RC Structures Strengthened With FRP For Earthquake Resistance Singh

Composites Science and Technology
Shamsher Bahadur Singh

C. V. R. Murty Editors
RC Structures
Strengthened
with FRP
for Earthquake
Resistance
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Series Editor
Mohammad Jawaid, Laboratory of Biocomposite Technology, Universiti Putra
Malaysia, INTROP, Serdang, Malaysia
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
This book series publishes cutting edge research monographs comprehensively
covering topics in the field of composite science and technology. The books in this
series are edited or authored by top researchers and professional across the globe.
The series aims at publishing state-of-the-art research and development in areas
including, but not limited to:
. Conventional Composites from natural and synthetic fibers
. Advanced Composites from natural and synthetic fibers
. Chemistry and biology of Composites and Biocomposites
. Fatigue damage modelling of Composites and Biocomposites
. Failure Analysis of Composites and Biocomposites
. Structural Health Monitoring of Composites and Biocomposites
. Durability of Composites and Biocomposites
. Biodegradability of Composites and Biocomposites
. Thermal properties of Composites and Biocomposites
. Flammability of Composites and Biocomposites
. Tribology of Composites and Biocomposites
. Applications of Composites and Biocomposites
Review Process
The proposal for each volume is reviewed by the main editor and/or the advisory
board. The chapters in each volume are individually reviewed single blind by expert
reviewers (at least two reviews per chapter) and the main editor.
Ethics Statement for this series can be found in the Springer standard guide-
lines here - https://www.springer.com/us/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-aut
hor-helpdesk/before-you-start/before-you-start/1330#c14214
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Shamsher Bahadur Singh · C. V. R. Murty
Editors
RC Structures Strengthened
with FRP for Earthquake
Resistance
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Editors
Shamsher Bahadur Singh C. V. R. Murty
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
Birla Institute of Technology and Science Indian Institute of Technology Madras
(BITS) Pilani Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Pilani, Rajasthan, India
ISSN 2662-1819 ISSN 2662-1827 (electronic)

ISBN 978-981-97-0101-8 ISBN 978-981-97-0102-5 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-0102-5
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Paper in this product is recyclable.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Contents
Design of Concrete Beams Reinforced with FRP Bars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

T. V. V. S. S. Padmanabha Rao, K. K. Bajpai, S. B. Singh,
and C. V. R. Murty
FRP Based Earthquake Retrofitting of RC Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
S. B. Singh and C. V. R. Murty
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composite Retrofitted Steel
Profiles Using Automated Fibre Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Ebrahim Oromiehie, Feleb Matti, Fidelis Mashiri,
and Gangadhara B. Prusty
Seismic Performance of Hybrid Structures Subjected to Extreme
Earthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Mohit Bhandari, Harmanpreet Singh, S. D. Bharti,
and Mahendra K. Shrimali
Seismic Strengthening and Retrofitting of RC Structures Using
Fibre Reinforced Composites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
R. Siva Chidambaram, Naveen Kumar Kothapalli, and Pankaj Agarwal
Seismic Retrofitting and Strengthening of Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Pranoy Debnath and Sekhar Chandra Dutta
Seismic Retrofit of Reinforced Concrete Structures Using Fibre
Reinforced Polymer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Aparna (Dey) Ghosh, Chaitali Ray, and Dhiraj Biswas
Conventional and Emerging Materials Used in FRP-Concrete
Composites for Earthquake Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Sanchit Gupta and Sandeep Chaudhary
Retrofitting of RC Structures Using FRP Techniques—Case Studies . . . . 207
Mangesh V. Joshi and S. V. Vivek
v
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
vi Contents
A Study on Ductility and Energy Absorption Capacity

of Reinforced Concrete Filled UPVC Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
P. K. Gupta and P. K. Gupta
Seismic and Fire Behaviour of FRP Strengthened Reinforced High
Strength Concrete Structures—An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
Sanket Rawat, Rahul Narula, Prachuryya Kaushik, Divya Prakash Jain,
Nitant Upasani, Ashirbad Satapathy, Mansi Bansal,
Harish Mulchandani, Shreyas Pranav, and G. Muthukumar
Retrofitting Methods for Shear Strengthening of Reinforced
Concrete Beams Using CFRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
R. Arvindh Raj and R. Senthilkumar
Use of FRP on Concrete Specimen, RC Elements and Components
for Higher Load Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
G. R. Reddy, Milan Savji Nakum, F. K. Muhammad Khizar,
and Lakhani M. Salman
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Design of Concrete Beams Reinforced
with FRP Bars
T. V. V. S. S. Padmanabha Rao, K. K. Bajpai, S. B. Singh, and C. V. R. Murty
1 Introduction
The built environment is said to be acceptable if it complies with five tenets, namely
safety, functionality, sustainability, aesthetics and economy. The first three are non-
negotiable, even in the order of their compliance; the last two can be swapped based
on the financial strength of the owner of the facility. On the matter of concrete
structures made with FRP bars used as reinforcement, two aspects dominate, namely
safety and sustainability. In particular, the concerns are with regard to earthquake
structural safety and durability of such structures.
(a) Earthquake Structural Safety
The earthquake structural safety of concrete structures reinforced with FRP bars
built in areas likely to sustain earthquake ground shaking of moderate to severe
intensities. As on date, the responses of concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars
have not been studied comprehensively and adequately under different cyclic loading
histories, especially shear behaviour of beams with transverse reinforcement also
made of FRP bars, distortional shear behaviour of beam-column joints, plastic hinge
rotational behaviour of beams, and axial compression-bending moment behaviour
of columns. Detailed R&D programs are yet to be undertaken by neutral research
T. V. V. S. S. Padmanabha Rao
Primero, Montreal, QC, USA
K. K. Bajpai
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Kanpur, Kanpur, India
S. B. Singh
Department of Civil Engineering, BITS Pilani, Pilani, India
C. V. R. Murty (B)
Department of Civil Engineering, P. S. Rao Institute Chair Professor, IIT Madras, Chennai, India
e-mail: [email protected]
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024 1
S. B. Singh and C. V. R. Murty (eds.), RC Structures Strengthened with FRP
for Earthquake Resistance, Composites Science and Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-0102-5_1
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
2 T. V. V. S. S. Padmanabha Rao et al.
laboratories, which demonstrate quantitatively that good earthquake behaviour can

be guaranteed of concrete structures reinforced with FRP bars. Often, the high cost
and the low availability of the FRP bars and their brittleness are quoted as reasons for
not undertaking the much needed studies. Hence, a clear statement cannot be made
yet, which recommends the use of concrete structures reinforced with FRP bars in
areas prone to severe to moderate earthquake shaking. During earthquakes, concrete
structures reinforced with the conventional steel bars are still collapsing, indicating
earthquake structural safety remains unresolved.
(b) Durability Aspect

Concrete structures (such as buildings and bridges), which are subjected to aggres-
sive environment, are facing corrosion problems—over 30% of steel produced is used
to replace older corroded steel [1]. With over 20 varieties of cements, 80 varieties
of admixtures, and uncounted types of coarse and fine aggregates and of water, the
contribution to corrosion has not been quantified under these multitudes of combina-
tions of the ingredients of concrete. In addition, there is another dimension imposed
by the levels of detrimental environment. Corrosion is leading to deterioration in the
capacity of the concrete structure (especially its stiffness, strength and deformability),
and, in turn, this is leading to loss of its serviceability (especially its service life).
Engineers have been attempting many measures to control this problem—epoxy-
coated steel bars, cathodic protection, increased concrete cover thickness, and
polymer concrete. But, each of these “remedies” could only impede, but not elimi-
nate corrosion problems. Also, they brought additional shortcomings. For instance,
(a) epoxy-coating on steel bars reduce bond between steel and concrete, (b) cathodic
protection increases maintenance effort, (c) increased concrete cover thickness leads
to early spalling of concrete results in large sudden loss of strength of member, and
(d) polymer concrete requires high precision engineering.
Clearly, the target is to have non-corrosive concrete structures. This points to two
needs, namely:
(1) Replace bars made of corrosive materials (like steel) with bars made of non-
corrosive materials; and
(2) Examine the roles of ingredients of concrete (like admixtures, water quality
and quantity, impurities in sand, and chemical composition of aggregates) to
understand how corrosion can be impeded.
(c) This Chapter
This chapter discusses flexural design of concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars
under monotonic loading. Its purpose is to understand the feasibility of replacing
conventional longitudinal steel bars with FRP bars. It presents:
(1) Procedure for structural design for bending moment, and
(2) Behaviour of concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars [2].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Design of Concrete Beams Reinforced with FRP Bars 3
2 Critical Issues in Design for Bending Moment
The implications should be understood of material behaviour, especially of FRP bars

on the behaviour, and hence on the design of concrete beams reinforced with FRP
bars.
2.1 Material
Commonly used FRP bars in civil engineering infrastructures are of three types,
namely glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP), aramid fiber reinforced polymer
(AFRP) and carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP). The range of values of salient
properties of steel bars and the said three types of FRP bars are presented in Table 1.
The following are the salient observations from these properties:
(1) The steel bars are ductile and hence have yield strength. Such ductile behaviour
is absent in FRP bars; they are brittle with no post-yield behaviour.
(2) The upper bound tensile strengths of FRP bars are larger than those of steel
bars.
(3) The modulus of elasticity of FRP bars varies over a large range; GFRP and
AFRP have values smaller than those of the steel bars.
(4) The rupture strain of FRP bars is much smaller than those of the steel bars.
(5) The coefficient of thermal expansion of FRP bars is direction dependent unlike
steel bars. Especially, the coefficient of thermal expansion of FRP bars in the
longitudinal direction is smaller than those of steel bars (and even negative for
CFRP and AFRP bars), while that in the transverse direction it is much higher
than that of steel bars.
The major implications of the above observations are:
Table 1 Salient properties of steel and FRP reinforcing bars [3]

Material property Steel GFRP CFRP AFRP
Modulus of elasticity (GPa) 195–205 35–51 120–580 41–125
Nominal yield strength 276–517 Not applicable
(MPa)
Tensile strength (MPa) 483–690 483–1,600 600–3,690 1,720–2,540
Yield strain (%) 1.4–2.5 Not applicable
Rupture strain (%) 6.0–12.0 1.2–3.1 0.5–1.7 1.9–4.4
Coefficient of thermal expansion (×10–6 /°C)
(a) Longitudinal direction 11.7 6–10 −2 to 0 −6 to –2
(b) Transverse direction 11.7 21–23 23–32 60–80
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(a) The fact (high strength and low ductility) together with brittle nature of FRP
bars suggests that the ductile under-reinforced design of concrete beams with
FRP bars is not practicable; only over-reinforced design of concrete beams with
FRP bars should be admitted; and
(b) The higher coefficient of thermal expansion of FRP bars in the transverse
direction can have adverse impact on the bond between the FRP bar and concrete.
2.2 Design Philosophy
Traditionally, concrete beams with steel bars were designed to behave in a ductile
manner. This was possible because steel bars have reasonable post-yield strain range
with large elongation at rupture. But, once the FRP bars replace the conventional
steel bars, the fact that FRP bars are brittle needs to be recognised; stress–strain curve
of FRP bars is linear till failure and this needs to be considered in the design method.
FRP bars are made of fibers and binder matrix. The actual stress–strain curve of
FRP bars and its two constituents are depicted in Fig. 1. The brittle nature of FRP
bars confirms that under-reinforced design philosophy (which depends on the brittle
failure of FRP bars in tension) is inadmissible in concrete beams reinforced with
FRP bars. Therefore, concrete beams with FRP bars should be designed based on
over-reinforced design philosophy. Thus, a major change is needed in the philosophy
of design of concrete beams—over-reinforced design should be accepted in concrete
beams reinforced with FRP bars (against the conventional under-reinforced design
admitted in concrete beams reinforced with steel bars).
Stress (MPa)
1,800 – 5,000 Fibers
600 – 3,000 FRP
Matrix
30 – 150
0 ~0.5 ~5.0
Strain (%)
Fig. 1 Stress–strain curves of FRP bars and its constituents (fibers and binder matrix) [4]
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3 Structural Design
The response of concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars has not been studied
adequately under different cyclic loading histories, especially shear behaviour of
beams with transverse reinforcement also made of FRP bars, distortional shear
behaviour of beam-column joint, plastic hinge rotational behaviour of beams, and
axial compression-bending moment behaviour of columns. Hence, a clear statement
cannot be made yet, which recommends the use of RC structures reinforced with
FRP bars in areas prone to severe to moderate earthquake shaking.
3.1 Design Properties of Materials
The main properties needed in the design of concrete beams reinforced with FRP
bars are:
(a) Stress–Strain Curves
Unconfined Concrete:
The actual stress–strain curves of concrete in compression and FRP bars in tension
are required to design concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars. Typically, the
stress–strain curve of unconfined concrete in compression is used in the estima-
tion of the design strength capacity and that of confined concrete in the estimation
of the overstrength capacity. In this chapter, the discussion is restricted to design
bending moment capacity of beams, and hence stress–strain curve of unconfined
concrete alone is presented. The expression for design stress–strain curve ( f c , εc ) of
unconfined concrete in compression (Fig. 2) is:
⎧
⎨ 0.67 fck 2 εc − εc 2 0 ≤ ε ≤ ε
γM εcp εcp c cp
f c (εc ) = (1)
⎩ 0.67 fck
γM
εcp < εc ≤ εcu
where
εcp Strain at design peak strength of unconfined concrete (Table 2)
0.00190 + 0.000005 f ck ,
εcu Ultimate strain in unconfined concrete = 0.003775 − 0.00001375 f ck (Table 2),
and
γ M Partial safety factor for concrete, taken as 1.5.
The shape of the monotonic stress–strain ( f c − εc ) curve of unconfined concrete
in compression is a combination of a parabola and a rectangle; this is derived from
the experimental stress–strain curves obtained from tests. The parabolic portion (in
the range 0 ≤ εc ≤ εcp ) increases with increase in the grade of concrete, because
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 2 Design stress–strain fc

curve of unconfined concrete
in compression
0.67 f ck
Characteristic
0 .67 f ck
Design
M
c
0 cp cu
Table 2 Strains at design peak strength, εcp and ultimate strain εcu of unconfined concrete in
compression
Characteristic compressive strength f ck (MPa) of concrete εcp εcu
20 0.002 00 0.003 50
25 0.002 03 0.003 43
30 0.002 05 0.003 36
35 0.002 08 0.003 29
40 0.002 10 0.003 23
45 0.002 13 0.003 16
50 0.002 15 0.003 09
55 0.002 18 0.003 02
60 0.002 20 0.002 95
65 0.002 23 0.002 88
70 0.002 25 0.002 81
80 0.002 30 0.002 68
90 0.002 35 0.002 54
100 0.002 40 0.002 40
εcp increases with increase in f ck . And, the rectangular portion (in the range εcp <
εc ≤ εcu ) reduces with increase in the grade of concrete, because εcp increases with
f ck and εcu decreases with increase in f ck .
When extreme fiber of concrete reaches the strain εcu , the full stress-block is
developed in concrete (Fig. 3), wherein the parameter α of average stress and the
parameter β of the location of the centroid of the compressive force are listed in
Table 3 for different grades of concrete.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
FRP Bars:
There is no overstrength capacity in FRP bars, because it is a brittle material. Hence,
the actual stress–strain curve of FRP bar is used as such for estimating the over-
strength capacity; it is used with a partial safety factor for strength (of FRP mate-
rial) for estimating the design bending moment capacity. The expression for design
cu
0 .45 fck
xu
xu f ck bx u
M
RC section Normal strain Normal stress

under flexure distribution distribution
Fig. 3 Parameters of full compression stress block of unconfined concrete
Table 3 Parameters of full compression stress block of unconfined concrete

Characteristic compressive strength fck (MPa) of unconfined concrete α β
20 0.364 0.416
25 0.361 0.413
30 0.358 0.411
35 0.355 0.409
40 0.352 0.407
45 0.349 0.404
50 0.346 0.402
55 0.342 0.399
60 0.338 0.396
65 0.334 0.393
70 0.330 0.391
75 0.325 0.388
80 0.321 0.386
85 0.316 0.383
90 0.311 0.380
95 0.305 0.377
100 0.300 0.375
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
stress–strain curve ( f f , ε f ) of FRP bars in tension and compression (Fig. 4) is:

⎧
⎨0 εfd ≤ εfu
ff εf = E f ε f −ε f d ≤ ε f ≤ +ε f d , (2)
⎩
0 ε f ≤ −ε f d
where
ε f d Strain at design maximum strength of FRP bar in tension

εfu
γM
,
ε f u Ultimate strain capacity of FRP bars in tension from test data,
γ M Partial safety factor for FRP bars in tension and compression, taken as 1.5, and
E f Modulus of elasticity of FRP bars derived from test data

ffu
εfu
,
wherein
f f u Ultimate tensile strength of FRP bar (Fig. 4), and
ε f u Ultimate tensile strain of FRP bar (Fig. 4).
(a) Modulus of Elasticity
The modulus of elasticity E s of steel bars in tension is taken as 200 GPa. But, the
modulus of elasticity E f of FRP bars in tension is not the same for all types and grades
of FRP bars. Hence, unlike in the steel bars, E f is not taken as a predetermined value,
but is dependent critically on the test data of bars to be used in the beams.
Fig. 4 Design stress–strain fc

curve of FRP bars in tension f fu Characteristic
and in compression
f fu Design
f fd
M
0 fu fu
f
fd
M
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3.2 Design Bending Moment Capacity M L
The Criteria for Strength of the structure or part thereof shall be assessed from
material reaching a design limit state (either strain or stress) at any critical cross-
section of a member. The design bending moment capacity M L of a member at any
section (including the effect of Partial Safety Factors γ M for Material Strengths) shall
not be less than the corresponding demand at that section produced by the probable
most unfavourable combination of loads on the structure (arrived at by using the
appropriate partial safety factors γ L for loads).
The aim when specifying the design for strength of a cross-section is to ensure
sufficient margin between the capacity and demand at each section. The Partial Safety
Factors γ M for materials strength and γ L for loads are applied to the respective char-
acteristics values. The values of γ M and γ L are so chosen that the members and hence
the structure possess a known level of margin of strength. The load combinations
and the partial safety factors to be considered in design are chosen as per the design
standard. For ensuring the specified objective, the design is based on characteristic
values for material strengths and applied loads, which take into account the variations
in the material strengths and in the loads to be supported. The characteristic values
should be based on statistical data if available; where such data are not available,
they should be based on experience. The design values are derived from the charac-
teristic value through the use of partial safety factors, one for material strengths and
the other for loads. In the absence of data, these factors should be specified in the
standard (considering material, loading and limit state being considered).
3.2.1 Limiting Strains
The method of estimating design strengths discussed hereunder is applicable to

shallow concrete members (whose l d ratios are greater than 5, and not to deep
concrete members). The design bending moment capacity M L of sections of concrete
members should be that corresponding to when either of the following limit states
of strain are reached:
(1) Limiting strain εc,lim of concrete in compression:
εc,lim = εcu , (3)
and
(2) Limiting strain ε f,lim of FRP bars in tension and compression:
εfu
ε f,lim = = 0.67ε f u , (4)
γM
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
where εcu is as per Table 2 depending on the grade of concrete, and ε f u as per
test on type and grade of the FRP bar being used.
The limiting strain in concrete is the maximum strain that unconfined concrete
can resist without significant loss in strength. But, the limiting strain in FRP bars is
restricted to within two-thirds of its rupture strain in tension. This is necessary because
the failure of FRP bars is brittle, with no yield plateau. The design of members cannot
be such that the bar reaches its rupture strain. Hence, sufficient margin is kept by
considering the design limiting strain of FRP bars in tension to be two-thirds of its
rupture strain in tension. There is insufficient study of FRP bars in compression in
concrete beams. Hence, as an interim measure, the design limiting strain of FRP bars
in compression is considered to be the same as that in tension; this has the underlying
assumption that the FRP bars are held from buckling by closely-spaced closed-loop
transverse reinforcement hoops.
When estimating the design bending moment capacity M L of shallow concrete
members that are reinforced with FRP bars, each section of the member should
comply with the basic principles of mechanics, namely:
(a) Equilibrium of forces at a section,
(b) Compatibility of strains at a section, and
(c) Constitutive Law of constituent materials,
at the limit states of strain specified above.
3.2.2 Assumptions
The following assumptions shall be made when estimating the design bending
moment capacity M L of shallow concrete members reinforced with FRP bars:
(1) Plane sections normal to the axis of bending before bending, remain plane and
normal to the axis of bending even after bending.
(2) The tensile strength of the concrete is ignored.
(3) The monotonic design stress–strain curve of:
(a) Concrete in compression, i.e., ( f c − εc ), is as per Eq. (1), and
(b) FRP bars in tension and compression, i.e., ( f f − ε f ), as per Eq. (2).
(4) The design strength of:
(a) Concrete in bending compression is f cbc,d = (0.67 f ck ) γ M = 0.45 f ck ,
where the Partial Safety Factor γ M is 1.5 for concrete in compression, and
(b) FRP Bars in direct tension and direct compression are f f c,d = f f t,d =
f f u γ M = 0.67 f f u , where Partial Safety Factor γ M is 1.5 for FRP bars
in axial tension and compression.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The bases behind these assumptions are:

(1) Bernoulli’s Hypothesis: The distribution of strain across the depth of the section
is linear, which has been observed in numerous tests on slender reinforced
concrete members.
(2) By ignoring the tensile strength of concrete, a conservative estimate is obtained
of bending moment capacity. Estimates can be made taking the tensile strength
of concrete into account, but such estimates are justified rarely.
(3) The monotonic stress–strain ( f c − εc ) curve of concrete in compression has
been idealised in the current form to simplify the design process. The assumed
stress–strain curve of concrete is a combination of a parabola and a rect-
angle; it is referred to as the stress block. Classically, bending compressive
stress has been related to the compressive strength of a cylinder. The apparent
strength of concrete in the compression zone of beam or column at failure is
observed to be approximately 0.85 times the cylinder compressive strength of
the same concrete. Since cube strength is used in India to reflect the character-
istic compressive strength f ck of concrete, cube characteristic strength f ck is
converted to cylinder characteristic strength by a factor of 0.80. Then, direct
characteristic compressive stress from a cylinder is converted to bending char-
acteristic compressive stress by a factor 0.85. Hence, the characteristic bending
compressive stress in a flexure member is obtained as 0.80×0.85 f ck = 0.67 f ck .
And, the design bending compressive strength is obtained by applying the Partial
Safety Factor γ M to the characteristic value. γ M of 1.5 is justified for concrete,
because it is a brittle material and is prepared at site.
And, the monotonic stress–strain curve ( f f − ε f ) of FRP bars in tension and
compression are considered to be linear. In compression, it is assumed that the
FRP bar is held against buckling by the transverse reinforcement spaced closely.
These transverse reinforcements are closed loops made of FRP too. They are
fabricated specially at the factory, with fibers woven into the desired rectangular
shapes with desired diameters, but with no joints.
(4) The design axial tensile and compressive strengths are obtained by applying the
Partial Safety Factor γ M to the characteristic value.
(a) For concrete in compression, γ M is taken as 1.5, as in conventional design
of concrete beams with steel bars, and
(b) For FRP bars in tension and compression, γ M is suggested as 1.5, as against
the value of 1.15 adopted in conventional design of concrete beams with
steel bars. This higher value is tied with two facts, namely linear stress–
strain behaviour of FRP bars and limiting strain needs to be significantly
less than the rupture strain.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3.2.3 Design Limiting Bending Moment Capacity M L
The Limit State Method of design of RC members as enumerated in the Indian

Concrete Code IS 456 is extended to estimate the design limiting bending moment
capacity M L . The method of estimating M L of a concrete member reinforced with
FRP bars subjected to bending moment is described hereunder for a member with a
rectangular cross-section.
(a) Limiting Strains
A concrete member shall be said to have reached its limit state at a section under the
action of bending moment, when at a section either concrete or FRP bar reaches the
corresponding limiting strain εc,lim or ε f,lim , respectively. And, the bending moment
resisted by the concrete member when the member reaches the said limit state at
a section is called the limiting moment capacity. The same is taken as M L of that
section.
The bending moment capacity of a section is based on the reaching of limiting
strain states. These limiting values need not be reached simultaneously. If at any
section:
(1) Concrete reaches the limiting strain εc,lim before FRP bar reaches ε f,lim , it is
called a compression-controlled over-reinforced section;
(2) Both concrete and steel reach simultaneously the corresponding limiting strains
εc,lim and εs,lim , respectively, it is called a balanced over-reinforced section; and
(3) FRP bar reaches the limiting strain ε f,lim before concrete reaches εc,lim , it is
called an tension-controlled under-reinforced section.
The third option is preferable in the design of concrete members reinforced FRP
bars, because it gives the best behaviour.
(b) The Method
RC slender beams, slabs, footings and rafts shall be designed to be under-reinforced

with FRP reaching the limiting strain in tension before concrete reaches the limiting
strain in compression. The design bending moment capacity M L of RC beams shall
be obtained by solving the following set of governing nonlinear equations:
(a) Equilibrium of forces and moment at a section,
(b) Compatibility of strains at a section, and
(c) Constitutive law of constituent materials.
The limiting moment capacity M L of a doubly-reinforced rectangular concrete
section designed to be over-reinforced is estimated as given hereunder (Fig. 5).
(1) Equilibrium of forces and moment at a section
Force Equilibrium:
f c,avg bx L + f f c − f c f c A f c = f f t A f t , (5)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 5 Distributions of strain and stress across a rectangular concrete section
and
Moment Equilibrium:
M L = f c,ave bx L (x L − xC G ) + f f c − f c f c A f c x L − d f c + f f t A f t (d − β x L ),
(6)
where

1 εcp
α = 0.45 1 − , (7)
3 εcu
and
2
εcp εcp
1
2
− 1
3 εcu
+ 1
12 εcu
β= . (8)
εcp
1− 1
3 εcu
(2) Compatibility of strains at a section
εc = εc,lim , (9)
xL − d f c
εfc = εc,lim , (10)
xL
xL − d f c
εc f c = εc,lim , (11)
xL
and
d − xL
εft = εc,lim , (12)
xL
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(3) Constitutive law of constituent materials
f c,avg (εc ) = αmax f ck , (13)

⎧
⎨ 0.45 f 2 εcsc − εcsc 2 0 ≤ ε ≤ ε
ck εcp εcp cf c cp
f c f c εc f c = , (14)
⎩
0.45 f ck εcp < εc f c ≤ εcu
f f c ε f c = E f ε f c, (15)
and
f f t ε f t = E f ε f t. (16)
When the section is over-reinforced, strain εc in extreme fiber of concrete section

on the compression side should be the limiting strain εc,lim specified, and that in the
extreme fiber of FRP bar on the tension side less than the limiting strain ε f,lim , where
εfu
ε f t,lim = , (17)
γM
and
εc,lim = εcu . (18)
Thus, the limiting depth x L of neutral axis shall be equal to the depth xbal of
neutral axis of the balanced section, given by:
εc,lim
xbal = d. (19)
εc,lim + ε f,lim
Therefore, x L shall be estimated as per the following step-wise procedure:

(a) Estimate xbal using Eq. (19).
(b) Use xbal as an approximation of x L , and estimate ε f c , εc f c and ε f t using
Eqs.(10)–(12).
(c) Use εc , ε f c and εc f c , and estimate f c f c , f f c and f f t using Eqs. (14)–(16).
(d) Use f c f c , f f c and f f t , and estimate x L using Eq. (5).
(e) Check if x L is converged. If yes, go to Step (f), else go back to Step (b), and use
the value of x L from Step (d).
(f) Estimate M L using Eq. (6).
The above step-wise iterative procedure (i.e., Step (a) to Step (e)) of an over-
reinforced concrete beam reinforced with FPR bars, to estimate x L is depicted in
Table 4.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 4 Step-wise procedure to estimate limiting depth x L of neutral axis of a concrete beam reinforced with FPR bars
x L assumed εfc εc f c εft fc f c ffc fft x L estimated
mm MPa MPa MPa mm
Equation (10) Equation (11) Equation (12) Equation (14) Equation (15) Equation (16) Equation (5)
xbal
Design of Concrete Beams Reinforced with FRP Bars
…
…
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
… εfc xL
15
When a beam needs to be designed, the only known quantity is external design
bending moment demand M D on the beam. So, to begin with, M L may be taken
as M D . All geometric and material properties and areas of steel in the section are
assumed, and hence considered to be known; the state of stress in the beam needs to
be determined. Thus, the quantities assumed are: (a) Geometric properties b, D, d
and d f c , (b) Material properties f ck and f f u , and (c) Areas of FRP bars A f t and A f c .
There are 8 equations, namely: 2 equilibrium equations, 3 compatibility conditions,
and 3 constitutive relations. And, there are 8 unknown quantities, namely the pairs
of strains and stresses (εc f c , f c f c ), (ε f c , f f c ) and (ε f t , f f t ), the depth of neutral axis
x L , and bending moment demand M D . Again, there are 8 unknowns and 8 equations,
and is solvable, even though the solution is iterative.
When the strength of a beam needs to be assessed, the design bending moment
capacity M L needs to be ascertained with all details (geometric and material proper-
ties) of the section given. The quantities given are: (a) Geometric properties b, D, d
and d f c , (b) Material properties f ck and f f u , and (c) Areas of FRP bars A f t and A f c .
(εc , f c ) are known as concrete is required to reach its limiting strain εc,lim . Further, 8
equations are available, namely 2 equilibrium equations, 3 compatibility conditions,
and 3 constitutive relations. And, there are 8 unknown quantities, namely the 3 pairs
of strains and stresses (εc f c , f c f c ), (ε f c , f f c ) and (ε f t , f f t ), the depth of neutral axis
x L , and bending moment capacity M L . There are 8 unknowns and 8 equations, and
is solvable, even though the solution is iterative.
3.3 Design Shear Force Capacity VL
Again, the Limit State Method of design of RC members as enumerated in the Indian
Concrete Code IS 456 is extended to estimate the limiting design shear force capacity
VL . At the critical section, VL is estimated by adding contributions to resistance
of both concrete and transverse FRP bars. Unlike in the estimation of the design
bending moment capacity M L , where limiting strains formed the basis of estimating
M L , here VL is estimated by a procedure that considers limiting stresses as the basis
of estimating VL .
(a) Limiting Stresses
At the critical section of a concrete beam, contributions of concrete in shear and of

transverse FRP bars in tension are used to estimate the limiting design shear force
capacity VL . In particular:
(i) Concrete shall be assumed to have reached its limiting stress of the Design
Shear Strength τc of concrete, and
(ii) Transverse reinforcing FRP bars shall be assumed to have reached its limiting
stress of 0.67 f f u ≤ 0.004 E f , the design tensile strength of FRP bars in tension,
wherein upper bound is based on strain of 0.004 to prevent the loss of aggregate
interlock.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
And, the shear force resisted by the concrete member when it reaches these said
limiting stresses simultaneously at a section are taken as the design shear force
capacity VL of that section.
(b) The Method
Normally, in rectangular sections, only the web is considered in the estimation of

VL . Also, transverse reinforcement required to resist shear force is provided only in
the form of vertical closed-loop stirrups.
The Design Shear Force Capacity VL of a beam of rectangular cross-section is:
VL = VLC + VL F , (20)
where
VLC Contribution of concrete to VL .
τC bd, and
VL F Contribution oftransverse
reinforcing FRPbars
to VL .
d
0.67 f f u A SV sV ≤ 0.004 E f A SV sVd
,
I NT I NT
in which
A SV Cross-sectional area of all transverse reinforcement legs of FRP in one
plane
N SV π ϕ2SV
2
,
d Effective depth of the member,
sV Spacing of the stirrups along the length of the member,
f fu Characteristic tensile strength of FRP used in transverse reinforcement,
N SV Number of legs in transverse reinforcement at each section of the member,
ϕ SV Diameter of the bar used as transverse reinforcement,
(...) I N T Integral value of the number,
τC Design shear strength of concrete as specified in conventional concrete
design codes, and
τC,max Maximum design shear stress of concrete as specified in the standard.
The design shear force capacity VL of concrete member is considered as the sum
of the shear strengths VL F offered by concrete and the shear strength VD F offered by
FRP transverse reinforcement. VLC arises from τC . Also, in arriving at the Design
Shear Strength VL F offered by shear reinforcement, a constant-angle truss model
is considered. The angle of shear crack (or compression strut) is taken as 45° to
get a conservative estimate of VL F . Although different theories have been proposed
to explain the action of shear reinforcement, the truss analogy theory is accepted
generally. The truss analogy assumes that in the imaginary pin jointed truss the
longitudinal tension is carried by longitudinal reinforcing bars, transverse tension
by transverse reinforcing bars, and the longitudinal and diagonal compression by
concrete.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Conventionally, in the design of concrete beams reinforced with steel bars, the
design of shear reinforcements allows the yielding of shear reinforcements at the
factored loads. Thus, the member was expected to undergo ductile failure charac-
teristics. But, the shear strengths of a beam cannot be increased indefinitely by the
addition of unlimited amounts of transverse reinforcement. This is because where
large shears are carried, the diagonal compressive struts are formed within the core
concrete, which may crush the web concrete. Such failures are brittle. Hence, and
upper limit of τc,max is imposed on τc . The partial safety factor γ M in concrete under
shear is taken as 1.5.
But, when FRP bars are used, the transverse reinforcement cannot be permitted
to yield. Thus, a larger γ M of 1.5 is recommended over the ultimate tensile strength
of FRP bars, unlike 1.15 of steel bars. Further, the design method when steel bars
are used requires that shear reinforcement is estimated with f y limited to 415 MPa.
The reasons for are:
(1) The grade of steel influences the width of cracks; larger the grade of steel, the
larger is the crack width.
(2) Higher strength steel bars imply smaller area, and when these small area bars
are used as stirrups, the bars may rupture at the corners during bar bending.
(c) The Gap Area
When the complete concrete structure is to be reinforced with FRP bars, transverse
reinforcement too is required to be made of FRP. But, straight FRP bars made at the
factory cannot be bent at site; they will rupture. Hence, it is necessary to prefabricate
the stirrups of different configurations in the factory (Fig. 6). Detailed studies are
required to develop suitable technology to prefabricate FRP stirrups and put them
through a path of qualification, certification and development as a technology.
(a) (b)
Fig. 6 Prefabricated stirrups for use in concrete beams of rectangular cross-section: a 2-legged
stirrups, and b 3-legged stirrups
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
4 Experimental Study
An experimental study was conducted of the beams reinforced with GFRP bars and
conventional steel bars [2]. The details of the test specimens and its fabrications with
typical calculations, test setup, load application system, instrumentation for response
measurement, data acquisition and control system and the loading history used in
the experiment are presented hereunder.
4.1 Test System
Two-point loading is employed to subject simply-supported concrete beams to pure

bending (Fig. 7). 2 m long beams with clear span of 1.8 m and shear span of 0.6 m
are subjected to monotonic vertical load using actuators.
L1 L2 L3 L4 L5
L6
300 300 300 300 300 300

100 600 600 600 100
2,000
Fig. 7 Set-up to undertake experimental study of concrete beams of rectangular cross-section

reinforced with FRP bars
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
4.2 Specimen Details
12 beams were tested, of which 8 were provided with longitudinal reinforcement

made of GFRP bars and remaining 4 of conventional steel bars. 4 beams with GFRP
bars and all 4 beams with steel bars were provided with shear reinforcement of 2-
legged 6 mm diameter mild steel stirrups spaced at 110 mm centers, and remaining
4 beams with GFRP bars with 2-legged 6 mm diameter mild steel stirrups spaced at
90 centers. All beams have cross-section of 150 mm × 200 mm (Fig. 8). The details
of reinforcement in the 12 test specimens are given in Table 5.
4.3 Properties of Material Used
The properties of different materials used in the specimen are presented hereunder.
4.3.1 Concrete
Six 150 mm × 150 mm standard concrete cubes, four 150 mm × 300 mm standard
cylinders and four 100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm flexure beams were cast with each
specimen. The mix proportion of concrete used in each specimen is given in Table 6.
The specimen, cylinders, flexure members and standard cubes are immersed in water
tank and cured for 28 days. These cubes are tested on 7 days, 28 days and the day of
testing of specimens to ascertain their compressive strengths. The results are shown
in Table 7.
4.3.2 GFRP Bars
The rebars used are made of glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP; manufacturer
M/s Hughes Brothers, with Fiber Aslan 100 and Matrix Vinyl Ester); the nominal
bar diameter is 6.35 mm. The ultimate tensile strength, modulus of elasticity and
ultimate strain of the rebars are 662 MPa, 33.7 GPa and 1.96%, respectively. Like all
FRP bars, GFRP bars too have linear elastic behavior up to failure. The stress–strain
curve of the FRP bar is shown in Fig. 9. These were used in an earlier study for
strengthening masonry walls [5].
4.3.3 Steel Reinforcement
The grade of steel used in longitudinal reinforcement is Fe415 and in transverse

reinforcement Fe250. The yield and ultimate strengths of the 8 mm diameter bars are
428.6 and 510.0 MPa, respectively. The modulus of elasticity and ultimate strain of
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
26
2 6 2 6 2 6
200
20
3 6 4 6 5 6
40
20 20 2-legged 6 @110 centers
150
(a)
26
2 6 2 6 2 6
200
7 6 9 6 11 6
40
20 20 2-legged 6 @90 centers
150
2 6
13 6
(b)
Fig. 8 Cross-section of concrete beams with longitudinal bars: a GFRP3a, 3b, 4 and 5, and Steel3a,
3b, 4 and 5, and b GFRP7, 9, 11 and 13
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 5 Details of reinforcement in concrete beam specimen studied

Specimen Beam Longitudinal reinforcement Transverse reinforcement
Diameter (mm) Number Diameter (mm) Spacing (mm)
I GFRP3a 6 3 6 110
II GFRP3b 3
III GFRP4 4
IV GFRP5 5
V GFRP7 6 7 6 90
VI GFRP9 9
VII GFRP11 11
VIII GFRP13 13
I Steel3a 8 3 6 110
II Steel3b 3
III Steel4 4
IV Steel5 5
Table 6 Composition of ingredients of concrete per batch

Specimen Quantity per batch (kg)
Cement Sand Course aggregates Water
10 mm 20 mm
I, II, III 35 76.3 69.1 69.1 22.4
Proportion 1 2.18 1.975 1.975 0.64
IV 36 79.2 68.8 68.8 23.76
Proportion 1.00 2.20 1.91 1.91 0.66
V, VI, VII, VIII 35 72.8 67.2 67.2 21.7
Proportion 1.00 2.08 1.92 1.92 0.62
the rebars are 171 GPa and 31%, respectively. The stress–strain curve of the 8 mm
steel bar is shown in Fig. 10.
4.4 Sensors Used
Responses of the beams are measured using load cell, displacement meters (LVDT)
and strain gauges.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 7 Strengths of concrete in the 12 specimen

Specimen Cube compressive strength (MPa) Modulus of rupture (MPa)
7 days 28 days Day of testing
I GFRP 3a 12.5 23.3 27.7 3.85
Steel 3a 11.7 22.0 27.0 3.9
II GFRP 3b 16.8 24.4 29.8 4.3
Steel 3b 18.2 25.2 33.2 4.0
III GFRP 4 14.9 21.5 26.9 3.5
Steel 4 14.6 25.0 27.8 3.75
IV GFRP 5 12.9 20.8 23.7 3.1
Steel 5 12.9 22.0 22.7 3.3
V GFRP 7 20.0 – 22.5
VI GFRP 9 21.3 – 24.0
VII GFRP 11 19.0 – 21.0
VIII GFRP 13 16.3 – 20.75
700
600
500
Stress (MPa)
400
300
200
100
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Strain
Fig. 9 Stress–strain curve of GFRP bar of 6 mm diameter
4.4.1 Load Cell
A compression load cell (Make: Sensotec; Model: TH/1590–05) of capacity 500 kN

was used to record load applied during flexural loading of beams in a compression
testing machine.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 10 Stress-strain curve of Steel bar of 6 mm diameter
4.4.2 LVDTs
Six linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs) were used to measure the
vertical deflection under each beam at locations shown in Fig. 7. The maximum
displacement range of LVDTs used was ±50 mm. All LVDTs were calibrated before
use.
4.4.3 Strain Gauges
Strain gauges (Manufacturer: Measurements Group, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina;

Model CEA-06-125UW-120; and range 20,000 micro-strains) were used to measure
strains on each longitudinal bar at the mid-span of the beam. The 5 mm long gauges
were pasted with a fully encapsulated grid and exposed copper-coated integral solder
tabs. The strain limits were approximately 5% for gauge lengths 3.2 mm and larger.
The resistance of gauges at 24 °C is 120.0 ± 0.3% Ohms and Gauge Factor is 2.07
± 0.5%.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
4.5 Results and Observations
4.5.1 Experimental Study
The normalised load–deflection and load-strain curves of the beams GFRP3a and
Steel3a are presented in Fig. 11a and b, respectively. At the normalised moment of
~0.12, the beam with GFRP bars shows a drastic drop in stiffness; this is attributed
to the initial cracking of the beam, when tensile bending stress in concrete at the
bottom face of the beam reaches the modulus of rupture. Thereafter, the beam with
GFRP bars has only linear behaviour till failure; the maximum normalised bending
moment is ~0.38. On the other hand, the beam with steel bars undergoes yielding
of longitudinal steel bars at a normalised moment of ~0.50, reaching a maximum
normalised bending moment of ~0.60, and finally failing at a normalised bending
moment of ~0.56. In general, the behaviour of all other beams is similar (Figs. 12,
13, 14 and 15). All these curves are shown together in Fig. 16. In Figs. 11, 12, 13,
14, 15 and 16, F represents the applied load and a the shear span in consistent units.
The salient observations and inferences from the tests are:
(1) Cracks appear at the mid-span in steel reinforced beams, and within the constant
moment region in GFRP reinforced beams. These cracks are flexural cracks;
they start from bottom of the beam and progress vertically towards the top. As
the applied load increases, new cracks appear within the shear span. They start
vertically and bend along a curved path towards the top owing to combined
shear and flexural stresses.
(2) No cracks developed within a distance of d from the support. This may be due
to the compressive stresses induced due to friction between beam and support.
(3) Beams with less FRP reinforcement have lower stiffness. So, the amount of
reinforcement is important, not only from the point of view of flexural capacity,
but also from the point of view of serviceability.
(4) There is no significant difference in the initial cracking moments of GFRP
reinforced beams.
(5) At a load where the steel beam yields, the deflections of GFRP reinforced
beams are much larger than that of steel reinforced beams. So, serviceability
considerations may govern design of GFRP reinforced beams. Also, GFRP
reinforced beams show brittle behaviour with sudden rupture. So, the design
philosophy for GFRP reinforced beams needs to consider higher factor of safety
against ultimate load.
(6) With increase in percentage of longitudinal FRP reinforcements, the ulti-
mate bending moment capacity of GFRP reinforced beams increases. But,
this increase is limited by the strain capacity of concrete in compressive of
over-reinforced beams, and not proportional to the increase in reinforcement
percentage.
(7) GFRP reinforced beams with large percentage of GFRP bars fail in compres-
sion of concrete (GFRP5, 7, 9 and 11), and demonstrate a flat region in
the load-deformation behaviour (which may be interpreted as ductility, even
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 11 Monotonic behaviour of GFRP3a and Steel3a beams: a Load–deflection curve, and b Load-
strain curve
through GFRP does not yield), unlike beams with low percentage of GFRP
bars (GFRP3a, 3b, 4 and 5), which fail in tension of GFRP bars (Table 8).
Beams GFRP5, 7, 9 and 11 sustain lesser deflection at service loads than beams
GFRP3a, 3b, 4 and 5, owing to higher initial stiffness of the beam and lower
stress in FRP bar.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 12 Monotonic behaviour of GFRP4 and Steel4 beams: a Load–deflection curve, and b Load-
strain curve
4.5.2 Analytical Study
The ultimate bending moment capacity is estimated; the method mentioned in Sect. 3
of this chapter is employed without using the partial safety factor γ M of 1.5 for
concrete and GFRP. These estimates are shown in Table 9.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 13 Monotonic behaviour of GFRP5 and Steel5 beams: a Load–deflection curve, and b Load-
strain curve
The design philosophy of concrete beams reinforced with GFRP bars suggests
that concrete will crush at failure. But, the tests show that as the percentage of area
of longitudinal bars increases, the failure mode transits from rupture of GFRP bars
to crushing of concrete (Table 10). Clearly, when the percentage of FRP ( A f t bd)
exceeds the balanced percentage ( A f t,b bd) of steel given by:
A f t,b f c,avg xb
= , (21)
bd f fu d
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 14 Monotonic behaviour of GFRP3b and Steel3b beams: a Load–deflection curve, and b Load-
strain curve
the beam will fail by crushing of concrete, else by rupture of longitudinal steel bars.
In Eq. (21), xb is estimated using Eq. (19). Also, Eq. (21) itself is derived from
Eq. (5) neglecting the term corresponding to the compressive force in FRP bars on
the compression side.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Vertical Load (kN)
Displacement (mm)
(a)
Vertical Load (kN)
Displacement (mm)
(b)
Fig. 15 Monotonic load–deflection behaviour of GFRP5, GFRP7, GFRP9, 3b and Steel3b beams
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Vertical Load (kN)
Displacement (mm)
(c)
Vertical Load (kN)
Displacement (mm)
(d)
Fig. 15 (continued)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 16 Monotonic load–deflection behaviour: a GFRP reinforced beams, and b Steel reinforced
beams
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 8 Stiffness (kN/mm) and ductility of beams

Specimen Stiffness (kN/mm) Ductility factor
GFRP3a 0.56 1
GFRP 3b 0.46 1
GFRP 4 0.69 1
GFRP 5 0.61 1
GFRP 7 0.99 1.45
GFRP 9 1.23 1.87
GFRP 11 1.47 2.46
GFRP 13 2.17 2.16
Steel 3a 3.77 4.60
Steel 3b 3.42 7.06
Steel 4 4.15 2.78
Steel 5 4.10 3.01
Table 9 Summary of test results for GFRP reinforced beams–load capacity

Specimen Ultimate moment capacity ρactual Sub-type of
over-reinforced
Experimental Analytical Experimental/ A
100 bdf
estimate (kN) estimate (kN) Analytical failure mode
GFRP 3a 9.0 9.4 0.96 0.43 Rupture of

GFRP 3b 13.1 11.2 1.17 0.58 longitudinal bars
GFRP 4 12.2 10.5 1.16 0.77
GFRP 5 7.71 8.7 0.89 0.43
GFRP 7 15.3 12.6 1.21 1.01 Crushing of
GFRP 9 17.4 14.5 1.20 1.30 concrete
GFRP 11 18.6 14.7 1.26 1.59
GFRP 13 21.3 15.5 1.37 1.87
Table 10 Summary of test results for GFRP reinforced beams–strain capacity

Specimen Ultimate strain ρbalanced ρactual Sub-type of over-reinforced failure mode

Concrete FRP bar A
100 bdf
GFRP 3a 0.0035 0.0200 1.46 0.43 Rupture of longitudinal bars
GFRP 3b 0.0035 0.0200 1.31 0.58
GFRP 4 0.0035 0.0200 1.16 0.77
GFRP 5 0.0035 0.0200 0.59 0.43
GFRP 7 0.0044 0.0200 0.43 1.01 Crushing of concrete
GFRP 9 0.0052 0.0200 0.46 1.30
GFRP 11 0.0038 0.0200 0.40 1.59
GFRP 13 0.0047 0.0200 0.40 1.87
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
5 Closing Comments
The preliminary experimental study reported in this chapter on concrete beams rein-
forced with GFRP bars is encouraging. It is possible to design concrete beams with
FRP bars and seek the desired behaviour. In particular, the following aspects should
be considered in the said design:
(1) Concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars should be designed as over-reinforced
beams, and not as under-reinforced beams.
(2) The stiffness of concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars increases with increase
in area of longitudinal bars.
(3) The failure mode depends critically on the ultimate strain of concrete in bending
compression. Hence, detailed experimental program is required to estimate ulti-
mate strain of concrete, for use in design criteria. Also, this result will guide in
more accurately determining the balanced percentage of FRP reinforcements of
concrete beams.
(4) Concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars are less stiff than conventional
concrete beams reinforced with steel bars. Hence, design of concrete beams
reinforced with FRP bars, deformation is likely to govern the design rather than
strength.
(5) If concrete beams are required to be used in environments involving nuclear
radiation, a technology development program is necessary to produce prefabri-
cated transverse reinforcement made of FRP too. In such a case, all reinforce-
ment is made of FRP material.
In the domain of concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars, the residual agenda
is significant for future work in this area. More experimental and analytical
studies should be conducted to investigate the flexural behaviour of concrete beams
reinforced with FRP bars, involving a wider range of:
(a) FRP reinforcements, namely GFRP, CFRP and AFRP bars.
(b) Concrete beam cross-section sizes, grades of concrete (from low to high),
percentage of longitudinal FRP reinforcement, and percentage of transverse
FRP reinforcement.
Also, the effect of confinement of concrete should be quantified arising from the
use of prefabricated transverse FRP reinforcement on ductility of concrete beams
reinforced with FRP bars.
References
1. Iannuzzi M, Frankel GS (2022) The carbon footprint of steel corrosion. NPJ Mater Degradra-
dation 6(101). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41529-022-00318-1
2. Padmanabha Rao TVVSS (2006) Flexural behaviour of GFRP reinforced concrete beams.
M.Tech. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3. ACI 440 (2000) Guide for the design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP bars. ACI
Committee 440.01R-05 Recommendations. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI,
USA
4. ISIS (2001) Reinforcing concrete structures with fiber reinforced polymers. In: Design Manual
No.3, Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures (ISIS) Research Network of the Canadian
Network of Centers of Excellence, Canada
5. Bajpai K, Duthinh D (2003) Bending performance of masonry walls strengthened with near-
surface mounted FRP bars. In: 9th North American masonry conference. Clemson(USA), pp
1052–1063
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
FRP Based Earthquake Retrofitting
of RC Columns
S. B. Singh and C. V. R. Murty
Abstract Fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) materials are being used for the last
two decades as reinforcement in new concrete structures and prestressing tendons
in pretressed concrete structures. In addition, they are being used at large scale
in external strengthening and/or retrofitting of deficient structures to restore the
strength and stiffness of the structure to the design values or to meet the current code
provisions. But, to make such structures capable of resisting the effects of strong
earthquake shaking, at least a minimum stiffness, sufficient strength and adequate
ductility are to be ensured. FRP laminates and FRP fabric sheets are used in external
strengthening to provide the needed stiffness, strength, and ductility by suitably
orientating the fibers and creating confinement. These FRP materials possess high
tensile strength with moderate stiffness and are non-corrodible; they can be used
efficiently for improving performance of structural elements, without increasing the
earthquake forces. In this chapter, a unified design approach has been presented for
earthquake retrofitting of RC columns; a design example is provided to demonstrate
the effectiveness of FRP for seismic strength and ductility enhancements.
Keywords Design approach · Ductility · Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) ·

Seismic forces · Strength · Stiffness · RC columns
S. B. Singh (B)
Department of Civil Engineering, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani 333031, India
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
C. V. R. Murty
Department of Civil Engineering, P. S. Rao Institute Chair Professor, Indian Institute of
Technology Madras, Chennai, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
38 S. B. Singh and C. V. R. Murty
1 Introduction
The fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) materials are advanced composite materials
having high specific tensile strength and high specific stiffness as reflected by their
corresponding strength-to-weight ratio and stiffness-to-weight ratio, respectively.
Most importantly, these advance composite materials have high corrosion resistance
and are considered practically to be non-corrodible. These materials could be used
in different forms, such as reinforcement bars, laminates, strips, tendons and fabric
sheets. Also, mechanical characteristics of these materials depend on the kinds of
fibers and bonding resins used. Currently, carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP),
glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP), aramid fiber reinforced polymer (AFRP) and
basalt fiber reinforced polymer (BFRP) are being used in civil engineering applica-
tions. In addition, natural fiber based FRP also are being used at large scale for devel-
oping green FRP composites with significantly reduced cost and high sustainability
of its use.
Since these FRP materials have high tensile strength, they are being used for
external strengthening of structures to meet the strength, stiffness and ductility
demands on structures that have deteriorated over time due to aging effects or have
been damaged during when natural actions (such as earthquake and tsunami) appear
on them [1, 2]. Recently, the background was provided [3] to European seismic
design provisions and stated that a large part of research effort is directed towards
the confinement models mostly for static loading situations, such as for shear and
anchorage. Performance-based criteria were presented for global and local retrofit of
structures permitting acceptable and repairable damage during severe intensity earth-
quake ground shaking and limited damage during low intensity earthquake ground
shaking. A review on fiber reinforced polymers for structural retrofitting [4] presented
scope and uses of FRP materials in earthquake strengthening of RC, masonry and
steel structures. Concepts of displacement-based earthquake design were introduced
[5] for a direct and rational retrofit. Primary strategies and principles were suggested
[6] for earthquake retrofit of existing structures with main focus on local strength-
ening. Results of experimental tests were presented [7] on effects of strengthening of
2 m high columns with and without internal steel reinforcements and strengthened
with textile-reinforced concrete; an increase of 85% in axial compressive strength
was reported with respect to that of non-strengthened concrete columns.
Results of a full-scale tests were presented [8] on under-designed RC structure in
the as-built and FRP retrofitted configurations, along with retrofit criteria and calcula-
tion procedures to design the amount and layout of FRP for improving the earthquake
performance of the deficient structures. The results highlight the effectiveness of FRP
wrapping in improving the global performance of under-designed RC columns with
regard to ductility and energy dissipation capacity. In another study [9], the princi-
ples were presented of the design of GFRP retrofit and verified with experimental
tests on both the as-built and GFRP retrofitted structure. In an analytical study [10],
a uniaxial model was used for concrete confined with FRP wrapping, steel jackets
or conventional transverse reinforcement. A relation was provided between axial
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
FRP Based Earthquake Retrofitting of RC Columns 39
and lateral strains to estimate the ultimate strength and ultimate strain of concrete
confined with FRP wrapping.
2 Earthquake Retrofitting of RC Structures Using FRP
RC structures need 7 virtues to be fully earthquake resistant, namely: (1) Good

structural configuration, (2) At least a minimum overall lateral stiffness, (3) Sufficient
overall lateral strength, (4) Large overall lateral deformability, (5) Good overall lateral
ductility, (6) Acceptable collapse mechanism, and (7) Good energy dissipation. The
order in which these are to be ensured is as given above. These are to be ensured at
the global and local levels. In the context of retrofitting of RC structures, the global
virtues should be ensured first and the local virtues next.
In general, it is observed that FRP wrapping to RC members is effective only to
enhance some of the local aspects, like axial strength capacity. Hence, the EuroCode
[6] permits the use of FRP wrapping to increase the shear strength of individual
members, enhance ductility of the concrete members with effective confinement,
and eliminate the chances of lap splice failure. For effective earthquake retrofitting
using external strengthening (wrapping) with FRP, the following are critical points:
(1) Structural configuration cannot be corrected by using FRP wrapping method;
(2) Stiffness irregularities in the structure cannot be solved by using FRP wrapping
method. Overall stiffness cannot be altered significantly by wrapping columns
with FRP sheets;
(3) Strength irregularities in the structure cannot be solved by using FRP wrapping
method. Overall strength can be modified marginally by strengthening select
members,
(4) Overall deformability of the structure is addressed only marginally, and hence
no appreciable change in global ductility.
(5) FRP strengthening is regarded as selective intervention technique to assist in
the following:
(a) Increasing the flexural strength of deficient RC beams at mid-span sections
(though not at the faces of the columns) and of deficient RC columns at
mid-height (though not at the faces of the beams and slabs) using FRP
composites with fibers oriented along axis of members;
(b) Increasing the shear capacity of RC members using FRP composites with
fibers placed in direction transverse to the axis of members;
(c) Increasing the section ductility of RC beams and columns by confinement
in critical zones through wrapping of FRP composites;
(d) Improving the efficiency of lap splice zones of RC beams and columns by
providing confinement using FRP wrapping;
(e) Preventing buckling of longitudinal bars under compression in RC beams
and columns by confinement using FRP wrapping; and
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(f) Intervening into the beam-column joint region with beams framing into it
from 4, 3 or 2 sides is not feasible. Increasing tensile cracking strength is
possible of joint panel zones of beam-column joints with a beam framing
on one side only provided there is no slab in the structure, using the FRP
composites with fibers placed along the principal tensile stresses.
The primary objectives of using external FRP strengthening by wrapping the RC
members in earthquake retrofitting are:
(1) All potential brittle failure mechanisms should be eliminated, such as shear
failure, lap splice failure, buckling of bars in compression, and joint shear (if
possible).
(2) The global deformation capacity of the structure should be enhanced to the
extent possible, by increasing the ductility of the potential plastic hinge zones
either: (a) without changing their position, or (b) relocating the potential plastic
hinge zones, by using the concept of capacity design concept, wherein columns
are strengthened in flexure with the goal of transforming the frame structure
into an energy dissipating mechanism with strong columns and weak beams.
(3) Evaluate the increase in the ductility of the RC structure when the brittle modes
of failure (in (1) above) are precluded.
Enhancement of axial strength and ductility using FRP wrapping in RC columns
with rectangular or square cross-sections is less than that in RC columns with circular
cross-sections, because confinement by FRP jacketing is uniform in circular cross-
sections but localized along the diagonals of the square or rectangular cross-sections.
In wall-like RC columns (with cross-sectional plan aspect ratio more than 3), the
effectiveness of FRP jacketing is lesser than that in RC columns with cross-sectional
plan aspect ratio less than 3. In wall-like columns or structural walls, the failure is
affected by premature failure mechanisms, such as buckling of compression bars and
spalling of cover concrete. Also, confinement models based on regression analysis
are sensitive to the ultimate rupture strain of FRP. The ultimate tensile strain of FRP
estimated from experiments (through flat coupon tests) is not reached even when
FRP jacket ruptures in confined concrete column during compression tests [11, 12].
The ratio between this strain at which FRP rupture during confined compression tests
and the ultimate strain from flat coupon test is called efficiency factor β.
In this chapter, an approach is presented to design the FRP jacketing based earth-
quake retrofitting of rectangular RC column; a design example is presented to demon-
strate the procedure. Expressions are presented for evaluating the load capacity of
RC columns strengthened with textile reinforced concrete and FRP strengthened
concrete.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3 Retrofitting of RC Columns Using FRP for Axial Strength
The axial load capacity Fu of the textile-reinforced concrete strengthened column is

given by:
Fu = Fc + F f c = f cm A g + f f c,e f f A f c,e f f (1)
where
f cm Mean compressive strength of existing concrete core = αc f cm,cube ,
Ag bc dc , and.
A f c,e f f Ae f f − Ac ,
wherein
α 0.665,
( ) ( )
Ae f f bc + 2te f f dc + 2te f f ,
te f f t f c − n 1 , and.
tfc 2(1 + n 2 ).
Here, n 1 refers to the number of layers or plies with 1 mm fine-grained concrete
cover per textile ply, and n 2 to the number of layers or plies with 2 mm fine-grained
concrete cover per textile ply. The effective fine-grained concrete area is calculated
from the 2 mm cover of the fine-grained concrete per textile layer minus the textile
reinforcement with no load bearing capacity. In Eq. (2), due to different compressive
stress–strain relations of existing and new fine-grained textile reinforced concrete,
it is assumed that the fine-grained textile reinforced concrete has not reached the
ultimate strain. Hence assuming rigid bonds, the stress in the fine-grained textile
reinforced concrete is taken corresponding to ultimate strain of existing concrete.
For an existing concrete column with steel reinforcement, Eq. (1) is modified
considering contribution of steel reinforcement with stress corresponding to the
ultimate strain of existing concrete (Fig. 1).
Fu = Fc + Fs + F f c = f cm Ac,net + f s,εcu As + f f c,εcu A f c,e f f , (2)
where
Ac,net A g − As ,
f f c,εcu Stress in fine-grained tensile reinforced concrete corresponding to ultimate
strain εcu of existing concrete, and.
f s,εcu Stress in steel reinforcement corresponding to ultimate strain εcu of the
existing concrete.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Stress
s, cu Steel
Fine-grained textile-reinforced
concrete
fc, cu
Concrete
cu Strain
Fig. 1 Stress–strain relation of concrete and steel reinforcements bars
3.1 Confinement Models
By wrapping the column with FRP sheets, the strength of column concrete increases
owing to enhancement in the axial compressive strain capacity of concrete. But,
the level of increase of axial strain capacity depends on the section. FRP wrapping
does not change the behaviour of the column in compression under low eccentric
axial load, but delays the buckling of longitudinal bars in compression and restrains
the concrete cover from spalling. Together, these actions lead to larger axial strain
capacity, higher axial compression load carrying capacity and enhancement of the
axial strain ductility of the RC column. ACI 440 code [13] provides an expression
to estimate the confinement of concrete to evaluate the cylindrical triaxial confined
concrete strength f cc for a given uniform confining pressure fl, .
( ) / ( ,) ( ,)
fcc fl f
= 2.25 1 + 7.9 , − 2 ,l − 1.25 (3)
f,c fc fc
where f c, is cylinder compressive strength of concrete. For a column of rectangular

cross-section (depth h less than width b), effective lateral confining pressure fl, is
given by [6]:
( )
2t
f,l = Ef εfu (4)
h
where
t Thickness of FRP jacket,
E f Modulus of elasticity of FRP jacket material, and.
ε f u Rupture strain of FRP.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
( ,)
f
For f,l < 1.3, confined compressive strength f cc of concrete for a given
c
thickness of FRP jacket [10] is given by:
( ) ( ) ( , )2 ( , )3
f cc fl, fl f
= 1 + 1.42 −1.40 + 0.30 l, (5)
f c, fc, fc, fc
In general, confined compressive strength f cc of concrete can be determined by

[14]:
( ) ( , )2/3
f cc f
= 1 + 2.6 l, (6)
f c, fc
( f, )
As per Italian standard [14], the confinement is effective only when l,ef ,f f >
c
0.05. The ultimate axial strain εccu of FRP-confined concrete is estimated using [14]:
/( )
,
fl,e ff
εccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 (7)
f c,
, ,
fl,e f f Effective lateral confinement pressure = ke f f f l .
wherein ke f f (≤1) is coefficient of effectiveness, which depends on the cross-

section shape and FRP configurations (continuous or discrete).
3.1.1 Effective Coefficient Factor ke f f
The effectiveness coefficient ke f f is defined as the ratio between the volume of the
effectively confined concrete Vc,e f f and that of the concrete member Vc , neglecting
the area of existing internal steel reinforcement. It is given by:
ke f f = k H k V kα (8)
where
k H Coefficient of Horizontal Efficiency
=
1 ( ) Circular cross − sections ,
b,2 +h ,2
1 − 3Ag Rectangular cross − sections
k V Coefficient of Vertical Efficiency
1 Continous FRP Wrapping
= ( p,f
)2 , and
1 − 2 dmin FRP strips at clear spacing of p ,f
kα Coefficient of Efficiency for fibers installed at an angle α f to the transverse to
the longitudinal axis of the Member.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
1
1+tan 2 α f
,
wherein
b, b − 2rc ,
h, h − 2rc ,
b Width of rectangular section.
h Depth of rectangular section.
rc Corner radius of rectangular section.
Ag Gross cross-sectional area of the section.
dmin Minimum cross-section dimension of the member (equal to diameter in a
circular section).
Also, the following
/ inequality should be satisfied.
p ,f ≤ dmin 2.
3.1.2 Lateral Confinement Pressure fl'
The lateral confinement pressure fl, is given by:
1
f,l = ρf Ef εfd,rid (9)
2
where
ρf Geometric strengthening ratio which depends on shape of sections (i.e.,
rectangular or circular) and FRP configurations (i.e., continuous or discon-
tinuous wrapping),
Ef Modulus of elasticity of the FRP in the fiber
/ direction, and.
ε f d,rid Reduced design strain of FRP min[ηa , ε f k γ f , 0.004],
The Italian standard
/ [14] does not consider confinement in slender rectangular
sections with b h > 2 or maximum dimension b > 900mm. In this situation, Eqs.
(3)–(5) could be used or equations given by Spoelstra and Monti [10] could be used
for such slender sections which are presented later in Sect. 4.3.
wherein
ηa Environmental
⎧ conversion factor (as per Table 3–2 of Italian standard [14]).
⎨ 0.95 Internal Environment
0.85 External Environment for carbon/epoxy system.
⎩
0.85 Aggressive Environment
⎧
0.75 External Environment for aramid/epoxy system.
⎩
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
⎧
0.65 External Environment for glass/epoxy system.
⎩
γf Partial safety factor for material.
⎧
⎨ 1.0 Serviceability Condition
1.1 Ultimate Condition for glass/epoxy system
⎩
1.2 − 1.5 Failure due to Debonding
ε f k Characteristic rupture strain of FRP = Specified ultimate rupture strain
ε f u.
3.1.3 Geometric Strengthening Ratio ρ f
The geometric strengthening ratio, ρ f to be used in Eq. (9) depends on shape of the
sections (circular and rectangular sections). ρf for circular and rectangular sections
as per Italian standard [14] are:
4t f b f
Strip FRP Wrapping
ρ f = 4tDf p f for circular sections, and
D
Continuous FRP Wrapping
2t f (b+h) b f
Strip FRP Wrapping
ρf = bh pf
2t f (b+h) for rectangular sections,
bh
Continuous FRP Wrapping
where t f , b f and p f are thickness, width and center to center spacing of FRP strips,
respectively, D, the diameter of circular section, and b and h are width and depth,
respectively, of rectangular section.
4 Member Deformations and Plastic Hinge Length
The yielding rotation θ y , ultimate rotation θu and plastic hinge length L pl of members
can be computed as per Eurocode 8 [13] as:
dbL f y
θ y = β f lex ϕ y L v + βshear + βsli p √ , (10)
f c,
[ ( )]
( ) 0.5 L pl
θu = γu θ y + ϕu − ϕ y L pl 1 − (11)
Lv
L pl = α f lex L v + αshear h + αsli p dbL f y (12)
where
L v Shear span = 0.5L [15],
dbL Diameter of longitudinal bars,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
f c, Cylinder strength of concrete, and.

fy Yield strength of steel,
ϕy Yield curvature,
ϕu Ultimate curvature,
α f lex = 0.1; αshear = 0.17; αsli p = √
0.24
,
;
fc
( )
β f lex = 13 ; βshear = 0.0013 1 + 1.5 Lhv ; βsli p = 0.13φ y ;
γu = 1
γel
,
wherein
1.5 Primary Members
γel = .
1.0 Secondary Members
4.1 FRP Earthquake Retrofit Approach

without Relocalization of Plastic Hinges
For structures designed for gravity load only, the overall deformation capacity is
governed by the limited rotation capacity in the plastic hinges at beam and column
ends due to small member dimensions and low amount of longitudinal reinforce-
ments. Thus, the FRP confinement of columns can help increase the overall struc-
ture deformation capacity, because column wrapping enhances the usable concrete
compressive strain capacity, which, in turn, leads to increase of curvature ductility.
The enhancement of curvature ductility will lead to proportional increase in the plastic
hinge rotation capacity, assuming that FRP wrapping does not significantly affect
the plastic hinge length. Also, the FRP confinement of columns at their ends induces
considerable increase in section ductility, but does not lead to significant increase in
strength and hence this retrofit approach using FRP wrapping does not change the
strength hierarchy of the structure. Hence, global deficiency like the weak column—
strong beam system cannot be converted to strong column—weak beam system by
FRP wrapping.
To design the earthquake retrofit in terms of number of plies and layers of
FRP fabrics required for critical structural elements, the following steps should be
followed:
(1) Estimate through pushover analysis the maximum deformation capacity of
designed structure, corresponding to the first plastic hinge reaching 0.75θu ;
and
(2) Determine the amount of FRP plies to be used to provide the required ductility
increase of plastic hinges at columns ends by:
(a) Determining the maximum ratio γ of demand chord rotations θdemand
and ultimate capacity chord rotations θu,capacit y , using capacity spectrum
approach (i.e., design response spectrum and capacity curve (Fig. 2), as:
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
1.00 ag=0.3g 1.00 ag=0.3g

0.90 0.90
0.80 0.80
0.70 Elastic demand 0.70 Elastic demand
0.60 0.60
Sa/g 0.50 Sa/g 0.50
=5.30 =5.20
0.40 0.40
0.30 0.30
0.20 Inelastic demand 0.20 Inelastic demand
0.10 Capacity Curve 0.10 Capacity Curve
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Sd (m) Sd (m)
(c) As-built structure (a) Retrofitted structure
Fig. 2 Typical theoretical seismic performance of as-built and retrofitted structure for 0.3 g PGA
θu,demand
γ = ,
θu,capacit y
(b) Determining target rotation capacity γ θu,capacit y and corresponding design

ultimate curvature φu,target at the cross-section;
(c) Estimating (by cross-section analysis) the ultimate concrete strain εcu,target
to achieve target curvature φu,target , and
(d) Determining the amount of FRP plies required to reach the target ultimate
concrete strain εcu,target .
In earthquake retrofit design, it should be ensured that structure meets the ductility
requirement by retrofitting structural elements, such as columns as described above.
But, it should be ensured that all brittle failure modes are precluded as discussed above
in the primary objectives of external FRP strengthening. Also, the structural global
performance before and after strengthening should be assessed by nonlinear static
pushover analysis in both the positive and negative directions of global X and Y-axes.
A typical capacity diagram for as-built and retrofitted structure (Fig. 3) demonstrates
that how deformation capacity of the structure can be enhanced by retrofitting (i.e., top
displacement of a framed structure) without significantly enhancing the load carrying
capacity as expressed by base shear. Thus, to pursue the objectives of retrofitting,
two main aspects should be focused on, namely:
(1) Increasing the global deformation capacity of structure to dissipate its global
response, and
(2) Fully exploiting the increased deformation capacity by avoiding brittle collapse
modes.
The design principles of the rehabilitation strategy for framed building structures
consists of:
(a) design of column confinement, and
(b) design of exterior beam-column joints and shear strengthening of wall-type
columns (columns having aspect ratio, b/h > 3).
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 3 Typical base shear

versus top displacement
curves of as-built and Retrofitted
Base Shear
retrofitted structures
As built
Roof Displacement
4.2 Brittle Collapse Mechanisms
For earthquake retrofit of structures, the following brittle collapse mechanisms [14]
should be prevented using FRP strengthening:
(1) Shear failure,
(2) Failure due to loss of bond in steel overlapping areas into columns,
(3) Failure due to buckling of longitudinal bars into the columns, and
(4) Failure due to tensile stresses on the beam-column joint.
The shear capacity can be increased by providing FRP wrapping with fibers
oriented in direction perpendicular to the axis of the member. The loss of bond
in steel overlapping areas into columns can be reduced by confining the member
cross-section with FRP wrapping. In members with circular cross-section (diameter
D), the thickness of FRP sheets needed for confining the section is given by:
D( fl − σsw )
tf = (13)
0.002 E f
where
σsw Smaller of tensile stress in stirrups corresponding to a strain of 0.001 and the
mortar injection pressure between the FRP reinforcement and the RC column,
if present,
f l = Confinement pressure at the lap splice location with a length L s .
As f yd
[ ue +2(d +c)] L , and.
2n b s
wherein f yd is the design yield strength of longitudinal steel reinforcement, u e the

perimeter of the cross-section within the polygon circumscribing the longitudinal
bars having average diameter db , n the number of bars spliced along u e, and c the
cover to concrete.
In addition to the above brittle failure modes, the buckling of vertical steel rein-
forcement bars in RC columns can be delayed by confining the member cross-section
with FRP of thickness t f given by:
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
2
0.45 n f yd d 10 n d
tf = ≈ (14)
4 E ds E f Ef
where
n Total number of existing steel longitudinal bars subjected to buckling.
f yd Design yield strength of longitudinal steel reinforcement.
d Size of cross-section parallel to the bending plane.
Ef Modulus of elasticity of FRP reinforcement in the direction of existing steel
vertical bars.
Eds Reduced modulus of steel reinforcing bar = √ 4 Es√Ei 2 ,
( Es + Ei )
in which E s is are initial modulus of elasticity and E i the tangent modulus of vertical
steel bars after yielding.
4.3 Concrete Confinement Models
In this section, uniaxial models are presented of concrete confined with fiber-
reinforced polymers, steel jackets and conventional transverse reinforcement. Espe-
cially, equations are presented to estimate the ultimate strength and strain of concrete
confined with FRP, which have been validated by experimental studies. Two sets of
models are available, namely exact expressions for ultimate strength and ultimate
strain, and expressions based on regression analysis of test results.
(a) Exact Expressions
The ultimate confinement pressure flu induced by FRP is given by [10]:
1 2 t j f ju
flu = ρ j f ju = , (15)
2 dj
where
/
ρj Volumetric jacket ratio = 4t j d j .
tj Thickness of FRP jacket,
dj Diameter of transverse reinforcement bars, and.
f ju Ultimate tensile strength of FRP layer.
The confined stress–strain curve of RC column confined by transverse steel is
given by [16]:
flu
1 + 7.94 (16)
f co ,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
[ ( )]
f cc ,
εcc = εco 1 + 5 −1 . (17)
f co ,
The secant modulus of elasticity E sec,u at ultimate strain of εcu is given by:
Ec Ec
E sec,u = = (18)
1 + 2β ε ju 1 + 2β f ju /E j
where
E c /E seco − 1
β= ,
2εlo
wherein ,
f co
E seco = εco
, and
( ) ( )
1 εlim − εco 2
εlo = −ν εco − − ν α εco .
2 εlim − α εco
Here, εlo is concrete lateral strain at unconfined compressive strain εco corresponding
to the peak unconfined compressive stress f,co . β is dependent only on unconfined
,
concrete properties f co and εco (= 0.002), initial elastic modulus E c , Poisson’s ratio
ν and α (0.9–1.0). εlim is the limiting axial strain beyond which micro-cracking starts,
taken as 0.001. Considering α = 1.0 and εlo = −0.05 εco :
1 Ec Ec 1
β= − , =| ,|− (19)
εco f co | f co | |εco |
,
β can be expressed as a function of
/|only| the unconfined concrete strength f co
assuming εco = 0.002 and E c = 5700 | f co
, | M Pa, as:
5700
β = /| | − 500 , (20)
|f, |
co
where f,co is in MPa. Equation (20) is reasonably accurate, if E c is close to the actual
elastic modulus.
,
The ultimate compressive strain εcu and stress f cu can be estimated as:
( ( ) )1−Esec /Ec
E sec E c − E sec,u
εcu = εcc , and (21)
E sec,u (E c − E sec )
,
f cu = E sec,u εcu , (22)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
where
f cc,
E sec = ,
εcc
wherein f cc, and εcc are confined compressive strength and strain of concrete.
(b) Regression Expressions
The approximate ultimate compressive strength and ultimate compressive strain of
confined concrete can be estimated as:
( / )
, ,
f cu = f co 0.2 + 3 flu , and (23)
( / )
εcu = εco 2 + 1.25E c ε ju flu , (24)
where
flu = flu
, ,
f co
Ec = Ec
, ,
f co
and.
f ju
ε ju = Ej
, the ultimate strain in confining jacket.
When there is no confinement, i.e., flu = 0, the expressions reduce to those of
unconfined concrete, with ultimate strain εcu = 0.004 and ultimate strength equal to
20% of the peak strength, which are the values adopted usually.
/ Also, ultimate strain
in the confining jacket should be estimated as ε ju = f ju E j and not be taken from
the manufacturers sheet.
4.4 Design Example
4.4.1 Problem Statement
A 3-storey residential RC frame building (height 9 m with storey height 3 m) has

plan dimension 12 m × 10 m (Fig. 4a). The clear column height L is 2.7 m. The
upper two storeys have masonry infills, while the ground storey is open (Fig. 4b). The
each column is rectangular (350 mm × 250 mm) and reinforced with 6 longitudinal
bars of 14 mm diameter and 6 mm diameter steel stirrups @150 mm centers, with
clear cover of 20 mm (Fig. 5). Each beam is rectangular (200 mm × 400 mm) with
200 m thick slab as flange thickness (Fig. 5b) and reinforced with 6 mm diameter
stirrups@250 mm centers and anchored with 90° hook ends.
The effective depth of column section about the major (X) axis is d = 350 −
20 − 0.5 × 14 = 323 mm. The shear reinforcement is less and is anchored poorly.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
C7 C8
C9
B5 B6
B8 B10 3m
5m B12
C4 C5
C6 3m 2.7m
B3 B4
B7 B11
5m
B9
B1 B2 3m
Y
C1 C2 C3
6m 6m
6m 6m
X (a) Plan View
(b) Elevation
Fig. 4 Plan view and elevation view of a typical 3-storey building: a Plan, and b Elevation
The longitudinal bar is lap spliced at the bottom of the column; the lap length is
50db = 50 × 14 = 700 mm with end hooks as shown in Fig. 5a. Hence, the effective
splice length is taken as 62.5db = 62.5 × 14 = 875 mm considering the positive
influence of hooks under tension.
The mean in-situ cylindrical concrete compressive strength f cm = f c, = 16 MPa.
The longitudinal reinforcement is ribbed and has average yield strength f ys =
500 MPa. The transverse reinforcement is smooth steel and has average yield strength
of f yw = 240 MPa. Owing to presence of an open ground storey, the lateral defor-
mation imposed by the earthquake shaking is localized in this storey, because all of
the large stiffness of the upper storeys arising from the infill walls. Hence, it is critical
to assess the ground storey columns (quantify their deficiencies) and suggest suit-
able retrofitting measures using FRP external wrapping and plates; the earthquake
hazard considered is that corresponding to a peak ground acceleration of 0.24 g. Also,
thickness of carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) plates t0 = 1.4 mm, modulus
of elasticity E f = 205 GPa, ultimate tensile stress f f u = 3,200 MPa, and ultimate
tensile strain ε f uk = 0.017, and partial safety factor γf = 3 for FRP anchored on
brittle substrate.
4.4.2 Solution
The step by step evaluation of columns are given below to assess their structural
weakness under earthquake loading events as the ground floor columns are more
critical than beams under seismic loading situations.
Step 1: Check Slenderness of Columns
Consider dead of reinforced concrete slab (γ = 25 kN/m3 ) of thickness 200 mm,
additional dead load (of columns and beams) of 2 kN/m2 , masonry walls (γ = 12
kN/m3 ) of thickness 0.12 m, and live load q of 3.5 kN/m2 . For the plan area of
building of 12 × 10 = 120 m2 , the gravity load on each floor is given by:
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Hook
end
6Y14
350mm
700mm
h=350 mm
20mm 6@150 centers
6Y14
250mm
(a)
200mm
400mm
6@250 centers
20mm
200mm
(b)
Fig. 5 Member cross-sections and reinforcement details: a column, and b beam
W Floor,RC = (γ f ) × Floor Plan Area = (25 × 0.2 + 2) × 120 = 840 kN
W Floor,LiveLoad = (0.25q) × Floor Plan Area = (0.25 × 3.5) × 120 = 105 kN
W Floor,Masonr y = γm × Thickness × Length × Height

= 12 × 0.12m × 2 × (8.95 + 11.25) × 2.7 ∼
= 154 kN
Total Axial Load carried by all ground storey columns = 3 × 945 + 2 × 154 =
3, 143 kN.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The central column has the largest tributary area, and hence carries the largest
load, given by:
6×5
NED = × 3, 143 = 786 kN.
12 × 10
The axial load ratio of central column
NE D 786 × 103
νE D = = = 0.56
b h f cm 250 × 350 × 16
This is high, and to reduce it to below 0.4 for better flexural response, there is need
to increase the cross-sectional area of column by using the procedures suggested in
ACI 318–19 [17].
The radius of gyration r yy of column about the minor axis, i.e., y-y axis is given
by:
/ /
hb3
I yy b
r yy = = 12
= √ = 0.29b = 0.29 × 250 = 72.5 mm
Ag bh 12
Hence, the slenderness ratio for bending about the minor axis is:
L 2700
λ= = = 37.2 > λlim
r yy 72.5
{ √ √ }
= max 25; 15/15 v E D − v E D
{ √ √ }
= max 25; 15/15 0.56 − 0.56 = 20.0
Hence, the slenderness ratio needs to be increased by increasing cross-section

dimensions by concrete jacketing with high quality concrete. Let the increased cross
section be b = 360 mm and h = 460 mm. Then, the revised axial load ratio of central
column is:
NED 786 × 103

νED,new = = = 0.30
b h fcm 360 × 460 × 16
and the revised radius of gyration
ryy,new = 0.29b = 0.29 × 360 = 104.4 mm
L 2700
λnew = = = 25.9 < λlim
r yy,new 104.4
{ √ √ }
= max 25; 15/15 ν E D − ν E D
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
{ √ √ }
= max 25; 15/15 0.30 − 0.30 = 27.4.
Thus, the increasing the dimensions of the central column satisfies the maximum
slenderness ratio requirement of the column to ensure dominant flexural response.
Step 2: Determine Strength
By evaluating the strength and deformation capacity of building in y-y direction, i.e.,
bending about the strong x-x axis, the corner columns are expected to yield first due
to lower axial load while the central column is susceptible to crushing owing to high
axial load. For a RC section with low reinforcements, the curvature φ y at onset of
yielding of tension reinforcement is given by:
2 εsy 2 × 0.0025
ϕy = = = 1.43 × 10−5 = 0.0143/m.
h 350
The moment at yielding can be approximated [18] as:
M y = Asl,1 f ym jd + N E D (0.5h − 0.4 × 0.25d),
where
jd = 0.85d is lever arm between tensile force of bottom
/ steel reinforcement
and concrete compressive force and Asl,1 = 3 × π × 142 4 = 462 mm2 (i.e.,
cross-sectional area of tensile reinforcement).
Yield moment of corner columns
M y = 462 × 500 × 0.85 × 323 + 200.4 × 103 × (0.5 × 350 − 0.4 × 0.25 × 323)
= 92.02 × 106 Nmm = 92.02 kNm
Yield moment of peripheral columns
M y = 462 × 500 × 0.85 × 323 + 400.8 × 103 × (0.5 × 350 − 0.4 × 0.25 × 323)
= 120.6 × 106 Nmm = 120.6 kNm
Using Fig. 6 [18, 19], the ultimate curvature of the corner column with longitudinal
/ ratio ρl is estimated as a function of normalized depth of compression
reinforcement
zone ξ = x d for different axial load ratios v E D for symmetrically reinforced cross-
section. For v E D = 0.14 and ρl = 250×350
2×462
× 100 = 1.06%, ξ = 0.24 (Fig. 6). Taking
the concrete crushing strain εcu = 0.0035, the ultimate curvature ϕu is:
εcu 0.0035
ϕu = = = 5.01 × 10−5 /mm = 0.05/m,
ξd 0.9 × 0.24 × 323
including a reduction factor of 0.9 on ξ. Thus, the secant effective flexural rigidity
to yield:
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
L (%)
4.0
ED = 10%
3.5
Longitudinal reinforcement ratio

20%
30%
3.0 40%
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40
Normalized compression zone =x/d
Fig. 6 Longitudinal reinforcement ratio versus normalized compression zone depth for different
axial load ratios
My 92.02
= 6, 435 kNm 2 corner columns
EI = = 0.0143 ,
ϕy 120.6
0.0143
= 8, 434 kNm2 peripheral columns
√ √
For modulus of elasticity of concrete of E = 5000 f ck = 5000 16/0.80 ×10−3 =
22.4 GPa, the moment of inertia of uncracked section
bh 3 250 × 3503
I = = = 8.93 × 108 mm4 ,
12 12
and the elastic flexural stiffness
E Iel = 22.4 × 8.93 × 108 × 10−6 = 20, 003 kN m2 .
As in pushover analysis, cross-sections are assumed to be cracked. Hence, 50%

of the elastic value is used as flexural stiffness at cracking, i.e.,
E Icr = 0.50E Iel = 0.5 × 20003 ≈ 10, 002 kN m2
Thus, the secant effective stiffness of columns under pure lateral translation is:
12E I 12×6435
= 3, 923 kNm 2 corner columns
K = = 2.73 ,
L3 12×8434
2.73
= 5, 142 kNm2 peripheral columns
The translational flexural stiffness under pure lateral translation are:
12E Iel 12 × 20003

K el = = = 12, 195 kN/m,
L3 2.73
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
12E Icr 12 × 10002

K cr = 3
= = 6, 097 kN/m,
L 2.73
There is significant difference in K estimated by different approaches. K has high
impact on natural period of the structure, and thereby the maximum displacement
during earthquake shaking. Here, the secant to yield translational stiffness K of 3,923
kN/m is used.
The chord rotation θ y at yield as per literature is [18] is:
ϕy H 0.0143 × 2.7
θy = = × 100 = 0.64%,
6 6
With reference to Eq. (10), we have
L v = 0.5L = 0.5 × 2.7 = 1.35 m = 1350 mm

( )
β f lex = 1
3
; ϕy = 0.0143/m; βshear = 0.0013 1 + 1.5 Lhv = 0.0013 ×
( )
1 + 1.5 × 350
1350
= 1.81 × 10−3
βsli p = 0.13 ϕ y = 0.13 × 0.0143/m = 0.13 × 0.0143 × 10−3 = 1.859 × 10−6 /mm
dbL f y
θ y = β f lex ϕ y L v + βshear + βsli p √
f c,
1 14 × 500
= × 0.0143 × 1.35 + 1.81 × 10−3 + 1.859 × 10−6 × √
3 16
= 0.0115 = 1.15%
Thus, Eq. (10) gives the yield rotation almost twice of the approximate value.
Again, the conservative value of 0.64% is used.
The ultimate chord rotation θu using Eq. (11) is: shear .
Using, γu = γ1el = 1.5
1
= 0.67, θ y = 0.64%, ϕ y = 0.0143/m and ϕu = 0.05/m,
the ultimate chord rotation θu as:
[ ( )]
( ) 0.5L pl
θu = γu θ y + ϕu − ϕ y L pl 1 −
Lv
[
= 0.67 × 0.64 × 10−2 + (0.05 − 0.0143) × 10−3 × 614.5
( )]
0.5 × 614.5
× 1− × 100 = 1.6%
1350
Thus, the rotational and displacement ductility are given by:
1.6
μθ = μΔ = = 2.5
0.64
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Alternatively, the curvature and rotational ductility can be estimated as per

literature [18] as:
0.45 εsyεcuν E D ν ≥ 0.2 θu ( )

μϕ = ( ) ED , and μθ = = μ = 0.5 μϕ + 1 .
εcu
0.45 εsy ξ d ν E D < 0.2
h
θy
A reduction factor of 0.9 is applied for ξ . So for corner column, ξ = 0.24 and
ν E D = 0.14 < 0.2. Hence,
εcu h 0.0035 350

μϕ = 0.45 = 0.45 × × = 3.16
εsy ξ d 0.0025 0.9 × 0.24 × 323
To consider the contribution of reinforcement pull-out to the rotation capacity μθ

should be multiplied by a factor of 1.5. Hence,
[ ( )]
μθ = μΔ = 1.5 0.5 μϕ + 1 = 1.5 × [0.5 × (3.16 + 1)] = 3.1
Thus,
θu = 3.1θ y = 3.1 × 0.64 = 2%
The displacement ductility of 3.1 is more conservative than 2.5 calculated earlier
for determining the required shear strength of column sections.
Step 3: Check for Brittle Mechanisms of Shear and Lap-Splice Failures
In Step 2, shear capacity of column was ignored when determining the flexural
response of ground storey column. Thus, calculations of Step 2 are meaningful
provided the columns are able to develop the lateral force V f l corresponding to
flexural capacity, i.e.,
My 92.02
= 68.2 kN corner column
Vfl = = 1.35 .
Lv 120.6
1.35
= 89.3 kN peripheral column
V f l should be multiplied by a safety factor more than 1 to account for over-

strength of columns. As per Eurocode [21], for medium ductility reinforced concrete
buildings, the over-strength in beams and columns can be found by product of the
flexural capacity with: (a) 1.15 the material safety factor for steel, (b) 1.2 due to
design-action effects at the end sections of critical regions, and (c) 1 and 1.1 due to
steel strain hardening for beams and columns, respectively. Hence, for columns, the
over-strength factor is equal to 1.15 × 1.2 × 1.1 ≈ 1.5.
The shear capacity of columns is:
1 { ( ) [ ( )]
pl ( )}
V R D,o = (h − x)/(2L v ) · min N , 0.55Ac f c, + 1 − 0.05 min 5, μθ V Rd,c + V R D,s
γel
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
√
VR D,c = 0.41 f c, b x
Asw
VR D,s = ρsw bo h o f y,st = bo h o f y,st
(sh bo )
For Corner Column,

/ √
V R D,c = 0.41 f c, b x = 0.41 × 16 × 250 × 0.9 × 0.24 × 323 × 10−3 = 28.6 kN
Asw
(sh bo )
π 62
=2× × × 210 × 310 × 240 × 10−3
4 (150 × 210)
= 28.05kN
Thus, taking a conservative value of displacement ductility factor of 3.1,

( )
pl θu − θ y
μθ = = μθ − 1 = 3.1 − 1 = 2.1.
θy
Hence,
( )
pl
1 − 0.05 min 5, μθ = 1 − 0.05 × min(5, 2.1) = 0.90
γel = 1.15
Thus,
1 {{ ( )
V R D,o = (h − x)/(2L v ) · min N , 0.55Ac f c,
γel
[ ( )] )}
pl (
+ 1 − 0.05 min 5, μθ V Rd,c + V R D,s
1
= × {(350 − 0.9 × 0.24 × 323)/(2 × 1350)
1.15
( ) }
× min 200.4, 0.55 × 250 × 350 × 16 × 10−3 + 0.90 × (28.6 + 28.05)
= 62.4 kN < 1.5 V f l = 1.5 × 68.2 = 102.3 kN
For Peripheral Columns, ( )

ξ = 0.27; μθ = ( u θ y y ) = μθ −1 = 2.6−1 = 1.6, and 1−0.05 min 5, μθ =
pl θ −θ pl
1 − 0.05 × min(5, 1.6) = 0.92.

/ √
V R D,c = 0.41 f c, b x = 0.41 × 16 × 250 × 0.9 × 0.27 × 323 × 10−3 = 32.2 kN
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Asw
(sh bo )
π 62
=2× × × 210 × 310 × 240 × 10−3 = 28.05kN
4 (150 × 210)
1 { ( )
V R D,o = (h − x)/(2L v ). min N , 0.55Ac f c,
γel
[ ( )] )}
pl (
+ 1 − 0.05 min 5, μθ V Rd,c + V R D,s
1
= × {(350 − 0.9 × 0.27 × 323)/(2 × 1350)
1.15
( ) }
× min 400.8, 0.55 × 250 × 350 × 16 × 10−3 + 0.92 × (32.2 + 28.05)
= 83.2 kN < 1.5V f l = 1.5 × 89.3 = 134
Thus, both the corner columns and peripheral columns will fail in shear on yielding
at about the same drift (i.e.,θ y VR D,o /V f l ). The drift is 0.64% × 62.4/68.2 = 0.59%
in corner columns and 0.64% × 83.2/89.3 = 0.60% in peripheral columns.
The other brittle failure mechanism is splice failure before development of yield
stress in the reinforcement bars. Thus we need to check whether available splice
length l0 is sufficient for reinforcement bars to develop their yield strength. The
available bond strength is:
[ ]
2μ f r 0.33Ast f y,st
τb = 2c f ctk + .
π Db Nb s
/
Taking μ f r = 1, c = 20 mm, Db = 14 mm, Ast = 2 × π × 62 4 = 56.5 mm2 ,
fyst = 240 MPa, Nb = 3 bar pairs, s = stirrup spacing of 150 mm centers, and
f ctk = 0.33 f cm
0.5
= 0.33 × (16)0.5 = 1.3 MPa,
[ ]
2μ f r 0.33Ast f y,st
τb = 2c f ctk +
π Db Nb s
2 × 1.0
= × [2 × 20 × 1.3 + 0.33 × (56.5 × 240)/(3 × 150)] = 2.82MPa
π × 14
The limiting value of bond strength to ensure yielding of longitudinal bars before
splice failure with hook length l0 of 875 mm,
γel Db f sy 1.15 × 14 × 500

τb,lim = = = 2.3 MPa.
4 lo 4 × 875
As available bond strength τb = 2.82 MPa is more than τb,lim = 2.3 MPa, the lap
splice is sufficient to ensure yielding of longitudinal reinforcement. But, immediately
after yielding of longitudinal reinforcements corresponding to displacement ductility
μ = 1, the cover may crack which implies that the term 2c f ctk ≈ 0, and bond
strength becomes equal to 0.45 MPa much less than τb,lim = 2.3 MPa. Hence, splice
failure is anticipated immediately after the yielding of longitudinal reinforcements.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Thus, from the above assessment, the ground columns may fail in shear before
any yielding of longitudinal reinforcements, at a drift of about 0.6% corresponding
to lateral displacement at the top of the ground storey, i.e., Δ = 0.6% × 2.7 m =
0.006 × 2700 = 16.2 mm. In the same way, in straight splices without hooks, the lap
splice failure occurs in both the peripheral and the corner columns before yielding.
Step 4: Check for Global Strengthening Requirements
The available effective stiffness K e f f of existing building is examined to check
whether it is sufficient to resist the earthquake demand or if there is need to reduce
the drift demand. To reduce the drift demand, the retrofit solution should increase
the global lateral stiffness K e f f . Local strengthening (like FRP wrapping) may be
employed to preventing brittle modes of failure in the columns. By increasing Keff , the
demand may be reduced in two different ways, namely: (i) reducing the predominant
period, and (ii) reducing deformation demand on individual members.
Here, total building mass M is 320.6 tonnes. Assuming that the building has a soft
storey, wherein all lateral translation is concentrated in the ground storey, i.e.,
∑
n
Ke f f = K i ΔΦi2 = K 1 × 12 = K 1
i
Thus, the translational stiffness against earthquake lateral sway of the ground
storey about major axis, i.e., x-x axis (in y-y direction) is given by:
K e f f = 4(cor ner columns) × 3923 + 4(Peri pheral columns) × 5142

+ (central column) × 3923 = 40183 kN/m
/ /
Effective Natural Period Te f f = 2π M
K
= 2π 320.6
40183
= 0.56 s
Empirical reference natural period, Tr e f = 0.075Htot = 0.075 × 90.75
0.75
= 0.39 s
Te f f 0.56
= = 1.44
Tr e f 0.39
Te f f is more than Tr e f by more than 25%, and hence Keff should be increased to
reduce Te f f to an acceptable value of 0.4 s – 0.5 s for 3-storey building.
For the earthquake assessment of the building, the peak ground acceleration PGA
of 0.24 g is considered as per problem statement. For TC ≤ T ≤ TD [21] with S =
1.2 for Soil Class B, TC = 0.50s, TD = 2s, ag = 0.24g, η = 1 ( f or ξ = 5%) and
βo = 2.5, the elastic spectral displacement demand for Te f f of 0.56 s is:
( )
Sd (T ) = ag S η βo TC T /40 = 0.24g × 1.2 × 1 × 2.5 × (0.5 × 0.56) /40 = 0.049 m.
The lateral drift Δ in the ground storey
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 7 Storey Stiffness ratios (Ki /K1 ) for n-storey frame building [18]
Sd 0.049
Δ= = × 100 = 1.8%.
H 2.7
Corresponding drift or displacement ductility demand, μΔ = 0.64 1.8

= 2.8. Thus,
displacement ductility demand of 2.8 for PGA of 0.24 g is more than drift supplied
by the columns (i.e., 2.5) estimated earlier assuming there is no brittle failure due
to shear failure or lap splice failure. The global intervention measures are required
to reduce the drift demand along with improvement of the deflection shape of stilt
type of building structures (i.e., with open ground storey] before considering any
application of FRP jacketing. / /
Figure 7 shows the storey stiffness K 2 K 1 = 1.1 and K 3 K 1 = 1.6 of a 3-storey
frame building.
Let the target natural period is 0.45 s (value taken between reference period and
initial effective period). Then from Fig. 8 and using the first storey mass m 1 of 96.6
tons,
K1
= 0.950 × 103 = 950
m1
⇒ K 1 = 950 × 96.6 = 91770 kN/m,
K2
= 1.1
K1
⇒ K 2 = 1.1 K 1 = 1.1 × 91770 = 100947 kN/m
K3
= 1.6
K1
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
/
Fig. 8 Reduction of stiffness to mass ratio K 1 m of first storey with Natural Period [18]
⇒ K 3 = 1.6 K 1 = 1.6 × 91770 = 146832 kN/m
K e f f = 40183 kN/m as calculated earlier.

Thus, the target stiffness K 1 = 91770 kN/m of the ground storey is much more
than available K e f f = 40183 kN/m. The increase in ground storey stiffness is
achieved by adding metallic cross-bracings in the considered direction of earthquake
shaking, i.e., y-y direction.
The increased stiffness of the central column due increased dimensions of 360 mm
× 460 mm can be estimated assuming the column to be pinned at its base. Hence,
(1 )
3 EI 3 × 29 × × 360 × 4603 × 10−6
K c,new = 3
= 12
= 12907 kN/m
H 2.73
The initial value of K c is 3,923 kN/m, and stiffnesses are 3923 kN/m and 5142
kN/m of corner and peripheral columns, respectively.
Required cross-bracing stiffness,
∑
K x = K 1 − K c,new − 4(cor ner columns) × 3923 kN/m
− 4( peri pheral columns) × 5142 kN/m
= 91770 − 12907 − 4 × 3923 − 4 × 5142 = 42, 603 kN/m
Length of each brace is given by
L = 5 − 1.5 × 0.350 = 4.475 m
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Angle of inclination of cross bracings

( ) ( )
−1 h st,cl −1 2.7
ϕ = tan = tan = 0.6
L 4.475
◦
⇒ ϕ = 31.1
√
Length of the diagonal brace Dx = (4475)2 + (2700)2 = 5226 mm.
Taking modulus of elasticity of steel bracing as Es = 150000 MPa.
Providing two cross bracings symmetrically in the building, required cross-
sectional area of each cross bracing, Abr is estimated as:
∑ 42603 × 5226 × cos2 31.1o

K X = 2 E s Abr /Dx cos2 ϕ = 42603 ⇒ Abr =
2 × 150000
= 544 mm2 (say 550 mm2 )
One brace could be provided between columns C1-C4 and another between
columns C6-C9.
Considering the stiffness of the exterior infill walls in the upper storeys, total
cross-sectional area Aw of side-walls in y-y direction for each of the upper two
storeys, is:
Aw = 2 × (10 − 3 × 0.350) × 0.12 = 2.15 m2
Thus,
Aw 2.15
ρmw = = = 0.018
A f loor 12 × 10
For hi = 2.7 m, f bc = 5 MPa, f mc = 5 MPa, γm = 1.5, μmw

y = 2.5 and θy = 0.15%,
mw
f bc 5
Design f bc = = = 3.33 MPa
γm 1.5
f mc 5
Design f mc = = = 3.33 MPa
γm 1.5
Masonry wall stiffness K mw in each floor is:

( )
0.7 0.3
A f loor 0.1 f bc f mc
K mw = ρmw,i (25)
hi μy θy
mw mw
Thus,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
m3=104.3 ton Shear type

K3=111223 kN/m
0.82
m2=112 ton 6
Htot= 9 m
K2=111223kN/m Rayleigh final
0.5 Assumed
m1=104.3 ton 3
K1=91770 kN/m
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(a) Stiffness distribution (b) Lateral displacement profile after Rayleigh iteration
Fig. 9 Stiffness distribution and lateral displacement profile of the3-storey building
120 ( )
K mw = 0.018 × × 103 × 0.1 × 3.330.7 × 3.330.3 /(2.5 × 0.0015)
2.7
= 71040kN/m
The available effective stiffness of the 2nd and 3rd storeys is:
K 2 = K 3 = K e f f + K mw = 40183 + 71040 = 111223 kN/m (Fig. 9a)
Since the available magnitudes of K 2 and K 3 are higher than or close to the
required value for chosen shear type response of the building (i.e., K 2 = 100,947
kN/m and K 3 = 146832 kN/m), there is no need of any global retrofit measures in
these floors. In Fig. 9a, floor mass has been increased by adding ¼ of the masonry
weight of 30.8 ton at top and bottom while the half the masonry weight has been
added at 2nd floor.
Taking the target natural period Ttrg as 0.45 s (<Tc = 0.5 s), ag = 0.24g, S =
1.2 (Soil Class B), η = 1 (ξ = 5%) and βo = 2.5, the elastic spectral displacement
demand is estimated as [21]:
Sd (T ) = ag S η βo T 2 /40 = 0.24 × 9.81 × 1.2 × 1 × 2.5 × 0.452 /40 = 0.036 m.
Considering that the displacement will be increased by about 20% when trans-
ferring from the spectrum (based on single degree of freedom system) to the actual
structure (multi-degree of freedom system), the relative drift demand at the ground
storey for ϕ = 0.5 (Fig. 9b) is:
Sd 0.036
θdem = 1.2Δ = 1.2 × 0.5 × × 100 = 0.8%.
H 2.7
The corresponding displacement ductility
0.80%
μΔ = = 1.25
0.64%
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
After placing the bracing in the ground storey, the ductility demand is reduced to
a value lower than that corresponding to the plastic hinge length of 615 mm, i.e., 2.5,
and close to that corresponding to the plastic hinge length of 160 mm, i.e., 1.2.
Step 5: Local Strengthening with FRP Wrapping
The local strengthening using FRP wrapping is needed to prevent brittle failure modes
in columns when flexural capacity of columns is developed fully. The FRP confine-
ment helps in enhancing displacement ductility and shear strength, and preventing
failure due to longitudinal steel bars. The properties of the available carbon fiber
fabric system used in jacketing are:
Thickness to = 0.12 mm.
Modulus of elasticity E f = 165, 000 MPa.
Ultimate tensile stress f f u = 2970 MPa.
Ultimate strain ε f uk = 0.018.
Slip strength so = 0.5 MPa.
Bond strength τa = 5 MPa.
As per approach given in literature [2], the design tensile strain of FRP layer is:
ε f u,h = η1 η2 η3 ε f uk /γ f
where η1 accounts for the radius of chamfer, R = c+0.5Db = 20+0.5×14 = 27 mm

and straight part of the largest cross-section side h , = 350 − 2 × 27 = 296 mm, and
is given by:
η1 = 0.25 + 2(2R + Db )/ h , = 0.25 + 2 × (2 × 27 + 14)/296 = 0.71
(1) Factor η2 = 1 which accounts for the sufficiency of the wrap development
length, i.e., straight parts of the cross section, h , = 350 − 2 × 27 = 296 mm
and b, = 250 − 2 × 27 = 196 mm are sufficient to accommodate√ the minimum
anchorage
√ length of the external FRP layer, l min
b = 0.5π E f o o a = 0.5π ×
t s /τ
165000 × 0.12 × 0.5/5 ≈ 70 mm. So external layer of the FRP jacket can
be anchored over the column’s shorter side.
(2) Factor η3 = 1 for fully wrapped jacket and considers the redundancy of the
jacket against debonding.
The design tensile strain εfu,h is:
ε f u,h = 0.71 × 1 × 1 × 0.018/1.5 = 0.0085
(i) Confinement Required for Design Ductility Demand
For the required displacement ductility μ of 1.25 (estimated in Step 4), the
associated curvature ductility μϕ is:
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
μϕ = 2μθ − 1 = 2 × 1.25 − 1 = 1.5.
The maximum compressive strain demand εcu,c is given by:
εcu,c = 2.2μϕ εsy ν E D

2.2 × 1.5 × 0.0025 × 0.14 = 0.0012 < 0.0035 corner columns
=
2.2 × 1.5 × 0.0025 × 0.28 = 0.0023 < 0.0035 periperal columns
Thus, from the displacement ductility consideration, there is no need to confine

concrete using closed FRP jackets to meet its strain demands in the compression
zone.
Shear Strengthening
As mentioned earlier, the flexural response dominates when shear strength V RD
exceeds 1.5 V fl . ( )
Maximum design shear force 1.5 V f l = max 1.5 V f l,cor ner , 1.5 V f l, peri pheral =
134 kN.
Minimum
( design shear
) strength available VR D,o =
min VR D,o,cor ner , VR D,o, peri pheral = 62.4 kN.
The shear force to be resisted by FRP closed-type jacketing is ΔV = 1.5V f l −
VR D,o = 134 − 62.4 = 71.6 kN. ( )
2t
Using the relation ΔV = VR D, f = bf bh E f ε f u,h = 71.6 kN,
71.6 × 103 × 250

tf = = 0.07 mm < to = 0.12 mm.
2 × 250 × 350 × 165000 × 0.0085
Thus, a single layer FRP jacket is sufficient for shear strengthening along the
column’s height.
(ii) Strengthening of Splice Region
As estimated in Step 2, for the lap splice with hook of 875 mm, the available bond
strength τb = 2.82 MPa is more than τb,lim = 2.3 MPa, the lap splice is sufficient
to ensure yielding of longitudinal reinforcement. But, immediately after yielding
of longitudinal reinforcements, the cover may crack which implies that the term
2c fctk ≈ 0 for calculation of bond strength τb , which becomes equal to 0.45 MPa
much less than τb,lim = 2.3 MPa. Hence, splice failure is anticipated immediately
after the yielding of longitudinal reinforcements.
Thus, the contribution of FRP jacketing in restoring the bond strength to the yield
limit, τb,lim = 2.3 MPa is given by:
[ ]
2μ f r 0.33 Ast f y,st 2 t f E f ε f,sl
τb = + .
π Db Nb s Nb
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Thus,
[ ]
2 × 1 0.33 × 56.5 × 240 2 n × 0.12 × 165000 × 0.0015
2.3 = +
π × 14 3 × 150 3
⇒ 19.8n = 40.636
Hence, 2 layers are needed to wrap the splice region of lo = 700 mm at the bottom
of column.
(iii) Prevention of Buckling of Longitudinal Columns
The required thickness t f of FRP jacket for preventing the buckling of existing
vertical longitudinal reinforcements, is:
2 d
0.45 n f yd 10 n d 10 × 6 × 350
tf = ≈ = = 0.127 mm ⇒ 1 layer o f F R P jacket
4 E ds E f Ef 165000
where
n Total number of existing steel longitudinal bars subjected to buckling = 6,

f yd Design yield strength of longitudinal steel reinforcement = 500 MPa,
d Size of cross-section parallel to the bending plane = 350 mm, and.
Ef Modulus of elasticity of FRP reinforcement in the direction of steel vertical
bars = 165,000 MPa.
But, considering the relation between strain ductility and spacing of stirrups given
in literature [18], to eliminate buckling of bars in compression for required curvature
ductility μϕ = 1.5, the compression strain demand εcu,c calculated previously is less
than 0.0035 for corner and peripheral columns. From Fig. 5 [18], for Dsb = 150 14
=
10.7 ≈ 11, the strain μec at which the bars become unstable is:
εs,crit
μec ≈ 2 =
εs,y
⇒ εs,crit = 2εsy = 2 × 0.0025 = 0.005
When estimating the required jacket confinement, it must be ensured that:

( )
εcu,c ≥ max εcu = 0.0035, εs,crit = 0.005 = 0.005
where
[ ( ) ]
εcu,c = εcu + 0.075 ς α f ρ f v E f ε f u,h + αw ρsv f y,st / f c − 0.1 ≥ εcu ,
( )
a f ≈ 1 − (b − 2R)2 + (h − 2R)2 /(3bh), and
ρ f v = 2t f (h + b)/ hb.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Thus,
( )
a f ≈ 1 − (b − 2R)2 + (h − 2R)2 /(3bh)
( )
= 1 − (250 − 2 × 27)2 + (350 − 2 × 27)2 /(3 × 250 × 350) = 0.52
(2×210+2×310)× π4 ×62
Volumetric ratio of transverse reinforcement ρsv = (150×210×310)
= 0.0030.
For
εcu = 0.0035, εcu,c = 0.005,

αw = 0.15(con f inement e f f ecti veness f actor de f ined f or stirr ups),
ξ = 1 ( f or εcu,c ≤ 0.01)
Thus,
[ ( ) ]
εcu,c = εcu + 0.075 ς α f ρ f v E f ε f u,h + αw ρsv f y,st / f c − 0.1 ⇒ 0.005
[ ( ) ]
= 0.0035 + 0.075 × 1 × 0.52 × ρ f v × 165000 × 0.0085 + 0.15 × 0.0030 × 240 /16 − 0.1 ⇒ ρ f v
2t f (250 + 350)
= 0.0025 = ⇒ tf
250 × 350
= 0.18 mm = n to = n × 0.12 ⇒ n = 2 F R P layer s
Thus, provide 2 layers of FRP along the critical regions of all columns at top
and bottom for lpl = 615 mm, which is rounded to 600 mm. Thus, for eliminating
premature buckling and splice failure, 2 layers of FRP jacketing (0.24 mm thickness
with ρ f v = 0.0033) provides a limited displacement ductility as:
( )
μΔ = 1.3 + 12.4 0.5α f ρ f v E f ε f u,h / f c − 0.1) ≥ 1.3
μΔ = 1.3 + 12.4 × (0.5 × 0.52 × 0.0033 × 165000 × 0.0085/16 − 0.1) ≥ 1.3

⇒ μΔ = 0.99 ≥ 1.3 ,
∴ μΔ = 1.3 > r equir ed μ = 1.25
So, 2 layers of FRP jacketing are appropriate at top and bottom of columns and 1
layer along the whole height of columns (corners and peripheral columns) as shown
in Fig. 10. A single CFRP layer wrapped along the height of each column alleviates
the shear failure. One additional CFRP layer at the lower 700 mm of each column
strengthen the splice region while the additional CFRP layer wrapped at the upper
600 mm of each column prevents the compressive bar buckling. The central column
C5 does not require any FRP strengthening as its cross-section size is increased
through reinforced concrete jacketing.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
200 mm
FRP U Wrap
600 mm FRP Closed Loop Wrap
2 layers
2 layers
FRP Closed Loop Wrap

1400 mm
1 layer
FRP Closed Loop Wrap

700 mm 2 layers
350 mm 250 mm
Fig. 10 Details of FRP Jacketing in ground floor columns and beam
5 Conclusions
In this chapter, an approach is presented for assessment and seismic retrofit design
using FRP materials of deficient columns in RC buildings. Details of confinement
models for FRP wrapped reinforced concrete columns are presented, which help to
estimate the increase in the ductility of the column members; the FRP wrapping
also reduces the likelihood of brittle failure modes (e.g., shear failure, lap splice
failure and buckling of longitudinal reinforcements) before the flexural failure mode
manifests. Basics of global and local strengthening are discussed.
FRP jacketing are recommended for local strengthening and the method of quan-
tifying the retrofit intervention is demonstrated through a design example; it shows
assessing and retrofitting 3-storey frame building towards seismic retrofitting of
buildings using FRP materials.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
References
1. ACI 440 (2012) Guide for the design and construction of exteranlly bonded FRP systems for
strengthening concrete stuctures, No. ACI 440.2R-12, Farmington Hills, Michigan, USA
2. fib (2001) Technical report on the by EBR working party of fib TG 9.3. fib Bull 14. ISBN
2–88394–054–1
3. Pantazopoulou S, Tatsani S, Thermou G, Triantafillou T, Monti G, Bournas D, Guadagnini
M (2016) Background to the European seismic design provisions for retrofitting RC elements
using FRP material. Struct Concr 17(2):194–219
4. Sarker P, Begum M, Nasrin S (2011) Fiber reinforced polymers for structural retrofitting: a
review. J Civil Eng 39(1):49–57. Institution of Engineers Bangladesh
5. Kam WY, Pampanin S (2011) Displacement based seismic retrofit design for non-ductile RC
frame structures using local retrofit interventions at beam-column joints. In: Proceedings of
ninth pacific conference on earthquake engineering building an earthquake-resilient society.
Auckland, New Zealand
6. Prota A, Manfredi G, Monti G, Ludovica MD, Lignola GP (2023) Retrofitting of existing
RC buildings with FRP. https://www.academia.edu/22931902/Retrofitting_of_Existing_RC_
Buildings_With_FRP,10pp
7. Ortlepp R, Ortlepp S (2017) Textile reinforced concrete for strengthening of RC columns: a
contribution to resource conservation through the preservation of structures. Constr Buid Mater
132:150–160
8. Di Ludovico M, Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2008) Seismic design of an under-designed
RC structure with FRP. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37:141–162
9. Di Ludovico M, Manfredi G, Mola E, Negro P, Prota A (2008) Seismic behavior of a full-scale
RC structure retrofitted using GFRP laminates. J Struct Eng ASCE 134(5):810–821
10. Spoelstra MR, Monti G (1999) FRP-confined concrete model. J Compos Constr 3(3):ASCE,
143–150
11. Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2008) Effective strain in FRP jackets on
circular RC columns. In: Procedings of 4th international conference on FRP composites in
civil engineering (CICE 2008). Zurich, Switzerland, Paper 2.A.5
12. Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2009) Analysis of FRP confinement on pris-
matic RC columns. In: Procedings of 9th international symposium on fiber reinforced polymer
reinforcement for concrete structures (FRPRCS9). Sydeney, Australia
13. EN 1998–3 (2003) Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 3: strengthening and
repair of buildings, European Standard, EN 1998–3. Eurocode 8, Doc CEN/TC250/SC8/N343,
Draft No.3
14. CNR-DT (2004) Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems for
strengthening, CNR-DT 200/400, Available on http://www.cnr.it/sitocnr/IlCNR/Attivita/Nor
mazioneeCertificazione/NormazioneeCertificazionefile/IstruzioniCNR DT200 2004 eng.pdf
15. Park R, Paulay T (1975) Reinforced concrete structures. Wiley, New York, USA
16. Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R (1988) Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete.
J Struct Eng ASCE 114(8):1804–1826
17. ACI 318 (2019) building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, ACI
318–19, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, USA
18. Tatsani S, Thermou G (2022) An example-guide for rapid assessment and FRP strengthening of
substandard RC buildings. Appl Sci 12(12950):1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122412950
19. Thermou GE, Pantazopoulou SJ, Elnashai AS (2012) Global interventions for seismic
upgrading of substandard RC buildings. J Struct Eng ASCE 138:387–401
20. Dai KY, Yu XH, Lu DG (2020) Phenomenological hysteretic model for corroded RC columns.
Eng Struct 210:110315
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
21. EN 1998-1 (2004) Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance-Part 1: General Rules,
Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings, EN 1998-1: Eurocode 8, European Committee for
Standardization (CEN), Brussels, Belgium
22. GSARC (2017) Earhquake planning and protection organization. Greek Seismic Assessment
and Retrofit Code, Official Government Gazette 2984 B, 30–8–2017. Available online: www.
oasp.gr
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer
Composite Retrofitted Steel Profiles
Using Automated Fibre Placement
Ebrahim Oromiehie, Feleb Matti, Fidelis Mashiri,

and Gangadhara B. Prusty
Abstract Traditional methods for repairing impaired structures such as concreting,

steel jackets, or timber splicing are impractical because of the inherent constraints
associated with these materials. They would be susceptible to the same deteriora-
tion as the existing structure, leading to an ongoing cycle of repairs. Fibre-reinforced
polymer (FRP) composite jackets offer a wide range of advantages including superior
corrosion resistance, lightweight properties, and long-lasting durability. These char-
acteristics make FRP composite jackets highly advantageous compared to conven-
tional repair systems. Additionally, they can be effectively utilized for repairing
various types of structures, including those made of timber, steel, and concrete.
FRP composite jackets can be implemented through several techniques. However,
in the experimental investigation presented in this chapter, automated fibre place-
ment (AFP) was used to overwrap and reinforce two sets of thin-walled square
hollow sections (SHS), columns and beams, with thermoplastic carbon fibre rein-
forced polymer (CFRP). The results obtained were then compared with the control
samples without CFRP reinforcement. For the control columns, a good agreement
was observed between the predicted and experimental ultimate compressive loads.
The ultimate loads of CFRP reinforced columns exceeded the ultimate loads of the
control columns. Inward and outward buckling was observed in each column. De-
bonding, tearing, and snapping of the CFRP plies was observed in column specimens
with thermoplastic CFRP reinforcement. For the control beams, there was a compa-
rable agreement between the predicted ultimate load and the experimental ultimate
load. It was found that the ultimate loads for some strengthened beams were higher
E. Oromiehie (B) · G. B. Prusty

ARC Training Centre for Automated Manufacture of Advanced Composites (AMAC), School of
Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW 2052, Australia
G. B. Prusty
Sovereign Manufacturing Automation for Composites CRC Ltd. (SOMAC CRC), Sydney, NSW,
Australia
F. Matti · F. Mashiri
School of Engineering, Design and Built Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith,
NSW 2751, Australia
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
74 E. Oromiehie et al.
than that of the control beams. For all beams, there was inward deformation on the
upper surface of each beam, and outward deformations were observed on the two
side walls of the SHS beams. This experimental investigation showed that the current
strengthening processes using AFP is not comparable to traditional CFRP strength-
ening methods which use epoxy and FRP plies and that further research is required in
this space. Due to the failure modes observed, future research is planned to improve
the reinforcement method using AFP. The planned improvements are surface prepa-
ration, AFP processing conditions, number of CFRP layers and orientation of the
CFRP.
Keywords Automated fibre placement · Thermoplastic composites · Steel beam

retrofitting · Fibre reinforced polymer jackets
1 Introduction
1.1 Retrofitting in Construction
Retrofitting the critical component of structures has become more vital in the progress
of civil engineering in present days. This involves the process of strengthening
existing structures, both in the short and long-term, through the addition of new
materials to protect them from natural events such as flooding, earthquakes, and
high winds as well as maintenance of structural cracks and damages, correction of
errors in design or construction, ensuring the security and the safety of the structure,
reconstructing the structure for the advantages of excessive loading, etc. Retrofitting
is mainly used for changing, repairing, and modifying the structures after they have
been constructed [1]. In the construction industry, retrofitting is classified into global
and local with subclassifications [2] which are depicted in Fig. 1.
1.1.1 Jacketing Methods
The focus of this chapter is on the local jacketing method for steel structures/profiles
that are mainly used in civil structures. This technique is employed to enhance the
ability of concrete, steel, and timber structures to bear heavier loads when the struc-
tural members lack sufficient capacity and also to safeguard them from further dete-
rioration [3]. In general, jacketing is classified into (a) reinforced concrete jacketing,
(b) steel jacketing, and (c) fibre reinforced polymer composite jacketing.
Reinforced Concrete Jacket (RCJ)
To reinforce concrete elements in buildings, retrofitting methods are employed on
structural elements such as walls, columns, and beams using various combinations
such as surface, web and flange strengthening. They aim to improve the axial and
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composite Retrofitted Steel Profiles … 75
Fig. 1 Retrofitting classification
shear strength of columns while minimizing the need for extensive foundation rein-
forcement. In this retrofitting technique for reinforced cement concrete (RCC) build-
ings a cage-like structure made from steel reinforcement, or a composite material
wrap is constructed around the deteriorated section. This cage serves as a foundation
onto which cast-in-place concrete or shotcrete is applied. Jacketing is also effective
for repairing collapsed columns, piers, and piles can even be utilized in underwater
applications [2–4].
Steel Jacket (SJ):
The steel jacketing reinforcement technique involves wrapping section steel, typi-
cally angle steel, around the corners of a structural member to enhance the load-
bearing capabilities, ductility, and rigidity of the component without altering its size,
resulting in more reliable structural performance. It is particularly suitable for rein-
forcing structures where increasing the cross-sectional size of the original member
is not feasible but a substantial boost in load-bearing capacity, ductility, and rigidity
is required. The steel jacketing technique requires applying structural adhesive to
affix steel onto the reinforced component, creating a unified and integrated system.
This method is suitable for strengthening structures where enlarging the original
member’s cross-sectional size is not possible, but there is a significant need to enhance
the cross-section’s load-bearing capacity, as well as improve ductility and rigidity.
The main advantages of steel jacketing include its simplicity, ease of construction,
ability to significantly enhance the load-carrying capacity of the structure, low onsite
workload, and short construction time [2–5].
Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composite Jacket (FRPCJ):
FRP composite jackets, provide enhanced characteristics like corrosion resistance,
lightweight, and durability, which make them superior to traditional repair systems.
They are also compatible with steel, concrete, and timber structures.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fibre reinforced polymer composite (FRPC) jacketing is classified into fibre cloth
reinforcement and fibre plate reinforcement technology, which are relatively new for
repair and reinforcement of structures. This method involves using resin bonding
materials to adhere fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) products onto the surfaces of the
building components that are expected to experience high stress. The main advantages
of FRPC jacketing are listed below [2, 3, 6],
. Provide a distinct reinforcing effect on the narrow working surface because of
their flexibility and ability to be wrapped around structures.
. Lightweight yet high-strength, resulting in minimal changes to the weight and
appearance of the reinforced structure. Additionally, their low thickness has
a negligible impact on shear moment.
. The construction process is quick and efficient.
. Carbon fibres with their high elastic modulus, offer improved control over factors
such as temperature, cracks, and expansion due to rust after reinforcement.
. The original structure remains undamaged as no fasteners such as bolts, anchors,
or external compression are necessary.
. Reduced manpower, materials, and construction time [4].
The effectiveness of an FRP jacket system is influenced primarily by three material
parameters: thickness, fibre type, and fibre orientation. The thickness of the FRP
jacket plays a significant role in the strength and ductility of repaired columns. It is
directly related to the confinement pressure exerted by the FRP jacket, with higher
thickness leading to increased confinement effectiveness [7, 8].
FRP wraps with higher thickness significantly enhance the strength and ductility
of wrapped concrete columns [9]. The same effect is observed in both steel and timber
structures since the exerted confining pressure is the crucial factor [10]. Nevertheless,
for hollow steel tubes, once the jacket thickness reaches a specific threshold, where
the dominant behaviour becomes inward buckling deformation of the jacket, further
increasing the jacket thickness does not provide significant additional benefit as the
jacket’s resistance to inward buckling deformation is limited [11]. There is also a
limitation on the thickness of a multilayer FRP laminate strengthening system due
to the increased potential failure modes introduced by additional layers. Failure can
occur in the adhesive between each layer, increasing the risk of failure within the
FRP. For example, two layers for pultruded plates and three layers for FRP fabrics
[12].
The magnitude of the confining stress applied by the prefabricated FRP jacket
is the main factor influencing the effectiveness of the repair system and is highly
influenced by the type and orientation of the fibres, regardless of the core material
(concrete, steel, or timber) [13, 14]. Glass fibres are more cost-effective than carbon
fibres. However, carbon fibres exhibit superior characteristics. Aramid fibres, on the
other hand, have lower compressive load capacities compared to other fibres [15].
However, in prefabricated FRP jackets, fibres are oriented in the circumferential
direction, in order to produce higher lateral stresses. This will result in an increased
axial load capacity. Also, additional fibres with various angles relative to the hoop
and longitudinal directions are used to provide resistance against multi-axial strains,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
enhance the structural integrity of the entire FRP shell, and exhibit more ductile
behaviour upon failure [16]. Finally, increasing the confining pressure significantly
increases the ductility enhancement ratio [7, 17].
1.2 Reinforcement Techniques
1.2.1 Wet Lay-Up
The wet layup process involves grinding the surface of a column or structure and
applying resin to the surface. This is followed by layering on reinforcing fibre and
using a roller to impregnate the fibres with resin and compact the layers. Proper
application and impregnation of the reinforcement is essential for effective FRP
strengthening, as it ensures the transfer of tangential stress from the existing structural
member to the FRP retrofitting. Additionally, an external resin layer contributes
to the impregnation of the fabric while providing protection to the fibres against
potentially harmful environments, such as marine environments. The wet lay-up
method is commonly employed in the production of large structures such as ship
hulls. Historically, it has been a dominant manufacturing technique due to its low
initial setup and tooling costs, as well as the relatively low skill level required for
component manufacturing [18]. It is a labor-intensive process that involves applying
each layer and ensuring proper wetting of the fibre reinforcement. This approach has
several limitations, resulting in highly inconsistent components in terms of weight,
fibre volume fraction, and strength. To mitigate these variations and minimize excess
resin, vacuum bagging is commonly employed in conjunction with the wet layup
procedure [6, 19].
1.2.2 Interposition of a Separating Film (ISF)
The ISF technique involves the use of a polymer film placed between the column and
the FRP. This method prevents the substrate from being wetted by the thermosetting
matrix, thereby avoiding irreversible permanent bonding. It is particularly suitable for
confinement applications where the interaction is based on contact rather than bond.
In cases of confinement, the FRP is activated passively by the lateral deformation
of the material, generating stress in the FRP jacket in the hoop direction. In this
scenario, the contact between the substrate and the confinement jacket remains intact
until either the fibres rupture or adhesion is lost in the overlap region. For successful
implementation of the ISF technique, the interposed polymer film should possess
several characteristics, including low roughness to minimize friction between the
FRP and the substrate, thereby facilitating potential future removal of the retrofitting.
Also, it should exhibit low stiffness to simplify and expedite installation. Moreover,
the film should be resistant to the heat generated by the exothermic crosslinking
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
reaction of the epoxy matrix and be cost-effective to avoid significant cost increases
in interventions that already involve expensive materials like carbon fibre [20].
1.2.3 Liquid Adhesion Release-Agent (LAR)
This method involves applying an inhibitor to the masonry surface. The objective is
to create a transparent and protective layer that prevents adhesion between the epoxy
matrix of the FRP and the masonry. When implementing the LAR technique, it is
essential to choose a suitable adhesion-inhibiting material that ensures the detach-
ment of the resin matrix without causing chemical alterations (maintaining breatha-
bility) or aesthetic changes (chromaticity) to the substrate. Adhesion between two
materials can be primarily categorized as either chemical or mechanical. Chemical
adhesion involves various types of bonds such as pure or polar primary covalent
bonds, metallic, ionic, polar (or hydrogen) bonds, and Van der Waals forces. On
the other hand, mechanical adhesion relies on the surface roughness, enabling one
material to grip onto another. The LAR technique belongs to chemical adhesion. The
primary chemical adhesion mechanism when using epoxy resin (e.g., for FRP) is
hydrogen bonding. Liquid release agents, which exhibit water repellent properties,
are employed to prevent hydrogen bonding. Additionally, these materials also serve
as protectors for the masonry substrate, safeguarding it from weathering effects [20].
1.2.4 Filament Winding (FW)
In FW, fibre tows are impregnated with resin prior to being wrapped around a rotating
mandrel. This process is commonly employed for cylindrical and spherical compo-
nents, such as pipes and pressure vessels. The winding process is inherently auto-
mated, enabling cost-effective production of consistent components. This method
is constrained to tubular parts and is not suitable for manufacturing open struc-
tures. Nevertheless, with a sufficiently flexible machine, it can be adapted to produce
slightly more complex shapes. One challenge is achieving uniform fibre distribution
and resin content across the entire thickness of the laminate. The filament winding
process demonstrates excellent repeatability, making it a cost-effective choice. By
maintaining a fibre to matrix volume fraction of 60:40. This technique can produce
components with relatively high strength. An additional advantage of this process is
the enhanced torsional strength it imparts to the final beam [18, 20].
1.2.5 Pultrusion
This is a fully automated method for producing composite materials. It is commonly

employed to create fibre-reinforced sections with diverse shapes and sizes. This
process is widely available and predominantly utilized in the civil engineering sector.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Its primary purpose is to fabricate composite components with a consistent cross-

section. In this method, tows or fabric are saturated with resin and then passed through
a heated die for curing. Additionally, resin can be directly injected into the die during
the process. Pultrusion stands out as the most efficient composite manufacturing
technique, boasting high productivity when compared to other methods. However,
a limitation of this approach is that the fibres tend to be oriented primarily in the
longitudinal direction of the beam element [18].
1.2.6 Automated Fibre Placement (AFP)
Automated fibre placement (AFP) is a high-speed manufacturing process that

combines the laying, curing/melting, and consolidation steps into a single apparatus.
This integration significantly improves the efficiency and output of this approach
[21–23]. The AFP machine comprises of a placement head and a robotic arm, both
of which are controlled by advanced software packages, Fig. 2 [24, 25].
During a lay-up, the placement head brings the surfaces of the prepreg tape
together under heat and pressure to form the bonding. To apply this pressure and
eliminate air from the composite structure, a consolidation roller is utilized, while a
Fig. 2 Automated fibre placement (AFP) machine with thermoplastic head. Photo courtesy UNSW
Sydney
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
heat source such as a hot gas torch (HGT) or laser system is employed. The cooling
process is done at room temperature. The quality of the end product is influenced by
various factors such as temperature, pressure, and the deposition rate of materials.
Hence, it is important to ensure that these factors remain within the allowed limits
or tolerances to maintain the desired quality [25]. In recent decades, the aerospace
industry has witnessed a revolutionary transformation in the production of composite
structures through automated manufacturing techniques such as AFP [26]. These
methods offer various advantages, including enhanced precision in fibre placement,
automated debulking, and the elimination of post-processing steps like oven or auto-
clave curing [27]. Furthermore, they contribute to reductions in material and labor
costs [28]. Consequently, major manufacturers like Boeing, Airbus and NASA have
adopted these techniques extensively to manufacture highly precise components like
wing skins, nose cones, and fuselages [29–32]. Additionally, ongoing studies are
exploring the utilization of these methods into other sectors and industries like
marine, automotive and wind energy for making composite propellers, wheels and
turbine blades [29–31, 33–37].
1.3 Composite Materials: Structures and Types
A composite material is formed by combining two or more different materials, each

of which possesses distinct physical or chemical properties. When these materials
are combined, they create a new material with unique characteristics. Composites
are widely used in many applications across multiple industries, including aerospace,
marine, aviation, transportation, sports, and civil engineering [38]. The categorization
of composites based on the types of reinforcement and matrix materials is depicted
in Fig. 3.
Among them, laminated and sandwich panels are increasingly utilized for struc-
tural purposes [39, 40]. Laminated composites are created by bonding multiple layers
(referred to as ply or lamina) together. Each layer consists of strong, continuous fibres
that provide reinforcement, surrounded by a comparatively weaker matrix mate-
rial. The use of carbon fibre reinforced polymers (CFRP) and glass fibre reinforced
plastic (GFRP) composites in structural components has greatly expanded in various
fields including aircraft, sports vehicles, wind turbines, and infrastructure projects
[26]. For instance, the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft incorporates composite
materials accounting for ~52% of its weight [41], and the new Airbus A380 utilizes
composites that makeup ~25% of its weight [42]. The exceptional properties of lami-
nated composites, such as a high strength-to-weight ratio, resistance to creep, high
tensile strength at high temperatures, and toughness, have sparked increasing interest
across different industries [38, 43]. Another key driver for the industry’s adoption of
composite materials is the advantage of reduced weight, leading to substantial cost
savings, energy efficiency improvements up to 18%, and lower CO2 emissions [44].
Figure 4 shows the application of FRPC in different industries.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 3 Classification of composites based on reinforcement and matrix materials
Fig. 4 Application of fibre reinforced polymer composites in Europe for different industry sectors
[45]
1.3.1 Composite Materials for AFP
Prepreg tapes are commonly utilized in AFP. They consist of carbon or glass fibres
impregnated with a thermosetting or thermoplastic resin matrix. They are available
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
in rolls of different widths and are characterized by factors such as resin content, self-
adhesive strength, drapeability, shelf life, and gel time. In prepregs, the reinforcing
fibres are pre-impregnated with a partially cured resin to a specific level. This allows
the prepreg tapes to be directly placed into a mould without the need for additional
resin. However, heat and pressure must be applied during the manufacturing process
to ensure a strong bond. In the case of thermoplastic composites, when the heated
surfaces of the tape and substrate come into contact under pressure, the polymer
chains diffuse between the matrix layers of each surface through thermal vibrations,
forming a bond. The bonded area is then cooled under pressure at room temperature
[28]. Thermoset prepregs, on the other hand, require controlled heat during the curing
process. This heat allows the resin to flow within the laminate and polymerize,
ultimately reaching the cured state [46].
Prepregs offer several advantages over non-impregnated tapes and fibres,
including enhanced maximum strength properties, uniformity, consistent quality,
and reduced material wastage. However, they are relatively expensive, require heat
for processing, and require special storage conditions [47, 48].
As mentioned earlier, prepregs are categorized into two main types based on their
polymer matrix: thermosets and thermoplastics. Thermoset matrices are the most
used and are cost-effective materials that exhibit resistance to solvents. They undergo
irreversible curing through the application of heat or suitable irradiation [49]. Epoxy
resin is the most prevalent thermoset materials, offering superior performance at
a relatively low cost. On the other hand, thermoplastic matrices can be softened by
heating them to their processing temperatures. The process is reversible since no cross
linking occurs. The choice of polymer matrix depends on the specific application
requirements [44, 50, 51]. An evaluation of these two matrix types, considering their
processing benefits, is discussed in [52].
2 Recent Studies
The viability of three novel approaches, including ISF, FW, and LAR, for retrofitting
stone columns has been examined by Cascardi et al. [20]. Through axial compres-
sive tests, it was demonstrated that the proposed techniques did not compromise
the effectiveness of confinement. The examination of the substrates after the tests
confirmed the reversibility of the proposed solutions, as evidenced by the absence
of detachment of the stone surface. The investigated retrofitting techniques demon-
strated their potential to serve as a valuable and efficient methods for increasing the
seismic protection of columns in heritage buildings.
Mohammed et al. [8] conducted a comprehensive review of the current practices
and potential applications of prefabricated composite jackets for structural repair.
According to their findings, prefabricated FRP composite repair systems are consid-
ered preferable to wet lay-up methods due to their ease of installation, improved
safety measures, higher quality, minimized on-site workforce needs and minimized
resource wastage. However, the design of effective joints, that facilitate easy, quick,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
and safe installation, plays a crucial role in ensuring structural continuity when
using prefabricated FRP composite jackets. The effectiveness of prefabricated FRP
composite jackets depends on factors such as fibre thickness, orientation, the proper-
ties of the infill grout, and the extent and shape of existing structural damage. Thus,
a thorough understanding of these design parameters is essential for achieving an
optimal and safe design for prefabricated FRP jacket repair systems. Additionally, the
existing models for predicting the strength and behaviour of structures strengthened
with FRP composite jackets often overlook the level of damage present in the original
structures. Hence, it is necessary to develop numerical and/or analytical models that
systematically account for the influence of key parameters on the overall response
of repaired structures. This will result in a more reliable and secure repair system.
Zeng et al. [53] have investigated the behaviour of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP)
confined elliptical concrete-filled steel tube (ECFST) columns and the effects of
various factors including the FRP jacket thickness and the cross-sectional aspect ratio.
The authors aimed to (a) examine the efficiency and benefits of FRP confinement to
ECFST columns under axial compression, (b) understand the behaviour of confined
concrete in FRP-confined ECFSTs, and (c) examine the capability and accuracy
of existing theoretical models for concrete in FRP-confined ECFSTs. Considering
the high vulnerability of high-strength steel (HSS) to buckling, Q690 steel tubes
were utilized in this study. According to their findings, an FRP jacket significantly
improves the elastic stiffness, yield axial load, and ultimate axial load of ECFST
columns. It was also shown that, the axial load-strain behaviour of ECFST columns
can be divided into two segments. An ascending linear segment, which is connected
to a secondary section can exhibit either an upward trend or a downward trend.. The
confinement mechanism of concrete in FRP-confined ECFST columns resembles
that of FRP-confined concrete, whose axial stress–strain curve typically exhibits a
bilinear behaviour. Both the ultimate axial stress and ultimate axial strain increase
with increasing FRP jacket thickness at a given cross-sectional aspect ratio. However,
for a given FRP jacket thickness, the confinement efficiency decreases as the cross-
sectional aspect ratio increases, leading to lower ultimate axial stress and a shallower
slope of the second ascending portion. FRP-confined ECFST specimens with a cross-
sectional aspect ratio of 2.0 exhibit poor FRP confinement efficiency. An increase in
cross-sectional aspect ratio results in a decrease in ultimate axial stress and ultimate
axial strain. The enhancement index for elastic stiffness increases with the cross-
sectional aspect ratio for specimens with a given FRP thickness. This indicates that
the FRP jacket is more effective in improving the elastic stiffness of ECFST columns
compared to circular concrete-filled steel tube (CCFST) columns[53].
In the following section, the effectiveness of a new automated technique to retrofit
short columns and beams is discussed. For this purpose, the behaviour of short steel
columns and beams overwrapped with thermoplastic carbon fibres using AFP is
presented.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 5 Over wrapping steel profiles with thermoplastic CFRP using AFP. Photo courtesy
Automated Composites Laboratory, UNSW Sydney
3 Experimental Program
3.1 Sample Preparation
The Automated Dynamics-built AFP machine at UNSW Sydney was utilized for
reinforcing the SHS specimens, as shown in Fig. 5. This AFP machine is a seven-
axis robot platform, including a coordinated spindle. The thermoplastic placement
head comprises of a consolidation system, prepreg tape dispensing system, hot gas
torch (HGT) as a heat source (Fig. 2), and a computer controller [25]. Carbon-PEEK
prepreg tapes (AS4/APC2, supplied by Solvay) were used to reinforce the steel
profiles. The prepreg tapes were 0.15 mm thick and 6.35 mm wide. The key mate-
rial properties of the prepreg tape of density, modulus of elasticity, shear modulus,
Poisson’s ratio and fibre volume fraction were 1570 kg/m3 , 138 GPa, 5 GPa, 0.28
and 0.6, respectively.
The AFP deposition rate, HGT temperature and consolidation force were selected
based on the authors’ earlier investigations [54–59] and set as 76 mm/s, 900 °C and
200 N, respectively. The layup sequences were chosen to ensure a strong and durable
bond between the prepreg and SHS for all reinforced profiles and are summarized
in Tables 1 and 2. The surface of the steel profiles was sandblasted using Class 2.0
blast with a GL40 steel grit size.
3.2 Column Specimens
Fourteen column specimens made up of SHS were tested under axial compression
for the determination of the ultimate load. The steel profiles were 3.5 mm thick with
cross sectional outer dimensions of 89 mm × 89 mm according to Standards Australia
Online [60]. As shown in Table 1, the length of each column was 267 mm, three times
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 1 Details of the column specimens

Specimen Direction (T/L) Lay-up Overwrapped with CF-PEEK
C a – – No
b – – No
1 a T [90, 90] Yes
b T [90, 90] Yes
c T [90, 90] Yes
d T [90, 90] Yes
2 a L [0, 0] Yes
b L [0, 0] Yes
c L [0, 0] Yes
d L [0, 0] Yes
e L [0, 0] Yes
f L [0, 0] Yes
g L [0, 0] Yes
h L [0, 0] Yes
Note T = Transverse, L = Longitudinal
Table 2 Details of the tested beam specimens

Specimen Direction (H/V) Lay-up Overwrapped with CF-PEEK
B a – – No
b – – No
3 a H [0, 0] Yes
b H [0, 0] Yes
4 a H [0, 0] Yes
b H [0, 0] Yes
5 a V [90, 90] Yes
b V [90, 90] Yes
6 a V, 45° [90, 90, 45] Yes
b V, 45° [90, 90, 45] Yes
7 a V [90, 90] Yes
b V [90, 90] Yes
8 a HV [90, 0] Yes
b HV [90, 0] Yes
9 a HV [90, 0] Yes
b HV [90, 0] Yes
Note H = Horizontal; and V = Vertical
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
that of the breadth of the specimen. The measured lengths of the columns ranged from
267 to 269 mm. Two control column specimens (C-a and C-b) were tested under axial
compression (Fig. 6). The control columns did not have thermoplastic carbon fibre
reinforced polymer (CFRP). Twenty-one specimens were externally reinforced with
thermoplastic CFRP plies AFP machine at UNSW Sydney. Four specimens (1-a, 1-b,
1-c and 1-d) had two layers of thermoplastic CFRP laid transversally (perpendicular
to axial loading) as shown in Fig. 7. Additionally, eight columns (2-a, 2-b, 2-c, 2-d,
2-e, 2-f, 2-g and 2-h) had two layers of thermoplastic CFRP plies laid longitudinally
(parallel to axial loading), see Fig. 8. Two Stainless Steel Hose Clamps were installed
on specimens (1-c, 1-d, 2-c, 2-d, 2-e, 2-f, 2-g and 2-h) to find out if the ultimate loads
of the CFRP strengthened columns with steel hose clamps increase in comparison to
the CFRP strengthened columns with no steel hose clamps. Steel hose clamps were
trailed as the CFRP plies that were laid longitudinally on column specimens separated
from the steel under axial compression loading. The location of the stainless-steel
hose clamps is shown in Fig. 9.
Fig. 6 Control column specimens
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 7 Transverse reinforced column specimens
Fig. 8 Longitudinal reinforced column specimens
3.3 Beam Specimens
Two control beams and fourteen thermoplastic CFRP overwrapped beams shown in
Table 2 were tested for their bending capacity. The steel beam specimens were in the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 9 Locations of
stainless-steel hose clamps
form SHS with thickness of 3.5 mm and cross-sectional outer dimensions of 89 mm

× 89 mm. The length of each beam was approximately 750 mm.
As shown in Fig. 10, the control beams (B-a and B-b) did not have thermoplastic
CFRP wrap. Beam specimens (3-a, 3-b, 4-a and 4-b) had two layers of CFRP plies
laid horizontally (parallel to length), as in Fig. 11. Specimens (5-a, 5-b, 7-a and 7-b)
had two layers of CFRP laid vertically (perpendicular to length), as shown in Fig. 12.
Beam specimens (6-a and 6-b) shown in Fig. 13 were made with three layers of CFRP
placed vertically and at angle of 45°. Beam specimens (8-a, 8-b, 9-a and 9-b) shown
in Fig. 14 had two layers of CFRP laid horizontally and vertically.
Fig. 10 Control beam specimens
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 11 Longitudinal reinforced beam specimens
Fig. 12 Transverse reinforced beam specimens
Fig. 13 Reinforced beam specimens with additional layer of 45°
Fig. 14 Transverse and longitudinal beam reinforced specimens
3.4 Instrumentation and Testing of Column Specimens
Axial deformations were measured using a linear potentiometer (LP1516). This is

detailed in Fig. 15. Two control columns and twelve CFRP columns were tested
under axial compressive loading using a compression test machine shown in Fig. 16.
The column specimens had a fixed support at the base of the column with the load
being applied to the top of the column via a flat plate (see Fig. 16). For determining
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
the peak load, the test specimens were subjected to a continuous axial compressive
load applied at a rate of 0.016 mm/s. The test continued at the same rate after the
peak load was obtained and then was stopped when the load reduced to a value of
300 kN for control columns and 150 kN for CFRP columns.
Fig. 15 Plan view of instrumentation locations
(a) (b)
Fig. 16 Test setup: a Schematic diagram and b test setup in compression-testing machine showing
LP1516
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 17 Test setup: a schematic diagram and b test rig (all dimensions are in mm)
3.5 Instrumentation and Testing of Beam Specimens
A liner potentiometer (LP) was used at the bottom face of the beams to measure
deflections, see Fig. 17a. The bending capacity of the control beams and 4 CFRP
strengthened beams were investigated using the test setup shown in Fig. 17a. Loads
were applied at the midspan of the beams using a hydraulic jack, as shown in Fig. 17b.
The control beam behaviour was compared to the different methods of strengthening
using CFRP. The beam specimens were pin connected at both ends of each beam.
The pinned supports were located 25 mm away from the end edges of the beam. The
load was applied to these test specimens at a rate of 0.016 mm/s. The test continued
at the same rate after obtaining the peak load until the load dropped to a value of 49
kN or the specimens failed.
4 Performance Prediction of Reinforced Steel Profiles
4.1 Strength of Steel Beams Reinforced with Thermoplastic

Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer
4.1.1 Behaviour of Beams
The ultimate loads for the SHS control beams and CFRP beams are shown in Table 3.
There is a good agreement between the predicted ultimate compressive loads (Stan-
dards Australia Online [61] and OneSteel Market Mills [62]) and experimental ulti-
mate compressive loads. The predicted value of the ultimate load for the control
beams was 93.9 kN. The values of the experimental ultimate load of specimens B-a
and B-b were 87.2 and 77.8 kN, respectively.
The ultimate load of B-b was lower than B-a. This may be because the weld line
of B-b was on the bottom surface (Fig. 18) whereas the weld line of B-a was on the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 3 Experimental values of ultimate loads

Specimen Direction (H/V) Lay-up Ultimate load (kN)
B a – – 87.21
b – – 77.82
3 a H [0, 0] 81.85
b H [0, 0] 82.73
4 a H [0, 0] 86.24
b H [0, 0] 85.99
5 a V [90, 90] 83.30
b V [90, 90] 88.81
6 a V, 45° [90, 90, 45] 82.98
b V, 45° [90, 90, 45] 87.26
7 a V [90, 90] 73.59
b V [90, 90] 72.40
8 a HV [90, 0] 74.15
b HV [90, 0] 76.21
9 a HV [90, 0] 84.33
b HV [90, 0] 83.57
top surface. This shows SHS beams may carry higher load when the weld line is on
the top surface.
Fig. 18 Weld line of

specimen B-b
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
90
80
70
60
Load (kN)
50
40
30
B-a
B-b
20 3-a
3-b
10 4-a
4-b
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 19 Load–deflection curves for the control beams and longitudinally reinforced CFRP beams
The load–deflection curves of the control beams and specimens 3-a, 3-b, 4-a and
4-b with longitudinal CFRP reinforcement are shown in Fig. 19. The values of the
experimental ultimate load of specimens 3-a, 3-b, 4-a and 4-b beams are 81.9, 82.7,
86.2 and 86.0 kN, respectively. These values are higher than the ultimate load of
specimen B-b of 77.8 kN. Specimens 3 and 4 were compared with control beam B-b
as the weld lines of beams 3, 4 and B-b were not located on the top surface.
The load–deflection curves of specimens 5-a, 5-b, 7-a and 7-b with transverse
CFRP reinforcement are shown in Fig. 20. The values of the experimental ultimate
load of specimens 5-a, 5-b, 7-a and 7-b beams were 83.3, 88.8, 73.6 and 72.4 kN,
respectively. The ultimate load of CFRP beam 5-a (83.3 kN) was greater than the
ultimate load of control beam B-b (77.8 kN). CFRP beam 5-a was compared with
control beam B-b as the weld lines of these beams was not located on the top surface.
The ultimate load of CFRP beam 5-b (88.8 kN) was greater than the ultimate load of
control beam B-a (87.2 kN). The weld lines of specimens 5-b and B-a were located
on the top surface. The ultimate loads of CFRP beams 7-a and 7-b were 73.6 and
72.4 kN, respectively. These values were lower than the ultimate loads of control
beams.
The load–deflection curves of specimens 6-a and 6-b with CFRP reinforcement at
45° are shown in Fig. 21. The values of the experimental ultimate loads for specimens
6-a and 6-b beams were 83.0 and 87.3 kN, respectively. These values were greater
than the ultimate load of control beam C-b (77.8 kN) and were lower than the ultimate
load of control beam C-a (87.2 kN).
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
90
80
70
60
Load (kN)
50
40
30 B-a B-b
20 5-a 5-b
10 7-a 7-b
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 20 Load–deflection curves for the control beams and transversally reinforced CFRP beams
90
80
70
60
Load (kN)
50
40
30
B-a
20 B-b
6-a
10 6-b
0
0 10 20 30 40
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 21 Load–deflection curves for the control beams and beams with CFRP reinforcement at 45°
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
90
80
70
60
Load (kN)
50
40
30 B-a B-b
20 8-a 8-b
10 9-a 9-b
0
0 10 20 30 40
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 22 Load–deflection curves of control beams and beams with CFRP laid longitudinally and
transversally
The load–deflection curves for specimens 8-a, 8-b, 9-a and 9-b with longitudinal
and transverse reinforcement are shown in Fig. 22. The values of the experimental
ultimate load of specimens 8-a, 8-b, 9-a and 9-b beams were 74.2, 76.2, 84.3 and
83.6 kN, respectively. The ultimate loads for the strengthened beams 8-a, 8-b, 9-a
and 9-b were similar to that of the control beams.
4.1.2 Failure Modes
For the SHS beams with and without thermoplastic CFRP overwrap, local defor-
mations were observed at the location of the load application. As shown in Fig. 23,
there was inward deformation (concave) on the upper surface of each beam. Outward
deformations (convex) were observed on the two side walls of the beams.
For beam specimens 3-a, 3-b, 4-a and 4-b with CFRP laid longitudinally, the
CFRP composites separated from steel SHS, see Fig. 23b for a typical failure mode.
For beam specimens 5-a, 5-b, 7-a and 7-b whose CFRP was laid transversally, the
thermoplastic CFRP layers snapped as the load was applied to the specimens, see
Fig. 23c for a typical failure mode. Figure 23d shows a typical failure mode for
a beam specimen whose CFRP was laid at an angle of 45°. The 45° CFRP layers
de-bonded from the thermoplastic transverse CFRP at the location of the load (top
and sides locations). For beam specimens 8-a, 8-b, 9-a and 9-b whose CFRP was
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e)
Fig. 23 Typical failure modes of the SHS beams: a B-b; b 3-b; c 5-a; d 6-b; and e 8-b
laid longitudinally and transversally, de-bonding of the thermoplastic CFRP from

the steel tube were observed at the corners, as shown in Fig. 23e.
4.2 Axial Strength of Steel Short Columns Reinforced

with Thermoplastic Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer
(CFRP)
4.2.1 Behaviour of Columns
The ultimate loads and the deflections at ultimate load for the two SHS control
columns and twelve CFRP columns are shown in Table 4. For control columns,
a good agreement was observed between the predicted and experimental ultimate
compressive loads. The experimental ultimate load of C-a and C-b were 527.9 and
524.1 kN, respectively. According to Standards Australia Online [61] and, OneSteel
Market Mills [62], the predicted value of the ultimate load for the control columns
was 517.5 kN (Table 4). As shown in Table 4, Figs. 24 and 25, the ultimate loads for
the thermoplastic CFRP columns did not exceed the ultimate loads for the control
columns.
4.2.2 Failure Modes
The failure modes for the steel SHS control columns were local buckling failure, as
shown in Fig. 26a. Both inward and outward buckling were observed in the control
columns. Bottom end buckling occurred on specimen C-a and top end buckling can
be observed on specimen C-b. Inward and outward buckling are also observed in the
transverse CFRP columns. As shown in Fig. 26b, bottom end buckling occurred on
specimen 1-a, 1-b and 1-c whereas top end buckling can be observed on specimen
1-d. Also, the CFRP layers for the transversally reinforced CFRP columns with
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 4 Ultimate loads and deflections for SHS columns

Specimen Direction (T/L) Steel Hose Clamps Ultimate load (kN)
installed on column
C a – No 527.94
b – No 524.08
1 a T No 478.10
b T No 507.88
c T Yes 493.00
d T Yes 513.63
2 a L No 484.53
b L No 499.46
c L Yes 448.13
d L Yes 404.03
e L Yes 494.51
f L Yes 491.50
g L Yes 498.04
h L Yes 504.20
500
C-a C-b
400 1-a 1-b
1-c 1-d
300
Load (kN)
200
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 24 Load–deflection curves for control columns and transversally reinforced CFRP columns
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 25 Load–deflection curves for control columns and longitudinally reinforced CFRP columns
and without steel hose clamps snapped as the compression load was applied on
the specimens. Inward and outward buckling were also observed in the longitudinal
CFRP columns. Bottom end buckling occurred on specimen 2-b, 2-e and 2-f. Top end
buckling was observed on specimens 2-a, 2-c, 2-d, 2-g and 2-h, see Fig. 26c. As shown
in Fig. 26c, de-bonding of the CFRP plies can be observed in specimens without
steel hose clamps (specimens 2-a and 2-b). For specimens with steel hose clamps,
the CFRP steel did not completely separate when the specimens were subjected to
compression loads. Furthermore, as shown in Fig. 26c, the steel hose clamps located
on the top edge of specimens 2-d and 2-g snapped under the compression load.
Tearing of CFRP plies on the corners of specimen 2-g and 2-h was also observed.
5 Discussion and Conclusion
Cold-formed SHS beams and columns are widely used in engineering structures
such as bridges, cranes, and towers. In engineering structures, these sections are
often subjected to cyclic loading from imposed loads such as vehicles and wind
loads. When loads are applied to a structure, cracks may initiate and propagate,
and subsequent fatigue failure may occur. Improving the mechanical behaviour of
such structures can be achieved with CFRP reinforcement in the form of a jacket.
The utilization of FRPC jackets provides a range of significant advantages including
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 26 Failure mode of: a control columns, b transverse CFRP columns with and without steel
hose clamps, and c longitudinal CFRP columns with and without steel hose clamps
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
superior resistance to corrosion, durability and long-life compared to the limita-

tions of conventional repair systems such as concrete and steel jackets. This exper-
imental investigation presented in this chapter focused on reinforcing thin-walled
SHS columns and beams with thermoplastic CFRP using hot gas torch assisted auto-
mated fibre placement. Fourteen SHS column specimens were tested under axial
compression for determination of their ultimate loads. Two control beams and four-
teen thermoplastic CFRP overwrapped beams were also tested for the determination
of their bending capacity. The results obtained from this investigation were compared
with the baseline samples without CFRP and are summarized below,
. For the control beams, there was a good agreement between the predicted ultimate
compressive loads and experimental ultimate compressive loads.
. The experimental ultimate load of thermoplastic CFRP beams did not show signif-
icant improvement using the current AFP strengthening method due to the failure
modes. For beam specimens whose CFRP was laid longitudinally, the thermo-
plastic CFRP plies separated from the steel. For beam specimens whose CFRP
was laid transversally, some thermoplastic CFRP layers snapped as the load was
applied on the specimens. For beam specimens whose CFRP was laid at an angle
of 45°, the CFRP layers de-bonded from the thermoplastic transverse CFRP at the
location of the load. For beam specimens whose CFRP was laid longitudinally
and transversally, de-bonding of the thermoplastic CFRP from the steel tube was
observed at the corners. For the SHS beams with and without thermoplastic CFRP,
inward deformation was observed on the upper surface of each beam and outward
deformation was observed on the two side walls of the beams.
. For the control columns, a good agreement was observed between the predicted
and experimental ultimate compressive loads. The ultimate loads of the CFRP
columns were lower than the ultimate loads for the control columns. De-
bonding, tearing and snapping of the CFRP plies are observed in specimens with
thermoplastic CFRP.
This investigation is still ongoing, as further research is being conducted to explore
the effect of factors such as the number of overwrapped plies, ply orientation, and AFP
processing conditions on the strength of reinforced SHS profiles. These continued
efforts aim to enhance our understanding of FRP composite jacketing techniques and
optimize their application in structural repairs.
Acknowledgements This project was funded by Western Sydney University (WSU) and University
of New South Wales (UNSW). The authors would like to acknowledge the support received through
following funding schemes of Australian Government:
ARC LIEF: An Australasian facility for the automated fabrication of high-performance bespoke
components (LE140100082).
ARC ITTC: ARC Training Centre for Automated Manufacture of Advanced Composites
(IC160100040).
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
References
1. Kumar Nigam P, Akhtar S (2021) Retrofitting practices in various categories of RCC

structures—a comprehensive review. Mater Today: Proc 45:7123–7131
2. 10 Best Retrofitting Techniques for RCC Buildings [Internet]. Civil String Get the Knowledge
(2021). Available from: https://civilstring.com/retrofitting-techniques-for-rcc-buildings/
3. Waghmare SPB (2011) Materials and jacketing technique for retrofitting of structures. Int J
Adv Eng Res Stud 1(1):15–19
4. FRP Jacketing versus Steel Jacketing—structural strengthening. In: Horse (ed) Solutions (2023)
5. Di Trapani F, Malavisi M, Marano G, Greco R, Ferrotto M (2020) Optimal design algorithm for
seismic retrofitting of RC columns with steel jacketing technique. Procedia Manuf 44:639–646
6. Samy K, Fawzy A, Fouda MA (2023) Strengthening of historic reinforced concrete columns
using concrete and FRP jacketing techniques. Asian J Civil Eng 24(3):885–896
7. Ozbakkaloglu T (2013) Compressive behavior of concrete-filled FRP tube columns: assessment
of critical column parameters. Eng Struct 51:188–199
8. Mohammed AA, Manalo AC, Ferdous W et al (2020) State-of-the-art of prefabricated FRP
composite jackets for structural repair. Eng Sci Technol Int J 23(5):1244–1258
9. Li G, Kidane S, Pang S-S, Helms JE, Stubblefield MA (2003) Investigation into FRP repaired
RC columns. Compos Struct 62(1):83–89
10. Saafi M, Asa E (eds) (2010) Extending the service life of electric distribution and transmission
wooden poles using a wet layup FRP composite strengthening system. J Perform Constructed
Facil
11. Teng JG, Yu T, Fernando D (2012) Strengthening of steel structures with fiber-reinforced
polymer composites. J Constr Steel Res 78:131–143
12. Roads V (ed) (2018) Code of practice: FRP for strengthening of bridge structures
13. Kim H, Lee KH, Lee YH, Lee J (2012) Axial behavior of concrete-filled carbon fiber-reinforced
polymer composite columns. Struct Design Tall Spec Build 21(3):178–193
14. Vincent T, Ozbakkaloglu T (2013) Influence of fiber orientation and specimen end condition
on axial compressive behavior of FRP-confined concrete. Constr Build Mater 47:814–826
15. Teng J, Chen J-F, Smith ST, Lam L (2002) FRP: strengthened RC structures
16. Wu R-Y, Pantelides CP (2017) Rapid repair and replacement of earthquake-damaged concrete
columns using plastic hinge relocation. Compos Struct 180:467–483
17. Lam L, Teng JG (2003) Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined concrete. Constr
Build Mater 17(6):471–489
18. Mazumdar SK (2002) Composites manufacturing: materials, product, and process engineering.
CRC Press LLC, United States of America
19. Performance Proven Worldwide. Wet Lay-Up Process United States of America: Performance
Proven Worldwide; cited 2015. Available from: http://www.pactinc.com/capabilities/wet-lay-
uphand-lay-up-method/
20. Cascardi A, Dell’Anna R, Micelli F, Lionetto F, Aiello MA, Maffezzoli A (2019) Reversible
techniques for FRP-confinement of masonry columns. Constr Build Mater 225:415–428
21. Gutowski T (1997) Advanced composites manufacturing. Wiley, New York, p 600
22. August Z, Ostrander G, Hauber D (eds) (2015) Additive manufacturing with high performance
thermoplastic composites. In: The second international symposium on automated composites
manufacturing. Montreal, Canada
23. Werner D (ed) (2015) Multi-material-head novel laser-assisted tape, prepreg and dry-
fiber placement system. In: The second international symposium on automated composites
24. Stokes-Griffin CM, Compston P (2015) The effect of processing temperature and placement
rate on the short beam strength of carbon fibre–PEEK manufactured using a laser tape placement
process. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 78:274–283
25. Oromiehie E, Prusty BG, Compston P, Rajan G (2019) Automated fibre placement based
composite structures: review on the defects, impacts and inspections techniques. Compos Struct
224:110987
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
26. Landry A (ed) (2015) The needs for automation in composite design and manufacturing. In: The
second international symposium on automated composites manufacturing. Montreal, Canada
27. Béland S (1990) High performance thermoplastic resins and their composites: Noyes Data
Corp
28. August Z, Ostrander G, Michasiow J, Hauber D (2014) Recent development in automated fibre
placement of thermoplastic composites. SAMPE 50(2):30–37
29. Jonsson M, Eklund D, Järneteg A, Åkermo M, Sjölander J (eds) (2015) Automated manufac-
turing of an integrated pre-preg structure. In: The second international symposium on automated
composites manufacturing. Montreal, Canada
30. Di Francesco M, Giddings P, Potter K (eds) (2015) On the layup of convex corners using
automated fibre placement: an evaluation method. In: the second international symposium on
automated composites manufacturing. Montreal, Canada
31. Girdauskaite L, Krzywinski S, Schmidt-Eisenlohr C, Krings M (eds) (2015) Introduction
of automated 3d vacuum buildup in the composite manufacturing chain. In: The second
international symposium on automated composites manufacturing. Montreal, Canada
32. Quddus M, Brux A, Larregain B, Galarneau Y (eds) (2015) A study to determine the influ-
ence of robotic lamination programs on the precision of automated fiber placement through
statistical comparisons. In: The second international symposium on automated composites
33. Serubibi A, Hazell PJ, Escobedo JP et al (2023) Fibre-metal laminate structures: high-velocity
impact, penetration, and blast loading–a review. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 173:107674
34. Serubibi A, Hazell PJ, Escobedo JP, Wang H, Oromiehie E, Prusty GB (2021) Analysis of
AFP manufactured fibre metal laminate structures under impact loading. Engineers Australia,
BARTON, ACT
35. Maung PT, Prusty BG, Oromiehie E, Phillips AW, St John NA (2022) Design and manufacture
of a shape-adaptive full-scale composite hydrofoil using automated fibre placement. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 123(11):4093–4108
36. Air A, Shamsuddoha M, Oromiehie E, Prusty BG (2023) Development of an automated fibre
placement-based hybrid composite wheel for a solar-powered car. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
125(9):4083–4097
37. Maung PT, Prusty BG, Donough MJ, Oromiehie E, Phillips AW, St John NA (2023) Automated
manufacture of optimised shape-adaptive composite hydrofoils with curvilinear fibre paths for
improved bend-twist performance. Mar Struct 87:103327
38. Garg DP, Zikry MA, Anderson GL (2001) Current and potential future research activities in
adaptive structures: an ARO perspective. Smart Mater Struct 10(4):610–623
39. Chung DDL (2010) Composite materials: science and applications, 2nd edn. Springer, London,
United Kingdom, p 371
40. Bannister M (2001) Challenges for composites into the next millennium—a reinforcement
perspective. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 32(7):901–910
41. Spenser J (2006) Boeing technologies developed for commercial jetliners are now being
integrated into some military products. Boeing Frontiers Online
42. Efficiency and reliability: Airbus (2023). Available from: https://www.airbus.com/en/products-
services/commercial-aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a380
43. Balageas D (2006) Introduction to structural health monitoring. Wiley Online Library
44. Prusty BG, Oromiehie E, Rajan G (2016) Introduction to composite materials and smart struc-
tures. In: Iniewski K (ed) Structural health monitoring of composite structures using fiber optic
methods. Devices, Circuits, and Systems. CRC Press, New York, pp 1–19
45. Elmar W, Bernhard J (2014) Composites market report. The European GRP market (AVK)
TgCmC
46. Prepregs: Composites One (2017). Available from: http://www.compositesone.com/product/
prepreg/
47. What are prepregs? Fibre Glast Development Corporation (n.d.) [Available from: http://www.
fibreglast.com/product/about-prepregs/Learning_Center
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
48. Daniel IM, Ishai O (2006) Engineering mechanics of composite materials, 2nd edn. Oxford
University Press, New York
49. Thermosets: Polymers International Australia (2014) [Available from: http://polymers.com.au/
thermosets/
50. Common Thermoplastics and Thermoseting and there uses: United Kingdom: Stephens Plastic
Mouldings (n.d.) cited 2015. Available from: http://www.stephensinjectionmoulding.co.uk/the
rmoplastics/
51. Chang IY, Lees JK (1988) Recent development in thermoplastic composites: a review of matrix
systems and processing methods. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 1(3):277–296
52. Muzzy JD, Kays AO (2004) Thermoplastic versus thermosetting structural composites.
Polymer Compos 5(3)
53. Zeng J-J, Liang S-D, Li Y-L, Guo Y-C, Shan G-Y (2021) Compressive behavior of FRP-
confined elliptical concrete-filled high-strength steel tube columns. Compos Struct 266:113808
54. Gain AK, Oromiehie E, Prusty BG (2022) Nanomechanical characterisation of CF-
PEEK composites manufactured using automated fibre placement (AFP). Compos Commun
31:101109
55. Oromiehie E, Gain AK, Donough MJ, Prusty BG (2022) Fracture toughness assessment of
CF-PEEK composites consolidated using hot gas torch assisted automated fibre placement.
Compos Struct 279:114762
56. Oromiehie E, Gain AK, Prusty BG (2021) Processing parameter optimisation for automated
fibre placement (AFP) manufactured thermoplastic composites. Compos Struct 272:114223
57. Arns J-Y, Oromiehie E, Arns C, Prusty BG (2021) Micro-CT analysis of process-induced
defects in composite laminates using AFP. Mater Manuf Process 1–10
58. Oromiehie E, Garbe U, Prusty BG (2019) Porosity analysis of carbon fibre reinforced polymer
laminates manufactured using automated fibre placement. Compos Mater
59. Matti FN, Oromiehie E, Mashiri FR, Prusty BG (2022) Strengthening of steel beams with
thermoplastic CFRP overwrapping using automated fibre placement. In: Proceedings of the 3rd
International Conference on Structural Engineering Research (iCSER 2022), 20–22 November
2022, Sydney, Australia, pp 107–114
60. Online SA (2016) Steel structures, AS 1163–2016. SAI Global database 1998
61. Online SA (1998) Steel structures, AS 4100–1998. SAI Global database 1998
62. OneSteel Market Mills (2004) Cold formed structural hollow sections and profiles, 4th edn
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Performance of Hybrid
Structures Subjected to Extreme
Earthquakes
Mohit Bhandari, Harmanpreet Singh, S. D. Bharti,

and Mahendra K. Shrimali
Abstract The present study aims to the evaluation of the effectiveness of hybrid
building systems to resist extreme earthquake forces. The study is conducted by
considering a five-storey building frame with different variants consisting of different
types of primary structural members: steel, reinforced cement concrete, concrete-
filled steel tube (CFST), and truss system. The seismic performance of five variants
of building frames is evaluated under the effect of near-field earthquakes also referred
to as extreme earthquakes by performing nonlinear time history analysis (NTHA).
The results obtained are compared for different cases considering various seismic
parameters of the building model. The performance of hybrid frames was evaluated
in terms of inter-storey drift, top-storey displacement, top storey acceleration and
base shear. The study concludes that hybrid building systems consisting of CFST
columns and steel beams perform outbound as compared to the other variants with
the decreased storey drift, and displacement and the hybrid structure consisting of
RCC beam produced lower accelerations.
Keywords Hybrid buildings · Near-field earthquake · Extreme earthquakes ·

Seismic performance · Nonlinear time history analysis
1 Introduction
Hybrid buildings are structures that combine different building systems and materials
to achieve improved structural performance and sustainability. These buildings often
incorporate elements of both traditional and modern construction techniques, such
as using steel and concrete in combination with wood or other renewable materials.
M. Bhandari (B) · H. Singh

University Institute of Civil Engineering, Chandigarh University, Mohali 140413, Punjab, India
S. D. Bharti · M. K. Shrimali
National Centre for Disaster Mitigation and Management, Malaviya National Institute of
Technology, Jaipur 302017, Rajasthan, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
106 M. Bhandari et al.
Hybrid buildings are an emerging trend in the field of construction that has gained
increasing attention in recent years [1]. These buildings are characterized by the
integration of different types of building systems and materials to achieve improved
structural performance and sustainability. The use of hybrid building systems can
result in structures stronger, more durable, and more energy-efficient structures built
using only one type of building system. Overall, hybrid buildings are becoming
increasingly popular in the construction industry as they offer a balance of structural
integrity, efficiency, and sustainability [2, 3].
Hybrid buildings are important for a number of reasons. Firstly, they offer
improved structural performance by combining different types of building systems
and materials. This can result in structures that are stronger, more durable, and
better able to withstand natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and floods.
Secondly, hybrid buildings can be more energy efficient than traditional buildings
due to the use of advanced materials and building technologies. This can lead to
reduced energy consumption and lower operating costs for the building’s occupants.
Thirdly, hybrid buildings can have a lower environmental impact than traditional
buildings by incorporating sustainable materials and construction techniques [4, 5].
Recent studies have shown that hybrid buildings have significant advantages
over traditional buildings in terms of structural performance, energy efficiency, and
sustainability. Zhang et al. [6] investigated the influence of shear connectors on
the behavior of FRP-concrete-steel (FCS) hollow beams. The outcome of the study
showed that the shear connectors play an important role in determining the behavior
of the beams. The beams under study exhibited a ductile behavior, and the use of recy-
cled aggregate concrete was found to be effective in enhancing their performance.
Zhang et al. [7] outlined the design and development of two prototype structures
using modelling techniques and the outcome of the nonlinear cyclic pushover and
nonlinear dynamic analyses of the developed model. A comprehensive examina-
tion of the behavior of model structures during earthquakes, including the maximum
floor movements during and after seismic activity, has been carried out. The results of
the analyses showed that the self-centering hybrid-steel-frame (SC-HSF) structures
exhibited a promising performance, with minimal residual drift.
Swarna and Reddy Suda [8] studied the comparison between Reinforced Cement
Concrete (RCC) structures and Concrete Filled Steel Tube (CFST) structures for
multi-story buildings in terms of seismic performance. The study considers multi-
story structures with heights of 10, 20 and 30 storey. The results of the study showed
that CFST structures have a better seismic performance compared to RCC structures.
The storey drift of the CFST structure was less than the RCC structure by 47% but both
remained within the permissible limit. Ghanem et al. [9] investigated the utilization
of waste plastic in the construction industry in non-structural concrete beams. To
investigate the effectiveness of the waste plastic sheets, the flexural behavior of
concrete beams containing waste plastic meshes was studied. The study involved the
preparation of beams with steel reinforcement and waste plastic sheets with varying
widths and patterns, which then were subjected to increasing loads until failure. The
waste plastic increased the moment capacity of the concrete beams and made them
more ductile.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Performance of Hybrid Structures Subjected to Extreme … 107
Poursadrollah et al. [10] presented a new approach to modular construction using

hybrid systems made of lightweight steel truss girders and tubular columns connected
by plug-and-play joints. The feasibility of using this system in low to moderate
seismic zones is investigated through a case study that follows the requirements of
EC3. The results of pushover analyses indicate that the main lateral resistance of the
frame is provided by the joint’s configuration, while plastic hinges tend to form in
the base columns. The authors suggest that the use of this type of modular structure
in low seismicity areas is feasible, as the inherent lateral resistance provided by the
components’ configuration is advantageous without the need for additional detailing
or elements.
Gao et al. [11] evaluated the behavior of steel–concrete hybrid transfer joints
through cyclic testing of four specimens. The research aimed to examine various
strength properties along with the damage pattern of the joints. The results showed
that all specimens exhibited stable load–displacement response, good energy dissipa-
tion capacity and ductility, with beam flexural breakdown as the prominent collapse
pattern. Jiang et al. [12] studied the performance of high-rise hybrid structures in
China. The authors compared the seismic behavior and construction cost of steel
structures and hybrid structures and concluded that the latter system is a better
choice. Further, static nonlinear (pushover) and dynamic nonlinear analyses were
performed to determine the earthquake response of the hybrid structure. Further
results indicated that the structure has satisfactory seismic performance and satisfies
inspection requirements. Vineetha et al. [13] discussed the seismic response of hybrid
RC-masonry structures. Additionally, the paper explores a framework for retrieving
geometrical, structural, and material data for modeling during routine condition
assessment of a chosen structure. The paper focuses on the seismic behavior of a
specific hybrid RC-masonry institutional building constructed in India in the 1950s.
Finally, the authors suggest that proper studies are required to capture the feasi-
bility of modern hybrid structures, with wooden frames and RC foundations, in hilly
regions.
CFST columns are a form of composite structure which combine the advantages
of both concrete and steel. They form a hybrid structure that takes advantage of the
inherent properties of steel and concrete. CFST columns have been widely used in
various structures, including high-rise buildings, bridges, and offshore structures.
They offer several benefits compared to traditional solid concrete columns or steel
columns, such as improved axial strength, fire resistance, and seismic performance
[14, 15].
In recent years, CFST columns have received increasing attention from researchers
and engineers due to their potential for providing efficient and economical solu-
tions for various structural applications. Despite the numerous benefits of CFST
columns, their behavior under extreme loading conditions and their ability to resist
lateral forces are still being studied. The continued development of design guide-
lines, construction techniques, and advanced computational tools has increased the
understanding of the behavior of CFST columns and allowed for their greater use in
structural engineering [16]. CFST columns represent a promising option for modern
structures due to their combination of high strength, fire resistance, and seismic
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
performance. Further research is necessary to further enhance our understanding of

CFST columns and their behavior under extreme loading conditions, but they hold
great potential for use in a variety of structural applications [17, 18].
He et al. [19] investigated the behavior of Concrete-Encased CFST (CE-CFST)
and tests were performed to evaluate the strength of CE-CFST columns. Further,
results captured a decrease in ultimate strength of column under evaluation with
an increase in initial stress, with a peak decrease of 9.3%. Authors developed a FE
model and based on the findings, proposed a methodology to determine the effect of
inceptive stress on the maximum load capacity of a Circular Eccentrically Loaded
Composite Filled Steel Tube Column. Swami et al. [20] investigated the influence of
CFST columns building connections on the stability of composite modular buildings.
Numerical models were established to assess the validity of the study. The results
showed that incorporating CFST columns into a 10-story composite modular building
improves resistance against buckling under high axial forces.
Zhang et al. [21] examined the behavior of composite frame structures subjected to
seismic excitation, specifically those composed of multi-cellular T-shaped concrete-
filled steel tubular (TM-CFST) columns and steel beams. The study involved physical
testing of four specimens under both compressive loads and lateral cyclic loads, as
well as a refined finite element (FE) modeling approach. A comparison between
FE and experimental results showed good agreement, validating the FE modeling
method. In conclusion, the study found that TM-CFST frames are suitable for low
to medium-rise building structures and have good structural properties.
Guo et al. [22] evaluated the seismic capacity of (CECFST) columns connected
to steel beams using bolted joints. Experimental tests were performed on bolted
CECFST column joints to analyze their behavior and identify typical failure modes.
An analytical model was also established using the component method. The study
confirmed the accuracy of the proposed method through experimentation and found it
to be useful in the practical engineering design of bolted joints. A full-scale CECFST
moment resisting frame was evaluated for its seismic behavior in different seismic
events. The analysis revealed that the CECFST moment frame displayed excep-
tional performance under earthquakes and exhibited high resilience and resistance
to collapse.
Han et al. [14] performed a review study on the recent advancements in CFST
research and application, particularly in China. A brief examination of the design
approaches used in different countries is also presented. The study highlights the
characteristics of CFST structures and considers it as an alternative to traditional steel
or reinforced concrete systems, but further evaluation is needed to fully understand
their feasibility and potential for wider application. The performance of CFST was
analyzed in a study where seven column specimens were tested with varying internal
designs and shear-span ratios. The outcomes indicated that these internal designs
significantly delayed the local buckling of the steel tube, resulting in an enhancement
in behavior of the CFST columns Dong et al. [23]
Despite the benefits offered by CFST columns, there are also challenges associated
with their use, such as the need for specialized design and construction knowledge,
and the potential for durability issues with the filled concrete. To fully assess the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
feasibility of CFST columns for widespread use, it is recommended that a thorough

comparison of its advantages and disadvantages be conducted and that the life-cycle
performance of CFST structures be evaluated.
In conclusion, the literature review highlights the development of CFST columns
and the current state of research on this type of structural system. While CFST
columns offer numerous benefits over traditional steel and RC systems, further
research is needed to fully evaluate their feasibility and potential for widespread
use in civil engineering projects.
Overall, the literature review on hybrid buildings highlights the potential benefits
and challenges of this emerging trend in the construction industry. However, it is also
evident that further research is needed to fully understand the implications of hybrid
building design and construction and to develop practical solutions for overcoming
the challenges associated with these structures.
With this background in view, this study attempts to evaluate the seismic perfor-
mance of the hybrid building under extreme earthquakes considering a five-storey
2-D frame building for the analytical study.
2 Modeling and Designing of Buildings
A five-storey building frame is considered in this study. The frame is made hybrid
by adopting different types of members varying in material like steel, reinforced
concrete, and CFST. A total of five variants of the frame is considered as described
in Table 1. The modeling of the frame is done in the commercial structural analysis
and design software ETABS. The frame consists of five storey levels of equal height
of 3.2 m having five bays only in the longitudinal direction of an equal span of 5 m
each. The structural members, beams and columns, are modelled using line elements
and material properties are assigned respectively.
The compressive strength of concrete is taken as 25 MPa; Poisson’s ratio of
concrete is 0.2, and the elastic modulus of concrete is 25000 MPa. The steel properties
include a yield strength equal to 500 MPa, Ultimate strength is 545 MPa. For the
CFST members, concrete of compressive strength 25 MPa and grade having a yield
strength of 345 MPa is used.
End length offsets are considered in the modeling and the value is auto-calculated
from the member sizes. A rigid zone factor at the beam-column joint is assumed
to equal to 0.5 for concrete, 1 for steel and 0.8 for CFST members. The summary
of the sizes of different model variants is given in Table 1. The nonlinearity in the
steel and concrete members is modelled with the help of plastic hinges located at the
end of members and auto hinge properties were generated by the ETABs adopting
the provisions of ASCE 41–17. The elevation view of the typical model variants is
shown in Fig. 1.
The designing of the building frames is carried out in the ETABS. The steel and
concrete members are designed as per Indian standards following IS 456–2000, IS
1893–2016, IS 13920–2016. The CFST members are designed as per the American
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 1 Details of members sizes of different variants of building models

Building model Type of Column Beam
ID building Type Size (mm) Type Size (mm)
B-1 Hybrid Concrete 300 × 300 Steel ISMB 450
B-2 Hybrid CFST 300 × 300 × Steel I-section ISMB 450
12 3–4–5 storey
ISMB 500 1–2
storey
B-3 Hybrid CFST 300 × 300 × Concrete 230 × 500
12
B-4 Conventional Steel H ISWB 450 Steel I ISMB 450
3–4–5 storey
ISMB 500 1–2
storey
B-5 Conventional Concrete 300 × 300 Concrete 230 × 300
code, AISC 360–16. The assumed loadings on the frames are identical for each
variant; the dead load is 12 kN/m.
3 Analytical Study
The seismic performance of five-storey hybrid building frames is evaluated under

near-field earthquakes which are referred to as extreme earthquakes in this study. The
Near-field earthquakes are reordered at a rupture distance of less than 20 km. The
distinct characteristic is the presence of high-velocity pulses having high amplitude
and long period. Due to these characteristics, near-field earthquakes are capable of
inputting high seismic energy in the building system in few seconds enabling it to
yield high responses. A set of real earthquake records as given in Table 2 is used to
carry out nonlinear time history analysis to compute the responses of the building
models. The seismic performance is evaluated in terms of inter-storey drift, storey
displacement, base shear, and floor accelerations. The analysis is performed at a
scaled PGA level of 0.4 g.
4 Discussion of Results
The performance of the hybrid building frame system is compared in terms of

different response parameters like inter-storey drift, storey displacement, Base shear,
and floor accelerations. The detailed discussion on each parameter is discussed in
the below section.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 1 Elevation view of building models
Inter-storey Drift: The trend in the results yielded by the hybrid building is presented
in Fig. 2. It is evident from the pattern of the IDR of the different building frames
that the maximum IDR responses have been yielded by the Kobe earthquake for
which a maximum value of IDR (0.045) is yielded in the B5 model (conventional
concrete buildings). The minimum value of IDR (0.0034) is produced in the B4
model (conventional steel model). The hybrid model B2 (CFST column and Steel
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 2 Details of earthquake records

Year Earthquake Mw PGA (g) PGV (cm/s) PGD (cm) PGV/PGA Rjb
(Station)
1979 Imperial valley 6.5 0.16 36 26 225 8.54
(Brawley airport)
1995 Kobe (Port island 6.9 0.35 90 39 257 3.31
0m)
1999 Kocaeli (Gebze) 7.5 0.14 33 30 235 7.57
Note Records taken from https://ngawest2.berkeley.edu/
Beam) is closely incoherent with the B4 model, which shows good performance of
the hybrid building. Figure 2d shows the mean IDR values for all the building models
and the same trend in the results is obtained confirming the low IDR value of the B2
hybrid model.
Storey Displacement: The results obtained from the hybrid building are depicted in
Fig. 3. It can be seen that the maximum Storey displacement responses were produced
by the Kobe earthquake, where the maximum value of 393.65 mm was recorded in the
B5 model (conventional concrete buildings). The Indian code prescribes a maximum
KOBE IMPERIAL VALLEY
5 5
4 4
STOREY LEVEL
STOREY LEVEL
3 B1 3 B1
B2 B2
B3 B3
2 2
B4 B4
B5 B5
1 1
0 0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
STOREY DRIFT STOREY DRIFT
(a) (b)
KOCAELI MEAN STOREY DRIFT
5 5
4 4
STOREY LEVEL
STOREY LEVEL
3 B1 3 B1
B2 B2
B3 B3
2 2
B4 B4
B5 B5
1 1
0 0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
STOREY DRIFT STOREY DRIFT
(c) (d)
Fig. 2 Variation in the IDR along the storey level of different types of buildings subjected to
different earthquakes; a Kobe earthquake; b Imperial valley; c Kocaeli; d Mean drift values of all
earthquakes
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
KOBE IMPERIAL VALLEY

5 5
4 4
STOREY LEVEL
STOREY LEVEL.
3 B1 3 B1
B2 B2
B3 B3
2 2
B4 B4
B5 B5
1 1
0 0
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500
DISPLACEMENT (mm) DISPLACEMENT(mm)
(a) (b)
KOCAELI MEAN DISPLACEMENT

5 5
4 4
STOREY LEVEL
STOREY LEVEL
3 B1 3 B1
B2 B2
B3 B3
2 2
B4 B4
B5 B5
1 1
0 0
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500
DISPLACEMENT(mm) MEAN DISPLACEMENT (mm)
(c) (d)
Fig. 3 Variation in the displacement along the storey level of different types of buildings subjected
to different earthquakes; a Kobe earthquake; b Imperial valley; c Kocaeli; d Mean displacement
values of all earthquakes
value of storey displacement as H/250 i.e. 64 mm in this case. The B4 model (conven-
tional steel structures) recorded the lowest value of storey displacement at 44.58 mm.
A similar trend as in storey drift was observed where the hybrid model B2, which
features CFST columns and steel beams, exhibits results that are comparable to
those of the B4 model, demonstrating the favorable behavior of the hybrid building
subjected to near-field earthquakes.
Base Shear:
The base shear is a crucial factor in the design of structures, as it represents the total
horizontal force acting at the base of the building or structure due to various external
loads, such as wind, earthquakes, or other similar forces. The magnitude of the
base shear is used to determine the necessary strength and stiffness of the structural
elements and components, including the foundation, walls, columns, beams, and
connections.
The results of the analysis shown in Fig. 4. indicate that the maximum base shear
was experienced by the B4 model, which was anticipated as the same model displayed
the minimum storey displacement and storey drift. Furthermore, the B4 model also
showed the highest deviation in the base shear values, followed by the B2 model,
highlighting that the response of these structural combinations is highly dependent on
the type of earthquake. It is noteworthy that the B5 structure (conventional concrete)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
BASE SHEAR
1400
1200
1000
BASE SHEAR (kN)
800
600
400
200
0
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5
MODEL
KOBE IMPERIAL VALLEY KOCAELI
Fig. 4 Variation in the base shear yielded in the building model under three earthquakes
was unable to withstand the complete time history excitation in the case of the Kobe
earthquake.
Top Floor Acceleration:
This metric measures the dynamic response of a structure to external loads, including
earthquakes, wind, and other similar forces, and is an essential consideration in the
design and analysis of structures. The Floor acceleration provides information on
the behavior of the structure under dynamic loads and the distribution of forces
throughout the structure.
The study of floor accelerations in various structures reveals the dynamic behavior
and response of each system to external loads. The results of this study, as presented
in Figs. 5, 6, 7, and 8, illustrate the joint acceleration experienced at the top-story
corner joint. The analysis demonstrates that each system has its unique strengths and
weaknesses in terms of its ability to resist joint accelerations.
In particular, the data highlights the highest joint acceleration in the B4 model
during the Kocaeli earthquake, followed by the B2 model, suggesting that incor-
porating steel into the construction increases joint acceleration. Conversely, the B5
model, which employs conventional concrete, displayed the lowest joint acceleration
for all time histories included in the study.
It is important to note that the structural system with the highest joint acceleration
values does not necessarily imply weakness or a higher likelihood of collapse. Rather,
this characteristic is dependent on various factors, including the type of load, the
distribution of mass and stiffness, and the type of connections.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
B1_KOCAELI B2_KOCAELI
20 20
JOINT ACCELERATION (m/sec2)

15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
-25 -25
TIME (SECONDS) TIME (SECONDS)
(a) (b)
B3_KOCAELI B4_KOCAELI
20 20
15 15

10 10
5 5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
-25 -25
(c) (d)
B5_KOCAELI
20
15
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
TIME (SECONDS)
(e)
Fig. 5 Top floor acceleration time history for kocaeli earthquake for different building models
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
B1_IMPERIAL VALLEY B2_IMPERIAL VALLEY

10 10
JOINT ACCELERATION (m2/sec)

8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-2 -2
-4 -4
-6 -6
-8 -8
-10 -10
(a) (b)
B3_IMPERIAL VALLEY B4_IMPERIAL VALLEY
10 10

JOINT ACCEELRATION (m/sec2)
8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-2 -2
-4 -4
-6 -6
-8 -8
-10 -10
(c) (d)
B5_IMPERIAL VALLEY
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
TIME (SECONDS)
(e)
Fig. 6 Top floor acceleration time history for imperial valley earthquake for different building
models
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
B1_KOBE B2_KOBE
10 10
JOINT ACCELERATION (m2/sec)

8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
-2 -2
-4 -4
-6 -6
-8 -8
-10 -10
(a) (b)
B3_KOBE B4_KOBE
10 10
JOINT ACCEELRATION (m/sec2)

8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
-2 -2
-4 -4
-6 -6
-8 -8
-10 -10
(c) (d)
B5_KOBE
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
TIME (SECONDS)
(e)
Fig. 7 Top floor acceleration time history for kobe earthquake for different building models
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
B1_KOCAELI
20
15
10
B1
5
B2
0 B3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 B4
-5
B5
-10
-15
-20
-25
TIME (SECONDS)
(a)
B1_IMPERIAL VALLEY
10
8
2 B1
B2
0 B3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
B4
-2
B5
-4
-6
-8
-10
TIME (SECONDS)
(b)
B1_KOBE
10
8
2 B1
B2
0 B3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
B4
-2
B5
-4
-6
-8
-10
TIME (SECONDS)
(c)
Fig. 8 Mean top floor acceleration time history for three considered earthquakes for different
building models
5 Conclusion
The performance of hybrid building models is evaluated under extreme earthquakes

for 5 storey building model. The Numerical analysis is conducted by performing a
time history analysis employing a suite of three near-field real earthquake records.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The responses of the building models are recorded and compared for different seismic
response parameters. On the basis of the assumed building models, constraints, and
earthquake data, the important conclusions drawn from this study are appended
below:
. The maximum IDR values were produced by the Kobe earthquake in the B5 model
(conventional concrete buildings), with the minimum value recorded in the B4
model (conventional steel structures).
. The maximum storey displacement was recorded in the B5 model (conventional
concrete buildings), with the lowest value in the B4 model. The hybrid model B2
exhibited results comparable to the B4 model.
. The B4 model showed the highest base shear value, with a higher deviation
compared to other models. The B5 model was unable to withstand the complete
time history excitation of the Kobe earthquake.
. The highest floor acceleration was recorded in the B4 model during the Kocaeli
earthquake, followed by the B2 model. The B5 model (conventional concrete)
had the lowest joint acceleration.
. In conclusion, the results from the analysis of five hybrid and conventional struc-
tures have shown that the hybrid structure with a steel beam and CFST Column
performs similarly to a conventional steel building and significantly better than
a conventional RCC structure in terms of serviceability. These findings demon-
strate the potential of hybrid structures to provide superior structural performance
compared to conventional structures and highlight the importance of considering
hybrid structures as a viable alternative in construction projects.
References
1. Roeder CW (1998) Overview of hybrid and composite systems for seismic design in the United
States. Eng Struct 20:355–363
2. Wang Z, Pan W (2020) A hybrid coupled wall system with replaceable steel coupling beams
for high-rise modular buildings. J Build Eng 31:101355
3. Loss C, Piazza M, Zandonini R (2016) Connections for steel–timber hybrid prefabricated
buildings. Part II: Innovative modular structures. Constr Build Mater 122:796–808
4. Stiemer S, Tesfamariam S, Karacabeyli E, Propovski M (2012) Development of steel-wood
hybrid systems for buildings under dynamic loads. In: Proceedings of the 7th international
specialty conference on behavior of steel structures in seismic areas (STESSA). Santiago,
Chile
5. Ji X, Liu D, Molina HC (2018) Seismic performance evaluation of a high-rise building with
novel hybrid coupled walls. Eng Struct 169:216–225
6. Zhang L, Zhang J, Chen G, Lin G (2023) Flexural behavior of hybrid FRP-recycled aggregate
concrete-steel hollow beams. J Constr Steel Res 200:107650
7. Zhang H, Zhou X, Ke K, Yam MCH, He X, Li H (2023) Self-centring hybrid-steel-frames
employing energy dissipation sequences: insights and inelastic seismic demand model. J Build
Eng 63:105451
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
8. Swarna C, Reddy Suda VB (2022) Comparison of seismic analysis of multi storey buildings
with RCC columns and CFST columns by varying heights. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci
1086:012009
9. Ghanem H, Chahal S, Khatib J, Elkordi A (2022) Flexural behavior of concrete beams
reinforced with recycled plastic mesh. Buildings 12:2085
10. Poursadrollah A, D’Aniello M, De Martino A, Landolfo R (2020) Preliminary study on the
seismic performance of hybrid steel structures with truss lightweight girders and plug-and-play
connections. Int J 37
11. Gao J-Y, Nie X, Ding R, Fan J-S (2020) Experimental study on seismic performance of a new
transfer joint in the steel-concrete vertical hybrid structure. J Constr Steel Res 174:106259
12. Jiang J, You B, Hu M, Hao J, Li Y (2008) Seismic design of a super high-rise hybrid structure.
In: The 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, pp 7–12
13. Vineetha N, Menon A, Gettu R (2012) Seismic response of hybrid buildings. 15 WCEE Lisboa
14. Han L-H, Li W, Bjorhovde R (2014) Developments and advanced applications of concrete-filled
steel tubular (CFST) structures: members. J Constr Steel Res 100:211–228
15. Wang X, Fan F, Lai J (2022) Strength behavior of circular concrete-filled steel tube stub columns
under axial compression: a review. Constr Build Mater 322:126144
16. Gunawardena YKR, Aslani F, Uy B, Kang W-H, Hicks S (2019) Review of strength behaviour of
circular concrete filled steel tubes under monotonic pure bending. J Constr Steel Res 158:460–
474
17. Wang Z-B, Tao Z, Han L-H, Uy B, Lam D, Kang W-H (2017) Strength, stiffness and ductility
of concrete-filled steel columns under axial compression. Eng Struct 135:209–221
18. Li G, Hou C, Shen L, Yao G-H (2022) Performance and strength calculation of CFST columns
with localized pitting corrosion damage. J Constr Steel Res 188:107011
19. He F, Li C, Chen B, Liu J, Zhang M, Briseghella B (2023) Compressive behavior of concrete-
encased CFST column with initial stress. J Constr Steel Res 201:107724
20. Swami G, Thai H-T, Liu X (2023) Structural robustness of composite modular buildings: the
roles of CFST columns and inter-module connections. Structures 48:1491–1504
21. Zhang J-W, Tong J-Z, Zhang L, Tong G-S, Li X-G (2022) Seismic performance evaluation on
composite frame structures with T-shaped multi-cellular CFST columns. J Constr Steel Res
199:107634
22. Guo L, Wang J, Wang W, Hu Z (2022) Experimental study and analytical evaluation on
seismic performance of CECFST moment resisting frame with bolted connections. Eng Struct
259:114074
23. Dong H, Qin J, Cao W, Zhao L (2022) Seismic behavior of circular CFST columns with
different internal constructions. Eng Struct 260:114262
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Strengthening and Retrofitting
of RC Structures Using Fibre Reinforced
Composites
R. Siva Chidambaram, Naveen Kumar Kothapalli, and Pankaj Agarwal
Abstract The conventional practices of strengthening RC elements like Reinforced

Concrete (RC) jacketing, Ferro cement jacketing, and Steel jacketing lead to an
increased cross-sectional size of the member, which interrupts the functionality and
proves to be nondurable when exposed to an aggressive environment. The use of Fiber
Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composite technique in strengthening work addresses
these issues over the other conventional practices. The simpler execution practice,
high strength-to-weight ratio and faster setting time make FRP an efficient material
in RC strengthening works. Many varieties of FRP, such as Glass, Carbon, Basalt,
Aramid, etc., are available in construction practice that have unique tensile properties.
The properties of tensile strength, Young’s modulus and rupture strain of FRP play
a major role in the strength and post-yield deflection of the associated RC members.
The property of adhesive used as a bonding source between FRP and concrete plays a
significant role in transferring the forces and determining the failure mode. Strength-
ening techniques primarily depend on the demand/deficiency of structural elements.
This chapter presents an overview of the strengthening techniques and experimental
behaviour of FRP-strengthened RC elements.
Keywords Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) · Flexural behaviour · Shear

strengthening · Beam-column joint strengthening · Fracture behaviour ·
Retrofitting
R. Siva Chidambaram
Advanced Concrete, Steel and Composites Division, CSIR-Central Building Research Institute,
Roorkee 247667, Uttarakhand, India
N. K. Kothapalli · P. Agarwal (B)
Department of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee,
Roorkee 247667, Uttarakhand, India
N. K. Kothapalli
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
122 R. Siva Chidambaram et al.
1 Introduction
The strength enhancement of a deficient structural element and retrofitting of

damaged RC elements in moment-resistant framed structures can be done in various
ways, such as steel plate bonding, steel jacketing, RC jacketing, ferro-cement jack-
eting, and Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) jacketing. FRP is an efficient strength-
ening technique composed of fibres with a high strength-to-weight ratio and resins
that bind them together. A reduction in additional dead load on a retrofitted member
is achieved using FRP strengthening compared to conventional techniques. FRP is
non-corrosive and flexible in nature and can be moulded into any shape or config-
uration. Strength attainment in the case of FRP is faster and requires less setting
time. The flexible nature of FRPs favours strengthening structural elements such as
beams, columns, and slabs without any need for sophisticated equipment. The FRP
wrapping pattern depends on the structural element’s type and requirement, such as
the confinement of a column being increased by wrapping it on its lateral face and the
flexural strengthening of the RC beam under bending by affixing it on its soffit face.
Shear strengthening is accomplished by adapting the composites in the deficient shear
zone with fibres oriented parallel to the loading direction. The externally wrapped
FRP effectively enhances the peak strength and stiffness rather than the deflection.
Strength upgradation in the FRP technique depends on the type of FRP, the pattern
in which it is established, and the chemical properties of the epoxy used. There are
many types of FRP, such as CFRP (carbon fibre), GFRP (glass fibre), BFRP (basalt
fibre), and AFRP (Aramid fibre), available for strengthening and retrofitting works.
The mechanical properties, such as strength, modulus, and rupture strain, vary with
reference to the FRP chosen. The common failure pattern observed in FRP strength-
ening technique is the delamination and debonding from the concrete substrate. The
fire resistance of an FRP-strengthened member primarily depends on the resin rather
than the temperature resistance of the fibres used. Significant degradation in stiff-
ness has been observed when the temperature at the concrete–FRP interface of a
strengthened member is greater than the glass transition temperature [1].
Flexural strengthening of RC beams:
The flexural strength capacity of RC beams can be enhanced through the application
of External Bonding (EB) and Near-Surface Mounted (NSM) FRP techniques. The
performance of these strengthened beams relies on various factors such as material
quality, strengthening methods, conditions under which they are subjected to loads
and other environmental factors. Flexural strength enhancement can effectively be
achieved by affixing FRP laminates at the tension face of beams, typically located on
the underside, known as the soffit face, as shown in Fig. 1a. Beams that are completely
enveloped by FRP sheets demonstrate exceptional performance. However, the prac-
tical implementation of this technique can pose considerable complexities. Use of the
partial wrapping technique, often referred to as the “U-wrapping,” can significantly
improve the flexural strength, stiffness, and resistance to deflection in reinforced
concrete beams, as shown in Fig. 1b. The thickness of FRP plays a crucial role in the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Strengthening and Retrofitting of RC Structures Using Fibre … 123
(a) Flexural strengthening (b) Flexural & U-shaped wrap (c) FRP Strengthening with
end anchorage
Fig. 1 Typical FRP strengthening and anchorage in RC beams
strengthening process, as demonstrated by bending tests showing a 39% reduction

in deflection for beams U-wrapped with two layers of composite as compared to
those with a single layer [2]. A combination of Carbon and Glass FRP layers in a U-
wrapped configuration can increase the load capacity of RC beams by 103% [3]. The
ultimate effectiveness of EB wrapping is contingent upon the adhesive bond between
the FRP sheet and the concrete substrate. To prevent premature bond failures, partic-
ularly those of a critical or brittle nature, it is recommended to employ additional
measures such as intermediate anchorage, mechanical fastening, and strengthening
with NSM FRP strips, Fig. 1c.
Shear strengthening using FRP composites:
Shear strengthening in RC beams can be executed in various ways, i.e. by adopting
continuous sheets or strips in U-shape, side bonding, and Full wrap techniques.
Figures 2 and 3 show the typical shear-strengthening patterns. Externally wrapped
FRP reinforcement was considered similar to the internal shear reinforcement,
assuming that at the ultimate limit state, the effective strain in FRP is smaller than
the ultimate tensile strain of FRP. References [4, 5] investigated shear-strengthened
RC beams with different fibre orientations and distributions, resulting in a conclu-
sion that a large amount of externally bonded CFRP composites don’t exhibit similar
increments in failure loads. Several factors, including a moderate low FRP spacing,
shear span-to-depth ratio, and transverse reinforcement, can improve the efficiency of
shear strengthening. The orientation of FRP wrapping plays a pivotal role in dictating
the crack pattern within the reinforced beam. For instance, beams featuring the FRP
wrap along the 45° inclined direction demonstrate the ability to deter the formation
of diagonal cracks. In contrast, beams with fibres wrapped along the 0 and 90° direc-
tions are less effective [6]. In cases where shear cracks occur in beams strengthened
with diagonal FRP wrapping, their propagation tends to follow a downward trajec-
tory upon reaching the ultimate load. The specific angle at which these shear cracks
manifest can vary, typically falling within the range of 30–60°. This variation is
influenced by factors related to the shear strength of the FRP system, as documented
in references [7–9]. Prior to the shear-strengthening design measures, it is impera-
tive to undertake a comprehensive analysis of crack size, shape, and orientation, as
these factors wield a unique influence on both the design strength and the ensuing
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
failure characteristics. Expanding the surface area covered by FRP can substantially
augment the structural capacity.
Importance of anchorage in FRP strengthening:
The efficiency and efficacy of FRP strengthening schemes vary with respect to the
type of fibre, orientation of fibre strands, and influence of anchorage. In shear-
strengthened beams wrapped with CFRP, it is observed that the FRP wrap acts as
an anchorage and improves the shear capacity of the beam, which alters the failure
mode from brittle to ductile [10, 11]. Despite of the higher tensile modulus of CFRP,
[12] observed a sudden failure of the strengthened RC beam after debonding of U-
wrapped strips due to the absence of anchorage. A lower modulus fibre sheet has
better efficiency than strengthening using multiple fibre layers and higher modulus
fibre. In design, the allowable strain value of FRP is limited by codal guidelines, and it
Fig. 2 Typical FRP wrapping in shear-deficient RC beams
Full-wrap U-wrap Side-bonded wrap
Fig. 3 Configurations for the shear strengthening of structures using FRP composites
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
can be as low as 10–25% of the rupture strain in cases of higher degree strengthening
[13]. Adequate anchorage can be adopted to effectively use FRP strain capacity in
achieving the design level and overcoming their shortcomings. Many studies have
been conducted to prevent debonding failure with the use of FRP U-jackets across
the span or at a specific spacing. References [14, 15] observed concrete cover separa-
tion failure rather than debonding failure when plate-end FRP U jackets were added.
Compared to specimens strengthened using NSM FRP or EB FRP with no anchorage
techniques, an appropriately designed end-anchorage system can contribute to better
shear resistance. The use of self-end anchorage using a groove at the beam-slab
corner showed 29% higher shear strength than the FRP-strengthened beam without
anchorage. Further, a 2.5 times higher deflection is noticed in the anchored specimen.
A specimen with sandwich anchorage showed a 12% enhancement in strength and a
more than two fold increase in deflection than the specimen without anchorage [16].
These observations clearly manifest that the anchorage system in FRP strengthening
plays a crucial role in enhancing strength and strain.
FRP strengthening in beam-column joints:
Beam–column joints play a vital role in resisting the lateral forces during an earth-
quake event. The combined forces of compression, tension and shear make the joint
more susceptible in an RC-framed structure. The strong-column weak-beam design
philosophy ensures that the failure is concentrated in the beam hinge regions instead
of the column and joints, enhancing the structure’s rotational capacity. Plastic hinge
formation in the beam improves energy dissipation and displacement ductility. The
reinforcement detailing in joint region plays a crucial role in achieving ductility and
damage tolerance. Many joint failures during past earthquakes were caused due to
improper detailing in the joint region. Inadequate confinement and anchorage lead
to early rebar slip and allow the rebar to buckle, which leads to joint collapse.
The use of FRP in strengthening beam-column joints is one of the most effective
solutions due to its high strength-to-weight ratio. This technique notably enhances
the strength and stiffness of the joints. Many types of strengthening schemes or
patterns are shown in Fig. 4, in which the feasibility of wrapping mostly relies on the
hinge region rather than the joint core region due to its inaccessibility. The common
practice is the use of L-shaped fabric to connect the column and beam at the hinge
region, followed by confinement using FRP. The interior part of the building joint core
region is not accessible compared to the corner joints of a building. The confinement
in actual practice may be restricted to U-wrap due to the presence of a slab, or in
some cases it may be full wrap through the holes made, as depicted in Fig. 3.
The strength and stiffness enhancement dominates the energy dissipation potential
[17, 18]. The yielding phenomenon in FRP primarily depends on the area fractions,
strength, modulus and anchorage used in the system, as discussed in the earlier
sections. Also, flexible fabric sheets perform better than solid stirps [19]. Various
factors, such as the number of layers, anchorages, joint internal retrofitting strategy,
reinforcement ratio, and concrete strength play vital roles in the seismic performance
of FRP-strengthened joints. A proper anchorage system enhances the post-yield
behaviour of the hinge region and compels the joints to dissipate more energy than
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 4 Typical FRP strengthening schemes
the strengthened joints without adequate anchorage [20]. Numerous studies have
been conducted on the use of glass-FRP as retrofitting materials for enhancing the
performance of beam-column joints [16, 21, 22]. These investigations have demon-
strated that the incorporation of GFRP anchors significantly elevates both the shear
strength and ductility of RC beam-column joints. This augmentation in structural
capacity is accompanied by a notable shift in failure mode from shear to flexure.
Further, it results in a substantial increase in energy dissipation potential compared
to control specimens. Schematic diagrams of retrofitted/strengthened beam-column
joints are shown in Fig. 5.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Fig. 5 Beam-column joint retrofitting/strengthening with FRP composites a X-shape b U-shape

c T-shape d L-shape
2 Guidelines to Estimate the Flexural and Shear Capacity

of FRP Strengthened RC Beams
The flexural and shear cracking capacity of FRP-strengthened members can be

estimated using the following standard guidelines.
ACI 440.2R-17 (Flexural Strengthening with FRP Composite)
The formula for estimating the nominal flexural strength capacity ‘M’ of a
conventional RC frame section with FRP as per ACI 440.2R-17 is
( x) ( x)
M = As f s d − β1 + φ f A f f f e d f − β1 (1)
2 2
A trial-and-error method can be used to estimate the neutral axis depth, x as given
in Eq. (2).
As f s + A f f f e
x= (2)
α1 f c' β1 b
where, α1 and β1 are the concrete stress block parameters. The value β1 can be
obtained from ACI-318-08 [23] and α1 having a value of 0.85.
'
0.85( f c ≤ 28M
) Pa
β1 = ' ' (3)
0.85 − 0.007 f c − 28 , f c > 28M Pa
ACI model provides a simplified Intermediate crack-induced debonding strain

based on the Teng [24] equation:
/
f c'
ε f d = 0.41 ≤ 0.9ε f u (4)
nE f t f
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
where, As , A f , f s , f f e , d, d f , φ f , are the area of steel reinforcement, area of external

FRP reinforcement, the stress in steel, effective stress in FRP, depth of section from
extreme compression fibre to centre of tension reinforcement, effective depth of FRP
flexural reinforcement, and strength reduction factor for FRP, respectively.
ACI 440.2R-17 (Shear Strengthening with FRP Composite)
The FRP design guide ACI 440.2R 2017 [25, 26] serves as an extensive reference for
shear strengthening using FRP. This guideline considers critical factors such as fibre
orientation and the anticipated crack pattern [27]. By analysing the force induced
due to tensile stress near the assumed crack location, the shear capacity achievable
with FRP can be determined.
( )df
V f = A f f f e sin α f + cos α f (5)
sf
A f = 2nt f w f (6)
f fe = εfeE f (7)
where t f , w f , A f , s f , α f , denote the thickness, width, area, spacing, and inclination

angle of the FRP composite, respectively. The effective strain ε f e depends on the
wrapping scheme of FRP [5].
In accordance with the design principles outlined in ACI, the addition to the overall
shear strength reduction factor φ, the contribution of FRP to shear strength is further
adjusted by a reduction factor. ϕ f , with the final shear strength capacity as follows:
( )
φV = φ Vc + Vs + ϕ f V f (8)
where Vc , Vs , V f , denotes the shear contribution of concrete, the shear contribution

of steel, and the shear contribution of FRP, respectively.
Triantafillou’s Model
Triantafillou [5] proposed a model to estimate the shear contribution of FRP based on
the area fraction of FRP and other parameters like fibre orientation, elastic Modulus,
and effective strain of FRP. The shear strength contribution of FRP can be estimated
as per Eq. 9.
0.9
V f r p,d = ρ f r p E f r p ε f r p,e bw d(1 + cot β) sin β (9)
γ f rp
if 0 ≤ ρ f r p E f r p ≤ 1
( ) ( )2
ε f r p = 0.0119 − 0.0205 ρ f r p E f r p + 0.0104 ρ f r p E f r p
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
if ρ f r p E f r p ≥ 1
( )
ε f r p = −0.00065 ρ f r p E f r p + 0.00245
where, ρ f r p , ε f r p,e , bw , β, γ f r p , E f r p , denotes the area fraction of FRP, the effective

strain of FRP, width of the beam, fibre orientation, partial safety factor for FRP in
uniaxial tension, and elastic modulus of FRP, respectively.
3 Experimental Study on the Flexural and Shear

Strengthening of RC Beams
The shear and flexural behaviour of FRP-strengthened RC beams was studied using
scaled-down beam specimens. Beams were cast with shear deficiency, followed by
strengthening using different FRPs. Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) of 43 grade
was used in the concrete mix preparation. The three FRPs adopted in this study
are CFRP uni-directional, BFRP and GFRP bi-directional fibre composites. The
corresponding fibre composites were adhered to the concrete surface using two types
of solutions, namely the primer and saturant. Each of the two solutions consists of
two components, namely resin and the hardener, which were mixed in the proportion
of 1: 0.5. The main function of the primer compound was to fill the concrete pores,
and that of the epoxy solution was to bind fibre composites on the primer coated
concrete surface. After a day’s curing of the primer coat, an epoxy coat was applied
over which the FRP was adhered, immediately after which a roller was rolled down
to eliminate the voids. For double-layered specimens, the epoxy coat was applied
in the direction parallel to the fibres of first layer, upon which the second layer was
fixed. The FRP-strengthened specimens were kept in a serene state for a period of
15 days for the epoxy to cure and gain its ultimate strength.
Fracture behaviour of the FRP strengthened concrete prisms
Plain concrete prism specimens of standard size 500 mm × 100 mm × 100 mm with
a vertical groove of 20 mm depth and 2 mm width at the mid-point were used in
the fracture study. Fracture specimens were strengthened by the three different FRPs
to investigate the contribution of FRP in fracture strength and corresponding failure
patterns. Specimens were tested in the flexural testing machine under single-point
loading. FRP was fixed within a span of 400 mm between the two roller supports. The
grooved portion was kept free from adhesive, and failure was anticipated to occur at
the mid-region, eventually by groove widening. Details of the tested specimens are
illustrated in Table 1.
The load–deflection plots of the fracture specimens are shown in Fig. 6. The Frac-
ture strength of the conventional specimen is low compared with FRP-strengthened
specimens. The fracture behaviour of the strengthened specimen depends on the
property of FRP. The specimen Fr Con 20 fails with an average fracture strength of
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 1 Details of the prism specimens fixed by FRP for fracture test
Specimens Details of specimens Grade of concrete
Fr Con 20 Conventional specimen M20
Fr B 20 S Basalt fibre single layer affixed specimen M20
Fr C 20 S Carbon fibre single-layer affixed specimen M20
Fr G 20 S Glass fibre single-layer affixed specimen M20
3.46 MPa with brittle failure at the mid-point, breaking into two parts. The specimen
Fr B 20 S exhibits 28% higher strength than conventional and possesses better post-
yield deflection due to the tensile contribution of FRP. The lower modulus BFRP
led the specimen to fail in a ductile manner by proper yielding of FRP at the middle
of the beam, shown in Fig. 7. The fracture strength of Fr C 20 S specimen is 14.89
MPa, which is higher than all the FRP layered specimens and also shows an average
increase of 330% than the conventional. The brittle failure of concrete, as shown
in Fig. 7, shows lesser post-peak behaviour. Generally, the higher modulus CFRP
converts the unstrengthened portion to the weak region. Thus, the failure was initi-
ated and occurred at the unstrengthened portion by forming truss action prior to
CFRP rupture. The specimen Fr G 20 S shows an average strength of 4.66 MPa, 34%
higher than the conventional, along with enhanced post-peak behaviour. This infers
that the influence of modulus and strength of the fibres decide the performance of
FRP-affixed concrete specimens.
R.C. Beams with External FRP Full U-Wrapping
Reinforced concrete beams of 1000 mm in length having a cross-sectional size of
100 mm × 150 mm with/without FRP wrapping using three different varieties of
FRP were tested under two-point loading. The reinforcement detailing was kept the
Fig. 6 Load versus

deflection behavior of the
fracture prisms
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 7 Failure patterns noticed in the fracture specimens
same in all the beams with a longitudinal reinforcement of 10 mm dia. at the bottom
and 8 mm dia. at the top. The shear detailing was deliberately kept high with 6 mm
2-legged stirrups placed at 220 mm center-to-centre. The configuration of wrapped
FRP in RC beams is presented in Table 2. A schematic diagram of the wrapping
pattern followed in all the FRP-strengthened beams is shown in Fig. 8. During the
grinding process, the bottom edges of the tension zone were made smooth to avoid
stress concentration on FRP during loading. After the fastening process of the FRP,
a roller was used to eliminate the voids present at the FRP-epoxy interface. BFRP
and GFRP, owing to their lesser thickness, were wrapped in double layers. In the
sequence of strengthening for both shear and flexure, shear zone FRP was fixed over
the flexure zone FRP, which acts as an anchorage to it.
The inadequate stirrup spacing fails to resist the truss action, which leads the
conventional specimen B M20 0 to fail in shear. The inclined shear cracks restrict
beam deflection and exhibit a sudden brittle failure. In FRP-strengthened specimens,
the external confinement effectively resists the shear force and allows the formation of
numerous flexural cracks in the mid-span. The strengthening measures in specimen
B B M20 1 using lower modulus BFRP at the tension zone allow vertical crack
Table 2 Detailed configuration of strengthening in the R.C beams

Specimen ID Description of specimen wrapping
Type 1 Concrete grade M20
B M20 0 Conventional specimen without any FRP wrapping
B B M20 1 Beam specimen strengthened in shear and flexure using BFRP sheets (2 layers)
B C M20 1 Beam Specimen strengthened in shear and flexure using CFRP sheet
B G M20 1 Beam specimen strengthened in shear and flexure using GFRP sheets (2 layers)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 8 Schematic diagram of strengthening pattern followed in the beams specimens
formation in the unstrengthened portion, which altered the shear failure to flexure,
as shown in Fig. 9b. The higher modulus CFRP improves the load-carrying capacity
of the beam by resisting its deformation. The inadequate anchorage in this specimen
fails to support the shear zone CFRP, which shows FRP debonding prior to the
tension zone rupture of CFRP. This led the specimen to fail in shear with a higher
load-carrying capacity, as shown in Fig. 9c. The lower modulus GFRP strengthened
B G M20 1 specimen’s cracking behaviour was similar to B B M20 1. Vertical
cracks were propagated in the unstrengthened mid region at a higher load, which led
to its higher ultimate deflection. The specimen failed in flexure with rupture of FRP,
followed by debonding in the tension zone, as shown in Fig. 9d.
The load–deflection behaviour of FRP-strengthened specimens shows a certain
drop in load after attaining their corresponding peak loads, which proves that the
trend of strength increase is evident till the active contribution of FRP, shown in
Fig. 10.
Immediately after the failure of FRP, the load gets transferred to the reinforcement.
The conventional specimen B M20 0 with inadequate confinement fails to restrict
the formation of shear cracks in the early stage and shows a sudden drop in load after
attaining a peak load of 45.83 kN with meagre post-peak behaviour. The BFRP-
strengthened B B M20 1 specimen fails at a load of 77.80 kN, which is 70% higher
Fig. 9 Failure patterns in the tested R.C. beams
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 10 Load–deflection
behaviour of RC beams with
full FRP wrapping
than the conventional with enhanced post-peak behaviour. The observed ultimate
deflection is nearly 175% higher than the conventional specimen. This evidences
the formation of flexural cracks, and the absence of shear cracks led the reinforce-
ment to yield and finally fail in flexure. The higher modulus CFRP strengthened
specimen B C M20 1 attains a peak load of 95.12 kN, which is higher than all
other specimens and is 107% higher than the conventional peak load. The absence
of end anchorage led the CFRP to delaminate from the strengthened zone, resulting
in the shear mode of failure with decreased ultimate deflection compared to other
lower modulus FRP-strengthened specimens. The average peak load of the GFRP-
strengthened specimen B G M20 1 specimen is 86.52 kN, which is 88% higher than
the conventional specimen. The post-yield behaviour is similar to the basalt specimen
with increased deflection. The initial tangent clearly shows the effective contribution
of FRP in stiffness enhancement, and the post-yield rate of loss in strength shows
improved inelastic stiffness retention capacity.
R.C. Beams with External FRP Stirp U-Wrapping
Three beam specimens having a length of 800 mm and a cross-sectional size of 150
× 200 mm were strengthened for shear. Two numbers of 12 mm diameter rebars
as longitudinal tension reinforcement and 6 mm diameter rebars as transverse rein-
forcement having a yield strength of 250 MPa at 120 mm c/c spacing have been
adopted in the preparation of RC beams. Table 3 presents the details of the specimen’s
configuration [26].
Table 3 Details of the RC beam specimens

Specimens Details of specimens Width of strip (mm) Strip spacing (mm)
B1 Conventional specimen 50 100
B2 Carbon fibre affixed specimen 50 100
B3 Basalt fibre affixed specimen 50 100
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 11 Load–deflection
behaviour of RC beams with
strip wrapping
Out of the three specimens, one specimen is strengthened using a 50 mm wide

CFRP strip (B2) and the other with a 50 mm width BFRP strip (B3) having a c/c
spacing of 100mm. All specimens were tested under four-point bending having a
shear–span ratio of 1.25. The load–deflection curve of tested beams shows that the
CFRP strengthening enhances the stiffness and peak strength by 17% compared to the
control specimen and displayed better post-yield deflection than BFRP strengthening,
shown in Fig. 11. The low strength and modulus capacity of BFRP failed to resist
the truss action, which led the specimen to experience diagonal cracks as shown in
Fig. 12c, and has shown only 6% strength enhancement than the control specimen.
CFRP strengthening in the shear span controlled the formation of diagonal cracks
and led the beam to fail under flexure, as shown in Fig. 12. Flexural cracks were
observed near the middle of the beam. The area under the load–displacement curve
shows 140% higher energy dissipation of B2 than B1, whereas it is only 60% for
specimen B3. This manifests the fact that appropriate use of FRP based on strength
and demand of cross section may become an effective solution in enhancing the
strength and ductility.
4 Cyclic Behaviour of FRP Strengthened Exterior Beam

Column Joints
An exterior beam-column joint specimen was tested under cyclic loading in quasi-
static test facility to evaluate its hysteresis behaviour under cyclic loading. Complete
details of the beam-column joint specimens are given in Table 4. Figure 13 shows
the beam-column joint test setup. The tested conventional beam-column joint has
been retrofitted and tested again under cyclic loading. The damaged cover concrete
and damaged/cracked region have been completely removed from the joint. The old
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 12 Crack and failure

pattern of a B1 b B2 c B3
specimens
reinforcement remained the same during the retrofitting process. After removing the
cover concrete, the surface was treated using latex-modified cement slurry followed
by concerting. After 28 days of curing, the concrete surface was ground and cleaned
for primer application. On the alternate day of primer coating, epoxy adhesives were
used, and CFRP was fixed in an L-shape between the column and beam hinge region,
continued by the column longitudinal directions by the GFRP confinement, as shown
in Fig. 14.
The hysteresis behaviours of tested beam-column joints are shown in Fig. 15. The
hysteresis behaviour of conventional specimen (J1 sudden drop in load) shows brittle
failure mode since there is a sudden drop in load after peak due to joint shear failure
Table 4 Detail of the exterior beam-column joint specimen

ID Transverse Joint configuration Beam reinforcement Column
reinforcement reinforcement
J1 Ø 10 mm @180 mm Conventional All specimens are All specimens are
J2 C/C in beam and Ø CFRP reinforced with 2 nos reinforced with 4 nos.
10 mm @300 mm C/ of 20 mm Ø at the top of 20 mm Ø
C in column and bottom
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 13 Beam column joint test setup
(a) Old concrete surface (b) Applying epoxy over the (c) CFRP reinforcement, along
treatment prior to the restored region with GFRP Confinement
repair work
Fig. 14 Retrofitting sequence of CFRP strengthening
[29]. The shear cracks at the beginning stage of the test led to cover concrete spalling
and allowed the longitudinal reinforcement to slip and deform. Thus, it shows a
higher rate of post-peak degradation. The pinched hysteresis loop of conventional
specimen indicates the absence of energy dissipation during inelastic deformation.
Figure 15 a shows 80% of strength degradation at 40 mm displacement. The CFRP-
strengthened specimen J2 shows enhanced load-carrying capacity with better post-
peak performance compared to the specimen J1. Specimen J2 shows 50% of peak
load at 40 mm displacement, which is 60% higher than the conventional specimen
J1. The hysteresis curve of J2 also shows pinching in the loop, but the area of the
loop shows enhanced energy dissipation capacity compared to J1.
The crack patterns noticed in tested beam-column joint specimens at failure level
under cyclic testing are shown in Fig. 16. It is observed that the formation of diagonal
cracks in the unconfined joint region allowed spalling of cover concrete at the early
stages of loading and led to the slip of longitudinal reinforcement. It exhibits brittle
failure, as shown in Fig. 16a. The joint core concrete remains intact with the top and
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 15 Hysteresis behaviour of the joint specimens
(a) J1-Conventional (b) J2 - CFRP
Fig. 16 Failure pattern noticed in the joint specimens
bottom column portions, whereas the column and beam interface have lost contact.
The external CFRP confinement in the joint specimen J2, showed no sign of cracks or
rupture. Popup noises during higher displacement were noticed, and finally the CFRP
sheet was delaminated from the joint surface, as shown in Fig. 16b. The post-failure
analysis shows that the failure pattern resembles the conventional joint specimen
J1. The wrapped GFRP failed to provide the required confinement when there was
an increase in the drift ratio. Consequently, the GFRP ruptures followed by CFRP
debonding from the column hinge region, as shown in Fig. 16b.
5 Conclusions
The chapter presents an overview of FRP strengthening for RC beams and beam–
column joints. Various strengthening schemes, their associated advantages and limi-
tations have been discussed. Following are the inferences from the literature and the
experimental studies conducted.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The strength, modulus, and rupture strain of FRP plays a crucial role in strength
contribution and mode of failure. In most cases, the lower modulus FRP yields
and supports ductile failure rather than the higher modulus FRP. Similarly, the area
fractions of FRP also have a significant contribution in deciding the failure mode.
FRP at the tension soffit face effectively enhances the flexural strength of RC
beams, whereas the FRP in transverse directions enhances their shear strength. In
both cases, the anchorage of FRP plays an influential role in strength enhance-
ment and post-yield deflection capability. The end anchorage system for flexural/
shear strengthening controls the early-stage debonding failure and allows for better
rotations without sudden degradation in strength, which also improves ductility.
The fracture behaviour shows that the CFRP composite possesses higher fracture
strength than the other FRPs. The other FRPs such as BFRP and GFRP, increase the
post-peak degradation of the specimen and dissipate higher energy than CFRP. This
concludes that the higher modulus FRP achieves higher strength enhancement but
exhibits a brittle failure mode compared to lower modulus FRP.
All FRP-strengthened RC beam specimens show improved strength and post-peak
degradation than the conventional specimen. The post-peak deflection of RC beams
follows a trend similar to that of the fracture specimens. Higher modulus CFRP
shows strength and stiffness enhancement rather than post-yield deflection, whereas
the GFRP and BFRP strengthened specimens show contrary behaviour with higher
post-yield deflections. The failure patterns also vary accordingly.
RC beam with strip U-wrapping shows that the CFRP confinement controls the
formation of diagonal cracks and compels the specimen to fail in flexure rather than
shear. The lower modulus BFRP could not resist the truss action and exhibited a
shear failure mode. This infers that the specimen configuration and type of fibre also
play a vital role in FRP strengthening. The FRP and steel reinforcement ratio also
contribute to each other in deciding the performance of strengthened RC beams.
The joint shear enhancement by FRP strengthening primarily depends on the
mode of strengthening and anchorage provided. Similar to the earlier observation, the
strength and modulus of FRP are deciding parameters in the augmentation of strength/
stiffness. There is a significant improvement in the joint strength of CFRP retrofitted
specimen. Though the joint core concrete remains older, the external confinement
using CFRP resisted the lateral load and exhibited better performance over conven-
tional joint specimen. Irrespective of pinching in the hysteresis behaviour, the energy
dissipation is higher than in the control specimen. The failure of GFRP confinement
led to CFRP delamination from the concrete substrate and failed to resist the applied
lateral forces.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
References
1. Ahmed E, Rahman Sobuz H, Mohamed Sutan N (2011) Flexural performance of CFRP

strengthened RC beams with different degrees of strengthening schemes. Int J Phys Sci
6(9):2229–2238
2. Dong J, Wang Q, Guan Z (2013) Structural behaviour of RC beams with external flexural and
flexural–shear strengthening by FRP sheets. Compos B Eng 44(1):604–612
3. Huang L, Zhang C, Yan L, Kasal B (2018) Flexural behavior of U-shape FRP profile-RC
composite beams with inner GFRP tube confinement at concrete compression zone. Compos
Struct 184:674–687
4. Beber A, Campos Filho A (2005) CFRP composites on the shear strengthening of reinforced
concrete beams. Rev IBRACON Estruturas
5. Triantafillou TC (1998) Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using epoxy-bonded
FRP composites. Struct J 95(2):107–115
6. Ary MI, Kang THK (2012) Shear-strengthening of reinforced and prestressed concrete beams
using FRP: Part I—review of previous research. Int J Concr Struct Mater 6(1):41–47
7. Pellegrino C, Vasic M (2013) Assessment of design procedures for the use of externally
bonded FRP composites in shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams. Compos B Eng
45(1):727–741
8. Rousakis TC, Saridaki ME, Mavrothalassitou SA, Hui D (2016) Utilization of hybrid approach
towards advanced database of concrete beams strengthened in shear with FRPs. Compos B Eng
85:315–335
9. Sas G, Täljsten B, Barros J, Lima J, Carolin A (2009) Are available models reliable for predicting
the FRP contribution to the shear resistance of RC beams? J Compos Constr 13(6):514–534
10. Al-Amery R, Al-Mahaidi R (2006) Coupled flexural-shear retrofitting of RC beams using
CFRP straps. Compos Struct 75(1–4):457–464
11. Sato Y, Ueda T, Kakuta Y, Tanaka T (1996) Shear reinforcing effect of carbon fiber sheet
attached to side of reinforced concrete beams. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international
conference on advanced composite materials in bridges and structures. ACMBS-II, Montreal
12. Hu Z, Zhou X, Guo M, Huang X, Hu B (2020) Enhancing the performance of CFRP shear-
strengthened RC beams using “ductile” anchoring devices. Front Mater 7:292
13. Kalfat R, Al-Mahaidi R (2010) Investigation into bond behaviour of a new CFRP
anchorage system for concrete utilising a mechanically strengthened substrate. Compos Struct
92(11):2738–2746
14. Khan A, Ayub T (2010) Effectiveness of U-shaped CFRP wraps as end anchorages in predom-
inant flexure and shear region. In: Proceedings (CD-Rom), 5th international conference on
FRP
15. Smith ST, Teng JG (2003) Shear-bending interaction in debonding failures of FRP-plated RC
beams. Adv Struct Eng 6(3):183–199
16. El-Amoury T, Ghobarah A (2002) Seismic rehabilitation of beam–column joint using GFRP
sheets. Eng Struct 24(11):1397–1407
17. Le-Trung K, Lee K, Lee J, Lee DH, Woo S (2010) Experimental study of RC beam–column
joints strengthened using CFRP composites. Compos B Eng 41(1):76–85
18. Prota A, Nanni A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2001) Selective upgrade of beam-column joints
with composites. In: Proceedings of the international conference on frp composites in civil
engineering, vol 1, pp 919–926
19. Antonopoulos CP, Triantafillou TC (2003) Experimental investigation of FRP-strengthened
RC beam-column joints. J Compos Constr 7(1):39–49
20. Lee WT, Chiou YJ, Shih MH (2010) Reinforced concrete beam–column joint strengthened
with carbon fiber reinforced polymer. Compos Struct 92(1):48–60
21. Realfonzo R, Napoli A (2012) Results from cyclic tests on high aspect ratio RC columns
strengthened with FRP systems. Constr Build Mater 37:606–620
22. Roy B, Laskar AI (2018) Cyclic performance of beam-column subassemblies with construction
joint in column retrofitted with GFRP. Structures 14:290–300
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
23. ACI Committee (2008) Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318–08) and
commentary. American Concrete Institute
24. Teng JG, Smith ST, Yao J, Chen JF (2003) Intermediate crack-induced debonding in RC beams
and slabs. Constr Build Mater 17(6):447–462
25. ACI 440.2R-17 (2017) Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems
for strengthening concrete structures. American Concrete Institute. Farmington Hills, MI, USA
26. ACI 440.2R (2017) Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems
for strengthening concrete structures. American Concrete Institute
27. Khalifa A, Gold William J, Nanni A, Aziz MIA (1998) Contribution of externally bonded FRP
to shear capacity of RC flexural members. J Compos Constr 2(4):195–202
28. Satyanarayana K, Rajendran SC, Kothapalli N (2022) Influence of FRP on the shear behaviour
of RC rectangular beam elements. Mater Today: Proc 64:1061–1068
29. Dadi VVSSK, Agarwal P (2013) Cyclic performance evaluation of unconfined and confined
beam-column joint specimens with different type of reinforcing characteristics as per ASCE/
SEI 41–06. Aust J Struct Eng 14(3):258–272
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Retrofitting and Strengthening
of Structures
Pranoy Debnath and Sekhar Chandra Dutta
Abstract Retrofitting the seismically damaged structures and strengthening the

existing structures due to the upgradation of seismic zones continuously taking
place. In fact, learning from occurring earthquakes and study of structural damages
has become a very important aspect of earthquake engineering. Most of the devel-
oping countries have large numbers of habitats made of masonry, while the focus on
the safety of these poor men’s habitats is relatively very less. Developing countries
can also afford concrete structures for dwellings, while steel structures are mostly
used for industrial purposes. On the other hand, the developed countries have large
numbers of steel structures as well as shear wall based structures as they can afford
the cost of the same. To have a comprehensive idea about retrofitting and strength-
ening measures for all categorial structures, the current chapter is an attempt to bring
together the existing techniques for retrofitting and strengthening all the structures
under separate subheadings and also underlines the promising new techniques which
are coming up for this purpose. At the end, the chapter summarizes a few important
points on this aspect. The chapter may be helpful for having an overall picture of the
retrofitting and strengthening of structures.
Keywords Retrofitting · Strengthening · Masonry structures · RC structures ·

Steel structures
1 Introduction
The massive destruction of engineered systems and facilities caused by past earth-
quakes has shown serious deficiencies in the current structural systems and construc-
tion standards [14, 49, 51, 74, 75, 122, 174]. These disasters have created a new
P. Debnath · S. C. Dutta (B)

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
P. Debnath
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
142 P. Debnath and S. C. Dutta
Fig. 1 World map of overlayed earthquake hazard map (red is the greatest hazard and white is the
smallest) [118, 119, 121]
awareness about disaster preparedness and mitigation. Figure 1 exhibits the global
distribution of earthquakes all over the world. Even though the recommended codes
of practice for earthquake-resistant design do exist but those design codes throw little
light on the issue of retrofitting and strengthening of the structures [62, 64, 82–86].
However, the issue of retrofitting and strengthening of damaged structures should
have been of equal importance for the rebuilding of an earthquake-prone civilization.
The present write-up is an effort to summarize the current state of the art on this issue
and the immediate use to be catered to in the future.
1.1 Significance of Studying the Strengthening

of Unreinforced Masonry (URM)
Most people in developing countries are usually poor and have little knowledge of
engineering construction. In these countries, masonry structures became the primary
type of habitat. It is difficult for practicing engineers to enhance the shear and
flexure strength of URM structures to achieve better earthquake sustainability. In
last few decades, increasing awareness about the importance of masonry structures
has initiated sustainable development strategies for strengthening these masonry
structures.
Traditional strengthening methods have been used for last few decades, such
as (i) internal or external tensioning with steel ties; (ii) stitching of large cracks
with metallic or brick elements; (iii) filling cracks by grouting; (iv) jacketing with
shotcrete; and (v) using ferrocement [35, 47, 48, 111, 132]. Further, some struc-
turally efficient methods are also suggested nowadays that are less intrusive, like
fiber-reinforced polymers (FRPs) and fabric-reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM)
[68, 165]. However, despite of their advantages in structural performance when used
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Retrofitting and Strengthening of Structures 143
with epoxy resins, FRP systems are considered less durable due to low resistance,
sensitivity to ultraviolet rays when exposed to open air, high toxicity, and unsatisfac-
tory long-term behaviour [163]. On the other hand, FRCMs can be combined with a
fiber-reinforced grid embedded with a high-performance cementitious matrix, which
can easily overcome most disadvantages of using epoxy resins as a binding agent.
Furthermore, these techniques are costly to be afforded by the people who live in
the masonry structures. Apart from these, some other modern materials, like organic
materials and timbers, need to be highlighted, with particular importance on their
eco-friendly nature and suitability characteristics.
1.2 Importance of Studying Reinforced Concrete (RC)

Structures
Concrete structures undergo deterioration and degradation of strength over the course
of time. For instance, the corrosive property of steel reinforcement is the primary
issue causing the deterioration of concrete structures [8, 10]. Further, slow loss of
strength with aging [88, 94], high-intensity loading [1, 110], freeze–thaw cycles,
temperature variations [80, 108], contact with chemicals and saline water [9, 61] as
well as exposure to UV radiations [92, 167] are all other factors that contribute to
the deterioration. Because of this unintended deterioration of strength, the structure
becomes weaker than it was designed for. Hence, such structures also need regular
maintenance following the procedure of strengthening and retrofitting. Retrofitting
is done to restore the strength of the weakened RC structures. It is really necessary to
provide perfect and practical strategies as most old RC buildings need to be retrofitted.
Once the proper retrofitting method is prepared and specified, the RC member can
regain its original strength. However, it depends on the intensity of the damage that
happened to the structure.
1.3 Importance of Studying Steel Structures
Although much effort has been made in recent years to strengthen URM buildings and
RC frames, steel structures have not received significant attention yet. The majority of
industrial buildings are examples of existing steel structures all over the world [154].
This kind of structure mainly spread during the twentieth century for its capability
of easy technological solutions with affordable costs. These structures still have
many drawbacks in design guidelines, like no differences were made between ductile
and brittle mechanisms in designing connections. Furthermore, the deficiencies in
provisions for joint classification usually led to poor design provisions (e.g., base
connections) [29, 143].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Some common ideas also considered some of the technical practices that in steel
structures, relatively low masses contribute to seismic action [2], like that was seen
for moment-resisting frames with truss beams [146]. However, multiple seismic
events proved this theorem is incorrect, as several industrial structures reported severe
damages and some cases of global collapse [79, 123]. Another essential aspect that
should be considered is indirect costs, like interruption expenses during productive
activities for a long time which is different from residential buildings [32]. On most
occasions, seismic damages occur due to local failures of different connections,
claddings, or roofing [29], even though there were a few cases of global collapse
[66].
Although current research has increased the variety of analysis for the seismic
performance methods available in structural design firms. However, this can only be
done briefly due to space constraints.
2 Common Failure Mechanisms
Construction methods are primarily determined by local patterns, engineering exper-

tise, and various demographic factors. However, the rapid urbanization of many
developing countries has significantly increased the demand for houses built without
regulations or controls. Different literature in the field of structural safety classi-
fies failures based on the following failure criteria [27, 139, 164]. Different types of
structures that have been observed to exhibit common failure mechanisms in previous
earthquakes are explained in this section.
. Due to different types of design errors or construction of structures.
. Due to unexpected high values of loading.
. Due to improper understanding of the structural behaviour of a system.
. Due to poor understating of the construction and using existing materials or other
technologies.
. Due to improper information handling among the stakeholders.
. Due to violation of construction methods, specifications, or codes.
2.1 Failure Mechanisms of Masonry Structures
Three basic types of masonry materials are used to construct URM structures world-
wide. These materials are adobe, bricks, and stones. Because of their heavy walls,
adobe houses are particularly so much vulnerable to collapse failure during lower-
intensity shakings. Furthermore, adobe structures are very brittle due to the lack of
ductility. So, the failure of adobe structures is caused either by separating walls at
the corners or cracking and failure of walls [89, 148, 155].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 2 Masonry buildings failure modes a In-plane direction (in Mangal Bazar, Lalitpur, India)
and b Out-of-plane direction (in Kathmandu, Nepal). Taken from Halder et al. [74, 76]
Some common failure mechanisms of brick masonry structures are corner junction
failure, shear crack failure in walls, and rocking failure of the whole wall in the in-
plane direction. After the walls collapse, disintegration may occur between the floors
and roofing, and in most severe cases, the building may collapse completely [36, 49,
53–55, 74–76, 96, 125].
Similarly, stone masonry buildings fail during seismic activities because of their
standard failure modes like delamination of the external walls from its rubble infill,
overturning the long-span walls in an out-of-plane direction, and in-plane shear
failure of the wall. The in-plane and out-of-plane mechanisms for masonry failures
are shown in Fig. 2. Another common type of failure is out-of-plane failure due to the
separation of the junction leading to collapse, as observed in many past earthquakes
[6]. Mainly local failures are seen in these structures, leading to global failure later
on.
2.2 Failure Mechanisms of RC Structures
Significant deformations in load-bearing frame elements occur across the structural

elements due to the response of structures during earthquake motions. As a result
of these distortions, internal forces change across the members of the building. For
example, structures with lower mass and higher stiffness have smaller displace-
ments demands. A sample failure mode of RC structures is shown in Fig. 3 during
Gorkha, Nepal earthquake. On the other hand, displacement demands also have to
increase. As a result, the main objective of retrofitting methods is to confirm that
the displacement demand should be lower than its displacement capacity [107, 172].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 3 Reinforced concrete buildings failure in Kathmandu, Nepal [149]
This may be accomplished primarily by lowering the probable displacement demand

of the building during earthquakes or by increasing the displacement capacity of the
building.
2.3 Failure Mechanisms of Steel Structures
Steel structures are considered the most flexible systems among all the structures.
Therefore, these structures are often prone to different types of instability because of
their inherent slenderness. However, for the last five decades, it has been observed
that steel structures respond relatively in an acceptable way when subjected to seismic
actions, avoiding a global collapse. Failure may occur suddenly in quasi-static load-
ings, such as overloading, snow, earth infill in case of green roofs, or indirect actions
resulting from lack of bracing or geometrical imperfections. A failure may also be
initiated by any type of error in the design, construction, operation, and mainte-
nance of the structures, lack of redundancy, robustness, and ductility. Some common
failure modes in steel structures are yielding, shear fracture, brittle fracture, fatigue,
corrosion, creep, etc. A typical steel roof structure failure is shown in Fig. 4.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 4 Maxima shopping center steel structure roof collapsed in Riga a Global collapse and b local
collapse [7, 73]
3 Strengthening Techniques
This section chronologically summarizes all the strengthening techniques available

for all types of structures. The first part discusses about the strengthening techniques
of URM structures, the second part is about the strengthening techniques of RC
structures, and the last part is the same about steel structures.
3.1 URM Strengthening Technologies
For the reasons stated earlier, a growing amount of research has been conducted into
retrofitting/strengthening existing masonry buildings to increase their probable time
of collapse during earthquakes. These methods may be beneficial in reducing the
huge loss of lives caused by rapid and catastrophic collapses of URM buildings. This
section will compile various strategies and investigate all possible studies with their
effectiveness. Different retrofitting/strengthening techniques for the URM buildings
are described below.
3.1.1 Surface Treatment
Surface treatment methods consist of applying steel or polymer meshes on the exterior
part of the members of the structure, which is subsequently coated with a high-
strength mortar. This strategy is useful for the developing countries. It can quickly
be done without any skilled labour. The system helps in the confinement of the
whole masonry walls after cracking. A moderate increase in the ultimate lateral load
resistance of the structures is easily possible with this method. Surface treatments can
also help to improve the out-of-plane resilience of the URM buildings by increasing
the height-to-thickness ratio of the walls and decreasing any arching action [4, 60].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 5 Examples of
strengthening of masonry
walls by shotcrete [116]
The only problem is that this method is very costly to use for the common people.
For this reason, this method is not very popular.
3.1.2 Application of Shotcrete
Some researchers have tested unreinforced and retrofitted walls with shotcrete [60,
116]. During the test, applied lateral loading increased with small increments up
to the ultimate failure of the wall. In the retrofitting tests, it has been noted that
the lateral load resistance and the stiffness of the walls at peak loading were also
increased. However, the limitations of using this method are that using shotcrete is
time-consuming, creates disturbances in occupancy, reduces available spaces, and
affects the aesthetics [65, 91]. A strengthening sample of URM walls by shotcrete is
shown in Fig. 5.
3.1.3 Stitching, Grouting, and Epoxy Injection
These methods entail grout or epoxy injection into the URM walls to fill any cracks
or voids caused by building deterioration, as shown in Fig. 6. Existing cracks on the
walls can also be stitched using steel ties and mortar, as shown in Fig. 7 [131]. These
methods can easily restore the wall stiffness same as in the initial condition. After
epoxy injection, the increase in stiffness has been less drastic than the increase in
strength [59]. Furthermore, these techniques are now very popular for the availability
of materials, low cost, and ease of implementation.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 6 Detail of the grout injection method on a masonry wall [17]
Fig. 7 Crack repair by

stitching [131]
3.1.4 Repointing
When the quality of bricks is good, but the quality of mortar is poor, then the mortar
may be partially replaced by a high-strength bonding material. However, adding 2%
Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) to the mortar has no such increase in lateral load
resistance [155]. This allows cracks in the masonry to be stabilized by bonding.
The advantages of using this method may be enlisted as minimum cost and ease of
application. However, this method is not at all sustainable, and the success of this
method depends on the compatibility of existing bricks with new mortar.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 8 Retrofitted wall

panels by bamboo
reinforcement at the end of
the test [140]
3.1.5 Bamboo Reinforcement
The bamboo retrofitting method is part of a system that includes ring beams,
buttresses, and internal or external reinforcement. This system has been shown to
increase the collapse time of masonry structures while having less capacity to prevent
cracking at low to moderate earthquakes. It has been proposed that a similar ring
beam and bamboo reinforcement partnership can be used with vertical reinforce-
ment, which can be externally fixed after construction [50]. Incorporating vertical
reinforcement after the wall construction eliminates complications, including the
orientation of reinforcement and breaking the brick. In one of the models with
bamboo reinforcements and ring beams, horizontal wire mesh was used. All the
structures had survived up to a 100% increment in lateral drift limits during testing.
Better reinforced models withstood increases of up to 125% and one of the heavily
reinforced models withstood increases of up to 400%. Pushpakumara et al. also tested
the masonry wallets with bamboo retrofitting [140], which is also shown in Fig. 8.
3.1.6 Seismic Wallpaper or Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (FRP)

Strengthening
This technique was tested on different URM walls made with clay bricks and low-
quality mortars [57]. All these testing specimens were strengthened by using FRP
strips in the vertical direction bonded with epoxy resins. Then, the walls were
subjected to out-of-plane loading using an airbag system. The flexural strength of
all retrofitted walls has increased significantly. Further, some other study has shown
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 9 Examples of
composite applications on
masonry wallets by
fiber-reinforced polymer
(FRP) [133]
that GFRP composites are useful when arranged at 0–45° to the horizontal direc-
tion [115]. This retrofitting method has increased the tensile strength at yield up to
two times and its ductility up to 7.5 times its original value in-plane diagonal shear
and out-of-plane bending tests. Another one-sided strengthened masonry wallet is
developed with vertical FRP strips, as shown in Fig. 9 [133]. Many researchers
have studied the usefulness of various FRP rehabilitation techniques in improving
the seismic resistance of URM walls. Some of the most significant contributions in
this regard can be found in [44, 58, 71, 77, 99, 102, 112, 120, 138, 141, 145, 153,
168]. These studies discovered that retrofitting walls could significantly increase the
ultimate load-carrying capacity, ductility, and energy absorption.
3.1.7 Strengthening by L-Shaped Reinforcement, Wire Meshes,

and Polypropylene (PP) Bands
Several studies have explored the improvement in the performance of URM structures
by strengthening the junctions, which are the most vulnerable part of the masonry
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 10 Construction of URM walls using a horizontal L-shaped reinforcing bars [125], b PP bands
[125], and c wire meshes [20, 21]
walls, using PP bands, wire meshes, and L-shaped reinforcements [18–22, 52, 124–
126]. All the walls were tested on the shaking table. These experiments have shown
significant strength increases due to the adopted retrofitting options (see Fig. 10).
The strengthened walls by PP bands are also tested under static loading by
Macabuag [113]. This method can also improve the shear strength of the test spec-
imens under static loading. However, there was an important issue with the mesh
density at stress concentration points, such as the corners of the walls. Macabuag
et al. investigated the retrofitting effect on the masonry buildings in Nepal with PP
band meshing with strong ground motion shocks [114]. The study determined that
using PP bands prevents the disintegration of the masonry elements. As a result, the
masonry wall system can accommodate more deformation without collapse.
Tetley and Madabhushi conducted more experiments to compare several other
retrofitting measures like a steel mesh cage around the wall, steel reinforcing bars,
and a similar mesh made by plastic carrier bags [155]. All test specimens were
built with 1:5 scale adobe blocks connected with kaolin clay and sand mortar. The
results showed a significant increase in displacements before failure and an increase
in resistance for acceleration by three times. A similar type of mesh using plastic
carrier bags also showed increased tensile strength and ductility of the walls. The
walls in the transverse direction failed at a PGA level of 0.64 g, and in-plane wall
failure occurred at 1.02 g.
3.1.8 Post-tensioning Using Rubber Tires
The post-tensioning method by using scrap rubber tires with steel meshes has been
proposed in some research as a potential retrofitting solution. The tires are assembled,
as shown in Fig. 11. Turer et al. [93] conducted testing on a scale of 1:10 model using
a simple shake table [162]. Testing was carried out using URM walls reinforced
horizontally, vertically, and in both directions. After the tests, it was seen that the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 11 Strengthening or
masonry walls by old tire
strips [93]
cracks were spread uniformly, and the brittle failure of these structures was changed
into a ductile response.
3.1.9 Mesh Reinforcement
Construction sites typically use industrial geogrids and weaker meshes as soft fences.
So, two different types of polymer mesh have been used to strengthen these URM
structures, as shown in Fig. 12. Blondet et al. conducted a study in which the
mesh reinforcements were wrapped around the wall and coated with mud plaster
[28]. Mainly three types of geogrid (50, 75, and 100% covered) and one soft mesh
system (80% covered) were tested using a unidirectional shake table. Other common
mesh reinforcements that are commonly used for strengthening materials are wire-
reinforced mortar (WRM) [133] and (c) textile-reinforced mortar (TRM) [133].
These strengthening materials have effectively improved the load-carrying capacity
and significantly increased the energy absorption capacity.
3.1.10 Steel Reinforcement for Masonry Structures
After extensive research at the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru (PUCP), the
Regional Seismological Center for South America (CERESIS) decided to reinforce
some adobe buildings with steel wire meshes [24]. These steel wire meshes were
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 12 Examples of mesh reinforcement application on masonry wallets a industrial geogrid [28]
b wire reinforced mortar (WRM) [133] and c textile-reinforced mortar (TRM) [133]
applied outside the adobe walls at critical points like free ends and corners. This was
then enclosed with a mortar layer. A large earthquake of magnitude (Mw ) 8.0 occurred
in Pisco, Peru, on August 15, 2007, resulting in the collapse of over 70,000 houses
and severe damage to more than 33,000 houses. However, only five houses were
reinforced in 1998, and these houses survived the earthquake. Significant cracking
or collapse was observed in the nearby buildings. Furthermore, another earthquake
of magnitude 8.4 occurred in South Peru with similar results in 2001. Taghdi et al.
conducted an experimental study using steel strips to retrofit low-rise masonry walls
[150]. This study has also shown that steel strips can effectively increase the in-
plane strength, energy dissipation capacity, and ductility. Another finding is that the
anchor bolts running along the vertical steel strips help to keep the masonry wall
from buckling.
3.2 Basic Concept of Strengthening for RC Structures
RC structures are strengthened to recover the strength of deteriorated struc-

tural concrete members and prevent further structural distress. Concrete structural
members can lose strength due to design flaws in structures, poor workmanship,
or deterioration caused by the aggression of harmful atmospheric agents. The main
retrofitting measures of RC structures are mainly divided into two categories, global
and local retrofits. The classifications are shown in Fig. 13. All the methods are
briefly described below.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 13 Classification of the strengthening measures of RC structures
3.2.1 Adding Shear Walls/Infill Walls
Adding RC infill shear walls is the most common global strengthening method. Even
when applied to damaged structures, the infill wall technique can produce adequate
strength [38, 147]. The shear walls can resist most of the lateral loads and limit the
displacement of the building. At the same time, the frame system can withstand high
earthquake loads. Infill walls made of reinforced concrete can be used as wing walls
and partial walls [34]. A sample of adding an infill shear wall is shown in Fig. 14.
3.2.2 Addition of Steel Bracings
This is a convenient solution when large openings are essential. Steel bracings are
very advantageous due to their higher strength, and openings for natural light can
be provided. Steel bracings can also be used for RC frames to reduce displacement
demands. Steel bracings may be applied inside the system [117] or outside the frame
[34]. Post-tensioning is another option that can be useful to the bracing elements
[70]. In both cases, steel braces provide more pleasing solutions for various uses.
However, its application inside buildings with small openings is complex. It only
permits simple installation across the axes on external facades of the wall [72].
There are many literatures that contain research on various types of bracing [135].
The steel bracing members must be designed according to the specific codes and
steel standards. The anchor design principles may be used to connect the existing
structure and steel members. Another type of damage is to the buttress-type steel
walls due to the out-of-plane buckling of the compression members. Installing
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 14 Infill wall

application in an RC
building [34]
lateral supports to the storey levels is also suggested to prevent buckling. Using
such members may also economize the design of shear walls [13, 171].
3.2.3 Base Isolation Techniques
Base isolation method is defined as the separation of the superstructure from the foun-
dation. It is the primary method for passive control of the vibration. The growing
number of isolated structures shows the importance of base isolation systems that
are gradually becoming accepted to mitigate earthquake hazards. This anti-seismic
design technique can decrease the effect of earthquake ground motion by uncou-
pling the superstructure from the foundation. Significant progress has been made in
isolation systems for civil engineering structures in recent years [39, 81, 87].
3.2.4 Jacketing of the RC Members
This is one of the popular methods to strengthen the RC building members. Two
basic types of Jacketing are Reinforced Concrete jacketing and steel jacketing.
Jacketing the RC members may be implemented as a confinement of the columns
or beams with new and higher quality RC materials, depending on the deficiencies
in the structural members (Fig. 15a). Jacketing brittle columns or beams improves
resistance to shear and axial loads. In that case, some variations will also arise in the
capacity and stiffness of the RC member after applying the jacketing. After these
modifications, the jacketed section is guaranteed to have adequate axial and shear
strength. Although RC jacketing can be helpful to all types of structural members, a
jacketing application is not recommended when it increases only the bending capacity
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 15 Types of jacketing, a by concrete and b by steel plate [15]
of beams. It may form a strong beam-weak column, resulting in a global failure of

the whole structure.
Another practical method is jacketing with steel members, which may be used
efficiently for various applications. Figure 15b depicts a typical application of steel
jacketing. Steel jacketing is a simple way to increase the shear strength of any RC
elements. Steel jacketing may also increase the bending strength to maintain the
continuity between different stories [15, 144].
In recent years, using fiber-reinforced polymer composite (FRPC) jackets have
considerably increased in applications of strengthening [15]. These composites can
be manufactured with various materials like glass, carbon, aramid etc. These mate-
rials can be used for various purposes, including increasing the flexural capacity
of floor slabs and improving the shear capacity of columns, beams, or shear walls.
FRP is used as longitudinal reinforcement. So, the additional flexural capacity can
be calculated using a simple cross-section calculation. More complex calculations
are required to measure changes in the axial capacity and ductility of the member,
which are beyond the basic knowledge of reinforced concrete [130].
In the same manner, beam-column joints are also can be retrofitted. The retrofitting
scheme is selected according to the availability of resources and seismic assessment
of the building. As a result, it enables the development of plastic hinges on the beams
and assures a ductile failure mode.
Retrofitting of the isolated footings can also be done by jacketing of the footings.
The foundation can be retrofitted by extending the jacketing up to the level of the
foundation (Fig. 16). In these cases, the foundation system can withstand a greater
strain than the beams or columns. Because of the increased strength of the structure,
the transmitted shear capacity between the soil and the reinforced structure may be
higher [142]. Large bending moments may be generated at the base of stiff structural
components, and large overturning movements may also develop large dynamic axial
forces in the columns.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 16 Jacketing of footings [157]
Fig. 17 Application of a epoxy resin, b cement grout injection in beam-column joints [157]
3.2.5 Injection in the Cracks of Concrete
Injection in cracks is a very useful, economical, and local retrofitting method for
repairing RC structures [23, 90, 100, 156]. The ability of adhesive materials to enter
the cracks of the damaged concrete under appropriate pressure determines the effec-
tiveness of the repair process. Repairing the bond between steel and concrete with
epoxy injection may be very difficult. This technique can be used to repair minor
cracks (up to 0.1 mm), medium cracks (up to 3 mm), and large cracks (5–6 mm).
Cement grout is the appropriate material for injection in larger cracks up to 20 mm
wide (Fig. 17). Flexural tests on RC beams. Beam-column joints demonstrate that
the repair process removes the unsightly appearance of wide cracks and restores the
actual flexural strength and stiffness [95, 161]. Static and dynamic tests can show
the increase in strength of joints after being repaired with epoxy resin injection.
3.2.6 Shotcrete Strengthening
Shotcrete is a strengthening method used for RC and masonry structures [26, 106].
There are two different types of shotcretes like wet-mix and dry-mix. Shotcrete
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 18 Shotcrete in RC walls and tunnels [106]
may be applied to any surface and combined with other retrofit schemes [37]. It
achieves excellent bonds to the majority of competent surfaces due to its high-velocity
impact and low water-cement ratio. Deficiencies in shotcrete applicability are typi-
cally divided into five categories listed below [166]. These are (i) delamination of
construction joints or interfaces of layers, (ii) failure of the bond of the receiving
surface, (iii) insufficient material filling behind the reinforcing steel, (iv) slough due
to excessive mixing water, and (v) weak interface between the concrete and steel.
Figure 18 shows the injection of shotcrete in RC walls and tunnel walls.
3.2.7 Steel Plate Addition
Steel plates are mainly added with the beams. Both flexural strength and shear
strength can be enhanced by this method. When thick steel plates are needed, using
several thin layers of plates can reduce interfacial shear stresses. Implementing the
bonding work is also very important to achieve composite action. A critical design
aspect is preventing premature de-bonding of externally bonded plates [5, 11, 152].
The process is shown in Fig. 19.
3.3 Strengthening Techniques of Steel Structures
Performance of the Steel frames may be governed by the plastic hinge formation, local
and global instabilities, fractures, and structural discontinuities. These behaviors or
their combination are likely to influence the capacity of any structural member.
Several studies have shown that capacity of steel structure is related to the response
of the members, connection response, panel zone failure, and premature brittle weld
failure [159]. In many cases, determining the capacity of columns is difficult. So, it
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 19 Steel plate adhesion

at the bottom of the beam
[105, 136]
is preferable to strengthen these structures well before the next calamities occur on
a large scale.
3.3.1 Side Plate Connections
A popular retrofitting method for a standard moment-resisting connection is side

plate connections, as shown in Fig. 20. In this method, the side plate retrofit system
is used for resisting the physical separation between the column flange and the end
of the beam [46]. The steel frame is stiffened, and the zone panel deformation is
removed using this type of connection due to the increased stiffness of the side
plates. This connection system is entirely fillet-welded, carrying shear and moments
via a combined system of transverse shear plates and fillet welds. The side plates
must be strong and rigid enough to withstand any significant plastic behaviour of the
connection system. FEMA 351 contains additional information [63].
3.3.2 Stiffeners at Connections
The effect of stiffeners on the welded connections has been studied for intermediate
moment frames presented in AISC [109]. The behaviour of stiffeners on I-beam
to hollow-column section connections is depicted in Fig. 21 [42, 98]. Connections
made with triangular stiffeners exhibit the lowest rigidity, whereas those with side
stiffeners exhibit higher moment capacities, ductility, and stiffness.
Furthermore, the performance of retrofitted connections was also studied, and
some design guidelines were proposed [69]. The side-stiffeners on concrete-filled
tabular (CFT) columns connected to I-beams have also been introduced to provide
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 20 Strengthening retrofit concept by side plate retrofit connection [46]
Fig. 21 Connection of a
typical I-beam to a box
column [98]
stable hysteretic behaviour and satisfactory ductility. Overall, connections with both
column stiffeners and top flange stiffeners have the highest energy dissipation value,
with the top flange stiffener of the beam being the most effective.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 22 Frame modified

with mid-span truss opening
[103]
3.3.3 Steel Frame Modifications
Steel frame modifications can be done in various ways, like frame modification at
the mid-span of beams and self-centering systems by cables. Frame modification
of beams can be implemented for new construction. Leelataviwat et al. have also
developed another strengthening method for existing moment-resisting frames [103].
Figure 22 shows the technique of replacing specific beams by introducing a ductile
behaviour in the mid-span. Braced rectangular openings are created at the mid-span
of the web to move the plastic deformation away from the critical joints and ensure
the development of a ductile mechanism.
3.3.4 Self-centering Systems
Self-centering systems by cables is another method that can be useful for connec-
tions to slabs. The placement methods of cables with girders or cables with beam
connections are critical, particularly in tall structures. Self-centering bracings are
designed using prestressed strands with friction pads or memory alloys. This system
achieves energy dissipation through friction dampers, yielding seat angles, or energy-
dissipating bars within tubes. Tendons can be used on multiple floors, and elas-
tomeric spring dampers can provide an energy dissipation system. Christopoulos
et al. proposed self-centering structural systems (Fig. 23) for seismic strengthening
of special moment resisting frames [43].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 23 PTED system for

strengthening beam-column
joint [43]
Later, Garlock et al. proposed a similar structural system with high-strength steel
strands after installing bolted replaceable top-and-seat angles [67]. Here, the vertical
shear is supported by both the angles and the friction between the beam and the
column.
3.3.5 Steel Plate Shear Walls
Thorburn et al. conducted preliminary research on the design of Steel Plate Shear
Walls (SPSW) and their strengthening methods [158]. SPSWs allow for shear buck-
ling in steel buildings and can also be used as the lateral force-resisting system of
the structures. Furthermore, using Reduced Beam Sections (RBS) connections, low-
yield strength steel panels, and light-gauge cold-formed steel plates have been used
as potential applications by Berman and Bruneau [25]. The low-yield strength steel
panels demonstrate an earlier onset dissipation of energy by the panel, while perfo-
rated panel specimens (Fig. 24) can be used to control the stiffness and over-strength
issues. This option is also helpful in retrofitting because it allows utilities to enter
the pre-designed system.
3.3.6 Bearing Walls
Bearing walls must add stiffness to the steel frame system while tied into any framing
to take the load in their weakest direction and make them equally stronger in both
directions. They must also remain in place after the shock waves to retain strength
for the aftershocks.
So, three approaches have been recognized to enhance building resilience by the
bearing walls under progressive collapse scenarios [46]. These approaches are (i) a
backup wall that builds as a secondary wall to support the existing wall, (ii) a strong
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 24 SPSW specimen

with cut-out corners [25]
wall that uses fabric reinforcement to control the breach area, and (iii) a ductile
wall treated with polyurethane spray to prevent the punching shear. Furthermore,
these walls may accommodate openings, especially in multi-story buildings, while
additional improvements are required.
3.3.7 Braced Frames
These types of frames can be made with single diagonal members, x- and k-type
connections, split and chevron braces, knee or lattice braces. Braced frames are
commonly used in interior cores. As a result, these connections can be made quickly
with wall panels inside and outside. Composite braced frames, in which concrete
bracings support steel frames, are also becoming very popular.
Khatib et al. first proposed a simplified procedure for designing the suspended
zipper frames [97]. This method was introduced by Leon and Yang later [104]. It
consisted of inverted V-braces by adding a zipper column connecting the intersection
point of the braces directly above the first floor. All intersection points of brace-to-
beams are connected by zipper columns, which force compression braces to buckle
the entire braced bay. As a result, the dissipated energy is distributed more evenly
across the building’s height [33].
Later, a system of suspension was proposed that ensured that the top storey braces
remained elastic. Other braces in the compressive force direction should buckle
down, and the suspended zipper struts should yield in tension [159, 170]. As a result,
adequate ductility, as well as superior seismic performance, can be provided.
Eatherton et al. proposed a system for controlling the rocking phenomenon that
removes residual drifts and concentrates on the major structural damages with
replaceable elements using replaceable links or braced frame retrofitting concepts
[56]. The system consists of three main components. Stiff steel braced frame that
remains elastic but is not tied to the foundation to allow the rocking behaviour, vertical
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 25 Non-buckling bracing [101]
post-tensioning strands from the top of the frame to the foundation that brings the
frame back to the center. The replaceable elements can absorb the energy during
rocking.
3.3.8 Non-buckling Braces
Conventional non-buckling braces are likely to buckle during the tension and the
tension–compression cycle during the seismic actions, resulting in less energy
dissipating during compression. This may cause a chronological reduction in the
hysteresis loop of the braces after some time due to forming a plastic hinge near the
midspan of the structural member. Using non-buckling braces can easily bypasses
this problem. These frames are also known as restrained braces [40, 101, 151]. This
bracing system requires suitable strength to resist compression and rigidity to avoid
buckling (Fig. 25).
Buckling Restrained Braces (BRB) have become much important in the last
decade because these braces have stable hysteretic behaviour and lower fatigue life
characteristics. However, in some cases, gusset plate cracking and buckling are likely
the same for all braced frames.
3.3.9 Strengthening Members like Beams and Columns
Members can be reinforced by welding plates or encasing/filling the gaps with

concrete. This method can be applied to any member, such as those resting on
the ground floor. So, concrete encasing of columns and floor beams has been
proposed [160]. This method constitutes a new strengthening method for existing
steel structures. A sample of adding plates is shown in Fig. 26 [173].
4 Guidelines
The guidelines for the seismic strengthening of structures can reduce the loss of life
due to the collapse of impending structures in future earthquakes. All the structures
that come under a high risk of loss of life should be identified first [127]. The vision
of the guidelines on seismic strengthening should be decided in such a way that
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 26 Strengthening pattern of steel beam and column [173]
mandatory seismic retrofitting shall be undertaken in a prioritized manner of seismi-

cally deficient existing important structures and selected privately-owned buildings.
The prioritization should be based on earthquake risk assessment of buildings and
structures. The cost of strengthening shall be critically examined when deciding to
undertake strengthening processes. The strengthening framework plan is shown in
Fig. 27. Some crucial points for considering the proper guidelines and the extent of
strengthening are discussed as follows.
Different national and international codes provide different technical criteria
for assessment or strengthening solutions. However, these also include a few non-
technical issues. As per [3, 16, 30, 31, 41, 64, 137], six basic non-technical issues
are to be considered to take the proper decision on the strengthening techniques.
1. Overall construction cost is a critical issue for deciding whether to strengthen,
according to the expected level of strengths.
2. In the case of fully or partially occupied buildings, the parameter of occupant
disruption becomes a major challenge for strengthening that structure.
3. In any historic building, the conservation of historic architecture also usually has
control over any particular strengthening methods.
4. The importance of a building after a disaster must be considered because it
refers to whether the building has any special usage after a disaster, for instance,
hospitals, airports, fire stations, etc.
5. The project’s location, the availability of the required skill set of the workforce,
and the material and availability of equipment may impact the choice of the
strengthening method.
6. Sustainability concepts like the amount of material and machinery required,
conveyance of materials, and recycled material content are the issues to be thought
about for the purpose of strengthening.
The extent of strengthening is also an important point. Some agencies have been
guiding in this direction. It is highly recommended that strengthening may be carried
out if the existing strength of the building falls below 70% of the strength capacity
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 27 Strengthening framework plan
required according to the current design standard, as suggested by [45]. When the
risk is more than ten times the standard risk, building authorities should prohibit
human occupancy in the interest of public safety. According to standards defined in
Delhi in India, if any structure is relatively old and has lived more than half of its
design life, it should be strengthened to withstand at least 70% of total design seismic
loads [45], as shown in Fig. 28 [169]. These guidelines should be considered as a
standard all over the world.
Some other guidelines are also available for seismic rehabilitation and strength-
ening existing structures [12, 37, 78, 127–129, 134]. In these guidelines, the require-
ments and some techniques are decided. But these guidelines are required to be
revised in this current scenario of large destruction during the Turkey earthquake.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 28 Extent of retrofit

[45]
5 Conclusive Remarks
The review begins with a broad idea of the casualties of previous earthquakes
in last 100 years. Following such discussions, the historical evolutions of various
earthquake-resisting design methodologies have been practiced for several decades.
However, there is some lag in these methods as a large amount of destruction and
causalities are still happening. The recent earthquake in Turkey is a burning example
of the drawbacks of these processes and shows that this issue has to be considered
more seriously. The failure pattern of the structures is discussed to show that the
actual scenario is happening all around. Thus, such failure of structures may signif-
icantly affect human civilization. Further, existing techniques for retrofitting and
strengthening URM, RC, and steel structures are elaborated. It is believed that while
going through this particular chapter of the book, the reader will have at least an
overall picture of the method of retrofitting and strengthening (which are existing
and evolving), and one might be in a position to choose a particular one depending
on the type of problem he is dealing with.
References
1. Adhikary S das, Li B, Fujikake K (2014) Effects of high loading rate on reinforced concrete
beams (with Appendix). Struct J 111:651–660. https://doi.org/10.14359/51686579
2. AISC (2022) Code of standard practice for steel buildings and bridges
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3. Alba-Rodríguez MD, Martínez-Rocamora A, González-Vallejo P et al (2017) Building reha-

bilitation versus demolition and new construction: economic and environmental assessment.
Environ Impact Assess Rev 66:115–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.06.002
4. Alcaino P, Maria HS (2008) Experimental response of externally retrofitted masonry walls
subjected to shear loading. J Compos Constr 12:489–498. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASC
E)1090-0268(2008)12:5(489)
5. Ali MSM, Oehlers DJ, Bradford MA (2001) Shear peeling of steel plates bonded to tension
faces of RC beams. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 127:1453–1459
6. Ali Q, Khan AN, Ashraf M et al (2013) Seismic performance of stone masonry buildings
used in the Himalayan belt. Earthq Spectra 29:1159–1181. https://doi.org/10.1193/091711
EQS228M
7. Anastasiadis A (2021) Failure of steel structures: rethinking some of the aftermaths. Urbanism
Arhitectură Construcţii 12(2).
8. Angst UM (2018) Challenges and opportunities in corrosion of steel in concrete. Mater
Struct/Materiaux et Constructions 51:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1617/S11527-017-1131-6/FIG
URES/6
9. Anwar M, Roushdi M (2013) Improved concrete properties to resist the saline water using
environmental by-product. Water Sci 27:30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WSJ.2013.12.003
10. Apostolopoulos C, Koulouris K (2021) Corrosion effects on durability of RC structures.
Metals 11:1812. https://doi.org/10.3390/MET11111812
11. Aprile A, Spacone E, Member A, Limkatanyu S (2001) Role of bond in RC beams strengthened
with steel and FRP plates. J Struct Eng (ASCE) 127:1445–1452
12. ASCE/SEI 41-06 (2007) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. American Society of
Civil Engineers
13. Astaneh-Asl A, Qian X, Shi Y (2019) Application of steel shear walls toward more resilient
structures. In: Resilient structures and infrastructure. Springer, Singapore, pp 3–46
14. Ates S, Kahya V, Yurdakul M, Adanur S (2013) Damages on reinforced concrete buildings
due to consecutive earthquakes in Van. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 53:109–118. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.soildyn.2013.06.006
15. Aydenlou RM (2020a) Types of existing buildings: detailed introduction and seismic
rehabilitation. In: Seismic rehabilitation methods for existing buildings. Elsevier, pp 193–553
16. Aydenlou RM (2020b) Seismic rehabilitation methods for existing buildings. Elsevier
17. Baltazar LG, Henriques FMA, Cidade MT (2019) Rheology of natural hydraulic lime grouts
for conservation of stone masonry-influence of compositional and processing parameters.
Fluids 4
18. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2018) Enhancing shear capacity of masonry wallet using PP-
band and steel wire mesh. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 431:072004. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1757-899X/431/7/072004
19. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2021) Seismic performance enhancement of masonry building
models strengthened with the cost-effective materials under bi-directional excitation. Eng
Struct 242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112516
20. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2020a) Shear and flexural behaviour of unreinforced masonry
wallets with steel wire mesh. J Build Eng 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101254
21. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2020) Improving the In-plane behavior of brick masonry wallet
using PP band and steel wire mesh. J Mater Civ Eng 32:04020132. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(asce)mt.1943-5533.0003159
22. Banerjee S, Nayak S, Das S (2019) Enhancing the flexural behaviour of masonry wallet using
PP band and steel wire mesh. Constr Build Mater 194:179–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.con
buildmat.2018.11.001
23. Bano S, Jaiswal G, Kumar R, Tiwari A, Karthikeyan M (2023) Experimental Study on the
crack repair techniques of concrete structures: a case study. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng
1273:012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1273/1/012006
24. Bartolomé AS, Quiun D, Zegarra L. (2008) Performance of reinforced adobe houses in Pisco,
Peru earthquake. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering.
Beijing, China
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
25. Bernam JW, Bruneau M (2004) Steel plate shear walls are not plate girders. AISC Eng J 95
26. Bernardo G, Guida A, Mecca I (2015) Advancements in shotcrete technology. In: Structural
studies, repairs and maintenance of heritage architecture XIV. WIT Press, pp 591–602
27. Blokley DI (1980) The nature of structural design and Safety. Ellis Horwood, London
28. Blondet M, Torrealva D, Vargas J, Velasquez J, Tarque J (2006) Seismic reinforcement of
adobe houses using external polymer mesh. In: First European conference on earthquake
engineering and seismology, Paper no. 632
29. Bosio M, di Salvatore C, Bellotti D, Capacci L, Belleri A, Piccolo V, Cavalieri F, Lago
BD, Riva P, Magliulo G, Nascimbene R, Biondini F (2022) Modelling and seismic response
analysis of non-residential single-storey existing precast buildings in Italy. J Earthquake Eng.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2022.2033364
30. Bostenaru Dan MD (2004) Multi-criteria decision model for retrofitting existing buildings.
Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 4:485–499. https://doi.org/10.5194/NHESS-4-485-2004
31. Bradshaw A, Rajeev P, Tesfamariam S (2011) Multi Criteria decision making tool for the
selection of seismic retrofitting techniques. In: Australian earthquake engineering society
conference. Barossa Valley, South Australia
32. Braga F, Gigliotti R, Monti G, Morelli F, Nuti C, Salvatore W, Vanzi I (2014) Speedup of post
earthquake community recovery: the case of precast industrial buildings after the Emilia 2012
earthquake. Bull Earthq Eng 12:2405–2418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9583-3
33. Bruneau M (2004) Seismic retrofit of steel structures. Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniera
Sismica, VIII SNIS, Tlaxcala
34. Bush TD, Wyllie LA, Jirsa JO (1991) Observations on two seismic strengthening schemes
for concrete frames. Earthq Spectra 7:511–527. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585640
35. Calderini C, Cattari S, Lagomarsino S (2010) The use of the diagonal compression test to
identify the shear mechanical parameters of masonry. Constr Build Mater 24:677–685. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2009.11.001
36. Calderoni B, Cordasco EA, del Zoppo M, Prota A (2020) Damage assessment of modern
masonry buildings after the L’Aquila earthquake. Bull Earthq Eng 18:2275–2301. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10518-020-00784-5
37. California University (1976) State-of-the-art review on shotcrete
38. Canbay E, Ersoy U, Ozcebe G (2003) Contribution of reinforced concrete infills to seismic
behavior of structural systems. ACI Struct J 100:637–643. https://doi.org/10.14359/12805
39. Cancellara D, de Angelis F (2016) Nonlinear dynamic analysis for multi-storey RC structures
with hybrid base isolation systems in presence of bi-directional ground motions. Compos
Struct 154:464–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.07.030
40. Carden L, Itani A, Buckle I, Aiken I (2004) Buckling restrained braces for ductile end cross
frames in steel plate girder bridges. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering.
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
41. Caterino N, Iervolino I, Manfredi G, Cosenza E (2009) Comparative analysis of multi-criteria
decision-making methods for seismic structural retrofitting. Comput-Aided Civil Infrastruct
Eng 24:432–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.2009.00599.x
42. Chen SJ, Lin HY (1990) Experimental study of steel I-beam to box-column moment
connection, 41–7. In: 4th international conference on steel structures and space frames
43. Christopoulos C, Filiatrault A, Uang CM (2002) Self-centering post-tensioned energy
dissipating (PTED) steel frames for seismic regions. San Diego, La Jolla, CA, p 292
44. Corradi M, Borri A, Vignoli A (2002) Strengthening techniques tested on masonry structures
struck by the Umbria–Marche earthquake of 1997–1998. Constr Build Mater 16:229–239.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-0618(02)00014-4
45. CPWD (2007) Handbook on repair and rehabilitation of RCC buildings. Delhi
46. Crawford JE (2002) Retrofit methods to mitigate progressive collapse, karagozian and case
structural engineers, Glendale, CA
47. Dauda JA, Silva LC, Lourenço PB, Iuorio O (2021) Out-of-plane loaded masonry walls
retrofitted with oriented strand boards: numerical analysis and influencing parameters. Eng
Struct 243:112683. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2021.112683
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
48. Debnath P, Chandra Dutta S, Mandal P (2023) Lateral behaviour of masonry walls with
different types of brick bonds, aspect ratio and strengthening measures by polypropylene
bands and wire mesh. Structures 49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2023.01.155
49. Debnath P, Halder L, Dutta SC (2022) Damage survey and seismic vulnerability assessment
of unreinforced masonry structures in low-intensity Ambasa earthquake of northeast India.
Structures 44:372–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.08.005
50. Dowling D, Samali B, Li J (2005) An Improved means of reinforcing adobe walls-external
vertical reinforcement. In: SismoAdobe. Lima, Peru
51. Dutta SC, Halder L, Sharma RP (2021) Seismic vulnerability assessment of low to mid-rise
RC buildings addressing prevailing design and construction practices in the Northeastern
region of the Indian subcontinent: a case study based approach. Structures 33:1561–1577.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.05.032
52. Dutta SC, Mukhopadhyay P, Goswami K (2013) Augmenting strength of collapsed unrein-
forced masonry junctions: principal damage feature of walls damaged by moderate Indian
earthquakes. Nat Hazards Rev 14:281–285. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.
0000096
53. Dutta SC, Mukhopadhyay PS, Saha R, Nayak S (2015) 2011 Sikkim earthquake at eastern
himalayas: lessons learnt from performance of structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 75:121–129.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.03.020
54. Dutta SC, Nayak S, Acharjee G, Panda SK, Das PK (2016) Gorkha (Nepal) earthquake of
April 25, 2015: actual damage, retrofitting measures and prediction by RVS for a few typical
structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 89:171–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.08.010
55. Dutta SC, Nayak S, Dinakar P (2014) Lateral period and seismic vulnerability of masonry
buildings. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 167:633–645. https://doi.org/10.1680/stbu.12.00043
56. Eatherton MR, Hajjar JF, Deierlein GG, Krawinkler H, Billington S, Ma X (2008) Controlled
rocking of steel-framed buildings with replaceable energy-dissipating fuses. In: 14th world
conference on earthquake engineering. Beijing, China
57. Ehsani MR, Saadatmanesh H, Velazquez-Dimas JI (1999) Behavior of retrofitted URM walls
under simulated earthquake loading. J Compos Constr 3:134–142. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)1090-0268(1999)3:3(134)
58. El-Dakhakhni WW, Hamid AA, Hakam ZHR, Elgaaly M (2006) Hazard mitigation and
strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls using composites. Compos Struct 73:458–477.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUCT.2005.02.017
59. Elgawady M, Lestuzzi P, Badoux M (2004) A review of conventional seismic retrofitting
techniques for URM. In: 13th international brick and block masonry conference. Amsterdam
60. Elgawady MA, Lestuzzi P, Badoux M (2006) Retrofitting of masonry walls using shotcrete.
In: NZSEE conference, Paper 45
61. Fazli H, Wee T (2014) Rehabilitation of RC structures exposed to salinity and moisture using
CFRP. Appl Mech Mater 567:488–493. https://doi.org/10.4028/WWW.SCIENTIFIC.NET/
AMM.567.488
62. FEMA 273 (1997) NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings
63. FEMA 351 (2000) Recommended seismic evaluation and upgrade criteria for existing welded
steel moment-frame buildings.
64. FEMA 547 (2006) Techniques for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. Washington
DC, USA
65. Fillitsa Karantoni BV, Fardis MN (1992) Effectiveness of seismic strengthening techniques
for masonry buildings. J Struct Eng 118:1884–1902. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9445(1992)118:7(1884)
66. Formisano A, Di Lorenzo G, Landolfo R (2019) Seismic retrofitting of industrial steel
buildings hit by the 2012 Emilia-Romagna earthquake: a case study. In: AIP conference
proceedings. American Institute of Physics Inc.
67. Garlock M, Ricles JM, Sause R (2004) Experimental studies on full-scale post-tensioned steel
moment connections. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering. Vancouver, B.C.,
Canada
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
68. Gattulli V, Lampis G, Marcari G, Paolone A (2014) Simulations of FRP reinforcement in

masonry panels and application to a historic facade. Eng Struct 75:604–618. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2014.06.023
69. Ghobadi MS, Ghassemieh M, Mazroi A, Abolmaali A (2009) Seismic performance of ductile
welded connections using T-stiffener. J Constr Steel Res 65:766–775. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jcsr.2008.05.007
70. Gilmore AT, Bertero VV, Youssef NFG (1996) Seismic rehabilitation of infilled non-ductile
frame buildings using post-tensioned steel braces. Earthq Spectra 12:863–882
71. Gilstrap JM, Dolan CW (1998) Out-of-plane bending of FRP-reinforced masonry walls.
Compos Sci Technol 58:1277–1284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(98)00007-4
72. Görgülü T, Tama YS, Yilmaz S et al (2012) Strengthening of reinforced concrete structures
with external steel shear walls. J Constr Steel Res 70:226–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JCSR.2011.08.010
73. Gusta S (2015) Tragedy in zolitude—a lesson for contemporary society. Aleksandras
Stulginskis University
74. Halder L, Dutta SC, Debnath P, Sharma RP (2021a) Seismic vulnerability assessment of low-
rise unreinforced masonry buildings in Northeast India considering variability of material
properties. Asian J Civil Eng 22:843–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-021-00350-7
75. Halder L, Dutta SC, Sharma RP (2020) Damage study and seismic vulnerability assessment
of existing masonry buildings in Northeast India. J Build Eng 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jobe.2020.101190
76. Halder L, Dutta SC, Sharma RP, Bhattacharya S (2021b) Lessons learnt from post-earthquake
damage study of Northeast India and Nepal during last ten years: 2021 Assam earthquake,
2020 Mizoram earthquake, 2017 Ambasa earthquake, 2016 Manipur earthquake, 2015 Nepal
earthquake, and 2011 Sikkim earthquake. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 151. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.soildyn.2021.106990
77. Hamed E, Rabinovitch O (2010) Failure characteristics of FRP-strengthened masonry walls
under out-of-plane loads. Eng Struct 32:2134–2145. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.
2010.03.016
78. Harris JR, Price HJ, Hutchinson DA, et al (2008) NEHRP workshop on meeting the challenges
of existing buildings
79. Hernández ET, Carrera JSG (2020) Damage assessment and seismic behavior of steel buildings
during the Mexico earthquake of 19 September 2017. Earthq Spectra 36:250–270. https://doi.
org/10.1177/8755293019878186
80. Huang KF, la Liu X (2014) Effects of temperature variations on safety of reinforced concrete
structures during construction. J Shanghai Jiaotong Univ Sci 19:139–145. https://doi.org/10.
1007/S12204-014-1482-X/METRICS
81. Iqbal S, Islam N (2022) Seismic base isolation of 7 storey RC structure using single fric-
tion pendulum system. Struct Int 27:200–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04793-0_
15/COVER
82. IS 4326 (1993) Earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings-code of practice
(Second Revision). New Delhi
83. IS 13827 (1993) Improving earthquake resistance of earthen buildings—guidelines. New
Delhi
84. IS 13828 (1993) Improving earthquake resistance of low strength masonry buildings—guide-
lines. New Delhi.
85. IS 13920 (1993) Ductile detailing of reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic
forces—code of practice. New Delhi
86. IS 13935 (2009) Seismic evaluation, repair and strengthening of masonry buildings—guide-
lines. New Delhi
87. Islam ABMS, Jumaat MZ, Ahmmad R, ud Darain KM (2015) Retrofitting of vulnerable RC
structures by base isolation technique. Earthq Struct 9:603–623. https://doi.org/10.12989/
EAS.2015.9.3.603
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
88. Ismail M, Muhammad B, Ismail MEG (2010) Compressive strength loss and reinforcement
degradations of reinforced concrete structure due to long-term exposure. Constr Build Mater
24:898–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2009.12.003
89. Ismail N, Khattak N (2015) Reconnaissance report on the Mw 7.5 Hindu Kush earthquake of
26th October 2015 and the subsequent aftershocks
90. Issa CA, Debs P (2007) Experimental study of epoxy repairing of cracks in concrete. Constr
Build Mater 21:157–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.06.030
91. Kahn L (1984) Shotcrete retrofit for unreinforced brick masonry. In: 8th WCEE. USA, pp
583–590
92. Kamde DK, Pillai RG (2020) Effect of sunlight/ultraviolet exposure on the corrosion of
Fusion-Bonded Epoxy (FBE) coated steel rebars in concrete. Corrosion 76:843–860. https://
doi.org/10.5006/3588
93. Kaplan H, Yilmaz S, Nohutcu H et al (2008) Experimental study on the use of old tyres
for seismic strengthening of masonry structures. In: 14th world conference on earthquake
engineering. Beijing, China
94. Karapetrou ST, Fotopoulou SD, Pitilakis KD (2017) Seismic vulnerability of RC buildings
under the effect of aging. Procedia Environ Sci 38:461–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.
2017.03.137
95. Karayannis CG, Chalioris CE, Sideris KK (1998) Effectiveness of RC beam-column connec-
tion repair using epoxy resin injections. J Earthquake Eng 2:217–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13632469809350320
96. Karic A, Atalić J, Kolbitsch A (2022) Seismic vulnerability of historic brick masonry buildings
in Vienna. Bull Earthq Eng 20:4117–4145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01367-2
97. Khabit IF, Mahin SA, Pister KS (1998) Seismic behavior of concentrically braced steel
frames. Report No UCB/EERC-88/01. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University
of California, Berkeley
98. Kiamanesh R, Abolmaali A, Ghassemieh M (2010) The effect of stiffeners on the strain
patterns of the welded connection zone. J Constr Steel Res 66:19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jcsr.2009.07.010
99. Korany Y, Drysdale R (2006) Rehabilitation of masonry walls using unobtrusive FRP tech-
niques for enhanced out-of-plane seismic resistance. J Compos Constr 10:213–222. https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:3(213)
100. Krauss PD, Scanlon JM, Hanson MA (1995) Evaluation of injection materials for the repair
of deep cracks in concrete structures
101. Kumar GR, Satish Kumar SR, Kalyanaraman V (2007) Behaviour of frames with Non-
Buckling bracings under earthquake loading. J Constr Steel Res 63:254–262. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.04.012
102. Kuzik MD, Elwi AE, Cheng JJR (2003) Cyclic flexure tests of masonry walls reinforced with
glass fiber reinforced polymer sheets. J Compos Constr 7:20–30. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)1090-0268(2003)7:1(20)
103. Leelataviwat S (1998) Drift and yield mechanism based seismic design and upgrading of steel
moment frames
104. Leon RT, Yang C-S (2003) Special inverted-v-braced frames with suspended zipper struts.
Georgia Institute of Technology
105. Li A, Assih T, Delmas Y (2000) Influence of the adhesive thickness and steel plate thickness
on the behaviour of strengthened concrete beams. J Adhes Sci Technol 14:1639–1656. https://
doi.org/10.1163/156856100742456
106. Li P, Zhou Z, Chen L, et al (2019) Research on dust suppression technology of shotcrete based
on new spray equipment and process optimization. Adv Civil Eng. https://doi.org/10.1155/
2019/4831215
107. Lieping YE, Zhe QU (2009) Failure mechanism and its control of building structures under
earthquakes based on structural system concept
108. Liu H, Wang X, Jiao Y (2016) Effect of temperature variation on modal frequency of reinforced
concrete slab and beam in cold regions. Shock Vib. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4792786
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
109. LRFD (1999) Specification for structural steel buildings

110. Lu Y (2019) Impact on reinforced concrete structures. Encycl Continuum Mech 1–24. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53605-6_227-1
111. Ma P, Xin R, Yao J (2021) Assessment of failure mode and seismic performance of damaged
masonry structures retrofitted with grout-injected ferrocement overlay reinforcement (GFOR).
Constr Build Mater 305:124778. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2021.124778
112. Maalej M, Lin VWJ, Nguyen MP, Quek ST (2010) Engineered cementitious composites for
effective strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls. Eng Struct 32:2432–2439. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2010.04.017
113. Macabuag J (2007) An introduction to modelling and retrofitting of non-engineered masonry
buildings under seismic loading
114. Macabuag J, Guragain R, Bhattacharya S (2012) Seismic retrofitting of non-engineered
masonry in rural Nepal. Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 165:273–286. https://doi.org/10.
1680/stbu.10.00015
115. Man L (2008) Improving the earthquake resistance of non-engineered adobe masonry
buildings. Oxford University
116. Mardani A, Dehkordi MR, Moghadam AS, Yekrangnia M (2018) Example of a two-story
unreinforced masonry building retrofitted by shotcrete. In: Advanced design examples of
seismic retrofit of structures. Elsevier, pp 13–118
117. Masri AC, Goel SC (1996) Seismic design and testing of an RC slab-column frame
strengthened by steel bracing. Earthq Spectra 12:645–666
118. Michiels T, Adriaenssens S, Dejong M (2019) Form finding of corrugated shell structures for
seismic design and validation using non-linear pushover analysis. Eng Struct 181:362–373.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2018.12.043
119. Michiels T, Adriaenssens S, Jorquera-Lucerga JJ (2017) Parametric study of masonry shells
form-found for seismic loading. J Int Assoc Shell Spatial Struct 58:267–275. https://doi.org/
10.20898/J.IASS.2017.194.892
120. Mosallam AS (2007) Out-of-plane flexural behavior of unreinforced red brick walls strength-
ened with FRP composites. Compos B Eng 38:559–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOS
ITESB.2006.07.019
121. Moudi M, Yan S, Bahador B et al (2019) Statistical model for earthquake economic loss
estimation using GDP and DPI: a case study from Iran. Qual Quant 53:583–598. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11135-018-0776-8
122. Mulas MG, Perotti F, Coronelli D et al (2013) The partial collapse of “Casa dello Studente”
during L’Aquila 2009 earthquake. Eng Fail Anal 34:566–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng
failanal.2013.02.031
123. Narayan S, Shrimali MK, Bharti SD, Datta TK (2018) Collapse of damaged steel building
frames because of earthquakes. J Perform Constructed Facil 32. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asc
e)cf.1943-5509.0001125
124. Nayak S, Banerjee S, Das S (2018) Augmenting out-of-plane behaviour of masonry wallet
using PP-band and steel wire mesh. In: IOP conference series: materials science and
engineering. Institute of Physics Publishing
125. Nayak S, Dutta SC (2016) Improving seismic performance of masonry structures with
openings by polypropylene bands and L-shaped reinforcing bars. J Perform Constr Facil
30:04015003. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0000733
126. Nayak S, Dutta SC (2016) Failure of masonry structures in earthquake: a few simple cost
effective techniques as possible solutions. Eng Struct 106:53–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2015.10.014
127. NDMA (2014) Seismic retrofitting of deficient buildings and structures. India
128. NIST (2012) program plan for the development of seismic design guidelines for port container,
wharf, and cargo systems
129. NIST (2013) Review of past performance and further development of modeling techniques
for collapse assessment of existing reinforced concrete buildings.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
130. Oyguc R (2016) Seismic performance of RC school buildings after 2011 Van earthquakes.
Bull Earthq Eng 14:821–847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9857-4
131. Oyguc R, Oyguc E (2017) 2011 Van earthquakes: lessons from damaged masonry structures.
J Perform Constructed Facil 31. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0001057
132. Padalu PKVR, Singh Y, Das S (2020) Cyclic two-way out-of-plane testing of unreinforced
masonry walls retrofitted using composite materials. Constr Build Mater 238:117784. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2019.117784
133. Padalu PKVR, Singh Y, Das S (2019) Out-of-plane flexural behaviour of masonry wallettes
strengthened using FRP composites and externally bonded grids: Comparative study.
Composites Part B 176. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2019.107302
134. Pekelnicky R, Poland C (2012) seismic evaluation and retrofit rehabilitation of existing
buildings. In: SEAOC 2012 convention proceedings
135. Perera R, Gómez S, Alarcón E (2004) Experimental and analytical study of masonry infill
reinforced concrete frames retrofitted with steel braces. J Struct Eng 130:2032–2039. https://
doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2004)130:12(2032)
136. Piekarczyk M, Grec R (2012) Application of adhesive bonding in steel and aluminium
structures. Arch Civ Eng 58:309–329. https://doi.org/10.2478/v.10169-012-0018-8
137. Power A (2008) Does demolition or refurbishment of old and inefficient homes help to increase
our environmental, social and economic viability? Energy Policy 36:4487–4501. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.09.022
138. Prakash SS, Alagusundaramoorthy P (2008) Load resistance of masonry wallettes and shear
triplets retrofitted with GFRP composites. Cem Concr Compos 30:745–761. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.CEMCONCOMP.2007.11.005
139. Pugsley AG (1951) Concepts of safety in structural Engineering, Pugsley on concepts of
safety in structural engineering.
140. Pushpakumara B, Mendis W, de Silva S (2016) Bamboo as a new retrofitting material for
existing masonry walls with improving the walls aesthetic view. Built Environ Spatial Sci
141. Roca P, Araiza G (2010) Shear response of brick masonry small assemblages strengthened
with bonded FRP laminates for in-plane reinforcement. Constr Build Mater 24:1372–1384.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2010.01.005
142. Roeder CW, Banerjee S, Jung DR, Smith SK (1996) The role of building foundations in
seismic retrofit. Earthq Spectra (EERI) 12:925–942
143. Scozzese F, Terracciano G, Zona A, Corte GD, Dall’Asta A, Landolfo R (2018) Modeling and
seismic response analysis of italian code-conforming single-storey steel buildings. J Earthq
Eng 22:2104–2133. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1528913
144. Sen D (2017) Behaviour and strength of RC columns retrofitted with steel angles and strips
under eccentric axial loads. Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
145. Shrive NG (2006) The use of fibre reinforced polymers to improve seismic resistance of
masonry. Constr Build Mater 20:269–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2005.
08.030
146. da Silva LS, Silva LC, Tankova T, Craveiro HD, Simões R, Costa R, D’Aniello M, Landolfo
R (2021) Performance of modular hybrid cold-formed/tubular structural system. Structures
30:1006–1019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.01.066
147. Sonuvar M, Ozcebe G, Ersoy U (2004) Rehabilitation of reinforced concrete frames with
reinforced concrete infills. ACI Struct J 101. https://doi.org/10.14359/13335
148. Sumerente G, Lovon H, Tarque N, Chácara C (2020) Assessment of combined in-plane and
out-of-plane fragility functions for adobe masonry buildings in the peruvian andes. Front Built
Environ 6:52. https://doi.org/10.3389/FBUIL.2020.00052/BIBTEX
149. Suwal R (2018) Failure study of reinforced concrete buildings of kathmandu valley in gorkha
earthquake 2015. Int J Modern Res Eng Manag (IJMREM) 2581–4540
150. Taghdi M, Bruneau M, Saatcioglu M (2000) Seismic retrofitting of low-rise masonry and
concrete walls using steel strips. J Struct Eng 126:1017–1025. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASC
E)0733-9445(2000)126:9(1017)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
151. Takeuchi T, Wada A (2018) Review of buckling-restrained brace design and application to
tall buildings. Int J High-Rise Build 7:187–195
152. Taljsten B (1997) Strengthening of beams by plate bonding. J Mater Civil Eng 9
153. Tan KH, Patoary MKH (2004) Strengthening of masonry walls against out-of-plane loads
using fiber-reinforced polymer reinforcement. J Compos Constr 8:79–87. https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:1(79)
154. Tartaglia R, Milone A, Prota A, Landolfo R (2022) seismic retrofitting of existing industrial
steel buildings: a case-study. Materials 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15093276
155. Tetley R, Madabhushi G (2007) Vulnerability of adobe buildings under earthquake loading. In:
Proceedings of the international conference on earthquake geotechnical engineering. Greece
156. Tetteh AR, Liang Y (2020) Repair of cracks on concrete structures. Int J Sci Res (IJSR)
9:82–92. https://doi.org/10.21275/sr20324212517
157. Thermou GE, Elnashai AS (2006) Seismic retrofit schemes for RC structures and local-global
consequences. Prog Struct Mat Eng 8:1–15
158. Thorburn LJ, Kulak GL, Montgomery CJ (1983) Analysis of steel plate shear walls. Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada
159. Tsavdaridis KD (2014) Strengthening techniques: code-deficient steel buildings. Encyclo-
pedia of earthquake engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–26
160. Tsavdaridis KD, D’Mello C, Huo BY (2013) Experimental and computational study of the
vertical shear behaviour of partially encased perforated steel beams. Eng Struct 56:805–822.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.04.025
161. Tsonos AG (2002) Seismic repair of reinforced concrete beam-column subassemblages of
modern structures by epoxy injection technique. Struct Eng Mech 14:543–563. https://doi.
org/10.12989/SEM.2002.14.5.543
162. Turer A, Korkmaz SZ, Korkmaz HH (2007) Performance improvement studies of masonry
houses using elastic post-tensioning straps. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:683–705. https://doi.
org/10.1002/EQE.649
163. Turk AM (2013) Seismic response analysis of masonry minaret and possible strengthening
by fiber reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM) materials. Adv Mater Sci Eng. https://doi.
org/10.1155/2013/952497
164. Turner BA (1978) Man-made disasters. Wykeham Publications, London
165. Valluzzi MR, Tinazzi D, Modena C (2002) Shear behavior of masonry panels strengthened by
FRP laminates. Constr Build Mater 16:409–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-0618(02)000
43-0
166. Warner J (1995) Understanding shotcrete—the fundamentals. Concr Int 17(5)
167. Wasserman I (2019) Behaviour of concrete structures upon the impact of UV and rain of
natural acidity. J Int Sci Publ: Mater Methods Technol (Online) 13:210–229
168. Willis CR, Yang Q, Seracino R, Griffith MC (2009) Damaged masonry walls in two-way
bending retrofitted with vertical FRP strips. Constr Build Mater 23:1591–1604. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2007.09.007
169. Yadav P, Khursheed S, Solanki SK, Kumar Paul V (2022) A review of retrofitting techniques
of masonry structures.
170. Yang CS, Leon RT, DesRoches R (2008) Design and behavior of zipper-braced frames. Eng
Struct 30:1092–1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.06.010
171. Ying B (2021) Investigating the behavior of boundary elements in steel shear walls with
different connections. Stavební Obzor—Civil Eng J 30. https://doi.org/10.14311/cej.2021.
04.0071
172. Yılmaz S, Tama YS, Kaplan H, Caliskan O, Solak A (2011) Experimental program on design
and application of external retrofit walls for low ductility RC frames. In: 4th international
conference on advances in experimental structural engineering. Isprira, Italy
173. Yossef NM (2015) Strengthening steel I-beams by welding steel plates before or while loading.
Int J Eng Res Technol (IJERT) 4
174. Zhao B, Taucer F, Rossetto T (2009) Field investigation on the performance of building
structures during the 12 May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China. Eng Struct 31:1707–1723.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.039
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Retrofit of Reinforced Concrete
Structures Using Fibre Reinforced
Polymer
Aparna (Dey) Ghosh, Chaitali Ray, and Dhiraj Biswas
Abstract Aging and deteriorating infrastructure, and more strict seismic design
standards, call for the need of seismic retrofitting. Amongst various seismic retrofit
strategies, use of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) is both effective and advantageous
over many other techniques, chiefly due to its high strength-to-weight ratio and
good fatigue strength. Further, the speed of installation of FRP being high, it results
in reduced downtime, that is extremely beneficial in case of seismic retrofitting of
crucial infrastructure. The retrofit techniques with FRP are designed to add ductility,
confinement, moment and shear capacity to existing structural members. Thus, local
strengthening of members is achieved and alterations to overall structural dynamic
properties are minimal. Amongst the commonly used fibres, glass fibres are suitable
in low-cost seismic retrofit applications in comparison to carbon. However, caution
needs to be exercised over the performance of FRP under elevated temperatures,
as fire is a common hazard associate with earthquakes. This chapter discusses the
various aspects of FRP retrofitting of reinforced concrete structural elements, as well
as of masonry infill walls, for enhanced seismic performance.
Keywords Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) · Seismic retrofit · Ductility ·

Confinement · Lateral strength · Strength-to-weight ratio
1 Introduction
There are several structures that do not meet the seismic requirements as specified
by the prevailing codal provisions, and are hence termed ‘deficient’. Needless to say,
such structures pose a very serious threat to the safety of the population, not only
under strong shaking but even under mild tremors. The deficiencies could be inherent
in the structure from the time it was built or it could have developed due to the aging
A. Ghosh (B) · C. Ray · D. Biswas

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology,
Shibpur 711103, Howrah, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
178 A. Ghosh et al.
of the building over time, or they could also be caused due to unplanned modifications
imposed on the structure. According to IS 13935: 2009 [1], upgrading the earthquake
resistance of the deficient structure to the level of the current codes through the
adoption of appropriate seismic strengthening techniques is defined as the seismic
retrofitting of the structure. Construction of a new structure in place of the deficient
structure is always an option, however, that is generally avoided, chiefly because that
is usually more expensive than seismic retrofitting and may lead to greater disruption
of normal activities. Moreover, retrofitting is faster than re-construction and also does
not cause an unwanted change in the look of the structure.
The chief aim of seismic retrofitting is to improve the lateral strength of the
structure. Moreover, it is also very important to enhance the structural integrity, so
as to ensure a proper transfer of load from the relatively weaker to the stronger
elements. Further, the ductility of the structure is to be improved by avoiding the
brittle modes of failure. These aims are attempted to be met through two broad
categories of methods of seismic retrofitting. The first attempts to reduce the seismic
demand on the structure, while the second focuses on upgrading the seismic capacity
of the structure. The retrofit techniques can also be classified into global and local
techniques, depending on whether the technique is applied to the structure as a whole
or to some particular member(s). Various retrofit techniques include incorporation
of additional infill walls, shear walls, insertion of steel braces, addition of frames
[2], all of which aid in enhancing the lateral strength and stiffness of the structure.
While these methods are very effective in improving the seismic performance of
the structure, they may lead to loss of existing space and functionality. Moreover,
being construction-intensive, they can significantly disrupt or lead to a suspension
of the daily activities within the structure. In this scenario, fibre reinforced plastic or
polymer (FRP) composites provide an alternate solution for strengthening of existing
structural sections, without the afore-mentioned problems.
The civil construction industry depends heavily on reinforced concrete (RC) mate-
rial and therefore a major chunk of civil infrastructure, such as buildings, tunnels,
bridges, airports, drainage and hydraulic projects, is made of reinforced concrete.
An engineer often experiences a challenge while working in the concrete industry,
which is to increase the strength and performance of the concrete as well as to
enhance its durability throughout its service life. With an ever-intensifying competi-
tion to construct tall buildings worldwide, there is a trend to use modern and newer
materials, and construction techniques. FRP composites have gained remarkable
acceptance worldwide, especially in the aircraft and marine industries since several
decades, due to their various favourable properties, and most importantly, being
lightweight. Now, these materials are increasingly being adopted in civil engineering
construction, especially in bridges and buildings [3]. The FRP material started its
journey in civil engineering in the 1990s. Along with its lightweight property, FRP
composites possess many other advantageous properties, such as, increased speed of
construction, easy and rapid installation, reduced environmental impact, less thermal
conductivity that aids to maintain ideal internal temperatures in buildings subjected
to severe weather conditions. They also have the capability of providing a better
service life. The composite materials are commonly used in civil engineering in
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic Retrofit of Reinforced Concrete Structures Using Fibre … 179
two ways, namely, (i) in new construction, and (ii) in retrofitting of existing struc-
tures. Composites have been more popular in repairing and retrofitting of damaged
structures than in new construction.
This chapter first discusses the properties of FRP owing to which it plays such an
important role in seismic retrofitting. Some of the relevant codes are then mentioned,
followed by a description of the different forms in which FRP are used and their
application procedures. Next, the retrofitting of RC columns, beams and masonry
infill wall members and subsequently, the seismic performance of RC framed build-
ings retrofitted with FRP are discussed. Lastly, a brief commentary on the problems
associated with FRP retrofitted structural members under fire is made, followed by
the concluding remarks.
2 Advantages of FRP in Retrofitting
Retrofitting of existing civil engineering structures using FRP composites possesses

the following advantages over conventional repair and strengthening systems.
1. Fast and clean to install
2. Reach desired strength faster
3. Lightweight and easy to transport material
4. Material is flexible and can conform to any geometry
5. High strength-to-weight ratio
6. Excellent resistance to corrosion
7. Resins used in the composite are non-hazardous and odourless making the system
ideal for work in occupied buildings
8. Low construction cost.
In addition, FRP also serves as a waterproofing membrane and does not require a
large work/setup area. With the above considerations, FRP has been established as
more economical and durable than conventional repairing materials. Under seismic
conditions, the most significant advantage of FRP is its high strength-to-weight ratio,
as it will limit the increase in the seismic base shear that might occur due to the added
retrofit material.
2.1 Design Specifications
Some standard design codes are available that offer appropriate guidelines for the
retrofitting and repairing of RC structures using FRP.
(a) Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE) [4]
The recommendations include (i) Design and construction standards for
upgrading the existing concrete structures using FRP sheets to improve their
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
180 A. Ghosh et al.
strength and durability, (ii) Evaluation of the effect of FRP sheet on flexural
capacity, shear capacity and ultimate deformation of columns, and (iii) Upgra-
dation of the process and material, detailed inspection of existing concrete
structures and maintenance of upgraded concrete structures.
(b) Canadian Standards [5, 6]
This Standard covers the manufacturing process requirements of FRP bars that
are part of a grid for use in non-prestressed internal reinforcement of concrete
components of structures (e.g., bridges, buildings, and marine structures).
(c) ACI Committee 440 Codes [7–10]
These have published various design and construction guidelines for the use of
FRP in RC structures.
(d) European Standard [11]
This provides design guidelines on the externally bonded FRP reinforcement for
repair and strengthening of concrete structures, practical execution and quality
control.
3 Types of FRP Composites and Installation
FRP composites for strengthening of civil engineering structures are available today
mainly in the form of: (a) thin unidirectional strips (with thickness in the order of 1
mm) fabricated by pultrusion; (b) flexible sheets or fabrics or textiles made of fibres
in one, two or more directions. The different types of strengthening systems using
FRP, available in the present day, are summarised below.
1. Pre-cured systems: manufactured in various shapes by pultrusion or lamination.
Pre-cured systems are directly bonded to the structural member.
2. Wet lay-up systems: manufactured with fibres lying in one or more directions,
e.g. FRP sheets or fabrics, and impregnated with resin at the construction site.
3. Prepreg (pre-impregnated) systems: manufactured with unidirectional or multi-
directional fibre sheets or fabrics pre-impregnated at the manufacturing plant
with partially polymerized resin. They may be bonded to the member to be
strengthened with (or without) the use of additional resins.
These systems correspond to several manufacturers and suppliers, and are based
on different configurations, types of fibres, adhesives, etc. Furthermore, the suitability
of each system depends on the type of structure that is to be strengthened. The overall
strengthening techniques are taken up in two stages, namely, (i) Treatment and surface
preparation, and (ii) Adhesive curing. The essentials of each step are depicted in the
following.
(i) Treatment and Surface Preparation
The overall success and performance of patching materials applied to the concrete
surface are highly dependent on the quality of the cleaning and surface preparation
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
performed. The surfaces should be free from dust, dirt, oil, previously applied coat-
ings, etc., on which the FRP laminates are to be applied. Any depression or concavity
in the surface should be eliminated by filling with putty as a stretched FRP sheet will
lose contact with the surface at such locations. The FRP sheets are also prone to
tearing at corners and sharp edges due to stress concentrations, so corners should
be rounded to a minimum radius of 25 mm. If the enhancement of the structural
performance of the repaired member relies on the bond to the laminate, then the
concrete surface preparation is a very important factor concerning the application of
FRP composites to concrete structures.
Most of the methods for concrete surface preparation are related to mechanical
abrasion, by grinding, sandblasting, water-jetting and scraping as shown in Fig. 1.
The effects of these surface preparation methods strictly depend on material proper-
ties, concrete strength, aggregate size, type of epoxy and ACM fibreglass mat used,
worker’s operation skill, construction environment, etc. ACI 515.1R-79 [10] has
provided a general procedure for roughening, cleaning, and checking of the concrete
surface.
(ii) Adhesive curing
An adhesive is applied to the RC structure surface to attach the FRP composites. The
goal of this approach is to provide the mechanical bond between two elements so
that they stick together, as shown in Fig. 2. The application of adhesives between the
substrate and compound substance is vital in the process of preparation of surfaces
before the application of FRP. The adhesives should not be applied in the wet condi-
tion of the surface as it may weaken the bond or cause negative effects. Again,
the environmental conditions like temperature, direct contact with rain or dust may
accelerate or retard the resin curing time. The following features of adhesives must
be maintained to achieve superior strengthening.
1. It must be easy to handle the process of mixing, applying and curing.
2. It should not be susceptible to ordinary alteration in the moisture content of the
surface.
a b
Fig. 1 Treatment and surface preparation; a water jetting, b sandblasting
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
182 A. Ghosh et al.
Fig. 2 Cross sectional configuration of concrete, adhesive and FRP composite
3. It should maintain compatible thermal characteristic with both concrete and FRP.
4. It must provide a low value of creep.
The appropriate curing is required to prevent transfer of moisture from the surface
of concrete to the outermost layer of FRP sheet as bonding may be affected by the
presence of moisture.
4 Retrofitting of RC Structures
Composite materials can be used effectively to retrofit reinforced concrete struc-

tures subjected to seismic load. The objective is to strengthen buildings that do not
meet the safety requirements defined by the current seismic codes under the design
seismic action, with respect to one or more limit states. Once a preliminary seismic
assessment is performed on the existing structure, the strengthening intervention is
designed based on its outcome. The entire process goes through the following steps:
(a) identification of safety requirements, (b) definition of protection levels (which
yields the intensity of the seismic action), (c) choice of analysis methods, (d) choice
of verification criteria, (e) assessment of seismic safety, (f) choice of material prop-
erties. Regarding the criteria for selection of the FRP strengthening method, it is
widely recognized that irregularities in stiffness cannot be solved by applying FRPs.
An intervention performed with FRP is classified as a selective technique, since irreg-
ularities in strength can be adjusted by strengthening a selected number of elements.
However, attention should be paid to ensure that the overall ductility is not reduced.
The design of a strengthening intervention with FRP should include the following
activities, (a) justification of the intervention type, (b) selection of techniques and/
or materials, (c) preliminary design of the strengthening intervention, (d) struc-
tural analysis of the upgraded structure. As mentioned above, FRP strengthening
is regarded as a selective intervention technique from the seismic standpoint, aiming
at, (a) increasing the flexural capacity of deficient members through the application of
composites with the fibres placed parallel to the element axis, (b) increasing the shear
strength through the application of composites with the fibres placed transversely to
the element axis, (c) increasing the ductility (or the chord rotation capacity) of critical
zones of beams and columns through FRP wrapping (confinement), (d) improving
the efficiency of lap splice zones through FRP wrapping, (e) preventing buckling
of longitudinal rebars under compression through FRP wrapping, (f) increasing the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
tensile strength of the panels of partially confined beam-column joints through the
application of composites with the fibres placed along the principal tensile stress
direction.
During retrofitting of RC structures, each type of member is treated on the basis
of its specific requirement and procedure.
5 Retrofitting of Axial Members
Strengthening of reinforced concrete axial members (columns) subjected to high axial

load levels is a challenge often faced by a structural engineer. Low concrete strength
combined with poor site curing conditions may result in axial load ratios in individual
columns of multi-storey buildings that are much higher than the values anticipated
during design. There are several ways to enhance the axial load capacity of such
members with deficiencies in strength. One of them is through passive confinement
of the concrete. As the ultimate load is approached, the concrete in the column dilates
and exerts pressure on the confining element. This interaction leads to a triaxial state
of stress in the concrete core of the axial member that results in an increase in the
ultimate compressive strength of the concrete. Thus, the axial load carrying capacity
of the members is also increased. Confinement of concrete also substantially increases
the deformation capacity of reinforced concrete columns, changing their mode of
failure from brittle to ductile. FRP composite jackets applied around the perimeter
of reinforced concrete columns confine the concrete member. External jacketing
of columns with FRP is a promising retrofitting technique for enhancing seismic
performance of sub-standard or damaged reinforced concrete (RC) buildings. The
enhancement in deformation capacity and shear strength of jacketed members helps
to avoid the brittle collapse mechanism of buildings with inadequate ductility. Further,
the increase in ductility due to the concrete confinement is highly beneficial in the
seismic retrofit scheme.
The enhancement in strength and ductility is proportional to the thickness of the
FRP wrapping, but is limited by the ultimate strain of the FRP. FRP composite jackets
may also provide restraint against buckling of the longitudinal column bars, which
may be significantly advantageous in columns of old buildings located in seismic
regions because, very often, the hoops are widely spaced and are unable to provide an
effective restraint. It is to be noted that the effects of FRP confinement on a column
are most successful for a circular column.
With the assumption of 45° cracking, the thickness of the FRP jacket, t j , for shear
retrofitting of columns under seismic loads may be determined from the following
(2).
Vf
tj = (1)
2ε f e E j D
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
184 A. Ghosh et al.
where,
Vf Vu − (Vc + Vs )
Vu shear demand based on the flexural capacity in the potential hinge locations
Vs shear capacity from steel ties
Vc shear capacity of concrete (IS 456:2000, Clause 40.2)
εfe effective usable strain in the FRP wrap
D the column dimension in the direction of loading
Ej elastic modulus of composite
6 Retrofitting of Flexural Members
6.1 Flexural Strengthening
Flexural strengthening with FRP materials may be carried out by applying one or
more laminates/sheets to the tension side of the element as shown in Fig. 3. The flex-
ural capacity is attained if either the compressive strain in concrete or the tensile strain
in FRP reaches its ultimate value. However, the capacity after strengthening cannot
be greater than twice the initial capacity. Furthermore, according to the capacity
design approach, flexural strengthening should be designed to avoid the activation of
shear failure mechanisms. As a member strengthened with FRP is generally loaded at
the time of retrofitting application, the existing state of strain in the structure should
be considered.
The flexural capacity of a RC beam retrofitted with FRP laminate may be evaluated
from the relevant constitutive relationships, equilibrium of forces and strain compat-
ibility conditions. The ultimate flexural capacity, Mu R , which should be greater than
the ultimate moment demand, is obtained from the following Eq. (2).
Mu R = 0.87 f y As (d − 0.42xu ) + ψ f A f f f (h − 0.42xu ) (2)
a b
Fig. 3 Retrofitting of a Bridge deck panel, b RC slab
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The definition of the symbols used in the above equation is given below.
fy yield stress of the steel reinforcement

As area of the steel reinforcement
d effective depth of the steel reinforcement
xu depth of the neutral axis
ψf reduction factor equal to 0.85 is used for the strength from the FRP
Af area of the FRP composite
ff stress in the FRP composite
h depth of the beam
Several researchers [12–17] have carried out investigations on the performance of
FRP retrofitted beams under seismic effect. Experimental studies on the confinement
of M30 RC beams using GFRP (Glass fiber reinforced polymer), CFRP (Carbon fiber
reinforced polymer), BFRP (Basalt fiber reinforced polymer), with double and four
layers of wrapping using bi-directional fibre mat [17] indicated the superior perfor-
mance of the four layer CFRP both in terms of increase in strength and reduction
in deflection. A comprehensive literature review was presented [18] on strength-
ening using prestressed CFRP laminates in conventionally and internally prestressed
concrete structures (PCSs). The flexural behavior, failure modes, and serviceability
performance of the strengthened concrete members were discussed. The effects of
the prestressing level on ductility and energy absorption and a summary of observa-
tions on the recommended optimum prestressing level was presented in the review
[18].
6.2 Shear Strengthening
Shear strengthening in a flexural member is necessary when the shear demand is

greater than the shear capacity of the flexural member, evaluated on the basis of
the contributions of both concrete and shear reinforcing steel. It may also be neces-
sary after designing flexural strengthening, in order to re-establish the strength hier-
archy between bending and shear failure mechanisms. Shear strengthening is usually
obtained by applying one or more layers of FRP, externally bonded to the surface
of the structural member to be strengthened. External FRP reinforcement can be
applied in a discontinuous manner, with gaps between strips or continuously, with
strips next to each other. Figure 4 shows U-wrapped FRP strengthening configura-
tions. For U-wrap strengthening of rectangular or T-sections, delamination of the
end portions of FRP reinforcement can be avoided by using laminates/sheets and/or
bars installed in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the member. There can also
be shear strengthening using inclined wraps.
The shear capacity of a FRP strengthened RC member is the summation of the
shear capacities of the steel reinforcement, the concrete and that of the FRP. The
latter is the shear strength of the FRP reduced by a factor, the value of which is
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
186 A. Ghosh et al.
Fig. 4 U-wrap shear

strengthening of rectangular
beam
limited to 0.85. The shear strength that can be derived from the FRP is dependent on
the orientation of the fibres and on the considered crack pattern. In case of discrete
strips of FRP and cracks with an angle of inclination of 45°, the shear strength of the
FRP is evaluated from the following expressions (2).
A f v f f (sin α + cos α)d f

Vf = . (3)
Sf
with, A f v = 2nt f w f
and, f f = ε f e E f
Here,
Afv total vertical area of the FRP wrap

ff stress in the FRP wrap
α inclination of the FRP wrap with respect to the beam axis
df effective depth of the FRP wrap
Ef elastic modulus of FRP
n number of wraps
Sf spacing of the FRP wrap
wf width of the FRP wrap
tf thickness of the FRP wrap
εfe effective usable strain in the FRP wrap
The above expression is modified in case of continuous FRP sheets, the change
being based on the length of the FRP sheet intercepted by an inclined crack.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 5 Retrofitted specimen

at ultimate load
7 Retrofitting of Beam Column Joints
The beam, and the connection between beam and column, are highly vulnerable
components of a building structure during the occurrence of an earthquake. FRP
wrapping helps to improve the performance of these critical elements under seismic
conditions. The increased confinement of the joints due to various types of wrap-
ping [19] helps to overcome inadequacies related to ties and anchorage at the joints.
Mosallam et al. [20] investigated the structural behaviour of retrofitted beam column
joints by using different FRP composites and hybrid connector through numerical
and experimental modelling. Allam et al. [21] conducted experimental investigations
to evaluate the seismic performance of FRP retrofitting in beam column joint (Fig. 5).
The results indicate that the FRP composite systems proposed in their study have
succeeded in enhancing the strength, stiffness and ductility of the seismically defi-
cient reinforced concrete beam-column joint. The test setup was capable of capturing
the shear deficiency behaviour of the beam-column joint and the enhancement in its
behaviour after retrofit. They used high-strength carbon fibre reinforced polymer
composites, E-glass fibre reinforced polymer composites and high-modulus carbon
fibre reinforced polymer composites for the study. Using the proposed retrofitting
systems, a significant enhancement in the joint shear strength was achieved. A few
other researchers [22, 23] have presented the techniques of FRP retrofitting of beam
column joints.
8 Retrofitting of Masonry Walls
RC structures have masonry infill walls that are highly susceptible to failure under
earthquake excitation due to their low tensile and shear resistance. Local crushing
at the corners, shear cracking along the bed joints and diagonal compression failure
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
188 A. Ghosh et al.
due to buckling are some of the common modes of failure of masonry infill walls.
FRP composites can be used to provide an economic and workable solution for the
seismic retrofit of masonry infill walls in RC structures [24]. Different configurations
of FRP laminates, such as full surface bonding, X-frame, H-frame, Picture frame,
etc. can be adopted for the purpose. The shear strength of the retrofitted masonry wall
is augmented by the shear strength of the FRP laminate, which is obtained in case
of vertical FRP laminates as a product of the elastic modulus of the FRP, the area of
the vertical FRP laminate and the effective usable strain in the FRP laminate. The
effective usable strain in the FRP is evaluated from half the ultimate tensile strain in
the FRP laminate, multiplied with an environmental reduction factor.
9 Performance of Seismic Retrofitting by FRP in RC

Structures
Despite the large amount of research work carried out on improving the load carrying
capacity and ductility of RC members using FRP composite materials, only a few
studies have focused on the behaviour of FRP retrofitted RC structural systems, and
in particular the structures that are code-compliant. A case study to evaluate the effi-
ciency of glass fibre reinforced polymers (GFRPs) in improving the seismic perfor-
mance of an 8-storey moment resisting framed RC building was reported in literature
[25]. A numerical investigation on the seismic enhancement of code-compliant and
poorly-confined RC buildings was presented by them. Nonlinear static analysis of
the frames was carried out in order to simulate the performance of the buildings
under ground motion. Plastic behaviour of the elements was characterised using two
nonlinear hinges at the end sections of the members based on the lumped plasticity
concept. The nonlinear properties of plastic hinges were calculated based on the
well-established models for concrete and steel reinforcement. After verification of
the adopted assumptions for nonlinear characterisation of members, the results of
pushover analysis were implemented in the seismic assessment of the frames. The
following retrofitting strategies were adopted in the investigation to increase the
displacement capacity of the structure and provide more energy dissipation under
seismic loads.
(i) Fully exploiting the rotational capacity of beams and columns through GFRP
wrapping of potential plastic hinge regions of each column in both code-
compliant and poorly-confined frames, as shown in Fig. 6.
(ii) Increasing the ductility of beams in the code-compliant structure in addition
to column confinement. This could be achieved using web bonded FRP with
fibres oriented in the direction of transverse reinforcement in regions prone to
inelastic behaviour. The stress–strain model proposed by Lam and Teng [26,
27] was selected for FRP-confined concrete as shown in Fig. 7.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 6 FRP jacketed regions

of columns for seismic
retrofitting
Fig. 7 The stress–strain model proposed by Lam and Teng [26, 27]
The poorly confined structure could resist much higher ground motion (PGA =
0.52 g) by adopting FRP wrap, which increased the ductility and energy dissipa-
tion capacity. However, further studies are required to be conducted on the FRP-
retrofitting of pre-existing RC buildings in order to not only study their seismic
response but also provide a more economical retrofitting scheme for these types of
buildings.
Details of a real-life implementation of FRP for seismic retrofitting of a ten
storied residential RC building of the 1970s may be found in [28]. The strategy of
FRP retrofitting was selected amongst other options as it was more economical and
had minimum interference with the living spaces. It provided the requisite strength,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
190 A. Ghosh et al.
without significantly impacting the stiffness, which would have caused a change in
the distribution of the lateral forces and a consequent need to retrofit other elements
as well. It is noteworthy that during the entire operation of retrofitting, the building
remained occupied.
10 Fire Performance of FRP
It is well recognized that fire is one of the major hazards following an earthquake.
Though the performance of RC structures under elevated temperatures is quite good,
RC structures that have been retrofitted with FRP need to be specially dealt with, as
there are problems with the performance of FRP under fire. Beyond about 200 °C,
there is a substantial loss in both the tensile strength and Young’s modulus of FRP
[29]. Moreover, the bond strength of near-surface mounted FRP system degrades
significantly with increase in temperature, and only 20% strength is retained at 200
°C. Hence, FRP-retrofitted RC members should be properly insulated for fire protec-
tion. The various factors that influence the fire performance of FRP-strengthened RC
structures are the steel-to-FRP reinforcement ratio, load level, fire scenario, insula-
tion scheme, etc. Simple alterations, such as changing the reinforcement ratio, or
location of the FRP bars, can help in achieving higher fire resistance of FRP-RC
members. Though some research has been carried out on the fire performance of
RC structural members retrofitted with FRP [30], more detailed investigations are
required to enhance the performance of FRP-strengthened RC structures subjected
to fire.
11 Conclusions
FRPs are established and effective seismic retrofit materials for reinforced concrete
structures. They possess several favorable properties and can enhance ductility and
strength, without significantly affecting the dynamic property of the structure. Several
retrofit projects that have utilized FRP strengthening techniques have been very
successful, with the retrofitted structures performing as designed under strong exci-
tation. Moreover, the retrofit project with FRP allows the functionality of the project
to be maintained, which is a substantial advantage of this retrofit strategy over other
options, especially in the post-earthquake scenario. Detailed experimental studies
and investigations with actual earthquake scenarios have led to the development of
reliable guidelines for design methodologies, testing methods and construction prac-
tices for FRP to be used by the engineering community. The performance of RC
structures strengthened with FRP under elevated temperatures, as in the outbreak of
a fire in the aftermath of an earthquake, is likely to deteriorate, and requires further
study.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
References
1. IS 13935: 2009 Seismic evaluation, repair and strengthening of masonry buildings–Guidelines

2. Seismic retrofit of buildings, CPWD, IBC in association with IIT Madras. Narosa Publishing
House
3. Nanni A, De Luca A, Zadeh HJ, Reinforced concrete with FRP bars: mechanics and design.
CRC Press
4. Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE) (1999) Recommendation for design and construction
of concrete structures using continuous fibre reinforcing materials. Concr Eng Ser
5. Canadian Standards Association (CSA) (2018) Specification for fibre reinforced polymers.
CAN/CSA S807–10, 2nd edn. Toronto
6. ISIS Canada Design Manual-4-Strengthening Reinforced Concrete Structures with Externally
Bonded Fibre Reinforced Polymer (2001) The Canadian Network of Centres of Excellence on
Intelligent Sensing of Innovative Structures
7. ACI 440.2–17 (2017) Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems
for strengthening concrete structures
8. ACI 440.3R-12 (2012) Guide Test Methods for Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites
for reinforcing or strengthening concrete and masonry structures
9. ACI 440.1R-15 (2015) Guide for the design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP
bars
10. ACI 440.11–22 (2023) Building code requirements for structural concrete reinforced with
Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) bars—code and commentary
11. European Commission (2012) Mandate for amending existing eurocodes and extending the
scope of structural eurocodes. Brussels.
12. Pham H, Al-Mahaidi R (2004) Assessment of available prediction models for the strength of
FRP retrofitted RC beams. Compos Struct 66(1–4):601–610
13. Buyukozturk O, Hearing B (1998) Failure behaviour of precracked concrete beams retrofitted
with FRP. J Compos Constr 2(3), ascelibrary.org
14. Amini Pishro A, Zhang S, Zhang Z, Zhao Y, Pishro MA, Zhang L, Yang Q, Postel V
(2022) Structural behavior of FRP-retrofitted RC beams under combined torsion and bending.
Materials 15(9):1–17
15. Danraka MN, Mahmod HM, Oluwatosin OJ (2017) Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams
using FRP technique: a review. IJESC 7(6):13199–13213
16. Pham H, Al-Mahaidi R (2004) Experimental investigation into flexural retrofitting of reinforced
concrete bridge beams using FRP composites. Compos Struct 66(1–4):617–625
17. Durgadevi S, Karthikeyan S, Lavanya N, Kavitha C ( 2021) A review on retrofitting of reinforced
concrete elements using FRP panel. Mater Today Proc, Part 2 45:1050–1054
18. Havez AA, Al-Mayah A (2023) Flexural strengthening of concrete structures using externally
bonded and unbonded prestressed CFRP laminates—a literature review. J Compos Constr
27(4). https://doi.org/10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4053
19. Mukherjee A, Joshi MV (2002) Seismic retrofitting techniques using fibre composites. Indian
Concr J 76(8):496–502. The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.
20. Mosallam A, Allam K, Salam M (2019) Analytical and numerical modeling of RC beam-
column joints retrofitted with FRP laminates and hybrid composite connectors. Compos Struct
214:486–503
21. Allam K, Mosallam AS, Salam MA (2019) Experimental evaluation of seismic performance
of interior RC beam-column joints strengthened with FRP composites panel. Eng Struct
196:1093–1108
22. Pohoryles DA, Melo J, Rossetto T (2019) Seismic retrofit schemes with FRP for deficient RC
beam-column joints: state-of-the-art review. J Compos Constr 23(4):2–18
23. Bindurani P, Ganesan N, Indira PV (2023) Strengthening of exterior RC moment-resisting
beam-column connections using fibre-reinforced polymers and ferrocement. IJST. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s40996-023-01078-x
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
192 A. Ghosh et al.
24. Surya Prakash S, Alagusundaramoorthy P (2007) Experimental study on masonry wallettes

and shear triplets externally bonded with glass fibre fabric. J Inst Eng (India) 88:24–31
25. Eslami A, Ronagh HR (2013) Effect of FRP wrapping in seismic performance of RC buildings
with and without special detailing–a case study. Compos Part B: Eng 45:1265–1274
26. Lam L, Teng JG (2003) Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined concrete. Constr
Build Mater 17:471–489
27. Lam L, Teng JG (2003) Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined concrete in
rectangular columns. J Reinf Plast Compos 22(2003):1149–1186
28. Witt S, Gilda G (2016) Seismic retrofit with fibre reinforced polymers-using ASCE-41 to
retrofit a multi-story concrete building. Struct Mag
29. Kodur VKR, Naser MZ (2020) Structural fire engineering. McGraw Hill Professional, New
York, p 480
30. Kodur VKR, Bisby LA, Green MF (2007) Preliminary guidance for the design of FRP-
strengthened concrete members exposed to fire. J Fire Prot Eng 17(1):5–26
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Conventional and Emerging Materials
Used in FRP-Concrete Composites
for Earthquake Resistance
Sanchit Gupta and Sandeep Chaudhary
1 Introduction
Fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) has gained significant applications in concrete

composites. A FRP consists of tendons or fibres encased in a polymer matrix or
bonding agent [1]. Different FRPs can be produced by selecting fibres and polymers
of suitable materials. A typical FRP consists of non-metallic fibres, like glass and
carbon fibres. The use of non-metallic fibres makes FRPs non-corrosive, chemically
resistant and magnetically inert [1]. Additionally, non-metallic fibres have a lower
weight than steel, improving FRP’s strength-to-weight ratio [1]. The high strength-
to-weight ratio of FRP is one of the essential properties of earthquake-resistant struc-
tures. Literature shows that frames designed using FRP, due to their lightweight, have
40 and 88.5% lower shear force at the base due to earthquakes than steel and concrete
frames, respectively [2]. The fibres in an FRP are aligned to provide tensile strength
along the fibres and flexibility along other directions; therefore, FRPs are much easier
to install than other steel-based composites. The high corrosion resistance, strength-
to-weight ratio and low maintenance costs of FRP have made them a fitting solution
to design concrete composites, especially for earthquake resistance [3].
FRP concrete composites are structural elements in which FRP act as the rein-
forcing material and transfers part of the stress of concrete. FRP concrete compos-
ites are typically prepared using FRP sheets, FRP reinforcements, FRP tubes or a
combination of them [1, 4–6]. FRP sheets are typically used for strengthening, i.e.,
improving the properties by applying FRP sheets after the construction of struc-
tures [4]. FRP reinforcements are also used as a substitute for conventionally used
S. Gupta · S. Chaudhary (B)

Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Simrol, Indore 453552,
India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
194 S. Gupta and S. Chaudhary
steel reinforcement [1]. Literature shows that FRP can be designed per the desired
geometry to substitute fabricated structural elements [3].
The FRPs can be engineered to have properties as per the desired applications.
These properties are based on the materials used for the development of FRP. For
example, glass fibre-reinforced polymers (GFRP) have higher creep and lower alka-
line resistance than other FRPs [3]. Therefore, GFRP is typically not recommended
for prestressed concrete [3]. A suitable selection of FRP depends on the selection
of materials used to engineer the same. Therefore, the present chapter focuses on
the various conventional and emerging materials used in FRP concrete composites.
The materials used in FRP have been studied in three categories: fibres, polymer
matrix and special materials used for improving earthquake resistance. The overall
discussion will present a better understanding of the various materials used in FRP
and their viability towards earthquake-resistant structures.
2 Fibres Used in FRP
Fibres provide the primary tensile characteristics associated with FRP. Some of the
commonly used materials in FRP are glass fibres (GFRP), carbon fibres (CFRP),
basalt fibres (BFRP) and aramid fibres (AFRP) [3]. In recent years, new fibres have
been identified for their potential in FRP, like polyethylene terephthalate (PET) fibres
and polyethylene naphthalate (PEN) fibres. However, their investigations are limited
in the literature.
2.1 Glass Fibres
Glass fibres are tendons produced with glass as the raw material. Several types
of glass fibres can be used to produce glass fibre-reinforced polymers (GFRP).
The most commonly used type of glass used in GFRP is E-glass [1]. GFRP have
good thermal stability, making them suitable for composite applications. The tensile
strength, compressive strength and modulus of elasticity for E-glass fibres can be as
high as 3400 MPa, 340 MPa and 76 GPa, respectively [1, 7]. The rupture strain of
GFRP (2.97%) is low, as compared to steel (38.0%) [7]. In terms of durability, GFRP
offers better resistance against corrosion [1]. The good mechanical characteristics,
low density (~2.54 g/cm3 ) and improved durability make GFRP a viable substitute
for steel reinforcements [1].
E-glass fibres are commonly referred to as glass fibres only [8]. Other notable
types of glass used in GFRP are known by different notations, i.e., A, AE, C, D,
Advantex, ECR, AR, R, S, and T [8–10]. The properties and advantages of using
some of the other glass fibres can be:
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Conventional and Emerging Materials Used in FRP-Concrete … 195
. C-glass fibres provide resistance to both acidic and alkaline corrosive environ-
ments [11]. However, their application is limited due to low-strength properties
[11].
. ECR-glass, AR-glass and Advantex are specially designed to have good mechan-
ical characteristics like E-glass fibre but with higher acidic and alkali corrosion
resistance [9]. These fibres can have structural applications with better durability
characteristics. AR-glass and Adnatex are highly alkali-resistant and commonly
used for direct addition in fibre-reinforced concrete [9]. ECR-glass shows better
corrosion resistance in acidic environments [8].
. S-glass has better mechanical properties than E-glass fibres [8]. Their tensile
strength and modulus of elasticity can be as high as 4900 MPa and 87 GPa,
respectively [8]. They are designed by glass with higher silica content [8].
Among the various glass fibres, S-glass can be used for earthquake engineering
applications requiring high mechanical characteristics (or better strength-to-weight
ratio). And other glass types can be used where durability parameters, like corrosion
and alkali-silica reaction, also act on the structure. For example, ECR-glass can be
used in GFRP concrete structures exposed to seawater [9].
2.2 Carbon Fibres
Carbon fibres are fibres prepared with carbon polymer as the primary material.
Mainly, two types of carbon fibres are used based on the raw materials: PAN type and
pitch type [12]. PAN or polyacrylonitrile type carbon fibre have high tensile strength
and elastic modulus, making them highly suitable for carbon fibre-reinforced poly-
mers (CFRP) [12]. Pitch type carbon fibres are typically cheaper but have lower
mechanical properties [12]. Carbon fibres are generally recognized by their elastic
modulus, which can range between 200 and 700 GPa [13]. The tensile strength of
carbon fibres can be more than 3500 MPa (as high as 7000 MPa) for intermediate
elastic modulus (250–350 GPa) [13].
Carbon fibres have high strength, low density and corrosion resistance, making
them widely applicable in CFRP concrete structures [1]. Carbon fibres have high
fatigue resistance and can be used for cyclic loadings, like foundations of heavy
machines and bridges [1]. Although the initial costs for CFRP are higher than steel,
the lower maintenance cost makes up for the difference [1]. Carbon fibres exhibit the
highest tensile strength and best durability characteristics among all conventional
fibres; however, the associated costs are also high. Therefore, it is recommended to
use CRFP in corrosion-resistant structures which require FRP strengthening.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
2.3 Basalt Fibres
Basalt fibres are prepared by melting and drawing basalt rocks. Basalt fibres are cost-
effective with high durability, making them a good solution for basalt fibre-reinforced
polymer (BFRP) concrete composites [1]. Compared to GFRP and CFRP, BFRP
shows higher thermal stability and can sustain exposure temperatures of 600 °C [14].
It should be noted that at high-temperature exposures (above 70 °C), the failure of
FRP depends on the glass transition temperature of the adhesive and polymer matrix.
Therefore, BFRP has no unique application in fire-resistant construction despite
having one of the highest thermal stabilities among various fibres. In terms of alkali
and UV exposure, BFRP performs better than GFRP but shows lower durability than
CFRP [14]. BFRP shows an ultimate tensile strength of up to 1500 MPa, lower than
other conventionally used fibres [14, 15]. Due to this, BFRP has been recommended
for moderate structural strengthening [14]. Some recent studies show that the tensile
strength of basalt fibres can be as high as 5000 MPa, but the application of high-
strength basalt fibre was not observed in the case of FRPs [16, 17].
The primary advantage of basalt fibre is the low cost, carbon emissions and
embodied energy associated with the production of fibres [17]. Considering the
production costs and associated emissions, basalt fibres have the highest cost-to-
benefit ratio among all conventional fibres [1, 18]. Therefore, basalt fibres can
be considered a low-cost and low-carbon option for earthquake-resistant structures
requiring moderate strengthening.
2.4 Aramid Fibres
Aramids are synthetic fibres produced by creating polymer chains of aromatic amide
[19]. Unlike other synthetic fibres, aramid has a higher melting point and tensile
strength [1, 19]. As a result, aramid fibres have substituted most natural and synthetic
fibres in protective clothing [1]. Aramid fibres are also used to produce aramid fibre-
reinforced polymers (AFRP) [19]. AFRP have high abrasion tolerance, low thermal
conductivity and high tensile strength, making them a good solution for surface
applications [1, 19]. However, AFRPs are sensitive to salts, acids and UV light,
limiting their application to low-durability structures [1, 19]. In case of earthquake
resistance, AFRP can be limited to indoor structures with less severe environmental
exposures.
2.5 PET and PEN Fibres
PET fibres are produced by recycling PET bottles [20]. Similarly, PEN fibres are
produced by recycling PEN waste. PET and PEN fibres are more environmentally
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
friendly than conventional fibres as they promote waste upcycling [20]. Among the
two, PET fibres are more abundantly available and cost-effective, while PEN fibres
have better resistance to chemical attacks [21]. Higher chemical resistance also helps
in improving the durability of FRP concrete composites [21].
PET and PEN fibres have a large rupture strain (more than 5%) and show ductile
failure. Furthermore, PET FRP and PEN FRP show a bi-linear stress–strain behaviour
with a yield point of around 1% strain value [20]. The conventional fibres, i.e., glass,
carbon, aramid, and basalt fibres, show a brittle failure with a small rupture strain [20].
As a result, the previously discussed FRPs show brittle failure with small rupture
strains (up to 3%) [20]. In contrast, PET FRP and PEN FRP show large rupture
strains (LRS) and are also termed LRS FRP [20]. The drawback to this large rupture
strain is the relatively low elastic modulus and low ultimate strength [20]. Dai et al.
[20] observed that the ultimate strain for PET FRP, PEN FRP and AFRP were 8.7,
6.3 and 3.2%, respectively. At the same time, the ultimate strength for PET FRP,
PEN FRP and AFRP were 751, 768 and 3732 MPa, respectively [20]. PET FRP
and PEN FRP show higher axial and lateral strain in FRP composite columns [20].
Results reported in the literature show that LRS FRP prepared from PET fibres and
PEN fibres can prevent sudden failure of FRP concrete composites [20]. On account
of ductile failure, the PET fibres and PEN fibres are recommended for FRP with
application in seismic retrofitting of concrete structures [20].
2.6 PA Fibres
PA or polyacetal fibres are prepared by drawing polyoxymethylene or polyacetal

materials [12]. PA fibres can be prepared from virgin and recycled materials and
may also be considered a waste recycling-based solution. PA fibres, similar to PET
fibre and PEN fibre, provide a solution for developing LRS FRP [12]. Compared
with PET fibres and PEN fibres, the PA fibres have higher rupture strain and tensile
strength [12, 22]. Despite the higher toughness of PA fibres, limited experimental
investigations have been carried out on their application as FRP [23]. Iihoshi et al.
[23] demonstrated the application of PA fibres on post-strengthening of concrete
columns under lateral seismic loading. The study shows that FRP prepared with PA
fibres provides a technically superior and cost-effective seismic retrofitting solution
than conventional fibres [23].
2.7 Flax Fibres
Flax is a naturally occurring fibre with relatively high tensile strength compared
to steel [24]. Flax fibre has a higher cellulose content, fibre length and mechanical
properties as compared to various natural fibres [25]. Flax fibre has been demon-
strated for developing a flax FRP [25]. Flax, being a naturally available resource, can
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
further lower the environmental cost of FRP [24]. The major drawback of flax fibre
is its hydrophilic nature, while polymer matrix is hydrophobic [24]. On exposure to
moisture, additional stress is created between the fibre and polymer matrix, causing
accelerated degradation of FRP [24]. Furthermore, flax fibres are also weak against
exposure to heat, UV rays and chemicals [24]. In its present state, flax FRP shows
poor durability characteristics, which limits its field application [24].
Like flax fibres, other natural fibres, like jute, have also been explored for FRP
development [26]. However, such investigations are limited, and their performance is
weaker than flax fibres [26]. Therefore, other natural fibres have not been discussed
separately in the chapter.
2.8 Overview
A comparison between the properties of different fibres has been shown in Table 1.
It can be observed from the table that conventional fibres, i.e., glass fibre, carbon
fibre, basalt fibre and aramid fibre, have high tensile strength. High tensile strength
helps in improving the strength of FRP concrete composites. The primary drawback
of conventional fibres is the low rupture strain and associated brittle failure, which
can be overcome through emerging fibres [27]. It can be observed that PET fibre,
PEN fibre and PA fibre have higher rupture strains than other fibres. Due to higher
rupture strains, PET, PEN, and PA fibre can be used to make LRS FRP concrete
composites. LRS FRP concrete composites have better ductility and are more suitable
for earthquake resistance [27]. Among the three, PA fibres also show high tensile
strength, making them suitable for strengthening and ductility improvement.
It should be kept in mind that low elasticity and high rupture strain improve
earthquake resistance for FRP concrete composites where bonding is ensured. Ko
Table 1 Properties of various fibres used in FRP [12, 22, 24]

Fibre Sub-type Tensile strength Modulus of Rupture strain Density (g/cm3 )
(MPa) elasticity (GPa) (%)
Glass E-glass 1700–3400 72 2.4 2.6
S-glass 2500–4600 87 2.9 2.5
Carbon PAN 2300–3790 242–370 0.6–1.6 1.8–1.9
Pitch 1100–3210 41–940 0.4–2.8 1.6–2.2
Basalt – 1000–1560 50 3.0–1.0 2.2
Aramid – 2060–2350 79–118 1.8–3.0 1.4–1.5
PET – 740 10 7.0–8.7 1.4
PEN – 790 15 5.0–6.3 1.4
PA – 1760 40 6.0–9.0 1.4
Flax – 300–1000 20–100 – 1.2–1.3
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
and Sato observed the issue of debonding in FRP concrete composites where FRP
sheets are transferring the loads [28]. The study showed that FRP sheets with higher
elastic modulus could resist more loads before debonding [28]. Therefore, in FRP
concrete structures where adequate bonding is not possible, conventional FRP with
a high modulus of elasticity should be used for earthquake resistance.
3 Matrix Used in FRP
Matrix holds the fibres together and can bond FRP to the concrete surface. The
mechanical properties of FRP are less affected by the matrix than the fibres. Matrix
plays a more important role during the load transferring across the fibres.
Resins are primarily used as polymer matrix in the FRPs [12]. Resins can be made
from either thermosetting or thermoplastic materials [12]. In the case of FRP, ther-
mosetting resins are used for better mechanical properties and thermal stability [12].
Thermosetting resins form irreversible cross-linking polymer chains after curing and
cannot be recycled or remoulded [12]. Literature shows that three types of thermoset-
ting resins are commonly used as polymer matrix in FRPs, i.e., epoxy, vinyl ester and
polyester [12]. At the same time, resins like phenolic resin and polyurethane (PU)
resin have started gaining attention. Table 2 shows the properties of different ther-
mosetting resins used in FRP. Other than the resins listed in Table 2, bismaleimide
(BMI) resin and cyanoacrylate resin can also be used for developing FRPs; however,
their application has not been explored in the case of concrete.
3.1 Epoxy Resin
Epoxy is one of the most commonly used polymer matrix in FRPs [18]. Epoxy matrix
is prepared by mixing epoxy resin and hardener in desired proportions [18]. Epoxy
resins show relatively higher strength, rupture strain, elasticity and thermal stability
Table 2 Properties of various resins used in FRP [12, 29, 30]

Matrix Density (g/ Glass Tensile Modulus of Rupture strain
cm3 ) transition strength elasticity (%)
temperature (MPa) (GPa)
(°C)
Epoxy 1.2–1.3 100–270 60–80 2.0–4.0 1.0–8.0
Polyester 1.2–1.3 70–120 20–70 2.0–3.0 1.0–5.0
Vinyl ester 1.1–1.2 102–105 68–82 3.5 3.0–4.0
Phenolic 1.0–1.3 260 30–50 3.6 1.8–2.5
Polyurethane 1.1 77–116 11–18 0.3–1.1 6.0–10.0
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
[12]. The primary drawback of using an epoxy matrix is the high material cost [12].
The properties of the epoxy resin can be engineered (by adjusting the proportion of
epoxy resin) to provide a matrix with desired characteristics. It should be noted that
epoxy resin can be designed for large rupture strains, making them highly suitable
for LRS FRP [12].
3.2 Polyester Resin
Polyester resins are ambient cured unsaturated polyesters [12]. They have a relatively
lower cost and are easy to manufacture among all thermosetting resins [12]. Their
properties are slightly inferior to epoxy resins in terms of mechanical characteristics.
The major drawback of polyester resins is the low glass transition temperature (70–
120 °C) [12]. In the given temperature range, polyester resins can be damaged by
steam. The low glass transition temperature lowers the thermal stability and mechan-
ical performance of FRP concrete composites [31]. As a result, it is recommended
to limit the application of polyester resins in FRP composites without exposure to
elevation in temperature. If polyester resins are used, adequate thermal insulation
should be provided.
3.3 Vinyl Ester Resin
Vinyl ester resins are a mid-way solution of epoxy and polyester resins [12]. Vinyl
ester consists of unsaturated esters of epoxy resins, providing the resin with good
mechanical properties and ease of processing [12, 32]. Vinyl ester resins have better
thermal stability than polyester resins [12]. The addition of flame retarders can further
improve the thermal stability of vinyl ester resin [32]. Vinyl ester resins also show
better resistance against alkaline attack than polyester resin and can help protect
encased fibres [9]. The major drawback of vinyl ester resin is the low rupture strain,
making it ineffective in LRS FRP. In earthquake-resistant structures, other than LRS
FRP, vinyl ester resin provides a better solution due to relatively lower cost, good
mechanical properties and satisfactory thermal stability.
3.4 Phenolic Resin
Phenolic resins show the best thermal stability among the discussed resins [33].
They have high glass transition temperature and low flammability [12, 33]. The
major drawback associated with phenolic resin is the high viscosity of the material,
making it challenging to produce FRP [12]. Alternatively, phenolic resins can be
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
used as a thermal insulation material on the external surface of FRPs. Functionally

layered FRP of such kind still requires further investigation.
3.5 Polyurethane Resin
Polyurethane resin provides an alternative to polyester resin. Polyurethane resin

is a fast-curing, low-cost, low shrinkage and easy-to-apply polymer [34, 35].
Polyurethane resin shows low glass transition temperature, making it susceptible to
damage from exposure temperatures [34]. The key difference of polyurethane resin
is its large rupture strain and relatively lower costs [35]. In the future, polyurethane
resin can be applied in LRS FRP, but the same was not observed in the available
literature.
4 Other Materials Used in FRP Concrete Composites
4.1 Shape Memory Alloys
Shape memory alloy, or SMA, has a high potential in earthquake-resistant FRP

composites, as it can provide active confinement during earthquakes and help post-
earthquake damage repairs [18, 36, 37]. SMA is a special material class that regains its
original shape on the application of heat by phase transformations [18, 37]. Han et al.
[18] demonstrated the application of iron-based SMA coupled with FRP on concrete
columns. The SMA was pre-stretched and anchored around concrete columns [18].
On application of heat, the SMA regains its original shape and generates an active
confining stress on the columns [18]. Active confinement acts as a prestressing force
and improves load-bearing capacity at smaller strain values [18, 37]. A jacket of FRP
coupled with SMA provides passive confining stress [18, 37]. Passive confinement
improves load-bearing capacity at higher strain values [18, 37]. The combination
of active and passive confinement provided improved performance of FRP concrete
composite columns [18, 37]. Literature shows that SMA can be an emergency repair
solution for damaged concrete [18, 37].
Among SMA, a special material class exists called superelastic alloys [38].
Superelast alloys, or SA, show a characteristic flag-like stress–strain curve [36, 38].
During the application of strain, SA initially shows elastic deformation followed
by plastic deformation [36, 38]. On removing strain, SA shows both elastic and
plastic recovery without requiring the application of heat [36, 38]. SA are highly
suitable for applications which require large recoverable deformations [38]. Zafar
and Andrawes [36] used the SA as fibres for developing FRP reinforcing bars and
explored their potential for earthquake resistance. As compared to conventional steel
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
bars, SA-based FRP bars can reduce the inter-story drift and improve the earthquake
resistance of structures, especially in case of aftershocks [36].
4.2 FRP Anchors
Anchors are used to join FRP sheets with concrete structures during jacketing [39,
40]. Anchors are typically employed when sufficient concrete surface is not available
to bond FRP sheets using adhesives [40, 41]. Unlike conventional anchors, FRP
anchors are prepared using FRP of the same material type [39, 41]. They are prepared
by bundling fibres in the form of a long rope of cylinder, which is then partly cured
using bonding agents [40, 41]. The bonded fibres are then inserted in concrete and
used as anchor dowels [40, 41]. The uncured part of the fibres is spread in a fan-like
formation and bonded on the FRP sheets or concrete surface using the curing agent
[40, 41]. FRP anchors can prevent debonding failure in FRP concrete composites
[39–41].
4.3 Thermal Insulation
FRP sheets, while strengthening most mechanical properties, have little impact on
the fire performance of concrete structures [31, 42]. The lack of impact on fire perfor-
mance results from the decomposition of adhesive between FRP and concrete [31,
42]. On exposure to temperatures above the glass transition temperature (Tg ) the
adhesive loses its bond properties [31]. The loss in bond properties results in delam-
ination of FRP from concrete, making them ineffective at higher temperatures [31].
The glass transition temperature for adhesives can be as low as 70 °C, which limits
their application in high-temperature environments like kitchens. As the probability
of fire increases during an earthquake, FRP concrete composites can become ineffec-
tive during structural fires. This challenge can be resolved through thermal insulation
[31, 42].
Thermal insulation can be applied on the exposed surface of FRP sheets to delay
the temperature rise. The delay in temperature rise increases the time after which
adhesives attain the glass transition temperature. The delay in failure of FRP improves
the fire protection of the FRP concrete composites [31]. The time of attaining glass
transition temperature depends on several factors, including exposure temperature,
insulation material type and thickness [31, 42]. Thermal insulation can be designed to
ensure a minimum time duration before the adhesives start to fail [31, 42]. Literature
shows that thermal insulation can improve the mechanical properties of FRP against
exposure temperatures as high as 400 °C [42]. Thermal insulation can also protect
against post-earthquake fire and provide added safety [43].
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
5 Summary
FRP concrete is a better substitute for steel-reinforced concrete or steel–concrete

composite in earthquake-resistant structures due to advantages like higher strength-
to-weight ratio and corrosion resistance. FRP concrete composites primarily consist
of two essential materials, i.e., fibres and polymer matrix. Fibres govern the mechan-
ical behaviour of FRP and have been extensively investigated in the literature.
Conventional fibres, i.e., glass fibre, carbon fibre, basalt fibre and aramid fibre, have
high tensile strength and modulus of elasticity. Higher mechanical strength favours
the application of conventional fibres to improve the strength of concrete, which helps
improve earthquake resistance. The emerging fibres, i.e., PET fibres, PEN fibres and
PA fibres, have large rupture strain and low modulus of elasticity. The emerging
fibres can be used for developing LRS FRP, which improves the ductility of concrete
and is highly effective in earthquake resistance.
Polymer matrix have a more dominant role in the stability of FRP and load
transfer across fibres. Epoxy resin provides large rupture strain, making it highly
suitable for LRS FRP. On the other hand, vinyl ester resin can provide a viable
solution for most engineering applications. In addition to the two primary materials,
several new materials have emerged for improving the overall performance of FRP
concrete composites, like SMA, FRP anchors and thermal insulators. These mate-
rials compensate for the drawbacks of FRP concrete composites and improve their
performance as earthquake-resistant structures. Understanding various materials will
help suitably identify the materials and develop the desired FRP concrete composite
for earthquake-resistant structures.
References
1. Rafieizonooz M, Kim J-HJ, Varaee H, Nam Y, Khankhaje E (2023) Testing methods and design
specifications for FRP-prestressed concrete members: a review of current practices and case
studies. J Build Eng 73:106723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106723
2. Mincigrucci L, Civera M, Lenticchia E, Ceravolo R, Rosano M, Russo S (2023) Comparative
structural analysis of GFRP, reinforced concrete, and steel frames under seismic loads. Materials
(Basel) 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/MA16144908
3. Zou Y, Yu K, Heng J, Zhang Z, Peng H, Wu C, Wang X (2023) Feasibility study of new GFRP
grid web—concrete composite beam. Compos Struct 305:116527. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
COMPSTRUCT.2022.116527
4. Turkowski P, Łukomski M, Sulik P, Roszkowski P (2017) Fire resistance of CFRP-strengthened
reinforced concrete beams under various load levels. Procedia Eng 172:1176–1183. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.PROENG.2017.02.137
5. Shi X, Guo T, Song L, Yang J (2023) Cyclic load tests and finite element modeling of self-
centering hollow-core FRP-concrete-steel bridge columns. Alexandria Eng J 70:301–314.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEJ.2023.03.001
6. Xiao Y (2004) Strengthening of concrete columns applications of Frp composites. 7:335–344
7. Boru E (2023) Torsional strengthening of steel I beams with different GFRP configurations.
Structures 56:104859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2023.07.049
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
8. Dwight DW, Begum S (2017) Glass fiber reinforcements. Compr Compos Mater II(1):243–268.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803581-8.03812-1
9. Benmokrane B, Wang P, Ton-That TM, Rahman H, Robert J-F (2002) Durability of glass fiber-
reinforced polymer reinforcing bars in concrete environment. J Compos Constr 6:143–153.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1090-0268(2002)6:3(143)
10. Rubino F, Nisticò A. Tucci F, Carlone P (2020) Marine application of fiber reinforced
composites: a review. J Mar Sci Eng 8:26. https://doi.org/10.3390/JMSE8010026
11. Safwat EM, Khater AGA, Abd-Elsatar AG, Khater GA (2021) Glass fiber-reinforced
composites in dentistry. Bull Natl Res Cent 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-021-00650-7
12. Ye YY, Da Liang S, Feng P, Zeng JJ (2021) Recyclable LRS FRP composites for engineering
structures: current status and future opportunities. Compos Part B Eng 212. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.compositesb.2021.108689
13. Mirdehghan SA (2021) Fibrous polymeric composites. Eng Polym Fibrous Mater 1–58. https://
doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824381-7.00012-3
14. Sim J, Park C, Moon DY (2005) Characteristics of basalt fiber as a strengthening material for
concrete structures. Compos Part B Eng 36:504–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.
2005.02.002
15. Mohamed OA, Al Hawat W, Keshawarz M (2021) Durability and mechanical properties
of concrete reinforced with basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (Bfrp) bars: towards sustainable
infrastructure. Polymers (Basel) 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091402
16. AL-Kharabsheh BN, Arbili MM, Majdi A, Alogla SM, Hakamy A, Ahmad J, Deifalla AF
(2022) Basalt fibers reinforced concrete: strength and failure modes. Materials (Basel) 15.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15207350
17. Al-Rousan ET, Khalid HR, Rahman MK (2023) Fresh, mechanical, and durability properties
of basalt fiber-reinforced concrete (BFRC): a review. Dev Built Environ 14:100155. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2023.100155
18. Han T, Dong Z, Zhu H, Wu G, Zhao X (2023) Compression behavior of concrete columns
combinedly confined by FRP externally wrapped Fe-SMA strips. Eng Struct 294:116754.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2023.116754
19. Dharmavarapu P, Sreekara SR (2022) Aramid fibre as potential reinforcement for polymer
matrix composites: a review. Emergent Mater 5:1561–1578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42247-
021-00246-x
20. Dai J-G, Bai Y-L, Teng JG (2011) Behavior and modeling of concrete confined with FRP
composites of large deformability. J Compos Constr 15:963–973. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asc
e)cc.1943-5614.0000230
21. Zeng JJ, Zhuge Y, Da Liang S, Bai YL, Liao JJ, Zhang L (2022) Durability assessment
of PEN/PET FRP composites based on accelerated aging in alkaline solution/seawater with
different temperatures. Constr Build Mater 327:126992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.
2022.126992
22. Ye YY, Zeng JJ, Li PL (2022) A state-of-the-art review of FRP-Confined Steel-Reinforced
Concrete (FCSRC) structural members. Polymers (Basel) 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/POL
YM14040677
23. Iihoshi C, Fukuyama H, Matsumoto Y, Abe S (1999) Strengthening effect of reinforced concrete
elements with polyacetal fiber sheets (1999)
24. Chen C, Li X, Li C, Zhou Y, Sui L (2022) Optimized flax FRP stirrup in reinforced concrete
beam: material property and shear performance. Compos Struct 302:116219. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116219
25. Liu Z, Wang H, Yang L, Du J (2022) Research on mechanical properties and durability of flax/
glass fiber bio-hybrid FRP composites laminates. Compos Struct 290:115566. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.115566
26. Chen C, Yang Y, Yu J, Yu J, Tan H, Sui L, Zhou Y (2020) Eco-friendly and mechanically
reliable alternative to synthetic FRP in externally bonded strengthening of RC beams: natural
FRP. Compos Struct 241:112081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112081
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
27. Liu X, Li Y (2018) Experimental study of seismic behavior of partially corrosion-damaged rein-
forced concrete columns strengthened with FRP composites with large deformability. Constr
Build Mater 191:1071–1081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.10.072
28. Ko H, Sato Y (2008) Bond stress—slip relationship between FRP sheet. J Compos Constr
11:419–426. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11
29. Zamri FA, Primus WC, Shaari AH, Sinin AE (2019) Technical note: Effects of polyurethane
resin on the physical and mechanical properties of wood fiber/Palm kernel shell composite
boards. Wood Fiber Sci 51:448–454. https://doi.org/10.22382/wfs-2019-043
30. Sales FCP, Ariati RM, Noronha VT, da Costa RRC, Ribeiro JE (2021) PU tensile tests: conven-
tional and digital image correlation analysis. Procedia Struct Integr 37:389–396. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.prostr.2022.01.100
31. Dong K, Hu K, Gao W (2016) Fire behavior of full-scale CFRP-strengthened RC beams
protected with different insulation systems. J Asian Archit Build Eng 15:581–588. https://doi.
org/10.3130/jaabe.15.581
32. Zhang X, Wu J, Geng Z, Qin Z, Pan YT, Zhang W, Yang R (2023) Effect of diluent on
the properties of intrinsically flame-retardant vinyl ester resins and their fiberglass-reinforced
composites. Compos Commun 37:101441. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COCO.2022.101441
33. Liu TQ, Wang R, Zhen S, Feng P (2023) A binary resin system of epoxy and phenol-
formaldehyde for improving the thermo-mechanical behavior of FRP composites. Constr Build
Mater 389:131790. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2023.131790
34. Al-Lebban Y (2017) Polyurethane fiber reinforced polymer strengthening of shear deficient
reinforced concrete beams. College Eng Comput Sci. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/5670.
Accessed 13 Sept 2023
35. Huang S, Bachtiar EV, Yan L, Kasal B (2022) Bond behaviour and thermal stability of flax/
glass hybrid fibre reinforced polymer–timber structures connected by polyurethane. Constr
Build Mater 322:126456. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2022.126456
36. Zafar A, Andrawes B (2015) Seismic behavior of SMA–FRP reinforced concrete frames under
sequential seismic hazard. Eng Struct 98:163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.
2015.03.045
37. Suhail R, Amato G, McCrum DP (2020) Active and passive confinement of shape modified low
strength concrete columns using SMA and FRP systems. Compos Struct 251:112649. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUCT.2020.112649
38. Tsuchiya K (2011) Mechanisms and properties of shape memory effect and superelasticity in
alloys and other materials: a practical guide. Woodhead Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.
1533/9780857092625.1.3
39. Dong K, Gao Y, Yang S, Yang Z, Jiang J (2023) Experimental investigation and analytical
prediction on bond behaviour of CFRP-to-concrete interface with FRP anchors. Case Stud
Constr Mater 19:e02510. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CSCM.2023.E02510
40. Khorasani M, Muciaccia G, Consiglio AN, Mostofinejad D (2023) Evaluating the behavior
and bond properties of FRP spike anchors under confined conditions and elevated temperature.
Compos Struct 322:117407. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUCT.2023.117407
41. Li Z, del Rey Castillo E, Henry RS, Thompson A (2023) Axial compression testing of
concrete prisms confined by FRP spike anchors and estimation of failure modes. Compos
Struct 322:117403. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUCT.2023.117403
42. Altunişik AC, Akbulut YE, Adanur S, Kaya A, Günaydin M, Mostofi S, Mosallam A (2023)
Evaluating the high-temperature endurance of FRP-strengthened concrete using an innovative
insulation system: experimental investigation. J Build Eng 73:106444. https://doi.org/10.1016/
J.JOBE.2023.106444
43. Risco GV, Zania V, Giuliani L (2023) Numerical assessment of post-earthquake fire response
of steel buildings. Saf Sci 157:105921. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SSCI.2022.105921
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Retrofitting of RC Structures Using FRP
Techniques—Case Studies
Mangesh V. Joshi and S. V. Vivek
Abstract Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) based strengthening and retrofitting

methods have gained importance even in developing countries such as India, with
the advent of professionally managed and technically sound contracting compa-
nies. Numerous advantages of FRP, such as fast and clean application, exceptional
tensile strength, free of corrosion, negligible deadload addition, etc. are being capi-
talized while staying within the limits of safety by understanding the limitations of
the same. The author has completed over 2,500 retrofitting projects on reinforced
cement concrete (RCC) structures in professional capacity in India and abroad, from
industrial and commercial structures to bridges, dams and heritage buildings. Most of
these projects required major utilization of FRP, in the form of FRP rods, laminates,
wraps, anchors, NSM applications, crack-stitch and fiber reinforced cementitious
matrix (FRCM) hot-wrap. In this chapter we shall discuss some of these projects as
case studies and get an introduction into some of its design concepts and practical
aspects.
Keywords Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) · Retrofitting of RC structures ·

Bridge repair · Prestressed FRP laminates · Carbon laminates · CFRP wrapping
1 Introduction
FIB Bulletin 14 by European Committee for Concrete published in 2001 stated

that the issue of upgrading the existing civil engineering infrastructure has been
of great importance [1] for over the previous 10 years, i.e., from at-least the early
M. V. Joshi (B)
Sanrachana Structural Strengthening Pvt. Ltd., Harinivas Circle, Thane West, Thane 400602,
Maharashtra, India
S. V. Vivek
Structural Design Team, Sanrachana Structural Strengthening Pvt. Ltd., Harinivas Circle, Thane
West, Thane 400602, Maharashtra, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
208 M. V. Joshi and S. V. Vivek
1990s. Several reasons such as change in use of the existing structures, building addi-
tional floors on them, increased axle loads of design vehicles of bridges, changes in
the design guidelines such as ductile detailing for earthquake resistance, mistakes
committed in design and in construction, etc. have been identified as the common
causes for this surge in demand for structural retrofitting [2]. Nearly thirty years
later, among many techniques in practice in India and abroad, FRP based solutions
appears to have gained popularity due to their versatility, ease of application and
instant strength contribution as opposed to traditional concrete based techniques.
The American Concrete Institute ACI has recognized this in their 2017 publica-
tion of FRP retrofitting guidelines [3] by naming FRP a viable option for repair
and retrofitting, highlighting advantages such as light-weight, non-corroding nature
and high tensile strength. Even in areas where it is hard to implement traditional
strengthening measures, thin profiles of FRP may help achieve desired results.
Due to the extent of distress or design deficiency, several RCC bridges in India
which were constructed decades ago have been demolished. The author has come
across road bridges in dry areas of Gujarat and Rajasthan which have lost significant
flexural and shear strength in less that 5 years of construction, due to corrosion and
poor construction practices. It is worthwhile noting that as of 2009, roughly 15% of
all the 1,47,523 bridges on Indian rail network were 80–100 years old [4]. While
addition of deadload and dynamic loads due to placing of concrete for jacketing may
be risky for aged and dilapidated structures, the light-weight FRP based solutions
seem appropriate, after performing structural repairs and satisfying the minimum
prerequisites set forth by design guidelines such as ACI-440-2R-17. Century old
bridges such as the Chitpore bridge in Kolkata, India has been retrofitted using FRP
based techniques in similar manner (Fig. 1).
It is well known that FRP could be used to impart strength and ductility to a
column through lateral confinement. As opposed to RCC jacketing, FRP confinement
does not increase the stiffness of the column. Through parametric modelling of
a symmetric RC framed multi-storey building with identical columns supporting
uniform symmetric static loading with 8 different cases of RC jacketed columns
(Fig. 2), it was found that RC jacketed columns attract larger loads through it even
when self-weight of the jacket is ignored (Table 1), because of their increased stiffness
[5]. Thereby the other structural members connected to the RCC jacketed column
such as beams, slabs and foundation, may be subjected to increased shear forces,
bending moment and axial loads.
This effect may be even more significant when considering rapidly varying and
stress-reversing loads such as seismic forces. Hence even for piers of bridges in
seismic zone 5 of India (zone with the highest risk of intense seismic activity) where
insufficient ties were provided, FRP based solutions have been used to compensate
the design deficiency in place of RC jacketing and thereby enabling the structure to
achieve the standards laid down by IRC and IS codes without impacting the behaviour
of the superstructure or foundation. A case study of such a bridge in Assam has been
discussed later in this chapter.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Retrofitting of RC Structures Using FRP Techniques—Case Studies 209
Fig. 1 Before and after structural repairs and FRP based retrofitting measures were performed on
100-year-old Chitpore bridge in Kolkata
2 Current Scenario of Retrofitting in India
The trend in the industry for retrofitting (especially seismic retrofitting) in India
as of early 2020s is as follows. The asset owner or the asset maintenance head,
seeks advice from a structural consultant upon observation of visible distresses,
perceivable serviceability concerns or when revisions occur in compliance standards.
This may also be the case when permissions are granted for increasing the floor
area of an existing building by construction of additional storeys. In either case,
consultant proceeds to analyse the structural model using commercially available
analysis software with or without FEM. As per latest strength parameters obtained
from non-destructive testing (NDT), the model is modified and accordingly it is
determined whether the structure needs any structural intervention or not.
The existing and required cross-sectional properties of each member can be tabu-
lated through this analysis, in terms of increased tension steel area, stirrup area, stirrup
spacing, total sectional area and grade of concrete. Otherwise, the factored bending
moment, shear force and axial force that the existing member shall be made capable
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 2 Structural model of multi-storey portal framed RCC structure, with loading condition. The
8 different cases of RC jacketing of columns are shown, jacketed columns in red
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Table 1 Reaction forces obtained at each foundation in kN for different jacketing cases and control
(no jacketing) when all self-weights including that of RC jacket were ignored. Reaction load at
footing no. 23 is highlighted and colour contoured, indicating highest (yellow) and lowest (green)
reactions
Set 1 Footings
Case No: Original CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 3 CASE 4 CASE 5 CASE 6 CASE 7 CASE 8
Footing No:
11 59.6 56.9 56.8 57.0 59.7 59.7 59.7 59.7 59.8
12 107.1 106.1 102.6 102.9 106.7 106.2 106.2 105.9 105.6
13 107.1 106.1 102.6 102.9 105.4 103.7 103.0 102.6 102.4
14 59.6 56.9 56.8 57.0 59.2 58.8 58.8 58.5 58.3
Set 2 Footings
Footing No:
21 113.8 115.5 117.4 114.2 114.1 114.3 114.5 114.4 114.5
22 204.8 213.3 216.4 216.4 200.2 197.1 196.0 195.0 193.7
23 204.8 213.3 216.4 211.3 218.9 229.1 232.0 235.6 239.4
24 113.8 115.5 117.4 114.2 109.8 107.1 106.5 105.5 104.7
Set 3 Footings
Footing No:
31 116.3 113.3 113.1 116.9 116.3 116.3 116.4 116.4 116.4
32 208.9 204.2 203.9 215.8 208.4 207.9 207.9 207.6 207.4
33 208.9 204.2 203.9 215.8 206.7 205.2 204.4 204.2 203.6
34 116.3 113.3 113.1 116.9 115.4 115.4 115.3 115.1 114.9
of handling by retrofitting, is tabulated. This data is sent to retrofitting consultants,

who design the optimal solution based on the nature and condition of the structure,
nature of loads, percentage increase in strength required, desired extension in life
expectancy of the structure, environmental exposure conditions, type of retrofit mate-
rials to be used, etc. Although this process exempts the retrofitting consultant from
performing structural analysis and bearing the associated liability, the retrofitting
consultant must make sure that their optimised solution equates to the requirements
adjudged by the structural consultant, and also make sure that it is practically (and
financially) feasible to implement the same. At times, the retrofitting consultant by
themselves develop the structural model through site visit, reinforcement scan data,
NDT data and assumptions.
The calculated strength and serviceability parameters of a retrofitted section may
be equal to or better than that of the consultant’s recommendation. However, the
performance of a retrofitted section in reality is highly reliant on the workmanship
of the retrofitting applicator. The novelty of structural retrofitting and its specialised
nature implies that the applicator skills are a very critical criteria in achieving desired
results. A wide variety of retrofitting products are also getting applied in practice.
Accordingly, the true margin of safety in a retrofit design is heavily dependent on the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
exposure that the applicator has, in installation of the given product. It becomes imper-
ative that retrofitting consultants have their own well-trained execution team, whose
skills are constantly updated as and when new products and application methods are
launched in the industry.
3 Prerequisites for Using FRP Based Solution
Several structural consultants prescribe FRP-wrapping as a blanket solution for struc-

tural strengthening in RCC. In Rashtrapati bhavan, which is a heritage structure that
serves as the office and residence of the President of India, a dilapidated embel-
lished lime-concrete chajja (sun-shade) of the length of 1,200 m constructed about
100 years ago needed repair and strengthening. By conducting a detailed condition
assessment, the most appropriate solution was identified as recasting with structural
lightweight concrete with cathodic protection.
This project was later recognized by American Concrete Institute (ACI) India
Chapter as the best retrofitting project in 2022 at national level. In this project, an
FRP based solution could not be modelled or proposed as the pre-requisites laid
down by ACI were not met. ACI-440-2R-17, one of the most commonly used FRP
retrofitting code of practice in India, states that the substrate, including all bond
surfaces between repaired areas and the original concrete, should have sufficient
direct tensile and shear strength to transfer force to the FRP system. For bond-critical
applications, the tensile strength should be at least 200 psi (1.4 MPa), determined
by using pull-off adhesion test. Bond critical and contact critical applications are
discussed later in this chapter. The code goes on to say that “FRP systems should not
be used when the concrete substrate has a compressive strength fc ’ less than 2500 psi
(17 MPa)”. It must be noted that the ACI code was meant for practice in USA, where
strength of concrete is measured in cylinder strength. An equivalent cube strength
(fck value) is estimated by increasing the cylinder strength by a factor of 0.8, i.e.,
minimum cube compressive strength shall be 21 MPa.
In addition to the minimum concrete grade, there are some prerequisites laid down
by ACI-440-2R-17 which are called the strengthening limits of the RC members.
These measures tend to preserve the structure against the possibility of a collapse,
in case the FRP incorporated into an RC structure for strengthening purpose gets
damaged by vandalism, fire or debonding activities such as nailing, hammering, etc.
Equation 9.2 in ACI-440-2R-17 stipulates that, the existing strength of the member,
when reduced by the factor φ shall be more than the sum of 1.1 times new deadload
and 0.75 times new live load. Since deadload can be relatively accurately assessed,
the factor of 1.1 is used. The statistical mean of yearly average live load factor as
per ASCE is 0.5, thereby to exceed this, 0.75 is used by ACI. However, in case the
design live load acting on the member has a high likelihood of being present for a
sustained period of time, then instead of 0.75, the live load factor used shall be 1.0 in
the equation. Φ can be obtained from ACI 318, based on strain in tensile steel. This
factor ensures that brittle sections have higher factor of safety than ductile sections.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Strengthening solution using FRP may affect the fire-rating requirement of the
structure since at the glass-transition temperature Tg , the mechanical and bond prop-
erties get depleted. The resin used in the FRP thereby becomes the weakest link in
case of fire. The code says that the Tg of commercially available ambient temperature-
cured FRP systems typically ranges from 60 to 82 °C. In practice, to comply with the
fire-rating norms of RCC structures, the FRP is either protected with a layer of fire-
resistant mortar (typically in buildings) or shall be encased within micro-concrete
jacketing (typically in bridges, especially in areas where impacts are anticipated,
such as in the submerged piers in Assam bridge project shown in Fig. 3).
In RCC structures where constant exposure to sun-light is expected such as in
exposed faces of road bridges, the applied FRP shall be protected from UV rays
of the sunlight using specialized UV-protection coatings. The love-grove flyover in
Worli, Mumbai is a good example (Fig. 4). In areas where extreme fire-protection is
required, the chance of fire in itself can be eliminated by totally submerging the FRP-
applied portion in sand, wherever possible such as in the case of structural retrofitting
of fire-damaged hydrocarbon storage tanks in Dhamra, India (discussed as case study
later). More than 180 circular c/s columns supporting a large hydrocarbon tank were
repaired at first and then strengthened using CFRP wrapping, followed by cement
plastering over the FRP layer. The entire space between the ground level and soffit
of the tank was then filled with sand so that in no case shall a fire event in its close
vicinity affect the polymers in the FRP.
ACI has put in place a minimum strength criterion based on strength reduction
of the structure during fire, as exposure to fire reduces the strength of both steel and
concrete. It says, that the resistance of a structural member to load, with the factored
concrete and steel strengths and without FRP contribution, can be compared to the
Fig. 3 Water from the melted snow and the rain, combines to reach high flood water levels, causing
complete submergence of piers, exposing them to impact from floating bodies such as uprooted
trees
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 4 Love Grove flyover in Mumbai, India showing carbon laminates exposed to direct sunlight,
protected by UV resistant coating
load demand on the member in the event of a fire, to ensure that a strengthened
member passes the fire-rating load. ACI 440-2R-17 can be used to check that this
condition is met. Fire would majorly affect the epoxy-based compounds that form
the matrix phase of an FRP or the saturant/adhesive used to bond the FRP to the
substrate. However, since the FRP is of small thickness and is bonded closely to the
concrete, the effects may be different from that of exposing a piece of CFRP laminate
to fire. Section 9.2.1 of ACI 440-2R-17 states: “Although the FRP system itself is
significantly affected by exposure to elevated temperature, a combination of the FRP
system with an existing concrete structure may still have an adequate fire resistance”.
Also, when fire-protection systems are applied on the installed FRP, they are applied
so that they shield most of the member and not just the FRP. This may help reduce
the extent of loss of strength of the embedded rebar and concrete due to fire as well.
The equation 9.2.1a in ACI 440-2R-17 essentially says that the reduced capacity of
the member (reduced due to fire) shall be sufficient to support 1.0 X new dead load
+1.0 X new live load.
In light of these pre-requisites of ACI, it is generally recommended to use FRP as
a secondary reinforcement in strengthening schemes. The code itself says “FRP
strengthening systems use FRP composite materials as supplemental externally-
bonded or near-surface mounted reinforcement”. If the factor of safety incorporated
in original RCC design has been depleted by flaws in design/detailing/execution or
by external factors such as floods, fire or earthquake, it is wiser to use traditional
retrofit materials as primary strength providers and use FRP to supplement them.
The case study of Ambet river bridge discussed later, is a good example.
The extent of deterioration of the hammerhead portion (the 12–16 m long RCC box
sections that transfer the load of the two spans onto the pier) in Ambet river bridge was
too high due to corrosion, carbonation and excessive reduction of concrete quality.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
After improving the microstructure of the concrete using low-viscosity monomer

application through pressure grouting followed by brush application of migratory
corrosion inhibitor, additional reinforcing steel was provided and section was rebuilt
using M50 grade micro-concrete. Once the structure is made sound through this
jacketing mechanism, FRP based strengthening in terms of prestressed and non-
prestressed carbon laminates were applied, over which shear strengthening was
performed using carbon FRP wraps.
One other pre-requisite of application of FRP is training of the workforce. For
all products used in construction and specifically in retrofitting, it is mandatory to
follow the manufacturer’s instructions and the material safety datasheet (MSDS) as
most materials used in retrofitting are outcomes of recent research and hence these
are not familiar to most engineers and workmen. Newer and more effective products
constantly replace the existing. Ignorance leads to mistakes, which may not only
affect the structural performance, but also the health and safety of the personnel
involved. FRP based strengthening is often performed after structural repairs, which
involve activities like application of anti-corrosive chemicals, pressure grouting,
crack filling, primer application, etc. Most of these applications require mixing a
base with a hardener, initiator, catalyst, solvent, or so on. Some of these components
could be highly volatile, inflammable, corrosive, initiator of undesired reactions or
a health hazard. FRP based materials tend to cause itching or irritation of the skin,
eyes and may cause breathing difficulties as well, since minute fibres could break off
from the material easily. Storage and handling of these materials must therefore be
performed only under strict supervision.
4 Points of Focus in FRP Application
For the FRP based retrofitting solution to take effect in a desired manner, the following
points shall be taken care of.
4.1 Substrate Strength and Quality
The structures that require strengthening, are often found to be left with significantly
low of concrete strength and quality. Poor construction practices such as inade-
quate compaction and high water-cement ratio, leaves the concrete with a less dense
matrix, honeycombed areas and porous substrate. This in-turn leads to early onset
of corrosion and carbonation, leading to even faster deterioration in the future. Ulti-
mately, the basic pre-requisites for performing FRP based strengthening may not be
met. By performing NDT tests such as rebound hammer test and ultrasonic pulse
velocity test, the quality of concrete can be ascertained. Carbonation test and half-cell
potential test can give an initial understanding of extent of carbonation and proba-
bility of active corrosion respectively. Breakout windows can be opened in concrete
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
to directly observe the state of corrosion in embedded steel. Advanced techniques

such as galva-pulse and i-corr may also be performed if detailed corrosion study is
required. Surface pull-off strength can be used to ensure that the minimum tensile
strength criteria is met. Core strength is generally considered a reliable measure of
compressive strength of concrete. Various chemical tests such as pH, chloride profile,
chloride content, sulphate content, etc. can further back-up the inferences made from
visual observation and the NDTs.
All these tests help identifying the characteristics of the concrete in the spot where
the test has been conducted. The number of test locations and the locations of those
tests shall be selected such that they become a statistically representative sample of the
bridge. Test readings shall be reported in a segregated manner, such that say the results
from the girder and the deck slab shall not be mixed. Often times, the cast-in-situ
deck may be in a state of severe distress whereas the girders may have relatively better
concrete quality, such as in the case of Baghajatin flyover (Fig. 5). This is especially
true if the girders are post tensioned, as precast PT structures undergo rigorous quality
control during casting while the decks are cast in situ, whose quality varies based on
the quality of site supervision and workmanship. In Baghajatin flyover, certain parts
of the deck slab were to be demolished and recast, whereas the girders only had a
few locations to be rectified, mostly due to honeycombing.
Fig. 5 A portion of Baghajatin flyover showing the old and new bridges side by side
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
4.2 Surface Preparation
FRP must be applied only on structurally sound and smooth concrete substrate.
This means that the surface cracks, pitting, undulation, moisture, laitance, etc. must
be removed and must have sufficient shear and tensile strength. These are gauged
indirectly using core test, CAPO test and surface pull-off strength test. The CAPO
(cut and pull off) and surface pull-off strength tests are good indicators of tensile
strength requirement of concrete for FRP application. However, the concrete on
which FRP is to be applied, usually needs repairs. Hence it is seldom included
in the initial NDT. Typical repairs may include rectification of microstructure of
concrete by pressurized injection or flooding of low-viscous monomers or other
suitable compounds. These penetrate the substrate through the interconnected pores
and voids in it. Upon solidification of these compounds, the permeability of the
concrete is significantly reduced, thereby improving its microstructure. After such
treatments, the concrete usually passes for the tensile strength criteria.
Concrete must however be checked for cracks that may be structural or corrosion
related. Unless the root cause is removed, the cracks may keep on widening, exerting
un-desirable local stresses on the FRP that may be applied across it. Hence any case
of hollowness must be checked by delamination survey, so that the loose concrete
shall be removed, corrosion shall be addressed and sound concrete can be packed
in its place. Several types of repair mortars and pre-mix concretes are commer-
cially available for such activities. Non-corrosion related cracks shall be opened up
by grooving and sealed appropriately, so that they may be packed while pressure
grouting. Structural cracks can only be addressed permanently if the root cause is
identified and appropriate solution is worked out. Crack stitching may be required
to counteract the widening forces acting across the crack. In areas of active water/
moisture ingress, the source needs to be identified and curtailed to prevent further
seepage or dripping, such that after sufficient surface dryness is attained, surface
preparation can be performed.
The surface on which FRP is to be applied, shall ultimately be made as good as
new. Hence, surface grinding (Fig. 6) must be performed whether the concrete is old
or freshly cast/repaired. This removes any material (paint, oil or laitance) adhering
to the surface and exposes the original concrete for retrofitting applications. Whether
it is beam or column, FRP wraps cannot be applied over sharp edges, since these
become sites of stress concentration, leading to premature failure of FRP. Hence
while grinding, the edges of the beams and columns are ground and rounded to a
minimum radius of 25 mm. After grinding, pressurised air blowing is performed so
that the concrete dust is removed from the surface. The prepared surface typically
needs to be primed before FRP application.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 6 Concrete surface

grinding on piers
4.3 Workmanship in FRP Application
Factory-cured FRP laminates and on-site applied FRP wraps are the most frequently
used forms of FRP for structural retrofitting in India as of now. Both are installed
in slightly different manner, but the surface preparation requirements remain the
same. FRP wraps are flexible fabrics thinner than 1 mm, made of the continuous
structural fibers only. These could either be carbon, glass, aramid, or a combination
of these fibers (Fig. 7). The weight class (in GSM) and number of layers to be used
in structural application are determined by the retrofitting design engineer. A 600
GSM UD (unidirectional) CFRP has thrice as much thread-count (carbon fibers) as in
200 GSM. Wraps can be unidirectional (UD) or bi-directional (BD). FRP laminates
on the other hand, are unidirectional and are manufactured in factories with precise
proportion of fiber and matrix (Fig. 8). This ensures effective quality control, such
that thicknesses of up-to 3 mm can be achieved while ensuring monolithic behaviour.
Before applying FRP, the surface undulations shall be removed by physically
grinding the surface to level and applying structurally sound thixotropic putty. These
fill the surface voids and also prevent bubbles from forming during curing of the
saturating resins. Sometimes it may be needed to apply a layer of polymer modified
mortar (PMM) or even micro-concrete before applying thixotropic putty, based on
the extent of undulation. The surface profiling has to be carried out in regions of
sharp edges and corners. Primer application follows as the next step. Selection of
primer depends of FRP manufacturer’s recommendation. This is to prevent excessive
absorption of saturant into the substrate, leading to unsaturated FRP. Primers also
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 7 Left—Glass aramid UD fabric (930 GSM) and Right—Carbon UD fabric (900 GSM)
Fig. 8 100 mm wide carbon

laminate
provide a good bonding surface for the saturant (in case of wraps) and structural
adhesive (in case of laminates).
On this treated surface, FRP wraps may be installed using wet-layup or dry-layup
process. Dry-layup process requires application of saturant on the substrate, once the
layer becomes tacky, fixing the wrap by saturant-roller application and if required,
application of another coat of saturant. This method may be good for fabrics of lighter
weight-class. Those above 600 GSM shall be installed only using wet-layup method.
In wet-layup, the fibers are pre-saturated by passing them through a pool of saturant,
such that a single layer of fabric emerges from a dry roll of FRP wrap, enters the pool
of saturant and passes through rollers to be spooled into a saturated roll of FRP wrap.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
This saturated roll is then taken for installation. In either case, while fixing the wrap,
the FRP fabric shall be gently pressed against the prepared surface with a medium
nap roller to remove any entrapped air between the fiber sheet and the surface. The
fiber sheet shall be applied stretched along the longitudinal direction (along the main
fiber direction).
Insufficient saturation of FRP with saturant causes part of the fabric to be not
bonded to the substrate. Such errors may cause early debonding of FRP. Non-
adherence to the detailing as per drawing can also result in the same. Sufficient
development length and overlaps must be provided as detailed by retrofit designer.
Detailing of laps and splices is usually provided in accordance with clause 14.2 of
ACI-440-2R-17. In cases where multiple layers of FRP wraps are to be applied,
designers often include fiber anchors, which are short and stiff FRP rods of length
75–200 mm, with a tuft of loose fibers on the other end. These are drilled onto the
substrate usually before application of subsequent layers of FRP wraps, such that
the tuft of loose fibers can then be flayed and fixed on to the previous FRP layer in a
spread manner using the same saturant. It is difficult to quantify the exact increase of
bonding force obtained by fiber anchors but it is a good detailing practice. Typically,
the design engineers limit the number of layers of FRP to three or four.
For FRP laminate application, the primed surface and underside of the laminate
are coated with slight surplus of structural adhesive. These are then adhered together
carefully, in such a manner that air-voids do not form between the laminate and the
substrate. The ends of the laminates are fixed onto the parent concrete using plate-bolt
systems, usually made of aluminium alloys, to reduce the chances of delamination
(end peeling). Laminates could also be post tensioned, for which specially designed
(usually proprietary) machinery is required. For these, specialised end plates are
used. Multiple layers of laminates are not usually applied in practice. FRP wrapping
at the curtailed ends of the laminates, suffices in place of the bolted end-plates.
Contact critical applications need the entire substrate to be structurally sound and
in-compressible. Loose, hollow, honeycombed or porous concrete may affect the
effectiveness of contact critical applications significantly. In bond-critical applica-
tions (eg. Strengthening for flexure and shear), the only way in which load transfer
happens between concrete and FRP, is through the bond between them, whose quality
as long as the recommended chemicals are used, purely depends on the workmanship
quality. Also concrete of poor strength and quality could fail while transferring loads
to the FRP. In general, the FRP systems work by capturing minute strains in concrete
and converting them into huge resistive forces by taking advantage of their large
Young’s modulus and tensile load carrying capacity. Any slack in an applied FRP
resulting from air entrapment, dry patches, etc. due to incompetency or negligence
in workmanship, can render the entire application ineffective, as the minute strains
generated in RCC would then be insufficient to stress the FRP.
Upon curing, FRP exposed to the environment is sprayed on with UV-resistant
coating for the longevity of the resins used. If fire-resistant mortars, regular cement
plaster or micro-concrete is to be applied, a layer of coarse-grained washed silica
sand is pasted on the FRP surface over a layer of saturant in tacky condition. This
provides mechanical keying between the FRP and the upcoming cementitious layer.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
4.4 Bond Critical and Contact Critical Applications
4.4.1 Bond Critical
The applications where a strong bond between FRP and the RCC substrate is required
for load transfer are called bond critical applications. In such cases, no load is trans-
ferred to FRP in the absence of bond. When FRP is applied as a supplementary
tensile reinforcement or as shear reinforcement, the application is typically bond
critical (Fig. 9). For instance, for installing an FRP laminate on the bottom sagging
face of a simply supported beam, high strength structural adhesive is applied in the
interface between the laminate and the beam bottom.
As design load is applied on a regular simply supported beam, the concrete tends to
crack in the tension face as expected, since it is weak in resisting tension. Hence these
sections are designed to have sufficient main reinforcement embedded in the bottom
face to handle 100% of all tensile forces generated. In practice, FRP application is
usually required on structures that have previously been subjected to design loads,
thereby the beams are usually cracked sections. Before application of FRP, some
superimposed dead loads and almost all live loads are removed from the area of
application and from nearby locations. Also propping is done from lower side so that
existing strain level at the soffit of the beam from time of application of FRP till time
of curing shall be minimal and unaffected by any impact loading.
After curing of FRP and on application of design loads, the previously formed
cracks in the tension face tend to open up. However, since the FRP is strongly bonded
to the tension face, the opening up of those cracks will happen only if a corresponding
strain is developed in the FRP, i.e. the FRP needs to get stretched as well. Since
the FRPs have high Young’s modulus in tension, this stretching requires tremendous
Fig. 9 Typical direction of unidirectional fiber in FRP wrapping for shear and flexure. Wraps for
shear shall be analogous to stirrups and that for flexure be analogous to main reinforcement
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
stress generation in FRP, for which large amount of force needs to get transferred from
the concrete to the FRP. This is the mechanism by which bond-critical application of
FRP increases the load-carrying capacity of a structural member. Evidently, the load
transfer happens through the bond, and therefore the name “bond critical”. Thus, the
mechanical properties of the bonding material act as the limiting factor in the design
of FRP based retrofit solution.
Failure of FRP through rupture is sudden and hence it is not preferred. The
preferred failure mode of FRP is through debonding, as it may be less drastic in
comparison. However, when the substrate quality and strength are lower than that of
the bond, the cover concrete fails instead of the bond, which is called cover delamina-
tion. If the bonding between concrete/FRP is strong enough, then the next weak link
in the concrete/FRP interface is the concrete. The minimum tensile and compressive
strength pre-requisites set by ACI, aims to avoid such incidents.
4.4.2 Contact Critical
When the tensile force required to be generated in the FRP can be transferred to it
without the necessity of an adhesive bond between the FRP and substrate, it is called
a contact critical application. Here the bond is not necessary as long as the contact
between the two is intact. Increasing the compressive load carrying capacity of an
axially loaded concrete member, by applying FRP along the Hoop direction, orienting
the unidirectional fibres transverse to the longitudinal axis of the member, may be
considered as a contact critical application. Clause 12.1 in the code ACI-440-2R-
17 says that the transverse Hoop fibers act similar to helical or tie reinforcements.
This contributes to passive confinement of the compression member, which until
dilation and cracking of the concrete, remains unstressed. Thereby, intimate contact
between FRP jacket and concrete member is critical.” Hence the term contact-critical
application (Fig. 10).
When a compressive axial load is applied on a non-slender column of uniform
cross-section, its longitudinal dimension decreases and the lateral dimensions
Fig. 10 Confining FRP wraps on short column. Dilation of concrete generates Hoop tension in
FRP
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
increase based on Poisson’s ratio. This leads to decrease in height of column and
increase in the perimeter of transverse sections. When load is increased, the column
could get compressed further and the radially outward acting pressure could keep
on increasing, causing increase in the perimeter. If a material sufficiently strong in
tension, is wrapped around the perimeter of the column so as to form a confining
ring of constant diameter, then increase in perimeter of the column can be restrained.
Confinement of concrete enhances it strength and ductility by restraining lateral
dilation [6]. To achieve this, typically uni-directional FRP are chosen for wrapping
around the column, with the fiber direction along the perimeter, in single/multiple
layers as required by design, with lengthwise overlap. While application of FRP on
the column, the saturant used will create a bond between FRP and concrete, but
it is not necessary as long as the ring diameter is maintained by adhesion of the
overlapped FRP with itself.
In a test conducted for the author as part of the Assam bridge project, four commer-
cially available brands of uni-directional FRP wraps were tested, to compare their
ability in enhancing the compressive strength of standard concrete test cylinders of
same grade by contact critical application. 3 specimens of FRP wrapped cylinders
were prepared per brand. There was one sample set of 900 GSM, three sample sets of
600 GSM and one sample set of control experiment, making a total of 15 specimens.
The 900 GSM specimens were given 3 wraps each and the 600 GSM specimens
given 4 wraps each. By performing uni-axial strain-controlled compression testing,
(Fig. 11) the stress–strain curves of the wrapped samples and bare sample (control)
were obtained in terms of cylinder strength (MPa) versus axial strain. In the resulting
stress–strain curve, it was found that the concrete samples after FRP wrapping were
able to resist high stresses even as the compressive strain exceeded 0.0100 value, as
opposed to the control specimens that failed at around stain of 0.0032 as expected.
ACI permits maximum compressive strain of 0.0100 in FRP wrapped concrete, hence
the stress–strain curves were manually limited at that point.
The test report concludes that all the CFRP wrapped specimens showed significant
improvement in performance in terms of ultimate load as well as ultimate strain
compared to the control specimens made of M40 grade bare concrete. Ultimate
load carrying capacity of wrapped specimens are observed to be more than 250%
compared to control specimens. Ultimate strain developed in wrapped specimens
are observed to be more than 300% compared to control specimens. Ultimate strain
of 0.32% with ultimate stress of 37 MPa (equivalent cube compressive strength =
46 MPa) was recorded for control specimens. Ultimate strain of 1% with average
ultimate stress of 122 MPa (minimum 97 MPa and maximum 152 MPa) was recorded
for strengthened specimens (Fig. 12). This implies significant enhancement in ductile
behaviour as well as improved load carrying capacity.
In case of earthquake resistance, it is important that the structural members accom-
modate the large strains which are generated by the ground movements, without
themselves failing in such a way as to totally lose their structural integrity and
thereby leading to collapse of the structure partially or globally. In the lab exper-
iment, FRP wrapping was found to make the specimens capable of handling much
higher strains than bare concrete. No apparent signs of distress were observed on
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 11 Experimental setup for testing the FRP wrapped specimens in axial compression. Strain
gauges attached
Fig. 12 Stress strain behaviour of different samples of FRP wrapped concrete in axial compression
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
CFRP wrapped specimens even when loaded up-to a load equal to two times of
ultimate load of control specimens (bare concrete specimens). The ultimate load-
carrying capacity of the wrapped samples were found to be more than 250% of the
control (bare specimens). Ultimate strains developed were more than 300% higher as
well. Average ultimate stress was found to be 122 MPa, where the highest and least
values obtained were 152 and 97 MPa respectively. Area under the stress–strain curve
for CFRP specimens was more than 8 times corresponding to area under the stress–
strain curve for control specimens. This implies significant improvement in energy
absorption capacity as compared to bare specimens, which is desirable for structures
that are expected to resist earthquake and impact loading. All the CFRP wrap systems
tested showed similar stress–strain behaviour, very close to the theorised bi-linear
curve with high initial slope and lesser slope afterwards.
5 Case Studies
5.1 Case study 1: Assam bridge project
In addition to other factors, every now and then, structural deficiencies occur because
of design issues such as usage of outdated design codes, inadequate detailing, incor-
rect consideration of design loads, etc. These may either be the designer’s mistake,
or could be lapse in communication, where site execution gets done based on older
versions of drawings. Ultimately, when the structure is built and commissioned,
service loads are subjected on it and the users experience serviceability issues in
the form of vibrations, excessive deflections, or cracks may start appearing unex-
pectedly, even before full design loads are applied. Sometimes, cracks may appear
during construction phase itself, due to exertion of loads arising from say shifting
of precast sections of a segmental PT girder, stacking of construction materials on
slabs, vibrations/movements of construction equipment, etc.
In case of this project, the new asset owner performed a structural due diligence and
found that the piers of this bridge did not comply with the latest seismic standards.
The structural consultant found that the vertical c/c spacing of lateral ties in the
piers is too high and thereby to comply with the latest code, the spacing must be
lesser. This can either be performed by anchoring additional ties and jacketing the
pier with RCC or by providing unidirectional FRP wrapping that can provide the
same design shear strength as that of the additionally required ties. The site location
makes it difficult to shift lot of steel and concrete (Fig. 13), but FRP based solution
requires significantly less qty of material shifting, and additionally, FRP is a very
light material in itself. The window of opportunity to access the pier fully is only 2
months/year, as on the other months, the piers would be submerged, as seen in Fig. 3
earlier. A study of rainfall pattern, daylight hours, ambient temperature and river
water-levels was required to arrive at that data. There were 182 piers that requires
this retrofitting, so methods that would take a long period for execution, such as RCC
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
jacketing, were impractical. FRP application is clean and fast. FRP wrapping has the
added advantage of confining the pier uniformly as a continuous layer, as opposed
to conventional lateral ties that are discrete steel rings. Taking into account all these
factors, the client decided to go with the FRP based solution (Fig. 14).
By using the design guidelines of ACI 440-2R-17, it was found that the piers
need 4 layers of 600 GSM unidirectional carbon wraps to generate the equivalent
shear strength. However, there was another challenge. The river carries large floating
bodies like trees, which may impact the retrofitted piers and thereby damaging the
FRP. To prevent this, a thin layer of nominal RCC jacketing could be done on the fully
submerged piers and cement plastering can be done in the other piers. The jacketing
could be of thickness as small as 40 mm and need to have only nominal reinforcement,
hence much less material requirement as compared to traditional jacketing.
Fig. 13 Photograph of the Assam bridge taken before retrofitting
Fig. 14 Schematic sketches of retrofitting scheme to be applied on the piers
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The piers were 2300 × 1900 mm in cross section. The FRP contribution to increase
in pure axial compressive strength was less, which is typical of rectangular cross
sections, especially when dimensions are large. ACI-440-2R-17 recommends the
use of FRP for improving compressive strength by FRP wrapping, only to columns
of cross-sectional dimensions less than 900 mm, but it can be used for larger columns
if the effectiveness is verified experimentally. In this application, the aim is not to
improve the compressive strength, but to compensate the shear strength, for which
there are no such dimensional restraints in the code.
For most piers, 2.3 m height of FRP wrapping (from top level of pile cap) was
required. Since concrete quality was found good, there was no need of structural
repair activities like injection grouting and anti-corrosion treatment. The works
started with surface grinding and finishing of the piers such that the corners are
rounded to at-least 25 mm edge radius. The rounding off is required to prevent stress
concentration at the edges which may cause FRP to fail prematurely. The loose dust
adhering to the surface after grinding was removed by pressurized air blowing. Struc-
tural putty was applied only in small patches to ensure perfect level surface. SRM
C-Wrap UD600 is the wrap that was to be installed. It is a 600 GSM unidirectional
carbon fiber wrap. It is recommended to use wet lay-up machine for installation of
FRP of grade 600 GSM and above. Wet lay-up machine un-wraps the dry roll of
FRP, makes the dry fabric pass through a bath of saturant and forces it out through a
series of rollers, which ensures complete saturation of the fibers. The saturated fabric
forms a wet roll, which is then taken to the site for direct site application (Fig. 15).
On the previously prepared surface of the pier, a layer of primer and saturant were
applied one after the other. While the saturant layer was still tacky, the saturated FRP
was applied gently without air pockets, all around the pier, using roller brush. This
process requires skilled and specially trained manpower. The vertical and horizontal
Fig. 15 Wet layup machine saturating a roll of 600 GSM unidirectional CFRP (left) and the
saturated roll of CFRP being applied on the piers after application of primer (right)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
overlaps are to be provided as per drawing. Usually, vertical overlaps of 10–20 mm is

sufficient, just enough to ensure continuity. Horizontal overlaps are more important.
In usual practice, for single layer application, after one complete lap, a horizontal
overlap of 150 mm is provided. If multiple layers are applier, the overlap length shall
be calculated based on ACI-440-2R-17.
Once the structural requirement is compensated using FRP, the next step is to
protect the FRP. In this project, as mentioned earlier, since FRP needs to be shielded
from physical impact, a nominal RCC jacketing was provided in the piers on the river.
In other locations, a layer of cement plaster was provided. While the surface of the
FRP is tacky with the semi-cured saturant, a layer of washed silica-sand is pasted on
its surface for ensuring good mechanical bonding between the FRP and the cement
based protective layer. For RCC jacketing, steel bars were anchored on the concrete
using chemical adhesive, up to a pre-designed depth. After formwork was in place,
pre-packaged M50 grade micro-concrete was poured from the carriageway through
pipe and fed to the inside of the formwork through gravity pouring (Fig. 16). The
cementitious protective layer by itself shields the FRP against its deterioration from
UV exposure. In case such cementitious coating is not given, it is necessary to apply
a UV protection coat, usually available as a sprayable PU compound. In this project
alone, 26,000 m2 of FRP was consumed, for a total of 182 piers. All the works were
completed as planned on time, because of the intensive planning that went into it
before execution stage.
Fig. 16 Protection of the FRP wraps on the pier using micro-concrete jacketing
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
5.2 Case study 2: Fire damaged hydrocarbon storage tanks

in Dhamra
In the field of structural retrofitting, each project must be treated as unique, since the
quality of workmanship in original construction and the distress induced onto the
concrete due to environmental factors over the years, are highly variable from project
to project. One such project was in Dhamra, where a huge hydrocarbon storage tank
that was supported by more than 200 circular columns, caught fire. Once the fire was
put out, it was observed that most of the columns were visibly affected by the fire.
Spalling was observed in varying intensities, but since the concrete cover was high,
no steel was exposed. Non-destructive tests including core-compression tests were
carried out on the columns. The consultant reached a conclusion that the cylinder
strength of the concrete has declined from 40 to 29 MPa. This was a major cause
of concern, since unlike in flexure and shear, reduction in concrete strength directly
affects the axial load carrying capacity of the RCC column. Hence, as a first aid,
the asset owner performed the first intervention in the form of removal of spalled
concrete, application of injection grouting and performing shotcreting.
Based on NDTs and visual observations, the column-wise damage report was
documented. For each column, the location and dimensions of spalled portions were
identified and tabulated. The retrofitting consultants were then contacted to perform
their evaluations and remedial measures. It was found that the injection grouting
and shotcreting was done well, thus there was no need to perform structural repair
activities and one can concentrate on bringing back the columns to their original
design compressive strength of M50 from the current M35 (both values indicate fck ).
If a structurally sound surface is obtained, then it is possible to perform this increase
using FRP wrapping. Detailed calculations were performed based on ACI-440-2R-
17 and found that the columns require four layers of 900 GSM unidirectional carbon
fiber for this increment. The structural consultant had indicated that for each column,
FRP wrapping shall be performed not along the entire column height, but only 150
mm above and below the distressed portion and directly over the distressed portion
itself. This significantly reduced the cost of retrofitting.
Upon approval of the retrofitting scheme, the team set out for execution (Fig. 17).
The first target was to obtain a structurally sound and smooth concrete surface for
application of FRP. The area to be wrapped was first grinded to level using hand-held
electric grinding machine. After sufficiently smooth surface profile was obtained, air
blowing was performed for removing the loose dust adhering to the concrete after
the grinding activity. This was followed by application of structural putty. These
are epoxy-based and are applied in very thin layers, just so the small pitting, minor
cracks and undulations are evened out. The putty itself must be of higher compressive
strength than the existing concrete strength. After putty application, primer coating
is required to ensure that excessive absorption of saturant does not occur. Without
primer application, the saturated FRP becomes partially dry after application, leading
to ineffective bonding with the substrate.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
a b
c d
Fig. 17 Stages of surface preparation before strengthening: a Surface grinding, b Pressurized air
blowing, c Structural putty application for smoothening, d Primer application
The primed surface is coated with a layer of saturant. Since 900 GSM CFRP is
applied, wet layup method was used. The saturated FRP is applied in layers using
roller, as soon as the saturant applied on the substrate becomes tacky. The lengthwise
(horizontal) overlap required as per calculation was 295 mm. An additional layer
of saturant is applied after fully curing the FRP, so that washed silica sand could
be pasted on the surface to ensure good mechanical bonding with the subsequent
cement-based plastering of 20 mm thickness that was applied for protection. This
was followed by curing, using wet gunny bags (Fig. 18). As it was important for
the client that such fire incidents do not affect the structure again, the entire area
containing the exposed columns were submerged in huge quantities of sand. Even as
curing of plastering takes around 15 days, a typical column can be retrofitted from
start to finish, from grinding to FRP installation and plastering, within about 3 weeks.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
a b
c d
Fig. 18 a FRP Wrapping for confinement, b Sand pasting for adhesion, c Cementitious protective
plastering d Curing using wet gunny bags for protective plastering
The advantage of using FRP for such applications is that, strengthening of each
column can be done in 3–4 days using FRP and then the time-consuming activities
such as plastering, can be done by general civil contractors. This project was critical
and time sensitive. Just as in all other projects, detailed planning performed and the
project was completed on time.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
5.3 Case study 3: Ambet river bridge
The Ambet river bridge is a 7-span bridge constructed across Savitri River, 200 kms
away from Mumbai, connecting Ambet and Mhapral. Each span is 7.5 m wide and
supported on hollow concrete structures called hammerheads that are monolithically
cast on the top of piers [7]. It was noticed that chunks of concrete were spalling
and falling from the hammerheads (Fig. 19) on to the river below, which lead to
investigations. The quality of concrete was so low, that the coarse aggregates were
getting removed by hand itself (Fig. 20). Delamination survey detected several hollow
sounding locations in addition to visible spalling sites with exposed steel, indicating
extensive corrosion. Shear cracks were also seen. The precast girders were found
to be in sound condition. Other issues such as defunct bearings, jammed expansion
joints, honey combing, seepage and instability of slopes of approach roads were also
observed.
The original construction was using M20 concrete and Fe 250 steel, which when
modelled using FEM, was ok for the current design load requirement. NDT data
suggests 30% loss of steel area and in compressive strength of concrete, for which
the structure failed for design load. The joint inspection committee comprising of
PWD engineers and Sanrachana, concluded that structural distresses such as shear
cracks were formed due to loss of steel area and poor concrete quality. The same was
getting aggravated due to ongoing corrosion, defunct bearings and jammed expansion
joint, as the impact of the vehicular loads were not getting damped. In such cases,
the solution must first address the root cause and only after eliminating the same,
shall appropriate strengthening measures be incorporated. If FRP based measures are
incorporated without addressing corrosion, the structure may continue to deteriorate
without showing external warnings and proceed to fail abruptly following the sudden
rupture of FRP due to expansive pressure generated through corrosion.
The following were the key targets of this project:
. Compensate for the loss of cross-section of the large diagonal bars which were
majorly contributing in shear
Fig. 19 Hammerhead portion, showing corrosion damages at the end articulations
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 20 Loose aggregate

and exposed corroded steel
. Compensate for the rebar cross-section loss of vertical walls and bottom inclined
bars, which were contributing to shear and flexural strength
. Perform detailed repair of concrete, removing all loose concrete, perform pressure
grouting to improve the microstructure of concrete
. Replace the defunct bearings, make the expansion joints functional again
. Repair the pedestals and platform where bearings are installed.
For FRP based activities to be done, the first step was to prepare the concrete.
Loose concrete was removed as it was not contributing to strength or stability of
the structure. On some areas of the external faces, previously performed shotcrete
repairs were also removed, since the steel-mesh used as its reinforcement was rusting.
Cracks were opened up into V shaped grooves of 12 mm width and 25 mm depth,
filled with non-expansive thixotropic putty. Drill holes of 12 mm dia were made
every 250 mm running length of this groove. On the general surface of concrete also,
such drills were made at about 250–300 mm c/c spacing.
The honey-combed areas were packed with the same thixotropic putty before
holes were drilled. These holes were fitted with non-return valves through which
M35 grade low viscosity grout was pressure injected (Fig. 21). Once the grout has
cured, exposed steel was treated with alkaline rust converting primer and epoxy
based anti-corrosion coating (Fig. 22). Migratory corrosion inhibitor was applied on
all accessible concrete surfaces, so as to act as an additional defence mechanism
against corrosion.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 21 Pressure grouting on vertical walls from inside the hammerhead
Fig. 22 Prestressed (top) and non-prestressed (side) carbon laminates, inside hammerhead
Inside the hammerhead, M50 micro-concrete with added 10 mm coarse aggre-

gates and polymer modified mortar were used to extensively repair the concrete. On
the external faces, the previously spalled or shotcreted areas were made ready for
micro-concrete jacketing as mentioned earlier. For jacketing, at-least 4 shear keys
were anchored into parent concrete on every square meter surface area of concrete,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
which were also corrosion treated. New steel reinforcements were provided as per
design and shotcreting was conducted with the free-flow self-compacting micro-
concrete. Although 28 days is the full-strength gain period of concrete, it was found
to develop over 35 MPa strength in one week itself, hence FRP based activities could
be initiated within 10 days of concreting itself. Further, surface preparation was done
by application of structural putty and concrete grinding, followed by pressurized air
blowing.
On the soffit of the deck portion of the interior of the hammerhead, prestressed
carbon laminates of 100 mm width and 1.4 mm thickness were installed, with a
nominal 50 kN prestress. In the interior vertical walls of the hammerhead, non-
prestressed laminates were installed horizontally along the direction of traffic, after
completion of the prestressing activity on the top. All non-prestressed members
shall be installed after the installation of prestressed members, otherwise the non-
prestressed members will oppose the resultant strains generated in the structure due
to prestressing.
On the exterior faces, 900 GSM unidirectional CFRP wraps were provided on the
cantilevering portions of the hammerhead (Fig. 23), so as to handle the shear forces
and to improve durability by greatly reducing the surface cracking of concrete. The
bonding behaviour of the carbon wraps were improved by inserting CFRP anchors at
regular intervals. With similar effect, the ends of the carbon laminates are anchored
by bolting, using machined aluminium end-plates of H30 grade in case of prestressed
laminates and with H9 grade for non-prestressed laminates if required. Carbon lami-
nates were also provided in an inclined manner on the external vertical faces of
the hammerhead to mitigate diagonal tension developed due to the loads transferred
through the bearings.
The defunct bearings themselves were rested on dilapidated pedestals, which
after lifting of the spans, were subject to repair. The pedestals were partly demol-
ished and recast with new reinforcement and micro-concrete, which were then later-
ally confined with the 900 GSM carbon fibre wraps (Fig. 24), followed by bearing
replacement. All exposed FRP were given specialized UV coating after installation.
The strengthening measures taken for the hammerhead where so apt for its condi-
tion, that the structure could be transformed from one where from coarse aggregates
were getting detached by hand and second layer of rebars were visible at places, to a
structure that not-only transfers the load of the 40 m long spans, but also the weight
of the huge steel truss, through which dynamic loads of span lifting were transmitted
through a different load path! This retrofitting project has been featured in CE&CR
journal and it also won their national level award for best retrofitting project in 2022
(Fig. 25).
5.4 Case study 4: Rashtrapati Bhavan
This is a case study on where not to use FRP based solutions.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 23 Anti-corrosion
treatment completed on the
existing exposed steel and
newly added rebars
Fig. 24 CFRP being applied on the cantilevering portions of the hammerhead, Inset: Carbon
anchors, installed for improving the bonding between concrete and CFRP
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 25 Pedestal after micro-concreting, undergoing CFRP wrapping for additional confinement
before installation of bearings
The Rashtrapati Bhavan of India was built in 1929 as the residence of the Viceroy of
India. This mansion covers 5 acres on a 330-acre estate with 340 rooms and 2.5 kms
of corridor (Fig. 26). Today as the residence and office of the first citizen of India,
it is emblematic of the secular and inclusive tradition of the biggest democracy in
the world. However, as the effects of ageing were catching up, in the form of severe
corrosion of reinforcement bars in the sunshades, also known as chajjas (Fig. 27).
Fig. 26 The front portion of Rashtrapati bhavan photographed while retrofitting was underway
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 27 The lime concrete chajja of Rashtrapati bhavan showing distresses due to corrosion
Made using lime mortar and steel, the chajjas were nearly 2 m wide and inclined
downwards from the walls at 4 storey height, following the step-ups and step downs,
curves and straight lines along the building perimeter. Upon rusting, corrosion prod-
ucts of significantly larger volume were formed, thereby creating expansive pressure
leading to spalling of concrete (Fig. 28).
In any habitable RCC structure, spalling and subsequent falling of chunks of
concrete cannot be permitted. Especially when it could be falling from 4 storey
height and when it is a building of national importance, occupied by officers of
top stature. Using advanced corrosion study instruments such as galvapulse, the
exact electrochemical potential generated by corrosion and the concrete resistivity
were mapped. Using this data, it is possible to predict the extent of corrosion even
Fig. 28 Dilapidated chajjas showing spalled areas. Temporarily, external supports were given
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
without making any direct connection with the embedded steel bar. It was found that
corrosion was severe throughout the chajja. Also, NDT revealed that the strength of
century-old lime concrete was too low for it to be strengthened using FRP as per the
pre-requisites laid out by ACI 440-2R-17. In fact, the deterioration was so severe,
that the only option left was to demolish and recast the chajja, but this option came
with its own challenge.
The underside of the chajja was sculpted with iconic lotus petal shaped hand-
made embellishments, each petal slightly different from another. Before demolition,
each petal shape must be captured to scale and then recreated with accuracy. For
this, 3D lidar scanning of each petal was performed. Corresponding CAD model
was generated. Using this, precise 2D drawings were made. FRP based light-weight
formwork was manufactured using the drawings and 3D model, with the aid of CNC
machine. The CNC machine cut the exact petal shape on plywood. This created a
mould for preparing FRP formwork. Using GFRP fabric, saturant and steel bars for
added support, the petal shaped FRP formworks were fabricated and sent to site after
curing (Fig. 29).
Since the cantilevering length of chajja was 2 m, it was necessary to perform weight
reduction. Hence structural light weight concrete was used. However, the underlying
issue of corrosion must be addressed first, or otherwise the same issue can recur. After
chemical anchorage of sufficient new rebars and anti-corrosion treatment (without
epoxy-based compounds) of old and new rebars, hybrid anodes containing in-built
power source was installed as per pre-defined circuitry, to provide active cathodic
protection. The circuit was such that the potential developed by the anodes can be
checked anytime in the monitoring box of each circuit, with the help of the lead
wire coming out of an embedded reference electrode. After setting up of the FRP
formwork (Figs. 30 and 31), the high early-strength, structural light-weight concrete
was cast, followed by water curing, de-shuttering, groove cutting, surface finishing
by grinding and finally inorganic painting to match the original colours of the petals
(Fig. 32).
Fig. 29 GFRP fibres used to produce custom light weight formwork based on CNC cuts
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 30 FRP formwork installed for light-weight concreting, after demolition of existing chajja
Fig. 31 FRP formwork installed and additional reinforcements anchored
FRP based solution may not be practical for all projects. In this project, because
of the poor quality of concrete, the calculations showed that existing structure did
not meet the pre-requisites, but FRP in itself is such a versatile material that in one
way or the other, it could be made use of, for executing custom-built solutions such
as the uniquely patterned light weight formwork.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 32 Photos taken before (inset) and after retrofitting the chajjas of Rashtrapati bhavan
6 Key Take-Aways
. FRP based strengthening has the advantage of increasing the load carrying
capacity and ductility of a column, without increasing its stiffness, thereby
preventing attracting additional loads onto it and behaving desirably under seismic
loads.
. Strengthening measures shall not be performed before addressing the under-
lying structural deficiency or other root cause. Corrosion is an expansive process
that may generate excessive internal pressure when not addressed before FRP
wrapping, which may cause sudden failure.
. FRP application should be done only after satisfying the structural prerequisites
laid down by ACI 440-2R-17
. Surface preparation and quality workmanship are of utmost importance in prac-
tical application of FRP. Manufacturer’s datasheet must be followed verbatim
since FRP systems constantly undergo upgradation through R&D
. FRP cannot be an answer to every strengthening requirement. At times, FRP may
be an unsuitable choice. High strength alloy plates, micro-concrete jacketing,
addition of structural steel members, span shortening, etc. may be relied upon as
and when needed.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
References
1. FIB 14 (2001) Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures. Task Group 9.3 FRP
(Fibre Reinforced Polymer) reinforcement for concrete structures
2. Raina VK (2022) Bridges: Past....and....Future
3. ACI 440.2R-17 (2017) Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems
for strengthening concrete structures
4. IRICEN (2009) Inspection, assessment, repairs and retrofitting of masonry arch bridges. Indian
Railways Institute of Civil Engineering, Pune, India.
5. Vivek SV (2019) Consequences of retrofitting on the response of a structure
6. Mirmiran A, Shahawy M (1997) Dilation characteristics of confined concrete. Mechanics of
cohesive-frictional. Mater Int J Exp Model Comput Mater Struct 2(3):237–249
7. Ingole P, Gosavi RM, Joshi M (2022) Structural repair and strengthening of road bridge across
Savitri River at Ambet, Maharashtra. Indian Highways 38–48
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
A Study on Ductility and Energy
Absorption Capacity of Reinforced
Concrete Filled UPVC Columns
P. K. Gupta and P. K. Gupta
Abstract In the present study, Unplastisized Poly Vinyl Chloride (UPVC) tubes
filled with concrete are axially loaded to investigate their load carrying capacity and
associated ductility. Total twelve specimens of UPVC tubes of diameters 140 and
200 mm with effective length of 900 mm were cast. M20 grade of concrete was filled
inside the tubes for the casting of UPVC concrete filled tube (CFUT) column speci-
mens. All these specimens were prepared to investigate the effect of outer diameter
to thickness (D/t) ratio on the strength, confinement and ductility of columns speci-
mens. The column specimens were tested for axial loading in the INSTRON machine
of capacity 250 tonnes. Their load-deformation curves and modes of deformation
were recorded. The test results indicate that as D/t ratio decreases, the confinement
and ductility increases. The magnitude of the displacement corresponding to peak
load increases as diameter of specimen increases. It can also be concluded from the
experiments that concrete filled UPVC tubes can be used as columns.
Keywords Unplastisized Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) tubes · Ductility ·

Confinement · Strength · Buckling
1 Introduction
Concrete Filled Tube (CFT) is an example of blending two materials generally steel
and concrete together to avail the compressive strength and stiffness of concrete and
ductility of steel in one of the best possible ways. The CFT is prepared by filling the
concrete in a steel tube. The CFT structural members such as columns and beams
have a number of distinct advantages over an equivalent steel, reinforced concrete,
or steel-reinforced concrete members. The orientation of the steel and concrete in the
cross section optimizes the strength and stiffness of the section. The steel lies at the
P. K. Gupta (B) · P. K. Gupta

Structural Engineering Group, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology
Roorkee, Roorkee 247667, Uttarakhand, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
244 P. K. Gupta and P. K. Gupta
outer perimeter where it performs most effectively in compression, tension and in

resisting bending moment. Also, the stiffness of the CFT is greatly enhanced because
the steel, which has a much greater modulus of elasticity than the concrete, is situated
farthest from the centroid, where it makes the greatest contribution to the moment of
inertia. Additionally, it has been shown that the steel tube confines the concrete core,
which increases the compressive strength of concrete core and consequently the axial
load carrying capacity and the ductility of CFT structural members. Therefore, it is
advantageous to use CFTs as columns [1] in high rise buildings where land space
is one of the major concerns due to high price of land. There has been significant
research on CFTs over past two decades [2–7]. As a result leading international codes
have devised the design procedures and guidelines for CFTs as columns and beams
[6]. In the severe environmental conditions the outer steel tube may have weathering
effects and as a results land to the lower load carrying capacity of members. UPVC
tube can be used as a barrier between the severe environment and the material of
the structural element. Therefore, in the present paper an experimental study on
Concrete Filled Unplastisized Poly Vinyl Chloride Tubes (CFUTs) as columns is
presented. The Unplastisized Poly Vinyl Chloride (UPVC) tubes were used in place
of conventional steel tubes. UPVC has certain distinct advantages as a material.
Firstly, it is cheaper than the steel. It is a low maintenance material. It does not
support combustion and is self extinguishing. It has a high electrical resistivity and
has good insulation properties. It is unaffected by most concentrations of acids, alkalis
and organic chemicals. It can also withstand huge deformations. Other advantages
include its availability in a range of colors and finishes. Due to all these properties it
qualifies as a suitable material in building construction.
2 Experimental Setup
Commercially available UPVC tubes generally used for water pipes were chosen
for this study. Two diameters of tubes were chosen; they were 140 and 200 mm
respectively. All the tubes had a length of 900 mm. Tubes were filled with one
grade of concretes, i.e. M20 grade to make ‘Concrete Filled UPVC Tubes’ (CFUTs).
Concrete was prepared as per the guidelines given in IS-10262: 1982, reaffirmed 2004
[8]. Locally available material and OPC 43 grade was used for making the concrete.
All the test specimens of similar configuration were casted with one design mix in
one go so that their physical properties had a minimum variation. Concrete cube
strength of 7 and 28 days were recorded. In total 12 test specimens were prepared
for the present study. Six specimens were prepared with UPVC tube having diameter
of 140 mm and another six specimens with UPVC tube having diameter 200 mm.
The geometrical parameters of UPVC tubes used to prepare three types of specimens
are presented in Table 1. The length of all specimens was taken equal to 900 mm
to keep the specimen as short column. Figure 1a shows the typical pipes used for
preparation of specimens. All these test specimens had their length/diameter (L/
D) ratio between 4.5 and 6.4 so that effects of slenderness were not prominent
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
A Study on Ductility and Energy Absorption Capacity of Reinforced … 245
and therefore the effects of confinement and resultant increase in strength could be
studied. Their diameter/wall thickness (D/t) ratios were between 35 and 42. All the
twelve specimens were prepared with concrete infill of M20 grade and had six TMT
bars of 12 mm diameter as longitudinal reinforcement in addition to these two hoop
one at top and other at bottom were also welded in the reinforcement (see Fig. 1b).
Details of the test specimens are shown in Fig. 1a–f. Figure 1d shows the specimens
sealed with polyethylene sheets to provide curing. In order to transfer the axial load
without any eccentricity both top and bottom surfaces were prepared using epoxy
(Fig. 1e). Figure 1f shows the cross-section of the prepared specimens ready for
testing. All the six reinforcement bars are clearly visible in the cross-section. Testing
of the specimens was carried out in two ways: first by transferring the load through
both concrete and UPVC pipe i.e. both loaded, and second only through concrete
core i.e. concrete loaded. For second type of loading i.e. concrete loaded, special
steel plates having diameters equal to the inner diameter of UPVC pipes were used.
Figure 2a shows these plates. In each diameter specimens two specimens were cured
in artificial sea water to study the effect of sea water on their mechanical behavior
and tested as concrete loaded. The salient properties of these test specimens are given
in Table 1.
The specimens were named on the basis of their diameters, compressive strength
of concrete, way of testing and type of curing. In specimen T140M20B-1, 1 signifies
the first specimen, T140 signifies external tube diameter of 140 mm, M20 signifies
filled with M20 grade of concrete cured with polyethylene sheet and B signifies
tested with transfer of load through both tube and concrete.
In specimen T140M20C-2, 2 signifies the second specimen, T140 signifies
external tube diameter of 140 mm, M20 signifies filled with M20 grade of concrete
cured with polyethylene sheet and B signifies tested with transfer of load through
only concrete using the steel plates shown in Fig. 2a.
In specimen D200M20CC-2, 2 signifies the second specimen, D200 signifies
external tube diameter of 200 mm, M20 signifies filled with M20 grade of concrete
cured with putting in sea water and CC signifies tested with transfer of load through
only concrete using the steel plates shown in Fig. 2a.
These specimens were tested on 250 ton capacity UTM available at the Structural
Engineering Laboratory of Civil Engineering Department of IIT Roorkee. Load-
compression curves were recorded with automatic recorder of the machine. The
testing was carried out at 1 mm/m speed of cross head. Figure 2b shows the machine
and specimen during testing. In general the specimens failed due development of one
Table 1 Details of UPVC tubes

S. Specimen Nominal Mean Inner Outer Cross-sectional D/t L/D Length
no. external thickness Dia. Dia. area (mm2 ) ratio ratio (L)
Dia. (t) (mm) (mm) (D) (mm)
(mm) (mm)
1 T140 140 3.86 134.0 140.39 1377.0 36.3 6.4 900
2 T200 200 5.94 188.0 200.17 3710.2 33.7 4.5 900
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 1 a Unfilled UPVC pipes. b Reinforcement for UPVC columns. c UPVC pipes filled with
concrete. d UPVC pipe columns sealed against water loss. e Epoxy capping on the test. f Cross-
section of prepared specimen
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 2 a Steel plates for loading only the concrete core in a CFUT. b UPVC pipe columns during
testing (only concrete loaded). c Typical mode of collapse UPVC pipe columns. d Visible shear
crack in mode of deformation
shear crack (see Fig. 2c). Figure 2d shows the picture of a typical specimen failed
due to development of shear crack.
Two different methods were employed to test the specimens. Four specimens were
tested by loading both concrete and UPVC tube and remaining eight were tested by
transfer of load through only concrete using the steel plates shown in Fig. 2a.
Eight specimens were tested by loading only concrete core in a CFUT. Remaining
four specimens were tested as pure concrete column so that the comparative data is
available to judge the increase in strength due to confinement. For loading both
concrete and UPVC tubes simultaneously, capping was done on the test specimens
using epoxy resin (see Fig. 1e). To load only the concrete steel plates of inner tube
diameters were prepared. These details are shown in Fig. 2a.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
3 Results and Discussion
Two types of specimens and in total twelve specimens were tested with two methods
to investigate the load carrying capacity and their behaviour under axial loading. The
Results of the load carrying capacity of the different specimens were obtained from
their corresponding load–displacement curves obtained during testing. Figure 3a–b
shows the typical variation of load-compression curves for all specimens i.e. concrete
loaded and both loaded. The corresponding energy-displacement curves are shown
in Fig. 4a–b. After comparison of load-compression curves in Fig. 3 it clear that the
behavior of the specimens; in different cases of loadings and curing conditions are
almost similar in terms of their load carrying capacity. The load carrying capacities
of all specimens having same diameters are almost comparable. It is clear from
Fig. 3a–b that UPVC CFTs exhibits ductile behaviour during axial collapse and
absorbs considerable energy also (see Fig. 4a–b). Figure 5 shows the comparison of
load-compression and energy-compression variations of specimens having different
diameters. It is clear from this figure that as the diameter increases and D/t decreases
the load carrying capacity and ductility increases due to increase in confinement. The
magnitude of the displacement corresponding to peak load increases as diameter of
specimen increases. The energy absorbing capacity of specimen also increases with
increase in its diameter. It is also clear from Figs. 3 and 4 that curing in sea water
does not hamper the load carrying capacity of CFUTs.
It is clear that all the test specimens show a clear increase in strength due to
confinement resulting from the use of UPVC tubes. It was seen that the mode of
failure was diagonal shear of the concrete core. This was ascertained by cutting the
test specimen’s outer UPVC cover after the failure of test specimen (see Fig. 2d).
4 Comparison of Load Carrying Capacity of the Test

Specimens with Standard Codes of Practice
Results for the load carrying capacity of the CFUT specimens as their ultimate
strength (Pu ) were obtained from the corresponding load–compression curves in
experiments. These values are tabulated in Tables 2. The theoretical values (Pthe )
of load carrying capacity of different concrete filled tubes were predicted using six
Internationals codes as per their recommendations and listed in Table 2. To vali-
date the results obtained by the experimental program, they were compared with
six standard codes of practice, whereby the predicted strength by these codes was
compared with the actual strength of test specimens obtained by the experiments
conducted. The comparison results are given in Table 2. Following codes were used
for comparison:-
(a) EN 1994-1-1 (Eurocode 4) [9].
(b) ANSI/AISC 360-05 [10].
(c) ACI-318.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
800
700
600
500
Load (kN)
400
300
T140M20B-1 T140M20B-2
200
T140M20C-1 T140M20C-2
100 D140M20CC-1 D140M20CC-2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Compression (mm)
(a)
1400
1200
1000
Load (kN)
800
600
400 T200M20B-1 T200M20B-2

T200M20C-1 T200M20-C2
200 D200M20CC-2 D200M20CC-1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Compression (mm)
(b)
Fig. 3 a–b Comparison of load-compression curves of different specimens tested with different
methods a diameter = 140 mm, b diameter = 200 mm
(d) NBR-8800.
(e) CAN/CSA-S16.1 M 94 [11].
(f) Egyptian Code of Practice.
The data for mechanical properties was as obtained by testing of the tube sample.
The other data was taken from the standard UPVC tube manufacturers’ websites.
Therefore the data used for calculations was as under.
(a) Ultimate tensile strength of UPVC tube = 42.22 MPa
(b) Young’s Modulus = 2750.
(c) Compressive strength = 20 MPa.
(d) Shear strength = 39 MPa.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
(a)
30000
25000 T200M20B-1 T200M20B-2

T200M20C-1 T200M20-C2
D200M20CC-2 D200M20CC-1
20000
Energy (J)
15000
10000
5000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Compression (mm)
(b)
Fig. 4 a-b Comparison of energy-compression curves of different specimens tested with different
methods a diameter = 140 mm, b diameter = 200 mm
(e) Poisson’s ratio = 0.35–0.38 (Higher value was taken for calculations, where
applicable).
(f) Concrete compressive strength (fck ) was taken as 70% of the 28 day cube
strength. This was based on the data obtained from testing the pure concrete
cores.
To have a balanced comparison only pure CFUTs or the CFUTs having only
concrete infill were compared so that the effect of only UPVC tube in generating the
confinement could be compared with standard international codes of practice.
It is evident from this table that EC4 and AISC-LRFD give the best estimation
of strength for the CFUTs followed by NBR 8800 and ACI. Hence, the use of these
standard codes can also be extended to design and strength predictions for CFUTs.
However, further studies are recommended on the subject to come out with suitable
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
1400
1200
1000
Load (kN)
800
600
400
T140M20B-1 T200M20B-1
200
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Compression (mm)
(a)
30000
25000
T140M20B-1 T200M20B-1
20000
Energy (J)
15000
10000
5000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Compression (mm)
(b)
Fig. 5 a–b Comparison of a load-compression and b energy-compression curves of specimens

having different diameters filled with same grade of concrete tested with both loaded methods
Table 2 Comparison of load carrying capacity (kN) of different specimens

Sp. no. Type of Exp EC4 AISC ACI NBR Egyptian CAN/
strength (LRFD) 318 8800 code CSA-S16.1
M94
T200M20 Ultimate 1150–1180 1058.93 1001.96 933.53 1010.08 238.97 687.10
Design 785.02 751.47 466.77 795.66 137.62 445.13
T140M20 Ultimate 627–672 669.37 644.35 545.91 657.71 347.91 312.48
Design 501.95 483.26 272.96 518.04 198.69 201.82
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
coefficients in these codes’ equations for even better strength prediction for CFTs
using UPVC tubes in place of conventional steel tubes.
5 Conclusion
. Present study focused on use of an alternate material for steel in conventional

CFTs. The purpose of study was to use UPVC due to its certain inherent advan-
tages, i.e. good weather resistance, good chemical resistance and high die-electric
strength to provide high electrical resistivity. It also has good insulation properties.
It is unaffected by most concentrations of acids, alkalis and organic chemicals.
It can also withstand huge deformations. Purpose of the present study was to see
whether a UPVC tube can give the comparable increase in strength of concrete
core due to confinement vis a vis the steel tube. It is evident from the results that
the UPVC tube qualifies as a replacement material for steel tube in CFTs with an
addition of other advantages offered by UPVC as listed above.
. The strength prediction in CFUT can be done by standard codes of practice used
for the design of CFTs by various nations as is brought out by this study which
makes the studies on CFUTs even simpler. With present studies it emerges that
CFUTs can be used as column members. It is also suggested that further studies
be carried out on CFUTs as structural members. The other variants of PVC such
as MPVC and OPVC can also be tried for their suitability in place of UPVC since
they have certain other advantages over UPVC.
Acknowledgements Authors are thankful to Building Materials and Technology Promotion

Council (BMTPC), Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India
for providing the financial support for this research work.
References
1. Oehlers DJ, Bradford MA (2004) Composite steel and concrete structural members. Elsevier
J. Oxford, Langfordlane, Kindlington, UK
2. Nardin SD (2007) Debs ALHCE. Axial load behaviour of concrete filled steel tubular columns.
In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers, structures and buildings. SBI160:13–22
3. Giakoumelis G, Lam D (2004) Axial capacity of circular concrete filled tube columns. J Constr
Steel Res 60:1049–1068
4. Gupta PK, Sarda SM, Kumar MS (2007) Experimental and computational study of concrete
filled steel tubular columns under axial loads. J Constr Steel Res 63:182–193
5. Singh YC (2008) Studies in steel encased RC columns. M. Tech. Dissertation. Department of
Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee
6. Zhang J (2004) Design of composite columns. Seminar on steel structures. Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
7. Raghuvanshi H, Studies on concrete filled circular PVC tubes as columns. M. Tech. Dissertation
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
8. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee (2010)

9. IS:10262–1982 (reaffirmed 2004) (2004) Recommended Guidelines for concrete mix design;
BIS, New Delhi
10. Eurocode 4: Design of steel and concrete structures (1996) Part 1.1: general rules and rules for
buildings. Brussels (Belgium): European Committee for Standardization
11. ANSI/AISC 360–05 (2007) Specification for structural steel buildings. American Institute of
Steel Construction Inc., third print
12. CAN/CSA-S16.1 M 94 (2002) Canadian code of practice for composite design
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic and Fire Behaviour of FRP
Strengthened Reinforced High Strength
Concrete Structures—An Overview
Sanket Rawat, Rahul Narula, Prachuryya Kaushik, Divya Prakash Jain,

Nitant Upasani, Ashirbad Satapathy, Mansi Bansal, Harish Mulchandani,
Shreyas Pranav, and G. Muthukumar
Abstract The development of Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) can be traced to

the expanded use of composites after the World War II in the early 1940s, though
the use of FRP was considered seriously for use as reinforced concrete until 1960s.
Fibre Reinforced Polymers are well recognized as an effective seismic retrofit/fire
resistant material for existing concrete buildings. This strengthening domain in civil
engineering, a critical part of overall lifecycle aspect of any infrastructure, is more
than two decades old and several successful projects have been installed using FRP as
reported in several literatures. Many of these retrofitted buildings have experienced
significant earthquakes and performed as designed, validating the effectiveness of
the FRP and technology. Extensive laboratory testing and actual earthquakes have
led to the growth of dependable design methodologies and guidelines for FRP to
be used by the engineering fraternity. FRP materials have a high strength-to-weight
ratio, which make them a perfect material for seismic retrofit. Although they do not
add significant mass to a structure, they certainly enhance the capacity of various
structural components. This also avoids the mandate of performing the analysis again
without appreciable weight change and further consequential effect on foundation
after due strengthening. FRP possesses innate characteristics to deal with fire and
heated environment. This article is an attempt to highlight some of the features
of FRP Reinforced High-Strength Concrete Structures from both Seismic and Fire
viewpoints.
Keywords Concrete · Ductility · Design · Materials · Seismic performance ·

Fire · FRP
S. Rawat · R. Narula · P. Kaushik · D. P. Jain · N. Upasani · A. Satapathy · M. Bansal ·

H. Mulchandani · S. Pranav · G. Muthukumar (B)
Department of Civil Engineering, BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus, Pilani 333 031, Rajasthan, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
256 S. Rawat et al.
1 Background and Introduction
The need for new materials and new versions of existing materials has been growing
at an accelerated rate. Out of all characteristics, the most sought after and indis-
pensable material characteristics in the construction industry are high workability
and high strength, as far as concrete is concerned. Also, the growing need of tall
buildings requires that the structural designs are optimized to perfection (no more
and no less), thereby instilling the need for research in search of high-performance
concrete. Consequently, new versions of concrete such as High Strength Concrete,
High-Performance Concrete, and Ultra-High-Performance concrete have emerged.
The primary reason behind the application of such performance concrete is to build
structures with minimum material use and maximum performance level. Under severe
earthquake loading or fire, ductility is highly desirable and is focussed on profoundly
during the design stage itself.
Failures due to severe heating environment: It is reported in literature that about
25,000 persons die due to fires and related causes in India. According to literature,
about 45% of the claims are due to fire losses and about Rs. 1000 crores are lost every
year due to fire. Electric defaults are the one of the primary reasons in initiating fire.
Many a times, beams with openings meant to carry electric lines and AC ducts are
susceptible to such failure. In terms of the potential risk, ‘Fire’ has been ranked fifth
and according to National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB), a total of 18,450 cases of
fire accidents were reported in India in 2015, with 1,193 persons injured and 17,700
killed during the disaster. After the 9–11 attack on the World Trade Centre, interest
in the design of structures for fire has greatly increased.
However, in May 2018, a 26-storey high-rise building has collapsed in Brazil in
90 min as building was unable to resist the severe heating environment. In the year
2017, a two-storeyed building in West Delhi collapsed after fire supposedly due to
faulty wiring in the air-conditioning system. In June 2018, major fire broke in G + 5
building and subsequently building collapses. Incidentally, this building was already
considered dangerous and such un-demolished building poses severe danger for the
pedestrians who are passing nearby the dangerous buildings. The schools where
mid-day meals are cooked are potential locations of fire hazards. In commercial
establishments, major fires start in storage area and warehouses than production
areas. The threat posed by fire following an earthquake has been highlighted by the
occurrence of a number of past earthquakes [27], notably those witnessed in San
Francisco (1906), Northridge (1994), Los Angeles (1994), and Kobe, Japan (1995).
Incidence of a fire may be pointedly riskier under post-earthquake circumstances
rather than under usual conditions and thereby creating a greater need for Ductile
design. Ductile detailing requires good amount of reinforcing bar to create good
confining effect but has the potential to naturally creating congestion in the structural
member for concreting to take place. Under such circumstances, the need for high
workability and flowability of concrete using high-range water reducers is mandated
to meet the construction requirement.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Seismic and Fire Behaviour of FRP Strengthened Reinforced High 257
Concrete is widely appreciated in the construction industry. Indeed, it is the most

consumed material in the world after water but its major disadvantage is its brittle
nature, which is attributed to its poor resistance to crack formation, low tensile
strength, and strain capacities. In the last two decades, the construction of high-rise
buildings using high-strength concrete has grown significantly in many residential
and commercial sectors due to paucity of land. Though HSC is preferred from strength
and durability point of view in ambient temperature conditions, normal strength
concrete exhibits good performance under fire situations. However, the use of high-
strength concrete in RC members cannot be avoided as it keeps the structural size
to the optimum level. On the other hand, with the introduction of high strength
concrete, structural members have become very thin and hence less fire resistant. The
concrete’s physical, chemical and mechanical properties do undergo extraordinary
modifications when subjected to elevated temperatures and a considerable loss in
strength occurs when concrete is heated above 300 °C [16]. Instead of conventional
steel reinforcement, this article attempts to highlight the features of FRP reinforced
high-strength concrete structures.
2 Firm Choice of Comfort in FRP
The retrofitting of existing concrete structures to counteract high design loads, correct
strength loss due to deterioration, correct design or construction deficiencies, or
increased ductility has traditionally been accomplished by the use of established
construction materials and techniques. Steel plates with external bonding, use of steel/
concrete jackets, and external post-tensioning are a few such techniques currently
being deployed. Orthodox methods of seismic assessment and design of buildings
with RC walls were challenged after the peculiar failure modes observed in RC
structural walls in the 2010 Chile and February 2011 New Zealand (NZ) earthquakes.
While some of the existing methods are also good at improving the specific building
performance, these methods lack overall resilience in terms of completing the task
with minimum disturbance in day-to-day operations. Composites made of fibres
in a polymeric resin, also known as fibre-reinforced polymers (FRPs), have been
developed as an alternative to conventional materials for repair and rehabilitation
(ACI 440–2R3). In the last decade, the acceptance of the usage of FRP as a structural
repair is beyond doubt.
3 Few Inherent Capabilities of FRP (As Per ACI–440)
. The greater interest in strengthening of RC columns by external wrapping since

1980s have led to the investigation in the direction towards the confinement of
concrete with FRP laminates.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
258 S. Rawat et al.
. Ductility has also been a concern where FRP is primarily used. It was highlighted
that the strength gain is often complimented by a reduced deflection at failure
(ductility). Nevertheless, the proper design is extremely essential to ensure that the
steel reinforcement in the beam yield before failure, giving advanced cautioning
prior to failure of the beam.
. The fact that shear strength in concrete is resisted by diagonal tension means that
the FRP can be used as shear reinforcement. The design guidelines with respect
to limiting low value of the allowable strain in the FRP for shear ensures that
shear crack does not become too wide and thereby ensuring the keeping intact of
aggregate interlock.
. Complete wrapping of the FRP laminate around the section is the most efficient
wrapping technique and is most frequently used in column applications where all
four sides of the column can generally be accessed. It is impractical to completely
wrap beam members due to the presence of an integral slab; therefore, the shear
strength can be enhanced by wrapping the FRP laminate on three sides of the
member (U-wrap) or pasting on two opposite sides of the member.
. The existing method of formulating FRP RC design guidelines by adjusting
conventional RC guidelines may seem reasonable, but it is not fully appropriate.
The basis of this statement is that conventional RC design guidelines assume
that the principal mode of failure is always ductile, due to flexural reinforcement
yielding. However, the same cannot be assumed for FRP RC; FRP RC guidelines
assume that brittle failure would be sustained because of either concrete crushing
or FRP reinforcement rupture.
. FRP bars are anisotropic in nature and can be manufactured using a variety of
techniques such as pultrusion, braiding, and weaving. The characteristics of FRP
bar are largely influenced by fiber volume, fiber type, resin type, fiber orienta-
tion, dimensional effects, and quality control during manufacturing. Hence, it
is suggested that manufacturer’s material data should be consulted for specific
product properties.
4 Literature Review—Fire Resistance
An analytical model, developed by [10], based on extensive experimental investi-

gation of the structural response of beams subjected to the elevated temperature
simulating the fire loading indicated that the significant shear cracks were developed
much early near the continuous support, thus highlighting the importance of consid-
ering fire in the design of concrete structures. However, the concrete reported in the
study was of normal-weight concrete.
Zhang et al. [35] investigated the performance of retrofitted RC deep beams using
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) laminates and observed the significant
improvement in ductility and shear strength.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Evaluation of the fire endurance of FRP reinforced concrete slabs by [17] high-
lighted the factors to be considered for the fire resistant design. The type of rein-
forcement, concrete cover and type of aggregate were the important factors reported
in the study. The differences in the critical temperature of the steel reinforcement
and FRP reinforcement were also reported in this paper. It was also highlighted that
the aggregate type has moderate influence on the fire resistance of FRP reinforced
concrete slabs. It was found that concrete made of carbonate aggregate has 10%
greater fire resistance as compared to siliceous aggregates; this was seen in terms
of the degree of temperature rise in specimen concrete slabs. Moreover, with higher
concrete cover, the higher fire resistance can be obtained as advocated in the study
and hence spalling characteristics are considered to be important.
In the past, engineers have endorsed the use of advanced analytical models to
determine fire growth within a compartment using the finite element models of struc-
tural components to evaluate the temperatures of many structural elements within a
component by heat transfer analysis [6]. The literature advocates that the input heat,
thermal expansion, degradation in strength and stiffness of materials at elevated
temperatures are required to be factored into the design of building components [9].
Another work highlighting the influence of reinforcement type on fire resistance
was reported in [20] and it was widely considered that FRP reinforced concrete
elements have lower fire resistances than conventional steel reinforcement due to the
sensitivity of FRP to the change in tensile and bond strength under severe elevated
temperature conditions. Kabay (2014) reported that the addition of basalt fibres in
normal as well as in high strength concrete can lead to massive improvement in flex-
ural strength (9–13%), fracture energy (126–140%) and reduction in abrasion wear
(2–18%). However, it may also be noted that the compressive strength of concrete
generally decreases on addition of basalt fibres.
It was also reported in [24] that at elevated temperatures, the moisture evaporation
takes place and moisture transportation in concrete has been reported to be a complex
phenomenon, not essentially controlled by temperature, pore pressure and vapor
content
Zaidi et al. [33] highlighted the influence of FRP properties on the numerical
deformations in FRP bars-RC elements in heated temperature and observed that
circumferential thermal deformations increase, profoundly with the increase of elas-
ticity modulus in the transverse direction of concrete especially in high temperature
zone. It was also highlighted that the concrete cover thickness has no big effect on
the circumferential thermal deformations of FRP bar-reinforced concrete cylinders.
The detailed study was reported by [5] by investigating the influence of cracking
on the heat propagation in RC structures (beams, columns and frames) experimentally
and analytically and predicted that the cracked regions are susceptible to the increase
in the rate of heat propagation. It was concluded that the temperature distribution
needs to be different for different nature of sections in order to arrive at the safe
design.
The demand for high-strength concrete (HSC) has increased in recent years with
the increase of modern construction projects (e.g., long-span bridges, super high-
rise buildings, offshore platforms and underground structures). It is well understood
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
260 S. Rawat et al.
that improving the performance of concrete can enhance the lifespan of concrete
structures (Wang et al. 2017).
The growing global population and the enormous economic development in areas
prone to calamities have amplified the chance of several catastrophic incidents, which
lead to disruption of buildings and infrastructures. Marasco et al. [21] discussed the
importance of hazard analysis of hospital building in an effort to improve structural
safety and resiliency and also to reduce the building life-cycle costs.
In the recent past, it was reported that development of Steel-Carbon FRP
Composite Bars (SCFCB) actually makes up for the lack of ductility of FRP rebars to
certain extent and thereby reducing engineering costs [30]. The results also indicated
that under the same conditions of reinforcement ratios, the SCFCB-reinforced beams
exhibit better performance than CFRP-reinforced beams, and stiffness is slightly
lower than that of steel-reinforced beams.
Tariq and Bhargava [28] highlighted the importance of dealing with aggres-
sive corrosive environment and subjected to accidental fire. It was highlighted
that accidental fires can cause irreparable damage to the construction. The load–
deflection characteristics of structural elements were studied under the influence of
corrosion-temperature interaction.
Gedam [13] proposed the performance-based fire resistance design method for
evaluating the flexural carrying capacity of reinforced concrete beams. It was
observed that the developed method is capable of predicting fire-resistance rating
of RC beams. The type of aggregate plays a crucial role in the flexural carrying
capacity at fire lad.
Cao and Nguyen [7] highlighted the importance of flexural performance of post-
fire Reinforced Concrete Beams as a part of retrofitting strategy. It was observed
that the ductility of post-fire specimens was decreased by up to 61.1%. Apart from
ductility, yield strength, yield stiffness and yield deflection were also affected.
5 Literature Review—Earthquake Resistance
Erkmen and Saatcioglu [11] studied the seismic performance of carbon fiber rein-
forced polymer concrete frame buildings. It was found that upon applying cyclic
dynamic loading, seismic force demand can be lesser than that computed through
equivalent static load analysis using experimentally determined period values. This
highlights the significance of FRP as a material as a choice for earthquake resistance
as well.
Eslami and Ronagh [12] performed a numerical examination of the enhancement
in seismic performance of RC buildings having glass and carbon FRP wrapping: both
code-complying and poorly-confined reinforced concrete buildings were considered.
Non-linear analysis showed that the GFRP and CFRP wrappings are incapable of
enhancing the ductility of code-complying structures, but they significantly enhanced
the ground motion resistance of poorly-confined buildings.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
A study reported by [27] highlighted the influence of ductile detailing on the

performance of RC building frame subjected to earthquake and fire and concluded
that the ductile detailing was found essential in arresting the fire damage and the
extensive spalling. A full-scale fire test was conducted on an already damaged
RC frame. A non-ductile detailing resulted in the higher temperatures and thermal
damages in the RC frame and its constituent elements. It was also highlighted that
the threat posed by post-earthquake fire scenario such as San Francisco (1906),
Northridge, Los Angeles (1994), and Kobe (1995) resulted in massive failure of
buildings and loss of human lives. Until the mid-1970s, the engineering commu-
nity knew little about how to design structures to resist earthquake loads safely. As
a result, the entire global inventory of buildings and bridges that were constructed
prior to those dates are unsafe for resisting earthquake loads. This is evident by the
large number of older buildings that have collapsed or were severely damaged in
recent earthquakes.
Salem and Issa [26] performed non-linear finite element analysis of high and ultra-
high strength concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars and observed that concrete
strength has a small effect on the ultimate capacity. However, the deflection is higher
for beams with lesser strength. It was also observed that CFRP reinforced beams
showed higher capacity and lesser ductility, while GFRP reinforced beams showed
lesser capacity and higher ductility.
Del Zoppo et al. [8] observed from his experience on earthquakes and also through
experimental analysis that use of external reinforcement systems, such as CFRP, is
herein experimentally investigated as a reliable method for enhancing the capacity of
short RC members and also helps in preventing the undesirable brittle shear failure. It
was also highlighted that L’Aquila earthquake (2009) confirmed the high incidence
of columns brittle failure due to shear, especially in case of reduced shear length
(i.e. band-type windows, semi-basement, etc.). 56 out of 284 heavily damaged RC
buildings were susceptible to shear failure of columns. Also, shear failures were also
observed in slender columns for those structures designed using “first-generation”
seismic codes, non-conforming to present day requirements.
Lee et al. [18] proposed a novel sprayed FRP strengthening technique for RC
columns. Different permutations and combinations of chopped glass and carbon
fibers with epoxy/vinyl ester resin were gushed onto the RC columns and dynamic
loading was applied. The shear strength and deflection capacity of the column
increased pointedly upon the usage of FRP; the most optimum mix was found to
be the one having glass and carbon fibers mixed with resin in a 1:2 proportion. The
shear strength of the FRP-strengthened specimens, on average, was found to be 31%
greater than the control columns.
Zeng et al. [34] studied the seismic behavior of basalt Fibre reinforced Polymer-
Recycled Concrete Aggregate-Steel Columns (FRSCs) having shear connectors.
FRSCs are capable of withstanding significant lateral loads, have very high ductility.
The presence of shear connectors on the inner steel tube was observed to be
instrumental in opposing the buckling of steel, and enhancing the lateral load capacity.
Mincigrucci et al. [23] conducted a comparative study between GFRP, RC and
steel frames subjected to seismic loading. Using GFRP decreased the base shear by
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
262 S. Rawat et al.
approximately 40% in comparison to steel and by 88.5% in comparison to reinforced

concrete. The Von Mises equivalent stress time histories reveal that the FRP frames
exhibit more regularity in behaviour than steel and RC. However, the FRP frames
show a less uniform stress distribution than steel and RC.
6 Literature Review—High Strength Concrete
ASCE [3] defines sustainability as a combination of economic, environmental, and

social circumstances in the society has the capability and possibility to maintain and
enhance its quality of life for the upcoming generations without deteriorating the
quantity, quality, or accessibility of resources. Even though the embodied energy
of concrete is among the lowest compared to other engineering materials [4], the
concrete industry is still one of the significant industrial pollutants. The cement
industry alone is accountable for approximately 5–8% of the world’s CO2 emissions
[22]. It is also to be noted that most materials used in construction are still natural
and non-renewable.
Sustainable Ultra High-Performance Concrete (UHPC) is defined as that UHPC
whose fresh-state and hardened-state properties can be tailored to meet design specifi-
cations including sustainability [31]. The partial utilization of agricultural and indus-
trial waste as alternatives for cement, aggregate, and rebar materials in the manufac-
ture of sustainable UHPC can be the solution. ACI 239R (ACI 2018) defines UHPC as
a fiber-reinforced concrete that has a compressive strength of at least 150 MPa with
specific durability, ductility, and toughness requirements. Also, according to ACI
363R (ACI 2005), high-strength concrete is concrete having a compressive strength
of 55 MPa or greater.
Though UHPC is having many benefits in terms of certain characteristics such as
impermeable, ductility, energy absorption, it may also potentially cause shrinkage
problems and can be very fragile without any steel fibre [29]. There is a great need to
reduce the cost of such HPC by looking for materials that not only satisfy technical
needs, but also satisfy the budgetary constraints. UHPC certainly has teething issues
and needs further refinement before being put into practice in masses.
7 Literature Review—Basalt Fibre—Sustainable

Construction Material of the Future
Basalt fibre was originally developed in the Soviet Union during the 1960–1980s.
Basalt fiber is a material made from extremely fine fibers of basalt, which is composed
of the minerals plagioclase, pyroxene, and olivine. Basalt is usually black or dark gray
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 1 Chopped basalt fibers
and relatively featureless. It is composed of mineral grains which are mostly indis-
tinguishable to the naked eye. Basalt may also contain volcanic glass (Fig. 1) (based
on Zhang et al. [36]).
Basalt fiber is an inorganic material produced from volcanic rock called basalt.
The production of basalt fibers does not create any environmental waste and it is
nontoxic and biodegradable. Basalt fiber has been considered to be environmentally
safe and noncorrosive with good insulating characteristics and thermal endurance. It
is stable in all aggressive environments, does not conduct electricity, and possesses
a high tensile strength. It is believed that basalt fibre-reinforced concrete (BFRC)
takes the pole position in the construction industry because it is cheaper, greener,
lighter, and eliminates the problem of corrosion of reinforcement bars and corrosion-
led damages in concrete structures. Currently, basalt chopped fibres are available in
various lengths ranging from 12 to 100 mm and various diameters ranging from 10
to 20 µm.
The use of high-performing materials (HPM) such as high strength concrete (HSC)
and fibre-reinforced polymers (FRP) have sneaked their way into the construction
world in the recent years. The reason for the emergence of FRP is primarily from
the durability (non-corrosive) point of view. Carbon and Glass fibres are two of such
materials which have gained significant attention due to their exceptional mechan-
ical performance and durability. However, their use is still a concern from environ-
ment perspective as incineration of discarded fibres generates plenty of smoke and
unhealthy odours. To overcome such environmentally hazardous concerns, basalt
has emerged as a suitable type of fibre, which has found multiple applications in
many fields. In 1990s, Basalt found its way in multiple applications of Civil Engi-
neering field and is now recognized as ‘The twenty-first century non-polluting green
material’. The use of continuous basalt fibre, considered to be the potential fire
resistant material, has already been explored as an alternative to the steel reinforce-
ment in achieving the desired strength and ductility characteristics under very severe
temperature conditions.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
264 S. Rawat et al.
Table 1 Chemical
Name of the chemical compound Percentage
composition of basalt fibre
SiO2 49.58
TiO2 2.08
Al2 O3 14.48
Fe2 O3 4.42
FeO 9.43
MnO 0.17
MgO 5.10
CaO 8.50
Na2 O 1.89
K2 O 1.12
P2 O5 0.35
Basalt is an igneous rock that contains more than 45 and less than 52% of SiO2 and
less than five percent of total Alkalies (K2 O + Na2 O) (Table 1) (based on Yuvaraj
et al. [32]).
Yoder and Tilley (1962) developed Basic Tetrahedron model (Dhand et al. 2015)
for the classification of minerals that constitute basalt rocks. The four corners of the
tetrahedron represented the four major constitutive minerals i.e. Forsterite (Olivine),
Diopside (Pyroxene), Nepheline (Feldspathoid) and Quartz. Chemically, basalt rocks
cover almost 70% of the earth’s surface and mainly contain Silica (SiO2 ), Alumina
(Al2 O3 ), Ferrous Oxide (FeO), Calcium Oxide (CaO), Magnesium Oxide (MgO)
etc. These rocks are classified as alkaline, mild-acidic and acidic basalts according
to the variation in the SiO2 content. Generally, only acidic basalt (SiO2 content >
46%) qualifies as suitable for the preparation of basalt fibre, as high silica content is
required to develop glass network. Moreover, SiO2 is also responsible for strength,
hardness and thermal characteristics of basalt. The brittleness of basalt is due to
the crystalline nature of SiO2 . Al2 O3 and FeO, on the other hand, are responsible
for imparting characteristics like wear resistance, alkali and acid resistance, thermal
stability, stiffness etc. [25]. The brown colour of basalt fiber is due to the presence of
FeO [19]. CaO provides strength and bonding nature to basalt. MgO is responsible
for Its chemical stability at elevated temperatures and moisture resistance.
8 Manufacturing of Basalt Fibres
Basalt rock is principally composed of silica, alumina, with lime, magnesium oxide
and ferric oxide found in lesser percentages. For fabrication of continuous basalt
fibre (CBF), the quantity of each material needs to be controlled. Mineralogically
speaking, basalt is primarily constituted of plagioclase, pyroxene and olivine. To
create basalt fibre, the basalt rock is mined and crushed into basalt fractures. Batches
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
of basalt fractures are sorted and mixed in order to achieve the desired composition.
These blended fractures are then melted in a furnace. Once the basalt fractures are
heated to an optimal temperature of between 1400 and 1600 °C, the molten basalt
is extruded into continuous filaments with a diameter of 12–18 µm. CBF may be
formed into chopped basalt fibre strands, basalt fabrics, basalt wires or meshes, which
can then be used in a wide range of application areas. It is similar to fiberglass, having
better physico-mechanical properties than fiberglass, but being significantly cheaper
than carbon fibre.
9 Summary and Conclusions
This paper presents overview of the importance of considering various aspects of

Fire and Seismic behavior and also the usage of FRP, especially the Basalt Fibre.
The high-strength and high-performance concrete are going to be unavoidable in
future because of multiple constraints and expectations in the construction industry.
FRP as a material has a potential to excel in many areas including durability,
corrosiveness, fire resistance etc. Also, basalt, which is considered as a green and
sustainable material has excellent capability in dealing with fire. It also possesses
better physico-mechanical properties and hence suitability is non-negotiable.
Strength, durability, stiffness, and ductility are few of the capabilities that are
sought in structural members. The design of FRP can be done in such a way that
it satisfies good number of characteristics and thus making it a viable material to
be used in the construction of buildings. A high strength to weight ratio is very
promising, and hence the issue of weight increase due to FRP does not emerge as a
discussion point.
References
1. ACI Committee 363 (2005) ACI 363R: high-strength concrete. 228:79–80. https://doi.org/10.
14359/14461
2. ACI Committee 440 (2008) ACI 440.2R-08: guide for the design and construction of externally
bonded FRP systems for strengthening concrete structures. https://edisciplinas.usp.br/plugin
file.php/3435659/mod_resource/content/1/4402r_08.pdf
3. ASCE. 2017. Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures.
ASCE/SEI 7–16. Reston, VA: ASCE.
4. Ashby M, Shercliff H, Cebon D (2007) Materials: engineering, science, processing and design.
Elsevier, Oxford
5. Ba G, Miao J, Zhang W, Liu C (2016) Influence of cracking on heat propagation in reinforced
concrete structures. ASCE J Struct Eng 142(7):11
6. Bilow DN, Kamara ME (2008) Fire and concrete structures. In: Structures congress. Vancouver,
British Columbia, Canada
7. Cao VV, Nguyen VN (2022) Flexural performance of post fire reinforced concrete beams:
experiments and theoretical analysis. J Perform Constr Facil 36(3):1–12
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
266 S. Rawat et al.
8. Del Zoppo M, Di Ludovico M, Balsamo A, Prota A, Manfredi G (2017) FRP for seismic
strengthening of shear controlled RC columns: experience from earthquakes and experimental
analysis. Compos B Eng 129:47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.07.028
9. Ellingwood BR (2005) Load combination requirements for fire-resistant structural design. J
Soc Fire Prot Eng 15(1):43–61
10. Ellingwood B, Lin TD (1991) Flexural and shear behavior of concrete beams during fires.
ASCE J Struct Eng 117(2):440–458
11. Erkmen C, Saatcioglu M (2008) Seismic bahviour of FRP reinforced concrete frame buildings.
In: The 1st world conference on earthquake engineering
12. Eslami A, Ronagh HR (2013) Effect of FRP wrapping in seismic performance of RC buildings
with and without special detailing–a case study. Compos B Eng 45(1):1265–1274. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.09.031
13. Gedam BA (2021) Fire resistance design method for reinforced concrete beams to evaluate
fire-resistance rating. Structures 33:855–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.04.046
14. Heintz JA (2014) Recommendations for seismic design of reinforced concrete wall buildings
based on studies of the 2010 Maule, Chile Earthquake. https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_
pdf.cfm?pub_id=916206
15. Kam WY, Pampanin S (2011) Revisiting performance-based seismic design in the aftermath
of the Christchurch 2010–2011: raising the bar to meet societal expectations
16. Khoury GA (1992) Compressive strength of concrete at high temperatures: a reassessment.
Mag Concr Res 44(161):291–309. https://doi.org/10.1680/macr.1992.44.161.291
17. Kodur VKR, Bisby LA (2005) Evaluation of fire endurance of concrete slabs reinforced with
fibre-reinforced polymer bars. ASCE J Struct Eng 131(1):34–43
18. Lee KS, Lee BY, Seo SY (2016) A seismic strengthening technique for reinforced concrete
columns using sprayed FRP. Polymers 8(4):107. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym8040107
19. Li M, Gong F, Wu Z (2020) Study on mechanical properties of alkali-resistant basalt fiber
reinforced concrete. Constr Build Mater 245:118424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.
2020.118424
20. Maluk C, Bisby L, Terrasi GP, Green M (2011) Bond strength of CRFP and steel bars in
concrete at elevated temperature. In: ACI SP 279. American Concrete Institute, Detroit
21. Marasco S, Noori AZ, Cimellaro GP (2017) Cascading hazard analysis of a hospital building.
J Struct Eng 143(9):1–15
22. Mehta PK, Monteiro PJM (2006) Concrete: microstructure, properties, and materials, 3rd edn.
McGraw-Hill, New York
23. Mincigrucci L, Civera M, Lenticchia E, Ceravolo R, John M, Russo S (2023) Comparative
structural analysis of GFRP, reinforced concrete, and steel frames under seismic loads. Materials
16(14):4908. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16144908
24. Peter A, Murugesan K, Sharma U, Arora P (2014) Numerical study of heat and moisture
transport through concrete at elevated temperatures. J Mech Sci Technol 28(5):1967–1977
25. Raj S, Kumar V, Kumar B, Iyer NR (2016) Basalt: structural insight as a construction material.
Sādhanā 42(1):75–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-016-0573-9
26. Salem M, Issa MS (2023) Nonlinear finite element analysis of high and ultra-high strength
concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars. HBRC J 19(1):15–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/168
74048.2023.2170765
27. Shah AH, Sharma UK, Kamnath P, Bhargava P, Reddy GR, Singh T (2016) Effect of ductile
detailing on the performance of reinforced concrete building frame subjected to earthquake
and fire. ASCE J Perform Constr Facil 30(5):17
28. Tariq F, Bhargava P (2021) Flexural behavior of corroded RC beams exposed to Fire. Elsevier
Struct 33:1366–1375
29. Wang D, Shi C, Wu Z, Xiao J, Huang Z, Fang Z (2015) A review on ultra-high performance
concrete: Part II. Hydration, microstructure and properties. Constr Build Mater 96:368–377
30. Wang L, Zhang J, Huang C, Fu F (2020) Comparative study of steel-FRP, FRP and steel-
reinforced coral concrete beams in their flexural performance. Materials (Basel) 13(9):2097
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
31. Wang X, Wu D, Zhang J, Yu R, Hou D, Shui Z (2021) Design for sustainable ultra-high
performance concrete: a review. Constr Build Mater 307:1–24
32. Yuvaraj M, Rajmohan M, Naveen G, Mohanraj S (2014) Mechanical characterisation of basalt
based composite materials. In: International conference on recent trends in engineering and
management. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2554.3369
33. Zaidi A, Brahim MM, Mouattah K, Masmoudi R (2016) FRP properties effect on numerical
deformations in FRP bars-reinforced concrete elements in hot zone. In: International conference
on materials and energy
34. Zeng L, Li L, Yang X, Liu F (2019) Seismic behavior of large-scale FRP- recycled aggregate
concrete-steel columns with shear connectors. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 18(4):823–844. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11803-019-0538-1
35. Zhang Z, Hsu CTT, Moren J (2004) Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete deep beams
using carbon fiber reinforced polymer laminates. ASCE J Compos Constr 8(5):403–414
36. Zhang W, Shi D, Shen Z, Zhang J, Zhao S, Gan L, Li Q, Chen Y, Tang P (2023) Influence of
chopped basalt fibers on the fracture performance of concrete subjected to calcium leaching.
Theor Appl Fract Mech 125:103934–103934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2023.103934
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Retrofitting Methods for Shear
Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete
Beams Using CFRP
R. Arvindh Raj and R. Senthilkumar
Abstract Due to the ageing of infrastructures, there is a need for repair and rehabil-
itation of the structures at later stages. The usage of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
for strengthening is one such practice that has become common in the Indian scenario.
This paper specifically discusses the comparison of different application methods of
carbon fiber-reinforced polymers for enhancing the shear capacity of the reinforced
concrete beams. Near surface mounted carbon fiber-reinforced polymer strips, exter-
nally bonded carbon fiber-reinforced polymer strips and externally bonded carbon
fiber-reinforced polymer strips with U–wrap are the methods adopted for strength-
ening reinforced concrete beams for shear. Three-point loading flexure tests were
conducted on the strengthened beams, and it was found that the near surface mounted
method exhibited a 28.5% increase in the shear capacity of the beam. In contrast, the
externally bonded method exhibited an 18.5% increase, and externally bonded with
U–wrap exhibited a 142% increase in the shear capacity of the beam compared to
the control beam.
Keywords Retrofitting · Shear · Near-surface mounted · Externally bonded ·

Reinforced concrete beams
1 Introduction
During the life of a structure, various situations would arise that may not have been
considered during the initial design stage. One such example is changing the struc-
ture’s functionality leading to heavier loads that may not have been considered in the
initial stage. For such conditions, demolishing and constructing a new building will
incur more time and cost. Thus, retrofitting and strengthening have become the ideal
solution to these situations. Though various methods of strengthening techniques
are available, strengthening using Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composites
R. Arvindh Raj · R. Senthilkumar (B)

Department of Civil Engineering, NIT, Tiruchirapalli 620015, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
270 R. Arvindh Raj and R. Senthilkumar
(CFRP) has become a prominent solution because of its strength and application
time. Based on the intended applications of the CFRP, they are classified as Bond-
critical and Contact-critical applications. The bond-critical application requires an
adhesive bond between the FRP and concrete, which can be used for flexural or shear
strengthening of beams, columns and slabs. The contact-critical application requires
intimate contact between FRP and concrete, such as column confinement.
Here in this study, discussions on the bond critical applications and the methods
of strengthening using CFRP laminates which are Near Surface Mounted CFRP
(NSM), Externally Bonded CFRP (EB), and Externally bonded CFRP strips with
U–Wrap CFRP (EBU), are critically presented. Briefly, the NSM method involves
cutting grooves in the concrete for the required depth to install the CFRP laminates
with epoxy adhesives. In the EB method, the CFRP laminate is glued with epoxy
adhesive on the surface of the Reinforced Concrete (RC) members. Similarly, the
U-Wrap involves the installation of CFRP laminates on the entire member for the
required length except the top surface using epoxy resins. For the installation of
CFRP, ACI 440 2R.17 (2017) suggests various parameters to be adhered to. One
such parameter is that the minimum tensile strength and compressive strength of
concrete should be 1.4 MPa and 17 MPa, respectively, to carry out the bond critical
applications. Whereas the same is not required for contact-critical applications.
Further profiling of the concrete surface for CFRP laminates is stipulated by ACI
546R (2017) and ICRI 03,730 (2008). They need to be compatible with adhesion to
concrete surfaces as well as FRPs and should be able to resist environmental impact
and be highly workable. Various studies have been done in the field of retrofitting
using CFRP. Barros (2006) concluded that the NSM method is an effective method of
shear strengthening of beams in comparison with the results of three variations in the
specimens—without shear reinforcement, with steel shear reinforcement and with
NSM CFRP laminate shear reinforcement. As a result, it was found that steel shear
reinforcement exhibited an 85% increase in the shear capacity, whereas NSM CFRP
exhibited a 102% increase in the shear capacity than the control specimen. Further,
Zhang (2017) found that the bond between the epoxy and CFRP laminate was better
in the NSM method than in the EB method. This was because the area of contact is
more in the NSM method, and hence the separation failure of the concrete cover was
prominent in the NSM method. In a recent study related to the groove spacing of
CFRP laminates, Zhang (2017) observed that the bond strength of the CFRP laminate
increases with an increase in the groove spacing. Comparing the different factors
affecting the bond strength, Sharaky (2013) suggested that in the NSM method of
CFRP, the failure load can be increased by 17% with an increase in 25% bond length.
From the above discussions, the NSM method is observed to be a viable method
for the shear strengthening of RC beams. Various past studies have established the
enhancement in the flexural strength of the strengthened RC beam with different
methods of CFRP, but further studies are required to interpret the performance of
shear strengthening of RC beams using different techniques. Therefore, this study
compares the shear strength enhancement of RC beams strengthened using three
existing approaches such as NSM, EB and EBU, which can be effectively practiced
at the site.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Retrofitting Methods for Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete … 271
2 Experimental Program
2.1 Design and Casting of Beam Specimens
A total of 8 RC beams (4 pairs) were cast, along with 3 cubes and 3 cylinders.
The beams cast were control beam specimens, beam specimens strengthened by the
NSM method, beam specimens strengthened by the EB method and beam specimens
strengthened by the EBU method. Cubes and cylinders were cast to ascertain the
mechanical properties of concrete. All beams were of length 1m, width 0.1 m and
depth 0.2 m. The grade of concrete adopted was M40. The reinforcement details for
all the beams adopted were Fe 415 grade steel with 2 numbers of 12 mm diameter
bars as the main reinforcement with 2 numbers of 12 mm diameter bars as hanger
bars and stirrups of 8 mm diameter bars at 125 mm c/c. Figures 1a, b and 2 show the
cross-section details, reinforcement arrangement and casting of RC beams.
Fig. 1 a Cross-section details. b Reinforcement details
Fig. 2 Cast RC beams
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
2.2 Preparation of RC Beam Specimens
The preparation procedure for strengthening the beam specimens using the three
methods is explained below. The properties of the CFRP laminates and ply are
stipulated in Table 1. A thixotropic epoxy adhesive resin named Sikadur-30 LP
which is tested according to EN 1504-4 was utilised for the study.
2.2.1 Near Surface Mounting Method (NSM)
Near Surface Mounting method involves cutting a groove through the concrete
(Fig. 3) and placing CFRP laminate inside the groove using an epoxy adhesive
(Fig. 4). On a trial basis, two grooves were cut for the CFRP installation. Care was
taken while cutting to ensure that no damage was caused to the steel reinforcement.
As per ACI 440 2R.17 (2017), the groove’s size should be at least 3 times the width
and 1.5 times the depth of CFRP laminate. Therefore, in order to place a 1.4 mm
thick and 25 mm wide CFRP laminate, a 4 mm wide and 35 mm deep groove cut was
made. This was due to the fact that, since it was a bond-critical application, the bond
between the FRP and concrete should be 100% and also should ensure perfect load
transfer between FRP and concrete. Similarly, the spacing between the two grooves
was kept at twice the depth of the groove, which is 80 mm. The grooves were
cleaned completely by removing all the dust from the groove. The two-component
epoxy adhesive was mixed and filled in the groove completely, and further adhesive
was applied on the surface of the CFRP ply and firmly placed inside the groove. The
adhesive was allowed to cure overnight.
2.2.2 Externally Bonded Method (EB)
The externally bonded method involves preparing the surface and bonding the lami-
nate. Being a bond-critical application, the bond between the FRP and concrete is
very vital. The surface was prepared as stipulated by ACI 546R (2017), Concrete
Surface Preparation Level 3 (CSP 3). Grinding of the surface was done extensively
by using an electrically operated grinding machine to remove any form of lattice and
dust. On a trial basis, it was decided to place CFRP laminates for the entire beam
Table 1 Properties of CFRP

Property CFRP ply CFRP laminates
ply and laminates
Weight of the fiber 450 GSM –
Thickness 0.25 mm 1.4 mm
Tensile strength 4900 MPa 2800 MPa
Elongation 1.5% 1.7%
Fiber orientation Unidirectional Unidirectional
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 3 Grooves for NSM
Fig. 4 Installation of CFRP
width by stacking together two laminates having a width of 50 mm and a thickness

of 1.4 mm. Before attaching the laminate, the undulations on the concrete surface
were leveled using thixotropic epoxy putty to ensure perfect bonding of the FRP and
concrete. The adhesive was mixed thoroughly until a uniform colour was obtained
using a mixer machine. The surplus adhesive was applied on the soffit of the beam,
and the laminates were installed effectively using rollers to remove any entrapped
air bubbles and to ensure that the contact area of FRP was completely coated with
the epoxy adhesive, as shown in Figs. 5 and 6.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 5 Applying Epoxy adhesive for installation of CFRP
Fig. 6 CFRP laminate installed to the beam using EB Method
2.2.3 Externally Bonded with U—Wrap (EBU)
CFRP laminates were installed as described in EB, and the CFRP plies were applied
as U-wraps to compare the performance of the combined action of externally bonded
laminates and U-wraps. Additionally, the corners of the beams were rounded to an
average radius of 15 mm for reducing the stress concentration in the FRP system as
per ACI 44-2R.17 (2017) after the installation of the U-wrap. All the undulations on
the concrete surface were leveled using thixotropic epoxy putty to ensure a uniform
level surface for the U-wrap installation. Post installation of the CFRP laminate by
EB method, epoxy primer was applied uniformly to the surface and allowed to cure
for 24 h. A wet layup system of application was adopted for the installation of the
CFRP U-wrap plies. 450 GSM CFRP fiber layers were saturated with epoxy matrix
and laid over the concrete surface using a hand layup process. Rollers were used
to ensure that the saturant passed through the fibers to provide a uniform layer of
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 7 CFRP laminate installed to the beam using the EBU Method
wrapping over the beam. The beam was left undisturbed for a period of 48 h. Figure 7
shows the beam specimen strengthened using the EBU method.
2.3 Experimental Setup
The three-point loading test was carried out using a Computerized Universal Testing
Machine (UTM) of 100 ton capacity. Tests were carried out on the 28th day of casting
and curing for all specimens. The three-point loading has been performed on the beam
specimens to ascertain the shear capacity of the control beam and the strengthened
beams, as shown in Fig. 8. The displacement was recorded at the mid-span of the
beam corresponding to every load increment. The displacement readings were noted
based on the UTM values as there were constraints in fitting LVDT or dial gauge.
The deflection pertaining to the beam was based on the column movement in the
UTM. The working length of the beam was taken as 0.8 m, and the specimens were
loaded till the failure at a loading rate of 1.8 kN/min.
3 Test Results and Discussions
The load–deflection plots of the tested RC specimens are shown in Fig. 9. It was
observed that the control specimen exhibited diagonal cracks of 45 degrees from a
distance of L/3 from the support region, which implies pure shear failure and the
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 8 Schematic diagram of three-point loading setup
crack width increased with an increase in the applied load. The specimen failed in a
brittle manner at a load of 70 kN. The NSM specimen exhibited the same cracking
and failure pattern with a relative increase of 28.5% in the load-carrying capacity.
The increase in the shear resistance is due to the dowel action of CFRP lami-
nates. Concrete crushing was noticed in both specimen types at the loading point.
Figures 10, 11, 12 and 13 showcase the different failure modes observed in the tested
specimens. In the case of the EB strengthened beam, the increase in shear capacity
was observed as 18.5%, which is marginally more than the control but lesser than
NSM strengthened specimens. The EBU specimen showed a very high increase in
the shear capacity. During testing, delamination occurred in the CFRP laminates,
and cohesive failure was witnessed in the concrete layer that was bonded to CFRP
laminates at the failure stage. The very high increase of 142% in shear was due to the
200
180
160
140
120
Load (kN)
Control
100 NSM
80 EB
60 EBU
40
20
0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 9 Load versus Deflection for all specimens
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 10 Concrete Crushing

in control beam
Fig. 11 Cracking in NSM

specimen
confinement provided by the CFRP U-wraps, which in turn increased the compres-
sive strength of the concrete by accounting for the increase in the shear strength of
the specimen and also the presence of the CFRP laminate placed through EB method
would account to the increase in the shear capacity of the EBU specimen.
4 Summary and Conclusions
In this study, three different types of retrofitting techniques focused on enhancing the
shear capacity of an RC beam are discussed. Based on the test results, the following
conclusions are drawn.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 12 Shear crack in EB

specimen
Fig. 13 CFRP
de-lamination and concrete
crushing in EBU specimen
. The EBU method of retrofitting showed a very prominent increase in the

shear capacity of the beam compared to other techniques primarily due to the
confinement provided by the CFRP wrap systems.
. The NSM is another efficient method that can be adopted to improve the shear
capacity, which enhanced the performance by 25% due to its dowel action and
higher stiffness (vertical orientation).
. The EB method did not show much increment in the shear strength compared to
other methods because of delamination and lower stiffness (horizontal orientation)
of CFRP laminates. Hence, EBU and NSM are better techniques to improve the
shear strength of the RC beam.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
. Concrete crushing and de-lamination of CFRP is the most prominent failure mode
noticed in all cases. Surface preparation of the substrate is critical for the efficient
performance of CFRP to prevent bond failure between concrete and CFRP.
References
1. Sabol P (2013) Shear strengthening of concrete members using NSM method. In: Concrete
and concrete structure conference
2. Zhang SS, Yu T, Chen GM (2017) Reinforced concrete beams strengthened in flexure with
near surface mounted (NSM) CFRP strips: Current status and research needs. Compos Part B
131:30–42
3. Zhang SS, Yu T, Chen GM (2017) Effect of groove spacing on bond strength of near surface
mounted (NSM) bonded joints with multiple FRP strips. Constr Build Mater 155:103–113
4. Sharaky IA, Torres L, Baena M (2013) An experimental study on different factors affecting
the bond of NSM FRP bars in concrete. Compos Part 99:350–365
5. Seo S-Y, Lee MS (2016) Flexural analysis of RC bean strengthens by partially de-bonded NSM
FRP strip. Compos Part B-21-30
6. Yang J, Wang L (2019) Experimental research on flexural behaviors of damaged PRC beams
strengthened with NSM CFRP strips. Constr Build Mater 190:265–275
7. Parretti R, Nanni A (2004) Strengthening of RC members using near surface mounted FRP
composites: design overview. Adv Struct Eng 7(6):469–483
8. De Lorenzis L, Nanni A (2001) Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams with NSM
rods. ACI Struct J 98(1):60–68
9. Barros JAO, Dias SJE (2006) Near surface mounted CFRP laminates for shear strengthening
of concrete beams. Cement Concr Compos 28(3):276–292
10. Barros JAO, Dias SJE (2005) Shear strengthening of RC beams with NSM CFRP laminates. In:
7th international symposium on Giber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) reinforcement for concrete
structures (FRP7RCS). Kansas, USA, DP-230-47, pp 807–824
11. Externally bonded FRP systems for strengthening concrete structures—ACI 440. 2R-17
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Use of FRP on Concrete Specimen, RC
Elements and Components for Higher
Load Resistance
G. R. Reddy, Milan Savji Nakum, F. K. Muhammad Khizar,
and Lakhani M. Salman
Abstract Most of the RC structures exposed to corrosion environment are getting

distressed and there is a loss of capacity of structural elements and components.
In addition, existing RC structures are generally weak at joint levels and causing
failures due to external events like earthquakes. Present chapter is made explaining
the detailed calculations to improve the concrete properties by FRP confinement.
A detailed procedure is provided to evaluate the improved strength of RC elements
strengthened with FRP plate. Also procedure explained to evaluate improved strength
of RC structural component (joint). All these procedures are validated with published
related experimental data.
1 Introduction
Structures are subjected to normal loads such as dead weight, live loads, imposed
loads, summer and winter temperatures, normal machine/vehicle vibration loads,
etc. It addition it is also subjected to accidental loads induced due to earthquake,
extreme wind, blasts, etc. The demand on the structure due to natural hazards such
as earthquakes keep changing with time. One example is recent Turkey earthquake,
2023 and past Kobe earthquake [1–3]. The failures are same as shown in Fig. 1 and
there is a big gap to implement the corrections needed in the structures.
The earthquake amplitudes such as peak ground acceleration has been exceeded
the design basis earthquake levels causing the damages of the structure. Some are
partially damaged and some are collapsed. To take care of these aspects, hazard levels
have to be improved with new data and structures have to be revisited frequently and
assessed for its strength and serviceability status. If the structures are not meeting
the new hazard or demand, the structure needs to be rehabilitated to meet the initial
design intent and retrofitted if the load demand increases. Conventionally after proper
repair, steel jacketing, concrete jacketing, bracing etc. are adopted to rehabilitate
G. R. Reddy (B) · M. S. Nakum · F. K. Muhammad Khizar · L. M. Salman

Structural Engineering Division, VJTI, Mumbai, India
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
282 G. R. Reddy et al.
a. Failure of columns of metrotrack b. Column failures in weak

deck columns axis Direction
Fig. 1 Failure of columns during Kobe (1995) and recent (2023) Turkey Earthquake
and retrofit the structure. However, recently fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) due
to its mechanical properties as shown in Table 1 is taking the lead material for
rehabilitation and retrofitting of structures especially reinforced concrete structures.
Wrapping the concrete structural elements will improve the confinement and hence
increase in strength as shown in Fig. 2a and is similar to effect of the confined steel.
It is essential to note that the wrapping will be effective only when the concrete
has lateral deformation the obvious behaviour of concrete when start loading. When
there is a need to increase the flexural capacity, it is achieved by using FRP laminates
similar to the reinforcement. It is located generally near the surface of the concrete of
structural elements. Both the confinement and flexure effects [4] are clearly shown in
Fig. 2b, c. Considering these characteristics of FRP wrapping and strengthening, this
chapter is developed explaining the procedure of evaluating the enhanced mechanical
properties of concrete due to wrapping, flexure properties of concrete elements such
as beam and columns, components (combination of beam an column) and structural
system.
Failure Modes of RC Components with FRP Plates (Laminates)
While estimating the capacity of RC structural element, components, it is important
to consider the proper failure modes. There are four modes of failures as explained
in Fig. 3 [5].
Table 1 Mechanical properties of fibres and steel

Property E-glass Carbon-HS Basalt Aramid Kevlar-29 Steel
Density (g/cc) 2.55 1.75 2.7 1.44 7.8
Young’s modulus (GPa) 69 221 89 83 210
Tensile strength (MPa) 3450 3100 4840 3620 500a
a Fe500 reinforcement steel
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Use of FRP on Concrete Specimen, RC Elements and Components … 283
Compressive Stress
Fully confined
Partly confined
Unconfined
Compressive strain
(b)
(a) (c)
Fig. 2 Effect of FRP rehabilitation on RCC structural component
Fig. 3 Failure modes of FRP strengthened RC elements
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Mode 1—High interfacial shear stresses causes the debonding as shown in the
Fig. 3a.
Mode 2—Discontinuity generated due to flexure cracks that further enhances
interfacial shear stresses causing debonding as shown in the Fig. 3b.
Mode 3—When the shear stresses are predominant to flexure stresses the laminate
gets opened.
Mode 4—Due to surface irregularity as shown in the Fig. 3d the debonding takes
place.
In this chapter mode 2 failure is considered for estimating the capacity of RC
elements and components strengthened with FRP.
Effect of FRP Confinement on Concrete Material Properties
Lin and Chen [6] conducted a series of experiments to investigate the stress–strain
characteristics of concrete specimen under unconfined and confined conditions with
different carbon wrapping configurations. Load tests were conducted to measure the
stress–strain response of the specimen. Details of tests and analysis are discussed in
the following sections.
Geometric Properties:
The concrete cylinder used for theoretical evaluation has dimensions of a height (H)
of 240 mm and a diameter (D) of 120 mm. The aspect ratio of concrete cylinder is 2.
The fibre used in the carbon composite is T300, and the matrix material is epoxy.
The thickness (t) of the carbon composite is 0.5 mm. One specimen was tested with
one layer of carbon composite wrapping and one more tested with two layers of
carbon composite. Figure 4a, b, c respectively shows the unconfined, confined and
pressure developed on wrapping due to compressive loads on cylinder are explained.
fl
a. Unconfined b. Confined c. Pressure on warp

Concrete Concrete due to loading
Fig. 4 Concrete cylinder without/with carbon composite sheet wrapping
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Material Properties:
Unconfined compressive strength of concrete (fcd ) = 32.7 MPa.
Modulus of elasticity of concrete (Ec ) = 26.29 GPa.
Compressive strength of carbon composite (ff ) = 770 MPa.
Modulus of elasticity of carbon composite (Ef ) = 157.54 GPa.
Evaluating the Stress and Strain Characteristics of Unconfined and Confined
Concrete
As per the National Research Council [5] the strength of confined concrete is
evaluated using Eq. 1.
( )
fccd f1,eff 2/3
= 1 + 2.6 (1)
fcd fcd
where
fcd is the design strength of unconfined concrete.
fl, eff is the effective confinement lateral pressure as explained in Fig. 4 is given as:
f1,eff = keff · f1 (2)
where k eff is a coefficient of efficiency (≤1), defined as the ratio between the volume
of the effectively confined concrete Vc, eff, and the volume of the concrete member
Vc.
The confinement lateral pressure as shown in Fig. 4c shall be evaluated as follows:
1
fl = .ρf .Ef .εfd,rid (3)
2
where ρf is the geometric strengthening ratio as a function of section shape (circular
or rectangular) and FRP configuration (continuous or discontinuous wrapping) as
shown in Fig. 5, E f is Young modulus of elasticity of the FRP in the direction of
fibers, and εfd, rid (0.004) is a reduced FRP design strain.
The coefficient of efficiency, k eff , shall be expressed as:
keff = kH .kv .kα (4)
The coefficient of horizontal efficiency, k H , depends on the cross-section shape.

For cylinder k H = 1 and kα = 1 for fibers normal to the axis.
The coefficient of vertical efficiency, k V , depends on FRP configurations as shown
in Fig. 5.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 5 Schematic of
confined concrete with FRP
bf
450 ρ 'f pf
Uncracked
FRP
concrete
D-ρ 'f /2
D
For RC confined members with continuous FRP wrapping, it is assumed k V = 1.
4.tf .bf
ρf = (5)
D.pf
where t f , bf and pf represent FRP thickness, width, and spacing, respectively, and D
is the diameter of the circular cross section as shown in Fig. 5.
In the case of continuous wrapping, ρf becomes
4 × tf
ρf = (6)
D
Geometric Strengthening ratios for one layer and two layers wrapping are
evaluated using Eq. 6 as follows.
4 × 0.5 × 10−3
ρf = = 0.0167 (for one layer)
120 × 10−3
4 × 2 × 0.5 × 10−3
ρf = = 0.0334 (for two layers)
120 × 10−3
Confinement lateral pressure for one layer and two layers are evaluated using
Eq. 3 as follows.
1
f1 = × 0.0167 × 157.54 × 109 × 0.004 = 5.26 MPa (for one layer)
2
1
f1 = × 0.0167 × 157.54 × 109 × 0.004 = 10.52 MPa (for two layers)
2
Effective confinement lateral pressure is evaluated using Eqs. 2 and 4 as follows.
f1,eff = keff . f1 = 5.26 MPa for one layer.
= 10.52 MPa for two layers.
Using effective confined lateral pressure and unconfined strength of concrete in
Eq. 1, confined strength of concrete is evaluated as follows.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
( ( ))
5.26 × 106
f ccd = 32.7 × 10 1 + 2.6 6
= 57.85 MPa (withonelayer)
32.7 × 106
( ( ))
10.52 × 106
f ccd = 32.7 × 106 1 + 2.6 = 72.62 MPa (with two layers)
32.7 × 106
Cylindrical strength of the concrete is also estimated using the empirical relation
given by Huei-Jeng Lin and Chin-Ting Chen [6, 7] as follows.
fcm
fccd = fcd + 2 × 2 × ×t (7)
D
D diameter of concrete cylinder

fcd strength of unconfined concrete
fccd strength of confined concrete
fcm tensile strength of composite
770 × 106
fccd = 32.7 × 106 + 2 × 2 × × 0.5 × 10−3 = 45.53 MPa (with one layer)
120 × 10−3
770 × 106
fccd = 32.7 × 106 + 2 × 2 × 2 × × 0.5 × 10−3
120 × 10−3
= 58.36 MPa (with two layers)
and compared with estimates made above using CNR-DT 200 R1/2013 [5] and
experiments in Table 2.
Evaluation of Stress–strain Relation of Unconfined and Confined Concrete
The Hognestad stress–strain relation [9] for unconfined concrete is given as follows.
[ ( )2 ]
2εc εc
f c = f cd − (8)
εo εo
2×32.7×106
where ε0 = 2 f cd
Ec
= 26.29×106
0.0025.
Table 2 Comparison of unconfined and confined concrete strengths (MPa)

S. no. Experiments CNR-DT200R1/2013 [9] Lin and Chen [6]
Unconfined Confined
1 (One layer) 32.7 50.3 57.85 (45.13)a 45.53
2 (Two layers) 32.7 66.6 72.63 (48.41)a 58.36
Note a Values in the bracket are at 0.4% strain
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Using Eq. 8 for different values of strains, stresses are evaluated and given in
Table 3 and also shown in Fig. 7.
Schematic of stress–strain relation of unconfined and confined concrete is shown
in Fig. 6.
For OA
( )
f c = f cd a − ε − ε2 0 ≤ ε ≤ 1
εc
ε= (9)
εco
where εcounconfined compressive strain of concrete = 0.0025 (Fig. 7).

For linear branch (AB)
εccu
f = f cd (1 + b × ε) 1 ≤ ε ≤
εco
εc
ε= (10)
εco
Table 3 Stress–strain data of

Steps Unconfined concrete
unconfined concrete
fc εc
1 0.000 0.00000
2 11.772 0.00050
3 20.928 0.00100
4 27.468 0.00149
5 31.392 0.00199
6 32.700 0.00249
7 31.474 0.00282
8 30.248 0.00314
9 29.021 0.00347
10 27.795 0.00380
Fig. 6 Schematic of
Stress-strains for unconfined
and confined concrete
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
60.000
50.000
40.000
Sttress in Mpa
30.000
20.000
Unconfined concrete
Confined Concrete (one layer)
10.000 Confined concrete (two layers)
0.000
0.00000 0.00050 0.00100 0.00150 0.00200 0.00250 0.00300 0.00350 0.00400 0.00450
Strain
Fig. 7 Comparison of compression stress–strain characteristics of confined and unconfined

concrete
where a and b are evaluated using tangent modulus as sown in Fig. 6 and using
unconfined strength and strains of concrete as follows.
a = 1 + γ; b = γ − 1
f cd + E t .ϵco
γ = (11)
f cd
f ccd − f cd
Et = (12)
ϵccu
where
/
f 1e f f
εccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 (13)
f cd
Tangent modulus as shown in Fig. 6 for one layer and two layers wrapping concrete
using Eq. 12 are evaluated as follows.
57.85 × 106 − 32.7 × 106

Et = = 2642 MPa For one layer
0.00952
72.63 × 106 − 32.7 × 106

Et = = 3327 MPa For two layer
0.00952
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Constants ‘a’ and ‘b’ of the confined material models are evaluated for single and
two layers confinement using Eq. 11 as follows.
32.7 × 106 + 2642 × 106 × 0.0025

γ = = 1.201 for one layer
32.7 × 106
32.7 × 106 + 3327 × 106 × 0.0025

γ = = 1.254 for two layers
32.7 × 106
a = 2.201 and b = 0.201 for one layer

a = 2.254 and b = 0.254 for two layers.
Using Eq. 13 ultimate confined compression strains are evaluated as follows for
one layer and two layers confinement.
/
5.26 × 106
εccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 for one layer
32.7 × 106
/
10.52 × 106
εccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 for two layers
32.7 × 106
Using above data and Eqs. 8–10, stresses are evaluated for different strains in the
concrete and tabulated in Table 4. Comparison of stress and strain characteristics of
confined and unconfined concrete is shown in Fig. 7 for one layer and two layers
confinement.
Table 4 Stress and strains of concrete with one layer and two layers confinement
Steps One layer Two layers
εc fc εc fc
1 0.00000 0.00 0.00000 0.00
2 0.00042 13.09 0.00042 13.43
3 0.00085 23.55 0.00085 24.25
4 0.00127 31.41 0.00127 32.45
5 0.00169 36.65 0.00169 38.04
6 0.00211 39.27 0.00211 41.00
7 0.00400 45.13 0.00400 48.41
8 0.00706 54.65 0.00706 60.43
9 0.00953 62.32 0.00953 70.13
10 0.01200 79.84
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Effect of FRP Laminates on Flexure Properties of RCC Beam Geometric

Properties of Beam Tested
A simply supported reinforced cement concrete beam of span 2400 mm has a rect-
angular cross-section of dimension 150 mm × 250 mm [8] is shown in Fig. 8 was
tested by Wenwei and Guo [8]. The main flexural reinforcement consisted of three
14 mm diameter deformed bars with a sectional area of 462 mm2 . Two 8 mm diameter
round bars with a sectional area of 100.5 mm2 were used as compression reinforce-
ment. Shear reinforcement consisted of 6 mm diameter round steel stirrups spaced
at 100 mm centre to centre. The overhang on either side of the beam is 150 mm
as shown in Fig. 8. Table 5 provides the details of mechanical properties of steel,
concrete and CFRP. Four point bending tests were performed [8] on Beams. One
beam was used as a control specimen and the other beam was strengthened in flexure
with CFRP.
The CFRP material 150 mm wide and 0.111 mm thick was externally bonded to
the tension face of the concrete beam. All parameters mentioned above are used for
theoretical calculation for estimation of the M–ϕ, M–θ, and P–∆ curve of beams
with and without CFRP strengthening.
For analysis, the beam is modelled as shown in Fig. 9. Elements 1 and 6 are
linear beam elements, elements 2 and 5 are rotational spring elements and elements
3 and 4 are shear springs. The left and right portions where concrete is confined with
shear reinforcement are modelled considering linear behaviour. Its 2-D stiffness
matric is shown in Annexure A1. The portion subjected to constant bending moment
causing flexure failure is modelled with nonlinear flexure rotational stiffness which
is obtained using the following procedure.
Fig. 8 Geometry details of beams tested
Table 5 Material properties of beams tested [8]

Material fy (MPa) ε y (%) fu (MPa) ε (%) E (GPa)
Steel 8 mm bar 352.1 0.168 523.9 – 210
14 mm bar 364.9 0.183 535.9 200
Concrete C30 – – 40.3 1.58 32.7
CFRP 3350 212
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 9 Mathematical model

4 5
of the beam
1 1 3 6
2 4
2
3
Steps for Estimating M–ϕ, M–θ, and P–∆ Diagram of the Simply Supported
Beam with and Without Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Strengthening
The following steps [5, 9] shall be carried out to determine moment–curvature,
moment-rotation, and load–deflection characteristics for a given section.
i. Assume a value of concrete strain at the extreme compression fiber, εcm .
ii. Assume a value of neutral axis depth, kd.
iii. Calculate stress block parameters α and γ for the assumed value of εcm as
shown in Fig. 10 for the cases of without and with fibers using an appropriate
equation based on the region in which εcm lies and the assumed stress–strain
model as explained in Annexure A2 considering applicable cases of with and
without confinement.
iv. Calculate the total compressive force in concrete, Ccon .
Ccon = α f c' bkd
f c′ f c′ α f c′
b < f c′
a d΄ Cs
Cs Cs Cs γkd
Ccon Ccon Ccon
ASc Ccon
d
ASt
Ts
Ts Ts Ts
ε cm ≤ 0.002 0.002 ≤ ε cm ≤ ε 20c ε cm ≥ ε 20c
(a) Section (b) Stress blocks (c) Rectangular Stress
block
Fig. 10 a Stress blocks at different extreme compression fiber strain, b Stress blocks at different
extreme compression fiber strain with CFRP
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
v. Calculate strains at different levels of steel and fiber and find the corresponding
stresses in reinforcement bars using the stress–strain curve for steel and fiber.
kd − di
εsi = εcm
kd
where di is depth of location of steel reinforcement or fiber.

vi. Calculate the compressive (Csi) in steel and fiber Cf , tensile (Tsi) forces in
reinforcement bars and in fibers Tf .
Csi or Tsi = f si Asi and Cf or Tf = ff Af
Kindly note that for beam problem, since there are no fibers no fiber force
components.
vii. Check whether the force equilibrium condition is satisfied.
∑
n ∑
P = α f c' bkd + f si Asi + ff Af
i=1
( ) ∑ n ( ) ∑ ( )
D D D
M= α f c' bkd − γ kd + f si Asi − di + ff Af − di
2 i=1
2 2
where
n Number of reinforcement bars
f si Stress in the ith bar
Asi Area of ith bar
ff Stress in Fiber
Af Area of fiber
D Total depth of section
d Effective depth of the section
di depth of ith bar from extreme compression fiber
viii. If the force equilibrium condition is satisfied then the assumed value of kd is
correct. Else assume a new value of kd and go to step ii.
ix. Calculate the moment of resistance, M and the corresponding curvature,
εcm
ϕ=
kd
x. Repeat steps i to ix for a range of εcm .
xi. Plot M–ϕ curve.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
B x A
L
(a) Cantilever beam
Mx=Px φx=Mx/EI
M=PL≤ My φ=M/EI
x x
(b) BMD (c) Curvature diagram
Fig. 11 Cantilever beam and its curvature distribution within elastic range
Determination of Moment-Rotation from Moment–curvature Characteristics

Curvature is defined as rotation per unit length of the member. Therefore, the rotation
of a member may be calculated by integrating the curvatures along the length of the
member. The rotation between any two points A and B as shown in Fig. 11 of the
member is given by
θ AB = ϕd x (14)
A
where dx is an element of length of the member.

Since ϕ = M/EI,
B
M
θ AB = dx (15)
EI
A
This is a generalization of first moment-area theorem and it applies to both elastic and
plastic curvatures. These equations can be used to calculate rotation of a member
by knowing the moment-curvature characteristics and the distribution of bending
moment.
Relationship Between Curvature and Rotation
Consider a cantilever beam subjected to a concentrated load at its free end as shown in
Fig. 11a. The bending moment diagram and the curvature distribution within elastic
range are shown in Fig. 11b, c, respectively.
From Eq. 15,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
L L
Mx Px
θ AB = dx = dx
EI EI
0 0
Since P and EI are constant (within elastic range),
P L2 ML ϕL
θ AB = = = (16)
2E I 2E I 2
Equation (16) is valid till the beam is within elastic range, i.e., up to yield point.
Therefore the yield rotation is given as;
ϕy L
θy = (17)
2
For the reinforced concrete member that has reached the ultimate curvature and
bending moment at critical section, the curvature distribution is no more linear, owing
to the cracking in the member. Figures 12a, b, c show a cantilever beam, its bending
moment diagram and curvature distribution respectively at ultimate moment.
As can be seen, the region of inelastic curvature is spread over a length of the
beam as shown in Fig. 12. This region is that, where the bending moment as shown in
Fig. 12b exceeds the yield moment of the section. The curvature fluctuates as shown
in Fig. 12c because of the increased rigidity of the member between the cracks.
The rotation of the member at the ultimate condition can be obtained from the actual
curvature distribution using Eq. (14). Since the curvature distribution along the length
of the member is complex, it is very difficult to use Eq. (14) to calculate the rotation.
Therefore, the curvature diagram is idealized as shown by dotted line in Fig. 12c.
The inelastic area at the
( ultimate) stage can be replaced by an equivalent rectangle
having height equal to ϕu − ϕ y and width equal to the plastic hinge length, lp . The
plastic hinge length, lp is the equivalent length of the plastic hinge over which the
plastic curvature is assumed to be constant. The width lp is so chosen that the area of
the assumed rectangle is equal to that of the actual inelastic curvature distribution.
Therefore, the plastic rotation is given as
( )
θ p = ϕu − ϕ y l p (18)
The total rotation at the ultimate moment is given as
θu = θ y + θ p (19)
Therefore, for a cantilever beam as shown,
L ( )
θu = ϕ y + ϕu − ϕ y l p (20)
2
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
B x A
L
(a) Cantilever beam

lp
(φu – φy)
Mx
Mu φu
φx=Mx/EI
x
(b) BMD (c) Curvature diagram
Fig. 12 Cantilever beam and its curvature distribution at ultimate moment
As seen by above equations, if the moment–curvature characteristics and the

geometry of the member are known, the only unknown to determine the moment-
rotation characteristics is the plastic hinge length, l p . Pauley and Priestley [10] also
recommend using an approximation of l p = 0.5d. In the present problem half of the
beam length of the central beam is used as hinge length as a special case due to uniform
bending moment. The left and right beam elements are modelled as linear elements
since it has confinement steel and subjected to less bending moment compared to
central portion. Central portion with constant bending moment as shown in Fig. 13
is modelled with hinges and shear springs. Linear translational shear stiffness as
explained in Annexure A1 and shown in Fig. 9 are used to model the concrete central
beam portion. The matrices are assembled and numerical analysis is performed using
Newton Raphson method as explained in Annexure A2.
For the central beam hinges the yield rotation form the curvature is obtained as
follows.
L/3 L/6 L/6 L/3
Fig. 13 Bending moment diagram of the loaded beam shown in Fig. 8
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Using Eq. 13, rotation of half of the central loaded beam with constant moment
is evaluated as follows.
L/6 M ML
∫ dx =
0 EI 6E I
which results into following yield rotation
∅y
θy = L (21)
6
Using unconfined properties of concrete as given in Fig. 7, steel reinforcement
properties and CFRP properties as shown in Fig. 14 are used to estimate the Moment
curvature characteristics using the procedure explained above is evaluated and shown
in Fig. 15.
Further M–θ characteristics are obtained for central portion of beam hinges using
Eqs. 14–20 and shown in the Fig. 16.
As mentioned before Figs. 15 and 16, respectively shows curvature and rotation
characteristics of central half beam for the case of without and with CFRP plate. The
moment rotation characteristics are assigned to the hinge as shown in Fig. 9. As seen
in Fig. 9, left and right portion of the beam has confinement and hence has strength
more than central portion and not expected flexure failures as expected in central
part. Due to this reason left and right portion are modelled with linear Euler beam.
The matrices as explained in Annexure A1 are assembled and solved on EXCEL plot
form using Newton–Raphson iteration procedure as explained in Annexure A3. The
results obtained are shown in Fig. 17.
900
800
700
600
Stress
500
400
300
200 8mm Dia. Bar
14mm Dia. Bar
100
CFRP
0
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.010
strain
Fig. 14 Stress–strain characteristics of CFRP and steel
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
50
45
40
35
Moment (kNm)
30
25
20
NO CFRP
15
CFRP
10
5
0
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060 0.070 0.080 0.090
Curvature
Fig. 15 Moment curvature chracteristics of central beam hinges without and with CFRP
50
45
40
35
Moment (kNm)
30
25
20
NO CFRP
15 CFRP
10
5
0
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030 0.035
Rotation (rad)
Fig. 16 Moment rotation characteristics of central beam hinges without and with CFRP
RCC Components—Beam-Column Joint

A RCC structural component called beam column joint as shown in Fig. 18a was
tested [11] with ductile detailing as per Indian standard IS 13920 [12] shown in
Fig. 18b and strengthened with CS and CP as shown in Fig. 18c, d [11, 13]. Table 6
provides the properties of concrete, steel and CFRP . Figure 19 shows the joint model
for analysis.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
160
140
120
100
Load (kN)
80
NO CFRP - ANALYTICAL
60
NO CFRP - EXPERIMENTAL
40
CFRP - ANALYTICAL
20 CFRP - EXPERIMENTAL
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 17 Variation of deflection with load without/with CFRP plate
(a) Joint on Test bed (b) Detailing of the joint
Fig. 18 Details of Beam-column joint strengthened with FRP sheets and plates (laminates)
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. 19 Joint model with hinges
Table 6 Material properties of Beam Column Joint

Sl. no. Material Youngs modulus Strength Strain
√
1 Concrete 5000 30 MPa 30 MPa (Cube strength) –
2 Steel 154 GPa (Main bars) 0.65 GPa 0.062 (Ultimate)
193 GPa (Stirrups) 0.5 GPa 0.043 (Ultimate)
3 CFRP 230 GPa (Carbon Sheets) 3790 MPa 0.017
155 GPa (Laminates/Plates) 2790 MPa 0.018
Resin 21.4 MPa 0.05
Evaluation of Concrete Properties Considering Steel Stirrups and CFRP

Wrapping
Using Modified Kent and Park (MKP) model as explained in Annexure A2, confined
concrete stress and strain relations are obtained considering steel stirrups and shown
in Fig. 20a. It is further improved considering effect of CFRP wrapping using the
following procedure.
rc h’=h-2rc
h
b’=b-2rc
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
40 50
35 40
Srtress in Mpa
30
Stress (MPa)
25 30
20
20
15
10 10
Modified Kent and Park
5
0
0
0.0000 0.0020 0.0040 0.0060 0 0.002 0.004 0.006
Strain Strain
(a) Modified Kent and Park without CS (b) With CS wrapping
Fig. 20 Material properties without and with CS wrapping
keff = kH .kv .kα
b' 2 + h' 2
KH = 1 − = 0.6
3Ag
b' = 150 − 40 = 120 mm
h' = 200 − 40 = 160 mm
Ag = Gross Area of the section
2.tf .(b + h).bf 2 × 0.23 × (200 + 150) × 1.0

ρf = = = 0.0054
b.h.pf 200 × 150 × 1.0
For bf and Pf refer Fig. 5 and for continuous wrapping it is equal to 1.0
1 1
fl = .ρf .Ef .εfd,rid = × 0.0054 × 230000 × 0.004 = 2.484
2 2
Ef = 230,000 MPa.
ϵfd,rid = 0.004.
For continuous wrapping kv = 1.0 and kα = 1.0 with spiral angle zero.
f1,eff = keff . f1 = 0.6 × 2.484 = 1.5
( ) ( )
f ccd fl,e f f 2/3 1.5 2/3
= 1 + 2.6 = 1 + 2.6 = 1.332
f cd f cd 33..82
f ccd = 1.332 × 33.82 = 44.72 MPa
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The stress–strain parameters as explained in Eqs.8 and 9 are evaluated for CS

confinement as follows.
Where a and b are evaluated using tangent modulus as shown in Fig. 3 and using
unconfined strength and strains of concrete as follows.
a = 1 + γ b = γ-1
f cd + E t .ϵco 33.815 + 1649.86 × 0.0028

γ = = = 1.14
f cd 33.815
f ccd − f cd 44.79 − 33.815
Et = = 1649.86 MPa
ϵccu 0.0066
where
/ /
f 1e f f 1.49
εccu = 0.0035 + 0.015 = 0.0035 + 0.015 = 0.0066
f cd 33.815
a = 1 + 1.14 = 2.14
b = 1.14–1 = 0.14.
Using above parameters and using Eqs. 8 and 9, the stress and strain characteristics
of concrete beam and column are obtained and shown in Fig. 20b.
Using above material properties, beam hinge and column hinge moment rotation
characteristics are obtained using the procedure as explained in Annexure A2 and
force balance equations as explained under the section ‘Steps for estimating M–ϕ,
M–θ, and P–∆ Diagram of the simply supported beam with and without carbon
fiber-reinforced polymer strengthening’. Considering hardening characteristics of
concrete with CS wrapping, equivalent stress blocks are obtained with the basic
principle as given in Equations A.2.15 and A.2.16. Figure 21a, b respectively show
the hinge moment rotation characteristics for beam and column for normal confined
concrete sections and Fig. 22 for strengthened section with CS (carbon sheets) and
CP (carbon plates).
Evaluation of Capacity of the Joint (Fig. 18)
Considering above properties of material and geometry as shown in Fig. 18, math-
ematical model of the joint is prepared as shown in Fig. 19. It is assumed that the
portion of the beam or column where hinge is not forming is considered as linear
beam elements. Only hinge has nonlinear moment-rotation characteristics as shown
in Fig. 19. Stiffness of shear and axial springs at hinges are estimated considering
axial and shear areas and hinge lengths. Till the concrete reaches the compression
strength, full area and shear area of the section is considered and later, area and shear
area of main reinforcement is considered for stiffness evaluation. Newton–Raphson
iterative method of SAP 200 [18] as explained in Annexure A3 is adopted to estimate
the capacity of the joint and the deformation characteristics with load so obtained
are shown in Fig. 23.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
25 45
40
20 35
Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)
30
15
25
10 20
15
5 10
5
0 0
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Rotation (Radians) Rotation (Radians)
(a) Beam (b) Column
Fig. 21 Moment-rotation characteristics considering stirrups effect in beam and column

45
60 40
Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)
35
40 30
25
20
20 15
10
5
0 0
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030
Rotation (radians) Rotation (Radians)
(a) Beam (MKP+CS+CP) (b) Column (MKP+CS)
Fig. 22 Moment-rotation characteristics considering stirrups + CS + CP effects in beam and

column
Fig. 23 Capacity of the Joint (Fig. 18) without and with Strengthening
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Conclusions and Future Suggestions

In this chapter a step by step method to evaluate strength improvement in concrete
due to one layer and two layers CFRP sheets is explained. It is seen experimentally
that there is a improvement of 53.8 and 104% strength respectively with one layer and
two layers wrapping. Also shown estimated strength using CNR-DT00R1 [9] is 15
and 9% more than with experimental data. As per reference [8] estimated strengths
are 9.5 and 12.4% lower than experimental data. Recommended strength as per the
code [9] are −10.3 and −27.3% at 0.004 strain respectively with one layer and two
layers.
Detailed calculation procedure to evaluate strength of RCC beam (element) with
FRP plate (laminate) is provided. Experimentally 11% improvement in strength with
0.15 mm thickness and 150 mm width is shown and compared with numerical anal-
ysis. The results may improve if nonlinear effects in left and right side confined beam
portions are considered.
Also detailed calculation procedure to evaluate strength of RCC beam-column
joint (component) with FRP sheet (carbon sheet, CS) confinement and plate (Carbon
plate, CP) is provided. In the experiment it is noticed that there is 87% improvement
in strength with 1.4 mm thickness and 50 mm width is shown and validated. It is
noticed in the experiment that the ductility reduced from 4.3 to 3. The authors feel
the procedure provided will surely help the work being carried out by students,
researchers, designers and rehabilitators.
The authors feel the procedure provided will surely help the work being carried
out by researchers, designers and rehabilitators.
As a future contribution, it is suggested to give a procedure considering shear
effects and bidirectional loading on elements and components in addition to in plane
loading considered in the present work. Also suggested to consider a 3D RCC frame
tested under three directional loading and provide detailed analysis procedure for the
same with validation.
Annexure A1 Element Stiffness Matrices
The element stiffness matrices of frame structural elements such as column and beam
considering bending deformations are given as follows.
Euler theory
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Timoshenko theory
⎡ ⎤
12 C1 6 L1 C1 −12 C1 6L1 C1
⎢ (4 + φ y1 )L21 C1 −6L1 C1 (2 − φ y1 )L21 C1 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣ 12 C1 −6 L1 C1 ⎦
Symmetric (4+φy1 )L21 C1
12 E I yi E I yi
where φ yi = G Asyi L i2
Ci = L i3 (1+φ yi )
where
Li Length of the ith beam element
Iyi Moment of inertia of ith beam element about z-axis
Asyi Shear area of the ith beam element along y-axis
E Modulus of elasticity
G Shear Modulus
In the case to consider axial and torsional deformations in beam or column the
following stiffness matrices can be added suitably.
Annexure A2 Concrete Stress Strain Constitutive Relations

and Equivalent Compressive Stress Block Parameters
Stress–Strain Models for Confined Concrete

In practice, the concrete in structures is always confined by transverse reinforcement
commonly in the form of closely spaced steel spirals or rectangular hoops. In this case,
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
at low levels of stress in concrete, the transverse reinforcement is hardly stressed;

hence the concrete is unconfined. The concrete becomes confined when at stresses
approaching the uniaxial strength, the transverse strains become very high because
of progressive internal cracking and the concrete bears out against the transverse
reinforcement, which then applies a confining reaction to the concrete. Thus the
transverse reinforcement provides passive confinement [14].
The confinement by transverse reinforcement has little effect on the stress–strain
curve until the concrete reaches its maximum stress. The shape of the stress–strain
curve at high strains is a function of many variables, the major ones being the
following:
(i) The ratio of the volume of transverse steel to the volume of concrete core,
because a high transverse steel content will mean a high transverse confining
pressure.
(ii) The yield strength of the confining steel, because this gives an upper limit to
the confining pressure.
(iii) The ratio of the spacing of the transverse steel to the dimensions of the concrete
core, because a smaller spacing leads to more effective confinement.
(iv) The ratio of the diameter of the transverse bars to the unsupported length of the
transverse bar, because a large bar diameter leads to more effective confinement.
If the flexural stiffness of the hoop bar is small (small diameter compared to
unsupported length), the hoops bow outward rather than effectively confining
the concrete.
(v) The content and size of longitudinal reinforcement, because this steel will also
confine the concrete.
(vi) The strength of the concrete, because low-strength concrete is more ductile
than high-strength concrete.
Kent and Park Model

In 1971, Kent and Park [16] proposed a stress–strain curve for concrete confined by
rectangular hoops as shown in Fig. A2.1 The suggested relationship combines many
of the features of previously proposed curves. A second-degree parabola represents
the ascending part of curve and assumes that the confining steel has no effect on the
shape of this part of curve or the strain at maximum stress. This essentially means that
the ascending curve is exactly the same for both confined and unconfined concrete.
It is also assumed that the maximum stress reached by confined concrete is equal to
the cylinder strength f c' that is reached at a strain of 0.002.
The relationship for the ascending parabola is given as,
Region AB, εc ≤ 0.002
[ ( ε )2 ]
2εc
f c = f c'
c
− (A2.1)
0.002 0.002
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. A2.1 Kent and Park fc

[16] model for Stress–strain
B
curve for concrete confined f c′ Unconfined
by rectangular hoops
concrete
ε 50h Confined concrete
0.5 f c′
C D
0.2 f c′
A ε 50u ε 50c ε 20c εc
The descending part of the confined concrete is modelled as per following

formulations.
Region BC, 0.002 ≤ εc ≤ ε20c
f c = f c' [1 − Z (εc − 0.002)] (A2.2)
where,
0.5
Z= (A2.3)
ε50u − ε50h − 0.002
3 + 0.002 f c'
ε50u = (A2.4)
f c' − 1000
/
3 b''
ε50h = ρs (A2.5)
4 sh
f c' Concrete cylinder strength in psi

ρs Ratio of volume of transverse reinforcement to volume of concrete core measured
to outside of hoops.
2(b'' + d '' ) As
ρs = (A2.6)
b'' d '' sh
As Cross-sectional area of the stirrup reinforcement

b'' Width of confined core measured to outside of hoops
d '' Depth of confined core measured to outside of hoops
sh Spacing of hoops
Figure A2.2 shows the various parameters and symbols. The parameter Z defines
the slope of the assumed linear falling branch. ε50u is the value of the strain when
the stress has fallen to 0.5 f c' (50% of the strength is lost) for the case of unconfined
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. A2.2 Transverse confining in RC members
concrete. The corresponding value of strain for confined concrete is ε50c . ε50h is the
additional ductility due to transverse reinforcement (ε50c = ε50u +ε50h ). It is assumed
that the cover concrete has spalled off by the time the stress had fallen to 0.5 f c' .
Region CD, εc ≥ ε20c
f c = 0.2 f c' (A2.7)
This equation accounts for the ability of concrete to sustain some stresses at very
large strains.
Putting, f c = 0.2 f c' and εc = ε20c in Eq. (A2.2), we get
0.8
ε20c = + 0.002 (A2.8)
Z
This concludes the Kent and park stress–strain model.
Modified Kent and Park Model.
The modified form of Kent and Park model was proposed by Park et al. [15]. This
model makes an allowance for the enhancement in the concrete strength due to
confinement. Figure A2.3 shows the modified Kent and Park model.
Fig. A2.3 Modified Kent and Park model for concrete confined by rectangular hoops
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The maximum stress reached (at point B) is assumed to be K f c' at a strain of

ε0 = 0.002 K, in which,
ρs f yh
K =1+ (A2.9)
f c'
f yh yield strength of steel hoops.
The modified Kent and Park stress–strain curve can be defined as,
Region AB, εc ≤ 0.002 K.
[ ( ε )2 ]
2εc
f c'
c
fc = K − (A2.10)
0.002K 0.002K
Region BC, 0.002K ≤ εc ≤ ε20m,c 0.002K ≤ εc ≤ ε20m,c
f c = K f c' [1 − Z m (εc − 0.002K )] ≥ 0.2K f c' (A2.11)
where,
0.5
Z= / (A2.12)
3+0.29 f c' b''
145 f c' −1000
+ 3
ρ
4 s sh
− 0.002 K
f c' Concrete cylinder strength in mega Pascal (N/mm2 )
Region CD,
f c = 0.2K f c' (A2.13)
This equation accounts for the ability of concrete to sustain some stresses at very
large strains.
Putting f c = 0.2K f c' and εc = ε20m,c in Eq. (A2.2), we get
0.8
ε20m,c = + 0.002 K (A2.14)
Zm
This concludes the Modified Kent and park stress–strain model.

The equivalent stress block parameters are calculated using Eqs. A2.15 and A2.16
for different values of εcm depending on whether εcm lies in zone AB, BC or CD of
Kent and Park model or modified Kent and Park model.
1. Stress block parameters for Kent and Park model
Region ‘AB’: εcm ≤ 0.002.
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
The mean stress factor, α and the centroid factor, γ for any strain εcm at the extreme
compression fiber can be determined for rectangular sections from the stress–strain
relationship as follows
εcm
Area under stress − strain curve = f c dεc = α f c' εcm

0
εcm
f c dεc
0
∴α= (A2.15)
f c' εcm
First moment of area about origin of area under stress–strain curve

εcm εcm
= f c εc dεc = (1 − γ )εcm f c dεc

0 0
εcm
εc f c dεc
0
∴γ =1− εcm (A2.16)
εcm f c dεc
0
Using Eq. (A2.1) in Eqs. (A2.15) and (A2.16) we get

[ ( ε )2 ]
2εc
f c = f c'
c
−
0.002 0.002
εcm [ εcm ]
α= 1− (A2.17)
0.002 0.006
[ 2 ( εcm )]
−
γ = 1 − [ 3 ( 0.008
εcm
)] (A2.18)
1 − 0.006
Region ‘BC’: 0.002 ≤ εcm ≤ ε20,c

Using Eqs. (A2.10) and (A2.11) in Eq. (A2.15) and (A2.16) we get
[ ]
1 0.004 Z
α= + (εcm − 0.002) − (εcm − 0.002)2 (A2.19)
εcm 3 2
[(
⎡ ε2 ) ( )] ⎤
(0.002)2 εcm
3
(0.002)3
1 ⎣
cm
2
− 12
− Z 3
− 0.001ε 2
cm + 6
γ =1− [( ) ( 2 )] ⎦ (A2.20)
εcm ε − 0.002
−Z
εcm
− 0.002ε + (0.002)2
cm 3 2 cm 2
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Region ‘CD’: εcm > ε20,c

Using Eqs. (A2.10), (A2.11) and (A2.13) in Eqs. (A2.15) and (A2.16) we get
[ ]
1 0.004 0.32
α= + + 0.2εcm − 0.0004 (A2.21)
εcm 3 Z
[ ]
1 1.2667 × 10−6 + 0.00064 + 0.83
2 + 0.1ε 2
cm
γ =1− Z 6Z
(A2.22)
εcm 0.004
3
− 0.32
Z
+ 0.2εcm − 0.0004
2. Stress block parameters for Modified Kent and Park model
Region ‘AB’: εcm ≤ 0.002 K.

Using Eq. (A2.10) in Eqs. (A2.16) and (A2.17) we get
εcm [ εcm ]
α= 1− (A2.23)
0.002K 0.006K
[ 2 ( εcm )]
−
γ = 1 − [ 3 ( 0.008K
εcm
)] (A2.24)
1 − 0.006K
Region ‘BC’: 0.002 K ≤ εcm ≤ ε20m,c

Using equations (A2.10) and (A2.11) in Eqs. (A2.15) and (A2.16) we get
[ ]
1 0.004K Zm
α= + (εcm − 0.002K ) − (εcm − 0.002K ) 2
(A2.25)
εcm 3 2
⎡ [( ε2 ) ( 3
ε
)] ⎤
1 ⎣
cm
2
− (0.002K
12
)2
− Z m cm 3
− 0.001K εcm
2
+ (0.002K
6
)3
γ =1− [( ) ( 2 )] ⎦
εcm ε − 0.002K
−Z
εcm
− 0.002K ε + (0.002K )2
cm 3 m 2 cm 2
(A2.26)
Region ‘CD’: εcm > ε20m,c

Using Eqs. (A2.10), (A2.11) and (A2.15) in Eqs. (A2.16) we get
[ ]
1 0.004K 0.32
α= + + 0.2K εcm − 0.0004K (A2.27)
εcm 3 Zm
⎡ ⎤
−6 2 0.83
1 ⎣ 1.2667 × 10 K + Z m + 6Z m2 + 0.1εcm ⎦
0.00064K 2
γ =1−
εcm 0.004K
3
− 0.32
Zm
+ 0.2K εcm − 0.0004K
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
P P
Rigid link
Fig. A3.1 Cantilever and its inelastic model for nonlinear static analysis
Annexure A3 N–Raphson Technique
Consider a cantilever is subjected to monotonic loading with increase in amplitude.

Maximum moment will be at the fixed end and when the member reinforcement starts
yielding hinge forms and mathematical model is modified as shown in Fig.A3.1. The
hinge is replaced with translational and rotational springs and to evaluate rotation
induced translation within the hinge length a rigid link is introduced.
Equilibrium equation is written as:
[K ]{δ} = {P}
Stiffness matrix will have single element stiffness till yielding and will get modi-
fied with hinge springs. The stiffness matrices are given in Appendix 1. If hinge
moment rotation characteristics are known, at every load step, the stiffness will get
modified with the iterations [17] as explained in Fig. A3.2.
(0)
θi+1 = θi M(0)
S = (M)i ∆R
(1)
= ∆Me KT = K i j = 1, 2, 2
1. K T × ∆θ (1) = ∆R (1)
( j) ( j−1)
2. θi+1 = θi+1 + ∆θ (1)
∆M p = M(j) (j−1)
j
3. s − Ms
( j+1) ( j) j
4. ∆R = ∆R − ∆M p .
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
Fig. A3.2 Inelastic moment-rotation characteristics of beam/column hinge
References
1. Önder Çetin K, Ilgaç M, Can G, Çakır E (2023) Preliminary reconnaissance report on February
6, 2023, Pazarcık Mw = 7.7 and Elbistan Mw = 7.6, Kahramanmaraş-Türkiye Earthquakes,
February 20, 2023, Report No: METU/EERC 2023-01
2. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, LFE Program GEER Association Report 082.
https://doi.org/10.18118/G6PM34
3. Reddy GR (1998) Advance approaches for the seismic analysis of nuclear power plant
structures, equipment and piping systems, PhD Thesis, Tokyo Metropolitan, University, Tokyo
4. Reddy GR (2023) Rehabilitation and Retrofitting of reinforced concrete structures using fibre
reinforced polymers-experiments. In: Singh SB et al (eds) Fiber reinforced polymeric materials
and sustainable structures, composites science and technology
5. Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening
Existing Structures, Materials, RC and PC structures, masonry structures, CNR-DT 200 R1/
2013, 2013
6. Lin H-J, Chen C-T 92001) Strength of concrete cylinder confined by composite materials. J
Reinf Plast Compos 20(18)
7. Moodi Y, Mousavi SR, Sohrabi MR (2019) New models for estimating compressive strength of
concrete confined with FRP sheets in circular sections. J Reinf Plast Compos 38(21–22):1014–
1028
8. Wenwei W, Guo L (2006) Experimental study and analysis of RC beams strengthened with
CFRP laminates under sustaining load. Int J Solids Struct 43:1372–1387
9. Sharma A, Reddy GR, Vaze KK, Ghosh AK, Kushwaha HS (2009) Experimental Investigations
and evaluation of strength and deflections of reinforced concrete beam-column joints using
nonlinear static analysis. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, report no. BARC/2009/E/012
10. Sharma A, Reddy GR, Vaze KK (2013) Pushover experiment and analysis of four storey
full scale reinforced concrete structure before and after retrofitting. Bhabha Atomic Research
Centre
11. Rai G (2007) Short-term and long-term performance of externally prestressed RC Beams and
Joints. PhD Thesis, Department of civil engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay
12. IS 13920:2016 (2016) Ductile design and detailing of reinforced concrete structures subjected
to seismic forces-code of practice. Bureau of Indian Standards
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation
13. Reddy GR, Hari Prasad M, Varma AK (2019) A text book of seismic design, structures, piping
systems and components. Springer International
14. Pauley T, Priestley MJN (1992) Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings.
Wiley, New York
15. Kent DC, Park R (1971) Flexural mechanics with confined concrete. J Struct Div ASCE
97(ST7):1969–1990
16. Park R, Priestley MJN, Gill WD (1982) Ductility of square-confined concrete columns. J Struct
Eng ASCE 108(ST4):929–950
17. Chopra AK (2001) Dynamics of structures, theory and applications to earthquake engineering.
Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
18. SAP 2000 Ultimate V-21, Education and Research Licence, 2021
@seismicisolation
@seismicisolation

RC Structures Strengthened With FRP For Earthquake Resistance Singh

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information-

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

RC Structures Strengthened With FRP For Earthquake Resistance Singh

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RC Structures Strengthened With FRP For Earthquake Resistance Singh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Composites Science and Technology

Shamsher Bahadur Singh

ISSN 2662-1819 ISSN 2662-1827 (electronic)

Paper in this product is recyclable.

Design of Concrete Beams Reinforced with FRP Bars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

A Study on Ductility and Energy Absorption Capacity

T. V. V. S. S. Padmanabha Rao, K. K. Bajpai, S. B. Singh, and C. V. R. Murty

laboratories, which demonstrate quantitatively that good earthquake behaviour can

(b) Durability Aspect

(c) This Chapter

2 Critical Issues in Design for Bending Moment

The implications should be understood of material behaviour, especially of FRP bars

The major implications of the above observations are:

Table 1 Salient properties of steel and FRP reinforcing bars [3]

2.2 Design Philosophy

1,800 – 5,000 Fibers

600 – 3,000 FRP

3.1 Design Properties of Materials

Fig. 2 Design stress–strain fc

RC section Normal strain Normal stress

Table 3 Parameters of full compression stress block of unconfined concrete

stress–strain curve ( f f , ε f ) of FRP bars in tension and compression (Fig. 4) is:

(a) Modulus of Elasticity

Fig. 4 Design stress–strain fc

3.2 Design Bending Moment Capacity M L

3.2.1 Limiting Strains

The method of estimating design strengths discussed hereunder is applicable to

εc,lim = εcu , (3)

The bases behind these assumptions are:

3.2.3 Design Limiting Bending Moment Capacity M L

The Limit State Method of design of RC members as enumerated in the Indian

(a) Limiting Strains

(b) The Method

RC slender beams, slabs, footings and rafts shall be designed to be under-reinforced

(1) Equilibrium of forces and moment at a section

Fig. 5 Distributions of strain and stress across a rectangular concrete section

(2) Compatibility of strains at a section

(3) Constitutive law of constituent materials

f c,avg (εc ) = αmax f ck , (13)

When the section is over-reinforced, strain εc in extreme fiber of concrete section

εc,lim = εcu . (18)

Therefore, x L shall be estimated as per the following step-wise procedure:

3.3 Design Shear Force Capacity VL

(a) Limiting Stresses

At the critical section of a concrete beam, contributions of concrete in shear and of

(b) The Method

Normally, in rectangular sections, only the web is considered in the estimation of

4.1 Test System

Two-point loading is employed to subject simply-supported concrete beams to pure

300 300 300 300 300 300

Fig. 7 Set-up to undertake experimental study of concrete beams of rectangular cross-section

4.2 Specimen Details

12 beams were tested, of which 8 were provided with longitudinal reinforcement

4.3 Properties of Material Used

4.3.2 GFRP Bars

4.3.3 Steel Reinforcement

The grade of steel used in longitudinal reinforcement is Fe415 and in transverse