See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/354157967

Effect of temperature variation on the plate-end debonding of FRP-

strengthened beams: A theoretical study

Article in Advances in Structural Engineering · October 2021

DOI: 10.1177/13694332211046342

CITATIONS READS

0 121

4 authors, including:

Guo Dong Wan-Yang Gao

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Shanghai Jiao Tong University
2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 46 PUBLICATIONS 1,121 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Chemically Activated Concrete/Geopolymer Concrete View project

Harmonisation through international standards View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wan-Yang Gao on 04 November 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Original Research

Advances in Structural Engineering

2021, Vol. 0(0) 1–16
Effect of temperature variation on the © The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
plate-end debonding of FRP-strengthened sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13694332211046342
journals.sagepub.com/home/ase
beams: A theoretical study

Dong Guo1, Wan-Yang Gao2,3 , Dilum Fernando4 and Jian-Guo Dai1

Abstract
Steel/concrete structures strengthened with externally bonded FRP plates may be subjected to significant temperature
variations during their service time. Such temperature variation (i.e., thermal loading) may significantly influence the
debonding mechanism in FRP-strengthened structures due to the thermal incompatibility between the FRP plate and the
substrate as well as the temperature-induced bond degradation at the FRP-to-steel/concrete interface. However, limited
information is available on the effect of temperature variation on the debonding failure in FRP-strengthened beams. This
paper presents a new and closed-form solution to investigate the plate-end debonding failure of the FRP-strengthened beam
subjected to combined thermal and mechanical (i.e., flexural) loading. A bilinear bond-slip model is used to describe the
bond behavior of the FRP-to-substrate interface. The analytical solution is validated through comparisons with finite
element analysis results regarding the distributions of the interfacial shear stresses, the interfacial slips and the axial stresses
of the FRP plate. Given that a constant bond-slip relationship is adopted, it is observed that an increase in service
temperature will lead to an increased interfacial slip at the plate end and consequently a reduced plate-end debonding load,
and vice versa. Further parametric studies have indicated that the thermal loading effects become more significant when
shorter and stiffer FRP plates are applied for strengthening.

Keywords
Plate-end debonding, FRP-strengthened beam, temperature variation, thermal stress effect, mechanical loading

Introduction peeling stresses at the plate end contribute to the plate-end

debonding failure. In quantification of the interfacial shear
Externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) sheets and peeling stresses at the plate end, early analytical studies
and plates (hereafter “plates” for brevity) have been widely have considered the constitutive behavior of the bond
used for flexural strengthening of steel/concrete beams interface as linear elastic (Smith and Teng, 2001; Teng
(hereafter “beams” for brevity) (Al Nuaimi et al., 2021; et al., 2002). Recent studies on FRP-to-steel/concrete
Idris and Ozbakkaloglu, 2014; Naser et al., 2019; Teng bonded joints have revealed that the bond strengths of
et al., 2012; Wang and Wu, 2018; Zhang and Teng, 2016;
Zhang et al., 2017). Plate-end debonding is a very common
failure mode of the strengthened beams under loading, and 1
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong
therefore, it has become one of the most fundamental re- Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
2
search topics in the past few decades. Numerous experi- State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong
mental (Deng and Lee, 2007; Lenwari et al., 2006; Rizkalla University, Shanghai, China
3
Shanghai Key Laboratory for Digital Maintenance of Buildings and
et al., 2008; Yu et al., 2011; Zeng et al., 2018) and theo-
Infrastructure, School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil
retical studies (De Lorenzis and Zavarise, 2009; De Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Lorenzis et al., 2013; Haghani et al., 2009; Naser et al., 4
School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3FB,
2021; Schnerch et al., 2007; Smith and Teng, 2001; Scotland, UK.
Stratford and Cadei, 2006; Teng et al., 2002, 2015) have
Corresponding author:
investigated the plate-end debonding failure in the FRP- Wan-Yang Gao, State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, Shanghai
strengthened beams at ambient temperature. The existing Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China.
studies have demonstrated that high interfacial shear and Email: [email protected]
2 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

such bonded joints with sufficiently long bond lengths are substrate (e.g., Gao et al., 2012; 2015a; Jia et al., 2021;
governed by interfacial fracture energy rather than inter- Silva and Biscaia, 2008); (b) bond degradation of the FRP-
facial shear stress (Al-Tamimi et al., 2015; Dai et al., 2005; to-steel/concrete interface due to the temperature-induced
Dong and Hu, 2016; Ouyang and Wan, 2009; Teng et al., changes in the mechanical properties (e.g., strength and
2012; Wang et al., 2021; Yu et al., 2012; Yuan et al., 2004, stiffness) of the bonding adhesive (e.g., Dai et al., 2013;
2012). More importantly, the use of stress-based failure Kodur et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2019). It is noteworthy that
criteria combined with consideration of the linear elastic the effects of thermal loadings on the mechanical properties
behavior of the bond interface may significantly under- of the reinforcing fibers of the FRP plate as well as the steel/
estimate the plate-end debonding loads (Teng et al., 2015). concrete substrates are negligible (Nguyen et al., 2011;
Therefore, some efforts have been made to consider the Sauder et al., 2004) compared with those of the bonding
nonlinear behavior of the bond interface in predicting the adhesives. In other words, the bond degradations at ele-
plate-end debonding failure modes of the FRP- vated service temperatures are of higher concern than the
strengthened beams. mechanical property degradations of the FRP plate and the
The cohesive-zone modeling approach is one of the steel/concrete substrate under the same temperature ex-
most commonly used approaches to model the nonlinear posure. Therefore, a large number of bonded joint tests
behavior of the FRP-to-steel/concrete interface (De have been conducted in the literature to study the bond
Lorenzis and Zavarise, 2009; De Lorenzis et al., 2013), performance between FRP and steel/concrete structures at
in which appropriate traction-separation constitutive laws different temperatures (e.g., Al-Shawaf et al., 2009; Biscaia
are usually adopted to describe both mode I and mode II and Ribeiro, 2019; Chandrathilaka et al., 2019; Ferrier
behavior of the bond interface. For pure mode II behavior, et al., 2016; Ke et al., 2020; Korayem et al., 2016; Nguyen
it is usually necessary to use a bond-slip model to define the et al., 2011; 2019; Yu and Kodur, 2014; Zhou et al., 2020),
relationship between interfacial shear stress and slip. and some temperature-dependent bond-slip models have
Therefore, some bond-slip models for the FRP-to-steel/ already been established based on the test results (e.g.,
concrete interface at ambient temperature have been well Biscaia and Ribeiro, 2019; Dai et al., 2013; Nguyen et al.,
established (e.g., Dai et al., 2005; Liu and Dawood, 2018; 2011; Zhou et al., 2019). Also, differential deformations
Lu et al., 2005; Teng et al., 2021; Yu et al., 2012; Zheng between the FRP plate and the steel/concrete substrate may
et al., 2020). Traction-separation models of pure mode I occur at elevated service temperatures due to different
behavior are little known and usually approximated by the thermal expansions of the FRP plate and the steel/concrete
uniaxial stress–strain behavior of the constituents or de- substrate (Biscaia, 2019; Biscaia et al., 2017; Deng et al.,
scribed by the mode I fracture energy of the bond interface 2004; Stratford and Cadei, 2006). Such deformations may
(Dai et al., 2003; Fernando et al., 2015; Teng et al., 2015). lead to increased interfacial shear and peeling stresses
Among the existing solutions for the cohesive zone within the bond interface, thereby influencing the behavior
modeling approach of the FRP-strengthened beams, early of the FRP-strengthened beam under combined thermal
models have only considered mode II behavior (De and mechanical loading. The effect of such temperature-
Lorenzis and Zavarise, 2009), while later ones have induced deformations on the interfacial stress distributions
been further extended to consider both mode I and mode II at the plate ends has been analytically studied only using
behavior using a mixed-mode cohesive law (Bruno et al., linear elastic material behavior (Deng et al., 2004; Stratford
2016; De Lorenzis et al., 2013; Teng et al., 2015). How- and Cadei, 2006). As discussed earlier, the nonlinear be-
ever, such modeling approaches so far have been limited to havior of the bond interface should be considered even at
the behavior of FRP-strengthened beams at ambient ambient temperature. At elevated service temperatures, the
temperature. behavior of the bond interface becomes increasingly
The FRP-strengthened beams in service are likely to nonlinear (Dai et al., 2013; Zhou et al., 2019) due to the
experience significant temperature variations due to the softening behavior of the bonding adhesive. Therefore, to
daily and seasonal temperature changes (Al-Shawaf, 2010; account for a more realistic estimation of interfacial stresses
Bai et al., 2021; Biscaia, 2019; Mhanna et al., 2020; Sahin at the plate ends, the nonlinear behavior of the bond in-
and Dawood, 2016; Stratford and Bisby, 2012; Teng et al., terface needs to be considered.
2021) and possible fire exposure (Gao et al., 2018; Kodur The above review work indicates that there is lacking
and Naser 2018; Kodur et al., 2019; Ouyang et al., 2021; research on the effects of interfacial thermal stress and bond
Song et al., 2021; Yu and Kodur 2014). The temperature degradation on the plate-end debonding failure of the FRP-
variations (i.e., thermal loadings) have two different effects strengthened beam under combined thermal and
on the interfacial behavior and the associated debonding mechanical loadings. This paper presents a new and closed-
failure: (a) thermal stresses at the FRP-to-steel/concrete form analytical solution to study the effects of thermal
interface that are induced by different thermal expansion loadings on the plate-end debonding propagation in the
coefficients of the FRP plate and the steel or concrete FRP-strengthened beam, which for the first time has
Guo et al. 3

considered the nonlinear bond-slip behavior between the

FRP plate and the substrate beam. The proposed analytical
solution aims to capture the interfacial shear stress distri-
bution near the plate end caused by the combined action of
thermal and mechanical loadings. In the theoretical anal-
ysis, the influence of the interfacial peeling stresses is
ignored, considering that the thermal incompatibility be-
tween the FRP plate and the substrate is parallel to the
longitudinal axis of the beam. Another justification is that
when the bending stiffness of the original steel/concrete
beam is much larger than the externally bonded FRP plate
(this is the most common condition for FRP-strengthened
steel/concrete beams), the bending moment in the FRP Figure 1. Bilinear bond-slip relationship in cohesive zone
plate and the relevant peeling stress at the interface may be analysis.
insignificant (De Lorenzis and Zavarise, 2009;
Mohammadi et al., 2017; Taljsten, 1997). In addition, bilinear model is simple, it can capture the essential
appropriate consideration of the peeling stresses will make properties of the interface. Therefore, it is the most widely
the analytical solution very complicated, so it may not be used bond-slip constitutive law in the literature for mod-
easy to obtain a closed-form analytical solution (De eling the mode II behavior of the FRP-to-steel/concrete
Lorenzis et al., 2013; Wilson et al., 2020). It is notewor- interface (De Lorenzis and Zavarise, 2009; De Lorenzis
thy that even for the FRP-strengthened beams at ambient et al., 2013; Gao et al., 2012; 2015a; Teng et al., 2015; Yuan
temperature, pure mode II stress-based models are often et al., 2004). The key parameters of the bilinear bond-slip
considered to simplify the theoretical solutions (Bennati model are the interfacial fracture energy (i.e., GII is the area
et al., 2016; Bocciarelli et al., 2016; Cornetti et al., 2015; underneath the interfacial shear stress–slip curve), the in-
De Lorenzis and Zavarise, 2009; Mohammadi et al., 2017). terfacial shear strength (τ p ), and the interfacial elastic shear
Therefore, only mode II stresses are considered in this stiffness (KT ) (Figure 1).
study to examine the thermo-mechanical coupling effect on The bilinear bond-slip model can be described by the
the plate-end debonding failure. following formula
8
>
New analytical solution < τ e ¼ KT δ
> 0 < δ ≤ δ0
τ s ¼ τ 0  KT0 δ δ0 < δ ≤ δf (1)
As stated in the introductory section, De Lorenzis and >
>
: τd ¼ 0 δ > δf
Zavarise (2009) developed a cohesive zone modeling
method to predict the plate-end debonding failure in the
FRP-strengthened beam under mechanical loading only. where τ e , τ s , and τ d are the interfacial shear stress at elastic,
This paper proposes a new analytical approach to consider softening and debonding stages respectively, δ is the in-
the thermal loading effect on the plate-end debonding terfacial shear slip, τ 0 is a stress value given by
mechanism following De Lorenzis and Zavarise’s (2009) τ 0 ¼ τ p δf =ðδf  δ0 Þ, δ0 and δf are the interfacial shear slips
method. Similar to the assumptions adopted in the previous at τ p and at the initiation of debonding respectively, and KT0
study, in the present study also: (a) both the beam and the is the absolute value of the gradient of the softening branch.
FRP plate are assumed to be linear elastic, (b) shear de- The slopes of the elastic branch (KT ) and the softening
formations of the beam and the FRP plate are neglected, branch (KT0 ) can be written as:
and (c) interfacial shear stresses are assumed to be invariant τp
across the thickness of the adhesive layer. In addition, the KT ¼ (2)
δ0
temperature variation and the associated thermal expan-
sions of the FRP and the substrate are assumed to be τp
KT0 ¼   (3)
uniformly distributed along the entire length of the beam. δf  δ0

δf can be related to GII and τ p as:

Mode-II cohesive law
τ p δf
A bilinear bond-slip relationship (Figure 1), which consists GII ¼ (4)
2
of a linear elastic branch and a subsequently linear soft-
ening branch, is adopted to describe the cohesive law of the Existing research has shown that the mechanical
interface between the FRP and the beam. Although such a properties of the bonding adhesive will change with the
4 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

temperature variations due to significant stiffness and Governing equation and analytical solution
strength reductions at elevated service temperatures (Zhou
et al., 2020). Therefore, the bond-slip behavior of the in- Figure 2 schematically shows a typical FRP-strengthened
terface varies with the temperature variations accordingly. beam under a three-point bending loading. The beam is
The present analytical solution is derived based on the strengthened at its soffit by an FRP plate with a length of LP
assumption that the local bond-slip model (as shown in and supported at both ends with a clear distance of L. b and
Figure 1) remains constant to simplify the analytical so- d denote the width and thickness of the two adherends and
lution. It is worth noting that the experimental study in the the subscripts of 1 and 2 denote the beam and the FRP plate
literature has indicated that the strength of the bond joint respectively. In addition, the thickness of the adhesive layer
depends only on the bond-slip behavior at the final service is denoted as ta .
temperature of the bonded joint, provided that the inter- Figure 3 illustrates a free–body diagram of the differ-
facial fracture energy changes monotonically with the ential element (with a length dx) of the FRP-strengthened
temperature variation (Zhou et al., 2019). Therefore, the beam. Each adhered is subjected to axial (N ðxÞ) and shear
proposed analytical solution can be easily extended to (V ðxÞ) forces as well as bending moments (M ðxÞ). The shear
consider the stiffness and strength reductions of the stress acting on the element interface is denoted as (τðxÞ)
bonding adhesive by using a temperature-dependent bond- (Figure 3). The axial force in the adhesive layer is ignored
slip model at the final service temperature (also described because the axial stiffness of the adhesive layer is much
by the bilinear function). smaller compared with those of the beam and the FRP plate.

Figure 2. Schematic of the FRP-strengthened beam.

Figure 3. Schematic of a differential element of FRP-strengthened beam.

Guo et al. 5

According to the horizontal force equilibrium of the beam By substituting equation (11) into equation (1), the shear
and the FRP plate, the following equations can be obtained: stress at the elastic stage of the interface can be calculated
by:
dN1 ðxÞ dN2 ðxÞ
¼ τðxÞb2 ¼ τðxÞb2 (5)
dx dx τ e ðxÞ ¼ KT ½u2 ðxÞ  u1 ðxÞ (13)
where b2 denotes the width of the FRP plate, which is also Furthermore, differentiating equation (13) twice and
the width of the adhesive layer. Considering the overall substituting equations (5), (7), (8), and (12) into it, the final
horizontal force equilibrium, the relationship between the governing differential equation of the interfacial shear
axial forces on beam and FRP plate can be obtained as: stress can be obtained as:
 
N1 ðxÞ ¼ N2 ðxÞ (6) d 2 τ e ðxÞ y1 ðy1 þ y2 þ ta Þ 1 1
 KT b2 þ þ τ e ðxÞ
dx2 E 1 I1 E1 A1 E2 A2
The relationship between the overall bending moment  
and the shear force distribution of the beam can be written as: K T y1
þ VT ðxÞ ¼ 0
E1 I1
dMT ðxÞ
¼ VT ðxÞ (7) (14)
dx
By setting λ2 ¼ KT b2 ½ðy1 ðy1 þ y2 þ ta Þ=E1 I1 Þþ
Since the flexural stiffness of the FRP plate is negligible
ð1=E1 A1 Þ þ ð1=E2 A2 Þ and m1 ¼ 1=λ2 ðKT y1 =E1 I1 Þ, equa-
compared with that of the beam, it is ignored and the overall
tion (14) can be simplified as:
moment equilibrium can be expressed as follows:
d 2 τ e ðxÞ
MT ¼ M1 þ N1 ðy1 þ y2 þ ta Þ (8)  λ2 τ e ðxÞ þ m1 λ2 VT ðxÞ ¼ 0 (15)
dx2
where y1 and y2 are the distances from the neutral axes of
The general solution of equation (15) is:
two adherends to the corresponding interface (see Figure 3
for more details), respectively. As stated earlier, the τ e ðxÞ ¼ Bx coshðλxÞ þ By sinhðλxÞ þ m1 VT ðxÞ (16)
transverse shear deformations in both the beam and the
FRP plate are negligible, and thus the strains at the bottom where Bx and By are two integral constants. The interfacial
of the beam ðε1 Þ and at the top of the FRP plate ðε2 Þ can be slip in the elastic region can be obtained as:
calculated as: 1 
δe ðxÞ ¼ Bx coshðλxÞ þ By sinhðλxÞ þ m1 VT ðxÞ (17)
y1 1 KT
ε1 ðxÞ ¼ M1 ðxÞ  N1 ðxÞ þ α1 ΔT (9)
E1 I1 E1 A1
When the interface enters the softening region, the shear
1 stress distribution can be expressed as
ε2 ðxÞ ¼ N2 ðxÞ þ α2 ΔT (10)
E2 A2 τ s ðxÞ ¼ τ 0  KT0 ½u2 ðxÞ  u1 ðxÞ (18)
where E, A, I and α are the elastic modulus, sectional area, Similarly, the governing equation of the shear stress
second moment of area, and thermal expansion coefficient distribution in the softening region can be derived as:
respectively; the subscripts 1 and 2 denote the beam and the  
FRP plate, respectively; ΔT is the temperature variation. d 2 τ s ðxÞ 0 y1 ðy1 þ y2 þ ta Þ 1 1
þ KT 2b þ þ τ s ðxÞ
The interfacial shear slip at the location x can be expressed as dx2 E 1 I1 E1 A1 E2 A2
δðxÞ ¼ u2 ðxÞ  u1 ðxÞ (11) K 0 y1
 T VT ðxÞ ¼ 0
E 1 I1
where u1 and u2 are the axial displacements at the bottom of (19)
the beam and the top of the FRP plate, respectively.
Differentiating equation (11) and substituting equations By defining λ02 ¼ KT0 b2 ½ðy1 ðy1 þ y2 þ ta Þ=E1 I1 Þ
(9) and (10) into it, the following equation can be derived: þð1=E1 A1 Þ þ ð1=E2 A2 Þ ¼ ðKT0 =KT Þλ2 , and m01 ¼ ð1=λ02 Þ
ðKT0 y1 =E1 I1 Þ ¼ m1 , equation (19) can be simplified as:
dδ
¼ ε2 ðxÞ  ε1 ðxÞ d 2 τ s ðxÞ
dx þ λ02 τ s ðxÞ  m01 λ02 VT ðxÞ ¼ 0 (20)
y1 1 1 dx2
¼ M1 ðxÞ þ N2 ðxÞ þ N1 ðxÞ þ ðα2  α1 ÞΔT
E1 I1 E2 A2 E1 A1 The general solution of the shear stress distribution in
(12) the softening region can be expressed as:
6 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

axial forces of the beam and the plate soffit are equal to zero
τ s ðxÞ ¼ Bm cos λ0 x þ Bn sin λ0 x þ m01 VT ðxÞ (21)
(equation (26)).
where Bm and Bn are also integral constants. Therefore, the F
interfacial slip in the softening region can be expressed as: V1 ð0Þ ¼ VT ð0Þ ¼ (24)
2
1 h i
Fa
δs ðxÞ ¼ 0 τ 0  Bm cos λ0 x  Bn sin λ0 x  m01 VT ðxÞ M1 ð0Þ ¼ MT ð0Þ ¼ (25)
KT 2
(22)
N1 ð0Þ ¼ N2 ð0Þ ¼ 0 (26)

where a represents the distance from the plate end to the

Stages of debonding process
supporting point (Figure 2).
The entire deformation process of the interface can be Substituting equations (9) and (10) into the first-order
divided into three stages, including the elastic (E) stage, differentiation of equation (13) and applying the above
elastic-softening (E-S) stage, and elastic-softening- boundary conditions, the following equation can be
debonding (E-S-D) stage. The interfacial shear stresses derived:
remain below τ p in the E stage, and the interfacial stress/slip
distributions are governed by equations (16) and (17). At dτ e ðxÞ m2 a
¼ m2 MT ð0Þ þ m3 ΔT ¼  F þ m3 ΔT
the end of the E stage, the plate end region enters the dx x¼0 2
softening stage. During the E-S stage, the length of the (27)
softening region near the plate end tends to expand, while
the region away from the plate end remains elastic. The where m3 ¼ KT ðα2  α1 Þ. The parameter m2 is defined as:
interfacial stress/slip distributions in the softening region KT y1
are governed by equations (21) and (22). Once the inter- m2 ¼ (28)
E1 I1
facial slip of the plate end increases to δf , the debonding
initiates at the plate end, and the deformation process of the By substituting equation (23) into equation (27), B2 can
interface enters the E-S-D stage. be determined as:
It is worth noting that once the debonding failure starts
1 h m2 a i
at the plate end, the loading-bearing capacity of the FRP- B2 ¼  F þ m3 ΔT (29)
strengthened beam will suddenly decrease, as reported by λ 2
Deng and Lee (2007). That is because the debonding Since the load applied to the FRP-strengthened beam is
propagation is likely to be a dynamic process and a sudden symmetrically distributed, the interfacial shear stress at the
release of energy is usually encountered during the de- mid-span is zero. That is,
bonding process (Teng et al., 2015). As a result, the load
corresponding to the occurrence of plate-end debonding LP
τe ¼0 (30)
failure is usually defined as the load-bearing capacity (i.e., 2
the debonding load) of the FRP-strengthened beam (Teng
Therefore, B1 can be determined as:
et al., 2015; De Lorenzis et al., 2013). Therefore, only the E
   
and E-S stages are included in the analytical solution to 1 m2 a λLP m1
predict the debonding load. B1 ¼ tanh  F
2 λ 2 coshðλðLP =2ÞÞ
(31)
tanhðλðLP =2ÞÞ
Elastic stage. In the elastic stage, the entire length of the  m3 ΔT
λ
interface behaves as elastic, and the shear stress distribution
can be expressed as In addition, the axial stress of the FRP plate (σ P ) at the
position of x0 ð0 ≤ x0 ≤ ðLP =2ÞÞ in the E stage can be
F
τ e ðxÞ ¼ B1 coshðλxÞ þ B2 sinhðλxÞ þ m1 (23) computed by integrating the shear stresses along the bond
2 interface as follows:
where F is the mechanical loading applied to the mid-span xð0
of the beam. Here, VT ðxÞ ¼ F=2. The integral constants of τ e ðxÞ 1
B1 and B2 can be determined by applying appropriate σ P ðx0 Þ ¼ dx ¼ ½B1 sinhðλx0 Þ
d2 d2 λ
boundary conditions, including the shear force (equation 0 (32)
(24)) and bending moment (equation (25)) of the m1 F
þ B2 coshðλx0 Þ  B2  þ x0
strengthened beam at the end of the FRP plate, while the 2d2
Guo et al. 7

 
Elastic-softening stage. In the E-S stage, both the softening 1 λLP
region (near the plate end) and the elastic region (near the B6 ¼  h . i τ p cosh
sinh λ LP 2  x 2
mid-span of the FRP plate) should be considered, and the (40)
  
length of the softening region ðxÞ grows with the increasing m1 F λLP
applied load. The shear stress distributions in the two re- þ cosh λx  cosh
2 2
gions can be expressed as follows:
F Since the determination of the above integral constants
τ s ðxÞ ¼ B3 cos λ0 x þ B4 sin λ0 x þ m1 0≤x<x includes the variable x, which varies with the load level.
2
(33) Using the same method adopted by De Lorenzis and
Zavarise (2009), the relationship between x and F can
 
F LP be determined by considering that N1 , N2 , and M1 are
τ e ðxÞ ¼ B5 coshðλxÞ þ B6 sinhðλxÞ þ m1 x≤x≤ continuous at x ¼ x. That is,
2 2
(34)
dτ s x KT0 dτ e x
Similar to the method used in the E stage, by applying ¼ (41)
the boundary conditions at the plate end, the integral dx KT dx
constant B4 can be determined as: K0 h
   B3 λ0 sin λ0 x þ B4 λ0 cos λ0 x ¼  T B5 λ sinh λx
1 m0 a i
KT
B4 ¼ 0 2 F  m03 ΔT (35)
λ 2 þ B6 λ cosh λx

where m02 ¼ KT0 y1 =E1 I1 and m03 ¼ KT0 ðα2  α1 Þ. (42)

Similarly, the shear stress is equal to zero at the mid- Therefore,
span. That is
n h io
      τ p tan λ0 x þ rcoth λðLP =2Þ  x
LP λLP λLP F .h i
τe ¼ B5 cosh þ B6 sinh þ m1 ¼ 0 0 0
0
2 2 2 2
F þ m 3 ΔT λ cos λ x
(36) ¼ nh . i. o nn
2 m1 sin λ x þ m02 a λ0 cos λ0 x þ m1 r cosh
0
h i o.n h ioo
In addition to the boundary conditions of the plate end
 λ ðLP =2Þ  x  1 sinh λ ðLP =2Þ  x
and mid-span as described above, the peak shear stress τ p is
obtained at the critical point x connecting the elastic and the (43)
softening regions (equation (37)): p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
Here, r ¼ ðλ0 =λÞ ¼ ðK 0 =KÞ is introduced.
τs x ¼ τe x ¼ τp (37) In addition, for the cases where λðLP =2  xÞ > 10,
equation (43) can be simplified as follows:
Substituting equations (37) and (35) into equation (33), n h i .h io
0 0 0 0
B3 can be determined as: F τ p tan λ x þ r þ m 3 ΔT λ cos λ x
   ¼    (44)
1 F m02 a 0 0
2
m1 sin λ0 x þ λ20
0
m a
cos λ0 x þ m1 r
B3 ¼ τp  sin λ x þ m1
cos λ0 x 2 λ0
 (38)
m03 ΔT In the E-S stage, the tensile stress in the FRP plate at a
þ sin λ0 x
λ0 distance x0 can be derived as:
when 0 ≤ x0 < x,
Similarly, substituting equation (37) into equation (34)
xð0
and combining equation (36), B5 and B6 can be determined τ s ðxÞ 1 h
as: σ P ðx0 Þ ¼ dx ¼ 0 B3 sin λ0 x0  B4 cos λ0 x0
d2 λ d2
  0
1 λLP i mF
B5 ¼ h i τ p sinh 1
2 þ B4 þ x0
sinh λ ðLP =2Þ  x 2d2
   (39)
m1 F λLP (45)
þ sinh λx  sinh
2 2 and when x ≤ x0 ≤ LP =2,
8 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

Table 1. Parameters used in the FE model.

Geometry parameters of the beam

b1 (mm) d1 (mm) b2 (mm) d2 (mm) L(mm) LP (mm) ta (mm)

76 86 76 3 1100 400 1

Material and interface parameters

E1 (MPa) E2 (MPa) τ p (MPa) δ0 (mm) δf (mm) GII (N/mm) α1 (/°C) α2 (/°C)

205000 212000 26.73 0.0526 0.1197 1.600 11×10-6 1×10-6

xð0
τ e ðxÞ 1
σ P ðx0 Þ ¼ dx þ σ P x ¼ ½B5 sinhðλx0 Þ
d2 λd2
x
m1 F 1 h
þ B6 coshðλx0 Þ þ x0  B5 sinh λx
2d2 λd2
i 1 h
þ B6 cosh λx þ 0 B3 sin λ0 x
λ d2
i
 B4 cos λ0 x þ B4
(46)

Debonding load
When the interfacial shear stress at the plate end decreases
to zero, the debonding load of the FRP-strengthened beam Figure 4. Distribution of interfacail shear stress with different
is reached at the end of the E-S stage. Applying the element sizes.
boundary condition (i.e., τ s ðxÞjx¼0 ¼ 0) and substituting
equation (38) into equation (33), the corresponding load- analytical solution. The distributions of the interfacial
bearing capacity Fdeb at the occurrence of the plate-end stresses/slips and the axial stresses in the FRP plate obtained
debonding can be obtained as: from the analytical solution are verified against the numerical
h i results. A simply supported beam as shown in Figure 2 is
2 λ0 τ p þ m03 ΔT sin λ0 xdeb considered as an example. The geometrical dimensions of the
Fdeb ¼ (47) beam are 76 mm in width, 86 mm in depth and 1100 mm in
m02 a sin λ0 xdeb þ m01 λ0 þ m01 λ0 cos λ0 xdeb
clear span. The beam is strengthened at its soffit with an
800 mm long FRP plate. The FRP plate has the same width as
The debonding load ðFdeb Þ and the corresponding length
the beam and a 3 mm thickness. The detailed parameters of
of softening zone ðxdeb Þ can be computed by combining
the beam are provided in Table 1. The bond-slip parameters
equations (43) and (47).
used to define the interfacial bond behavior between the FRP
plate and the beam are also listed in Table 1, which are taken
Validation of the analytical solution from De Lorenzis et al.’s (2013) study.
All the FE results in the paper are obtained using the
Finite element (FE) model
general-purpose software Abaqus 6.14 (Abaqus, 2014). It
In the literature, the existing experimental research on FRP- is worth mentioning that the authors have extensively used
strengthened steel/concrete beams under combined thermal Abaqus software for modeling the behavior of FRP-
and mechanical loadings is very limited (Klamer et al., strengthened reinforced concrete (RC) beams at ambient
2008; Sahin and Dawood 2016; Stratford and Bisby 2012; and high temperatures (i.e., under fire exposure) (Dai et al.,
Teng et al., 2021). Among the limited experimental studies, 2015; Gao et al., 2015b, 2016, 2017), the debonding be-
the Mode-II bond-slip characteristics of the FRP-to-steel havior of FRP-to-steel/concrete bonded joints under
interface were not given, and the experimental results combined thermal and mechanical loadings (Gao et al.,
cannot be directly used for model validation. Therefore, a 2012; 2015a), as well as the flexural behavior and asso-
finite element (FE) model was developed to generate ciated debonding failures of the FRP-strengthened steel
sufficient numerical results to validate the proposed beams under bending loading (Zeng et al., 2018). A similar
Guo et al. 9

two-dimensional (2D) FE model is used in the current

study to simulate the interfacial stress distribution and
related debonding propagation of the FRP-strengthened
beam under combined thermal and mechanical loadings.
The steel beam is modeled by the Euler-Bernoulli beam
element (B23 in the Abaqus notation), which uses cubic
interpolation functions and has two translational and one
rotational degrees of freedom at each node. The FRP plate
is modeled by a two-node truss element (T2D2), which has
two translational degrees of freedom at each node. The
adhesive layer between the FRP plate and the steel beam is
modeled by a four-node cohesive element (COH2D4),
which can simulate the bond interface with appropriately
defined bond-slip properties. When defining the interface
behavior in the normal direction of the cohesive elements,
the stiffness and the mode I fracture energy are assumed to
be several orders of magnitude greater than those of the
mode II case to ensure that no penetration or separation
occurs in the interfacial normal direction. The FE model is
created and solved using the Abaqus static general ap-
proach, in which the nonlinear analysis of each load step is
solved using Newton-Raphson equilibrium iterations with
the default force convergence value (i.e., 0.5%).

Mesh sensitivity analysis

A mesh sensitivity analysis is carried out to obtain the most
suitable size of FE meshes. The substrate beam, the FRP
plate and the adhesive layer are simulated with the same
mesh size. Such element size varies from 0.1 mm to
6.4 mm. Figure 4 compares the interfacial shear stress
distributions near the plate end predicted for the beam
under a mechanical load of 80 kN with different element
sizes, including 0.1 mm, 0.2 mm, 0.4 mm, 0.8 mm, 1.6 mm,
3.2 mm, and 6.4 mm. The comparisons in Figure 4 indicate
that a mesh size not larger than 0.4 mm is suitable for
achieving an accurate FE prediction of the shear stress
distribution near the plate end. Therefore, the element size
of all components (i.e., both the adherends and the adhesive
layer) is set to 0.2 mm in the FE model based on a tradeoff
between accuracy and efficiency of the computation.

Comparisons with the FE results

Figure 5. Comparisons between analytical and FE results for the
Figures 5 and 6 show the distributions of interfacial shear
FRP-strengthened beam under various applied load levels: (a)
stresses/slips and axial stresses in the FRP plate predicted normalized shear stress distribution; (b) normalized shear slip
by the analytical solution and the FE model under two distribution; (c) axial stress of the FRP plate.
different conditions: (a) the beam is subjected to me-
chanical loading only and the temperature variation is not
considered (i.e., at room temperature); (b) the beam is and the corresponding slip ðδ0 Þ. Also, only half of the
subjected to varying service temperatures (from 50°C laminate (i.e., from the plate end to the mid-span) is il-
to +50°C) while the applied load is constant. In these lustrated considering the symmetry of the strengthened
figures, the magnitudes of interfacial stresses/slips are beam. It can be clearly seen that the analytical predictions
normalized by the maximum interfacial shear stress ðτ p Þ are almost the same as those obtained from the FE model. It
10 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

applied load increases. During the E stage (F = 80 kN or

130 kN and ΔT = 0°C), the values of the shear stress/slip
and the axial tensile stress of the FRP plate all increase with
the growth of the applied load. After the peak shear stress
ðτ p Þ is reached at the plate end, the deformation process
enters the E-S stage, during which the softening of the bond
interface starts from the plate end, and the length of the
softening region expands with the growth of the applied
load. Meanwhile, the interfacial shear stresses near the
plate end decrease with further load growth. However, the
shear slips of the bond interface always increase during
both the E and E-S stages. Once the interfacial slip in-
creases to its maximum value ðδf Þ and the shear stress
drops to zero accordingly, the debonding initiates at the
plate end and the debonding load of the strengthened beam
is obtained.
In Figure 5(c), it is observed that the axial stresses of the
FRP plate increase from the plate end to the middle zone.
Also, the axial stresses in the FRP plate are improved with
the increased mechanical load under low loading levels
regardless of the plate location. During the E-S stage, the
axial stresses near the plate end are reduced due to de-
creased interfacial shear stresses, as shown in Figure 5(a).
A similar phenomenon can be observed when the beam is
subjected to a constant mechanical load and an increased
service temperature (Figure 6). As illustrated in Figure 6,
the interfacial shear stresses change significantly with the
temperature growth, although the applied load remains
constant. When the temperature variation is zero, the in-
terface has entered the softening stage under the given load.
However, if the temperature variation is 25°C or 50°C,
the interface is still in the elastic stage. On the other hand,
when the temperature variation increases to 25°C or 50°C,
the interface softening near the plate end becomes more
significant. The comparisons depicted in Figures 5 and 6
have indicated that the interfacial shear stresses/slips
caused by the temperature increase are in the same di-
rection as those induced by the mechanical loading. In
other words, if the service temperature grows, the maxi-
mum interfacial shear stress and the corresponding slip are
obtained at a relatively lower level of applied load, re-
sulting in a decrease in the debonding load of the FRP-
strengthened beam.
Figure 6. Comparisons between analytical and FE results for the
FRP-strengthened beam at various service temperatures: (a) Parametric Study
normalized shear stress distribution; (b) normalized shear slip
distribution; (c) axial stress of the FRP plate. Effect of FRP plate properties
In this section, the analytically predicted debonding loads
is noteworthy that the proposed solution can be easily of the FRP-strengthened beam with different properties of
automated into a Matlab code to generate the analytical the FRP plate are studied to obtain a good understanding of
predictions, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. the thermal loading effect on the debonding load. The beam
As shown in Figure 5, the deformation process grad- with the properties listed in Table 1 is still used as the
ually evolves from the E-stage to the E-S stage as the benchmark. The main properties studied herein are the
Guo et al. 11

thicknesses and elastic moduli, respectively. The predicted

debonding loads at different temperatures are normalized
by the value at the reference temperature (i.e., ΔT ¼ 0 in
the absence of temperature variation).
It can be seen that the debonding load of the FRP-
strengthened beam decreases with the increase of tem-
perature regardless of the properties of the FRP plate
(Figure 7(a)–(c)). The effect of the FRP plate length on the
debonding load of the FRP-strengthened beam under
various service temperatures is negligible, as shown in
Figure 7(a). However, both the thickness and the elastic
modulus of the FRP plate have significant effects on the
changes of the debonding load with the temperature var-
iation. The normalized debonding load of the FRP-
strengthened beam at lower service temperatures
increases with the increase in the thickness and/or elastic
modulus of the FRP plate, while the opposite trend appears
at higher service temperatures. This finding means that
higher plate end debonding load reductions are observed
for the FRP-strengthened beam with higher elastic modulus
and thickness of the FRP plate. Note that only the thermal
stress effect is considered herein (i.e., assuming that the
bond-slip relationship remains unchanged) to produce the
analytical results. The FRP plate thickness and the elastic
modulus are expected to affect the debonding load since the
interfacial shear stresses are related to the axial stiffness
values of the FRP plate. That is, when the FRP plate has a
higher stiffness, any thermal deformation may cause a
larger load transfer through the interface, resulting in a
higher changing rate of interfacial stress. Even if this
tendency cannot be directly reflected by equation (47), the
results of Figure 7(b) and (c) show that the higher changing
rate exists due to the temperature variations for the FRP-
strengthened beam with higher stiffness of the FRP plate.

Effect of bond degradations at elevated

service temperatures
In the preceding section, the thermal stress effect on the
plate-end debonding load of the FRP-strengthened beam at
various service temperatures has been studied in detail
without considering the degradation of bond performance.
However, it is clear that at elevated service temperatures,
the mechanical properties of the bonding adhesive will be
Figure 7. Effect of temperature variation on the normalized significantly reduced (Bai et al., 2008; Dai et al., 2013).
debonding load for the beam strengthened with an FRP plate Existing bonded joint tests show that the bond interface
with varying (a) lengths; (b) thicknesses; (c) elastic moduli. exhibits cohesion failure in the adhesive layer, which is
directly attributed to the degradation in the mechanical
length, thickness, and elastic modulus of the externally properties of the adhesive at elevated service temperatures
bonded FRP plate. (Dai et al., 2013; Zhou et al., 2020). Similarly, the bending
Figure 7(a)–(c) shows the changes in the debonding load tests on FRP-strengthened RC beams in the literature in-
of the FRP-strengthened beam under various service dicate that the failure at ambient temperature mainly occurs
temperatures in cases of different FRP plate lengths, in the concrete cover layer below the bond interface, while
12 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

Figure 9. Normalized debonding loads at elevated service

temperatures.

to be the same as the elastic modulus degradation of the

bonding adhesive, as reported by Nguyen et al. (2011). In
Scheme A (Figure 8(a)), both δ0 and δf remain unchanged
while GII decreases with the increasing temperature. In
Scheme B, GII is assumed to be constant, while KT and τ p
decrease with temperature similar to that used in Scheme A.
It is noteworthy that Scheme B allows isolating the effects
of the elastic stiffness and interfacial shear strength deg-
radations of the bond-slip behavior on the plate-end de-
bonding load from the effect of the interfacial fracture
energy. The above two schemes with different consider-
Figure 8. Two schemes of temperature-dependent bond-slip
ations of temperature-dependent bond-slip models are
models: (a) scheme A; (b) scheme B.
adopted in the proposed analytical solution to reveal how
they affect the pate-end debonding loads of the FRP-
the beams tested at elevated service temperatures exhibit strengthened beam under different service temperatures.
cohesion failure in the bonding adhesive layer due to the It is worth noting that, in practice, the reduction of the
degradations in the mechanical properties of the adhesive interfacial fracture energy at an elevated service temper-
(Klamer et al., 2008). Therefore, the service temperature ature is slower than that of the shear stiffness of the bond-
variations have a significant impact on the bond-slip be- slip model. Therefore, the above two schemes almost
havior of the FRP-to-steel/concrete interface. In this sec- represent the lower and upper bounds of the changes of the
tion, an attempt has been made to investigate the effect of interfacial fracture energy at elevated service temperatures.
temperature-dependent bond-slip behavior on the plate-end Figure 9 illustrates the analytical results of the plate-end
debonding load of the FRP-strengthened beam at various debonding loads of the FRP-strengthened beam at elevated
service temperatures. service temperatures on the basis of considering the above
Since the available information on the bond-slip char- two schemes of temperature-dependent bond-slip models.
acteristics of the FRP-to-steel/concrete interface at various In Figure 9, the plate-end debonding loads at elevated
service temperatures is very limited (Naser et al., 2021), service temperatures are normalized by the corresponding
two different idealized schemes as shown in Figure 8 are value obtained at ambient temperature (i.e., 20°C). Note
assumed in this study to account for the temperature- that the reference case considered in Figure 9 does not
dependent bond-slip models (including the shear consider the change of the bond-slip model.
strength degradations) at elevated service temperatures. In Figure 9 shows that the analytical results of Scheme B
these two schemes, the initial elastic stiffness ðKT Þ and the are in good agreement with the results of the reference
interfacial shear strength ðτ p Þ of the temperature-dependent scheme, indicating that the reductions in the initial stiffness
bond-slip models are assumed to decrease with the in- and the interfacial shear strength almost have negligible
creasing temperature. The decreasing rate of KT is assumed effects on the plate-end debonding load, if the interfacial
Guo et al. 13

fracture energy remains unchanged. However, the ana- debonding load, the accuracy of the theoretical analysis can
lytical results of Scheme A show a significant reduction in be further improved by considering an appropriate
plate-end debonding load, which indicates that the inter- temperature-dependent bond-slip model. However, the
facial fracture energy has a significant effect on the plate- determination of the temperature-dependent bond-slip
end debonding load. This finding is consistent with the behavior of the FRP-to-steel/concrete interface at ele-
analytical results reported by Zhou et al. (2019). In their vated service temperatures is still largely unknown. Since
study, the bond strengths of the FRP-to-steel bonded joints the plate-end debonding loads decrease significantly with
were found to decrease with the temperature increase only the increasing temperature, it is necessary to conduct
if the interfacial fracture energy was reduced. This finding further research to better understand the temperature-
also confirms that the analytical solution based on a dependent bond-slip behavior of the FRP-to-steel/
constant bond-slip model determined at the final temper- concrete interface at different service temperatures.
ature yields a conservative plate-end debonding load, es-
pecially when the bond-slip relationships in Figure 8(a) are Declaration of conflicting interests
used for describing the bond degradations at elevated The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with re-
service temperatures. spect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conclusions Funding
This paper presents a new and closed-form analytical so- The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support
lution for predicting the plate-end debonding failure of the for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The
FRP-strengthened steel/concrete beam under combined authors are grateful for the financial support received from the
mechanical and thermal loadings. The distributions of National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)
interfacial shear stresses/slips and the axial stresses of the (51978398 and 51478406), the Research Grants Council of the
FRP plate at different loading stages can be predicted using Hong Kong SAR (15219919) and the Natural Science Foundation
the proposed analytical solution. The analytical solution of Shanghai (19ZR1426200).
has been validated by the comparisons between analytical
and FE results. The following conclusions can be drawn ORCID iD
based on the analytical solution and the results presented in
the paper. Wan-Yang Gao  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2187-3615

(a) When the FRP-to-steel/concrete interface main- References

tains elastic behavior, the interfacial shear stresses Abaqus (2014) Abaqus 6.14 Documentation. Providence, RI,
at the plate end grow with the increasing service USA: Dassault Systemes Simulia Corporation.
temperature. The interfacial shear slip at the plate- Al Nuaimi N, Sohail MG, Hawileh R, et al. (2021) Durability of
end always increases with the temperature growth. reinforced concrete beams externally strengthened with
(b) The plate-end debonding load of the FRP- CFRP laminates under harsh climatic conditions. Journal of
strengthened beam decreases with the increasing Composites for Construction 25(2): 04021005.
temperature. The enhancement in the FRP plate Al-Shawaf A, Al-Mahaidi R and Zhao XL (2009) Effect of el-
stiffness leads to an increasing rate of the de- evated temperature on bond behaviour of high modulus
bonding load reduction with the temperature. CFRP/steel double-strap joints. Australian Journal of
(c) The reduction of the interfacial fracture energy Structural Engineering 10(1): 63–74.
significantly reduces the plate-end debonding load. Al-Shawaf AK (2010) Characterization of Bonding Behavior
On the contrary, the reductions of the initial elastic between Wet Lay-Up Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer and
stiffness and the interfacial shear strength have Steel Plates in Double-Strap Joints under Extreme Envi-
almost negligible effects on the plate-end de- ronmental Temperatures. PhD thesis, Monash University,
bonding load provided that the interfacial fracture Australia.
energy remains unchanged. Al-Tamimi AK, Hawileh RA, Abdalla JA, et al. (2015) Durability
(d) The analytical solution based on a constant bond- of the bond between CFRP plates and concrete exposed to
slip model determined at the final temperature harsh environments. Journal of Materials in Civil Engi-
yields a conservative plate-end debonding load, neering 27(9): 04014252.
which is suitable for practical design purposes. Bai YL, Yan ZW, Ozbakkaloglu T, et al. (2021) Mechanical
behavior of large-rupture-strain (LRS) polyethylene naph-
Although the proposed analytical solution provides a thalene fiber bundles at different strain rates and tempera-
conservative method for predicting the plate-end tures. Construction and Building Materials 297: 123786.
14 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

Bai Y, Keller T and Vallee T (2008) Modeling of stiffness of FRP Deng J, Lee MMK and Moy SSJ (2004) Stress analysis of steel
composites under elevated and high temperatures. Com- beams reinforced with a bonded CFRP plate. Composite
posites Science and Technology 68(15–16): 3099–3106. Structures 65(2): 205–215.
Bennati S, Colonna D and Valvo PS (2016) A cohesive-zone Dong K and Hu K (2016) Development of bond strength model
model for steel beams strengthened with pre-stressed lam- for CFRP-to-concrete joints at high temperatures. Com-
inates. Procedia Structural Integrity 2: 2682–2689. posites Part B: Engineering 95: 264–271.
Biscaia HC (2019) The influence of temperature variations on Fernando D, Yu T and Teng JG (2015) Behavior and modeling of
adhesively bonded structures: a non-linear theoretical per- CFRP-strengthened rectangular steel tubes subjected to a
spective. International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics transverse end bearing load. International Journal of
113: 67–85. Structural Stability and Dynamics 15(08): 1540031.
Biscaia HC, Chastre C and Silva MA (2017) Analytical model Ferrier E, Rabinovitch O and Michel L (2016) Mechanical be-
with uncoupled adhesion laws for the bond failure prediction havior of concrete–resin/adhesive–FRP structural assem-
of curved FRP-concrete joints subjected to temperature. blies under low and high temperatures. Construction and
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 89: 63–78. Building Materials 127: 1017–1028.
Biscaia HC and Ribeiro P (2019) A temperature-dependent bond- Gao WY, Dai JG and Teng JG (2015a) Analysis of Mode II
slip model for CFRP-to-steel joints. Composite Structures debonding behavior of fiber-reinforced polymer-to-substrate
217: 186–205. bonded joints subjected to combined thermal and mechanical
Bocciarelli M, Colombi P, Fava G, et al. (2016) Energy-based an- loading. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 136: 241–264.
alytical formulation for the prediction of end debonding in Gao WY, Dai JG and Teng JG (2015b) Simple method for pre-
strengthened steel beams. Composite Structures 153: 212–221. dicting temperatures in insulated, FRP-strengthened RC
Bruno D, Greco F, Feudo SL, et al. (2016) Multi-layer modeling members exposed to a standard fire. Journal of Composites
of edge debonding in strengthened beams using interface for Construction 19(6): 04015013.
stresses and fracture energies. Engineering Structures 109: Gao WY, Dai JG and Teng JG (2016) Fire resistance design of un-
26–42. protected FRP-strengthened RC beams. Materials and
Chandrathilaka E, Gamage J and Fawzia S (2019) Mechanical Structures 49(12): 5357–5371.
characterization of CFRP/steel bond cured and tested at Gao WY, Dai JG and Teng JG (2017) Fire resistance of RC beams
elevated temperature. Composite Structures 207: 471–477. under design fire exposure. Magazine of Concrete Research
Cornetti P, Corrado M, De Lorenzis L, et al. (2015) An analytical 69(8): 402–423.
cohesive crack modeling approach to the edge debonding Gao WY, Dai JG and Teng JG (2018) Three-level fire resistance
failure of FRP-plated beams. International Journal of Solids design of FRP-strengthened RC beams. Journal of Com-
and Structures 53: 92–106. posites for Construction 22(3): 05018001.
Dai JG, Gao WY and Teng JG (2013) Bond-slip model for FRP Gao WY, Teng JG and Dai JG (2012) Effect of temperature
laminates externally bonded to concrete at elevated tempera- variation on the full-range behavior of FRP-to-concrete
ture. Journal of Composites for Construction 17(2): 217–228. bonded joints. Journal of Composites for Construction
Dai JG, Gao WY and Teng JG (2015) Finite element modeling of 16(6): 671–683.
insulated FRP-strengthened RC beams exposed to fire. Haghani R, Al-Emrani M and Kliger R (2009) Interfacial stress
Journal of Composites for Construction 19(2): 04014046. analysis of geometrically modified adhesive joints in steel
Dai JG, Ueda T and Sato Y (2005) Development of the nonlinear beams strengthened with FRP laminates. Construction and
bond stress–slip model of fiber reinforced plastics sheet– Building Materials 23(3): 1413–1422.
concrete interfaces with a simple method. Journal of Idris Y and Ozbakkaloglu T (2014) Flexural behavior of FRP-
Composites for Construction 9(1): 52–62. HSC-steel composite beams. Thin-Walled Structures 80:
Dai JG, Ueda T, Sato Y, et al. (2003) Mode I fracture behavior of 207–216.
FRP-concrete interfaces. Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Jia DG, Gao WY, Duan DX, et al. (2021) Full-range behavior of
Institute 25(1): 1577. FRP-to-concrete bonded joints subjected to combined effects
De Lorenzis L, Fernando D and Teng JG (2013) Coupled mixed- of loading and temperature variation. Engineering Fracture
mode cohesive zone modeling of interfacial debonding in Mechanics 254: 107928.
simply supported plated beams. International Journal of Ke L, Li C, He J, et al. (2020) Effects of elevated temperatures on
Solids and Structures 50(14–15): 2477–2494. mechanical behavior of epoxy adhesives and CFRP-steel
De Lorenzis L and Zavarise G (2009) Cohesive zone modeling of hybrid joints. Composite Structures 235: 111789.
interfacial stresses in plated beams. International Journal of Klamer EL, Hordijk DA and Hermes MCJH (2008) The influence
Solids and Structures 46(24): 4181–4191. of temperature on RC beams strengthened with externally
Deng J and Lee MMK (2007) Behaviour under static loading of bonded CFRP reinforcement. 53(3): 157–185.
metallic beams reinforced with a bonded CFRP plate. Kodur VKR, Bhatt PP and Naser MZ (2019) High tempertaure
Composite Structures 78(2): 232–242. properties of fiber reinforced polymers and fire insulation for
Guo et al. 15

fire resistance modeling of strengthened concrete structrues. Sahin MU and Dawood M (2016) Experimental investigation of
Composites Part B: Engineering 175: 107104. bond between high-modulus CFRP and steel at moderately
Kodur VKR and Naser MZ (2018) Approach for shear capacity elevated temperatures. Journal of Composites for Con-
evaluation of fire exposed steel and composite beams. struction 20(6): 04016049.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 141: 91–103. Sauder C, Lamon J and Pailler R (2004) The tensile behavior of
Korayem AH, Chen SJ, Zhang QH, et al. (2016) Failure of CFRP- carbon fibers at high temperatures up to 2400 degrees C.
to-steel double strap joint bonded using carbon nanotubes Carbon 42(4): 715–725.
modified epoxy adhesive at moderately elevated tempera- Schnerch D, Dawood M, Rizkalla S, et al. (2007) Proposed design
tures. Composites Part B: Engineering 94: 95–101. guidelines for strengthening of steel bridges with FRP mate-
Lenwari A, Thepchatri T and Albrecht P (2006) Debonding rials. Construction and Building Materials 21(5): 1001–1010.
strength of steel beams strengthened with CFRP plates. Silva MAG and Biscaia H (2008) Degradation of bond between
Journal of Composites for Construction 10(1): 69–78. FRP and RC beams. Composite Structures 85(2): 164–174.
Liu M and Dawood M (2018) A closed-form solution of the Smith ST and Teng JG (2001) Interfacial stresses in plated beams.
interfacial stresses and strains in steel beams strengthened Engineering Structures 23(7): 857–871.
with externally bonded plates using ductile adhesives. En- Song J, Gao WY, Ouyang LJ, et al. (2021) Compressive behavior
gineering Structures 154: 66–77. of heat-damaged square concrete prisms confined with basalt
Lu X, Teng J, Ye L, et al. (2005) Bond–slip models for FRP fiber-reinforced polymer jackets. Engineering Structures
sheets/plates bonded to concrete. Engineering Structures 242: 112504.
27(6): 920–937. Stratford T and Bisby L (2012) Effect of warm temperatures on
Mhanna HH, Hawieh RA, Abuzaid W, et al. (2020) Experimental externally bonded FRP strengthening. Journal of Compos-
investigation and modeling of the thermal effect on the ites for Construction 16(3): 235–244.
mechanical properties of polyethylene-terephthalate FRP Stratford T and Cadei J (2006) Elastic analysis of adhesion
laminates. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 32(10): stresses for the design of a strengthening plate bonded to a
04020296. beam. Construction and Building Materials 20(1–2): 34–45.
Mohammadi T, Wan B, Harries KA, et al. (2017) Bond behavior Taljsten B (1997) Strengthening of beams by plate bonding.
of FRP–concrete in presence of intermediate crack de- Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 9(4): 206–212.
bonding failure. Journal of Composites for Construction Teng JG, Fernando D and Yu T (2015) Finite element modelling
21(5): 04017018. of debonding failures in steel beams flexurally strengthened
Naser MZ, Hawileh RA and Abdalla JA (2019) Fiber-reinforced with CFRP laminates. Engineering Structures 86: 213–224.
polymer composites in strengthening reinforced concrete Teng JG, Yu T and Fernando D (2012) Strengthening of steel
structures: a critical review. Engineering Structures 198: structures with fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Journal
109542. of Constructional Steel Research 78: 131–143.
Naser MZ, Hawileh RA and Abdalla J (2021) Modeling strategies Teng JG, Zhang JW and Smith ST (2002) Interfacial stresses in
of finite element simulation of reinforced concrete beams reinforced concrete beams bonded with a soffit plate: a finite
strengthened with FRP: a review. Journal of Composites element study. Construction and Building Materials 16(1):
Science 5(1): 19; DOI: 10.3390/jcs5010019. 1–14.
Nguyen PL, Vu XH and Ferrier E (2019) Elevated temperature Teng R, Guo Y, Wang H, et al. (2021) Experimental study of
thermomechanical behaviour of near surface mounted CFRP bending interface characteristics of CFRP-strengthened
reinforced concrete specimens: effect of adhesive at concrete/ long-span steel main beams at different temperatures. En-
CFRP interface. Engineering Structures 197: 109361. gineering Structures 235:111932.
Nguyen TC, Bai Y, Zhao XL, et al. (2011) Mechanical charac- Wang HT and Wu G (2018) Crack propagation prediction of
terization of steel/CFRP double strap joints at elevated double-edged cracked steel beams strengthened with FRP
temperatures. Composite Structures 93(6): 1604–1612. plates. Thin-Walled Structures 127: 459–468.
Ouyang Z and Wan B (2009) Nonlinear deterioration model for Wang Z, Dai JG, Wang M, et al. (2021) Residual bond strengths of
bond interfacial fracture energy of FRP-concrete joints in epoxy and cement-bonded CFRP reinforcements to concrete
moist environments. Journal of Composites for Construction interfaces after elevated temperature exposure. Fire Safety
13(1): 53–63. Journal 124: 103393.
Ouyang LJ, Chai MX, Song J, et al. (2021) Repair of thermally Wilson J, Gao WY and Yang J (2020) Effect of temperature var-
damaged concrete cylinders with basalt fiber-reinforced iations on interfacial debonding of FRP-plated beams: A
polymer jackets. Journal of Building Engineering 44: 102673. couplted mix-mode cohesive zone modeling. IOP Conference
Rizkalla S, Dawood M and Schnerch D (2008) Development of a Series: Materials Science and Engineering 784: 012003.
carbon fiber reinforced polymer system for strengthening Yu B and Kodur VKR (2014) Effect of high temperature on bond
steel structures. Composites Part A: Applied Science and strength of near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement.
Manufacturing 39(2): 388–397. Composite Structures 110: 88–97.
 16 Advances in Structural Engineering 0(0)

Yu T, Fernando D, Teng JG, et al. (2012) Experimental study on E1 , E2 elastic moduli of the beam and the FRP plate,
CFRP-to-steel bonded interfaces. Composites Part B-En- respectively
gineering 43(5): 2279–2289. F applied mechanical load
Yu Y, Chiew SP and Lee CK (2011) Bond failure of steel beams Fdeb debonding load
strengthened with FRP laminates - Part 2: Verification. GII Mode II interfacial fracture energy
Composites Part B: Engineering 42(5): 1122–1134. I1 , I2 second moments of areas of the substrate beam
Yuan H, Lu X, Hui D, et al. (2012) Studies on FRP-concrete and the FRP plate, respectively
interface with hardening and softening bond-slip law. L clear distance between the two supporting points
Composite Structures 94(12): 3781–3792. LP length of the FRP plate
Yuan H, Teng JG, Seracino R, et al. (2004) Full-range behavior of KT slope of the elastic branch of the bond-slip model
FRP-to-concrete bonded joints. Engineering Structures KT’ absolute slope of the softening branch of the
26(5): 553–565. bond-slip model
Zeng JJ, Gao WY and Liu F (2018) Interfacial behavior and MT bending moment acting on the FRP-strengthened
debonding failures of full-scale CFRP-strengthened H- beam
section steel beams. Composite Structures 201: 540–552. M1 bending moment acting on the substrate beam
Zhang SS and Teng JG (2016) End cover separation in RC beams N1 ,N2 axial forces sustained by the substrate beam and
strengthened in flexure with bonded FRP reinforcement: the FRP plate, respectively
simplified finite element approach. Materials and Structures ta thickness of the adhesive layer
49(6): 2223–2236. ΔT temperature variation
Zhang SS, Yu T and Chen GM (2017) Reinforced concrete beams u 1 , u2 axial deformations at the bottom of the substrate
strengthened in flexure with near-surface mounted (NSM) beam and at the top of the FRP plate, respectively
CFRP strips: Current status and research needs. Composites VT shear force acting on the FRP-strengthened beam
Part B: Engineering 131: 30–42. V1 shear force acting on the substrate beam
Zheng JJ, Li QB and Dai JG (2020) Analytical solution for FRP- x distance from the end of the FRP plate
to-concrete bonded joints considering local unloading and x length of the softening region during the elastic-
reloading. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 235: 107185. softening stage
Zhou H, Fernando D, Torero JL, et al. (2020) Bond behavior of xdeb length of the softening region at the occurrence of
CFRP-to-steel bonded joints at mild temperatures: experi- the debonding failure
mental study. Journal of Composites for Construction 24(6): y1 distance from the neutral axis to the bottom of the
04020070. substrate beam
Zhou H, Torres JP, Fernando D, et al. (2019) The bond behaviour of y2 distance from the neutral axis to the top of the
CFRP-to-steel bonded joints with varying bond properties at FRP plate
elevated temperatures. Engineering Structures 183: 1121–1133. α1 , α2 thermal expansion coefficients of the substrate
beam and the FRP plate, respectively
δ interfacial shear slip
Appendix δ0 interfacial shear slip at the peak shear stress
δf interfacial shear slip when the shear stress
Nomenclature decreases to zero
a distance from the plate end to the supporting ε1 , ε2 strains at bottom of the substrate beam and at the
point top of the FRP plate, respectively
A1 , A2 sectional areas of the substrate beam and the FRP σP axial stress of the FRP plate
plate, respectively τ interfacial shear stress between the substrate
b1 ,b2 widths of the substrate beam and the FRP plate, beam and the FRP plate
respectively τd interfacial shear stress during the debonding stage
d1 ,d2 depth of the substrate beam and thickness of the τe interfacial shear stress during the elastic stage
FRP plate, respectively τp peak interfacial shear stress
dx length of the differential element τs interfacial shear stress during the softening stage

View publication stats