Upload
docong
View
228
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Page 1 of 10
PROGRESSIVE FAILURE OF FRP COMPOSITES FOR
CONSTRUCTION
Lawrence C. Bank
Associate Provost for Research and Professor of Civil Engineering
The City College of New York
160 Convent Avenue, New York, NY 10031, USA
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of and observations on progressive failure of
Fiber-Reinforced-Polymer (FRP) composites of interest to civil and infrastructure
construction applications. The primary reason for this is that although FRP composites have,
over the last 25 years, successfully penetrated niche markets in civil engineering applications
one of the most frequently heard concerns from designers is their discomfort with the
“ductility” of these composites and the structures built or reinforced with them. If we wish to
expand the market for FRP applications in construction we must as a community address this
issue in greater depth. One approach is to use system-wide, structural, progressive failure
behavior of the composite material itself to dissipate internal strain energy in-lieu of the
elasto-plastic behavior seen in metallic materials. Specific applications of FRP composites in
construction where progressive failure mechanisms have been considered are reviewed.
These include FRP profiles, FRP reinforcing bars, externally bonded FRP or mechanically
fastened FRP strengthening strips, and FRP column wraps.
Keywords: Crashworthiness, Ductility, Energy Dissipation, Progressive Failure, Pultruded
Profiles, Rebars, Strengthening, Wrapping.
1 Introduction
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composite materials typically used in civil engineering
consist of brittle high strength fibers (e.g., glass, carbon) embedded in a thermosetting
polymer matrix material (e.g., epoxy, polyester, vinylester). While some thermosetting
polymer resins have a relative large strain to failure (f ~5%) they are nevertheless also brittle
materials like the fibers (f < 1.5%). Neither components are ductile, that is, they do not
deform plastically under tensile stress hence dissipating internal strain energy, like many
metallic materials. The inability to dissipate strain energy is a significant impediment to
structural applications of composite materials, especially in civil structures. Large structural
deformations and significant load-carrying capacity prior to ultimate failure, typically seen in
ductile-material structures, are critical in civil structures where sudden failure and especially
the lack of warning of this sudden and generally catastrophic failure is unacceptable. Since
the material constituents themselves are not ductile and do not deform plastically designers of
FRP composite structures must look for alternative means to dissipate internal strain energy
and to cause a structure to undergo large deformations while at the same time carrying the
design loads. This can be achieved by judicious design of the FRP composite material and
the composite structure to fail in a controlled progressive manner and hence dissipate the
internal strain energy. In the aerospace and automotive industries the use of energy
dissipation via the progressive, gradual and controlled failure of brittle fiber composites
subjected to impact or dynamic loading has been exploited successfully in a number of
commercial applications. Research in this field, also known as “crashworthiness,” has grown
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 2 of 10
considerably in recent years with the advent of high speed test methods and explicit finite
element methods. In what follows, the experimental and numerical work on the quasi-static
and dynamic progressive failure of composite material FRP profiles (typically tubes)
subjected to axial compression is briefly reviewed. Thereafter, attempts to exploit stable,
controlled progressive failure in FRP material products developed for use in civil structures
are discussed. These include FRP reinforcing bars, externally bonded FRP or mechanically
fastened FRP strengthening strips, and FRP column wraps.
2 FRP Profiles Subjected to Axial Compression
The emphasis of this work over the past three decades has been to develop crashworthy
composite material structures and components for automotive [1],[2] and rotorcraft structures
[3]. Early work conducted in this area has been reviewed by Hull [4]. The work has focused
on the ability of tubular thin-walled composite (circular or polygonal) tubes to absorb energy
due to stable crushing when loaded axially. The objective of this work has been to develop a
fundamental understanding of the physical phenomenon of, and the parameters that control,
the crushing of composite tubes. The design objective has been to obtain a “stable crushing
behavior” or a “sustained crushing load (or stress)” [1],[5] as shown in Fig. 1.
(a) (b)
Figure 1 (a) Quasi static crushing of an FRP tube [1] (b) Schematic of load-deflection curve of composite
tube specimen [5]
The global load-deflection behavior seen in Fig. 1 is due to progressive compressive failure
on the local level. It can be termed pseudo-ductile since the global load-deflection behavior
resembles the uniaxial stress-strain diagram of an elasto-plastic ductile material. Throughout
the 1990s and 2000s experimental work continued much of it focused on understanding the
morphology of the failure mechanisms and the effect of different hybrid fiber architectures
and geometric parameters [6],[7]. Since the late 1990s, as simulation tools have improved,
significant work has been conducted on the numerical simulation of tubular crushing using
explicit finite element codes such as LS-DYNA [8],[9] as shown in Fig. 2.
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 3 of 10
(a) (b)
Figure 2 Comparisons between (a) numerical simulation and (b) experimental results [8]
A key feature of axial crushing of FFP tubes is that the tube has no elastic recovery following
the axial splaying and fragmentation and hence all the energy dissipated is equal to the work
done by the loading head as it crushes the tube (i.e., the area under the load displacement
curve seen in Fig. 1). The energy dissipated is equal to the sustained crushing load multiplied
by the crush distance. Although, applications of axially loaded tubular composites as energy
dissipaters in the automotive, aircraft and to a limited extend in highway guardrail end-
terminals are now routine they have not been explored in civil structural applications to-date.
3 FRP Reinforcements for Concrete
3.1 FRP Reinforcing Bars and Grids for Beams
Glass fiber reinforced polyester (and later vinylester) reinforcing bars for concrete (“rebars”)
were first developed about 40 years ago and are currently available from a number of
manufacturers [10]. Carbon, aramid and basalt fiber rebars have also been produced. These
rebars are brittle and fail at ultimate load with little warning and no with ductility. Attempts
have been made over the years to improve the ductility and energy absorption capability of
FRP rebars by a using combinations of longitudinal fibers with different failure strains
(“hybrid rebars”) and/or by using alternative manufacturing techniques (e.g., braiding)
[11],[12],[13]. By hybridizing the fiber types a pseudo ductile stress-strain behavior in the bar
and a pseudo ductile load-deflection response in a concrete beam reinforced with such bars
has been obtained as shown in Fig. 3a. In a different method to develop progressive failure in
the reinforcing bars themselves others [14],[15] have suggested 3-dimensional reinforcement
cages constructed from pultruded FRP members to reinforce concrete beams,. The cage
members fail progressively by local bearing failure at the junctions of the FRP cage as seen in
Fig. 3b.
(a) (b)
Figure 3 (a) Load-deflection responses in a concrete beams reinforced with hybrid FRP rebars [11] and
(b) FRP pultruded cage and progressive failure more [13]
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 4 of 10
The most commonly promoted method to develop some measure of ductility in FRP
reinforced RC beams is to over-reinforce the beams such that they fail by concrete crushing
in compression which is purported to be less brittle than the failure of the tensile FRP rebars.
The load deflection characteristics of over-reinforced FRP reinforced concrete beams and
under-reinforced steel reinforced concrete beams is not really similar, even though the
deflection at failure in the FRP reinforced beams is reasonably large. In addition, since the
unloading curves are not reported in most studies it is not possible to determine the energy
absorbed by the FRP reinforced beams prior to ultimate failure. In a proposed new method to
increase the ductility of over-reinforced beams [16] perforated SIFCON blocks have been
inserted in the compression zone to create a compression yielding mechanism to develop
stable crushing similar to that seen in axially crushed pultruded tubes. The response of these
beams shows a plateau similar to that seen in under-reinforced steel RC beams as seen in Fig
4a. In related work [17] have used a combination of FRP rebars and Fiber Reinforced
Concrete (FRC) [18] to develop a more ductile compression failure mode in over-reinforced
beams as shown in Fig. 4b. Also, significant in this work is the attention to the unloading
curves and the calculation of the ductility index based on dissipated and elastic energy
recovered proposed in [19] using unloading data. Comparisons with the values of a proposed
deformability index [20] are also reported.
(a) (b)
Figure 4 (a) Compression yielding response in RFP bar reinforced beams [16] (b) Comparison between
plain and FRC reinforced beams with FRP rebars [17]
3.2 FRP Strengthening Systems for Reinforced Concrete
3.2.1 Epoxy Bonded (EB) Systems
The strengthening of reinforced concrete members with externally bonded (EB) FRP dry
fabrics, dry fiber sheets and pre-cured pultruded FRP strips (or near surface mounted (NSM)
“bars”) is now well-accepted in structural engineering. The method is used to increase the
flexural strength, the shear strength and to a limited extent the flexural stiffness of existing
conventionally steel reinforced and pre-stressed concrete members [21],[10]. It is well know
that the addition of FRP external reinforcement decreases the deformability (i.e., deflection
and curvature at failure of the FRP strengthening system) of the strengthened member and
that the failure is brittle. Nevertheless, since the original steel reinforced concrete member is
typically designed to fail in a ductile manner by yielding of the internal steel the member can
usually return to its pre-strengthened (and ductile) behavior following failure of the FRP
strengthening system. Consequently, the use of FRP strengthened concrete is much less of a
concern to structural engineers than the use of FRP in new structures. In addition, a common
design philosophy is to design the strengthened beam to become an over-reinforced beam
such that the ultimate failure of the strengthened beam will be due to concrete crushing and
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 5 of 10
not due to FRP rupture or debonding. However, as in the case of FRP rebar reinforced beams
discussed above the “ductility” enhancement provided by this failure mode is not entirely
convincing.
The reason for the decrease in deformability and ductility in FRP strengthened members is
the linear elastic and relatively low strain to failure of (≤1.5%) in the fiber-sheets and pre-
cured laminates currently available on the market. For design purposes the ultimate failure
strain of these products needs to be reduced even further (to about 0.8 % for flexural and
0.4% for shear strengthening) to prevent premature debonding of the FRP strengthening
system, which also occurs in a sudden and brittle fashion. In order to prevent plate (or strip)
end and interior debonding failures, anchorage devices (typically bolted steel plates, FRP U-
wraps, or fiber anchors) have been proposed and are frequently used in practice [22], even
though design guidance for such anchorages is not codified as yet. The deformability of
these anchored FRP strengthened members is generally improved by the use of such devices
[22]. Anchorage devices can delay debonding failures. However, the ultimate failure is still
sudden and may be due to FRP rupture, concrete compression failure or anchor debonding.
As demonstrated in [23] and [24] the use of anchors can significantly increase the efficacy
(and in some cases) the ductility of the strengthened beam as shown in Fig. 5a and 5b. The
use of small U-shaped anchors distributed along the entire length of the beam has been shown
to be very effective in increasing the efficacy of beams strengthened with multiple FRP strips
[25].
(a) (b)
Figure 5 Comparison of control and FRP anchored beams (a) [23] (b) [24]
Hybrid fabrics and sheets have also been explored in order to achieve a gradual progressive
failure in the FRP strengthening system which can lead to a ductile failure of the reinforced
beam itself. This has been achieved by either using a triaxially braided hybrid carbon/glass
fabric [26] or by using alternating plies of high modulus and high strength fiber sheets [27].
These techniques can provide some measure of a pseudo ductile response that is analogous to
yielding seen in under-reinforced steel reinforced beams.
3.2.2 Mechanically-Fastened (MF) Systems
An alternative method for attaching FRP precured plates to concrete members is known as
the Mechanically-Fastened FRP (MF-FRP) method [28], [29],[30]. In this method the strip is
attached with metallic fasteners (powder actuated pins (nails), concrete screws or concrete
expansion anchors) and the load is transferred to the strip at the anchor points by bearing on
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 6 of 10
the specially designed FRP strip having high bearing strength. The method is particularly
useful when the concrete substrate is poor or rapid installation is required. Strain
compatibility between the strip and the concrete are intentionally not maintained. A review
[30] of the experimental investigations conducted using the MF-FRP method indicates that
equivalent strengthening to the epoxy bonded method can be obtained with the MF-FRP
method and that the failure modes are extremely ductile due to a sustained bearing failure
mode in the FRP strips at the fastener locations. Typical load-displacement curves for a
single fastener and strip are shown in Fig 6a and load-deflection of MF-FRP strengthened
beams are shown in Fig 6b. The ability of the strengthened beam to maintain a significant
portioned of its strengthened capacity after the peak load can be seen. Numerical modelling
of the behavior of MF-FRP strengthened beam shows very good agreement between
experiment and theory [31],[32].
(a) (b)
Figure 6 (a) Single fastener bearing behavior (b) response of MF-FRP strengthened beams [29].
3.3 FRP Wraps for Ductility Enhancement
FRP wrapping (or jacketing) of reinforced concrete columns is primarily performed to
increase the lateral deformation capacity of the column to improve its seismic resistance
[33],[34]. By wrapping FRP materials around the outside of concrete columns the internal
concrete is better confined and increases in shear strength, plastic hinge zone strength and
lap-splice bar pullout strength is obtained [35]. This allows the column to absorb energy due
to crushing of the confined concrete and yielding of the primary steel reinforcement. The
ability of a column to sustain its axial load with increased lateral displacement is enhanced
and the ductility of the entire system is enhanced. The displacement ductility, µ, of a column
is typically defined as the ratio of the maximum lateral displacement divided by the
displacement at tensile yielding of the longitudinal steel bars. Fig. 7a shows a typical cyclic
load-lateral deflection trace of a glass fiber wrapped column [36] which Fig. 7b shows a
typical load-displacement envelope comparing the response of columns with different
wrapping materials [35]. It can be seen that the ductility ratios of the confined column is
greater than that of the unconfined column and similar to that of a steel jacketed column.
Also, and perhaps more relevant to his paper is the fact that all tests conducted to examine
ductility enhancement present the entire loading-unloading and reloading history over many
quasi-static cycles from which the energy absorption can be calculated. Nevertheless, little
work has been done to determine the precise nature of the progressive failure mechanisms
occurring during these dissipation cycles and ways in which is control them. It is however
important to note that the progressive failure mechanisms that dissipate the energy are not
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 7 of 10
due to the FRP failing progressively but rather due to the concrete failing progressively or the
reinforcing steel yielding. Since most wraps are applied in the hoop direction only, it is
generally assumed that the FRP wrap is linear elastic to failure. The failure strain of the fiber
(glass, carbon or aramid) is usually limited to 0.4% by design codes, which is well below the
failure strain of most fibers. This believed to be necessary to ensure aggregate interlock in
the concrete [35]. The use of fiber wraps with off axis orientations would provide much
larger strain to failure but the integrity of the column may be compromised.
(a) (b)
Figure 7 (a) cyclic load-lateral deflection trace of a glass fiber wrapped column [36] (b) load-displacement
envelope comparing the response of columns with different wrapping materials [35].
The use of PET fibers with very high failure strains has been considered [37] as an alternative
to using low strain to failure fibers. It has been shown that the ductility ratios of such
systems can be very large (µ~10-15) and that the integrity of the concrete and the load
carrying capacity can be partially maintained. The PET jackets reach a strain of 3% at
maximum lateral load and 12% at rupture at the maximum lateral displacement [38].
Nevertheless it does not appear that the fibers themselves contribute to the energy absorption
of the systems through a progressive failure mechanism.
4 Summary and Discussion
Progressive failure in fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) composites and the implications that it
has on the behaviour of FRP composites for construction have been reviewed in the paper. It
has been shown that their remains a potential to exploit progressive failure of the composites
themselves and the systems that they are used to reinforce or strengthen or confine in order to
better address the concerns that designers have with the lack of ductility in FRP materials and
structures. The first part of the paper demonstrates how FRP tubes have been used in the
automotive and aerospace industries by exploiting the crashworthiness of tubular composite
structures. Perhaps lessons can be learned from these applications that can be used in
composites for construction. The second part of the paper reviews the different ways in
which the notion of ductility is interpreted in FRP composites used in concrete reinforcement,
strengthening and confining systems. It is shown that hybrid systems appear to hold some
promise but that generally there has been insufficient attention to exploiting and enhancing
progressive failure and energy absorption in the FRP composites themselves. Rather, the
current philosophy appears to be to continue to use linear elastic composite materials in their
on-axis and unidirectional architectures which have no ductility to speak of and attempt to
provide some system energy absorption via non-FRP mechanisms, such as concrete crushing,
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 8 of 10
debonding, or in the case of wrapping by enhancing the energy absorption ability of the
existing non-FRP materials. In FRP-only structures this is not possible and therefore more
attention has been paid to the ways in which the composites themselves can dissipate energy
through progressive failure. Perhaps it is time to adopt this philosophy in the concrete related
applications of FRP composites for construction.
5 References
[1] THORNTON, P. H., JERYAN, R. A., “Crash Energy Management in Composite
Automotive Structures,” International Journal of Impact Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 2,
1988, pp. 167-180.
[2] LIN K. H., MASE, G. T., “An Assessment of Add-on Energy Absorbing Devices for
Vehicle Crashworthiness,” Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, Vol.
112, 1990, pp. 406-411.
[3] SEN, J. K., “Designing for a Crashworthy All-Composite Helicopter Fuselage,”
Journal of the American Helicopter Society, April 1987, pp. 56-66.
[4] HULL, D., “A Unified Approach to Progressive Crushing of Fibre-Reinforced
Composite Tubes,” Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 40, 1991, pp. 377-421.
[5] FARLEY, G. L., “Effect of Specimen Geometry on the Energy Absorption Capability
of Composite Materials,” Journal of Composite Materials, Vol. 11, 1986, pp. 390-400.
[6] MAMALIS, A.G., MANOLAKOS, D.E., IOANNIDIS, M.B., PAPAPOSTOLOU,
D.P., “Crashworthy Characteristics of Axially Statically Compressed Thin-Walled
Square CFRP Composite Tubes: Experimental,” Composite Structures, Vol. 63, 2004,
pp. 347–360.
[7] BISAGNI, C., “Experimental Investigation of the Collapse Modes and Energy
Absorption Characteristics of Composite Tubes,” International Journal of
Crashworthiness, Vol. 14, No. 4, August 2009, pp. 365–378.
[8] MAMALIS, A.G., MANOLAKOS, D.E., IOANNIDIS, M.B., PAPAPOSTOLOU,
D.P., “The Static and Dynamic Axial Collapse of CFRP Square Tubes: Finite Element
Modeling,” Composite Structures, Vol. 74, 2006, pp. 213–225
[9] MCGREGOR, C. J., VAZIRI, R., POURSARTIP, A., XIAO, X., “Simulation of
Progressive Damage Development in Braided Composite Tubes under Axial
Compression,” Composites: Part A, Vol. 38, 2007, pp. 2247–2259.
[10] BANK, L.C., Composites for Construction: Structural Design with FRP Materials,
John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
[11] BELARBI, A., CHANDRASHEKHARA, K., WATKINS, S. E., “Smart Composite
Rebars with Enhanced Ductility,” Engineering Mechanics (eds. Y. K. Lin and T. C.
Su) Proceedings of the 11th Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, ASCE, May 19-22,
1996, pp. 788-791.
[12] HARRIS, H. G., SOMBOONSONG, W., KO, F. K., “New Ductile Hybrid FRP
Reinforcement Bar for Concrete Structures.” Journal of Composites for Construction,
Vol. 2, No. 1, 1998, pp. 28–37.
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 9 of 10
[13] BAKIS, C. E., NANNI, A., TEROSKY, J. A., KOEHLER, S. W., “Self-monitoring,
pseudo-ductile, hybrid FRP reinforcement rods for concrete applications,” Composites
Science and Technology, Vol. 61, No. 6, 2001, pp. 815-823.
[14] BANK, L.C., OZEL, M., “Shear Failure of Concrete Beams Reinforced with 3-D
Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grids,” Fourth International Symposium - Fiber Reinforced
Polymer Reinforcement for Reinforced Concrete Structures, (eds. C. W. Dolan, S. H.
Rizkalla and A. Nanni), SP-188, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI,
1999, pp. 145-156.
[15] TAVAREZ, F. A., BANK, L. C., PLESHA, M. E., “Analysis of FRP Composite Grid
Reinforced Concrete Beams,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2003, pp. 250-
258.
[16] WU, Y-F., ZHOU, Y-W., HE, X-Q, “Performance-Based Optimal Design of
Compression-Yielding FRP-Reinforced Concrete Beams,” Composite Structures, Vol.
93, 2010, pp. 113–123.
[17] WANG, H., BELARBI, A., “Flexural Behavior of Fiber-Reinforced-Concrete Beams
Reinforced with FRP Rebars,” 7th
Symposium on FRP in Reinforced Concrete
Structures - FRPRCS7, SP-230, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI,
2005, pp. 895-913.
[18] BENTUR, A., MINDESS, S., Fibre Reinforced Cementitious Composites, 2nd
Edition, Taylor & Francis, 2006.
[19] NAAMAN, A. E., JEONG, S. M. ‘‘Structural Ductility of Concrete Beams Prestressed
with FRP Tendons.’’ 2nd International RILEM Symposium (FRPRCS-5) (ed. L.
Taerwe), RILEM, France, 1995, pp. 379–384.
[20] MUFTI, A. A., NEWHOOK, J. P., TADROS, G., “Deformability versus Ductility in
Concrete Beams with FRP Reinforcement,” Second International Conference on
Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures – ACMBS2, Montreal,
Quebec, Canada, 1996, pp. 189-199.
[21] TENG, J. G., CHEN, J. F., SMITH, S. T., LAM, L., FRP Strengthened RC Structures,
John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
[22] AL-MAHAIDI, K. R., SMITH, S. T., “Anchorage Devices used to improve the
Performance of Reinforced Concrete Beams Retrofitted with FRP Composites: A-
State-of-the-Art-Review,” Journal of Composites for Construction, posted ahead of
print December 20, 2011. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000276.
[23] SPADEA, G., BENCARDINO, F., SWAMY, R.N., “Structural Behavior of Composite
RC Beams with Externally Bonded CFRP,” Journal of Composites for Construction,
Vol. 2, No. 3, 1998, pp. 132-137.
[24] SMITH, S. T., TENG, J. G., “Shear-Bending Interaction in Debonding Failures of
FRP-Plated RC Beams,” Advances in Structural Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2003, pp.
183-199.
[25] WU, Y-F., HUANG, Y., “Hybrid Bonding of FRP to Reinforced Concrete Structures,”
Journal of Composites for Construction,” Vol. 12, No. 3, 2008, pp. 266-273.
[26] GRACE, N. F., RAGHEB, W. F., ABDEL-SAYED, G., “Development and
Application of Innovative Triaxially Braided Ductile FRP Fabric for Strengthening
Concrete Beams,” Composite Structures, Vol. 64, 2004, pp. 521-530.
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)
Page 10 of 10
[27] WU, Z., SHAO, Y., IWASHITA, K., SAKAMOTO, K., “Strengthening of Preloaded
RC Beams Using Hybrid Carbon Sheets,” Journal of Composites for Construction,
Vol. 11, No. 3, 2007, pp. 299-307.
[28] LAMANNA, A. J., BANK, L. C., SCOTT, D. W., “Flexural Strengthening of RC
Beams using Fasteners and FRP Strips,” ACI Structures Journal, Vol. 98, No. 3, 2001,
pp. 368-376.
[29] BANK, L. C., ARORA, D., “Analysis and Design of RC Beams with Mechanically
Fastened FRP (MF-FRP) Strips,” Composite Structures, Vol. 79, No. 2, 2007, pp. 180-
191.
[30] BROWN, V. L., BANK, L. C., ARORA, D., BOROWICZ, D. T., GODAT, A.,
LAMANNA, A., J., LEE, J., MATTA, F., NAPOLI, A., TAN, K. H., “Experimental
Studies of Mechanically-Fastened FRP Systems: State-of-the-Art,” 10th Symposium
on FRP in Reinforced Concrete Structures - FRPRCS10, SP-275, American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2011, CD-ROM.
[31] ELSAYED, W. E., EBEAD, U., E., NEALE, K. W., “Studies on Mechanically
Fastened Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Strengthening Systems,” ACI Structural Journal,
Vol. 106, No. 1, 2009, pp. 49-59.
[32] NARDONE, F., LIGNOLA, G. P., PROTA, A., MANFREDI, G., NANNI, A.,
“Modeling of Flexural Behavior of RC Beams Strengthened with Mechanically
Fastened FRP Strips,” Composite Structures, Vol. 93, 2011, pp. 1973-1985.
[33] KATSUMATA, H., KOBATAKE, Y., TAKEDA, T., “A Study on Strengthening with
Carbon Fiber for Earthquake-Resistant Capacity of Existing Reinforced Concrete
Columns,” Ninth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan,
Vol. VII, 1988, pp. 517-522.
[34] PRIESTLEY, M. J. N., SEIBLE, F., FYFE, E., “Column Strengthening using
Fibreglass/Epoxy Jackets,” Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures
- ACMBS, (eds. K.W. Neale and P. Labossiere), Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada, 1992,
pp. 287-298.
[35] SEIBLE, F., PRIESTLEY, J. N., HEGEMEIER, G. A., INNAMORATO, D., “Seismic
Retrofit of RC Columns with Continuous Carbon Fiber Jackets,” Journal of
Composites for Construction, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1997, pp. 52-62.
[36] PRIESTLEY, M. J. N. SEIBLE, F., “Design of Seismic Retrofit Measures for
Concrete and Masonry Structures,” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 9, No.
6, 1995, pp. 365-377.
[37] ANGGAWIDJAJA, D., UEDA, T., DAI, J., NAKAI, H., “Deformation Capacity of
RC Piers Wrapped by New Fiber-Reinforced Polymer with Large Fracture Strain,”
Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 28, 2006, pp. 914-927.
[38] DAI, J-G., LAM, L., UEDA, T., “Seismic Retrofit of Square RC Columns with
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composites,”
Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 206-217.
Proceedings of CICE 2012 6th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering Rome, Italy, 13-15 June 2012 © International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC)