European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.30 No.4 (2009), pp.526-541 © EuroJournals Publishing, Inc.

2009 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm

Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates
Amer M. Ibrahim Asst. prof, College of engineering Diyala University, Iraq Mohammed Sh. Mahmood Asst. lecturer, College of engineering Diyala University, Iraq

Abstract In this paper an analysis model is presented for reinforced concrete beams externally reinforced with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) laminates using finite elements method adopted by ANSYS. The finite element models are developed using a smeared cracking approach for concrete and three dimensional layered elements for the FRP composites. The results obtained from the ANSYS finite element analysis are compared with the experimental data for six beams with different conditions from researches (all beams are deficient shear reinforcement). The comparisons are made for load-deflection curves at mid-span; and failure load. The results from finite element analysis were calculated at the same location as the experimental test of the beams. The accuracy of the finite element models is assessed by comparison with the experimental results, which are to be in good agreement. The load-deflection curves from the finite element analysis agree well with the experimental results in the linear range, but the finite elements results are slightly stiffer than that from the experimental results. The maximum difference in ultimate loads for all cases is 7.8%. Keywords: Finite Element Modeling; Reinforced Concrete Beams; FRP Laminates

Introduction
Externally bonded FRP laminates and fabrics can be used to increase the shear strength of reinforced concrete beams and columns. Figure1 shows examples of possible FRP shear strengthening configurations. It can be seen that the shear strength of columns can be easily improved by wrapping with a continuous sheet of FRP to form a complete ring around the member. Shear strengthening of beams, however, is likely to be more problematic when they are cast monolithically with slabs. This increases the difficulty of anchoring the FRP at the beam/slab junction and increases the risk of debonding failure. Nevertheless, bonding FRP on either the side faces, or the side faces and soffit, will provide some shear strengthening for such members. In both cases, it is recommended that the FRP is placed such that the principal fiber orientation, , is either 45º or 90º to the longitudinal axis of the member. There is some evidence that the shear resistance of beams can be further improved by bonding additional sheets with their fibers orientated at right angles to the principal fiber direction. In

In most cases it is only practical to increase the live-load capacity of a structure. A large number of available software like sap2000. and ANSYS etc incorporate finite elements based analysis. e. the additional reinforcement will play its part in carrying the structures dead load. by jacking and propping. The finite elements model uses a smeared cracking approach to model the reinforced concrete and three dimensional layered elements to model the fiber reinforced polymer FRP composites. fiber reinforced polymer FRP composites have been used for strengthening structural members of reinforced concrete bridges.g. across joints between precast members. • To replace or supplement reinforcement. flexural compression.Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates 527 FRP-strengthened beams failure may occur due to beam shear. This model can help to confirm the theoretical calculations as well as to provide a valuable supplement to the laboratory investigation of behavior. • To improve continuity. FRP rupture. of a bridge subject to increased vehicle loads or a building the use of which is to change from residential to commercial. In the last decade. or by improving continuity between members. e. in some situations it may be possible to relieve dead load. either by providing more confinement to increase the strain capacity of the concrete. Three basic principles underlie the strengthening of concrete structures using fiber composite materials. damaged by impact or lost due to corrosion. prior to the application of the additional reinforcement. . Figure 1: FRP shear strengthening configurations (a) Vertical strips (b) Inclined strips (c) Continuous A concrete structure may need strengthening for many reasons: • To increase live-load capacity. • To add reinforcement to a member that has been under designed or wrongly constructed. • Increase the axial and shear capacity of columns by wrapping fiber composite materials around the perimeter. • Increase the shear capacity of beams by adding fiber composite materials to the sides in the shear tensile zone. LUSAS. Many researchers have found that FRP composites applied to the reinforced concrete members provide efficiency. In these cases. However.g.g. In this paper an attempt has been made with ANSYS (version 10)[6] software to bring into focus the versatility and powerful analytical capabilities of finite elements technique by objectively modeling the complete response of test beams. e. FRP debonding or concrete cover ripping [1]. which are deficient or obsolete due to changes in their use or consideration of increased loadings [2]. which are the same irrespective of the type of structure: • Increase the bending moment capacity of beams and slabs by adding fiber composite materials to the tensile face. • To improve seismic resistance. reliability and cost effectiveness in rehabilitation [3-4-5].

0 representing a rough crack (no loss of shear transfer) [6]. y. Figure 2: Solid65 element geometry. fr) Poisson’s ratio (ν) = 0. The value of βt ranges from 0.0 to 1. Mahmood Finite Element Modeling The finite elements analysis calibration study included modeling a reinforced concrete beams with the dimensions and properties corresponding to beams tested in previous researches[7-8]. The shear transfer coefficient used in present study varied between 0. This element is capable of plastic deformation.2.3 and 0. This element has eight nodes with three degrees of freedom at each node – translations in the nodal x. Shear transfer coefficient (βt) which is represents conditions of the crack face. Concrete Solid65 element was used to model the concrete. and crushing. The compressive uniaxial stress-strain relationship for concrete model is obtained by using the following equations to compute the multilinear isotropic stress-strain curve for the concrete is as shown in Figure3.0. The following properties must be entered in ANSYS: • Elastic modulus (Ec). • Ultimate uniaxial compressive strength ( ). The present study assumed that the concrete is a homogeneous and initially isotropic. and z directions.528 Amer M. (1) • • • fc = ε Ec ⎛ε ⎞ 1+ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ε ⎟ ⎝ o⎠ 2 for for f c = f c' ε1 ≤ ε ≤ ε ° ε ° ≤ ε ≤ ε cu (2) (3) .0 representing a smooth crack (complete loss of shear transfer) and 1. with 0. Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh. A schematic of the element is shown in Figure2 [6]. cracking in three orthogonal directions. [10] Ultimate uniaxial tensile strength (modulus of rupture. Smeared cracking approach has been used in modeling the concrete in the present study [9].4 • Compressive uniaxial stress-strain relationship for concrete.

. and z directions. y. 2 f c' εo = Ec +ε ε1 ε2 ε3 ε4 ε5 -ε Reinforcing steel Modeling of reinforcing steel in finite elements is much simpler than the modeling of concrete. This element is also capable of plastic deformation. and . in which εo is calculated from Equation 4. A Link8 element was used to model steel reinforcement. A perfect bond between the concrete and steel reinforcement considered. A Poisson’s ratio of 0. Figure 3: Simplified compressive uniaxial stress-strain curve for concrete.Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates 529 4) The simplified stress-strain curve for each beam model is constructed from six points connected .3 is used for the steel reinforcement. The steel for the finite element models is assumed to be an elastic-perfectly plastic material and identical in tension and compression as shown in Figure5. Point 1. Points 2. Steel reinforcement in the experimental beams was constructed with typical steel reinforcing bars. at stress-strain relationship of the concrete in the linear range (must satisfy Hooke’s law). The 4 are obtained from Equation 2. The same approach was adopted for FRP composites. Figure 4: Link8 element geometry. 3. so the two materials shared the same nodes. However. Point 5 is at εo and behavior is assumed to be perfectly plastic after point 5. is calculated for the by straight lines. This element is a 3D spar element and it has two nodes with three degrees of freedom – translations in the nodal x. Elastic modulus and yield stress for the steel reinforcement used in this FEM study follow the design material properties used for the experimental investigation. The curve starts at zero stress and strain. in the present study the steel reinforcing was connected between nodes of each adjacent concrete solid element. This element is shown in Figure4[6].

. which are typically stiffer and stronger than the matrix. i. A Solid 45 element was used to model steel plates. Mahmood Figure 5: Stress-strain curve for steel reinforcement Steel plate Steel plates were added at support and loading locations in the finite element models (as in the actual beams) in order to avoid stress concentration problems. FRP Laminates FRP composites are materials that consist of two constituents. Figure 6: Solid 45 element geometry. a continuous polymer called the matrix. their properties are not the same in all directions. The steel plates were assumed to be linear elastic materials. One constituent is the reinforcement. The reinforcing material is in the form of fibers.e.000 N/mm2 and Poisson’s ratio of 0. Figure 7 shows a schematic of FRP composites. An elastic modulus equal to 200..3 were used for the plates. The geometry and node locations for this element type are shown in Figure 6[6]. Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh. The FRP composites are orthotropic materials.530 Amer M. carbon and glass. The constituents are combined at a macroscopic level and are not soluble in each other. that is. which is embedded in the second constituent.

. A summary of material properties for FRP composites used for the finite elements modeling of the strengthened beams in the present study is shown in Table 1. Figure 8: Solid 46 layered element geometry. In the present study linear elastic properties of FRP composites are assumed as shown in Figure 9. The geometry and node locations for this element type are shown in Figure 8[6].Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates Figure 7: Schematic of FRP composites. 531 A Solid 46 layered element was used to model FRP composites. The high strength of the epoxy used to attach FRP sheets to the experimental beams supported the perfect bond assumption.

Strengthen by warping with one layer of CFRP inclined at an angle of 90º with an additional layer of CFRP on both sides of the web inclined at an angle of 0o to the longitudinal axis[8]. Strengthen by one layer of unidirectional transverse carbon/epoxy laminates CFRP inclined at an angle of 90º to the longitudinal axis [7]. Table2 shows all beams evaluated in the present study. FRP Laminates thickness (mm) ---1.6 2. Mahmood Figure 9: Stress-strain curves for the FRP composites in the direction of the fibers. the finite elements representation using ANSYS program has been applied to practical sections and the results will be compared with the experimental results reported by previous researches[7-8]. Table 1: Summary of material properties for FRP composite.1 ---0. Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh.18 0. Description As built beam (control beam)[7]. Geometry and materials properties.532 Amer M.18 . As built beam (control beam) [8]. Strengthen by warping with one layer of CFRP inclined at an angle of 90º to the longitudinal axis[8]. Table 2: Symbol B1 B1C-90 B1G-90 B2 B2C-90 B2C-90-0 Summary of beams evaluated in the present study. Strengthen by two layers of unidirectional transverse E-glass/epoxy laminates GFRP inclined at an angle of 90º to the longitudinal axis [7]. Six beams with different conditions (all beams are deficient shear reinforcement) will be analyzed using the proposed ANSYS finite elements model. Elastic modulus N /mm2 Major Poisson’s ratio Shear modulus N /mm2 FRP composite Carbon fiber reinforced polymer CFRP Glass fiber reinforced polymer GFRP Numerical Analysis In order to validate the numerical representation of the reinforced concrete beams strengthening with fiber reinforced polymer composites.

05m 0.41m 0.5P 0.5P 0.44m 3.61m 0.5P 0.37m FRP 0.915m 2Φ9 2Φ25 Φ9@0.38m 1. and the material properties adopted in the analysis are given in Table 3.62m (a) Dimension and reinforcement of as built beam B1. 0.41m 0. Figure 10: Loading reigns and geometrical properties of analyzed beams.3m 0. P 0. 0.37m 1.134m (c) Dimension and reinforcement of as built beam B2.83m 2.7m 0.05m 2.15m 0.62m (b) Shear strengthening details for beams B1C-90.44m 3.37m 1. and B1G-90.Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates 533 The geometry of all beams is shown in Figure 10.37m 2Φ10 2Φ13 Φ10@0.7m 0.15m FRP 0.5P 0.25m 2.915m 0.23m . 0.

only one quarter of the beam was modeled.3 27. B1C-90 & B1G-90 420 200000 0.54 0. boundary condition and loading regions of all beams are shown in Figure11. boundary condition and loading regions for a quarter beam model of all beams Loading steel plate FRP composite Supporting steel plate a.534 Table 3: Amer M. Mahmood Summary of Material Properties of Selected Beams B1.2 B2. Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh. Finite element modeling for B1C-90 & B1G-90 . B2C-90 & B2C-90-0 414 200000 0. symmetry was utilized in the finite elements analysis. This approach reduced computational time and computer disk space requirements significantly. The finite element mesh.3 31 0. Figure 11: Finite element mesh.2 Steel yield strength fy (N/mm2) Steel modulus of elasticity Es (N/mm2) Steel Poisson's ratio vs Concrete compressive strength (N/mm2) Concrete Poisson's ratio vc Due to the symmetry in cross-section of the concrete beam and loading.

These would reduce the stiffness of the actual beams. while the finite element models do not include microcracks due to factors that are not incorporated into the models.3m Φ25 tension reinforcement d. the beam stiffness was reduced and the linear load –deflection behavior ended when the internal steel reinforcement began to yield. for all beams the finite element model is stiffer than the actual beam in the linear range. Several factors may cause the higher stiffness in the finite element models. .Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates 535 Φ10 compression reinforcement Stirrups Φ10@ 0. Also the microcracks produced by drying shrinkage and handling are present in the concrete to some degree. The bond between the concrete and steel reinforcing is assumed to be perfect (no slip) in the finite element analyses. but for the actual beams the assumption would not be true slip occurs. B1C-90 & B1G-90 Φ9 compression reinforcement Stirrups Φ9@ 0.Steel reinforcement for a B2. therefore the composite action between the concrete and steel reinforcing is lost in the actual beams. B2C-90 & B2C-90-0 Discussion of Results Load deflection curves The experimental and numerical load-deflection curves obtained for the beams are illustrated in Figure11. The curves show good agreement in finite element analysis with the experimental results throughout the entire range of behavior and failure mode.6m Φ12 tension reinforcement c.Steel reinforcement for B1. After the initiation of flexural cracks.

a.536 Amer M. Load deflection curve for beam B1C-90. Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh. Mahmood Figure11: Load deflection curves. . Load deflection curve for beam B1. b.

Load deflection curve for beam B1G-90. Load deflection curve for beam B2C-90.Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates c. . 537 d.

so that the additional layer is not sufficient to increase the beam stiffness. Load deflection curve for beam B2C-90-0. Crack Pattern The ANSYS program records a crack pattern at each applied load step. Figure11 d. the second crack with a green outline. but B1C-90 appear stiffer than B1G-90 which means that carbon fiber polymer is better than glass fiber polymer in strengthening the reinforced concrete beams for shear. . and the third crack with a blue outline [6]. As shown in Figure11 a . Figure12 shows evolutions of crack patterns developing for each beam at the last loading step. and c. Mahmood e.538 Amer M. and e indicate that the using of additional layer of carbon fiber polymer composite to both side of the beam web inclined at an angle of 0º to the longitudinal axis increase the stiffness of the beam by 2. ANSYS program displays circles at locations of cracking or crushing in concrete elements. and crushing is shown with an octahedron outline.b. The first crack at an integration point is shown with a red circle outline. the strengthened beams B1C-90 and B1G-90 are stiffer than the control beam B1.3% . Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh. Cracking is shown with a circle outline in the plane of the crack.

The addition of FRP reinforcement to the control beam . B1 539 B1C-90 B1G-90 B2 B2C-90 B2C-90-0 The failure modes of the finite element models show good agreement with observations and data from the experimental full-scale beams.Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates Figure 12: Evolution of Crack Patterns.

03 Beam B1 B1C-90 B1G-90 B2 B2C-90 B2C-90-0 Conclusions The numerical solution was adopted to evaluate the ultimate shear strength of the reinforced concrete beams reinforced with FRP laminates in simple. Failure load The failure load obtained from the numerical solution for all beams is slightly smaller than experimental load. The general behaviors of the finite element models show good agreement with observations and data from the experimental full-scale beam tests. The addition of FRP reinforcement to the control beam shifts the behavior of the control beams from shear failure near the ends of the beam to flexure failure at the midspan.3 4. and ultimate capacity of the strengthened beams with ultimate capacity of the control beams. and the ultimate capacity of the strengthened beams with ultimate capacity of the control beams. Mahmood shifts the behavior of the beams from a shear failure near the ends of the beam to flexure failure at the midspan. cheap and rapid way compared with experimental full scale test.6 1.02 1. The results obtained demonstrate that carbon fiber polymer is efficient more than glass fiber polymer in strengthening the reinforced concrete beams for shear. Ibrahim and Mohammed Sh.540 Amer M.8 5. The present finite element model can be used in additional studies to develop design rules for strengthening reinforced concrete members using FRP laminates.6 Increased in ultimate load of strengthened 1 1. Experimental ultimate load (kN) 69 125 116 416 435 445 Numerical ultimate load (kN) 66 119 107 405 414 420 % Difference 4.8 7. Table 4: Comparsions between experimental and finite element ultimate loads.8 1 1.8 2. . The final loads for the finite element models are the last applied load step before the solution diverges due to numerous cracks and large deflections.6 4. Table4 shows comparison between the ultimate loads of the experimental beams and the final loads from the finite element models.

Composite: part B38. doi:10. Beitelman and R.1016/j. Frostig (2003) Experiments and analytical comparison of RC beams strengthened with CFRP composites.1016/j. H. Issues 8. volume 27. Al-Mahaidi and V. pages 225-223. college of engineering.2008. ACI 318m-05. pp781-793 doi:10. Michigan.(2002) Shear strength of R/C beams wrapped with CFRP fabric Kentucky transportation center. M. Yih-Yuan Jan.12. Saouma (2006) Modeling of CFRP.Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates 541 References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Esfahani MR.1016/1359-8368(95)00044-5.10. Issues 4. B. doi:10. Pham. Hsuan-Teh Hu. pages 497-508. [10] Nomenclature (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) Ultimate uniaxial compressive strength Concrete elastic modulus Steel elastic modulus stress at any strain ε Concrete modulus of rupture Shear transfer coefficient Strain strain corresponding to ( ) ultimate compressive strain Strain at the ultimate compressive strength Concrete Poisson’s ratio Steel Poisson’s ratio Ec Es ƒc fr βt Ε ε1 εcu εo νc νs .1016/S0263-8223(03)000174-0.Mosallam. P. Swagata Banerjee. composite part B: engineering. volume 75. T.2006.008 M. pages 145-150.002.1016/S1359-8368(03)00090-8.0). American Concrete Institute. Fu-Ming Lin. Harik.039. Sun-Kyu Park and Kenneth W.1016/j.(2007) Shear enhancement of reinforced concrete beams strengthened with FRP composite laminates. and C. Sowrirajan (1996) Reinforced concrete rectangular beams strengthened with CFRP laminates. Version (10. Ayman S. ANSYS Manual. KTC02-14/SPR200-99-2F.concrete bond using smeared and discrete cracks.compstruct. Issues 3-4. Shahawy. Dong-Suk Yang. pp 271–281. O. composite part B: engineering . R.016.04. Farmington Hills. A.2006. Arockiasamy. (2004) Nonlinear finite element analysis of reinforced concrete beams strengthened by fiber-reinforced plastics. I. 1996. 2002. pages 663-677.1016/j.compstruct. Alagusundaramoorthy.C. volume 88. American Concrete Institute. composite structures. ScienceDirect. E. Engineering Structures (2007).engstruct.2006. volume 34.compstruct b.05. Composite Structures 63. Flexural behaviour of reinforced concrete beams strengthened by CFRP sheets.(2005) Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete. Issues 1-4. doi:10. Rabinovitch and Y. et al. doi:10. Neale (2008) Flexural behavior of reinforced concrete beams strengthened with prestressed carbon composites. doi:10. Choo. composite part B: engineering . Thirteen International Conference on Composite Structures – ICCS/13doi:10.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful