Emirates Journal for Engineering Research, 9 (2), 83-89 (2004) (Regular Paper


Dept. of Civil & Environmental Eng., UAE University, Al Ain , P.O.Box 17555, United Arab Emirates 2 Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ont., Canada


‫ ﻴﺘﻡ ﻤﺩ ﺭﺒﻊ ﻜﻤﻴﺔ ﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﻠﻰ‬، 318 ‫ﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﺼﺩﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ ﻟﻜﻭﺩ ﻤﻌﻬﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﺭﺴﺎﻨﺔ ﺍﻷﻤﺭﻴﻜﻰ ﺭﻗﻡ‬  ‫ﺒﻨﺎ‬ ‫ ﺇﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻠﺔ ﺃﺼﺒﺤﺕ ﻤﺄﻟﻭﻓﺔ ﺍﻹﺴﺘﺨﺩﺍﻡ ﻓﻰ‬.‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﻗل ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺔ ﺴﺕ ﺒﻭﺼﺎﺕ ﺩﺍﺨل ﻭﺼﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﺭﺓ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻭﺩ‬ ‫ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺘﺠﺔ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﺯﻻﺯل ﻗﺩ ﺘﺴﺒﺏ ﻋﺯﻭﻡ‬.‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﺂﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﻘﺎﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻷﺤﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﺭﺃﺴﻴﺔ )ﺍﻟﺠﺎﺫﺒﻴﺔ( ﻓﻘﻁ‬ ‫ﻋﻜﺴﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻨﺩ ﻭﺠﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻭﺩ ﻤﺴﺒﺒﺔ ﻋﺯﻭﻡ ﻤﻭﺠﺒﺔ ﻭﺸﺩ ﺒﺎﻟﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﻠﻰ ﺒﺠﻭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﻭﺩ ﻴﻘﺎﻭﻤﻪ ﻁﻭل‬ ‫ ﺇﻻ ﺃﻨﻪ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺤﺩﺙ ﺇﻗﺘﻼﻉ ﻷﺴﻴﺎﺥ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﺢ ﻤﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻠﺔ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺃﻯ ﺤﺭﻜﺔ ﺃﻓﻘﻴﺔ‬، ‫ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺎﻁ ﺒﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ ﺴﺕ ﺒﻭﺼﺎﺕ‬ .‫ﺒﺴﻴﻁﺔ ﻟﻸﻋﻤﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﺴﻠﻭﺏ ﺘﺩﻋﻴﻡ ﺒﺈﺴﺘﺨﺩﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﻭﻟﻴﻤﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﻭﺍﺓ ﺒﺎﻷﻟﻴﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻜﺭﺒﻭﻨﻴﺔ‬ ‫ ﻹﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺘﺄﻫﻴل ﻁﻭل ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺎﻁ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻓﻰ ﻟﺤﺩﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﻠﻰ ﺒﺎﻟﻜﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻰ‬L ‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺼﻨﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻜل ﺤﺭﻑ‬ ‫ ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﺄﺒﺤﺎﺙ ﻤﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺴﻠﻭﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻌﺩ ﺘﺩﻋﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺄﻟﻭﺍﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ‬.‫ﺍﻟﻭﺼﻼﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻷﻋﻤﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻤﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺒﺩﻭﻥ‬، ‫ ﻤﻘﻭﺍﺓ ﺒﺎﻷﻟﻴﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻜﺭﺒﻭﻨﻴﺔ ؛ ﻓﺘﻡ ﺘﺠﻬﻴﺯ ﺘﺴﻊ ﻋﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﺇﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺘﺤﺕ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺯﻭﻡ‬L ‫ﺸﻜل ﺤﺭﻑ‬ ‫ ﻭﺜﻼﺜﺔ ﻋﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻤﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻁﺒﻘﺎ ﻟﻠﻜﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬، ‫ﺎ ﻟﻠﻜﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﻴﻤﺔ( ﺒﻐﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ‬ ‫ﺘﻘﻭﻴﺔ )ﻤﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻁﺒﻘﹰ‬ ‫ ﻭﺃﺨﻴﺭﹰ‬، ‫ﺒﻁﻭل ﺭﺒﺎﻁ ﻜﺎﻓﻰ‬ ‫ ﻭﺘﻡ‬.‫ ﻤﻘﻭﺍﺓ ﺒﺎﻷﻟﻴﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻜﺭﺒﻭﻨﻴﺔ‬L ‫ﺍ ﺜﻼﺜﺔ ﻋﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺩﻋﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﺒﺄﻟﻭﺍﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻜل ﺤﺭﻑ‬ .‫ﻋﺭﺽ ﻭﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻤﻠﻰ ﺒﻤﺎ ﻓﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻭﻯ ﻭﻤﻘﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻹﻨﻔﻌﺎل ﻭﺁﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻹﻨﻬﻴﺎﺭ‬ ‫ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺯﻭﺩﺕ‬،‫ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺩﻋﻤﺔ ﺒﺎﻷﻟﻴﺎﻑ ﺍﻟﻜﺭﺒﻭﻨﻴﺔ‬L ‫ﻟﻘﺩ ﺃﻅﻬﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺃﻟﻭﺍﺡ ﺍﻟﺒﻭﻟﻴﻤﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺸﻜل ﺤﺭﻑ‬ ‫ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﺸﺘﻤﻠﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻌﻠﻭﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻔﻴﺩ ﻜل ﻤﻥ‬، ‫ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺒﻁﻭل ﺘﻤﺎﺴﻙ ﻜﺎﻓﻰ ﻭﺭﻓﻌﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻹﻨﺯﻻﻕ‬ .‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻤﻤﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺎﺤﺜﻴﻥ ﻓﻰ ﻤﺠﺎل ﺘﺩﻋﻴﻡ ﻭﺘﺭﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺨﺭﺴﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﺔ‬ According to the earlier editions of the ACI 318 code, at least quarter of the beam bottom (positive) flexural reinforcement at midspan had to be embedded 6 inches into the beam-column joint. This detail is also common to present practice in structures designed for gravity loads only. Earthquake-induced forces can cause reversal in the beam bending moment at the column face resulting in a positive bending moment with the bottom beam flexural reinforcement under tension near the supports. The tension force in this reinforcement must be developed by the 6 inch embedment in the joint. Pull-out of the embedded reinforcement from the joint may occur under relatively small lateral drift levels. The objective of this research is to obtain a rehabilitation technique using Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers (CFRP) L-shaped plates to retrofit the inadequate anchorage of beam bottom reinforcement at beam-column joints. An experimental investigation was conducted to study the applicability and behaviour of beams rehabilitated using CFRP L-shaped plates. Nine medium-scale reinforced concrete joints were cast and tested under flexural loading. Three joints were used as control joints. Three joints were designed according to current codes with adequate anchorage of beam bottom reinforcement at beam-column joint with different column depth. Three joints with different column depth were strengthened using CFRP Lshaped plates, and tested. The results of the experimental investigation are reported and discussed including ultimate strength, strains and modes of failure. The test results indicated the feasibility of using CFRP L-shaped plates to resist the slippage and provide adequate anchorage of the beam bottom reinforcement into the beam-column joints. Useful information for the designers, researchers are provided in the field of rehabilitation of reinforced concrete members.

Gravity load-designed structures and buildings designed in the 1960s and 1970s or earlier may have insufficient lateral load resistance. During recent earthquakes (1995 Kobe, 1994 Northridge earthquakes), the behaviour of buildings designed to earlier codes was not satisfactory due to inadequate

lateral load carrying capacity and limited ductility. Some of the main deficiencies in existing reinforced concrete frame structures are: inadequate column shear capacity, short lap splices in columns at maximum flexure locations, lack of rotational capacity of beams due to inadequate anchorage of bottom reinforcement, and joint failure due to insufficient transverse reinforcement.


2. The geometry can be made of 3 cores 26 mm diameter spaced at 12 mm centers. respectively. SP2 and SP3. By the end of 1990's. Specimens SP4. the bend zone length in this research was selected to be 200 mm. or as far as possible into the support and terminated in standard hooks. are of column total depth of 150. Prefabricated CFRP L-shaped plate stressed. The anchored steel plate relieves the bottom reinforcement from carrying excessive tension that lead to anchor failure. Anchorage of 100 mm length gives failure load utilization of approximately 60%. Swiss innovation for strengthening of structures with composite fiber material is introduced which is CFRP L-shaped plate for shear strengthening of concrete structures. Vol. Previous pull-out tests were conducted on the CFRP L-shaped plates for different anchorage length3. 225 84 Emirates Journal for Engineering Research. 150 mm about 80% and 200 mm about 95% of the failure load of the free length plate (126 kN/plate). are of column total depth of 150. the code designed specimens. The prefabricated CFRP L-shaped plates consisted of carbon fibers in an epoxy matrix as shown in Figure 1. 200 and 250 mm. the control specimens. The beam and columns of all specimens are of 120 mm width. Specimens SP7. The CFRP L-shaped plate was glued in the hole in the column and to the top soffit of the beam. One way to retrofit the beam end is by the use of steel straps attached to the bottom surface of the beam at the beam-column joint and connected to it by epoxy-resin type anchors1. SP2 and SP3 beam top reinforcement are embedded into the column with total length of 100 mm (10 times bar diameter) straight bar without 90o hook. SP8 and SP9 is strengthened from the top soffit of the beam by one prefabricated CFRP L-shaped plate. details of reinforcement and loading system of the specimens are shown in Figure 2. respectively. giving easy handling on site in addition to the other benefits of CFRP products for example corrosion resistance and high strength. never a primary break in the bend zone. Specimens SP1. 2004 . The authors experimentally investigated a new application for the CFRP L-shaped plates in rehabilitating the anchorage of the beams bottom reinforcement. 1/4 or more of the bottom (positive) reinforcement in continuous beams was required to extend into the beam-column joint a distance of ten or more bar diameters. SP5 and SP6 beam top reinforcement are anchored to the column with the standard 90o hook satisfying the ACI-ASCE4 recommendations. the surface of the concrete was ground and the dust removed.A. Ghobarah Before the 1951 edition of the ACI 318 code. the strengthened specimens. 200 and 250 mm. The cause of failure was always shearing of the whole plate. These figures represent a lower limit because in the actual application the Lshaped plates are always bonded over their entire length so that the anchorage zone is not as heavily conducted for different bend zone length of 150. Biddah and A. For developing the tensile capacity of the steel strap. Biddah2 used two steel straps at the beams sides to resist the pull-out that may happen to the beam bottom reinforcement. Further preparation of the hole consisted of removing loose particles with a vacuum cleaner. Typically. Test Specimens Nine medium scale reinforced concrete exterior joints specimens were tested. Each specimen of SP7. or other adequate anchorage. The plate was bonded to the concrete with the same adhesive. The bend zone tensile test was also and 300 mm and the results were 67%. the surface of the anchorage zone of the L-shaped plate was pre-coated with adhesive. SP4. The surfaces of the L-shaped plate are EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM The work proposed in this research focuses on rehabilitation of beam bottom reinforcement using CFRP L-shaped plates. are of column total depth of 150. The steel straps were fastened to the sides of the beam using expansion anchors. An important feature of these L-shaped plates is their lightweight. The hole was filled with a solvent-free. epoxy-based twocomponent adhesive mortar named Sikadur-30 and the CFRP plate was inserted into it as shown in Figure 3.9. core hole must first be drilled in it to a complete column depth. SP1. Figure 1. a bracket was welded to the strap and connected to a large threaded rod placed through the column just below the soffit. This requirement was relaxed in 1951 edition. The dimensions. Progressive failure of the anchors occurred starting at the far end anchor then the anchor near the column due to the bending stiffness of the straps. In order to anchor the CFRP L-shaped plate in the column. SP8 and SP9. 69% and 74% of the failure load of the free length plate. Before application of the CFRP L-shaped plate. This detail is presently common practice in structures designed for gravity load only. According to the previous tests. SP5 and SP6. at least 1/4 of the beam bottom reinforcement at midspan was required to be embedded into the beam-column joint to a length of 6 inches. respectively. 200 and 250 mm. The beams were tested upside down due to the laboratory facilities in which the loads can only be applied from top to bottom. For better anchorage. No.

SP2.2 fc'. This is removed immediately before installation and the surface is then ready for bonding. Figure 4 shows the test setup and the supporting system of the specimens. The column in each specimen was loaded by a constant axial load causing compressive stress on the column of 0. This system avoids the need to abrade the plate to prepare the surface or use solvents on site for cleaning the prepared surface. dial gauges for measuring the beam tip deflection and strain gauges for measuring steel bars and CFRP L-shaped plate strain in the beam at the face of the column section. No. SP5 and SP6 Figure 2. φ 8 @ 120 2 φ 10 φ 8 @ 80 150 200 250 250 mm Specimens SP4.Strengthening of Inadequate Anchorage of Beam Reinforcement in Beam . In all specimens. SP7.9. Test setup and supporting system of the specimens Emirates Journal for Engineering Research. Vol. SP8 and SP9 100 mm 1000 mm 2 φ 10 each side P1 P2 2 φ 10 250 mm 250 mm protected both sides at the factory with peel-ply containing no release agent.2. The loading was continued up to failure of the specimen. 2004 85 . Installation of the CFRP L-shaped plate Constant load P1 40 mm CFRP L-shaped plate Spacer P2 Strong Floor 40 mm Figure 4. measurements were taken using deformeter for measuring the concrete compressive strain. The specimens were tested under one concentrated load at the tip of the beam. SP3. Load control was employed and the loading was applied in increments of approximately 5% of the expected failure load. Dimensions and details of reinforcement of the tested specimens Figure 3. The specimens were tested upside down due to the laboratory facilities in which the loads can only be applied from top to bottom.Column Joints 100 mm 1000 mm 2 φ 10 each side 100 P1 P2 2 φ 10 250 mm 250 mm 250 mm 150 200 250 φ 8 @ 120 2 φ 10 φ 8 @ 80 mm Specimens SP1.

Behaviour of the Tested Specimens A summary of the experimental results is presented in Table 1. In case of strengthened specimens SP7. SP5 and SP6. respectively. Ghobarah Material Properties The reinforcing bars used as longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the specimens are of yield strength of 420 MPa. Primary flexural crack was first visible in the beam at the face of the column at about 11 to 21% of the ultimate load.07 22.31 11. The used prefabricated CFRP L-shaped plates are of 90o bent with inner radius of 25 mm. respectively.23 14.4 mm.92 28.87 Deflection at ultimate load (mm) 13.92. These specimens failed due to crushing of concrete near the beam bottom surface at the column face. Failure loads. 28. Cracking of the joint core due to shear in the joint is an important factor affecting the bond of reinforcing bars passing through the joint.5 kN compared to approximately 3 kN for the control and code designed specimens SP1 to SP6. SP3.14 8.40 22.10 34. around 3. SP2 and SP3. The joint shear cracks of specimens SP7 and SP8 reduced the bond of the reinforcing bars causing higher forces on the CFRP L-shaped plate at a lower load level.9.39 30. The strengthening system increased the beam capacity causing higher shear on the joints.32 22.25 53. 2004 . This noise gave indication of debonding of the CFRP L-shaped plate starting form the column face.87 kN.42 27. Joint shear cracks appeared in specimens SP1 and SP4 at a load level of 15 and 18 kN. SP8 and SP9. SP3. with anchorage length of 100 mm length and no hook. consequently.35 24. initial cracking occurred at higher load. SP2 and SP3. The control specimens SP1. TEST RESULTS The experimental results of beam tip deflection. It includes the loads and deflections at ultimate (failure) stage in addition to the modes of failure. 6. this ratio may have a significant role in the anchorage of the beam top bars. plate width 40 mm and Elastic modulus 120000 MPa5. The concrete cylinder compressive strength is 31 MPa. strains and crack propagation were recorded at different stages of loading till the failure load of the tested specimens has been reached. at a load level of 27. deflections and mode of failure of the tested specimens Group Specimen designation SP1 Control specimens SP2 SP3 Code designed specimens SP4 SP5 SP6 Strengthened specimens SP7 SP8 SP9 Column total depth (mm) 150 200 250 150 200 250 150 200 250 Ultimate Load (kN) 17. debonding of the plate happened at a lower load. Increasing the column total depth decreases the ultimate load in the control specimens. In the strengthened specimens SP7. all the specimens behave similarly. respectively. Specimens designed according to code requirements in terms of the anchorage of the beam top steel bars showed almost identical behaviour with different column total depth. SP7 and SP9.59 58. This is attributed to ratio between the 100 mm anchorage length and the column total depth which are 67. No shear cracks were noticed in specimens SP2.87 14. No.39 and 30. Since the top column face is subjected to constant axial load and variable moment. respectively. 50 and 40% in case of the specimens SP1. as shown in figure 4. Figure 5 shows the failure of specimens SP1. Biddah and A. Separation between the CFRP Lshaped plate from the top surface of the beam occurred.2. a slight noise was heard at a load level of 22.A.00 21. failed in bar pull-out after yielding of the beam top steel bars. Vol.27 Modes of failure Pull out after yielding Pull out after yielding Pull out after yielding Concrete crushing after steel yielding Concrete crushing after steel yielding Concrete crushing after steel yielding Debonding at the full beam length Debonding at the full beam length Debonding at the full beam length 86 Emirates Journal for Engineering Research. Table 1. Plate thickness 1. and other observed behaviour of the tested specimens show that before cracking. 23 and 25 kN. respectively. Joint shear cracks appeared in specimens SP7 and SP8 at a load level of 18 and 22 kN. SP8 and SP9. Figure 5. No shear cracks were noticed in specimen SP9.29 54. Table 1.

9. The pull-out failure of the control specimens SP1. The code designed specimens SP4. This significant reduction in strain indicates higher load capacity of the strengthened specimens due to the composite action of the concrete specimens with the CFRP L-shaped plates. This is attributed to the higher joint shear capacity of the specimens of large column total depth. The post cracking stiffness of the strengthened specimens SP7. b and c) of specimens (SP1. SP8 and SP9. is displayed in Figure 7 (a. The figure shows that the initial stiffness of the strengthened specimens is not significantly different from that of the control and code designed specimens.Strengthening of Inadequate Anchorage of Beam Reinforcement in Beam . The system exhibited many advantages such as lightweight. respectively. Increasing the column total depth increases the specimen overall capacity. 2004 87 . b and c). SP5. respectively. SP4. SP7). easy and fast assembly without heavy lifting equipment. Specimen SP7 CONCLUSIONS In this study. SP2 and SP3 was a brittle failure showing rapid strength degradation after reaching its ultimate load. reinforcing steel and CFRP Strains The concrete. The total applied load versus strain curves. The figure shows that at all load levels. SP8) and (SP3. The following conclusions can be drawn: Specimen SP9 Figure 5. SP6. the strain increasing rate of the CFRP L-shaped plate decreases showing lower CFRP strain than that of the reinforcing steel. corrosion resistance and significant over-strength in the assembled system. This is attributed to the composite action between the concrete specimen and the CFRP L-shaped plate which improved the strength and the stiffness of the beam. (SP2. SP5 and SP6 demonstrated ductile failure. lower longitudinal reinforcing steel strains are noticed in case of the strengthened specimens compared with those of the control specimen SP1. SP8 and SP9 is higher than that of the control specimens especially after yielding of the steel bars. SP9). Crack pattern of different tested specimens Emirates Journal for Engineering Research. This happened at load level of 22. Vol. reinforcing steel bars and CFRP Lshaped plates longitudinal strains were recorded at various locations in the specimens at different load levels. in the beam at the face of the column section.2. 23 and 25 kN in case of the specimens SP7.Column Joints Load-Deflection Behaviour The applied tip load versus beam tip-deflection of the tested specimens is presented in Figure 6 (a. Specimen SP1 Specimen SP3 Concrete. CFRP L-shaped plate system is considered as an outstanding solution to increase the beam capacity. No. The addition of the CFRP L-shaped plate does not only serve to improve the strength of the beam but also leads to a stiffer specimen. At the beginning of debonding of the CFRP Lshaped plate from the concrete surface.

35 30 25 20 15 SP7 SP4 Total load (kN) SP1 10 5 0 0 10 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was conducted in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering laboratories. J. “Use of steel elements to strengthen a reinforced concrete building. 1997. SP6 and SP9 (column depth of 250 mm) Figure 6.” Ph. Thesis. “Shear strengthening with CFRP Lshaped plates. Vol. United Arab Emirates University. Thesis. 3. “Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures.D. Beam tip deflection (mm) 20 30 40 50 60 a) SP1.” reported by Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 352.1998. report No. “Shear strengthening with prefabricated CFRP L-shaped plates. 2002. 3..” 2001. Biddah and A. Fib Bulletin 14. 326p. SP4 and SP7 (column depth of 150 mm) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 SP8 SP5 REFERENCES 1. 130p. 2004 . The CFRP L-shaped plates have not reached their full capacity due to the debonding of the plates.2. 5. 2. 2. Therefore. “Recommendations for Design of Beam-Column Connections in Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structures.” Dubendorf.” M. 78p. The test results indicated the feasibility of using CFRP L-shaped plates when externally bonded to reinforced concrete beams to increase the load carrying capacity and the corresponding stiffness with limited ductility. 6. 37p.116/7.. 43/1998.9. University of Texas at Austin. 66p. No. 4. ACI-ASCE 352R-02.A. 22p.I.Sc. report No. Biddah. Ghobarah 1. Canada. the joint shear strength should be checked before strengthening the beams using CFRP L-shaped plates. Load-beam tip load-tip deflection relationship of the tested specimens 88 Emirates Journal for Engineering Research.” Dubendorf. Total load (kN) SP2 Beam tip deflection (mm) 20 30 40 50 60 b) SP2. A. Estrada. EMPA test report. EMPA test report. The free providing of the CFRP L-shaped plates by Sika UAE is deeply appreciated. SP5 and SP8 (column depth of 200 mm) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 SP9 SP6 Total load (kN) SP3 Beam tip deflection (mm) 20 30 40 50 60 c) SP3. Hamilton. 1990. 2002. “Seismic behaviour of existing and rehabilitated reinforced concrete frame connections. McMaster University. Increasing the beam capacity may increase the shear demand on the joint causing brittle joint shear failure.

conc 30 SP9 .006 0.006 0.9.conc SP1.FRP Total load (kN) 25 20 15 10 5 SP6 .004 0.Strengthening of Inadequate Anchorage of Beam Reinforcement in Beam .012 Longitudinal Strains (mm/mm) c) SP3.conc SP4 .steel 0 0.FRP Total load (kN) 25 20 15 10 5 0 -0.steel 0 0.004 -0.012 Longitudinal Strains (mm/mm) a) SP1.conc SP2 .steel SP3 .008 0.002 0.FRP Total load (kN) 25 20 15 10 5 0 -0.conc SP3 .2.conc SP8 .004 -0.conc SP7.steel SP1. SP5 and SP8 (column depth of 200 mm) 35 SP9 . Vol.002 0.012 Longitudinal Strains (mm/mm) b) SP2.01 0.006 0.01 0.steel SP8 .01 0.002 0. SP4 and SP7 (column depth of 150 mm) 35 30 SP8 .conc SP9 . Load-longitudinal strain relationship for specimens Emirates Journal for Engineering Research.008 0. SP6 and SP9 (column depth of 250 mm) Figure 7.steel SP6 .004 -0.004 0.conc SP2 -steel SP5 .002 0 0.steel 0 -0.002 SP4.008 0.steel SP7.002 SP5 .004 0. No. 2004 89 .Column Joints 35 30 SP7.