Professional Documents
Culture Documents
"
INTRODUCTION
Strengthening of R.C. columns requires increasing its vertical load capacity as well as
increasing their ductility. Confinement of concrete is an effective way for strengthening
of concrete members, specially the columns. In the recent years the use of Fiber
Reinforced Polymers composites (FRP) in R.C. structures rehabilitation becomes
promising alternative of R.C. Jacketing, the behavior of retrofitted concrete columns
wrapped by FRP sheets opens the way to a new powerful strengthening technique.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
1
Later studies by Rochette et al. (2000) , and Chaallal et al., (2000) have shown that
the effectiveness of the wraps is dependent on the shape of the cross-section of the
column and the stiffness of the FRP wraps. Square-and rectangular-section columns
were found to experience less increase in strength and ductility than their circular
counterparts. This is because the distribution of lateral confining pressure in circular
SG96F
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Twelve square RC columns were tested. As shown in Figure 1 the dimensions of the
columns cross-section were 200X200 mm. The over all height was 1500 mm and the
clear height was 1100 mm. Corner radius was chosen to be 20 mm. Reinforced
concrete head of dimensions 200X400 at each end of the columns was chosen to
prevent any premature failure of the columns head due to stress concentration. The
average concrete strength (cylinder strength fc) of the used concrete was 20 MPa.
The longitudinal reinforcement of the all the specimens was four bars of high grade
(36/52) steel 12 mm in diameter having yield stress of 420MPa, reinforcement ratio
was 1.13%. The transverse reinforcement was 6 mm diameter of normal mild steel
(24/35) having yield stress of 280MPa at vertical spacing of 160 mm.
Two columns were considered as control specimens, six columns were
strengthened using sandwich wrapping method while the remaining four columns were
strengthened using regular wrapping for comparison. The strengthening of columns
was made using either CFRP sheets or GFRP sheets.
SG96F
Column Head
2 12
100
100
6/5cm
6/5cm
R20
4 12
200
200
100
100
200
1100
2 12
2 12
6/16cm
COLUMN'S CROSS-SECTION
6/5cm
Column Head
100
100
400
ELEVATION
6/5cm
2 12
RFT. DETAILS
FIBER PROPERTIES
Two types of FRP sheets were used E-glass and Carbon fiber. The used E-glass fiber
was Tyfo SHE-51A while the used carbon fiber was Tyfo SCH-41S. Dry properties of
the used FRP sheets and the gross laminate properties as reported by the
manufacture are shown in Table 2. The used Epoxy was Tyfo-S epoxy.
SG96F
FRP
Sheets
Type
Wrapping
method
Sandwich
plate
thickness
Confinement
ratio %
Percentage of
wrapping
R1
R2
G-S-2-00
E-Glass
Regular
2.60
G-F-2-00
E-Glass
Regular
5.20
G-S-2-10
E-Glass
Sandwich
10mm
2.60
G-S-3-10
E-Glass
Sandwich
10mm
3.90
G-F-2-06
E-Glass
Sandwich
6mm
5.20
G-F-2-10
E-Glass
Sandwich
10mm
5.20
C-S-2-00
Carbon
Regular
2.00
C-F-2-00
Carbon
Regular
4.00
C-S-2-10
Carbon
Sandwich
10mm
2.00
C-F-2-10
Carbon
Sandwich
10mm
4.00
Table 2. Dry Properties And Gross Laminate Properties Of The Used FRP Sheets
Dry properties of FRP sheets
Tensile
strength
Tensile
modulus
Gpa
Gpa
E-glass
(GFRP)
3.24
72.4
Carbon
(CFRP)
3.79
230
Ultimate
elongation
Tensile
strength
Tensile
modulus
Elongation
at break
Laminate
thickness
mm
Mpa
Gpa
4.50%
0.36
460
20.9
2.20%
1.30
1.70%
0.28
876
72.4
1.20%
1.00
mm
ACRYLIC PLATES
Local fabricated acrylic plates are used in sandwich wrapping between the FRP inner
and outer layers. The used Acrylic plates were clear smooth acrylic plats (strips and
plates). The commercial name of the producer is Spiro plastic. Two thicknesses were
used in this research 6 mm and 10 mm plates. The acrylic plates were chosen due to
their good properties both in compression and tension, their light weight and their
moderate price. Table 3 shows the manufacturer reported mechanical properties of
acrylic plates.
SG96F
68-75 Mpa
ASTM D 638
Elongation at break
4%
Modulus of elasticity
2900-3200 Mpa
ASTM D 638
Compressive strength
110 Mpa
ASTM D 695
STRENGTHENING METHOD
The major difference was the method of wrapping which was regular or sandwich
wrapping. FRP were prepared and an overlap of 100 mm was found to be sufficient.
The FRP sheets were wrapped on the concrete, with fiber direction perpendicular to
the column longitudinal axis. The overlap location was staggered along the column
sides for strips wrapping. No over lap was applied in case of full wrapping in
longitudinal direction. The sandwich wrapping acrylic plates were fixed on the sheets.
The surface of the plates was smooth, accordingly, rouging operation were applied on
both sides of the plates in order to form a rough surface to increase the bond between
the plates and epoxy. A thin layer of epoxy prime was applied on FRP sheets and the
acrylic plates. The plates were fixed to column. The strip plates were fixed easily but
the full length plates for full wrapping columns needed a special steel clamp to tighten
the plates in their place till the epoxy hardened.
The corners of the sandwich wrapped columns needed to be filled and rounded in
the area between acrylic plates. Epoxy mortar was used in rounding column corners
Figure 3. The corner of the columns were filled using such mortar and then rounded,
the radius of corner was 20 mm plus plate thickness (26 mm or 30 mm). The wrapping
of the outer layer or the second layer took place after hardening of the epoxy mortar.
For column G-S-3-10 additional second outer layer was added after hardening of the
epoxy.
Regular wrapping based on the traditional membrane technique was applied for
columns G-S-2-00, G-F-2-00, C-S-2-00 and C-S-F-00, bearing in mind that G-S-2-00
and C-S-2-00 columns were strip wrapping so the applications were done on 100 mm
strips every 200 mm of the column height, while they were applied on all over the
column height for G-F-2-00 and C-S-F-00 columns.
Sandwich wrapping was applied for columns G-S-2-10, G-S-3-10, G-F-2-06, G-F-210, C-S-2-10 and C-F-2-10. The sandwich wrapping was strip for columns G-S-2-10,
G-S-3-10, and C-S-2-10. Wrapping applications were done on 100 mm strips every
200 mm of the column height, while they were applied on all over the column height
for the G-F-2-06, G-F-2-10 and C-F-2-10 columns.
Columns head were carefully confined in order to avoid any premature failure of
concrete head due to stress concentration, using two methods of confinement. Steel
collar were used to confine the concrete column head to prevent premature failure of
the concrete head when high load reached. Head wrapping was also used as an
additional confining precaution for the columns which high load capacity was
expected, (G-F-2-00, G-F-2-06, G-F-2-10, C-F-2-00 and C-F-2-10). The head was
wrapped using two layers of GFRP 100 mm strips.
SG96F
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
1100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Two Layers
GFRP Sheet
or CFRP Sheet
100
100
Two Layers
GFRP Sheet
or CFRP Sheet
Two Layers
GFRP Sheet
or CFRP Sheet
1100
G-S-2-10
C-S-2-10
G-F-2-00
C-F-2-00
100
100
1100
100
100
100
100
100
1100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
G-S-2-00
C-S-2-00
Two Layers
GFRP Sheet
or CFRP Sheet
100
100
100
100
Two Layers
GFRP Sheet
100
100
Two Layers
GFRP Sheet
1100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
1100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
G-F-2-10
C-F-2-10
G-F-2-06
G-S-3-10
100
Radius=R
100
Epoxy
Mortar
Acrylic
100
Plate
First Layer
Min.20mm
Second Layer
Inner Layer
Outer Layer
R(mm)=Plate Thickness+20
SG96F
Instrumentation
Linear Variable Differential Transducers (LVDT) was used to measure the axial
displacement of the column at the four sides. The transverse strain in the FRP sheets
in columns were measured using electrical strain gages. A computer controlled load
system was used for testing the columns. The main component of the testing facility
was control station, hydraulic testing machine and hydraulic equipments. The control
station was connected with servo controllers, data acquisition equipment and
computer control system based on (Lab View) software. The used loading system was
based on displacement control technique which allow for the recording of the
descending branch of the load displacement curve.
SG96F
Column (C-F-2-00)
Column(C-F-2-10)
SG96F
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Summary of test results are presented in Table 4, the ultimate load of each specimen,
the axial strain at ultimate load and the ductility. The ductility of the columns which
indicated by the energy which columns can sustain are shown also in Table 4.
SG96F
2500
Control
GFRP
CFRP
2.62
2.41
2000
1.98
1.76
1.77
1500
1.58
1.15
1.06
1000
1.28
1.18
500
0
R1
R2
G-S-2-00
G-F-2-00
G-S-2-10
G-S-3-10
G-F-2-06
G-F-2-10
C-S-2-00
C-F-2-00
C-S-2-10
C-F-2-10
Column Designation
Accent
cc
cru
cc/co
Gs total
Gs total / G sc total
0.23
1.00
1.51
1.00
0.20
0.23
1.00
1.41
0.93
105.53
0.45
1.29
2.22
9.55
6.32
1423
177.45
0.49
1.25
2.42
16.56
10.97
1105
919
114.56
0.71
1.17
3.55
11.48
7.60
G-S-3-10
1455
1269
158.16
0.60
1.49
2.99
18.58
12.30
G-F-2-06
1772
1586
197.70
1.34
1.50
6.64
22.16
14.67
G-F-2-10
2123
1937
241.46
0.96
1.19
4.78
20.51
13.58
C-S-2-00
1135
949
118.27
0.27
1.03
1.34
9.88
6.54
C-F-2-00
1598
1412
176.03
0.94
1.23
4.66
16.34
10.82
C-S-2-10
1212
1026
127.85
1.03
2.25
5.12
24.71
16.36
C-F-2-10
2285
2098
261.57
1.03
1.10
5.13
20.36
13.48
Column
(KN)
(KN)
R1
988
802
R2
992
G-S-2-00
-2
x10
x10
100.00
0.20
806
100.47
1033
846
G-F-2-00
1610
G-S-2-10
SG96F
-2
Axial Deformation
One of the major problems which face the design of RC columns is the low value of
axial strain (cc) in concrete at ultimate load, which is about 0.20 %. Increasing this
value will greatly enhance the performance of the RC columns. This brittle behavior of
RC columns load leads to a conservative design to avoid brittle failure of columns
which usually happens suddenly without any warning. The maximum strain of RC
columns at failure (cru) is so near to the value of (cc). Wrapping RC column with FRP
sheets increased the value of axial strain of column at ultimate load. Table 4 shows
the value of (cc) and (cru) for all the columns. The values of (cc) varied between 0.27
% and 1.34 %. The values of ultimate axial strain at failure (cru) were also improved
due to the FRP wrapping, the values varied between 1.10 and 2.25. The ratio between
(cc) of columns to the value (co) which is the value of axial strain at ultimate load of
control column shows enhancement of the columns due to strengthening. As
illustrated in Figure 6., this ratio varied between 1.33 and 6.62.
8
Control
GFRP
CFRP
6.64
5.12
4.78
5.13
4.66
cc / co
4
3.55
2.99
2.22
2.42
2
1
1.00
1.00
R1
R2
1.34
0
G-S-2-00 G-F-2-00 G-S-2-10 G-S-3-10 G-F-2-06 G-F-2-10 C-S-2-00 C-F-2-00 C-S-2-10 C-F-2-10
Column Designation
Figure 6. Axial strain at ultimate load of columns compared with control column
SG96F
the structure or the element under the applied load. The calculated areas of this
surface for all columns are shown in Table 4. The ratio between the ductility of all
columns and the control column is also shown in Figure 7. Wrapping RC columns with
FRP greatly increased the ductility of the columns with ratio varied between 6.3 times
and 16.4 times the control column. Studying the values of all columns it was noticed
that sandwich wrapped columns had greater values than regular wrapped columns. It
was also noticed that GFRP wrapped columns had more ductility than CFRP wrapped
columns except for column C-S-2-10 which showed the maximum value of ductility of
all columns which was 16.4 times the control. Confining ratio also affect the ductility
greatly, doubling the confinement ratio nearly double the ductility of the columns.
Control
GFRP
CFRP
16
14.67
13.58
14
16.36
13.48
12.30
12
10.97
10.82
10
7.60
6.54
6.32
6
4
2
1.00
0.93
R1
R2
0
G-S-2-00 G-F-2-00 G-S-2-10 G-S-3-10 G-F-2-06 G-F-2-10 C-S-2-00 C-F-2-00 C-S-2-10 C-F-2-10
Column Designation
SG96F
value of axial strain ratio than the regular wrapping columns. it was noticed also that
the sandwich columns had lower value of that ratio which means that although the
sandwich columns had a higher value of axial strain as well as axial load but they tend
to act in a brittle way at failure stage The groups are as follows:
1200
Control
G-S-2-00
G-S-2-10
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
SG96F
-2.50
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
Control
C-S-2-00
C-S-2-10
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
2000
Control
G-F-2-00
1500
G-F-2-10
1000
500
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
SG96F
-2.50
This group includes columns C-F-2-00 and C-F-2-10. The effect of wrapping method
on CFRP full wrapping is illustrated in Figure 11. The axial load for column C-F-2-10
was increased by 161.5 % compared with the control column R1 and the ductility
increased by 9.4 times the control column. The column C-F-2-10 showed a high
increase in both axial load capacity and ductility. The enhancement of axial load
capacity was 48.6 %, while the increase in axial strain at ultimate load was only 10%.
The energy sustained by the columns increased by sandwich wrapping, the total
energy of column C-F-2-10 increased by 25% than the column C-F-2-00 that increase
was due to the increase of axial load capacity not increase in ductility.
2500
Control
C-F-2-00
2000
C-F-2-10
1500
1000
500
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
SG96F
This group includes columns C-S-2-00 and C-F-2-00. Figure 13 Illiterate the effect of
percentage of wrapping on CFRP regular wrapping. Full wrapping increased both axial
load capacity and ductility. The enhancement of axial load capacity was 49 %, the
increase in axial strain at ultimate load was 248%. The energy sustained by the full
wrapped column increased greatly, the total energy of column C-F-2-00 increased by
65.4% than the column C-S-2-00 that increase was due to the increase of axial load
capacity not increase in ductility.
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
Control
G-S-2-00
400
G-F-2-00
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
1600
C-S-2-00
1400
C-F-2-00
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
SG96F
2500
2000
1500
0
0.00
G-F-2-10
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
SG96F
2500
2000
1500
1000
Control
500
C-S-2-10
C-F-2-10
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
1200
1000
800
600
400
C-S-2-00
G-S-2-00
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
SG96F
-2.50
This group includes columns C-F-2-00 and C-F-2-10. The effect of wrapping method on
CFRP full wrapping is illustrated in Figure 11. The axial load for column C-F-2-10 was
increased by 161.5 % compared with the control column R1 and the ductility increased
by 9.4 times the control column. The column C-F-2-10 showed a high increase in both
axial load capacity and ductility. The enhancement of axial load capacity was 48.6 %,
while the increase in axial strain at ultimate load was only 10%. The energy sustained
by the columns increased by sandwich wrapping, the total energy of column C-F-2-10
increased by 25% than the column C-F-2-00 that increase was due to the increase of
axial load capacity not increase in ductility.
1400
1200
1000
800
Control
C-S-2-10
600
G-S-2-10
400
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
SG96F
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
Control
G-F-2-00
400
C-F-2-00
200
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
2000
1500
1000
G-F-2-10
C-F-2-10
500
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
SG96F
G-F-2-10 increased than column G-F-2-06 by 20.0 %. The axial strain at ultimate load
for columns G-F-2-06 was more than the column G-F-2-10 by 40 %. The total energy
sustained by column G-F-2-06 was higher than G-F-2-10 by 8.0 %.
2000
1500
1000
Control
G-F-2-06
500
G-F-2-10
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
SG96F
-2.50
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
Control
400
G-S-2-10
200
G-S-3-10
0
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
CONCLUSIONS
The following is a summary of the salient points regarding the effects of the test
variables on the performance of the columns in this study:
(1) Wrapping of square RC columns with FRP sheets can significantly increase the
ultimate axial load capacity, axial deformation and ductility of the columns. The axial
load carried by the strengthened columns in the test program varied from 1.06 to
2.62 times the ultimate axial load of the control column R1. The improvement of the
axial deformation in columns The improvement of axial deformation in columns
which calculated by the ratio of axial strain in columns at ultimate load compared
with the control column varied from 2.2 to 6.6 times the control column R1. The
increase in ductility which calculated by the ratio between total energy which can be
sustained by the column compared with the control column also varied between 6.3
to 16.4 times the control column R1
(2) Sandwich wrapping significantly increases the effectiveness of FRP wrapping
without any increase in the stiffness of the strengthen columns.
(3) The use of strip sandwich wrapping significantly improve the ultimate axial load
capacity and axial strain deformation compared with that recorded for regular strip
wrapping. The enhancement of the ultimate axial load was 8.5 % for GFRP
wrapped columns and 8 % for CFRP wrapped columns.
(4) The use of full sandwich wrapping significantly increase the ultimate axial load
capacity and axial strain deformation compared with that recorded for regular full
wrapping. The enhancement of the ultimate axial load was 36 % for GFRP wrapped
columns and 48.5 % for CFRP wrapped columns.
(5) The influence of regular and sandwich strips wrapping on increasing the axial
carrying load capacity is relatively low but its influence on increasing axial
deformation and ductility is considerably high.
(6) Percentage of wrapping affected the ultimate axial carrying capacity for columns.
Full wrapped columns showed higher ultimate axial carrying capacity compared
with that recorded for strips wrapped column.
SG96F
(7) The type of FRP sheets slightly affected the increase of ultimate axial carrying
capacity. CFRP wrapped columns showed higher values than GFRP wrapped
column for the same strengthening scheme.
(8) Increasing of thickness of sandwich filling material from 6 mm to 10 mm leaded to
increase of ultimate axial load for columns by 20 %. The axial strain at ultimate load
was also increased by 40 %. The ductility of the columns was not affected
noticeably by the increase of sandwich plate thickness.
(9) Adding additional outer layer for the sandwich strips wrapped column significantly
increase the axial carrying load capacity of the sandwich strips wrapped column by
a value of 38% and ductility increased by 62 %.
(10) The use of acrylic plates as a non-compressible material was effective in sandwich
wrapping system due to its light weight and mechanical properties.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge Fyfe Company in U.S.A. particularly Mr. Edward
Donnelly for donating the TYFO S Fiber wrap materials needed in this research, Ms.
Sarah Cruickshank for her positive support and continuous feeding with needed
technical information for wrapping. The support from the technical staff at Housing and
Building Research Center (H.B.R.C.) including Prof. Dr. Omaima Salah Eldin , Dr.
Yehia Abd Elmegeed is particularly appreciated.
REFERENCES
1. Rochette, P. and Labossiere P., (2000), "Axial Testing of Rectangular Column
Models Confined With Composites", Journal of Structural Engineering, August
2000, p.p. 129-136.
2. Chaallal, O.; Shahawy, M. and Al-saad, A., (2000), "Behavior of Axially Loaded
Short Rectangular Columns Strengthened with CFRP Composite Wrapping",
Technical report, Florida Department Of Transportation (FDOT), Structures Research Center, 2007E. Paul Dirac Drive, Tallahassee, FL 32310, August 2000.
3. Parvin, A. and Wang, Wei, (2001), Behavior of FRP Jacketed Concrete Columns
under Eccentric Loading, ASCE, Journal of Composites for Construction, Vol. 5,
No. 3, August 2001, pp. 146-152.
4. Pessiki, S.; Harries, K.; Kestner, J.; Sause, R. and Ricles, M., (2001), "Axial
Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns Confined with FRP Jackets", Journal of
Composites for Construction, November 2001, p.p. 237-245.
5. Tan, K., (2002), "Strength Enhancement of Rectangular Reinforced Concrete
Columns using Fiber-Reinforced Polymer", Journal of Composites for Construction,
August 2002, p.p. 175-183.
6. Mahfouz, I.; Shahram, S. and Rizk, T., (2001) Wrapping System for Strengthening
Structural Columns or Walls, United States Patent, No. 6,219,988 , April 24, 2001.
7. Rizk, T.; Mahfouz I. and Sakani, S. , (2002) Strengthening Rectangular Concrete
Columns Using FRP: A New Technique , ACI Special Publication, ACI Fifth
International Conference on Innovation in Design with Emphasis on Seismic Wind
and Environmental Loading, Quality Control and Innovation in Materials/Hot
weather Concreting, December 2002, Cancun, Mexico.
SG96F