Construction Technology Update No.

74

Fire Performance of Fibre-Reinforced

Polymer Systems Used for the
Repair of Concrete Buildings
by N. Benichou, V.K.R. Kodur, M.F. Green, and L.A. Bisby
This Update reviews NRC-IRC research on the fire resistance of externally
bonded, fibre-reinforced polymer (FRPs) systems used for repairing concrete
building members. The research showed that FRP systems that include
specially designed insulation can enable repaired or strengthened concrete
members to exceed the 4-hour fire resistance requirements of building codes.

The use of fibre-reinforced polymers (FRPs)
has become an accepted repair methods for
concrete bridge structures. Their use for
repairing concrete buildings and parking
garages, however, has been limited because
of concerns about their behaviour in fire.
NRC-IRC performed full-scale fire tests on
FRP-strengthened circular columns, T-beams,
and slabs to shed more light on their fire
performance.
Properties of FRPs
A fibre-reinforced polymer is a two-
component material consisting of high-
strength fibres embedded in a polymer
matrix. FRPs offer great advantages for the
repair of concrete structures because of their
high strength, corrosion resistance, and ease
of application. They have been successfully
used both internally, as an alternative to
steel reinforcement, and externally for
strengthening damaged concrete.
The three main types of FRP fibres used
in most structural applications are carbon,
glass, and to a lesser extent, aramid. Each
has advantages and disadvantages. Carbon
fibres are favoured for flexural strengthening
because of their high stiffness, strength, and
superior fatigue and durability characteristics.
Glass fibres are more commonly used for
shear strengthening.
The polymer matrix supports and protects
the fibres, transfers and distributes forces to
the fibres, and disperses and maintains the
spacing of the fibres. The polymers used in
structural applications need to have good
thermal stability, chemical resistance and
low creep. In fire situations, the matrix is
the vulnerable component of FRPs because
of its combustibility and softening with
rising temperatures.
FRP behaviour in fire
One of the characteristics of FRPs is their
low glass transition temperature (Tg). Tg is
the midpoint of the range of temperatures
over which the FRP polymer matrix
undergoes a change from hard and brittle to
viscous and rubbery. Polymer matrices that
cure at room temperature and are often used
for strengthening concrete structures have
glass transition temperatures ranging from
60°C to 100°C. Without protection from heat,
a polymer matrix may also ignite, emit smoke,
and support flame spread. One of the main
objectives of the NRC-IRC research was to
investigate how low FRP glass transition
temperature affected the performance of
insulated FRP concrete strengthening
systems in fire situations.
 120
% of Room Temperature Strength
Average Bond Strength
100
Aramid FRP Strength
When exposed to fire, FRP materials may
80 Carbon FRP Strength suffer charring, melting, delamination,
cracking and deformation. Figure 1 shows
60
Glass FRP Strength
that for some types of matrices, debonding
can be well advanced at 200°C. It also shows
40 that the fibres themselves lose strength with
rising temperatures, with carbon fibre losing
the least.
20
Fire resistance experiments
0 The objective of the NRC-IRC experiments
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 was to investigate the fire and structural
Temperature (°C) performance of insulated FRP-strengthened
columns, T-beams and slabs. The FRP
Figure 1. Change in FRP strength and bond strength with systems tested used proprietary insulations
temperature increase [References 1 and 2] that were spray-applied.
(The curves are not definitive, and should not be used for FRP-wrapped circular columns
design purposes.) Full-scale fire tests were carried out on four
FRP-wrapped circular concrete columns
(400 mm ø x 3810 mm long) under full
sustained service loads. Figure 2 shows a
column at various stages in the testing
process.

Bare reinforced Column with FRP Column with FRP wrap Column after fire
concrete column installed and spray-on insulation resistance testing
in test chamber
Figure 2. Preparation and testing of circular concrete column

Table 1. Results for column fire tests

Fire Predicted
Type of insulation Test load resistance strength (at room
Column No. Type of FRP and thickness ratio1 (min) temperature) (kN)
1 1 layer Gypsum-based, 0.50 > 3002 5,094
Carbon Tg = 93°C 57 mm
2 1 layer Gypsum-based, 0.50 > 3002 5,094
Carbon Tg = 93°C 32 mm
3 2 layers Cementitious, 0.56 > 3002 4,720
Carbon Tg = 71°C 53 mm
4 2 layers None 0.56 210 4,720
Carbon Tg = 71°C
1. Test load ratio is the ratio of the applied load during fire tests divided by the predicted strength (at room temperature).
2. After the insulated columns had passed 300 minutes (5 hours) of fire resistance, the load was increased to induce failure.

2
 1200
Column 4 (uninsulated)
1000
Temperature (°C)

800
Column 1
600
Column 2
Column 3
400
200
0
0 60 120 180 240
Time (min)
Figure 3. Temperature change with time at the FRP/concrete
interface for the column tests
All four columns were internally reinforced
with conventional steel reinforcing bars and
spirals as per ACI design specifications.
The FRP wraps were applied around the
circumference of the columns to provide
confinement. Three of the columns had fire
insulation spray applied to the FRP wraps
and one was tested without any insulation.
Test results are shown in Table 1.
Figure 3 plots temperatures recorded at
the FRP–concrete interfaces of each column.
It shows that the insulation provided good
thermal protection for the three columns
even though the Tg (Table 1) was exceeded
early in the fire.
Even after prolonged fire exposure, the
insulation remained in place and in good
condition so that the FRP system – consisting
of the insulation and the FRP layer – provided
hs = 150 mm
significant protection for the concrete. The
FRP systems allowed the columns to achieve
satisfactory ULC S101 fire resistance ratings
[Reference 3] – in excess of 5 hours – even
when the Tg of the FRPs was exceeded early.
The uninsulated, FRP-wrapped column
sustained its applied load for about 3.5 hours,
falling short of the 4-hour (240-minute)
fire-resistance requirement. In this case, the
300 360 FRP wrap debonded from the column in
less than 30 minutes and was eventually
consumed by the fire.
The results showed that FRPs, bonded to
repaired concrete surfaces and protected
by insulation, can contribute to the overall
fire resistance of concrete members even
though the FRP itself might be sacrificed
during a fire. This increases the likelihood
that after a fire concrete members could be
repaired by reapplication of FRP systems
rather than replaced. It also means that
exceeding the glass transition temperature
(Tg) does not cause the insulated FRP system
to lose its effectiveness.
FRP-strengthened T-beams
Full-scale fire tests were conducted on
reinforced concrete T-beams (1220 mm wide
x 3900 mm long) that were strengthened in
flexure with one layer of carbon FRP sheets
bonded to their undersides and around the
webs (Figure 4).
All four T-beams were protected by
insulation around the web portion of the
beams. They were tested under full applied
load according to the ULC S101 standard.
All the beams achieved fire resistance
ratings of 4 hours (Table 2). In fact, they were

able to sustain the applied loads for more than

Beams 3 & 4
bs = 1220 mm
Beams 1 & 2
four hours. The results of tests conducted
after the T-beams had cooled to room
610 610
temperature indicate that the capacity of the
members after the fire tests was equivalent
to the capacity of the unstrengthened
h = 400 mm

members before the tests. Thus, provided

Spaced at 150mm
o/c longitudinally
that reasonable FRP-strengthening limits are
10 mm bars
20mmØ bars
not exceeded as suggested by ACI 440.2R-08
[Reference 4], these members could, after
Insulation careful inspection, be considered undamaged
FRP System
by fire and be rewrapped with FRP and
All bars10mm Ø insulation for continued service.
bw = 300 mm

Figure 4. T-beam arrangement

3
Table 2. Results for T-beam fire tests

Fire Predicted
Type of insulation Test load resistance strength (at room
T-beam No. Type of FRP and thickness ratio1 (min) temperature) (kN-m)
1 1 layer Gypsum-based, 0.53 > 240 130
Carbon Tg = 93°C 25 mm
2 1 layer Gypsum-based, 0.53 > 240 130
Carbon Tg = 93°C 38 mm
3 2 layers Cementitious, 0.50 > 240 145
Carbon Tg = 71°C 30 mm
4 2 layers Cementitious, 0.50 > 240 145
Carbon Tg = 71°C 28 mm
1. Test load ratio is the ratio of the applied load during fire tests divided by the predicted strength (at room temperature).

FRP-strengthened slabs provide a 2-h fire resistance rating for slabs

Intermediate-scale fire resistance experiments
were conducted on four reinforced concrete
slabs (150 mm thick x 950 mm wide x
1330 mm long) strengthened with carbon
FRP sheets bonded to their undersides.
The slabs were internally reinforced with
conventional reinforcing steel, and were
constructed using carbonate aggregate
concrete. The four slabs were insulated with
spray-applied cementitous or gypsum-based
plasters, proprietary products developed
specifically for this application. The slabs
were fire tested according to ULC S101
[Reference 3] (equivalent to ASTM E119
[Reference 5]).
The tests provided insight into the
appropriate insulation configurations and
thicknesses to be used for full-scale testing
of FRP-strengthened beams and columns.
The tests demonstrated that a 4-h fire
resistance rating could be achieved by
affixing as little as 38 mm of supplemental
insulation to the FRP wrap (Table 3).
A 19-mm thickness of insulation could
carrying only their self-weight.
In all cases the insulation provided good
thermal protection to the FRP sheets,
although the Tg was exceeded in less than
2 hours in all four cases. Again, this
demonstrates that exceeding the Tg is not
an appropriate failure criterion for FRP-
strengthened concrete members.
Applying fire research findings
Because FRP materials are combustible,
they require some form of fire protection to
restrict the evolution of smoke and the
spread of flame. The specific requirements
depend on the classification of the building
and the properties of the FRP system being
used. Most FRP manufacturers have coatings
or other fire protection systems to meet
smoke and flame spread requirements.
For structural performance in fire, the
research has shown that externally bonded
FRPs can be protected with insulation to give
fire resistance ratings in excess of 4 hours.
Thus, FRP materials can be used for

Table 3. Results for slab fire tests

Fire Predicted
Type of insulation Test load resistance strength (at room
Slab No. Type of FRP and thickness ratio1 (min) temperature) (kN)
1 1 layer Gypsum-based, No load 147 NA
Carbon Tg = 93°C 19 mm
2 1 layer Gypsum-based, No load > 240 NA
Carbon Tg = 93°C 38 mm
3 1 layer Cementitious, No load > 240 NA
Carbon Tg = 71°C 38 mm
4 1 layer Cementitious, No load > 240 NA
Carbon Tg = 71°C 38 mm
1. The slabs were tested under self-weight only. No load was applied.

4
 strengthening in buildings and still meet
fire code requirements, even if the Tg of an
FRP is exceeded. For the insulations tested
on columns and T-beams, a thickness of
40 mm provided 4 hours of fire resistance.
These results are applicable for FRP
strengthening or rehabilitation that increases
the existing strength of a concrete structure
by up to 40%. This increase in strength
helps support additional loads that may be
applied to the structure in the future.
Numerical studies
Numerical models were developed to simulate the
behaviour of FRPs for a wide variety of factors influencing
fire resistance. In most cases, the models reasonably
predicted heat transfer behaviour and temperatures
within insulated FRP-strengthened members.
Additional validation and testing will lead to design
guidance for fire-safe FRP-strengthening systems.
1200
ASTM E1 19 Fire
1000
Temperature (°C)
800
Insulation Surface
600
FRP Surface
Concrete Surface
400
200
0 does not mean that the reinforced
0 60 120 180 240
Time (min)
Measured and predicted temperatures for Column 1 (black lines
are test data, grey lines are model predictions)
Applications in practice
This research has enabled several building
retrofits to be carried out using FRPs. In
Denver, Colorado, a concrete roof damaged
by fire was repaired with an FRP system
instead of being replaced, minimizing
downtime in the manufacturing facility.
Damaged concrete cover on the underside
of the roof was repaired and the slab was
strengthened by applying an externally
bonded FRP-strengthening system. Once the
FRP had cured sufficiently, steel mesh was
mechanically attached to the underside of the
slab, including the previously fire damaged
areas, and a cementitious fireproofing
material was spray-applied. The insulated
FRP-strengthening system provided the
1-h fire resistance rating required for this
application.
Other recent applications include parking
garage strengthening in Toronto, and
building strengthening in Vancouver and
Las Vegas.
Conclusions
FRP-strengthened concrete members
(columns, T-beams, and slabs) protected
with a specially designed insulation system
are capable of achieving satisfactory fire
resistance ratings according to ULC S101
[Reference 3] or ASTM E119 [Reference 5]
under full service loads. In all cases, the
satisfactory fire resistance was achieved
even though the glass transition temperature
(Tg) of the FRP polymer matrix was exceeded
relatively early in the tests.
The research provided several important
findings that will increase the level of
confidence in using FRP systems to repair
and strengthen reinforced concrete members
in buildings, where fire resistance is a
primary design consideration:
1. Failure of FRPs protected by insulation
300 concrete member will fail to meet fire
resistance requirements.
2. FRP-strengthened concrete structures can
achieve fire resistance ratings of more
than 4 hours when suitable protective
insulation is applied.
3. Using insulated FRPs to repair concrete
means that after a fire, it may be possible
to replace the FRP system – the FRP and
insulation – rather than replace the
reinforced concrete member.
5
References
1. Bisby, L.A., Green, M.F., and Kodur, V.K.R.,
Response to fire of concrete structures
that incorporate FRP, Progress in Structural
Engineering and Materials, 7, 3, 2005,
pp. 136-149.
2. Katz, A., Berman, N., and Bank, L.C.,
Effect of high temperature on the bond
strength of FRP rebars, Journal of
Composites for Construction, 3, 2, 1999,
pp. 73-81.
3. CAN/ULC-S101-07, Standard methods
of fire endurance tests of building
construction and materials, Underwriters’
Laboratories of Canada, Scarborough, 2007.
4. ACI 440.2R-08, Guide for the Design and
Construction of Externally Bonded FRP
Systems for Strengthening Concrete
Structures, American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2008.
5. ASTM E119-08a, Standard Methods of
Fire Test of Building Construction and
Materials, American Society for Testing
and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
2008.
Acknowledgments
This research was conducted in collaboration
with Queen’s University as part of the
Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures
(ISIS Canada) Research Network. The authors
would like to acknowledge the contributions
of former graduate students Brea Williams
(Ph.D.) and Ershad Chowdhury (M.Sc.).
Industry partners were Fyfe Co. and BASF.
Dr. Noureddine Benichou is a Senior Research
Officer in the Fire Research program of the
National Research Council Institute for Research
in Construction. Dr. Venkatesh Kodur is a former
Senior Research Officer in the same program
and is now Professor at Michigan State University.
Dr. Mark Green is a Professor at Queen’s
University, and Dr. Luke Bisby is a Reader at the
University of Edinburgh.

© 2010
National Research Council of Canada
August 2010
ISSN 1206-1220

“Construction Technology Updates” is a series of technical articles containing

practical information distilled from recent construction research.

For more information, contact Institute for Research in Construction,

National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa K1A 0R6.
Telephone: (613) 993-2607; Facsimile: (613) 952-7673; Internet: http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/irc