Review of

“Capacity estimation of FRP strengthened RC beam-column joints using hierarchy of

strength assessment”
By Ali Sahin Tasligedik

This paper investigates the strengthening of beam-column joints by externally bonding

FRP sheets on the surface aiming to shift the mode of failure from joint shear failure to
plastic hinge formation under lateral loads. To dissipate the energy during an earthquake,
allowing the formation of ductile plastic hinges on a beam is favorable than the failure of
joints or columns. This helps maintain the lateral strength of the structure and is the basic
principle of strength hierarchy assessment.
The author uses interaction diagram for columns and the moment equilibrium at joints for
beams to quantify member capacities. The author also mentions the existing capacity of
joints can be estimated using equilibrium equations and compatibility conditions. Beam
lacking sufficient joint reinforcements are considered for strengthening and a typical
layout for the installation of FRP is considered, the only thing varying is the number of
layers.
The author studies two different sets of experiments for this research; first by testing three
different types of beam-column connections only and second by conducting tests on a full
scale 3 story RC frame. The first part of the experiment consisted following setups; one
without any joint reinforcement, and out of the other two one had a single layer and the
final one had a double layer of GFRP. Varying loads were applied to simulate the effects
of an earthquake and as expected the specimen without reinforcement showed joint shear
failure, at 1% drift. Although the setup with a single GFRP layer also failed due to joint
shear, it failed at a higher load, but at lower drift level (0.8%). This is most likely due to an
apparent increase in stiffness which the author fails to mention. However, the load-
deflection curve presented subsequently, clearly shows higher stiffness as the number
layers of FRP increases. The third specimen with 2 layers of GFRP developed enough
joint shear capacity to shift the mode of failure to beam plastic hinge with roughly 30%
increase in load capacity and 3 times as much drift compared to the non-strengthened
section. The single layer of FRP was unable to shift the failure mode to beams. The paper,
on the other hand, doesn’t mention if the failure of the joint was followed by failure in the
FRP layer or happens with layers intact (neither debonding nor rupture). On the other
hand, two layers of FRP was able to achieve the desired output. FRP being intact when
the joint failed might need further clarification.
The increased capacity of the beam after the addition of FRP layers is computed in terms
of equivalent principal tensile strength capacity. The principal tensile capacity of FRP,
which depends on the number of layers and mechanical properties of FRP, is added to
the capacity of concrete to estimate total capacity. In the second part of the paper, the
author discusses the test conducted on a 3-story RC frame with each joint having different
levels of reinforcement. The purpose of this study was to validate the capacity calculation
method discussed earlier. The results were very close to the estimated capacities, which
increases the credibility of this approach.
To summarize, the capacity of beam column joints whose initial design overlooked joint
strength can be restored using FRP strengthening system such that the failure is pushed
towards beams which is less catastrophic and favorable from a seismic point of view. This
system can fully capitalize on the capacity of beams, increasing stiffness and ultimate
load capacity. Furthermore, the author could have further mentioned about the increase
in ductility after strengthening. This system enhances ductility of the system making the
joints capable of dissipating higher earthquake energy. The paper mentioned the scope
of this kind of repair was more inclined towards older structures where the beam-column
strength of joints was discarded. Yet, the paper fails to mention a scenario in which failure
can be pushed into columns (where a strong column weak beam concept was not used)
and could make the system more vulnerable than before. There is no discussion about
the increase in capacity of columns.