QUALITY CONTROL TEST FOR CARBON FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER

(CFRP) ANCHORS FOR REHABILITATION

Guillermo D. Huaco, James O. Jirsa, and Oguzhan Bayrak

Sypnosis: Different strategies can be used to repair, rehabilitate and strengthen existing
structures. Techniques based on Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) materials appear to be
innovative alternatives to traditional solutions because of their high tensile strength,
lightweight, and ease of installation. One of the most common and useful FRPs is Carbon
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) sheets and anchors attached to strengthen the section
through addition of tensile capacity. The purpose of this study was to develop a technique
for assessing the strength of anchors for quality control. A method for assessing the
quality of CFRP anchor installation was developed using plain concrete beams reinforced
externally with CFRP sheets attached with epoxy and CFRP anchors. Under loading on
the beam, a tensile force was developed in the CFRP sheets and a shear force on the
CFRP anchors. The forces in the CFRP anchors were defined by the load applied to the
beam and compared with forces based on measured stress in CFRP sheets.

Keywords: CFRP anchor, CFRP anchor failure, CFRP sheet, CFRP sheet fracture,
concrete shear failure, debonding

1 

 
Guillermo Huaco is a PhDP candidatee in structural Engineering aat The Univerrsity of
Texas at Austin
A where completed
c his M.S.E. degreee. He obtaineed a B.Sc. froom the
National Un
niversity of En
ngineering, Lim
ma, Peru.

James O. Jirsa holds th he Janet S. Co ockrell Centennnial Chair inn Engineering at The
University of
o Texas at Au ustin. He is an Honorary Mem mber and Presiident of the Ammerican
Concrete In
nstitute and a member
m of ACII 318, Structuraal Concrete Buuilding Code.

Oguzhan Bayrak
B is an Associate
A Proffessor of Civill, Architecturaal and Environnmental
Engineering
g at The Univeersity of Texass at Austin. Hee is a Fellow oof ACI and a m
member
of ACI Com TGS, 341, 441,, and 445.
mmittees 318-T

DUCTION
1. INTROD

Despite the good tensile performance

p of Carbon Fiberr Reinforced P Polymers (CFR RP) and
the potentiaal for improveement of the capacity of reetrofitted RC members, ancchorage
between CF FRP and reinfforced concrette (RC) membbers is a weakk link that lim mits the
performancce of retrofitteed RC membeers. CFRP shheets debond from the surfface of
reinforced concrete
c memb o avoid this faiilure, CFRP annchors can be aapplied
bers (Fig.1). To
to provide a “mechanicall” anchor. Thee CFRP ancho rs allow the C CFRP sheets too reach
tensile capaacity (Fig.2) an
nd to maximizee the efficiencyy of the CFRPP retrofit. The nnumber
and size off anchors play a critical role. However the capacity of C CFRP anchors hhas not
been investigated extensiv vely.

 
 
 
 
 

Figure 1 --- Debonding of CFRP sheet before strenggth of sheet is reached (Kim
m 2006)
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure
F 2 -- CF
FRP sheet rup
pture when an
nchor used. (K
Kim 2006).

2 

 
2. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE

The use of CFRP materials for rehabilitation of concrete structures is gaining acceptance.
In order to use these materials, procedure are needed to assess the quality of materials and
workmanship associated with the installation of the CFRP anchors. The purpose of this
study was to develop a technique for assessing the strength of anchors for quality control
using simple specimens that could be tested easily.
 
 
3. OBJECTIVES

2.1. Develop a test specimen to study the variables influencing anchor performance and
for use as a quality control technique.
2.2. Propose specimen size and materials, using a standard test for concrete material
strength evaluation but modified for this purpose.

4. METHODOLOGY

A test specimen was developed to study the variables influencing anchor performance by
making changes to the specimen used in ASTM C293A, commonly used to evaluate
concrete material strength. ASTM C293 involves a concrete beam loaded at midspan. In
the modified beam, CFRP sheets and anchors were installed on bottom side of the beam.
In order to isolate the behavior of the CFRP anchor, only concrete and CFRP materials
were used. No steel reinforcement was included in order to simplify the test and the
fabrication of test specimens.

Table.1 shows the beams parameters specified in ASTM C293 and the changes made for
the beams in this research project.

Table.1 -- Parameters specified in ASTM C293 and proposed modifications for

CFRP anchor quality control (1in=25.4mm)

Parameter ASTM C293 Selected specimen

Flexural capacity Concrete only Concrete and CFRP sheet
Width Not specified 8 in
Depth (D) L/3 6 in
Span length (L) 3D 20 in. - 21 in.

The modified beam is proposed for quality control of CFRP anchor installations. Based
on adjustments to ASTM C293 shown above, a procedure for assessing the capacity of
CFRP anchors is presented.

3 

 
5. CFRP ANCHOR
A INS
STALLATION
N

The CFRP anchor consistts of a CFRP sh heet folded as shown in Fig. 3 that is insertted into
the concrette and splayedd out over the CFRP sheet aas shown in F Fig.5d. Details of the
anchor are shown
s in Fig. 4.
4

Wire for
inserting
anchor

ms. 
Figure 3 -- CFRP anchor to be insstalled on beam

Embedme
ent
Fille
et Depth
.

radius
Concrete
. Hole Diameter

CFRP anchor
a CFRP sheet
s
CFRP patch

Figuree 4.a -- Detailss of CFRP ancchor installatiion

4 

 
 CFRP anchor

.
Fan Length
h CFR
RP sheet

CFRP anchor

CFR
RP sheet
CFRP patch

Figure
F 4.b -- Plan
P View deta
ails of CFRP aanchor and CF
FRP patch

Although thhe anchor wass intended to carry

c the forcee developed in the CFRP sheeet, the
concrete su
urface in contacct with the CFR RP sheet was ccleaned. And a hole was drillled for
the CFRP anchor.
a A rolleer was used to o apply the eppoxy on the suurface of the cooncrete
beam. Epox xy was also insserted into the holes drilled fo
for the CFRP annchors. (Fig.5..a)

Figure 5.aa -- Application of the epoxy

y Fig ure 5.b -- Application of
into drilleed holes for CFRP
C anchor. poxy to CFRP materials 
ep

5 

 
Next the CF FRP materials were saturated d with epoxy (F Fig.5.b) and appplied to the cooncrete.
It was neceessary to eliminate excess ep poxy on the CF FRP materialss by squeezingg it out.
The CFRP sheets were po ositioned beforee the installatioon of the CFRPP anchors. Thee CFRP
anchors weere inserted ussing a wire to push the CFR RP anchor intto the drilled hhole as
shown in Fiig 5.c. The maaterial protrudinng from the hoole was splayedd as shown in Fig.5d.
After the innstallation of the
t CFRP sheeets and CFRP P anchors was completed, thhe wire
used to inseert the anchor was
w cut.

Figure 5.c
5 -- Installattion of CFRP Figure 5.d -- Spreadiing out of the
ancchor in concreete beam. CFRP anchorr fan.

A small sq quare patch off CFRP was placed over thee root of the anchor (or fann). The
patches cov ver the CFRP P anchor are shown
s in Fig. 6 and in the detail in Fig..4. The
o the CFRP waas the same as in the CFRP ssheet. The dimeensions
direction off the filament of
of the patchhes were based d on the width
h of CFRP sheeet being anchhored. Finally a roller
saturated with
w the epoxy was passed over o the sheet and anchor faan. The lengthh of the
patch was th he same as the width of CFR
RP sheet.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Figure 6 --- Application of

o the patch oon the CFRP aanchor

The fan had d to be large enough

e to ensuure sufficient bbond area wass present betweeen the
anchor and the strengthen ning sheet. Phaam (2009) repoorted that the ffan angle affeccted the
force transffer from the CFFRP to the anchhor.

6 

 
6. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

Kim (2008) reported initial tests using concrete beams for quality control tests of CFRP
sheets. The beams had CFRP sheets attached on their bottom face. A flexural test was
conducted by applying a midspan load on the beam. Pham (2009) based his tests on data
from tests of the same type of CFRP anchors tested by Kim (2008). The depth of anchor
holes was selected based on recommendations by Pham (2009).

The specimens reported in this paper were an extension of two sets of tests conducted by
Pham (2009) . To delay premature shear failure in the test, transverse reinforcement in
the form of wire mesh was placed in the beam at the location of the anchor holes in
several tests. It was concluded that the mesh did not improve shear performance of the
beam. Pham also studied the effect of fillet radius at the anchor hole. He used preformed
holes together with the formwork of the concrete beam. Pham did not use bearing plates
at the point of load application and at the reactions and that may have affected tensile
stresses in the beam. It should be noted that the concrete strength in his tests was 4.6ksi
and may have contributed to the shear failures observed.

Based on Pham’s results, a series of 4 sets of tests was developed and are reported here as
Sets 3-6. Each set of beams was designed using the results and behavior of the previous
set. In each set, a different parameter was varied; strength of the concrete, internal
reinforcement, type of connection and condition of the epoxy.
Steel plate
2"x13"

CFRP ANCHORS
6.0"

CFRP SHEET

Steel rod Steel plate

L=13" 2"x13"

Steel plate
13"x28" 17.0"
21.0"
24.0"

CFRP ANCHORS
8.0"

CFRP SHEET

24.0"

Figure.7 -- Selection of width and length of CFRP strengthening sheets.

(1in=25.4mm)

7 

 
To producee failure by fracture of the CF FRP sheets or the anchors, thhe width of the strips
used to makke anchors wass varied. The width
w of CFRP sheets used inn the tests varieed from
1.2in (31mm 2mm). The length of CFRP ssheet was seleccted so that thhe sheet
m) to 4in (102
extended 2 in (51mm) bey yond the centerr of the anchorr holes. For thee last set, the m
material
in the CFRRP anchors waas reduced so that anchor fa failure occurred. The length of the
anchor was equal to the depth
d of the holle plus the fan length plus 0.55 in (13mm). T The fan
length was equal than the length of the depth
d of the hoole. The anchoor holes were 4 inches
(102mm) deep. The diam meter of the ancchor hole was selected so thhat the cross-seectional
area of the hole was at least 140% of th he cross-sectionnal area of thee anchor and tthe size
of the CFRPP sheet used fo
or the anchor.
All the tessts were perfo ormed in a universal
u comppression machhine. The beaam was
supported by
b a roller andd pin as shown n in Fig. 8. Inn most tests, thhe load and reeactions
were applieed through bearring plates attaached to the suurface of the cooncrete. Deflecction at
the beam midspan
m was meeasured. Strainn gages were atttached to the C CFRP sheet.

Figuree.8 -- Specimeen in test mach

hine (test setu
up)

The dimenssions of the CF

FRP materials used in each test are defineed in the notattion for
each specim
men. Table 2 sh
hows the notatiion.

Tab
ble.2 -- Specim
men Notation (11in=25.4mm)

S3 – 2 – 2x4 – 0.25 – 4 – 00.25

Fillet radius, in.
Set No.
Embeddment depth, in.
Width
W of CFRP
P Width off CFRP in
sheets,
s in. anchor, in.
i Hole dia., in.
(2 sheetts, 4in wide)

8 

 
 Table.3 -- Specimen details (1in=25.4mm ; 1kips = 4.5 kN)
  Max. Beam load (kips)
  Patch
strain in Initial
Failure mode
  applied
CFRP craking of Failure
SPECIMEN (in/in) concrete
 
  SET 3
Expired life S3-2-2 x 4-0.25-4-0.25 No 0.0063 7.22 11.8 anchor debonding
  of S3-3-2 x 6-0.5-4-0.25 No 0.0055 7.52 14.24 Concrete
  shelf epoxy S3-4-2 x 8-0.75-4-0.25 No 0.0043 9.71 13.43 Concrete
  SET 4
  S4A-2-2 x 4-0.25-4-0.25 Yes 0.0101 8.67 11.34 CFRP sheet
  New epoxy S4A-3-2 x 6-0.5-4-0.25 Yes 0.0048 8.81 11.34 Concrete
S4A-4-2 x 8-0.75-4-0.25 Yes 0.0049 10.48 13.78 Concrete
 
S4B-2-2 x 4-0.25-4-0.25 Yes 0.0081 4.27 12.96 Concrete
  Transversal cut S4B-3-2 x 6-0.5-4-0.25 Yes 0.0056 4.68 12.65 Concrete
  on midspan S4B-4-2 x 8-0.75-4-0.25 Yes 0.0062 8.40 17.12 Concrete
  SET 5
  S5A-2-2 x 3-0.25-4-0.25 Yes 0.0130 8.23 9.34 CFRP sheet
  S5A-2-2 x 2-0.25-4-0.25 Yes 0.0091 9.23 12.99 Concrete
Diferent size S5A-2-2 x 1-0.25-4-0.25 Yes 0.0080 8.69 11.46 CFRP sheet
  of CFRP anchors S5B-1.2-2 x 3-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0053 8.97 7.37 CFRP sheet
  S5B-1.2-2 x 2-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0055 8.26 5.64 CFRP sheet
  S5B-1.2-2 x 1-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0120 8.12 6.06 CFRP sheet
  SET 6
  Bonded S6A-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0084 7.61 9.83 CFRP anchor
  Debonded S6B-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0053 7.18 8.25 CFRP anchor
Bonded S6A-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0056 7.32 9.06 CFRP anchor
  Debonded S6B-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 Yes 0.0058 8.34 7.17 CFRP anchor

 
For the specimens listed in Table 3, the high strengh concrete, of 11.4 ksi was selected in
order to increase shear capacity without adding shear reinforcement. Steel plates were
used at load and reaction points. All anchor holes were drilled. Dimensions of concrete
beam were shown in Fig.7. 
 
Set 3: Three different widths of CFRP sheets and anchors were used in Set 3. However, it
was found that the shelf life of the epoxy had been exceeded. As a result, the quality of
the bond between the CFRP sheet and the concrete surface was reduced and failures by
debonding were observed. The maximum strain observed was 0.6%, less than 1% as
indicated in manufacturer’s specifications. The failures were anchor debonding or
concrete fracture as indicated in Table 3. The CFRP sheets did not fracture. Specimen S3-
4-2 x 8-0.75-4-0.25, which had the most CFRP material, should have had the highest
failure load but, as shown in Fig.9, debonding of the anchor occurred before the capacity
of the CFRP sheet was reached. The poor quality of the epoxy led to debonding between
the CFRP sheet and the concrete, and between the anchor and the sheet.

9 

 
 Fig
gure 9 -- Set 3. CFRP ancho
or debonding d
due to poor qu
uality epoxy

Set 4: New epoxy was used for the speccimens in Set 44. Set 4 was ddivided into 2 ggroups:
(A) was a repetition of Seet 3 with new epoxy
e materialls, (B) was the same as (A) bbut with
a groove cu
ut into the beam
m to create a faailure plane at tthe midspan.

Installation of the CFRP materials wass supervised byy a commerciaal FRP installeer, who
suggested adding
a patchess of CFRP oveer the anchor as shown in F Fig. 4. Some ppatches
were applieed to the anch hors that were already instaalled. CFRP frracture (Fig. 10) was
observed fo or 2in (51mm) wide sheets (strain
( at failurre was 1%); cooncrete fracturre (Fig.
11) occurreed in the other two specimenss (0.5% strain in the CFRP ssheet). For speecimens
with a wid der CFRP sheeet, concrete frracture occurreed and the maaximum strainns were
lower than 0.8%.
0

Figure
F 10 -- Seet 4A. Concrette fracture 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
gure 11 -- Set 4A. CFRP sheeet fracture.
Fig

In Set 4B, a transverse cu ut 3in (76mm)) deep was maade at the middspan with a wwidth of
mm) to lower th
0.2in (5.1m he cracking mooment. Maximuum values of C CFRP strain att failure
were less that
t 0.8%. Th he predominan nt failure wass concrete fraccture (Fig. 122). The
response was
w largely lin near, without a pronouncedd change in sttiffness. The section
cracked undder very low load
l because of
o the transverrse cut at middspan. The maaximum
capacity of the section waas 17.12kips (77.04kN).

Fiigure 12 -- Concrete fracturre in Set 4B

Set 5: To avoid
a fracture of the concrette, the CFRP ssheet widths w
were reduced inn Set5.
Two groupss of specimenss were tested: group A had 22in (51mm) w wide CFRP sheets and
anchor wid
dths were madee using 3in (76 6mm), 2in (51 mm) and 1in (25mm) wide sheets;
group B haad 1.2in (30mm m) wide CFR RP sheets and aanchor widthss of 3in (76mmm), 2in
(51mm) andd 1in (25mm).

In Set 5A, fracture

f w observed iin 2 of 3 tests (Table 3). The beam
of the CFRP sheets was
with a 2in (51mm)
( anchoor, specimen S5
5A-2-2 x 2-0.225-4-0.25, reacched a load off 13kips
(58.46kN) at concrete frracture. With a 3 in (76mm m) anchor widdth, the CFRP P sheet

11 

 
ruptured att a strain of 1.3% while a 1 in wide ancchor fractured at 0.8% straiin. The
appearance of a specimen with sheet fracture is shownn in Fig.13.

In Set5B, fracture
f of thee CFRP sheets occurred in all the specim mens (Table 33). The
maximum beam b load was 7.37kips (33 3.17kN). An innteresting obseervation was tthe low
strain at failure (0.53%) in n two tests witth wide anchorrs. This may inndicate that thee CFRP
anchors had d an influence ono the narrow CFRP sheet beehavior.

Figure 13
1 Set 5A and
d Set 5B. CFR
RP sheet fractu
ure.
 
Set 6: In thhis set, the wiidth of CFRP sheets was 2inn (51mm) andd the width off CFRP
anchors was less than 1in n (25mm) so thhat anchor failuure would occuur before the cooncrete
failed in shhear or the CFR RP sheet ruptu
ured. Additionnally half of Seet 6 specimenss had a
sheet of plaastic placed beetween concrette surface andd CFRP sheet tto create a debbonded
interface.. The
T tensile forcce in the CFRPP sheets was caarried only by tthe CFRP anchhors.

Debonding (Set 6A) did notn have a sign nificant influennce on the cappacity of the annchors.
The strains, at anchor faillure were quite different eveen though the loads were thee same.
The maxim mum strain valu ues measured were less thann 1%. In bothh cases anchor failure
was observed at nearly thhe same beam load. The resuults indicate thhat bond betweeen the
sheet and th
he concrete surrface was not needed
n to ensuure that all the force was trannsferred
to the ancho
or. Anchor failures are shownn in Fig.14.

4 ‐‐ CFRP anchor fracture w

Figure 14 with bonded sheets

12 

 
Anchor faillures were also o observed in Set
S 6B. There iss little differennce in loads at failure,
once again indicating thatt adhesion wass not importantt for achievingg anchor failuree of the
2 x 0.6 in (2
2 x 15.2mm) wide
w CFRP ancchors. The maxximum strain m measured was cclose to
0.6%. The appearance off the specimen n after fracturee is shown in Fig.15. Theree was a
shear blockk failure when the CFRP sheet fractured sim milar to boltedd connections iin steel
our tests in Set 6 after failure are shown in F
joins. All fo Fig. 16.

Figure 15 ‐‐‐ CFRP anchor fracture wiith unbonded sheets

Figure 16
6 ‐‐ Fracture off CFRP anchoors in all Set 6 tests

13 

 
7. CALCULATION OF SHEAR FORCE ON CFRP ANCHOR

The tension in the CFRP sheet is produced by flexure on the beam and is transferred to
the CFRP anchor thereby producing a shear force on the anchor (Fig. 17). The forces
transferred to the anchor can be determined from the measured CFRP strain and
compared with the force computed using measured beam loads.

Compression forces
by flexion
6.0" (152mm)

CFRP anchor
Crack in concrete

Shear Force in Anchor by
Tension in CFRP Sheet

CFRP sheet Tension in
CFRP Sheets by flexion

Figure 17 -- Beam used in calculations (1in=25.4mm)

7.1 FORCE FROM STRAIN MEASURED ON CFRP SHEET

The shear force on the anchors is calculated using the value of the ultimate strain
measured in the CFRP sheet ()and the elastic modulus provided from the manufacture
of the CFRP which is E manufacturer = 13900ksi. (95910 MPa).
 x E x (Transversal Area CFRP sheet) =
Tension CFRP sheet = Shear Force CFRP anchor ……………..(1)

Table 4 shows the shear force transmitted to the CFRP anchors as determined from the
maximum strain measured.

14 

 
 Table 4 -- Shear force on anchors
 
MAX. STRAIN MEASURED STRESS CALCULATED TENSION FORCE - kips (4.5kN)
SPECIMEN (in/in) ksi (Mpa) SHEAR FORCE IN ANCHORS
S6A-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 0.0056 77.84 (537.1) 6.23 (28.04)
S6A-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 0.0084 116.76 (805.65) 9.34 (42.03)
S6B-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 0.0058 80.62 (556.28) 6.45 (29.03)
S6B-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 0.0053 73.67 (508.33) 5.89 (26.51)

7.2 USING VALUES OF MEASURED BEAM LOAD P

Considering that the most reliable data is the measured load, the force transferred to the
anchor can be determined from the load. The moment in the beam is:

  ….…. (2)
 
/   …….. (3)
 
/   ….…. (4)

The terms used in Eqs. 2-4, are defined in Fig. 18,

a  C =
.

0.85 f'c Compression
6.0" (152mm)

CFRP anchor
force in
Concrete
.

T = Tension in t
CFRP sheet
CFRP sheet

Figure 18-- Stress on beam due P load (1in=25.4mm)

15 

 
Because the strength of concrete is high, it was observed that the value of “a” is small
(about 0.1 in (2.5mm). in comparison with the moment arm “Z”. The formulation of arm
Z can be simplified as follows:

≅ ….…. (5)

Using the measured load, the computed values of shear force on the anchors is shown in
Table 5:

Table 5 -- Shear force on anchor from measured beam load

SPECIMEN Load at failure - kips (kN) Shear Force - kips (kN)

S6A-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 9.06 (40.77) 7.97 (35.87)
S6A-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 9.83 (44.24) 8.65 (38.93)
S6B-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 7.17 (32.27) 6.29 (28.31)
S6B-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 8.25 (37.13) 7.25 (32.63)

Differences between the shear force computed from measured stresses in the CFRP sheet
and the calculated value using beam load are indicated in Table 6. Since strains may vary
considerably across a CFRP sheet, the values shown in Table 5 are acceptable.

Table 6 -- Comparison among shear force on anchor

Calculated by measured beam Computed by strain

SPECIMEN load - kips (kN) measured - kips (kN)
S6A-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 7.97 (35.87) 6.23 (28.04)
S6A-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 8.65 (38.93) 9.34 (42.03)
S6B-2-2 x 0.6-0.375-4-0.375 6.29 (28.31) 6.45 (29.03)
S6B-2-2 x 0.8-0.375-4-0.375 7.25 (32.63) 5.89 (26.51)

8. CONCLUSIONS

The performance of CFRP sheets used to strengthen concrete in tension depends on the
attachment with the concrete member surface. Under high force and deformations of the
concrete member, the adhesion between the sheet and the concrete surface will not be
sufficient to prevent debonding of the CFRP sheet. CFRP anchors provided an alternate
means of transferring tension from the sheet to the concrete so that debonding did not
control the mode of failure.

16 

 
The size of CFRP sheets and anchors, and/or strength of concrete were studied in order to
find a reliable procedure for quality control of CFRP anchors. It was possible to develop
anchor fracture using less material in the anchor than in the sheet fracture and concrete
fracture were thereby eliminated. For a 2 in. wide CFRP sheet the width of the material in
the CFRP anchor had to be less than 1.6 in or 80% of sheet width.

The forces transferred to the anchor were determined from the measured CFRP strain,
and were found to compare favorably with the force computed using measured beam
loads. The measured load is considered to be more reliable than measured strain in the
CFRP sheet since stress can vary considerable across the sheet.

Although the test conducted indicate that a reasonably simple and reliable test could be
developed for quality control of CFRP anchor systems, much more work is needed on a
wider range of parameters so that the procedure can be implemented as a quality control
test method.

REFERENCES

Kim, I., (2006). “Rehabilitation of Poorly Detailed RC Structures Using CFRP Materials”
M.S.E. thesis. The University of Texas at Austin.USA, 142pp.

ASTM International, (2007), “Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete
Using Simple Beam With Center-Point Loading, (C293-07),” ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA, 3 pp.

American Concrete Institute, (2008). “Guide for the Design and Construction of
Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures (ACI 440.2R-
08).” Farmington Hills, Michigan, USA.

Kim, I., (2008). “Use of CFRP to Provide Continuity in Existing Reinforced Concrete
Members Subjected to Extreme Loads”, Ph.D Dissertation, The University of Texas at
Austin, USA, 478 pp.

Pham, L.T.;(2009) “Development of a Quality Control Test For Carbon Fiber Reinforced
Polymer Anchors” M.S.E. Thesis The University of Texas at Austin. USA, 84pp

Huaco, G.;(2009) “Quality Control Test For Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP)
Anchors For Rehabilitation” M.S.E. Thesis The University of Texas at Austin. USA,
95pp

17