Mechanics of Composite Materials, Vol. 39, No.

4, 2003

MODELING OF THE BEHAVIOR OF CONCRETE TENSION

MEMBERS REINFORCED WITH FRP RODS

M. A. Aiello, M. Leone, and L. Ombres

Keywords: concrete, fiber-reinforced polymer rods, tension, cracking, tensile stiffening, theoretical calcula-
tions, experiments

The paper is devoted to the analysis of cracking and deformability of concrete tension members reinforced
with fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) rods. A theoretical nonlinear model, derived from a cracking analysis
founded on slip and bond stresses, is adopted for evaluating the crack width, crack spacing, and elongation of
tension members. The procedure takes into account the local bond-slip law, experimentally determined by
means of pullout tests, and allows us to evaluate the influence of tensile stiffening. The analysis is performed
with considering all parameters influencing the behavior of tension members, such as the concrete strength,
the kind of FRP rebars, the surface treatment of FRP rebars, and the concrete cover thickness. The theoretical
predictions are compared with available experimental results, obtained on cylindrical concrete specimens re-
inforced with carbon FRP (CFRP) rods, and with predictions of the traditional models usually adopted for de-
sign purposes.

Introduction

Due to the low elastic modulus of fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP), the mechanical behavior of concrete structures re-
inforced with nonmetallic rebars is mainly governed by serviceability conditions, instead of ultimate conditions as in tradi-
tional steel-reinforced concrete structures. Consequently, an accurate analysis of cracking and deformations becomes funda-
mental for design purposes. To this end, the contribution of tensile stiffening and the bond between the concrete and the
reinforcement must be taken into account.
The tensile stiffening, which is the ability of cracked concrete to reduce strains in the reinforcement at the expense of
contribution of the concrete between cracks to the bearing tensile stresses, is strongly dependent on the bond between the con-
crete and reinforcement. The bond, in fact, controls the stress transfer between these constituents.
For traditional steel-reinforced concrete structures, the bond behavior and the tensile stiffening effects are well de-
fined and are considered by using Code relationships (ACI, 1996 [1] and Eurocode, 1992 [2]) in the structural analysis. For con-
crete structures reinforced with FRP rebars, on the contrary, the bond behavior and the tensile stiffening effects are not clearly
defined. In this case, in fact, the parameters involved are numerous and their influence on the physical phenomenon is not
readily apparent. As a consequence, in the structural analysis of FRP-reinforced concrete members, the tensile stiffening ef-
fects are often neglected.
*
Department of Innovation Engineering, University of Lecce, Via per Monteroni, 73100 Lecce, Italy. Russian transla-
tion published in Mekhanika Kompozitnykh Materialov, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 431-444 , Jule-August, 2002. Original article sub-
mitted May 2, 2002; revision submitted February 14, 2003.

0191-5665/03/3904-0283$25.00 © 2003 Plenum Publishing Corporation 283

 Many researches, both theoretical and experimental, are still in progress on this topic. Useful information on the ten-
sile stiffening of FRP-reinforced concrete structures can be obtained by analyzing the mechanical behavior of tension mem-
bers, as described in this paper. Results of an ongoing investigation devoted to this phenomenon are reported and discussed
here.The behavior of concrete tension members reinforced with commercial carbon FRP rebars is analyzed both theoretically
and experimentally. The experimental investigation was carried out on cylindrical specimens reinforced with CFRP rods vary-
ing both the concrete cover reinforcement and the concrete strength. A theoretical nonlinear model, derived from a cracking
analysis based on slip and bond stresses, is adopted for evaluating the crack widths and cracks spacing and the elongation of
tension members. The procedure takes into account the local bond-slip law, determined experimentally by means of pullout
tests, and allows us to evaluate the influence of tensile stiffening. All parameters influencing the behavior of tension members, such
as the concrete strength, the kind of FRP rebars, the surface treatment of FRP rebars, and the concrete cover thickness, are considered.
The traditional models founded on the hypothesis of a perfect bond between the concrete and reinforcement and Code
relationships are also considered in the analysis.
The crack spacing, crack width, and specimen strains measured during the tests are compared with those obtained
from the theoretical analysis. Results of the comparison allow us to evaluate the tensile stiffening effects and to obtain useful in-
formation for design purposes.

Models for Analyzing the Behavior of FRP-Reinforced Concrete

Tension Members

To examine the behavior of FRP-reinforced concrete tension members, a theoretical analysis is performed; in particu-
lar, an analytical model founded on equilibrium and compatibility conditions and models provided by Codes, such as ACI [2, 3]
and Eurocode EC2 [2], for steel-reinforced concrete members are used.
Analytical model. This model, up to failure, is based on the Bernoulli hypothesis (beam cross sections remain plane
during deformation), which supposes a uniform distribution of bond stresses along the reinforcement. Furthermore, linear con-
stitutive relations are assumed for the FRP and tensed concrete.
The tensile force corresponding to the first crack in the specimen is expressed as

Fcr = f ct A c (1+ nm ), (1)

where f ct is the tensile strength of concrete, A c is the area of a concrete specimen, m = A r A c is the reinforcement ratio, A r is
the area of the FRP-reinforcement, and n = E r E ct is the ratio between the elastic moduli of FRP and tensed concrete.
In the cracking stage, F > Fcr , the static problem is solved by using equilibrium and compatibility conditions [4].
Assuming a uniform distribution for the bond stress, t( z ) = t ad , we obtain the expression for the minimum crack
spacing

f ct A c
lmin = (2)
t ad p

and for the mean reinforcement strain

1 é F 2t ad lmin ù 1 é F f A ù
em = ê - ú= ê - ct c ú ,
Er ë Ar db û Er ë Ar 2A r û (3)

where d b and p are the diameter and perimeter of rebars, respectively.

Design models. According to the Eurocode EC2 (Eurocode 2, 1996 ) [2], for steel-reinforced concrete structures, the
average strain in the reinforcement is expressed as

284
 f é æ ö
2ù
e sm = s ê1- b1b 2 ç f sr ÷ ú,
Es ê ç f ÷ ú
ë è s ø û (4)

where f s is the tension stress in the rebar, f sr is the tension stress in the rebar at the cracked section when the first crack occurs
( f sr = Fcr A s ), b1 is the bond quality coefficient, and b 2 is a coefficient depending on the duration of loading (b 2 = 1 for
short-term loads). Althought (4) is validated only for steel-reinforced concrete structures, it can also be used for analyzing
FRP-reinforced concrete structures, by assuming an adequate value for the bond coefficient b1 .
The mean value of crack spacing is expressed as

db
srm = 50 + k1 k 2 ,
m (5)

where k1 is the bond coefficient and k 2 is a coefficient depending on the duration of loading. The mean value of crack width is
obtained as

w m = srm e sm . (6)

In the ACI Code (ACI, 1992) [3], the average strain of the reinforcement is expressed as

F
em = ,
Ec Ae (7)

where

æF ö
3 é æ F ö3 ù
A e = A g çç cr ÷÷ + A cr ê1- çç cr ÷÷ ú ,
è F ø êë è F ø úû (8)

A g = A c + nA r and A cr = nA r .
To evaluate the maximum crack width in FRP-reinforced concrete elements, the following relationship is proposed
(ACI, 1996) [1]:

–3
w max = 0.0112bk f f s 3 d c A × 10 (mm),
(9)

where A (mm2) is the effective tension area of the rebar, b is the ratio between the distances from the reinforcement centroid to
the extreme tensed fibers and to the neutral axis, f s (MPa) is the stress in the FRP reinforcement at the loading stage considered,
and d c (mm) is the thickness of concrete cover, measured from the extreme tensed fiber to the center of the closest bar; k f is a
coefficient that takes into account the specific behavior of FRP rebars,

E steel
k f = kb ,
E FRP (10)

where E FRP and E steel are the elastic moduli of FRP and steel, respectively; k b is a coefficient that depends on the bond proper-
ties of rebars and have to be determined from experiments on commercially available FRP rebars; if k b is unknown, the value
1.5 is suggested by ACI to have safe results for deformed rebars.

285
A Nonlinear Model for Analyzing the Behavior of FRP-Reinforced
Tension Members

A nonlinear model derived from a cracking analysis based on slip and bond stresses was adopted for examining
FRP-reinforced concrete tension members. The model takes into account the local bond-slip law between FRP reinforcements
and concrete determined experimentally by means of pullout tests.
We consider a beam element between two adjacent cracks subjected to a constant axial force F exceeding the
first-crack force F > Fcr . The generic section between the cracks is analyzed on the assumption that, due to the slip between
the concrete and the FRP reinforcement, plane cross sections does not remain plane. Two limit configurations, which corre-
spond to the maximum and minimum cracks spacings, respectively, and bound all possible cracking configurations are consid-
ered. In the first case, the maximum crack spacing is lmax = 2lb , where lb is the crack development length, the slip is zero half-
way between the cracks, and the tensile concrete stress in the halfway section reaches the tensile strength of concrete, f ct . In the
second limit cracking configuration, lmin = lb , the slip is still zero halfway between the cracks because of the symmetry condi-
tion, whereas, in the halfway section, the concrete stress is unknown but less than f ct .
The following conditions allow us to solve the static problem:
— axial equilibrium for FRP rebars

ds r ( z ) = pt( z ) dz, (11)

where p and A r are the perimeter and area, of the reinforcement bar, respectively; z is the longitudinal coordinate, t( z ) is the
bond stress, and s r ( z ) is the tensile stress;
— compatibility condition

ds( z )
= e r ( z ) - e c ( z ), (12)
dz

where s( z ) is the slip; and e r ( z ) and e c ( z ) are the strains along the z-axis in the reinforcement and concrete, respectively;
— equilibrium conditions for cross sections

F = s r ( z )A r - s c ( z )A c , (13)

where A r and A c are the areas of the FRP rebar and concrete, respectively; s c ( z )and s r ( z )are the stresses in the concrete and
FRP reinforcement, respectively.
Equations (11), (12), and (13) form a system of differential equations which, in the case of stabilized cracking, cannot
be solved in a closed form [5]; therefore, only a numerical procedure has to be used, as described in [6, 7]. By using such a pro-
cedure, the stress and strain distributions for the FRP reinforcement and concrete, the crack width, the crack spacing, and the
elongation of the tensile member can be determined.

Parametric Analysis

To clarify the influence of key parameters, both geometrical and mechanical, on the behavior of FRP-reinforced con-
crete tension members, a parametric analysis was carried out. In this analysis, the bond-slip law was expressed as

é s( z ) ù
t( z ) = Cs a ( z )ê1- .
ë s úû (14)

Relationship (14) was obtained from the results of pullout tests, which were carried out on the same CFRP rebars
adopted as a reinforcement for the concrete tension members considered. A typical bond-slip curve obtained in these tests is

286
 20 t, MPa 100 F, kN

16 80

12 60

8 40

4 20
s, mm e
0 5 10 15 20 0 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

Fig. 1. Bond-slip law t(s): (m) — experiment; (—) — calculation by Eq. (14).

Fig. 2. Applied tensile force F vs. the specimen strain e for d b D = 0.1 (u), 0.2 (n), 0.3 (F),
and 0.4 (l) and for a naked rebar (—); f c = 30 MPa, d b = 8 mm, and l = 500 mm.

shown in Fig. 1 [8]. It was found that a = 0.53, C = 6.85, and s= 61.28 mm. Equation (14) refers only to the ascending branch of
the bond-slip relation; the curve which fits the experimental results very well is also shown in the Fig. 1.
Figure 2 shows the tensile force vs. the specimen strain for various ratios between the rebar diameter d b and the speci-
men diameter D. It should be mentioned that we varied only the value of D, i.e., the concrete cover thickness, keeping d b con-
stant; in this way it was possible to analyze the influence of the confining action of concrete on the tensile stiffening. The results
obtained show that a better performance correspond to low values of d b D; with increasing ratio d b D, the increase in the stiff-
ness of concrete specimens is negligible. Therefore, it seems possible to define an upper limit for the ratio d b D guaranteeing
an adequate contribution of concrete cover thickness to the tensile stiffening.
In Fig. 3, the applied force vs. the specimen strain for various concrete tensile strengths is shown. As expected, an in-
crease in the concrete strength increases the specimen stiffness.
The results of the parametric analysis evidence that, for the given kind and geometry of FRP reinforcement, the con-
fining action of concrete, i. e., the concrete cover thickness, and the concrete strength can be considered as the main parameters
influencing the tensile stiffening of FRP-reinforced concrete members.

Experimental Investigation

An experimental investigation was carried out in order to clarify the effect of tensile stiffening on the cracking and
deformability of FRP-reinforced concrete members. FRP-reinforced concrete members were tested in uniaxial tension. The
aim of the experimental programme, which is still in progress, was to check the influence of some key parameters on the stiffness
of reinforced concrete members; in particular, the mechanical properties of ordinary concrete (OC) and a high-performance con-
crete (HPC) and the degree of concrete confinement was analyzed. The results reported in this paper refer to tension members
made with OC and HPC and reinforced with CFRP (carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer) rebars; the elements exhibited different
confining actions, depending on the thickness of the concrete layer covering the FRP reinforcement.

287
 70 F, kN

50

30

10
e
0 0.004 0.008 0.012

Fig. 3. The same for concrete tensile strengths f ct = 3 (u), 5 (n), 7 (F), and
9 MPa (l) and for a naked rebar (—); D = 60 mm, d b = 8 mm, and l = 500 mm.

Materials

The compressive strength of both concretes was determined by standard compression tests on cubes 150 mm high; the
mean values were f c = 46.5 MPa for the OC and f c = 81.2 MPa for the HPC. The mean values of tensile strength, determined by
splitting tests on cylinders with a diameter of 150 mm and height of 300 mm, were f ct = 4.35 MPa for the OC and f ct = 4.46 MPa for
HPC.
We used CFRP rebars produced by the Sireg Co., Italy, of nominal diameter 8 mm; they were sanded and spirally
wound with carbon fibers. The constitutive law was determined experimentally, and the mean values of strength and Young’s
modulus were f R = 2401 MPa and f R = 109.187 MPa, respectively.

Specimens and test setup

Cylindrical concrete specimens were made by embeding a CFRP rebar in a concrete block. A tensile force was applied
by means of a tensile machine under displacement control. The geometrical details of the specimens are reported in Table 1.
To record the elongations of the rebar and concrete, two LVDT were used, as shown in Fig. 4.

Results of tests

The diagrams of applied force vs. strain e = Dl l, where Dl is the measured elongation of specimens with initial length l,
for the T50 and T80 specimens and a naked FRP rebar, are shown in Fig. 5. The measured elongation refers to the whole speci-
mens length l.
From an analysis of the results it follows that the tensile stiffening effect, measured as the difference between the curve
for reinforced concrete and that corresponding to the naked bar, is not negligible and increases with applied force.
The diagrams of applied force vs. the number of cracks and applied force vs. maximum crack width are depicted in
Fig. 6. The results obtained show that the number of cracks increases with the ratio d b D, whereas the crack width decreases.

288
 TABLE 1. Mechanical and Geometrical Properties of Tested Specimens

Number of Height, Nominal di- Effective di-

Material Specimens
specimens mm ameter, mm ameter, mm
OC, 2 T40A, T40B 450 40 36
fc = 46.5 MPa 2 T50A, T50B 450 50 44
2 T60A, T60B 450 60 56
2 T80A, T80B 450 80 74
HPC, 2 T40C, T40D 400 40 36
fc = 81.2 MPa 2 T50C, T50D 400 50 44
2 T60C, T60D 400 60 56
2 T80C, T80D 400 80 74

LVDT

LVDT

Fig. 4. Test setup.

Theoretical and Experimental Comparison

Let us compare the theoretical predictions, Code formulations, and experimental results. The curves labeled Th1 and
Th2 will refer to the theoretical predictions concerning the maximum and minimum crack spacing configurations, respectively,
while the curves labeled Th3 refer to the analytical model currently adopted in the analysis when a perfect bond between the
concrete and reinforcement is assumed.

289
 120 F, kN à 100 F, kN b
T80D
100
T50D 80
80
T50C T80C
60
60
40
40 Rebar Rebar

20 20
e e
0 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020

Fig. 5. Applied force F vs. strain e for the T50 (a) and T80 (b) specimens.

90 F, kN à 90 F, kN b
T60C
T60C
T50C
70 70
T80C T50C T80C
T40C
50 50

30 T40C 30

10 N 10 wmax, mm

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6

Fig. 6. Applied force F vs. the number of cracks N (a) and the crack width w (b)
for the C-group specimens.

Predictions of the nonlinear model were obtained by using bond-slip law (14). In all calculations, the tensile strength
of concrete was assumed equal to the mean value obtained experimentally in splitting tests ( f ct = 4.35 MPa for the OC and
f ct = 4.46 MPa for HPC).
The applied tensile force vs. strain diagrams are depicted in Fig. 7 for different specimens. A comparison shows that
the two limit cracking configurations considered in the nonlinear model adopted, in all cases, bound the experimental results; in
general the linear model underestimates experimental results and therefore does not allow us to evaluate in full measure the ten-
sile stiffening effects.
The Code models often give unsatisfactory predictions, because they use the same parameters defined for steel-reinforced
concrete elements.
Figure 8 shows the theoretical predictions and experimental results for the applied force vs. maximum cracks width.
The predictions of crack width according to Eurocode EC2 were evaluated at b1 = 1.0, b 2 = 1.0 in Eq. (4) and k1 = 1.0,
k 2 = 1.0 in Eq. (5); the mean value of crack width was calculated by Eq. (6).
The crack widths according to the ACI Code were calculated at b = 1.0 and k b = 1.5 (Eq. 9).

290
 à 100 F, kN b
90 F, kN
80
70

60
50
40
30
20
10 e e
0 0.005 0.010 0.015 0 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020

80 F, kN c

60

40

20

e
0 0.005 0.010 0.015

Fig. 7. Applied force F vs. strain e for the T80C (a), T60C (b), and T60A (c) specimens:
(—) — experiment; (n) — Th1; (s) — Th2; (m) — Th3; (v) — EC2; (l) — ACI. Other ex-
planations in the text.

An analysis of the results confirms that the nonlinear model is able to predict the crack width of tension members even
if, in some cases, the difference between the two curves corresponding to the two limit cracking configurations is considerable,
especially for a high applied force.
At the same time, it is seen that the predictions of the ACI model are more accurate than those of the Eurocode model,
though a better definition of bond parameters is needed in both cases.

Conclusions

Based on the results obtained, the following conclusions can be drawn:

— the tensile stiffening effects are not negligible in FRP-reinforced concrete structures and must be taken into account
for a reliable structural analysis;
— the nonlinear model adopted in this analysis is able to predict very well the tensile stiffening effects of
FRP-reinforced concrete structures mainly under service conditions. The model allows one to consider all parameters influenc-
ing the behavior of FRP-reinforced concrete members in the cracking stage; however, the model strongly depends on the

291
 45 F, kN à 120 F, kN
b

100
35
80
25
60

15 40

20
5 wmax, mm wmax, mm
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 1 2 3 4

Fig. 8. Applied force F vs. maximum crack width w for the T40B (a) and T60C (b) specimens.
Designations as in Fig. 7.

bond-slip law, which, as varying with the kind and surface treatment of FRP rebars, is not available in an analytical form and
has to be determined experimentally;
— the Code models can be used to predict the tensile stiffening effects of FRP-reinforced concrete members; how-
ever, a redefinition of the parameters depending on the bond is necessary.

REFERENCES

1. ACI440R-96, State-of-the-Art Report on Fiber-Reinforced Concrete and Commentary (1996).

2. Eurocode 2 (EC2), Design of Concrete Structures. Pt. 1-1. General Rules and Rules for Buildings, ENV 1992-1-1,
Brussels (1992).
3. ACI Committee 224, Cracking of Concrete Members in Direct Tension (1992).
4. M. A. Aiello, M. Leone, and L. Ombres, “Cracking analysis of FRP reinforced concrete tension members,” in: Proc. of
the 1st Int. Conf. on Advanced Polymer Composites for Structural Applications in Construction, Thomas Telford, Lon-
don (2002), pp. 77-85
5. G. Balazs, “Cracking analysis based on slip and bond stresses,” ACI Mater. J., 90, No. 4, 340-348 (1993).
6. M. A. Aiello and L. Ombres, “Cracking analysis of FRP reinforced concrete flexural members,” Mech. Compos. Ma-
ter., 36, No. 5, 389-394 (2000).
7. M. A. Aiello and L. Ombres, “Load–deflection analysis of FRP-reinforced concrete flexural members,” J. Comp.
Constr. ASCE, 4, No. 4, 164-171 (2000).
8. M. A. Aiello, M. Leone, and M. R. Pecce, “Experimental analysis on bond between FRP rebars and concrete,” in: Proc.
of the Int. Conf. on Composites in Construction–CCC2001, Porto, Portugal (2001), pp. 199-204.

292