Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Review

Repair and rehabilitation of concrete structures using confinement:

A review
Chau-Khun Ma a,⇑, Nazirah Mohd Apandi a, Sofrie Chin Siew Yung a, Ng Jen Hau a, Lo Wen Haur a,
Abdullah Zawawi Awang a, Wahid Omar b
a
Department of Structure and Materials, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi, Malaysia, Malaysia
b
Office of Chancellery, Universiti Teknologi, Malaysia, Malaysia

h i g h l i g h t s

Research findings on design and applications of repair techniques using confinement are discussed.

FRP confinement has significant potential in repairing applications.

The lacking in the current research development is discussed.

Issues that hindered the widespread use of confinement are critically analysed.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Repair and rehabilitation of existing damaged concrete structures have emerged as one of the most
Received 30 July 2016 important construction activities globally. Money used on repairing damaged structures has exceeded
Received in revised form 17 October 2016 that of the money used on building new structures. The earthquake strikes recently in Asian countries
Accepted 21 December 2016
such as Japan and Borneo Malaysia have attracted the attention of structural engineers and scholars
Available online 29 December 2016
on the research and development of rapid repairing techniques. Confinement is one of the rapid repairing
techniques that is popular and proven to be efficient in restoring the original capacities of damaged con-
Keywords:
crete. Although many research investigations have been done to confirm the suitability of these tech-
Confinement
Repairing
niques in repairing damaged concrete structures, there are several barriers that hindered the
Fibre-reinforced polymer widespread use in practical. These barriers include the lack of design and installation guidelines and
Concrete jacketing long-term durability studies. This paper reviewed the use of confinement as a repairing technique and
Steel jacketing the design and installation processes involved in order to facilitate the research development in this field.
Ferrocement laminate The findings have reached a consensus that confinement repair techniques are effective as they can
restore the original capacities of damaged concrete members. More investigations are still required to
establish sufficient design guidelines and lastly, the confinement pressure loss over a service period
should be tested to ensure the durability of the repaired concrete members.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
2. Types of confining methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
2.1. Concrete jacketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
2.2. Steel jacketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
2.3. Ferrocement laminate jacketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
2.4. Fibre-reinforced polymer (frp) confinement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505

Abbreviations: FRP, fibre-reinforced polymer; CFRP, carbon fibre-reinforced polymer; GFRP, glass fibre-reinforced polymer; AFRP, aramid fibre-reinforced polymer; SCC,
self-compacting concrete.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: machaukhun@gmail.com (C.-K. Ma).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.100
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515 503

2.5. Other confinement types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509

3. Implemented approaches for the development of confinement repairing techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509
4. Effectiveness measurement methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509
5. Testing variables and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511
6. Structure tests for evaluating repairing efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511
7. Design of confining method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512
7.1. Load-carrying capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512
7.2. Deformation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512
7.3. Serviceability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
7.4. Restorability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
7.5. Earthquake resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
8. Summary and conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
8.1. Recommendations for future research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
8.2. Design tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
8.3. Durability tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
8.4. Feasibility tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514

1. Introduction concrete with a new layer of reinforcement and concrete. Hence,

The integrity and stability of a concrete structure are compro-
mised when it is damaged, be it due to seismic, impact or excessive
loads. Actions are immediately required to be taken to arrest the
damage and prevent the ultimate failure of the whole structure
[1]. Various strategies are available to address the damage, such
as downgrading the structure function, demolition, reconstruction
of a part or the whole structure or arrest further damaging using
rapid repair techniques [2]. Due to the time and economic consid-
erations, the option to immediately repair the damaged part is the
most favourable. Past research works have proven that repairing
damaged concrete using external confinement is effective in
restoring the original load carrying capacity of the concrete col-
umns [3–7]. Besides, it was also reported that the confinement
can restore the ductility of damaged concrete elements as well
[8–11]. Despite extensive research being done in this area, concrete
repair using confinement has not yet gained worldwide acceptance
as a reliable method. This can be mainly due to the reasons as
follows:
(1) The installation of confinement needs to be more economi-
cally competitive.
(2) More reliable data is required to be tested on practical on a
long term basis.
(3) The design of such repair works need to be further
developed.
this technique is also known as reinforced concrete jacketing
(Fig. 1). The normal procedure to perform concrete jacketing is as
shown in Fig. 2. It is generally acknowledged that the effectiveness
of concrete jacketing is directly attributed from the monolithic
behaviour of the composite element. Hence, the treatment of the
interface must be handled with extra care. Roughening the con-
crete surface and the use of epoxy resin can increase the bonding
of the new concrete layer with the old surface. Steel connectors
might be used to replace dowel bars (Fig. 2). To reduce the thick-
ness of the jacket, higher strength concrete might be used. As the
compaction of the new concrete layer is difficult to be performed,
self-compacting concrete (SCC) is used to replace the conventional
concrete.
In 1988, Bett et al. [14] investigated the effectiveness of con-
crete jacketing in restoring the lateral load capacity of damaged
columns. Lateral load and constant axial load were applied for all
specimens. They reported that the columns repaired with concrete
jacketing demonstrated higher stiffness and lateral load capacity
than control columns. This clearly indicated the effectiveness of
concrete jacketing in repairing damaged concrete structures. A
few years after that, Ersoy et al. [15] extended the study in con-
crete jacketing by studying the behaviour of jacketed columns sub-
jected to uniaxial load and the combination of uniaxial load and
cyclic lateral load. As expected, they concluded that the jacketed

The current study is aimed to provide an all-encompassing

review and assessment of the existing confining methods that have
been proposed to repair damaged concrete. To this end, extensive
literature are first reviewed and classified according to their partic-
ular types. The variables and parameters as well as the reliability of
the existing database are then carefully assessed. In the last part of
this paper, a critical discussion is presented on the important fac-
tors that influence the effectiveness of these methods. It is believed
that this paper can aid in closing the gap between research and
large-scale industry adoption.

2. Types of confining methods

2.1. Concrete jacketing

Among many confining methods, concrete jacketing can be con-

sidered as the first method that has been attempted to repair dam- Fig. 1. Installation of dowel bars and new steel cage for concreting (Source:
aged concrete columns. It is a technique to cover the damaged www.coreandcut.com [12]).
504 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515

Fig. 2. Concrete jacketing: (a) Roughening of concrete surface; (b) Installation of dowel bars; (c) Erection of new steel cage; (d) coating with epoxy; (e) Pouring of new
concrete layer (Source: www.theconstructor.org [13]).

columns performed better than unjacketed columns, in both series

of tests. In 1994, Rodriguez and Park [16] tested four square con-
crete columns subjected to seismic loading. Two columns were
pre-damaged, repaired by jacketing and then recompressed whilst
the other two specimens were jacketed and compressed until fail-
ure. It was found that the repaired columns showed significantly
higher ductility and strength. Later, Eduardo et al. [17] tested seven
full scale column-footing specimens under monotonic loading after
different surface treatments. The results showed that for the
undamaged columns, composite effectiveness can be obtained
even without increasing the concrete surface roughness before
jacketing. More recently, Yuce et al. [18] investigated the effective-
ness of using thin jacketing in repairing the local failure of concrete
columns. In the first test series, four full scale square concrete col-
umns were tested under constant axial load and cyclic lateral dis-
placements. Self-compacting concrete was used for jacketing. The
second test series dealt with repaired columns. It was found that
the applied thin jacketing made from self-compacting concrete
increased the lateral stiffness strength properties of heavily dam-
aged columns.
From the past research works, it was confirmed that concrete
jacketing is effective in restoring strength and ductility or even
improving the lateral stiffness of damaged concrete members.
However, there are some drawbacks of concrete jacketing. It was
reported that the operation cost is very high because roughening
and cleaning of concrete surface are required to ensure good com-
patibility between the jacket and column surface. Moreover, the
jacketing technique disrupts the existing structures as drilling into Fig. 3. Steel jacketing (Source: www.buildingresearch.com.np [24]).

the existing concrete structures to add dowel bars or connectors

cannot be avoided. Lastly, the dimensions of the repaired columns
can be significantly increased. These disadvantages have no doubt
limited its application in practice.
2.2. Steel jacketing
Steel jacketing method was reported to be one of the most effi-
cient methods to increase the ductility of damaged concrete col-
umns by Xiao and Wu [19] (Fig. 3). In fact, the research on steel
jacketed columns had been started since the 1990s. In 1997, Gho-
barah et al. [20] investigated the effectiveness of using corrugated
steel jackets to improve the shear strength and ductility of laterally
loaded columns. It was found that this method can increase the
seismic resistance of the structure which originally was deficient
in seismic capacity. Ghobarah et al. [21] then conducted a study
to investigate the effectiveness of steel jacketing on larger scale
concrete columns and prove its effectiveness. In 2003, Wu et al.
[22] used steel platen as jacket and applied it on a rectangular rein-
forced concrete (RC) column and found that this method can
increase the ductility of concrete columns significantly. Sarno
et al. [23] used stainless steel jacket to retrofit seismically loaded
framed concrete structures. The structures tested were designed
as braced structure and moment resisting frames respectively.
The results showed that stainless steel jacket can significantly
increase the plastic deformations and the strengthened frames also
exhibited better energy absorbing capacities. The strain hardening
properties of stainless steel was observed to be beneficial in avoid-
ing local buckling in steel members. Different from the concrete
jacketing method, it increases the shear strength of concrete mem-
bers. However, disadvantages were reported from these studies
albeit its effectiveness. The effectiveness of using steel jacketing
can be significantly affected by the bonding between the steel
plates. Their efficiency was found considerably low for members
with a right angle of cross section (square or rectangular), mainly
because they are not effective in enhancing flexural stiffness. This
limits the effectiveness of the method in increasing the deformabil-
ity of the columns.
2.3. Ferrocement laminate jacketing
Ferrocement is formed by a combination of cement mortar rein-
forced with a thin layer of wire mesh. Batson et al. [25] has defined
ferrocement as ‘‘a type of thin wall reinforced concrete, commonly
constructed of hydraulic cement mortar, reinforced with closely
spaced layers of continuous and relatively small diameter mesh”.
No restriction for the material of the mesh is used; it can be metal-
lic or other materials such as fibres. Meshes of alkali resistant glass
fibres and woven fabric of vegetables fibres such as jute burlaps
and bamboo have also been tried as reinforcement. Several advan-
tages of ferrocement were reported such as strength, crack resis-
 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515
Fig. 4. Ferrocement laminate jacketing (Source: Makki [31]).
tance, ductility and durability. The thickness of ferrocement lami-
nation is normally very thin (<25 mm). The normal procedure in
constructing ferrocement are as follows: (1) Erection of skeletal
frame; (2) Preparation and modelling of meshes following the
frame; (3) Plastering; and (4) Curing and hydration. It was found
that technical skills are required for steps (1) and (3). Meanwhile,
step (2) is very labour intensive. These clearly show the disadvan-
tages of ferrocement. However, the ductility of ferrocement is far
better compared with the conventional RC due to the presence of
wire mesh. With closer spacing of the meshes, better ductility
and crack-arrest mechanism are found. Ferrocement is lighter
compared to the conventional reinforced concrete. Lower self-
weight and higher ductility are the most distinct advantages of fer-
rocement. Besides, it also has better toughness, fatigue resistance,
and impermeability compared to reinforced concrete.
In 1994, Paramasivam et al. [26] attempted to use ferrocement
laminate jacket to strengthen concrete flanged beams. The ferroce-
ment laminate was used to reinforce the tension side of the beams.
From the experiment, it was concluded that ferrocement laminate
jacketing is very effective in strengthening concrete flanged beams.
It increases the cracking strength and rigidity of the beams. How-
ever, compatibility should be ensured between the concrete sur-
face and ferrocement laminate as this has significantly affected
their effectiveness. Later, in 1998, Nassif et al. [27] investigated
the effectiveness of using an additional thin layer of ferrocement
to enhance the ductility and cracking strength of concrete beams.
The difference between the reinforcement by using square mesh
and hexagonal mesh as reinforcement was studied. It was found
that in general, the specimen with square mesh performed better
than hexagonal mesh. It was also found that the increase in the
number of layers generally increases the cracking stiffness of both
composite beams. The ferrocement jacketing was again attempted
to strengthen concrete columns by Takiguchi and Abdullah [28]. In
their study, six columns were tested with two as the control and
four others were strengthened with different numbers of wire
mesh layers. All of the specimens were tested under cyclic lateral
forces combined with constant axial load. It was reported that col-
umns with jacketing increased in shear strength. Kumar et al. [29]
extended the study to bridge pier specimens retrofitted with ferro-
cement jackets and it also showed enhanced stiffness, ductility and
strength. The potential of using textiles impregnated with cements
to confine damaged concrete was studied by Peled [6]. Simulation
of repair was carried out by wrapping fabric impregnated with
cement and epoxy around damaged concrete cylinders. It was
found that the confining method can increase the flexural stiffness
of repaired cylinders. Later, Bansal et al. [30] studied the effect of
wire mesh orientation of ferrocement jackets in retrofitting con-
crete beams. The results demonstrated that with an orientation
at 45°, the energy absorption was the highest, indicating the signif-
icance of the effects of wire mesh orientation. Fig. 4 shows concrete
beam confined with ferrocement laminate jacket.
505
2.4. Fibre-reinforced polymer (frp) confinement
Fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) confinement is the most popu-
lar confining method among those available (Fig. 5). In 2000, Xiao
and Wu [32] reported their experimental results on an axial com-
pression test of 27 concrete cylinders confined with carbon fiber
reinforced polymer (CFRP) jackets. It was found that confining con-
crete using CFRP can increase both the compressive strength and
ductility of concrete. It was also reported that the effectiveness
of using CFRP is highly dependent on the concrete strength and
confinement modulus. Recently, Wu et al. [33] conducted tests
on square and rectangular columns with FRP wrapping and
reported the importance of the corner radius of cross section to
the effectiveness of CFRP confinement. Several studies have been
conducted in repairing damaged concrete by using FRP wrapping
such as those performed by Green et al. [34], Liu et al. [35] and Tas-
tani and Pantazopoulou [36]. Among these studies, it should be
noted that only the study carried out by Liu et al. [35] was focused
on concrete damaged by compressive crushing, whilst the other
two studies focused on concrete damaged by low temperature
and accelerated electrochemical corrosion, respectively. All of
these studies confirmed the applicability of using FRP in repairing
damaged concrete. Later, Valdmanis et al. [37] analysed the
mechanical behaviour of concrete confined by CFRP sheets. The
authors concluded that a reduction of 50% in ultimate strength
should be assumed. Panjehpour et al. [5] investigated the beha-
viour of damaged HSC cylinders repaired using CFRP sheets. The
experimental works involved various pre-damaged levels indi-
cated that CFRP can precisely resist the axial aggravated deforma-
tion of cylinders caused by damaging under uniaxial compression.
It showed that the energy absorption of the damaged specimens
confined with CFRP was restored approximately three times more
than that of the undamaged specimens without confinement. Sev-
eral disadvantages associated with the use of FRP confinement are
the high and the lack of pretension in the fibres which prevent the
full utilisation of FRP [38]. A study done by Yan et al. [39] showed
that they are highly dependent on the shape of columns. The circu-
lar shape columns were improved after being retrofitted. More
recently, a study done by Wu et al. [3] indicated that the effects
of pre-damage levels can significantly alter the stress-strain beha-
viour of concrete. Stress-strain models incorporating the effects of
pre-damaged level had been developed for FRP-confined concrete.
However, these models are suitable for concrete subjected to
monotonic axial loads only.
Fig. 5. Repair of reinforced concrete bridge using fiber reinforced polymer (Source:
www.cenews.com [40]).
Table 1

506
An overview of existing studies on strengthening and repairing concrete structures using confinement.

Confinement Researcher(s) Confining material Number and type Type of Testing parameters Strengthening/ Loading scheme Remarks
type of specimen confinement Repairing
Concrete Bett et al. [14] Ordinary Concrete 3 two-third scale Passive Jacketed and unjacketted Strengthening
Monotonic lateral load Higher stiffness and lateral load capacity
jacketing columns + Repairing + constant axial load
Ersoy et al. [15] Ordinary Concrete 4 columns for (i); Passive Load history Strengthening
(i) Uniaxial load Jacketed columns performed better for both
5 columns for (ii) + Repairing (ii) Uniaxial load loading schemes
+ cyclic lateral loads
Rodriguez and Ordinary Concrete 4 square concrete Passive Arrangement in transverse Strengthening/ Seismic load Repaired columns showed significantly
Park [16] columns reinforcement Repairing higher ductility and strength compared to
strengthened columns.
Eduardo et al. Concrete jacketing 7 full scale Passive Interface treatment Strengthening/ Monotonic axial load Composite effectiveness can be achieved for
[17] + surface treatment column-footing Repairing undamaged concrete without surface
roughening.
Yuce et al. [18] Self-compacting 4 full scale square Passive Jacketed and unjacketted Strengthening/ Constant axial load Lateral stiffness increased of heavily
concrete concrete column Repairing + cyclic lateral displacement damaged columns.

C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515

Ruano et al. Self-compacting Analytical beam Passive Content and type of fibres Strengthening/ Shear Fibres content should be enough to prevent
[44] steel fiber Repairing jacketing debonding but limited to assure
reinforced concrete SFRC workability and pouring. Fibres
(SFRC) slender should be enough to control
jacketing cracking but fibers length is
conditioned by the jacketing thickness.
Dubey and Self-compacting 36 cylindrical RC Passive Different types of SCC; Repairing Monotonic axial load The ultimate strain of the confined concrete
Kumar [43] concrete column Curing time increases. Strong jacket on weak core
system surges the post peak ductility due to
confinement. Weak jacket on weak core
decreases the strength gain factor and
ductility factor.
Chalioris et al. Self-compacting 20 RC beam Passive Beam sizes and Repairing Flexural load test Application of this technique to flexural
[45] concrete configuration members which had been heavily damaged
during previous loading was shown to lead
to full recovery and even to a remarkable
increase of strength with enhanced ductility
capacity and favourable failure modes.
Steel Xiao and Wu Steel 5 one-third scale Passive Concrete strength and Repairing Constant axial load An efficient method to increase ductility of
jacketing [19] columns confinement modulus + cyclic lateral force damaged concrete columns.
Ghobarah et al. Rectangular flat 3 full scale Passive Jacketed and unjacketed Repairing Cyclic load Effective in increasing the shear strength
[20] steel columns and ductility of beam column connection
with low seismic capacity.
Ghobarah et al. Corrugated steel 3 full scale Passive Transverse reinforcement Repairing Cyclic load Capable to rehabilitate the original under
[21] columns and jacketing of the designed column.
column
Wu et al. [22] Steel jacketing 3 columns for (i); Passive Composite partial Strengthening (i) Axial load(ii) Effective in increasing the ductility of
+ bolting 2 columns for (ii) interaction Cyclic load columns.
Abdel-Hay and Steel 6 RC columns Passive Type of steel jacket used Repairing Monotonic compression Increasing the strengthened part height
Fawzy [46] and height of partial using steel angles improves the overall
strengthened part of behavior of the strengthened column.
column
Ferrocement Paramasivam Ferrocement 12 concrete Passive Spacing of the shear Strengthening Monotonic Cautions to be given to the bond strength of
laminate et al. [26] T-beams connectors, method of flexural load the concrete surface and ferrocement
jacketing surface preparation and laminate to ensure perfect composite action
the volume fraction of
reinforcement in the
ferrocement laminates.
Table 1 (continued)

Confinement Researcher(s) Confining material Number and type Type of Testing parameters Strengthening/ Loading scheme Remarks
type of specimen confinement Repairing
Bansal et al. Ferrocement 8 rectangular Passive Wire mesh orientation Repairing Monotonic flexural load Wire mesh with orientation at 45 degrees,
[30] concrete beams the energy absorption ability of stressed
beam is the highest
Takiguchi and Ferrocement 6 columns Passive Numbers of layers Strengthening/ Cyclic lateral forces Columns with jacketing increase in shear
Abdullah [28] of wire mesh repairing combined + constant strength
axial load
Kumar et al. Ferrocement 3 bridge pier Passive Axial load levels Strengthening/ Constant axial load The external confinement using
[29] specimens repairing + cyclic load ferrocement resulted in enhanced stiffness,
ductility, strength and energy dissipation
capacity. The mode of failure could be
changed from brittle shear failure to ductile
flexural failure.
Mourad and High strength 10 one-third scale Passive Damaged degree Repairing Axial compression The test results also indicated that repairing
Shannag [47] mortar square RC column similar reinforced concrete columns (after

C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515

preloading them to failure) with the same
ferrocement jacket almost restored their
original load capacity and stiffness.
Furthermore, the repaired columns failed in
a ductile manner compared to the brittle
failure exhibited by the control columns.
Li et al. [48] Ferrocement Four 2/3 scale Pssive Types of mortar Repair Quasi-static cyclic Test results have indicated that the
interior beam– loading proposed rehabilitation method can
column joints improve the seismic performance of interior
beam–column joints using ferrocement
with high strength mortar. Strength of
mortar is the vital factor affecting the
performance of strengthened specimens.
FRP Xiao and Wu CFRP confinement 27 concrete Passive Concrete strength and Strengthening Axial compression The effectiveness of using CFRP is highly
Confinement [32] cylinders confinement modulus dependent on the concrete strength and
confinement modulus
Wu et al. [33] FRP wrapping 300 concrete Passive Types of FRP included Strengthening Axial compression Stress–strain response of FRP-confined
cylinders CFRP, GFRP and AFRP, concrete cylinder may have a strain-
concrete strength and softening component or a strain-hardening
diameter of specimens component, which depends on FRP
confinement ratio.
Liu et al. [35] FRP pipes 7 composites Passive Expansive and Non Strengthening Axial compression Ultimate load capacities of the composite
columns expansive concrete as core columns increased significantly.
Tastani and FRP wrapping Analytical Passive Jacket characteristics and Repairing n/a A large component of the drift attained in
Pantazopoulou the repair method applied jacketed column.
[36]
Valdmanis CFRP confinement 30 cylindrical Passive Concrete strength and Strengthening Monotonic and cyclic CFRP tensile strength has to be reduced with
et al. [37] specimens confinement volumetric axial compressive load a factor 0.50 in the ultimate strength
ratio approach in order to obtain accurate
strength predictions
Panjehpour CFRP confinement 21 cylindrical Passive Pre-damaged levels Repairing Uniaxial compression The energy absorption of the damaged
et al. [5] specimens specimens confined with CFRP was restored
approximately three times more than that
of the undamaged specimens without
confinement
Mirmiran et al. Fiber reinforced 30 (6  12 in.) Passive Concrete strength, types of Strengthening Uniaxial compression Unlike steel, Fiber reinforced plastic tube
[38] plastic tube cylindrical fibers and resin, fiber curtails the dilation tendency of concrete, as
specimens volume and fiber it reverses the direction of volumetric
orientation in the jacket, strains.
jacket thickness, shape of
cross section, slenderness

507
ratio, interface bond

(continued on next page)

 508
Table 1 (continued)

Confinement Researcher(s) Confining material Number and type Type of Testing parameters Strengthening/ Loading scheme Remarks
type of specimen confinement Repairing
Yan et al. [39] Posttensioned FRP 32 circular, Passive Shape effects Strengthening Uniaxial compression Externally bonded external jackets for
Composite Shells rectangular and square and rectangular columns are not as
square columns effective as they are for circular columns.
Harajli [49] FRP laminates 12 RC beams Passive Concrete strength, Repairing Cyclic load It was found that repairing the bond-
confinement types damaged zone through concrete
confinement leads to substantial regain of
flexural stiffness and strength up to or
exceeding those for the original specimens,
reduces the structural damage, and results
in considerable improvement of the energy
absorption and dissipation capacity under
cyclic loading.
He et al. [50] CFRP bond 3 half-scale Passive Damaged condition Repairing Monotonic compression Successful in restoring the strength of the
severely damaged columns without fractured bars, but only

C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515

square RC bridge partially successful for the column with
columns fractured bars located near the base because
of CFRP anchorage limitations
Contamine Textile reinforced 11 RC beams Passive Confining scheme, layup Repairing Shear test The results show that TRC performs well
et al. [51] concrete (TRC) and fabricated sheet compared with CFRP and has qualitatively
similar effects on the overall behaviour of
the repaired beams.
Wu et al. [3] FRP confinement 102 concrete Passive Pre-damaged effects Repairing Monotonic compression Confinement did not affect the initial elastic
cylinders modulus of columns with low damage but
significant for columns with higher damage
degrees.
Nguyen-Minh Glass or carbon 18 RC beams Passive Size effect Repairing Flexural bending test The results indicated that fabric-epoxy
and Rovňák fiber fabrics and continuous U-jackets have reduced the
[52] epoxy composite brittleness of the shear failure of beams,
materials tensile strains in stirrups, and, in a
significant way, also the width of shear
cracks at the failure state.
Jiang et al. [53] Near-surface- 4 circular bridge Passive Combination of BFRP bars Repairing Combined effects of a Flexural capacity of the repaired columns
mounted (NMS) columns and sheets constant axial compression was restored and even enhanced;
basalt fiber that was applied at the top of furthermore, the stiffness and the
reinforced polymer the column and displacement capacity of repaired columns
(BFRP) bars and incrementally increasing were restored to an extent that can meet the
BFRP sheets lateral deformation reversals. needs of a temporary repair and allow
jacketing emergency service use after an earthquake.
Guo et al. [54] CFRP laminates 60 cylinders Passive Concrete type, damaged Repairing Monotonic Compression Pre-damaged effect was significant on lowly
level and confining confined NSC. The effect was relatively
volumetric ratio smaller on confined HSC.
Sun et al. [55] Early-strength 6 circular pier Passive Axial load levels, Repairing Seismic load Both shear strength and lateral
concrete with high- specimens reinforcement ratio displacement of the repaired piers increased
fluidity and carbon when compared to the original specimens,
CFRP and the failure mechanism of the piers
shifted from flexural-shear failure to ductile
flexural failure.
Other Fukuyama Reinforced 8 RC column Passive Different confining Repairing Axial compressive load and Shear strength and ductility of the repaired
miscellaneous et al. [56] concrete (RC), steel materials cyclic shear forces columns, in which the concrete remained
methods plates or carbon crushed and the longitudinal bars remained
fiber (CF) sheets buckled, can be restored over the pre-
damaged level.
Janke et al. [40] Pre-stressed 45 cylindrical Active Types of loading Strengthening Concentric and eccentric, Confirmed the beneficial influence of
external confined single and cyclic loading confinement prestressing on concrete
confinement specimens residual capacity.
 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515 509

2.5. Other confinement types

friction between the external wrapping and

recommended for plastic hinge confinement

of MS-damaged bridge columns subjected to
original pier under the same seismic action.
Performed satisfactorily under loading with

sequences than FRP jackets. In the case of

FRP jackets, bidirectional fiber wraps are
dissipation under Mainshock–Aftershock
Several other confining materials had also been tried to repair

Modulus elasticity of repaired cylinders

high pretension levels possible without

The results obtained were encouraging

considering the severe damage of the

Steel jackets exhibited higher energy

damaged concrete. Janke et al. [41] found that pre-stressed exter-

increased comparable with the FRP.

nal confinement using steel bands or CFRP bands was particularly
effective in improving the seismic capacity of concrete columns.
Rousakis and Tourtouras [42] studied the effect of high extension
capacity fiber ropes as a means of externally confining reinforce-
ment in square plain or reinforced concrete columns. The results
demonstrated that the method performed satisfactorily under
loading with high pretension levels. However, after the ropes were
the concrete

aftershocks.
unwrapped following testing, extensive cracking of the concrete
Remarks

core was detected along with the buckling of multiple steel bars.
Notwithstanding this, all strengthened reinforced concrete col-
umns presented improved stress–strain behaviour with an approx-
Strengthening/ Monotonic or cyclic loading

imately 40% higher ultimate strength. Table 1 shows the overview

of existing studies on confinement in retrofitting and repairing
Pseudo-dynamic test

damaged concrete.
Axial compression
Strengthening/ Loading scheme

3. Implemented approaches for the development of

Cyclic loads

confinement repairing techniques

The literature reviews have clearly indicated that the confine-

ment repairing techniques can be roughly categorized into 5 main
groups, which are concrete jacket, steel jacket, ferrocement lami-
Repairing

Repairing

Repairing

Repairing

nate, FRP and other miscellaneous methods. The most famous

repairing

method is FRP confinement as a large number of research works

were focusing on it. Different materials have been adopted as con-
finement as well such as fiber rope, steel band and so on. In these
Fabric type, cell opening,

tests, all of the specimens, regardless of the type of specimens,

application of pressure

Code (1986) and EC 2.

Confinement schemes
and number of layers

cement-based matrix

were damaged first and then repaired by confinement to check

according to Italian
during casting, and
Testing parameters

Different confining

the effectiveness of these materials as confining agents, through

Different design

their restorability on the capacity, deformability, ductility or even

modification

stiffness of the structure members. The taxonomy of the research

schemes

in this area is presented in Fig. 6.

4. Effectiveness measurement methods

confinement

Passive/

The majority of the researchers tested the repaired members

Type of

Passive

Passive
Active

Active

until failure and compared their ultimate capacities with the

capacities of the control specimens. The control specimens can
concrete cylinders

be either unconfined members or undamaged confined members.

24 standard plain
Number and type

8 concrete bridge

highway bridge

This is the predominant method adopted in assessing the effective-

of specimen

A prototype

ness of the repair method. Monotonic compression, cyclic reversal

Cylinders

and flexural 4-points bending tests were among the methods nor-
piers

mally used. Table 2 shows the recorded best restorability of each

repairing method. It can be seen that the maximum restorability
polypropylene fiber

Fakharifar et al. FRP, thick steel, and

thin steel wrapped
Confining material

is approximately 3 times of the original strength of damaged con-

strengthened with
impregnated with

with prestressing
rebar parts, self-
Epoxy adhesive,

CFRP wrapping

crete by FRP confinement, indicating that the repair method is the

stainless steel
Low modulus

concrete and
Tourtouras [42] vinylon and

most effective method. On the other hand, restorability of about

compacting
cements

1/3 of the original strength of damaged concrete was reported

Textiles

strands
ropes

for ferrocement. This clearly shows the disadvantage of this

method in restoring the original capacity of damaged concrete.
Based on the available literature to this study, only few researchers
Researcher(s)

Rousakis and

Lavorato and

have reported the ‘pre-damaged’ or ‘pre-loaded’ levels of the spec-

Nuti [57]
Peled [6]

imens. Most of these studies have only reported the damaged level
of the tested specimens based on their subjective observation such
[58]

as ‘partially damaged’, ‘heavily damaged’ and so on. It was clearly

reported that the pre-damaged level was significant in affecting
the effectiveness of repair technique and should be assessed before
the design of repair works. Hence, the studies in this area are sug-
Table 1 (continued)

gested to incorporate this parameter to close the gap. Among these

Confinement

studies, only the studies done by Panjehpour et al. [5], Guo et al.
[54] and Wu et al. [3] studied the specimens that were damaged
type

with up to 50% reduction in load capacity after the ultimate load

had been attained.
510 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515

Development in confinement repair

techniques

Concrete Steel jacket Ferrocement FRP Others

Jacket laminate jacket confinement

Parameters: Parameters: Parameters: Parameters: Parameters:

Jackeng Concrete Surface Concrete strength; Confining
technique; load strength; preparaon; confinement modulus; materials; types of
history; confinement volume fracon of types of FRP; size effects; loading; number of
arrangement of modulus; ferrocement; wire intact concrete core; layers; fabric
transverse arrangement of mesh orientaon; jacket characteriscs; types; confining
reinforcement; transverse number of mesh repair method; pressure; cement
interface reinforcement; layers; axial load confinement volumetric matrix
treatment; SCC shear connector level; damaged rao; pre-damaged levels;
type; curing spacing; surface degree; mortar type of resin; fibre
me; size effects interacon type orientaon; jacket
thickness; shape;
slenderness; interface
bond; damaged condion
Member types: Member types: Member types: Member types:
RC columns; RC column T-beams; RC Cylinders; RC
column foong; beams; RC columns; bridge
RC column; RC Member types:
columns; bridge piers
beam Cylinders; RC
pier; beam-
columns; RC
column joints
beams; bridge
piers

Assessment in ulmate strength,

deformability, duclity and sffness of
repaired members

Fig. 6. Taxonomy of confinement repair technique research.

Table 2
Confinement repairing methods and measure variables.

Technique Measured variables (restorability) References

Concrete jacketing Restored at least 100% of original strength for Bett et al. [14]; Rodriguez and Park [16]; Yuce
ultimately damaged specimens et al. [18]; Ruano et al. [44]
Steel jacketing Capacity of partially damaged specimens were Abdel-Hay and Fawzy [46]
restored to at least to the original strength
Ferrocement jacketing Ultimately damaged specimens were restored Mourad and Shanog [47]
about 30% of the original strength
FRP jacketing Specimens damaged at -50% of ultimate Panjehpour et al. [5]; Guo et al. [54]; Wu et al.
strength were restored as much as 3 times of [3]
original capacity
Others Heavily damaged specimens were restored to Fukuyama et al. [56]
original strength
 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515 511

Table 3
Testing variables and methods.

Testing variable Method Repair technique Authors

Load history Column test Concrete jacket; others Ersoy et al. [15]; Janke et al. [40]
Arrangement in transverse reinforcement Column test Concrete jacket; steel jacket Rodriguez and Park [16]; Ghobarah
et al. [21]
Interface treatment Column-footing test Concrete jacket; steel jacket Eduardo et al. [17]; Wu et al. [22]
Content and type of fibres Beam test Concrete jacket Ruano et al. [44]
Types of confining material Column test; beam-column joint test; Concrete jacket; steel jacket; Dubey and Kumar [43]; Abdel-hay
cylinder test; beam tests ferrocement jacket; FRP; others and Fawzy. [46]; Li et al. [48]; Wu
et al. [33]; Liu et al. [35]; Tastani and
Pantazopoulou [36]; Haraili [49];
Jiang et al. [53]; Fukuyama et al. [56]
Reinforcement configuration Beam test Concrete jacket Chalioris et al. [45]
Confinement modulus Column test Concrete jacket; FRP Xiao and Wu [19]; Xiao and Wu [32]
Spacing of shear connector Beam test Ferrocement jacket Paramasivam et al. [26]
Volume fraction of ferrocement Beam test Ferrocement jacket Paramasivam et al. [26]
Wire mesh orientation Beam test Ferrocement jacket Bansal et al. [30]
Axial load level Bridge pier test Ferrocement jacket; FRP Kumar et al. [29]; Sun et al. [55]
Damaged degree Column test; cylinder tests; Ferrocement jacket; FRP Mourad and Shannag [47]; Panjeh-
bridge pier test pour et al. [5]; He et al. [50]; Wu et al.
[22]; Guo et al. [54]
Confining volumetric ratio Column test Ferrocement jacket; FRP; others Takiguchi and Abdullah [28]; Vald-
manis et al. [37]; Guo et al. [54]
Slenderness ratio Cylinder test FRP Mirmiran et al. [38]
Shape effects Column test FRP Yan et al. [39]; Nguyen-Minh and
Rovňák [52]
Size effects Beam test Concrete jacket; FRP Chalioris et al. [45]
Concrete strength Cylinder test, column test FRP; Steel jacket Xiao and Wu [32]; Xiao and Wu [19];
Valdmanis et al. [37]; Mirmiran et al.
[38]; Haraili [49]

5. Testing variables and methods
In this area, researchers have adopted different testing methods
to establish the efficiency of the repairing methods. The efficiency
of the repairing was affected by a number of factors. Common
influencing factors were the type of loading, characteristic of the
confining materials and confining scheme. Other influencing
factors are summarized and tabulated in Table 3. The testing
variables were dependent on the testing method and specimen
types. From Table 3, it can be observed that repair technique using
FRP almost covered all the testing variables tested in this field,
except a few parameters which were not related such as the
orientation of wire mesh, volume fraction of ferrocement and etc.
It can also be seen that among the repair techniques, the least
variables tested was steel jacketing, indicating the lack of
research. Most of the past researches focussed on setting the
characteristics of confining materials as variables. In fact, the most
important parameter, the pre-damaged level, was not commonly
tested.
6. Structure tests for evaluating repairing efficiency
Structure tests conducted at small, medium and full scale levels
were used to establish the efficiency in repairing damaged con-
crete structures. These included cylinder and unreinforced col-
umns for the small scale test, medium sized specimens for the
medium scale test and full scale member or frame for the full scale
test. Repairing efficiency evaluated based on such tests are pre-
sented in Table 4. Literature hinted that most of the studies had
mainly focussed on the medium scale test. Several of them had
conducted full scale tests and a very limited number of them car-
ried out the test at a small scale level. This could be the barrier

Table 4
Different scales of structure test.

Scale of Specimen Testing variables Loading Repair technique Authors

test scheme*
Small Cylinder Concrete strength; Confinement modulus; Type ML; CA; MA FRP; Others Xiao and Wu [32]; Wu et al. [33]; Valdmanis
of confining material; Size effects; Pre-damaged et al. [37]; Panjehpour et al. [5]; Mirmiran et al.
levels; characteristic of confining materials; [38]; Wu et al. [3]; Guo et al. [54]; Janke et al.
Load history [40]; Rousakis and Tourtouras [42]; Peled [6]
Medium Column; Load history; Concrete Strength; Confinement ML + CA; MA; Concrete jacket; Bett et al. [14]; Xiao and Wu [19]; Wu et al. [22];
beam-column modulus; Partial interaction; wire mesh FL; CSF Steel jacket; Bansal et al. [30]; Takiguchi and Abdullah [28];
joint; bridge orientation; Numbers of wire layers; Axial load Ferrocement Kumar et al. [29]; Mourad and Shannag [47]; Li
piers levels; Damaged degree; Types of mortar; Types jacket; FRP; et al. [48]; Yan et al. [39]; He et al. [50];
of concrete core; Shape effects; Damaged others Fukuyama et al. [56]; Lavorato and Nuti, [57];
condition; Types of confining material Fakharifar et al. [58]
Full Column- Interface treatment; Types of confining material; MA; ML + CA; Concrete jacket; Eduardo et al. [17]; Yuce et al. [18]; Dubey and
footing; Size effects; configuration; transverse FL; CL; SL Steel jacket; Kumar [43]; Chalioris et al. [45]; Ghobarah et al.
column; beam; reinforcement; Height of repaired part; spacing Ferrocement [20]; Ghobarah et al. [21]; Abdel-Hay and Fawzy
T-beam; bridge of shear connectors; Axial load levels, Confining jacket; FRP [46]; Paramasivam et al. [26]; Contamine et al.
piers volumetric ratio [51]; Nguyen-Minh and Rovňák [52]; Jiang et al.
[53]; Sun et al. [55]
*
ML = Monotonic lateral load; CA = Constant axial load; MA = Monotonic axial load; FL = Flexural load; CL = Cyclic lateral load; CA = Cyclic axial load; SL = Shear load;
CSF = Cyclic shear force.
512 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515
in the research as the material properties and behaviour of the con-
fined material was not yet established.
Although many studies had been carried out to study a wide
range of variables in small scale tests, it was found that most of
these studies were focused on FRP confinement. The stress-strain
behaviour of the confined concrete was normally examined and
subsequently the stress-strain models were proposed for particular
confining schemes and materials. Reliable design of repair works
necessitated a clear understanding and accurate modelling of
stress-strain behaviour. However, it can be evidenced that the
investigation in this area is still lacking.
Medium scale tests normally involved simulation of the con-
crete members in a smaller scale due to research budget, testing
equipment capacity and time constraints. It can be observed from
Table 4 that the majority of the tests for repair were within these
categories. Wide ranges of variables were tested in these cate-
gories. The specimens tested also included column, column-beam
joint and bridge pier model. The tests confirmed the applicability
of confinement repair techniques in restoring the damaged con-
crete members.
The tests on full-scaled specimens were also being carried out
by a number of researchers. These tests had confirmed discernible
size effects on the results obtained compared with the medium
scale tests. These tests had evidenced that medium scale tests were
reliable.
7. Design of confining method
Techniques of concrete repair by using confinement can become
a sustainable option. It can be a good strategy if limitations such as
cost, time and construction space are concerned. Therefore, it is
essential that the design issues, such as load carrying capacity, ulti-
mate deformation, serviceability and restorability are studied and
assessed to determine which types of confinement are suitable
for applications and which areas need improvement. This section
highlights the considerations required in designing the repair
works using confinement techniques. The design capabilities of
these confining methods are explored together while the inade-
quacy in the design is highlighted.
The typical load-deformation behaviour of repaired concrete is
as shown in Fig. 7. The column is considered unconfined and it
should exhibit a load decrease after the post-peak followed A-B-C
in Fig. 7. Most of the past studies had proven that confinement
can significantly enhance the original post-peak region of the
structure element in terms of ultimate load, deformability and
ductility, following the path A-D-E. After the damage, load is
released to point R and the structure element is repaired using
the confining method. The repaired structure element will exhibit
Retrofied
element
E
D equation to be used.
T
B S
Repaired
element
C
Unconfined
element
A R
Fig. 7. Typical load-deformation behaviour of repaired concrete structures.
the load-deformation behaviour following the path R-S-T. It is clear
that the repaired element exhibits a different behaviour compared
to either unconfined structure element or retrofitted element
(confined concrete element without pre-damage). The determina-
tion of the mechanical behaviour of repaired elements thus should
not follow exactly the prediction based on the retrofitted element.
In the study of repaired concrete element using confining, it
can be seen that the important aspects that one should investigate
are the load carrying capacity, deformability, serviceability and
restorability, which are critically discussed in the following
subsections.
7.1. Load-carrying capacity
Load carrying capacity of a material is the ability of a member to
resist load. The load carrying capacity of a repaired concrete ele-
ment must at any time be larger than the load or force acting on
the structure to avoid failure. However, most of the estimation of
load carrying capacity using different types of confining methods
followed the empirical or theoretical prediction using retrofitted
column. The load carrying capacity of retrofitted element and
repaired element can be different as can be seen in Fig. 7. The main
barrier preventing the widespread use of confinement in the con-
struction industry is the lack of established procedures and guide-
lines in estimating the load carrying capacity. An example is short
concrete columns tend to behave like slender columns after being
confined and experienced larger deformation. The load carrying
capacity of these confined columns is also reduced due to slender-
ness effects. These issues make it difficult to determine exactly the
load carrying capacity of confined members. To understand the
issues in determining the load carrying capacity of confined mem-
bers, researchers must first understand the components that affect
the load carrying capacity.
The factors that influence the load carrying capacity of a
repaired concrete are the confining pressure, confining efficiency,
types of confinement (active or passive), composite effect between
old structure and the new confining material and lastly, the dam-
age level of the old structure. Mostly, the confining method
adopted the strength model developed by Richart et al. [59] in
the determination of load capacity. The enhanced strength due to
confinement, fcc can be estimated as follows:
f cc ¼ f co þ kfl ð1Þ
where fco is the unconfined concrete strength; k is the confinement
effectiveness coefficient; fl is the confining pressure. Noted that the
Eq. (1) was originally proposed for confined concrete, hence in the
case of repaired concrete, the unconfined concrete strength fco
needs to be revised to fcd which is the residual strength of damaged
concrete [3]. It can be seen that the accuracy of prediction is highly
dependent on these parameters. The main issue here is the determi-
nation of the residual strength of a damaged concrete. However,
there are still no practical guidelines in determining the damaged
levels of a concrete element. Meanwhile, the confining pressures
provided are largely different from one confinement type to
another, which has rendered the impossibility for a standard unified
7.2. Deformation
Currently, there is no single model or standard being proposed
for modelling strain related properties of concrete after a large
deformation. In fact, plastic strain is related to confinement stiff-
ness and load path [60,61]; therefore, the modelling of ultimate
strain is complicated. The determination of ultimate strain and
deformation of repaired concrete can only be empirical and thus
it is difficult to develop a guideline for it.
 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515
Once the ultimate strain of a repaired concrete is experimen-
tally determined, the deformation of a member can be estimated
by integrating the curvatures along the member. The deformability
of a repaired member is not only contributed by the changes in the
ultimate strain of the concrete but also from other effects such as
confinement effect on concrete tension between cracks, bond slip
and lastly plastic hinge of the member which will ultimately result
in different extents of deformation. When a member is cracked, all
the tension forces are carried by the reinforcing steel. A minority of
the forces will be carried by the concrete between cracks. Hence,
the ability of the concrete to withstand tension force will affect
the deformation of the member. However, the effect of confine-
ment in improving tension in concrete is currently vague. This is
mainly due to existing theories that generally neglected the tensile
strength in concrete as it is small (<10%) in the concrete compres-
sive strength. In the determination of deflection, this consideration
will be needed. The bond slip of reinforcement in anchorage zones
will also increase the deformations. However, the effects of con-
finement on the bond slip of reinforcement remained unanswered.
It has been widely reported that the confinement can increase the
plastic hinge of concrete stressed at a critical section. This con-
tributes to the inelastic rotation of the member and also increases
the deformation significantly.
7.3. Serviceability
Serviceability is the conditions where no large deflections and
excessive cracks are observed in a structure. A building can be con-
sidered as unfit for occupation if the serviceability is exceeded,
even though it is still structurally sound. Besides, serviceability of
a structure can also be addressed through durability, overall stabil-
ity, fire resistance and excessive vibration.
The assessment of the performance of the structure at the ser-
vice load is an extremely important consideration when members
are proportioned on the basis of the required strength. This is
because members with small sections and sections with little com-
pression steel can satisfy the strength requirements but this will
lead to high stresses and deformations at the service load. There-
fore, it must be verified that deflections at the service load are
within acceptable limits. The control of cracking is very important
for the sake of the appearance and durability. The crack widths and
deflections should not exceed a specified limit. However, these
limits are very difficult to be specified [62].
The cracking and deflection behaviour of a member depend
upon the tensile strength and modulus of rupture of the material.
Many factors have been reported to influence the tensile strength
of concrete and one of them is confinement level [63]. At the same
time, confinement has been reported to increase the deformability
of concrete members, significantly and subsequently leads to the
increase of crack. However, there are no systematic studies being
conducted to investigate the direct effects of confinement to the
tensile strength of confined concrete to the best knowledge of
the authors. Hence, the understanding on the matter is still very
limited. As can be seen in Fig. 7 also, a repaired concrete element
might demonstrate larger deformation compared to retrofitted
concrete element. This effect should also be incorporated in the
design of serviceability.
On the other hand, numerous studies have been conducted on
the effects of confinement on the deformability of concrete mem-
bers. It was found that the confinement can result in large defor-
mation of a confined member [64–72,42]. Some researchers have
even reported that the confinement can increase the susceptibility
of short concrete column to the slenderness effects [73–78]. The
confinement effects on crack development and deformability are
not yet established.
513
7.4. Restorability
The restorability of confinement is the ability of the method to
restore the capacity of a damaged concrete member to be equalled
to its original strength or even beyond that. Restorability is impor-
tant in the design of repair works as it indicates the efficiency of
the repairing techniques. Some repairing methods may only arrest
the further damaging of the member whilst some other might
restore the capacity of the member to its original capacity. How-
ever, most of the studies on confinement have mainly focused on
intact concrete, and relatively few studies have investigated the
effect of concrete damage on the restorability of confinement
[79,3], indicating the lack of research in this area. As a matter of
fact, damage cracks normally exist in most in-service concrete
members. Hence, the study on pre-damaged concrete with con-
finement is closer to practical situation and more reliable. Peled
[6], Iiki and Kumbasar [80] and Rabehi et al. [81] used FRP to con-
fine pre-damaged concrete and reported that confinement is effec-
tive in restoring the compressive strength of the columns. Liu et al.
[35] also found that the level of damage has a slight effect on the
strength of FRP-confined damaged columns. However, these stud-
ies mainly focussed on FRP confinement only. This indicated that
the studies on the restorability of repair methods are still very
new and most of these studies are less than a decade old. It can also
be seen that the all of these studies were focused on FRP and no
unified equation was proposed for other repair methods.
7.5. Earthquake resistance
Very limited tests have been carried out in determining the
earthquake resistance compared to the static load resistance of
confined concrete structures. However, it was consistently being
reported the confinement has the ability to increase the ductility
of concrete structures subjected to excitation loads. The failure
modes of the confined structures were also found to be less sudden
and explosive compared to unconfined columns. It was found that
repairing the bond-damaged zone through concrete confinement
leads to the substantial regain of flexural stiffness and strength
up to or exceeding those of the original specimens, reduces the
structural damage, and results in considerable improvement of
the energy absorption and dissipation capacity under the cyclic
loading [49].
8. Summary and conclusion
The present study analysed and compared several tests and
methods that were developed to evaluate the efficiency of confine-
ment repairing technique in repairing damaged concrete members.
It was found that there are roughly 5 groups of confinements used
as repair techniques. They can be categorized as concrete jacketing,
steel jacketing, ferrocement laminate jacketing, FRP confinement
and others. Among these methods, FRP confinement is the most
popular and effective in terms of restorability. Several conclusions
can be made based on the assessment made in this paper:
a) The efficiency of the proposed methods was measured by
comparing the restored capacities of the damaged members
with the original capacities of undamaged members using
cylinder, beam and column tests. Axial, flexural and cyclic
loads were among the most popular load types being tested.
b) Past studies have covered a wide range of variables includ-
ing load history, arrangement in transverse reinforcement,
interface treatment, types of confining material, configura-
tion of member, confinement modulus, axial load level, dam-
aged degree, confining volumetric ratio, slenderness ratio,
514 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515
shape effects, size effects and concrete compressive
strength. Most of the past studies have focused on testing
the efficiency of different types of confining materials as
repair techniques. The lack of tests in investigating pre-
damaged level and slenderness ratio was also highlighted.
c) Three scales of tests are normally being carried out, namely
small, medium and full scale tests. Most of the previous
studies have focussed on medium scale tests. Discernible
size effects were reported. It was found that the small scale
tests are still lacking.
d) In the design of confinement, few aspects need considera-
tion. They are load carrying capacity, deformation, service-
ability and restorability. However, it can be observed that
the designs of confinement repair techniques are still not
well standardized. The following are the shortcomings in
the design based on the literature conducted:
– Load carrying capacity: The determination of residual
strength of damaged concrete is not yet established. In
addition, the guidelines in determining the damaged
levels of concrete element are still not yet available.
– Deformation: The investigation of confinement effect on
the bond slip of reinforcement remains answered.
– Serviceability: The confinement effect on crack develop-
ment and deformability are not yet established.
– Restorability: The studies on the restorability of repair
methods are still very new. It can also be seen that the
all of these studies were focused on FRP and none of a
unified equation was proposed for other repair methods.
The above are presented based on the authors’ observation
while future researches will highlight more. More studies are
required to address these gaps before these techniques can be used
confidently in practice.
8.1. Recommendations for future research
Based on the needs highlighted from this paper, the recommen-
dations for future research are suggested as follows:
8.2. Design tests

Experimental investigation on the confinement to crack devel-
opment to improve their serviceability.

Studies on bond slip and anchorage behaviour of reinforcing bar
of confined concrete in order to determine the flexural strength
and deformability.

Load bearing capacity and restorability of confined section.
8.3. Durability tests

Further studies are required to ensure the confining effects will
not diminish over a long service period.

The durability test on the confining material itself.

Creep and shrinkage of confined concrete.
8.4. Feasibility tests

The confining methods should be tested for their reliability and
feasibility on an actual construction site.
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the Fundamental Research Grant
Scheme (FRGS) from the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia
[R.J130000.7822.4F826]. The first author would like to acknowl-
edge that the undergraduate students Amirul Radzi, Melvay Allens
and Muhammad Fadhli undertook the tests as their final year pro-
jects supervised by the first author.
References
[1] A.G. Tsonos, Effectiveness of CFRP-jackets and RC-jackets in post-earthquake
and pre-earthquake retrofitting of beam–column subassemblages, Eng. Struct.
30 (3) (2008) 777–793.
[2] S. Macdonald (Ed.), Concrete: Building Pathology, John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[3] Y.F. Wu, Y. Yun, Y. Wei, Y. Zhou, Effect of predamage on the stress-strain
relationship of confined concrete under monotonic loading, J. Struct. Eng. 140
(12) (2014) 04014093.
[4] Y.W. Zhou, X.M. Liu, L.L. Sui, F. Xing, H.J. Zhou, Stress–strain model for fibre
reinforced polymer confined load-induced damaged concrete, Mater. Res.
Innov. 19 (6) (2015) S6–S125.
[5] M. Panjehpour, N. Farzadnia, R. Demirboga, A.A.A. Ali, Behavior of high-
strength concrete cylinders repaired with CFRP sheets, J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 22
(1) (2016) 56–64.
[6] A. Peled, Confinement of damaged and nondamaged structural concrete with
FRP and TRC sleeves, J. Compos. Constr. 11 (5) (2007) 514–522.
[7] A. Ilki, O. Peker, E. Karamuk, C. Demir, N. Kumbasar, FRP retrofit of low and
medium strength circular and rectangular reinforced concrete columns, J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 20 (2) (2008) 169–188.
[8] D.S. Gu, G. Wu, Z.S. Wu, Y.F. Wu, Confinement effectiveness of FRP in
retrofitting circular concrete columns under simulated seismic load, J. Compos.
Constr. 14 (5) (2010) 531–540.
[9] R.D. Iacobucci, S.A. Sheikh, O. Bayrak, Retrofit of square concrete columns with
carbon fiber-reinforced polymer for seismic resistance, ACI Struct. J. 100 (6)
(2003) 785–794.
[10] D.E. Lehman, S.E. Gookin, A.M. Nacamuli, J.P. Moehle, Repair of earthquake-
damaged bridge columns, ACI Struct. J. 98 (3) (2001) 233–238.
[11] D.R. Stoppenhagen, J.O. Jirsa, L.A. Wyllie, Seismic repair and strengthening of a
severely damaged concrete frame, ACI Struct. J. 92 (2) (1995) 177–187.
[12] Core & Cut, <www.coreandcut.com>, 2011.
[13] The Constructor, <www.theconstructor.org>, 2015.
[14] B.J. Bett, R.E. Klingner, J.O. Jirsa, Lateral load response of strengthened and
repaired reinforced concrete columns, ACI Struct. J. 85 (5) (1988) 499–508.
[15] U. Ersoy, A.T. Tankut, R. Suleiman, Behavior of jacketed columns, ACI Struct. J.
90 (1993) 288–293.
[16] M. Rodriguez, R. Park, Seismic load tests on reinforced concrete columns
strengthened by jacketing, ACI Struct. J. 91 (2) (1994) 150–159.
[17] N.B.S. Eduardo, A.B. Fernando, D.S. Vitor, Reinforced concrete jacketing.
Interface influence on monotonic loading response, ACI Struct. J. 102 (2)
(2005) 252–257.
[18] S.Z. Yuce, E. Yuksel, Y. Bingol, K. Taskin, H.F. Karadogan, Local thin jacketing for
the retrofitting of reinforced concrete columns, Struct. Eng. Mech. 27 (5)
(2007) 589–607.
[19] Y. Xiao, H. Wu, Retrofit of reinforce concrete columns using partially stiffened
steel jackets, J. Struct. Eng. 129 (6) (2003) 725–732.
[20] A. Ghobarah, A. Biddah, M. Mahgoub, Seismic retrofit of reinforced concrete
columns using steel jackets, Eur. Earthquake Eng. 11 (1997) 21–31.
[21] A. Ghobarah, A. Biddah, M. Mahgoub, Rehabilitation of reinforced concrete
columns using corrugated steel jacketing, J. Earthquake Eng. 1 (4) (1997) 651–
673.
[22] Y.F. Wu, M.C. Griffith, D.J. Oehlers, Improving the strength and ductility of
rectangular reinforced concrete columns through composite partial
interaction: test, J. Struct. Eng. 129 (9) (2003) 1183–1190.
[23] L.D. Sarno, A.S. Elnashai, D.A. Nethercot, Seismic retrofitting of framed
structures with stainless steel, J. Constr. Steel Res. 62 (2006) 93–104.
[24] Building Research Institute (P) Ltd. <www.buildingresearch.com.np>, 2009.
[25] G.B. Batson, J.O. Castro, A.J. Guerra, M.E. Iorns, C.D. Johnston, A.E. Naaman, J.P.
Romualdi, S.P. Shah, R.F. Zollo, N. Swamy, B.L. Tilsen, Guide for the design,
construction, and repair of ferrocement, ACI Struct. J. 85 (3) (1988) 325–351.
[26] P. Paramasivam, K.C.G. Ong, C.T.E. Lim, Ferrocement laminates for
strengthening RC T-beams, Cem. Concr. Compos. 16 (2) (1994) 143–152.
[27] H.H. Nassif, H. Najm, Experimental and analytical investigation of
ferrocement–concrete composite beams, Cem. Concr. Compos. 26 (7) (2004)
787–796.
[28] K. Takiguchi, Abdullah, Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete columns
using ferrocement jacket, Struct. J. 98 (5) (2001) 696–704.
[29] P.R. Kumar, T. Oshima, S.H. Mikami, T. Yamazaki, Studies on RC and
ferrocement jacketed columns subjected to simulated seismic loading, Asian
J. Civ. Eng. (Build. Hous.) 8 (2) (2007) 215–225.
[30] P.P. Bansal, M. Kumar, S.K. Kaushik, Effect of wire mesh orientation on strength
of beams retrofitted using Ferrocement jackets, Int. J. Eng. 2 (1) (2008) 8–19.
[31] R.F. Makki, Response of reinforced concrete beams retrofitted by ferrocement,
Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 3 (2014) 27–34.
[32] Y. Xiao, H. Wu, Compressive behavior of concrete confined by carbon fiber
composite jackets, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 12 (2) (2000) 139–146.
[33] G. Wu, Z.T. Lü, Z.S. Wu, Strength and ductility of concrete cylinders confined
with FRP composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 20 (3) (2006) 134–148.
[34] M.F. Green, L.A. Bisby, A.Z. Fam, V.K. Kodur, FRP confined concrete columns:
behaviour under extreme conditions, Cem. Concr. Compos. 28 (10) (2006)
928–937.
 C.-K. Ma et al. / Construction and Building Materials 133 (2017) 502–515
[35] X. Liu, A. Nanni, P.F. Silva, Rehabilitation of compression steel members using
FRP pipes filled with non-expansive and expansive light-weight concrete, Adv.
Struct. Eng. 8 (2) (2005) 129–142.
[36] S.P. Tastani, S.J. Pantazopoulou, Experimental evaluation of FRP jackets in
upgrading RC corroded columns with substandard detailing, Eng. Struct. 26 (6)
(2004) 817–829.
[37] V. Valdmanis, L. De Lorenzis, T. Rousakis, R. Tepfers, Behaviour and capacity of
CFRP-confined concrete cylinders subjected to monotonic and cyclic axial
compressive load, Struct. Concr. 8 (4) (2007) 187.
[38] A. Mirmiran, M. Shahawy, M. Samaan, H.E. Echary, J.C. Mastrapa, O. Pico, Effect
of column parameters on FRP-confined concrete, J. Compos. Constr. 2 (4)
(1998) 175–185.
[39] Z. Yan, C.P. Pantelides, L.D. Reaveley, Posttensioned FRP composite shells for
concrete confinement, J. Compos. Constr. 11 (1) (2007) 81–90.
[40] ZweigWhite LLC, <www.cenews.com>, 2016.
[41] L. Janke, C. Czaderski, J. Ruth, M. Motavalli, Experiments on the residual load-
bearing capacity of prestressed confined concrete columns, Eng. Struct. 31 (10)
(2009) 2247–2256.
[42] T.C. Rousakis, I.S. Tourtouras, RC columns of square section – passive and
active confinement with composite ropes, Compos. B Eng. 58 (2014) 573–581.
[43] R. Dubey, P. Kumar, Experimental study of the effectiveness of retrofitting RC
cylindrical columns using self-compacting concrete jackets, Constr. Build.
Mater. 124 (2016) 104–117.
[44] G. Ruano, F. Isla, R.I. Pedraza, D. Sfer, B. Luccioni, Shear retrofitting of
reinforced concrete beams with steel fiber reinforced concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 54 (2014) 646–658.
[45] C.E. Chalioris, G.E. Thermou, S.J. Pantazopoulou, Behaviour of rehabilitated RC
beams with self-compacting concrete jacketing – analytical model and test
results, Constr. Build. Mater. 55 (2014) 257–273.
[46] A.S. Abdel-Hay, Y.A.G. Fawzy, Behavior of partially defected RC columns
strengthened using steel jackets, HBRC J. 11 (2) (2015) 194–200.
[47] S.M. Mourad, M.J. Shannag, Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete
square columns using ferrocement jackets, Cem. Concr. Compos. 34 (2) (2012)
288–294.
[48] B. Li, E.S.S. Lam, B. Wu, Y.Y. Wang, Experimental investigation on reinforced
concrete interior beam–column joints rehabilitated by ferrocement jackets,
Eng. Struct. 56 (2013) 897–909.
[49] M.H. Harajli, Cyclic response of concrete members with bond-damaged zones
repaired using concrete confinement, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (5) (2007) 937–
951.
[50] R. He, S. Grelle, L.H. Sneed, A. Belarbi, Rapid repair of a severely damaged RC
column having fractured bars using externally bonded CFRP, Compos. Struct.
101 (2013) 225–242.
[51] R. Contamine, A.S. Larbi, P. Hamelin, Identifying the contributing mechanisms
of textile reinforced concrete (TRC) in the case of shear repairing damaged and
reinforced concrete beams, Eng. Struct. 46 (2013) 447–458.
[52] L. Nguyen-Minh, M. Rovňák, Size effect in uncracked and pre-cracked
reinforced concrete beams shear-strengthened with composite jackets,
Compos. B Eng. 78 (2015) 361–376.
[53] S.F. Jiang, X. Zeng, S. Shen, X. Xu, Experimental studies on the seismic behavior
of earthquake-damaged circular bridge columns repaired by using
combination of near-surface-mounted BFRP bars with external BFRP sheets
jacketing, Eng. Struct. 106 (2016) 317–331.
[54] Y. Guo, J. Xie, Z. Xie, J. Zhong, Experimental study on compressive behavior of
damaged normal-and high-strength concrete confined with CFRP laminates,
Constr. Build. Mater. 107 (2016) 411–425.
[55] Z. Sun, D. Wang, X. Du, B. Si, Rapid repair of severely earthquake-damaged
bridge piers with flexural-shear failure mode, Earthquake Eng. Eng. Vibr. 10 (4)
(2011) 553–567.
[56] K. Fukuyama, Y. Higashibata, Y. Miyauchi, Studies on repair and strengthening
methods of damaged reinforced concrete columns, Cem. Concr. Compos. 22 (1)
(2000) 81–88.
[57] D. Lavorato, C. Nuti, Pseudo-dynamic tests on reinforced concrete bridges
repaired and retrofitted after seismic damage, Eng. Struct. 94 (2015) 96–112.
515
[58] M. Fakharifar, G. Chen, L. Sneed, A. Dalvand, Seismic performance of post-
mainshock FRP/steel repaired RC bridge columns subjected to aftershocks,
Compos. B Eng. 72 (2015) 183–198.
[59] F.E. Richart, A. Brandtzaeg, R.L. Brown, A Study of the Failure of Concrete under
Combined Compressive Stresses, vol. 26, University of Illinois Bulletin, 1928.
no. 12.
[60] T. Yu, J.G. Teng, Y.L. Wong, S.L. Dong, Finite element modeling of confined
concrete-I: Drucker-Prager type plasticity model, Eng. Struct. 32 (3) (2010)
665–679.
[61] J.F. Jiang, Y.F. Wu, Identification of material parameters for Drucker-Prager
plasticity model for FRP confined circular concrete columns, Int. J. Solids
Struct. 49 (3) (2012) 445–456.
[62] R. Park, T. Paulay, Reinforced Concrete Structures, John Wiley & Sons, 1975.
[63] M. Ahmed, J. Mallick, M.A. Hasan, A study of factors affecting the flexural
tensile strength of concrete, J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. (2014).
[64] A.K.H. Kwan, C.X. Dong, J.C.M. Ho, Axial and lateral stress–strain model for
circular concrete-filled steel tubes with external steel confinement, Eng.
Struct. 117 (2016) 528–541.
[65] V. Korsun, N. Vatin, A. Franchi, A. Korsun, P. Crespi, S. Mashtaler, The strength
and strain of high-strength concrete elements with confinement and steel
fiber reinforcement including the conditions of the effect of elevated
temperatures, Procedia Eng. 117 (2015) 975–984.
[66] K.J.H. Zhou, J.C.M. Ho, R.K.L. Su, Flexural strength and deformability design of
reinforced concrete beams, Procedia Eng. 14 (2011) 1399–1407.
[67] Y.S. Youcef, S. Amziane, M. Chemrouk, CFRP confinement effectiveness on the
behavior of reinforced concrete columns with respect to buckling instability,
Constr. Build. Mater. 81 (2015) 81–92.
[68] C. Quon, L. Cheng, Y. Li, W. Yu, Confinement of concrete with hybrid FRP
bistable structures, Cem. Concr. Compos. 37 (2013) 222–231.
[69] P. Colajanni, F. De Domenico, A. Recupero, N. Spinella, Concrete columns
confined with fibre reinforced cementitious mortars: experimentation and
modelling, Constr. Build. Mater. 52 (2014) 375–384.
[70] F.J.D.C. y Basalo, F. Matta, A. Nanni, Fiber reinforced cement-based composite
system for concrete confinement, Constr. Build. Mater. 32 (2012) 55–65.
[71] J. Chen, N. Chouw, Compressive behaviour of flax FRP double tube confined
coconut fibre reinforced concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 666–673.
[72] J.C.M. Ho, C.X. Dong, Improving strength, stiffness and ductility of CFDST
columns by external confinement, Thin-Wall. Struct. 75 (2014) 18–29.
[73] A. Mirmiran, M. Shahawy, T. Beitleman, Slenderness limit for hybrid FRP-
concrete columns, J. Compos. Constr. 5 (1) (2001) 26–34.
[74] W. Yuan, A. Mirmiran, Buckling analysis of concrete-filled FRP tubes, Int. J.
Struct. Stab. Dyn. 1 (03) (2001) 367–383.
[75] Z. Tao, J.G. Teng, L.H. Han, L. Lam, Experimental behaviour of FRP-confined
slender RC columns under eccentric loading, in: Proceeding, 2nd International
Conference on Advanced Polymer Composites for Structural Applications in
Construction, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK, 2004.
[76] J. Fitzwilliam, L.A. Bisby, Slenderness effects on circular CFRP confined
reinforced concrete columns, J. Compos. Constr. 14 (3) (2010) 280–288.
[77] M. Ranger, L.A. Bisby, Effects of load eccentricities on circular FRP-confined
reinforced concrete columns, in: Proceeding, 8th International Symposium on
Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-8),
University of Patras, Patras, Greece, 2007.
[78] T. Jiang, J.G. Teng, Slenderness limit for short FRP-confined circular RC
columns, J. Compos. Constr. 16 (6) (2012) 650–661.
[79] Y.W. Zhou, X.M. Liu, L.L. Sui, F. Xing, H.J. Zhou, Stress–strain model for fibre
reinforced polymer confined load-induced damaged concrete, Mater. Res.
Innov. 19 (sup6) (2015) S6–S125.
[80] A. Ilki, N. Kumbasar, Behavior of damaged and undamaged concrete
strengthened by carbon fiber composite sheets, Struct. Eng. Mech. 13 (1)
(2002) 75–90.
[81] B. Rabehi, Y. Ghernouti, A. Li, K. Boumchedda, Comparative behavior under
compression of concrete columns repaired by fiber reinforced polymer (FRP)
jacketing and ultra high-performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), J.
Adhes. Sci. Technol. 28 (22–23) (2014) 2327–2346.