Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

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

Behavior of FRP-confined FRP spiral reinforced concrete square columns

(FCFRCs) under axial compression
Jie-Kai Zhou a, Wen-Kai Lin a, Shao-Xiong Guo a, Jun-Jie Zeng a, b, *, Yu-Lei Bai c, **
a
School of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510006, China
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Macau, China
c
Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering of Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) confinement has been demonstrated to be efficient in enhancing the deformation
Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) bars and strength capacities of concrete, while Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) FRP-confined concrete easily exhibits
FRP spiral a strain-softening stress-strain behavior, especially for PET FRP-confined concrete in square columns. In this
Glass FRP (GFRP)
study, novel PET FRP-confined FRP spiral reinforced concrete square columns (FCFRSCs) are proposed. Capi­
Confinement
Axial load-strain behavior
talizing the benefits of internal FRP spiral reinforcement, the strain-softening behavior of PET FRP-confined
Reinforced concrete columns concrete is expected to be alleviated, leading to excellent mechanical performance of the proposed square col­
umns. The axial compressive behavior of FCFRSCs, as well as square concrete-filled PET FRP tube columns
(CFFTs) and FRP reinforced concrete columns (FRCs) as reference columns, were investigated via experimen­
tation. The experimental results show that the strain softening behavior of confined concrete in FCFRSCs has
been substantially enhanced with the internal FRP reinforcement, confirming the viability of the system. The
strain softening behavior of FRP-confined concrete after the first peak is prevented and a hardening behavior is
achieved for concrete in FCFRSCs, especially when the GFRP spiral pitch is 30 mm.

1. Introduction concrete may be enhanced much more considerably [28–38] by

Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites have been far and wide
used as confining device in forms of wraps or tubes for strengthening
existing structures [1–12] or constructing new structures [13–18].
Capitalizing FRP confinement, the load carrying and deformation ca­
pacities of concrete are enhanced considerably [4–7]. For FRP com­
posites to be used as confining device, they usually fail due to FRP
rupture resulted from concrete dilation under compression. Therefore,
the FRP material properties under tension are predominant to
FRP-confined concrete. Recently, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) FRP
composites, which have a number of advantages such as large tensile
rupture strain (LRS), have been developed and used in civil engineering
applications [19–27]. PET FRP composites made from PET fibers, which
can be originated from recycled products and are recyclable at the end of
their service life. PET FRP composites are thus believed to be a type of
environmental friendly product. As PET FRP composites have a much
larger tensile rupture strain than those of conventional FRPs such as
glass FRP (GFRP) and carbon FRP (CFRP), the deformation capacity of
confinement from PET FRP.
FRP tubes have been widely used in various forms of hybrid columns
[39–42]. A particular design in usage of FRP tubes is implementing FRP
tubes as the external skin of hybrid columns so that they provide some
confinement to internal components and protects the internal compo­
nents from being damaged by corrosive substances. PET FRP tubes have
also been adopted in various forms of hybrid columns [24,25,28,29] and
the fundamental studies have been carried on concrete confined with
PET FRP [19–21,30–38] and concrete confined with both steel and PET
FRP [24,25]. Studies on PET FRP-confined concrete have found that
although the ultimate axial stress and ultimate axial strain of concrete
can be enhanced substantially by PET FRP wraps/tubes [34–36], the
small elastic modulus of PET FRP may lead to a stress-strain behavior of
concrete with a descending portion upon an axial strain corresponds to
the ultimate axial stress of the unconfined concrete, especially for con­
crete in square/rectangular columns [34,35]. Although this stress
deduction due to the confinement lag effect [35] can be compensated
when substantial dilation has been developed in concrete, the stress

* Corresponding author. School of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510006, China.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jjzeng@gdut.edu.cn (J.-J. Zeng), baiyulei@bjut.edu.cn (Y.-L. Bai).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103452
Received 30 June 2021; Received in revised form 15 September 2021; Accepted 10 October 2021
Available online 11 October 2021
2352-7102/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

degradation is generally unwarrantable in real applications. Therefore,

the concern that the low elastic modulus of PET FRP and associated
consequences should be properly solved before PET FRP tubes can be
widely used.
On the other hand, great demand of construction in developing
countries requires extensive consumption of raw materials for concrete,
subsequently resulting in shortage of river sand and fresh water.
Recently, some researchers have proposed using seawater and sea-sand
directly for concrete production in coastal and offshore areas [43–47].
Exemption of treatment to reduce the chloride ion content in seawater
and sea-sand, FRP reinforcement instead of steel reinforcement is an
ideal option in seawater sea-sand structures due to its excellent dura­
bility. FRP-seawater sea-sand (SCC) structures have thus been proposed
and a number of subsequent studies have been conducted [43]. Zeng
et al. [37] have found that sea-sand have negligible effect on mechanical
behavior of unconfined and FRP-confined concrete. A new dilation
model for PET FRP-confined SSC has also been proposed by Zeng et al.
[37]. Behavior of FRP-confined SSC in square columns has also been
investigated by Zeng et al. [36], and that the stress-strain behavior of
SSC in square columns exhibit a post-peak softening segment because of
relatively weak confinement provided by the PET FRP tube is well
documented. Han et al. [34] conducted an experimental study on
compressive behavior of PET FRP-confined concrete in square and cir­
cular columns. They found that confined concrete wrapped with PET
FRP exhibits a stress–strain behavior with three segments, while existing
models are conservative in predicting the strength of confined concrete
in square concrete-filled PET FRP tubes. Although the material proper­
ties of SSC and basic mechanism on FRP-confined SSC have been un­
derstood, new form of structural members which are easily constructed
and corrosion-resistant should be proposed for FRP-SSC structures to be
used in applications. In fact, RC structures with FRP reinforcement (i.e.,
FRP bars, FRP spirals) are suitable to be used with SSC [48–53]. The FRP
spiral has been demonstrated to be effective in enhancing the strength
and deformation capacity of concrete columns. Therefore, it is expected
that the stress degradation after the initial peak load of concrete-filled
PET FRP tube columns could be alleviated by internal FRP spiral
reinforcement.
To this end, this paper proposes novel FRP-confined FRP reinforced
concrete square columns (FCFRSCs) consisting of an external square Fig. 1. Three-dimensional diagram of FCFRSCs.
reinforcing PET FRP tube and FRP spiral-reinforced concrete (Fig. 1). In
FCFRSCs, an GFRP reinforcing cage with an FRP spiral and four longi­ 2. Experimental program
tudinal reinforcing bars is implemented in the square PET FRP tube. In
FCFRSCs, the confinement from the internal FRP spiral alleviates the 2.1. Specimen preparation
strain softening behavior of PET FRP-confined concrete and the internal
FRP reinforcing cage provides additional strength to resist combined A total of twenty-two square columns were fabricated and tested in
axial compressive loading and bending moments. The behavior of FRP the laboratory in order to investigate the axial compressive behavior of
spiral-confined concrete and PET FRP-confined concrete in isolation FCFRSCs (Fig. 2). The following experimental variables: (i) the pitch of
have been studied to some extent. Only Ahmad et al. [16] have reported the GFRP spiral, and (ii) the thickness of the PET FRP tube, were
studies on FRP reinforced concrete filled FRP tube circular columns, considered in this study. The columns had a cross section width of 200
while the study conducted by Ahmad et al. [16] is mainly on geopolymer mm and a height of 400 mm. Three pitches of the GFRP spiral were
concrete and conventional FRP tubes. Note that concrete columns designed, namely 30 mm, 60 mm and 90 mm, and specimens without
internally reinforced with longitudinal FRP bars and an FRP spiral can FRP spiral (concrete-filled PET FRP tube specimens) were also included
be termed as FRP-RC columns. Existing studies have revealed that FRP for comparison. The diameter of the straight FRP bars and FRP spirals
spiral substantially enhances the strength and deformation capacity of was 10 mm. The outer diameter of the FRP spiral was 190 mm. Only six
concrete and the FRP longitudinal reinforcement has only slight influ­ longitudinal reinforcing FRP bars with a diameter of 10 mm were
ence on compressive behavior of FRP-RC columns under compression. designed for the specimens, leading a longitudinal reinforcement ratio of
Also, behavior and confinement mechanism of PET FRP-confined con­ 1.18%. Although it is generally believed that the contribution of FRP
crete are well documented. However, no research has been conducted on bars in column load carrying capacity can be neglected, longitudinal
behavior of FCFRSCs under compression. Against this background, an FRP reinforcement may still has some small effects on axial compressive
experimental program consisting of 22 columnar specimens was behavior of concrete columns. This small longitudinal reinforcement
designed and carried out to understand the axial compressive behavior ratio (slightly larger than the minimum value specified in the specifi­
of FCFRSCs. The test parameters investigated in this study included the cation ACI 440-3R 2019 [54] (1.0%–8.0%)) used for FCFRSCs would be
thickness of the PET FRP tube and the pitch of the GFRP spiral. The effect beneficial to eliminate the effect of the longitudinal FRP bars on effect of
of combined FRP spiral and FRP tube confinement to concrete was confinement on concrete confined with combined FRP spiral and FRP
carefully studied and discussed. tube. Because the main issue of the present study is the behavior and
mechanism of concrete under combined FRP spiral and FRP tube

2
J.-K. Zhou et al.
Fig. 2. Specimens tested in this study.
confinement. The GFRP reinforcing cages were prepared in the labora­
tory and steel wires were used to fix the FRP spiral with the FRP lon­
gitudinal reinforcing bars (Fig. 3a).
Two pairs of concrete-filled PET FRP tube specimens (CFFTs)
(Fig. 2b) were also prepared and tested for comparison in this study. The
PET FRP tube thicknesses adopted in this study were 0, 0.841 mm and
1.682 mm, and PET FRP tubes with thicknesses of 0.841 mm and 1.682
mm are one-layer and two-layer PET FRP tubes respectively. The spec­
imens with a PET FRP tube thickness of 0 are GFRP spiral reinforced
concrete columns (SRCs) (Fig. 2c). All the PET FRP tubes (or the column)
had a cross-section with a width of 200 mm (inner width of the tube)
which based on the inner spacing.
The PET FRP tubes were prepared in the laboratory with an over­
lapping length of 200 mm using the method reported in Ref. [35]
(Fig. 3b). This also comforts the Chinese code for civil engineering ap­
plications of FRP composites (GB 50608 [55]). A 20-mm-wide PET FRP
strip was applied to each FRP tube end to avoid FRP premature local
failure. The well prepared GFRP reinforcing cage was fix on a bottom
wooden plate which had six holes with a diameter of 10 mm for posi­
tioning the longitudinal FRP bars. The PET FRP tube was fix on the
wooden plate outside the GFRP reinforcing cage before concrete casting,
and the PET FRP tube serves as permeant formwork for FCFRSCs
Fig. 3. Fabrication of specimens.
3
Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452
(Fig. 3c). The least space between the FRP spiral and the PET FRP tube
was 5 mm, and this distance was ensured owning to well-designed holes
of the bottom plate. Apart from the FCFRSC specimens, a pair of un­
confined concrete (i.e. plain concrete, PCs) square columns with iden­
tical dimensions with the test specimens (Fig. 2d) was also prepared.
Regarding to SRC and PC specimens, one-layer PET FRP tubes were
prepared and utilized as formworks, and the tubes were cut and removed
three days after concrete casting. Three standard concrete cylinders
were also prepared. All the specimens were casted by commercial con­
crete and then cured in wet condition in the laboratory for 28 days.
In the label system of FCFRSC specimens (Table 1) the letter “P”
represents “PET FRP” and the subsequent number represents the number
of layers (i.e., 1 and 2). The letter “S” represents the “Spiral” and the
followed number represents the pitch of the GFRP spiral. The duplicated
specimens are differentiated by the last number (i.e., 1 or 2). For
example, “P2–S30-1” refers to the first FCFRSC specimen with a two-
layer of PET FRP tube and an GFRP spiral pitch of 30 mm. The SRCs,
CFFTs (PET FRP-confined concrete columns) and PCs are given names
that start with “S”, “P” and “S” respectively.
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

Table 1
Details of specimens.
Name FRP Number of FRP Corner radius Diameter of the GFRP spirals Spiral pitch Diameter of the longitudinal bars Number of GFRP
type layer (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) bars

P1-1 PET 1 30 10 N.A. N.A. N.A.

P1-2 FRP 1 30 10 N.A. N.A. N.A.
P2-1 2 30 10 N.A. N.A. N.A.
P2-2 2 30 10 N.A. N.A. N.A.
P1–S30- 1 30 10 30 10 6
1
P1–S30- 1 30 10 30 10 6
2
P1–S60- 1 30 10 60 10 6
1
P1–S60- 1 30 10 60 10 6
2
P1–S90- 1 30 10 90 10 6
1
P1–S90- 1 30 10 90 10 6
2
P2–S30- 2 30 10 30 10 6
1
P2–S30- 2 30 10 30 10 6
2
P2–S60- 2 30 10 60 10 6
1
P2–S60- 2 30 10 60 10 6
2
P2–S90- 2 30 10 90 10 6
1
P2–S90- 0 30 10 90 10 6
2
S30-1 N.A. 0 30 10 30 10 6
S30-2 0 30 10 30 10 6
S60-1 0 30 10 60 10 6
S60-2 0 30 10 60 10 6
S90-1 0 30 10 90 10 6
S90-2 0 30 10 90 10 6
S-1 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
S-2 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

2.2. Material properties 2.3. Instrumentations and compression tests

Commercial concrete, which had a satisfactory working capability Instrumentations, including linear variable displacement transducers
with a slump of 228 mm based on ASTM C469 [56], was used for (LVDTs) for displacements and strain gauges (SGs) for strains, were
specimen fabrication. The unconfined concrete material properties, as employed to measure deformation of FCFRSCs. Fig. 4 shows the lay-out
per ASTM C469 [56], are provided in Table 2. The GFRP bars and spiral of LVDTs and SGs for CFFTs (Fig. 4a), SRC and PC specimens (Fig. 4b).
were provided by Nanjing Fenghui Composite Mateiral Co., Ltd. The The age of the specimens when they were tested was 6 months. The
10-mm-diameter GFRP straight bars from the same batch as the GFRP column compression test set-up is shown in Fig. 5, while test data were
spiral had tensile strength of 980.0 MPa and a tensile modulus of elas­ recorded in a computer automatically with a rate of 1Hz. A loading rate
ticity of 45.3 GPa based on material tests as per CSA S806-12 [58]. of 0.30 mm/min was adopted for all the columns. The recordings of all
ASTM D3039 [57] was adopted to conduct tensile tests of flat PET the FRP-confined specimens were ended when PET FRP rapture
FRP sheets which had a nominal layer thickness of 0.841 mm. This study occurred, while the recordings of other specimens were ended until their
found that, as has been reported by other researchers [19], a bilinear axial stress was below 50% of the peak stress. More details of
stress-strain behavior of PET FRP sheet can be observed. The average compression testing of columns can be found elsewhere [35].
values of elastic modulus for the first and second linear portions (i.e. E1 ,
E2 ), the ultimate tensile stress and the tensile rupture strain were 22.0 3. Results and discussions
GPa, 9.2 GPa, 971.1 MPa and 9.77%, respectively. Note that the elastic
modulus for the first linear portion is based on the stress-strain curve in 3.1. Failure mode
the axial strain range of 0.002–0.004, and elastic modulus for the second
linear portion is based on the stress-strain curve in the axial strain range The failure mode of PC and CFFT specimens have been well reported
of 0.01 to the ultimate strain. in previous studies. Only typical FRP rupture failure of concrete-filled
PET FRP-confined concrete column is given in Fig. 6a, showing failure
Table 2 region near the mid-height, concurring well with existing findings [15,
Material properties of concrete. 37]. The failure mode of CFFT specimens is independent to the PET FRP
Specimen fco
,
(MPa) Ec (GPa) εco (%) Poisson’s ratio
tube thickness. SRC specimens failed by GFRP spiral rupture failure,
while a number of cracking in concrete can be seen before the GFRP
Cylinder 1 39.42 23.10 0.33 0.19 spiral rupture. The rupture failure of the GFRP spiral led to concrete
Cylinder 2 38.45 22.64 0.30 0.21
crushing failure and concrete cover spalling failure (Fig. 6f–h). FCFRSC
Cylinder 3 39.52 23.52 0.31 0.20
Average 39.13 23.09 0.31 0.20 specimens experienced GFRP spiral failure prior to final failure of PET
Coefficient of variation 0.015 0.019 0.049 0.05 FRP tube, accompanying with substantial decrease in axial load. The

4
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

FCFRSC specimens failed by PET FRP tube rupture failure at the end
(Fig. 6b–e) with a considerable axial strain.

3.2. Average stress-strain responses

The average axial stresses of the column cross section are adopted
when drawing the stress-strain curves. The contribution of FRP longi­
tudinal reinforcement is neglected because the existing design guideline
neglects the compressive resistance and stiffness of FRP bars in the
compression zone in evaluating the load carrying capacity of the
member (CAN/CSA S806 [58]). As the compressive behavior of FRP bars
is much inferior to the tensile behavior of FRP bars, this neglection of
longitudinal contribution of FRP bars may lead to little influence in
interpreting the test resutls. The axial strains are based on mid-height
LVDTs at the initial loading stage (when average axial stress in col­
umns is below the unconfined concrete strength), while the axial strains
at the subsequent loading stage are based on full-height LVDTs. For
specimens incorporating an FRP tube, the hoop strains are from average
readings of the SGs mounted at mid-height of the centers of the four
sides. In case that the SGs were damaged during the loading test, the
hoop strains were achieved based on the linear extrapolation of axial
strain-hoop strain curves as per the tangent slope at the point upon SG
failure.
The stress-strain responses of specimens are shown in Figs. 7–9. The
two curves of each pair of specimens may deviate from each other at the
final loading stage (Figs. 7–9) due to different localized failure modes of
this pair of specimens. The axial stress-strain responses of SRC speci­
mens are shown in Fig. 7, exhibiting that the SRC specimens generally
exhibit a two-segment stress-strain behavior. For FCFRSCs with a GFRP
spiral pitch of 60 mm or 90 mm (weaker than that of the column with a
pitch of 30 mm), the stress-strain responses of SRCs exhibit a first linear
segment, followed by a strain-softening segment. For specimens with an
FRP spiral pitch of 30 mm, the second segment exhibits a slight strain-
hardening behavior with a slope of the second segment being positive.
Note that the confinement ratio for GFRP spiral-confined concrete in
circular columns can be evaluated using fl = 2Asp fsp /sdc where Asp and
′

Fig. 4. Locations of SGs and LVDTs for test specimens.
Fig. 5. Test set-up and instrumentation.
fsp are the cross sectional area and strength of GFRP spiral respectively, s
is the pitch of the FRP spiral and dc is the effective diameter of the
column. Fig. 7 shows that a larger FRP confinement stiffness (a decrease
in FRP spiral pitch) leads to a larger slope of the second segment of the
stress-strain curve and a better column ductility. It is also found that the
incorporation of longitudinal FRP reinforcement does not lead to an
increase in axial load capacity, but a decrease in axial load capacity
(except for specimen S30-2 which had a strong confinement). This
concurs with the specifications in existing design guidelines that the FRP
bars are not recommended to be used as compressive reinforcement (e.
g., ACI 440) [59] or the compressive resistance and stiffness of FRP bars
in the compression zone in evaluating the load carrying capacity of the
member are neglected (e.g., CAN/CSA S806 [58]).
The axial stress versus axial strain responses of FCFRSC and CFFT
specimens are shown in Fig. 8. In each subfigure of Fig. 8, the PET FRP
tube thicknesses are identical, allowing direct comparisons between
specimens with different FRP spiral pitches. It can be seen from Fig. 8
that the CFFT specimens exhibit a three-segment stress-strain behavior:
(i) a first linear (ascending) segment, (ii) a strain softening (rapid
descending segment), and (iii) a third post-peak strain hardening
(ascending) segment. This stress-strain behavior of PET FRP-confined
concrete in square columns is similar with the finding reported in
Ref. [35] for concrete in circular columns wrapped with PET FRP. The
slope of the strain softening segment decreases with (i.e. the strain
softening segment is deeper) the PET FRP tube thickness (see Fig. 9) as a
result of a decreased actual confinement ratio fl,a /fco (where fl,a =
′ ′ ′

2Ef tf εh,rup /D is the actual confining stress at FRP rupture and D is the
equivalent diameter of the square PET FRP tube). This considerable
decrease in axial stress is generally unacceptable in applications, thus it

5
J.-K. Zhou et al.
Fig. 6. Typical failure modes of specimens.
is believed that additional confinement is necessary for CFFT columns to
be used as a strong structural member. The average stress-strain curve
for concrete in FCFRSCs will be discussed in detail in the next section.
3.3. Typical average stress-strain curve for concrete in FCFRSCs
Different to the stress-strain behavior of CFFT specimens which
generally exhibit a three-segment stress-strain behavior, FCFRSC spec­
imens exhibit a four-segment stress-strain behavior. The difference be­
tween concrete in FCFRSCs and that in CFFTs lies in that an additional
transition segment with various slopes can be seen between the first
ascending segment and the second descending segment for concrete in
FCFRSCs. This is owning to combined confinement from both the GRRP
spiral and PET FRP tube. A typical curve of average axial stress-strain
response of concrete in FCFRSCs is shown in Fig. 10. The transition
segment is quite nonlinear, and the overall slope (i.e., the slope of the
straight line linking the onset and terminated points of the second
6
Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452
segment) and the length of this segment are determined by the amount
of the GFRP spiral. The nonlinear second transition segment begins at an
axial strain of around 0.004, and terminates at an axial strain between
0.006 and 0.02 when the GFRP spiral experienced rupture failure. The
terminate point is earlier as the pitch of FRP spiral become larger. The
average axial stress-strain curve exhibits a sudden decrease due to the
rupture of the GFRP spiral, followed by the fourth segment. In the fourth
segment, the confinement from the PET FRP tube plays a significant role
in maintaining the integrity of the column. The fourth segment is either
an approximately horizontal linear or an ascending linear segment,
depending on the confinement stiffness of the PET FRP tube, which is
intact in this segment before the final rupture failure.
Typical average stress-strain curves of confined concrete in FCFRSCs
are shown in Fig. 10. The curves exhibit a four-segment behavior with
the commence and termination points of each segment being the four
characteristic points: i) the first peak stress point (the first peak stress
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

Fig. 7. Stress-strain curves of confined concrete in SRCs.

(fc1 ) and the corresponding axial strain εc1 ); ii) The spiral rupture point
′

(coordinate: (εc2 , fc2 )); iii) the stress valley point (coordinate: (εc3 , fc3 ));
′ ′

and iv) the final stress point (εcf , fcf ) upon PET FRP rupture. The test
′

results show that the second segment is nonlinear, while the third and
fourth segments are approximately linear. Governed by the overall slope
of the second segment, two types of stress-strain curves of concrete in
FCFRSCs (i.e. Type I and Type II) could be observed, as shown in Fig. 10.
The difference between the two types of stress-strain curves lies in that
the second segment has either an overall positive slope or an overall
negative slope. In summary, the concrete in FCFRSCs has two categories
of stress-strain responses (Fig. 11): (i) the second transition segment has
an overall positive secant slope (Type I); (ii) the second transition
segment has an overall negative secant slope (Type II).
Table 3 contains key experimental data. The FRP hoop rupture
strains (εh,rup ) are the average value of four stain gauges at the center of
the column faces. Those strain gauges were also not located in the
overlapping zone for FCFRSCs. It is found that the FRP hoop rupture
strain increases with GFRP spiral pitch. Although it is well documented
that the hoop rupture strain of FRP-confined concrete with conventional
FRP is generally considerably smaller than material rupture stain that is
based on coupon tests [60–63], the average hoop rupture strain of PET
Fig. 8. Stress-strain curves of confined concrete in FCFRSCs.
FRP is generally larger than the corresponding FRP tensile rupture
strain, as can be seen in Table 3. Saleem et al. [26] also reported that the
FRP strain efficiency ratio could be higher for PET FRP than the con­ of FCFRSC specimens. This suggests that the inclusion of longitudinal
ventional FRP wraps. The increase in PET FRP strain efficiency (even FRP reinforcement has no contribution in enhancing the axial load
larger than one) for FCFRSC specimens may be due to the following carrying capacity of the FCFRSC columns, while it should not be the case
reasons: i) the confinement from the inner GFRP spiral alleviates the when the columns are subjected to bending moment. Fig. 11 also shows
concrete localized failure that may lead to premature failure of FRP that the transition segment for specimens with a GFRP spiral pitch of 30
wraps; ii) the hoop strains at the external surface of the PET FRP square mm is long and has an overall positive slope, while the transition
tube are larger than those at the inner surface due to existing bending segment for specimens with a GFRP spiral pitch of 90 mm is short and
deformation of PET FRP tube initiated from concrete dilation; iii) the has an overall negative slope. This implies the additional confinement
hoop rupture strains are based on the linear extrapolation of the test from the GFRP spiral prevents the strain softening of confined concrete
results, which may not be true values of the hoop rupture strain of PET in FCFRSCs when the average axial stress is approaching the ultimate
FRP wraps. axial stress of unconfined concrete, demonstrating the efficiency of in­
clusion of a GFRP reinforcing cage in concrete-filled PET FRP tubes. The
3.4. Effect of GFRP spiral pitch and PET FRP tube thickness confinement from the GFRP spiral is favorable for FCFRSCs because both
the column ductility and strength are enhanced provided that proper
Fig. 11 shows the axial stress-strain curves of FCFRSCs with the axial amount of GFRP spiral is included in the column. This also solves the
strains being in a range between 0 and 0.05 with an aim to identify more problem that CFFT columns with PET FRP tube generally exhibit a
details of the curves. The first peak stress for CFFT specimens (on-set of strain-softening behavior after the first peak point.
concrete substantial dilation and FRP tube confinement) is slightly Previous research [35] has found that the PET FRP tube axial loading
larger than the stress at the beginning of the second transition segment capacity can be estimated by a bi-linear curve while the axial stresses of

7
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

Fig. 10. Typical stress-strain curve of confined concrete in FCFRSCs.

Fig. 11. Detailed stress-strain curves of confined concrete in FCFRSCs.

Fig. 9. The influence of PET FRP tube thickness on the stress-strain curves of
confined concrete in FCFRSCs.

8
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

Table 3
Key test results.
Specimen fc1 (MPa)
′
εc1 fc2 (MPa)
′
εc2 fc3 (MPa)
′
εc3 fcf (MPa)
′
εcf εh,rup εh,rup (Average)

P1-1 46.92 0.0037 N.A. N.A. 23.36 0.0140 25.78 0.0958 0.270 0.254
P1-2 47.50 0.0028 N.A. N.A. 26.48 0.0130 26.99 0.0914 0.237
P2-1 44.91 0.0051 N.A. N.A. 26.28 0.0174 43.60 0.1222 0.164 0.143
P2-2 43.70 0.0052 N.A. N.A. 26.78 0.0203 39.17 0.1033 0.123
P1–S30-1 44.61 0.0046 55.99 0.0170 35.14 0.0378 35.14 0.0593 0.080 0.095
P1–S30-2 43.20 0.0044 52.56 0.0131 34.94 0.0343 34.14 0.0864 0.110
P1–S60-1 42.90 0.0041 39.67 0.0161 27.19 0.0296 26.89 0.0784 0.111 0.107
P1–S60-2 41.79 0.0036 43.30 0.0113 29.81 0.0250 26.58 0.0824 0.102
P1–S90-1 39.07 0.0033 46.12 0.0069 23.86 0.0375 27.39 0.0686 0.116 0.118
P1–S90-2 38.06 0.0030 45.21 0.0071 23.97 0.0325 27.99 0.0802 0.120
P2–S30-1 43.30 0.0038 61.93 0.0195 41.38 0.0388 37.96 0.0858 0.076 0.085
P2–S30-2 44.25 0.0039 61.02 0.0163 41.68 0.0337 46.32 0.0951 0.095
P2–S60-1 41.18 0.0038 48.84 0.0121 33.63 0.0320 39.98 0.0954 0.103 0.100
P2–S60-2 41.26 0.0038 50.65 0.0121 34.84 0.0399 42.89 0.0838 0.096
P2–S90-1 40.78 0.0038 44.41 0.0116 32.73 0.0327 43.80 0.0968 0.133 0.143
P2–S90-2 40.99 0.0033 47.33 0.0085 32.52 0.0258 43.40 0.1089 0.153

Note: N.A. —— Not applicable; fc1 , εc1 , fc2 , εc2 , fc3 , εc3 , fcf , εcf —— Refer to Fig. 10 for definitions; εh,rup —— PET FRP tube hoop rupture strain based on linear
′ ′ ′ ′

extrapolation.

confined concrete in FCFRSC (neglecting the contribution of FRP lon­
gitudinal reinforcement) only slightly deviate from those of confined
concrete with the longitudinal contribution being accounted for due to
the low modulus of PET FRP in compression. Each subfigure in Fig. 9
shows specimens with different PET FRP tube thicknesses. A brittle
stress-strain behavior is seen for SRC specimens due to failure of con­
crete cover and insufficient confinement. As a thicker FRP tube provides
a stronger confinement, an increase in PET FRP tube thickness leads to
an increase in the overall slope of the second segment (see Fig. 11) and
the slope of the fourth segment. Additionally, the post-peak stress
degradation of the specimen decreases with the increasing of PET FRP
tube thickness.
3.5. Dilation behavior
Fig. 12 shows the dilation behavior of the columns. It has been
demonstrated that the hoop strains based on the LVDTs and SGs are
close to each other upon early test stage. The difference between dilation
behaviors of CFFTs and FCFRSCs is small (Fig. 12) in early loading stage
in that the lateral expansion of concrete was small. The hoop strain in­
crease rate became faster and faster with respect to the increasing axial
strains, as has also been reported in literature (e.g. Refs. [26,35]). Also,
inclusion of GFRP spiral decrease the hoop strain at a given axial strain.
A decrease in GFRP spiral pitch leads to a decrease in dilation of concrete
in FCFRSCs.
Fig. 12 shows that the dilation curves that have a first parabolic
segment, subsequently followed by a second linear segment, whilst the
first parabolic segment of the curves for FCFRSCs is relatively short
compared with their second segment. It is interesting to find that the
second segment of the dilation curves is approximately linear for
FCFRSCs, while the second segment of the curves has some nonlinearity
for SRC specimens. This implies that the confinement mechanism for
confined concrete in FCFRSCs may be slightly different from that of
confined concrete in SRCs because the confinement from the FRP spiral
is more nonuniform than that from the square FRP tube in the longitu­
dinal direction. This linear behavior of axial strain-hoop strain curves for
FCFRSCs also implies that the confinement from the GFRP spiral and
that from the PET FRP tube can be summed up when estimating the
confinement to the confined concrete core.
3.6. Hoop strain distribution
Fig. 13 shows the hoop strain distributions for FCFRSCs and SRCs.
The locations of the hoop strains are determined based on locations of
SGs, as shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 13 shows that the hoop strains were
nonuniformly distributed along the periphery of the specimens. The
non-uniformity for FCFRSCs was more obvious than that for SRCs. This
is because the hoop strains in SRCs were based on SGs mounted on the
GFRP spiral, while those in FCFRSCs were based on SGs mounted on the
PET FRP square tubes. It is also found that the hoop strain of FRP at the
center of each column face is generally larger than that at the corner-side
transition point. The hoop strain non-uniformity observed in the tests
concurs well with previous studies on FRP-confined non-circular col­
umns [63]. For FCFRSC specimens, the hoop strains at the center of the
sides close to the end of the overlapping zone (SG 5 and SG8) are
generally larger than those at the other locations.
4. Conclusions
Axial compressive behavior of PET FRP-confined FRP spiral rein­
forced concrete square columns (FCFRSCs) has been investigated via
experimentation. Upon experimental results, the following conclusions
can be drawn:
(1) FCFRSC specimens experienced GFRP spiral failure prior to final
failure of PET FRP tube, accompanying with a substantial
decrease in axial load. The FCFRSC specimens failed finally by
PET FRP tube rupture failure with a considerable axial strain.
(2) The concrete in FCFRSCs features elastic-strain hardening-soft­
ening-hardening four-segment behavior.
(3) The usage of GFRP spiral alleviates the strain soften behavior
(failure) after the first peak for concrete-filled PET FRP tube
columns, and subsequently could significantly enhance the per­
formance (both ductility and strength) of the confined concrete in
FCFRSCs at the second segment, leading to an excellent column
performance.
(4) Longitudinal FRP reinforcement has no contribution in
enhancing the axial load carrying capacity of the FCFRSC col­
umns, while it should not be the case when the columns are
subjected to combined axial compression and bending moment.
The specimens with a stronger GFRP spiral (a GFRP spiral pitch of
30 mm) have a longer second stress-strain segment with an
overall positive slope, while specimens with a weaker GFRP spiral
(a GFRP spiral pitch of 90 mm) have a shorter second stress-strain
segment with an overall negative slope. The additional confine­
ment from the GFRP spiral prevents the strain softening when the
average axial stress is approaching the ultimate axial stress of
unconfined concrete, demonstrating the efficiency of a GFRP
reinforcing cage in enhancing the performance of concrete-filled
PET FRP tubes.

9
J.-K. Zhou et al. Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452

Fig. 12. Axial strain-hoop strain curves. Fig. 13. Hoop strain distributions around periphery before SG damage.

10
J.-K. Zhou et al.
(5) The axial strain-hoop strain curves of concrete in FCFRSCs have a
parabolic first segment followed by a linear second segment,
while the second segment of the curve has some nonlinearity for
SRC specimens.
Accuracy of the existing theoretical models for confined concrete in
FCFRSCs needs to be exanimated. Also, the FCFRSCs can be extended to
be used as a column segment at the beam-column joints so as to enhance
the strength and ductility of FRP bar-reinforced beam-column joints.
Author statement
Authors’ individual contributions are listed below:
Jie-Kai Zhou: Investigation, Methodology, Data curation, Writing –
original draft;
Wen-Kai Lin: Investigation, Methodology;
Shao-Xiong Guo: Investigation
Jun-Jie Zeng: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision,
Writing – review & editing;
Yu-Lei Bai: Supervision, Methodology; Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Nos. 51908137 and 52008116), the Guangzhou Science and
Technology Department (No. 201904010163), the Natural Science
Foundation of Guangdong Province (Nos. 2019A1515011637 and
2021B1515020029).
References
[1] M.H. Lai, W.Y. Liang, Q. Wang, F.M. Ren, M.T. Chen, J.C.M. Ho, A stress-path
dependent stress-strain model for FRP-confined concrete, Eng. Struct. 203 (2020),
109824.
[2] Y.W. Zhou, Y.W. Zhang, L.L. Sui, F. Xing, J.J. Hu, P.D. Li, Behavior and modeling of
FRP-confined ultra-lightweight cement composites under monotonic axial
compression, Compos. B Eng. 162 (2019) 289–302.
[3] D.H. Lee, S.J. Han, K.S. Kim, J.M. LaFave, Shear strength of reinforced concrete
beams strengthened in shear using externally-bonded FRP composites, Compos.
Struct. 173 (2017) 177–187.
[4] C. Jiang, Q.Q. Yu, X.L. Gu, A unified bond-slip model for the interface between FRP
and steel, Compos. B Eng. (2021), 109380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compo
sitesb.2021.109380.
[5] A.H.M. Algburi, M.N. Sheikh, M.N. S Hadi, Analytical investigation on the behavior
of circular and square RC columns strengthened with RPC and wrapped with FRP
under uniaxial compression, J. Build. Eng. 25 (2019) 100833.
[6] Y.R. Zhang, Y. Wei, J.W. Bai, G. Wu, Z.Q. Dong, A novel seawater and sea sand
concrete filled FRP-carbon steel composite tube column: concept and behavior,
Compos. Struct. 246 (8) (2020) 112421.
[7] T. Ozbakkaloglu, J.C. Lim, T. Vincent, FRP-confined concrete in circular sections:
review and assessment of stress-strain models, Eng. Struct. 49 (2013) 1068–1088.
[8] Z. Tang, W. Li, V.W.Y. Tam, L. Yan, Mechanical behaviors of CFRP-confined
sustainable geopolymeric recycled aggregate concrete under both static and cyclic
compressions, Compos. Struct. 252 (2020) 112750.
[9] S. Cao, C.Q. Wu, W.Q. Wang, Behavior of FRP confined UHPFRC-filled steel tube
columns under axial compressive loading, J. Build. Eng. 32 (2020) 101511.
[10] F. Micelli, A. Cascardi, M. Marsano, Seismic strengthening of a theatre masonry
building by using active FRP wires, in: Brick and Block Masonry: Proceedings of the
16th International Brick and Block Masonry Conference, 2016, pp. 753–761.
[11] A. Cascardi, F. Micelli, M.A. Aiello, Unified model for hollow columns externally
confined by FRP, Eng. Struct. 111 (2016) 119–130.
[12] J.J. Zeng, S.P. Chen, Y. Zhuge, W.Y. Gao, Z.J. Duan, Y.C. Guo, Three-dimensional
finite element modeling and theoretical analysis of concrete confined with FRP
rings, Eng. Struct. 234 (2021) 111966.
[13] Y. Wang, G. Chen, B. Wan, B. Han, J. Ran, Axial compressive behavior and
confinement mechanism of circular FRP-steel tubed concrete stub columns,
Compos. Struct. 256 (2021) 113082.
11
Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452
[14] Y. Wei, Y.R. Zhang, J. Chai, G. Wu, Z.Q. Dong, Experimental investigation of
rectangular concrete-filled fiber reinforced polymer (FRP)-steel composite tube
columns for various corner radii, Compos. Struct. 244 (7) (2020) 112311.
[15] Y.L. Li, X.L. Zhao, R.K. Singh Raman, Behaviour of seawater and sea sand concrete
filled FRP square hollow sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 148 (2020) 106596.
[16] J. Ahmad, S. Ali, T. Yu, M.N. Sheikh, M.N.S. Hadi, Analytical investigation on the
load-moment interaction behavior of the FRP reinforced geopolymer concrete
filled FRP tube circular columns, J. Build. Eng. 42 (2021) 102818.
[17] J.Q. Yang, P. Feng, Analysis-oriented models for FRP-confined concrete: 3D
interpretation and general methodology, Eng. Struct. 216 (2020) 110749.
[18] F.M. Ren, W.Y. Liang, J.C.M. Ho, M.H. Lai, Behaviour of FRP tube-concrete-
encased steel composite columns, Compos. Struct. 24 (2020), 112139.
[19] J.G. Dai, Y.L. Bai, J.G. Teng, Behavior and modeling of concrete confined with FRP
composites of large deformability, J. Compos. Constr. ASCE 6 (2011) 963–973.
[20] Y.L. Bai, Z.W. Yan, J.F. Jia, T. Ozbakkaloglu, Y. Liu, Dynamic compressive
behavior of concrete confined with unidirectional natural flax FRP based on SHPB
tests, Compos. Struct. 259 (2021) 113233.
[21] T. Jirawattanasomkul, J.G. Dai, D.W. Zhang, M. Senda, T. Ueda, Experimental
study on shear behavior of reinforced-concrete members fully wrapped with large
rupture-strain FRP composites, J. Compos. Construct. 18 (3) (2014) A4013009.
[22] D.W. Zhang, Y.X. Zhao, W.L. Jin, T. Ueda, H. Nakai, Shear strengthening of
corroded reinforced concrete columns using PET fiber based composties, Eng.
Struct. 153 (2017) 757–765.
[23] Y.C. Guo, S.H. Xiao, S.W. Shi, W.Q. Wang, H.C. Zhao, J.J. Zeng, Axial compressive
behavior of concrete-filled FRP-steel wire reinforced thermoplastics pipe hybrid
columns, Compos. Struct. 244 (2020) 112237.
[24] Y.C. Guo, Y.Y. Ye, G. Lin, J.F. Lv, Y.L. Bai, J.J. Zeng, Effective usage of high
strength steel tubes: axial compressive behavior of hybrid FRP-concrete-steel solid
columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 154 (2020) 106796.
[25] J.J. Zeng, Y.W. Zheng, F. Liu, Y.C. Guo, C. Hou, Behavior of FRP ring-confined
CFSTs under axial compression, Compos. Struct. 257 (2021) 113166.
[26] S. Saleem, Q. Hussain, A. Pimanmas, Compressive behavior of PET FRP-confined
circular, square, and rectangular concrete columns, J. Compos. Construct. 21 (3)
(2017), 04016097.
[27] S. Saleem, A. Pimanmas, W. Rattanapitikon, Lateral response of PET FRP-confined
concrete, Construct. Build. Mater. 159 (2018) 390–407.
[28] L. Huang, S.S. Zhang, T. Yu, Compressive behaviour of large rupture strain FRP-
confined concrete-encased steel columns, Construct. Build. Mater. 183 (2018)
513–522.
[29] T. Yu, S.S. Zhang, L. Huang, C.W. Chan, Compressive behavior of hybrid double-
skin tubular columns with a large rupture strain FRP tube, Compos. Struct. 171
(2017) 10–18.
[30] C. Gao, L. Huang, L. Yan, R. Jin, B. Kasal, Strength and ductility improvement of
recycled aggregate concrete by polyester FRP-PVC tube confinement, Compos. B
Eng. 162 (2019) 178–197.
[31] M. Ispir, K.D. Dalgic, A. Ilki, Hybrid confinement of concrete through use of low
and high rupture strain FRP, Compos. B Eng. 153 (2018) 243–255.
[32] M. Ispirm, Monotonic and cyclic compression tests on concrete confined with PET-
FRP, J. Compos. Construct. 19 (1) (2015), 04014034.
[33] N. Sirach, S.T. Smith, T. Yu, A. Mostafa, Experimental study on the confinement of
concrete cylinders with large rupture-strain FRP composites, J. Compos. Construct.
25 (4) (2021), 04021026.
[34] Q. Han, W. Yuan, Y. Bai, X. Du, Compressive behavior of large rupture strain (LRS)
FRP-confined square concrete columns: experimental study and model evaluation,
Mater. Struct. 53 (4) (2020) 99.
[35] J.J. Zeng, Y.Y. Ye, W.Y. Gao, S.T. Smith, Y.C. Guo, Stress-strain behavior of
polyethylene terephthalate fiber-reinforced polymer-confined normal-, high- and
ultra high-strength concrete, J. Build. Eng. 30 (2020) 101243.
[36] J.J. Zeng, Z.J. Duan, W.Y. Gao, L.J. Ouyang, Compressive behavior of FRP-confined
seawater sea-sand concrete in square columns, Construct. Build. Mater. 262 (2020)
120881.
[37] J.J. Zeng, W.Y. Gao, Z.J. Duan, Y.C. Guo, Y.L. Bai, L.J. Ouyang, Axial compressive
behavior of polyethylene terephthalate/carbon FRP-confined seawater sea-sand
concrete in circular columns, Construct. Build. Mater. 234 (2020) 117383.
[38] Z.W. Yan, Y.L. Bai, T. Ozbakkaloglu, W.Y. Gao, J.J. Zeng, Rate-dependent
compressive behavior of concrete confined with Large-Rupture-Strain (LRS) FRP,
Compos. Struct. 272 (2021) 114199.
[39] T. Yu, G. Lin, S.S. Zhang, Compressive behavior of FRP-confined concrete-encased
steel columns, Compos. Struct. 154 (2016) 493–506.
[40] Y.Y. Ye, D.H. Zhu, J.J. Zeng, G. Lin, W.Q. Wang, Rectangular double-tube concrete
columns with an internal elliptical high-strength steel tube: concept and behavior,
Eng. Struct. 216 (2020) 110742.
[41] W.Q. Wang, M.N. Sheikh, M.N.S. Hadi, D. Gao, G. Chen, Behaviour of concrete-
encased concrete-filled FRP tube (CCFT) columns under axial compression, Eng.
Struct. 147 (2018) 256–268.
[42] S. Cheng, P. Feng, Z.Y. Li, J.K. Du, Mechanical behavior of cylindrical GFRP
chimney liners subjected to axial tension, Compos. B Eng. 177 (2019) 107411.
[43] J.G. Teng, Y. Xiang, T. Yu, Z. Fang, Development and mechanical behaviour of
ultra-high-performance seawater sea-sand concrete, Adv. Struct. Eng. 22 (14)
(2019) 3100–3120.
[44] B.T. Huang, J.Q. Wu, J. Yu, J.G. Dai, C.K.Y. Leung, V.C. Li, Seawater sea-sand
engineered/strain-hardening cementitious composites (ECC/SHCC): assessment
and modeling of crack characteristics, Cement Concr. Res. 140 (2021) 106292.
[45] J.Z. Xiao, C.B. Qiang, A. Nanni, K.J. Zhang, Use of sea-sand and seawater in
concrete construction: current status and future opportunities, Construct. Build.
Mater. 155 (1) (2017) 1101–1111.
J.-K. Zhou et al.
[46] Y.Y. Ye, S.T. Smith, J.J. Zeng, Y. Zhuge, W.M. Quach, Novel ultra-high-
performance concrete composite plates reinforced with FRP grid: development and
mechanical behaviour, Compos. Struct. 268 (2021) 114033.
[47] S. Li, S.C. Guo, Y.M. Yao, Z.Q. Jin, C.Q. Shi, D.J. Zhu, The effects of aging in
seawater and SWSSC and strain rate on the tensile performance of GFRP/BFRP
composites: a critical review, Construct. Build. Mater. 282 (2021) 122534.
[48] J.J. Liao, K.Y. Yang, J.J. Zeng, W.M. Quach, Y.Y. Ye, L.H. Zhang, Compressive
behavior of FRP-confined ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) in circular
columns, Eng. Struct. 249 (2021), 113246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.20
21.113246.
[49] B. Benmokrane, A.H. Ali, H.M. Mohamed, A. ElSafty, A. Manolo, Laboratory
assessment and durability performance of vinyl-ester, polyester, and epoxy glass-
FRP bars for concrete structures, Compos. B Eng. 114 (2017) 163–174.
[50] G. Wu, Z.Q. Dong, X. Wang, Y. Zhu, Z.S. Wu, Prediction of long-term performance
and durability of BFRP bars under the combined effect of sustained load and
corrosive solutions, J. Compos. Construct. 19 (3) (2015), 04014058.
[51] H.A. Hasan, M.N. Sheikh, M.N.S. Hadi, Performance evaluation of high strength
concrete and steel fibre high strength concrete columns reinforced with GFRP bars
and helices, Construct. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 297–310.
[52] P.P. Sankholkar, C.P. Pantelides, T.A. Hales, Confinement model for concrete
columns reinforced with GFRP spirals, J. Compos. Construct. 22 (3) (2018),
04018007.
[53] A.H. Ali, H.M. Mohamed, B. Benmokrane, Bar size effect on long-term durability of
sand-coated basalt-FRP composite bars, Compos. B Eng. 195 (2020) 108059.
[54] ACI 440.3R-12, Guide Test Methods for Fiber-Reinfroced Polymers (FRPs) for
Reinforcing or Strengthening Concrete Structures, American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, 2012.
12
Journal of Building Engineering 45 (2022) 103452
[55] GB-50608, Technical Code for Infrastructure Application of FRP Composites, China
Planning Press, Beijing, China, 2010.
[56] ASTM C469, Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson
Ratio of Concrete in Compression, American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, USA, 2002.
[57] ASTM D3039, Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix
Composite Materials, American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, USA, 2015.
[58] CSA S806-12 (R2017), Design and Construction of Building Components with
Fiber-Reinforced Polymers, Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, ON, Canada,
2017.
[59] ACI 440.1R-15, Guide for the Design and Construction of Concrete Reinforced with
FRP Bars, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2015.
[60] L. Lam, J.G. Teng, Design-oriented stress-strain model for FRP-confined concrete,
Construct. Build. Mater. 17 (6–7) (2003) 471–489.
[61] P. Sadeghian, R. Seracino, B. Das, G. Lucier, Influence of geometry and fiber
properties on rupture strain of cylindrical FRP jackets under internal ICE pressure,
Compos. Struct. 192 (2018) 173–183.
[62] Y.C. Guo, S.H. Xiao, J.W. Luo, Y.Y. Ye, J.J. Zeng, Confined concrete in square
columns partially wrapped with FRP strips: axial compressive behavior and strain
distributions by a particle image velocimetry sensing technique, Sensors 12 (2018)
4118.
[63] J.J. Zeng, G. Lin, J.G. Teng, L.J. Li, Behavior of large-scale FRP-confined
rectangular RC columns under axial compression, Eng. Struct. 174 (2018)
629–645.