Chire by Abraham 2021

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM
WITH CARBON FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER BAR
By
CHERINET TARIKU
A Thesis Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment to the Requirement for the

Award of the Degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering
(Structural Engineering)
to
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
MASTER'S ON STUCTURAL ENGINEERING
COLLEGE OF CIVIL AND ARCHITECTURALENGINEERING
ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGYUNIVERSITY
FEBRURY, 2021
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this thesis entitled “Experimental Study on Reinforced Concrete
Beam with Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Bar” was prepared by me, with the
guidance of my advisor. The work contained herein is my own except where explicitly
stated otherwise in the text, and that this work has not been submitted, in whole or in part,
for any other degree or professional qualification. Parts of this work have been published
in any other university.
Author: Signature, Date:
Cherinet Tariku ______
Witnessed by:
Name of student advisor: Signature, Date:
Temesgen Wondimu(PhD ) _______ ______
i
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis prepared by Cherinet Tariku entitled with “Experimental
Study on Reinforced Concrete Beam with Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Bar”
and submitted as a partial fulfillment of degree for masters of science complies with the
regulations of the university and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality,
content and quality.
Signed by Examining board:

External Examiner: Signature Date
Internal Examiner: Signature Date
Chairperson: Signature Date
ERA, Program Coordinator: Signature Date
DGC Chairperson: Signature Date
College Dean/Associate Dean for GP: Signature Date
ii
ABSTRACT
In recent years repair and retrofit of existing structuressuch as buildings, bridges, etc., have
been amongst the mostimportant challenges in Civil Engineering. The primaryreason for
strengthening of structures includes upgrading ofits resistance to withstand underestimated
loads, increase inthe load carrying capacity for higher permit loads, such asdue to increased
perceived risk from seismic excitations,eliminating premature failure due to inadequate
detailing,restoration of lost load carrying capacity due to corrosion orother types of
degradation caused by aging, etc. The use ofcarbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) in
strengtheningreinforced concrete (RC) structures has become an increasinglypopular
retrofit technique.
FRP offers the engineers an outstanding combination of properties such as low weight,
easier site handling, immunity from corrosion, excellent mechanical strength and stiffness,
and the ability of formation in long lengths, thus eliminating the need for lap joints. Further,
there has been a rapid progress in concrete technology that has resulted in the evolution of
concretes having specified characteristics.
FRP reinforcing bars have attracted attention for applications where corrosion of steel
reinforcement is problematic. Due to low elastic modulus and poor bond characteristics as
compared to steel reinforcing bars, the use of FRP results in larger crack widths under
service loads.
Six beam samples, three samples for each, were casted with 0%, 33% and 100%
replacement of steel reinforcing bar with that of C-FRP bars for bar diameters of 12 mm
and 14 mm to investigate the effect of use of C-FRP bars as longitudinal reinforcement on
flexural behavior of slender shear reinforced concrete beams. The experimental result
showed that as the percent replacement of steel reinforcing bars by C-FRP increases, the
peak load capacity declines. Samples with higher percent of C-FRP bars showed greater
deflection.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Prior to any thing, I thank to almighty GOD who is the ultimate means of my success and
teach me the begging of knowledge is the fear of GOD. For my general concern I would
like to thanks Ethiopian Road Authority (ERA) for facilitating & preparing master
program for successive upgrading in civil engineering.
I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my advisor Temesgen Wondmu (PhD)
for the especial way of giving his devoted advice and nice consultation.
My deepest gratitude goes to Dr.Tesfaye Alemu for his advice and my best Friend Engineer
Brhanemeskel Taye for his assisting and cooperation during primary data collection.
I would like to thank AAU Laboratory technician Fikru for allowing valuable data and
information during my research work.
I would like to say thanks to Engineer Tariku Habtamu and Abraham Kefelegn for
providing the valuable suggestions related with direct Carbon Fiber reinforced polymer
bar. And also Kinfe Aklilu for his assisting during carbon Fiber importing process that lead
to achieve my research work properly.
At last but not least, I would like to appreciate the moral and financial support from my
family member Ato Beyene Girma and thank who were standing beside me throughout
the research.
Cherinet Tariku,
February, 2021
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ................................................................................................................. i
CERTIFICATE ................................................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS .....................................................................................................v
LIST OF TABLES. ........................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1
1.1 General Background ................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Significance .............................................................................................. 3
1.4 Objectives ................................................................................................................. 4
1.4.1 General Objective ............................................................................................. 4
1.4.2 Specific Objectives ........................................................................................... 4
1.5 Research Question .................................................................................................... 4
1.6 Scope ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.7 Limitation of the study ............................................................................................. 5
CHAPTER 2: LITRATURE REIEW ..................................................................................6
2.1 Flexural Analysis of Beams ..................................................................................... 6
2.1.1 Bending of Homogeneous Beams .................................................................... 6
2.1.2 Reinforced Concrete Beam Behavior ............................................................... 8
2.2 Shear and diagonal tension in beams ..................................................................... 18
2.2.1 Diagonal Tension in Homogeneous Elastic Beams. ....................................... 19
2.2.2 Behavior of Beams Failing in Shear ............................................................... 22
2.2.3 Behavior of Beams with Web Reinforcement ................................................ 22
2.2.4 Truss Model of the Behavior of Slender Beams Failure in Shear .................. 25
2.2.5 Modified Compression Field Theory ............................................................. 26
2.3 Behavior of structural elements strengthened with C-FRP sheets, plates C-FRP bars
29
2.4 Behavior of beams reinforced with C-FRP bars .................................................... 31
CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM .................................................................33
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ........................................................................................... 33
3.2 Materials ................................................................................................................. 33
v
3.2.1 Concrete .......................................................................................................... 33
3.2.2 Steel ................................................................................................................ 33
3.3 Specimen Preparation ............................................................................................. 35
3.4 Test Setup ............................................................................................................... 35
3.5 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 36
CHAPTER 4: RESULT AND DISCUSION .....................................................................37
4.1 Experimental Result ............................................................................................... 37
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .........................................50
5.1 Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 50
5.2 Recommendation .................................................................................................... 50
REFFERENCE ..................................................................................................................51
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................54
vi
LIST OF TABLES.
Table 1-1 Type of Fiber used in Composite. ..................................................................... 3
Table 1-2 Percent replacement of steel reinforcement by C-FRP. .................................... 5
Table 3-1 Cubic compressive strength of concrete. ......................................................... 33
Table 3-2 Mechanical Properties of Reinforcements....................................................... 34
Table 4-1 Percent difference in peak load capacity. ........................................................ 49
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Elastic and inelastic stress distributions in homogenous beams .(Arthur
H.Nilson et al.,2010). .......................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2-2 Behavior of reinforced concrete beam under increasing load (Arthur H.Nilson
et al.,2010). ....................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 2-3 Uncracked transformed beam section .(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010). .......... 12
Figure 2-4 Cracked transformed section. (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010). ........................ 13
Figure 2-5 Stress distribution at ultimate load (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010). ................ 16
Figure 2-6 Shear in homogenous rectangular beam(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010). ......... 20
Figure 2-7 Stress trajectories in homogenous rectangular beam (Arthur H.Nilson et
al.,2010). ........................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 2-8 Forces at a diagonal crack in a beam with vertical stirrups (Arthur H.Nilson et
al.,2010). ........................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 2-9 Redistribution of internal shear forces in a beam with stirrups (Arthur
H.Nilson et al.,2010). ........................................................................................................ 25
Figure 2-10 Truss Analogy (.(K.J.Wight and J.G et al.,2012) . ....................................... 26
Figure 2-11 Basis of compression field theory for shear (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010). 29
Figure 3-1 Formwork. ...................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3-2 Laboratory test setup. ..................................................................................... 36
Figure 3-3 Data logger. ................................................................................................... 36
Figure 4-1 Flexural shear failure of beam with 0% 12 mm carbon fiber. ....................... 37
Figure 4-2 Flexural shear failure of beam with 33% 12 mm carbon fiber. ..................... 37
Figure 4-3 Flexural shear failure of beam with 100% 12 mm carbon fiber. ................... 38
Figure 4-4 Flexural shear failure of beam with 0% 14 mm carbon fiber. ....................... 38
Figure 4-5 Figure 4 5 Flexural shear failure of beam with 33% 14 mm carbon fiber. ... 38
Figure 4-6 Flexural shear failure of beam with 100% 14 mm carbon fiber. ................... 39
Figure 4-7 Load-deflection curve of beam with 0% 12 mm carbon fiber. ...................... 39
Figure 4-8 Load-deflection curve of beam with 33% 12 mm carbon fiber. .................... 40
Figure 4-9 Load-deflection curve of beam with 100% 12 mm carbon fiber. .................. 40
Figure 4-10 Load-deflection curve of beam with 0% 14 mm carbon fiber. .................... 41
Figure 4-11 Load-deflection curve of beam with 33% 14 mm carbon fiber. .................. 41
viii
Figure 4-12 Load-deflection curve of beam with 100% 14 mm carbon fiber. ................ 42
Figure 4-13 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beam with12 mm reinforcement. . 42
Figure 4-14 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beam with14 mm reinforcement. . 43
Figure 4-15 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beams with 12mm and 14mm with
0% carbon. ........................................................................................................................ 44
Figure 4-16 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beams with 12mm with 33% carbon
fiber and 14mm with 0% carbon fiber. ............................................................................. 45
Figure 4-17 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beams with 12mm with 100%
carbon fiber and 14mm with 0% carbon fiber. ................................................................. 45
and 14mm with 33% carbon. ............................................................................................ 46
33% carbon fiber. .............................................................................................................. 46
Figure 4-20 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beams with 12mm with 100%
carbon fiber and 14mm with 33% carbon fiber. ............................................................... 47
fiber and 14mm with 100% carbon fiber. ......................................................................... 47
fiber and 14mm with 100% carbon fiber. ......................................................................... 48
100% carbon fiber. ............................................................................................................ 48
ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 General Background
Concrete cracks due to tension and reinforcement is required where flexure, axial loads, or
shrinkage effects cause tensile stresses. In simply supported, uniformly loaded beams, the
bending moment is positive throughout and thus tensile flexural stresses and cracks are
developed along the bottom of the beam. Longitudinal reinforcement is required to resist
these tensile stresses and is placed close to the bottom side of the beam. Because the
moments are greatest at mid-span, more reinforcement is required at the mid span than at
the ends, and it may not be necessary to extend all the bars into the supports and it may
require to cut off some of the bars within the span. (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010)
A cantilever beam develops negative moment throughout with the concave surface
downward, so that flexural tensions and cracks develop on the top surface. In this case, the
reinforcement is placed near the top surface. Because the moments are largest at the fixed
end, more reinforcement is required there than at any other point. (K.J.Wight and J.K et
al.,2012)
Flexural design of concrete members reinforced with Fiber-Reinforced-Plastic composites

may be conducted using both the ultimate-strength method and working-stress method.
Since FRP reinforcement does not yield, there should be the explicit provision that failure
be controlled by concrete crushing as opposed to reinforcement rupture. Deflection control
may become as important as flexure strength for the design of FRP-reinforced concrete
structures. They also have low modulus of elasticity and low shear strength. Consequently,
concrete beams reinforced with FRP bars show linear-elastic behavior up to failure without
exhibiting any yielding and their final failure is characterized as brittle whether happens
due to FRP rupture or due to concrete crushing; although the latter one can be considered
as more desirable for RC flexural structural elements with FRPs. (Chris G.Karayannis et
al.,2018)
1
The corrosion of steel reinforcement is one of the most common causes of deterioration in
reinforced concrete structures. Steel reinforcement embedded in concrete is ordinarily
protected from corrosion by a passive oxide layer that forms on the surface of the
reinforcement in the high PH level provided by the cement paste. Corrosion can occur in
the presence of moisture and oxygen if their protective oxide layer is broken down. (Won
k.Lee et al.,2010)
Recently, advanced composite materials have been applied to mitigate the problem of
corrosion in reinforced concrete. One form of composite being studied is the composite
reinforcing bar for use in place of traditional steel reinforcing bars. These composites,
commonly known as fiber-reinforced polymers (FRPs), have high tensile strengths in
comparison to steel and, more importantly, are resistant to corrosion. However, FRP bars
also have some characteristics that make them disadvantageous compared to steel bars.
Most types of FRP have a low elastic modulus and a relatively poor bond to concrete as
compared to steel bars. A direct result of these characteristics is larger crack widths and
larger deflections under service loads as compared with beams reinforced similarly with
steel. In addition, FRPs display linear elastic behavior in tension until failure and exhibit
no yielding, making it difficult it to design members to fail in a ductile fashion. (Won k.Lee
et al.,2010)
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Although conventional reinforced concrete (RC) is the most globally used building
material; however, its detrimental structural characteristics such as brittle failure
mechanism in tension need to be improved. Carbon fiber reinforced polymer bars has been
selected for this study as an alternative. A qualitative comparison of the performance of
carbon, glass, and aramid composites is presented in Table below as Meier and Winistörfer
work reveals cited by (Sergio F. B et al.,2001). Table 2.1 A qualitative comparison of the
performance of carbon, glass, and aramid composites Meier and Winistörfer cited by
(Sergio F. B et al.,2001).
2
Table 1-1 Type of Fiber used in Composite.
Type of Fiber used in Composite

Criterion
Carbon Glass Aramid
Fibers Fibers Fibers
Tensile strength Very good Very good Very good
Compressive strength Very good Inadequate Good
Young’s modulus Very good Good Adequate
Long-term behavior Very good Good Adequate
Fatigue behavior Excellent Good Adequate
Bulk density Good Excellent Adequate
Alkaline resistance Very good Good Inadequate
Price Adequate Adequate Very good
1.3 Research Significance
The corrosion of reinforcing steel leads to the deterioration of many reinforced concrete
structures. The use of FRPs can prevent corrosion deterioration, but their use can lead to
excessive cracking due to their low elastic moduli and poor bond characteristics. The
tensile strength of FRPs is high as compared with that of steel reinforcing bars. The
research provides a result on load-deflection behavior by comparing results from
experimental tests conducted on slender beams reinforced with steel reinforcing bars, 33%
of the steel reinforcing bars replaced with FRP and 100% of the steel reinforcing bars
replaced with FRPs with an equivalent bar diameter.
3
1.4 Objectives
1.4.1 General Objective
The objective of the research is to investigate and compare the behavior of reinforced
concrete beams with carbon fiber reinforced polymer with beam reinforced with deformed
steel reinforcement under monotonic loading.
1.4.2 Specific Objectives
• To investigate and compare behavior of concrete beams reinforced with 12 mm

steel reinforcing, with that of the beam reinforced with 33% C-FRP and 100% C-
FRP with equivalent C-FRP diameter with that of steel reinforcement.
• To examine and contrast behavior of concrete beams reinforced with 14 mm steel
reinforcing, with that of the beam reinforced with 33% C-FRP and 100% C-FRP
with equivalent C-FRP diameter with that of steel reinforcement.
1.5 Research Question

➢ What measure use to investigate and compare behavior of concrete beams
reinforced with 12 mm steel reinforcing, with that of the beam reinforced with
33% C-FRP and 100% C-FRP with equivalent C-FRP diameter with that of steel
reinforcement?
➢ How can examine and contrast behavior of concrete beams reinforced with 14
mm steel reinforcing, with that of the beam reinforced with 33% C-FRP and
100% C-FRP with equivalent C-FRP diameter with that of steel reinforcement?
1.6 Scope
This research is limited with slender beams reinforced with 12 mm and 14 mm

reinforcement, with normal strength concrete. Concrete is low in tension and high in
compression and to increase the bending resistance of concrete, steel reinforcement bars
are placed at bottom tension side of beam section. Since the beginning of using steel
reinforcement bars for tension resistance in structural elements till now steel reinforcement
4
bars have been among popular construction materials widely used in construction sector.
This study was investigated the flexural behavior of CFRP bars under cyclic loading. Six-
beam specimens will be prepared for testing under four-point loading to investigate the
flexural performance of C-FRP bars reinforced beams with varying numbers of CFRP bars.
A LVDT was attached at the middle of beams to record vertical displacements (deflections)
and a load cell have been placed above the spreader beam to record the applied loads. Four-
point loading test for beams have been used and the present research have been limited to
investigating the Load carrying capacities, deflections, pre-cracking and after-cracking
stiffness, sudden local drops of strength, failure modes, and cracking propagation of CFRP
beam samples cured for 28 days.
Table 1-2 Percent replacement of steel reinforcement by C-FRP.
Percent of carbon Longitudinal bar Longitudinal bar

Cases
fiber polymer diameter of 12 mm diameter of 14 mm
1 0 ✓ ✓
2 33 ✓ ✓
3 100 ✓ ✓
1.7 Limitation of the study

Experimental setup unavailability
Difficulty to get sample materials
Financial matter
Willingness of laboratory technicians
Covid 19 epidemic problem
5
CHAPTER 2: LITRATURE REIEW
2.1 Flexural Analysis of Beams
2.1.1 Bending of Homogeneous Beams
Reinforced concrete beams are non homogeneous in that they are made up of two entirely
different materials, concrete and reinforcing bar. The method used in the analysis of
reinforced concrete beams are therefore different from those used in the design or
investigation of beams composed of homogeneous materials like wood, steel or other
structural material. However, the fundamental principles involved are essentially the
same.(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010)
At any cross section there exists internal forces that can be resolved into components
normal and tangential to the section. The components that are normal to the section are
called bending stresses, whose function is to resist the bending moment at the section. The
tangential components that resist the transverse or shear forces are known as shear stresses.
Fundamental assumptions relating to flexure and flexural stress are as follows:
1. A cross section that was plane before loading remains plane after loading. This
means that the unit strains in a beam above and below the neutral axis are
proportional to the distance from that axis.
2. The bending stress 𝜎 at any point depends on the strain at that point in a manner
given by the stress-strain diagram of the material. If the beam is made of a
homogeneous material whose stress-strain diagram in tension and compression is
that of Fig. 2.1a, the following holds. If the maximum strain at the outer fiber is
smaller than the strain 𝜀𝑝 up to which stress and strain are proportional for the given
material, then the compression and tension stresses on the either side of the axis are
proportional to the distance from the axis, as shown in Fig 2.1b. However, if the
maximum strain at the outer fibers is larger than 𝜀𝑝 , this is no longer true. The
situation that then occurs is shown in Fig 2.1c; i.e., in the outer portion of the beam,
where 𝜀 > 𝜀𝑝 , stress and strain are no longer proportional. In these regions, the
magnitude of stress at any level, such as 𝜎2 in Fig. 2.1c, depends on the strain 𝜀2 at
6
that level in the manner given by the stress-strain diagram of the material. For a
given strain in the beam, the stress at a point is the same as that given by the stress-
strain diagram for the same strain.
3. The distribution of the shear stress 𝜏 over the depth of the section depends on the
shape of the cross section and of the stress-strain diagram. These shear stresses are
largest at the neutral axis and equal to zero at the outer fibers. The shear stresses on
horizontal and vertical planes through any point are equal.
4. At any point in beam there are inclined stresses of tension and compression the
largest of which form at an angle of 900 with each other. The intensity of the
inclined maximum or principal stress at any point is given by
𝜎 𝜎2
𝑡= = √[ 4 + 𝜏 2 ]…………………………………..…………….………….(2.1)
2
where 𝜎 = intensity of normal stress

𝜏 = intensity of tangential shearing stress
2𝜏
The inclined stress makes an angle 𝜃 with the horizontal such that 2𝜃 = 𝜎
5. At the neutral axis the inclined tensile and compressive stresses at any point form
an angle of 450 with the horizontal, the intensity of horizontal and vertical shearing
stresses being equal to the unit shear at the point. At the neutral axis, the flexural
stress is zero.
6. When the stresses in the outer fiber are smaller than the proportional limit 𝜎𝑝 , the
beam behaves elastically, as shown in Figure. 2.1b. In this case the following
pertains:
(a) The neutral axis passes through the center of gravity of the cross section
(b) The intensity of bending stress normal to the section increases directly with the
distance from the neutral axis and is maximum at the extreme fibers. The stress
at any given point in the cross section is represented by the equation
𝑀𝑦
𝜎= …………………………………………………………..……………..(2.2)
𝐼
Where 𝜎 = bending stress at a distance 𝑦 from the neutral axis

𝑀= extreme bending moment at the section
𝐼 = moment of inertia of cross section about neutral axis.
7
The maximum bending stress occurs at extreme fibers.
Figure 2-1 Elastic and inelastic stress distributions in homogenous beams .(Arthur
H.Nilson et al.,2010).
The shear stress (horizontal and vertical) 𝜏 at any point in the cross section is given by
𝑉𝑄
𝜏= ………………………………………………………...………………..(2.3)
𝐼𝑏
Where 𝑉 = total shear at section

𝑄 = first moment of area about the neutral axis of that portion of the cross section lying
between a line through point in question parallel to neutral axis and nearest face of beam.
𝐼 = moment of inertia of cross section about neutral axis
𝑏 = width of beam at a given point
(c) The intensity of shear along a vertical cross section in a rectangular beam varies
as the ordinates of a parabola, the intensity being zero at the outer fibers of the
beam and a maximum at the neutral axis.
2.1.2 Reinforced Concrete Beam Behavior
Plain concrete beams are inefficient as flexural members because the tensile strength in
bending is a small fraction of the compressive strength. As a consequence, plain concrete
8
beams fail on the tension side at low loads low before the strength of the concrete on the
compression side has been fully utilized. For these reason, steel reinforcing bars are placed
on the tension side as close to the extreme tension fiber. In such a reinforced concrete beam,
the tension caused by the bending moments is chiefly resisted by the steel reinforcement,
while the concrete alone is usually capable of resisting the corresponding compression.
Such joint action of two materials is ensured if relative slip is prevented. This is achieved
by using deformed bars with their high bond strength at the steel-concrete interface and, if
necessary, by special anchorage of the ends of the bars.
While the load on such a beam is gradually increased from zero to a magnitude that will
cause the beam to fail, several different stages of behavior can be clearly distinguished. At
low loads, as long as the maximum tensile stress in the concrete is smaller than the modulus
of rupture, the entire concrete is effective in resisting stress, in compression on one side
and in tension on the other side of the neutral axis. In addition, the reinforcement deforming
the same amount as the adjacent concrete is also subject to tensile stress. At this stage, all
stresses in the concrete are of small magnitude and are proportional to strains. The
distribution os strains and stresses in concrete and steel over the depth of the section is
shown in Figure. 2.2c.
When the load is further increased, the tensile strength of concrete is soon reached, and at
this stage tension cracks develop. These propagate quickly upward to or close to the level
of the neutral plane, which in turn shifts upward with progressive cracking. The general
shape and distribution of these tension cracks is shown in Figure. 2.2d In well-designed
beams, the width of these cracks is so small that they are
9
Figure 2-2 Behavior of reinforced concrete beam under increasing load (Arthur H.Nilson
et al.,2010).
10
not objectionable from the viewpoint of either corrosion protection or appearance. Their
presence, however, profoundly affects the behavior of the beam under load. Evidently, in
a cracked section, i.e., in a cross section located at a crack such as a-a in Figure. 2.2d, the
concrete does not transmit any tensile stresses. Hence, just as tension members the steel is
called upon to resist the entire tension. At moderate loads, if the concrete stresses do not
𝑓𝑐′
exceed approximately , stresses and strains continue to be closely proportional. The
2
distribution of stresses and strains at or near a cracked section is then that shown in Figure.
2.2e. When the load is then further increased, stresses and strains rise correspondingly and
are no longer proportional. The ensuing nonlinear relation between stresses and strains is
that given by the concrete stress-strain curve. Therefore, just as in homogenous beam, the
distribution of concrete stresses on the compression side of the beam is of the same shape
as the stress-strain curve.
Evidently, the carrying capacity of the beam is reached. Failure can be caused on one of
two ways. When relatively moderate amounts of reinforcement are employed, at some
value of the load the steel will reach its yield point. At that stress, the reinforcement yields
suddenly stretches a large amount, and the tension cracks in a concrete widen visibly and
propagate upward, with simultaneous significant deflection of the beam. When this
happens, the strain in the remaining compression zone of the concrete increases to such a
degree that crushing of the concrete, the secondary compression failure, ensues at a load
only slightly larger than that which caused the steel to yield. Effectively, therefore,
attainment of the yield point in the steel determines the carrying capacity of moderately
reinforced beams. Such yield failure is gradual and is preceded by visible signs of distress,
such as the widening and lengthening of cracks and the marked increase in deflection.
On the other hand, if large amount of reinforcement or normal amounts of steel of very
high strength are employed, the compressive strength of the concrete may be exhausted
before the steel starts yielding. Concrete fails by crushing when strains become so large
that they disrupt the integrity of the concrete. Extra criteria for this occurrence have yet to
be established, but it has been observed that rectangular beams fail in compression when
the concrete strains reach values of about 0.003 to 0.004. Compression failure through
crushing of the concrete is sudden, of almost an explosive nature, and occurs without
11
warning. For this reason it is good practice to dimension beams in such a manner that
should they be overloaded, failure would be initiated by yielding of the steel rather than by
crushing of the concrete.
Figure 2-3 Uncracked transformed beam section .(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).

a) Stresses Elastic and Section Uncracked
As long as the tensile stress in the concrete is smaller than the modulus of rupture, so that
no tension cracks develop, the stress and strain distribution as shown in Figure. 2.2c, is
essentially the same as in an elastic, homogenous beam. The only difference is the presence
of another material, the steel reinforcement. In the elastic range for any given value of
strain, the stress in the steel is 𝑛 times that of the concrete. In the same section, it was
shown that one can take amount of this fact in calculations by replacing the actual steel and
concrete cross section with a fictitious section thought of as consisting of concrete only. In
this “transformed section,” the actual area of the reinforcement is replaced with an
equivalent concrete area equal to 𝑛𝐴, located at the level of the steel. The transformed
section pertaining to the beamed Figure. 2.2b is shown in Figure 2.3.
Once the transformed section has been obtained, the usual method of analysis of elastic
homogenous beams apply.
b) Stress Elastic and Section Cracked
When the tensile stress 𝑓𝑐𝑡 exceeds the modulus of rupture, cracks form, as shown in Fig
𝑓𝑐′
2.2d. If the concrete compressive stress is less than approximately and the steel stress
2
has not reached the yield point, both materials continue to behave elastically, or very nearly
12
so. This situation generally occurs in structures under normal service conditions and loads.
At this stage, for simplicity and with little if any error, it is assumed that tension cracks
have propagated all the way to the neutral axis and that section plane before bending are
plane in the deformed member. The situation with regard to strain and stress distribution is
that shown in Figure. 2.2e.
To compute stresses, and strains if desired, the device of the transformed section can still
be used. One need only take account of the fact that all the concrete thatis stresses in tension
is assumed cracked, and therefore effectively absent.
Figure 2-4 Cracked transformed section. (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).
As shown in Figure. 2.4a, the transformed section then consists of the concrete in
compression on one side of the axis and 𝑛 times the steel area on the other. The distance to
the neutral axis, in this stage, is conveniently expressed as a fraction 𝑘𝑑 of the effective
depth 𝑑. (Once the concrete is cracked, any material located below the steel is ineffective,
which is why 𝑑 is the effective depth of the beam.) to determine the location of the neutral
axis, the moment of the tension area about the axis is set equal to the moment of the
compression area, which gives
(𝑘𝑑)2
𝑏 − 𝑛𝐴𝑠 (𝑑 − 𝑘𝑑) = 0………………………...………………………….(2.4)
2
13
Having obtained 𝑘𝑑 by solving this quadratic equation, one can determine the moment of
inertia and other properties of the transformed section as in the preceding case.
Alternatively, one can proceed from basic principles by accounting directly for the forces
that act on the cross section. These are shown in Figure. 2.4b. The concrete stress, with
maximum value 𝑓𝑐 at the outer edge, is distributed linearly as shown. The entire steel area
𝐴𝑠 is subjected to the stress 𝑓𝑐 . Correspondingly, the total compression force 𝐶 and total
tension force 𝑇are
𝑓𝑐
𝐶= 𝑏𝑘𝑑 and 𝑇 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 ………………………………………..…………….(2.5)
2
The requirement that these two forces be equal numerically has been taken care of by the
manner in which the location of the neutral axis has been determined.
Equilibrium requires that the couple constituted by the two forces 𝐶 and 𝑇 be equal
numerically to the external bending moment 𝑀. Hence, taking moments about 𝐶 gives
𝑀 = 𝑇𝑗𝑑 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 𝑗𝑑…………………………………………...………………..(2.6)
Where 𝑗𝑑 is the internal lever arm between 𝐶 and 𝑇. From Equation. (2.6) the steel stress
is
𝑀
𝑓𝑠 = 𝐴 …………………………………………………….……………..…..(2.7)
𝑠 𝑗𝑑
Conversely taking moment about 𝑇 gives
𝑓𝑐′ 𝑓𝑐′
𝑀 = 𝐶𝑗𝑑 = 𝑏𝑘𝑑𝑗𝑑 = 𝑘𝑗𝑏𝑑 2 …………………………...……………..…(2.8)
2 2
From which the concrete stress is
2𝑀
𝑓𝑐 = 𝑘𝑗𝑏𝑑2 …………………………………………………….………………..(2.9)
In using Equation. (2.5) through (2.9), it is convenient to have equation by which 𝑘 and 𝑗
may be found directly, to establish the neutral axis distance 𝑘𝑑 and the inner lever arm 𝑗𝑑.
First defining the reinforcement ratio as
14
𝐴
𝜌 = 𝑏𝑑𝑠 ………………………………………………………………..…….…(2.10)
Then substituting 𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑏𝑑 into Eq. (2.4) and solving for 𝑘, one obtains
𝑘 = √(𝜌𝑛)2 + 2𝜌𝑛 − 𝜌𝑛……………………………………….……………(2.11)
𝑘𝑑
From Figure. 2.4b, it is seen that 𝑗𝑑 = 𝑑 − , or
3
𝑘
𝑗 = 1 − 3………………………………………………………...…………..(2.12)
c) Flexural Strength
It is of interest in structural practice to calculate those stresses and deformations that occur
in a structure in service under design load. For reinforced concrete beams, analysis is done
by assuming elastic behavior for both materials. It is clear, however, that at or near the
ultimate load, stresses are no more proportional to strain. More realistic method of analysis,
based on actual inelastic rather than assumed elastic behavior of the materials and on results
of extremely extensive experimental research, have been developed to predict the member
strength.
If the distribution of concrete compressive stresses at or near ultimate load had a well-
defined and invariable shape-parabolic, trapezoidal, or otherwise, it would be possible to
derive a completely rational theory of bending strength, just as the theory of elastic bending
with its known triangular shape of stress distribution is straightforward and rational.
Let Figure. 2.5 represents the distribution of internal stresses and strains when the beam is
about to fail. One desires a method to calculate that moment 𝑀𝑛 (nominal moment) at which
the beam will fail either by tension yielding of the steel or by crushing of the concrete in
the outer compression fiber. For the first mode of failure, the criterion is that the steel stress
equals yield point,𝑓𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 . An exact criterion for concrete compression failure is not yet
known, but that for rectangular beams, strains of 0.003 to 0.004 have been measured
immediately preceding failure. If one assumes, usually slightly conservatively, that the
concrete is about to crush when the maximum strain reaches 𝜀𝑢 =0.003, comparison with
15
a great many tests of beams and columns of a considerable variety of shapes and conditions
of loading shows that a satisfactorily accurate and safe strength prediction can be made. In
addition to these two criteria (yielding of the steel at a stress of 𝑓𝑦 and crushing of concrete
at a strain of 0.003), it is not really necessary to know the exact shape of the concrete stress
distribution in Figure. 2.5. What is necessary is to know, for a given distance 𝑐 of the
neutral axis, (1) the total resultant compression force 𝐶 in the concrete and (2) its vertical
location, i.e., its distance from the outer compression fiber.
Figure 2-5 Stress distribution at ultimate load (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).
In a rectangular beam, the area that is in compression is 𝑏𝑐, and the total compression force
on this area can be expressed as 𝐶 = 𝑓𝑎𝑣 𝑏𝑐, where 𝑓𝑎𝑣 is the average compression stress on
the area 𝑏𝑐. Evidently, the average compressive stress that can be developed before failure
occurs becomes larger, the higher cylinder strength 𝑓𝑐 ′ of the particular concrete. Let
𝑓𝑎𝑣
𝛼= …………………………………………………..……………………(2.13)
𝑓𝑐′
Then
𝐶 = 𝛼𝑓𝑐 ′𝑏𝑐………………………………………………...…………………(2.14)
16
For a given distance 𝑐 to the neutral axis, the location of 𝐶 can be defined as some fraction
𝛽 of this distance. Thus, for a concrete of given strength it is necessary to know only 𝛼 and
𝛽 to completely define the effect of the concrete compressive stresses.
Extensive direct measurements, as well as indirect evaluations of numerous beam tests,

have shown that the following values for 𝛼 and 𝛽 are satisfactorily accurate
𝛼 equals 0.72 for 𝑓𝑐 ′ ≤ 27.56 MPa and decreases by 0.04 for every 6.89 MPa above 27.56
MPa up to 55.12 MPa. For 𝑓𝑐 ′ ≥ 55.12 MPa, 𝛼 = 0.56.
𝛽 equals 0.425 for 𝑓𝑐 ′ ≤ 27.56 MPa and decreases by 0.025 for every 6.89 MPa above
27.56 MPa up to 55.12 MPa. For 𝑓𝑐 ′ ≥ 55.12 MPa, 𝛽 = 0.325.
The decrease in 𝛼 and 𝛽 for high-strength concrete is related to the fact that such concretes
are more brittle; i.e., they show a more sharply curved stress-strain plot.
It the above experimental information is accepted, the maximum moment can be calculated
from the law of equilibrium and from the assumption that plane cross sections remain plane.
Equilibrium requires that
𝐶 = 𝑇 or 𝛼𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑐 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 ………………………………………..……………..(2.15)
Also, the bending moment, being couple of the forces 𝐶 and 𝑇, can be written as either
𝑀 = 𝑇𝑧 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 (𝑑 − 𝛽𝑐)…………………………………………...………..(2.16)
or
𝑀 = 𝐶𝑧 = 𝛼𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑐(𝑑 − 𝛽𝑐)………………………………………………….(2.17)
For failure initiated by yielding of the tension steel, 𝑓𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 . Substituting this value in
Equation. (2.15), one obtains the distance to the neutral axis
𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦
𝑐= ………………………………………………………..……………(2.18a)
𝛼𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏
Alternatively, using 𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑏𝑑, the neutral axis distance is
17
𝜌𝑓𝑦 𝑑
𝑐= ………………………………………………………...…….……..(2.18b)
𝛼𝑓𝑐′
Giving the distance to the neutral axis when tension failure occurs. The nominal moment
𝑀𝑛 is obtained from Eq. (2.16) with the value for 𝑐 just determined, and 𝑓𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 ; that is
𝛽𝑓𝑦 𝜌
𝑀𝑛 = 𝜌𝑓𝑦 𝑏𝑑2 (1 − )………………………………………...………….(2.19a)
𝛼𝑓𝑐′
With the specific, experimentally obtained values for 𝛼 and 𝛽 given previously, this
becomes
𝑓𝑦 𝜌
𝑀𝑛 = 𝜌𝑓𝑦 𝑏𝑑2 (1 − 0.59 )…………………………………..……………(2.19b)
𝑓𝑐′
Whether or not the steel has yielded at failure can be determined by comparing the actual
reinforcement ratio with the balanced reinforcement ratio, 𝜌𝑏 , representing that amount of
reinforcement necessary for the beam to fail by crushing of the concrete at the same load
that causes the steel to yield. This means that the neutral axis must be so located that at the
load at which the steel starts yielding, the concrete reaches its compressive strain limit ∈𝑢 .
Correspondingly, setting 𝑓𝑠 = 𝑓𝑦 and substituting the yield strain ∈𝑦 for 𝑓𝑦 /𝐸𝑠 , one obtains
the value of 𝑐 defining the unique position of the neutral axis corresponding to
simultaneous crushing of the concrete and initiation of yielding in the steel
∈𝑢
𝑐= 𝑑……………………………………………...….…………….(2.20)
∈𝑢 +∈𝑦
Substituting that value of 𝑐 into Eq. (2.15), with 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑠 = 𝜌𝑏𝑑𝑓𝑦 , one obtains for the
balanced reinforcement ratio
𝛼𝑓𝑐′ ∈𝑢
𝜌𝑏 = …………………………...………………………………..(2.21)
𝑓𝑦 ∈𝑢 +∈𝑦
2.2 Shear and diagonal tension in beams
Beams must have an adequate safety margin against all types of failure, which might be
caused because of greater uncertainty in predicting certain other modes of collapse, or
18
because of the catastrophic nature of some other types of failure. Some of which may be
more dangerous than flexural failure. (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).
Shear failure of reinforced concrete, diagonal tension failure, is one example of failure,
which is difficult to predict accurately. If a beam without properly designed shear
reinforcement is overloaded to failure, shear collapse is likely to occur suddenly without
advance warning of distress, which is in strong contrast with the nature of flexural failure.
For typically under reinforced beams, flexural failure is initiated by gradual yielding of the
tension steel, accompanied by obvious cracking of the concrete and large deflections,
giving ample warning and providing the opportunity to take corrective measures. Because
of these differences in behavior, reinforced concrete beams are generally provided with
special shear reinforcement to ensure that flexural failure would occur before shear failure,
which increases the shear resistance if the section is considered to be overloaded.
Shear analysis and design are not generally concerned with shear as such, because the shear
stresses in most beams are far below the direct shear strength of concrete. The concern is
with diagonal tension stress, resulting from the combination of shear stress and longitudinal
flexural stress. In some circumstances, consideration of direct shear is appropriate as in the
case of the design of composite members combining precast beams with a cast-in-place top
slab where horizontal shear stresses on interface between components are important.
(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).
2.2.1 Diagonal Tension in Homogeneous Elastic Beams.
The roll of shear stresses can easily be visualized by the performance under the load of the
laminated beam, shown on Figure 2-6can help to visualize the roll of shear stress. It consists
of two rectangular pieces bonded together along the contact surface.
19
Figure 2-6 Shear in homogenous rectangular beam(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).
The member will deform as one single beam if the adhesive is strong enough, as shown in
Figure 2-6a. On the other hand the two pieces will separate and slide relative to each other
if the adhesive is weak, as shown in Figure 2-6b. Evidently, when the adhesive is effective,
there are forces or stresses acting in it that prevent sliding or shearing. These horizontal
shear stresses are shown in Figure 2-6c as they act on the top and bottom pieces separately.
The same stresses occur in horizontal plane in single-piece beams, and they vary in
intensity at different distances from the neutral axis.
Figure 2-6d shows a differential length of a single-piece rectangular beam subjected to

shear force of magnitude V. Vertical equilibrium is provided by the vertical shear stresses
V and thus, upward translation is prevented. The average values of stresses is equal to the
V
shear force divided by the cross-sectional areaVav = ab, but their intensity is different over
the depth of the section, the variation being parabolic. The shear stress is zero at the outer
fibers and has a maximum of 1.5Vav at the neutral axis with parabolic variation. If a small
square element located at the neutral axis of such a beam is isolated as shown in Figure 2-
7b, the vertical shear stresses on it, equal and opposite on the two faces for reasons of
equilibrium, act as shown. However, the element would not be in equilibrium if these were
the only stresses present. Therefore, there exist equilibrating horizontal shear stresses of
the same magnitude on the two horizontal faces. That is, the horizontal shear stresses of
Figure 2-7b are equal in magnitude to the vertical shear stresses of Figure 2-7d at any point
within the beam.
20
Figure 2-7 Stress trajectories in homogenous rectangular beam (Arthur H.Nilson et
al.,2010).
It is proved in any strength-of-materials text that on an element cut at 450 these shear
stresses combine in such a manner that their effect is as shown in Figure 2-7c. That is, the
action of the two pairs of shear stresses on the vertical and horizontal faces is the same as
that of two pairs of normal stresses, one tensile and one compressive, acting on the 450
faces and of numerical value equal to that of the shear stresses. Considering an element of
beam that is located neither at the neutral axis nor at the outer edges, its vertical faces are
subject to both the shear stresses and bending stresses. The six stresses that now act on the
element can be combined into a pair of inclined compressive stresses and a pair of inclined
tensile stresses that act at right angles to each other, which are known as principal stresses
(Figure 2-7e).
The inclinations as well as the magnitudes of the resulting principal stresses also vary from
one place to another since the magnitudes of the shear stresses V and the bending stresses
f change both along the beam and vertically with distance from the neutral axis. Figure 2-
21
7f shows the inclinations of principal stresses for a uniformly loaded rectangular beam.
That is, these stress trajectories are lines which at any point, are drawn in the direction in
which the particular principal stress, tension or compression, acts at that point. It is seen
that at the neutral axis the principal stresses in a beam are always inclined at 450 to the axis.
Near the outer fibers, they are horizontal near mid span.
Tensile stresses, because of the low tensile strength of the concrete, are not confined to the
horizontal bending stressesf, which are caused by bending alone. Tensile stresses of various
inclinations and magnitudes, resulting from shear alone, at the neutral axis, or from the
combined action of shear and bending, exist in all parts of a beam and can impair its
integrity if not adequately provided for. For this reason, the inclined tensile stresses, known
as diagonal tension, must be carefully considered in the design of reinforced concrete
members.
2.2.2 Behavior of Beams Failing in Shear
The relative contributions of beam action and arch action and the amount of web
reinforcement affects the behavior of beams failing in shear widely.(K.J.Wight and J.G et
al.,2012)
2.2.3 Behavior of Beams with Web Reinforcement
The strength of beams drops below the flexural capacity due to inclined cracking. To ensure
that the full flexural capacity can be developed, web reinforcements are used.
Prior to inclined cracking, the strain in the stirrups is equal to the corresponding strain of
the concrete (Arhur H.Nilson et al.,2010), (K.J.Wight and J.G et al.,2012)
. Stirrups do not prevent inclined cracks from forming; they come into play only after the
cracks have formed (K.J.Wight and J.G et al.,2012).
22
Web reinforcement has no noticeable effect prior to the formation of diagonal cracks. In
fact, measurements show that the web steel is practically free of stress prior to crack
formation. After diagonal cracks have developed, web reinforcement augments the shear
resistance of a beam in four separate ways:
1. The bars traversing a particular crack resist part of the shear force.
2. The presence of these bars reduce the penetration of diagonal cracks into the
compression zone, leaving more uncracked concrete available at the head of the
crack for restricting the combined action of shear and compression.
3. The stirrups also counteracts the widening of cracks, so that the two crack faces
stay in close contact, making a significant and a reliable interface force, Vi.
4. Stirrups are arranged to tie the longitudinal reinforcement into the main bulk of the
concrete providing some measure of restraint against the splitting of concrete along
the longitudinal reinforcement and increasing the share of the shear force resisted
by dowel action.
It becomes clear from this description that member behavior is quite complex and
dependent in its detail on the particulars of crack configuration, once a crack is formed.
The magnitude of the shear force of stress that causes cracking to occur is the same as in a
beam without web reinforcement and with web reinforcement since web reinforcement is
ineffective in the uncracked beam. Most frequently, web reinforcement consists of vertical
stirrups. The forces acting on the portion of such a beam between the crack and the nearby
support are shown in Figure 2-8. Each stirrup traversing the crack exerts a force Av fv on
the given portion of the beam. Here Av is the cross sectional area of the stirrup and fv is the
tensile stress in the stirrups. Equilibrium in vertical direction requires
Vext = Vcz + Vd + Viy + Vs
Where Vs = nAs fv is the vertical force in the stirrups, n being the number of stirrups
traversing the crack. If S is the stirrup spacing and p the horizontal projection of the crack
p
as shown, thenn = S. Viy is the vertical component of aggregate interlocking force.
23
Figure 2-8 Forces at a diagonal crack in a beam with vertical stirrups (Arthur H.Nilson et
al.,2010).
The approximate distribution of the four mentioned components of the internal shear force
with increasing external shear Vext is shown in Figure 2-9. The componentsof the internal
shear resistance must equal the applied shear, indicated by the upper 45°line. Prior to
flexural cracking, all the shear is carried by the uncracked concrete.It is seen that after
inclined cracking, portion of the shear Vs = nAs fv carried by the stirrups increases linearly,
while the sum of three other components,Vcz + Vd + Viy stays nearly constant. When the
stirrups yield, their contribution remains constant at the yield value Vs = nAs fyt . However,
because of widening of the inclined cracks and longitudinal splitting, Viy and Vd fall off
rapidly. This overloads the remaining uncracked concrete precipitating a rapid failure.
The individual magnitude of the three other components are not known while total shear
carried by the stirrups at yielding is known. Just prior to failure of a web reinforced beam,
the sum of these three internal shear components is equal to the cracking shear Vcr and this
is the contribution of the concrete to the total shear resistance and is denoted by Vc . Thus,
Vc = Vcr = Vcz + Vd + Viy
24
Figure 2-9 Redistribution of internal shear forces in a beam with stirrups (Arthur H.Nilson
et al.,2010).
2.2.4 Truss Model of the Behavior of Slender Beams Failure in Shear
Before designers can make use of their knowledge in design, the behavior of beams failing
in shear must be expressed in terms of a mechanical-mathematical model. The best model
for beams with web reinforcement is the truss model.(K.J.Wight and J.G et al.,2012)
As shown in the Figure 2-10a, a beam with inclined cracks develops compressive and
tensile force in the top and bottom flanges, vertical tensions in the stirrups and inclined
compressive force in the concrete diagonals between the inclined cracks. An analogous
truss replaces this highly indeterminate system of forces. The simplest truss is shown in
Figure 2-10b.Several assumptions and simplifications are needed to derive the analogous
truss.
In Figure 2-10b, the truss has been formed by lumping all of the stirrups cut by section A-
A into one vertical member b-c and all the diagonal concrete members cut by section B-B
into one diagonal member e-f. This diagonal member is stressed in compression to resist
the shear on section B-B. The compression chord along the top of the truss is actually the
force in a concrete, but is shown as a truss member. The compressive members in the truss
25
are shown with dashed lines to show that they are forces in the concrete, not separate truss
members. The tensile members are shown with solid lines on Figure 2-10b.
Figure 2-10 Truss Analogy (.(K.J.Wight and J.G et al.,2012) .

2.2.5 Modified Compression Field Theory
Morsch (1922) stated that it was impossible to determine mathematically the slope of
secondary inclined cracks to analyze and design shear reinforcements. Wagner (1929), the
German engineer, solved an analogous problem when dealing with the post buckling shear
resistance of thin-webbed metal girders. Wagner assumed that after the thin metal skin
buckled, it could continue to carry shear by a field of diagonal tension, supposing that,
transverse frames and longitudinal stringers stiffened the member. He assumed that the
angle of inclination of the diagonal tensile stresses would coincide with the angle of
inclination of the principal tensile strain as determined from the compatibility of the
deformation of the skin, the transverse frames and the longitudinal stringers.(Arthur
H.Nilson et al.,2010).The compression field approach determines the angle θ , crack
inclination from the horizontal plane, by considering the compatibility of the deformations
26
of the transverse shear reinforcement, the longitudinal reinforcement and diagonally
stressed concrete. Therefore, this method satisfies equilibrium, strain compatibility and
stress-strain relationships.
The first method for determiningθ, that was applicable over the full loading range and
based on Wagner’s procedure, was developed for members in torsion by (Mitchell and
Collines et al.,1974). Further developments led to the Modified Compression Field Theory
(Vecchio and Collins et al.,1986).
The Modified Compression Field Theory is a general model for the load-deformation
behavior of two-dimensional cracked concrete subjected to shear. It models concrete by
considering concrete stresses in the principal directions summed with reinforcing stresses
assumed only to be in axial. The concrete stress-strain behavior in compression and tension
was derived originally from tests performed by Vecchio (Vecchio and Collins et al.,1982).
The key assumption of the MFCT uses is the principal strain directions coincide with the
principal stress directions. This assumption is confirmed by experimental measurements,
which show that the principal direction of stresses and strains are parallel within ±100.
Concrete struts are at shallower angle than cracks and the compressive stress field is
transferred across the cracks, which causes the strength of concrete to be reduced from its
uncracked state. This produces tensile stress in the cracked concrete.
Local stresses in the concrete and the reinforcement are known to vary from point to point
in the cracked concrete, with higher reinforcement stresses and low concrete tensile stresses
taking place at the location of the crack. In MCFT, the compatibility conditions relating
the strains in the cracked concrete with the strains in the reinforcement are expressed in
terms of average strains, where the strains are measured over base lengths, which are
greater than the crack spacing. The equilibrium conditions relating the concrete stresses to
the applied loads are expressed in terms of average stresses.
The strains used for the stress-strain relationship are average strains. They consider
together the combined effect of local strains at cracks, strains between cracks, bond slip
and crack slip. The calculated stresses are also average stresses in that they implicitly
encompasses the stresses between cracks, interface shear on cracks and dowel actions. In
27
this model, the cracked concrete is treated as a new material with empirically defined
stress-strain behavior.
The equilibrium equations, the compatibility relationships, the reinforcement stress-strain

relationships and the stress-strain relationships for the cracked concrete in compression and
tension enable the average stresses, the average strains, and the angle θ to be determined
for any load level up to failure. Failure of reinforced concrete element may be governed by
the local stresses occurring at a crack not by average stresses.
This theory accounts for requirements of compatibility as well as equilibrium and

incorporates stress-strain characteristics of both materials, reinforcement and concrete,
which makes the theory capable of predicting the failure load and the complete load-
deformation response. The most basic element of the compression field theory, applied to
members carrying combined flexure and shear is shown in Figure 2-11. in Figure 2-11a,
light diagonal lines are an idealized representation of potential tensile cracking in the
concrete.
Figure 2-11b illustrates that the net shear V at a section x distance from the support is
resisted by the vertical component of a diagonal compression force in the concrete struts.
The horizontal component of the compression in the struts must be equilibrated by the total
tension force ΔN in the longitudinal steel.
Thus, the magnitude of the longitudinal tension resulting from shear is
V
ΔN = tan θ = Vcot θ…………………………...…………………………….(2.22)
Where θ is the angle of inclination of the diagonal struts.

The effective depth for shear calculation, according to this method, is taken at the distance
between longitudinal force resultants,dv . Thus, the diagonal compressive stress in a web
having width bv is
V
fd = b …………………………….…………………………….(2.23)
v dv sin θ cos θ
The tensile force in the vertical stirrups, each having area Av and assumed to act at the
yield stressfyt , with uniform spacing of stirrups S,
VS tan θ
Av fyt = ……………………………………….……………………….(2.24)
dv
28
Figure 2-11 Basis of compression field theory for shear (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).
2.3 Behavior of structural elements strengthened with C-FRP sheets, plates C-FRP
bars
Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) systems are simply defined as high-strength and
lightweight reinforcements created by combining carbon (CFRP) or E-glass fibers with a
polymer material. Traditionally, FRP has been used in the civil, aerospace, and automotive
industries for applications requiring high strength-to-weight ratios and rigidity. Even
though, CFRP plates and sheets have been used for strengthening existing concrete
structures, few researches have been conducted on CFRP bars reinforced structural
29
elements. For this study literatures are reviewed mainly based on the load carrying
capacity, Deflection properties, crack propagation and failure modes and pre-cracking and
after cracking stiffness of structural elements reinforced with CFRP plates, sheets and bars.
Especial attention has been given for literatures related with CFRP bar reinforced beams.
According to (Jian-Feichen et al.,2003) CFRP sheets and plates had been used for Flexural
and shear strengthening of beams, flexural strengthening of slabs, and strengthening of
columns subject to both static and seismic loads since 1960. Fiber-reinforced polymer
(FRP) reinforcing bars are being increasingly used as a favorable alternative, due to
advantages such as resistance to corrosion under deicing salts, high strength to weight ratio,
and good fatigue properties and ease of handling. Carbon-FRP (CFRP) bars can provide
superior performance and durability, but they are not cost competitive with Glass-FRP
(GFRP) bars, which are the most commonly used in civil engineering applications
(Lokman Gemi et al.,2019).
(Asa dur R. and Shamsoon F et al.,2013) studied the flexural response of externally bonded
CFRP wraps to strengthen RC beams in flexure with and without end anchorages. Six
beams (four with end anchorage and two without end anchorage) were tested with different
a/d ratios and the result indicated that the use of CFRP wraps with end anchorages having
higher a/d ratio resulted in increasing the ductility and stiffness of the RC-beams and failed
in flexure. Whereas beams without end anchorages having lower a/d ratios failed in shear-
tension and shear-compression inspite of having adequate shear stirrups to resist shear.
(Nouran Elmessalami , Ahmed El Refai and Farid Abed et al.,2019) reviewed more than
300 tests from 43 experimental results on Fiber Reinforced polymer bars for compression
reinforcement and The results of compressive strength on FRP bars showed that the
compression strength and modulus of FRP bars ranged from 10 to 86% and 65 to 97% of
their tensile strength and modulus, respectively, depending on the type of fibers of the bar.
On the other hand, the contribution of GFRP bars to the load-carrying capacities of RC
columns is less than that of steel and CFRP bars whereas the contribution-to capacity of
CFRP bars is the same as or higher than that of steel bars. GFRP bars contribute by 3 to
14% to the total capacity of the columns compared to 6 and 19% for CFRP bars and 12 and
16% for steel reinforcing bars.
30
Analysis of masonry building strengthened with CFRP on tension sides of slabs and walls
were conducted (Balamural Likrishnan and C et al.,2009) A 2-story masonry building with
brick walls and wooden slabs were analyzed. Both walls and slabs were strengthened with
CFRP, and comparison was done in terms of stresses and stiffness for buildings with and
without CFRP. It was shown that there is around 48% increase in the stiffness of building
with CFRP compared to one without CFRP. In addition, stresses resulted from building
with CFRP are far smaller, indicating the effectiveness of using CFRP in strengthening and
prevention of both invisible and visible cracks for Retrofitted structures.
GFRP reinforced frame elements with different lap-splice lengths were investigated under
reverse cyclic quasi-static loading. 8 real-size one-bay one-story frames were constructed
and it was concluded that GFRP reinforced frames had performed well in compression than
ordinary steel reinforcement bar frames under seismic load (Meltem Eryilmaz-
Yildirim.,2019)
2.4 Behavior of beams reinforced with C-FRP bars

The experimental investigation conducted by (Mohammed N. and Jiansong Y.et al.,2018)
on composite beams reinforced with GFRP I-beam and steel bars indicated that the
proposed composite beams have a very ductile response due to the existence of the tensile
steel bars, and the yield point of the composite beam is controlled by the tensile steel bars.
The ultimate load of the proposed composite beam was higher than the traditional RC
beam, and the ultimate load was governed by the encased I-beam. In line with this, when
GFRP bars were used to replace the tensile steel bars to reinforce the composite beams, the
brittle failure of GFRP bars caused lack of ductility of the beam members, and both the
stiffness and ultimate load were reduced significantly. Compared with steel bars, the slip
between the concrete and the I-beam was also increased when GFRP bars were used. The
different location of the I-beam has little effect on the flexural response.
(Lokman G., Emrah M. and Yasin O.et al.,2019) compared hybrid beams consisting of
GFRP and steel bars with steel bar reinforced beams. The investigation had carried out by
three specimens: the first sample beam was reinforced with all steel bars, and the second
were hybrid bars (one GFRP bar and the other two tension reinforcement were steel bars)
and the third specimen were all tension zone were reinforced with GFRP bars. The
31
experimental investigation found that beam sample with all steel bars at the tension zone
undergo minimum displacement at maximum load. However, low in load carrying capacity
and energy absorption capacity compared to hybrid and GFRP bars reinforced beam
samples.
According to (Chris G.Karayannis.,2018) studied the behavior of flexural slender concrete

beams reinforced with C-FRP bars under increasing static loading. The potential influence
of the anchorage conditions at the end support were enhanced by confining steel spiral at
each support of beam samples a remarkable results have been obtained in improving Load
carrying capacities, deflections, pre-cracking and after-cracking stiffness, sudden local
drops of strength, failure modes, and cracking propagation than conventional steel bar
reinforced beam samples.
The conclusions from previous investigations on the behavior of reinforced concrete beams
using CFRP composites are presented. From this review, it is evident that, although the
benefits that can be obtained from CFRP flexural members are well identified, there are
still areas where further research is required. In particular, most of the previous research
was conducted on small-scale specimens where local effects can have a large impact on
the global response. Reviewed literature reveals that CFRP exhibit a brittle behavior than
conventional steel bars and break suddenly.
In order to use the high load carrying capacity and corrosion resistance of CFRP bars,
hybrid bars consisting of CFRP and conventional reinforcement bars on the tension zone
of beams should be investigated. Given the limited amount of information available from
previous research in the area of hybrid beams (beams consisting of CFRP and conventional
steel bars) on the tension zone of beam sample, testing flexural response of beam specimens
by varying the reinforcement bar diameter will be considered a priority for this thesis.
32
CHAPTER 3: EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN
The experimental research design was used because; it is suitable to describe the
experimental study of reinforced beam with carbon fiber reinforced polymer bar on the
study area.
The study has been employed both quantitative and qualitative research approach of data
collection and analysis. Quantitative aspects which focused upon the data with numeric
nature was selected to address the research objective that aimed to assess the existing
problems and qualitative type also helps to compensate the deficiency of quantitative
analysis and provide a more explanatory power to it.
3.2 Materials
3.2.1 Concrete
Samples of fifteen concrete cubes for compressive strength with 150mm dimension were
taken to be tested at 14th, 28thand at the test day. All the samples are casted with the same
concrete mix. Test results are shown on table 3.8 below.
Table 3-1 Cubic compressive strength of concrete.
Cubic compressive strength, MPa

Test day
Cube 1 Cube 2 Cube 3 Mean Value
14th day 18.98 18.39 18.93 18.77
28th day 20.62 22.55 21.98 21.72
50th day 25.63 24.01 23.69 24.44
51th day 22.97 24.76 26.72 24.82
52th day 24.42 25.58 23.39 24.46
3.2.2 Steel
Deformed bar with diameter of 12mm and 14mm were used as bottom reinforcement and
deformed bar with diameter of 8mm was used as top reinforcement. Plain bar with diameter
of 6mm was used as shear reinforcement. As mentioned on the methodology part,
replacement of these deformed bars equivalent diameter of C-FRP was done.
33
Test results of reinforcements used are shown on the table below.
Table 3-2 Mechanical Properties of Reinforcements.
Number Diameter Elongation Mass per Length,

D1, mm D2, mm length, kg/m cm
1 6.05 11.4 0.226 70
6.03 10.6 0.224 70
6.09 12.4 0.229 70
2 7.4 8.64 26.7 0.399 70
7.42 8.66 25.9 0.401 70
7.45 8.6 25.8 0.400 70
3 11.44 12.7 72.4 0.902 70
11.42 12.6 73.5 0.893 70
11.46 12.68 72.9 0.902 70
4 13.39 14.72 97.2 1.222 70
13.37 14.74 98.4 1.222 70
13.36 14.78 97.3 1.225 70
Continued…
Yield stress, Failure stress,

Diameter Yield Failure
MPa Mpa
Number Load, Load,
D1, D2,
kN *1 *2 kN *1 *2
mm mm
6.05 11.4 396.56 12.9 448.73
1 6.03 10.6 371.18 12.7 444.71
6.09 12.4 425.69 15.1 518.39
7.4 8.64 26.7 620.81 455.40 32.4 753.34 552.62
2 7.42 8.66 25.9 598.97 439.72 33.1 765.47 561.96
7.45 8.6 25.8 591.86 444.15 32.8 752.44 564.66
11.44 12.7 72.4 704.36 571.53 89.2 867.81 704.15
3 11.42 12.6 73.5 717.57 589.46 86.4 843.51 692.92
11.46 12.68 72.9 706.75 577.30 85.3 826.97 675.49
13.39 14.72 97.2 690.26 571.16 112.4 798.21 660.48
4 13.37 14.74 98.4 700.88 576.65 112.8 803.45 661.03
13.36 14.78 97.3 694.08 567.12 111.8 797.52 651.63
34
3.3 Specimen Preparation
After the formworks are prepared and stiffened at every point to avoid bulging of concrete
during casting, oiling was applied on the inner surface for easy removal of formworks. The
assembled steel was then placed inside the formwork by maintaining minimum concrete
cover in all sides. The concrete was casted by using mixer and vibrator was used to remove
voids and compact the beam. All the specimens casted were kept at the same environment
and covering was provided to avoid evaporation.
Figure 3-1 Formwork.

3.4 Test Setup
All the beams tested were instrumented in order to measure the applied load and deflection.
The support type was roller support and point load was applied at the mid-span using
hydraulic jack with load cell measuring the load applied by the hydraulic jack. All the
instrumentations are connected to data logger and the experimental result can easily be
obtained.
35
Figure 3-2 Laboratory test setup.
Figure 3-3 Data logger.

3.5 Methodology
For reinforcement diameter of 12 mm, three samples are casted by using 3 bars as
longitudinal reinforcement, other three samples are casted by replacing one of the steel
reinforcement by C-FRP (33%) and three samples by replacing the whole steel
reinforcement by C-FRP (100%). All the specimens have shear reinforcement to make
them resist more shear force. For each case, three samples are used to make the result more
realistic using average of the three sample test results. After the 28th day of casting, they
were tested with monotonic loading with point load at center of the beams. Results of load-
deflection were taken from the data logger and the results were interpreted.
The same procedure was followed for those beams with 14 mm reinforcement size. Here
also the steel reinforcing bars with replaced with that of C-FRP sizes of 14 mm.
36
CHAPTER 4: RESULT AND DISCUSION
4.1 Experimental Result
It was intended that all the samples were required to fail in flexure. But after testing the
specimens, shear failure was observed in specimens casted with 100% steel reinforcement.
When 33% of the steel reinforcement is replaced by C-FRP, almost balanced failure was
observed, i,e,. diagonal cracks and flexural cracks were observed when the applied load
was increased for both 12 mm and 14 mm bar diameters.
When 100% of the steel reinforcement is replaced by C-FRP, typical flexural crack was
observed for both reinforcement sizes.
Figure 4-1 Flexural shear failure of beam with 0% 12 mm carbon fiber.
37
Figure 4-5 Figure 4 5 Flexural shear failure of beam with 33% 14 mm carbon fiber.
38
100
80
12 0(1)
60 12 0(2)
Load kN
12 0(3)
40
Average
20
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Deflection, mm
Figure 4-7 Load-deflection curve of beam with 0% 12 mm carbon fiber.
39
100
80
60
12 33(1)
Load kN
12 33(2)
40
12 33(3)
Average
20
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
Deflection, mm
22
20
18
16
14
Load, kN
12 12 100(2)
10 12 100(1)
8 12 100(3)
6 Average
4
2
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
Deflection, mm
40
140
120
100
80 14 0(1)
Load, kN
60 14 0(2)
14,0(3)
40 Average
20
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
Deflection, mm
120
100
80
14 33(1)
Load, kN
60
14 33(2)
40 14 33(3)
Average
20
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
Deflection, mm
41
60
40
14 100(2)
Load, kN
14 100(3)
Average
20 14 100(1)
0
0 4 8 1 2 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44
Deflection, mm
100
80
60 12, 100
Load, kN
12 0
40 12 33
,
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
Figure 4-13 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beam with12 mm reinforcement.
42
120
100
80
14 0
Load, kN
60 14 33
14 100
40
20
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44
Deflection, mm
Figure 4-14 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beam with14 mm reinforcement.
The tensile strength of C-FRP was not measured due to unavailability of testing machine
for these reinforcements.
During testing of beams, they were required to fail in flexure. But due to delay in test day,
the compressive strength has increased from the intended compressive strength and it have
resulted in shear failure in some samples. Samples with bar sizes of 12 mm and 14 mm
with 100% steel reinforcement have fail in such manner.
The test result showed that as the percent replacement of bars by C-FRP increased, the
peak load capacity decreases.
The initial cracking load was lower for beams with C-FRP and the cracking loads are
comparatively the same for beams with 100% C-FRP. As the percent replacement of
reinforcement by C-FRP increases, the cracking load declines for both reinforcement
catagories.
The length of transducer for measuring the vertical deflection was insufficient to load the
beam until failure. Also, the length of the tip hydraulic jack was also insufficient. Due to
these, samples with 100% C-FRP were not tested until failure and the peak load capacity
was not exactly known for these samples. But from the result obtained for bar sizes of 12
43
mm, the load capacity of beams with 0% C-FRP exceeds about 4.3 times that of beams
with 100% C-FRP. For beams with 14 mm bar, peak load capacity of beams with 0% C-
FRP exceeds about 3 times that of beams with 100% C-FRP.
The C-FRP used as replacement of steel reinforcement do not have shown any sign of
yielding between cracks after testing. This may be due loss of bond between the concrete
and C-FRP bars. Also, development length was not provided due to difficulty in bending
C-FRP bars. If they are forced to bend to provide a development length, it will result in
failure of bars.
Figures 4-15 to 4-23 show comparison of load-deflection curve of beams with 12mm bar
diameter and 14mm bar diameter with different percentage of replacement of steel
reinforcement by C-FRP.
Beam Designation Failure mode Ductility Crack

initiation
12, 0% C-FRP shear failure Low support
120
100
80 14, 0
Load kN
12, 0
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
Figure 4-15 Comparison of load-deflection curve of beams with 12mm and 14mm with 0%
carbon.
44
initiation
12, 33% C-FRP flexural/shear Moderate middle span
failure
120
100
80
Load kN
14, 0
60 12, 33
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
fiber and 14mm with 0% carbon fiber.

initiation
12, 100% C-FRP Section failure High middle span
120
100
80
Load kN
60 14, 0
40 12, 100
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Deflection, mm
45
initiation
failure
100
80
Load kN
60
12, 0
40 14, 33
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
and 14mm with 33% carbon.
Beam Designation Failure mode Ductility Crack initiation
12, 33% C-FRP flexural/shear failure Moderate middle span

14, 33% C-FRP flexural/shear failure Moderate middle span
100
80
60
Load kN
14, 33
40 12, 33
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
33% carbon fiber.
46
initiation
failure
100
80
Load kN
60
14, 33
40 12, 100
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm

initiation
80
60
Load kN
40 12, 0
14, 100
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
47
initiation
failure
80
60
Load kN
40 14, 100
12, 33
20
0
0 5 1 0 Deflection,
1 5 mm 2 0 25

initiation
40
30
Load kN
20 14, 100
12, 100
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deflection, mm
100% carbon fiber.
48
Table 4-1 Percent difference in peak load capacity.
Experimental average Percent decrease in peak

Sample
peak load capacity, kN load capacity,%
12, 100% C-FRP 77.78 0
12, 33% C-FRP 75.98 2.37
12, 0% C-FRP 18.06 330.68
14, 100% C-FRP 112.05 0
14, 33% C-FRP 93.28 20.16
14, 0% C-FRP 37.76 196.74
49
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion
The following conclusions are based on the experimental result

1. The initial cracking load for beams with C-FRP are lower than beams with steel
reinforcement.
2. The peak load capacity declines with increase in percent replacement of steel
reinforcement with C- FRP.
3. In beams with steel reinforcement bars, the crack length increases with small
increase in external applied load and failure results in small increase in load from
the cracking load while in beams reinforced with C-FRP, they carry relatively equal
load while the deflection is increasing after crack formation.
4. Beams casted with C-FRP are more ductile than that of beams with steel
reinforcement, in that they show higher deflection, resulting in ductile moment-
curvature relationship. As the percent of steel reinforcement replacement by C-FRP
declines, the ductility also declines.
5.2 Recommendation
The following recommendations are forwarded for future research.

1. Flexural behavior of slender beams with C-FRP shall be redone with the use of
longer deflection measuring transducer.
2. Shear behavior of short and slender beams with C-FRP shall be accessed in high
and normal strength concrete.
50
REFFERENCE
A National Standard of Canada, “Design and Construction of Building Components with
Fiber-Reinforced Polymers”, (CAN/CSA-A23.3-04), Canadian Standards Association,
Ontario, Canada, May 2004.
Abebe Dinku, “The Need For Standardization of Aggregates For Concrete Production in
Ethiopian Construction Industry”, Civil Engineering Department, Addis Ababa University,
Ethiopia.
ACI Committee 211, Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal, Heavyweight,
and Mass Concrete (ACI 211.1-91), 2002.
American Concrete Institute, ACI 440.1R-06, “Guide for the Design and Construction of
Structural Concrete Reinforced with FRP Bars, ACI Committee 440, February 2006.
Antoni Nanni, “Flexural behavior and Design of RC Members Using FRP Reinforcements”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 119, no. 11, November 1993.
ASTM Standards: C33-01, “Standard Specification for Coarse Aggregate”, 2001.
Arthur H. Nilson,David Darwin, Charles W. Dalon, “Design of Concrete Structures”, 14th
edition, New York, US,: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2010.
Chris G. Karayannis, Parthena-Maria K. Kosmidou and Constantin E. Chalioris,
“Reinforced Concrete Beams with Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bars-Experimental
Study”, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece, December 2018
Ethiopian Building Code Standard- Based on European Norm, “Design of Concrete
Structures Part1-1: General rules for buildings (ES- EN 1992-1-1: 2015); Ministry of
Urban Development, Housing and Construction..
K. J. Wight and J. G. Macgregor, “Reinforced Concrete Mechanics & Design”, 6th ed.
New Jersey, US: Pearson Education, 2012.
Muhammad Masood Rafi, Ali Nadjai and Faris Ali, “Experimental Testing of Concrete
Beams Reinforced with Carbon FRP Bars”, Journal of Composite Materials, Vol. 41, No.
22/2007, FireSERT, University of Ulster at Jordanstown.
R. BalamuralikrishnanandC. Antony Jeyasehar, “Flexural Behavior of RC Beams
Strengthened with Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) Fabrics”, The Open Civil
Engineering Journal, 2009, 3, 102-10, Tamilnadu, India.
51
Won K. Lee, Daniel C. Jansen, Kenneth B. Berlin, and E. Cohen, “Flexural Cracks in Fiber-
Reinforced Concrete Beams with Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Reinforcing Bars”, ACI
Structural Journal, Title no 107-S31, May-June 2010.
Jian-Fei Chen,Lik Lam,Scott Thomas Smith and J.G. Teng, "Behaviour and Strength of
FRP-strengthen RC structures: a state -of- the- art review,"
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245408515, pp. 1-34, 2003.
Lokman Gemi, Emrah Madenci and Yasin Onuralp Özkılıç, "An Investigation on Effect of
Steel/Glass Fiber Bars in Concrete Beams," Book of Full Texts, pp. 651-656, 2019.
Asad ur Rehman Khan ,Shamsoon Fareed, "Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Beams
Strengthened by CFRP Wraps with and Without Anchorages," in Fourth International
Symposium on Infrastructure Engineering in Developing Countries, IEDC 2013, Karachi,
Pakistan, 2013.
Nouran Elmessalami, Ahmed El Refai,, Farid Abed, "Fiber-reinforced polymers bars for
compression reinforcement: A promising alternative to steel bars," Construction and
Building Materials, no. 209, pp. 725-737, 2019.
Aloys Dushimimana, Mahmoud Ziada, Sertaç Tuhta, "Effect of Carbon Fiber Reinforced
Polymer (CFRP) Composites Applied To Walls and Slabs of Masonry Building,"
International Journal of Advance Engineering and Research Development, vol. 5, no. 04,
pp. 2434-2442, 2018.
Meltem Eryilmaz-yildirim, Eşref ünlüoğlu, mizan doğan ömer karagöz, "experimental
investigation of seismic behaviour of gfrp reinforced frames," pp. 1-6, 2019.
Muhammad N. S Hadi, Jiansong Yuan, "Experimental investigation of composite beams
reinforced with GFRP I-beam and steel bars," Construction and Building Material, vol.
Part B, pp. 462-474, 2017.
Chris G. Karayannis, Parthena-Maria K. Kosmidou and Constantin E. Chalioris,
"Reinforced Concrete Beams with Carbon-Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bars—Experimental
Study," Fibers, 2018.
Sergio F. Breña, Regan M. Bramblett, Michaël A. Benouaich,Sharon L. Wood, and

Michael E. Kreger, "Use of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites to Increase the
52
Flexural Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Beams," Center for transportation research
bureau of engineering research the university of texas at austin, Austin,Texas, 2001.
P.Alagusundaramoorthy, I.E. Harik, C.C.Choo, "Shear Strength Of R/C Beams Wrapped

With CFRP Fabric," Commonwealth of Kentucky Transportation Cabinet,
Frankfort,Kentucky, 2002.
53
APPENDIX
Mix Design
The following steps are followed to determine the required amount of ingredients for
concrete mix.
Step 1: Determining approximate mixing water from Table 3.2 for the intended nominal
maximum size of aggregate based on the slump limit for the intended type of construction
recommended on Table 3.1
Table A-1: Recommended slumps for various types of construction (ACI committee,211et
al.,2002).
Type of Construction Maximum slump, mm Minimum slump, mm
Reinforced foundation walls and
75 25
footings
Plain footing, caissons, and
75 25
substructure walls
Beams and reinforced walls 100 25
Building columns 100 25
Pavements and slabs 75 25
Mass concrete 75 25
Table A-2: Approximate mixing water and air content requirements for different slumps
and nominal maximum size of aggregates (ACI committee,211 et al.,2002).
Non air entrained concrete

Slump
9.5 mm 12.5 mm 19 mm 25 mm 37.5 mm 50 mm 75 mm 150mm
(mm)
25 to 50 207 199 190 179 166 154 130 113
75 to 100 228 216 205 193 181 169 145 124
150 to 175 243 228 216 202 190 178 160 -
More than
- - - - - - - -
175
Approximate amount of entrapped air in non-air entrained concrete (%)
Slump
9.5 mm 12.5 mm 19 mm 25 mm 37.5 mm 50 mm 75 mm 150mm
(mm)
All 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0.3 0.2
54
Step 2: Calculating the cement content required based on the compressive strength at 28
days and the approximate mixing water determined in step 1.
Table A-3: Relationship between water-cement or water-cementations materials ratio and

compressive strength of concrete (ACI committee,211 et al.,2002).
Compressive strength at 28 days Water cement ratio by weight

(MPa) (Non-air entrained concrete)
40 0.42
35 0.47
30 0.54
25 0.61
20 0.69
15 0.79
Step 3: Determination of course aggregate content based on fineness modulus of fine

aggregate and the nominal maximum size aggregate in the mix from Table A-4.
Table A-4: Volume of oven-dry-rolled coarse aggregate per unit volume of concrete for
different fineness moduli of fine aggregates (ACI committe,211 et al.,2002).
Nominal maximum size of aggregate (mm) 2.4 2.6 2.8 3

9.5 0.5 0.48 0.46 0.44
12.5 0.59 0.57 0.55 0.53
19 0.66 0.64 0.62 0.6
25 0.71 0.69 0.67 0.65
37.5 0.75 0.73 0.71 0.69
50 0.78 0.76 0.74 0.72
75 0.82 0.8 0.78 0.76
150 0.87 0.85 0.83 0.81
Step 4: Estimation of fine aggregate based on weight of concrete from Table A-3
55
Table A-5: First estimate of concrete weight (kg/m3) (ACI committee,211 et al.,2002).
Nominal maximum size of aggregate (mm) Non-air entrained concrete
9.5 2280
12.5 2310
19 2345
25 2380
37.5 2410
50 2445
75 2490
150 2530
Step 5: Moisture adjustment
If there is difference in moisture content and absorption capacity in fine aggregate and
course aggregate, the mixing water have to be adjusted. Water must be added if moisture
content is less than absorption capacity; and water should be deducted from the mixing
water if moisture content exceeds absorption capacity.
The above procedures were followed and first trial mix resulted in some varying results in
compressive strength, requiring another trial. Table A-6 shows the final mix proportion.
56
Table A-6: Mix design procedure per cubic meter of concrete.
Nominal maximum size of aggregates, mm 25
Target compressive strength, MPa

Slump required, mm 25 - 100
Required water, kg/m3[A] 193
Water to cement ratio [B] 0.53
Weight of cement, kg/m3[C] = [A]/[B] 364.15
Fineness modulus of fine aggregate [D] 2.874
Compacted density of coarse aggregate, kg/m3[E] 1613.077
Percent of volume of oven dry rolled coarse aggregate per unit volume of
0.6626
concrete based on fineness modulus of fine aggregate [F]
Weight of coarse aggregate required, kg/m3 [G] = [E] × [F] 1068.83
Moisture content of fine aggregate, (%) [H] 4.5
Absorption capacity of fine aggregate, (%) [I] 8.53
Moisture content of coarse aggregate, (%) [J] 1.04
Absorption capacity of coarse aggregate, (%) [K] 1.8
First estimated weight of concrete, kg/m3[L] 2380
Weight of Fine aggregate, kg/m3 [M] = [L] – ([G]
754.02
+ [A] + [C])
Added/ removed water from fine aggregate [N] = [H] - [I] 4.03
Added/ removed water from coarse aggregate [O] = [J] - [K] 0.76
Adjusted water , kg/m3 [P] = [A] ±
231.51
[([G]×[O]/100) + ([M]×[N]/100)]
The above procedure shown on table…was used to determine the volume of coarse
aggregate, fine aggregate, cement and water for each beam to be tested with different coarse
aggregate size.
Considering 20% wastage, volume of concrete required for all beams is
=[(0.2m)(0.2m)(1.7m)(18)+(0.15m)(0.15m)(0.15m)(15)+(π)((0.15m)2/4)(0.3m) (15)] ×
1.2
= 1.625 m3
57
Table A-7: Determination of mass of aggregate for ACI mix design procedure.
Nominal maximum size of aggregate, mm 25

Coarse aggregate per m3, kg [A] 1068.82
Fine aggregate per m3, kg [B] 754.02
Cement per m3, kg [C] 364.15
Water per m3, kg [D] 231.51
Volume of concrete required for the test, m3[E] 1.625
Fine aggregate, kg [F] = [B] × [E] 1225.28

Cement, Kg [G] = [C] ×[E] 591.74
Water, Kg [H] = [D] × [E] 376.20
Course aggregate, kg [I] = [A] × [E] 1736.83
Sieve size (mm) Mass (kg)
25 173.68
Gradation of coarse aggregate 19 998.68
12.5 512.36
9.5 52.1
[Coarse aggregate of 10% retained on 25 mm sieve, 57.5% retained on 19 mm, 29.5%

retained on 12.5 mm and 3% retained on 9.5 mm was used.]
58

Chire by Abraham 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chire by Abraham 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM

WITH CARBON FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER BAR

A Thesis Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment to the Requirement for the

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

MASTER'S ON STUCTURAL ENGINEERING

COLLEGE OF CIVIL AND ARCHITECTURALENGINEERING

ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGYUNIVERSITY

Author: Signature, Date:

Cherinet Tariku ______

Name of student advisor: Signature, Date:

Temesgen Wondimu(PhD ) _______ ______

Signed by Examining board:

Internal Examiner: Signature Date

Chairperson: Signature Date

ERA, Program Coordinator: Signature Date

DGC Chairperson: Signature Date

College Dean/Associate Dean for GP: Signature Date

1.1 General Background

Flexural design of concrete members reinforced with Fiber-Reinforced-Plastic composites

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Type of Fiber used in Composite

1.3 Research Significance

1.4.1 General Objective

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

• To investigate and compare behavior of concrete beams reinforced with 12 mm

1.5 Research Question

This research is limited with slender beams reinforced with 12 mm and 14 mm

Table 1-2 Percent replacement of steel reinforcement by C-FRP.

Percent of carbon Longitudinal bar Longitudinal bar

1.7 Limitation of the study

2.1.1 Bending of Homogeneous Beams

Fundamental assumptions relating to flexure and flexural stress are as follows:

where 𝜎 = intensity of normal stress

Where 𝜎 = bending stress at a distance 𝑦 from the neutral axis

Where 𝑉 = total shear at section

2.1.2 Reinforced Concrete Beam Behavior

Figure 2-3 Uncracked transformed beam section .(Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).

b) Stress Elastic and Section Cracked

Figure 2-4 Cracked transformed section. (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).

Conversely taking moment about 𝑇 gives

From which the concrete stress is

𝑘 = √(𝜌𝑛)2 + 2𝜌𝑛 − 𝜌𝑛……………………………………….……………(2.11)

Figure 2-5 Stress distribution at ultimate load (Arthur H.Nilson et al.,2010).

Extensive direct measurements, as well as indirect evaluations of numerous beam tests,

𝑀 = 𝐶𝑧 = 𝛼𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑐(𝑑 − 𝛽𝑐)………………………………………………….(2.17)

Alternatively, using 𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑏𝑑, the neutral axis distance is

2.2 Shear and diagonal tension in beams

2.2.1 Diagonal Tension in Homogeneous Elastic Beams.

Figure 2-6d shows a differential length of a single-piece rectangular beam subjected to

2.2.2 Behavior of Beams Failing in Shear

2.2.3 Behavior of Beams with Web Reinforcement

Vext = Vcz + Vd + Viy + Vs

Figure 2-10 Truss Analogy (.(K.J.Wight and J.G et al.,2012) .

The equilibrium equations, the compatibility relationships, the reinforcement stress-strain

This theory accounts for requirements of compatibility as well as equilibrium and

Where θ is the angle of inclination of the diagonal struts.

2.4 Behavior of beams reinforced with C-FRP bars

According to (Chris G.Karayannis.,2018) studied the behavior of flexural slender concrete

Table 3-1 Cubic compressive strength of concrete.

Cubic compressive strength, MPa

Table 3-2 Mechanical Properties of Reinforcements.

Number Diameter Elongation Mass per Length,

Yield stress, Failure stress,

Temesgen Wondimu(PhD ) _