Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Shear behavior of concrete beams reinforced with CFRP sheet strip stirrups T
using wet-layup technique
⁎
Muhammad Tahira,b,c,d, Zhenyu Wanga,b,c, , Kanwar Majid Alia,b,c, Haytham F. Isleema,b,c
a
Key Lab of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control of the Ministry of Education, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090, China
b
Key Lab of Smart Prevention and Mitigation of Civil Engineering Disasters of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin
150090, China
c
School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090, China
d
Civil Engineering Department, University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Narowal Campus, Pakistan

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP) are being used in reinforced concrete structures featuring their lightweight,
CFRP high tensile strength, nonmagnetic, and corrosion resistance properties, contrasting conventional steel re-
Concrete inforcement. However, low bend strength, anisotropic and non-plastic nature of FRP composites are the major
Beam concerns for their assertive applications in construction industry. Pultruded FRP bar stirrups are characterized by
Strip stirrup
premature failure either due to slippage at overlapping region or rupture at bend portion due to kinking of fibers.
Shear
In this experimental study, close-type direct wound rectangular cross-section CFRP sheet strip stirrups (CSS)
Stirrup strain
Stress limit were proposed to mitigate the shortcomings of pultruded CFRP bar stirrups (CP). Total of seven full-scale beam
specimens reinforced with steel longitudinal bars and CFRP stirrups were cast and tested to investigate the
performance of proposed stirrups. The main study parameters include shear reinforcement material type, the
cross-sectional geometry of CFRP stirrups, and the inclination angle of CSS stirrups with the beam axis.
Specimens reinforced with CSS stirrups provided better shear capacity and crack control ability compared to
steel and CP stirrups for same shear reinforcement ratios. Shear capacity of beam corresponding to serviceability
limit state was improved up to 13% by changing the inclination of CSS stirrups from 90° to 45°.

1. Introduction
Since decades, steel is being used as reinforcing material in concrete
structures to provide strength and ductility. However, steel is suscep-
tible to corrosion in the presence of oxygen and moisture. The perme-
ability of concrete provides a favorable condition for corrosion in
marine structures where the intrusion of slats and moisture into the
concrete leads to a higher rate of steel corrosion. Durability concerns of
steel-reinforced concrete structures pushed the researchers to find the
remedies for such a devastating problem and look for some more dur-
able and reliable materials. Since the last few decades, fiber-reinforced
polymers (FRPs) have got considerable attention as substitute material
of steel in reinforced concrete structures.
FRP pultruded bars are being used for retrofitting and strengthening
of existing structures using near-surface mounted techniques [1–4].
Recently, researchers focused on the use of FRP bars as a replacement of
conventional steel reinforcement in concrete structures [5–9].
Nevertheless, pultruded FRP bar stirrup when used as shear and con-
fining reinforcement in RC structures exhibit premature failure at bend
locations due to kinking of fibers resulting from the bending of FRP bars
to make the stirrups [6,9,10]. Kinking of fibers at bend location results
in a reduction of the strength of stirrup. The bend strength ratio (ffb/ffu)
of pultruded FRP stirrups ranges from 0.3 to 0.6 depending upon bend
radius to stirrup diameter ratio [11–14]. Moreover, premature bond-
slip failure in overlapping regions of pultruded FRP bar stirrups was
reported by the researchers [5,9,15]. The full strength of FRP material
could not be utilized due to these problems associated with pultruded
FRP bar stirrups. Hence, the material demand increases for the desired
performance of the structure, which makes the structure un-econom-
ical.
During the last few years, researchers have tried different options to
overcome the shortcomings of pultruded FRP bar stirrups. Maranan
et al. [5] and Ali et al. [16] used continuous FRP spirals as shear re-
inforcement of beam to overcome the possibility of bond-slip failure.

⁎
Corresponding author at: Key Lab of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control of the Ministry of Education, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090,
China.
E-mail address: zhenyuwang@hit.edu.cn (Z. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2019.08.001
Received 7 June 2019; Received in revised form 30 July 2019; Accepted 1 August 2019
Available online 13 August 2019
2352-0124/ © 2019 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Tahir, et al.
Lee et al. [13], Spadea et al. [14], and Dong et al. [15] made attempts to
improve the bend strength ratio and address other issues related to
pultruded FRP bar stirrups, resulting in the development of close-type
wound rectangular cross-section stirrups. The proposed stirrups pro-
vided improved bend strength ratio and eliminated the possibility of
bond-slip failure. Test results of beams utilizing the developed rectan-
gular cross-section stirrups witnessed the improvement in shear beha-
vior compared to conventional FRP bar stirrups [17,18]. However, the
rectangular cross-section stirrups proposed by Lee et al. [13] and Dong
et al. [15] were pre-fabricated requiring special arrangement for the
fabrication such as mandrel and couldn't be resized or reshaped, unlike
steel. Moreover, using the direct filament winding technique proposed
by Spadea et al. [14,19], it is challenging to control the cross-sectional
dimensions (width and thickness) of stirrups, which are characteristic
parameters for strength and performance of stirrups [13,20]. Therefore,
to overcome the shortcomings of pultruded FRP bar stirrups, to best suit
for the shape and size of sections, and for on-site fabrication of FRP
stirrups without requiring additional arrangements like mandrels; di-
rect wound close-type CFRP sheet strip stirrups (designated as CSS
stirrups) were proposed in this study for the shear reinforcement of
beams.
Ashour and Kara [21] studied the size effect on shear strength of
beam. It was found that the size of beam has great influence on the
shear performance of the beam, especially for specimens with effective
depth greater than 300 mm. In the past, majority of test studies were
conducted on small-scale beam specimens utilizing FRP stirrups
[5,17,18]. Therefore, in this study, full scale beam specimens (200 ×
500 mm) were considered to evaluate the shear performance of pro-
posed stirrups. Moreover, according to ACI 440 [11] the shear re-
sistance provided by FRP inclined stirrups is more than that of vertical
stirrups by a factor k = sin θ × cos θ. Therefore, in the current study,
using CSS stirrups at various inclinations with the axis of the beam was
also considered to investigate the influence of inclination of CSS stir-
rups on shear performance of beams, as their flexible nature made it
feasible to apply at any inclination. Main study parameters investigated
in this study were shear reinforcement material type, the cross-sectional
geometry of CFRP stirrups, and the inclination angle of CSS stirrups.
The results of this experimental study will serve as reference to opti-
mize the inclination of CSS stirrups using finite element modeling.
Moreover, it would be a valuable addition to the existing literature for
the effective application of FRP composites as internal reinforcement in
concrete structures.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Specimen design
The experimental program comprising of 7 full-scale beams
(200 × 500 × 2650 mm) was designed to investigate the shear perfor-
mance of CSS stirrups. Main parameters investigated in this study were
shear reinforcement material type (Steel and CFRP), stirrups cross-
sectional geometry (circular and rectangular) and the inclination angle
of CSS stirrups. Fig. 1 represents the cross-sectional dimensions, re-
inforcement details along with internal instrumentation, and the re-
inforcement cages of test specimens. Table 1 represents the designation
and details of test specimens.
FRPs are anisotropic in nature, having high tensile strength along
the direction of fibers and weak in the transverse directions. Therefore,
CFRP bars when used as longitudinal reinforcement in beams are sus-
ceptible to fracture due to the interaction of shear and compressive
stresses in the compressive zone. To eradicate the possibility of any
undesirable failure and to quantify the shear contribution of stirrups,
steel longitudinal reinforcing bars were used as flexural reinforcement
in all the beam specimens. All the beams were longitudinally reinforced
with five steel bar of 22 mm diameter in tension zone, having the re-
inforcement ratio of 2.19%, while two hanger bars of 22 mm diameter
44
Structures 22 (2019) 43–52
were provided in compression region. All the beam specimens were
reinforced with stirrups having the same reinforcement ratio (ρv = Av/
b. s) of 0.25% in order to compare the shear performance of different
types of stirrups [17,22]. All the beams were designed to have a same
shear span-to-depth ratio of 2.3 and 200 mm center-to-center spacing of
stirrups. Flexural and shear reinforcement and shear span-to-depth ratio
were selected to ensure the shear failure of beam specimens. Based on
the study parameters, each specimen was designated by one set of
letters and two numbers. The letters (S, CP, or CSS) represents the type
of stirrup; steel, CFRP pultruded bar, or CFRP sheet strip stirrups, re-
spectively. The first number (8, 20 or 30) represents the diameter of
steel and CP stirrups or the width of CSS stirrups. The second number
(90, 60 or 45 etc.) represents the inclination angle of stirrups with the
axis of beam. Beams S8-90 and CP8-90 reinforced with steel and CP
stirrups of 8 mm diameter were designed to investigate the effect of
stirrups material-type on the shear performance of beams. Beams
CSS20-90 and CSS30-90 were reinforced with CSS stirrups of 20 mm
and 30 mm width having same fiber content than that of CP stirrups,
and were designed to compare the efficiency of CSS stirrups with CP
stirrups and to check the effect of stirrups width on shear performance.
Remaining three beam specimens CSS20-45, CSS20-60, and CSS20-90/
64 were reinforced with CSS stirrups at different inclinations to in-
vestigate the effect of inclination of stirrups on the shear performance
of beam. CSS20-90/64 beam was reinforced with truss type arrange-
ment of CSS stirrups at 64 and 90°.
CFRP pultruded bar stirrups (CP) were fabricated in the factory by
bending pultruded bars in the form of continuous spiral before full
polymerization of the resin. For the fabrication of reinforcement cage;
continuous CP spiral was cut into hoops with overlap equal to one side
length. For the fabrication of reinforcement cages of beams with CSS
stirrups; firstly, the steel longitudinal bars were assembled with three
steel stirrups, one at each end and one at center, then the CFRP sheet
was cut into strips of 20 mm and 30 mm widths, impregnated with resin
and wrapped directly around the steel cage in required number of
layers to make CSS stirrups. After fabrication of CSS stirrups, the cages
were placed to dry under room temperature for one week to allow for
the full polymerization of the resin. For further details regarding the
fabrication process of CSS stirrups using wet lay-up technique, readers
are directed to the earlier study by the authors [20]. The longitudinal
bars and stirrups were instrumented with electric strain gauges. Finally,
the cages were placed in wooden molds and concrete was cast with
ready-mix concrete. Concrete cover of 30 mm was maintained around
the reinforcement cages.
2.2. Material properties
The CSS stirrups were fabricated using unidirectional Carbon fiber
sheet (UT70-30) strips impregnated with two-component epoxy resin.
The tensile strength of CSS stirrups and CP stirrups was determined
according to the specifications of ISO 527-1/5 [23,24]. For bend
strength of CSS and CP stirrups; bend strength test samples were pre-
pared and tested as per specifications proposed by Spadea et al. [14].
Fig. 2 represents the details of tests performed on CFRP stirrups. Tensile
properties of steel longitudinal bars were determined as per ASTM
specifications [25]. Tensile and bend-strength properties of steel bars
and CFRP stirrups are summarized in Table 2. Ready-mix concrete was
used to cast concrete beams. The average compressive strength of
concrete determined by six cylinder specimens (∅150 × 300 mm) was
40 MPa.
2.3. Instrumentation and testing procedure
Internal as well as external instrumentation was done to monitor the
deformations of reinforcement, concrete, and the overall beam speci-
mens. Longitudinal steel reinforcing bars were instrumented with
electric strain gauges at mid-length to monitor their level of strain.
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

Elevation Section A-A

(a)

α = 90

α = 60

α = 45

α = 90/64

(b)
Fig. 1. Test specimen's detail; (a) cross-section dimensions and reinforcement details, (b) reinforcement cages with different inclination of CSS stirrups.

Table 1 Stirrups expected to encounter the shear cracks on both sides of loading
Test matrix. point were instrumented with the electric strain gauges to monitor the
Designation Stirrup material α ds or ws S
level of strains with the application of load. Compressive strains of
concrete in compression zone of the beam were also monitored with the
degree mm mm electric strain gauges bonded on the concrete surface at and above the
mid-height of the beam (refer to Fig. 3). To measure the deflection of
S8-90 Steel 90 8 200
CP8-90 CFRP 90 8 200
beam three LVDTs were used; one at each support to measure the set-
CSS20-90 CFRP 90 20 200 tlement of supports if any and one at the mid-span. The arrangement of
CSS30-90 CFRP 90 30 200 LVDTs and test setup for three-point loading system is represented in
CSS20-45 CFRP 45 20 200 Fig. 3. The beam specimens were loaded with hydraulic jack and load
CSS20-60 CFRP 60 20 200
was recorded using a load cell connected with the data acquisition
CSS20-90/64 CFRP 90/64 20 200
system. The load was applied in load control manner (0.1 kN/s) with
Note: α = inclination angle of stirrups; ds = diameter of steel or pultruded bar the increments of 30 kN until the width of shear crack reached to 1 mm.
stirrups; ws = width of CSS stirrups; S = center to center spacing of stirrups. After each increment of 30 kN, the crack pattern was marked and crack
width was recorded using a portable microscope of 40 times magnifi-
cation power. After the development of 1 mm crack width, the load was
applied continuously up to failure. During testing following

45
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

Fig. 2. CFRP stirrup strength tests; (a) tensile strength test of CFRP stirrups at straight portion; (b) bend strength test of CFRP stirrups.

observations were made 1) peak load 2) failure mode 3) load corre-
sponding to fracture of stirrups 4) crack width and pattern at each load
increment.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Failure modes and cracking pattern
The final failure mode of beam describes the level of reinforcement
provided and design adequacy. All the beams in this study were de-
signed to fail in shear to evaluate the efficiency of proposed CSS stirrups
and to compare with pultruded CFRP bar stirrups. Fig. 4 represents the
different test stages and typical failure mode of tested beams. Fig. 5
presents the schematic diagrams of cracking pattern, major shear crack,
and inclination of major shear crack of all the tested beam specimens.
Failure of beam S8-90 was initiated by the development of inclined
diagonal crack at mid-height of the beams, which continued to widen
and extend towards the top and bottom of the beam. After the peak load
has reached, the inclined crack opened suddenly with a significant drop
in load. This failure may be considered as diagonal tension failure
(shear failure) because no crushing of concrete or cracking along the
longitudinal bars was observed; highlighting the inadequacy of shear
reinforcement. The failure mechanism of beams CP8-90, CSS20-90,
CSS30-90, CSS20-60, and CSS20-90/64 was similar and can be cate-
gorized as shear compression failure. At peak load concrete in com-
pression zone crushed at the tip of inclined shear crack followed by the

Table 2
Material properties.
Material Diameter or width Area Elastic modulus Tensile strength Tensile strain Bend strength ffb/ffu

(mm) (mm ) 2
(GPa) (MPa) (%) (MPa) –

CFRP bar 8 50.2 136 ffu = 1620 εf = 1.2 544 0.33

CFRP Strip 30 50.1 151 ffu = 2170 εf = 1.43 1180 0.54
CFRP Strip 20 50.1 146 ffu = 1908 εf = 1.26 1115 0.58
Steel bar 8 50.2 190 fy = 380 εy = 0.20 – –
Steel bar 22 380 200 fy = 460 εy = 0.25 – –

46
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

Fig. 3. Three-point loading system and external instrumentation.

crushing of concrete along the diagonal compression strut and the
rupture of stirrups at bends (as evident from Fig. 4(b)–(d)). Similar
failure mechanism was observed by Ali et al. [16] for FRP-RC circular
cross-section beams having shear span-to-depth ratio of 2.0 to 2.6.
Linear elastic behavior of CFRP stirrups allowed the widening and ex-
tension of cracks towards the extreme compression fibers of concrete
with continuously increasing load, resulting in reduced concrete area
resisting compression stresses and ultimately crushing of concrete. This
observation necessitates the use of high strength concrete to get the
maximum benefit of high strength of CFRP reinforcement. The beam
CSS20-45 also experienced shear-compression failure. However, load
was significantly dropped just after crushing of compression concrete
and test was stopped prior to rupture of stirrup.
Shear reinforcement material type and cross-section geometry (cir-
cular and rectangular) of CFRP stirrups showed insignificant effect on
the inclination of major shear crack and the intensity of cracks.
Nonetheless, the inclination of CSS stirrups imparted great impact on
the crack intensity, crack width, and inclination of major shear cracks.
Specimens with inclined C-SS stirrups bridged the cracks effectively and
resulted in dispersed shear cracks, higher in numbers, having relatively
lesser widths (as evident from Fig. 5). Changing the inclination of
stirrups from 90 to 60° shifted the inclination of shear crack from 38 to
45 degrees (refer to Table 3).
3.2. Load-deflection response
In this section, comparison between the performances of tested
beam specimens is drawn based on the load-deflection response. Fig. 6
shows the load-deflection response of tested beam specimens. The load-
deflection curves consist of an inclined linear branch, starting from zero
loads and extending up to about 95% of peak load, followed by a non-
linear branch, extending up to rupture of stirrups. All the test specimens
exhibited almost similar initial stiffness with an average value of about
92.3 kN/mm, indicating that the initial stiffness of the beam is in-
dependent of shear reinforcement material type. In case of beam spe-
cimen reinforced with steel stirrups (S8-90), after a certain level of load
(about 300 kN) stiffness of beam dropped which is attributed to the
yielding of stirrups. The Non-linear branch of load-deflection curves

(a)
Crushing
of concrete

Rupture
of stirrup
(b) (c) (d)
Fig. 4. Different test stages and failure mechanism (CSS20-90); (a) appearance of specimen after failure, (b) cracking pattern at about 70% of maximum load, (c)
crushing of concrete in compression zone, (d) crushing of compression strut and rupture of stirrup.

47
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

(caption on next page)

48
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

Fig. 5. Cracking pattern and inclination of major shear crack of tested specimens.

Table 3 capacity and showed softening behavior. This softening may be at-
Test results. tributed to the poor bond between CFRP stirrups and cover concrete
Designation Pcr Pmax Vn Δmax P0.5 ε0.5 θcr Failure mode
and more separated area between the core and cover concrete due to
the larger width of stirrups, resulting in early crushing and separation
kN kN kN mm kN % deg. of cover concrete. The inclination of stirrups showed a significant in-
fluence on the non-linear branch of the load-deflection curves. By
S8-90 48 470 235.0 6.41 326 0.19 33 DT
CP8-90 47 737 368.5 11.27 326 – 35 SC
changing the angle from 90 to 60° post-peak behavior was improved
CSS20-90 80 785 392.5 13.81 390 0.11 38 SC and the load was sustained for larger deflections. This improvement
CSS30-90 100 744 372.0 10.66 319 0.13 38 SC could be attributed to the favorable inclination of stirrups approxi-
CSS20-45 60 752 376.0 10.16 442 0.20 41 SC mately perpendicular to the shear cracks [5]. The stirrups with in-
CSS20-60 47 777 388.5 15.77 378 0.25 45 SC
clination of 45° showed a detrimental effect on the post-peak branch of
CSS20-90/64 48 738 369.0 9.61 469 0.28 45 SC
load-deflection curve. Relative displacement along the crack was ob-
Note: Pcr = load corresponding to initiation of flexural cracking; served after crushing of concrete in compression and the load was
Pmax = maximum load sustained by beam; Vn = maximum shear capacity of dropped significantly. However, further investigations are required to
beam; Δmax = maximum deflection corresponding to peak shear; P0.5 and better understand the influence of inclination of stirrups and to estimate
ε0.5 = load and stirrup strain corresponding to 0.5 mm crack width; the optimum value of inclination angle. For beam CSS20-90/64 re-
DT = diagonal tension failure; SC = shear-compression failure. inforced with CSS stirrups having truss type arrangement, the post-peak
behavior was also limited which is attributed to lower stiffness of in-
dividual stirrups.

3.3. Crack width

Limiting the width of cracks is one of the major criteria for the
serviceability design of concrete structures. Design strength of beam is
determined based on the limiting value of crack width in addition to
other limitations such as deflection. Therefore, in this section of test
results, the limiting crack width and corresponding strength of test
specimens are described for the purpose of comparison of different
study parameters. During testing, width of shear cracks was measured
perpendicular to the crack inclination with the portable microscope of
40 times magnification power. Maximum width of shear cracks on ei-
ther side of beam specimen was recorded for each loading interval.
Fig. 7 represents the relationship between the applied load and crack
width for the tested specimens. The study parameters showed great
influence on crack control ability. For a specific value of load (say
400 kN), the crack width of beam reinforced with steel stirrups was
1.2 mm, while for beam reinforced with CFRP pultruded bar stirrups
Fig. 6. Load-deflection curves of tested specimens. was 1 mm which is 20% less than its counter specimen reinforced with
steel stirrups. Crack width for CSS stirrups is 50 to 70% less than that
exhibited a high dependency on the type of shear reinforcement as well for CP stirrups. Increasing the width of CSS stirrups while keeping the
as the inclination angle of stirrups. In case of beam S8-90 reinforced cross-sectional area same had an adverse effect on crack control. Beams
with steel stirrups, the ultimate load sustained (470 kN) was con- with inclined stirrups (CSS20-45 and CSS20-90/64) showed better
siderably less than that of counter specimens reinforced with CFRP
stirrups. Moreover, the post-peak branch was limited having a very
steep slope, indicating the brittle behavior of the beam. Beam CP8-90
showed considerably better performance in term of peak load and post-
peak branch as compared to the reference beam S8-90 with the same
shear reinforcement ratio. The lower shear capacity of S8-90 may be
attributed to the lower yield strength of steel stirrups compared to the
rupture strength of CFRP stirrups. The beam CSS20-90 reinforced with
CSS stirrups exhibited improved performance than its counter beam
CP8-90 by sustaining a larger load at almost horizontal plateau for
larger deflections. Contrary to that beam CP8-90 failed shortly after the
peak load due to crushing of concrete and rupture of stirrups. For the
beam CSS20-90 reinforced with CSS stirrups, the larger second branch
of load-deflection curves is attributed to the better confinement pro-
vided by CSS stirrups to the concrete in compression zone [15,20] and
higher bend strength and ultimate strain of CSS stirrups compared to CP
stirrups. The higher concrete and stirrups strength delayed the failure
and consequently more strain developed in tension reinforcement
which resulted in higher mid-span deflections. By increasing the width
of CSS stirrup from 20 mm to 30 mm imparted negative impact on shear Fig. 7. Representation of growth of crack width with the increasing load.

49
M. Tahir, et al.
performance regarding crack control ability. Reducing the inclination
of CSS stirrups from 90 to 45° improved the crack control performance
by about 35%. ACI 2006 & 2015 [11,26] design guidelines impose the
maximum limit of 0.5 mm on crack width for serviceability of beams
reinforced with FRP stirrups. Comparison of the load carried by the
beam specimens corresponding to 0.5 mm width of crack (as enlisted in
Table 3) indicates that the stirrups material does not have significant
influence at this level of cracking. However, service load seems to in-
crease by the decrease of inclination of stirrups (90° to 45°). Beam re-
inforced with CSS stirrups in truss-type arrangement (CSS20-90/64)
sustained highest service load of 469 kN which is 20% higher than its
counter CSS20-90 specimen (refer to Table 3). In the current study,
0.11% to 0.28% strains in CSS stirrups were observed at service load
limit state. These observations are consistent with the observations
made by Lee et al. [17] for CFRP sheet strip stirrups.
3.4. Shear strength and deflection capacity
Table 3 summarizes the maximum shear load capacity (Vn) and
corresponding mid-span deflection (Δmax) of tested beam specimens.
Maximum shear load capacity (Vn) was calculated as half of the max-
imum applied load (Pmax). The study parameters seem to have influence
on the maximum shear capacity and corresponding mid-span deflec-
tion. Replacement of steel stirrups with CFRP stirrups of equal re-
inforcement ratio developed higher shear-load capacity and corre-
sponding mid-span deflection due to relatively higher failure strength
of CFRP stirrups. Vn of beam CSS20-90 with CSS stirrups was 6.5%
higher than the counter beam CP8-90 with CP stirrups. Insignificant
improvement in shear-load capacity was recorded by changing the
cross-sectional geometry of CFRP stirrups from circular to rectangular,
however, considerable improvements in Δmax (about 22%) and ultimate
deflection were observed. These observations approved the superiority
of CSS stirrups over CP stirrups, especially in the post-peak behavior
because of precluding the possibility of bond-slip failure and improved
strength at bend locations. The improvement in deflection corre-
sponding to maximum shear capacity with same longitudinal re-
inforcement ratio of test specimens is attributed to the better confine-
ment provided by CSS stirrups to the concrete in compression zone
compared to CP stirrups [15,20]. The higher concrete strength delayed
the failure and consequently more strain developed in tension re-
inforcement which resulted in higher mid-span deflection. Inclination
and width (ws) of CSS stirrups didn't significantly affect the shear ca-
pacity of the beam.
3.5. Strain in web reinforcement
Effective utilization of reinforcing material is indicated by the
maximum strains produced at the failure stage. Based on the maximum
strains produced in the reinforcing material, limiting values are speci-
fied for the design and analysis of structural members. Therefore, this
section describes the development of stirrup strains with the increase of
load, maximum values of strains developed at failure, and the effect of
study parameters on the development of stirrup strains. Fig. 8 re-
presents the load-strain relation for web reinforcement. From the load-
strain behavior of stirrups, it can be concluded that stirrups in all the
beams activated after the development of shear cracks and the level of
strain in stirrups for a beam were dependent on their location corre-
sponding to the shear crack. Stirrups intersecting the shear cracks de-
veloped higher strains compared to the rest which were not directly
intersected by shear cracks. In most of the beams, larger strains were
measured in the stirrups instrumented with the strain gauges V1, V2,
V5, and V6 located at mid-height of the section and near to the path of
main diagonal crack. For S8-90 stirrups start to yield prior to peak load
and specimen failed in shear (diagonal tension). For CSS20-90 spe-
cimen, a maximum strain of 0.56% was measured from strain gauge V2,
which is 44% of the ultimate tensile strain of CSS stirrup. For CSS30-90
50
Structures 22 (2019) 43–52
specimen, a maximum strain of 0.44% was measured form gauge V2,
which corresponds to 33% of the ultimate tensile strain of the same CSS
stirrup. By varying the inclination of stirrups from 90° to 60° increased
the stirrups strain; however, further reduction in inclination imparted
negative impact on stirrup strains. Stirrup strains of 0.56, 0.59 and
0.49% were recorded for specimens with CSS stirrups at inclination of
90, 60 and 45 degrees (CSS20-90, CSS20-60 and CSS20-45), respec-
tively. These values correspond to 44%, 47% and 38% of the ultimate
tensile strain of CSS stirrup. In case of the beam with the truss-type
arrangement of stirrups, inclined stirrup having lesser cross-sectional
area compared to vertical stirrup of other beams developed the highest
strain of above 0.8% due to lesser stiffness. This observation was con-
sistent with the observation made by Lee et al. [17], reported as; the
stirrups with lesser shear reinforcement ratio were stressed more
compared to stirrups with higher shear reinforcement ratio. The strain
of 0.11% to 0.28% in CSS stirrups was observed at service load limit
state as enlisted in Table 3. These observations are consistent with the
observations made by Lee et al. [17] for CFRP sheet strip stirrups. So,
the recommendations of Lee et al. [17] for the strain limit of 0.25% at
service load could be adopted.
3.6. Stirrups stress level and code specifications
Shear failure of beam is always brittle in nature irrespective of shear
reinforcing material, steel or FRPs. Therefore, beams are always de-
signed to fail in flexure instead of shear. For the safe and ductile design
of structural members, guidelines and specifications have been pro-
posed by different organizations, normally referred to as standards,
based on the observations made by different researchers. For the design
of FRP reinforced beams, existing design equations of steel reinforced
members are modified based on ‘strain approach’ [27]. Shear capacity
equations of the concrete section are established by replacing the steel
longitudinal reinforcement parameters with corresponding FRP re-
inforcement parameters; provided that the same strains are developed
in longitudinal reinforcement corresponding to same forces (strain ap-
proach). However, for the shear contribution provided by stirrups, the
same equations of steel reinforcement may be used with corresponding
FRP material properties. In this study the longitudinal reinforcement
was steel for the test specimens, so the ACI [28] equation of steel re-
inforced concrete was used for the prediction of shear capacity of
concrete section without stirrups (Vc). The shear resistance provided by
CFRP stirrups can be computed by subtracting the shear resistance
provided by concrete from the maximum shear capacity of the spe-
cimen (Vf = Vn − Vc). The average stress level in the stirrups (ffv−avg)
can be calculated using the truss analogy, as given in Eq. (1).
Vf S
f fv − avg =
Av d (cotθ + cotα ) sinα (1)
where, Av is the area of shear reinforcement, d is the effective depth of
section, and S is the center-to-center spacing of stirrups. Each Standard
has different limitations on design stress level (ffv = Efεf ≤ ffb) of FRP
stirrups. ACI 440 [11] limits the strain in FRP stirrups to 0.004 for
design stress level, while withstanding the aggregate interlocking and
shear of concrete. Canadian standard CSA S806 [29] limits the stress
level in FRP stirrups for design as 40% of the ultimate tensile strength of
the straight portion. Modified BS8110 [30] limits the strain in stirrups
to 0.0025, while CNR-DT [31] specifies the stress level in FRP stirrups
as high as 50% of the ultimate tensile strength. In all the cases, the
stress level in stirrups should not exceed the bend strength of stirrups. A
statistical parameter, average absolute error “AAE”, was used to com-
pare the adequacy of stress levels specified by different standards with
the experimentally determined stress level in CSS stirrups (as given in
Eq. (2)).
N
∑i = 1 |(Anai − Expi )/ Expi |
AAE =
N (2)
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

S8-90 CSS20-90

CSS30-90 CSS20-45

CSS20-60 CSS20-90/64
Fig. 8. Load-strain curves for web reinforcement.

Table 4 compares the normalized stress level (ffv/ffu) of stirrups Italian standard is less but the results are overestimated. Considering
experimentally determined and specified by different standards. The the stress limit of 0.5ffu may result in the unsafe design. The limit of
stress levels corresponding to strain limits of 0.0025 and 0.004 are 0.4ffu for design stress level proposed in CSA yielded conservative but
highly conservative. Although the AAE for the limit of 0.5ffu specified in reasonably good results with AAE of 17.7% for specimens with CSS

51
M. Tahir, et al. Structures 22 (2019) 43–52

Table 4 RC beams. Construct Build Mater 2016;118:52–62.

Experimental Vs Code specified stress level in CSS stirrups (ffv/ffu). [2] Badawi M, Soudki K. Flexural strengthening of RC beams with prestressed NSM
CFRP rods–experimental and analytical investigation. Construct Build Mater
Specimen ID Experimental Analytical 2009;23(10):3292–300.
[3] Barros JA, Dias SJ, Lima JL. Efficacy of CFRP-based techniques for the flexural and
ACI CSA BS CNR shear strengthening of concrete beams. Cement and Concrete Composites
2007;29(3):203–17.
CSS20-90 0.55 0.31 0.40 0.19 0.50 [4] Daghash SM, Ozbulut OE. Flexural performance evaluation of NSM basalt FRP-
CSS30-90 0.45 0.28 0.40 0.17 0.50 strengthened concrete beams using digital image correlation system. Composite
CSS20-45 0.44 0.31 0.40 0.19 0.50 Structures 2017;176:748–56.
[5] Maranan G, Manalo A, Benmokrane B, Karunasena W, Mendis P, Nguyen T. Shear
CSS20-60 0.51 0.31 0.40 0.19 0.50
behaviour of geopolymer-concrete beams transversely reinforced with continuous
AAE for C-SS stirrups 38.6 17.7 61.6 9.0
rectangular GFRP composite spirals. Composite Structures 2018;187:454–65.
[6] Said M, Adam MA, Mahmoud AA, Shanour AS. Experimental and analytical shear
evaluation of concrete beams reinforced with glass fiber reinforced polymers bars.
stirrups. Construct Build Mater 2016;102:574–91.
[7] El-Mogy M, El-Ragaby A, El-Salakawy E. Flexural behavior of continuous FRP-re-
inforced concrete beams. Journal of Composites for Construction
4. Conclusion 2010;14(6):669–80.
[8] Lau D, Pam HJ. Experimental study of hybrid FRP reinforced concrete beams. Eng
This paper presents the experimental study carried out to in- Struct 2010;32(12):3857–65.
[9] Tobbi H, Farghaly AS, Benmokrane B. Behavior of concentrically loaded fiber-re-
vestigate the shear performance of CFRP sheet strip stirrups (CSS) inforced polymer reinforced concrete columns with varying reinforcement types
fabricated using wet-layup technique. The main parameters in- and ratios. ACI Structural Journal 2014;111(2).
vestigated include shear reinforcement material type, stirrup cross- [10] Shehata E, Morphy R, Rizkalla S. Fibre reinforced polymer shear reinforcement for
concrete members: behaviour and design guidelines. Canadian Journal of Civil
section geometry and stirrup inclination with beam axis. Based on the Engineering 2000;27(5):859–72.
experimental results and observations discussed in the paper, the fol- [11] ACI. Guide for the design and construction of structural concrete reinforced with
lowing conclusion can be drawn: fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) bars. ACI Farmington hills. USA: Michigan; 2015.
[12] El-Sayed AK, El-Salakawy E, Benmokrane B. Mechanical and structural character-
ization of new carbon FRP stirrups for concrete members. Journal of Composites for
1. Initial stiffness of beam is independent of shear reinforcement ma- Construction 2007;11(4):352–62.
terial and the cross-sectional geometry of CFRP stirrups. [13] Lee C, Ko M, Lee Y. Bend strength of complete closed-type carbon fiber-reinforced
polymer stirrups with rectangular section. Journal of Composites for Construction
2. Changing the cross-sectional geometry of CFRP stirrups from cir- 2013;18(1):04013022.
cular to rectangular improved the bend strength ratio of stirrups, [14] Spadea S, Orr J, Ivanova K. Bend-strength of novel filament wound shear re-
resulting in improvement of shear capacity and deflection corre- inforcement. Composite Structures 2017;176:244–53.
[15] Dong H-L, Wang D, Wang Z, Sun Y. Axial compressive behavior of square concrete
sponding to peak shear.
columns reinforced with innovative closed-type winding GFRP stirrups. Composite
3. Application of CSS stirrups at an inclination with the beam axis Structures 2018;192:115–25.
improved the shear performance of beam at service limit state, [16] Ali AH, Mohamed HM, Benmokrane B. Shear behavior of circular concrete members
especially for the specimen with truss type arrangement of stirrups. reinforced with GFRP bars and spirals at shear span-to-depth ratios between 1.5 and
3.0. Journal of Composites for Construction 2016;20(6):04016055.
4. Strain limit of 0.004 specified by ACI 440.1R-15 is highly con- [17] Lee C, Lee S, Shin S. Shear capacity of RC beams with carbon fiber-reinforced
servative for design strength of CSS stirrups, while, the limit of 0.4ffu polymer stirrups with rectangular section. Journal of Composites for Construction
proposed by CSA S806-02 proved to be rational for safe and eco- 2015;20(4):04015085.
[18] Spadea S, Orr J, Nanni A, Yang Y. Wound FRP shear reinforcement for concrete
nomical shear design using CSS stirrups. structures. Journal of Composites for Construction 2017;21(5):04017026.
It is now well established that the use of CFRP sheet strip stirrups is [19] Spadea S, Orr J, Nanni A. New frontiers for the use of FRP reinforcement in geo-
a viable option to overcome the shortcomings of pultruded CFRP bar metrically complex concrete structures. 2016.
[20] Tahir M, Wang Z, Ali KM. Axial compressive behavior of square concrete columns
stirrups and durability issues of steel reinforcement. However, fur- confined with CFRP strip ties using wet lay-up technique. Construct Build Mater
ther investigations are required to find the optimum inclination of 2019;200:282–92.
CSS stirrups. Moreover, further studies may be carried out to explore [21] Ashour AF, Kara IF. Size effect on shear strength of FRP reinforced concrete beams.
Compos Part B Eng 2014;60:612–20.
the interaction of CSS stirrups with longitudinal CFRP reinforce- [22] Lee C, Kim J-Y, Heo S-Y. Experimental observation on the effectiveness of fiber
ment. sheet strip stirrups in concrete beams. Journal of Composites for Construction
2010;14(5):487–97.
[23] E. DIN, 527-1: 2012-6 (E), plastics–determination of tensile properties–part 1.
Declaration of competing interest
[24] E. ISO. 527–5: 2009 plastics–determination of tensile properties–part 5: Test con-
ditions for unidirectional fibrereinforced plastic composites. West Conshohocken:
None. ISO international standards; 2009.
[25] S. ASTM. Standard specification for deformed and plain carbon-steel bars for con-
crete reinforcement. 2009.
Acknowledgments [26] ACI. Guide for the design and construction of structural concrete reinforced with
FRP bars, ACI 440.1 R-06. 2006.
This work was supported by the National Key Research and [27] Fib b. FRP reinforcement in RC structures. Technical report. 2007.
[28] A.C. 318. Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-14). An ACI
Development Program of China (No. 2017YFC0703001) and the standard: commentary on building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51408153, No. 318R-14): An ACI report. American Concrete Institute; 2014.
51478143, and No. 51278150). [29] C.S. CAN. CSA-S806-02, Design and construction of building components with
fiber-reinforced polymers. Mississauga, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Standards
Association; 2002.
References [30] B. BS, Structural use of concrete, part 1: code of practice for design and construc-
tion, British Standards Institution, UK (1997).
[31] CNR-DT. Guide for the design and construction of concrete structures reinforced
[1] El-Gamal S, Al-Nuaimi A, Al-Saidy A, Al-Lawati A. Efficiency of near surface
with fiber-reinforced polymer bars. 2006.
mounted technique using fiber reinforced polymers for the flexural strengthening of

52