Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

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

Flexural behavior of strengthened concrete beams with multiple

retrofitting systems
Mohammed M. Attia a, *, Bassam Abdelsalam Abdelsalam a, Dina E. Tobbala a, b,
Basem O. Rageh c
a
Civil & Architectural Construction Dept., Faculty of Technology and Education, Suez University, Suez, Egypt
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Nile Higher Institute of Engineering & Technology, Mansoura, Egypt
c
Civil Engineering Dep., Delta Higher Institute for Engineering and Technology, Mansoura, Egypt

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

Keywords: Due to material deterioration, structure age, changes in building function, fault design, and
Flexural behavior decreased structural reliability brought on by natural catastrophes, it may require to strength­
GFRP laminates ening the reinforced concrete (RC) beams. The entire carbon footprint is increased by the usage of
Steel plate
building materials like cement. Therefore, restoring/improving their overall functionality may be
Abaqus
Nonlinear Finite Element
accomplished more sustainably by strengthening and repairing damaged members. In this study,
Fibrous concrete jacket a series of RC beams were tested in three-point bending to determine the ability of various
strengthening techniques to improve the beams’ flexural capacity. Three strengthening tech­
niques were proposed: External bonding with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) laminates,
near-surface mounted (NSM), and U-jacket. The experimental study compared the various
strengthening methods in terms of ultimate loads, crack loads, maximum deflections, gains in
ductility, and energy absorption. The finite element program (ABAQUS) was used for the nu­
merical computations because it is capable of properly simulating experimental research on the
flexural behaviour of reinforced concrete beams. Compared to all techniques, the strengthening
using GFRP in the different techniques (GFRP laminate, NSM, and U-jacket) propagation of cracks
before failure occurred in the RC beam. The sample B3-St. plate-NSM, which used the NSM
technique, had the highest peak load of 77.2 MPa compared to all samples and a 36.64% increase
over the control sample B0-Control. Moreover, the sample B3-St. Plate-NSM has improved stiff­
ness which contributed to reducing the deflection at peak load by 21.12% than the control
sample. The strengthening system using steel plate as NSM showed the lowest cost ($/m`) among
the other strengthening systems. The specimen B1-GFRP, which used the GFRP technique, had the
highest toughness of 1099.2 kN.mm by an increase of 40.25% over the control sample. Finally,
the results obtained by using numerical FE models show good agreement with the experimental
results.

1. Introduction

RC structures that are typical will need to be updated or replaced and they’re in poor condition, not only due to natural disasters,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mohammed.mahmoudattia@suezuni.edu.eg (M.M. Attia).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2023.e01862
Received 16 August 2022; Received in revised form 31 December 2022; Accepted 16 January 2023
Available online 18 January 2023
2214-5095/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

material deterioration, and the change of useful function but also due to errors made all through design and execution [1–6]. Addi­
tionally, most existing structures are constructed as per out-of-date norms and codes [7–14] As a result, they do not comply with
modern design requirements, and ASCE 2009 classifies them as structurally deficient [15]. It is both economically and environmentally
advantageous to reinforce existing structures rather than completely replace them, as the cost of new constructions has risen signif­
icantly[16,17]. As a result, designers must discover novel materials and building strategies to handle the problem of reinforcing
existing RC structures [4].
The industry offers a variety of reinforcing materials, including steel plates, Ferro cement, and fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)
laminate [18,19]. The use of FRP materials is amongst the most outstanding methods for increasing the ultimate sustainable load
capacity of existing RC structures [20–24]. When comparing cost-effective strengthening solutions, corrosion resistance, ease of
installation, strength-to-weight ratio, use, durability performance, fatigue resistance, and availability in a range of shapes and sizes,
FRP materials outperform traditional strengthening materials like steel sheets [25–27] Externally bonded reinforcement (EBR) and
near-surface mounted reinforcement (NSM) are two techniques of strengthening RC structures with FRP [4,28–30].
Externally bonding involves bonding one or more FRP laminates to the tensile surface of concrete members to the bending
strengthening of concrete elements. The strengthening external bonding technique necessitates extensive surface preparation because
the effect of strengthening is heavily dependent on the contact between the FRP and the parent concrete [31]. ACI 440.2 R [32]
specifies detailed guidelines for the external bonding technique for strengthening RC members. The members are cleaned with
high-pressure water and then allowed to dry and, to improve the effectiveness of the bond applied the primer on the surface. After that,
an epoxy resin layer is added in preparation for fixing the FRP strips. The number of FRP layers required depends on the required
strength increase. R. Capozucca et al. [33] investigated RC beam strengthened with GFRP strips in flexural. Static tests were performed
on three RC beams with the same geometric properties. One of the beams was a control beam and two were reinforced with EB GFRP
strips connected to the beam by two-phase epoxy resin. It concluded that the GFRP strips increase the ductility of strengthened RC
beams. Sandeep G. Sawant et al. [34] investigated the flexural behavior of GFRP-reinforced RC beams. The load-carrying capacity of
GFRP laminates increases with increasing length, width, and number of layers. Furthermore, the deflection increased using single,
double, and three layers of GFRP strips.
Unlike EB, the NSM technique does not alter the appearance of R.C members [35] Significant advantages of using NSM over EB
strengthening include; less proclivity for FRP debonding, higher strengthening efficiency due to better bonding, and effective utili­
zation of FRP [36]. A high-strength adhesive made mostly of epoxy resin is used to fill the pre-cut grooves on the bottom beam after
inserting FRP rods or strips, as one of the main procedures for reinforcing RC elements utilizing the NSM technology [37,38]. NSM
strengthening can be used to improve RC members’ flexural performance [31]. ACI 440.2 R [32] guidelines can be used to repair and
strengthen RC members using the NSM technique. First, the members are prepared with grooves of the required dimensions (at least
1.5 times the specimen’s dimension) and thoroughly cleaned with a high-pressure water jet. To improve the bond between the FRP
reinforcement and the concrete in NSM strengthening, a layer of primer coating was applied. Before installing the FRP, the grooves will
partially fill using the epoxy resin. After that, the FRP reinforcement was installed into groove and filled once again with the epoxy.
Prior to mechanical testing, the strengthened specimen is given a minimum curing time to allow the epoxy resin to harden sufficiently.
Y. Kusuma et al. [39] studied the flexural performance of RC beams strengthened by the NSM technique using GFRP strips. The
experimental study entails casting a RC beam with dimensions of 150 * 150 * 700 mm, strengthening it with GFRP strips of 12 mm
width and along the span. It was determined that the NSM method is one of the most effective methods for Curvature strengthening
when compared to the control beam. Furthermore, in the case of strengthened beams, many characteristics such as first cracking load,
peak load carrying capacity, deflection, and stress-strain relationship are developed. Tarek H. Almusallam et.al [40], investigated
flexural reinforcement of RC beams using near-surface mounted. The test results demonstrated that the original load capacity of the
control beam could be successfully restored by using NSM to offset the difference in the main reinforcement, while the higher ratios of
NSM reinforcement, both deflection, and energy ductility ratios significantly decrease. Also, no debonding failure was seen in any of
the tested beams due to the excellent bond behavior of all planted steel and GFRP bars.
Strengthening structures with the installation of RC layers and jackets is a widely utilized technology. Numerous practical,
theoretical, and modeling research on columns, beams, and slabs reinforced with FRP sheets, steel plates, and ordinary concrete jackets
have been published [41–47]. The concrete shrinkage strain of the added layers/jackets is a critical parameter in this procedure, as it
can significantly affect the lifetime and performance of the strengthened structures. Further stress is introduced into stronger materials,
resulting in the new layer breaking and/or debonding [48–54]. Thus, a novel technique for enhancing the performance of current
structural parts is to connect them with extra fiber RC layers or jackets [46,55] resulting in improved mechanical qualities of these
structures and enriching both their resistance and durability [56]. On the other hand, the fiber content is a critical characteristic
determining the flexural strength and ductility of RC members. As per reported experimental research [57–61], increasing the ratios of
synthetic or natural fibers resulted in an increase in flexural strength at the expense of ductility and improve the brittle behavior of
concrete. Utilizing fibers has the potential to reduce the brittleness of the cementitious matrix. Many advantages of fibers, the brittle
fracture process can be controlled, the post-cracking strength and toughness may be provided, and the cracking behavior can be
influenced. The fiber reinforcement can be described in terms of its material (steel, mineral, or synthetic fibres), shape, aspect ratio
(diameter to length ratio), and mechanical characteristics [62]. Steel fibres used in concrete mix typically range in l/d ratio from 50 to
100. Increasing l/d ratios increases the likelihood of heterogeneous distribution of fibres in concrete mix. Furthermore, Vf has a
significant impact on the workability of concrete. The best Vf values for concrete mixes are 0.5–2.5% by volume of concrete. According
to drop weight type tests by Mohammadi et al. [63] on SFRC specimens with varying aspect ratios up to 40%, the higher aspect ratio of
fiber can improve the impact resistance. Lin Liao et. Al [64] studied the effect of different fiber content and aspect ratio of steel fiber on
the mechanical properties of concrete. Three fibre aspect ratios (30, 50, and 60, respectively) and six fibre content levels (0%, 0.5%,

2
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

1.0%, 1.5%, 2.0%, and 2.5% in volume fraction) were investigated. The results of the tests show that SFRC has a noticeable strain rate
effect. The fibre content of SFRC exhibits strain rate sensitivity with the same fibre aspect ratio. The maximum compressive strength is
displayed by SFRC with a fibre aspect ratio of 50 at various strain rates for the same fibre content. Semsi Yazc [65] investigated the
effect of steel fibre aspect ratio (l/d) and volume fraction (Vf) on the mechanical properties of concrete. Three different l/d ratios were
used: 45, 65, and 80. Fiber volumes of 0.5%, 1.0%, and 1.5% by volume of concrete were added to concrete mixes. It was discovered
that the inclusion of steel fibres has a significant effect on the split tensile and flexural strength of concrete in relation to the l/d ratio
and Vf. M Maksum et al. [66] investigated the effect of steel fibre volume fraction on concrete strength. Parameters were steel fibre
volume fraction of 0%, 0.5%, 1%, 1.5%, and 2.0%. The test results revealed a linear increase in concrete tensile strength as a function
of steel fibre volume fraction, also the volume fraction of steel fibre in concrete has an effect on its workability. Shaoqiang Meng [67],
invistigated the effect of steel fibre volume fraction (0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, and 2.0%) and distribution on flexural behaviour. The crack
propagation behaviour of concrete under bending load was determined using digital image correlation. The crack propagation path
becomes more zigzagged as the fibre volume fraction increases. Kang and Kim[68] studied the influence of fiber orientation and
dispersion in the mix. As per this research [68], whereas fiber distribution and orientation have a minimal effect on pre-cracking
action, they have a major impact on post-cracking properties of materials.
Most of the previous studies discussed only one technique and its effect on the behavior of R.C beams. So, the aim of this paper is to
make a comparative study to clarify the behavior of RC beams with different strengthening techniques under static flexural.
Furthermore, introducing steel fibers in the jacket technique to improve its overall behavior of RC beams. Finally, validation of
experimental work was carried out by the nonlinear finite element (FE) model. Finally, n economic study was conducted to determine
which of the strengthening systems had the lowest cost.

2. Experimental work

2.1. Materials and concrete mixes

Two mixtures were used, one of them for casting RC beams and the other for strengthening, and they are referred to as Mo and MR
respectively. Ordinary Portland cement-type OPC- I 42.5 N and OPC-I 52.5 N were used in Mo and MR, respectively. Silica fume (SF)
was used as binder materials (B) in the repair mix MR. The chemical composition, phase composition, and physical properties of binder
materials are listed in Table 1. Ordinary Portland cement tests were carried out according to ASTM C150/C150M-21 [69]. Natural sand
(S) with a fineness modulus of 2.6 and specific gravity (SG) of 2.67 was used as fine aggregate for the two mixes. Dolomite (D) with a
specific weight of 2.7 with water absorption of 3% and nominal maximum size (NMZ) of 19 mm and 9.5 mm were utilized as coarse
aggregates of Mo and MR mixes, respectively. The grading of dolomite and sand is shown in Fig. 1. The sulphate content of S and D
were 0.25% and 0.19%, respectively. Aggregate tests were carried out according to ASTM C33/C33M-18 [70]. Sikament -NN types F
with a density of 1.2 kg/m3 was used in Mo as the superplasticizer (SP1), compatible with ASTM C494/C494M-19 [71]. Sika Vis­
coCrete 5930 with a density of 1.08 kg/m3 was the superplasticizer (SP2), compatible with ASTM C494/C494M-19 [71] types G and F,
used in MR mix. Steel-reinforced fibres (SRF) are hooked-shaped materials having a strength of 1100 N/mm2, a specific gravity of 7.85,
a diameter of 0.8 mm, a length of 50 mm, and an aspect ratio of 50, a fibre length to fibre diameter ratio. It was used in MR mix only

Table 1
Chemical and physical properties of the OPC and SF.
Properties OPC I-42.5 N OPC I-52.5 N SF

Chemical Properties
CaO % 63.64 62.34 0.21
SiO2 % 19.58 20 97.20
Al2O3 % 5.41 6.25 0.25
Fe2O3 % 3.41 3.55 0.54
SO3 % 2.29 2.42 0.11
MgO % 0.91 2.12 0.43
K2 O % - 0.75 0.45
Na2O % 0.83 0.81 0.15
Cl % 0.048 0.013 -
F-CaO % 1.1 0.6 -
LOI % 4.65 3.57 0.74
Phase composition
C3S % 68.11 60.6 -
C2S % 4.64 10 -
C3A % 6.56 9.5 -
C4AF % 10.22 10.8 -
Physical Properties
Water for standard consistency % 27.2 30.26 -
Specific surface area (Blain) cm2/g 2984 3630 17.8 × 103
Specific weight 3.15 3.15 2.15
Soundness (Le-Chatelier) mm 1.5 1.0 -
Initial setting time min. 150 90 -
Final setting time min. 189 565 -

3
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 1. Grading curve; a) fine aggregate (sand); b) coarse aggregate (dolomite).

Table 2
Mixture proportions of concrete mixes, all the component unit is with kg/m3.
Mix No. B. materials S D W SP1 SP2 SRF

OPC I-42.5 N OPC I-52.5 N SF

MO 400 - - 761.5 1142.3 160 8 - -

MR - 450 67.5 704.1 1056.1 129.4 0 20.7 102.05

Notes: B: materials: Binder materials (C+SF)W: Water D: Dolomite as the coarse aggregate S: Sand as the fine aggregate SF: Silica fume SP1: Sikament-
NN SP2: Sika Visco-Crete 5–930

with 1.5% of the total volume of the mix. Components of concrete mixes of Mo and MR are presented in Table 2. The two mixes were
blended with the same procedures of a previous study [72]. The sand was 40% of the total aggregates, while water and SP were
calculated as percentages of binders. Cement content, water-to-binder ratio (w/b), and SP/b% of Mo mix were 400 kg/m3, 0.4% and
2%, respectively. While they changed to 450 kg/m3, 0.25% and 4%, respectively in MR mix. Six cylinders with a diameter of 150 mm
and a height of 300 mm were used for quality control and in the same treatment conditions for the RC beams. The stress-strain curve of
Mo and MR concrete are shown in Fig. 2. The conventional cylinder splitting test was used to determine the average tensile strength of
the concrete (fct) for Mo, MR and it was found to be 2.44 MPa, and 3.6 MPa, respectively.
The Mechanical characteristics of mild and high-strength steel reinforcement used in the experimental study are shown in Table 3.
The steel plate strips (St. 37) with dimensions 4 × 20 × 110 mm. The average yield stress of steel plate strip samples was 398.4 N/
mm2. The average ultimate tensile strength was 495 N/mm2. The strain at the yield point was 0.03, as shown in Fig. 3. The material for
strengthening was the GFRP laminate Sikawrap_430 from Sika Egypt, steel plate, and Epoxy Sikadur-330 from sika Egypt to bond GFRP
laminate and the steel plate on the concrete surface of the strengthened beams in this study. The properties of strengthening materials
are shown in Table4.

Fig. 2. Uniaxial compressive-stress-strain of concrete obtained experimentally.

4
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Table 3
Mechanical characteristics of longitudinal steel bars.
Nominal diameter (mm) Elastic modulus (Es) Yield stress (MPa) Ultimate stress Ultimate strain Poisson ratio
(GPa) (Mpa)

8 200 180 260 0.10 0.3

10 211 365 520 0.13 0.3
12 208 370 530 0.14 0.3

Fig. 3. Stress-strain curve of steel plate.

Table 4
Characteristics of strengthening materials.
Strengthening materials Thickness (mm) Elastic modulus (GPa) Tensile strength ( MPa)

GFRP laminate (Sikawrap_430) 0.168 70 1500

Epoxy resin- (Sikadur-330) - 3.4 33.8

2.2. Specimens and experimental Set-up

Six beams were cast with Mo mix with typical dimensions of 150 cm length, 20 cm height, and 15 cm width. The six beams had
typical steel reinforcement, (2Ø12 mm) as the main reinforcement in the tension zone, (2Ø10 mm) as a secondary reinforcement in the
compression zone and the stirrups were (8Ø8 mm/m), as shown in Fig. 4. A three-point bending test was applied to the beams as

Fig. 4. Reinforced detailing, and concrete and steel strain gauge locations in beams.

Table 5
Program details for tested beams.
Beam No. Terminology Strengthening Strategy

B0 B0-Control -
B1 B1-GFRP GFRP
B2 B2-GFRP-NSM GFRP-NSM
B3 B3-St. plate-NSM St. plate-NSM
B4 B4-U_Conc. U_Conc.
B5 B5-U_Conc.-GFRP U_Conc.-GFRP

5
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

illustrated in Fig. 4 after curing for 7 days using wet burlap. The distance between supports was 1250 mm. Dial gauge sensitivity
(50 ×10–6)/mm was used to measure the deflection. Steel electrical strain gauge (6 mm length, with gauge resistance 120 ± 0.5% Ω)
was used and attached to the surface of tension reinforcement and installed in the middle of the longitudinal tension reinforcing bars.
On the other hand, a concrete electrical strain gauge (60 mm length with gauge resistance 120 ± 0.5% Ω), was installed on the
compression surface of the beam near the middle. The measured data were recorded using lab view software by a data logger con­
nected to a computer system. Table 5 illustrates the program details of the RC-tested beams.
The 1st beam, named (B0), was tested as a control beam, used to compare the other five beams, and reinforced with different
methods. The 2nd beam (B1-GFRP) was reinforced by three layers of glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) with 100 mm width and
1000 mm length, as shown in Fig. 5. Firstly, 20 mm of the bottom of the beam had been removed to add the reinforced fiber. Each layer
of GFRP had been glued to the next with sikadur-32. An extra layer of sikadur-330 was added to the surface of the layers to recover and
flatten the beam’s lower surface.
The 3rd and 4th beams (B2-GFRP-NSM and B3- St. plate-NSM) were reinforced using NSM system with GFRP and steel (St.) plate,
respectively, as shown in Fig. 6. These beams were prepared by making grooves along the bottom surface of the beam, 10 mm thickness
and 30 mm depth. The beam B2-GFRP-NSM was reinforced using one piece of GFRP of 60 mm width and folded into three layers of
20 mm width and 1100 mm length. It was fixed in the groove and glued with sikadur-330 then the groove was filled with sikadur-330.
On the other hand, the beam B3- St. plate-NSM was reinforced using a steel plate of 4 mm thickness, 20 mm height, and 1100 mm
length. The steel plate was glued in the groove with sikadur-32 then the groove was filled with sikadur-330.
The 5th and 6th beams were named B4-U_Conc. and B5-U_Conc.-GFRP and prepared by removing a U-section of 20 mm from the
bottom cover and 2/3 of the beam’s sides height. B4-U_Conc. beam was repaired by recovering the removed U- section with steel fiber
RC MR mix. B5-U_Conc.-GFRP beam was repaired using three perpendicular strips of GFRP, as shown in Fig. 7. The 1st strip is 150 mm
wide and 2/3 of the bottom’s length. The 2nd strip consisted of 6 U-shape strips of width 100 mm along the bottom of the beam. The
3rd strip consisted of 2 side strips 100 mm in width and along the total length of the beam, fixing the U-shaped strips. Finally, the
beam’s cover was recovered with MR mix.

Fig. 5. Preparation of B1-GFR. a) glued GFRP strips b) recovering beam with Sikadur-330.

Fig. 6. Preparation of B2-GFRP-NSM and B3- St. plate-NSM beams. a) making groove, b) glued GFRP or steel plate.

6
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 7. Preparation steps of B5-U_Conc.-GFRP. a) glued bottom strip, b) glued U-sec strips, and c) glued the two sides strips.

3. Results and discussions

In this study, load-deflection, load-strain, ductility index, toughness, and failure modes were measured and analyzed. Table 6 shows
the experimental results of tested specimens.

3.1. load-deflection behavior

The load-deflection behavior of strengthened R.C beams was shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9. The crack load of beam B1-GFRP started at
18 kN, while the crack load of control beam B0-Control was 15 kN. This result referred to the significant role of GFRP sheets in
reducing the deflection value, consequently delaying the appearance of the first crack. For beam B4-U_Conc. Strengthened with U
concrete jacket, the crack load was recorded at 12 kN, revealed earlier than beam B0-Control. This result may be due to debonding
between the concrete jacket and beam, also referred to as insufficiency of shear strength using shear connector bars.
All strengthening systems exhibited a higher ultimate load than the control beam by ratios of 22%, 19%, 37%, 14%, and 28% for
beams B1-GFRP, B2-GFRP-NSM, and B3-St. plate-NSM, B4-U_Conc., and B5-U_Conc.-GFRP, respectively. The maximum deflection of
strengthened beams corresponding to the ultimate load of the control beam is 6.76, 4.65, 2.18, 5.05, and 6.1 mm with reduction
percentages of 58.1%, 71.2%, 86.5%, 68.7%, and 62.2% for beams B1, B2, B3, B4, and B5, respectively, compared with a maximum
deflection of control beam B0 as presented in Fig. 8. For the GFRP technique, using two layers of GFRP sheet at the bottom beam is
better than using GFRP by NSM into a grove at the bottom beam, as shown in Fig. 9a. For the NSM technique, the strengthening using
steel plate into a grove at the bottom beam revealed a good structural behavior compared with beam strengthened with GFRP into a
grove, as shown in Fig. 9b. For the concrete jacket technique, the strengthening using U-GFRP covered by concrete jacket improved the
concrete beam behavior contrasted to strengthening with a concrete jacket only, as appeared in Fig. 9c. The best strengthening method
is NSM with steel plate due to higher stiffness and ultimate capacity than the other strengthening techniques. The ultimate load

Table 6
Experimental results of tested specimens.
Beams Loads (kN) Max. deflection (mm) Toughness (kN.mm) Ductility index

Crack Yield Ultimate

B0-Control 15 48.3 56.5 16.1 783.7 2.79

B1-GFRP 18 50.6 68.9 20.0 1099.2 3.59
B2-GFRP-NSM 14 52.6 67.0 18.1 1062.7 2.98
B3-St. plate-NSM 14 57.2 77.2 12.7 861.0 2.78
B4-U_Conc. 12 53.6 64.6 14.4 782.6 2.85
B5-U_Conc.-GFRP 14 51.0 72.3 18.6 1039.0 2.93

7
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 8. Load-deflection curve of tested R.C beams.

Fig. 9. Load-deflection comparisons of strengthening techniques.

capacity of sample B3-St. plate-NSM reached to highest load compared with other beams. On the other hand, the specimens B1-GFRP
demonstrate higher deformation than other beams.

3.2. Load-strain behavior

The load vs tensile strain at the mid-span of RC beams were shown in Fig. 10a. The tensile strain at yield load was 1911, 1835, 2326,
1868, 1756, and 1852 µ strain for beams B0, B1, B2, B3, B4, and B5, respectively. The tensile strain of beams strengthened with the
NSM technique was 2326 and 1868 µ strain for specimens B2 -GFRP-NSM and B3-St. plate-NSM. The NSM technique with steel plate
proved better stiffness and yield load than NSM with GFRP. The beams strengthened using a concrete jacket with U-GFRP and steel
plate NSM techniques exhibited high stiffness and yield load compared with the control beam. On the other hand, the other

8
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 10. Load-strain curves of RC beams.

strengthened techniques provide a higher yield load and lower stiffness than the control beam. All strengthening systems show
increment yield load capacity by ratios 4.8%, 8.9%, 39.1%, 11%, and 5.6% for specimens B1-GFRP, B2-GFRP-NSM, and B3-St. plate-
NSM, B4-U_Conc., and B5-U_Conc.-GFRP, respectively, compared with the control beam.
The compressive strain was recorded from a strain gauge placed on the top surface of the concrete beam at mid-span as shown in
Fig. 10b. The strain of concrete ranged between 1312 and 1965 µ strain. It can be concluded that specimen B5-U_Conc.-GFRP showed
the highest compressive strain than the other specimens. These results achieveme the main aim of this study which was improving the
efficiency of strengthening RC beams in the flexural zone.

3.3. Ductility index

The ductility index of tested beams is determined by dividing the deflection at the ultimate load by the deflection on the steel yield
load. The beams B1-GFRP and B2-GFRP-NSM exhibited a higher ductility index than the control beam B0 and other strengthening
techniques, expressed as ductile behavior. The increment ratio of the ductility index was about 29% and 7% for beams B1-GFRP and
B2-GFRP-NSM, respectively, compared to control beam B0. Fig. 11a shows the ductility index of all RC beams. The RC jackets
strengthening technique slightly increased the ductility index by 2% and 5% for specimens B4-U_Conc. and B5-U_Conc.-GFRP,
respectively, compared to B0. The beam B3-St. plate-NSM shows ductility index as the same as beam B0. It can be concluded that
the GFRP sheets increase the deformation of the RC beams comparable with other techniques.

Fig. 11. Ductility index and toughness of tested beams.

9
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

3.4. Toughness

The toughness of the RC beam is defined as the amount of energy absorbed in the beam under loading. The area under the load-
deflection curve calculates the beam toughness. The toughness increases compared to the control specimen B0 by about 40%, 36%,

Fig. 12. Failure modes of tested beams.

10
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

10%, and 33% for specimens B1, B2, B3, and B5, respectively. Moreover, this was referred to the increase in ultimate load and
deflection subsequently, which increased the stiffness of RC beams. Otherwise, the beam strengthened with concrete jacket B4 has
identical toughness as B0, as seen in Fig. 11b. The unimprovement in the toughness of beam B4 may be due to the weakness of the bond
between old and new concrete and the absence of shear connector bars. The GFRP sheets strengthening technique, whether the layers
or NSM, has developed the toughness of the beam compared with other strengthening systems.

3.5. Modes of failure

The tested beams show the crack pattern through subjected to static loads. All strengthened and control beams failed by tension
failure at the flexural zone. The beam strengthened with GFRP laminates B1-GFRP presented increasing in cracks numbers, in addition,
reduce the distance between cracks as presented in Fig. 12a. The failure sequence of B1-GFRP was started by yielding bottom steel
reinforcement bars then debonding failure of GFRP strips between glass fiber sheets and the concrete surface. For beams strengthened
with NSM techniques, beams B2 and B3 exhibited high deformation compared with other strengthened beams, consequently, showing
high deflection at the ultimate load. The St. plate-NSM contributes to reducing the deflection at the ultimate load of beams
strengthened with GFRP-NSM by a ratio of 81% as shown in Fig. 12b. Specimen B2 failed as the same failure mode of beam B3 by
yielding main steel reinforcement bars followed by debonding of GFRP-NSM and St. plate-NSM as displayed in Fig. 12c and Fig. 12d.
The crack development of the beams strengthened by fibrous concrete jackets with and without GFRP laminates is shown in Fig. 12e
and Fig. 12f. The strengthening by a fibrous concrete jacket with GFRP sheets revealed numerous cracks at the flexural zone before
failure compared with the specimen strengthened using a fibrous concrete jacket without GFRP strips. However, the strengthening
using GFRP in the different systems (strips, NSM, and U-jacket) developed cracks before failure occurred in the RC beam. On the other
hand, the FE model of all samples showed cracks in the middle third that validated experimental results.

4. Finite element analysis

A numerical investigation was carried out using the FE method to study the suggested strengthening schemes of simply supported
beams as shown in Fig. 13. To confirm the sufficiency of the experimental results, the FE modeling was developed using ABAQUS
software [73]. All investigated beams were analyzed under vertical monotonic loading.

Fig. 13. Strengthening configuration: a) B0-Control, b) B1-GFRP, c) B2-GFRP-NSM, d) B3-St-plate-NSM, e) B4-U_Conc, f) B5-U_Conc.-GFRP.
11
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

4.1. Modelling of concrete

The “Concrete damage plasticity model” (CDP) is used for concrete modelling due to the ability of the model to simulate concrete’s
plastic properties and consider the behavior of concrete softening in tension and compression. The main failure modes are tensile
cracking and compressive crushing in this model [74]. The compressive stress-strain curve of the concrete was determined during the
experimental program and the resulting curve was taken into account in the nonlinear analysis, as shown in Fig. 2.
The tensile post-failure behavior of concrete was modeled as a fracture energy cracking. This method for modeling the tension
behavior of concrete prevents unconstitutional mesh-sensitive results. Elastic modulus Ec, and tensile strength fct are the variables
needed to establish the first part of this relation Fig. 14a. Gf is the fracture energy of concrete which is used to specify the post-peak
tension failure behavior of concrete mix M0 Fig. 14b. The same procedures are used for modeling MR mix for B4-U_Conc.

4.2. Modelling steel reinforcement

To simulate the plastic behavior of steel, the simplified stress-strain curve utilizing the experimental values was taken into
consideration. A bilinear elastic-plastic material with a stress-strain curve is shown in Fig. 15. The embedded region constraint is used
to model the steel as fully bonded with concrete where the concrete is the host element. The parameter values of steel reinforcement
used to define the elastic-plastic behavior are elastic modulus Es, yield stress fy, ultimate stress, and Poisson’s ratio were taken from the
experimental results. (Refer Sections 3–1– Table 3).

Fig. 14. Tensile curve of concrete, concrete mix M0, fc’= 60 MPa.

Fig. 15. Stress-strain curve for steel reinforcement in finite element analysis.

12
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

4.3. GFRP Laminate and steel plates modelling

The GFRP laminate was modeled as a linear elastic isotropic till failure. Manufacturer specifications for the laminate tensile
strength and elastic modulus of the unidirectional GFRP and steel plate were used in the numerical investigation. (Refer Sections 3–1–
Table 4).

4.4. Modelling of GFRP Laminate and steel plate – Concrete interface

Since no debonding was observed during the experimental tests for all specimens, the bond between the GFRP laminate and the
concrete interface was assumed as a perfect bond. In perfect bond modeling, the traction or slippage of laminates during each step of
the finite element analysis is not allowed. A similar assumption was applied to the steel plate/concrete interface.

4.5. Boundary conditions, elements, and meshing

The FE model consisted of defining geometry, materials, constraints, and contacts to simulate the behavior of beams. RC beam was
modelled using 3D stress eight-nodded linear brick, reduced integration, hourglass control element (C3D8R) while, the steel-
reinforcing rebars and stirrups were modelled as two-nodded linear 3D truss element (T3D2). The strengthened elements (steel
plate, GFRP, etc.) were modelled as four-nodded doubly thin curved shell, reduced integration, hourglass control (S4R). A mesh size of
25 × 25 mm, as shown in Fig. 16 was used to divide the RC beams into fine elements.

4.6. FE models Results against the experimental investigation

Fig. 17 (a, b, c, d, e, and f) indicates load-deflection curves provided from both experimental and FE models of all beams. Fig. 18
shows a comparison between the results of the experimental and FE of the ultimate load and deflection, respectively, of all the studied
samples. Fig. 19 illustrates each failure mode that was obtained from the FE analysis of all beams which agreed with the experimental
results. The ratio between the FE to the experimental results varies from 0.95 to 1.06 and 0.97–1.01 for the deflection and the ultimate
load, respectively. Therefore, it could be concluded that both the numerical and experimental results are in agreement indicating that
the CDP model for modeling concrete and steel reinforcement were successful in capturing the fracture behavior.

5. Economic study

Table 7 shows the strengthening costs for each RC beam; the materials cost, the final cost of the Lin.m, the final cost of the RC beam,
and the costs of increasing 1 kN for the maximum load. The evaluation of the strengthening techniques of the RC beam in this study is
shown in Fig. 20. The maximum load of the beams B1, B2, B3, B4, and B5 increased when compared to the control beam by 12.4 MPa,
10.5 MPa, 20.7 MPa, 8.1 MPa, and 15.8 MPa, respectively. Total cost using different strengthening techniques for R.C beams B1, B2,
B3, B4, and B5 were 14.2$, 10$, 9.5$, 12.2$, and 27.7$, respectively. The beam B3, St. Plate-N.S.M, showed the lowest costs, and the
maximum increase in the maximum load compared to all strengthening techniques. Furthermore, that 1 kN of increase in the
maximum load requires 0.4 dollars $.

Fig. 16. FE mesh for RC beam.

13
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 17. Load-deflection curves of experimental and FE models of all beams.

14
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 18. Comparison between Exp. and FEM: (a) ultimate load; (b) deflection.

Fig. 19. Failure modes of tested beams-PEEQT (The tensile equivalent plastic strain obtained numerically).

15
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

Fig. 19. (continued).

Table 7
Cost of the strengthening system.
Beam Terminology Unit price Unit price-sikadur 330 Final cost Final cost Increasing in Pu Cost $/m’ For each 1 kN
No. $/m’ $/m′ $/m’ $ (kN) increase in Pu

B0 B0-Control - - - - - -
B1 B1-GFRP 6.3 6.60 12.9 14.2 12.4 1.0
B2 B2-GFRP-NSM 1.3 7.80 9.1 10.0 10.5 0.9
B3 B3-St. plate- 0.9 7.80 8.7 9.5 20.7 0.4
NSM
B4 B4-U_Conc. 11.0 - 11.0 12.2 8.1 1.4
B5 B5-U_Conc.- 16.2 9.0 25.2 27.7 15.8 1.6
GFRP

Fig. 20. Evaluation of the strengthening techniques.

16
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

6. Conclusions

This paper demonstrated an experimental and analytical investigation of the strengthening R.C beams under static bending. Three
strengthening techniques were proposed: External bonding with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) laminates, near-surface
mounted (NSM), and U-jacket. The experimental study compared the various strengthening methods in terms of ultimate loads,
crack loads, maximum deflections, gains in ductility, and energy absorption. The numerical analyses were carried out using the finite
element software ABAQUS. The following conclusions can be drawn from the results of the experiments and theoretical analysis:

1. For different systems of reinforcement, while the maximum load of some systems improves compared to the control sample,
other characteristics such as toughness and ductility index are affected, so we cannot say which systems are better, but this is
due to the designer and the purpose of the design.
2. All strengthening systems exhibited higher ultimate load than the control beam by ratios of 22%, 19%, 37%, 14%, and 28% for
beams B1-GFRP, B2-GFRP-NSM, B3-St. plate-NSM, B4-U_Conc., and B5-U_Conc.-GFRP, respectively.
3. The sample B3-St. plate-NSM, which used the NSM technique, had the highest peak load of 77.2 MPa compared to all samples
and a 36.64% increase over the control sample B0-Control. Moreover, the sample B3-St. Plate-NSM has improved stiffness
which contributed to reducing the deflection at peak load by 21.12% than the control sample.
4. The GFRP-reinforced Sample B1 displayed the highest crack load and toughness of 18 kN and 1099 kN.mm, respectively, among
all the samples. Along increase with 20% and 40% of the control sample, respectively.
5. The strengthening by a fibrous concrete jacket with GFRP sheets revealed numerous cracks at the flexural zone before failure
compared with the specimen strengthened using a fibrous concrete jacket without GFRP strips.
6. The weak bonding between the concrete jacket and beam contributes to appearing the first crack at a load less than the other
beams, also the weak bonding is referred to as insufficiency of shear strength.
7. The unimprovement in the toughness of beam B4 may be due to the weakness of the bond between old and new concrete and the
absence of shear connector bars. The GFRP sheets strengthening technique, whether the layers or NSM, has developed the
toughness of the beam compared with other strengthening systems.
8. The St. plate-NSM contributes to reducing the deflection at the ultimate load of beams strengthened with GFRP-NSM by a ratio
of 13%. The strengthening using GFRP in the different systems (strips, NSM, and U-jacket) was developed the cracks before
failure occurred in the RC beam.
9. Finally, for the exhibited beams, the findings from a numerical FE model created with the Abaqus program demonstrate
agreement between the computational and experimental results. This agreement shows that the constitutive models for concrete
and reinforcement are adequate for capturing the fracture behavior.
10. The beam B3, St. Plate-N.S.M, showed the lowest costs, and the maximum increase in the maximum load compared to all
strengthening techniques. Furthermore, to that 1 kn of increase in the maximum load requires 0.4 dollars $.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Mohammed M. Attia: Visualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Bassam A. Abdelsalam:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Dina E. Tobbala: Visualization, Methodology,
Writing – original draft. Basem O. Rageh: Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data Availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the team of the Concrete and Materials Resistance Laboratory and the students of the Civil and
Architectural Construction dept., Faculty of Technology and Education, Suez University.

References

[1] A.H.H. Khalil, A.M.A. Heniegal, M.Mahmoud Attia, N.Finite Element, Analysis of steel fibers reinforced post-tensioned lightweight concrete beams, N. Y. Sci. J.
vol. 11 (6) (2018), https://doi.org/10.7537/marsnys110618.12.
[2] M.M. Attia, O. Ahmed, O. Kobesy, A.S. Malek, Behavior of FRP rods under uniaxial tensile strength with multiple materials as an alternative to steel rebar, Case
Stud. Constr. Mater. vol. 17 (2022), e01241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01241.
[3] M.M. Attia, M.A.A. El-Shaer, S.M.M. Shawky, M.F. Samaan, Replacement efficiency of steel reinforcement with FRB bars in RC beams under flexure load:
experimental and FE study, Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. vol. 7 (5) (2022) 281, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00879-9.

17
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

[4] M. Panahi, S.A. Zareei, A. Izadi, Flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beams through externally bonded FRP sheets and near surface mounted FRP bars,
Case Stud. Constr. Mater. vol. 15 (2021), e00601, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00601.
[5] Z.K. Szabó, G.L. Balázs, Near surface mounted FRP reinforcement for strengthening of concrete structures, Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng. vol. 51 (1) (2007), https://
doi.org/10.3311/pp.ci.2007-1.05.
[6] M.A. El-Mandouh, G. Elsamak, B.O. Rageh, A. Hamoda, F. Abdelazeem, Experimental and numerical investigation of one-way reinforced concrete slabs using
various strengthening systems, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. vol. 18 (2023), e01691, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01691.
[7] H. Nordin, B. Täljsten, Concrete beams strengthened with prestressed near surface mounted CFRP, J. Compos. Constr. vol. 10 (1) (2006), https://doi.org/
10.1061/(asce)1090-0268(2006)10:1(60).
[8] T.C. Triantafillou, Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using epoxy-bonded FRP composites, Acids Struct. J. vol. 95 (2) (1998), https://doi.org/
10.14359/531.
[9] C. Deniaud, J.J.R. Cheng, Shear behavior of reinforced concrete T-beams with externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymer sheets, Acids Struct. J. vol. 98 (3)
(2001), https://doi.org/10.14359/10227.
[10] B.H. Oh, J.Y. Cho, D.G. Park, Failure behavior and separation criterion for strengthened concrete members with steel plates, J. Struct. Eng. vol. 129 (9) (2003),
https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2003)129:9(1191).
[11] L.Z. Li, S.H. Lo, R.K.L. Su, Experimental study of moderately reinforced concrete beams strengthened with bolted-side steel plates, Adv. Struct. Eng. vol. 16 (3)
(2013), https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.16.3.499.
[12] A. Sharif, G.J. Al-Sulaimani, I.A. Basunbul, M.H. Baluch, B.N. Ghaleb, Strengthening of initially loaded reinforced concrete beams using FRP plates, Acids Struct.
J. vol. 91 (2) (1994), https://doi.org/10.14359/4594.
[13] Y. Yang, M.F.M. Fahmy, J. Cui, Z. Pan, J. Shi, Nonlinear behavior analysis of flexural strengthening of RC beams with NSM FRP laminates, Structures vol. 20
(2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2019.05.001.
[14] N.F. Grace, G.A. Sayed, A.K. Soliman, K.R. Saleh, Strengthening reinforced concrete beams using fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) laminates, Acids Struct. J. vol.
96 (5) (1999), https://doi.org/10.14359/741.
[15] D. Lee, L. Cheng, J.Yan-Gee Hui, Bond characteristics of various NSM FRP reinforcements in concrete, J. Compos. Constr. vol. 17 (1) (2013), https://doi.org/
10.1061/(asce)cc.1943-5614.0000318.
[16] M.M. Önal, Strengthening reinforced concrete beams with CFRP and GFRP, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. vol. 2014 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/967964.
[17] H. Varastehpour, P. Hamelin, Strengthening of concrete beams using fiber-reinforced plastics, Mater. Struct. Constr. vol. 30 (3) (1997), https://doi.org/
10.1007/bf02486388.
[18] B.O. Rageh, M.A. El-Mandouh, A.H. Elmasry, M.M. Attia, Flexural behavior of RC beams strengthened with GFRP laminate and retrofitting with novelty of
adhesive material, Buildings vol. 12 (9) (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12091444.
[19] R. Kishore, N.Zia Nasiry, A.Muslim Rujhan, Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using CFRP laminates, Asian J. Civ. Eng. vol. 17 (2) (2016).
[20] M. Panahi, M. Izadinia, A parametric study on the flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beams with near surface mounted FRP bars, Civ. Eng. J. vol. 4
(8) (2018), https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-03091126.
[21] M.A. Mashrei, J.S. Makki, A.A. Sultan, Flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets with grooves,
Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. vol. 16 (4) (2019), https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-78255514.
[22] A.R. Sattarifard, M.K. Sharbatdar, A. Dalvand, RC connections strengthened with FRP sheets using grooves on the surface, Int. J. Civ. Eng. vol. 13 (4A) (2015).
[23] S.T. Smith, J.G. Teng, FRP-strengthened RC beams. II: assessment of debonding strength models, Eng. Struct. vol. 24 (4) (2002), https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0141-0296(01)00106-7.
[24] J.G. Teng and J.F. Chen, “Debonding failures of RC beams strengthened with externally bonded FRP reinforcement: Behaviour and modelling,” in Proceedings of
the 1st Asia-Pacific Conference on FRP in Structures, APFIS 2007, 2007, vol. 1.
[25] L.C. Hollaway, “Fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites used in rehabilitation,” in Strengthening and Rehabilitation of Civil Infrastructures Using Fibre-
Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Composites, 2008. doi: 10.1533/9781845694890.45.
[26] A. Hajihashemi, D. Mostofinejad, M. Azhari, Investigation of RC Beams Strengthened with Prestressed NSM CFRP Laminates, J. Compos. Constr. vol. 15 (6)
(2011), https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cc.1943-5614.0000225.
[27] M. Mohammadi, D. Mostofinejad, M. Barghian, Effects of surface preparation method on FRP-concrete bond strength under alkaline conditions, J. Compos.
Constr. vol. 21 (4) (2017), https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cc.1943-5614.0000786.
[28] M.M. Attia, A.H.H. Khalil, G.N. Mohamed, M.F. Samaan, D. Katunský, Nonlinear behavior of bonded and unbonded two-way post-tensioned slabs pre-
strengthened with CFRP laminates, Buildings vol. 13 (1) (2023), https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13010035.
[29] J.G. Teng, J.F. Chen, S.T. Smith, L. Lam, Behaviour and strength of FRP-strengthened RC structures: A state-of-the-art review, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build.
vol. 156 (1) (2003), https://doi.org/10.1680/stbu.2003.156.1.51.
[30] D. Novidis, S.J. Pantazopoulou, E. Tentolouris, Experimental study of bond of NSM-FRP reinforcement, Constr. Build. Mater. vol. 21 (8) (2007), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.05.054.
[31] J. Maheswaran, M. Chellapandian, N. Arunachelam, Retrofitting of severely damaged reinforced concrete members using fiber reinforced polymers: a
comprehensive review, Structures vol. 38 (2022) 1257–1276, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.02.059.
[32] ACI Committee 440, “ACI440.2R-17 Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures Reported
by ACI Committee 440,” Am. Concr. Inst., vol. 5, 2017.
[33] R. Capozucca, E. Magagnini, E. Bettucci, Delamination buckling of GFRP-strips in strengthened RC beams, Compos. Struct. vol. 300 (2022), 116183, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116183.
[34] S.G. Sawant, H.S. Jadhav, Flexural behaviour of GFRP strengthened RC beams under cyclic loading, Mater. Today Proc. vol. 59 (2022) 188–195, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.396.
[35] V.S. Kuntal, M. Chellapandian, S.S. Prakash, A. Sharma, Experimental study on the effectiveness of inorganic bonding materials for near-surface mounting shear
strengthening of prestressed concrete beams, Fibers vol. 8 (6) (2020), https://doi.org/10.3390/fib8060040.
[36] M. Chellapandian, S.S. Prakash, A. Sharma, Experimental and finite element studies on the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete elements strengthened with
hybrid FRP technique, Compos. Struct. vol. 208 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.10.028.
[37] L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng, Near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement: an emerging technique for strengthening structures, Compos. Part B Eng. vol. 38 (2) (2007),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.08.003.
[38] B. Antonio, et al., Bond of NSM FRP-strengthened concrete: round robin test initiative, J. Compos. Constr. vol. 20 (1) (. 2016), 4015026, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000579.
[39] Y. Kusuma, T. Rashmi, V.N. Anand, N.C. Balaji, An experimental study on flexural performance of RC beams strengthened by NSM technique using GFRP strips
for a resilient infrastructure system (in), Mater. Today.: Proc. vol. 52 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.11.600.
[40] T.H. Almusallam, H.M. Elsanadedy, Y.A. Al-Salloum, S.H. Alsayed, Experimental and numerical investigation for the flexural strengthening of RC beams using
near-surface mounted steel or GFRP bars, Constr. Build. Mater. vol. 40 (2013), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.09.107.
[41] Performance of Lightweight Concrete Beams Strengthened With GFRP,” Port-Said Eng. Res. J., vol. 17, no. 2, 2013, doi: 10.21608/pserj.2013.50580.
[42] E.N.B.S. Júlio, F.A.B. Branco, V.D. Silva, Reinforced concrete jacketing - Interface influence on monotonic loading response, Acids Struct. J. vol. 102 (2) (2005).
[43] A. Khalil, A. Heniegal, and B. Abdelsalam, “Finite Element Investigation of RC Cantilever Slabs Strengthened with Different Systems,” vol. 7, pp. 7–15, Jan.
2018.
[44] S.C.J.D.N. Trikha and S.K. Hali, Repair and Strengthening of Damaged Concrete Beams, Concr. Int., vol. 13, no. 6.
[45] A. Khalil, A. Heniegal, and B. Abdelsalam, Experimental Study on Strengthening Systems of Reinforced Concrete Cantilever Slabs. 2018.
[46] O.T. Tsioulou, S.E. Dritsos, A theoretical model to predict interface slip due to bending, Mater. Struct. Constr. vol. 44 (4) (2011), https://doi.org/10.1617/
s11527-010-9669-6.

18
M.M. Attia et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01862

[47] O.T. Tsioulou, A.P. Lampropoulos, S.E. Dritsos, Experimental investigation of interface behaviour of RC beams strengthened with concrete layers, Constr. Build.
Mater. vol. 40 (2013), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.09.093.
[48] Y.S. Yuan, M. Marosszeky, Restrained shrinkage in repaired reinforced concrete elements, Mater. Struct. vol. 27 (7) (1994), https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02473440.
[49] J. Silfwerbrand, Stresses and strains in composite concrete beams subjected to differential shrinkage, Acids Struct. J. vol. 94 (4) (1997), https://doi.org/
10.14359/485.
[50] E. Denarié and J. Silfwerbrand, “Structural behaviour of bonded concrete overlays,” Jan. 2004.
[51] R. Abbasnia, P. Godossi, J. Ahmadi, Prediction of restrained shrinkage based on restraint factors in patching repair mortar, Cem. Concr. Res. vol. 35 (10) (2005),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.11.020.
[52] H. Beushausen, M.G. Alexander, Failure mechanisms and tensile relaxation of bonded concrete overlays subjected to differential shrinkage, Cem. Concr. Res.
vol. 36 (10) (2006), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2006.05.027.
[53] H. Beushausen, M.G. Alexander, Localised strain and stress in bonded concrete overlays subjected to differential shrinkage, Mater. Struct. Constr. vol. 40 (2)
(2007), https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-006-9130-z.
[54] J. Zhou, G. Ye, E. Schlangen, K. van Breugel, Modelling of stresses and strains in bonded concrete overlays subjected to differential volume changes, Theor. Appl.
Fract. Mech. vol. 49 (2) (2008), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2007.11.006.
[55] A. Khalil, A. Heniegal, and M. Attia, “Behavior of post-tensioned fibrous lightweight concrete beams made of natural pumice,” Nov. 2018.
[56] A.P. Lampropoulos, S.A. Paschalis, O.T. Tsioulou, S.E. Dritsos, Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using ultra high performance fibre reinforced
concrete (UHPFRC), Eng. Struct. vol. 106 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.042.
[57] M. Attia and S. Mukhtar, “Banana Fiber Reinforced Concrete: A Review,” vol. 14, pp. 48–57, Jan. 2021.
[58] M.M. Attia, A.A.-K.A. Al Sayed, B.A. Tayeh, S.M.M. Shawky, Banana agriculture waste as eco-friendly material in fibre-reinforced concrete: An experimental
study, Adv. Concr. Constr. vol. 14 (5) (2022) 355–368.
[59] S.T. Kang, Y. Lee, Y.D. Park, J.K. Kim, Tensile fracture properties of an ultra high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC) with steel fiber, Compos.
Struct. vol. 92 (1) (2010), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.06.012.
[60] D.Y. Yoo, H.O. Shin, J.M. Yang, Y.S. Yoon, Material and bond properties of ultra high performance fiber reinforced concrete with micro steel fibers, Compos.
Part B Eng. vol. 58 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.10.081.
[61] M. Saad, I.S. Agwa, B. Abdelsalam Abdelsalam, M. Amin, Improving the brittle behavior of high strength concrete using banana and palm leaf sheath fibers,
Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. vol. 29 (4) (2022), https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2020.1780352.
[62] I.L. Larsen, R.T. Thorstensen, The influence of steel fibres on compressive and tensile strength of ultra high performance concrete: a review, Constr. Build. Mater.
vol. 256 (2020), 119459, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119459.
[63] Y. Mohammadi, R. Carkon-Azad, S.P. Singh, S.K. Kaushik, Impact resistance of steel fibrous concrete containing fibres of mixed aspect ratio, Constr. Build.
Mater. vol. 23 (1) (2009), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.01.002.
[64] L. Liao, J. Zhao, F. Zhang, S. Li, Z. Wang, Experimental study on compressive properties of SFRC under high strain rate with different fiber content and aspect
ratio, Constr. Build. Mater. vol. 261 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119906.
[65] Ş. Yazici, G. Inan, V. Tabak, Effect of aspect ratio and volume fraction of steel fiber on the mechanical properties of SFRC, Constr. Build. Mater. vol. 21 (6)
(2007), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.05.025.
[66] M. Maksum, H. Alrasyid, M. Irmawan, B. Piscesa, Effect of steel fiber volume fraction to the tensile splitting strength of concrete cylinder (in), IOP Conf. Ser.:
Mater. Sci. Eng. vol. 930 (1) (2020), https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/930/1/012058.
[67] S. Meng, C. Jiao, X. Ouyang, Y. Niu, J. Fu, Effect of steel fiber-volume fraction and distribution on flexural behavior of Ultra-high performance fiber reinforced
concrete by digital image correlation technique, Constr. Build. Mater. vol. 320 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126281.
[68] S.T. Kang, J.K. Kim, The relation between fiber orientation and tensile behavior in an ultra high performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites
(UHPFRCC), Cem. Concr. Res. vol. 41 (10) (2011), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2011.05.009.
[69] ASTM C150/C150M, Standard specification for portland cement, Annu. B. ASTM Stand. (2019).
[70] ASTM:C33/C33M - 18, Standard specification for concrete aggregates, ASTM Int. (2018).
[71] ASTM C494, Standard specification for chemical admixtures for concrete, ASTM Int vol. 04 (2019).
[72] D.E. Tobbala, B.A. Abdelsalam, I.S. Agwa, Bond performance of a hybrid coating zinc-rich epoxy incorporating nano-ferrite for steel rebars subjected to high
temperatures in concrete, J. Build. Eng. vol. 32 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101698.
[73] ABAQUS, Abaqus/CAE 6.14 User’s Manual, Dassault Systémes Inc. Provid. RI, USA vol. IV (no.) (, 2014).
[74] H. Hsuam-Teh, S.W. C, Constitutive modeling of concrete by using nonassociated plasticity, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. vol. 1 (4) (. 1989) 199–216, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(1989)1:4(199).

19