Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Adaptive neuro fuzzy prediction of deflection and cracking behavior

of NSM strengthened RC beams
Kh Mahfuz ud Darain a,b, Sahaboddin Shamshirband c, Mohd Zamin Jumaat a,⇑, M. Obaydullah a
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
b
Architecture Discipline, Science, Engineering and Technology School, Khulna University, 9208 Khulna, Bangladesh
c
Department of Computer System and Technology, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

h i g h l i g h t s

Near Surface Mounted (NSM) strengthening for underperforming structures.

A soft computing technique is employed for the serviceability prediction.

Reinforced Concrete (RC) beams strengthened with the NSM technique.

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

Article history: The Near Surface Mounted (NSM) technique is a promising strengthening approach, though unpopular
Received 23 April 2015 due to reliable serviceability prediction options. In this paper, a soft computing technique is employed
Received in revised form 6 August 2015 to predict the deflection and cracking behavior of NSM strengthened RC beams. The Adaptive Neuro-
Accepted 10 August 2015
Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) was used to simulate the serviceability behavior of one control and six
NSM strengthened RC beams using variable bond lengths (1600, 1800 or 1900 mm) with different
NSM strengthening materials (steel and CFRP bars). The proposed ANFIS model employed variable load
Keywords:
and bond length as inputs while the output parameters were deflection and crack width of the steel
ANFIS
Serviceability
and CFRP bars. The ANFIS results were compared with the experimental results using the root-mean-
Structural strengthening square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination and Pearson coefficient. The results found that the
Deflection ANFIS approach showed an improvement in predictive accuracy and generalization capability in compar-
Crack width ison to the fuzzy approach. The highest level of accuracy with ANFIS was achieved when predicting CFRP
Soft computing bar crack width, where RMSE = 8.05E07. In contrast, the lowest level of accuracy was achieved when
predicting CFRP bar deflection, with RMSE = 0.045185.
Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction
NSM technique is a promising strengthening approach for
extending the design service life of underperforming structures
[1–3]. This technique demonstrates better performance in enhanc-
ing flexural and shear capacity as well as delaying the premature
debonding problem of RC beams [4,5]. However, appropriate ser-
viceability (deflection, crack width, vibration of structure, etc.) pre-
diction model is a major lack of this technique [6]. The researchers
are updating previously solved Externally Bonded Reinforcement
(EBR) load–deflection model for making applicable for NSM tech-
nique using the simple linear approach to the tri-linear response
(pre-cracking, cracking and post yielding) [7–10]. They also
explained the serviceability behavior of EBR from the view point of
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zamin@um.edu.my (M.Z. Jumaat).
the moment curvature approach [11,12] to the more recently partial
interaction based moment rotation approach [13,14]. However,
these models cannot be directly applied to the NSM technique as
its structural mechanics are quite unlike the EBR approach. When
NSM reinforcement is inserted in the RC beam, a complex system
is developed due to the tension stiffening effect of the FRP–concrete
interface in addition to the internal steel reinforcement-concrete
stiffening effect. As a result, the deflection behavior, crack width,
crack spacing and other serviceability parameters vary considerably
compared to the EBR strengthened beams.
The promising applicability of the NSM system in real applica-
tion demands a prompt and straightforward, yet consistent and
precise alternative system to predict the serviceability perfor-
mance of the strengthened structures. The soft computing tech-
niques can be a better choice as they can efficiently and
promptly predict any complicated problem if the operational data
are available. The neuro-fuzzy network or Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.08.096
0950-0618/Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285
Inference System (ANFIS) [15] was used by researchers for model-
ing [16,17], predictions [18–20] and control in various engineering
systems [21,22]. It is a hybrid intelligent system that merges the
technique of the learning power of the artificial neural network
(ANN) with the knowledge representation of fuzzy logic.
The concept of using artificial intelligence in structural strength-
ening is quite new. In this particular area of research, ANN has been
used more than the other artificial intelligence techniques [23],
such as fuzzy inference system (FIS), ANFIS and Genetic Algorithms
(GA), etc. [24–27]. Flood et al. [24] studied the possibility of predict-
ing the externally reinforced RC beam’s deflection using the ANN
model. Several researchers used the ANN model to predict the shear
strength of the RC beam using FRP material [25] and steel plates
[26], and suggested some modification of the design equations.
Nasrollahzadeh and Basiri [28] used FIS to predict the shear
strength of 197 RC beams from the work of different researchers,
which were reinforced with FRP. Darain et al. [29] demonstrated
a simplified serviceability model using fuzzy logic to predict the
deflection and crack width of NSM strengthened RC beams. ANFIS
is an improvement over ANN and FIS although it was rarely imple-
mented in this area for analysis and prediction of the strengthening
efficacy of any structural component.
Park et al. [30] predicted the behavior of a FRP retrofitted circu-
lar column using the ANFIS model. Seven parameters of specimens
and FRP configuration were selected to predict the strength, strain,
and stiffness of the post-yielding modulus, which finally exhibited
good agreement with the constitutive model of other researchers.
Balasubramaniam et al. [31] studied different levels of corrosion
damaged RC beams, which were strengthened with Glass FRP.
The ANFIS model was employed to assess the performance charac-
teristics of those beams and the output of the model confirmed the
experimental results of the study. Jalal et al. [32] estimated the
ultimate strength of a CFRP confined concrete cylinder from
reviewing several experimental studies and compared the perfor-
mance using ANN, multiple regression (MR), genetic programming
(GP), ANFIS and several empirical models. The comparison demon-
strated that the mean absolute percent errors (MAPEs) were lowest
(1.85%) for the ANFIS model amongst others.
In the existing literature, the prediction model for the deflection
and crack width of NSM strengthened RC beams is rare and almost
no work has been done on developing a prediction model of its ser-
viceability behavior using ANFIS. To address this gap, the present
study has an aim to develop an accurate yet rapid prediction model
for the deflection and crack width of NSM strengthened RC beams
using ANFIS. In this paper, two approaches were taken into consider-
ation. One control and six full sized NSM strengthened RC beams
were experimented and studied. Then, ANFIS was used to predict
the deflection and cracking behavior of NSM strengthened RC beams.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Experimental program
2.1.1. Test specimens
In order to comprehend the proposed analysis approach, an experimental pro-
gram was carried out on NSM strengthened RC specimens. One RC beam was pre-
pared without any strengthening material and was tested as the control
Table 1
Test matrix of control and strengthened RC beam.
Sl. no. Notation Description
1 CB Control RC beam
2 N1.6F NSM strengthened RC beam with 12 mm
3 N1.6S NSM strengthened RC beam with 12 mm
4 N1.8F NSM strengthened RC beam with 12 mm
5 N1.8S NSM strengthened RC beam with 12 mm
6 N1.9F NSM strengthened RC beam with 12 mm
7 N1.9S NSM strengthened RC beam with 12 mm
277
specimen. Six RC specimens were strengthened using NSM Steel bars (3 in number)
and CFRP bars (3 in numbers) with variable bond length (1600 mm, 1800 mm and
1900 mm). Consequently, a total of seven RC rectangular beams were considered in
this study with two testing variables. These variable parameters were the bonded
length of NSM reinforcement, and the type of NSM reinforcement. The testing
matrix is shown in Table 1.
2.1.2. Specimens and materials
Rectangular 2.3 m long RC beams with 125-mm  250 mm cross-sectional
dimension were selected for the experimental study. The beams were designed as
under reinforced beams (q = As/bd = 0.0085) with two 12 mm diameter deformed
bars as tensile reinforcement. Two 10 mm diameter deformed bars were used as
hanger bars to hold the stirrups. Double-legged closed 8 mm diameter steel stirrups
were used as shear reinforcement with spacing of 90 mm center to center to ensure
that the flexure failure would prevail. Fig. 1 exhibits the features of the beam
arrangement where the dimensions were given in millimeter scale.
Crushed stone (20 mm diameter) and natural river sand were used as coarse and fine
aggregate, respectively, for concrete casting. The compressive and flexural strength of
hardened concrete were measured at 28 days based on the cube (100 mm 
100 mm  100 mm), cylinder (200 mm  100 mm diameter) and prism specimens
(500 mm  100 mm  100 mm). The compressive and flexural strengths of the con-
crete were determined according to BS EN (12390-3), ASTM (C39/C39M-14) and BS
EN (12390-5) [33–35]. The material properties of concrete are described in Table 2.
The supplied manufacturer’s mechanical properties of deformed steel bars were
checked in the laboratory to confirm whether they conform to the ASTM A615 [36]
specification. LaMaCo System Sdn Bhd. supplied the 12 mm diameter sand coated
carbon-epoxy pultruded FRP (CFRP) bars with a density of 1.65 g/mm2 for NSM
strengthening. These CFRP bars showed linear elastic response up to ultimate fail-
ure. To adhere the NSM steel or CFRP bar with the concrete substrate, SikadurÒ 30
was used as the epoxy adhesive. According to the manufacturer’s results, the den-
sity was 1.65 kg/l at 23 °C. The adhesive is composed of two components, a resin
and a hardener, which were blended together in a ratio of 3:1 until an even gray
color was attained. The details of the concrete, steel and CFRP material properties
are described in Table 2 and [37] SikadurÒ 30 properties are mentioned in Table 3.
Each of the strengthened beam specimens had a single groove
(24 mm  24 mm) made using a diamond bladed concrete saw along the beam
length to accommodate the CFRP bar. A hammer and hand chisel were used to
remove the remaining concrete lugs of the groove, resulting in a rough surface
inside of the groove that improves bonding. All the debris was then removed from
the groove using airbrushing pressure. An epoxy adhesive (SikadurÒ 30) was
applied into the groove to fill around 2/3 of the groove depth. The CFRP bar was
then gently inserted into the groove, and pressed lightly to ensure proper epoxy
covering surrounding the bar. The groove’s outer surface was then levelled and left
for one week to achieve proper epoxy strength. The beams were then tested under
static loading using the four-point loading test.
Suitable support condition was prepared where four point loading was applied
using a 500 kN capacity closed-loop Instron universal testing machine (in Fig. 2).
Deflection measurement was performed with three vertical Linear Variable Differ-
ential Transducers (LVDT) which were placed at the midpoint, 250 mm away the
center point (under the spreader beam load point) and 500 mm from the center
of the RC beam. 5 mm strain gauges were affixed at the internal steel and NSM steel
or CFRP bar to measure the strain during test. To measure concrete compressive
strain, 30 mm strain gauges were fixed at the top of the concrete surface. Demec
discs were planted at the mid-span of the beams along the depth to measure trans-
verse strains. A Dino-Lite digital microscope was used to measure micro cracks on
the surface of the beams.
2.2. Adaptive neuro-fuzzy application
2.2.1. Neuro-fuzzy computing
Soft computing is an innovative approach in the construction of systems that
are computationally intelligent, which possess humanlike expertise within a speci-
fic domain. These systems are supposed to adapt to changing environments, learn
to do better and explain their decision-making process. It is usually more beneficial
to employ several computing methods in a synergistic way rather than building a
system based exclusively on one technique. This is useful in confronting real-
world computing problems. The result of such synergistic use of computing tech-
Groove size (mm) Total bonded length of strengthened bars 2L (mm)
– –
CFRP bar 24 mm  24 mm 1600
steel bar 1600
CFRP bar 1800
steel bar 1800
CFRP bar 1900
steel bar 1900
278 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285

P/2 P/2

900 500 900

2-10 mm 2-10 mm

250
8 mm @ 90 mm c/c.
NSM steel/CFRP bar
150 2-12 mm 2000 150
2300

24 mm
NSM steel
/CFRP bar

250 mm 24 mm Epoxy

125 mm

Fig. 1. Reinforcement and strengthening detail of RC beam.

Table 2
Properties of concrete, internal steel reinforcement, NSM steel and CFRP bar.

Material Compressive strength Flexure strength Yield stress Ultimate strength Elastic modulus Elongation
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (GPa) (%)
Concrete 43.24 (cube) 5.01 – – 30.1 –
35.63 (cylinder)
RC beam steel – u 12 mm – – 400 480 200 27
NSM steel – u 12 mm – – 520 587 200 20
Steel – u 10 mm – – 529 578 200 21
Steel – u 8 mm – – 380 450 200 29
CFRP – u 12 mm – – – 2400 165 –

human knowledge and implement decision-making and differentiation. The combi-

Table 3 nation and integration of these two complementary methodologies produce a novel
Properties of SikadurÒ 30 [37]. discipline called neuro-fuzzy computing.
Strength 15 °C (MPa) 35 °C (MPa)
2.2.2. Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System
Compressive strength 70–80 85–95
The ANFIS (Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System) is a class of adaptive net-
Tensile strength 14–17 16–19
works functionally equivalent to the fuzzy inference systems. Simulations were run
Shear strength 24–27 26–31
in MATLAB toolbox and the results were observed on the corresponding output
blocks. In this study, the fuzzy inference system used has two inputs, x and y and
niques is the construction of complementary hybrid intelligent systems. The epit- one output f. In this study, the first-order Sugeno fuzzy model, with two fuzzy if-
ome of designing and constructing intelligent systems of this kind is neuro-fuzzy then rules was used as follows (Eqs. (1) and (2)):
computing: firstly, neural networks recognize patterns and adapt to cope with
evolving environments; and, secondly, fuzzy inference systems, which include Rule 1 : if x is A and y is C then f 1 ¼ p1 x þ q1 y þ r1 ð1Þ

Fig. 2. Instrumentation and testing arrangement of the prepared specimen.

 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285 279

Rule 2 : if x is B and y is D then f 2 ¼ p2 x þ q2 y þ r 2 ð2Þ Layer 3: Each node in the 3rd layer is a fixed node. The ith node calculates the
proportion of the firing strength of the ith rule to the sum of the firing strength of all
where parameters fpi ; qi ; r i g are referred to as premise parameters. In other words rules (Eq. (7)):
these parameters are the user defined parameters which needs to be optimized by
ANFIS training procedure. The reasoning mechanism for this Sugeno model is illus- wi
trated in Fig. 3(a); while Fig. 3(b) shows the corresponding equivalent ANFIS archi- O3;i ¼ wi ¼ ; i ¼ 1; 2: ð7Þ
w1 þ w2
tecture. Nodes of the same layer have similar functions. The output of the ith node in
layer l is denoted as Ol;i . For the sake of convenience, the outputs of this layer are called normalized fir-
Layer 1: Each node i in this first layer is an adaptive node with a node function ing strengths.
(Eqs. (3) and (4)) Layer 4: Each node I in this 4th layer is an adaptive node with a node function
(Eq. (8))
Ol;i ¼ lAi ðxÞ; for i ¼ 1; 2; or ð3Þ
O4;i ¼ wi f i ¼ wi ðpi x þ qi y þ ri Þ; ð8Þ
Ol;i ¼ lBi2 ðyÞ; for i ¼ 3; 4 ð4Þ
where wi is a normalized firing strength from the 3rd layer and fpi ; qi ; r i g is this
where x or y is the input variable to node i and Ai or Bi2 is an associated linguistic node’s parameters set. In this layer, variables are referred to as consequent parame-
label (such as ‘small’ or ‘large’). In other words, Ol;i is the membership grade of a ters. In other words, these parameters now present optimal values after ANFIS train-
fuzzy set A and B ð¼ A1 ; A2 ; B1 ; A2 Þ. It stipulates the extent to which the specified ing procedure.
input x or y satisfies the quantifier A. In this instance, the membership function Layer 5: In this 5th layer, the single node is a fixed node. The fixed node calcu-
can be any suitable parameterized membership function. The generalized bell func- lates the total output as the summation of all the signals that are incoming (Eq. (9)):
tion is used here (Eq. (5)) as it has the best abilities for the generalization of nonlin-
X P
ear parameters: wi f
O5;i ¼ wi f i ¼ Pi ð9Þ
i i wi
1
lA ðxÞ ¼
2bi ð5Þ
xci The parameters in the ANFIS architecture were identified by applying the
1þ ai
hybrid learning algorithms. In the forward pass of this algorithm, functional signals
go forward until Layer 4. Consequent parameters are identified by the least squares
where fai ; bi ; ci g are the parameters for the membership function. These membership estimate. In the backward pass, the error rates propagate backwards. Premise
parameters are updated during ANFIS training procedure. The bell-shaped function parameters are updated by the gradient descent.
varies accordingly as the values of the variables change, therefore manifesting differ-
ent types of membership functions for fuzzy set A. Variables in the first layer are
called premise variables.
Layer 2: Each node in the 2nd layer is a fixed node and its output is the conse- 2.2.3. Input variables
quence of all signals which are incoming (Eq. (6)): In this study, the load and bonded length were used for generating the ANFIS
models. The experimental data are given in Table 4. There are total 36 measure-
O2;i ¼ wi ¼ lAi ðxÞlBi ðyÞ; i ¼ 1; 2 ð6Þ ments. 70% data of each group was used for training and 30% for testing of the mod-
els since it was shown as the most suitable data division for training and testing. In
Every node output represents the firing strength of a rule. It other words, the this case all groups are included in the training of the models and in later in testing
layer determines the strength of the rules. as well. It is suitable to have more training than testing data.

Fig. 3. (a) A two-input first order Sugeno fuzzy model with two rules; (b) equivalent ANFIS architecture.
280 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285

2.3. Evaluation of model performances remarkably. In Table 5, there is a comparison of the NSM strength-
ened RC beams of different bond lengths with the control beam. In
The following statistical indicators were selected for calculation of the ANFIS
accuracy.
this table, the first crack load, first crack deflection, ultimate crack
(1) Root-mean-square error (RMSE) and ultimate crack deflection are analyzed with the percentile dif-
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ference. From the Table 5, it is visible that the 1st crack and ulti-
Pn 2
i¼1 ðP i  Oi Þ mate load of NSM strengthened beams were increased
RMSE ¼ ð10Þ
n considerably compared to the control specimen. At the first crack
(2) Pearson correlation coefficient (r) load, the deflection of the strengthened beam seemed to be more
P   Pn   Pn  than that of the control beam. This phenomenon was changed
n ni¼1 Oi  Pi  i¼1 Oi  i¼1 P i
r ¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

P 
P ð11Þ afterwards and the ultimate deflection was less than the control
 P  2  P 2 
n ni¼1 O2i  n
i¼1 Oi  n ni¼1 P2i  n
i¼1 P i specimen.
The failure pattern of the strengthened beams is depicted in
(3) Coefficient of determination (R2)
Figs. 4 and 5. From the figures, it is clearly visible that the CFRP
hP i2
n strengthened beams failed due to premature debonding failure.
i¼1 ðOi  Oi Þ  ðP i  P i Þ
2
R ¼P
 P   ð12Þ However, the NSM steel beam overcomes the premature failure
n
Oi  Oi  ni¼1 P i  P i
i¼1 and their failure mode was concrete crushing after yielding the
where Oi = ANFIS value, Pi = measurement values, and n = the total number of test internal steel. The bond length of NSM reinforcement for the
data. While some controversy regarding the validity of this error metrics does exist, N1.8F and N1.8S beams was 1800 mm whereas 1900 mm bond
it pertains to comparison of forecasting methods across different data sets [38,39], length was selected for the N1.9F and N1.9S specimens. The bond
which falls beyond the scope of this article. efficiency was superior in the case of the steel bar as NSM rein-
forcement and the failure pattern confirmed the composite action
3. Results of the NSM reinforcement and RC beam.
Fig. 6 shows the load–deflection behavior of the control and
3.1. Experimental results NSM strengthened RC beam. As shown in the figure, beyond the
1st cracking of the concrete the load–deflection relationship is
Depending upon the type of strengthening material (CFRP and the same for both the specimens. After the elastic limit, the embed-
steel) and bond length (1600 mm, 1800 mm and 1900 mm), the ded NSM reinforcement contributed a stiffer response and showed
load–deflection behavior was influenced considerably. In all cases, a pronounced effect in enhancing the flexural response of the
the ultimate capacity of the strengthened RC beam was increased strengthened beam. The NSM steel reinforced beam demonstrated
a nearly bilinear response characteristic of the RC beam in under
reinforced conditions. With the exception of the N1.6S beam, the
Table 4
Experimental data.
other two steel strengthened beams failed in flexure with the for-
mation of a wider flexural crack at midspan, which further led to
Input data Steel bar output FRP bar output concrete crushing at the top of the midspan. The CFRP strength-
Load Length of NSM Deflection Crack Deflection Crack ened beams demonstrated a trilinear response with a sharp fall
bar width width after the failure of the beams. All the beams failed due to concrete
0 1600 0 0 0 0 cover separation. The slope of the load–deflection curve of the NSM
0 1800 0 0 0 0 steel strengthened beam was steeper compared to the NSM CFRP
0 1900 0 0 0 0
specimens, which also indicated the higher stiffness of these
10 1600 0.434 0 0 0
10 1800 0.761 0 0.349 0 beams.
10 1900 0.1 0 0.078 0 In Fig. 7, the load vs. crack width is demonstrated for the control
15 1600 0.762 0.042 0.2125 0.103 and strengthened beam. After strengthening, the crack width of all
15 1800 1.091 0.063 0.761 0.06 the strengthened beams was less than that of the control specimen.
15 1900 0.314 0 0.344 0.047
20 1600 1.089 0.088 0.631 0.16
It is evident that the bond length of the NSM reinforcing bar signif-
20 1800 1.518 0.106 1.305 0.136 icantly influences the crack width of the tested specimens. The
20 1900 0.496 0 0.795 0.079 beam with a bond length of 1900 mm showed less crack width
30 1600 1.682 0.15 1.759 0.206 compared to the specimens with other bond lengths (1600 mm
30 1800 2.44 0.215 2.585 0.213
and 1800 mm). Interestingly, the steel NSM bar performed better
30 1900 1.173 0.11 1.838 0.2
40 1600 2.314 0.24 2.897 0.315 compared to the CFRP strengthening bar. Even the N1.9S showed
40 1800 3.434 0.231 3.773 0.304 the minimum deflection (8.5 mm) and the least crack width
40 1900 2.062 0.115 2.91 0.242 (0.3 mm) compared to the N1.9F beam, which had a deflection of
50 1600 3.003 0.282 5.7875 0.385 9.88 mm with 0.44 mm crack width across the same load point
50 1800 4.409 0.247 4.996 0.383
50 1900 2.946 0.192 4.055 0.268
(100 kN).
60 1600 4.179 0.313 7.7125 0.45
60 1800 5.393 0.296 6.126 0.448
60 1900 3.81 0.209 5.175 0.312 3.2. ANFIS model analysis
70 1600 5.389 0.472 10.1375 0.493
70 1800 6.541 0.351 7.634 0.488
70 1900 4.635 0.245 6.349 0.354 Initially, the ANFIS network was trained with measured data by
80 1600 6.859 0.547 12 0.554 the previously presented experimental procedures. Three bell-
80 1800 7.857 0.567 8.701 0.542 shaped membership functions were used to fuzzify the ANFIS
80 1900 5.735 0.267 7.498 0.397 inputs. After the training process, the ANFIS networks were tested
90 1600 8.44 0.61 14.1375 0.57
90 1800 9.288 0.637 10.112 0.56
to determine the deflection and crack width of the steel and CFRP
90 1900 7.036 0.286 8.614 0.421 bars. According to the experiments, the input parameters were
100 1600 0 0 16.925 0.597 applied load (F) and bonded length (L). The final outputs – deflec-
100 1800 0 0 11.368 0.578 tion for steel bar strengthened beams (DS), crack width for steel
100 1900 8.563 0.304 9.879 0.439
bar strengthened beams (WS), deflection for CFRP bar strength-
 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285 281

Table 5
Summary of experimental test results.

Beam ID Pcr (kN) % Pcr Dcr (mm) % Dcr Pu (kN) % Pu Du (mm) % Du Failure mode
CB 10.6 – 0.3 64.4 – 24.7 FF
N1.9F 15.0 41.5 0.3 0 133.2 106.8 19.2 22 CCS
N1.9S 23.0 117.0 0.7 133 103.8 61.2 12.4 50 FF
N1.8F 14.0 32.1 0.6 100 130.8 103.1 18.6 25 CCS
N1.8S 15.5 46.2 1.0 233 99.6 54.7 16.8 32 FF
N1.6F 17.5 65.1 0.4 33 109.5 70.0 13.6 45 CCS
N1.6S 14.4 35.5 0.7 133 94.1 46.1 9.4 62 CCS

Where Pcr = first crack load; % Pcr = percent increase in first crack load over the control beam; Pu = ultimate load; % Pu = percent increase in ultimate load over the control
beam; Dcr = deflection at 1st crack; Du = mid-span deflection at ultimate load, % Dcr = percent increase of deflection at 1st crack compare to control beam; % Du = percent
increase of deflection at ultimate load compare to control beam; FF = flexural failure (concrete crushing after steel yielding), CCS = concrete cover separation.

Fig. 4. Failure behavior of (a) N1.8F and (b) N1.8S beams.

Fig. 5. Failure behavior of (a) N1.9F and (b) N1.9S beams.

ened beams (DF) and crack width for CFRP bar strengthened beams
(WF) of ANFIS – were verified using MATLAB ANFIS Toolbox.
Fig. 8 shows the ANFIS decision surfaces for steel bar deflection,
FRP bar deflection, steel bar crack width and FRP bar crack width,
respectively. Fig. 8(a) shows that the maximum steel bar deflection
occurs for a load of 70 kN and for the 1700 mm long NSM bar. In
contrast, Fig. 8(b) shows that the maximum FRP bar deflection
occurs for the load of 100 kN and for the 1600 mm long NSM bar.
‘‘Fig. 8(c) and (d) show that the crack width of steel and CFRP
bar is getting bigger with the increment of applied load. Almost
the same trend is noticed for widening the crack width with
increasing load for the variable bond length of NSM steel or CFRP
bar”.
The predicted values using the ANFIS model are shown in Fig. 9
in the form of scatter plots. In this section, the performance of the
steel and CFRP in terms of deflection and crack width in the ANFIS
predictive model are reported. It can be seen that most of the
points fall along the diagonal line for the ANFIS prediction models.
Consequently, it follows that the prediction results are in very good
agreement with the measured values for the ANFIS method. This
observation can be confirmed with very high value for the coeffi-
cient of determination. The number of either overestimated or
underestimated values produced is limited. Consequently, it is
obvious that the predicted values enjoy high level precision.
The performance of the ANFIS model in estimating the deflec-
tion and crack width were evaluated according to the statistical
criteria, such as RMSE, coefficient of determination R2 and Pearson
coefficient r.
In order to demonstrate the merits of the proposed ANFIS
approach on a more definite and tangible basis, the prediction
accuracy of the ANFIS model was compared with the prediction
accuracy of the fuzzy method [40], genetic programming (GP)
[41] and artificial neural network (ANN) method [42], which were
used as a benchmark. The efficiency of the ANFIS model over clas-
sical methods is listed in Table 6. Conventional error statistical
indicators, RMSE, r and R2, were used for comparison. Table 6 sum-
282 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285

Load (kN)

Deflection (mm)
Fig. 6. Load–deflection curve of the control and NSM strengthened RC beams.

Fig. 7. Load vs. crack width diagram of the control and NSM strengthened RC beams.

marizes the prediction accuracy results for the test datasets since
the training error is not a credible indicator for the prediction
potential of a particular model. The ANFIS model outperformed
the Fuzzy models according to the results in Table 6. The ANFIS
model provides significantly better results than the benchmark
models. The one reason for the higher ANFIS accuracy could be
related to the adaptability of the ANFIS network since ANFIS found
optimal values for the membership functions. Another reason
could be in respect of the membership function type, since, in
the ANFIS network, bell-shaped membership functions are used,
and, in fuzzy logic, triangular membership functions are used. In
On the basis of the comparison of the RMSE analysis with Fuzzy,
it may be concluded that the proposed ANFIS outperformed the
results obtained with the benchmark models. The main parameters
used for ANN model are:

first layer: 2 nodes (5 inputs),

hidden layers: 3, 6, 10 (three nodes in the second layer, 6 nodes
in the third layer and 10 nodes in the fourth layer),

output layer: 1 node (1 output),

number of iteration: 1000,

activation function: continuous log-sigmoid function.
The following main parameters employed in GP modeling are
selected by trial and error procedure:
 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285 283

Steel Steel
bar bar
defle crack
ction width
(mm) (mm)

Length of NSM Load (kN) Length of NSM Load (kN)

steel bar (mm) steel bar (mm)

(a) (c)

CFRP CFRP
bar bar
deflec crack
tion width
(mm) (mm)

Length of NSM Load (kN) Length of NSM

CFRP bar (mm) Load (kN)
CFRP bar (mm)

(b) (d)
Fig. 8. ANFIS decision surfaces for: (a) steel bar deflection, (b) CFRP bar deflection, (c) steel bar crack width, and (d) CFRP bar crack width.

population size: 1024,

function set: þ; ; ; ; pffi; x2 ; ln; e x ; a x

head size: 5–9,

chromosomes: 20–40,

number of genes: 3–4,

mutation rate: 95.66,

crossover rate: 34.44,

inversion rate: 110.33.
4. Conclusion
This paper investigated the feasibility of using the adaptive
neuro-fuzzy technique to predict the serviceability behavior of
NSM strengthened RC beams. The variable load and bond length
of NSM steel and CFRP bar were used as input parameters to
observe the deflection and crack width of the tested RC beam.
The simulated output from ANFIS was compared with the experi-
mental data and classical fuzzy technique. The conclusions are as
follows:
(1) The experimental test revealed that the NSM strengthened
RC beam is superior to the unstrengthen control specimen
in terms of strength and stiffness. The chosen test parame-
ters (bond length and NSM strengthening material) signifi-
cantly influenced the deflection pattern, cracking behavior
and failure mode of the tested specimens. The steel NSM
bar showed better bonding capacity and ductile behavior,
which, eventually, prevented the premature failure unlike
the CFRP NSM material, even though the steel’s strength
capacity was lower than the CFRP NSM specimens. The crack
width pattern of the steel NSM bars showed stiffer behavior
than that of the CFRP bars. Irrespective of the strengthening
materials (CFRP or steel), the 1900 mm bond length showed
better efficiency than the other lengths (1600 mm and
1800 mm).
(2) The study indicated that the predicted deflection and crack
width closely conform to the experimental results, which
affirms the performance of the ANFIS model. This model
demonstrated the superior predictive accuracy and capabil-
ity of generalization over the fuzzy logic approach and arti-
ficial neural network (ANN) and genetic programming (GP)
approaches as well as benchmark models. The highest level
of accuracy with ANFIS was achieved for the CFRP bar crack
width prediction RMSE = 8.05E07. In contrast, the lowest
level of accuracy was achieved for the FRP bar deflection pre-
diction RMSE = 0.045185. The main advantages of the ANFIS
model are computationally efficient, very adaptable with
optimization and adaptive techniques. The proposed ANFIS
model can be used for estimating the deflection and crack
width of NSM strengthened steel or CFRP material, which
will eventually save valuable time and the expense of rigor-
ous relevant experimental tests.
284 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285

Fig. 9. Scatter plots of predicted values using ANFIS models for (a) deflection prediction of steel/CFRP bar; (b) crack width prediction of CFRP/steel bar.

Table 6
Performance statistics of the ANFIS and fuzzy models of steel and FRP bar estimation based upon different statistical indicators.

ANFIS model Fuzzy inference system (FIS)

RMSE R2 r RMSE R2 r
Steel bar deflection 0.002249 1 1 0.0525 0.9831 0.9915
FRP bar deflection 0.045185 1 0.999997 0.0672 0.9962 0.9980
Steel bar crack width 5.8E07 1 1 0.0343 0.9945 0.9972
FRP bar crack width 8.05E07 1 1 0.0278 0.9922 0.9960
GP model ANN model
Steel bar deflection 0.0649 0.9763 0.9734 0.0785 0.9637 0.9615
FRP bar deflection 0.0785 0.9845 0.9832 0.0892 0.9767 0.9680
Steel bar crack width 0.0456 0.9842 0.9742 0.0647 0.9646 0.9672
FRP bar crack width 0.0453 0.9811 0.9797 0.0577 0.9627 0.9660

Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support given by
University of Malaya (UM), Malaysia for funding the study through
the High Impact Research Grant UM.C/HIR/MOHE/ENG/36 –
‘‘Strengthening Structural Elements for Load and Fatigue”
(D000036-16001).
References
[1] J. Teng, J. Chen, S.T. Smith, L. Lam, Behaviour and strength of FRP-strengthened
RC structures: a state-of-the-art review, Proc. ICE Struct. Build. 156 (1) (2003)
51–62.
[2] L. Hollaway, A review of the present and future utilisation of FRP composites in
the civil infrastructure with reference to their important in-service properties,
Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (12) (2010) 2419–2445.
[3] M.R. Coelho, J.M. Sena-Cruz, L.A. Neves, A review on the bond behavior of FRP
NSM systems in concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 93 (2015) 1157–1169.
[4] L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng, Near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement: an
emerging technique for strengthening structures, Compos. Part B Eng. 38 (2)
(2007) 119–143.
[5] R. El-Hacha, S.H. Rizkalla, Near-surface-mounted fiber-reinforced polymer
reinforcements for flexural strengthening of concrete structures, ACI Struct. J.
101 (5) (2004) 717–726.
[6] M.M. Rahman, M.Z. Jumaat, M.A. Rahman, I.M. Qeshta, Innovative hybrid
bonding method for strengthening reinforced concrete beam in flexure, Constr.
Build. Mater. 79 (2015) 370–378.
[7] M.T. El-Mihilmy, J.W. Tedesco, Deflection of reinforced concrete beams
strengthened with fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) plates, ACI Struct. J. 97 (5)
(2000).
 K.M.u. Darain et al. / Construction and Building Materials 98 (2015) 276–285
[8] H. Charkas, H.A. Rasheed, H. Melhem, Rigorous procedure for calculating
deflections of fiber-reinforced polymer-strengthened reinforced concrete
beams, ACI Struct. J. 100 (4) (2003).
[9] W.-W. Wang, J.-G. Dai, K.A. Harries, Performance evaluation of RC beams
strengthened with an externally bonded FRP system under simulated vehicle
loads, J. Bridge Eng. 18 (1) (2011) 76–82.
[10] H.A. Rasheed, H. Charkas, H. Melhem, Simplified nonlinear analysis of
strengthened concrete beams based on a rigorous approach, J. Struct. Eng.
130 (7) (2004) 1087–1096.
[11] H.A. Rasheed, R. Nayal, H. Melhem, Response prediction of concrete beams
reinforced with FRP bars, Compos. Struct. 65 (2) (2004) 193–204.
[12] P.H. Bischoff, Reevaluation of deflection prediction for concrete beams
reinforced with steel and fiber reinforced polymer bars, J. Struct. Eng. 131
(5) (2005) 752–767.
[13] P. Visintin, D.J. Oehlers, R. Muhamad, C. Wu, Partial-interaction short term
serviceability deflection of RC beams, Eng. Struct. 56 (2013) 993–1006.
[14] A.A. Shukri, K.M.U. Darain, M.Z. Jumaat, The tension-stiffening contribution of
NSM CFRP to the behavior of strengthened RC beams, Materials 8 (7) (2015)
4131–4146.
[15] J.-S. Jang, ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system, IEEE Trans.
Syst. Man Cybern. 23 (3) (1993) 665–685.
[16] A. Talei, L.H.C. Chua, C. Quek, A novel application of a neuro-fuzzy
computational technique in event-based rainfall–runoff modeling, Expert
Syst. Appl. 37 (12) (2010) 7456–7468.
[17] D. Petković, N.D. Pavlović, Ž. Ćojbašić, N.T. Pavlović, Adaptive neuro fuzzy
estimation of underactuated robotic gripper contact forces, Expert Syst. Appl.
40 (1) (2013) 281–286.
[18] C. Wu, K. Chau, Prediction of rainfall time series using modular soft computing
methods, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 26 (3) (2013) 997–1007.
[19] S. Shamshirband, D. Petković, N.B. Anuar, M.L. Mat Kiah, S. Akib, A. Gani, et al.,
Sensorless estimation of wind speed by adaptive neuro-fuzzy methodology,
Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 62 (2014) 490–495.
[20] H. Basser, S. Shamshirband, H. Karami, D. Petković, S. Akib, A. Jahangirzadeh,
Adaptive neuro-fuzzy selection of the optimal parameters of protective spur
dike, Nat. Hazards (2014) 1–12.
[21] T.L. Grigorie, R.M. Botez, A.V. Popov, M. Mamou, Y. Mébarki, A hybrid fuzzy
logic proportional-integral-derivative and conventional on-off controller for
morphing wing actuation using shape memory alloy-Part 1: Morphing system
mechanisms and controller architecture design, Aeronaut. J. 116 (1179) (2012)
433.
[22] T.L. Grigorie, R.M. Botez, A.V. Popov, M. Mamou, Y. Mébarki, A hybrid fuzzy
logic proportional-integral-derivative and conventional on-off controller for
morphing wing actuation using shape memory alloy, Part 2: Controller
implementation and validation, Aeronaut. J. 116 (1179) (2012) 451–465.
[23] A.H. Al-Rahmani, H.A. Rasheed, Y. Najjar, A combined soft computing-
mechanics approach to inversely predict damage in bridges, Proc. Comput.
Sci. 8 (2012) 461–466.
[24] I. Flood, L. Muszynski, S. Nandy, Rapid analysis of externally reinforced
concrete beams using neural networks, Comput. Struct. 79 (17) (2001) 1553–
1559.
285
[25] R. Perera, M. Barchín, A. Arteaga, A.D. Diego, Prediction of the ultimate strength
of reinforced concrete beams FRP-strengthened in shear using neural
networks, Compos. B Eng. 41 (4) (2010) 287–298.
[26] B.B. Adhikary, H. Mutsuyoshi, Artificial neural networks for the prediction of
shear capacity of steel plate strengthened RC beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 18
(6) (2004) 409–417.
[27] N. Boely, R.M. Botez, G. Kouba, Identification of a non-linear F/A-18 model by
the use of fuzzy logic and neural network methods, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part
G: J. Aerosp. Eng. 225 (5) (2011) 559–574.
[28] K. Nasrollahzadeh, M.M. Basiri, Prediction of shear strength of FRP reinforced
concrete beams using fuzzy inference system, Expert Syst. Appl. 41 (4) (2014)
1006–1020.
[29] K.M.U. Darain, M.Z. Jumaat, M.A. Hossain, M.A. Hosen, M. Obaydullah, M.N.
Huda, et al., Automated serviceability prediction of NSM strengthened
structure using a fuzzy logic expert system, Expert Syst. Appl. 42 (1) (2015)
376–389.
[30] T.-W. Park, U.-J. Na, S.-J. Kwon, Prediction of ultimate strength and strain of
concrete columns retrofitted by FRP using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference
system, J. Korea Concr. Inst. 22 (1) (2010) 19–27.
[31] V. Balasubramaniam, P. Raghunath, K. Suguna, An adaptive neuro-fuzzy
inference system based modeling for corrosion-damaged reinforced HSC
beams strengthened with external glass fibre reinforced polymer laminates, J.
Comput. Sci. 8 (6) (2012) 879.
[32] M. Jalal, A.A. Ramezanianpour, A.R. Pouladkhan, P. Tedro, Application of
genetic programming (GP) and ANFIS for strength enhancement modeling of
CFRP-retrofitted concrete cylinders, Neural Comput. Appl. 23 (2) (2013) 455–
470.
[33] EN B. 12390-3: 2009, Testing hardened concrete. Making and curing
specimens for strength tests 2009, ISBN, 940137696.
[34] ASTM, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete
Specimens. ASTM C39/C39M-14, American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) International, USA, 2014.
[35] EN B. 12390-5: 2009. Flexural Strength of Test Specimens Testing Hardened
Concrete, 2009, 1–14.
[36] A615M-14 AA, Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain Carbon-Steel
Bars for Concrete Reinforcement, ASTM International, 2014.
[37] SikadurÒ-30, Product Data Sheet-Adhesive for bonding reinforcement. Edition:
2014-01_1. Retrieved June 02, 2014, from: <http://mys.sika.com/en/solutions_
products/02/02a013/02a013sa06/02a013sa06100/02a013sa06105.html>.
[38] J.S. Armstrong, R. Fildes, Correspondence on the selection of error measures for
comparisons among forecasting methods, J. Forecast. 14 (1) (1995) 67–71.
[39] J.S. Armstrong, F. Collopy, Error measures for generalizing about forecasting
methods: empirical comparisons, Int. J. Forecast. 8 (1) (1992) 69–80.
[40] L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy Logic, Neural Networks and Soft Computing. One-page
Course Announcement of CS 294-4, University of California, Berkley, 1992.
[41] J.R. Koza, Genetic Programming: On the Programming of Computers by Means
of Natural Selection, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992. 840 p..
[42] G.-B. Huang, L. Chen, C.K. Siew, Universal approximation using incremental
constructive feed forward networks with random hidden nodes, IEEE Trans.
Neural Networks 17 (2006) 879–892.