See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/229351855

Near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement: An emerging technique for

strengthening structures

Article in Composites Part B Engineering · March 2007

DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.08.003

CITATIONS READS

841 4,148

2 authors:

Laura De Lorenzis J.G. Teng

ETH Zurich The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
246 PUBLICATIONS 12,909 CITATIONS 329 PUBLICATIONS 29,622 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Laura De Lorenzis on 09 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 This article was originally published in a journal published by
Elsevier, and the attached copy is provided by Elsevier for the
author’s benefit and for the benefit of the author’s institution, for
non-commercial research and educational use including without
limitation use in instruction at your institution, sending it to specific
colleagues that you know, and providing a copy to your institution’s
administrator.
All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without
limitation commercial reprints, selling or licensing copies or access,
or posting on open internet sites, your personal or institution’s
website or repository, are prohibited. For exceptions, permission
may be sought for such use through Elsevier’s permissions site at:

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissionusematerial
 Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement: An emerging technique

py
for strengthening structures
a,* b
L. De Lorenzis , J.G. Teng

co
a
Department of Innovation Engineering, University of Lecce, via per Monteroni, 73100 Lecce, Italy
b
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China

Received 27 January 2006; accepted 17 August 2006

Available online 18 October 2006

al
Abstract on
Near-surface mounted (NSM) fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcement is one of the latest and most promising strengthening
techniques for reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Research on this topic started only a few years ago but has by now attracted world-
wide attention. Issues raised by the use of NSM FRP reinforcement include the optimization of construction details, models for the bond
behaviour between NSM FRP and concrete, reliable design methods for flexural and shear strengthening, and the maximization of the
advantages of this technique. This paper provides a critical review of existing research in this area, identifies gaps of knowledge, and
rs

outlines directions for further research.

 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: A. Polymer matrix composites (PMCs); B. Debonding; C. Analytical modeling; D. Mechanical testing; Near-surface mounted reinforcement
pe

1. Introduction Examples of the use of NSM steel rebars in Europe for

the strengthening of RC structures date back to the early
Over the past decade, extensive research has been 1950s [1]. More recent applications of NSM stainless steel
conducted on the strengthening of reinforced concrete bars for the strengthening of masonry buildings and arch
r's

(RC) structures using externally bonded fiber-reinforced
polymer (FRP) laminates; the technology has also been
implemented in a large number of practical projects world-
wide. More recently, near-surface mounted (NSM) FRP
o
bridges have also been documented (e.g. [4]). The advanta-
ges of FRP versus steel as NSM reinforcement are better
resistance to corrosion, increased ease and speed of instal-
lation due to its lightweight, and a reduced groove size due

reinforcement has attracted an increasing amount of to the higher tensile strength and better corrosion resis-
research as well as practical application. In the NSM tance of FRP.
th

method, grooves are first cut into the concrete cover of Compared to externally bonded FRP reinforcement, the
an RC element and the FRP reinforcement is bonded NSM system has a number of advantages: (a) the amount
therein with an appropriate groove filler (typically epoxy of site installation work may be reduced, as surface prepa-
Au

paste or cement grout). What is herein called ‘‘NSM rein-
forcement’’ was previously given other names such as
‘‘grouted reinforcement’’ [1], or ‘‘embedded reinforcement’’
[2,3].
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0832 297241; fax: +39 0832 297279.
E-mail address: laura.delorenzis@unile.it (L. De Lorenzis).
ration other than grooving is no longer required (e.g., plas-
ter removal is not necessary; irregularities of the concrete
surface can be more easily accommodated; removal of
the weak laitance layer on the concrete surface is no longer
needed); (b) NSM reinforcement is less prone to debonding
from the concrete substrate; (c) NSM bars can be more eas-
ily anchored into adjacent members to prevent debonding
failures; this feature is particularly attractive in the flexural
strengthening of beams and columns in rigidly-jointed

1359-8368/$ - see front matter  2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.08.003
120 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

frames, where the maximum moments typically occur

at the ends of the member; (d) NSM reinforcement
can be more easily pre-stressed; (e) NSM bars are pro-
tected by the concrete cover and so are less exposed to acci-
dental impact and mechanical damage, fire, and vandalism;
this aspect makes this technology particularly suitable for
the strengthening of negative moment regions of beams/
slabs; (f) the aesthetic of the strengthened structure is

py
virtually unchanged. Due to the above advantages, the
NSM FRP method is in many cases superior to the
externally bonded FRP method or can be used in combina-
tion with it, provided that the cover of the member is suf-

co
ficiently thick for grooves of a desirable size to be
accommodated.
The existing knowledge on the NSM FRP method is
much more limited than that on the externally bonded
FRP method, as reflected by the absence of relevant provi-
sions in the existing guidelines on the FRP strengthening of
concrete structures issued by fib [5] and ACI-440 [6]. How-

al
ever, the international engineering community has become
Fig. 1. Types of FRP bars for NSM applications.
increasingly aware of the practical advantages of this
method, which has led to accelerations of research and
on
practical applications worldwide. Both ACI-440 and fib
are currently considering revisions to their documents to
include NSM-related provisions. Against this background,
this paper provides a critical review of existing research in
rs

this area, identifies gaps of knowledge, and outlines direc-

tions for further research.
This paper focuses on research work on the structural
pe

aspects of NSM strengthening of concrete structures. Dis-

cussions on some significant practical applications of the
NSM method, on NSM strengthening of masonry and tim-
ber structures, and on durability-related aspects are given
in Ref. [7]. Space limitation does not allow them to be dis-
cussed in this paper.
r's

2. Materials and systems

2.1. FRP reinforcement

o

In most existing studies, carbon FRP (CFRP) NSM

reinforcement has been used to strengthen concrete struc-
th

tures. Glass FRP (GFRP) has been used in most applica-

tions of the NSM method to masonry and timber
structures. The present authors are not aware of any study
Au

or practical application in which aramid FRP (AFRP) was

used. The tensile strength and elastic modulus of CFRP are
much higher than those of GFRP, so for the same tensile
capacity, a CFRP bar has a smaller cross-sectional area
than a GFRP bar and requires a smaller groove. This in
turn leads to easier installation, with less risks of interfering
with the internal steel reinforcement, and with savings in
the groove-filling material.
FRP bars can be manufactured in a virtually endless
variety of shapes. Hence, the NSM FRP reinforcement
may be round, square, rectangular and oval bars, as well
as strips (Figs. 1 and 2). For brevity, the term ‘‘bars’’ is
Fig. 2. Different NSM systems and nomenclature.
used herein as a generic term encompassing all cross-
sectional shapes, while the term ‘‘strips’’ is reserved for
thin narrow strips. Different cross-sectional shapes have
different advantages, and offer different choices for practi-
cal applications. For example, square bars maximize the
bar sectional area for a given size of square groove while
round bars are more readily available and can be more
easily anchored in pre-stressing operations. Narrow strips
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
maximize the surface area-to-sectional area ratio for a
given volume and thus minimize the risk of debonding,
but require a thicker cover for a given cross-sectional area.
In practical applications, the choice depends strongly on
the constraints of a specific situation, such as the depth
of the cover, and the availability and cost of a particular
type of FRP bar.
FRP bars are also manufactured with a variety of sur-
face textures, which strongly affect their bond behaviour
as NSM reinforcement. Their surface can be smooth,
sand-blasted, sand-coated, or roughened with a peel-ply
surface treatment. Round bars can also be spirally wound
with a fiber tow, or ribbed [8].
2.2. Groove filler
The groove filler is the medium for the transfer of stres-
ses between the FRP bar and the concrete. In terms of
structural behaviour, its most relevant mechanical proper-
ties are the tensile and shear strengths. The tensile strength
is especially important when the embedded bars have a
deformed surface, which produces high circumferential
on
tensile stresses in the cover formed by the groove filler
(simply referred to as ‘‘the cover’’ or ‘‘the epoxy cover’’
hereafter) as a result of the bond action. In addition, the
shear strength is important when the bond capacity of
rs
the NSM reinforcement is controlled by cohesive shear fail-
ure of the groove filler. The effect of the modulus of elastic-
ity of the groove filler has never been experimentally
pe
investigated.
The most common and best performing groove filler
is a two-component epoxy. Low-viscosity epoxy can be
selected for strengthening in negative moment regions as
the epoxy can be ‘‘poured’’ into the grooves. For other
cases, a high-viscosity epoxy is needed to avoid dripping
or flowing-away. The addition of sand to epoxy can
r's
increase the volume, control the viscosity, lower the coeffi-
cient of thermal expansion, and raise the glass transition
temperature. A drawback of this addition seems to be
reduced adhesion at the bar–epoxy interface for a smooth
o
bar surface [2].
The use of cement paste or mortar in place of epoxy as a
th
groove filler has recently been explored in an attempt to
lower the material cost, reduce the hazard to workers, min-
imize the environmental impact, allow effective bonding to
Au
wet substrates, and achieve better resistance to high tem-
peratures and improved thermal compatibility with the
concrete substrate. However, cement mortar has inferior
mechanical properties and durability, with a tensile
strength an order of magnitude smaller than that of com-
mon epoxies. Results of bond tests and flexural tests
[9,10] have identified some significant limitations of cement
mortar as a groove filler. Given these limitations and the
very limited data available, the rest of this paper is focused
on epoxy-bonded NSM FRP reinforcement only, except
when future research needs are discussed. Nevertheless,
tests on NSM FRP reinforcement using cement grout as
121
the groove filler, if available, are included in Tables 1–4
for completeness.
2.3. Groove dimensions
Fig. 2 shows several configurations of NSM FRP rein-
forcement, where db is the nominal diameter of a round
bar, and tf and hf are the thickness/width and the height
py
of an FRP strip or rectangular bar respectively. The groove
width bg, the groove depth hg, the net distance between two
adjacent grooves ag, and the net distance between a groove
and the beam edge ae are all relevant construction param-
co
eters, which can influence the bond performance and hence
the structural behaviour.
For round bars, De Lorenzis [11], based on results of
bond tests with square grooves (bg = hg) and defining
k = bg/db, proposed a minimum value of 1.5 for k for
smooth or lightly sand-blasted bars and a minimum value
of 2.0 for k for deformed bars. Parretti and Nanni [12] sug-
al
gested that both bg and hg should be no less than 1.5db. For
NSM strips, Blaschko [13] suggested that the depth and
width of the cut groove should be about 3 mm larger than
the height and thickness of the corresponding FRP strip
respectively, so to obtain an adhesive layer thickness of
about 1–2 mm. Also for NSM strips, Parretti and Nanni
[12] recommended that the minimum width of a groove
be no less than 3tf and the minimum depth be no less than
1.5hf. For a more detailed discussion, see the section on
bond behaviour.
In the existing studies, NSM strips were bonded using
epoxy either along all four sides of the strip surface
[14,15], or along three sides of the strip surface only
[16,17] (Fig. 2). Due to the large width to thickness ratio
of the strips, the reduction in the bond surface in the latter
case is negligible. In existing tests on NSM square bars [18],
only three sides of the bar surface were bonded to the con-
crete member.
2.4. Groove position
If a single NSM bar is to be provided to the tension side
of an RC member, it should naturally be centrally located
over the beam width. When two or more NSM bars need to
be provided, then the distance between two adjacent NSM
bars and the distance between the edge of the member and
the adjacent bar become important design parameters. The
effect of these parameters is discussed in the section on
bond behaviour.
2.5. Constructional aspects
Compared with the use of externally bonded FRP lam-
inates, the need to cut grooves into the concrete member in
the construction process of the NSM method is the key dif-
ference. A detailed discussion of the construction process
can be found in Ref. [7].
 py

122
Table 1

co
Summary of existing experimental work on the bond behaviour of NSM FRP reinforcement bonded to concrete
Round bars Square bars Strips
[2] [38] [3] [21] [23] [26] [9] [13,16] [20] [14]
Test method Direct pull-out Beam pull-out Direct pull-out Beam pull-out Direct pull-out Beam
pull-out
Specimen Epoxy-filled Concrete Two concrete Inverted T beam, C-shaped C-shaped Beam with two Concrete block, Concrete block, RILEM
shape and plastic pipe, block, blocks, each total specimen, specimen, halves connected 300 · 300 · 150 · 150 · 350 beam pull-
dimensions diameter = 152 · 152 · 150 · 150 · height = 254 mm, external external by a steel hinge, 1100 mm, one NSM mm, one NSM out test
51 mm, 203 mm, two 300 mm, two flange width = dimensions dimensions net span = 1.73 m, strip strip per test

al
one bar NSM bars on NSM bars on 254 mm, net are 300 · are cross-sectional per test
embedded opposite opposite sides span = 1.07 m, 300 · 400 mm, 300 · 300 · dimensions N/Aa,

L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

concentrically sides one NSM bar one NSM bar 400 mm, one NSM bar
one NSM bar
fc0 (MPa) – 34 20 28 22 22 N/Aa 32 and 46 29 cube 35, 45, 70
on strength
Groove-filler Epoxy or Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy or Epoxy or Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy
epoxy + sand cement paste cement paste
Direct tensile 15–20 from 13.8 from N/Aa 13.8, from 27.4, from 27.4, from 31, from manufacturer 33.3 from 42.6 from 16–22, from
strength of manufacturer manufacturer manufacturer testing testing (epoxy) (epoxy)e 9, bending testing testing testing
groove filler (value with 6.3, bending tensile
(MPa) no sand) tensile strength from
rs

strength manufacturer (cement)

from testing
(cement)
Type of FRP/ CFRP/ CFRP/ CFRP/round/ CFRP/round/ CFRP/round/ CFRP/round/ CFRP/square/SM CFRP/strip/ CFRP/strip/ CFRP/strip/
cross- round/SM round/SB SB SB SWS SWS roughened roughened N/Aa
pe

sectional CFRP/ CFRP/round/ GFRP/round/ GFRP/round/ CFRP/square/SC

shape/ round/SB RB RB RB
surface GFRP/round/
configuration RB
Nominal db or 9.5 11 9.5 9.5 and 12.7 7.5 and 9.5 7.5 and 9.5 10 · 10 (1.2–2) · 20 5 · 16 1.4 · 9.3
tf · hf of
FRP (mm)
bg · hg (mm) – 14.3 · 19.0 16 · 25 bg = hg, bg = hg, b g = h g, 16 · 16 (2.8–4.3) · (21–23) 9 · 22 3.3 · 15
k = 1.12–2.67 k = 1.24–2.50 k = 1.24–2.50 average 3.3 · 22
Groove surface – Saw-cut Saw-cut Saw-cut Pre-formed Saw-cut Saw-cut Saw-cut Saw-cut Saw-cut
Test variables Bar surface, BL BL BL, type of bar, BL, type of BL, type of BL, bar surface BL, type of strip, fc0 , BL BL, concrete
r's

type of epoxy bar diameter, k bar, k bar, groove- configuration, type of loading, ae strength
filler groove-filler
Observed bond BE-I Concrete Concrete BE-I, SP-E, EC-I, SP-C1 SP-C1, BE-C N/Aa (indicated as BE-C, SP-ED BE-I BEd
failure shear at shear failurec SP-C1, SP-C2 ‘‘concrete failure’’ and
modesb edgec, BE-I ‘‘delamination’’)
Acronyms: BL = bond length; RB = ribbed; SB = sand-blasted; SC = sand-coated; SM = smooth; SWS = spirally wound and sand-coated.
a
N/A = not available.
o

b
For acronyms see Fig. 3.
c
Failure mode influenced by specimen details.
d
Unspecified whether BE-I or BE-C.
th

e
Tensile test method unspecified.
Au
 py
co
Table 2
Local bond strength of NSM systems (saw-cut grooves)
Type of bar (material, Surface Nominal db or k or bg · hg Groove Direct tensile strength of fc0 (MPa) Local bond Mainb Reference

al
cross-sectional shape) configuration tf · hf (mm) (mm) filler groove filler (MPa) strength (MPa) failure mode
CFRP, round Sand-blasted 9.5 1.34–2.67 Epoxy 13.8 From manufacturer 28 8.6 BE-I [21]

L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

12.7 1.25 9.7
CFRP, round Ribbed 9.5 1.33 27.4 From testing 22 11.2 SP-C1 [26]
1.59
on 15.4
2.12 16.6
GFRP, round Ribbed 9.5 1.36 9.1
1.64 10.0
2.18 12.5
CFRP, round Spirally wound and 7.5 1.50 18.0
sand-coated 2.00 20.8
rs

2.50 21.9
CFRP, square Smooth 10 · 10 N/Aa 31 From manufacturer N/Aa 9.0c N/Aa [9]
CFRP, strip N/Aa 1.5 · 9.6 3.3 · 15 16–22 From testing 35, 45, 70 19.8 BE [14]
Roughened (1.2–2) · 20 Average 33.3 From testing 32 and 46 20.0d BE-C [16]
3.3 · 22
pe

Roughened 5 · 16 9 · 22 42.6 From testing 29 Cube 10–12 BE-I [20]

strength
CFRP, round Ribbed 9.5 1.59 Cement 6.3, Bending tensile strength 22 9.7 SP-C1, BE-C [26]
2.21 paste from testing 6.4
GFRP, round Ribbed 9.5 1.64 8.0
2.27 8.3
CFRP, round Spirally wound and 7.5 1.50 6.7
sand-coated
CFRP, square Sand-coated 10 · 10 N/Aa 9, Bending tensile strength N/Aa 4.3c N/Aa [9]
from manufacturer
r's

a
N/A = not available.
b
In some cases more than one failure mode were concurrent.
c
Taken from the specimen with the shortest bonded length (100 mm).
d
With no influence of edge distance (i.e. a0e P 150 mm).
o
th

123
Au
 py

124
Table 3
Summary of existing experimental work on flexural strengthening with NSM FRP reinforcement – beams with limited bonded lengths, slabs, and columns

co
Beams with limited bonded lengths Slabs Columns
Reference [17] [19] [20] [2] [42] [43] [42]
Test method 3-Point bending 4-Point bending Patch loading at centre 3-Point bending Uniform line load Horizontal load
at mid-span or at 330 at top
from free end of
cantilever slab
Cross-sectional T, total height = 300, Rectangular, 5400 · 229 RC, simply 1800 · 229 PC, simply 7600 · 460 1180 · 406 PC 600 · 600
shape and web height = 250, 150 · 300 supported supportedc
dimensions flange width = 300,
(mm) web width = 150
Net span (m) 2.5 3 3 7.9 4.9 (mid-span), 1.8 Height

al
(cantilever) 1.8–3.4
Shear span (m) – – – – – –

L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

fc0 (MPa) 48 35 28 41 56 45–50 56
Groove filler Epoxy
Direct tensile N/Aa 42.6 from testing N/Aa N/Aa N/Aa N/Aa N/Aa
strength of
on
groove filler
(MPa)
Type of FRP/cross- CFRP/strip/ CFRP/ CFRP/ CFRP/round/SM CFRP/round/SM CFRP/round/SB CFRP/round/N/Aa CFRP/round/
sectional shape/ N/Aa round/RB strip/PP CFRP/strip/N/Aa CFRP/strip/N/Aa SB
surface CFRP/round/RB
configuration
FRP nominal db or 1.2 · 25 9.5 4 · 16 3 9.5, 1.2 · 25 11 10; 1.4 · 25; 9.5 11
rs

tf · hf (mm)
Number of FRP 1 1 1 4 Bars every 102 mm 1 Bar every 102 mm 20 bars (one every 10; 18; (mid-span) 3 on each face
bars o.c. (long.), 1 bar every o.c. (long.), 1 strip 381 mm o.c.) 6; 6; 8 (cantilever) or 7 on each
102 mm o.c. (transv.) every 51 mm o.c. face
(long.)
pe

Elastic modulus of 150 111 151 172 172 (bars), 119 147; 150; 111 119
FRP (GPa) 130 (strips)
Tensile strength of 2000 1918 2068 1550 1550 (bars), 1240 1970; 2000; 1918 1240
FRP (MPa) 1790 (strips)
bg · hg (mm) 5 · 25 18 · 30 8 · 22 9.5 · 13 16 · 25, 3.2 · 29 14 · 19 16 · 30; 5 · 25; 16 · 30 14 · 19
Steel tension Two 10-mm bars Two 12-mm bars 16-mm bars @102 mm None 25-mm bars @127 mm Five 16-mm mild bars Four 19-mm
reinforcement o.c. (long.) and o.c. (long.) and 13-mm (mid-span), four 16-mm bars
204 mm o.c. (transv.) bars @457 mm o.c. mild bars (cantilever) +
(transv.) twelve 15-mm 7-wire
pre-stressing strands
Bar anchorage 150–1200 150–1200 0–1150 Termination: 152 from N/Aa Bar length 6 m N/Aa 381 mm in the
lengthb (mm) support, 762 from free footing
edge
r's

Test variables Bar anchorage length – – – Type of bar Number of bars

Observed failure Debonding by EC-Cb at Concrete CCS (cut-off), Punching CC + DBd (bars), BR CC BR, CC
modes cut-off and MMR, BR Splittingc CCS (MMR) shear + DBd CC (strips)
(MMR)
Increase in ultimate 0–54 0–41 0–106 15 300 27 36; 43; 39 102, 177
load (%)
Acronyms: BR = bar rupture, CC = concrete crushing, CCS = concrete cover separation; DB = debonding; MMR = maximum moment region; RC = reinforced concrete; PC = pre-stressed concrete; PP = roughened with peel-ply
o

surface treatment; RB = ribbed; SB = sand-blasted; SM = smooth.

a
N/A = not available.
b
See Fig. 3.
th

c
Not clear whether it was CCS.
d
Debonding mechanism not clear.
Au
 py
co
Table 4
Summary of existing experimental work on flexural strengthening with NSM FRP reinforcement –beams
Reference
[61] [44] [11] [10] [16] [41] [62] [63] [15]
Test method 4-Point bending 3-Point bending 4-Point bending
Cross-sectional Rectangular, T, total height = 406, Rectangular, Rectangular, Rectangular, T, total height = 300, Rectangular, Rectangular, Rectangular,
shape and 457 · 152, web height = 305, 200 · 400 200 · 300 200 · 500, web height = 250, 152  304 · 188 200 · 120 100 · 170  180
dimensions 914 · 356 flange width = 381, 600 · 500 flange width=300,
(mm) web width = 152 web width=150
Net span (m) 2.4, 7.5 3.9 4 3.6 2.8, 7.5 2.5 1.3 1.1 1.5

al
Shear span (m) 0.8, 2.5 1.83 1.75 1.3 1.15, 3.25 – 0.5 0.5 0.5
fc0 (MPa) N/Aa 36 15 61 44 48 37 20–63 46
Groove filler Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy and Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy Epoxy
cement grout

L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

Direct tensile 30 13.8 27.4 N/Aa 33.3 48 (bars) 70 (strips) N/Aa N/Aa 16–22 from testing
strength of
on
groove filler
(MPa)
Type of FRP/ CFRP/round/ GFRP/round/RB CFRP/round/ CFRP/square/ CFRP/strip/ CFRP/round/SW CFRP/strip/ CFRP/round/ CFRP/strip/N/A
cross-sectional SM CFRP/round/SB SWS SM roughened CFRP/strip/N/A roughened N/Aa
shape/surface CFRP/square/ CFRP/strip/ N/A
configuration SC GFRP/strip/N/A
FRP nominal db 4.75, 6.35 12.7 (GFRP), 9.5 and 7.5 10 · 10 2 · 20 9.5, 2 · 16, 1.2 · 25, 0.25 · 15.5 7 (net); 8 1.5 · 9.6
rs

or tf · hf (mm) 12.7 (CFRP) 2 · 20 (external)

Number of FRP 4, 11 2 1, 2 2 3, 11 1, 2 (CFRP), 5 1, 2 1, 3 1–3
bars (GFRP)
Elastic modulus 122 38.6 (GFRP) 175 230 156 122.5, 140, 150, 45 136.6 201 159
of FRP (GPa)
pe

Tensile strength 1326 773 (GFRP) 2214 4140 1813 1408, 1525, 2000, 1000 1656 1940 2740
of FRP (MPa)
bg · hg (mm) bg = 10.2, 19 · 19 (db = 9.5) 16 · 16 N/Aa 3.3 · 23 18 · 30, 6.4 · 19, 6.4 · 19 N/Aa 4 · 12
varying hg 25 · 25 (db = 12.7) 6.4 · 25, 6.4 · 25
Steel tension 1.14, 1.19 0.89 0.38–0.64 0.67 0.63, 0.84 0.48 0.83–1.74 0.28, 0.57 0.33–0.84
reinforcement
ratio (%)
Cut-off distance N/Aa Extended over Extended over 300 or extended 150, 300 50 Extended over 50 50
from support supports supports over supports supports
(mm)
Test variables Beam size, steel Type of FRP bar, Steel ratio, NSM bar length, End anchorage, Type of FRP bar Section width, Number of FRP Steel ratio,
ratio, groove size bar diameter number of FRP groove filler type of loading steel ratio, number bars, concrete number of FRP
r's

bars of FRP bars strength bars

Observed failure CC, secondary DBb of NSM SB bar, CC, CCS DBc of NSM CCS from CCS (MMR) (CFRP CC, BR CC, DB CCSd
modes debonding and CCS (MMR) (MMR), edge bars, BR (when cut-off, BR round bars and (described as
partial BR failure extended over GFRP strips), BR ‘‘rod slippage’’)
supports) (CFRP strips)
Increase in 20–50 26–44 21–61 56–92 67–82 69–99 15–55 140–430 78–98
capacity (%)
o

Acronyms: BR = bar rupture, CC = concrete crushing, CCS = concrete cover separation; DB = debonding; MMR = maximum moment region; RB = ribbed; SB = sand-blasted; SC = sand-coated; SM = smooth;
SW = spirally wound; SWS = spirally wound and sand-coated.
a
N/A = not available.
th

b
Debonding mechanism BE-I (Fig. 3), see Fig. 7a.
c
Debonding mechanism not clear.
125
Au
126 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
3. Bond behaviour
3.1. Summary of existing work
The bond between an NSM bar and the substrate mate-
rial plays a key role in ensuring the effectiveness of the
NSM strengthening method. The performance of the bond
depends on a number of parameters: the groove and the
bar dimensions, the tensile and shear strengths of the con-
crete and the groove filler, the bar cross-sectional shape
and surface configuration, and the degree of roughness of
the groove surface. This large number of parameters calls
for extensive laboratory characterization, as well as analyt-
ical and numerical modelling. Table 1 provides a summary
of the existing experimental data on bond behaviour. Note
that the tests in some existing studies [17,19,20], although
addressing bond-related aspects, were conducted on beams
under bending and are therefore discussed in a later
section.
3.2. Failure modes and mechanisms
on
The bond tests summarized in Table 1 identified differ-
ent possible bond failure modes of NSM systems (Fig. 3).
These modes are described in some detail below and the
underlying mechanisms examined.
rs
3.2.1. Bond failure at the bar–epoxy interface
pe
This mode may occur as either pure interfacial failure
(BE-I), or as cohesive shear failure in the groove
filler (BE-C). The BE-I mode is critical for bars with a
smooth or lightly sand-blasted surface, i.e. when the
degree of surface deformation is insufficient to provide
mechanical interlocking between the bar and the groove
filler and the bond resistance relies primarily on adhesion
r's
between the bar and the filler. For round bars, this mode
becomes critical if the groove size is sufficiently large to
avoid splitting failure of the groove filler. For epoxy and
concrete of moderate strengths, De Lorenzis and Nanni
o
[21] estimated that for lightly sand-blasted round bars, a
k value of 1.5 was enough to prevent splitting failure of
th
the epoxy cover. For round bars, cracking of the epoxy
cover (Fig. 3) produced by the radial components of the
bond stresses can accelerate the occurrence of a BE-I
Au
failure.
The BE-C failure mode was observed for NSM strips
with a roughened surface [13,16]. This mode occurs when
the shear strength of the epoxy is exceeded.
Inter-laminar shear failure within the bar, although the-
oretically possible, has never been observed. Shearing-off of
ribs in ribbed bars has never been reported as a failure
mode itself, unlike in the case of FRP ribbed bars as inter-
nal reinforcement for concrete [22]. However, in some tests
[21], the surface of the ribbed bars was found to have been
damaged after bond failure, indicating that this could be an
upper-bound failure mode.
3.2.2. Bond failure at the epoxy–concrete interface
Bond failure at the epoxy–concrete interface may
occur as pure interfacial failure (EC-I), or as cohesive
shear failure in the concrete (EC-C). The EC-I failure
mode was found to be critical for pre-cast grooves
[23]. For spirally wound bars or ribbed bars with low
rib protrusions, this was found to be the critical fail-
ure mode whenever the groove was preformed, indepen-
py
dent of the value of k. For ribbed bars with high
rib protrusions, this mode was found to be critical only
for k values larger than a minimum value (equal to
approximately 2.00 for ribbed bars in epoxy), and for
co
lower k values, splitting failure of the epoxy cover
dominated.
The EC-C failure mode has never been observed in bond
tests, but it has been observed in bending tests on beams
(Fig. 3, see also Fig. 7f) within the strengthened region
[11,20] or at the bar cut-off point [17]. The latter authors
considered this failure mode in their theoretical model for
al
debonding of NSM strips.
3.2.3. Splitting of the epoxy cover
Longitudinal cracking of the groove filler and/or frac-
ture of the surrounding concrete along inclined planes is
herein referred to as cover splitting. This was observed to
be the critical failure mode for deformed (i.e. ribbed and
spirally wound) round bars.
The mechanics of cover splitting bond failure in an
NSM system is similar to that of splitting bond failure of
steel deformed bars in concrete, on which a good under-
standing has been developed from decades of research
[24]. For an NSM FRP bar, the radial component of the
bond stresses is balanced by circumferential tensile stresses
in the epoxy cover which may lead to the formation of lon-
gitudinal splitting cracks of the cover. The concrete sur-
rounding the groove is also subjected to tensile stresses
and may eventually fail when its tensile strength is reached,
causing fracture along inclined planes. Whether fracture in
the concrete occurs before or after the appearance of split-
ting cracks in the cover or even after the complete fracture
of the cover, depends on the groove size and the tensile
strengths of the two materials.
The tensile strength of epoxy is one order of magnitude
larger than that of concrete, but the epoxy cover thickness
for NSM FRP reinforcement is one order of magnitude
smaller than the thickness of concrete cover to internal
steel reinforcement in an ordinary RC member. Moreover,
longitudinal steel reinforcement in RC beams benefits from
the restraint of shear links, but this restraint is not available
for NSM longitudinal reinforcement, unless external
restraint of some form (e.g. FRP U jackets as shear rein-
forcement) is provided. These factors explain why cover
splitting is a likely bond failure mode for an NSM system.
Figs. 4b–c illustrate how the bond mechanism of an NSM
system can be modelled in the plane perpendicular to the
bar axis, as further explained later. These figures also clar-
ify the difference in bond mechanism between round bars
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143 127

py
co
al
on
rs
pe
o r's
th
Au

Fig. 3. Bond failure modes of NSM systems observed in bond tests.

and strips. In the latter case, the normal component of the
bond stresses is transverse to the thick lateral sides of
the groove [13,25] so that splitting failure is less likely to
occur.
The different patterns of cover splitting failure of NSM
systems are shown in Fig. 3. When the k ratio is very low
(e.g. specimens in Ref. [21] with k = 1.12–1.18), failure is
limited to the epoxy cover and involves little damage in
the surrounding concrete (SP-E failure). For higher values
of k, failure involves a combination of longitudinal crack-
ing in the epoxy cover and fracture of the surrounding con-
crete along inclined planes (SP-C-1 failure); concrete
fracture starts as soon as the epoxy cover cracks and the
tensile stresses are redistributed [26]. The inclined fracture
planes in the concrete have been observed to form an angle
(b in Fig. 3) of approximately 30 with the horizontal. For
128 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
on
Fig. 4. Schematics of the bond behaviour of NSM FRP reinforcement: (a) bond stresses in the longitudinal plane; (b) normal stresses in the transverse
plane generated by a round bar; (c) normal stresses in the transverse plane generated by a rectangular bar.
large groove depths and/or when the tensile strength ratio
rs
between concrete and epoxy is small, fracture of concrete
may occur before the epoxy crack has reached the external
surface (SP-C-2 failure).
pe
The bond failure modes discussed above are for an
NSM bar located centrally in a wide member, where
edge effects are unimportant. When an NSM bar is close
to the edge of a concrete member, failure involves the
splitting of the edge concrete (SP-ED failure) [16]. In tests,
this failure mode was found to occur when a0e < 20 mm
[16], with the angle b 0 defined in Fig. 3 ranging from 45
r's
to 70.
The bond strength associated with the SP-E mode is
expected to depend strongly on the tensile strength of the
epoxy, whereas those associated with the SP-C-1 and SP-
o
C-2 modes are expected to depend strongly on the concrete
tensile strength. In all cases, the bond strength is expected
th
to increase with the cover thickness of the NSM bar (i.e.
the groove depth). However, the rate of strength increase
with the groove depth has been observed to reduce after
Au
the groove depth exceeds about 2 times the diameter,
around which the SP-C-2 mode replaces the SP-C-1 mode
as the critical bond failure mode. The bond strength of
the SP-E mode also increases as the surface deformations
become less pronounced [26].
3.3. Effect of groove detailing on bond performance
The effect of the groove width-to-depth ratio on the
bond performance has not yet been investigated in detail.
Through finite element modelling, the debonding load of
an NSM strip was found to increase with the groove width
py
co
al
[17]. As the groove depth was kept constant, an increased
groove width implied a larger interfacial area between
epoxy and concrete. This in turn implied a larger debond-
ing load since debonding was assumed to occur by cohesive
shear failure in the concrete at the epoxy–concrete interface
[17].
By simplified analytical modelling for deformed round
bars [25], the cracking load of the epoxy cover was found
to decrease with an increase in the groove width-to-depth
ratio (for a given depth) but the failure load was found
to remain substantially unchanged due to failure being in
the concrete along fracture surfaces nearly independent of
the groove width-to-depth ratio. The first result was con-
firmed by Hassan and Rizkalla [19] through finite element
modelling. It was also found that the tensile stresses in the
concrete decrease with an increase in the groove width,
which implies a larger concrete cracking load (but not nec-
essarily a larger failure load). However, experimental evi-
dence on the effect of the groove width-to-depth ratio on
bond performance is still lacking.
From bond tests on NSM strips, Blaschko [13,16]
indicated that a minimum a0e ða0e ¼ ae þ bg =2Þ of about
20 mm was required to avoid a splitting failure of the con-
crete corner, and for a0e values larger than 30 mm, no cracks
were observed in the concrete at bond failure. He suggested
that a0e be no less than 30 mm or the maximum aggregate
size, whichever is greater. The maximum aggregate size
was suggested as a limit to avoid damaging the concrete
during the cutting of the groove. In his bond tests, a0e did
still influence the bond behaviour until the maximum inves-
tigated value of 150 mm, beyond which no further influ-
ence was assumed.
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
Based on finite element modelling for round deformed
bars, Hassan and Rizkalla [19] suggested a minimum ag
and a minimum ae of two and four bar diameters respec-
tively, regardless of the groove width. However, one of the
beams tested by De Lorenzis [11], which was strengthened
with NSM spirally wound round bars with ag = 30 mm
(i.e. about 1.8 times the groove size and 3.6 times the bar
diameter) and ae = 69 mm (i.e. about 4.3 times the groove
size and 8.6 times the bar diameter), failed by debonding
of the NSM bars involving the spalling of the concrete cover
of the longitudinal steel reinforcement along the edges. This
test thus suggested that the minimum values for ag and ae as
specified in Ref. [19] are insufficient to eliminate interactions
between an NSM bar and the edge of a beam.
3.4. Local bond strength
3.4.1. Experimental results
In any type of bond test, the average bond strength usu-
ally decreases with increases in the bond length, as a result
of the non-uniform distribution of bond stresses (Fig. 4a).
The local bond strength refers to the maximum value of
on
bond stress that the interface can resist, in contrast to the
overall bond strength (or simply bond strength as used in
this paper) which refers to the maximum transferable load
of the joint. The local bond strength must then be obtained
rs
either from very short specimens or from a long specimen
by elaborative strain (and/or slip) measurements.
Several authors studied the local bond strengths of
pe
NSM systems [13,27,16,20,21,25]. A summary of their val-
ues, reported in Table 2, allows the following observations
to be made:
 the local bond strength of the cover splitting mode
(deformed bars), as expected, is higher if the groove
depth is larger and the bar surface deformation less
r's
pronounced;
 the local bond strength of the bar–epoxy interfacial (BE-
I) failure mode, which was observed for sand-blasted
bars, is not influenced by the groove size and is lower
o
than that for deformed bars;
 the local bond strengths of NSM strips from two test
th
series by different authors [14,16] are very close to each
other and are comparable to that of spirally wound bars
[26]; by contrast, the local bond strength obtained from
Au
a third test series [20] is notably lower.
Available information on the bond behaviour of square
bars is still very limited. Nordin and Taljsten [9] reported
average bond strengths from specimens whose lengths were
at least 10 times the width of the square cross-section but
no local bond strengths were reported. An unusual aspect
of the results reported by these authors is that the average
bond strength increased with the bond length.
De Lorenzis [25] reported the local bond strengths at the
epoxy–concrete interface for specimens with different types
of bars tested by De Lorenzis et al. [23]. As EC-I failure
129
was the critical mode, the surface configuration of the
bar did not have a significant effect on the bond behaviour
and the difference in local bond strength between ribbed
and spirally wound bars was basically due to the different
diameters, and hence to the different groove size corre-
sponding to a given k value. The local bond strength was
found to decrease with an increasing groove size.
py
3.4.2. Theoretical models for NSM strips
It is interesting to compare the experimental local bond
strengths of NSM strips reported by Sena Cruz and Barros
[27] with the predictions by the formula proposed by
co
Blaschko [13], and with those given by Hassan and Rizka-
lla’s theoretical model [17]. Blaschko’s formula [13] is given
by:
pffiffiffiffiffi
smax ¼ 0:2 4 a0e  saf ða0e 6 150 mmÞ ð1Þ
where saf is the shear strength of the epoxy. Hassan and
Rizkalla’s formula [17] is given by:
al
fc0 fct
smax ¼ ð2Þ
fc0þ fct
where fc0 and fct are the (cylinder) compressive and tensile
strengths of concrete, respectively. The two formulae relate
the local bond strength to different parameters, consistent
with their own experimental observations: Blaschko ob-
served cohesive shear failure in the epoxy and studied the
effect of a0e , whereas Hassan and Rizkalla observed cohe-
sive shear failure in the concrete (hence, their value of smax
is the shear strength of concrete). The following differences
between the two formulae should also be noted: (a) Blas-
chko performed pull-out bond tests to provide the experi-
mental basis, while Hassan and Rizkalla conducted
flexural tests on RC beams embedded with bars of varying
lengths; (b) Blaschko’s formula was calibrated with bond
test results, while Hassan and Rizkalla’s formula was de-
rived from Mohr’s circle for the pure shear stress state,
which, when used in finite element modelling, yielded pre-
dictions of the debonding load in good agreement with test
results.
The 95 percentile characteristic value of saf was indi-
cated by Blaschko [16] to vary between 20 and 25 MPa
for common highly filled, two-component epoxies. Accord-
ing to the tests by Blaschko, the ratio between the charac-
teristic and the average values of saf is about 0.89, hence the
average value of saf of common epoxies can be assumed to
vary between 22.5 and 28.1 MPa. For a0e ¼ 150 mm (i.e.
with no edge effect), Eq. (1) thus yields a local bond
strength ranging between 15.8 and 19.8 MPa, whose upper
bound practically coincides with the values in Table 2 from
tests in [14,16]. This is as expected as Eq. (1) was calibrated
using test results with an average value of 28.7 MPa for saf,
very close to the upper bound of the average value range
mentioned above.
0
For fp ranging between 20 and 40 MPa and taking fct
c ffiffiffiffi
as 0:53 fc0 [28], Eq. (2) predicts local bond strengths
between 2.1 and 3.1 MPa. The large difference between
130 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
the predictions of Eqs. (1) and (2) is a result of the different
materials controlling the failure (epoxy for Eq. (1) and con-
crete for Eq. (2)) and thus the different interfaces that these
two formulae correspond to; the concrete shear strength is
much smaller than that of the adhesive.
3.4.3. Theoretical models for NSM round deformed bars
The bond behaviour of the NSM round deformed bars
is controlled by splitting tensile stresses in the epoxy cover
and the surrounding concrete. Figs. 4a and b illustrate the
approach adopted in [11,17] to model this bond behaviour
in the plane perpendicular to the bar axis. Two simplifying
assumptions are common to these two studies. First, the
frictional coefficient l (=1/tan c) relating bond shear stres-
ses and internal splitting pressures is constant, although it
is known to change during the loading process. Second,
the distribution of the radial pressure is uniform, although
the pressures on the thicker concrete substrate are higher
than those on the thinner cover.
De Lorenzis [11] took c to be 45 (i.e. l = 1), whereas
Hassan and Rizkalla measured it according to ASTM
G115-98 [29]. However, it should be noted that the concept
on
of frictional coefficient used in this context is very different
from that defined by the ASTM specification. The latter
pertains to pure frictional properties between materials,
depending on material and surface characteristics, whereas
rs
the frictional coefficient in the bond context is also influ-
enced by ‘‘structural’’ variables such as the cover depth
and the bar diameter in the case of internal reinforcing bars
pe
(e.g. [30]). In the case of NSM reinforcement, even more
variables are involved. For steel bars in concrete, Tepfers
and Olsson [31] performed ‘‘ring pull-out tests’’ in order
to estimate the angle c of bond stresses at different stages
of loading. They established curves relating the coefficient
of friction to the slip for different types of bars. Similar
measurements for NSM bars would require accurate mon-
r's
itoring of strains in epoxy and concrete transverse to the
bar axis.
For round deformed bars, Hassan and Rizkalla [19] pro-
posed a model for cover splitting bond failure, based on
o
elastic finite element analysis. They provided two formulae
to predict the local bond strengths for the bar–epoxy and
th
the epoxy–concrete interfaces respectively, and the one cor-
responding to the smaller local bond strength would
control.
Au
Depending on how they are computed, these local bond
strengths correspond to either the first cracking of the
epoxy cover or the first cracking of the concrete adjacent
to the groove. The two formulae are:
fat l
smax bar–epoxy ¼ ð3Þ
G2
fct l
smax epoxy–concrete ¼ ð4Þ
G1
where fat is the tensile strength of epoxy, and G1 and G2 are
coefficients which were evaluated by finite element analysis
and are dependent on the groove depth-to-bar diameter
and the groove width-to-bar diameter ratios. Graphs for
G1 and G2 were developed. The range of the first ratio
examined by them is between 2.00 and 2.50, while that of
the second ratio is between 1.50 and 2.50. G1 and G2 range
between 0.58 and 1.3 and between 0.5 and 0.72, respec-
tively. Hence, Eq. (4) controls in all cases with values of
0.77–1.72 times lfct. For a concrete cylinder compressive
strength of 20–40 MPa, the local bond strength varies be-
py
tween 1.4 and 5.2l, which are very low compared with
the test results in Table 2, already with l = 1 instead of
0.5 as originally proposed in Ref. [19].
It should be noted that the so-called local bond strength
co
in this model is the bond shear stress corresponding to the
initiation of cracking in the epoxy or in the concrete,
whereas the joint can still sustain significant increments
of the applied load between first cracking and ultimate fail-
ure. Also, the distinction between cracking of epoxy and
cracking of concrete as two independent modes of bond
failure contradicts the experimental evidence that failure
al
in the concrete usually follows cracking of the epoxy.
An approximate two-dimensional elastic stress analysis
was conducted by De Lorenzis [25] to determine the bond
shear stress corresponding to the cracking of the epoxy
cover. For computation of an upper and a lower bound
to the ultimate radial pressure of the NSM system (and
hence to the local bond strength if the frictional coefficient
is known), different possible failure modes were analyzed.
A uniform tensile stress distribution along the fracture lines
was assumed and justified on the basis of redistribution of
cohesive stresses between the crack faces. The experimental
values of local bond strength were shown to fall within the
computed range. However, no equation for the local bond
strength was proposed.
3.4.4. Theoretical models for NSM bars in pre-formed
grooves
The local bond strength of the epoxy-to-concrete inter-
face for pre-formed grooves was shown to decrease almost
linearly with increases in groove size. An equation is given
in Ref. [25] that may be used to compute the local bond
strength for different groove sizes for this case.
3.4.5. Comparison with internal FRP rebars and externally
bonded FRP laminates
Cosenza et al. [32] presented a summary of bond prop-
erties of FRP bars used as internal reinforcement, obtain-
ing an average local bond strength of 2.74 MPa for
sand-blasted bars (with a COV of 52%) and of
11.61 MPa for ‘‘ribbed bars’’ (with a COV of 34%). The
local bond strength value for sand-blasted bars is the aver-
age of results from Ref. [33], conducted on only one type of
bars different from those used by De Lorenzis and Nanni
[21], hence a direct comparison is not meaningful. The cat-
egory of ‘‘ribbed bars’’ referred to by Ref. [32] encompasses
a wide variety of material and surface configurations as it
covers what are referred to as ribbed bars and spirally
wound bars in the present paper, plus some cross-wound
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
bars. The local bond strength values for spirally wound
bars from Ref. [32] vary between 4.76 and 18.04 MPa, with
an average of 11.9 MPa, which is lower than what has been
obtained for NSM systems (Table 2). In bond tests of spi-
rally wound bars as internal reinforcement, significant
interlocking was not evident, but when used as NSM rein-
forcement, these bars normally produce cover splitting
bond failure before the loss of bond at the bar–epoxy inter-
face. The higher local bond strength for an NSM system
can be attributed to a larger resistance at the bar–epoxy
interface than at the bar–concrete interface.
Nanni et al. [34] conducted bond tests on GFRP ribbed
bars of the same type as used by De Lorenzis et al. [26]
(although bars in this study had a larger diameter, equal
to 12.7 mm), and found a local bond strength of 17 MPa
for them as internal reinforcement, which is larger than
the value obtained for an NSM configuration. The bond
failure of these rebars as internal reinforcement occurred
by the shearing-off of the ribs, a mode which was
approached but never attained in NSM bond tests as cover
splitting bond failure always occurs first.
For FRP laminates externally bonded to concrete, Lu
on
et al. [35] proposed a simple equation for the local bond
strength. Assuming an FRP-to-concrete width ratio of
0.5, this equation yields a local bond strength of 1.5 times
the tensile strength of concrete, which is significantly lower
rs
than the cover splitting local bond strength of NSM bars.
This results from the fact that, in the cover splitting bond
pe
o r's
th
b
Au
Fig. 5. Typical bond–slip curves of NSM FRP reinforcement.
131
failure mode of an NSM system, the fracture of concrete
relates to the larger perimeter (see Fig. 3, mechanisms
SP-C1 and SP-C2), while the nominal bond strength is
defined using the smaller bar perimeter. In the debonding
failure of an externally bonded laminate, the fracture plane
has approximately the width of the laminate and the nom-
inal bond strength is based on the same width.
py
3.5. Local bond–slip behaviour
Local bond–slip curves were deduced from test data by
De Lorenzis [25] for different types of NSM round bars,
co
and by Sena Cruz and Barros [27] for NSM strips. De
Lorenzis [25] reported three different types of local bond–
slip behaviour (types I–III), of which the first two are
shown in Fig. 5. The third type (for sand-blasted round
bars) differs from the second in that the abrupt decay from
the maximum bond stress to the frictional bond stress level
is replaced by a linearly decreasing branch. This third type
al
could be seen as a special case of the second type. The
equation proposed by Sena Cruz and Barros [27] has the
same form as that of the type I curve shown in Fig. 5.
The type I equation seems to reproduce rather accu-
rately experimental curves showing a gradual decrease of
local bond stress after the peak. Such a gradual decrease
exists when bond failure is at an interface (the epoxy–con-
crete or the bar–epoxy interfaces) or by cover splitting gen-
erated by ribbed bars with low rib protrusions. In both
132 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
cases, a significant amount of post-peak friction develops,
due to interfacial friction in the first case and to aggregate
interlocking of the cracked concrete in the second case.
Conversely, cover splitting failure generated by ribbed
bars with high rib protrusions and spirally wound bars
has a more brittle nature (for a detailed description see
Ref. [26]) with an abrupt decrease in bond stress upon
the attainment of the peak value. However, even after the
complete loss of the cover, a small amount of residual fric-
tion remains because half of the perimeter of the bar is still
in contact with the epoxy.
The type I equation, where the bond stress tends to zero
as the slip approaches infinity, cannot reproduce the resid-
ual frictional branch. This is only a minor drawback if a 0 is
larger than 1, as in such cases the bond stress from the
type I equation reaches the frictional plateau only at very
large values of slip and the area underneath the bond–slip
curve is infinite. However, if a 0 is smaller than 1, this area
becomes finite, and the joint may be predicted to be unable
to develop the full tensile capacity of the bar (see next sub-
section), which contradicts the better behaviour of this type
of joint compared with type II joints. More work on local
on
bond–slip curves of NSM systems, both experimental and
theoretical, is still needed, in particular on the post-peak
behaviour which greatly influences the performance of bars
with long embedment lengths such as those used in
rs
practice.
De Lorenzis et al. [26] commented on the variations of
the secant stiffness and the shape of the curve with test vari-
pe
ables. In nearly all cases, the slip at peak stress was found
to be in the range of 0.1–0.3 mm. Sena Cruz and Barros
[27] found a value of 0.25 mm for NSM strips.
Based on strain gage and free-end slip readings, Blas-
chko [16] obtained local bond–slip curves of NSM strips,
very similar in shape to the type I curves discussed above.
However, by plotting the local bond–slip curves at different
r's
measurement locations along the bond length, he noted
that the local bond strength tended to be larger close to
the free end and smaller close to the loaded end. This
was attributed to the influence of the transverse displace-
o
ments of the concrete adjacent to the groove, which were
also measured in the same tests. In his analytical model,
th
the author adopted a local bond–slip curve consisting of
an ascending branch defined by a second-degree parabola
and a horizontal branch at the local bond strength. This
Au
curve was assumed to represent the pure shear stress–strain
behaviour of the epoxy. The local bond strength was taken
as the shear strength of the epoxy, multiplied by an empir-
ical function of the transverse displacement of concrete.
The transverse displacements were predicted with a sepa-
rate elastic model. Mohr’s failure criterion was used to
model the effect of local normal stresses, associated with
transverse concrete displacements, on the local bond
strength. Regression analysis was used to maximize the
agreement between measured and predicted strain distribu-
tions in the strip along the bond length. In summary, his
local bond–slip model considers the response of the NSM
bar and the concrete member as a system so that the influ-
ence of edge distance can be effectively reflected. However,
the model is rather complex to apply as it requires an iter-
ative procedure. Also, it cannot accurately represent the
presence of a frictional asymptote in the local bond–slip
curves obtained from tests and hence it overestimates the
bond failure loads of specimens with long bond lengths.
For this reason, the author relied on the direct calibration
py
of test results, rather than the output of the bond–slip
model, to obtain Eq. (1).
3.6. Effective bond length, development length
co
and anchorage length
The maximum stress that can be resisted by a bonded
joint between an NSM bar and the concrete substrate with
a sufficiently long bond length is given by:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
R
rmax ¼ 2E Gf ð5Þ
al
A
with
Z
1
Gf ¼ sðsÞds ð6Þ
0
where Gf, being the area underneath the bond–slip curve, is
the fracture energy of the bonded joint, R is the perimeter
over which the bond stress acts, A is the cross-sectional
area over which the tensile stress acts, and E is the elastic
modulus of the material on which the tensile stress is ap-
plied [23]. For round bars bonded to epoxy (or to concrete
in the case of internal rebars), Eq. (5) reduces to
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
8Eb
rmax ¼ Gf ð7Þ
db
where Eb is the elastic modulus of the bar, and for lami-
nates bonded to concrete (neglecting the thickness of the
adhesive layer), Eq. (5) reduces to
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2Ef Gf
rmax ¼ ð8Þ
tf
where Ef and tf are the elastic modulus and thickness
respectively of the laminate. If rmax computed by Eq. (5)
is below the tensile strength of the reinforcement, its full
capacity cannot be developed no matter how long the bond
length is. In this case, a value of bond length exists (‘‘the
effective bond length’’) at which rmax is developed, and be-
yond which a further increase in bond length does not pro-
duce any benefit. The concept of effective bond length has
been well established for externally bonded FRP laminates
[36,37]. If rmax is larger than the tensile strength of the bar
(and in particular for bond–slip curves with infinite values
of Gf), the full capacity of the reinforcement can be devel-
oped, and the corresponding value of bond length is usu-
ally termed ‘‘the development length’’.
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
Fig. 6. Idealised bilinear local bond–slip model of FRP laminates
externally bonded to concrete.
For type I bond–slip curves, Gf has an infinite or a finite
value when a 0 P 1 or a 0 < 1, respectively. For type II
responses, if the post-peak frictional branch is unlimited,
Gf would have an infinite value and the joint would be able
to reach the tensile capacity of the reinforcement. In the
case of externally bonded laminates, a simplified local
bond–slip model is shown in Fig. 6. The Gf value for such
on
systems is finite, and its value is usually insufficient for the
reinforcement to develop its full tensile strength; hence no
development length but an effective bond length can be
computed. In the case of internal steel or FRP reinforcing
rs
bars, Gf is usually infinite, due to an unlimited post-peak
frictional branch, hence a development length always
exists. Available evidence for NSM systems shows that
pe
their behaviour is similar to that of internal rebars rather
than that of external laminates. The calibrated values of
a 0 given in Refs. [25,27] are larger than 1 in all but one
case, so the drawback of the type I curve outlined in the
previous sub-section has minor practical relevance. Hence,
a development length generally exists for an NSM system.
However, this statement is based on limited experimental
r's
evidence as available bond test results for NSM systems
are still limited.
The development lengths of NSM round bars in saw-cut
grooves computed by De Lorenzis [25] were often imprac-
o
tically long. This was partly due to the need for a better cal-
ibration of the post-peak local bond–slip response, which
th
displays a significant scatter and often a quite irregular
behaviour particularly in the case of splitting failure. That
is, De Lorenzis [25] may have underestimated the ductility
Au
of the post-peak response, which led to overestimations of
development lengths. For NSM strips, Sena Cruz and Bar-
ros [27] predicted a development length of about 90 mm,
i.e. less than 10 times the strip height. The failure load-
bond length curves (one for each a0e value) proposed by
Blaschko [13,16] are composed of a parabolic portion fol-
lowed by a straight line whose slope is proportional to
the post-peak frictional stress. Full development of the ten-
sile capacity of the strip was achieved in the experiments
with a relatively short bond length, which is equal to
approximately 150 mm (7.5 times the strip height) in
absence of edge effects ða0e P 150 mmÞ and increases with
133
a decreasing a0e . The good performance of strips results
from the high local bond strength, from the pseudo-ductile
post-peak local bond–slip response and from the large lat-
eral surface to cross-sectional area ratio.
From their tests (see the section on flexural strengthen-
ing), Hassan and Rizkalla [19] found an effective bond
length to exist for NSM round ribbed bars. They computed
this effective bond length by assuming a uniform distribu-
py
tion of bond stress equal to the lower of the two local bond
strengths given by Eqs. (3) and (4). However, in deriving
these equations, bond failure was equated to the imminent
cracking of epoxy and concrete, when no significant bond
co
stress redistribution is expected to have occurred and hence
the assumption of a uniform bond distribution is unjusti-
fied. Indeed, the assumption of a uniform bond stress dis-
tribution contradicts the existence of an effective bond
length as the latter implies a limited possibility of bond
stress redistribution. These authors did not provide an
equation for the maximum tensile stress that can be sus-
al
tained by the bar, but suggested to obtain it from testing
or finite element modelling.
The local bond–slip curves of NSM FRP bars have been
used to determine their bond failure load as a function of
the bond length by solving the governing differential equa-
tion [27,21,25]. It is important to note that, while the local
bond strength smax dictates the ultimate load of a short
NSM FRP-to-concrete joint, the ultimate load of a long
joint depends more on the shape of the local bond–slip
relationship, particularly its post-peak descending branch
which controls the ability of the joint to redistribute stres-
ses along its bond length. The shortest bond length
required for an FRP bar to resist a given load is herein
termed the anchorage length for that load. Note that the
anchorage length depends on the load level, and obviously,
the anchorage length corresponding to the FRP bar rup-
ture failure load is equal to the development length. In
design, it is also important to ensure that the anchorage
length provided satisfies serviceability requirements: the
state of the bond stress along the bar should stay within
the ascending portion of the bond–slip curve and the free
end of the bar should not show slip under service loads.
Both De Lorenzis [25] and Sena Cruz and Barros [27]
provided curves of load at onset of free-end slip versus
bond length and outlined a design procedure complying
with both ultimate and serviceability limit state
requirements.
3.7. Bond test methods
The most common types of bond tests used for NSM
reinforcement are the direct pull-out test and the beam
pull-out test. While detailed descriptions of the various test
arrangements can be retrieved from the original papers
(see Table 1), some of the issues of concern are discussed
below.
A number of practical disadvantages exist with beam
pull-out tests [14,21]. For example, the specimen size is
134 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
large, especially if long bond lengths are tested; it is diffi-
cult to conduct the test in slip-control mode; and it is
difficult to visually inspect the behaviour of the joint during
loading, especially the initiation and propagation of
cracks.
Direct pull-out tests overcome the drawbacks of beam
pull-out tests mentioned above. The simplest direct pull-
out test specimen may be composed of a square/rectangu-
lar concrete block embedded with an NSM bar on one of
the sides, but in this set-up, the NSM bar leads to eccentric
loading of the concrete block. The use of two bars on two
opposite sides [38] or even four bars on all four sides [3] has
been attempted to overcome this problem. The multiple-
bar specimen has its own problem: any small deviations
of the groove/bar positions can induce flexural effects,
significantly altering test results.
De Lorenzis et al. [23] introduced a C-shaped
block where a single NSM bar was placed at the centre
of gravity of the block. The set-up performed well, but
the specimen dimensions had to be specifically designed
for each groove depth. This set-up is also not suitable for
studying edge effects due to the presence of two thick
on
flanges.
Based on the above discussions, a direct shear test on a
single NSM FRP bar embedded in a concrete block, where
the tensile force applied on the bar is reacted by compres-
rs
sive stresses on the concrete block at the loaded end, is
probably a good choice that combines simplicity with reli-
ability. A similar test set-up has been popular in studies on
pe
externally bonded laminates (e.g. [39]). Blaschko [16] used
such a set-up, in which a steel plate was used to provide
the reaction to the concrete block. The steel plate had a
central hole of 80-mm diameter to avoid reactive stresses
on the immediate vicinity of the groove.
To minimize the transverse friction generated by the
bearing pressure, which could delay the initiation of split-
r's
ting cracks as generally observed in pull-out tests of steel
rebars in concrete, layers of PTFE or similar materials
can be placed between the bearing plate and the concrete
block.
o
Three main methods are available for obtaining the
local bond–slip curve of a bonded joint:
th
 Approximate it with the curve relating the average bond
stress to the loaded-end slip (or the free-end slip, or the
Au
average of the two) from specimens with a short bond
length (SBL).
 Obtain bond stresses and slips from free-end slip and
strain measurements at discrete points along the bond
length. This method is usually adopted when long bond
length (LBL) specimens are used, as strain gages on a
SBL specimen are likely to significantly affect the bond
performance.
 Calibrate the unknown parameters in the local bond–
slip equation, whose form needs to be known or
assumed in advance, from loaded-end slip and free-end
slip measurements.
Each of the above methods has its advantages and dis-
advantages. The first method does not require the use of
strain gages, which simplifies specimen preparation and
does not alter the bond properties between the bar and
the epoxy. However, the bond length still needs to be long
enough for the specimen to behave as a representative sam-
ple (e.g. for ribbed or spirally wound bars, a minimum
number of deformations should be included) and to reduce
py
the influence of end effects. The bond–slip curve obtained
represents the average performance of the chosen bond
length of the specimen.
The second method, more onerous and altering to
co
some extent the bar–epoxy interface, has the advantage
that the bond performance over a longer and hence more
representative portion of the reinforcement can be
studied. A local bond–slip curve can be retrieved at each
load level, or alternatively at each measurement point, so
that more data are obtained from such a test than from
one on a SBL specimen. It is worth noting that even
al
for tests conducted with load control on LBL
specimens, strain measurements allow the descending
branch of the local bond–slip relationship to be obtained
as a result of stress redistribution over the bond
length, although these measurements tend to show a nota-
ble scatter, due to damage to the strain gages resulting
from slips of the reinforcement. Teng et al. [20] presented
tests where strain gauges were sandwiched between two
CFRP strips so that the strain gauges were well protected
and did not affect the interfacial properties. Wang et al.
[40] recently explored the use of fiber optic sensors
embedded inside FRP bars for the measurement of
strains so that the use of strain gauges on the bar sur-
face can be avoided. These and similar techniques
for strain measurement are highly desirable for bond
tests on LBL specimens to minimize damage to the
strain sensors and interference with the interfacial
behaviour.
The third method has the advantage that it allows the
local bond–slip curve to be obtained from LBL specimens
without the need for strain measurements. The disadvan-
tages are that the form of the bond–slip equation must
be known a priori, and the accuracy of the deduced equa-
tion may be compromised if the assumed form is inappro-
priate in some way. If many different forms of equations
are tested to find the most suitable form, this approach
involves a much more onerous process than the other
two approaches.
In all cases, the specimen must be carefully designed
to ensure that the failure mode and load are not signifi-
cantly influenced by the specimen dimensions. An example
of inadequate specimen size can be found in Ref. [3],
which reports shear fracture failure of the concrete involv-
ing the entire specimen cross-section due to its limited
section size. When the NSM bar is close to the edge of
the concrete block, test results have indicated a strong
influence of the transverse stiffness of the concrete on the
measured bond–slip curve [13], which then also varies
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
along the bond length as a result of the variation of the
bond stresses. This effect should either be a parameter to
be considered or be eliminated by the use of a sufficiently
wide specimen.
In addition to section size, the bonded portion of the bar
should start at a suitable distance from the loaded end of
the concrete block. If this distance is insufficient, the behav-
iour of a specimen with a short bond length may be similar
to that of a fastener (see e.g. [38]), or the failure mode of
the specimen is unduly influenced by the cracking of con-
crete at the loaded end [16].
4. Flexural strengthening
4.1. Summary of existing work
A summary of the existing experimental data is reported
in Tables 3 and 4.
Some existing studies were conducted on beams
strengthened with NSM bars of limited embedment lengths
(Table 3). Although such tests were intended to study bond
failure mechanisms, they are not ‘‘pure’’ bond tests as the
on
bond performance is affected by flexural cracking. More-
over, the NSM FRP bars in such tests generally extend into
the shear spans, where part of the interfacial shear stress is
directly dependent on the transverse shear force in the
rs
beam.
Hassan and Rizkalla [17,19] conducted flexural tests on
RC beams with NSM CFRP round ribbed bars and strips
pe
of varying embedment length. Failure of beams with
NSM round ribbed bars occurred by splitting of the con-
crete cover followed by the complete debonding of the bars
in all cases. These authors concluded that the tensile rupture
of this type of bars is unlikely to occur, regardless of the
embedment length, that the maximum usable strain of these
bars should be limited to 0.7–0.8%, and that the anchorage
r's
length should not be shorter than 800 mm. In the case of
beams with NSM strips, rupture of the strips occurred when
the embedment length was larger than 850 mm.
Teng et al. [20] conducted flexural tests on RC beams
o
with NSM strips of varying embedment length. As the
embedment length increased, the failure mode changed
th
from concrete cover separation starting from the cut-off
section, to concrete crushing followed by secondary cover
separation close to the maximum moment region. In the
Au
beams with the two longest embedment lengths, secondary
debonding mechanisms were also observed.
All existing test results of strengthened beams, slabs, and
columns (Tables 3 and 4) indicate that the NSM reinforce-
ment improved the ultimate load and the load at the yield-
ing of steel reinforcement, as well as the post-cracking
stiffness. Some test programs included identical beams
strengthened with equivalent amounts of FRP provided
as either externally bonded or NSM reinforcement. In all
cases, the NSM reinforcement performed more efficiently,
as debonding of the NSM reinforcement occurred at a
higher strain or did not occur [17,41–43].
135
One study [41] has compared equivalent amounts of
NSM reinforcement provided as round bars or strips. As
expected, strips performed better and failed by tensile rup-
ture as opposed to debonding of the round bars, as a result
of the higher local bond strength and larger lateral surface
to cross-sectional area ratio of NSM strips.
4.2. Failure modes of flexurally-strengthened beams
py
The possible failure modes of beams flexurally-strength-
ened with NSM FRP reinforcement are of two types: those
of conventional RC beams, including concrete crushing or
co
FRP rupture generally after the yielding of internal steel
bars, for which the composite action between the original
beam and the NSM FRP is practically maintained up to
failure, and ‘‘premature’’ debonding failure modes which
involve the loss of this composite action. Although deb-
onding failures are less likely a problem with NSM FRP
compared with externally bonded FRP, they may still sig-
al
nificantly limit the efficiency of this technology.
The likeliness of a debonding failure depends on several
parameters, among which the internal steel reinforcement
ratio, the FRP reinforcement ratio, the cross-sectional
shape and the surface configuration of the NSM reinforce-
ment, and the tensile strengths of both the epoxy and the
concrete. Some researchers [11,10] extended the NSM
FRP reinforcement over the beam supports to simulate
anchorage in adjacent members. Despite this anchorage,
debonding failures can still occur [11]. The beam reported
in Ref. [10] failed by FRP rupture, as opposed to debond-
ing observed in an identical beam with the NSM reinforce-
ment terminated away from the supports. Blaschko [16]
reported the results of two beam tests: the first one failed
by concrete cover separation starting from the cut-off sec-
tion but the second beam, which was provided with a steel
U-jacket bonded to the cut-off section, failed by the rupture
of the FRP strips. In the same study it was observed that
fatigue loading to two million load cycles did not affect
the residual beam capacity.
There is still limited understanding of the mechanics of
debonding in beams strengthened with NSM systems.
Descriptions of failure modes in the existing literature are
often not sufficiently detailed to understand the progres-
sion of the failure process. Based on the available experi-
mental evidence, the possible failure modes of beams
flexurally-strengthened with NSM FRP reinforcement are
classified in Fig. 7 and described below. The interactions
between the main failure modes described below and the
‘‘secondary’’ failure modes are still unclear and deserve fur-
ther investigations.
4.2.1. Bar–epoxy interfacial debonding
This mode involves interfacial debonding between a bar
and the epoxy and has been observed for sand-blasted round
bars [44]. This mode correlates well with the failure mode
observed in bond tests on the same type of bars (see the
previous section). However, unlike in a bond specimen, the
136 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

py
co
al
on
rs
pe
o r's
th
Au

Fig. 7. Debonding failure modes of NSM bars and strips observed in tests on flexurally-strengthened beams: (a) debonding at the bar–epoxy interface; (b)
separation of concrete cover between two cracks in the maximum moment region; (c) separation of concrete cover over a large length of the beam; (d)
separation of concrete cover starting from a cutoff section; (e) separation of concrete cover along the edge; (f) secondary loss of bond between epoxy and
concrete; (g) secondary splitting of the epoxy cover.

epoxy cover in the beam was intersected by flexural ting cracks and hence accelerated interfacial debonding
cracks which facilitated the initiation of longitudinal split- (Fig. 7a).
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
4.2.2. Concrete cover separation
The formation of bond cracks on the soffit of the
beam has been observed in tests [11,16,20], and these bond
cracks are inclined at approximately 45 [20] to the beam
axis. Upon reaching the edges of the beam soffit, these
cracks may propagate upwards on the beam sides main-
taining a 45 inclination within the cover thickness, and
then propagate horizontally at the level of the steel tension
bars. Debonding may next occur in different forms,
depending on the subsequent evolution of the crack
pattern:
(a) Bar end cover separation. If the NSM FRP reinforce-
ment is terminated at a significant distance from the
supports, separation of concrete cover typically starts
from the cut-off section and propagates inwards
[16,20] (Fig. 7d). This mode is similar to the cover
separation failure mode observed in RC beams with
an externally bonded FRP laminate [37,45,46].
(b) Localized cover separation. Bond cracks within or
close to the maximum moment region, together with
the pre-existing flexural and flexural-shear cracks,
on
may isolate triangular or trapezoidal concrete
wedges, of which one or more are eventually split
off (Fig. 7b). This mode can be identified from photos
of failed beams given in Refs. [11,15,20].
rs
(c) Flexural crack-induced cover separation. Separation
of the concrete cover occurs almost simultaneously
over a long portion of the NSM reinforcement, often
pe
involving one of the shear spans and the maximum
moment region (Fig. 7c) [15,44]. This mode was
observed by De Lorenzis et al. [44] to start from the
maximum moment region, whereas the location of
initiation was not made clear in Ref. [15]. This mode
is similar to the intermediate crack-induced debond-
ing failure mode observed in RC beams with an exter-
r's
nally bonded FRP laminate [37,47,48].
(d) Beam edge cover separation. NSM bars located near
the edges may generate detachment of the concrete
cover along the edges (Fig. 7e).
o
4.2.3. Epoxy–concrete interfacial debonding
th
For beams with NSM strips of a limited embedment
length, Hassan and Rizkalla [17] reported cohesive shear
failure in the concrete at the epoxy–concrete interface start-
Au
ing from the cut-off section. Unfortunately no picture of
the failed specimens was provided. This mode is believed
to be similar to the plate end interfacial debonding failure
of RC beams with externally bonded FRP laminate
described in Refs. [37,45,46].
4.2.4. Secondary debonding failure mechanisms
Other debonding mechanisms have also been observed.
They are herein classified as ‘‘secondary’’ failure modes
and the role they play in the context of debonding failures
is still unclear. It has been observed [20] that upon the for-
mation of the bond cracks, the opening-up of these inclined
137
bond cracks was restrained by the dowel action of NSM
reinforcement which in turn tended to cause the detach-
ment of the NSM FRP reinforcement from the soffit of
the beam. After failure, the prism formed by the CFRP
strip and surrounding epoxy was found to retain a thin
concrete layer of variable thickness on the sides (Fig. 7f),
indicating that a strong epoxy–concrete bond existed.
Moreover, localized splitting occurred in the epoxy cover,
py
exposing the internal CFRP strip (Fig. 7g). Similar obser-
vations had been reported previously [11].
4.3. Prediction of ultimate loads and load–deflection
co
behaviour
For the safe design of an NSM FRP system for the flex-
ural strengthening of an RC beam, the foremost issue is the
prediction of the ultimate load. If the failure of a strength-
ened beam does not involve debonding, then the failure
load can be easily predicted using equations developed
al
for externally bonded FRP based on the plane section
assumption (e.g. [37]) and with the difference in position
between the two types of reinforcement duly taken into
account. Accurate predictions of debonding failure loads
are much more challenging.
In the past few years, numerous studies have examined
debonding failures of beams with externally bonded steel
plates and FRP laminates [37,45–49]. Research on RC
beams flexurally-strengthened with NSM FRP has been
much more limited. The few theoretical models developed
so far are extensions of approaches developed for exter-
nally bonded FRP laminates. For instance, Hassan and
Rizkalla [17] proposed a theoretical model for NSM strips
(valid only for concrete shear failure at the epoxy–concrete
interface at the cut-off section) which is an extension of the
interfacial stress-based approach proposed by Malek et al.
[45]. The model has been compared with a very limited
database. Moreover, the failure mode assumed in the
model of Hassan and Rizkalla [17] was only observed in
the tests by these authors but has not been observed in
other tests.
Of the reported failure modes, the most critical appears
to be the mode of concrete cover separation starting from
the maximum moment region. Provided that bars with a
reasonable degree of surface deformation are used, failure
at the bar–epoxy interface is unlikely. Moreover, in cases
where the NSM reinforcement is needed over the entire
length of a member, NSM bars can be easily anchored
to adjacent members so that debonding failure at a cut-
off section can be prevented. For similar reasons, the
intermediate crack-induced debonding failure mode has
been recognised as the most important mode for RC
beams strengthened with externally bonded FRP lami-
nates [47].
For design purposes, the simplest approach to the pre-
diction of debonding is to establish a bond reduction factor
for the ultimate tensile strain of the reinforcement. Such an
approach is currently adopted by ACI-440 [6] for debond-
138 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
ing of externally bonded laminates. The predictive models
in Refs. [47,48] also follow this approach. Alternative
approaches [5,50] for this type of debonding failure of
externally bonded FRP laminates consider stress gradients
in the FRP between two adjacent cracks instead of a simple
bond reduction factor [51].
Development of reliable predictive models for debond-
ing failures requires a thorough understanding of the
mechanics of debonding failures, and of the qualitative
and quantitative roles of relevant variables. The most
challenging aspect in tackling this problem appears to
be the lack of a direct correlation between the bond fail-
ure modes in bond specimens and the debonding failure
modes in flexurally-strengthened beams. The possible
reasons are the presence of flexural and flexural-shear
cracks which alter the bond stress distribution, the curva-
ture of the beam, the dowel action of the FRP bars
restraining the opening-up of inclined bond cracks, phe-
nomena which are all absent in a bond specimen. The
same problem has been encountered in predicting inter-
mediate crack debonding failures in RC beams with
externally bonded FRP laminates, although to a lesser
on
extent [48].
The load–deflection behaviour of beams strengthened
with NSM reinforcement can be predicted with reason-
able accuracy by the conventional sectional approach
rs
neglecting tension stiffening and assuming a perfect bond
for both steel and NSM reinforcement [11,16]. More
refined approaches where tension stiffening is taken into
pe
account (with different laws for un-strengthened and
strengthened beams) [15] and where slips of steel and
FRP reinforcement are modelled using experimentally
determined bond–slip equations [52] have delivered more
accurate predictions of experimental load–deflection
curves.
r's
4.4. Strengthening with pre-stressed NSM FRP
NSM FRP bars or strips can be more easily pre-stressed
and anchored than externally bonded laminates, so flexural
o
strengthening with pre-stressed NSM FRP is a promising
technique. Nordin and Taljsten [53] have explored the use
th
of this technique by tensioning NSM bars to 20% of their
tensile strength, filling the grooves with epoxy, and releas-
ing the pre-stressing force upon hardening of the epoxy.
Au
The expected gains in the cracking load and the stiffness
of the beam as a result of pre-stressing were achieved,
and the failure mode was the tensile rupture of the FRP
bars in all cases. The method used by these authors cannot
yet be implemented in a real strengthening project as their
procedure of tensioning and anchoring the bars requires
access to the ends of the beam, which is generally not pos-
sible in reality. For this reason, a tensioning–anchoring
device for NSM bars was proposed by De Lorenzis et al.
[54].
5. Shear strengthening
5.1. Summary of existing work
The use of NSM FRP reinforcement is also effective in
enhancing the shear capacity of RC beams. For this pur-
pose, the bars are embedded in grooves cut on the sides
of the member at a desired angle to the beam axis.
py
Only three studies appear to have been published on the
use of NSM FRP bars for shear strengthening of RC
beams. De Lorenzis and Nanni [55] carried out eight tests
on large size T-beams, of which six had no internal stirrups.
co
CFRP ribbed round bars in epoxy-filled grooves were used
as NSM shear reinforcement. The test variables included
bar spacing, inclination angle and anchorage of the bars
in the flange. The NSM reinforcement produced a shear
strength increase which is as high as 106% in the absence
of steel stirrups, and still significant in presence of a limited
amount of internal shear reinforcement.
al
Barros and Dias [56] tested beams of different sizes with
no internal stirrups. Some of these beams were strength-
ened with NSM CFRP strips of different inclinations, while
the rest were strengthened with equivalent amounts of
externally bonded FRP shear reinforcement. The reported
strength increases ranged from 22% to 77%, and were in all
cases larger than those obtained with externally bonded
FRP. Although failure modes were not described, based
on the reported load–deflection curves, at least some of
the beams are believed to have failed in bending.
Nanni et al. [57] reported the test results of a single full-
scale PC girder taken from a bridge and shear-strengthened
with NSM CFRP strips. The beam failed in flexure at a
shear force close to the shear resistance predicted by the
model given in Ref. [55].
5.2. Failure modes
Two different failure modes were identified by De
Lorenzis and Nanni [55]. The first was debonding of the
FRP bars by splitting of the epoxy cover and cracking of
the surrounding concrete, associated with the diagonal ten-
sion failure of concrete (Fig. 8a). This failure mode may be
prevented by providing better anchorage of the NSM bars
crossing the critical shear crack, by either anchoring the
bars in the beam flange or the use of inclined (e.g. 45) bars
at a sufficiently close spacing to achieve a longer total bond
length. Once this mechanism was prevented, separation of
the concrete cover of the steel longitudinal reinforcement
became the controlling failure mode in the tests presented
in Ref. [55] (Fig. 8b). Unlike internal steel stirrups, NSM
shear reinforcement does not exert a restraining action on
the longitudinal reinforcement subjected to dowel forces.
These forces, in conjunction with the normal pressures gen-
erated by the bond action of the steel longitudinal rein-
forcement, create considerable tensile stresses in the cover
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
Fig. 8. Debonding failure modes of NSM bars observed in tests on shear-strengthened beams: (a) debonding of NSM bars by splitting of epoxy cover; (b)
local separation of concrete cover.
which may eventually lead to cover separation failure. This
second mode, however, may be attributed to the fact that
no or very limited steel stirrups were present in these
beams, and is unlikely in beams with a significant amount
on by incorporating an appropriate bond–slip curve instead
of steel stirrups. The most important failure mode is thus
debonding of the FRP bars. Although it has not been
observed so far, tensile rupture of the NSM reinforcement
is another possible failure mode.
rs
5.3. Prediction of ultimate loads
pe
The truss analogy was used by De Lorenzis and Nanni
[55] to compute the shear capacity of a member strength-
ened in shear with NSM FRP reinforcement, and in partic-
ular the load at diagonal tension failure of concrete
involving debonding of the NSM bars. The basic assump-
tion of their approach is that, at the instant of failure,
r's
the bond stresses are evenly distributed along the bars
crossed by the critical shear crack, and are equal to the
local bond strength. This assumption is acceptable if the
bond–slip behaviour is ductile enough to allow a substan-
o
tial redistribution of bond stresses along the bars crossed
by the shear crack. This basic assumption yields easily
the tensile stresses in the bars crossed by the shear crack
th
and hence the corresponding shear force. This approach
was shown to compare favourably with test results
[55,57]. Further research is obviously needed for the assess-
Au
ment and improvement of the model.
Unlike the case of flexurally-strengthened beams, exist-
ing evidence indicates that the debonding failure mode of
NSM bars in shear-strengthened beams is similar to the
bond failure mode of the same bars in bond specimens.
Further work is needed to confirm this observation as it
is important for the modelling of debonding failures of
shear-strengthened RC beams. If confirmed, this observa-
tion means that local bond–slip relationships developed
from bond tests can be directly used in predicting debond-
139
py
co
ing failures of RC beams shear-strengthened with NSM
al
FRP bars. With such an approach, the truss model [55]
can be easily generalized to the case of debonding failure
of the simple ideally plastic curve assumed in the original
model. Similarly, local bond–slip relationships obtained
from bond tests can also be directly used in the numerical
modelling of debonding failures.
6. Strengthening of beam–column joints
Recently, Prota et al. [58] proposed the combined use of
FRP laminates and NSM bars for upgrading RC beam–col-
umn connections. NSM bars were installed on the column
prior to wrapping and anchored through the beam (i.e.
the bars passed through the beam). This provided addi-
tional reinforcement which is fully anchored and effective
in the maximum moment region of the column. The pres-
ence of FRP wraps prevented the NSM reinforcement from
becoming ineffective as a result of load reversals. The instal-
lation of NSM bars enabled the transition of the failure
mode from the column to the shear failure of the joint. In
further specimens, additional strengthening was provided
to the joint to suppress joint shear failure. For this purpose,
the FRP reinforcement was placed in two directions: (a)
along the beam axis, NSM FRP bars were provided and
transversely confined by single-ply CFRP U-jackets bonded
to the beams; (b) along the column axis, a one-ply FRP lam-
inate was provided, and this laminate was terminated below
the base of the upper column to simulate the field condition
of the presence of a slab. With this strengthening scheme,
failure shifted to the column–joint interface at the termina-
tion of the FRP laminate. The upgrading of the joint zone
increased its deformability and hence provided a significant
contribution to the ductility of the system.
This study [58] showed that the combination of
NSM bars with externally bonded laminates enabled the
140 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143

advantages of both techniques to be exploited in a comple-
mentary manner. This topic deserves further investigation
as similar advantages may be realised by suitable combina-
tions of the two techniques in solving other strengthening
problems.
7. Research needs
bars in concrete, coupled with appropriate modelling of
the epoxy–concrete interface and constitutive modelling
of the materials [26], also seems to be a promising
approach.
Analytical modelling also has a significant role to play in
the modelling of the bond behaviour of NSM FRP bars. In
existing bond tests, splitting of the epoxy cover of NSM
FRP bars has been identified as an important failure mode.

This paper has provided a comprehensive and critical
assessment of existing research on the structural behaviour
of RC structures strengthened with NSM FRP reinforce-
ment. On the basis of this review, the main research needs
py
Here, the frictional coefficients of different deformed bars
with different groove shapes and dimensions should be
measured as a function of the slip in order to further clarify
the splitting bond failure mechanism and develop a split-

in this area for the immediate future are outlined as
follows.
7.1. Bond behaviour
There is a lack of experimental evidence on the effects of
the many variables that are likely to have a significant effect
co
ting bond strength model to be used in splitting-critical
cases. The approach in Ref. [25] can be considered a first
step towards the definition of a simple splitting bond
strength formula accounting for geometric parameters
and material properties. For this purpose, the simplifying
assumptions of a friction coefficient equal to 1 and of a uni-
form distribution of radial pressures need to be removed,

al
on the bond behaviour of NSM FRP bars. The number of on the basis of experimental measurements of the friction
variables associated with NSM FRP systems is much larger coefficient.
than that for externally bonded FRP systems, but the
on
amount of work available on the former is much more lim-
7.2. Flexural strengthening
ited than that on the latter. Therefore, extensive further
testing is obviously required.
Obviously, given the larger number of parameters that
Based on existing knowledge and experience, the pre-
can affect the flexural behaviour of RC beams with NSM
rs

ferred bond test set-up is believed to be a simple pull-out

FRP reinforcement, a great deal of further experimental
test where an NSM FRP bar subjected to tension is bonded
and theoretical work is required. In particular, the debond-
to a concrete block which is supported at the loaded end.
ing failure mechanisms in beams strengthened with NSM
pe

Using such a set-up, effects of factors such as the distance

reinforcement need to be clarified through further testing.
between adjacent grooves (i.e. groove spacing), and the dis-
The relationship between concrete cover separation and
tance between the member edge and the nearest groove (i.e.
other modes of debonding ‘‘local’’ to the NSM FRP–con-
edge distance) should be examined in the near future. In
crete joint such as fracture at the epoxy–concrete interface
such bond tests, specimens with either long bond lengths
and splitting of the epoxy cover needs further research.
or short bond lengths may be used, and the local bond–slip
Furthermore, the behaviour of pre-damaged beams
curves obtained from them need to be compared to under-
strengthened with NSM FRP is of significant practical
r's

stand the advantages and disadvantages of using short and

interest, as cracking and damage to the cover of the steel
long bond lengths. To obtain reliable strain measurements
reinforcement may have a significant effect on the debond-
without interference with the interfacial behaviour, the
ing failure process.
development and application of innovative strain sensors
The relationship between bond failure mechanisms in
o

such as fiber optic sensors embedded in the FRP bar should

bond test specimens and debonding failure mechanisms
also be given due attention.
in flexurally-strengthened beams needs to be clarified by
th

The most important outcome of the bond tests should

detailed experimental studies as well as rigorous theoretical
be local bond–slip curves. Further tests are required to
modelling. Here, the study of the interaction between flex-
assess the existing local bond–slip equations, and more
ural/flexural-shear cracking and bond stresses is of crucial
Au

importantly to explore the possibility of developing general

local bond–slip models with parameters expressed as func-
tions of geometry- and material-related properties. To
achieve this, the tests should preferably be assisted by
numerical modelling of the bond behaviour. For externally
bonded FRP laminates, an accurate meso-scale finite ele-
ment method has recently been developed by Lu et al.
[59] which produced numerical results for use with test
results in the development of a set of accurate bond–slip
models [35]. A similar approach should be explored for
NSM FRP reinforcement. The model by Lundgren [60]
which successfully predicted the bond behaviour of steel
importance. Once this relationship is clarified, it will then
be possible to develop numerical and analytical models
for predicting debonding failures.
7.3. Shear strengthening
More tests need to be conducted to further clarify the
failure modes of strengthened beams and to evaluate the
effects of various significant factors. More tests are also
needed to confirm the applicability of local bond–slip mod-
els from bond tests in predicting debonding failures of
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
shear-strengthened beams. This confirmation will facilitate
the development of accurate numerical and analytical mod-
els for RC beams shear-strengthened with NSM FRP.
7.4. Other issues
As mentioned earlier in the paper, the combined use of
NSM FRP reinforcement in conjunction with externally
bonded FRP reinforcement has been found to be effective
in strengthening beam–column joints [58]. As externally
bonded FRP reinforcement alone has met with only limited
success in strengthening beam–column joints, this com-
bined approach definitely deserves further work. This com-
bined use to take advantages of both techniques should
also be explored in solving other strengthening problems.
It is widely accepted that pre-stressing the FRP refine-
ment before bonding it to concrete structures for strength-
ening purposes is often desirable, both to improve the
serviceability of the structure and to make more efficient
use of the FRP material. Pre-stressing externally bonded
FRP reinforcement has had little success in practice so
on
far because it is difficult to tension and anchor FRP lami-
nates on site, particularly when they are formed by the
wet lay-up process. NSM FRP reinforcement has a much
better chance to succeed: NSM FRP bars can be tensioned
rs
much more easily, particularly when compared with dry
fiber sheets, and are much better anchored than externally
bonded laminates.
The use of cement grout to replace epoxy as the groove
pe
filler has been explored by a limited amount of work
[9,18,23,26]. There are benefits with the use of a cementi-
tious groove filler as discussed earlier in the paper.
Research is needed to provide a better understanding of
the performance of cement grout as a groove filler and to
formulate stronger cementitious groove fillers.
r's
8. Concluding remarks
Strengthening of structures with NSM FRP reinforce-
o
ment is a technique that has attracted a considerable atten-
tion as a feasible and economic alternative to the technique
th
of strengthening structures with externally bonded FRP
reinforcement. The former technique offers some signifi-
cant advantages over the latter, including the more efficient
Au
use of the FRP material due to a reduced risk of debonding
failure and the better protection of the FRP material from
external sources of damage.
Research on the strengthening of structures using NSM
FRP reinforcement started only a few years ago but has by
now attracted worldwide attention. A significant amount
of research has been conducted on this emerging technique,
particularly on the application of this technique in the
strengthening of concrete structures. This paper has pro-
vided a detailed and critical review of existing research on
the structural behaviour of concrete structures strengthened
with NSM FRP reinforcement. This review has shown that
141
the existing work is still limited in both scope and depth,
and many questions remain to be answered before the tech-
nique can be widely accepted by practicing engineers. Based
on this review, the more urgent research needs have been out-
lined for NSM FRP strengthening of concrete structures.
This paper has been limited to the short-term structural
behaviour of concrete structures strengthened with NSM
FRP reinforcement, so the use of NSM FRP reinforcement
py
for the strengthening of masonry and timber structures and
long-term aspects have not been addressed. Obviously,
these additional aspects are equally important, and existing
work on them is even more limited. It is thus clear that this
co
emerging strengthening technique poses many challenges as
well as opportunities for the international research
community.
Acknowledgements
The work presented in this paper has received financial
al
support from the Research Grants Council of the Hong
Kong SAR (PolyU 5173/04E) and The Hong Kong Poly-
technic University (G31 YD 61). The authors are grateful
to both organizations for their financial support.
References
[1] Asplund SO. Strengthening bridge slabs with grouted reinforcement.
J Am Concr Inst 1949;20(6):397–406.
[2] Warren GE. Waterfront repair and upgrade, advanced technology
demonstration site No. 2: Pier 12, NAVSTA San Diego. Site Specific
Report SSR-2419-SHR, Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center,
Port Hueneme (CA), 1998.
[3] Warren GE. Waterfront repair and upgrade, advanced technology
demonstration site No. 3: NAVSTA Bravo 25, Pearl Harbour. Site
Specific Report SSR-2567-SHR, Naval Facilities Engineering Service
Center, Port Hueneme (CA), 2000.
[4] Garrity SW. Near-surface reinforcement of masonry arch highway
bridges. In: Proceedings of the 9th Canadian masonry symposium,
Fredericton (Canada), CD-ROM, 2001.
[5] Fib TG9.3. Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures.
Technical report on the design and use of externally bonded fibre
reinforced polymer reinforcement (FRP EBR) for reinforced concrete
structures. International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lau-
sanne, 2001.
[6] American Concrete Institute Technical Committee 440. Guide for the
design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems for
strengthening concrete structures. ACI 440.2R-02, 2002.
[7] De Lorenzis L, Teng JG. Near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement:
an emerging technique for structural strengthening. Research Report
of Hong Kong Polytechnic University, in preparation.
[8] American Concrete Institute Technical Committee 440. Guide for the
design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP bars. ACI
440.1R-03, 2003.
[9] Nordin H, Taljsten B. Concrete beams strengthened with CFRP. A
study of anchor lengths. In: Proceedings 10th conference on
structural faults and repair, London (UK), 2003.
[10] Taljsten B, Carolin A, Nordin H. Concrete structures strengthened
with near surface mounted reinforcement of CFRP. Adv Struct Eng
2003;6(3):201–13.
[11] De Lorenzis L. Strengthening of RC structures with near surface
mounted FRP rods. PhD Thesis, Department of Innovation Engi-
neering, University of Lecce, Italy, 2002.
142 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143
[12] Parretti R, Nanni A. Strengthening of RC members using near-
surface mounted FRP composites: design overview. Adv Struct Eng
2004;7(6):469–83.
[13] Blaschko M. Bond behaviour of CFRP strips glued into slits. In:
Proceedings FRPRCS-6. Singapore: World Scientific; 2003. p.
205–14.
[14] Sena Cruz JM, Barros JAO. Bond behavior of carbon laminate strips
into concrete by pull-out bending tests. In: Proceedings of the
international symposium ‘‘Bond in concrete – from research to
standards’’, Budapest (Hungary), 2002. p. 614–21.
[15] Barros JAO, Fortes AS. Flexural strengthening of concrete beams
with CFRP laminates bonded into slits. Cement Concr Compos
2005;27(4):471–80.
[16] Blaschko M. Zum tragverhalten von betonbauteilen mit in schlitze
eingeklebten CFK-lamellen. Bericht 8/2001 aus dem Konstruktiven
Ingenieurbau, TU München, 2001. 147 pp [in German].
[17] Hassan T, Rizkalla S. Investigation of bond in concrete structures
strengthened with near surface mounted carbon fiber reinforced
polymer strips. ASCE J Compos Constr 2003;7(3):248–57.
[18] Carolin A, Taljsten B. Behaviour of concrete beams strengthened
with near-surface mounted reinforcement, NSMR. In: Proceedings
ACIC2002, Southampton (UK), 2002. p. 177–84.
[19] Hassan T, Rizkalla S. Bond mechanism of near-surface-mounted
fiber-reinforced polymer bars for flexural strengthening of concrete
structures. ACI Struct J 2004;101(6):830–9.
[20] Teng JG, De Lorenzis L, Wang B, Rong L, Wong TN, Lam L.
Debonding failures of RC beams strengthened with near-surface
mounted CFRP strips. J Compos Constr, ASCE 2006;10(2):92–105.
[21] De Lorenzis L, Nanni A. Bond between NSM fiber-reinforced
polymer rods and concrete in structural strengthening. ACI Struct J
2002;99(2):123–32.
rs
[22] Al-Zahrani MM. Bond behavior of fiber reinforced plastic (FRP)
reinforcements with concrete. PhD Thesis, Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park (PE), 1995. p. 263.
pe
[23] De Lorenzis L, Rizzo A, La Tegola A. A modified pull-out test for
bond of near-surface mounted FRP rods in concrete. Compos—Part
B: Eng 2002;33(8):589–603.
[24] Tepfers R. A theory of bond applied to overlapped tensile reinforce-
ment splices for deformed bars. Publication 73:2, Division of
Concrete Structures, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothen-
burg (Sweden), 1973. 328 pp.
[25] De Lorenzis L. Anchorage length of near-surface mounted FRP bars
r's
for concrete strengthening – analytical modeling. ACI Struct J
2004;101(3):375–86.
[26] De Lorenzis L, Lundgren K, Rizzo A. Anchorage length of near-
surface mounted FRP bars for concrete strengthening – experimental
investigation and numerical modeling. ACI Struct J use of continuous fiber sheets. Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 2001.
o
2004;101(2):269–78.
[27] Sena Cruz JM, Barros JAO. Modeling of bond between near-surface
mounted CFRP laminate strips and concrete. Comput Struct
th
2004;82(17–19):1513–21.
[28] MacGregor JC. Reinforced concrete – mechanics and design. 3rd
ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 1997, 939 pp.
Au
[29] ASTM G115-98. Standard guide for measuring and reporting friction
coefficients. ASTM International, West Conshohocken (PA), 2001.
11 pp.
[30] van der Veen C. Cryogenic bond stress–slip relationship. Delft
University of Technology, Doctoral Thesis, Delft (The Netherlands),
1990. 111 pp.
[31] Tepfers R, Olsson PA. Ring test for evaluation of bond properties of
reinforcing bars. In: Proceedings of the international conference on
bond in concrete – from research to practice, Riga, Latvia, vol. 1,
1992. p. 89–99.
[32] Cosenza E, Manfredi G, Realfonzo R. Behavior and modeling of
bond of FRP rebars to concrete. ASCE J Compos Constr
1997;1(2):40–51.
[33] Alunno Rossetti V, Galeota D, Giammatteo MM. Local bond stress–
slip relationships of glass fibre reinforced plastic bars embedded in
concrete. Mater Struct 1995;28(180).
[34] Nanni A, Conrad JO, Bakis CE, Uchno J. Material properties of C-
Bar reinforcing bar. Civil Engineering Department, Pennsylvania
State University, PA, 1997.
[35] Lu XZ, Teng JG, Ye LP, Jiang JJ. Bond–slip models for FRP sheets/
plates bonded to concrete. Eng Struct 2005;27(6):920–37.
[36] Chen JF, Teng JG. Anchorage strength models for FRP and steel
plates bonded to concrete. J Struct Eng, ASCE 2001;127(7):784–91.
py
[37] Teng JG, Chen JF, Smith ST, Lam L. FRP strengthened RC
structures. England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2002.
[38] Yan X, Miller B, Nanni A, Bakis CE. Characterization of CFRP bars
used as near-surface mounted reinforcement. In: Proceedings 8th
international structural faults and repair conference, Edinburgh
co
(Scotland), CD-ROM version, 1999.
[39] Yao J, Teng JG, Chen JF. Experimental study on FRP-to-concrete
bonded joints. Compos—Part B: Eng 2005;36(2):99–113.
[40] Wang B, Teng JG, De Lorenzis L, Zhou LM, Ou JP, Jin W, et al.
Strain Monitoring of RC Beams Strengthened with Smart NSM FRP
Bars, in preparation.
[41] El-Hacha R, Rizkalla SH. Near-surface-mounted fiber-reinforced
polymer reinforcements for flexural strengthening of concrete struc-
al
tures. ACI Struct J 2004;101(5):717–26.
[42] Alkhrdaji T, Nanni A, Chen G, Barker M. Upgrading the transpor-
tation infrastructure: solid RC decks strengthened with FRP. Concr
on Int 1999;21(10):37–41.
[43] Hassan T, Rizkalla S. Flexural strengthening of prestressed bridge
slabs with FRP systems. PCI J 2002;47:76–93.
[44] De Lorenzis L, Nanni A, La Tegola A. Flexural and shear
strengthening of reinforced concrete structures with near surface
mounted FRP rods. In: Proceedings ACMBS III, Ottawa (Canada),
2000. p. 521–8.
[45] Smith ST, Teng JG. FRP-strengthened RC beams. I: review of
debonding strength models. Eng Struct 2002;24(4):385–95.
[46] Smith ST, Teng JG. FRP-strengthened RC beams. II: assessment of
debonding strength models. Eng Struct 2002;24(4):397–417.
[47] Teng JG, Smith ST, Yao J, Chen JF. Intermediate crack-induced
debonding in beams and slabs. Constr Build Mater 2003;17(6–7):
447–62.
[48] Lu XZ, Teng JG, Ye LP, Jiang JJ. Intermediate crack debonding in
FRP strengthened RC beams: FE analysis and strength model,
submitted for publication.
[49] Oehlers DJ, Seracino R. Design of FRP and steel plated RC
structures: retrofitting beams and slabs for strength, stiffness and
ductility. Elsevier; 2004.
[50] JSCE. Recommendations for upgrading of concrete structures with
[51] Yao J, Teng JG, Lam L. Experimental study on intermediate crack
debonding in FRP-strengthened RC flexural members. Adv Struct
Eng 2005;8(4):365–96.
[52] Aiello MA, De Lorenzis L, Micelli F. Load–deflection behavior of
RC beams strengthened with near-surface mounted FRP bars. In:
Proceedings CCC2003, Cosenza (Italy), September 2003.
[53] Nordin H, Taljsten B. Concrete beams strengthened with prestressed
near surface mounted reinforcement. In: Proceedings FRPRCS-6,
Singapore, 2003. p. 1077–86.
[54] De Lorenzis L, Micelli F, La Tegola A. Passive and active near-
surface mounted FRP rods for flexural strengthening of RC beams.
In: Proceedings ICCI-02, San Francisco (CA), CD-ROM version,
2002.
[55] De Lorenzis L, Nanni A. Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete
beams with NSM fiber-reinforced polymer rods. ACI Struct J
2001;98(1):60–8.
[56] Barros JAO, Dias S. Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete
beams with laminate strips of CFRP. In: Proceedings CCC2003,
Cosenza (Italy), 2003. p. 289–94.
 L. De Lorenzis, J.G. Teng / Composites: Part B 38 (2007) 119–143 143

[57] Nanni A, Di Ludovico M, Parretti R. Shear strengthening of a PC
bridge with NSM CFRP rectangular bars. Adv Struct Eng
2004;7(4):97–109.
[58] Prota A, Nanni A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E. Selective upgrade of
underdesigned RC beam–column joints using CFRP. ACI Struct J
2004;101(5):699–707.
[59] Lu XZ, Ye LP, Teng JG, Jiang JJ. Meso-scale finite element model
for FRP sheets/plates bonded to concrete. Eng Struct
2005;27(4):564–75.
[60] Lundgren K. Bond between ribbed bars and concrete: Part 1.
[61] Crasto A, Kim R, Ragland W. Private communication, University of
Dayton Research Institute, 1999.
[62] Yost JR, Gross SP, Dinehart DW, Mildenberg J. Near surface
mounted CFRP reinforcement for the structural retrofit of concrete
flexural members. In: Proceedings ACMBS-IV, Calgary (Canada),
July 2004, CD-ROM.
[63] Arduini M, Romagnolo M, Camomilla G, Nanni A. Influence of
concrete tensile softening on the performance of FRP strengthened
RC beams: experiments. In: Proceedings ACMBS-IV, Calgary
(Canada), July 2004, CD-ROM.

py
Modified model. Mag Concr Res, in press.

co
al
on
rs
pe
o r's
th
Au

View publication stats