ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL

TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 95-S11

Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beams

Using Epoxy-Bonded FRP Composites

by Thanasis C. Triantafillou
The paper deals with the application of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP)
laminates or fabrics as shear strengthening materials for reinforced concrete beams. The study aims at increasing the experimental database on
shear strengthening of concrete using composites and, most importantly,
developing an analytical model for the design of such members within the
framework of modern code formats, based on ultimate limit states. The
experimental part of the study involved testing of eleven concrete beams
strengthened in shear with carbon FRP (CFRP) at various area fractions
and fiber configurations, while the analytical part resulted in a model for
the contribution of FRP to shear capacity in analogy with steel stirrups,
with an effective FRP strain that decreases with increasing FRP axial
rigidity. It is shown that the effectiveness of the technique increases almost
linearly with the FRP axial rigidity and reaches a maximum, beyond which
it varies very little.
Keywords: adhesives; composite materials; reinforced concrete beams;
shear design; shear strengthening.

INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Changing social needs, upgrading of design standards,
increased safety requirements, and deterioration result in
existing reinforced concrete structures such as bridges and
buildings that need to be strengthened. Strengthening of
concrete members is usually accomplished by construction
of external reinforced concrete or shotcrete jackets, by epoxy
bonding of steel plates to the tension faces of the members,
or by external post-tensioning. A relatively new technique
involves the replacement of steel plates by fiber reinforced
polymers (FRP), or simply composites, in the form of thin
laminates or fabrics. These materials offer the engineer an
outstanding combination of properties, such as low weight
(making them much easier to handle on site), immunity to
corrosion, excellent mechanical strength and stiffness, and
the ability of formation in very long lengths, thus eliminating
the need for lapping at joints. The FRP-strengthening technique has found wide attractiveness and acceptance among
researchers and engineers today in many parts of the world,
and is no longer considered to be a new technique for certain
types of strengthening jobs.
The initial developments of the FRP-strengthening technique took place in Germany1 and Switzerland.2 Flexural
strengthening of reinforced concrete members with externally epoxy-bonded FRP laminates has been studied in detail
by researchers at several institutions, including the Swiss
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research

(EMPA),2-5 the German Institute for Structural Materials,
Building Construction, and Fire Protection (IBMB),1,6 the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,7-11 and the University
of Arizona.12-13 These (and a few other) studies have examined both the short-term and the long-term performance of
reinforced concrete beams strengthened by carbon, glass, or
aramid FRP epoxy-bonded laminates. Among the topics
investigated was the static, creep and fatigue behavior, the
effect of various types of adhesives and composite materials
on the response, the use of pretensioned laminates, the
behavior under fire, and the development of design procedures
based on reliability theory. The results obtained through
such investigations have proved that the FRP-strengthening
technique is highly efficient and effective, especially when
the FRP materials are made using carbon fibers (CFRP), and
have led to hundreds of applications worldwide.
Another area of investigation related to the use of composites as strengthening materials of concrete structures has
been that of column wrapping with FRP jackets to provide
flexural, axial, and shear strength enhancement under
seismic loads.14-19 Analytical and experimental results, as
well as practical experiences, have demonstrated that FRPwrapped columns (or column-like elements, such as tall
chimneys) under axial, flexural and shear loading possess
excellent strength, stiffness, and ductility characteristics.
Studies on shear strengthening of reinforced concrete
beams using composite materials have been limited, and to a
certain degree controversial. The first research study was
performed by Berset20 at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. He tested reinforced concrete beams with and
without shear strengthening reinforcement in the form of
GFRP laminates epoxy-bonded to the vertical sides in the
shear-critical zones, and developed a simple analytical model
for the contribution of the external reinforcement to shear
capacity. In Bersets20 model the FRP shear reinforcement is
ACI Structural Journal, V. 95, No. 2, March-April 1998.
Received May 24, 1996, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright 1998, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making
of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent
discussion will be published in the January-February 1999 ACI Structural Journal if
received by Sept.1, 1998.

107

ACI member Thanasis C. Triantafillou is Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at

the University of Patras, Greece. He received his diploma in civil engineering for the
University of Patras in 1985 and his MSc (1987) and PhD (1989) degrees in civil
engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he served as Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering from 1990 to 1993. His current research interests
include the application of advanced composite materials in combination with
concrete, masonry, and wood, with emphasis on strengthening.

treated in analogy with steel stirrups, reaching a maximum

allowable strain, which is determined by experiments.
The second study reported in the literature is that of Uji,21
who tested reinforced concrete beams strengthened in shear
with either wrapped-around carbon fabrics or CFRP laminates bonded to the vertical sides (with the fibers either
vertical or inclined). His model for the FRP contribution to
shear capacity is based on rather arbitrarily defined FRPconcrete bonding interfaces, which, during peeling-off
(debonding) of the fabrics, carry average shear stresses
(bonding stresses) determined by experiments (to be about
1.3 MPa). The upper limit to the FRP contribution is given
by its tensile strength.
In another study, Dolan et al.22 tested prestressed concrete
beams with externally applied aramid fabric reinforcement,
and concluded that AFRP fabrics perform quite well as shear
retrofit reinforcement.
The work of Al-Sulaimani et al.23 dealt with shear strengthening using GFRP laminates in the form of plates or strips.
Their model for the contribution of composites to shear capacity
is based on the assumption of FRP-concrete interfaces which
carry average shear stresses during peeling-off equal to 0.8 MPa
and 1.2 MPa for the case of plates and strips, respectively.
Ohuchi et al.24 carried out an extensive series of experiments on reinforced concrete beams strengthened in shear
with wrapped-around carbon fabrics. They modeled the
CFRP contribution to shear capacity in analogy with steel
stirrups, assuming a limiting strain for the external reinforcement equal to either the tensile failure strain of CFRP or 2/3
of it, depending on the thickness of the fabrics.
At another research effort, Chajes et al.25 report on FRPstrengthened concrete beams using composites with various
types of fibers, namely glass, aramid, and carbon. In this
work, the FRP contribution to shear capacity is modeled in
analogy with steel stirrups and assumes a limiting FRP
strain, which was determined by experiments to be approximately equal to 0.005.
Malvar et al.26 also tested reinforced concrete beams
strengthened in shear with CFRP fabrics and verified the
high effectiveness of the technique. In terms of analysis,
they stated that the contribution of the fabrics to shear
capacity can be obtained in analogy with steel stirrups by
considering the limiting FRP strain equal to that at tensile
fracture of the material.
Vielhaber and Limberger27 reported on the shear strengthening of large scale reinforced concrete beams with CFRP
fabrics, and demonstrated through testing that even small
amounts of external reinforcement provide considerable
safety against brittle shear failures.
Finally, Sato et al.28 conducted tests on concrete beams
strengthened in shear with CFRP strips or continuous
fabrics, and described the observed failure mode (debonding
108

of external reinforcement) through a simple model which

accounts for partial shear transfer by the debonded CFRP.
From the above review of the literature it becomes clear that
although some studies on shear strengthening of reinforced
concrete beams exist, the design of such members is far from
straightforward. The analytical models proposed in the literature are almost as numerous as the studies from which they
came, and are in most cases contradictory. According to the
writer's view, the relatively good agreement between models
and experimental results is attributed to the fact that, essentially, the same set of data have been used for both calibration
and comparison. The present studys scope is twofold: (a) to
enhance the experimental database on shear strengthening of
concrete beams using composites, and (b) to develop an
analytical model for the design of such members within the
framework of modern code formats.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
A considerable proportion of construction worldwide is
devoted to repair and strengthening of existing structures.
In earthquake- prone regions, repair of seismically
damaged and seismic strengthening of concrete structures
is very common, whereas in other regions repair and
strengthening projects mostly aim at remedying the ravages
of time and/or harsh environmental conditions on old or
otherwise deteriorating structures. Repair and strengthening is usually based on traditional, often inefficient, techniques and on conventional materials, which may soon
exhibit new durability problems. It is common belief today
that the limited financial resources available and the
current technology together cannot solve the problem of
infrastructure rebuilding. Instead, high-tech solutions must
be investigated, relying on innovative uses of new technologies and advanced construction materials. One such innovative strengthening technique involves the use of
composite materials in the form of external epoxy-bonded
reinforcement for concrete structures. Recent years have
seen numerous research efforts and successful applications
(in Europe, the United States, and Japan) regarding the use
of composites for flexural strengthening of reinforced
concrete, and limited research results (often contradictory)
regarding the use of these materials as shear strengthening
reinforcement. Combining all the available experimental
evidence on shear strengthening of reinforced concrete
members using composites with some new experimental
results, and based on analytical developments, the present
research provides a comprehensive design procedure for reinforced concrete members strengthened with composites in
shear, within the framework of ultimate limit state design.
ANALYTICAL FORMULATION
Design of reinforced concrete beams in shear
According to modern design codes, the design of reinforced concrete beams in shear is typically based on the
assumption that the total contribution to shear capacity is
given as the sum of two terms. The first accounts for the
action of mechanisms such as the dowel action, the aggregate interlock, and the uncracked concrete in the compression zone, and the second accounts for the effect of shear
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

reinforcement (e.g. stirrups or inclined bars), which is

modeled by the well-known truss analogy. An upper bound
to shear capacity is obtained by considering compression
crushing of the concrete blocks formed between diagonal
shear cracks. For instance, the theoretical shear capacity VRd
of a reinforced concrete beam is given, according to Eurocode 2, as follows:29
VRd = min(Vcd + Vwd, VRd2)

(1)

Vcd = Rdmin(2, 1.2 +40l )max(1, 1.6 d)bwd

(2)

A sw
V wd = ------- f 0.9b w d ( 1 + cot ) sin
sb w ywd

(3)

where

f ck
V Rd2 = 0.5max 0.5, 0.7 -------- f 0.9b w d ( 1 + cot )

200 cd

(4)

In the above equations, Rd = basic design shear strength

= 0.25fctk/c (fctk = characteristic tensile strength of concrete,
c = 1.5 = partial safety factor for concrete), l = longitudinal
reinforcement ratio, d = effective depth of cross section, bw
= minimum width of cross section over the effective depth,
Asw = cross sectional area of shear reinforcement, s = spacing
of shear reinforcement measured along the longitudinal axis,
fywd = design yield strength of shear reinforcement, = angle
of the shear reinforcement to the longitudinal axis of the
member, fck = characteristic compressive cylinder strength
of concrete at 28 days, and fcd = fck/c = design value of
concrete cylinder compressive strength. As characteristic
strength is defined that with 95 percent probability of
exceedance. For design under seismic loading, the value of
Vcd in the critical areas is reduced to rsVcd, where the reduction factor rs depends on the ductility demands (ductility
class of the structure). Finally, in case of strengthening in
the absence of full repair, that is, in the case of damaged
(diagonally cracked) beams, the value of Vcd may be taken
lower than that given by Eq. (1). Such a reduction depends
on the degree of damage, and can only be estimated on a case
by case basis.
Contribution of FRP reinforcement
Typical FRP configurations for shear strengthening of
concrete beams are shown in Fig. 1. The external reinforcement in Fig. 1(a) is in the form of epoxy-bonded laminates or
fabrics extending in the compression zone, where adhesive
bonding may be supplemented by mechanical fastening.
Another possibility is that of Fig. 1(b), where the epoxybonded FRP fabric is wrapped around the beam. The effectiveness of the strengthening reinforcement, that is, the load
carried by the FRP at the ultimate limit state, depends on its
failure mechanism, which, in turn, depends on various
factors. As suggested by experimental evidence,20-28 failure
of the FRP reinforcement may occur either by peeling off
(debonding) through the concrete near the concrete-FRP
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

Fig. 1Shear strengthening of concrete with FRP: (a) laminates or fabrics (b) wrapped fabrics or strips.

interface, or by tensile fracture at a stress which may be

lower than the tensile strength of the composite material,
because of stress concentrations (e.g. at rounded corners or
at debonded areas), etc. Whether debonding or fracture will
occur first depends on the bond conditions, the available
anchorage length and/or the type of attachment at the FRP
ends, the thickness of the laminates and others. In many
cases, the actual failure mechanism is a combination of FRP
debonding at certain areas and fracture at others.
In light of the above, the load carried by FRP at the beam's
ultimate limit state is rather impossible to quantify based on
rigorous analysis. In what follows, the contribution of FRP
to shear capacity is calculated through a semi-quantitative
description of the problem, leading to a simple equation
which describes reasonably well the majority of the experimental results.
Let us consider first the case of epoxy-bonded laminates or
fabrics without special anchorage (e.g. through wrapping or
mechanical fastening) and with the strong material direction
(that is, the principal fiber orientation) at an angle to the
longitudinal axis of the member. A qualitative description of
the FRP load bearing mechanisms at ultimate shear capacity
is shown in Fig. 2(a), which indicates regions of full
debonding, limited shear transfer (through the concrete), and
full shear transfer. A simplification of the associated tensile
109

Fig. 2(a) Schematic illustration of FRP stress bearing mechanisms; (b) simplified
FRP normal stress along diagonal crack.
stresses in the FRP is given in Fig. 2(b), where only a portion
of the reinforcement is stressed to its tensile capacity, ffrp,d.
Adopting the classical truss analogy, as in the case of
internal steel shear reinforcement, and based on the geometry of Fig. 2(a) and the simplified stress distribution of Fig.
2(b), the contribution of external FRP to shear capacity can
be expressed as:
z
z
2t
V frp, d = ------ f frp, d ---1- + z 2 + ---3- ( 1 + cot ) sin
b w
2
2

(5)

where t = thickness of FRP laminate or fabric on each side of

the beam. Defining the FRP area fraction as frp = 2t/bw,
Eq. (5) is written as:
frp, u
V frp, d = frp E frp 0.9b w d r 1 ----------- ( 1 + cot ) sin
frp

(6)

where Efrp = FRP elastic modulus, frp,u = ultimate tensile

strain of FRP in the principal material direction, frp = partial
safety factor for FRP in uniaxial tension (approximately
equal to 1.15, 1.20 and 1.25 for CFRP, AFRP and GFRP,
respectively30) and r1 = FRP reinforcement efficiency
factor, which depends on the exact failure mechanism, and is
equal to:
z---1- + z + z---3-
2
2
2
r 1 = -------------------------------0.9d
110

(7)

In the case of perfect anchorage of the FRP reinforcement

onto the concrete surface, as could be achieved, for instance,
by wrapping or by using clamping devices, Eq. (6) is still
valid with r1 replaced by r2, which has the meaning of a FRP
strength reduction factor (e.g. due to stress concentrations).
Hence, the FRP contribution to shear capacity can be
written in the following form:
0.9
V frp, d = -------- frp E frp frp, e b w d ( 1 + cot ) sin
frp

(8)

where frp,e is an effective FRP strain, the only unknown yet

to be determined for completing the analysis on FRP contribution to shear capacity. It should be stated at this point that
the above physical model is a descriptive one and not an
exact model relating the effective FRP strain with the
geometric parameters z1, z2, and z3.
As far as frp,e is concerned, one may qualitatively argue
that it depends heavily on the area of the FRP-concrete
debonded interfaces, or, in other words, on the FRP development length, defined as that necessary to reach FRP
tensile fracture before debonding. Apart from the bond
conditions, the development length depends (almost
proportionally) on the FRP axial rigidity (area times elastic
modulus), expressed by the product frpEfrp. Hence, one
would expect frp,e to be roughly inversely proportional to
frpEfrp. The implication of this argument is that as the FRP
laminates or fabrics become stiffer and thicker, debonding
dominates over tensile fracture, and the effective FRP strain
is reduced. Finally, frp,e depends on whether r1 or r2 applies,
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

Table 1Experimental data on shear strengthening using FRP laminates or fabrics

Beam*

bw,m

d,m

B(3)
B(4)
U(3)
U(5)
U(6)
U(7)
D(F2)

0.114
0.114
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.038

0.085
0.085
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.127

A(WO)
A(SO)
A(JO)
O(BS12)
O(BS24)
O(BM06)
O(BM12)
O(BM18)
O(BM24)
O(BL06)
O(BL12)
O(BMW06)
O(BMW12)
O(BMW24)
O(2)
O(3)
C(A)
C(E)
C(G)
C(45G)
M(B2)

0.15
0.15
0.15
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.4
0.4
0.0635
0.0635
0.0635
0.0635
0.127

0.113
0.113
0.113
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.34
0.34
0.1525
0.1525
0.1525
0.1525
0.133

S(S2)
S(S3)
S(S4)
S(S5)
S(S6)
T(S1a)
T(S1b)
T(S2a)
T(S2b)
T(S3a)
T(S3b)
T(S1-45)
T(S2-45)
T(S3-45)

0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07

0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10

FRP type
G,sides (s)
G, s
C, wrap
C, s
C, s
C, s
A, sides & bottom
(s & b)
G, s
G, s
G, s & b
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
C, wrap
A, s & b
G, s & b
C, s & b
C, s & b
C, s & b
C, s
C, s & b
C, s
C, s & b
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s
C, s

frp

, deg

frp,e

0.011
16.8
0.027
16.8
0.00194
230
0.00194
230
0.00194
230
0.0039
230
frpEfrp = 0.363

45
45
90
90
56
90
90

0.0066
0.0056
0.0050
0.0030
0.0034
0.0015
>0.0044

Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Flexure

0.04
16
0.016
16
0.04
16
0.0012
230
0.0024
230
0.0006
230
0.0012
230
0.0018
230
0.0024
230
0.0006
230
0.0012
230
0.0006
230
0.0012
230
0.0024
230
0.00029
230
0.00058
230
0.033
11
0.021
14.3
0.018
21
0.018
21
frpEfrp = 0.409

90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
45
90

0.0008
0.0018
>0.0016
0.0084
0.0062
0.0117
0.0093
0.0078
0.0060
0.0084
0.0078
0.0084
0.0069
0.0046
0.0120
0.0103
0.0049
0.0063
0.0052
0.0051
>0.0020

Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Flexure
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Shear (fracture)
Flexure

0.006
0.006
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.0022
0.0022
0.0033
0.0033
0.0044
0.0044
0.0022
0.0033
0.0044

90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
45
45
45

0.0010
0.0017
0.0005
0.0008
>0.0009
0.0041
0.0034
0.0032
0.0026
0.0020
0.0016
0.0030
0.0022
0.0013

Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Flexure
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)
Shear (debonding)

Efrp, GPa

230
230
230
230
230
235
235
235
235
235
235
235
235
235

Failure mechanism

*
B = Berset20; U = Uji21; D = Dolan et al.22; A = Al-Sulaimani et al.23; O = Ohuchi et al.24; C = Chajes et al.25; M = Malvar et al.26; S = Sato et al.28; T = present study (Triantafillou).
Symbols for each beam appear in parentheses (), as assigned by those who conducted tests.

G = GFRP; C = CFRP; A = AFRP; sides = bonded to sides only; wrap = wrapped around.
Note: 1 m =39.4 in.; 1 GPa =145 ksi.

that is, on whether the FRP is wrapped around the cross

section or not.
Next we proceed to an evaluation and synthesis of all the
experimental results on shear strengthening of concrete
beams with FRP laminates or fabrics. The available data are
summarized in Table 1, as found in the literature. The effective FRP strain, frp,e, was calculated based on Eq. (8) and
the experimentally measured contribution to shear capacity,
equal to frpVfrp,d. These data, along with the ones obtained
in the experimental program of the present study, will be
used later to establish the dependence of frp,e on frpEfrp.
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
Experimental procedure
To increase the experimental database on shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using FRP, a series of
tests was carried out. Eleven deficient in shear identical
concrete beams were fabricated, of which nine were
strengthened in shear with epoxy- bonded CFRP fabrics
attached on the two sides, and two were used as control specimens, that is, without external reinforcement. The 1000 mm
(39.4 in.) long beams were loaded in four-point bending at a
span of 800 mm (31.5 in.) and a shear span of 320 mm (12.6
111

Fig. 3Geometry of reinforced concrete beams.

Fig. 4Strengthened beam.

in.) (Fig. 3). Six 100 x 200 mm (4 x 4 in.) cylinders were also
cast and tested at the time of beam tests (at an age of 28 days)
to determine the compressive strength of concrete.
Type I portland cement was used, the maximum aggregate
size was about 10 mm (0.4 in.), and the
water:cement:sand:gravel ratio was 0.5:1:2.5:3.2 by weight.
After casting the concrete in steel molds, all specimens (both
beams and cylinders) were covered by plastic bags for one
day and then were cured at 20 deg C (68 deg F) in a water
bath for six days and outside the bath until the day of testing.
Shear strengthening reinforcement was provided by CFRP
fabrics made up of epoxy-bonded unidirectional fibers,
approximately 15 days after concrete casting. According to
data provided by the CFRP supplier, the fabrics had an
elastic modulus of 235 GPa (34 103 ksi) and a tensile
strength of 3300 MPa (480 ksi). Application of the CFRP
reinforcement was achieved through the following steps: (a)
removal of laitance on the sides of the concrete beam shear
spans using a disk grinder; (b) blowing the concrete surface
with air; (c) coating the concrete with primer; (d) applying
putty, after the primer surface became tack-free; (e) applying
two-part epoxy-adhesive; (f) adhesion of CFRP sheets and
debulking along the fibers direction using a plastic roller; (g)
applying second impregnation resin; and (h) removing
excessive resin using a rubber scraper. A photograph of a
strengthened beam is shown in Fig. 4.
Each beam had a cross section 70 mm (2.7 in.) wide and
110 mm (4.3 in.) deep. Longitudinal steel reinforcement was
provided by two 8-mm-diameter deformed steel bars (fywd =
112

400 MPa [58 ksi]) at an effective depth of 100 mm (3.9 in.).

No steel shear reinforcement was provided, in order to
ensure that the failure modes would be governed by shear.
Details about the CFRP area fraction and fiber orientation
are given in Table 1 for all beam designs tested.
The load was applied at a rate of 0.02 mm/sec (0.8 x 10-3
in./sec) through a programmable servohydraulic testing
machine (Fig. 5). Total load and midspan deflection and load
were recorded continuously through the load cell and a linear
variable differential transformer (LVDT), respectively.
Test results
The concrete cylinder tests gave an average strength of
approximately 30 MPa (4.3 ksi). All the beams tested experienced a brittle shear failure mode evidenced by development of diagonal tension cracks in the constant shear span.
In those externally reinforced with CFRP, diagonal cracking
was followed by CFRP debonding, and failure occurred at a
load significantly higher than that for unreinforced beams.
Increases of strength ranged from 65 percent to 95 percent
over that of the control beams. All the test results obtained
are presented in Table 2, which also gives the contribution of
FRP to shear capacity, calculated as the difference between
the shear at failure and the average shear capacity of the
control beams (8.2 kN [1.8 kip]).
MODEL CALIBRATION AND DISCUSSION
All the experimental results available in the literature
were combined with those obtained in the present study and
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

Fig. 5Experimental testing apparatus.

Table 2Shear capacity of beams tested and
contribution of FRP
Beam
Ca

Failure load, kN
15.5

FRP shear capacity, kN

Cb
S1a

17.3
43.5

13.55

S1b
S1(45)

38.9
44.5

11.25
14.05

S2a
S2b

48.1
42.2

15.85
12.90

S2(45)
S3a

47.3
42.8

15.45
13.20

S3b
S3(45)

37.5
40.7

10.55
12.15

1 kN = 0.225 kip.

were used to produce the plot of Fig. 6, which gives frp,e

in terms of frpEfrp. In agreement with the qualitative arguments made in the analysis, it can be seen that frp,e
decreases as frpEfrp increases. It is also interesting to note
that all the data (for wrapped beams failing by FRP fracture
as well as for beams without wrapping failing by shear
debonding) follow the same trend, so that they can be fit
with reasonable accuracy by a single curve (although they
correspond to two different mechanisms). Hence, based on
the results of Fig. 6, the derivation of two different expressions for frp,e, each one associated with a different failure
mechanism, is not considered necessary at this point.
However, such a distinction may be required in the future,
when more data on shear strengthening of concrete beams
(using FRP) become available.
The relationship between frp,e and frpEfrp is obtained
here from the best-fit second order equation up to frpEfrp =
1 GPa (145 ksi) and by the equation of a straight line for
frpEfrp > 1 GPa (145 ksi), given as follows:
0 frp E frp 1 :
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

frp = 0.0119 0.0205 ( frp E frp ) + 0.0104 ( frp E frp )

(9a)

frp E frp > 1 :

frp = 0.00065 ( frp E frp ) + 0.00245

(9b)

Finally, the equation for the contribution of FRP to the

design shear capacity can be computed from Eq. (8)-(9). The
result, given in Fig. 7, is quite interesting. It is shown that for
values of frpEfrp up to about 0.4 GPa (58 ksi) the FRP
contribution to shear strength increases almost linearly with
frpEfrp reaching a maximum, beyond which it drops slightly
and then increases again (slightly). This suggests that the
value frpEfrp = 0.4 GPa (58 ksi) can be used to determine the
limiting area fraction of FRP, frp, beyond which the effectiveness of strengthening ceases to be positive.
A point of discussion here concerns size effects. Some of
the experimental data shown in Fig. 6 (including those
obtained in this study) correspond to relatively small-sized
reinforced concrete members, which may not be representative of practical sizes for members used in buildings and
bridges. The FRP bond transfer length for small-sized beams
strengthened in shear without circumferential wrapping will,
in general, be smaller than that for large beams, implying
that the results presented above for the shear capacity will be
conservative for such members (that is, frp,e in reality will
be higher). Such conservatism, although desirable, should be
kept in mind.
Another point of discussion to be added here concerns the
angle between the principal FRP fibers direction and the
longitudinal axis of the members. In the experimental database described above, is limited to 90, 45, and 56 deg (one
test), whereas the proposed design equation could apply to
all angles, including = 0 deg. In fact, the predicted FRP
contribution to shear capacity in the latter case is zero.
Considering other deformation mechanisms of the FRP, such
as the dowel action (which was neglected due to the rela113

Fig. 6Effective FRP strain in terms of frpEfrp (1 GPa =

1000 MPa = 145 ksi).

Fig.7FRP contribution to shear capacity in terms of

frpEfrp (1 GPa = 1000 MPa = 145 ksi).

tively low rigidity of the material), it may turn out that 0 deg
fibers provide some contribution to shear capacity, but the
authors view is that such contribution will be small and the
0 deg configuration is far from efficient.
The last point to be discussed here is the application of
external FRP shear strengthening reinforcement with pretensioning. Prestressing the laminates or fabrics can only be
accomplished with proper attachment of the FRPs ends, for
instance, through circumferential wrapping or mechanical
fastening. Such prestressing has the following effects: (a)
reduction of the design shear force VSd, equal to the
prestressing force component parallel to VSd; (b) reduction
of the FRP contribution to shear capacity, approximately
equal to the prestressing force; and (c) increase of the
concrete contribution to shear capacity, due to active
confinement, increased aggregate interlock, etc. Therefore, it
can be concluded that shear strengthening with pretensioned
composites has only indirect effects on shear capacity,
related to the contribution of Vcd, and Vfrp,d can be assumed
to remain unaffected.

forcement to the shear capacity of strengthened beams. It

was shown that this contribution increases almost linearly
with frpEfrp for values of frpEfrp up to approximately 0.4
GPa (58 ksi), beyond which the effectiveness of FRP ceases
to be positive. This conclusion is particularly useful in
designing FRP reinforcements and determining optimum
material quantities. In terms of fiber orientation, the analysis
presented above as well as test results demonstrated that, as
intuitively expected, the effectiveness of FRP increases as
the fibers direction becomes closer to the perpendicular to
the diagonal crack.
Future studies should focus on expanding the experimental database of concrete beams strengthened in shear
with FRPs through full-scale experimental testing and on
long-term performance.

CONCLUSIONS
Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams in shear using
epoxy- bonded composite materials in the form of laminates
or fabrics appears to be a highly effective technique. Within
the framework of modern code formats, based on limit
states, the design of FRP- strengthened members can be
treated in analogy with the design of internal shear reinforcement, provided that an effective FRP strain is used in the
formulation. Contrary to most of the existing theories, this
strain is not constant, but decreases as the FRP axial rigidity,
expressed by the product frpEfrp, increases. This argument
is supported not only by theoretical considerations, as
presented above, but also by experimental results, reported
by various researchers and supplemented with some new
ones in this study. Based on these results, the effective FRP
strain was established here as a function of frpEfrp, which
was used to quantify the contribution of external FRP rein114

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The partial support of Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation and Sumitomo
Corporation is gratefully acknowledged. The author wishes to thank Mr. K.
Antonopoulos for his invaluable assistance in the experimental program.

NOTATION
Asw
bw
d
Efrp
fcd
fck

=
=
=
=
=
=

ffrp,d
fywd
P
r1
r2
rs
s

=
=
=
=
=
=
=

t
=
Vcd =
Vfrp,d =
VRd =
VRd2 =

cross sectional area of shear reinforcement

minimum width of cross section over the effective depth
effective depth of cross section
FRP elastic modulus
design value of concrete cylinder compressive strength
characteristic compressive cylinder strength of concrete at 28
days
design tensile strength of FRP
design yield strength of shear reinforcement
load
FRP reinforcement efficiency factor
FRP reinforcement efficiency factor
ductility class shear reduction factor
spacing of shear reinforcement measured along the longitudinal
axis
thickness of FRP laminate or fabric on each side of the beam
shear capacity of concrete
contribution of external FRP reinforcement (design value)
design shear resistance
maximum design shear force that can be carried without web
failure

ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

VSd
Vwd
z1-z3

=
=
=
=

c
frp

=
=
=
=
=
=
=

frp,e
frp,u

frp
l
Rd

design shear force

contribution of steel shear reinforcement
geometric variables
angle of steel shear reinforcement to longitudinal axis of the
member
angle of strong FRP material direction to longitudinal axis of
the member
partial safety factor for concrete
partial safety factor for FRP
effective FRP strain
ultimate tensile strain of FRP in the principal material direction
FRP area fraction
longitudinal reinforcement ratio
design shear strength of concrete

REFERENCES
1. Federal Institute for Materials Testing (MPA), Bonding of Steel and
GFRP Plates in the Area of Coupling Joints, Talbrucke Kattenbusch,
Research Report No. 3126/1429, Braunschweig, Germany, 1987 (in German).
2. Meier, U., Bridge Repair with High Performance Composite
Materials, Material und Technik, V. 4, 1987, pp. 125-128.
3. Kaiser, H., Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete with EpoxyBonded Carbon-Fiber Plastics, Doctoral thesis, Swiss Federal Institute
(ETH), Zurich, Switzerland, 1989 (in German).
4. Deuring, M., Post-Strengthening of Concrete Structures with Pretensioned Advanced Composites, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials
Testing and Research (EMPA), Research Report No. 224, Dubendorf,
Switzerland, 1993 (in German).
5. Meier, U., and Winistoerfer, A., Retrofitting of Structures Through
External Bonding of CFRP Sheets, Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for
Concrete Structures, E & FN Spon, London, 1995, pp. 465-472.
6. Rostasy, F. S.; Hankers, C.; and Ranisch, E.-H., Strengthening of R/Cand P/C-Structures with Bonded FRP Plates, Advanced Composite Materials
in Bridges and Structures, CSCE, Sherbrooke, Canada, 1992, pp. 253-263.
7. Triantafillou, T. C., and Deskovic, N., Innovative Prestressing with
FRP Sheets: Mechanics of Short-Term Behavior, Journal of Engineering
Mechanics, ASCE, V. 117, No. 7, 1991, pp.1652-1672.
8. Triantafillou, T. C., and Plevris, N., Strengthening of R/C Beams
with Epoxy-Bonded Fiber Composite Materials, Materials and Structures,
RILEM, V. 25, 1992, pp. 201-211.
9. Triantafillou, T. C.; Deskovic, N.; and Deuring, M., Strengthening of
Concrete Structures with Prestressed Fiber Reinforced Plastic Sheets, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 89, No. 3, 1992, pp. 235-244.
10. Plevris, N., and Triantafillou, T. C., Time-Dependent Behavior of
RC Members Strengthened with FRP Laminates, Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, V. 120, No. 3, 1995, pp. 1016-1042.
11. Plevris, N.; Triantafillou, T. C.; and Veneziano, D., Reliability of
RC Members Strengthened with CFRP Laminates, Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, V. 121, No. 7, 1995, pp. 1037-1044.
12. Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M., RC Beams Strengthened with
GFRP Plates. I: Experimental Study, Journal of Structural Engineering,
ASCE, V. 117, No. 11, 1991, pp. 3417-3433.
13. Saadatmanesh, H., and Ehsani, M., RC Beams Strengthened with
GFRP Plates. II: Analysis and Parametric Stud, Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, V. 117, No. 11, 1991, pp. 3434-3455.
14. Katsumata, H.; Yoshirou, K.; and Toshikaza, T., Study with Carbon
Fiber for Earthquake-Resistant Capacity of Existing Reinforced Concrete

ACI Structural Journal/March-April 1998

Columns, Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Earthquake

Engineering, Tokyo, 1988, V. 7, pp. 517- 522.
15. Priestley, M. J. N.; Seible, F.; and Fyfe, E., Column Seismic Retrofit
Using Fiberglass/Epoxy Jackets, Advanced Composite Materials in
Bridges and Structures, CSCE, Sherbrooke, Canada, 1992, pp. 287-298.
16. Saadatmanesh, H.; Ehsani, M. R.; and Li, M. W., Behavior of Externally Confined Concrete Columns, Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, SP-138, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, 1992, pp. 249-265.
17. Kobatake, Y.; Kimura, K.; and Katsumata, H., A Retrofitting
Method for Reinforced Concrete Structures Using Carbon Fiber, FiberReinforced-Plastic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures: Properties and Applications, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1993, pp. 435-450.
18. Nanni, A.; Norris, M. S.; and Bradford, N. M., Lateral Confinement
of Concrete Using FRP Reinforcement, Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, SP-138, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, 1992, pp. 193-209.
19. Ohuchi, H.; Tanaka, K.; and Kobatake, Y., Carbon Fiber Retrofit of
the Example B Bridge, Seismic Design and Retrofitting of Reinforced
Concrete Bridges, edited by R. Park, 1994, pp. 737-748.
20. Berset, J.-D., Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beams for
Shear Using FRP Composites, MSc thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Jan. 1992.
21. Uji, K., Improving Shear Capacity of Existing Reinforced Concrete
Members by Applying Carbon Fiber Sheets, Transactions of the Japan
Concrete Institute, 1992, V. 14, pp. 253-266.
22. Dolan, C. W.; Rider, W.; Chajes, M. J.; and DeAscanis, M., Prestressed Concrete Beams Using Non-Metallic Tendons and External Shear
Reinforcement, Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, SP-138, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1992, pp. 475-495.
23. Al-Sulaimani, G. J.; Sharif, A.; Basunbul, I. A.; Baluch, M. H.; and Ghaleb, B. N., Shear Repair for Reinforced Concrete by Fiberglass Plate Bonding, ACI Structural Journal, V. 91, No. 3, July-Aug. 1994, pp. 458-464.
24. Ohuchi, H.; Ohno, S.; Katsumata, H.; Kobatake, Y.; Meta, T.; Yamagata,
K.; Inokuma, Y.; and Ogata, N., Seismic Strengthening Design Technique
for Existing Bridge Columns with CFRP, Seismic Design and Retrofitting
of Reinforced Concrete Bridges, edited by R. Park, 1994, pp. 495-514.
25. Chajes, M. J.; Januska, T. F.; Mertz, D. R.; Thomson, T. A.; and
Finch, W. W., Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beams Using
Externally Applied Composite Fabrics, ACI Structural Journal, V. 92, No.
3, May-June 1995, pp. 295-303.
26. Malvar, L. J.; Warren, G. E.; and Inaba, C., Rehabilitation of Navy
Pier Beams with Composite Sheets, Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement
for Concrete Structures, E & FN Spon, London, 1995, pp. 534-540.
27. Vielhaber, J., and Limberger, E., Upgrading of Concrete Beams
with a Local Lack of Shear Reinforcement, Federal Institute for Materials
Research and Testing (BAM), Unpublished Report, Berlin, Germany, 1995.
28. Sato, Y.; Ueda, T.; Kakuta, Y.; and Tanaka, T., Shear Reinforcing
Effect of Carbon Fiber Sheet Attached to Side of Reinforced Concrete
Beams, Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, edited
by M. M. El-Badry, 1996, pp. 621-627.
29. Eurocode No. 2, Design of Concrete Structures, Comit EuroInternational du Bton, Lausanne, 1992.
30. Triantafillou, T. C., and Fardis, M. N., Strengthening of Historic
Masonry Structures with Composite Materials, Materials and Structures,
V. 30, pp. 486-496.

115