International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),  INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CI...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volu...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Seismic response of frp strengthened rc frame

1,252 views
1,162 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,252
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
109
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Seismic response of frp strengthened rc frame

  1. 1. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print)ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online)Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), pp. 305-321 IJCIET© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.aspJournal Impact Factor (2012): 3.1861 (Calculated by GISI) IAEMEwww.jifactor.com SEISMIC RESPONSE OF FRP STRENGTHENED RC FRAME Shaikh Zahoor Khalid 1 S.B. Shinde2 1 2 P.G. Student Dept. of Civil Associate Professor Dept. of Civil Engineering, J.N.E.C., Aurangabad Engineering, J.N.E.C., Aurangabad (M.S.) India. (M.S.) India. E-mail : szahoor555@gmail.com E-mail : sb_shinde@yahoo.co.in ABSTRACT The use of fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) materials is becoming attractive solution to retrofitting, strengthening and constructing column-like structural systems. The method is considered superior to conventional concrete and steel jacketing methods in terms of confinement strength; post-retrofit ductility, sectional area, weight, corrosion resistance; application ease and overall project costs. Axial strength and ductility increase of concrete columns is needed whenever repair and strengthening are involved. Repair may be required when columns are damaged under excessive external loads or due to erosion in exposed environments. Strengthening may be required when there is a change of structural use or removal of some adjacent load bearing structural members. Concrete jacketing, though has a lower cost, simply adds weight and cross sectional area to the original structure and may be undesirable. On the contrary, FRP composites, initially developed for aerospace and automobile applications, are found to be a very promising material for civil engineering applications because of their high strength/weight ratio, high corrosion resistance, ease of installation, and relatively low cost of maintenance. The aim of the present research was to recover the structural properties that the Frame had before the seismic action by providing both column and beams cracks with FRP laminate and to prove that FRP can be used for retrofitting for cracked sections. The driving principals in the design and the outcomes of the study are presented in the paper. Comparisons between original and repaired structures are discussed in terms of global and local performances. In addition to the validation of the proposed technique, the results will represent a reference database for the development of design criteria for the seismic repair of RC frames using FRP. Keywords: Fiber reinforced plastic (FRP), Axial Strength, Concrete Jacketing, Retrofitting, 305
  2. 2. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME1. INTRODUCTION Fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) confined concrete under static axial, flexural and cyclic orseismic lateral loads have been under investigation to develop retrofit technologies and newconstruction methods. Over the past twenty years, a few models were developed for FRPconfined concrete. No one model can be applied directly for design with confidence.Moreover, all models for the prediction of ultimate strength of the hybrid column aredeveloped based on the first confinement model that is developed by Richart et al. in 1927.The only changes were the difference in constant coefficient and the power coefficientcorresponding to the confining pressure. They are all developed from regression analysis ofthe researchers’ experimental data. A few stress-strain relationships were also developed soas to model the load-deformation behavior of the confined concrete. These models mainlyrelied on previously developed models for concrete or soil behaviors under triaxial stresses orconfinement stresses. Subsequent modifications were made to fit in the use of FRPconfinement.[1-7] Finally, it should be pointed out that all these models are only valid, if accurate, for the useof FRP encased concrete construction method, but not for retrofitting or strengthening ofconcrete. The reason is that from the preceding experiments, FRP were used to wrap onsound concrete instead of cracked concrete, which can have a very different behavior uponinitial loading. The FRP materials were also wrapped on initially unstressed concretespecimens. When the specimens were prepared and loaded, both concrete and FRP werestressed together from scratch. In reality, for the case of strengthening or retrofitting,concrete columns are already under stress. The FRP is used to wrap around stressed columnsafterwards. The strength increase by FRP confinement may or may not be the as much aspredicted because the Poisson’s ratio of damaged concrete is much larger than that ofconcrete stressed in the elastic region, hence activating the FRP confinement much earlierthan one might expect due to substantial radial dilation. Plastic zone of concrete is entered notlong after additional loading after wrap. Ultimate strain will definitely be different in thiscase. [9-12] Amirr M Malik, Hamid Saadatmanesh[8] presented analytical models to calculate thestresses in the strengthened beams, and the shear force resisted by the composite plates beforecracking and after formation of flexural cracks. The anisotropic (orthotropic) behavior of thecomposite plates or fabric has been considered in the analytical model. The companion paperextends this discussion into post cracking behavior at the ultimate load, where the diagonalshear cracks are formed. The method has been developed assuming perfect bond betweenFRP and concrete (i.e. no slip), and using compatibility of the strains in the FRP and theconcrete beam. Amer M. Ibrahim, Mohammed Sh. Mahmood[13] presented an analysis model forreinforced concrete beams externally reinforced with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP)laminates using finite elements method adopted by ANSYS. The finite element models aredeveloped using a smeared cracking approach for concrete and three dimensional layeredelements for the FRP composites. The results obtained from the ANSYS finite elementanalysis are compared with the experimental data for six beams with different conditionsfrom researches (all beams are deficient shear reinforcement). The comparisons are made forload-deflection curves at mid-span; and failure load. The results from finite element analysiswere calculated at the same location as the experimental test of the beams. Baris Binici, Guney Ozcebe, Ramazan Ozcelik[14] Proposed that an urgent need toretrofit deficient mid-rise reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings in Turkey. For thispurpose, an efficient FRP retrofit scheme has been developed previously, in which hollowclay brick infill walls can be utilized as lateral load resisting elements after retrofitting. The 306
  3. 3. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEMEmain premise of this practical retrofit scheme was to limit inter-storey deformations by FRPstrengthened infill walls that are integrated to the boundary frame members by means of FRPanchors. Based on the analytical model that was previously verified extensively bycomparison with test results, a simplified model was proposed for use in displacement baseddesign of FRPs for deficient RC frame buildings. Researchers have been going on in the last two decades in the United States, Canada,Japan, Singapore, and some other countries. Significant contributions were mainly founded inthe past ten years in the US and Japan. Besides the above mentioned studies there have beenseveral studies on FRP, all these studies are based on testing columns under different loadconditions or testing beams under different load conditions. Experimental testing andanalytical models have been studied but differently for beams and columns and not as asingle unit i.e RC frame. Hence there is a gap in knowledge of the behaviour of FRP wrappedRC frame when studied as a unit [15-16].2. PRESENT STUDY This paper presents findings of a programme where RC frame has been analysed usingfinite element analysis in STAAD PRO software. Different number of models with differentthicknesses of FRP has been made and results have been compared for various location ofcracks. 2.1 Design Parameters Considered:- Beam cross Section: 300mmx500mm Column Cross Section: 300mmx500mm Beam length: 5m Column Length: 4m (Floor to Floor) Diameter of Steel Bar: 20mm Thickness of FRP Sheet: 1mm 2.2 Material Constants :- a. Concrete: Density= 25kn/m3 Elasticity= 2.5x107kn/m2 Poisson’s Ratio=0.15 b. Steel: Density= 78.5kn/m3 Elasticity= 2.1x108 kn/m2 Poisson’s Ratio=0.15 c. FRP: Density= 16kn/m3 (As per ACI 440.2R-02) Elasticity= 3.6 x107kn/m2 Poisson’s Ratio=0.17 2.3 Method of Analysis:- Different frame models namely 2bay 3storey and 3 bay 5 storey are made using STAAD.PRO.V8i software and are analysed for different crack locations and various thicknesses of FRP. Line models of 2bay 3storey and 3bay 5storey can be seen in fig 1 and fig 2 respectively. For analysis purpose each frame model i.e. 3bay 5Storey and 2bay 3storey is distinguished into three groups namely Model I, Model II and MODELIII depending upon the different crack patterns. Each group consists of • Sound RC Frame 307
  4. 4. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME • RC Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load • RC Frame Retrofitted Using FRP Laminate Fig. 1: 2 Bay 3 Storey line Model Fig. 2: 3 Bay 5 Storey line Model2.4 3Bay 5Storey:- In order to validate the numerical representation of the reinforced concrete beams andcolumns strengthening with Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP), lateral loading is considered foreach storey for the analysis of Frame. Results and comparisons are based on this analysis.For the present paper the analysis is done at different crack location and the thickness of FRPused for wrapping the cracked section is 1mm. Three different frame models with differentcrack location will be analysed using the proposed STAAD PRO finite element analysis.Model IA) Sound RC frame: This is a solid RC frame which is subjected to designlateral loads on each storey. The analysis of the behaviour ofthis frame for the stresses developed and storey displacementdue to the applied lateral load is observed. Refer Fig. 3 Fig. 3 : Sound RC FrameB) RC frame cracked due to earthquake load: This frame consists of three different cracks developed dueto lateral load. The first crack at an integration point is shownwith a red circle outline, the second crack with a green outlineand the third crack with a pink outline.(refer fig4).Theanalysis of the behaviour of this frame for the stressesdeveloped and storey displacement due to the applied lateralload is observed. This frame consists of three different cracks developed due tolateral load. The first crack at an integration point is shown with ared circle outline, the second crack with a green outline and thethird crack with a pink outline.(refer fig4).The analysis of the Fig. 4 : R.C. Frame Crackedbehaviour of this frame for the stresses developed and storey During Earthquake Loaddisplacement due to the applied lateral load is observed. (Pattern I) 308
  5. 5. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEMEC) RC frame retrofitted by FRP laminate: In this frame the cracked sections mentioned in the aboveframe are wrapped using 1mm thick FRP laminate. Thecracked sections are wrapped as a single unit long theperiphery. Again the analysis of the behaviour of this framefor the stresses developed and storey displacement due to theapplied lateral load is observed. Refer Fig. 5 Fig. 5: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern I) The stress pattern and storey displacement obtained from the analysis of RC frame crackeddue to earthquake load and RC frame retrofitted by FRP laminate are compared with thestress pattern and storey displacement obtained from the analysis of Sound RC frame. As the frames of Model I are analysed and compared, similar analysis and comparison isdone for Model II and Model III frames for different crack locations. The Sound RC frame issame as mentioned above in Model I for both Model II and Model III. RC frame cracked dueto earthquake load and RC frame retrofitted by FRP laminate for Model II is shown in fig 6aand 6b respectively, similarly RC frame cracked due to earthquake load and RC frameretrofitted by FRP laminate for Model III is shown in fig 7a and 7b respectively. Fig. 6a : R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load (Pattern II) Fig. 6b: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern II) 309
  6. 6. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 7a : R.C. Frame Cracked During Fig. 7b: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Earthquake Load (Pattern III) Laminate (Pattern III)3. RESULT AND COMPARISON Results obtained from the different frame models for stresses and storey displacements arecompared. For different crack locations, the cracks developed are in beam as well as incolumns. So foe better comparison of the results the beam stresses and the column stressesare compared individually Model I3.1 Beam Stress Pattern Comparison Fig. 8a: Sound R.C. Frame Fig.8b: R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load (Pattern I) 310
  7. 7. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 8c: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern I) It can be seen from the beam stress pattern developed in the sound RC frame due to lateralloads (fig. 8a), these stresses are disturbed when the cracks are developed due to earthquakeload (fig. 8b), and the variations in the stress pattern can be observed near the crack locations.But when the same frame i.e. RC frame cracked due to effect of earthquake load is retrofittedwith FRP laminate of 1mm thickness, the original stress pattern and strength as that of thesound RC frame is regained (fig. 8c).3.2 Column Stress Pattern Comparison Fig.9b: R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load Fig. 9a: Sound R.C. Frame (Pattern I) 311
  8. 8. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 9c: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern I) It can be seen from the column stress pattern developed in the sound RC frame due tolateral loads (fig. 9a), these stresses are disturbed when the cracks are developed due toearthquake load (fig. 9b), and the variations in the stress pattern can be observed near thecrack locations. But when the same frame i.e. RC frame cracked due to effect of earthquakeload is retrofitted with FRP laminate of 1mm thickness, the original stress pattern andstrength as that of the sound RC frame is regained (fig. 9c).3.3 Storey Displacement In the table given below the storey displacement in x-direction of Sound RC frame, RCframe cracked due to earthquake load and RC frame retrofitted (wrapped) by FRP laminateare compared. z Table I: Comparison for storey displacement in x-direction for Model I Storey Displacement in x-direction (mm) Storey RC frame cracked RC frame retrofitted Sound RC frame during earthquake load by FRP laminate 0 5.281 5.283 5.281 1 36.072 36.105 36.077 2 66.764 66.848 66.777 3 92.466 93.043 92.536 4 111.369 114.533 111.711 5 122.464 134.453 123.485 From the table above it can be observed that when the lateral load is acted upon the RCframe cracked due to earthquake load, the storey displacement varies as compared to thesound RC frame. The variations of the storey displacement can be seen on the storeys wherethe cracks are developed in the beams or columns. In the above case the cracks are located onthe 4th and 5th storey, but when the crack frame is retrofitted with FRP laminate the original 312
  9. 9. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEMEstorey displacement is observed as that of sound RC frame. Considering the storeydisplacement the graph is plotted (fig. 10). Fig10: Storey Displacement In X-Direction Model II3.4 Beam Stress Pattern Comparison Fig. 11a: Sound R.C. Frame Fig.11b: R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load (Pattern II) 313
  10. 10. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 11c: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern II)3.5 Column Stress Pattern Comparison Fig.12b: R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load Fig. 12a: Sound R.C. Frame (Pattern II) 314
  11. 11. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 12c: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern II)3.6 Storey Displacement In the table given below the storey displacement in x-direction of Sound RC frame, RCframe cracked due to earthquake load and RC frame retrofitted (wrapped) by FRP laminateare compared. Table II: Comparison for storey displacement in x-direction for Model II Storey Displacement in x-direction (mm) Storey RC frame cracked RC frame retrofitted Sound RC frame during earthquake load by FRP laminate 0 5.281 5.283 5.281 1 36.072 36.037 36.071 2 66.764 66.836 66.774 3 92.466 91.482 92.468 4 111.369 118.739 112.056 5 122.464 130.529 123.237 315
  12. 12. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig23: Storey Displacement In X-Direction Model III3.7 Beam Stress Pattern Comparison Fig. 13a: Sound R.C. Frame Fig.13b: R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load (Pattern III) 316
  13. 13. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 13c: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern III)3.8 Column Stress Pattern Comparison Fig.14b: R.C. Frame Cracked During Earthquake Load (Pattern III) Fig. 14a: Sound R.C. Frame 317
  14. 14. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig. 14c: R.C. Frame Retrofitted (Wrapped) by F.R.P. Laminate (Pattern III)3.9 Storey Displacement In the table given below the storey displacement in x-direction of Sound RC frame, RCframe cracked due to earthquake load and RC frame retrofitted (wrapped) by FRP laminateare compared. Table III: Comparison for storey displacement in x-direction for Model III Storey Displacement in x-direction (mm) Storey RC frame cracked RC frame retrofitted Sound RC frame during earthquake load by FRP laminate 0 5.281 5.442 5.295 1 36.072 34.887 36.010 2 66.764 70.753 67.310 3 92.466 99.872 93.459 4 111.369 118.890 112.404 5 122.464 131.520 123.677 318
  15. 15. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME Fig35: Storey Displacement In X-Direction As the stresses in beams, stresses in columns and storey displacement are obtained andcompared for Model I, similar analysis and comparison is done for Model II (fig. 11a, 11b,11c and Fig. 12a, 12b,12c) and Model III(fig.13a, 13b, 13c and 14a, 14b, 14c ). In all themodels after retrofitting the RC frame cracked due to earthquake load, the stress pattern andthe strength obtained is in good agreement with that of the original sound RC frame.Similarly, the storey displacement for Model II (table 2, fig. 14) and Model III (table 3, fig.15) can be regained for the RC frame cracked due to earthquake load after retrofitting it withFRP laminate.4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Different techniques have been developed in order to achieve local modification ofstructural components. Reinforced concrete jacketing, steel profile jacketing and steelencasement have been widely used in the past. All of them were characterised bydisadvantaged related to constructability (i.e. difficulty of ensuring perfect bond andcollaboration between new and old parts, loss of space, construction time and high impact onbuilding function) and durability issues. Innovative techniques based on FRP material appearto be interesting alternatives to those solutions, along with high structural effectiveness. FRPis light and easy to install, their application does not imply loss of space and in some cases itcan be performed without interrupting the use of structure. This numerical solution adopted to evaluate the ultimate shear strength of RC framewrapped with FRP laminate is a simple, cheap and rapid way compared with experimentalfull scale set test. The results obtained demonstrate that the use of FRP laminate is far moreeffective and easy than reinforced concrete jacketing and steel profile jacketing instrengthening RC frame. The present models can be used in additional studies to developdesign rules for strengthening RC frame using FRP laminates. The main outcomes of the present study can be summarised as follows: 319
  16. 16. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME • The results confirmed that FRP laminate allowed the RC frame retrofitted, to withstand the lateral loads as the original RC frame. • RC frame retrofitted with FRP laminates showed a large displacement capacity without exhibiting any loss of strength and was able to provide energy dissipation very similar to that of the original sound RC frame. • The cyclic behaviour of RC frame retrofitted with FRP laminates was stable and no significant effect of cumulative damage was observed on the strengthened elements • FRP laminates are a better option for retrofitting because the can withstand the seismic loads.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors wish to thank the Management, Principal, Head of Civil EngineeringDepartment and staff of Jawaharlal Nehru engineering College, Aurangabad and Authoritiesof Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University for their support. The authors expresstheir deep and sincere thanks to Mr. Karim M. Pathan (Consulting Structural Engineer,Aurangabad) for his tremendous support and valuable guidance from time to time.REFERENCES[1] Yousef A. Al-Salloum, Hussein M. Elsanadedy, Aref A. Abadel (2011), “Behavior of FRP-confined concrete after high temperature exposure”, Construction and Building Materials, Vol.25, pp. 838-850.[2] Prof. Björn Täljsten (2007) “ Use of FRP in Construction in Scandinavia – Experiences and a Verification test”, Composites & Polycon.[3] Tim Ibell, Antony Darby, Steve Denton (2009), “Research issues related to the appropriate use of FRP in concrete structures”, Construction and Building Materials Vol.23, pp.1521-1528.[4] R.V.Balendran, T.M Rana, T.Masood and W.G.Tang (2002), “Application of FRP bars an reinforcement in civil engineering structures”, Structural Survey Vol.20, pp.62-72.[5] Khaled Soudki; Ehab El-Salakawy and Brent Craig 2007, “Behavior of CFRP Strengthened Reinforced Concrete Beams in Corrosive Environment”, Journal of Composites for Construction, Vol.11, No. 3, pp. 291-298.[6] H.W. Zhang, S.T. Smith, (2011) “FRP-to-concrete joint assemblages anchored with multiple FRP anchors”, Composite Structures, pp. 1-12.[7] L.C. Hollaway (2010), “A review of the present and future utilisation of FRP composites in the civil infrastructure with reference to their important in-service properties”, Construction and Building Materials Vol.24, pp. 2419–2445.[8] Amirr M Malik, Hamid Saadatmanesh (1998), “Analytical study Of Reinforced Concrete Beams With Web-Bonded Fiber Reinforced Plastic Plates or Fabrics”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol.95, No3.[9] Stephen J. Foster (1999), “Design and Detailing of High Strength Concrete Columns”, UNICIV Report No. R375, ISBN: 85841 342 6,[10] Supaviriyakit, T., Pornpongsaroj, P. and Pimanmas. (2004), “A. Finite element analysis of FRP-strengthened RC beams”, Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol., 26(4) : pp.497-507[11] Meisam Safari Gorji. (2009), “Analysis of FRP Strengthened Reinforced Concrete Beams Using Energy Variation Method”, World Applied Sciences Journal 6 (1), pp.105-111. 320
  17. 17. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME[12] Tavio T. Tata A. (2009), “ Predicting Nonlinear Behavior and Stress-Strain Relationship of Rectangular Confined Reinforced Concrete Columns with ANSYS”; Civil Engineering Dimension, Vol.11, No. 1, pp. 23-31.[13] Amer M. Ibrahim, Mohammed Sh. Mahmood. (2009), “Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with FRP Laminates”, European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol.30 No.4, pp.526-541.[14] Baris Binici, Guney Ozcebe, Ramazan Ozcelik. (2007) , “Analysis and design of FRP composites for seismic retrofit of infill walls in reinforced concrete frames”, Composites: Part B 38 pp. 575–583[15] J.G. Teng, H. Yuan, J.F. Chen. (2006), “FRP-to-concrete interfaces between two adjacent cracks: Theoretical model for de-bonding failure”, International Journal of Solids and Structures 43 pp.5750–5778.[16] C. Faella, E. Martinelli, E. Nigro. (2008), “Formulation and validation of a theoretical model for intermediate de-bonding in FRP-strengthened RC beams”, Composites: Part B 39 pp. 645–655. 321

×