Professional Documents
Culture Documents
TABLEOFCONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................6
2 REFERENCE GUIDELINES.....................................................................................................................6
3 ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE..........................................................................................................................7
3.1 Reduction factors.............................................................................................................................8
4 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE.............................................................................................................8
4.1 Basis of calculation.........................................................................................................................9
4.1.1 Initial situation..........................................................................................................................9
4.1.2 Service stresses......................................................................................................................9
4.2 Verification of deflections............................................................................................................10
4.3 Verification of crack widths.........................................................................................................11
4.4 Verification of bond interface cracking....................................................................................12
4.4.1 Debonding...............................................................................................................................12
4.4.2 Concrete cover de-lamination............................................................................................13
4.5 Allowable stresses.........................................................................................................................13
5 PRE-STRENGTHENING FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT....................................................................14
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................15
6.1 Ultimate Limit State.......................................................................................................................15
6.2 Serviceability Limit State..............................................................................................................15
7 REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................17
MAIN ROADS Western Australia Page 5 of 21
NOTATION
y
]
= FRP safety coefficient
y
L
= coefficient accounting for bond characteristic of the
reinforcement and the type of loading
o = crack width
e
0
= initial strain level in concrete
e
c
= strain level in concrete
e
c0
= initial concrete strain
e
cu
= ultimate strain in concrete
e
]
= strain level in the FRP reinforcement
e
]u
= design rupture strain level in the FRP reinforcement
e
]d
= design strain level in the FRP reinforcement
e
]c
= effective strain level in the FRP reinforcement
e
s1
= tensile steel strain
e
s2
= compressive steel strain
= tension stiffening coefficient
m
= bond-dependent coefficient for flexure
p
]
= balanced reinforcement ratio
p
]b
= FRP reinforcement ratio
p
s
= steel reinforcement ratio
p
c,c]]
= ratio of effective concrete area in tension
b
= average bond strength
]
= FRP strength reduction factor
o
b
= thickness of the NSM CFRP plate
b = width of rectangular cross section
b
b
= width of the NSM CFRP plate
b
]
= width of the externally bonded CFRP plate
J = effective depth of the member
J
1
= distance from centroid of tensile steel to extreme
tensile fibre
J
2
= distance from centroid of compressive steel to
extreme compressive fibre
'
c
= specified compressive strength of concrete
cs
= stress level in concrete at service loads
ctm
= mean value of the concrete tensile strength
]
= stress level in the FRP reinforcement
]d
= design stress level in the FRP reinforcement
]s
= stress level in the FRP caused by a moment within
the elastic range of the member
]u
= FRP design ultimate strength
s
= stress in steel reinforcement
ss
= stress level in steel reinforcement at service loads
x
0
(3)
Figure 1: Initial situation (from FIB 14).
b) Service Stresses
Calculations to verify the serviceability limit state can be performed assuming an elastic
strain and stress distribution. Whereas the neutral axis depth of RC members, according to
a linear elastic calculation, is independent from the acting moment, this is no longer the case
for a strengthened section as a result of the initial strains before strengthening. Assuming
linear elastic material behaviour and that the concrete does not sustain tension, the cracked
section analysis can be based on Fig. 2.
From the equilibrium of forces (compression forces in the concrete, N
c
, and in the steel, N
s2
,
tension forces in steel, N
s1
, and in the FRP, N
]
) and strain compatibility, the depth of the
neutral axis x
c
can be derived from (see Fig. 2):
MAIN ROADS Western Australia Page 10 of 21
1
2
bx
c
2
+(n
s
- 1)A
s2
(x
c
-J
2
) = n
s
A
s1
(J - x
c
) +n
]
A
]
jb - [1 +
s
0
s
c
x
c
[ (4)
where n
]
= E
]
E
c
.
The stresses in the component materials can be expressed as:
cs
= E
c
e
c
= H
k
j
1
2
bx
c
[b -
x
c
3
+ (n
s
-1)A
s2
[1 -
d
2
x
c
(b - J
2
) -n
s
A
s1
[
d
x
c
- 1 (b -J)[
-1
(5)
Eq (5) is the equilibrium equation with respect to the extreme compression fibre derived from
the balancing the moments about the concrete compressive force.
ss
= E
s
e
c
[
d
x
c
-1 (6)
]s
= E
]
je
c
[
h
x
c
- 1 - e
0
[ (7)
Noting that e
c
can be related to e
0
(Eq. 3) in the form: e
c
e
0
= (H
0
H
k
) (x
c
x
0
).
To comply with MRWA recommendations, the resultant stresses will have to satisfy the
limitations given in Section 6.
Figure 2: Elastic strain and stress distribution (from FIB 14).
4.2 Verification of Deflections
Given the relatively small cross-section of the externally added FRP material required to
achieve the required increase of the flexural capacity, the stiffness of the strengthening
system is usually insufficient to limit curvatures and deflections of the strengthened structural
member under service loads. Hence deflection is not considered as a controlling criterion in
preparing the strengthening design. However for completeness the following information on
various deflection calculation methods is included.
FIB14 discusses the early method introduced by CEB (Comit Euro-International du Bton)
in 1993, called CEB bilinear method, for predicting deflections at SLS. According to this
method, the mean deflection of the strengthened member can be calculated as:
w = w
0
+ w
0
[
w
cr
w
0
- 1 (8)
MAIN ROADS Western Australia Page 11 of 21
where w
0
and w
c
are the deflections in the uncracked and fully cracked state, respectively,
and is a distribution coefficient. Such coefficient can be introduced only if H
k
> H
c
, with
H
c
the cracking moment. For a rectangular beam, the cracking moment can be
approximately be expressed as H
c
=
ctm
(bb
2
)6, where
ctm
is the mean value of the
concrete tensile strength. Then can be derived as
= 1 - y
L
[
H
c
H
k
,
u
(9)
where u.S y
L
1, and equal to 0.5 in poor bonding condition and short term loads and
equal to unity in good bonding condition and long-term loading; the exponent o is set to
unity for normal strength concrete, and to 1.5 for high strength concrete.
For H
k
> H
0
, by classical elasticity analysis, considering identical loading type in both the
uncracked and fully cracked scenarios, the ratio w
c
w
0
can be expressed as:
w
cr
w
0
= [
M
0
L
c
I
c0
+
M
k
-M
0
L
c
I
cr
[
M
k
L
c
I
0
(10)
where: E
c
I
0
is the flexural stiffness in the uncracked state, being I
0
the moment of inertia of
the transformed uncracked section, and E
c
I
c
is the flexural stiffness in the fully cracked
state, being I
c
is the moment of the inertia of the transformed cracked section after
strengthening; I
c0
is the moment of inertia of the transformed cracked section before
strengthening.
4.3 Verification of Crack Widths
It is expected that the application of FRP will affect the crack spacing and width. In
particular, for RC members strengthened with externally bonded FRP, it is likely that new
cracks will appears between existing cracks. A consequence of an increased frequency of
cracking is a reduction of the crack widths and most guidelines do not consider it necessary
to verify the crack widths.
It is noted that the crack width limit is set to 0.3mm in both Eurocode 2 (EC2) and ACI318,
and, accordingly in ACI440. No reference has been made to the calculation of the crack
width of a FRP strengthened reinforced concrete flexural element in the Australian draft
guideline. TR55 indicates that in all normal cases, crack widths will not be excessive in case
where the FRP system has been properly installed (see TR57). TR55 refers to the crack
width formulations given in BS5400.4, which depend on the strain in the reinforcement, after
taking into account the transformed area of the FRP to evaluate the stress in the tension
steel.
From experimental studies (Nanni 2003), it has been established that there is an association
between the crack width, o, the degree of bond or bonded area between the FRP plate/strip
and the concrete, and the reinforcement ratios. In particular, in FIB14 the proposed
formulations for o demonstrate that the crack width is directly proportional to the effective
concrete tension area, A
c,c]]
, defined in EC2 as the area of concrete surrounding the tension
reinforcement, and inversely proportional to the degree of bonding of the reinforcement and
the effective area of reinforcement (A
cq
= A
s
+ n
]s
A
]
, with n
]s
= E
]
E
s
), in the form of
o = c
2
A
c,c]]
A
cq
v
(u
]
)
M
k
L
s
d
(11)
MAIN ROADS Western Australia Page 12 of 21
where A
c,c]]
= b
c,c]]
b, with b
c,c]]
the lesser between 2.S(b -J)b, (b -x)bS or b2 (EC2);
c
2
is a calibration factor set as 2.1; v
(u
]
)
= u
]
+ c
3
u
s
, with c
3
equal to 0.7, u
]
the bond
perimeter of the FRP strip/plate, and u
s
the bond perimeter of the reinforcing steel bar.
Following EC2 recommendation to fix o 0.3 mm, u
]
is derived as
u
]
c
4
A
c,c]]
A
cq
H
k
E
s
J
-c
5
u
s
(12)
where the calibration factors c
4
and c
5
are set as 10.1 and 1.4, respectively. FIB14 also
notes that sufficient bond area should be provided to bridge the cracks in such a way that
the crack width is limited under service load. For a constant reinforcement ratios p
]
=
A
]
(bJ) and, therefore, p
cq
= A
cq
(bJ) , the crack widths are likely to be smaller for FRP
strips of larger width and smaller thickness.
4.4 Verification of bond interface cracking
a) Debonding and development length
Teng et al (2001), ACI440 (2002) provide guidelines limits to the tensile strain level in the
FRP system to prevent delamination failure, in the form e
]c
m
e
]d
, i.e. the effective strain
level in the FRP, e
]c
, should not exceed the debonding strain, e
]d
, factored by the
empirically obtained bond-dependent coefficient
m
, which is a function of the unit stiffness
of the FRP system (Teng et al. 2001). The bond-dependent coefficient
m
should not
exceed 0.9, but can be limited to values as low as 0.7 by manufacturers guidelines. A
guidance to avoid debonding and delamination for both externally bonded FRP strips and
NSM bars is given in ACI440 (2008).
The bonding strength can be maximised by increasing the anchorage length (see Teng et
al., 2003, ACI440). The bond capacity of the FRP is developed over a critical length l
d
,
which is also known as anchorage length. While the anchorage length should not be less
than 150 mm, it is a function of the strip/plate/bar thickness t
]
and can be expressed in
empirical form proposed by Teng et al. (2001)
l
d
= (
c
i
)
-0.25
E
]
t
]
(13)
With reference to the notation used in Fig. 3, for NSM mounted rectangular plates, the
expression for the development length becomes (ACI440)
l
d
=
u
b
b
b
2(u
b
+b
b
):
b
]d
(14)
with
b
the average bond strength (reported in the range between 3.5 and 20.7 MPa in
ACI440), and
]d
the design stress of the FRP reinforcement. It should also be checked
that the maximum axial force, N
mux
, that can be carried out by the total number of strips, i.e.
N
mux
= A
]
E
]
e
]
, with A
]
the total cross sectional area of the applied FRP and e
]
as derived
from cross section equilibrium and strain compatibility, does not exceed the sum of the
tensile forces carried by each strip (FIB 14), i.e
N
],mux
=
m
c
1
k
b
b
b
E
]
t
]
ctm
(15)
MAIN ROADS Western Australia Page 13 of 21
Figure 3: Minimum grooves dimensions for NSM plates/bars (from ACI440).
With c
1
a calibration factor set as 0.64 for CFRP, and 1.u k
b
1.S, being the highest
value related to strips of larger width. If the total force N
mux
N
],mux
i
]u
= C
L
]u
-
e
]u
= C
L
e
]u
-
e
b
=
H
L
(J
]
-kJ)
I
c
E
c
e
]d
= u.41_
]
c
nL
]
t
]
u.9e
]u
e
]c
= u.uuS _
J
]
- c
c
_ - e
b
e
]d
e
c
= (e
]c
+e
b
) _
c
J
]
- c
_
e
s
= (e
]c
+e
b
) _
J -c
J
]
- c
_
s
= E
s
e
s
]c
= E
]
e
]c
E
c,
A
s
, A
f
c ~ 0.20d
MAIN ROADS Western Australia Page 20 of 21
Step 9 Calculate the internal force
resultants and check equilibrium.
Concrete stress block calculated using
ACI318-05. Approx. stress block factors may
also be calculated based on the parabolic
stress-strain relationship for concrete as
shown.
Force equilibrium is verified by checking the
initial estimate of c.
Step 11 Calculate flexural strength
components.
Steel contribution to bending:
FRP contribution to bending:
Step 10 Adjust c and repeat steps 6 to 9
until force equilibrium is satisfied.
[
1
=
4e
c
i
-e
c
6e
c
i
-2e
c
o
1
=
Se
c
i
e
c
-e
c
2
S[
1
e
c
i2
c =
A
s
s
+A
]
]c
o
1
c
i
[
1
b
Wheree
c
i
isthestraincorrespondingto
c
calculatedase
c
i
=
1.7
c
i
E
c
,
H
ns
= A
s
s
(J -
[
1
c
2
)
H
n]
= A
]
]c
(J
]
-
[
1
c
2
)
Step 12 Calculate design flexural strength
of the section. Select the appropriate
strength reduction . An additional strength
reduction factor is applied to the contribution
of the FRP system
]
Step 13 Check serviceability stresses in
the reinforcing steel and FRP
Calculate elastic depth to the cracked neutral
axis.
Calculate the stress level in the reinforcing
steel
H
n
= (H
ns
+
]
H
n]
)
Step 14 Check creep rupture limit at
service of FRP. Confirm that it is less than
allowable. Assume that the full service load is
sustained.
The sustained plus cyclic stress limit for FRP
is 0.55
]u
],s
=
s,s
_
E
]
E
s
] _
J
]
-kJ
J -kJ
_ -e
b
E
]
=
A
st
bd
, p =
A
st
bd
, p
p
=
A
p
bd
, A
st
, A
st,
and
A
p
- the area of compression steel reinforcement, tension steel reinforcement and FRP.
u
,
y
and
r
- ultimate strain of concrete at crushing, yield strain of steel, and ultimate strain of FRP at rupture respectively.
f
pr
- design stress of FRP at rupture,
p
= C
L
]u
-
, where
]u
-
is the characteristic strength provided by the manufacturer, C
E
is the environmental reduction
factor, 0.95 for interior exposure, and 0.85 for exterior exposure (Australian Draft Guideline, 2008) .
- bending strength reduction factor, decided according to AS 5100 (2004).
D,d and d are the depth of the slab, depth to tension steel and depth to compression steel respectively
H
u
= (e
u
J
n
-J
J
n
)E
s
A
s
_
yJ
n
2
-J
] +A
s
_J -
yJ
n
2
]
+(
-J
n
J
n
e
u
-e
p
)A
p
E
p
( -
yJ
n
2
)
A
= u.8S
c
yb
B
= E
s
e
u
A
s
-A
s
+(e
u
+e
p
)E
p
A
p
C
= -e
u
A
p
E
p
-e
u
J
A
s
E
s
where J
n
satisfies A
J
n
2
+B
J
n
+C
= u and
N
o
,
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
t
e
e
l
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
y
i
e
l
d
No
(Concrete
Crushing)
Yes, compression steel yields
No
Calculate maximum area ratio of FRP. To ensure yielding of the tension steel at the time of
concrete crushing,
max
= 0.75
p,b
p
p,b
=
c
s
+0.85]
c
yq
1
-p]
j
(s
u
D-q
1
d
q
1
d
-s
pi
)L
p
, where p
1
=
s
u
s
u
+s
j
and
o
s
= _
s
u
-s
j
s
u
+s
j
J
q
1
d-d
q
1
d
E
s
J
>
s
u
-s
j
s
u
+s
j
J
Calculate area ratio of FRP for balanced failure when FRP rupture and concrete crushing
occur simultaneously,
p,bb
p
p,bb
=
0.85]
c
y
q
3
D
d
+p
s
s
L
s
-p]
j
]
pr
, where p
3
=
s
u
s
u
+s
r
+s
pi
, and e
s
= (1 -
d
q
3
)e
u
e
Try a cross section area ratio of FRP,
p
= A
p
/bd <
max
A
= u.8S
c
yb
B
= -u.8S
c
yb -(e
+e
p
)A
s
E
s
-A
s
-A
p
p
C
= (e
+e
p
)E
s
A
s
+(A
s
+A
p
p
)
H
u
= [
d
n
-d
|
-d
n
(e
+e
p
)A
s
i
E
s
[
yd
n
2
-J
i
+
A
s
[J -
yd
n
2
+A
p
p
[ -
yd
n
2
where J
n
satisfies A
J
n
2
+B
J
n
+C
= u and
H
u
= A
s
i
_
yJ
n
2
-J
i
] +A
s
_J -
yJ
n
2
]
+A
p
p
( -
yJ
n
2
)
Where J
n
= (A
s
+A
p
p
-A
s
i
)
H
u
= A
s
i
_
yJ
n
2
-J
i
] +A
s
_J -
yJ
n
2
]
+(
-J
n
J
n
e
u
-e
p
)A
p
E
p
( -
yJ
n
2
)
A
= u.8S
c
i
ybB
= (A
s
i
-A
s
)
+(e
u
+e
p
)E
p
A
p
= -e
u
A
p
E
p
where J
n
satisfiesA
J
n
2
+B
J
n
+C
= uand
Calculate M
u
p
p,cj
=
0.85]
c
y
d
n
d
+(p
-p)]
j
]
pr
J
n
= (e
+e
J)(e
+e
)
Calculate minimum area ratio of
FRP for yielding of the compression
steel,
p,cy
where d
n
is the depth of neutral axis
p
p,cj
=
0.85]
c
yq
2
d
d
+(p
-p)]
j
L
p
(s
p
-s
pi
)
e
p
= e
u
( -p
2
J
)p
2
J
Calculate minimum area ratio of
FRP for yielding of the
compression steel,
p,cy
where
p
2
= e
u
(e
u
-e
), and
Yes
(FRP
Rupture)
p
p
p
p,bb
?
N
o
,
c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
s
t
e
e
l
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
y
i
e
l
d
Does M
u
meet strengthening
requirement?
Yes
Finish
p
p
p
p,c
? p
p
p
p,c
?