Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites: Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Strengthening slabs using externally-bonded strip composites: Analysis of concrete covers on the strengthening
Amen Agbossou a,*, Laurent Michel b, Manuel Lagache a, Patrice Hamelin b
a b

Laboratoire Optimisation de la Conception et Ingnierie de lEnvironnement (LOCIE), PolytechSavoie, Universit de Savoie, 73376 Le Bourget du Lac Cedex, France Laboratoire de Gnie Civil et Ingnirie Environnementale (LGCIE), Universit CBL Lyon I, 82 Boulevard N. Bohr, 69622 Villeurbanne Cedex, France

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
This study pertains to the experimental and theoretical behaviour of slabs strengthened by bre reinforced polymer (FRP). The experimental results show that FRP signicantly increases punching failure stress, resulting in a reduction of slab rotation around the loading column. The theoretical investigation presents a nite element model for the bending of strengthened slabs. The developed model considers the concrete as a 3D multi-layered non-linear material and explicitly takes into account the steel reinforcement and the FRP strips. The proposed model is then used to analyse the effects of a concrete cover on the reinforcement and repairs. In the analysed cases, the results show that an average reduction in the concrete shear modulus, between steel rod and FRP, of more than 30% leads to signicant reductions of stress and slab stiffness. 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 22 November 2007 Accepted 6 April 2008 Available online 20 June 2008 Keywords: A. Carbon bre A. Plates B. Interface/inter-phase C. Damage mechanics C. Finite element analysis (FEA)

1. Introduction Due to the increasingly severe conditions (legal and used) of civil engineering structures, the reinforcement and repair of works with composite material is increasingly recommended [1]. There are many studies on the strengthening of works done with bre reinforced polymer (FRP). Most of these concern beams [2,3]. These studies analyse: (i) the effects of bonded bre-reinforced composites in the strengthening of structural materials and on techniques for bonding, (ii) the structural strengthening of concrete using unstressed or prestressed composite, (iii) environmental durability, time-dependent behaviour and fatigue, and (iv) design and specication for the structural strengthening of beams. None of these studies considers the effect of the concrete, between the steel rods and the FRP, on the behaviour of the strengthened structure. The rst section of this study analyses the strengthening of slabs using externally-bonded FRP composites, as well as indicates the relation between the bending behaviour and the mechanical properties of concrete between FRP and steel rods. In the second section, the experimental results are presented, illustrating the effect of FRP on the stiffness and punching stress of slabs. In Section 3, a theoretical analysis is developed, simulating the bending behaviour of slabs reinforced by FRP strips. In this analysis, the concrete of the area between FRP strips and lower steel reinforcements is regarded as multi-layer non-linear concrete. Finally, the proposed model is used to analyse the effects
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 (0) 479 758 850; fax: +33 (0) 479 758 144. E-mail address: Amen.agbossou@univ-savoie.fr (A. Agbossou). 1359-8368/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2008.04.002

of the layer of concrete covering the steel on the bending behaviour of FRP-strengthened slabs.

2. Experimental analysis 2.1. Experiment preparation and test scheme Four steel-reinforced concrete slabs of 1.25 m 1.25 m 0.1 m were made in laboratory conditions. The concrete was made to class C30. Table 1 presents the ratio of components in the concrete mixture and the actual mechanical properties. The compression tests were carried out on 16 32 test samples in accordance with standard NF P 18-406. The tensile strengths were obtained by following NF P 18-408. The steel reinforcement was made from ST65 C welded square mesh (S = 636 mm2, s = 100 100, s = 9 mm 9 mm) for the lower side and ST35C welded square mesh (S = 385 mm2, s = 100 100, s = 7 mm 7 mm) for the upper side. The elastic limit of steel was 500 MPa. The minimum cover of steel rebars was 25 mm. Plastic wedges were used for spacing. The steel truss was centred following the symmetry axis of the slab in both directions. The composite reinforcement was made of ROCC UD carbon sheet developed by GTM. Two epoxy components, CAB and GTM ROCC, were used to impregnate and bond carbon bre reinforced polymer (CFRP) strips on slabs according to the recommendations of the manufacturer. The number of CFRP strips used was decided according to the desired strength of the slab. Therefore, n-layers (n = 1, 2, 3)

1126 Table 1 C30 concrete formulation Cement CPA 52.5 (kg/m3) 350 Water (l/m3) 192 Sand (kg/m3) 850 Rock (kg/m3) 1020

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

Compression strength (MPa) 36

Tensile strength (MPa) 3.3

ST35C

1280 F
100100

ST65C

e 1200

represented the number of CFRP strips used in x (0) and y (90) direction. The symbol [0n/90n] represents strengthening with n-layers of CFRP in x (0) and n-layers in y (90) direction. The thickness and the width of each strip layer were 1 and 5 mm, respectively. Table 2 presents the mechanical properties of the analysed slabs. The CFRP strips were positioned during a preliminary layout. Regularly-spaced CFRP strips were bonded to the lower face of the slab after the surface had been sandblasted (Fig. 1). The spacing between the middle of each parallel strip was 10 mm. The bonding was done according to the manufacturers recommendations. The resin was applied to the concrete and then CFRP bonding was used as a primer. Excess resin was removed by passing a roller with uniform pressure (Figs. 13). The slabs were placed on four 1.2 m lines with simple supports at the slab edges (Fig. 2). A 500 kN hydraulic jack was used to apply the load locally to a surface 10 10 cm in the centre of the slab.

Fig. 2. Loading system and slab sizes.

Table 2 (a) Mechanical properties and (b) presentation of the analysed slabs CFRP (a) Elastic modulus (GPa) Poissons ratio Tensile failure stresses (MPa) Crushing failure stresses (MPa) Density (kg/m3) Stressstrain relations Layer thickness (mm) Layer width (mm) Layers spacing (mm) (b) Slab R0: no CFRP Slab R1: one layer in x direction, one layer in y direction [01/901] 79.94 4.6 925 48 Linear elastic. Non-plastic 1 5 15 Concrete 30 0.2 2.5 35.4 2500 r Eb Steel 200 4 0.3 500 500 7850 Elasticplastic (perfect plasticity) Down ST 65C Up ST 35C

e 11e=e0 2

f with e0 2 Ecb

Slab R2: reinforced slab after initial pre-cracking: two layers in x direction, two layers in y direction, [02/902] Slab R3: three layers in x direction, three layers in y direction [03/903]

Fig. 1. CFRP slabs: (1) marking; (2) the carbon strips are impregnated and bonded on the concrete slab; (3) removing excess resin by rolling; (4) additional layering.

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

1127

Fig. 3. Location of the strain gauges on: (a) steel reinforcement; (b) CFRP material.

Slab R2 was pre-cracked before being reinforced in order to evaluate the effect of externally- bonded CFRP reinforcement on slab behaviour. Load, displacement, as well as steel and composite strains were measured during the slab loading. Two LVDT transducers (displacement range of 100 mm) were used to monitor displacement. The rst (LVDT1) was located on the top face of the slab, close to the jack. The second (LVDT2) was on the lower face, to monitor the central deection of the slab. A 1000 kN transducer located under the jack measured the load. Steel strain was measured by means of three 120 X strain gauges with a 10 mm grid length located on the lower steel rebars. They were used to measure strain in both directions of the steel truss (Fig. 3a). Then, strain gauges were placed on the CFRP strips in the middle of the slab in both directions (Fig. 3b). Five strain gauges were bonded onto the CFRP close to the critical punching perimeter. 2.2. Test results 2.2.1. Flexing behaviour: bending stiffness of strengthened slabs Fig. 4 shows the maximal load displacement curves and the load strain curves, which illustrate the effects of externally-bonded strip composites on the behaviour of the slab. Table 3 presents the main values of the experimental results. The composite reinforcement permits a signicant increase in slab stiffness. Indeed, the mid-span deection of R1 and R3-type slabs are reduced respectively by 35% and 45% (Fig. 4). An initial observation is that the cracking load of RC slab is increased by 40% for slab R1 and by 48% for slab R3. For slab R2, the cracking load does not increase signicantly. It is important to note that when the externally-bonded CFRP is applied after cracking, the stiffness of the RC slab is also increased (see Fig. 4 slab R2). It should also be stated that CFRP increases the initial cracking load of slabs (Table 3). In addition, it decreases the maximal bending displacement, while signicantly increasing the failure stress and stiffness of slabs after the concrete cover has been cracked. Therefore the total strain energy (integral of load displacement curves) tends to decrease with the presence of CFRP strips and with the increase in the number of strips.

2.2.2. Ultimate behaviour: punching shear failures The failure of all slabs occurs by punching. The composite reinforcement increases the failure load by approximately 15% for slabs reinforced by one layer (R1: [01/901]) of CFRP strip and by approximately 30% for slabs reinforced by three layers (R3: [03/ 903]). In order to observe the punch cracking pattern in the slabs, each slab was cut down in the middle, revealing a cross section of the slab. The punching shear crack pattern consists of one or two main cracks. As in Mentrey [4], the main crack may be divided into three straight lines, each with a different angle (a1, a2 and a3). The steel rebars decrease these angles. Consequently, the number of angles depends on the number of steel rebar layers. For a slab with two punching cracks, the second crack corresponds to a straight line with angle a4. The analysis of crack patterns in slabs R1, R2 and R3 shows that the external bonding of CFRP on the lower surface affects the punching mechanism (Figs. 5 and 6), which results in a slight modication of angle a2. The value of a2 decreases (for R1 and R3) as CFRP thickness increases (Table 4). For the initially pre-cracked slab R2, repair with CFRP limits the two main crack mechanisms as shown in slabs R1 and R3. A detailed analysis of crack patterns in slab R2 shows also that the CFRP may change the initial cracking failure mode [5]. 3. Theoretical analysis 3.1. Finite element model of FRP-strengthened slabs The main questions regarding this model are: what model to use for reinforced concrete, how to take into account the tensile cracking in concrete and how to associate elements of multilayer composite with damageable concrete elements. The aim of the proposed models is to take into account the variable mechanical properties of the concrete between the CFRP and the steel rebars. There are two methods of calculating damage in concrete: (i) the discrete method (the discrete crack approach), and (ii) the

1128

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

160

R3 R1 R0 Load (kN)
160 120 80 40 2 4 6 8 10 12 4

R3 R1 R0

Load (kN)

120 80 40

Bending displacement in middle of slab (mm) 160

Tensile strain on steel rebar in middle area of slab (%)

120

Load (kN)

80

R2 = R0 with initial cracking + 2 layers of CFRP[02/902] R2 without CFRP = R0 with initial cracking
0 2 4 6 8

40

Bending displacement in middle of slab (mm)

Fig. 4. Experimental bending behaviour of slabs strengthened by FRP (bre reinforced polymer).

Table 3 Experimental results R0 Initial stiffness (kN/mm) Stiffness after cracking in concrete cover (kN/mm) Failure load (kN) 27.18 10.69 121.2 R1 37.21 17.65 139.5 R3 24.97 26.24 154.2

smeared crack approach. The discrete method aims to reproduce the propagation of the individual cracks by re-meshing the model with developing cracks. The smeared crack approach simulates the macroscopic behaviour of the concrete, by taking into account the reduction of cracks through stiffness and stress transfer (specic damage laws of concrete). In this study, the models were developed with the second approach. The next section presents two basic models which, together, analyse the behaviour of RC structures strengthened with FRP.

3.1.1. Reinforced concrete model (RCM) Fig. 7 presents the two concrete models that have been developed. The rst reinforced concrete model (RCM1) represents the beam or the slab as a multi-layer material (Fig. 7a). The second (RCM2 Fig. 7b) specically takes into account reinforcement by bar or link elements. In this study, a perfect bond between concrete and steel was assumed. The type of concrete used was element SOLID65 in ANSYS. This element was used for calculating threedimensional solids with or without reinforcing bars (rebars). The solid is capable of cracking in tension, crushing in compression, creep nonlinearity and large deection geometrical nonlinearity. The WilliamWarnke model shows the failure criterion of concrete with ve experimental constants [6]. The uniaxial stressstrain relation was dened by the civil engineering Eurocode. For the RCM2 model, the reinforcing bar adopted element LINK8. This three-dimensional element is a uniaxial tension-com-

Fig. 5. Punching failure of slab R1.

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

1129

Fig. 6. Cracks in slabs cross-section.

Table 4 Punching angle values CFRP thickness Slab R0 0 13 21 35 Slab R1 1 mm 25 17 32 44 Slab R2 2 mm 17 18 36 Slab R3 3 mm 21 15 38 34

Table 5 compares the two Reinforced Concrete Models, RCM1 and RCM2. 3.1.2. Fibre-reinforced-polymer model (FRPM) coupled with reinforced concrete model The rst proposed model of FRP (Fig. 7c) is an 8-node structural element (3D), designed to replicate thick layered shells and solids. The element (Solid46) allows up to 250 different material layers. Each node of this element has three degrees of freedom to move in directions x, y, and z. The nodes of the composite elements are connected to those of adjacent concrete elements. The use of this composite element is benecial, but it often leads to an unsatisfactory meshing condition of the basic nite element method. It can, however, be useful for thick FRP.

a1 a2 a3 a4

pression element with three degrees of freedom at each node. Plasticity, creep, swelling, stress stiffening, and large deection capabilities are included. The bar was considered an elastic and perfectly plastic material. The strength was dened according to the data in the test.

Fig. 7. Reinforced concrete models: (a) RCM1 and (b) RCM2 and the developed bre-reinforced-polymer model (FRPM) coupled with reinforced concrete model; (c) FRPM1, (d) FRPM2 and (e) FRPM3.

1130 Table 5 Comparison of RCM1 and RCM2 Model RCM1 Advantages Easy modelling Low computing time RCM2 Takes into account the exact position of steel parts Direct determination of stresses in reinforcement Disadvantages

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

Not very exact solution in areas with nonhomogeneous distribution of steels Stresses in reinforcement depend on the used homogenized law Modelling and meshing are complex (necessary on account of nodal locations) High computing time with convergence problems

The second FRP model (Fig. 7d) is a 3D element having membrane (in-plane) stiffness, but no bending (out-of-plane) stiffness (Shell41). The element (FRPM2) also has three degrees of freedom at each node: translations in nodal directions x, y and z. As for (FRPM1), the nodes of the FRP elements are connected to those of the adjacent concrete elements. This element is benecial and easy to implement. Unfortunately, its use is limited to a single layer of FRP. The third developed FRP model (Fig. 7e) is a multi-layer composite (FRPM3) able to take into account both in-plane stiffness and bending behaviour. This element (Shell99) allows up to 250 layers. It has six degrees of freedom at each node: three translations in the nodal directions and three rotations around axes x, y and z. The nodes of the composite elements are connected to those of the adjacent concrete elements. In order to ensure the compatibility of the degrees of freedom (dof), one can change the conditions of rotation into specic coupling conditions at the point of interface of the concrete and FRP. The development of this model requires specic programming to ensure element continuity (Fig. 7e). The model allows analysis of the failure of multiple layers of FRP using quadratic failure criteria (such as Tsai-Wu criteria). In addition, because of this models multiple layers, it can shed new light on the bonding problems between the concrete and the externally-bonded FRP. To summarize, the following models are developed and combined: (i) RCM1 + FRPM1 (homogenized reinforced concrete + 3D

multi-layer thick composite); (ii) RCM1 + FRPM2 (homogenized reinforced concrete + composite in-plane element); (iii) RCM1 + FRPM3 (homogenized reinforced concrete + multi-layer composite); (iv) RCM2 + FRPM1 (specic modelling of reinforcement in concrete + 3D multi-layer thick composite); (v) RCM2 + FRPM2 (specic modelling of reinforcement in concrete + composite inplane element); (vi) RCM2 + FRPM3 (specic modelling of reinforcement in concrete + multi-layer composite). Fig. 8, shows typical meshes of RCM2 + FRPM3 of the analysed beams and slabs. The number of elements required for beam analysis was 1458 (880 3D elements, 498 link elements and 80 shell elements). For slabs analysis, 6296 elements (5408 3D elements, 728 link elements, 160 shell elements) were used. The total nodes of the slab were 6561. The choice of these numbers was based on preliminary studies in which different nite element sizes were used. These numbers represent a good balance for the analyzed beams and slabs, between the computational time and the numerical accuracy of results. 3.2. Numerical and experimental results 3.2.1. Beams with externally-bonded CFRP This section aims to validate the proposed model by analysing the behaviour of beams strengthened with composites. To show the usefulness of the developed model compared to the usual numerical approaches (RCM1), the three-point bending and four-point bending tests were presented. First, numerical results (Fig. 9a and b), in the case of three-point bending tests, were compared for the following models: (RCM1 + FRPM1, 2, 3) and (RCM2 + FRP3). Then, the consistency was examined between proposed models RCM2 + FRPM3 and the experimental results for four-point bending tests (Fig. 9ce). The properties of the analyzed beams are presented in Table 6. Fig. 9a and b present a numerical comparison of models RCM1 + FRPM1, 2, 3 and RCM2 + FRPM3, applied to a beam with and without external FRP. The analysis concerns a three-point bending load. Table 7 shows particular values of the bending behaviour of the analysed beam. As expected, the FRP bonded to a beam increases the rst crack load and serviceability load. The

Fig. 8. Typical meshes of RCM2 + FRP3 of the analysed: (a) beams and (b) slabs with rst cracking pattern. (c) Zoom of typical cracking pattern.

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

1131

Tensile stress in steel

a
Load (kN)

b
60 50 40
30 RCM1 20 10 RCM1+FRPM1 RCM1+FRPM3 RCM1+FRPM2 RCM2+FRPM3

320
RCM1

RCM1+FRPM1 RCM1+FRPM2

RCM1+FRPM3 RCM2+FRPM3

240

160 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Bending displacement (mm)

Load (kN)

c
Load (kN)

100 80 60 40 20 0 0 5 10 15 20 Bending displacement (mm) RCM2 Experimen

Fig. 9. Numerical analysis of three-point bending tests of beams: (a) load versus bending displacement in the middle of the beam; (b) stress in steels versus applied load. Plot of four-point bending tests results compared to numerical results of (c) beam without CFRP; (d) beam with CFRP strengthening; (e) load versus CFRP strain in the middle of the beam.

ultimate bending displacement decreases signicantly with the use of FRP. The relevance of the developed models is the stress analysis of the steel and the FRP composites. Table 8 gives the stress values in the middle of the beam under a 3-point bending load (48 kN). The stress analysis in the FRP shows that the highest stress is rx (stress parallel to beam) followed by ry and rxy. It should also be show that the three composite models (FRPM1, FRPM2, FRPM3) combined with the homogenized concrete model (RCM2) lead to similar results for bending displacement and stress in the steel and the FRP. However, when one compares the results of models RCM1 + FRPM1, 2, 3 and RCM2 + FRPM1, 2, 3 (Fig. 9a and b), differences are observed in the values of the steel rods. These differences are mainly due to the fact that the RCM1 approach uses the homogenized law to determine stress values in the steel, whereas the other proposed approach directly gives the stress values in reinforcement elements.

Fig. 9ce compare experimental and numerical results in the case of four-point bending load. The models RCM2 + FRPM1, 2, 3, were used. The results illustrate the accuracy of the FEM approach especially the model (RCM2 + FRPM3). However, in the case of slabs, usually less thick than beams, the use of the RCM1 model must be done with careful attention to the thickness of each layer. For slabs, the difference between the results of the models RCM1 + FRPM1, 2, 3 and RCM2 + FRPM1, 2, 3 can become signicant. As an illustration, one can consider the bending of the slab (3 m long and 2 m wide and 100 mm thick). Fig. 10 shows the stress (rx) in the steel reinforcement in the area directly under the loading point of the slab. These stress values (rx) as required by the model RCM1 are deducted from the classical law of mixtures with mechanics of solid rules (homogenization rule). For models RCM1 + FRPM1 and RCM1 + FRPM2, one can note, as might be expected, a negative value of stress at the beginning of the slab load, followed by unexpected positive values

1132

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

Table 6 Mechanical properties of the analysed beams of 0.15 m 0.25 m 2.5 m CFRP Elastic modulus (GPa) Poissons ratio Tensile failure stresses (MPa) Crushing failure stresses (MPa) density (kg/m3) Stressstrain relations Layer thickness (mm) Layer Width (mm) Modulus (GPa) 79.94 4.6 1380 1130 1500 Linear elastic. Non-plastic 1 150 (beam width) Ex = 117; Ey = 7; Ez = 7 Gxy = 4.2; Gxz = 4.2; Gyz = 2.7 mxy = 0.25; mxz = 0.25; myz = 0.3 Concrete 34.52 0.2 3.5 32.8 2500 r Eb Steel 200 4 0.3 500 500 7850 Elasticplastic; down: 2 14 mm; up: 2 8 mm

e 11e=e0 2

f with e0 2 Ecb

Distance between external supports 2 m.

Table 7 Comparison of rst crack load and serviceability load of analysed beam Loads First crack load (kN) Serviceability (kN) RCM2 4.5 18.7 RCM2 + FRPM1 5.2 32.1 RCM2 + FRPM2 5.3 33.5 RCM2 + FRPM3 5.3 34.2

Table 8 Comparison of the stresses in the middle of the FRP for 48 kN applied load on the analysed beam Stress RCM1 + FRPM1 424 5.77 0.57 RCM1 + FRPM2 412 5.90 0.04 RCM1 + FRPM3 387 5.60 0.006

rx (MPa) ry (MPa) rxy (MPa)

Fig. 10. Stresses in the steel reinforcement in the area directly under the loading point of the slab. Comparison of models RCM1 + FRPM1, RCM1 + FRPM3 and RCM2 + FRPM3.

of stress. Whereas for the model RCM2 + FRPM3, the stress is negative and decreases until the slab breaks. This shows an example of the usefulness of the model RCM2 + FRPM3 compared to the usual models RCM1 + FRPM1 and RCM1 + FRPM2. The applications of RCM1 + FRPM1, 2, 3 models for slabs often show results, which depend on the estimated thickness of the homogenized layer. Hence, models RCM2 + FRPM1, 2, 3 are better suited for slabs due to their ability to take into account explicit steel reinforcements and composites, without predetermining the layers thickness. In addition, in order to take into account interface effects, one can introduce the FRPconcrete bond by means of contact elements to the models RCM2 + FRPM1, 2, 3 without any difculties.

3.2.2. Slabs with externally-bonded CFRP Based on a good correspondence between the experiment and nite element models for various analysed beams, the RCM2 + FRPM3 model was used for slabs. Fig. 11 shows a comparison of experimental and numerical results for slabs R0, R1 and R3. Table 9 gives the stiffness results. There is a good correspondence between the numerical and experimental results for failure stress and stiffness after initial cracking in the concrete cover. In contrast, for initial stiffness, signicant discrepancies between numerical and experimental results can be noted. These discrepancies could be due mainly to measuring accuracies of displacement mist for the weak displacements measured at the beginning of the tests. Conrmation of the good correspondence was obtained by comparing the results of the numerical and experimental values of strain gauges on the rebars and the CFRP. Fig. 11bf compare the maximal bending displacement and the cracks in two slabs (one with an externally-bonded CFRP strip and the other without CFRP). These gures display crack symbols at locations of cracking in concrete elements. The crack elements located at the bottom of the slab were presented in these gures. Each element can crack in up to three different planes. The third crack, which corresponds to nal cracks in the elements, was presented in Fig. 11 for different loading (Fig. 11df). For the same load (Fig. 11d and e), the obvious effect of strengthening due to CFRP can be observed through the number of crack symbols, which are signicantly higher in the strengthened slab (R1). The numerical results (Fig. 11f) show also that CFRP strips change the distribution of cracks, allowing a larger number of cracks as a result of increasing slab loading capacity. Detailed analysis of the numerical results conrms the experimental punching failure. The punching crack patterns are accurately evaluated by calcuDmax lating the angle w 2La of the slab around the loading column. The effect of the CFRP strips (Fig. 12a) is a variation of the punching load inversely proportional to the w angle. The maximum values of w are comparable to those of a2 in Table 10. The results in Table 10 clearly show a linear relation between punching cone angle a2 and rotation w around the loading column. The use of CFRP decreases the w rotation value, which exhibits the same variation as the punching cone angle a2. Therefore, an actual dependence seems to exist between the rotation around the column, the punching failure load and the CFRP properties.

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

1133

a
Load (kN)

200 160 120 80 40

R3 exp. + numeric. R1 exp. + numeric.

R0 exp.+numeric.

10

12

Bending displacement in middle of slab (mm)

b
R0

c
R1

R0 (load = 125 kN)

R1(load = 125 kN)

R1(load = 160 kN)

g
Fig. 11. Comparison: (a) numerical and experimental results; (b) bending displacement in R0 slab; (c) bending displacement in R1 slab and third crack symbols; (d) in R0 slab at 12.5 kN; (e) in R1 slab at 12.5 kN; (f) in R0 slab at 16 kN; and (g) punching mechanism of slab.

Table 9 Comparison of the theoretical and experimental results R0 Exp. value Initial stiffness (kN/mm) Stiffness after cracking in steel cover concrete (kN/mm) Failure load (kN) 27.18 10.69 121.2 Num. value 128.2 10.62 124.7 R1 Exp. value 37.21 17.65 139.5 Num. value 134.23 15.25 134.3 R3 Exp. value 24.97 26.24 154.2 Num. value 141.78 26.19 199.3

3.3. Effects of concrete cover 3.3.1. Concrete cover considered as inter-phase material As slabs and beams have been strengthened over the years, structures have suffered severe strength and stiffness deterioration of the concrete covering the steel due to tensile microcracks or aggressive environmental conditions such as humidity, alkali solutions and salt-water. As shown by Hernandez et al. [7], porosity due to micro-cracks, damages, and aging effects can lead to reduction of the concrete stiffness. They show that a

30% decrease of mortar density due to porosity can introduce approximately a 14% reduction in concrete stiffness. The reduction in the stiffness of cover concrete could be magnied by the way durability is affected by the intensity of interactions of the material with aggressive agents. The pores and capillaries inside cover concrete facilitate the destructive processes that generally begin on the surface. While interacting with its service environment, concrete often undergoes signicant alterations that frequently have very adverse consequences on its engineering properties.

1134

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

a
Load (kN)

250 200 150 100 50 0

b
R3 R1
Load (kN)

250 Rdcoating + CFRP (02/902) 200

R2

Rdcoating+CFRP (01/901)
150

R0
100 50 Rdcoating = R0 + Eci concrete cover : i = 1 to 4 5 10 15 Rotation (0/00) 20

10

15

20

Rotation (0/00)

Fig. 12. Loadrotation curves of: (a) slabs strengthened with FRP of increasing thickness R0, R1, R2 and R3; (b) slabs, with weak modulus of concrete cover, strengthened by CFRP.

Table 10 Comparison of punching angle a2 and theoretical rotation w around the loading column Experimental punching angle a2 () R0 R1 R3 21 17 15 Rotation w () 19.03 14.28 12.44 Punching failure load (kN) 124.7 134.3 199.3

This section presents, numerically, the effect of the concretes properties between the lower steel layer and the CFRP on the effectiveness of slab strengthening. As in previous works on interface in composite material [8,9], the alteration in engineering properties of cover concrete is considered a linear increase of Youngs modulus from the surface towards the steel reinforcements. With this assumption, the cover is therefore considered as four concrete layers with modules (from the outside towards the interior) Ec1, Ec2, Ec3 and Ec4.

Fig. 13. Model of concrete cover: four layers with degraded mechanical properties. (b1) Proposed 3D inter-phase model. (b2) Well known 2D interface with a displacement discontinuity.

A. Agbossou et al. / Composites: Part B 39 (2008) 11251135

1135

In reality, the concrete cover does not degrade uniformly but its load transfer capability decreases through the formation of discrete cracks. However, in order to highlight the problem of FRP strengthening in a different way, the graded cover assumption (Fig. 13) was adopted. Such modeling of the concrete cover is motivated by the fact that an interface zone between phases has at least two distinct properties: strength (related to interfacial failure) and stiffness (related to stress transfer between components). Instead of analysing FRPconcrete interfacial failure (widely studied in literature), one needs to focus analysis on inter-phase stiffness properties, which are important when considering composite mechanical properties. The principle of the proposed 3D model compared to the wellknown 2D model is illustrated in Fig. 13b. The Fig. 13b1 shows a schematic representation of concrete cover considered as an inter-phase zone with a gradient in properties between FRP and steel re-rebar zone. The Fig. 13b2 shows a useful simplied 2D model where macroscopic deformations are the same, but a 2D interface has replaced the 3D inter-phase zone. The use of theoretical linear variation concrete modulus in the concrete cover zone could be seen, here, as a method to model the deformation of the 3D inter-phase by allowing a displacement discontinuity by means of non-linear behaviour of cover concrete during the load. The magnitude of displacement discontinuity should be a function of the traction vector in the direction of the discontinuity and stiffness properties of the inter-phase (cover concrete which is a non-linear material in the proposed analysis). Therefore, one can assume in the 3D model (Fig. 13a) that there are perfect bonds between CFRP and concrete, which could be material with poor inter-phase mechanical properties. The proposed model takes into account the FRP/concrete separation and yields to solve interface problems in terms of damage in concrete stiffness and failure. When the FRP/concrete bond becomes weak, the low slab loading leads to interfacial failure of FRP and concrete. Therefore, the effectiveness of strengthening with the FRP will become considerably lower especially for poor mechanical properties of cover. 3.3.2. Numerical analysis of concrete cover considered as n-layer material Three cases of slabs with degraded concrete cover with one or two layers of CFRP were analysed. To illustrate the principal conclusion, Fig. 13 presents the results of a slab with 2.5 cm of graded concrete cover. The lower concrete cover of the analysed slab was considered as four layers of concrete material in which the modulus increases from 1 to 4 GPa. The rst layer (1 GPa) is the lower face layer. (Ec1 = 1 GPa, Ec2 = 2 GPa, Ec3 = 3 GPa, Ec4 = 4 GPa). Results (Fig. 12b) show that a reduction in the properties of the concrete cover considerably limits the effectiveness of the CFRP. Obtaining the initial properties of the slab becomes possible only with very thick composites. In these cases, failure is not by punching but by bending. The obvious decrease in slab performance is mainly due to the low quality of concrete between steel and CFRP. This low quality leads to a weak load transfer of the

externally-bonded composite strips. The other analysed cases of low quality concrete cover show that, even with a perfect bond between concrete and CFRP, an average decrease in concrete modulus of less than 30% ensures improved effectiveness of the reinforcement or repair of the analysed slabs. In reality, such a reduction   with damage EInitial E Modulus d Modulus damage 30% could be due to high micro-cracks, with
E
Modulus

aging phenomena and service environment. The service environment effects, coupled with porosity and high micro-cracks in coating concrete could yield to signicant reduction of cover concrete. 4. Conclusion This study presents an experimental and numerical analysis of the bending behaviour of reinforced slabs with externally-bonded FRP. The results indicate the effect of the composites on punching failure in slabs. They show the inuence of the low mechanical quality of the concrete between steels and CFRP strips on the effectiveness of the externally-bonded CFRP strips. One notes for punching that the composites tend to considerably reduce the overall rotation angle of the slab around the loading column and consequently tend to increase the stress of punching failure. For low properties of the cover, a reduction in the concrete cover modulus tends to decrease the effectiveness of thin CFRP strips and leads to bending failure. These results show that one limiting element among others in externally-bonded strip composite could be the mechanical quality of the concrete between steel and composite. Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge Emily Coffey and Rivers Camp for their reading advice on this paper. References
[1] American Concrete Institute 440.2R-02: Design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems for strengthening concrete structures, American Concr. Inst., USA; 2002. [2] Ferrier E, Avril S, Hamelin P, Vautrin A. Mechanical behavior of RC beams reinforced by externally bonded CFRP sheets. Mater Struct, Rilem 2003;36(262):5229. [3] Teng JC, Chen JF, Smith ST, Lam L. FRP strengthened RC structures. John Wiley & sons; 2002. [4] Mentrey Ph. Synthesis of punching failure in reinforced concrete. Cem Concr Compos 2002;24(6):497507. [5] Michel L, Ferrier E, Bigaud D, Agbossou A. Criteria for punching failure mode in RC slabs reinforced by externally bonded CFRP. Compos Struct 2007;81(3): 43849. [6] William KJ, Warnke EP. Constitutive model for the triaxial behavior of concrete. In: Proceedings, international association for bridge and structural engineering, ISMES, Bergamo, Italy, vol. 19; 1975. p. 174. [7] Hernandez MG, Izquierdo MAG, Ibanez A, Anaya JJ, Ullate LG. Porosity estimation of concrete by ultrasonic NDE. Ultrasonics 2000;38:5313. [8] Lagache M, Agbossou A, Pastor J, Muller D. Role of interface on the elastic behavior of composite materials: theoretical and experimental analysis. J Compos Mater 1994;28(12):114057. [9] Agbossou A, Pastor J. Thermal stresses and thermal expansion coefcients of n-layered ber-reinforced composites. Compos Sci Technol 1997;57(2): 24960.