Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Experimental study of external bonded CFRP-concrete interface under low

cycle fatigue loading
A. Chalot, L. Michel *, E. Ferrier
Universit�e Claude Bernard LYON 1, Laboratoire des Mat�eriaux Composites pour la Construction, (LMC2)82 boulevard Niels BOHR, Site de Villeurbanne DOUA, 69622,
Villeurbanne Cedex, France

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The main problem with carbon fibre reinforced polymers (CFRPs) in reinforcement is the bonding of the rein­
Fatigue forcement to the concrete because the failure generally occurs by debonding. In the case of seismic loading, a
Carbon fibre high level of stress with cyclic loading may appear in the adhesive zone that’s why this study focuses on the low-
Adhesion
cycle fatigue of a concrete/CFRP interface under a high level of shear stress. It focuses on the influence of the
Polymer (textile) fibre
fatigue loading amplitude on the service life (number of cycles prior to failure). This paper presents the results of
an experimental campaign conducted on double shear test, an analysis of the failure mechanism, and the
development of an analytical model to predict the lifetime of a CFRP/concrete interface. We studied two different
CFRPs, one based on a unidirectional textile, composite A, and the other reinforcement based on a bidirectional
textile (with a 70/30 ratio), composite B. The results of this study will allow the development of an empirical
model based on W€ ohler’s fatigue law describing the fatigue life of a CFRP-concrete interface as a function of the
imposed fatigue loading amplitude. Once validated and enhanced, this empirical model will make it possible to
predict and therefore reduce the risk of disbonding.

1. Introduction
The need to protect buildings and people against seismic risk has
become a major preoccupation of legislators. To reduce such risks,
infrastructure standards are becoming increasingly strict. A large pro­
portion of buildings and transport infrastructure built during the 1970s
and 1980s do not adhere to the latest regulations.
To respond to the requirements of the new standards and ensure the
stability of a structure, it is necessary to provide solutions to reinforce or
repair existing structures. The reinforcement and repair of structures
using an externally bonded composite, and more particularly, those
using an epoxy matrix and carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP), have
shown significant potential for many years. This technology is already
being widely used around the world. CFRPs have extremely good me­
chanical properties with a strength of up to 2000 MPa and a modulus of
elasticity on the order of 230 GPa. They can act as complementary re­
inforcements in bent elements, as transverse reinforcements for the
shear strength, or as a confinement for a compressed element to increase
the strength. The good mechanical performance of CFRPs generally
leads to a failure in CFRP-concrete prior to a tensile FRP failure.
The use of CFRP reinforcements has been well documented in the
literature. For the flexural strengthening of the beams [1–6], or to in­
crease the shear strength [7,8], it is also possible to reinforce the slabs
[9]. CFRPs are also used for confinement [6,7,11]. It is also possible to
combine several of these effects on the same structure [12].
The main problem with a CFRP reinforcement is anchoring the re­
inforcements to the existing structure. In most of the tests, the failure of
the reinforcement is caused by debonding of the CFRP strips. Numerous
experimental, numerical and theorical studies [13–26] have therefore
been conducted on the behaviour of a CFRP/concrete interface. Such
studies have indicated the existence of an effective bond zone where the
shear stress is concentrated. The effective bond length depends on the
Young’s modulus and the thickness of the reinforcement. Most static
tests end in concrete failure. The ultimate load of the joint is therefore
directly related to the tensile–shear strength of the concrete substrate
and the mechanical properties of the reinforcement.
Most studies on fatigue behaviour have focused on a large number of
low-intensity loading cycles. However, in the case of a seismic event, the
structures are subjected to a low number of high intensity cycles. Thus,
this paper focuses on a fatigue collapse during low cycle fatigue (LCF).
J. F. Chen and J. G. Teng (2001) [14] studied the effects of the
effective bond length on the ultimate strength of bonded joints. Eq. (1)

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: antoine.chalot@univ-lyon1.fr (A. Chalot), laurent.michel@univ-lyon1.fr (L. Michel), emmanuel.ferrier@univ-lyon1.fr (E. Ferrier).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107255
Received 10 April 2019; Received in revised form 19 July 2019; Accepted 8 August 2019
Available online 28 August 2019
1359-8368/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Chalot et al. Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Fig. 1. Diagram of the different test configurations: (a) single shear test, (b) double shear test, and (c) modified beam test.

Fig. 2. Dimensions of double shear (DS) specimen.

indicates that the effective length depends on the tensile strength of the higher fatigue resistance than GFRP. Eq. (2) corresponds to the lifetime
concrete as well as the modulus of elasticity (Ef) and the thickness of the of an unidirectional CFRP, whereas Eq. (3) corresponds to that of 0/90�
reinforcement (tf). They also showed that an anchorage length that is bidirectional CFRP. Note that the equations quoted are equations
longer than the effective length (Le) does not increase the bond strength. designed with 95% more resistant specimens than the model applied.
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi These results indicate that bidirectional CFRP has a higher fatigue life
uE t
Le ¼ u
f f
tqffiffiffiffi (1) than unidirectional CFRP for an equivalent stress rate, and thus has more
f ’c fatigue resistance than unidirectional CFRP.
Pmax
J.F. Dong et al. (2012) [27] studied the fatigue and post-fatigue ¼ 0:8227 0:0519 LogðNÞ (2)
Pu
behaviour of a series of shear-reinforced beams. Their study shows
that, in addition to increasing the strength and stiffness of the speci­ Pmax
mens, the reinforcement increases the fatigue life (1,000,000 cycles) of ¼ 0:8133 0:0415 Log ðNÞ (3)
Pu
the RC by increasing the spacing of cracks and reducing their opening.
E. Demers (1997) [28] studied the tensile fatigue behaviour of J. Zhu et al. (2015) [29] studied the fatigue behaviour of
several glass fibre and carbon composite reinforcements. CFRP has a CFRP/concrete interfaces on modified beam specimens. The

2
A. Chalot et al. Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Table 1 a tensile strength of 1700 MPa, Young’s modulus of 105 GPa, and rein­
CFRP properties [36,37]. forcement thickness of 0.48 mm. The concrete used in all specimens is
A B identical and has a compressive strength of 38 MPa.
Composite A Composite B

Fabric properties 2. Experimental program

Fibre Carbon Carbon
Type of fabric Ratio Unidirectional 100/0 Bidirectional 70/30 2.1. Materials and specimens
CFRP properties
Ultimate tensile strength ff [MPa] 600 1700
Modulus of elasticity Ef [GPa] 60 105
There are several methods used to test the CFRP/concrete interface,
Thickness tf [mm] 1.00 0.48 namely single shear tests [30–32], double shear tests [16,19,20,34], and
Interface property modified beam tests [29]. To study the fatigue behaviour of the
Transfer length Le [mm] 99 90 CFRP/concrete interface, double shear tests (DS) were conducted. Fig. 1
Resin property
presents the three CFRP/concrete interface characterisation test
Ultimate tensile strength fr [MPa] 56 27
Modulus of elasticity Ef [GPa] 3.2 2.3 configurations.

experimental campaign, which included three static tests and five fa­
tigue tests, allowed them to develop a model (Eq. (4)) in which the fa­
tigue life of the interface depends mainly on the loading amplitude (T)
and, on a smaller scale, the concrete compressive strength (fc’).
�
lnðNÞ ¼ 31:646 ð T 0:8683 Þ 0:0021 f ’c þ 0:8724 (4)

Ferrier et al. (2005) [30] investigated the fatigue behaviour of the

CFRP/concrete interfaces of three types of carbon fibre reinforcements.
The experimental campaign, which includes 18 fatigue tests, allowed
them to calibrate a fatigue model for each of the three reinforcements.
C. Carloni et al. (2012 and 2013) [31,32] studied the fatigue and
post-fatigue behaviour of six double shear tests. Their study showed that
the ultimate strength of the post-fatigue tests is equal to that of mono­
topic tests. They also demonstrated through a monitoring of the digital
image correlation (DIC) that the effective bond length remains the same Fig. 4. Fatigue loading profile.
throughout the fatigue test.
R.A. Daud et al. (2015) [33] investigated the behaviour of
Table 2
CFRP/concrete interfaces for static and fatigue tests by using pull-out Static test results.
tests (single shear tests). A total of 14 specimens were tested.
CFRP Specimen ID fcu Pu
The results of the fatigue tests mentioned above were compiled in a
database to compare the results of these experimental campaigns with [MPa] [kN]
the model presented at the end of the present paper. COMPOSITE A A-M-1 38 36.8
A total of 39 specimens were tested during this test campaign. This A-M-2 38 38.3
study aims to compare the fatigue resistance of two carbon fibre re­ A-M-3 38 39.8
Average 38 38.3
inforcements, one unidirectional (composite A) and the other bidirec­ COMPOSITE B B-M-1 38 28.2
tional (composite B). The properties of composite A are as follows: a B-M-2 39 29.2
tensile strength of 600 MPa, Young’s modulus of 60 GPa, and rein­ B-M-3 38 29.6
forcement thickness of 1 mm. Composite B has the following properties: Average 38 29.0

Fig. 3. Specimen manufacturing.

3
A. Chalot et al. Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Table 3
Fatigue loading descriptions and fatigue test results.
CFRP Specimen ID fcu Pmin %Pmin Pmax %Pu Pu T N Log(N)

[MPa] [kN] [%] [kN] [%] [kN] [%] [cycle] [cycle]

Composite A A-F1-1 40 2.4 6% 31.3 82% 38.3 75% 387 3

A-F1-2 40 2.3 6% 31.4 82% 38.3 76% 56 2
A-F1-3 40 2.3 6% 31.3 82% 38.3 76% 24 1
A-F1-4 40 6.3 16% 35.8 93% 38.3 77% 80 2
A-F1-5 40 2.8 7% 35.1 92% 38.3 84% 6 1
A-F2-1 40 5.5 14% 28.1 73% 38.3 59% 16458 4
A-F2-2 40 5.4 14% 28.1 73% 38.3 59% 534 3
A-F2-3 40 2.7 7% 29.1 76% 38.3 69% 120 2
A-F2-4 40 2.8 7% 29.1 76% 38.3 69% 251 2
A-F2-5 40 6.2 16% 32.2 84% 38.3 68% 159 2
A-F3-1 40 8.5 22% 24.9 65% 38.3 43% 99491 5
A-F3-2 40 9.9 26% 28.8 75% 38.3 49% 3609 4
A-F3-3 40 9.8 26% 28.9 75% 38.3 50% 14018 4
A-F3-4 40 9.8 26% 28.7 75% 38.3 49% 1699 3
A-F3-5 40 9.9 26% 28.5 74% 38.3 49% 5075 4
Composite B B–F1-1 38 1.4 5% 27.2 94% 29.0 89% 62 2
B–F1-2 38 1.9 7% 27.0 93% 29.0 86% 24 1
B–F1-3 38 4.9 17% 25.9 89% 29.0 72% 3 0
B–F1-4 39 1.4 5% 24.4 84% 29.0 79% 1574 3
B–F1-5 39 2.0 7% 24.5 85% 29.0 78% 451 3
B–F2-1 38 2.7 9% 24.3 84% 29.0 75% 40 2
B–F2-2 38 4.8 17% 24.3 84% 29.0 67% 21 1
B–F2-3 38 3.3 11% 22.9 79% 29.0 68% 291 2
B–F2-4 42 4,8 17% 21,4 74% 29,0 57% 7053 4
B–F2-5 39 4.6 16% 21.6 75% 29.0 59% 554 3
B–F3-1 39 3.2 11% 20.1 69% 29.0 59% 9353 4
B–F3-2 42 4.6 16% 20.1 69% 29.0 53% 6941 4
B–F3-3 39 5.9 20% 20.1 70% 29.0 49% 7761 4
B–F3-4 42 6.0 21% 18.8 65% 29.0 44% 52877 5

Fig. 5. Strain gauges and LVDT detail.

The plan of the specimens and all dimensions are detailed in Fig. 2.
The concrete blocks have dimensions of 140 mm � 140 mm x 260 mm
and are installed in a 140 mm � 140 mm x 560 mm mould with a 40-mm
thick separating element. The connection between the two blocks is
ensured by two threaded rods connected by a bolt. This assembly en­
sures a perfect alignment of the side faces of the blocks because they are
both form-worked.
For all batches, samples are cast to test their compressive and tensile
Fig. 6. Picture of an instrumented specimen.
strengths (by splitting). The average concrete strength is 39.6 MPa with
a standard deviation of 0.9 MPa. Concrete characterisation tests are
conducted in accordance with the European standard [35]. The
composition of the mixture is 350, 190, 850, and 1020 kg/m3 of cement,
water, sand, and gravel, respectively.
Once the concrete has cured (28 days), the reinforced areas are

4
A. Chalot et al.
Fig. 7. Pictures of interface of some specimens after failure.
sanded. This step is carried out using an angle grinder with a diamond
disc. The surface is sanded down to the aggregates, the aim is to increase
the bond between CFRP and concrete. During all these steps the faces of
the two blocks remain parallel with each other because of the threaded
rod. The tolerance on the alignment of the gluing faces is 0.25 mm under
a 20-cm ruler. Composite reinforcements of 440 mm � 50 mm and di­
mensions are laminated on both sides using wet lay-up method. The
reinforcing sheets and substrate are impregnated with epoxy resins, and
the sheets are then placed on the concrete. Once in place, the strips are
squeezed to remove any air bubbles, and a final layer of resin is applied
to the CFRP strips. The geometry of the specimens is detailed in Fig. 2,
and the preparation of the support and the application of the re­
inforcements are conducted in accordance with the technical advice
provided by the products [22,23] and the temporary recommendations
of the AFGC [38]. The properties of the reinforcement are summarised in
Table 1.
Fig. 3 shows an image of the formwork (left) with a Styrofoam
separating element (thickness ¼ 40 mm) and threaded rods. On the right
side of the figure, CFRP bonded to the specimen is shown.
A total of 35 double shear tests were conducted, 18 for reinforcement
A and 17 for reinforcement B. For each reinforcement, three tests were
conducted under monotonic loading to identify the ultimate strength
(Pu). The remaining specimens were tested under fatigue loading.
2.2. Loading
The loading applied is a cyclic type under tension with Pmax and Pmin
exceeding zero. The double shear tests do not allow the interfaces to be
stressed during compression owing to the risk of buckling. Traditionally,
the fatigue life of an element is controlled based on the rate of stress. The
5
Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255
loading rate corresponds to the ratio between the maximum applied
force and the static failure force of the specimen, which is noted as %Pu
(Eq. (5)). Some models described in the literature have linked the life
span to the amplitude of the loading [29]. In the case of a tensile fatigue
test, the amplitude of the load, T, is also noted (Eq. (6)). Here, Pmax
corresponds to the maximum load of the loading cycle, and Pmin corre­
sponds to the minimum load (see Fig. 4). In general, the number of
cycles is expressed as a logarithmic, namely, log(N) or le(N).
Pmax
%Pu ¼ (5)
Pu
Pmax Pmin
T¼ (6)
Pu
In this experimental program, the loading rate ranges from 60% to
95%, and the loading amplitude ranges from 18 to 90%. The results of
the static tests are detailed in Table 2. These results allow the ultimate
load values (Pu) of the fatigue tests to be set.
Table 3 shows the loading parameters and properties of the concrete,
as well as the number of cycles. As a reminder, the properties of the
reinforcements are as indicated in Table 1.
The tests were conducted on a Zwick tensile compression press with a
capacity of 65 kN. The tensile forces were applied using hinges located at
the clamping jaws to suppress any parasitic bending. Monotonic tests
were are driven at a speed of 1 mm/min until the specimen failed. The
fatigue tests were controlled while moving at a speed of 60 mm/min.
The loading frequency varied from 0.2 to 0.33 Hz depending on the
intensity of the loading. This frequency is much lower than 20 Hz, which
prevented an overheating during the test [28]. Fig. 4 shows the shape of
the cyclic loading imposed on the specimen. Tensile/tensile fatigue tests
A. Chalot et al. Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Fig. 8. CFRP strain distribution for different numbers of cycles.

were applied, and thus we consistently have 0 < Pmin < Pmax < Pu. These local shear stress and the evolution of the debonding during the cycle.
tests ended when the specimen failed. The strain gauges measured 10 mm and have a resistance of 120 Ω. The
displacement between the blocks is due to the elongation of the tensile
composite and the sliding of the glued composite. Knowing that we have
2.3. Sensor setup
the distance between the blocks (ΔL1) and the elongation of the com­
posite (ΔL2), we can compute the average sliding value. The sliding is
At the equipment level, the displacement between the two blocks
noted as ΔL (8). In the following equation, L2 is equal to 40 mm, which is
(noted ΔL1) was measured using two linear variable differential trans­
the length of the tensile part (see Fig. 2) (see Fig. 6).
formers (LVDTs). An LVDT has an amplitude of �5 mm and an accuracy
of 10 3 mm. Two strain gauges (SG1 and SG2) were placed on the tensile ε1 þ ε2
ΔL2 ¼ *L2 (7)
part of the composite. The arrangement of all sensors is shown in Fig. 5. 2
SG1 and SG2 were used to measure the strain of the tensile CFRP during
the test. SG2 is located was located on the other side of the specimen, in ΔL1 ΔL2
ΔL ¼ (8)
the middle of the tensile part. The elongation of the tensile part is noted 2
as ΔL2, as indicated in Eq. (7). For some specimens, several gauges were On some of the specimens, five strain gauges (SG3 to SG7) were
placed on one side of the reinforcement to follow the distribution of the placed along the composite to follow the evolution of the distribution of

6
A. Chalot et al. Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Fig. 9. CFRP shear stress distribution for different numbers of cycles.

the deformation on one of the four interfaces. The following relationship 3. Test results
(9) is used to calculate the average shear stress between two gauges,τ
where dε corresponds to the strain variation between 2 gauges and dx to 3.1. Failure mode
the spacing between them.
J. F. Chen and J. G. Teng (2001) [10] distinguished six failure modes
dε
τ ¼ tf Ef (9) for single or double shear tests:
dx
1. Concrete delamination
2. Tensile failure of the CFRP
3. Adhesive failure

7
A. Chalot et al.
Fig. 10. Evolution of sliding and stiffness during the tests.
4. Internal delamination of the CFRP
5. Adhesive–concrete interface failure
6. Adhesive–reinforced interface failure
None of the tested specimens failed in the stretched part of the
reinforcement (failure mode 2). In the monotonic tests, failure mode 1
was predominant with a concrete delamination failure (Fig. 7 (a)), the
cracks is located inside the concrete block and there is no damage in the
adhesive or in the composite. A failure at the glue/concrete interface
(failure mode 5) could also be observed on some specimens, although
8
Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255
this phenomenon remained marginal. Fatigue loading completely
modified the failure mode of the specimens. Indeed, failure mode 5 was
predominant with a failure at the interface between the glue and con­
crete. As shown in Fig. 7 (b) and (c), a local concrete pull-out could also
be observed at the front and rear ends of the CFRP strip. On a certain
specimen of reinforcement A, a failure quickly occurred at the fibre/
resin interface. As indicated in Fig. 7 (d), the fatigue loading intensity
did not appear to affect the type of failure mode during the experimental
campaign. Both reinforcements also showed the same failure mode.
A. Chalot et al.
Fig. 11. Debonding evolution.
Fig. 12. Loading rate of Log(N) curve: Composite A.
3.2. Strain distribution
Fig. 8 shows the evolution of the strain distribution along the
bonding during the fatigue tests. Each curve shows the distribution for a
full cycle. We can see that, during the first loading cycles, the strain was
at maximum in the first part of the bonding joint (SG3). The strain in this
9
Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255
Fig. 13. Loading rate of Log(N) curve: Composite B.
zone increased slightly during the test. This increase was not caused by a
modification of the bonding but was probably due to the damaging of
the CFRP itself. At SG4 and SG5, we can see that the deformation
increased until ε3, namely, the deformation of the front part of the
bonding joint. This phenomenon was visible during all tests. We can also
see that at SG6 and SG7, the most distant locations from the tensile end
of the bond, the deformation was close to zero during the first cycles,
A. Chalot et al.
Fig. 14. Loading rate of Log(N) curve: Composites A and B.
which indicates that the force had already completely transited. The
values then increased up to the failure of the specimen. In the case of A-
F1-1 and B–F1-5, the most loaded specimens, the strain is was on all
gauges at the end of the tests. In the case of A-F3-1, ε6 moved to ε3 when
ε7 did not exceed 1000 μm/m. To understand this phenomenon at work,
it is necessary to study the local shear stress distribution.
3.3. Local shear stress distribution
Fig. 9 shows the local shear stress distribution throughout the
bonding. The local shear stress is calculated using Eq. (9). As described
in the previous section, we note that the behaviours of the different tests
were similar to those described in the previous section. During the first
cycles, the shear stress was high in the part of the adhesive closest to the
tensioned end. The values of τ1 and τ2 were close to 10 MPa. The values
of τ4 and τ5 were low or zero, except for specimen A-F1-1 shown in
Fig. 9 (a), where a shear stress of 1.5 MPa was observed from the first
cycle at τ4. The stress was concentrated at the bonding front. The rest
was almost unsolicited. The length of the transfer zone of composite A
was 100 mm, which corresponds to the calculation by Le [14]. For
composite B, this zone measured 80 mm, which is less than Le’s
calculation.
As we progress, we observe a change in the distribution. Indeed, from
the tenth cycle, the stress profile shifted to the right. There is a decrease
in stress at the front part of the FRP band, and this drop is associated
with an increase in stress in the central part. The phenomenon continued
for the duration of the test until a brutal failure of the specimen
10
Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255
occurred. The length of the transfer zone was approximately constant
throughout the duration of the tests.
The decrease in stress in the front part of the adhesive reflects a loss
of adhesion caused by the strip debonding. When the bonded composite
surface became too small, it caused a sudden increase in the local shear
stress, leading to a brutal failure of the specimen.
3.4. Evolution of sliding and stiffness
Fig. 10 shows the evolution of the sliding (ΔL) and stiffness
(k ¼ Pmax/ΔL) as a function of the log(N). The pattern observed for the
two types of reinforcements is identical, although the different fatigue
loading intensity groups (F1, F2, and F3) do not show the same behav­
iours. The higher the load rate, the bigger the initial and final slips that
occurred. The initial stiffness of the tests with low fatigue loading was
greater, whereas the stiffness at the time of failure was extremely close
to this value. The decrease in stiffness was linear when plotted to log(N).
3.5. Debonding process
As described in the previous section, it was observed that the length
of the transfer zone remained constant during the test. The increase in
slip and the decrease in stiffness were therefore caused by the propa­
gation of the debonding. The increase in the slip observed from the first
cycle was caused by an increase in the length of the tensile CFRP. Using
Eqs. (7) and (8), it is possible to return to the debonding length. Note
that this is the average debonding of the 4 gluing joist. Fig. 11 shows the
evolution of the average debonding during the tests. The debonding was
initiated from the first cycle of the test, and then progressed in a linear
manner (in the function of log(N)). At the end of the test, this process
accelerated to failure. The final detachment length during the composite
B tests was smaller (80 mm) despite a smaller transfer zone than that of
composite A.
It could be interesting to precisely follow the debonding of a bond by
using a digital image correlation (DIC). This will provide the true
debonding length of each bounding zone and not the average value of
the four.
4. Analysis and discussion
4.1. Fatigue life model (Wo€hler curve) Ncycle (%Pu)
In this study, we considered the impact of the fatigue loading on the
service life of CFRP/concrete interfaces. A Wo €hler curve is a widely used
technique to predict the fatigue life of a material. The study was con­
ducted on two different reinforcements to study the effects of the type of
textile on the fatigue resistance of the bonding.
The relationships between the number of cycles up to failure of the
two types of reinforcements and the loading rate are presented in Fig. 12
and Fig. 13. The relationship between these two variables is linear. An
order 1 linear regression makes it possible to obtain the fatigue model of
each of the two reinforcements. Eq. (10) provides the trend of composite
A, with a correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.65 and a standard deviation
(RMSE) of 0.739. Eq. (11) is the equation for composite B, with an R2 of
0.76 and an RMSE of 0.783. The large dispersion obtained during the
fatigue tests does not allow a good correlation. We can see that, for a
high loading rate (%Pu ¼ 95%), the bi-directional reinforcement (B) is
4% more enduring than reinforcement A. However, this tendency is
reversed when one takes a lower loading rate. For %Pu ¼ 60%, rein­
forcement A has 5% more endurance. More testing would be appropriate
to confirm these observations (see Fig. 14).
The two models are still very close. It is therefore possible to combine
the two groups to calculate a common model. The model written in Eq.
(11) has an R2 of 0.7 and an RMSE of 0.760.
%Pu ¼ 0:051 logðNÞ þ 0:925 (10)
A. Chalot et al. Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255

Table 4
Database.
Paper Sample ID fcu %Pu T N cycle Log(N) test Log(N) Log(N)
Proposed Model Zhu
Model

[MPa] [%] [%] [Cycle] [Cycle] [%] [%]

J. Zhu et al. 2016 [29] A-1 62 80% 65% 2615 3.4 0.8 3.0
A-2 62 70% 55% 31984 4.5 4.3 4.4
A-3 62 65% 50% 168890 5.2 5.2 5.1
A-4 62 55% 40% 1550364 6.2 6.9 6.5
B-1 25 65% 50% 66970 4.8 5.2 4.7
B-2 35 65% 50% 88256 4.9 5.2 4.8
E. Ferrier et al. 2005 [30] A-2 43 50% 50% 950000 6.0 7.7 4.9
A-3 43 48% 48% 980000 6.0 8.1 5.1
A-4 43 49% 49% 1000000 6.0 7.9 5.0
B-2 43 70% 70% 4000 3.6 4.3 2.2
B-3 43 70% 70% 5500 3.7 4.3 2.2
B-4 43 70% 70% 6700 3.8 4.3 2.2
B-5 43 60% 60% 200000 5.3 6.0 3.5
B-6 43 60% 60% 176800 5.2 6.0 3.5
B-7 43 60% 60% 156700 5.2 6.0 3.5
C-2 43 80% 80% 1000 3.0 2.6 0.9
C-3 43 80% 80% 1240 3.1 2.6 0.9
C-4 43 80% 80% 850 2.9 2.6 0.9
C-5 43 65% 65% 345000 5.5 5.2 2.9
C-6 43 65% 65% 290560 5.5 5.2 2.9
C-7 43 65% 65% 320000 5.5 5.2 2.9
C-8 43 55% 55% 850000 5.9 6.9 4.2
C-9 43 55% 55% 870900 5.9 6.9 4.2
C-10 43 55% 55% 1050000 6.0 6.9 4.2
B2-2 43 66% 66% 2450 3.4 5.0 2.8
B2-3 43 63% 63% 6700 3.8 5.5 3.1
B2-4 43 59% 59% 25670 4.4 6.2 3.7
B2-5 43 54% 54% 135000 5.1 7.1 4.3
B2-6 43 50% 50% 1000000 6.0 7.7 4.9
C. Carloni et al. 2013 [32] DS-FT-1 42 70% 55% 9367 4.0 4.2 4.2
DS-FT-2 42 70% 55% 5513 3.7 4.3 4.2
DS-FT-3 42 70% 55% 10565 4.0 4.3 4.2
C. Carloni et al. 2012 [31] DS-F-1 35 79% 63% 1290 3.1 2.7 3.2
DS-F-2 35 67% 53% 13192 4.1 4.8 4.4
DS-F-3 35 59% 45% 116995 5.1 6.1 5.5
A. Daude et al. 2015 [33] F-1 53 70% 55% 2475 3.4 4.3 4.3
F-2 53 70% 55% 10900 4.0 4.3 4.3
F-3 53 70% 55% 15050 4.2 4.3 4.3
F-4 53 70% 55% 20839 4.3 4.3 4.3
F-5 53 70% 55% 31000 4.5 4.3 4.3
F-6 53 70% 55% 19550 4.3 4.3 4.3
F-7 23 70% 55% 15400 4.2 4.3 4.0
F-8 53 80% 65% 450 2.7 2.6 3.0
F-9 53 80% 65% 2900 3.5 2.6 3.0
F-10 53 80% 65% 5100 3.7 2.6 3.0
F-11 53 80% 65% 12600 4.1 2.6 3.0
F-12 53 80% 65% 19200 4.3 2.6 3.0
F-13 53 80% 65% 9050 4.0 2.6 3.0
F-14 23 80% 65% 9600 4.0 2.6 2.8

Fig. 15. Reliability of proposed and existing models.

11
A. Chalot et al.
Fig. 16. W€
ohler curve: Designed model.
%Pu ¼ 0:065 logðNÞ þ 0:971 (11)
%Pu ¼ 0:058 logðNÞ þ 0:949 (12)
4.2. Testing and comparison of the proposed model
A fatigue test database from the literature was edited to test our fa­
tigue model, which was calibrated as described in the previous section.
The model was also compared to the model developed by Ref. [29],
which is indicated in Eq. (4). The test parameters and results of the two
models are detailed in Table 4.
In Fig. 15, we can see that the proposed model provides more reliable
results than the Zhu model [29], with a determination coefficient of 0.72
against 0.41 for the Zhu model. These results confirm the validity of the
proposed model despite the fatigue tests being conducted under
different experimental protocols (see Fig. 16).
4.3. Predictive preliminary model
In addition to the analytical model, a predictive preliminary model
was also calibrated. The distribution of the results follows a normal rule.
The different series of tests show the same deviations. By studying the
distribution of the tests, we can thus obtain a trend curve that delimits
the lower 5% from the upper 95%. The predictive preliminary model is
given through Eq. (13).
%Pu ¼ 0:861 0:058 logðNÞ (13)
5. Conclusion
The objective of this study was to determine the fatigue behaviour of
CFRP/concrete interfaces. The following conclusions can be
highlighted:
The fatigue tests show significant dispersion. To counter this exper­
imental bias, it is therefore necessary to conduct many tests and control
this dispersion. Using 29 fatigue tests, this experimental campaign
provides a faithful picture of the behaviour, although additional tests
will have to be conducted to increase the relevance of the analytical
model.
The tests performed showed that the fatigue life (number of cycles
prior to failure) of the specimens is a function of the loading rate which
depends only of the static strength of the bond. The other parameters do
not seem to have any influence on the fatigue behaviour of the interface.
Cyclic fatigue loading changes the failure mode. We move from a
concrete pull-out, namely, a type 1 failure mode (concrete delamina­
tion), to a type 5 (adhesive/concrete interface failure) and type 6
12
Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255
(adhesive/CFRP interface failure) mixed failure. It is therefore the resin
and not the concrete which is the weak point.
Cyclic fatigue loading produces debonding, which spreads along the
adhesive joint until the bonded surface is too small to take up the load.
The final failure remains significant.
CFRP A (unidirectional fabric) and CFRP B (bidirectional carbon
fabric) show similar fatigue behaviours. The data collected made it
possible to calibrate the model in Eq. (12) and the designed model in Eq.
(13). The proposed model was compared to an existing model based on a
database provided in the literature.
References
[1] Zhao C, Huang PY, Zheng X, Yao G. Ductility research of reinforced concrete beams
strengthened with CFRP. Key Eng Mater 2004;274–276. https://doi.org/10.4
028/www.scientific.net/KEM.274-276.1159. 1159–0.
[2] Spadea G, Bencardino F, Swamy RN. Structural behavior of composite RC beams
with externally bonded CFRP. J Compos Constr 1998;2:132–7. https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268. 1998)2:3(132.
[3] Kim Yail J, Chen Shi, Green Mark F. Ductility and cracking behavior of prestressed
concrete beams strengthened with prestressed CFRP sheets. J Compos Constr 2008;
12:274–83. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2008)12:3(274).
[4] Evaluation of bending strength of RC beams strengthened with FRP sheets.
J Compos Constr 2006;10(4). n.d. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/. 10:4
(313) (accessed June 5, 2019
[5] Ascione L, Berardi VP, Feo L, Mancusi G. A numerical evaluation of the
interlaminar stress state in externally FRP plated RC beams. Compos B Eng 2005;
36:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-8368(03)00018-0.
[6] Bocciarelli M, di Feo C, Nistic�o N, Pisani MA, Poggi C. Failure of RC beams
strengthened in bending with unconventionally arranged CFRP laminates. Compos
B Eng 2013;54:246–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.05.028.
[7] Dong J, Wang Q, Guan Z. Structural behaviour of RC beams with external flexural
and flexural–shear strengthening by FRP sheets. Compos B Eng 2013;44:604–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.02.018.
[8] Bocciarelli M, Gambarelli S, Nistic�o N, Pisani MA, Poggi C. Shear failure of RC
elements strengthened with steel profiles and CFRP wraps. Compos B Eng 2014;67:
9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.06.009.
[9] Shen H-S, Chen Y, Su W-L. Bending and vibration characteristics of damaged RC
slabs strengthened with externally bonded CFRP sheets. Compos Struct 2004;63:
231–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-8223(03)00170-3.
[10] Tao Z, Han L-H, Zhuang J-P. Axial loading behavior of CFRP strengthened
concrete-filled steel Tubular stub columns , axial loading behavior of CFRP
strengthened concrete-filled steel Tubular stub columns. Adv Struct Eng 2007;10:
37–46. https://doi.org/10.1260/136943307780150814.
[11] Bouchelaghem H, Bezazi A, Scarpa F. Compressive behaviour of concrete
cylindrical FRP-confined columns subjected to a new sequential loading technique.
Compos B Eng 2011;42:1987–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2011.05.045.
[12] Promis G, Ferrier E. Performance indices to assess the efficiency of external FRP
retrofitting of reinforced concrete short columns for seismic strengthening. Constr
Build Mater 2012;26:32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.04.067.
[13] Bizindavyi L, Neale KW. Transfer lengths and bond strengths for composites
bonded to concrete. J Compos Constr 1999;3. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
1090-0268(1999)3:4(153).
[14] Chen JF, Teng JG. Anchorage strength models for FRP and steel plates bonded to
concrete. J Struct Eng 2001;127:784–91. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9445(2001)127:7(784).
[15] Yao J, Teng JG, Chen J-F. Experimental study on FRP-to-concrete bonded joints.
Compos B Eng 2004;36:99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2004.06.001.
[16] Lu XZ, Teng JG, Ye LP, Jiang JJ. Bond–slip models for FRP sheets/plates bonded to
concrete. Eng Struct 2005;27:920–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2005.01.014.
[17] Nakaba K, Kanakubo T, Furuta T, Yoshizawa H. Bond behavior between fiber-
reinforced polymer laminates and concrete. SJ 2001;98:359–67. https://doi.org/
10.14359/10224.
[18] Savoia M, Ferracuti B, Mazzotti C. Non linear bond-slip law for frp-concrete
interface. In: Fibre-reinforced polymer reinforcement for concrete structures.
World Scientific Publishing Company; 2003. p. 163–72. https://doi.org/10.1142/
9789812704863_0013.
[19] Wu Z, Yin J. Fracturing behaviors of FRP-strengthened concrete structures. Eng
Fract Mech 2003;70:1339–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(02)00100-5.
[20] Buyukozturk O, Gunes O, Karaca E. Progress on understanding debonding
problems in reinforced concrete and steel members strengthened using FRP
composites. Constr Build Mater 2004;18:9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-
0618(03)00094-1.
[21] Lu XZ, Teng JG, Ye LP, Jiang JJ. Bond–slip models for FRP sheets/plates bonded to
concrete. Eng Struct 2005;27:920–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2005.01.014.
[22] Carloni C, Subramaniam KV. Direct determination of cohesive stress transfer
during debonding of FRP from concrete. Compos Struct 2010;93:184–92. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2010.05.024.
A. Chalot et al.
[23] Ali-Ahmad Mohamad K, Subramaniam Kolluru V, Michel Ghosn. Analysis of
scaling and instability in FRP-concrete shear debonding for beam-strengthening
applications. J Eng Mech 2007;133:58–65. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9399(2007)133:1(58).
[24] Subramaniam KV, Carloni C, Nobile L. Width effect in the interface fracture during
shear debonding of FRP sheets from concrete. Eng Fract Mech 2007;74:578–94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.09.002.
[25] Carlo Pellegrino, Davide Tinazzi, Claudio Modena. Experimental study on bond
behavior between concrete and FRP reinforcement. J Compos Constr 2008;12:
180–9. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2008)12:2(180).
[26] Ali-Ahmad Mohamad, Kolluru Subramaniam, Michel Ghosn. Experimental
investigation and fracture analysis of debonding between concrete and FRP sheets.
J Eng Mech 2006;132:914–23. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2006)
132:9(914).
[27] Dong JF, Wang QY, Guan ZW. Structural behaviour of RC beams externally
strengthened with FRP sheets under fatigue and monotonic loading. Eng Struct
2012;41:24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.03.024.
[28] Demers CE. Fatigue strength degradation of E-glass FRP composites and carbon
FRP composites. Constr Build Mater 1998;12:311–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0950-0618(98)00012-9.
[29] Zhu J-T, Wang X-L, Kang X-D, Li K. Analysis of interfacial bonding characteristics
of CFRP-concrete under fatigue loading. Constr Build Mater 2016;126:823–33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.06.071.
13
Composites Part B 177 (2019) 107255
[30] Ferrier E, Bigaud D, Hamelin P, Bizindavyi L, Neale KW. Fatigue of CFRPs
externally bonded to concrete. Mater Struct 2005;38:39–46. https://doi.org/
10.1007/BF02480573.
[31] Carloni C, Subramaniam KV, Savoia M, Mazzotti C. Experimental determination of
FRP–concrete cohesive interface properties under fatigue loading. Compos Struct
2012;94:1288–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.10.026.
[32] Carloni C, Subramaniam KV. Investigation of sub-critical fatigue crack growth in
FRP/concrete cohesive interface using digital image analysis. Compos B Eng 2013;
51:35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.02.015.
[33] Daud RA, Cunningham LS, Wang YC. Static and fatigue behaviour of the bond
interface between concrete and externally bonded CFRP in single shear. Eng Struct
2015;97:54–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.068.
[34] Yun Y, Wu Y-F, Tang WC. Performance of FRP bonding systems under fatigue
loading. Eng Struct 2008;30:3129–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2008.04.026.
[35] NF EN 12390-3. 2012.
[36] Soci�
et�e Freyssinet. Foreva TFC (ou TFC H) Avis technique 3/14-757*V2. 2017.
[37] GTM SUD. Proc� ed�e ROCCþ Avis technique 3/09-626*01 Mod. 2016.
[38] AFGC. Renforcement parasismiques de structures en b� eton arm�e par mat�eriaux
composites – Recommandations provisoires. 2015.