See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348363884

Case study Response of interior beam-column connections integrated with

various schemes of CFRP composites

Article  in  Case Studies in Construction Materials · January 2021

DOI: 10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00488

CITATIONS READS

2 222

3 authors, including:

Rajai Z. Al-Rousan Mohammad Alhassan

Jordan University of Science and Technology Jordan University of Science and Technology
96 PUBLICATIONS   784 CITATIONS    76 PUBLICATIONS   313 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

CFRP composites & Fiber-reinforced concrete for repair of structures View project

Development of Mechanical Anchor System to Enhance the Efficiency of Flexural Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beams using Fiber Reinforced Polymers View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Alhassan on 10 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cscm

Case study

Response of interior beam-column connections integrated

with various schemes of CFRP composites
Rajai Z. Al-Rousana,*, Mohammad A. Alhassana,b , Rawan J. Al-omarya
a
Jordan University of Science and Technology (JUST), Irbid, Jordan
b
Al Ain University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

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

Article history: This study evaluates the effectiveness of integrating Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer
Received 24 August 2020 (CFRP) composites for improving the response of interior Beam-Column (B-C) connections
Received in revised form 23 November 2020 under the combined effects of axial and lateral cyclic loads. Eighteen Reinforced Concrete
Accepted 3 January 2021
(RC) B-C connection models were simulated using the nonlinear Finite Element Analysis
(FEA) ANSYS software. The beam had a cross-sectional dimensions of 125  160 mm with a
Keywords: total length of 1600 mm, and the column cross-sectional dimensions were 125  150 mm
B-C connection
with a total height of 1050 mm. Different parameters were taken into consideration in this
Joint
CFRP composites
study including: the configuration, orientation, length, and number of layers of CFRP sheets.
Lateral cyclic loading The nonlinear FEA models were calibrated and reasonably validated based on experimental
Hysteresis test results previously published in reputable journals. The response of the B-C connections
was then evaluated in terms of mode of failure, stress contours, hysteretic loops, load-
displacement envelopes, ultimate lateral load and corresponding drift displacement, and
energy dissipation. The nonlinear FEA results showed that the used strengthening schemes
of CFRP composites can significantly enhance the B-C connection performance leading to
higher lateral load and drift capacities as well as energy dissipation. The effectiveness of the
employed CFRP composite increased as the bonding area and number of CFRP sheet layers
increased. The orientation angle of the CFRP sheets had had a considerable effect on the
energy dissipation and minor effect on the ultimate lateral load and corresponding drift.
© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction

The structural behavior and integrity of Reinforced Concrete (RC) buildings exposed to lateral cyclic loads dominantly
depends on the performance of the joints between the beams and columns; referred as the B-C connections. The lateral load
carrying capacity of the B-C connection dependent on the strength of its components; namely the beam, column, and joint.
Design of the B-C connections of moment resisting frames require special provisions in all design codes to ensure a specific
level of controlled damage with target ductility when resisting seismic forces. Such loading condition results in internal
moments in the beams on both sides of the joints, and these moments have the same the same direction. As a result, the
moments pull the top bars that are continuous within the joint inside while pulling the bottom in the adverse direction [1].
The developed tensile forces in the top and bottom bars induce bond stresses between the concrete and steel bars. Bond
failure will occur if the column’s dimensions are not large enough or if the strength of the concrete within the joint is low.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rzalrousan@just.edu.jo (R.Z. Al-Rousan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00488
2214-5095/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

This will cause the steel bars to slide into the joint area resulting in a reduction in the beam carrying capacity. Moreover, the
pull and push forces originated near the top and bottom ends of the joint cause it to deform in which one dimension expands
while the other shortens. If the size of the column cannot accommodate this deformation, the concrete within the joint area
develops diagonal cracks. Therefore, the B-C the B-C connection must have special reinforcement to control the diagonal
cracks and to prevent crushing of the concrete in the joint area; thus allowing the B-C connection to perform as intended for
RC moment resisting frames subjected to earthquake loading [2–4]. Lack of transverse reinforcement within the joint area
and inadequate use of splicing are the main reasons of failure of the B-C connections.
One of the most effective ways to ensure adequate B-C connection behavior is to enlarge the column dimensions and to
encase the column and beam steel bars within the joint and on both sides of the connection. This will increase the shear
resistance and the confined concrete strength [5]. However, most B-C connections lack these design measures which
dictate the need for effective strengthening method [6,7]. Sudden failure that may occur within the joint area can lead to a
series of local collapses that may ultimately lead to the collapse of the entire structure [8]. Another type of failure is a
ductile one that usually occurs on the beam at a small distance from the column through plastic hinge formation [9,10].
Retrofitting and strengthening of current RC B-C connection is a major concern in structural engineering at present due to
the structural deficiency resulting from a combination of factors including not taking into consideration the seismic design
and detailing requirements [5–11]. The main techniques that are typically used for strengthening of B-C connection are: RC
jacketing, steel plating, and FRP composites [12]. The RC jacketing is most frequently used to increase the column and joint
seismic capacities; however, it may not be feasible due to accessibility issues and will result in undesired oversized
dimensions of the strengthened element. Steel plating requires special anchoring system with accessibility problem and
most importantly it is susceptible to corrosion. The FRP composites has superior advantage due to their high strength to
weight ratio, easy of installment, minor increase in the dimensions of the strengthened elements, and non-corrosive
[13,14]. The most effective FRP material for strengthening of structural elements the carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
(CFRP) as a result of its distinctive properties such as high strength to weight ratio, high stiffness, excellent corrosion and
alkali resistant.
Over the past decades, many researches have been evaluating the effectiveness of CFRP strengthening for B-C connections
[15,16]. The intent is to arrive at the optimum design of the CFRP configuration given the existing detailing of the B-C
connection. The main factors that affect the process is the nonlinearity of both the CFRP composite and concrete, and the
bond type between these materials, which must be carefully defined in the FEA; the simplest approach is to assume perfect
bond meaning no-slipping between the CFRP composite and concrete [17]. In most 3D FEA, the CFRP is modelled as
orthotropic material and the concrete as brittle material with isotropic properties [18–23]. There are many studies in
literature document the FEA simulation of CFRP composites and concrete elements in terms of bond behavior [24,25],
cementitious matrix [26], anchored CFRP [27], general strenghtneing techniques [28–32]. In addition, there are many other
studies that are worthy citing and specifically focused on CFRP strengthening of various types of RC B-C connections in terms
of retrofitting techniques [33–36], strengthening techniques [37–42], repairing techniques [43–46], numerical investigation
[47–49], size effect [50–52], and production and applications [53].
The FEA was proven to be a suitable technique of structural simulations after correlation between numerical results and
relevant experimental results exist in literature. A comprehensive set of solutions is provided by FEA programs capable of
solving linear and nonlinear, static/dynamic, implicit/explicit structural problems [54–56]. Through systematic nonlinear
FEA using ANSYS software [57], a number of parameters, that are connected to the response of B-C bond when exposed to
cyclic loading, are investigated in this work. The study takes into consideration the effects of the strengthening technique
configuration (one full face of the column, two full faces of the column, and all faces of the column), number of CFRP layers (1,
2, and 3), and the fiber orientation of the CFRP (0 , 45 , 60 , 90 ). Because of the restrictions of the loading machines, the
special setup requirements, and the needed instrumentation, it is somewhat difficult to investigate the intended parameters,
experimentally.
In beam-column connections that are part of moment resisting frames, the typical design philosophy is to achieve a
strong column-weak beam action, which provides the level of needed ductility by the connection and ensures plastic hinge
formation in the beam away from the joint region. Beam-column connections that lack such performance can be repaired
with CFRP composites to upgrade their performance to the aforementioned level. However, the efficiency of strengthening
using CFRP composites depends on critical factors including the configuration, orientation, length, and number of layers of
CFRP sheets. In order to fulfill the purposes of this study, eighteen nonlinear FEA models were designed; taking into
consideration the models' dimensions, actual setup of loading, reinforcement details, and the characteristics of the concrete
and steel used. The models were set and calibrated according to the experimental results achieved by Shannag and Alhassan
[6].

2. Non-linear finite element analysis

2.1. General

The nonlinear FEA method is a numerical tool that has been utilized to investigate the behavior of CFRP strengthened B-C
connections, when exposed to loads, axially and horizontally. For more accuracy, finite element models, that consisted nodes,
have been used rather than the original structure. The algebraic equations were formulated and solved for the system.

2
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

As mentioned earlier, eighteen full-scale models were built and strengthened with CFRP composites. Then, they were
calibrated and validated. Moreover, the B-C connection specimens were built using the FEA software package ANSYS. The
analysis was extended to include many important factors through a parametric study.

2.2. Experimental work review

Fig.1 shows the actual members' dimensions and reinforcement details. The column was rectangular with a length of 750
mm and cross-sectional dimensions of 125  150 mm; while the beam was rectangular that were 1600 mm long and had
cross-sectional dimensions of 200  125 mm. The support was installed on the column's bottom end, while the other end
was kept free in order to permit the relative drift; and simple rollers were put to support the beams-ends, as shown in (Fig. 1).

2.3. Description of NLFEA

The dimensions, meshing, reinforcement, type of support at each end, and type of loading of the control un-strengthened
B-C connection are shown in Fig. 1 as simulated in ANSYS. The B-C connection models were examined using 3-D
isoperimetric 8-node solid elements and each node has three degrees of freedom. The “SOLID65” was used to make the non-
linear concrete material because of its ability to predict: the cracks in tension, crushing in compression, and plastic
deformation. This component is a three-dimensional element so it can be used to model solids with and without
reinforcements. Fig. 2(a) represents the concrete non-linear stress-strain relationship with ultimate concrete compressive
strengths of 27 MPa. The reinforcing steel was simulated using link element LINK180, which has two nodes at its edges and
each of them has three degrees of freedom. This element is a 3D uniaxial tension-compression spar that can predict plasticity
rotation, and large strain and deflection. In contrast, commonly used steel reinforcement bars exhibit hardening after a yield
plateau in the post-yield range; though the hardening stiffness and range may vary between the bars produced in different
countries. To overcome this discrepancy and cover all types of reinforcing bars, this parametric study was conducted for
linear hardening material, which along with elastic-perfectly plastic material constitute the two opposite extremes of all
possible hardening mechanisms. So, this was simulated as a Bilinear Isotropic (BISO) material. There are two types of steel
reinforcement in column, longitudinal bars of 14 mm-diameter and lateral stirrups of 8 mm-diameter spacing at 250 mm.
Also, there are two types of steel reinforcement in beam, longitudinal bars of 14 and 10 mm-diameters and stirrups of 8 mm-
diameter spacing at 150 mm. Modulus of elasticity of 200 GPa and poisons ratio of 0.3 were used for the steel as shown in
Fig. 2(b). SOLID185 was used to simulate the steel plates at the column and beam ends to avoid stress concentration as the
load is applied. The investigated parameters are shown in Fig. 3 and Table 1. The loading process began by applying an axial
load was first applied. After that, a load was used horizontally as a displacement–controlled loading to make sure that the
declining part of the load-displacement response curve was included.
For CFRP wrapping, thin solid or shell element types could be used to model this type of confinement since it has small
third dimension compared with others. The shell elements behave only as a membrane with some limitations. As laminated
thicknesses increase, out-of-plane stress become more significant. Therefore, it is good to use the layered solid elements to
incorporate the composite materials in the large assemblies. SOLID186 is a 3D element defined by 20 nodes with three
degrees of freedom capable to support plasticity, large deflection and strain [58]. This element type is available in form of
layered structural solid with different orientations and orthotropic material properties for each required layer of CFRP. The
anisotropic and no homogeneity behavior of CFRP that come from different material micro-level and insoluble components
make it act as an orthotropic material. The used CFRP with a thickness of 0.166 mm is a bi-directional material [58]. Due to
the presence of fibers in the longitudinal and transverse directions, the stiffness parallel to these directions is much higher
than the other one. Elastic modulus, shear modulus, and poisons ratio were defined for each direction as shown in Table 2.
The CFRP ruptures when the stress reaches the maximum tensile strength.

2.4. Assembly and loading

Three hydraulic actuators were used in the test, as shown in Fig. 1. Tow of them were vertical, and the third one was
horizontal. To apply the axial load, two of the actuators were connected together vertically, by a highly-rigid-steel I-beam, for
axial load application. Post applying the axial load, the horizontal actuator was used to apply quasi-static, displacement-
controlled cyclic loading [6]. It is worth noting, at this point, that the bonding, that attached the reinforcement bars to the
concrete, was presumed not to be a very strong one and not slippery and simulated a strong contact interface. As a result, the
simultaneous nodes merged into one, with adequate tolerance. In order to find the most suitable size, a mesh with 25 mm
element meshing size was specified, as shown in Fig. 1. At the two ends of the beams, the boundary conditions were strained
in vertical, as Uy = 0; whereas, the column's lower end, the bottom, was set as a hinge support. The first loading step consisted
of applying the column axial load. Next, the horizontal load was added, as displacement-controlled loading, to guarantee the
inclusion of the load-displacement response curve’s descending section was included. This kind of loading was added, by
increments, to prevent abrupt failure (solution divergence), and ensure the stability of the analysis. It must be mentioned,
here, that the ANSYS method can, automatically, split the whole loading to smaller steps, or sub-steps, that should be
manually inputted. At every increment of loading, the matrix of the elements' stiffness was updated at each iteration to attain
a nonlinear response convergence using the Newton-Raphson equilibrium iterative method, with 0.001 of tolerance.

3
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 1. Specimen geometry, steel detailing, and schematic of test setup (dimensions in mm) [6].

Fig. 2. Stress-Strain curves for (a) concrete and (b) steel reinforcement.

The Influence of column axial load level on the value of lateral load capacity and net drift greatly affected by percent of the
axial load for the column, and this column axial load can be at several levels (25 %, 50 %, and 75 %). Alhassan et al. study [5]
showed that the level of the axial load for column if it reaches up to the value of 75 % of its maximum value, is useful for the
structural attitude for the B-C, that could be due to that the compressive stresses that induced in the joint area and column
that will reduce the shear and tensile stresses generated by lateral loading. When increasing the column' load level, it was
observed that there was a non-proportional increase in the lateral load capacity and the ultimate net drift of the connection.
In this paper, the applied axial load level of the column was 75 % of the nominal capacity [5].

4
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 3. Strengthening technique for simulated beam-column connections.

5
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Table 1
Models characteristics and FEA results.

Group Configuration Number of layers Orientation Maximum horizontal Maximum horizontal Energy dissipation,
load, kN net drift, mm kN.mm
BC0S0F Control None None 19.0 9.1 318
BC1S1F One face (full column) 1 90 25.8 12.4 757
BC2S1F Two faces (full column) 33.2 19.5 1385
BC4S1F All faces (full column) 38.7 28.9 409
BC1S2F One face (full column) 2 90 , 0 27.4 15.0 924
BC2S2F Two faces (full column) 36.8 21.5 1718
BC4S2F All faces (full column) 42.1 32.9 579
BC1S3F One face (full column) 3 90 , 0 , 90 30.1 19.3 1209
BC2S3F Two faces (full column) 41.8 24.8 2087
BC4S3F All faces (full column) 47.0 35.8 229
BC1S1FJ One face (Joint) 1 90 22.7 10.3 322
BC1S2FJ 2 90 , 0 24.4 14.4 445
BC1S3FJ 3 90 , 0 , 90 27.1 17.9 291
BC2S1FJ Two faces (Joint) 1 90 27.1 11.1 478
BC2S2FJ 2 90 , 0 29.6 16.7 657
BC2S3FJ 3 90 , 0 , 90 33.3 20.4 443
BC1S1F45 One face (full column) 1 45 30.1 14.8 381
BC1S1F60 One face (full column) 1 60 28.2 13.6 318

Table 2
CFRP composite properties.

Composite Modulus of elasticity (GPa) Poisons ratio Shear modulus of Ultimate tensile Ultimate strain
elasticity (GPa) strength (MPa)
CFRP sheet Gxy 106.6 Vxy 0.22 Ex 260 0.015 3900
Gyz 106.6 Vyz 0.22 Ey 260
Gzx 106.6 Vzx 0.22 Ez 4.5

2.5. Calibration and validation

2.5.1. Control beam-column connections

The NLFEA models had been adjusted as per the experimented study samples of Shannag and Alhassan [6]. So, the
following specifications were taken into consideration upon designing the non-linear FEA models: the actual dimensions
and the details of the reinforcement (Fig. 1), the properties of the concrete and steel (Fig. 2). It was assured to conduct a
proper calibration by using: a suitable-sized mesh, the conditions of boundary, the loading, and the non-linearity of the
materials. The results of this work show a big agreement with the results obtained by Shannag and Alhassan [6], considering
the following during the loading’s push-pull stages: degradation, stiffness, and the ultimate load and drift. Also, the
nonlinear FEA models' generated cracking patterns, deformed shapes, and failure modes totally agreed with the
experimental results (Fig. 4(a)). For more elaboration, Fig. 4(a) (top) shows the results of the load-drift hysteresis obtained
from virgin (top left) and strengthened (top right) B-C connections, tested by Shannag and Alhassan [6]; while Fig. 5 shows
the FEA results of this study of the models.

2.5.2. Strengthened beam-column connections

Khaled et al. [59] tested eight full-scale interior RC beam-column specimens by applying both gravity and low-frequency
full cyclic load on a sub-assembly of interior RC beam-column joint. The RC beam-column joint specimens were designed
according to the ACI 318-14 Code [60]. The dimensions of beam members were 254 mm  406 mm reinforced with 4w19 mm
longitudinal steel reinforcement placed at both top and bottom of beam section. The beams transverse reinforcement is in
the form of 13 mm steel stirrups spaced equally at 102 mm on centers from the face of the column to a distance of 381 mm
away from the beam edge and the remaining stirrups with the same diameter were positioned at 76 mm on centers. The
column dimensions are 254 mm  406 mm with 4w19 mm longitudinal steel reinforcement placed at the top and bottom
constituting about 2 % steel reinforcement ratio. The full height of the column is confined with 13 mm stirrups spaced at 76
mm on centers except within the joint region. For more elaboration on the accuracy of the FEA of strengthened RC beam-
column connection, Fig. 4(b) reveals that the load-drift hysteresis response of FEA and experimental obtained by Khaled et al.
[59] are comparable to each other. The stress patterns obtained using FEA were compared against those observed
experimentally as shown in Fig. 6. Therefore, Figs. 4 and 6 reflect the accuracy of FEA in predicting of ultimate load and load-
drift hysteresis response up to failure.

6
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 4. The FEA results are validated with experiential results.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Mode of failure and cracking load

Fig. 7 shows the crack patterns and the brittle failure modes of the simulated B-C connections. The first crack in control
beam-column connection occurred in the top and the bottom of the diagonal joint area in the pushing part of the loading
while in the pulling part crack begin to appear at the top and the bottom of the another diagonal side. Therefore, when the
displacement increased the initial cracks extended from the joints side corner diagonally and also extended in the third
direction due to the cyclic load that leads to open and closed these crack so for that reason the strength decreased. With
further load increase, the cracks extended toward the beam and column and this caused a crushing failure in the concrete.
Prior to failure, the control beam-column connection exhibited a yielding in the tension steel reinforcement at an ultimate
horizontal load of 19.0 kN and the corresponding horizontal net drift of 9.1 mm. For the strengthened beam-column
connection with CFRP sheet at full side of the column, the cracks start to appear at the side of the tension for the beam with

7
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 5. The cracks patterns in the virgin B-C (left) and the strengthened one (right).

Fig. 6. Typical stress contours for Khaled et al. [59] beam-column connections.

the load is increased that yielded to increasing the spread of cracks at the tension side for the beam. Then, cracks began to
appear at the tension side of the lower column, while diagonal shear cracks start to begin at joints. During the load increasing,
flexural cracks initiated at the joint and extended toward the beam and column. Prior to failure, the joint started to fail by
yielding in the tension reinforcement and with the creating more cracks. With increasing the load, these stresses were
transferred to the CFRP sheet. Inspection of Fig. 7 reveals that the number of occurred cracks decreased with the increase of
CFRP strengthening faces and the number of CFRP layers. In addition, the number of occurred cracks decreased with the
decrease of CFRP orientation. Therefore, the results showed that fully wrap CFRP sheet delayed the occurrence of initial
cracks more than one and two faces strengthening technique because fully wrap CFRP sheet have higher CFRP bonded area
and better resistance to the tensile stresses during loading as well as the cracks in the joint-column region were much more
distributed in the fully wrap CFRP sheet strengthened beam-column connection. The CFRP B-C 's stress contours show that,
at the joint area, the tensile stress is less tensed, and yielded further into the beam's main steel. That means that the CFRP
sheet transformed the failure mode from brittle- in joint- to a ductile beam, leading to a strong column-weak beam action, as
shown in Fig. 8.

8
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 7. Crack patterns and failure mode of simulated beam-column connections.

3.2. Horizontal load-net drift hysteresis loops

Fig. 9 shows horizontal load-net drift hysteresis loops for the simulated B-C connections. The results show the effect of
CFRP, as the configuration effects increase the hysteresis loops for specimen increase, the ultimate load capacity and net drift
increased respectively. The value of the load against the net drift results these results were for the eighteen models with
different variables are shown in Table 1. These models were named in a method that clarifies the studied variables. For
example, BC1S1F indicates a model with CFRP on one side of the column as one layer. While BC2S2FJ indicates a model with
CFRP on two sides of the column as two-layer at the joint area only and so on. The results are presented and discussed to
evaluate how the B-C joints are influenced by each of the CFRP properties (namely: configuration, number of layers,

9
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

orientation, length, and shape), in terms of horizontal load capacity, net drift, failure mode, cracking, and joint shear stress.
The effect of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) materials has the ability to manufacture effective strengthening
systems. These systems are effective for increasing the RC beams' strength in flexural or shear. The CFRP materials are
featured for: low weight-volume ratio, corrosion proof, and high tensile strength. So, for that reason, if the concrete is
crushed, the CFRP begins to confining beam-column connection gradually and the high tensile strength of CFRP carried that
load until reaching the failure. Fig. 9 shows the load-displacement envelopes for all simulated beam-column connections
were the maximum loads and corresponding displacements attained in each half cycle (pushing and pulling). Inspection of
Fig. 10 reveals that control beam-column connection (without FRP repairing) exhibited minimum horizontal load and
displacement. Strengthened beam-column connection (fully wrap CFRP sheet) exhibited higher strength and displacement
than beam-column connection strengthened with one and two faces of CFRP sheets although the imposed lateral
reinforcement in this joint region is still inadequate to transmit the failure mechanism to the RC beam. Horizontal load-
displacement loops of strengthened with CFRP composite applied on the whole column show a considerable enhancement in
the performance in terms of horizontal load and displacement because of the CFRP provided confinement to the joint rejoin
by providing external cracks arresting mechanism and improving the post cracking ductility after reaching the ultimate load
capacity and displacement. Also, the CFRP orientation had a considerable influence on the loops of horizontal load-
displacement. That is because the compressive stress in the column increased with the decreasing of CFRP orientation angle
which leads to the initiation of joint tensile concrete cracks that cause reduction in joint strength and maintaining the
integrity of the joint connections.

3.3. Ultimate horizontal load capacity

Table 1 shows the beam-column connections nonlinear FEA results. The normalized ultimate horizontal load versus
investigated parameter (Fig. 11) of simulated beam-column connections were normalized with respect to the control
simulated beam-column connection (un-strengthened). Inspection of Fig. 11(a) reveals that the enhancement in the ultimate
horizontal load for beam-column connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP sheet is 36 %, 75 %, and 103 % for
beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and all faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively,
with an average significant enhancement of 71 % (Fig. 11(a)). This reflected that the ultimate horizontal load increased with
the increase of CFRP bonded area. The enhancement in ultimate horizontal load for beam-column connection strengthened
column with two layers of CFRP sheet is 44 %, 94 %, and 122 % for beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one
face, two faces, and all faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively, with an average significant enhancement of 87 % and this
percentage is 1.22 times the percentage of beam-column connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP (Fig. 11(b)).
Whereas, the enhancement in ultimate horizontal load for beam-column connection strengthened column with three layers
of CFRP sheet is 59 %, 120 %, and 147 % for beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and all
faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively, with an average significant enhancement of 109 % and this percentage is 1.56 times
the percentage of beam-column connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP (Fig. 11(c)). On other hand, the
average enhancement in the ultimate horizontal load for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on
one face of column area with an orientation of 60 and 45 is 48 % and 58 %, respectively, and this percentage is 1.36 and 1.64,
respectively, times the average percentage of enhancement in the ultimate horizontal load for beam-column connection
strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of column area with an orientation of 90 (Fig. 11(d)). Finally, the average
enhancement in the ultimate horizontal load for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one
face of joint area is 30 % and this percentage is 0.85 times the average percentage of enhancement in the ultimate horizontal
load for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of column area (Fig. 11(e)). While, the
average enhancement in the ultimate horizontal load for B-C connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on two faces
of joint area is 57 % and this percentage is 0.56 times the average percentage of enhancement in the ultimate horizontal load
for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on two faces of column area (Fig. 11(f)).

3.4. Ultimate horizontal net drift

Fig. 12 shows the normalized ultimate horizontal net drift versus investigated parameter of simulated beam-column
connections were normalized with respect to the control simulated beam-column connection (un-strengthened). it is much
difficult to predict the lateral drift compared with the ultimate load capacity. Inspection of Fig. 12(a) reveals that the
enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net drift for beam-column connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP
sheet is 36 %, 114 %, and 218 % for beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and all faces (Fully
wrap) of column, respectively, with an average significant enhancement of 123 % (1.72 times the enhancement percentage in
ultimate horizontal load) (Fig. 12(a)). This reflected that the ultimate horizontal net drift increased with the increase of CFRP
bonded area. The enhancement in ultimate horizontal net drift for beam-column connection strengthened column with two
layers of CFRP sheet is 65 %, 136 %, and 262 % for beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and
all faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively, with an average significant enhancement of 154 % (1.77 times the enhancement
percentage in ultimate horizontal load) and this percentage is 1.39 times the percentage of beam-column connection
strengthened column with one layer of CFRP (Fig. 12(b)). Whereas, the enhancement in ultimate horizontal net drift for
beam-column connection strengthened column with three layers of CFRP sheet is 112 %, 173 %, and 293 % for beam-column

10
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 8. Typical stress contours for simulated beam-column connections.

11
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 9. Horizontal load-net drift hysteresis loops for strengthened beam-column connections.

connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and all faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively, with an average
significant enhancement of 193 % (1.78 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load) and this percentage is
1.98 times the percentage of beam-column connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP (Fig. 12(c)). On other
hand, the average enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net drift for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP
sheet applied on one face of column area with an orientation of 60 and 45 is 49 % (1.01 times the enhancement percentage
in ultimate horizontal load) and 63 % (1.09 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load), respectively, and
this percentage is 1.37 and 1.73, respectively, times the average percentage of enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net
drift for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of column area with an orientation of
90 (Fig. 12(d)). Finally, the average enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net drift for beam-column connection
strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of joint area is 56 % (1.87 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate
horizontal load) and this percentage is 0.57 times the average percentage of enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net drift
for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of column area (Fig. 12(e)). While, the
average enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net drift for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet
applied on two faces of joint area is 77 % (1.38 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load) and this

12
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 10. The load-displacement curve envelops for simulated beam-column connections.

percentage is 0.51 times the average percentage of enhancement in the ultimate horizontal net drift for beam-column
connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on two faces of column area (Fig. 12(f)).

3.5. Energy dissipation

The energy dissipation is defined as the area under the hysteretic loop for each cyclic load so when the building subjected
to lateral loading a higher energy dissipation capability to absorb more energy. Fig. 13 shows the normalized energy
dissipation versus investigated parameter of simulated B-C connections were normalized with respect to the control
simulated beam-column connection (un-strengthened). Inspection of Fig. 13(a) reveals that the enhancement in the energy
dissipation for beam-column connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP sheet is 471 %, 1261 %, and 2392 % for
beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and all faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively,

13
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 11. Enhancement percentages in maximum horizontal load with respect to control model.

with an average significant enhancement of 1375 % (18 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load)
(Fig. 13(a)). This reflected that the energy dissipation increased with the increase of CFRP bonded area. The enhancement in
energy dissipation for beam-column connection strengthened column with two layers of CFRP sheet is 635 %, 1561 %, and
2990 % for beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on one face, two faces, and all faces (Fully wrap) of column,
respectively, with an average significant enhancement of 1729 % (19 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate
horizontal load) and this percentage is 1.26 times the percentage of beam-column connection strengthened column with one
layer of CFRP (Fig. 13(b)). Whereas, the enhancement in energy dissipation for beam-column connection strengthened
column with three layers of CFRP sheet is 941 %, 2074 %, and 3654 % for beam-column connection with CFRP sheet applied on

14
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 12. Enhancement percentages in maximum horizontal net drift with respect to control model.

one face, two faces, and all faces (Fully wrap) of column, respectively, with an average significant enhancement of 2223 % (20
times the enhancement in ultimate horizontal load) and this percentage is 1.62 times the percentage of beam-column
connection strengthened column with one layer of CFRP (Fig. 13(c)).
On other hand, the average enhancement in the energy dissipation for B-C connection strengthened with CFRP sheet
applied on one face of column area with an orientation of 60 and 45 is 586 % (12.4 times the enhancement percentage in
ultimate horizontal load) and 697 % (14.8 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load), respectively, and
this percentage is 1.24 and 1.48, respectively, times the average percentage of enhancement in the energy dissipation for
beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of column area with an orientation of 90

15
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

Fig. 13. Enhancement percentages in energy dissipation with respect to control model.

(Fig. 13(d)). Finally, the average enhancement in the energy dissipation for beam-column connection strengthened with
CFRP sheet applied on one face of joint area is 497 % (16.57 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load)
and this percentage is 0.72 times the average percentage of enhancement in the energy dissipation for beam-column
connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on one face of column area (Fig. 13(e)). While, the average enhancement in
the energy dissipation for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on two faces of joint area is 755 %
(13.5 times the enhancement percentage in ultimate horizontal load) and this percentage is 0.45 times the average
percentage of enhancement in the energy dissipation for beam-column connection strengthened with CFRP sheet applied on
two faces of column area (Fig. 13(f)).

16
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

4. Conclusions

Based on the finding of this nonlinear FEA study, the following conclusions are made:

1 In general, the use of CFRP composite as external strengthening technique results in increase in the number of hysteresis
loops indicating higher energy dissipation, enhanced ductility, and more stabilized stiffness degradation. The intensity of
the stresses within the joint decreases and yielding of steel spreads more to the beam main steel.
2 Compared with the control (un-strengthened) B-C connection, the strengthened B-C connections attained higher
horizontal load levels, larger horizontal drift displacements, and higher energy dissipation along with significant increase
in the joint strength was recorded.
3 As for the B-C connections that are strengthened by CFRP composite, the joint may dissipate the energy before the system
loses its stability. This is an indication of the joint maximum capacity to be stressed until failure.
4 The use of CFRP composites as external strengthening technique improves the lateral load capacity of B-C connections by
36 %–147 % with respect to companion control B-C connections. The improvement in the ductility was 36 %–293 % but the
improvement in the energy dissipation was 471 %–3654 %.
5 For the studied B-C connections, changing the CFRP orientation angle had a minor effect on the ultimate horizontal load
and corresponding drift but it had a considerable effect on the energy dissipation.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors report no declarations of interest

References

[1] M.A.L. Silva, J.C.P.H. Gamage, S. Fawzia, Performance of slab-column connections of flat slabs strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymers, Case
Stud. Constr. Mater. 11 (1) (2019)e00275.
[2] SayanKumar Shaw, Arjun Sil, Experimental study on cyclic loading characteristics of fly ash as partial replacement of cement in beam-column joint,
Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 13 (1) (2020)e00362.
[3] Ibrahim G. Shaaban, Mohamed Said, Finite element modeling of exterior beam-column joints strengthened by ferrocement under cyclic loading, Case
Stud. Constr. Mater. 8 (1) (2018) 333–346.
[4] Ibrahim G. Shaaban, Osama A. Seoud, Experimental behavior of full-scale exterior beam-column space joints retrofitted by ferrocement layers under
cyclic loading, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 8 (1) (2018) 61–78.
[5] M.A. Alhassan, R.Z. Al-Rousan, L.K. Amaireh, M.H. Barfed, Nonlinear finite element analysis of B-C connections: influence of the column axial load,
jacket thickness, and fiber dosage, Structures 16 (2018) 50–62.
[6] M.J. Shannag, M.A. Alhassan, Seismic upgrade of interior beam-column subassemblages with high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete jackets, ACI
Struct. J. 102 (1) (2005) 131–138.
[7] M. Melek, J.W. Wallace, Cyclic behavior of columns with short lap splices, ACI Struct. J. 101 (6) (2004) 802–811.
[8] E. Masoero, F.K. Wittel, H.J. Herrmann, B.M. Chiaia, Progressive collapse mechanisms of brittle and ductile framed structures, J. Eng. Mech. 136 (8)
(2010) 987–995.
[9] S.R. Uma, Seismic behavior of beam column joints in reinforced concrete moment resisting frames, Earthquake 2 (7) (2015) 1–36.
[10] I. Faridmehr, M.M. Tahir, T. Lahmer, Classification system for semi-rigid beam-to-column connections, Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. 13 (11) (2016) 2152–
2175.
[11] A. Ghobarah, A. Said, Seismic rehabilitation of beam-column joints using FRP laminates, J. Earthq. Eng. 5 (1) (2001) 113–129.
[12] W. Khan, S. Akhtar, A. Hussain, Rehabilitation of concrete and masonry structures, AIP Conf. Proc. 2158 (September) (2019).
[13] S. Raza, M.K.I. Khan, S.J. Menegon, H.H. Tsang, J.L. Wilson, Strengthening and repair of reinforced concrete columns by jacketing: state-of-the-art
review, Sustain 11 (11) (2019).
[14] K.G. Vandoros, S.E. Dritsos, Concrete jacket construction detail effectiveness when strengthening RC columns, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (3) (2008) 264–
276.
[15] A. Siddika, MamunM.A. Al, R. Alyousef, Y.H.M. Amran, Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams by using fiber-reinforced polymer composites: a
review, J. Build Eng. 25 (2019)100798.
[16] A. Juan-Valdés, D. Rodríguez-Robles, J. García-González, M.I. Guerra-Romero, J.M. Morán-del Pozo, Influence of the use of external carbon fiber
reinforcement on the flexural behavior of prismatic concrete test specimens. An application for repairing of deteriorated agricultural structures,
Materials (Basel) 12 (12) (2019) 1–11.
[17] T. Martin, S. Taylor, D. Robinson, D. Cleland, Finite element modelling of FRP strengthened restrained concrete slabs, Eng. Struct. 187 (July 2018) (2019)
101–119.
[18] W. Sun, W.M. Ghannoum, Modeling of anchored CFRP strips bonded to concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 85 (2015) 144–156.
[19] P. Neto, J. Alfaiate, J. Vinagre, A three-dimensional analysis of CFRP-concrete bond behaviour, Compos. Part B Eng. 59 (2014) 153–165.
[20] M.A. Alhassan, R.Z. Al Rousan, E.A. Al Shuqari, Bond-slip behavior between fiber reinforced concrete and CFRP composites, Ain Shams Eng. J. 10 (2)
(2019) 359–367.
[21] X.Z. Lu, J.G. Teng, L.P. Ye, J.J. Jiang, Bond-slip models for FRP sheets/plates bonded to concrete, Eng. Struct. 27 (6) (2005) 920–937.
[22] A. D’Ambrisi, L. Feo, F. Focacci, Experimental analysis on bond between PBO-FRCM strengthening materials and concrete, Compos Part B Eng. 44 (1)
(2013) 524–532.
[23] A. D’Ambrisi, L. Feo, F. Focacci, Bond-slip relations for PBO-FRCM materials externally bonded to concrete, Compos Part B Eng. 43 (8) (2012) 2938–2949.
[24] L. Ombres, Analysis of the bond between Fabric reinforced Cementitious Mortar (FRCM) strengthening systems and concrete, Compos Part B Eng. 69
(2015) 418–426.
[25] V. Alecci, M. De Stefano, R. Luciano, L. Rovero, G. Stipo, Experimental investigation on bond behavior of cement-matrix-based composites for
strengthening of masonry structures, J Compos Constr. 20 (1) (2016) 1–10.
[26] F.G. Carozzi, C. Poggi, Mechanical properties and debonding strength of Fabric Reinforced Cementitious Matrix (FRCM) systems for masonry
strengthening, Compos Part B Eng. 70 (2015) 215–230.
[27] D.A. Bournas, A. Pavese, W. Tizani, Tensile capacity of FRP anchors in connecting FRP and TRM sheets to concrete, Eng. Struct. 82 (2015) 72–81.
[28] S.S. Pendhari, T. Kant, Y.M. Desai, Application of polymer composites in civil construction: a general review, Compos. Struct. 84 (2) (2008) 114–124.

17
R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan and R.J. Al-omary Case Studies in Construction Materials 14 (2021) e00488

[29] U.S. Camli, B. Binici, Strength of carbon fiber reinforced polymers bonded to concrete and masonry, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (7) (2007) 1431–1446.
[30] B. Täljsten, Strengthening concrete beams for shear with CFRP sheets, Constr. Build. Mater. 17 (1) (2003) 15–26.
[31] C. Selin Ravikumar, T.S. Thandavamoorthy, Application of FRP for strengthening and retrofitting of civil\nengineering structures, Int. J. Civil, Struct.
Environ. Infrastruct Eng. Res. Dev. 4 (1) (2014) 49–60.
[32] A. Napoli, R. Realfonzo, Full scale reinforced concrete beam-column joints strengthened with steel reinforced polymer systems, Front Mater. 4 (July)
(2017) 1–17.
[33] Y.T. Obaidat, S. Heyden, O. Dahlblom, G. Abu-Farsakh, Y. Abdel-Jawad, Retrofitting of reinforced concrete beams using composite laminates, Constr.
Build. Mater. 25 (2) (2011) 591–597.
[34] M.N.S. Hadi, T.M. Tran, Retrofitting nonseismically detailed exterior beam-column joints using concrete covers together with CFRP jacket, Constr. Build.
Mater. 63 (2014) 161–173.
[35] C. Beschi, A. Meda, P. Riva, Column and joint retrofitting with high performance fiber reinforced concrete jacketing, J. Earthq. Eng. 15 (7) (2011) 989–
1014.
[36] E. Esmaeeli, J.A.O. Barros, J. Sena-Cruz, L. Fasan, F.R. Li Prizzi, J. Melo, et al., Retrofitting of interior RC beam-column joints using CFRP strengthened
SHCC: cast-in-place solution, Compos. Struct. 122 (2015) 456–467.
[37] E.Z. Beydokhty, H. Shariatmadar, Behavior of damaged exterior RC beam-column joints strengthened by CFRP composites, Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. 13
(5) (2016) 880–896.
[38] M.A. Mashrei, J.S. Makki, A.A. Sultan, Flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets with
grooves, Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. 16 (4) (2019) 1–13.
[39] C.P. Antonopoulos, T.C. Triantafillou, Experimental investigation of FRP-strengthened RC beam-column joints, J. Compos. Constr. 7 (1) (2003) 39–49.
[40] M.Z. Jumaat, M.M. Rahman, M.A. Rahman, Review on bonding techniques of CFRP in strengthening concrete structures, Int. J. Phys. Sci. 6 (15) (2011)
3567–3575.
[41] R. Realfonzo, A. Napoli, J.G.R. Pinilla, Cyclic behavior of RC beam-column joints strengthened with FRP systems, Constr. Build. Mater. 54 (2014) 282–297.
[42] K. Le-Trung, K. Lee, J. Lee, D.H. Lee, S. Woo, Experimental study of RC beam-column joints strengthened using CFRP composites, Compos. Part B Eng. 41
(1) (2010) 76–85.
[43] E. Zamani Beydokhti, H. Shariatmadar, Strengthening and rehabilitation of exterior RC beam–column joints using carbon-FRP jacketing, Mater. Struct.
Constr. 49 (12) (2016) 5067–5083.
[44] A. Vatani-Oskouei, Repairing of seismically damaged RC exterior beam-column connection using CFRP, J. Reinf. Plast Compos. 29 (21) (2010) 3257–
3274.
[45] A. Mukherjee, M. Joshi, FRPC reinforced concrete beam-column joints under cyclic excitation, Compos. Struct. 70 (2) (2005) 185–199.
[46] X. Lu, T.H. Urukap, S. Li, F. Lin, Seismic behavior of interior RC beam-column joints with additional bars under cyclic loading, Earthq. Struct. 3 (1) (2012)
37–57.
[47] P. Pathak, Y.X. Zhang, Numerical study of structural behavior of fiber-reinforced polymer-strengthened reinforced concrete beams with bond-slip effect
under cyclic loading, Struct Concr. 20 (1) (2019) 97–107.
[48] H.M. Elsanadedy, Y.A. Al-Salloum, S.H. Alsayed, R.A. Iqbal, Experimental and numerical investigation of size effects in FRP-wrapped concrete columns,
Constr. Build. Mater. 29 (2012) 56–72.
[49] Hamid Sinaei, Numerical investigation on exterior reinforced concrete Beam-Column joint strengthened by composite fiber reinforced polymer
(CFRP), Int. J. Phys. Sci. 6 (28) (2011) 6572–6579.
[50] K. Ha, H. Choi, M. Shin, K. Park, On the size effect of interfacial fracture between concrete and fiber reinforced polymer, Chem. Compd. 93 (1) (2018) 99–
106.
[51] P. Zhang, X. Xu, Size effect of concrete column retrofitted by fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP), IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 61 (1) (2017).
[52] J.W. Nader, H.J. Dagher, R. Lopez-Anido, Size effects on the bending strength of fiber-reinforced polymer matrix composites, J. Reinf. Plast Compos. 30
(4) (2011) 309–317.
[53] W. Frohs, H. Jaeger, Industrial Carbon and Graphite Materials: Raw Materials, Production and Applications, VCH, 2017.
[54] M. Žmindák, P. Pastorek, Finite element analysis of cohesion between reinforced concrete beam and polymer lamella reinforced by carbon fibers,
Procedia Eng. 177 (2017) 582–589.
[55] A. Hrennikoff, Solution of problems of elasticity by framework method, J. Appl. Mech. 9 (1942) 144–145.
[56] R. Courant, Variational methods for the solution of problems of equilibrium and vibrations, Bull Am. Math Soc. 49 (1943) 1–23 B.S. Code of Practice for
Reinforced Concrete, London: BSI Group.
[57] ANSYS Inc, ANSYS User’s Manual Revision 9.0 SAS IP, (2015) .
[58] Rajai Z. Al-Rousan, Muneer H. Barfed, Impact of curvature type on the behavior of slender reinforced concrete rectangular column confined with CFRP
composite, Compos. Part B: Eng. 173 (1) (2019) 106939.
[59] Khaled Allam, Ayman S. Mosallam, Mohamed A. Salama, Experimental evaluation of seismic performance of interior RC beam-column joints
strengthened with FRP composites, Eng. Struct. 196 (1) (2019) 109308.
[60] American Concrete Institute (ACI), Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, ACI Committee 318 (2014) ACI318-14.

18

View publication stats