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

net/publication/340451962

Prediction of Axial Compressive Strength for FRP-Confined Concrete

Compression Members

Article  in  KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering · May 2020

DOI: 10.1007/s12205-020-1682-x

CITATIONS READS

15 466

3 authors:

Ali Raza Qaiser uz Zaman Khan

University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila
73 PUBLICATIONS   423 CITATIONS    44 PUBLICATIONS   496 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Afaq Ahmad
University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila
56 PUBLICATIONS   236 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Effective utilization of construction and demolition wastes in concrete manufacturing View project

Green and Sustainable Construction (Recycling, Geopolymers) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ali Raza on 02 June 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808
DOI 10.1007/s12205-020-1682-x www.springer.com/12205
Structural Engineering

Prediction of Axial Compressive Strength for FRP-Confined Concrete

Compression Members
a
Ali Raza , Qaiser uz Zaman Khanb, and Afaq Ahmad b

a
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Technology, Multan 66000, Pakistan
b
Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila 47080, Pakistan

ARTICLE HISTORY ABSTRACT

Received 18 September 2019 In the current work, a new strength model was proposed for capturing the ultimate axial
Revised 3 February 2020 strength of fiber reinforced polymers (FRP)-confined concrete compression members. First, a
Accepted 15 March 2020 preliminary evaluation of previous strength models for estimating the wrapping effect of FRPs-
Published Online 1 June 2020 confined concrete specimens was performed a large database of 520 confined concrete
specimens was constructed with the detailed information of various geometric and material
KEYWORDS parameters of confined concrete specimens. Then, a strength model was suggested using
regression analysis in MATLAB. The validation of the proposed strength model was made in
CFRP two different approaches. In the first approach, the validation of proposed models was done
Strength model by performing an experimental work of 6 carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) confined
Nonlinear finite elements analysis concrete cylinders and in the second approach, the nonlinear finite element analysis (NLFEA)
Confined concrete via a general-purpose program ABAQUS was performed. After validation, a detailed
Parametric study
parametric numerical study was done using the newly suggested strength model. A close
Concrete damaged plasticity
agreement could be found between tests, NLFEA and theoretical results.

1. Introduction for capturing the ultimate conditions of FRP-confined concrete

Recently, the application of fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) as
external confinement has been increased to enhance the axial
compressive and flexural strengths of concrete members when
the internal reinforcement is deficient. These advanced composites
are also used for the retrofitting and rehabilitation of the buildings
and bridges that are damaged due to earthquakes to enhance their
strength and ductility (Cheok, 1990; Li et al., 2003; Delgado et
al., 2012; Castillo et al., 2018). The benefits of FRPs include high
strength, lightweight, good durability, high stiffness, corrosion and
electromagnetic resistance, and easiness in repairing of the
damaged structures. When the concrete structures are damaged due
to earthquakes, their strength and serviceability are decreased which
can be enhanced by rehabilitating and retrofitting them through
FRP composites.
Various studies have been found in the literature that evaluate
the behavior of FRP-confined concrete members (Cevik et al.,
2010; Wu et al., 2010; Al Zand et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2018;
Güneyisi and Nour, 2019; Shen et al., 2019a; Shen et al., 2019b;
Shen et al., 2020). Fardis and Khalili (1982) presented the models
members after evaluating the models given by Richart et al.
(1929) and Newman and Newman (1971). These empirical
models were proposed using the limited geometric and mechanical
characteristics of the FRP-confined members that can give no
guarantee for the accurate prediction and applicability. The higher
accuracy of the models can be achieved by increasing the
experimental database and validating them through self-supported
experimentation and finite element modeling (FEM). By using
the energy balance method, Mander et al. (1988) gave the empirical
models for capturing the axial strength and strain of columns
internally confined with FRPs. The energy balance method considers
that the energy required to rupture the transverse FRP confinement
is equal to the additional strain energy of concrete confined with
FRPs. Lam and Teng (2003) used the concept of strain volume
and dilation behavior of the concrete to propose the models for
estimating the final conditions of FRP confinement of concrete that
were adopted by ACI 440.2R-08 (2008) with slight modifications.
In the previously proposed models during the ’90s, the hoop
rupture strain of FRPs was not considered and the ultimate tensile
strain of FRPs was utilized as provided by the manufacturer. But,

CORRESPONDENCE Ali Raza araza4846@gmail.com Dept. of Civil Engineering, Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Technology, Multan 66000, Pakistan
ⓒ 2020 Korean Society of Civil Engineers
2 A. Raza et al.

the recent works demonstrate that the rupture of FRPs occurs Σ ( x – y )-

2

RMSE = ------------------- (2)

usually at lesser strain than the actual strain of FRPs (Lam and n
Teng, 2003; Chen et al., 2011).
In these relationships, ‘n’ is the total experimental data points,
The main objective of the current study is to give an empirical
‘x’ is any experimentally measured value of the axial strength
model for the axial compressive strength of externally confined
and ‘y’ is any theoretical value of the axial strength predicted by
concrete specimens with FRPs using a general regression analysis
the proposed empirical models. The numeric value of RMSE lies
technique on the experimental results of 520 specimens developed
between zero and one. Zero indicates a weak correlation and one
from the literature. A detailed evaluation of the previously
indicates the strong correlation between the experimental and
proposed strength models was performed using the constructed
theoretical results. Similarly, the numeric value of R2 may vary
database to select the general form of the newly developed
between zero and one. Zero indicates that there is no correlation
model. The developed model was validated by performing the
and one indicates a perfect correlation between experimental and
experimental program of 6 cylinders that were confined with
theoretical values. Several models for estimating the strength of
carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) and their numerical
FRP-confinement available in previous research (Richart et al.,
modeling using a commercial finite element software ABAQUS
1929; Newman and Newman, 1971; Fardis and Khalili, 1982;
6.14. Furthermore, a detailed parametric study was also carried
Mander et al., 1988; Miyauchi, 1997; Karbhari and Gao, 1997;
out to determine the effect of various variables of FRP-confined
Samaan et al., 1998; Saafi et al., 1999; Toutanji, 1999; Lam and
specimens on the axial strength of concrete cylinders. This study
Teng, 2003; Matthys et al., 2005; Teng et al., 2009) were evaluated.
will help the construction industry to further understand the
The evaluations of the previously proposed strength models for
structural behavior of FRP-confined concrete.
FRP-confinement have been represented in Fig. 1.
2. Constructed Database
4. Proposed Strength Model
A large database of 520 cylindrical concrete specimens was
The nonlinear model proposed by Toutanji (1999) performed well
constructed from 47 previous experimental works. The strength
with relatively better performance (R2 = 0.90 and RMSE = 0.23).
models were assessed over this database using statistical indices
Thus, the general form of the current model was considered
such as coefficient of determination (R2) and root mean square
similar to that of the Toutanji (1999) model. The Mander et al.
error (RMSE). Various statistical parameters of the developed
(1988) model that was initially implemented by ACI, portrayed a
database were presented in Table 1. The elastic modulus of FRPs
good presentation with RMSE of 0.22 but, it gave a higher
(Ef) varies between 10 GPa and 612 GPa indicating two types of
diversion of predictions while considering R2 with a value of
FRPs i.e., low and high modulus of elasticity. The constructed
0.89. Thus, the form of this model was not chosen for the currently
database also includes the results of concrete columns confined
proposed equation. The general form of the newly developed
with FRPs having a height (H) of 812 mm and the axial confined
equation can be represented by Eq. (3).
compressive strength ( fcc′ ) of 302.2 MPa. n
f
fcc = fco + kfco ⎛ ----l-⎞ (3)
⎝ fco⎠
3. Assessment of Previous Models
The values of these constants, ‘k’ and ‘n’, were determined
The currently proposed strength model was established using using the regression analysis technique. Putting the values of
curve fitting method in MATLAB. Two different statistical constants ‘k’ and ‘n’ in Eq. (3), the proposed model takes the
indices (RMSE and sum of squared errors (SSE)) between form as represented by Eq. (5).
theoretical predictions and experimental values of strength were 3
--
f
fcc = fco + 3fco ⎛ ----l- ⎞
4

minimized to obtain an accurate model. The relationships for R2 ⎝ fco ⎠

(4)
and RMSE have been presented by Eqs. (1) and (2), respectively.
n( ΣXY ) – ( Σx ) ( Σy ) 2 3

R = ⎛ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-⎞
--
2
2Ef εh rup t ⎞
(1) fcc = fco + 3fco ⎛ --------------------
4

⎝ ⎠ - ,
(5)
[ nΣx – ( Σx ) ] [ nΣy – ( Σy ) ]
2 2 2 2
⎝ Dfco ⎠

Table 1. Statistical Information of All Parameters of Constructed Database

Diameter Thickness Ef H fco′ fcc′ εco εcc
Parameter
(mm) (mm) (GPa) (mm) (MPa) (MPa) (%) (%)
Min. value 51 0.09 10 102 12.41 18.5 0.16 0.47
Max. value 406 5.9 612 812 188.2 302.2 1.53 4.62
Avg. value 154 0.95 164 307.9 42.28 75.46 0.27 1.63
St. Dev. 45.5 1.12 118 90.9 22.97 32.56 0.16 0.83
Coef. of Variance 0.3 1.18 0.73 0.3 0.55 0.44 0.6 0.51
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 3

Fig. 1. Performance of Previous Compressive Strength Models on the Constructed Database: (a) Richart, (b) Fardis, (c) Newman, (d) Mander, (e)
Karbhari, (f) Samaan, (g) Toutanji, (h) Lanm and Teng, (i) Teng, (j) Saafi, (k) Miyauchi, (l) Matthys

The performance of the currently developed model based on
the constructed database of 520 sample points was shown in
Fig. 2. The values of R2 and RMSE given by this model were
0.91 and 0.18, respectively. These values represent that the
performance of the newly developed model for capturing the
axial compressive strength is better than all other models
available in the literature.
Figure 3 represents the normal distribution of the ratios of
experimental values of the axial compressive strengths of
concrete ( fcc′ ⁄ f c′oexp ) to the theoretically predicted values
( fcc′ ⁄ f ′c opred ) . The performances of the currently proposed
empirical model and the Toutanji (1999) model were better
with the mean normalized values having the deviations of 1%
and 1.5% from unity, respectively. Similarly, the distribution
of the ratios of unconfined concrete strength to the FRP-
confined concrete strength ( fcc′ ⁄ fco′ ) for various models was
presented in Fig. 4. It was depicted that the Karbhari and Gao
(1997) model gave the most of fcc′ ⁄ fco′ ratios in the range 0.0 −
2.0. The experimental values of fcc′ ⁄ fco′ were 330 in this range
while the predicted values of fcc′ ⁄ fco′ by the new model were
4 A. Raza et al.

329. These satisfactory comparisons solidly validate the applicability 5. Validation of Proposed Model
of proposed model.
5.1 Experimental Program
A total of 6 CFRP-confined concrete cylinders were constructed
using a different number of CFRP layers. Two groups of
cylinders were made with different concrete strengths. In each
group, there were three cylinders: one cylinder was constructed
without CFRP layers; one cylinder was constructed with a single
CFRP layer; and one cylinder was constructed with two CFRP
layers. The thickness of each layer was 0.55 mm. Table 2
demonstrates the concrete mix designs and their characteristics
for the projected experimental work that aims the two different
classes of concrete strength. The water to cement ratios for
groups CON-12.5 and CON-16.5 were 0.65 and 0.60, respectively.
The unidirectional CFRP wraps provided by SikaWrap-300C
Fig. 2. Performance of Currently Developed Axial Strength Model on product were used in the current study. The manufacturer’s
the Constructed Database guaranteed ultimate tensile strength and Young’s modulus of

Fig. 3. Normal Distribution of ( fcc′ ⁄ f ′c oexp ) / ( fcc′ ⁄ f ′c opred ) for Various Strength Models

Fig. 4. Distribution of fcc′ ⁄ fco′ for Various Strength Models

 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 5

Table 2. Test Matrix remaining three cylinders had a concrete strength of 16.5 MPa.
Concrete strength The labels of the specimens indicated the strength of concrete
Group Mix ratio Label CFRP layer
(MPa) and the number of CFRP wraps. For example, in the specimen
CON-12.5 1:2.5:5 12.5 C12.5-0L 0 with label C16.5-2L, ‘C’ indicates ‘cylinder’, 16.5 is the crushing
12.5 C12.5-1L 1 strength of concrete without any confinement and ‘2L’ indicates
12.5 C12.5-2L 2 ‘double layer of CFRP wraps’. The specimens were tested by
CON-16.5 1:2:4 16.5 C16.5-0L 0 applying uniaxial compressive load. The surface of the cylinders
16.5 C16.5-1L 1
was roughed using a grinder for the application of the adhesive
16.5 C16.5-2L 2
between CFRP wraps and the concrete so that a good bond can
be ensured. The testing results exhibited that the axial compressive
strength and ductility of the specimens were increased by using a
CFRP wraps were 4,100 MPa and 231 GPa, respectively. The bond greater number of CFRP layers as compared with the plain
between CFRP wraps and concrete cylinders was provided using concrete. The compressive failure of confined cylinders was
a 2-part epoxy impregnation resin provided by Sikadur®-330. occurred after the rupturing of CFRP wraps.
The tensile strength, elastic modulus, and percentage elongation
of the epoxy impregnation resin were 30 MPa, 4,500 MPa and 5.2 Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis
0.9% at 7-day, respectively. The NLFEA of CFRP-confined concrete specimens was performed
All the cylinders were 150 mm × 300 mm in dimensions. using the ABAQUS 6.14. A control model of the specimen
Three cylinders had a concrete strength of 12.5 MPa and the (C12.5-1L) was selected and validated using the experimental

Fig. 5. Geometry and Boundary Conditions of Cylinders in FEM: (a) Rigid Surface Constraint, (b) Tie Bond between CFRP and Concrete, (c)
Applied Boundary Conditions, (d) Meshing

Fig. 6. The Behavior of Concrete in ABAQUS: (a) Compressive Stress against Compressive Strain Curve, (b) Tension Stiffening Model
6 A. Raza et al.

stress-strain curve. The concrete material was defined using the (εcu1) were defined using the relationships given by Majewski
Concrete Damaged Plastic Model (CDPM) and the behavior of (2003) as presented by Eqs. (6) and (7), respectively.
CFRP wraps was defined using the Hashin Damage Model – 0.024 fcm – 0.140 fcm
εc = 0.0014 [ 2 – e
1 –e ] (6)
(Hashin, 1980). Fig. 5 represents the simulated specimens. The
top end of the specimens was kept free to rotate and translate in
εcu = 0.004 – 0.0011 [ 1 – e fcm ]
–0.0215
1 (7)
either direction while the bottom end was restrained. For the
application of load using displacement control method, a 5 mm The compressive stresses of concrete were calculated using
deflection was implemented on the top surface of the cylinders. Eq. (8) provided by Eurocode (EN 1992-1-1, 2004).
The CDPM simulates the complex behavior of concrete by
kη – η
2

considering the damages of concrete in compression and tension σc = fcm -------------------------- (8)
1 + ( k – 2 )η
separately. Therefore, this model is usually chosen for the
definition of concrete in finite element simulations (Raza et al., ε ε
where k = 1.05Ecm -----c-, η = -----c- . Although the tensile behavior
1

2019). The plasticity, compressive, and tensile behaviors of fcm εc 1

concrete are considered by CDPM. The compressive behavior of
concrete was predicted by Eurocode 2 (2004) as shown in
Fig. 6(a). The concrete was assumed as a linear elastic material
up to 0.4fcm. The compressive strain of concrete at the maximum
stress (εc1) and the maximum compressive strain of concrete
of concrete is not considered in the compression testing, this
behavior was also defined in the presented NLFEA. The
modified tension stiffening model (Wahalathantri et al., 2011)
was employed to define the tensile cracking of concrete as
shown in Fig. 6(b). The tensile stress and cracking strain of

Fig. 7. Effect of: (a) Dilation Angle, (b) Viscosity Parameter on the Stress-Strain Response of Control Model

Fig. 8. Stress-Strain Curves of Confined and Unconfined Concrete Specimens: (a) C12.5-0L, (b) C12.5-1L, (c) C12.5-2L, (d) C16.5-0L, (e) C16.5-
1L, (f) C16.5-2L

Fig. 9. Experimental and NLFEA Failure Modes of Tested Specimens: (a) C12.5-0L, (b) C12.5-1L, (c) C12.5-2L, (d) C16.5-0L, (e) C16.5-1L,
(f) C16.5-2L
concrete were determine using the following relationships (Wu
et al., 2006; Liu and Chen, 2014):
σt = 0.40 fc ′( MPa )
0 (9)
εcr = 0.000065f
0.54
t (10)
5.2.1 Validation of FEA Model
After the selection of a control model, it was calibrated for
various values of eccentricity, dilation angle, uniaxial to biaxial
stress ratio, shape factor, and viscosity parameter. Furthermore, the
control model was also calibrated for different mesh sizes and
element types of concrete and CFRP material. The sensitivity
analysis of the stress-strain curve due to the variation of the
dilation angle of concrete, the viscosity parameter of concrete and
the mesh size of the specimens are shown in Fig. 9. It can be
observed that the numerical value of the maximum compressive
stress of CFRP-confined concrete cylinder is equal to the
experimental value when the viscosity parameter is 0.003 and the
value of the dilation angle is 30 degrees. The concept of Drucker-
Prager plastic potential function was implemented to determine the
dilation angle as represented by Eq. (11).
1
G ( σ ) = ( εσto tan ψ ) + q + --- I tan ψ
2 2
(11)
3 1
where ψ is the dilation angle of concrete and αp is the dilatancy
parameter. The sensitivity analysis of the stress-strain curve of
control model due to the variation of eccentricity, stresses ratio
and shape factor of concrete was also examined but their
influence was observed to be negligible. Therefore, their default
values i.e., shape factor = 0.667, eccentricity = 0.1 and stress ratio =
1.16 were considered in the present work. The close agreement
between experimental and FEM results was observed while
using a mesh size of 20 mm. All 3D stress elements of concrete
(hexahedral, tetrahedral and triangular) were evaluated. A close
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 7
Table 3. Elastic and Hasin Damage Properties of CFRP Used in ABAQUS
Parameter Quantity
Elastic modulus of fabric, E E , respectively
1, 2 230 and 16.58 GPa
Longitudinal and transverse Poisson’s ratio 0.30
Shear modulus G , G , G , respectively
12 13 23 9188.5, 12259, and
5911 MPa
Longitudinal tensile and compressive strength, 3900 and 3120 MPa
respectively
Transverse tensile and compressive strength, 210.6 and 643.5 MPa
respectively
Longitudinal and transverse shear strength, 210.6 and 276.9 MPa
respectively
correlation between the experiments and NLFEA was obtained
while using hexahedral elements (C3D8R) for concrete and
curved shell elements (S4R) for CFRP wraps.
The CFRP wraps were modeled as a 2D filament material
with a different elastic modulus in the transverse and longitudinal
direction. The elastic behavior of CFRP wraps was mainly
defined using the elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio while the
plastic behavior was defined using Hashin (1980) damage model.
The elastic properties and the different parameters for the
definition of Hashin damage model have been presented in Table 3.
6. Results and Discussions
Figure 8 presents the experimental and numerical compressive
stress-strain curves of the studied specimens. It was confirmed
from the tests that the axial compressive strength and ductility of
concrete specimens confined with CFRP wraps improved with
the increase in the CFRP wraps. For the concrete having 12.5
MPa strength, the percentage increase of 69.4% and 87.2%
observed in the axial strength for the specimens with one and
8 A. Raza et al.
Fig. 10. Performance of NLFEA Model, Currently Proposed Model and Previously Proposed Strength Models on the Current Experimental Results
two layers of wraps compared with the specimen without
confinement. Similarly, for the concrete having 16.5 MPa
strength, the percentage increase of 60.8% and 103.2% occurred
in axial compressive strength for the cylinders with one and two
layers of wraps, respectively. The percentage increase in the
axial strain of specimens fabricated with 12.5 MPa concrete, was
409.3% and 277.8% for the cylinders with one and two layers of
wraps, respectively. Similarly, the percentage increase in the
axial strain of specimens fabricated with 16.5 MPa concrete, was
464.8% and 459.7% for the cylinders with one and two layers of
wraps, respectively. This discussion indicates that the CFRP-
confinement causes enough improvement in the axial strength
and ductility of concrete.
The comparative study between the experimental and NLFEA
results demonstrates that the average percentage discrepancy
between the results of experiments and NLFEA of specimens
was 16.93% and 14.93% for the strain and strength, respectively.
The minor errors may be due to the initial geometric imperfections,
inaccurate definition of damage evolution of CFRP, inaccuracy
of testing instruments, or assumptions made in NLFEA.
The comparison of crack patterns obtained from the tests and
NLFEA was presented in Fig. 9. The failure patterns in NLFEA
can be represented by maximum positive principal plastic
deformations (Raza and Khan, 2020; Raza et al., 2020; Ahmad et
al., 2020). The experimental and NLFEA failure modes of the
CFRP-wrapped cylinders are in close agreement with each other.
Like the experiments, the failure of CFRP wraps occurred after
the cracking of concrete when the applied stress was greater than
the maximum tensile strength of CFRP wraps in the transverse
direction.
As concerned with the theoretical predictions, the difference
between the average results of theoretical and experimental
results was only 0.16% which indicates that the suggested theoretical
equation is accurate enough to capture the axial compressive strength
of concrete compression members confined with FRPs. The
comparative study of test results of six CFRP-confined concrete
cylinders with the estimates of NLFEA and strength models was
represented in Fig. 10. The models given by Richart et al. (1929);
Newman and Newman (1971); Fardis and Khalili (1982);
Mander et al. (1988); Miyauchi (1997); Karbhari and Gao (1997);
Samaan et al. (1998); Saafi et al. (1999); Toutanji (1999); Lam and
Teng (2003); Matthys et al. (2005) and Teng et al. (2009)
presented the percentage discrepancies of 6.13%, 7.04%, 7.02%,
7.12%, 7.74%, 17.20%, 4.76%, 14.51%, 5.67%, 9.68%, 13.65%
and 16.37% from the experimental results, respectively. It can be
observed that the predictions of the newly developed strength
model on the six CFRP-confined concrete specimens are showing
more accuracy as compared with the previously proposed
models.
7. Parametric Study
7.1 Effect of Concrete Strength ( f 'co)
An extensive parametric study was performed using the proposed
theoretical model. The values considered for fco′ were 5 to 50
MPa. When fco′ was increased from 5 to 50 MPa with the
increment of ‘d’ from 100 to 550 mm at a constant Ef of 200
GPa, the percentage increment in the confined strength of the
concrete specimen was 208.56%. When fco′ was increased from
minimum to maximum value with the increment of ‘Ef ’ from
110 to 245 GPa, the percentage increment in the confined
concrete strength of the specimen was 494.85%. Similarly, when
fco′ was increased from 5 to 50 MPa with the increment of ‘nt’
from 0.15 to 1.05 mm, the percentage increment in the confined
concrete strength of the specimen was 761.22% as shown in
Figs. 11(a), 11(d), and 11(e).

Fig. 11. Numerical Parametric Study Using the Developed Strength Model: (a) Effect of d and fco′ , (b) Effect of Ef and d, (c) Effect of nt and Ef, (d) Effect
of Ef and fco′ , (e) Effect of nt and fco′ , (f) Effect of nt and d
7.2 Effect of the Diameter of Specimen (d)
With the increase of ‘d’ from 100 to 550 mm with the increment
of fco′ from 5 to 50 MPa keeping the other parameters as constant,
the percentage increment in the strength of concrete specimen
confined with wraps was 208.56%. When ‘d’ increases from
minimum to maximum value with the increment of ‘Ef ’ from
110 to 245 GPa, the percentage increment in the confined
concrete strength of the cylinder was 14.62%. Similarly, when
‘d’ increases from minimum to maximum value with the increment
of ‘nt’ from 0.15 to 1.05 mm, the percentage increment in the
strength of concrete specimen was only 3.27% as shown in
Figs. 11(a), 11(b), and 11(f). However, the increment in the
thickness of FRPs is more significant for the strength of confined
concrete when the lower diameters of the specimen are used.
7.3 Effect of Elastic Modulus of FRPs (Ef)
The values considered for this parameter were 110 to 245 GPa.
When Ef increases from 110 to 245 GPa with the increment of
‘d’ from minimum to maximum value, the percentage increment
in the strength of confined concrete of the specimen was 14.62%.
When Ef increases from minimum to maximum value with the
increment of ‘nt’ from minimum to maximum value, the
percentage increment in the strength of confined concrete of the
specimen was 58.43%. Similarly, when Ef increases from
minimum to maximum value with the increment of fco′ from
minimum to maximum value, the percentage increment in the
strength of concrete of the specimen was 494.85% as shown in
Figs. 11(b), 11(c), and 11(d). This comparative study concludes
that the effect of enhancing the Ef is more dominant for the
confined strength with the increase of the unconfined strength.
7.4 Effect of FRPs Thickness (nt)
When ‘nt’ was increased from 0.15 to 1.05 mm with the increment
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 9
of ‘Ef ’ from 110 to 245 GPa, the percentage increment in the
strength of concrete specimen confined with wraps was 58.43%.
When ‘nt’ was increased from minimum to maximum value with
the increment of fco′ from 5 to 50 MPa, the percentage increment
in the strength of concrete specimen confined with wraps was
761.22%. Similarly, when ‘nt’ was enhanced from minimum to
maximum value with the rise of ‘d’ from 100 to 550 mm, the
percentage increment in the confined concrete strength of the
specimen was only 3.3% as shown in Figs. 11(c), 11(e), and
11(f). Thus, for the cylinders of larger diameter, the effect of ‘nt’
was insignificant.
8. Conclusions
The following key points were drawn from the current research
work:
1. The performance of the proposed strength model on the
constructed database of 520 FRP-confined concrete specimens
represents its superiority over the previously proposed
strength models with R2 = 0.91 and RMSE = 0.18.
2. The axial strength of specimens was improved by a
maximum amount of 69.42% using a single layer of CFRP
wraps and a maximum increase of 103.20% in the axial
strength was occurred using the double layers of CFRP
wraps. The ductility of concrete was increased by a maximum
amount of 464.81% using double of CFRP wraps.
3. The results of NLFEA showed that the behavior of FRP-
confined concrete can be precisely predicted by the finite
element simulations. The average discrepancy between the
experimental and NLFEA results of the axial strength of
six CFRP-confined concrete specimens was 14.93%. The
failure modes of the specimens predicted by the NLFEA
were in a close correlation with the experimental failure
10 A. Raza et al.
modes.
4. The discrepancy between the testing results and theoretical
results of six CFRP-confined specimens was 0.16%.
Moreover, the average difference between the NLFEA and
the theoretical results of six specimens was 12.96%. These
minor discrepancies show that the proposed strength model
can predict the axial behavior of concrete confined with
FRPs.
5. The detailed parametric study revealed that the axial
compression capacity of concrete confined with FRPs
increases when we increase the concrete strength, elastic
modulus of FRPs, and total thickness of FRPs. Moreover,
there was observed no significant effect on the axial strength
of confined concrete by increasing the concrete core diameter.
The comparative studies solidly substantiate the proposed
models.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the UET Taxila for the provision of the
facility of Structural and CAD Laboratory.
ORCID
Ali Raza https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0357-585X
Afaq Ahmad http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9427-4296
References
ACI 440.2 R-08 (2008) Guide for the design and construction of
externally bonded FRP systems for strengthening concrete structures.
ACI 440.2 R-08, ACI Committee, Farmington Hills, MI, USA
Ahmad A, Khan QUZ, Raza A (2020) Reliability analysis of strength
models for CFRP-confined concrete cylinders. Composite Structures
244:112312, DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112312
Al Zand AW, Badaruzzaman WHW, Mutalib AA, Hilo SJ (2016) The
enhanced performance of CFST beams using different strengthening
schemes involving unidirectional CFRP sheets: An experimental
study. Engineering Structures 128:184-198, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.
2016.09.044
Castillo DR, Griffith M, Ingham J (2018) Seismic behavior of RC
columns flexurally strengthened with FRP sheets and FRP anchors.
Composite Structures 203:382-395, DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.
2018.07.029
Cevik A, Göğüş MT, Güzelbey İH, Filiz H (2010) Soft computing-
based formulation for strength enhancement of CFRP-confined
concrete cylinders. Advances in Engineering Software 41(4):527-
536, DOI: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2009.10.015
Chen JF, Li SQ, Bisby LA, Ai J (2011) FRP rupture strains in the split-
disk test. Composites Part B: Engineering 42(4):962-972, DOI:
10.1016/j.compositesb.2010.12.015
Cheok GS (1990) Behavior of 1/6-scale model bridge columns subjected to
inelastic cyclic loading. Structural Journal 87(6):630-638
Delgado P, Arêde A, Pouca NV, Rocha P, Costa A, Delgado R (2012)
Retrofit of RC hollow piers with CFRP sheets. Composite Structures
94(4):1280-1287, DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.11.032
EN 1992-1-1 (2004) Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-
1: General rules and rules for buildings. Eurocode
Fardis MN, Khalili HH (1982) FRP-encased concrete as a structural
material. Magazine of Concrete Research 34(121):191-202, DOI:
10.1680/macr.1983.35.125.242
Güneyisi EM, Nour AI (2019) Axial compression capacity of circular
CFST columns transversely strengthened by FRP. Engineering
Structures 191:417-431, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.04.056
Hashin Z (1980) Failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites.
Journal of Applied Mechanics 47(2):329-334, DOI: 10.1115/1.3157744
Karbhari VM, Gao Y (1997) Composite jacketed concrete under uniaxial
compression - Verification of simple design equations. Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering 9(4):185-193, DOI: 10.1061/(asce)
0899-1561(1997)9:4(185)
Lam L, Teng JG (2003) Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-
confined concrete. Construction and Building Materials 17(6-7):
471-489
Li G, Kidane S, Pang SS, Helms J, Stubblefield MA (2003) Investigation
into FRP repaired RC columns. Composite Structures 62(1):83-89,
DOI: 10.1016/s0263-8223(03)00094-1
Liu W, Chen Z (2014) Parameters calibration and verification of concrete
damage plasticity model of ABAQUS. Industrial Construction
2014(44): 167-213
Majewski S (2003) The mechanics of structural concrete in terms of
elasto-plasticity. Publishing House of Silesian University of Technology,
Gliwice, Poland
Mander JB, Priestley MJ, Park R (1988) Theoretical stress-strain model
for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 114(8):
1804-1826
Matthys S, Toutanji H, Audenaert K, Taerwe L (2005) Axial load behavior
of large-scale columns confined with fiber-reinforced polymer
composites. ACI Structural Journal 102(2):258, DOI: 10.14359/
14277
Miyauchi K (1997) Estimation of strengthening effects with carbon
fiber sheet for concrete column. Proceedings of the 3rd international
symposium on non-metallic (FRP) reinforcement for concrete
structures, October 14-16, Sapporo, Japan
Newman K, Newman JB (1971) Failure theories and design criteria for
plain concrete. Structure, Solid Mechanics and Engineering Design,
Wiley Interscience, London, UK, 963-995
Raza A, Khan QUZ (2020) Experimental and numerical behavior of
hybrid-fiber-reinforced concrete compression members under concentric
loading. SN Applied Science 2(701), DOI: 10.1007/s42452-020-
2461-5
Raza A, Khan QUZ, Ahmad A (2019) Numerical investigation of load-
carrying capacity of GFRP-Reinforced rectangular concrete members
using CDP model in ABAQUS. Advances in Civil Engineering
2019:21, DOI: 10.1155/2019/1745341
Raza A, Shah SAR, Khan AR, Aslam MA, Khan TA, Arshad K, Hussan
S, Sultan A, Shahzadi G, Waseem M (2020) Sustainable FRP-confined
symmetric concrete structures: An application experimental and
numerical validation process for reference data. Applied Sciences
10(1):333, DOI: 10.3390/app10010333
Richart FE, Brandtzæg A, Brown RL (1929) Failure of plain and spirally
reinforced concrete in compression. Bulletin No. 190, University of
Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA
Saafi M, Toutanji H, Li Z (1999) Behavior of concrete columns confined
with fiber reinforced polymer tubes. Materials Journal 96(4):500-
509, DOI: 10.14359/652
Samaan M, Mirmiran A, Shahawy M (1998) Model of concrete confined
by fiber composites. Journal of Structural Engineering 124(9):1025-

1031, DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1998)124:9(1025)
Shen Q, Wang J, Wang Y, Wang F (2019a) Analytical modelling and
design of partially CFRP-wrapped thin-walled circular NCFST stub
columns under axial compression. Thin-Walled Structures 144:
106276, DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2019.106276
Shen Q, Wang J, Wang J, Ding Z (2019b) Axial compressive performance
of circular CFST columns partially wrapped by carbon FRP. Journal
of Constructional Steel Research 155:90-106, DOI: 10.1016/
j.jcsr.2018.12.017
Shen Q, Wang J, Xu Q, Cui Y (2020) Performance and design of partially
CFRP-jacketed circular CFT column under eccentric compression.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 166:105925, DOI: 10.1016/
j.jcsr.2019.105925
Teng JG, Jiang T, Lam L, Luo YZ (2009) Refinement of a design-
oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined concrete. Journal of
Composites for Construction 13(4):269-278, DOI: 10.1061/(asce)
cc.1943-5614.0000012
Toutanji H (1999) Stress-strain characteristics of concrete columns
View publication stats
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 11
externally confined with advanced fiber composite sheets. Materials
Journal 96(3):397-404, DOI: 10.14359/639
Wahalathantri BL, Thambiratnam D, Chan T, Fawzia S (2011) A material
model for flexural crack simulation in reinforced concrete elements
using ABAQUS. Proceedings of the first international conference on
engineering, designing and developing the built environment for
sustainable wellbeing, April 27-29, Brisbane, Australia
Wang J, Shen Q, Wang F, Wang W (2018) Experimental and analytical
studies on CFRP strengthened circular thin-walled CFST stub
columns under eccentric compression. Thin-Walled Structures 127:
102-119, DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2018.01.039
Wu JY, Li J, Faria R (2006) An energy release rate-based plastic-damage
model for concrete. International Journal of Solids and Structures
43(3-4):583-612, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2005.05.038
Wu YB, Jin GF, Ding T, Meng D (2010) Modeling confinement efficiency
of FRP-confined concrete column using radial basis function neural
network. 2010 2nd international workshop on intelligent systems
and applications, May 22-23, Wuhan, China