Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

An Artificial Neural Networks model for the prediction of the

compressive strength of FRP-confined concrete circular columns
Alessio Cascardi, Francesco Micelli ⇑, Maria Antonietta Aiello
Department of Innovation Engineering – University of Salento, Lecce, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Nowadays, Fiber Reinforced Polymers are extensively applied in the field of civil engineering due to their
Received 7 April 2016 advantageous proprieties such as high strength-to-weight ratio and high corrosion resistance in aggres-
Revised 24 January 2017 sive environments. It is well-known that the compressive strength of concrete significantly increases if a
Accepted 17 February 2017
lateral confining pressure is provided.
The present paper aims to present an analytical model, able to predict the strength of FRP-confined
concrete, which is based on Artificial Neural Networks. The innovation of the proposed model consists
Keywords:
of a formulation of an analytical relationship that does not consider the traditional effectiveness param-
Artificial Neural Networks
FRP
eter commonly found in the models presented in the literature. An extensive experimental database was
Confinement used to define the variables of the proposed equations. The proposed model is recommended for circular
Concrete columns with continuous FRP wrapping. The validity of the predictions is indicated through a parametric
Column study and the accuracy is tested by an experimental versus theoretical comparison. An additional com-
parison is shown by considering the theoretical predictions obtained from the proposed model and the
outcomes of equations adopted by important international design codes.
The results evidence that the proposed model is adapt for the design of FRP-confined concrete and
guarantees an improved accuracy with respect the available competitors.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Fiber Reinforced Polymers (FRP) have been widely adopted in
order to afford passive confinement to Reinforced Concrete (RC) or
masonry columns (e.g. in [1,2]) for improving both compressive
strength and ductility. The research presented herein allows deter-
mining an alternative analytical theory for the prediction of the
actual axial capacity of FRP-confined concrete column subjected
to centred compression loads. In FRP-confined concrete column,
the core expands laterally when it is subjected to an axial compres-
sion load. This expansion is counteracted by the FRP jackets or
shells, and thus transforms the concrete core into a solid subjected
to a tri-axial compressive stress condition. The FRP-confining phe-
nomenon is approached in two habits: Analysis-Oriented-Model
(AOM) and Design-Oriented-Model (DOM). The main difference con-
sists that AOM provides the behaviour curve of the confined col-
umn in terms of the stress-strain while the DOM furnishes just
the value of the stress and strain at the peak or ultimate point as
deeply reported in [3]. Most of the prevailing strength models for
FRP-confined concrete adopted the theory anticipated by Richart
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: francesco.micelli@unisalento.it (F. Micelli).
et al. and Mander et al. in [4] and [5] respectively, in which the
peak strength, for concrete confined by hydrostatic pressure, takes
the following form (Eq. (1)):
0 0
f cc ¼ f c0 þ k1  f l ð1Þ
where
0
 f cc : is the compressive strength of the confined column.
0
 f c0 : is the compressive strength of the un-confined column.
 k1 : is a dimensionless confinement effectiveness coefficient.
 f l :is the effective confining pressure provided by the FRP-
confinement and it is assumed equal to Ef efu.
 efu is the ultimate strain of the FRP-sheet while Ef is its elastic
modulus.
The lateral confining pressure is related to the ultimate com-
pressive strength of the confined concrete by a k-coefficient, which
came from a series of short column specimen test. A large amount
of research has been conducted through the decades on the beha-
viour of FRP-confined concrete since the 20’s. A large number of
analytical models are the direct result of the efforts employed in
this field. A summary of the principal mathematical formulations
proposed to predict the strength of FRP confined columns is

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.047
0141-0296/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
200 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208
summarised in Table 1, supported by an adequate number of refer-
ences (e.g. [6,7,5,8–53]). In the same Table the proposed model is
reported, even if it will be discussed in details in the following
sections.
The proposed model is based on Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)
and it is able to provide a function F, which can substitute the long-
established k-coefficient (see Table 1). The k-coefficient comes
from a simple design-by-testing and cannot easily adapt to the dif-
ferent cases of FRP-confined concrete column because of the strong
possibility of combinations of the geometrical and mechanical
parameters involved in the phenomena. The main concept consists,
in fact, in constructing a function that depends on the dimensions
and the strength of the reinforcement and the concrete core. Inputs
are assumed in forms of dimensionless ratios. The target coincides
with the experimental value of the k-coefficient calculated by the
inverse formula of the well-known analytical procedures available
in the scientific literature like, for example, those reported in
Table 1. A first attempt to realize a formulation of the FRP-
confined concrete column based on ANN-approach is reported in
[48]. Starting from that pioneer work some possible improvements
have been identified, thus an alternative ANN-based model is here
discussed and validated to predict the compressive strength of
FRP-confined concrete. In particular, the proposed model can be
utilized for a confining reinforcement made of both carbon and
glass fibers, while the mentioned previous model was formulated
only with reference to carbon fibres. In this study a larger database
has been considered, respect to [48], the diameter of the column is
now included as a new variable; the thickness of the FRP sheet and
the mechanical properties of the unconfined concrete and the con-
fining FRP material are also considered. The validity of the pro-
posed model will be demonstrated through a parametric study;
while the accuracy and the precision of the predicted results have
been tested, also by doing a comparison with different analytical
models and design equations.
2. The Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)
A neural network is a concept born due to the scientific interest
about Artificial Intelligence (AI) during in the middle of 1950s. The AI
is the capacity of an electronic data to perform functions and rea-
soning typical of the human mind. It has been studied for decades
in order to achieve human-like intelligence in many fields, first of
all speech and image recognition. Artificial neural networks are
inspired by the architecture of the human central nervous system
which consists in a large number of cells (neurons) working in par-
allel in order to facilitate decision-making in the most rapid way.
These simple units are connected each other by electrical stimulus
named synapse. Similarly, the ANN-model offers the synaptic activ-
ity through a matrix of weight (numeric values), which is typically
updated by the like-human learning process. The direct advantage
of this approach is that neuron-computing devices do not have to
be programmed, but on the contrary, the random choice of initial
weights induces the learn-making from the process of adjusting
Table 1
Analytical models for the prediction of the FRP-confined concrete column strength.
References Analytical Model
0 0
[6,10–12,14,19–24, f cc ¼ f c0 þ k1 f l
27,29,31,34,35,39,41,42,45,46,52]
[7,8,9,13,15–17,25,26,28,30,32,34,37–39, 0 0
f cc ¼ f c0 þ k1 f l 2
43,44,48,53]
[5,36,50,49] 0 0
f cc ¼ f c0 þ k1 f l 2 þ k3 f l þ k4
0 0
[18,51,49] f cc ¼ k1 f c0 þ k2 f l
Proposed Model 0 0
f cc ¼ f c0 þ FðD; f c0 ; tf ; Ef Þ  f l 2
the weights itself by reaching the minimum error of prediction.
The procedure used to perform the learning process is called learn-
ing algorithm which is the function able to modify the synaptic
weight of the network. When the brain receives a stimulus, it goes
in the neural network for interpretation by electrical impulse. The
effectors convert the electrical signal generated by the neural net
into the response as system outputs. Similarly, the ANN proposes
a weight matrix of numerical value and a bias ‘‘b” for each neuron
in which different analytical formulas (transformation formula) are
solved in order to create adjustments to the matrix itself. The input
quantities are processed through successive layers of ‘‘neurons”.
The input layer (with the number of neurons equal to the number
of the pondered variables) and an output layer are always consid-
ered. A defined number of layers in between, called ‘‘hidden” layers,
are also provided. Commonly only one hidden layer is considered;
however, the use of two or more hidden layers can sometimes sig-
nificantly improves the performance of the ANN. A synthetic repre-
sentation of the human nervous system inspiration of the ANN-
methodology is illustrated in Fig. 1, where a e b are the dimension-
less input parameters, better specified in the following sections.
The architecture of the hidden layer was established by the
usual method of trial and error (learning and training stages). Fifty
trials were carried out, utilizing the whole database, in order to
find the number of nodes in the hidden layer, which offered the
highest coefficient of correlation (R2) with experimental data. All
these networks had the same structure; only the number of nodes
in the hidden layer was varied. It was found that a network with
three hidden layers (H1, H2 and H3 in Fig. 1) guaranteed the best
performance. Inside a neuron, inputs are linearly combined accord-
ing to a set of previously random-defined weights w and the bias b.
Subsequently, a transfer function was adopted to the result of the
combination, providing the output of the neuron. Any kind of func-
tion may be used as transfer functions, although sigmoidal func-
tion was used (see Fig. 2).
Once the network has been structured, it was ready to be
trained. The initial weights were chosen randomly. The network
processed the records in the training data (2/3 of the whole data-
base was used) one at a time, using the weights and the functions
in the hidden layers, and then compared the resulting output (the-
oretical k) against the desired one (experimental k). Errors were
then propagated back through the structure, causing the arrange-
ment to adjust the weights for application to the next record to
be processed. This progression occurred over and over as the
weights were continually corrected. During the training of a
network the same set of data was processed many times as the
k
k
k
Fig. 1. Artificial Neural Networks inspiration from the human synapse.
 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208 201

Fig. 2. Single neuron activity.

connection weights were continually experienced. In order to

measure the accuracy of the ANN during the learning stage, the
scatter was calculated every 25 iterations.
Examples of ANN application in the field of civil engineering are
relatively recent literature, e.g. [55–59]; in this perspective, this
study wants to contribute in improving the knowledge regarding
the ANN modelling in structural civil engineering problems.

3. The proposed model – formulation and parametric analysis

Several research studies were focused on the analysis and test-

ing of compressed FRP-confined concrete columns. A large data-
base, including Carbon (CFRP) and Glass (GFRP) Fiber Reinforced
Polymer utilized for continuous confinement of circular concrete
column is thoroughly reported in [60]. The analysed database
includes 306 samples with CFRP reinforcement and 159 with GFRP
reinforcement, thus a total of 465 specimens was included in the
database and utilized in this study. The ratio between the height
and the diameter of the column (H/D), the compressive strength
of the plain concrete (fc0), the thickness of the FRP jacket (tf), the
Young modulus of the FRP (Ef), the ultimate tensile strain of the
FRP-sheet (efu), the ultimate strength (fcc) and axial strain (ecc) of
the FRP-confined concrete and the k (hardening coefficient due to
the lateral pressure) are all reported in the database. Two dimen-
sionless factors were then inputted into the ANN as reported in
Fig. 3. Distribution of data in terms of the input parameter: a (top) and b (bottom).
Eqs. (2) and (3).

f c0
a¼  1000 ð2Þ The ANN-procedure used the two inputs (a and b) and three
Ef hidden layers in order to provide a sigmoidal formulation of the
theoretical k according to Eqs. ((5)–(11)). The formula correspond-
tf ing to the minimum error of the theoretical versus the experimen-
b¼ ð3Þ
D tal values of k (Eq. (5)) was elected for the FRP-confined concrete
The a includes information about the mechanical characteris- strength prediction (Eq. (4)). The Eqs. (6)–(11) serve to calculate
tics of the un-confined concrete and the FRP-sheet (data were con- the theoretical k based on the data inputs.
sidered both in MPa), while the b refers to the geometry of the 4; 58
column in respect of the thickness of the confinement (data were k¼  0; 03 ð5Þ
1 þ ey6
considered both in mm). The variations of the ANN-inputs are
shown in Fig. 3. In either cases the mode is evident with about where
250 specimens and also another eight ranges with quite the same y1 ¼ 0; 48a þ 1; 05b  1; 88 ð6Þ
importance are clear.
The actual k was calculated by the inverse formula expressed in y2 ¼ 0; 19a  1; 58 ð7Þ
Eq. (4); in which the power of the confining pressure was fixed
equal to 0,5 (e.g. in [16,30]). The confining pressure fl was consid- y3 ¼ 0; 88y1 y2 þ 0; 33y22  1; 10y21 ð8Þ
ered as reported in Section 1.
0 0 0;5
y4 ¼ 0; 60a þ 1; 66b  0; 20ab þ 0; 08a2  2; 12 ð9Þ
f cc ¼ f c0 þ k  f l ð4Þ
202 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208

Fig. 4. Experimental and corresponding ANN compressive strength for the training and test data of the ANN model.

Fig. 5. Frequency of the Experimental/Theoretical values of fcc: (a) normal distribution and (b) trend distribution.

y5 ¼ 0; 69y4  0; 18y24 ð10Þ

y6 ¼ 0; 73y5 þ 0; 72y5 y3  0; 87y25 þ 0; 16 ð11Þ

The plot of the experimental compressive strength against the
corresponding ANN predictions for the database is reported in
Fig. 4. The linear correlation can be detected, and the correlation
coefficients (R2) are 0,80 and 0,90 for the training and the test data,
respectively. Therefore, the proposed model successively predicts
accurately the compressive strength of the FRP-confined concrete
column.
Therefore the proposed model consists in a series of simple
polynomial functions in which the inputs a and b appears and a
final sigmoidal function F, instead of the k effectiveness parameter
of the confining pressure, is evaluated and better adapt to the dif-
ferent axial test results considered in [57]. The Gaussian plot of the
ratio between experimental and predicted values of the compres-
sive strength of the FRP-confined concrete is reported in Fig. 5(a) Fig. 6. Box plot of the frequency of the Experimental/Theoretical values of fcc.
for all the 465 specimens included in the utilized database. The
average value, the median (Me) and the mode are respectively equal to the theoretical values). In Fig. 5a the theoretical Gaussian curve
to 1.00, 0.99 and 0.98 with a standard deviator of 0.16. The nearness is also reported. The theoretical forecasts are precise and accurate
of the average, the median and the mode between themselves and since their frequency trend distribution is focused around the unit
the unity indicates that the trend of the actual frequency curve is (Fig. 5b).
symmetric (Fig. 5(b)) and its axis of symmetry is very close to The effectiveness of the proposed model is shown also utilizing
1.00 which corresponds to the ideal prediction (experimental equal a boxplot. A boxplot, as known, is a type of graph used to display
 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208 203

Fig. 7. Experimental vs. Theoretical correlation in the Quartile-Quartile range.

patterns of quantitative data, splitting the data set into quartiles.

The body of the boxplot consists of a ‘‘box” (hence, the name),
which goes from the first quartile (Q1) to the third quartile (Q3).
Within the box, a horizontal line is drawn at the Q2 (=Me), the
Fig. 9. Influence of the thickness of the FRP and the compressive strength of the un-
median of the data set. Two horizontal lines, called whiskers, confined concrete on the compressive strength of the FRP-confined column.
extend from the front and the back of the box. The front whisker
goes from Q1 to the smallest non-outlier in the data set, and the
back whisker goes from Q4 to the largest non-outlier. The box plot In the following the validity of the model is tested by a compar-
reported in Fig. 6 confirms the good predictive power of the pro- ison between experimental and theoretical values, moreover a
posed ANN-model. In fact, the 50% of the casuistry is restrained parametric study is illustrated and discussed. In order to evaluate
inside the box (Q3-Q1), which appears small compared to the entire the linear correlation between the actual and the predicted out-
domain (Q4-Q0). So half of the predictions are close to the corre- come, the diagrams in Figs. 7 and 8 have been evaluated. Here,
sponding experimental records. the relationship in term of the compressive strength of FRP-
A further consideration about the validity of the model can be confined concrete is considered either referring to the values fall-
done on the basis of statistical parameters such as the RRMSE ing in the box range and for the total sample investigated. The cor-
(Relative Root Mean Square Error) expressed by Eq. (12) and the relation ratio R2 was calculated for the values included in the box,
MAPE (Mean Absolute Percentage Error) expressed in Eq. (13); called Quartile-Quartile (Q-Q), it resulted equal to 0,98. In fact 250
which appear very low and assert that the average scatter of the analytical predictions versus experimental data are plotted in
whole predictions can be considered acceptable. Fig. 7; they appear aligned along the main diagonal of the graph
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Xn y  y  that corresponds to the ideal correspondence between experimen-
1 ^i 2 tal values and theoretical predictions. In Fig. 8, referring to the
RRMSE ¼ i
 100 ¼ 0; 8% ð12Þ
n i¼1 yi whole sample the area under the ratio experimental/theoretical
compressive strength is evidenced; in this figure the percentage
n  
1X 
^i 
yi  y   100 ¼ 3% of conservative and un-conservative results can be appreciated
MAPE ¼ ð13Þ
n i¼1  yi  besides the accuracy of predicted values.
The results of the parametric analyses are provided in Figs. 9
where and 10. In the former the compressive strength of FRP-confined
 n is the number of samples in the input database, concrete is related to the thickness of the FRP-sheet varying the
 i is the general sample, compressive strength of the unconfined concrete. While in
 yi : is the experimental value, Fig. 10 the strength is related to the geometry, in terms of the
y^i is the theoretical value.

Fig. 8. Area graph of the Experimental/Predicted fcc.

204 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208
Fig. 10. Influence of the Young’s Modulus of the FRP and the diameter of the
column on the compressive strength of the FRP-confined concrete.
diameter of the circular concrete column, varying the Elastic mod-
ulus of the reinforcement. An increase in compressive strength is
not appreciable when the thickness of the FRP jacket increases over
2,0 mm, while a slight increase is observed for lower values of the
FRP thickness. On the contrary the values of the confined strength
are strongly dependent on the initial properties of the unconfined
concrete, as clearly shown by the Fig. 9 (passing from 10 to
100 MPa of the unconfined compressive strength an increase of
the confined one is noted from about 93 to 181 MPa).
In Fig. 10, where the results of a parametric analysis related to
the dimensions of the concrete core and elastic modulus of FRP are
provided, it is clear that the dimension of the confined column
plays a significant role on the compressive strength. High value
of the FRP Young’s modulus result in a higher compressive strength
because of the different dilation properties of the confining com-
posite material.
4. Comparison with international codes and analytical models
An exhaustive list of analytical models was presented in previ-
ous sections (see Table 1), in this paragraph the results obtained by
Fig. 11. Box Plot classification of the reproduced models.
the application of the proposed ANN-based model are compared
with those obtained by using the models reported in Table 1. The
box plot following to the application of the analytical models avail-
able in the scientific literature and design guidelines is reported in
Fig. 11. The results obtained for each model (identified by the cor-
responding reference on x-axis), in terms of boxplot, are drawn by
sorting them with increasing the median, represented by the hori-
zontal black segment inside each box. In this way it seems easy to
individuate those models which provide un-conservative results
(left-side) and conservative results (right-side). Those models that
predicted the experimental results with high accuracy are located
in the central part of the diagram. It should be noted that the pro-
posed model appears accurate and precise since its median is very
close to the unitary value of the ratio fcc,exp/fcc,theo. Moreover, the
Inter Quartile Range (IQR = Q3-Q1) is one of the narrowest, as con-
firmed in Table 2, as well as the domain of the fcc,exp/fcc,theo ratio
is certainly the smallest with the worst predictions on the safe side.
In Table 2, the kurtosis K, the Pearson’s coefficients as1–as2–as3
and the correlation index R2 are also reported; the minimum and
the maximum value for each of them have been also added in
the table. In particular, the maximum value of K indicates the most
accurate model; the minimum value of the as1-as2-as3 defines the
most precise one; the maximum value of R2 corresponds to the
best fitting between experimental and theoretical results. The data
in Table 2 which correspond to the best predictions in terms of
accuracy, precision and correlation are reported in bold. The
obtained results proved that the proposed ANN-model reveals
the best match of accuracy, precision and correlation so it can be
considered at least competitive with the analytical models cur-
rently available in scientific literature. It has to be specified that
the Table 2 aims to compare and individuate the best model per-
formance; which cannot be indicate by single parameter but by
the best concomitance of them (e.g. in the K max = 5,03 that
indicate high level of accuracy but with the as1-as2-as3 indexes
equal to 0,26-0,77-0,25 respectively and corresponding to bad pre-
cision; in other words, the predictions present frequently the same
experimental on theoretical value but it is faraway from 1 = perfect
prediction).
 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208 205

Table 2
Comparison of the precision, accuracy and linear correlation of the analysed models.

References Q1 Q0 Me Q4 Q3 IQR K as1 as2 as3 R2

[7] 0,67 0,02 0,74 1,27 0,83 0,17 4,65 0,29 0,87 0,27 0,80
[31] 0,67 0,02 0,75 1,30 0,84 0,18 4,54 0,41 1,24 0,19 0,79
[6] 0,67 0,02 0,76 1,31 0,86 0,18 4,56 0,41 1,23 0,21 0,79
[26] 0,69 0,02 0,76 1,31 0,86 0,17 4,63 0,27 0,81 0,31 0,80
[17] 0,69 0,02 0,76 1,31 0,86 0,17 4,63 0,27 0,81 0,31 0,80
[5] 0,68 0,02 0,78 1,41 0,92 0,23 3,72 0,09 0,28 0,51 0,72
[51] 0,70 0,02 0,78 1,32 0,88 0,17 5,03 0,26 0,77 0,25 0,80
[50] 0,69 0,02 0,78 1,42 0,92 0,23 3,71 0,10 0,29 0,52 0,72
[33] 0,72 0,02 0,80 1,39 0,92 0,20 4,44 0,19 0,57 0,44 0,79
[47] 0,73 0,02 0,82 1,42 0,92 0,19 4,63 0,39 1,18 0,21 0,80
[10] 0,74 0,02 0,83 1,44 0,93 0,19 4,63 0,39 1,17 0,22 0,80
[29] 0,74 0,02 0,83 1,44 0,94 0,20 4,70 0,38 1,13 0,26 0,80
[45] 0,75 0,02 0,84 1,46 0,95 0,20 4,63 0,39 1,16 0,24 0,80
[24] 0,76 0,02 0,85 1,48 0,96 0,20 4,63 0,38 1,14 0,25 0,80
[41] 0,77 0,02 0,86 1,50 0,97 0,20 4,63 0,37 1,12 0,25 0,80
[52] 0,78 0,03 0,87 1,65 1,01 0,23 4,59 0,15 0,45 0,45 0,72
[14] 0,80 0,02 0,89 1,56 1,00 0,20 4,61 0,36 1,07 0,29 0,80
[28] 0,81 0,02 0,92 1,53 1,05 0,24 4,38 0,00 0,01 0,33 0,78
[37] 0,83 0,02 0,92 1,61 1,03 0,20 4,57 0,34 1,02 0,29 0,80
[36] 0,83 0,02 0,92 1,61 1,03 0,20 4,57 0,34 1,02 0,29 0,80
[13] 0,82 0,02 0,93 1,57 1,07 0,25 4,32 0,01 0,03 0,36 0,78
[44] 0,84 0,02 0,93 1,59 1,06 0,22 4,44 0,15 0,44 0,41 0,79
[46] 0,82 0,02 0,94 1,62 1,06 0,24 4,33 0,42 1,25 0,11 0,78
[30] 0,84 0,02 0,95 1,64 1,09 0,25 4,13 0,13 0,40 0,38 0,77
[15] 0,85 0,02 0,96 1,65 1,10 0,25 4,15 0,14 0,42 0,39 0,77
[16] 0,87 0,02 0,96 1,61 1,09 0,23 4,30 0,04 0,11 0,43 0,78
[49] 0,87 0,02 0,96 1,61 1,09 0,23 4,30 0,04 0,11 0,43 0,78
[18] 0,85 0,03 0,97 1,77 1,11 0,27 4,37 0,17 0,51 0,24 0,71
[27] 0,87 0,02 0,98 1,71 1,11 0,23 4,44 0,29 0,88 0,35 0,79
[34] 0,87 0,02 0,98 1,72 1,11 0,24 4,43 0,29 0,87 0,37 0,79
[9] 0,88 0,03 0,99 1,71 1,13 0,26 4,13 0,15 0,45 0,39 0,77
PM 0,89 0,53 0,99 1,62 1,08 0,19 3,90 0,12 0,35 0,09 0,83
[22] 0,89 0,03 0,99 1,74 1,13 0,25 4,39 0,28 0,84 0,40 0,79
[40] 0,89 0,03 0,99 1,74 1,14 0,26 4,31 0,24 0,71 0,43 0,79
[38] 0,89 0,03 1,00 1,75 1,14 0,25 4,38 0,28 0,83 0,40 0,79
[32] 0,88 0,03 1,00 1,72 1,14 0,27 3,94 0,08 0,25 0,31 0,76
[20] 0,90 0,03 1,01 1,78 1,16 0,26 4,33 0,26 0,79 0,41 0,79
[42] 0,90 0,03 1,02 1,79 1,17 0,27 4,32 0,26 0,78 0,40 0,79
[21] 0,94 0,03 1,06 1,86 1,22 0,29 4,19 0,22 0,67 0,44 0,78
[23] 0,94 0,03 1,06 1,86 1,22 0,29 4,19 0,22 0,67 0,44 0,78
[39] 0,94 0,03 1,06 1,86 1,22 0,29 4,19 0,22 0,67 0,44 0,78
[19] 0,94 0,03 1,06 1,86 1,22 0,29 4,19 0,22 0,67 0,44 0,88
[25] 0,95 0,03 1,06 1,89 1,19 0,24 4,42 0,41 1,24 0,27 0,78
[43] 0,94 0,03 1,09 1,88 1,25 0,31 3,87 0,17 0,52 0,31 0,74
[8] 1,01 0,03 1,21 2,35 1,45 0,45 3,24 0,20 0,60 0,44 0,64
[53] 1,09 0,04 1,33 2,64 1,61 0,52 3,12 0,19 0,57 0,41 0,61
[37] 1,31 0,06 1,71 3,75 2,16 0,84 3,29 0,07 0,20 0,38 0,14
[11] 1,38 0,06 1,79 5,20 2,38 1,00 3,93 0,33 0,99 0,84 0,37
[12] 1,38 0,06 1,79 5,22 2,38 1,00 3,95 0,33 0,99 0,84 0,37
[54] 2,14 -2,94 2,52 15,66 2,83 0,69 82,01 0,32 0,97 -0,03 0,27
[48] 1,81 0,08 2,36 6,87 3,12 1,31 3,95 0,89 2,68 0,84 0,14
Max. 1,00 5,03 0,89 2,68 0,84 0,88
Min. 0,17 3,24 0,00 0,01 0,09 0,14

On the basis of the previous discussed results, some theoretical
models have been selected in order to better understand which one
provides enhanced accuracy of the predictions; those reported in
[27,34,9,22,40] have been designated for this purpose. According
to Fig. 11 and Table 2 they demonstrated to have better simultane-
ity of precision, accuracy and linear correlation, in comparison
with all the other models. The Cumulative Distribution Function
(CDF) has been realised by referring to the probability of the
parameter xi defined in Eq. (14).
f cc;exp
xi ¼
f cc;theo
The well-known relationship of the CDF is therefore the
following:
Fðxi Þ ¼ PðX 6 xi Þ
The comparison between obtained CDF is illustrated in Fig. 12.
The accuracy of the model increases with the cumulative probabil-
ity of the parameter xi to be found in a small range around the ori-
gin point, or rather CDF should tend to the vertical axis. It is clear as
the Proposed Model (PM) shows the highest slope of the curve,
close to the vertical axis of the CDF, which indicates the higher
probability that the theoretical predictions are in agreement with
the experimental outcomes. The other models also show a cumula-
tive distribution of the exanimated frequency but slightly worse
with respect to the proposed model, since the functions shapes
ð14Þ appear less vertical.
Moreover, the RMSE (Root Mean Square Error) has been com-
puted for the proposed model in comparison with models reported
in [27,34,9,22,40], as expressed in Eq. (16). About 68% of the exper-
imental vs theoretical points are within 1 time the RMSE and about
ð15Þ 95% of them are within 2 times the RMSE. The model comparisons
206 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208

Fig. 12. Probabilistic assessment for the total specimens through the Cumulative Distribution Function classification (left) and zoom-detail of the [0,5;1,0] probability range
(right).

Table 3 The chart consists in a representation of the limits (gray continu-

Root Mean Square Error results for the considered ous lines) over which the fractal of 5% is located (Fig. 13). The ana-
models.
lytical model that guarantees the best theoretical prediction has
Ref. 2  RMSE [MPa] the smaller (2RMSE). When the lines tend to be parallel to the
PM 24,10 diagonal line x = y, the correlation increases. This type of plot is
[27] 35,31 useful to see at the same time the correlation and the dispersion
[34] 35,11 properties of the tested models. PM in the diagram is the ‘‘pro-
[9] 34,48
posed model”.
[22] 34,55
[40] 34,15
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Pn
i¼1 ðy1  yi Þ
^ 2
RMSE ¼ ð16Þ
n
in terms of the linear correlation, precision and accuracy have been By considering the 95% of the experimental outcomes, which
separately discussed in previous sections and a final remark about corresponds to the best theoretical predictions in Table 3 and
them can be deduced from the value of 2 times the RMSE (Table 3). Fig. 13, it can be notice as the PM shows to be the most accurate

Fig. 13. Root Mean Square Error classification.

 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208
and precise. The linear correlation of the existing analytical mod-
els, chosen for the comparison [27,34,9,22,40], looks slightly better
then the PM, which shows anyway a high R2 equal to 0,91.
5. Conclusions
The compressive strength of the FRP-confined concrete is con-
trolled by several factors, which include mechanical and geometric
properties. The laboratory evidence has demonstrated the influ-
ence of important parameters on the compressive strength such
as the diameter of the column, the compressive strength of the
un-confined concrete, the thickness of the FRP jacket and its
Young’s modulus. A large test database of more than 450 speci-
mens, reported in [60], allowed to use a representative statistical
population to be studied in order to provide an ANN-based analyt-
ical model. The target value of the model was individuated in a
dimensionless parameter, which was able to provide the equiva-
lent compressive strength due to the FRP-confining action. Based
on these assumptions, a new analytical model was proposed and
discussed in the present paper. The predictive power of the pro-
posed theory was illustrated in terms of the Gaussian distribution
of the frequency of the fcc,exp/fcc,theo ratio as also by the box plot
graph. Very satisficing statistical evidence of the predictive perfor-
mance was clearly indicated by the RRMSE = 0,8% and MAPE = 3%.
Moreover, the median value of the fcc,exp/fcc,theo ratio was equal to
0,99 demonstrating high precision of the forecast and the correla-
tion (R2 = 0,83) can also confirm the quality of the produced model.
A parametric analysis has been performed in order to verify if the
mathematical formula is coherent with the FRP-confined concrete
compressive behaviour described in experimental tests. The pro-
posed model has shown to be consistent with the mechanical
trends that were observed in laboratory tests. Finally, an extensive
comparison with other theoretical models found in International
Design Codes and scientific literature has been shown and dis-
cussed. All these comparisons and parametric analyses confirmed
that the proposed procedure, based on ANN-approach, might be
used for an accurate prediction of the compressive strength of
FRP-confined concrete. The paper has shown that the ANN-based
modelling can be used in order to provide predictive equations,
based on a large number of inhomogeneous experimental samples.
References
[1] Wu G, Lu ZT, Wu ZS. Strength and ductility of concrete cylinders confined with
FRP composites. Constr Build Mater 2006;20:134–48.
[2] Aiello MA, Micelli F, Valente L. Structural upgrading of masonry columns by
using composite reinforcements. J Compos Constr, ASCE 2007;11(6):650–9.
[3] Cascardi A, Micelli F, Aiello MA. Unified model for hollow columns externally
confined by FRP. Eng Struct 2016;111:119–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2015.12.032. ISSN: 0141-0296.
[4] Richart FE, Brandtzaeg A, Brown RL. A study of the failure of concrete under
combined compressive stresses. In: Bulletin no. 185, Univ. of Illinois, Eng.
Experimental Station: Champaign, Ill; 1928.
[5] Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical stress–strain model for confined
concrete. ASCE J Struct Eng 1988;114(8):1804–26.
[6] Richart FE, Brandtzaeg A, Brown RL, The failure of plain and spirally reinforced
concrete in compression. Bulletin No. 190, Engineering Experiment Station,
University of Illinois, Urbana, USA, 1929.
[7] Newman K, Newman JB. Failure theories and design criteria for plain concrete.
In: Proc. int. civ. eng. mater. conference on structure. New York: Wiley
Interscience; 1969.
[8] Mirmiran A, Kargahi M, Samaan MS, Shahawy M. Composite FRP-concrete
column with bi-directional external reinforcement. In: Proc. 1st int. conf.
composites in infrastructure. Tucson, Arizona: Univ. of Arizona; 1996.
[9] Karbhari VM, Gao Y. Composite jacketed concrete under uniaxial compression-
verification of simple design equations. J Mater Civ Eng 1997;9(4):185–93.
[10] Miyauchi K, Nishibayashi S, Inoue S. Estimation of strengthening effects with
carbon fiber sheet for concrete column. In: 3rd Int. symp. of non-metallic
reinforcement for concrete structures; 1997.
[11] Jolly CK, Lilistone D. The stress–strain behavior of concrete confined by
advanced fibre composites. In: Proc. 8th BCA conference higher education and
the concrete industry. Southampton; 1998.
207
[12] Kono S, Inazuni M, Kaku T, Evaluation of confining effects of CFRP sheets on
reinforced concrete members. In: Proc. 2nd int. conf. on composites in
infrastructures; 1998.
[13] Samaan M, Mirmiran A, Shahawy M. Model of concrete confined by fiber
composites. ASCE J Struct Eng 1998;124(9):1025–31.
[14] Miyauchi K, Inoue S, Kuroda T, Kobayashi A. Strengthening effects with carbon
fiber sheet for concrete column. In: Japan concr. inst.; 1999.
[15] Saafi M, Toutanji HA, Li Z. Behavior of concrete columns confined with fiber
reinforced polymer tubes. ACI Struct J 1999;96(5):500–9.
[16] Spoelstra MR, Monti G. FRP-confined concrete model. J Compos Constr 1999;3
(3):143–50.
[17] Toutanji HA. Stress–strain characteristics of concrete columns externally
confined with advanced fiber composite sheets. ACI Mater J 1999;96
(3):397–404.
[18] Jolly CK, Lilistone D. An innovative form of reinforcement for concrete columns
using advanced composites. Struct Eng 2000;78(23–24):20–8.
[19] Lin HJ, Chen CT. Strength of concrete cylinder confined by composite materials.
J Reinf Plas Compos 2001;20(18):1577–600.
[20] Ilki A, Kumbasar N, Koc V. Strength and deformability of low strength concrete
confined by carbon fibre composite sheets. In: Proc. 15th eng. mech.
conference. New York: Columbia Univ.; 2002.
[21] Lam L, Teng JG. Strength models for fiber-reinforced plastic-confined concrete.
ASCE J Struct Eng 2002;128(5):612–23.
[22] Moran DA, Pantelides CP. Variable strain ductility ratio for fiber reinforced
polymer-confined concrete. ASCE J Compos Constr 2002;6(4):224–32.
[23] Shehata IAEM, Carneiro LAV, Shehata LCD. Strength of short concrete columns
confined with CFRP sheets. Mater Struct 2002;35:50–8.
[24] Lam L, Teng JG. Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined
concrete. Constr Build Mater 2003;17(6–7):471–89.
[25] Ilki A, Kumbasar N, Koc V. Low strength concrete members externally confined
with FRP sheets. Struct Eng Mech 2004;18(2):167–94.
[26] Matthys S, Toutanji H, Audenaert K, Taerwe L. Axial load behavior of large-
scale columns confined with fiber-reinforced polymer composites. ACI Struct J
2005;102(2):258–67.
[27] Bisby LA, Dent AJS, Green MF. Comparison of confinement models for fiber-
reinforced polymer-wrapped concrete. ACI Struct J 2005;102(1):62–72.
[28] Saiidi MS, Sureshkumar K, Pulido C. Simple carbon-fiber-reinforced-plastic-
confined concrete model for moment-curvature analysis. ASCE J Compos
Constr 2005;9(1):101–4.
[29] Berthet JF, Ferrier E, Hamelin P. Compressive behavior of concrete externally
confined by composite jackets. Part B: model. Constr Build Mater 2006;20
(5):338–47.
[30] Guralnick SA, Gunawan LM. Strengthening of reinforced concrete bridge
columns with FRP wrap. Practice Period Struct Des Constr, ASCE 2006;11
(4):218–28.
[31] Tamuzs V, Tepfers R, Sparnins E. Behavior of concrete cylinders confined by
carbon composite II: prediction of strength. Mech Compos Mater 2006;42
(2):109–18.
[32] Al-Tersawy SH, Hodhod OA, Hefnawy AA. Reliability and code calibration of RC
short columns confined with CFRP wraps. In: Proc. 8th int. symp. on fiber
reinforced polymer reinforcement for concrete structures. Patras,
Greece: Univ. of Patras; 2007.
[33] Ciupala MA, Pilakoutas K, Mortazavi AA. Effectiveness of FRP composites in
confined concrete. In: Proc. 8th int. symp. on fiber reinforced polymer
reinforcement for concrete structures. Patras: Greece Univ. of Patras; 2007.
[34] Shehata IAEM, Carneiro LAV, Shehata LCD. Strength of confined short concrete
columns. In: Proc. 8th int. symp. on fiber reinforced polymer reinforcement for
concrete structures. Patras, Greece: Univ. of Patras; 2007.
[35] Vintzileou E, Panagiotidou E. An empirical model for predicting the mechanical
properties of FRP-confined concrete. In: Proc. 8th int. symp. on fiber reinforced
polymer reinforcement for concrete structures. Patras, Greece: Univ. of Patras;
2007.
[36] Yan Z, Pantelides CP. Design-oriented model for concrete columns confined
with bonded FRP jackets or post-tensioned FRP shells. In: Proc. 8th int. symp.
on fiber reinforced polymer reinforcement for concrete structures. Patras,
Greece: Univ. of Patras; 2007.
[37] Youssef MN, Feng MQ, Mosallam AS. Stress–strain model for concrete confined
by FRP composites. Compos Part B: Eng 2007;38(5–6):614–28.
[38] Binici B. Design of FRPs in circular bridge column retrofits for ductility
enhancement. Eng Struct 2008;30(3):766–76.
[39] Thériault M, Neale KW. Design equations for axially loaded reinforced concrete
columns strengthened with FRP wraps. Can J Ci Eng 2009;27(5):1011–20.
[40] Wu YF, Wang L. Unified strength model for square and circular concrete
columns confined by external jacket. ASCE J Struct Eng 2009;135(3):253–61.
[41] Wu H, Wang Y, Yu L, Li X. Experimental and computational studies on high-
strength concrete circular columns confined by aramid fiber-reinforced
polymer sheets. ASCE J Compos Constr 2009;13(2):125–34.
[42] Benzaid R, Mesbah H, Chikh N. FRP-confined concrete cylinders: axial
compression experiments and strength model. J Reinf Plas Compos 2010;29
(16):2469–88.
[43] Fahmy M, Wu Z. Evaluating and proposing models of circular concrete
columns confined with different FRP composites. Compos Part B: Eng 2010;41
(3):199–213.
[44] Mohamed H, Masmoudi R. Axial load capacity of concrete-filled FRP tube
columns: experimental versus predictions. ASCE J Compos Constr 2010;14
(2):231–43.
208 A. Cascardi et al. / Engineering Structures 140 (2017) 199–208
[45] Wu H, Wang Y. Experimental study on high-strength concrete short columns
confined with AFRP sheets. Steel Compos Struct 2010;10(6):501–16.
[46] Park JH, Jo BW, Yoon SJ, Park SK. Experimental investigation on the structural
behavior of concrete filled FRP tubes with/without steel re-bar. KSCE J Civ Eng
2011;15(2):337–45.
[47] Realfonzo R, Napoli A. Concrete confined by FRP systems: confinement
efficiency and design strength models. Compos Part B: Eng 2011;42:736–55.
[48] Youssif ST. New model of CFRP-confined circular concrete columns: ANN
approach. Int J Civ Eng Technol (IJCIET) 2013;4(3):98–110. ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316 (Online).
[49] Fédération internationale du Béton (fib). (2001). ‘‘Externally bonded FRP
reinforcement for RC structures”. Bulletin No. 14, Technical Rep., Lausanne,
Switzerland.
[50] American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2002). ‘‘Guide for the design and
construction of externally bonded FRP systems for strengthening of concrete
structures”. ACI 440.2R-02, Farmington Hills, Mich.
[51] Canadian Standards Association (CSA). (2002). ‘‘Design and construction of
building components with fibre-reinforced polymers”. CSA-S806, Rexdale,
Ont., Canada.
[52] TR 55 (2012) Design guidance for strengthening concrete structures using
fibre composite materials, third edition. Technical Report No. 55 of the
Concrete Society, UK.
[53] CNR-DT 200 R1/2013. Istruzioni per la Progettazione, l’Esecuzione ed il
Controllo di Interventi di Consolidamento Statico mediante l’utilizzo di
Compositi Fibrorinforzati. Roma: Concilio Nazionale delle Ricerche; 2013 (in
Italian).
[54] Naderpour H, Kheyroddin A, Amiri GG. Prediction of FRP-confined compressive
strength of concrete using artificial neural networks. Compos Struct 2010;92
(12):2817–29.
[55] Alqedra MA, Ashour AF. Prediction of shear capacity of single anchors located
near a concrete edge using neural networks. Comput Struct
2005;83:2495–502.
[56] Dahou Z, Sbartai ZM, Caste A, Ghomari F. Artificial neural network for steel-
concrete bond prediction. Eng Struct 2009;31:1724–33.
[57] Tinoco J, Correia AG, Cortez P. Application of data mining techniques in the
estimation of the uniaxial compressive strength of jet grouting columns over
time. Constr Build Mater 2011;25(3):1257–62.
[58] Amani J, Moeini R. Prediction of shear strength of reinforced concrete beams
using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and artificial neural network. Sci
Iran A 2012;19(2):242–8.
[59] Cascardi A, Aiello MA, Micelli F. Analytical model based on artificial neural
network for masonry shear walls strengthened with FRM systems. Compos
Part B (In Press – accepted on March 24th 2016) doi: 10.1016/
j.compositesb.2016.03.066.
[60] Realfonso R, Napoli A. Concrete confined by FRP systems: confinement
efficiency and design strength models. Compos B 2011;42:736–55.