Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

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

Experimental study on effect of EBR and EBROG methods on debonding

of FRP sheets used for shear strengthening of RC beams
Davood Mostofinejad, Amirhomayoon Tabatabaei Kashani ⇑
Department of Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology (IUT), Isfahan, Iran

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

Article history: Rehabilitation and retrofit of structures have been widely used in buildings since many years ago. In
Received 29 July 2012 recent years, Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites have been utilized to rehabilitate and retrofit
Received in revised form 19 September various types of structures. Due to the desirable properties of FRP composites such as high strength
2012
and light weight, engineers have shown great tendency to use FRP sheets extensively in reinforced con-
Accepted 24 September 2012
crete structures for both shear and flexural strengthening. Nevertheless, premature failure due to deb-
Available online 10 October 2012
onding of FRP sheets from the concrete surface is one of the major challenges in using FRP composites
in strengthening projects. Surface preparation of concrete in order to provide proper bond between con-
Keywords:
A. Carbon fiber
crete surface and FRP sheet can put off debonding up to a limited stage. However, in most investigations
B. Debonding which RC beams are strengthened in shear with FRP sheets, the debonding has been finally observed. In
B. Strength the current study, the effects of surface preparation on shear strengthening of RC beams are investigated;
D. Mechanical testing also the substitute of conventional surface preparation with grooving method is considered. Experimen-
Grooving method (GM) tal specimens consisted of 32 small scales concrete beams which were subjected to 4-point loading test.
The results revealed that although the surface preparation of concrete before attaching the FRP sheets
often does not prevent from the debonding, but it can delay debonding even slightly and, accordingly,
increase carrying loads of beams up to 12%. Furthermore, the results showed that grooving method per-
forms better than surface preparation; so that the detachment of FRP strips did not occur in any of beam
specimens strengthened by this method and the weakness of beams in shear disappeared and flexural
failure became dominant failure mode.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The probable collapse of concrete structures is one of the main
worries in building industry. A large numbers of buildings all over
the world are counted unsafe according to requirements of new
codes. Furthermore, the changes in building usage and applied
loads, computational and fabrication errors, and reinforcement
corrosion make the structures unsafe. Since an alternative for these
structures requires high cost and much time, retrofit has become
an accepted method to improve bearing capacity of buildings and
their serviceability [1].
Various methods have been represented for retrofit of buildings
since many years ago. In recent decades, use of FRP sheets to
strengthen concrete structures has been more favorite because of
their desirable properties. Some advantages of FRP sheets are high
durability, being light, easy transportation due to their low weight,
simple installation and clean finished surfaces [2]. Researches on
FRP composites toward shear strengthening of beams have
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 311 391 3818; fax: +98 311 391 2700.
E-mail address: a.tabatabaei@cv.iut.ac.ir (A. Tabatabaei Kashani).
referred to nearly two decades ago. Norris et al. [3] experimentally
studied the behavior of damaged beams which had been repaired
by CFRP sheets. In order to increase the flexural and shear strength
of RC beams, the FRP sheets were attached to the tension and lat-
eral faces of the beams. The tests showed that the strength and
stiffness of the strengthened specimens were increased in compar-
ison with unstrengthened samples. Rita and Vecchio [4] stated that
FRP composites increase the shear strength and remove the brittle
shear failure by excluding shear cracks propagation and rising the
interlocking of aggregates. Furthermore, shear strengthening in-
creases the carrying load of the beam and subsequently the stress
in longitudinal reinforcement probably up to yielding, leading to
ductile behavior of the beam.
One of the most important problems in the use of FRP sheets for
strengthening purposes is their early and unpredictable debond-
ing. A large number of various failure modes of reinforced concrete
beams strengthened by FRP sheets have been observed in experi-
mental investigations. Oehlers [5] has referred to about 30 modes
of failure for bonded plates. He categorizes three types of debond-
ing mechanism in RC elements strengthened with FRP sheets; i.e.
flexural, shear and axial peeling.

1359-8368/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.09.081
 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713
Debonding mechanism is the most complicated problem in use
of FRP sheets. Researchers have tried to predict the transfer mech-
anism of shear stresses between the concrete substrate and FRP
sheets and the maximum load before debonding using FE method
[6,7]. Ascione et al. investigated the stresses between the concrete
beam and FRP sheets through FE analysis, and presented a new
procedure to evaluate the peak value of longitudinal shear interac-
tions to preserve FRP systems from premature debonding failure
[8,9].
Taheri et al. [10] stated this hypothesis that the debonding of
FRP sheets are a function of difference between Poisson’s ratio of
concrete and composites and as the difference between the two
Poisson’s ratios increases, debonding occurs faster.
The main objective of the preparation of concrete surface is to
remove external weak layer as well as impurities hidden in con-
crete surface which cause poor and inappropriate attachment. In
conventional surface preparation weak layer is removed and a sur-
face with visible aggregates is obtained. This leads to proper and
sufficient adhesion between concrete surface and FRP composite
[11]. Chajes et al. [12] claimed that surface preparation can in-
crease the ultimate load by 3–10%.
Surface preparation along with external bonding is a popular
method for the attachment of FRP sheets on the surface of concrete
beams. Investigations revealed that removing a thin layer of con-
crete surface by water pressure will increase the effect of surface
preparation. Toutanji and Ortiz [13] reported that beams smoothed
by water pressure carry higher loads than ones smoothed by
grinding.
Shear strengthening of RC beams are provided by the attach-
ment of FRP sheets to the beam sides. FRP sheets may be attached
to the beam faces for shear strengthening in full warp at four faces,
in U shape at bottom and side faces, or on two lateral sides. Fur-
thermore, the sheets may be connected to the beams in the form
of vertical or diagonal, continuously or intermittently as shown
in Fig. 1. Externally Bonded (EB) accompanied with surface prepa-
ration usually is used for shear strengthening; however, the lami-
nates are still faced to debonding. Kim et al. [14] did some tests on
RC beams strengthened with FRP strips on two lateral faces of
Full warp
Fig. 1. Typical wrapping schemes for shear strengthening using FRP laminates; (a) around beam section; (b) along the beam.
1705
beams and observed that FRP strips were separated from lateral
faces of all the specimens.
In order to prevent from or postpone debonding of FRP sheets
used in shear and flexural strengthening, alternative methods to
conventional externally bonded reinforcement (EBR) are used to
attach FRP sheets, such as Near Surface Mounted (NSM) method
[15], mechanical anchor system method [16], and recently groov-
ing method (GM) for flexural strengthening [17].
NSM method could be effective in shear strengthening of RC
beams so that in Rizzo and De Lorenzis tests [18], the shear capac-
ity of the beams strengthened by conventional EBR method in-
creased by about 16%, while the shear capacity of the beams
strengthened by NSM method increased within 22–44%. However,
in all strengthened specimens with NSM method, FRP strips as well
as concrete surface were separated. Seo et al. compared the bond
strength of FRP sheets in NSM and EBR methods and concluded
that for equal bond length, the strength of FRP sheets in NSM
method increases about 1.5 of that of EBR technique [19]. Hajihas-
hemi et al. investigated the cracking and ultimate loads of RC
beams strengthened by prestressed FRP strips using NSM method;
they reported 15% increase in the ultimate load and less cracking
and deformation in the beam [20].
The attachments of FRP sheets to the side surfaces of RC beams
are also performed by mechanical anchor systems [16]. This meth-
od can somewhat put off the debonding of shear strengthening
sheets so that in Galal and Mofidi’s experiments, the carrying load
of beams were increased by 48% in comparison with control spec-
imen; but finally, the beam had shear failure. High costs of
mechanical tools are the most disadvantage of this method.
Externally Bonded Reinforcement On Grooves (EBROG) as a
technique of grooving method was employed by Mostofinejad
and Mahmoudabadi [17] for flexural strengthening of RC beams.
This method showed that externally bonding of FRP sheets on lon-
gitudinal grooves causes considerable increase in ultimate rupture
strength and load capacity of the strengthened beam; such that
longitudinal grooves of 10 mm deep, led to fully elimination of
debonding and considerably increased the load carrying capacity
and maintained 100% capacity of the FRP sheets.
U-shape 2 sides
(a)
(b)
1706 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713
In this research, shear strengthening of RC beams was achieved
using conventional EBR method and EBROG method with vertical
grooves, and the load carrying capacity as well as the failure mode
and mechanism in both methods were compared, as will be de-
scribed in the followings.
2. Experimental program
In order to investigate the performance of grooving method in
shear strengthening with FRP sheets, RC beam specimens with
dimension of 560  85  70 mm have been categorized in five
groups. Each group includes control beams, strengthened without
surface preparation (WSP), with surface preparation by EB method
and by grooving method.
To investigate the shear behavior of the beams and prevent
from flexural failure, bars of 12 and 8 mm diameter with yield
stress of about 400 MPa were used as flexural reinforcement of
beams. Since the full required development lengths of the bars
were not provided, 12 mm thick steel plates connected to the bars
at the beams ends were used as mechanical anchors to prevent
from any probable bar movement.
Mix proportions designed for target compressive strength of 28
and 38 MPa as presented in Table 1. The beam specimens were cast
and cured in water up to 28 days. The specimens were then
strengthened with FRP sheets attached on their sides. Various
methods of attachment were examined and evaluated by compar-
ing the corresponding load–displacement curves as well as ulti-
mate loads obtained from 4-point flexural test; the rate of
loading for the test was taken equal to 0.1 mm/min based on ASTM
C78 [21]. Test setup and its detail are shown in Fig. 2. Load–dis-
placement curves were drawn regarding the mid-span deflection
of the beams.
As for shear strengthening of beams using conventional EBR
method, first the weak layer of concrete surface was removed
using a grinding machine, and the surface was cleaned by air pres-
sure. Then, the surface cavities were filled with Epoxy Dur 31; and
after 72 h, the FRP sheets were glued on the surface using Epoxy
Dur 300. Care was taken at this stage to prevent any extra epoxy
resin between the prepared concrete surface and FRP sheet in order
to avoid reduced strength of bonding. The properties of epoxies
and FRP strips have been obtained from manufacturer’s specifica-
tions which are presented in Table 2.
Alternatively, for shear strengthening of beams using grooving
method, first the location of grooves were marked on the side faces
of concrete beams. Then, grooves with 10 mm depth, 5 mm width
and 20 mm interval were made by grinding; so that two grooves
were placed under each of FRP strips. All grooves were cleaned
by air pressure and filled with Epoxy Dur 31N glue. Then, the
grooves were covered with Epoxy Dur 300 and immediately FRP
strips with 85 mm length and 40 mm width were attached to con-
crete surface.
2.1. Classifications of specimens
Test beams included 32 specimens as are described in Table 3;
and were classified in five groups as follows:
 Group 1
Group 1 including four beams was designed to investigate the
effects of replacement of EBR method with EBROG method as a
technique of grooving method. The beams consist of one control
beam, one strengthened with FRP sheets using EBR method and
two remaining beams strengthened using EBROG technique. The
center to center distance of 40 mm wide FRP strips used for shear
Table 1
Mix proportions (kg/m3).
Mix no. Cement Water Coarse aggregates Fine aggregates
1 290 152 995 933
2 375 168 958 900
strengthening was 55 mm. Reinforcing details of this group are
represented in Fig. 3a.
 Group 2
The beams of this group were similar to those of group 1, except
that two 8 mm diameter bars were used instead of one 12 mm bar
as shown in Fig. 3b, in order to decrease the development length
and make sure of mechanical anchorage performance.
 Group 3
In this group of eight concrete beams, one 8 mm diameter bar
was used as compression reinforcement in addition to two 8 mm
reinforcing bars in tension, as shown in Fig. 3c. To increase the flex-
ural capacity and change the failure mode, four beams of this group
were strengthened in flexure by two layers of FRP sheets; each
with 530 mm length and 40 mm width attached to the bottom face
of beams by grooving method. This group included control beams,
the beams strengthened by EBR method with and without surface
preparation, and by grooving method. Therefore, the effects of sur-
face preparation on shear strengthening of beams can be investi-
gated from the experimental results of this group. The FRP sheets
used for shear strengthening were 40 mm wide with intervals of
60 mm.
 Group 4
The beams of this group were similar to those of group 3 and
similarly half of the eight beams were strengthened in flexure by
FRP sheets to prevent from flexural failure and make the shear
behavior dominant. The center to center distance of shear
strengthening FRP strips of this group was 80 mm. The specimens
of this group were strengthened for shear similar to those of group
3; therefore, comparison of different methods of attaching the
shear strengthening FRP composites onto concrete surface on the
load carrying capacity of the beams is also possible in this group.
Furthermore, the effect of spacing of FRP strips can be investigated
through comparison of the specimens of groups 4 and 3; since the
strips interval in groups 3 and 4 was 60 and 80 mm, respectively.
 Group 5
The beams of this group were similar to those of group 4; except
that the concrete compressive strength of the specimens of groups
4 and 5 was 36 MPa and 26 MPa, respectively. Detailed classifica-
tion of the specimens in each group can be seen in Table 3.
3. Comparison of experimental results
The load–displacement curves of beams strengthened in shear
are shown in Fig. 4. Furthermore, the load–displacement curves
of beams strengthened in both shear and flexure are presented in
Fig. 5. As it is observed in the curves, at the first steps of loading,
all beams show linear behavior. By increasing the load and devel-
oping small flexural cracks in tensile zone of beam, the stiffness of
beam decreases and the slope of load–displacement curve reduces.
Since the control beams were not strengthened, by increasing the
 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713 1707

P P W
S 100 mm

85 mm

LVDT
LVDT LVDT
500 mm

Fig. 2. Test setup.

Table 2
Properties of FRP materials.

Type Thickness per layer (mm) Tensile strength (MPa) Elastic modulus (GPa) Ultimate tensile strain (%)
Fibers
Sika warp Hex230C 0.12 4100 231 1.7
Tensile modulus (MPa) Flexural modulus (MPa)
Adhesive
EpoxyDur 300 0.4 45.0 3500 3000
EpoxyDur 31 N – 24.8 5200 6900

Table 3
Detail of tested beams and summary of test results.

Group fc0 (MPa) Lable Flexural strengthening Shear strengthening method Sfa (mm) Ultimate load (kN) Load increase (%)

1 35.8 IIVNUA55 No 55 21.70

IIVSUA55 No EB 55 24.59 13.3
IIVGUA55 No GM 55 28.08 29.7
IIVGUB55 No GM 55 27.72 27.7
2 34.5 IIIVNUA55 No 55 21.91
IIIVSUA55 No EB 55 24.95 13.0
IIIVGUA55 No GM 55 26.98 23.0
IIIVGUB55 No GM 55 26.29 20.0
3 37.6 IVVNUB60 Yes 60 23.57
IVVNUA60 No 60 21.89
IVVWUB60 Yes WSPb 60 32.18 36.5
IVVWUA60 No WSP 60 24.13 10.0
IVVSUB60 Yes EB 60 34.87 47.9
IVVSUA60 No EB 60 24.23 10.0
IVVGUB60 Yes GM 60 37.28 58.2
IVVGUA60 No GM 60 26.06 19.2
4 36 IVVNUB80 Yes 80 22.62
IVVNUA80 No 80 21.57
IVVWUB80 Yes WSP 80 28.19 24.6
IVVWUA80 No WSP 80 23.43 8.6
IVVSUB80 Yes EB 80 30.71 35.8
IVVSUA80 No EB 80 23.89 10.8
IVVGUB80 Yes GM 80 34.3 51.6
IVVGUA80 No GM 80 25.18 16.7
5 26.2 IVVNLB80 Yes 80 22.86
IVVNLA80 No 80 20.44
IVVWLB80 Yes WSP 80 26.75 17.0
IVVWLA80 No WSP 80 22.71 11.1
IVVSLB80 Yes EB 80 27.7 21.1
IVVSLA80 No EB 80 23.11 13.0
IVVGLB80 Yes GM 80 29.65 29.7
IVVGLA80 No GM 80 24.35 19.1
a
Spacing of FRP strips.
b
WSP: without surface preparation.
1708 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713

55 mm 40 mm

Ø12 mm 85 mm

25 mm
70 mm
(a)
55 mm 40 mm

Ø8 mm 26 mm 85 mm

25 mm
70 mm
(b)
60 mm 40 mm
25 mm
Ø8 mm 26 mm
85 mm

25 mm
70 mm
(c)
40 mm
80 mm
25 mm
Ø8 mm 26 mm
85 mm

25 mm
70 mm
(d)
Fig. 3. Reinforcement detail of RC beam: (a) group 1; (b) group 2; (c) group 3; (d) groups 4 and 5.

load and formation of shear cracks, the slope of load–displacement
will decrease significantly and suddenly failure occurs. Fig. 6 dis-
plays some pictures from the formation of cracks and the failure
mechanism for different beams. For unstrengthened concrete
beams, the failure formed with classical diagonal cracks from load-
ing point to support as it is seen in Fig. 6a.
3.1. Groups 1 and 2
Beams which were strengthened in shear with FRP sheets using
EBR method and conventional surface preparation failed in a high-
er load and displacement compared to control beams. This method
caused about 13% increase in ultimate load relative to control
beams in groups 1 and 2. Finally, because of the weak interface be-
tween the shear strengthening FRP strips and concrete beam, diag-
onal cracks passed under FRP strips and the strips were separated
from the beam surface; therefore, the failure load decreased dras-
tically (Fig. 6b).
On the other hand, the beams which were strengthened in shear
by grooving method carried more load than those beams strength-
ened by EBR method; so that grooving method led to increase of
the load carrying capacity of beams by 30% and 23% relative to con-
trol beams in groups 1 and 2, respectively; while the flexural cracks
occurred at mid-span of the beams. Grooving method made appro-
priate bond between FRP strips and concrete beams and the shear
weakness of beams removed. Since in the beams of group 1 which
were strengthened by grooving method, bond and flexural cracks
were occurred along longitudinal reinforcements at ultimate load-
ing (Fig. 6d), so in the specimens of other groups in order to pre-
vent from bond cracks, two bars of 8 mm diameter were used
instead of one 12 mm diameter bar. Accordingly, bond cracks were
removed in beams of group 2 which were strengthened with FRP
sheets using grooving method, and the load increased till the ver-
tical flexural cracks developed from bottom to the top of the beam
at mid-span and the beam failed in flexural mode by crushing of
compression zone (Fig. 6c). Thus, the failure of the beams strength-
ened in shear by grooving method was flexural mode and the
beams carried 68% higher displacement than those strengthened
by EBR method, as it is seen in Fig. 4b. The relatively horizontal
and smooth curve at the end of the loading in Fig. 4c reveals that
the beams strengthened by grooving method had ductile behavior.
3.2. Groups 3, 4 and 5
The control beams and the specimens which were strengthened
only for shear showed a similar behavior to the specimens of
groups 1 and 2. The beams strengthened by EBR method behaved
similar to the strengthened beams without surface preparation
and FRP strips were separated from beam’s surface. Nevertheless,
as mentioned earlier, in groups 3, 4 and 5, half of the beams were
strengthened in flexure by FRP sheets to increase the flexural
capacity and prevent from flexural failure of the beams strength-
ened by grooving method. Beams strengthened by grooving meth-
od carried more load and displacement than other specimens.
These beams in groups 3, 4 and 5 showed respectively 58%, 52%
and 30% increase in the load carrying capacity compared to control
beams. In these beam specimens, shear cracks were connected to
the flexural strengthening sheet and propagated to the end of the
sheet leading to the failure.
It can be observed in Fig. 7 that the ultimate loads for specimens
in group 3 with spacing of FRP strips, sf, of 60 mm were higher than
those for specimens in group 4 with sf = 80 mm. Furthermore, Fig. 8
 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713 1709

30
25

Load (kN)
20
15
IIVNUA55 (Control)
10 IIVSUA55 (EB)
5 IIVGUA55 (GM)
IIVGUB55 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Displacement (mm)
(a) Group 1
30
25
Load (kN)

20
15
IIIVNUA55 (Control)
10 IIIVSUA55 (EB)
5 IIIVGUA55 (GM)
IIIVGUB55 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
Displacement (mm)
(b) Group 2
30
25
Load (kN)

20
15
IVVNUA60 (Control)
10 IVVWUA60 (WSP)
5 IVVSUA60 (EB)
IVVGUA60 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Displacement (mm)
(c) Group3
30
25
Load (kN)

20
15
IVVNUA80 (Control)
10 IVVWUA80 (WSP)
5 IVVSUA80 (EB)
IVVGUA80 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
Displacement (mm)
(d) Group 4
30
25
Load (kN)

20
15
IVVNLA80 (Control)
10 IVVWLA80 (WSP)
5 IVVSLA80 (EB)
IVVGLA80 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0
Displacement (mm)
(e) Group 5
Fig. 4. Load–displacement diagrams for beams strengthened for shear: (a) group 1; (b) group 2; (c) group 3; (d) group4; (e) group 5.

shows that higher compressive strength of concrete in specimens
with exactly the same shear strengthening FRP sheets led to higher
load carrying capacities.
4. Discussion
Results obtained from beam tests are presented in Table 3. All
beam specimens strengthened in shear by FRP strips using groov-
ing method carried higher loads than other specimens and their
failure modes changed from shear to flexural. The almost horizon-
tal and smooth part of load–displacement curve of strengthened
beams with GM at the end of loading in Fig. 5a shows their change
of failure mode to flexural. However, the beams strengthened by
EBR method without or with conventional surface preparation
failed in shear mode due to debonding of FRP strips.
The test results of groups 1 and 2 were almost the same. The
control beam of group 1 carried 21.7 kN while the beams strength-
1710 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713

40

35

30

25

Load (kN) 20

15

10
IVVNUB60 (Control)
IVVWUB60 (WSP)
5
IVVSUB60 (EB)
IVVGUB60 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
Displacement (mm)
(a) Group 3
40

35

30

25
Load (kN)

20

15

10
IVVNUB80 (Control)
IVVWUB80 (WSP)
5
IVVSUB80 (EB)
IVVGUB80 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Displacement (mm)
(b) Group 4
35

30

25
Load (kN)

20

15

10
IVVNLB80 (Control)
IVVWLB80 (WSP)
5
IVVSLB80 (EB)
IVVGLB80 (GM)
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Displacement (mm)
(c) Group 5
Fig. 5. Load–displacement diagrams for beams strengthened for shear and flexure: (a) group 3; (b) group 4; (c) group 5.

ened by FRP strips using GM and EBR method resisted 29.7% and
13.3% higher loads, respectively. The control beam of group 2 car-
ried 21.9 kN while the beams strengthened by FRP strips using GM
and EBR method resisted 23% and 13% higher loads, respectively.
The mid-span displacement of the beams strengthened by FRP
strips using EBR method was 3.7 mm at the end of loading while
the same displacement for the beams strengthened using GM
was 6.2 mm since the FRP sheets on their sides did not experience
debonding and their mode of failure changed from shear to
flexural.
The beams of group 3 which were strengthened for both shear
and flexure carried the highest loads and displacements. The beam
specimen with shear and flexural strengthening by grooving meth-
od showed 58% increase in its carrying load, while the beam which
was strengthened just in shear by the same method had 19% in-
crease. EBR method using conventional surface preparation for
the beam strengthened in both shear and flexure and the beam
strengthened just in shear led to respectively 48% and 10% increase
in the loading capacity. The failure mode of the beam which was
strengthened in shear by grooving method was peeling of flexural
 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713 1711

Fig. 6. Failure mode of tested beams; (a) diagonal shear crack in control beam; (b) debonding of FRP shear strips in specimens strengthened using conventional EBR method;
(c) concrete crushing and flexural crack in specimens strengthened using EBROG technique; (d) bond and flexural cracks in specimens of group 1 strengthened with grooving
method.

plate without any debonding of FRP strips on the side faces of the
specimens. On the other hand, in the beam which was strength-
ened by EBR method, not only flexural plate was detached, but
shear strengthening strips also were separated from concrete sur-
face. The beam which was strengthened in shear without surface
preparation showed only 10% increase in loading capacity.
The behavior of shear strengthening FRP strips is similar to
shear stirrups in RC beams in a way that as the distance between
stirrups becomes smaller, the shear capacity of member increases.
By increasing of the distance between FRP strips from 60 mm in
group 3 to 80 mm in group 4, the carrying load of the strengthened
beams using grooving method decreased from 37.3 kN to 34.9 kN.
In a simmilar manner, for the beams strengthened by EBR method
with or without conventional surface preparation, the carrying
load diminished from 34.9 kN to 30.7 kN and from 32.2 kN to
28.2 kN, respectively.
1712 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713

70 1. Attachment of CFRP composites to the side faces of RC

Group 3 (sf = 60 mm)
beams without any surface preparation caused the carrying
Group 4 (sf = 80 mm) load of beams to be increased about 9–11% in comparison
60
with unstrengthened beams; and finally the beams failed
due to debonding of FRP sheets.
Increase in ultimate load (%)

50 2. Shear strengthening of beams by EBR method and with

conventional surface preparation, led to an increase of
40 about 10–13% in carrying loads compared to unstrength-
ened beams while finally the beams failed due to debond-

IVVGUB60
ing of FRP composites. Therefore, the conventional surface

IVVGUB80
30
preparation in EBR method showed a limited effect in shear
IVVSUB60

strengthening with FRP strips compared to EBROG

IVVWUB60

IVVSUB80

20 technique.
IVVWUB80

3. Using vertical grooves through EBROG technique as a sub-

stitute to conventional surface preparation prior to shear
10
strengthening of beams by FRP sheets changed the failure
mode from shear to flexural and increased loading capacity
0 of the beams about 17–23% relative to unstrengthened
WSP EB GM beams.
Fig. 7. Effect of FRP strips interval on load carrying capacity of tested beams. 4. When flexural failure was postponed by additional flexural
strengthening, the specimens strengthened in shear using
vertical grooves and EBROG technique withstood 10–15%
higher loads without any debonding of FRP strips compared
to specimens strengthened for shear through conventional
EBR method which experienced debonding of shear strips
prior to failure.
5. When the FRP sheets intervals decreases and/or the com-
pressive strength of concrete increases, the superiority of
EBROG technique on EBR method for shear strengthening
becomes more apparent.

References

[1] ACI 440.2R-08. Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP
systems for strengthening concrete structures. American Concrete Institute;
2008.
[2] Teng JG, Chen JF, Smith ST, lam L. FRP strengthened RC structures. John Wiley &
Sons; 2002.
[3] Norris T, Saadatmanesh H, Ehsani MR. Shear and flexural strengthening of RC
beams with carbon fiber sheets. J Struct Eng 1997;123(7):903–11.
Fig. 8. Effect of compressive strength of concrete on load carrying capacity of tested [4] Rita SYW, Vecchio FJ. Towards modeling of reinforced concrete members with
beams. externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymer composites. ACI Struct J
2003;100(1):47–55.
[5] Oehlers DJ. Development of design rules for retrofitting by adhesive bonding or
As stated in FIB code [22], the compressive strength of concrete
bolting either FRP or steel plate to RC beams or slabs in bridges and building.
is very influential on debonding when FRP strips are attached to Composites: Part A 2001;32:1345–55.
two lateral faces of beams. It is observed from Fig. 8 that by reduc- [6] Yuan H, Lu X, Hui D, Feo L. Studies on FRP–concrete interface with hardening
tion of the compressive strength of concrete from 36 MPa in group and softening bond-slip law. Compos Struct 2012;94:3781–92.
[7] Aprile A, Feo L. Concrete cover rip-off of R/C beams strengthened with FRP
4 to 26 MPa in group 5, the increase of carrying load of the beam composites. Composites: Part B 2007;38:759–71.
strengthened by grooving method changed from 52% to 30%. Sim- [8] Ascione L, Feo L. Modeling of composite/concrete interface of RC beams
ilarly, when the compressive strength of concrete decreased from strengthened with composite laminates. Composites: Part B 2000;31:
535–40.
36 to 26 MPa, the increase of ultimate load of the beams strength- [9] Ascione L, Berardi VP, Feo L, Mancusi G. A numerical evaluation of the
ened by EBR method with or without conventional surface prepa- interlaminar stress state in externally FRP plated RC beams. Composites: Part B
ration varied from 36% to 21% and from 25% to 17%, respectively. 2005;36:83–90.
[10] Taheri F, Shahin K, Widiarsa I. On the parameters influencing the performance
of reinforced concrete beams strengthened with FRP plates. Compos Struct
2002;58:217–26.
5. Conclusions [11] Hollway LC, Leeing MB. Strengthening of reinforced concrete structures. CRC
Press; 2000.
This research aimed to investigate the effect of surface prepara- [12] Chajes MJ, Finch WW, Januszka TF, Thomson TA. Bond and force transfer of
composite material plates bonded to concrete. ACI Struct Eng
tion in shear strengthening of RC beams with FRP sheets, also the 1996;93(2):208–17.
effect of replacement of conventional surface preparation with [13] Toutanji H, Ortiz G. The effect of surface preparation on the bond interface
grooving method. Eight beams were prepared without strengthen- between FRP sheets and concrete members. Compos Struct 2001;53:457–62.
[14] Kim G, Sim J, Oh H. Shear strength of strengthened RC beams with FRPs in
ing as control specimens, and 24 beams were strengthened in
shear. Constr Build Mater 2008;22:1261–70.
shear by FRP strips without surface preparation, with surface prep- [15] De Lorenzis L, Teng JG. Near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement: an
aration by EB method and with grooving method using EBROG emerging technique for strengthening structures. Composites: Part B
technique. The beams then subjected to 4-point flexural loading. 2007;38:119–43.
[16] Galal K, Mofidi A. Shear strengthening of RC T-Beams using mechanically
Following conclusions are derived from the analysis of the test anchored unbonded dry carbon fiber sheets. J Perform Constr Facil
results. 2010;24(1):31–9.
 D. Mostofinejad, A. Tabatabaei Kashani / Composites: Part B 45 (2013) 1704–1713 1713

[17] Mostofinejad D, Mahmoudabadi E. Grooving as an alternative of surface
preparation to postpone debonding of FRP lamination in concrete beams. J
Compos Constr 2010;14(6):804–11.
[18] Rizzo A, De Lorenzis L. Behavior and capacity of RC beams strengthened in
shear with NSM FRP reinforcement. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:1555–67.
[19] Seo SY, Feo L, Hui D. Bond strength of near surface-mounted FRP plate for
retrofit of concrete structures. Compos Struct 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.compstruct.2012.08.038.
[20] Hajihashemi A, Mostofinejad D, Azhari M. Investigation of RC beams
strengthened with prestressed NSM CFRP laminates. J Compos Constr
2011;15(6):887–95.
[21] ASTM C78–02. Standard test for flexural strength of concrete (using simple
beam with third-point loading). Annual Book of ASTM Standard, vol. 03.02;
2002.
[22] FIB. Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures. FIB Bulletin
14. International Federation for Structural Concrete; 2001.