Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Effect of cross-sectional aspect ratio on the strength of CFRP-confined

rectangular concrete columns
Yu-Fei Wu ∗ , You-Yi Wei
Department of Building and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Ave, Hong Kong

article info abstract

Article history: This paper presents the results of an experimental study on the behavior of axially loaded short
Received 20 November 2008 rectangular columns that have been strengthened with carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) wrap.
Received in revised form Three series of uniaxial compression tests were conducted on 45 specimens. The parameters considered
15 August 2009
were the aspect ratio, defined as the depth (longer side)/width (shorter side) of the cross-section,
Accepted 18 August 2009
Available online 1 September 2009
and the number of CFRP layers. The behavior of the specimens in the axial and transverse directions
was investigated. The test results clearly demonstrate that the strength gain in the confined concrete
Keywords:
columns relative to the original unconfined columns, fcc /fco decreases as the aspect ratio increases, until
Concrete columns it becomes insignificant when the aspect ratio reaches 2. The test results are compared with the theoretical
Aspect ratio predictions of existing strength models and significant differences are found, indicating the need for
Confinement further model development. A new model for the strength of FRP confined rectangular concrete columns
FRP is proposed, based on the test results from this work and results collected from the literature.
Stress–strain relations © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Strength model

1. Introduction from a series of tests on small-scale specimens under uniaxial

The use of externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)
has gained popularity in the strengthening and retrofitting of
concrete structures. FRP materials have been used successfully
to improve the strength and deformability of circular concrete
columns with a geometrical configuration that allows the fibers
to be uniformly stressed, thus providing a highly effective
confinement for concrete across the entire cross-section. For
square and rectangular columns, the confinement effectiveness
is much reduced due to the non-uniformity of the confinement
pressure across the cross-section [1–3]. The effectiveness of the
confinement of concrete columns by FRP jackets depends on
several factors, including the concrete strength, type of fiber, fiber
volume and orientation, shape of the cross-section, length-to-
diameter (slenderness) ratio, and the bond at the interface between
the concrete core and the jacket [1]. Thus far, the main thrust
of research in this area has concentrated on characterizing the
behavior of columns with circular and square cross-sections [1–7].
The effectiveness of FRP confinement for rectangular shaped
columns, however, is much less known.
Rochette and Labossière [8] investigated the behavior of plain
concrete columns with square and rectangular cross-sections
confined with carbon and aramid fiber sheets. The results
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 27844259; fax: +852 27887612.
E-mail address: yfwu00@cityu.edu.hk (Y.-F. Wu).
0141-0296/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.08.012
compression showed that the confinement increased the strength
and ductility of the columns. For a given number of wraps
around a section (or a given transverse reinforcement ratio), the
confinement effect was directly related to the shape of the section.
Cole and Belarbi [9] experimentally investigated the confinement
characteristics of FRP-jacketed rectangular reinforced concrete
(RC) columns and studied the effects of the aspect ratio of the
rectangular cross-section. They found that increasing the aspect
ratio of the cross-section resulted in a lower ultimate strength
for a CFRP-jacketed RC column. Maalej et al. [10] conducted a
parametric study to investigate the effects of the aspect ratio
on RC columns, and found that as the aspect ratio increased
from 1:1 to 6:1, the strengthening ratio decreased from 1.17 to
1.08, a reduction of about 10%. Tan [11] examined the case of
rectangular RC columns with a section aspect ratio of 3.65, and
found that the transverse fiber sheets increased the axial load
capacity of the column. Furthermore, anchoring the transverse
fiber sheets along the wider faces of the column led to better
confinement of the concrete, which resulted in a higher axial load
capacity. Investigations of the behavior of axially loaded short
rectangular plain concrete columns strengthened with externally
bonded FRP material was reported by Chaallal et al. [12,13], who
showed that CFRP wrapping enhanced the compressive strength
and the ductility of both square and rectangular columns, but
to a lesser degree than was the case for the circular columns.
The ultimate strength and ductility of the CFRP-confined concrete
increased with the number of confining FRP layers, and the
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45
increase in strength and ductility was more significant for lower
strength concrete than for normal to high strength concrete. Yan
et al. [14] investigated the confinement of concrete in square
and rectangular columns using post-tensioned FRP composite
shells with expansive cement concrete. They observed that shape-
modified square and rectangular compression members with
post-tensioned FRP shells (oval shaped jacket) had a higher
axial compressive strength and energy absorption than members
confined using bonded FRP jackets with the same number of
FRP layers. It was concluded that the shape modification method
can transform the stress–strain behavior of lightly or moderately
FRP-confined square or rectangular compression members from
softening to hardening, which improves their performance. Prota
et al. [15] studied the behavior of rectangular RC columns with
high aspect ratios (wall-like) that were confined with both uni-
directional and quadri-directional glass FRP (GFRP) laminates.
An analysis of the test results indicated that GFRP confinement
resulted in significant increases in strength and ductility, and that
the failure of GFRP confined wall-like columns was controlled by
the shape of the cross-section and occurred at a transverse strain
of the jacket that was much lower than the ultimate strain of the
fibers. Ilki et al. [16] studied the uniaxial compressive behavior of
15 RC columns and one plain concrete column jacketed with CFRP
sheets. It was observed that the enhancement in deformability was
greater for a rectangular cross-section, whereas the enhancement
in strength was more pronounced for a circular cross-section. The
test results also showed that CFRP jackets were more effective
in enhancing the strength and deformability where the concrete
strength was low. The behavior of RC rectangular columns
strengthened by GFRP was investigated by Kumutha et al. [17],
who examined the variation in the number of GFRP layers and the
aspect ratio. They found that the use of GFRP produced an increase
in strength, but that the phenomenon was strongly influenced by
the aspect ratio of the cross-section, with an increasing aspect
ratio leading to a decrease in ultimate strength. Ozabakkaloglu
and Oehlers [18] studied the behavior of square and rectangular
concrete-filled FRP tubes under concentric compression, and
reported that FRP confinement led to a substantial improvement
in the ductility of both square and rectangular columns. The
confinement provided by the FRP tube may also improve the
axial load-carrying capacity of square and rectangular columns if
the confinement effectiveness is sufficiently high. The results also
indicated that the confinement effectiveness of FRP tubes is higher
in square columns than in rectangular columns. Wang and Hsu [19]
evaluated the axial load strength of rectangular and square RC
compression members confined with GFRP jackets and steel hoops,
and found that the FRP jackets provided excellent confinement
in rectangular and square reinforced concrete columns, increasing
both the ultimate strength and strain.
For square columns, it has been concluded that the most
important shape factor that affects the confinement effectiveness
is the corner radius ratio (corner radius/half width) [2,20,21].
Recent investigations have enabled the quantification of the corner
radius effect [2,20], from which a strength model that considers
the corner radius ratio has been developed [21]. For rectangular
shaped columns, another important factor in addition to the corner
radius ratio that governs the confinement effectiveness is the
aspect ratio, as has been mentioned. However, data for rectangular
columns that can be used for the quantification of the isolated
effect of the aspect ratio are scarce. Only 38 data points were
collected from an extensive search of the available literature:
16 data points with 2 aspect ratios from the work of Chaallal
et al. [12], 9 data points with 1 aspect ratio from Ozbakkaloglu
and Oehlers [18], 4 data points with 1 aspect ratio from Rochette
and Labossière [8], 4 data points with 1 aspect ratio from Shehata
et al. [22], 3 points with 1 aspect ratio from Harajli et al. [23]
33
h/b=1.0 h/b =1.25 h/b =1.5
h/b=1.75 h/b =2.0
Fig. 1. Aspect ratios of column.
and 2 points with 1 aspect ratio from Lam and Teng [24]. This
scarcity of test data clearly indicates the need for more quantitative
experimental investigations on the effect of the aspect ratio for
the development of theoretical models. The main objective of
this work is thus to experimentally investigate the behavior of
rectangular concrete columns, focusing on the effect of the aspect
ratio. A theoretical strength model is then developed based on the
test results.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Specimen design
All of the specimens were 300 mm in height with a corner radius
of 30 mm but different cross-sectional aspect ratios. The variables
considered in this investigation include the aspect ratio h/b, where
h and b are, respectively, the dimensions of the longer and the
shorter sides of the cross-section, and the thickness of the CFRP
jacket. Aspect ratios of 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, and 2.0 were tested. The
jacket thickness varied from none to one and two ply of CFRP. Fig. 1
shows the cross-section of the test specimens and the variation in
the aspect ratio. Three identical specimens were manufactured for
each specimen design. The total number of specimens is 5 (aspect
ratio) × 3 (jacket thickness) × 3 (sample), which is 45.
The test specimens are summarized in Table 1. The specimens
are labeled as XS (or R)-Y, where X is the number of CFRP layers,
S stands for a square cross-section and R for a rectangular cross-
section, and Y specifies the aspect ratio (h/b).
2.2. Materials
Ordinary Portland cement (OPC) was used with a water–cement
ratio of 0.74 for the designed cube strength of 30 MPa. The
concrete mix design is given in Table 2. River sand was used as
the fine aggregate, and crushed granite stone with a maximum
size of 10 mm was used as the coarse aggregate. Before mixing,
all of the aggregates were carefully and completely dried to
minimize variation in the water content. The specimens were cast
in specially manufactured steel moulds, as shown in Fig. 2. One
day after casting, the specimens were removed from the moulds
and cured in a water tank at a constant temperature of 27 ◦ C for
28 days. On the 28th day, the specimens were removed from the
water and ground with a grinding machine to produce a smooth
contact surface with the test platen. Afterwards, the specimens
were prepared for CFRP wrapping and strain gauge installation.
Careful attention was paid in the construction of the specimens to
minimize variations in the concrete strength.
A high tensile strength carbon fiber fabric, TORAYCA CLOTH
UT70-30, was used for jacketing, and a two-part Sikadur-300 epoxy
impregnation resin was used as the adhesive. The CFRP materials
had a nominal thickness of 0.167 mm. Details of the material
properties of the CFRP are presented in Table 3.
34 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45

Table 1
Test specimens.
Series Specimen ID h×b Cross-sectional area (mm2 ) CFRP layers FRP reinforcement ratio (%) Specimens number

1 0S-1.0 150 × 150 21 726 0 0 3

0R-1.25 188 × 150 27 426 0 0 3
0R-1.5 225 × 150 32 976 0 0 3
0R-1.75 263 × 150 38 676 0 0 3
0R-2.0 300×150 44 226 0 0 3

2 1S-1.0 150 × 150 21 726 1 0.42 3

1R-1.25 188 × 150 27 426 1 0.38 3
1R-1.5 225 × 150 32 976 1 0.35 3
1R-1.75 263 × 150 38 676 1 0.33 3
1R-2.0 300 × 150 44 226 1 0.32 3

3 2S-1.0 150 × 150 21 726 2 0.84 3

2R-1.25 188 × 150 27 426 2 0.76 3
2R-1.5 225 × 150 32 976 2 0.70 3
2R-1.75 263 × 150 38 676 2 0.67 3
2R-2.0 300 × 150 44 226 2 0.64 3

Table 2
Concrete mix design.
Element Quantity

Water 230 (kg/m3 )

Cement 310.81 (kg/m3 )
Fine aggregate 747.92 (kg/m3 )
Coarse aggregate 1076.27 (kg/m3 )
Water/cement ratio 0.74

Table 3
Mechanical properties of CFRP.
Mechanical properties Torayca cloth UT70-30
Fig. 2. Prefabricated steel moulds. Manufacturer Coupon test

L2 L2 L2 Ultimate strength (MPa) – 4192

C2 C2 C2 Design strength (MPa) 3400 –
M11 M21 M11M21 M31 C1R1 M11M21 M31
C1R1 R2 C1R1 R2 R2
L1 L1 L1 Tensile modulus (GPa) 230 229
M12 M12 M12
Ultimate strain (%) 1.48 1.84
M22 M22 M22
20 25

20 25

20 25

CFRP thickness (mm/ply) 0.167 –

20 25 20 25 19 20 25 37.5
around the external surface to ensure a tight wrap. In all cases, each
h/b=1.0 h/b =1.25 h/b =1.5
layer had an overlap of 150 mm located at the middle of the longer
L2 L2
R1 C2 C2 side.
C1 M11M21M31M41
R2 C1R1 M11 M21 M31 M41
R2
L1 L1
M12 M12
M22 M22 2.4. Instrumentation
20 25
20 25

20 25 30 26.5 20 25 30 45 All of the specimens were instrumented with strain gauges,

h/b=1.75
Fig. 3. Location of transverse strain gauges.
2.3. Wrapping of the CFRP
Before jacketing, the surface of the specimens was lightly
sanded to remove surface contaminants, and was then cleaned
with water and left to dry. The two-part epoxy impregnation resin
was then thoroughly mixed in accordance with the manufacture’s
specifications. First, a thin layer of resin was applied to the
surface of the specimen, and then the CFRP laminate was carefully
wrapped around the specimen with the fibers oriented in the hoop
direction to form one or two layers of CFRP. Special attention was
paid to ensure that there was no void between the CFRP and the
concrete surface. After wrapping the fiber sheet, another layer
of epoxy impregnation resin was applied to the surface of the
wrapped columns and a plastic roller was used to work the resin
into the fiber. The height of the specimen was 300 mm and the
width of the CFRP fabric was 290 mm. After wrapping, the gap
between the top/bottom of the concrete specimen and the FRP was
reduced to about 2 mm. Finally, a layer of plastic film was wrapped
h/b=2.0 glued either onto the concrete surface in the case of the control
specimens without FRP or onto the CFRP outer layer in the case
of the FRP-confined specimens. The strain gauges were mounted
at multiple points at the mid-height of the specimens to measure
the strain in different locations. The gauge length of these strain
gauges was 5 mm. Fig. 3 shows the locations of the transverse strain
gauges, where M, C, L, and R refer to positions on the side face, the
center of the corner, and the curvature changing point on the left-
and right-hand sides, respectively.
The vertical displacement of the specimen was measured by
two linear variable differential transformers (LVDT) with a travel
of 50 mm which were mounted onto two aluminum frames that
were fixed at the top and bottom of the specimen 200 mm apart,
as shown in Fig. 4. The axial load was measured by a load cell placed
under the specimen, and four other LVDTs were used to measure
the lateral dilations of the columns on the four sides, as shown in
Fig. 5.
2.5. Testing
All of the specimens were tested under concentric compression
using a FORNEY testing machine with a maximum load capacity of
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45 35

To be removed
in tests

Fig. 4. Displacement measurement system.

Table 4
Compressive strengths.
h/b Unconfined (MPa) 1-ply CFRP (MPa) 2-ply CFRP (MPa)
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.
68 days 88 days 92 days 78 days 65 days 77 days 83 days 75 days 66 days 70 days 74 days 70 days

1.0 32.34 35.93 42.38 34.14 40.54 40.67 42.47 41.23 59.22 59.63 62.25 60.37
1.25 34.23 32.91 39.91 33.57 37.98 38.89 39.44 38.77 48.84 51.90 53.33 51.36
1.5 35.77 36.56 39.74 36.17 37.56 35.62 39.23 38.39 43.02 45.23 43.35 43.87
1.75 36.47 38.12 38.93 37.30 35.20 37.79 37.58 37.68 38.87 41.38 41.28 40.51
2.0 33.91 36.78 39.94 35.35 36.64 37.66 38.02 37.44 38.58 39.06 39.26 38.97

with CFRP wrap increased the compressive strength. The greater

Horizontal
LVDTs
Load cell
Fig. 5. Test setup.
2500 kN. The axial load, vertical displacement, lateral expansion,
and strains were recorded by an automatic data acquisition system
to monitor the behavior of the specimens. The centering of the
specimen was necessary to avoid eccentric loading before the test,
which was achieved by comparing the readings of the two vertical
LVDTs located on the left- and right-hand sides, respectively. The
specimen was then loaded under manual control until failure.
The loading rate was approximately 10 kN/min before the peak
load was reached, after which it was manually controlled to have
a similar displacement rate to that before the peak load (under
displacement control).
3. Test results and discussion
3.1. Compressive strength and failure modes
The compressive strengths obtained from the tests are sum-
marized in Table 4, from which it can be seen that confinement
the number of CFRP layers, the greater the gain in the compres-
sive strength with respect to the corresponding unconfined col-
umn. For a given number of CFRP layers, the increase in aspect
ratio resulted in a decrease in load capacity. The maximum in-
creases were achieved in the square columns, which showed a 71%
and 17% increase against the control column for two-ply and one-
ply CFRP confined columns, respectively.
Batch 3 of the unconfined group was unusual, as their strengths
were significantly higher than the other two unconfined groups
and even slightly higher than the one-ply CFRP confined columns.
This may have been caused by different batches of raw materials,
and also the greater age of the concrete for this batch, as shown in
Table 4. This group of data was therefore disregarded in the calcu-
lation of the results, and the mean value of the unconfined group is
the average of the results from the other two batches. In addition,
the one-ply CFRP confined column specimens with an aspect ratio
of h/b = 1.5 in batch 2 and h/b = 1.75 in batch 1 showed a lower
compressive strength than the other two specimens with the same
design, and an even lower strength than those of the correspond-
ing unconfined specimens. As the results for these two specimens
were unexpected and unreasonable, the specimens were carefully
inspected and were found to have an eccentric failure mode (non-
symmetrical crush of concrete) that may be attributable to a poor
centering of the specimen on the loading platen or non-uniformity
of concrete strength across the cross-section. These two data points
were thus also removed from the test results.
The typical failure modes of the confined columns are shown in
Fig. 6. All of the confined columns tested failed by the rupturing
of the CFRP at the mid-height of the specimen and at or near
the corners. The FRP and concrete at the top and bottom of the
specimens were still intact at failure. During the loading, clicking
sounds could be heard, signifying the straining of the FRP laminate
and the cracking of the epoxy resin. The final failure occurred
suddenly with an explosive sound.
3.2. Stress–strain response
The typical stress–strain curves for each type of specimen are
presented in Figs. 7 and 8. The curves to the left-hand side of
the Y -axis present the responses of the lateral strains versus the
36 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45

(a) CFRP ruptures at h/b = 1.0. (b) CFRP ruptures at h/b = 1.25. (c) CFRP ruptures at h/b = 1.5.

(d) CFRP ruptures at h/b = 1.75. (e) CFRP ruptures at h/b = 2.0.

Fig. 6. Failure modes.

axial stresses, whereas the curves to the right-hand side show the Table 5
responses of the axial strains versus the axial stresses. The axial Mean compressive strength and corresponding fcc /fco .
strains are calculated from the average readings of the two vertical Aspect ratio Unconfined 1-ply fcc /fco 2-ply fcc /fco
LVDTs divided by the gauge length, which is 200 mm. The lateral h/b (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
strains are the summation of the readings of the two horizontal 1.0 35.30 41.23 1.17 60.37 1.71
LVDTs that were located at the middle of the opposite faces of 1.25 35.30 38.77 1.10 51.36 1.45
the specimens, divided by the distance between the two LVDTs or 1.5 35.30 38.39 1.09 43.87 1.24
the side dimension of the specimen. The lateral strains were also 1.75 35.30 37.68 1.07 40.51 1.15
2.0 35.30 37.44 1.06 38.97 1.10
measured by strain gauges in this work. A comparison between
the lateral strains measured by LVDTs and strain gauges is given
in Fig. 9, where the vertical axis gives the average value of strain (3) The ultimate strains in both the axial and the lateral
gauges on the longer side. It is interesting to note that the strain directions increase as the number of CFRP layers increases from
gauge readings and LVDT measurements are generally similar at one to two (see Fig. 8).
small loadings. However, the LVDT readings are significantly larger (4) For a certain thickness of CFRP, the ultimate axial and lateral
than those from strain gauges, which may signify the bulging of the strains on the longer side generally decrease as the aspect ratio
specimens in the middle of the section. increases, whereas the ultimate lateral strain on the shorter side
An examination of the stress–strain curves gives rise to the generally increases as the aspect ratio increases.
following observations.
(1) The figures clearly show that confinement with CFRP can
enhance the performance of concrete. The CFRP wrapping is 3.3. Effect of the aspect ratio
more effective in square sections than in rectangular sections. For
columns with a certain thickness of CFRP, the ultimate confined Table 5 gives the mean values of the compressive strength and
strength decreases as the aspect ratio increases (see Fig. 7 and the corresponding strength gain for the confined columns fcc /fco ,
Table 4). where fcc is the mean compressive strength of the CFRP-confined
(2) For columns with a certain aspect ratio, the concrete concrete columns and fco is the mean compressive strength of
strength increases as the number of CFRP layers increases (see the unconfined control columns. As shown in the table, the
Fig. 8). values of fcc /fco for two-ply and one-ply CFRP-confined square
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45 37

2 2

(a) For longer side. (b) For shorter side.

Fig. 7. Stress–strain responses for a certain CFRP thickness.

specimens are 1.71 and 1.17, respectively, whereas those for the
rectangular specimens with the largest aspect ratio of 2 are much
smaller, at 1.10 and 1.06, respectively. Fig. 10 shows the curves
(the solid lines) of the strength gain in the confined concrete
versus the aspect ratio h/b. The strength gain of the confined
concrete decreases when the aspect ratio increases, and there is
no significant strength gain for columns with an aspect ratio of 2.0.
The ultimate axial strains and corresponding lateral strains at
the two sides are shown in Tables 6–8, respectively, and in Fig. 11.
The values of the ultimate strains are taken at the point of FRP
rupture. Generally, the axial ultimate strain decreases when the
aspect ratio increases, but the value of the ultimate lateral strains
on the shorter side increase as the aspect ratio increases, whereas
those on the longer side decrease as the aspect ratio increases. The
strains at the respective peak strengths are given in Tables 9–11,
and in Fig. 11. It can be seen from Fig. 11 that for the two-ply CFRP-
confined columns, the ultimate strains occurs at or near the peak
strength for h/b = 1.0, 1.25, and 1.5, whereas for all other aspect
ratios it occurs on the descending branch, as shown in Fig. 7. For
one-ply CFRP confined columns, Fig.11 shows that the ultimate
strain occurs after the peak strength for all aspect ratios: that is, the
specimens generally have a descending stress–strain curve before
FRP rupture, although some specimens show a nearly flat yield
plateau before FRP rupture for h/b = 1.0 and 1.25 (see Fig. 7).
3.4. Distribution of the FRP strain
The mean values of the CFRP strain along the perimeter of the
specimens for various aspect ratios at ultimate failure are shown
in Table 12 and plotted in Fig. 12, in which Rmax is the ratio of the
maximum strain of each specimen at CFRP rupture to the ultimate
tensile strain that was obtained from the flat coupon tests. The
table shows that the ratio Rmax is close to 1.0 for various aspect
ratios and CFRP thicknesses, and has a maximum value of 1.04
and a minimum value of 0.87. Rmax values greater than 1.0 are not
unusual and have been reported in the literature [25]. However,
it is noted that the ultimate strains measured in this work is
38 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45

(a) For longer side. (b) For shorter side.

Fig. 8. Stress–strain responses for a certain aspect ratio.

Table 6
Ultimate strain in axial direction.
Aspect ratio 1-ply 2-ply
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.

1 0.0155 0.0111 0.0127 0.0131 0.0232 0.0175 0.0207 0.0205

1.25 0.0077 0.0093 0.0118 0.0096 0.0122 0.0112 0.0223 0.0152
1.5 0.0144 0.0086 0.0116 0.0115 0.0146 0.0155 0.0146 0.0149
1.75 0.0096 0.0084 0.0095 0.0092 0.0200 0.0132 0.0092 0.0141
2 0.0077 0.0082 0.0088 0.0082 0.0107 0.0119 0.0146 0.0124

Table 7
Ultimate strain in lateral direction at shorter side.
Aspect ratio 1-ply 2-ply
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.

1 – 0.0365 0.0308 0.0337 – 0.0452 0.0480 0.0466

1.25 – 0.0476 0.0504 0.0490 – 0.0682 0.0853 0.0768
1.5 – 0.0541 0.0541 0.0541 – 0.0661 0.0670 0.0666
1.75 – 0.0569 0.0610 0.0589 – 0.0959 0.0641 0.0800
2 – 0.0395 0.0528 0.0461 – 0.0859 0.0667 0.0763
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45 39

(a) For longer side. (b) For shorter side.

Fig. 8. (continued)

0.02
h/b=1 h/b=1.25 0.02
Strain from strain gauges

h/b=1.5 h/b=1.75 h/b=1 h/b=1.25

Strain from strain gauges

0.015 h/b=1.5 h/b=1.75

h/b=2
0.015 h/b=2

0.01
0.01

0.005 0.005

0 0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045
Lateral strain (LVDT) Lateral strain (LVDT)
(a) For specimen with 1-ply CFRP. (b) For specimen with 2-ply CFRP.

Fig. 9. Comparison of lateral strains.

Table 8
Ultimate strain in lateral direction at longer side.
Aspect ratio 1-ply 2-ply
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.

1 0.0304 0.0323 0.0260 0.0296 0.0361 0.0677 0.0369 0.0469

1.25 0.0219 0.0256 0.0262 0.0246 0.0298 0.0305 0.0461 0.0355
1.5 0.0260 0.0215 0.0223 0.0233 0.0293 – 0.0295 0.0294
1.75 0.0248 0.0167 0.0163 0.0193 0.0347 – 0.0252 0.0299
2 0.0098 0.0105 0.0190 0.0131 0.0414 0.0273 0.0225 0.0304

generally larger than those reported in our previous work [2]. The Harries and Carey [26] indicated that unless a measurement is
maximum ultimate strains for the square columns in Fig. 12 are made exactly at the strain concentration point where a crack exists,
1.84 and 1.8 for specimens with 1-ply and 2-ply CFRP, respectively; the average jacket strain at rupture, is lower than the material
whilst the corresponding strains were 1.44 and 1.34, respectively, strain capacity which is only reach at the stress concentration. The
for the identical specimens in reference [2]. This difference could cracks could be another reason for the difference.
be attributed to the gauge length of the strain gauges that was The CFRP strains at the respective peak loads are plotted in
10 mm and 5 mm, respectively, for the previous tests and this work. Fig. 13. For cases with two-ply CFRP and small aspect ratios (h/b =
40 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45

Table 9
Strain at peak load in axial direction.
Aspect ratio 1-ply 2-ply
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.

1 0.0154 0.0110 0.0050 0.0105 0.0232 0.0174 0.0207 0.0204

1.25 0.0065 0.0064 0.0070 0.0067 0.0122 0.0112 0.0209 0.0148
1.5 0.0056 0.0040 0.0056 0.0051 0.0142 0.0155 0.0130 0.0142
1.75 0.0044 0.0042 0.0043 0.0043 0.0045 0.0056 0.0045 0.0049
2 0.0047 0.0044 0.0038 0.0043 0.0044 0.0042 0.0041 0.0043

Table 10
Strain at peak load in lateral direction at shorter side.
Aspect ratio 1-ply 2-ply
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.

1 – 0.0352 0.0062 0.0207 – 0.0408 0.0480 0.0444

1.25 – 0.0221 0.0207 0.0214 – 0.0682 0.0733 0.0708
1.5 – 0.0081 0.0102 0.0091 – 0.0663 0.0603 0.0633
1.75 – 0.0094 0.0071 0.0082 – 0.0145 0.0106 0.0126
2 – 0.0114 0.0099 0.0107 – 0.0069 0.0067 0.0068

Table 11
Strain at peak load in lateral direction at longer side.
Aspect ratio 1-ply 2-ply
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave. Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 3 Ave.

1 0.0297 0.0293 0.0057 0.0216 0.0361 0.0628 0.0369 0.0453

1.25 0.0136 0.0134 0.0111 0.0127 0.0298 0.0305 0.0380 0.0328
1.5 0.0049 0.0045 0.0055 0.0050 0.0289 – 0.0259 0.0274
1.75 0.0030 0.0031 0.0029 0.0030 0.0021 0.0164 0.0033 0.0072
2 0.0023 0.0033 0.0035 0.0030 0.0039 0.0023 0.0022 0.0028

Table 12
CFRP strains at failure.
Aspect ratio h/b CFRP strain (%)
M11 M21 M31 M41 L2 C2 R2 M12 M22 Rmax

2-ply CFRP 1.0 1.69 1.80 – – 1.38 1.21 1.21 1.66 1.26 0.98
1.25 1.61 1.27 1.34 – 1.41 1.33 1.76 1.68 1.51 0.96
1.5 1.54 1.64 1.80 – 1.67 1.44 1.75 1.82 1.83 0.99
1.75 1.43 1.52 1.57 1.63 1.49 1.72 1.85 1.36 1.67 1.01
2.0 1.40 1.38 1.42 1.58 1.66 1.37 1.51 1.70 1.68 0.92

1-ply CFRP 1.0 1.34 1.64 – – 1.67 1.84 1.55 1.40 1.04 1.00
1.25 1.60 1.67 1.42 – 1.61 1.46 1.43 1.64 1.92 1.04
1.5 1.10 1.12 1.63 – 1.60 1.58 1.43 1.48 1.56 0.89
1.75 1.27 1.24 1.25 1.47 1.48 1.31 1.73 1.18 1.16 0.94
2.0 0.90 0.91 0.96 0.96 1.16 1.15 1.54 1.43 1.61 0.87

1.70 4. Strength modeling

fcc/fco Orginal curve (1-ply)
1.60 Orginal curve (2-ply) Fig. 14 shows a comparison between the test results from this
work and the theoretical predictions of models reported in the
1.50 Consider all specimens (1-ply)
literature [10,13,17,24,27–32]. The figure shows that all of the
1.40 Consider all specimens (2-ply) existing models predict a decrease in the strength gain fcc /fco
as the aspect ratio increases. The models of Lam and Teng [24]
1.30 and the Concrete Society [32] show a better agreement with
1.20 the experimental results for the two-ply CFRP confined columns,
whereas for the one-ply CFRP confined columns the model
1.10
h/b proposed by Chaallal et al. [13] better predicts the test results. In
general, there are significant differences between the test results
1.00
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 from this work and the theoretical predictions. Relatively large
differences between theoretical predictions and the test results
Fig. 10. Strength gain of confined concrete versus aspect ratio. have also been noticed in the recent assessment of confinement
models for rectangular columns by Hassan and Chaallal [33].
Further investigation to deduce a better theoretical model is clearly
1.0, 1.25 and 1.5), the strains are identical or close to those in necessary.
Fig. 12. However, for other cases, the strains at the peak loads are As mentioned in the introduction, a model for the compressive
different from those at the ultimate failure of the FRP because of the strength of square concrete columns confined by FRP jacket has
existence of the descending branch for the less effectively confined been developed by Wu and Wang [21], which has a unified form
columns. for both square and circular concrete columns. The model defines
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45 41

(a) Axial strain. (b) Lateral strain at the shorter side.

(c) Lateral strain at the longer side.

Fig. 11. Ultimate and peak strains versus aspect ratio.

1.80% 1.63% circular concrete columns takes the form

1.84%  β  γ
fcc 2r fl
=1+α , (1)
1.78% fco b fco
1.92% 1.83% where α , β , γ can be determined by regression analyses using an
h/b=1.0 h/b=1.25 h/b=1.5 existing database, and fl , the confining pressure, is calculated by

2ffrp t 2Efrp εfrp t

fl = = . (2)
b b
1.85%
1.73% 1.70%
This model can easily be extended to rectangular columns by
1.61% the inclusion of a modification factor for the aspect ratio ka , which
h/b=1.75 h/b=2.0 reflects the reduction in the effectiveness of confinement due
to the change in cross-sectional shape, as illustrated by Fig. 10.
Solid line = 1-ply; dashed line = 2-ply
Therefore, for rectangular columns, Eq. (1) is revised to take the
Fig. 12. Ultimate strain distribution in CFRP.
form
 β  γ
fcc 2r fl
1.8% 0.8% =1+α ka . (3)
fco b fco
0.5%
According to the experimental test results carried out in this work,
1.11% 1.78% 1.75% the strength gain is approximately proportional to the aspect ratio,
as shown in Fig. 10. Therefore, the aspect ratio factor ka can be
h/b=1.0 h/b=1.25 h/b=1.5 expressed as a function of h/b, or
0.43%
 
0.46% h
0.42%
0.38% ka = f . (4)
b
After a careful examination of various mathematical functions, the

λ
h/b=1.75 h/b=2.0 exponential function, or ka = hb , is found to fit the trend of
Fig. 10 best. Therefore, Eq. (3) becomes
Solid line = 1-ply; dashed line = 2-ply
 β  γ  λ
fcc 2r fl h
Fig. 13. Strain distribution in CFRP at peak load. =1+α . (5)
fco b fco b
the corner radius ratio ρ as 2r /b (corner radius divided by half the When h/b = 1.0, Eq. (5) degenerates into Eq. (1), which means
width of the column), and thus when ρ = 1 and 0, respectively, that the model for circular and square columns is a special
it represents the cases of circular and sharp-cornered square case of the model for rectangular columns. When the aspect
columns. Wu and Wang’s unified strength model for square and ratio approaches infinity, ka approaches zero, which is physically
42 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45

2.4
1.8
2.2

1.6 2.0

1.8
1.4
1.6

1.4
1.2
1.2

1.0 1.0
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
(a) For 1-ply. (b) For 2-ply.

Fig. 14. Comparisons between tests and existing models.

reasonable. Therefore, the proposed strength model of Eq. (5) is 2.0

suitable for circular, square, and rectangular sections. 1.8
For square columns, ka = 1. Through a regression analysis 1.6
using the experimental test data reported in the author’s previous 1.4
work [2] plus the points for square columns determined in this 1.2
work, the coefficients α , β , and γ are obtained as 3.66, 0.72, and 1.0
1.87, respectively. Eq. (5) thus yields
0.8
fcc 0.6
−1
fco
ka =  1.87 . (6) 0.4
2r 0.72
3.66
fl


b fco
0.2
0.0
The values of Eq. (6) for the test points from this work are 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
calculated and plotted in Fig. 15. It can be observed that the
Fig. 15. Shape factor for aspect ratio.
modification factor for the aspect ratio decreases as the aspect
ratio increases. From the regression analysis with the data points
in Fig. 10, λ is identified to be −2.5, or the aspect ratio into the strength model to reflect the variation
of confinement effectiveness, which is different from all of the
 −2.5
h previous models. In the experimental program, the shorter side of
ka = . (7) the rectangular columns is equal to the side length of the reference
b
square column. Therefore, the calculation of the two first parts in
Substituting λ into Eq. (5) gives Eq. (8) must be based on a square column that has a side length
 0.72  1.87  −2.5 equal to b instead of h. In other words, for the calculation of fl in
fcc 2r fl h Eqs. (8) and (2) should be used where the side length is taken as b
= 1 + 3.66 . (8)
fco b fco b instead of h.
The four coefficients in Eq. (5) depend very much on the
The performance of the proposed model is assessed using the
database. If we use the database that includes all of the available
data collected for rectangular columns, which contains 60 data
data collected from the literature, that is, test results from 297 FRP-
points for rectangular columns comprising 22 points from this
wrapped plain concrete circular columns, 182 square columns, and
work and 38 points from other works, plus 22 data points for
60 rectangular columns, then the regression analyses lead to a
square columns from this work and the author’s previous work [2],
different equation as follows.
as shown in Fig. 16. The criterion used to evaluate the performance
of the model is the mean of the error squares ω, which is defined
 0.72  0.94  −1.9
fcc 2r fl h
as = 1 + 2.2 . (10)
fco b fco b
n
The performance of Eq. (10) is shown in Fig. 17. Apparently,
X
ω= [Expe.(fcc /fco ) − Theo.(fcc /fco )]2 /n, (9)
1
the Eq. (10) model is heavily biased toward square and circular
columns at h/b = 1, where most of the data points are located. The
where Expe.(fcc /fco ) and Theo.(fcc /fco ) are the experimental and development of a more accurate model for rectangular columns
theoretical values of the strength gain, respectively, and n is the clearly requires an evenly distributed database across the whole
total number of data points. The performance of the other models parameter range of h/b, and thus more test data for rectangular
is also compared in the figure, which indicates that the proposed columns with greater variation in the aspect ratio is very much
model agrees best with the selected database. The models by ISIS needed.
and CSA give a prediction near the lower bound and therefore are As mentioned in Section 3.1 that some of the data was omitted
more conservative compared with other models shown in Fig. 16. for model development. If all of the test data is considered, the
It is worthwhile noting that the first two parts of Eq. (8), strength gain of the columns will be reduced due to the increase
 1.87
2r 0.72 in the unconfined concrete strength, as shown by the dotted lines
fcc
= 1 + 3.66 fl


i.e. fco b fco
is for the reference square
in Fig. 10. As a result, Eqs. (8) and (10) will respectively become
column. The effect of the aspect ratio for rectangular columns

−2.5 0.72  1.87  −2.5
is accounted for in the third part, i.e. hb

, which is based fcc 2r fl h
on experimental observation. This third part explicitly includes = 1 + 3.9 , (11)
fco b fco b
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45 43

a 1.6 b 1.6
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2

c 1.6 d 1.6
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2

e 1.6 f 1.6
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2

g 2.0 h 1.6
1.8 1.4
1.6 1.2
1.4
1.2 1.0
1.0 0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4 0.4
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2

i 1.6 j 1.6
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2

k 2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2

Fig. 16. Performance of models. a. Eq. (8); b. Chaallal et al.; c. Lam and Teng; d. Maalej et al.; e. Kumutha et al.; f. Wang and Restrepo; g. CSA; h. FIB; i. ACI; j. Concrete society;
k. ISIS.

and 5. Conclusions

 0.72  0.94  −1.7 This study presents an experimental investigation of the

fcc 2r fl h
= 1 + 2.2 . (12) behavior of axially loaded short rectangular columns strengthened
fco b fco b with CFRP wrap. Forty-five specimens were tested in this work,
the main purpose of which was to investigate the effect of the
It can be seen that the difference is small. aspect ratio on the effectiveness of the confinement provided by
44 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45
Fig. 17. Performance of Eq. (10).
CFRP jackets. Two parameters were considered: the aspect ratio of
the cross-section (1.0, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2.0) and the number of CFRP
layers (zero, one, and two). Based on the test results, a new model
for the strength of FRP-confined rectangular columns is developed.
The findings from this work can be summarized as follows.
(1) Confinement by FRP jackets enhances the performance of
rectangular concrete columns. CFRP wrapping is more effective
for square sections than for rectangular sections. As the
aspect ratio increases from one to two, the strength gain in
confined concrete columns fcc /fco decreases until it becomes
insignificant at an aspect ratio of greater than 2.
(2) The stress–strain response changes from a monotonically
increasing and strain-hardening type to a strain-softening type
when the aspect ratio increases. The value of the aspect ratio
that divides the two types of stress–strain response curve
increases with the thickness of the FRP. In other words, a
column with a larger aspect ratio requires a thicker FRP jacket
to avoid strength degradation before the FRP ruptures.
(3) The maximum strain of the FRP at rupture can be as great as the
ultimate strain of the FRP from the flat coupon test (where the
corner radius is r = 30 mm), and is apparently unaffected by
the aspect ratio. This result is consistent with the author’s pre-
vious test results for square columns, in which a reduction in
FRP rupture strain was observed only for columns with sharper
corners (r < 15 mm) [2].
(4) The maximum FRP strain at the peak strength decreases sig-
nificantly with an increase in the aspect ratio. This is consis-
tent with the fact that the confinement effectiveness decreases
when the aspect ratio increases.
(5) An evaluation of existing models of the strength of FRP-
confined rectangular columns reveals relatively large differ-
ences between their predictions and the test results from this
work. A further theoretical modeling study is therefore neces-
sary.
(6) A new strength model for FRP-confined rectangular columns
is proposed in which a modification factor is introduced as a
function of the aspect ratio. The new model has a unified form
for circular, square, and rectangular sections.
(7) The determination of the coefficients for the new model largely
depends on the database used. The current database for rect-
angular columns is small, and more tests with greater variation
in the aspect ratio, sizes of specimen, concrete strength, and
number of FRP layers are very much needed.
Acknowledgments
The work described in this paper was fully supported by a grant
from the Research Grants
Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
[Project No.: CityU 122106]. The undergraduate student Chan Ka
Yee was partly involved in the testing of this project as her final
year project.
References
[1] Mirmiran A, Shahawy M, Samaan M, Echary HE, Mastrapa JC, Pico O. Effect of
column parameters on FRP-confined concrete. J Compos Constr ASCE 1998;
2(4):175–85.
[2] Wang LM, Wu YF. Effect of corner radius on the performance of CFRP-confined
square concrete columns: Test. Eng Struct 2008;30(2):493–505.
[3] Rocca S, Galati N, Nanni A. Review of design guidelines for FRP confinement
of reinforced concrete columns of noncircular cross sections. J Compos Constr
ASCE 2008;12(1):80–92.
[4] Youssef MN, Feng Q, Mosallam AS. Stress–strain model for concrete confined
by FRP composites. Composites Part B 2007;38:614–28.
[5] Wu G, Wu ZS, Lu ZT. Design-oriented stress–strain model for concrete prisms
confined with FRP composites. Constr Building mater 2007;21:1107–21.
[6] Fraldi M, Nunziante L, Carannante F, Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E. On the
prediction of the collapse load of circular concrete columns confined by FRP.
Eng Struct 2008;30(11):3247–64.
[7] Lam L, Teng JG. Stress–strain model for FRP-confined concrete under cyclic
axial compression. Eng Struct 2009;31(2):308–21.
[8] Rochette P, Labossière P. Axial testing of rectangular column models confined
with composites. J Compos Constr ASCE 2000;4(3):129–36.
[9] Cole C, Belarbi A. Confinement characteristics of rectangular FRP jacketed RC
columns. In: Proceeding of 5th international symposium on fiber reinforced
polymer for reinforce concrete structures (FRPRCS-5), Cambridge, July
16th–18th, 2001. p. 823–832.
[10] Maalej M, Tanwongsval S, Paramasivam P. Modeling of rectangular RC columns
strengthened with FRP. Cement Concrete Compos 2002;25(2):263–76.
[11] Tan KH. Strength enhancement of rectangular reinforced concrete columns
using fiber-reinforced polymer. J Compos Constr ASCE 2002;6(3):175–83.
[12] Chaallal O, Shahawy M, Hassan M. Performance of axially loaded short
rectangular columns strengthened with carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
wrapping. J Compos Constr ASCE 2003;7(3):200–8.
[13] Chaallal O, Hassan M, Shahawy M. Confinement Model for axially loaded short
rectangular columns strengthened with fiber-reinforced polymer wrapping.
ACI Struct J 2003;100(2):215–21.
[14] Yan Z, Pantelides CP, Reaveley LD. Fiber-reinforced polymer jacketed and
shape-modified compression members: I-experimental behavior. ACI Struct
J 2006;103(6):885–93.
[15] Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E. Ultimate behavior of axially loaded RC wall-
like columns confined with GFRP. Composites: Part B 2006;37:670–8.
[16] Ilki A, Peker O, Karamuk E, Demir C, Kumbasar N. Axial behavior of RC columns
retrofitted with FRP composites. Adv Earthq Eng Urban Risk Reduction 2006;
66:301–16.
[17] Kumutha R, Vaidyanathan R, Palanichamy MS. Behaviour of reinforced
concrete rectangular columns strengthened using GFRP. Cemmet Concrete
Compos 2007;29(8):609–15.
[18] Ozbakkaloglu T, Oehlers DJ. Concrete-filled square and rectangular FRP tubes
under axial compression. J Compos Constr ASCE 2008;12(4):469–77.
[19] Wang YC, Hsu K. Design of FRP-wrapped reinforced concrete columns for
enhancing axial load carrying capacity. Compos Struct 2007;82:132–9.
[20] Wu YF, Tao L, Oehlers DJ. Fundamental principles that govern retrofitting of
reinforced concrete columns by steel and FRP jacketing. Adv Struct Eng 2006;
9(4):507–33.
[21] Wu YF, Wang LM. Unified strength model for square and circular concrete
columns confined by external jacket. J Struct Eng ASCE 2009;135(3):253–61.
[22] Shehata IAEM, Carneiro LAV, Shehata LCD. Strength of short concrete columns
confined with CFRP sheets. Materials and Structures 2002;35(245):50–8.
[23] Harajli MH, Hantouche E, Soudki K. Stress–strain model for fiber-reinforced
polymer jacketed concrete columns. ACI Struct J 2006;103(5):672–82.
[24] Lam L, Teng JG. Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined concrete
in rectangular columns. J Reinf Plastics Compos 2003;22(13):1149–86.
[25] Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E. Effective strain in FRP jackets
on circular RC columns. In: Proceedings 4th international conference on FRP
composites in civil engineering 2008.
[26] Harries LA, Carey SA. Shape and ‘‘gap’’ effects on the behavior of variably
confined concrete. Cement Concrete Research 2003;33(6):881–90.
[27] FIB. Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures. Bulletin No. 14,
Task Group 9.3, Fédération Internationale du Béton, 2001.
[28] ISIS M04. Externally bonded FRP for strengthening reinforced concrete
structures. The Canadian Network of Centres of Excellence on Intelligent
Sensing for Innovative Structures, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, 2001.
[29] Wang YC, Restrepo JI. Investigation of concentrically loaded reinforced
concrete columns confined with grass fiber-reinforced polymer jackets. ACI
Struct J 2001;98(3):377–85.
 Y.-F. Wu, Y.-Y. Wei / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 32–45 45

[30] ACI Committee 440. Guide for the design and construction of externally
bonded FRP systems for strengthening concrete structures (ACI 440.2R).
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2002.
[31] CSA-S806-02. Design and construction of building components with fiber-
reinforced polymers. Canadian Standard Association, Rexdale, Toronto, ON,
Canada, 2002.
[32] Concrete Society. Design guideline for strengthening concrete structures
using fiber composite material. Concrete Society Technical Report No. 55,
Crowthorne, UK, 2004.
[33] Hassan M, Chaallal O. Fiber-reinforced polymer confined rectangular columns:
Assessment of models and design guidelines. ACI Struct J 2008;101(4):
693–702.