Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

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

Experimental and numerical investigation of the usability of

nonwoven hemp as a reinforcement material
Sedat Savas , Dursun Bakir *, Yusuf Kenan Akcaat
Firat University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Elazig 23200, Turkey

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

Keywords: This study presents experimental and numerical investigations on the use of chemically untreated
Nonwoven hemp and recyclable hemp fibers as reinforcement for outer wrapping in reinforced concrete beams.
Hemp fiber Hemp fibers, recognized as an alternative to Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) and Glass
Hemp rope
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (GFRP), were utilized in three forms: unwashed hemp, washed hemp,
NFRP
Structural reinforcement
and hemp rope. The materials underwent distinct tensile tests, compression tests on cylinder
Finite element analysis specimens (15×30 cm), and 4-point bending tests on reinforced concrete beams (15×25×200 cm)
wrapped with CFRP, GFRP, Glass Fiber Chopped Strand, Geotextile, and NFRP (Unwashed hemp,
washed hemp, and hemp rope). Additionally, the epoxy used in wrapping underwent adhesive
and tensile tests. Despite swelling during adhesion, untreated hemp demonstrated effectiveness in
load-carrying capacity, positioning it as a viable alternative to costly petroleum-derived mate­
rials. A finite element model compared the experimental results, confirming the efficacy of un­
treated hemp fibers in reinforced concrete applications. This study contributes not only to the
exploration of sustainable construction materials but also underscores the potential of untreated
hemp fibers in meeting the demand for eco-conscious alternatives in structural reinforcement.

1. Introduction

Reinforced concrete (RC) structures, which constitute the majority of building stocks, have a certain lifespan. When time and
natural factors are taken into consideration, there is a need for reinforcement. Different methods are used in the repair and
strengthening of reinforced concrete structural elements. For reinforcement, Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) applications
that do not increase the weight of the structure can be applied easily and quickly, and significantly increase the capacity of the ele­
ments [1–8]. With these materials, beams, columns, shear walls, and infill walls can be strengthened quickly and effectively [9]. In
experimental studies to determine the behavior of damaged reinforced concrete beams reinforced with FRP fibers, FRP material was
bonded with epoxy at different angles in and around the tension zone to increase the flexural and shear strength of the beams. Different
types of fracture under load and increases in beam strength were observed [10]. When the behavior of the experimental beams formed
by wrapping FRP fibers at different angles under load was examined, it was observed that FRP-coated beams carried 53% more load
than unreinforced normal beams in bending tests [11]. Despite all the advantages and successful applications, the FRP reinforcement
technique has disadvantages such as the high cost of synthetic fabricated fibers and epoxy resins, environmental concerns due to high
carbon emissions from the use of synthetic fibers, not easily recyclable and not biodegradable at the end of their life [12–14]. Due to
the increase in cost due to the use of high technology in FRP production, the use of composites reinforced with natural fibers, which

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: dbakir@firat.edu.tr (D. Bakir).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03091
Received 7 December 2023; Received in revised form 3 March 2024; Accepted 24 March 2024
Available online 30 March 2024
2214-5095/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

have been used for thousands of years as an alternative to synthetic fibers, has gained popularity [15–18].
Hemp fibers, which are intended to be used as reinforcement material, can be wrapped in the building element, adhesive, resistance
to ambient conditions and examination of its strength under load is very important in today’s conditions. Ensuring its applicability will
make significant contributions to nature and the economy. Hemp, which is a natural fiber, has many advantages such as low density,
biodegradability, non-corrosiveness, abundance in nature, low cost, and high strength compared to synthetic fibers such as other
natural fibers [19–22]. Of the approximately 2000 species of natural fibrous plants, a few account for about 90% of the world’s natural
fibers. These include sisal, flax, hemp, and jute. Due to its high strength properties, numerous studies were conducted on the use of
natural fiber-based composite boards and rope for reinforcement of reinforced concrete structures, as in the case of CFRP material
[23–30]. According to studies, hemp fibers exhibit tensile strength similar to steel and can be utilized as an alternative to polymer
composites in reinforcing reinforced concrete constructions. Table 1 displays some of the information from literature research indi­
cating the tensile strength of materials. When hemp fibers are subjected to sodium hydroxide, the fiber bundles split, causing the
surface roughness of the fibers to increase. When employed as a composite fiber, it increases compressive and bending strength while
also increasing energy absorption capacity [31–33]. Unprocessed hemp exposed to weather conditions on the exteriors of buildings
demonstrated that hemp, albeit unprocessed, is not unprotected. It was also examined by aging for 75 days at 30◦ C [34]. Hemp, one of
the natural fibers, has been around since 7000 BC, indicating its endurance. The sections of the plant where cellulose pectin and lignin
are located are shown in Fig. 1 of the structural diagram of high-strength hemp. Chemical component ratios in hemp fiber were
determined as 52–71% cellulose, 14–22% hemicellulose, 0.8–10% pectin, and 2.4–6% lignin in various studies [35–39]. The cellulose
in hemp fiber is hydrophilic, meaning it is insoluble in water and most organic solvents. The lignin in the cell wall is generated in the
gaps between the cellulose, hemicellulose, and pectin components. Lignin’s primary function in cell walls is to sustain the structure of
plant tissue. The presence of lignin in bast fibers reduces the fiber’s capacity to absorb water. Lignin stiffens the fibers, which causes
certain challenges during hemp processing. It is important to treat this hardness via chemical operations to eliminate them [40].
Fig. 2 shows an example of the test setup devised by Alam et al. to investigate the strengthening of natural fiber-reinforced concrete
elements; in this case, untreated and spaced 10 cm apart adjacent to the support sections, 15 cm wide, 30 cm high, and 200 cm long BA
beams are used to increase shear strength. Composite sheets made of kenaf, jute, and jute rope that had been treated with NaOH were
tested via a four-point bending test. The test sheets were 6 mm thick and 3.5 cm wide. (Sodium hydroxide). As a result of the
experiment, the failure load of the natural fiber-reinforced beam made from unprocessed fibers increased by an average of 35%, while
it increased by only around 20% in the treated beams. Carbon fiber reinforcement was also explored in the trials, although the 1.2 mm
thickness of the CFRP used resulted in a 12% decrease in strength [43].
Tidarut et al. subjected the pre-damaged BA beam to a three-point bending test by sticking 2 and 4 layers of jute textile panel
around it (Fig. 3). In the experiment, it was observed that the beam reinforced with jute reached the same bearing capacity as the
control beam without pre-damage [44].
Yinh et al. utilized two different binders, namely polyester, and epoxy, to adhere sisal fibers onto the tensile zone of a beam in single
and double layers, each with a thickness of 3 mm. A three-point bending test was conducted on the beam, and the results indicated that
the incorporation of sisal fibers enhanced the strength and ductility of the concrete. The researchers applied a single and double layer
of sisal fabric using epoxy and polyester binders on control samples with varying compressive strengths (Fig. 4) and compared the
strength of cylindrical samples. The study revealed that sisal fibers exhibited better behavior in low-strength concrete compared to
other types. In a subsequent experiment conducted by the same researchers, pressure tests were conducted on cylindrical concrete
samples, and similar outcomes were obtained (Fig. 5) [45].
Suparp et al. winded the cylindrical concrete sample using 3 mm diameter hemp rope and 1, 2, and 3 layers of the epoxy resin
binder. In the experiment, a load of 1000 kN was applied at a constant speed of 0.5 mm/min. As a result of the test, the control sample
collapsed under a load of 15 MPa, while the compressive strength increased to 33, 50, and 59 MPa in samples treated with 1, 2, and 3
layers of hemp rope, respectively[46].
Yalburgimath et al. conducted a four-point bending test on reinforced concrete beams by wrapping 3 single layer CFRP with epoxy
on control specimens with dimensions of 150×200×1500 mm. The behavior of CFRP-wrapped beams against bending was investi­
gated. The beams were preloaded and the cracks formed were subjected to reloading tests by wrapping a single layer of CFRP on the
lateral and bottom of the beam. The control specimen was subjected to a four-point bending test and withstood 135 kn load. The
second specimen was reinforced with CFRP after 40 kn preloading and when the four-point bending test was applied, it was seen that it
withstood 220 kn load with a 63% increase, the third specimen was preloaded 43 kn and when the test was applied as in the second
specimen, it withstood 200 kn load with 49% load increase and the last specimen withstood 200 kn load with 49% load increase after
38 kn preloading CFRP application [47].
In another study conducted by Nazir et al., an experimental study system was aimed to investigate the behavior of structurally
damaged and CFRP-reinforced full-scale reinforced concrete beams in shear or bending. Two types of reinforcement layouts were

Table 1
The tensile strength of materials in the literature.
Density (g/cm3) Elongation (%) Tensile Strength (MPa) Elastic Modulus (GPa) Refs.

Hemp 1.47 2–4.0 690 70 [41]

E-glass 2.5 0.5 2000–3500 70 [42]
S-glass 2.5 2.8 4570 86 [42]
Carbon(Std. PAN-based) 1.4 1.4–1.8 4000 230–240 [42]

2
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 1. Structure of hemp fiber [35].

Fig. 2. Manufacture of the reinforced beam with natural fiber strips [43].

Fig. 3. Collapse modes and crack models before and after removal of NFRP sheets in reinforced samples.

Fig. 4. Collapse modes of beams reinforced with one layer and two layers of sisal[45].

applied to create different types of cracks at different reinforcement spacings and ratios of 150×300×1960mm beams. In the first plan
(RF), the reinforcement spacing is tension reinforcement, 2Ø12, compression reinforcement, 2Ø10, stirrups, Ø8 with 100 mm spacing.
In the second plan (RS), tension reinforcement, 2Ø16, compression reinforcement, 2Ø10, stirrups, Ø8 with 450 mm spacing. Four-
point bending test was applied to the beams produced with two types of plans. The first cracks in the beams started to form at
60 kN, and then CFRP was applied to the entire bottom face of the RF-type beams (L) (RF1) and two beams from the middle note (L/3)
(RF2). In the RS-type beam, CFRP was wrapped on both sides of the beam body. In the four-point bending test, RF1 provided 46.4%,
RF2 provided a 20% maximum load increase and RS provided a 25% increase [48].
In this study, the effectiveness of nonwoven hemp, which had not undergone any chemical or physical treatment, as a structural
reinforcement material was investigated. Tensile tests, uniaxial compression tests conducted by wrapping fibers on cylindrical sam­
ples, and four-point pressure tests conducted by wrapping fibers on RC beams were performed to compare the performance of hemp

3
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 5. Final collapse mode and preparation technique of a concrete cylindrical specimen with a height of 20 cm and a diameter of 10 cm[45,46].

with other inorganic materials. The mechanical properties obtained from these tests were used in a numerical model, which was then
simulated using the ANSYS software package, and the results were compared with the test results.

2. Experiments

The hemp fibers to be compared in the study are directly separated into fibers (Fig. 6a) as a consequence of harvesting hemp plants
cultivated in Samsun in Turkey’s northern area, split into fibers after being stored in water in pools for one month (Fig. 6b), and three
varieties of hemp fiber (Fig. 6c). A fiber sorting machine separated the first form of hemp, while the second type of hemp was manually
broken into fibers to allow it to decay in water. Some of these separated strands were made into ropes, resulting in the third variety of
hemp. Washed hemp and unwashed hemp refer to the processing methods used to clean and prepare the fibers of the hemp plant for
use. The primary difference between the two is that washed hemp undergoes a cleaning process, while unwashed hemp is not subjected
to such a process. Washing hemp is typically conducted to remove impurities such as dirt, plant matter, and other contaminants that
may accumulate during the growing and harvesting process. It also helps to soften the fibers and make them easier to work with. The
washing process involves soaking the hemp fibers in water to remove the impurities. The fibers are then rinsed several times to ensure
that all the dirt is removed. After washing, the hemp fibers may be dried and further processed into textiles, paper, or other products.
Unwashed hemp, on the other hand, is typically harvested and then processed immediately without undergoing any cleaning or
washing. This can result in a coarser texture and a more natural appearance, but it may also contain more impurities and be more
difficult to work with. Overall, the choice between washed and unwashed hemp depends on the intended use of the fibers and personal
preference. Washed hemp is generally considered to be of higher quality and may be better suited for finer applications such as clothing
or bedding. Unwashed hemp, on the other hand, can be more suitable for coarser applications such as rope or twine.
Tensile tests of washed hemp fiber, unwashed hemp fiber, rope hemp, steel wire, and glass fiber were performed in the first stage. In
the second stage, uniaxial compression tests were performed by wrapping unwashed hemp fiber, rope hemp, and glass fiber on cy­
lindrical concrete specimens. In the third stage, Washed hemp fiber, unwashed hemp fiber, rope hemp, glass fiber, glass fiber, glass
fiber Chopped Strand Mat, carbon fiber, and geotextile materials were bonded to the beam specimens with epoxy adhesive at the
intervals shown in Fig. 7 and four-point bending tests were performed (Table 2). The spacing was determined by considering the
behavior of stirrup reinforcement applied in conventional reinforced concrete beams. The materials used in the studies for comparison
were similarly weighted at the same weights and their applications were created. The concrete mix used in the test system was the same
for all specimens (Table 3).

2.1. Tensile test

Steel wire, CFRP, and hemp rope samples of equal weight and length were subjected to a tensile test to make a comparison with
unwashed hemp fiber with a weight of 0.34 g and a length of 10 cm. According to the results of the experiment, the tensile strengths of

Fig. 6. Loops of hemp used in experiments.

4
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 7. Winding intervals and layout.

Table 2
Experimenet setup.
Beam Tensile Test Uniaxial Compression Test Winding – 3 Layers 4-Point Bending Test

Hemp group(Unwashed-washed- Hemp group(washed- Hemp group(Unwashed-washed- Hemp group(Unwashed-washed-

rope) rope) rope) rope)
Glass Fiber Glass Fiber Glass Fiber Glass Fiber
- - CFRP CFRP
Steel wire - - -
Geotextile - - Geotextile
- - Glass Fiber Chopped Strand Glass Fiber Chopped Strand

Table 3
Concrete mixing ratios.
Cement 16%
Aggregate (7–14 mm diameter) 35.40%
Aggregate (3–9 mm diameter) 4.40%
Sand 37.60%
Water 6.40%
Additive 0.20%

the materials used with equal weight (0.33 g) and equal length (10 cm) were measured for glass fiber at 720 N, carbon fiber (CFRP) at
1383 N, washed hemp fiber 351 N, and unwashed hemp fiber as 314 N. The tensile strength of hemp rope with a 10 cm length (equal)
and 0.6 g weight was measured as 524 N, and the tensile strength of hemp rope with a weight of 0.9 g was measured as 597 N
(Table 4).

2.2. Uniaxial compression experiment

The 15×30 cm cylindrical specimens with a compressive strength of 35 MPa were winded with glass fiber, hemp rope, and un­
washed hemp using epoxy resin. After the winding process was completed, the diameter of the sample winded with glass fiber was
15.9 cm, the diameter of the sample winded with hemp rope was 16.5 cm, and the diameter of the sample winded with unwashed
hemp fiber was 18.5 cm (Fig. 8).
When the data in Table 5 were examined, it was observed that the glass fiber cylinder increased the compressive strength of the

Table 4
Tensile strengths of materials used in the tensile test.
Material Length (cm) Weight (gr) Load (N)

Steel wire 10 0.33 155

Glass fiber (GFRP) 10 0.33 720
Carbon fiber (CFRP) 10 0.33 1383
Unwashed hemp 10 0.33 314
Washed hemp 10 0.33 351
Hemp rope(thin) 10 0.6 422
Hemp rope 10 0.9 597

5
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

sample by 116.20%, the hemp rope increased the compressive strength of the cylinder sample by 65.92%, and the washed hemp fibers
increased the compressive strength of the cylinder sample by 44.28%.

2.3. Experiments using epoxy resin as an adhesive

Epoxy resin, used as an adhesive, is a Teknobond200 branded construction material with low viscosity, solvent-free, high pene­
tration, ease of application, and resistance to weather conditions [49]. Shear stress was 30.4 MPa and tensile stress was 4.1 MPa in the
mechanical properties studies we conducted. The epoxy was put between two timbers with the settlement geometry shown in the
picture and left for 7 days in the experiment. Following that, the experiment was carried out as shown in the figure (Figs. 9–10).

2.4. Preparation of samples

During the preparation of the samples, epoxy was applied to the concrete surface and the fibers were bonded to it. To study the
shear force effect on the samples, they were wrapped in three layers with 50 cm widths and 100 cm intervals, similar to stirrups
(Figs. 11–17). Equal weights (with reference to CFRP) adhered to 40 gr. to assess the materials used in all samples under the same
conditions. The beam examples measure 150×250×2000 mm and are made with 145 stirrups and 45 longitudinal reinforcements (two
on the bottom, two on the top). As a reference, RC beams manufactured without the use of any wrapping material were compared to
beams reinforced using the aforementioned materials.

2.5. Four-point bending examination

The beams are put on the press support with a 10 cm support margin at a 180 cm span. The HEM200A Steel Profile with high
strength moment was chosen with the press load at its middle to equally transfer the load applied to the beam. The distance between
the supports is 60 cm (Fig. 18).
When examining the data in Table 6, the average of the findings obtained as a result of loading two reference samples was used to
make a comparison, and the reference average failure load was determined to be 39.98 kN. The average failure load was used to
evaluate the test findings. Similarly, the time required to attain and collapse the maximum load that two reference beams can support is
calculated to be 18 seconds. Carbon Fiber raised the failure load of the beam by 228.81% and the failure time by 122.22% in the
bonded beam sample. The hemp rope raised the collapse load of the beam sample by 36.09% and its duration by 155.56%. The failure
load was enhanced by 95.87% and the duration was increased by 500.00% when the glass Fiber fabric was treated. Geotextile felt did
not contribute to the collapse load but increased the failure time by 372.22%; washed hemp Fiber increased the failure load by 38.42%
and the duration by 194.44%; and unwashed hemp Fiber increased the failure load by 34.24% and the duration by 88.89%.

3. Finite element analysis

The reinforced concrete beam model was created using concrete SOLID65, steel reinforcement LINK180, and reinforcement
components (CFRP, GFRP, NFRP, Geotextile) SHELL181 finite element models. Under tensile and compressive stress, SOLID65 has the
property of breaking, cracking, and separating. This eight-node element has three degrees of freedom at each node (Fig. 19a). SOLID65
is used to describe cracking, crushing, fracture, and separation of concrete under plastic deformation in three orthogonal directions
[50]. Fig. 19 depicts the LINK180 used in the steel reinforcement model, which has two nodes and three degrees of freedom at each
node. It functions as a uniaxial pulling element.
The contact elements of the adhesives stated in the experiment empirically supply contact elements according to their stiffness in
ANSYS to connect the concrete surface and the wrapping materials utilized. Between concrete and fiber, the cohesive zone material
(CZM) concept is applied[50,51]. CZM model traction ’τ’ and effective opening displacement ’s’ (interfacial separation). Fig. 20 shows
hardness, ks.

Fig. 8. Cylindrical samples that were not reinforced and cylindrical samples reinforced with hemp rope, pooled hemp fiber (washed), and glass
fiber, respectively.

6
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Table 5
Experimental data of uniaxial compression test of the cylinder samples.
150×300mm Cylinder Samples Compressive Force (N) Surface area (mm2) Compressive Strength (MPa) Percentage of Strength Increase (%)

Control Sample 538,400 17,671.46 30.47 -

Glass Fiber-Winded Sample 1164,000 17,671.46 65.87 116.20
Rope Hemp-Winded Sample 893,300 17,671.46 50.55 65.92
Washed Hemp-Winded Sample 776,800 17,671.46 43.96 44.28

Fig. 9. Epoxy test setup.

Fig. 10. Epoxy tensile test.

Fig. 11. Experiment with washed hemp fiber.

Fig. 12. Experiment with unwashed hemp.

7
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 13. Experiment with CFRP.

Fig. 14. Experiment with Hemp rope.

Fig. 15. Experiment with GFRP.

Fig. 16. Experiment with Chopped Strand Glass Fibre.

1
ks = ti (1)
Gi
+ Gtcc

The epoxy thickness is ti , the concrete thickness is tc , the epoxy shear modulus is Gi , and the concrete shear modulus is Gc . ti =
1mm,tc = 25mm,Gi = 0.534GPa and Gc = 9.8GPa are used in the computations. CONTA174 is the contact element, while TARGE170 is
the target element (Figs. 20 and 21). CONTA174, the Fiber interface, is also employed in rigid-flexible and flexible-flexible contact

8
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 17. Experiment with Geotextile.

Fig. 18. Four-point bending test.

Table 6
Four-point bending test results.
Material Total Load (kN) Duration of collapse (sn) Load increase rate (%) Rate of change in collapse duration (%)

Reference Sample 39.98 18

Glass Fiber 1 52.8 28 32.07 55.56
Carbon Fiber 131.46 40 228.81 122.22
Hemp Rope 54.41 46 36.09 155.56
Glass Fiber Chopped Strand 78.31 108 95.87 500.00
Geotextile Felt 42.13 85 5.37 372.22
Washed Fiber Hemp 55.34 53 38.42 194.44
Unwashed Fiber Hemp 53.67 34 34.24 88.89

Fig. 19. Finite elements used in modeling.

9
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 20. CZM model[50].

analysis[52]. For the concrete and FRP interfaces, CZM constants were utilized (Eq. 1). The four-point loading FEM model was used to
create experimentally generated control samples (Fig. 22). The mechanical characteristics of NFRP-natural Fiber reinforced polymer
(washed, unwashed, and hemp rope fiber), CFRP, GFRP, and Geotextile models were determined using the tensile test (Table 4). The
fact that the finite element technique findings are close to the experimental results demonstrates the numerical model’s correctness.

4. Discussion and results

In the current study, tensile, compressive, and flexural behavior of untreated reinforcement materials under load compared to
treated materials were examined respectively. In addition, the effect of epoxy in wrapping the beams with epoxy was also examined
separately.
In the initial tensile test conducted to evaluate the usability of hemp fibers for reinforcement (Table 4), strengths of 1383 N for
CFRP, 720 N for GFRP, 351 N for washed hemp, and 314 N for unwashed hemp were obtained. The CFRP exhibited higher tensile
strength compared to GFRP and hemp fibers. However, considering the physical and chemical processing of CFRP and GFRP, it is
important to note the strength of hemp fibers in their untreated state. The fact that hemp fibers yielded lower strength than hemp rope
in the uniaxial compression test may be because the fibers were glued in their natural state and we could not provide a homogeneous
and tight bonding because the fibers were scattered during the gluing process. When the load increase percentages in the cylinder
samples presented in Table 5 were examined, glass Fiber provided a 116.20% increase, hemp rope 65.92%, and Fiber provided a
44.28% increase. Although untreated, hemp Fiber and unwashed were successful in increasing the strength. The same winding
techniques were applied in the experiments. After winding, the outer diameter of the GFRP cylinder sample increased by 6%, the Hemp
rope sample increased by 10% and the unwashed sample increased by 23%. As can be seen from these rate differences, unwashed hemp
fibers did not fully contact the concrete specimen. Therefore, stress loss occurred. Considering the benefits of hemp fibers, we
continued to investigate the contribution of natural and artificial fibers to the strengthening of concrete structural elements with a
different experimental setup. Similar to our uniaxial compression test, Suparp et al.[46] reported similar load increases in compressive
strength based on reference specimens in the uniaxial compression test compared to Table 5. Based on this study, when unwashed
hemp was implemented to cylinder specimens and compression tests were performed, hemp Fiber rope made a difference of 6.59%
compared to unwashed hemp. Both experiments show that strengthening with hemp Fiber ropes is an effective solution to replace
existing strengthening techniques such as carbon and glass fiber-reinforced polymer composites. When the four-point bending test
results (Table 6) are analyzed, increases in the collapse load of the structural element were achieved in other materials except geo­
textile felt material. In the four-point bending test performed by [47] and [48], beam specimens reinforced with CFRP were preloaded
and a single layer of CFRP was wrapped on the beams that had cracks. In these studies, loading was performed after strengthening and

Fig. 21. Contact elements.

10
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 22. FRP FEM models.

the maximum loads that can be carried were examined. It was observed that the lateral parts of the beams and the tensile zones
(bottom) were better in terms of load resisting when wrapped all over. In this study, a single layer was wrapped around the entire
tensile zone and lateral parts of the beams without preloading and bending tests were performed. Moreover, 30.4 MPa shear stress and
4.1 MPa tensile stress are created between the epoxy and the concrete surface. When the results of the four-point bending test were
analyzed (Table 6), it was observed that the collapse load of the beam specimen increased by 228.81% without preloading. Washed
and unwashed hemp samples were also implemented with the same winding techniques as can be seen in Fig. 10 while a complete
adhesion could not be achieved due to the swelling of the fibers on the beam specimen. This situation resulted in decreases in strength
(Table 6).
The goal of employing geotextile felt in the four-point bending test is to see how epoxy affects strength in trials with various
materials soaked with the same amount of epoxy resin. According to the geotextile test findings (Table 6), the shear strength of the
epoxy resin did not influence the tensile strength since the geotextile did not split from the concrete surface.
The modeling was verified using finite element analysis with materials whose mechanical properties are known (GFRP, CFRP). The
validated model was also applied to NFRP material and its mechanical properties were found to be close to the values in the literature.
The results of samples modeled with the Ansys (APDL) package software were given in Figs. 23–26.
The fact that reinforced concrete constructions have a high failure time shows that the structure is ductile. Because ductile fracture

Fig. 23. Experimental and numerical results of the reference sample.

11
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 24. NFRP experimental and numerical results.

Fig. 25. GFRP experimental and numerical results.

12
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

Fig. 26. CFRP experimental and numerical results.

is required in beams, the ductility of the materials employed in reinforcing plays a significant role in the construction. As a result,
following the data obtained from the four-point bending test, the data on reaching the maximum failure load and failure time of the
materials used were examined, and the behavior of the materials used on the reinforced concrete structural element was shown in the
comparative graph in Fig. 27.
Washed hemp Fiber made the reinforced concrete structural element more ductile than carbon Fiber when tested to see whether it
could be utilized as an alternative to carbon fiber. This might explain why hemp fibers are favored for reinforcement in reinforced
concrete constructions.

5. Conclusion

Within the framework of the study, although hemp has a swelling problem in practice, its behavior under load is competitive with
non-organic GFRP and CFRP. In future studies in the literature, if the swelling problem is eliminated, a material that can be recycled to
the environment that can compete with these two materials can be obtained. Hemp that has not undergone chemical treatment has

Fig. 27. The collapse load and collapse duration related to the four-point bending experiment.

13
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

increased strength when turned into rope. In this case, it was seen that the tensile strength can be higher if the hemp fibers receive
equal stress.
There was no difference in strength between non-ponded and pooled hemp. For this reason, it will be more beneficial to use hemp
after it is harvested if it is turned into fiber without any physical or chemical treatment. Hemp, which has been used in shipping and
daily life since ancient times because it is a material resistant to environmental and chemical factors, seems to have a good durability
feature. In the experiments, geotextile felt was bonded under the beam by impregnating epoxy felt in the experiments. In the ex­
periments, it was observed that the contribution of the geotextile felt soaked in epoxy with the reference specimen to the flexural
strength of the beam was very small. According to this result, there is no harm in neglecting the tensile strength of epoxy in the
calculations to be made. However, it is of great importance to ensure the shear stress between the repair material and the structural
element. In terms of load-carrying capacities, in the construction sector, the limited raw material resources and raw material resources
of artificial fibers used in the reinforcement of steel reinforcement and reinforced concrete structures can be used in construction
building elements, while the process is made with high energy technologies and a large labor force. These materials also have envi­
ronmental and other economic consequences, such as severe environmental damage both during manufacture and throughout the
waste disposal process, low recyclability, and restricted production in local resources. Considering these consequences, as an alter­
native to these materials, it is possible to use technologies that demand less energy in the process, from producing ecologically friendly
hemp to employing it as reinforcement or reinforced concrete reinforcement in the building business.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Sedat Savaş: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Supervision, Software, Methodology, Conceptualization. Dursun
Bakır: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Software, Formal analysis, Data curation. Yusuf Akcaat: Writing – original draft,
Visualization, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

[1] C. Arya, J.L. Clarke, E.A. Kay, P.D. O’Regan, TR 55: design guidance for strengthening concrete structures using Fiber composite materials: a review, Eng. Struct.
24 (2002) 889–900, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00027-5.
[2] F. Hejazi, H. Karim, H. Kazemi, S. Shahbazpanahi, A. Mosavi, Case studies in construction materials fracture mechanics modeling of reinforced concrete joints
strengthened by CFRP sheets, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 17 (2022) e01273, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01273.
[3] A. Abadel, H. Abbas, T. Almusallam, I.M.H. Alshaikh, M. Khawaji, H. Alghamdi, A.A. Salah, Experimental study of shear behavior of CFRP strengthened ultra-
high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete deep beams, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 16 (2022) e01103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01103.
[4] Y. Zhang, L. Wang, H. Gao, Experimental study on notched concrete beams with externally-bonded CFRP under repeated environmental treatments, Constr.
Build. Mater. 346 (2022) 128415, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128415.
[5] A.A. Abadel, M.I. Khan, R. Masmoudi, Axial capacity and stiffness of post-heated circular and square columns strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymer
jackets, Structures 33 (2021) 2599–2610, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.05.081.
[6] Y.A. Al-Salloum, Influence of edge sharpness on the strength of square concrete columns confined with FRP composite laminates, Compos. Part B Eng. 38 (2007)
640–650, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.06.019.
[7] A. Albidah, A. Abadel, H. Abbas, T. Almusallam, Y. Al-Salloum, Experimental and analytical study of strengthening schemes for shear deficient RC deep beams,
Constr. Build. Mater. 216 (2019) 673–686, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.05.024.
[8] A.S. Karzad, M. Leblouba, S.Al Toubat, M. Maalej, Repair and strengthening of shear-deficient reinforced concrete beams using Carbon Fiber Reinforced
Polymer, Compos. Struct. 223 (2019) 110963, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.110963.
[9] L. Anania, A. Badalà, G. Failla, Increasing the flexural performance of RC beams strengthened with CFRP materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 19 (2005) 55–61,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2004.04.011.
[10] T. Norris, H. Saadatmanesh, M.R. Ehsani, Shear and Flexural Strengthening of R/C Beams with Carbon Fiber Sheets, J. Struct. Eng. 123 (1997) 903–911, https://
doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1997)123:7(903).
[11] N.F. Grace, W.F. Ragheb, G. Abdel-Sayed, Development and application of innovative triaxially braided ductile FRP fabric for strengthening concrete beams,
Compos. Struct. 64 (2004) 521–530, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2003.09.051.
[12] A.G.N. Abbas, F.N.A.A. Aziz, K. Abdan, N.A.M. Nasir, G.F. Huseien, A state-of-the-art review on fibre-reinforced geopolymer composites, Constr. Build. Mater.
330 (2022) 127187, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127187.
[13] A. Wongsa, R. Kunthawatwong, S. Naenudon, V. Sata, P. Chindaprasirt, Natural fiber reinforced high calcium fly ash geopolymer mortar, Constr. Build. Mater.
241 (2020) 118143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118143.
[14] A.G. Noor Abbas, F. Nora Aznieta Abdul Aziz, K. Abdan, N. Azline Mohd Nasir, G. Fahim Huseien, Experimental evaluation and statistical modeling of kenaf
fiber-reinforced geopolymer concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 367 (2023) 130228, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130228.
[15] K.N. Pruthviraj, S. Jagalur Mahalingasharma, S. Patil, Experimental study on strength behaviour of concrete reinforced with natural fibers, Mater. Today Proc.
(2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.11.065.
[16] F.P. Torgal, S. Jalali, Natural fiber reinforced concrete, Fibrous Compos. Mater. Civ. Eng. Appl. (2011) 154–167, https://doi.org/10.1533/
9780857095583.2.154.
[17] H. Savastano Junior, L.L. Pimentel, Viabilidade do aproveitamento de resíduos de fibras vegetais para fins de obtenção de material de construção, Rev. Bras.
Eng. Agr. ícola e Ambient 4 (2000) 103–110, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662000000100019.

14
S. Savas et al. Case Studies in Construction Materials 20 (2024) e03091

[18] I. Shah, J. Li, S. Yang, Y. Zhang, A. Anwar, Experimental investigation on the mechanical properties of natural fiber reinforced concrete, J. Renew. Mater. 10
(2022) 1307–1320, https://doi.org/10.32604/jrm.2022.017513.
[19] C.S. Saran, A. Satapathy, Epoxy-hemp and epoxy-flax composites filled with glass dust for enhanced thermal insulation: an analytical and experimental study,
Polym. Compos. (2024), https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.28123.
[20] P. Soni, S. Sinha, Fiber and future: unleashing the power of industrial hemp waste through epoxy composites, Polym. Compos. 45 (2024) 413–423, https://doi.
org/10.1002/pc.27786.
[21] K. Yorseng, S. Mavinkere Rangappa, V. Ayyappan, R. Srisuk, S. Siengchin, Bioepoxy based advanced lightweight hybrid composites from hemp fibers: towards
greener production, J. Build. Eng. 86 (2024) 108808, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.108808.
[22] A. Vinod, M.R. Sanjay, S. Siengchin, Recently explored natural cellulosic plant fibers 2018–2022: a potential raw material resource for lightweight composites,
Ind. Crops Prod. 192 (2023) 116099, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.116099.
[23] M.M. Attia, O. Ahmed, O. Kobesy, A.S. Malek, Behavior of FRP rods under uniaxial tensile strength with multiple materials as an alternative to steel rebar, Case
Stud. Constr. Mater. 17 (2022) e01241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01241.
[24] O. Gooranorimi, W. Suaris, E. Dauer, A. Nanni, Microstructural investigation of glass fiber reinforced polymer bars, Compos. Part B Eng. 110 (2017) 388–395,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.029.
[25] S. Yinh, Q. Hussain, P. Joyklad, P. Chaimahawan, W. Rattanapitikon, S. Limkatanyu, A. Pimanmas, Strengthening effect of natural fiber reinforced polymer
composites (NFRP) on concrete, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 15 (2021) e00653, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00653.
[26] M.A. Alam, K. Nouri, M.Z. Jumaat, Z.C. Muda, Flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beam using jute rope composite plate, 3rd Natl. Grad. Conf. (2015)
210–213.
[27] W. Li, E.D. Shumuye, T. Shiying, Z. Wang, K. Zerfu, Eco-friendly Fiber reinforced geopolymer concrete: a critical review on the microstructure and long-term
durability properties, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 16 (2022) e00894, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e00894.
[28] J.A. Abdalla, B.S. Thomas, R.A. Hawileh, Proceedings Use of hemp, kenaf and bamboo natural fiber in cement-based concrete, Mater. Today Proc, Mater. Today
65 (2022) 2070–2072, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.06.428.
[29] M. Suriyaprakash, M. Nallusamy, K.S.R. Shanjai, N. Akash, V. Rohith, Experimental investigation on mechanical properties of Ramie, Hemp fiber and coconut
shell particle hybrid composites with reinforced epoxy resin, Mater. Today Proc. 2022 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.08.091.
[30] J. Merotte, A. Le Duigou, A. Kervoelen, A. Bourmaud, K. Behlouli, O. Sire, C. Baley, Flax and hemp nonwoven composites: the contribution of interfacial bonding
to improving tensile properties, Polym. Test. 66 (2018) 303–311, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.01.019.
[31] B. Poletanovic, I. Janotka, M. Janek, M. Bacuvcik, I. Merta, Influence of the NaOH-treated hemp fibres on the properties of fly-ash based alkali-activated mortars
prior and after wet/dry cycles, Constr. Build. Mater. 309 (2021) 125072, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125072.
[32] M.A. Sawpan, K.L. Pickering, A. Fernyhough, Effect of various chemical treatments on the Fiber structure and tensile properties of industrial hemp fibres,
Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 42 (2011) 888–895, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.03.008.
[33] L.Y. Mwaikambo, M.P. Ansell, Mechanical properties of alkali treated plant fibres and their potential as reinforcement materials. I. hemp fibres, J. Mater. Sci. 41
(2006) 2483–2496, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-006-5098-x.
[34] S. Marceau, P. Glé, M. Guéguen-Minerbe, E. Gourlay, S. Moscardelli, I. Nour, S. Amziane, Influence of accelerated aging on the properties of hemp concretes,
Constr. Build. Mater. 139 (2017) 524–530, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.129.
[35] M. Le Troëdec, A. Rachini, C. Peyratout, S. Rossignol, E. Max, O. Kaftan, A. Fery, A. Smith, Influence of chemical treatments on adhesion properties of hemp
fibres, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 356 (2011) 303–310, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2010.12.066.
[36] J. Gassan, V.S. Gutowski, Effects of corona discharge and UV treatment on the properties of jute-Fiber epoxy composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 60 (2000)
2857–2863, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(00)00168-8.
[37] I. Van de Weyenberg, J. Ivens, A. De Coster, B. Kino, E. Baetens, I. Verpoest, Influence of processing and chemical treatment of flax fibres on their composites,
Compos. Sci. Technol. 63 (2003) 1241–1246, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00093-9.
[38] M.Z. Rong, M.Q. Zhang, Y. Liu, G.C. Yang, H.M. Zeng, The effect of fiber treatment on the mechanical properties of unidirectional sisal-reinforced epoxy
composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 61 (2001) 1437–1447, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(01)00046-X.
[39] Y. Xie, C.A.S. Hill, Z. Xiao, H. Militz, C. Mai, Silane coupling agents used for natural fiber/polymer composites: a review, Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 41
(2010) 806–819, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2010.03.005.
[40] M. Zimniewska, Hemp fiber properties and processing target textile: a review, Mater. (Basel) 15 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15051901.
[41] D.N. Saheb, J.P. Jog, 0Deec52E7C9B24B713000000.Pdf, J. Adv. Polym. Technol. 18 (1999) 351–363.
[42] H. Hargitai, I. Rácz, R. Anandjiwala, Development of hemp fiber reinforced polypropylene composites, Text. Sustain. Dev. (2007) 189–198.
[43] M.A. Alam, K. Al Riyami, Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beam using natural Fiber reinforced polymer laminates, Constr. Build. Mater. 162 (2018)
683–696, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.011.
[44] T. Jirawattanasomkul, S. Likitlersuang, N. Wuttiwannasak, T. Ueda, D. Zhang, M. Shono, Structural behaviour of pre-damaged reinforced concrete beams
strengthened with natural Fiber reinforced polymer composites, Compos. Struct. 244 (2020) 112309, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112309.
[45] S. Yinh, Q. Hussain, P. Joyklad, P. Chaimahawan, W. Rattanapitikon, S. Limkatanyu, A. Pimanmas, Strengthening effect of natural fiber reinforced polymer
composites (NFRP) on concrete, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 15 (2021) e00653, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00653.
[46] S. Suparp, Q. Hussain, P. Joyklad, Axial Compressive Behavior of Rope Fi Reinforced Polymer Composite Concrete, 134 (2018) 90–93. https://doi.org/10.2991/
ismems-17.2018.21.
[47] C. Yalburgimath, A. Rathod, S. Bhavanishankar, Retrofitting of Reinforced Concrete Beam Using Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) Fabric, Int. Res. J.
Eng. Technol. (2018).
[48] A. Nazir, M.Z. Ali, A.R. Wani, Structural retrofıttıng of reınforced concrete beams usıng carbon Fiber reınforced polymer, 2018. 〈https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.
2.2.17779.35368〉.
[49] Teknobond 200, (n.d.). 〈https://teknoyapi.com.tr/en/products/search/teknobond-200-epoxy-adhesive〉.
[50] M. Hamrat, F. Bouziadi, B. Boulekbache, T.H. Daouadji, S. Chergui, A. Labed, S. Amziane, Experimental and numerical investigation on the deflection behavior
of pre-cracked and repaired reinforced concrete beams with fiber-reinforced polymer, Constr. Build. Mater. 249 (2020) 118745, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2020.118745.
[51] A. Godat, P. Labossire, K.W. Neale, Numerical investigation of the parameters influencing the behaviour of FRP shear-strengthened beams, Constr. Build. Mater.
32 (2012) 90–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.11.110.
[52] N.K. Banjara, K. Ramanjaneyulu, Experimental and numerical investigations on the performance evaluation of shear deficient and GFRP strengthened reinforced
concrete beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 137 (2017) 520–534, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.01.089.

15