Cyclic performance of reinforced concrete T-beams strengthened in shear with fiber-reinforced polymer composites: Sheets versus laminates

Abstract

Much existing reinforced concrete (RC) civil infrastructure worldwide is in need of shear strengthening and rehabilitation. The use of externally bonded (EB) carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets and laminates to strengthen deficient RC beams in shear is now an acceptable and cost-effective practice, particularly under static loads. However, due to its complexity, the cyclic (fatigue) behavior and performance of shear-strengthened beams is not fully documented. Recently, use of CFRP continuous sheets wrapped over the shear length for fatigue upgrade has been studied. This technique may present drawbacks related to surface preparation and FRP debonding. Therefore, when possible, prefabricated CFRP L-shaped laminates can be a cost-effective alternative because they require less surface preparation and do not peel off easily. The objective of this paper was to present the results of an experimental investigation that compared cyclic (fatigue) and static (post-fatigue) behavior of two EB CFRP techniques (sheets vs. laminates) for shear retrofit of RC T-beams. In total, six laboratory tests on full-size 4520-mm-long beams were conducted. The specimens were subjected to fatigue loading of up to 6 million load cycles at a rate of 3 Hz. Specimens that sustained 6 million cycles were then tested monotonically up to failure. The variables examined in the paper were: (1) the EB CFRP strengthening scheme, and (2) the presence and ratio (spacing) of internal shear reinforcement. The test results confirmed the effectiveness of using EB CFRP shear-strengthening methods under cyclic loading. They also revealed that the fatigue performance of RC T-beams strengthened with L-shaped laminates is significantly superior in extending fatigue life compared to corresponding T-beams strengthened with U-wrapped sheets. This was quantified in terms of deflection response (47% increase due to fatigue loading for specimens with L-shaped laminates compared to 90% for specimens with U-wrapped sheets), and the level of increase in steel-stirrups strain range (9–42% vs. 62–114%) and in EB CFRP (36–97% vs. 58–163%).