Color profile: Disabled

Composite Default screen

Size effects in axially loaded square-section

concrete prisms strengthened using carbon fibre
reinforced polymer wrapping
Mark J. Masia, Trevor N. Gale, and Nigel G. Shrive

Abstract: The use of carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) wrapping to strengthen plain concrete prisms of square
cross section was investigated experimentally. The study was aimed at quantifying the increase in axial compressive
strength and ductility that can be achieved and assessing the effect of cross-sectional size on the increases. Thirty
prisms of three different square cross-sectional sizes (100 mm 100 mm 300 mm, 125 mm 125 mm 375 mm,
150 mm 150 mm 450 mm) were tested. Ten prisms were constructed in each size. Five prisms in each size were
left unwrapped as control specimens, and five were wrapped with two layers of unidirectional CFRP laminate. All
prisms were loaded in axial compression until failure. Significant increases in strength and ductility were achieved by
wrapping. The effectiveness of the wrap, as measured by the percentage increases in strength and peak axial strain, re-
duced with increasing cross-sectional size. These tests indicate that the use of CFRP wrapping is an effective technique
for strengthening and (or) rehabilitating concrete columns. Test results available in the literature by other authors are
also summarized. Although these results are highly scattered, they are consistent with the findings of the current tests.
Key words: concrete, prism, column, square, rehabilitation, strengthening, FRP, experimental.
Rsum : Lutilisation dun chemisage de polymres renforcs de fibres de carbone ( carbon fibre reinforced poly-
mer : CFRP ) pour renforcer des prismes en bton ordinaire de section carre a fait lobjet dune tude exprimentale.
Cette tude visait quantifier laugmentation de la rsistance en compression axiale et en ductilit qui peut tre at-
teinte et valuer leffet de la dimension de la section sur les augmentations. Trente prismes ont t tests, ayant trois
sections carrs diffrentes (100 mm 100 mm 300 mm, 125 mm 125 mm 375 mm et 150 mm 150 mm
450 mm). Dix prismes ont t construits dans chaque grosseur. Cinq prismes de chaque grosseur ont t laisss libres
de tout chemisage en tant que spcimens de contrle, et cinq ont t recouverts de deux couches de lamin CFRP uni-
directionnel. Tous les prismes ont t chargs en compression axiale jusqu la rupture. Le chemisage a permis
datteindre des augmentations importantes en rsistance et en ductilit. Lefficacit du chemisage, telle que mesure par
les augmentations de pourcentage en rsistance et en dformation maximale axiale diminuait en fonction de
laugmentation des dimensions de la section. Ces tests indiquent que lutilisation de chemisages en CFRP est une tech-
nique efficace pour renforcer et (ou) rhabiliter les colonnes de bton. Les rsultats des tests effectus par dautres au-
teurs et qui sont disponibles dans la littrature sont galement rsums. Bien que trs disperss, ces rsultats
concordent avec les rsultats des tests effectus.
Mots cls : bton, prisme, colonne, carr, rhabilitation, renforcement, FRP, exprimental.
[Traduit par la Rdaction] Masia et al. 13

Introduction tion of more stringent design code requirements. For eco-

Occasionally, an existing structure will reach a state
where it is no longer able to resist safely the loads acting
upon it. This may be a result of deterioration of the struc-
tural components, an increase in the loads, or the introduc-
nomic or heritage reasons it is often desirable to strengthen
or restore the existing structure rather than replace it with a
new structure. The use of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP)
wraps to confine concrete columns is one form of such
strengthening or rehabilitation that has received much atten-

Received 13 January 2003. Revision accepted 10 July 2003. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at http://cjce.nrc.ca on
12 January 2004.
M.J. Masia.1 Centre for Infrastructure Performance and Reliability, School of Engineering, The University of Newcastle, University
Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.
T.N. Gale. Hunter Water Australia (Engineering), PO Box 5007 HRMC, NSW 2310, Australia.
N.G. Shrive. Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4,
Canada.
Written discussion of this article is welcomed and will be received by the Editor until 30 June 2004.
1
Corresponding author (e-mail: mark.masia@newcastle.edu.au).

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 31: 113 (2004) doi: 10.1139/L03-064 2004 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:09:49 PM
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

2 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004

tion from the research community and has found significant Fig. 1. Confined area (Micelli et al. 2001).
use in practice. Several studies on the performance of FRP
wrapped columns have been conducted, using both experi-
mental and analytical approaches. The majority of such stud-
ies have focused on the performance of columns of circular
cross section. The data available for columns of square or
rectangular cross sections have increased over recent years
but are still limited.
We, therefore, carried out an experimental study into the
use of carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) wrapping to
strengthen square-section concrete columns. The study used
plain concrete prisms and was aimed at quantifying the in-
crease in axial compressive strength and ductility that can be
achieved and, in particular, assessing the effect of
cross-sectional size on the increases. As far as the authors
are aware, no other experimental study has explicitly ad-
dressed the effect of column size on the increases in strength Fig. 2. Confined area (Thriault and Neale 2000).
and ductility achieved by FRP wrapping of square-section
concrete columns. The current paper, therefore, adds to the
limited data available for square-section columns against
which numerical models and design equations can be
checked and (or) refined.
In the assessment of the influence of column
cross-sectional size on the strengthening achieved by CFRP
wrapping, greater confinement of smaller columns was ex-
pected. The rationale for this expectation is developed in the
following paragraphs. The experimental program was de-
signed to investigate this effect systematically, and the re-
sults are reported in the following sections. fined area as shown in Fig. 2. Shrive et al. (2003) and Parvin
For FRP wrapped, axially loaded columns the design phi- and Wang (2001) draw similar conclusions regarding the
losophy relies on the wrap to carry tensile forces around the confined area using nonlinear finite element analyses for
perimeter of the column as a result of lateral expansion of square-section columns that have had the corners chamfered
the underlying column when loaded axially in compression. or rounded prior to wrapping.
Constraining the lateral expansion of the column confines When wrapping square- or rectangular-section concrete
the concrete and thereby increases its axial compressive ca- columns with FRPs it is usual first to round or chamfer the
pacity. It should be emphasized that passive confinement of column corners to prevent damage to the FRP fabric at the
this type requires significant lateral expansion of the con- sharp column corner. Thriault and Neale (2000) recom-
crete before the CFRP is loaded and confinement is initiated. mend minimum corner radii of b/6 or 35 mm, whichever is
Experimental results reported by several authors for CFRP larger, where b is the side length of the square-column cross
wrapped concrete columns indicate that tensile strains in the section.
CFRP sheets are negligible prior to reaching 60%70% of Rochette and Labossire (2000) have shown experimen-
the ultimate column strength (Purba and Mufti 1999; tally that for concrete columns the strength and ductility
Rochette and Labossire 2000; Demers and Neale 1999). gains achieved by wrapping increase with the radius of the
For columns square or rectangular in cross section the column corner, implying that as the corner radius is in-
confinement is effective at the column corners only with creased, the confined area increases. This concept is illus-
negligible resistance to lateral expansion being provided trated in Fig. 3. Conversely, for a fixed corner radius, as the
along the flat column sides (Thriault and Neale 2000; column section size is increased, the ratio of confined area
Demers and Neale 1999). The result is that not all the col- to total cross-sectional area will reduce. Pessiki et al. (2001)
umn cross section is effectively confined. The increased provide an equation for square- or rectangular-column cross
compressive strength due to confinement can only be acti- sections that can be used to illustrate this effect. They define
vated over the so-called confined area. Various authors a shape factor, s, as the ratio of the confined area Ac to
have discussed this effect, based mainly on the work of the total section area AT. Limiting the expression of Pessiki
Mander et al. (1988). Micelli et al. (2001) describe the con- et el. (2001) to square sections and plain concrete allows s
fined area as bounded by parabolas extending from the col- to be expressed as a function of the ratio of the column side
umn corners (Fig. 1). They confirmed this experimentally length b to corner radius r (eq. [1]).
from the observed cracking pattern over the cross sections of
natural stone masonry columns confined with CFRP wraps. Ac 2(b / r 2) 2
[1] s = =1
Micelli et al. (2001) state On the upper surface of the speci- AT 3(b / r) 2
men, parabolic-shaped cracks indicated the trajectories along
which the confinement stresses had spread along the cross The ratio Ac/AT or s is plotted against b/r in Fig. 4. The
section. Thriault and Neale (2000) conceptualize the con- plot clearly shows the decrease in the ratio of confined area

2004 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:09:50 PM
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen
Masia et al.
Fig. 3. Effect of corner radius on confined area: (a) small radius
and (b) large radius.
to total area as the column side length b is increased for a
fixed corner radius r.
The theoretical ultimate effective confining pressure fconf
on the core concrete of a square cross section due to FRP
wrapping can be related to the strength of the wrap fuw and
thickness of the wrap tw using the formula for hoop stress
(eq. [2]) (Pessiki et al. 2001; Purba and Mufti 1999; Parent
and Labossire 2000).
2t w fuw
[2] fconf = s loaded axially until failure. A detailed description of the ex-
b
Equation [2] implies that the confining pressure is a function
not only of the shape s, which may be influenced by the
size, but also of the size b of the cross section directly. For a
given ratio b/r and thickness of the wrap, the effective con-
fining pressure reduces as the column cross-sectional size is
increased. That is, as size increases, the maximum confining
pressure available from a given thickness of wrap is reduced.
The ratio of the compressive strength of confined concrete
fcc to the compressive strength of the unconfined concrete fc
increases with the ratio fconf:fc (Mander et al. 1988). There-
fore, the percentage strength increase achieved by wrapping
a square-section column is expected to decrease as the col-
umn size increases. Further to this, substitution in design
equations proposed by Thriault and Neale (2000) for axi-
ally loaded rectangular or square-section concrete columns
also indicates that the compressive strength of the confined
concrete decreases as cross-sectional dimensions of the col-
umn are increased.
Although previous experimental studies have not explic-
itly addressed size effect, trends can be investigated by col-
lecting results from various sources. Table 1 summarizes test
results from a variety of sources for tests on unwrapped U
and wrapped W square-section concrete columns and prisms
subjected to axial compression. Differences in FRP proper-
I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:09:52 PM
3
Fig. 4. Confined area versus cross-sectional size.
ties and thicknesses, corner radii, and the presence of rein-
forcing steel in some of the specimens make direct compari-
sons among the various results difficult, and any attempt to
plot the trends would be potentially misleading. However,
the results reported in Table 1 indicate that as the square
cross-sectional size is increased, the percentage increases
observed in peak axial stress and peak axial strain as a result
of FRP wrapping are diminished. This is consistent with the
above theoretical discussion. However, the results are highly
scattered, emphasizing the need for a systematic and con-
trolled investigation of the effect of cross-sectional size.
Experimental program
The aim was to assess the increases in strength and ductil-
ity under axial compressive loading for square-section plain
concrete prisms achieved by wrapping with CFRP sheets. In
particular, the study aimed to quantify the effect of the
cross-sectional size on the increases in strength and ductility.
Thirty prisms were tested in three different sizes, five un-
wrapped and five wrapped in each size. Each prism was
perimental procedure follows.
Specimen construction
Thirty prisms of three different square cross-sectional
sizes (100 mm 100 mm 300 mm, 125 mm 125 mm
375 mm, 150 mm 150 mm 450 mm) were constructed
(Fig. 5). Ten prisms were constructed in each size by labora-
tory staff at the Civil Engineering Laboratory at The Univer-
sity of Newcastle. The concrete was cast in plywood forms.
Along the vertical edges of the prisms a radius of 25 mm
fillet was formed by including suitable block outs in the
formwork. Although this value satisfies the b/6 limit sug-
gested by Thriault and Neale (2000), it does not meet the
recommended minimum corner radius of 35 mm. However,
Rochette and Labossire (1996) report tests in which signifi-
cant strength increases have been achieved for wrapped
prisms with corner radii of 25 mm. It was considered that
corner radii greater than 25 mm would result in the smallest
cross section becoming too close to being circular.
The choice of cross-sectional sizes was limited on the one
hand by the capacity of the testing machine and on the other
hand by the need to provide at least a 25 mm corner radius
while still maintaining an essentially square cross section.
The testing machine used had a capacity of 1.8 MN. Pre-
dictions of expected strength increases due to CFRP wrap-
2004 NRC Canada
 4
Table 1. Test results from other sources for square-section prisms and columns.
Strength (MPa) Peak axial strain (%)
3 a
Source fc (MPa) Specimen size, b h r (mm ) FRP/layers (properties) U W % inc U W % inca
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

29

January 6, 2004 3:09:52 PM

Azarnejad et al. 2000 53 200 1200 20 chamfer CFRP/2 53 68.2

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
fuw = 958 MPa
Ew = 73 GPa
uw = 0.0133
tw = 1.0 mm/layer
53 200 1200 20 chamfer CFRP/2 (as above) 53 70.3 33
Feng et al. 2002 21.1 200 600 20 (steel rebar also) GFRP/1 20.7 26.9 30 0.27 1.48 448
fuw = 900 MPa
Ew = 65 GPa
tw = 0.304 mm/layer
21.1 200 600 20 (steel rebar also) GFRP/2 (as above) 20.7 27.0 30 0.27 1.88 596
21.1 200 600 20 (steel rebar also) GFRP/3 (as above) 20.7 29.0 40 0.27 1.93 615
21.1 200 600 20 (steel rebar also) CFRP/1 20.7 26.3 27 0.27 1.18 337
fuw = 3550 MPa
Ew = 235 GPa
tw = 0.111 mm/layer
Mirmiran et al. 1998 40.6 152.5 305 6.35 GFRP/1.45 mm thick 40.6 43.6 7
fuw = 2186 MPa
Ew = 69.6 GPa
40.6 152.5 305 6.35 GFRP/2.21 mm thick (as above) 40.6 45.0 11
40.6 152.5 305 6.35 GFRP/2.97 mm thick (as above) 40.6 45.0 11
Parvin and Wang 2001 21.4 108 305 8.26 CFRP/1 22.6 34.7 54 0.17 1.32 695
fuw = 3800 MPa
Ew = 189 GPa
uw = 0.016
tw = 0.165 mm/layer
21.4 108 305 8.26 CFRP/2 (as above) 22.6 45.2 100 0.17 2.03 1120
Pessiki et al. 2001 26.4 152 610 38 CFRP/1 26.4 41.4 57 0.28 1.33 375
fuw = 580 N/mm/ply
Ew = 38.1 kN/mm/ply
uw = 0.015
26.4 152 610 38 CFRP/2 (as above) 26.4 55.1 109 0.28 1.70 507
26.4 457 1830 38 (steel rebar also) CFRP/3 (as above) 31.5 37.4 19 0.21 0.23 10
26.4 457 1830 38 (steel rebar also) GFRP/3 31.5 35.5 13 0.21 0.35 67
fuw = 383 N/mm/ply
Ew = 21.6 kN/mm/ply
uw = 0.019
Rochette and Labossire 2000 42 152 500 5 CFRP/3 42.6 39.5 7 0.69
fuw = 1265 MPa
Ew = 82.7 GPa
uw = 0.015
tw = 0.30 mm/layer

2004 NRC Canada

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004
 Table 1 (continued).
Strength (MPa) Peak axial strain (%)
3 a
Source fc (MPa) Specimen size, b h r (mm ) FRP/layers (properties) U W % inc U W % inca
Masia et al.
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

42 152 500 25 CFRP/3 (as above) 42.6 42.4 0 0.92

January 6, 2004 3:09:53 PM

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
42 152 500 38 CFRP/3 (as above) 42.6 48.9 15 1.12
43.9 152 500 5 CFRP/5 (as above) 43.9 43.9 0 1.02
43.9 152 500 25 CFRP/4 (as above) 43.9 50.9 16 1.35
43.9 152 500 25 CFRP/5 (as above) 43.9 47.9 9 0.90
35.8 152 500 25 CFRP/4 (as above) 35.4 52.3 48 2.04
35.8 152 500 25 CFRP/5 (as above) 35.4 57.6 63 2.12
35.8 152 500 38 CFRP/4 (as above) 35.4 59.4 68 1.92
35.8 152 500 38 CFRP/5 (as above) 35.4 68.7 94 2.39
Rochette and Labossire 2000 43 152 500 5 AFRP/3 43.0 50.7 18 1.06
fuw = 230 MPa
Ew = 13.6 GPa
uw = 0.0169
tw = 0.42 mm/layer
43 152 500 5 AFRP/6 (as above) 43.0 51.6 20 1.49
43 152 500 5 AFRP/9 (as above) 43.0 53.8 25 2.08
43 152 500 5 AFRP/12 (as above) 43.0 54.2 26 1.24
43 152 500 25 AFRP/3 (as above) 43.0 51.2 19 0.79
43 152 500 25 AFRP/6 (as above) 43.0 51.2 19 0.97
43 152 500 25 AFRP/9 (as above) 43.0 53.3 24 1.10
43 152 500 25 AFRP/12 (as above) 43.0 55.0 28 1.26
43 152 500 38 AFRP/6 (as above) 43.0 50.7 18 0.96
43 152 500 38 AFRP/9 (as above) 43.0 52.9 23 1.18
SEQAD 1996 37 207 610 20 GFRP/1 37 39.2 6 0.57
Ew = 23 GPa
tw = 1.27 mm/layer
37 207 610 20 GFRP/2 (as above) 37 40.4 9 0.45
37 207 610 20 GFRP/4 (as above) 37 42.7 15 0.59
Shehata et al. 2002 25 150 300 10 CFRP/1 23.7 27.4 16
fuw = 3550 MPa
Ew = 235 GPa
uw = 0.015
tw = 0.165 mm/layer
25 150 300 10 CFRP/2 (as above) 23.7 36.5 54
30 150 300 10 CFRP/1 (as above) 29.5 40.4 37 0.16 0.88 450
30 150 300 10 CFRP/2 (as above) 29.5 43.7 48 0.16 1.23 669
Tsai and Lin 2002 25 280 1200 30 (steel rebar also) CFRP/2 38.4 49.4 29 0.90 1.66 84
fuw = 3550 MPa
Ew = 235 GPa
uw = 0.015
tw = 0.1375 mm/layer
25 280 1200 30 (steel rebar also) CFRP/3 (as above) 38.4 57.4 49 0.90 2.90 222

2004 NRC Canada

5
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

6 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004

% inca
Fig. 5. Specimen dimensions.

900

2050
Peak axial strain (%)

2.00

4.30
W
0.20

0.20
a
U
% inc
20

91
Strength (MPa)

28.0

44.8
W
23.4

23.4
U

ping were made based on results from previously reported

tests (Demers and Neale 1999; Rochette and Labossire
1996, 2000). Allowing a factor of safety for the testing ma-
chine and a target unconfined mean concrete strength of
FRP/layers (properties)

25 MPa, the largest prism cross section was set at 150 mm

tw = 1.27 mm/layer

150 mm. The relatively low concrete strength was selected

GFRP/6 (as above)

to allow the cross-sectional size to be maximized.

Ew = 20.5 GPa
fuw = 375 MPa

The smallest cross section of 100 mm 100 mm was se-

Note: U, unwrapped prism specimen; W, wrapped prism specimen; AFRP, aramid fibre reinforced polymer.
uw = 0.02

lected to achieve a side length at least four times the corner

GFRP/2

radius for a corner radius of 25 mm. An intermediate

cross-sectional size was selected between these values. It
would be preferable to test larger cross-sectional sizes, as
they are more representative of columns used in service.
However, it was considered that the sizes chosen could still
300 900 30 (steel rebar also)

300 900 30 (steel rebar also)

3
Specimen size, b h r (mm )

be used to establish trends regarding the influence of

cross-sectional size on the effectiveness of the wrapping.
The prism heights h were determined by adopting a con-
stant aspect ratio of 3:1 (h:b) for all specimens. This ratio
was used to allow the study of column behavior over the
middle one third of the height that should be free from end
effects while still ensuring short column behavior.
After casting, the specimens were left for 24 h, the form-
Percentage increase in peak axial stress or peak axial strain.

work stripped from them, and then they were cured in a fog
room for 17 d. The specimens were then removed from the
fog room and allowed to dry in the laboratory. In each of the
three size categories, five of the prisms were wrapped with
CFRP (Sika Wrap Hex-230) and five were left unwrapped
fc (MPa)

for use as control specimens. For the wrapped prisms, the

13.5

13.5

concrete surface was roughened by careful abrasion with an

angle grinder and all dust was removed by blowing with
compressed air. Epoxy adhesive was applied to the concrete
surface using a lamb skin roller. The unidirectional CFRP
fabric was then applied with the strong direction aligned
Wang and Restrepo 2001

horizontally. For each prism, the fabric was cut in a single

Table 1 (concluded).

sheet that was wrapped around the perimeter of the prism to

form two complete layers with an overlap that resulted in a
third layer on one face (Fig. 6). The fabric was pulled tight
by hand and all air bubbles were removed by rolling with a
smooth hand roller. Sufficient adhesive was used to ensure
Source

complete wetting of the fabric. The adhesive was allowed to

a

cure for at least 7 d prior to testing.

2004 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:09:53 PM
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

Masia et al. 7

Fig. 6. Detail for CFRP wrapping. Fig. 7. Typical unwrapped prism specimen.

All prisms, unwrapped and wrapped, were sulphur capped

at both ends to ensure even and parallel loading surfaces.
The prisms were tested at a concrete age of 50 d.

Testing of unwrapped prisms

Each of the fifteen unwrapped prisms was loaded axially
in compression until failure occurred. The test machine used
was displacement controlled. The upper loading platen in-
corporated a spherical seat to help ensure concentric loading.
Two of the five prisms of each size were instrumented
with linear potentiometers, one on each face, at approxi-
mately mid-face (Fig. 7). The potentiometers were posi-
tioned over a gauge length equal to one-third of the prism
height (gauge lengths of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm re-
spectively for the three prism sizes) and centered about
mid-height. The use of four transducers allowed to check
that the loading was concentric. The vertical deflection at
each transducer and the axial load were recorded at intervals
of 1 s during testing. The four transducer readings were av-
eraged to allow plotting of axial load versus axial deflection,
and from this, axial stress versus axial strain. The axial
stress was found simply by dividing the axial load by the
cross-sectional area (b2 minus the area lost in corner round-
ing) and is therefore averaged over the cross section. The ac-
tual distribution of axial stress over the cross section may
not be uniform, particularly for the wrapped prisms after the
concrete is cracked and the CFRP wrap is loaded signifi-
cantly.
For the remaining three prisms in each size category, only
the peak load was recorded.
During previous tests on CFRP wrapped masonry col-
umns (Masia and Shrive 2003), the authors observed prema-
ture failures at the column ends, particularly in the CFRP
laminate for the wrapped columns. This led to the use of
steel end confining brackets to ensure failure away from the
column ends. Similar end confining brackets were fabricated
for the current tests and used for all prisms, both unwrapped
and wrapped (Fig. 7). The brackets were designed to confine
the prisms over a height of 50 mm at each end of the prisms.
Rubber packing was used between the steel brackets and the
specimen to protect the specimen. This was particularly im-
portant for the CFRP wrapped prisms to prevent damage to
the laminate.
Testing of carbon fibre reinforced polymer wrapped
prisms
The 15 CFRP wrapped prisms were each loaded to failure.
The same instrumentation was used as for the unwrapped
tests, except in the case of the wrapped tests, three of the
five prisms in each size category were instrumented. In addi-
tion to this, two of the prisms in each size with linear poten-
tiometers were also fitted with strain gauges on the CFRP
laminate. For these prisms a strain gauge was placed at
mid-face on two opposite faces of the prism. The gauges
were aligned horizontally on the outside surface of the wrap
to record the tensile strain in the CFRP at intervals of 1 s
during loading. The height of gauge placement varied be-
tween specimens but was always within the middle third of
the height. In all cases, the gauges were placed on faces with
only two layers of CFRP fabric.
Material properties
The specimens were cast using two batches of concrete to
reduce formwork requirements. Five prisms of each size
were cast using each batch. The same mix design was used

2004 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:10:02 PM
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen
8 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004
for both batches. The concrete compressive strengths were
tested using 100 mm diameter, 200 mm high cylinders, in
accordance with the Australian standard AS 1012.9 (Stan-
dards Australia 1999). The cylinders were subjected to the
same curing conditions as the prism specimens, and the
compressive strength tests were conducted at the same time
as testing of the prism specimens. The mean compressive
strength for batch 1 was 27.2 MPa (standard deviation
1.4 MPa) and for batch 2, 26.8 MPa (standard deviation
1.3 MPa). The consistency achieved between the two
batches allowed direct comparison of results between prism
specimens from each batch assuming the same concrete
properties.
The CFRP fabric (Sika Wrap Hex-230) had the follow-
ing properties: thickness, 0.13 mm; tensile strength,
3500 MPa; elastic modulus, 230 GPa; and elongation at
break, 1.5% (information sourced from manufacturer data
sheet). The fabric was unidirectional with a nonstructural
weave in the secondary direction to hold the fabric together.
The fabric was laminated to the prisms using Sikadur 330
epoxy. Carbon fibre reinforced polymer was selected in pref-
erence to glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) because its
higher stiffness provides a higher level of confinement for a
given thickness of wrap.
Specimen naming convention
The prism specimens and associated tests are identified
using a three character naming code. The first letter indi-
cates unwrapped U or wrapped W, the second indicates
specimen size (small S, medium M, or large L), and the
third is the specimen number (1 to 5). For example, WM3
is a 125 mm 125 mm 375 mm wrapped prism, specimen
number 3 of 5.
Results and discussion
The results for all tests are summarized in Table 2 and
Figs. 814. The linear potentiometer data for test US2 were
unfortunately lost.
In Table 2, peak axial strain is the largest value of the
mean of the four transducer readings divided by the appro-
priate gauge length. Note that peak axial strain does not nec-
essarily coincide with peak axial stress, although this was
the case for many of the CFRP wrapped prisms.
The axial stiffness for each prism was calculated based
on the procedure for determining the elastic modulus E of
concrete described in AS 1012.17 (Standards Australia
1997). For the unwrapped prisms this involved determining
the slope of a chord drawn between two points on the plot of
axial stress versus axial strain corresponding to (i) a strain of
50 106 and (ii) a stress equal to 40% of the peak axial
stress. This chord falls well within the elastic response re-
gion of the stressstrain curve for the unwrapped prisms. For
the wrapped prisms 40% of the peak axial stress approaches
the transition point where the prism behaviour is becoming
inelastic and nonlinear. Therefore, the wrapped stiffnesses
were calculated using a chord terminating at 40% of the un-
wrapped peak axial load, averaged for all unwrapped speci-
mens in each size category. This approach ensured that the
unwrapped and wrapped stiffnesses were calculated over
similar portions of the elastic response region and allowed a
I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:10:03 PM
more direct comparison between unwrapped and wrapped
stiffnesses. The unusually large axial stiffness calculated for
specimen WS3 (Table 2) was ignored in calculating the
mean stiffness for the WS prisms.
The peak CFRP strain is the largest tensile strain re-
corded in the CFRP laminate, averaged between the two
strain gauges on each specimen.
Unwrapped prisms
The unwrapped prisms displayed behaviour typical of
plain concrete loaded in compression (Fig. 8). In the failed
state, the prisms displayed vertical and diagonal cracking
and diagonal cone or pyramid cracking near the confined
ends, similar to that observed in cylindrical compression test
specimens.
The mean values of peak axial stress, peak axial strain,
and axial stiffness appear to be independent of specimen size
(Table 2).
Carbon fibre reinforced polymer wrapped prisms
The axial stressstrain responses for the wrapped prisms
are shown in Fig. 9. In each case, the response was essen-
tially linear until the compressive strength of the unconfined
concrete was achieved (around 25 MPa). At that point the
curves flattened significantly and then followed another es-
sentially linear branch until ultimate failure occurred when
the CFRP wrap ruptured. Other than the changing shape of
the stressstrain curve, the only signs of distress prior to the
final sudden failure were faint audible creaking sounds.
It is believed that the sudden loss of axial stiffness at the
unconfined compressive strength is due to the concrete be-
coming significantly cracked. Prior to that point the CFRP
tensile strains are very small (Figs. 1012), indicating insig-
nificant contribution from the wrap. As the concrete cracks
it dilates but is confined by the CFRP wrap that begins to
develop stress in hoop tension. The prism continues to sup-
port more load by transferring more hoop stress into the
CFRP wrap. Final failure occurs when the brittle CFRP
wrap suddenly ruptures.
Typically the wrap ruptured over a height between 50 and
100 mm (Fig. 15). The end confining brackets ensured fail-
ure did not occur at the prism ends. In most cases the rup-
ture occurred at a corner. For a small number of specimens
the rupture was mid-face. The measured peak CFRP strains,
which ranged from 0.77% to 1.22%, were less than the ulti-
mate breaking strain of 1.5% reported by the CFRP manu-
facturer. These strains were measured mid-face, and it is
likely that the strains were higher at the location of the rup-
tures. The strains recorded indicate that much of the CFRP
laminate was not able to achieve its ultimate strain. It is be-
lieved that one source of stress concentration in the CFRP
laminate arises where the laminate bridges underlying cracks
in the concrete (Pessiki et al. 2001). This could be a possible
explanation for the laminate rupturing at mid-face for some
specimens. Another source is associated with the corner de-
tail. The recorded strains highlight the need to provide a sig-
nificant corner radius to prevent stress concentrations and
(or) damage in the CFRP laminate. For the current tests, a
larger corner radius of 35 mm as suggested by Thriault and
Neale (2000) may have helped prevent the laminate punch-
ing observed at the corners for most specimens.
2004 NRC Canada
 Masia et al.
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

January 6, 2004 3:10:03 PM

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
Table 2. Test results for current tests.
Unwrapped Wrapped
Specimen Peak axial Peak axial Peak axial Axial stiffness, Specimen Peak axial Peak axial Peak axial Axial stiffness, Peak CFRP
No. load (kN) stress (MPa) strain (%) E (MPa) No. load (kN) stress (MPa) strain (%) E (MPa) strain (%)
US1 242 25.5 0.26 31 519 WS1 529 55.9 2.00 35 520 1.22
US2 216 22.8 WS2 461 48.7 1.82 35 715 0.92
US3 238 25.1 WS3 433 45.7 1.47 66 099
US4 225 23.8 WS4 480 50.7
US5 205 21.7 WS5 532 56.2
Mean Mean
225 23.8 0.26 31 519 487 51.4 1.76 35 618 1.07
Increases unwrapped to wrapped (%)
116 116 577 13
UM1 357 23.7 0.22 29 528 WM1 679 45.0 1.62 35 777 0.89
UM2 345 22.9 0.27 32 794 WM2 602 39.9 1.55 32 267 1.12
UM3 388 25.7 WM3 636 42.1 1.72 31 720
UM4 385 25.5 WM4 535 35.5
UM5 366 24.3 WM5 607 40.2
Mean Mean
368 24.4 0.25 31 161 612 40.5 1.63 33 255 1.01
Increases unwrapped to wrapped (%)
66 66 552 7
UL1 538 24.5 WL1 784 35.7 1.06 36 451 0.79
UL2 467 21.3 WL2 795 36.2 1.09 37 320 0.77
UL3 544 24.8 0.25 30 159 WL3 803 36.6 1.52 34 506
UL4 518 23.6 0.21 31 700 WL4 801 36.5
UL5 555 25.3 WL5 791 36.0
Mean Mean
524 23.9 0.23 30 930 795 36.2 1.22 36 092 0.78
Increases unwrapped to wrapped (%)
52 52 430 17

2004 NRC Canada

9
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen
10
Fig. 8. Axial stress versus axial strain for unwrapped prisms.
Fig. 9. Axial stress versus axial strain for unwrapped and
wrapped prisms.
Comparison unwrapped to wrapped
The following observations are clearly displayed in Ta-
ble 2 and Figs. 914:
The ultimate strength of the prisms was significantly in-
creased by CFRP wrapping (up to 116% for the
100 mm 100 mm 300 mm prisms).
The ductility was significantly increased by CFRP wrap-
ping (peak axial strain increased 577% for the 100 mm
100 mm 300 mm prisms). The area under the axial
stressstrain curve, which is a measure of the energy ab-
I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:10:10 PM
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004
Fig. 10. Axial stress versus CFRP strain and axial strain for
small wrapped prisms.
Fig. 11. Axial stress versus CFRP strain and axial strain for me-
dium wrapped prisms.
Fig. 12. Axial stress versus CFRP strain and axial strain for
large wrapped prisms.
sorbed during deformation, was also significantly
increased by wrapping.
The CFRP wrap remained essentially unloaded until the
unconfined concrete strength was reached (Figs. 1012).
The wrap is therefore of little benefit to the serviceability
performance of columns and benefits only in the overload
region. Despite this, increases in axial stiffness due to
wrapping, calculated from the working stress range of the
elastic response, averaged 12% over the three prism sizes.
As expected, the percentage strength increases achieved
by wrapping reduced as the cross-sectional size was in-
creased for a fixed corner radius (Figs. 9 and 13). Consis-
tent with this, the recorded peak CFRP strain reduced
2004 NRC Canada
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen
Masia et al.
Fig. 13. Effect of size on peak axial stress.
Fig. 14. Effect of size on peak axial strain.
with increasing size (Table 2), indicating reduced effec-
tiveness of the confinement.
The percentage increases in peak axial strain achieved by
wrapping reduced slightly as the cross-sectional size was
increased for a fixed corner radius (Figs. 9 and 14). The
effect of prism size on the increase of peak-axial strain
was not as significant as its effect on the increase of
strength.
Comparison with results by other authors
Test results from a variety of sources for axially loaded
unwrapped and FRP wrapped square-section concrete col-
umns and prisms are summarized in Table 1. The results are
highly scattered but in general are consistent with the trends
observed for the current tests. The review of literature re-
veals a distinct lack of data for column cross sections larger
than 200 mm 200 mm in size.
For the current tests the plots of axial stress versus axial
strain for all wrapped prisms indicate a strain hardening re-
sponse (Fig. 9). In numerous cases, other authors (Pessiki et
al. 2001; Rochette and Labossire 2000; Mirmiran et al.
1998) have reported descending post peak responses for
square-section wrapped prisms and columns. The latter rep-
resents less effective confinement, which arises for insuffi-
ciently stiff wraps and insufficient corner radii and also
I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:10:17 PM
11
Fig. 15. Typical failure for the wrapped prisms.
occurs as the cross-sectional size is increased. It would be
useful for designers to be aware of the conditions under
which the stressstrain response changes from strain harden-
ing to post peak softening. Mirmiran et al. (1998) use a
modified confinement ratio (MCR) (from Rochette (1996))
for square-section columns of the form
2rfconf
[3] MCR =
bfc
where the confinement pressure fconf is given by
2t w fuw
[4] fconf =
b
Using test results on square-section prisms, Mirmiran et
al. (1998) show that for values of MCR less than 0.15 a post
peak descending branch was observed in the axial stress ver-
sus axial strain response. For the tests reported in the current
paper eqs. [3] and [4] were used to calculate MCR values of
0.34, 0.22, and 0.15 for the small (100 mm 100 mm
300 mm), medium (125 mm 125 mm 375 mm), and
large (150 mm 150 mm 450 mm) specimens, respec-
tively. The results of current tests were consistent with those
reported by Mirmiran et al. (1998) and showed a hardening
response in all cases with the response flattening with in-
creasing cross-sectional size (reducing MCR).
An extension of the current tests to larger cross sections is
needed to investigate this important effect further.
2004 NRC Canada
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen
12
Conclusions
An experimental investigation was reported on the effect
of cross-sectional size on the increases in strength and duc-
tility under axial compression achieved by
FRP-wrapping-square concrete prisms.
Theoretical models proposed in the literature imply re-
duced effectiveness of the confinement with increasing
cross-sectional size, but no previous experimental studies
have explicitly investigated this effect. A review of available
experimental data from various sources loosely confirms the
expected trends, but the data are highly scattered. The aim of
the current experimental program was to investigate this ef-
fect systematically.
For the current tests, the ultimate strength and peak axial
strain of the prisms was significantly increased by CFRP
wrapping. The CFRP wrap remained essentially unloaded
until the unconfined concrete strength was reached. The
wrap is therefore of little benefit to the serviceability perfor-
mance of prisms and columns and has benefit only in the
overload region. As expected, the percentage strength in-
creases achieved by wrapping reduced as the prism
cross-sectional size was increased for a fixed corner radius,
indicating reduced effectiveness of the confinement. The
percentage increases in peak axial strain achieved by wrap-
ping reduced slightly as the cross-sectional size was in-
creased. The effect of size on the increase in peak axial
strain was not as significant as its effect on the increase in
strength.
The current tests displayed strain hardening responses for
all the wrapped prisms. Further tests are essential. Larger
cross sections, representative of columns used in practice,
should be tested to investigate the transition to descending
post peak responses. That is, the large increases in strength
and ductility observed for small-scale square specimens
should not be directly extrapolated to real size columns.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance pro-
vided during the testing program by the laboratory staff at
The University of Newcastle, Civil Engineering Laboratory.
References
Azarnejad, A., Tadros, G., Shrive, N.G., and McWhinnie, K. 2000.
Column strengthening with CFRP wraps. In Proceedings of the
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering Structural Conference,
London, Ont., 710 June 2000. Edited by D. McTavish. Cana-
dian Society for Civil Engineering, Montral, Que. pp. 200207.
Demers, M., and Neale, K.W. 1999. Confinement of reinforced
concrete columns with fibre-reinforced composite sheets an
experimental study. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 26:
226241.
Feng, P., Lu, X.Z., and Ye, L.P. 2002. Experimental research and
finite element analysis of square concrete columns confined by
FRP sheets under uniaxial compression. In Proceedings of the
17th Australasian Conference on the Mechanics of Structures
and Materials, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, 1214 June
2002. Edited by Y.-C. Loo, S.H. Chowdhury and S. Fragomeni.
A.A. Balkema, Lisse, The Netherlands. pp. 7176.
I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:10:17 PM
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004
Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N., and Park, R. 1988. Theoretical
stress strain model for confined concrete. ASCE Journal of
Structural Engineering, 114(8): 18041826.
Masia, M.J., and Shrive, N.G. 2003. Carbon fibre reinforced poly-
mer wrapping for the rehabilitation of masonry columns. Cana-
dian Journal of Civil Engineering, 30: 734744.
Micelli, F., Galati, N., De Lorenzis, L., and La Tegola, A. 2001.
Confinement of natural block masonry columns using fibre rein-
forced polymer rebars and laminates. In Proceedings of the 9th
Canadian Masonry Symposium, Fredericton, N.B., 46 June
2001. Edited by P.H. Bischoff, J.L. Dawe, A.B. Schriver, and
A.J. Valsangar. Department of Civil Engineering, University of
New Brunswick, Fredericton, N.B. CD ROM.
Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., Samaan, M., El Echary, H., Mastrapa,
J.C., and Pico, O. 1998. Effect of column parameters on
FRP-confined concrete. ASCE Journal of Composites for Con-
struction, 2(4): 175185.
Parent, S., and Labossire, P. 2000. Finite element analysis of rein-
forced concrete columns confined with composite materials. Ca-
nadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 27: 400411.
Parvin, A., and Wang, W. 2001. Behavior of FRP jacketed concrete
columns under eccentric loading. ASCE Journal of Composites
for Construction, 5(3): 146152.
Pessiki, S., Harries, K.A., Kestner, J.T., Sause, R., and Ricles, J.M.
2001. Axial behaviour of reinforced concrete columns confined
with FRP jackets. ASCE Journal of Composites for Construc-
tion, 5(4): 237245.
Purba, B.K., and Mufti, A.A. 1999. Investigation of the behaviour
of circular concrete columns reinforced with carbon fibre rein-
forced polymer (CFRP) jackets. Canadian Journal of Civil Engi-
neering, 26: 590596.
Rochette, P. 1996. Confinement of short square and rectangular
columns with composite materials. M.Sc. thesis, University of
Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Que.
Rochette, P., and Labossire, P. 1996. A plasticity approach for
concrete columns confined with composite materials. In Pro-
ceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advanced
Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, Montral, Que.,
1114 August 1996. Edited by M.M. El-Badry. Canadian Soci-
ety for Civil Engineering, Montral, Que. pp. 359366.
Rochette, P., and Labossire, P. 2000. Axial testing of rectangular
columns models confined with composites. ASCE Journal of
Composites for Construction, 4(3): 129136.
SEQAD. 1996. Axial load characteristics of rectangular columns
wrapped with TYFO-S jackets. Report No. 96/04, prepared for
Hexcell Fyfe Inc., SEQAD Consulting Engineers, Solana Beach,
Calif.
Shehata, I.A.E.M., Carneiro, L.A.V., and Shehata, L.C.D. 2002.
Strength of short concrete columns confined with CFRP sheets.
Materials and Structures, 35: 5058.
Shrive, P.L., Azarnejad, A., Tadros, G., McWhinnie, K., and
Shrive, N.G. 2003. Strengthening of concrete columns with car-
bon fibre reinforced polymer wrap. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 30: 543554.
Standards Australia. 1997. Methods of testing concrete method
17: determination of the static chord modulus of elasticity and
Poissons ratio of concrete specimens. AS 1012.17. Standards
Australia, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia.
Standards Australia. 1999. Methods of testing concrete method
9: determination of the compressive strength of concrete. AS
1012.9. Standards Australia, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia.
Thriault, M., and Neale, K.W. 2000. Design equations for axially
loaded reinforced concrete columns strengthened with fibre rein-
2004 NRC Canada
Color profile: Disabled
Composite Default screen

Masia et al. 13

forced polymer wraps. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering,
27: 10111020.
Tsai, K.C., and Lin, M.L. 2002. Seismic jacketing of rc columns
for enhanced axial load carrying performance. Journal of the
Chinese Institute of Engineers, 25(4): 389402.
Wang, Y.C., and Restrepo, J.I. 2001. Investigation of concentrically
loaded reinforced concrete columns confined with glass fi-
ber-reinforced polymer jackets. ACI Structural Journal, 98(3):
377385.
List of symbols
Ac confined area of square or rectangular prism or column
cross section
Aeff confined area as defined by Micelli et al. (2001)
AT total area of square prism or column cross section
b side length for a square-section prism or column
Ew elastic modulus of the FRP wrap
fcaverage compressive strength of the unconfined concrete
fcccompressive strength of the confined concrete
fconf ultimate confining pressure provided by the FRP wrap
fuw ultimate strength of the FRP wrap
h height of a prism or column specimen
r rounding radius at the corners of a square prism or col-
umn cross section
tw thickness of the FRP wrap
uw ultimate tensile strain of the FRP wrap
s shape factor (Pessiki et al. 2001) equal to Ac/AT

2004 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce3101\L03-064.vp
January 6, 2004 3:10:17 PM