Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Composite Steel/FRP-

Reinforced Concrete Beams Using a New Beam Element

Xiaoshan Lin & Y.X. Zhang (y.zhang@adfa.edu.au)

School of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of New South Wales, Australian Defence Force
Academy, Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia




ABSTRACT In this paper, a simple and computation effective one-dimensional two-node beam element is developed
based on the Timoshenkos beam functions and layered approach for nonlinear finite element analysis of structural
behaviour of composite steel/FRP-reinforced concrete beams. Both geometric nonlinearity and material nonlinearity are
accounted for in the nonlinear finite element model, and Timoshenkos composite beam functions are employed to
represent the transverse displacement and rotation of the element. The agreement of the computed results for steel and
FRP reinforced concrete beams with those obtained from experimental study and other numerical analysis demonstrate
the efficiency and accuracy of the proposed element model.
KEY WORDS
1 INTRODUCTION
The use of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) as internal
reinforcing bars in concrete structures has become
widespread in recent years. As a substitute of the
traditional steel reinforcement, FRPs have many
advantages, such as high strength-to-weight ratio, high
electrochemical corrosion resistance and low thermal
expansivity. FRP possesses different mechanical properties
from steel bars, including elastic brittle behaviour and
low elastic modulus. Hence, the investigation of
structure performance of composite FRP-reinforced
concrete members has become a critical issue.
During the past decades, a lot of experimental studies
and theoretical analysis on the structural performance of
composite FRP reinforced concrete beams have been
conducted by many researchers. However, very few
finite element models and analyses have been developed
for accurate analysis of nonlinear structural behavior of
FRP reinforced concrete beams. A two-dimensional
layered degenerated shell element was developed and
used to analyze deflections and stresses of FRP
reinforced beams and shell structures with prefect
bonding assumption by Ferreira et al. (2001). The
reinforcing bars were implemented as an equivalent
layer in the degenerated shell element with strength and
stiffness characteristics in the bar diction only.
Achillides and Pilakoutas (2006) analyzed the bond
behaviour between FRP rebars and concrete by modelling
the concrete using 4-node plane square elements,
modelling the FRP bars using 2-node square bar
elements, and modelling the interface between concrete
and FRP bars using nonlinear spring elements with the
bond-slip curve of the springs. Rafi et al. (2007)
analyzed some simply supported carbon FRP-reinforced
concrete beams using a non-linear finite element model
with the help of 2D isoparametric plane stress elements.
They also developed nonlinear three-dimensional finite
element model (Rafi et al. 2008) for the prediction of
response and crack formation and propagation of steel
and FRP reinforced concrete beams under a combined
thermal and mechanical loading. In their 3-D model,
20-noded isoparametric three-dimensional solid brick
elements with three translational degrees of freedom at
each node were selected for FE discretization of
concrete, and uniaxial bar elements were used to model
reinforcing bars. Perfect bar-concrete bond was assumed
and only tensile reinforcing bars were included in the
model. Nour et al. (2007) used a refined 3-D hypoelastic
constitutive model to study the nonlinear response of
concrete structures reinforced with internal and external
FRPs.
Most of the finite elements developed and used for
finite element analysis and modelling of FRP reinforced
concrete beams are 2-D models, 3-D models and layered
shell elements. In 2-D and 3-D models, the concrete and
the reinforcing bar have to be discredited individually
using different elements, usually with 2-D or 3-D model
modelling concrete and 1-D bar or truss element
modelling the rebar, and these make the model and
analysis not computation and cost effective.
In this paper, a 1-D two-node beam element is
developed to predict load-deflection relationship of
concrete beams reinforced with FRP and steel bars. The
element is developed based on the Timoshenkos beam
CICE 2010 - The 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering
September 27-29, 2010, Beijing, China
L. Ye et al. (eds.), Advances in FRP Composites in Civil Engineering
Tsinghua University Press, Beijing and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering

728
functions (Zhang et al. 2007, Zhang & Zhu 2010), and a
layered approach is used to model accurately the
nonlinear behaviour of the concrete beams. Geometric
nonlinearity caused by low elastic modulus of FRP is
included in the new element. Due to the limitation of the
page, the cracking progress will not be presented in this
paper.
2 2-NODE COMPOSITE BEAM ELEMENT
The proposed two-node composite beam element and
the cross section of composite beam element consisting
of n concrete layers and smeared equivalent layers for
the reinforcing bars are shown in Figure 1. There are
only two degrees of freedom at each node, thus the
element is very simple and computation effective.

Figure 1 A two-node composite beam element and its cross
section
2.1 Timoshenkos composite beam functions
Locking-free Timoshenkos composite beam functions
(Zhang et al. 2007, Zhang & Zhu 2010) are utilized to
represent the displacement and rotation in the proposed
element. The formulas of deflection w and rotation for
the composite beam element with length L, width b and
height h are given as
1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2
( ( )) ( ( )) / 2
( ( )) ( ( )) / 2
e e
e e
w L L L L L w L L L L L L L
L L L L L w L L L L L L L
u
u
= + + + +
+ + +
(1)
( )
( )
1 2
1 1 2 1
1 2
2 2 1 2
6
1 3
6
1 3
e e
e e
L L
w L L
L
L L
w L L
L
u u
u
| |
= +
|
\ .
| |
+ +
|
\ .

(2)

where
1
1
x
L
L
= ,
2
x
L
L
= ,
1
1 12
e
e

=
+
,
2
b
e
s
Q
Q L
= (3)
in which x is the coordinator along the beam, Q
b
and Q
s

are bending elastic constant and shear elastic constant
respectively.
Assuming that the in-plane forces are zero and the
in-plane displacements (u
0
v
0
) in the mid-plane are zero,
the displacement field takes the form of
( , ) ( ) u x z z x u = (4)
0
( , ) ( ) w x z w x = (5)
Strain-displacement relationships are
x
u d
z
x dx
u
c
c
= =
c
(6)
u w w
z x x
u
c c c
= + =
c c c
(7)
where
x
is axial strain,

is shear strain, and d/dx is the
slope of the neutral axis.
2.2 Strain and strain matrix
The element nodal displacement vector can be expressed
as:
{ }
1 ( )
2
e
q
q
q

=
`
)
with { }
i
i
i
w
q
u

=
`
)
(i=1,2) (8)
Hence, the element bending strain vector at neutral
axis and shear strain vector are
{ } | |{ }
( ) e
b b
d
B q
dx
u
c = = (9)
{ } | |{ }
( ) e
s
B q = (10)
in which
| |
2 2
2 2
6 3 1 1 2
6
6 1 3 1 2
6
e e
b e
e e
e
x x
B
L L L L L
x x
L L L L L

+ | |
=
|
\ .

| | (

|
(
\ .
(11)
| |
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2
e e e e
s
B
L L L L
(
= + +
(

(12)
where [B
b
] is the curvature-displacement matrix, and
[B
s
] is the shear strain-displacement matrix.
2.3 Material property
Material properties of the whole section of the element
are
2 2
1 1
c s
bb ci ci i sj sj j
i j
D b E t Y b E t Y
= =
= +

(13)
( )
1
1
c
ss ci i i
i
D b G z z k
+
=
=

(14)
where
D
bb
and D
ss
: bending stiffness and transverse shear
stiffness
b: breadth of beam element
c: number of concrete layers
s: number of the smeared reinforcing layers
: constant of the non-uniformity of the shearing
stress, which is generally set to be 5/6
E
ci
and E
sj
: bending elastic modulus of the i
th
concrete
layer and the j
th
reinforcement layer
G
ci
: shear modulus of the i
th
concrete layer
z
i+1
and z
i
: coordinates of the upper and lower
surfaces of the i
th
concrete layer in z direction
t
ci
and t
si
: thickness of the i
th
concrete layer and the j
th

September 2729, 2010, Beijing, China

729
reinforcement layer
Y
i
and Y
j
: distances from the centroid of the i
th
concrete
layer and j
th
reinforcement layer to the neutral axis
2.3.1 Concrete model
The stress-strain curve of concrete under uniaxial
compression shown in Figure 2(a) (Nitereka & Neale
1999) is used in the present model.

Figure 2 Stress-strain relationship of concrete in (a) compression
and (b) tension
In the tension area, concrete is assumed to be
isotropic and linear elastic before cracking. Once the
maximum principal strain at Gauss points reaches the
concrete ultimate tensile strain, crack occurs. After
cracking, concrete becomes orthotropic. With regard to
the tension stiffening effect between concrete and
reinforcement after cracking, the constitutive relation
curve of concrete is adopted as Figure 2 (b) (Nour et al.
2007).
2.3.2 Steel and FRP model
The reinforcing steel bars are modelled to be elastic-
perfectly plastic in both tension and compression. FRPs
are assumed to be linearly elastic until the tension stress
reaches the material ultimate strength. After that, the
stress within FRP reduces to zero immediately.
3 NONLINEAR FINITE ELEMENT
FORMULATION
The nonlinear finite element analysis is carried out
based on the Total Lagrangian approach. The strain
vector due to large deflection of Timoshenkos beam is
{ } { } { }
2
0
d
1 d
d
2 d
d
0
d
l
z w
x
x
w
x
u
c c c
u

| |


|
= + = +
` ` \ .

)

)
(15)
where {
0
} and {
l
} are linear and nonlinear strain
vectors respectively.
{ } | |{ } | |{ }
2
( ) ( )
1 d 1
2 d 2
e e
l
w
C q C q
x
c
| |
= =
|
\ .
< (16)
| |
2 2
2 3 2 2 3
2 2
2 3 2 2 3
1 1 6 6 1 2 1 6 6
2
1 6 1 6 2 1 1 6 6
2
e e
e e
x x x x x L
C
L L L L L L L L L
x x x x x L
L L L L L L L L L


| | | | | |
| |
= + + + + | | | |
|
\ .
\ . \ . \ .
( | | | | | |
| |
+ + + ( | | | |
|
\ .
( \ . \ . \ .

hence
{ } { } ( ) | | | | ( ) { }
( )
0 0
{ }
e
l l
B B q o c o c c o = + = + (17)
in which [B
0
] is linear part of strain matrix, and [B
l
] is
nonlinear part of strain matrix.
The unbalance force {} of the beam element can be
expressed as
{ } | | | | ( ) { } { }
0
d
T
l
B B x R o = +
}
(18)
where {R} is the element equivalent nodal loadings, {}
is the inner stress matrix of the element. The tangential
stiffness matrix of the element [K
T
] is
| | | | | | | |
0 T l
K K K K
o
= + + (19)
where [K
0
] is the linear stiffness matrix, [K
l
] is large
displacement matrix and [K

] is the initial stress matrix,

which are determined by the following equations:
| | | | | || |
0 0 0
d
T
t
K B D B x =
}
(20)
| | | | | || | | | | || | | | | || |
( ) 0 0
d
T T T
l t l l t l t l
K B D B B D B B D B x = + +
}

(21)
| | | | | |d
T
x
K C N C x
o
=
}
(22)
in which N
x
is axial force of beam element, and [D
t
] is
tangential modulus matrix.
| |
1 1 1 1
1 1
0
0
0 0
c s c s
ci ci sj sj ci ci i sj sj j
i j i j
c s
t ci ci i sj sj j bb
i j
ss
b E t b E t b E t Y b E t Y
D b E t Y b E t Y D
D
= = = =
= =
(
+ +
(
(
= +
(
(
(



(23)
4 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
The validation of the proposed model is examined by
studying of two concrete beams which were reinforced
with steel and FRP bars respectively.
4.1 A steel reinforced concrete beam
A steel reinforced concrete beam under three-point bending
with overall length 1800mm tested by Karihaloo (1990)
is computed firstly. The beam was 100mm wide and 150
mm high with a steel ratio of 0.75%. The compressive
strength of concrete was 38MPa, and Youngs modulus
was 30GPa. The total applied load versus mid-span
deflection rerelationship is computed using the proposed
2-node model and the computed results are compared
with those obtained from Ashours model and ABAQUS
analysis (Ashour & Morley 1993) in Figure 3. It can be
seen that the load-deflection curve obtained from the
present model is in excellent agreement with that
obtained from the Ashours model. As for the failure
load of the beam, the result from the experimental
investigation was 24.25 kN, 14.16 kN and 15.68 kN from
Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering

730
ABAQUS analysis and Ashours model respectively,
and 21.9 kN from the current model, which is much
more closer to the test result.

Figure 3 Load versus mid-span deflection of Beam 1
4.2 A FRP reinforced concrete beam
A FRP reinforced concrete beam tested by Barris et al.
(2009) under four-point bending with 600mm shear span
is computed by the present model. The beam has a total
length of 2050mm, with a clear span 1800mm, a width
of 40mm and a depth of 190mm. Two GFRP rebars with
diameter of 16mm were used as longitudinal reinforcement
in the bottom of the cross section. Ratios of reinforcement
and effective depth-to-height were 1.78% and 0.85%
respectively. Youngs modulus and rupture tensile
strength of GFRP were 64.152GPa and 995MPa. The
compressive strength of concrete was 56.3MPa, and the
modulus of elasticity was 26524MPa. The comparison of
load-deflection relationship obtained from the proposed
model, the experimental study and Eurocode 2 (Barris et
al. 2009) are shown in Figure 4. It can be seen that the
load-deflection curve obtained from the present model
agrees well with the experimental data and the
prediction given by Eurocode 2.

Figure 4 Load versus mid-span deflection of Beam 2
5 CONCLUSION
A 1-D two-node beam element is developed to investigate
the flexural behaviour of concrete beams reinforced with
FRP and/or steel bars in this paper. The proposed 1-D
beam element is much simpler than 2-D and 3-D finite
elements, which can save computation time and
computational resources remarkably. Instead of being
modelled separately, concrete and reinforcement are
modelled in one unified element in the new model by
using layered approach, which simplifies modelling of
structures. Analyses of concrete beams reinforced with
FRP and steel bars, including material and geometric
nonlinearities, were performed. The coincidence of the
computed results from the proposed model with those
obtained from other finite element model, experiments
and ABAQUS analysis demonstrate the efficiency and
accuracy of the model.
REFERENCES
Achillides Z.& Pilakoutas K. 2006. FE modelling of bond
interaction of FRP bars to concrete. Structural Concrete, 7(1):
7-16.
Ashour, A.F. & Morley, C.T. 1993. Three-dimensional nonlinear
finite element modelling of reinforced concrete structures.
Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 15: 43-55.
Barris, C., Torres, Ll., Turon, A., Baena, M. & Catalan, A. 2009.
An experimental study of the flexural behaviour of GFRP RC
beams and comparison with prediction models. Composite
Structures 91: 286-295.
Bischoff, Peter H. & Paixao, Richard 2004. Tension stiffening and
cracking of concrete reinforced with glass fibre reinforced
polymer (GFRP) bars. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
31: 579-588.
Coronado, Carlos A. & Lopez, Maria M. 2006. Sensitivity
analysis of reinforced concrete beams strengthened with FRP
laminates. Cement & Concrete Composites 28: 102-114.
Ferreira, A.J.M., Camanho, P.P., Marques, A.T. & Fernandes, A.A.
2001. Modelling of concrete beams reinforced with FRP
re-bars. Composite Structures 53: 107-116.
Karihaloo, B.L. 1990. Failure modes of longitudinally reinforced
beams. Int. Workshop on the Application of Fracture Mechanics
to Reinforced Concrete, Italy: 523-546.
Nitereka, C. & Neale, K.W. 1999. Analysis of reinforced concrete
beams strengthened in flexure with composite laminates.
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 26: 646-654.
Nour, Ali, Massicotte, Bruno, Yildiz, Emre & Koval, Viacheslav
2007. Finite element modeling of concrete structures
reinforced with internal and external fibre-reinforced polymers.
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 34: 340-354.
Rafi, Muhammad Masood, Nadjai, Ali & Ali, Faris. 2007.
Analytical modeling of concrete beams reinforced with
carbon FRP bars. Journal of Composite Materials 41(22):
2675-2690.
Rafi, Muhammad Masood, Nadjai, Ali & Ali, Faris. 2008. Finite
element modeling of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
reinforced concrete beams under elevated temperatures. ACI
Structural Journal 105(6):701-710.
Zhang, Y.X., Bradford, M.A. & Gilbert, R.I. 2007. A layered
shear-flexural plate/shell element using Timoshenko beam
functions for nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete plates.
Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 43 (11): 888-900.
Zhang, Y.X. & Zhu, Y. 2010. A new shear-flexible FRP-reinforced
concrete slab element. Composite Structures 92 (3): 730-735.