Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Concrete cover requirements for FRP reinforced members

in hot climates
Hany Abdalla

Department of Structural Engineering, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

Available online 14 March 2005

Abstract
Excessive corrosion problems exist in the Arabian Gulf countries. The exterior surfaces of reinforced concrete structures in these
countries are subjected to high temperatures and humidity. Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) bars are currently contending conventional steel in reinforced concrete members in highly corrosive environments or where non-magnetic elds are required. However,
the dierence in thermal expansion between FRP bars and the surrounding concrete may cause signicant splitting stresses within
the concrete around the bars during temperature increase. In this paper, the non-linear analysis of concrete members subjected to
high temperatures ranging from 20
C to 100
C is discussed. Several design parameters are varied such as FRP type, bar diameter,
concrete cover, and concrete strength. The results of the analytical study are substantiated by test results from ten FRP and steel
reinforced concrete beam specimens subjected to high temperatures and vertically applied loads up to failure. The experimental program also included testing of 42 concrete cylinders reinforced with dierent types of FRP bars and subjected to high temperatures.
 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Concrete; Cracking; Cover; Fiber reinforced polymers; Finite elements; Temperature; Thermal stresses

1. Introduction
Temperature variations in concrete structures can
produce relatively high thermal stresses. Such stresses
develop when free expansion, contraction, or rotation
due to temperature is restrained. The restraint can be
external such as that provided by the supports in continuous structures or internal when temperature distribution is non-linear across the section. In the latter case,
internal self-equilibrating stress develop in the longitudinal direction due to an incompatibility of displacement
occurring within the section. Internal restraints can also
occur in FRP reinforced concrete members due to the
dierence between the coecient of thermal expansion
(CTE) of the FRP and that of the surrounding concrete.

Present address: Department of Civil Engineering, College of

Technological Studies, PAAET, Kuwait. Fax: +965 4843143.
E-mail address: habdalla5@yahoo.com
0263-8223/$ - see front matter  2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2005.01.033

FRP bars are generally made of longitudinal bers

and a polymeric resin. The mechanical properties of
the FRP bars strongly depend on the type and volume
of bers, while the polymeric resin plays an important
role in the transverse direction. Consequently, the
CTE in the transverse direction is completely dierent
from that in the longitudinal direction. According to
the ACI-440 design guidelines [1], carbon bre reinforced polymers, CFRP, for example, have a longitudinal CTE, a of almost zero, and a transverse CTE, aft of
about 30 10
6/
C. A positive value of 0.68 10
6/
C
for the longitudinal CTE of the CFRP was reported
by the manufacturer [2], and a negative value of

0.9 10
6/
C was reported by Daniel and Ishai [3].
For the Isorod type of glass bre reinforced polymers,
GFRP, while the longitudinal CTE, a, is similar to that
of hardened concrete, the transverse CTE, aft is over ve
times higher [4]. The dierence in thermal expansion in
the transverse direction may cause signicant splitting
stresses in concrete around the bars under temperature

62

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

Nomenclature
a
Af
Ac
b
c
db
Ec
E
Eft
Es
fc
ffu
ft
ftmax
fy
n

radius of FRP bar

area of FRP reinforcement
cross-sectional area of concrete
radius of concrete ring around the bar
concrete cover
bar diameter
elastic modulus of concrete
elastic modulus of the FRP reinforcement in
the longitudinal direction
elastic modulus of the FRP reinforcement in
the transverse direction
elastic modulus of steel reinforcement
stress in concrete
ultimate tensile strength of FRP reinforcement
tangential stress
maximum tangential stress
yield stress of steel reinforcement
modular ratio in the longitudinal direction

increase [5], or separation of the bars from the concrete

under temperature decrease. This may aect the bond
between the FRP reinforcement and the surrounding
concrete [6] and cause cracking of the concrete cover
around the reinforcement [7].
Over the past decade, many investigations have been
carried out on the behavior of concrete members reinforced or strengthened by FRP materials subjected to
mechanically applied loads. Comparatively little attention has been directed toward the eect of high temperatures on these members. Aiello [8] studied the
phenomenon of concrete splitting around the rebars
due to high temperatures. The theoretical model was
based on assuming linear behavior for the concrete surrounding the FRP bars. The splitting phenomenon was
also reported experimentally by others [9,10].
In order to examine the eects of high coecient of
thermal expansion in the transversal direction, tests were
conducted on concrete cylinders reinforced with dierent
types of FRP bars and subjected to uniform increase in
temperature. A series of concrete beams (50 76 750
mm) reinforced by dierent types of FRP bars, were also
subjected to vertical loading up to failure after being subjected to uniform increase in temperature.

2. Thermal stresses in reinforced concrete members

During the service life of a structure, thermal stresses depend upon the non-linear temperature variation
within the structure. Geometric location and orienta-

nft
p
r
T
ac
a
aft
al
as
at
b
lf
mc
mft

modular ratio in the transverse direction

radial pressure
radius measured from center of the bar
change in temperature
coecient of thermal expansion of concrete
longitudinal coecient of thermal expansion
of FRP bars
transverse coecient of thermal expansion of
FRP bars
coecient of thermal expansion in the longitudinal direction
coecient of thermal expansion of steel reinforcement
coecient of thermal expansion in the transverse direction
shape coecient
FRP reinforcement ratio
Poissons ratio of concrete
in-plane Poissons ratio of FRP bar

tion of the structure, climatological conditions, crosssection geometry, thermal properties of the material
and the exposed surfaces aect these stresses. If the
temperature varies in a non-linear fashion over the
cross-section, restraint stresses will develop even in
statically determinate structures. The values and distribution of these stresses over a cross-section can be
found elsewhere [11]. Additional longitudinal and
transverse thermal stresses are developed in the concrete section due to the dierence between the coecient of thermal expansion of concrete and the
longitudinal and transverse coecients of the reinforcing FRP bars. Typical coecients of thermal expansion of concrete and dierent types of reinforcing
bars are given in Table 1 [1].
2.1. Thermal stresses in the longitudinal direction
Longitudinal self-equilibrating stresses develop in
reinforced concrete members in two cases; namely, when
the longitudinal coecient of thermal expansion of the
reinforcement is dierent from that of the concrete,
and when the temperature distribution over the crosssection is non-linear. In the rst case, development of
stresses can be explained considering a concrete prism
symmetrically reinforced by FRP bars and subjected
to uniform rise of temperature, T. Assuming perfect
bond between the concrete and the FRP reinforcement,
and considering compatibility of strains and equilibrium
of forces, it can be shown that the stresses in the FRP
reinforcement, ff, is given by

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

63

Table 1
Typical coecients of thermal expansion for concrete and reinforcing bars
Material

Longitudinal CTE, al 10
6/
C

Transverse CTE, at 10
6/
C

Concrete
Steel
Glass ber reinforced polymer, GFRP
Carbon ber reinforced polymer, CFRP
Aramid ber reinforced polymer, AFRP

7.2 to 10.8
11.7
6 to 10

2 to 0

6 to
2

7.2 to 10.8
11.7
21 to 23
23 to 32
60 to 80

ff ac
afl

TEfl
1 lf nfl

where lf = Af/Ac is the reinforcement ratio; Af is the area

of FRP reinforcement; Ac is the cross-sectional area of
the concrete; ac is the coecient of thermal expansion
for the concrete; a is the longitudinal coecient of thermal expansion for the FRP bars; n = E/Ec is the modular ratio; E is the modulus of elasticity of the FRP in
the longitudinal direction; and Ec is the modulus of elasticity of the concrete.
The stress in the concrete around the bars, fc, is given
by
fc
lf ff

It has to be noted that from Eqs. (1) and (2), tensile

stress takes place in concrete for temperature increase
and when a has a positive value greater than ac.
In the longitudinal direction, self-equilibrating stresses may also occur due to non-linear temperature distribution over the cross-section. In addition, continuity
thermal stresses develop in the longitudinal direction
of the member when end displacements due to temperature are externally restrained. The values of the selfequilibrating stresses and continuity stresses are given
by Elbadry et al. [11]. This investigation is limited to
the stresses in the transverse direction aecting the concrete cover around the FRP bars.

2.2. Thermal stresses in the transverse direction

These stresses result from the high transverse thermal
expansion of FRP reinforcement with respect to that of
concrete, Table 1. Such stresses may lead to radial
cracking in concrete surrounding the FRP bars. This
may aect the bond between the concrete cover and
the reinforcement as well as the eciency of that cover
in protecting the reinforcement. The tangential stresses
that cause radial cracking can be estimated considering
a ring of concrete surrounding the FRP bar, as shown
in Fig. 1(a). At temperature increase, the large transverse expansion of the FRP bar produces radial
pressure, p, on the concrete. This pressure can be calculated assuming plane stress conditions by [12]:
p

aft
ac TEft
nft b mc 1
mft

where mft is the in-plane Poissons ratio of the FRP bar;

mc is the Poissons ratio of concrete; and the coecient b
is a shape coecient that depends on the FRP bar diameter, db, and the concrete cover, c, and is given by
b

b2 a2
b2
a2

where b = c + (db/2) and a = (db/2) are the radii of the

concrete ring and the FRP bar, respectively.

Fig. 1. Cracking due to transverse thermal expansion of FRP: (a) axisymmetric model of FRP bar embedded in concrete; (b) plan and elevation of
concrete cylinder reinforced with GFRP subjected to temperature increase.

64

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

5.0

5
Tensile stress ft (MPa)

Tensile stress ft (MPa)

db = 25 mm
T = 80 C

4
3

T = 50 C

2
T = 20 C

1
0
5

10

15
20
25
Radius r (mm)

30

35

Fig. 2. Tangential tensile stress around a 16 mm diameter GFRP bar

in a 76 mm concrete cylinder (concrete cover = 30 mm).

The tangential concrete stress, ft, induced in the

concrete at any radius, r, due to the radial pressure, p,
is given by
ft

a2 b2 r2
p
r2 b2
a2

According to Eqs. (4) and (5), the maximum tangential stress occurs at the interface between the concrete
and the FRP bar, where
ftmax bp

Fig. 1(b) shows the cracking due to temperature increase of 80
C in a concrete cylinder reinforced with a
GFRP bar. Eq. (5) was used to estimate the tangential
tensile stresses in a 76 mm diameter concrete cylinder
reinforced with 16 mm diameter GFRP bar. The results
are shown in Fig. 2 for temperature increase of 20
C, 50

C, and 80
C. The stresses were estimated based on the
following properties for the GFRP bars: transverse CTE
of 22 10
6/
C, transverse modulus of elasticity of 3300
MPa, and Poisons ratio of 0.28. It can be seen from the
results that at the interface between the concrete and the
FRP bar for a temperature increase of 80
C, the tensile
stress reaches a value of 4.63 MPa which exceeds the
tensile strength of concrete. At the outer surface of the
cylinder (r = 38 mm) which represents a concrete cover
of 1.875db, the tensile stress is reduced to 0.4 MPa for
the same temperature increase. Fig. 2 shows also that
for a temperature increase of 80
C, the tensile stress
at a distance equal to db from the bar surface (r = 24
mm), the tensile stress is reduced to 0.7 MPa which represents 15% of the maximum value in the concrete
around the bar. At a distance of 1.5db from the bar surface (r = 32 mm), the tensile stress reaches a value of
0.47 MPa representing 10% of the maximum value.
According to the ACI-440 design guidelines [1], for
static loading conditions, the concrete cover for FRP
reinforcement should not be less than the bar diameter
db, to avoid splitting bond failure. In case of using a concrete cover of db, a modication factor of 1.5 should be
used as a multiplier for the development length of the

= cover > 1.5 db

db = 16 mm

4.0

db = 12 mm

3.5
3.0
2.5

40

10

15

20 25 30 35 40
Concrete cover C (mm)

45

50

55

Fig. 3. Maximum tensile stress around GFRP for temperature

increase of 50
C.

FRP bar. This multiplier is taken as 1.0 in case of using

a concrete cover of 2db. The tensile stresses due to a temperature increase of 50
C were estimated for 12 mm, 16
mm, and 25 mm diameter GFRP bars for dierent concrete covers. The results are shown in Fig. 3, where it
can be seen that the maximum tensile stress is signicantly reduced when the concrete cover exceeds 1.5db.
Therefore, considering the results shown in Fig. 3, it
can be seen that a concrete cover ranging between
1.5db and 2db can satisfy both the loading and temperature requirements.
The tensile stress distributions in the concrete cover
for 12 mm diameter bars of dierent reinforcing materials are shown in Fig. 4. It can be seen from the results
that increasing the concrete cover from 1.5db to 2db does
not signicantly decrease the tensile stresses close to the
bar perimeter. The reduction in the maximum tensile
stress at the bar surface (r = a) was 4% for the FRP bars,
and 2% for the steel bar. At the outside bers of the concrete cover (r = b), the tensile stress decreases by 35%
when increasing the cover from 1.5db to 2db. Therefore,
increasing the cover to 2db may be helpful in case of
4.0
3.5
Tensile stress ft (MPa)

4.5

CFRP

3.0
GFRP
2.5
2.0

Cover = 1.5 db
Cover = 2.0 db

1.5
1.0
0.5

Steel

0.0
0

6
12
18
24
Distance from bar center r (mm)

30

Fig. 4. Tensile stress around 12 mm diameter bars of dierent

materials (temperature increase = 50
C).

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

using large bar diameters and high temperatures to reduce the tensile stress and hence avoid cracking at the
outside concrete bers.
It has to be mentioned that the above estimation of the
tensile stresses is based on linear analysis, which can be
used to determine theses stresses before cracking. It can
be used also to determine the temperature that causes rst
crack in the vicinity of the bar. After cracking, stress relief
takes place leading to dierent stress distributions and
stress values in the concrete cover. Therefore, the above
analysis can not be used to fully determine the behavior
of the concrete cover around the bars. A non-linear nite
element analysis is described below in an attempt to accurately determine the tensile stresses around the FRP bars
under temperature increase.
According to Eq. (5), for temperature increase of 50
C,
bar diameter of 16 mm, and concrete cover of 30 mm (cover = 1.875db), the maximum tensile stress reaches 2.89
MPa. For concrete cover of 20 mm (cover = 1.25db), the
maximum tensile stress reaches 3.08 MPa. These cases
of concrete cover equal to 30 mm and 20 mm are analyzed
below using a non-linear nite element analysis for temperature increase up to 50
C. These ratios of concrete
cover to bar diameter were chosen to evaluate the cases
of concrete cover less than or larger than 1.5db.

3. Non-linear analysis of thermal stresses

The nite element program ABAQUS [13] was used for
the non-linear analysis of concrete reinforced with FRP
and subjected to temperature increase. In the program,
the temperature is applied gradually in small increments.
The size of each increment depends on the convergence of
the iteration process in the previous increments. The concrete under compression is modeled by an elastic-plastic
theory, using a simple form for the yield surface expressed
in terms of the equivalent pressure stress and the Mises
equivalent deviatoric stress [13]. Cracking is assumed to
occur when the stress reaches the failure surface represented by a simple Coulomb line in terms of the equivalent
pressure, and the Mises equivalent deviatoric stress. The
model is a smeared crack model, in the sense that it does
not track individual micro cracks. Instead, constitutive
calculations are performed independently at each integration point of the nite element model, and the presence of
cracks enters into these calculations by the way in which
the cracks aect the stresses and material stiness associated with the integration point.
Fig. 5(a) shows the non-linear nite element results
for the compression stresses in the GFRP bar and the
tensile stresses in the surrounding concrete due temperature increase up to 50
C. The stresses are shown for a
16 mm diameter GFRP bar with 20 mm concrete cover.
This cover of 1.25db (cover > db) is accepted by the ACI440 design guidelines [1] as discussed before. It can be

65

Fig. 5. Stresses in the GFRP and the surrounding concrete due

to temperature increase: (a) concrete cover = 1.25db; (b) concrete
cover = 1.875db.

seen from the results that the maximum tensile stress

around the bar from the nite element method was
11% less than that estimated according to Eq. (5). In
Fig. 5(b), where the concrete cover was increased to
1.875db, the maximum tensile stress in the concrete
around the bar was decreased by 10%. It can be seen
also from the results that the maximum tensile stress
around the bar from the nite element method was
14% less than that estimated according to Eq. (5). Therefore, Eq. (5) can be used conservatively to determine the
maximum tensile stresses due to temperature increase as
long as the tensile stresses are less than the concrete
cracking strength. Once the concrete cracks, stress relief
takes place leading to less tensile stresses around the bar.
Fig. 5 shows also that the tensile stress around the bar
decreases at the outer bres of the concrete beam away
from the bar. It reaches zero or turns to compression at
the corners of the beam cross-section. Due to temperature increase, the principal stresses in the plane of the
bar cross-section were compressive, with a value of
3.85 MPa and 3.91 MPa for concrete cover of 1.25db
and 1.875db, respectively.

4. Experimental program
In the experimental program, load tests were carried
out on 10 reinforced concrete beams subjected to temperature increase. Splitting tests were also conducted

66

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

on 42 concrete cylinders reinforced with dierent types

of FRP reinforcing bars after being subjected to temperature increase.
4.1. Material properties
Five types of reinforcing bars were used in the experimental study, namely, GFRP (Isorod), GFRP (C-bar),
CFRP (Leadline), CFRP (CFCC), and steel. The GFRP
(Isorod) bars are manufactured by pultrusion of E-glass
continuous bers and thermosetting polyester resin. To
enhance the bond characteristics, the surface is wrapped
by helical glass ber strands and covered by a mixture of
a known grain size of sand and polyester resin [4]. The
GFRP (C-Bar) rod is manufactured by the hybrid pultrusion process [14]. C-Bar rods are produced using four
dierent ber types, namely, E-Glass, Carbon, Aramid,
and a hybrid of Carbon and E-Glass, designated as
Type 1, Type 2, Type 3, and Type 4, respectively. Type
1 reinforcing bars are manufactured in two grades,
Grade A and Grade B, according to the surface deformations and characteristics. Type 1-Grade B was used
in this study. The CFRP (Leadline) rods are pultruded
using linearly oriented coal tar pitch-based continuous
ber epoxy resin [2]. The CFRP (CFCC) is composed
of a prepreg in which polyacrylonitrile based carbon bers are impregnated with epoxy resin. A seven-wire
cable of 5 mm diameter with eective cross-sectional
area of 10.1 mm2, and guaranteed breaking load of
17.7 kN was used in this study. The CFCC conguration
as a cable allows excellent exibility and adhesion to
concrete, as well as ease of preparation, [15,16].
The measured average cylinder compressive strength
of the concrete used for the beam specimens ranged
from 30 MPa to 35 MPa at the time of testing, with a
maximum aggregate size of 13 mm. The reinforcing steel
was of Grade 400 (fy = 435 MPa). Table 2 shows the
physical properties of the dierent types of reinforcements used in the experimental program.

Table 3
Details of the tested beams
Beam

Temperature

Reinforcement

Bar diameter (mm)

BP1
BP2
BI3
BI4
BC5
BC6
BS7
BS8
BS9
BL10

20
80
20
80
20
80
20
80
80
80

Plain concrete
Plain concrete
GFRP, Isorod
GFRP, Isorod
CFRP, CFCCa
CFRP, CFCC
Steel
Steel
Steel
CFRP, Leadline

12.7
12.7
5
5
10
10
16
10

CFCC = Carbon Fiber Composite Cables.

specimens were reinforced with dierent types of reinforcement. Table 3 shows the type of reinforcement
and the maximum temperature for each of the tested
beams. All beams had the same dimensions of 50 76
mm cross-section and 750 mm length. The pre-heated
beams were tested under two point loads up to failure.
Fig. 6 shows the loading test of beam BI4 after being
heated to temperature increase of 80
C.
The experimental program also included conducting
splitting tests on concrete cylinders reinforced with different FRP materials. A total of 42 concrete cylinders,
of 76 mm diameter and 152 mm height, were tested.
Three cylinders were tested for each bar diameter. The
reinforcing bars used in the tests were: GFRP, Isorod,
of diameters 9.5 mm, 15.9 mm, 19.7 mm and 25.4 mm;
CFRP, Leadline, of diameters 8 mm and 10 mm; CFRP,
CFCC cables, of diameters 5 mm and 15 mm; and steel
of diameters 11 mm and 20 mm. For each diameter of
the reinforcing bars, one cylinder was subjected to splitting tension test after being subjected to a uniform rise
in temperature of 100
C and one cylinder was tested under room temperature. Tests were also conducted on cylinders reinforced with GFRP of diameters 12.7 mm and
19.7 mm after being subjected to a uniform rise in temperature of 50
C. Six plain concrete cylinders were also

4.2. Test procedure

The experimental program includes testing of ten
beam specimens. Two beams were tested without reinforcement as control beams, and the remaining eight

Table 2
Properties of reinforcements used in the experimental study
Reinforcement

Specic
gravity

ffu or fy
(MPa)

E or Es
(GPa)

al 10
6/
C

GFRP, Isorod
GFRP, C-bar
CFRP, Leadline
CFRP, CFCC
Steel

2.0
2.1
1.6
1.5
7.8

692
746
1970
1780
435

42
42
147
137
200

9.0
9.0
0.68
0.6
10.6

Fig. 6. Load testing of beam BI4.

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

67

T=20 C

T=100 C

3
2

Pla
in C

Iso
rod
, d=
9.5
mm
Iso
rod
, d=
15.
9m
Iso
m
rod
, d=
19.
7
m
Iso
m
rod
, d=
25.
4m
Lea
m
dlin
e, d
=8
Lea
mm
dlin
e, d
=10
mm
CF
CC
, d=
5m
m
CF
CC
, d=
15
mm
S te
el,
d=6
mm
S te
el,
d=1
1m
m
S te
el,
d=2
0m
m

onc
rete

Splitting Strength (MPa)

Cylinder

Fig. 8. Splitting strength of concrete cylinders reinforced with GFRP,

CFRP and steel.

Fig. 7. Heating box used for the beam and cylinder specimens.

tested, for comparison purposes, after being subjected

to: temperature of 100
C, temperature of 50
C, and
room temperature.
The temperature increase in the beams and cylinders
tests was produced using the heating box shown in Fig.
7. The insulated wooden heating box contained 10
mounted infrared 250 W heating bulbs used to provide
a uniform heat ux. The temperature inside the concrete
beams or cylinder specimens was monitored using sucient number of thermocouples for each specimen to
reach the required temperature.

5. Experimental results
The cylinder splitting tests were carried out to study
the eect of the dierence between the transversal coefcient of thermal expansion of the FRP reinforcement
and that of the surrounding concrete. Fig. 8 shows the
splitting strength of the tested concrete cylinders. The results are shown for cylinders tested after being subjected
to uniform rise of temperature up to 100
C and for cylinders tested at room temperature, 20
C. It can be seen
that increasing the temperature to 100
C resulted in
decreasing the tensile strength of all the cylinders. The
concrete cylinders reinforced with GFRP exhibited the
highest reduction in the splitting strength. The cylinder
of 76 mm diameter reinforced with 25.4 mm diameter
GFRP Isorod was fully cracked due to temperature
only. The crack shown in Fig. 1(b) for that cylinder
was observed at a temperature increase of 70
C.

Splitting Strength (MPa)

T=20 C

T=50 C

0
e

ret

nc

o
nC

lai

rod

Iso

.7

12

=
,d

mm

9.7

rod

mm

1
d=

Iso

2m

=1

C-

d
ar,

5m

=1

d
ar,

C-

Cylinder

Fig. 9. Splitting strength of concrete cylinders reinforced with GFRP.

Fig. 9 shows the results of the splitting tests conducted on cylinders reinforced with GFRP after being
subjected to a temperature rise of 50
C. The cylinder
reinforced with a 19.7 mm diameter of Isorod bar exhibited a reduction in splitting strength of 25%. The results
of the cylinder tests clearly show the eect of radial
cracking of concrete surrounding the FRP bars due to
the dierence in transverse thermal expansion between
FRP and concrete. It has to be noted that the reduction
in splitting strength of the cylinders reinforced with steel
is attributed to the small dierence in thermal expansion
between concrete and steel which is usually ignored for
normal temperatures. The cylinders reinforced with
CFRP have exhibited reduction in strength similar to
that observed in cylinders reinforced with steel. This
indicates that the dierence between the transverse thermal expansion of concrete and CFRP would not cause a
problem in the normal weather temperature increase
particularly for bars of small diameters. This is not the
case for GFRP bars.

68

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

Fig. 10 shows the deection results for pre-heated

concrete beams having dierent types of reinforcement.
The deection of plain concrete beams is also shown for
comparison purposes. The results show that the uniform
increase of temperature up to 80
C generally leads to an
increase in deection for all types of reinforcement. This
may be attributed to the reduction in modulus of elasticity of concrete and reinforcement accompanying the
temperature increase. It can be seen from Fig. 10 that
the largest deection increase due to temperature took
place in the beam reinforced with GFRP. This may be
attributed to the development of radial cracks around
the GFRP bars due to the dierence between the
transverse thermal expansion of concrete and GFRP.

These cracks contribute in bond reduction between the

bars and the surrounding concrete leading to higher
deections. Fig. 11 shows the cracking pattern for the
concrete beams tested in this study. The beams were
reinforced with dierent materials and tested at high
temperatures. The results show that the thermal behavior of the beams reinforced with CFRP was similar to
that of the beams reinforced with steel.

9
Reinforced
with Isorod
T=20 ooC, = 1.8 %

8
Load (kN)

Plain Concrete
T=20 ooC

6
5
4

Reinforced
with Isorod
T=80 ooC, = 1.8 %

3
2

Plain Concrete
T=80 ooC

1
0
0

4
5
6
7
Deflection (mm)

10

Load (kN)

Reinforced with CFCC

T=20 ooC, = 0.52 %

Plain Concrete
T=20 ooC

4
3

Reinforced with CFCC

T=80 ooC, = 0.52 %

2
Plain Concrete
T=80 ooC

1
0
0

2
3
4
Deflection (mm)

6
Reinforced with Steel
T=20 ooC, = 0.75 %

5
Plain Concrete
T=20 ooC

4
3

Reinforced with Steel

T=80 ooC, = 0.75 %

2
Plain Concrete
T=80 ooC

1
0
0

2
3
4
Deflection (mm)

6. Summary and conclusions

Results from tests as well as from non-linear nite
element analysis were utilized to investigate the eect
of concrete cover on the behavior of members reinforced
with FRP bars in hot climates. Based on the results of
this investigation, the following conclusions can be
made:

Load (kN)

Fig. 11. Cracking of concrete beams reinforced with dierent materials

at high temperatures.

Fig. 10. Deection of concrete beams reinforced with dierent

materials.

1. The high transverse coecient of thermal expansion

of the GFRP bars creates bursting tensile stresses
in the concrete surrounding the bars at high
temperatures.
2. Concrete cylinders reinforced with GFRP exhibited
wide cracks around the bars at high temperatures.
In concrete beams reinforced with GFRP, the cracks
in the vicinity of the bars resulted in weakening of
bond between the concrete and the GFRP and, consequently a reduction in the tension stiening of the
concrete and an increase in deection.
3. The thermal behavior of concrete beams reinforced
with CFRP was similar to that of beams reinforced
with steel. This behavior was better than that of
beams reinforced with GFRP.
4. The tensile stresses around the bars due to temperature increase are signicantly reduced when the concrete cover exceeds 1.5db. A concrete cover ranging
between 1.5db and 2db can satisfy both the loading
and temperature requirements for beams in hot
climates.

H. Abdalla / Composite Structures 73 (2006) 6169

5. For temperatures higher than 50
C, it is not recommended to use GFRP bars of diameters larger than
12 mm in order to avoid the high bursting stresses
in the vicinity of the bars which cause a reduction
of bond.

References
[1] ACI Committee 440. Guide for the design and construction of
concrete reinforced with FRP bars. American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, May 2001.
[2] Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation. Leadline carbon ber reinforced plastic rod. Technical Data, Japan, 1995.
[3] Daniel IM, Ishai O. Engineering mechanics of composite materials. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1994.
[4] Challal O, Benmokrane B. Physical and mechanical performance of an innovative glass ber reinforced plastic rod for
concrete and grouted anchorages. Canad J Civil Eng 1993;
20(2):25468.
[5] Gentry TR, Husain M. Thermal compatibility of concrete and
composite reinforcement. J Compos Construct ASCE 1999;
3(2):826. May.
[6] Katz A, Berman N, Bank LC. Eect of high temperature on bond
strength of FRP rebars. J Compos Construct ASCE 1999;
3(2):7381. May.
[7] Gentry TR, Bank LC. Application of FRP reinforcement
in structural precast concrete. In: Proc 3rd Material
Engineering Conference, ASCE, Reston, VA, USA, 1994.
p. 57582.

69

[8] Aiello MA. Concrete cover failure in FRP reinforced beams under
thermal loading. J Compos Construct ASCE 1999;3(1):4652.
[9] De Sitter WR, Tolman F. Uni-directional bre pretensioned
concrete elements. In: Second International Symposium on
Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures
(FRPRCS-2), RILEM Proceedings 29, Ghent, Belgium, 1995. p.
4956.
[10] Matthys S, De Schutter G, Taerwe L. Inuence of transverse
thermal expansion of FRP reinforcement on the critical concrete
cover. In: Proc the 2nd International Conference on Advanced
Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, ACMBS-II,
Montreal, Canada, 1996. p. 2018.
[11] Elbadry MM, Abdalla HA, Ghali A. Eects of temperature on the
behaviour of ber reinforced polymer reinforced concrete members: experimental studies. Canad J Civil Eng 2000;
27(5):9931004.
[12] Rahman AH, Kingsley CY, Taylor DA. Thermal stress in FRPreinforced concrete. In: Proc the Annual Conference of the
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, CSCE, Montreal,
Canada, 1995. p. 60514.
[13] Hibbitt HD, Karlsson BI, Sorensen EP. ABAQUS Finite Element
Program version 5.5. Providence, RI: Hibbitt, Karlsson, and
Sorensen, Inc.; 1995.
[14] Faza SS, GangaRao HVS. Theoretical and experimental correlation of behavior of concrete beams reinforced with bre reinforced
plastic rebars. In: Fibre-Reinforced-Plastic Reinforcement for
Concrete Structures, SP-138, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, 1993. p. 599614.
[15] Tokyo Rope Mfg., Ltd., Technical Data on CFCC, Japan,
October 1993.
[16] Nanni A. Fiber-reinforced-plastic (FRP) reinforcement for concrete structures: Properties and applications. Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers; 1993.