Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

The Effect of Cutting Openings on the Behavior of Two-way Solid Loaded T

Slabs
⁎
Mona Mahlisa, , Ata Elkareim Shoeibb, Sherif Abd Elnabya, Alaa Sherifb
a
Construction Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Egyptian Russian University, Cairo, Egypt
b
Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Helwan University, Mataria branch, Cairo, Egypt

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: It is often necessary to cut openings in existing two-way reinforced concrete slabs due to late design require-
Two-way slabs ments. Those openings should be studied extensively; as they pose a break in the continuity of the reinforcing
Openings bars hence; they weaken the slabs and reduce their load carrying capacity. The purpose of this research is to
Near Surface Mounting Technique investigate the behavior of two-way RC beamed slabs with openings introduced after casting. The method of
Externally bonded Carbon fiber Reinforcing
cutting the slab under service loading and the strengthening methods' efficiency are the main parameters. Ten
Polymer
Yield Line Theory
square reinforced concrete two-way beamed slabs were prepared to be tested experimentally. They were divided
into two cases: (case A), and (case B). Case A consisted of: five slabs cast with a square 300 mm side opening in
the mid-span of the slabs, and case B was composed of: five slabs with no openings.
For (case A), the five slabs were divided into: a control two-way slab with an opening in the mid-span; which
was not strengthened, three two-way slabs each with an opening in the mid-span; they were strengthened in-
ternally using extra reinforcing steel bars around the opening; which had different development length, and
finally, a slab with a mid-span opening strengthened with externally bonded Carbon Fiber Reinforcing Polymer
(EB-CFRP) laminates at the tension side. Whereas, (case B's) five slabs were: a square control slab, it was ex-
amined till failure to evaluate the slabs' capacity, and four two-way squared reinforced concrete slabs with no
openings, they were tested following a certain sequence. It was as follows; the four two-way squared reinforced
concrete slabs were loaded till the initial cracking load as that of the control slab. Then, the strengthening was
installed, and the opening was cut at the mid-span. The loading continued till failure occurred. The strength-
ening was carried out using Near Surface Mounted Technique (NSM) and EB CFRP. Strength, deflection and
energy dissipation were calculated, and compared for both groups.
The experimental results were verified numerically using Yield Line Theory.

1. Introduction
Nowadays, we are living in a fast-paced world; the evolution had
reached every aspect of life. In this technological era, there is always a
continuous need of change. Many consumer goods were modified to
adapt to the new situation. By the same way, buildings' uses were
changed; which require several modifications as: cutting openings in
existing slabs to situate cables, escalators, elevators or even ventilation
ducts to match with those uses. Engineers should be ready to fulfill this
demanding life style.
Many design codes discussed the effect of openings and set some
strengthening rules; the BBK04 (2004) [1] allows the application of
opening no longer than third the short-span. On the other hand, the
Polish code (PN-B-03264) [2] stated stricter limits for the opening size;
the opening edge should not be longer than quarter the effective length
of the corresponding slab span. Despite all those precautions, cutting
openings in existing RC slabs remains a critical issue to be studied [3].
Openings often reduce the slabs' load carrying capacity, stiffness, and
ability to control deflection. Herein, the issue of discovering the sui-
table technique to strengthen, and cut openings through existing slabs
was investigated. The strengthening technique, the materials used, its
affordability, and the method of introducing the opening were studied.
In general, many researches [4–11] were carried out to see the effect of
openings on slabs.
Most of the work done focused on investigating the behavior of one-
way slabs with existing openings [4–8,9–11,12,22,24], fewer work
studied two-way slabs [4,14–16,25]. In most cases, the strengthening
techniques were good enough in restoring the flexural capacity of the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: monamohamedmaguid@gmail.com (M. Mahlis).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2018.09.002
Received 28 May 2018; Received in revised form 7 September 2018; Accepted 10 September 2018
Available online 13 September 2018
2352-0124/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Institution of Structural Engineers.
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

Table 1
Details of the tested specimens.
Slab Opening RFT slab mesh T&B RFT of beam RFT around opening Technique of strengthening Shape of additional RFT

T&B Stirrup

S1 No 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm No No –

S2 Case A 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm No No –
S4 Case A 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 2#8 Internal Straight
S6 Case A 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 2#8 Internal Hook
S8 Case A 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 2#8 Internal Full length
S5 Case B 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 2#8 NSM Short
S7 Case B 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 2#8 NSM Hook
S9 Case B 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 2#8 NSM Full length
S10 Case C 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 50 mm EB CFRP Strip
S11 Case B 8 mm@125 mm 2#10 mm 8 mm@167 mm 50 mm EB CFRP Strip

Table 2 1650mm 2 10T&B

Concrete compressive strength.
Batch No. Slabs Average compressive Average compressive
strength (MPa) strength (MPa)
After 7 days After 28 days

1 S2,S4, S6, S8 19.9 32.6

& S10 6 8

2
2 S1,S5, S7, S9 18.7 31.97
& S11 2 8

1650mm
A A
Table 3
2 8
Steel yield and ultimate strength.

2
Reinforcing steel Yield strength (N/ Ultimate strength Elongation (%) 8 8

8
grade mm2) (N/mm2)

24/35 246 365 25

slab [3,20]. CFRP strips were one of the most preferred strengthening
materials used to increase the load carrying capacity and stiffness of RC Fig. 2. Schematic figure for the details of reinforcement of strengthened RC
slabs with openings [3,5,6,10,13,14,17,20,26]. The strengthening slabs with openings (i.e. S4, S6 and S8).
technique applied with CFRP affected the increase in the slab's load
carrying capacity; NSM CFRP is more effective than EB CFRP [17]. One

1650 mm
2 10
2 10T&B
1650mm
8
2

6 8
8
1650 mm

8 8 2 8 2 8
1650mm

6 8

8 8
2
8

100mm 1450 mm 100mm

250mm

(a) Specimen S1 (b) Specimen S2

Fig. 1. Schematic figure for the details of reinforcement of slab with and without openings.

138
M. Mahlis et al.
30mm
900mm 840mm
S4 S6
Fig. 4. The steps followed to strengthen, and cut slabs (S5) with openings introduced under loading.
100mm 1450 mm
=8mm
Steel bars Grout Epoxy
of CFRP advantages is that; it slows down the appearance of the cracks,
and reduces their width [5,21]. The use of anchors with CFRP pre-
vented the CFRP from de-bonding; it even made the CFRP strip take
their full tensile capacity [7].
Despite the fact that CFRP strips were used in most of the published
work, they had some negativity; which could not be skipped such as:
their high price compared to ordinary reinforcing steel bars or the de-
pendence of their strength on the method of their installation, and the
position of the loads. The tested specimens were either strengthened
one-way slabs or rarely two-way slabs. Concerning the method of in-
troducing the opening in existing loaded (during serviceability) RC
slabs, fewer researches were published in this area in comparison with
the previous cases.
Yield Line Theory is one of the historic and trusted methods to
predict the failure loads of slabs. Many handbooks [27,28] and re-
searches [18,19,23,29] discussed this method proposing several
139
Structures 16 (2018) 137–149
Fig. 3. Schematic figure for the shape of the
reinforcing bars used in slabs (S4, S6 and S8).
1550mm
S8
Fig. 5. Section (A-A) from Fig. 2 detailed scheme of Near
100mm
Surface Mounted Technique (S6 the hooked bars).
solutions for each slab; today it is still used to verify experimental result
of slab failure loads or to predict those loads before proceeding in the
experimental work. In yield line method, several crack patterns are
proposed; for each one the failure loads are calculated, and the least
load is chosen to be the slab's failure load [4,8]. Yield line analysis is
even used to determine loads for strengthened slabs with openings [8].
Generally, yield line method can predict the ultimate load carrying
capacity very well [10].
2. Experimental work program
2.1. Test specimen and material
Ten two-way reinforced concrete beamed square slabs with di-
mensions 1650 mm for each side, and 80 mm thickness surrounded by
beams of dimensions 100 mm × 250 mm were tested. The dimensions
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

were chosen to resemble a one-third scaled slab; considering the

Fig. 6. The installation of EB CFRP laminates for slab S10.
thickness it was chosen to be the smallest thickness that can be cast in
residential building, at the same time it was chosen to accommodate
with the NSM strengthening technique. Those ten slabs were divided
into: five slabs cast with a square central opening of dimensions
300 mm × 300 mm, and five solid slabs with no openings.
The first five slabs (case A) were defined as: (S2) the control slab for
slabs with openings; S2 was cast with a central opening, and no extra
steel bars to strengthen it, slabs (S4, S6 and S8) were cast each with a
central opening; which was strengthened internally using two reinfor-
cing steel bars at each side of it. The strengthening bars for each slab
had a different development length. Slab (S10) was cast with an
opening; which was further strengthened with externally bonded
Carbon Fiber Reinforcing Polymer laminates (see Table 1).
The other five specimens (case B) were cast as solid slabs with the
same dimensions as those of (case A). They were divided as follows;
slab S1 the control reference slab for all specimens, and four reinforced
concrete two-way slabs (S5, S7, S9, and S11). Those slabs were tested
by following a certain sequence of steps. First, they were loaded by
25 kN (which represents the working load that the slabs would be

Demec
Demec Point 2
Point 4

Demec Demec
Point 3 Point 1

Demec
m

38
0m

0m

490mm
Point 5
38

295mm 118.7mm Demec

Point 6
Dial Gauge 2 Dial Gauge 1

118.7mm
LoadingPoints

LVDT 3 LVDT 1

Dial Gauge 3 LVDT 2

Dial Gauge 4

Fig. 7. Position of the deflection measuring device, and the point load.

140
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

lever arm I-beam tightening nuts

Loading Cell Nuts

loading device 8 8/m'

rubber plate

weights
The Testing Frame

Fig. 8. Schematic view of the test setup.

Table 4
Maximum loads with the corresponding deflections of the tested specimens.
Slab Opening PFailure (kN) Max. deflection (mm) PFailure/PFailure control (S1) PFailure/PFailure control (S2) defFailure/defFailure control (S1) defFailure/defFailure control (S2)

S1 No 85.30 15.59 1.00 1.22 1.00 1.2

S2 Yes 70.11 13 0.821 1.00 0.83 1.00
S4 Case A 80.75 7.9 0.95 1.15 0.51 0.61
S6 Case A 106.3 14.05 1.25 1.52 0.90 1.08
S8 Case A 100.41 13.92 1.18 1.43 0.89 1.07
S5 Case B 54.2 12.7 0.64 0.77 0.81 0.98
S7 Case B 65.2 10.27 0.76 0.93 0.66 0.79
S9 Case B 116 13.853 1.36 1.65 0.89 1.07
S10 Case A 80.08 12.64 0.94 1.14 0.81 0.97
S11 Case B 54.5 12.85 0.64 0.78 0.82 0.99

subjected to during their serviceability stage). For slabs (S5, S7 and S9), epoxy resin was 3800 MPa and the tensile modulus of elasticity was
Near Surface Mounting Technique was used to strengthen them. The 30 MPa.
reinforcing steel bars used for those slabs had the same development
length as those used in slabs (S4, S6 and S8). Slab (S11) followed the
2.2. The strengthening scheme
same sequence, but was strengthened with externally bonded CFRP as
in slab (S10). The properties of the specimens were given in Tables 2
For slabs S4, S6 and S8, the details of reinforcement, the position,
and 3.
and the shape of the extra steel bars around the opening are clearly
The longitudinal and the transverse reinforcement for the slabs were
detailed in Figs. 2 and 3. It is noted that the strengthening bars in slab
chosen as 8 pieces of Φ8 at each 125 mm approximately; which is about
S4 were straight, for S6, the steel bars were hooked, and for S8, the steel
0.8% of the maximum flexure reinforcing ratio, and is below the
bars extended for the whole length of the slab. Slabs S5, S7, and S9 were
maximum reinforcing ratio as stated by ECP203 and ACI 318-11. Fig. 1
strengthened with reinforcing steel bars of the same shape as S4, S6,
shows the details of reinforcement of the solid control slab (S1), and the
and S8 respectively. The reinforcing steel bars were bonded to the
un-strengthened control slab with opening (S2) of cases A and B re-
specimens using a two-component epoxy adhesive by using NSM
spectively. Slabs (S2, S4, S6, S8 and S10) were cast with an opening, the
technique. To cut the opening in slabs S5, S7, and S9, the slabs were
reinforcement bars were cut passing through the opening before
loaded with 25 kN. The load was applied as a point load; it was dis-
pouring the concrete. To determine the concrete compressive strength,
tributed using 2 welded I-beams to distribute the load to four points.
standard cubes of dimensions 150 mm × 150 mm × 150 mm were
Grooves about 2 cm deep, and 2 cm wide were created in the place of
taken from every batch of concrete, and tested. They were kept in the
the strengthening bars; the bars were installed using the epoxy ad-
same conditions as the specimens and cured as well.
hesive, bearing in mind that all of this was done under loading. The
The steel bars used in reinforcing, and strengthening the RC slabs,
strengthening was left for 48 hrs, so that the epoxy grout could harden,
and RC beams' stirrups were mild steel with grade 24/35, while the
and gain strength. Then, the opening was cut opened using an electric
tension, and compression steel bars in RC beams were high tensile steel
grinder, and a hand driller. After cutting the concrete, the steel bars
with 36/52, and a diameter; which is equal to 10 mm. As the manu-
passing through the opening were cut. Then, the loading continued till
facturer data sheet, the CFRP laminates have an ultimate load carrying
the failure of the RC slabs. Fig. 4 shows the steps followed to cut, and
capacity of 480 kN/m width per layer (at typical laminate thickness of
strengthen slabs. Fig. 5 shows a clear detail of how the Near Surface
1.0 mm), and tensile young's modulus of 35 kN/mm2 (based on typical
Mounted Technique is carried out.
laminate thickness of 1.0 mm). The flexural strength at 7-days for the
For RC slabs S10, and S11, both were strengthened by externally

141
M. Mahlis et al.
a) Crack Pattern of slab S1.
Fig. 9. The effect of the opening on the propagation and density of cracks.
bonded Carbon Fiber Reinforcing Polymer laminates. Four CFRP lami-
nates were bonded to the slab tension surface around the opening, each
laminate consisted only of: one layer of fiber. To apply the laminates,
first, the concrete surface was being roughened, then, the CFRP lami-
nates were being bonded using a two-component epoxy adhesive. Each
CFRP laminate installed around the open, had a thickness of 1.0 mm,
50 mm wide, and 900 mm long. The suggested development length for
the fiber laminates was 300 mm at the end of each side of the opening;
which is equal to the development length of the steel bars used in the
slabs (S4 & S6) and equal to the length side of the opening. Fig. 6 il-
lustrates that the CFRP was installed around the opening.
2.3. Experimental setup
A schematic view of test setup, and the arrangement of the mea-
suring Device is shown in Figs. 7 and 8. The test setup consisted of: a
steel frame formed of four I-beams resting on four steel columns to
support slabs during loading. The clear span of the tested slabs between
supports was 1550 mm from the center line of the beam to the center
line of the opposite beam. The load was delivered to the RC slabs using
a steel I-beam acting as a lever. One end of the steel beam was attached
to the strong floor of the laboratory using threaded steel rods that
provided a hinge support for the lever. The other end of the lever beam
was provided with a hanger to support concrete weights. The lever
beam applied its reaction load in the center of the tested slab. The load
was transferred through four points; three I-beams were welded
creating an H-letter. A loading cell was provided between the lever I-
beam, and the tested slab to accurately measure the applied load. The
effect of the load acting on the RC slab was increased by tightening the
nuts that existed at the end of the rods carrying the weights.
142
Structures 16 (2018) 137–149
b) Crack Pattern of slab S2.
To introduce the opening under loading (25 kN load), the loading
was initially achieved by increasing the weights hung from the end of
the lever steel beam, and tightening the nuts of the rods until the re-
action load acting on the center of the tested slab reached 25 kN. This
ensured that the load remained constant during the strengthening of the
RC slab, and cutting the opening. Deflections of specimens were mea-
sured at 2 points; one just in front of the opening, and the other at mid-
span between the beam, and the opening using ‘Dial Gauges and
LVDTS’. In addition, the strains of the reinforcing steel bars just at the
edge of the opening were measured using strain gauges. Digital Load
cell of capacity 550 kN with accuracy of 0.1 kN was adopted to measure
the applied load. The value of the loads was recorded from a monitor
connected to the load cell.
3. Experimental results and evaluations
The test results for both cases (A & B) were compared to investigate
the efficiency of the adopted strengthening technique specially when
introducing the opening under loading. It was important to verify the
effectiveness of the strengthening in restoring the load carrying capa-
city of the slab, and at the same time in controlling the deflection.
Generally, the NSM technique was effective; as the development length
of the used strengthening steel bars increased. Some slabs even
achieved higher load carrying capacity than that of the control slabs. A
summary of the test results is given in Table 4.
3.1. Cracks' patterns and mode of failure
Fig. 9 shows the crack patterns of the two control two-way RC
beamed slabs with and without opening (S1 and S2). For the control
M. Mahlis et al.
a) Crack pattern of S4 (Case A)
c) Crack pattern of S6 (Case A)
Fig. 10. The effect of external and internal strengthening on the crack pattern.
slab (S1); which was cast without opening, cracks appeared on its
bottom tension surface; the main cracks were parallel to the diagonals
of the slab, those cracks were accompanied by narrower cracks dis-
tributed in the whole slab in a direction parallel to them. For the tested
slab with opening (S2), the cracks began from the corner of the
opening, and extended towards the edges of the slab; cracks continued
to develop till failure. Generally, the mode of failure for both slabs was
flexural failure. By comparing between the cracks' patterns of both
slabs, we find that the presence of the opening led to an obvious in-
crease in the number of cracks.
Fig. 10 shows the crack patterns of slabs (S4, S5, S6, S7, S8 and S9
respectively); which had the same number and shape of strengthening
steel bars that was added before or after cast under loading; it is noticed
143
Structures 16 (2018) 137–149
b) Crack pattern of S5 (Case B)
d) Crack pattern of S7 (Case B)
that all slabs failed due to flexure mode.
For all tested specimens with internal strengthening around opening
(case A), the crack patterns were as the control tested specimens with
opening with an increase in diagonal cracks that propagated from the
position of the concentrated load. It was obvious that the number of
cracks increased by increasing the development length of the additional
steel reinforcement around opening due to the increase in the max-
imum load as shown in Fig. 10a, c, and e. whereas, the cracks' patterns
of tested slabs with strengthening done externally by NSM steel bar or
EB CFRP were shown in Fig. 10b, d and f respectively.
By comparing between the cracks' patterns of the tested specimens;
the internally strengthened (case A), and the externally strengthened
with the NSM steel bars (case B), we found that creating the opening
M. Mahlis et al.
e) Crack pattern of S8 (Case A)
Fig. 10. (continued)
a) Crack pattern of S10 (Case A)
Fig. 11. The effect of external strengthening by EB CFRP laminates on crack patterns.
under the service loading caused a reduction in the cracks' numbers, at
the same time the cracks were spread un-symmetrically in case of using
straight or hooked NSM steel bars as in slabs S5, and S7 respectively
compared to slabs S4, and S6. Using the external strengthening steel
bars with the development length extending to the surrounding beams
as in slab S9, the number of cracks were approximately the same as
those of the tested slab S8 but with a slight increase in the cracks' width
of slab S9. It is worth mentioning that the ultimate load carrying ca-
pacity was higher than that of the other strengthened slabs of case B.
Fig. 11 illustrates the cracks' patterns of the tested two-way beamed
slabs strengthened with EB CFRP around the opening. It was observed
that the tested slabs had failed due to de-lamination of CFRP. From the
cracks' patterns, and the failure loads, it was found that using EB CFRP
in strengthening the openings especially in case B is not recommended,
the behavior of the slabs may change if the anchorage bolts were
available. The failure may have occurred due to the weak bond between
the CFRP layer, and the concrete as a result of the opening process
itself.
3.2. Effect of the strengthening on the maximum load, and the
corresponding deflection of the slabs
From Table 4, we can compare between the maximum loads, and
144
Structures 16 (2018) 137–149
f) Crack pattern of S9 (Case B)
b) Crack pattern of S11 (Case B)
the corresponding deflections of the tested specimens taking into ac-
count the effect of the opening, the time of its introduction, and the
strengthening technique that was carried out.
For the slabs S4, S6, and S8, the failure loads were equal to 1.15,
1.52, and 1.43 of the control open tested specimens (S2) by using
straight, hook, and full length additional steel reinforcing around the
opening respectively. Comparing the failure loads of the same slabs
with that of (S1), they were equal to 0.95, 1.25, and 1.18. As a result,
the additional internal steel reinforcing bars around the opening could
restore the load carrying capacity of the slabs. In contrary, extra re-
inforcement around the opening was not efficient in controlling the
increase in the deflection corresponding to the load, and the ductility.
By using external NSM steel bars around the opening, the failure
loads of the slabs were equal to 0.77, 0.93, and 1.65 compared to slab
(S2) by using straight, hook, and full length additional steel reinforcing
around the opening respectively. Moreover, if those results were com-
pared to the control slab (S1), the failure loads of the slabs would be
equal to 0.64, 0.76, and 1.36 respectively. Consequently, it is re-
commended to extend the steel bars till the surrounding beams as in
slab S9 because this slab acted ideally.
By comparing between the failures loads taking into account the
timing of the opening; the failure loads for slabs (S4, S6, and S8) were
equal to (80.75 kN, 106.3 kN, and 100.42 kN), whereas the failure loads
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

Allowable deflection
value L/250

Allowable deflection
value L/250

a) The effect of the opening. b) The effect of the internal strengthening.

Allowable deflection value L/250

Allowable deflection value L/250

c) The effect of NSM steel bars. d) The effect of EB CFRP.

Fig. 12. Load deflection curves of tested specimen.

for slabs (S5, S7, and S9) were equal to (54.2, 65.2, and 116 kN). It was
clear that a reduction in the slabs' strength had occurred due to cutting
the opening under loading despite the placement of NSM strengthening
steel bars around the position before cutting it. The impact of the
method of cutting the opening is that the drilling machine caused a de-
bonding between the concrete, and the external reinforcement. This
outcome had shown that the external strengthening hadn't worked ef-
ficiently as the internal reinforcement unless the development length of
the installed steel bars had been sufficient to overcome the impacts; the
slab was subjected to during cutting the opening.

145
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

a) Short Reinforcement. B) Hooked Reinforcement. c) Full Length Reinforcement.

Fig. 13. The effect of the opening time and strengthening on load-deflection curves.

Table 5 that of S2, the absorbed energy decreased as well from 1334.2 N·mm to
The energy absorption of the tested specimens. 467.60 N·mm due to the opening.
Slab Opening EU Eu/Eu, control Eu/Eu, control
By differentiating between the load-deflection of the tested slabs (S1
(N·mm) S1 S2 & S2), and slabs (S4, S6, and S8) of (case A) as shown in Fig. 12b, we
learned that the internal reinforcement around the opening enhanced
S1 No 1047.5 1.00 2.24 the stiffness of the slabs at the working stage compared with slab (S2)
S2 Yes 467.60 0.45 1.00
S4 Case A 316.918 0.30 0.68
but not more than that of slab S1. After the working stage, and the crack
S6 Case A 799.60 0.76 1.71 initiation, the additional steel around the opening had increased the
S8 Case A 674.87 0.64 1.44 stiffness of the slab more than the two controls tested slabs (S1, and S2).
S5 Case B 288.55 0.28 0.62 This may be due to the increase in the cracking moment of inertia
S7 Case B 389.27 0.37 0.83
through the depth of the slab as a result of the presence of the tension
S9 Case B 1076.95 1.03 2.30
S10 Case A 746.89 0.71 1.60 cracks on the bottom side of the slab which in turn caused an increase in
S11 Case B 430.89 0.41 0.92 the calculated effective moment of inertia. The calculated absorbed
energy for slab S4, S6, and S8 were 316.918 N·mm, 799.6 N·mm, and
Where Eu: is the absorbed energy. 674.87 N·mm; the absorbed energy decreased than that of the control
slab (S1) from 30% to 76%. Despite the fact that the opening had
By studying the effect of EB CFRP laminates strengthening on slabs' caused a decrease in the ductility of the two-way RC beamed slabs
behavior, we found that cutting the opening after casting and before compared with the control two-way solid slab, the existence of
loading (case A) caused an increase by 14% in the failure load com- strengthening reinforcing steel around the opening enhanced the ef-
pared to slab (S1). For case B, the external strengthening used caused a fective moment of inertia after cracking.
reduction in the failure by 22% compared to slab S2. As mentioned By observing the load-deflection of the control slabs (S1, and S2),
above, the process of creating the opening caused deterioration in the and the tested slabs (S5, S7, and S9) as shown in Fig. 12c, we noticed
bond between the concrete, and the adhesive epoxy. Besides, the that the external reinforcement around the opening affected the beha-
method used for cutting the opening “drilling” affected also the slab vior of the slab depending on its development length, and shape.
strength, and consequently, the efficiency of the strengthening tech- Whereas, there obvious enhancement in the stiffness of the slabs had
nique. occurred by increasing the length of the additional reinforcement bars.
In case of the straight, and the hook steel bars, the energy absorption
was equal to 288.55 N·mm, and 389.27 N·mm respectively which was
3.3. Load deflection relation analysis less than the absorbed energy of the control tested slabs (S1), and (S2).
The load-deflection curves of the tested slabs strengthened ex-
The relation between the load, and the measured deflection; at the ternally with CFRP laminates (S10, and S11) were shown in Fig. 12d.
nearest point to the center of the slabs were shown in Figs. 12 and 13. From the figure, we noted that the strengthening by CFRP increased the
The energy absorption of two-way RC beamed slabs was calculated to stiffness of the slab than that of the control slab S2. It also enhanced the
be equal to the area under the load-deflection curves as listed in performance of the slab compared to the tested slab (S2). On the other
Table 5. side by installing CFRP layer, then, cutting the opening, the capacity,
As shown in Fig. 12a, the load-deflection of the tested slabs S1, and and ductility of the slab decreased. In all cases the allowable value of
S2 clarified that the opening affected the behavior of the two-way RC deflection (L/250) is set in the curves; it is observed the corresponding
slabs. After the initial cracking, the stiffness of slab S1 was more than

146
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

a) Control Slabs S1 and S2. b) Slabs with internal strengthening.

c) Slabs with NSM Steel bars. d) Slabs with EB CFRP.

Fig. 14. The relation between load and strain of main steel bars at the mid-span section besides opening of the two-way RC beamed slab.

load to the value of this deflection proved to be higher than the slabs
capacity in normal conditions. Hence it assured the effectiveness of the
strengthening techniques especially for S9 of case B.
3.4. Load strain relationship analysis
The relation between the loads and the reinforcing steel bars strains;
those bars at the edge of the opening are shown in Fig. 14. By com-
paring between the values of the strains in S1 and S2 (shown in
Fig. 14a), it was found that after cracking the strains of steel bars in S2

147
M. Mahlis et al. Structures 16 (2018) 137–149

a) Cracks’ Pattern for solid slab (S1) b) Cracks’ Pattern for slabs with openings
Fig. 15. Proposed crack patterns of tested two-way control RC slabs (S1) and (S2).

Table 6 the strain of steel bar of control two-way beamed slab with opening
the comparing between experimental and theoretical yield line ultimate load (S2).
for control two-way spanning slabs.
Group Slab Opening PFailure Yield line (PFailureYL/PFailure) 4. Theoretical analysis using yield line
(kN) PFailure YL (kN)
Yield Line Design is a well-founded method of designing reinforced
Control slab S1 No 85.3 84.58 100.85%
concrete slabs, and similar types of elements. It uses Yield Line Theory
S2 Yes 70.11 79.27 113.06%
to investigate failure mechanisms at the ultimate limit state. The theory
is based on the principle that:
Work done in yield lines rotating = Work done in loads moving.

4.1. Energy dissipation

From studying the experimental real cracks patterns of slabs, the

yield line cracking patterns were suggested for slab (S1) and two-way
beamed solid slabs with central opening (S2) as shown in Fig. 15.
As shown in Table 6, in slab (S1), the ratio between the theoretical
maximum loads using Yield Line Theory and the experimental max-
imum loads was 100.85%. In slab (S2), the ratios between the theore-
tical maximum loads using Yield Line Theory and the experimental
maximum loads was 113.06%. The yield line pattern agrees with the
Fig. 16. Proposed cracks' patterns of tested strengthened two-way RC beamed
experimental result, other cracking patterns used give minimum value
slabs.
of theoretical load could be considered.

Table 7 4.2. The increase in the ultimate load of slabs due to adding additional
The maximum load of strengthened two way beamed supported slab. reinforcement around opening
Slab Opening Failure P additional bars by Total load Ratio between
loads yield line PYL/PExp In the two-way beamed slabs which were externally and internally
strengthened, the cracks' pattern was same as that of the control slab
S1 No 85.3 – 84.58 0.992
S2 Yes 70.11 – 79.27 1.131 with opening S2 as shown in Fig. 16. And the maximum load due to
S4 Case A 80.75 12.35 91.62 1.135 Yield Line Theory is equal to the maximum load of control opened slab
S6 Case A 106.3 12.35 91.62 0.862 S2. The additional load due to additional steel reinforcement around
S8 Case A 100.41 20.60 99.87 0.995 opening that can be calculated as the following.
S5 Case B 54.2 15.68 94.95 1.752
S7 Case B 65.2 15.68 94.95 1.456 ΣPadd × δ = ΣMadd × θ (1)
S9 Case B 116 26.15 105.39 0.909
S10 Case A 80.08 45.5 97.8 1.22 where; Padd is the additional load, δ is the deflection, θbar is the angle of
S11 Case B 54.5 45.5 97.8 1.19 rotation of bars passing through two segments of the slab and Madd is
the additional moment calculated as the following equation

is Significantly higher than that of S1. This could be explained; as S2 ΣMadd × θ = Tadd × (dadd − a/2) (2)
had an un-strengthened opening the reinforcing bars must have shared where θ is the angle of rotation of bars passing through two segments of
earlier in the load resistance due to the presence of the opening. From the slab, Tadd is the additional tensile force, dadd the effective depth due
Fig. 14b and c; the internal additional steel bars around the opening ti the increased bars.
caused a decrease in strain values compared with the control opening
slab (S2). However, the tested slab (S 9) with the full length anchorage ⎧ AS,int × f y incase of additional internal reinforcement
showed a decrease in the strain. From Fig. 14d it is obvious that the Tadd A s,NSM × f y incase of using NSM technique
⎨
strain of steel bar in slab with EB CFRP (case B) is approximately equal ⎩ Af × ffe incase of using externally bonded CFRP (3)

148
M. Mahlis et al.
The additional moment in the previous equation calculated from the
external and internal steel bars passing through crack patterns is not
less than the allowable values by standard. The tensile force (Tadd) can
be calculated from Eq. (3).
From Table 7, by comparing between the values of the experimental
and the yield line maximum load values; it can be concluded that the
yield line pattern does provide sufficiently safe values for the ultimate
loads which strengthened slabs with openings can carry. The result for
yield line pattern proved to be matching the experimental crack pat-
terns due to concentrated load. In addition ultimate load due to addi-
tional reinforcement give as good solution in the practical design.
5. Conclusion
Based on the results obtained from the experimental work, the fol-
lowing can be concluded:
1. The behavior of two-way solid slabs is affected by the presence of
openings especially those in the mid spans of the slabs; the presence
of the opening caused a reduction in the load carrying capacity of
slabs by 18.2%.
2. Adding additional internal steel reinforcement around the opening
caused a significant increase in the load carrying capacity of slabs as
the load carrying capacity increased between 15% to 51% de-
pending on the development length and shape of bars; hence in-
creasing the slabs' efficiency even better than the control slab with
no opening.
3. In the case of strengthening two-way beamed slabs using Near
Surface Mounting Technique, the technique proved to be efficient in
restoring slab's load carrying capacity with increasing the length of
the strengthening bars.
4. In slabs strengthened by externally bonded CFRP laminates and near
surface mounting steel bar, the bond between the concrete and
adhesive materials affect the slabs' strength as openings were cre-
ated under loading using a drilling machine, so it is recommended to
use longer anchorage in the creating openings in existing RC floor
slabs.
5. The reduction of the ultimate load carrying capacity of tested slabs
was significant so it is required to do more experimental work to
study the effect of different parameters as the size and the position
of the opening.
6. Although the different codes did not mention any recommendations
about creating the opening on the existing two-way RC beamed slab;
it is suggested to use Yield Line Theory as the reduction of the ul-
timate loads of the two-way beamed slabs due to creating openings
and additional load due to adding strengthening reinforcing bars
around the opening can be successfully calculated.
References
[1] BBK 04. The Swedish building administrations handbook on concrete structure. The
Swedish Building Administration, Division of Buildings; 2004.
149
Structures 16 (2018) 137–149
[2] PN-B-03264. Polish code concrete, reinforced concrete, pre-stressed structure, Static
calculations and design. 2002.
[3] Seliem HM, et al. Field testing of RC slabs with openings strengthened with CFRP.
Fourth International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering
(CICE2008). 2008. [Zurich, Switzerland. 6. pp.].
[4] Sorin-Codrut F, Sas G, Popescu C, Stoian V. Tests on reinforced concrete slabs with
cut-out openings strengthened with fiber-reinforced polymers. Compos Part B
2014;66:484–93.
[5] Al-Fatlawi Abdul Ridah Saleh, Abed Hayder Ali. CFRP strengthening of concrete
slabs with and without openings. Int J Sci Technol Res 2015;4(8):132–46.
[6] Anil Ö, Kaya N, Arslan O. Strengthening of one-way RC slab with opening using
CFRP strips. Constr Build Mater 2013;48:883–93.
[7] Afefy HM, Fawzy TM. Strengthening of RC one-way slabs including cut-out using
different techniques. Eng Struct 2013;57:23–36.
[8] Smith ST, Kim SJ. Strengthening of one-way spanning RC slabs with cutouts using
FRP composite. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:1578–90.
[9] Al-hafiz AM, Chiad SS, Farhan MS. Flexural strength of reinforced concrete one-way
opened slabs with and without strengthening. Aust J Basic Appl Sci
2013;7(6):642–51.
[10] Tan KH, Zhao H. Strengthening of openings in one-way reinforced-concrete slabs
using carbon fiber-reinforced polymer systems. J Compos Constr 2004;8:393–402.
[11] Kim SJ, Smith ST. Strengthening of RC slabs with large penetrations using anchored
FRP composites; the second official international conference of the international
institute for FRP in construction for Asia-Pacific Region. 2009.
[12] Boon KH, Diah AM, Loon LY. Flexural behavior of reinforced concrete slab with
opening. Proceedings of MUCEET2009, Malaysian technical universities conference
on engineering and technology. Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia: MS Garden; June
20–22, 2009.
[13] Enochsson O, Lundqvist J, Taljsten B, Rusinowski P, Olofsson T. CFRP strengthened
openings in two-way concrete slabs – an experimental and numerical study. Constr
Build Mater 2007;21:810–26.
[14] Banu D, Ţăranu N, Barros RC, Ciobanu P, Popoaei S. Experimental study of two way
RC slabs with or without openings strengthened composite strips. Publicat de
Universitatea Tehnică “Gheorghe Asachi” din Iaşi Tomul LVIII (LXII); 2012.
(Fasc. 3).
[15] Fall D, et al. Two-way slabs: experimental investigation of load redistributions in
steel fiber reinforced concrete. Eng Struct 2014;80:61–74.
[16] Foret G, Limam O. Experimental and numerical analysis of RC two-way slabs
strengthened with NSM CFRP rods. Constr Build Mater 2008;22:2025–30.
[17] Dalfré GM, Barros JAO. NSM technique to increase the load carrying capacity of
continuous RC slabs. Eng Struct 2013;56:137–53.
[18] Ng CK, Edward TJ, Lee DKT. Theoretical evaluation on effects of opening on ulti-
mate load-carrying capacity of square slabs. Electron J Struct Eng 2008;8.
[19] Mikael Braesstrup W. Morley symposium on concrete plasticity and its application.
University of Cambridge; July 23, 2007.
[20] ElSayed AA, Amer N. Experimental analysis of centrally opened two way slabs
strengthened with carbon fiber laminates. Concr Res Lett Dec. 2015;6(4).
[21] Correia L, Teixeira T, Michels J, Almeida JAPP, Sena-Cruz J. Flexural behavior of
RC slabs strengthened with pre-stressed CFRP strips using different anchorage
systems. Compos Part B 2015;81:158–70.
[22] Badawy S, ElSayed M, ElSayed A. Using ferro-cement laminates in strengthening
flexural behavior of R.C. slabs with opening. Life Sci J 2015;12(5):146–52.
[23] Kwan AKH, Lam JYK, Ng PL. Yield line analysis of reinforced concrete slabs with
openings by dip and strike angles method. Adv Struct Eng 2013;16(7).
[24] Choi Y, Park IH, Kang SG, Cho CG. Strengthening of RC slabs with symmetric
openings using GFRP composite beams. Polymer 2013;5:1352–61.
[25] Mosallam AS, Mosalam KM. Strengthening of two-way concrete slabs with FRP
composite laminates. Constr Build Mater 2003;17:43–54.
[26] Pachalla1 SKS, Prakash SS. Efficient near surface mounting CFRP strengthening of
pretensioned hollowcore slabs with opening – an experimental study; composite
structure. vol. 162. February 15, 2017. p. 28–38.
[27] Zaslavsky A. Yield-line analysis of rectangular slabs with central openings. Proc ACI
1967;64(64):838–44.
[28] Islam S, Park R. Yield-line analysis of two-way reinforced concrete slabs with
openings. J Inst Struct Eng 1971;49(6):269–76.
[29] Linwei H, et al. Automatic yield-line analysis of practical slab configurations via
discontinuity layout optimization. J Struct Eng 2017;143(7):04017036.