COMPOSITE

STRUCTURES
ELSEVIER Composite Structures 44 (1999) 155-161

Durability characteristics of concrete columns confined with

advanced composite materials
Houssam A. Toutanji *
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alabama, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA

Abstract

The durability performance of concrete columns confined with fiber-reinforced polymer composite (FRPC) sheets was studied.
Columns were wrapped around with four different types of FRP composite wraps: two carbon (Cl and C5) and two glass (GE1 and
GE2). Two types of epoxy matrix systems, Type A and B, were used. The confined and unconfined specimens were subjected to two
environmental conditions: room temperature, wet and dry cycling. For the wet and dry exposure, the specimens were placed in an
environmental chamber in which they were subjected to 300 cycles of wetting and drying. Sea water was used for the wet cycles and
hot air at 35°C average for the dry cycles. After every 30 cycles, pulse velocity and weight changes were measured. At the end of 300
cycles the stress-strain behavior of the samples was obtained in order to evaluate their strength, stiffness, and ductility, which were
compared to the performance of the unconditioned samples (room temperature exposure). Results show that both epoxy systems
produce similar results in the unconditioned specimens, with respect to strength, ductility, and failure behavior. However, specimens
wrapped with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) using Type A epoxy experienced no reduction in strength or ductility due to
wet/dry exposure, whereas samples using Type B epoxy experienced reduction in both strength and ductility. Specimens wrapped
with carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) using either epoxy Type A or Type B exhibited no reduction in strength nor in
ductility due to exposure. 0 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Columns; Durability; Salt water; Epoxy; Glass fiber; Carbon fiber

1. Introduction and background cause it is very important during construction. Heavy

equipment is needed for construction with steel; how-
Advanced composite materials such as fiber-rein- ever, it is not needed for repair with FRP composites.
forced polymers (FRP) have the potential to revolu- The fact that these composites are electrically non-con-
tionize engineering technology. In order to use these ductive and impact resistant also helps in certain ap-
advanced composite materials, a detailed knowledge of plications. Extensive research has been carried out on
their mechanical behavior is imperative. Moreover, using these composites for repair and strengthening;
structurally efficient design using these advanced com- however, information about their durability is still
posites mandates a detailed knowledge of their me- lacking. The long-term durability of FRP composites is
chanical properties. The mechanical properties of FRP a crucial factor in their successful application as repair
composites have received much attention for decades, materials or as reinforcement for concrete.
but their performance in environments simulating hos- Columns retrofitted with FRP fabrics or wires have
tile service conditions and their long-term durability are been investigated primarily for strength behavior. The
only beginning to be studied. elements investigated include building columns, bridge
These composites are particularly suitable for repair columns, and chimneys [l-l 11. Chimneys were repaired
because they are lightweight, presumably durable, cor- without taking them out of service. It has been shown
rosion resistant, and have high modulus and stiffness. that wrapping FRP fabric around the perimeter of both
Their lower density is important not only because it circular and rectangular concrete columns to create a
adds less weight to the existing structures but also be- confinement effect resulted in improving the ductility
and strength. In addition, it has been shown that con-
finement with FRP may improve the behavior of col-
* Tel.: 001-205-890-6370; fax: 001-205-890-6724; e-mail: tout- umns submitted to seismic loadings [8,11]. Other FRP
anji@cee.uah.edu confinement techniques have been shown to improve the

0263-8223/99/$ see front matter 0 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII:SO263-8223(98)00125-l
 behavior of normal and high-strength concrete [9]. formation in the area of long-term durability. Since a
Retrofitting of concrete columns by lateral confinement considerable number of deteriorating structures are lo-
with FRP wires has also demonstrated an increase in cated near the sea, evaluation of structural elements
strength and ductility [4]. Results showed significant repaired with advanced composites under sea water is
increases in compressive strength and pseudo-ductility very important. The effect of harsh environmental con-
under uniaxial compression. Analytical studies have ditions such as wet-dry cycles using sea water and high
been conducted to evaluate the strength and durability humidity on the compressive strength, stress-strain be-
behavior of columns retrofitted with FRP fabrics havior, and ductility of concrete cylinders wrapped with
[12,13]. FRP sheets is reported. The results will contribute to the
Results available on the durability aspects of FRP are data needed for the development of useful design
limited. Some of these studies are discussed herein. The guidelines for the immediate application of FRP in re-
durability of several composite systems externally pair and rehabilitation.
bonded to concrete beams has been investigated [ 141. In
this study, beams externally bonded with different
composites were exposed to cycles of freezing and 2. Experimental procedure
thawing. Another set of beams was exposed to cycles of
wetting and drying. Results of the study showed a loss in
flexural strength due to a degradation of the bond be-
tween the concrete and the external composite rein- Thirty-six concrete cylinders were made. The speci-
forcement. However, degradation of the composite mens measured 76 mm in diameter and 305 mm in
materials was not reported. Another study has shown length. The average standard 2%day cylinder compres-
that carbon FRP bonded beams performed well up to sive strength of the concrete was approximately 30 MPa
200 freeze-thaw cycles [ 151. with mix ratio of cement : sand : gravel : wa-
The durability of S-2 glass/epoxy pretensioned beams ter = 1 : 2 : 3 : 0.5. ASTM Type II Portland cement was
subjected to wet/dry cycles simulating tidal effects has used. The aggregate consisted of crushed stone of a
been experimentally investigated [16]. The pretensioned maximum size 12.7 mm as coarse aggregate, and con-
beams were designed and prepared to model piles driven crete sand as fine aggregate. The concrete sand material
in a tidal environment. A number of specimens were composition was made of 50% river sand and 50% beach
initially cracked to simulate pile-driving damage. lden- sand. All specimens were moist cured for 58 days at a
tical specimens were fabricated with steel pretensioning temperature of 25°C and a relative humidity in excess of
tendons for comparison. The results indicated a com- 90’%,.
plete loss in the effectiveness of the fiberglass strands Cylinders were confined by wrapping them unidirec-
exposed to wet/dry cycles after an average of 6 months tionally with FRP sheets. The specimens were
for precracked beams and 15 months for the untracked strengthened by wrapping in a continuous manner in
beams. This extensive damage in the fiberglass preten- two laps. Four types of FRP sheets were used, two
sioned beams led to an unsatisfactory level of strength carbon (Cl and C5) and two glass (GE1 and GE2), and
loss. two types of epoxy systems were used: Type A and Type
The effect of acidic and alkaline conditioning, under B. A summary of the FRP sheets and the epoxy systems
varying and constant temperature, on the strength and is given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
stiffness of concrete beams wrapped with carbon fiber
sheets was also studied [17]. Results showed that the 2.2. Specinwns pwpuwtion und testing
bond shear strength of samples exposed to environ-
mental conditioning decreased with respect to the un- The 36 concrete specimens were divided into two
conditioned samples. The percentage decrease was 17% groups of 18 each; 16 confined (eight using epoxy Type
for samples in an acidic condition, 24% for samples in A and eight using epoxy Type B) and 2 unconfined.
an alkaline condition, and 29% for samples exposed to Specimens in the first group were used as virgin samples
hygrothermal condition.
In summary, it can be stated that information on the
durability of FRP composites and structural compo- Table I
nents strengthened or repaired with FRP composites is Mechanical properties of FRP sheets
scattered and limited. And yet this information is vital FRP sheet Tensile strength E (GPa) Ultimate- Thickness
for the use of FRP composites in the repair and reha- (Mf’d) strain (“/;I) (mm)
bilitation of structures. It is imperative that questions GE1 1518 69 2.1 0.1 18
and doubts related to durability be addressed before GE2 2270 72 3.2 I .30
field implementation of FRP materials is initiated. The Cl 3485 228 I.5 O.Ih5
(‘5 2940 373 0.8 0.165
purpose of this paper is to provide valuable basic in-
 H.A. Toutanji I Composite Structures 44 (1999) 155-161 151

Table 2
Mechanical properties of adhesives
Properties Epoxy type A Epoxy type B
Chemical name Modified amine/epoxy resin blend Polyxypropylenediamine hardener/epoxy resin
Chemical composition Modified amine 30% alkyl ether amine 40% Proprietary
Mixing proportion 112 3:l
Water miscibility >lO%/<O.l% > 1O%/negligible
Density 1.1 (g/cm2) I. 11 (g/cm2)
Viscosity 12 350 cPs at 25°C 9415 cPs at 25°C
Tensile strength 55.9 MPa 69.1 MPa
Flexural strength 78.7 MPa 79.4 MPa
Tensile modulus 2.35 GPa 3.06 GPa
Elongation 2.40% 3.5-5.0%

(room temperature exposure) and those in the second Water Hot air
inlet inlet
were exposed to wet/dry cycling.
Both the epoxy systems used in this work were made
of two-part resin and hardener. Each epoxy system was
thoroughly hand mixed for at least 5 min. The concrete
LA-
-==-
cylinders were cleaned and completely dried before the Test Snecimens
epoxy was applied. A thin layer of epoxy (300 g/m*) was
applied to the concrete cylinder. A unidirectional FRP
sheet was then applied directly on the surface. Special
attention was taken to ensure that there was no void
between the FRP sheet and the concrete surface. After
the application of the first lap of the FRP sheet, a second
layer of epoxy was applied on the surface of the first
layer to allow the impregnation of the second lap of the
FRP sheet. Finally, a layer of epoxy was applied on the
surface of the wrapped cylinder. All specimens were
confined at a configuration of 0” orientation. In all
cases, the outside layer was extended by an overlap of 76 Water outlet
mm to ensure the development of full composite Fig. 1, Schematic of the wet-dry exposure set-up.
strength. All specimens were left at room temperature
for at least 7 days before testing or before they were
subjected to wet/dry conditions. This was done to ensure All specimens were loaded uniaxially in compression
that the epoxy had enough time to cure. until failure, using a hydraulic testing machine at a
Group 1 specimens were used as virgin samples; constant loading rate of about 0.24 MPa/s. Axial and
therefore, they were not subjected to any environmental radial strain gauges were attached to all specimens. The
conditions. They were kept at room temperature for 75 axial strain gauges were installed at the center points
days. Group 2 specimens were placed in a specially and the radial strain gauges were installed at the third
constructed environmental chamber and were exposed point. In addition, an axial LVDT was installed at the
to 300 cycles of wetting and drying. The wet/dry envi- center point of the specimens. The strain gauges were
ronmental chamber is schematically shown in Fig. 1. mounted so that strain, modulus of elasticity, and
The specimens were subjected to saline water environ- Poisson’s ratio could be determined. All specimens were
ments in which there were alternating wet and dry cycles capped at their two ends by sulfur mix to ensure a
(hot air at 35°C average and 90% humidity). Sea water parallel and smooth surface. Load, strains and axial
was simulated using 35 g of salt in a liter of water. This load were recorded during testing by an automatic data
is the approximate content of salt found in the ocean. acquisition system.
The duration of the wet cycle was 4 h and that of the dry
cycle, 2 h; thus the specimens were exposed to a total of
75 days. After every 30 cycles, pulse velocity and weight 3. Results
changes were measured. At the end of 300 cycles, the
stress-strain behavior of the samples was obtained to 3.1. Effect of conjinement
evaluate their strength, stiffness and ductility, which
were compared to the performance of the unconditioned The experimental result values obtained for the un-
samples (specimens kept at room temperature). conditioned, confined and unconfined specimens using
 Type A and Type B adhesive matrices are summarized
in Table 3. The subscripts A and B correspond to the
type of the matrix used. The compressive strength 0 is
the average of two specimens, ,f; is the unconfined
concrete strength, and f:;, and i:, are the strains in the
axial and radial directions at failure, respectively.
Data show that both epoxy systems produce the same
results in the case of unconditioned specimens. In other
words, specimens confined with FRP sheets using Type
A epoxy matrix have similar failure behavior, strength.
and stress-strain curves as those using Type B epoxy
matrix (Fig. 2). This figure also presents the axial stress GEI. Matnx B

plotted as a function of axial strain. drawn on the right A GE2.M:\tnxA

P 1 GELMatnn B
side, and the axial stress expressed as a function of radial A CS. Matrix A
70 -a C5, Matrix B
strain, drawn on the left side. Both epoxy systems re-
mained effective up to the final rupture; a thin layer of IO

concrete glued to the innermost composite layer was

always observed on the failed specimens.
Confined concrete cylinders exhibit plastic zones in
their stress-strain curves at near the maximum uncon-
Fig. 2. Typical strewstrain curve 01‘confined columns using Type A
fined strength ,f,‘, at which the axial and radial strains
and Type B epoxy.
begin to increase rapidly. The stress at which the slope
of the stress-strain curve changes indicates the point
where the concrete in the wrapped concrete cylinder has Crete cylinder significantly improved with the FRP sheet
started to crack. Although the curves indicate a signih- confinement.
cant improvement in ductility, the confined specimens
exhibit sudden failure, especially in the C5 wrapped
specimens. These specimens experienced a catastrophic
failure with a very loud sound due to the sudden The effect of wet/dry exposure using salt water was
breakage of the carbon composite wrap. which has a low the focus of this research. The conditioned specimens
strain tolerance. were placed in the environmental chamber (Fig. 1) and
In all cases. the ultimate axial strain was always were exposed to 300 wet/dry cycles. The duration of the
higher than the radial strain with the exception of the wet cycle was 4 h and that of the dry cycle, 2 h; thus, the
GE1 specimens; their axial strain was approximately the specimens were exposed for a total of 75 days. After
same as the radial strain. The largest difference between every 30 cycles, pulse velocity and weight changes were
the axial and radial strains was in the case of C5 speci- measured. The ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement
mens, which may be attributed to the large stiffness of showed no cracks or delamination in the specimens.
C5 fiber sheet. Also. there was no change in the weight of the specimens
To study the effect of confinement on the compressive due to exposure and no visual sign of deterioration.
strength of the concrete specimens. cA/,fz and IT~/.#;~ However, there was an apparent thin layer of salt sedi-
were calculated (Table 3). The ratios of average com- ment on the surfaces of both wrapped and unwrapped
pressive strength of confined specimens to unconfined specimens.
specimens for the Type A matrix were similar to those The results obtained for the conditioned specimens
for the Type B matrix. The ultimate strength increased are summarized in Table 4. The subscripts A and B
between 2- and 3.5-fold depending on the type of fiber correspond to the type of epoxy used and E corresponds
composite sheets. In addition, the ductility of the con- to wet/dry exposure. The compressive strength 0 is the

Table 3
Experimental results for unconditioned cylinder
Cylinder CA ot( %x/1: muIf: i:;,\ (‘%I) i:,* (‘%I) i), H (‘XI) cr B (‘%a)

Control 31.8 31.8 0.2 0.18 0.2 0.18

GE1 63.2 62.5 I .YY I .1)1 I .43 I .49 I .65 1.64
GE2 107.2 102.2 3.37 3.21 2.7 1.33 2.80 1.27
Cl 98.70 95.1 3.10 1.99 I.86 0.72 1.68 0.73
c5 96.0 98.7 3.02 3.10 I .so 0.45 1.52 0.52
 H.A. Toutanji I Composite Structures 44 (1999) 155-161 159

Table 4 Type A epoxy, which may have allowed the penetration

Experimental results for conditioned cylinder of salt water and heat, causing degradation in the glass
Cylinder ‘JAE OLIE &,,A (“!I %,A (%I Ea.8 (%I &LB (“d fiber sheets, and thus, loss in their confinement effec-
Control 38.2 38.2 0.13 0.24 0.13 0.24 tiveness. The Type B epoxy, which exhibited better du-
GE1 51.2 61.1 1.41 1.17 1.48 1.37 rability characteristics, may have formed more durable
GE2 89.5 99.0 1.69 1.38 1.94 1.47 barriers that protected the fibers. This could explain the
Cl 94.6 91.0 1.56 1.35 1.56 1.10
c5 91.8 94.8 1.48 0.34 1.18 0.35
reduction in strength in the GFRP concrete wrapped
specimens. Preliminary data from accelerated corrosion
average of two specimens, and E, and E, are the strains in tests appear to confirm this hypothesis [16,18]. However,
the axial and radial directions at failure, respectively. wet/dry cycles exhibited no effect on the durability of
Comparing Table 4 with Table 3, results show that carbon fibers even if the matrices were damaged due to
specimens confined with GFRP sheets using Type A conditioning. Microscopic evaluation of the fracture
epoxy matrix exhibited a loss in strength. The strength surface could perhaps distinguish the damage mecha-
of GE1 and GE2 cylinders decreased by as much as 10% nisms causing material property degradation; however,
and 18%, respectively, due to wet/dry exposure. The that was beyond the scope of this study.
average strength of specimens GE1 and GE2 decreased The wet/dry exposure seemed to have a positive effect
from 63.2 to 57.2 MPa and from 107.2 to 89.5 MPa, on the compressive strength of the concrete cylinders.
respectively. However, using Type B matrix resulted in The average compressive strength improved by as much
an insignificant loss in strength. The strength was re- as 20%; the average strength increased from 31.8 to 38.2
duced by about 3% for GE1 specimens and 4% for the MPa. The concrete specimens were moist cured for 58
GE2 specimens. The specimens confined with carbon days before they were placed in the environmental
sheets, using Type A and Type B epoxies, have shown chamber, and thus they went through a long period of
good durability with no significant degradation in curing and strength development. Their exposure to
strength. Using either Type A or Type B epoxy, each Cl sodium chloride had no adverse effect on the strength.
and C5 specimen exhibited reduction in strength of less The improvement in strength is attributed to accelerat-
than 5%. A strength comparison between exposed and ing the aging process due to high humidity and high
unexposed specimens is shown in Fig. 3. heat.
The loss in strength in specimens GE1 and GE2 due
to wet/dry exposure may be attributed to damage to the 3.3. Effect of exposure on ductility

Figures 4-7 show the stress-strain curves for Cl, C5,

GEl, and GE2 specimens, respectively. Each figure
1n No exposure I shows typical stress-strain curves of conditioned and
•i Wet/Dry Exposure
n

100

80

GE1 GE2 Cl C5 GE1 GE2 Cl C5

0
Epoxy Matrix A Epoxy Matrix B
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8
FBP Sheet Wraps Strain (S)

Fig. 3. Strength comparison between exposed and unexposed speci- Fig. 4. Typical stress-strain curves of concrete columns confined with
mens using Type A and Type B epoxy. Cl fiber sheet.
160 H. A. Toutunji I Composite Struc.tur.r.c 44 (1999) 155 161

100

90

x0

z 70
zz
2 60

R 50
3
2 40

30

20

IO

0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 I .x 0 0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5; 3
Strain (%I Strain (s/o)

Fig. 5. Typical stress-strain curves of’ concrete columns conlined with f-‘~g. 7. Typical stress-strain curves of’concrete columns confined with
C5 fiber sheet GE7 fiber sheet.

70
the stress-strain graph of each specimen was obtained
by linear regression analysis. This line was then ex-
60 trapolated to intersect with the maximum stress sus-
tained by the column. Strain c? corresponds to 0.85 of
the ultimate compressive strength f,‘. Table 5 compares
the ductility values of unexposed specimens (,u(,) to those
exposed (~1,~). Specimens wrapped with FRP sheets, Cl
and C5, exhibited no reduction in ductility due to wet/
dry exposure; actually there was a small increase in their
ductility factor which was between 5% and 15%. How-
ever, specimens wrapped with the GFRP sheets experi-
20
enced a reduction in ductility due to wet/dry exposure.
The ductility value of GE1 and GE2 specimens was re-
duced by as much as 20% and 42X, respectively.
10

0 1 4. Conclusions
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 I .s
Strain (%) Tests were performed to evaluate the durability per-
Fig. 6. Typical stress-strain curves oT concrete columns confined with formance of concrete columns confined with fiber-rein-
GE1 fiber sheet. forced polymer sheets. The influence of wet/dry
exposure using salt water on the strength and ductility of
FRP wrapped concrete columns was evaluated. Three
unconditioned specimens wrapped with FRP sheets variables were considered: the fiber sheet, the epoxy
using Type A epoxy. Since specimens wrapped with matrix systems, and the environmental exposure condi-
FRP sheets using Type B epoxy exhibited an insignifi- tions. The following conclusions can be drawn from this
cant loss in strength and ductility, they are not shown study:
here; thus, ductility analysis was done on specimens Confinement of concrete cylinders with FRP sheets
wrapped with FRP composite using Type A epoxy only. improves the compressive strength and ductility.
The ductility ratio ,u,, was found by dividing strain Q The improvement in strength and ductility is depen-
by strain cl. Strain aI corresponds to an initial strain dent on the type of FRP composite sheets.
corresponding to an approximation of the limit of The two different types of epoxy matrices used in this
elasticity behavior. A best-fit line of the linear portion of study, Type A and Type B, produced similar results
 H.A. Toutanji I Composite Structures 44 (1999) 155-161
Table 5
Ductility values for exposed and unexposed specimens
Specimen No exposure
El (%) c2 (“h) PC
GE1 0.18 0.94 5.22
GE2 0.38 2.00 5.26
Cl 0.30 1.38 4.60
c5 0.40 1.23 3.07
for the unconditioned specimens, with respect to
strength, ductility, stress-strain curve, and failure be-
havior. Both types of the epoxy matrices remained
very effective up to the final rupture.
Specimens confined with GFRP sheets using Type A
epoxy exhibited a loss in strength due to wet/dry con-
ditioning. The average strength of GE1 and GE2 cyl-
inders decreased by as much as 10% and 18%,
respectively. However, using Type B epoxy resulted
in an insignificant loss in strength. The specimens
confined with CFRP sheets, regardless of the type
of epoxy used, showed good durability and an insig-
nificant strength reduction.
Wet/dry exposure produced no loss in ductility in
specimens wrapped with CFRP sheets, whereas those
wrapped with GFRP sheets exhibited a reduction in
ductility.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the financial
support of the National Science Foundation CAREER
Grant CMS-9796326. The contribution of materials
from Tonen, Hexcel Fyfe, and Master Builders is
gratefully acknowledged.
References
VI Xiao Y, Martin CR, Yin Z, Ma, R. Seismic retrofit of existing
reinforced concrete bridge columns using a prefabricated com-
posite wrapping system. Proceedings of the First International
Conference on Composites in Infrastructure (ICCI’96), Tucson,
AZ, 1996:903-16.
[21 Harmon T, Slattery K, Ramakrishnan S. The effect of confine-
ment stiffness on confined concrete. Proceedings of the Second
International RILEM Symposium (FRPRCS-2) on Non-metallic
(FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, RILEM Proceed-
ings, 1995;29:58492.
131 Labossier P, Neale K, Demers M, Picher F. Repair of reinforce-
ment concrete columns with advanced composite materials
confinement. In: Toutanji H, editor. Proceedings of the Confcr-
en&Workshop on Repair and Rehabilitation of Infrastructure in
the Americans, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, 1994153365.
161
Exposure &%I&
El (Oh) 82 (xl flu,,
0.19 0.78 4.11 0.79
0.26 0.80 3.08 0.58
0.21 1.oo 4.76 1.05
0.31 1.10 3.55 1.15
t41 Nanni A, Norris MS, Bradford NM. Lateral confinement of
concrete using FRP reinforcement. American Concrete Institute-
Special Publication, Detroit, MI, 1993;138:1933209.
[51 Toutanji H, Rey F. Stress-strain characteristics of concrete
columns externally confined with advanced fiber composite
sheets. AC1 Materials Journal, in press.
PI Saafi M, Toutanji H. Behavior of concrete columns confined with
fiber-reinforced polymer tubes. AC1 Structural Journal, in press.
[71 Toutanji H, El-Korchi. Evaluation of the tensile strength of
cement-based frp composite wrapped specimens. ASCE Journal
of Composites for Construction, in press.
PI Priestley MJN, Seible F, Fyfe E. Column seismic retrofit using
fibreglass/epoxy jackets. Proceedings of the First International
Conference on Advanced Composite Material in Bridges and
Structures, Sherbrooke, Que., Canada, 1992:287-98.
[91 Harmon TG, Slattery KT. Advanced composite confinement of
concrete. Proceedings of the First International Conference on
Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures,
Sherbrooke, Que., Canada, 1992:299-306.
DOI Katsumata H, Kimura K. Applications of retrofit method with
carbon fiber for existing reinforced concrete structures. The 22nd
Joint UJNR Panel Meeting, US-Japan Workshop, Gaithersburg,
MD, 199O:ll28.
1111 Katsumata H, Kobatale Y, Takeda T. A study on the strength-
ening with carbon fiber for earthquake-resistance capacity of
existing reinforced concrete columns. Proceedings of the Seminar
on Repair and Retrofit of Structures, US-Japan Panel on Wired
and Seismic Effects, UJNR, 1987:18-l-18-23.
P21 Li MW, Saadatmanash H, Ehsani MR. Behavior of externally
confined concrete columns. Proceedings of the Materials Engi-
neering Congress, Atlanta, GA, 1992:677-90.
1131 Berset JD. Strengthening of reinforced concrete structures for
shear using composite materials. MS. Thesis, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1992.
1141 Chajes MJ, Mertz DR, Thomson JR. Durability of composite
material reinforcement. Proceedings of the Third Materials
Engineering Conference, ASCE, Dallas, TX, 1994:598-605.
1151 Kaiser H. Strengthening of reinforced concrete with epoxy-
bonded carbon-fiber plastics. Ph.D. Thesis, ETH, Zurich, Swit-
zerland, 1989.
[161 Sen R, Mariscal D, Shahawy MR. Durability of fiberglass
pretensioned beams. AC1 Structural Journal 1993;90(5):525-33.
1171 Javed S, Kumar SV, GangaRao VS. Experimental behavior of
concrete beams with externally bonded carbon fiber tow sheets.
Presented at the 51st Annual Meeting of SPIlCI Conference &
Exposition, February 1996.
[181 Saadatmanesh H, Jin L. Seismic retrofitting of concrete columns
with advanced composite materials. In: Toutanji H, editor.
Proceedings of the Conference/Workshop on repair and rehabil-
itation of Infrastructure in the Americans, Mayaguez, Puerto
Rico, 1994:167-79.