SHEAR RESISTANCE OF CONCRETE T-BEAMS PRESTRESSED

WITH CFRP CABLES

Payam NABIPAY
B.Sc, EIT
University of Manitoba
Department of Civil Engineering
15 Gillson st., Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
umnabipa@cc.umanitoba.ca
Dagmar SVECOVA
PhD, P.Eng
University of Manitoba
Department of Civil Engineering
15 Gillson St., Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
svecovad@cc.umanitba.ca*

Abstract
This paper investigates the shear capacity of concrete T-beams prestressed with CFRP strands.
The effect of the shear span to depth ratio (a/d) as well as the prestressing force on the shear
strength of concrete beams reinforced with FRP is discussed. Three different designs with a/d
of 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 were investigated with 2 samples per each design. The experimental results
along with similar data from other researchers are compared to theoretical values obtained
from the most recent versions of the North American design codes and guidelines. The results
found the ACI guidelines most conservative for FRP reinforced and especially prestressed
concrete beams. CSA-S806-11 worked best for both FRP reinforced and prestressed concrete
beams. From all the codes and guidelines studied, only CSA-S806-11 included a factor to
account for arch action in deep beams with a/d < 2.5, which worked reasonably well for
beams tested in this project.
Keywords: ACI, Arch action, Code equations, CSA, FRP, Prestress, Shear

1. Introduction
Several factors are known to influence the concrete contribution to shear resistance of
reinforced concrete beams including presence of axial force and a/d ratio. Axial compressive
forces such as prestressing improve the beams stiffness and increase the cracking load which
will allow the beam to reach higher shear loads. The a/d ratio can influence the load transfer
mechanism in the beam. While, the behaviour of slender beams with 2.5 < a/d < 6 is
governed by beam action, at a/d < 2.5 significant arch action can develop which enhances
the beams shear capacity [1]. Studies on FRP prestressed concrete beams have shown that
increasing the prestressing ratio enhances the shear capacity of the beams [2, 3, 4]. Also
increasing the a/d ratio was found to reduce the shear strength and increase the ductility of the
beams [2].
Although the mechanism of shear transfer is the same between steel and FRP reinforced
concrete beams, the lower stiffness of FRP reinforced members is concerning. FRP reinforced
concrete members develop wider cracks which lead to less shear capacity in slender beams.
Therefore, more research is needed to better understand the shear behaviour of FRP
reinforced concrete beams. The current project adds to the scarce research regarding the effect

Page 1 of 8

of prestressing and a/d ratio on shear capacity of concrete beams containing FRP flexural
reinforcement. Various North American design codes and guidelines are investigated and
their effectiveness in estimating the influence of the aforementioned parameters is discussed.

2. Experimental Work
2.1

Specimen Geometry and Testing Procedure

A total of 6 T-beams were tested in this project. All the beams included two layers of CFRP
prestressing tendons (CFCC) with an average effective depth of 188 mm and included no
transverse reinforcement in their shear spans. The flange of the beams contained a grid
reinforcement made from 6mm GFRP rebars. The grid reinforcement was designed to
counteract the shrinkage stresses in the concrete after casting. Also, the longitudinal bars in
the flange were designed to restrict cracking in the top of the beam when transferring the
prestressing force to concrete. The end zones of the beams were reinforced with GFRP
stirrups as well as steel spirals around each strand to prevent cracking in those regions at time
of stress transfer. Figure 1 illustrates a cross section of the beam outside the end-zones.
650
mm

80
m
m 270
mm

188
mm
CFCC
12.5mm
150
mm

Figure 1. Beam Cross section geometry and test set-up

All the beams were tested under four point loading at the University of Manitoba. The loading
cross head was centred between the supports and had a fixed length. The shear span of the
beams was varied between each group to create different a/d ratios. Table 1 outlines the
specifications of each group of samples.
Table 1. Dimensions of the beams

Group ID No. Samples

PR-1
2
PR-2
2
PR-3
2

2.2

a/d a (mm) Span (mm) Length (mm)

1.5
633
1016
1716
2.5
772
1394
1994
3.5
960
1770
2370

Mechanical Properties and Prestressing Process

The CFCC strands used in this research were manufactured by Tokyo Rope Company and
had 12.5mm diameter. Tension tests conducted on the strands revealed their tensile capacity
of 2100 MPa and modulus of elasticity of 137 GPa which matched the manufacturers
specifications. The grid reinforcement in the flange was made from 6mm GFRP rebars
manufactured by Pultrall under the trade name V-Rod. The stirrups used to reinforce the endzones were made from the same rebars. The normal density concrete used in this project had
strength of approximately 47 MPa at time of testing for all the specimens.
All the CFCC strands were prestressed to 53% of their ultimate capacity. The prestressing
losses at time of testing were approximately 10%. The strands were pulled using a hydraulic

Page 2 of 8

jack and a coupler system that was designed to prevent damage to the strands as a result of
using steel chucks. Figure 2 illustrates the coupler system.

CFCC

Steel

1.5 nuts
Figure 2. Prestressing Coupler

The CFCC and steel strands were cast separately inside threaded steel anchors with expansive
grout and joined together with two welded nuts. The steel strands were of the same diameter
as the CFCC strands. The coupler and the anchors were tested under tension before
application to ensure they could sustain at least double the required load. The anchors were
designed according to CSA-S806 Annex B [14]. The prestressing load was monitored using a
load cell placed between the bulkhead and the jack as well as strain gauges on the strands.

3.

Design Equations

Among the current North American design equations for concrete beams reinforced with
FRP, only the CSA-S6-10 and CSA-S806-11 consider the effect from prestressing. CSA-S610 includes the factor which is a measure of the aggregate interlock across diagonal cracks
and is a function of the average longitudinal strain at mid-depth of the section (x). Increasing
prestressing in the beam will decrease the value of x which will in turn increase and the
shear capacity of the beam. The formula for Vc in CSA-S6-10 is shown below:
Vc 2.5f cr bd v
(1)
In the above formula, fcr is cracking strength of concrete; dv is the effective shear depth; is a
factor used to account for the shear strength of cracked concrete and is calculated from the
formula below:

0.4
1300

1 1500 x 1000 s ze

Mf

V f V p 0.5 N f Ap f po

dv

2( E r Ar E p Ap )

(2)

(3)

sze is equivalent value of crack spacing parameter (sz) that accounts for influence of aggregate
size; Nf is factored axial force (negative for compression); Ap is area of prestressing tendon;
Ar is area of non-prestressed reinforcement; Er and Ep are modulus of non-prestressed and
prestressed reinforcement respectively; fpo is stress in prestressed reinforcement when the
stress in surrounding concrete is zero.
CSA-S806-11 accounts for the effect of prestressing by adding the load resulting from the
decompression moment (Mdc), in addition to the component of prestressing force in direction
of applied shear (Vp).
Vr Vc VsF 0.5V p

M dcV f
Mf

Vc 0.05c k m k s k a k r ( f c' )1 / 3 bw d v

Page 3 of 8

(4)

(5)

km represents the impact of the interaction between factored shear and moment on the shear
strength of the section; ks relates to size effect; kr and ka represent the effect of reinforcement
rigidity and arch action. It should be noted that the term MdcVf/ Mf is the same as Mdc/a, for
beams tested under three or four point loading and increases as the shear span decreases.
ACI 440.1R-06 guidelines recommend the following formula for design of concrete beams
reinforced with FRP:

2
(6)
f c' bw c
5
bw is width of the web; c is cracked transformed section neutral axis depth; fc is compressive
strength of concrete.
Vc

ACI 440.4R on prestressing concrete structures with FRP tendons recommends a minimum
value for Vc specified below:
Vc 0.17 f c' bw d
(7)
The ACI guidelines use the Vcmin formula for steel prestressed concrete beams. The formula is
not expanded due to lack of sufficient research and the fact that FRP prestressed beams are
likely to develop wider cracks than steel counterparts [5]. Also, the above formula includes no
special provision to account for presence of prestressing in the beam.

It should be noted that the ISIS design manual on FRP prestressed concrete beams follows the
same procedure as the 2006 version of the CSA-S6 that multiplied Eq.1 by the square root of
the ratio between the modulus of elasticity of FRP longitudinal reinforcement and common
steel tendon with Es = 200000MPa. Work done by other researchers such as Matta et al. found
this ratio to be unnecessary [6].

4. Results and Discussion

The prestressed beams tested in this project are grouped as PR-1, PR-2, and PR-3 beams
which have a/d ratios of 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 respectively. The experimental loads represent the
load applied to the beams which is half the machine load.
4.1

Experimental Results

Figure 3 shows a typical normalised load-deflection curve for the specimens tested in this
project. The ductility of the beams increased with the a/d ratio. This is especially noticeable
between PR-1 and PR-3 samples. At service loads of about 50% of the ultimate, PR-3 beams
reached less than 10% of their ductility while PR-1 beams reached almost 30% of their
ultimate deflection.

Figure 3. Typical normalised load-deflection curves for the design specimens

Page 4 of 8

The higher stiffness of PR-1 beams can be attributed to significant arch action that develops
in these beams. As a result of the arch action the PR-1 samples reached 80% higher shear
capacity than PR-2 beams. For PR-3 beams, beam action governs the behaviour of the beams.
In slender beams without transverse reinforcement such as PR-3 beams, failure occurs as soon
as the diagonal crack is formed. However, in PR-2 and specially PR-1 specimens, the beam is
able to carry additional shear passed diagonal cracking through arch action [1]. The
experimental results show that at a/d ratios less than 2.5 the contribution from arch action is
very significant. It can be seen from Table 2 that the capacity of the beams increased as the
a/d ratio decreased.
Table 2. Experimental results

Specimens
PR-1-B1
PR-1-B2
PR-2-B1
PR-2-B2
PR-3-B1
PR-3-B2

Pexp (kN)
327
333
184
182
148
146

CSA-S6

ACI

CSA-S806

202

98

34

108

98

33

84

The shear capacity of the beams almost doubled with decreasing a/d from 2.5 to 1.5. CSAS806 includes a factor ka to account for arch action in deep beams. The results from this
comparison are shown in Table 2. For this project, applying the CSA-S806 formula to PR-1
beams provided a reasonable estimate with experimental values being 1.6 times the
theoretical ones.
It should be noted that all the beams tested in this project failed in diagonal tension, except for
PR-1 beams that demonstrated shear compression failure. Figure 4 below illustrates typical
failure for each group of beams inside their shear span.

(a) PR-1

(b) PR-2

(c) PR-3

Figure 4. Typical failure for beam specimens

4.2

Discussion

Tests conducted by other researchers in the past saw the shear capacity of FRP prestressed
concrete beams doubled by increasing the prestressing ratio from 0 to 60% [3]. Similar
increase was seen in another study by prestressing the tendons to 40% of their ultimate
capacity [4]. Results from these tests are included in the database presented in this paper.
It should be noted that all the beams in the database were made from normal density concrete
with no transverse reinforcement and only FRP longitudinal reinforcement. Also, all the
beams in the database had a shear failure. The number of specimens in Table 3 represents the
number of beams that were included in the analysis. To avoid redundancy, not all samples
were included. The specimens varied by flexural rigidity of longitudinal reinforcement, type

Page 5 of 8

of FRP tendons used, a/d ratio, concrete compressive strength, size of the beam and
prestressing ratio.
Table 3. Database of beams tested by other researchers

Reference

a/d

Tureyen et al. (2002)

Razaqpur et al. (2004)
Mota. (2005)
Zhao et al. (1995)
Nishikawa et al.(1993)
Whitehead et al. (2005)
Matta et al. (2008)
Yost et al. (2001)
Sang et al. (1999)

3.4
2.67-4.5
2.8-3.09
3
2.57
3.1
3.1
4.1
2.5

No. Reinforced
specimens
4
5
4
2
3
2
3
6
-

No. Prestressed
specimens
6
4
2

fpe [%fpu]
0.3-0.6
0.4
0.51

Figure 5 illustrates a comparison between experimental results from the current project and
literature with theoretical values obtained from the design equations considered in this study.
It should be mentioned that only PR-2 and PR-3 beams with a/d > 2.5 were included.

(a) Reinforced Concrete

(b) Prestressed Concrete

Figure 5. Comparison of experimental and theoretical values

The ACI guidelines were conservative for all the samples in the database. CSA-S806-11 and
CSA-S6-10 provided more conservative values for prestressed concrete beams. This can also
be seen in Table 4 that shows the average ratio of experimental loads to theoretical values for
all equations.
Table 4.Average ratio experimental loads to theoretical values

Ratio of experimental to theoretical shear capacity

Reinforced concrete beams
Prestressed concrete beams
a/d
CSA-S6 ACI 440.1R CSA-S806 CSA-S6 ACI 440.4R CSA-S806
Average
1.3
2.22
1.23
2.26
3.53
2.05
St. Dev.
0.74
1.44
0.59
0.98
1.68
0.86
COV [%]
57
65
48
43
48
42

In case of reinforced concrete beams, both CSA-S806-11 and CSA-S6-10 performed well
with CSA-S806-11 providing slightly less conservative estimate of the experimental values.
The same was true for prestressed concrete beams, where CSA-S806-11 was slightly less

Page 6 of 8

conservative compared to CSA-S6-10. The ACI guidelines were most conservative for both
reinforced and prestressed beams. The ACI guidelines are especially conservative for
prestressed concrete beams with smaller cross section and high level of prestressing. This is
not surprising as these beams have a high stiffness as the result of prestressing that is not
accounted for in the ACI 440.4R-04 shear formula.
The high coefficient of variation (COV) in Table 4 is due to the variability of other influential
factors among the samples used in the database. As mentioned earlier, these factors include
a/d ratio, size of the beams, flexural rigidity of longitudinal reinforcement, concrete
compressive strength and type of FRP tendon used. For reinforced concrete beams, this
variability was the least for CSA-S806-11. In case of prestressed concrete beams, CSA-S80611 and CSA-S6-10 showed approximately the same variation. For both reinforced and
prestressed concrete beams, CSA-S806-11 and CSA-S6-10 showed less variation compared to
ACI guidelines, which shows these codes have relatively wider range of applicability.

5. Conclusions
This paper presents results from shear tests performed on six FRP prestressed concrete Tbeams with variable a/d ratio and adds to the current small database of FRP prestressed beams
tested in shear.
Prestressing can significantly improve the shear capacity of FRP reinforced concrete beams.
From the three major North American design codes and guidelines for concrete beams
reinforced or prestressed with FRP, the ACI guidelines were the most conservative. ACI
especially requires revision for FRP prestressed beams. CSA-S806-11 better estimated the
capacity of both reinforced and prestressed beams.
The study also showed that the shear capacity increases with decreasing a/d ratio, which is
especially noticeable with deep beam with a/d < 2.5 that develop significant arch action. Only
CSA-S806-11 includes a factor to account for arch action and provided reasonable estimate
for beams tested in this project. However, more testing is needed to confirm that.
This paper shows that the advantage from prestressing and arch action on shear capacity of
FRP reinforced concrete beams is underestimated. This is mainly due to conservatism
associated with shear design. More research is required to reduce the conservative nature of
design guidelines and allow for more efficient and cost effective designs as well as more
application for FRP material.

6. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Natural Sciences and Research Council of Canada for
their financial support. Also the assistance of Mr. Chad Klowak and Mr. Grant Whiteside in
the structures lab at the University of Manitoba is much appreciated.

References
[1]

MACGREGOR, J., BARTLETT, F., Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design

Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall. (2000).

[2]

PARK, S., NAAMAN, A., Shear Behaviour of Concrete Beams Prestressed with FRP
Tendons, PCI Journal, January 1999, pp.74-85.

Page 7 of 8

[3]

NISHIKAWA, K., KANDA, M., UCHIDA, K., Structural Behavior of Prestressed

Concrete Beams Using FRP Tendons, Public works Research Institute, Japan 1993

[4]

WHITEHEAD, P., IBELL, T., Novel Shear Reinforcement for Fiber-Reinforced

Polymer-Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete, ACI Structural Journal, March 2005
pp. 286- 294

[5]

American Concrete Institute (ACI), Prestressing Concrete Structures with FRP

Tendons. ACI 440.4R-04, 2004

[6]

MATTA, F., NANNI, A., HERNANDEZ, T., BENMOKRANE, B., Scaling of

Strength of FRP Reinforced Concrete Beams without Shear Reinforcement, 4th Int.
Conf. on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering (CICE), Zurich, July 2008

[7]

TUREYEN, A., FROSCH, R., Shear Tests of FRP-Reinforced Concrete Beams

without Stirrups, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 99, No.4, 427-434.

[8]

RAZAQPUR, A., ISGOR, B., GREENAWAY, S., SELLEY A., Concrete

Contribution to the Shear Resistance of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforced
Concrete Members, Journal of Composites for Construction, Vol.8, No.5, September
2004, pp.452-460

[9]

MOTA, C., Flexural and Shear Behaviour of FRP-RC members, MSc. Thesis,
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, 2005

[10]

ZHAO, W., MARUYAMA, K., SUZUKI, K., Shear Behavior of Concrete Beams
Reinforced by FRP Rods as Longitudinal and Shear Reinforcement., Proc. of
FRPRCS-2 Conference, Ghent, 1995, pp. 352-359

[11]

YOST, J., GROSS, S., DINEHART, D., Shear Strength of Normal Strength Concrete
Beams Reinforced with Deformed GFRP Bars, Journal of Composites for
Construction, Vol.5, No.4, pp.268-275.

[12]

AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE (ACI), Guide for the Design and

Construction of Structural Concrete Reinforced with FRP Bars, ACI 440.1R-06, 2006

[13]

CANADIAN STANDARDS ASSOCIATION (CSA), Canadian Highway Bridge

Design Code, CSA-S6-10, Mississauga, Ontario, 2010

[14]

CANADIAN STANDARDS ASSOCIATION (CSA), Design and Construction of

Building structures with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers, CSA-S806-10, Mississauga,
Ontario, 2010

Page 8 of 8