Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Effect of combined pre-cracking and corrosion on the method of repair of

concrete beams
Ali Siad a,⇑, Mohamed Bencheikh a, Luaay Hussein b
a
Geo-materials Development Laboratory (GMDL), M’Sila University, Algeria
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada

h i g h l i g h t s

Effects of combined pre-cracking and corrosion on repair methods were studied.

Two different methods were used to repair the damaged concrete beams.

The properties of the repaired concretes were based on those of the strengthen system.

The method of repair influenced considerably the results of the reinforced beams.

Combining pre-cracking and corrosion influences the properties of the repaired beams.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study investigated the combined effect of pre-cracking and corrosion on repair methods of rein-
Received 25 August 2016 forced concrete beams. The experimental program consisted of prismatic pre-cracked reinforced concrete
Received in revised form 28 November 2016 beam specimens, exposed to accelerated corrosion. The corrosion rate varied from 5% to 15% and the pre-
Accepted 7 December 2016
cracking was achieved by preloading the beams up to 60% of their ultimate loads. Two different methods
were used to repair the specimens. Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers plates (CFRP) were used to
strengthen the bottom portion of the specimens in the first method, and sheets containing carbon fibers
Keywords:
were added to the bottom portion, left and right sides of the specimens, in the second method. The test
Pre-cracking
Corrosion
results revealed that, the harmful effect of combined corrosion and pre-cracking was notable especially at
Repair 15% corrosion rate. The two methods of repair used can be considered as convenient. The ultimate
Damage strengths of the repaired beams were equivalent or significantly higher than those of the control speci-
Composite materials mens, although reduced deflection capacities were registered after repair.
Reinforced concrete Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The corrosion of steel reinforcements can be considered as the
primary cause of damage and early failure in concrete structures.
Indeed, it results in significant technical and financial problems
in terms of maintenance and/or rehabilitation applications and
re-construction or replacement of existing structures. For instance,
it is estimated that it costs around 1.8 trillion US$ to repair cor-
roded structures around the world annually [1].
In normal conditions, the reinforcement steel is protected from
corrosion because of the high alkalinity of concrete. When carbon-
ation occurs, or when the concentration of chloride ions near the
steel reinforcement increases, the alkalinity of concrete is reduced.
As a result, the passive layer that protects the steel reinforcement
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: si-huntsman@hotmail.fr (A. Siad).
from corrosion gets destroyed [2]. Therefore, the embedded steel
reinforcement corrodes, which leads to the reduction in the
cross-sectional area of the reinforcing steel [3], cracking, delamina-
tion and spalling of the concrete cover [4], and thus deteriorating
the bond at steel-concrete interface [5,6].
The repair and rehabilitation of reinforced concrete structures is
only successful if the new material interact efficiently with the old
concrete and form a durable barrier against the ingress of carbon
dioxide and chlorides. A variety of methods have been developed
to repair the corrosion damage of reinforced concrete (RC) beams,
and strengthen them using plates and steel sheets, or by projecting
the damaged area with concrete containing fibers [7]. However,
there are many disadvantages to these methods, including the
durability of the projected concrete as well as the heavy weight
and corrosion of the steel plates. In order to overcome these disad-
vantages, fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) have been used in recent
years to repair or strengthen the RC elements [8–11]. Among the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.020
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469 463

common FRP techniques used to strengthen/repair the damaged Table 1

RC beams, externally bonded reinforcement (EBR) and near- Experimental parameters of tested beams.

surface mounted (NSM) have gained great interest and use [12– Beam Pre-cracking Corrosion % Mode of repair
15]. The EBR system involves the use of FRP sheets bonded in the PC0T1 No 0 No
external part of the element with an epoxy resin. While, in the PC0T2 No 0 No
NSM technique, FRP laminates are inserted into precut grooves in PC0T3 No 0 No
the concrete cover of the beams. Although, the use of FRP tech- PC5 No 5 No
PC5P Yes 5 No
niques has been investigated by several researchers, and proved PC5P-M1 Yes 5 M1
to be of high level of strengthening efficacy [16,17], it’s important PC5P-M2 Yes 5 M2
to note that the damage in the RC elements used in these studies PC10 No 10 No
was limited to corrosion or pre-cracking. PC10P Yes 10 No
PC10P-M1 Yes 10 M1
Recently, limited studies have been completed about the effect
PC10P-M2 Yes 10 M2
of the combination of two simultaneous factors on the repair PC15 No 15 No
method of concrete beams. Wu (2010) [18], experimentally and PC15P Yes 15 No
theoretically investigated the combined effect of pre-cracking PC15P-M1 Yes 15 M1
and cyclic loading on reinforced concrete short beams. The results PC15P-M2 Yes 15 M2

revealed that the influence of repair under combined pre-cracking

and cyclic loading was insignificant. The effects of coupled corro-
sion and progressive loading on the FRP repair of reinforced con-
crete beams, were considered by Ali (2012) [19], through Monte-
Carlo simulation technique, which is based on Neural Networks
and finite element method. The results of this study clearly showed
that the coupling of two variables has a particular significance,
which requires an extensive attention. In addition, regarding the
real field observations, that usually showed two or more internal
or external combined actions, the study of simultaneous degrada-
tion factors on the mechanical and durability properties of con-
crete beams repair can be considered as more accurate than that
of dealing with a single factor.
Cracks in RC elements may be expected, even under normal ser-
vice conditions that include tensile strength of concrete, humidity,
temperature, shrinkage, and creep effects [20]. In addition, con-
crete cracking can be subject to development during the entire ser-
vice life of RC members due to the extreme exposure environments
caused by either the overloading or the ingression of chemical
gases and liquids [21]. Although, cracks in RC elements do not cer-
tainly cause the failure of concrete structures, the presence of
cracking can cause an excessive carbonation and chlorides ingress,
which aggravates and accelerates the corrosion and the damage of
concrete cover. When the cracking of the concrete cover occurs due
to steel corrosion, the repair of RC members is essential to main-
tain or restore the serviceability of structure [22,23]. Despite the
importance of studying the repair of RC elements subjected to
the combined effects of cracking and corrosion, no investigation
into this subject has so far been carried out. Hence, this study
investigated the effect of combined pre-cracking and corrosion
on the method of repair of RC beams. In order to examine the effect
of these simultaneous factors on the structural behavior of pre-
cracked RC beams, corrosion rates varying from 5% to 15% were
used. These corrosion percentages represent the loss in the cross-
sectional area of the steel reinforcement on the tension side. Two
methods were used to repair the damaged reinforced concrete cor-
roded beams. For the first method, Carbon Fiber Reinforced Poly-
mers (CFRP) were used to strengthen the bottom portion of the
specimens. And for the second method, sheets containing carbon
fibers were added to the bottom portion, left and right sides of
the specimens.
mens were 960 mm long, 150 mm wide, and 150 mm high, as illus-
trated in Fig. 1. All of the beams were reinforced with four 10 mm
bottom bars (tensile reinforcement), two 10 mm top bars (com-
pression), and 6 mm stirrups spaced at 100 mm. The concrete
cover was 20 mm. Each bottom steel reinforcement was fitted with
an electric connection in order to facilitate the corrosion process, as
illustrated in Fig. 1.
Beams PC0T (0%) were control beams with no corrosion or pre-
cracking, while beams PC5, PC10, and PC15 were corroded at a 5%,
10%, and 15% corrosion rate, respectively, with no pre-cracking.
Beams PC5P, PC10P, and PC15P were pre-cracked to 60% of the ulti-
mate load of the control beams at a 5%, 10%, and 15% corrosion rate,
respectively. Beams PC5P-M1, PC10P-M1, and PC15P-M1 were pre-
cracked and corroded at a 5%, 10%, and 15% corrosion rate respec-
tively, then repaired by external bonding of CFRP sheets to the bot-
tom of the beams. Beams PC5P-M2, PC10P-M2, and PC15P-M2
were pre-cracked and corroded at 5%, 10%, and 15% corrosion rates
respectively, then repaired by external bonding of CFRP sheets to
the bottom part, and carbon fibers tissue sheets in the bottom, left
and right sides of the beams.
2.2. Material properties
The concrete mixture used in this study was composed of water
to cement (W/C) ratio of 0.63, according to the Dreux Gorisse
method [24], in order to get slump of 7 cm and 28-day compressive
strength around 40 MPa. Ordinary Portland cement complying
with ASTM C150 Type I cement [25] was used as part of the cemen-
titious materials. Its principal properties provided by the manufac-
turer indicated: C3S and C3A contents of 60% and 7.5% respectively,
specific gravity of 3.13, Blaine fineness of 380 m2/kg and 28-day
compressive strength of 42.5 MPa. Siliceous round sand and
crushed silico-calcareous rocks with maximum grain sizes of
3 mm and 12.5 mm were used as fine and coarse aggregate in
the production of the concrete. The yield strength of the reinforce-

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Specimens details

A total of 15 RC beams were tested in this study as summarized

in Table 1. The test beams were categorized into four series,
according to the corrosion rate (0%, 5%, 10% and 15%). The speci- Fig. 1. Geometry of beams specimens.
464 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469

Table 2
Composition of concrete mixtures.

Components Composition (kg/m3)

Cement 375
Gravel 960
Sand 512
Water 235
NaCl 0.019

ment bars was 410 and 420 MPa for the 6 and 10 mm bars, respec- Fig. 3. Accelerated corrosion process.
tively, with a modulus of elasticity of 200 GPa. Table 2 shows the
composition of the concrete mixtures. Chloride in the form of NaCl
with a concentration of 5% by weight of cement was added during Table 3
the mixing process to quickly surpass the critical corrosion- Accelerated corrosion parameters.

inducing limit and initiate the reinforcement corrosion [26–28]. The rate of corrosion: % 5 10 15
Mass of rebar exposed to 1094.1 1094.1 1094.1
corrosion (g)
2.3. Preparation of test specimens Length of rebar exposed to 920 920 920
corrosion (mm)
Current density used (i) 432 432 432
Wooden prismatic forms were used to cast the test specimens.
(lA/cm2)
The reinforcements were placed inside the forms, providing a min- Applied current (I) (mA) 250 250 250
imum clear concrete cover of 20 mm. After casting, the specimens Surface of rebar exposed to 57,805 57,805 57,805
were cured for 28 days in a climatic room at 20 ± 2 °C and 95 ± 5% corrosion (A) (mm2)
Molar mass of steel (M) 55.9 55.9 55.9
humidity. All beams were tested after 28 days of casting.
(g/mol)
Pre-cracking was achieved by preloading the beams to 60% of Number of load of valence 2 2 2
the ultimate load to induce maximum crack openings of 0.3 mm, Fez+ (z)
in accordance with the suggestions of Schiessl and Raupach Constant of Faraday (F) 96,500  103 96,500  103 96,500  103
(1997) [29]. During the pre-cracking process, one cycle of load- (mA/s)
The mass loss per day (g) 3.61 3.61 3.61
ing/unloading was applied with an initial preloading force of
The total mass loss (g) 54.705 109.41 164.11
1 kN and standard increments rate of 0.005 kN/s. When 60% of The exposure time under 15 30 45
the ultimate load was achieved (49 kN), the loading was stopped electric current (days)
and the unloading proceeded with the same loading speed. The
pre-cracking method was similar for all the beams. All of the
beams were loaded using four-point loading according to ASTM order to ensure electric conductivity [26]. The electrolyte solution
C1341-13 [30] recommendations for more reliable flexural was changed every week in order to maintain a steady concentra-
strength and extended cracking along the specimen surface. The tion. The exposure time for the beams in the electric field was cal-
load was applied using a 300 kN hydraulic actuator. Linear variable culated using Faraday’s law. Table 3 summarizes all the necessary
displacement transducers (LVDT) with a 0.01 mm resolution were data for this stage.
installed at the mid span of each beam in order to measure the
deflection. Fig. 2 shows the transversal microscopic shear cracks m iM
that formed during the pre-cracking stage. During the pre- ¼ ð1Þ
tA zF
loading of the beams, the first cracks appeared and were localised
beneath the two loads. When the preloading was increased, differ- I
ent micro-cracks between the two applied loads appeared. i¼ ð2Þ
A
Where, m: mass of the rebar exposed to corrosion, t: corrosion
2.4. The process of accelerated corrosion duration, i: current density, M: Molar mass of steel, A: Surface of
the rebar exposed to corrosion area, z: Number of electrons/ atom
In order to obtain the desired rate of corrosion within a reason- generated or consumed, F: Faraday’s constant, and I: Applied
able time frame, an electrochemical method based on the applica- current.
tion of a constant electric current was carried out [8,26,31,32]. This
involves imposing a current density between the steel reinforce- 2.5. Repair methods
ment bars (anode), and a counter-electrode made of a stainless
plate (cathode) below the beams (Fig. 3). The beams were partially To evaluate the effectiveness of the repair method on the flexu-
immersed in a tank containing 5% NaCl (electrolyte solution) in ral capacity of pre-cracked-corroded RC beams, two different

Appearance of cracks in the bottom part Appearance of cracks in the side

Fig. 2. Microscopic cracks during the pre-cracking stage.

 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469 465

Fig. 4. Repair methods of tested beams.

Table 4
Properties of composite sheets.

Materials Width (mm) Length (mm) Thickness (mm) Density Fiber percentage (%) Elasticity modulus (MPa)
SikaCarboDur 100 700 1.2 1.6 >68 165,000
SikaWrap 450 700 0.331 1.81 96 242,000

Table 5
Properties of epoxy resins.

Resins Mixture density Shrinkage (%) Tensile strength (MPa) Bond strength (MPa)
Sikadur 30 1,65 ± 0,1 0.04 65–75(3 days at + 10 °C) >4
Sikadur 330 1.3 ± 0.1 / 30(7 days at 23 oC) >4

Table 6
strengthening techniques with CFRP sheets were used. Those two
Experimental results of tested beams.
methods were chosen because of their easier and quicker installa-
tion practices, in addition to their proved reliability in the rein- Beams Ultimate deflection Ultimate load Stiffness k
(mm) (kN) kN/mm
forcement of corroded or pre-cracked RC beams, with increased
stiffness, ductility and load carrying capacity [33]. In the first PC0T 10.31 79.21 25.40
PC5 6.37 82.67 22.76
method (M1), Carbon Fibers Reinforced Polymers (CFRP) were used
PC5P 6.2 82.71 21.39
to strengthen the bottom portion of the beams, as illustrated in PC5P-M1 2.83 88.16 45.89
Fig. 4. The CFRP were Sika CarboDur sheets embedded in an epoxy PC5P-M2 3.11 135.83 56.28
matrix [34], presented in the form of prefabricated plates that can PC10 6.23 80.71 17.65
be used to reinforce concrete and masonry structures. These plates PC10P 6.53 78.51 17.20
PC10P-M1 2.42 89.53 50.91
are attached to the beams using double component epoxy resin PC10P-M2 2.75 135.32 53.24
Sikadur30 (Table 5) [35], ensuring perfect bonding between the PC15 5.77 72.32 18.15
concrete and CFRP, this method is often used when the lower por- PC15P 5.45 69.62 15.01
tion of the beam is visible. The second method (M2) is similar to PC15P-M1 1.59 76.57 56.69
PC15P-M2 2.47 112.81 67.9
the first (Fig. 4), except in this case, a Sika Wrap 600C [36] type tis-
sue was used below the CFRP sheet and on both sides of the beams.
The type of CFRP used is a stitched unidirectional carbon fiber fab-
ric, oriented in the longitudinal direction of the sheet. It is com- 3.1. Behavior of corroded beams without external reinforcement
posed of 96% mid-range strength black carbon fibers, (PC0T, PC5, PC10, PC15)
characterised by sheet thickness of 0.331 mm and density of
1.81. An epoxy resin Sikadur330 (Table 5) [37] was used in the sec- Fig. 5 shows the load-deflection curves at the mid-span for the
ond method to ensure a good anchorage between the sheets and corroded beams PC5, PC10, and PC15. The behavior of the beams
the beams. Tables 4 and 5 show the properties of all the repair can be divided into two phases. The first phase is linear and the
materials according to the manufacturer’s specifications. force is proportional to the deflection until the loading threshold
(the elastic domain interval). The second phase is non-linear and
characterized by a slight increase in the load compared to the rapid
3. Results and discussion evolution of the deflection. In this phase, vertical micro-cracks
appeared at the bottom of the beams, which corresponds to the
Table 6 summarizes all the experimental results for the control, ultimate failure of the beams.
sound/corroded and pre-cracked/corroded beams without external It is clear from the test results that corrosion adversely affects
reinforcement, and for the pre-cracked/corroded beams that were the flexural capacity and the stiffness of reinforced concrete beams.
reinforced using methods M1 and M2. PC0T represents the average The results of the stiffness of the beams presented in Table 6 were
results of the control beams PC0T1, PC0T2 and PC0T3 tested with calculated from the load-deflection diagrams, where the material
no corrosion or pre-cracking. For comparison purposes, the men- was in phase 1. It can be noted from this table that the stiffness
tioned results are discussed in depth in the following sections of the beams decreased from 25.40 kN/mm for beam PC0T to
according to the state of tested specimens. 22.76 kN/mm for beam PC5T. This slight reduction in stiffness
466 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469

Fig. 5. Behavior of corroded beams.

can be attributed to the loss of bond between reinforcing steel and

concrete due to corrosion. In addition, it can be noted that the stiff-
ness decreases as the corrosion rate increases. From Fig. 5 and
Table 6, the ultimate deflection of beams PC5, PC10, and PC15
was 6.23 mm, 6.2 mm, and 5.77 mm, respectively, while for the
control beams (PC0T), it was 10.31 mm, on average. The differences
between PC0T and PC5, PC10, and PC15 were 38.22%, 39.57%, and
44.03% respectively. It is clear from these results that corrosion
adversely affects the deflection capacity and the stiffness of rein-
forced concrete beams. In addition, beams PC5 and PC10 achieved
a high ultimate load compared to PC0T, while for PC15, the maxi-
mum load was 8.7% smaller than that of PC0T. This can be attribu-
ted to the reduction in the cross-sectional area of the steel
reinforcement, and the presence of corrosion products that affect
the adherence between concrete and steel. The results also
revealed that the ultimate load for the PC5 beam (82.67 kN) was
almost similar to that of PC10 (80.71 kN). This finding was not pre-
dicted because increases in corrosion are usually accompanied by a
decrease in ultimate strength. However, other researchers have
also observed similar behavior [8,38], and they concluded that an
enhancement of anchorage capacity, believed to be associated
principally with increased radial stresses at the steel-concrete
interface, was able to offset the loss of the bar section. Although,
the ultimate load of corroded PC5 and PC10 beams was higher than
that of the control beam PC0T, this finding was not true for PC15.
Increasing the corrosion rate up to 15% caused around 8.7%
decrease in the ultimate strength of PC15 compared to PC0T. This
can explain that the corrosion rate can be considered harmful to
the ultimate load, especially when it equals or exceeds 15%.
3.2. Behavior of pre-cracked/corroded beams without external
reinforcements (PC0T, PC5P, PC10P, PC15P)
When the pre-cracking and corrosion were combined, two
types of cracks were noticed; transversal cracks, due to the pre-
loading, and longitudinal cracks (Fig. 6) resulted from the applied
corrosion rate. Fig. 7 shows the load-deflection curves at the
mid-span for the pre-cracked and corroded beams PC5P, PC10P,
and PC15P. These results reveal that the ultimate load for beams
PC5P and PC10P was almost similar to that of the beams in series
one (PC5 and PC10), with slight decrements. For instance, com-
pared to PC5 and PC10 results (82.67 kN and 80.71 kN respec-
tively), PC5P and PC510 showed ultimate loads of 82.31 kN for
PC5P and 78.51 kN for PC10P. Which explain that even after pre-
cracking, the application of 5% and 10% corrosion rate did not influ-
ence the maximum flexure strength supported by the beams. How-
ever, with 15% corrosion rate, the ultimate load of PC15P decreased
by 12.11% compared to the control beam PC0T. If considering the
Fig. 6. Longitudinal cracks appeared on the beam PC15P.
Fig. 7. Behavior of pre-cracked/corroded beams.
8.7% drop registered for PC15 (corroded only), around 6.3% extra
decrease was generated from the combined effect of pre-cracking
and corrosion. In terms of mid-span beam deflection capacities,
results decreased by 39.86% for PC5P, 36.66% for PC10P, and
47.13% for PC15P, compared to PC0T, which shows that the com-
bined pre-cracking and corrosion didn’t influence the ultimate
deflexion results considerably, compared to the first series without
pre-cracking.
However, for a deflection value of 2 mm, the loads were 78 kN
for PC5P and 61 kN for PC10P, compared to 68 kN and 54 kN for
PC5 and PC10, respectively. These small differences between cor-
roded and pre-cracked/corroded beams may be attributed to the
initial pre-cracking that made these beams more ductile by delay-
ing the load of plasticity. This delay increases the plasticity stage of
the beams (PC5P and PC10P) up to a certain corrosion rate.
At a higher corrosion level (15%), the pre-cracking has a detri-
mental effect on the behavior of the beams, accelerating the plas-
ticisation stage. This is demonstrated by the values of the applied
loads at a 2 mm deflection for beams PC15 and PC15P (60 kN and
50 kN, respectively). This reduction may be explained by the pres-
ence of the transverse crack from the initial pre-cracking, which
facilitated the transport of chloride [39], leading to the augmenta-
tion in the contact pressure at the steel-concrete interface, and in
the tensile stresses in the concrete member parallel to the rein-
forcements. This causes the formation of longitudinal cracks, and
acceleration in the corrosion rate, which evidently decreases the
ultimate load.
 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469
Fig. 8. Behavior of pre-cracked/corroded beams reinforced using the M1 method.
3.3. Behavior of pre-cracked /corroded beams reinforced using the M1
method (PC0T, PC5P-M1, PC10P-M1, PC15P-M1)
Fig. 8 shows the load-deflection curves at the mid-span for the
corroded beams PC5P-M1, PC10P-M1, and PC15P-M1. A linear ini-
tial phase was observed for all the curves followed by a sudden
increase in deflection, especially for PC5P-M1 and PC10P-M1. The
linear behavior was without any appearance of cracks up to
approximately 70–90 kN. At this range, visual cracking appeared
and the initial de-bonding of the composite sheets was noticed.
The ultimate load of PC15P-M1 was 96.66% of that of the control
beams PC0T. This indicates that PC15P-M1 was almost back to its
initial state. For PC5P-M1 and PC10P-M1, the ultimate load
exceeded the original state by 11.11% and 13%, respectively. In
addition, from the results presented in Table 6, the stiffness of
the beams repaired with M1 method increased significantly com-
pared to the control specimen, which explains the effectiveness
and the improved performance of the repaired beams by using
the M1 method.
However, with regards to the ultimate deflections, significant
decrements of about 72.55%, 76.52%, and 84.57% were calculated
for PC5P-M1, PC10P-M1 and PC15P-M1, respectively, compared
to PC0T. These results can be explained by the fact that the com-
posite sheet increased the stiffness of the beams, preventing them
from deforming. The addition of the composite plate changed the
mode of failure from ductile to brittle, as illustrated in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9. The detachment of the composite sheets.
467
Fig. 10. Behavior of pre cracked/corroded beams repaired with M2 method.
3.4. Behavior of pre-cracked/corroded beams reinforced using the M2
method (PC0T, PC5P-M2, PC10P-M2, PC15P-M2)
Fig. 10 shows the load-deflection curves at the mid-span of the
corroded beams PC5P-M2, PC10P-M2, and PC15P-M2. Those curves
revealed a significant increase in the ultimate strength of the
repaired beams, compared to the control beams (PC0T). The repair
by using M2 method resulted in decrements of about 171.48% for
PC5P-M2, 146.84% for PC10P-M2, and 142.42% for PC15P-M2, com-
pared to the ultimate strength of PC0T. However, those significant
improvements were accompanied by a remarkable decrease in the
mid-span deflection capacities. For instance, ultimate deflections
of PC5P-M2, PC10P-M2 and PC15P-M2 were 69.83%, 73.32%, and
76%, respectively, lower than that of PC0T. The improvement in
the mechanical properties between damaged/repaired (with CFRP
reinforcement) and control beams was already observed by Ben-
jeddou et al. (2007) [40]. They explained that for any damage
degree, the overall result came from the high strength CFRP lami-
nate that enhanced the mechanical performances of the damaged/
repaired beams. The elastoplastic behavior of beams changed to
elastic behavior, which explains the lower ductility performance
of the repaired beams.
3.5. Comparison of repair methods M1 and M2
For both methods M1 and M2, it is clear from the test results
that using the composite material to repair the damaged beams
significantly enhanced and improved their flexural capacity. The
high strength of the CFRP sheets compensated the negative effect
of corrosion and pre-cracking. A comparison of results from these
two methods (Fig. 11) revealed that, compared to M1, the ultimate
loads in method M2 increased by 60.18%, 33.84%, and 45.76% for
corrosion rates of 5%, 10% and 15%, respectively. In addition, the
ultimate deflections increased by 2.72%, 3.2%, and 8.57% for corro-
sion rates of 5%, 10% and 15%, respectively. Also it can be observed
that the stiffness of the beams increased from method M1 to
method M2.
The mechanical behavior of the repaired beams was depending
upon the performance of the strengthening system. According to
Benjeddou et al. (2007) [40], the characteristics of CFRP sheets is
the only reason that can influence the rigidity of the repaired
beams. For the first method M1, the bonding of the SikaCarboDur
CFRP plates in the tension zone significantly enhanced the rigidity
of reinforced beams. Therefore, the failure mode changed from
ductile to brittle. For the M2 method, the addition of SikaWrap
CFRP sheets to the bottom region, left and right sides (tension
and shear regions) advantageously enhanced the stiffness, the ulti-
mate load, and the ductility of the repaired beams, probably
468 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469

Fig. 11. Comparison of the repair methods M1 and M2.

because of the properties of the SikaWrap sheets compared to Sika-
CarboDur CFRP plates. In addition, if considering that de-bonding
of the CFRP reinforcement was proved to be the main reason of
the flexural failure of beams reinforced with CFRP [41], de-
bonding of CFRP in M1 was in tension zone only (bonding zone),
whereas the de-bonding of CFRP in M2 occurred in almost all of
the beams strengthened in shear and tension zones. These can
explain that method M2 increased the bond capacity of CFRP
sheets compared to method M1, which can also be the cause of
enhanced properties of pre-cracked/corroded beams repaired by
using method M2.
3.6. Relationship between the pre-cracking and rate of corrosion
A comparison of the test results of corroded beams (without
pre-cracking) and pre-cracked/corroded beams (Fig. 12) revealed
only slight differences, in spite of the presence of pre-cracking
during corrosion exposure. For example, the ultimate load for the
corroded beam PC5 was 82.67 kN at a corrosion rate of 5%, while
the ultimate load for the pre-cracked/corroded beam at the same
corrosion rate was 82.71kN. These results can be explained by
two phenomena. The first phenomenon is the reduction in the pen-
etration rate of chlorides within the beam because corrosion prod-
ucts can accumulate at the bottom of the crack, and prevent the
further ingress of chlorides, water, and oxygen into the concrete
[42,43]. The second phenomenon is maybe due to self-healing,
which depends on the width of the cracks and the cement hydra-
tion. Indeed, the ability of cementitious materials to hydrate the
additional cement particles can help the pre-cracked concretes to
recover some of their physical and mechanical properties [44,45].
For the other levels of corrosion (10% and 15%), the results
revealed differences of 2.78% and 3.41% between PC10 and PC10P
(for a corrosion rate of 10%), and between PC15 and PC15P (for a
corrosion rate of 15%) respectively. These decrements in the ulti-
mate strength of pre-cracked/corroded beams compared to those
of corroded beams can be explained by the formation of higher
amounts of corrosion products due to concrete pre-cracking and
increased level of corrosion. The accumulation of corrosion prod-
ucts at the steel-concrete interface induced more contact pressure,
which in turn increased the corrosion crack width, especially in the
longitudinal direction parallel to the tensile reinforcement (Fig. 6).
This phenomenon was expected to highly decrease the ultimate
load between the corroded beams and the pre-cracked/corroded
beams. The small decrements recorded for 10% and 15% corrosion
rates, proved the explanation mentioned above about the forma-
tion of self-healing products or a rust layer in concrete cracks,

Fig. 12. Relationship between the pre-cracking and rate of corrosion.

 A. Siad et al. / Construction and Building Materials 132 (2017) 462–469
which in turn reduced the corrosion activity and limited the effect
of pre-cracking. These results also agreed with those of El Maad-
dawy and Topper (2005) [46], who showed that the presence of
flexural cracks during corrosion exposure had almost no effect on
the flexural strength of beams, especially after long term corrosion
exposure.
4. Conclusions
The experimental tests carried out during this study revealed a
significant increase in the ultimate load of all beams reinforced,
using composite materials containing carbon fibers (up to
171.48% for PC5P-M2, 146.84% for PC10P-M2, and 142.42% for
PC15P-M2 compared to PC0T). However, there was a significant
reduction in the ultimate deflection (up to 69.83%, for PC5P-M2,
73.32% for PC10P-M2, and 76% for PC15P-M2 compared to PC0T).
The following conclusions were drawn from the experimental
results:

The different gains in the ultimate load of the repaired beams
were depending on the performance of the strengthen system.
The high strength of the composite reinforcement increased
the rigidity of the beams.

The method of repair influenced considerably the results of the
reinforced beams.

The addition of CFRP sheets to the bottom, left and right sides
prevented the rapid de-bonding of the composite from the
beams, which in turn increased the mechanical performance
of the strengthen system. For instance, the ultimate load of
the beams reinforced using M2 increased by 60.18%, for corro-
sion rate of 5%, compared to M1 result.

The presence of pre-cracking during corrosion exposure influ-
ences the ultimate load capacity of reinforced concrete beams,
especially for corrosion rates of 10% and 15%. However, the for-
mation of self-healing products or a rust layer in concrete cracks
limited the combined effect of pre-cracking and corrosion.
References
[1] G. Schmitt, Global Needs for Knowledge Dissemination, Research, and
Development in Materials Deterioration and Corrosion Control, World
Corrosion Organization, New York, 2009.
[2] J.P. Olivier, A. Vichot, Concrete Durability Chapter 9, Press of National School of
Bridges and Roads, France, 2008.
[3] A.K. Azad, S. Ahmad, S.A. Azher, Residual strength of corrosion-damaged
reinforced concrete beams, ACI Mater. J. 104 (1) (2007) 40–47.
[4] C. Li, J. Zheng, W. Lawanwisut, R.E. Melchers, Concrete delamination caused by
steel reinforcement corrosion, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 19 (2007) 591–600.
[5] X. Wang, X. Liu, Bond strength modelling for corroded reinforcements, Constr.
Build. Mater. 20 (2006) 177–186.
[6] L. Berto, P. Simioni, A. Saetta, Numerical modelling of bond behaviour in RC
structures affected by reinforcement corrosion, Eng. Struct. 30 (2008) 1375–
1385.
[7] French Association of Civil Engineering (FACE), Rehabilitation of Reinforced
Concrete Degraded by Corrosion France, 2003.
[8] A.H. Al-Saidy, A.S. Al-Harthy, K.S. Al-Jabri, M. Abdul-Halim, N.M. Al-Shidi,
Structural performance off corroded RC beams repaired with CFRP sheets,
Compos. Struct. 92 (2010) 1931–1938.
[9] C. Francesca, C. Edoardo, G. Manfredi, P. Marisa, Durability issues of FRP rebars
in reinforced concrete members, Cem. Concr. Compos. 28 (2006) 857–868.
[10] H. Wang, A. Belarbi, Ductility characteristics of fiber-reinforced-concrete
beams reinforced with FRP rebars, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 2391–2401.
[11] A. Mosallam, S. Banerjee, Enhancement in in-plane shear capacity of
unreinforced masonry (URM) walls strengthened with fiber reinforced
polymer composites, Compos. B 42 (2011) 1657–1670.
[12] M.Z. Jumaat, M.A. Alam, Strengthening of RC beams using externally bonded
plates and anchorages, Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 3 (2008) 2207–2211.
469
[13] A. Bilotta, F. Ceroni, M. Di Ludovico, E. Nigro, M. Pecce, G. Manfredi, Bond
efficiency of EBR and NSM FRP systems for strengthening concrete members, J.
Compos. Constr. 5 (2011) 757–772.
[14] B. Almassri, F. Al Mahmoud, R. Francois, Behaviour of corroded Reinforced
Concrete beams repaired with NSM CFRP rods, experimental and finite
element study, Compos. B 92 (2016) 477–488.
[15] B. Almassri, Strengthening of corroded reinforced concrete (RC) beams with
near surface mounted (NSM) technique using carbon fiber polymer (CFRP)
rods, an experimental and finite element (FE) modelling study (Ph.D. thesis),
INSA of Toulouse, France, 2015.
[16] M.Z. Jumaat, A.A. Shukri, M. Obaydullah, M.N. Huda, M.A. Hosen, N. Hoque,
Strengthening of RC beams using externally bonded reinforcement combined
with near-surface mounted technique, Polymers 8 (2016) 261.
[17] J.M. Sena-Cruz, J.A. Barros, M.R. Coelho, L.F. Silva, Efficiency of different
techniques in flexural strengthening of RC beams under monotonic and fatigue
loading, Constr. Build. Mater. 29 (2012) 175–182.
[18] Z.Y. Wu, Experimental study of the behavior of short concrete beams pre-
cracked and reinforced by composite materials under static loading and
fatigue (Ph.D. thesis), LCPC Paris, France, 2010.
[19] O.M.M. Ali, Time-dependent reliability of FRP strengthened reinforced
concrete beams under coupled corrosion and changing loading effects (Ph.D.
thesis), Angers University, France, 2012.
[20] D. Zhang, S. Shijun, Y. Zhao, J. Weiliang, U. Tamon, Cracking behavior of CFRP
laminate-strengthened RC beams with premechanical and postmechanical
environmental damage, J. Compos. Constr. 4 (2014) 04014066.
[21] M. Ekenel, J.J. Myers, Durability performance of RC beams strengthened with
epoxy injection and CFRP fabrics, Constr. Build. Mater. 6 (2007) 1182–1190.
[22] G. Malumbela, M. Alexander, P. Moyo, Serviceability of corrosion-affected RC
beams after patch repairs and FRPs under load, Mater. Struct. 44 (2011) 331–
349.
[23] O. Rio, C. Andrade, D. Izquierdo, C. Alonso, Behaviour of patch repaired
concrete structural elements under increasing static loads to flexural failure, J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 17 (2005) 168–177.
[24] G. Dreux, J. Festa, A New Guide to Concrete and Its Constituents, France, Paris,
1998.
[25] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Specification for
Portland Cement ASTM C150-12, 2012.
[26] V. Bouteiller, J. Dauthuile, A. Deman, Feasibility of Accelerated Corrosion on
Reinforced Concrete Beams APPLET L2-3-2, National Research Agency, France,
2008.
[27] F. Vallot, E. Cailleux, V. Pollet, Synthesis Report of Aging APPLET L3-2-2,
National Research Agency, France, 2009.
[28] J. Cairns, Y. Du, D. Law, Structural performance of corrosion-damaged concrete
beams, Mag. Concr. Res. 60 (2008) 359–370.
[29] P. Schiessl, M. Raupach, Laboratory studies and calculations on the influence of
crack width on chloride-induced corrosion of steel in concrete, ACI Mater. J. 94
(1997) 56–62.
[30] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test Method for Flexural
Properties of Continuous Fiber-Reinforced Advanced Ceramic Composites
ASTM C1341-13, 2013.
[31] A. Hassan, Bond of reinforcement in concrete with different types of corroder
bars (MASc thesis), Ryerson University, Canada, 2003.
[32] R. Smith, The effects of corrosion on the performance of reinforced concrete
beams (MASc thesis), Ryerson University, Canada, 2007.
[33] F. Shamsoon, Behaviour of reinforced concrete beams strengthened by CFRP
wraps with and without end anchorages, Procedia Eng. 77 (2014) 123–130.
[34] SikaÒ CarboDurÒ Plates, Pultruded Carbon Fiber Plates for Structural
Strengthening.
[35] SikadurÒ-30, Structural Adhesive for Bonding Reinforcement.
[36] SikaWrapÒ-600 C, Woven Unidirectional Carbon Fibre Fabric, Designed for
Structural.
[37] SikadurÒ-330, Resin Epoxy of Impregnation for Tissue of Strengthening.
[38] J. Cairns, G. Plizzari, Y. Du, D. Law, C. Franzoni, Mechanical properties of
corrosion damaged reinforcement, ACI Mater. J. 102 (2005) 256–264.
[39] T. Vidal, Requalification of structures degraded by corrosion of reinforcements
(Ph.D. thesis), Toulouse University, France, 2003.
[40] O. Benjeddou, M. Ben Ouezdou, A. Bedday, Damaged RC beams repaired by
bonding of CFRP laminates, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (2007) 1301–1310.
[41] A.M. Reza, C. Czaderski, M. Motavalli, Debonding failure modes of flexural FRP-
strengthened RC beams, Compos. B 5 (2008) 826–841.
[42] P. François, Influence of concrete cracking on reinforcement corrosion (Ph.D.
thesis), Laval University, Canada, 2009.
[43] T. Lorentz, C. French, Corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete: effects of
materials, mix composition and cracking, ACI Mater. J. 92 (1995) 181–190.
[44] H. Haoliang, G. Ye, D. Damidot, Characterization and quantification of self-
healing behaviors of microcracks due to further hydration in cement paste,
Cem. Concr. Res. 52 (2013) 71–81.
[45] V.C. Li, E.H. Yang, Self Healing in Concrete Materials, Self Healing Materials,
Springer, Netherlands, 2007, pp. 161–193.
[46] T. El Maaddawy, T. Topper, Long term performance of corrosion-damaged
reinforced concrete beams, ACI Struct. J. 102 (2005) 649–656.