Construction and Building Materials: Giovanni Muciaccia, Mehdi Khorasani, Davood Mostofinejad

Construction and Building Materials 354 (2022) 129181
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
Review
Effect of different parameters on the performance of FRP anchors in

combination with EBR-FRP strengthening systems: A review
Giovanni Muciaccia a, Mehdi Khorasani a, b, *, Davood Mostofinejad b
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan 20133, Italy
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology (IUT), Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: The use of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites using externally bonded reinforcement (EBR) installation
FRP technique is an alternative to conventional retrofitting techniques for retrofitting and strengthening deficient
FRP anchors structures to improve their seismic performance. In spite of this widespread application, premature failure caused
Spike anchors
by FRP sheets debonding from the concrete surface is one of the greatest challenges faced when FRP composites
Strengthening
are used for structural strengthening. FRP anchors (FRP spike anchors) proved their ability to suppress or
Anchorage
postpone FRP debonding and can provide safe means to transfer and guide the load from one member to another
in FRP strengthening of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. This study aims to provide an overview of the effect
of different parameters on the performance of FRP anchors in RC structures strengthened with FRP composites.
This study also tries to review the various design models in order to determine the capacity of FRP anchors
according to a failure mode approach or a bond-slip approach. Finally, despite wide research on the behavior of
FRP anchors, there are some issues and research gaps like the effect of cyclic loading, different environmental
situations, temperature, creep, and fatigue on the behavior of FRP anchors as well as a comprehensive and
unified model to predict FRP anchor capacity in different conditions that still need to be investigated and
clarified that are mentioned in this paper.
capacities of these materials [7,46,55–60].

1. Introduction To solve the problem of FRP sheets debonding from the concrete
surface, several solutions and techniques have been developed by re
The use of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites using Exter searchers. These solutions include using FRP materials with less capacity
nally Bonded Reinforcement (EBR) installation technique is a common [61], changing the method of installation of FRP materials including the
method for strengthening, repairing, and rehabilitating reinforced con near-surface mounted method (NSM) [62,63] or grooving method
crete (RC) structures [1–9]. EBR-FRP systems have been found to be [64–70], and also using different anchorage systems. Generally,
quite effective for the strengthening or repairing of existing RC members anchorage systems can also be divided into two general types, FRP and
such as beams [10–16], columns [17–20], beam-column connections steel, depending on the material used. FRP anchorage systems include
[21–28], slabs [29,30], shear walls [31–34], bridge components spike anchors (FRP anchors), FRP U-wrap [16,25,27,71–74], FRP
[35–37], infill walls in reinforced concrete frames [38,39] and masonry patches [75–77], π-anchor [78,79], C-anchor [80,81], hybrid anchors
structural elements [40–45] and are nowadays accounted by several (combination of FRP spike anchors and patch anchors) [82] and other
codes and guidelines such as ACI 440.2R [46], fib Bulletin 90 [47], CNR- innovative anchorage geometry [83,84]. On the other hand, steel
DT200 [48], HB 305 [49], AS5100.8 [50], JSCE-E 541 [51], AFGC [52], anchorage systems are also classified as steel plates [85,86], cylindrical
CECS-146, TR55 report [53] and CSA-S806 [54]. hollow section (CHS) anchorage [87] and other mechanical fasteners
Despite all the advantages of FRP materials including high tensile [88–92]. In addition to FRP and steel anchors, Yuan et al., [93],
strength, corrosion resistance, low weight, fast and easy application, and Alhassan et al., [94], Al-Rousan and Abu-Elhija [95] presented newly
slight modifications in dimensions of retrofitted members, the phe epoxy anchors. The researchers reported the epoxy anchors significantly
nomenon of premature debonding /delamination of FRP sheets or enhanced the shear strength of FRP to concrete joint as well as
laminates from the concrete surface has suppressed the use of all debonding progress was significantly postponed [93,95].
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mehdi.khorasani@mail.polimi.it, mehdi.khorasani@cv.iut.ac.ir, mehdi_kh11@yahoo.com (M. Khorasani).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129181
Received 27 June 2022; Received in revised form 2 September 2022; Accepted 12 September 2022
0950-0618/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
G. Muciaccia et al. Construction and Building Materials 354 (2022) 129181
Notation β dowel angle (degree);

Nuj strength of the unanchored control joint (N);
The following symbols were used in this study: Naj strength of the anchored joint (N);
Parameter Definition (unit) Ndb debonding strength of the FRP (N);
cc concrete cone failure; Na strength of anchor (N);
cb combined cone-bond failure; ks strength enhancement coefficient for a single anchor;
po pull-out failure; kL coefficient related to the distance from the of FRP sheet;
fr fiber rupture failure; kβ dowel angle factor;
fsd fan-to-sheet debonding failure; kb sheet width factor;
Ncc concrete cone capacity of a single FRP anchor (N); klend factor of the bonded length behind the anchor and its
Ncb concrete combined cone-bond capacity of a single FRP position respect to FRP sheet;
anchor (N); lend bonded length behind the anchor (mm);
Npo pull-out capacity of a single FRP anchor (N); lef effective bond length of the respective unanchored control
Nfr fiber rupture capacity of a single FRP anchor (N); joint (mm);
Nfsd fan-to-sheet capacity of a single FRP anchor (N); lab fan length (mm);
hef effective embedment depth (mm); Srat anchor/sheet strength ratio;
f’c concrete cylinder compressive strength (MPa); τmax ultimate shear stress of the element without any
dh diameter of the anchor hole (mm); anchorages (MPa);
wfrp width of FRP sheet for making FRP anchor (mm); τmax-anchor ultimate shear stress capacity of the system with
tfrp thickness of FRP sheet for making FRP anchor (mm); anchorages (MPa);
Adowel area of anchor dowel (mm2); n anchors numbers;
ffrp tensile rupture strength of a flat FRP coupon (MPa); bf CFRP strip width (mm);
fct maximum concrete tensile strength (MPa); Sn number of anchor rows standardized strength factor;
AN projected area of the failure cone (mm2); Ss spacing between anchors standardized strength factor;
da diameter of the anchor (mm); Sad anchor diameter standardized strength factor;
dc depth of concrete cone (mm); St CFRP sheet fiber thickness standardized strength factor;
τsb shear bond strength of epoxy as reported by manufacturer Sfd anchor fan diameter standardized strength factor;
(MPa); na number of anchor rows along the debonding path;
Afan area of Fan bonded to FRP substrate (mm2); tf CFRP sheet fiber thickness (mm);
rb bend ratio at the key portion (mm); Sa center-to-center spacing between anchors along the
EFRP elastic modulus of the FRP material (MPa); debonding path (mm);
εFRP rupture strain of the FRP material (mm/mm); ad anchor diameter (mm);
α fan angle (degree); fd normalized anchor fan diameter;
Among the various methods to solve the problem of FRP debonding elements. In addition to solving the problem of debonding along the FRP
from the concrete surface, FRP anchors are an effective option that have sheet, such anchors can safely transfer the force on the FRP sheets from
shown their effectiveness in strengthening various reinforced concrete one member to another [96–100]. In fact, due to the flexibility of FRP
Fig. 1. The process of construction of FRP anchor, (a) Cutting FRP sheet in desired dimension, (b) Removing lateral string in Fan region, (c) Impregnating both sides
of FRP sheet in dowel region and rolling by a slender steel bar, (d) Removing steel bar and opening fibers in Fan region [129].
2
anchors compared to steel anchors, they can be used in a variety of FRP- defined as insertion angle. The effect of these parameters on the
strengthened members in any shape and anywhere. This flexibility also behavior of FRP anchors has been previously investigated and is dis
reduces the bearing stress on the FRP sheet in contact and prevents the cussed in the following section.
sheet from fracture due to such stresses. On the other hand, the simul FRP anchors can be installed either wet or dry installation techniques
taneous implementation of FRP anchors and FRP-strengthened sheets by technicians (Fig. 4). In wet procedure, first, the bundles of fibers that
leads to integration and effective performance between them [101]. are prepared in the required size are impregnated with epoxy resin and
Researchers have used FRP anchors to strengthen or retrofit various processed for a certain period of time as curing time. Then, after the
elements of reinforced concrete structures, including beams curing time is over, they are placed in the hole (impregnated on site and
[74,102–106], columns [17,107–113], beam-column connections inserted wet in the hole) [130–133]. However, the dry method is simpler
[114–118], slabs [119–122], shear walls [61,123–126], infill walls in than the wet method, since it does not require curing time. In the dry-
reinforced concrete frames [38], as well as masonry structures mounting technique, the bundles of fibers are soaked into a hole filled
[41,127,128]. with resin without being pre-impregnated [130,132,134–136]. The
FRP anchors consist of a bundle of fibers, or a rolled fiber sheet method described here is faster than the wet installation method.
together (Fig. 1) which impregnated with epoxy resin as adhesive and Nevertheless, the wet procedure, creates better adherence and bonding
with one end inserted into a hole pre-drilled in the structure member performances [137].
(dowel component) and the other end bonded and splayed onto the FRP
sheet (fan component). On the other hand, different types of FRP an 3. Different tests for evaluation of the behavior of FRP anchor
chors can be made based on the number of fans used in the fabrication of
them and the way of spreading the fan on the FRP sheet, such as bow-tie Depending on the position of the FRP anchors relative to the FRP
fan splay, one-end fan splay and two-end fan splay (Fig. 2). In addition to sheet attached to it, these anchors may be subjected to different com
making FRP anchors manually and rolling FRP fabric, some manufac binations of applied loads. In order to investigate the behavior of the
turers of FRP materials also provide ready-made anchors called FRP FRP anchors under the applied loads, in general, two different ap
ropes or FRP bundles that can also be applied to strengthening projects. proaches can be distinguished in their experimental modeling in contact
Even though, so far and over the past two decades, a variety of with the concrete member [97,100].
studies have been conducted to investigate the effect of different pa A) Simplified Single Anchor Testing.
rameters on the behavior of FRP anchors, however, many questions By using this approach, anchoring system behavior can be deter
about their behavior remain unanswered. Therefore, despite the mined and its relationship to material characteristics and basic
recommendation of the design codes to use FRP anchors in FRP- geometrical considerations can be assessed. When testing is conducted
strengthened structures, the design and implementation criteria for in this manner, it is possible to study the anchor individually and eval
these anchors have not yet been included in the codes and guidelines. uate the effect of different FRP anchor geometric parameters such as
Therefore, the current paper, with a comprehensive review of research anchor depth, anchor diameter, width and length and opening angle of
conducted so far, summarizes the impact of various parameters on the the fan (α factor), anchor angle relative to the FRP sheet (β factor).
behavior of FRP anchors, identifying existing lacks or gaps as priority Additionally, determination of shear strength and/or pull-out strength
topics for future research. of anchor are provided. Two important subsets of single anchor testing
approach are pull-out and single shear test.
2. Types of FRP anchors and fabrication techniques B) Full Strengthened System Testing.
This system is fundamental to validate the effectiveness of an
In terms of how FRP anchors work and their position respect to the anchoring solution in real-life applications and fully characterize the
FRP sheet and the strengthened member, they can be classified as two anchors’ effectiveness. Such approach is generally pursued after inves
general categories: straight anchors or bent anchors (Fig. 3). Straight tigating on the behavior of single anchor. Beam bending tests are
anchors are responsible for transmitting force from one member or part generally carried out to such scope.
of a member to another. Therefore, these anchors are installed at the end The above-mentioned testing procedures are addressed in the
of the FRP sheet in a way that is in line with the strengthening sheet. On following Subsections.
the other hand, bent anchors can be installed both along with the sheet
and at the end of the sheet. In the case where they are placed at the end 3.1. Pull out test
of the sheet, their duty is force transferring to the surrounding element,
otherwise, they are used to prevent the phenomenon of premature Pull-out test is the simplest and most basic form of anchor testing. By
debonding. In this case, they are oriented at specific intervals along with performing this test, the ability of the anchorage system to transfer
the sheet at an angle of approximately perpendicular to it. As it can be tensile force from concrete to anchor is evaluated. Nevertheless, one of
seen in Fig. 3, there are two important angles that can affect the behavior the disadvantages of this test is that the shear interfacial force between
of FRP anchors. First one is the parameter of α that is defined as fanning FRP and concrete is not taken into account [97,100]. Among the ad
angle to the orientation of the force. The second parameter is β that is vantages of this method of testing, it can be pointed out to possibility to
Fig. 2. Different types of fan splay, (a) Bow-tie fan, (b) One-end fan splay, (c) Two-end fan splay.
3
Fig. 3. Different types of FRP anchors.
Fig. 4. Different fabrication techniques of FRP anchors, (a) Rolling of dry fibres, (b) Tying of anchor dowel fibres, (c) Completed dry anchor, (d) Rolling of
impregnated fibres (dowel part) and dry fibres (fan part), (e) Forming of anchor dowel component, (f) Completed wet anchor [132].
measure the pull-out ultimate strength and the load-slip curve directly [133], Zheng et al., [148], and Muciaccia et al., [129].
without the need to refer to conversion formulas.
Research on the fundamental pull-out behavior of FRP anchors has
3.2. Lap shear test
however been limited to primarily studies by Eshwar et al., [138],
Huang and Chen [139], Ozdemir and Akyuz [140,141], Orton
The lap shear test due to its simplicity of design is still the most
[141,142], Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu [143,144] (Fig. 5), Kim &
widely experimental procedure for determining joint behavior and its
Smith [145], Sami et al., [146], Bournas el al. [147], Carozzi et al.,
strength [149]. A failure mechanism (FRP rupture, adhesive failure, or
4
Fig. 5. Pull out setup [144].
substrate failure) can also be detected through single lap shear tests. It
was found that there are roughly-two set-ups used as lap shear test that
have been with relative fortunes. In general, they can be categorized as:
A) Single shear test (Fig. 6c and 6d) is the most basic setup in this
category. In this test, the strengthening sheet is glued to one side
of the concrete member and stretched from free end. The main
advantage of this test is its the conceptual simplicity, while
providing a solution to keep the block fixed during load appli
cation can provide some challenges, as well as applying a uniform
load eccentrically to the system of FRP-strengthened concrete
specimen. Single shear tests have been used by [150–156].
B) Double shear method of testing (Fig. 6a & 6b) accounts for the
centered load application since they are symmetric because of
test setup. However, the concrete block fixity issue continues to
be a concern. This method has been followed by [137,157–163].
Fig. 7. Bending test in a three-point load beam test [167].
3.3. Bending test (beam test)
stresses to simulate a real-scale bended structure, which is possible
Small-scale bending tests (Fig. 7) provide a simply fixable set-up for
through a small-scale test [97]. In this case, recovery of characterization
anchors characterization in combined shear-bending and even in equi
data from the applied transversal load measurement is the primary issue.
librium critical application. It is probably the closest combination of
Fig. 6. Classification of bond tests [164].
5
This method of loading has been utilized by various researchers to This failure mode occurs for low strength values of the bonding agent. It
explore the behavior FRP-strengthened member under flexural loads is worth noting that creating confinement situation for concrete can
[165–167]. increase this kind of failure mode in some cases [129].
4. FRP anchors failure modes 4.3. Combined concrete cone-bond failure
Various failure modes of FRP anchors have been identified in liter Regarding the researches of Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu [144],
ature (Fig. 8). Concrete failure, anchor pull-out, fan-to-sheet debonding anchors with 50, 75, and 100 mm embedment lengths and a 12.7 mm
and FRP rupture are the most common failures modes in previous diameter by rolling a 140 mm width of FRP sheet, as well as with 15.9
investigation in different loading systems. The occurrence or non- mm diameter for 220 mm FRP width and 19.1 mm diameter for 300 mm
occurrence of some of these failure modes, in addition to the design that failed by anchor pullout exhibited a combined cone–bond failure.
parameters of the FRP anchors, also depends on the type of anchor, As shown in Fig. 9b, length of FRP anchor embedment is divided to two
whether it is straight or bent. In the following, the required conditions parts, one part with concrete cone failure and the other one with bond
for the occurrence of each of these failure modes are discussed. failure. This implies that the capacity of anchor should be equal to the
In RC strengthening application by FRP-EBR systems, it is preferable sum of concrete cone capacity and adhesive bond capacity between the
to prevent or postpone the debonding failure mode of the FRP sheet from cone tip and the end of anchor.
the concrete surface as much as possible, tending toward an ideal failure
mode governed by FRP strip failure, similarly to promoting yielding
4.4. Fiber rupture failure
steel rebars in RC members.
The fiber rupture failure mode depends on the material properties of
4.1. Concrete-cone failure the FRP materials, the anchor size and the fanning angle α, and typically
occurs in the key portion)the connection point of the dowel part to the
Failure of the anchor could occur in the form of either concrete fan part). Some researchers like Llaurado et al., [171–173] has stated
pullout or combined cone–bond pullout. As noted by Luke et al., [168] that the bend ratio at the key portion (for bent anchor) and embedment
for metal adhesive anchors, cone failure of the concrete can be observed of FRP anchor could affect on the capacity of FRP anchors.
for only very shallow embedment lengths and on the other hand for
embedment lengths greater than 50–75 mm, the most commonly 4.5. Fan-to-sheet debonding failure
observed failure mode is combined cone–bond failure which is charac
terized by pullout of a shallow concrete cone with an adhesive core. In This failure mode is typical of FRP anchor only, while the other ones
this study concrete cone failure is separated from combined cone-bond can be observed also for other type of anchors embedded in concrete.
failure (Fig. 9). In such failure mode, the dimensions and geometry of the fan as part
Ozdemir [140–142] and Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu [143,144] of FRP anchor are decisive. In fact, this type of failure is likely if the fan
studied the influence of the mechanical properties of the concrete sub does not have the suitable connection with the bottom FRP sheet. In this
strate into which the dowel is introduced on the behavior of straight failure, the fan fibers are separated from the FRP sheet attached to it and
hand-made impregnated anchors, using concrete preparations with in the transfer of load from the sheet to the anchor and vice versa occurs
compressive strengths ranging between 10 MPa and 60 MPa. A 45 de discontinuity which eventually leads to loss of bearing capacity of the
grees crack angle for specimens exhibiting concrete cone failure mode bonded joint. Kobayashi [174] concluded that due to the shape of the
was observed in both studies, in accordance with the findings of others fan part, part of the tensile force applied to the anchor is transversely
(see e.g., [145,169,170]). transmitted to FRP sheet. Therefore, the correct transfer of forces be
tween the FRP sheet and anchor must be ensured. To ensure this tran
4.2. Bond failure sition, he suggested that the fan parts of adjacent anchors should
overlap. Other researchers have examined this type of failure and ways
In this failure, the bond between the adhesive core and concrete is to prevent such a failure from occurring, which will be discussed in the
overcome such that the anchor simply and singly pulls out from the hole. following sections.
Fig. 8. Possible failure modes for FRP anchors [99].
6
Fig. 9. a) Concrete cone failure, b) Combined concrete cone adhesive bond failure [144].
5. The effects of different parameters on the behavior of FRP

anchors
There are many parameters that affect the performance of FRP an
chors and make one of the failure modes (among the ones previously
identified) dominant with respect to the other ones. Identifying such
parameters will lead to an understanding of the ultimate behavior of FRP
anchor and to the ability of obtained the required failure mode. This
section addresses the effects of various parameters on the behavior of
FRP anchors, as currently available in literature.
5.1. Anchor preparation and installation
In addition to considering the design points of FRP anchors, how they

are implemented is also remarkably effective in their performance. In
fact, work quality plays an undeniable role in the bond strength of FRP
Fig. 10. Detail of anchor hole [178].
anchors. If the preparation of holes and adhesives, impregnation of FRP
sheets and improper placement of FRP anchors and adhesives have
problems, this will lead to a significant reduction in bond strength. in CFRP tensile capacity due to bending, and proposed the following
Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu [144] illustrated that the improper equation:
installation of the FRP anchors could reduce the anchor bond strengths fa rb
by up to 50 %. The most parameters that affect the quality of installation = 0.07 + 0.45 (2)
fu da
include condition of the drilled hole, hole cleaning, placement of anchor
and adhesive in the hole. Huaco [175] developed a methodology for fa rb
= 0.05 + 0.3 (3)
assessing the quality of CFRP anchors. This issue was emphasized that fu da
quality control for CFRP installations is necessary for retrofitting pro
In these equations, fa is the capacity in the bent CFRP in kN, fu is the
jects. Muciaccia et al., [129] have expressed that the quality of work
ultimate capacity of the straight CFRP in kN, rb is the radius of the
manship and impregnation procedure in preparing FRP anchors have an
bending in mm, and da is the diameter of the CFRP anchor in mm.
important role in ultimate capacity of FRP anchors. Castillo and Kanitkar
In a recent study, Llauradó et al., [172] have modified those
[113] stated that the quality of installation of FRP anchors is critical for
empirical equations by including the impact of embedded depth (hef)
adequate performance. They also concluded that in seismic applications
and dowel angle (β in degrees). The modified equation is shown as
when ductility is critical, adequate saturation of anchor fibers should be
follows:
provided on site.
fa hef rb β
= 0.3 + 0.5 ( ) ( ◦ ) (4)
5.2. Hole and corner bending radius fu 150 da 90
Sun et al., recently [179] developed Llauradó’s equation and the
As a first attempt to consider the effect of hole radius on the capacity
strength ratio of FRP anchor to FRP reinforcement (Sratio) have been
of bent FRP rods, Ishihara et al., [176] developed the Eq. (1). The
added to related formula. The equation can be expressed as:
following equation was obtained based on numerical analysis.
[ ]/[ ] fa rb β
fa da da
− 1.15
= 0.06 + 0.22Sratio + 0.23( ◦ ) − 0.02 (5)
= ln 1.9 + 0.73ln( ) 0.9 + 0.73ln( ) (1) fu da 90
fu rb rb
A hole chamfer radius of 1.4 times the hole cross-sectional radius (at
The Japan Society of Civil Engineers [51] and the American Concrete least 0.5 in) was found to be effective by Pudleiner et al., [167]. Pham
Institute [46,177] recommend to round the corners of the holes (Fig. 10) [180] explored this topic in greater detail through a series of tests using
to minimize stress concentrations at the anchor bend (for bend anchor), a 0.0′′ radius, 0.25′′ radius, and 0.5′′ radius. Pham’s results indicated that
but no comprehensive research could be found regarding the effect of the effect of the bend radius on anchor capacity may not increase sub
rounding the holes on the anchor strength. JSCE [51] (Eq. (2)) and ACI stantially beyond a certain radius. Furthermore, more labor is required
440.2R-17 [46] (Eq. (3)) published a method to estimate the reduction
7
to create larger bend radiuses for these reasons, a bend radius of at least required. With the concrete cover included, the total embedment dis
0.25′′ is recommended, whereas Garcia et al., [181], Sun [182] and Kim tance could reach a depth of five inches. Kim [188] tested CFRP anchors
[183] recommended a fixed 0.5 in. (13 mm) chamfer radius. Ultimately, similarly to Orton’s tests, and recommended an embedment depth of at
ACI 440.2R-17 [46] and Eshwar et al., [138] stated where fibers wrap least 4 in.. However, Kim recommended the use of CFRP U-wraps in
around corners, the corners should be rounded to a minimum 0.5 in (13 combination with CFRP anchors to develop full strength in the rein
mm) radius to reduce stress concentrations in the FRP system and con forcing sheet. Shear tests were conducted for bent CFRP anchors by
crete. Shekarchi et al., [184] based on small-scale tests, recommended Niemitz [134]. For these tests, CFRP anchors were installed to a depth of
that the bending radius of anchor hole should be at least 1.4 times the two inches and the sheet was pulled in tension by a hydraulic jack.
radius of the hole (minimum 13 mm) to mitigate stress concentrations at Several trials of Niemitz’s tests showed that the embedment depth had a
the edge of the hole. minimal effect on the shear strength of the anchor. Slight effect of FRP
anchor depth on bent anchor capacity compared to straight anchors was
reported by Eshwar et al., [138]. A depth of 50 mm was also suggested
5.3. Anchor dowel angle respect to load direction (bent or straight
for bent anchors by them. The three point standard test for flexural
anchor)
strength of plain concrete beams was accomplished by Huaco [175]. He
suggested four inches for embedment depth of FRP anchors. Shekarchi
Koutas and Triantafillou [185] performed an experimental investi
et al., [184] declared that the embedment of can be selected the mini
gation on the effectiveness of various types of spike anchors in combi
mum value between 4 in and concrete cover + 2 in.. Fib bulletin 90 [47]
nation with U-shaped FRP jackets for shear strengthening of RC beams.
in the flexural strengthening of beams with FRP has suggested that FRP
They concluded that straight anchors are many times more effective
anchors have to be inserted at least 50 mm into the concrete cone as well
than bent anchors. In fact, straight anchors were found to be
as have a total depth at least equals to 120 mm.
approximately-six times more effective in comparison with their hori
zontal counterparts. This result is not surprising because, unlike nearly
5.5. Hole diameter
straight anchors, fibers in bent anchors are hardly activated in tension.
Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu [143,144], showed that Increasing in the
Ozdemir and Akyuz [140–142] concluded that the diameter of the
inclination angle (transferring straight anchor to bent anchor) results in
anchor hole did not have a significant impact on the tensile strength of
a significant reduction in the pullout capacity of the anchors.
the anchor, but recommended 1 or 2 mm of free space in the anchor hole
In order to present an equation between the anchor dowel insertion
for the epoxy. Kim [131] explored the effects of different anchor hole
angle β to the bonded surface, Zhang and Smith [186] proposed a linear
diameters, considering diameters equal to the anchor and larger than the
equation by as provided in Eq. (6).
anchor. Diameters of 5/8′′ , 1/2′′ , and 3/4′′ were used and based on test
kβ = 2.34(
β
) − 0.33 (6) results, Kim [131] reported area of an anchor hole needs to be at least
2π 40 % larger than area of an anchor. Research conducted by Baggio [189]
In this equation, kβ is the reduction coefficient for bent anchors recommended that the anchor hole area be at least 40 % larger than that
comparing to straight anchor which is applied to the capacity obtained of the anchor. In the research of Eshwar [138] the diameter of anchor
from straight anchor under equal conditions and β is the insertion angle was approximately 70 % of desired hole diameter. Smith & Zhang [132]
in radians. The range of β used to develop the model was 0.5π ⩽ β mentioned that just 2 mm, hole diameter needs to be larger than anchor
⩽1.76π. Castillo et al., [99] concluded that the efficiency of bent anchors diameter. So, for the anchor with the diameter of 12 and 14 mm tests a
is significantly lower than the efficiency of straight anchors, due to the 14 mm and 16 mm diameter hole were drilled, respectively. Sun [182]
fibers being less well aligned with the direction of the applied force. conducted tests on rectangular concrete beams to study the behavior of
CFRP anchor. He recommended the value of 2.2 as a ratio of hole area to
anchor area. Research conducted by Pham [180] recommended that the
5.4. Embedment length (dowel length) area of the anchor hole should be at least 1.4 times larger than the
equivalent FRP sheet area of the CFRP anchors. Pudleiner [178] and
Many recommendations for an effective embedment depth of CFRP Shekarchi et al., [184] also confirmed the factor suggested by Pham
anchors have been presented in the past. According to tension tests [180]. Castillo [190] suggested that diameter of the hole to be between
(Fig. 11) conducted by Akyuz and Ozdemir [140–142], an effective 1.2 and 1.4 times larger than the diameter of the impregnated dowel.
depth of 10 cm (4 in.) exists for straight CFRP anchors, beyond which the
capacity of the anchor no longer increases.
According to Orton et al., [135,187], results from flexure tests have
shown that an embedment of at least 2 in. into the concrete core is
Fig. 11. a) Anchor dowel in the concrete, b) Anchor dowel bonded to steel for tension test [140–142].
8
5.6. Effect of cyclic loading 5.9. Fan geometry
Mahrenholt at al. [191] showed that when FRP anchors are subjected The impact of the end geometry of FRP anchor (fan geometry) on the
to cyclic loading, they exhibit far less capacity than when subjected to transition of forces from the CFRP sheet to the anchor has been an
monotonic loading. The anchors were isolated and instead of attaching important subject of study. Kobayashi [174] found that spreading the
to the FRP sheet, they were attached to the steel channel (Fig. 12). end fibers of the FRP anchor into a fan shape allowed a smooth transfer
of forces from the sheet to the anchor (Fig. 14). In fact, the angle of the
5.7. Amount of FRP used in FRP anchor and width of FRP strip fan impacts the effectiveness of the force transfer. Kobayashi concluded
that the fan angle should be less than 90 degrees to be most effective.
The amount of FRP anchor material required to make FRP anchor In another experimental study, 360-degree anchor fans were
relative to the volume of FRP sheet in contact with it, greatly affects the explored by Niemitz [134]. Test results indicated that the 360-degree
retention and failure performance of the FRP sheet prior to FRP anchor anchors failed when a larger splay diameter was used, most likely due
failure. In other words, the amount of fiber used to make the anchor to insufficient anchor capacity. Niemitz [134,194] reported that it is
respect to the fibers of the sheet attached to it also determines whether better the whole width of the FRP sheet are covered by fans in order to
the anchor is strong enough to allow the CFRP sheet to develop its full transfer force effectively from the FRP sheet into the RC structure. Kim
capacity. As an early research, Orton [135] recommends the total cross- [188] suggested the angle of the fan portion of an anchor should be less
sectional area of CFRP anchors should be two times the cross-sectional than 90 degrees. So, for his research he considered 60 degrees as the
area of the CFRP reinforcing sheet. Quinn [192] tested anchors with angle of the fan. On the other hand, Sun [195] verified the applicability
material ratios of 1.5 and 2. It was found that anchors with a material of the maximum fan angle of 60 degrees recommended by Kim. He
ratio of 2 have capability to develop the full strength of CFRP strips recommended 45 degrees for fan angle. Shekarchi et al., [184] also
without premature rupture of anchor. Kim [188] and Pham [180] tested confirmed the limitation for anchor-fan angle suggested by Kim [188].
a variety of anchor sizes and found that an anchor with a cross-sectional Confirming previous studies, the relationship between anchor size and
area 1.5 times larger than the area of CFRP sheet has enough ability to ultimate tensile capacity of the anchor was not linear, with the efficiency
develop the full capacity of the sheet. Fib bulletin 90 [47] in flexural dropping as the anchor increases in size. A novel observation is the effect
strengthening of RC beams with FRP has suggested that the cross- of fanning angle α on anchor capacity, with wide anchors being weaker
sectional are of an FRP anchor has to be at least 50 % greater that the than narrow anchors. Regarding the length of the fan that is another way
cross sectional are of the longitudinal FRP sheet. Shekarchi et al., [184] to discuss about the effect of fan angle, it is recommended by Kobayeshi
reported that the anchor-to-strip material ratio should be considered [174] and Orton [135] that the anchor fan should be long enough to
greater than 2.0 to achieve full CFRP material capacity and To limit the completely cover the width of the main FRP sheet.
probability of anchor rupture. Kim [188] and Shekarchi et al., [184] reported that an effective
Pudleiner et al., [167] expressed that there is a correlation between CFRP anchor is expected to be long enough to allow the anchor fan to
the area of the CFRP strip developed per anchor and the maximum stress extend 0.5 in. beyond the width of CFRP Fan. Thus, the length of anchor
at fracture of that strip. In fact, they introduced a normalized strip area fans can be obtained from a given width of CFRP strip and a given angle
parameter that has shown the more CFRP stripe area developed per of CFRP strip using following equation:
anchor, the less stress is placed on that strip when it is fractured. ( wf )
+ 0.5
Lfan (inch) = 2 ( αanchor ) (7)
5.8. Anchor patch geometry tan 2
In the Eq. (7), wf is the width of CFRP strip, αanchor is the angle of
Patches placed over anchors (Fig. 13) have been shown their ability CFRP anchor fan, Lfan is the length of CFRP fan.
to increase anchor strength and feasibility by Kalfat et al., [82,98], Kim Hu [196] and Zhang [186] reported that the shape of a single fan
et al., [193], Sun et al., [76] and Quinn [192]. whose direction is towards the place where the force is applied is
Kobayashi et al., [174] suggested the application of one CFRP patch considered to be an optimal state. Fib bulletin 90 [47] has recommended
over anchors, with patch fibers running perpendicular to the fibers of the fanning angle of 30 in order to minimize stress concentrations in flexural
strip. The patch thickness was recommended to be at least 50 % that of strengthening of RC beams. Shekarchi et al., [184] suggested the
the CFRP strip. Huaco [175] suggested adding two patches with following equation for the minimum anchor fan length:
orthogonal fiber directions over CFRP anchors. Pudleiner [178] and
Shekarchi et al., [184] concluded that applying FRP patches over the fan lfan,min =
ffu .N.tf
(8)
of FRP anchors could increase the performance of the FRP anchor. They σb
stated that anchor patches should have the same width as the CFRP strip Where, σb is bond stress capacity that specified by the manufacturer,
and the same length as the CFRP anchor. N is the number of strip plies, tf is the laminate thickness and ffu is design
ultimate tensile strength of the CFRP.
Fig. 12. Specimen geometry and details in the research of Mahrenholt et al., (units in mm) [191].
9
Fig. 13. Schematic of applying patches over FRP anchors [178].
shown in Fig. 15. He also found that spacing of the anchors in the di
rection perpendicular to the main sheet needs to be less than 200 mm.
Fib bulletin 90 [47] in strengthening RC column or RC pier walls
with high aspect ratio has recommended to use FRP anchors in combi
nation with transverse FRP wrapping system in order to achieve effec
tive confinement. However, there is no recommendation about the
spacing of FRP anchors or their depth and fan configuration. Al-Sammari
and Breña [197] developed an approach to quantify the strength of
bonded CFRP sheets in combination with FRP anchors using FE simu
lations that was verified with experimental tests. They concluded that
efficiency of FRP anchors decreases exponentially as the spacing be
tween anchors increases. This result indicates that anchors placed
outside the effective stress transfer zone are mostly ineffective. Some
other researchers concluded that using more anchors with a smaller
diameter is preferable to using fewer anchors with a larger diameter
[120,135,198]. In another research, Flores et al., [155] concluded that
Fig. 14. Recommended anchor fan angle [174]. utilizing one single FRP anchor in a narrow FRP sheet (100 mm width)
can be very effective from the point of view of increasing material
5.10. Spacing and configuration of FRP anchors properties and strength. This can be comparable to using multiple FRP
anchors (two in this case) in wide FRP sheets (200 mm), with a suitable
For anchors that are installed adjacent each another, Kobayashi configuration. A anchored joint performance can also be affected by the
[174] recommended an overlap of anchor fans of 10 mm or more as
Fig. 15. Anchor overlap spacing as recommended by Kobayashi [174].
10
arrangement of anchors within a certain width of the sheet. According to strength of a CFRP anchor. Smith and Zhang [132] investigated the ef
the literature, specimens with a longitudinal FRP anchor arrangement fect of FRP anchor type on the behavior of them. The only significant
tend to develop a more ductile behaviour before failure, while speci conclusion that can be inferred from the Smith and Zhang studies is that
mens with a transversal FRP anchor arrangement are generally char the efficiency of glass anchors was significantly less than the efficiency
acterized by a greater strength [155]. of carbon anchors.
5.11. Concrete strength 6. Design models
Ozdemir and Akyuz [140–142] concluded that compressive strength In this section, models for calculating the capacity of FRP anchors for
of the concrete in the range of 10 MPa to 16 MPa did not have effect on the different failure modes and bond-slip behavior are presented. Such
the tensile capacity of the CFRP anchor if its embedment depth was less models are largely of a semi-empirical nature. In order to determine the
than 50 mm. However, the effect of concrete compressive strength capacity of anchors exhibiting concrete-related failure modes, the
became more important as embedment depth increased. Ozbakkaloglu models are informed by the behavior of metallic anchors, while for fiber
and Saatcioglu [144] expressed that the bond strength was not signifi rupture and fan-to-sheet debonding failure modes, the models are
cantly affected by the strength of concrete for specimens with two inspired by trigonometry and by the anchor geometrical configuration,
compressive strength of concrete (25 MPa and 50 MPa). However, when respectively. Table 1 summarize existing literature models developed on
the failure of the anchor is governed by concrete cone (in the anchors the basis of test results by isolating specific failure modes. It is worth to
with embedment lengths less than 50 mm), the strength of concrete noticing that the final capacity of FRP anchors should be the minimum
becomes important. value obtained from different failure modes. When determining the
capacity of FRP anchor, for some mechanisms, as concrete cone failure,
the strength of concrete becomes a decisive parameter, differently from
5.12. Type of anchor fiber (glass, carbon etc.)
the case when fiber rupture or pull-out failure mode is dominant, where
the compressive strength of concrete does not have any special influ
A study to investigate the behavior of glass fiber reinforced polymer
ence. In such direction, Castilo et al., [200] proposed to adopt a step-by-
(GFRP) anchors was conducted by Wang [199]. It was found that
step design methodology for FRP anchors. This approach has a primary
specimens with GFRP anchors exhibited similar trends to specimens
limitation in that most models were generated through pull-out tests in
with CFRP anchors. On the other hands, GFRP fibers were found to be
different configurations and with limited parameter ranges. Addition
easier to bend as well as easier to install into drilled anchor holes. As a
ally, some researchers may have focused on special parameters totally
disadvantage of GFRP anchor, the lower tensile strength of GFRP pre
ignore by others. As an example, parameter of hef was emphasized by
sented a potential need for larger sized anchors to achieve the equivalent
Table 1
Prediction of the capacity of FRP anchors according to specific failure mode.
Reference Failure mode Type of Anchor capacity Remarks
FRP
anchor
ACI 349–85 [204] Concrete cone Straight Ncc = fct AN AN is the projected area of the failure cone with a cone angle of 45
√̅̅̅̅
fc ( ) degrees.
fct = , AN = π h2c + hc .da
3 √̅̅̅̅
CCD models [205] Concrete cone Straight Cone angle is approximately 35 degrees.
Ncc = 14.7h1.5 fc
′
c
√̅̅̅̅
Kim and Smith Concrete cone Straight Model developed within such range of parameters:
Ncc = 9.68h1.5 fc
′
ef
[130,206] 17.5 mm ≤ hef ≤ 100 mm
Fiber rupture Straight Nfr = 0.59Adowel fFRP
10.4MPa ≤ fc < 100MPa)
′
Combined Straight Ncb = 4.69πdh hef (fc < 20Mpa)Ncb =

′
11.8 mm ≤ dh ≤ 20 mm
concrete cone- 9.07πdh hef (fc ≥ 20Mpa)
′
pull-out
Uniform Bond Model Dowel pull-out Straight Npo = τUBM .π.da .hef τUBM is the mean bond strength value evaluated from confined testing
[169], Muciaccia et al., on short-bonded length.
[129]
Castillo et al., [99] Dowel pull-out Bent Npo = 700hef − 18000 Taking into account such a range of parameters, the following model
was developed:
40 mm ≤ hef ≤ 100 mm.
Kanitkar et al., [207] Fan-to-sheet Straight Nfsd = 0.35τsb Afan Relationship derived from fan splay lengths ranging from 100 mm to
215 mm with a maximum fan angle α of 30 degrees and area Afan
6500 mm2⩽Afan⩽16800 mm2.
Ozbakkaloglu and Fiber rupture Straight Nfr = (0.3 − 0.5)Adowel fFRP A reduction in ultimate strength occurs as a result of misalignment and
Saatcioglu [144] uneven straining of fibers when anchors are manufactured.
)
Castilo et al., [208] Fiber rupture Straight ( 90 − α The Model was developed within such range of parameters:
Nfr = 3.1EFRP εFRP A0.62
dowel fFRP
90 EFRP = 253 GPa, εFRP = 0.0098, 15 ⩽ α ⩽ 60 degrees, 142mm2 ⩽ Adowel
)
Bent ( 90 − α ⩽ 168 mm2.
Nfr = 2.2EFRP εFRP A0.69
dowel fFRP
90 Coefficients calibrated on test results adopting a non-linear least
squares curve fitting method with 95% confidence bounds.
Mahrenholtz et al., Fiber rupture Bent Nfr = 0.06Adowel fFRP The Model was developed within such range of parameters:
[191] 79mm2 ⩽Adowel ⩽201mm2 and for fFRP = 4800 MPa.
Isolated FRP anchors assessed under cyclic loading in shear and not
bonded to a FRP sheet.
Llaurado et al., Fiber rupture Bent 50β The following parameters were utilized to develop the model:
Nfr = 0.002Adowel fFRP (hef + rb )
[171–173] π 201 mm2 ≤ Adowel ≤ 314 mm2
50 mm ≤ hef ≤ 125 mm
0.3 mm ≤ rb ≤ 2.5 mm
90◦ ≤ β ≤ 135◦ .
11
Llaurado et al., [165] while the model of Castilo et al., [165] has been transmission. This can only be achieved by properly designing FRP an
included the fan angle that is different from other. chors and paying attention to the parameters involved in its behavioral
Differently, other group of researchers tried to start from the model along with correct and accurate execution. At the end of this
formulation of a local bond-slip law to derive a comprehensive design study,the main points that extracted from the analyzed researches to
model. Zhang and Smith [201] collected the results coming from a large evaluate the efficiency of FRP anchors in strengthening reinforced
experimental program carried out at the university of Hong Kong and concrete members with FRP are summarized hereinafter.
exposed them in [132,186,198,202]. They investigated the effect of an
enormous range of parameters and proposed a regression model that 7.1. FRP anchor fabrication and installation procedure
considers the most effective parameters. Table 2 summarizes the model
governing formulations, jointly with some analytical formulations for As for regards the anchor preparation (or fabrication) and installa
anchor groups. tion, available literature results suggest that:
The use of bond-slip approach was continued by some other re
searchers [155,156], who provided bond-slip relationships in graphical 1. Quality of construction procedure and dry or impregnation of dowel
form, without any specific analytical formulation. For instance, Kurtoglu part of FRP anchor has a vital role on bond strength of FRP anchors.
et al., [203] presented a machine-learning-based constitutive bond-slip In fact, poor hole preparation, poor adhesive placement and non-
graphs (shear stress vs slip) for anchored CFRP strips externally verticality of the anchor (fibers misalignment) may result in
bonded on concrete members. The name of algorithm was support remarkable reductions in bond strength of FRP anchors.
vector regression (SVR). Proposed models have shown high correlation 2. It is recommended to round the corners of the holes in installation of
coefficients around/greater than 90 % and low error rates. bent anchors (at least 13 mm) to minimize stress concentrations.
3. Diameter of the anchor hole has no significant impact on the tensile
7. Main outcomes of the literature review strength of the anchor, but a gap of 2 mm between the anchor and the
borehole is recommended for a better placement of epoxy round the
The application of FRP anchors can significantly increase load car anchor.
rying capacity of EBR-FRP systems and suppress or delay the phenom
enon of premature debonding as well as help to reliable force
Table 2
Prediction of the capacity of FRP anchors based on bond-slip formulation.
References Type of Proposed model Remarks
anchored
joint
Zhang and Single- Naj = ks Nuj ks = 1.59(kL − 1)(kβ − 1)(kb − 1) + 1kL = Model is based on a large experimental program.
Smith [201] anchored ⎧ lend lend ⎫
⎨ 0.7 lef 0.22 ≤ < 1.76 ⎪
⎪
joint ⎪
lef
⎪
45 < βdowel < 158.4
◦
⎬ β
◦ ◦
kβ = 2.34 dowel +
⎪
⎪ lend ⎪
⎪ 180 50 mm < bfrp (mm) < 150 mm .
⎩ 2.23 ≥ 1.76 ⎭
lef
bfrp − 0.39
0.67 kb = 1.02( )
200∑
Multiple- Naj = km Nuj , km = n1 (ks − 1) + 1 ks is calculated according to single anchored joint.
anchored
joints
Flores et al., Single- Naj = Ndb + kglob Na kglob = 0.6kb + 0.4285klend kb = If the anchor fan expanded onto the sheet, λ are 0.03 and 0.16 for Srat
[209] anchored ⎧ 30.75 n is less than 1.5 and more than 1.5, repectively. If the anchor fan
⎪ Srat < 1.5
joint ⎪
⎨ bf √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ expanded between two sheet plies, λ is 0.017 and 0.03 for Srat is less
klend = λ (lend − lab ) than 1.5 and more than 1.5, repectively.
⎩ 39.94 n Srat ≥ 1.5
⎪
⎪
bf Ndb can either be determined experimentally or estimated using Chen
and Teng’s formulas [164].
Na can be obtained according to Villanueva

et al., model that is for bent anchors [173].
Multiple- Naj = Ndb + n kglob Na n is the number of anchors distributed transversally in the
anchored reinforcement in a row.
joints
Mertoglu et al., Multiple- τmax− anchor = e0.17n τmax,0 In absence of specific experimental data, τmax,0 may be evaluated from
anchored existing analytical models.
[210]
joints
[∑ ]( ′ )−
Ghoroubı Multiple- τmax− = f1 τmax,0 f1 = β=90
+ 4.564) fc
0.32
(bf )− 0.095 The dowel angle had three values of 0, 45 and 90 degrees and the sheet
anchor β=0 (0.0024β
et al., [211] anchored width were selected 50 and 100 mm.
joints
Al-Sammari Multiple- Naj = kεa Nuj , kεa = εfd(anchored) /εfd(unanchored) The model is dependent on both finite element simulations and
and anchored General form: pervious experimental data.
Breña [197] joints kεa = S1.6
n ⋅ St ⋅ Ss fd ≥ 1.0, sa ≤ 200mm
− 1 2.35 1
⋅Sad ⋅S0.1
kεa = 1.617⋅ S−t 1 ⋅ ⋅S1ad ⋅S0.1
fd ≥ 1.0, sa > 200mm
Sn = 0.007(na )3 − 0.13(na )2 + 0.74(na ) + 1.0

0.2
St = 0.72(tf )−
0.15
Ss = 1.7(Sa )− ≥ 0.75
Sad = 0.52(ad )0.24 ≤ 1.10
Sfd = 0.5(fd ) + 0.52
Simplified form:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
tf nd 2
kεa = 1 + αc ⋅ ⋅n ≥ 1.0
3sa a
12
4. Increasing the insertion angle significantly decreases the efficiency dry and impregnated installation method.
of straight anchors, due to the fibers being less well aligned with the Additional investigations should also focus on the influence of cyclic
direction of the applied force. loading, different environmental situations, temperature, creep, and
5. The amount of fiber used to make the anchor respect to the fibers of fatigue.
the sheet attached to it also determines whether the anchor is strong Advanced measurement techniques could be adopted to better
enough to allow the CFRP sheet to develop its full capacity. It is investigate the strain distribution along the FRP anchor as well as in the
recommended the total cross-sectional area of CFRP anchors should contact area of the anchor with the lower sheet and in the bending area,
be at least two times the cross-sectional area of the CFRP reinforcing in case of bent anchors.
sheet the anchor is connecting. In fact, this issue greatly affects the
retention and failure performance of the FRP sheet prior to FRP
anchor failure. Declaration of Competing Interest
6. An effective FRP anchor is expected to be long enough to allow the
anchor fan to extend 13 mm in beyond the width of FRP Fan with a The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
maximum anchor-fan angle of 60 degrees. interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
7. For anchors that are installed adjacent to one another, it is recom the work reported in this paper.
mended an overlap of anchor fans of 10 mm or more. Using more
anchors with a smaller diameter is preferable to using fewer anchors Data availability
with a larger diameter.
No data was used for the research described in the article.
7.2. Capacity prediction models and failure modes
References
Regarding the potential failure modes and the associated capacity
[1] J. Bai, Advanced fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites for structural
prediction models, it is observed that: applications, Elsevier, 2013.
[2] L. Hollaway, A review of the present and future utilisation of FRP composites in
1. As it can be seen in proposal models for determining the capacity of the civil infrastructure with reference to their important in-service properties,
Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (12) (2010) 2419–2445.
FRP anchor, when the failure of the anchor is governed by concrete
[3] L.C. Hollaway, J.-G. Teng, Strengthening and rehabilitation of civil
cone, the strength of concrete becomes important. Otherwise, for an infrastructures using fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites, Elsevier, 2008.
example in pull-out failure mode, the compressive strength of con [4] Z. Wu, Y. Wu, M.F. Fahmy, Structures Strengthened with Bonded Composites,
Woodhead Publishing, 2020.
crete has no significant impact.
[5] Y.M. Amran, R. Alyousef, R.S. Rashid, H. Alabduljabbar, C.-C. Hung, Properties
2. Except for the concrete cone failure of FRP anchor, the area and and applications of FRP in strengthening RC structures: A review, Structures 16
tensile strength of the fibers used in the construction of the anchor (2018) 208–238.
are effective in determining the final capacity of the anchor. [6] M. Naser, R. Hawileh, J. Abdalla, Fiber-reinforced polymer composites in
strengthening reinforced concrete structures: A critical review, Eng. Struct. 198
3. Studies on the effect of different material of FRP anchors such as (2019), 109542.
basalt fibers, aramid or glass fibers in different situations are less to [7] R. Al-Mahaidi, R. Kalfat, Rehabilitation of concrete structures with fiber-
get an accurate conclusion about them. But the only significant reinforced polymer, Butterworth-Heinemann2018.
[8] A. Nanni, CFRP strengthening, Concr. Int. 19 (6) (1997) 19–23.
conclusion that can be inferred from the Smith and Zhang [132] [9] K. Zilch, R. Niedermeier, W. Finckh, Strengthening of concrete structures with
studies is that the efficiency of glass anchors was significantly less adhesively bonded reinforcement: Design and dimensioning of CFRP laminates
than the efficiency of carbon anchors. and steel plates, John Wiley & Sons, 2014.
[10] A. Siddika, M.A. Al Mamun, R. Alyousef, Y.M. Amran, Strengthening of reinforced
4. The method of testing such as pull-out test, lap shear or bending test concrete beams by using fiber-reinforced polymer composites: A review, J. Build.
in addition to the type of member that FRP anchor installed and Eng. 25 (2019), 100798.
located on it, has a key role in the capacity and the behavior of FRP [11] D. Duthinh, M. Starnes, Strength and ductility of concrete beams reinforced with
carbon fiber-reinforced polymer plates and steel, J. Compos. Constr. 8 (1) (2004)
anchors.
59–69.
[12] C.A. Ross, D.M. Jerome, J.W. Tedesco, M.L. Hughes, Strengthening of reinforced
8. Research gaps and future directions concrete beams with externally bonded composite laminates, Structural Journal
96 (2) (1999) 212–220.
[13] N. Attari, S. Amziane, M. Chemrouk, Flexural strengthening of concrete beams
The above review highlights, in authors opinion, a general lack of a using CFRP, GFRP and hybrid FRP sheets, Constr. Build. Mater. 37 (2012)
systematic approach to establish the influence of different parameters on 746–757.
the capacity and, more in general, of the behavior of FRP anchors. [14] T. Triantafillou, N. Plevris, Strengthening of RC beams with epoxy-bonded fibre-
composite materials, Mater. Struct. 25 (4) (1992) 201–211.
By taking for example the simple embedment depth, it is quite clear [15] F. Ceroni, Experimental performances of RC beams strengthened with FRP
that in a bond-dominated mechanism (as the pull-out), the anchor ca materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (9) (2010) 1547–1559.
pacity will increase as a function of the depth. However, being such [16] M. Alhassan, R. Al-Rousan, A. Ababneh, Anchoring of the main CFRP sheets with
transverse CFRP strips for optimum upgrade of RC Beams: Parametric
mechanism competitive with other ones, as concrete cone or fibers experimental study, Constr. Build. Mater. 293 (2021), 123525.
failure, it should be characterized as a function of mechanical properties [17] E. del Rey Castillo, M. Griffith, J. Ingham, Seismic behavior of RC columns
of the specific bonding agent, being most of the recommendations flexurally strengthened with FRP sheets and FRP anchors, Compos. Struct. 203
(2018) 382–395.
available in literature (e.g., “at least 50 mm”) clearly function of the [18] A.M. ElSouri, M.H. Harajli, Seismic repair and strengthening of lap splices in RC
specific properties of the anchor used in given experiments. columns: carbon fiber–reinforced polymer versus steel confinement, J. Compos.
Similarly, geometrical properties of the entire fastening (as anchor Constr. 15 (5) (2011) 721–731.
[19] M.N. Hadi, T.M. Pham, X. Lei, New method of strengthening reinforced concrete
diameter, spacing between anchor, presence of free edges) clearly in square columns by circularizing and wrapping with fiber-reinforced polymer or
fluence both the pull-out and the concrete cone capacity and they may steel straps, J. Compos. Constr. 17 (2) (2013) 229–238.
play distinct roles in interaction between anchors depending on the [20] A. Saljoughian, D. Mostofinejad, Behavior of RC columns confined with CFRP
using CSB method under cyclic axial compression, Constr. Build. Mater. 235
considered failure mode.
(2020), 117786.
A comprehensive and unified model to predict FRP anchor capacity, [21] R. Shrestha, S.T. Smith, B. Samali, Strengthening RC beam–column connections
as a function of their geometrical and mechanical properties should be with FRP strips, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Structures and
developed in the future. Buildings 162(5) (2009) 323-334.
[22] Y.A. Al-Salloum, T.H. Almusallam, Seismic response of interior RC beam-column
Further research will also be required to investigate the effect of the joints upgraded with FRP sheets. I: Experimental study, J. Compos. Constr. 11 (6)
type of adhesive, quality of workmanship (construction methods) and (2007) 575–589.
13
[23] C.P. Antonopoulos, T.C. Triantafillou, Experimental investigation of FRP- [58] P. Balaguru, A. Nanni, J. Giancaspro, FRP composites for reinforced and
strengthened RC beam-column joints, J. Compos. Constr. 7 (1) (2003) 39–49. prestressed concrete structures: a guide to fundamentals and design for repair and
[24] A. Bousselham, State of research on seismic retrofit of RC beam-column joints retrofit, CRC Press, 2008.
with externally bonded FRP, J. Compos. Constr. 14 (1) (2010) 49–61. [59] S.F. Brena, R.M. Bramblett, S.L. Wood, M.E. Kreger, Increasing flexural capacity
[25] D. Shen, M. Li, C. Liu, J. Kang, C. Li, J. Yang, Seismic performance of corroded of reinforced concrete beams using carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composites,
reinforced concrete beam-column joints repaired with BFRP sheets, Constr. Build. Structural Journal 100 (1) (2003) 36–46.
Mater. 307 (2021), 124731. [60] G. Camata, E. Spacone, R. Zarnic, Experimental and nonlinear finite element
[26] D. Shen, M. Li, J. Kang, C. Liu, C. Li, Experimental studies on the seismic behavior studies of RC beams strengthened with FRP plates, Compos. B Eng. 38 (2) (2007)
of reinforced concrete beam-column joints strengthened with basalt fiber- 277–288.
reinforced polymer sheets, Constr. Build. Mater. 287 (2021), 122901. [61] D. Shen, Q. Yang, Y. Jiao, Z. Cui, J. Zhang, Experimental investigations on
[27] M. Li, D. Shen, Q. Yang, X. Cao, C. Liu, J. Kang, Rehabilitation of seismic- reinforced concrete shear walls strengthened with basalt fiber-reinforced
damaged reinforced concrete beam-column joints with different corrosion rates polymers under cyclic load, Constr. Build. Mater. 136 (2017) 217–229.
using basalt fiber-reinforced polymer sheets, Compos. Struct. 289 (2022), [62] A. Bilotta, F. Ceroni, E. Nigro, M. Pecce, Strain assessment for the design of NSM
115397. FRP systems for the strengthening of RC members, Constr. Build. Mater. 69
[28] R.Z. Al-Rousan, M.A. Alhassan, R.J. Al-omary, Response of interior beam-column (2014) 143–158.
connections integrated with various schemes of CFRP composites, Case Stud. [63] A. Bilotta, F. Ceroni, M. Di Ludovico, E. Nigro, M. Pecce, G. Manfredi,
Constr. Mater. 14 (2021), e00488. Experimental bond test on concrete members strengthened with NSM FRP
[29] S.T. Smith, S. Hu, S.J. Kim, R. Seracino, FRP-strengthened RC slabs anchored with systems, in: Influence of Groove Dimensions and Surface Treatment, Proceedings
FRP anchors, Eng. Struct. 33 (4) (2011) 1075–1087. of the CICE 2012, 2012, p. 8.
[30] A.S. Mosallam, K.M. Mosalam, Strengthening of two-way concrete slabs with FRP [64] D. Mostofinejad, E. Mahmoudabadi, Grooving as alternative method of surface
composite laminates, Constr. Build. Mater. 17 (1) (2003) 43–54. preparation to postpone debonding of FRP laminates in concrete beams,
[31] A.S. Mosallam, A. Nasr, Structural performance of RC shear walls with post- J. Compos. Constr. 14 (6) (2010) 804–811.
construction openings strengthened with FRP composite laminates, Compos. B [65] D. Mostofinejad, S.M. Shameli, Externally bonded reinforcement in grooves
Eng. 115 (2017) 488–504. (EBRIG) technique to postpone debonding of FRP sheets in strengthened concrete
[32] D. Shen, Q. Yang, C. Huang, Z. Cui, J. Zhang, Tests on seismic performance of beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 38 (2013) 751–758.
corroded reinforced concrete shear walls repaired with basalt fiber-reinforced [66] A. Saljoughian, D. Mostofinejad, RC columns longitudinally strengthened via
polymers, Constr. Build. Mater. 209 (2019) 508–521. novel EBRIOG technique, Structural Concrete 21 (2) (2020) 570–586.
[33] J.E. Woods, D.T. Lau, C.A. Cruz-Noguez, In-plane seismic strengthening of [67] K. Sanginabadi, A. Yazdani, D. Mostofinejad, C. Czaderski, RC members
nonductile reinforced concrete shear walls using externally bonded CFRP sheets, externally strengthened with FRP composites by grooving methods including
J. Compos. Constr. 20 (6) (2016) 04016052. EBROG and EBRIG: A state-of-the-art review, Constr. Build. Mater. 324 (2022),
[34] K.K. Antoniades, T.N. Salonikios, A.J. Kappos, Evaluation of hysteretic response 126662.
and strength of repaired R/C walls strengthened with FRPs, Eng. Struct. 29 (9) [68] D. Shen, X. Zeng, J. Zhang, B. Zhou, Wang,, Wei, Behavior of RC box beam
(2007) 2158–2171. strengthened with basalt FRP using end anchorage with grooving, J. Compos.
[35] W. Hu, Y. Li, H. Yuan, Review of experimental studies on application of FRP for Mater. 53 (23) (2019) 3307–3324.
strengthening of bridge structures, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020 (2020). [69] F.M. Ghahsareh, D. Mostofinejad, S. Batebi, Effects of Different Groove Classes
[36] H. Pham, R. Al-Mahaidi, Experimental investigation into flexural retrofitting of Used in Externally Bonded Reinforcement on Grooves Joints on Carbon Fiber-
reinforced concrete bridge beams using FRP composites, Compos. Struct. 66 (1–4) Reinforced Polymer-to-Concrete Bond Behavior, ACI Struct. J. 119 (4) (2022).
(2004) 617–625. [70] F.M. Ghahsareh, D. Mostofinejad, Groove classification in EBROG FRP-to-
[37] N. Chagnon, B. Massicotte, Seismic retrofitting of rectangular bridge piers with concrete joints, Constr. Build. Mater. 275 (2021), 122169.
CFRP, (2005). [71] J. Lee, M.M. Lopez, Characterization of FRP Uwrap anchors for externally bonded
[38] B. Binici, G. Ozcebe, R. Ozcelik, Analysis and design of FRP composites for FRP-reinforced concrete elements: An experimental study, J. Compos. Constr. 20
seismic retrofit of infill walls in reinforced concrete frames, Compos. B Eng. 38 (5) (4) (2016) 04016012.
(2007) 575–583. [72] B. Fu, X. Tang, L. Li, F. Liu, G. Lin, Inclined FRP U-jackets for enhancing structural
[39] E. Erduran, Behaviour of brick infilled reinforced concrete frames strenghened performance of FRP-plated RC beams suffering from IC debonding, Compos.
CFRP reinforcement: Phase II, Middle East Technical University (2002). Struct. 200 (2018) 36–46.
[40] M.L. Albert, A.E. Elwi, J.R. Cheng, Strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls [73] H.A. Rasheed, M.A. Zaki, A.S. Foerster, Efficient bidirectional U-wrap system to
using FRPs, J. Compos. Constr. 5 (2) (2001) 76–84. anchor CFRP sheets bonded to reinforced concrete T-girders, Elsevier, Structures,
[41] P. Foraboschi, A. Vanin, New methods for bonding FRP strips onto masonry 2022, pp. 226–236.
structures: experimental results and analytical evaluations, Composites: [74] S. Ozden, H.M. Atalay, E. Akpinar, H. Erdogan, Y.Z. Vulaş, Shear strengthening of
Mechanics, Computations, Applications: An, International Journal 4 (1) (2013). reinforced concrete T-beams with fully or partially bonded fibre-reinforced
[42] D.V. Oliveira, I. Basilio, P.B. Lourenço, Experimental behavior of FRP polymer composites, Structural Concrete 15 (2) (2014) 229–239.
strengthened masonry arches, J. Compos. Constr. 14 (3) (2010) 312–322. [75] R. Kalfat, R. Al-Mahaidi, Experimental investigation into the size effect of
[43] A.C. Burr, Recent developments in the use of FRP anchors and masonry wall bidirectional fiber patch anchors in strengthening of concrete structures, Compos.
strengthening techniques, Structural Engineer 82 (18) (2004) 20–21. Struct. 112 (2014) 134–145.
[44] A.S. Mosallam, Out-of-plane flexural behavior of unreinforced red brick walls [76] W. Sun, S. Liu, C. Zhang, An effective improvement for enhancing the strength
strengthened with FRP composites, Compos. B Eng. 38 (5) (2007) 559–574. and feasibility of FRP spike anchors, Compos. Struct. 247 (2020), 112449.
[45] A. Mosallam, S. Banerjee, Enhancement in in-plane shear capacity of unreinforced [77] B. Al-Atta, R. Kalfat, R. Al-Mahaidi, A. Al-Mosawe, Mitigation of IC debonding in
masonry (URM) walls strengthened with fiber reinforced polymer composites, FRP-plated concrete slabs using patch anchors, Eng. Struct. 214 (2020), 110626.
Compos. B Eng. 42 (6) (2011) 1657–1670. [78] R.A.G. Mostafa Ahmed AB,, A new CFRP anchor for preventing separation of
[46] A., 440.2R, Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP externally bonded laminates from concrete, J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 32 (24)
Systems, American Concrete Institute Farmington Hills, Michigan (2017). (2013) 1895–1906.
[47] Fib-Bulletin-90, Externally bonded FRP reinforcement for RC structures, fib Task [79] A.G.a.M. Razaqpur, A., A new CFRP anchor for preventing separation of
Group 5.1, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2019. externally bonded laminates from concrete 2009 Nagoya, Japan.
[48] N.R.C. (CNR), Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP [80] G.a.M. Razaqpur, A.B.,, C-Anchor for strengthening the connection between
systems for strengthening of existing structures, CNR-DT200, Roma, Italy, 2013. adhesively bonded laminates and concrete substrates, Technologies 3 (4) (2015)
[49] H. 305-2008, Design handbook for RC structures retrofitted with FRP and metal 238–258.
plates: beams and slabs, Standards Australia, Sydney, NSW, 2008. [81] A. Mostafa, A Novel FRP Anchor for Preventing Delamination in FRP
[50] A., 5100.8, Bridge design Part 8: Rehabilitation and strengthening of existing Strengthened Concrete Beams, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada,
bridges, Standards Australia (2017). 2010.
[51] J.-E. 541, Japanese Design and construction guidelines for seismic retrofit of [82] R. Kalfat, R. Al-Mahaidi, Improvement of FRP-to-concrete bond performance
existing reinforced concrete buildings, Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE), using bidirectional fiber patch anchors combined with FRP spike anchors,
Tokyo, Japan, 2001. Compos. Struct. 155 (2016) 89–98.
[52] AFGC, Réparation et, Renforcement des Structures en Béton au Moyen de [83] M.A. Zaki, H.A. Rasheed, Behavior of reinforced concrete beams strengthened
Matériaux Composites, French Association of Civil Engineering 2011 Paris, using CFRP sheets with innovative anchorage devices, Eng. Struct. 215 (2020),
France. 110689.
[53] Concrete Society, Camberley, UK (2012). [84] A. Eslami, H.R. Shayegh, A. Moghavem, H.R. Ronagh, Experimental and
[54] CSA-S806.12(R2017), Design and construction of building components with analytical investigations of a novel end anchorage for CFRP flexural retrofits,
fibre-reinforced polymers, Canadian Standards Association, Mississauga, Ontario, Compos. B Eng. 176 (2019), 107309.
2017. [85] S.-W. Bae, A. Belarbi, Behavior of various anchorage systems used for shear
[55] J. Teng, S.T. Smith, J. Yao, J.-F. Chen, Intermediate crack-induced debonding in strengthening of concrete structures with externally bonded FRP sheets, J. Bridge
RC beams and slabs, Constr. Build. Mater. 17 (6–7) (2003) 447–462. Eng. 18 (9) (2013) 837–847.
[56] M.R. Aram, C. Czaderski, M. Motavalli, Debonding failure modes of flexural FRP- [86] Q. Jin, C.K. Leung, Fiber-reinforced-cementitious-composites plate for anchoring
strengthened RC beams, Compos. B Eng. 39 (5) (2008) 826–841. FRP sheet on concrete member, J. Compos. Constr. 15 (5) (2011) 790–798.
[57] D. Mostofinejad, A.T. Kashani, Experimental study on effect of EBR and EBROG [87] S. Hiotakis, Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete shear walls for
methods on debonding of FRP sheets used for shear strengthening of RC beams, earthquake resistance using externally bonded carbon fibre sheets and a novel
Compos. B Eng. 45 (1) (2013) 1704–1713. anchor system, Carleton University, 2004.
14
[88] W.E. Elsayed, U.A. Ebead, K.W. Neale, Studies on mechanically fastened fiber- [118] E.I. Saqan, H.A. Rasheed, T. Alkhrdaji, Seismic Behavior of Carbon Fiber-
reinforced polymer strengthening systems, ACI Struct. J. 106 (1) (2009) 49. Reinforced Polymer-Strengthened Reinforced Concrete Members with Various
[89] K. Galal, M. Sekar, Rehabilitation of RC inverted-T girders using anchored CFRP Anchors, ACI Struct. J. 117 (4) (2020) 3–14.
sheets, Compos. B Eng. 39 (4) (2008) 604–617. [119] M.H. Meisami, D. Mostofinejad, H. Nakamura, Strengthening of flat slabs with
[90] A. Deifalla, A. Ghobarah, Strengthening RC T-beams subjected to combined FRP fan for punching shear, Compos. Struct. 119 (2015) 305–314.
torsion and shear using FRP fabrics: Experimental study, J. Compos. Constr. 14 [120] S.T. Smith, H. Zhang, Z. Wang, Influence of FRP anchors on the strength and
(3) (2010) 301–311. ductility of FRP-strengthened RC slabs, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (2013)
[91] A. Belarbi, S.-W. Bae, A. Brancaccio, Behavior of full-scale RC T-beams 998–1012.
strengthened in shear with externally bonded FRP sheets, Constr. Build. Mater. 32 [121] J.G. Teng, S.Y. Cao, L. Lam, Behaviour of GFRP-strengthened RC cantilever slabs,
(2012) 27–40. Constr. Build. Mater. 15 (7) (2001) 339–349.
[92] J. Hall, P. Schuman, H. Hamilton III, Ductile anchorage for connecting FRP [122] C.M. Jackson, E. Jacques, M. Saatcioglu, Blast retrofit of one-way reinforced
strengthening of under-reinforced masonry buildings, J. Compos. Constr. 6 (1) concrete members using externally bonded FRP and FRP anchorage, International
(2002) 3–10. Journal of Protective Structures 13 (2) (2022) 209–235.
[93] C. Yuan, W. Chen, T.M. Pham, H. Hao, L. Chen, M. Zhang, New epoxy anchor for [123] S. Qazi, L. Michel, E. Ferrier, Mechanical behaviour of slender RC walls under
better bonding between FRP sheets and concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 248 seismic loading strengthened with externally bonded CFRP, European journal of
(2020), 118628. environmental and civil engineering 17 (6) (2013) 496–506.
[94] M.A. Alhassan, R.Z. Al-Rousan, A.M. Abu-Elhija, Anchoring holes configured to [124] S. Altin, Ö. Anil, Y. Kopraman, M.E. Kara, Hysteretic behavior of RC shear walls
enhance the bond-slip behavior between CFRP composites and concrete, Constr. strengthened with CFRP strips, Compos. B Eng. 44 (1) (2013) 321–329.
Build. Mater. 250 (2020), 118905. [125] G. Di Luccio, L. Michel, E. Ferrier, E. Martinelli, Seismic retrofitting of RC walls
[95] R.Z. Al-Rousan, A.M. Abu-Elhija, Predicting the bond-slip relationship between externally strengthened by flax–FRP strips, Compos. B Eng. 127 (2017) 133–149.
concrete and CFRP using anchoring holes technique, Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 13 [126] Z. Li, E. del Rey Castillo, A. ASCE, R.S. Henry, A. Thompson, Axial behavior of
(2020), e00462. concrete prisms confined by FRP laminate and spike anchors, strain 200 (2022)
[96] S.V. Grelle, L. Sneed, An evaluation of anchorage systems for fiber-reinforced 1943-5614.0001171.
polymer (FRP) laminates bonded to reinforced concrete elements, Structures [127] B. Abdulsalam, A.H. Ali, A. ElSafty, N. Elshafey, Behavior of GFRP strengthening
Congress 2011 (2011) 1157–1168. masonry walls using glass fiber composite anchors, Structures 29 (2021)
[97] S.V. Grelle, L.H. Sneed, Review of anchorage systems for externally bonded FRP 1352–1361.
laminates, International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials 7 (1) [128] M. Fagone, T. Rotunno, E. Bertolesi, E. Grande, G. Milani, Experimental Study on
(2013) 17–33. the Local Behavior of CFRP Anchor Spikes Fixed to Masonry Substrates, Trans
[98] R. Kalfat, R. Al-Mahaidi, S.T. Smith, Anchorage devices used to improve the Tech Publ, Key Engineering Materials, 2022, pp. 361–368.
performance of reinforced concrete beams retrofitted with FRP composites: State- [129] G. Muciaccia, M. Khorasani, D. Mostofinejad, Effect of confinement on the
of-the-art review, J. Compos. Constr. 17 (1) (2013) 14–33. behavior of FRP straight anchors, Bond in Concrete 2022, Stuttgart, Germany,
[99] E. del Rey Castillo, D. Dizhur, M. Griffith, J. Ingham, Strengthening RC structures 2022.
using FRP spike anchors in combination with EBR systems, Compos. Struct. 209 [130] S.T. Smith FRP anchors, recent advances in research and understanding,
(2019) 668–685. Proceedings of the 2nd APFIS 2009.
[100] S.V. Grelle, Categorization and experimental evaluation of anchorage systems for [131] I. Kim, Use of CFRP to Provide Continuity in Existing Reinforced Concrete
fiber-reinforced polymer laminates bonded to reinforced concrete structures, Members Subjected to Extreme Loads. Deparment of Civil, Environmental and
2011. Architectural Engineering. Austin, Texas, The University of Texas at Austin, Ph. D
[101] H. Zhang, S.T. Smith, R.J. Gravina, Z. Wang, Modelling of FRP-concrete bonded Dissertation, 2008.
interfaces containing FRP anchors, Constr. Build. Mater. 139 (2017) 394–402. [132] H. Zhang, S.T. Smith, S. Kim, Optimisation of carbon and glass FRP anchor design,
[102] H.H. Mhanna, R.A. Hawileh, J.A. Abdalla, Shear behavior of RC T-beams Constr. Build. Mater. 32 (2012) 1–12.
externally strengthened with anchored high modulus carbon fiber-reinforced [133] F.G. Carozzi, P. Colombi, G. Fava, C. Poggi, Mechanical and bond properties of
polymer (CFRP) laminates, Compos. Struct. 272 (2021), 114198. FRP anchor spikes in concrete and masonry blocks, Compos. Struct. 183 (2018)
[103] Y. Kim, W.M. Ghannoum, J.O. Jirsa, Shear behavior of full-scale reinforced 185–198.
concrete T-beams strengthened with CFRP strips and anchors, Constr. Build. [134] C.W. Niemitz, Anchorage of carbon fiber reinforced polymers to reinforced
Mater. 94 (2015) 1–9. concrete in shear applications, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2008.
[104] H.H. Mhanna, R.A. Hawileh, J.A. Abdalla, Shear strengthening of reinforced [135] S.L. Orton, Development of a CFRP system to provide continuity in existing
concrete T-beams using CFRP laminates anchored with bent CFRP splay anchors, reinforced concrete buildings vulnerable to progressive collapse, The University
Procedia Struct. Integrity 28 (2020) 811–819. of Texas at Austin, 2007.
[105] M.A. Zaki, H.A. Rasheed, T. Alkhrdaji, Performance of CFRP-strengthened [136] S.F. Brena, G.N. McGuirk, Advances on the behavior characterization of FRP-
concrete beams fastened with distributed CFRP dowel and fiber anchors, Compos. anchored carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets used to strengthen
B Eng. 176 (2019), 107117. concrete elements, International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials 7
[106] A. Ali, J. Abdalla, R. Hawileh, K. Galal, CFRP mechanical anchorage for externally (1) (2013) 3–16.
strengthened RC beams under flexure, Physics Procedia 55 (2014) 10–16. [137] A. Berneschi, Enhancing the use of externally bonded FRP laminates with FRP
[107] S.M. Hosseini, D. Mostofinejad, Seismic Performance of RC Short Columns anchor spikes, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Politecnico
Retrofitted with a Novel System in Shear and Flexure Using CFRP Composites, Di Milano, 2015.
J. Compos. Constr. 25 (5) (2021) 04021039. [138] N. Eshwar, A. Nanni, T.J. Ibell, Performance of two anchor systems of externally
[108] I. Vrettos, E. Kefala, T.C. Triantaillou, Innovative Flexural Strengthening of bonded fiber-reinforced polymer laminates, ACI Mater. J. 105 (1) (2008) 72.
Reinforced Concrete Columns Using Carbon-Fiber Anchors, ACI Struct. J. 110 (1) [139] X. Huang, G. Chen, Bonding and anchoring characterization between FRP sheets,
(2013). concrete, and viscoelastic layers under static and dynamic loading. Proceedings of
[109] A.B. Dionysios, C.T. Thanasis, Biaxial Bending of Reinforced Concrete Columns the international Symposium on Bond Behavior of FRP in Structures, 2005.
Strengthened with Externally Applied Reinforcement in Combination with [140] G. Ozdemir, U. Akyuz, Tensile Capacities of CFRP Anchors, Special, Publication
Confinement, ACI Structural Journal 110(2). 230 (2005) 39–56.
[110] T. Triantafillou, E. Choutopoulou, E. Fotaki, M. Skorda, M. Stathopoulou, [141] G. Ozdemir, U. Akyuz, Tensile capacities of CFRP anchors, Advances in
K. Karlos, FRP confinement of wall-like reinforced concrete columns, Mater. earthquake engineering for urban risk reduction, Springer (2006) 471–487.
Struct. 49 (1) (2016) 651–664. [142] G. Özdemir, Mechanical properties of CFRP anchorages, Middle East Technical
[111] A. Prota, G. Manfredi, A. Balsamo, A. Nanni, E. Cosenza, Innovative technique for University (2005).
seismic upgrade of RC square columns, Special, Publication 230 (2005) [143] S.M. Ozbakkaloglu Togay, S. Foo, Performance and design of FRP anchors, Eigth
1289–1304. International Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for
[112] M. Karantzikis, C.G. Papanicolaou, C.P. Antonopoulos, T.C. Triantafillou, Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-8), University of Patras, Patras, Greece, 2007.
Experimental investigation of nonconventional confinement for concrete using [144] T. Ozbakkaloglu, M. Saatcioglu, Tensile behavior of FRP anchors in concrete,
FRP, J. Compos. Constr. 9 (6) (2005) 480–487. J. Compos. Constr. 13 (2) (2009) 82–92.
[113] E. del Rey Castillo, R. Kanitkar, Effect of FRP spike anchor installation quality and [145] S.J. Kim, S.T. Smith, Pullout strength models for FRP anchors in uncracked
concrete repair on the seismic behavior of FRP-strengthened RC columns, concrete, J. Compos. Constr. 14 (4) (2010) 406–414.
J. Compos. Constr. 25 (1) (2021) 04020085. [146] Q. Sami, E. Ferrier, L. Michel, A. Si-Larbi, P. Hamelin, Experimental investigation
[114] A. Akhlaghi, D. Mostofinejad, Experimental and analytical assessment of different of CF anchorage system used for seismic retrofitting of RC columns, Advances in
anchorage systems used for CFRP flexurally retrofitted exterior RC beam-column FRP Composites, Civ. Eng. (Springer 2011,) 541–544.
connections, Elsevier, Structures, 2020, pp. 881–893. [147] D.A. Bournas, A. Pavese, W. Tizani, Tensile capacity of FRP anchors in connecting
[115] E. Ilia, D. Mostofinejad, A. Moghaddas, Cyclic behavior of strong beam–weak FRP and TRM sheets to concrete, Eng. Struct. 82 (2015) 72–81.
column joints strengthened with different configurations of CFRP sheets, Archives [148] X.-L. Zheng, Y. Tao, Q.-X. Shi, J.-F. Chen, Pullout behaviour of FRP anchors in
of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 20 (2) (2020) 1–26. clay bricks, Constr. Build. Mater. 283 (2021), 122544.
[116] D. Mostofinejad, M. Hajrasouliha, 3D beam–column corner joints retrofitted with [149] A. Jouan, A. Constantinescu, A critical comparison of shear tests for adhesive
X-shaped FRP sheets attached via the EBROG technique, Eng. Struct. 183 (2019) joints, Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 84 (2018) 63–79.
987–998. [150] A. Bilotta, F. Ceroni, M. Di Ludovico, E. Nigro, M. Pecce, G. Manfredi, Bond
[117] D. Mostofinejad, M. Hajrasouliha, Shear retrofitting of corner 3D-reinforced efficiency of EBR and NSM FRP systems for strengthening concrete members,
concrete beam-column joints using externally bonded CFRP reinforcement on J. Compos. Constr. 15 (5) (2011) 757–772.
grooves, J. Compos. Constr. 22 (5) (2018) 04018037.
15
[151] T. Yu, D. Fernando, J. Teng, X.L. Zhao, Experimental study on CFRP-to-steel [181] J. Garcia, W. Sun, C. Kim, W.M. Ghannoum, J.O. Jirsa, Procedures for the
bonded interfaces, Compos. B Eng. 43 (5) (2012) 2279–2289. Installation and Quality Control of Anchored CFRP Sheets for Shear Strengthening
[152] H. Yuan, J. Teng, R. Seracino, Z. Wu, J. Yao, Full-range behavior of FRP-to- of, Concrete Bridge Girders (2014).
concrete bonded joints, Eng. Struct. 26 (5) (2004) 553–565. [182] W. Sun, Behavior of carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) anchors
[153] H.B. Pham, R. Al-Mahaidi, Modelling of CFRP-concrete shear-lap tests, Constr. strengthening reinforced concrete structures, The University of Texas at Austin,
Build. Mater. 21 (4) (2007) 727–735. USA, 2014.
[154] S. Chataigner, J.-F. Caron, K. Benzarti, M. Quiertant, C. Aubagnac, Use of a single [183] Y. Kim, Shear Behavior of Reinforced Concrete T-Beams Strengthened with
lap shear test to characterize composite-to-concrete or composite-to-steel bonded Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) Sheets and CFRP Anchors, The
interfaces, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2) (2011) 468–478. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 2011.
[155] I.A.C. Flores, J.F. Gómez, P.V. Llauradó, Influence of multiple anchor [184] W. Shekarchi, D. Pudleiner, N. Alotaibi, W. Ghannoum, J. Jirsa, Carbon Fiber-
arrangement in the behaviour of FRP-to-concrete anchored joints, Compos. Reinforced Polymer Spike Anchor Design Recommendations, ACI Struct. J. 117
Struct. 230 (2019), 111528. (6) (2020).
[156] T. Ozbakkaloglu, C. Fang, A. Gholampour, Influence of FRP anchor configuration [185] L. Koutas, T.C. Triantafillou, Use of anchors in shear strengthening of reinforced
on the behavior of FRP plates externally bonded on concrete members, Eng. concrete T-beams with FRP, J. Compos. Constr. 17 (1) (2013) 101–107.
Struct. 133 (2017) 133–150. [186] H. Zhang, S.T. Smith, Influence of FRP anchor fan configuration and dowel angle
[157] W. Xue, L. Zeng, Y. Tan, Experimental studies on bond behaviour of high strength on anchoring FRP plates, Compos. B Eng. 43 (8) (2012) 3516–3527.
CFRP plates, Compos. B Eng. 39 (4) (2008) 592–603. [187] S.L. Orton, J.O. Jirsa, O. Bayrak, Design considerations of carbon fiber anchors,
[158] E. Ferrier, M. Quiertant, K. Benzarti, P. Hamelin, Influence of the properties of J. Compos. Constr. 12 (6) (2008) 608–616.
externally bonded CFRP on the shear behavior of concrete/composite adhesive [188] I. Kim, Rehabilitation of poorly detailed RC structures using CFRP materials,
joints, Compos. B Eng. 41 (5) (2010) 354–362. University of Texas, 2006.
[159] J. Xiao, J. Li, Q. Zha, Experimental study on bond behavior between FRP and [189] D.F. Baggio, Effect of FRP anchors on the FRP rehabilitation of shear critical RC
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (10) (2004) 745–752. beams and flexure critical RC slabs, University of Waterloo, 2013.
[160] S. Cao, J.F. Chen, J. Pan, N. Sun, ESPI measurement of bond-slip relationships of [190] E.D.R. Castillo, Fibre Rupture Failure Mode of FRP Spike Anchors, University of
FRP-concrete interface, J. Compos. Constr. 11 (2) (2007) 149–160. Auckland, 2018.
[161] H.M. Diab, O.A. Farghal, Bond strength and effective bond length of FRP sheets/ [191] P. Mahrenholtz, J.-M. Park, J.-Y. Cho, Monotonic and cyclic behaviour of isolated
plates bonded to concrete considering the type of adhesive layer, Compos. B Eng. FRP anchors loaded in shear, Compos. B Eng. 72 (2015) 72–79.
58 (2014) 618–624. [192] K.T. Quinn, Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams with carbon fiber
[162] M. Rossini, F.R.P. Anchors, For External ReinForcement of Concrete Structural reinforced polymer (CFRP). and improved anchor details, 2009.
Elements, 2016. [193] Y. Kim, K. Quinn, N. Satrom, J. Garcia, W. Sun, W.M. Ghannoum, J.O. Jirsa, Shear
[163] M.A. Alhassan, R.Z. Al Rousan, E.A. Al Shuqari, Bond-slip behavior between fiber strengthening of reinforced and prestressed concrete beams using carbon fiber
reinforced concrete and CFRP composites, Ain Shams Eng. J. 10 (2) (2019) reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets and anchors, 2012.
359–367. [194] C.W. Niemitz, R. James, S.F. Breña, Experimental behavior of carbon fiber-
[164] J.F. Chen, J. Teng, Anchorage strength models for FRP and steel plates bonded to reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets attached to concrete surfaces using CFRP
concrete, J. Struct. Eng. 127 (7) (2001) 784–791. anchors, J. Compos. Constr. 14 (2) (2010) 185–194.
[165] Y. Ziraba, M. Baluch, I. Basunbul, A. Azad, G. Al-Sulaimani, A. Sharif, Combined [195] W. Sun, Development of a testing methodology for the design and quality control
experimental-numerical approach to characterization of steel-glue-concrete of carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) anchors, Constr. Build. Mater. 164
interface, Mater. Struct. 28 (9) (1995) 518–525. (2018) 150–163.
[166] B. Miller, A. Nanni, Bond between CFRP sheets and concrete congress, [196] S. Hu, FRP-strengthened RC slabs anchored with FRP anchors, The University of
Proceedings ASCE 5th Materials Cincinnati, Ohio (1999) 240–247. Hong Kong (2011).
[167] D. Pudleiner, W.M. Ghannoum, J.O. Jirsa, Influence of Anchor Size on Anchored [197] A.T. Al-Sammari, S.F. Breña, Strength of Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer
CFRP Systems, J. Compos. Constr. 23 (5) (2019) 04019033. (CFRP) Sheets Bonded to Concrete with CFRP Spike Anchors, ACI Struct. J. 118
[168] P.C. Luke, C. Chon, J.O. Jirsa, Use of epoxies for grouting reinforcing bar dowels (1) (2021).
in concrete, University of Texas at Austin. Phil M. Ferguson Structural, [198] H. Zhang, Influence of FRP anchors on FRP-to-concrete bonder interfaces, HKU
Engineering (…1985.). Theses Online (HKUTO) (2013).
[169] R. Eligehausen, R.A. Cook, J. Appl, Behavior and design of adhesive bonded [199] H.H. Wang, Test of glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) anchors, The University
anchors, ACI Struct. J. 103 (6) (2006) 822. of Texas at Austin, USA, 2013.
[170] R. Eligehausen, R. Mallée, J.F. Silva, Anchorage in concrete construction, John [200] E. del Rey Castillo, R. Kanitkar, S.T. Smith, M.C. Griffith, J.M. Ingham, Design
Wiley & Sons, 2006. approach for FRP spike anchors in FRP-strengthened RC structures, Compos.
[171] P.V. Llauradó, J. Fernández-Gómez, F.J.G. Ramos, Influence of geometrical and Struct. 214 (2019) 23–33.
installation parameters on performance of CFRP anchors, Compos. Struct. 176 [201] H. Zhang, S.T. Smith, Fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP)-to-concrete joints anchored
(2017) 105–116. with FRP anchors: tests and experimental trends, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 40 (11) (2013)
[172] P. Villanueva Llauradó, J.F. Gómez, F.J. González Ramos, Influence of the anchor 1103–1116.
fan position on the performance of FRP anchors, High Tech Concrete: Where [202] H. Zhang, S.T. Smith, FRP-to-concrete joint assemblages anchored with multiple
Technology and Engineering Meet (Springer 2018,) 191–198. FRP anchors, Compos. Struct. 94 (2) (2012) 403–414.
[173] P.V. Llauradó, T. Ibell, J.F. Gómez, F.J.G. Ramos, Pull-out and shear-strength [203] A.E. Kurtoğlu, Ö. Anil, A. Çevik, A machine-learning-based constitutive bond-slip
models for FRP spike anchors, Compos. B Eng. 116 (2017) 239–252. model for anchored CFRP strips externally bonded on concrete members,
[174] K. Kobayashi, S. Fujil, Y. Yabe, H. Tsukagoshi, T. Sugiyama, in: Advanced Structural Concrete (2022).
Wrapping System With CF-anchor–Stress Transfer Mechanism of CF-anchor, [204] A.C. 349, Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Structures (ACI 349–85)
FRPRCS-5: Fibre-reinforced plastics for reinforced concrete structures Volume 1, American Concrete Institute 1997 Farmington Hills, Michigan.
Thomas Telford Publishing, 2001, pp. 379–388. [205] W. Fuchs, R. Eligehausen, J.E. Breen, Concrete capacity design (CCD) approach
[175] G.D. Huaco, Quality control test for carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) for fastening to concrete, Structural Journal 92 (1) (1995) 73–94.
anchors for rehabilitation, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, 2009. [206] S. Kim, S.T. Smith, Behaviour of handmade FRP anchors under tensile load in
[176] K. Ishihara, T. Obara, Y. Sato, T. Ueda, Y. Kakuta, Evaluation of Ultimate Strength uncracked concrete, Adv. Struct. Eng. 12 (6) (2009) 845–865.
of FRP Rods at Bent-Up Portion, Non-Metallic (FRP), in: Reinforcement for [207] R. Kanitkar, S.T. Smith, C. Lewis, An Experimental Investigation on the splay
Concrete Structures, Proceedings of the Third International Symposium, 1997, portion of embedded FRP tension anchors, Proceedings of the Eighth
pp. 27–34. International Conference on Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Composites in Civil
[177] A. 440.3R, Guide test methods for Fibre-Reinforced Polymers (FRPs) for Engineering (CICE 2016), Southern Cross University, 2016.
reinforcing or strengthening concrete structures 2012 Farming Hills, Michigan, U. [208] E. del Rey Castillo, D. Dizhur, M. Griffith, J. Ingham, Experimental testing and
S.A. design model for bent FRP anchors exhibiting fiber rupture failure mode, Compos.
[178] D.K. Pudleiner, Design considerations based on size effects of anchored carbon Struct. 210 (2019) 618–627.
fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) systems, The University of Texas at Austin, USA, [209] I.A.C. Flores, J.F. Gómez, P.V. Llauradó, A. Ferreira, An empirical model to
2016. estimate FRP anchored joint strength using spike anchors, Compos. Struct. 254
[179] W. Sun, H. Liu, Y. Wang, T. He, Impacts of configurations on the strength of FRP (2020), 112789.
anchors, Compos. Struct. 194 (2018) 126–135. [210] Ç. Mertoğlu, Ö. Anil, C. Durucan, Bond slip behavior of anchored CFRP strips on
[180] L. Pham, Development of a Quality Control Test for Carbon Fiber Reinforced concrete surfaces, Constr. Build. Mater. 123 (2016) 553–564.
Polymer Anchors.“, master’s thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, [211] R. Ghoroubı, Ö. Mercimek, S. Sakın, Ö. Anıl, Novel bond-slip model between
2009. concrete and angular CFRP fan type anchoraged CFRP strip, European Journal of
Environmental and Civil Engineering (2021) 1–19.
16

Construction and Building Materials: Giovanni Muciaccia, Mehdi Khorasani, Davood Mostofinejad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Construction and Building Materials: Giovanni Muciaccia, Mehdi Khorasani, Davood Mostofinejad

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Construction and Building Materials: Giovanni Muciaccia, Mehdi Khorasani, Davood Mostofinejad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Construction and Building Materials 354 (2022) 129181

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

Effect of different parameters on the performance of FRP anchors in

capacities of these materials [7,46,55–60].

Notation β dowel angle (degree);

Fig. 3. Different types of FRP anchors.

Fig. 5. Pull out setup [144].

Fig. 6. Classification of bond tests [164].

4. FRP anchors failure modes 4.3. Combined concrete cone-bond failure

Fig. 8. Possible failure modes for FRP anchors [99].

5. The effects of different parameters on the behavior of FRP

5.1. Anchor preparation and installation

In addition to considering the design points of FRP anchors, how they

5.6. Effect of cyclic loading 5.9. Fan geometry

Fig. 13. Schematic of applying patches over FRP anchors [178].

Fig. 15. Anchor overlap spacing as recommended by Kobayashi [174].

5.11. Concrete strength 6. Design models

Combined Straight Ncb = 4.69πdh hef (fc < 20Mpa)Ncb =

Na can be obtained according to Villanueva

Sn = 0.007(na )3 − 0.13(na )2 + 0.74(na ) + 1.0

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.