Hamdy et al.

Journal of Engineering
Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38
https://doi.org/10.1186/s44147-025-00604-0 and Applied Science

RESEARCH Open Access

Experimental and numerical behavior

of strengthened reinforced concrete slabs
Abdelrhman Emad Hamdy1* , Hany Ahmed Abdalla2, Ghada Diaa Abdelhamed3 and Ahmed Alaa Elansary4,5,6

*Correspondence:
[email protected]
Abstract
1
Lecturer Assistant, Faculty In terms of the importance of establishing mega structures in Egypt, there is an increas-
of Engineering, Ahram Canadian ing demand to strengthen their slabs. Accordingly, this research was initiated
University, Giza 12451, Egypt with the objective of assessing different strengthening techniques (strengthening
2
Department of Structural
Engineering, Faculty by concrete jacket or strips of carbon fiber reinforced polymer “CFRP”), where a multi-
of Engineering, Cairo University, disciplinary approach was employed. Principally, literature within the domain of slab
Giza 12613, Egypt strengthening was amassed and scrutinized. An experimental work was conducted
3
Housing and Building National
Research Center, Giza 12622, to examine 5 specimens of slabs under 4-point loadings. Crack patterns, midspan
Egypt deflections, and steel strains were designated, where load–deflection curves and load-
4
Department of Structural strain curves were produced. Moreover, the experimental investigation was repli-
Engineering, Faculty
of Engineering, Cairo University, cated numerically by ABAQUS. Experimental and numerical results were contrasted,
Giza 12613, Egypt from which it was apparent that their results provided comparable trends. Confident
5
Department of Civil with this contrasting process, a parametric study was achieved by ABAQUS, where 54
Engineering, Faculty
of Engineering and Material specimens with various parameters were investigated. Results showed that strengthen-
Science, German University ing with RC jacketing and CFRP strips enhanced the load capacity and initial stiffness
in Cairo, New Cairo City 11835, while decreasing the ductility for RC slabs. In addition, various jacketing bar and CFRP
Egypt
6
Department of Civil properties changes showed significant enhancement in the behavior of strengthened
and Environmental Engineering, slabs. The numerical results showed enhancement in the load capacity of strength-
The University of Western ened specimens due to the increase in the jacketing yield strength, bar diameter,
Ontario, London, ON N6A3K7,
Canada and the jacketing concrete compressive strength. Increasing the number of CFRP strips
enhanced the performance of the strengthened slab specimens by 14.2% ~ 25.1%.
Keywords: Concrete slabs, ABAQUS, Strengthening, Jacket, CFRP

Introduction
In some cases, slabs acquire strengthening techniques to withstand the load demands
or service life requirements. Among these techniques are jacketing strengthening
(J-ST) and CFRP strengthening (CFRP-ST), where they emerged, as common solutions
due to their efficiency in fostering the structural capacity. CFRP-ST offers high tensile
strength with limited weight, which pronounces it as a suitable solution for structures
with weight limitations. However, J-ST adds extra weight to concrete and steel, but
they enhance the durability under compressive forces. Accordingly, relevant studies
were collected and reviewed, revealing that many researchers were focused on study-
ing strengthening methods. Among them, for example, are [1], who documented that
slabs and beams strengthening with concrete jackets or CFRP is indispensable in many

© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits
use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original
author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third
party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the mate-
rial. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or
exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdo-
main/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 2 of 21

structural applications to foster their flexural and shear strengths with limited crack-
ing. Likewise, [2] advocated that J-ST necessitate the architectural engineer approval,
due to its obvious increased concrete size. Additionally, [2] stated that CFRP-ST does
not noticeably change the thickness due to its offering reasonable enhancement in ten-
sile strength, weight, and crack resistance, as well as ductility and load capacity of the
strengthened element. Reinforced concrete (RC) overlay has proven its effectiveness in
improving the flexural strength and durability of the strengthened structural element [3].
Using shear connectors between the concrete overlay and the original concrete surface
improves the bonding resistance and load transfer, especially when making roughness
for the contact surface between the concrete tension surface and concrete overlay [4,
5]. The concrete overlay may suffer from shrinkage which can affect its performance in
strengthening the RC slab. Shear connectors are used to overcome any shrinkage stress
affecting the structural performance of the strengthened slabs [6]. Within the same con-
text, El-Mandouh et al. [7] specified that CFRP-ST is efficient for strengthening con-
crete elements that acquire easy installation, flexible implementation, and non-corrosive
identities. El-Mandouh et al. [7] further added that CFRP-ST requires experienced labor
and a higher budget than J-ST. On the other hand, Lima et al. [8] designated that CFRP
laminate orientation imposes a vital impact on the load capacity of the strengthened ele-
ments. In contrast, Barros et al. [9] and Ashteyat et al. [10] achieved an experimental
investigation that tested beams with near surface and external CFRP-ST, under a 4-point
load. Similarly, Al-Rousan et al. [11] and Limam et al. [12] specified that the ultimate
capacity of slabs with CFRP-ST could attain 186.7% above control slabs. Likewise, Zhu
et al. advocated that CFRP-ST limits crack growth in members of flexure due to dis-
tributing the minute cracks [13–15]. Moreover, CFRP-ST strengthened the load capac-
ity of strengthened elements more than CFRP-ST, in spite of the fact that CFRP-ST is
cost-effective and fosters the strengthened elements. Their results proved the efficiency
of CFRP-ST in fostering the flexural load capacity by 300%, in reference to the control
specimen. However, Zhu et al. [13] advocated that the highest value was achieved in the
case of utilizing a steel fiber content of 3%. Within the same framework, He et al. [16]
conducted an experimental investigation to explore the impact of basalt fiber-reinforced
polymer “BFRP” on slab flexural capabilities. They advocated that J-ST is more economi-
cal and more efficient than near surface-mounted “NSM” BFRP-ST, in terms of fostering
load capacity. Moreover, Sharaky et al. [17] carried out an experimental study to investi-
gate the efficiency of external bonding “EB” and NSM in fostering one-way slabs under
different reinforcement. However, their results indicated that a significant increase was
attained in load capacity, in the case of the NSM technique more than in the case of
utilizing the EB technique, where the load capacity increased by 33.8–164.5% more than
the reference slab.
Limited studies [10, 11, 18] focused on the performance of one-way CFRP-ST slabs. In
addition, these studies did not monitor the performance of slabs with thicknesses larger
than 125 mm, and the effect of upper reinforcement mesh in the slab required strength-
ening. The current study experimentally and numerically investigates the flexural per-
formance of J-ST and CFRP-ST slabs. An intensive parametric study was conducted to
investigate the effect of critical design parameters on the performance of strengthened
specimens.
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 3 of 21

Fig. 1 Control slab elevation, cross section and plan

Fig. 2 Strengthened slab by J-ST elevation and plan

Experimental
Study design and setting
This experimental study aims to compare between flexural performance of reinforced
concrete slabs strengthened with CFRP strips and reinforced concrete jacketing, to
monitor the effect of the crucial design parameters affecting each strengthening tech-
nique. This goal aids in getting the optimized design for the reinforced concrete slabs.
The experimental investigation was conducted in the concrete laboratory of the
Housing and Building National Research Center “HBRC” [19]. Five 2-m-long and

slab, slab strengthened by a concrete 4-cm jacket 7 ф 10/m, slab strengthened by a con-
0.75-m-wide slabs were prepared. Their descriptions are as follows: control or reference

crete 4-cm jacket 7 ф 12/m, slab strengthened by three 10-cm-wide 1-layer CFRP strips,
and slab strengthened by three 10-cm-wide 2-layer CFRP strips. Moreover, Figs. 1, 2,
and 3 present the plan and elevation of the control slab, slab strengthened by J-ST, and
slab strengthened by CFRP-ST, respectively. The prepared slabs for the experimental
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 4 of 21

Fig. 3 Strengthened slab by CFRP-ST elevation and plan

Table 1 Prepared slabs

Slab Strengthening technique (ST) Jacket Steel Reinforcement Number
of CFRP
layers

RC-0 --- --- ---

RC-J1 J-ST 7 Ø 10/m ---
RC-J2 J-ST 7 Ø 12/m ---
RC-C1 CFRP-ST --- 1 layer
RC-C2 CFRP-ST --- 2 layers

investigation purpose are listed in Table 1. Strain gauges were installed on the midspan
of the middle main steel and jacketing steel bars and the CFRP, as shown in Fig. 4. Fig-
ures 5 and 6 show the test setup and locations of LVDTs mounted under the specimen
during loading up to failure. The slabs were loaded by four points loading. AMSLER-
Universal-Testing-Machine [20] was employed for the loading process, where deflec-
tions and strains were detected throughout the loading process.

Materials
Tables 2 and 3 show the properties of CFRP (SikarWrap-230C) [21] and epoxy adhesive
(Sikadur-330) [22], respectively. The nominal thickness of the CFRP sheet was 0.129 mm.
The utilized concrete compressive strength of the slabs was 40 MPa, and steel yield and
ultimate strength of the steel were 500 and 615 MPa, respectively. The minimum elonga-
tion is 13% according to the steel data sheet [23]. It is worth mentioning that the com-
pressive strength was obtained from 3 standard cubes and 3 standard cylinders which
were tested after 28 days of curing, as shown in Fig. 7. The average compressive strength
for the substrate concrete and jacketing concrete layer was 40.4 MPa, as shown in Fig. 7.
Average compressive strength of cylinders was 33.3 MPa. For both the substrate and
jacketing concrete, the average compressive strengths were 40.4 MPa for cube samples
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 5 of 21

Fig. 4 Strain gauge preparation and installation

Fig. 5 Schematic for test setup

and 33.3 MPa for cylinder samples. The nominal aggregate size used for the concrete
substrate and concrete overlay was 9.5 mm. Moreover, it is noteworthy to specify that
the slabs strengthened by J-ST were designed according to ACI 318–19 [24].

Methodology
These slabs were constructed in Fig. 8 and presented in the following steps: rough-
ening the surface and drilling 14-mm holes and 10-mm shear dowel, removing dust
from the holes and polishing them with Kemapoxy 150 primer [25], filling the holes by
epoxy Kemapoxy 165 [26]; polishing the concrete slab by epoxy Kemapoxy 104 [27],
and curing RC jacket by water for 28 days. However, the slabs strengthened by CFRP-
ST were designed according to ACI 440.2R-17 [28]. These slabs were constructed in
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 6 of 21

Fig. 6 Testing machine and measuring equipment

Table 2 CFRP mechanical properties

Property Data

Type Unidirectional
Color Black
Nominal thickness 0.129
Modulus of elasticity in tension 230 000 MPa
Tensile strength 3500 MPa
Elongation at break 1.7 %

Table 3 CFRP epoxy adhesive properties

Property Data

Type Unidirectional
Color grey
Thickness 0.1 mm
Elongation at break 0.9%
Modulus of elasticity – Normal to adhesive plane 444.4 MPa
Modulus of elasticity – parallel to adhesive plan 3800 MPa
Tensile adhesion strength - Normal to adhesive plane 4 MPa
Elongation at break 1.7 %

Fig. 9 as follows: smoothing the surface by grinder machine [29], marking the CFRP
strip location, polishing epoxy Sikadur 330 [22] on the locations of the CFRP, insert-
ing CFRP strips [21], and squeezing all strips by a hard roll to eliminate air voids, then
leaving for air curing for 48 h according to the manufacturer recommendations [22].
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 7 of 21

Fig. 7 Compressive strength of tested cubes

Fig. 8 J-ST procedure

Numerical parametric investigations

This section elaborates on the preliminary numerical simulations that were achieved to
make sure that the numerical model could provide similar results to the experimental
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 8 of 21

Fig. 9 CFRP-ST procedure

investigation results. Confident with this process, a parametric investigation was con-
ducted numerically and expounded in this section, as well.

Numerical investigation
The numerical investigations were achieved by employing ABAQUS, where it resolves
engineering difficulties and offers structural analysis and nonlinear analysis. It is a pow-
erful software for engineering applications. It is based on finite element method (FEM).
ABAQUS integrates continuum mechanics to simulate material behavior. It includes
material models (i.e., metals, composites, polymers, and concrete) with their specific
identities (i.e., elasticity and damage). ABAQUS employs iterative methods (i.e., New-
ton–Raphson method). It has implicit and explicit solvers. Its theoretical foundation
makes it to be a robust tool for simulating actual cases.

Numerical simulation
ABAQUS was employed on the same inspected slabs (i.e., 5), where the load–deflec-
tion curves were obtained. Five 2-m long and 0.75-m wide slabs were simulated. Their

crete 4-cm jacket 7 ф 10/m, slab strengthened by a concrete 4-cm jacket 7 ф 12/m,
descriptions are, as follows: control or reference slab, slab strengthened by a con-

slab strengthened by three 10-cm-wide 1-layer CFRP strips, and slab strengthened
by three 10-cm-wide 2-layer CFRP strips. These 5 slabs were numerically simulated
by ABAQUS software, as shown in Fig. 10. Types of the FEM elements are shown
in Fig. 11, which are as follows: node 3D linear brick-element with mismatching dis-
placement patterns (i.e., C3D8I) was employed to mimic the concrete slab, where
rotations and translations were estimated, at the 8 nodes of each C3D8I element. A
truss element was employed to mimic the steel reinforcement steel, where the truss
element type used was a two-node linear 3D truss element (T3D2), as this element
type can bear both compressive and tensile forces. Shell element was utilized to
mimic CFRP strips, where 4-node shell element (i.e., S4) were utilized and 3 degrees
of freedom were defined, at each node. Concrete was modeled using concrete damage
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 9 of 21

Fig. 10 Numerical model components

Fig. 11 Utilized elements in the developed FEM simulating the tested slabs
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 10 of 21

plasticity in ABAQUS software [30], to monitor the nonlinear behavior of concrete

under loading up to failure. Concrete compressive and tensile stress–strain behavior
are modeled according to [31] and [32, 33], respectively. The concrete damage param-
eter in the concrete damage plasticity model was calculated according to [34]. The
reinforcement steel material model includes the yield and ultimate stress and strain
according to the experimentally tested mechanical properties [23]. The steel mate-
rial model simulated the plastic behavior under loading up to failure. CFRP strips
were modeled using elastic lamina behavior in ABAQUS considering the manufac-
turer’s CFRP mechanical properties [21]. CFRP damage criteria were modeled using
Hashin damage criteria [35, 36]. Cohesion property was used for modeling the con-
tact between CFRP strips and the soffit of the strengthened specimen. The cohesion
property followed the mechanical property of the epoxy material mentioned in the
experimental investigation. Epoxy properties in the FEM were calculated based on
[37], as presented in Table 4. Apparently, the model succeeded in producing similar
results to the load–deflection curves with an error percentage of not exceeding 10%,
which is acceptable for engineering applications.

Numerical parametric investigation

Confident with the model results, a parametric study was conducted numerically,
where 54 runs were carried out to explore the impact of the contributing parame-
ters on the slab behavior. The same slab with its dimensions (2.0 m × 0.75 m) was
inspected. Table 5 specifies the identities of the slabs that were strengthened by
employing jacketing strengthening. The table specifies the incorporated parameters
′j
such as reinforcement diameter (ф), jacketing concrete compressive strength ( fc ) and
steel yield strength (fy). The table signifies that each parameter varies 3 times. Steel
yield strength is an important parameter, as it indicates the stress, beyond which steel
bars start to deform plastically. Table 6 lists the identities of CFRP. It specifies the
number of strips (Ns), strip spacing (Ss), and strip width (Sw). Each parameter var-
ies 3 times. It is to be noted that CFRP number of strips is an influencing parameter,
where CFRP is a composite material (i.e., carbon fibers are embedded into the poly-
mer matrix by an epoxy resin). CFRP is acknowledged for its high strength/weight, its
corrosion resistance, and its rigidity, which makes it ideal for aerospace applications.
Moreover, it is employed in construction engineering, where it reinforces structures
(i.e., beams and columns). Moreover, due to its capability to enhance the load-bearing
capacity without adding weight.

Table 4 Modeling properties of epoxy adhesive material

Property Data

Stiffness coefficients Knn= 4444.4 MPa

Modulus of elasticity/thickness [37] Kss= 38,000 MPa
Ktt = 38,000 MPa
Fracture energy [37] 27
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 11 of 21

Table 5 Parametric investigation for jacketing strengthening specimens

Numerical specimens ′j
fc (MPa) fy (MPa) ф (mm)

RC-J3 30 400 12
RC-J4 500
RC-J5 600
RC-J6 40 400
RC-J7 500
RC-J8 600
RC-J9 50 400
RC-J10 500
RC-J11 600
RC-J12 30 400 16
RC-J13 500
RC-J14 600
RC-J15 40 400
RC-J16 500
RC-J17 600
RC-J18 50 400
RC-J19 500
RC-J20 600
RC-J21 30 400 18
RC-J22 500
RC-J23 600
RC-J24 40 400
RC-J25 500
RC-J26 600
RC-J27 50 400
RC-J28 500
RC-J29 600

Results and discussions

Cracking and load capacities
Deflections and strains were recorded using LVDTs and strain gauges (i.e., LVDTs were
placed under midspan and at thirds of all slabs for accurate monitoring), whereas strain
gauges were mounted on midspan of main steel, so as jacketing steel, and CFRP strips.
Table 7 specifies the first cracking load, maximum load, and deflections for all slabs. The
increase percentages at maximum loads of the strengthened slabs, relative to the refer-
ence slab are presented in the same table. Table 8 shows the experimental and numerical
results for tested slabs including failure loads and maximum deflections. Based on the
experimental and numerical results, an intensive parametric study was conducted.
Figure 12 specifies the crack pattern for the tested slabs till failure. The numbers
written on the beams represent the instant cracking load at this location. This proce-
dure was followed for all beams till failure. Figure 13 presents the structural behavior
curves (load deflection and load strain curves). Load deflection curves followed lin-
ear elastic behavior; afterwards, steel yielded and nonlinear behavior continued till
failure. Discussions for variation in load capacity, maximum deflection, initial stiff-
ness, and ductility were conducted for both J-ST and CFRP-ST. The initial stiffness
was calculated from the slope of the linear part of the load–deflection curves for the
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 12 of 21

Table 6 Parametric investigation for CFRP strengthening

Numerical specimens Sc(mm) Sw(mm) Ns

RC-C3 75 50 2
RC-C4 100
RC-C5 125
RC-C6 100 50
RC-C7 100
RC-C8 125
RC-C9 125 50
RC-C10 100
RC-C11 125
RC-C12 75 50 3
RC-C13 100
RC-C14 125
RC-C15 100 50
RC-C16 100
RC-C17 125
RC-C18 125 50
RC-C19 100
RC-C20 125
RC-C21 75 50 4
RC-C22 100
RC-C23 125
RC-C24 100 25
RC-C25 50
RC-C26 100
RC-C27 125 50
RC-C28 50 25
RC-C29 100

Table 7 Experimental results for tested slabs

Specimen First cracking First cracking Maximum load Maximum Increase*
load (kN) deflection (mm) (kN) deflection (mm)

RC-0 55 1.9 252.2 29.2 NA

RC-J1 75 1.8 330.2 15.8 30.9
RC-J2 85 3 383.2 13.3 51.9
RC-C1 70 2.1 304.1 20.1 20.6
RC-C2 80 2.6 327.6 26.2 29.9
increase* : increase percentage in maximum load of strengthened slabs compared to RC-0

tested specimens as shown in Fig. 14. The ductility was calculated as the area under
the load–deflection curves for the tested specimens.
Jacketing strengthening technique enhanced load capacity by 30.9 to 51.9% and
improved the initial stiffness for slabs (RC-J1 and RC-J2) by 150.1 to 218.2%, in terms
of reference slab (RC-0). Strengthened RC slab with jacketing (RC-J1 and RC-J2) hav-
ing a reinforcement mesh of 7 Ø 10/m and 7 Ø12 /m exhibited a reduction in ductil-
ity by 62.7% and 70.2%, respectively, compared to the control RC slab. The jacketing
strengthening technique led to slab failure at deflections of 45.9 to 54.5%, below the
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 13 of 21

Table 8 Experimental versus numerical results for tested slabs

Specimens Experimental results Numerical results
Failure load (kN) Maximum Failure load (kN) Maximum
deflection (mm) deflection
(mm)

RC-0 252.2 29.2 223.1 28.3

RC-J1 330.2 15.8 310.1 15.6
RC-J2 383.2 13.3 360.2 13.2
RC-C1 304.1 20.1 314.8 19.2
RC-C2 327.6 26.2 337.9 25.1

Fig. 12 Crack patterns for slabs at failure load

reference slab. Consequently, jacketing steel bars exceed the yield strain, as shown in
Fig. 13.
CFRP strengthening technique fostered failure load by 20.4 to 29.8%. In addition, the
initial stiffness by 112.2 to 135.6%. CFRP-ST reduced the maximum deflection by ~ 10.95
to 31.16%, relative to the reference slab. Regarding ductility, RC-C1 with one CFRP layer
resulted in a 57.4% decrease, while slab RC-C2 with two CFRP layers demonstrated a
35.8% decrease compared to the reference RC slab. Strain in CFRP attained 8270 µε and
9457 µε, at failure load for RC-C1 and RC-C2, respectively, as shown in Fig. 13.
Regarding the failure modes, the control RC slab (RC-0) failed by concrete crushing
at midspan after main steel reinforcement yielding. Jacketing and CFRP-strengthened
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 14 of 21

Fig. 13 Load-midspan deflection and load-strain curves

Fig. 14 Sketch for calculation of specimen’s initial stiffness

specimens showed shear failure after yielding the main steel reinforcement. Strength-
ened specimens’ shear mode of failure happened because the CFRP strengthened
technique enhanced the flexural strength without enhancing the shear strength.
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 15 of 21

The jacketing strengthening technique enhanced the flexural strength with a minor
enhancement in the shear strength. Consequently, these slabs suffered from shear
failure because their shear capacities were less than their flexural capacities. Despite
the shear failure, the main and jacketing steel yielded. Flexural shear cracks occurred
which ensured the feasibility of strengthening existing RC slabs with a high reinforce-
ment ratio. Strain in the CFRP strips should not exceed 80% of the ultimate strain
(14,546 µε), mentioned in the datasheet of CFRP Sikawrap 230 C (2023). The utili-
zation factor, which reflected the optimized usage of the CFRP material, is defined
according to Eq. 1. This factor is crucial in CFRP strengthening technique due to the
high cost of CFRP material. Strain in CFRP attained 8270 µε and 9457 µε, at failure
load for RC-C1 and RC-C2, respectively. Using the CFRP strips is more economical
than using CFRP sheets resulting in utilization factors of 71.1% and 81.3% for RC-C1
and RC-C2, respectively.

εexp
ut =
εallowable (1)

Parametric study results

Based on experimental results, validated numerical models were used to perform the
parametric study. The numerical study aimed to preciously monitor the effect of design
critical strengthening technique parameters on the performance of strengthened speci-
mens. This goal aimed to optimize the design of strengthened slabs using RC jacketing
and CFRP strips. In addition, the intensive results from the conducted parametric study
can be fed into a machine learning technique to optimize the design of strengthened
slabs. The parametric study focuses on investigating critical design parameters for each
strengthening technique. Figures 15, 16, 17, and 18 elaborate on the results of the numer-
ical parametric investigation, as follows: Fig. 16 presents experimental versus numeri-
cal load–deflection curves for tested slabs, in addition to J-ST load–deflection curves
for the numerical jacketing parametric study. Figure 16 expounds on the experimental

analysis of the experimental versus numerical failure load for J-ST slabs with different ф.
versus numerical load deflection curve for CRFP-ST slabs, whereas Fig. 17 elaborates

Increasing the jacketing bar yield strength from 400 to 500 MPa and 600 MPa enhanced
the load capacity of the strengthened specimen ~ 15.2 to 28.9%, respectively. Results
show that increasing the bar diameter from 12 to 16 mm and 18 mm enhanced slab load
capacity from ~ 41.3 to 66.9%, respectively. Changing the concrete compressive strength
from 30 to 40 MPa and 50 MPa showed an increase in specimen load capacity ~ 0.12 to
0.88%, respectively. Consequently, it can be concluded that increasing the jacketing com-
pressive strength has an insignificant effect on the load capacity of the strengthened RC
specimen. However, increasing bar diameter and yield strength had a significant effect
on the strengthened specimen.
Figure 18 particularizes the impact of CFRP spacing and width on the load capacity
of CFRP-ST sabs. CFRP Results show that increasing the total bonded width of CFRP
strips from ~ 100 to 250 mm, enhanced the failure load of the strengthened specimens
on average from ~ 14.1 to 19.0%. In addition, increasing the total bonded width of CFRP
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 16 of 21

Fig. 15 Experimental versus numerical load load-deflection curve for J-ST- boasted slabs

strips from ~ 150 to 375 mm, improved the load capacity of the strengthened specimens
on average from ~ 18.3 to 24.2%. It can be observed that decreasing the CFRP spacing
from ~ 100 to 75 mm enhanced the load capacity on average from ~ 4.1 to 5.6% for CFRP
total bonded width ~ 100 to 250 mm. In addition, the average enhancement range for
the same decrease in spacing ~ 100 to 75 mm was ~ 5.2 to 7.9% for ~ 150 to 375 mm total
bonded CFRP strips width. Consequently, increasing the total bonded width of CFRP
strips improved the load capacity of the strengthened specimen for the same CFRP spac-
ing. The contact stresses between CFRP strips and concrete did not exceed the bonding
stress of the epoxy material (4 MPa) which matched the experimental failure mode.

Conclusions
Based on the analyzed results, the following conclusions were deduced:

• It was found that CFRP-ST and J-ST fostered the structural performance of slabs,
specifically for load-bearing capacity, flexural strength, and durability.
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 17 of 21

Fig. 16 Experimental versus numerical load load-deflection curve for CRFP-ST- boasted slabs

• CFRP-ST particularly increased tensile strength and flexural rigidity without adding
significant weight. Accordingly, the technique is pronounced as an ideal technique
for applications in specific buildings, where weight is critical. However, the technique
requires a particular surface preparation and so as application, which could limit its
practicality in a lower controlled environment.
• J-ST particularly provided grander durability so as resistance to compressive loads.
Accordingly, the technique is pronounced as extremely suitable for structures sub-
jected to impact forces or exposed to abrasive circumstances, although it acquires
more material than CFRP-ST.
• Both techniques offer substantial benefits, whereas CFRP-ST offers a lightweight-
efficient solution and J-ST fosters durability in challenging environments.
• J-ST and CFRP-ST strengthened the first cracking load, so as initial stiffness and fail-
ure load. However, the techniques reduced the ductility of slabs.
• J-ST and CFRP-ST reduced the spacing between cracks.
• J-ST and CFRP-ST did not prevent the yielding of main reinforcement.
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 18 of 21

Fig. 17 Experimental versus numerical failure load for J-ST slabs with different bar diameters

Fig. 18 Impact of CFRP- spacing and width on the load capacity of CFRP-ST sabs
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 19 of 21

• J-ST and CFRP-ST provided comparable results for both experimental and numer-
ical investigations.
• For J-ST, increasing the jacket bar diameter and jacket reinforcement steel yield
strength strengthened the load capacity.
• For J-ST, increasing the jacketing concrete compressive strength of the jacket
showed an insignificant effect on the load capacity of the slabs.
• CFRP-ST strengthened the load capacity. However, decreasing the spacing
between CFRP strips enhanced the slab capacity.

Based on the deduced conclusions, the following recommendations are suggested:

• CFRP-ST is ideal for weight-sensitive projects due to its high strength and low
weight, while J-ST is better for slabs under high compressive loads, enhancing
durability.
• CFRP-ST is ideal for controlled environments due to its ease of implementation,
while J-ST is better for outdoor conditions, offering improved long-term perfor-
mance.
• When tensile strength and impact resistance are equally important, a hybrid
approach combining both techniques is preferred to optimize performance and
leverage their respective strengths.
• Future research should explore hybrid techniques under long-term performance
in different environments, as both CFRP-ST and J-ST are efficient strengthening
techniques and each offers specific advantages, in terms of the specific demands of
the project.
• Machine learning and parametric study results can be used to develop optimized
models for strengthened slabs with jacketing and CFRP, incorporating key design
parameters and their impact on load–deflection behavior up to failure.

Abbreviations
Fc Concrete-compressive strength

Ф Bar diameter in the jacketing

fy Steel-yield-strength of the jacketing

Ss CFRP strips spacing

Sw CFRP strips width
Ns Number of CFRP strips
E Load at midspan of slab
N Load at midspan deflection of slabs

Acknowledgements
Not applicable.

Authors’ contributions
The authors declare that the employed datasets are available from the corresponding author. Moreover, they state that
they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the
work reported in this paper and the work was achieved without funding. Moreover, they affirmed that the experimental
and numerical investigations were their own work, where GD and HA supervised the experimental investigation and
designed the numerical workflow, whereas AE and AA conducted the experimental testing and numerical analysis.
However, all authors carried out the analysis, discussed the experimental so as numerical results, and approved the final
manuscript.

Funding
Not applicable.
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 20 of 21

Data availability
The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable
request.

Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Received: 29 October 2024 Accepted: 22 February 2025

References
1. Banu D, Taranu N (2010) Traditional solutions for strengthening reinforced concrete slabs. Bul Inst Politehnic Lasi
Sectia Constructii, Arhitectura 56:53
2. Sabbaghian M, Kheyroddin A (2020) Flexural strengthening of RC one way slabs with high-performance fiber-
reinforced cementitious composite laminates using steel and GFRP bar. Eng Struct 221:111106
3. Al-Majidi MH, Lampropoulos AP, Cundy AB, Tsioulou OT, Alrekabi S (2019) Flexural performance of reinforced con-
crete beams strengthened with fibre reinforced geopolymer concrete under accelerated corrosion. In Structures
(Vol. 19, pp. 394-410). Elsevier. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​istruc.​2019.​02.​005
4. H Fernandes V Lúcio A Ramos 2017 Strengthening of RC slabs with reinforced concrete overlay on the tensile face
Eng Struct 132 540 550
5. Fernandes HDP (2019) Strengthening of flat slabs with reinforced concrete overlay–analysis and development of
the solution (Doctoral dissertation, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa (Portugal))
6. Lampropoulos AP, Dritsos SE (2008) Numerical study of the effects of preloading, axial loading and concrete shrink-
age on reinforced concrete elements strengthened by concrete layers and jackets. In AIP Conference Proceed-
ings (Vol. 1020, No. 1, pp. 1203–1210). American Institute of Physics. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1063/1.​29637​41
7. El-Mandouh MA, Elsamak G, Rageh BO, Hamoda A, Abdelazeem F (2023) Experimental and numerical investigation
of one-way reinforced concrete slabs using various strengthening systems. Case Stud Constr Mater 18:e01691
8. MM Lima J-H Doh MNS Hadi D Miller 2016 The effects of CFRP orientation on the strengthening of reinforced
concrete structures Struct Design Tall Spec Build 25 759 784
9. JAO Barros SJE Dias JLT Lima 2007 Efficacy of CFRP-based techniques for the flexural and shear strengthening of
concrete beams Cement Concr Compos 29 203 217
10. Ashteyat M, Al Rjoub YS, Obaidat A, Dagamseh H (2019) Strengthening and repair of one-way and two-way
self-compacted concrete slabs using near-surface-mounted carbon-fiber-reinforced polymers. Adv Struct Eng
22:2435–2448
11. R Al-Rousan M Issa H Shabila March 2012 Performance of reinforced concrete slabs strengthened with different
types and configurations of CFRP Compos B Eng 43 510 521
12. O Limam G Foret A Ehrlacher 2003 RC two-way slabs strengthened with CFRP strips: experimental study and a limit
analysis approach Compos Struct 60 467 471
13. Zhu Y, Zhang Y, Hussein HH, Chen G (2020) Flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beams or slabs using ultra-
high performance concrete (UHPC): a state of the art review. Eng Struct 205:110035
14. H Yin W Teo K Shirai 2017 Experimental investigation on the behaviour of reinforced concrete slabs strengthened
with ultra-high performance concrete Constr Build Mater 155 463 474
15. Hoang VH, Do TA, Tran AT, Nguyen XH (2024) Flexural capacity of reinforced concrete slabs retrofitted with ultra-
high-performance concrete and fiber-reinforced polymer. Innov Infrastruct Solut 9:113
16. He W, Wang X, Ding L, Wu Z (2021) Efficiency of different BFRP-based strengthening techniques in improving flex-
ural behavior of RC slabs. Constr Build Mater 308:125002
17. Sharaky IA, Elamary AS, Alharthi YM (2023) Experimental and numerical investigation on the flexural performance of
RC slabs strengthened with EB/NSM CFRP reinforcement and bonded reinforced HSC layers. Eng Struct 289:116338
18. SS Aman BS Mohammed MA Wahab A Anwar 2020 Performance of reinforced concrete slab with opening strength-
ened using CFRP Fibers 8 25
19. HBRC, Housing and Building National Research Center, HBRC, 21 May 2023. Available: www.​hbrc.​edu.​eg/​en.
Accessed 16 May 2023
20. AMSLER, Test resources, AMSLER, 10 April 2023. Available: www.​testr​esour​ces.​net/​campa​igns/​amsler-​unive​rsal-​testi​
ng-​machi​ne. Accessed in April 2023.
21. Sikawrap 230 C, SIKA Egypt, SIKA, 16 December 2023. Available: https://​gcc.​sika.​com/​dam/​dms/​gcc/j/​sikaw​rap_-​
230_c.​pdf. Accessed 30 Dec 2023
22. Sikadur-330, SIKA Egypt, SIKA, 30 December 2023. Available: https://​gcc.​sika.​com/​conte​nt/​dam/​dms/​gcc/b/​sikad​
ur_-​330.​pdf. Accessed 15 Dec 2023
23. High strength steel Grade B500DWR, 15 March 2023. Available: http://​www.​ezzst​eel.​com/​steel-​produ​cts/​rebar/​
high-​stren​gth-​steel-​grade-​b500d​wr. Accessed in April 2023
24. American Concrete Institute (2019) Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318–19): An ACI
Standard; Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318R-19). American Concrete
Institute
Hamdy et al. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science (2025) 72:38 Page 21 of 21

25. CMB Egypt, CMB, 30 Decemeber 2023. Available: www.​cmbeg​ypt.​com/​cmb/​en/​produ​ct/​kemap​oxy-​150 . Accessed

30 Dec 2023.
26. CMB Egypt, CMB, 30 December 2023. Available: www.​cmbeg​ypt.​com/​cmb/​en/​produ​ct/​kemap​oxy-​165. Accessed
11 Dec 2023
27. CMB Egypt, CMB, 30 December 2023. Available: www.​cmbeg​ypt.​com/​cmb/​en/​produ​ct/​kemap​oxy-​104. Accessed
11 Dec 2023
28. American Concrete Institute (2017) Guide for the design and construction of externally bonded FRP systems for
strengthening concrete structures (ACI 440.2R-17). Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute
29. G. Machine, Shibang Machinery, SHIBANG, 5 April 2023. Available: https://​www.​sbm-​mill.​com/​produ​cts . Accessed 2
Apr 2023
30. ABAQUS documentation - section 23.6.3, 2016. Available: http://​130.​149.​89.​49:​2080/​v2016/​books/​usb/​pt05c​h23s0​
6abm39.​html
31. British Standard Institution (2014) Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures - part 1–1: general rules and rules for
buildings, BS EN 1992–1–1
32. Ayhan B, Lale E (2021) Modeling strain rate effect on tensile strength of concrete using damage plasticity model. Int
J Impact Eng 162:162
33. R Nayal HA Rasheed 2006 Tension stiffening model for concrete beams reinforced with steel and FRP bars J Mater
Civ Eng 18 6 831 841
34. Y Guo G Gao L Jing V Shim 2017 Response of high-strength concrete to dynamic compressive loading Int J Impact
Eng 108 114 135
35. Z Hashin A Rotem 1973 A fatigue failure criterion for fiber reinforced materials J Compos Mater 7 4 448 464
36. Z Hashin 1980 Failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites J Appl Mech 47 2 329 334
37. ABAQUS documentation - section 35.1.10, 2011. Available: http://​130.​149.​89.​49:​2080/​v6.​11/​books/​usb/​defau​lt.​htm?​
start​at=​pt09c​h35s0​1alm62.​html

Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.