PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS USING

SYNTHETIC FIBER COMPOSITES FOR STRUCTURAL REHABILITATION

ABSTRACT
The degradation of reinforced concrete (RC) structures due to environmental exposure,
corrosion, and poor construction practices necessitates effective repair and rehabilitation
strategies. Among the emerging techniques, the use of Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
composites has demonstrated significant potential for structural strengthening. This study
investigates the flexural performance of RC beams retrofitted externally with synthetic fiber
materials, specifically glass fiber and basalt fiber mats, bonded using epoxy resin. Experimental
analysis was conducted on beam specimens subjected to standardized loading conditions, and
results were compared to control beams without retrofitting. Findings indicate notable
improvements in load-bearing capacity, reduction in deflection, and delayed crack initiation in
the retrofitted beams. The study confirms that synthetic fiber wrapping is an efficient and
practical method for enhancing the structural integrity and service life of deteriorated concrete
elements.

Keywords: RCC beams, Structural retrofitting, Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP), Glass fiber mat,
Basalt fiber, Epoxy bonding, Flexural strength, Synthetic fiber reinforcement, Load-deflection
behavior, Concrete rehabilitation.

1. INTRODUCTION
Reinforced concrete (RC) structures are widely used in infrastructure systems due to their
durability and strength. However, over time, many of these structures experience degradation
caused by reinforcement corrosion, environmental stressors, and insufficient detailing. These
conditions often lead to a loss in structural capacity, demanding intervention through repair or
rehabilitation. Full reconstruction is typically time-consuming and cost-intensive, making
retrofitting a more feasible and sustainable alternative.
In recent years, the application of Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites has gained
traction in the field of civil engineering for structural strengthening. FRP systems offer several
advantages over traditional methods, including high tensile strength, low weight, resistance to
corrosion, and ease of application. Among the various types of synthetic fibers available, glass
and basalt fiber composites have shown excellent performance in improving flexural behavior
when externally bonded to RC beams.

This study presents an experimental investigation into the flexural performance of RC beams
retrofitted with synthetic fiber mats—glass fiber mat and basalt fiber mat. The research aims to
evaluate the structural improvements in terms of load-deflection characteristics, crack resistance,
and overall strength enhancement. The outcomes of this study are intended to contribute to the
growing body of knowledge in sustainable and efficient rehabilitation techniques for aging
concrete infrastructure.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The structural rehabilitation of reinforced concrete (RC) beams using fiber-reinforced polymers
(FRPs) has received substantial attention in recent decades due to the growing demand for
effective strengthening solutions. FRP composites offer numerous advantages, such as high
tensile strength, corrosion resistance, and ease of installation, making them a viable alternative to
traditional retrofitting techniques.

1. Early Development and FRP Fundamentals

The early exploration into FRP applications focused on externally bonded systems,
demonstrating significant flexural and shear strength enhancement. Triantafillou (1998) reported
promising results in the use of epoxy-bonded FRP for shear strengthening of RC beams [6].
Pellegrino and Modena (2002) conducted a detailed investigation on the shear strengthening of
RC beams with transverse steel reinforcement using FRPs, confirming their efficiency in
improving shear resistance [4]. Their follow-up work combined experimental and analytical
approaches to refine design methodologies [5].

2. Flexural and Shear Strengthening

Papakonstantinou et al. (2001) studied the fatigue performance of RC beams strengthened with
GFRP sheets, finding enhanced fatigue life compared to unstrengthened beams [2]. Park et al.
(2001) examined CFRP sheets applied for shear strengthening, demonstrating increased shear
capacity and delayed crack propagation [3]. In a more analytical context, Triantafillou and
Antonopoulos (2000) proposed design methodologies for FRP-strengthened members under
shear [7].
Experimental studies by Song et al. (2005) confirmed the effectiveness of externally bonded
CFRP sheets in improving shear strength [9], while Li et al. (2012) evaluated the flexural
performance of RC beams strengthened with side-bonded CFRP laminates, reporting
considerable increases in ultimate load capacity [10]. Moreover, Hosen et al. (2015) proposed the
Side Near Surface Mounted (SNSM) technique, showing improved bond strength and flexural
capacity [11].

3. Interface Behavior and Bond Mechanism

The bond behavior between FRP and concrete is a critical factor influencing the overall
performance of strengthened elements. Ueda and Dai (2005) conducted a comprehensive study
on the interface bond mechanism, including numerical modeling and its influence on the
behavior of structural members [8]. Wu and Davies (2003) presented mechanical analysis of
cracked beams retrofitted with externally bonded FRP, focusing on stress transfer and debonding
issues [14]. Similarly, de Sena Cruz and Barros (2004) emphasized the bond behavior in near-
surface mounted CFRP strips [15].
4. Alternative Strengthening Strategies
Beyond externally bonded FRPs, several researchers explored alternative strengthening
techniques. Harajli et al. (2006) combined FRP sheets with steel bolts to strengthen interior slab–
column connections [16]. Thermou et al. (2007) used concrete jacketing for brittle RC members,
comparing it with FRP-based systems [17]. Additionally, Davalos et al. (2000; 2005) highlighted
the role of externally bonded FRP in extending the service life of deteriorated RC infrastructure
[18], [19].

5. Advances in Basalt Fiber Reinforced Polymers (BFRP)

Recent years have seen a surge in interest towards basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP)
materials due to their cost-effectiveness and eco-friendliness. Sim et al. (2005) introduced basalt
fibers as a competitive alternative to traditional FRPs, offering desirable mechanical properties
and chemical stability [20]. Duic et al. (2018) and Pawlowski & Szumigala (2015) examined
full-scale BFRP-reinforced concrete beams, confirming improvements in load-carrying capacity
and ductility [21], [22]. High et al. (2015) also validated the structural potential of basalt fibers in
reinforcing concrete [23].
Comprehensive reviews by Fiore et al. (2015) highlighted the physical, mechanical, and thermal
performance of basalt fiber composites [24]. Experimental investigations by Ma et al. (2013)
assessed seismic retrofitting of earthquake-damaged RC frames using BFRP, indicating
favorable energy dissipation and crack control [25].
Shen et al. (2015) analyzed RC box beams repaired with BFRP sheets, highlighting successful
crack healing and stiffness restoration [26]. Raoof et al. (2023) introduced basalt textile-
reinforced mortar (BTRM) for beam strengthening, demonstrating ductile behavior and high
flexural capacity [27]. Additionally, bond performance studies by Wang et al. (2019) on BFRP
bars in coral aggregate concrete provided insights into applications in marine environments [28].
A more recent study by Liu et al. (2024) used acoustic emission and machine learning to assess
damage evolution in BFRP-strengthened beams, showcasing smart monitoring potential [29].

6. General Reviews and State-of-the-Art Discussions

Comprehensive reviews such as Aravind et al. (2013) outlined key findings in FRP-based
retrofitting, consolidating experimental results and identifying challenges such as debonding and
long-term durability [1]. Similarly, a recent review (2022) in Case Studies in Construction
Materials highlighted the performance, opportunities, and practical challenges in FRP-based
strengthening strategies [12]. Riabehi et al. (2021) incorporated recycled tire steel fibers and
CFRP laminates, proposing a hybrid approach for sustainable rehabilitation [13].

The collective body of literature demonstrates that FRP composites, especially CFRP, GFRP,
and BFRP, are highly effective in the repair and rehabilitation of reinforced concrete beams.
Innovations such as near-surface mounting and textile reinforcement are improving performance
metrics. However, challenges such as bond integrity, long-term durability, and cost-effectiveness
remain areas for further investigation. Basalt fiber, in particular, offers significant promise for
sustainable and high-performance structural retrofitting applications.

3. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

Materials Used
The materials selected for the study include Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) of 43 grade,
natural river sand as fine aggregate, and crushed granite as coarse aggregate with a maximum
size of 20 mm. Potable water was used for mixing and curing processes. The synthetic fiber
materials used for retrofitting included Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP), Glass Fiber
Reinforced Polymer (GFRP), and Basalt Fiber Reinforced Polymer (BFRP). These fiber
composites were procured in sheet and laminate forms with epoxy resin as the bonding agent.
The mechanical properties of each fiber type were verified using manufacturer data sheets and
in-house testing in accordance with ASTM standards.

Specimen Preparation
Standard reinforced concrete (RCC) beam specimens were cast with dimensions of 150 mm ×
150 mm × 1200 mm. The reinforcement consisted of 2 bars of 12 mm diameter as tension
reinforcement and 2 bars of 10 mm diameter in compression with 6 mm stirrups at 100 mm c/c
spacing. The mix proportion for M30 grade concrete was adopted as 1:1.65:2.8 with a water-
cement ratio of 0.45. The specimens were demoulded after 24 hours and water-cured for 28 days
under standard curing conditions.

Damage Induction and Retrofitting Process

After 28 days of curing, the beams were subjected to preloading to simulate damage and distress
similar to real-world deterioration. Controlled cracks were introduced up to 75% of their ultimate
load capacity using a two-point loading setup. After inducing damage, the surface of each beam
was cleaned and roughened to ensure proper bonding of fiber composites.
The retrofitting was carried out using externally bonded fiber sheets. A layer of epoxy adhesive
was applied on the beam surface, followed by careful placement of CFRP, GFRP, or BFRP
sheets. The fibers were applied either to the bottom (for flexural strengthening) or sides (for
shear strengthening) depending on the intended repair strategy. After application, the beams were
left to cure for 7 days at room temperature to allow full setting of the epoxy and fiber system.

Testing Procedure
All retrofitted and control specimens were tested under a two-point loading arrangement using a
universal testing machine (UTM). Load-deflection behavior was monitored using linear variable
differential transformers (LVDTs) placed at the mid-span of the beams. The first crack load,
ultimate load, and failure modes were recorded. In addition, strain gauges were attached to the
fibers and concrete surface to monitor strain distribution during loading. The testing followed IS
516 and ASTM D3039 standards for concrete and composite behavior assessment respectively.
Data Analysis
The experimental data were compared among control beams (unstrengthened), damaged-
unrepaired beams, and retrofitted beams using CFRP, GFRP, and BFRP. Load-bearing capacity,
ductility, stiffness degradation, and failure patterns were analyzed. Comparative graphs were
plotted to understand the influence of each fiber type on the structural performance of RCC
beams.

4.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Load-Carrying Capacity
The retrofitted beams showed a substantial improvement in load-carrying capacity compared to
both control and damaged-unrepaired beams. Among the three types of synthetic fibers used,
beams strengthened with Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) exhibited the highest
increase in ultimate load capacity, followed by Basalt (BFRP) and Glass Fiber Reinforced
Polymers (GFRP). On average, CFRP-retrofitted beams achieved a 50–70% improvement in
load capacity, while BFRP and GFRP retrofitted beams showed enhancements of approximately
35–55% and 25–40%, respectively. This improvement can be attributed to the high tensile
strength and stiffness properties of the synthetic fibers, particularly CFRP.

Table 1: Summary of Load-Carrying Capacity for Different Beam Types

First Crack Load Ultimate Load % Increase Over
Beam Type
(kN) (kN) Control
Control Beam 30 72 –
Damaged Beam
18 48 –33%
(Unrepaired)
Repaired with CFRP 42 122 +69%
Repaired with GFRP 38 101 +40%
Repaired with BFRP 40 110 +53%
 Figure : Ultimate Load Capacity of Different Beam Types
Crack Pattern and Failure Mode
Control beams exhibited typical flexural cracks originating from the tension face and progressing
toward the compression zone. In contrast, retrofitted beams displayed delayed crack initiation
and a more distributed crack pattern. Beams repaired with CFRP showed fewer and finer cracks,
indicating effective stress redistribution due to the external confinement. Failure modes of the
retrofitted beams were governed either by fiber debonding or rupture, depending on the fiber
type and application technique. CFRP-retrofitted specimens primarily failed due to fiber rupture,
whereas GFRP and BFRP strengthened beams exhibited interfacial debonding before failure,
suggesting relatively weaker bond characteristics.

Figure 3: Crack Pattern and Failure Mode in CFRP-Retrofitted Beam

Figure 3 illustrates the typical crack pattern and failure mode observed in the CFRP-retrofitted
beam. It shows diagonal shear cracks and fiber debonding near the load application zone,
indicating enhanced shear resistance and delayed failure compared to the control beam.
 Table 2: Observed Failure Modes for Retrofitted Beams
Fiber Type Failure Mode Observations
CFRP Fiber rupture Ductile failure, no debonding
GFRP Debonding at mid-span Brittle behavior near failure
BFRP End debonding Moderate ductility, smooth cracks

Load-Deflection Behavior
The load-deflection response of retrofitted beams demonstrated a marked increase in stiffness
and ductility. CFRP-strengthened beams showed a steep linear load-deflection curve up to the
cracking load, followed by a stable post-cracking performance up to failure. The increased
stiffness reflects the ability of CFRP to resist deformation under service loads. Beams
strengthened with BFRP and GFRP also exhibited enhanced stiffness compared to the control
group but to a lesser degree. Furthermore, all retrofitted beams exhibited improved ductility, with
increased energy absorption capacity, making them suitable for seismic and fatigue-prone
structures.

Figure 2: Load-Deflection Curves for All Beam Types

Strain Distribution
Strain measurements revealed that externally bonded fiber systems participated effectively in
load sharing. CFRP laminates carried significant tensile strain during the loading process,
delaying yielding in the internal reinforcement. Strain in the fibers remained linear until failure,
confirming effective stress transfer through the epoxy bond. BFRP and GFRP retrofitted beams
showed similar trends but with slightly earlier strain localization and reduced capacity, indicating
less efficient load sharing.

Comparative Performance of Fibers

Among the three types of synthetic fiber materials used, CFRP emerged as the most effective in
terms of both strength enhancement and ductility improvement. However, BFRP offered a good
balance between cost-effectiveness and performance, particularly in moderately loaded
structures. GFRP, while the most economical, showed limited performance under high-stress
conditions and is more suitable for light rehabilitation applications. The results validate the
selection of synthetic fibers based on the required structural performance and cost constraints.

Discussion on Practical Implications

The experimental findings highlight the potential of synthetic fiber materials in extending the
service life and restoring the structural capacity of deteriorated RCC beams. The externally
bonded fiber technique is simple, non-intrusive, and compatible with existing concrete structures.
The choice of fiber type should be guided by performance requirements, environmental exposure
conditions, and budgetary considerations. While CFRP delivers superior results, BFRP presents a
sustainable alternative with sufficient structural benefit. Moreover, the application technique and
bond quality significantly influence the effectiveness of retrofitting.

5. CONCLUSION
This study clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of synthetic fiber materials—specifically
CFRP, GFRP, and BFRP—in enhancing the structural performance of damaged reinforced
concrete (RCC) beams. The experimental results revealed that all retrofitted beams exhibited
improved load-bearing capacity and ductility compared to the control and damaged beams.
Among the tested composites, CFRP showed the highest increase in ultimate load capacity
(approximately 69% improvement), followed by BFRP and GFRP, indicating their suitability for
flexural and shear strengthening applications.

The load-deflection curves confirmed stiffer and more ductile behavior in retrofitted specimens,
while visual inspection showed favorable crack control and delayed failure modes. These
findings support the use of synthetic fiber composites as a viable, efficient, and practical solution
for the repair and rehabilitation of structural elements in aging infrastructure.

FUTURE SCOPE
Although the present study establishes the effectiveness of synthetic fiber materials in retrofitting
RCC beams, several areas remain open for future exploration. Long-term performance
evaluation under various environmental conditions such as moisture, UV exposure, and
temperature fluctuations is necessary to understand durability and aging behavior. Additionally,
testing under dynamic and seismic loading can help determine the suitability of these materials
for structures located in earthquake-prone or high-traffic regions. Future research could also
focus on hybrid strengthening techniques that combine different fiber types, such as CFRP and
BFRP, to optimize both flexural and shear performance. Extending the study to full-scale
structural components like slabs, columns, and beam-column joints would provide system-level
insights and validate real-world applicability. Moreover, a detailed cost-benefit analysis of each
fiber type, including installation and maintenance considerations, could guide engineers and
stakeholders in choosing the most efficient and economical retrofitting solutions.
REFERENCES:
[1].N. Aravind, A. K. Samanta, D. K. Singha Roy and J. V. Thanikal, “Retrofitting of
reinforced concrete beams using fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) composites – A review,”
Journal of Urban and Environmental Engineering, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 164–175, 2013,
doi: 10.4090/juee.2013.v7n1.164-175.
[2].J. F. Papakonstantinou, M. F. Petrou and K. A. Harries, “Fatigue of reinforced concrete
beams strengthened with GFRP sheets,” ASCE Journal of Composites in Construction,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 246–253, 2001.
[3].S. Y. Park, A. E. Naaman, M. M. Lopez and R. D. Till, “Shear strengthening effect of
R/C beams using glued CFRP sheets,” Int. Conf. on FRP Composites in Civil
Engineering, Hong Kong, 2001, pp. 669–676.
[4]. C. Pellegrino and C. Modena, “Fiber-reinforced polymer shear strengthening of
reinforced concrete beams with transverse steel reinforcement,” Journal of Composites
for Construction, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 104–111, 2002
[5].C. Pellegrino and C. Modena, “Fiber-reinforced polymer shear strengthening of
reinforced concrete beams: experimental study and analytical modeling,” ACI Structural
Journal, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 720–728, 2006.
[6]. T. C. Triantafillou, “Shear strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using
epoxy-bonded FRP composites,” ACI Structural Journal, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 107–115,
1998.
[7].Triantafillou and C. P. Antonopoulos, “Design of concrete flexural members strengthened
in shear with FRP,” Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 198–205,
2000.
[8].Y. Ueda and J. G. Dai, “Interface bond between FRP sheets and concrete substrates:
properties, numerical modeling and roles in member behavior,” Prog. in Struct.
Engineering and Materials, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 27–43, 2005.
[9].X. Song, F. Jie and C. Zhong Fan, “Experimental research on shear strengthening of
reinforced concrete beams with externally bonded CFRP sheets,” Journal of Composites
for Construction, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 158–169, 2005.
[10]. J. Li, Y. Gao and X. Sun, “Flexural performance of RC beams flexurally
strengthened by side-bonded CFRP laminates,” Open Civil Engineering Journal, vol. 6,
no. 1, pp. 26–32, 2012
[11]. M. A. Hosen, M. Z. Jumaat and A. S. Islam, “Side near surface mounted (SNSM)
technique for flexural enhancement of RC beams,” Materials & Design, vol. 83, pp. 587–
597, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.035.
[12]. “Performances, challenges and opportunities in strengthening reinforced concrete
structures by using FRPs – A state-of-the-art review,” Case Studies in Construction
Materials (2022).
[13]. H. Riabehi et al., in “Rehabilitation and strengthening of damaged reinforced
concrete beams using CFRP laminates and high-strength concrete integrating recycled
tire steel fiber,” Polymers, vol. 13, no. 1, 2021.
[14]. G. Wu and J. M. Davies, “Mechanical analysis of a cracked beam reinforced with
an external FRP plate,” Composites Structures, vol. 62, pp. 139–143, 2003.
[15]. L. de Sena Cruz and J. A. Oliveira de Barros, “Bond between near-surface
mounted CFRP laminate strips and concrete,” Journal of Composites for Construction,
vol. 8, pp. 519–527, 2004.
[16]. M. H. Harajli, K. Soudki and T. Kudsi, “Strengthening of interior slab–column
connections using FRP sheets and steel bolts,” Journal of Composites for Construction,
vol. 10, pp. 399–406, 2006.
[17]. G. E. Thermou, S. J. Pantazopoulou and A. S. Elnashai, “Flexural behavior of
brittle RC members rehabilitated with concrete jacketing,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, vol. 133, pp. 1373–1384, 2007.
[18]. J. F. Davalos, M. Lin, I. Ray and D. Brayack, “Applications of externally bonded
composites for concrete repair and rehabilitation,” Proc. American Society for
Composites Technical Conference, Philadelphia, PA, Sep. 2005.
[19]. J. F. Davalos and M. Maalej, “Externally bonded FRP for service-life extension of
RC infrastructure,” Journal of Infrastructure Systems, ASCE, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 41–51,
2000.
[20]. J. Sim, C. Park and D. Y. Moon, “Characteristics of basalt fiber as a strengthening
material for concrete structures,” Composites: Part B, Engineering, vol. 36, no. 6–7,
pp. 504–512, 2005, doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2005.02.002.
[21]. L. Duic, S. Kenno and D. Sreekanta, “Performance of concrete beams reinforced
with basalt fiber composite rebar,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 176,
pp. 470–481, 2018.
[22]. J. Pawlowski, M. Szumigala, “Flexural behavior of full-scale basalt FRP RC
beams—experimental and numerical studies,” Procedia Engineering, vol. 108, pp. 518–
525, 2015.
[23]. H. High, M. Hatem, C. Adel-El-Safty and S. Rizkalla, “Use of basalt fibers for
concrete structure,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 96, pp. 37–46, 2015.
[24]. Q. Fiore, T. Scalici, G. Di Bella and A. Valenza, “A review on basalt fiber and its
composites,” Composites: Part B, Engineering, vol. 74, pp. 74–94, 2015.
[25]. M. Ma, H. Li, J. Wang, “Experimental study of the seismic behavior of an
earthquake-damaged reinforced concrete frame structure retrofitted with basalt
fiber-reinforced polymer,” Journal of Composite Construction, vol. 17, no. 04013002,
pp. 1–10, 2013, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000413.
[26]. D. Shen, S. Deng, J. Zhang, W. Wang and G. Jiang, “Behavior of reinforced
concrete box beam with initial cracks repaired with basalt fiber-reinforced polymer
sheet,” Journal of Civil and Structural Health Monitoring, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. ??–??, 2015.
[27]. C. Raoof et al., “Strengthening of reinforced concrete beams with basalt
textile-reinforced mortar (BTRM): flexural enhancement and ductile behaviour,” Journal
of Buildings, vol. 13, no. 7, Art. 1765, 2023, pp. 1–16.
[28]. A. Wang, Z. Song, J. Yi, J. Li, F. Fu and K. Qian, “Experimental studies on bond
performance of BFRP bars reinforced coral aggregate concrete,” International Journal of
Concrete Structures and Materials, 2019.
[29]. L. Liu, T. Wulan, Y. Yao, M. Bian and Y. Bao, “Assessment of damage evolution
of concrete beams strengthened with BFRP sheets with acoustic emission and
unsupervised machine learning,” Engineering Structures, vol. 300, Art. 117228, 2024.