Ultimate strength and axial strain of FRP strengthened circular concrete columns

Figures & data

Table 1. Typical mechanical properties fiber reinforced polymers (Molded Fiber Glass Companies, 2003; American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 440, 440.6–08, 2008; Prince Engineering, PLC, 2011)

Reinforcing Material	Yield Strength ksi (MPa)	Tensile Strength ksi (MPa)	Elastic Modulus ksi (GPa)	Strain at Break percent (%)
Glass FRP	N/A	70–230 (480–1600)	5100–7400 (35–51)	1.2–3.1
Basalt FRP	N/A	150–240 (1035–1650)	6500–8500 (45–59)	1.6–3.0
Aramid FRP	N/A	250–368 (1720–2540)	6000–18,000 (41–125)	1.9–4.4
Carbon FRP	N/A	250–585 (1720–3690)	15,900–84,000 (120–580)	0.5–1.9

Figure 1. Mechanism of confinement (Touhari & Mitiche-Kettab, 2016).

Table 2. Comparison between the experimental and predicted results from previous equations of FRP confined concrete columns

(CFRP)										(GFRP)
${\mathit{f}}_{\mathit{c}\mathit{c}}^{{ }^{\mathbf{\prime }}}$ theo. /$f^{\prime }cc$ exp. Eq.(2 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$ exp. Eq.(3 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$ exp. Eq.(4 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$ exp. Eq.(6 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$exp. Eq.(8 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$exp. Eq.(9 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$exp. Eq.(11 )	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo. /${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp. Eq.(15 )	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo. /${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp. Eq.(16 )	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo. /${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp. Eq.(17 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$ exp. Eq.(7 )	$f^{\prime }$ theo. /$f^{\prime }$exp. Eq.(10 )	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo. /${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp. Eq.(18 )
Touhari and Mitiche-Kettab (2016)										Touhari and Mitiche-Kettab (2016)
0.98	1.12	0.55	0.93	0.84	0.83	0.51	0.61	0.70	0.95	1.02	0.92	1.16
1.01	1.16	0.57	0.96	0.87	0.86	0.53	0.64	0.75	1.02	1.12	1.01	1.36
1.12	1.25	0.84	1.08	1.14	1.02	0.81	0.50	0.81	1.04	1.03	0.93	1.26
1.17	1.27	0.49	1.09	0.86	0.94	0.43	0.81	0.74	1.05	1.03	0.98	1.47
1.21	1.31	0.49	1.12	0.88	0.96	0.44	0.92	0.85	1.20	1.03	0.88	1.20
1.16	1.26	0.47	1.08	0.84	0.93	0.42	0.83	0.74	1.04	0.99	0.84	1.16
1.08	1.11	0.37	0.99	0.72	0.84	0.32	1.13	0.74	1.06	0.99	0.82	1.17
1.07	1.09	0.36	0.98	0.71	0.82	0.32	1.11	0.72	1.03	1.06	0.88	1.24
1.11	1.15	0.39	1.02	0.75	0.86	0.34	1.12	0.78	1.12	1.09	0.91	1.27
1.07	1.18	0.89	1.04	0.95	1.00	0.84	0.48	0.78	1.00	0.97	0.91	1.23
1.01	1.15	0.75	0.97	0.83	0.90	0.68	0.52	0.76	1.01	0.98	0.92	1.28
1.00	1.13	0.74	0.96	0.82	0.89	0.66	0.53	0.75	1.00	0.95	0.88	1.19
1.05	1.20	0.67	0.99	0.79	0.89	0.57	0.65	0.79	1.10	0.99	0.88	1.31
1.08	1.23	0.66	1.02	0.78	0.91	0.54	0.64	0.74	1.05	0.97	0.86	1.26
1.08	1.23	0.66	1.02	0.78	0.91	0.54	0.60	0.69	0.97	0.95	0.85	1.22
1.04	1.16	0.57	0.97	0.70	0.85	0.43	0.76	0.68	1.00	1.04	0.90	1.35
1.04	1.16	0.57	0.97	0.71	0.85	0.43	0.81	0.74	1.07	1.03	0.88	1.21
1.06	1.18	0.58	0.99	0.72	0.87	0.45	0.79	0.74	1.08	1.02	0.88	1.29
1.03	1.15	0.96	1.00	0.81	0.95	0.77	0.47	0.74	0.95	1.05	1.00	1.29
1.02	1.13	0.95	0.99	0.81	0.94	0.78	0.49	0.79	1.01	1.01	0.96	1.28
1.01	1.13	0.94	0.98	0.80	0.93	0.76	0.52	0.82	1.06	0.97	0.92	1.14
1.04	1.18	0.93	0.99	0.76	0.91	0.64	0.65	0.89	1.20	1.08	0.99	1.23
1.01	1.15	0.90	0.97	0.74	0.89	0.62	0.57	0.76	1.03	1.12	1.03	1.30
1.05	1.20	0.93	1.00	0.76	0.91	0.63	0.54	0.72	0.98	1.12	1.02	1.26
1.05	1.20	0.92	1.00	0.74	0.90	0.59	0.59	0.75	1.03	1.07	0.95	1.31
1.05	1.20	0.91	0.99	0.71	0.89	0.53	0.67	0.76	1.06	1.07	0.95	1.24
1.09	1.24	0.95	1.03	0.75	0.93	0.58	0.62	0.77	1.07	1.06	0.94	1.24
Lam and Teng (2004)										Jiang and Teng (2007)
1.31	1.50	0.81	1.24	1.02	1.12	0.71	0.44	1.52	0.88	1.04	0.96	1.51
1.40	1.60	0.86	1.33	1.09	1.20	0.76	0.49	1.76	1.01	1.06	0.98	1.17
1.24	1.42	0.77	1.18	0.97	1.06	0.67	0.45	1.50	0.86	1.40	1.32	1.24
1.43	1.55	0.67	1.33	0.95	1.14	0.53	0.73	2.15	1.11	1.40	1.32	0.95
1.41	1.53	0.66	1.31	0.94	1.13	0.52	0.63	1.84	0.96	1.28	1.16	1.53
1.37	1.49	0.64	1.27	0.91	1.10	0.51	0.68	1.95	1.01	1.23	1.11	1.23
1.53	1.55	0.58	1.41	0.94	1.18	0.44	0.96	2.48	1.17	1.22	1.06	1.33
1.40	1.42	0.53	1.29	0.86	1.08	0.41	0.89	2.12	1.00	1.40	1.23	2.06
1.30	1.32	0.49	1.20	0.80	1.00	0.38	0.92	2.03	0.96	Cui and Sheikh(2010)
1.28	1.46	0.77	1.21	1.00	1.09	0.68	0.53	1.84	1.01	1.18	1.07	1.02
1.29	1.47	0.77	1.22	1.01	1.10	0.69	0.50	1.74	0.96	1.17	1.06	1.20
1.14	1.30	0.68	1.08	0.89	0.97	0.61	0.50	1.62	0.89	1.03	0.88	1.05
1.33	1.52	0.89	1.27	1.09	1.17	0.81	0.61	2.16	1.30	1.04	0.89	1.05
1.33	1.53	0.89	1.28	1.09	1.17	0.81	0.57	2.03	1.22	1.01	0.83	1.14
1.36	1.55	0.91	1.30	1.11	1.19	0.82	0.57	2.03	1.22	1.02	0.84	1.63
1.36	1.52	0.74	1.27	0.96	1.12	0.60	0.59	1.92	1.03	Teng et al. (2007)
1.31	1.46	0.71	1.22	0.92	1.07	0.58	0.56	1.76	0.94	1.36	1.27	1.25
1.44	1.61	0.75	1.35	1.02	1.18	0.62	0.72	2.39	1.27	1.30	1.22	1.42
1.34	1.50	1.30	1.30	1.04	1.22	0.98	0.71	2.19	1.61	1.12	1.00	0.86
1.27	1.43	1.24	1.24	0.99	1.17	0.94	0.75	2.26	1.67	1.09	0.97	1.00
1.30	1.46	1.23	1.26	1.01	1.19	0.95	0.66	2.02	1.48	1.10	0.95	0.98
1.56	1.78	1.49	1.49	1.10	1.35	0.89	0.67	2.35	1.50	1.18	1.02	1.40
1.62	1.85	1.46	1.54	1.14	1.39	0.91	0.88	3.16	2.01
1.65	1.89	1.56	1.57	1.16	1.42	0.94	0.73	2.67	1.71
1.61	1.81	1.52	1.51	1.05	1.33	0.75	0.76	2.59	1.55
1.72	1.94	1.62	1.62	1.13	1.43	0.80	0.72	2.59	1.55
1.62	1.79	1.52	1.51	1.01	1.31	0.65	0.89	2.82	1.64
1.57	1.73	1.36	1.47	0.98	1.27	0.62	0.93	2.84	1.64
1.56	1.73	1.54	1.46	0.98	1.27	0.63	0.91	2.81	1.63
Valdmanis et. al. (2007)
0.93	1.06	0.67	0.89	0.76	0.83	0.61	0.64	1.69	1.15
0.95	1.08	0.56	0.89	0.69	0.79	0.46	0.73	1.71	1.04
1.08	1.19	0.55	1.01	0.72	0.87	0.42	0.87	1.91	1.10
0.90	1.02	0.68	0.86	0.73	0.80	0.60	0.65	1.71	1.19
1.05	1.20	0.67	1.00	0.76	0.89	0.54	1.19	3.12	1.92
0.94	1.04	0.53	0.88	0.63	0.77	0.39	1.23	2.53	1.47
$\mu$ 1.22	1.36	0.83	1.15	0.89	1.03	0.62	0.71	1.55	1.17	1.09	0.98	1.25
$\sigma$0.22	0.24	0.33	0.20	0.14	0.18	0.17	0.19	0.78	0.27	0.13	0.13	0.19
C.% 18	20	27	16	12	14	14	16	64	22	12	12	17

*Where µ is sample mean, σ is standard deviation, C.% is coefficient of variation

Table 3. The effective lateral confining factor $k$

(CFRP)			(GFRP)
If n = 1 & $f_L^{\prime }$ > 5.6	$k$ = 1.75	else $k$ = 3.7	If n = 1 & $f_L^{\prime }$ ≤ 4.1	$k$ = 0.75	else $k$ = 3
If n = 2 & $f_L^{\prime }$ > 11	$k$ = 1.5		If n = 2 & $f_L^{\prime }$ ≤ 9	$k$ = 2.1
If n = 3 & $f_L^{\prime }$ > 16	$k$ = 1.35		If n = 3 & $f_L^{\prime }$ ≤ 12.4	$k$ = 2.6
If n = 4 & $f_L^{\prime }$ > 20	$k$ = 1.35		If n = 4 & $f_L^{\prime }$ ≤ 17	$k$ = 3.4
If n = 5 & $f_L^{\prime }$ > 24	$k$ = 1.25		If n = 5 & $f_L^{\prime }$ ≤ 20	$k$ = 3.45
If n = 6 & $f_L^{\prime }$ > 27.5	$k$ = 1.15		If n = 6 & $f_L^{\prime }$ ≤ 25	$k$ = 3.6

Table 4. The effective strain of unconfined concrete $k_2$

(CFRP)		(GFRP)
If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ ≤ 0.19%	$k_2=$ 3.2	If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (0.2–0.29) %	$k_2=$ 5.5
If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (0.2–0.29) %	$k_2=$ 3.45	If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (0.3–0.35) %	$k_2=$ 6
If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (2.6–2.9) %	$k_2=$ 60	If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (2.6–2.9) %	$k_2=$ 60
If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (3–3.3) %	$k_2=$ 65	If ${\epsilon }_{co}^{\prime }$ (3–3.3) %	$k_2=$ 65

Table 5. Comparison between the experimental and predicted results of circular confined concrete by (CFRP) for (proposed model)

$\mathit{D}$ mm	${f^{\prime }}_{co}$ Mpa	$t$ mm	$n$	$E$ Gpa	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{frp}$ (%)	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{co}$ (%)	$k$	$k_2$	${f^{\prime }}_L$ exp Mpa	$f^{\prime }$ theo Mpa	$f^{\prime }$ exp Mpa	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo (%)	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp (%)	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo / ${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp	$f^{\prime }$ theo / $f^{\prime }$ exp
Touhari and Mitiche-Kettab (Touhari & Mitiche-Kettab, 2016)
160	24	0.13	1	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	5.41	44.43	47	16.24	16.9	0.96	0.95
160	24	0.13	1	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	5.35	44.15	45.3	16.09	15.6	1.03	0.97
160	24	0.13	1	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	2.17	29.20	29.5	8.14	9.31	0.87	0.99
160	24	0.26	2	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	10.1	61.47	55.8	27.96	24.1	1.16	1.10
160	24	0.26	2	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	10.5	63.35	55.5	28.96	26.5	1.09	1.14
160	24	0.26	2	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	10.6	63.82	58	29.21	25.2	1.16	1.10
160	24	0.39	3	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	14.5	77.15	77.3	38.96	32.9	1.18	1.00
160	24	0.39	3	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	14.7	78.09	79	39.46	33.4	1.18	0.99
160	24	0.39	3	234	14	2.71	3.7	60	13.8	73.86	72.9	37.21	35.8	1.04	1.01
160	41.6	0.13	1	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	2.84	49.95	49.8	7.55	8.92	0.85	1.00
160	41.6	0.13	1	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	4.94	59.82	61.3	10.83	12.5	0.87	0.98
160	41.6	0.13	1	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	5.14	60.76	62.9	11.14	12.9	0.86	0.97
160	41.6	0.26	2	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	8.54	71.74	73.2	16.45	15.7	1.05	0.98
160	41.6	0.26	2	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	10	78.60	76.6	18.74	18.4	1.02	1.03
160	41.6	0.26	2	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	10.1	79.07	77	18.89	19.9	0.95	1.03
160	41.6	0.39	3	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	14.5	94.75	96.9	25.77	25.2	1.02	0.98
160	41.6	0.39	3	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	14.2	93.34	95.9	25.30	23	1.10	0.97
160	41.6	0.39	3	234	14	3.11	3.7	65	13.8	91.46	92.7	24.67	22.4	1.10	0.99
160	61.5	0.13	1	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	5.08	80.38	80	8.39	10.25	0.82	1.00
160	61.5	0.13	1	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	4.54	77.84	78.9	7.82	9.78	0.80	0.99
160	61.5	0.13	1	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	4.99	79.95	81.1	8.29	9.72	0.85	0.99
160	61.5	0.26	2	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	9.25	94.98	96	12.80	11.6	1.10	0.99
160	61.5	0.26	2	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	9.46	95.96	99.4	13.02	13.7	0.95	0.97
160	61.5	0.26	2	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	10.1	98.97	98.2	13.69	14.9	0.92	1.01
160	61.5	0.39	3	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	11.8	101.96	104.9	15.49	15.6	0.99	0.97
160	61.5	0.39	3	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	15.1	117.47	117.1	18.98	17.8	1.07	1.00
160	61.5	0.39	3	234	14	3.02	3.7	65	12.9	107.13	105.4	16.65	15.9	1.05	1.02
Lam and Teng (Lam & Teng, 2004)
150	35.9	0.16	1	230	15	0.2	1.75	3.45	7.36	51.14	50.4	0.91	1.27	0.78	1.01
150	35.9	0.16	1	230	15	0.2	1.75	3.45	7.36	51.14	47.2	0.91	1.1	0.83	1.08
150	35.9	0.16	1	230	15	0.2	1.75	3.45	7.36	51.14	53.2	0.91	1.29	0.76	0.96
150	35.9	0.33	2	230	15	0.2	1.5	3.45	15.18	63.85	68.7	1.66	1.68	0.99	0.93
150	35.9	0.33	2	230	15	0.2	1.5	3.45	15.18	63.85	69.6	1.66	1.96	0.85	0.92
150	35.9	0.33	2	230	15	0.2	1.5	3.45	15.18	63.85	71.6	1.66	1.85	0.90	0.89
150	34.3	0.49	3	230	15	0.18	1.35	3.2	22.54	72.27	82.6	2.28	2.06	1.11	0.87
150	34.3	0.49	3	230	15	0.18	1.35	3.2	22.54	72.27	90.4	2.28	2.41	0.95	0.80
150	34.3	0.49	3	230	15	0.18	1.35	3.2	22.54	72.27	97.3	2.28	2.51	0.91	0.74
150	34.3	0.16	1	230	15	0.18	1.75	3.2	7.36	49.54	50.3	0.87	1.02	0.85	0.98
150	34.3	0.16	1	230	15	0.18	1.75	3.2	7.36	49.54	50	0.87	1.08	0.81	0.99
150	34.3	0.16	1	230	15	0.18	1.75	3.2	7.36	49.54	56.7	0.87	1.16	0.79	0.87
Vincent and Ozbakkaloglu T (Vincent & Ozbakkaloglu, 2013)
150	35.5	0.11	1	240	16	0.21	1.75	3.45	5.63	45.99	44	0.76	0.77	0.98	1.05
150	35.5	0.11	1	240	16	0.21	1.75	3.45	5.63	45.99	43.9	0.76	0.82	0.92	1.05
150	35.5	0.11	1	240	16	0.21	1.75	3.45	5.63	45.99	43.1	0.76	0.82	0.92	1.07
150	38	0.23	2	240	16	0.21	1.5	3.45	11.78	56.26	63.5	1.28	1.51	0.85	0.89
150	38	0.23	2	240	16	0.21	1.5	3.45	11.78	56.26	66.1	1.28	1.65	0.82	0.85
150	36.1	0.23	2	240	16	0.21	1.5	3.45	11.78	54.36	58.6	1.34	1.27	1.06	0.93
150	64.5	0.11	1	240	16	0.27	1.75	3.45	5.63	74.99	65.6	0.57	0.59	0.97	1.14
150	64.5	0.11	1	240	16	0.27	1.75	3.45	5.63	74.99	68.7	0.57	0.57	1.00	1.09
150	62.9	0.11	1	240	16	0.27	1.75	3.45	5.63	73.39	66.3	0.58	0.65	0.89	1.11
150	64.5	0.23	2	240	16	0.27	1.5	3.45	11.78	82.76	72.3	0.90	0.93	0.97	1.14
150	62.4	0.23	2	240	16	0.27	1.5	3.45	11.78	80.66	68.4	0.92	0.71	1.14	1.18
150	64.2	0.23	2	240	16	0.27	1.5	3.45	11.78	82.46	68.2	0.90	0.82	1.10	1.21
150	64.5	0.35	3	240	16	0.27	1.35	3.45	17.92	91.61	85.9	1.23	1.19	1.03	1.07
150	64.5	0.35	3	240	16	0.27	1.35	3.45	17.92	91.61	80.3	1.23	1.19	1.03	1.14
150	64.5	0.46	4	240	16	0.27	1.35	3.45	23.55	99.85	99.4	1.53	1.38	1.11	1.00
150	62.4	0.46	4	240	16	0.27	1.35	3.45	23.55	97.75	101	1.57	1.41	1.12	0.97
150	65.8	0.46	4	240	16	0.27	1.35	3.45	23.55	101.15	104	1.50	1.36	1.09	0.97
Valdmanis et. all (Valdmanis et al., 2007)
150	40	0.17	1	230	10	0.17	3.7	3.2	5.21	59.50	66	0.59	0.63	0.93	0.90
150	40	0.34	2	230	10	0.17	3.7	3.2	10.43	79.01	87.2	1.00	1.07	0.94	0.91
150	40	0.51	3	230	10	0.17	3.7	3.2	15.64	98.51	96	1.42	1.36	1.05	1.03
150	44.3	0.17	1	230	10	0.17	3.7	3.2	5.21	63.80	73.3	0.55	0.58	0.94	0.87
150	44.3	0.34	2	230	10	0.17	3.7	3.2	10.43	83.31	82.6	0.92	0.54	1.08	1.01
150	44.3	0.51	3	230	10	0.17	3.7	3.2	15.64	102.81	115	1.30	0.94	1.11	0.89
$\mu$														0.98	0.99
$\sigma$														0.11	0.09
C.%														11.2	9.0

Table 6. Comparison between the experimental and predicted results of circular confined concrete by (GFRP) for (proposed model)

$D$ mm	${f^{\prime }}_{co}$ Mpa	$t$ mm	$n$	$E$ Gpa	${f^{\prime }}_{frp}$ (%)	${f^{\prime }}_{co}$ (%)	$k$	$k_2$	${f^{\prime }}_L$ exp Mpa	$f^{\prime }$ theo Mpa	$f^{\prime }$ exp Mpa	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo (%)	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp (%)	${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ theo / ${{\epsilon }^{\prime }}_{cc}$ exp	$f^{\prime }$ theo / $f^{\prime }$ exp
Touhari and Mitiche-Kettab (Touhari & Mitiche-Kettab, 2016)
160	26.2	0.17	1	76	19	2.67	3	60	4.83	37.52	38.3	13.73	15	0.92	0.98
160	26.2	0.17	1	76	19	2.67	3	60	4.71	37.04	34.6	13.46	12.6	1.07	1.07
160	26.2	0.17	1	76	19	2.67	3	60	4.87	37.68	38	13.82	13.9	0.99	0.99
160	26.2	0.34	2	76	19	2.67	2.1	60	1.86	15.97	30.2	6.93	6.81	1.02	0.53
160	26.2	0.34	2	76	19	2.67	3	60	9.42	47.88	49.4	24.24	24.1	1.01	0.97
160	26.2	0.34	2	76	19	2.67	3	60	9.75	49.20	52.5	25.00	25.5	0.98	0.94
160	26.2	0.51	3	76	19	2.67	3	60	13.71	57.04	62.8	34.06	33.9	1.00	0.91
160	26.2	0.51	3	76	19	2.67	3	60	12.7	53.00	56.4	31.75	29.8	1.07	0.94
160	26.2	0.51	3	76	19	2.67	3	60	12.6	52.60	54.7	31.52	28.9	1.09	0.96
160	42.6	0.17	1	76	19	2.89	3	60	4.66	53.24	56.5	9.45	11	0.86	0.94
160	42.6	0.17	1	76	19	2.89	3	60	4.55	52.80	55.5	9.30	10.4	0.89	0.95
160	42.6	0.17	1	76	19	2.89	3	60	5.31	55.84	59.8	10.37	12.3	0.84	0.93
160	42.6	0.34	2	76	19	2.89	3	60	9.52	64.68	68.5	16.30	16.5	0.99	0.94
160	42.6	0.34	2	76	19	2.89	3	60	9.6	65.00	70	16.41	17.2	0.95	0.93
160	42.6	0.34	2	76	19	2.89	3	60	9.77	65.68	71.7	16.65	18.1	0.92	0.92
160	42.6	0.51	3	76	19	2.89	3	60	13.6	73.00	75.5	22.04	21	1.05	0.97
160	42.6	0.51	3	76	19	2.89	3	60	14.6	77.00	78.8	23.45	24.9	0.94	0.98
160	42.6	0.51	3	76	19	2.89	3	60	13.9	74.20	77.5	22.47	22.4	1.00	0.96
160	61.7	0.17	1	76	19	3.11	3	65	4.2	70.50	69.4	7.53	8.85	0.85	1.02
160	61.7	0.17	1	76	19	3.11	3	65	4.71	72.54	73.1	8.07	9.37	0.86	0.99
160	61.7	0.17	1	76	19	3.11	3	65	5.2	74.50	77.5	8.59	11.1	0.77	0.96
160	61.7	0.34	2	76	19	3.11	3	65	9.78	84.82	80.8	13.41	14.9	0.90	1.05
160	61.7	0.34	2	76	19	3.11	3	65	9.23	82.62	76.7	12.83	13.5	0.95	1.08
160	61.7	0.34	2	76	19	3.11	3	65	9.67	84.38	78	13.30	14.4	0.92	1.08
160	61.7	0.51	3	76	19	3.11	3	65	13.1	90.10	90.1	16.91	17.1	0.99	1.00
160	61.7	0.51	3	76	19	3.11	3	65	13.8	92.90	92.1	17.65	18.8	0.94	1.01
160	61.7	0.51	3	76	19	3.11	3	65	14.6	96.10	94.4	18.49	19.5	0.95	1.02
Jiang and Teng J (Jiang & Teng, 2007)
150	33.1	0.17	1	80.1	23	0.30	3	6	4.12	41.58	42.4	1.05	1	1.05	1.06
150	33.1	0.17	1	80.1	23	0.30	3	6	4.12	41.58	41.6	1.05	1.29	0.81	1.06
150	45.9	0.17	1	80.1	23	0.24	3	5.5	4.12	54.38	40.5	0.73	0.81	0.90	1.08
150	45.9	0.17	1	80.1	23	0.24	3	5.5	4.12	54.38	40.5	0.73	1.06	0.69	0.91
150	45.9	0.34	2	80.1	23	0.24	2.1	5.5	8.24	55.44	52.8	1.23	1.12	1.10	0.87
150	45.9	0.34	2	80.1	23	0.24	2.1	5.5	8.24	55.44	55.2	1.23	1.25	0.98	0.95
150	45.9	0.51	3	80.1	23	0.24	2.6	5.5	12.36	66.41	64.6	1.72	1.55	1.11	1.15
150	45.9	0.51	3	80.1	23	0.24	2.6	5.5	12.36	66.41	55.9	1.72	1.68	1.02	1.10
Cui and Sheikh (Cui & Sheikh, 2010)
150	47.8	1.25	2	22	23	0.22	2.1	5.5	8.32	57.59	59.1	1.18	1.35	0.87	0.97
150	47.8	1.25	2	22	23	0.22	2.1	5.5	8.32	57.59	59.8	1.18	1.15	1.03	0.96
150	47.8	2.5	4	22	23	0.22	3.4	5.5	16.65	89.04	88.9	2.14	2.21	0.97	1.00
150	47.8	2.5	4	22	23	0.22	3.4	5.5	16.65	89.04	88	2.14	2.21	0.97	1.01
150	47.8	3.75	6	22	23	0.22	3.6	5.5	24.97	114.65	113	3.09	2.85	1.08	1.01
150	47.8	3.75	6	22	23	0.22	3.6	5.5	24.97	114.65	112	3.09	2.94	1.05	1.02
Teng et. all (Teng et al., 2007)
152	39.6	0.17	1	80.1	23	0.26	0.75	5.5	4.1	38.78	37.2	0.83	0.94	0.88	1.04
152	39.6	0.17	1	80.1	23	0.26	0.75	5.5	4.1	38.78	38.8	0.83	0.83	1.00	1.00
152	39.6	0.34	2	80.1	23	0.26	2.1	5.5	8.21	49.05	54.6	1.40	1.77	0.79	0.90
152	39.6	0.34	2	80.1	23	0.26	2.1	5.5	8.21	49.05	56.3	1.40	1.83	0.77	0.87
152	39.6	0.51	3	80.1	23	0.26	2.6	5.5	12.32	59.96	65.7	1.97	2.56	0.77	0.91
152	39.6	0.51	3	80.1	23	0.26	2.6	5.5	12.32	59.96	60.9	1.97	1.79	1.10	0.98
$\mu$														0.95	0.97
$\sigma$														0.10	0.09
C.%														10.5	9.3

American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 440, 440.6-08 . (2008). Specification for carbon and glass fiber-reinforced polymer bar materials for concrete reinforcement . ACI 440.6 M-08.‏ISO 690

 Google Scholar

Prince Engineering, PLC . (2011). Characteristics and behaviors of fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) used for reinforcement and strengthening of structures . Retrieved from https://www.build-on-prince.com/fiber-reinforced-polymers.html

 Google Scholar

Touhari, M. , & Mitiche-Kettab, R. (2016). Behaviour of FRP confined concrete cylinders: Experimental investigation and strength model. Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering , 60(4), 647–660. doi:10.3311/PPci.8759

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lam, L. , & Teng, J. G. (2004). Ultimate condition of FRP-confined concrete. Journal of Composites for Construction (ASCE) , 8, 539–548. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:6(539)

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jiang, T. , & Teng, J. (2007). Analysis-oriented stress-strain models for FRP confined concrete. Engineering Structures , 29, 2968–2986. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.01.010

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cui, C. , & Sheikh, A. (2010). Experimental study of normal- and high-strength concrete confined with fiber-reinforced polymers. Journal of Composites for Construction (ASCE) , 14, 553–561. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000116

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Teng, J. G. , Yu, T. , Wong, Y. L. , & Dong, S. (2007). Hybrid FRP-concrete-steel tubular columns: Concept and behaviour. Construction and Building Materials , 21(4), 846–854. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.06.017

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Valdmanis, V. , DeLorenzis, L. , Rousakis, T. , & Tepfers, R. (2007). Behaviour and capacity of CFRP-confined concrete cylinders subjected to monotonic and cyclic axial compressive load. Structural Concrete Journal , 8(4), 187–190. doi:10.1680/stco.2007.8.4.187

 Google Scholar

Vincent, T. , & Ozbakkaloglu, T. (2013). Influence of concrete strength and confinement method on axial compressive behaviour of FRP confined high- and ultra high-strength concrete. Composites Part B: Engineering , 50, 413–428. doi:10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.02.017

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar