article · Materials
Numerical modelling provides insights into how externally bonded carbon-fibre-reinforced polymer sheets improve the flexural performance of timber beams. Comparing different simulation approaches shows that elastic-plastic models predict the flexural strength and failure patterns of bare timber more accurately than linear elastic models. Interfacial bonding can be simulated using either perfect bond assumptions or cohesive zone progressive damage techniques. When validating these models against published experimental data, parametric studies demonstrate that increasing sheet length improves beam flexural strength by 10.3 percent to 52.9 percent. However, structural gains plateau at an effective length of 80 percent of the total beam span, showing that full-length wrapping is unnecessary. Furthermore, applying strengthening sheets to both the tensile and compressive zones produces superior flexural stiffness, strength, and load-deflection responses compared to reinforcement placed solely on the tensile side.
Timber structures often require reinforcement to extend their service life and increase load-bearing capacity. Establishing that reinforcement beyond 80 percent of a beam span yields no additional flexural strength allows designers to optimise material consumption. Accurately simulating these composite configurations provides structural engineers with validated techniques to predict beam performance, potentially reducing the cost and material waste associated with retrofitting wooden infrastructure.
This work serves structural engineering firms, retrofitting contractors, and timber construction designers seeking efficient beam-strengthening methods. By identifying an optimal reinforcement threshold at 80 percent beam length and demonstrating the benefits of dual-zone bonding, the findings inform cost-effective composite material specifications. Because the results rely on numerical simulation validated against existing experimental literature, the approach represents early-stage to applied engineering research requiring site-specific physical trials before routine commercial deployment.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
This paper presents a numerical investigation of the flexural behavior of timber beams externally strengthened with carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets. At first, the accuracy of linear elastic and elastic-plastic models in predicting the behavior of bare timber beams was compared. Then, two modeling approaches (i.e., the perfect bond method and progressive damage technique using the cohesive zone model (CZM)) were considered to simulate the interfacial behavior between FRP and timber. The models were validated against published experimental data, and the most accurate numerical procedure was identified and subsequently used for a parametric study. The length of FRP sheets varied from 50% to 100% of the total length of the beam, while different FRP layers were considered. Moreover, the effects of two strengthening configurations (i.e., FRP attached in the tensile zone only and in both the tensile and compressive zones) on load-deflection response, flexural strength, and flexural rigidity were considered. The results showed that elastic-plastic models are more accurate than linear elastic models in predicting the flexural strength and failure patterns of bare timber beams. In addition, with increasing FRP length, the increase in flexural strength ranged from 10.3% to 52.9%, while no further increase in flexural strength could be achieved beyond an effective length of 80% of the total length of the beam. Attaching the FRP to both the tensile and compressive zone was more effective in enhancing the flexural properties of the timber beam than attaching the FRP to the tensile zone only.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.3390/ma17020321
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
