materials

Article
Experimental Study on Seismic Performance of Precast
Columns Repaired with CFRP Fabrics
Laijun Liu 1 , Song Lei 1,2, *, Fangwen Wu 1 , Weiwei Lin 2 , Kai Peng 1 and Xiangyan Fan 1

1 School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China

2 Department of Civil Engineering, Aalto University, 02150 Espoo, Finland
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Earthquakes worldwide highlight the seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete (RC)
bridge columns. RC bridges are likely to collapse or lose service function due to damage to the bridge
columns from strong earthquakes. Rapid repair of RC bridge columns is of great significance for
maintaining traffic lines for emergency rescue work after earthquakes. In this study, an improved
rapid repair method was developed to restore the bearing capacity of a damaged precast column after
earthquake damage. A cyclic loading test was performed to simulate the seismic loading. The original
column and the repaired column were both tested. The test results showed that the bearing capacity
of the repaired columns was increased by 8%, and the energy dissipation capacity was 53% higher
than that of the original column. The ductility decreased because the test for the repaired specimen
ended in advance. The initial stiffness of the repaired columns was reduced, but the stiffness was
significantly developed in the later loading stage. The rapid repair method proposed in this study
exhibited an excellent effect on restoring the seismic resistance of the damaged columns.

Keywords: precast column; rapid repair; CFRP fabrics; cyclic load; seismic performance

Citation: Liu, L.; Lei, S.; Wu, F.; Lin,

W.; Peng, K.; Fan, X. Experimental 1. Introduction
Study on Seismic Performance of
There is a considerable portion of aging reinforced concrete bridges that demand
Precast Columns Repaired with
rapid and effective methods of repair worldwide. An unnegotiable fact is that the majority
CFRP Fabrics. Materials 2022, 15,
of highway bridges were designed according to older design codes. These bridges are
7443. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma
vulnerable to disasters such as earthquakes [1]. Frequent earthquakes in recent years
15217443
(such as the Hualian earthquake (M6.9) in China in 2022, the Michoacán earthquake (M7.5)
Academic Editor: Karim Benzarti in Mexico in 2022, and the Luzon Island earthquake (M7.0) in the Philippines in 2022)
Received: 27 September 2022
highlight the role of rehabilitation of damaged bridges to restore their bearing capacity.
Accepted: 21 October 2022
Rapid repair after a severe earthquake maintains the normal functionality of transportation
Published: 24 October 2022
for rescuing [2], and repair after light earthquakes maintains the service life of aging
bridges. As the bridge columns were found to be the critical component of bridges and
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
suffered severe damage from earthquakes [3,4], it is necessary to further develop rapid
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
repair methods for restoring the bearing capacity of reinforced concrete bridge columns.
published maps and institutional affil-
To restore the bearing capacity of damaged columns, several methods have been de-
iations.
veloped to provide additional reinforcement, including the enlarging section method [5,6],
steel plate method [7,8], steel mesh wrap method [9,10], FRP strip method [11,12], and
FRP jacketing method [13,14]. Although steel material and concrete material are easy and
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
cheap to obtain, additional concrete mortar is required in these steel methods. This means
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. it is necessary to wait until the concrete material reaches a certain strength. The cross
This article is an open access article section of the column is also enlarged, thereby reducing the ductility of the column [15].
distributed under the terms and Composite polymers have been widely used in building structures recently [16–18]. Com-
conditions of the Creative Commons pared with traditional materials, fiber-reinforced polymers (FRPs) have the advantages
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// of high strength, high ductility, high elastic modulus, and light weight [19–21]. Carbon
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ fiber-reinforced polymers (CFRPs) such as CFRP fabrics have been confirmed to be an effec-
4.0/). tive material for reinforcing concrete columns. By wrapping the CFRP fabrics around the

Materials 2022, 15, 7443. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15217443 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2022, 15, 7443 2 of 17

surface, not only the bearing capacity of the column is strengthened, but also the ductility
of the column is improved [22].
A great number of studies have been conducted on the seismic performance of CFRP
fabric-reinforced columns [23–27]. In most of them, the CFRP fabrics were fully warped
along the height of the column to make better use of the excellent mechanical performance
of the CFRP fabrics. Wang et al. [23] designed a new form of wrapping with gaps and
compared its seismic performance with the fully wrapped columns by conducting cyclic
loading tests. The results showed that the seismic performance of the fully wrapped
columns was increased with respect to the bearing capacity, the ductility, and the energy
dissipation capacity. However, Wang et al. [24] found that it was more economical to wrap
the column in the plastic hinge region. They designed 11 large-scale square columns and
subjected them to cyclic loading tests; the test results showed that the reinforcement effect
was more significant when the CFRP fabrics were applied in the potential plastic hinge
regions. They also suggested a minimum reinforcing height of 1.1 times the cross-section
diameter in later research [25]. Peng et al. [26] compared the repair effects of CFRP fabrics
on the different damage levels of columns; the test results indicated that the CFRP fabrics
had a better repair effect on severely damaged columns than slightly damaged columns.
The effect of the number of CFRP layers was also studied by Elic [27]. Six columns were
tested three times with different repair stages, and the results indicated that a single layer
of the CFRP fabrics had little effect on the ductility of the repaired column. All studies
above have shown that the CFRP fabrics behave well in restoring the seismic performance
of bridge columns, including their bearing capacity and ductility. The majority of tested
specimens were cast-in-place columns with full-wrapped CFRP fabrics.
Compared with the cast-in-place columns, the precast columns have the advantages of
a short construction period, high manufacturing quality, and lower carbon emissions [28].
However, the precast columns are vulnerable to seismic excitation because of the unbonded
interface [29]. Precast columns have been widely used in urban bridges and highway
bridges in recent years [30], while little research has been conducted on the repair of precast
columns after seismic damage. Rapid repair of these bridges after disasters is critical for
rehabilitating the functionality of transportation infrastructures. Thus, it is necessary to
develop rapid repair methods for precast columns damaged by seismic excitation.
The traditional repair method for the cast-in-place columns does not cover the column–
footing interface. However, the column–footing interface is the weakness of the precast
column, as discussed above. In this paper, a new repair method with the CFRP fabrics in
different directions was specially designed to take into account the weakness of the precast
column. The precast column was first tested and damaged under the cyclic loading test.
Then, it was repaired with the CFRP fabrics and tested by the cyclic loading test with the
same protocol. The experimental results are discussed, including the damage progression,
the load–displacement curves, the skeleton curves, the ductility, the stiffness degradation,
the energy dissipation, and the measured strain. Finally, the repair effect for the damaged
precast column is summarized in the conclusion. This study provides a design for the rapid
repair of earthquake-damaged precast columns.

2. Experimental Program
2.1. Design of Original Precast Column
In order to study the effect of repair with CFRP fabrics on damaged precast columns
after earthquakes, a precast column with grouted sleeve connections was designed and
tested under cyclic loading. Figure 1 shows the details of the specimen. The specimen
used in this test represents a typical precast bridge column. The specimen was divided
into three components: the cap beam, the column, and the footing. The column had a
height of 1400 mm and a cross section of 450 mm × 450 mm. The aspect ratio of the column
was about 3:1. The cap beam had dimensions of 800 mm × 700 mm × 500 mm, and the
footing had dimensions of 1200 mm × 700 mm × 500 mm. The reinforcement ratio of
the column was 1.19%. The column was longitudinally reinforced by 12-Φ16 HRB400
 ribbed bars with a nominal yield strength of 400 MPa) rebars and transversely reinforced
by Φ8 HPB300 (hot-rolled plain bars with a nominal yield strength of 300 MPa) stirrups.
The center-to-center spacing of the stirrups was 100 mm in the non-strengthened area and
75 mm in the strengthened area. The cap beam and the footing were reinforced by Φ22
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 HRB400 rebars, thereby ensuring their failure would occur later than that of the column 3 of 17
under vertical and lateral loads. At the cap beam and the footing, longitudinal rebars that
extended 150 mm were lap spliced. The grouted sleeve had a height of 310 mm, an inner
diameter of 36 mm, and an outer diameter of 42 mm, as shown in Figure 1f. Ultra-high-
(hot-rolled ribbed bars with a nominal yield strength of 400 MPa) rebars and transversely
performance
reinforced by concrete
Φ8 HPB300 (UHPC) grout material
(hot-rolled was
plain bars applied
with to theyield
a nominal grouted sleeve
strength ofto300
connect
MPa)
the longitudinal rebars.
stirrups. The center-to-center spacing of the stirrups was 100 mm in the non-strengthened
Unlike
area and the construction
75 mm of the cast-in-place
in the strengthened area. The capcolumn,
beam and thethe
components
footing were of the precast
reinforced
column were prefabricated individually and then assembled. All components
by Φ22 HRB400 rebars, thereby ensuring their failure would occur later than that of were cured
the
for 28 days before assembly. During the assembling process, cement mortar
column under vertical and lateral loads. At the cap beam and the footing, longitudinal was poured
on thethat
rebars surface of the150
extended joint
mmat were
first. lap
Then, rebars
spliced. were
The inserted
grouted into
sleeve thea grouted
had height ofsleeve
310 mm, in
different components, and the UHPC grout material was pressed into
an inner diameter of 36 mm, and an outer diameter of 42 mm, as shown in Figure 1f.the grouted sleeves
to connect the precast components.
Ultra-high-performance The specimen
concrete (UHPC) was taken
grout material was to the cyclic
applied loading
to the grouted testsleeve
after
another 28 days of curing until
to connect the longitudinal rebars. the grout material gained enough strength.

Figure Detailsofofthe
1. Details
Figure 1. thespecimen:
specimen:(a)(a) precast
precast column
column with
with grouted
grouted sleeve
sleeve connections;
connections; (b) cross
(b) cross sec-
section of the
tion of the column;
column; (c) cross
(c) cross section
section of theofcolumn
the column with grouted
with grouted sleeve sleeve connections;
connections; (d)section
(d) cross cross
of the cap
section beam;
of the cap(e) cross(e)section
beam; of the footing;
cross section (f) details
of the footing; of the grouted
(f) details sleeve. sleeve.
of the grouted

Unlike
Unlike the
the construction
construction ofof the
the cast-in-place
cast-in-place column,
column, the the components
components of of the
the precast
precast
column
column were prefabricated individually and then assembled, as shown in Figure cured
were prefabricated individually and then assembled. All components were 2. All
for 28 days before
components assembly.
were cured During
for 28 the assembling
days before assembly.process,
During cement mortar was
the assembling poured
process, ce-
on
mentthemortar
surface of poured
was the jointon
atthe
first. Then,ofrebars
surface were
the joint inserted
at first. Then,into the were
rebars grouted sleeve
inserted in
into
different components, and the UHPC grout material was pressed into the
the grouted sleeve in different components, and the UHPC grout material was pressed grouted sleeves
to connect
into the precast
the grouted components.
sleeves to connectThethe specimen was taken toThe
precast components. the specimen
cyclic loading
was test after
taken to
another 28 days of curing until the grout material gained enough strength.
Unlike the construction of the cast-in-place column, the components of the precast
column were prefabricated individually and then assembled, as shown in Figure 2. All
components were cured for 28 days before assembly. During the assembling process,
cement mortar was poured on the surface of the joint at first. Then, rebars were inserted
into the grouted sleeve in different components, and the UHPC grout material was pressed
into the grouted sleeves to connect the precast components. The specimen was taken to the
cyclic loading test after another 28 days of curing until the grout material reached enough
strength.
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 18

Materials 2022, 15, 7443 4 of 17

the cyclic loading test after another 28 days of curing until the grout material reached
enough strength.

Figure
Figure 2. Construction of
2. Construction of the
theprecast
precastcolumn
columnwith
withgrouted
grouted sleeve
sleeve connections:
connections: (a) (a)
capcap beam;
beam; (b)
(b) col-
column; (c) footing; (d) assembling; (e) 3D model of the precast column.
umn; (c) footing; (d) assembling; (e) 3D model of the precast column.

2.2.
2.2. Repair
Repair of
of Damaged
Damaged Precast
Precast Column
Column
Prior repair,the
Prior to repair, theprecast
precastcolumn
column waswas tested
tested under
under vertical
vertical loadload
andand lateral
lateral cyclecycle
load
load to simulate
to simulate the earthquake
the earthquake excitation.
excitation. The original
The original precastprecast
columncolumn was damaged
was damaged untilun-
the
til the lateral
lateral load capacity
load capacity decreaseddecreased
to 85% to of 85%
the peakof the peak
load load
[31]. The[31].
test The
step test step is de-
is described in
detail ininthis
scribed paper
detail later,paper
in this as is later,
the testas step
is thefor thestep
test repaired
for theprecast
repairedcolumn.
precast column.
After the
After the loading
loading testtest for
for the
the original
original precast
precast column,
column, the the test
test device
device was was removed,
removed,
and
and a a repair design was proposed. The design philosophy of the
The design philosophy of the repair for repair for the damaged
damaged
precast column was to rehabilitate the displacement capacity capacity and and strength of the original
precast column.
column. Different
Differentfrom fromthethetraditional
traditional CFRP-confined
CFRP-confined column
column design
designwhichwhichapplies
ap-
the CFRP
plies fabrics
the CFRP to surround
fabrics the column
to surround [25], side
the column [25],and
sideplain
and CFRP
plain fabrics were added
CFRP fabrics were
to the design
added presented
to the design in thisin
presented paper, as shown
this paper, in Figure
as shown 3. The3.side
in Figure TheCFRP fabrics
side CFRP were
fabrics
applied on the bending surface of the column at first. The flexure
were applied on the bending surface of the column at first. The flexure behavior of the behavior of the precast
columncolumn
precast was enhanced in this way.
was enhanced in thisIt way.
is worth
It isnoticing that thethat
worth noticing sidetheCFRPsidefabrics extend
CFRP fabrics
from the column to the footing, thereby strengthening the critical
extend from the column to the footing, thereby strengthening the critical interface of the interface of the precast
column.column.
precast Then, the plainthe
Then, CFRP
plainfabrics
CFRPwere applied
fabrics were on the footing
applied on thetofooting
enhance to the adhesion
enhance the
of the side CFRP fabrics. Finally, the surrounding CFRP fabrics were
adhesion of the side CFRP fabrics. Finally, the surrounding CFRP fabrics were applied to applied to the column.
Thecolumn.
the surrounding CFRP fabrics
The surrounding werefabrics
CFRP revealedwere to revealed
improve to theimprove
mechanical performance
the mechanical of
per-
the concrete in the plastic hinge region, including its compressive
formance of the concrete in the plastic hinge region, including its compressive strength, strength, durability,
and ductility
durability, and[32]. Different
ductility fabrics were
[32]. Different placed
fabrics wereat 0/90 at
placed angles in thein
0/90 angles stack area. area.
the stack The
CFRP-confined area was within the height of 700 mm above
The CFRP-confined area was within the height of 700 mm above the column–footing in- the column–footing interface,
and three
terface, andlayers
threeoflayers
the CFRP
of thefabrics
CFRPwere fabrics used
were in used
each step.
in each step.
The repair consisted of the following procedures recommended by CECS 146: 2003 [33],
as shown in Figure 4: (a) The sharp corner of the column under the CFRP fabrics was
rounded to a radius of 20 mm. The rounded corner prevented the CFRP fabrics from stress
concentrations. (b) The surface of the damaged precast column was roughed using an
electric metal brush to enhance adhesion to the CFRP fabrics. (c) The spalling concrete in
the plastic hinge region was removed using a chisel. (d) The surface of the specimen was
cleaned using compressed air. (e) The broken concrete was refilled with epoxy. The corner
between the column–footing interface was filled with epoxy to a radius of 20 mm. (f) The
CFRP fabrics were applied to the specimen as designed.
als 2022, 15,Materials 15, 7443
2022, REVIEW
x FOR PEER 5 of 18 5 of 17

Figure 3. Repair design for the damaged precast column with CFRP fabrics.

The repair consisted of the following procedures recommended by CECS 146: 2003
[33], as shown in Figure 4: (a) The sharp corner of the column under the CFRP fabrics was
rounded to a radius of 20 mm. The rounded corner prevented the CFRP fabrics from stress
concentrations. (b) The surface of the damaged precast column was roughed using an
electric metal brush to enhance adhesion to the CFRP fabrics. (c) The spalling concrete in
the plastic hinge region was removed using a chisel. (d) The surface of the specimen was
cleaned using compressed air. (e) The broken concrete was refilled with epoxy. The corner
between
Figure 3. Repair design for the
the column–footing
damaged precastinterface
column was
withfilled
CFRPwith epoxy to a radius of 20 mm. (f) The
fabrics.
CFRP
Figure 3. fabrics
Repair were applied
design for theto the specimen
damaged ascolumn
precast designed.
with CFRP fabrics.
The repair consisted of the following procedures recommended by CECS 146: 2003
[33], as shown in Figure 4: (a) The sharp corner of the column under the CFRP fabrics was
rounded to a radius of 20 mm. The rounded corner prevented the CFRP fabrics from stress
concentrations. (b) The surface of the damaged precast column was roughed using an
electric metal brush to enhance adhesion to the CFRP fabrics. (c) The spalling concrete in
the plastic hinge region was removed using a chisel. (d) The surface of the specimen was
cleaned using compressed air. (e) The broken concrete was refilled with epoxy. The corner
between the column–footing interface was filled with epoxy to a radius of 20 mm. (f) The
CFRP fabrics were applied to the specimen as designed.
(a) (b)

Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 18

(c) (d)
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 4. Repair procedures: (a) rounding the corner; (b) roughing the surface; (c) removing the
Figure 4. Repair procedures: (a) rounding the corner; (b) roughing the surface; (c) removing the
spalling concrete; (d) cleaning the surface; (e) filling the crack and the corner of the column–footing
spalling concrete;
interface; (d) cleaning
(f) applying thefabrics.
the CFRP surface; (e) filling the crack and the corner of the column–footing
interface; (f) applying the CFRP fabrics.
2.3. Mechanical Properties of Materials
The mechanical properties of all the materials were determined experimentally. The
C50 (concrete with a nominal compressive strength of 50 MPa) concrete used in the pre-
cast column was tested with three 150 mm cube samples. The tested cubic compressive
strength for the C50 concrete was 49.4 MPa after 28 days of curing. The UHPC grout was
tested with three 160 mm × 40 mm × 40 mm samples. The tested compressive strength for
 Materials 2022, 15, 7443 6 of 17

2.3. Mechanical Properties of Materials

The mechanical properties of all the materials were determined experimentally. The
C50 (concrete with a nominal compressive strength of 50 MPa) concrete used in the precast
column was tested with three 150 mm cube samples. The tested cubic compressive strength
for the C50 concrete was 49.4 MPa after 28 days of curing. The UHPC grout was tested
with three 160 mm × 40 mm × 40 mm samples. The tested compressive strength for the
UHPC grout was 143 MPa after 28 days of curing.
Three samples of the HRB400 rebars and HPB300 rebars were tested under axial
tension. Three samples of grouted sleeve connections were also tested under axial tension.
The test results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Mechanical properties of the rebars and the grouted sleeve.

Type Yield Strength Peak Strength

HRB400 481.2 MPa 654.7 MPa
HPB300 360.0 MPa 526.0 MPa
Grouted sleeve 91.6 kN 129 kN

The thickness of the CFRP fabrics used in this test was 0.167 mm. The test report
of mechanical properties was provided by the China National Center Test of Chemical
Building Materials. The test results are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Mechanical properties of the CFRP fabrics.

Characteristics Characteristic Values

Tensile strength 3512.7 MPa
Elastic modulus 240,000 MPa
Elongation 1.7%
Bending strength 724.4 MPa
Shear strength 50.4 MPa
ls 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 18
All the mechanical properties tests for materials are exhibited in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Mechanical property tests: (a) concrete; (b,c) grout; (d) rebars; (e) grouted sleeve.
Figure 5. Mechanical property tests: (a) concrete; (b,c) grout; (d) rebars; (e) grouted sleeve.

2.4. Instrumentation and Test Step and Test Step

2.4. Instrumentation
Figure 6 showsFigure
the test devicethe
6 shows for test
the device
specimen. A 1000
for the kN servo-hydraulic
specimen. vertical
A 1000 kN servo-hydraulic vertical
actuator was used to apply
actuator was constant axial constant
used to apply pressure axial
on the top of the
pressure on specimen. Thespecimen.
the top of the axial The axial
pressure was 7% of the specimen’s
pressure compressive
was 7% of the specimen’sbearing capacity.
compressive A 500
bearing kN servo-hydrau-
capacity. A 500 kN servo-hydraulic
lateral
lic lateral actuator wasactuator
used towas used
apply to apply
cyclic cyclic displacement-control
displacement-control load.was
load. The footing The footing was
anchored to the anchored
ground byto the
the ground by the
prestressed prestressed
rod, and the caprod, and was
beam the cap beam was
anchored withanchored
the with the
lateral actuator by the prestressed rod as well. The protocol of the cyclic displacement-
control load is shown in Figure 7. Three cycles at each displacement level were conducted
until 40 mm. The precast column suffered significant plastic damage at large displacement
levels, so one cycle was conducted on the specimen in subsequent displacement levels.
During the cyclic loading test on the original precast column, the test ended when the
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 7 of 17

lateral actuator by the prestressed rod as well. The protocol of the cyclic displacement-
control load is shown in Figure 7. Three cycles at each displacement level were conducted
until 40 mm. The precast column suffered significant plastic damage at large displacement
levels, so one cycle was conducted on the specimen in subsequent displacement levels.
During the cyclic loading test on the original precast column, the test ended when the
lateral load decreased to 85% of the peak load at a displacement of 66.67 mm. To compare
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18
the repaired precast column with the original column, the loading protocol for the repaired
specimen was the same as that of the original column, and the test ended after one cycle at
the displacement level of 70 mm. The experimental conditions of the tested specimens
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18 are
shown in Table 3.

Figure6.
Figure 6. Test
Test step
stepand
andinstrumentation.
instrumentation.
Figure 6. Test step and instrumentation.
80
70
80 mm
50 70
mm mm
40 mm 50
40 35 mm mm
30 mm 40 mm
25 mm
Displacement (mm)

40 15 mm20 mm 35 mm
10 mm 30 mm
25 mm
Displacement (mm)

2 mm 5 mm 15 mm 20 mm
0 10 mm
2 mm 5 mm
0

−40

−40
−80
6 12 18 24 30

−80 Cycles
6 12 18 24 30
Figure 7. The protocol of the cyclic displacement-control load.
Cycles
3. Experimental Results and Discussion
Figure 7.
Figure The protocol
7. The protocol of
of the
the cyclic
cyclic displacement-control
displacement-control load.
load.
3.1. Damage Progression
3.1.1. Original Precast Column
3. Experimental Results and Discussion
During the cyclic loading test for the original precast column, the specimen exhibited
3.1. Damage
typical Progression
flexure–shear damage progression, as shown in Figure 8a. The initial crack ap-
peared
3.1.1. about 150
Original mm and
Precast 300 mm above the column–footing interface at the first dis-
Column
placement cycle of 10 mm. Then, evenly distributed flexural cracks appeared within 900
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 8 of 17

Table 3. Experimental conditions of tested specimens.

Thickness of Concrete
Specimen Test Arrangement Axial Pressure Ratio Repair Method
Protective Layer
Original specimen 1st Tests 7% - 37 mm
Repaired specimen 2nd Tests 7% CFRP fabrics 37 mm + 3 layers CFRP

Both the vertical actuator and lateral actuator were instrumented with load cells and
displacement transformers. The load and displacement data of the actuators were recorded
and fed back to control the actuators. Seven linear variable displacement transformers
(LVDTs) were instrumented to record the lateral displacements along the height of the
specimen. Three LVDTs were spaced 100 mm above the column–footing interface. Another
three LVDTs were spaced 100 mm below the cap beam–footing interface. An additional
LVDT was installed on the middle height of the cap beam to check the lateral displacement
of the actuator. Six strain gauges were used to record the strain of the CFRP fabrics. They
were installed on the CFRP fabrics on two perpendicular surfaces. All the measured data
were collected by the data logger (TDS-530), as shown in Figure 6.

3. Experimental Results and Discussion

3.1. Damage Progression
3.1.1. Original Precast Column
During the cyclic loading test for the original precast column, the specimen exhibited
typical flexure–shear damage progression, as shown in Figure 8a. The initial crack appeared
about 150 mm and 300 mm above the column–footing interface at the first displacement
cycle of 10 mm. Then, evenly distributed flexural cracks appeared within 900 mm above the
column–footing interface until 25 mm cycles. The cracks gradually extended and penetrated
with the increase in loading cycles. Spalling of concrete was found at displacement cycles
of 30 mm and 35 mm. Spalling of concrete concentrated at the corners of the bottom of the
column due to the stress concentration here [34]. The cyclic loading test ended when the
precast column researched its ultimate capacity at the displacement level of 66.67 mm. The
largest crack appeared at the column–footing interface, which was proposed to be a critical
interface for the precast column with grouted sleeve connections [35]. Nonetheless, the
width of cracks was less than 1 mm during the cyclic loading test for the original precast
column.

3.1.2. Repaired Precast Column

During the cyclic loading test for the repaired precast column, concrete cracks could
not be recorded within the wrap of the CFRP fabrics. Localized debonding was found on
the CFRP fabrics within 400 mm above the column–footing interface after the displacement
cycles of 15 mm, as shown in Figure 9b. The most significant debonding is 110 mm above
the column–footing interface where the CFRP fabrics experienced stress concentration, as
shown in Figure 8d. Corresponding to the debonding, a crack formed on the CFRP sheet at
the same height, as shown in Figure 8d. It should be noted that a crack could be found at
the column–footing interface, as shown in Figure 9c. The width of this crack is larger than
that of the crack of the original specimen, but still less than 2 mm. The side fabrics limited
the deformation at the column–footing interface.
 found at displacement cycles of 30 mm and 35 mm. Spalling of concrete concentrated at
the corners of the bottom of the column due to the stress concentration here [34]. The cyclic
loading test ended when the precast column researched its ultimate capacity at the dis-
placement level of 66.67 mm. The largest crack appeared at the column–footing interface,
which was proposed to be a critical interface for the precast column with grouted sleeve
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 9 of 17
connections [35]. Nonetheless, the width of cracks was less than 1 mm during the cyclic
loading test for the original precast column.

Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18

Figure
Figure 8.8.Damage
Damageof oftested
testedspecimens:
specimens:(a)
(a)original
originalspecimen;
specimen;(b)
(b)repaired
repairedspecimen;
specimen; (c)
(c)crack
crackdetails
details
for
for the
the original
original specimen;
specimen; (d,e)
(d,e) crack
crack details
details for
for the
the repaired
repaired specimen.
specimen.

3.1.2. Repaired Precast Column

During the cyclic loading test for the repaired precast column, concrete cracks could
not be recorded within the wrap of the CFRP fabrics. Localized debonding was found on
the CFRP fabrics within 400 mm above the column–footing interface after the displace-
ment cycles of 15 mm, as shown in Figure 9b. The most significant debonding is 110 mm
above the column–footing interface where the CFRP fabrics experienced stress concentra-
tion, as shown in Figure 8d. Corresponding to the debonding, a crack formed on the CFRP
sheet at the same height, as shown in Figure 8d. It should be noted that a crack could be
found at the column–footing interface, as shown in Figure 9c. The width of this crack is
larger than that of the crack of the original specimen, but still less than 2 mm. The side
fabrics limited the deformation at the column–footing interface.
To compare the damage between the original specimen and the repaired specimen,
the CFRP fabrics were peeled off within the debonding area, as shown in Figure 8e. It was
found that the protective layer suffered serious damage. The main crack formed at the
height of about 150 mm above the column–footing interface. The position of the main
crack is the same as that of the initial crack of the original specimen when compared with
Figure9.
Figure
Figure 9.Damage
8c.Damage
Although atthe
at the displacement
thedisplacement
column concrete levelof
level of
was70mm
70 mm forthe
damaged
for therepaired
repairedspecimen:
severely, specimen: (a)damage
the bearing
(a) damagefor
capacity for
wasthe
the
repaired
rehabilitatedspecimen; (b)
by repair
repaired specimen; debonding of
with theofCFRP
(b) debonding the CFRP
the CFRP fabrics;
fabrics. (c) crack
The(c)CFRP
fabrics; at the
fabrics
crack at column–footing
also prevented
the column–footing interface.
the con-
interface.
crete from spalling.
3.2. Load–Displacement
To compare the damage Curves between the original specimen and the repaired specimen,
the CFRP fabrics were peeledcurves
The load–displacement off within
reflectthe
thedebonding area, asofshown
hysteric behavior in Figure
the columns 8e. cy-
under It
was
clic found
loadingthat theAprotective
tests. comparison layerof suffered serious damage.
the load–displacement The is
curves main crack
shown in formed
Figure 10.at
the
Theheight of about
skeleton curves150 mmused
were aboveto the column–footing
determine the criticalinterface. The position
characteristics of the main
of the seismic per-
crack is the same as that of the initial crack of the original specimen
formance of the precast columns. The skeleton curves were obtained from the envelope when compared withof
Figure 8c. Although the curves,
the load–displacement columnas concrete
shownwas damaged
in Figure severely,
11. Both the bearing
columns capacity
exhibited was
the pinch-
rehabilitated
ing effect onby therepair
shapewith the CFRP
of curves fabrics.reinforcement
as typical The CFRP fabrics also prevented
columns. The originalthespecimen
concrete
from spalling.
reached the peak point with a peak load (Fp) of 213.93 kN and a peak displacement (∆p) of
40.1 mm. The repaired specimen had an 8% larger peak load of 227.09 kN at the displace-
3.2. Load–Displacement Curves
ment level of 70 mm. The ultimate strength (Fu) was 174.19 kN for the original specimen,
and The load–displacement
the related curves reflect
ultimate displacement the66.67
(∆u) was hysteric
mm.behavior of the
The ultimate columns
point was theunder
same
cyclic loading tests. A comparison of the load–displacement curves is shown
as the peak point for the repaired specimen. For the repaired specimen, the cyclic in Figure 10.
loading
The skeleton curves were used to determine the critical characteristics of
test ended in advance at the same displacement cycle as the original specimen. The re-the seismic
performance of thewas
paired specimen precast columns.
not at its actualThe skeleton
ultimate curves
state, andwere obtained
the actual from displacement
ultimate the envelope
should be larger than 70 mm.

240
 repaired specimen; (b) debonding of the CFRP fabrics; (c) crack at the column–footing interface.

3.2. Load–Displacement Curves

The load–displacement curves reflect the hysteric behavior of the columns under cy-
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 clic loading tests. A comparison of the load–displacement curves is shown in Figure 10 of10.
17
The skeleton curves were used to determine the critical characteristics of the seismic per-
formance of the precast columns. The skeleton curves were obtained from the envelope of
thethe
of load–displacement
load–displacement curves, as shown
curves, in Figure
as shown 11. Both
in Figure 11. columns exhibited
Both columns the pinch-
exhibited the
pinching effect on the shape of curves as typical reinforcement columns. Thespecimen
ing effect on the shape of curves as typical reinforcement columns. The original original
reached the
specimen peak the
reached point with
peak a peak
point withload (Fpload
a peak ) of 213.93
(Fp ) ofkN andkN
213.93 a peak
and adisplacement (∆p) of
peak displacement
40.1 mm. The repaired specimen had an 8% larger peak load of 227.09
(∆p ) of 40.1 mm. The repaired specimen had an 8% larger peak load of 227.09 kN at the kN at the displace-
ment level of 70
displacement mm.
level of The
70 mm.ultimate strength (F
The ultimate u) was 174.19
strength kN174.19
(Fu ) was for thekNoriginal
for thespecimen,
original
and the related
specimen, ultimate
and the relateddisplacement (∆u) was 66.67
ultimate displacement (∆umm.
) wasThe ultimate
66.67 point
mm. The was thepoint
ultimate same
as the peak point for the repaired specimen. For the repaired specimen,
was the same as the peak point for the repaired specimen. For the repaired specimen, the cyclic loading
testcyclic
the endedloading
in advance at the in
test ended same displacement
advance at the samecycledisplacement
as the original specimen.
cycle The re-
as the original
paired specimen was not at its actual ultimate state, and the actual ultimate
specimen. The repaired specimen was not at its actual ultimate state, and the actual ultimate displacement
should be larger
displacement thanbe
should 70larger
mm. than 70 mm.

240

120
Load (kN)

− 120

Original specimen
Repaired specimen
− 240
− 80 − 40 0 40 80
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW Displacement (mm) 11 of 18

Figure 10. Load–displacement

Figure10. Load–displacement curves.
curves.

240

120
Load (kN)

− 120
Original specimen
Repaired specimen
− 240
− 80 − 40 0 40 80
Displacement (mm)

Figure 11. Skeleton

Figure11. Skeletoncurves.
curves.

Repair
Repair with
with the
theCFRP
CFRPfabrics
fabricsrehabilitated
rehabilitatedandandincreased
increasedthe
thebearing
bearingcapacity
capacityof
ofthe
the
damaged column. However, the initial stiffness of the repaired specimen was obviously
damaged column. However, the initial stiffness of the repaired specimen was obviously
lower than that of the original specimen. The repaired specimen also had a larger residual
lower than that of the original specimen. The repaired specimen also had a larger residual
displacement. It was indicated that the concrete column suffered plastic damage before
displacement. It was indicated that the concrete column suffered plastic damage before
repair. The CFRP fabrics did not work well at lower strains [23]. When the displacement
repair. The CFRP fabrics did not work well at lower strains [23]. When the displacement
level reached 40 mm, the column experienced enough plastic strain to take advantage of the
level reached 40 mm, the column experienced enough plastic strain to take advantage of
strong tensile strength of the CFRP fabrics. The repair effect of the CFRP fabrics was limited
the strong tensile strength of the CFRP fabrics. The repair effect of the CFRP fabrics was
limited in the elastic stage, but the repair effort was good in the plastic stage. Some re-
searchers proposed improving the initial stiffness by prestressing the CFRP fabrics [36,37].
It is worth noticing that there were three loading cycles at each displacement level
until 40 mm, while there was only one load value at each displacement level shown in
 Figure 11. Skeleton curves.

Repair with the CFRP fabrics rehabilitated and increased the bearing capacity of the
damaged column. However, the initial stiffness of the repaired specimen was obviously
lower than that of the original specimen. The repaired specimen also had a larger residual
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 11 of 17
displacement. It was indicated that the concrete column suffered plastic damage before
repair. The CFRP fabrics did not work well at lower strains [23]. When the displacement
level reached 40 mm, the column experienced enough plastic strain to take advantage of
the elastic
in the strong tensile
stage, strength
but the of the CFRP
repair effortfabrics. The repair
was good in theeffect of the
plastic CFRP
stage. fabrics
Some was
researchers
proposed improving the initial stiffness by prestressing the CFRP fabrics [36,37]. re-
limited in the elastic stage, but the repair effort was good in the plastic stage. Some
searchers proposed
It is worth improving
noticing the initial
that there werestiffness by prestressing
three loading cycles the CFRPdisplacement
at each fabrics [36,37]. level
It is worth noticing that there were three loading cycles at each displacement level
until 40 mm, while there was only one load value at each displacement level shown in
until 40 mm, while there was only one load value at each displacement level shown in
Figure 12. The loads in the skeleton curves were the average values of three cycles at each
Figure 12. The loads in the skeleton curves were the average values of three cycles at each
displacement
displacement level.
level. In thiscase,
In this case,a statistical
a statistical analysis
analysis was conducted,
was conducted, and theand the standard
standard de-
deviation
viation results areshown
results are showninin Figure
Figure 12.12.

200 200

Load (kN)
Load (kN)

100 100

Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 18

0 0
2 5 10 15 3.3.
20 Ductility
25 30 35 40 50 66.67 2 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 50 66.67
Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)
The yield point was determined by the Park [38] method, which is the method most
(a) Original specimen (b) Repaired specimen
commonly used to calculate the yield point for reinforcement columns. The principle of
Figure 12. The standard deviation for the peak loads at each displacement level: (a) standard devi-
the method
Figure 12. The is shown
standardindeviation
Figure 13. forThe
the yield load (F
peak loads ) wasdisplacement
atyeach 0.75 Fp. Twolevel:
horizontal lines
(a) standard
ation of the original specimen; (b) standard deviation of the repaired specimen.
were drawn
deviation at original
of the the heights of Fp and
specimen; Fy. Then,
(b) standard a line was
deviation drawn
of the passing
repaired the zero point and
specimen.
the intersection point of the skeleton curve and horizontal line Fy. This line intersected the
3.3. Ductility
horizontal line Fp, and the abscissa of the intersection point is the yield displacement (∆y).
The yieldcoefficient
The ductility point was(μ) determined
is calculatedby according
the Park [38] method, which
to Equation (1): is the method most
commonly used to calculate the yield point for reinforcement columns. The principle of
the method is shown in Figure 13. The yield μ ⁄ ∆y
μ = ∆load (Fy ) was 0.75 Fp . Two horizontal lines (1)
were drawn at the heights of Fp and Fy . Then, a line was drawn passing the zero point and
All the seismic performance characteristics for the specimens are shown in Table 4.
the intersection point of the skeleton curve and horizontal line Fy . This line intersected the
The ductility coefficient of the repaired specimen decreased by 11.94% from 3.93 to 3.50.
horizontal line Fp , and the abscissa of the intersection point is the yield displacement (∆y ).
The result was attributed to two reasons: (1) The yield displacement of the repaired spec-
The ductility coefficient (µ) is calculated according to Equation (1):
imen had increased by 17.9%. (2) The cyclic loading test of the repaired specimen ended
in advance. The repaired precast column µ =had
∆µa/longer
∆y elastic stage than the original spec- (1)
imen. It exhibited larger ultimate displacement and larger loading capacity as well.

240
(Fp,∆p)
Fp ▲
(Fu,∆u)

Fy ▲
Load (kN)

120

∆y
0
0 20 40 60 80
Displacement (mm)

Figure 13. Determination of the yield point according to the Park [38] method.

Table 4. Seismic performance characteristics for the specimens.

Characteristics Original Specimen Repaired Specimen

Yield load 160.45 kN 170.32 kN
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 12 of 17

All the seismic performance characteristics for the specimens are shown in Table 4. The
ductility coefficient of the repaired specimen decreased by 11.94% from 3.93 to 3.50. The
result was attributed to two reasons: (1) The yield displacement of the repaired specimen
had increased by 17.9%. (2) The cyclic loading test of the repaired specimen ended in
advance. The repaired precast column had a longer elastic stage than the original specimen.
It exhibited larger ultimate displacement and larger loading capacity as well.

Table 4. Seismic performance characteristics for the specimens.

Characteristics Original Specimen Repaired Specimen

Yield load 160.45 kN 170.32 kN
Yield displacement 16.96 mm 20.00 mm
Peak load 213.93 kN 227.09 kN
Peak displacement 40.01 mm 70.00 mm
Ultimate load 174.19 kN 227.09 kN
Ultimate displacement 66.67 mm 70.00 mm
Ductility coefficient 3.93 3.50

3.4. Stiffness Degradation

The stiffness degradation is known as the decrease rate of the bearing capacity [39].
The stiffness degradation for the tested specimens is shown in Figure 14. The stiffness
degradation curves were almost symmetrical with minor differences. The construction
deviation and material anisotropy contributed to the differences [40]. In the first two
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 18
displacement levels, the stiffness degradation of the original specimen was much greater
than that of the repaired specimen. The maximum error reached 48% at the positive
displacement level of 5 mm. For the original specimen, the damage progression for the
concrete column
concrete columndeveloped
developedfast fastatatthe
the primary
primary stage
stage of loading.
of loading. ForFor
the the repaired
repaired speci-
specimen,
men,
the the concrete
concrete was
was still in still in of
a state a state of low strength
low strength with damage.
with damage. Repair restored
Repair restored the
the strength
strength
of of theby
the column column by supplementing
supplementing its strength, its rather
strength,
thanrather thanthe
helping helping thematerials
original original
materials
regain regain At
strength. strength. At the displacement
the displacement level of 25 level
mm, ofthe
25 mm, the repaired
repaired specimenspecimen
exhibitedex-a
decreasing trend in the
hibited a decreasing rateinofthe
trend stiffness
rate ofdegradation, and its stiffness
stiffness degradation, and itsdegradation remained
stiffness degradation
larger
remainedthanlarger
the original
than thespecimen later. It was
original specimen indicated
later. that the CFRP
It was indicated fabrics
that the CFRP began to
fabrics
exhibit
began to rehabilitation ability. The
exhibit rehabilitation stiffness
ability. Thedegradation of the original
stiffness degradation of thespecimen
original was close
specimen
to
was0 at the to
close displacement level of 35 level
0 at the displacement mm. of This35 result
mm. Thisshowed
resultthat the original
showed that thespecimen
original
nearly
specimen reached
nearlythe peak bearing
reached the peak capacity
bearingstate.
capacityThestate.
repaired
The specimen closed to closed
repaired specimen the peakto
state at the displacement level of 70 mm, which doubled the displacement.
the peak state at the displacement level of 70 mm, which doubled the displacement. The The comparison
confirmed
comparison that the repaired
confirmed specimen
that the repaired hadspecimen
remaining hadductility.
remaining ductility.

20
Original specimen
Repaired specimen
Stiffness degradation (kN/mm)

15

10

−5
−80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80
Displacement (mm)
Figure 14.
Figure 14. Stiffness
Stiffness degradation.
degradation.

3.5. Energy Dissipation

When suffering seismic excitation, structures dissipate seismic energy through flex-
ural displacement. The energy dissipation ability helps structures resist seismic loads,
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 13 of 17

3.5. Energy Dissipation

When suffering seismic excitation, structures dissipate seismic energy through flexural
displacement. The energy dissipation ability helps structures resist seismic loads, minimizes
damage, and prevents structures from collapsing [41].
Figure 15 shows the energy dissipation at different displacement levels. The data from
2 mm to 40 mm were the average values of three cycles. The standard deviation was also
calculated, as shown in Figure 15. The energy dissipation for the original specimen at the
displacement level of 66.67 mm could not be calculated because it was not a whole cycle.
The repaired specimen showed a similar energy dissipation ability to the original specimen
in the first three displacement levels. In the later loading stage, the repaired specimen
exhibited better energy dissipation ability. At the displacement cycle of 50 mm, the repaired
specimen dissipated 9.27 × 104 N · m of energy. This value was 5.6 × 103 N · m more
than that of the original specimen. The energy dissipation ability had not been restored in
small displacement levels. However, this ability was significantly strengthened
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18 in large
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18
displacement levels.

Original specimen Repaired specimen

Original specimen Repaired specimen
2 mm 3.89×10 1 3.00×1011
1
2 mm 3.89×10 3.00×10
5 mm 1.61×1022 1.65×1022
5 mm 1.61×10 1.65×10
10 mm 7.39×1022 7.27×1022
10 mm 7.39×103 7.27×10 3
15 mm 2.47×10 3 2.74×10 3
15 mm 2.47×10 2.74×10 3
20 mm 6.51×1033 8.00×10 3
20 mm 6.51×10 8.00×10 4
25 mm 4
1.43×10 4 1.69×10 4
25 mm 1.43×10 1.69×10 4
30 mm 2.66×1044 3.00×10 4
30 mm 2.66×10 3.00×10
4
35 mm 4.38×10 4 4.77×1044
35 mm 4.38×10 4.77×10
4
40 mm 6.65×10 4 7.11×1044
40 mm 6.65×10 7.11×10 4
50 mm 8.71×104 9.27×10 4
50 mm 8.71×104 9.27×10
70 mm 1.10×1055
70 mm 1.10×10
Energy dissipation(N•m)
Energy dissipation(N•m)
Figure 15.
Figure Comparison
Comparison ofof
energy
energydissipation at different
dissipation displacement
at different levels. levels.
displacement
Figure 15.
15. Comparison of energy dissipation at different displacement levels.
Figure 16
Figure 16 shows
showsthe thecumulative
cumulative energy
energydissipation. TheThe
dissipation. repaired specimen
repaired showed
specimen showed su-
Figure
superior 16 shows
energy the
dissipationcumulative energy
ability. The dissipation.
repaired specimenThe repaired
achieved specimen
a total energyshowed
dissi-
perior energy
superior dissipation ability. The repaired specimen achieved a total energy dissipation
pation of energy
3.805 × dissipation
105 N · m. ability. The repaired
As the original specimen
specimen ended achieved a total
the loading energy
test at thedissi-
dis-
3.80 ×
ofpation 3.80N×· 10
of 10 m. N
5 As· the original
m. As specimen
the original ended
specimen the the
ended loading
loadingtesttest
at the displacement
at the dis-
placement level of 66.67 mm, it was only able to dissipate 2.485 × 105 N · m of energy.
level of 66.67
placement mm,
level it was
of 66.67 only
mm, ableonly
it was to dissipate 2.48 ×2.48
able to dissipate 10 N ·m
× 10 5 Nof· energy.
m of energy.
4 × 1055
4 × 10
(N·m)

3 × 1055
(N·m)

3 × 10
dissipation
dissipation

2 × 1055
2 × 10
Energy
Energy

1 × 1055
1 × 10
Original specimen
Original specimen
Repaired specimen
0 Repaired specimen
0
40 0 20 60 80
40 0 20 60 80
Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)
Figure 16. Cumulative energy dissipation.
Figure 16.
Figure 16. Cumulative
Cumulativeenergy dissipation.
energy dissipation.
3.6. Measured Strain
3.6. Measured Strain
Strain gauges were instrumented on the surface of the CFRP fabrics to measure the
strainStrain
of thegauges
columnwere instrumented
at different onasthe
heights, surface
shown in of the CFRP
Figure 6. Thefabrics
strain to
of measure the
the column
strain of the column at different heights, as shown in Figure 6. The strain of the
surface at the heights of 100 mm, 200 mm, and 300 mm above the column–footing interface column
surface at the heights of 100 mm, 200 mm, and 300 mm above the column–footing interface
Materials 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 18

Materials 2022, 15, 7443 14 of 17

level of −10 mm, as shown in Figure 17a. The column surface experienced obvious residual
deformation at this position, which correlated with the debonding and stress concentra-
3.6. Measured Strain
tion of the fabrics as discussed before. The maximum strain at the height of 100 mm
Strain
reached 5841gauges
με atwere instrumentedlevel
the displacement on the
of surface of the
39.36 mm CFRP fabrics
in advance. The to measure
strain data the
ex-
strain
ceededofthethefeasible
columnrange
at different heights,
of the strain as shown
gauge in Figure
later. The maximum6. The strain
strains atof the
the column
heights of
surface at the heights of 100 mm, 200 mm, and 300 mm above the column–footing
200 mm and 300 mm were 1522 με and 1024 με, respectively. The particularly high strain interface
was
at therecorded,
height ofas100shown in Figure
was due 17. The
to the stress recorded data
concentration range
of the CFRPwasfabrics
from asdisplacement
well. There
levels
was a negative correlation between measured strain stress and the position of calculated
of 2 mm to 50 mm because they were complete cycles. The yield strain was the strain
as 1431.88 µε.
gauges.

6000 3000
100mm 200mm

4000 2000
Strain (με)

Strain (με)
Yield strain

1000
2000
Yield strain

0
0

−60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60

Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)
(a) (b)
3000
300mm

2000
Strain (με)

Yield strain

1000

−60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60

Displacement (mm)
(c)
Figure 17.
Figure 17. Measured
Measured strain
strain of
of the
thecolumn
columnsurface
surfaceatatdifferent
differentheights:
heights:(a)
(a)100
100mm
mmheight;
height;(b)
(b)200
200mm
mm height; (c) 300 mm height.
height; (c) 300 mm height.

4. Conclusions
The surface concrete at the height of 100 mm and 200 mm reached the yield strain at
the displacement
A precast columnlevel of 16.06
with mm and
grouted 44.06
sleeve mm, respectively.
connections The strain at tested
was experimentally the height of
in two
300 mm did not reach the yield strain during the loading test. The curves of the
stages: the original specimen and the repaired specimen. A rapid repair method with the strain were
not
CFRPstrictly
fabricssymmetrical.
was specially In particular,
designed forforthe
the damaged
one at 100precast
mm above the column–footing
column. The test results
interface, the minimal
were discussed strainthe
to evaluate in effect
the load cycleson
of repair of the
35 mm was atprecast
damaged the displacement
column. Thelevel
fol-
of −10 mm,
lowing as shown
conclusions caninbeFigure
drawn:17a. The column surface experienced obvious residual
deformation at this position, which correlated with the debonding and stress concentration
1. The repaired specimen suffered severe damage inside the CFRP fabrics but main-
of the fabrics as discussed before. The maximum strain at the height of 100 mm reached
tained its bearing capacity. The CFRP fabrics prevented the cover concrete from spall-
5841 µε at the displacement level of 39.36 mm in advance. The strain data exceeded the
ing and limited the cracks at the column–footing interface. The main crack of the
feasible range of the strain gauge later. The maximum strains at the heights of 200 mm and
300 mm were 1522 µε and 1024 µε, respectively. The particularly high strain at the height
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 15 of 17

of 100 was due to the stress concentration of the CFRP fabrics as well. There was a negative
correlation between measured strain stress and the position of the strain gauges.

4. Conclusions
A precast column with grouted sleeve connections was experimentally tested in two
stages: the original specimen and the repaired specimen. A rapid repair method with the
CFRP fabrics was specially designed for the damaged precast column. The test results were
discussed to evaluate the effect of repair on the damaged precast column. The following
conclusions can be drawn:
1. The repaired specimen suffered severe damage inside the CFRP fabrics but maintained
its bearing capacity. The CFRP fabrics prevented the cover concrete from spalling and
limited the cracks at the column–footing interface. The main crack of the CFRP fabrics
formed at the height of 110 mm above the column–footing interface due to the stress
concentration, which was also confirmed by the measured strain.
2. The peak load capacity of the repaired specimen increased by 8%, from 213.93 kN to
227.09 kN. The initial stiffness of the repaired bridge was reduced, but it was signifi-
cantly developed in the later loading stage. The excellent mechanical performance
of the CFRP fabrics was better utilized under high strength state. It was proposed to
improve the initial stiffness by prestressing the CFRP fabrics.
3. Although the ductility for the repaired specimen decreased, it was supposed to be
larger because the test ended in advance. The stiffness degradation was close to 0 at
the displacement level of 70 mm for the repaired specimen, while it was close to 0 at
the displacement level of only 35 mm for the original specimen. This confirmed that
the repaired specimen had remaining ductility.
4. The energy dissipation capacity was not restored in the early loading stage, but this
ability was obviously increased in the later loading stage. The repaired specimen
dissipated total energy of 3.80 × 105 N · m, which was 53.31% higher than that of the
original specimen.
In future research, prestress load could be applied to CFRP fabrics to strengthen the
initial stiffness of the damaged precast columns. Further attempts on prestressed CFRP
fabrics could prove quite beneficial for rehabilitating the seismic resistance of damaged
precast columns. In addition, the possibility of different fiber-reinforced polymer materials,
such as glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) and basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP),
warrants further investigation.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.L.; investigation, S.L., K.P. and X.F.; data curation,
S.L.; formal analysis, S.L.; writing—original draft preparation, S.L.; writing—review and editing,
W.L.; funding acquisition, F.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the
manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Shaanxi Province Science and Technology Department,
grant number 2022JZ-32, and Chang’an University, grant number 300102212212. This paper was
written during the academic visit of the second author to Aalto University in Finland, financially
supported by the China Scholarship Council.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to the funding contract.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. ASCE. 2017 infrastructure report card. ASCE News, 9 March 2017.
2. Yang, J.; Liang, S.; Zhu, X.; Dang, L.; Wang, J.; Tao, J. Experimental research and finite element analysis on the seismic behavior of
CFRP-strengthened severely seismic-damaged RC columns. Structures 2021, 34, 3968–3981. [CrossRef]
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 16 of 17

3. Kawashima, K.; Takahashi, Y.; Ge, H.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, J. Reconnaissance Report on Damage of Bridges in 2008 Wenchuan, China,
Earthquake. J. Earthq. Eng. 2009, 13, 965–996. [CrossRef]
4. Li, X.; Chen, K.; Chen, J.; Li, Y.; Yang, D. Seismic Response of Resilient Bridges with SMA-Based Rocking ECC-Reinforced Piers.
Materials 2021, 14, 6500. [CrossRef]
5. Tong, T.; Wang, J.; Lei, H.; Liu, Z. UHPC jacket retrofitting of reinforced concrete bridge piers with low flexural reinforcement
ratios: Experimental investigation and three-dimensional finite element modeling. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2021, 17, 1315–1337.
[CrossRef]
6. Guan, D.; Chen, Z.; Liu, J.; Lin, Z.; Guo, Z. Seismic performance of precast concrete columns with prefabricated UHPC jackets in
plastic hinge zone. Eng. Struct. 2021, 245, 112776. [CrossRef]
7. Shoukry, M.E.; Tarabia, A.M.; Abdelrahman, M.Z. Seismic retrofit of deficient exterior RC beam-column joints using steel plates
and angles. Alex. Eng. J. 2022, 61, 3147–3164. [CrossRef]
8. Shafaei, J.; Hosseini, A.; Marefat, M.S. Seismic retrofit of external RC beam–column joints by joint enlargement using prestressed
steel angles. Eng. Struct. 2014, 81, 265–288. [CrossRef]
9. Kennedy-Kuiper, R.C.S.; Wakjira, T.G.; Alam, M.S. Repair and Retrofit of RC Bridge Piers with Steel-Reinforced Grout Jackets: An
Experimental Investigation. J. Bridge Eng. 2022, 27, 04022067. [CrossRef]
10. Thermou, G.E.; Katakalos, K.; Manos, G. Experimental investigation of substandard RC columns confined with SRG jackets
under compression. Compos. Struct. 2018, 184, 56–65. [CrossRef]
11. Al-Bayati, G.; Al-Mahaidi, R.; Hashemi, M.J.; Kalfat, R. Torsional strengthening of RC beams using NSM CFRP rope and
innovative adhesives. Compos. Struct. 2018, 187, 190–202. [CrossRef]
12. Obaidat, Y.T. Cyclic behavior of interior RC beam-column joints strengthened with NSM-CFRP ropes. Structures 2022, 37, 735–744.
[CrossRef]
13. Pereiro-Barceló, J.; Bonet, J.L.; Rueda-García, L.; Ciurana-Tatay, Á. Behaviour of retrofited precast UHPC and Ni-Ti SMA
column-to-foundation connection with CFRP wrapping layers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 323, 126536. [CrossRef]
14. Zhao, J.; Ren, W.; Ruan, X.; Gong, X.; Si, C. Experimental Study on the Seismic Performance of Columns Reinforced by the CFRP
Bar and Sheet. Appl. Compos. Mater. 2021, 28, 1291–1313. [CrossRef]
15. Sun, Z.; Si, B.; Wang, D.; Huang, Z.; Yu, D. Review on the repair techniques for earthquake damaged RC bridge piers. J. Earthq.
Eng. Vib. 2009, 29, 128–132.
16. Elsheikh, A.H.; Panchal, H.; Shanmugan, S.; Muthuramalingam, T.; El-Kassas, A.M.; Ramesh, B. Recent progresses in wood-plastic
composites: Pre-processing treatments, manufacturing techniques, recyclability and eco-friendly assessment. Clean. Eng. Technol.
2022, 8, 100450. [CrossRef]
17. Elsheikh, A. Bistable Morphing Composites for Energy-Harvesting Applications. Polymers 2022, 14, 1893. [CrossRef]
18. Showaib, E.A.; Elsheikh, A.H. Effect of surface preparation on the strength of vibration welded butt joint made from PBT
composite. Polym. Test. 2020, 83, 106319. [CrossRef]
19. Borrie, D.; Al-Saadi, S.; Zhao, X.L.; Singh Raman, R.K.; Bai, Y. Effects of CNT modified adhesives and silane chemical pre-treatment
on CFRP/steel bond behaviour and durability. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 273, 121803. [CrossRef]
20. Anand Raj, M.K.; Muthusamy, S.; Panchal, H.; Mahmoud Ibrahim, A.M.; Alsoufi, M.S.; Elsheikh, A.H. Investigation of mechanical
properties of dual-fiber reinforcement in polymer composite. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2022, 18, 3908–3915. [CrossRef]
21. Elsheikh, A.H.; Abd Elaziz, M.; Ramesh, B.; Egiza, M.; Al-qaness, M.A.A. Modeling of drilling process of GFRP composite
using a hybrid random vector functional link network/parasitism-predation algorithm. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2021, 14, 298–311.
[CrossRef]
22. Dirikgil, T. Experimental investigation of the effects of concrete strength and axial load ratio on the performances of CFRP-
wrapped and externally collared RC short columns. Eng. Struct. 2021, 230, 111647. [CrossRef]
23. Wang, Q.; Lv, J.; Lu, C.L.; Zhu, W.X. Experimental study on seismic performance of square RC columns strengthened with
multi-layer prestressed CFRP fabric. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 45, 103589. [CrossRef]
24. Wang, D.; Huang, L.; Yu, T.; Wang, Z. Seismic Performance of CFRP-Retrofitted Large-Scale Square RC Columns with High Axial
Compression Ratios. J. Compos. Constr. 2017, 21, 04017031. [CrossRef]
25. Wang, D.; Wang, Z.; Smith, S.T.; Yu, T. Seismic performance of CFRP-confined circular high-strength concrete columns with high
axial compression ratio. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 134, 91–103. [CrossRef]
26. Peng, S.; Xu, C.; Lu, M.; Yang, J. Experimental research and finite element analysis on seismic behavior of CFRP-strengthened
seismic-damaged composite steel-concrete frame columns. Eng. Struct. 2018, 155, 50–60. [CrossRef]
27. Elci, H. Seismic strengthening of improperly repaired reinforced concrete columns using CFRP confinement. Structures 2020, 28,
266–275. [CrossRef]
28. Zhang, Q.; Alam, M.S. State-of-the-Art Review of Seismic-Resistant Precast Bridge Columns. J. Bridge Eng. 2020, 25, 03120001.
[CrossRef]
29. Haber, Z.B.; Saiidi, M.S.; Sanders, D.H. Seismic Performance of Precast Columns with Mechanically Spliced Column-Footing
Connections. ACI Struct. J. 2014, 111, 639–650. [CrossRef]
30. Wang, J.; Wang, Z.; Gao, Y.; Zhu, J. Review on seismic behavior of precast piers: New material, new concept, and new application.
Gongcheng Lixue/Eng. Mech. 2019, 36, 1–23.
Materials 2022, 15, 7443 17 of 17

31. MOHURD. Specification for seismic test of buildings. In JGJ T 101-2015; Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of
the People’s Republic of China: Beijing China, 2015.
32. Dundar, C.; Erturkmen, D.; Tokgoz, S. Studies on carbon fiber polymer confined slender plain and steel fiber reinforced concrete
columns. Eng. Struct. 2015, 102, 31–39. [CrossRef]
33. CECS. Technical specification for strengthening concrete structures with carbon fiber reinforcea polymer laninate. In CECS 146:
2003; China Engineering Construction Standardization Association: Beijing China, 2003.
34. Xu, L.; Pan, J.; Guo, L. Mechanical performance of precast RC columns with grouted sleeve connections. Eng. Struct. 2022, 252,
113654. [CrossRef]
35. Xu, W.; Ma, B.; Huang, H.; Su, J.; Li, J.; Wang, R. The seismic performance of precast bridge piers with grouted sleeves. Gongcheng
Lixue/Eng. Mech. 2020, 37, 93–104.
36. Cheng, D.; Yang, Y. Design method for concrete columns strengthened with prestressed CFRP sheets. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017,
151, 331–344. [CrossRef]
37. Zhou, C.; Qiu, Y.; Pan, Q. Experimental Investigation of Axial Compressive Behavior of Large-Scale Circular Concrete Columns
Confined by Prestressed CFRP Strips. J. Struct. Eng. 2019, 145, 04019070. [CrossRef]
38. Park, R. Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing. Bull. New Zealand Soc. Earthq.
Eng. 1989, 22, 155–166. [CrossRef]
39. Qiao, D.-H.; Xu, Y.-Q.; Zhang, X.; Pang, J.-B.; Liu, K.; Wang, S.-J. Seismic behaviour and size effect of column base joints with
inverted exposed grouted sleeves. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 51, 104333. [CrossRef]
40. Tazarv, M.; Saiidi, M.S. UHPC-filled duct connections for accelerated bridge construction of RC columns in high seismic zones.
Eng. Struct. 2015, 99, 413–422. [CrossRef]
41. Tong, T.; Lei, H.; Yuan, S.; Liu, Z. Experimental investigation and seismic vulnerability assessment of low flexural strength
rectangular bridge piers retrofitted with ultrahigh-performance concrete jackets. Eng. Struct. 2020, 206, 110132. [CrossRef]