近來愈多鋼筋混凝土使用鋼纖維聚合物（FRP）以提高強度，並增加極限載重，不讓此達到破壞行為。此研究便是利用LS-DYNA軟體，以有限元（FE）分析未補強與FRP補強鋼筋混凝土樑的所有行為，並與實驗做比對。其中，未補強樑有四個試樣，主要分為兩種形式─完全粘接式與粘結滑移式，並在靜載重下，施加彎矩力在四個節點上。荷載-撓度曲線、開裂擴展與FRP剝離中，將數值結果與分析的文獻相比較，發現未補強樑之完全粘接的數值模擬與文現相同，且更易模擬分析，但分析模型時間卻比粘結滑移式久。然而，在有限元建模的FRP補強鋼筋混凝土樑卻是有問題的。在LS-DYNA中，以有限元建模的FRP材料在粘結模型上很難取得適當的精確度與可靠度來驗證頸縮接觸（意謂FRP-混凝土的粘結）。雙懸臂梁（DCB）和終端彎曲（ENF）的模擬可以分析模型I與II，在頸縮接觸的分層斷裂擴展行為。從這些測試中，發現模型I是可靠的，而模式II是不準確的。進一步以抗剪切試驗，驗證FRP混凝土的的粘結性能，得到的數值模擬與實驗結果之間的行為類似。但需要更深的調查，因為其兩者間的偏差超過20％。;Recently, the use of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) in the strengthening of Reinforced Concrete (RC) has become popular to increase the ultimate load carrying capacity of RC, but it also has unwanted failures. In this research, Finite Element (FE) analysis using LS-DYNA software was conducted with the aim of investigating overall behavior of the un-strengthened and FRP-strengthened beam which experimentally tested by Wang et al. There are four specimens of un-strengthened beams which divide into 2 major types i.e. prefect bond and bond slip model which were arranged and tested under static loading of four point bending loads. The numerical result in terms of load-deflection curve, crack propagation, and FRP debonding were discussed and compared with experimental and analytical literature. The numerical simulation of un-strengthened beam reveals that perfect bond type has identical behavior with experimental result, easier to be simulated, but less efficient in running time the model than bond slip type. Whereas, conducting of FRP-strengthened beam in the finite element modeling has a problem. Literally, the FE test of FRP material exhibit in accurate and reliable results compared with analytical calculation. But, it is quite hard to obtain the proper fundamental concept model in order to validate the tie-break contact (represent bond between FRP-concrete) modeling in LS-DYNA. The simulation of double cantilever beam (DCB) and end-notched flexure (ENF) are conducted to analyze the progressive growth of delamination of tie-break contact under Mode I and Mode II fracture, respectively. From these test, it reveals that Mode I fracture is reliable, while Mode II fracture is not accurate. When further validation modeling of bond behavior between FRP-concrete i.e. shear bond test of FRP attached to concrete is conducted. The similar behavior between numerical simulation and experimental result was obtained. But it needed deeper investigation, since the result was not closed enough with deviation between numerical and experimental result can be exceed of 20%.
