Structures made of reinforced concrete have a shorter service life every day. This is a result of the reinforced structural elements—beams, columns, walls, floors, etc.—degrading. Numerous circumstances, such as heavy loads, fires, earthquakes, mistakes in the design, chemical attacks, etc., might cause these components to be damaged. Retrofitting procedures can be used to strengthen these structural elements. Retrofitting is already spreading like wildfire over the globe as many historically significant public and private structures get really old and weaken over time. One of the best ways to make an insufficient building safe against future earthquakes or other natural pressures is to retrofit it. Retrofitting is the process of incorporating new elements into existing constructions such as bridges, historic buildings, and so forth. A retrofitted building is less likely to sustain damage from seismic activity in the near future. It seeks to reinforce a structure in order to meet the demands of the current seismic design rules. Retrofit goes beyond simple repair or even rehabilitation in this regard. It involves modifying existing structures to increase their resistance to seismic action, ground motion, and soil collapse brought on by earthquakes or other natural disasters like tornadoes, cyclones, and winds with high velocity generated by thunderstorms, snowfall, hailstorms, etc. Structures gradually lose their strength over time, although some are crucial from a public and social perspective. Retrofitting extends the structure's overall strength, resistance, and longevity. RC beam retrofitted with various thermoplastic polymer composite sheets was subjected to a finite element study using the Ansys V20 programme. Utilizing Ansys software, RC beams with various thermoplastic sheets were modelled. The bottom, top, and both sides were composed of bonding. The findings of the comparison between the reinforced beam and the aforementioned retrofitted beam's performances were presented in this project. The project's goals are to hand design a G+3 structure before using ANSYS SOFTWARE to model the external continuous beam. After modelling, we use ANSYS SOFTWARE to statically analyse this continuous beam, and then we compute the results by both mannual and software. We recognise that there is little difference between the results obtained from Case 1 (solved in Ansys) and the calculations performed manually. The beam without wrapping experienced the largest deviation, measuring 6.8mm, while the wrapped beam only saw a 1.02mm deflection under controlled conditions. The best results are obtained while wrapping on CFRP sheet with a 450 degree orientation. The maximum shear strength of a wrapped beam is 90.951 KN, while the maximum shear strength of a beam without wrapping is 68.071 KN. The greater the maximum shear force that the beam can withstand, the more durable the beam is. The maximum BMD provided by the wrapped beam is 62.1*106 KNm, whereas the unwrapped beam provides BMD