Rolling Load Fatigue Experiment on a Bridge Deck Reinforced with a New Design of GFRP Stay-In-Place Form
Source abstract
Abstract
A full-scale deck slab (15,240 mm × 3,890 mm × 210 mm) supported by steel girders spaced at 3.05 m, including a 3,810 mm × 3,890 mm section incorporating a new design of glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) stay-in-place (SIP) structural form, is tested under 3M rolling load cycles. The SIP form comprises transverse GFRP I-beams spanning the steel girders and GFRP ribbed plates (planks) spanning the transverse GFRP I-beams and supported by their lower flanges. The design of the SIP form was governed by readily available pultruded sections such that they meet deflection limits under self-weight of fresh concrete and also provide reinforcement ratios comparable to, or exceeding, the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) requirements for GFRP rebar. This deck section is compared with another section designed according to CHBDC with top and bottom GFRP rebar meshes. The deck was tested using the 250 kN Rolling Load Simulator (ROLLS) at Queen’s University, Canada, which is equipped with two half-axles spaced at 1.2 m, each comprising nitrogen-inflated dual tires. After 3M cycles, the section with SIP structural form showed very similar performance to that of the GFRP rebar section with the stiffness reducing by 72% in both. Nearly 90% of stiffness reduction occurred in the first 0.4M cycles. The residual deflection of the SIP form section was only 60% of that of the rebar section at 3M cycles. Live load deflection ratio reached 3.4 at 3M cycles, almost identical to the rebar section. The span/800 deflection limit was reached at 0.8M cycles, compared with 1.1M cycles for the rebar section. The maximum tensile strain reached in the GFRP SIP form system after 3M cycles was only 11% of its ultimate value.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Structural Load-Bearing Analysis · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil Eng., Queen’s Univ., Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 3N6. ORCID: .
President of the International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC) and Munro Chair Professor and Vice-Dean (Research), Queens Univ., Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 3N6. (corresponding author). ORCID: .
References (49)
Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO. 2002. AASHTO standard specifications for highway bridges. 17th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
2. AASHTO. 2018. AASHTO LRFD bridge design guide specifications for GFRP-reinforced concrete. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
3. Abe, T., and Y. Kawai. 2019. “A study on applicability of Miner’s rule to wheel running fatigue test results of highway bridge RC deck slabs.” J. Struct. Eng. A 65A: 646–654. https://doi.org/10.11532/structcivil.65A.646.
4. Abe, T., T. Kida, M. Takano, T. Sawano, and K. Kato. 2004. “Punching shear load-carrying capacity of RC slabs under static and running loads.” J. Jpn. Soc. Civ. Eng., Ser. A1 (Struct. Eng. Earthquake Eng.) 50A: 919–926.
5. 10.2472/jsms.58.61910.2472/jsms.58.619 ↗
6. ASTM. 2010. Test method for apparent shear strength of single-lap-joint adhesively bonded metal specimens by tension loading. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
7. ASTM. 2014. Test method for static modulus of elasticity and Poissons ratio of concrete in compression. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
8. ASTM. 2017a. Test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
9. ASTM. 2017b. Test method for splitting tensile strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
10. ASTM. 2018. Test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
11. 10.1260/13694330778241768110.1260/136943307782417681 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.10.00210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.10.002 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.02.00710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.02.007 ↗
14. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000110910.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001109 ↗
15. CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2012. Design and construction of building structures with fibre-reinforced polymers. CSA S806:12 (R2021). Rexdale, ON, Canada: CSA.
16. CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2019a. Canadian highway and bridge design code. CSA s06:19. Rexdale, ON, Canada: CSA.
17. CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2019b. Canadian highway bridge design code. Commentary on CSA S6:19. Rexdale, ON, Canada: CSA.
18. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.03.03310.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.03.033 ↗
19. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11:3(258)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11:3(258) ↗
20. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.07.01210.1016/j.compositesb.2006.07.012 ↗
21. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000022910.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000229 ↗
22. 10.1139/cjce-2019-034110.1139/cjce-2019-0341 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.08.05010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.08.050 ↗
24. Gao C. A. Jawdhari and A. Fam. 2022. “Modeling of Full-Size Bridge Deck with Novel GFRP SIP Formwork and GFRP Rebar under Moving Load.” In Proc. of the 11th Int. Conf. on Short and Medium Span Bridges. Toronto: Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (CSCE).
25. Gao C. L. Tauskela and A. Fam. 2024. “Rolling Load versus Pulsating Load Fatigue Behavior of a Full-Scale Bridge Deck Reinforced with GFRP Bars.” J. Compos. Constr. 28 (4). https://doi.org/10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4608.10.1061/JCCOF2.CCENG-4608 ↗
26. Grace, N., J. L. Hanson, and H. I. AbdelMessih. 2004. Inspection and deterioration of bridge decks constructed using stay-in-place metal forms and epoxy-coated reinforcement. Southfield, MI: MI DOT.
27. Graddy, J. C., J. Kim, J. H. Whitt, N. H. Burns, and N. H. Klingner. 2002. “Punching-shear behavior of bridge decks under fatigue loading.” ACI Struct. J. 99 (3): 257–266. https://doi.org/10.14359/11909.
28. Hewitt, B. E. 1972. An investigation of the punching strengh of restrained slabs with particular reference to the deck slabs of composite I-beam bridges. Kingston, ON, Canada: Queen’s University.
29. Higashiyama, H., and S. Matsui. 1998. “Fatigue durability of longitudinally prestressed concrete slabs under running wheel.” J. Jpn. Soc. Civ. Eng. 605 (I–45): 79–90.
30. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.00510.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.005 ↗
31. 10.1002/stco.20091002310.1002/stco.200910023 ↗
32. 10.14250/cement.63.53810.14250/cement.63.538 ↗
33. Kosaka, T., H. Kanaji, T. Ichinomiya, M. Fujishiro, and T. Miki. 2018. “Fatigue resistance and mechanical characteristic of waffle-shaped bridge deck using ultra-high strength fiber reinforced concrete by wheel loading.” J. Jpn. Soc. Civ. Eng., Ser. A1 (Struct. Eng. Earthquake Eng.) 74 (3): 491–503. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscejseee.74.491.
34. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:1(11)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:1(11) ↗
35. 10.1007/BF0298428010.1007/BF02984280 ↗
36. Maeda, Y., S. Matsui, I. Shimada, and H. Kato. 1980. “Deterioration and repairing of reinforced concrete slabs of highway bridges in Japan II -causes of cracking and stress.” Technol. Rep. Osaka Univ. 30 (1579): 553–563.
37. Matsui, S. 1984. Study on fatigue and design methods for concrete slabs of highway bridges. Osaka, Japan: Osaka Univ.
38. Matsui, S., S. Ishizaki, and K. Kubo. 1994. “A study on FRP permanent form for reinforced concrete slabs.” Technol. Rep. Osaka Univ. 44 (2196): 295–307.
39. 10.1115/1.400945810.1115/1.4009458 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.05.03110.1016/j.engstruct.2013.05.031 ↗
41. Oliva M. L. Bank H.-U. Bae J. Barker and S.-W. Yoo. 2007. “FRP stay-in-place formwork and reinforcing for concrete highway bridge decks 10.” In Proc. of the 8th Int. Symp. on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Reinforced Concrete Structures. Patras Greece: RILEM.
42. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:3(591)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:3(591) ↗
43. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000121410.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001214 ↗
44. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000043210.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000432 ↗
45. 10.1177/036119810619760012010.1177/0361198106197600120 ↗
46. Sonoda, K., and T. Horikawa. 1982. “Fatigue strength of reinforced concrete slabs under moving loads.” IABSE Rep. 37, 456–462. https://doi.org/10.5169/SEALS-28942.
47. 10.1088/1757-899X/758/1/01208910.1088/1757-899X/758/1/012089 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.istruc.2021.09.01810.1016/j.istruc.2021.09.018 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11465310.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114653 ↗