Bond Performance of GFRP Reinforcing Bars under Uniform or Gradient Temperature Distributions
Source abstract
Abstract
Standard pullout tests (e.g., 150 mm cubes) with a short embedment length have shown a significant reduction (80% loss at 200°C) in the bond strength of glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars at high temperatures but little information is known about how this information can be extended to longer embedment lengths. To address this knowledge gap, a more detailed bond behavior of GFRP reinforcing bars has been examined in this study with a modified pullout test method in which pullout specimens consisting of GFRP bars embedded in 350 mm (22db) long concrete cylinders were tested at high temperatures. The tests examined the bond degradation under different temperature distributions (i.e., uniform and gradient). The results were compared with the previous pullout tests with 68 mm (4db) embedment length and showed that the pullout capacity of GFRP bars in this test was 3.3, 4.0, and 2.0 times higher at 115°C, 135°C, and 300°C, respectively. The results were the first to prove the effectiveness of longer embedment length particularly at temperatures below 200°C. Additionally, pullout tests with temperature gradients simulated the bond behavior of GFRP bars at the unexposed end zones of GFRP reinforced concrete beams or slabs. The results showed that the tensile force in GFRP bars gradually transferred to the lower temperature zones as the heated parts of the bar lost bond with concrete. The results showed that the concentrated forces over a short length of GFRP bars can trigger concrete splitting and loss of bond even if the GFRP bars still maintain the bond with concrete. Providing thicker concrete cover at the end zones of GFRP reinforced members is recommended to enhance fire resistance. The findings of this study are being used in developing forthcoming FRP reinforced concrete design codes.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Fire effects on concrete materials · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Formerly M.Sc. Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Queen’s Univ., Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 3N6.
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, ON, Canada K7L 3N6 (corresponding author). ORCID: .
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Queen’s Univ., Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 3N6. ORCID: .
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:2(173)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:2(173) ↗
2. ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2004. Guide test methods for fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) for reinforcing or strengthening concrete structures. ACI 440.3R. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
3. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000111210.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001112 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.01.03410.1016/j.compositesb.2012.01.034 ↗
5. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:3(205)10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:3(205) ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2009.07.00310.1016/j.compositesb.2009.07.003 ↗
7. Bank, L. C., M. Puterman, and A. Katz. 1998. “The effect of material degradation on bond properties of fiber reinforced plastic reinforcing bars in concrete.” Materials 95 (3): 232–243.
8. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000027010.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000270 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.02.00210.1016/j.compositesb.2017.02.002 ↗
10. Benmokrane, B., and B. Tighiouart. 1996. “Bond strength and load distribution of composite GFRP reinforcing bars in concrete.” Materials 93 (3): 254–259.
11. 10.1139/cjce-2012-050610.1139/cjce-2012-0506 ↗
12. 10.1002/pse.19810.1002/pse.198 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.07.01310.1016/j.compositesb.2006.07.013 ↗
14. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1997)1:2(40)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1997)1:2(40) ↗
15. CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2010. Specification for fibre-reinforced polymers. CSA S807. Mississauga, ON, Canada: CSA.
16. CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2012. Design and construction of building components with fiber-reinforced polymers. CSA S806. Mississauga, ON, Canada: CSA.
17. CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2014. Concrete materials and methods of concrete construction: Methods of test for concrete. CSA A23.1/A23.2. Mississauga, ON, Canada: CSA.
18. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.12.03710.1016/j.compositesb.2017.12.037 ↗
19. 10.1177/073168441455540810.1177/0731684414555408 ↗
20. 10.1520/STP44699S10.1520/STP44699S ↗
21. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000089710.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000897 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.06.04710.1016/j.compstruct.2018.06.047 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.02510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.025 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.07.06010.1016/j.compstruct.2017.07.060 ↗
25. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000093710.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000937 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.11709010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117090 ↗
27. Huer, T., and R. Eligehausen. 2007. “Splitting failure mode of bonded anchors.” In Proc., 6th Int. Conf. on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete and Concrete Structures, 753–760. Lausanne, Switzerland: fib-international.
28. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1999)3:2(73)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1999)3:2(73) ↗
29. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000027910.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000279 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.02.02510.1016/j.compositesb.2011.02.025 ↗
31. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:3(203)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:3(203) ↗
32. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.10.02010.1016/j.compositesb.2018.10.020 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2006.04.06910.1016/j.compstruct.2006.04.069 ↗
34. Weber, A. 2005. “Bond Properties of a newly developed composite Rebar.” In Proc., Int. Symp. on Bond Behaviour of FRP in Structure, 387–392. Ontario, ON: International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC).