journal article·2016-04

Concept Development and Evaluation of a New GFRP Reinforcement Geometry for Concrete Beams

Christopher Bright, Rebecca Atadero, John W. van de Lindt

Publisher page

Abstract

In this paper a reinforcement system that utilizes unique geometries in order to improve reinforced concrete beam stiffness, shear strength, and reinforcement bond properties, as compared with conventional glass-fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) bar-style reinforcement is introduced. The proposed GFRP reinforcement is formed into modular units intended for use in place of traditional flexural reinforcement. Prototype reinforcement units were manufactured and cast into eight concrete beam specimens. These specimens were tested and compared to similar specimens with conventional straight GFRP bars in order to document their behavior and assess the effect on beam performance of the new geometry under typical loading. Bond failures that occurred in the control specimens were not present in the prototype specimens. Ultimate shear capacity in one of the prototype variations was increased by 26% over the bar-reinforced control specimens. Flexural performance for one of the prototypes was also found to be comparable to the bar-style control reinforcements.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Concrete Corrosion and Durability · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523 (corresponding author).

Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523.

George T. Abell Distinguished Professor in Infrastructure, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523.

References (19)

Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO. (2006). “AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications.” Washington DC.
2. ACI (American Concrete Institute). (2006). “Guide for the design and construction of structural concrete reinforced with FRP bars.” ACI 440.1 R-06 Farmington Hills MI.
3. ACI (American Concrete Institute). (2011). “Building code requirements for structural concrete.” ACI 318-11 Farmington Hills MI.
4. 10.1016/j.aej.2012.12.00510.1016/j.aej.2012.12.005 ↗
5. 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2006)11:2(217)10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2006)11:2(217) ↗
6. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:6(470)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:6(470) ↗
7. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000014510.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000145 ↗
8. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000013910.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000139 ↗
9. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1998)2:1(28)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1998)2:1(28) ↗
10. 10.1016/S0997-7538(99)00164-310.1016/S0997-7538(99)00164-3 ↗
11. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:6(481)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:6(481) ↗
12. Koch G. H. Brongers M. P. H. Thompson N. G. Virmani Y. P. and Payer J. H. (2001). “Corrosion costs and preventive strategies in the United States.” 〈https://www.corrdefense.com/AcademiaGovernmentandIndustry/05-Koch.pdf〉 (Aug. 25 2013).
13. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000016610.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000166 ↗
14. 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.11410.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.114 ↗
15. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:3(203)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:3(203) ↗
16. Porter M. and Harries K. (2007). “Prioritized FRP research needs in civil infrastructure.” 〈http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/40944(249)54〉 (Aug. 6 2013).10.1061/40944(249)54 ↗
17. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1997)1:3(82)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1997)1:3(82) ↗
18. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000020210.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000202 ↗
19. Taerwe L. Matthys S. and FRP Working Party Task Group 9.3. (2007). “FRP reinforcement in RC structures: Technical report.” International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib) Lausanne Switzerland.