Investigating a Structural Form System for Concrete Girders Using Commercially Available GFRP Sheet-Pile Sections
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a new girder consisting of a trapezoidal pultruded glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) hat-shaped section commercially available as a sheet pile, but used in this study as a structural form for concrete. It can also offer continuity in the transverse direction through a pin-and-eye connection. Five 610 mm×325 mm and 3,300-mm-long girders were tested in flexure to examine different bond systems, voided and solid concrete cores, and the performance in positive and negative bending. Bond systems were wet adhesive bond to freshly cast concrete, adhesively bonded coarse aggregates, and mechanical shear studs. No slip was observed between concrete and the GFRP section until delamination failure occurred within a thin layer of cement mortar that remained attached to GFRP. The studs failed by pull out from the concrete flange. In general, 47–75% of the full strengths of concrete and GFRP were reached at ultimate bond failure. Wet adhesive bonding was the simplest and quickest to apply, while resulting in a comparable strength to other systems. A “moment-curvature” analytical model, incorporating a robust bond failure criterion, was developed, validated, and used in a parametric study. It showed that varying the concrete compressive strength or thickness of the GFRP section has insignificant effect on the bond failure load. Also, there are critical values for shear span-to-depth ratio, shear strength of cement mortar, concrete strength, and width of the top GFRP flange, beyond which, the desired flexural failure mode would precede bond failure.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Concrete Corrosion and Durability · Structural Load-Bearing Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Formerly, MS Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Queen’s Univ., Kingston ON, Canada K7L 3N6.
Professor and Canada Research Chair in Innovative and Retrofitted Structures, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Queen’s Univ., Kingston ON, Canada K7L 3N6 (corresponding author). E-mail: fam@civil.queensu.ca
References (24)
Show source-provided references
1. ASTM. (2008). “Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens.” C39/C39M-05E1 West Conshohocken Pa.
2. ASTM. (2005). “Standard test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials.” D3039/D3039M West Conshohocken Pa.
3. Badie S. Baishya M. and Tadros M. (1998). “NUDECK—A new prestressed stay-in-place concrete panel for bridge decks.” Proc. 1998 Transportation Conf. Iowa State Univ. Ames Iowa.
4. 10.1260/13694330778241768110.1260/136943307782417681 ↗
5. Berg A. C. Bank L. C. Oliva M. G. and Russell J. S. (2004). “Construction of a FRP reinforced bridge deck on US Highway 151 in Wisconsin.” Proc. 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting (CD-ROM) Washington D.C. 25.
6. Canadian Standards Association. (1994). “Design of concrete structures.” CSA standard A23.3-94 Toronto.
7. 10.1002/pse.22110.1002/pse.221 ↗
8. Collins M. · 1987
9. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1995)121:7(1069)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1995)121:7(1069) ↗
10. 10.3141/1814-2610.3141/1814-26 ↗
11. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:1(34)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:1(34) ↗
12. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:2(172)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:2(172) ↗
13. Concrete encased in fibreglass-reinforced plastic
14. 10.1002/pse.11310.1002/pse.113 ↗
15. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1998)2:2(78)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1998)2:2(78) ↗
16. Harik I. (1999). “Testing of concrete/FRP composite deck panels.” Proc. 5th Construction Materials Congress ASCE Reston Va. 351–358.
17. Hegemier G. Arya S. Krishnamoorthy G. Nachbar W. and Furgeson R. (1978). “On the behavior of joints in concrete masonry.” Proc. North American Masonry Conf. Boulder Colo. 4/1–4/21.
18. Honickman H. (2008). “Pultruded GFRP sections as stay-in-place structural open formwork for concrete slabs and girders.” MS thesis Dept. of Civil Engineering Queen’s Univ. 201.
19. Keller T. Schaumann E. and Valee T. (2006). “Hybrid FRP-concrete sandwich bridge deck.” Proc. Third Int. Conf. on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering (CICE 2006) Miami 351–354.
20. 10.15554/pcij.05011975.34.6110.15554/pcij.05011975.34.61 ↗
21. Kuennen T. (2006). “Transportation officials weigh SIP bridge forms laud FRP design.” Rep. Prepared for Transportation Research Board .
22. Matta F. Galati N. and Nanni A. (2005). “Pultruded grid and stay-in-place form panels for the rapid construction of bridge decks.” Proc. Composites 2005 American Composites Manufacturers Association Convention and Trade Show Columbus Ohio.
23. Pluijm R. V. D. (1993). “Shear behaviour of bed joints.” Proc. North American Masonry Conf. Philadelphia 125–136.
24. Prestressed Concrete Institute · 2001