Bend Strength of FRP Bars: Experimental Investigation and Bond Modeling
Source abstract
Abstract
The unique properties of internal fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcement influence their bond interaction with the surrounding concrete. This is especially true in the case of bent FRP reinforcement, which bond behavior is not well understood. Equations included in existing design recommendations do not predict accurately the experimental data. This paper investigates experimentally and analytically the mechanical and bond performance of two main types of bent FRP reinforcement. To achieve this, a total of 73 specimens of thermosetting and thermoplastic composite bars with 32 different configurations embedded in concrete cubes were tested in direct pullout. The effects of bent geometry, surface treatment, front embedment length, and concrete strength on bent capacity of FRPs are examined. The test results show that the capacity of bent FRP bars embedded in concrete ranges from 25 to 84% of the theoretical strength of the composite. It is found that a bending radius to diameter ratio r/d>4 is required to guarantee a minimum bend capacity of 40% of the theoretical composite strength. The test results are further analysed numerically to gain additional insight into the examined parameters. The results confirm that high stresses are concentrated at the beginning of the bent portion, inducing failure at this location. Larger bending radius or sufficient bonded length along the bent portion reduces stress concentrations and leads to higher bend capacities.
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
Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Rajamangala Univ. of Technology Tawan-Ok, 225 Phayathai Rd., Pathum-Wan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand (corresponding author).
Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Civil and Structural Engineering, Univ. of Sheffield, Sir Frederick Mappin Bldg., Mappin St., Sheffield S1 3JD, U.K.
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Structural Engineering, Univ. of Sheffield, Sir Frederick Mappin Bldg., Mappin St., Sheffield S1 3JD, U.K.
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. ABAQUS [Computer software]. Dassault Systemes Providence RI.
2. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:2(173)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2004)8:2(173) ↗
3. 10.1680/stco.2006.7.1.710.1680/stco.2006.7.1.7 ↗
4. ACI (American Concrete Institute). (2004). “Guide test methods for fiber reinforced polymers (FRPs) for reinforcing or strengthening concrete structures.” ACI 440.3 R-04 Farmington Hills MI.
5. ACI (American Concrete Institute). (2006). “Guide for the design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP bar.” ACI 440.1 R-06 Farmington Hills MI.
6. ACI (American Concrete Institute). (2015). “Guide for the design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP bar.” ACI 440.1 R-15 Farmington Hills MI.
7. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000005010.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000050 ↗
8. Performance evaluation of GFRP shear reinforcement in concrete beams
9. BSI (British Standard Institution). (2000). “Specification for scheduling dimensioning bending and cutting of steel reinforcement for concrete.” BS 8666:2000 London.
10. An evaluation of bond pullout tests and their relevance to structural performance
11. CEN (Comité Européen de Normalisation). (2004). “Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures. Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings.” Brussels Belgium.
12. CSA (Canadian Standard Association). (2016). “Canadian highway bridge design code.” CAN/CSA S6–14 Rexdale ON Canada.
13. CurvedNFR. (2015). “Final report of the CRAFT RTD project CurvedNFR funded by the EU commission framework 5 GROWTH programme.” Sheffield U.K.
14. Bond of hooked GFRP rebars to concrete
15. 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11:4(352)10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11:4(352) ↗
16. fib. (2007). “FRP reinforcement in RC structures.” Sprint-Digital-Druck Stuttgart Germany.
17. Guadagnini M. Imjai T. and Pilakoutas K. (2007). “The performance of curved FRP reinforcement for concrete structures.” 8th Int. Symp. for Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures–FRPRCS8 Univ. of Patras Patras Greece.
18. 10.1177/07316840303557910.1177/073168403035579 ↗
19. Imjai T. (2007). “Design and analysis of curved FRP composites as shear reinforcement for concrete structures.” Ph.D. thesis Univ. of Sheffield Sheffield U.K.
20. Ishihara K. Obara T. Sato Y. Ueda T. and Kakuta Y. (1997). “Evaluation of ultimate strength of FRP rods at bent-up portion.” Proc. Int. Symp. on Nonmetallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Japan Concrete Institute Tokyo.
21. ISIS (Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures). (2007). “Reinforcing concrete structures with fiber reinforced polymer.” ISIS-M03-07 Univ. of Winnipeg Winnipeg MB Canada.
22. JSCE (Japan Society of Civil Engineer). (1997). “Recommendation for design and construction of concrete structures using continuous fiber reinforcing materials.” Tokyo.
23. 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.000042810.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000428 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.00710.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.007 ↗
25. Maruyama T. Honama M. and Okmura H. (1993). “Experimental study on tensile strength of bent portion of FRP rods.” ACI Special publication 138 American Concrete Institute Farmington Hills MI 163–176.
26. Experimental study on tensile strength of FRP bent bar
27. Evaluation of shear strength on concrete beams reinforced with FRP
28. 10.1139/cjce-27-5-85910.1139/cjce-27-5-859 ↗
29. Tottori S. and Wakui H. (1993). “Shear capacity of RC and PC beams using FRP reinforcement.” SP-138 American Concrete Institute Detroit 615–32.
30. Ueda T. Sato Y. Kakuta Y. Imamura A. and Kanematsu H. (1995). “Failure criteria for FRP rods subjected to a combination of tensile and shear forces.” Proc. 2nd RILEM Symp. on Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-2) E&FN Spon London 26–33.
31. 10.14359/5168704210.14359/51687042 ↗