A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Development Length of GFRP Reinformcement in Concrete Bridge Decks
This report summarizes an experimental program that investigated the development length and variability in bond of glass-fiber-reinforced-polymer (GFRP) reinforcement in concrete. The study variables included manufacturer (Marshall Industries Composites, Inc. (M1) and Corrosion Proof Products/Hughes Brothers (M2)), bar size (No. 5 and 6), cover (2 and 3 bar diamters), and embedment length (10 through 47 in.). Researchers tested 84 inverted half-beam bond specimens while monitoring load, loaded-end slip, free-end slip, cracking, and acoustic emissions on the embedded bar and concrete. Neither bar was recommended for immediate use as reinforcement in bridge decks. The M1 rebar exhibited cracking and splitting along the outer coating of the bar, which damaged bar deformations. Additionally these bars exhibited large COVs for bar failures with average ultimate loads below the reported manufacturer's value. The M2 rebar exhibited a smaller COV for tensile test bar failures and a similar ultimate load average when compared to the manufacturer's reported strength. However, both GFRP rebar had 47.0 in. embedment length bond tests, which exhibited bar failures with ultimate loads less than the tensile test average minus two standard deviations.
Development Length of GFRP Reinformcement in Concrete Bridge Decks
This report summarizes an experimental program that investigated the development length and variability in bond of glass-fiber-reinforced-polymer (GFRP) reinforcement in concrete. The study variables included manufacturer (Marshall Industries Composites, Inc. (M1) and Corrosion Proof Products/Hughes Brothers (M2)), bar size (No. 5 and 6), cover (2 and 3 bar diamters), and embedment length (10 through 47 in.). Researchers tested 84 inverted half-beam bond specimens while monitoring load, loaded-end slip, free-end slip, cracking, and acoustic emissions on the embedded bar and concrete. Neither bar was recommended for immediate use as reinforcement in bridge decks. The M1 rebar exhibited cracking and splitting along the outer coating of the bar, which damaged bar deformations. Additionally these bars exhibited large COVs for bar failures with average ultimate loads below the reported manufacturer's value. The M2 rebar exhibited a smaller COV for tensile test bar failures and a similar ultimate load average when compared to the manufacturer's reported strength. However, both GFRP rebar had 47.0 in. embedment length bond tests, which exhibited bar failures with ultimate loads less than the tensile test average minus two standard deviations.
Development Length of GFRP Reinformcement in Concrete Bridge Decks
J. Hanus (author) / C. Shield (author) / C. W. French (author)
2000
376 pages
Report
No indication
English
Highway Engineering , Construction Equipment, Materials, & Supplies , Bridge decks , Composite materials , Fiber reinforcements , Polymers , Reinforced concrete , Durability , Bonding , Composite structures , Corrosion resistance , Mechanical properties , Cracking(Fracturing) , Loads(Force) , Road materials , Glass-fiber-reinforced- polymer(GFRP) , Debar
Development of Modular GFRP Bridge Decks
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2000
GFRP Reinforced Concrete Brdige Decks
| NTIS | 2000
Delamination of GFRP Panels in Bridge Decks
| Trans Tech Publications | 2015
SHEAR STRENGTH OF CONCRETE BRIDGE DECKS WITH GFRP AS TOP MAT REINFORCEMENT
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2005