00 голосов за00 голосов против

18 просмотров133 стр.Stiffness Enhancement of Reinforced Concrete Beams StrengtHened With CFRP Sheets

Oct 31, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

Stiffness Enhancement of Reinforced Concrete Beams StrengtHened With CFRP Sheets

© All Rights Reserved

18 просмотров

00 голосов за00 голосов против

Stiffness Enhancement of Reinforced Concrete Beams StrengtHened With CFRP Sheets

© All Rights Reserved

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 133

on and Sciientific Reesearch

Al-Mustaansiriya University

U

College of Engineeering

Department of Civvil Engineeering

Stif

iffne

ness E

Enh

hanc

ceme

ent of

o

R

Reinf

nforc

rced

d Con

ncre

ete B

Beam

ms

Str

reng

gtHe

ened

d wit

ith CFRP

C

P she

eets

s

A THESIIS SUBMI

MITTED TO

T

T

THE

DEPA

ARTMEN

NT OF CIIVIL ENG

GINEERIN

NG

COLLEGE

C

E OF ENG

GINEERIN

ING

AL--MUSTAN

NSIRIYA UNIVER

RSITY

IN PA

ARTIAL FULFILM

F

MENT OF

F THE RE

EQUIREM

MENTS

F

FOR

THE

E DEGREE

E OF MA

ASTER OF

F SCIENC

NCE

IN CIVIIL ENGIN

NEERING

G

By

Baydaa M. Hameed

H

d

(B.Sc

(

Civi

vil Engineeering,200

06)

Auggust 2012

Ramaadan 1433

))

((.

)(

Dedication

To My Lovely Home

IRAQ

To The Candles of My Life

My Parents

To My Best Guide

My Husband

Bayda M. Hameed

August 2012

Acknowledgement

First of all, praise be to Allah for providing me the willingness

and strength to accomplish this work.

I wish to express my immense sense of gratitude to my

supervisors Assist. Prof. Mithaq A. Louse and Dr. Husain

Khalaf Jarallah, for their invaluable guidance, thought

provoking discussions and untiring efforts throughout the tenure

of this work. Their timely help, constructive criticism and

painstaking efforts are gratefully acknowledged.

Heartfelt thanks are due to Prof.Dr. Bayan S. Al-Numan, for his

useful suggestions and inspiration at various

stages of the

work.

Appreciation is devoted to my husband, Hussam, without his

kind support, encouragement and prayers; this work would have

never seen the light.

Finally, sweet thanks to all my friends for their interest and

support during this study, especially, Mohammed, Rweda,

Lubna Alaani, Lubna Mohammed, Hayder, Jasim and Alaa.

Bayda M. Hameed

August 2012

Abstract

In this research experimental and theoretical investigations of the deflection

control of R.C. beams strengthened using continuous Carbon Fiber Reinforced

Polymer (CFRP) sheets is carried out. The experimental part involves eight R.C.

beams, one of them is a control beam without strengthening and the others are

strengthened with (CFRP). All the beams are tested under one concentrated point

load at mid-span over a simply supported span of (2 m). The eight rectangular

simply supported R.C. beams have been studied with three different variables; the

variables are the (Span/Depth) ratio, the steel reinforcement ratio at tension face

and the yield stress of the steel. The test results show that the strengthening with

(CFRP) sheet has a significant effect on the load-deflection response by increasing

beam stiffness especially beyond the precracking stage. By using (CFRP), the

maximum deflection is decreased by (26.7%) in comparison with the maximum

deflection of beam without (CRFP). The effect of Span to depth ratio has also an

important role in the control of deflection, comparing with beam has minimum

depth with minimum steel ratio and strengthened with CFRP. The reduction of

(Span/Depth) ratio from (20) to (15, 12.5 and 10) will reduce the maximum

deflection by (21%, 30.3% and 41.6%) respectively. The test results show the loaddeflection response has not been affected significantly by changing the steel

reinforcement ratio at the pre-cracking stage. However, this behavior is

dramatically changed at the cracking stage, by changing steel reinforcement ratio

From minimum steel ratio (min) to two times of minimum steel ratio (2min)and

maximum steel ratio (max) for beams were strengthened with CFRP and have

similar (span/depth) ratio, the maximum deflection is reduced by (13.5% and

29.2%) for beams were strengthened with CFRP and reinforced with (2min) and

(max) as compared with beam strengthened with CFRP and reinforced with(min)

,when all these beams have similar (span/depth) ratio. Also the load-deflection

response is not affected by the grade of steel reinforcement at the cracking stage.

After the cracking stage with the anticipation of large contribution of tension

reinforcement, the beam reinforced with steel of yield stress equal to (460 MPa)

shows a difference in deflection with the beam reinforced with steel of yield stress

equal to (300 MPa), the increment in the ultimate deflection is (23.8 %) for beams

strengthened with CFRP and reinforced with (min ) and similar (span/depth) ratio.

In general the strengthened beams failed by concrete crashing at mid-span

combined with de-bonding of the (CFRP) fabric along the beam span. For beam

with the largest depth and highest ultimate load capacity, the beam failure mode

was different comparing with the other strengthening beams, where (CFRP) rupture

in the mid-span region is observed, (CFRP) layer is suddenly disrupts and with no

concrete crashing at the beam compression face.

Finally, the immediate deflection has been calculated by using theoretical

calculations given in CEB-FIP 1990 and ACI 318-08, compared with the

experimental deflection of the eight tested beams. The comparison shows that the

CEB-FIP procedure is more applicable than ACI 318-08 procedure for beams

externally strengthened with (CFRP) sheet, so a new procedure may be needed for

R.C. beams strengthened with (CFRP) sheet based on many future experimental

works

List of Contents

Subjects

Page

Acknowledgement

Abstract

List of Contents

List of Figures

IV

List of Tables

VI

List of Plates

VII

VIII

1.1 Control of deflection

1.2.1 Fiber

1.2.2 Matrix

1.2.4 Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer CFRP

6

7

1.5 Layout of the Thesis

9

10

2.1 Introduction

11

12

16

17

Deflection

23

24

24

24

26

28

2.8 Summery

29

3.1 Introduction

30

3.3 Materials

30

32

3.3.1 Cement

33

33

33

33

33

38

38

38

40

40

3.6 Compaction

41

3.8 Strengthening of Beams

41

42

42

42

43

43

43

44

46

II

4.1 Introduction

47

47

47

48

49

50

50

behavior

4.3.3 Effect of (Span/Depth) Ratio on The Load-Deflection

b h i

4.3.4 Effect of Steel Reinforcement Ratio on The Load-Deflection

behavior

56

behavior

4.4 Crack Pattern and Failure Mode

61

67

67

59

60

62

5.1 Introduction

69

69

69

71

77

6.1 Conclusions

79

81

References

Appendix-A

III

List of Figures

List of Figures

Fig

No.

Titles

Page

No.

1-1

1-2

2-4

Typical Reinforcing Steel

Typical LoadDeflection Curve of Strengthened and

Un-strengthened Concrete Beams .

Typical Load-Deflection Curve for Reinforced

Concrete Beams

European

Concrete

Committee

Recommended

Procedure for Calculating Short-time deflection

Load-Deflection Behavior of a Typical RC Beam

2-5

28

3-1

34

3-2

36

3-3

45

4-2

Point Loading

Comparison of Predicted with Measured Modulus of

Elasticity

Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam 1

4-3

52

4-4

52

4-5

53

4-6

53

4-7

54

4-8

54

2-1

2-2

2-3

4-1

IV

12

17

19

26

49

51

List of Figures

List of Figures

Fig

No.

Titles

Page

No.

4-9

55

4-10

55

4-11

56

4-12

60

4-13

61

4-14

62

4-15

4-16

68

68

5-1

5-2

5-3

5-4

5-5

5-6

5-7

5-8

5-9

5-10

Comparison between Experimental and Theoretical Cracking

Deflection

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam1

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam2

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam3

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam4

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam5

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam6

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam7

Experimental and Theoretical Moment-Deflection Response

of Beam8

Relationship between (Beam Span to Depth ratio) and CFRP

ratio

71

74

74

75

75

76

76

77

77

79

List of Tables

List of Tables

Table

No.

Description

Page

No.

1-1

1-2

1-3

2-1

25

2-2

26

3-1

32

3-2

35

3-3

35

3-4

36

3-5

36

3-6

37

3-7

37

3-8

37

3-9

39

3-10

40

3-11

40

4-1

49

4-2

50

4-3

51

4-4

59

5-1

71

5-2

74

VI

List of Plates

List of Plates

Plate

No.

Description

Page

No.

1-1

1-2

3-1

31

3-2

32

3-3

38

3-4

39

3-7

45

3-8

47

4-1

64

Cracks at Mid-span

4-2

66

4-3

67

VII

List of Abbreviations

and Symbols

Abbreviation

Description

and Symbol

ACI

W/C

Water/Cement ratio

NCCLR

FRP

Fiber Reinforced Polymer

CFRP

GFRP

AFRP

IQS

Iraqi Standards

SP

Superplasticizer

ASTM

BS

CEB

MAS

British Standard

Comite Euro-International du Beton (Euro-International

Committee for Concrete)

Maximum Aggregate Size of concrete

fc

yt

Ma

section

Maximum moment in beam due to service loads at stage

deflection is computed

VIII

Abbreviation

Description

and Symbol

fy

Icr

Moment of Inertia of the Cracked Section transformed to

concrete

Ie

bw

Beam Width

kd

Es

fcu

d'

fiber to centroid of longitudial tension reinforcement)

Effective depth of beam(distance from extreme compresion

fiber to centroid of longitudial compresion reinforcement)

Deflection

Ig

Ec

fr

Mcr

Cracking moment

Applied load

depth measured from extreme compression fiber

concrete = Es /Ec

IX

Abbreviation

Description

and Symbol

nf

concrete = Ef /Ec

Ef

As

As'

Af

Deflection Values for Non-cracked and Fully cracked Section

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Chapter One

Introduction

Chapter One

Introduction

1.1 Control of Deflection

Deflections of reinforced concrete beams can be controlled directly or indirectly.

Direct deflection control refers to the calculation of deflections and their comparison

with allowable limits. ACI Committee 435-74 (1) and Branson (2) report comprehensive

summaries of classic direct deflection control procedures for steel reinforced concrete

beams and flat plates. Indirect deflection control procedures limit deflections by

determining maximum span-depth ratios, minimum depths, or minimum tension

reinforcement ratios ACI Committee 435-78

(3)

(2)

recommended using

indirect procedures for initial member proportioning and then checking deflections

directly. Deflections can also be controlled by means of appropriate construction

practice. Pre-cambering and delaying removal of forms are some of the preferred

options.

Deflection control provisions for steel-reinforced beams in ACI 318-08

(4)

are

concerned with deflections that occur at service levels due to immediate and sustained

static loads. Two methods are given in ACI 318-08 (4) as below:

1. Indirect method of controlling deflection by the minimum thickness of the

member (ACI 318-08) (4).

2. The direct method of limiting computed deflections (ACI 318-08)

(4)

. The

Table (1-1) shows values of minimum thickness for non-prestressed steel

reinforced beams and one-way slabs as per ACI 318-08

(4)

expressed as

per ACI 318-08 (4).

Chapter One

Introduction

Beams and One-way Slabs as per ACI 318-08 (4)

Minimum thickness, h

Simply

One end

Both ends

supported

continuous

continuous

Cantilever

Member

Solid one-way slabs

Beams or ribbed

one-way slabs

L/20

L/24

L/28

L/10

L/16

L/18.5

L/21

L/8

Type of member

Flat roofs not supporting or attached to

nonstructural elements likely to be

damaged by large deflections

Floors not supporting or attached to

nonstructural elements likely to be

damaged by large deflections

Deflection to be considered

Deflection

limitations

L/180

live load

L/360

live load

to any additional live loads)

L/480

L/240

Chapter One

Introduction

The direct deflection control design provisions for Fiber Reinforced Polymer

(FRP) concrete beams and one-way slabs in ACI 440.1R-06 (5) follow a format similar

to that of ACI 318-08(4). Deflections are calculated directly using a modified version

of Bransons effective moment of inertia equation, developed by Gao et al (6).

ACI committee 440.1R-06

(5)

(4)

(FRP) reinforced concrete beams and one-way slabs, based on the indirect deflection

control approach proposed by Ospina et al

(7)

provide designers guidance for preliminary sizing of members in the form of typical

(Span/Depth) ratios required to satisfy serviceability design criteria.

Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites are defined as the materials that

consist of high strength and stiffness fiber reinforcement embedded in a resin matrix

which is an adhesive material that supports fibers from buckling under compression,

binds the fibers together through cohesion and adhesion, and protects the fiber layers

from external mechanical and environmental damage. Figure (1-1) shows a schematic

of (FRP) composites.

+

Fiber

Matrix

FRP

Chapter One

Introduction

Fiber Reinforced Polymer composites are different from other composites in that

their constituent materials are different at the molecular level. The mechanical and

physical properties of (FRP) are controlled by their constituent properties and by

structural configurations at micro-level

(8)

many shapes and forms. Thus; their applications in civil engineering are diverse and

may include internal reinforcement, structural elements, and externally bonded

reinforcement. For concrete reinforcement, the most popular forms of (FRP) are

smooth and deformed bars, pre-stressing tendons and pre-cured and cured-in place

laminates or sheets. (FRP) bars and tendons are currently produced with sizes and

deformation patterns similar to those of steel bars and strands. (FRP) composites are

light in weight, which means they are easier to transport and install. They are

corrosion-resistant and; therefore, perform better in terms of long-term durability and

maintenance and cost (9).

1.2.1 Fiber

This term is generally used for materials whose length is at least 100 times its

diameter and in (FRP) materials. It refers to any fine thread-like natural or synthetic

object of mineral or organic origin

(10)

load and provide stiffness, strength, thermal stability, and other structural properties in

the (FRP). To perform these desirable functions, the fibers in (FRP) composite must

have:

High modulus of elasticity for use as reinforcement.

High ultimate strength.

Low variation of strength among fibers.

High stability of their strength during handling.

High uniformity of diameter and surface dimension.

Chapter One

Introduction

There are three types of fibers dominating in civil engineering industry: glass

fiber, armed fiber and carbon fiber. All fibers have generally higher stress capacity

than ordinary steel and are linearly elastic until failure .The three fiber types are

schematically drawn in Figure (1-2) in comparison with an ordinary steel bar and a

steel tendon (11).

1.2.2 Matrix

Matrix material is a polymer composed of molecules made from many simpler

and smaller units called monomers. Without the presence of matrix material, fibers in

themselves are little use. The matrix must have a lower modulus and greater

elongation than those of fibers, so that fibers can carry maximum load (12).

Figure (1-2) Stress-Strain Relationship of Different Fibers and Typical Reinforcing Steel (11).

Matrix material binds the fibers together, transfers forces between the fibers and

protects the fibers from environment. Matrices are typically epoxies, polyesters, vinyl

esters, or phenolic (13).

Chapter One

Introduction

Epoxy is mostly favored above other matrices, but it is also more costly. It has a

pot life around 30 minutes at 20 C, but can be changed with different formulations.

The curing goes faster with the increased temperature. It has good strength, bond

creep properties and chemical resistance (8).

When the fiber and the matrix are combined into a new material, they become a

composite. The fibers may be placed in one direction in the composite and then the

composite is unidirectional. However, fiber may also be woven or bonded in many

directions and the composite becomes bi-or-multi directional. For strengthening

purposes, it is most common to use unidirectional composites. The composites

mechanical properties are dependent on the fibers, matrix, fiber amount and fiber

direction. Also, the volume or the size of the composite will affect the mechanical

properties. The fiber content by volume is normally (30% 60%), depending on

materials, manufacturing process and desired properties. Fiber content is defined as

the volume of fibers to the volume of composite.

Composite materials (FRP) have created a revolution in high-performance

structures in recent years. (FRP) composites are anisotropic (properties vary with the

direction), therefore, (FRP) composite properties are directional, and typically the

most favorable mechanical properties are in the direction of the fiber placement (14).

They offer significant advantages in strength and stiffness coupled with lightweight

relative to conventionally used metallic materials. No yielding is exhibited in FRP

materials, but instead they are elastic up to failure. Fiber composites are made of

small fiber bonded together with a resin matrix, the fiber takes the role of the

principal load-bearing constituent, and the resin (matrix) is used to bind the fibers

together, transfer the force between the fibers and to protect the fiber against external

mechanical and environmental damage.

Chapter One

Introduction

It is important that the matrix has the capability of taking higher strain than the

fiber, if not, there will be cracks in the matrix before the fibers fail and the fiber will

be unprotected. The properties of (FRP) system are based on the net fiber area or the

gross-laminate area.

ACI 440.2R-02

(10)

externally bonded (FRP) systems. The failure modes of beams strengthened in flexure

with external (FRP) reinforcement are classified, as follows (10):

Flexural failure by crushing of concrete.

Shear failure.

Concrete cover de-bonding.

Plate-end interfacial de-bonding.

Intermediate shear cracked-induced interfacial de-bonding.

Intermediate flexural cracked-induced interfacial de-bonding.

Carbon fiber reinforced polymer is one of the three types of (FRP) composites

(Carbon, Glass and Armed), (CFRP) proved to be the most suitable fiber in civil

engineering application because of its excellent properties, and almost 95% of

applications for strengthening uses in civil engineering are by carbon fibers

(15)

.The

fiber of armed, carbon and glass. They can be produced by different manufacturing

methods in many shapes and forms; the most popular ones for concrete reinforcement

are rebars, pre-stressing tendons, procured laminates/shells and fiber sheets (16). Plate

(1-1) shows unidirectional glass, armed, and carbon fiber sheets. Plate (1-2) shows

different kinds of FRP rods, and Table (1-3) shows qualitative comparison of fibers in

composites.

Chapter One

Introduction

CFRP

AFRP

GFRP

CFRP

GFRP

Type of fibers used in composite

Criterion

Carbon fibers

Glass fiber

Armed fibers

Tensile strength

Very good

Very good

Very good

Stiffness

Very good

Good

Adequate

Long-term behavior

Very good

Good

Adequate

Fatigue behavior

Excellent

Good

Adequate

Bulk density

Good

Excellent

Adequate

Alkaline resistance

Very good

Good

Inadequate

Chapter One

Introduction

The main objective of the present study is to investigate the immediate

deflection control requirements of reinforced concrete simply supported beams

strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymer under one point load at mid-span,

through experimental work and theoretical calculation.

In the present study, an attempt has been made to investigate the behavior and

deflection control for R.C. beams strengthened with (CFRP). With the experimental

investigated of these beams, so conducted,

1. Carry out a literature survey related to the work.

2. The experimental part includes testing of eight rectangular simply supported

beams, one of them is the control beam without strengthening and seven

reinforced concrete beams strengthened with (CFRP), subjected to one point load

at mid-span and the applied load is increased up to failure, the load-deflection

curves will carefully be obtained. The most influential factors will be taken in

consideration including member span/depth ratio, allowable deflection limits and

material properties.

3. The theoretical calculations part will include the discussion of experimental work

comparing with relevant codes and committees report and recommending or

proposing design adjustments if required.

The thesis is divided into six chapters and the brief description about each

chapter is described below:

Chapter One

Introduction

The importance and the definition of the problem chosen for the present

investigation has been highlighted in Chapter one with the scope of the study. Chapter

two presents the review of literature on the subject. Chapter three summarizes an

experimental study conducted on reinforced concrete beam were without and with

(CFRP) strengthened. The beams were simply supported and single load was applied

at the mid-span, the beams were instrumented for measurement vertical deflection at

mid-span. Chapter four discusses the details of experiments results obtained from

testing of the beams. Chapter five presents the theoretical study for deflection

calculated of tested beam. The deflection results from theoretical study at crack stage

have been compared with the experimental results obtained from this study. Chapter

six summarizes the conclusions drawn from the present study. It also includes the

scope of further investigation in this area.

10

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

2.1 Introduction

Strengthening with externally bonded (CFRP) fabric has shown to be

applicable to many kinds of structures. Currently, this method has been applied to

strengthen such structural members as beams, columns, walls and slabs. The use

of external (CFRP) reinforcement may be classified as flexural strengthening,

improving the ductility of compression members and shear strengthening. It is

well known that reinforced concrete beams strengthened with externally bonded

(FRP) to the tension face can exhibit ultimate flexural strength greater than their

original flexural strength. However, these (FRP) strengthened beams could lose

some of their ductility due to the brittleness of (FRP) sheets (18). A relatively new

technique involves replacement of the steel plates by (FRP) in the form of fabric

or wraps

1. Low weight

2. Easier site handling

3. Immunity from corrosion

4. Excellent mechanical strength and stiffness

5. The ability of formation in long lengths, thus eliminating the need for lap

joints.

Further, there has been a rapid progress in concrete technology that has resulted

in the evolution of concretes having specified characteristics.

11

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

Meier and Kaiser

(23)

beams with a (2.4 m) span strengthened with (CFRP) laminates. A typical loaddeflection curve is shown in Figure (2-1) which shows a doubling of strength for

the strengthened beam, but with reduced deflections and hence, ductility, at

failure. The laminate also caused a more distributed cracking pattern in the

strengthened beam with reduced crack widths. Other researchers have

subsequently found similar results (24 through 30).

A comprehensive analytical and experimental study of the short-term

flexural behavior of strengthened (FRP) reinforced concrete beams was carried

out by Triantafillou and Plevris

(31, 32)

described by the classical theory of plane-sectional analysis to predict the

moment-curvature of the load deflection response at a specific section when

premature peeling or de-bonding failure of the (FRP) is avoided. Assih et al

have subsequently validated these results.

Figure (2-1): Typical LoadDeflection Curve of Strengthened and Unstrengthened Concrete Beams (23).

12

(33)

Chapter Two

An et al.

Review of Literature

(34)

strengthened with (FRP) plates. It was found that for beams with high internal

reinforcement ratios, a stiffer plate in combination with higher-strength concrete

is more effective than a plate with a lower stiffness in combination with lowerstrength concrete. For beams with the same internal reinforcement ratios and

concrete compressive strength, it was found that, as the plate strength and

stiffness increased, the ultimate moment capacity increased until the failure mode

changed to crushing of the concrete in compression. Cha et al.

(35)

found similar

results.

White et al. (36) investigated the effects of loading rates on the behavior of

(3.0 m) span reinforced concrete beams strengthened with (CFRP) laminates. The

test results showed that service and ultimate flexural capacity increased as the rate

of loading increased. Cracking and failure modes were not affected by the rate of

loading.

A study has been conducted by David et al. (37) in an attempt to quantify the

flexural and shear strengthening enhancements offered by the externally bonded

(CFRP) laminates. It was found that the influence of pre-loading on the (CFRP)

strengthened beam will reduce the stiffness of the strengthened beams.

Tan and Mathivoli

(38)

span length and strengthened with (CFRP) sheets. Seven different preload levels

(from 10 to 90% of the ultimate strength of the un-strengthened beams) were

applied before strengthening. The beam with no pre-load had a strength gain of

80%, while those with a preload between 10 and 60% had a strength increase of

60%. At higher preload levels, the strength increase reduced significantly.

Aboutaha

(39)

length. To simulate the damage, the undamaged girder was loaded to its ultimate

flexural capacity, resulting in severe flexural cracks under the loading points and

13

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

bond deterioration between the steel strands and concrete. The response of the

girder in its damaged condition showed a serious deterioration of stiffness,

approximately (50%) lower than that of the original girder. The stiffness of the

repaired girder was approximately (25%) lower than that of the original girder;

however, it was still lower than that of the undamaged girder. The ultimate

strength of the repaired girder was much higher than that of the original girder.

Charkas et al.

(40)

(FRP) at any load stage. The solution assumes a tri-linear moment-curvature

response. It incorporated some tension-stiffening effects and assumed the section

to be fully cracked only upon or near steel yielding depending on the concrete

nonlinearity in compression. A closed form equation was presented for the case of

four point bending and uniform load. Comparisons with experiments indicated

the effectiveness of the procedure for properly anchored plates.

The deflection of (FRP) reinforced members will be greater than comparable

steel reinforced members because of the lower modulus of elasticity of the (FRP).

This leads to greater strains to achieve comparable stress levels and to lower

transformed moment of inertia.

Nawy and Neuwerth

(41)

stress, and ultimate load behavior of twenty tested beams reinforced with glass

fibre rebars. It concluded that the beams reinforced with steel had fewer cracks

than the corresponding beams reinforced with GFRP bars. At ultimate load, the

deflection of the fibre glass reinforced beams was approximately three times

greater than those of corresponding steel reinforced beams.

Larralde et al.

(42)

underestimated test results for loads above (50%) of ultimate; deflection values

were fairly well predicted at load levels up to approximately (30%) of ultimate.

The study suggested a procedure in which values of curvature calculated at

14

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

deflection values.

(43)

Although the (FRP) grating was designed to be used as a structural component

independent of concrete, the low modulus of the (FRP) caused large deflections at

load levels only a fraction of the ultimate load carrying capacity. Within this

context, concrete was considered a stiffening agent employed to produce a

composite section with more favorable structural properties. All samples were

(570 mm) long, simply supported, loaded at two locations, and with a shear-span

(232 mm). Concrete compressive strength was (29 MPa).

Deblois et al.

(44)

strengthening. A series of specimens (100100 1000mm) reinforced with steel

two (12mm) diameter bars in the tension region, were tested after strengthening.

The use of bidirectional sheets increased the ultimate load by up to 34%, whereas

unidirectional GFRP resulted in an increase of only 18%.

The first full-scale (FRP) repaired beam tests conducted in the United States

were at the University of Arizona, Saadatmanesh and Ehsani

(45)

. The tests

450) mm and one T-beam (75 600) mm flange, (200 450) mm web. All the

specimens were (4.8 m) long and tested as a simple span in four points loading.

Steel reinforcement ratios, shear reinforcement, and cambering were varied in the

six beams. However, the externally applied (GFRP) was identical for each beam

(6 25 4200) mm. The research concluded adding (GFRP) plates improved the

strength and stiffness of the specimens. The tests showed the (GFRP) sheets

carried a portion of the tensile force, which decreased the stress in the steel

15

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

reinforcement. This was particularly evident with the smaller steel reinforcement

ratios.

Shahawy et al.

(46)

terms of the cracking moment, maximum moment, deflection, and crack patterns.

Four beams (200 300 2700) mm, were tested using minimum steel

reinforcement two (12 mm) diameter bars and varying the layers of unidirectional

(CFRP). Also, non-linear finite element computer model was used to compare to

the results of the experiment.

The research by Bazaa et al.

(47)

orientation of the (CFRP) to increase beam strength and ductility. Eight beams

(200 300 3000) mm were minimally reinforced with steel two (12 mm)

diameter bars) and overdesigned for shear to cause a flexural failure. One beam

was used as a control while the others were bonded with three layers of (CFRP)

(3 165) mm. The sheets varied in length and orientation of the fibers. Four had

unidirectional fibers with different lengths, and the other three had various fiber

directions with regard to the longitudinal direction ( 6, 9 and 12).

A common and accepted methodology to estimate deflections is Branson

equation (2). The deflection may be calculated using usual elastic theory equations

for elastic uncracked elements. The flexural stiffness (EI) of the member is

considered, being the (E) modulus of elasticity of the concrete and (I) the moment

of inertia of the equivalent section. Until the maximum tensile stress in the

element does not reach the tensile strength of the concrete, it shall be considered

that the section remains uncracked, thus (I) is the gross moment of inertia about

the centroid axis (Ig).When the bending moment is great enough for the tensile

stress to exceed the tensile strength of concrete, cracks will form and the moment

of inertia suddenly reduced at the cracked section

16

(2)

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

moment of inertia (Ie).

The Prediction and control of deflection of reinforced concrete members is

difficult because of the change of stiffness members during loading due to

cracking of the concrete (48). Figure (2-2) shows that for loads below the cracking

load, deflection may be based on the gross section, with generally a small

difference arising from whether or not the transformed area of reinforcement was

included. However, as the load increases above the cracking load, the moment of

inertia approaches the moment of inertia of the cracked section (Icr), although the

value of the moment of inertia may be greater between cracks (49).

The method of determining the deflection of beams by integrating the

curvatures along the span is affected by bond slip in anchorage zones and by the

spacing of cracks. When only flexural cracks occur, the maximum stress of steel

reinforcement is concentrated across one or two critical cracks. On the other

hand, if diagonal tension cracks are present, the maximum stress of steel occurs

over a much wider zone. In this case the tension in flexural reinforcement at

section away from the section of maximum moment may be larger than that

computed from the bending moment diagram. Thus, additional slip of steel will

take place, which will increase the curvature and the deflection of the beam (50).

17

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

According to Branson (51), Yu and winter (52) in 1960 suggested two methods

which could be used for calculating immediate deflection, where described as

follows:

Method (A): Deflection was computed by using the elastic theory, and using

the cracked transformed section at mid-span as constant value throughout the

length of the span for simple span beams , and the average cracked transformed

section for the positive and negative moment regions for continuous beams.

Method (B): In this method the concrete between cracks on the tension side

was assumed to contribute in rigidity of the member. To account for this, the

immediate deflections computed by method (A) are reduced by multiplying by

the following factor:

where:

Ma : service moment.

bw : beam width .

h : total depth of the beam.

kd : neutral axis depth.

Method (B) provides somewhat better predicted values than method (A).

The European concrete committee (CEB) (53) suggested another method for

the calculation of instantaneous deflection. This method considered the

instantaneous deflection () to be composed of two parts (1) and (2), as

follow:

where:

18

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

Calculating Short-Time Deflection (53)

Later the ACI 318-63(54) considered the moment of inertia of flexural

member on either, gross section (Ig) or a cracked section (Icr). If the value of

(.fy) is equal or less than 3.45 MPa, the moment of inertia is set equal to (Ig)

while if (.fy) exceeds 3.45 MPa it is set equal to (Icr), where () is the steel

reinforcement ratio and (fy) is the yield stress of steel reinforcement.

From literatures

proposed an empirical expression for the determination of the effective moment

of inertia at any particular cross section of a member as a function of the cracking

moment, bending moment, section properties and concrete strength as given

below:

19

Chapter Two

(

Review of Literature

)

) ]

Where:

Mcr: The cracking moment computed from the following equation:

Ig: gross moment of inertia.

Icr: cracked section moment of inertia.

fr: modulus of rupture of concrete.

yt: distance from the neutral axis to the tension face of un-cracked section.

For the average effective moment of inertia (Ie) of simply supported beams (or

between the inflection points of continuous beams), equation (2-10) was

recommended to be used for calculation the short-time deflection from the elastic

theory as follows:

(

) ]

where,

: Immediate deflection (mm).

K: Factor of support fixity and loading condition.

M: Maximum flexural moment along the span (kN.m).

L: Beam clear span length (m).

Ec: Concrete modulus of elasticity (MPa).

Since 1970s the (Ie) method was adopted by the ACI codes (equation (2-9)).

20

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

curvature at successive section along the member and using a numerical

integration technique for computing the maximum deflection. Alternatively, the

following simplified approach may be used.

( )

where:

L: Beam clear span length (m).

(1/r): Curvature at mid-span.

r: Radius of curvature.

K: Factor of support fixity and loading condition.

Ramsay et al (48) studied the effects of the strength of concrete, amount of

reinforcement, the cross section dimensions, steel arrangement, and the applied

load on the deflections of reinforced concrete beams by using Equation (2-11) as

theoretical model. It was compared the results with those of ACI 318-63

(54)

and

ACI 318-77 (58) method and found that the Ie-method is the best.

Jacob (59) mentioned cases in which (Icr) is greater than (Ig) as follow:

Members that are heavily reinforced.

Members are flanged.

Light weight concrete member

When low yield strength steel is used

Jacob suggested simplified (Ie) equations for a typical one-way member as

follows:

When

When

with a lower bound of 0.35 for (

21

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

(60)

Branson

(58)

inertia (Iucr) in the (Ie) equation, equation (2-13) and (Ie) to be replaced by (Icr)

for

.

Pretorius

(61)

load:

he compared the results with (Ie) Method and found that the ACI method

gives more accurate prediction for the experimental results, and recommended

that the immediate deflections should be calculated by using (Ie) method.

Faza and GangaRao

(62)

prescribed by ACI 318-08

(4)

reinforcement. The new expression was based on the assumption that a concrete

section between the point loads is assumed to be fully cracked, while the end

sections were assumed to be partially cracked. Therefore, an expression for crack

moment of inertia (Icr) was used in the middle third section, and the effective

moment of inertia (Ie) was used in the end sections. Using the moment-area

approach to calculate maximum deflection at the center of the beam resulted in an

expression for a modified moment of inertia as shown:

22

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

where

Icr : The moment of inertia of a cracked section.

Ie : The effective moment of inertia.

Ghali

(63)

with the results predicted by using ACI 318-89

(65)

(64)

Comparisons of the deflection showed that ACI and CEB-FIP gives accurate

predicted values for the immediate deflection for uniformly loaded simply

supported beams. While, the deflection due to concentrated load is overestimated

(or Ie is underestimated) when ACI equation is used. The CEB-FIP equation is

more accurate than ACI method. Also, Ghali and Azarnejed

(67)

studied the

The experimental data measured by Washa and Fluck

with those by using ACI 318-95

(69)

(68)

were compared

(70)

Model

code method. The study showed that the ACI 318-95 (69) approach yields accurate

predications in some cases, but it is not the case in other practical applications,

e.g. when the maximum moment is not substantially greater than the cracking

moment.

Deflection.

There are some of engineering properties of concrete required to predict the

short-time deflection in reinforced concrete beams. These factors include the

modulus of elasticity which is used directly in calculating the deflection by using

the elastic theory, and the modulus of rupture (flexural strength), which is

required for the prediction of the initial cracking moment. This moment is

23

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

important in the prediction of the effective moment of inertia, and the mean

curvature required for the theoretical analysis.

The modulus of elasticity of concrete is one of the most important

mechanical properties of concrete. It is closely related to the properties of cement

paste and the stiffness and volume of selected aggregate. The modulus of

elasticity of concrete increases for high contents of aggregate of high rigidity

whereas it decreases with the increase in hardened cement paste content and

increasing porosity. Mehta and Monteiro

(71)

affects the elastic modulus of concrete, and aggregate porosity seems to be the

most important factor because aggregate porosity determines its stiffness, which

in turn controls the ability of aggregate to restrain matrix strain. Dense aggregate

has a high elastic modulus. In general, larger amount of coarse aggregate with a

high elastic modulus of elasticity will result in high modulus of elasticity of

concrete.

2.5.2 Concrete Flexural Strength

It is well known that as the compressive strength increases, the flexural

strength (fr) also increases but at a decreasing rate. Number of factors affects the

relation between the two strengths (fr/f'c) ratio, such as properties of coarse and

fine aggregate, age of concrete, curing conditions and concrete compaction. An

empirical formula that relate fr and fc, have been suggested by ACI committee

318-08 (4), where fr = 0.62

(FRP) composites consist of high strength fibers embedded in a matrix of

polymer resin .Typical values for properties of the fibers are given in Table (2-1).

These fibers are all linear elastic up to failure, with no significant yielding

compared to steel. The primary functions of the matrix in a composite are to

24

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

transfer stress between the fibers, to provide a barrier against the environment and

to protect the surface of the fibers from mechanical abrasion.

Table (2-1): Typical Properties of FRPs (72)

Elastic modulus

Tensile

Ultimate tensile

(GPa)

strength (MPa)

strain (%)

High strength

215-235

3500-4800

1.4-2.0

215-235

3500-6000

1.5-2.3

High modulus

350-700

2100-2400

0.5-0.9

500-700

2100-2400

0.2-0.4

E-glass

70

1900-3000

3.0-4.5

S-glass

85-90

3500-4800

4.5-5.5

Low modulus

70-80

3500-4100

4.3-5.0

High modulus

115-130

3500-4000

2.5-3.5

Material

Carbon

Glass

Armed

properties, matrix properties, fiber-matrix bond properties, fiber amount and fiber

orientation. A composite with all fibers in one direction is designated as

unidirectional. If the fibers are woven, or oriented in many directions, the

composite is bi-or multidirectional. Since it is mainly the fibers that provide

stiffness and strength composites are often an isotropic with high stiffness in the

fiber directions. In strengthening applications, unidirectional composites are

predominantly used. The approximate stiffness and strength of a unidirectional

CFRP with a 65% volume fraction of carbon fiber is given in Table (2-2), a

comparison of the corresponding properties for steel is also given.

Carbon fibers offer the highest modules of all reinforcing fibers. Among the

advantages of carbon fibers is their exceptionally high tensile strength to weight

ratios as well as high tensile modules to weight ratios, for comparison with steel.

25

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

Table (2-2): Typical Properties of CFRP Fabric (73)

Elastic modulus

Tensile

Ultimate tensile

(GPa)

strength (MPa)

strain (%)

170

2800

1.6

300

1300

0.5

Mild steel

200

400

25

Material

The load- deflection behavior of reinforced concrete beams can be divided

into three parts consisting of (a) pre-cracked, (b) working load and (c) postyielding regions, as shown in Figure (2-4). At the initial stages of loading,

concrete resists both compression and tension forces. When the tensile strain in

the extreme fiber reaches between (0.002-0.003), the concrete starts to crack and

the flexural stiffness decreases rapidly. If the instrumentation is sensitive, the

rapid increase in deflection at the onset of cracking can be observed during the

experimental testing. This transition occurs between points 1 and 2, as shown in

Figure (2-4) (74).

26

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

Once the tension zone concrete cracks, its tensile force resistance becomes

negligible. The tension force due to external load is primarily carried by

reinforcement. The coupling of tension force carried by reinforcement and the

compression force carried by concrete is achieved by shear through un-cracked

concrete. The region between points 2 and 4 in Figure (2-4)

(74)

is considered the

typically mild steel, starts to yield. In almost all cases, the working load lies in

this region. In other words, part of the reinforced concrete beam is cracked under

load. The beam sections near simple supports or inflection points in continuous

beams could still be un-cracked because of lower moments.

Once the steel starts to yield, the deflection increases rapidly with very little

increase in load (moment). The beam could be failed by crushing of concrete or

fracture of steel. In most cases, failure occurs by crushing of concrete, because

the strain capacity of steel is very high. In some cases, the beam may not fail at

maximum load. This process called strain softening and can occur if concrete

sustains large strains due to confinement.

The increase in deflection between yielding and failure between points 4

and 6 in Figure (2-4) defines the ductility of beam. If the beam is over-reinforced

the concrete fails before yielding of steel, the ductility and the impending warning

of failure becomes negligible. Therefore, most codes of practice around the world

restrict the amount of reinforcement to ascertain yielding of steel before failure.

This is achieved by limiting the reinforcement ratio to a fraction of the balanced

reinforcement ratio. At the balanced reinforcement ratio, crushing of concrete and

yielding of steel occur simultaneously.

27

Chapter Two

Review of Literature

Reinforced concrete beams strengthened externally by sheets bonded to the

tension face have been noted to fail in a variety of modes:

Flexural failure by FRP ruptures.

Flexural failure by crushing of compressive concrete.

Shear failure.

Concrete cover de-bonding, Figure (2.5 a)

Sheet-end interfacial de-bonding, Figure (2.5 b)

Intermediate shear cracked-induced interfacial de-bonding, Figure (2.5 c)

Intermediate flexural cracked-induced interfacial de-bonding, Figure (2.5 d)

Meier et al. (23) also studied the failure modes related to (FRP) repaired beams.

A preliminary study dealt with three different failures:

1. Tensile failure of the (CFRP) sheets.

2. Classical concrete failure in the compressive zone.

3. Continuous peeling-off of the CFRP sheets due to an uneven concrete

surface.

28

Chapter Two

Meier et al.

Review of Literature

(76)

4. Shearing of the concrete in the tensile zone.

5. Inter laminar shear within the (CFRP) sheet.

6. Cohesive failure within the adhesive.

7. Adhesive failure at the interface (CFRP) sheet/adhesive.

8. Adhesive failure at the interface (CFRP) concrete/adhesive.

2.8 Summary

Based on the above review, the following main points are emerged:

1. The behavior of R.C. beam strengthened with (FRP) has been widely studied

in both experimental and analytical work.

2. There are several models for the effective stiffness properties (EI) for R.C.

beam and this coefficient significantly affects the behavior of the R.C beam.

3. Only few studies on deflection control requirements for R.C. beam

strengthened with (FRP) have been reported in the literature.

29

CHAPTER THREE

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

3.1 Introduction

The experimental program consists of fabricating and testing eight simply

supported rectangular simply supported section beams under one point load at

mid-span. One concrete mix proportion (cement: sand: gravel) of (1: 2.1: 2.9) by

weight, with w/c of (0.42), to produce concrete with (fcu = 32 MPa), is used to all

beam specimens.

Beams strengthening with (CFRP), testing procedure and measuring

instruments are also presented in this chapter. The experimental investigation has

been conducted at the Materials Laboratory and Construction Laboratory College

of Engineering for AL- Mustansiriya University in support of the ACI 318-08

and ACI 440.2R -02

(10)

(4)

an interpretation of the deflection performance of the eight R.C. beams with and

without (CFRP) strengthening.

The eight beams are designed with three different variables to investigate the

deflection of these beams, the variables are as follows:

Span/depth ratio.

The steel reinforcement ratio ().

The yield stress of the steel (fy).

The CFRP strengthening ratio (f).

In the present experimental work, the detail design is according to ACI 31808 (4) Code. Four wooden molds are used in the fabrication of beams, as shown in

plate (3-1). Eight simply supported beams are used with 2m span length. One of

these beams is control beam (B1), where is without (CFRP) strengthening, the

others seven tested beams are strengthened with (CFRP) wrap. Total depths (h)

values are (100, 133, 160 and 200 mm) have been selected for test beams.

30

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

All beams are reinforced with minimum steel ratio ( min) except beams (B6)

and (B7), have reinforced with (2

min)

and (

max)

and maximum steel reinforcement as per ACI 318-08 (4) building code have been

used in the present experimental work.

The geometric configuration, element designation, dimensions and

reinforcement details of the tested beams are shown in Table (3-1) and Figure (31). For strengthened beams, (CFRP) has been placed at the tension face (bottom)

for the tested beams as shown in Figure (3-1).

Also six cube specimens (150) mm have been tested at age of (28) days to

determine concrete compressive strength. Four cylinder specimens (150 300)

mm have been tested at age of (28) days to determine elastic modulus of

elasticity, as shown as in plate (3-2).

31

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Beam

Beam

Designation span(mm)

section

Steel

Steel

bwh

ratio

stress fy

(mm)

()

(MPa)

Using of (CFRP)

B1

2000

100133

min

460

Un-strengthened

B2

2000

100100

min

460

Strengthened

B3

2000

100133

min

460

Strengthened

B4

2000

100160

min

460

Strengthened

B5

2000

100200

min

460

Strengthened

B6

2000

100133

2(min)

460

Strengthened

B7

2000

100133

max

460

Strengthened

B8

2000

100133

min

300

Strengthened

3.3 Materials

Several materials are used in this study to produce the original specimens

and then to test them. The main properties of these materials are, as follows:

32

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

3.3.1 Cement

Ordinary Portland cement (Type I) is used in this study. The main chemical

and physical properties of this cement are given in Tables (3-2) and (3-3). It

conforms to the Iraqi Specification No.5/ 1984 (77).

3.3.2 Fine Aggregate

Natural sand (fine aggregate) from Al-Akhaider region in Iraq is used in this

study. The fine aggregate has 4.75mm maximum size with rounded-shape

particles and smooth texture with fineness modulus of 2.74. Tables (3-4) and (35) shows the specific gravity, sulfate content and absorption of the fine aggregate.

Figure (3-2) shows the Sieve analysis of fine aggregate. The obtained results

indicate that the fine aggregate grading and the sulfate content are within the

limits of Iraqi Specification No.45/1984 (78).

3.3.3 Coarse Aggregate

Crushed gravel (Coarse Aggregate) from Sammara/Iraq with maximum

size of 14 mm is used throughout the tests. The specific gravity and absorption

are 2.66 and 0.66% respectively. The grading of the coarse aggregate is shown in

Table (3-6) and Table (3-7). The obtained results indicate that the coarse

aggregate grading is within the requirements of Iraqi Specification No. 45/1984

(78)

Two types of reinforcements are used in the present work are described as

follow:

3.3.4.1 Steel bars

Deformed steel bars of diameters (4, 5, 6 and 8) mm are used for the main

reinforcement also deformed steel bars of diameter (4 mm) are used for stirrups.

The bars are tested to determine the yield stress, ultimate stress and elongation.

The test has been carried according to ASTM A615 / A615M

(79)

. Properties of

the steel bars and results obtained from the test are present in Table (3-8).

33

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

34

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Compound composition

(Oxides)

Chemical

Percentage by

composition

weight

Calcium Oxide

Silicon dioxide

Iron oxide

Aluminum oxide

Magnesium oxide

Sulphor trioxide

Lime saturation factor

Loss on Ignition

Insoluble residue

Tri-calcium silicate

Di-calcium silicate

Tri-calcium Aluminates

CaO

SiO2

Fe2O3

Al2O3

MgO

SO3

L.S.F

L.O.I

I.R

C3S

C2S

C3A

66.28

19.12

3.33

6.41

1.46

2.35

0.92

2.24

0.97

61.79

8.53

10.39

Limits of

IQS

5:1984(77)

----<5

<2.8

0.66 1.02

<4

<1.5

----

Tetra-calcium aluminates

ferrite

C4AF

7.08

--

Properties

Test

results

IQS 5:

1984

criteria(77)

446

>230

1:35

3:25

0.09%

>45 min

<10 hrs

<0.80%

25.7

34.9

42.6

>15

>23

-----

permeability apparatus (m2/kg)

Setting time using Vicat's Method

Initial (hrs:min)

Final (hrs: min)

Soundness using Autoclave Method

Compressive strength for cement

past cube (50 mm) at:

3 day

7 day

28 day

35

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Sieve size

(mm)

% passing by

weight

10

4.75

2.36

1.18

0.60

0.30

0.15

100

96

83

70

55

18

4

Limits of Iraqi

specifications No.

45/1984 (Zone 2)(78)

100

90-100

75-100

55-90

35-59

8-30

0-10

Table (3-5) Other Properties of Fine Aggregate

Physical

properties

Specific gravity

Sulfate content

absorption

Test

results

2.60

0.17 %

1.8 %

specification No.

45/1984(78)

- 0.5%

--

36

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Sieve size

(mm)

14

% passing by

weight

specification No. 45/1984(78)

98

90-100

10

71

50-85

10

0-10

Pan

Physical

properties

Specific gravity

Sulfate content

absorption

Test results

No. 45/1984(78)

- 0.1%

--

2.66

0.07%

0.66%

Nominal

deformed bar

Diameter (mm)

Modulus of Elasticity

(Es) (GPa)

Elongation

(%)

Yield Stress

( fy ) (MPa)

Ultimate Stress

( fu ) (MPa)

200

7.6 %

306

412

200

8.6 %

462

548

200

8.6 %

460

540

200

8.6 %

453

540

200

9.2 %

464

550

37

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

The Sika Wrap Hex-230C is an externally applied repairing or strengthening

system for structural members made of reinforced concrete, masonry or timber.

This system was supplied by (Sika, Beirut - Lebanon). The following information

related to this system is summarized, as follows:

Carbon fiber fabric Sika Wrap Hex-230C and epoxy based impregnating

resin Sikadur-330 are shown in Plate (3-3).

(a) CFRP

(b) Epoxy

Table (3-9) present the technical data of the carbon fiber fabric used in the

experimental work of the resent study.

38

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Fiber Type

Fiber Orientation

which prevent loosening of the roving (heat set process).

Warp: carbon fibers (99% of total areal weight)

Construction

Areal Weight

230 g/m2

Fiber Density

1.76 g/cm3

Fabric Thickness

Tensile Strength

4300 MPa

Tensile Modulus

238000 MPa

Elongation at Break

1.8 %

Fabric Length/Roll

50 m

Fabric Width

300/600 mm

Table (3-10) presents the technical data of the epoxy based impregnation

resin used in the experimental work of the resent study.

Table (3-10) Sikadur-330 (Impregnating Resin)*

Comp. a: white

Appearance

Comp. b: grey

Density

Mixing ratio

A : B = 4 : 1 by weight

Open time

Viscosity

Application

temperature

Tensile strength

Flexural E-modulus

39

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Several trial mixes are made according to the recommendations of the British

Standard BS 5328: part 2: 1991

(80)

achieve cube strength of (30 MPa) at (28) days (normal strength concrete).

Mixture details are given in table (3-11). The mixture is (1cement: 2.1 sand: 2.9

gravel, by weight). It is found that the used mixture produces good workability

and uniform mixing of concrete without segregation.

W/C

Mix

Ratio

Cubic

3

W

Mix Ratio

compressive

Strength (MPa)

0.48

200

415

535

1250

1 : 1.3 : 3

44.3

0.45

180

400

600

1200

1 : 1.5 : 3

37.3

0.42

174

415

872

1204

1 : 2.1 : 2.9

32.0

The mixing procedure is, as follows:

1. All quantities are weighed and packed in a clean container, before mixing.

2. Saturated surfaces, dry crushed gravel and dry sand are added to the

rotary drum mixer of (0.19 m3) volume capacity and mixed for several

minutes. Cement is then added to the mixer, and water is added gradually

to the mix. The total mixing time is (8-10 minutes).

3. Before casting, all molds (beams, cylinders and cubes) are oiled and the

reinforcement mesh is placed in corner molds, then the molds are placed

on a table vibrator.

40

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

additional specimens are then cast in three layers and compacted by a table

vibrator to shake the mix and consolidate it into the molds. The vibrating

table is (1.0 1.5 m) of (10 mm) thick steel plate. The table vibrates with a

simple harmonic motion. The frequency of vibration is (7000 rpm).

5. The surface of the concrete samples is leveled off and finished with a

trowel. Then, the specimens are covered with a nylon sheet to prevent

evaporation of water.

6. All specimens are left in the laboratory for 24 hours, and then placed in

water bath for (28) days with almost constant laboratory temperature. After

(28) days, they are taken out of water and left to dry for (24) hours and

then tested in accordance with the standard specifications.

3.6 Compaction

The beam specimens and the corresponding concrete control specimens were

vibrated at the same time by using table vibrator, the concrete was cast in two

layers with a compaction time of about (1-2 min) for each layers.

Water curing for concrete is recommended during the early stages of

hardening to reduce the loss of water which is essential for the process of cement

hydration and that will lead to high percentage of strength gain at this duration.

The strength of concrete is traditionally characterized by the 28 day value, early

cement gained strength slowly and it was necessary to base the strength

description on concrete in which a significant hydration of cement had already

taken place.

41

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Before bonding the composite fabric on to the concrete surface, the required

region of concrete surface is made rough using a sand paper texture and cleaned

with a brash to remove all dirt and dust. Once the surface is prepared, the epoxy

resin is mixed in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. Mixing is carried

out in plastic container until the mixture is in uniform color. When this is

completed and the fabrics had been cut to size, the epoxy resin is applied to the

concrete surface. The composite fabric is then placed on top of epoxy resin

coating and the resin was squeezed through the roving of the fabric with the

roller. Air bubbles entrapped at the epoxy/concrete or epoxy/fabric interface are

to be eliminated. During hardening of the epoxy, a constant uniform pressure is

applied on the composite fabric surface in order to extrude the excess epoxy resin

and to ensure good contact between the epoxy, the concrete and the fabric. This

operation is carried out at room temperature. Concrete beams are strengthened

with carbon fiber fabric cured for 24 hours at room temperature before testing.

3.9.1 Compressive Strength Test (fcu)

Standard cubes (150) mm are used according to BS 1881: part 116 (81), and

they are de-molded one day after casting.

Testing is carried out at (28) days. The machine which is used in the tests is

one of the hydraulic types of (3000) kN capacity. The specimen is carefully

aligned at the center of thrust of the upper bearing block and loading is applied

continuously until failure. Cubic compressive strength in (MPa) is obtained by

averaging the results of three specimens.

42

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

This test method provides a stress to strain ratio value for standard

hardened concrete cylindrical specimens at any age and curing conditions. The

modulus of elasticity is determined according to ASTM C469-02

(82)

. Thirty

cylindrical specimens with the (150 300) mm dimensions are cast and tested in

the laboratory. The chord modulus is calculated from the relation:

Ec

S 2 S1

2 0.00005

(3-1)

Where:

Ec The static modulus of elasticity (MPa).

S2 Stress corresponding to 40% of ultimate load (MPa).

3.10.1 Testing Machine

The hydraulic universal testing machine (MFL system) is used to test all

beam specimens. The testing machine has three scale loads (0 to 600 kN), (0 to

1500 kN) and (0 to 3000 kN) and capacity of (3000 kN), the machine is shown in

Plate (3-4). The high capacity, stiffness and dimensions of the testing machine

make it more adequate to test large scale beam made with normal strength

concrete. These features of testing machine satisfy the test requirements of

normal strength concrete. It may be noted that the universal testing machine is

calibrated by "The Iraqi Central Organization for Standardization and Quality

Control".

43

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

The beams are tested under one point load at mid-span as shown in Figure

(3-3). The beams are supported on roller bearing acting on similar spreader

plates. The beam specimen is placed over the two steel rollers bearing leaving

100 mm from the ends of the beam. The remaining 2000 mm is divided into two

equal parts of 1000 mm as shown in Figure (3-3). Two dial gauges are used for

recording the deflection of the beams, the two dial gauges are placed just below

the center of the beam to measure deflections, as shown in Plate (3-5).

44

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Figure (3-3) Shear Force and Bending Moment Diagram of One Point

Loading

Plate (3-5) Two Dial Gauges are Placed below the Center of Beams

45

Chapter Three

Experimental Program

Before testing beams are checked dimensionally, and detailed visual

inspection made with all information carefully recorded. After setting and reading

dial gauges, the load is increased steadily by (2 kN) increments up to failure with

loads and deflections recorded. Cracking observations are suspended as failure

approaches unless special safety precautions are taken also dial gauges

replacement is necessary to avoid them damage when approaching beam collapse,

failure mode is also carefully observed.

46

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND

DISCUSSION

Chapter Four

Chapter Four

4.1 Introduction

In this chapter the results obtained from the experimental program are analyzed to

achieve the aim to study the immediate deflection behavior of (CFRP) reinforced

concrete beams. This study included the following main points:

In chapter three, it was mentioned that cube specimens and cylinder

specimens were taken in addition to the beam specimens to investigate some

mechanical properties of the concrete. These properties are:

(1) compressive strength

(2) modulus of elasticity

(3) unit weight

The results obtained concerning these properties are discussed below;

Table (4-1) shows the nominal and the measured of cubic compressive

strength for the two groups of concrete mixed. This strength was obtained from

the average of three concrete cubes cast with every concrete mixture, and tested at

the same age as the beam specimen.

47

Chapter Four

The modulus of elasticity of concrete is one of the most important

mechanical properties of concrete. It is closely related to the properties of cement

paste and the stiffness and volume of selected aggregate. The modulus of

elasticity of concrete increases for high contents of aggregate of high rigidity;

whereas, it decreases with the increase in hardened cement paste content and

increasing porosity.

Table (4-1) shows a comparison between the measured and predicted values

of the modulus of elasticity of concrete using the formulas adopted by CP

110:1972

(57)

in MPa and

Most of the values of modulus of elasticity obtained were above those predicted

by CP 110:1972 formula with not less than (10 %).

Mix

Nominal Compressive

Strength (fcu) (MPa)

30

30

Measured

Predicted

Measured

Compressive

Modulus of

Modulus of

Strength (MPa)

elasticity (GPa)

elasticity (GPa)

34.6

26.47

27.6

30.8

24.97

25.21

33.5

26.04

26.56

28.4

23.98

24.28

33.8

26.16

26.77

34.1

26.28

26.89

48

Chapter Four

One concrete mixes have been used to produce eight reinforced concrete

beams, these mixes have the same mix proportions and then vibrated by mean of

vibrating tables which provide a reliable compaction and offer a maximum

density for concrete mixes, Table (4-2) shows the results of density of control

specimens.

Table (4-2) Density Test Results of Control Specimens

Mix

Measured

Bulk

Compressive

Density

Strength (MPa)

(Kg/m3)

34.6

2402

30.8

2386

33.5

2400

28.4

2380

33.8

2407

34.1

2411

Nominal Compressive

Strength (fcu) (MPa)

30

30

49

Chapter Four

4.3.1 Deflection at Mid -Span

The load-Deflection behavior for all beams is shown in Figures (4-2)

through (4-9) individually and Figure (4-10) shows the load-deflection curve for

all beams. The load- deflection figures show different deformation and behavior

under load for all beams, thus beam specimens have been made with three

variables (Span/depth ratio, steel reinforcement ratio and steel grade) are tested to

the ultimate load capacity in order to investigate deflection behavior in this study,

Table (4-3) shows the test results of all beams.

Beam

Load at

Ultimate

Deflection of

Max.

Designation

Cracking

Load

Cracking

Deflection

Stage (kN)

(kN)

Stage (mm)

(mm)

B1

15

0.4

7.1

B2

23.5

0.35

6.6

B3

27.5

0.3

5.2

B4

6.5

39.5

0.26

4.6

B5

8.5

43.5

0.23

3.85

B6

4.5

35.5

0.3

4.5

B7

42.5

0.28

3.68

B8

3.5

22.5

0.3

4.2

In the pre-cracking stage, the deflection increased linearly with loading. This

is expected since the strains in the steel and concrete are relatively small and both

materials steel and concrete are in the elastic portion of their respective responses.

Initial cracking was observed at loads ranging from 8.5 percent for Beam (B2) to

20 percent for Beam (B1) of the beam ultimate load.

50

Chapter Four

curve due to the cracking of concrete, which results in reduction in the effective

moment of inertia of the beam cross section. After cracking, deflection gain

increase almost linearly with load up to the point at which the tensile steel yields,

where expected.

For the higher loading stage, the contribution of (CFRP) becomes very

significant. The (CFRP) strengthened beams continuous to provide strength

increase because the (CFRP) force contribution continues at the same level.

Figure (4-2) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B1)

51

Chapter Four

Figure (4-3) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B2)

Figure (4-4) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B3)

52

Chapter Four

Figure (4-5) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B4)

Figure (4-6) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B5)

53

Chapter Four

Figure (4-7) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B6)

Figure (4-8) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B7)

54

Chapter Four

Figure (4-9) Load Versus Mid-span Deflection Curve for Beam (B8)

55

Chapter Four

The load deflection response of unstrengthened beam (B1) exhibits three

regions of behaviour, as shown in Fig. (4-11). At low applied loads, the stiffness

of Beam (B1) is relatively high, indicating that the concrete behaves in a linear

elastic manner. As the load increase the bending stresses in the extreme fibers at

the top and bottom of the section increase until the tensile strength of the concrete

is reached at the base of the beam, causing flexural cracks to form, initialy in the

mid-span at applied load of (3 kN). The occurrence of flexural cracking causes a

marked reduction in the member stiffness, as shown by a sudden change of

gradient in the response. The response after the cracking load is approximately

linear, at a gradient which will be refferred the postcracking stiffness.

56

Chapter Four

bending component is carried by the reinforcing steel at the base of the section.

Eventually, the yield stress of the steel is reached at one or more points; this loss

of material stiffness results in a reduction in overall beam stiffness (defined as the

total load-central deflection) as the ability of the section to support the tensile

component of the bending moment is reduced. This is shown by the second

marked change in gradient of the load-deflection response at a load, reffered to as

the yield load (8 kN). Beam (B1) is designed to be under-reinforecement so that

yielding of the steel precedes crushing of the concrete in compression. The

deflection of the (B1) at collapse is substantial and accompanied by excessive

cracking. Flexural cracks form in the mid-span region are extend vertically

upwards and become progressively wider as the applied load is increased.

Since the beams (B1) and (B3) having simillar gross section dimentions, but

the different in the strenghtened with (CFRP), the form of the load-deflection

response of (CFRP) strengthening beam (B3) is shown in Figure (4-11) and is

similar to an unstrengthened beam (B1) but with several key differences.

The initial stiffness before cracking is almost identical for the the two

beams. This is to be expected since, before the concrete has cracked, all of the

section is effective and the (CFRP) has relatively little effect on the moment of

inertia, and hence flexural rigidity of the section. In addition, since the load which

causes the concrete to crack initially is dependent on the moment of inertia of the

section, this will also be altered little by the addition of an external (CFRP).

The postcracking stiffness of (B3) is significantly higher than that of the

(B1). After cracking, when the concrete beneath the neutral axis is no longer as

effective at supporting load, the addition of an external (CFRP) causes the

moment of inertia of the section to be increased significantly.

57

Chapter Four

tensile stress can be distributed to intact concrete between cracks, resulting in

improved performance of the concrete in the tension zone. This enables the

section to work more efficiently and produce a tension stiffening effect, whereby

the concrete can contribute to the moment of inertia and thus to the flexural

rigidity of the section.

Before the slop changing of load-deflection curve after cracking stage, the

tensile component in flexure is shared between the internal steel reinforcement

and the bonded (CFRP). The concrete beneath the neutral axis also contributes to

some extent as a result of tension stiffening, described above, from both the steel

and (CFRP). The fact that the external (CFRP) relieves some of the tensile stress

carried by the internal steel reinforcement is structurally significant.

As the slope of load-deflection curve changed at load of (16 kN), so the

overall member stiffness decreases, as for the (B1). However, the (CFRP)

continues to support the tensile component of the moment couple acting on the

section. This stiffness after yielding is referred to the post-yielding stiffness and is

taken as the gradient of a line joining the yield point to the point of collapse. The

(CFRP) is able to support an increasing tensile bending compenent and (B3)

sustains considerably higher applied loads than (B1) (83 %) at collapse . Table (44) shows a comparison between B1 and B3.

Cracking

Cracking

Ultimate

Ultimate Deflection

Load (kN)

Deflection (mm)

Load (kN)

(mm)

B1

0.4

15

7.1

B3

0.3

27.5

5.2

% of Change

+ 50%

25%

+ 83%

26.7%

Beam No.

58

Chapter Four

Figure (4-12) shows the load-deflection curves for four beams (B2, B3, B4

and B5) which have different (Span/Depth) ratios (20, 15, 12.5 and 10)

respectively, in addition to the control beam (B1). According to the ACI 318-08(4)

requirements for deflection, the maximum (Span/Depth) ratio of simply supported

beam is (16).

For beam (B2) which has a (Span/Depth) ratio more than the maximum, the

test results show that this beam has the same un-cracked stiffness compared with

the control beam (B1), however reduction of (7 %) in the maximum deflection of

beam (B2) comparing with beam (B1) can be observed from Figure (4-12). This

reduction is due to the effect of (CFRP) strengthening, while the comparisons of

deflection for other beams with beam (B2) are as below:

Increasing the total depth of the beams will reduce the maximum

deflection by (21%, 30.3% and 41.6%) for (B3, B4, and B5) respectively.

increased by (17%, 68 % and 85%) for (B3, B4, and B5) respectively.

59

Chapter Four

Behavior

Figure (4-13) shows the load-deflection curves for four beams (B3, B6 and

B7) which have different tension steel ratio (min , 2 min and max) respectively,

in addition to the control beam (B1), where reinforced with (min) to obtain the

effect of steel reinforcement ratio on the deflection behavior. The test results

show that the load-deflection response is not affected by increasing the steel

amount at the pre-cracking stage. However, this behavior is dramatically changed

at the cracking stage due to the contribution of steel reinforcement in the cracked

moment of inertia (Icr), so by increasing tensile steel ratio of B6 and B7

comparing with B3, the maximum deflection is reduced by (13.5% and 29.2%)

for B6 and B7 respectively. Also the ultimate load capacity is increased by (29%

and 54.5%) for B6 and B7 respectively.

60

Chapter Four

Two beams (B3 and B8) are made to investigate this effect, where two values

of yield stress of steel reinforcement are used (460 and 300) MPa for beams (B3

and B8) respectively, Figure (4-14) shows the effect of yield stress of steel on the

load-deflection response.

The response of the two beams at the pre-cracking stage is identical.

However, at the cracking stage and with the anticipation of large contribution of

tension reinforcement, beam (B3) shows differences in deflection behavior and

strength with B8, the increment in the maximum deflection and ultimate load

capacity of beam (B3) are (23.8 % and 22%) respectively.

The experimental load-deflection curve of beam (B3) shows three clear

stages of response (pre-cracked, cracked and post-yield up to failure), while beam

(B8) shows only two stages (pre-cracked and cracked up to failure) as shown in

Figure (4-14).

61

Chapter Four

This behavior of beam (B8) may be due to the low yield stress of steel

reinforcement which has been used in beam (B8) and that could produce a

constant stiffness up to the beam failure.

As a result of experimental testing program, all the tested beams are

designed to fail with flexural by increasing the shear strength of the beams, the

control beam (B1) failed by the yielding of the internal steel reinforcement as

shown in Plate (4-1).

62

Chapter Four

face at the beam mid-span combining with de-bonding of the (CFRP) fabric along

the beam span as shown in Plate (4-2) , although all of these beams were

designed to fail in flexure. Flexural cracks were observed to be uniformly

distributed within the fabric-bond zone on the tension face. The cracks were

narrower in the strengthened beams as compared to those observed in control

beam (B1) due to the presence of the (CFRP) fabric at the concrete surface.

Flexural cracks, located in regions of the beam with large moment, can initiate

interfacial fracture which propagates between the concrete and (CFRP) interface.

For beam (B5) with the largest beam thickness and highest ultimate load

capacity, the beam failure mode was different in comparison with other

strengthening beams as shown in Plate (4-3), the cracks was initiated at the beam

mid-span and with the increasing of applied load the cracks propagation was

increased also, neither top concrete crashing nor (CFRP) de-bonding was

observed during the test and with further increase in bending moment will result

in large force in the (CFRP) which leads to (CFRP) rupture in the mid-span

region, (CFRP) layer is suddenly disrupts and with no concrete crashing at the

beam compression face, this failure mode can be observed with one loading point

and large beam thickness.

In general, de-bonding failure between (FRP) fabric and concrete occurred

due to susceptibility of the interface relative to vertical displacements of shear

cracks in the concrete beam.

63

Chapter Four

Plate (4-1) A- Crack Pattern of Control Beam (B1); B-Flexural Cracks at

Mid-span

64

Chapter Four

65

Chapter Four

Plate (4-2) Crack Pattern for Beams (B2, B3, B6 and B7)

66

Chapter Four

One point static loading was done on all beams and at each increment of the

load, deflection and crack development were observed. The load at initial crack of

all beams was observed, recorded and is shown in Figure (4-15). The initiation of

the cracks take place at a load ranged from (2 kN for B2) to (8.5 kN for B5).

The load carrying capacity of the control beam and the strengthened beams

were found out and is shown in Figure (4-16). All tested beams were loaded up to

their ultimate loads. It was noted that:

The ultimate load of the strengthened beams is higher than the control beam.

With the increase of the steel reinforcement ratio at the tension face of the

beams, the ultimate load is also increased.

67

Chapter Four

68

CHAPTER FIVE

THEORETICAL

PREDICTION

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

5.1 Introduction

In this chapter the immediate deflection calculations for the tested simply

supported beams are presented. The main purpose of this chapter is to compare and

check the validation of present experimental deflection results with the results

obtained from several theoretical procedures.

The two theoretical procedures have been used for immediate deflection

calculation in this study and described as follows:

5.2.1 CEB-FIP Method

The equation of immediate deflection at mid span for simply supported R.C.

beams with and without strengthened (CFRP) based on CEB-FIP method (53) is:

=

[10 m (t, )]

(5-1)

where:

: Immediate deflection.

L: span length of beam

m: Mid-span Curvature of beam.

The procedure for deflection calculation at mid-span for simply supported R.C.

beam with and without strengthened are given in details in Appendix (A).

The results of experimental and theoretical cracking deflection are presented

in Table (5-1), the numerical calculation have been presented in Appendix (A).

69

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

The results show that experimental deflection is higher than the theoretical

deflections that computed by CEB method for all beams. This difference is within

the limits and acceptable and its ranging from (2.5% to 23.3%). Figure (5-1) shows

a comparison between the experimental and theoretical (CEB method) precracking

deflection. On the other hand, the theoretical deflections that computed by ACI

method show a wide range of variation comparing with the experimental

deflections. This variation is depending on beam (Span/Depth) ratio, steel

reinforcement ratio () and steel yield stress. It is observed that the experimental

and theoretical deflection results at crack stage compared well. Experimental

studies by Ghali and other authors

accurate than (ACI method) in the case of simply supported beam subjected to one

concentrated point load at mid-span.

Th.(CEB)

of Cracking

stage (mm)

0.39

Exp.

of Cracking

stage (mm)

0.4

% of Error

B1

Cracking

Load

(kN)

4

B2

0.43

0.35

22.9

B3

0.36

0.3

20.0

B4

0.31

0.26

19.2

B5

12

0.25

0.23

8.7

B6

0.37

0.3

23.3

B7

0.3

0.28

7.1

B8

0.36

0.3

20.0

Beam

Designation

70

2.5

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Deflection (CEB method)

5.2.2 ACI 318-08 Method

In this method the immediate deflection is calculated by using the effective

moment of inertia (Ie),the numerical calculation have been presented in Appendix

(A), the (Ie) formula in the ACI 318 has been derived based on experimental

evidence from test on reinforced concrete beams with (Ig/Icr) less than (3). Bischoff

(83)

suggests modifying the ACI procedure to be applicable for large (Ig/Icr) (low

ACI procedure to find the immediate deflection of both un-strengthened and

(CFRP) strengthened beams.

71

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

The equations for immediate deflection of one concentrated point load at mid

- span for simply supported R.C. beams with and without strengthened (CFRP)

used by ACI 318-08 method is:

(5-2)

=

Where:

: Mid-span deflection (mm).

w: Self weight of beam.

P: Applied load (kN).

Modulus of elasticity of concrete (MPa).

: Effective moment of inertia (mm4).

The procedure for deflection calculation at mid-span for R.C.beam with and

without strengthened is given in details in Appendix (A).

The results of experimental and theoretical moment-deflection response are

presented in Figures (5-2) through (5-9), the results show that the experimental and

theoretical response is identical for all tested beams at uncracked stage (Ms Mcr),

however this response is dramatically changed beyond this stage (Ms > Mcr),

although both experimental and theoretical are almost give a similar stiffness for

all beams, but it's easy to observed that the theoretical response according to ACI

318-08 method gives an over estimate results for deflection, this variation may be

due to the fact that the actual physical characteristics of (CFRP) sheets differ from

which are used in theoretical calculations.

However, the control beam, unstrengthened beam (B1) and beam (B5) which

have the biggest beam thickness show a similarity between the experimental and

theoretical response as shown in Figures (5-2) and (5-6) respectively. On the other

hand by decreasing the (Span/Depth) ratio, the value of (EIexp) will be close to the

value of (EIe). The numerical calculation have been presented in Appendix (A) the

72

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

results show that experimental deflection is lower than the theoretical deflections

that computed by ACI method for all beams.

The results of experimental and theoretical cracking deflection are presented

in Table (5-2). The deflection results from ACI method given higher result than

experimental results at cracking stage, the reasons may be that the ACI method

assumed full cracked for the concrete at the tension face and moment of inertia (I e,

Icr) assumed to be constant overall length of the beam, which in fact there are some

part of concrete at tension zone still uncracked and this is increase the flexural

stiffness of the beam and decrease the deflection results.

Beam

Designation

Cracking

Load (kN)

Th.(ACI)

of Cracking stage (mm)

Exp.

of Cracking stage (mm)

B1

5.5

0.4

B2

2.3

0.35

B3

1.25

0.3

B4

1.6

0.26

B5

12

1.45

0.23

B6

1.7

0.3

B7

2.1

0.28

B8

1.9

0.3

73

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Beam (B1)

Beam (B2)

74

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Beam (B3)

Beam (B4)

75

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Beam (B5)

Beam (B6)

76

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Beam (B7)

Beam (B8)

77

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

The limiting span to depth ratio for (CFRP) externally strengthened

rectangular beam can be calculated by using equation (5-3). The values of (kf and

f) are calculated using equations (5-4) and (5-5) respectively. Equation (5-3)

shows that the (L/h) ratio can be obtained for a calculated (CFRP) sheets ratio (f);

a graphical representation is made from equation (5-3) and is shown in Figure (510).

Where:

(

)

(

c=

= h = beam total depth

=

,n=

and

experimental logarithm equation is obtained between (L/h) and (CFRP) ratio as

follow:

L/h = 1.48 ln (f) + 8.25

(R2 =0.97)

78

(5 - 6)

Chapter Five

Theoretical Prediction

Figure (5-10) Relationship between (Span /Depth) Ratio and (CFRP) Ratio

79

CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

Chapter Six

Chapter Six

Conclusions and

Recommendations

6.1 Conclusions

1. Load-deflection behavior: The immediate mid-span deflections at

different load levels of eight simply supported beams were measured.

They were then compared first with the predicted deflection according to

each CEB-FIP 1990 and ACI 318-08 procedures. The following

conclusions were drawn:

The CEB-FIP procedure to calculate deflection is more applicable

than ACI 318-08 procedure for beams externally strengthened with

(CFRP) sheet.

A new procedure is may needed for concrete beams strengthened with

(CFRP) sheet based on many future experimental works.

2. The strengthening with (CFRP) sheet has a significant effect on the loaddeflection response by increasing beam stiffness especially beyond the

precracking stage. By using (CFRP), the ultimate deflection is decreased

by (26.7%) and the ultimate load capacity is increased by (83%).

3. Span to depth ratio has also an important role in control of deflection; the

comparisons of deflection for beams (B3, B4 and B5) with (B2) are as

below:

79

Chapter Six

The decreasing the (Span/Depth) ratio of the beams will reduced the

maximum deflection by (21%, 30.3% and 41.6%) for (B3, B4, and B5)

respectively.

load capacity is increased by (17%, 68 % and 85%) for (B3, B4, and B5)

respectively.

increasing the steel amount at the pre-cracking stage, however this

behavior is dramatically changed at the cracking stage, by increasing

tensile steel ratio of B6 and B7 comparing with B3, the maximum

deflection is reduced by (13.5% and 29.2%) for B6 and B7 respectively.

Also the ultimate load capacity is increased by (29% and 54.5%) for B6

and B7 respectively.

5. The load-deflection response is not affected by the grade of steel

reinforcement at the pre-cracking stage. However after the cracking stage

and with the anticipation of large contribution of tension reinforcement,

beam (B3) (fy equal to 460 MPa) shows a difference in deflection and

load carrying capacity with beam B8 (fy equal to 300), the increment in

both of ultimate deflection and ultimate load capacity for beam (B3)

comparing with (B8) are (23.8 %) and (22%) respectively.

6. In general, the strengthened beams failed by concrete crushing of beam

compression face at mid-span combining with de-bonding of the (CFRP)

fabric along the beam span. For beam (B5) with the largest beam

thickness and highest ultimate load capacity, the beam failure mode was

different comparing with the other strengthening beams, where (CFRP)

80

Chapter Six

disrupts and with no concrete crushing at the beam compression face.

7. The use of (CFRP) strengthening is delay the initiation of concrete

cracking at the soffit of beams by distributing the tensile stress along the

flexural zone.

6.2 Recommendations

The general major recommendations for further research works are given in the

following:

1. Using two or more strengthening layers of (CFRP) with different

(Span/Depth) ratios to study the deflection control of concrete beams.

2. Deflection control of high strength concrete beams externally strengthened

with (CFRP) sheets.

3. Investigation of the load-deflection response of other types of

strengthening materials (GFRP, AFRP and steel plate).

4. Investigate the load-deflection response of two directional (CFRP)

strengthening.

81

REFERENCES

References

References

1. ACI Committee 435, 1974, State-of-the-Art Report, Deflection of Two

Way Reinforced Concrete Floor Systems, ACI SP 43-3, Deflections of

Concrete Structures, pp. 55- 81.

2. Branson, D.E., 1977, "Deformation of Concrete Structures", McGraw-Hill,

New York, 546 pp.

3. ACI Committee 435, 1978, Proposed Revisions by Committee 435 to ACI

Building Code and Commentary Provisions on Deflections, ACI Journal,

Proceedings Vol. 75, No. 6, pp. 229-238.

4. ACI Committee 318," Building Code Requirements for Reinforced

Concrete" ACI 318-08, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 2008, 147 pp.

5. ACI Committee 440, 2006, "Guide for the Design and Construction of

Concrete Reinforced with FRP Bars" ACI 440.1R-06, American Concrete

Institute, Farmington Hills.

6. Gao, D., Benmokrane, B. and Masmoudi, R., 1998, A Calculating Method of

Flexural Properties of FRP-reinforced Concrete Beam: Part 1: Crack

Width and Deflection, Technical Report, Department of Civil Engineering,

Universit de Sherbrooke, Qubec, Canada, 24 pp.

7. Ospina, C.E., Alexander, S.D.B. and Cheng, J.J.R., 2001, Behavior of

Concrete Slabs with Fiber-reinforced Polymer Reinforcement, Structural

Engineering Report No. 242, Department of Civil and Environmental

Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, 356 pp.

82

References

Structural Elements", PhD Thesis, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden,

pp (13-16).

9. Alkhrdaji, T. and Nanni, A., 1999, "Surface Bonded FRP Reinforcement for

Strengthening/Repair of Structural Reinforced Concrete", Center for

Infrastructure Engineering Studies (CIES), University of Missouri-Rolla, USA,

13p.

10. ACI Committee 440.2R, 2002, "Guide for the Design and Construction of

Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures"

American Concrete Institute, Michigan, USA, 45p

11. Thermou., G. E. and Elnashai., A. S., 2006, "Seismic Retrofit Schemes for

RC Structures and Local-Global Consequences" Proceedings of 8th

National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, University of Illinois, USA,

15p.

12. Tuakta, C., 2005, "Use of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite in Bridge

Structures", M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental

Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA, June.

50p

13. Setunge, S., 2002, "Review of Strengthening Techniques Using Externally

Bonded Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites", Report 2002-005-C-01,

CRC Construction Innovation, Queensland University of Technology,

Brisbane, Australia, 59p.

14. ACI Committee 440- XR, 2006, "Report on Fiber Reinforced Polymer

(FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures", American Concrete

Institute, Michigan, USA, 348P.

83

References

Concrete Beams Strengthened With Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer"

M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, AL Mustansiriya University, Baghdad, Iraq, 118p.

16. Yang, X., Nanni, A., Chen, G. and Dharani, L. R., 2004, The Engineering of

Construction Specifications for Externally Bonded FRP Composites",

Report, Center for Infrastructure Engineering Studies, University of MissouriRolla, USA, 168p.

17. Hollaway , L. C. and Leeming ,M. B. , 2001, " Strengthening of Reinforced

Concrete Structures using Externally-bonded FRP Composites in

Structural and Civil Engineering ", 3rd Edition, Woodhead Publishing Ltd

and CRC Press Editions ,Cambridge , England, 342p.

18. Meier, U., 1987, "Bridge Repair with high performance Composite

Materials", Ricerca, Italiana: Material and Technic Report, 4.

19. Triantafillou, T.C., 1998, Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete

Beams using Epoxy Bonded FRP Composites, ACI Structural Journal, Vol.

95, No. 2, pp.107-115, Mar-April.

20. Malek, A.M. and Saadmatmanesh, H., 1998, Ultimate Shear Capacity of

Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened With Web-bonded Fiber

Reinforced Plastic Plates, ACI journal Structural. Vol. 95, No. 4, Nov, pp.

391-399.

21. Norris, T., Saadatmanesh, H. and Ehsani, M.R., 1996, Shear and Flexure

Strengthening of RC Beams with Carbon Fiber Sheets, ASCE Journal of

Structural Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 7, Dec, pp. 903- 911.

84

References

Strengthened with FRP Laminates against Impact, CONMAT, Vol. 1,

Aug, pp. 84-94.

23. Meier, U. and Kaiser, H., 1991, Strengthening of Structures with CFRP

Laminates, Advanced Composite Materials in Civil Engineering Structures,

ASCE,New York, pp. 224-232.

24. Hefferman, P. J. and Erki, M. A., 1996, Equivalent Capacity and Efficiency

of Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with Carbon Fiber

Reinforced Plastic Sheets, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 23,

No. 1, Feb., pp. 21-29.

25. Swamy, R. N., Jones, R. and Charif, A., 1996, Contribution of Externally

Bonded Steel Plate Reinforcement to the Shear Resistance of Reinforced

Concrete Beams, Repair and Strengthening of Concrete Members with

Adhesive Bonded Plates, SP-165, R. N. Swamy and R. Gaul, eds., American

Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 1-24.

26. Swamy, R. N. Lynsdale, C. J. and Mukhopadhaya, P., 1996, Effective

Strengthening with Ductility: Use of Externally Bonded Plates of NonMetallic Composite Materials, Second International Conference on

Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, ACMBS II,

Montral, Canada, M. M. El-Badry, ed., Aug. 11-14, pp. 481-488.

27. Beber, A. J., Filloh, A. C. and Campagnolo, J. L., 1999, Flexural

Strengthening of R.C. Beams with CFRP Sheets, Structural Faults and

Repair 99, The Eighth International Conference on Extending the Life of

Bridges, Civil and Building Structures, London, 9 pp.

85

References

Beams Using CFRP Laminates, Research Project No. RC-1372, Testing and

Research Section, Construction and Technology Division, University of

Michigan, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

29. Kachlakev, D. I. and Barnes, W. A., 1999, Flexural and Shear Performance

of Concrete Beams Strengthened with Fiber Reinforced Polymer

Laminates, Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Reinforced

Concrete Structures, SP-188, C. W. Dolan, S. H., Rizkalla, and A. Nanni, eds.,

American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 959-972.

30. Jonaitis, B., Papinigis, V. and Kamaitis, Z., 1999, Behavior of Reinforced

Concrete Flexural Members Strengthened by Bonded Steel Plates and

Glass Fiber Plates, Proceedings of the International Conference on

Extending Performance of Concrete Structures, Dundee, Scotland, UK, R. K.

Dhir and P. A. J. Tittle, eds., Sept. 7, pp. 33-38.

31. Triantafillou, T. C. and Plevris, N., 1990, Flexural Behavior of Concrete

Structures Strengthened with Epoxy-Bonded Fiber Reinforced Plastics,

International Seminar on Structural Repairs/Strengthening by the Plate

Bonding Technique, University of Sheffield, England, Sept., pp. 152-161.

32. Triantafillou, T. C. and Plevris, N., 1992, Strengthening of RC Beams with

Epoxy-Bonded Fiber-Composite Materials, Materials and Structures

Journal, Vol. 25, May, pp. 201-211.

33. Assih, T., Li, Y. and Delmas, Y., 1997, Repairing of Reinforced Concrete

Beams by Bonded Carbon Fiber Composite Sheets, Proceedings of the

U.S.-Europe Workshop on Recent Advances in Bridge Engineering: Advanced

86

References

Rehabilitation,

Durable

Materials,

Non-destructive

Evaluation,

and

Management, U. Meier and R. Betti, eds., Dubendorf and Zurich, pp. 119-126.

34. An, W., Saadatmanesh, H. and Ehsani, M., 1991, RC Beams Strengthened

with GFRP Plates: Part II: Analysis and Parametric Study, ASCE Journal

of Structural Engineering, Vol. 117, No. 11, Nov., pp. 3433-3455.

35. Cha, J. Y., Balaguru, P. and Chung, L., 1999, Experimental and Analytical

Investigation of Partially Prestressed Concrete Beams Strengthened with

Carbon Reinforcement, Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium

on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Reinforced Concrete

Structures (FRPRCS-4), Baltimore, Md., pp. 625-633.

36. White, T., Soudki, K. S. and Erki, M. A., 1998, Loading Rate Effects on

Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened with Carbon-Fiber Reinforced

Polymer Laminates, Proceedings of the 1998 Annual Conference of the

Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Vol. III, Halifax, Nova Scotia,

Canada, June, pp. 633-642.

37. David, E., Djelal, C., Ragneau, E. and Buyle-Bodin, F., 1999, Use of FRP to

Strengthen and Repair RC Beams: Experimental Study and Numerical

Simulations, Structural Faults and Repair 99. The 8th International

Conference on Extending the Life of Bridges, Civil and Building Structures,

London, July 13-15, 10 pp.

Concrete Beams Strengthened with Carbon Fiber Sheets, Proceedings of

the

Fourth

International

Symposium

87

on

Fiber

Reinforced

Polymer

References

Maryland, pp.159-170.

39. Aboutaha, R. S., 1999, Structural Rehab of Prestressed Concrete Bridge

Girders Using CFRP Composites, Proceeding of Structural Faults and

Repair 99, The 8th International Conference on Extending the Life of Bridges,

Civil and Building Structures, London, England, 9 pp.

40. Charkas, H., Rasheed, H. and Mehlem, H., 2003, Rigorous Procedure for

Calculating Deflections of Fiber Reinforced Polymers Strengthened

Reinforced Concrete Beams, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 100, No. 4, JulyAug., pp. 529-539.

41. Nawy, E. G. and Neuwerth, G. E., 1971, Behavior of Fiber Glass

Reinforced Concrete Beams, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE,

Sept.,Vol.103, No.2, pp. 2203-2215.

42. Larralde, J., Renbaum, L. and Morsi, A., 1988, Fiber-Glass Reinforced

Plastic Rebars in Lieu of Steel Rebars, TRB Annual Meeting, Task Force

A2C51Structural Applications of Fiber Reinforced Plastics, Aug.

43. Larralde, J. and Zerva, A., 1991. Load-Deflection Performance of FRP

Grating-Concrete Composites, Advanced Composite Materials in Civil

Engineering Structure, Proceedings of the Specialty Conference, Las Vegas,

February, pp. 271-277.

44. Deblois, A. P., Picard, A. and Beaulieu, D., 1992, Reinforcement de Poutres

en Beton Arm a laide de Materiaux Composites: Etudes Theorique et

Experimentale, First International Conference, Advanced Composite

88

References

Sherbrooke, Canada, pp. 265-275.

45. Saadatmanesh, H. and Ehsani, M., 1991. R.C. Beams Strengthened with

GFRP Plates I: Experimental Study, Journal of Structural Engineering,

ASCE, Vol. 117, No. 11, pp. 3417-3433.

46. Shahawy, M. A., Arockiasamy, M., Beitelman, T. and Sowrirajan, R., 1996,

"Reinforced Concrete Rectangular Beams Strengthened with CFRP

Laminates," Composites, Part B, 27B, pp. 225-233.

47. M'Bazaa, L.,Missihoun, M. and Labossiere, P., 1996, "Optimizing the Length

and Orientation of the CFRP to Increase Beam Strength and Ductility",

Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 123, No.8, pp.1080-1092.

48. Ramsay, R.J., Mirza, S.A. and MacGreger, J.G., 1979, Monte Carlo Study

of Short Time Deflections of Reinforced Concrete Beams, ACI Journal,

Vol.76, No.8, Aug. ,pp. 897-918.

49. Wang, G. and Salmon, C.G., 1985, "Reinforced Concrete Design", In text

Educational Publishers, New York 434pp.

50. Park, R. and Paulay, T., 1975, "Reinforced Concrete Structure", Jon Wiley

and Sons, 769 pp.

51. Branson, D. E., 1977, Deformation of Concrete Structure , McGraw-Hill,

New York, 546 pp.

52. Yu, W.W and Winter, G., 1960, Instantaneous and Long-Time Deflections

of Reinforced Concrete Beams under Working Loads" ACI journal,

Proceedings, Vol. 57, No.1, July, pp.29-50.

89

References

Structures", Federation International Precontrainte (CEB FIP) (MC-90),

Thomas Teleford, London, UK.

54. ACI Committee 318, 1963, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced

Concrete" (ACI 318-63), American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 144 pp.

55. Branson, D. E., 1968, Design Procedures for Computing Deflection, ACI

Journal, Vol. 65, No.9, September 1968, pp.730-742.

56. ACI Committee 435, 1990, Deflection of Reinforced Concrete Flexural

Members, ACI Manual of Concrete Practice, part 4.

57. British Standards Institute, CP110, 1972, The Structural Use of Concrete ",

part 1, Design, Materials and Workmanship, London. UK.

58. ACI Committee 318, 1977, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced

Concrete ", American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 104 pp.

59. Jacob, S.G., 1981, "Simplified Computations for Effective Moment of

Inertia Ie and Minimum Thickness to Avoid Deflection Computations

ACI journal, Proceedings, Vol.78, No.6, November December, pp.428-439.

60. Branson, D. E. and Trost, H., 1982, "Unified Procedures for Predicting the

deflection and centroid Axes Location of Partially Cracked Nonprestressed and prestressed Concrete Member, ACI journal, Vol.79, No.2,

March April pp.119-130.

61. Pretorius, P.C., 1985, Deflection of Reinforced Concrete Members: A

simplified Approach, ACI journal, Vol.82, No.6, Nov. Dec., pp.805-812.

62. Faza, S. S. and Ganga Rao, H. V. S., 1992, Bending and Bond Behavior of

Concrete Beams Reinforced with Fiber Reinforced Plastic Rebars,

90

References

W.Va., pp. 128-173.

63. Ghali, A., 1993, Deflection of Reinforced Concrete Members: A Critical

Review, ACI Structural journal, Vol.90, No.4, July August, pp.364-373

64. AL Zaid, R.Z., AL- Shikh, A.H., 1991, "Effect of Loading Type on The

Effective Moment of Inertia of Reinforced Concrete Beams" ACI Structural

journal, Vol.88, March April, pp.184-190.

65. ACI 318, 1989, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete"

(ACI 318-89), American Concrete Institute, Detroit.

66. Committee Euro-International du Beton, 1978, "Model Code for Concrete

Structures", Federation International Precontrainte (CEB FIP) (MC-78),

Lausanne.

67. Ghali, A. and Azarnejed A., 1999, Deflection Prediction of Members Any

Concrete Strength" ACI Structural Journal, Vol.96, No.5 September

October, pp.807-816

68. Washa, G.W. and Fluck, P.G., 1952, Effect of Compressive Reinforcement

on The Plastic Flow of Reinforced Concrete Beams, ACI Journal, Vol.49,

No.2, pp.89-108.

69. ACI Committee 318, 1995, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced

Concrete ", (ACI 318 M-95) and Commentary (ACI 318 RM-95), American

Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, 371pp.

70. Committee Euro-International du Beton, 1993, "Model Code for Concrete

Structures", Federation International Precontrainte (CEB FIP) (MC-90),

Thomas Teleford, London, UK.

91

References

71. Mehta, P.K., and Monteiro, P.J., 2001 Concrete: Microstructure, Properties

and Materials, Second and Final Edition, Englewood Clifts, New Jersey,

USA, October, 239 pp.

72. Mayo, C. A., 1987, "Engineering Materials Handbook-Vol. 1, Composites",

ASM International, pp. 76.

73. FIB, 2001, "Externally Bonded FRP Reinforcement for RC Structures",

International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lausanne, Switzerland.

74. Catalin A. Neagoe, 2011, Concrete Beams Reinforced with CFRP

Laminates MSc. Thesis, Department Civil Engineering, College of

engineering, University of Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain, February, pp. 51-52.

75. Mohammed, D. H., 2007, "Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beams

Strengthened by CFRP in Flexure", MSc. Thesis, Building and Construction

Department, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq, June, PP 212.

76. Meier, U., Deuring, M., Meier, H. and Schwegler, G., 1992. Strengthening of

Structures with CFRP Laminates: Research and Applications in

Switzerland, Proceedings, 1st International Conference on Advanced

Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures, Sherbrook, pp. 243-251.

77. Iraqi Specifications No. 5, 1984, Portland Cement, Baghdad, Iraq.

78. Iraqi Specifications No. 45, 1984, Natural Sources for Gravel that is Used

in Concrete and Construction, Baghdad, Iraq.

79. ASTM Standards: A615/A615M-03, 2003, Standard Specification for

Deformed and Plain Billet-Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement,

ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 194282959, USA.

92

References

Standard Institute, London, UK.

81. BS 1881:part 116, 1983, Method for Determination of Compressive

Strength of Concrete Cubes, British Standard Institute.

82. ASTM C 469, 2002, Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of

Elasticity and Poissons Ratio of Concrete in Compression, ASTM

International.

83. Bischoff, P. H., 2005, Re-Evaluation of Deflection Prediction for Concrete

Beams Reinforced With Steel and Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bars,

Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 131, No. 5, pp. 752-767.

93

APPENDIX-A

Appendix-A

Appendix-A

A.1 Introduction

To show the procedure for predicting the immediate crack load mid-span

deflection to both the proposed methods and the developed models, beams (B1)

and (B3) was adopted. These beams have the same cross sectional area and the

same steel reinforcement details; the only difference between them is the presence

of (CFRP) strengthening wrap.

A.2.1 CEB-FIP Method

In This method, the immediate deflection is computed from the curvature as

follows:

A.2.1.1 Deflection of beam (without strengthening)

Solution: un-cracked section analysis

Transformed un-cracked section

1.

a. (

2.

3.

4.

)

(

(

)

(

)

(

) (

(

(

)

)

5.

6.

A

Appendix-A

a. (

7.

(

8.

9. 1 =

, 2 =

11. =

[10 m (t, )]

where

: Mid-Span deflection

m: Main curvature

t: Time or age in (days)

: Instant of time

A.2.1.2 Deflection of control beam (B1)

Beam thickness (h): 133 mm

Effective depth (d): 115.5 mm

Beam width (bw): 100 mm

Clear span (L): 2000 mm

Steel tensile strength (fy): 460 MPa

Steel modulus of elasticity (Es): 200 GPa

Concrete compressive strength (f'c): 26.5 MPa

Appendix-A

Transformed Un-cracked Section

)

(

(

)

)

(

)

(

)

(

(

1 =

=

[10 m (t, )]

Appendix-A

Solution: Un-cracked Section Analysis

Transformed Un-cracked Section

1.

2.

a.

3.

(

a.

4.

5.

)

)

6.

)

) (

)

)

7.

8.

a.

9.

(

10.

11. 1 =

, 2 =

12.

13.

[10 m (t, )]

Appendix-A

where

: Mid-Span deflection

m: Main curvature

t: Time or age in (days)

: Instant of time

A.2.1.4 Deflection of beam (B3) (CFRP strengthened beam)

Beam Properties:

Beam thickness (h): 133 mm

Effective depth (d): 115.5 mm

Beam width (bw): 100 mm

Clear length (L): 2000 mm

Steel tensile strength (fy): 460 MPa

Steel modulus of elasticity (Es): 200 GPa

Concrete compressive strength (f'c): 26.5 MPa

CFRP modulus of elasticity (Ef):238000 MPa

CFRP width (bf): 100 mm

CFRP thickness (hf): 1 mm

Solution: Un-cracked Section Analysis

Transformed Un-cracked Section

Appendix-A

)

(

(

)

)

(

)

(

(

(

1 =

=

[10 m (t, )]

Appendix-A

In This method, the immediate deflection is computed as follows:

A.2.2.1 Deflection of control beam

Solution:

1.

2.

(

3.

a.

4.

(

5.

)

(

6.

(

) (

7.

)

)

8.

9.

a.

11.

12.

13. =

) ]

[Mid-Span deflection].

Appendix-A

Beam thickness (h): 133 mm

Effective depth (d): 115.5 mm

Beam width (bw): 100 mm

Clear length (L): 2000 mm

Steel tensile strength (fy): 460 MPa

Steel modulus of elasticity (Es): 200 GPa

Concrete compressive strength (f'c): 26.5 MPa

Solution:

(

(

)

(

)

)

)

(

)

H

Appendix-A

) ]

{Mid-Span deflection}.

Solution:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

(

7.

)

(

8.

9.

)

(

10.

(

)

)

(

) (

11.

)

)

12.

13.

Appendix-A

14. (

16.

17.

18. =

) ]

[Mid-Span deflection].

Beam Properties:

Beam thickness (h): 133 mm

Effective depth (d): 115.5 mm

Beam width (bw): 100 mm

Clear length (L): 2000 mm

Steel tensile strength (fy): 460 MPa

Steel tensile strain (Es): 200 GPa

Concrete compressive strength (f'c): 26.5 MPa

CFRP modulus of elasticity (Ef):238000 Mpa

CFRP width (bf): 100 mm

CFRP thickness (hf): 1 mm

Solution:

Appendix-A

)

(

) ]

{Mid-Span deflection}.

Appendix-A

Eq. (1)

And

()

( )

( )

Eq. (2)

For beams externally reinforced with CFRP sheets, Eq. (2) can be written as

follow:

=

Eq. (3)

For One Point Load the Mid-span Deflection can be computed as Follow:

=

)=

( ) Eq. (4)

=

[

)

)

]

( )

]

L

Appendix-A

where:

(

= 0.003 (

c=

= h = beam total depth

=

,n=

and

n: Modular ratio of elasticity between steel and concrete.

nf: Modular ratio of elasticity between FRP and concrete

Ratio of compressive concrete zone to the effective flexural depth for FRP

strengthened beams.

.

.

) (% ,

. ) /(

) ( ) , (

) %, % (%, .

) 2min

(max ) %, (%, .

) (

) (%,

) (.

.

.

.

) ACI

(31808 ) (CEBFIP1990

.

.

) (

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.