Fourth Asia-Pacific Conference on FRP in Structures (APFIS 2013)

11-13 December 2013, Melbourne, Australia

© 2013 International Institute for FRP in Construction

BASALT FRP REINFORCING BARS FOR CONCRETE STRUCTURES

F. Elgabbas, E. Ahmed and B. Benmokrane

Department of Civil Engineering
The University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Email: Brahim.Benmokrane@Usherbrooke.ca.

ABSTRACT

The increasing use of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) bars encourages utilizing new fiber types, such as basalt
fibers, rather than the commonly used fibers (glass, aramid, and carbon). However, extensive investigations are
needed to evaluate the short- and long-term characteristics of these newly developed bars. This investigation
aims at characterizing newly developed basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) bars and tendons. The
investigation included physical and mechanical characterizations of two different products of deformed BFRP
bars (type A and type B) of 8 mm-diameter and one product of BFRP tendons of 7 mm diameter (for prestressing
purposes). The test results confirmed that the developed BFRP bars meet the physical and mechanical properties
requirements of CSA S807-10.

KEYWORDS

FRP, fibers, basalt, physical, mechanical, characterization.

INTRODUCTION

Given the recent research in the textile/fiber industry, the basalt fiber showed a great potential as a competitive
for glass fiber. An extensive experimental investigation is being conducted at the University of Sherbrooke
(Quebec, Canada) to evaluate the short- long-term characteristics of newly developed BFRP bars in collaboration
with industrial partners. The investigation includes five different types of BFRP bars. Preliminary results of this
investigation (Vincent et al. 2013) confirmed the feasibility of producing new BFRP bars for structural concrete
elements with physical and mechanical properties meet the requirements of ACI 440 (2008) and CSA S807
(2010). This study, upon completion, will help in introducing FRP bars made with basalt fibers in the Canadian
Codes and Standards such as CSA S806, CSA S6 and CSA S807.

This paper, however, presents some results of the physical and mechanical characterizations of newly developed
BFRP bars and prestressing tendons.

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM OUTLINE

An extensive research project is being conducted at the University of Sherbrooke to evaluate the short- and long-
term characteristics of newly developed BFRP bars and tendons. The project includes five different types of
BFRP bars and one type of BFRP tendons. The main objective of this project is evaluate the material
characteristics and the structural performance as preliminary steps to introduce these new materials to the FRP
design codes and guides.

This paper presents the characterization of two types of newly developed basalt BFRP bars of 8 mm diameter
(types A and B) and one type of the BFRP tendons of 7 mm diameter. The BFRP bars have a deformed surface
over helical ribs while the BFRP tendons have a woven surface as shown in Figure 1. The investigation includes
complete physical and mechanical characterization of these BFRP bars (types A and B) and BFRP tendons. The
characterization is conducted in accordance with the ACI 440 (2008) and CSA S807 (2010).

PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION

The physical properties of the BFRP bars and tendons were determined in accordance with ACI 440 (2008) and
CSA S807 (2010). The effective cross-sectional area was determined following CSA S806 (2012), Annex A
“Determination of Cross-Sectional Area of FRP Reinforcement”. The relative density was determined according
to ASTM D792 (2008) “Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of Plastics
by Displacement”. The fiber content was determined according to ASTM D3171 (2011) “Standard Test Method
for Constituent Content of Composite - Method I; Procedure G”. The transverse coefficient of thermal expansion
was determined according to ASTM E831 (2012) “Standard Test Method for Linear Thermal Expansion of
Solids Materials by Thermomechanical Analysis”. The water absorption was determined according to ASTM
D570 (2010) “Standard Test Method for Water Absorption of Plastics”. The cure ratio was determined
according to ASTM D5028 (2009) “Standard Test Method for Curing Properties of Pultrusion Resin by Thermal
Analysis”. The glass transition temperature (Tg) was determined according to ASTM D3418 (2012) “Standard
Test Method for Transition Temperatures of Polymers by Thermal Analysis”. It should be mentioned that the
void content ratio was not measured because of the unavailable data concerning the densities of the fibers and
the resin. Table 1 presents the results of those physical characterization tests and compare them with the
specified limits of ACI 440 (2008) and CSA S807 (2010). The comparison presented in Table 1 confirms that the
newly developed BFRP bars tested herein meet the physical properties requirements of ACI 440 (2008) and CSA
S807 (2010).

BFRP prestressing tendons BFRP bars (type A and B)

Figure 1. Basalt FRP bars and tendons

Table 1. Specified limits and results for physical properties of BFRP bars and tendons
Measured value Specified limits
Property BFRP bars ACI 440.6 CSA S807
BFRP tendons
Type A Type B (2008) (2010)
Diameter (mm) 9.7 9.6 7.8 -- --
Relatively density (ρmeas) 1.998 2.046 2.167 -- --
Fiber content by weight (%) 77.4 81.1 85.1 55% (vol.) 70% (wt.)
Transverse CTE (x 10-6 °C-1) 26.8 18.4 18.7 NA 40
1.0 (D2*);
Water absorption at saturation (%) 0.56 0.62 0.15 1.0
0.75 (D1*)
≥ 93 (D2*);
Cure ratio (%) 100 100 97.5 NA
95 (D1*)
≥ 80 (D2*);
Glass transition temperature (°C) 118 127 102 100
100 (D1*)
*
Classification based on durability: FRPs with high durability shall be classified as D1; FRPs with moderate durability shall
be classified as D2; FRPs made with vinylester and epoxy shall be classified as D1 or D2; FRPs made with polyester matrix
shall be classified as D2.

MECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION

The mechanical characterization conducted herein included tensile test, transverse shear strength test, flexure
strength test, interlaminar shear strength test (short-beam test) and bond strength test (pullout test). The tensile
properties of the BFRP bars were determined by testing of five specimens in accordance with CSA S806 (2012),
Annex C “Test Method for Tensile Properties of FRP Reinforcement”. Figure 2 shows a typical tensile test and
mode of failure of the tested BFRP bars and tendons. The transverse shear strength were determined in
accordance with ASTM D7617 (2011) “Standard Test Method for Transverse Shear Strength of Fiber-
Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite Bars”. Figure 3 shows the transverse shear strength test setup and photos
for the typical mode of failure of the BFRP bars and tendons. The flexure strength were carried out in
accordance with ASTM D4476 (2009) “Standard Test Method for Flexural Properties of Fiber Reinforced
 Pultruded Plastic Rods”. Figure 4 shows the three-point flexure test and photos for the typical mode of failure of
the BFRP bars and tendons. The interlaminar shear strength (apparent horizontal shear strength) was determined
in accordance to ASTM D4475 (2008) “Standard Test Method for Apparent Horizontal Shear Strength of
Pultruded Reinforced Plastic Rods by the Short-Beam Method”. Figure 5 shows the short beam test as well as
the failure mode of BFRP bars and tendons. Finally, The pullout tests were carried out in normal-strength
concrete according to ACI 440 (2004), B.3 Test Method “Test Method for Bond Strength of FRP Bars by Pullout
Testing” and CSA S806 (2012), Annex G “Test Method for Bond Strength of FRP Rods by Pullout Testing”. The
bonded length was kept constant at 5db, where db is the BFRP bar diameter. Figure 6 shows the geometry of the
pullout specimens, test setup, and mode of failure, while Figure 7 shows the typical bond stress-free slip
relationship of the tested BFRP bars and tendons. The complete description of the mechanical properties of the
BFRP bars and tendons is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Mechanical properties of BFRP bars and tendons

Type and Area Tensile Ultimate Ultimate Transverse Flexure Interlaminar Bond
designated (mm²) modulus strength strain shear strength strength shear strength strength
diameter (GPa) (MPa) (%) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
Type A, 8 50.28* 64.63±1.4 1655± 95 2.6±0.2 315.3±37.5 2061±216 72.4±2.9 25.4± 2.3
mm
Type B, 8 50.28* 59.48±3.3 1567±114 2.7±0.3 293.0±27.7 1587±110 59.9±2.4 27.2± 2.4
mm
Tendons, 7 38.48** 69.04± 0.7 1680±132 2.4±0.1 343.5±17.6 1790±91 63.1±2.7 7.0±0.9
mm

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 2. Tensile test: (a) Test setup; (b) Typical tension failure of BFRP bars; (c) Typical tension failure of
BFRP tendons

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 3. Transverse shear strength test: (a) Test setup; (b) Typical transverse shear failure of BFRP bars;
(c) Typical transverse shear failure of BFRP tendons
Table 2 shows that both BFRP bars and tendons have a modulus of elasticity close to that of GFRP bars of Grade
III (CSA S807, 2010), as well as the ultimate tensile strength was above the minimum designation strength value
of the CFRP bars according to the same code. It is worth mentioning that the tensile stress-strain behavior of
BFRP bars and tendons was linear elastic to failure with a typical brittle failure as shown in Figure 2. In addition,
the BFRP bars and tendons exhibited maximum strain at failure ranging from 2.4% to 2.7% which is higher than
the minimum value of 1.2% (CSA S807, 2010). Furthermore, the BFRP bars showed average transverse shear
strength of 315.3±37.5 MPa and 293.0±27.7 MPa for BFRP bar types A and B, respectively, while BFRP
tendons showed average transverse shear strength of 343.5±17.6 MPa. These values are higher than the 160 MPa
limit provided by CSA S807 (2010). Moreover, the tested specimens have flexure strength of 2061±216 MPa,
1587±110 MPa and 1790±91MPa for BFRP bars type A, B and BFRP tendons, respectively, which is higher
than the ultimate tensile strength. The interlaminar shear strength of the tested specimens were 72.4±2.9 MPa,
59.9±2.4 MPa and 63.1±2.7MPa for BFRP bars type A, B and BFRP tendons, respectively. It is clear that the
high values of the interlaminar shear strength indicate the good interface between the resin and the reinforcing
fibers. The bond strength was also satisfied because the two types of the tested BFRP bars showed bond
strengths higher than the 8 MPa specified by CSA S807 (2010). Thus, it could be concluded that the tested BFRP
bars meet the mechanical properties requirements of CSA S807 (2010).

The BFRP tendons, similarly, met those requirements but they showed average bond strength of 7.0±0.9 MPa.
According CEB-FIP (1978) the bond strength between prestressing steel bars smaller than 32 mm diameter in
normal-weight concrete with compressive strength of 35 MPa is about 4 MPa for deformed bars and lower than
2 MPa for smooth bars. Thus, the bond strength obtained herein is in agreement with what has been reported for
steel tendons.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4. Flexure test: (a) Test setup; (b) Typical flexure failure of BFRP bars; (c) Typical flexure failure of
BFRP tendons

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 5. Short-beam test: (a) Test setup; (b) Typical interlaminar shear failure of BFRP bars; (c) Typical
interlaminar shear failure of BFRP tendons
 Steel Tube
(Sleeve)

FRP Bar

db

Debonding 200 mm
Tube

5d b
200 mm
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 6. Pullout test: (a) Geometry of the specimens; (b) Test setup; (c) Typical bond failure of BFRP bars; (d)
Typical bond failure of BFRP tendons

Figure 7. Bond stress-free slip relationship

CONCLUDING REMARKS

This paper presented the result of an investigation conducted to characterize two types of basalt fiber-reinforced
polymer (BFRP) bars and one type of BFRP tendons. Based on the test results presented herein, the following
conclusions are drawn:

• This preliminary study confirms that the developed basalt FRP (BFRP) bars meet the physical and
mechanical properties requirements of ACI 440 (2008) and CSA S807 (2010). The evaluation of the long-
term performance of these bars in different environments and under different exposure conditions, however,
is still in progress.
• The bond strength of the BFRP tendons obtained herein is in agreement with what has been reported for
steel tendons.
• The results obtained herein contribute to developing and enhancing the physical properties of the BFRP
bars under investigation. New generations of these bars are currently available and the complete
characterization and structural testing in concrete members will be conducted shortly. This work will
contribute to introducing these new products the FRP design codes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Fonds québécois de la recherche sur la nature et les technologies (FQRNT)
of Quebec.
REFERENCES

ACI Committee 440. (2004). “Guide Test Methods for Fiber-Reinforced Polymers (FRPs) for Reinforcing or
Strengthening Concrete Structures (ACI 440.3R-04).” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, USA,
40 p.
ACI Committee 440. (2008). “Specification for Carbon and Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bar Materials for
Concrete Reinforcement (ACI 440.6M-08).” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 6 p.
ASTM D3171. 2011. “Standard Test Methods for Constituent Content of Composite.” American Society for
Testing and Materials, Conshohocken, USA, 10 p.
ASTM D3418. (2012). “Standard Test Method for Transition Temperatures and Enthalpies of Fusion and
Crystallization of Polymers by Differential Scanning Calorimetry.” American Society for Testing and
Materials, Conshohocken, USA, 7 p.
ASTM D4475. (2008). “Standard Test Method for Apparent Horizontal Shear Strength of Pultruded Reinforced
Plastic Rods by the Short Beam Method.” American Society for Testing and Materials, Conshohocken,
USA. 4p.
ASTM D4476. (2009). “Standard Test Method for Flexural Properties of Fiber Reinforced Pultruded Plastic
Rods.” American Society for Testing and Material, Conshohocken, USA. 5p.
ASTM D5028. (1990). “Standard Test Method for Curing Properties of Pultrusion Resin by Thermal Analysis.”
American Society for Testing and Material, Conshohocken, USA, 3 p.
ASTM D570. (2010). “Standard Test Method for Water Absorption of Plastics.” American Society for Testing
and Materials, Conshohocken, USA. 4 p.
ASTM D7617. (2011). “Standard Test Method for Transverse Shear Strength of Fiber-reinforced Polymer
Matrix Composite Bars.” American Society for Testing and Materials, Conshohocken, USA, 12 p.
ASTM D792. (2008). “Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of Plastics by
Displacement.” American Society for Testing and Materials, Conshohocken, USA. 6 p
ASTM E831. (2012). “Standard Test Methods for Linear Thermal Expansion of Solids Materials by
Thermomechanical Analysis.” American Society for Testing and Materials, Conshohocken, USA, 4p.
Canadian Standards Association (CSA). (2010). “Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CAN/CSA S6-06).”
Rexdale, ON, Canada. 733 p.
Canadian Standards Association (CSA). (2010). “Specification for Fibre-Reinforced Polymers (CAN/CSA
S807–10).” Rexdale, ON, Canada, 27 p.
Canadian Standards Association (CSA). (2012). “Design and Construction of Building Structures with Fibre
Reinforced Polymers (CAN/CSA S806-12).” Rexdale, ON, Canada.
CEB-FIP. (1978). “Model Code for Concrete Structures,” CEB FIP International Recommendations, 3rd ed.,
Comite Euro-International de Béton, Paris, 348 p.
ISIS Manual No. 3. (2007). “Reinforced Concrete Structures with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers.” ISIS Canada
Research Network, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, 151 p.
Vincent, P., Ahmed, E., and Benmokrane, B. (2013). “Characterization of Basalt Fiber-Reinforced Polymer
(BFRP) Reinforcing Bars for Concrete Structures.” Proceedings of the 3rd Specialty Conference on Material
Engineering & Applied Mechanics, Canadian Society of Civil Engineers, Montreal, Canada. May 29 to June
1, 8 p.