Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
BeamCross-Sections
1#3Bar
I 127 mm I
D
I 406.4mm
31.75 mm
Experimental study
Test programme
This programme consisted of testing 14under-reinforced
rectangular concrete beams. The tests were designed to
evaluate the effect of externally bonded, composite fabric
reinforcement on the beams' flexural behaviour. The
beams were loaded monotonically to failure in four-
point bending using an 890 kN capacity Tinius Olsen
universal testing machine (see Figure 1).
Beam design
Fourteen rectangular beams with span lengths of 1.12 m
and cross-sectional dimensions of 76.2 mm x 127 mm
were used (see Figure 1). The set of beams consisted of
three control beams having only traditional steel reinfor-
cement (beams CI, C2, C3); three sets of three beams,
each having the same steel reinforcement as the control
beams but with additional, externally applied aramid, E-
glass and graphite fibre fabric reinforcement (beams AI,
A2, A3, EI, E2, E3, GI, G2, G3); and two beams having
twice the steel reinforcement of the control beams but no
external composite fabric reinforcement (beams Sl, S2).
The beams with additional steel reinforcement were used
to allow a comparison of beams having additional exter-
nal fabric reinforcement with beams having additional
internal steel reinforcement. Cross-sections of the vari-
ous types of beams are shown in Figure 1.
All beams were designed to fail in flexure. The control
beams and the beams with additional steel reinforcement
were designed according to the specifications of the ACI
Building Code". In satisfying the ductility requirement
a single Grade 60#3 bar (9.525
mm diameter with a yield strength of 413 MPa) was used.
Two # 3 bars were used in beams having extra steel
plates have been tested
1s
-
25
These studies have shown
that the externally reinforced concrete beams exhibited
substantial increases in flexural capacity and stiffness. In
the earliest work, many of the beams failed due to the
debonding of the composite plate. In later studies, adhe-
sives with sufficient strength to transfer the shear forces
between the composite and concrete were found. When
these adhesives were used, the failure mode with regard
to bond was a shear failure of the concrete. Finally,
analytical models were developed for predicting the
flexural behaviour of the beams.
The technique of prestressing composite plates and
then bonding them to reinforced concrete beams has also
been studied>:". These studies found that prestressed,
bonded reinforcement produced a moderate gain over
non-prestressed reinforcement. The most significant
improvement found was the control of cracking. In one
study>, a theory for the optimal design of externally
bonded composite plates was presented.
While FRP composite plates can be used as an effective
means of providing additional reinforcement, they do
possess some drawbacks including (i) the need for a flat
surface for bonding, (ii) the cost associated with manu-
facturing large plates, and (iii) the difficulty in achieving
a bond between the concrete and the composite plate
sufficient enough to prevent debonding from governing
the failure mode.
As an alternative to the use of composite plates, this
paper investigates the strengthening of reinforced con-
crete beams using epoxy-bonded composite fabrics made
of aramid (Kevlar*), E-glass, and graphite fibres. Like
the composite plates, these fabrics are non-corrosive and
possess high strength-to-weight ratios. They also have
the beneficial qualities of (i) being able to conform to
irregular surface geometries, (ii) being manufactured in
long lengths, and (iii) being able to be bonded to beams
in such a way as to develop full tensile capacity prior to
debonding. Jackets made from glass-fibre fabrics expox-
ied to concrete columns have been studied as a possible
seismic retrofitting procedure and have been found to
perform quite well>.
This research can be directly applied to the upgrading
and rehabilitation of concrete beams. In situations where
bridges will be required to handle increased traffic, com-
posite fabrics can be adhered to the beams, thereby
increasing allowable loads. Likewise, damaged beams
can be reinforced and restored to their original capacity.
Because of their ability to conform to the shape of the
beam, composite fabrics can be used in a wide variety of
situations, and by wrapping the exposed cross-section,
strong bonds can be achieved and a simultaneous
increase in shear capacity can be gainedv-". It should be
noted that additional environmental and fatigue testing
must be run before actual field application is attempted.
The environmental testing should investigate the ability
of the various fabrics to withstand aggressive environ-
ments, while the fatigue testing should verify that cyclic
*Kev!ar is the registered tradename of a family of aramid fibres pro-
duced by the E.I. duPont de Nemours and Co. Inc., Wilmington, DE,
USA
192 Construction and Building Materials 1994 Volume 8 Number 3
Flexural strengthening of concrete beams: M. J. Chajes et al.
0.025
-Aramid (1 layer)
......... E-glass (3 layers)
- - - - -Graphite (2 layers)
0.010 0.Q15 0.020
Strain (mm1mm)
....
.'
,
,
,
..'
0.005
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, .'
, .'
, .:
r .'
, .'
, .'
0...jL..-'-............+ - - ' - ~ ' - ' - f - - ' - - - " - - - ' - ~ + - ' - ~ - ' - 1 - - ' - - - ' - ' - - - ' - - +
0.000
Ultimate strength,};' (MPa)
Table I Beams tested
250
Beams Internal steel External fabric
reinforcement reinforcement
200
CI, C2, C3 I #3 bar
I
SI, S2 2#3 bars
150
AI, A2, A3 I #3 bar Aramid (one layer)
El, E2, E3 I #3 bar E-glass (three layers)
'"
Gl, G2, G3 I #3 bar Graphite (two layers) '"
4)
100
J:l
tf.l
50
Concrete batch
Table 2 Concrete strengths
1
2
3
4
5
34.8
33.6
36.0
42.5
42.1
Figure 2 Stress-strain behaviour of impregnated composite fabrics
reinforcement (beams Sl and S2). The beams with exter-
nal composite fabric reinforcement were designed so that
the tensile capacity of the fabric was close to the yield
load of the additional # 3 bar (29.4 kN). To accomplish
this, different numbers of fabric layers were used accord-
ing to the ultimate strength of the various types of fabric.
According to the tensile capacity of the aramid, E-glass
and graphite fabrics (see section on composite fabrics),
one layer of aramid fabric (29.5 kN), three layers of E-
glass (24.9 kN) and two layers of graphite fabric (29.4
kN) were used. Shear reinforcement was not needed in
any of the beams. Table 1 provides a summary of the
various beams tested.
Beam fabrication
A concrete mix having a water-to-cement ratio of 0.50 by
weight was used to cast the 14 beams. Type I Portland
cement was used, and the maximum aggregate size was
9.5 mm. Five batches of concrete were needed to fabri-
cate the 14 beams and associated standard test cylinders
(152.4 mm diameter by 304.8 mm high). The beams were
cast in the University of Delaware Structures Laboratory
and were allowed to cure in a water bath for 28 days.
The concrete strengths for the five batches are shown
in Table 2. The average strength for the five batches was
37.8 MPa, and none differed by more than 12.5% from
this average. The Grade 60 steel reinforcing bars used
were tested and found to have an actual yield strength of
493.0 MPa.
Composite fabrics
The three types of composite fabrics used in this study
were (i) plain-weave aramid (Kevlar") fabric, (ii) crow-
foot satin-weave E-glass fabric, and (iii) plain-weave
graphite fabric. All of these woven composite fabrics are
made up of fibres oriented at 0 and 90 with an equal
distribution of fibres in each direction. The use of the
three different fabrics allowed the effect of varying the
stiffness of the external reinforcement to be studied. It
should be noted, however, that the use of some of these
fabrics may prove to be undesirable if they are found to
lack acceptable environmental durability.
For each type of fabric, three tensile test specimens
impregnated with the same adhesive used to bond the
fabrics to the concrete (see next section) were prepared.
The number of layers of fabric used for the specimens
was the same as used for the beams (one layer of aramid
fabric, three layers of E-glass fabric and two layers of
graphite fabric). All test specimens were cured under a
vacuum. After curing, the tensile specimens were loaded
to failure using an Instron universal testing machine.
From the test results, their respective elastic moduli,
failure strains and ultimate strengths were computed.
Stress-strain plots for the three impregnated composite
fabrics are shown in Figure 2, and a summary of the
average test values is presented in Table 3.
Adhesive selection
Based on ongoing research by the authors dealing with
the bonding of composite plates to concrete surfaces,
Sikadur 32 was selected as the adhesive for this appli-
cation. Sikadur 32 is a two-component, high-modulus,
high-strength, construction epoxy. The two parts are
mixed in a ratio of 1:1and can be cured at room tempera-
ture.
Since the previous bond tests involved composite
plates bonded to concrete, additional bond tests using
Sikadur 32 and the three types of composite fabrics were
conducted. A series of pull-off tests were run using the
set-up shown in Figure 3. The tests involved the bonding
of a 1 inch wide piece of epoxy-impregnated composite
fabric to a concrete block. Nine specimens having bond
lengths of 25.4, 50.8 and 76.2 mm were tested (three at
each length). The tests indicate that a single layer of
aramid, a triple layer of E-glass, and a double layer of
graphite fabric can be expected to develop full tensile
capacity in approximately 50.8 mm for both the E-glass
and graphite fabric, and in approximately 76.2 mm for
the aramid fabric. Based on these results, Sikadur 32 was
deemed to be a suitable adhesive choice. A summary of
the bond test results is given in Table 4.
Construction and Building Materials 1994 Volume 8 Number 3 193
Flexural strengthening of concrete beams: M. J. Chajes et al.
Table 3 Properties of resin-impregnated composite fabrics
Composite fabric Specimen thickness Modulus of elasticity Failure strain, 4u Failure stress, a,u
(mm) E,(MPa) (mm mm-
I
) (MPa)
Aramid (one layer) 1.04 11020 0.0225 223
E-glass (three layers) 1.42 13090 0.0122 138
Graphite (two layers) 1.22 22050 0.00748 190
p p
t t
.-Composite Fabric---. Composite Fabric (no end tabs)
(b)
Front View SideView
Figure 4 Externally bonded fabric: (a) beams AI, EI, E2, E3, GI, G2,
G3; (b) beams A2, A3
Figure 3 Experimental set-up for bond tests
Table 4 Bond test results
Bond length (mm) Aramid fabric E-glass fabric Graphite fabric
25.4 B B B
B B F
B F F
50.8 B F F
B F F
B F F
76.2 F F F
F F F
F F F
B - Bond failure
F - Fabric tensile failure
Bonding of composite fabric
Prior to the bonding of the fabric to the beams, the
concrete surface was mechanically abraded using a
grinding wheel, creating a somewhat porous surface. The
fabric was coated with adhesive on both sides and placed
onto the tension face of the beam, which itself had been
coated with adhesive. The fabric was then smoothed to
ensure a uniform distribution of adhesive and placed in a
vacuum bag. The beam was allowed to cure under
vacuum for I day and for an additional 2 days once it
was removed from the vacuum.
The two bonding schemes used are shown in Figure 4.
Originally, all beams were bonded without end tabs as
shown in Figure 4(a). During the initial round of testing,
however, the first aramid-reinforced beam (beam AI)
experienced some fabric debonding. As a result, end tabs
were added (see Figure 4b) as suggested in a study by
Ritchie et a/.
21