Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST OF STEEL PLATE BONDED VARIOUS FRP SHEETS

Takeshi MIYASHITA Specially appointed associate professor Nagaoka University of Technology 1603-1 Kamitomioka, Nagaoka, Niigata, Japan mtakeshi@vos.nagaokaut.ac.jp* Yusuke OKUYAMA Ph.D. Student Nagaoka University of Technology Dai WAKABAYASHI Nippon Expressway Research Institute Company Ltd. Norio KOIDE Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. Yuya HIDEKUMA, Akira KOBAYASHI Nippon Steel Composite Company, Ltd. Wataru HORIMOTO Kurabo Industries, Ltd. Masatsugu NAGAI Professor Nagaoka University of Technology

Abstract
This paper is a fundamental study on rational repair and reinforcement of webs in corroded steel girder bridges using Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP). Uniaxial compression test of steel plates bonded various FRP sheets is carried out. The objective of this test is to select FRP sheets that have reinforcing effect following large deformation induced by buckling. Furthermore, a layer of polyurea putty is inserted between the steel plate and the FRP sheet and its effect is investigated. Lastly, the method that predicts elastic buckling load of the steel plate with FRP is developed. Keywords: Fiber Reinforced Plastic, steel plate, uniaxial compression test, buckling

1. Introduction
Most of the deterioration for steel bridges is the corrosion. During their period of service, progress of corrosion is inevitable due to the influence from surrounding circumstance. The conventional methods repairing and reinforcing the damage are the replacement of corroded members or the attachment of steel plate on them. However, these methods are regulated in service because of requiring heavy machineries. Therefore, efficient and rational method repairing and reinforcing the damage is strongly needed. In this situation, Fiber Reinforced Plastics (FRP) has been paid to attentions due to light weight and high stiffness, and many studies have been reported so far [1], [2]. Previous studies mainly focus on the applications to members subjected to normal stress; flanges in a steel girder bridge or chord members in a steel truss bridge. However, corrosions in the steel

Page 1 of 8

bridges mostly occur at webs near the ends of supports where shear force with large deformation at the ultimate state is dominant. Herein, although debonding of FRP under large deformation becomes a problem, this type of investigation has been few reported. Therefore, the objective of this research is to carry out a fundamental study on rational repair and reinforcement of webs in corroded steel girder bridges using FRP. Uniaxial compression test of steel plates bonded various FRP sheets is carried out. This test aims to select FRP sheets that have reinforcing effect following large deformation induced by buckling. Furthermore, a layer of polyurea putty is inserted between the steel plate and the FRP sheet and its effect is investigated. Lastly, the method that predicts elastic buckling load of the steel plate with FRP is developed.

2. Outline of experiment
2.1 Materials The property used in this research is shown in Table 1. In this study, six kinds of FRP sheets are selected ; high elastic carbon fiber (CE), high strength carbon fiber (CU), carbon fiber strand sheet (CS), glass fiber (G), high strength polyethylene (P) and hybrid fiber (H, C:G=1:1). Table 2 shows the dimensions and the material characteristic of a steel plate used in this study. Table 3 shows the material properties of the polyurea putty and resin.
Table 1. Properties of FRP sheets.
Fiber sheet Design value Sign Type Thickness mm t cd CE CU CS G P H High elastic carbon fiber High strength carbon fiber Carbon fiber strand sheet glass fiber High strength polyethylen Hybrid fiber 0.116 0.121 0.286 0.123 0.108 0.121 Young's modulus M Pa Ecd 6.40E+05 2.40E+05 6.40E+05 7.40E+04 8.80E+04 3.83E+05 M easured value Young's modulus M Pa Ecm 7.80E+05 2.79E+05 7.45E+05 1.05E+05 9.30E+04 5.01E+05 mm t FRP 0.966 0.971 1.976 0.973 0.958 0.971 M Pa EFRP 9.37E+04 3.48E+04 1.08E+05 1.29E+04 1.05E+04 6.24E+04 Thickness FRP Young's modulus

Table 2. Properties of steel plate.


Length mm SM 490YB 400 / 800 Cross section Young's modulus mm 609 M Pa 2.00E+05 Yield stress M Pa 428

Table 3. Properties of putty and resin.


Polyurea putty FU-Z Density Amount of coating Resin thickness Young's modulus g/cm g/m mm M Pa
3

Resin FR-E5P 1.17 1000 0.85 2533 FB-E7S for CS 1.48 2500 1.69 2434

1.25 1000 0.80 54.7

2.2

Specimens

Figure 1 shows the cross section of specimens. FRP sheets were bonded to both sides of the steel plate. The parameters in this experiment are shown in Table 4. The types of the specimen are classified into two cases according to the number of laminated FRP sheets. In Case 1, the number of FRP layers bonded to both sides of the steel plate is one. In Case 2, the number of FRP layers is two.

Page 2 of 8

Steel

Resin Fiber sheet Resin Polyurea putty Primer

Steel

Resin Fiber sheet Resin Primer

Figure 1. Cross section of Specimen.

Table 4. Experimental parameter (Unit: mm).


Case 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-9 1-10 1-11 1-12 1-13 1-14 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 2-7 2-8 Specimens Sign CEN CEU CUN CUU CSN CSU GN GU PN PU HN HU CEN CEU 2CEN 2CEU GCEN GCEU PCEN PCEU GCSU CECSU FRP 1st layer CE CE CU CU CS CS G G P P H H CE CE CE CE G G P P G CE FRP 2nd layer CE CE CE CE CE CE CS CS Sheet length 1st layer / 2nd layer 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 300 300 450/400 450/400 450/400 450/400 450/400 450/400 450/400 750/700 Steel length 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 400 400 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 Polyurea putty

2.3

Experimental method

In this experiment, horizontal displacements and strains on both sides of the specimen were measured. Figure 2 shows the measurement positions of strain gauges and displacement sensors. In order to realize simple supported boundary conditions, both ends of the steel plate were sharply cut. As a preliminary experiment, uniaxial compression test for a steel plate revealed its maximum load as 9.53kN. Since theoretical value (Euler buckling load) of the plate is 9.68kN, it can be said that expected boundary condition is realized.

Page 3 of 8

100

112

188

188

112

100
60

25

37

138

138 50 50

37

25
60

192

400 800

192

8 42

300 400

42 8

(a) Case 1 (Steel: 800mm, FRP: 400mm)

(b) Case 1 (Steel: 400mm, FRP: 300mm)

9
25 22 388 300 388 300 25 17 22
60

100

87

25

188

188

25

87

100
60

17

167

25

400 800

25

167

8 17

25

700 800

25 17

(c) Case 2 (Steel: 800mm, FRP: 450mm)

(d) Case 2 (Steel: 800mm, FRP: 750mm)

Figure 2. Details of specimen.

3. Results and discussions


3.1 Reinforcing effect Table 5 shows the results of experiment. In the table, PE and Pmax mean Euler buckling load and the maximum load in experiment respectively. The reinforcing effect is defined as the following equation. Reinforcing effect (%) =
Pmax PE 100 PE

(1)

Figure 3 shows the reinforcing effect in Case1 and Case2.


Table 5. Result of experiment.
Specimen Euler buckling load M aximum load Central displacement Specimen Euler buckling load M aximum load Central displacement Specimen Euler buckling load M aximum load Central displacement Specimen Euler buckling load M aximum load Central displacement Specimen Euler buckling load M aximum load Central displacement Specimen Euler buckling load M aximum load Central displacement kN kN mm kN kN mm kN kN mm kN kN mm kN kN mm kN kN mm CEN-1 9.57 12.13 43.65 CSN-1 10.04 16.44 25.15 PN-1 9.57 10.05 212.05 CEN-1 38.15 49.64 12.75 2CEN-1 9.61 13.25 35.15 PCEN-1 9.49 11.15 50.70 CEN-2 9.52 12.29 52.60 CSN-2 9.54 16.47 23.05 PN-2 9.60 10.36 219.55 CEN-2 38.47 47.41 14.55 2CEN-2 9.57 15.64 34.40 PCEN-2 10.04 13.80 43.95 CEN-3 9.45 12.28 49.65 CSN-3 9.58 16.31 33.90 PN-3 9.46 10.24 125.45 CEN-3 38.50 50.99 19.10 2CEN-3 9.60 13.69 39.60 PCEN-3 9.31 13.82 49.65 CEU-1 9.69 12.32 33.05 CSU-1 9.68 15.34 64.30 PU-1 9.70 10.13 109.65 CEU-1 38.11 53.60 23.40 2CEU-1 9.20 15.33 75.95 PCEU-1 9.50 12.86 57.40 CEU-2 9.47 12.03 38.90 CSU-2 9.58 15.15 64.40 PU-2 9.46 10.76 229.05 CEU-2 38.19 53.20 21.35 2CEU-2 9.99 15.27 62.00 PCEU-2 10.00 14.07 51.25 CEU-3 9.52 12.90 33.05 CSU-3 9.43 14.81 39.25 PU-3 9.55 10.71 179.40 CEU-3 37.62 51.57 12.95 2CEU-3 9.43 14.27 62.40 PCEU-3 9.87 13.99 53.40 GCEN-1 10.00 14.48 43.40 GCSU-1 9.44 16.82 49.40 GCEN-2 9.53 12.82 46.05 GCSU-2 10.05 17.32 35.60 GCEN-3 9.49 12.65 52.05 GCSU-3 9.79 17.31 55.65 GCEU-1 9.96 14.41 44.80 CECSU-1 10.21 26.55 52.15 GCEU-2 10.00 14.49 46.60 CECSU-2 9.56 25.48 60.45 GCEU-3 9.54 12.24 54.90 CECSU-3 9.86 27.24 23.75 CUN-1 9.57 10.82 97.80 GN-1 9.67 10.77 HN-1 9.58 11.96 45.45 CUN-2 9.57 11.06 111.95 GN-2 9.57 10.62 198.75 HN-2 9.47 11.35 49.80 CUN-3 9.63 10.93 91.50 GN-3 9.77 10.93 155.95 HN-3 9.64 10.85 74.65 CUU-1 9.57 10.96 80.30 GU-1 9.73 9.86 79.65 HU-1 9.68 11.21 25.00 CUU-2 9.80 11.18 94.10 GU-2 9.71 10.36 100.95 HU-2 9.75 12.07 41.15 CUU-3 9.48 10.91 94.35 GU-3 9.50 10.50 77.75 HU-3 9.54 11.03 26.25

Page 4 of 8

200

200

(Pmax - PE) / PE 100 (%)

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0


CEN CEU CUN CUU CSN CSU GN GU PN PU HN

(Pmax - PE) / PE 100 (%)

Average

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Average

HU CEN CEU (400) (400)

2CEN

2CEU

GCEN

GCEU

PCEN

PCEU

GCSU CECSU

(a) Case 1 Figure 3. Reinforcing effect.

(b) Case 2

3.2

Deformation

In Table 5, central horizontal displacement at the ultimate states of FRP is also shown. Herein, the ultimate state, which were debonding or breaking, was determined from measurements by the strain gauges. It was confirmed from the result of Case 1 that low modulus fiber sheets such as P and G showed better performance on deformation. 3.3 Load-displacement curve Representative examples of load-displacement curve in CE and 2CE are shown in Figure 4. In the figures, CEU and CEN mean the cases with and without putty. In the case of CEN, the load dropped suddenly when the central displacement reached beyond 50mm due to the fracture of FRP sheets. On the other hand, the load in CEU did not show sudden drop by the effect of putty. Similarly, in the case of 2CEN, the load dropped suddenly when the central displacement reached beyond 40mm. On the other hand, the load in 2CEU did not show sudden drop. Therefore, it is found that the polyurea putty used in this study can prevent the debonding or breaking of FRP, and improve the flexibility.
20 18 16 14
20

CEU-1 CEN-1

18 16 14

2CEU-1 2CEN-1

Load [kN]

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Load [kN]

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250

Displacement [mm]

Displacement [mm]

(a) CE(Case1FRP: 400mm)

(b) 2CE(Case2FRP: 450mm)

Figure 4. Load-displacement curve.

3.4

Failure modes

3.4.1 Case1 The most of failure mode in this case was debonding or breaking at the center of the specimens in tensile side. However, the case using CS only shown other failure mode that was debonding at the end of the specimens in Figure 5. This is the reason why the change of cross section at the end of the specimen is larger since CS is thicker than other FRP sheets. In the case of CSN, FRP sheets were delaminated at the end of the specimen in small deformation. On the other hand, in the case of CSU, the polyurea putty suppressed the

Page 5 of 8

progress of delamination although FRP sheets were delaminated at the end of the specimen.

(a) CSN Figure 5. CS(Case1FRP:400mm).

(b) CSU

3.4.2 Case2 In this case, the combination of FRP sheets lead to different failure modes. In the case of 2CE, which is the case using two CE layers, failure mode was the delamination at the end of the specimen in spite of the existence of the polyurea putty. In the case using low elastic FRP sheets such as G or P, the most of failure mode was the breaking at the center of FRP sheet although there was a little difference by the existence of the polyurea putty. In the case of GCS that G and CS were used in the first and second layer, failure modes were the delamination at the end of the all specimen. However, GCSU shown different failure mode comparing to other two specimen as shown in Figure 6. The specimen bent at the end of FRP sheet. On the other hand, in the case of CECSU, the specimen bent at its center in spite of using CS sheet as shown in Figure 7. Thus, when the length of FRP sheet having high stiffness such as CS is short on the steel plate, it is necessary to consider the effect of reinforcing length.

Figure 6. GCSU(Case2FRP:400mm).

Figure 7. CECSU(Case2FRP:750mm).

Page 6 of 8

4. Prediction of elastic buckling load


4.1 Formulation In the case not considering FRP bonding length, Euler buckling load for composite section of the steel and FRP is the following.
P V EI V L
2

(2)

where (EI)V is a flexural rigidity of composite cross section, L is a length of the steel plate. In this method, it is assumed that the bonding length of FRP sheet is equal to the length of the steel plate. Next, in the case considering FRP bonding length, the method predicting elastic buckling load is needed to develop. At first, as shown in Figure 8, differential equations of wi, which are displacements in beam i (i = 1 ~ N), are expressed as follows.
2 d 4 wi 2 d wi 0 i dx 4 dx 2

(3)

where
i P EI i

(4)

N is the total number of beam segments, Li is a length of each beam, (EI)i is a composite flexural rigidity, P is an applied axial load. General solutions of equation (3) are given as the followings.
wi C1i sin i x C2i cos i x C3i x C4i

(5)

where Cji (j = 1, 2, 3, 4) are unknown coefficients determined from boundary, continuity and symmetrical conditions. Then, equations determining unknown coefficients can be summarized as follows.

B C 0

(6)

where C is a vector consisting of unknown coefficients. Condition having nontrivial solution in equation (6) is
det B 0

(7)

The minimum value of P (0) satisfying equation (7) affords the elastic buckling load in Figure 8. The calculation of equation (7) is carried out numerically since it is difficult to calculate analytically as the number N increases.

Figure 8. Analytical model for formulation.

Page 7 of 8

4.2

Result

Figures 9 and 10 show predicted result from equations (2) and (7) in Case1 and Case2 respectively. Here, vertical axes in the figures are evaluated by the following equation.
Pmax P V 100 P V

(12)

where, Pmax means the maximum load in experiment and PV means the predicted loads from equations (2) and (7). It is found from Figures 9 and 10 that the accuracy of prediction becomes better in equation (7) than in equation (2) since the exact FRP bonding length is considered in equation (7).
30 30

Average
20 20

Avarage

(Pmax - PV) / PV (%)

(Pmax - P) / P (%)

10

7.2 1.3 1.7 2.1 2.8

5.7

10

3.6 3.0 4.0 4.1

8.0 1.8 6.5 2.9 3.6 2.7 2.2 -2.0 5.8

4.9

-2.9 -1.9
-10

-1.0 -1.5 -2.8

-10

-5.0

-14.3
-20 -20

-20.1
-30 CEN CEU CUN CUU CSN CSU GN GU PN PU HN HU CEN CEU (400) (400) -30 CEN CEU CUN CUU CSN CSU GN GU PN PU HN HU CEN CEU (400) (400)

(a) eq. (2)

(b) eq. (7)

Figure 9. Prediction of elastic buckling load (Case1).


30 30

Average
20 20

Avarage

(Pmax - PV) / PV (%)

10

(Pmax - P) / P (%)

10

0.4
0

1.1
0

1.1 -2.6 -6.9

0.8

-0.3 -1.6 -7.1

-10

-7.4 -8.7 -12.6

-7.4 -10.9

-10

-20

-20

-17.4
-30 2CEN 2CEU GCEN GCEU PCEN PCEU

-26.7
GCSU CECSU

-30 2CEN 2CEU GCEN GCEU PCEN PCEU GCSU CECSU

(a) eq. (2)

(b) eq. (7)

Figure 10. Prediction of elastic buckling load (Case2).

5. Conclusions
In this research, a fundamental study on rational repair and reinforcement of webs in corroded steel girder bridges using Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) was carried out. Uniaxial compression test of steel plates bonded various FRP sheets was conducted in order to select FRP sheets that have reinforcing effect following large deformation induced by buckling. Lastly, the method that predicts elastic buckling load of the steel plate with FRP was developed. References [1] Okura I., Fukuui T., Nakamura K. and Matsugami T., Decrease in Stress in Steel Plates by Carbon Fiber Sheets and Debonding Shearing Stress, Journal of Structure Mechanics and Earthquake Engineering, No.689, pp.239-249, 2001 (in Japanese). [2] Kishi N., Mikami H. and Zhang G, Numerical Analysis of Debonding Behavior of FRP Sheet for Flexural Strengthening RC Beams, Journal of Materials, Concrete Structures and Pavements, No.725, pp.255-272, 2003 (in Japanese).

Page 8 of 8

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi