CICE 2010 - The 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering

September 27-29, 2010 Beijing, China

Experimental Studies on FRP-Concrete Composite Deck with FRP

Perfobond Shear Connectors
Weichen Xue (xuewc@tongji.edu.cn), Chang Ge, Yuan Tan, Yongsheng Wang
Department of Building Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China

ABSTRACT: Push-out tests were conducted to investigate the shear performance of FRP perfobond shear
connectors. Shear failure was observed on the ribs of connectors at ultimate. Based on test results, the FRP
perfobond connectors showed relatively high shear capacity and could be applied to the FRP-concrete com-
posite deck. Then the simply supported FRP-concrete composite deck with FRP perfobond shear connectors
was tested under monotonic load. The load versus mid-span deflection response of composite deck behaved
linearly up to the ultimate load. Shear failure occurred on the webs of FRP deck near the upper flange, while
the FRP perfobond shear connectors remained intact without any damage. The measured maximum mid-span
deflection was 25.4 mm, corresponding to 1/63 of the simply supported span, which demonstrated the large
deformability of FRP-concrete composite deck.

1 INTRODUCTION (Hall & Mottram 1998). In addition, experimental

The application of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)
materials combined with concrete has been proposed
to reduce the initial costs, enhance the structural
stiffness and make more effective use of each con-
stituent material (Deskovic et al. 1995). One innova-
tive FRP-concrete composite member developed in
bridge engineering is the FRP-concrete composite
deck, which consists of FRP deck in tension and
concrete slab in compression. To make insure the
composite action between FRP deck and concrete
slab, some shear transfer methods have been pro-
vided and investigated, including bond with epoxy
adhesive, installation of bolts or FRP perfobond
shear connectors etc (Zhou & Keller 2005). Based
on the experimental work carried out by Nam et al.
(Nam et al. 2007), the FRP perfobond shear connec-
tors exhibited the advantages of high shear capacity
and easy of construction.
The Miyun bridge of China built in 1982, was a
road traffic bridge, in which the FRP-concrete com-
posite deck systems were firstly employed (Ye &
Feng 2008). In 1990s, Descovic et al. provided the
conception of lightweight composite beam consist-
ing of a glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) fila-
ment wound box section with a concrete layer on the
top side and a carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
(CFRP) strap on the bottom flange (Deskovic et al.
1995). In 1998, Hall & Mottram performed tests on
the FRP-concrete composite beams, which were
composed of pultruded GFRP panels with T-
upstands and normal or lightweight concrete slabs
work on the FRP-concrete composite deck systems
was also conducted by other researchers (Van Erp et
al. 2002; Kitane et al. 2004; Keller & Gurtler 2005).
In summary, existing studies mainly focused on
the feasibility and structural behavior of FRP-
concrete composite beam/deck bonded with epoxy
adhesive, or connected with bolts, while limited re-
search was reported regarding to the FRP-concrete
composite deck with FRP perfobond shear connec-
tors. Herein, this paper presents the push-out tests on
FRP perfobond shear connectors and the pilot ex-
perimental studies on the FRP-concrete composite
deck with FRP perfobond shear connectors.
2 PUSH-OUT TESTS ON FRP PERFOBOND
SHEAR CONNECTORS
2.1 Test design
2.1.1 Specimens
Push-out tests were conducted on two identical
specimens, numbering PS-1 and PS-2, respectively.
The FRP perfobond shear connectors used are
shown in Fig. 1. The FRP perfobond shear connec-
tors had several parallel ribs with six 20 mm-
diameter holes. The holes were drilled at the middle
height of the ribs, and spaced with 100 mm. The
GFRP rebars installed through the holes were 360
mm long and 9.5 mm in diameter. For each push-out
specimen, a 176 mm-width FRP deck is attached
with the FRP perfobond shear connectors at each
side and then held by two identical reinforced con-
crete slabs, as illustrated in Fig. 2.

Ribs
Figure 4. Shear failure on ribs of perfobond shear connectors

2.2.2 Load versus slip curves

GFRP The measured load versus slip curves of push-out
rebars
specimens are plotted in Fig. 5. Note the slip repre-
sents the average relative slip between FRP deck and
concrete slab recorded by the displacement trans-
ducers.
Figure 1. FRP perfobond shear connectors

2.1.2 Loading and measurements 250

The push-out specimens were tested to failure under

monotonic loading. Fig. 3 shows the test setup.
200

Two displacement transducers were positioned at 150

each side of the specimen to measure the relative

P /kN

slip between the FRP deck and concrete slab. For 100

each push-out specimen, six strain rosettes in all 50

PS-1
PS-2

were used to measure the strains of FRP perfobond

shear connectors. The strains on two of the three ribs 0
0 0.4 Slip/m m 0.8 1.2
of FRP perfobond shear connectors, the middle one
and a side one, were recorded during the tests. Figure 5. Load versus slip curves of push-out specimens

FRP deck
The measured load versus slip curves of push-out
specimens exhibit the elastic stage and plastic stage
under loading. As the applied loads were less than
20 0.2 time the ultimate loads, specimens showed an
hole
P almost linear-elastic responses, and the slip between
GFRP the FRP deck and concrete slab was small. Some
rebars
fine damage might begin to form at the FRP per-
fobond shear connectors when the applied loads
reached 0.2 time the ultimate loads, and the stiffness
of FRP perfobond shear connectors decreased as the
applied loads increased. The load versus slip curves
Foamed plastic are nonlinear after 0.2 time the ultimate loads. At ul-
timate, the relative slip developed rapidly with little
Figure 2. Details of push-out Figure 3. Test setup increase of applied loads.
specimen
2.2.3 Load versus strain curves
2.2 Test results and analysis Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 show the measured load versus
strain curves of specimens. Note ε1 and ε2 denote the
normal strain parallel to and perpendicular to the di-
2.2.1 Failure pattern rection of loading, respectively, and γ12 denotes the
Shear failure on the ribs of FRP perfobond shear converted shear strain. Seen from the figures:
connectors was observed in the push-out tests, as (1) The load versus strain curves are similar for
shown in Fig. 4. During test loading, no damage oc- the two specimens. The strains on ribs of FRP per-
curred on the surrounding concrete and the GFRP fobond connectors developed linearly up to 0.4 time
rebars installed through the holes. the ultimate loads. When shear failure occurred, the
shear strains on ribs of FRP perfobond connectors
are 8113 με and 7898 με, respectively.
 (2) The normal strains measured at the same posi-
tion are much smaller than the shear strains, which
indicates that the FRP perfobond connectors are
mainly subjected to the shear forces in the push-out
tests.
200 250
200
160
ε2 ε1 γ12
120 150
P /kN
P /kN
80 100
40
0 0
-2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Strain/με
Figure 6. Load versus strain Figure 7. Load versus strain
curves of PS-1
2.2.4 Shear capacity
The measured ultimate loads were 173.1 kN and
203.3 kN for specimen PS-1 and PS-2, respectively.
Based on the test results, the shear failure on ribs of
FRP perfobond shear connectors was observed. So
the load carrying capacity of push-out specimens
was mainly controlled by the shear capacity of FRP
perfobond connectors, Ps, which can be calculated
by:
Ps   u Asn
where  u = shear strength of ribs (MPa); Asn = total
area of ribs with deducting the area of holes (mm2).
The predicted shear capacity of FRP perfobond con-
nectors is 243.0 kN according to Eq. (1), which is
higher than the measured ultimate loads. It may be
due to the fact that FRP perfobond connectors were
under the combined forces of shear and flexure in
push-out test. Based on test results, the FRP per-
fobond connectors showed promising behaviors and
could be used to the FRP-concrete composite deck.
3 STATIC TEST ON
COMPOSITE DECK
3.1 Test design
3.1.1 Specimen
The specimen of FRP-concrete composite deck was
1800 mm long and had a cross-sectional area of 500
× 140 mm, consisting a 80 mm-depth FRP deck and
60 mm-depth concrete slab. The FRP perfobond
connectors were applied to transfer shear. Note the
materials of FRP perfobond connectors, FRP deck
and GFRP rebars used in the static test were identi-
cal with those used in the push-out tests, while with
different dimensions.
The simply supported composite deck was loaded
monotonically to failure. Fig. 8 shows a diagram of
the loading configuration. A hydraulic jack and dis-
tribution beam produced two point loads at equal
distances of 200 mm from the center of the compos-
ite deck.
P
East West
Neoprene pad
10mm Concrete slab
Neoprene pad
100
100 10mm
ε1
ε2 γ12
FRP deck
50
Figure 8. Loading configuration
-3000 0 3000 6000 9000
Strain/με
3.2 Overall response
curves of PS-2
The initial cracking was observed at the bottom of
concrete slab beneath the west load point when the
applied load, P, increased to about 0.1 time the ulti-
mate load, Pu. The formed cracks propagated up-
wards and several new cracks developed within the
constant moment region as the applied load in-
creased. Under the load of 0.7Pu, the relative slip be-
tween the FRP deck and concrete slab was 0.6mm
and the sounds of fiber fracture from FRP deck
could be heard sporadically. The relative slip be-
tween the FRP deck and concrete slab was increased
(1) to about 1.1 mm at ultimate, and the measured shear
stresses on FRP webs were 52.4 MPa, which ex-
ceeded the shear strength of FRP deck obtained from
the tests of mechanical properties. Fig. 9 shows the
failure pattern of FRP-concrete composite deck.
Shear failure occurred on the webs of FRP deck near
the upper flange accompanied with a loud sound,
while the FRP perfobond shear connectors remained
intact without any damage.
FRP-CONCRETE
Figure 9. Failure pattern of FRP-concrete composite deck
3.3 Test results analysis
3.3.1 Strain distributions of mid-span section
The strain distributions through depth of mid-span
section under different load levels are plotted in Fig.
10. Seen from the figure, the strains approximately
exhibit a linear distribution along the height of sec-
tion, while the short fold lines reflect the relative slip
developed between concrete slab and FRP deck.
 140 160 parallel to and perpendicular to the longitudinal di-
120
100
0.2Pu
0.4Pu
120 rection of composite deck, respectively, and γ12 de-
notes the converted shear strain. Seen from Fig. 14,
Deepth /mm

0.6Pu

P /kN
80 0.8Pu 80
60
40
1.0Pu
40
the normal strains developed linearly under the ap-
20
0
plied loads, while some nonlinear characteristics
0
-4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000
0 10 20 30 could be observed in the response of load versus
Strain/με Deflection /mm
shear strain. In addition, the shear strains are higher
than the normal strains at the position, which may be
Figure 10. Strain distributions Figure 11. Load versus
of mid-span section deflection curves caused by the fact that webs of FRP deck mainly re-
sist the shear forces. The shear strains developed in
3.3.2 Load versus deflection curves the web of FRP deck were 10691 με at ultimate load,
As illustrated in Fig. 11, the measured curves of load and the corresponding shear stresses were 52.4 MPa,
versus deflection at mid-span behave linearly up to which led to the shear failure on webs of FRP deck.
Pu. The initial concrete crack was observed at about
0.1Pu, while it seemed that the concrete cracking had 160

limited influence on the stiffness of the composite

deck. The measured mid-span deflection was 25.4 120

mm at ultimate, corresponding to 1/63 of the simply ε2 ε1 γ12

P /kN
80

supported span, which demonstrates the large de-

formability of FRP-concrete composite deck. 40

3.3.3 Load versus slip curves -2000 0 2000 4000 6000

Strain/με
8000 10000 12000 14000

Three displacement transducers were used to record

the relative slips between the FRP deck and concrete Figure 14. Strains developed at the web of FRP deck
slab at the ends of composite deck (s1), the middle of
shear span (s3) and at the position beneath the west 3.3.5 Load carrying capacity
loading point (s2), respectively. Fig. 12 shows the Based on test results, shear failure was observed on
measured load versus slip curves of composite deck. the webs of composite deck and concrete in com-
No slip was observed under the applied load of pression remained intact. So the load carrying capac-
0.1Pu. The relative slips between the FRP deck and ity of FRP-concrete composite deck could be con-
concrete slab began to develop after 0.1Pu, and the trolled by the shear capacity of FRP deck.
load versus slip responses exhibited an approximate Furthermore, the shear capacity of FRP deck was
linear relationship up to Pu. The maximum average mainly contributed to the shear capacity of its webs
relative slip reached 1.1 mm at ultimate, and it was according to the principles of material mechanics.
observed that the values of relative slip at the middle By this means, the shear capacity of FRP-concrete
of shear span were larger than those measured at the composite deck was calculated as 129.8 kN, corre-
ends of composite deck or the middle of shear span sponding to 83% of the measured ultimate load.
during test.

160
4 CONCLUSION
160

120 120
s3 The following conclusions can be drawn from the
P /kN

s2
P /kN

s1 80
80
experimental studies:
40 40
(1) Shear failure on the ribs of FRP perfobond
0 0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 0 1400 2800 4200 5600 shear connectors was observed in the push-out tests,
Slip /mm
Strain/με while no damage occurred on the surrounding con-
crete and the GFRP rebars installed through the
Figure 12. Load versus slip Figure 13. Strains developed
holes. The FRP perfobond connectors showed prom-
curves at the bottom of FRP deck
ising behaviors and could be used to the FRP-
3.3.4 Strains developed in FRP deck concrete composite deck.
As shown in Fig. 13, the longitudinal strains at the (2) For the FRP-concrete composite deck, shear
bottom of FRP deck in mid-span section are in- failure occurred on the webs of FRP deck near the
creased linearly up to the ultimate load. The meas- upper flange at ultimate, and the FRP perfobond
ured strains of FRP deck web at the distance of 330 shear connectors remained intact without any dam-
mm from the specimen center and at the distance of age. The strains approximately exhibit a linear dis-
15 mm from the FRP deck upper flange are shown in tribution along the height of section, and the average
Fig. 14, where ε1 and ε2 represent the normal strain relative slip reached 2.5 mm under the ultimate load.
The measured mid-span deflection was 25.4 mm at
ultimate, corresponding to 1/63 of the simply sup-
ported span, which demonstrates the large deform-
ability of FRP-concrete composite deck.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the Fund of Western

Communications Construction Scientific and Tech-
nological Project by the Ministry of Communica-
tions of the P.R. China (No.20063188 2244) and the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.
50008012 & No. 50978193).

REFERENCES

Deskovic, N., Triantafillou, T.C. & Meier, U. 1995. Innovative

design of FRP combined with concrete short-term behavior.
Journal of Structural Engineering 121(7):1069-1078.
Hall, J.E. & Mottram, J.T. 1998. Combined FRP reinforcement
and permanent framework for concrete members. Journal
of Composites for Construction 2(2):78–86.
Keller, T., Gurtler, H. 2005. Composite action and adhesive
bond between FRP bridge decks and main girders. Journal
of Composites for Construction 9(4):360–368.
Kitane, Y., Aref A.J. & Lee, G.C. 2004. Static and fatigue test-
ing of hybrid fiberreinforced polymer–concrete bridge su-
perstructure. Journal of Composites for Construction
8(2):182–190.
Nam, J.H., Yoon, S.J., Ok, D.M. & Cho, S.K. 2007. Perfobond
FRP Shear Connector for the FRP-Concrete Composite
Bridge Deck. Key Engineering Materials 334-335 I: 281-
284.
Van Erp, G.M., Heldt T., McCormick, L., Carter, D. & Tran-
berg, C. 2002. An Australian approach to fiber composite
bridges. In Gowripalan, N., Sri Bandyopadhyay, S. & Riz-
kalla, S.H. (eds), Composite systems: macro composites,
micro composites, nano composites; Proc. ACUN-4 inter-
national composites conference, 21-25 July 2002, Univer-
sity of New South Wales: Sydney.
Ye, L.P. & Feng P. 2008. Applications and development of fi-
ber-reinforced polymer in engineering structures. China
Civil Engineering Journal 39: 24-36. (in Chinese)
Zhou, A. & Keller, T. 2005. Joining techniques for fiber rein-
forced polymer composite bridge deck systems. Composite
Structures 69(3): 336-345.