Journals / Düzce Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

Investigation of Flexural Performance of Steel, Glass FRP and Hybrid Reinforced Concrete Beams

Çelik, Cam FRP ve Hibrit Donatılı Betonarme Kirişlerin Eğilme Performansının İncelenmesi

Pages
1470–1483
Publication Date
2020-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In order to explain the damages occurred at the specimen, damage analysis is presented.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcing bars are preferred alternative to steel reinforcements, due to advantages such as resistance to corrosion, high strength to weight ratio, good fatigue properties and ease of handling.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Energy absorption capacity of the specimen with GFRP bar was significantly higher than the other specimens.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In order to explain the damages occurred at the specimen, damage analysis is presented.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Cam fiber takviyeli polimer (GFRP) · Hibrit kiriş · Eğilme analizi

Abstract

Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcing bars are preferred alternative to steel reinforcements, due to advantages such as resistance to corrosion, high strength to weight ratio, good fatigue properties and ease of handling. Glass-FRP (GFRP) bars are the most commonly used in civil engineering applications due to their low cost. Recently, a lot of research has been done on GFRP reinforcements and steel together with GFRP reinforcements called as “Hybrid” reinforcements instead of using steel reinforcements in beams and columns. In this study; the advantages of GFRP and Hybrid reinforcements over reinforced in concrete beams compared to conventional steel bars have been investigated. Reinforced concrete beams produced consisting of steel bars and different number of glass bars. Four-point bending test was performed on the produced beams. All three specimens have almost equal maximum load carrying capacity. However, specimen with steel bar and specimen with hybrid bar showed brittle failure while specimen with GFRP bar showed ductile behavior. Energy absorption capacity of the specimen with GFRP bar was significantly higher than the other specimens. In order to explain the damages occurred at the specimen, damage analysis is presented.

Özet

Elyaf takviyeli polimer (FRP) donatılar korozyona karşı direnç, ağırlıkça yüksek mukavemet oranı, iyi yorulma özellikleri ve kullanım kolaylığı gibi avantajlar nedeniyle, alternatif olarak tercih edilmekte ve kullanımı giderek artmaktadır. İnşaat mühendisliği uygulamalarında düşük maliyetlerinden dolayı en yaygın olarak Cam-FRP (GFRP) donatılar kullanılmaktadır. Son zamanlarda, kiriş ve kolonlarda kullanılan çelik donatılar yerine Cam FRP donatılar ve çelik ile Cam FRP donatının birlikte kullanıldığı “Hibrit” donatı düzeni üzerinde birçok araştırma yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmada; Cam FRP ve Hibrit donatıların betonarme kirişlerde geleneksel çelik donatılara göre avantajları araştırılmıştır. Çelik çubuklardan ve farklı sayıda cam çubuklardan oluşan betonarme kirişler üretilmiştir. Üretilen betonarme kirişlere dört nokta eğilme testleri yapılmıştır. Deney sonucu her üç numune için yaklaşık eşit maksimum yük taşıma kapasitesi elde edilmiştir. Bununla birlikte, çelik donatılı ve hibrit donatılı kiriş, gevrek bir davranış sergilerken, GFRP donatılı kiriş sünek bir davranış sergilemiştir. Tamamen GFRP donatılı numunenin enerji emme kapasitesi diğer numunelere göre ciddi oranda artış gösterdi. Numunelerde oluşan hasarları açıklamak için hasar analizi sunuldu.

🔖

Cite This Article

GEMİ, L., MADENCİ, E., ÖZKILIÇ, Y. O. (2020). Investigation of Flexural Performance of Steel, Glass FRP and Hybrid Reinforced Concrete Beams. Düzce Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 1470–1483. https://ajindex.com/articles/660921

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. E. Madenci. “A refined functional and mixed formulation to static analyses of FGM beams,” Structural Engineering and Mechanics, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 427-437, 2019
  2. A. Özütok, E. Madenci. “Static analysis of laminated composite beams based on higher-order shear deformation theory by using mixed-type finite element method,” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, vol. 130, pp. 234-243, 2017
  3. E. Madenci, A. Özütok. “Variational approximate and mixed-finite element solution for static analysis of laminated composite plates,” Solid State Phenomena, vol. 267, pp. 35-39, 2017
  4. A. Özütok, E. Madenci. “Free vibration analysis of cross-ply laminated composite beams by mixed finite element formulation,” International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1250056-17, 2013
  5. L. Gemi, U. Köklü, Ş. Yazman, S. Morkavuk. “The effects of stacking sequence on drilling machinability of filament wound hybrid composite pipes: Part-1 mechanical characterization and drilling tests,” Composites Part B: Engineering, vol. 186, pp. 107787, 2020
  6. S. Kocaoz, V. Samaranayake, A. Nanni. “Tensile characterization of glass FRP bars,” Composites Part B: Engineering, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 127-134, 2005
  7. L. Gemi, M. Kayrıcı, M. Uludağ, D.S. Gemi, Ö.S. Şahin. “Experimental and statistical analysis of low velocity impact response of filament wound composite pipes,” Composites Part B: Engineering, vol. 149, pp. 38-48, 2018
  8. L. Gemi, M.A. Köroğlu, A. Ashour. “Experimental study on compressive behavior and failure analysis of composite concrete confined by glass/epoxy ±55° filament wound pipes” Composite Structures, vol. 187, pp. 157-168, 2018
  9. L. Gemi, S. Morkavuk, U. Köklü, Ş. Yazman. “The effects of stacking sequence on drilling machinability of filament wound hybrid composite pipes: Part-2 damage analysis and surface quality,” Composite Structures, vol. 235, pp. 111737, 2020
  10. A. Ashour. “Flexural and shear capacities of concrete beams reinforced with GFRP bars,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 1005-1015, 2006
  11. M. Robert, P. Cousin, B. Benmokrane. “Durability of GFRP reinforcing bars embedded in moist concrete,” Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 66-73, 2009
  12. M. Robert, B. Benmokrane. “Behavior of GFRP reinforcing bars subjected to extreme temperatures,” Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 353-360, 2010
  13. F. Yan, Z. Lin, M. Yang. “Bond m