4.6 Article

Effective Flexural Stiffness of Beams Reinforced with FRP Bars in Reinforced Concrete Moment Frames

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES FOR CONSTRUCTION
Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001101

Keywords

Effective flexural stiffness; FRP reinforced beam; Beam and frame analysis; Stiffness range; Moment– curvature

Funding

  1. Center of Excellence in Composite Structures and Seismic Strengthening

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A formulation based on moment-curvature diagrams was proposed to calculate the effective flexural stiffness (EFS) of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforced concrete (RC) beam members. The study included a parametric investigation of factors such as tensile reinforcement ratio, concrete compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, and aspect ratio. The results suggest that the EFS ratio (EIe/EcIg) for FRP RC beams should fall within the range of 0.05 to 0.18.
In this paper, a formulation based on the moment-curvature diagrams was proposed to calculate the effective flexural stiffness (EFS) of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforced concrete (RC) beam members. A parametric study was carried out to encompass the effect of different factors, such as tensile reinforcement ratio, concrete compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, and aspect ratio. The proposed formulation was verified with numerous experimental data reported by various researchers. To extend the validation of the formulation into the beams of RC frames, the EFS (EIe) of cracked GFRP (glass FRP) and CFRP (carbon FRP) RC beam sections for four types of frames were calculated. Based on the analytical study, experimental approach, and frame analysis approach, the EFS of FRP RC beams is less than 0.184 times the gross flexural stiffness (EcIg). According to the results obtained from various approaches, the range between 0.05 and 0.18 for the EFS ratio (EIe/EcIg) of FRP RC beams is proposed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available