4.6 Article

Mechanical Properties of Hybrid Fiber Reinforced Rubber Concrete

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 14, Issue 20, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14206028

Keywords

concrete; mechanical properties; basalt fiber; PVA fiber; rubber; SEM microscopic; EDS quantitative analysis

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences Foundation Committee of China [41472254]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Orthogonal experiments were conducted to study hybrid fiber rubber concrete (HFRC) and compared its mechanical properties with ordinary concrete. The study found that basalt fiber had the strongest influence on the strength of HFRC, and the combination of different fibers could significantly improve its strength. However, an increase in rubber volume ratio led to a gradual decrease in strength. The toughening and cracking resistance mechanism of fiber in HFRC was analyzed using SEM and EDS, and the strength of HFRC was predicted through a model.
Orthogonal experiments were designed for hybrid fiber rubber concrete (HFRC). The mechanical properties of HFRC were tested and compared with ordinary concrete. The effects of basalt fiber volume ratio (V-BF), PVA fiber volume ratio (V-PF) and rubber volume ratio (V-R) on the compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and flexural strength of HFRC were analyzed. The results show that the strength of HFRC is the best when the volume ratio of basalt fiber is 0.3%, the volume ratio of PVA fiber is 0.2% and the volume ratio of rubber is 5%. Basalt fiber has the greatest influence on the strength of HFRC. The strength of HFRC mixed with hybrid fiber is greatly improved, which reflects the good fiber positive hybrid effect . With the increase of rubber volume ratio, the strength of HFRC decreases gradually. With the help of SEM and EDS, the toughening and cracking resistance mechanism of the fiber to HFRC was analyzed. Finally, the strength of HFRC was predicted by model.

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