4.6 Article

Comparison of flexural behaviors between plain and steel-fiber-reinforced concrete beams with hybrid GFRP and steel bars

Journal

STRUCTURES
Volume 43, Issue -, Pages 1-11

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2022.06.037

Keywords

GFRP bars; Hybrid reinforced concrete beam; Flexural behavior; Failure mode; Balanced nominal reinforcement ratio

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51878319, 51578267]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the flexural behavior of steel-fiber-reinforced concrete beams with hybrid glass fiber reinforced polymer and steel bars. The effects of concrete type and strength on the flexural capacity and failure mode of the beams are analyzed. The results suggest that the use of hybrid reinforcement can achieve a proper flexural failure mode through the optimization of the nominal reinforcement ratio.
This study investigates the flexural behavior of steel-fiber-reinforced concrete (SC) beams with hybrid glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) and steel bars. The experimental results of current SC beams are compared with those of the plain concrete (PC) beams conducted in our previous research. Taking account of the differences in nominal reinforcement ratio and reinforcement layout of seven tested SC beams, the test results including cracking load, ultimate load, failure mode, crack spacing and width, and mid-span deflection were firstly discussed. Then, a comprehensive comparison of flexural behaviors between SC beams and PC beams with same reinforcements was conducted in this paper. Especially, the crucial effects of type and strength of concrete on flexural capacity and failure mode of test beams were analyzed in detail. Finally, for concrete beams reinforced with hybrid (GFRP and steel) bars, the optimization of two balanced nominal reinforcement ratios was proposed to ensure the beam's flexural failure in an appropriate-reinforced mode without rupture of GFRP bars.

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