4.3 Article

Impact Resistance Design of Porosity-Free Concrete Beams Strengthened with Aramid Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Sheet

Journal

ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Volume 118, Issue 1, Pages 101-111

Publisher

AMER CONCRETE INST
DOI: 10.14359/51728090

Keywords

aramid fiber-reinforced polymer (AFRP) sheet strengthening method; impact resistance capacity; porosity-free concrete; steel fiber

Funding

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [19H02394]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19H02394] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study established an impact resistance design method for steel fiber-reinforced porosity-free concrete beams strengthened with aramid fiber-reinforced polymer sheets using static and impact loading tests. The study showed that the maximum deflection under impact loading can be estimated using the load-deflection curve calculated under static loading, and demonstrated a performance-based impact resistance design concept using the tensile strain in the AFRP sheet as a performance index.
In this study, an impact resistance design method for steel fiber-reinforeed porosity-free concrete (PFC) beams strengthened with aramid fiber-reinforced polymer (AFRP) sheets was established using static and impact loading tests. The influence of the loading method on the deformation behavior of the beams was investigated, and it was determined that the maximum deflection under impact loading can be estimated using the load-deflection curve calculated under static loading. Then, a performance-based impact resistance design concept was demonstrated using the magnitude of the tensile strain in the AFRP sheet as a performance index. By establishing an impact resistance design method for the FRP sheet-reinforced PFC members based on this study, it is possible to improve the impact resistance of concrete structures subject to impacts from falling rocks, debris flows, flying objects, and so forth.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available