4.7 Article

Numerical evaluation of blast resistance of RC slab strengthened with AFRP

Journal

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
Volume 178, Issue -, Pages 244-253

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.081

Keywords

Blast resistance; Reinforced concrete slabs; Aramid fiber reinforced plastic; Simulation analysis

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11302093]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province, China [SY2016001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, in order to precisely evaluated the retrofitting effectiveness of the Aramid Fiber Reinforced Plastic (AFRP) sheet on the blast response of reinforced concrete (RC) slab, a refined non-linear finite element model is proposed for simulating of the structural response of RC slab strengthened with AFRP under blast loads. The complicated material models are applied in the simulation considering the high strain rate effects of the materials as well as the dynamic interfacial behavior between AFRP and concrete. Also, a appropriate erosion criterion technique is specially applied to capture the fracture and material separation process during the detonation of the explosive. At first, the numerical model of an actual laboratory sample of a conventional RC slab subjected to blast loads was simulated and verified using available experimental results. Then with the calibrated model, numerical simulations of RC slabs strengthened with AFRP to blast loadings are carried out. The numerical results of strengthened and non-strengthened RC slab (i.e., conventional slab) are compared to investigate the retrofitting effectiveness of AFRP on blast-resistant performance of RC slabs. In addition, a comprehensive investigation on the blast responses of FRP-strengthened RC slabs affected by these parameters, i.e. different AFRP layer, FRP type, strengthening mode, FRP bond strength and TNT mass, are also reported. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available