EVALUATION OF FRP CONCRETE COMPRESSION MEMBER UNDER REPEATED LOAD AND HARSH ENVIRONMENT

Authors

  • Ghanim Kashwani
  • Adil K. Al-Tamimi
  • Riyadh Al-Ameri

Keywords:

Concrete compression member, CFRP, GFRP, Repeated load, Sea water splash zone

Abstract

Strengthening and rehabilitation have been increasingly applied in many structures to improve
their capacity and serviceability. Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) materials are universally known for their
ability to improve the load capacity of damaged structural elements because of their high linear-elastic
behavior. However, enhancing the capacity of structural elements that are exposed to repeated load coupled
with harsh environment is an area that requires further investigation. This research focused on experimental
analysis of the behavior and response of confined and unconfined concrete compression members (300mm x
150mm) under repeated load while exposed to 1440 cycles of seawater splash zone in United Arab Emirates
(UAE). Confining concrete compression members with Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) and Glass
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) sheets have increased the load capacity compared to the control sample at
room temperature by 110% and 84%, respectively. Results showed that the average value of compressive
strength for the confined concrete exposed to sea water splash zone conditions for CFRP and GFRP
specimens has decreased by 33% and 23%, respectively, compared to the confined concrete in the room
temperature. However, GFRP specimens showed higher performance in compressive strength under sea
water splash zone than those of the CFRP specimens. Different mode of failures such as delamination, debonding and combination of such modes were observed and related to various exposure factors and
mechanical properties.

 

Downloads

Published

2016-12-09

How to Cite

Ghanim Kashwani, Adil K. Al-Tamimi, & Riyadh Al-Ameri. (2016). EVALUATION OF FRP CONCRETE COMPRESSION MEMBER UNDER REPEATED LOAD AND HARSH ENVIRONMENT . GEOMATE Journal, 9(18), 1460–1466. Retrieved from https://geomatejournal.com/geomate/article/view/1817