Presentation on theme: "Fibreglass GFRP Rebar for Concrete Reinforcement"— Presentation transcript:
1 Fibreglass GFRP Rebar for Concrete Reinforcement An Introduction into Applications for Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) Rebar5522 – 36 StreetEdmonton, AlbertaT6B 3P3T:780 – 448 – 9338F:780 – 448 – 93381–888–99–REBAR(73227)
2 Production Brow, Penobsquis, New Brunswick HISTORYIn 1997, Dywidag-Systems International (DSI) contacted BP Automation to develop a threaded fibreglass rebar system.In 1999, the company developed threaded fibreglass manufacturing equipment.In 2000, BP Composites was formed to supply the mining industry with fibreglass rebar and rock bolts.Production Brow, Penobsquis, New Brunswick
3 Spalling on bridge girder ISIS 1995In 1995 the Canadian Government formed the Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures (ISIS) to find a solution to the crumbling infrastructure of North America.Consisting of 14 Universities and 22 Researchers with a 15 year mandate to publish the CSA codeSpalling on bridge girder
4 CONCRETE HISTORYRomans are the pioneers of the concrete revolution. Their structures have lasted close to 2000 years.Pantheon, Rome; Constructed ~126AD; worlds largest unreinforced dome.
5 PROBLEM IS STEELReinforced Concrete with Steel Rebar is the cause of the failing infrastructureSteel rebar has been used since the early 1900’sSteel expands 10x in volume when it rusts, and causes concrete to crack and failIron OxideIron
7 CORROSION Epoxy Coated Steel: Corrodes Galvanized Steel: Corrodes Stainless Steel: SusceptibleCracking with Epoxy Coated Steel, 19 Year Old Ontario Bridge, MTO 2005Failure with Stainless Steel, Roof of 13 Year Old Swimming Pool Collapses, SwitzerlandCracking with Galvanized Steel, 23 Yr Old Ontario Bridge, MTO 2007Rusting Stainless Steel in Bridge InstallAnthony Henday, Edmonton AB
8 ISIS DURABILITY REPORT Core-samples from Five Bridges using GFRP were analyzed in High Corrosion Environments, in two studies 5 years apart; the samples were sent to 4 different laboratories for evaluation, using different test methods; the bridges were in service up to 13 years.Joffre Bridge, Sherbrooke, QC, 12 yearsCrowchild Trail Bridge, Calgary, AB, 13 years (pictured)Hall's Harbour Wharf, Hall's Harbour, NS, 10 yearsWaterloo Creek Bridge, Vancouver Island, BC, 11 yearsChatham Bridge, Chatham, ON, 13 yearsRigorous testing has concluded:100+ Year Life Expectancy for GFRP Reinforced Structures.
9 ISIS BRIDGE TEST RESULTS No Degradation in GFRP ReinforcementExcellent BondingNo DebondingNo MicrocrackingNo VoidsNo Glass TransitionNo Resin MicrocrackingNo Glass Fibre DegradationNo Significant DelaminationNo Resin DegradationNo Chemical DegradationNo HydrolysisExcellent BondingNO DEBONDING NO MICROCRACKINGNO VOIDSNO RESIN MICROCRACKINGNO GLASS FIBRE DEGRADATIONNO SIGNIFICANT DELAMINATION/DEBONDING NO GLASS TRANSITIONNO SIGN OF CHEMICAL DEGRADATION OF THE RESINNO CHEMICAL DEGRADATION (HYDROLYSIS)
10 ISIS FATIGUE RESISTANCE Steel: cyclesGFRP: cyclesLasts 20x Longer under cyclic LoadsTruck Traffic, Wave Action, Seismic60 Ton Loading FixtureA. El-Ragaby , E. F. El-Salakawy and B. Benmokrane
11 THINGS TO KNOW Glass Creep Modulus of Elasticity Elongation Ultimate Tensile StrengthGlass CreepGFRP not recommended for:Pre-TensioningPost-TensioningDead Loads (max 25% UTS)Modulus of Elasticity¼ that of SteelCantilevering LoadsElongationElongates Linearly 2%Not DuctileYield PointTUF-BAR™ Rebar is not recommended for pre-tensioning or post-tensioningGlass creep effect limits the rating of the bar to 25% of ultimate strengthLower ModulusAdditional reinforcement required in cantilevering loads compared to steel.Not suitable for constant dead loading applicationsNot a direct substitution for steel. Need to design specifically for applicationElongationSteel Designs to YieldGFRP elongates to 2%2% Elastic Deformation, Steel is till YieldDr. Roger Cheng from U of A explains that you design for deformability of the structure whereas with steel you design for ductility of the reinforcement
12 THINGS TO KNOW 𝑤 𝑐𝑟 =2 𝑓 𝐹𝑅𝑃 𝐸 𝐹𝑅𝑃 ℎ 2 ℎ 1 𝑘 𝑏 𝑑 𝑐 2 + 𝑠/2 2 High Embedment StrengthRough SurfaceSand CoatingKb FactorCrack Width < inSand Coating Kb = 0.820% Less Bar RequiredTUF-BAR® Sand CoatingTUF-BAR™ Rebar is not recommended for pre-tensioning or post-tensioningGlass creep effect limits the rating of the bar to 25% of ultimate strengthLower ModulusAdditional reinforcement required in cantilevering loads compared to steel.Not suitable for constant dead loading applicationsNot a direct substitution for steel. Need to design specifically for applicationElongationSteel Designs to YieldGFRP elongates to 2%2% Elastic Deformation, Steel is till YieldDr. Roger Cheng from U of A explains that you design for deformability of the structure whereas with steel you design for ductility of the reinforcement𝑤 𝑐𝑟 =2 𝑓 𝐹𝑅𝑃 𝐸 𝐹𝑅𝑃 ℎ 2 ℎ 1 𝑘 𝑏 𝑑 𝑐 𝑠/2 2
13 ISIS In 2001, ISIS Canada published guidelines for building with GFRP In 2006, ISIS Canada developed a Product Specification Manual for GFRP reinforcement for civil application.
14 ISISIn 2007, ISIS encouraged BP Composites to develop a family of GFRP rebar suitable for civil infrastructure.
15 GFRP CODES2002 CSA code for “Design and Construction of Building Components with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers”CSA-S8062006 CSA Highway Bridge Design Code updated for GFRPCSA-S6-06CanadaCAN/CSA-S6-06 (2006) “Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code” Canadian Standards Association, 800pCAN/CSA-S (R2007) “Design and Construction of Building Components with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers”USAACI 440.1R-06 (2006) “Guide for the Design and Construction of Structural Concrete Reinforced with FRP Bars”
16 USA GFRP DESIGN GUIDELINES 2006 ACI 440 Guide for Structural Concrete Reinforced with FRP BarsACI 440.1R2009 AASHTO Bridge Design Guide for GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Bridge Decks and Traffic RailingsAASHTO GFRP-1
17 CSA-S807: Manufacturing Requirements for GFRP Rebar 2010 CSA-S807 Code Specifications for FRP Rebar:Mechanical PropertiesPhysical PropertiesDurability PropertiesMaterial Requirements:Vinyl Ester ResinE-type Glass or E-CR FibreglassUSA, ACI Equivalent: ACI 440.6R (2008)
18 CSA-S807: Mechanical Properties (Straight & Bent Bars)Cross-Sectional AreaTensile StrengthModulus of ElasticityUltimate ElongationBond StrengthTransverse Shear StrengthCold Temperature Tensile PropertiesFlexural Modulus and StrengthTUF-BAR® Tensile Strength Testing
19 CSA-S807: Physical Properties Fibre ContentCoefficient of Thermal ExpansionLongitudinal & TransverseDensityVoid ContentWater AbsorptionCure RatioGlass Transition TemperatureTUF-BAR® Creep Rupture Strength Test
20 CSA-S807 Durability Properties Alkali Resistance in High pH Solution (60C 3 months 14 pH)With LoadWithout LoadCreepTest Creep at 10,000 HrCreep Rupture StrengthExtrapolate Creep failure to 1 million HrMust hold >35% 1 million HrTUF-BAR® Creep Rupture Strength Test
21 COST SAVINGS Minimal Concrete Cover Fewer Concrete Additives No Concrete TreatmentsNo Protective MembranesNo Rebar Coating RepairsLightweightLower Transport CostsLess HandlingLess Injuries (WCB/OSHA)Fast InstallationCuts with Chop Saw or Grinding Disc in SecondsTUF-BAR® GridGrinding Cutter, Diamond-Bladed Chop Saw or Hacksaw. (No Shears)Vinyl Coated tie wire or zip tiesApprox. 40 x Bar Diameter = Splice Length.No Mechanical Fasteners or Welded SplicesNo Patching or Corrosion Treatment
22 TUF-BAR® in an MRI Facility Other FeaturesThermal IsolatorNon-ConductiveNon-MagneticSizes #2-#8, 6mm-25mmStandard/Custom LengthsShapesBendsCoils 25mm bar)TUF-BAR® in an MRI Facility
23 TUF-BAR® in Pre-fab Bridge Deck Slabs Canada Green Building Council MemberTUF-BAR® is 100% recyclableTUF-BAR® contributes:6 LEED® Credits in Canada7 LEED® Credits in USAChange LEED symbol to darker green, and match LEED text Blue 293, Pantone green 347TUF-BAR® in Pre-fab Bridge Deck Slabs
24 COMPARISON: Steel vs TUF-BAR® Black SteelStainless SteelTUF-BAR®Price10x Black Steel2x Black Steel≃ Galvanized Steel≃ Epoxy Coated SteelCorrosionSusceptibleNon-SusceptibleWeight1/4 of SteelTensile Strength2x Steel/StainlessModulus200 GPa40, 60 GPaBond Strength8-11 MPa14 MPaThermal ConductivityYesNoElectrical ConductivityMagnetic
25 LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS Composites Innovation Centre University of Manitoba:GFRP 70% cost savings over 100 yearsRepairs start in yearsMore expensive as time goes onCorrosion & Spalling
26 CONCLUSIONS Save Money with GFRP Codes are Published “If you look at the full life cycle cost, GFRP is far more cost-effective than metallic reinforcement”- Dr. Brahim Benmokrane NSERC Industry Research ChairSave Money with GFRPCodes are PublishedLive without Corrosion100+ Years SustainabilityResearch teams recommend: That GFRP Be allowed as the Primary ReinforcementCAN/CSA-S6-06 “Canadian Highway Bridge Code”December 2008), 800p.CAN/CSA-S (R2007)“ Construction of Building Components with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers" Product Number Update No. 3 was published as notification; it is now a National Standard of Canada."If you look at the full life cycle cost, GFRP is far more cost-effective than metallic reinforcement.” Dr.Brahim Benmokrane Chair NSER Council of Canada
27 Bridge that didn’t use TUF-BAR® DESIGN WITH TUF-BAR®BP Composites Ltd.(T):(F):REBAR(73227)Bridge that didn’t use TUF-BAR®
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.