11.

1 Overview 83

11 Application Recommendations
11.1 Overview
Based on the state-of-the-art reports presented in chapters 6 to 9 we have prepared the
following application recommendations, which are basically subdivided as follows:
a) possible short-term applications: period 0-5 years,
b) possible medium-term applications: period 5-15 years,
c) possible long-term applications: period 15-50 years.
It is important to distinguish, especially for short-term applications, between applica-
tions which are already economic together with pilot applications and technologies
with future potential, which, however, still require a certain amount of investigation
and support.
To have a broader base for these application recommendations, an e-mail survey of the
opinions of recognised international experts on the use of FRP in bridge construction
was carried out (cf. appendix A2.2).The next section will begin with the results of the
survey. In the subsequent sections we present our own assessment.

11.2 Results of a Survey

Thirteen experts responded to the following questions:
Which applications of FRP materials in bridge constructionf o r repair; strengthening
and new structures are conceivable, reasonable and realisable for a) the short term
(0-5 years), b) the medium term (5-15 years), c) the long term (15-50 years)?
The answers were summarised in categories which are ordered according to the per-
centage of the number of responses per category. These rankings, due to the limited
sample, should be taken with caution, but they do show fairly definite tendencies for
the short- and long-term periods.
The results of the survey for the short-term period of 0-5 years can be summarised in
the following six categories:
- repair and strengthening (46%),
- concrete deck replacement by FRP decks (21%),
- non-loadbearing, secondary elements (13%),
- footbridges (8%),
- concrete reinforced with FRP bars (8%),
- others (only one answer given, 4%).
The applications in the area of repair and strengthening, particularly strips and sheets
for strengthening purposes, already predominate. The others include pilot applica-
tions, for which a corresponding development potential is acknowledged.

The medium-term period of 5-15 years includes, on the one hand, the same categories
as for the short term as well as, on the other, answers, which one can consider to be
precursors of the long-term categories. Thus the categories are not ordered according
to percentages, but in two blocks according to the rankings of the short- and long-term
periods:
84 1 1 Application Recommendations

- repair and strengthening (1 1%),

- concrete deck replacement by FRP decks (7%),
- non-loadbearing, secondary elements (7%),
- footbridges (7%),
- concrete reinforced with FRP bars (7%),

- smaller all-composite highway bridges (8%),

- advanced measuring and monitoring (FOS) (14%),
- FRP prestressed and stay cables (21%),
- others (18%).
The applications are classified as economically applicable in the medium term.

The results of the questioning on the possible applications in the longer term (15-50
years) can be summarised in the following four categories:
- all-composite or hybrid bridges with new material-adapted structural concepts (65%),
- smart structures (self-diagnosing, intelligent sensing, sensor actuator systems) (15%),
- FRP cables for suspension bridges (15%),
-others (5%).
As with the short-term applications, one category stands out: Here, this is that of the
all-composite or hybrid bridges with new material-adapted structural concepts, which
allow the excellent material properties to be utilised, thus permitting economic appli-
cation. An important element of these material-adapted concepts is seen in the aspect
of “smart structures.”

11.3 Author’s Own Assessment

Fibre composite materials for application in bridge construction, in contrast to tradi-
tional materials, are advantageous mainly in the following four areas:
- low self-weight (approx. 18 kN/m3),
- high strength (approx. double the strength of prestressing steel, in unidirectional use),
- short installation times (due to industrial fabrication and simple assembly and erection),
- corrosion resistance (especially against de-icing salts).
Disadvantages for immediate application at the present time include in particular the
following factors:
- material costs still high, above all for carbon fibres,
- lack of experience with respect to durability and long-term behaviour,
- lack of standards, application guidelines and design codes.
The question of high material costs is relativised if a comparison at the level of life-
cycle costs is made. The definite proof, however, is often difficult due to the lack of
long-term experience.
As an alternative, according to our estimation, one can apply the following simple
rules: FRP materials today (in short term, 0-5 years) can be used reliably and econo-
mically if, on the one hand, in at least three of the four areas cited above the advanta-
ges definitely outweigh those of traditional materials and, on the other hand, if there is
experience with the applications of roughly 10 years. After 10 years of use, as a rule,
some application and design guidelines will have been prepared. Today, applications
11.3 Author’s Own Assessment 85

with great potential in the medium term (5-15 years) also possess great advantages in
at least three areas, but do not have a sufficient level of experience (less than 10 years).
Guidelines and codes have not yet been produced. These applications can be used
today in pilot projects with the goal, above all, of obtaining the necessary experience
in the medium term.
The most important FRP applications are analysed from this point of view in table 11.1.

Strips Sheets Cables Reinforcing Profiles Deck slabs

(external) bars
Areas Strengthening Strengthening Strengthening New New Repair, new
New construc. construction construction construction
Self-weight + + 0 to + - 0 to + +
Strength + 0 to + + 0 0 0
Short
installation + + 0 to + - to 0 0 to + +
time

Table 11.1: Economic use of FRP materials according to our assessment

(evaluation -/O/+, condition at present: 3 + in the 4 areas).

Strips
FRP strips for strengthening purposes possess big advantages in all four areas com-
pared to, for example, steel strips (each evaluation in table 11.1 is given: +). Application
experience goes back about 10 years and design guidelines are available. As expected,
strips have established themselves worldwide as a possible alternative to traditional
materials. The technology can still be applied in Switzerland in future.
Our assessment is in agreement with the results of the survey in section 11.2.

Sheets
FRP sheets possess big advantages, at least in three areas, and for unidirectional applica-
tions in all four areas. For nearly 10 years now experience with their application has been
gained. But application guidelines are not available everywhere. As a possible alternative
to traditional technologies, sheets have gained much ground, especially in the USA and
Japan. In many other countries pilot projects are being carried out. In particular, in the
case of the strengthening of surfaces, column strengthening and in general in the case of
small radii of curvature, sheets are advantageous compared to strips. Today, the use of
sheets in pilot projects can be recommended in suitable cases in Switzerland too.
Our assessment is in agreement with the results of the survey in section 11.2.
86 1 1 Application Recommendations

Cables
The following assessment only applies for external cables for strengthening or in new
structures. Depending on the case, they possess considerable advantages in two to four
areas compared to the equivalent steel cables. Experience with this application is less
than 10 years, and there are no application guidelines.
Thus, in the medium term FRP cables can be expected to provide an alternative, if ac-
cording to table 11.1 either their lower self-weight or/and the advantages in erection
is advantageous. In these specific cases, therefore, their application in pilot projects
can already be recommended today, in order to gain the necessary experience in the
medium term. Systems with the so-called gradient anchorages are recommended.
(example in Switzerland: Verdasio Bridge, p. 122.)
In the long term CFRP cables will predominate, above all for large span suspension
bridges. Their use as main cables in suspension bridges with spans up to 4 km is prob-
able in the long term. Advancing to the limit spans of CFRP cables (>lo km) is likely
to depend on the development of stiff girder concepts in the transverse direction rather
than on cable technology.
The use of cables as internal prestressing elements offers definite advantages only in
two areas (strength and corrosion resistance). Thus, this type of application will not be
significant in the near future.
Our assessment is largely in agreement with the results of the survey in section 11.2.

Reinforcing Bars
FRP reinforcing bars have a definite advantage only in one area (corrosion resistance).
In fact, in the construction phase they exhibit considerable disadvantages. In our
opinion, the use of FRP reinforcing bars will always be limited to special cases in
which the corrosion resistance is of prime importance.
Our assessment is not in agreement with the results of the survey in section 11.2.

Profiles
In bridge construction FRP profiles possess big advantages in one to three areas. Ex-
perience in their application goes back more than 10 years. Application guidelines
also exist, at least those of the manufacturers. According to table 11.1 the use of
profiles is already an interesting alternative, provided the low self-weight and the
resulting short installation times can be taken advantage of. Specific examples are
temporary bridges. (Example in Switzerland: Pontresina Bridge, p. 115.)
The application of profiles in connection with other structural components is very pro-
mising, e.g. sandwich construction, whereby the profiles play the part of subordinate
structural elements (cf. section 9.3.3).

Decks
FRP decks possess comparatively big advantages in three areas. The low self-weight
(roughly 20% that of a concrete deck) in the case of deck slab replacement does not
lead to any overloading of beams and of the substructure, but on the contrary the pos-
sibility is offered of widening decks. Prefabrication and installation with simple lifting
gear allow short erection times with little interruption to traffic. Further, FRP decks
are corrosion-resistant and largely maintenance-free.
11.4 Summary 87

Experience in their use extends over 5 years. Guidelines or codes still have to be pro-
duced.
From these considerations, in our opinion in the medium term FRP decks have great
potential as an alternative to concrete decks. The use of FRP decks today, therefore,
can be recommended in pilot projects.
Their increased use today is also in the long term important with respect to a new gen-
eration of bridges, comprising all-composite or hybrid new structures with material-
adapted concepts, as mentioned in the survey (section 11.2).
Our assessment is in agreement with the results of the survey in section 11.2.

11.4 Summary
Based on the e-mail survey and our own assessment, FRP materials can be recom-
mended today in the following cases:

Repair and Strengthening

- strips and sheets for strengthening purposes,
- external cables in specific cases,
-bridge decks in the replacement of slabs.

Hybrid New Structures

- external cables in
specific cases,
-bridge decks.

All-Composite New Structures

- combined profile/sandwich/slab superstructures for footbridges and smaller high-
way bridges in specific cases.

If possible and meaningful the applications should be combined with FOS (fibre optic
sensors). With the exception of untensioned strips, the proposed applications can
be classified as pilot applications with medium-term success potential. Therefore,
these should always be accompanied by scientific studies within an overall concept
(cf. section 12.3).