Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • ACI Journal - Improving Punching

    Uploaded by

    Evelyn Segura
    13 views8 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    13 views8 pages

    ACI Journal - Improving Punching

    Uploaded by

    Evelyn Segura

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 8
    Fiona. 108-840 Improving Punching Shear Behavior of Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Reinforced Slabs [Wy Joo-Ha Lee, Young-Soo Yoon, Wiliam D. Cook, and Denis Mitchell De bie of te ne of eecemet aster renoced Wve IR vers el tr) on pushing hear renee Ue ivesgsed ation the eee of soncnaing Be erronen inthe immedi ou region andthe ur of yer infor cone (FRC) thes ner ae (GC chy ta pc ie iy ran Mii rojrcoent ond i of SFRC nthe Sd eda AS joetng behavior of he sab forced wih GPRD bare Pelion sing die dein dele a compared he ene res obtained fom the enforcer 1h fread stand oe ed ye fewer: Conran the op mat of fea recone Pils bei fess on punching seer eg tt (Wing ef and reckon years: eric yes cig hea i ee. INTRODUCTION ‘There has heen amines nthe se of fiber-reinforced foyer FRP) materials a non comodbe enforcement Nirconeree sms Only ew counties, such 3 gan (in Society of Civil agin (ISCET), Cana (Canaan Denar Assocation (CSA), and the US. (Amedcan Conese Insite (ACI) have established uidelines for thedesign and constucion osetia concrete using FRP. The punching shear behave of two-way sibs velo th FRP bars has soc been Tully investigated wheres fitcsive work as been performed investigating the [lsu eho of concrete members reinforced with FRP ‘Te punching. shear behavior of an interior colama supporting a two-way conc sad ceinfored with FR, fochasplss FR (GERD), eabon FRP(CFRP) or «hye Of lass and carbon FRP (EFRP), fae ben reported Dota et al, Matis and Taare E-Ghandor eal Unpina eal and Zhang et aL* They demonstrated that lhe difernces nthe mechanal proper beeen FRP and el enforcement (such a the relatively low models of slisiity and the betleness of FRP materia) affect the sh punching Behavie. There hasbeen no research on the fet ote conenaaton of FR ib xara informe ‘sound column onthe bettie From thei tt ress om slo conning steel einforcng har, Hawn a. Hawkins and Mice! Chamoun Mtr ea? ac Yoon eal concluded that he concentration ofthe ree foreman rested in an impeevement inthe placing seat behavior ofthe sas. Mos cous, however do ot kein eco hs benefit The CSA Sanda requiem ‘mou ofp eral einforeenet be cosenrted in band wid extending 13 umes hes thickness rr the olurt ‘aces. The Bish Sand aesign expression ices the iflonce ofan average flex enforcement ratio within ACI Structural JournalJuly-August 2009, 1.5 times the effective flexural depth of he sad from he ‘oma faces for predicting the paching sea tesistance, ‘Asher promising ay for improving the behovior of two-way sas i tb sea el fiber inte concrete Stel ‘ers concrete are not in contact with each othe’ ad, ene, re not as suscep to corosion se eifocing ‘ar nless they happen to be atthe srace or very age cracks develop allowing comosive agent to permeate itd the concrete” The addon af set fibers improves the ‘cages, impos einoe, and fatigue eranc of conc. Bantia etal reponed thatthe us of SFRC incensed the mae ea and pes of be inne! with PRP ide ‘The iain objective of this study was 10 compare the behavior of stel and. GERP-einforced slabscolomn connections and investignte the effects of the bended “isto of flexural eeforcement and SERC in asad on the behavior of two-way abe enforced wth GFRP ba In dition, the test resus were compared with the predictions ‘sng the equations of ACT 440.1R" and ISCE, developed Specialy for FRP-eifore slabs. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Generally, slabs reinforced wth GERP bars show an lafeior sacral beaviorcompued 10 slabs having the same equivalent area of enforcement but reifored with ‘el bars, de tthe lower elas mods of GFRP beth this research, concentating GFRP bts ia the immediate ‘lum eon and using SFRC inthe dane econ faes Inyroved te punching behave The bof fee of ese renoring methods ar damon EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM Details of test specimens Figure I shows the layout of the top ang bottom slab senfrcemeat. The main vasa wer the sth tdecepent ‘ae the conceneation of ib relforement around he Column, nd the presence of steel ites nthe sab cnet ‘The specimens canbe divided no two sei sa sens Ieinfreed wit) conventional see! bars (8 Seis) anda Sa series elafrced with GFRP brs (GF Series) The top feinfrcement was datibted either uniformly or in 9 banded manner The lees U and Bin the specimen names Indicate the layout ofthe slab reinforcement aroand the column (U for uniform pacing of top reinforcement and 8 fer and evocemen) Als, he beri te desption paecanarmpm men gaa wena Epa eee ‘italien em Pah ‘prea inthe immediarecoluma repion (within a distance 1'Skfrom the column face, where i he lab dicks) For example, Specinen SUI and GFE indicate the tee ‘eile sla with form dita of approximately Tip reinforcement and te GFRP-renfreed sb with 2 ‘banded dstibation of approximately 3% reinforcement, respectively. Specinen GFBFS had the sume veafocing ‘ete a Specimen GFBS, bt SFRC was place nthe lab invarepion extending 2 (ic the eecve depth of the $b it the hfe te clam ices Fer speemens wih ‘frm spacing of the op tary the efercement rao Was ‘001 (Specimens SUL an GFUL) The handel dsbuion of ‘inrent for Specimens SB2 snd OFB2 sted et the ine fad wih with a ler rernfrcement ato of (00214 Specimens GPBS and GFBPS contained 12 GFRP bas (epsutandorvt (0382 na G2 (1G ane ces (2) foto mat for Fig. I-Relaforcement and strain gauge layout (Note Dimensions inmm: in. = 254 mm) «28 {nthe nde gin with areiafrcement rat of 0.08.The sel ‘enfrcmet ual forthe Botom mat hd the same you for slabs a hown a Fig. (0, Foal specimens. he average ‘Mfc deh was 10mm (43). Specimens SUL and. SB2 were pevicualy tested by ‘Ghansoun' he xgina designations were I-U and S13, respectively, Specimens SUI and SB2 had the same ‘einforemeat layouts a GFUL and GFE, especivey In ftion, the concrete compressive stenghs of SUI and 'SB2 wee sour to hose of specimens relafrced ith GGFRP bars. Therefore, Specimens SUI and SB2 provided tench resuls for comprion withthe seqponses of tla enforced with GFRP bare Figure 2 shows the lading geomety and est setup ofthe 2300 2500+ 180 mm (90161906 x 59 in) two-way sab ted at McGill University. Montel, QC, eases, he reinforced clun stb extended 45300 mm (11.8 in) above and below the tab. The lower ‘olun sb of he slab-column specimens was placed on & ‘el supporting block The lah wis loaded with ether eq concerted Toads around the perimeter to simulate © ‘atfonny dstibated load onthe text specimen, For each ‘ir of losing points, sel dstabuton beams spanning 70 mn 29.5) beteen adjacent tng pins Were sed ‘row the sab, Frente yr ack were conte toa sage hydaulc pump to ensure eight equal lands were {pplied othe slab The sab oaing was applied moncton- ically in sal incemens, with be leds elton, and ‘sine recored teach increment. At ey Toad sages, the ‘rack pate and crack widihs were alo reared. The ‘pled leads were monitored wing fur lea els potioned ‘etch lading rod. The dflion ofeach leading pat was Imeasured wth a linear volnge difereaal tansformer (@LYDD, Four additonal LVDTs were installed om he Underside of the Hab, cle othe clu face oot he Punching deletion of the sib relative to the coum 1 ec the srt of pcg shear ale Eccl vesistance Suan gauges were glued to te reinforcing tars in the (op matin ne withthe cota ees in eo cipal dectons tthe slab as showa in Fg 1 Material properties Highestength concrete forthe column stubs was produced in the laboratay. The slabs were constructed using nora ‘eighe eady mac cone fom aol bach plan Sadar Compresive cylinder teste were conducted using 150 x 5300 mm 59" 118 in) cyingers forte norma srength once and 100 200 min (39 7.8 in) evn foe he hgh-suengh concrete. Alo, the meds of pre was Chine fom for pom. leading ests of exural speciens having dimensions of 100 100 x 30 min (3.939 x 13 in) Table 1 summaries the mater proper ofthe one usd ia he slab-column specimens. “Adebar etal and Mindess eta. contd that the increase in abet eng for elforedconree beams wat ropoonal othe ier conten at ew fiber volumes. Pot fiber volumes above approximately 0%, they found that farther inreassin he shear stent were ots sii. “Metirg tal and Swamy and AB reported the ees of| SERC on the punching shear bebavior of sib-olsm connections. McHarg el! repre that he jcreass ia punching shear esistance due to he preseace of FRC inthe Slab around the columa were 26% for specimens conning (05% volume of sel hes. Swany and All concluded ‘ACI Structural JournallJty-August 2008 ‘hate increase in lima load amounted to approximately 40% witha ber volume of 15. nthis soy 03% volume steal bers war chose othe SFRC ofthe lab within the {mediate colums region of Specimen GEBF 3. The 30a (12m Tong hooked ste bers used in the specimen hada Miameter and ultimate tense sueagh of 0 a (0.022) nd 1200 MPs (178k, respestvely The properties ofthe SFRC are summarized in Table “Table? gives the mechanical properties ofthe sel and CGFRP bas used inthe consructon ofthe test specimens For the GFRP bars the manufrs garanted design roperucs were used iy ts sidy The GPRP bar were Imanufactre by combining the pliusin proces with an Indie cating proses forthe ouside sand sutace, which Ted to improved bond characterises with concreie The CGFRP reinforcing bars were made from highsength = ass Gers (05% by by volume), witha vinyls ein ‘eit and fers ‘TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ‘Losd-deftection responses sue 3 shows he server average ond pint defection focal slabs. The shears fepated are te sums of he apie ‘eas atthe eight loading points and the dead Toad (2 KN [67 hips. The dfleesons eportd ae the average of those ‘nesuredat the eight loading pins. Table 3 summarizes he ‘esued toa sear load and verge deflections at ft Grcking int yielding. abd at he peak loads, CANCSA W062! recommends tht when GFRP reinforcement Table 1—Concrete properties Secines [TS] ee Tae ten ade [ 334 | ma | 3505 ‘Gree es) 010) [ 360 | eT) res tan) ——| 965655 | sea sac aaa) [Tie [59 Table 2—Properties of GFAP and stee! reinforcing bars me Th ele ‘eigsior|ant es) ory |srun| HAS | oa Grenasionwesn] mze@o| wa her quale i50 Seto |e] 0 [eH] eH | OE Set [903] oon a or] 5) [2 Mermneise encase ‘le Summary ot nate Weel Slee woo fal [as ae oe oe ee i fof ol a LS oo i a a] Se et aR sed for sructal purposes, the tense sess shall not exceed 09 of Hs tne fare sees, The ain of the (GFRP bas coresponding 1 30% of ws ten fale est ‘s approximately 0008S Therefore, inthis study, aliing Suan o 0.005 and he sca see wa edo etermine ‘he maximom sess inthe bare, “Tble 3 vacludes the siffness ofall slabs, For the lod deflection responses, the ope ofthe seg ine extending {om the point of ist eracking tthe point of fist yield in the top euvrciag ia sopesee the ps cacking tes. Becaute the GFRP bare exhibit no yield piety the ‘maximum allowable stain of 0.048 dod the areca Ses wee tse to clculate he ines ofthe GFRP bar [Asshown in Table 3 and Fg. 3, the stiffs of te specimens ‘eas functon ofthe ease modulus othe reinforcing bars {nd renfreement ation the immediate column eon. All Slabs behaved smiaty i the uncracked sate, but the GF teres had mich loser ses ater ft caching ‘Sompared tothe seis. The onde dstbtion of lx ‘einforerent increased the sass of the sab, with he Siffnss of GF2 and GFES being 7 and 235 larger tan thatofGFUI, respectively. Specimen SB als showed 16%. higher tines conpared to SUI: however. te incsion of Stel fibers in the concrete dd ot afer the lb sis, Sch tat the fod-deecton cures for GPBF3 were very Snular © GFBS after cracking and before pnching fale, stshown in Fg 3 ore fo] drp| S| etden|aes lanze) Ged) rae, foal o| diy |cta|aelaudalaain| a) {ACI Structural JournaiJuy-August 2008 Pig. 3-Load vere average la point deflection spose. 129 As shown in Fig. 3 all he specimens exibied abrupt punching shear faa’. This is so abvis from Fig ‘hich tows theta slab oad versus te eerage punching fefection, as eased by LVDTs, for slabs reinforced ‘vit GERP bas At peak lod be botom surface ofthe lab Seeenly doppe relativeto the bom coun ty Ths was ‘companied ya immediate and sigfcat drop ed Site renford ith GPRP toe bad sinicanty lower Punching sens compared with sly enforced. ith Fel bats. Tis was due fo the lower elastic modus of CGERP bars, whch leads tos smaller aren of concrete a ompession for cracked secon that ae subjected to the Sine moment. Ir addition, the GF series demonstrated ager ‘tai and deflections due ote lower modulo ease Of GFRP, resulting areduod efecve moment of ineria tthe be Comparing sibs reinforce with the uniform and banded Aisrbons of lexus enforcement, the specimens mith the burda dsebaton had higher punching sexe capac. Inthe specimens with banded reinforcement. the area of reinfercement as Bete ited to est th sis moment Fesling in flower, ore nsf stains ihe lab force tment. As sown in Table 3, the increase in ponching sear ‘essance due tothe banded dstibuton of wp minforeement tear 5 and 108% forse SB2 and GPRD respectively. fame nrcing ttectoninmy Fig 5 Stain top mat iforing bart a peak lad 420 (GFB:, bowever had a similar uma la to GFB2. Tis ‘nde hat excessive conensons of thesia reinforce Se not facie in improving he puchig shea resistance ofthe FRPeinforced soncrte sabe. Ie noted tht the Eurocode 2. which icles the nen ofthe reinforce ‘ment at,itste rao of tet reiafeeeeat © 2% Tis trend was obese in the est om slabs enforced with FRE. reinforcement “The sition of ses fibers in the corerete id more proncunced infuene cathe punching ser sength than {he conenton of sib reinfocemest Sab GFE bad a 23. hgher punching shear srength thn Sab GF; his was. 418 higher hn sab SBD doe wo be bedi ees of he ers ana tr ably wane erson es eck. Strain distribution of GFRP bers Figure S shows the measred tin pois inthe top mst ofthe GERP brs at peak lod in both te weak (he inner layer) and suong (he outer ayer econ, with he gauge Iocations relative to the centerline of te slab shown Fig. 1 For al slabs the immediate clr region, the Sans inthe weak dzecton were ighe than hse in he Stone dietion, which as consent rh the fat tha the ‘rack wits occuring along the line perpendicular tothe ‘teak direction were gener large. ‘Specinen GFUI, with uifomly spaced bas, ad higher strains rer te colar than tie te comin region, The- Aileence asin between these wo regions for GFUI was lage, indicating the sais of slabs infor with a Utform disrbation of GFRP bars tende to oclize neat the column face where the moments se concentrated Conversely, the strains inthe specimens witha banded flstrbution ‘of reinforcement’ were velatively more tniform across the slab width, except te stains of GFB2 Inthe weak direction which have similar eee) to GPU "The son inthe GFRP bur for sabe GFR and GBF st maximum lating were 0.0036 and 0(O68, respectively ‘Aldbough the reinforcement suas in sDGFBFS were 21% larger hn that of OFS, ts noted tha sb GFBES reached shears and momens that were 33.1% gber than tat of (GFBS and, hence, experienced larger sas (Cracking and falture mode Figure 6 shows the rack puters at pat loads. Inallslabe reinforced with GFRP bas, the Fist cracks occured along theline perpendicular tothe weak deton of reinfoesmen passing tough he slab-column Jon, tory flowed by the forming of similar cack along the wet Iyer (weak ‘Gzecon) af tp bas. Radial cracks then occured in the ‘olan gion and propagated towards te edges of thes. ‘Ate sae tne many cementless connecting the ‘dal cack ome expecially nthe immed cour region ‘Wile Specimen SUI Rad smd cocking patems ote OF secs he fest rocking of Spcinen SB cred te ces, ‘wher the reinforcement ratio was lowe, andthe sack ‘oper towar the cauma comes. ‘The vratonof the maim crck isin the immediate cola fegion, a5 function of the sab deletion foe all ‘Slab, ar sbown in i, 7. Ths figure shows tht he band ‘Gsibtion of inforeement ress in smaller crack wits ‘han the uniform distibtion. Also, the slab einorced with Stel ier had smaller erack wid than comparable slabs ‘ACI Structural JournaJy- August 2000 m7 TFT Spzcimen GFBFS dipiyed excellent performance with ‘epriacrickcontralntte coir region The presence of ‘te ers in the conte ed wo sae crack with and ttercrack stnbution inating thatthe steel ers inthe ‘once matin wore sctsfl in brigging the cracks and liming hei growth with neal loading "Resin the rie messed ne enforcing as, vas son tha no anche ares cured In ation, he Sic condton of the GFRP bar embed inte specs Ss ves ae testing. AS sr a Pig ys ‘here othe surface ofthe GFRP bar even a are ‘A slab fled inthe classical punching ode. The culine f the extent of he punching cone on punching {ales presented by th bold linen Fig. 6. The specimens (ld longa sloping sure extensing fo he cmpesion trace ofthe ib tthe face of the clara othe esion Siac some distance frm the col face, The shear fale plane was affected bythe concentration of xual reinforcement inthe coi vicinity wae appre hat for ‘gecmens With banded rsforcement, the punching sear fale plane sorfaced ata este distance fom the colums Fes The punching shear re rack rfaed a estion ‘here the lexaral enforcement aio as reed, that the edge ofthe handed reinforcement. Fig, Crack panters at peak load (bold lines indicate sarang of punching shear flare sue) [ACI Structural Journal August 2000 CONPARISON OF FAILURE LOADS. "TO PREDICTIONS ‘The experimental ress f the punching shear suength of the slabs with intemal FRP reinforcement performed 9 ‘varius researchers including he esl rr hs sty, ‘tere compared withthe nominal tear sreagh pried (Sing te commendation equsions The characters of the diferent slab specimens andthe ist to predicted ratios 3g the equations of ACI 40.180 and SCE! ae given ing the ogutions of ACI-A80.1R! and ISCE The Fig. 7—Crack width in immediate column region versa ‘erage load: poit defection Fig. 8Suface of GFRP bor (a) before texting: and (b) ‘fer esting «a1 ‘punching shesr strength equations of ACI 440.18? and SCE ere developed specially for FRP-zeinfored lbs sated hah wt eas in Tabled and Fig 9 inch Slabs renfro! with CFRP tae (her ) aad GRP bars (Gower Ep. In Fe 9, Eg (NCI 40 1) 2nd EYE, OSCE") ‘reese she main aranaes hat cape bo fe amount frenforcemes andthe pe of reinforcement. ‘The equation of ACL 4418-6" is based on he esearch cof Tweyen and Frosch" and Orpaa®® The womial ‘unchng shear svengh Via is given by os Mims © whee fs the specined compressive stength of concrete (Ps (i uoay the eral petmeter at distance OS ftom cof fase (wn (i) and the average efectve ‘ep a i) Te shape of the rel section shoul be lua, 4 Boe onto an where gyis the FRP reinforcement ratio, and ny = B/E Iwbere Ef the modulus of clasteity of PRP ba and 1s the modalus of elasticity of eonrete, In this paper, By = 4700,f¢ (bP si) was assumes. ‘Rectendatons by the ISCE" lo provide an equation for the punching shear capacity of FRP-tinfrced sibs, ‘which i modification ofthe equation fo te-einforced ‘libs, a given by 1, aphid where By (1d) s 1.5 (d in meters), By» (1¢ Es re tac aasjay fore gts (2 Me (itdpa, Eis the modulo laity of sel (assumed 12 Sree) Mcatanhc tcc amiamed 6 200GPs{2.00 ann perter ote acon a ‘Seon nual ep ewe The seppeang clu, tp say fe “abe 4 Testto-preited rat : sa [cone | comer [EET EOROT Tos] Te See Cre aes [reso er a + — sees} sare psarees Pammeena| estan | ar] Sead fe am wom area [aaa ose Tose ee eV Sean samp orem aan — tar -ssera | a6 |e Sige ere sseas [seni | — tos —[ asta | tor | ar ee S—Hirere [ares [ secon aariaan | ost [soe [ze S—[Lasesn_[ won| eee inssian| —on—[raoin_[ aa a S— Harem [ ore asm fansite | ew —[-ton [9 SS —[amesn_|-wasn_[ ares sen) | sr aroi_| aor —[ a Ses ges pasem [arom {ta mone] —ar | oo a meso [sree [snes tint Paes [ae [oe ease ram [areas | se | ist [aren | ae omsaraal Set am eae aeons as roma [aor aan msism_ [aime airs [ear [tar eee paree [soem [—an— fae tte apf aesean_[ sme | en [aro Tage wae [amesoen|—ea— anes ta min ae ao as ae [ae Ene [ase sana | ta [ans | — 8 | eC Sama Dose aren [am ee Se [sess _Cien [separa | —t0—[ asa | os [om ‘ACI Structural Journal dly-August 2000 secre , wl ogea, ot . Fig Comparison of ACT 440.18 and ISCE! predictions qu to 1.3 of 1.5 for conte strengths below and above ‘Oa 7246 pi, reapecively, that wa se equal f0 1.00 rai th nominal punching shear apa in us pape. The {sen comrte compen strength og is asamed to be Iecocretcompresivestength pared bythe researcher “Te predictions sing ACL#40.1R are ver conservative Ina, te ACI SHOR predions had igh coelsent ot vation of 198% Te prediction wing the ISCE! fecmimenduions. provided. feter predictions, with an Ieage esto-predced capacity rao of 117, a Sandard ‘sition of 0-20 and csficien of variation of 16.6%. I noted that dhe predictions wing he ISCE™ equations for ‘pement OFB2 and GFB3 were enconservatve tnd it Tegested ht Unit of 2% fr the veinfrceent rp ‘oul give beter petition concuusions ‘The following contusions canbe drawn based on the capeimentl and bores rests I. Due tothe loner elastic modulus of GFRP bar, the COFRP-einfoced sibs have significantly lower ponching ‘Gear capactes, lower pou-cracung theses sl restr fetons than slabs reinforced wih ste enforcing bars. Pnching sear capaciies (GPU and GFED were 20% and 25 lower thin those of companion sab, SUL and SB2, spectively. The OFRP-winfored sabe produced more ‘ucks in he immedi eauma region than labs reiaforeed ‘ih teal reinforeing bar however, 2. Concenvating the up mat of Mexural reinforcement within aitance 1.5 tines the slab tikness from the fetus faces vesled ins sph Bigher panehing sete Strength, reater posterating stffmss, more uniform

    You might also like