CICE 2010 - The 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering

September 27-29, 2010, Beijing, China

Bond Strength of BFRP Bars to Basalt Fiber Reinforced

High-Strength Concrete
1,2
Qiaowei Bi (biqiaow@sina.com) & 2Hui Wang
1 School of Civil & Hydraulic Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China
2 School of Civil & Safety Engineering, Dalian Jiaotong University, Dalian, China

ABSTRACT In order to study the bonding characteristic of the BFRP(Basalt Fiber Reinforced Plastics for short)
bars and the basalt fiber reinforced high-strength concrete, we embedded the BFRP bar into the cubic concrete
specimen which mixed the element of the basalt fiber sized 150mm×150mm×150mm. The diameter of the BFRP bars
used for experiment were differentiated into 10mm, 14mm and 18mm. The BFRP bonding length was differentiated
into 40mm, 70mm and 100mm. The basalt fiber volume content of high-strength concrete was differentiated into 0%,
0.1%, 0.15% and 0.2%. By changing the diameter of the BFRP, the bonding length of the BFRP and the basalt fiber
volume content of the basalt fiber reinforced high-strength concrete, we can research the bonding capacity between
the BFRP and the basalt fiber reinforced high-strength concrete. The experimental results indicate that the average
bonding strength decreased while the bonding length increased and it become weaker while the diameter of the BFRP
was bigger, and we have the best effect of the bonding strength when its fiber content was 0.2% comparing with three
kinds of fiber content.

1 INTRODUCTION has been used the pullout test to study the bonding
Basalt fiber reinforced concrete has the remarkable behaviors of ribbed bars of basalt fiber reinforced
advantages on excellence of crack resistance, impact polymer (BFRP) to the basalt fiber reinforced high-
resistance, freeze thaw, anti-shrinkage and impermeability; strength concrete, and conclude the primary result of the
it is beneficial to improve the durability of concrete and bonding strength as references for engineering application.
to prolong the service life of concrete structure[1].
Inorganic basalt fiber is superior to organic fiber in 2 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
anti-aging performance, and it also can improve 2.1 BFRP bar
mechanical behavior of concrete.
The BFRP bars which were used in this research
Basalt Fiber Reinforced Polymer (BFRP) has been
program in nominal diameters of 10mm, 14mm and 18
extensively researched as a new type material because
mm provided by Zhe Jiang Shi Jin Basalt Fiber Ltd were
of its advantages of high strength, light quality, linear
made of ribs in helical pattern on the rebar surface. The
elasticity, corrosion resistance, easy cutting, low relaxation,
main technical specifications of the BFRP bars are
non-magnetic performance, anti-fatigue and so on in the
described in Table 1.
worldwide in recent years [2-3]. There are research
reports on substituting ordinary reinforcements for the
Table 1 Main technical specifications of BFRP bars
BFRP bars in order to solve the durability problem of
reinforcement corrosion in the worldwide. Ultimate Ultimate tensile Elastic
Diameter
Study of bonding behaviors of FRP bars to concrete tensile load strength modulus
(mm)
˄kN˅ ˄MPa˅ (GPa)
have been researched widely [4-12]. However, the bonding
problems of the BFRP bars to the basalt fiber reinforced 10 61.31 781 40.6
high-strength concrete have not been reported. Whether 14 109 708 36.8
or not the BFRP and the basalt fiber reinforced high- 18 171.93 676 35.2
strength concrete can work together effectively was
based on the bonding strength of the two materials. This
paper adopts three kinds of diameter, three kinds of 2.2 Pullout specimen
bonding length, three kinds of fiber volume content For the experimental determination of the bond-slip
considered as the centric pullout bonding strength test relationship between bar and concrete, pullout specimens
parts. Based on the 108 pullout specimens, this paper with centric bar placement can be used. This method is

L. Ye et al. (eds.), Advances in FRP Composites in Civil Engineering

© Tsinghua University Press, Beijing and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011
September 27–29, 2010, Beijing, China
popular because it provides a simple means of
comparing the relative bonding behavior developed by
different bars. A sketch of the pullout specimen is
shown in Figure 1. Each bar was embedded in the center
of an 150mm×150mm×150mm concrete cube, and each
embedded length of them was 40mm, 70mm and
100mm. All the bars were 500mm long. The length of
the BFRP bars have 300mm left from its bottom end, in
order to meet the load requirements and left 50mm of
the length from its top which call free end, so that we
can measure the slip on the free end.
Figure 1 Sketch of pullout specimen (mm)
Contacting surface boundaries between the concrete
and the bar were separated by using a PVC tube to
reduce the influence of the stress coming from the free
end. The basalt filament volume fraction was 0%, 0.1%,
0.15% and 0.2%. Three nominally identical specimens
were tested for each bar to check the reliability of the
test setup and the scatter of the test results. The concrete
and the BFRP bar were cast vertically. After molding,
place the specimens in the standard curing room for 28
days.
2.3 Testing equipment
The load frame used in this test was made according to
CSA [9], which is shown in Figure 2. The bonding
specimen was put into the frame, and the frame could be
connected with the testing machine using a sleeving
made specially. The steel plate had a hole through which
the BFRP bar could pass. A spherical seat was put
between the channel steel plate and the lower plate,
which ensured that the deformed the BFRP bar was
subjected to the axial loads, not the torsional or flexural
loads.
The slips of the bar relative to concrete at the loaded
end and at the free end were measured with four
displacement meters. On the loaded end, two displacement
meters were clamped to the bar using the gripper rack,
which measured the relative displacement. The other
two displacement meters were located on the free end to
measure the relative displacement between the concrete
and the unloaded end of the bar.
The testing machine for pullout tests must be capable
of accurately applying the prescribed load. The load
applied to the bar must be at a rate not more than 22
kN/min or at a speed of the testing machine head that
must not be greater than 1.27 mm/min. In this test, the
577
testing machine was the INSTRON Series WAW-2000
electronic universal material testing machine with a
capacity of 2000 kN. All the tests were carried out in
displacement control mode at a speed of 0.5 mm/min so
as to obtain the peak behavior. The output load from the
testing machine and the four displacement meters were
recorded using by an automatic data acquisition system.
Loadings and readings were continued until: (1) pull-
through or rupture of the BFRP bar occurs; (2) the
enclosing concrete splits; or (3) slippage of at least 5
mm has occurred at the loaded end with the load nearly
remaining the same.
1. pullout specimen; 2. displacement meters; 3. spherical seat; 4. displacement
meters
Figure 2 Setup of pullout test
3 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
3.1 Mode of failure
By observing each test, the type of failure is given in
Table 2. In some cases, the specimens failed to pull out.
Pullout failure occurred because the energy of shearing
bonding strength between the bar and the concrete was
exceeded over the bonding capacity. In most cases the
specimens failed due to the exfoliation of the deformation.
The ultimate bonding strength of the specimens was
dictated by the shearing strength of the concrete where
the bar.
3.2 Average bond strength
Assuming that the uniform of bonding strength distribute
along the embedded length in the concrete, the average
bonding strength is defined as the shear force on the
per unit surface area of the bar. This is given by the
relationship:
W P / ʌ ˜ d ˜ la (1)
Where W = average bonding strength in MPa; P =
applied pullout load in kN; d = diameter of the bar in
mm; and la = embedded length in mm.
3.3 Slip at the free end
S is the average slip of the two displacement meters at
the free end in mm. The results of the test for all the
bonding specimens are given in Table 2.
578 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering

Table 2 Experimental results of bond strength of BFRP bars in high-strength concrete

Test parameters Test results

d fc P W S Failure
BF (%) l a (mm)
(mm) (MPa) (kN) (MPa) (mm) mode

40 60.21 35.07 27.92 5.00 CS

0 70 60.21 46.87 21.32 2.28 CD
100 60.21 53.28 16.97 0.26 DD
40 62.89 42.15 33.56 1.00 CD
0.1 70 62.89 51.25 23.32 0.16 DD
100 62.89 39.79 12.67 0.11 DD
10
40 54.07 37.77 30.07 12.68 CS
0.15 70 54.07 48.22 21.94 0.24 DD
100 54.07 51.93 16.54 0.98 DD
40 57.77 45.86 36.51 2.22 CD
0.2 70 57.77 52.95 24.09 0.78 DD
100 57.77 55.64 17.72 0.80 DD
40 60.21 69.80 39.70 10.01 CS
0 70 60.21 82.27 26.74 1.57 CD
100 60.21 48.80 11.10 0.23 DD
40 62.89 49.23 28.00 16.03 CS
0.1 70 62.89 72.83 23.67 15.01 CS
100 62.89 61.71 14.04 0.11 DD
14
40 54.07 40.36 22.95 20.88 CS
0.15 70 54.07 61.71 20.05 22.51 CS
100 54.07 81.26 18.48 0.13 DD
40 57.77 60.69 34.51 9.82 CS
0.2 70 57.77 75.87 24.66 0.55 DD
100 57.77 87.32 19.86 0.29 DD
40 60.21 44.51 19.69 22.43 CS
0 70 60.21 77.89 19.69 22.89 CS
100 60.21 73.17 12.95 0.09 DD
40 62.89 50.77 22.46 12.88 CS
0.1 70 62.89 76.54 19.35 7.98 CD
100 62.89 72.16 12.77 0.11 DD
18
40 54.07 61.37 27.15 0.62 DD
0.15 70 54.07 63.39 16.02 0.13 DD
100 54.07 79.58 14.08 0.11 DD
40 57.77 62.00 27.42 34.73 CS
0.2 70 57.77 78.07 19.73 0.13 DD
100 57.77 83.62 14.79 0.07 DD
d: BFRP diameter; BF: basalt fiber volume fraction; la: embedded length; f : the concrete compressive strength;
c
W : average bond strength; P:applied pullout load; S: the slip at the free end; CS: the shear of bar slip (The pullout specimen occurred a relatively longer bond-slip
move from the BFRP bar under the pullout load); CD: the shear of the deformation with the bar being slightly slip (The pullout specimen occurred a relatively shorter
bond-slip move from the BFRP bar under the pullout load then it split off very soon); DD: the splitting failure (The pullout specimen almost didn’t occur bond-slip
move from the BFRP bar under the pullout load, but the specimen split off directly)
September 27–29, 2010, Beijing, China
4 ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL
RESULTS
4.1 Effect of the BFRP embedded length
The bond-slip curves of the BFRP bars embedded in the
different length are shown in Figure 3. From Figure 3 it
can be seen that the bonding strength decreased when
the embedded length of the bar increased based on the
fixed condition of fiber volume fraction. From Figure 3
and Table 2, it can be seen that the failure mode in series
40mm are most the shearing of bar slipping; only one
group is the splitting failure and two groups are the
shearing of the deformation with the bar slightly slipping
then splitting thoroughly; three groups in series 70mm
are the shearing of bar slipping and three groups are the
shearing of the deformation with the bar slightly slipping
then splitting thoroughly, six groups in series 70mm are
the splitting failure. The failure mode in series 100mm
are all the splitting failure.
Figure 3 Effect of BFRP embedded length
4.2 Effect of basalt fiber volume fraction
The bond-slip curves of bars embedded in the different
basalt fiber volume fraction are shown in Figure 4. It can
be seen that the bonding strength of bars in series of 0.2%
is higher than the other series in Figure 4. It is explained
by the lower of water-cement ratio and more cement in
high-strength concrete. So the fiber filaments were fully
encapsulated by the cement and the BFRP bars were
encapsulated sufficiently by the cement fiber filaments.
Figure 4 Effect of basalt fiber volume fraction
579
4.3 Effect of bar diameter
The bond-slip curves of the BFRP bars are shown in
Figure 5. It can be seen that when the bonding length
was fixed, the bonding strength decreased as the diameter
of the bar increased. The reason was that the bigger the
diameter of the BFRP bar, the more the quantity of
mixed water beneath the bar overflowed so that created
greater space. This space reduced the contact surface
between the bar and the concrete and hence the bonding
strength decreased.

Figure 5 Effect of BFRP diameter
5 CONCLUSIONS
We study the bonding length, the diameter of the BFRP
and the influence of basalt fiber volume content on the
bonding strength between the BFRP and the basalt fiber
reinforced high-strength concrete by comparing with the
results of the test of 108 pullout specimens, we can
make the conclusions as follow:
(1) The bonding strength of the BFRP bar depended
primarily on mechanical interaction between the bar and
the concrete where it was embedded. However, the
bonding strength and bond-slip relationship of the BFRP
bars did not vary with the compressive strength of the
concrete.
(2) The bonding strength of the BFRP bar embedded
in 0.2% volume fraction of basalt fiber was superior to
those which were in other volume of the fiber fraction.
(3) The bonding strength of the BFRP bar varied with
the diameter of the bar. The bonding strength decreased
due to the increase of the bar diameter.
(4) The average bonding strength between the BFRP
bar and the basalt fiber concrete decreased as anchorage
length of the BFRP bar increased.
REFERENCES
XIE Er-gai, LI Zhongying.2003. Application prospect of basalt
fiber (in Chinese). Fiber Composite 3:15-18 .
HU Xianqi; LUO Yifeng; SHEN Tunian. 2002. Basalt continuous
fiber and its reinforcing composite material (in Chinese).
580 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering
Hi-tech Fiber & Application 2: 3-7.
HU Xianqi, SHEN Tunian. 2005.The Applications of the CBF in
War Industry & Civil Fields [J] (in Chinese). Hi-tech Fiber &
Application 6: 11-17.
Okelo, R., Yuan, R.L.2005. Bond strength of fiber reinforced
polymer rebars in normal strength concrete. Journal of
Composites for Construction 9 (3): 203-213.
San-José, T.J., Manso, J.M. 2006.Fiber-reinforced polymer bars
embedded in a resin concrete: Study of both materials and
their bond behavior. Polymer Composites.27 (3): 315-322.
Achillides, Z., Pilakoutas, K.2006. Bond behavior of fiber
reinforced polymer bars under direct pullout conditions.
Journal of Composites for Construction 8 (2):173-181.
Benmokrane, B.,Tighiouart, B., Chaallal, O.1996. Bond strength
and load distribution of composite GFRP reinforcing bars in
concrete. ACI Materials Journal 3:246-253.
Benmokrane, B., Zhang, B.R., Chennouf, A.2000. Tensile properties
and pullout behavior of AFRP and CFRP rods for grouted
anchor applications. Construction and Building Materials 14
(3):157-170.
CSA (Canadian Standard Association). CSA S806 02. 2002.
Design and Construction of Building Components with Fibre
Reinforced Polymers. Canadian Standards Association
International, Toronto, Canada.
Hao, Q.D., Wang, B., Ou, J.P.2006. Fiber reinforced polymer
rebar’s application to civil engineering (in Chinese). Concrete
9:38-40.
Hao, Q.D., Wang, B., Ou, J.P.2007a. Bond behavior between FRP
rebar and concrete (in Chinese). Architecture Technology
1:15-17.
HAO Qingduo, WANG Yanlei, ZHANG Zhichun, OU Jin-ping.
2007. Bond strength improvement of GFRP rebars with different
rib geometries. Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A
8(9):1356-1365.