FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

SANKALCHAND PATEL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

SANKALCHAND PATEL UNIVERSITY
VISNAGAR, INDIA

DESIGN, ANALYSIS & COST COMPARISION

BY USING GFRP & HYSD BAR BY USING STAAD. PRO
Submitted By:-
Guided By:- Chawda Dhairyakumar Ashwinkumar
Ashutosh Patel M.E. (Civil) in Structural Engineering
Assistant Professor (2022095900019932)

1
CONTENTS
•INTRODUCTION
•LITERATURE SURVEY
•OBJECTIVE
•SCOPE OF WORK
•METHODOLOGY
•SOFTWARE VALIDATION
•REFERENCES

2
INTRODUCTION

3
INTRODUCTION
•Durability of the reinforced concrete structure has been the prime concern since its inception.
•Service life of the structure is the key factor for the growth as well as the stability economy.
•Conventionally used steel reinforcement are prone to corrosion when RC members are subjected
to harsh environmental conditions.
•The deterioration of steel reinforcement inside concrete reduced the strength and service life of
the RC structural members.
•This results in increase in the cost inform of retrofitting or replacement of the structural
members.

4
 Exposed to aggressive
conventional steel Gets Strength Affects
environment
reinforcement corroded reduced serviceability

5
GFRP Rebar

6
What is Fiber Reinforced Polymer(FRP)
Rebars?
𝑭𝑹𝑷 𝑹𝒆𝒃𝒂𝒓𝒔¿ 𝑭𝒊𝒃𝒆𝒓 +¿ 𝑴𝒂𝒕𝒓𝒊𝒙 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒊𝒏
Carbon, Polyester,
Glass, Epoxy,
Aramid, Vinyl ester
Basalt

7
 History of FRP
• First found its application after World War II in 1940s.
• It came into further use during the cold war in aerospace industry and defence industry.
• In 1950s, further research was done on corrosion of steel reinforcement.
• In 1960, FRP was considered as reinforcement in concrete for the first time and was commercially available in
1970s.
• In 1980s, Europe and Germany employed pre-stressed FRP in highway bridge.
• Up to mid- 1990s, Japan made maximum use of FRP and had established norms for it in Japan Society of Civil
Engineering.
• In 2000s, China became the largest user of composite reinforcement.
• After 2000s, more than 200 bridges have been constructed using FRP in Canada.

8
Applications of FRP
This concept aims to modify the current construction practice as a whole, especially which the concrete
structures are subjected to aggressive exposure conditions such as:

• RCC roads
• Bridges
• Sea Walls
• Ports, Dry Docks, Jetties, Floating Structures
• Retaining Walls
• RCC Building
• Chemical Plants
• Waste water Treatment plants

9
Advantage and Disadvantage of FRP
Advantage Disadvantage
• High longitudinal tensile strength • No yielding before brittle rupture
• Corrosion resistance • Low transverse strength
• Non magnetic • Low modulus of elasticity
• High fatigue endurance • Anisotropic material
• Lightweight (about ⅕ to ¼ the density of steel)
• Low thermal and electric conductivity

10
Comparison between FRP and Steel
FRP
• Non-corrosive
• Impervious to chloride ion and chemical attack
• Light weight (1250 - 2100 kg/m3)
• Thermally and electrically non conductive
• Serviceability criteria controls the design
• Linear elastic up-to failure
• Low compressive strength
• Anisotropic
• Re-cycling is difficult
STEEL
• Corrosive
• Pervious to chloride ion and chemical attack
• Comparatively heavy (7850 kg/m3)
• Thermally and electrically conductive
• Safety criteria controls the design
• Linear elastic up-to yield point
• High compressive strength
• Isotropic
• Re-cycling is easy
11
LITERATURE SURVEY

12
1. Analysis And Design Of Single Cell Rcc Box Type Vup By Using Staad-pro.
Hardeep pilania 2Rajeev Singh Parihar 3Abhay Kumar Jha, 4Barun Kumar, 5Rajesh Misra (ISSN: 2320-2882)

AIM:
The main objective of this present study is to study the behavior of box type minor bridge or vehicular under pass when
subjected to different combination of loads in terms of bending moment and Shear force variations.
WORK DONE:

• DESIGN FOR VUP 1 X 15.0 X 7.0 M

• This Report is prepared for Design of VUP at the project Stretch, The summery of the Structure is given in the table below.

SR.NO Type of Member Dimensions or Nos.

1 Top Slab 7000mm x 15000mm x 700mm
2 Bottom Slab 7000mm x 15000mm x 750mm
3 Outer wall 750mm x 15000mm x 7000mm

• After the analysis is completed, the design of the bridge is made in accordance with IRC 112-2011 for the optimal section
of the bridge for each case considering the same loading and geometry.

13
 Fibers: Glass and Carbon

CONCLUSION:

• The design of RCC Box is covered by using three load cases. The values of design moments etc are marginally more
than (close to) the values given by manual calculations for the three load cases.
• The maximum shear forces develop at the corners of top and bottom slab when the RCC Box is running full and the top
slab carries the dead and live load.

14
2. Rcc Box Culvert - Methodology And Designs Including Computer Method ( B.N. Sinha & R.P. Sharma)
AIM:
Design and analysis of box culvert of different span with moment distribution method for manyual calculation and staad. Pro
for software calculation.

WORK DONE :
The box of 3 m x 3 m without cushion and with 5 m cushion have been given. Various load cases have been given for the
maximum design moments. The box has also been checked in shear and shear reinforcement provided as required. The
relevant parameters are mentioned in the design. Detailed design of single cell box culvert with and without cushion have
been given. Basically, there is no difference in design of multi cell box having two, three or more cells. The bending moment
is obtained by moment distribution considering all the cells together for different combination of loading and design of
section accomplished for final bending moments for that member.

Cross Section of Box

15
 Bending Moment Diagram Shear Force Diagram
CONCLUSION:

• Box for cross drainage works across high embankments has many advantages compared to a slab culvert.
• Box does not need any elaborate foundation and can easily be placed over soft foundation by increasing
• base slab projection to retain base pressure within safe bearing capacity of ground soil.
• Right box can be used for flow of water in skew direction by increasing length or providing edge beam
around the box and it is not necessary to design skew box.

16
3. To Study of a Box Culvert for Semi-Arid Zone for Improvement of Life Span and it's Cost Analysis
Talha Rahim, Volume-1, Issue-12, December-2018

AIM:
The study included estimation of PCC & RCC Cut off & Curtain walls through comparative results using WSM method and
LSM method.

WORK DONE:
 The Cut off Wall Reinforcement: The main requirement of cut off wall (COW) is to flow the water. But due to the hydraulic
pressure & scour pressure it get damaged easily. Hence in this study we are providing reinforcement in Cut off wall as
shown in given figure.

 The main bar Ring is of 12 mm & distribution bar is of 8 mm. The 2nd figure shows the establishment of reinforcement in
COW by which the wall is also capable to bear the tensile load developed due to hydraulic pressure & Scour pressure and
gives more strength to Box Culvert to resist the tensile force developed in Cut off Wall.

 Curtain Wall Reinforcement: The wall which is constructed below the box in a Box Culvert is called as Curtain wall or pin
wall. This wall provides stability to the box. In previous studies curtain wall is constructed of normal P.C.C on both beneath
end side of Boxes which get affected due to loading and get damaged easily.

17
 Cost comparison

CONCLUSION:
 The main objective of this study is to determine the most stable and load resisting structure .To determine the costing of
RCC& PCC cutoff and curtain wall .To compare PCC and RCC Cutoff and Curtain wall in terms of Life span Stability and
costing.
 Seepage pressure is less in box culvert with RCC cutoff & curtain walls.
 Money Manpower and resources will be used less times.
 Government planning will not be affected because project will be for life time period.

18
4. To Study of a Box Culvert for Semi-Arid Zone for Improvement of Life Span and it's Cost Analysis
Talha Rahim, Volume-1, Issue-12, December-2018

AIM:
The study included estimation of PCC & RCC Cut off & Curtain walls through comparative results using WSM method and
LSM method.

WORK DONE:
 The complete work have been done done manually without any use of software, then the cases taken with respect to
different loading types are then solved and the final result will guide the whole work to the result and conclusion section.
Following are the methodology approach in which cases are taken into account for with cushion and without cushion cases
for loading Class 70 (R), Class A along with Class B.

 For Without Cushion:- 350 kN of Tracked vehicle using Class 70(R) will be Case A, 114 kN of Wheeled vehicle of Class A
will be Case B, 68 kN of Wheeled vehicle of Class B will be Case C.

 The above literature analysis and design of box culvert is under the influence of different kinds of loading conditions. It can
be noted that effect of depth of cushion, impact load, braking forces, coefficient of earth pressure and the angle of load
dispersion due live load are important factors.

19
 Graphical Representation of with & with out cushion.
CONCLUSION:
• There are many varieties of materials, Size and Shapes. Concrete hollow box culverts are the best for the durability and
economical satisfaction. To design and analysis of box saves time and money improving planning of road and management
also reduces the risks when selection is based on whether condition. It is easy to construct the box with fast workmanship and
cost effectiveness can be achieved. The result of analysis for given parameters can be solved by using moment distribution
method. There is more stresses produces in without case with compare to cushion case. The box culvert includes three
pressure cases for designing. The Class-70(R) Loading is also been used as calculation of Class A Loading.

20
OBJECTIVES
• To investigate and compare the performance of GFRP with HYSD bar.

• To compare the performance of specimen reinforced with GFRP and Steel under harsh environmental conditions.

• To investigate the corrosion of GFRP rebars in various environmental conditions.

• To find ways to improve the structure and reduce maintenance cost.

• To compare the durability of concrete reinforced with GFRP and Steel rebars.

21
 SCOPE
• To prepare model of box culvert in staad. Pro with specified dimensions.
• The design of this box culvert is carried out by keeping in mind the section 5 of IRC:112-2020, where basis of
design is prescribed.
• The loads will be calculated as per the provisions of IRC:6-2016. (Dead loads, Live loads, Impact load)
• Load cases and combinations will be considered as per IRC:6-2016 in STAAD model with Active Earth
pressure in (Dry & HFL Condition).
• Shrinkage strain is calculated as per Cl. 6.4.2.6, IRC:112-2020 and the same is converted to equvilaent
temperature fall and then applied in STAAD model.
• Then after comparing results of HYSD & GFRP Bar with share force , bending moment and axial load , then after
working out with Economic cost of Bar.

22
Methodology

1st 2nd
COLLECTING ANALYSIS CHECKING COST
DIFFERENT & OF COMPARISON
PROPERTIES OF DESIGN IN OUTPUT DATA OF BOX CULVERT
MATERIAL STAAD. PRO SF. BM. & AL.

23
SOFTWARE VALIDATION

24
 SOFTWARE VALIDATION
PAPER: SIMPLIFIED MODEL FOR DESIGN RCC BOX CULVERTS BY STAAD.PRO
Abdul Kareem M.B. Al-Shammaa, ARPN Journal (Vol. 13, No. 22, November 2018).

• Total length of culvert is equal 15 meters. Segment in one meter length will be taken to perform the analysis and design so
that consider the structure as a plane instead of space structure.
• Depending on the discharge data every ten years, the highest level of water in front of the culvert is one meter.
• Thickness of all components will be chosen equal to 400mm, as a condition that not less than sixth of dimensions.
So, D=2+0.4=2.4m.
• Due to earth pressure 25.2 KN/M
• Due to surcharge live loads 6.7 KN/M
• KFY will be calculated equal to,
• KFY=6400(0.5*1.00)= 3200kN/m,
• While for the outer supports,
• KFY=6400(0.25*1.00)= 1600kN/m.

25
OBJECTIVES
• To investigate and compare the performance of GFRP with HYSD bar.

• To compare the performance of specimen reinforced with GFRP and Steel under harsh environmental conditions.

• To investigate the corrosion of GFRP rebars in various environmental conditions.

• To find ways to improve the structure and reduce maintenance cost.

• To compare the durability of concrete reinforced with GFRP and Steel rebars.

26
 SOFTWARE VALIDATION
PAPER: SIMPLIFIED MODEL FOR DESIGN RCC BOX CULVERTS BY STAAD.PRO
Abdul Kareem M.B. Al-Shammaa, ARPN Journal (Vol. 13, No. 22, November 2018).
Displacement Diagram

Prepared Model Reference Paper Model

27
 SOFTWARE VALIDATION
PAPER: SIMPLIFIED MODEL FOR DESIGN RCC BOX CULVERTS BY STAAD.PRO
Abdul Kareem M.B. Al-Shammaa, ARPN Journal (Vol. 13, No. 22, November 2018).
Actions and Reactions Diagram

Prepared Model Reference Paper Model

28
 SOFTWARE VALIDATION
PAPER: SIMPLIFIED MODEL FOR DESIGN RCC BOX CULVERTS BY STAAD.PRO
Abdul Kareem M.B. Al-Shammaa, ARPN Journal (Vol. 13, No. 22, November 2018).
Bending moment diagram

Prepared Model Reference Paper Model

29
 SOFTWARE VALIDATION
PAPER: SIMPLIFIED MODEL FOR DESIGN RCC BOX CULVERTS BY STAAD.PRO
Abdul Kareem M.B. Al-Shammaa, ARPN Journal (Vol. 13, No. 22, November 2018).
Shear force diagram

Prepared Model Reference Paper Model

30
 VALIDATION PROBLEM
PAPER: SIMPLIFIED MODEL FOR DESIGN RCC BOX CULVERTS BY STAAD.PRO
Abdul Kareem M.B. Al-Shammaa, ARPN Journal (Vol. 13, No. 22, November 2018).

COMPARISON OF MODEL WITH REFERENCE MODEL & PREPARED MODEL

Name Unit Reference Prepared
Model Model
Displacement Max at End MM 18.640 17.861
Displacement Max at Center MM 18.711 17.929
Actions and Reactions (x) N -26.289 -26.689
Actions and Reactions (Y) N 28.545 29.791
Bending moment at Bottom support (At end) KN.M 20.052 19.372

Bending moment at Bottom support(At center) KN.M 29.557 28.327

Shear force on Bottom support (At end) N -76.143 -79.300
Shear force on Bottom support (At center) N -28.396 -29.600

31
REFERENCES

32
REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2006), “Guide for the design and construction of concrete reinforced with FRP
bars.” ACI 440.1R-06, Farmington Hills, MI.
Bureau of Indian Standards (2000). “ Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice”. IS 456:2000. BIS, New
Delhi.
Bureau of Indian Standards (2000). “Concrete Mix Proportioning — Guidelines ( Second Revision )”. IS
10262:2019. BIS, New Delhi.
ASCE-ACI Committee 445 on Shear and Torsion. (1998), “Recent approaches to shear design of structures.” Journal
of Structural Engineering, 10.1061/ (ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:12(1375), 1375–1417, ISSN: 0733-9445.
Bureau of Indian Standards (2000). “Ordinary Portland Cement – 53 Grade Specification”. IS 12269:2013. BIS,
New Delhi.
Bureau of Indian Standards (2000). “Coarse and Fine Aggregates for Concrete – Specification”. IS 383:2016. BIS,
New Delhi.
Canadian Standards Association (CSA) (2012), “Design and Construction of Buildings Components with fibre-
Reinforced Polymers.” CSA S806-12, Toronto.

33
REFERENCES
El-Sayed, A., El-Salakawy, E., and Benmokrane, B. (2005), “Shear strength of one- way concrete slabs
reinforced with fibre-reinforced polymer composite bars.” Journal of Composites for Construction,
10.1061/(ASCE)1090 - 0268(2005)9:2(147), 147–157, ISSN: 1090-0268.
El-Sayed, A. K., El-Salakawy, E. F., and Benmokrane, B. (2006), “Shear strength of FRP-reinforced
concrete beams without transverse reinforcement.” ACI Structural Journal, 103(2), 235–243, ISSN : 0889-
3241.
Alam, M. S., and Hussein, A. (2011), “Experimental investigation on the effect of longitudinal
reinforcement on shear strength of fibre reinforced polymer reinforced concrete beams.” Canadian Journal
of Civil Engineering, 38(3), 243–251, ISSN : 0315-1468.
Matta, F., Nanni, A., Hernandez, T. M., and Benmokrane, B. (2008), “Scaling of strength of FRP reinforced
concrete beams without shear reinforcement.” CICE2008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Steiner, S., El-Sayed, A. K., Benmokrane, B., Matta, F., and Nanni, A. (2008), “Shear behaviour of large-
size beams reinforced with glass FRP bars.” Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures: 5th
International Conference, ACMBS-II, 1397–1406.

34
THANK YOU

35