Advertisement

An improved design method to predict the E-modulus and strength of FRP composites at different temperatures

  • Mohammed FaruqiEmail author
  • Gobishanker Rajaskanthan
  • Breanna Bailey
  • Francisco Aguiniga
Research Article
  • 21 Downloads

Abstract

In recent years, there has been an increased interest in the use of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) in the construction industry. However, the E-modulus and strength of such members at high service temperatures is still unknown. Modulus and strength of FRP at high service temperatures are highly required parameters for full design. The knowledge and application of this could lead to a cost effective and practical consideration in fire safety design. Thus, this paper proposes design methods for calculating the E-modulus and strength of FRP members at different temperatures. Experimental data from literature were normalized and compared with the results predicted by this method. It was found that the proposed design methods conservatively estimate the E-modulus and strength of FRP structural members. In addition, comparison was also made with direct references to the real behavior of materials. It was found to be satisfactory. Finally, an application is provided.

Keywords

concrete fiber reinforced polymer E-modulus strength temperatures 

Notation

a1

material fitting constant

a2

material fitting constant

a3

material fitting constant

E1

E-modulus corresponds to glassy state

E2

E-modulus corresponds to rubbery state

E3

E-modulus corresponds to decomposed state

E0

E-modulus at ambient temperature

Eg

E-modulus glassy state

Ei

initial E-modulus

Er

residual E-modulus

E(T)

E-modulus at evaluated temperature

g

material dependent constant

k

Weibull exponent

Km

empirical constant

m1

Weibull moduli corresponding to bond breakage

m2

Weibull moduli corresponding to bond breakage

m3

Weibull moduli corresponding to bond breakage

m

power low index

Pi

initial strength

Pr

residual strength

P(T)

strength at evaluated temperature

Rn

power modification factor

RrcTn

scaling function

T1

temperature correspondent to glassy state

T2

temperature correspondent to rubbery state

T3

temperature correspondent to decomposed state

T

evaluating temperature

Tce

temperature where experimental curve is symmetric

Ti

initial temperature

Tk

experimental fitting parameters

Tr

residual temperature

Tg

glass transition temperature

αd

degree of decomposed state

aE

normalized E-modulus

ag

degree of glassy state

aP

normalized strength

ar

degree of rubbery state

aT

normalized temperature

Δm (T)

mass loss at time T

Δmend

mass loss at end

σ0

minimum strength

σg

strength at glassy state

σ1

strength at leathery state

σi

strength at decomposed state

σr

strength at rubbery state

σR

strength at ambient temperature

σ(T)

strength at evaluated temperature.

φ

experimental fitting constant

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Faruqi M A, Roy S, Salem A A. Elevated temperature deflection behavior of concrete members reinforced with FRP bars. Journal of Fire Protection Engineering, 2012, 22(3): 183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nadjai A, Talamona D, Faris A. Fire performance of concrete beam rein forced with FRP bars. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Bond Behavior of FRP in Structures (BBFS 2005). Hong Kong, China: International Institute for FRP in Construction, 2005Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Keitel H, Zhao J, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Stochastic predictions of bulk properties of amorphous polyethylene based on molecular dynamics simulations. Mechanics of Materials, 2014, 68: 70–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vu-Bac N, Bessa M A, Rabczuk T, Liu W K. A multiscale model for the quasi-static thermo-plastic behavior of highly cross-linked glassy polymers. Macromolecules, 2015, 48(18): 6713–6723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vu-Bac N, Areias P M A, Rabczuk T. A multiscale multisurface constitutive model for the thermo-plastic behavior of polyethylene. Polymer, 2016, 105: 327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blontrock H, Taerwe L, Matthy S S. Properties of fiber reinforced plastics at elevated temperatures with regard to fire resistance of reinforced concrete members. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Reinforced Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-4). Baltimore: American Concrete Institute, 1999Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ashby M F, Jones D R H. Engineering Materials. Oxford: Oxford Pergamon Press, 1999Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davis R E. Modern Chemistry. San Diego: Harcourt Brace and Company, 1990Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bai Y, Keller T. Modeling of mechanical response of FRP composites in fire. Applied Science and Manufacturing, 2009, 40(6–7): 731–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Halverson H, Bausano J, Case S W, Lesko J. Simulation of response of composite structures under fire exposure. In: Proceedings of the Interna tional SAMPE Symposium. Long Beach: Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineering, 2004Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Rabczuk T. Concurrent multiscale modeling of three dimensional crack and dislocation propagation. Advances in Software, 2015, 80: 82–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Talebi H, Silani M, Bordas S, Kerfriden P, Rabczuk T. A computational library for multiscale modeling of material failure. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(5): 1047–1071MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Budarapu P, Gracie R, Bordas S, Rabczuk T. An adaptive multiscale method for quasi-static crack growth. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(6): 1129–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Budarapu P, Gracie R, Yang S, Zhuang X, Rabczuk T. Efficient coarse graining in multiscale modeling of fracture. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 126–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gibson A G, Wu Y S, Evans J T, Mouritz A P. Laminate theory analysis of composite under load in fire. Journal of Composite Materials, 2006, 40(7): 639–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gu P, Asaro R J. Stuctural buckling of polymer matrix composites due to reduce stiffness from fire damage. Composite Structures, 2005, 69(1): 65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mouriz A P, Gibson A G. Fire Properties of Polymer Composite Materials. Berlin: Springer, 2006Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mahieux C A, Reifsnider K L. Property of modeling across transition temperatures in polymers. Journal of Materials Science, 2002, 37(5): 911–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Springer G S. Model for predicting the mechanical properties of composites at elevated temperature. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 1984, 3(1): 85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bai Y, Keller T, Vallée T. Modeling of stiffness of FRP composites under elevated and high temperatures. Composites Science and Technology, 2008, 68(15–16): 3099–3106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Feih S, Mouritz A P, Mathys Z, Gibson A G. Tensile strength modeling of glass fiber-polymer compo sites in fire. Journal of Composite Materials, 2007, 41(19): 2387–2410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Feih S, Mathys Z, Gibson A G, Mouritz A P. Modelling the tension and compression strengths of polymer laminates in fire. Composites Science and Technology, 2007, 67(3–4): 551–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kulkarni A P, Gibson R F. Non-destructive characterization of effects of temperature and moisture on elastic moduli of vinyl ester resin and E-glass/vinyl ester resin composite. In: Proceedings of the American Society of Composites, the 18th Annual Technical Conference. Florida: American Society of Composites, 2003Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feng P, Wang J, Tian Y, Loughery D. Mechanical behavior and design of FRP structural members at high and low service temperatures. Journal of Composites for Construction 2016, 20(5): 16–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhu H G, Leung C K, Kim J K, Liu M Y. Tensile properties degradation of GFRP composites containing nanoclay in three different environments. Journal of Composite Materials, 2012, 46(18): 2179–2192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chowdhury E U, Eedson R, Green M F, Bisby A, Benichou N. Mechanical characterization of fiber reinforced polymers material at high temperature. Fire Technology, 2012, 47(4): 1036–1080Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang Y, Vassilopoulos A P, Keller T. Effects of low and high temperatures on tensile behavior of adhesively-bonded GFRP joints. Composite Structures, 2010, 92(7): 1631–1639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gibson A, Browne T, Feih S, Mouritz A. Modeling composite high temperature behavior and fire response under load. Journal of Composite Materials, 2012, 46(16): 2005–2022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mahieux C A, Reifsnider K L, Case S W. Property modeling across transition temperature in PMC’s: Part 1, tensile properties. Applied Composite Materials, 2001, 8(4): 217–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammed Faruqi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gobishanker Rajaskanthan
    • 1
  • Breanna Bailey
    • 1
  • Francisco Aguiniga
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Architectural EngineeringTexas A&M UniversityKingsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations