| Literature DB >> 30925679 |
Fei Zhou1, Jiwen Zhang2,3, Shoutan Song4,5, Dong Yang6, Chao Wang7.
Abstract
Material properties at elevated temperatures are important factors in the fire safety design and numerical analysis of concrete members strengthened with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) composites. Most of the previous research mainly focused on tensile strength and elastic modulus in conventional steady state temperature tests. However, the transient state test method is more realistic for strengthening concrete structures. At the same time, the coefficient of thermal expansion of FRP composites is also one of the important factors affecting concrete members at elevated temperatures. This paper presents a detailed experimental investigation on the longitudinal thermal expansion deformation, and the mechanical properties of carbon FRP (CFRP) tendons with 8 mm diameter in the steady state and transient state. The results indicate that longitudinal deformation of CFRP tendons is negative at high temperature; in addition, the transient state test results of CFRP tendons are slightly higher than the steady state test results. The final part of this paper assesses the accuracy of different empirical models. Furthermore, a new equation calculating the properties of CFRP composites at elevated temperatures is presented with the numerical fitting technique, which is in good agreement with the experimental results.Entities:
Keywords: carbon fiber reinforced polymer; elevated temperatures; experimental tests; material properties; modeling
Year: 2019 PMID: 30925679 PMCID: PMC6479849 DOI: 10.3390/ma12071025
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Material properties of carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) tendons used.
| Specimen | Dimension | Tensile Properties | Physical Properties | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length L(mm) | Diameter D(mm) | Strength | Modulus | Density | Fiber Content | |||
| CFRP | 800 | 8 | 2070 | 156 | 1.6 | 65 | 126 | 405 |
Figure 1Anchorage system for CFRP tendons.
Figure 2Test setup for CFRP tensile tests at elevated temperatures.
Number of specimens in this study.
| Type of Tests | Number of Specimens |
|---|---|
| Thermal expansion test | 3 |
| Steady state test | 24 |
| Transient state test | 15 |
| Total | 42 |
Figure 3Time–temperature curve for no. 3 point.
Figure 4Constant temperature distribution on the surface of CFRP tendons.
Figure 5Expansion coefficient–temperature curves.
Tensile strength of CFRP tendons in steady state tests.
| Target Temp (°C) | Average Surface Temp (°C) | Strength (MPa) | Average Strength (MPa) | Standard Deviation | Coefficient of Variation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SS-1 | SS-2 | SS-3 | ||||||
| 20 | 23 | 2048 | 2087 | 2075 | 2070 | 16.3 | 0.0079 | 100 |
| 100 | 91 | 1906 | 1943 | 1901 | 1917 | 18.7 | 0.0098 | 92.6 |
| 150 | 137 | 1584 | 1714 | 1508 | 1602 | 85.1 | 0.053 | 77.4 |
| 200 | 180 | 1325 | 1303 | 1281 | 1303 | 18.0 | 0.014 | 62.9 |
| 250 | 228 | 1248 | 1165 | 1097 | 1170 | 61.7 | 0.053 | 56.5 |
| 300 | 278 | 1105 | 1110 | 1091 | 1102 | 8.0 | 0.0073 | 53.2 |
| 400 | 383 | 996 | 901 | 953 | 950 | 38.8 | 0.041 | 45.9 |
| 500 | 518 | 331 | 365 | 350 | 349 | 13.9 | 0.040 | 16.9 |
Figure 6Tensile strength degradation in steady state tests.
Figure 7Failure modes of CFRP tendons at elevated temperatures.
Failure temperatures of CFRP tendons in transient state tests.
| Target Load (kN) | Stress (MPa) | Stress Ratio (%) | Temp (°C) | Average Temp (°C) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TS-1 | TS-2 | TS-3 | ||||
| 30 | 597 | 28.8 | 441 | 489 | 473 | 468 |
| 40 | 796 | 38.5 | 432 | 421 | 439 | 431 |
| 50 | 995 | 48.1 | 360 | 344 | 394 | 366 |
| 60 | 1194 | 57.7 | 253 | 246 | 219 | 239 |
| 70 | 1393 | 67.3 | 169 | 196 | 184 | 183 |
Figure 8Variation of failure temperatures with target loads in transient state tests.
Simulation of CFRP material strength for different models.
| Model | Parameters | Steady State | Transient State | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strength | R-Square | Strength | R-Square | ||
| Gu and Asaro [ |
| 1 | 0.941 | 0.885 | 0.782 |
| Liu et al. [ |
| 0.281 | 0.963 | 0.332 | 0.957 |
|
| −0.056 | −0.09 | |||
|
| 0.007 | 0.012 | |||
| Correia et al. [ | B | −3.529 | 0.936 | −2.862 | 0.898 |
| C | −0.007 | −0.007 | |||
| Yu and Kodur [ |
| 0.0035 | 0.796 | 0.0036 | −0.548 |
| Present study |
| 1.419 | 0.984 | 1.155 | 0.955 |
|
| 0.663 | 0.552 | |||
Figure 9Nominal strength–temperature modeling curves.