| Literature DB >> 31071962 |
Christine M Lozano1, Guillermo A Riveros2.
Abstract
Over eighty percent of the navigation steel structures (NSS) in the United States have highly deteriorated design boundary conditions, resulting in overloads that cause fatigue cracking. The NSSs' highly corrosive environment and deterioration of the protective system accelerate the fatigue cracking and cause standard crack repair methods to become ineffective. Numerous studies have assessed and demonstrated the use of carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP) to rehabilitate aging and deteriorated reinforced concrete infrastructure in the aerospace industry. Due to the increase of fatigue and fracture failures of NSS and the shortage of research on CFRP retrofits for submerged steel structures, it is imperative to conduct research on the effects of CFRP repairs on NSS, specifically on the adhesive's chemical bonding to the steel substrate. This was accomplished by developing a new analytical algorithm for CFRP bond-slip behavior, which is based on Volkersen's contact shear single lap joint (SLJ) connection. The algorithm was validated by experimental results of fatigue center-cracked large steel plates repaired with CFRP patches. The state of stresses at the crack tip are largely influenced by a combination of the crack tip plasticity radius and overall bond surface area.Entities:
Keywords: bond-slip; carbon fibers; cohesive damage; extended finite element; fatigue and fracture repairs; hydraulic steel structures; traction-separation
Year: 2019 PMID: 31071962 PMCID: PMC6540136 DOI: 10.3390/ma12091495
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Energy release rate crack growth stages.
Figure 2Implemented carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) repairs. (a) Miter gate flange. (b) Tainter valve strut arm.
Summary of common bond shear analytical models and their common assumptions [21].
| Analytical Model | Assumptions | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linear Elastic | Deformation | Bending | Transverse Stress | Type of Joint 1 | |
| Volkersen | x | Shear only | Equal | SLJ & DLJ | |
| Goland and Reissner | x | Shear & Normal | x | Equal | SLJ & DLJ |
| Frostig et al. | x | Shear & Normal | x | Equal | SLJ & DLJ |
| Hart-Smith | x | Shear & Normal | x | Equal | SLJ & DLJ |
| Bigwood and Crocombe | x | Shear & Normal | x | Equal | Multiple Configuration |
1 Types of joints: Single Lap Joint (SLJ) and Double Lap Joint (DLJ).
Figure 3Large-scale steel plate specimen configuration (a) with CFRP Repairs; (b) without CFRP Repairs.
Material properties.
| Mechanical Property | Steel | Tyfo SCH-41 | Tyfo S |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ex 1 (Gpa) | - | 5.93 | - |
| Ey 1 (Gpa) | 206 | 82.7 | 2.9 |
| Gxy (Gpa) | - | 29.5 | 1.03 |
| ε | - | 0.0085 | - |
| σy (Gpa) | 344.7 | 82 | - |
| τu (Gpa) | - | - | 1.69 × 10−2 |
| Gc (Gpa) | - | - | 2.10 × 10−7 |
1 The x and y denote the latitudinal and longitudinal directions, respectively.
Figure 4Diagram of single lap joint.
Figure 5Algorithm of analytical model.
Figure 6Cycles vs. half crack length results.
Figure 7Far-field stress result.