| Literature DB >> 31197087 |
Ondrej Petruška1, Jozef Zajac2, Vieroslav Molnár3, Gabriel Fedorko4, Jozef Tkáč5.
Abstract
This article explores the effect of carbon fiber content on the flexural strength of polymer concrete testing samples and compares the damping of polymer concrete and U-shaped steel profiles. The experiments involved and described herein consisted of flexural strength testing according to STN EN 12 390-5 Testing of Hardened Concrete, Part 5: Flexural Strength of Test Samples. The test results were evaluated graphically and by calculations and were further processed in various programs. The experimental results indicated that the highest flexural strength value was obtained by the test samples containing 12% of carbon fibers while culminating at 17.9 MPa. The results showed that the highest increase of flexural strength was caused by the addition of 3% of carbon fibers to the mixture, which increased the flexural strength by 4.2 MPa, or 26.75%. The results indicated that, based on the shape of the regression curve, flexural strength culminated at 13% carbon fiber content. The experimental results demonstrated that the tested polymer concrete test sample had a 6.87 times higher attenuation coefficient than the U-shaped steel profile. The results showed that the polymer concrete test sample No. 4 reduced vibration acceleration deviation by 93.5% in 0.005 sec and the U-shaped steel profile by 32.9%.Entities:
Keywords: damping; flexural strength; polymer concrete
Year: 2019 PMID: 31197087 PMCID: PMC6631027 DOI: 10.3390/ma12121917
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
The characteristics of the organic fillers.
| Kind of Filler | Size of the Fraction | Specific Gravity | Water Absorption | Mining Area |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andesite gravel | 4–8 mm | 2400 kg·m−3 | 0.5–2.5% | Fintice, Slovak Republic |
| Silica sand ST 06/12 | 0.63–1.2 mm | 2500 kg·m−3 | 0.1–0.3% | Mladějov, Czech Republic |
| Silica sand STJ 25 | 0.06–0.31 mm | 2700 kg·m−3 | 0.1–0.3% | Mladějov, Czech Republic |
The characteristics of epoxy resin LH 160 and hardener H 287 [26].
| Kind of Binder | Property | Value of Property |
|---|---|---|
| epoxy resin LH 160 | Density at 25 °C | 1.13–1.17 g·cm−3 |
| Viscosity at 25 °C | 700–900 mPa·s | |
| Epoxy mass equivalent | 166–182 g·mol−1 | |
| Epoxy index | 0.55–0.60 mol.1000g−1 | |
| hardener H 287 | Density at 25 °C | 0.93–0.96 g·cm−3 |
| Viscosity at 25 °C | 80–100 mPa·s | |
| Amine number | 450–500 |
Figure 1Used materials.
Figure 2Matrix and fillers.
Figure 3Table Lievers LTT 40/40.
Figure 4The casting from the mold.
Figure 5Control of test samples.
Figure 6Weighing the test sample.
Measured dimensions, weight, and average specific weight of the test samples.
| No. of Test Sample | Measured Dimensions | Weight of Test Sample | Standard Deviation | Average Specific Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 99.8 × 100.2 × 500.1 mm | 9.355 kg | 8.165 × 10−3 kg | 1890 kg·m−3 |
| 2 | 99.6 × 100.5 × 500.3 mm | 9.365 kg | ||
| 3 | 99.7 × 100.3 × 499.5 mm | 9.345 kg | ||
| 4 | 98.5 × 100.4 × 499.7 mm | 9.220 kg | 12.247 × 10−3 kg | 1870 kg·m−3 |
| 5 | 99.9 × 100.2 × 499.9 mm | 9.235 kg | ||
| 6 | 99.6 × 100.1 × 499.6 mm | 9.205 kg | ||
| 7 | 100.2 × 100.3 × 499.6 mm | 9.130 kg | 2.356 × 10−3 kg | 1820 kg·m−3 |
| 8 | 100.1 × 100.2 × 499.8 mm | 9.135 kg | ||
| 9 | 100.2 × 100.2 × 499.7 mm | 9.135 kg | ||
| 10 | 101.1 × 100.6 × 499.6 mm | 8.920 kg | 8.165 × 10−3 kg | 1 760 kg·m−3 |
| 11 | 99.8 × 100.2 × 499.8 mm | 8.930 kg | ||
| 12 | 100.0 × 99.8 × 500.1 mm | 8.910 kg | ||
| 13 | 101.1 × 100.6 × 499.6 mm | 8.575 kg | 10.261 × 10−3 kg | 1680 kg·m−3 |
| 14 | 99.6 × 99.9 × 499.8 mm | 8.560 kg | ||
| 15 | 100.2 × 100.6 × 500.4 mm | 8.585 kg | ||
| 16 | 103.1 × 100.7 × 499.6 mm | 8.125 kg | 11.025 × 10−3 kg | 1570 kg·m−3 |
| 17 | 99.8 × 100.3 × 499.8 mm | 8.115 kg | ||
| 18 | 101.2 × 99.6 × 499.5 mm | 8.140 kg |
Figure 7Test sample mounting scheme.
Figure 8The NI LabVIEW SignalExppress software and the CMLV 3850 accelerometer.
Figure 9Location of the vibration acceleration sensor indicating the direction of stroke.
Figure 10The schematic representation of attenuation λ in muted oscillation motion.
The measured load force values and the average calculated flexural strength values.
| No. of Test Sample | Measured Load Force | Standard Deviation | Average Calculated Flexural Strength |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 38.24 kN | 0.588 kN | 11.5 MPa |
| 2 | 39.02 kN | ||
| 3 | 37.58 kN | ||
| 4 | 51.85 kN | 0.367 kN | 15.7 MPa |
| 5 | 51.40 kN | ||
| 6 | 52,30 kN | ||
| 7 | 52.50 kN | 0.515 kN | 15.9 MPa |
| 8 | 53.16 kN | ||
| 9 | 51.90 kN | ||
| 10 | 54.73 kN | 0.294 kN | 16.0 MPa |
| 11 | 55.07 kN | ||
| 12 | 55.45 kN | ||
| 13 | 61.45 kN | 0.211 kN | 17.9 MPa |
| 14 | 61.40 kN | ||
| 15 | 60.98 kN | ||
| 16 | 56.61 kN | 0.062 kN | 16.3 MPa |
| 17 | 56.47 kN | ||
| 18 | 56.59 kN |
Figure 11The graphical comparison of the effect of carbon fiber content on flexural strength.
Figure 12The graphical comparison of the effect of the carbon fiber content on specific weight.
Figure 13The comparison of damping in polymer concrete and U-shaped steel profile.
Figure 14The comparison of calculated damping of polymer concrete and U-shaped steel profile.
Figure 15Gaussian regression curve.