Study on Axial Compression Behavior of Concrete Short Columns Confined by Flax/Glass Fiber Hybrid-Reinforced Epoxy Resin Composites
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Test Materials and Equipments
2.2. Preparation of Composite-Confined Concrete Short Column
- (1)
- As shown in Figure 2a, after the curing age reached 28 days, the concrete cylindrical specimen was taken out from the standard curing chamber. Sandpaper was used to polish the surface of the specimen. After blowing the floating ash, an acetone solution was used to scrub the surface.
- (2)
- The flax fiber sheet was cut to a certain size and put into the ultrasonic cleaning machine (distilled water, room temperature) for reaction for 40 min to remove impurities, and then was taken out and dried for later use. The flax fiber and glass fiber sheet was cut to a size of 400 mm × 300 mm and put into the oven. The drying treatment was conducted at a constant temperature of 60 °C until a constant weight was attained, and then the sample quality was measured, and data were recorded;
- (3)
- We mixed the composite according to the mass proportion 2:1, configured group A and group B with epoxy resin impregnation glue, and used a glass rod to stir the impregnation glue until the color distribution was uniform. Then, the impregnation glue was coated on the surface of the specimen, and the fiber sheet was wound around the concrete cylinder in the direction of fibers several times, and the internal bubbles were extruded. We repeated the above steps to the specified number of coating layers, then coated the outermost layer with epoxy resin adhesive (as shown in Figure 2b). Finally, three flax fiber layers with a width of 4 cm were pasted at the upper and lower ends of the specimen to strengthen the ends.
- (4)
- After curing for 7 days at room temperature, the upper and lower parts of all specimens were leveled. If the end of the specimen was uneven, the stress concentration phenomenon occurred under the action of axial compressive stress, leading to the specimen breakage in advance. The end leveling was mainly made of high-strength gypsum. The high-strength gypsum added with an appropriate amount of water was stirred evenly and coated on the end of the specimen. The gypsum was compacted with a flat slide plate and the upper and lower ends were made sufficiently level, as shown in Figure 2c.
- (5)
- Finally, we determined the paste position of the test strain gauge and polished it smooth for later use.
2.3. Experimental Method
2.4. Measures to Control Test Errors
- (1)
- After wrapping the fiber around the concrete cylinder, the surface of the cylinder was leveled with a plastic scraper, and the composite material was uniformly wrapped in the concrete cylinder, so that the compression of the cross-section was uniform.
- (2)
- We adopted the method of laser wiring to determine the specific sticking position of strain gauge to ensure it was horizontal and vertical. It was then carefully polished with fine sandpaper until smooth.
- (3)
- Special glue was used for strain gauge bonding to better force the strain gauge and material together, prevent the risk of damage in advance, and record more accurate and effective data.
- (4)
- In order to ensure that the specimen was subjected to uniform load and axial compression, the upper and lower ends of the specimen were made of high-strength gypsum as the leveling layer, so as to avoid local stress of the specimen.
- (5)
- Before the test, the pressure sensor was calibrated and the strain gauge was checked again to check that it was intact.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Failure Mode and Process
3.2. Characteristic Load and Load-Displacement Curve
3.3. Ductility Analysis of Energy Dissipation
3.4. Stress-Strain Relationship Analysis
4. Conclusions
- (1)
- The axial compression failure modes of HFRP-confined concrete cylindrical members are basically the same; cracking occurs in the middle part first and spreads to both ends, and the internal core concrete is seriously damaged in a cone shape, which is in obvious contrast to FFRP-confined specimens.
- (2)
- The load–displacement curve of HFRP composite-confined concrete cylinders subjected to axial compression performance test shows that the failure trend is basically consistent throughout the loading process. The ultimate bearing capacity of the CC-H6-confined concrete cylindrical specimen is 91.05% higher than that of the control group (CC-FFRP), and its axial deflection is 11.49% higher than that of the control group. The ultimate bearing capacity of CC-H5 is increased by 84.8%, but the deflection extension is increased by 27.87%. There is no significant difference in the influence of other hybrid layers on the axial compressive performance of concrete columns, and ranged between the values observed for the CC-H6 and CC-H5 groups.
- (3)
- The strength and ductility of concrete columns confined by HFRP can be significantly improved. The CC-H6 group has the largest energy dissipation coefficient (9.79), and its confined concrete columns have the best ductility and seismic performance. CC-H5 performs poorly, and its energy dissipation coefficient is 5.95. The energy dissipation coefficient values of CC-H1, CC-H2, CC-H3, CC-H4, CC-H7 and CC-H8 groups are similar.
- (4)
- The failure trend of the stress–strain curves of FRP-confined concrete cylinders is basically the same, and the main difference is in the failure process of the second stage, which depends on the comprehensive mechanical properties of each HFRP composite. The ultimate stress and elastic modulus of the CC-H6-confined concrete cylinder are obviously higher than other combinations. Further comparison shows that the stress and axial strain of HFFRP composite-confined concrete cylindrical members are increased by 247.9~292.5% and 486.7~701.0%, respectively. The axial stress of CC-H6-constrained specimens increased the most, but the axial strain improvement effect was not good, while the effect of CC-H5 was the opposite, which was mainly related to the different fiber layering sequence. The improvement effect of other HFRP-constrained specimens ranged between that of CC-H5 and CC-H6.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sanjay, M.R.; Siengchin, S.; Parameswaranpillai, J.; Jawaid, M.; Pruncu, C.I.; Khan, A. A comprehensive review of techniques for natural fibers as reinforcement in composites: Preparation, processing and characterization. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 207, 108–121. [Google Scholar]
- Sood, M.; Dwivedi, G. Effect of fiber treatment on flexural properties of natural fiber reinforced composites: A review. Egypt. J. Petrol. 2018, 27, 775–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, S.; Manna, A.; Dang, R. A review on applications of natural Fiber-Reinforced composites (NFRCs). Mater. Today Proc. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramesh, M.; Palanikumar, K.; Reddy, K.H. Plant fibre based bio-composites: Sustainable and renewable green materials. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 79, 558–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.; Hou, C.; Shen, L.M. Life-cycle analysis of FRP-strengthened offshore CFST columns suffering from steel corrosion. Compos. Struct. 2021, 277, 114607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gribniak, V.; Ng, P.L.; Tamulenas, V.; Misiunaite, I.; Norkus, A.; Sapalas, A. Strengthening of Fibre Reinforced Concrete Elements: Synergy of the Fibres and External Sheet. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Peng, S.; Xiong, Z. Experimental study on the seismic behavior of CFRP-strengthened seismic-damaged recycled aggregate concrete-filled rectangular steel tube frame columns. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 45, 103422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Draganic, H.; Gazic, G.; Lukic, S.; Jelec, M. Experimental investigation on blast load resistance of reinforced concrete slabs retrofitted with epoxy resin impregnated glass fiber textiles. Compos. Struct. 2021, 274, 114349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silva, L.F.; Sanchez, E.D.; Silva, J.J.H. Torsional behavior of RC beams strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymer composites. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2021, 24, 2027–2041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faleschini, F.; Zanini, M.A.; Hofer, L.; Toska, K.; De Domenico, D.; Pellegrino, C. Confinement of reinforced concrete columns with glass fiber reinforced cementitious matrix jackets. Eng. Struct. 2020, 218, 110847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, L.B. Plain concrete cylinders and beams externally strengthened with natural flax fabric reinforced epoxy composites. Mater. Struct. 2016, 49, 2083–2095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alshammari, B.A.; Alsuhybani, M.S.; Almushaikeh, A.M.; Alotaibi, B.M.; Alenad, A.M.; Alqahtani, N.B.; Alharbi, A.G. Comprehensive Review of the Properties and Modifications of Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Thermoplastic Composites. Polymers 2021, 13, 2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, Z.; Yavas, D.; Liu, Q.; Wu, D. Effect of build orientation and raster pattern on the fracture behavior of carbon fiber reinforced polymer composites fabricated by additive manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 47, 102204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faruk, O.; Bledzki, A.K.; Fink, H.P.; Sain, M. Progress Report on Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites. Macromol. Mater. Eng. 2014, 299, 9–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baley, C.; Bourmaud, A.; Davies, P. Eighty years of composites reinforced by flax fibres: A historical review. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2021, 144, 106333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, Z.H.; Zhao, B.B.; Wang, J.; Pan, X.X.; Hu, X.Y.; Tan, J.Y.; Shen, Y.O. Morphological and mechanical behavior of polyurethane/epoxy interpenetrating polymers and its flax fiber-reinforced composites. Polym. Compos. 2021, 42, 1258–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, L.B.; Chouw, N.; Jayaraman, K. Flax fibre and its composites—A review. Compos. Part B Eng. 2014, 56, 296–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baley, C.; Le Duigou, A.; Bourmaud, A.; Davies, P. Influence of drying on the mechanical behaviour of flax fibres and their unidirectional composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2012, 43, 1226–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dittenber, D.B.; GangaRao, H.V.S. Critical review of recent publications on use of natural composites in infrastructure. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2012, 43, 1419–1429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkateshwaran, N.; Elayaperumal, A.; Sathiya, G.K. Prediction of tensile properties of hybrid-natural fiber composites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2012, 43, 793–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asma, B.; Hamdi, L.; Ali, B.; Youcef, M. Flexural Mechanical Properties of Natural Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composites—A Statistical Investigation. Fiber. Polym. 2020, 21, 2321–2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wahab, N.; Srinophakun, P.; Hussain, Q.; Chaimahawan, P. Performance of Concrete Confined with a Jute–Polyester Hybrid Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite: A Novel Strengthening Technique. Fibers 2019, 7, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xia, Y.Y.; Xian, G.J. Hybrid basalt/flax fibers reinforced polymer composites and their use in confinement of concrete cylinders. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2019, 23, 941–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozbakkaloglu, T. Compressive behavior of concrete-filled FRP tube columns: Assessment of critical column parameters. Eng. Struct. 2013, 51, 188–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Mechanical Parameters | Tensile Strength (MPa) | Tensile Modulus (MPa) | Bending Strength (MPa) | Elongation (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Average value | 45.8 | 2731 | 70.9 | 2.04 |
Experimental Instrument | Specification and Model | Manufacturer |
---|---|---|
Universal testing machine | 100 kN, WDW-100 | Changchun Kexin Test Instrument Co., Ltd., Changchun, China |
High speed static strain testing analyzer | 16 channel, JM3816A | Yangzhou Jingming Technology Co., Ltd., Yangzhou, China |
Pressure sensor | 200 t, QLZ-200T | Shenzhen qinheyuan Technology Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China |
Resistance strain gauge | 120 Ω, BX120-20AA | Ningbo Yaonan Electrical Equipment Co., Ltd., Ningbo, China |
Design Grade | Cement | Water | Fine Aggregate | Coarse Aggregate | Water Reducing Agent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
C30 | 466 | 605 | 1174 | 205 | 0.9 |
Concrete Column | Fiber Sheet Wrapping Sequence | Paste Layers | Number of Samples |
---|---|---|---|
CC | Unwrapped | 0 | 3 |
CC-FFRP | F8 | 8 | 3 |
CC-H1 | F2G2F2G2 | 8 | 3 |
CC-H2 | G2F2G2F2 | 8 | 3 |
CC-H3 | FGFGFGFG | 8 | 3 |
CC-H4 | GFGFGFGF | 8 | 3 |
CC-H5 | F2G4F2 | 8 | 3 |
CC-H6 | G2F4G2 | 8 | 3 |
Concrete Column | Pu (kN) | ΔPu (%) | δu (mm) | Δδu (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
CC | 253.19 | — | 6.02 | — |
CC-FFRP | 519.93 | 105 | 6.96 | 15.61 |
CC-H1 | 932.95 | 268 | 8.11 | 34.72 |
CC-H2 | 901.61 | 256 | 7.96 | 32.23 |
CC-H3 | 896.67 | 254 | 8.20 | 36.21 |
CC-H4 | 903.51 | 257 | 7.99 | 32.72 |
CC-H5 | 745.24 | 194 | 8.90 | 47.84 |
CC-H6 | 993.33 | 292 | 7.76 | 28.90 |
Concrete Column | Energy Dissipation Coefficient (λ) | Concrete Column | Energy Dissipation Coefficient (λ) |
---|---|---|---|
CC-FFRP | 2.27 | CC-H5 | 5.95 |
CC-H1 | 8.19 | CC-H6 | 9.79 |
CC-H2 | 8.37 | CC-H7 | 8.14 |
CC-H3 | 8.05 | CC-H8 | 8.64 |
CC-H4 | 8.24 |
Concrete Column | fcc′ (MPa) | εcc (με) | εec (με) | fcc′/fco′ | εcc/εco | εec/εuc | ωf (%) | ωε (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CC-FFRP | 66.23 | 6418 | 5276 | 2.05 | 3.65 | 0.086 | 76.9 | 265.5 |
CC-H1 | 118.85 | 13,391 | 12,777 | 3.69 | 7.63 | 0.260 | 262.6 | 662.6 |
CC-H2 | 114.85 | 13,541 | 12,035 | 3.56 | 7.71 | 0.245 | 252.9 | 671.1 |
CC-H3 | 114.23 | 13,207 | 10,646 | 3.54 | 7.52 | 0.213 | 257.3 | 652.1 |
CC-H4 | 115.10 | 10,836 | 10,253 | 3.57 | 6.17 | 0.205 | 273.1 | 517.1 |
CC-H5 | 94.94 | 14,066 | 14,010 | 2.94 | 8.01 | 0.274 | 247.9 | 701.0 |
CC-H6 | 126.54 | 10,302 | 10,063 | 3.92 | 5.87 | 0.198 | 292.5 | 486.7 |
CC-H7 | 113.74 | 11,851 | 11,143 | 3.53 | 6.75 | 0.226 | 252.8 | 574.9 |
CC-H8 | 117.31 | 11,982 | 11,493 | 3.64 | 6.82 | 0.236 | 263.9 | 582.3 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yang, L.; Wang, H.; Gao, S. Study on Axial Compression Behavior of Concrete Short Columns Confined by Flax/Glass Fiber Hybrid-Reinforced Epoxy Resin Composites. Polymers 2022, 14, 517. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14030517
Yang L, Wang H, Gao S. Study on Axial Compression Behavior of Concrete Short Columns Confined by Flax/Glass Fiber Hybrid-Reinforced Epoxy Resin Composites. Polymers. 2022; 14(3):517. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14030517
Chicago/Turabian StyleYang, Lanjie, Hongguang Wang, and Shansong Gao. 2022. "Study on Axial Compression Behavior of Concrete Short Columns Confined by Flax/Glass Fiber Hybrid-Reinforced Epoxy Resin Composites" Polymers 14, no. 3: 517. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14030517
APA StyleYang, L., Wang, H., & Gao, S. (2022). Study on Axial Compression Behavior of Concrete Short Columns Confined by Flax/Glass Fiber Hybrid-Reinforced Epoxy Resin Composites. Polymers, 14(3), 517. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14030517