AN OVERVIEW OF THE USE OF COMPOSITE MATERIAL FOR

STRUCTURAL ENHANCEMENT
By
Robert Harris and Kenneth E. Kruse
ABSTRACT
The use of advanced composite materials in construction is an exciting emerging
technology. The composite materials are light -weight non-corrosive durable and
allow for a high degree of design flexibility. These field -proven materials exhibit low
creep and elongation. The composite materials are lighter thinner and have !" times
the tensile strength capacity when compared to steel. #n addition the composite
system is fast and easy to install when compared to the conventional strengthening
techni$ues. The %Brace &omposite 'trengthening 'ystem by %BT is an externally
bonded fiber reinforcement system for concrete and masonry structures. This paper
will outline an overview of the technology applications and design considerations for
composite materials in construction.
Keywords: concrete composite strengthening carbon fiber thermoset
INTRODUCTION
&oncrete is one of the most versatile of all construction materials. &oncrete is strong in
compression but wea( in tension. The tensile strength of concrete is only about ) * to
!+ * of its compressive strength. To compensate for concrete,s low tensile strength
concrete members are often designed with steel reinforcement to carry tensile loads. %any
times existing concrete members are not ade$uately reinforced to meet the demands of
their current service conditions. This situation can occur due to several reasons-
- The potential of a seismic occurrence demands increased strength.
- . change of use of the structure such that it will be sub/ected to greater loads than
originally designed for.
- The concrete member was improperly designed.
- The concrete member was not properly constructed.
- 0eterioration of the member has resulted in reduced load carrying capacity.
&onventional methods for strengthening existing concrete structures include steel plate
bonding enlargement of members with conventional concrete and external post
!
tensioning. These techni$ues have been used for many years. However the conventional
methods can be costly and time-consuming. .n alternative to conventional strengthening
methods is the use of advanced composite materials. &omposite technology can increase
the strength without increasing the si1e of the concrete members.
OVERVIEW
. composite material is a matrix of polymeric material reinforced by fibers or other
reinforcement that has a discernable aspect ratio of length to thic(ness. That is it is
extremely thin yet very strong. The reinforcement provides the oriented strength and the
polymer matrix hold the reinforcement in its proper orientation to provide optimum
properties. 'ee 2igure #
2#34RE #
&ommercial applications of composite material began in the !56"s in the aircraft and
aerospace industries. 4tili1ing the basic composite characteristics of lightweight thin and
high tensile strength other industries adapted the use of the materials. 7roducts ranging
from bicycle frames golf club shafts racecars and tennis rac(ets all embraced the benefits
of composite materials.
+
Composite SYSTEM
TOW SHEET CROSS SECTION
resin !"ri#
$i%er rein$or&een"
The polymer resin systems can either be thermoset or thermoplastic in nature. Thermoset
are typically used for construction applications and can be polyester vinyl ester phenolic
or epoxy resin systems. The type and percentage of fibers selected depends on the
performance criteria as established by the design engineer.
.dvanced fiber reinforcement materials for construction are primarily-
-&arbon fiber 8&2R79
-.ramid 8.2R79
-E-3lass 832R79
-Hybrids
The basic properties of glass carbon and aramid 2R7 compared to steel are outlined in
Table !
The inherent advantages of the composite materials when compared to conventional
materials include-
&orrosion resistance
:ight weight
High strength
0esign flexibility
:ow maintenance
0urability
;
The structural benefits of a composite system include an increase in strength stiffness and
toughness yet this high performing technology saves +<* to <" * in labor costs due to
ease of installation. 2igure ## compares the conventional vs. a 2R7 upgrade of a simply
supported beam re$uiring a ;< * upgrade in live load. =ot only is the upgrade achieved
without the substantial time re$uired for the conventional techni$ues it is completed with
only a minor increase in dead load. #nstalling one ".""6< inch thic( carbon fiber sheet
8tensile strength of ;;"" pounds per inch width9 to the bottom of the beam is e$uivalent
to adding > ) rebars on ) inch centers in a beam at the same depth.
2#34RE ##
?
FRP vs. Conventional
Upgrade
'imply supported beam 8?),x;,x!,9
;<* upgrade in live load
Bonded steel plate
;@!6A plate
bolted
+?< lb. dead load
placed by lift truc(
%ember enlargement
+ >) rebars
?A grout@concrete
+<"" lb. dead load
formed
cured
%Brace
! layer 2R7
resin bonded
6 lb. dead load
placed by hand
The ultimate strength analysis calculates the capacity of the section by combining stress
e$uilibrium strain compatibility and the constitutive laws of the materials at failure. The
stress and strain distributions at ultimate are shown in 2igure ###. The ultimate strength of
a flexural member strengthened with 2R7 is generally controlled by either the failure of the
concrete by compression crushing or failure of the 2R7 by tensile fracture. The overall
behavior of the member will be dramatically affected by whether these failures occur
before or after yielding of the existing steel in order to assess its nominal moment capacity.
2#34RE ###
<
b
h
d
dB
c

c
B
s

bi
fB
s
fB
s
f
s
f
f

!
c
f,
c
f
s
f
f
S"r!in
S"ress
M
F ' (
M ' (
E)UILIBRIUM
#f the loading of a plain concrete ..'THC beam and its deflection center point is
observed one can see that an unreinforced beam vs. a 2R7 reinforced beam 8with only one
".""6< inch thic( of carbon fiber placed on the bottom of the beam9 that the unreinforced
beam brea(s at )""" lbs. and the 2R7 reinforced beam does not brea( until !?""" lbs.
7lease see 2igure #D.
2#34RE #D
6
Plain Conrete !eam
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
FRP Reinforced
Unreinforced
:
o
a
d

8
l
b
.
9
&enter 7oint 0eflection 8in.9
#f the loading of a conventionally steel rebar reinforced ..'THC beam is observed again
with and without one sheet of carbon fiber reinforcement on the bottom similar results are
obtained. The plain beam brea(s at +<""" lbs. while the 2R7 reinforced beam is
strengthened to ?"""" please see 2igure D
2#34RE D
S*!ry
&omposite strengthening has been used for over +< years in aerospace and manufacturing
applications where low weight high tensile strength and non-corrosive structural
properties are re$uired. These field proven materials exhibit low creep and elongation and
compared to steel they are thinner lighter and have !" times the tensile strength capacity.
The %Brace composite strengthening system an externally bonded fiber reinforcement
system for concrete and masonry structures exhibits all of these properties and allows for
a labor savings of +< * to <" * vs. conventional strengthening techni$ues.
E
Conventionall" Rein#ored !eam
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
FRP Reinforced
Plain
:
o
a
d

8
l
b
.
9
&enter 7oint 0eflection 8in.9