ITH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPOSITE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Punching Shear Capacity of Macro Synthetic Fiber- Reinforced Concrete Two-Way Slabs with GFRP Rebars Mohammad AlHamaydeh, Ph.D., P.E.", Mohamed Orabi', Moustafa Ahmed’, Salma Mohamed!, Ahmed Jabr!, Mohammad Khir Athariri! ' Department of Civil Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE. e-mail: malhamaydeh@aus.edu Abstract: This study investigates the punching shear capacity of full seale synthetie FRC two- ‘way slabs with GFRP rebats as flexural reinforcement. The paper presents the results of testing total of six two-way slab specimens subjected to concentric monotonic loading up to failure. ‘Three specimens had 0.75% volumettic fiber content to be compared against three control (0% fiber) counterparts. Each set of three slabs were reinforced with 16mm-diamter FRP rebars spaced at 60mm, 80mm, and 110mm. The experimental results confirmed thatthe failure mode was punching shear in all specimens, and the synthetic fibers increased punching shear resistance compared to the control slabs. Keywords: GFRP, Macro Synthetic Fiber, FRC, Two-Way Slab, Punching Shear. 1. Introduction One of the solutions currently implemented to improve the punching shear capacity of concrete flat slabs is reinforcing the concrete mix with steel fibers. However, corrosion of the steel fibers and the steel flexural reinforcement remains a critical durability issue. The use of synthetic fibers as an alternative to steel fibers, as well as replacing the traditional steel flexural rebars ‘with GFRP rebars is a promising solution. A number of studies investigated the punching shear behavior of flat slabs with FRP reinforcement. A particular experimental study where ten slab- column samples reinforced with GFRP rebars were tested under concentrated loads, concluded that the reinforcement ratio has almost no influence on punching shear failure. In addition, results showed that GFRP rebars produced lower punching capacity compared to steel rebars in two-way flat slabs, which was attributed to the lower modulus of elasticity of GFRP [1 Another experimental study inspecting the effect of GFRP rebars on the punching shear behavior often two-way slabs with GFRP or CFRP stirrups, showed that increasing the flexural reinforeement ratio of the GFRP rebars increases the punching shear capacity. The lower ‘lexural reinforcement ratios resulted in wider cracks which limit the punching shear transfer through un-cracked concrete [2]. These same conclusions were also confirmed by another study carried out on 17 flat-slab samples reinforced with GFRP rebars and tested for punching shear. ‘The results ofthat study also show that to further increase the ultimate punching shear capacity the GFRP rebars should be concentrated in the compression side through the column cross section [3]. Fewer research have been conducted on the role of synthetic fibers in improving punching shear strength, Hassan et. al [4] conducted a study to explore the mechanical properties of macro synthetic FRC by testing and analyzing a number of cube, beam and prism samples. The results showed a significant increase in the shear strength and ductility of the tested FRC specimens and dissipation of energy in the post-cracking state [4]. However, the aPunching Shear Capacity of Synthetic Macro Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Two-Way Slabs with GFRP Rebars: AlHamaydeh etal effects of incorporating synthetic fibers into concrete flat slabs reinforced with GFRP rebars require further investigation. Quantification of the effects on the punching shear behavior is the objective ofthis presented experimental study. 2. Material Properties In this study, bi-component macro synthetic fibers were used in the conerete mix. Adding the synthetic fibers to the conerete mix would inerease the impact resistance of the conerete and prevent sedimentation, The use of synthetic fibers can also create a high level of resistance for concrete structures exposed to aggressive water conditions [5] GERP bars of 16 mm diameter were used in all of the test specimens throughout this investigation. The tensile properties of the rebars were calculated based on the nominal cross- sectional areas and determined by testing representative specimens in accordance with ASTM. 1D 7205 [6] which was conducted by the manufacturer (Dextra Building Products Co., Ltd). Table 1 shows the results of the tensile properties of the GFRP bars. ‘The specimens were cast using ready-mixed normal weight conerete, The 28-days compressive strength of the specimens was determined using three standard cube specimens (150150%150 mm), All samples had compressive strength ranging between 4622 MPa depending on the amount of fibers and superplasticizer used, Table 1, Tensile properties of GERP Bar Size Actualbar Cross- Modulus Ultimate Ultimate Ultimate diameter sectional of tensile te strain (%) (mm) area elasticity, load (kN) strength (mm), (GPa) (MPa) #6 MME S06 208 Toss 237 3. Test Specimens, Setup and Instrumentation ‘A total of six two-way slab specimens were subjected to concentric monotonic loading up to failure, to quantify punching shear behavior based on reinforcement spacing and fit Three of the slabs were reinforced with synthetic fibers of 0.75% volumetric ratio and the other three slabs had no synthetic fibers. All slabs were reinforced with 16 mm diameter GFRP bars as flexural reinforcement and had a clear concrete cover of 25 mm. Each set of three slabs were reinforced with 16mm-liamter FRP rebars spaced at 60 mm, 80 mm, and 110 mm. All specimens had dimensions of 2,000 * 2,000 mm, a thickness of 150 mm, and a square column stub measuring 250 250 mm. Figure l(a) shows details ofthe dimensions of the 80 mm spaced rebars specimens, The column stub extruded 150 mm beyond the surface of the slab and was reinforced with a total of eight 16 mm diameter bent steel rebars, and No.8 stec! stirrups spaced at $0 mm on center. er content, All test specimens were subjected to concentric loading applied on the column stub from the bottom until failure of the specimens. Twelve steel tie rods attached to the strong floor were used to support and level the specimens that were securely held in their position by a 150 mm ‘wide rigid steel fame that was leveled and fixed on top of the specimens. In order to evenly distribute the load on the column stub and prevent local extremes, a 250 250 x 25 mm rubber EyITH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPOSITE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY pad was carefully placed between the column stub and the load cell [Fig. 1(b)]. One hydraulic jack was used to apply the load, and the response was monitored until failure. Toor Haan os Fig. 1. Specimen and test schematics: (a) 80 mm spacing specimen dimensions (b) Test The deflections across key positions of the specimens were recorded using two LVDTs positioned at half the distance between the center of the steel frame and the center of the specimen. Additionally, one transducer positioned at the center of the specimen was used, Moreover, each specimen was equipped with Ovo strain gauges, one in each direction of the reinforcing rebars, positioned at the center of the slab. The strain gauges, transducer, load cell, and LVDTs were connected to the computer and their synchronized corresponding readings recorded throughout the tests. Crack propagation was also marked during the test, and the results were recorded, 4, Test Results and Discussion Al six slab specimens failed in punching shear, evident by the manifestation of the standard punching shear failure cone in all the specimens. The testing was stopped at 100 mm deflection of the specimens, which occurred well after the punching shear failure was reached, Fig. 2. Punching shear eracks: (a) FRC specimen (b) RC specimen None of the specimens experienced any rupture of the GFRP rebars since the minimum strain required to rupture the rebars (20,000 microstrains) was never reached. Smaller crack openings 2Punching Shear Capacity of Synthetic Macro Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Two-Way Slabs with GFRP Rebars: AlHamaydeh etal ‘were observed the specimens with SNFRC compared to those of the RC specimens which can be seen in Figure 2. The load vs, central deflection graphs were prepared for all the specimens. ‘The graphs show a sharp drop of the load upon reaching the peak value at which punching shear failure occurred, Figure 3 shows the load vs. deflection graph for the 80 mm spacing FRC and RC specimens. The punching capacities of the specimens are summarized in Table 2 Fig. 3. Load vs. deflection relationship for FRC and RC specimens Table 2. Punching shear capacity of the test specimens ‘Synthetic Fiber _ Spacing (mm) Compressive Punching Shear Percentage (%) strength f'e (MPa) Capacity (kN) — Oo #46 °° | 0 80 48 486 110 48 436 0 my 306 07s 80 44 455 110 44 493 ‘The results indicate that the addition of synthetic fibers caused a 9% and 12% increase in the punching shear capacity of the specimens with 60 mm and 110 mm GFRP spacing respectively. On the other hand, the capacity was reduced by 7% for the 80 mm spacing specimens. The results show an average increase of the punching shear capacity by 5% for the slabs reinforced ‘with synthetic fibers. That being said, there was no conclusive pattern that relates the inerease in the flexural reinforcement ratio to the increase in the punching shear capacity of the slabs. In addition, the results of the specimens with 60 mm spacing (the highest reinforcement ratio py) show a higher punching capacity achieved for the slab without synthetic fibers, Therefore, the inconsistency of these results suggests that the experiments are inconclusive on the effect 0Load (kN) ITH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPOSITE ‘SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY synthetic fibers have on the capacity of RC slabs in punching. It may be speculated that the peculiarities of the concrete, including the distribution of the synthetic fibers in the mix, as well as the variance in the young’s modulus of the reinforcement can explain the inconsistency of the results. Furthermore, the high flexural reinforcement ratios used in the experiment for all specimens did not allow for the neutral axis to shift significantly. This can be seen in Equation | for the nominal flexural strength (f;) of FRP rebars from the ACI 440,1R-06 design code [7]: jy- [Cake le By tay 05 Ey toy (I) The load-deflection relationship for all the specimens, as presented in Figure 4, demonstrates a mild bilinear behavior reaching the ultimate shear capacity. It is also evident that the area under the graph for the FRC specimens is significantly larger than that for the RC specimens. This indicates that slabs reinforced with synthetic fibers are capable of experiencing lower deflection for higher loads. It can also be observed that the FRC specimens experienced a more gradual drop after reaching the peak load, ‘compared to the sudden sharp drop shown by the RC specimens which also showed a lower post-peak maximum load, —nm 0 mm sow ton 500 mm 00 Ao Hom 400 400 300 00 200 F200 100 00 . ; o ° 0 20 40 4 ° 20 40 “0 Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm) Fig. 4. Load vs. deflection graph: (a) FRC specimens (b) RC specimens Finally, based on the results it is recommended to use smaller reinforcement ratios when experimenting with flexural GFRP rebars in order to unveil the effects of other parameters to hopefully establish a more clear relationship between the fiber volumetric ratio and the punching shear capacity. 5. Conclusion ‘This paper presents an experimental study investigating the punching shear bchavior of two- way synthetic FRC slabs reinforced with GERP rebars. Six full scale specimens were constructed and tested. The results of the experiments show the following: ‘©The mode of failure for all the slabs was punching shear and the load-deflection response aPunching Shear Capacity of Synthetic Macro Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Two-Way Slabs with GFRP Rebars: AlHamaydeh etal ‘was mildly bilinear until peak punching shear capacity is reached, followed by some load- carrying recovery © An average of 5% increase in the punching shear capacity was achieved for the FRC specimens, although the inconsistency of the increase in the specimens leads to the conclusion that the addition of synthetic fibers does not cause a noticeable inerease in the punching capacity. However, the fibers cause more mild and gradual drop in load-carrying capacity and higher load recovery. The peculiarities of the concrete, including the distribution ofthe synthetic fibers in the mix, as well asthe variance in the young’s modulus of the reinforcement may be speculated to be the source of the inconsistency of the results. ‘©The results show no strong correlation between the GFRP flexural reinforcement ratio and the punching shear capacity of the specimens, which is mainly due to the high reinforcement ratio used. ‘© Although no conclusive statements can be made from this experiment on the effect of using GERP reinforced synthetic FRC on the punching shear capacity, itis evident that the use of synthetic FRC with GFRP flexural reinforcement can lead to better post cracking behavior and increased resistance to corrosion, 5. Acknowledgements Many thanks and appreciation for Dextra Building Products Co, Ltd., Brug Contec AG, and Emirates Stone precast factory for their valued support of this study by providing the required. materials and providing continuous assistance. References [1] C. Dulude and M. Hassan, “Punching shear behaviour of concrete two-way slabs reinforced with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GERP) bars,” Struct. J, vol. 110, no. 5, p. 192, 2013, [2] M. Hassan, E. A. Ahmed, and B. Benmokrane, “Punching Shear Behavior of Two- ‘Way Slabs Reinforced with FRP Shear Reinforcement,” J. Compos. Constr., vol. 19, no. 1, p. 04014030, Feb. 2015, (2) M. Hassan, E. Ahmed, and B. Benmokrane, “Punching shear strength of glass fiber- reinforced polymer reinforced conerete flat slabs,” Can. J. Civ. Eng,, vol. 960, no. April, pp. 951-960, 2013, [4] M.J. Hasan, M, Affoz, and H. M, I. Mahmud, “An Experimental Investigation on ‘Mechanical Behavior of Macro Synthetic Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” Environ. Eng., no. June, pp. 18-23, 2011 [5] DR, Tobergte and S. Curtis, “Conerix ES," J. Chem. Inf: Model, vol. 53, n0. 9, pp. 1689-1699, 2013, [6] ASTM Standard D7205/D7205M, “Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite Bars,” D7205, no, Reapproved 201, pp. 1-13, 2011 [7] “Guide for the Design and Construction of Structural Conerete Reinforced with FRP. Bars.” ACI 440.1R, 2006.