Sotiris Demis

Professor Kyrpos Pilakoutas

Dr Ewan Byars

Durability of FRP in Concrete

Procedures for Reduced Alkalinity Exposures

Department of Civil & Structural Engineering

The University of Sheffield, UK
 Definition of the Problem

• What is the main aggressive agent for FRP ?

• What is the rate of deterioration ?

• Is deterioration affected by the pH level ?

• Can cement replacements address the issue?

• Can carbonation address the issue?

 Experimental Programme
GFRP Concrete strength
Pilot Studies Tensile Testing Carbonation Pull-out Testing
development

Programme Programme Programme Programme

FRP type: GFRP FRP type: GFRP FRP type: GFRP

Concrete mix : OPC 40
Concrete mixes: Concrete mixes:
Exposure Environnent Exposure Environnent OPC 40 OPC 40
OPC/PFA 40/30 OPC/PFA 40/30
Air, 20 ○C (lab temp.) Air (control) 20 ○C OPC/GGBS 40/70 OPC/GGBS 40/70
Alkali: pH 9, 20 ○C
Testing Technique pH 12, 20 ○C Exposure Environment Exposure Environment

GFRP Tensile Testing CO2 : 15 %, 23.94 ○C Water CO2: 15%, RH: 55 %

GFRP Flexural (3-point bending) CO2: 15%, RH: 55 %
Direct Cube pull-out
Test ages: Test ages: Test ages:
0, 1, 6, 12 months 0, 1, 6, 12, 24 months 0, 1, 6, 12, 24 months

Standards Standards Standards Standards

BS EN ISO 14125, 1998 BS EN ISO 527-4, 1997 BS 12, 1989 fib T.G. 9.3, 2006
BS EN 2746, 1998 BS EN 2561, 1995 BS 1881 (125), 1986 BS EN 13295, 2004
BS 2782-10 (1005), 1977 BS EN 2747, 1998 BS 1881 (112), 1983
BS EN ISO 178, 2003 ACI 549 R:, 1997 BS 146, 1996
BS EN 2562, 1997 ACI 440.3 R:, 2004 BS 6588, 1996
ACI 549 R, 1997 BS 5328, 1997
ACI 440.3 R, 2004 ACI 232.2 R, 2003
ACI 233 R, 2003
 Results – Samples in Solution
• Reductions in the tensile capacity of the FRP bars up to 41.6 %.

• Caused by alkali ingress to fibre/matrix interface

• Accelerated with a non-perfect quality of FRP bars tested.

matrix fibres
 Results – Samples in Concrete

12
Mean Bond Strength (MPa)
10

6
Initial bond strength value
of control samples
4
OPC (control)
OPC
Embedment length: 150 mm OPC/GGBS
2
Bar size: 8 mm square OPC/PFA
Concrete Strength: 40 MPa
0
1 6 11 16 21 26

Time of Exposure (months)

 Results – Samples in Concrete
12
Normalised Bond Strength (MPa)

10

Initial bond strength value

4
of control samples

2
5
OPC (control) OPC OPC/GGBS OPC/PFA
OPC OPC/GGBS OPC/PFA
0
1 6 11 16 21 26
0
Time of exposure (months) 1 6 11 16 21 26

Loss of bond (%)

-5

-10
• Carbonated OPC bond reduced by 12.9 %

• PFA bigger increase in bond after 1 year -15

• Considerable changes in bond after 6 -20

months Time of exposure (months)
 Results – Samples in Concrete
120
exposed
Carbonation Depth (mm)

100
Edge of the 100 x 100 x 500 mm concrete prism concrete
Carbon Dioxide
80
100
60 100
Carbonation Test on
40 100 x 100 x 500 mm prisms
20
500
0 waxed
surfaces freshly broken
100 and then re-waxed
Carbonation Depth (mm)

80 Position of the FRP bar at the centre of the 150 mm cube

60 70.4 mm
Phenolphthalein
40 Carbonation Test on Carbon
150 mm pull/out cubes Dioxide
Carbonated
20 Area

0 OPC
OPC/GGBS
OPC/PFA
Waxed Uncarbonated Area
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Surfaces
Time of Exposure (months)
 Results – Samples in Concrete

12

10
1.20
Ratio of Concrete Compressive
strength to the controls OPC

1.15
compressive strength

Bond Strength (MPa)

8

1.10

1.05 6

1.00

4
0.95

OPC OPC/GGBS OPC/PFA

0.90
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 2
OPC (control) OPC
Carbonation Depth (mm)
OPC/GGBS OPC/PFA
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Cube compressive strength (MPa)

 Normalised Bond Strength with Noramlised Bond
respect to revised concrete Strength with respect to
compressive strength concrete compressive
(MPa) strength (MPa) Bond Strength (MPa)

6
7
8
9
5
6
7
8
9

5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11

10
11

30
35
OPC

OPC/PFA

40
OPC/GGBS
OPC (control)

45
50
55
60

Concrete Compressive Strength (MPa)

Normalised Bond with Classical Normalised
respect to fcu' (MPa) Bond (MPa) Mean Bond (MPa)
5
6
7
8
9
5
6
7
8
9

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
10
11

10
11

0
5
10
15
20
opc

opc/pfa
Results – Samples in Concrete

opc/ggbs

25
opc control

Time of Exposure (months)

30
 Results – Samples in Concrete
Before carbonation reached After carbonation reached Before and after
the bar the bar carbonation
No significant statistical No significant statistical Significant statistical
difference difference difference

Chemical Deterioration
takes place once the
carbonation front reaches
the FRP bar

Key finding

2 models required to
predict this behaviour

Model to predict the Model to predict the

penetration of the effect of carbonation
carbonation front on bond strength
 Results – Samples in Concrete

− −
− − − −
: Relative bond retention ty D tR fcm(ty) t t ⋅ tR t tR
tR
(years) (mm) (%) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
fcm(ty) : OPC concrete strength as
enhanced by time and
carbonation 28 days 0 100 35.7 6.81 6.81 1

The strength is calculated 5 8.32 4.6 51.1 9.30 7.87 1.24

according to Eurocode 2 as,
10 11.8 81.6 51.6 9.35 7.63 1.20
fcm(t) = βcc(t) · fcm 20 16.6 78.6 51.9 9.39 7.38 1.11
⎧⎪ ⎡ ⎛ 28 ⎞0.5 ⎤ ⎫⎪
βcc(t) = exp ⎨s ⋅ ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥⎬
30 20.4 76.9 52.1 9.41 7.23 1.08
⎩⎪ ⎢⎣ ⎝ t ⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎭⎪
50 26.3 74.6 52.2 9.73 7.04 1.04
and is increased by 15% to
100 37.2 71.6 52.4 9.45 6.77 1.00
account for the effect of
carbonation

−
: expected bond strength calculated according to Eurocode 2,
t
taking into account the gain in compressive strength.
− −
t ⋅ tR : expected bond strength due to the
effect of carbonation The above table assumes that concrete had zero
− cover and carbonation took place at 28 days
t tR : total bond strength retention in time
 Results – Samples in Concrete
1.6

1.4

Total Bond Retention

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4
no cover 20 mm cover
0.2
10 mm cover 30 mm cover
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Time of Exposure (years)

• the negative effect of carbonation is counteracted by the gain in

strength with time and as such does not reduce the initial bond
strength for length of exposure up to 100 years.
 Conclusions
• pH 9 and pH 12 solutions had detrimental effect on the GFRP tensile strength

• Although pH has impact on FRP in solutions, its impact may be as

significant as the impact of moisture on FRP.

• Alkalinity does not have a major impact on FRP bond

• As concrete strength increases due to time and carbonation, bond also

increases

• Blended cements reduced alkalinity but did not improve behaviour

• Carbonation operates as a switch on deterioration of FRP

• Expected bond deterioration due to carbonation is more than compensated by

the increase in strength of concrete due to time and carbonation

• There is no need to take into account the carbonation effect on the stress
reduction factors used for durability design