2008
DOI: 10.15554/pcij.07012008.62.82
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flexural behavior of precast concrete box beams posttensioned with unbonded, carbon-fibercomposite cables

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to test results, it was concluded that both bridge models showed identical flexural behaviour, particularly as to the cracking load, mode of failure, and variation in post-tensioning forces. Flexural performance of three concrete box-beam bridge models prestressed and reinforced with CFCCs was studied by Grace et al [11]. The research primarily focused on the effects of the unbonded longitudinal post-tensioning usage.…”
Section: State Of the Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to test results, it was concluded that both bridge models showed identical flexural behaviour, particularly as to the cracking load, mode of failure, and variation in post-tensioning forces. Flexural performance of three concrete box-beam bridge models prestressed and reinforced with CFCCs was studied by Grace et al [11]. The research primarily focused on the effects of the unbonded longitudinal post-tensioning usage.…”
Section: State Of the Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Linearly varying strength reduction factors were suggested from 0.65 for compression-controlled sections to 0.85 for tension-controlled sections with CFRP (aramid fiber-reinforced polymer) tendons. Determining q U pfb becomes more challenging for prestressed beams with unbonded FRP tendons, as the tensile stress of the unbonded tendons depends on the averaged elongation of concrete at the level of unbonded tendons along the beam span (Naaman and Alkhairi 1991a, b;Kato and Hayashida 1993;Maissen and De Semet 1995;Grace et al 2006Grace et al , 2008Du et al 2008;Heo et al 2013). Consequently, it is expected that q U pfb is always smaller than q B pfb , and prestressing the beam with a reinforcement ratio of unbodned CFRP tendon (q U pf ) greater than q B pfb would preserve the compression-controlled section with a higher degree of plasticity, avoiding an abrupt brittle failure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although much experimental and theoretical research has been conducted for characterising the flexural behaviour of concrete beams prestressed with bonded FRPs (Burke and Dolan, 2001;Dolan and Swanson, 2002;Ehsani et al, 2001;Naaman et al, 1993;Yonekura et al, 1993), fewer studies have been conducted on concrete beams prestressed with unbonded FRPs (Grace et al, 2006(Grace et al, , 2008Heo et al, 2013;Kato and Hayashida, 1993;Maissen and de Smet, 1995). To gain a better understanding of the flexural behaviour and practical application of such beams, it seems necessary to develop a theoretical model that can incorporate the properties of both concrete and reinforcing materials and member-dependent tendon strains in the simulation of the non-linear flexural behaviour of these beams.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%