2023
DOI: 10.3390/buildings13020374
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flexural Response of Concrete Beams Reinforced with Steel and Fiber Reinforced Polymers

Abstract: This paper numerically investigates the flexural response of concrete beams reinforced with steel and four types of Fiber-Reinforced Polymers (FRP), i.e., Carbon FRP (CFRP), Glass FRP (GFRP), Aramid FRP (AFRP), and Basalt FRP (BFRP). The flexural responses of forty beams with two boundary conditions (simply supported and over-hanging beams) were determined using ABAQUS. Subsequently, the finite element models were validated using experimental results. Eventually, the impact of the reinforcement ratios ranging … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 24 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results of the study showed that the beams with GFRP bars possessed a 64% higher flexural resistance and exhibited less deflection compared with those containing steel bars. Shawki Ali et al [24] found that the beams with carbon-fiber-reinforced polymers (CFRP) bars could withstand a higher load and absorb more fracture energy than steel. With more reinforcement, CFRP showed a greater loadcarrying capacity than GFRP due to its higher tensile strength and modulus of elasticity.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results of the study showed that the beams with GFRP bars possessed a 64% higher flexural resistance and exhibited less deflection compared with those containing steel bars. Shawki Ali et al [24] found that the beams with carbon-fiber-reinforced polymers (CFRP) bars could withstand a higher load and absorb more fracture energy than steel. With more reinforcement, CFRP showed a greater loadcarrying capacity than GFRP due to its higher tensile strength and modulus of elasticity.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%