A GFRP Bar Bond Stress and Strength: Comparison of Beam-bond and Pullout Tests Results

Abstract

Four beam-bond test specimens, two in accordance with RILEM TC-RC5 recommendation, labelled as RILEM and two based on a modified form of the ACI 208 beam-bond test method, labelled as Notched, were tested in four-point bending to investigate the bond stress distribution and values along the bar embedment length of a 15 𝑚𝑚 nominal diameter GFRP rebar. The beams experienced failure through the rupturing of the longitudinal GFRP tensile reinforcement. In addition, two Modified and ten Standard pullout specimens were tested using the same bar. The beam-bond and the Modified pullout specimens had embedment length of 600 𝑚𝑚 while the Standard pullout specimens had, in accordance with CSA S806, 60 𝑚𝑚 embedment, or four times the bar nominal diameter. The first Modified pullout specimen experienced concrete splitting failure and as a result, the second was lightly confined and failed by GFRP bar rupture. All ten Standard pullout specimens failed due to bar pullout. It was determined that the actual bond stress distribution as a function of the embedment length is practically parabolic and can be described by the derivative of a modified form of the logistic growth function used to approximate the strain distribution along the embedment length. Furthermore, the maximum bond stress location progressively moves from the loaded-end towards the unloaded-end as the bond continues to deteriorate with increasing GFRP stress levels. The development length recommendations by ACI 440.1 and to a lesser degree, CSA S806 and CSA S6 are quite conservative compared to that which is required. It is observed that pullout tests alone cannot provide sufficient knowledge regarding the bond behaviour of FRP reinforcement; consequently, the results of beam-bond testing are more appropriate. Standard pullout tests may be incorporated into quality assurance programs with the understanding that they cannot provide valuable information regarding bond stress distribution and required development length in real structural elements with large embedment lengths. In terms of the beam-bond test method, the RILEM TC-RC5 design recommendation appears to be superior since it eschews severe stress perturbation caused by incidence of flexural cracks at beam midspan. As a result, it produces stability in the terms of the data gathered from the strain gauges placed on the GFRP bar. This benefit outweighs the ease of constructability of the Notched beams as well as their resemblance to real beams.