Está en la página 1de 7

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)

Finite Element Analysis of Different Types of Composite


Column
Richa Pateriya1, Dr. Saleem Akhtar2, Prof. Nita Rajvaidya3
1,2
Department of Civil Engineering, UIT RGPV, Bhopal, India
3
Department of Civil Engineering, TIEIT, Bhopal, India
Abstract - The use of composite materials has been FRP composite materials have been used as internal
increased in strengthening of concrete columns in recent and external reinforcement in the field of civil
years. One of the applications is to use FRP (fiber engineering constructions. It has been used as internal
reinforced polymer) reinforcement instead of steel reinforcement for beams, slabs and pavements [2,3] and
reinforcement in concrete columns.
also as external reinforcement for rehabilitation and
In this paper, the results of an analytical investigation on
the behavior of RC column reinforced with Steel rebar and strengthening different structures [4,5]. Fibers reinforced
Glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars are comprised polymer composites, developed primarily for the
and discussed. Linear and Nonlinear finite element analysis aerospace and defence industries, are a class of materials
(FEA) on 12-column specimens were accomplished by using with great potential to be used in civil infrastructures.
ANSYS software. In this research, we investigated the Since the construction of the first all-composite bridge
benefits of superseding steel rebar with FRP bars in superstructure in Miyun, China, in 1982, they have been
concrete columns. An extensive set of parameters was gradually gaining acceptance from civil engineers as a
scrutinized, including different main reinforcement ratios, new construction material. During these 30 years, they
main reinforcement types (GFRP, Steel), ultimate load
proved to be useful in a few areas of application: mostly
carrying capacity of columns and deformations. A
comparison between the theoretical results and those in the form of sheets and strips for strengthening existing
obtained by analytical modeling using ANSYS are bridge structures and to some extent, as reinforcing bars
presented. substituting steel as concrete reinforcement.
The analysis done will be useful for predicting the So, the purpose of this research is to study the
ultimate load bearing capacity and deformations of concrete behavior of reinforced concrete columns with GFRP. The
columns reinforced with GFRP bars. results and observations presented in this paper are useful
for engineers to predict the compressive strength of
Keywords: ANSYS, Fiber reinforced polymer (FRP), concrete column while using GFRP.
Finite Element Analysis (FEA), GFRP Reinforced Concrete
columns (GFRP).
II. OBJECTIVES
I. INTRODUCTION The chief objectives of this study are:
The traditional reinforcement methods in reinforced  To study the compressive behavior of reinforced
concrete column have been accepted for several years as concrete columns reinforced longitudinally as well
a common practice amongst designers and contractors. as transversely with steel rebar under pure axial
There has been a large amount of research completed and load.
designers are capable of predicting the future functioning  To study the compressive behavior of reinforced
of the columns. concrete columns reinforced longitudinally as well
Fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) is continuously used as transversely with Glass fiber reinforced polymer
for reinforcing new structures, and also for rehabilitation under pure axial load.
of existing structures. FRP composites, in form of sheets,  To compare the Structural behavior of RCC and
cables, rods, and plates, have proven to be a future GFRP Column.
alternative to steel reinforcements because of their light  To perform linear and non-linear analysis of column
weight, no corrosiveness, high specific strength, specific with steel and GFRP reinforcement.
stiffness and are easily constructed.
The most common types of FRP are aramid, glass, and III. SCOPE
carbon; AFRP, GFRP and CFRP respectively [1].
Analysis of the results will create a conclusion on the
Fiberglass is a cheaper composite material made from
effectiveness of analytical analysis and effectiveness of
glass fibers in a polymeric matrix (GFRP). The fibers
GFRP as reinforcement.
provide the main load carrying capability of the material
and the polymer serves to protect the fibers and permit
load transfer for them.

173
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)
IV. DETAILS O F COLUMN SPECIMENS The used element is capable of plastic deformation,
Length of all Column Specimens =3200mm cracking in three orthogonal directions, and crushing [9],
Cross Section of all column specimen=300mm×300mm [10].
TABLE I
DETAILS OF COLUMN SPECIMENS

Figure 2: Solid-65 Element for concrete

A link8 element was used to model the reinforcement


Polymer bar; two nodes are required for this element.
Each node has three degrees of freedom, translation in
the nodal x, y, and z directions. The element is also
capable of plastic deformation [9], [10].

V. F INITE E LEMENT MODELING


5.1 Geometry
The details of testing columns were shown in Fig.1.
Analysis was carried out in 12-column specimens, where Figure 3: A link 8 Element for Reinforcement
all columns had a square cross-section with a 300mm
side and length of 3200mm. Analyzed columns had main 5.3 Material Properties
reinforcement(Steel, GFRP) 6#12mm, 6#16mm,6#20mm The input data for the concrete, GFRP, and steel
8#12mm,8#16mm and 8#20mm. properties are shown in Table II, which is taken from
The transverse reinforcement (Steel, GFRP) was ф8 Indian Standard code 2000 [14], Table III is taken from
mm stirrups spaced 200mm, characteristic compressive ACI Code 2008 [7, 11], Table IV is taken from
strength of concrete columns 30 N/mm2. EGYPTIAN Code 2001 [12], and Table V is taken from
British Standards Institution 1997 [13].
IS code does not provide any recommendations for
FRP.
TABLE II
INPUT DATA AS PER IS 456:2000

Figure 1: Details of reinforcement of columns

5.2 Element types


An eight-node solid element, solid65, was used to
model the concrete. Solid element has eight nodes with
three degrees of freedom at each node, translation in the
nodal x, y, and z directions.

174
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)
TABLE III
INPUT DATA AS PER ACI CODE

4.1: IS 456:2000

TABLE IV
INPUT DATA AS PER EGYPTIAN CODE

4.2: ACI CODE

TABLE V
INPUT DATA AS PER BS 8110 CODE

4.3: BS CODE
Figure 4: Stress-Strain Curves for Concrete as per various codes

VI. LINEAR & NON -LINEAR ANALYSIS


For Linear & nonlinear analysis of column, first, we
define stress strain curve for concrete, steel, and FRP
using different codes [11], [12], [13], [14].

5.1: IS 456:2000
175
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)

5.2: ACI CODE 6.3: EGYPTIAN CODE


Figure 6: Stress-Strain Curve for FRP as per various codes

VII. LOADINGS
The parametric studies included in this investigation
are the reinforcement ratios and reinforcement types, and
the characteristic compressive strength of concrete,
ultimate load bearing capacity etc. Table VI shows the
ultimate loads on columns using ultimate load carrying
capacity formula on the basis of different codes [11],
[12], [13], [14].
TABLE VI
5.3: BS CODE
ULTIMATE LOAD ON COLUMN (KN)
Figure 5: Stress-Strain Curve for Steel as per various codes

VIII. ANALYSIS O F C OLUMN USING ANSYS &


6.1: ACI CODE
COMPARISON O F RESULTS
8.1 Linear Analysis: Table VII shows analytical results
of deformations using ANSYS and also shows the
comparison of deformations in columns using Steel and
GFRP as a reinforcement as per various codes. The
analysis results are shown graphically in figure 7 to
figure 10.

6.2: BS CODE

176
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)
TABLE VII 8.3 Non Linear Analysis:
ANSYS RESULTS FOR DEFORMATION (LINEAR ANALYSIS)
Table X shows analytical results of deformations using
ANSYS and also shows the comparison of deformations
using Steel and GFRP as a reinforcement as per various
codes. The analysis results are shown graphically in
figure 11 to figure 14.
TABLE X
ANSYS RESULTS FOR DEFORMATION (NON LINEAR
ANALYSIS)

8.2 Validation for deformations: The values of


deformations obtained from ANSYS (In Linear Analysis)
are validated with the help of Equation of Elasticity for
composite material. [6]. Table VIII and Table IX show
the validation of deformation when steel and GFRP is
used as reinforcement in concrete columns.
Table VIII 8.4 Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph:
VALIDATION FOR DEFORMATION (mm) [WHEN STEEL IS
USED AS REINFORCEMENT

Figure 7: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per IS


code

TABLE IX  IS code does not give recommendations for FRP &


VALIDATION FOR DEFORMATION (mm) [WHEN GFRP IS hence this graph represents reinforcement ratio Vs
USED AS REINFORCEMENT] deformation only for Steel.

Figure 8: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per ACI


code

177
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)

Figure 9: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per BS


Code
Figure 13: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per BS
Code

Figure 10: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per


Egyptian Code
Figure 14: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per
EGYPTIAN Code

IX. COST C OMPARISON O F S TEEL AND GFRP FOR


DEIFFERENT REINFORCEMENT R ATIO
TABLE XI:
COST ANALYSIS & COMPARISON

Figure 11: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation as per IS Code

 IS code does not give recommendations for FRP &


hence this graph represents reinforcement ratio Vs
deformation only for Steel.

Figure 12: Reinforcement ratio Vs Deformation Graph as per ACI


code
178
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2015)
 Although the initial cost of GFRP columns is more,
the use of GFRP is beneficial instead of steel as it is
corrosion resistant, weighs 1/4th of steel, has greater
tensile strength and also it reduces the maintenance
cost to a greater extent.
REFERENCES
[1] Ehab M. Lofty, (2010) “Ehab M. Lofty, (2010) “Behavior of
reinforced concrete short columns with Fiber Reinforced polymer
bars” International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 1, No 4 pp 707-722.
[2] Rizkalla, S., Hassan, T., and Hassan, N., [2003]. “Design
Figure 15: Reinforcement ratio Vs total cost of reinforcement Recommendations for the use of FRP for Reinforcement and
Strengthening of Concrete Structures. ‖ Journal of Progress in
Initial cost of installation of GFRP reinforcement as Structural Engineering and Materials, 5 (1), 16-28.
compare to steel reinforcement is more however in the [3] Benmokrane, B., El-Salakawy, E., El-Ragaby, A., and Lackey, T.
future; it becomes cost effective in the long run as: [2006]. ―Designing and Testing of Concrete Bridge Decks
Reinforced with Glass FRP Bars. ‖ Journal of Bridge Engineering,
 GFRP is corrosion free. 11 (2): 217–229.
 Use of GFRP reduces concrete cover and eliminates [4] Demers, M., and Neale, K.W. [1999]. ―Confinement of
corrosion protection measures. Reinforced Concrete Columns with Fiber Reinforced Composite
 Using GFRP may minimize expensive repair work Sheets- an Experimental Study. ‖ Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 26, 226-241.
required in case of steel reinforcement.
[5] Teng, J.G., Chen, J.F., Smith, S.T., and Lam, L., [2002]. ―FRP
Strengthened RC Structures.‖ John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
X. CONCLUSION [6] S S Bhavikatti “strength of materials” Vikas Publishing House Pvt
The Linear and Non-linear behavior of 12 column Ltd, 2009, third edition.
specimens are investigated in this study. The conclusions [7] ACI Committee 440, (2006) “Guide for the design and
construction of structural concrete reinforced with FRP bars,”
made from this investigation are as follows: ACI 440.1R-06, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
 Increasing reinforcement ratio from 0.8 to 2.792 % MI
[8] Ching Chiaw Choo, Issam E. Harik, and Hans Gesund (2006)
has a significant effect on ultimate loads.
“Minimum Reinforcement Ratio for Fiber-Reinforced Polymer
 As per ACI and BS-8110 code, for the same Reinforced Concrete Rectangular Columns” ACI Structural
reinforcement ratio GFRP does not affect the Journal/May-June, 460-466 pp
ultimate load capacity of the column. While as per [9] ANSYS User's Manual, Swanson Systems, Inc
Egyptian code, for the same reinforcement ratio [10] Ehab M. Lotfy, (2010) “Behavior of reinforced concrete short
columns with Fiber Reinforced polymers bars” International
GFRP significantly increases the ultimate load
Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering Volume 1, No 3, pp
capacity of the column. 545-557
 As per ACI and BS-8110 code, for linear and [11] American Concrete Institute, (2008) “Building code requirements
nonlinear analysis and for the same reinforcement for structural concrete,” ACI 318-08, ACI, Farmington Hills, MI
ratio deformation does not change when using [12] Egyptian Code for design and construction of concrete structures,
code no 203, 2001
GFRP, but as per Egyptian Code, for the same
reinforcement ratio deformation significantly [13] British Standards Institution (BSI), (2002) Structural use of
concrete Part 1: Code of practice for design and
increases in case of GFRP. construction.BS8110-1:1997, London.
 The cost of reinforcement increases in case of [14] Indian Standards Code (IS),(2000) Plain and Reinforced Concrete
GFRP from 37% to 74% for different reinforcement Code of Practice Forth Revision, IS 456:2000, India.
ratio.

179