Experimental and probabilistic investigation on the durability of geopolymer concrete confined with fiber reinforced polymer

被引:11
作者
Anvari, MohammadAmin [1 ]
Toufigh, Vahab [1 ]
机构
[1] Sharif Univ Technol, Dept Civil Engn, Tehran, Iran
关键词
Fly ash; Ground granulated glast-furnace slag; Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP); Durability; Corrosion; Reliability analysis; Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM);
D O I
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127419
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
This study investigates the durability of confined geopolymer concrete with fiber-reinforced polymer and compares the results with ordinary Portland cement concrete (OPCC). Two hundred and seventy geopolymer concrete (GPC) specimens with different mix designs (fly ash- and granulated blast furnace slag(GBFS)-based GPC) were prepared and then wrapped with two different fiber-reinforced polymers (carbon and glass FRPs). For 12,960 hrs (eighteen months), the specimens were exposed to four different pHs (2.5, 7 (water), 7.25 (saltwater), 12.5). The reliability analysis was performed after modeling the compressive strength over time. Based on the results, the ductility of all specimens decreased 9 to 40 percent, depending on aggressive environments. The reduction of the compressive strength was up to 22% in an acidic environment. The compressive strength of the specimens increased 11 percent after being exposed to the alkaline solution. Overall, GPC had better durability than OPCC. The reliability analysis for durability for this study was compared with ACI 440-2R recommendations of aggressive environments. For the GFRP confined specimens, the probability of failure of limit state function for fly ash-based GPC under acidic, alkalic, salty water, and water conditions was 72.5, 33.3, 53.7, and 38.7 percent, respectively, and for GBFS-based GPC was 56.7, 22.7, 30.7, and 18.3, respectively. In most of the cases, the probability of failure of limit state function for CFRP confined specimens was less than GFRP confined.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]   Durability evaluation of geopolymer and conventional concretes [J].
Albitar, M. ;
Ali, M. S. Mohamed ;
Visintin, P. ;
Drechsler, M. .
CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS, 2017, 136 :374-385
[2]   Effect of cement addition, solution resting time and curing characteristics on fly ash based geopolymer concrete performance [J].
Aliabdo, Ali A. ;
Abd Elmoaty, Abd Elmoaty M. ;
Salem, Hazem A. .
CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS, 2016, 123 :581-593
[3]   Predicting the time to corrosion initiation in reinforced concrete structures exposed to chlorides [J].
Angst, Ueli M. .
CEMENT AND CONCRETE RESEARCH, 2019, 115 :559-567
[4]  
[Anonymous], C172C172M17 ASTM
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2017, GUIDE DESIGN CONSTRU
[6]   Sources of uncertainty and design values for field-manufactured FRP [J].
Atadero, Rebecca A. ;
Karbhari, Vistasp M. .
COMPOSITE STRUCTURES, 2009, 89 (01) :83-93
[7]  
Baji H., 2013, SMART MONITORING ASS
[8]   Resistance of geopolymer materials to acid attack [J].
Bakharev, T .
CEMENT AND CONCRETE RESEARCH, 2005, 35 (04) :658-670
[9]   Resistance of alkali-activated slag concrete to acid attack [J].
Bakharev, T ;
Sanjayan, JG ;
Cheng, YB .
CEMENT AND CONCRETE RESEARCH, 2003, 33 (10) :1607-1611
[10]   Experiments and probabilistic models of bond strength between GFRP bar and different types of concrete under aggressive environments [J].
Bazli, Milad ;
Ashrafi, Hamed ;
Oskouei, Asghar Vatani .
CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS, 2017, 148 :429-443