Modified Constitutive Models and Mechanical Properties of GFRP after High-Temperature Cooling
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Specimen Design
2.2. Test Procedures
3. Test Results
3.1. Experimental Phenomena
3.1.1. Surface Characteristics
3.1.2. Failure Mode
3.2. Mechanical Properties
3.2.1. Tensile Strength
3.2.2. Modulus of Elasticity
3.2.3. Ultimate Strain
3.3. Stress–Strain Curves
4. Theoretical Analysis
4.1. The T-E Model
4.2. Johnson−Cook Model
4.2.1. Parametric Analysis
4.2.2. Verification of the Constitutive Model
5. Conclusions
- The elevated temperatures and cooling methods significantly influenced the mechanical properties of GFRP. When exposed to temperatures below 200 °C, the three cooling methods can recover the mechanical properties of GFRP to a greater extent. At temperatures ranging from 20 to 200 °C, the recovery ability of water cooling is the weakest, with tensile strength values of 486.38, 457.30, 405.87, and 328.86. Conversely, natural cooling exhibits the strongest recovery ability, with corresponding tensile strength values of 486.38, 515.24, 485.26, and 428.58; while in 200 °C–300 °C, mechanical properties of GFRP decreased substantially, the ability of the cooling methods to restore the mechanical properties gradually decreased; when at 300 °C, GFRP has basically lost work abilities.
- The best fire extinguishing method for GFRP materials after exposure to fire is firefighting foam cooling. At 100 °C, the residual factors of elastic modulus (1.05, 1.19) and tensile strength (1.10, 1.06) for GFRP in fire foam cooling and air cooling are greater than those at ambient temperature. The elastic modulus and tensile strength of GFRP under fire foam cooling and air cooling are greater than those under ambient temperature. They decreased gradually with the increase in temperature. For the same target temperature, the strength retention rates of the materials are air cooling > fire foam cooling > water cooling.
- The prediction equation of the mechanical properties of GFRP is established based on the experimental results, and the JC constitutive model is also modified to obtain the stress–strain curve equation suitable for this experiment, which is specifically applicable to the boundary conditions and materials utilized in this study.
- This paper investigates the impact of different firefighting methods on the mechanical properties of GFRP in the event of a fire. Three commonly used cooling methods, namely, fire foam cooling, water cooling, and natural cooling, were employed. This study aims to provide a basis for the post-fire structural safety assessment of buildings.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Yang, Y.; Fahmy, M.F.M.; Guan, S.; Pan, Z.; Zhan, Y.; Zhao, T. Properties and applications of FRP cable on long-span cable-supported bridges: A review. Compos. Part B Eng. 2020, 190, 107934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Zhang, C. Stability analysis of pultruded basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) tube under axial compression. Compos. Struct. 2024, 327, 117660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, C.; Chen, Y.; Dou, M. Axial Compression Behaviour and Modelling of Pultruded Basalt-Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (BFRP) Tubes. Buildings 2023, 13, 1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nawaz, W.; Elchalakani, M.; Karrech, A.; Yehia, S.; Yang, B.; Youssf, O. Flexural behavior of all lightweight reinforced concrete beams externally strengthened with CFRP sheets. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 327, 126966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Zhang, C. Effects of high-temperature cooling and ultralow cyclic loading on mechanical behavior of Q450 weathering steel. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2023, 202, 107783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, C.; Li, Y.; Wu, J. Mechanical Properties of Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Composites at Elevated Temperatures. Buildings 2022, 13, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asaro, R.J.; Lattimer, B.; Ramroth, W. Structural response of FRP composites during fire. Compos. Struct. 2009, 87, 382–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, Y.; Keller, T. Modeling of mechanical response of FRP composites in fire. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2009, 40, 731–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Zhao, X.-L.; Xian, G.; Wu, G.; Raman, R.K.S.; Al-Saadi, S. Effect of sustained load and seawater and sea sand concrete environment on durability of basalt- and glass-fibre reinforced polymer (B/GFRP) bars. Corros. Sci. 2018, 138, 200–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Correia, J.R.; Keller, T.; Garrido, M.; Sá, M.; Firmo, J.P.; Shahid, M.A.; Machado, M. Mechanical properties of FRP materials at elevated temperature—Definition of a temperature conversion factor for design in service conditions. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 367, 130298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spagnuolo, S.; Meda, A.; Rinaldi, Z.; Nanni, A. Residual behaviour of glass FRP bars subjected to high temperatures. Compos. Struct. 2018, 203, 886–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, Y.; Keller, T.; Vallée, T. Modeling of stiffness of FRP composites under elevated and high temperatures. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2008, 68, 3099–3106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashrafi, H.; Bazli, M.; Najafabadi, E.P.; Vatani Oskouei, A. The effect of mechanical and thermal properties of FRP bars on their tensile performance under elevated temperatures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 157, 1001–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, T.; Zhu, H.; Shen, J.; Keller, T. Thermophysical and thermomechanical properties of basalt-phenolic FRP rebars under high temperature. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 342, 127983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khorasani, M.; Muciaccia, G.; Consiglio, A.N.; Mostofinejad, D. Evaluating the behavior and bond properties of FRP spike anchors under confined conditions and elevated temperature. Compos. Struct. 2023, 322, 117407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, B.; Kodur, V.K.R. Effect of high temperature on bond strength of near-surface mounted FRP reinforcement. Compos. Struct. 2014, 110, 88–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, K.; Hao, J.; Li, P.; Zhong, C. A nonlinear analytical model for predicting bond behavior of FRP-to-concrete/steel substrate joints subjected to temperature variations. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 320, 126225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katz, A.; Berman, N. Modeling the effect of high temperature on the bond of FRP reinforcing bars to concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2000, 22, 433–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faysal, R.M.; Bhuiyan, M.M.H.; Momin, K.A.; Tafsirojjaman, T.; Liu, Y. A review on the advances of the study on FRP-Concrete bond under hygrothermal exposure. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 363, 129818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosa, I.C.; Firmo, J.P.; Correia, J.R.; Mazzuca, P. Influence of elevated temperatures on the bond behaviour of ribbed GFRP bars in concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2021, 122, 104119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue, Y.-J.; Wang, W.-W.; Wu, Z.-H.; Hu, S.; Tian, J. Experimental study on flexural behavior of RC beams strengthened with FRP/SMA composites. Eng. Struct. 2023, 289, 116288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shayanfar, J.; Kafshgarkolaei, H.J.; Barros, J.A.O.; Rezazadeh, M. Unified strength model for FRP confined heat-damaged circular and square concrete columns. Compos. Struct. 2023, 307, 116647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Stratford, T.; Reynolds, T.P.S. Linear creep of bonded FRP-strengthened metallic structures at warm service temperatures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 283, 122699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, V.V.; Vo, H.B.; Dinh, L.H.; Doan, D.V. Experimental behavior of fire-exposed reinforced concrete slabs without and with FRP retrofitting. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 51, 104315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, D.; Gao, W.-Y.; Dai, J.-G. Effects of temperature variation on intermediate crack-induced debonding and stress intensity factor in FRP-retrofitted cracked steel beams: An analytical study. Compos. Struct. 2022, 279, 114776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, G.; Dong, Z.-Q.; Wang, X.; Zhu, Y.; Wu, Z.-S. Prediction of Long-Term Performance and Durability of BFRP Bars under the Combined Effect of Sustained Load and Corrosive Solutions. J. Compos. Constr. 2015, 19, 04014058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Gong, Z.; Hao, Y.; Deng, Y.; Zhang, C. Evolution of strain-rate dependent compressive failure behavior of ceramifiable FRP composites at high temperature conditions. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2023, 241, 110145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khaneghahi, M.H.; Najafabadi, E.P.; Shoaei, P.; Oskouei, A.V. Effect of intumescent paint coating on mechanical properties of FRP bars at elevated temperature. Polym. Test. 2018, 71, 72–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.C.; Wong, P.M.H.; Kodur, V. An experimental study of the mechanical properties of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) and steel reinforcing bars at elevated temperatures. Compos. Struct. 2007, 80, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GB/T 1447-2005; Fiber-Reinforced Plastics Composites—Determination of Tensile Properties. General Administration of Quality Supervision, and Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China: Beijing, China, 2005.
- GB/T 38515-2020; The Method for High Temperature Mechanical Properties of Quartz Fabric-Reinforced Resin Matrix Composite Materials. General Administration of Quality Supervision, and Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China: Beijing, China, 2020.
- Robert, M.; Benmokrane, B. Behavior of GFRP Reinforcing Bars Subjected to Extreme Temperatures. J. Compos. Constr. 2010, 14, 353–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.; Yin, X.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Xian, G. Mechanical property evolution and service life prediction of pultruded carbon/glass hybrid rod exposed in harsh oil-well condition. Compos. Struct. 2020, 246, 112418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzuca, P.; Firmo, J.P.; Correia, J.R.; Castilho, E. Influence of elevated temperatures on the mechanical properties of glass fibre reinforced polymer laminates produced by vacuum infusion. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 345, 128340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, G.R.; Cook, W.H. Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng. Fract. Mech. 1985, 21, 31–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, A.; Xie, G.; Zhang, H.; Wang, X. A comparative study on Johnson–Cook, modified Johnson–Cook and Arrhenius-type constitutive models to predict the high temperature flow stress in 20CrMo alloy steel. Mater. Des. 2013, 52, 677–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Specimen Labels | Tensile Strength fu/MPa | Modulus of Elasticity E/GPa | Elongation δ/% |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 427.89 | 37.05 | 12.05 |
2 | 563.31 | 39.16 | 14.33 |
3 | 467.92 | 38.15 | 12.51 |
Average | 486.37 | 38.12 | 12.96 |
Standard Deviation | 56.80 | 0.86 | 0.98 |
Cooling Methods | Temperature/°C | Tensile Strength (MPa) | Residual Factor (σT/σ20) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Average | Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Average | ||
Air Cooling | Ambient | 427.89 | 563.35 | 467.89 | 486.38 | 0.88 | 1.16 | 0.96 | 1.00 |
100 | 587.68 | 485.30 | 472.76 | 515.24 | 1.21 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 1.06 | |
150 | 490.92 | 470.92 | 493.95 | 485.26 | 1.01 | 0.97 | 1.02 | 1.00 | |
200 | 461.95 | 431.03 | 392.76 | 428.58 | 0.95 | 0.89 | 0.81 | 0.88 | |
250 | 197.30 | 190.38 | 195.24 | 194.31 | 0.41 | 0.39 | 0.40 | 0.40 | |
300 | 77.73 | 36.54 | 45.19 | 53.15 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.11 | |
Fire Foam Cooling | Ambient | 427.89 | 563.35 | 467.89 | 486.38 | 0.88 | 1.16 | 0.96 | 1.00 |
100 | 598.05 | 499.89 | 502.16 | 533.37 | 1.23 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.10 | |
150 | 405.41 | 423.35 | 480.32 | 436.36 | 0.83 | 0.87 | 0.99 | 0.90 | |
200 | 443.03 | 383.24 | 431.14 | 419.14 | 0.91 | 0.79 | 0.89 | 0.86 | |
250 | 113.84 | 119.46 | 239.89 | 157.73 | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.49 | 0.32 | |
300 | 7.14 | 42.92 | 29.30 | 26.45 | 0.01 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.05 | |
Water Cooling | Ambient | 427.89 | 563.35 | 467.89 | 486.38 | 0.88 | 1.16 | 0.96 | 1.00 |
100 | 415.03 | 477.08 | 479.78 | 457.30 | 0.85 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.94 | |
150 | 466.38 | 358.38 | 392.86 | 405.87 | 0.96 | 0.74 | 0.81 | 0.83 | |
200 | 326.05 | 335.03 | 325.51 | 328.86 | 0.67 | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.68 | |
250 | 97.62 | 81.84 | 147.24 | 108.90 | 0.20 | 0.17 | 0.30 | 0.22 | |
300 | 16.43 | 55.78 | 79.46 | 50.56 | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.10 |
Cooling Methods | Temperature/°C | Elastic Modulus (GPa) | Residual Factor (ET/E20) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Average | Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Average | ||
Air Cooling | Ambient | 37.05 | 39.16 | 38.15 | 38.12 | 0.97 | 1.03 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
100 | 42.37 | 54.33 | 39.96 | 40.06 | 1.11 | 1.42 | 1.04 | 1.19 | |
150 | 41.78 | 38.40 | 39.61 | 39.93 | 1.09 | 1.01 | 1.03 | 1.04 | |
200 | 43.14 | 39.39 | 34.44 | 38.99 | 1.13 | 1.03 | 0.90 | 1.02 | |
250 | 32.53 | 28.20 | 28.97 | 29.90 | 0.85 | 0.74 | 0.75 | 0.78 | |
300 | 11.26 | 3.26 | 10.29 | 8.27 | 0.30 | 0.08 | 0.26 | 0.21 | |
Fire Foam Cooling | Ambient | 37.05 | 39.16 | 38.15 | 38.12 | 0.97 | 1.03 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
100 | 41.22 | 41.74 | 37.97 | 40.31 | 1.08 | 1.09 | 0.99 | 1.05 | |
150 | 38.12 | 36.83 | 36.21 | 37.05 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.97 | |
200 | 33.70 | 36.41 | 38.32 | 36.15 | 0.88 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 0.94 | |
250 | 17.91 | 27.87 | 28.89 | 24.89 | 0.46 | 0.73 | 0.75 | 0.65 | |
300 | 2.08 | 9.39 | 11.40 | 7.62 | 0.05 | 0.24 | 0.29 | 0.19 | |
Water Cooling | Ambient | 37.05 | 39.16 | 38.15 | 38.12 | 0.97 | 1.03 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
100 | 36.80 | 37.98 | 37.88 | 37.55 | 0.96 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.98 | |
150 | 39.54 | 39.33 | 37.12 | 38.66 | 1.04 | 1.03 | 0.97 | 1.01 | |
200 | 36.17 | 36.25 | 32.68 | 35.03 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.85 | 0.91 | |
250 | 13.67 | 15.05 | 16.50 | 15.08 | 0.35 | 0.39 | 0.43 | 0.39 | |
300 | 5.21 | 1.28 | 10.46 | 5.65 | 0.14 | 0.03 | 0.27 | 0.15 |
Cooling Methods | Temperature/°C | Ultimate Strain (%) | Residual Factor (εT/ε20) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Average | Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Average | ||
Air Cooling | Ambient | 12.05 | 14.33 | 12.51 | 12.96 | 0.93 | 1.11 | 0.97 | 1.00 |
100 | 14.31 | 13.54 | 11.28 | 13.04 | 1.10 | 1.04 | 0.87 | 1.01 | |
150 | 11.28 | 12.01 | 12.31 | 11.87 | 0.87 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.92 | |
200 | 11.52 | 11.40 | 9.80 | 10.90 | 0.89 | 0.88 | 0.76 | 0.84 | |
250 | 7.69 | 6.60 | 7.30 | 7.20 | 0.59 | 0.51 | 0.56 | 0.56 | |
300 | 6.42 | 15.35 | 4.16 | 8.64 | 0.50 | 1.18 | 0.32 | 0.67 | |
Fire Foam Cooling | Ambient | 12.05 | 14.33 | 12.51 | 12.96 | 0.93 | 1.11 | 0.97 | 1.00 |
100 | 14.91 | 13.10 | 12.01 | 13.34 | 1.15 | 1.01 | 0.93 | 1.03 | |
150 | 10.14 | 10.57 | 11.87 | 10.86 | 0.78 | 0.82 | 0.92 | 0.84 | |
200 | 11.74 | 10.46 | 11.79 | 11.33 | 0.91 | 0.81 | 0.91 | 0.87 | |
250 | 8.02 | 6.38 | 9.80 | 8.06 | 0.62 | 0.49 | 0.76 | 0.62 | |
300 | 1.85 | 4.27 | 14.89 | 7.03 | 0.14 | 0.33 | 1.15 | 0.54 | |
Water Cooling | Ambient | 12.05 | 14.33 | 12.51 | 12.96 | 0.93 | 1.11 | 0.97 | 1.00 |
100 | 10.71 | 12.31 | 11.81 | 11.61 | 0.83 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.90 | |
150 | 12.07 | 8.99 | 10.21 | 10.42 | 0.93 | 0.69 | 0.79 | 0.80 | |
200 | 8.89 | 9.31 | 9.72 | 9.31 | 0.69 | 0.72 | 0.75 | 0.72 | |
250 | 8.00 | 5.03 | 5.88 | 6.30 | 0.62 | 0.39 | 0.45 | 0.49 | |
300 | 2.81 | 11.65 | 5.92 | 6.79 | 0.22 | 0.90 | 0.46 | 0.52 |
Cooling Method | A1 | A2 | x0 |
---|---|---|---|
Air cooling | 1.08 | 0.22 | 266.08 |
Fire foam cooling | 1.01 | 0.21 | 260.76 |
Water cooling | 1.00 | 0.15 | 241.42 |
Parameters | Air Cooling | Fire Foam Cooling | Water Cooling |
---|---|---|---|
n | 1.16 | 1.04 | 1.10 |
B | 5653.33 | 4105.16 | 4865.87 |
C | 0.26 | 0.30 | 0.38 |
m | 4.26 | 3.60 | 3.49 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wu, J.; Zhang, C. Modified Constitutive Models and Mechanical Properties of GFRP after High-Temperature Cooling. Buildings 2024, 14, 439. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14020439
Wu J, Zhang C. Modified Constitutive Models and Mechanical Properties of GFRP after High-Temperature Cooling. Buildings. 2024; 14(2):439. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14020439
Chicago/Turabian StyleWu, Junjie, and Chuntao Zhang. 2024. "Modified Constitutive Models and Mechanical Properties of GFRP after High-Temperature Cooling" Buildings 14, no. 2: 439. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14020439