CFRP片材-工程水泥基复合材料-混凝土复合界面单面剪切试验研究

Single-shear test of CFRP plate-engineered cementitious composites-concrete composite interface

  • 摘要: 为解决碳纤维增强树脂复合材料(CFRP)片材加固混凝土结构时CFRP片材易过早剥离及工程水泥基复合材料(ECC)加固混凝土结构极限承载力提高不足等问题,采用CFRP片材-ECC-混凝土复合界面,以同时发挥CFRP片材高抗拉强度和ECC多缝开裂及耐久性较好的优势。设计21个单面剪切试件并进行单面剪切试验,研究不同ECC厚度和混凝土/ECC强度对复合界面承载力、应变分布及粘结滑移曲线等影响规律。试验结果表明:设置ECC层的单面剪切试件破坏模式均为CFRP片材和ECC界面间的剥离破坏,有效延缓了CFRP片材的剥离,并可以有效地传递界面剪应力。与无ECC层的试件相比,设置ECC层试件的极限承载力增加了27.3%~59.6%。基于陆新征等提出的极限承载力计算模型,提出了考虑ECC厚度的复合界面单面剪切试件的极限承载力预测模型,计算值与试验值相吻合。采用不同粘结滑移模型对试验数据进行分析,对比结果表明:Ferracuti等提出的模型考虑的影响因素较全面且模型的拟合结果较好。

     

    Abstract: To solve the problems of CFRP plate being easy to peel off from concrete of concrete structure strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) plate and the limited increase of bearing capacity of concrete structure strengthened with engineered cementitious composites (ECC), the CFRP plate-ECC-concrete composite interface was proposed to take full advantage of both the high tensile strength of CFRP plate and good durability of ECC with multiple cracking. 21 single-shear specimens with different ECC thickness and concrete/ECC strength were designed and tested. The distribution of interface load-carrying capacity, strain distribution and bond-slip curve of specimens were obtained. The results show that the failure pattern of all specimens with ECC layer is the debonding failure which occurs in the interface between the CFRP plate and ECC. It demonstrates that the ECC layer can obviously delay the debonding of CFRP plate, meanwhile, transfer the interfacial shear stress effectively. Compare with the specimens without ECC layer, the ultimate load-carrying capacity of specimens with ECC layer increases by 27.3%-59.6%. Based on the LU Xinzheng et al’ ultimate load-carrying capacity calculation model, a prediction model of the load-carrying capacity of single-shear specimens considering the thickness of ECC was proposed, and the calculated value is consistent with the experimental results. Different bond-slip models were adopted to analyse the test results and the comparison shows that: Ferracuti et al’ model considers more comprehensive factors and fits better with the test results than other models.

     

/

返回文章
返回