PSI - Issue 64

Asad-ur-Rehman Khan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 64 (2024) 1065–1072 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

1071

7

kN with a deflection of 18.07 mm. The ultimate loads and deflections for the control beam were 258.20 kN and 21.52 mm, whereas for the TRM beam, they were found to be 287.24 kN and 26.0 mm, respectively. Post-cracking stiffness of the TRM2.5 beam was again found to be higher than the control beam. Yield load of control beam was found to be 204.32 kN at a deflection of 21.27 mm which was lower than the yield load of TRM2.5 beam which was 220.37 kN at a deflection of 19.95 mm. The control beam failed at an ultimate load of 214.70 kN at a deflection of 32.25 mm while ultimate load for TRM beam was 234.58 kN at a deflection of 30.03 mm. TRM2.5 performed better than the control beam CT2.5.

(a) a/d 1

(b) a/d 2

(c) a/d 2.5

Figure 6: Load Deflection curve for varying shear span-to-depth ratio

4. Conclusions This study presented the behaviour of full-scale shear critical RC beams strengthened with basalt fibres based TRM. Shear span-to-depth (a/d) ratio was varied between 1 to 2.5. The results showed that Basalt fibres based TRM played an active role in enhancing the overall behaviour of full-scale RC beams with respect to the initial cracking load in both shear and flexural shear. Deformations and crack widths were controlled as compared to the respective control beams. Ultimate load carrying capacities at failure were also enhanced, but the enhancement was not very significant. No improvement was observed in pre-cracking stiffness, but it significantly improves the post-cracking

stiffness of the beams. Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Department of Civil Engineering, NED University of Engineering and Technology, in the pursuit of this work, and Fyfe® for providing the TRM material for the study.