Performance of Ultra-High Strength Concrete and FRP Retrofitted RC Slabs under Blast Loads Chengqing Wu, Oehler DJ,

Rebentrost M, Leach J, Whittaker AS

1. Introduction Why?
Terrorism Ultra-high Performance Concrete Retrofitting technologies

School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, The University of Adelaide

1. Introduction
Mechanical properties of conventional concrete and UHPFC

1. Introduction
Blast Testing of FRP retrofitted RC members
Test Specimen
1000 mm

Section A-A
1.4

1300 mm

20

150

100

200

100

200

100

150

Blast Test 1: ELASTIC RANGE Blast Test 2: PLASTIC RANGE

2 Test Program
(MPa MPa) ) Compression Stress (
160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 0.005 0.01 0.015
Major Bending Plane

2 Test Program Blast Testing Specimens

Normal Reinforced Concrete Specimens
1000

10

Section A-A

2000 1000

100

Retrofitting

Ultra high performance concrete

Strain

Minor Bending Plane

2 Test Program
Retrofitted Reinforced Concrete Specimens
Pultruded: CFRP 1.4 mm
40 100 100 100 100

2 Test Program Testing Set-up

Adhesive

40

155

240

210

240

155

Ultra-high Performance Concrete Specimens

Two slabs of UHPFC with and without reinforcement were designed.

Blast Setup

2 Test Program Data acquisition

Support PT1

Explosive Charge

Slab
LVDT Pressure Transducer (PT)

LVDT
50 mm

PT2

Support

20 mm

Concrete Slab

2 Test Program
Experimental air blast program
Blast NRC-1 NRC-2 NRC-3 NRC-4 RET-1 RET-2 UUHPFC RUHPFC Slab Name 1A 1A 1B 1A 3A 3B D1B D3A Description NSC RC NSC RC NSC RC NSC RC RC+CFRP 2.8mm strip, one side (EB) RC+CFRP 2.8mm strip, one side (EB) UUHPFC RUHPFC Dimension mm*mm*mm 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 2000*1000*100 Reo. Rate 1.2 % 1.2 % 1.2 % 1.2 % 1.2 % 1.2 % 1.4 % Standoff distance (m) 3 3 1.4 1.5 1.5 0.92 0.75 1 Scaled distance (m/kg1/3) 3.0 1.5 0.93 0.75 1.5 0.54 1.13 0.37 Explosive Used (g) 1007 8139 3440 8213 1044 5083 3433 20101

Performance of Testing Specimens

Normal reinforced concrete slabs

Retrofitted Experimental Results

FRP Debonding

NRC-3 crack development (a charge weight of 3.4kg at stand-off distance 1.4m, energy 2536 kN.mm)

Direct Shear

Flexural

Direct Shear

NRC-4 crack development

(a charge weight of 8kg at stand-off distance 1.5m, energy 5464 kN.mm)

(a charge weight of 5kg at stand-off distance 0.92m, energy 10375 kN.mm)

FRP Debonding

2 Test Program
Unreinforced ultra-high performance fibre concrete slab

(a charge weight of 3.4kg at stand-off distance 0.75m, energy 3089 kN.mm)

Normal reinforced concrete slabs

NRC-3 crack development (a charge weight of 3.4kg at stand-off distance 1.4m, energy 2536 kN.mm)

Reinforced ultra-high performance fibre concrete slab

(kN kN) ) Resistance (
700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

3 Blast Resistance
Ultra high strength

Retrofitted Normal reinforced concrete

10 20 30 40 50 60

Deflection (mm)
(a charge weight of 20kg at stand-off distance 1m, energy 93077 kN.mm)

Resistance, reflected impulses and energy demands and capacities

Comparison and Discussions

Based on this diagram, almost all specimens (except NRC-1) tested in this study will collapse.

4. Conclusion
A series of blast tests have been carried out to investigate blast resistance of the NRC, the retrofitted, the UUHPFC and the RUHPFC slabs. It was found that: Although EB FRP compressive face of retrofitting can increase ductility in blast tests, the effectiveness of the retrofitting was inconclusive as slab failure was not achieved throughout the experiments. The UUHPFC slab suffered even less flexural cracks at middle span by comparison with those for NRC slabs when it was subjected to similar blast loads, showing UHPFC is of high ductility and high energy absorption capacity, and is therefore a more effective material against blast loading.

4. Conclusion
Blast testing also validated the superior blast resistance of the RUHPFC slab due to the excellent mechanical properties of UHPFC. P-I diagrams specified by current codes are very conservative when they are used to assess damage levels of specimens tested in this study.

Questions?