TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY STUDY OF GFRP CONFINED RC DRIVEN PILES - NEW CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY

Transcription

1 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) Volume 9, Issue 5, May 2018, pp , Article ID: IJMET_09_05_018 Available online at ISSN Print: and ISSN Online: IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY STUDY OF GFRP CONFINED RC DRIVEN PILES - NEW CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY J. Prakash Arul Jose Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Bharath IHER, Chennai, India P. Rajesh Prasanna Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Anna University, Tiruchirappalli, India Fleming Prakash Assistant Engineer, TN Slum Clearance Board, Trichy Division, India ABSTRACT Piles are relatively long and slender members used to transmit foundation loads through soil strata of low bearing capacity to deeper soil or rock strata having a high bearing capacity. They are also used in normal ground conditions to resist heavy uplift forces or in poor soil conditions to resist horizontal loads. Load carrying capacity of GFRP confined and unconfined piles were found out using the dynamic formulae and pile load test. Safe load carrying capacity of piles determined from piles load test was slightly higher than the dynamic formulae. The experimental result also shows that surface roughness of specimen is significantly changes the interface friction angle. The shear strength at the interface increases with the increase in surface roughness of the specimens. Key words: Strengthening, RC piles, FRP, CFRP, vertical loads, driven piles. Cite this Article: J. Prakash Arul Jose, P. Rajesh Prasanna and Fleming Prakash, Technical Feasibility Study of GFRP Confined RC Driven Piles - New Construction Methodology, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(5), 2018, pp INTRODUCTION Piles are normally designed for the compressive load or lateral load or both. But some time, the same piles may be subjected to tensile loads under particular loading conditions. The tensile capacity of the pile depends on the skin friction between the pile surface and soil and the cohesive action of the soil. Piles supporting tall structures, such as tall chimneys, transmission towers, water tanks, offshore platforms, sky scrappers are required to resist uplift forces caused due to wind action. Some of the piles in these structures are hence required to resist tensile forces. Soil-structure interaction is the mechanism that governs the pile response editor@iaeme.com

2 J. Prakash Arul Jose, P. Rajesh Prasanna and Fleming Prakash behavior and ultimate capacity of the structure for the applied loads. The response of an individual pile to externally applied load is one of the most complex soil-structure interaction problems in the field of foundation engineering. An extensive amount of theoretical and analytical work has been reported on the behavior of single and group piles under vertical and lateral loads. The main focus of this research is to determine the potential of GFRP materials in strengthening of RC piles subjected to vertical loads. To establish the feasibility of using GFRP materials in strengthening of RC piles, more information and performance data were gathered in critical areas, interface behavior between GFRP materials & soil and soil-pile load transfer interactions. Hammoud and Boumekik (2006) studied the interfacial shearing between cohesive soils and solid materials. The results show that the shearing resistance at the interface depends on the interface roughness, as well as on the properties of soils. Reddy et al. (2009) studied the retrofitting of RC Piles using GFRP composites. The authors concluded that the axial and lateral load carrying capacity of the GFRP retrofitted pile increases with the conventional pile. Sangeetha and Sumathi (2010) investigated the behaviour of Glass fibre wrapped concrete columns under uniaxial compression. The study concluded that confinement increased the strength of the concrete columns loaded axially. Gireesha and Muthukkumaran (2011) studied the interface friction angle of different structural materials (concrete, steel and wood) against well and poorly graded sands with varying relative density. The experimental results show that both internal and interface friction angles decrease with increasing relative density of both well and poorly graded sand. 2. INTERFACE BEHAVIOR BETWEEN SOIL AND FRP COMPOSITES It is essential to determine the interface strength between soil and geotechnical structures to make a good estimation of load transfer between structures and soils. FRP has limited use in geotechnical engineering applications to date, due to lack of information regarding the behavior of systems that include these materials. So it is important to study the interface behaviour between FRP and soil. An experimental study was performed to evaluate the importance of various factors. The behavior of the GFRP-soil interfaces was also compared with the concrete-soil interfaces. The interface frictional strength study was carried out in a conventional direct shear test apparatus. Concrete specimens of size 6 cm x 6 cm x 1.4 cm were prepared for interface frictional study. The specimens were tested without any GFRP wrapping and wrapped with GFRP sheet. The specimens were placed in the lower half of the direct shear box and the upper half of the shear box was filled with soil at predetermined density as per Tables 1. The direct shear test setup is schematically shown in Fig. 1. Figure 1 Schematic view of interface friction measurement set up editor@iaeme.com

3 Technical Feasibility Study of GFRP Confined RC Driven Piles - New Construction Methodology Engineering and Index properties of Soil: Engineering and index properties of soil were determined by conducting experiments in order to understand the interface frictional resistance between GFRP wrapped concrete and soil. The index and engineering properties of the soil is presented in Table 1. Table 1 Engineering and Index properties of clayey sand % Passing Atterberg Limits Dry unit weight (kn/m 3 ) Type of soil LL PL Ip γ (IS 1498) mm μm μm (%) (%) (%) d (max) γ d (min) γ d (test) SC Surface Roughness of Specimens: Surface roughness of the material is one of the important factors that influence the shear strength parameters. Generally, Absolute roughness (R a ) is considered for calculating interface friction between two different materials. The absolute surface roughness of the specimens was estimated using Surface Roughness Meter. The absolute surface roughness values of specimens are presented in Table 2. Table 2 Surface roughness of specimens Surface roughness, R a Specimens (μm) Concrete ºGFRP wrapped specimen º GFRP wrapped specimen º : Fiber orientation- parallel 90º : Fiber orientation- perpendicular The obtained interface friction angle between clayey sand and GFRP composites is presented in Table 3. Table 3 Interface friction angle between soil and FRP composites Type of interaction Angle of internal /interface friction (degree) Soil-Soil Soil Concrete Soil 0ºGFRP wrapped specimen Soil 90ºGFRP wrapped specimen The experimental results show that surface roughness of specimen is significantly changes the interface friction angle. The shear strength at the interface increases with the increase in surface roughness of the specimens. The maximum shear resistance was obtained for fibers with perpendicular (90 o ) orientation against shear loading. 3. PREPARATION OF GFRP CONFINED RC DRIVEN PILES Piles are generally used to transmit vertical loads to the surrounding soil media. A relatively new trend in deep foundation industry is to use a fiber reinforced polymer composite materials as a substitute in piling system. This experimental study presents the performance of GFRP confined and unconfined piles subjected to vertical loads. RC pile of length 750 mm with 50 mm diameter was used for this study. The following steps are followed to cast the GFRP confined and unconfined precast RC piles editor@iaeme.com

4 J. Prakash Arul Jose, P. Rajesh Prasanna and Fleming Prakash Concrete: The characteristic compressive strength of concrete used for the study was 30 N/mm 2. The mix ratio adopted for casting the piles was 1: 1.204: (Cement: Fine aggregate: Coarse aggregate) with water-cement ratio of Reinforcement: The yield strength of steel used for the study was 415 N/mm 2. Six numbers of 6 mm diameter bars were used as longitudinal reinforcement with a cover thickness of 10 mm. Bars of 6 mm diameter at 100 mm spacing were used as ties. Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP): Glass fiber reinforced polymer was used in the study. Properties of GFRP material are given in Table 4. Table 4 Properties of FRP Material Properties Glass Uni-directional Mass of fiber (g/m 2 ) 920 Fiber thickness (mm) 0.90 Nominal thickness per layer (mm) 1.2 Fiber tensile vertical load carrying capacity (N/mm 2 ) 3400 Tensile modulus (N/mm 2 ) Primer Coating: The mixed material of Nitowrap 30 primer was applied over the prepared and cleaned surface and it was allowed for drying about 24 hours before the application of Nitowrap 410 saturant. Properties of Nitowrap 30 primer is given in Table 5. Table 5 Properties of Nitowrap 30 primer Density Pot life Full cure 1.14 g/cc 25 27⁰ C 7 days Saturant Coating: The Nitowrap 410 saturant system used in this work was made of two parts, resin and hardener. The components were thoroughly hand mixed for 3 minutes before application. Properties of Nitowrap 410 saturant is given in Table 6. Fig.2 shows the GFRP confined and unconfined RC piles. Table 6 Properties of Nitowrap 410 saturant Color Application temperature Viscosity Density Pot life Full cure Pale yellow to amber 15⁰C - 40⁰C Thixotropic g/cc 2 30⁰ C 5 30⁰ C editor@iaeme.com

5 Technical Feasibility Study of GFRP Confined RC Driven Piles - New Construction Methodology a) Unconfined b) Uni-GFRP-C c) Uni-GFRP-L Figure 2 GFRP Confined and unconfined concrete piles 4. SAFE LOAD BASED ON PILE DRIVEN FORMULAE The allowable load Q a is the safe load which the pile can safely and is determined on the basis of (i) ultimate bearing resistance divided by suitable factor of safety, (ii) the permissible settlement, and (iii) overall stability of the pile foundation. The load carrying capacity of a pile can be determined by the following methods: 1. Dynamic formulae 2. Static formulae 3. Pile load tests 4. Penetration tests Dynamic formulae: When a pile hammer hits the pile, the total driving energy is equal to the weight of hammer times the height of drop or stroke. In addition to this, in the case of double acting hammers, some energy is also imparted by the steam pressure during the returns stroke. The total downward energy is consumed by the work done in penetrating the pile and by certain losses. The various dynamic formulae are essentially based on this assumption. It is also assumed that soil resistance of dynamic penetration of pile is the same as to the penetration of pile under static or sustained loading. Following are some the commonly used dynamic formulae. Engineering news formulae: The Engineering News formula was proposed by A. M. Wellington (1818) in the following general form. Where, = Allowable load C = Empirical constant C= 2.5 cm for drop hammer and C = 0.25 (single and double acting hammer) editor@iaeme.com

6 J. Prakash Arul Jose, P. Rajesh Prasanna and Fleming Prakash Single acting hammer: If the hammer is raised by steam, compressed air or internal combustion but is allowed to fall by gravity alone, it is called a single acting hammer. The energy of such of hammer is equal to the weight of the ram times the height of fall. Double acting hammer: The double acting hammer employs steam or air for lifting the ram and for accelerating the downward stroke.it operates with succession of rapid blows. Drop hammer: If a hammer is raised by winch and allowed to fall by gravity on the top of a pile, it is called a drop hammer. F = Factor of safety = 6 S = Final set (penetration) per blow, usually taken as average penetration cm per blow for the last 5 blows of a hammer, or 20 blows of a steam hammer. W = Weight of hammer (W = 4.90 kg) H = Height of fall (H = 45 cm) Piles are commonly driven by means of a hammer supported by a crane or by a special device known as pile driver. During pile driving, heads, helmets, or caps are placed on the top of the pile to receive the blows of the hammer and to prevent damage to the head of the pile. A cushion, consisting of a pad of resilient materials, hard wood or rope, is placed between the drive cap and the top of pile to protect the pile head. Single acting hammers are advantageous when driving heavy piles in compact or hard soil, while double acting hammers are generally used to drive piles of light or moderate in soils of average resistance against driving. Piles are ordinarily driven to a resistance measured by the number of blows required for the last 1 cm of penetration. Resistance of 3 to 5 blows per cm is commonly specified for concrete pile. Final set penetration per blow, usually taken as average penetration per blow for the last 5 blows of a drop hammer, or 20 blows of a steam hammer. It is denoted as S. When a pile hammer hits the pile, the total driving energy is equal to the weight of hammer times the height of drop or stroke. In addition to this, in the case of double acting hammers, some energy is also imparted by the steam pressure during the returns stroke. Driving of GFRP confined and unconfined RC piles by single acting hammer are shown in Fig. 3. Table 7 presents the safe load based on pile driven formulae. a) Unconfined b) Uni-GFRP-C c) Uni-GFRP-L Figure 3 Driving of GFRP confined and unconfined RC piles editor@iaeme.com

7 Technical Feasibility Study of GFRP Confined RC Driven Piles - New Construction Methodology Table 7 Safe load based on Engineering News formula Types of Confinement No. of blows Safe load (N) Unconfined pile Unidirectional GFRP confined pile with fibers along the length (Uni-GFRP-L) Unidirectional GFRP confined pile with fibers along the circumference (Uni-GFRP-C) SAFE LOAD BASED ON PILE LOAD TEST The pile load test is carried out in clayey sand. The pile test can be performed either on a working pile which forms the foundations of the structure or on a test pile. The pile load test setup is shown in Fig.4. a) Schematic diagram b) Photograph Figure 4 Test setup Loading Procedure: The vertical load to the pile was applied through steel discs of known weights. The load is applied equal increments of about one-fifth of the estimated allowable load. The settlement was recorded with the help of dial gauge of sensitivity Each load increment is kept for sufficient time till the rate of settlement becomes less than 0.02 mm per hour. The test piles are loaded until the ultimate load is reached. Safe load based on Settlement criteria: Experimental investigations have been conducted on GFRP confined and unconfined piles. Fig. 5 shows the pile load test on GFRP confined and unconfined RC piles in the field. The vertical load test was performed in accordance with IS: 2911 (Part 4) At each stage of loading, settlement of piles were measured. Vertical load corresponds to 5 mm and 12 mm settlement is tabulated in Table 8. As per IS : 2911(Part 4) , safe load of the pile was taken as 50% of final load at which the total settlement increases to 12 mm or final load at which the total settlement corresponds to 5 mm at ground level. However, the safe load of the pile is taken as the minimum of the above two. In all the cases it was observed that the first condition is the minimum editor@iaeme.com

8 J. Prakash Arul Jose, P. Rajesh Prasanna and Fleming Prakash a) Unconfined b) Uni-GFRP-C c) Uni-GFRP-L Types of Confinement Figure 5 Pile load test on GFRP confined and unconfined piles Table 8 Safe load based on settlement criteria Load corresponding to 5 mm settlement at GL (N) Load corresponding to 12 mm settlement at GL (N) Safe load (N) Unconfined pile Unidirectional GFRP confined pile with fibers along the length (Uni-GFRP-L) Unidirectional GFRP confined pile with fibers along the circumference (Uni-GFRP-C) CONCLUSIONS The strength and stability of geotechnical structures depends on soil-solid interface behaviour. Direct shear tests were conducted to investigate the interface friction angle between GFRP wrapped concrete specimens with soil. The experimental results show that surface roughness of specimen is significantly changes the interface friction angle. The shear strength at the interface increases with the increase in surface roughness of the specimens. Angle of interface friction is slightly higher when the direction of shear force is perpendicular to the direction of fibres. To check the capability of GFRP materials, RC piles were cast with the same reinforcement details to study the behaviour of RC driven piles confined with GFRP under static vertical loads. Experimental results indicate that surface roughness of pile significantly affects the load carrying capacity of driven piles. The load carrying capacity of driven piles increases with the increase in surface roughness of the pile. REFERENCES [1] Hammoud. F and Boumekik. A (2006) Experiment l study of the beh vior of interf ci l she ring between cohesive soils nd solid m teri ls t l rge displ cement, Asi n Journ l of Civil Engineering, 07, [2] Sangeetha. P and Sumathi. R (2010) Beh viour of gl ss fibre wr pped concrete columns under uni xi l compression, Intern tion l Journ l of Adv nced Engineering Technology, 1, editor@iaeme.com

9 Technical Feasibility Study of GFRP Confined RC Driven Piles - New Construction Methodology [3] Gireesha, N.T. and K. Muthukkumaran (2011) Study on soil structure interface strength property, International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, 4, [4] Reddy. B.P, Alagusundaramoorthy. P and Sundaravadivelu. R (2009) Retrofitting of RC piles using GFRP composites, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 13, [5] IS : Classification and identification of soils for general engineering purposes. Bureau of Indian standards. [6] Y.K. Sabapathy, S. Santhanabharathi, M. Bhagirathan, P riyadarshini K.P, Manimanickam R.M, Durga Abishek Katragadda, Pown Krishnan B, Behaviour of Concrete Short Columns with GFRP Reinforcements. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(1), 2018, pp [7] Soumik Sarker, Dr. Anil Midathada and Dr. Uday K. Ravella, Dr. G. K. B. Nair Dr. S. K.K. Swami Friction and We ar Studies of Heat Treated Plain Bearing Materials. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 8(7), 2017, pp [8] L. Missoum, M. Djermane, B. Labbaci. Concrete Beams Reinforcement using Composite Materials (CFRP and GFRP). International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(7), 2017, pp editor@iaeme.com