الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 96 |  |  |
| | | from | 96 | | |
Abstract
An experimental investigation that looked into the flexural behavior of concrete beams reinforced with basalt-fiber-reinforced polymer sheets (BFRP) was presented in this work. Eight concrete beams with dimensions of 3100 mm in length, 150 mm in width, and 350 mm in depth were built and tested until they failed. The beams were put through four-point bending testing over a clear span of 2800 mm until they failed. The experimental findings and the design specifications were then compared. The ideal number of BFRP layers, the amount of time needed for development to avoid debonding failure, and the efficacy of spike and U-wrap anchorage systems were the test criteria. The following conclusions can be made in light of the test findings and the discussions that have been provided here:
BFRP composite is a green and efficient material to be used for flexural strengthening of RC beams. The load-carrying capacities for beam strengthened with two layers of BFRP sheets [B4-0.91S-2L] was increased by 29% compared to the control beam.
1. As the amount of BFRP sheets increases for flexure strengthening, the usage efficiency of BFRP will be decreased due to premature debonding. Using two layers of BFRP enhanced the flexural capacity by 27% [B3-S-2L] with BFRP rupture failure mode, while doubling the number of layers [B2-S-4L] enhanced the flexural capacity by 33% only, due to premature debonding failure mode.
2. Development length calculated from ACI 440-17 has been verified to prevent premature debonding of BFRP layers and FRP rupture occurs [B4-0.91S-2L].
3. Using BFRP sheets for strengthening of RC beams decreases the ductility by an average value of 28% when compared to the ductility of the control beam.
4. The anchorage systems affected the failure mode of the strengthened beams. Failure modes are changed from plate end delamination to FRP rupture using U-wraps, while spike anchors didn’t change the failure mode but enhanced the ultimate capacity of the beams.
5. Using U-wraps as an anchorage system increased the beam strength by 25% compared to the control beam, and the beams failed due to BFRP rupture.
6. Spike anchors of 150 mm embedded depth enhanced the strength of the beam by 23% [B8-0.54S-2L-SP150] compared to the control beam, which is slightly less effective than using U-wraps (B6-0.54S-2L-U). However, reducing the embedded depth to 75 mm was ineffective [B7-0.54S-2L-SP75], as it enhanced the beam capacity by 18% only compared to the control beam which is similar to beam (B5-0.54S-2L) without anchorage systems.
7. U-wraps have anchorage effectiveness factor kfab =2.36, which matches with (Kalfat et al. 2013), while spike anchors have anchorage effectiveness factor kfab =1.97.
8. Generally, U-wraps have higher efficiency than spike anchors. In addition to that U- wraps are easy to install and non-destructive, which makes them an ideal choice for beam strengthening applications.
5.2 Recommendations for Future Studies
1. More Investigations are needed on different BFRP products to evaluate the mechanical properties of the BFRP Laminates.
2. More studies are needed to formulate design equations for U-wraps and different anchorage systems.
3. Parameters of U-wraps such as the effective depth of U-wraps needed and orientation angle.
4. Parameters of spike anchors such as the effective depth anchor dowel and the optimum number and spacing between spikes.