Greetings, readers!
It will be about the hackneyed, but still the topic of using polymer composite reinforcement. In order not to be unfounded in front of the audience, I bring to your attention several scientific articles published in engineering journals from different parts of Russia. Each article summarizes the experiments and tests carried out in terms of the use of composite reinforcement.
The scientific work of candidates of technical sciences serves as an evidence base. All materials in this publication are in the public domain.
Further in the text you will come across the designation PKA - this stands for polymer composite reinforcement.
So 1st document:
Conclusion of the article:
Summing up the results of the experiments, the article says that the nature of destruction from pulling the reinforcement was detected. This is one of the most serious problems. Composite has much lower adhesion to concrete than steel. In addition, steel reinforcement has many ways to strengthen the anchoring - bend the rod into a loop, make a hook, flatten the end into a "mushroom", weld cross-members, etc. In addition to poor adhesion, composite reinforcement has no options for reinforcing anchoring at all.
2nd document:
Conclusion of the article:
This conclusion mentions the second group of limit states, which is not determinative for use! And the II group of limiting states is deflections and opening of cracks. All this is due to the fact that the modulus of elasticity of the composite reinforcement is very low, and the structures made with such reinforcement are not rigid enough. This is exactly where it is said that if the stiffness is not at the forefront and economically profitable is achieved - then PKA can be used in structures, otherwise the use is not recommended!
3rd document: paper prepared for the 2011 symposium candidate of technical sciences.
Conclusion:
The conclusion says that such fittings can be used where it is necessary to obtain certain properties that are not attainable when using steel: radio transparency, chemical resistance, dielectric properties.
And further it is mentioned "it is necessary to develop building codes, rules, requirements, etc.". Why is it said? But because these documents do not exist in nature! As a result, we buy and use PCA at our own peril and risk.
4th document:
Conclusion of the article:
If you read the conclusion in detail, then this article deals the main blow to the composite reinforcement: surprise structural failure and destruction of resins at 100 ° C with a small, and, accordingly, limitation of the use in load-bearing constructions.
5th article:
Conclusions of the article:
In conclusion, I would like to note that not all scientific research works are presented in my article, there are more, found by me, about 10 materials and also in open access, built on research and experiments with PKA.
Therefore, it is better not to lay this type of reinforcement in critical structures, but to use a blind area, curtain walls of septic tanks, concreting driveways into the courtyard, etc.
I hope you found this article helpful. Thanks for attention!
Source of material: "Engineering and construction portal about building structures". Author: Anton Weber
Why is the main standard size of rolled metal products 11.7 m long?
Why can't the ball valve be opened halfway?