Durability Performance and Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Concrete Beams Reinforced with Various Reinforcement

dc.contributor.advisorEl-Hacha, Raafat
dc.contributor.authorAmiri, Mouhammad Abdullah
dc.contributor.committeememberDuncan, Neil A.
dc.contributor.committeememberKhoshnazar, Rahil
dc.date2019-06
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-20T16:46:44Z
dc.date.available2019-02-20T16:46:44Z
dc.date.issued2019-02
dc.description.abstractIn the context of efficiency, sustainability, and life-cycle cost, reinforcement durability became a significant concern. Long-term costs are bringing the attention of many countries and companies who aim to minimize them maximally. Subsequently, researchers started concentrating on the study of the durability of materials to enhance the sustainability and resiliency of future structures. The primary objective of this study is to examine the durability and performance of concrete beams reinforced with different types of materials exposed to identical environmental conditions and loads. Therefore, several types of corrosion-resistant reinforcing rebars including Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) (Glass, Carbon, and Basalt), Martensitic Micro-Composite Formable Steel (MMFX), and Stainless steel, in addition to the conventional uncoated black steel for comparison purposes were examined. The research studied the performance of 28 beams in total, the beams were 2 metres long with 150x305 mm cross section, twenty-one beams were subjected to environmental conditions, and seven were used as controls. The exposed beams were subjected to a sustained load equivalent to 40% of their ultimate capacity, exposed to spraying salt water with 3.5% sodium chloride (NaCl) concentration, and subjected to a total of 195 freeze-thaw cycles with temperature ranging between +34°C and –34°C equivalent to 5 years in real conditions. After the exposure, the beams were acclimatized to room temperature and together with the control unexposed specimens were tested for ultimate capacity. No one material was found to be superior in all of the studied parameters, the beams presented differences in the performance such as load-deflection, deviation from linearity, ductility, crack pattern, in addition to the strength loss, and cost. The initial cost of the beams was calculated, and the results showed more than 60% difference for specific types of rebars in comparison to conventional steel reinforced beams.en_US
dc.identifier.citationAmiri, M. A. (2019). Durability performance and life cycle cost analysis of concrete beams reinforced with various reinforcement (Master's thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada). Retrieved from https://prism.ucalgary.ca.en_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/36147
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1880/109910
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisher.facultySchulich School of Engineeringen_US
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Calgaryen
dc.rightsUniversity of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission.en_US
dc.subjectDurabiityen_US
dc.subjectLCCAen_US
dc.subjectFRPen_US
dc.subjectMMFXen_US
dc.subjectReinforced concreteen_US
dc.subject.classificationEngineering--Civilen_US
dc.titleDurability Performance and Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Concrete Beams Reinforced with Various Reinforcementen_US
dc.typemaster thesisen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineEngineering – Civilen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Calgaryen_US
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Science (MSc)en_US
ucalgary.item.requestcopytrue
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ucalgary_2019_amiri_mouhammad.pdf
Size:
68.58 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Thesis File
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.74 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: