Fibreglass GFRP Rebar for Concrete Reinforcement An Introduction into Applications for Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) Rebar 5522 – 36 Street Edmonton, Alberta T6B 3P3 T:780 – 448 – 9338 F:780 – 448 – 9338 info@bpcomposites.com 1–888–99–REBAR(73227)

Production Brow, Penobsquis, New Brunswick HISTORY In 1997, Dywidag-Systems International (DSI) contacted BP Automation to develop a threaded fibreglass rebar system. In 1999, the company developed threaded fibreglass manufacturing equipment. In 2000, BP Composites was formed to supply the mining industry with fibreglass rebar and rock bolts. Production Brow, Penobsquis, New Brunswick

Spalling on bridge girder ISIS 1995 In 1995 the Canadian Government formed the Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures (ISIS) to find a solution to the crumbling infrastructure of North America. Consisting of 14 Universities and 22 Researchers with a 15 year mandate to publish the CSA code Spalling on bridge girder

CONCRETE HISTORY Romans are the pioneers of the concrete revolution. Their structures have lasted close to 2000 years. Pantheon, Rome; Constructed ~126AD; worlds largest unreinforced dome.

PROBLEM IS STEEL Reinforced Concrete with Steel Rebar is the cause of the failing infrastructure Steel rebar has been used since the early 1900’s Steel expands 10x in volume when it rusts, and causes concrete to crack and fail Iron Oxide Iron

STEEL CORROSION

CORROSION Epoxy Coated Steel: Corrodes Galvanized Steel: Corrodes Stainless Steel: Susceptible Cracking with Epoxy Coated Steel, 19 Year Old Ontario Bridge, MTO 2005 Failure with Stainless Steel, Roof of 13 Year Old Swimming Pool Collapses, Switzerland Cracking with Galvanized Steel, 23 Yr Old Ontario Bridge, MTO 2007 Rusting Stainless Steel in Bridge Install Anthony Henday, Edmonton AB

ISIS DURABILITY REPORT Core-samples from Five Bridges using GFRP were analyzed in High Corrosion Environments, in two studies 5 years apart; the samples were sent to 4 different laboratories for evaluation, using different test methods; the bridges were in service up to 13 years. Joffre Bridge, Sherbrooke, QC, 12 years Crowchild Trail Bridge, Calgary, AB, 13 years (pictured) Hall's Harbour Wharf, Hall's Harbour, NS, 10 years Waterloo Creek Bridge, Vancouver Island, BC, 11 years Chatham Bridge, Chatham, ON, 13 years Rigorous testing has concluded: 100+ Year Life Expectancy for GFRP Reinforced Structures.

ISIS BRIDGE TEST RESULTS No Degradation in GFRP Reinforcement Excellent Bonding No Debonding No Microcracking No Voids No Glass Transition No Resin Microcracking No Glass Fibre Degradation No Significant Delamination No Resin Degradation No Chemical Degradation No Hydrolysis Excellent Bonding NO DEBONDING  NO MICROCRACKING NO VOIDS NO RESIN MICROCRACKING NO GLASS FIBRE DEGRADATION NO SIGNIFICANT DELAMINATION/DEBONDING  NO GLASS TRANSITION NO SIGN OF CHEMICAL DEGRADATION  OF THE RESIN NO CHEMICAL DEGRADATION (HYDROLYSIS)

ISIS FATIGUE RESISTANCE Steel: 20000 cycles GFRP: 420000 cycles Lasts 20x Longer under cyclic Loads Truck Traffic, Wave Action, Seismic 60 Ton Loading Fixture A. El-Ragaby , E. F. El-Salakawy and B. Benmokrane

THINGS TO KNOW Glass Creep Modulus of Elasticity Elongation Ultimate Tensile Strength Glass Creep GFRP not recommended for: Pre-Tensioning Post-Tensioning Dead Loads (max 25% UTS) Modulus of Elasticity ¼ that of Steel Cantilevering Loads Elongation Elongates Linearly 2% Not Ductile Yield Point TUF-BAR™ Rebar is not recommended for pre-tensioning or post-tensioning Glass creep effect limits the rating of the bar to 25% of ultimate strength Lower Modulus Additional reinforcement required in cantilevering loads compared to steel. Not suitable for constant dead loading applications Not a direct substitution for steel. Need to design specifically for application Elongation Steel Designs to Yield GFRP elongates to 2% 2% Elastic Deformation, Steel is till Yield Dr. Roger Cheng from U of A explains that you design for deformability of the structure whereas with steel you design for ductility of the reinforcement

THINGS TO KNOW 𝑤 𝑐𝑟 =2 𝑓 𝐹𝑅𝑃 𝐸 𝐹𝑅𝑃 ℎ 2 ℎ 1 𝑘 𝑏 𝑑 𝑐 2 + 𝑠/2 2 High Embedment Strength Rough Surface Sand Coating Kb Factor Crack Width < 0.023 in Sand Coating Kb = 0.8 20% Less Bar Required TUF-BAR® Sand Coating TUF-BAR™ Rebar is not recommended for pre-tensioning or post-tensioning Glass creep effect limits the rating of the bar to 25% of ultimate strength Lower Modulus Additional reinforcement required in cantilevering loads compared to steel. Not suitable for constant dead loading applications Not a direct substitution for steel. Need to design specifically for application Elongation Steel Designs to Yield GFRP elongates to 2% 2% Elastic Deformation, Steel is till Yield Dr. Roger Cheng from U of A explains that you design for deformability of the structure whereas with steel you design for ductility of the reinforcement 𝑤 𝑐𝑟 =2 𝑓 𝐹𝑅𝑃 𝐸 𝐹𝑅𝑃 ℎ 2 ℎ 1 𝑘 𝑏 𝑑 𝑐 2 + 𝑠/2 2

ISIS In 2001, ISIS Canada published guidelines for building with GFRP In 2006, ISIS Canada developed a Product Specification Manual for GFRP reinforcement for civil application.

ISIS In 2007, ISIS encouraged BP Composites to develop a family of GFRP rebar suitable for civil infrastructure.

GFRP CODES 2002 CSA code for “Design and Construction of Building Components with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers” CSA-S806 2006 CSA Highway Bridge Design Code updated for GFRP CSA-S6-06 Canada CAN/CSA-S6-06 (2006) “Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code” Canadian Standards Association, 800p CAN/CSA-S806-02 (R2007) “Design and Construction of Building Components with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers” USA ACI 440.1R-06 (2006) “Guide for the Design and Construction of Structural Concrete Reinforced with FRP Bars”

USA GFRP DESIGN GUIDELINES 2006 ACI 440 Guide for Structural Concrete Reinforced with FRP Bars ACI 440.1R 2009 AASHTO Bridge Design Guide for GFRP-Reinforced Concrete Bridge Decks and Traffic Railings AASHTO GFRP-1

CSA-S807: Manufacturing Requirements for GFRP Rebar 2010 CSA-S807 Code Specifications for FRP Rebar: Mechanical Properties Physical Properties Durability Properties Material Requirements: Vinyl Ester Resin E-type Glass or E-CR Fibreglass USA, ACI Equivalent: ACI 440.6R (2008)

CSA-S807: Mechanical Properties (Straight & Bent Bars) Cross-Sectional Area Tensile Strength Modulus of Elasticity Ultimate Elongation Bond Strength Transverse Shear Strength Cold Temperature Tensile Properties Flexural Modulus and Strength TUF-BAR® Tensile Strength Testing

CSA-S807: Physical Properties Fibre Content Coefficient of Thermal Expansion Longitudinal & Transverse Density Void Content Water Absorption Cure Ratio Glass Transition Temperature TUF-BAR® Creep Rupture Strength Test

CSA-S807 Durability Properties Alkali Resistance in High pH Solution (60C 3 months 14 pH) With Load Without Load Creep Test Creep at 10,000 Hr Creep Rupture Strength Extrapolate Creep failure to 1 million Hr Must hold >35% UTS @ 1 million Hr TUF-BAR® Creep Rupture Strength Test

COST SAVINGS Minimal Concrete Cover Fewer Concrete Additives No Concrete Treatments No Protective Membranes No Rebar Coating Repairs Lightweight Lower Transport Costs Less Handling Less Injuries (WCB/OSHA) Fast Installation Cuts with Chop Saw or Grinding Disc in Seconds TUF-BAR® Grid Grinding Cutter, Diamond-Bladed Chop Saw or Hacksaw. (No Shears) Vinyl Coated tie wire or zip ties Approx. 40 x Bar Diameter = Splice Length. No Mechanical Fasteners or Welded Splices No Patching or Corrosion Treatment

TUF-BAR® in an MRI Facility Other Features Thermal Isolator Non-Conductive Non-Magnetic Sizes #2-#8, 6mm-25mm Standard/Custom Lengths Shapes Bends Coils (1km @ 25mm bar) TUF-BAR® in an MRI Facility

TUF-BAR® in Pre-fab Bridge Deck Slabs Canada Green Building Council Member TUF-BAR® is 100% recyclable TUF-BAR® contributes: 6 LEED® Credits in Canada 7 LEED® Credits in USA Change LEED symbol to darker green, and match LEED text Blue 293, Pantone green 347 TUF-BAR® in Pre-fab Bridge Deck Slabs

COMPARISON: Steel vs TUF-BAR® Black Steel Stainless Steel TUF-BAR® Price 10x Black Steel 2x Black Steel ≃ Galvanized Steel ≃ Epoxy Coated Steel Corrosion Susceptible Non-Susceptible Weight 1/4 of Steel Tensile Strength 2x Steel/Stainless Modulus 200 GPa 40, 60 GPa Bond Strength 8-11 MPa 14 MPa Thermal Conductivity Yes No Electrical Conductivity Magnetic

LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS Composites Innovation Centre University of Manitoba: GFRP 70% cost savings over 100 years Repairs start in 10-15 years More expensive as time goes on Corrosion & Spalling

CONCLUSIONS Save Money with GFRP Codes are Published “If you look at the full life cycle cost, GFRP is far more cost-effective than metallic reinforcement” - Dr. Brahim Benmokrane NSERC Industry Research Chair Save Money with GFRP Codes are Published Live without Corrosion 100+ Years Sustainability Research teams recommend: That GFRP Be allowed as the Primary Reinforcement CAN/CSA-S6-06 “Canadian Highway Bridge Code”December 2008), 800p. CAN/CSA-S806-02 (R2007)“ Construction of Building Components with Fibre-Reinforced Polymers" Product Number 2012972
Update No. 3 was published as notification; it is now a National Standard of Canada. "If you look at the full life cycle cost, GFRP is far more cost-effective than metallic reinforcement.” Dr.Brahim Benmokrane Chair NSER Council of Canada

Bridge that didn’t use TUF-BAR® DESIGN WITH TUF-BAR® BP Composites Ltd. (T): 780-448-9338 (F): 780-448-9360 1-888-99-REBAR(73227) info@bpcomposites.com Bridge that didn’t use TUF-BAR®