Reinforced Concrete (RC) and Prestressed Concrete (PC) structures using conventional materials in aggressive exposure conditions are susceptible to corrosion. Non-corrosive reinforcement materials such as: Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) rebars; Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) strands; Stainless-Steel (SS); and Epoxy-coated steel (ECS) reinforcing bars, are attracting attention as more appropriate options in concrete structures. This paper addresses a Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis that verifies the cost performance of four different alternative reinforcement bars for the design of a demonstration FRP-RC/PC bridge in Florida, namely Halls River Bridge (HRB). The four different alternatives to be compared are namely Carbon Steel (CS), SS, FRP, and ECS, and the analysis is performed over 100-years. Additionally, a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is included in the analysis to investigate the environmental credentials of the four design alternatives. Cost sensitivity analyses over specific parameters are included. The parameters analyzed are: reinforcement cost, changes in chloride concentration levels over the bridge service life, and discount rate values. Conclusions and recommendations for standard practices and design of future alternative solutions are then presented.
Cost and environmental analyses of reinforcement alternatives for a concrete bridge
Dotelli G.;
2020-01-01
Abstract
Reinforced Concrete (RC) and Prestressed Concrete (PC) structures using conventional materials in aggressive exposure conditions are susceptible to corrosion. Non-corrosive reinforcement materials such as: Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) rebars; Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) strands; Stainless-Steel (SS); and Epoxy-coated steel (ECS) reinforcing bars, are attracting attention as more appropriate options in concrete structures. This paper addresses a Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis that verifies the cost performance of four different alternative reinforcement bars for the design of a demonstration FRP-RC/PC bridge in Florida, namely Halls River Bridge (HRB). The four different alternatives to be compared are namely Carbon Steel (CS), SS, FRP, and ECS, and the analysis is performed over 100-years. Additionally, a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is included in the analysis to investigate the environmental credentials of the four design alternatives. Cost sensitivity analyses over specific parameters are included. The parameters analyzed are: reinforcement cost, changes in chloride concentration levels over the bridge service life, and discount rate values. Conclusions and recommendations for standard practices and design of future alternative solutions are then presented.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Cadenazzi et al - invited for Special Issue IALCCE2018 - FINAL (Recuperato).pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: final revised version
:
Post-Print (DRAFT o Author’s Accepted Manuscript-AAM)
Dimensione
1.42 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.42 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
P260. Cost and environmental analyses of reinforcement alternatives for a concrete bridge_SIE_2019.pdf
Accesso riservato
Descrizione: articolo finale
:
Publisher’s version
Dimensione
3.33 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
3.33 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.