Engineering, 2013, 5, 865-869

Published Online November 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/eng)

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/eng.2013.511105

Enhancement in Elastic Modulus of GFRP Bars by

Material Hybridization
Dong-Woo Seo*, Ki-Tae Park, Young-Jun You, Hyeong-Yeol Kim
Structural Engineering Research Division, Korea Institute of Construction Technology, Goyang, Republic of Korea
Email: *dwseo@kict.re.kr

Received August 29, 2013; revised September 29, 2013; accepted October 10, 2013

Copyright © 2013 Dong-Woo Seo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

ABSTRACT
Fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcing bars for concrete structure has been extensively investigated for last two
decades and a number of FRP bars are commercially available. However, one of shortcomings of the existing FRP bars
is its low elastic modulus, if glass fibers are used (i.e., GFRP). The main objective of this study using the concept of
material hybridization is to develop a viable hybrid FRP bar for concrete structures, especially for marine and port con-
crete structures. The purposes of hybridization are to increase the elastic modulus of GFRP bar with acceptable tensile
strength. Two types of hybrid GFRP bar were considered in the development: GFRP crust with steel core and GFRP bar
with steel wires dispersed over the cross-section. Using E-glass fibers and unsaturated polyester resins, the hybrid
GFRP bar samples of 13 mm in diameter were pultruded and tested for tensile properties. The effect of hybridization on
tensile properties of GFRP bars was evaluated by comparing the results of tensile test with those of non-hybrid GFRP
bars. The results of this study indicated that the elastic modulus of the hybrid GFRP bar was increased by up to 270
percent by the material hybridization. The results of the test and the future recommendations are summarized in this
paper. To ensure long-term durability of the hybrid GFRP bars in waterfront structure applications, the individual and
combined effects of environmental conditions on hybrid GFRP rebar itself as well as on the interface between rebar and
concrete should be accessed.

Keywords: FRP; Glass Fibers; Tensile Test; Elastic Modulus; Pultrusion; Material Hybridization; Marine Structures

1. Introduction glass fiber. Use of glass fiber can be more beneficial ma-
terial in the initial cost. However, low modulus of elas-
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) is widely used as an
ticity is a main disadvantage of using glass fiber, which
alternative material to resolve the corrosion problem of
attains the elastic modulus less than a quarter of steel.
the steel reinforcement and to increase the service life of
This leads to excessive deflection when FRP rebar was
reinforced concrete (RC) structures. FRP rebar can pro-
used as the reinforcement for flexural members. With
vide high tensile strength as well as good resistance to
this reason, the concept of “hybridization” was arisen for
corrosion comparing to the steel reinforcement [1] for
the FRP rebar to overcome their shortcomings. The hy-
RC structures, especially ones exposed to corrosive en-
bridization of FRP has been investigated by many re-
vironments such as sea water. However, FRP has not
searchers [2-5].
been actively applied as the reinforcement or structural
This paper discusses the recent development of FRP
materials in civil engineering structures due to its low
hybrid bars using glass fiber and an experimentation of
elastic modulus and brittle fracture.
their tensile properties. The purpose of this study is to
FRP is mainly composed of fibers and resin. Glass and
identify a feasible material hybridization of the glass
carbon are commonly used fiber materials. Carbon fiber
fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) reinforcing bar to be
provides even higher tensile strength and more elastic
used for concrete structures. Two different materials,
modulus than steel. These are advantageous features of
mainly the combination of fibers and steel within the
using carbon fiber in a structural point of view but not in cross-section of FRP bar, were considered for the hybrid
economics, since its price is almost ten times higher than FRP bars. Two types of the hybrid GFRP bar were con-
*
Corresponding author. sidered in the development: a) GFRP crust with steel

Open Access ENG

866 D.-W. SEO ET AL.

core; b) GFRP bar with steel wires dispersed over the total of 13 numbers of 2 mm steel wire were inserted
cross-section. with volume fraction 30.8% for type C. In case of type D,
GFRP rebar with a circular cross-section was consid- 9 mm steel rebar was inserted into GFRP to be an outer
ered. Both vinylester and unsaturated polyester were diameter equal to 13 mm, steel volume fraction was
utilized as resin materials. For comparison purpose, the 47.9%.
existing GFRP bar developed and fabricated at Korea The hybrid bars were fabricated with a circular cross-
Institute of Construction Technology (KICT, [6-8]) and section of diameter equal to approximately 13 mm. E-
also two commercially available GFRP bars (Aslan and glass fiber (SE1200-2200TEX, Owens Corning Korea
V-rod [9,10]) were tested. The effect of material hy- [11]), steel wire (KS D3510 C-type, Korea) and steel
bridization on tensile properties of GFRP bars was rebar (nominal strength with 400 MPa) were used in this
evaluated by comparing the results of tensile test with study. Vinylester and unsaturated polyester are known as
those of the non-hybrid bars. effective resins for the pultrusion process of fabrication
because they offer economical advantage, low viscosity,
2. Development of Hybrid GFRP Bars and rapid hardening. The material properties of the fiber
This study suggests two types of hybrid GFRP bars con- and resins are provided in Table 2.
sidering in the development: a) GFRP crust with steel
core; b) GFRP bar with steel wires dispersed over the
3. Experiments
cross-section. Using E-glass fibers and unsaturated poly- 3.1. Tensile Test
ester resins, the hybrid GFRP bar samples of 13 mm in
The tensile tests on the specimens were carried out in
diameter were pultruded and tested for tensile properties.
accordance with ASTM D 3916 [12]. The total length of
Figure 1 shows the pultrusion process designed by KICT.
the specimens was 2000 mm and the gauge length was
Vinylester (VE) and unsaturated polyester (PE) were
1070 mm. An UTM with a capacity of 1000 kN was used.
used as resins.
Strain gauges were attached at the center and the quarter
Table 1 summarizes four cross-section types consid-
of the specimens within the gauge length. The specimens
ered in this study, categorized by steel volume fraction
were fixed both at the top and the bottom with steel grip
from 0% to approximately 48%. Type A (e.g., KICT,
adapters shown in Figure 2. Mortar was filled into the
Aslan, and V-Rod) was selected as a reference case that
was considered as a non-hybrid GFRP bar. For the de- Table 2. Material properties of fiber and resins [8].
signing purpose, the tensile strength of the hybrid GFRP
bar was assumed to be 800 MPa. Tensile strength Elastic modulus Elongation
Material
(MPa) (GPa) (%)
For type B, diameter equal to 4 mm steel bar was in-
serted with volume fraction 9.5% in the cross-section. A E-glass fiber 2410 79.0 3.04

Vinylester resin 9 3.7 7.00

Unsaturated
62 3.1
polyester resin
Steel wire 16.5 200

Steel rebar 400 200

Figure 1. Fabricating method for GFRP hybrid bars [6]: (a)

Detailed view of braiding method; (b) Pultrusion process
while braiding.

Table 1. Type of FRP hybrid bar samples.

Type A B C D
Steel volume fraction by
None 9.5 30.8 47.9
cross-section area (%)

Figure 2. Test setup and fracture types: (a) Tensile test

Cross-Section
setup; (b) Hybrid GFRP fracture; (c) Aslan fracture; (d) V-
Rod fracture.

Open Access ENG

 D.-W. SEO ET AL. 867

grip adapters and cured for two weeks to obtain the com- Table 4. Results of tensile tests at the location L/2.
pressive strength approximately 60 MPa. Figure 2 shows
Elastic Modulus (E) Tensile Strength (P)
the tensile test with the loading rate equal to 5 mm/min Case
[13]. GPa N (E) MPa N (P)
Brittle fractures of GFRP bars, including Case A, A 49.6 1.00 754.4 1.00
Asaln, and V-rod were seen in Figure 3 one of short-
comings of FRP was a brittle fracture and this issue was B 53.7 1.08 762.1 0.94
improved by material hybridization proved in this study. C 98.3 1.98 688.2 0.85
Table 3 summarizes the list of specimens that tested in D-1 129.2 2.60 - -
this study. 7 cases of tested specimens were selected for D-2 133.2 2.69 715.4 0.88
Aslan 52.5 1.06 601.8 0.74
tensile test associated with 4 types explained in Table 1.
V-Rod 46.2 0.93 574.6 0.71
A total of 21 samples consisting 3 specimens for each
case was tested.
Cases A through C were corresponding to the types A, found for cases B and C after steel wire was likely
B, and C in Table 1. For cases D-1 and D-2, type D in yielded earlier than GFRP. The bilinear type of fracture
Table 1 was subdivided into two types depending on a behavior was detected for cases D-1 and D-2. In these
steel type; Case D-1 with circular shape of rebar and D-2 cases, failure mechanism is clearly dominated by steel
with the deformed rebar. Cases A through D-2 were de- rebar in the initial stage and GFRP holds the applying
veloped and fabricated by KICT [6]. Two commercially loads after approximately 350 MPa.
available GFRP bars (i.e., Aslan and V-Rod, [9,10]) were Most of the specimens failed in the gauge length, but
also considered and their tensile strength was compared some of them presented ruptures at the grip adapters. The
to other hybrid GFRP bars developed at KICT. averaged value of the three specimens for each case re-
sults, measured at the location L/2, was presented in Ta-
3.2. Results and Discussion ble 4. A negligible difference of strains between the two
locations, L/2 and L/4, was found. In Table 4, values for
The tensile strength of the specimen can be calculated by both elastic modulus (E) and maximum tensile strength
dividing the measured maximum load by the cross-sec-
(P) were normalized to case A for comparison purpose.
tional area of the GFRP bar (Ahybrid). The elastic modulus
Case A was considered as a non-hybrid GFRP bar de-
of the GFRP bar (Ehybrid) can be given by the following
veloped at KICT.
expression as recommended in [13].
Enhancement in elastic modulus was investigated by

Ehybrid 
 P1  P2  . (1)
material hybridization up to 269%. However, regarding
1  2  Ahybrid the tensile strength, a small reduction was found for all
cases. This reduction may occur due to damage, the size
In Equation (1) P1 and P2 are the applied loads corre- of specimen, the gripping method, or slip between two
sponding to 50% and 25% of the ultimate load respec- materials (i.e., GFRP and steel). More detailed study for
tively, and ɛ1 and ɛ2 are the corresponding strains. this issue is planned by the authors.
Table 4 and Figures 3 and 4 summarize the result of Cases D-1 and D-2 shows the highest hybrid effect for
tensile tests. Figure 3 shows a linear increment of elastic the GFRP bar in terms of elastic modulus with steel frac-
The linear stress-strain relationship of the specimens was tion of 47.9%.
found for Case A, Aslan and V-rod, in which no material The commercial GFRP bars, Aslan and V-Rod pro-
hybridization was considered. vided maximum tensile strength approximately 30%
In these cases the brittle fracture was occurred shown lower than “KICT GFRP bar” while elastic modulus was
Figures 1(c) and (d). Small change of the curvature was a similar value supposed to be around 50 GPa.

Table 3. List of specimens for tensile test. 4. Conclusions

Case Description In this study material hybridization of GFRP bar was
A D13 with GFRP only considered to overcome its low elastic modulus to be
used as reinforcement for concrete structures built in the
B D13 with GFRP and D4 steel wire inserted
C D13 with GFRP and D2 × 13EA (steel wire) inserted
corrosive environment. The existing GFRP bar devel-
D-1 D13 with GFRP and D9 rebar inserted oped at Korea Institute of Construction Technology
D-2 D13 with GFRP and D9 deformed rebar inserted (KICT [6]) was hybridized by adding steel as a high
Aslan D13 Aslan 100 [9] strength material. Various combinations of mixing ratio
V-Rod D13 V-Rod GFRP [10] between GFRP and steel were investigated.

Open Access ENG

868 D.-W. SEO ET AL.

Case A Case B
1000 1000

800 800
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)
600 600

400 400

200 200
at L/2 at L/2
at L/4 at L/4
0 0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
Strain Strain
(a) (b)
Case C Case D-1
1000 1000

800 800
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)
600 600

400 400

200 200
at L/2 at L/2
at L/4 at L/4
0 0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
Strain Strain
(c) (d)
Case D-2 Aslan V-Rod
600 800 700

700 600
500
600
500
400
Stress (MPa)
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)

500
400
300 400
300
300
200
200
200
100 100
at L/2 100 at L/2 at L/2
at L/4 at L/4 at L/4
0 0 0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0 0.005 0.01 0.015
Strain Strain Strain
(e) (f) (g)

Figure 3. Stress vs. strain curves at the location L/2 and L/4 for hybrid GFRP specimens: (a) Case A; (b) Case B; (c) Case C;
(d) Case D-1; (e) Case D-2; (f) Aslan; (g) V-Rod.

140 As a result of tensile test, the elastic modulus of the

Case D-2
hybrid rods was increased by 8% to 269% with material
120 hybridization in comparison with the non-hybrid GFRP
Elastic Modulus, GPa

bar. However, a small reduction of tensile strength was

100 Case C
found. This reduction may occur due to damage, mis-
placement of fibers during the fabrication, the size of
80 specimen, the gripping method, or slip between two ma-
terials (i.e., GFRP and steel). More detailed study for this
issue is planned by the authors.
60
Case B One of shortcomings of FRP was a brittle fracture and
Case A this issue was improved to “pseudo-ductile” behavior by
40
0 10 20 30 40 50 material hybridization.
Steel Volume Fraction, % The hybrid effect was the largest where steel was
Figure 4. Relationship between steel volume fraction in the added the most in the section. Furthermore, the incre-
cross-section and elastic modulus. ment of elastic modulus was proportional to the quantity

Open Access ENG

 D.-W. SEO ET AL. 869

of steel added in the section. [4] C. E. Bakis, A. Nanni, J. A. Terosky and S. W. Koehler,
Further investigation should be conducted to study the “Self-Monitoring, Pseudo-Ductile, Hybrid FRP Rein-
forcement Rods for Concrete Applications,” Composites
effect of the stress redistribution mechanism on the
Science and Technology, Vol. 61, No. 6, 2001, pp. 815-
“pseudo-ductile” behavior regarding to the quantity as 823. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(00)00184-6
well as the dispersion of steel. Economic feasibility of
[5] L. Taerwe, “Non-Metallic FRP Reinforcement for Con-
the hybrid FRP bars should also be investigated. crete Structures: Proceedings of the Second International
Rilem Symposium,” Taylor & Francis, London, 1995.
5. Acknowledgements [6] Korea Institute of Construction Technology (KICT).
This research (2013 Basic Research: Development of www.kict.re.kr
Hybrid FRP Bars for Concrete Waterfront Structures) [7] Korea Institure of Construction Technology (KICT), “De-
sign and Construction Technology for Concrete Struc-
was supported by Korea Institute of Construction Tech-
tures Using Advanced Composite Materials: FRP Rebars
nology and funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT, and and Grids (in Korean),” Korea Research Council of Pub-
Future Planning of Korean Government. lic Science and Technology, Interim Report, 2004.
[8] Y.-J. You, Y.-H. Park, H.-Y. Kim and J.-S. Park, “Hybrid
REFERENCES Effect on Tensile Properties of FRP Rods with Various
Material Compositions,” Composite Structures, Vol. 80,
[1] A. A. Mufti, M.-A. Erki and L. G. Jaeger, “Advanced No. 1, 2007, pp. 117-122.
Composites Materials with Application to Bridges,” Ca- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2006.04.065
nadian Society of Civil Engineers, Montreal, 1991. [9] ASLAN. www.aslanfrp.com
[2] G. Kretsis, “A Review of the Tensile, Compressive, Flex- [10] V-Rod. www.vrod.ca
ural and Shear Properties of Hybrid Fibre-Reinforced
Plastics,” Composites, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1987, pp. 13-23. [11] Owens Corning. http://www.owenscorning.co.kr/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-4361(87)90003-6 [12] ASTM. D 3916, “Standard Test Method for Tensile
[3] K. D. Jones, A. T. Di Benedetto, “Fiber Fracture in Hy- Properties of Pultruded Glass-Fiber-Reinforced Plastic
brid Composite Systems,” Composites Science and Tech- Rods,” 2002.
nology, Vol. 51, No. 1, 1994, pp. 53-62. [13] CSA, “Test Method for Tensile Properties of FRP Rein-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(94)90156-2 forcement,” Canadian Standard Association, 2002.

Open Access ENG