20320140502015

225 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
225
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

20320140502015

  1. 1. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 146 INFLUENCE OF THERMAL DISTRESS ON STRENGTH OF LAMINATED CEMENT COMPOSITES Md. Zakaria Hossain (Associate Professor, Department of Environmental Science and Technology, Graduate School of Bioresources, Mie University, 1577 Kurima Machiya-cho, Tsu city, Mie 514-8507, Japan ABSTRACT Thermal distress such as variation of temperature that occurred regularly due to the day-night cycles may cause the reduction of service life of building materials made of laminated cement composites. Influence of thermal distress on flexural ultimate strength of laminated cement composites has been investigated experimentally. Five types of composite panels containing reinforcement layers of one, two, three, four and five have been constructed and tested. Five stages of thermal distresses such as zero cycles (28 days curing), 30 cycles, 60 cycles, 90 cycles and 120 cycles have been applied on the specimens. Each cycle consisted of 48 hours duration having 24 hours in oven of 110o C and 24 hours in room temperature of 15o C. For comparison, control specimens without thermal distress having same cycles of thermal distress consisted of 24 hours water curing and 24 hours 15o C room temperature have been demonstrated. Test results revealed that the flexural ultimate strength of the laminated cement composites increased with the increase in cycles for all the specimens. It was observed that the thermal distress altered the behavior of laminated cement composites and lead to strength increment as compared to control specimens. Results obtained are encouraging especially for the manufacture of building components with laminated cement composites where fluctuation of temperatures occurs. Keywords: Laminated Composites, Ultimate Strength, Thermal Distress, Flexural Behavior I. INTRODUCTION Laminated cement composites offer a variety of advantages over traditional construction materials such as it has improved dimensional stability, moisture resistance, decay resistance and fire resistance when compared to wood; has enabled faster, lower cost, lightweight construction when compared to masonry; has improved toughness, ductility, flexural capacity and crack resistance when INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET) ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print) ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.asp Journal Impact Factor (2014): 3.7120 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com IJCIET ©IAEME
  2. 2. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 147 compared to cement-based materials without fibers or reinforcement [1]-[5]. Thermal distress such as variation of temperature that occurred regularly due to the day-night cycles may cause the reduction of service life of the composite structures [6]-[9]. It is necessary to investigate the behavior of such kind of composites for its effective design and construction [10]-[15]. Flexural load- deflection behavior as well as flexural ultimate strength plays a vital role on structures during construction and on service after the construction [16]-[20]. It should be pointed out here that in spite of the volume of information available, little or no research work is reported in the literature on the effect of heating cycles on the flexural ultimate strength of laminated composite materials [20]-[27]. The objectives of the present study are as follows: 1) to study the influence of thermal distress of laminated cement composite under elevated temperature, 2) to compare the flexural ultimate strength of laminated cement composites treated under thermal distress and normal conditions. In view of the above objectives, an experimental investigation was carried out for two groups of specimens called as control and thermal distress. Thermal distress used in this investigation was applied in five stages heating period separated by varying number of heating cycles. Each heating cycle was 48hours in which 24 hours in oven of 110o C and 24 hour in room temperature of 15o C. On the other hand, another group of specimens (control specimens in water curing) were prepared and investigated having same cycles of thermal distress in order to verify the results between the heating and non- heating specimens. Basic curing for 28 days in water is considered as zero cycle. After that the heating and non-heating cycles were demonstrated. Each group of specimens consisted of five stages of number of cycles such as zero cycles (28 days curing), 30 cycles, 60 cycles, 90 cycles and 120 cycles. The layers of the laminated composite were varying as one-layer, two-layers, three-layers, four-layers and five-layers. This provided the reinforcement ratio as 0.375%, 0.75%, 1.13%, 1.5% and 1.88% for the laminated composites containing layer of one to five respectively. II. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM The details of the experimental program are given in Table 1 and Table 2. The tests were carried out on two identical specimens for each group with heating and curing cycles. For better comparison, another two identical specimens with same cycles in natural drying and curing were also used without heating. Therefore, four specimens were used in a batch. For the heating group, each cycle was 48 hours duration consisting of 24 hours of heating in oven with constant temperature of 1100 C and 24 hours of wetting in fresh water. On the other hand, for another group (here called as the air drying in room temperature), each cycle was 48 hours duration consisting of 24 hours of air- drying in room temperature of 150 C and 24 hours of wetting in fresh water. A total of 100 specimens were prepared, 50 specimens for heating and curing cycles and another 50 specimens for natural air- drying and curing cycles. The number of reinforcements layers, chosen for this investigation were 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; whereas the thickness of the test panels was kept constant as 30 mm for all the specimens to investigates the influence of the effective reinforcement on the flexural ultimate strength of the laminated composites.
  3. 3. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 148 TABLE I CONTROL – NON-HEATING GROUP EACH CYCLE CONSISTS OF 48 HOURS DURATION HAVING 24 HOURS IN WATER CURING AND 24 HOUR IN ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 150 C (C MEANS CONTROL SPECIMENS) Non-heating Cyclesa One- layer Two- layers Three- layers Four- layers Five- layers C0-cycle Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels C30-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels C60-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels C90-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels C120-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels a C0-cycle = 28-days water curing + 2 days room drying, C30-cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 30-days water curing, C60-cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 60-days water curing, C90- cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 90-days water curing, C120-cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 120- days water curing TABLE II THERMAL DISTRESS- HEATING GROUP EACH CYCLE CONSISTS OF 48 HOURS DURATION HAVING 24 HOURS IN OVEN OF 1100 C AND 24 HOUR IN ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 150 C (H MEANS HEATING) Heating Cyclesb One- layer Two- layers Three- layers Four- layers Five- layers H0-cycle Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels H30-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels H60-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels H90-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels H120-cycles Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels Two panels b H0-cycle = 28-days water curing + 2 days room drying, H30-cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 30-days heating, H60-cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 60-days heating, H90- cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 90-days heating, H120-cycles = 28-days curing + 2 days drying + 120- days heating
  4. 4. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 149 III. MATERIALS AND METHODS A. Layer Properties The layers of the laminated cement composite were made using the fine wire mesh as shown in Fig. 1. The properties of the reinforcement obtained through the experiments are given in Table 3. Fig. 1: Reinforcement used for making layer in laminated composite TABLE III PROPERTIES OF REINFORCEMENT USED IN LAMINATION Properties Values Diameter (mm) 1.00 C/c spacing (mm) 10.00 Young's modulus (kN/mm2 ) 138.00 Poison's ratio 0.28 B. Mortar and Mix proportions Layer Properties Ordinary Portland cement and river sand with maximum size of 2.38 mm was used. The fineness modulus of the sand was found to be 2.33. The water to cement ratio and cement to sand ratio were kept as 0.5 by weight for all the mixes. In each casting, two elements of plain mortar of size 100×200 mm with thickness of 30 mm and three cylinders of diameter 100 mm and length 120 mm were also cast and tested to find out the compressive strength, modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio of the mortar. The details of the mortar properties obtained in the laboratory experiments are given in Table 4. TABLE IV PROPERTIES OF MORTAR USED IN LAMINATION Properties Values Compressive strength (N/mm2 ) 27.84 Young's modulus (kN/mm2 ) 15.47 Poison's ratio 0.19 IV. CASTING OF TEST PANELS The test panels were cast in wooden moulds with open tops as shown in Fig.2. Each of the four sidewalls and the base of the mould were detachable to facilitate the demoulding process after its initial setting. At first, the mortar layer of 2 mm thickness was spread in the wooden mould and on
  5. 5. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 150 this base layer the first mesh was laid. Another layer of mortar then covered the mesh layer, and the process was repeated until the specimen contains the desired number of mesh layers. Thus, the mesh layers, leaving a cover of 2 mm at the top and bottom surfaces, equally divided the thickness of 30 mm. The specimens were air-dried for 24 hours for initial setting and then immersed in water for curing. The specimens were removed from water after 28 days and were air-dried for 48 hours in room temperature of about 150 C and relative humidity of about 40%. The 28 days curing period with 48 hours room drying is common for all the specimens which is considered as the zero cycle. The actual cycles of thawing/wetting and drying/wetting were started after this basic period. Fig. 2: Cast of laminated cement composite V. TESTING OF PANELS Panels were tested under one-way flexure with their two edges simply supported over a span of 360 mm. The distance between the two loading points is 120 mm with moment arms of 120 mm at both sides of the loading points. The tests were performed with a loading speed of 1mm per minute and the readings were taken at an interval of 0.1 kN. At various stages of loading, the deflections were measured with the mechanical dial gauges having a least count of 0.01 mm at the mid-section of the element. A proving ring of 50 kN capacity was used for accurate measurement of the applied loads. Before testing, all the elements were painted white for clearly observation of the cracking patterns. In general, most of the elements produced initial cracks (visible to the naked eye) without any cracking noise. The crack patterns of some tested elements in flexure are shown in Fig.3 and Fig.4. Fig. 3: Cracking patterns of composites under normal curing (control) (W means water)
  6. 6. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 151 Fig. 4: Cracking patterns of composites under thermal distress (H means heating) VI. CALCULATION OF LAYER REINFORCEMENT The layer reinforcement of the cement composite defined as the ratio of the area of reinforcement to the total area of specimen in the same direction. The percent effective reinforcement Rr for cement composite element in any direction can be written as tD NA R L r 100 = (1) where, A is the area of reinforcement strands in square centimeters, NL is the number of layers, t is the thickness of the cement composite in centimeters and D is the center to center distance of mesh wires in centimeters. The numerical value 100 has mainly appeared due to conversion of effective reinforcement in percent. By using the above equation, the effective reinforcement of laminated cement composites containing one, two, three, four and five layers are calculated as 0.375%, 0.75%, 1.25%, 1.5% and 1.875%, respectively. VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The flexural ultimate strength of control specimens and thermal distress are given in Table 5 and Table 6 respectively. It is observed that the flexural ultimate strength of laminated cement composites are increased with the increase in number of layers of reinforcement as well as the number of cycles for both non-heating and heating conditions. TABLE VI FLEXURAL ULTIMATE STRENGTH OF CONTROL SPECIMENS Lc 0 Cycle 30 Cycles 60 Cycles 90 Cycles 120 Cycles L1 10.30 10.25 11.09 10.60 12.30 L1 10.70 11.15 10.87 13.00 12.70 L2 10.01 10.30 10.78 11.40 12.09 L2 11.70 11.54 11.32 12.30 13.13 L3 10.90 9.87 13.20 12.01 12.80 L3 11.04 12.11 9.82 11.93 12.70 L4 11.30 11.00 10.23 12.05 12.40 L4 11.50 12.26 13.35 12.51 13.44 L5 13.06 13.00 13.11 13.80 12.70 L5 11.64 11.86 11.83 11.24 13.26 Lc = Layer, Values are in N/mm2
  7. 7. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 152 TABLE VII FLEXURAL ULTIMATE STRENGTH OF SPECIMENS UNDER THERMAL DISTRESS Lc (0 Cycle) 30 Cycles 60 Cycles 90 Cycles 120 Cycles L1 8.90 12.02 13.40 14.20 17.40 L1 12.10 11.18 11.80 14.00 15.00 L2 10.30 10.09 13.60 13.90 17.80 L2 11.60 13.85 12.06 15.14 15.32 L3 10.23 11.56 12.80 14.62 17.01 L3 12.37 17.72 13.24 15.36 16.95 L4 12.41 13.09 12.30 15.76 16.50 L4 11.35 13.01 15.36 14.92 17.88 L5 13.06 12.50 15.07 16.80 16.09 L5 11.64 15.06 13.09 15.14 19.87 Lc = Layer, Values are in N/mm2 For clear perception, the average values of flexural ultimate strength are plotted in Fig.5 and Fig.6 for laminated cement composites of control specimens and thermal distress, respectively. Figures 5 and 6 indicated that the average values of flexural ultimate strength are higher for specimens under thermal distress than that of control specimens. This is obvious due to the maturity of mortar matrix with the increase in number of cycles for both control and thermal distress. It is interesting to note that increase in ultimate strength is uniform for specimens under thermal distress whereas it is little more for control specimens at reinforcement 1.875%. Fig. 5: Ultimate strength vs. laminate reinforcement for control specimens Fig. 6: Ultimate strength vs. laminate reinforcement for thermal distress 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 0.000 0.375 0.750 1.125 1.500 1.875 2.250 Rr(%) σu(MPa) 0 cycle 30 cycles 60 cycles 90 cycles 120 cycles 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 0.000 0.375 0.750 1.125 1.500 1.875 2.250 Rr(%) σu(MPa) 0 cycle 30 cycles 60 cycles 90 cycles 120 cycles
  8. 8. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 153 In order to find out the difference of the strength increment between the control and thermal distress, the increment in ultimate strength with the number of cycles for both the control and thermal distress are shown in Figs.7-11 for layer reinforcement of 0.375%, 0.75%, 1.125%, 1.50% and 1.875% respectively. Fig. 7: Relationships of strength increment and number of cycles for 0.375% layer reinforcement Fig. 8: Relationships of strength increment and number of cycles for 0.75% layer reinforcement Fig. 9: Relationships of strength increment and number of cycles for 1.125% layer reinforcement The relationships of strength increment with the variation of lumber of layers and number of cycles for depicted in Figs.7-11 showed a significant increment in strength for thermal distress as compared to control specimens. Both the curves for control and thermal distress are smooth nature with the increase in number of cycle for layer reinforcement of 0.375%, 1.125% and 1.50%. In case 0.75% and 1.875% layer reinforcement, a slight fluctuation is observed at 60 cycles. However, this is 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 Number of thermal cycle (N) Increamentinσu(MPa) Control Thermal distress 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 Number of thermal cycle (N) Increamentinσu(MPa) Control Thermal distress 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 Number of thermal cycle (N) Increamentinσu(MPa) Control Thermal distress
  9. 9. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 154 not significant and thermal distress did not show any loss of composite action due to thawing effect. It should be noted that the composite action remained increase at the higher reinforcement under thermal distress. Fig. 10: Relationships of strength increment and number of cycles for 1.50% layer reinforcement Fig. 11: Relationships of strength increment and number of cycles for 1.875% layer reinforcement To be more clarified, the rate of increment in ultimate strength with the increase in thermal distress is plotted in Fig.12. As it can be observed, the rate of increment of ultimate strength is more for higher percentage of layer reinforcement. This clearly indicated that the bond of composite between the reinforcement and mortar increased with the increase in layer reinforcement and number of cycles. As discussed earlier, this may be owing to the strength-gained by the mortar component with the increase in cycles. Fig. 12: Rate of strength increment vs. number of cycles for different layer reinforcement 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 Number of thermal cycle (N) Increamentinσu(MPa) Control Thermal distress 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 Number of thermal cycle (N) Increamentinσu(MPa) Control Thermal distress y = 0.0287x y = 0.0316x y = 0.0341x y = 0.0353x y = 0.0384x 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0 30 60 90 120 150 Number of thermal cycle (N) Rateofincreamentinσu(MPa) 0.375(%) 0.75(%) 1.13(%) 1.5(%) 1.875(%)
  10. 10. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 155 For the sake of convenient design of structures, the percentage rate of increment in ultimate strength i.e. angle of slope of the rate of increment curve in percent for the laminated cement composites with the increase in percentage of reinforcement are depicted in Fig.13. From this figure, it is found that the percentage rate of increment in ultimate strength increased with the increase in the reinforcement percentage. A close inspection of the results given in Fig.13 indicated that slight variation is found at 1.5%, however, it again resumed increasing pattern at 1.87% reinforcement. This discrepancy is mainly appeared owing to the bonding phenomena between the mesh and mortar. Fig. 13: Percentage rate of strength increment vs. layer reinforcement (Ir=Increment) VIII. CONCLUSIONS 1. Thermal distress did not show any negative impact on the ultimate strength of laminated cement composite reinforcement with fine wire mesh. 2. In general, the flexural ultimate strength of the laminated cement composites increased with the increase in cycles for all the specimens. 3. It was observed that the thermal distress altered the behavior of laminated cement composites and lead to strength increment as compared to control specimens. 4. The rate of increment in ultimate strength is about 3.4 MPa for composite of 0.375% layer reinforcement and about 5.0 MPa for composite of 1.875% layer reinforcement when the number of cycles increased from zero cycle (28days curing plus 2 days room drying) to 120 cycles. 5. The percentage rate of strength increment can be noted as 2.8% to 3.4% when the number of layers of reinforcement increased from one layer to five layers. XIX. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The research reported in this paper is partly supported by the Research Grant No. 22580271 with funds from Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research, Japan. The writer gratefully acknowledges these supports. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsor. 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Rr(%) Percentrateofincreamentin σu(%) Ir(%)
  11. 11. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 156 XX. REFERENCES [1] Abdullah and M.A. Mansur, “Effect of Mesh Orientation on Tensile Response of Ferrocement,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol. 31, no.4, pp.289-298, 2001. [2] ACI 544.1R, State-of-the-Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Concrete, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1996. [3] ACI Committee 549, Guide for Design, Construction, and Repair of Ferrocement, ACI Structural J., Vol. 85, no.1, pp. 325-351, 1998. [4] L.R. Austriaco, “Evolution of Ferrocement,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol. 31, no.4, pp.281-288, 2001. [5] P.N. Balaguru and S.P. Shah, Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites, McGraw Hill, New York, 1992. [6] A. Bentur and S. Mindess, “Effect of Drying and Wetting Cycles on Length and Strength Changes of Wood Fiber Reinforced Cement,” Durability of Building Materials, Vol. 2, pp.37-43, 1993. [7] M.K. El Debs and A.E. Naaman, “Bending Behavior of Ferrocement Reinforced With Steel Meshes and Polymeric Fibres,” J. of Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol.17, no.4, pp. 327-328, 1995. [8] K. Ghavami, R.D.T. Filho, and N.P. Barbosa, “Behavior of Composite Soil Reinforced with Natural Fibers, J. of Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol.21, no.1, pp.39-48, 1999. [9] M.Z. Hossain and A.S.M.A Awal, “A Study on Flexural Modulus, Ductility and Field Applications of Laminated Cementitious Composites,” Malaysian J. of Civil Engineering, Vol.22, no2, pp.32-43, 2010. [10] M.Z. Hossain and A.S.M.A Awal, “Experimental Validation of A Theoretical Model For Flexural Modulus of Elasticity of Thin Cement Composite,” J. of Construction & Building Materials, Vol.25, no.3, pp.1460-1465, 2011. [11] M.Z. Hossain and A.S.M.A Awal, “Flexural Response of Hybrid Carbon Fiber Thin Cement Composites,” Vol.25, no.2, pp.670-677, 2010. [12] M.Z. Hossain and T. Hasegawa, “A Study on Pre- and Post-Cracking Behavior of Ferrocement Plates,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.27, no.2, pp.127-143, 1997. [13] M.Z. Hossain and T. Hasegawa, “A Comparison of the Mechanical Properties of Ferrocement in Flexure for Square and Hexagonal Meshes,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.28, no.2, pp.111-134, 1998. [14] M.Z. Hossain and and S. Inoue, “Finite Element Analysis of Thin Panels Reinforced With a Square Mesh,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.32, no.2, pp.109-125, 2002. [15] M.Z. Hossain and and S. Inoue, “A Comparison of the Mechanical Properties of Ferrocement Elements Under Compression for Square and Chicken Meshes,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol. 30. no.4, pp.319-343, 2000. [16] M.Z. Hossain and and S. Inoue, “Compression Behavior and Buckling Analysis of Ferrocement Elements Using the Finite Element Method,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.30, no.2, pp.147-166, 2000. [17] M.Z. Hossain and and S. Inoue, “Effect of Recycled Aggregates on Compression Behavior of Cement-Based Composite Materials,” J. of Aca. of Engrs. and Assoc. of Sci., Vol.6. No.1-2, pp.81-90, 2004. [18] M.Z. Hossain and and S. Inoue, “Young's Modulus and Bearing Capacity of Thin Panels Reinforced With Geogrid and Hexagonal Meshes,” J. of Rural and Env. Engg., No.44, pp.13- 26, 2003.
  12. 12. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 5, Issue 2, February (2014), pp. 146-157 © IAEME 157 [19] M.Z. Hossain and M.P. Islam, “Cracking Stress and Bending Moment in Flexural Ferrocement Elements,” Int. J. of Charac. and Develop. of Novel Mat., 2010, Vol.1, no.4, pp.1-16, 2010. [20] M.Z. Hossain, M.Z. and T. Tsukioka, “Development of Design Equations for Flexural Young’s Modulus of Thin Cementitious Composites Reinforced with Different Types of Meshes,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.36, no.3, pp.849-860, 2006. [21] M.Z. Hossain, T. Sakai, T and P. Paramasivam, “Bearing Capacity of Thin Cementitious composites Reinforced with Different Types of Meshes,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.36, no.3, pp.833-848. 2006. [22] C.D. Johnston and D.N. Mowat, D.N., “Ferrocement - Material Behavior in Flexure,” J. of Struc. Div., Vol.100, no.10, pp.2053-2069, 1974. [23] M.A. Mansur and T. Kiritharan, T., “Shear Strength of Ferrocement Structural Section, J. of Ferrocement, Vol.31, no.3, pp.195-211, 2001. [24] P.K. Mehta and P.J.M. Monterio, Concrete: Microstructure, Properties and Materilas, McGraw Hill, New York, 1993. [25] A.E. Naaman and K. Chandrangsu, “Bending behavior of Laminated Cementitious Composites Reinforced with FRP meshes,” ACI Sym. on High Perfor. Fiber Reinf. Thin Sheet Pro., ACI SP 190, pp.97-116, 2000. [26] A.E. Naaman, Ferrocement and Laminated Cementitious Composites, Techno Press 3000, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2000. [27] A.E. Naaman, “Ferrocement and Thin Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites: Looking Back, Looking Ahead,” J. of Ferrocement, Vol.31, no.4, pp.267-280, 2001. [28] Mohammed Mansour Kadhum, “Effect of Dynamic Load: Impact of Missile on Mechanical Behavior of Ferrocement – Infrastructure Application”, International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 4, Issue 2, 2013, pp. 295 - 305, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316.

×