Cost and environmental analyses of reinforcement alternatives for a concrete bridge

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.

New directions for reinforced concrete coastal structures

“…The time-dependent effect and cost of corrosion in transportation infrastructure is of extreme concern to owners of structures near the coastline. Repairs due to corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete is estimated to be the most expensive repairs performed on coastal structures [19,30,31]. Chlorides accumulate on the concrete surface either through direct contact with the surrounding waterbody, by contaminated runoff flowing over the surface, or by exposure to salt-laden airborne spray.…”

“…Monitoring protocols were implemented at the design and construction stages and will be continued through the early service life of the structure [93]. A Life-Cycle Cost analysis was later performed by [30,31], proving a complete FRP-RC/PC design to be the least impacting solution from both an economic and environmental perspective over an estimated service life of 100years.…”

“…Cadenazzi et al [30,31] performed LCC analysis and LCA on the Halls River Bridge using conceptual alternative designs with both conventional and HCR materials. The findings implied that the FRP-RC/PC solutions where typically preferential.…”

Life-Cycle Assessment in the Polymeric Sector: A Comprehensive Review of Application Experiences on the Italian Scale

“…A LCA and also a LCC analysis on four non-corrosive reinforcement materials for concrete structures were carried out by Dotelli et al taking into account stainless-steel (SS); GFRP rebars, CFRP strands and epoxy-coated steel (ECS) reinforcing bars [ 75 , 76 ]. SIMAPRO (version 8.5.2.0, 2018) software and Ecoinvent database, as source of secondary data, were used firstly in a cradle-to-gate (raw materials, transportation, and construction) investigation and then in a cradle-to-grave (raw materials, transportation, construction, maintenance, and EOL) one.…”

Comparison of Tensile Properties of Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer Rebars by Testing According to Various Standards

“…Glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) reinforcement has emerged as an attractive alternative of steel rebars due to the higher ultimate tensile strength to weight ratio, resistance to corrosion and chemical attack, electromagnetic neutrality, and long-term strength and durability of GFRP bars in harsh and corrosive environments [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]. GFRP bars are mainly used in the construction or rehabilitation of bridges [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Enormous potential exists for applications in multi-story buildings, parking garages, and industrial structures.…”