Design of GFRP-Reinforced Members: A Comparative Study of European Guidelines with a New Engineer-friendly Tool
Files
Crasson_46962100_Herphelin_35422100_2026.pdf
Embargoed access from 2029-06-01 - Adobe PDF
- 17.37 MB
Details
- Supervisors
- Faculty
- Degree label
- Abstract
- The corrosion of steel reinforcement is recognized as the primary cause of premature deterioration in reinforced concrete infrastructure, generating costs estimated at several trillion euros annually worldwide. Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) bars, chemically inert and unaffected by chloride environments, offer a structurally viable and corrosion-immune alternative. Despite a growing body of experimental evidence supporting their use, GFRP reinforcement remains underutilized in European practice. A key obstacle lies in the coexistence of three distinct and partially diverging normative frameworks, CNR-DT 203, the French AFGC guide (2023), and the forthcoming Annex R to EN 1992-1-1:2023, whose differences are not self-evident and whose combined complexity discourages adoption among practitioners unfamiliar with GFRP-specific provisions. This thesis pursues two complementary objectives. The first is a comparative analysis of the three European frameworks, covering material characterization, Ultimate Limit State provisions for bending and shear and Serviceability Limit State criteria for stress limitation, crack control and deflection. The second objective is the development of a Python-based engineer-friendly design tool that implements all three normative frameworks. The tool features an interactive graphical interface, automated PDF report generation and parametric visualization capabilities. It is directly usable by practicing engineers without prior expertise in GFRP design. The tool is applied to a representative bridge beam case study, confirming that GFRP design is generally governed by serviceability criteria, a direct consequence of the lower elastic modulus of GFRP relative to steel. This SLS-governing behavior intensifies with span length and always leads to higher reinforcement areas than an equivalent steel solution. Finally, a Life-Cycle Cost analysis demonstrates that in highly aggressive environments, the long-term savings associated with the elimination of corrosion-driven maintenance outweigh the higher initial material cost of GFRP, making it the economically superior solution. Taken together, the normative comparison, the computational tool, and the economic analysis provide both the theoretical understanding and the practical means to lower the barriers to GFRP adoption in European structural engineering practice.