Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Shaking table tests reveal kinematic performance of FRP piles in saturated soils, indicating potential advantages over traditional materials.
Abstract This study evaluates the performance of single hollow frictional Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) piles embedded in saturated liquefiable sand and subjected to seismic loading using a shaking table. A unidirectional shaking table equipped with a 1 m x 1 m x 1 m laminar sand box consisting of 27 lamina rings was used. The FRP piles were manufactured from epoxy saturated Carbon Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) and Glass Fibre-Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) fabrics and shaped into tubes. For comparison, an aluminum pile was included in the setup to represent the behaviour of traditional steel piles. Pile dimensions and properties were based on scaling relationships that account for the nonlinear nature of soil-pile systems under seismic loading. Scaled versions of ground motions from the 2010 Val-des-Bois (Ottawa) and 1995 Hyogo-Ken Nambu (Kobe) earthquakes were implemented as the input motions in the tests. Although inertial head displacements were similar across all piles, significant differences in kinematic pile response were observed. GFRP piles exhibited higher kinematic acceleration amplification compared to both the CFRP and the aluminum piles. Aluminum piles, on the other hand, showed higher amplification of acceleration than the CFRP piles. These results suggest that in addition to their durability, FRP piles demonstrate geotechnical performance comparable to traditional piling materials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdul-Hamid et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: