Ibrahim, Teghreed H.
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

On the Impact of Lacing Reinforcement Arrangement on Reinforced Concrete Deep Beams Performance Mohammed, Shatha D.; Salman, Hamza M.; Ibrahim, Teghreed H.; Oukaili, Nazar K.; Allawi, Abbas A.
Civil Engineering Journal Vol 11, No 2 (2025): February
Publisher : Salehan Institute of Higher Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.28991/CEJ-2025-011-02-019

Abstract

The optimum design is characterized by structural concrete components that can sustain loads well beyond the yielding stage. This is often accomplished by a fulfilled ductility index, which is greatly influenced by the arrangement of the shear reinforcement. The current study investigates the impact of the shear reinforcement arrangement on the structural response of the deep beams using a variety of parameters, including the type of shear reinforcement, the number of lacing bars, and the lacing arrangement pattern. It was found that lacing reinforcement, as opposed to vertical stirrups, enhanced the overall structural response of deep beams, as evidenced by test results showing increases in ultimate loads, yielding, and cracking of 30.6, 20.8, and 100%, respectively. There was also a 53.6% increase in absorbed energy at the ultimate load. The shear reinforcement arrangement had a greater impact and a significant effect on the structural response than the number of lacing bars. For lacing reinforcement with a phase difference equivalent to the half-lacing cycle (i.e., phase lag lacing), the percentage of improvement under different loading stages was 6.7-27.1% and 20.8-113.3%, respectively. The structural responses are significantly impacted by the lacing arrangement; members with two and three lacing bars, respectively, exhibited improvements in ultimate load of 30.6% and 47%. Beyond the yielding stage, the phase lag lacing specimens deviated from those without phase lag lacing and normal shear stirrups because of the lacing contribution. Phase lag specimens showed more strain than specimens without phase lag lacing, meaning that the lacing reinforcement contributed more to the beam strength. It was found that the first shear cracking load of all the laced reinforced specimens was higher than that of the conventional shear stirrup specimens. Phase lag lacing produced the greatest improvement, with two bars achieving 92.44% and three bars achieving 217.07%. For the aforementioned number of bars, lacing shear reinforcement without phase lag was less successful, with 36.91% and 46.53%, respectively. Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2025-011-02-019 Full Text: PDF
Study on Shear Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beams Confined with Reinforcing Meshes Abdulkareem, Bashar F.; Ibrahim, Teghreed H.; Mohammed, Hussein K.; Allawi, Abbas A.
Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 11 No. 10 (2025): October
Publisher : Salehan Institute of Higher Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.28991/CEJ-2025-011-10-012

Abstract

This study reveals the results of a numerical simulation performed using the ABAQUS/CAE finite element program. The study aimed to provide a simulation model that can forecast the shear behavior of reinforced concrete beams confined with reinforcing meshes. Limited numerical studies have been conducted using geogrid or FRP mesh as shear reinforcement, with limited representation accuracy and limited material quality. The results were compared to published experimental findings in the literature. The finding of the finite element model and the experimental results were highly comparable; consequently, the model was determined to be valid. Following this, the domain of numerical analyses was broadened to include the investigation of many aspects, like the material of reinforcement mesh, the angle of inclination of mesh strip, and the number of mesh strips. The results show that the inclined strip beams gave ultimate loads greater than the beams with vertical strips, where the ultimate load for beams with inclined strips was higher than that for beams with vertical strips by 5.6, 2.5, and 9.4% for beams with geogrid, geotextile, and GFRP mesh, respectively. The smaller the strip width and the larger the number, the better. Beams with inclined strips (45°) gave higher ductility indexes than similar beams with vertical strips. Beams with six strips (width of 50 mm) gave higher ductility indexes than similar beams with four strips (width of 75 mm).