地工發泡材應用於混凝土界面防水伸縮縫之工程特性

The Engineering Properties of Various Geo-foams as Water Barrier at Concrete Interface

范智光(Chich-Kuang Fan)

指導教授 ： 謝啟萬

國立屏東科技大學/工學院/土木工程系所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6346/NPUST.2009.00058

摘要

本研究針對地工發泡材使用於一般的伸縮縫為目的，進行相關之特性研究。研究之特性有基本物理特性、伸縮縫應用特性、滲水特性等，主要針對地工發泡材之發泡聚苯乙烯(Expanded Polystyrene，EPS)、發泡聚丙烯(Expanded Polypropylene，EPP)、發泡聚乙烯(Expanded polyethylene，EPE)等，評估與混凝土結合後之強度試驗。而EPS和EPP而兩種發泡材其發泡形式為顆粒式發泡，而EPE發泡材發泡形式則為閉孔式發泡。
研究結果指出地工發泡材的單位重以及發泡形式的不同，在一般伸縮縫工程特性上會有不同的結果，單位重越重的地工發泡材有可能可以改善一般伸縮縫的工程特性。閉孔發泡形式的EPE發泡材在抗拉強度試驗、抗壓強度試驗、回彈性試驗以及三軸透水試驗等試驗結果，皆比另外兩種的發泡材EPS、EPP還要好。
在三軸試驗結果中，可得知此三種地工發泡材皆為中、低滲透性的材料。在與混凝土結合後的伸縮縫應用特性之界面抗張試驗結果中得知，EPE與混凝土結合之試體所測試的界面抗張強度是277.62 kPa，約為EPS、EPP與混凝土結合之試體所測試強度的2 ~ 2.5倍。在反覆位移試驗中，EPE與混凝土結合之試體所能夠承受的應變距離可達到1.2 mm，EPS與混凝土結合之試體可達到0.9 mm，EPP與混凝土結合之試體可達到0.8 mm，推估EPE發泡形式所產生的粗糙表面提供了與混凝土結合的界面很好的結合強度。而在滲水特性試驗結果中，得知一般型EPE與混凝土結合之試體的抗滲強度為214 kPa，而灌製成倒T形式的EPE試體其試驗結果強度會比一般型的試體試驗結果還要好。一般型EPE與混凝土結合之試體測試的結果強度會是EPS、EPP與混凝土結合之試體測試結果強度的20倍左右。

關鍵字

地工發泡材 ； 發泡聚苯乙烯 ； 發泡聚丙烯 ； 發泡聚乙烯 ； 混凝土伸縮縫

並列摘要

The objective of this study is to investigate the engineering properties of expanded geofoams as the water barrier at concrete expansion joint. The test materials included expanded polystyrene (EPS), expanded polypropylene (EPP), and expanded polyethylene (EPE) geofoams. The general physical properties, compressibility and expansibility, bonding capability and seepage resistance between geofoam/concrete interfaces were all evaluated. The EPS and EPP geofoams were composed from expanded foaming beads. However, EPE was made by a closed single cell structure.
The results of the study indicated that the unit weight and forming structure of expanded geofoam showed a great influence on its engineering properties. The increasing of the unit of geofoam would improve the engineering properties of the product. The closed single cell EPE geofoam consisted of a better tensile strength, compressibility, expansibility, and seepage resistance than that associated with EPS and EPP geofoams.
The test geofoams were relatively medium low permeable materials. The bonding strength between EPE geofoam and concrete interface was 277.62 kPa. This bonding strength was about 2 to 2.5 times more that associated with EPP and EPS geofoam/concrete interfaces. For the compression and expansion cyclic movement test of geofoam/concrete specimen, the interface between EPE, EPP, EPS and concreter block would allow 1.2 mm, 0.9 mm, and 0.8 mm movement before debonding observed, respectively. The test EPE geofoam consisted of a relatively rough surface which can provide a better bonding surface with concrete. The seepage resistance at the interfaces between the test EPE geofoam and concrete block was equal and greater than 214 kPa for the flat and T-type placement schemes. The seepage resistance associated with the EPE geofoam/concrete interface was about 20 times more than that for EPS/concrete or EPP/concrete interfaces.

並列關鍵字

Geofoam ； Expanded polyethylene ； Expanded polypropylene ； Expanded polystyrene ； Concrete expansion joint

參考文獻

8. 江瑞琪，2007，以EPP緩衝包材包覆之液晶單元落下試驗與數值模擬，國立台灣大學土木工程學系研究所碩士論文。

27. Chin Jian Leo, M Kumruzzaman, Henry Wong, Jin H Yin, 2008, Behavior of EPS geofoam in true triaxial compression test. Geotextiles and Geomemberanes 26. 175-180.

30. M.E. Kalinski and D. P. Pentapati, 2006, Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Behavior of Geofoam Embankment, Transportation research board of the national academies, Washington, D.C. pp. 89-95.

31. Mustafa Aytekin., 1998, Numerical Modeling of EPS Geofoam used with swelling soil. Geotextiles and Geomembranes 15. 133-146.

32. N.J. Mills., A. Gilchrist, 2006, Properties of bonded-polpropylene-bead foams: data and modeling. Journal of Materials Science 41.