Differences between FRP bond behavior in cracked and uncracked regions

Based on an analysis of the experimental results of a proposed bond test method, significant differences are shown to exist between the local FRP bond stress-slip relationships in the uncracked anchorage regions and in the regions between cracks. The proposed method simulates the bond behavior between the flexural cracks and anchorage regions of a flexurally FRP-strengthened RC beam. The boundary conditions, including the presence of cracks and steel, are shown to have significant effects on the local bond stress-slip models. The results showed that, at the same force, the bond stresses in the regions between cracks were lower than in regions outside the cracks, so the debonding formed in the anchorage regions. The local bond stress-slip models in the anchorage regions can be obtained from the conventional bond test methods but these do not mimic the conditions between the cracks.

Insight into differences in nanoindentation properties of bone.

Nanoindentation provides the ideal framework to determine mechanical properties of bone at the tissue scale without being affected by the size, shape, and porosity of the bone. However, the values of tissue level mechanical properties vary significantly between studies. Since the differences in the bone sample, hydration state, and test parameters complicate direct comparisons across the various studies, these discrepancies in values cannot be compared directly. The objective of the current study is to evaluate and compare mechanical properties of the same bones using a broad range of testing parameters. Wild type C56BL6 mice tibiae were embedded following different processes and tested in dry and rehydrated conditions. Spherical and Berkovich indenter probes were used, and data analysis was considered within the elasto-plastic (Oliver-Pharr), viscoelastic and visco-elastic-plastic frameworks. The mean values of plane strain modulus varied significantly depending on the hydration state, probe geometry and analysis method. Indentations in dry bone analyzed using a visco-elastic-plastic approach gave values of 34 GPa. After rehydrating the same bones and indenting them with a spherical tip and utilizing a viscoelastic analysis, the mean modulus value was 4 GPa, nearly an order of magnitude smaller. Results suggest that the hydration state, probe geometry and the limitations and assumptions of each analysis method influence significantly the measured mechanical properties. This is the first time that such a systematic study has been carried out and it has been concluded that the discrepancies in the mechanical properties of bone measured by nanoindentation found in the literature should not be attributed only to the differences between the bones themselves, but also to the testing and analysis protocols.

Low voltage ride-through of DFIG and brushless DFIG: Similarities and differences

The brushless doubly fed induction generator (BDFIG) has been proposed as a viable alternative in wind turbines to the commonly used doubly fed induction generator (DFIG). The BDFIG retains the benefits of the DFIG, i.e. variable speed operation with a partially rated converter, but without the use of brush gear and slip rings, thereby conferring enhanced reliability. As low voltage ride-through (LVRT) performance of the DFIG-based wind turbine is well understood, this paper aims to analyze LVRT behavior of the BDFIG-based wind turbine in a similar way. In order to achieve this goal, the equivalence between their two-axis model parameters is investigated. The variation of flux linkages, back-EMFs and currents of both types of generator are elaborated during three phase voltage dips. Moreover, the structural differences between the two generators, which lead to different equivalent parameters and hence different LVRT capabilities, are investigated. The analytical results are verified via time-domain simulations for medium size wind turbine generators as well as experimental results of a voltage dip on a prototype 250 kVA BDFIG. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.