piles was lower than the capacity of the non corroded pile bent, ranging from 45 to 80%.

Further improvement of the ductility and load capacity of the pile bents using the FRP

reinforced piles was needed.

 The ductility of the sections might be further improved by increasing the amount of

confinement reinforcement which could increase the ductility of the enclosed concrete.

The capacity of the sections could be improved by providing additional longitudinal

reinforcement or by increasing the size of the section or both. Any pile section design

must ensure that the section is heavily reinforced which will result in compression

controlled failure which can use concrete confinement to improve section ductility prior

to rupture of the FRP longitudinal reinforcement.

Results for Load Case 2

 The static non-linear analysis of the pile bents for load case 2 was very similar for

all different pile bends analyzed. It was discovered that failure of the external pile to

which the load was applied prevented the formation of plastic hinges on the remaining

piles in the pile bent system. The lack of plastic hinge formation on the internal piles

resulted in a non-ductile response of the pile bent system. Because the pile bent system

behavior was non-ductile the ductility factors of the systems were not calculated for load

case 2.

 As an example the load-displacement of the prestressed pile bent with minor

corrosion was plotted for load case 2 (Fig. 7-8). The load-displacement of the same pile

bent for load case 1 was plotted for comparison. Similar behavior was exhibited by all

pile bents using FRP reinforced piles.

 The failure load of the pile bent system in load case 2 was lower than the failure

load for load case 1. Only a portion of the total load applied to the external pile was