SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • Structural Testing;
  • Concrete Structures;
  • Concrete Testing;
  • Codes of Practice and Standards;
  • Beams and Girders;
  • Slabs and Plates

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Experimental Programme
  5. Analysing the Experimental Results
  6. Conclusions
  7. References

The main purpose of this article is to study the behaviour of thin RC membranes under compression in one direction and tension in the perpendicular direction. The influence of the thickness on the behaviour of the concrete panel is investigated. To study the behaviour of the panels, an experimental programme was carried out. Six RC panels under pure shear were tested up to failure. As a result, new experimental stress–strain relationships of thin plates under pure shear are presented. Such relationships take into account the reduction of the compressive strength due to perpendicular tensile stresses and the influence of the thickness of the RC panels. The good experimental values obtained from this investigation validate the effectiveness of the low cost testing equipment developed for this study. This was a good achievement, because previous tests on this topic were performed using expensive equipment, which very few laboratories could afford. In general, the values obtained for the stress–strain relationships are approximately within the range proposed by other investigators. It is also shown that the strength capacity predicted by European codes is higher than that obtained from the experimental tests. The values predicted by ACI code are very conservative.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Experimental Programme
  5. Analysing the Experimental Results
  6. Conclusions
  7. References

The authors previously presented an article on state-of-the-art about compressive behaviour of concrete under perpendicular tensile stresses.[1] It is an important matter in many aspects regarding the behaviour of concrete elements, such as in hollow beams under torsion, where the section walls work as membranes mainly subjected to shear, with compressive stresses in one direction and tensile stresses in a perpendicular direction. These studies also show that the walls thickness may affect the behaviour of the compressive concrete in the struts differently from what the theoretical models had evaluated.[2-6] Thus, it is important to study this phenomenon, as well as its evolution with the panels/walls thickness.

As previously discussed[1] Compression Field Approaches or Smeared Approaches as defined by ASCE-ACI Committee 445 on Shear and Torsion,[7] which are also used in the research work presented in this article, are particularly important.

There are only a few studies on this subject, possibly due to considerable costs of the tests. Some recent studies in this area[8-10] have analysed cases of walls or of strut and tie mechanisms but do not include experimental verification of the strength of concrete struts under perpendicular tension stresses.

The work developed for this article aims at studying the behaviour of concrete in compression in the main diagonal strut of a membrane, especially through stress versus strain diagrams. Particular attention was given to studying the influence of the plate thickness, comparing the experimental results with existing theoretical models, and to reduction factor of compressive strength of concrete through the action of transverse tensile strains obtained experimentally with the factors proposed in normative documents.

The design and validation of a simple and less onerous testing apparatus is also the objective of this study.

This article is the second of a series of two articles dealing with RC membranes under shear. In the first article of the series,[1] a state-of-the-art with regard to concrete struts under perpendicular tensile stress was presented. In the same article, the test specimens and the testing procedure of the specimens under shear were described, and the results of the strain and stress with respect to the principal direction were also presented and discussed.

Experimental Programme

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Experimental Programme
  5. Analysing the Experimental Results
  6. Conclusions
  7. References

Figure 1 illustrates the geometry adopted for tested membranes. Two series of similar membranes were tested (Series I and II), each containing three (membranes). The details of the testing models of Fig. 1 are presented in Tables 1 and 2. The adopted cover for the reinforcements is 2 cm.

image

Figure 1. Geometry of test specimens and reinforcement.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 1. Parameters of Fig. 1
SeriesNamee (cm)c (cm)Geometrical % of distributed reinforcement
ISIE4 415.51.0%
 SIE7 7141.0%
 SIE101012.51.0%
IISIIE4 415.51.0%
 SIIE7 7141.0%
 SIIE101012.51.0%
Table 2. Reinforcement bars
ModelDistributed reinforcementTie
SeriesNameNameϕ (mm)Spacing (mm)Nameϕ (mm)n.°
ISIE4A500NR 6 7A500NR10 5
 SIE7A500NR 8 7A500NR1010
 SIE10A500NR107.5A400NR1210
IISIIE4A500NR 6 7A500NR10 5
 SIIE7A500NR 8 7A500NR1010
 SIIE10A500NR107.5A400NR1210

The authors understand that some differences between lab tests and in situ actual strength of concrete is possible. Some tests are developed for in situ evaluation of concrete.[11-15] Nevertheless, the use of cubes or cylinders to evaluate the concrete strength is a common procedure and it was used in this investigation work also. Some cubes were tested and the values of the maximum stress varied between 24.9 and 26.5 MPa. Tensile tests to steel bars specimens were carried out in order to determine the medium yield stress, fym, and the yield strain corresponding to the beginning of yielding ɛym (Table 3). The normative value usually indicated for ordinary reinforcements, for the elasticity model, was assumed: Es = 200 GPa. The test apparatus is presented in Fig. 2. Test instrumentation and procedures were explained in the previous article.[1]

Table 3. Results from tension tests to steel bars
ϕ (mm)fym (MPa)ɛym (×10−6)
6595.22976
8576.32881
10570.182851
12469.102346
image

Figure 2. Test apparatus.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Analysing the Experimental Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Experimental Programme
  5. Analysing the Experimental Results
  6. Conclusions
  7. References

The state of strain and stress of the elements tested were described in the previous article, and other aspects of the elements behaviour will now be described.

Stress–strain diagrams: concrete in compression

Experimental curves translate the stress versus strain behaviour of concrete carried by compression, as well as maximum stress and strain compared to the estimates based on Hognestad's parabola[16] and Thorenfeldt's curve,[17] which translate the behaviour of stress versus strain of concrete cylindrical specimens (ϕ 15× 30cm) when subjected to uniaxial compression. The aforementioned concrete behaviour aspects were also compared with the theoretical estimates proposed by other authors which were presented in the previous article by the authors.[1]

Experimental results should be represented in a three-dimensional form representing compressive stress in the concrete as a function of the principal strain 1 and 2 of the concrete strain state. To facilitate the comparative analysis, an orthogonal projection of these strains was represented in the plan defined by the axis corresponding to the principal compressive stress in concrete inline image and to the principal compressive strain in concrete inline image.

Figure 3 represents experimental diagrams for the behaviour of compressive concrete which were obtained combining the measured strains with a mechanical extensometer in the direction that corresponds to an angle of 45° from the axis x with the stress in the concrete in the same direction which was obtained through the procedure explained before.[1]

image

Figure 3. inline image versus ɛc450.

Download figure to PowerPoint

A qualitative analysis of Fig. 3 evidences that the experimentally obtained curves, as well as the state of stress and strain corresponding to compressive concrete strength are within these estimates based on the models proposed by other authors. This observation validates the testing procedure, as well as the results obtained. Figure 3 also suggests that the curves corresponding to the 4-cm thick membranes (especially SIE4 curve) present lower inline image values compared with most curves proposed by other authors for the same state of strain. The curve corresponding to the 10-cm thick membrane, however, presents higher values of inline image than the majority of curves proposed by other authors for the same state of strain. The curves corresponding to the 7-cm thick membrane present an intermediate behaviour. These observations suggest a possible influence of the membrane thickness in the behaviour of compressive concrete.

The non-existence of a drop-down curve after a peak in the experimental stress versus strain curves for the concrete under compression is observed, despite the fact that the tests were performed in deformation control. In fact, the membranes failure generally occurs in a sudden and explosive way. For the principal tensile strains mode below 0.015 (1.5%) with membranes loaded with deformation control, Zhang and Hsu[18] also obtained an explosive failure by concrete crushing without having observed a drop-down curve.

The quantification of the adequacy degree of the curves proposed by other authors to the experimental results was carried out resorting to an adjusting parameter C (Eq. (1)), adapted from Ferreira.[19]

Considering two curves, y1 and y2 defined by the same number of points (0 to imax), parameter C, which varies between 0 and 1, provides a comparison measure between the curves. This parameter becomes 1 when both curves are exactly the same and 0 when, for any xi point, one of the functions is always higher then another, and both have opposing signals.

  • display math(1)

Parameters A1 and A are defined by Eqs. (2) and (3), respectively, and are represented by Fig. 4.

image

Figure 4. Parameters A and A1.

Download figure to PowerPoint

The geometric correspondence of the previous parameters is illustrated in the figure.

  • display math(2)
  • display math(3)

Table 4 presents the results of the application of the expressions previous to the experimental results.[16-25] As expected, it shows that the curves which translate concrete's uniaxial compressive behaviour present a lower adjusting degree regarding the experimental data. Table 5 presents an arithmetic average of parameter C for membranes with the same thickness.

Table 4. Parameter C
 SIE4SIE7SIE10SIE4SIE7
Hognestad[16]53.7%74.2%78.5%66.0%63.7%
Thorenfeldt et al.[17]50.3%69.3%71.8%62.5%59.8%
Vecchio and Collins[20]71.9%91.6%82.0%92.2%91.9%
Mikame et al.[21]69.5%96.6%93.8%87.5%85.3%
Belarbi and Hsu[22] PL80.7%90.0%82.8%95.5%93.0%
Hsu[23]73.8%89.9%85.9%85.2%82.5%
Vecchio et al. Model B[24]64.8%89.2%91.8%83.5%83.1%
Vecchio Model B[25]57.8%80.0%85.0%73.4%72.5%
Table 5. Influence of the thickness on parameter C
 e = 4cme = 7cme = 10cm
Hognestad[16]59.9%68.9%78.5%
Thorenfeldt et al.[17]56.4%64.6%71.8%
Vecchio and Collins[20]82.0%91.8%82.0%
Mikame et al.[21]78.5%90.9%93.8%
Belarbi and Hsu[22] PL88.1%91.5%82.8%
Hsu[23]79.5%86.2%85.9%
Vecchio et al. Model B[24]74.2%86.1%91.8%
Vecchio Model B[25]65.6%76.2%85.0%

By looking at the values of the previous tables and at the graphs, the curves proposed by Mikame et al.[21] and Vecchio et al. Model B[24] are better adjusted to the behaviour of the 10-cmthick membrane, presenting parameters C = 93.8% and C = 91.8%, respectively. This is due to the fact that they suggest higher values of inline image for a given state of strain. The curve proposed by Belarbi and Hsu[22] better adjusts to the shape of the curves experimentally obtained for the 4-cm thick membranes, because it presents a medium parameter of C = 88.1%. This is due to the fact that the equation proposed by the authors suggests lower values of inline image for the same values of ɛc20.

The 7-cm thick membrane has an intermediate compressive concrete behaviour curve regarding what had been verified for the 4- and 10-cm thick curves. The expressions proposed by Vecchio and Collins,[20] Belarbi and Hsu,[22] and Mikame et al.[21] are the ones that better adjust to the progress of experimental curves obtained for these membranes with parameters C = 91.8%, C = 91.5% and C = 90.9%, respectively.

Failure load

Table 6 presents, for each of the tested models, the maximum load (Q), the load corresponding to the last reading of average strains on the concrete's surface (Qd) and the normalised applied shear stress regarding compressive strength of concrete(νn). Medium strains are measured over a length that would cross some few cracks.

Table 6. Maximum loads
 SIE4SIE7SIE10SIIE4SIIE7
Maximum load: Q (tf)M21.3–36.0–49.2–23.0–35.5
Load for the last reading: Qd (demec's) (tf)–20.9–36.0–48.2–23.0–34.8
(Qd -Q)/Q (%)–1.7% 0.0%–2.0% 0.0%–2.2%
ν = Q/(eh) (MPa)–6.1–5.9–5.6–6.6–5.8
νn = ν /fc' (%)–30.8% –28.8% –29.4% –31.5% –29.8% 

The maximum load presents reduced deviations regarding the load corresponding to the last reading using a strain meter before the failure occurred. Therefore, despite the readings regarding the values of the second line of Table 6, belonging to the last level of deformation to which the membranes were submitted, the results represent the state of stress immediately before the failure of that membrane. Also, according to Table 6 the normalised shear stress regarding compressive strength of concrete (νn), which corresponds to the failure of the membranes, presents a much reduced dispersion.

Stress and strain in concrete before failure

Table 7 presents the values of compressive stress in concrete fc45, as well as medium strain in concrete along direction that corresponds to an angle of 45° and −45° from the axis x, corresponding to the last reading using a mechanical strain gauge for each membrane.

Table 7. Stresses and strains in concrete before failure
   SIE4  SIE7  SIE10  SIIE4  SIIE7
fc45 (MPa)–10.0–10.7–10.4–11.2–10.9
fc45 /fc'50.7%52.3%54.5%53.9%56.3%
ɛc45–0.001596–0.001162–0.001227–0.001492–0.001704
ɛc45072.6%52.8%55.8%67.8%77.4%
ɛc-450.0055800.0064710.0072040.0063490.007029
ɛc-45c45–3.5–5.6–5.9–4.3–4.1

According to Table 7, the compressive strain in concrete (fc45) normalised in relation to strength to uniaxial compression presents a much reduced dispersion. Also in Table 7, and as expected, the experimentally obtained compressive strength in concrete inline image is considerably inferior to the uniaxial compressive strength which would be obtained in uniaxial compressive tests with concrete cylinders. When failure occurs, it is possible to see that the strain inline image is considerably inferior to the value obtained in uniaxial compressive tests ɛ0.

Maximum stress and corresponding strain

By analysing the membranes tests results, the readings presented a quotient of inline image with reduced variations. Figure 5 presents the relationship experimentally obtained for the strain quotient ɛc-45c45 in the test membranes. Considering that the quotient inline image was approximately constant, strain versus stress diagrams for compressive concrete were drawn for each membrane by some authors (cited in Fig. 6), matching the quotient inline image to the value corresponding to the last reading as obtained through mechanical strain gauges (Fig. 6). Stress and strain corresponding to maximum stress based on the curves proposed by other authors were also compared with the experimental results (Fig. 6).

image

Figure 5. ɛc-45 versus ɛc45.

Download figure to PowerPoint

image

Figure 6. inline image versus ɛc450 for constant inline image = -3.5).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 8 shows the percentage deviations of ɛ0 of the values for compressive strain (ɛc2max) which correspond to the maximum compressive stress in concrete values estimated by the curves proposed by some authors (for ɛc-45c45 obtained through the reading immediately before the membrane failure), as well as experimental values. Table 9 presents the percentage deviations of the values obtained through experiment for the compressive strain which corresponds to the maximum compressive stress supported by concrete regarding the values based on expressions proposed by other authors. From Fig. 6 and Tables 9 and 10, it appears that the strain corresponding to maximum compressive stress which concrete can support, in the presence of tensile stresses strains, is inferior to the value usually presumed for uniaxial compressive tests (−0.002 or −0.0022).

Table 8. Softening effect associated to ɛ0
inline imageinline imageVecchio and Collins[20]Mikame et al.[21]Belarbi and Hsu[22] (PL)Hsu[23]Vecchio et al. Model B[24]Vecchio Model B[25]Hognestad[16]
SIE472.6%67.0%93.2%63.6%44.3%56.8%69.3%100.0%
SIE752.8%59.1%92.0%56.8%38.6%48.9%61.4%100.0%
SIE1055.8%58.0%92.0%56.8%38.6%46.6%59.1%100.0%
SIIE467.8%63.6%93.2%60.2%42.0%53.4%67.0%100.0%
SIIE777.4%63.6%93.2%61.4%42.0%53.4%65.9%100.0%
Table 9. Softening effect associated toinline image
inline imageVecchio and Collins[20]Mikame et al.[21]Belarbi and Hsu[22] (PL)Hsu[23]Vecchio et al. Model B[24]Vecchio Model B[25]Hognestad[16]
SIE4108.2%77.9%114.0%163.7%127.7%104.7%72.6%
SIE789.4%57.4%93.0%136.7%108.1%86.1%52.8%
SIE1096.3%60.6%98.2%144.4%119.7%94.4%55.8%
SIIE4106.5%72.8%112.6%161.3%127.0%101.1%67.8%
SIIE7121.7%83.1%126.2%184.2%145.0%117.5%77.4%
Average104.4%70.4%108.8%158.1%125.5%100.8%65.3%
Table 10. Softening effect associated to inline image
inline imageinline imageVecchio and Collins[20]Mikame et al.[21]Belarbi and Hsu[22] (PL)Hsu[23]Vecchio et al. Model B[24]Vecchio Model B[25]Hognestad[16]
SIE450.7%55.8%69.2%51.2%50.6%61.1%73.1%100.0%
SIE752.3%43.4%64.9%44.9%44.8%51.0%63.7%100.0%
SIE1054.5%42.1%64.4%44.2%44.1%50.6%63.1%100.0%
SIIE453.9%50.4%67.3%48.4%48.1%56.5%69.0%100.0%
SIIE756.3%51.3%67.6%48.9%48.5%57.7%70.0%100.0%

According to Vecchio and Collins,[20] the process to experimentally evaluate whether the softening effect is a phenomenon only associated to compressive stress in concrete, or also occurring in the strain corresponding to the maximum compressive stress, implies that the variable ɛc1, that is, which ensures that reinforced concrete elements present a tensile principal strain constant throughout the entire test or with a very reduced variation. The way these tests (to which this study refers) were carried out does not allow to control the tensile principal strain. Consequently, it is not possible to explicitly evaluate this aspect. In view of this, an indirect process was chosen to evaluate the softening effect, evaluating the curves adjustment proposed by other authors to the curves obtained through experiment (section Stress–Strain Diagrams: Concrete in Compression), as well as the deviation of stresses and strains regarding the estimated values based on the curves proposed by other authors for stress and strain corresponding to the concrete compressive strength.

Table 9 demonstrates that the compressive strain in concrete corresponding to membrane failure, for the quotients ɛc1c2 experimentally registered and associated to expressions proposed by Vecchio and Collins,[20] Belarbi and Hsu,[22] and Vecchio Model B,[25] presents lower medium deviations regarding experimental values. However, it should be noted that, except for estimates based on the expression proposed by Mikame et al.,[21] which suggests higher values, or even the estimates based on the expressions proposed by Hsu[23] and Vecchio et al.[24] suggesting inferior values, there was a considerable dispersion of results and trends. Table 10 presents percentual deviations regarding uniaxial compressive strength (fc'), the maximum experimental compressive stress, and the estimates of the constitutive laws proposed by some authors for the quotient of principal strains (ɛc1c2) when the membranes failure was experimentally registered. Table 11 presents the percentual deviations of the experimental values of the compressive strength of concrete in the presence of transverse tensile stresses from the values obtained through the equations proposed by various authors. Figure 6 and Tables 10 and 11 show, as expected, that the value of compressive strength of concrete in the presence of high tensile strains presents considerable deviations regarding the results obtained through the uniaxial strain tests.

Table 11. Softening effect associated to inline image
inline imageVecchio and Collins[20]Mikame et al.[21]Belarbi and Hsu[22] (PL)Hsu[23]Vecchio et al. Model B[24]Vecchio Model B[25]Hognestad[16]
SIE490.8%73.3%99.1%100.2%82.9%69.3%50.7%
SIE7120.5%80.6%116.6%116.8%102.5%82.1%52.3%
SIE10129.6%84.6%123.4%123.6%107.8%86.5%54.5%
SIIE4106.9%80.1%111.3%112.1%95.4%78.1%53.9%
SIIE7109.7%83.2%115.1%116.1%97.5%80.4%56.3%
Average111.5%80.4%113.1%113.8%97.2%79.3%53.5%

The estimates for concrete compression strength in the presence of transverse tensile stresses based on the equation proposed by Vecchio et al.[24] were better adjusted to the experimental results. As expected, the equation proposed by Hsu[23] provided inferior estimates to the ones which were observed (in proposing this expression, the author presented it as an inferior limit), and the same happened to the estimates obtained through the equations proposed by Belarbi and Hsu,[22] and by Vecchio and Collins.[20] The estimates based on the equations proposed by Mikame et al.[21] and Vecchio et al. Model B[24] were always higher than those obtained experimentally.

Influence of the thickness

The most correct way of evaluating the influence of thickness of each plate in compressive strength of concrete does not solely consist of normalising this parameter in relation to uniaxial compressive strength. It is also necessary to consider the transverse tensile strain and the quotient ɛc1c2 regarding to concrete. As a consequence, the influence of the thickness must be studied by comparing experimental results with mathematical expressions which consider the aforementioned aspects.

Table 12 can be obtained by calculating the medium values of fc45max/fc2max in Table 11, for each thickness and in relation to each of the studied mathematical expressions. The values on the right column of Table 12, which are the arithmetic average of fc45max/fc2max for each plate's thickness, suggest that effective compressive strength of concrete in the presence of transverse tensile strains tends to increase with the thickness of the membranes, that is, it suggests that by increasing the thickness of the membranes the curves, which are better adjusted to the behaviour experimentally obtained, recommend higher compressive stress for concrete for the same strength ɛc2. This trend had already been suggested by the curves presented by Vecchio and Collins[20] and by parameter C.

Table 12. inline image
inline imageVecchio and Collins[20]Mikame et al.[21]Belarbi and Hsu[22] (PL)Hsu[23]Vecchio et al. Model B[24]Vecchio Model B[25]Average
E498.9%76.7%105.2%106.2%89.2%73.7%91.7%
E7115.1%81.9%115.8%116.5%100.0%81.2%101.8%
E10129.6%84.6%123.4%123.6%107.8%86.5%109.3%

This way, for 4-cm thick membranes, the best estimates for compressive strength correspond to those based on the equations proposed by Vecchio and Collins,[20] Belarbi and Hsu,[22] and Hsu[23]. The equation proposed by Vecchio et al. Model B[24] provides better estimates for the 7- and 10-cm thick membranes.

Comparing with normative provisions

This section compares reduction factor of compressive strength in concretes in the presence of transverse tensile strains (according to the presented experimental procedure) with the strength capacity reduction factors recommended in normative documents.

CEN EN 1992-1-1[26]

Table 13 and Fig. 7 compare the results obtained through experiment for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete, as well as the predictions carried out according to the provisions regarding CEN EN 1992-1-1. In reading Table 13 and Fig. 7, it is possible to conclude that the normative values for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete are very close to those experimentally verified.

image

Figure 7. Reduction factor tests/standard (CEN EN 1992-1-1[26]).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 13. CEN EN 1992-1-1[26]
 Softening coefficient testShear + torsion
Softening coefficient standardTest/standard
SIE40.510.570.89
SIE70.52 0.92
SIE100.55 0.95
SIIE40.54 0.95
SIIE70.56 0.98
Average 0.94

CEB-FIP MC 90[27]

Table 14 and Fig. 8 compare the results obtained through experiment for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete, as well as the predictions carried out according to the provisions regarding CEB-FIP MC 90.

Table 14. CEB–FIP MC 90[27]
 Softening coefficient testShear + torsion (simplified)CEB-FIP MC 90[27]FIB, CEB-FIP[28]
Softening coefficient codeTest/codeSoftening coefficient codeTest/codeSoftening coefficient codeTest/code
SIE40.510.570.890.800.640.600.84
SIE70.52 0.920.770.680.560.94
SIE100.55 0.950.750.720.521.04
SIIE40.54 0.950.780.690.560.96
SIIE70.56 0.980.760.740.531.06
Average 0.94 0.69 0.97

In reading Table 14 and Fig. 8, it is possible to conclude that the normative values for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete are very close to those experimentally verified. The values of the reduction factor provided by CEB-FIP MC 90 are less restrictive than those experimentally verified and the values provided by FIB, CEB-FIP[28] present a higher correspondence to the values experimentally obtained.

image

Figure 8. Reduction factor tests/code (CEB-FIP MC 90[28]).

Download figure to PowerPoint

ACI 318-05[29]

Table 15 and Fig. 9 compare the results obtained through experiment for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete, as well as the predictions carried out according to the provisions regarding ACI 318–05, with α =90° and θ = 45°. By reading Table 15 and Fig. 9 it is possible to conclude that the strength capacity reduction factor suggested by the document in question provides conservative values regarding experimental values.

Table 15. ACI 318-05[29]
 Softening coefficient testShearTorsion
Softening coefficient standardTest/standardSoftening coefficient standardTest/ standard
SIE40.510.431.170.391.30
SIE70.520.421.240.381.38
SIE100.550.451.220.401.36
SIIE40.540.411.300.371.45
SIIE70.560.441.280.391.43
Average 1.24 1.38
image

Figure 9. Reduction factor tests/standard (ACI 318-05[29]).

Download figure to PowerPoint

CSA 23.3-04[30]

Table 16 and Fig. 10 compare the results obtained through experiment for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete, as well as the predictions carried out according to the provisions regarding CSA 23.3–04. In reading Table 16 and Fig. 10 it is possible to conclude that, for the values of the observed coefficient ɛc1c2, the equation in question generally suggests a greater capacity reduction of the compressive strength for concrete than that obtained through experiment.

image

Figure 10. Reduction factor tests/standard (CSA 23.3-04[30]).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 16. CSA 23.3-04[30]
 Softening coefficient testShear + torsion
Softening coefficient standardTest/standard
SIE40.510.560.91
SIE70.520.431.21
SIE100.550.421.29
SIIE40.540.501.07
SIIE70.560.511.10
Average 1.12

Conclusions

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Experimental Programme
  5. Analysing the Experimental Results
  6. Conclusions
  7. References

The analysis of experimental results show the softening effect associated to compressive stress for concrete.

The analysis of the figures representing the stress versus strain compressive concrete behaviour shows that the form of the curve, as well as the stress and strain corresponding to the compressive strength for concrete experimentally obtained, are within the estimates based on the models proposed by other authors. This validates the test procedures that were implemented in this work, as well as the results that were obtained.

The results of this study suggest that the thickness of the membranes influences the behaviour of the concrete in the struts. The increase in thickness corresponds to an increase in the effective strength in concrete struts (in terms of stresses). This trend must, however, be cautiously considered for the following reasons:

  1. the reduced number of validated tests (five membranes);
  2. the normalised shear supported by the membranes suggests an opposing trend which, according to the authors, may be related to the dispersion which medium experimental tensile strains may have caused by the location of the cracks.

In any case, the work shows that the influence of the membrane's thickness must be subjected to specific studies geared towards the analysis of this variable. Furthermore, it is known that tests on larger concrete cubes with oriented damage (without friction between the concrete specimen and the machine platens) will lead to higher values of compressive strength when compared to the values obtained for smaller cubes.[31] The confinement effect of the outer concrete mass may have some influence on the overall strength of the specimens both in cube crushing and in the testing of panels reported here. Comparing the values of the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete with the normative provisions shows that:

  • (i) CEN EN 1992-1-1[26] presents very similar reduction factors (shear + torsion) for the strength capacity, although slightly less restrictive, to those obtained;
  • (ii) CEB-FIP MC 90[27] shows reduction factors of compressive strength in concrete, in the simplified provisions regarding shear and torsion, similar to CEN EN 1992-1-1; in the most rigorous provisions, CEB-FIP MC 90[27] suggests reduction factors much less restrictive than those experimentally verified. FIB, CEB-FIP[28], in its turn, suggests reduction factors matching the experimental ones;
  • (iii) ACI 318–05[29] suggests limitations to strength capacity of elements carried by very restrictive shear or torsion provisions when compared to values which were experimentally obtained for the reduction factor of compressive strength in concrete;
  • (iv) CSA 23.3–04[30] suggests reduction factors of compressive strength in concretes more restrictive than those experimentally obtained.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Experimental Programme
  5. Analysing the Experimental Results
  6. Conclusions
  7. References
  • 1
    Lopes S.M.R., Bernardo L.F.A., and Costa R.J.T., “Reinforced Concrete Membranes Under Shear. General Behaviour,” Experimental Techniques (2012).
  • 2
    Bernardo L.F.A., and Lopes S.M.R., “Behaviour of Concrete Beams under Torsion—NSC Plain and Hollow Beams,” Materials and Structures, RILEM 41(6): 11431167 (2008).
  • 3
    Lopes S.M.R., and Bernardo L.F.A., “Twist Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Hollow Beams—Formation of Plastic Hinges Along the Length,” Engineering Structures 31(1): 138149 (2009).
  • 4
    Bernardo L.F.A., and Lopes S.M.R., “Torsion in HSC Hollow Beams: Strength and Ductility Analysis,” ACI Structural Journal 106(1): 3948 (2009).
  • 5
    Bernardo L.F.A., and Lopes S.M.R., “High-Strength Concrete Hollow Beams Strengthened with External Transversal Steel Reinforcement Under Torsion,” Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, Taylor and Francis 17(3): 330339 (2011).
  • 6
    Bernardo L.F.A., and Lopes S.M.R., “Theoretical Behavior of HSC Beams Under Torsion,” Engineering Structures 33(12): 37023714 (2011).
  • 7
    ASCE-ACI Committee 445 on Shear and Torsion, Recent Approaches to Shear Design of Structural Concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 124(12): 13751417 (1998).
  • 8
    Kotsovos G.M., Cotsovos D.M., Kotsovos M.D., and Kounadis A.N., “Seismic Behaviour of RC Walls: An Attempt to Reduce Reinforcement Congestion,” Magazine of Concrete Research 63(4): 235246 (2011).
  • 9
    Pimanmas A., “Web Crushing Strength of Reinforced Concrete Beams with Pre-existing Cracks,” Magazine of Concrete Research 62( 9): 665678 (2010).
  • 10
    Sahoo D.K., Singh B., and Bhargava P., “Effect of Inclination on the Strength of Struts,” Magazine of Concrete Research 63(2): 111117 (2010).
  • 11
    Lopes S.M.R., Carmo R.N.F., and Bernardo L.F.A., “Plastic Rotation Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Beams”, Keynote Paper, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Concrete Future. Yantai, China, 2008.
  • 12
    Bhalla S., Tuli S., and Arora R., “Defect Detection in Concrete Structures Using Thermal Imaging Techniques,” Experimental Techniques 35: 3943 (2011).
  • 13
    Godinho L., Tadeu A., and Branco, F.G., “Dynamic Analysis of Submerged Fluid-Filled Pipelines Subjected to a Point Pressure Load,” Journal of Sound and Vibration 271(1–2): 257277 (2004).
  • 14
    Malcolm K.L., and Honggang C., Combining multiple NDT methods to improve testing effectiveness, Construction and Building Materials, ISSN 0950-0618, 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.01.011 [accessed 8 July 2011].
  • 15
    Parivallal S., Ravisankar K., Nagamani K., and Kesavan K., “Core-Drilling Technique for In-Situ Stress Evaluation in Concrete Structures,” Experimental Techniques 35: 2934 (2011).
  • 16
    Hognestad E., What Do We Know About Diagonal Tension and Web Reinforcement in Concrete? Circular Series, 64, University of Illinois, Engineering Exp. Station, I (1952).
  • 17
    Thorenfeldt E., Tomasziewicz A., and Jensen J.J., Mechanical Properties of HSC and Application in Design. Proceedings, Symposium on Utilization of High-Strength Concrete, Stavanger, Norway, pp. 149159 (1987).
  • 18
    Zhang L.X., and Hsu T.T.C., “Behaviour and Analysis of 100 MPa Concrete Membrane Elements,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 124(1): 2434 (1998).
  • 19
    Ferreira M.C.P., Efeito da Variabilidade Espacial da Acção Sísmica em Pontes Atirantadas (Seismic Spatial Variability Effect on Cable Stayed Bridges), Master Thesis, University of Coimbra (in Portuguese) (2004).
  • 20
    Vecchio F.J., and Collins M.P., “The Modified Compression-Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear,” Journal of ACI, 83(2), 219231 (1986).
  • 21
    Mikame A., Uchida K., and Noguchi H., A Study of Compressive Deterioration of Cracked Concrete. Proc. Int. Workshop on Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete, Columbia Univ., New York, (1991).
  • 22
    Belarbi A., and Hsu T.C., Constitutive Laws of Softened Concrete in Biaxial Tension-Compression. Research Report UHCEE 91-2, Univ. of Houston, Texas (1991).
  • 23
    Hsu T.T.C., Unified Theory of Reinforced Concrete, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL (1993).
  • 24
    Vecchio F.J., Collins M.P., and Aspiotis J., “High-Strength Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear,” Structural Journal of American Concrete Institute 91(4): 423433 (1994).
  • 25
    Vecchio F.J., “Disturbed Stress Field Model for Reinforced Concrete: Formulation,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 126(9): 10701077 (2000).
  • 26
    CEN EN 1992-1-1. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures—Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings (2004).
  • 27
    CEB-FIP Model Code 1990, Comité Euro-International du Béton, Lausanne, Suisse (1990).
  • 28
    FIB, CEB-FIP, Structural Concrete - Textbook on Behaviour, Design and Performance, Updated Knowledge of the CEB/FIP Model Code 1990, FIB CEB-FIP Manual-Textbook, Volume 1, Lausanne (1999).
  • 29
    ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (ACI 318R-05). American Concrete Institute, Detroit (2005).
  • 30
    A23.3-04. Design of Concrete Structures, Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (2004).1
  • 31
    Litewka A., Debinski J. and Mesquita A.B., “Stress–Strain Relations for Concrete Subjected to Oriented Damage”. 32nd Solid Mechanics Conference, September 1998 1–5, Zakopane, Poland, pp. 241242.