Shrinkage in reinforced concrete structures: a computational aspect/Betono traukimosi itaka gelzbetoniniu elementu elgsenai: skaiciavimo ypatumai.
Gribniak, Viktor ; Kaklauskas, Gintaris ; Bacinskas, Darius 等
Abstract. This paper introduces the recent state of research on
shrinkage of concrete. It reviews prediction models of shrinkage strain
and curvature analysis methods of reinforced concrete members. New test
data on concrete shrinkage has been presented. Various factors that
influence shrinkage have been discussed. A calculation technique on
short-term deformations of cracked reinforced concrete members including
shrinkage has been introduced. The technique is based on layer model and
smeared crack approach. Shrinkage influence on behaviour of reinforced
concrete beams was investigated numerically and compared with test data
reported in the literature. It has been shown that shrinkage has
significantly reduced the cracking resistance and leads to larger
deflections.
Keywords: shrinkage, reinforced concrete, cracking, short-term
loading, creep.
Santrauka
Straipsnyje atlikta betono traukimosi itakos gelzbetoniniu elementu
elgsenai analize, pateikta betono traukimosi deformaciju apskaiciavimo
modeliu apzvalga, aptarti traukimosi sukeltu kreiviu nesimetriskai
armuotuose gelzbetoniniuose elementuose apskaiciavimo metodai, taip pat
pateikti nauji betono traukimosi eksperimentiniu tyrimu duomenys.
Aptarti veiksniai, turintys itaka traukimosi deformacijoms, aprasytas
supleisejusiu gelzbetoniniu elementu trumpalaikiu deformaciju
apskaiciavimo algoritmas, rodantis traukimosi itaka. Algoritmas
pagristas sluoksniu modeliu ir vidutiniu deformaciju koncepcija.
Traukimosi itaka gelzbetoniniu siju elgsenai nagrineta, taikant normu
bei sluoksniu metodus. Teoriniai rezultatai palyginti su literaturoje
paskelbtais eksperimentiniu tyrimu rezultatais. Parodyta, kad betono
traukimasis gerokai sumazina trumpalaike apkrova veikiamu gelzbetoniniu
siju atsparuma pleisejimui bei lemia didesnes ilinkiu reiksmes.
Reiksminiai zodziai: traukimasis, gelzbetonis, pleisejimas,
trumpalaikis apkrovimas, valksnumas.
1. Introduction
Mechanical loading, deleterious reactions, and environment loading
can result in the development of tensile stresses in concrete
structures. Furthermore, concrete shrink as it dries under ambient
conditions. Tensile stresses occur when free shrinkage is restrained.
The combination of high tensile stresses with low fracture resistance of
concrete often results in cracking. This cracking reduces the durability
of a concrete structure.
Effects of shrinkage and accompanying creep of concrete along with
cracking provide the major concern to the structural designer because of
the inaccuracies and unknowns that surround them. In general, these
effects are taken into account of long-term deformation and prestress
loss analysis of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Though considered
as long-term effects, shrinkage and creep also have influence on crack
resistance and deformations of RC members subjected to short-term
loading.
This paper introduces the recent state of research on shrinkage of
concrete and reviews the prediction models. Factors that influence the
behaviour of the shrunk reinforced concrete members are discussed.
Shrinkage influence on short-term behaviour of reinforced concrete beams
has been investigated numerically and compared with test data reported
in the literature.
2. Factors, affecting shrinkage of concrete
Four main types of shrinkage associated with concrete are plastic
shrinkage, autogenous shrinkage, carbonation shrinkage, and drying
shrinkage. Plastic shrinkage is associated with moisture loss from
freshly poured concrete into the surrounding environment. Autogenous
shrinkage is the early shrinkage of concrete caused by loss of water
from capillary pores due to the hydration of cementitious materials,
without loss of water into the surrounding environment. This type of
shrinkage tends to increase at lower water to cementitious materials
ratio and at a higher cement content of a concrete mixture. Carbonation
shrinkage is caused by the chemical reactions of various cement
hydration products with carbon dioxide present in the air. Drying
shrinkage can be defined as the volumetric change due to the drying of
hardened concrete. This type of shrinkage is caused by the diffusion of
water from hardened concrete into the surrounding environment. Drying
shrinkage is a volumetric change caused by the movement and the loss of
water squeezing out from the capillary pores resulting in the
development of tensile stresses, since the internal humidity attempts to
make uniform with a lower environmental humidity. More recent
investigation on various aspects of shrinkage is given in reference
(Gribniak et al. 2007).
The magnitude of shrinkage deformations depends on concrete mixture
proportions and material properties, method of curing, ambient
temperature and humidity conditions, and geometry of the concrete
element. In the analysis of concrete structures two components, i.e.
drying and autogenous shrinkage, are taken into account. The ratio of
autogenous and drying shrinkage in total shrinkage of concrete is
schematically illustrated in Fig. 1 (Sakata & Shimomura 2004). In
the case of normal-strength concrete, it is not a problem if shrinkage
is treated without distinguishing between autogenous and drying
shrinkage because for such concrete autogenous shrinkage strain varies
between 20 and 110 micro-strains.
This is only 10 to 20 % of the long-term shrinkage (Silliman &
Newtson 2006). Consequently, autogenous shrinkage was neglected for many
years. On the other hand, in the case of high-strength concrete (HSC),
autogenous and drying shrinkage should be distinguished because the
ratio of these shrinkages to total shrinkage varies with respect to age
when concrete is exposed to drying conditions (Sakata & Shimomura
2004). The focus of shrinkage research today is to understand more the
phenomenon of autogenous and drying shrinkage (Kovler & Zhutovskiy
2006).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
3. Recent investigation on autogenous shrinkage modelling
Models reviewed in this chapter after deal with autogenous
shrinkage, which is justly considered as the most important shrinkage
components in HSC. Only the relevant aspects of researches are presented
herein.
C. Hua, A. Erlacher and P. Acker (1995). Hua et al. presented a
macroscopic scale analytical model of autogenous shrinkage (1995). It
introduced a macroscopic stress induced by capillary depression and
applied it to viscoelastic aging behaviour of the material.
Hardening cement paste is considered as a continuum medium with
aging viscoelastic behaviour, which can be generally characterised by a
creep function:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1)
where [[epsilon].sub.[infinity]] (t'), [alpha](t'),
b(t') are empirical parameters, which were obtained through a
series of the experiments, as well as the values of Young's
modulus. Shrinkage strain was calculated using the creep function:
[epsilon](t) = [[integral].sup.t.sub.0] J (t, t')[1 - 2v]
d[[summation].sup.s] (t'), (2)
where [[summation].sup.s] (t') is macroscopic stress derived
using the following equation:
[[summation].sup.s] = [P.sub.c] P = (-2[gamma]/r)P, (3)
where [gamma] is surface tension of the liquid, r - radius of
menisci curvature, P is total porosity of the material.
C. Hua, A. Erlacher and P. Acker (1997). The previous model
represented autogenous deformations on the macroscopic scale, whereas
the present model treats autogenous shrinkage at the scale of hydrating
cement grains (Hua et al. 1997). In this model, the initial state is
taken as the time of setting when continuous skeleton is formed and
begins to undergo the capillary depression. To simplify the model, it
was assumed that all cement grains are spherical and identical, and that
distribution of grains is periodical. This allows working on periodic
cell.
In the mechanical model the material is composed of three
constituents with locally non-ageing properties. Anhydrous cement was
considered as elastic isotropic, characterised by Young's modulus
and Poisson's ratio, and modelled by internal hydrate layers.
Hydrates and immobilised water was considered as a viscoelastic
isotropic component. The viscoelastic deformation of each layer begins
when it forms. Accordingly, each new layer is deposited on layers
already deformed by capillary depression and thus each hydrate layer has
its own history of deformation. This model allows modelling a
macroscopically ageing material, while constituents have a very simple
behaviour.
E. A. B. Koenders and K. van Breugel (1997). This model uses
thermodynamic approach to determine autogenous shrinkage of hardening
cement paste (Koenders & van Breugel 1997). In this model, variation
in surface tension is considered as the major driving force of
autogenous shrinkage. Assuming a cylindrical pore shape, pore size
distribution model was initially established, which is described
mathematically by the function:
[V.sub.p] (d) = a ln (d/[d.sub.0]), (4)
where [V.sub.p] (d) is volume of all capillary pores with diameter
[less than or equal to] d ; [d.sub.0] is the minimum capillary pore
diameter was set to 0,002 [micro]m, and a is the constant which reflects
the increase of pore space with respect to the pore diameter.
Autogenous deformations are calculated using Bangham formula
(Bangham & Fackhoury 1931):
[DELTA]l/l = [lambda] x [DELTA] [gamma]. (5)
The proportionality factor [lambda] utilises the empty pore wall
area found from pore size distribution and is calculated according to the equation
[lambda] = [summation] x [rho]/3E, (6)
where [SIGMA] is pore wall area of empty pores, [rho]--specific
mass and E--elasticity modulus of the material.
Ishida et al. (1998). This model was derived from micro-mechanical
physics of water in pore structure of concrete (Ishida et al. 1999). The
capillary tension was assumed to be the driving force of autogenous and
drying shrinkage.
The material properties of ageing concrete were obtained by the
analysis considering the interrelation of hydration, moisture transport
and pore structure development process. Cement hydration model provided
hydration level of each mineral and temperature development due to heat
of hydration. The capillary tension is assumed a driving force of both
autogenous and drying shrinkage. This method allows modelling a
macroscopically ageing material with viscoelastic behaviour, and
additionally taking into account a loading history.
4. Shrinkage and creep prediction techniques
Designers typically use one of two code methods to estimate creep
and shrinkage strain in concrete, ie either Eurocode 2 or ACI 318.
Eurocode 2 is based on the CEB-FIP MC 90 model recommended by the
Euro-International Committee, and ACI 318 is based on the ACI 209 model
recommended by the American Concrete Institute (Meyerson et al. 2002:
8). This chapter presents three shrinkage and creep predictions models,
namely the CEB-FIP MC 90 model, ACI 209 model, and Bazant & Baweia
(B3) model.
4.1. Modulus of elasticity
The modulus of elasticity is an input parameter to the creep
compliance. It is defined as the tangent modulus of elasticity at the
origin of the stress-strain diagram and can be estimated from the mean
compressive cylinder strength and the concrete age. The tangent modulus
[E.sub.c] is approximately equal to the secant modulus [E.sub.cm] of
unloading which is usually measured in tests. Formulas according to some
relevant design codes are shown in Table 1, where [f.sub.cm] is the mean
concrete cylinder compressive strength at the age of 28 days [MPa].
Besides the concrete strength, the elastic modulus depends also on
the type of the aggregate, the curing conditions and the test method.
The influences of these factors are largely responsible for the
significant scatter which can be observed when experimental values of
the modulus of elasticity are plotted against the concrete strength
(Takacs 2002: 14). Test result of the elastic modulus is usually
available for major structures but it is very rare that at least a
short-term creep test is carried out (Takacs 2002: 30). Applying the
measured elastic modulus into creep analysis may improve the deformation
prediction or may corrupt it. A short-term creep test is therefore a
recommended option for major structures. Under precise and careful
implementation a creep test with a load duration as short as two days
can be adequate to adjust the theoretical creep compliance with
appreciable accuracy (Bazant et al. 1999).
4.2. CEB-FIP Model Code 1990 (MC 90)
The equations presented here were published in the final draft of
the MC 90 (CEB 1991). The model is valid for normal density concrete
with grade up to C80 and exposed to a mean relative humidity in the
range of 40 to 100 %. At the time when the code was prepared very
limited information on concrete with a characteristic strength higher
than 50 MPa were available and therefore the models should be used with
caution in that strength range.
Creep. The relationship between the total stress-dependent strain
and the stress is described with the compliance function which is
written as
J(t, [t.sub.0]) = 1/[E.sub.c]([t.sub.0]) + [PHI](t,
[t.sub.0])/[E.sub.c], (7)
where [PHI](t, [t.sub.0]) is the creep coefficient; [t.sub.0] - the
age of concrete at loading [days]; [E.sub.c] = 1,1 x [E.sub.cm]--the
tangent modulus at the age of 28 days [MPa]; [E.sub.c] ([t.sub.0]--the
tangent modulus at the age of loading t0 [MPa].
The creep coefficient is estimated from
[PHI](t, [t.sub.0]) = [[PHI].sub.0] [[beta].sub.c] (t - [t.sub.0]),
(8)
where [[PHI].sub.0] is the notional creep coefficient;
[[beta].sub.c] (t - [t.sub.0])--the time function to describe the
development of creep with time. The notional creep coefficient is
derived from
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (9)
where RH is the relative humidity of the ambient environment [%];
[h.sub.0]--the notional size of the structural member [mm];
[A.sub.c]--the area of the cross-section of the structural member
[[mm.sup.2]]; u--the perimeter of the cross-section in contact with the
atmosphere [mm].
The time development function for the creep coefficient is written
as
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (10)
Shrinkage. The shrinkage strain is calculated as
[[epsilon].sub.cs] (t, [t.sub.s]) = [[epsilon].sub.cs0]
[[beta].sub.s] (t - [t.sub.s]), (11)
where [[epsilon].sub.cs0] is the notional shrinkage coefficient;
[[beta].sub.s]--the time function to describe the development of
shrinkage with time; [t.sub.s]--the age of concrete when drying begins
[days]. The notional shrinkage coefficient can be estimated from
[[epsilon].sub.cs0] = [[epsilon].sub.s]
([f.sub.cm])[[beta].sub.RH], (12)
where
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (13)
where [[beta].sub.sc] is a coefficient which depends on the cement
type, 4 for slowly hardening cement, 5 for normal and rapid hardening
cement and 8 for rapid hardening high strength cement; factor
[[beta].sub.s1] was assumed equal to 1,0. RH in Eq (13) should be not
less than 40 %.
The development of shrinkage with time is given by
[[beta].sub.s] (t - [t.sub.s]) = [square root of t -
[t.sub.s]/0,035 x [h.sup.2.sub.0] + t - [t.sub.s]] (14)
The influence of mean temperature other than 20[degrees]C can be
also taken into account. With the decreasing temperature both the
notional creep coefficient and the notional shrinkage coefficient are
decreasing and their development with time are decelerated.
4.3. The 1999 update of the CEB-FIP MC 1990
The models were published in the fib Bulletin (FIB 1999). The
primary intention with the update was to improve the prediction models
for high-strength concrete and further extend the validity of the models
to high-performance concrete.
Creep. The updated creep model was in fact first published in
Eurocode 2 (CEN 2001). It is closely related to the model in the MC 90
(CEB 1991), but three strength dependent coefficients were introduced
into the original model. The extended model is valid for both normal
strength concrete and high performance concrete up to concrete cylinder
strength of 110 MPa. Three coefficients were introduced into the MC 90
model:
[[alpha].sub.1] = [(35/[f.sub.cm]).sup.0,7]; [[alpha].sub.2] =
[(35/[f.sub.cm]).sup.0,2]; [[alpha].sub.3] = [(35/[f.sub.cm]).sup.0,5].
(15)
Coefficients [[alpha].sub.1] and [[alpha].sub.2] are meant to
adjust the notional creep coefficient through the [[PHI].sub.RH] term.
Coefficient [[alpha].sub.3] is meant to be the adjustment for the time
dependency function. Eqs (9) and (10) have been rearranged in following
form:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (16)
Shrinkage. The shrinkage model represents a major change. The total
shrinkage is subdivided into the autogenous shrinkage component and the
drying shrinkage component. With this approach it was possible to
formulate a model which is valid for both normal strength concrete and
high performance concrete having compressive strength up to 120 MPa.
The total shrinkage strain at time t is calculated as
[[epsilon].sub.cs] (t, [t.sub.s]) = [[epsilon].sub.cas] (t) +
[[epsilon].sub.cds] (t, [t.sub.s]) (17)
with
[[epsilon].sub.cas] (t) = [[epsilon].sub.cas0] ([f.sub.cm]) x
[[beta].sub.as] (t) (18) [[epsilon].sub.cds] (t, [t.sub.s]) =
[[epsilon].sub.cds0] ([f.sub.cm]) x [[beta].sub.RH] (RH) x
[[beta].sub.ds] (t -[t.sub.ts]),
where [[epsilon].sub.cas] (t) and [[epsilon].sub.cds0] (t,
[t.sub.s]) are the autogenous and drying shrinkage strain at time t,
respectively; [[espilon].sub.cas0] ([f.sub.cm]) and [[epsilon].sub.cds0]
([f.sub.cm])are the notional autogenous and drying shrinkage
coefficients, respectively; [[beta].sub.as] (t) and [[beta].sub.ds] (t -
[t.sub.s]) are the time development function for autogenous and drying
shrinkage, respectively; [[beta].sub.RH] (RH) is the coefficient taking
into account the effect of relative humidity on drying; t--the concrete
age [days]; [t.sub.s]--the age of concrete, when drying begins [days]; t
- [t.sub.s]--the duration of drying [days].
The formulations for estimating the autogenous shrinkage are
written as
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (19)
where as [[alpha].sub.as] is a coefficient which depends on the
cement type, 800 for slowly hardening cement, 700 for normal and rapidly
hardening cement and 600 for rapidly hardening high-strength cement.
In Eurocode 2 (CEN 2001) autogenous shrinkage is calculated using
the following equation:
[[epsilon].sub.cas0] ([f.sub.ck]) = -2,5 ([f.sub.ck] - 10) x
[10.sup.-6]. (20)
The formulations for estimating the drying shrinkage are written as
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (21)
where [[alpha].sub.ds1] is a coefficient which depends on the
cement type, 3 for slowly hardening cement, 4 for normal and rapidly
hardening cement and 6 for rapidly hardening high-strength cement;
[[alpha].sub.ds2] is a coefficient which depends on the cement type,
0,13 for slowly hardening cement, 0,11 for normal and rapidly hardening
cement and 0,12 for rapidly hardening high-strength cement. Coefficients
[[beta].sub.RH] and [[beta].sub.s] (t - [t.sub.s]) are derived according
to formulas (13) and (14) using factor [[beta].sub.s1] calculated by Eq
(21). The effect of ageing on the elastic modulus can be taken into
account using the following equation:
[E.sub.c] (t) = [[beta].sub.E] (t) [E.sub.c]), (22)
where [E.sub.c] (t) is the modulus of elasticity of the concrete at
age of t days [MPa], [[beta].sub.E] (t)--the time development function
for the elastic modulus. This function can be derived from the
relationship
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (23)
where t is the concrete age [day]; s--a coefficient which depends
on the cement type, 0,20 for rapid hardening high-strength cement, 0,25
for normal and rapid hardening cement and 0,38 for slowly hardening
cement; [alpha] is parameter assumed equal to 0,3.
4.4. ACI 209 model
ACI 209 model (ACI Committee 209 1998) recommended by the American
Concrete Institute to estimate shrinkage and creep strain.
Creep. This model uses a hyperbolic function to represent the
creep-time relationship:
[PHI](t, [t.sub.0]) = [(t - [t.sub.0]).sup.0,6]/10 + [(t -
[t.sub.0]).sup.0,6] [PHI] ([t.sub.0]), (24)
where [t.sub.0]--the age of the concrete at first loading [days]; t
- [t.sub.0]--the duration of loading [days]; [PHI]([t.sub.0])--the final
creep coefficient and expressed as
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (25)
where [[gamma].sub.c,i], 1 ... 6 are empirical coefficients with
account for parameters affecting the creep magnitude.
Coefficient [[gamma].sub.c,1] accounts the concrete age at the time
of the first loading, [t.sub.0].
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (26)
Coefficient ,2 c a includes the effect of variations in the ambient
relative humidity, RH [%]:
[[gamma].sub.c,2] = 1,27 - 0,0067 x RH, RH > 40 %. (27)
Coefficient [[gamma].sub.c,3] a accounts the size and shape of the
member. Two alternative methods are given for the estimation of
[[gamma].sub.c,3] (ACI Committee 209 1998). Here presented technique is
based on the average thickness [h.sub.0,ACI] = 2[h.sub.0] [see Eq (9)]
and recommended for average thicknesses up to about 305 to 380 mm. For
average thickness of the member less than 150 mm, [[gamma].sub.c,3] is
obtained from Table 2.
For average thickness of members greater than 150 mm and up to 380
mm, [[gamma].sub.c,3] is calculated by the equation
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (28)
Coefficients [[gamma].sub.c,4] ... [[gamma].sub.c,6] depend on the
composition of the concrete
[[gamma].sub.c,4] = 0,82 + 0,00264 x s; s > 130 mm;
[[gamma].sub.c,5] = 0,88 + 0,0024 x [psi]; [psi] < 40 or [psi] >
60 %; [[gamma].sub.c,6] = 0,46 + 0,09 x [alpha] < 1,0; [alpha] > 8
%, or (29)
where s is the slump of the fresh concrete [mm]; [psi]--the ratio
of the fine aggregate to total aggregate by weight [%] and [alpha] is
the air content [%]. These coefficients in undefined intervals are
assumed equal to 1,0.
Under a constant stress [[sigma].sub.0] first applied at age
[t.sub.0], the load-dependent strain at time t is derived from the
relationship:
[epsilon](t) = [[sigma].sub.0]/[E.sub.c]([t.sub.0]) [1 + [PSI] (t,
[t.sub.0])], (30)
where [E.sub.c] ([t.sub.0]) is obtained from the equation presented
in Table 1. The concrete strength at age [t.sub.0] may be obtained from
the 28 day strength by the equation
[f.sub.c] (t) = [t.sub.0]/[alpha] + [beta] x [t.sub.0] [f.sub.c]
(28), (31)
where [alpha] and [beta] depend on the cement type and curing
conditions. For normal Type I cement, these coefficients are assumed
equal to 4 and 0,85 (for moist curing) and 1 and 0,95 (for steam
curing), respectively.
Shrinkage. The shrinkage strain at time t measured from the start
of drying is calculated by following equation:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (32)
where [[epsilon].sub.cs,u] is the ultimate shrinkage at time
infinity and represents the product of the applicable correction
factors:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (33)
where [[gamma].sub.cs,i], i = 1 ... are empirical coefficients with
account for parameters affecting the shrinkage magnitude.
Coefficient [[gamma].sub.cs,1] includes the effect of variations in
the ambient relative humidity, RH [%]:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (34)
Coefficient [[gamma].sub.cs,2] a accounts for the size and shape of
the member. Two alternative methods as in creep analysis are given in
(ACI Committee 209 1998) for estimating the [[gamma].sub.cs,2]. Herein
presented technique is based on the average thickness [h.sub.0,ACI]
(Table 2). For average thickness of members greater than 150 mm and up
to 380 mm, [[gamma].sub.cs,2] is calculated using the equation
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (35)
Coefficients [[gamma].sub.cs,3] ... [[gamma].sub.cs,7] depend on
the composition of the concrete
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (36)
where c is cement content in concrete [kg/[m.sup.3]]; other
parameters are analogous to Eq (29). These coefficients in undefined
intervals are assumed equal to 1,0.
Coefficient [[gamma].sub.cs,7] accounts for variations in the
period of initial moist curing and is presented in Table 3. For a
concrete which is steam cured for a period of between one and three days
[[gamma].sub.cs,7] = 1, 0.
4.5. Bazant & Baweia (B3) model
The complete description of the B3 model can be found in (Bazant
& Baweja 1995a, 1995b).
Creep. An important feature of the B3 creep model is that the
compliance function is decomposed into the instantaneous response, the
compliance function for basic creep and the additional compliance
function for drying creep. The creep compliance is written as
J(t, [t.sub.0]) = 1/[E.sub.0] + [C.sub.0] (t, [t.sub.0]) +
[C.sub.d] (t, [t.sub.0], [t.sub.s]), (37)
where [E.sub.0] is the so-called asymptotic modulus; [C.sub.0] (t,
[t.sub.0]) and [C.sub.d] (t, [t.sub.0], [t.sub.s] are the compliance
function for basic and drying creep, respectively.
The instantaneous response is defined with the so-called asymptotic
modulus, [E.sub.0], which is not the same as the conventional static
modulus. The asymptotic modulus is considered age independent. Its value
is higher than the real elastic modulus and it can be estimated as
[E.sub.0] [approximately equal to] 1,5 E. According to Bazant, it is
more convenient to use the asymptotic modulus because concrete exhibits
a pronounced creep even after a short loading.
Shrinkage. The shrinkage strain at time t is defined as:
[[epsilon].sub.cs] (t, [t.sub.0]) = -[[epsilon].sub.cs[infinity]]
[k.sub.RH] S(t), (38)
where
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (39)
where [[epsilon].sub.cs[infinity]] is the ultimate shrinkage; S
(t)--the time function for shrinkage; [[alpha].sub.1] and
[[alpha].sub.2] are the correlation terms for effects of cement type and
curing conditions, respectively; w--the water content;
[k.sub.RH]--humidity dependence factor; t--the age of concrete;
[t.sub.0]--the age, when during begins; [[tau].sub.sh]--the size
dependence factor.
The B3 model takes into account the influence of the material
composition directly. Besides model parameters, which are considered in
previously reviewed models, the cement content, the water-cement ratio,
the aggregate-cement ratio and the water content are taken into account.
5. Experimental investigations of concrete shrinkage
An important but often overlooked property of creep and shrinkage
prediction models is the expected error of the prediction. Creep and
shrinkage are among the most uncertain mechanical properties of
concrete. The theoretical models only predict the mean tendencies based
on observations in available experimental data. In any particular
prediction the effect of a certain parameter may be overestimated or
underestimated (Takacs 2002: 17). This chapter introduces experimental
shrinkage measurements performed by the authors and performs a
comparison with the predictions by Eurocode 2 and ACI 209 predictions
against these data.
The tests were performed in the laboratory of Vilnius Gediminas
Technical University in 2005. The experimental specimens were cured
under the laboratory conditions at average relative humidity (RH) 64,7 %
and average temperature 13,1[degrees]C. Concrete mix proportion is given
in Table 4. The ordinary Portland cement and crushed aggregate (16 mm
maximum nominal size) were used. Water/cement and aggregate/cement ratio
by weight were taken as 0,42 and 2,97, respectively.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
Free shrinkage measurements were performed on prisms of 100 x 100 x
400 mm and 280 x 300 x 350 mm in size. The specimens and instrumentation
for measuring the shrinkage deformations are shown in Fig. 2. Steel
gauge studs, with the base 200 mm, were either glued on the concrete
surface (Figs 2a and 2b) or embedded in fresh concrete (Fig. 2c). In the
latter case, free shrinkage measurements were initiated in 24 h after
casting, whereas measurements on other prisms were started in 3-4 days.
Shrinkage deformation variation in time is shown in Fig. 3(a). It
is clearly seen the difference between the deformations measured in 280
x 300 x 350 mm and 100 x 100 x 400 mm prisms. The latter effect is
caused by the only factor, i.e. the difference in the cross-section.
The size conversion factors obtained from the tests and predicted
by the Eurocode 2 (EC 2) and ACI 209 design code formulas are given in
Table 5. It is seen that the EC 2 predictions were adequate, whereas the
ACI technique has significantly overestimated the factor. Fig. 3b plots
experimental points obtained for both types of specimens using the
experimentally derived size correction factor (Table 5). The predicted
shrinkage variation curves using the EC 2 and ACI 209 methods for 280 x
300 x 350 mm prisms, based on averaged parameters of test specimens are
also shown in Fig. 3b.
It can be stated that the averaged curve obtained from the test
results falls in between the code curves. Numerical results in Table 6
support the graphical data.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
6. Creep and shrinkage models in comparison
Experimental results of creep and shrinkage are marked with a large
scatter, at least from the perspective of existing approach in
modelling. The creep compliance and the shrinkage strain given by the
theoretical models are seen as the expected average value of the
responses and the prediction is also characterised by the corresponding
measure of variation. Consequently, the structural response should be
considered as a statistical variable rather than a deterministic value.
The expected statistical variation has to be taken into account in the
structural design. The reported coefficient of variation is 20 % for the
creep compliance and 35 % for the shrinkage strain for the MC 90 (CEB
1991). The same values are 23 % and 34 % for the B3 model (Bazant &
Baweja 1995a, 1995b).
A recent comparison of models discussed in Chapter 4 using the
distribution of residuals of the creep predictions showed that the
Eurocode 2, ACI 209 and B3 models overestimated the creep for 39 %, 23 %
and 42 %, of the total number of data points and underestimated the
creep for 61 %, 77 % and 58 %, respectively (Al-Manaseer &
Lakshmikantan 1999). The mean coefficient of variation for the residuals
for the Eurocode 2, ACI 209 and B3 models were 31 %, 38,6 % and 32 %,
respectively. The prediction model parameters and corresponding
limitations are presented in Table 7. In this table A/C is
aggregate-to-cement ratio; W/C is water-to-cement ratio; [t.sub.0] or
[t.sub.s] are the age of concrete at loading and beginning of a
shrinkage, respectively.
A comprehensive investigation into accuracy of shrinkage and creep
prediction models was performed by Meyerson et al. (2002: 46). It has
been shown that the Eurocode 2 predicts the creep and shrinkage strain
of concrete with the best precision and accuracy. Al-Manaseer & Lam
(2005) performed a comparative analysis of shrinkage and creep models
using experimental data from RILEM Data Bank. It has been found that B3
is the best model to predict shrinkage and creep effects; Eurocode 2
predictions of creep were also considered accurate.
Schellenberg et al. (2005) compared the creep and shrinkage
predictions made by Eurocode 2 and ACI 209. It has been stated that the
differences between codes can be significant in early stages of
construction. For longer periods of time there was found no essential
difference between predictions. It has been pointed out that the most
important thing is taking the shrinkage and creep effects into
consideration, while it is only of a secondary importance which code is
applied.
7. Influence of shrinkage and creep on deformations of RC
structures
Under restraining conditions, shrinkage is always associated with
creep which relieves the stresses induced by shrinkage. In general,
shrinkage and creep are taken into account of long-term deformation and
prestress loss analysis of concrete structures (Zamblauskaite et al.
2005). Though considered as a long-term effect, shrinkage may
significantly reduce crack resistance and increase deformations of RC
members subjected to short-term loading (Bischoff 2001; Sato et al.
2007). However, most of the known techniques do not include these
effects in a short-term analysis.
To better understand how volumetric changes of hardened concrete
can result in cracking, Fig. 4(a) compares the time dependent strength
(cracking resistance) development with the time dependent residual
stresses that develop. If strength and residual stress development are
plotted as shown in Fig. 4(a), it is likely that the specimen will crack
when these two lines intersect. Similarly, it follows that if strength
of the concrete is always greater than the developed stresses, no
cracking will occur.
The residual stress that develops in concrete as a result of
restraint may sometimes be difficult to quantify. This residual stress
cannot be computed directly by multiplying the free shrinkage strain by
the elastic modulus (ie Hooke's Law) since stress relaxation occurs. Stress relaxation is similar to creep. However, while creep can
be thought of as the time dependent deformation due to a sustained load,
stress relaxation is a term used to describe the reduction in stress
under a constant deformation. This reduction is illustrated in Fig. 4b
in which a specimen of original length (I) is exposed to drying and a
uniform shrinkage strain uniformly developed across the section. If the
specimen is unrestrained, the applied shrinkage would cause the specimen
to undergo a change in length of [DELTA][L.sup.+] (II). To maintain the
condition of perfect restraint (ie no length change) a fictitious load
can be envisioned to be applied (III). However, it should be noted that,
if the specimen was free to displace under this fictitious loading, the
length of the specimen would increase (due to creep) by an amount
[DELTA][L.sup.-] (IV). Again, to maintain a perfect restraint (ie no
length change) an opposing fictitious stress is applied (V) resulting in
an overall reduction in shrinkage stress (VI). This illustrates that
creep can play a very significant role in determining the magnitude of
stresses that develop at early ages and has been estimated to relax the
stresses by 30 % to 70 % (Weiss 1999: 145).
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
Deformational behaviour of plain and RC members due to shrinkage
has been analysed under the assumption of uniform distribution of
shrinkage strain across the section. As shown in Figs 5a and 5c,
shrinkage of an isolated plain concrete member would merely shorten it
without causing camber. Reinforcement embedded in a concrete member
provides restraint to shrinkage leading to compressive stresses in
reinforcement and tensile stresses in concrete (Figs 5b, 5d). If the
reinforcement is not symmetrically placed in a section, shrinkage causes
non-uniform stress and strain distribution within the height of the
section (Fig. 6). The maximal tensile stresses appear in the extreme
concrete fibre, close to a larger concentration of reinforcement.
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
8. Prediction methods for shrinkage deflection
It is common for all approximate methods based on beam model to
calculate the mid-deflection f by the formula representing an
approximate integration of curvature of cracked cross-sections:
f = s x [kappa] x [l.sup.2]. (40)
In the above, s is the factor depending on a loading case covering
the shape of moment distribution; [kappa]--the curvature; l--the beam
span. The crucial point is how to estimate the shrinkage curvature. This
chapter presents some methods for predicting this curvature.
8.1. Eurocode 2 method
It is pointed out in Eurocode 2 (CEN 2001) that time dependent
deformations of concrete from creep and shrinkage shall be taken into
account. Shrinkage curvature [[kappa].sub.cs] may be assessed using the
following expression:
[[kappa].sub.cs] = [[epsilon].sub.cs][[alpha].sub.e] S/I;
[[alpha].sub.e] = [E.sub.s]/[E.sub.c,eff]; [E.sub.c,eff] = [E.sub.cm/1 +
[PHI],(41)
where [[epsilon].sub.cs] is the free shrinkage strain (see Eq
(17)); S--the first moment of area of the reinforcement about the
centroid of the section; I--the second moment of area of the section;
[PHI]--the creep coefficient relevant for the load and time interval
(see Eq (8)).
8.2. ACI 435 method
Based on the ACI 435 (ACI Committee 435 2003), a long-term
curvature at time t is the sum of three components corresponding to the
influence of external loading, creep and shrinkage. Shrinkage curvature
is determined, using the equivalent tensile force method, by the
following formula:
[[kappa].sub.cs] = [[epsilon].sub.cs]
[A.sub.c][e.sub.c]/[I.sub.eff]; [E.sub.c,eff] = [E.sub.c]/1 +
[[chi].sup.[PHI] (42)
where [[epsilon].sub.cs] is the shrinkage strain (see Eq (32));
[e.sub.c] is the distance between the centroid of plain concrete area
[A.sub.c] and the centroid of the age-adjusted transformed section (Fig.
6); [I.sub.eff]--moment of inertia about the centroid of the
age-adjusted transformed section composed of [A.sub.c] plus [??] =
[E.sub.s]/[E.sub.c,eff] multiplied by areas of reinforcements;
[chi]--the ageing coefficient (can be assumed 1,0); [PHI]--the creep
coefficient (see (24)).
8.3. Modified equivalent tensile force method
The equivalent tensile force method (a fictitious elastic analysis)
has been used in various forms at least since 1936, for instance see
(Branson 1977: 168). This method was modified in (ACI Committee 435
2003) using 0,5[E.sub.c] and the gross section properties for better
results, is given by next equation:
[kappa].sub.cs] = 2 [N.sub.cs][e.sub.g]/[E.sub.c,eff][I.sub.g];
[N.sub.cs] = [[epsilon].sub.cs] [E.sub.s] ([A.sub.s1] + [A.sub.s2]),
(43)
where [e.sub.g] is the distance between the centroid of the plain
concrete section and the extreme tensile fibre (Fig. 6); [I.sub.g]
refers to pain concrete section, other notations are the same as in Eq
(41).
8.4. Miller's method
Miller's method (1958) refers to singly reinforced members
only. This method assumes that the extreme fibre of a beam farthest from
the tensile steel shrinks in the same degree as the free shrinkage of
the concrete, and the shrinkage curvature is calculated by formula:
[[kappa].sub.cs] = [[epsilon].sub.cs] (1 - [k.sub.cs])/d;
[k.sub.cs] = [[epsilon].sub.s,cs]/[[epsilon].sub.cs], (44)
where [[epsilon].sub.s,cs] is the steel strain due to shrinkage.
Miller suggested empirical values of coefficient [k.sub.cs] equal to 0,1
for heavily reinforced members and 0,3 for moderately reinforced
members.
8.5. Branson's method
Branson's method (1977: 169) represents a modification of
Miller's method. This method is applicable to both singly- and
doubly-reinforced members. The shrinkage curvature of a member is
derived by the formula:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (45)
This method is also suggested by British Standard Code and
recommended by ACI 209 (ACI Committee 209 1998).
8.6. Corley & Sozen method
This method (Branson 1977: 171) is given by
[[kappa].sub.cs] = 0,035/d ([rho] - [rho]'); [rho] =
[A.sub.s1]/bd; [rho]' = [A.sub.s2]/bd. (46)
The constant 0,035 may be used for sections where the free
shrinkage is known or where it is of the order of 500 micro-strains. In
this case, the calculated curvature may be multiplied by the ratio of
shrinkage to 500 microstrains. This procedure is also recommended by ACI
for the design of concrete bridges (Branson 1977: 171).
9. Analysis of shrinkage effect on deformational behaviour of RC
beams
Two numerical analyses of shrinkage effect on deformational
behaviour of RC beams are presented in this chapter. The test results
reported by [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [Figarovskij] (1962) are
used for this purpose. The experimental beams were cured under the
laboratory conditions at average relative humidity (RH) 53 %. The beams
of rectangular section, 3,0 m in span, were tested during 29 days under
a four point bending system with 1,0 m pure bending zone. Basic
parameters of the beams employed in the analyses are presented in Table
8.
9.1. Prediction of shrinkage curvature
This sub-chapter presents a comparative analysis of predictions
made by the methods discussed in Chapter 8. Shrinkage curvature of beam
P3-2Pd (Table 8) was calculated. The calculation results are presented
in Fig. 7. Fig. 7 also shows (by dashed vertical lines) shrinkage
deformations calculated for the beam using the Eurocode 2 and the ACI
209 methods.
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
It can be noted that predictions made by most of the methods, ie
Eurocode 2, Modified equivalent tensile force, Branson's and Corley
& Sozen, are very close. The curvatures calculated (for a normative
value of shrinkage strain) using these methods were 437, 493, 417 and
404 x [10.sup.-6] [m.sup.-1], respectively. In contrast to this, the
prediction by the ACI 435 method was 256 x [10.sup.-6] [m.sup.-1].
9.2. Numerical modelling the test beams
In this section, the deflection predictions made by Eurocode 2 (CEN
2001) and ACI 318 (ACI Committee 318 2005) code methods and the layer
model (Kaklauskas 2004) are checked against the experiment data of RC
beams reported by [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [Figarovskij] (1962).
Deflections predicted by the codes are shown in Fig. 8.
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
In the layer model shrinkage was modelled by a fictitious axial force and bending moment as shown in Fig. 9 (see also Fig. 6). Eurocode
2 technique was used for calculating free shrinkage strains. Concrete
tensile and compressive strengths and modulus of elasticity were defined
using Eurocode 2. An elastic-plastic relationship has been adopted for
reinforcement material idealisation. The Eurocode 2 stress-strain
relationship was assumed for the compressive concrete. A simple linear
tension stiffening relationship shown in Fig. 10a was taken for
modelling cracked tensile concrete. Factor [beta] in this relationship
was calculated using the relationship proposed by Kaklauskas (2001: 70):
[beta] = 32,8 - 27,6 x p + 7,12 x [p.sup.2], (47)
where p is the reinforcement ratio (%). Beam P1-1Kk was reinforced
with plain bars, thus according recommendations (Kaklauskas 2001: 70),
[beta] was reduced by 20 %.
Experimental and calculated moment-deflection diagrams are shown in
Fig. 10b. A good agreement of calculation results with experimental
data, when shrinkage effect was taken into consideration, should be
noted. Fig. 10b shows that shrinkage has significantly reduced the
cracking resistance and leads to larger deflections. On average,
deflections after cracking have increased about 15 % when shrinkage was
taken into account. Table 9 presents a relative error of deflection
predictions at service load (corresponding to 50 % of the ultimate
bending moment [M.sub.u]) including and ignoring shrinkage.
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]
10. Concluding remarks
Beyond the uncertainties associated with the creep and the
shrinkage characteristics in concrete, which are undoubtedly the biggest
obstacle to improve the accuracy of deformation prediction, there are
further uncertainties contributing to the deformation problem in RC
structures. It seems evident that the shrinkage prediction models can be
found in o reasonable agreement when the parameters are in the range
which is typical of an experimental setup in a laboratory. The
availability of sufficient experimental data within that range provides
a more solid basis for adjusting the theoretical models and the degree
of uncertainty is smaller.
Shrinkage curvatures analysis has shown the difference in almost
1,7 times between predictions made by ACI 435 method and other methods.
Deflection analysis has shown that code methods indirectly take
into account the shrinkage effect: the code predictions of cracking
moment are in accordance with test results.
In the numerical short-term deflection analysis, shrinkage and
creep effects have to be taken into account. The calculated deflections
ignoring shrinkage were underestimated by about 15 %.
Received 14 Dec. 2007; accepted 31 Jan. 2008
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to express their gratitude for the financial
support provided by the Lithuanian State Fund of Research and Studies,
and for the complementary financial support provided by the Agency of
International Programs of Scientific and Technology Development in
Lithuania.
References
ACI Committee 209. 1998. Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage, and
Temperature Effects in Concrete Structures, ACI 209R-92 (Reapproved
1997). 47 p.
ACI Committee 318. 2005. Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete, ACI 318-05. 430 p.
ACI Committee 435. 2003. Control of Deflection in Concrete
Structures, ACI 435R-95 (Reapproved 2000). 89 p.
AL-Manaseer, A.; Lakshmikantan, S. 1999. Comparison between current
and future design code models for shrinkage and creep, Revue Francaise
de Genie Civil 3(3-4): 39-59.
AL-Manaseer, A.; Lam, J.-P. 2005. Statistical evaluation of
shrinkage and creep models, ACI Materials Journal 102(3): 170-176.
Bangham, D. H.; Fackhoury, N. 1931. The swelling of charcoal, in
Proc of Royal Society of London 130: 81-89.
Bazant, Z. P.; Baweja, S. 1995b. Justification and refinements of
model b3 for concrete creep and shrinkage. Updating and Theoretical
Basis, Materials and Structures 28(8): 488-495.
Bazant, Z. P.; Baweja, S. 1995a. Justification and refinements of
model b3 for concrete creep and shrinkage. Statistics and sensitivity,
Materials and Structures 28(7): 415-430.
Bazant, Z. P., et al. 1993. Preliminary guidelines and
recommendation for characterizing creep and shrinkage in structural
design codes, in Proc of the 5th International RILEM Symposium Creep and
Shrinkage of Concrete, Barcelona, Spain, 1993, 805-829.
Bischoff, P. H. 2001. Effects of shrinkage on tension stiffening
and cracking in reinforced concrete, Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering 28(3): 363-374.
Branson, D. E. 1977. Deformation of Concrete Structures. New York:
McGraw-Hill, Inc. 546 p.
Comite Euro-International Du Beton. 1991. CEB-FIB Model Code 1990:
Design Code. Thomas Telford. 437 p.
Comite Europeen De Normalisation. 2001. Eurocode 2: Design of
Concrete Structures--Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings.
Brussels: CEN. 230 p.
Federation Internationale Du Beton. 1999. Structural Concrete.
Textbook on Behaviour, Design and Performance. Updated knowledge of the
CEB/FIP Model Code 1990. 244 p.
Gribniak, V.; Kaklauskas, G.; Bacinskas, D. 2007. State-of-art
review on shrinkage effect on cracking and deformations of concrete
bridge elements, The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 2(4):
183-193.
Hua, C.; Ehrlacher, A.; Acker, P. 1995. Analyses and models of the
autogenous shrinkage of hardening cement paste: i. modelling at
macroscopic scale, Cement and Concrete Research 25(7): 1457-1468.
Hua, C.; Ehrlacher, A.; Acker, P. 1997. Analyses and models of the
autogenous shrinkage of hardening cement paste: ii. modeling at scale of
hydrating grains, Cement and Concrete Research 27(2): 245-258.
Ishida, T., et al. 1999. Microphysical approach to coupled
autogenous and drying shrinkage of concrete, in Proc. of International
Workshop on Autogenous Shrinkage of Concrete, Hiroshima, Japan, 1998.
Taylor & Francis, 301-312.
Kaklauskas, G. 2004. Flexural layered deformational model of
reinforced concrete members, Magazine of Concrete Research 56(10):
575-584.
Kaklauskas, G. 2001. Integral Flexural Constitutive Model for
Deformational Analysis of Concrete Structures. 140 p.
Koenders, E. A. B.; Van Breugel, K. 1997. Numerical modelling of
autogenous shrinkage of hardening cement paste, Cement and Concrete
Research 27(10): 1489-1499.
Kovler, K.; Zhutovskiy, S. 2006. Overview and future trends of
shrinkage research, Materials and Structures 39(9): 827-847.
Meyerson, R., et al. 2002. Evaluation of Models for Predicting
(Total) Creep of Prestressed Concrete Mixtures. Final Contract Report
VTRC 03-CR5. Virginia: TRC. 55 p.
Miller, A. 1958. Warping of reinforced concrete due to shrinkage,
ACI Journal Proceedings 54(11): 939-950.
Sakata, K.; Shimomura, T. 2004. Recent progress in research on and
evaluation of concrete creep and shrinkage in Japan, Journal of Advanced
Concrete Technology 2(2): 133-140.
Sato, R., et al. 2007. Flexural behavior of reinforced recycled
concrete beams, Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology 5(1): 43-61.
Schellenberg, K., et al. 2005. Comparison of European and US
practices concerning creep and shrinkage, in Proc. of the fib Symposium
Structural Concrete and Time, La Plata, 2005, 445-452.
Silliman, K. R.; Newtson, C. 2006. Effect of misting rate on
concrete shrinkage, in Proc of HPC: Build Fast, Build to Last--2006
Concrete Bridge Conference, Reno, Nevada, 2005. PCA (CD). 19 p.
Takacs, P. F. 2002. Deformations in Concrete Cantilevel Bridges:
Observations and Theoretical Modelling. PhD dissertation. The Norwegian
University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 205 p.
Weiss, W. J. 1999. Prediction of Early-Age Shrinkage Cracking in
Concrete. PhD dissertation. Northwestern University, Evanston. 277 p.
Zamblauskaite, R.; Kaklauskas, G.; Bacinskas, D. 2005.
Deformational analysis of prestressed high strength concrete members
using flexural constitutive model, Journal of Civil Engineering and
Management 11(2): 145-151.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Viktor GRIBNIAK. Researcher at the Dept of Bridges and Special
Structures, VGTU, Lithuania. BSc (2001, Civil Engineering) and MSc
(2003, Building Structures) from VGTU. A study visit to Polytechnico di
Torino (2003). Author of a number of papers. Research interests:
mathematical modelling, statistical analysis and numerical simulation of
concrete structures.
Gintaris KAKLAUSKAS. Professor and the Head of Dept of Bridges and
Special Structures at VGTU, Lithuania. He received his engineering
degree, PhD and Dr Habil (Dr Sc) from VGTU. Research interests include
various topics of reinforced concrete, particularly constitutive
modelling and numerical simulation of reinforced concrete structures.
Recipient of Fulbright Fellowship (for research work at the University
of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1996) and Marie Curie Fellowship (experienced researcher category, 2002-2003). Member of the FIB Task
Group 4.1 "Serviceability Models".
Darius BACINSKAS. Associate Professor of Dept of Bridges and
Special Structures at Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU),
Lithuania. He received his engineering degree, PhD (2002) from VGTU.
Research interests: material constitutive models, non-linear numerical
analysis of reinforced concrete structures.
Viktor Gribniak (1), Gintaris Kaklauskas (2), Darius Bacinskas (3)
Dept of Bridges and Special Structures, Vilnius Gediminas Technical
University, Sauletekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania
E-mail: (1) Viktor.Gribniak@st.vgtu.lt, (2)
Gintaris.Kaklauskas@st.vgtu.lt, (3) Darius.Bacinskas@st.vgtu.lt
Table 1. Formulas for the modulus of elasticity at age of 28
days
Design code Formula for [E.sub.c] [MPa]
Eurocode 2 [E.sub.cm] = 22000 [(0,1 x [f.sub.cm]).sup.0,3]
CEB-FIP Model
Code 1990 [E.sub.cm] = 99803 [cube root of [f.sub.cm]]
ACI 318 [E.sub.c] = 4733 [square root of [f.sub.cm]]
Table 2. Correction factor accounts size and shape of
the member for deriving creep and shrinkage
Average thickness [h.sub.0,ACI]
Effects
51 76 104 127 152
Creep 1,30 1,17 1,11 1,04 1,00
Shrinkage 1,35 1,25 1,17 1,08 1,00
Table 3. Shrinkage correction factor accounts for initial moist
curing period
Curing period, days 1 3 7 14 28 90
[[gamma].sub.cs,7] 1,2 1,1 1,0 0,93 0,86 0,75
Table 4. Mix proportion of the experimental specimens
Explanation Measure Amount
Sand, 0/4 mm kg/[m.sup.3] 905 [+ or -] 2 %
Crushed aggregate, 5/8 mm kg/[m.sup.3] 388 [+ or -] 1 %
Crushed aggregate, 11/16 mm kg/[m.sup.3] 548 [+ or -] 1 %
Cement CEM I 42,5 N kg/[m.sup.3] 400 [+ or -] 0,5 %
Water kg/[m.sup.3] 123,8 [+ or -] 5 %
Concrete plasticiser Muraplast kg/[m.sup.3] 2 [+ or -] 2 %
Table 5. Size factor (converting shrinkage strain
from 100 X 100 X 400 mm prisms to 280 X 300 X
350 mm prisms)
Beams EC 2 ACI 209 Experimentally
derived
S-1, S-1R 0,494 0,678 0,45
S-2, S-2R 0,495 0,45
S-3, S-3R 0,498 0,50
S-4, S-4R 0,520 0,45
Table 6. Shrinkage deformations of 280 X 300 X 350 mm
prisms at test day ([[epsilon].sub.cs] x [10.sub.06])
Predicted by Experimentally
Beam [t.sub.0] EC 2 ACI 209 measured
S-1 4 days -165,6 -253,5 -194,6
S-1R 4 days -164,1 -250,6 -188,2
S-2 3 days -141,6 -192,2 -152,6
S-2R 3 days -143,3 -196,2 -155,7
S-3 4 days -132,0 -191,1 -137,0
S-3R 4 days -133,3 -194,6 -139,6
S-4 4 days -152,5 -203,3 -172,0
S-4R 4 days -154,5 -209,0 -177,0
Table 7. Models variables and limitations
Variable EC 2 ACI 209
[f.sub.cm] [MPa] 20-120 --
A/C -- --
Cement [kg/[m.sup.3]] -- --
W/C -- --
RH [%] 40-100 40-100
Cement type I, II or III I or III
[t.sub.0] or [t.sub.s] -- [greater than or
(moist cured) equal to] = 7 days
[t.sub.0] or [t.sub.s] -- [greater than or
(steam cured) equal to]
= 1- 3 days
Variable B3
[f.sub.cm] [MPa] 17-69
A/C 2,5-13,5
Cement [kg/[m.sup.3]] 160-720
W/C 0,35-0,85
RH [%] 40-100
Cement type I, II or III
[t.sub.0] or [t.sub.s] [t.sub.s] =
(moist cured) [less than or
equal to]
[t.sub.0]
[t.sub.0] or [t.sub.s] [t.sub.s] =
(steam cured) [less than or
equal to]
[t.sub.0]
Table 8. Parameters of test beams ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]
[Figarovskij] 1962)
h d b [a.sub.2]
Beams
mm
P1-1Kk 251 228 179 15
P2-2Pk 252 232 179 15
P3-2Pd 250 230 180 15
[f.sub.c,
[A.sub.s1] [A.sub.s2] p cube200]
Beams
[mm.sup.2] % MPa
P1-1Kk 149,4 56,5 0,37 28,0
P2-2Pk 221,5 56,5 0,53 30,9
P3-2Pd 364,5 56,5 0,88 35,3
[f.sub.y] [E.sub.s]
Beams
MPa GPa
P1-1Kk 389 210
P2-2Pk 428 200
P3-2Pd 437 200
Table 9. Relative error of deflection predictions at service loading
Relative error ([f.sub.calc] - [f.sub.obs])/[f.sub.obs], %
Beams Layer model
EC 2 ACI Shrinkage Shrinkage
318 ignored included
P1-1Kk -49,8 37,4 54,8 41,8
P2-2Pk -35,2 -6,24 35,4 12,3
P3-2Pd 12,4 9,3 16,7 4,1