Calculation model for steel fibre reinforced concrete punching zones of bridge superstructure and foundation slabs/ Tiltu gelzbetoniniu perdangu ir pamatu ploksciu praspaudimo zonos dispersinio armavimo skaiciavimo modelis/ Caurspiesanas bides pretestibas aprekina modelis tiltu laiduma un pamatu platnu konstrukcijam no fibrubetona/Terasfiibriga armeeritud ....
Marciukaitis, Gediminas ; Salna, Remigijus ; Jonaitis, Bronius 等
1. Introduction
In many cases complicated stress and strain state due to load
action in structures of bridges appears. That is the case with joints
between flat slabs and columns, columns to foundations joints,
connections of columns to piles, etc. The said and other structural
bridge members may be subjected to impulse and cycle loads. Various
types of stresses in these areas of structures are generated:
compression, tension, local compression, shear etc. It is well known
that the highest strength of the concrete is in compression and the
lowest--in tension. When strengthening of a concrete zone subjected to
the action of forces in one direction only is required then one
direction reinforcing is applied. But in the case of complicated stress
state reinforcing by bars becomes either complicated or even
economically unjustifiable. Such state of stress takes place in some
bridge structures, e. g. in superstructure decks supported on columns
and these--on foundation reinforced concrete (RC) slab (Fig. 1). For
such structures or its elements more effective materials are materials
with higher mechanical and deformation properties in all directions of
axis. Such material for many RC structures is steel fibre reinforced
concrete (SFRC) (Baikovs, Rocens 2010; Szmigiera 2007; Salna,
Marciukaitis 2007).
Analytical models and mechanical calculation methods for SFRC were
created. Compression and tension strengths and elasticity modulus of
SFRC were most widely investigated. They are the main properties that
allowed starting using such type of concrete for load bearing RC
structures or their parts. In some countries standards and technical
recommendations regulating quality and requirements for SFRC products
are established: in the USA ASTM C1018-97 Standard Test Method for
Flexural Toughness and First-Crack Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete
(Using Beam with Third-Point Loading), in Japan --JSCESF4: 1984. Method
of Tests for Flexural Strength and Flexural Toughness of Steel Fibre
Reinforced Concrete, in the United Kingdom--TR34 Report (1995), General
document and Appendix F: Slab Design with Steel Fibres, in Russia--CII
52-104-2006: [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] [SP 52-104-2006: Steel
Fibre Reinforced Concrete Structures], etc.
Nevertheless, methods for determination of properties and
estimation, values of results according to the said
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
documents differ in many cases; valuation of indices describing
intermediate strength as well as rates relating strength and strain are
assessed in different way. Generally, stress to strain, especially
plastic ones, relation is determined by tests. There is a lack of
theoretical and experimental investigations in behaviour of SFRC in
elastic plastic stage. It is an obstacle in selecting a suitable model
for punching strength analysis of SFRC slabs, e. g. in standards of ASTM
C1018-97 and JSCE-SF4: 1984 accomplishment of experiments is proposed
for determination of the actual [sigma]-[epsilon]diagrams.
Investigation in punching strength analysis methods and in design
codes of various countries (Salna et al. 2004) pointed out that the
opinion about punching strength analysis varies. According to the all
said codes conditional tangential stress ([[tau].sub.c]) acting in a
conditional critical area is conditionally described and does not
reflect actual behaviour of structure at all. Moreover, effect of such
important factor as the longitudinal reinforcement is taken in to
account not in all codes. Influence of transverse reinforcement is
evaluated not in the same way as well. Values of partial safety factors
to the strengths of materials and to the loads as well are different.
There is no unified opinion about design for punching strength
according to the all codes and there is no unified model for punching
strength analysis as well. For description of models various theories
were applied--theory of plasticity, of built-up bars, of failure etc.
but the unified opinion was not reached. Analysis of models performed by
Georgopoulos (1989), Broms (1990), Hallgren (1996), Men?trey (2002),
Theodorakopoulos and Swamy (2002) also points out that in all models
considered different design diagrams and different criteria are assumed.
The principle stresses are related to the concrete strength
characteristics in different way. It shows that punching is not
sufficiently investigated and additional experimental and theoretical
research is required.
Performed analysis of models makes it possible to distinguish the 2
model types:
I type--failure takes place due to shearing the compression zone by
the principle stress (Broms 1990; Halgren 1998; Theodorakopoulos, Swamy
2002);
II type--failure takes place due to tension stress in diagonal
section (Georgopoulos 1989, Menetrey 2002).
Presented review makes it clear that the models referred to the 2nd
group are less realistic. Models referred to the 1st group reflect the
real failure mode much better.
Most authors punching phenomenon consider as a plane problem, i.e.
the same principles as for the strength of diagonal section for RC beam
without shear reinforcement are applied. Then normal and diagonal cracks
with the action of the principle stresses progress towards the
compression zone and failure occurs when the compression zone is
destructed under a certain combination of compression and shear
stresses. Actually, the compression zone is under the action of
tri-axial stress state but most authors neglect it. It is neglected in
almost all design codes and recommendations.
Steel fibres in punching slab zone not only change interrelation
between stresses of different types but also their distribution due to
the influence of difference in strain properties and their character in
elastic plastic structure behaviour stage. Thus, it is important to
create such analytical model that would allow complete evaluation
influence of steel fibres in determination of punching strength for RC
superstructure deck slabs and foundations of bridge.
2. Diagram of analytical model and assumptions
Analytical model selected on the basis of investigation in strength
and deformation properties of SFRC (Salna, Marciukaitis 2007) and
behaviour of common slabs under punching (Broms 1990; Halgren, 1998;
Theodorakopoulos, Swamy 2002) and according to general principles of
mechanics is shown in Fig. 2.
For creation, analysis and investigation of the model the following
assumption were made:
1) tension and compression stress strain diagrams for the materials
are of trapezium shape (Fig. 3);
2) hypothesis of plain sections is valid;
3) in determination of the neutral axis location at failure the
ultimate values of concrete strain are used;
4) diagram of normal stress in the compression zone--trapezium,
that for tangential stress--in relationship with the normal stress;
5) failure occurs when compression zone of the slab is cut by the
principle stress at an angle coinciding to the direction of the said
stress.
Trapezoidal normal stress diagram is taken for determination of the
compression zone. Investigations performed by different authors (Maalej,
Li 1994) point out that application of trapezoidal[sigma]- [epsilon] as
diagrams in compression and tension zones for SFRC gives results that
show better
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
agreement with experimental ones than in the cases when rectangular
or triangular diagrams are applied. Such diagrams are provided also in
EC2.
Diagram for determination of neutral axis location for SFRC member
is shown in Fig. 3. Stress diagrams for compression and tension zones
assumed trapezoidal where elastic tension and compression fibre-concrete
strains [[lambda].sub.sfrc,t,el], [[lambda].sub.sfrc,c,el] correspond to
variable stress parts are represented by[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT
REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] while constant ones--correspondingly
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] elasticity and
plasticity coefficients for fibre-concrete. [[lambda].sub.sfrc]in
tension and in compression are determined by empirical formulas obtained
using results of experimental investigations. When steel fibres are with
bends:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]
where [[lambda].sub.c] and [[lambda].sub.t]--plasticity
coefficients for concrete in compression and tension. According to
investigations [[lambda].sub.c]=[[lambda].sub.t]=1-0.061[f.sup.0.5.sub.c], since it is assumed that concrete elasticity module in tension and
compression are equal.
Ratios between the average stress value and the max one in the
diagrams, below referred to as stress diagrams completeness
coefficients:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]
Stresses in compression and tension zones corresponding to
[[lambda].sub.sfrc.c] and [[lambda].sub.sfrc.t] strains related to
tension reinforcement stress [[sigma].sub.s1]:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]
Then resultants acting in tension and compression of SFRC member
are:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]When stresses
and coefficients of their diagrams for
the fibre-concrete are known it is simple to determine their
resultants and to calculate compression zone depth from conditions of
equilibrium for these resultants.
3. Analysis of normal and tangential stress diagrams in the
compression zone
Analysis of publications revealed that different normal and
tangential stress diagrams for principle stress calculations are used by
the most of authors (Fig. 2). For example, Choi el al. (2007) apply
cubic parabola for normal stress and for tangential one--trapezium,
Shertwood et al. (2007) --trapezium for normal stress and square
parabola--for tangential one, Zink (1999)--triangle for normal stress
and cubic parabola--for tangential one. Nevertheless, trajectories of
the principle stress depend very much on selected stress diagrams. Angle
of the principle stress trajectory variation in relation to various
selected combinations of normal and tangential stress diagrams is
presented in the Table 1. When for normal stress trapezoidal diagram in
relation to concrete plasticity coefficient (its completeness
coefficient raa = 0.8-1) and for tangential either trapezoidal or
triangle diagrams (raa = 0.5-1) are assumed, the results apparently
differ. Between extreme completeness coefficient values, angle of the
principle stress trajectory vary from a = 23 up to a = 57.
However, analysis of results of experimental investigations
performed by Choi et al. (2007), Shertwood et al. (2007), Sharma (1986),
Tuchlinski (2004) and Zink (1999) revealed that completeness coefficient
for tangential stress diagram on average rax = 0.65-0.75, which
corresponds to the smaller spread of the principle stress trajectories
angle: 33 -45. These values are commonly applied in classical theories
and they generally agree with the experimental investigations of the
said authors. Relation of these results with obtained experimental
results and with idealized normal stress diagram expressed via
plasticity coefficient gives completeness coefficients for normal and
tangential stress diagrams:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]
Tangential stress diagram coefficient value determined in such way
by formula varies within the limits of [[omega].sub.[tau]] = 0.6-0.75.
It conforms to the completeness coefficient for diagrams described by
square and cubic parabolas.
4. Principle stress and area of its action in the compression zone
According to proposed punching diagram presented in the Fig. 2 the
principle stress depends on normal and shear (i.e. tangential) stresses.
Following the rule that the ultimate compression stress
[[sigma].sub.u] equals to the concrete compression strength fc and the
ultimate shear (tangential) stress at compression [[tau].sub.u]=
0.5[f.sub.c], applying classical strength of materials formulas
principle stress and angle its trajectory is expressed by:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]
Diagrams for determination of principle stress action in the
compression zone area are given in Fig. 4.
When base and slant altitude of lateral surface for truncated
pyramid and generatrix of lateral surface for truncated cone are
expressed via % and a area of principle stress action in the compression
zone may be determined using simple geometrical formulas:
for circular columns A = 4 [(a + x cot[alpha]) x/sin [alpha]] (8)
for square columns A = [pi][(a + x cot[alpha]) x/sin [alpha]] (9)
where a--cross-sectional dimension of square column or
cross-sectional diameter of circular column.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
Punching force [F.sub.u] is determined assuming that failure takes
place due to cutting the compression zone by the principle stress a1 2
in the area A:
min[F.sub.u] =[[sigma].sub.1,2]A. (10)
5. Model verification by experiments
5.1. Method of investigation
Experimental investigations of punching strength for fibre-concrete
slab zone around a column are not many. More extensive data of the said
investigations are presented by Haralji et al. 1995; Swamy, Ali 1982;
Urban 1984; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] 2004. Small amount of
tests may be explained by great test materials and labour consumption
and by complexity.
Thus experimental investigations giving opportunity to assess
punching failure character for SFRC slabs more deeply and to verify the
theoretical model were performed.
Four RC slabs were produced and tested: three of them were
additionally reinforced by steel fibres and one was control slab. Amount
of steel fibres was selected as variable in the experiment while
concrete class and longitudinal reinforcement were constant values
([p.sub.l] =1.28%, Table 2). The experimental slabs were concreted in
two series: I series--slabs reinforced by 1% and 1.5% of steel fibres;
II series--slabs reinforced by 2% of steel fibres and the control
concrete slab.
Cement of Cem 42.5R, sand of (0-4 mm), gravel of (4-16 mm), water
and plasticizer were used for the concrete mix. Concrete properties
presented in the Table 3. Slab zone at distance of 4d from the column
face was additionally reinforced with steel fibres. Steel fibres of
"Metalproducts" MPZ50/1 (product No. 1010) with its
[l.sub.f]/[d.sub.f]=50/1=50,([f.sub.y] = 1100 MPa) was used. Three
different volume fractions of steel fibres for slabs were applied: 1%
78.5 kg/[m.sup.3], 1.5% -117.8 kg/[m.sup.3], 2% -157 kg/[m.sup.3]. They
were tested in a special test stand. The slabs are supported on 10 mm
thick support along the whole their contour. Cement and sand mix was
used to make the supports even. Hydraulic jack of 1000 kN was used for
slab loading. Diagram of the test presented in Fig. 5.
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
Slab deflection at its centre was measured during the test with
allowance for movements at corners, longitudinal and transverse (radial)
strains of tension and compression zones were measured as well. Slab
tension zone strains were measured by mechanical (150 mm base) and by
electrical resistance (50 mm base) strain gauges. Mechanical gauges for
longitudinal and radial strains were arranged in 3 specific zones: at d,
2d, 3d distances from column face in perpendicular and diagonal
directions. Compression slab face stains in d zone were measured only by
electrical resistance strain gauges. Arrangement of mechanical and
electrical resistance strain gauges during the test is presented in Fig.
6.
5.2. Results of experimental investigations
Analysis of available experimental investigation results revealed
that steel fibres affect not only the carrying capacity of slabs,
plasticity, strains but the failure mode as well. Influence of steel
fibres on carrying capacity determined according to the ratio between
the actual carrying capacity and the concrete cube strength
[F,sub,test]/[F,sub,c,cube]Results of [F,sub,test]/[F,sub,c,cube]
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
presented in the Table 2 point out that increase in amount of
fibres [V.sub.f] = 1%, 1.5%, 2% resulted in 1.02, 1.09 and 1.15 times
greater carrying capacity of slab in comparison with not reinforced one.
Similar results were obtained and by other authors (Harajli et al. 1995;
Kutzing, Konig 2000; Urban 1984).
It was determined by comparison deformation properties of control
and SFRC slabs that they differ substantially. For example, slab
deflection at its centre at the ultimate load for SFRC slab is 2.8 times
(Fig. 7) and at failure --more than 3 times greater than that for the
control slab. Moreover, failure modes are very different--the control
slab failed suddenly, almost unexpectedly (Fig. 8a) while SFRC slabs
failed plastically. When the ultimate load was reached, further loading
resulted in decrease of the load carried by the slab and intensive
growth of deflections (Fig. 8b). In fact there was no sudden failure.
Analysis of slab deformation during loading and tension zone
failure mode revealed evident difference. The first radial crack opened
almost at the same load in both slabs: at 0.14[F.sub.u]--in the RC slab
without steel fibres and at 0.14Fu -0.17[F.sub.u]--in SFRC slabs.
Development of cracks is similar in both radial and tangential
directions. For example, all cracks in radial direction at distance d
from the column face appeared at 0.1-0.4[F.sub.u], at 2d distance at
0.3-0.6[F.sub.u], while in tangential direction--at 0.25-0.4[F.sub.u]
and 0.3-0.6[F.sub.u] respectively. However, cracks in SFRC slabs are
distributed much closer to each other. Obvious development of tangential
crack width in the zone of 0.5d from the column face in the concrete
slab is observed when the load is razed from 0.6-1.0[F.sub.u]. In SFRC
slab it develops at greater distance -0.7-1.2d. Distinct formation of
the
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
punching cone starts, critical future punching perimeter becomes
clearly visible.
These factors altogether show that formation of compression zone
depth as well as direction of the main shear stress and its value
depends on steel fibres. That is why these factors are assessed in the
proposed model.
Saw-cuts of the slabs were made after their tests (Fig. 9). It is
seen from the transverse saw-cuts of the slabs that the punching cone in
concrete slabs formed at the angle of about 27[degrees] (2d from the
column face) while in SFRC slabs at smaller angle
-21[degrees]-23[degrees](2.4-2.6)d. Diagonal crack develops up to the
compression zone which is cut by the principle stress at different angle
as well. Moreover, different depth of compression zones is clearly seen.
Compression zone depth in SFRC slab is substantially greater than that
in common RC slab.
6. Analytical model compared with experimental results and models
of other authors
Accuracy of proposed model was investigated first. Therefore,
comparison of experimental values presented by various authors (Fig. 10)
with theoretical values obtained according to the proposed model was
made.
Comparison of experimental values presented by various authors with
theoretical values according to the proposed model in graphical form is
given in Fig. 10 for accuracy assessment of the model for the case with
steel fibres. Steel fibres of various geometrical, strength and
different anchorage (with full and half bends, wavy and smooth shape)
properties were used for comparison as well. It was determined from
these data that the average ratio between experimental and theoretical
values according to the proposed model [F.sub.test]/[F.sub.calc] =1.12,
standard deviation [[sigma].sub.X] -0.08 and coefficient of variation v
-7.0%. According to these statistical data for the proposed model with
steel fibres systematic error equals to [[micro].sub.R] = 1.12 and the
random one [[sigma].sub.R] = 0.08.
Analytical model was compared with different experimental data of
other authors (Fig. 10). Specimens of their tests differ by geometrical
parameters, concrete strength and longitudinal reinforcement quantity:
[f.sub.c] = 14-120 MPa, [f.sub.y] = 330-706 MPa, [p.sub.l] = 0.33-3%, d
= 99-476 mm.
There are only 11 slab test results ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN
ASCII.] 2004 --4, Urban 1984 -4, and 3 presented slab tests) for
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
accurate comparison of model for punching with steel fibres. Even
so quite good agreement was obtained and from verification of 11 slabs:
average value of ratio [F.sub.test]/[F.sub.calc] =1.11, its standard
deviation -0.21, coefficient of variation 10.9%. Additional 35 slab
tests (Fig. 10) presented for increase in carrying capacity
[F.sub.test]/[F.sub.calc], between RC slabs with steel fibres and
without it assessment in relation to steel fibre type. Using
conditionally equal strength and geometrical characteristics of the
slabs ([f.sub.c] = 30 MPa, [f.sub.y] = 400 MPa, [p.sub.l] = 1.5%, d =
0.17 mm, dimensions of column are 200x200 mm) verification calculations
according to the proposed model in relation to steel fibres type and
quantity were performed. After merging together experimental and
theoretical comparison of the said 11 and 35 slab results the average
value of ratio [F.sub.test]/[F.sub.calc] = 1.12, standard deviation and
variation coefficient values reduced (0.08 and 6%).
Results obtained according to the proposed model were compared with
those obtained according to the models proposed by other authors.
Calculations involved 46 versions according to 3 models. Comparison of
obtained results is presented in Fig. 11 and their accuracy in the Table
4.
Parallel to %--axis regression straights joining related points
(Fig. 11) shows that the proposed model is not sensitive to various
factors, such as slab geometrical characteristics, steel fibres type,
anchorage properties etc. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] (2004)
method is very close to the proposed one since it is based on the same
design principles of composites, but plastic strains and influence of
longitudinal reinforcement on punching strength are not taken into
account and larger deviations are obtained. Distinctly stands out
Harajli et al. (1995) method that demonstrates clearly that not for all
cases punching strength analysis using the same empirical relationship
for evaluation of steel fibres influence on carrying capacity can be
carried out. Results presented in Table 4 shows that proposed model is
substantially more accurate than other known models.
[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 11 OMITTED]
7. Conclusions
Model for punching strength analysis of bridge flat slab
superstructure deck and foundation slab is proposed which allows
evaluation of all the most important factors influencing punching
strength. It is proven that these factors are concrete strength, amount
of longitudinal and steel fibres, and its strength and anchorage
properties.
The model gives opportunity to take into account SFRC strength not
only in compression zone but also in tension zone as well that is an
impossible using model with longitudinal reinforcement only.
Proposed method for evaluation plasticity properties of SFRC and
for selection diagrams of normal and tangential stresses acting in slab
tension and compression zones during punching and area on which the
principle stresses act taking in to account plastic strains of SFRC.
Model accuracy verified comparing with experimental results.
Accuracy figures of the proposed model obtained comparing experimental
results with analytical ones are: average of the mean values
[[micro].sub.x] = 1.12, their square deviations [[sigma].sub.x] = 0.08
and variation coefficient v = 0.07.
Behaviour under the load of SFRC slabs is substantially different
from that of slabs reinforced with steel bars. Their cracking starts at
larger loads, spacing of cracks is less, slab failure is of plastic
type. At failure slab deflects 3 times more than that without steel
fibres.
Received 11 October 2010; accepted 20 May 2011
doi: 10.3846/bjrbe.2011.25
References
Baikovs, A.; Rocens, K. 2010. Prediction of the Anticlastic Shape
Changes of Hybrid Composite Material, Journal of Civil Engineering and
Management 16(2): 222-229. doi:10.3846/jcem.2010.25
Broms, C. E. 1990. Punching of Flat Plates--a Question of Concrete
Properties in Biaxial Compression and Size Effect, ACI Structural
Journal 87(3): 292-304.
Choi, K. K.; Park, H. G.; Wight, K. J. 2007. Unified Shear Strength
Model for Reinforced Concrete Beams--Part I: Development, ACI Structural
Journal 104(2): 142-152.
Georgopoulos, T. 1989. Durchstanzlast und Durchstanzwinkel
Punkforming Gestutzter Stahlbetonplatten ohne Schubbewehrung [Punching
Force and Punching Angle of a Flat Slabs without Shear Reinforcement],
Bauingenieur [Civil Engineering] 64: 187-191.
Hallgren, M. 1996. Punching Shear Capacity of Reinforced High
Strength Concrete Slabs. PhD thesis. Stockholm: Royal Institute of
Technology. 206 p.
Harajli, M. H.; Maalouf, D.; Khatib, H. 1995. Effect of Fibres on
the Punching Shear Strength of Slab-Column Connections, Cement and
Concrete Composites 17(2): 161-170. doi:10.1016/0958-9465(94)00031-S
Kutzing, L.; Koning, G. 2000. Punching Behaviour of High
Performance Concrete Columns with Fibre Cocktails, Lacer 5: 253-260.
Maalej, M.; Li, V. C. 1994. Flexural/Tensile Strength Ratio in
Engineered Cementitious Composite, Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering 6(4): 513-528. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(1994)6:4(513)
Menetrey, Ph. 2002. Synthesis of Punching Failure in Reinforced
Concrete, Cement and Concrete Composites 24(6): 497-507.
doi:10.1016/S0958-9465(01)00066-X
Sharma, A. K. 1986. Shear Strength of Steel Fibres Reinforced
beams, ACI Journal Proceedings 83(4): 624-628.
Shertwood, E. G.; Bentz, E. C.; Collins, M. P. 2007. Effect of
Aggregate Size on Beam-Shear Strength of Thick Slabs, ACI Structural
Journal 104(2): 180-190.
Swamy, R. N.; Ali, S. 1982. Punching Shear Behavior of Reinforced
Slab-Column Connections Made with Steel Fiber
Concrete, ACI Journal 79(5): 392-406.
Szmigiera, E. 2007. Influence of Concrete and Fibre Concrete on the
Load-Carrying Capacity and Deformability of Composite Steel-Concrete
Columns, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 13(1): 55-61.
doi:10.1080/13923730.2007.9636419
Salna, R.; Marciukaitis, G. 2007. The Influence of Shear Span Ratio
on Load Capacity of Fibre Reinforced Concrete Elements with Various
Steel Fibre Volumes, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 13(3):
209-215. doi:10.1080/13923730.2007.9636439
Salna, R.; Marciukaitis, G.; Vainiunas, P. 2004. Estimation of
Factors Influencing Punching Shear Strength of RC Floor Slabs, Journal
of Civil Engineering and Management 10(Suppl 2): 137-142.
Theodorakopoulos, D. D.; Swamy, R. N. 2002. Ultimate Punching Shear
Strength Analysis of Slab-Column Connections, Cement and Concrete
Composites 24(6): 509-521. doi:10.1016/S0958-9465(01)00067-l
Tuchlinski, D. 2004. Zum Durchstanzen von Flachdecken unter
Berucksichtigung der Momenten-Querkraft-Interaktion und der Vorspannung
[Punching of Flat Slabs Considering Moment-Shear Interaction and
Prestressing]. PhD. Lehrstuhl und Institut fur Massivbau, RWTH Aachen,
2005. 149 p.
Urban, T. 1984. Badania zelbetowych zlaczy plytowo-slupowych z
dodatkiem drutu cietego w strefie przyslupowej [Tests of Reinforced
Concrete Slab-Pole Connectors with Wire Cut in the Punching Zone],
Inzineria i Budownictwo [Engineering and Constructions] 10: 390-393.
Zink, M. 1999. Zum Biegeschubversagen schlanker bauteile aus
hochleistungsbeton mit und ohne schubbewehrung [Bending to Shear Failure
of Slender Components of High Performance Concrete with and Without
Shear Reinforcement]. PhD. Universitat Leipcig. 172 p.
[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] H. 2004. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE
IN ASCII.]. [Rabinovic, F. N. Composite Structures, Based on Fibre
Reinforcement. The Questions of Theory, Design, Technology and
Structures]. MOCKBA: ACB. 506 c.
Gediminas Marciukaitis (1), Remigijus Salna (2), Bronius Jonaitis
(3), Juozas Valivonis (4)
Dept of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures, Vilnius
Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, 10223 Vilnius,
Lithuania E-mails: (1) gelz@vgtu.lt; (2) remigijus.salna@vgtu.lt; (3)
bronius.jonaitis@vgtu.lt; (4) juozas.valivonis@ygtu.lt
Table 1. Influence of stress diagrams on the angle of the principle
stress trajectories
[[omega].[tau]] [alpha] [[omega].sub.[tau]] [alpha]
0.5 47.27 0.5 57.29
0.6 42.97 0.6 47.74
0.7 33.76 0.7 40.69
0.8 29.54 0.8 35.81
0.9 26.64 0.9 31.83
1 23.63 1 28.64
[[lambda].sub.c] [alpha] [[lambda].sub.c] [alpha]
0.5 42.97 0.5 28.64
0.6 45.83 0.6 32.74
0.7 48.70 0.7 37.46
0.8 51.56 0.8 42.97
0.9 54.43 0.9 49.48
1 57.29 1 57.29
where tg2[alpha] = 2[tau]/[sigma]; [sigma] = [f.sub.c];
[tau] = 0.5 [f.sub.c]
Table 2. Punching carrying capacity results of experimental slabs
Series Test name d, m [[rho].sub.l], % [V.sub.f], %
I FRC-1 0.12 1.28 1
FRC-1.5 0.12 1.28 1.5
FRC-0 0.12 1.28 0
II FRC-2 0.12 1.28 2
Series Test name [f.sub.c,cube] [f.sub.sfrc,cube] [F.sub.test],
Mpa Mpa kN
I FRC-1 37.54 38.46 417.02
FRC-1.5 37.54 39.60 457.79
FRC-0 41.56 -- 454.20
II FRC-2 41.56 43.80 519.76
Series Test name [F.sub.test]/
[F.sub.c,cube],
[m.sup.2]
I FRC-1 0.0111
FRC-1.5 0.0121
FRC-0 0.0109
II FRC-2 0.0125
Table 3. Concrete strength characteristics
Series [V.sub.f], % [f.sub.c, cube], [f.sub.c], MPa
MPa
0 37.54 30.27
I 1 38.46 30.92
1.5 39.60 31.68
0 41.56 33.25
II 2 43.80 35.04
Series f.sub.ct, flex], [f.sbu.ct, spilt], [E.sub.c], MPa
MPa MPa
4.41 2.45 32.95
I 5.10 3.13 33.76
5.75 4.22 34.67
5.13 2.67 35.50
II 7.30 5.23 37.42
Table 4. Experimental results related to theoretical ones for
slabs with steel fibres
Author n [[mu].sub.X] [[sigma].sub.x] n
Harajli et al. (1995) 11 1.43 0.21 0.15
Pa6[??]HOB[??][??] (2004) 11 1.19 0.17 0.14
Proposed model 11 1.11 0.21 0.11
Harajli et al. (1995) 46 1.23 0.16 0.13
Pa6[??]HOB[??][??] (2004) 46 1.15 0.12 0.11
Suggested model 46 1.12 0.08 0.07