Crack width verification and minimum reinforcement according to EC 2: Current model with specifications in Germany and Austria vs proposal for revision

Nguyen Viet Tue, Ekkehard Fehling, Dirk Schlicke, Christina Krenn
{"title":"Crack width verification and minimum reinforcement according to EC 2: Current model with specifications in Germany and Austria vs proposal for revision","authors":"Nguyen Viet Tue,&nbsp;Ekkehard Fehling,&nbsp;Dirk Schlicke,&nbsp;Christina Krenn","doi":"10.1002/cend.202100045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Limiting crack widths to an acceptable level and determining the required minimum reinforcement are important tasks in the design of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. Experience with different types of structures, ranging from watertight concrete structures to prestressed concrete bridges, shows that the concept currently applied in Germany and Austria is very effective and that significant changes are not necessary. The current draft for the revision of the EC2 (prEC2), however, presents a new concept for crack width verification and minimum reinforcement. In contrast to the concept currently used in Germany and Austria, this new concept is based more on the analysis and good reproduction of observations made in laboratory experiments and takes less account of the mechanical relationships of reinforced or prestressed concrete after cracking. For this purpose, numerous empirical factors are introduced which not only complicate the understanding but also the application in practice. However, an improvement in the accuracy of the crack width prediction is not achieved and the minimum reinforcement is significantly underestimated, especially for prestressed cross sections and thick members. In this article, the new concept set out in prEC2 is explained in detail. Its main weaknesses and contradictions are discussed by a comparison with the concept currently applied in Germany and Austria as well as detailed analysis of 2D FEM simulations with discrete cracks and adequate regard of the bond stress-slip relationship at the reinforcement-concrete interface. This should provide the basis for a factual discussion before the introduction of prEC2 into practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":100248,"journal":{"name":"Civil Engineering Design","volume":"3 5-6","pages":"210-228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cend.202100045","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Civil Engineering Design","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cend.202100045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Limiting crack widths to an acceptable level and determining the required minimum reinforcement are important tasks in the design of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. Experience with different types of structures, ranging from watertight concrete structures to prestressed concrete bridges, shows that the concept currently applied in Germany and Austria is very effective and that significant changes are not necessary. The current draft for the revision of the EC2 (prEC2), however, presents a new concept for crack width verification and minimum reinforcement. In contrast to the concept currently used in Germany and Austria, this new concept is based more on the analysis and good reproduction of observations made in laboratory experiments and takes less account of the mechanical relationships of reinforced or prestressed concrete after cracking. For this purpose, numerous empirical factors are introduced which not only complicate the understanding but also the application in practice. However, an improvement in the accuracy of the crack width prediction is not achieved and the minimum reinforcement is significantly underestimated, especially for prestressed cross sections and thick members. In this article, the new concept set out in prEC2 is explained in detail. Its main weaknesses and contradictions are discussed by a comparison with the concept currently applied in Germany and Austria as well as detailed analysis of 2D FEM simulations with discrete cracks and adequate regard of the bond stress-slip relationship at the reinforcement-concrete interface. This should provide the basis for a factual discussion before the introduction of prEC2 into practice.

Abstract Image

根据EC 2的裂缝宽度验证和最小加固:德国和奥地利规范的当前模型与修订建议
将裂缝宽度限制在可接受的水平和确定所需的最小配筋是钢筋和预应力混凝土结构设计中的重要任务。从水密混凝土结构到预应力混凝土桥梁等不同类型结构的经验表明,目前在德国和奥地利应用的概念非常有效,不需要进行重大改变。然而,目前的EC2修订草案(prEC2)提出了裂缝宽度验证和最小配筋的新概念。与目前在德国和奥地利使用的概念相反,这个新概念更多地基于对实验室实验中观察结果的分析和良好再现,较少考虑钢筋或预应力混凝土开裂后的力学关系。为此,引入了许多经验因素,这些因素不仅使理解复杂化,而且使实践中的应用复杂化。然而,裂缝宽度预测的精度没有提高,最小配筋明显低估,特别是对于预应力截面和厚构件。本文详细阐述了prEC2中提出的新概念。通过与德国和奥地利目前采用的概念的比较,以及对二维有限元模拟中离散裂缝的详细分析,并充分考虑了钢筋-混凝土界面的粘结应力-滑移关系,讨论了其主要缺点和矛盾。这应该为在将预防犯罪方案2付诸实践之前进行事实性讨论提供基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信