Mathieu Pellerano, Gabriel Samson, Zakaria Ilyes Djamaï, Anthony Calviac, Cédric Patapy, Martin Cyr
{"title":"适用于预制的钢筋低碳混凝土梁的结构性能","authors":"Mathieu Pellerano, Gabriel Samson, Zakaria Ilyes Djamaï, Anthony Calviac, Cédric Patapy, Martin Cyr","doi":"10.1617/s11527-025-02703-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study evaluates the structural behavior of two low-carbon self-compacting concretes in comparison to an Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) concrete, used as a reference: a binary binder S70 (OPC substituted by 70% of ground granulated blast furnace slag, GGBS,−58% of carbon emission (em-CO<sub>2</sub>) versus OPC) and a supersulfated cement SSC (− 78% of em-CO<sub>2</sub> versus OPC).</p><p>For each binder, a mechanical characterization through compressive strength, tensile strength and Young’s modulus tests after 28 days and 90 days, was carried out. Steel–concrete bonding at 28 days was also tested through pull-out tests. Additionally, two beams per binder (3-meter long, section 280 × 150 mm²) were cast, varying the longitudinal reinforcement section: a low steel reinforcement ratio (1.6 cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>Conf1</i>) leading to steels rupture, and a high steel reinforcement ratio (7.1 cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>Conf2</i>) for higher beam resistance. The design of the beams was made according to Eurocode 2. Beams were tested using 4-point bending test with the recording of strains at different locations of the beam using Digital Image Correlation (DIC).</p><p>For both configurations, S70 and SSC binders resulted in an equivalent load–deflection behavior compared to OPC beam, despite lower mechanical properties for SSC concrete, while reducing the associated carbon emissions. The DIC system helped to explain the observed fracture modes (reinforcements or “shear force” ruptures) and revealed slight differences in behavior between the beams, such as variations in the position of the neutral axis, as well as number of cracks and opening. These results suggest that structures with low-carbon binders can be dimensioned according to Eurocode 2, similar to OPC.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":691,"journal":{"name":"Materials and Structures","volume":"58 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1617/s11527-025-02703-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structural behavior of reinforced low-carbon concrete beams adapted for precast\",\"authors\":\"Mathieu Pellerano, Gabriel Samson, Zakaria Ilyes Djamaï, Anthony Calviac, Cédric Patapy, Martin Cyr\",\"doi\":\"10.1617/s11527-025-02703-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study evaluates the structural behavior of two low-carbon self-compacting concretes in comparison to an Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) concrete, used as a reference: a binary binder S70 (OPC substituted by 70% of ground granulated blast furnace slag, GGBS,−58% of carbon emission (em-CO<sub>2</sub>) versus OPC) and a supersulfated cement SSC (− 78% of em-CO<sub>2</sub> versus OPC).</p><p>For each binder, a mechanical characterization through compressive strength, tensile strength and Young’s modulus tests after 28 days and 90 days, was carried out. Steel–concrete bonding at 28 days was also tested through pull-out tests. Additionally, two beams per binder (3-meter long, section 280 × 150 mm²) were cast, varying the longitudinal reinforcement section: a low steel reinforcement ratio (1.6 cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>Conf1</i>) leading to steels rupture, and a high steel reinforcement ratio (7.1 cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>Conf2</i>) for higher beam resistance. The design of the beams was made according to Eurocode 2. Beams were tested using 4-point bending test with the recording of strains at different locations of the beam using Digital Image Correlation (DIC).</p><p>For both configurations, S70 and SSC binders resulted in an equivalent load–deflection behavior compared to OPC beam, despite lower mechanical properties for SSC concrete, while reducing the associated carbon emissions. The DIC system helped to explain the observed fracture modes (reinforcements or “shear force” ruptures) and revealed slight differences in behavior between the beams, such as variations in the position of the neutral axis, as well as number of cracks and opening. These results suggest that structures with low-carbon binders can be dimensioned according to Eurocode 2, similar to OPC.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Materials and Structures\",\"volume\":\"58 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1617/s11527-025-02703-z.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Materials and Structures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1617/s11527-025-02703-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Materials and Structures","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1617/s11527-025-02703-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Structural behavior of reinforced low-carbon concrete beams adapted for precast
This study evaluates the structural behavior of two low-carbon self-compacting concretes in comparison to an Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) concrete, used as a reference: a binary binder S70 (OPC substituted by 70% of ground granulated blast furnace slag, GGBS,−58% of carbon emission (em-CO2) versus OPC) and a supersulfated cement SSC (− 78% of em-CO2 versus OPC).
For each binder, a mechanical characterization through compressive strength, tensile strength and Young’s modulus tests after 28 days and 90 days, was carried out. Steel–concrete bonding at 28 days was also tested through pull-out tests. Additionally, two beams per binder (3-meter long, section 280 × 150 mm²) were cast, varying the longitudinal reinforcement section: a low steel reinforcement ratio (1.6 cm2, Conf1) leading to steels rupture, and a high steel reinforcement ratio (7.1 cm2, Conf2) for higher beam resistance. The design of the beams was made according to Eurocode 2. Beams were tested using 4-point bending test with the recording of strains at different locations of the beam using Digital Image Correlation (DIC).
For both configurations, S70 and SSC binders resulted in an equivalent load–deflection behavior compared to OPC beam, despite lower mechanical properties for SSC concrete, while reducing the associated carbon emissions. The DIC system helped to explain the observed fracture modes (reinforcements or “shear force” ruptures) and revealed slight differences in behavior between the beams, such as variations in the position of the neutral axis, as well as number of cracks and opening. These results suggest that structures with low-carbon binders can be dimensioned according to Eurocode 2, similar to OPC.
期刊介绍:
Materials and Structures, the flagship publication of the International Union of Laboratories and Experts in Construction Materials, Systems and Structures (RILEM), provides a unique international and interdisciplinary forum for new research findings on the performance of construction materials. A leader in cutting-edge research, the journal is dedicated to the publication of high quality papers examining the fundamental properties of building materials, their characterization and processing techniques, modeling, standardization of test methods, and the application of research results in building and civil engineering. Materials and Structures also publishes comprehensive reports prepared by the RILEM’s technical committees.