Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Crack formation presents a complex mechanical and geometrical question to be modelled. The available crack
width formulations are often based on simplifications. A rigorous formulation of crack widths should be based on
the integration of strain differences of reinforcement and concrete between cracks, due to the accumulated slips.
In this paper an extensive literature review on crack widths and crack spacing is presented. The basic intention of
the present paper is to summarise the development of flexural crack models and collect the most relevant formulae
for crack spacing and crack width. It reports not only the possible improvement of design or research equations but
also the appearance of new types of reinforcements with different characteristics from those of steel
reinforcements. This state-of-the-art Report is a contribution to the work of fib TG 4.1 Serviceability Models.
Adorjan Borosnyoi
Budapest University of Technology and
Economics, Hungary
Gyorgy L. Balazs
Budapest University of Technology and
Economics, Hungary
D1s
r
ref
ss
ssr
ssrn
tbm
Notation
Ac,ef
acr
b
c
d
Ec
Ef
Es
fct,fl
fctm
h
M
Mr
s
sr,min
srm
sr,max
wk
wm
ae
1sm
1sm,r
fs
Su
tension stiffening
reinforcement ratio (As /bd)
effective reinforcement ratio
(As /Ac,ef)
stress in the reinforcement
stress in the reinforcement under the
cracking load
stress in the reinforcement under
the load corresponding to crack
stabilisation
average bond stress along the
disturbed zone
nominal diameter of reinforcement
(sum of) perimeter(s) of reinforcing
bar(s)
Introduction
Cracks can be usually observed on concrete
structures in service. Cracks have significant
influence on serviceability, durability, aesthetics
and force transfer. Cracking of concrete (related
to its limited tensile deformation capacity) is
usually expected under tensile stresses. Cracking phenomena (such as pattern, orientation,
extension and width) are considerably dependent on the available reinforcement. Surface
pattern (bond characteristics), Youngs modulus
of reinforcement, bar diameter, bar spacing,
concrete cover and cross-sectional reinforcement ratio are the most important parameters.
Recently non-metallic fibre-reinforced plastic
(FRP) reinforcements have also become available
as alternatives to steel reinforcement in order to
avoid corrosion of conventional steel reinforcements. As the novel types of reinforcing materials are rather different from conventional steel
in mechanical properties, chemical composition
and surface characteristics, the analysis of cracking behaviour of reinforced or prestressed concrete members becomes important again.
The present paper gives an extensive literature
review of available formulae for the calculation of
crack spacing and crack width of steel-reinforced
or prestressed concrete flexural members preceded by discussions on causes of cracking,
phases of cracking and contribution of concrete
in tension.
Causes of cracking
There are several reasons for cracking in concrete. Cracks can be formed both in fresh concrete (before setting of cement paste) and in
hardened concrete. As concrete sets, plastic
cracking may occur during the first few hours
after casting. There are two types of plastic
cracking: plastic shrinkage cracking (commonly
in slabs) and plastic settlement cracking (in
deep members). Both types of plastic cracking
are associated with bleeding of concrete. In
hardened concrete cracks can be formed
from loads (flexure, tension, shear, torsion,
bond, etc.) or from imposed deformations
(shrinkage, thermal movements, etc). The
present paper focuses exclusively on the flexural cracking behaviour of reinforced or prestressed concrete members.
Sr
In reinforced concrete beams or slabs, the reinforcing bars are usually located close to the
surface of the member, to achieve the highest
lever arm of inner forces. The contribution of
concrete in tension is different at various
locations within a member. It can be shown
that an effective concrete area in tension
(Ac,ef) can be taken into account around the
tensile reinforcements, which is not identical
with the concrete area under the neutral axis
(considered as concrete in tension). Usually,
Ac,ef is considered to have the same centroid
as the tensile reinforcement. Ac,ef is a nonlinear function of the concrete strength, the
geometry of the member, the reinforcement
ratio, the bond properties of the reinforcement
and the modular ratio.2 Ac,ef can be developed
analytically for rectangular cross-sections as
shown in equation (1).2
Ac,ef
[fct,fl bd(d 2 4ae rd 2 12ae rdh12ae rh2 )]=
[2fctm h(2ae rd 2ae rh d)(3 ae r
p
(ae r2 ) 2ae r) ae rbh
Load
(1)
Sr, max
Srm
Sr, min
Cracking
load
An extended formula for Ac,ef can be developed by taking into consideration the size
effect, as here in equation (3)5
distribution
of tensile
stress
(2)
crack
first crack
last crack
Contribution of concrete
in tension
crack
Crack spacings
54
bar
concrete not
significantly
affected by bar
(3)
where
m h=(h d)
0 h=(h d) 5
333 033[h=(h d)] 5 , h=(h d) 35
15
h=(h d) . 35:
Tension stiffening
Tensile loads are considered to be carried only
by the reinforcement at the section of a
crack. Between adjacent cracks (as slips and
bond stresses are utilised) a limited tensile
force is transferred from the reinforcement to
the surrounding concrete. Strains in the
reinforcement as well as strains in the concrete
are not constant along the longitudinal axis
of the reinforcement. Strain of embedded
reinforcement (1s1 at zero slip) is less than
that of the naked reinforcement itself at
the section of a crack (1s2 at maximum slip)
due to bond stresses. Contribution of concrete
between cracks may be considered as an
increase to the stiffness of the tensile reinforcement. Therefore, this effect is known as tension
stiffening. In other words, Youngs modulus of
the reinforcement is apparently increased.
Between two cracks the average strain (1sm)
can be defined along the reinforcement as
1sm 1s2 D1s
(4)
2005 6 No 2
sr0
4tbm ref
tbm Su
M
Ac,ef
F
w
Sr
es1
es
ts
es2
tbm
srm 13sr0 2
ecm
ec
srm 14sr0 8
(5)
Crack spacings
A minimum crack spacing (sr0) can be defined,
based on strain compatibility. It gives the
closest point to an existing crack at which
another crack can be formed (i.e. where the
tensile strain in the concrete reaches its
tensile capacity). The minimum crack spacing
is a constant for a given concrete strength
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2
fs
f
A s
ref
ref
srm A1 A2 c A3 s A4 fs A5
fs
ref
(9a)
(9b)
(7a)
(7b)
reinforcement ratio (ref). However, this simplified statement is exclusively valid for tie
elements with one concentric reinforcing bar.
Experiments on reinforced concrete
elements in flexure have demonstrated13 that
concrete cover (c), spacing of reinforcing bars
(s) and size effect have considerable influences
on the average crack spacing (srm). Table 1
summarises formulae proposed by various
authors for the average crack spacing (srm).
Approaches in Table 1 can be generalised in
linear form
or non-linear form
f
srm f c, s, fs , s , ss , etc:
ref
55
(8)
56
Table 1 Formulae proposed by various authors for average crack spacing of reinforced concrete members [extension of Balazs,
G. L. (1993) Literature Review on Crack Width Formulae (unpublished manuscript)]
Formula for average crack spacing (srm)
Proposed by
srm kc
f
srm 2 c s
2
srm 50 k s
srm A1 c
srm A1 c A2 fs
Broms17
srm A1 A2 s
srm A1 A2 s
srm A1 A2 s
Jaccoud19
srm A1 c A2 s A3 fs
JSCE20
srm
srm
srm
d
50 0637s
25
4
50 15k s
3
k 4 c 07(s fs )
srm
2
fs
3 36ref
f fcm
srm 0157 s
4rtbm
fs
ref
srm A1
fs
ref
Saliger21
srm 50 025k1 k2
srm A1 A2
Eurocode 23
1
f
30 s
17
4ref
fs
ref
srm A1 A2
fs
ref
srm
fs
ref
srm A1
f
srm 15c 012 s
ref
srm k1 c k2
fs
ref
srm k1 c 025k2 k3
srm 35c kw
srm
fs
ref
fs
ref
3fs
1
1
10ref
k
s
f
k1 k2 s
srm 2 c
10
ref
s
f
01 s
srm 2 c
10
ref
s
f
k s
srm 2 c
10
10ref
s
A
srm 165 056 c c,ef
Sfs
f
srm 5(fs 72) 008 s K1 (c; s)
ref
!089
(022fctm =r)088
srm 31 k
fs
066
fctm
srm
srm
1 ss2
f
2 asc1 s
"
r#
ss
2 d Ach
ss fctm =ref
1
srm
h d 45
1 Ac,ef 1=3 0236 106
257
166
h x2
n As
f
12s2
srm A1 c A2
fs
ref
srm A1 c A2
fs
ref
Ferry-Borges24
srm A1 c A2
fs
ref
Braam25
srm A1 c A2
fs
ref
Alander26
srm A1 fs A2
fs
ref
Brice27
srm A1 c A2 s A3
fs
ref
srm A1 c A2 s A3
fs
ref
AIJ29
srm A1 c A2 s A3
fs
ref
Menn30
Holmberg31
srm A1 f (c;fs )
srm A1 A2 fs A3
fs
f (c; s)
ref
Leonhardt32
Noakowski10
Janko33
Bernardi et al. 34
Oh and Kang35
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2
ss2
ss2
es1
esm,r = zes2
es1
es2
ssr
es2
ssr
esm
esm,r
Crack widths
ss2
ss2
esm,r = es2 - 06es2
es1
es1
es2
13ssr
es2
13ssr
ssr
ssr
esm,r
esm
Crack stabilisation
The first crack is considered to appear when
the tensile strain reaches the tensile capacity
of concrete. In calculations it is taken into
account with the stress condition sct fct,min
at the extreme tensile face. Minimum concrete
tensile strength can be considered as a lower
fractile of the tensile strength, e.g. fct,min
fct,005. The influence of reinforcement ratio
and age of concrete at loading can be also
taken into account.5
2005 6 No 2
fct,max
d
:
fct,min
In the case of structural elements in flexure, the
flexural tensile strength of concrete ( fct,fl) should
be analysed. Flexural tensile strength of concrete
wk sr,max 1sm,r :
A
section
A-A
(11)
(12)
where
Number of cracks
ssrn dssr
first crack
n fct,min
57
fct,max
last crack
Stabilised cracking phase
first crack
Reinforcement stress
ssrn
ssr
58
Table 2 Formulae proposed by various authors for crack widths of reinforced concrete members [extension of Balazs, G. L. (1993)
Literature Review on Crack Width Formulae (unpublished manuscript)]
General form of proposal
Basics of proposal
wk b wm
b 1.5
Proposed by
(022fctm =r)088
wk 15(k)31
fs
066
fctm
#089
s
f
ss2 k1 k2 fctm =ref
01 s
wk 15 2 c
10
ref
Es
Bruggeling9
Noakowski10
AIJ29
b 1.55
wm determined from the sum of crack widths
b 1.66
1
f
75
wk 166 15c 004 s ss2
Es
r
r
Ferry-Borges24
b 1.7
f
ss2
wk 17 50 025k1 k2 s z
ref
Es
Eurocode 23
Schiessl-Wolfel36
ss2
wk 17(50 075s)08
Es
s
f
ss2
k1 k2 s z
wk 17 2 c
10
ref
Es
b 2.0
wk 4te 1sm
f
1sm
wk 4 c
2
f fcm ss2 fcm (005=r 2)
wk 2 0157 s
Es
4r tbm
wk sr,max1sm,r
Empirical relationships
fs
(1sm 1cm )
36ref
04
ss2
45
fs
ref
K2
r
4 Ac,ef d x
K
ss2
n hx
p d x
K 3 (h d)Ac,ef
ss2
hx
s
2
s
K ss2 (h d) 1
4(h d)
wk
CEB-FIP MC904
wk
CEB37
wk
wk
wk
Sygula42
Suri and Dilger43
Rao and Dilger44
(Table continued )
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2
Table 2 Continued
General form of proposal
Basics of proposal
Proposed by
Analytical relationships
Janko33
Nawy45
wk K
Ac,ef
(Dss )
Su
Scholz46
Act,1 sct,1 h x
dx
As
s2s2 fs
FrK
ksct,1 Es
FrK (1 q)(1 05q) 1
ss1
ss2
1q
d(1 05q)
sct,1
fctd
no-slip theory
wk
Karman47
3acr 1m
1 2((acr cmin )=h x)
BS 8110
Reynolds-Steedman48
debonded-length theory
wm r (1s2 1c,r )
r
DL L1c1
0:7t
n(1s2 1c1 )
Jaccoud19
Farra and Jaccoud23
debonded-length theory
ss
r Dw
Es
c
r srm 0378 011
fs
r
ss
c
Dw c
104
454 99
30
fs
wm
Holmberg49
Noakowski10
Alvarez11
Fehling and Konig22
Edwards and Picard50
Somayaji and Shah51
Krips52
Yang and Chen53
Balazs54 etc.
Bernardi et al. 34
"
r!#
2sf
sf
1
wk
d A tanh cosh
Ef
sf (fctm =rf )
(Table continued )
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2
59
Table 2 Continued
General form of proposal
Basics of proposal
Proposed by
Oh and Kang35
f
1 Nd=L hd=wc
rEs
Ec
equation (14).14
w
b k
wm
where
wm
wmax
(
"
#)
srm Mr
srm
srm 2
033 3
sr,max M
sr,max
sr,max
Mr
067
(14)
M
wk sr,max 1sm,r
(15a)
Density
pk
pm
(13)
wm wk
crack width, w
fs
36ref
(15b)
ss2
fctm (t)
06
(1 ae ref )
Es
ref Es
(15c)
sr,max
1sm,r
wm srm 1sm,r
(16a)
where
1sm,r
2
2 fs
srm sr,max
3
3 36ref
(16b)
ss2 2
fctm (t)
06
(1 ae ref ):
Es 3
ref Es
(16c)
Distribution
60
10
wk
= 15
wm
08
06
04
02
00
00
fcm = 30 to 50 N/mm2
r = 0.5% to 2.5%
02
04
06
Average crack width, wm: mm
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2
Future work
Future work is two-fold.
(a) Harmonisation of cracking models is
needed by selecting the most important
variables.13
(b) Further development of cracking models is
required for the novel types of reinforcements other than steel.
Conclusions
Based on an extensive literature review of available formulae for the calculation of crack
spacings and crack widths of reinforced
concrete flexural members, the following conclusions can be drawn.
Cracking of concrete (related to its
limited tensile deformation capacity) is always
expected under tensile stresses.
Crack formation is a complex mechanical
and geometrical question to be modelled.
Available crack width formulations are usually
based on simplifications. A rigorous formulation of crack width has to be based on the
integration of the actual strains of reinforcement and concrete between cracks due to
the accumulated slips. Formulation of crack
width in design is usually based on the crack
spacing (sr) and the average reinforcement
strain (1sm).
Experiments have demonstrated that the
nominal diameter of reinforcement (fs), the
effective reinforcement ratio (ref including
influence of bond by the effective concrete
area in tension), concrete cover (c), reinforcing
bar spacing (s) and size effect have considerable influences on the average crack spacing
(srm). Basic parameters of the crack width (w)
are the average crack spacing and the
average strain in the reinforcement relative to
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2
Acknowledgement
This state-of-the-art report is a contribution to
the work of fib TG 4.1 Serviceability Models.
The authors acknowledge the financial
support of the Hungarian Research Fund
(OTKA) (Grant No. T 032 525).
References
1. Comite Euro-Internationale du Beton. Design
Manual on Cracking and Deformations. CEB Bulletin. Ed. Favre, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de
Lausanne, Suisse, 1985.
2. Bigaj, A. J. Structural Dependence of Rotation
Capacity of Plastic Hinges in RC Beams and
Slabs. PhD Thesis, Delft University, 1999.
3. Comite Europeen de Normalisation. Eurocode 2:
Design of Concrete Structures, General Rules and
Rules for Buildings. European Prestandard ENV
1992-1-1, Dec 1991.
4. Comite Euro-Internationale du Beton. CEB-FIP
Model Code 1990 Design Code. CEB,
Thomas Telford, London, 1993 (CEB Bulletin
dInformation No. 213/214).
5. Bergner, H. (1997) Rissbreitenbeschrankung
zwangbeanspruchter Bauteile aus hochfestem
Normalbeton. Deutscher Ausschuss fur Stahlbeton, Heft 482, 1997.
61
6. Park, R. and Paulay, T. Reinforced Concrete Structures. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1975.
7. Rizkalla, S. H. and Hwang, L. S. Crack prediction
for members in uniaxial tension. ACI Journal,
1984, 82, No. 6, November December, pp.
572 579.
8. Janovic, K. and Kupfer, H. Zur Rissbildung im
Stahlbeton- und Spannbetonbau. Betonwerk
und Fertigteil-Technik, 1986, 12, 161 169.
9. Bruggeling, A. S. G. Structural Concrete: Theory
and its Applications. Balkema, Rotterdam, 1991.
10. Noakowski, P. Verbundorientierte, kontinuierliche Theorie zur Ermittlung der Rissbreite.
Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, 1985, 7, 185 190;
1985, 8, 215 221.
11. Alvarez, M. Einfluss des Verbundverhaltens auf
das Verformungsvermogen von Stahlbeton. IBK
Bericht, 236, July, 1998.
12. Rusch, H. and Rehm, G. Notes on crack spacing in
members subjected to bending. RILEM Symposium on Bond and Crack Formation in Reinforced Concrete. Stockholm, 1957, pp. 525533.
13. Beeby, A. W. The influence of the parameter
freff on crack widths. Structural Concrete,
2004, 5, No. 2, 71 83.
14. Tue, N. V. Zur Spannungsumlagerung im
Spannbeton bei der Rissbildung unter statischer
und wiederholter Belastung, Dissertation, D17.
Fachbereich Konstruktiver Ingenieurbau der
Technischen Hochschule Darmstadt, 1992.
15. American Concrete Institute. Building Code
Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 31895) and Commentary (ACI 318R-95). ACI
Manual of Concrete Practice, Part 3 Use of
Concrete in Buildings Design, Specifications
and Related Topics. ACI, Detroit, USA, 1997.
16. Broms, B. B. and Lutz, L. A. Effects of arrangement of reinforcement on crack width and
spacing of reinforced concrete members. Journal
of the ACI, 1965, 62, No. 11, 13951409.
17. Broms, B. B. Crack width and crack spacing in
reinforced concrete members. Journal of the
ACI, 1965, 62, No. 10, 1237 1256.
18. Janovic, K. and Kupfer, H. Beschrankung der
Rissbreite bei teilweiser Vorspannung. Bauingenieur, 1982, 57, 109 114.
19. Jaccoud, J-P. Armature minimale pour le controle
de la fissuration des structures en beton. E`cole
Polytechnique Fe`derale de Lausanne These
No. 666, 1987.
20. Japan Society of Civil Engineers. Recommendation for Design and Construction of Concrete
Structures Using Continuous Fiber Reinforcing
Materials, (ed. A. Machida). Concrete Engineering Series Vol. 23, JSCE, Tokyo, 1997.
21. Saliger, R. Die neue Theorie des Stahlbetons.
Franz Deuticke, Wien, 1950.
22. Fehling, E. and Konig, G. Zur Rissbreitenbeschrankung im Stahlbetonbau. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, 1988, 6, 161167; 1988, 7, 199204.
62
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
Structural Concrete
2005 6 No 2