Sie sind auf Seite 1von 23

DESIGN EXAMPLE FLEXURAL STRENGTHENING

1
RC beam strengthened with CFRP composite for bending
1 SYSTEM
P/2 P/2
1. SYSTEM
P/2 P/2
410
370
2
2. CROSS SECTION AND MATERIALS
RCbeam
h=40cm
b = 20 cm
FRPcomposite
b
f
=50mm
t
f
= 1 2 mm
b=20cm
d=36.7cm
A
s1
=216=4.02cm
2
4
0
t
f
1.2mm
E
fk
=165000N/mm
2

fku
=1.7%
Concrete:
C30/37
f
ck
=30N/mm
2
ck
E
c
=33000N/mm
2
f
ctm
=2.9N/mm
2
20
Steel:
f
yk
=500N/mm
2
E
s
=210000N/mm
2
3
3. LOADS AND DESIGN VALUES
1.Selfweight G=
2.Liveloadbeforestrengthening q
1
=
3.Liveloadafterstrengthening q
1
+q
2
=
n

EJ
k,]
] =1
k,1

o
cJ
ck
c

EJ
where
c
=1.5

s
= 1.15
yJ
yk
s

s
1.15

f
=1.2

J
=

k
y

=
4
4. INITIAL SITUATION
ServicemomentM
o
selfweight+q
1
Calculationoftheneutralaxisdepthx
0
:
o
2
s s2 o 2 s s1 o

Where
s
= E
s
E
c
s

5
4. INITIAL SITUATION
2 2

o
s s1 s
2
s1
2
s s1

o

Theconcretestrain
co
atthetopfibrecanbeexpressedas:
co
o o
c co

b
S
Where
I
co
=
bx
o
S
S
+(
s
-1)A
s2
(x
o
-J
2
)
2
+
s
A
s1
(J -x
o
)
2

co

co

6
4. INITIAL SITUATION
Basedonthestraincompatibility,thestrain
o
attheextremetensionfiber
canbederivedas
o co
o
o

7
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.1. Full composite action
Steelyieldingfollowedbyconcretecrushing
0.85
cJ
bx +A
s2
E
s
e
s2
= A
s1

yJ
+ A

Where =0.8 and


cu o

8
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.1. Full composite action
Steelyieldingfollowedbyconcretecrushing
Onlyiterativesolvingpossible:
1
st
proposal x=90mm
cu
b-x
o
=
cu
x
o
0.85
cJ
bx = A
s1

yJ
+A

2
nd
proposal x=....cm p p
cu
b-x
x
o
=
0 85 bx = A +A E e 0.85
cJ
bx = A
s1

yJ
+A

9
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.1. Full composite action
Steelyieldingfollowedbyconcretecrushing

cu
b-x
o uJ
e
u

1
J-x

yJ
cu
x
o uJ
y

s1

cu
x E
s
) ( ) ( ) (
2 2 2 1
d x E A x h E A x d f A M
G s s s G f f f G yd s Rd

Where
G
=0.4
RJ EJ
10
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.1. Full composite action
SteelyieldingfollowedbyFRP fracture
istheoreticallypossibleifpropermechanicalanchorageareused
ISNOTTHECASE
11
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.2. Loss composite action
L d a>L+d
a
L
<a
EJ RJ RJ
12
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.2. Loss composite action
Endshearfailure
EJ RJ RJ
Where
s
s1

o
I
=
_
(1 -

p
s
)
2
p
s
JI
S
4
=

RJ
= u.1S_S
J
o
S
_1 +
_
2uu
J
_

1uup
s

ck
S
_
p
s
(designvalueofresistingshearstrengthofconcrete)
_
o
I
_
_
J
_

RJ
=
RJ
13
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Approach1:AnchorageverificationandFRP strainlimitation
cracks
A
f
A
s1
l
b
N
s1
z
N
b
N
f
14
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
ThemaximumFRP forcewhichcanbeanchored:
N k k b
_
E |N] N
o,mox
= oc
1
k
c
k
b
b
_
E

ctm
|N]
Themaximumanchorable length:
b,mox

2 ctm

15
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
Where: =0.9or =1.0 forbeamswithsufficientinternal
andexternalreinforcement
k
c
=1.0
f
k 1 u6
_
2 -
b

b
1
geometryfactor
c 0 64
k
b
= 1.u6
_
b
1 +
b

4uu
1
c
1
=0.64
c
2
=2.0
16
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
N
o,mox
=
z =
l
b,mox
=
z=
17
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks

H
RJ
(z) =
H
o
(z) =
Initialsituationatthepositionofz
H
RJ
(z) =
co
o o
c co

o co
o
o

o
18
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks

c
andx isunknownonlyiterativesolvingispossible
19
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
Forceequilibriumcondition:
0 85
1
st
proposal x = cm and 0 002
0.85
cJ s1 s s1
1
st
proposal x=....cm and
c
0.002

= 1uuue
c
_u.S -
1uuu
12
e
c
] _
12
]
c

20
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
1
st
proposal x=....cm and
c
0.002


b-x

s1

c
J-x

c
x
o

o
0
=
8 -1uuue
c
4(6 1uuu )
s1 c
x

0
4(6 -1uuue
c
)
) ( ) (
1 1
x h E A x d E A M
G f f f G s s s Rd

1 1 G f f f G s s s Rd
21
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
2
nd
proposal x=....cm and
c
0.002
1uuu _u S
1uuu
] = 1uuue
c
_u.S -
12
e
c
]
0.85
cJ s1 s s1
0.85
cJ s1 s s1

c

22
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks
2
nd
proposal x=....cm and
c
0.002


b-x

s1

c
J-x

c
x
o

o
0
=
8 -1uuue
c
4(6 1uuu )
s1 c
x

0
4(6 -1uuue
c
)
) ( ) (
1 1
x h E A x d E A M
G f f f G s s s Rd

1 1 G f f f G s s s Rd
23
5. ANALYSIS IN ULS
5.3. Verification of peeling-off at the end anchorage and at flexural
Anchorageverification
cracks



o,mox ,J
N
o,mox
y
cb

Where
cb
=1.5

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen