Partially Prestressed Concrete

10/12/2013
MSTERDENGINYERIADECAMINSCANALSIPORTS
MSTERDENGINYERIAESTRUCTURALIDELACONSTRUCCI
(20132014)
Diseoavanzadodeestructurasdehormign
Advanced ConcreteStructures Design
2000
Linearsolution
(Manders diagram)
1500
-t,adm
M0 M0
1000 P P
c,adm
Nonlinearfeasible
Pe
500
solutions
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
M1
P
-500 c,adm
-t,adm M2
P
-1000
P
PARTIALLYPRESTRESSEDCONCRETE
Professor:Jess Bairn andAntonioMar
DIRECTOPTIMALDESIGNOFPARTIALLYPRESTRESSEDCONCRETEFOR
CONTROLLEDCRACKINGORFATIGUE Introduction
Conceptoftotallyprestressed concrete(TPC) Absenceofcracksinservice
Linearbehaviourofbothconcreteandsteel
Limitstateconditionsarelinear
Feasiblesolutionsdomain:Manders diagram
2000
M0
P
1500
c,adm
0
1000 P
M0
Disadvantages:
Highcompressionstresses.
Pe
500 Feasiblesolutions
Highcreepanddelayedlosses.
High creep and delayed losses.
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Cost:highactivesteelratio.
-500
c,adm
M2
P
M2
-1000 P
0
P
Recall:
Basis ofprestressed concretedesign.
Useofsecondary prestressed moments (hiperestticosdepretensado)
1
10/12/2013
Partiallyprestressed concrete(PPC)
Eithertensilestressesorcracksareallowedinatleastoneservicehypothesis
Nocrackscondition Controlledcracking
Frequentofquasipermenent situation ifcrackingtakesplace

Characteristic situation forahigherload,tensile
strengthdisappears
2000
M0
P
Advantages
1500
c,adm
-t,adm
InbetweenTPCandRC.
1000 M0
P
Moreflexibilityindesign.
More flexibility in design
Pe
500 Feasible
solutions Economicsolutions
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Reducematerialconsumption
-500 c,adm
P
M1 andelementsize.
M2
P
-1000 -t,adm
Servicerequirementsincurrentcodes
EHE08 EC2
Wmx [mm]
Clase de exposicin, Hormign pretensado

segn artculo 8. (para la combinacin
frecuente de acciones)
I 0.2
IIa, IIb, H 0.2 (1)
IIIa, IIIb, IV, F, Qa Descompresin
IIIc, Qb, Qc
(1) Adicionalmente deber comprobarse que las armaduras activas se encuentran

en la zona comprimida de la combinacin cuasipermanente de acciones.
ACI318 Partiallyprestressedconcrete
Cracksalloweddependending ontheenvironment.
Class U
Class T Targetcrackwidthcanbedefinedadm :
Class C
PerformanceBasedconcept
Fullycompressioninaggressiveenvironmentsunder
Ficticious stresses
frequentconditions(cracksallowedundercharacteristic
InclassesTandC:ft> fct conditions).
OnlyClassCrequirescrackcontrolcheck
Typicalpractice:LinearTheory
aposteriori checkofadm.
2
10/12/2013
Crackedprestressedelements
Deriveneutral
Nonlinearbehaviour(neutralaxisandmechanicalpropertiesloaddependent). axisfor cracked
Crackwidthcomputationiscomplex. prestressed
Traditionalmethodsbasedonlineartheory(Magnels diagram)usesubjective section andcrack
parameters,optimalsolutionisnotguaranteed: width evaluation
Degreeofprestressing(k) Fictitiousallowablestresses(fct*) Variablesnotrelatedto

Referredtoserviceload: Uncracked propertiesassumed. theperformance
measure:
Thesestressesmaybelargerthan
thetensilestrength. CrackingSLS:
ReferredtodecompressionPforce:
FatigueULS:
Chooseofallowablestress?
Ch fd f i ?
Chooseofdegreeofprestressing?
Objective:DesignmethodologyforPartiallyPrestressed Concrete(PPC):
Objective considerationoftheperformance measure.
Considerationofactualnonlinearbehaviour.
Allowsoptimization.
Easeofuse,suitablefordesignapplication.
HelpextendinguseofPPCasameanstomoreSUSTAINABLECONSTRUCTIONS.
Analysisofcracked
CONTROLLEDCRACKINGORFATIGUE prestressed section
Internalequilibrium
Cs
z Cc M
Tp PN
Ts
Neutralaxisandmechanicalproperties:
X=f(,,M/P)
Nonlinearproblem
crackedsectionstiffeness isloaddependent.
For rectangularsection:
If P0:
3
10/12/2013
Analysisofcracked
Stressincrementsduringdecompression:
Conceptofneutralizationforce(PN)
Internalforcesneededtoeliminatethestressesinconcrete.
Pretensionedelements

app+p
Unbonded Posttensionedelements
app P PN
+ =
BondedPosttensionedelements with
Analysisofcracked
Internalequilibrium
Cs
z Cc M
Tp PN
Ts
Neutralaxisandmechanicalproperties:
X=f(,,M/P)
Nonlinearproblem
crackedsectionstiffeness isloaddependent.
4
10/12/2013
Analysisofcracked
CONTROLLEDCRACKINGORFATIGUE prestressedsection

Cs
z Cc
Incrementofstressesinreinforcement:
Tp
Ts
FatigueULS:
Crackwidth:
CrackingSLS:
Standardsolution:
TryavalueofP,Ap andAs Optimumsolution?
IflimitstatenotsatisfiedchangeAs orAp
CONTROLLEDCRACKINGORFATIGUE Proposedmethod
Twosteps:
1. Domainoffeasiblesolutionsundercrackedconditions
2. DesignApconsideringelasticprestressedgains
1 D i f f ibl l ti N li d i
1.Domainoffeasiblesolutions:Nonlineardomain
Internalequilibrium
Dropunknown
Ap infirst
instance

Stressgradient: Cs
z Cc M
Tp PN
Ts
Spaceoffeasiblesolutions(PN,PNe)throughequilibriumequations: Analyticalexpressionsmaybe
derivedforgivengeometry
DependonAs.
IndependentonAp (simplification
correctedinstep2)
5
10/12/2013
Variationofneutralaxis
Definitionsoffixedpointsdefinedforgivenperformaneobjectives(crackSLSorfatigueULS)
stress planes
variation stress planes
variation
Fixed point
Fixed point

Compression in top fibre Compression in bottom fibre
Bound Description Fixed point position (p) Stress in fixed point (*)
interaction
1 Compression in bot. fibre diagrams
2 Tension in top fibre
3 Tension in bottom fibre or
4 Compression in top fibre
Neutralaxisvariation
Case:Compressionbottom
Case:Compressiontop
6
10/12/2013
2000
Linearsolution
(Manders diagram)
1500
-t,adm
M0 M0
1000 P P
c,adm
Nonlinearfeasible
Pe
500
solutions
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
M1
P
-500 c,adm
-t,adm M2
P
-1000
Nonlinear
N li f ibl
feasiblesolutionsdomain
l i d i P
Comparable againstMagnels diagram(lineartheory)

Magnels diagramisconservative inmostofthedomain moreeconomicalsolutionsexist.
Methodallowseasyidentificationofoptimalsolution pair(P,e)(minumum P,minimumAP As).
Boundaries arenotparalleltoMagnels intension sm (mm)
relatedperformance(notamatterofdifferentfct*). (mm) 100 150 200
k
Itreferstoneutralizationprestressing force(PN). 0.1 120MPa 80MPa 60MPa
Selectionofp basedonfatigue orcrackwidth. 0.2 240MPa 160MPa 120MPa
0.3 350MPa 240MPa 180MPa
2.Designofactivereinforcement(Ap)
Workingstressinactivereinforcement(p)
Estimationoftotalprestressinglosses:
Cs
z Cc
cissmallerthaninnoncrackcases.
Tp
Twodifferentgainsofprestressingforcemayexist: Ts
a) Tendondecompression:neutralizationforce.
b) Tensileelasticgaininthecrackedstage(P).
Knownfromthefixedpointdiagram.
3possibleexpressionsdependingonprestressing technology
Posttensionedbonded: Posttensionesunbonded: Pretensioned:
PartiallycorrectsindependenceofAp infeasibledomain
7
10/12/2013
2.Designofactivereinforcement(Ap)
PerformanceassessmentthroughnonlinearanalysisconductedwithCONS(Mar 2000)model
Crackingunder
permanentloads
tl d
Lossesinactivereinforcement Concretestressintendonposition(cp)
Totallosses:12% 17%
Recommendationsregardingpassivereinforcementselection(As,As)
Parametricstudiesondifferentcrosssectiongeometries
1. Rectangular 2. Wide T section (slab)
3. Slender I section 4. Box section
Performance objectives:
max 0,2 mm For frequent conditions
c , max 0,6 f cj For characteristic conditions
8
10/12/2013
Recomendationsregardingpassivereinforcementselection(As,As)
Activereinforcement 3
Relativecost: =
Pasivereinforcement 1
Caso1 Caso2
60000 9000
8000
50000
7000
40000 6000
5000
Coste
Coste
30000
4000
20000 3000
2000
10000
1000
0 0
0,00 10,00 20,00 30,00 40,00 50,00 60,00 0,00 20,00 40,00 60,00 80,00 100,00 120,00
As/Ap As/Ap
Caso3 Caso4
10000 30000
9000
8000 25000
7000
6000 20000
Coste
Coste
5000
15000
4000
3000 10000
2000
1000 5000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0
0,00 20,00 40,00 60,00 80,00 100,00 120,00
As/Ap
As/Ap
MoreeconomicaltoincreaseAp insteadofAs.
PPC:useAsclosetoAsmin
CONTROLLEDCRACKINGORFATIGUE Applicationexample
Crosssecton:
Concrete:C40/50(fcj=30MPa)
Exposureclass:XC4
Pasivereinforcement:fy=500MPa
A ti
ActivereinforcementY1860S7
i f t Y1860 S7
(fpu=1860MPa,fpy=1690MPa)
As=As=16c/250mm
Designloads:
Self weight Quasipermanent Frequent Characteristic
10.254kNm 12.795kNm 16.926kNm 18.301kNm
Performancerequirements:
Characteristic: Afterestimationofsm
Frequent: Alternatively,fatigue
performancerequirement
Quasipermanent: basedonstressrangesmaybe
used
9
10/12/2013
Feasible solutions
30,000
Newfeasible Condition:s=160MPa(frequent)
regions: 25,000
Magnelssolution
( l ti ) f
(elastic)for
20,000 tadm =2.5MPa
Pe (kNm)
15,000
e=350mm
10,000
5,000
Condition:compressed
tendon(permanent)
d ( ) 0
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000
P (kN)
Elastictheoryfeasibledomain(Magnels) Proposal
...marginPmin9%lower
Pmin=26.451kN Pmin=24.212kN
...marginPmax/Pmin11%higher
Pmax=51.888kN Pmax=52.808kN
DesignApasbondedposttensioned:
PN=24.212kN
Consideringc=0.8(20%losses)
Designaccordingtoelasticdomain Proposal
Ap=23.787mm2 Ap=19.016mm2 ReductionAp:20.1%.

Cuasipermanente
Performanceverifications:
Frecuente Procoprobable
Nonlinearanalysis:BCSEC(Bairn,2002)
30000
25000
20000 Mfrec
M(kNm)
15000
cmax=7.7MPa cmax=14.6MPa cmax=17.4MPa
10000
cgp=1.3MPa p=1269 MPa p=1331MPa
M=13200kNm
p=1154MPa s=154MPa s=241 MPa
5000 s=48MPa
0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014
Errorins :3.8%onthesafeside
curv (rad/m)
10
10/12/2013
CONTROLLEDCRACKINGORFATIGUE Conclusions
1. TheproposedmethodproducesfeasiblesolutionsdomainsequivalenttoMagnels
method,howeveritsvariablesaredirectlyrelatedtolimitstatesperformance
objectives.
2. Themethodexplicitlyconsiders
p y problemsnonlinearity.
p y
3. Themethodisdirect andshowsgoodaccuracy.
4. Analyticalformulations werederivedforthedesignofAp consideringofelasticstress
gainsintwophases:decompressionandtensileworkaftercracking.
5. Moreeconomicalsolutions tendstopotentiateactivereinforcementinfrontofpassive.
ItisrecommendedtoconstructNL feasiblesolutionsdomainconsideringtheminimum
passivereinforcement.
6. ProposedmethodallowsreductionsofAp between10%and30% withrespecttolinear
theoryusingallowabletensilestresses.
(
7. HigherreductionofAp isobtainedforlessefficientsections(smallis //hratio)) andsmall
eccentricities.
8. Therangeoffeasibleprestressing force(Pmax/Pmin)increases,thisallowsfitting
solutionswithslendersections (reducedelementssize).
Reducematerialconsumptionincreasesustainability
MSTERDENGINYERIADECAMINSCANALSIPORTS
MSTERDENGINYERIAESTRUCTURALIDELACONSTRUCCI
(20112012)
Diseoavanzadodeestructurasdehormign
Advanced ConcreteStructures Design
2000
Linearsolution
(Manders diagram)
1500
- t,adm
M0 M0
1000 P P
c,adm
Nonlinearfeasible
Pe
500
solutions
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
M1
P
-500 c,adm
-t,adm M2
P
-1000
P
PARTIALLYPRESTRESSEDCONCRETE
Professors:AntonioMar,Jess BairnandEvaOller.
11

Partially Prestressed Concrete

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Partially Prestressed Concrete

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

10/12/2013

Conceptoftotallyprestressed concrete(TPC) Absenceofcracksinservice

Frequentofquasipermenent situation ifcrackingtakesplace

Clase de exposicin, Hormign pretensado

IIa, IIb, H 0.2 (1)

IIIa, IIIb, IV, F, Qa Descompresin

(1) Adicionalmente deber comprobarse que las armaduras activas se encuentran

Degreeofprestressing(k) Fictitiousallowablestresses(fct*) Variablesnotrelatedto

3 Tension in bottom fibre or

4 Compression in top fibre

Comparable againstMagnels diagram(lineartheory)

3. Slender I section 4. Box section

Ap=23.787mm2 Ap=19.016mm2 ReductionAp:20.1%.

Você também pode gostar