© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 0

© All Rights Reserved

- Arching Behaviour of Precast Concrete Slabs in a Deconstructable Composite Brigde Deck
- Adhesion 2003MaterSciEngAPei
- Paper2ACIShearAruna
- Design Criteria vs. Line Pipe Requirements for Offshore Pipelines
- metals-02-00178
- Algo del fly ash influencia pasta.pdf
- 1-s2.0-S0143974X0700171X-main
- 2012ChanSHCPhD
- Atriculo de Analisis de La Fractura
- Singapore Paper
- Indian Highways
- ies 2015
- 10.1.1.295.9828
- A Computational Model for Splitting in Laminates
- fatigue notes
- Size Effect on Shear Behavior of High Strength Rc Slender Beams
- Strut and Tie Design
- 225R-99
- 3491r_91.pdf
- module9a

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

at the bottom face

Fedja Arifovic & Bjrn Tljsten

Department of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

ABSTRACT: When RC beams are strengthened by FRP plates bonded to the bottom face of the beam they

fail due to the lack of the mechanical anchorage of the plate. This paper shows that it is possible to relate the

anchorage failure of tension face FRP-plated beams to the crack sliding capacity of the beams.

The method suggested gives the highly desirable occurrence of the critical diagonal shear crack. The occurrence of this crack is suggested as the anchorage failure mechanism of the plate. The failure load that produces

the sliding in such crack is shown to be a lower bound to the anchorage failure load of tension face plated

beams. The assumption is that the FRP-plate must be extended at least one critical anchorage length beyond the

theoretical occurrence of the critical diagonal crack.

INTRODUCTION

bonded to the bottom face of the beam and subjected

to bending it fails due to the anchorage failure of the

plate. This means that the full composite action of the

plate can not be expected.

This paper suggests the occurrence of the critical

diagonal shear crack as the governing failure mechanism of the anchorage failure. The occurrence of

this crack is found by the means of the crack sliding

theory. Thus, this solution suggests the shear resistance of an unplated RC beam without internal shear

reinforcement as the lower bound to the load that

produces the anchorage failure of tension plated RC

beams. This requires a simplification of the dominant

failure modes of tension face plated RC beams to the

diagonal cracking failure (the diagonal cracking is

shown in Figure 1).

Zhang (1997) develops the crack sliding theory

for the beams without shear reinforcement by defining the load that produces diagonal cracking in such

beams. These beams fail in shear by a major diagonal crack, and by demanding the sliding in such a

crack the shear carrying capacity of the beam may

be found.

The reason for using the crack sliding theory is

that it is based on the upper bound solutions of the

theory of plasticity. The upper bound solutions are

based on the geometrically possible strain fields.

Thus, on the basis of a predicted failure mechanism

Figure 1.

beam.

may be found. By means of the work equation this

leads to the carrying capacity of the structure. Since

the upper bound solutions do not require any knowledge on the difficult stress state in the structure, they

seem obvious for producing the simple design equations at the limit state for RC beams strengthened by

bonded FRP.

In the FRP tension face plated beams the stress state

is difficult to determine because of the vertical cracking between the FRP and concrete at the limit state.

1069

the anchorage of the internal tensile reinforcement is

not applicable since the cracking does not allow for the

usual tensile force distribution. Normally, the internal tensile reinforcement must sustain certain tensile

force T at certain anchorage length. For instance, the

distribution of this force along the beam length x for

shear reinforced beams may be written as

T ( x) =

M ( x) 1

+ V ( x)cot

h

2

(1)

Here is the inclination of the diagonal compression field and M and V are the moment and shear section forces, respectively. h is the beam height.

It is seen that the tensile force T is thus not only

equal to the value M/ h from the section with bending moment only but due to the presence of the compressive stresses in normal sections of the web it

increases, Nielsen (1998). Not being able to establish

the same tensile force distribution in an FRP plate as

given in eq. (1), at the limit state, must mean that in

general the elastic solutions (normally based on an

elastic stress state at the plate end) fail to give rational

solutions of the anchorage failure.

The literature describes the anchorage failure of

FRP tension face plated beams very well and there

is a general agreement in the description. Quantrill

et al. (1996) describe the dominant failure in the

tests they conducted as the plate separation failure.

This plate separation occurs at the plate end near

the support with the concrete cover still attached

to the plate. Garden and Hollaway (1998) investigate the influence of the plate end anchorage. They

find the plate separation failure as the most common

failure due to the peeling action at the end of the

plate. They write that this failure is influenced by

the shear span to depth ratio of the beam: increasing ratio leads to the plate separation being initiated away from the plate end towards the constant

moment region. Oh et al. (2003) recognize the plate

separation failure as the rip-off failure that occurs

at the cover to internal reinforcement ratio but they

also describe the same type of failure occurring in

the interface between the adhesive and the concrete.

One more extensive description of the anchorage

failure mechanisms is due to Teng and Yao (2007).

They describe major failure modes as the critical

diagonal cracking (CDC) debonding of the plate

and the cover separation failure. Their description

is somewhat comprehensive and it even contains the

combinations of these failures.

Ali et al. (2001) and Oehlers et al. (2004) use

the crack sliding theory for FRP tension face plated

beams. This paper gives a brief discussion of their

solutions.

METHODS

carrying capacity of the tension face plated beams

that undergo the anchorage failure. Firstly, the section describes the classical plastic solution for calculating shear capacity of non-shear reinforced

beams followed by the description of the crack sliding theory. The classical approach describes the use

of the upper bound theory and the need for a better physical explanation of the shear failure of nonshear reinforced beams. The crack sliding theory

provides this. The crack sliding theory for tension

face plated beams is subsequently discussed. Finally,

the approaches by Ali et al. (2001) and Oehlers et al.

(2004) are described.

2.1

approach

is shown. Utilizing the expression for the dissipation

in concrete per unit length D = 12 fc ub(1 sin ) for shear

failure given by Nielsen (1998) the work equation

becomes

Pu =

1

h

f c ub(1 cos )

u

2

sin

(2)

geometrical quantities are given in Figure 2.

Inserting tan = h/a and introducing = P/bh the

solution becomes

2

a

1

a

= 1+

h

fc 2

h

(3)

concentrated forces, Nielsen (1998).

1070

Due to the lack of perfect plasticity of the concrete compressive strength a so-called effectiveness

factor must be introduced. The effectiveness factor

also covers the strength reductio due to the cracking.

In the beam shear problem the effectiveness factor

is a product of functions f depending on concrete

strength, the beam height (size effect), the reinforcement ratio = As/bh and the relative shear span a/ h.

he f-functions are written as

f1 ( f c ) =

3.5

[MPa ]

fc

(4a)

f 2 ( h) = 0.27 1 +

[m]

(4b)

f 3 ( ) = 15 + 0.58 [%]

(4c)

a

a

h

h

(4d)

effectiveness factor the model is not able to quantify

for the influence of cracking on the failure mechanism. Furthermore, here is no physical explanation

for the function f4 that describes the relative shear

span dependency. This indicates that the classical

plasticity approach does not explain the beam shear

problem fully. Therefore, the crack sliding theory

must be induced.

2.2

cracking that influences the failure. It is the last

formed diagonal crack that initiates at the bottom face

and propagates to the load point that is of the interest. The theory is for beams without shear reinforcement and may furthermore be extended to beams with

light shear reinforcement. The theory is developed by

Zhang (1997).

By the means of the crack sliding theory it is possible to predict a theoretical occurrence of the critical diagonal shear crack. It is well known that this

crack is the failure mechanism that governs the failure of beams without shear reinforcement. The failure

occurs by sliding in this critical crack. Figure 3 illustrates this. The figure shows that the cracks that occur

close to the loading point occur for low levels of

the cracking load. However, the sliding failure in those

cracks demands higher dissipation in concrete than in

those cracks that start closer to the support.

Finally, the sliding in a crack can thus only occur

for the load defined by the intersection of the cracking load curve and the shear load curve. This defines

the position of the critical diagonal crack.

The cracking load may be found by inducing a

simple solution to a problem that in reality belongs

to the field of the fracture mechanics. The solution

is based on the assumption that the diagonal cracking appears when the effective tensile strength in the

crack is exceeded. The load that induces this failure is

found by the moment equilibrium (see Figure 4) and

by approximating the crack to a linear crack, thus

1

1

Pcr c + a = bf t .ef (h 2 + (a x) 2 )

2

2

(5)

solutions from the above defines the sliding in the

Figure 3.

1071

using the analogy of eq. (3). The sliding load becomes

Pu =

1

bf c ( h2 + ( a x )2 ( a x ))

2

(6)

beams (eq. (3)) the reinforcement is strong, i.e. the

beam is overreinforced.

The sliding in the crack demands now (5) equal to

(6). Thus the crack sliding criterion becomes

a x

fc 1 +

h

( )

a x

1+ h

a x

= f t .ef a 1 c

h

h + 2 h

2

(7)

plate to the intersection of the critical diagonal crack

with the bottom face.

Sliding failure in such a crack involves the use

of the effectiveness factor v for the compressive

strength of cracked concrete. v is a product of v0 and

vs vs is the crack sliding factor and is set to 0.5 and

v0 is a function of the concrete compressive strength

fc, beam height h and the reinforcement ratio (see

eq. (4)). The relative shear span dependency can now

be avoided. The effectiveness factor v is written as

such as one proposed by Chen and Teng (2001).

Thus, when calculating the anchorage failure load

the approach is to define the theoretical occurrence of

the critical diagonal crack by satisfying the crack sliding criterion. If the FRP-plate is extended at least one

anchorage length beyond the intersection between the

crack and the bottom face (i.e. if positions 3 or 4 from

Figure 5 are achieved) the crack sliding solution is on

the safe side. It is thus assumed that the load carrying capacity is increased by increasing the anchorage

length beyond the theoretical occurrence of the critical diagonal crack. If there is no sufficient anchorage

length a mechanical anchorage must be provided.

v0 = f1 ( f c ) f 2 (h) f 3 ( )

2.4

(8)

is the load factor: 1.6 for point load. The effective tensile strength of concrete is given by Zhang (1997) to

f t .ef = 0.6 f t s( h),

f t = 0.26 f c 2 / 3 ,

0.3

h

s( h) =

0.1

(9)

2.3

plated RC beams

the peeling in a tension face plated beam may be taken

as the shear strength of the beam without stirrups. Ali

et al. (2001) use this approach by applying the crack

sliding theory developed by Zhang (1997). Thus, they

modified the theory presented in this paper. They

modify the crack sliding model to account for the

contribution of the tension face plating.

Ali et al. (2001) suggest the component Pcr the

plate must resist to

Pcr = m

is assumed governed by the critical diagonal shear

crack. In Figure 5 it is illustrated that the crack may

intersect the bottom face outside the range of the FRP

(case 1), inside the critical anchorage length (case 2),

at the critical anchorage length (case 3) and outside

the critical anchorage length (case 4). The occurrence

of the crack is approximately found by the crack sliding criterion (eq. (7)), in which the beams are assumed

overreinforced (tensile reinforcement does not yield at

the failure). It is suggested to approximate the critical

anchorage length of the FRP-plate to the ones found

(a x) 2 + h 2

b f t f f tf

h

(10)

ratio and ft is the concrete tensile strength. Using the contribution (10) the cracking load from (5) becomes then

( a x )2 + h2 f t .ef mf t b f t f ( h + 0.5t f )

Pcr =

2 +

a

h2

(11)

ftef is given in eq. (9).

1072

sliding load given by modified eq. (6). The modification consists of changing the influence of the reinforcement ratio on to the effectiveness factor for

compressive strength of the concrete. This may be

done through the function f3 from eq. (8). They propose the effectiveness factor to be

v0 vs = 0.25

3.5

fc

8.54

0.27 +

f 3 ( f )

h

f1 ( f c ) f 2 ( h) f 3 ( ) / 1 KW

(12)

cause the debonding and fyf is the yield strength of the

plate. They transform function f2 to h being inserted

in mm. -factor describes the load type: 1.6 for point

load.

2.5

Fps + Paxial

Pu = 0.4 f c bh 1 + 2

f c bh

a x

a x

1+

by Oehlers et al. (2004)

the crack sliding theory and they develop passive

prestress approach. In this model the tension face

plates act as additional longitudinal reinforcing

bars. They assume that the resistance to the shear

across the diagonal crack is controlled by the crosssection of all longitudinal reinforcing bars crossing

the crack. This is also valid for the maximum axial

force in the plate but they assume those to act as

passive prestressing forces, i.e. not before the diagonal crack forms. The equations from Oehlers et al.

(2004) are of the same form as eq. (10), (11) and

(12) that Ali et al. (2001) propose. In addition Oehlers et al. (2004)s equations account for the force

from the prestressing tendons and the equations

include factors KM and KW that are the factors that

relate moment section force to the shear section

force and the shear section force to the load, respectively. Thus, Oehlers et al. (2004) suggest the cracking load to

(14)

are given in (8). As in the original crack sliding theory

equalizing (13) to (14) gives the position of the critical diagonal shear crack.

RESULTS

sliding theory are compared to experimental failure

loads. The experimental failure loads are due to a test

database collected by Teng and Yao (2007). The tests

in this database all exhibited concrete cover separation failure. The comparison is shown in Figure 6 and

the test database is reproduced in Table 1. In the calculation it is assumed that all beams were provided

with FRP-plates with sufficient anchorage length (i.e.

at least one anchorage length beyond the theoretical

occurrence of the critical crack). The comparison

showed that the crack sliding solution renders safe

failure loads with a mean value of 0.8. The coefficient

of variation is 20% and the correlation is 0.94.

f t ( m p Af L f )

bf t .ef

+

Pcr = ( x 2 + h2 )

h2

+ Fps d ps /( L0 + K M + KW e)

(13)

where Af and Lf are the cross-sectional area of a rectangular section of the plate and the lever arm from

the centroid of the rectangular section to the focal

point O, respectively. Fps is the prestressing force

and dps is the lever arm of the prestressing force

from the focal point. They define the crack sliding

load as

from the cover separation data base of Teng and Yao (2007).

1073

1074

1T6LN

2T6LN

274LN

A-S1

A-S2

B-S1

B-S2

1B

3B

AF4

AF10

AF11

DF2

DF3

DF4

5

B1u1.0

B2u.10

B1u2.3

1Au

1Bu

1B2u

2Bu

1Cu

2Cu

2Au

3Au

3Bu

3Cu

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

150

150

150

100

100

100

100

154

151

125

200

200

125

125

125

150

100

100

130

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

200

200

200

150

150

150

150

250

250

225

150

150

225

225

225

250

100

100

230

87

87

87

87

87

87

87

87

87

87

167

167

167

133

133

133

133

220

220

197

125

125

197

197

197

210

87

87

211

150

150

150

110

150

110

110

50

50

50

250

250

250

100

100

100

100

250

250

250

300

300

250

250

250

250

150

150

256

L1

280

280

280

320

280

320

320

380

380

380

480

480

480

350

350

350

350

475

450

450

750

750

450

450

450

450

280

280

804

L2

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

50

50

50

50

25

50

50

0

0

50

50

50

50

20

20

40

L3

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

46.70

47.80

62.10

62.10

39.50

39.50

41.60

41.60

31.10

44.70

41.00

48.60

48.60

46.00

46.00

46.00

40.10

42.70

42.70

37.10

fc

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

460

460

460

500

500

500

500

506

506

568

575

575

568

568

568

537

350

350

556

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

2

3

3

3

fy

Tensile reinf.

Beam details

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

10.00

8.00

10.00

10.00

8.00

8.00

8.00

10.00

6.00

6.00

10.00

dt

Internal reinforcement

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

2.99

8

8

8

6

6

6

6

10

10

6

6

6

6

6

6

10

2.99

2.99

6

dw

51

51

51

51

51

51

51

51

51

51

75

75

75

100

100

100

100

100

100

71

150

150

100

100

100

100

51

51

150

fyw

Shear reinf.

Table 1. Test database of four-point bending tests exhibiting the cover separation failure, Teng and Yao (2007).

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

350

250

250

250

500

500

500

500

506

506

553

250

250

553

553

553

537

350

350

350

sw

0.500

0.700

0.700

0.700

1.000

1.000

0.500

0.500

0.700

1.000

0.660

0.660

0.440

1.200

1.200

1.200

1.200

0.330

0.330

0.334

0.800

0.800

0.334

0.501

0.668

2.640

0.820

0.820

1.280

tf

90

65

65

65

45

45

90

90

65

45

150

150

150

50

50

50

50

150

147

75

150

150

75

75

75

150

67

67

90

bf

FRP details

111

111

111

111

111

111

111

111

111

111

235

235

235

165

165

165

165

271

257

240

127

127

240

240

240

20

111

111

115

Ef

1273

1273

1273

1273

1273

1273

1273

1273

1273

1273

4200

4200

4200

2600

2600

2600

2600

3720

4519

3500

1532

1532

3500

3500

3500

259

1414

1414

1284

ftf

5.94

5.49

5.46

5.78

4.80

6.05

6.56

7.80

6.92

6.16

29.05

34.00

33.35

15.72

16.84

14.04

15.12

33.40

32.65

27.75

25.35

26.03

30.15

30.00

31.40

39.70

5.49

4.80

42.37

Mu

5.26

5.26

5.26

5.70

5.26

5.70

5.70

6.34

6.34

6.34

21.49

24.89

24.89

8.93

8.93

9.19

9.19

21.51

25.88

18.12

27.97

27.97

19.84

19.84

19.84

24.19

5.01

5.01

27.12

Mtheory

Comparison

Note: For the origin of the data see Teng and Yao (2007). The units are mm, kN, MPa and GPa for Ef . L1, L2 and L3 are the horizontal distance from the middle of the beam to

the first loading point, from the loading point to the plate end and from the plate end to the support point, respectively. For other quantities see List of symbols. The predicted

moment values are found by satisfying (7) and inserting the corresponding x into (5) or (6). The achieved force P is multiplied with a = L2 + L3 in order to get Mtheory. Mu is

maximum moment by applying the test failure loads from the database.

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

B2

B4

B6

A1c

A2b

A2c

G

M

100

100

100

100

100

100

152

152

100

100

100

100

100

100

305

305

87

87

87

87

87

87

257

257

150

150

150

150

150

150

305

305

280

280

280

280

280

280

914

914

20

20

20

20

20

20

0

0

41.90

41.90

41.90

55.30

33.20

33.20

43.00

43.00

350

350

350

350

350

350

414

414

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

6.00

12.70

12.70

2.99

2.99

2.99

3

3

3

7.94

7.94

50

50

50

100

100

100

102

102

350

350

350

350

350

350

414

414

1.200

1.600

1.200

1.200

1.200

1.200

4.190

1.270

80

60

80

80

80

80

152

152

49

49

119

49

49

49

10

118

1078

1078

987

1078

1078

1078

184

1489

5.10

5.25

6.12

6.60

5.52

5.61

57.49

65.90

4.95

4.95

4.95

5.78

4.35

4.35

46.95

46.95

carrying capacity that is a lower bound to the load that

produces the anchorage failure of a tension face FRPplated beam. The demand is that the FRP-plate extends

at least one critical anchorage length beyond the theoretical occurrence of the critical diagonal crack.

In this paper the solutions given by Ali et al. (2001)

and Oehlers et al. (2004) are described. They observed

that the shear capacity of a beam without shear reinforcement may be a lower bound to the beam capacity

of tension plated beam that undergoes the anchorage

failure. They modified the crack sliding theory for

beams plated in longitudinal direction in order to define

the carrying capacity of the strengthened beams.

In the crack sliding theory only external loading

may influence cracking load (right hand side of eq. (7))

and this load may be, beside the beam loading, the

prestressing force in the case of prestress beams. This

means that the longitudinal plating may only affect

the capacity of the through the crack sliding load (left

hand side of eq. (7)and only if the beam is normally

reinforced). Oehlers et al. (2004)s principle of passive approach stated that FRP becomes active only

when the diagonal shear has formed. This must also

mean that it can not affect the cracking load. However, Oehlers et al. (2004) included plating contribution in the cracking load.

Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that the

sliding load was defined through an upper bound

solution. This solution assumed strong stringers, i.e.

longitudinal reinforcement and tension face plating

do not contribute to the upper bound equations. In

plastic solutions the longitudinal reinforcement only

contributes if it yields. Ali et al. (2001) and Oehlers et

al. (2004) included the longitudinal plating contribution to the crack sliding load disregarding the upper

bound nature of the solution.

Furthermore, the solution given by Ali et al. (2001)

is derived using the effectiveness factor from (8).

They modified f2() inserting f = (As + Pf /fyf)/bh. The

function f2() is entirely due to the dowel action of

the longitudinal reinforcing bars, Nielsen (1998). The

effect of the longitudinal plating on the dowel action

is not clear and it is therefore doubtful whether the

longitudinal plating affects the effectiveness factor in

this way.

5

LIST OF SYMBOLS

Angle between the diagonal crack and the longitudinal axis of the beam

Load type factor

Mean shear stress distribution along the beam

height

1075

Tensile reinforcement degree

Shear reinforcement degree

a Shear span of the beam

Asw Stirrup area

b Beam width

bf FRP plate/sheet width

c Width of the support plate

d Beam effective height

dt Tensile reinforcement diameter

dw Shear reinforcement diameter

Ef FRP stiffness

Ec Concrete stiffness

fc Concrete compressive strength

fy Tensile reinf. yields strength

fyw Stirrups yield strength

ft Tensile concrete strength

ftf FRP tensile strength

ftef Effective tensile concrete strength

h Beam height

M Moment section force

n Number of tensile bars

P Point loading

sw Center to center distance between the shear

reinforcement

tf FRP plate/sheet thickness

V Shear section force

for FRP and Steel Plats Bonded To Concrete. Journal of

structural engineering, 127(7):784791.

Garden, H.N. and Hollaway, L.C. (1998). An experimental

study of the influence of plate end anchorage of carbon

fibre composite plates used to strengthen reinforced concrete beams. Composite Structures, 42(2):175188.

Nielsen, M.P. (1998). Limit Analysis and Concrete Plasticity. CRC Press, 2nd edition.

Nielsen, M.P. (2005). Beton 2 Del 7. MP Nielsen, 1st

edition.

Oehlers, D.J. (1992). Reinforced concrete beams with plates

glued to their soffits. Journal of Structural Engineering,

118(8):20232038.

Oehlers, D.J., Liu, I.S.T., Seracino, R., and Ali, M.S.M.

(2004). Prestress model for shear deformation debonding

of FRP- and steel-plated RC beams. Magazine of Concrete Research, 56(8):475486.

Oh, B.H., Cho, J.Y., and Park, D.G. (2003). Failure behavior

and separation criterion for strengthened concrete members with steel plates. Journal of Structural EngineeringAsce, 129(9):11911198.

Quantrill, R.J., Hollaway, L.C., and Thorne, A.M. (1996).

Experimental and analytical of FRP strenghtened beam

response: Part I. Magazine of Concrete Research,

48(177):33142.

Teng, J.G. and Yao, J. (2007). Plate end debonding in FRPplated RC beamsII: Strength model. Engineering

Structures, 29:24722486.

Zhang, J. (1997). Diagonal cracking and shear strength

of reinforced concrete beams. Magazine of Concrete

Research, 49(178):5565.

REFERENCES

Ali, M.S.M., Oehlers, J.D., and Bradford, M.A. (2001).

Shear peeling of steel plates bonded to tension faces

of RC beams. Journal of structural engineering,

127(12):14531459.

1076

- Arching Behaviour of Precast Concrete Slabs in a Deconstructable Composite Brigde DeckЗагружено:Christian Roberth Rimac Colcas
- Adhesion 2003MaterSciEngAPeiЗагружено:gammaprime
- Paper2ACIShearArunaЗагружено:Jiabin Li
- Design Criteria vs. Line Pipe Requirements for Offshore PipelinesЗагружено:rabee320001258
- metals-02-00178Загружено:khers_zal
- Algo del fly ash influencia pasta.pdfЗагружено:Mario Ravr
- 1-s2.0-S0143974X0700171X-mainЗагружено:Sam Samoura
- 2012ChanSHCPhDЗагружено:Ricardo Horacio Lorefice
- Atriculo de Analisis de La FracturaЗагружено:Jhon Abel
- Singapore PaperЗагружено:Anonymous POUAc3z
- Indian HighwaysЗагружено:harnishtanna21285
- ies 2015Загружено:Sourav Basak
- 10.1.1.295.9828Загружено:Jayanthan Madheswaran
- A Computational Model for Splitting in LaminatesЗагружено:Luis Huayaney
- fatigue notesЗагружено:Nirmalya Mishra
- Size Effect on Shear Behavior of High Strength Rc Slender BeamsЗагружено:esatjournals
- Strut and Tie DesignЗагружено:andyoch86
- 225R-99Загружено:farhadam
- 3491r_91.pdfЗагружено:JM Viray
- module9aЗагружено:Alejandro Rodríguez
- Cracks-in-Buildings.pptЗагружено:Bia Mughal
- Effect of Freeze-thaw Cycles on Concrete Reinforced With Basalt-fiber Reinforced Polymers (BFRP) BarsЗагружено:Emil Mattotorang
- Notes4Загружено:ganesh dongre
- 416Загружено:s s katti
- 16.pdfЗагружено:Cak Ijiey
- 2002Загружено:Huda Jawad
- C19 Timber1Загружено:Ce Win
- concrete modelingЗагружено:Ricardo Escobar
- Strength of MaterialsЗагружено:Jherome Manuel
- PrefiЗагружено:Jefferson Kevin Lerio

- Frp Jacketed Reinforced Concrete ColumnsЗагружено:Faraaz Faisal
- Interaction diagram methodology for design of FRP-confined RC columns (2009) - Paper (13).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FEMA 1998 Homeowners Retrofitting-Flooding 173pЗагружено:dyahshalindri
- Implementation of Infrared Nondestructive Evaluation in FRP Double-Web I-beams (2006) - Thesis (110).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- 83 Guidelines _for _retrofitting_ of _buildingsЗагружено:Sudarshan Kamble
- FRP Repair of CorrosionЗагружено:ahmadlie
- Tp IndirectFlexuralCrackControlЗагружено:Salvatore Miranda
- Health monitoring of FRP using acoustic emission and fibre optic techniques (2004) - Thesis (257).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP ConcreteBondBehaviorAParametricStudyThroughPull OffTestingЗагружено:Sonia Faisal
- Irwin_rahman Frp PaperЗагружено:Sal Saad
- Hybrid Members employing FRP Skin Reinforcement for Beams & Cladding Wall Applications (2008) - Thesis (105).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- Health Buildings. Unhealthy Buildings. Unhealthy Materials. Unhealthy Practices (2004) - Presentation (41).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- GuideExamplesforDesignofConcreteReinforcedwithFRPBarsЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- Handbook for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings - Paper (7).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- design pipeЗагружено:Muliadi Ahmjah
- Guide for the Design and Construction of Concrete Reinforced With FRPЗагружено:bahaahussain
- Guidance for FRP Repair & Strengthening of Concrete Substructures (2002) - Guide (5).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- Grp and Frp PipelineЗагружено:Prasad Bhosale
- FRP shear strengthening of RC beams and walls (2008) - Thesis (202).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- Mexico- FRP ProjectЗагружено:ninju1
- IJESIT201301_55Загружено:mfhfhf
- FRP-Concrete Bond Behaviour under Cyclic Debonding Force (2007) - Paper (8).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP tendon anchorage in post-tensioned concrete structures (2009) - Paper (6).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- Hdpe Versus FrpЗагружено:Ashok Narayan
- FRP Dowels for Concrete Pavements (1999) - Thesis (113).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP Repair of Damaged Large-Scale Circular RC Columns - Paper (8).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP Shear Strengthening of RC Beams (2011) - Presentation (55).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP Repair Methods for Unreinforced Masonry Buildings Subject to Cyclic Loading - Paper (18).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP Manufacturing. Innovative Building Materials. Lecture 5 - Presentation (33).pdfЗагружено:Julio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- FRP Construction with DERAKANE* Epoxy Vinylester ResinsЗагружено:ty

- Drill BitЗагружено:Black Widow
- WL122-0115 PE4710 Performance.pdfЗагружено:Juan Zamora
- ojnghd346hЗагружено:Sushank Dani
- Banthia - Fibre-Reinforced ConcreteЗагружено:sthakshy
- OPSS 1202 Nov08Загружено:Safa Ghasemkhani
- Norfibre PaperЗагружено:Ayingaran Thevathasan
- Influence of IronЗагружено:mtnit07
- An Experimental Study of the Behaviour of Sleeved Bolt Connections in Precast Concrete FramesЗагружено:pavan2deepuaki
- Presentation 3M St Paul - Paulo CesarЗагружено:paulofcesar
- Mechanical Properties of Metals.docxЗагружено:Isza Marie N. Socorin
- _0142-1123(91)90472-b] -- Bore Inspection and Life Evaluation of Vintage Steam Turbinegenerator Rotors- Jhansale, H.R. and McCann, D.R. ASTM J. Test. EvaЗагружено:aliscribd46
- ASTM SD 2563 (Defectologia)Загружено:JorgeGarcia
- FAILURE ANALYSIS OF CARRIER CHAIN PINSЗагружено:Rodrigo Marin
- Frac Acid - Prop - Fundations CopyЗагружено:alizareiforoush
- Effect of Corrosion on Heat Transfer in boiler tubesЗагружено:Ansuman Sen Sharma
- 5682Загружено:crazybelka
- 769S[1] Ph D ThesisЗагружено:Er Arivazhagan Kuganathan
- Alexnder Kielland PengelasanЗагружено:Zaiimatul Husnaa Muharramiyyah
- L07 Destructive Test.pdfЗагружено:fatinzalila
- B 928 - 04 _QJKYOA__Загружено:mercab15
- Crack and DeflectionЗагружено:Sravanthi Mehar
- AHSS 101 - The Evolving Use of Advanced High-Strength Steels for Automotive Applications - LrЗагружено:Nur Adlina
- Implications of the lead crack philosophy and the role of short cracks in combat aircraftЗагружено:Dinaz Zenobia Tamboli
- 4102- Chap 11 - Damage Tolerance.pdfЗагружено:jonthemes
- A. Hillerborg-Strip Method Design Handbook-CRC Press (1996)Загружено:Nabigh Ahmad
- Thesis SummaryЗагружено:agustine06
- Intro to pipeline engЗагружено:Ehigiator Joseph
- The Effect of Fiber Architecture on the Mechanical Properties of Carbon-carbon Fiber CompositesЗагружено:Bolaji Suberu
- 8206Загружено:Hamed Memarian
- Size Related Mechanical Properties of Pure MagnesiumЗагружено:thuron

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.