Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in phase 2 had been established. As seen in
and the numerical results is
In general the hand calculations were This is though not reflected in t
without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact : Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with
The crack pattern direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the pattern from the laboratory test
predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances between single cracks with what was observed during the laboratory testing. The
pattern direction and variations
plastic strains as shown in
: Abaqus symbol plot of minimum in plane principle
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental Result of the Concept CSS Beams
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in phase 2 had been established. As seen in
and the numerical results is
In general the hand calculations were This is though not reflected in t
without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
1 2 3 4
Force[kN]
: Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with laboratory results of CSS beams.
direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the pattern from the laboratory tests. Howeve
predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances between single cracks with what was observed during the laboratory testing. The
nd variations can be read from a strains as shown in
: Abaqus symbol plot of minimum in plane principle
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental Result of the Concept CSS Beams
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in phase 2 had been established. As seen in
and the numerical results is good.
In general the hand calculations were
This is though not reflected in the results for the hand calculations for the Concept CSS beam without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
0
: Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with laboratory results of CSS beams.
direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the . However, the concrete damage plasticity model cannot predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances between single cracks with what was observed during the laboratory testing. The
can be read from a strains as shown in Fig. 99.
: Abaqus symbol plot of minimum in plane principle
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental Result of the Concept CSS Beams
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in phase 2 had been established. As seen in Fig. 100 the correlation between the hand calculatio
In general the hand calculations were conservatively
he results for the hand calculations for the Concept CSS beam without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
20 40
: Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with laboratory results of CSS beams.
direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the r, the concrete damage plasticity model cannot predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances between single cracks with what was observed during the laboratory testing. The
can be read from an Abaqus symbol plot of the minimum in
: Abaqus symbol plot of minimum in plane principle plastic strains from a
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental Result of the Concept CSS Beams
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in the correlation between the hand calculatio
conservatively performed, as mentioned in Section he results for the hand calculations for the Concept CSS beam without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
0 60
: Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with
direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the r, the concrete damage plasticity model cannot predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances between single cracks with what was observed during the laboratory testing. The
Abaqus symbol plot of the minimum in
strains from a
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in the correlation between the hand calculatio
performed, as mentioned in Section he results for the hand calculations for the Concept CSS beam without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
80 op cast ut top cast
: Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with
direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the r, the concrete damage plasticity model cannot predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances between single cracks with what was observed during the laboratory testing. The analysis
Abaqus symbol plot of the minimum in
strains from analysis of CSS beam.
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in the correlation between the hand calculatio
performed, as mentioned in Section he results for the hand calculations for the Concept CSS beam without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
123 : Result from Abaqus analyses of CSS beams, with and without top cast, compared with
direction and variations generated in Abaqus also correlates well to the r, the concrete damage plasticity model cannot predict physical cracks and it is therefore not possible to compare crack widths and distances analysis crack Abaqus symbol plot of the minimum in
nalysis of CSS beam.
Comparison between Hand Calculations and Experimental
Hand calculations were performed after all material parameters for the Concept CSS beams in the correlation between the hand calculations
performed, as mentioned in Section 9.1.
he results for the hand calculations for the Concept CSS beam without the top cast. This is most likely related to the brittle behavior of the LWAC and the fact
10. Test Phase 2: Analysis of Concept CSS Beams
124
that the LWAC most likely would not be able to establish a fully utilized compression zone, as assumed for the hand calculations.
Fig. 100: Comparison between hand calculations and experimental results of the Concept CSS beams.
The results from the hand calculations are summarized in Table 35:
Table 35: Summarized capacities Concept CSS beams, based on measured material strengths.
Beam VRk [kN] MRk [kNm] lanchorage,Euro
[mm]
Lanchorage,NS
[mm]
CSS with top cast 38.205 24.62 120 94
CSS without top cast 32.236 16.19 120 ≤94
MRk,w.top =24.62kNm corresponds to Vmax = 18.58kN < VRk,w.top → Flexural tensile failure.
MRk,wo.top = 16.19kNm corresponds to Vmax = 12.22kN < VRk,wo.top → Flexural tensile failure.
0 20 40 60 80
Displacement [mm]
0 10 20 30 40
Force[kN]
HB1 (No top cast) HB2 (No top cast) HB3 (With top cast) HB4 (With top cast) Hand Calculations, Moment failure HB3 & HB4
Hand Calculations, Moment Failure HB1 & HB2
11
factors in the calculations and
An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m set to 250mm
cross sectional properties
sketch of the measures and load case 1m is oad bearing capacity according to governing regulations
factors in the calculations and
An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m set to 250mm
cross sectional properties
sketch of the measures and load case 1m is used for the example beam
Fig. 101: Sketch of
Numerical S Beams
the Concept CSS beam according to the laboratory results
In order to compare the Concept CSS with other existing products bearing capacity according to governing regulations
factors in the calculations and
An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m and 200mm with and without top cast respectively.
cross sectional properties has been used as the Concept CSS beam as described in sketch of the measures and load case
used for the example beam
: Sketch of measures and loading for
sections are assumed to have
Numerical Analyses of 6m S Beams
CSS beams
laboratory results. No safety factors on the material or load have been
In order to compare the Concept CSS with other existing products bearing capacity according to governing regulations
factors in the calculations and load amplification factors to the loading An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m
and 200mm with and without top cast respectively.
has been used as the Concept CSS beam as described in sketch of the measures and load case used in the
used for the example beam.
measures and loading for
sections are assumed to have
Analyses of 6m
have been considered in respect to absolute failure . No safety factors on the material or load have been
In order to compare the Concept CSS with other existing products bearing capacity according to governing regulations
load amplification factors to the loading An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m
and 200mm with and without top cast respectively.
has been used as the Concept CSS beam as described in used in the example are shown in
measures and loading for simple supported sections are assumed to have
Analyses of 6m
have been considered in respect to absolute failure . No safety factors on the material or load have been
In order to compare the Concept CSS with other existing products
bearing capacity according to governing regulations, it is essential to include material load amplification factors to the loading
An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m and 200mm with and without top cast respectively.
has been used as the Concept CSS beam as described in example are shown in
simple supported beam sections are assumed to have unit length of 1m.
Analyses of 6m Example
have been considered in respect to absolute failure . No safety factors on the material or load have been
In order to compare the Concept CSS with other existing products and determine maximum it is essential to include material load amplification factors to the loading.
An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m
and 200mm with and without top cast respectively. In this example the same has been used as the Concept CSS beam as described in
example are shown in Fig.
beam used in the unit length of 1m.
Example
have been considered in respect to absolute failure . No safety factors on the material or load have been
and determine maximum it is essential to include material
An example is illustrated with a simply supported beam with a span of 6m. The beam
In this example the same
and determine maximum it is essential to include material
11. Numerical Analyses of 6m Example CSS Beams
126