Example 3.16 Design of A Cantilever Reta

TIME-DEPENDENT CRACKING AND
CRACK CONTROL IN REINFORCED

CONCRETE STRUCTURES
by
Shamsaddin Nejadi BSc., MSc.
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of

the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering

The University of New South Wales
Sydney, Australia
March 2005
THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Thesis/Project Report Sheet
Surname or Family name: Nejadi
First name: Shamsaddin Other name/s: Shami
Abbreviation for degree as given in the University calendar: Ph. D.
School: Civil and Environmental Engineering Faculty: Engineering
Time-dependent Cracking and Crack Control in Reinforced

Title:
Concrete Structures
Abstract 350 words maximum:
Due to the relatively low tensile strength of concrete, cracks are inevitable in reinforced concrete structures. Therefore, studying the cracking
behaviour of reinforced concrete elements and controlling the width of cracks are necessary objectives both in research and in design. The
introduction of higher strength reinforcing steel has exacerbated the problem of crack control. Using higher strength steel, means less steel is
required for a given structure to satisfy the strength requirements. The stiffness after cracking is reduced and wider crack widths will occur
under normal service loads. Unserviceable cracking may encourage corrosion in the reinforcement and surface deterioration, and may lead to
long term problems with durability. Indeed excessive cracking results in a huge annual cost to the construction industry because it is the most
common cause of damage in concrete structures. In this study cracking caused by both shrinkage and external loads in reinforced concrete
members is examined experimentally and analytically. The mechanisms associated with cracking and the factors affecting the time-varying
width and spacing of both direct tension cracks due to restrained shrinkage deformation and flexural cracks due to the combined effects of
constant sustained service loads and shrinkage are examined. Laboratory tests on eight fully restrained slab specimens were conducted for up
to 150 days to measure the effects of drying shrinkage on the time-dependent development of direct tension cracks due to restrained
deformation. The effect of varying the quantity, diameter, and spacing of reinforcing steel bars was studied. In addition, an analytical model
previously developed without experimental verification by Gilbert (1992) to study shrinkage cracking was modified and recalibrated. A second
series of tests on twenty four prismatic, singly reinforced concrete beams and slabs subjected to monotonically increasing loads or to constant
sustained service loads for up to 400 days, were also conducted. The effects of steel area, steel stress, bar diameter, bar spacing, concrete
cover and shrinkage were measured and quantified. An analytical model is presented to simulate instantaneous and time-dependent flexural
cracking. The tension chord model (Marti et al, 1998) is modified and used in the proposed model to simulate the tension zone of a flexural
member and the time-dependent effects of creep and shrinkage are included. The analytical predictions of crack width and crack spacing are in
reasonably good agreement with the experimental observations.
Declaration relating to disposition of project report/thesis
I am fully aware of the policy of the University relating to the retention and use of higher degree project reports and theses, namely that the University retains the copies submitted
for examination and is free to allow them to be consulted or borrowed. Subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968, the University may issue a project report or thesis in
whole or in part, in photostat or microfilm or other copying medium.
I also authorise the publication by University Microfilms of a 350 word abstract in Dissertation Abstracts International (applicable to doctorates only).
…………………………………………………………… ……………………………………..……………… ……….……………………...…….…

Signature Witness Date
The University recognises that there may be exceptional circumstances requiring restrictions on copying or conditions on use. Requests for restriction for a period of up to 2 years
must be made in writing to the Registrar. Requests for a longer period of restriction may be considered in exceptional circumstances if accompanied by a letter of support from the
Supervisor or Head of School. Such requests must be submitted with the thesis/project report.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of completion of requirements for Award:
Registrar and Deputy Principal
THIS SHEET IS TO BE GLUED TO THE INSIDE FRONT COVER OF THE THESIS

N:\FLORENCE\ABSTRACT
To my children
Nahal and Nasim
ABSTRACT
Due to the relatively low tensile strength of concrete, cracks are inevitable in reinforced
concrete structures. Therefore, studying the cracking behaviour of reinforced concrete
elements and controlling the width of cracks are necessary objectives both in research and
in design. The introduction of higher strength reinforcing steel has exacerbated the problem
of crack control. Using higher strength steel, means less steel is required for a given
structure to satisfy the strength requirements. The stiffness after cracking is reduced and
wider crack widths will occur under normal service loads. Unserviceable cracking may
encourage corrosion in the reinforcement and surface deterioration, and may lead to long
term problems with durability. Indeed excessive cracking results in a huge annual cost to
the construction industry because it is the most common cause of damage in concrete
structures.
In this study cracking caused by both shrinkage and external loads in reinforced
concrete members is examined experimentally and analytically. The mechanisms associated
with cracking and the factors affecting the time-varying width and spacing of both direct
tension cracks due to restrained shrinkage deformation and flexural cracks due to the
combined effects of constant sustained service loads and shrinkage are examined.
Laboratory tests on eight fully restrained slab specimens were conducted for up to 150 days
to measure the effects of drying shrinkage on the time-dependent development of direct
tension cracks due to restrained deformation. The effect of varying the quantity, diameter,
and spacing of reinforcing steel bars was studied. In addition, an analytical model
previously developed without experimental verification by Gilbert (1992) to study
shrinkage cracking was modified and recalibrated.
A second series of tests on twenty four prismatic, singly reinforced concrete beams
and slabs subjected to monotonically increasing loads or to constant sustained service loads
for up to 400 days, were also conducted. The effects of steel area, steel stress, bar diameter,
bar spacing, concrete cover and shrinkage were measured and quantified. An analytical
i
.
model is presented to simulate instantaneous and time-dependent flexural cracking. The
tension chord model (Marti et al, 1998) is modified and used in the proposed model to
simulate the tension zone of a flexural member and the time-dependent effects of creep and
shrinkage are included. The analytical predictions of crack width and crack spacing are in
reasonably good agreement with the experimental observations.
ii
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and to the best of my knowledge
it contains no material previously published or written by another person, nor material
which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or
diploma at the University of New South Wales or any other educational institution,
except where due acknowledgment is made in the thesis. Any contribution made to the
research by others, with whom I have worked at the University of New South Wales or
elsewhere, is explicitly acknowledged in the thesis.
I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work,
except to the extent that assistance from others in the project’s design and conception or
in style, presentation and linguistic expression is acknowledged.
………………………………
Shamsaddin Nejadi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research presented in this thesis was carried out in the School of Civil and
Environmental Engineering at the University of New South Wales.
I wish to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to my supervisor, Professor

R. Ian Gilbert for his patient supervision, valuable guidance and critical suggestions,
continuous support and assistance throughout the course of this research. I would also like
to thank my co-supervisor, Associate Professor Stephen J. Foster, for many discussions in
our group meetings and his support during the study.
Thanks are also due to the staff at the Randwick Structures Laboratory. This thesis
could not have succeeded without the assistance of Chris Gianopoulos, Frank Scharfe and
Ron Moncay.
The funding for this research was provided by the Australian Research Council
(ARC). The support of ARC is gratefully acknowledged.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my parents and family for their love,
support and encouragement. Finally, I wish to thank my wife, Nazli, who has accompanied
me throughout all these years; without whose love, patience and support the completion of
this thesis would not have been possible.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT i
ACKNWLEDGMENTS iii
NOTATION ix
CAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Objectives and Scope of the Thesis 4
1.3 Layout of the Thesis 7
CHAPTER 2 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Instantaneous Behaviour of Hardened Concrete 10
2.2.1 Uniaxial Compression 10
2.2.2 Uniaxial Tension 11
2.3 Time-dependent Behaviour of Hardened Concrete 13
2.3.1 Instantaneous Strain 15
2.3.2 Creep Strain 17
2.3.2.1 Creep Coefficient 19
2.3.2.2 Creep in Tension 20
2.3.3 Shrinkage Strain 21
2.3.4 Effects of Creep 24
2.3.5 Effects of Shrinkage 26
2.4 Steel Reinforcement 27
2.5 Time-analysis of Concrete Structures 29
CHAPTER 3 INTERACTION BETWEEN CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT

3.1 Introduction 32
iv
3.2 Bond between Reinforcement and Concrete 33
3.2.1 Short-term Bond Stress-slip Relationship 35
3.2.2 Long-term Bond Stress-slip Relationship 38
3.3 Cracking of Reinforced Concrete Structures 39
3.4 Tension Stiffening 41
3.5 Tension Chord Model 48
3.5.1 Tension Chord in Pure Flexure 50
3.5.1.1 Maximum and Minimum Steel and Concrete Stresses in T.C. 53
3.5.1.2 Average Concrete Tensile Stress in T.C. 55
CHAPTER 4 RESTRAINED DEFORMATION CRACKING

4.1 Introduction 58
4.2 Analytical Model for Cracking in Direct Tension Members 61
4.3 Experimental Program 68
4.3.1 Slab Specimens and Test Parameters 70
4.3.2 Construction of Specimens and Test Procedures 72
4.3.3 Construction and Testing of Companion Specimens 75
4.4 Test Results 76
4.4.1 Martial Properties 77
4.4.2 Slabs RS1-a and RS1-b 80
4.4.6 Crack Width 91
4.4.7 Crack Spacing 92
4.4.8 Steel Stress 93
4.4.9 Concrete Stress 94
4.4.10 The Bond Transfer Length 96
4.5 Summary and Conclusions 97
v
CHAPTER 5 SHORT-TERM FLEXURAL CRACKING
5.1 Introduction 100
5.2.1 Test Parameters and Reinforcement Layouts 102
5.3 Test Results 107
5.3.1 Material Properties 108
5.3.2 Beams B1-a and B1-b 108
5.3.5 Slabs S1-a and S1-b 120
5.4 Bond Shear Stress (Instantaneous Behaviour) 131
CHAPTER 6 LONG-TERM FLEXURAL CRACKING

6.2.1 Test Parameters and Reinforcement Layouts 142
6.3 Test Results 145
6.3.1 Material Properties 145
6.3.2.1 Cracking Behaviour 147
6.3.2.2 Deflection 150
vi
6.4 Bond Shear Stress (Time-dependent Behaviour) 169
6.5 Effective Tension Area of the Concrete for Beams 174
6.6 Effective Tension Area of the Concrete for Slabs 177
CHAPTER 7 ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR FLEXURAL CRACKING

7.2 Flexural Cracking Model – Instantaneous Behaviour 186
7.2.1 Description of Model 187
7.2.2 Calculation of Instantaneous Crack Width 195
7.3 Flexural Cracking Model – Time-dependent Behaviour 199
7.3.1 Time-dependent Analysis of the Average Section 199
7.3.2 Calculation of Time-dependent Crack Width 203
7.3.2.1 Elongation of Concrete at Time t 203
7.3.2.2 Elongation of Steel at Time t 204
7.3.2.3 Time-dependent Crack Width 205
7.4 Numerical Example 206
7.4.1 Instantaneous Behaviour 207
7.4.2 Time-dependent Behaviour 210
7.5 Crack Width and Crack Spacing Predicted by International Codes 212
7.5.1 Eurocode 2-1991 (EC2-91) 212
vii
7.5.1.1 Calculation of Crack Width and Spacing for Beam B1-a 214
7.5.2 CEB-FIP 1990 (MC-90) 216
7.5.3 ACI318-89 and ACI318-99 219
CHAPTER 8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

8.1 Summary 235
8.2 Conclusions 237
8.3 Recommendations for Future Research 241
REFERENCES 243
Appendix I WORKED EXAMPLES

AI.1 Calculation of Final Crack Spacing and Crack Width for RS1-a 261
AI.2 Calculation of Final Crack Spacing and Crack Width for RS2-b 265
AI.3 Calculation of the Instantaneous and Time-dependent Crack
Width and Crack Spacing for S1-a 270
Appendix II GRAPHS OF CONCRETE SURFACE AND STEEL STRAINS

AII.1 Shrinkage Cracking 281
AII.2 Flexural Cracking (Short-term Tests) 291
AII.3 Flexural Cracking (Long-term Tests) 297
Appendix III EXPERIMENTAL DATA

AIII.1 Shrinkage Cracking 307
AIII.2 Flexural Cracking (Short-term Tests) 335
AIII.3 Flexural Cracking (Long-term Tests) 359
viii
NOTATION
A, B, I Area, first moment of area, and second moment of area, respectively,

calculated about the top fibre of the transformed cross-section
Ac, Bc , Ic
B Properties A, B, and I of the concrete compressive zone of depth dn.ave
Ae , Be , I e Properties A, B, and I of the fully-cracked age-adjusted transformed section
Ac Cross-sectional area of concrete
Act Area of tensile concrete at the steel level after cracking (intact area of tensile
concrete)
Act.b Effective tension area of concrete for each reinforcement bar
Ae Effective tension area of concrete surrounding the flexural tension

reinforcement and having the same centroid as that of reinforcement,
divided by the number of bars.
Ast cross-sectional area of tensile steel reinforcement
beff Effective width of tensile concrete in slabs for each reinforcement bar
bw Width of section at the level of the tensile reinforcement
D Overall depth of a cross-section
d Depth to the tensile reinforcement
db Nominal diameter of the tensile reinforcing bars
dc Distance from the centre of reinforcement bar to extreme tensile fibre
dn Depth of compressive zone in a fully cracked section
dn.ave Depth of compressive zone in average cracked section
Ec Elastic modulus of concrete
ix
Ee Effective modulus of concrete
Ee Age-adjusted effective modulus of concrete
Es Elastic modulus of steel
fc Strength of concrete in compression
fc’ Characteristic strength of concrete in compression
fcm Mean compressive strength of concrete
fct Tensile strength of concrete
fctm Mean value of axial tensile strength
fn Dimensionless function
fsy Yield stress of steel reinforcement
Hc.ef Effective height of tensile concrete
Icr Second moment of area of the fully-cracked transformed cross-section
Ie Effective moment of inertia after cracking
k Ratio of (dn/d)
kave Ratio of (dn.ave /d)
k1 Coefficient depending upon bond quality
k2 Coefficient depending upon the shape of the strain diagram
lb Embedment length
ls.max Length over which slip between steel and concrete occurs
Mcr Cracking moment
Ms Applied service moment
m Number of cracks
N Full restraining force
x
Ncr Restraining force after direct tension cracking
N(∞) Final restraining force
n Modular ratio of the section
nb Number of reinforcing bar (nb ≥ 2)
n* Effective modular ratio (Es /Ee)
n* Age-adjusted modular ratio ( E s / Ee )
Rf Reduction factor
s Bar spacing
sr Crack spacing
srm Average crack spacing
srmo Maximum crack spacing
s’ Bar spacing of the transformed equivalent section
so Bond transfer length
T Axial tensile force
t Time or age of concrete
te An increased effective cover
to Age at first loading or time at the commencement of drying of concrete
w Crack width
wi Instantaneous crack width
wk Design or characteristic maximum crack width
wm Mean value of crack width
w(t) Time-dependent crack width
w/c Water cement ratio
xi
α Power of bond stress-slip relationship by MC90
α1 Coefficient taking into account the steel stress in bond
α2 Coefficient taking into account the load history in bond
βec Coefficient relating the average crack width to the design value (= 1.7 for
load induced flexural cracking)
βmc Empirical coefficient to assess the average strain within ls.max .
βac Ratio of the distances from the neutral axis to the extreme tension fibre and
from the neutral axis to the centroid of the main reinforcement
β1 Coefficient taking into account the bond properties
β2 Coefficient taking into account the duration of application or repetition of

loading
Δec.i Elongation of concrete (instantaneous behaviour)
Δec.t Total elongation of concrete at time t
Δes.i Elongation of steel (instantaneous behaviour)
Δes.t Total elongation of steel at time t
ΔN, ΔM Restraining actions
Δu Supports movement
Δε o Change in top fibre strain with time
Δκ Change in curvature with time
Δσc Change in concrete stress with time
Δσs Change in steel stress with time
Δσct(t) Change of stress in tension chord
δs Slip between concrete and reinforcing steel
xii
δs.i Initial slip
δs.t Long-term slip
ε c (t, t o ) Creep strain at time t due to a stress first applied at to
εe Instantaneous strain
εcm Average concrete strain
εs Steel strain
εsh , εcs Shrinkage strain
εsm Average strain in the reinforcing bar
ε*sh Final shrinkage strain
εoi Initial strain in the top fibre
εs2 Steel strain at the crack
εsr2 Steel strain at the crack, under a force causing stress equal to fctm within Acef
ρ Reinforcement ratio (Ast /Ac)
ρef Effective reinforcement ratio (ratio of tensile reinforcement area to the area
of the effective concrete in tension, Ast /Act)
σc Stress in the concrete
σcm , σcti Average concrete tensile stress
σc1 Concrete stress away from the crack
σst , σs Stress in the steel
σs1 Steel stress away from the crack
σs2 Steel stress at the crack
σ*s2 Final steel stress at the crack
σ*s1 Final steel stress away from the crack
xiii
σ*c1 Final concrete stress away from the crack
σo Stress at the time of first loading to
τb Average bond shear stress
τbi Short-term bond shear stress
τb(t) Bond shear stress at time t
τf Ultimate friction bond resistance
τbo Bond shear stress prior to onset of yielding of the reinforcement
τb1 Bond shear stress after the onset of yielding of the reinforcement
φ(t,to) Creep coefficient of concrete at time t, loaded at time to
ϕ * (t o ) Final creep coefficient at time infinity for concrete loaded at time to
χ Aging coefficient
χ * (t o ) Final ageing coefficient for concrete loaded at time to
xiv
Chapter 1, Introduction
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Generally, strength and serviceability are the two main criteria to be satisfied in the
design of reinforced concrete structures. Strength is the ability of the structure to carry the
design ultimate loads without collapsing. The strength of a structure may usually be
determined with reasonable accuracy because reinforced concrete structures are commonly
designed to provide ductile failure, i.e., yielding of the reinforcement before failure of the
concrete. Serviceability refers to the behaviour of structures at working loads, with
particular reference to cracking and deflection. Both cracking and deflection are primarily
dependent on the properties and behaviour of the concrete but are more difficult to predict
because of the non-linear, inelastic and time-dependent nature of the concrete. If structural
designers do not adequately account for this non-linear behaviour, serviceability problems
may result. Therefore, crack control is an important aspect of the design of reinforced
concrete structures at the serviceability limit state.
Because concrete is low in tensile strength, cracks are inevitable in reinforced concrete
structures. Therefore, studying the cracking behaviour and controlling the width of cracks
in reinforced concrete members are absolutely necessary. The introduction of higher
strength reinforcing steel in recent years has exacerbated the problem of crack control.
Using higher strength steel, means less steel is required for a given structure to satisfy the
strength requirements. The stiffness after cracking is reduced and wider crack widths will
occur under normal service loads. Unserviceable cracking may encourage corrosion in the
reinforcement and surface deterioration, and may lead to long term problems with
1
durability. Indeed excessive cracking results in a huge annual cost to the construction
industry because it is the most common cause of damage in concrete structures.
There are numerous reasons why concrete cracks, including internal pressure in the
concrete due to corrosion of reinforcement, plastic shrinkage, expansive chemical reactions
within the concrete, tension caused by external loads, and tension caused by restrained
deformations (such as shrinkage or temperature movements, or foundation settlement or
rotation). Only cracking resulting from external loads or restrained deformation can be
effectively controlled by reinforcement. In general, inclusion of steel reinforcement helps to
distribute the cracks over the cracked regions (e.g. the high moment regions in flexural
members) and effectively controls the crack width and crack spacing. Cracking caused by
mechanisms other than external loads and restrained deformation may be prevented by a
properly designed concrete mix, by controlled casting and construction, and by a suitable
cover for each reinforcement bar. This study is concerned primarily with cracking that
arises from external loads or restrained deformations.
Cracking usually starts as microcracks in the cement paste. These microcracks

extend and join into visible cracks whose widths are measurable. Where reinforcement is
used to control cracking, the gradual development of shrinkage strains with time increases
the extent and width of the cracks, regardless of whether the initial cause was externally
applied loads or restrained deformation. Crack width depends on the quantity, orientation,
and distribution of the reinforcing steel across the crack and on the characteristics of the
bond between the concrete and the reinforcement bars in and near the crack. Under
sustained loads, the bond breaks down locally at, and adjacent to a crack due to creep, and
time-dependent slip between the reinforcement and concrete. Therefore, modelling
becomes complicated as does the time-dependent change in the bond characteristics caused
by drying shrinkage.
In a given situation the maximum crack width considered acceptable depends on the
type of structure, the location within the structure, the environment, and the consequences
of excessive cracking. Some building codes and specifications recommend that in an
2
external environment, crack widths should not exceed about 0.3 mm. For members with
more than one exposed surface, a maximum crack width of 0.3 mm should be visually
acceptable. To ensure durability, maximum crack width in a corrosive and aggressive
environment may need to be considerably smaller, but for the sheltered interior of buildings
where the concrete is not exposed and aesthetic requirements are secondary, a larger crack
width of say, 0.5 mm may be acceptable. Crack widths are inherently subject to wide
scatter even in carefully monitored laboratory tests and are influenced by shrinkage and
other time dependent effects. Therefore, the objective of many codes of practice is to
control cracking through reasonable detailing of the reinforcement determined by research
work and practical experience rather than by emphasizing a maximum crack width.
Leonhardt (1977) stated that the acceptable crack width for a structure should be a matter of
agreement between the client and the designer rather than a strict requirement specified in a
code.
Various simplified approaches have been proposed to calculate crack widths.

Generally, in most of these, the mean crack width (wm) is assumed to depend on the mean
steel strain (εsm) over a gauge length containing several cracks with an average crack
spacing (srm). To realistically predict crack widths, any variation of steel stress along the
bar must be accurately determined and a relationship between the localised steel strain at a
crack (εs) and the mean strain (εsm) must be established. To achieve this, the time-varying
bond characteristics of the reinforcing steel must be known, as well as the extent of
breakdown in the bond which occurs at the onset of cracking and which gradually increases
with time.
Much research has been undertaken to understand cracking and crack control, but
the time-dependent mechanisms and interactions are still not completely understood. In
addition, a reliable and universally accepted design procedure has not been developed.
There exists a need for both theoretical and experimental research of the critical factors
which affect time-dependent cracking. One of the primary objectives in this study is to
develop analytical models that accurately simulate time-dependent cracking. It should be
emphasized that any analytical model developed for predicting long-term behaviour of
3
reinforced concrete structures and for calculation of crack width and crack spacing must be
verified by experimental data. However, experimental information on the long-term
behaviour and crack width under sustained loads is very limited. Therefore, laboratory-
controlled test data for the long-term development of cracking is also required. The
research presented in this thesis also includes the results of several series of tests aimed at
measuring the instantaneous and time-dependent development of cracking, crack widths
and crack spacings, in restrained direct tension members and in flexural reinforced concrete
beams and slabs.
1.2 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE THESIS
The objectives of this thesis are as follows:
• To better understand the mechanisms associated with shrinkage induced direct

tension cracking and the factors affect crack width and crack spacing in fully
restrained reinforced concrete elements.
• To study the mechanisms associated with flexural cracking and the influence of the
many factors that affect the width and spacing of flexural cracks under sustained
service loads.
• To obtain Laboratory controlled data to calibrate, validate, and extent analytical

models that are being developed concurrently with the experimental program.
• To develop a new analytical model that simulate flexural cracking and design-
oriented procedures for controlling cracking and calculating crack widths.
• To accurately measure the material properties, including the creep and shrinkage
characteristics of the concrete used in the slab and beam specimens.
4
To achieve these objectives, the work has been subdivided into a number of discrete tasks
which are summarized as follows:
1- Eight fully restrained slab specimens with four different reinforcement layouts were
monitored for up to 150 days to measure the effects of drying shrinkage on the time-
dependent development of direct tension cracking due to restrained deformation. The
effects of varying the quantity of reinforcing steel, the bar diameter, and the bar spacing
were studied. The steel strains in the vicinity of the first crack, the steel strains along the
full length of the reinforcement, the concrete surface strains, crack widths and crack
spacing were recorded throughout the test.
2- An analytical model previously developed by Gilbert (1992), to study the shrinkage

cracking was modified and recalibrated. The applicability of the simple expression
s o = d b / 10 ρ for the bond transfer length was examined and the value of so for final or
long-term calculations was proposed. The experiments indicated that so gradually increases
with time due to a deterioration in bond at the concrete-steel interface caused by the
shrinkage.
3- Twelve prismatic, singly reinforced concrete specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs) were cast
and moist cured for a period of 28 days, and then tested under third point loading over a
simply supported span of 3.5 m. Factors that were varied in this test include the quantity of
the steel, bar diameter, bar spacing, and concrete cover. The distribution and extent of both
primary and secondary cracking were recorded at all stages of loading. The results were
subsequently used in the development and calibration of an analytical model to simulate
flexural cracking in reinforced concrete structures.
4- An experimental program including twelve specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs) with the
same cross-sections and details as the short-term tests was carried out. These specimens
were monitored under sustained loads for up to 400 days to measure the cracking and
deformations due to service loads and to quantify the effects of steel area, steel stress, bar
5
diameter, bar spacing, concrete cover, and concrete shrinkage. The gradual development of
cracking and the gradual increase in crack width with time were carefully monitored and
recorded during the test.
5- Tests were also conducted to obtain the creep and shrinkage characteristics of the
concrete, and other properties such as compressive strength, tensile strength and elastic
modulus, to provide accurate data for analysing the specimens.
6- An analytical model was developed to model flexural cracking in a reinforced concrete

beams or one-way slabs in bending. In the proposed model, the tension chord model (Marti
et al, 1998) was modified and used to simulate and study the tension zone of a flexural
member and the time-dependent effects of creep and shrinkage.
7- According to the experimental results from 3 and 4, and following Marti et al, (1998) a
new model for bond shear stress under service load range (σs< fsy) was adopted. In this
model a stepped, perfectly rigid-plastic bond shear stress-slip relationship for two different
steel stress ranges σs.max < 160 MPa and 160 MPa ≤ σs.max < fsy was proposed which leads
to predictions of crack widths and crack spacing in reasonable agreement with the
experimental observations.
8- In this study, the effective tension area of concrete Act, is assumed to be constant after
cracking and independent of time. New analytical models for calculating the effective
tension area for beam and slab specimens were proposed and calibrated according to the
test results.
9- Using the analytical models presented in 2 and 6, analysis of the test specimens were
undertaken with crack width and crack spacing being of particular interest. The accuracy of
each model is assessed by comparison with the measured experimental values. Despite,
cracking being a random phenomenon and the measured crack widths and crack spacings in
structural members showing large scatter, good agreement was obtained between the
6
measured experimental and predicted values; both for instantaneous and time-dependent
behaviour.
10- The crack width and crack spacing calculation procedures outlined in three
international concrete codes, namely EC2-91, MC-90 and ACI318-99, are presented and
the code predictions are compared with the analytical model proposed in 6 and the
measured experimental values. A comparison between the experimental results, analytical
model, and international codes was also presented diagrammatically for all beam and slab
specimens for both instantaneous and time-dependent behaviour.
1.3 LAYOUT OF THE THESIS
This thesis is presented in eight chapters and three appendices. A literature review relevant
to this study is given in Chapters 2 and 3. Chapter 2 is a state-of-the-art review on the
material properties, and Chapter 3 is an overview of the literature dealing with interaction
between concrete and reinforcement.
In chapter 4 the problem of cracking caused by shrinkage in a restrained reinforced

concrete member is discussed and examined both experimentally and analytically, with the
summary and conclusions given at the end of the chapter.
Chapters 5 and 6 describe the experimental program for short-term and long-term
flexural cracking. Detailed test results of the crack width, crack history and crack pattern
for each specimen are included in both chapters. The results are summarised and discussed
at the end of each chapter.
The analytical model for flexural cracking developed for short-term and time-
dependent behaviour, is presented in chapter 7, including a numerical example. An
evaluation of the crack width and crack spacing calculation procedures in accordance with
7
three international codes is also presented and the results are discussed and compared
diagrammatically at the end of the chapter.
Chapter 8 presents the conclusions drawn from this study, a summary of the
outcomes and suggestions for further research.
Appendix I presents full calculations of the worked numerical examples.
In Appendix II concrete surface strains and steel strains measured throughout the
tests are plotted.
Finally, Appendix III presents experimental data (measured raw data) obtained from
the tests outlined in chapters 4, 5, and 6.
8
Chapter 2, Material Properties
CHAPTER 2
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Cementitious materials have been used for many centuries but Portland cement in the form
used today, has only been known since 1824. Concrete has been traditionally produced by
mixing Portland cement, water, sand, river gravel or crushed stone in appropriate
proportions, with Portland cement being the bonding agent in the water-cement paste. For
over a century researchers have investigated the properties of concrete itself and the
combined actions of the constituent materials on reinforced concrete structures. With the
gradual accumulation of test data, the theoretical understanding and statistical evaluation of
this data has steadily improved, particularly over the past thirty years. However, concrete is
a heterogeneous mix of materials whose properties are influenced by many factors and
continuing research is necessary to gain an even better understanding of the behaviour of
concrete structures.
In this chapter, a brief review of the literature relevant to the constitutive behaviour
of concrete and steel reinforcement, particularly, the time-dependent behaviour of concrete,
and the time analysis of concrete structures is presented. Since, large-scale long-term
laboratory tests were undertaken in the present study, a state-of-the-art review is given on
the properties of concrete, especially the time-dependent creep and shrinkage
characteristics.
9
2.2 INSTANTANEOUS BEHAVIOUR OF HARDENED

CONCRETE
2.2.1 Uniaxial Compression
The compressive strength of concrete is the property most often used in structural design
calculations. It can be readily determined in practice by simple test procedures. The
response of concrete in uniaxial compression is usually obtained from cylinders with a
height to diameter ratio of 2 to 1 or from cubes. A standard cylinder is 300 mm high by 150
mm diameter and the lower characteristic value of its compressive strength at 28 days is
termed fc’. This is the value of compressive strength exceeded by 95% of all standard
cylinder specimens tested at 28 days under standard conditions (Gilbert, 2002). Smaller
cylinders, or cubes, (generally having a higher compressive strength) are also used for
production control, the results of which can be converted into equivalent standard cylinder
strength values using appropriate conversion factors.
Figure 2.1 illustrates a typical average stress-strain curve for a concrete specimen
subjected to uniaxial compression. Although the curve is non-linear throughout, the
response may be taken as linear-elastic up to 30-40% of the ultimate strength, after which
the curve exhibits increasingly non-linear behaviour up to the peak stress (f’c) because of
the propagation of internal micro cracks. The concrete undergoes strain softening after the
peak stress, as shown in Figure 2.1.
Response under compression in the post-peak range follows a softening or

descending branch until the concrete reaches its ultimate strain. Strain softening under
compression is influenced by specimen size, strength of the concrete, (Kaufmann, 1998)
and the stiffness of the testing machine. RILEM TC 148-SSC (1997) presented an
extensive test program which minimised the influence of specimen size and boundary
restraint in measuring strain softening of concrete subjected to uniaxial compression.
10
σc
fc’
0.4 fc’
ε’c εc
Figure 2.1 Typical uniaxial stress-strain response of concrete in compression
In the literature, many compressive stress-strain relationships based on uniaxial tests

have been developed by researchers such as Desayi and Krishnan (1964); Popovics (1973);
Thorenfeldt et al. (1987), and reviewed by many other researchers. It should be mentioned
that the strength of concrete in the actual structure may not equal that of the cylinder
because its in-situ strength depends on workmanship during construction, degree of
compaction, curing procedures, load history, and environmental conditions. Generally, in-
situ compressive strength may be taken as about 90% of the strength of the cylinder. Other
properties such as tensile strength and elastic modulus are usually evaluated from the
concrete compressive strength, or obtained directly from test specimens.
2.2.2 Uniaxial Tension
The tensile strength of concrete fct is only about 10% of its compressive strength and is
defined here as the maximum stress that concrete can withstand when subjected to uniaxial
tension. It is hard to measure direct uniaxial tensile strength because it is difficult to achieve
true axial tension without secondary stresses caused by the holding devices. The most
commonly used methods to determine tensile strength are the cylinder splitting or Brazilian
11
test in accordance with AS 1012.10, and the flexural or modulus of rupture test in
accordance with AS 1012.11.
The indirect tensile strength of concrete or split cylinder strength may be computed
from measurements taken from a cylinder placed horizontally in a testing machine and
loaded along a diameter until it splits. The indirect tensile strength measured from a split
cylinder fct.sp , is higher than the uniaxial tensile strength by about 10% due to the confining
effect of the bearing plate in the standard test.
The flexural tensile strength of concrete can be evaluated by bending or modulus of

rupture tests conducted on plain concrete beams. With a flexure test, tensile strength is
calculated on the assumption of a linear elastic distribution of stress at failure which
ignores the non-linear behaviour of concrete in the tension zone at over load and therefore
the flexural tensile strength is significantly higher than the uniaxial tensile strength, usually
in the range 0.50 fct.f < fct < 0.60 fct.f.
In the absence of test data, and for engineering purposes, formulas are often given in
codes of practice for estimating the tensile strength fct(t) as a function of the compressive
strength f c (t ) . AS3600 expresses tensile strength in the following way
f ct (t ) = k1 f c (t ) (2.1)
Typical values for the upper and lower 5 percentile limits and mean value for k1 may be
taken as Table 2.1 for both direct and flexural tensile strengths in MPa.
Table 2.1 Tensile strength coefficients (Gilbert, 1988)
Type of Tensile k1
Strength Lower Mean Upper
5% limit 5% limit
Direct Tension 0.40 0.50 0.70
Flexural Tension 0.60 0.85 1.10
12
Figure 2.2 illustrates the stress-strain response of a concrete member in uniaxial

tension, and its initial behaviour, which is approximately linear-elastic. The response
becomes non-linear near the peak load (about 60-80% of the peak stress) due to micro
cracking and as it reaches the tensile strength a crack forms. The tensile stress does not
drop to zero instantly as with other brittle materials, rather, when the rate of strain is
controlled in the testing, its carrying capacity decreases as the deformation increases (i.e.
strain softening or quasi-brittle behaviour is occurring). Bridging by aggregate particles
causes concrete to transmit tensile stresses after cracking (Karihaloo, 1995). However, in
this case, the softening branch depends largely on the length of the strain gauge used to
measure axial deformation (Van Mier, 1997).
σc
fcr
Controlled strain increase
Uncontrolled strain increase
εcr εc
Figure 2.2 Uniaxial tensile stress-strain response for concrete
2.3 TIME-DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR OF HARDENED

CONCRETE
The time-dependent behaviour of concrete has been investigated by many researchers since
it was first observed and reported almost a century ago. In 1905, Woolson (1905) described
the ability of concrete in a steel tube to “flow” under a high axial stress. Later, Hatt (1907)
published the first data on creep of reinforced concrete. A concrete specimen subjected to
13
load responds instantaneously and time-dependently. When concrete is subjected to a

sustained load, deformation gradually increases with time due to creep. Concrete also
deforms with time due to shrinkage. Creep strain is produced by sustained stress, while,
shrinkage strains are independent of stress and are caused by the loss of water during the
drying process or by chemical reactions in the hydrating cement paste. Any increase in
deformation over time directly attributable to creep and shrinkage significantly affects the
service load behaviour. In some cases these deformations are much larger than the initial
deformations produced when the external loads are first applied. In reality, creep and
shrinkage are interdependent but for most design calculations they are assumed to be
independent and additive. The total concrete strain may be considered to consist of an
instantaneous component occurring immediately after application of the stress but does not
change unless the level of stress changes, a time-dependent and stress-dependent creep
component, and a time-dependent but stress-independent shrinkage component.
The varying deformation of concrete over time may be illustrated by taking a uni-
axially loaded specimen at constant temperature and under constant sustained stress σo first
applied at time to. The total strain at any time t > to is the sum of the instantaneous, creep
and shrinkage components (Gilbert, 1988):
ε (t ) = ε e (t ) + ε c (t ) + ε sh (t ) (2.2)
In Figure 2.3 the components of strain in a specimen under a sustained compressive

stress first applied at time to are illustrated diagrammatically. Shrinkage strains develop
immediately after drying commences (when the concrete sets or moist curing has finished)
and increases continuously at a decreasing rate. Applying the first stress at time to, the
instantaneous strain component causes the strain diagram to jump suddenly, followed by an
additional increase in strain caused by creep. The magnitude and development rate of each
strain component must be known in order to accurately prediction of the varying behaviour
of the concrete over time. Predicting the time-dependent deformation of a concrete
structure is further complicated by the restraint provided by the reinforcement and the
14
external supports, and the fact that the stress history in a concrete structure is rarely
constant.
Strain ε c (t )
εc(t)
ε tot (t )
ε ε(t(t)
e
) ε(t)
ε sh (t )
εsh(t)
t0 t Time t
Figure 2.3 Concrete strain components under sustained stress
2.3.1 Instantaneous Strain
The magnitude of instantaneous strain εe(t), occurring immediately after the application of
compressive or tensile stress depends on the rate and magnitude of the applied stress and
the properties and proportions of the concrete and its constituent materials. Figure 2.4
illustrates the uniaxial instantaneous strain versus compressive stress curve. When the
applied stress is less than about half the compressive strength (0.5f’c), the curve is
essentially linear and the instantaneous strain is usually considered to be elastic (fully-
recoverable). At higher stress levels the curve is non-linear and a significant proportion of
the instantaneous strain is irrecoverable. Because compressive stresses in a concrete
structure caused by service loads are low, seldom exceeding half the compressive strength,
the secant modulus Ec does not vary significantly with stress in this low stress range, and is
only slightly smaller than the initial tangent modulus. Therefore, it is common to assume
that the instantaneous behaviour of concrete at service loads is entirely linear-elastic and
the instantaneous strain is given by
15
σ (t )
ε e (t ) = (2.3)
Ec
initial tangent modulus
σc
σcu
Uniaxial compressive stress,

σ
unloading
secant modulus, Ec
Instantaneous longitudinal strain, εe
Figure 2.4 Typical stress vs instantaneous strain curve for concrete in compression
(Gilbert, 1993)
As the concrete gains strength and hardness, the value of the elastic modulus Ec
increases with time. The elastic modulus also depends on the stress rate and actually
increases as the loading rate increases, ie the faster the load is applied, the larger the value
of Ec. For engineering purposes, these variations are usually ignored and it is assumed that
Ec is constant with time. Pauw’s expression may be used to obtain a numerical estimate of
the elastic modulus for normal strength concrete at stress levels less than about 0.4f’c and
for stresses applied over a relatively short period (up to 5 minutes) (Pauw, 1960):
E c = ρ 1.5 0.043 f cm (2.4)
where ρ is the density of concrete and fcm is the mean compressive strength in MPa at the
time of first loading.
When stress is slowly applied, over say one day’s duration, additional deformation
occurs because of the rapid and early development of creep. To estimate such a short-term
16
deformation Gilbert (1988) suggested multiplying the elastic modulus given by Equation
2.4 by 0.8.
Concrete’s instantaneous behaviour in tension is also important and greatly affects

the in-service performance of concrete structures. Before cracking occurs, the instantaneous
strain in tension consists of elastic and inelastic components. In structural design, concrete
is usually taken to be elastic-brittle in tension and, at stress levels less than the tensile
strength, the instantaneous strain versus stress relationship is assumed to be linear.
Cracking is assumed to occur when the tensile strength is reached and therefore the stress
perpendicular to the crack is generally taken as zero. It is common practice to assume that
the initial elastic modulus in tension is equal to that in compression and may be calculated
using Equation 2.4, although the initial elastic modulus in tension is actually higher than in
compression. Prior to cracking the instantaneous strain in tension may be calculated by
means of Equation 2.3.
2.3.2 Creep Strain
Under sustained loads, the deformation of a specimen gradually increases such that it may
eventually be many times greater than its instantaneous value. The gradual development of
strain with time is caused by creep and shrinkage. Creep strain is a time-dependent
deformation produced at a gradually decreasing rate by sustained stress. Creep occurs in the
hardened cement paste and is related to the movement of moisture and the slow growth of
micro cracks.
Creep may be divided into two components, (a) under hygral equilibrium (no
drying) conditions the time-dependent increase in strain in a loaded specimen is known as
basic creep; (b) additional creep in excess of basic creep in a drying specimen is known as
drying creep. Creep in a drying environment is the difference between the total time-
dependent deformation of a loaded specimen and shrinkage of an identical but unloaded
specimen. In this study, creep is considered as the time-dependent deformation in excess of
17
shrinkage. Figure 2.3 shows the gradual development of creep strain with time. Creep strain
increases rapidly immediately after first loading but the rate of increase in creep decreases
with time. Approximately, 50% of the final creep develops within the first 2 or 3 months
and about 90% of final creep after 2 or 3 years (Gilbert, 1993).
Figure 2.5 illustrates a typical strain-time curve of a concrete specimen subjected to

a sustained load, with creep increasing at a decreasing rate under sustained stress. When the
stress is removed, creep strain gradually reduces, and eventually tends to a constant. Creep
strain is therefore often decomposed into two strain components; recoverable (or delayed
elastic) creep and irrecoverable (or flow) creep. Most creep strain is irrecoverable, while
the recoverable part is generally less than 30% of the total creep strain.
Stress
Strain
Recoverable
creep ε rec
Irrecoverable
creep ε irr
t0 Time t
Figure 2.5 Strain versus time for specimen under constant stress
Many factors influence the magnitude and rate of creep development, including the
properties of the concrete mix and its constituent materials. The composition of a concrete
structure can be essentially defined by the water-cement ratio w/c, aggregate and cement
types, and aggregate and cement contents. Lorman (1940) demonstrated that creep is
approximately proportional to the square of the w/c ratio when all other factors are kept
constant. An increase in the w/c ratio increases creep, on the contrary, an increase in either
18
aggregate content or maximum aggregate size or the use of a stiffer aggregate type reduces
creep. A rise in temperature also increases creep. In general, when the quality of the
concrete increases there is a tendency towards lower creep.
Creep is also influenced by the environmental conditions (i.e. relative humidity and
specimen size), the duration of load and the age of the concrete at first loading. As the
surface area-to-volume ratio increases, creep increases, and therefore creep is greater in thin
members such as slabs, than in thicker members such as beams or columns. The magnitude
of creep strain under sustained stress is strongly affected by the age of the concrete at first
loading (Davis et al, 1934). As shown in Figure 2.6, concrete loaded at an early age creeps
more than concrete loaded at a later age. Concrete is therefore a material that hardens over
time although the tendency to creep never completely disappears, even in very old concrete.
Creep strain
ε c* (t 01 )
ε c* (t 02 )
ε c* (t 03 )
t01 t02 t03 Time
Figure 2.6 Effect of age at first loading on the creep strain (Gilbert, 1988)
2.3.2.1 Creep Coefficient
The capacity of concrete to creep is commonly defined as the creep coefficient. Under a
constant sustained stress first applied at age to, the creep coefficient is the ratio of the creep
strain at time t to the instantaneous elastic strain:
19
ε c (t , t o )
ϕ (t , t o ) = (2.5)
ε e (t o )
For stress levels less than about 0.5fc’ (the usual service stress range), the creep
coefficient is a stress-independent quantity and a pure time function. The creep coefficient
is assumed to approach a final value φ*(to), as time approaches infinity, which usually falls
within 1.5-4.0 (Gilbert, 1988).
ε c * (t o )
ϕ (t o ) = ϕ (∞, t o ) =
*
(2.6)
ε e (t o )
By testing or using one of the many predictive methods available in the literature
(e.g., Clause 6.1.8 of AS3600-2001), the creep coefficient for a particular mix can readily
be estimated. Under a constant sustained stress σo, the creep strain may be obtained as
σo
ε c (t , t o ) = φ (t , t o ) (2.7)
Ec
2.3.2.2 Creep in Tension
Creep in tension is of interest in many practical situations, especially in estimating the

possibility of cracking due to shrinkage or thermal stresses. Tensile creep is thought to be a
different mechanism from compressive creep even though the magnitudes are similar at the
same stress levels.
Glanville and Thomas (1939) found that creep in compression and tension to be
equal under an equal stress while Illston (1965) confirmed a higher initial rate of creep in
tension. Davis et al (1937) demonstrated that the rate of creep in tension is initially higher
20
than compression under the same stress, but long-term creep is lower in tension than in
compression. It appears that creep in tension is proportional to applied stress up to a stress-
strength ratio of 0.5, and even higher than 0.5 (Gvozdev, 1966), and therefore from this
perspective there is no difference between its behaviour in tension and in compression.
To assume identical creep coefficients in tension and compression for design

purposes is quite common because it simplifies calculations without causing serious errors.
Although difficulties with experimental techniques are the reason for a lack of universal
agreement on tensile creep, further research into concrete in tensile creep is imperative.
2.3.3 Shrinkage Strain
Shrinkage is a reduction in volume caused by water moving out of a porous body, a

movement that occurs in concrete throughout its life. Here, shrinkage is defined as the
time-dependent strain measured at a constant temperature in an unloaded and unrestrained
specimen. Concrete begins to shrink when drying commences and continues to increase
with time at a decreasing rate, and is assumed to approach a final value as time approaches
infinity (see Figure 2.7).
εsh
to = time at which concrete

is subjected to drying
Shrinkage strain environment
to t
Figure 2.7 Typical shrinkage curve for concrete
Shrinkage may be classified as plastic shrinkage, chemical shrinkage, thermal shrinkage,

and drying shrinkage (Gilbert, 2002).While the concrete is still in its plastic state, water can
21
be lost by evaporation from the surface or suction by the underlying dry concrete or soil.
This contraction is known as plastic shrinkage because the concrete is still in the plastic
state. Here moisture evaporates faster from the surface than can be replaced by bleed water
from the lower layers, and surface cracking may occur. Steel reinforcement does not
control this type of cracking because the bond between the concrete and steel has not yet
developed.
Chemical shrinkage is related to the various chemical reactions within the cement
paste and there are two different types of chemical shrinkage in concrete namely
autogenous shrinkage and carbonation shrinkage. Under isothermal condition in the
absence of hygral exchange with the ambient medium, the hydration of cement continues
long after setting. This type of shrinkage, known as autogenous shrinkage or autogenous
volume change, is a direct consequence of water withdrawn from the capillary pores by the
hydration of un-hydrated cement, which in practice occurs inside a concrete mass.
Autogenous shrinkage is an inherent characteristic of the material and is largely
independent of specimen size (CEB, 1997).
The cement paste is also subjected to carbonation shrinkage resulting from the
effects of carbon dioxide on the chemical changes of calcium-silicate hydrate, and the
drying of the pores by removing absorbed water. Because atmospheric carbon dioxide does
not penetrate more than about 12 mm into the surface of high-quality, low porosity
concrete, carbonation shrinkage is of minor importance in the overall shrinkage of most
concrete structures (ACI, 2003).
During the setting process hydration of the cement causes heat to be generated, and
as the concrete cools, thermal shrinkage occurs due to thermal contraction. Thermal
shrinkage is important for mass concrete structures such as dams, but may be reduced by
restricting temperature rise during hydration.
22
Withdrawal of water from concrete stored in unsaturated air causes drying

shrinkage. This phenomenon may be defined as the time-dependent linear strain at constant
temperature measured on an unloaded specimen which is allowed to dry and it may be
considered proportional to the loss of water from concrete (Pickett, 1946). The opposite
phenomenon is swelling, which is an increase in volume caused by water absorption.
Shrinkage and swelling represent water movement into and out of the concrete gel.
Shrinkage however, is not a completely reversible process, if a specimen is saturated with
water after full shrinkage it will not expand to its original volume. The irreversible
shrinkage may be considered as 30 to 60 percent of the ultimate first drying shrinkage
(Helmuth and Turk, 1967). The reason of that is the gel pores are reduced due to additional
bonds developing within them while drying. The irreversible shrinkage residual may be
reduced if most of the cement paste in the concrete is hydrated before drying (Neville,
1995).
Drying shrinkage is affected by all the factors that affect the drying process. The
following factors influence the magnitude of the drying shrinkage:
- Aggregates provide restraint to shrinkage of the cement paste, depending on their

quantity and type (properties). Concrete with high aggregate content and high-
quality (stiffer) aggregates are more resistant to shrinkage.
- The water/cement (w/c) ratio strongly affects shrinkage. The higher the w/c ratio,
the higher the shrinkage effect.
- The rate and magnitude of shrinkage decreases as the volume (size) of the concrete
element is increased, however, the duration of shrinkage is longer for larger
members because the inside of an element takes longer to dry.
- Shrinkage is also affected by temperature and humidity; shrinkage is lower at high
humidity and is stabilised at low temperatures. Results by Troxell, Raphael, and
Davis (1958) showed that the lower the relative humidity, the greater the ultimate
shrinkage and rate of shrinkage.
23
- The effect of admixtures on concrete shrinkage is unclear. For instance, early-age

shrinkage appears to increase by about 100% in the presence of calcium chloride,
whereas later-age shrinkage is increased by about 40% compared with control
specimens (ACI, 2003). Air-entrainment dose not increase shrinkage more than
10% for air contents up to about 5% (Carlson, 1938). Results by Gosh and Malhotra
(1979), Wainwright and Nevile (1979), Feldman and Swenson (1975) indicated that
the use of high-range water-reducing admixtures increases shrinkage.
In practical applications, it is not necessary to separate the different shrinkage types.

Concrete shrinkage strain (εsh) can be considered as the sum of the drying, chemical, and
thermal components (Gilbert, 2002). Empirical formulae are currently used for estimating
shrinkage strains (εsh) and for calculating the mean shrinkage of a section. Procedures for
reliable estimation of the variation of shrinkage strain through the depth of a section have
not been available to date.
2.3.4 Effects of Creep
Creep causes a redistribution of stresses between the concrete and bonded

reinforcement on a cross-section. The gradual development of creep strain on a reinforced
concrete beam section increases curvature, with a consequent increase in beam deflection.
Generally, stresses developed by shrinkage or temperature changes are relieved by creep.
As an example, consider a singly reinforced beam section subjected to a sustained

service moment. On the uncracked section shown in Figure 2.8-a, as the concrete creeps,
the tensile reinforcement restrains tensile creep and causes the stress in the tension zone to
be redistributed. The neutral axis moves downward slightly and the concrete strain at the
top compressive fibre increases, but, the maximum compressive stress decreases by a small
amount since, the compressive concrete area increases. Depending on the amount of tensile
steel, the increase in curvature is proportional to a number between 0.6φ and φ, (Gilbert,
1993).
24
On the fully cracked cross-section shown in Figure 2.8-b, the initial curvature is
larger and the cracked tensile concrete below the neutral axis carries no stress, and
therefore does not creep. Only the concrete in the compression zone creeps, and the
distribution of compressive stresses becomes non-linear with time. The drop in the top fibre
compressive stress due to lowering of the neutral axis causes the subsequent creep strain to
reduce, while the tensile steel strain increases slightly to maintain equilibrium. The relative
increase in curvature is less than on an uncracked cross-section and is proportional to about
one-third the creep coefficient (Gilbert, 1993).
εο ε ο (1+ φ)
кo
к (t) .
M M к(t) =. к o (1+φ(t) /α )
time, t
time=0
where 1.0 < α≤ 1.6
Elevation Strain
(a) Uncracked cross-section

εο ε ο (1+ φ)
кo
к (t)
M M .
к(t) =
. к o (1+φ(t) /α )
time=0
time, t
where 3.0 ≤ α ≤ 5.0
Elevation Strain
(b) Fully-cracked cross-section
Figure 2.8 Effect of creep on curvature (a) uncracked cross-section (b) fully-cracked
cross-section (Gilbert, 1993)
In summary, the influence of creep on structural behaviour at service loads is in some

respects unfavourable, such as the increase in deformation and deflection. In other respects,
25
the influence of creep is beneficial, such as reducing the effects of shrinkage and support
settlement.
2.3.5 Effects of Shrinkage
After manufacture, and before imposing any external load, a concrete member hardens,
progressively gains strength, and a bond develops between the steel and adjacent concrete.
Consider the small segment of a singly reinforced member shown in Figure 2.9-a, when
initial hardening occurs and drying commences, concrete begins to shrink. If there were no
steel present, shrinkage would be uniform as shown by dashed lines in Figures 2.9-a &
2.9-b, and the resulting shrinkage strain would not cause any stress, but the steel bonded
to the concrete restrains shrinkage in the lower part of the beam to some extent, putting
the steel into compression. This compressive force in the steel is balanced by an equal and
opposite tensile force acting on the concrete. That is, the steel imposes an equal and
opposite tensile force ΔT on the concrete at the level of the steel. This gradually increasing
tensile force ΔT, produces curvature (elastic plus creep) and a gradual warping of the beam
because of eccentricity to the centroid at the cross-section. Depending on the quantity of
reinforcement and cracking of cross-section, the value of ΔT subsequently changes.
Shrinkage warping is not independent of load but shrinkage strain is independent of

stress, and as Figure 2.9 shows, shrinkage warping is much greater on a cracked section
rather than an identical uncracked section. The eccentricity of the resultant tension is
reduced by providing a restraint at the top (via compressive reinforcement) and bottom (via
tensile reinforcement) of a cross-section, which also reduces the shrinkage induced
curvature because an uncracked, symmetrically reinforced section does not suffer from any
shrinkage curvature. Most concrete structures have members restrained by connection to
other parts of the structure or foundation. The shrinkage induced change in the reactions of
a restrained indeterminate member can lead to a significant redistribution of moments and
shears and a build-up of tension which may lead to cracking (Gilbert, 1993).
26
Δx εsh
кsh
εsh Δ x
_
εs Δ x
ΔT=εsEsAs Due to ΔT +
εs
Section Elevation Strain Concrete stress
(a) Uncracked section
Δx εsh
кsh
εsh Δ x _
+
εs Δ x
ΔT Due to ΔT
Section Elevation Strain Concrete stress
(b) Cracked section
Figure 2.9 Deformation, strain and stress in a fully cracked cross-section due to shrinkage
(Gilbert, 1988)
To summarise, shrinkage causes axial deformation and warping. It also induces

tension and the resulting cracks which, if left uncontrolled, lead to problems with
serviceability and durability.
2.4 STEEL REINFORCEMENT
Steel reinforcement is used to provide strength, ductility, and serviceability to concrete

structures. With regard to serviceability, reinforcement is used to reduce instantaneous and
long-term deformations and provide crack control.
27
Steel reinforcing bars are usually round with regularly spaced, rib-shaped
deformations on the surface to provide a better bond between the concrete and steel. There
are basically two different types of stress-strain characteristics of reinforcing steel; hot-
rolled, low–carbon or micro-alloyed steel bars, and cold-worked and high-carbon steel bars
or wires (Kaufmann, 1998). As shown in Figure 2.10-a, a hot-rolled, low-carbon steel bar
in tension, exhibits an initial linear elastic portion followed by a yield plateau in which the
strain increases with little or no change in stress, and a strain-hardening range which
increases until rupture of steel bar at the tensile strength. Cold-worked and high-carbon
steel bars initially show a linear elastic response with a smooth change to the strain-
hardening branch, without a distinct yield point (see Figure 2.10-b). In such case, the yield
stress is taken as the stress at which a permanent strain of 0.2% remains after unloading.
In Australia, reinforcing bar with the higher guaranteed minimum yield strength of
500 MPa has recently been produced while the previous 400Y grade bars have been phased
out. These new reinforcing bars are produced in three classes, 500L, 500N, and 500E. The
final letter denotes ductility, with L indicating low ductility, N normal ductility, and E a
special high ductility steel for use in earthquake resistant designs (AS/NZS 4671, 2001).
σs σs
fsu fsu
fsy
fsy
Es Es
0.2%
1 1
εsy εsu εs εsy εsu εs
(a) (b)
Figure 2.10 Stress-strain characteristics of reinforcement in uniaxial tension:

(a) hot-rolled, heat-treated, low carbon steel; (b) cold-worked or high-carbon steel
(Kaufmann, 1998)
28
Another grade of steel is the 250N undeformed plain steel bars used for fitments
such as column ties and beam stirrups. Their guaranteed minimum yield strength is
250 MPa and the elastic modulus for both steel grades (500 MPa and 250 MPa) is
2×105 MPa.
Reinforcing steel is generally assumed as elastic-plastic for design calculations and

fsy is taken to be the material strength, where the stress-strain curve is assumed horizontal
when fsy is reached. Under service loads steel stress is less than yield stress and its
behaviour is linear-elastic; the stress-strain curve in compression is also assumed to be
similar to that in tension.
2.5 Time-analysis of Concrete Structures
The time-analysis of a concrete structure is the calculation of the changes of strains,

stresses, curvatures, and deformations with time under sustained loads. The most important
factor complicating this problem is the association between creep strain and stress history.
Accurately predicting time-dependent behaviour is difficult because of the variability of the
material properties and simplified assumptions and approximations within the existing
analytical methods.
Consider a concrete element subjected to a constant stress σo at time to. As discussed

earlier, an uncomplicated way to calculation of the time-dependent structural behaviour is
that the concrete strain at any time t > to is the sum of the elastic, creep, and shrinkage
components:
σo σo
ε (t ) = ε e (t ) + ε c (t ) + ε sh (t ) = + ϕ (t , t o ) + ε sh (t ) (2.8)
Ec Ec
Faber (1927) introduced the simplest and oldest technique for including creep in
structural analysis by combining the instantaneous and creep components of strain, namely
the Effective Modulus Method (EMM);
29
σo σo
ε (t ) = [1 + ϕ (t , t o )] + ε sh (t ) = + ε sh (t ) (2.9)
Ec E e (t , t o )
Ee(t,to) is known as the effective modulus and is given by
Ec
E e (t , t o ) = (2.10)
1 + ϕ (t , t o )
where Ec is the elastic modulus of concrete, and φ(t,to) is the creep coefficient at time t for
concrete loaded at time to.
In this method, the creep strain at time t only depends on the current stress σo and
remains independent of its previous stress history and consequently, creep strain is
overestimated for an increasing stress history and underestimated for a decreasing stress
history (Gilbert, 1988). In reality, even in structures under constant sustained loads, stresses
are seldom constant due to the effects of creep and shrinkage particularly, in young
concrete structures. In such cases Equations 2.8 and 2.9 are not applicable and the stress
history and ageing effects must be included.
Trost (1967) first proposed the Age-Adjusted Effective Modulus Method (AEMM)
but Dilger and Neville (1971) and Bazant (1972) actually developed and formulated it
based on simple adjustments to account for concrete ageing.
The stress history in Figure 2.11 shows an initial stress σo, applied at time to which
is gradually reduced as time passes. The stress change Δσ(t) is not usually known when the
analysis begins, and may be due to changes to the external loads, creep and shrinkage
restraints, temperature variations, or a combination of these. Here, the total strain at time t
is the sum of the strains produced by σo (both instantaneous and creep), the strains produced
by the gradually applied stress increment Δσ(t) (both instantaneous and creep), and the
shrinkage strain (Gilbert, 1988):
30
⎡σ o σ o ⎤ ⎡ Δσ (t ) Δσ (t ) ⎤
ε (t ) = ⎢ + ϕ (t , t o )⎥ + ⎢ + χϕ (t , t o )⎥ + ε sh (t )
⎣ Ec Ec ⎦ ⎣ Ec Ec ⎦
σo Δσ (t )
= + + ε sh (t ) (2.11)
Ee (t , t o ) Ee (t , t o )
Ee (t , t o ) is the age-adjusted effective modulus and is given by
Ec
Ee (t , t o ) = (2.12)
1 + χϕ (t , t o )
where χ is an aging coefficient and depends on the duration of loading and the age at first
loading.
Stress
σo
Δσ(t)=σ(t)-σo
σ(t)
to t
Time
Figure 2.11 A gradually reducing stress history (Gilbert, 1988)
Neville et al (1983) suggested that when the age of first loading exceeds 5 days
(which is usual in practical applications) the final ageing coefficient χ is approximately
equal to 0.8. By taking χ (∞, t o ) = χ * (t o ) = 0.8 the age-adjusted effective modulus method
becomes a simple straightforward procedure, which usually leads to good approximations
of both material and structural behaviour.
31
Chapter 3, Interaction between Concrete and Reinforcement
CHAPTER 3
INTERACTION BETWEEN CONCRETE AND
REINFORCEMENT
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Reinforcement in concrete structures enhances the strength of a section in tension but the
structural behaviour depends on the composite action of the concrete and steel in resisting
the external load. If the reinforcing bar undergoes the same strain or deformation as the
surrounding concrete, no slip occurs between the two materials under load and a perfect
bond exists. In reality, some slip does occur between the steel and concrete after cracking
and reliable estimates of cracking, including the prediction of crack width and crack
spacing, requires accurate modelling of the bond stress versus slip relationship.
After the initial cracking of a reinforced structural member, three interdependent

steel-concrete load transfer mechanisms are activated; they are associated with;
- Steel-concrete bond
- Aggregate interlock or interface shear transfer
- Dowel action
In the cases of flexural cracking in beams or slabs, or direct-tension cracking in

longitudinally restrained members, the steel-concrete bond is of paramount importance and
forms the focus of this study.
32
3.2 BOND BETWEEN REINFORCEMENT AND CONCRETE
Bond can be thought as the shear stress or force between a reinforcing bar and the
surrounding concrete. The force in the bar is transmitted to the concrete by bond; bond
stress must be present wherever the stress or force in a reinforcing bar changes from point
to point along its length. In the absence of bond stress the bar will pull out of the concrete.
Bond comprises three components:
(a) Chemical adhesion
(b) Friction
(c) Mechanical interaction between concrete and steel
A plain bar embedded in concrete develops bond by adhesion between itself and the
concrete, and by a small amount of friction. Both of these effects are quickly lost when the
bar is loaded in tension, particularly as the diameter of the bar decreases slightly due to
Poisson’s ratio. For this reason, plain bars are not generally used as main longitudinal
reinforcement, but where they must be embedded in concrete, mechanical anchorage in the
form of hooks, nuts washers or similar devices are used to provide adequate anchorage.
Although friction and adhesion are present in deformed bars, when they are loaded
for the first time, the bond mostly is transferred by bearing of the deformations of the bar as
shown in Figure 3.1-a. Equal and opposite bearing stresses act on the concrete and these
stresses on the concrete have a longitudinal and a radial component (see Figures 3.1-b and
3.1-c). The radial component causes circumferential tensile stress in the concrete around the
bar (see Figure 3.1-d) such that eventually, the concrete splits parallel to the bar and the
resulting crack propagates out to the surface. The splitting or bond cracks follow the
reinforcing bars along the bottom or side surfaces of a beam as shown in Figure 3.2. Once
these cracks develop, the bond transfer drops rapidly unless suitable reinforcement is
provided to restrain the opening of the splitting crack.
33
(a) (b)
Longitudinal Radial
(c) (d)
Figure 3.1 Mechanism of bond transfer. (a) forces on bar (b) forces on concrete
(c) components of force on concrete (d) radial forces on concrete and splitting stresses
(MacGregor, 1992)
(a)
Section
Primary cracks Bond cracks
(b)
Section
Figure 3.2 Bond cracks and typical splitting failure surfaces (a) axially loaded tension
member (b) flexural member (modified from MacGregor, 1992)
34
3.2.1 Short-term Bond Stress-slip Relationship
Steel to concrete bond is the phenomenon, which allows longitudinal forces to be

transferred from the reinforcement to the surrounding concrete in a reinforced concrete
structure. Due to this force transfer, the force in a reinforcing bar changes along its length
and depends on the proximity of a crack. Wherever steel strains differ from concrete
strains, a relative displacement or “slip” between the steel and concrete occurs and bond
stresses develop at the steel-concrete interface.
Rehm (1961) showed that bond stress (τb) is a basic function of slip (δs) and their
relationship is called the bond stress-slip relationship (τb-δs). This relationship depends on
several factors, including concrete cover, bar size, rib pattern on the bar, confining effects,
the casting position with respect to loading direction, distance to cracks, temperature,
coating of the bar, and load history.
In a simplified approach, the complex mechanism of force transfer between

concrete and reinforcement is substituted by an average bond shear stress uniformly
distributed over the nominal perimeter of the reinforcing bar. The easiest way to study and
obtain the bond shear stress-slip relationship in a laboratory is by the pull-out test. The
average bond shear stress τb along the embedment length lb can be calculated from the pull-
out force as
F
τb = (3.1)
dbπlb
where db is the nominal diameter of reinforcing bar; and F is the force in the reinforcing
bar.
Bond behaviour is a combination of adhesion, micro cracking (Goto and Otsuka,
1971), micro crushing (Gambarova and Giuriani, 1985), bearing of the deformations on the
bar against the concrete (mechanical interlock), and friction (see Figure 3.3).
35
Bond stress, τb
Mechanical interlock
Friction
Micro-cracking
Micro-crushing
Friction
Confinement increases Pull-out failure

Adhesion
Plain bars Deformed bars
Slip, δs
Figure 3.3 A schematic representation of the bond stress versus slip relationship and
different phases of bond behaviour (fib, 2000)
Interaction between concrete and a bar subjected to pull-out force generally has four
different stages (fib, 2000):
Stage I (uncracked concrete): In this stage for low bond stresses about 0.2fct to 0.8fct
no cracking is observed and bar slip is small. Bond between steel and concrete is provided
mainly by chemical adhesion, and partly by the micromechanical interaction related with
the microscopically roughness of steel surface. Increasing the relative displacement
between the steel and concrete increases bond stress.
Stage II (first cracking): Here the bond stress is higher, the chemical adhesion
breaks down, and with deformed bars, the lugs induce bearing stresses in the concrete and
transverse micro-cracks form adjacent to the tips. The radial component of the bearing
force (wedging action) remains limited and concrete splitting does not occur.
Stage III (mechanical interlock): In this stage bond stress is greater than the tensile
strength of the concrete and longitudinal cracks (splitting cracks) form rapidly due to the
wedging action. The inclined compressive forces radiating from a ribbed bar are balanced
by circumferential tensile stresses in the concrete surrounding the bar (Tepfers, 1979), and
36
the failure of these rings in tension produces longitudinal cracking (splitting cracks). In this
stage, bond strength is assured mostly by the mechanical interlock across the reinforcement.
When transverse reinforcement is light, this stage ends as soon as splitting reaches the
surface of the concrete member by failing abruptly.
Stage IV: (a) In the concrete members with plain bars this stage immediately follows the
break down of adhesive bond. The force is transferred by friction and is affected by
transverse pressure, concrete shrinkage, and bar roughness. (b) In the case of deformed bars
where there is low transverse reinforcement, longitudinal cracks (splitting cracks) break out
through the whole cover and bar spacing, and the bond tends to fail abruptly. Through
splitting does not occur where there is heavy transverse reinforcement and bond failure is
caused by bar pull-out. The force transfer mechanism changes from rib bearing to friction,
and the shear resistance of the keys is dominant.
Researchers have used different mathematical forms of the bond stress-slip

relationships. Codes only use a constant bond stress-slip relationship (τb= c) providing a
linear increase of steel stresses and parabolic increase of slip between the cracks. There are
several different proposals based on linear (τb=k.δs) (Tepfers, 1973), bilinear (Giuriani,
1982) or non-linear (Martin 1973, Eligehauson, Popov and Bertero 1983, Noakowski 1985,
and Balazs 1993) approaches.
MC90 (CEB-FIP, 1993) adopted the non-linear relationship based on a proposal by

Eligehausen et al (1983). Generally in non-linear approaches the adhesive bond is neglected
and the bond-stress-slip relationship is defined as a power function ( τ b = C.δ sb ). MC90
proposed an initial non-linear relationship τ b = τ max (δ s / δ s1 )α for the slip range δs ≤ δs1 is
followed by a plateau τb=τmax for δs1 ≤ δs ≤ δs2 which then decreases linearly to the value of
the ultimate frictional bond resistance, τf for a slip range δs ≥ δs2 (see Figure 3.4). A
corresponding slip to τf is δs3 , which is assumed to be equal to the distance between the
lugs of the deformed bars. MC90 has provided different values for δs1, δs2, δs3, α and τmax
for confined and unconfined concrete.
37
Unconfined concrete Confined concrete

Bond conditions Bond conditions
Good Others Good Others
δss11 0.6 mm 0.6 mm 1.0 mm
τmax
Bond stress, τb
δss22 0.6 mm 0.6 mm 3.0 mm
sδs3
3 1.0 mm 2.5 mm Clraer rib space
α 0.4 0.4
τ max 2 f ck f 2.5 f ck 1.25 f ck
τ = τmax (δs / δs1 )α
ck
τf 0.15τ max 0.4τ max
τf
δs1 δs2 δs3 Slip, δs
Figure 3.4 Analytical bond stress versus slip relationship for monotonic loading;
MC 90 (CEB-FIP, 1993)
3.2.2 Long-term Bond Stress-slip Relationship
Little information is available on the effect of long-term loading on bond behaviour. It was
found that the bond breaks down under sustained loading (Illston and Stevens, 1972).
Long-term loading increases slip and redistributes the bond stress (probably due to creep).
Owing to bond breakdown under sustained loads, crack widths increase and the crack sides
tend to become more parallel.
The experimental results compiled by Franke (1976), and Rostasy and Keep (1982),
indicate that the relationship of slip to load duration is approximately linear in double
logarithmic scale. MC90 used this method to predict long-term slip (δs.t) as a function of
initial slip (δs.i) and duration of load (t):
δ s.t = δ s.i (1 + k t ) (3.2)
where k t = (1 + 10t ) b − 1 and b=0.080
Long-term pull-out tests performed by Koch and Balazs (1993) show that the higher
the load, the higher the initial slip and increase in slip.
38
3.3 CRACKING OF REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES
Cracking of reinforced concrete structures is inevitable and difficult to avoid. It occurs in a

cross-section when the stress in the extreme tensile fibre reaches the tensile strength of the
concrete. In most of the studies related to the mechanism of cracking, the bond between
concrete and reinforcing steel has a noticeable influence on crack width and crack spacing.
In fact crack control depends largely on the bond quality between the steel and concrete.
Consider the axially loaded tension member illustrated in Figure 3.5, before
cracking, stresses and strains are uniform along the length of the member. Equilibrium of
forces and compatibility of strains are satisfied by assuming linear elastic material
behaviour for both the concrete and steel and applied load is shared between the concrete
and steel in relation to their respective stiffnesses. The first primary crack forms when the
tensile strength of the concrete is exceeded at the weakest section, located randomly along
the member. Slip occurs between the concrete and steel at the crack. The slip of deformed
bars can occur in two ways:
(1) the ribs can split the concrete by wedging action.
(2) the ribs can crush the concrete.
The steel experiences a jump in stress at the crack location, and the distribution of
stresses and strains is no longer uniform along the member length. The sudden increase in
steel stress produces strain in the steel which is not compatible with the strain in the
adjacent concrete and results in widening of the crack. At some distance (bond transfer
length, so) from the first crack, strain compatibility is recovered and when the tensile
strength in concrete is again reached the second crack occurs at the next weakest section.
Additional cracks may form between the initial cracks at higher loads when the tensile
strength of the concrete has been reached. The process continues until the final crack
pattern is established. No further cracking can occur if the distance between the cracks is
not large enough to develop sufficient bond to allow the concrete stress to reach its tensile
strength. Figures 3.5-c and 3.5-d illustrate schematically how the stresses in the concrete
39
and the reinforcement vary between the cracks, respectively. Average or smeared stresses
and strains are usually used to represent the member response to account for this variation.
NT
TN
srm srm srm

(a)
τb
(b)
σcm σc
(c)
σs
σsm
(d)
Figure 3.5 Cracking in reinforced concrete members and stress distributions (a) cracked
tensile reinforced concrete member (b) bond shear stress (c) concrete stress (d) steel stress
Cracks occur due to tensile stresses, which may result from loads or imposed deformations
such as differential settlement of the foundations (externally imposed movement),
shrinkage and temperature differentials (internally imposed deformation). When loads are
the primary cause of cracking, the crack pattern is established at first loading, the number
of cracks remains constant under variations of load and their width depends on the loading
level, or more precisely, on the tensile steel stress. When restrained shrinkage and
temperature changes are the primary cause of cracking, the number and width of cracks
depend mostly on the amount of reinforcement crossing the crack, on the degree of
restraint, the quality of bond between the concrete and steel, and the amount of shrinkage.
Figure 3.6 illustrates the idealized behaviour of a reinforced concrete tie adopted by MC90.
40
Y d
Tensile force
(a) Uncracked
c (b) Crack formation
(c) Stabilized cracking
R b S
(d) Post-yielding
a (R) First crack

Bar steel (S) Last crack
(Y) Yielding
Elongation
Figure 3.6 The idealized behaviour of reinforced concrete tie (CEB-FIP, 1993)
After cracking, tensile stress is present in the concrete between the cracks because
tension is transferred from the steel to the surrounding concrete by the bond. In a cracked
reinforced concrete tension or flexural member, the bond in the intact concrete between two
adjacent cracks helps the steel carry the tensile load. As a consequence, the overall tensile
stiffness of cracked reinforced concrete is higher than the reinforcing bars alone. This
contribution of tensile concrete to stiffness is known as tension stiffening.
3.4 TENSION STIFFENING
One of the main factors affecting the stiffness of a cracked reinforced concrete
member is the bond between the reinforcement and concrete. This phenomenon is called
“tension stiffening” which allows tensile stresses to transfer between the reinforcement and
the uncracked concrete between the cracks. Tension stiffening results from crack formation
and bond slip between the reinforcing bars and surrounding concrete and is influenced
mainly by the tensile strength of concrete, the magnitude of bond stresses, the
reinforcement ratio, and the load history. Sometimes the terminology used to define the
post cracking behaviour of reinforced concrete members is confusing. Therefore, the terms
“strain softening”, “tension softening” and “tension stiffening” are defined as follows:
41
Strain softening is any material response where the change rate of incremental work
(dw=dσ × dε) is negative (ie, where the slope of the stress-strain curve is negative). As
illustrated in Figure 3.7, this is the response of concrete post-cracking or post-crushing.
Stress
Strain softening region
In tension
fct
- εco
Strain softening region Strain
In compression
-f’c
Figure 3.7 Complete stress-strain curve for concrete
The stress-strain characteristics of tensile concrete in cracked reinforced concrete

structures are different from the stress-strain characteristics of plain concrete primarily, due
to the bond with steel. It is evident that the tensile failure of plain concrete is due to the
formation and propagation of micro cracks in an area known as the crack process zone. In
this zone, concrete has some residual load-carrying capacity after reaching the tensile
strength and continues to transfer stress across the crack opening direction due to bridging
of aggregates. The tensile stress then gradually diminishes until a complete crack is formed;
by this process concrete undergoes tension softening. The stress-strain curve (Figure 3.8)
derived from deformation-control tests of plain concrete in tension compiled by Rheinhardt
and Cornelli (1984) is shown after the tensile strength of concrete (fct) has been reached.
Note that the stress-strain curve descends very sharply initially, but then slowly falls off.
42
Tensile stress, σct

fct
Tensile strain, εct

Figure 3.8 Concrete in tension
If concrete is reinforced by a steel bar, it’s cracking and post-cracking behaviour are
significantly influenced by the steel bar. A typical response for a reinforced concrete
member in tension and the corresponding contribution of the concrete to stiffness are
illustrated in Figure 3.9. As shown, the difference between the structural response of a
cracked reinforced concrete tension member and bare reinforcing steel is the contribution of
the concrete and is called tension stiffening.
(a)
T T
T
reinforced concrete
steel alone
Tcr
concrete contribution, Tc
(b) Tc Tension stiffening
εs
Figure 3.9 Tension stiffening (a) reinforced concrete member (b) concrete contribution
Massicotte et al (1988)
43
In summary, the strain softening branch in the tension region of the reinforced
concrete stress-strain relationship, when isolated, represents the tension stiffening effect
(see Figure 3.9-b). It is measured by the ability of the reinforced concrete to retain part of
its tensile force after cracking. It can be seen that tension stiffening decays as the load
increases beyond the cracking load. It is generally agreed that good bond properties
increase the stiffening effect and tension stiffening is more significant for low
reinforcement ratios than for higher values (as shown experimentally by Rao, 1976).
Generally, only an effective portion of the concrete develops and maintains some
tensile stresses and participates in carrying the tensile stresses through the section between
the cracks. The effective concrete embedment zone in the vicinity of a reinforcing bar after
cracking is called the effective tensile area of the concrete, Act. When applied load increases
tension stiffening effect decreases. Consequently, tension stiffening may be modelled by
reducing the effective tensile area of the concrete Act, or by reducing the average concrete
tensile stress σcm. In this study, Act is assumed to be constant after cracking and independent
of time. However, σcm is assumed to depend on the applied load and reduces with time due
to creep and shrinkage.
Tension stiffening affects the in-service behaviour of reinforced concrete members

by significantly increasing stiffness in the post cracking range. Ignoring this effect
generally results in an over estimation of deflection or crack width. Proper modelling of
tension stiffening is important in the design and analysis of cracked reinforced concrete
members. There are two approaches to modelling the global post cracking behaviour of
reinforced concrete members:
1- A modified stiffness approach based on a repeated modification of stiffness

according to the strain history in which, the user selects a post-cracking stress-strain curve
for concrete and adjusts the shape of the strain-softening curve in tension. This approach
was first proposed by Scanlon (1971) and considered later by Lin and Scordelis (1975),
Gilbert and Warner (1978), Cope et al. (1979), Damjanic and Owen (1984), Carreira and
Chu (1986), and Massicottee et al (1990). Three concrete tensile stress-strain curves are
44
shown in Figure 3.9. Scanlon and Murray (1974) proposed a stepped stress-strain curve
shown in Figure 3.9.a. Lin and Scordelis (1975) used a gradual unloading curve (Figure
3.9.b). Gilbert and Warner (1978) tried several variations of the Scanlon-Murray and Lin-
Scordelis curves. They also employed a series of curves each representing a different drop-
off in stress after cracking depending on the proximity of the concrete layer to the steel
reinforcement, as shown in Figure 3.9.c.
σc / fct
1.0
0.6
0.15 0.39
0.5
1 4 7.8
ε/ε crack
(a) stepped response after cracking (Scanlon & Murray)
σc / fct
1.0
1 ε/ε crack
(b) gradual unloading after cracking (Lin & Scordells)
σc / fct
1.0
0.8
0.5
0.2
1 10 ε/ε crack
(c) discontinuous unloading after cracking (Gilbert & Warner)
Figure 3.9 Different approaches of concrete tensile stress-strain curve
45
2- A bond-slip based model constructed from the force equilibrium and strain
compatibility condition at the cracked concrete matrix with the assumed bond stress
distribution. Tension stiffening models mostly simulate the tension stiffening effect due to
the effective bond between the concrete and steel. To verify the bond-slip mechanism and
relationship between the bond stress and crack pattern in reinforced concrete structures,
many experimental and numerical studies have been conducted and various analytical
models have been developed, Edwards and Picard (1972); Tepfers (1980); Somayaji and
Shah (1981); Floegl and Mang (1982); Bazant and Oh (1984); Rizkalla and Hwang (1984);
Yankelevsky (1985); Murakami and Hegemier (1986); Yang and Chen (1988); Gupta and
Maestrini (1990); Wu, Yoshikawa and Tanabe (1991); Chan et al (1992); Kankam (1997);
Ouyang, Kulkarni and Shah (1997); and many more.
For design purposes, an empirical description of the tension stiffening effect is often
incorporated into global force-displacement or moment-curvature relations by using an
empirical formula, such as that proposed by Branson (1968), and the American Concrete
Institute Committee 435 (1973). Some of these models are described below:
The tension-stiffening model specified in ACI318 (2002) involves the calculation of

the transformed second moments of the cracked and uncracked critical sections and
calculating an effective second moment of area, which depends on the ratio of applied
service moment Ms, to cracking moment Mcr, at the cross-section. This model is based on
that of Branson (1968), which was originally developed for reinforced concrete where the
effective second moment of area, Ie is
3
⎛M ⎞
I e = I cr + (I g − I cr )⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ ≤ I g (3.3)
⎝ Ms ⎠
For lightly reinforced beams and most slabs (small in service moment), Branson’s
equation may overestimate stiffness considerably, since time–dependent change in the
cracking moment and a consequent reduction in tension stiffening are not considered.
46
The CEB-FIP (1983) has also proposed an alternative approach for tension
stiffening by considering the reinforcing bar’s bond properties (β1) and the duration of
application or repetition of loading (β2). According to the CEB-FIP model, the effective
second moment of area is given by
I e = (1 − ζ )I g + ζI cr (3.4)
where
2
⎛M ⎞
ζ = 1 − β1 β 2 ⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ (when Mcr≤ Ms) (3.5)
⎝ Ms ⎠
and
β1 = 1.0 for deformed bars
= 0.5 for plain bars
β2 = 1.0 for initial loading

= 0.5 for long-term sustained loads or cycles of load
The CEB-FIP model best accounts for tension stiffening breaking down under
long-term or cyclic loading and allows for a reduction in tension stiffening when the
steel-concrete bond is not perfect.
Rao and Subrahmanyam (1973), Clark and Speirs (1978), and Gillbert (1983)
proposed alternative approaches for modelling tension stiffening in which an area of
concrete located at the tensile steel level is assumed to be effective in providing stiffening.
Since the properties of proposed section are between those of the fully cracked and
uncracked cross-sections, this approach has been known as the average cross-section
method. The tensile concrete area Act, which is assumed to contribute to beam stiffness after
cracking (Figure 3.10), depends on the magnitude of the maximum applied moment Ms ,
the area of tensile reinforcement Ast, the amount of concrete below the neutral axis, the
tensile strength of the concrete (the cracking moment Mcr), and duration of the sustained
47
load. Gilbert (1983), proposed the following empirical formula for calculating the tensile
concrete area Act:
2
⎛M ⎞
Act = β1 β 2 [0.21bw d − nAst ]⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ (3.6)
⎝ Ms ⎠
where
β1 = 1.0 for deformed bars
= 0.5 for plain bars
β2 = 1.0 for initial loading
= 0.5 for long-term sustained loads or cycles of load
dn
Act
bw
Figure 3.10 Average section in a cracked reinforced concrete member (Gilbert, 1988)
Tension stiffening between the cracks in reinforced concrete structures can also be
modelled using a stepped, perfectly rigid-plastic concrete-steel bond slip relationship
proposed in Tension Chord Model (Marti et al, 1998).
3.5 TENSION CHORD MODEL
In cracked concrete structures, the tensile zone of a cracked member can be

modelled using a tension chord element. The tension chord element and the distribution of
48
stresses and strains are illustrated in Figure 3.11. The concrete stresses are zero at the crack
and the entire tensile force is carried by the reinforcement. Tensile stresses away from the
cracks are transferred from the reinforcement to the surrounding concrete by bond shear
stresses. Bond shear stresses and slip vanish between the cracks, at the centre, where
reinforcement stresses are minimum and the concrete stresses reach their maximum value.
S rm
N N
T T
(τ b)
τ b1
τ bo
(σs )
σ smin
σ sr
(ε s )
εm
ε sr
(σc)
λ fct
Figure 3.11 Chord element and distribution of bond stress, steel stress, steel strain, and
concrete stress (Kaufman, 1998)
Only the overall response of the member is needed for most applications, while the
exact distribution of stresses and strains are not of primary interest, but concrete and steel
stresses and a reliable estimate of the bond stresses are required for predicting crack width
49
and crack spacing. For ordinary ribbed bars the stepped, perfectly rigid-plastic bond shear
stress-slip relationship proposed in tension chord model (Marti et al., 1998), is illustrated in
Figure 3.12; where, τbo=2fct prior to yielding of the reinforcement, τb1=fct after onset of
yielding of the reinforcement, and fct is the tensile strength of concrete
τb
τ bo
τ b1
δ 1 ( σ s =f sy ) δ
Figure 3.12 Proposed bond stress-slip relationship (Marti et al, 1998)
The tension chord model simplifies the analysis of many problems, particularly
cracking, minimum reinforcement, and tension stiffening and treats the deformation
capacity of structural concrete members in a unified manner.
3.5.1 Tension Chord in Pure Flexure
Consider a segment of a singly reinforced concrete beam subjected to a bending moment

M, greater than the cracking moment Mcr, illustrated in Figure 3.13a-1 The idealized
cracked beam (see Figures 3.13a-2 and 3.13a-3) is assumed to consist of two longitudinal
reinforced concrete chords, one representing the compressive zone of depth kd and width b
and the other representing the tensile zone consisting of the effective tensile area of the
concrete Act at the steel level, and the reinforcing steel area Ast. A segment of a longitudinal
chord representing the tensile zone between two consecutive cracks is subjected to an axial
tensile force T, and is shown in Figure 3.13b-1. The length of the segment is srm, which is
50
the same as the crack spacing. At each crack the entire tensile force is carried by the steel
reinforcement and may be obtained from
⎛ My ⎞ M (1 − k )d
T = n⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ Ast = n Ast (3.7)
⎝ I cr ⎠ I cr
where Icr is the second moment of area of the fully-cracked transformed cross-section, kd is
the depth to the neutral axis of the fully-cracked cross-section, and n(=Es/Ec) is the modular
ratio of the section.
a)
C C
M M kd
d
Act
Ast
T T
srm srm b
(a-1) (a-2) (a-3)
b)
S rm
Fc Fc Fc+dFc
τb
T T
O X Fs T Fs Fs+dFs τb
Fc Fc Fc+dFc
dx
dx
(Srm/2)-X
S rm /2 Srm /2
(b-1) (b-2) (b-3) (b-4)
Figure 3.13 Tension chord in pure flexure (a) a reinforced concrete member in flexure
and idealized cracked beam (b) tension chord and free-body diagrams.
51
The origin of the axial coordinate x is taken midway between the two cracks at point
“O”. The free body diagram of the right side of the section at distance x is shown in Figure
3.13b-2. An infinitesimal element of length dx is taken out from the segment. The free body
diagrams of the steel and concrete elements are shown in Figures 3.13b-3 and 3.13b-4
respectively. The equilibrium for the free body of differential steel element of length dx
shown in Figure 3.13b-3 results in
Fs + τ b (πd b dx ) = Fs + dFs (3.8)
dFs
= πd bτ b (3.9)
dx
dσ s 4τ b
= (3.10)
dx db
The equilibrium for the free body of differential concrete element of length dx shown in
Figure 3.13b-4 yields
Fc = Fc + dFc + (πd b dx )τ b (3.11)
dFc
= −πd bτ b (3.12)
dx
dσ c − 4τ b ρ ef
= (3.13)
dx db
where τb is the bond stress at the steel-concrete interface, db is the nominal diameter of the
tensile reinforcing bar, and ρef (=Ast /Act ) is the effective reinforcement ratio (ratio of
tensile reinforcement area to the area of the effective concrete in tension).
52
Concrete tensile stresses cannot be greater than concrete tensile strength fct, so the
requirement in Equation 3.14 should be satisfied for maximum crack spacing srmo in a fully
developed crack pattern. The minimum crack spacing amounts to srmo/2 since a tensile
stress equal to the concrete tensile strength must be transferred to the concrete in order to
generate a new crack;
4 ρ ef S rmo / 2
σc =
db ∫x =0
τ bo dx ≤ f ct (3.14)
4 ρ ef ⎛ s rmo ⎞
τ bo ⎜ ⎟ ≤ f ct (3.15)
db ⎝ 2 ⎠
therefore, the maximum crack spacing in a fully developed pattern may be expressed as
f ct d b
s rmo = (3.16)
2τ b o ρ ef
and the average crack spacing (srm) in a fully developed crack pattern is limited by
s rmo
≤ s rm ≤ s rmo (3.17)
2
or
s rm = λs rmo (3.18)
where
0 .5 ≤ λ ≤ 1 (3.19)
3.5.1.1 Maximum and Minimum Steel and Concrete Stresses in Tension Chord
Taking into account the appropriate boundary conditions for steel element, Fs=T at the
crack (x=srm/2), the differential Equation 3.9, gives
53
∫ dF = ∫ πd τ
s b b dx (3.20)
nM (1 − k )d ⎛s ⎞
Fs = Ast − πd bτ b ⎜ rm − x ⎟ (3.21)
I cr ⎝ 2 ⎠
the steel stress may be represented as
Fs nM (1 − k )d 2τ b
σ st = = − (s rm − 2 x ) (3.22)
Ast I cr db
The minimum stress in the steel occurs at the centre of the segment when (x=0)
nM (1 − k )d 2τ b s rm
σ st (min) = − (3.23)
I cr db
The maximum stress in the steel occurs at the crack when (x=srm/2)
nM (1 − k )d
σ st (max) = (3.24)
I cr
Similarly, integrating the differential Equation 3.12 for concrete element and
considering the appropriate boundary conditions, Fc=0 at the crack (x=srm/2), results in
∫ dF c = − ∫ πd bτ b d x (3.25)
⎛s ⎞
Fc = πd bτ b ⎜ rm − x ⎟ (3.26)
⎝ 2 ⎠
and the concrete stress may be expressed as
54
Fc 4τ b ρ ef ⎛ s rm ⎞
σc = = ⎜ − x⎟ (3.27)
Ac db ⎝ 2 ⎠
At the crack (x=srm/2), the concrete stress is minimum thus;
σc(min)=0 (3.28)
and at the centre of the segment (x=0), the concrete stress is maximum
2τ b s rm ρ ef
σ c (max) = (3.29)
db
3.5.1.2 Average Concrete Tensile Stress (σcm) in Tension Chord
Cracking is generally of concern under service load conditions where both steel and
concrete may be assumed to behave in an elastic manner. Thus, the force-strain relationship
for steel is as follow
du s
Fs = Ast E s ε s = Ast E s (3.30)
dx
Rearranging Equation 3.30 gives
du s Fs
εs = = (3.31)
dx Ast E s
substituting Equation (3.21) in Equation (3.31) and integrating over one-half of the segment
yields
55
du s nM (1 − k )d ⎛s ⎞
Ast E s = Ast − πd bτ b ⎜ rm − x ⎟ (3.32)
dx I cr ⎝ 2 ⎠
1 ⎡ nM (1 − k )d ⎛s ⎞⎤
∫ du s =
Ast E s ∫ ⎢⎣ I cr
Ast − πd bτ b ⎜ rm − x ⎟⎥dx
⎝ 2 ⎠⎦
(3.33)
⎡ 2nM (1 − k )d ⎤
Ast − πd bτ b (s rm − x )⎥
x
us = ⎢ (3.34)
2 Ast E s ⎣ I cr ⎦
the average strain in the reinforcing bar may be represented as
1 ⎡ nM (1 − k )d πd τ s ⎤
ε sm = ⎢ Ast − b b rm ⎥ (3.35)
Ast E s ⎣ I cr 4 ⎦
the equilibrium equation at the crack results in
nM (1 − k )d
σ sm Ast + σ cm ( Ac ) = Fs (max) = Ast (3.36)
I cr
nM (1 − k )d
σ cm ( Ac ) = Ast − E s Ast ε sm (3.37)
I cr
substitution of Equation (3.35) in Equation (3.37) and rearranging gives:
πd bτ b s rm
σ cm = (3.38)
4 Ac
The average concrete tensile stress acting uniformly on the tension chord area is
calculated by dividing the numerator and denominator of Equation (7.38) by Ast as follow
56
τ b s rm ρ ef
σ cm = (3.39)
db
where
τb = the short-term bond stress at the steel-concrete interface;
ρef = the effective reinforcement ratio (ratio of tensile reinforcement area to the area of
the effective concrete in tension, Ast /Act);
Ast = cross-sectional area of tensile steel reinforcement;
Act = intact area of tensile concrete;
srm = average crack spacing; and
db = nominal diameter of the tensile reinforcing bars.
In Chapter 7, flexural cracking in reinforced concrete structures is presented as an

analytical procedure to calculate crack width and crack spacing. The tension chord model
(Marti et al, 1998) is modified and used to study the tensile zone of a flexural member and
the time-dependent effects of creep and shrinkage.
57
Chapter 4, Restrained Deformation Cracking
CHAPTER 4
RESTRAINED DEFORMATION CRACKING
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Direct tension cracks caused by restrained deformation are induced by shrinkage and
thermal strains and often penetrate completely through the cross-section of a member. They
are one of the most difficult and troublesome peculiarities of structural concrete.
By definition, concrete shrinkage is a reduction in volume caused by a combination

of water lost during drying (i.e. drying shrinkage) and chemical reactions in the hydrating
cement paste (i.e. endogenous shrinkage). Drying shrinkage may be considered as the time-
dependent linear strain at constant temperature measured on an unloaded specimen, which
is allowed to dry. A typical range of values for the final shrinkage strain of concrete in a
structure is between 500×10-6με and 1000×10-6με depending on the environment and the
size and shape of the member, and the concrete tensile strain capacity is about 150×10-6με
or less. If the shrinkage is restrained by either the foundation, another part of the structure,
or the reinforcing steel embedded in the concrete, cracking will inevitably occur (see Figure
4.1). Thin floor slabs and building walls are good examples of elements in which cracking
occurs due to restrained shrinkage and temperature changes. Cracking resulting from
restrained deformation is the focus of this Chapter.
58
Because, drying occurs nonuniformly from the surface towards the concrete core,
shrinkage causes tensile stresses near the drying surfaces and compression in the core.
Differential shrinkage may lead to surface cracking. The surface cracks do not penetrate
over the full depth of a slab and are not considered in this study.
Creep or stress relaxation reduces the tensile stresses induced by restraining drying
shrinkage with time. Cracks develop only when the net tensile stress reaches the tensile
strength of concrete (see Figure 4.2).
Shrinkage and creep are often responsible for excessive deflections and curvatures
in flexural members, and redistribution of internal stresses and reactions in statically
indeterminate members. If not controlled, drying shrinkage can lead to serviceability
problems, and the resulting cracks can in turn lead to durability problems, such as freeze-
thaw deterioration and corrosion at cracks.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 4.1 Cracking of concrete due to drying shrinkage; (a) original member; (b)
unrestrained shrinkage of the member; (c) restrained shrinkage develops tensile stress; (d) if
tensile stress is greater than tensile strength, concrete cracks.
59
Elastic stress
Tensile Stress
Tensile strength
Creep
Net tensile stress Crack develops
Time
Figure 4.2 Effect of creep on tensile stress
Direct tension cracking caused by restrained shrinkage is fundamentally different

from flexural cracking which penetrates only part-way through a section (ho) and requires a
compression zone to exist in the member. Shrinkage cracking in a reinforced concrete
flexural member depends on the level of moment. Shrinkage induces tension that reduces
the cracking moment and causes a gradual widening of flexural cracks with time. This will
be discussed in more details in Chapter 7.
In this chapter cracking caused by shrinkage in restrained reinforced concrete

members is presented both experimentally and analytically. Eight longitudinally restrained
slab specimens with different reinforcement layouts were monitored for up to 150 days to
measure the effects of shrinkage on the time-dependent development of direct tension
cracking. Strains in both the reinforcement and the concrete were monitored throughout the
test. The age of the concrete when each crack developed, the crack locations, and the
gradual change in crack widths with time were also recorded. An analytical model
developed previously to study the problem by Gilbert (1992) is modified and recalibrated
and experimental results and analytical predictions are compared.
60
4.2 ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR CRACKING IN DIRECT

TENSION MEMBERS
The fully restrained member shown in Figure 4.3a (Gilbert 1992), illustrates that as
concrete shrinks the restraining force N(t) gradually increases until the first crack appears
when N(t) = Ac fct(t) (usually within a week of shrinkage commencing).
Ac= area of concrete Ast= area of reinforcing steel
N(t) N(t)=Acfct
L
(a) Just prior to first cracking.
w
Ncr Ncr
L
(b) Just after first cracking.
so w so
σc1 σc1
Region 1 Region 2 Region 1
(c) Average concrete stress just after first cracking.

σs2
σs1 σs1
so w so
(d) Steel stress just after first cracking.
Figure 4.3 First cracking in a restrained direct tension member (Gilbert, 1992)
The restraining force reduces to Ncr, immediately after the first crack appears and
the stress away from the crack is less than the tensile strength of the concrete fct(t). On
either side of the crack the concrete shortens elastically, allowing the crack to open to a
61
width w, as shown in Figure 4.3-b, while at the crack itself, the steel carries the entire force
Ncr and the stress in the concrete is zero. The concrete and steel stresses vary considerably
in the region adjacent to the crack where there is a region of high bond stress. At the crack,
there remains a region of partial breakdown in the bond. From some distance so (bond
transfer length) on each side of the crack, the concrete and steel stresses are no longer
directly influenced by the crack, as shown in Figures 4.3-c and 4.3-d. For conventional
deformed bar reinforcement it is expected that the bond transfer length will increase as the
stress in the reinforcement across the crack increases. This relationship is unlikely to be
linear because a zone of internal micro-cracking exists around the bar. The bond transfer
length so, where stresses in the concrete and steel vary on either side of a crack and bond
stresses exist, was taken to be (Gilbert, 1992):
db
so = (4.1)
10 ρ
where db is the bar diameter and ρ (=Ast /Ac) is the reinforcement ratio; this expression was
proposed earlier by Favre et al (1983), for a member that contained deformed bars or
welded wire mesh, and Base and Murray (1982), used a similar expression. Referring to
Figure 4.3, Gilbert (1992) derived the following expressions for the restraining force Ncr,
the concrete and steel stresses away from the crack σc1 and σs1 respectively, and the steel
stress at the crack σs2
n ρ f ct Ac
N cr = (4.2)
C1 + n ρ (1 + C1 )
N cr − σ s1 Ast N cr (1 + C1 )
σ c1 = = (4.3)
Ac Ac
2so
σ s1 = − σ s 2 = −C1σ s 2 (4.4)
3L − 2 s o
62
N cr
σ s2 = (4.5)
Ast
where n (=Es/Ec) is the modular ratio, fct is the direct tensile strength of the concrete when
the first crack occurs, and the constant C1 is
2so
C1 = (4.6)
3L − 2 s o
The final number of cracks and their final average width depends on the length of
the member, the quantity and distribution of reinforcement, the quality of the bond between
concrete and steel, and the amount of shrinkage and properties of the concrete. Figure 4.4-a
shows a portion of a fully restrained member under direct tension when all the shrinkage
has occurred and the final pattern of cracks has been established. Figures 4.4-b and 4.4-c
illustrate average stresses in the concrete and steel caused by shrinkage.
w s sr w s sr w
(a) Portion of a restrained member after all cracking.
w w w
so so so so so so
σ*c1 σ*c1
Region 2 Region 1 Region 2 Region 1 Region 2
(b) Average concrete stress after all shrinkage cracking.
σ*s2 σ*s2 σ*s2
σ*s1 σ*s1
so w so so w so so w so
(c) Steel stress after all shrinkage cracking.
Figure 4.4 Final concrete and steel stresses after direct tension cracking (Gilbert, 1992)
63
Gilbert (1992), derived expressions for the final average spacing s and width w in a
fully restrained member, the final restraining force in a member, and the final concrete and
steel stresses (as shown in Figures 4.4-b and 4.4-c) by enforcing the requirements for
compatibility and equilibrium. With these derivations so was assumed to remain constant
over time (Equation 4.1), and the supports of the member were presumed to be immovable.
But these assumptions may introduce significant error because the results from the
experimental program presented in Section 4.4 indicate that shrinkage causes deterioration
in the bond at the concrete-steel interface and a gradual increase in so with time. According
to Section 4.4.10, it is suggested that for final or long-term calculations, the value of so
given by Equation 4.1 should be multiplied by 1.33.
In many practical situations, the supports of a reinforced concrete member that

restrain shrinkage are not immovable; they are adjacent parts of the structure also prone to
shrinkage and movement. If, over time, the supports of the restrained member suffer a
relative movement Δu such that the final length is (L+Δu), the final restraining force N(∞)
changes and so too does the crack spacing and crack width. In fact, if Δu increases, N(∞)
increases and so too do the number and width of the cracks. For a member containing m
cracks where the reinforcing steel has not yielded, the following expressions are obtained
by equating overall elongation of the steel reinforcement to Δu
σ s*1 σ s*2 − σ s*1 ⎛ 2 ⎞

L+m ⎜ s o + w ⎟ = Δu (4.7)
Es Es ⎝3 ⎠
Since, w is much less than so, rearranging gives
− 2so m 3ΔuE s
σ s*1 = σ s*2 + (4.8)
3L − 2 s o m 3L − 2 s o m
Final steel stress at each crack is
64
N (∞ )
σ s2∗ = (4.9)
Ast
A typical concrete stress history is shown diagrammatically in Figure 4.5 (Gilbert,

1992) in Region 1 where, the distance away from each crack exceeds s o (with so taken as
1.33 times the value given by Equation 4.1). Over time the tensile stress of the concrete
increases gradually to approach the direct tensile strength of the concrete fct.
Concrete stress
fct σ*c1
σav
σc1
First cracking Time
Figure 4.5 Concrete stress history in uncracked Region 1 (Gilbert, 1992)
As shown in Figure 4.5, when cracking occurs elsewhere in the member, the tensile
stress in the uncracked regions drops suddenly, and while the stress history of the concrete
is continuously changing, average stress at any time after drying commences σav, is
between σc1 and fct, and the final creep strain in Region 1 may be approximated by:
σ av
ε c* = ϕ* (4.10)
Ec
where ϕ * is the final creep coefficient (defined as the ratio of the final creep strain to elastic
strain under the average sustained stress σav ). Gilbert (1992) assumed that;
σ c1 + f ct
σ av = (4.11)
2
65
In Region 1, the final concrete strain may be expressed as the sum of the elastic,
creep, and shrinkage components
σ av σ av
ε 1∗ = ε e + ε c ∗ + ε sh ∗ = + ϕ ∗ + ε sh ∗ (4.12)
Ec Ec
Depending on the age when drying commenced and the quality of the concrete, the
magnitude of the final creep coefficient ϕ* may be considered between 2 and 4. The final
shrinkage strain ε*sh , depends on relative humidity, the size and shape of the member and
the characteristics of the concrete mix. Numerical estimates for ϕ* and ε*sh may be obtained
from the Australian Standard AS3600-2001 and elsewhere. Equation 4.12 may be
expressed as
σ av
ε 1∗ = *
+ ε sh
*
(4.13)
E e
where the final effective modulus for concrete is Ee* and is given by:
Ec
Ee =
*
(4.14)
1+φ*
At any distance from a crack greater than s o , equilibrium in Region 1 requires that
the sum of the forces in the concrete and steel are equal to N(∞), that is.
σ c1* Ac + σ s1* Ast = N (∞) (4.15)
rearranging gives the final concrete stress away from the crack
N (∞) − σ s1 Ast
*
σ c1 *
= (4.16)
Ac
66
The requirement for compatibility is that the strains for concrete and steel be
identical ( ε s1 = ε 1 ). Using Equation 4.13
* *
σ s1* σ av
= + ε sh
*
*
(4.17)
Es Ee
By substituting Equations 4.8 and 4.9 into Equation 4.17 and rearranging, gives
3 Ast E s Δu (3L − 2s o m)n * Ast ∗

N (∞) = − (σ av + ε sh E e )
*
(4.18)
2so m 2so m
where n* = Es/Ee*.
With the restraining force N(∞) and the steel stress in Region 1 obtained from
Equation 4.18 and 4.8, respectively, the final concrete stress in Region 1 is
N (∞) − σ s1 Ast
*
σ c1 *
= (4.19)
Ac
The number of cracks m is the lowest integer value of m that satisfies Equation 4.20.
σ c*1 ≤ f ct (4.20)
In equation 4.20, the direct tensile strength fct should be taken as the mean value at
age 28 days. The final average crack spacing (sr) is sr=L/m. The overall shortening of the
concrete is an estimate of the sum of the crack widths and the final concrete strain at any
point in Region 1 (of Figure 4.4) is given by Equation 4.13. The final concrete strain in
Region 2 (of Figure 4.4) is
67
f nσ c*1
ε 2* = + ε sh* (4.21)
E e*
where fn is a dimensionless function and varies between zero at a crack and unity at
s o from a crack. In Region 2, if a parabolic variation of stress is assumed, the following
expression for average crack width w can be obtained by integrating concrete strain over
the length of the member
⎡ σ c1* 2 ⎤
w = − ⎢ * ( s r − so ) + ε sh s r ⎥
*
(4.22)
⎣ Ee 3 ⎦
Note: For calculations at first cracking, so may be taken from Equation 4.1, however, for
final or long-term calculations the bond transfer length should be taken as 1.33 times the
value given by Equation 4.1.
Provided the assumption of linear-elastic behaviour in the steel is valid, the

preceding analysis is sound only if the steel has not yielded.
4.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
A total of eight fully restrained slab specimens with four different reinforcement layouts
were monitored for up to 150 days to measure the effect of drying shrinkage on the
development of time-dependent direct tension cracking due to restrained deformation. A
photograph of the test specimens anchored to the laboratory floor is shown in Figure 4.6.
The steel strains in the vicinity of the first crack and along the full length of the
reinforcement, the concrete surface strains, crack widths and crack spacing were recorded
throughout the test.
68
The compressive and tensile strength of the concrete were measured at various
times in tests on companion specimens (in the form of concrete cylinders and prisms),
together with the elastic modulus and creep coefficient. In addition, unrestrained and
unreinforced companion specimens with the same cross-section as the test specimens were
used to measure the magnitude and development rate of free shrinkage in the concrete.
Figure 4.6 General view of slabs
The major objectives of this experimental program were:
(a) To gain a better understanding of the mechanisms associated with cracking and
the many factors that affect the spacing and crack width in fully restrained
reinforced concrete elements.
(b) To obtain benchmark, laboratory-controlled data to calibrate, validate and
extend the analytical model.
(c) To accurately measure material properties, including the creep and shrinkage
characteristics of the concrete used in the slab specimens.
69
4.3.1 Slab Specimens and Test Parameters
Details of the cross-section of slabs are provided in Figure 4.7, and details of the
parameters varied in the tests are given in Table 4.1. Each specimen consisted of a 2000
mm long prismatic portion with the cross-section illustrated in Figure 4.7. The specimen
was effectively anchored at its ends by casting each end monolithically with a 1m by 1m by
0.6 m concrete block. These blocks were rigidly clamped to the reaction floor using 36 mm
diameter high strength alloy steel rods tensioned sufficiently to ensure that the ends of the
specimen were effectively held in position via friction between the end block and the
laboratory floor (see Figure 4.8).
Table 4.1 Details of test specimens
No. of Bar Dia. Ast cs s

Bars (mm) (mm2 ) (mm) (mm)
RS1-a 3 12 339 109 185

RS1-b 3 12 339 109 185
RS2-a 3 10 236 110 185
RS2-b 3 10 236 110 185
RS3-a 2 10 157 145 300
RS3-b 2 10 157 145 300
RS4-a 4 10 314 115 120
RS4-b 4 10 314 115 120
600 mm
As D=100 (nominal)
cb = 46 mm
s cs
Figure 4.7 Cross section details of slabs
70
Figure 4.8 Slab ends effectively held in position and restrained against translation
Figure 4.9 Smooth supports at the bottom surface of the slabs to eliminate flexural action
A plan view of a typical slab is shown in Figure 4.10, together with the typical
reinforcement layout. The 600 mm wide by 100 mm deep slab specimens were gradually
splayed at each end, as shown, to ensure cracking occurred within the specimen length and
not at the restrained ends. At the mid-length of each specimen the section was locally
reduced in width by 150 mm using thin 75 mm wide plates attached to the side forms to
ensure that first cracking always occurred at this location (see Figure 4.11). The bottom
71
surface of each specimen was supported on smooth supports to ensure negligible bending in
the specimen and no longitudinal restraint, except at the ends of the specimen (see Figure
4.9). Slabs RS1-a & RS1-b were identical (so too were RS2-a & RS2-b, RS3-a & RS3-b,
and RS4-a & RS4-b), except for small variations in the measured slab thicknesses arising
during construction.
2000
A
B C
1000
A
1000 2660 1000
Plan
100
B C
600
Elevation
36 mm alloy steel bar
tensioned to strong floor
600
As 100 (nominal)
75 S S 75
Section width reduced locally at
Section A-A midlength to induce first crack
Figure 4.10 Dimensions and reinforcement details (typical).
4.3.2 Construction of Specimens and Test Procedures
By using the experience gained from two preliminary specimens, the shape of the
specimens was altered in order to ensure direct tension cracking occurred in the 2 m long
72
prismatic specimens and the first crack occurred at mid-length (Section AA in Figure 4.10).
In order to measure the steel strains in the vicinity of the first crack, three strain gauges
were attached to each main reinforcement bar, one at the mid-length and the others 50 mm
either side. The strain gauges were connected to a HBM amplifier. In order to measure steel
strains along the full length of the reinforcement, 12 steel pins were welded to one of the
interior bars at 250 mm centres, as shown in Figure 4.11, and a demec gauge, able to
measure in micro strains, was used to manually measure the deformation between the pins.
Two steel pins were welded to all longitudinal bars on each side of the slab mid-length in
order to measure the deformation of each bar over a gauge length of 250 mm containing the
first crack (see Figure 4.11).
Figure 4.11 Attached strain gauges and welded steel pins
To measure the concrete surface strains, 12 targets were glued adjacent to the pins
on the top surface of the slab by using HBB-X60 non-shrink adhesive, (see Figure 4.12). A
demec gauge was also used to measure the concrete surface strains and a microscope with a
magnification factor of 40 was used for measuring the crack widths. The development,
propagation, extent and width of cracking was observed and recorded throughout the test.
Figure 4.13 is a photograph showing the demec gauge, the microscope and the HBM
amplifier used in the experimental program for strain and deformation measurements.
73
Figure 4.12 Surface targets attached adjacent to the pins
Figure 4.13 HBM amplifier, demec gauge and microscope
Prior to casting each specimen, the inside surface of the mould was cleaned and
thinly coated with a concrete release agent to prevent adhesion of the concrete. The
concrete was placed in the mould in equal layers and compacted by internal vibration. For
each layer, the concrete was vibrated until the surface became smooth in appearance.
Sufficient concrete was placed in the top layer to overfill the mould when compacted, and
the surface was then stripped off and finished with a steel trowel. Companion specimens
were also cast at this time in the form of concrete cylinders and prisms.
74
The specimens were undisturbed in their moulds for 3 days and kept continuously
moist by a thick and complete covering of wet hessian to minimize the loss of moisture
from the concrete and thereby to delay the onset of drying shrinkage. After 3 days the
specimens were removed from the mould, the demec strain targets were glued to the
concrete surface and initial strain measurements were recorded. The specimen end blocks
were then rigidly clamped to the reaction floor using 36 mm diameter high strength alloy
steel rods tensioned sufficiently to ensure that the ends of the specimen were effectively
held in position by friction.
4.3.3 Construction and Testing of Companion Specimens
Companion cylinders, prisms and unreinforced block specimens were cast at the same time
as each slab specimen in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard. The companion
specimens were used to measure the properties of the concrete throughout the test.
Measured properties included the compressive strength, elastic modulus, flexural and direct
tensile strength, and the creep coefficient. The time-dependent development of drying
shrinkage strain was also measured on unrestrained specimens of similar dimension to the
slab specimens. The companion specimens were of standard size. The cylinders were either
150 mm or 100 mm in diameter and 300 mm or 200 mm in height, respectively. The prisms
had dimensions of 100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm; and the dimensions of the shrinkage
blocks were 600 mm × 600 mm × 100 mm. The companion specimens were exposed to the
same environmental, curing and drying conditions as the slab specimens. Testing of
companion specimens were carried out in accordance with the relevant parts of the
Australian Standard AS1012. Cylinder and prism strength and elastic modulus tests were
carried out at ages 3 days, 7 days, 14 days, 21 days, and 28 days.
The compressive strength and elastic modulus tests were performed in an Amsler
hydraulic testing machine. The flexural tensile strength tests were carried out in a Shimadzu
universal testing machine, using two point loads 100 mm apart and centrally located in a
300 mm span. The split cylinder direct tensile strength of the concrete (Brazil test) was
75
measured at age 7 days and 28 days and was typically about 50% of the flexural tensile
strength. The elastic modulus was measured using the standard test procedure on 150 mm
diameter cylinders. Creep tests for each batch of concrete were carried out using standard
creep rigs, each containing two or three 150 mm diameter cylinders loaded with a constant
sustained stress of 5 MPa first applied at age 3 days. Other unloaded companion cylinders,
with the same dimensions as the creep cylinders, were placed beside the creep rig and used
to measure drying shrinkage strains. The creep strain was determined by subtracting the
measured shrinkage strain and the instantaneous strain from the total strain measured on the
creep cylinders. The creep coefficient at any time was determined as the measured creep
strain at that time divided by the measured instantaneous strain.
In order to acquire a more realistic knowledge of the drying shrinkage occurring in

the slabs, shrinkage was also measured on specimens with the same thickness as the slabs.
Two unreinforced concrete blocks with dimensions of 600 mm × 600 mm × 100 mm were
cast using the same concrete as in the slab test specimens and were subjected to the same
environmental, curing and drying conditions (i.e. drying commenced at age 3 days). For
each block, two sets of demec targets were glued to the top surface of the specimen, so that
drying shrinkage strains were measured in two orthogonal directions, each parallel to the
edges of the block, and crossing the geometric centre of the block.
4.4 TEST RESULTS
The experimental results taken from the 8 specimens are presented in this section. All the
slabs were anchored to the supports at age 3 days and drying also commenced after the
same period at age 3 days. First cracking, due to direct longitudinal tension caused by
restraint to shrinkage, occurred within the first week and subsequent cracks developed
mostly over the next 2-3 months. The crack widths gradually increased over time, with the
change being relatively small after about 3 months. All the cracks observed during these
tests penetrated through the full depth of the cross-section in each specimen. Steel strains in
the vicinity of the first crack and along the full length of the reinforcement, concrete surface
76
strains, crack widths and crack spacing were recorded. Due to shrinkage of the 1 m × 1 m ×
0.6 m anchorage blocks at each end of the specimens, the ends of each 2000 mm long slab
specimens (B and C in Figure 4.10) suffered a relative longitudinal movement Δu which
was measured throughout each test. The thickness of each slab was measured across the
slab width where the first cracking occurred to determine the average value and to account
for any variations arising from construction.
After 150 days, the finest final crack width (w = 0.18 mm) and the lowest final steel
stress (σ*s2 =190 MPa) measured during the experimental program were in slab RS1-b (the
slab containing the most longitudinal reinforcement - 3N12 bars). The measured widest
final crack (w = 0.84 mm) and highest final steel stress (σ*s2 =532 MPa) were in slab RS3-a
(the slab containing the least longitudinal reinforcement - 2N10).
By using the mathematical model presented in Section 4.2, the final average crack
width (w) and crack spacing (s), the final steel stress at the crack (σ*s2), and the final steel
and concrete stresses away from the crack (σ*s1 and σ*c1, respectively) were calculated for
each slab, together with the values immediately after first cracking. These quantities were
determined from the test data and comparisons are made between the theoretical and
experimental results for each slab throughout the following sections. Full calculations for
slabs RS1-a and RS2-b are presented in Appendix I. Graphs of concrete surface and steel
strains are illustrated in Appendix II. Raw data measured throughout the tests are presented
in Appendix III.
4.4.1 Material Properties
Two different batches of concrete were used throughout the test, batch I (for slabs RS1-a,
RS1-b, RS2-a, RS3-a, RS3-b, RS4-a and RS4-b) and batch II (for slab RS2-b). The
measured concrete compressive strength, flexural tensile strength, indirect tensile strength
and the modulus of elasticity at ages 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days are presented in Tables 4.2
and 4.3 for concrete batch 1 and 2, respectively. The measured creep coefficient and
77
shrinkage strain for concrete batch I and batch II are presented in Tables 4.4 and 4.5 and
plotted in Figures 4.14 to 4.17.
Table 4.2 Material properties for concrete batch I
Age (days)
Material Property 3 7 14 21 28
Compressive Strength (MPa) 8.17 13.7 20.7 22.9 24.3
Flexural Tensile Strength(Modulus of Rupture)(MPa) 1.91 3.15 3.43 3.77 3.98
Indirect Tensile Strength (Brazil test) (MPa) 1.55 1.97
Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 13240 17130 21080 22150 22810
Table 4.3 Material properties for concrete batch II
Age (days)
Material Property 3 7 14 21 28
Compressive Strength (MPa) 10.7 17.4 25.0 27.5 28.4
Flexural Tensile Strength(Modulus of Rupture)(MPa) 2.47 3.10 3.77 3.97 4.04
Indirect Tensile Strength (Brazil test) (MPa) 1.60 2.1
Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 16130 18940 21750 22840 23210
Table 4.4 Creep coefficient and shrinkage strain for concrete batch I
Age(days) 7 14 21 28 36 43 53 77 100 122
ϕcc 0.38 0.60 0.68 0.69 0.73 0.84 0.86 0.93 0.97 0.98
εsh (×10-6) 66 115 154 208 244 313 327 342 421 457
Table 4.5 Creep coefficient and shrinkage strain for concrete batch II
Age(days) 7 13 21 27 33 51 62 79 127 150
ϕcc 0.40 0.60 0.82 0.87 0.85 1.04 1.00 1.15 1.07 1.16
εsh (×10-6) 72 183 277 258 331 381.2 456.7 463 469.4 495
78
1.2
Creep Coefficient
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Figure 4.14 Creep coefficient for concrete batch I
600
Shrinkage Strain (microstrain)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Figure 4.15 Shrinkage strain for concrete batch I
1.4
1.2
1
Creep Coefficient
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Age (days)
Figure 4.16 Creep coefficient for concrete batch II
79
600

500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Age (days)
Figure 4.17 Shrinkage strain for concrete batch II
4.4.2 Slabs RS1-a and RS1-b
Slabs RS1-a and RS1-b (containing the most longitudinal reinforcement - 3N12, with 46
mm bottom cover) had an average thickness of 102.2 mm and 99.8 mm, respectively.
Concrete batch I was used in the manufacture of the two identical slabs, RS1-a and RS1-b.
Drying commenced after 3 days and development of drying shrinkage of concrete

with time induced tensile stresses in the concrete after that period. The first crack occurred
after 7 days in slab RS1-a and after 10 days in RS1-b, with additional cracks appearing as
the shrinkage strain increased over time. Four cracks were observed in RS1-a and five
cracks in RS1-b after 122 days with the final maximum crack width being 0.37 mm and
0.34 mm in RS1-a and RS1-b, respectively. The final average crack spacing was 670 mm
in RS1-a and 403 mm in RS1-b and the relative longitudinal movement of the supports
was 0.305 mm and 0.383 mm for RS1-a and RS1-b,
The final crack patterns for Slabs RS1-a and RS1-b are illustrated in Figures 4.18
and 4.19, respectively. The crack width history is presented in Tables 4.6 for RS1-a and 4.7
for RS1-b. A comparison between the theoretical and experimental results for the final
average crack width, final steel stress at the crack, and the final steel and concrete stresses
away from the crack, are presented in Tables 4.8 and 4.9.
80
CenterLine
Centre Line
C1 C2 C3 C4
w=0.21 mm w=0.13 mm w=0.15 mm
W=0.37 mm
441 mm
1057 946 mm
Figure 4.18 Final crack pattern for slab RS1-a (3N12)
Table 4.6 Crack history for slab RS1-a (3N12)
Crack No. Crack Occurred Initial Crack Final Crack

Age (days) Width (mm) Width (mm)
C1 66 0.12 0.21
C2 7 0.15 0.37
C3 30 0.10 0.13
C4 43 0.11 0.15
CentreLine
Center Line
C1 C2 C3 C5
w=0.1 mm w=0.21 mm
w=0.13 mm
C4
w=0.34
w=0.1 mm w=0.12 mm
254 361 mm
847 mm 449 mm
Figure 4.19 Final crack pattern for slab RS1-b (3N12)
81
Table 4.7 Crack history for slab RS1-b (3N12)

C1 122 0.10 0.10
C2 30 0.15 0.34
C3 10 0.10 0.21
C4 77 0.10 0.12
C5 100 0.11 0.13
Table 4.8 Comparison between theoretical and experimental results for slab RS1-a
SLAB RS1-a THEORETICAL EXPERIMENTAL

The final average crack width 0.19 0.21
w (mm)
The final steel stress at the crack 245 273
σ*s2 (MPa)
The final steel stress away from the crack
-55.7 -47.9
σ*s1 (MPa)
The final concrete stress away from the crack 1.67 1.77
σ*c1 (MPa)
Table 4.9 Comparison between theoretical and experimental results for slab RS1-b
SLAB RS1-b THEORETICAL EXPERIMENTAL

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-55.5 -57.9
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)
82
Slabs RS2-a and RS2-b (containing 3N10 longitudinal reinforcing bars with 46 mm bottom
cover) had an average thickness of 101.6 mm and 98.3 mm, respectively. Concrete batch I
was used in the manufacture of slab RS2-a and batch II in slab RS2-b.
First crack due to shrinkage induced tensile stresses occurred at age 7 days in both
RS2-a and RS2-b with additional cracks appearing as the shrinkage strain increased over
time. Three cracks were observed in RS2-a after 122 days and 3 cracks in RS2-b after 150
days. The final maximum crack width was 0.43 mm and 0.45 mm in RS2-a and RS2-b,
respectively. The final average crack spacing was 674 mm in RS2-a and 700 mm in RS2-b
and the relative longitudinal movement of the supports was 0.309 mm and 0.315 mm for
RS2-a and RS2-b, respectively.
The crack width history and a comparison between the theoretical and experimental
results for RS2-a and RS2-b are presented in Tables 4.10 to 4.13. The final crack patterns
for slabs RS2-a and RS2-b are illustrated in Figures 4.20 and 4.21, respectively.
Center
CentreLine
Line
C1 C2 C3
w=0.22 mm w=0.25 mm
w=0.43 mm
957 mm 391 mm
83

C1 110 0.21 0.22
C2 7 0.13 0.43
C3 43 0.17 0.25
Center
Centre Line
Line
C1 C2 C3
w=0.21 mm w=0.45 mm
w=0.28 mm
533 mm
1035 mm

C1 27 0.15 0.21
C2 51 0.18 0.28
C3 7 0.15 0.45
84

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-58.8 -41.0
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-69.5 -75.0
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)
Slabs RS3-a and RS3-b (containing the least longitudinal reinforcing bars 2N10, with 46
mm bottom cover) had an average thickness of 99.2 mm and 99.3 mm, respectively. Batch I
was used in the manufacture of two identical slabs RS3-a and RS3-b.
After 122 days only one crack which occurred at age 7 days, was observed in slab
RS3-a and two cracks in slab RS3-b. The first crack appeared after 6 days in slab RS3-b.
85
The measured final maximum crack width was 0.84 mm and 0.78 mm in RS3-a and RS3-b,
respectively. The measured final average crack spacing was 997 mm in RS3-b (Note: Slab
RS3-a contained a single crack only). The measured relative longitudinal movement of the
supports was 0.402 mm and 0.419 mm for RS3-a and RS3-b, respectively.
The final crack patterns for slabs RS3-a and RS3-b are illustrated in Figures 4.22
and 4.23, respectively. The crack width history is presented in Tables 4.14 for RS3-a and
4.15 for RS3-b. A comparison between the theoretical and experimental results made for
RS3-a and RS3-b are illustrated in Tables 4.16 and 4.17, respectively.
Center
CentreLine
Line
C1
w=0.84 mm

C1 7 0.19 0.84
86
CentreLine
Center Line
C1 C2
w=0.78 mm w=0.22 mm
997 mm

C1 6 0.20 0.78
C2 110 0.21 0.22

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-62.6 -19.2
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)
87

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-62.6 -33.4
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)
Slabs RS4-a and RS4-b (containing 4N10 longitudinal reinforcing bars with 46 mm bottom
cover) had an average thickness of 100.5 mm and 101.1 mm, respectively. Concrete batch I
was used in the manufacture of the slabs RS4-a and RS4-b.
The first crack due to shrinkage occurred after 6 days in RS4-a and after 7 days in
RS4-b. Four cracks were observed in slab RS4-a and three cracks in slab RS4-b after 122
days where the measured final maximum crack width was 0.29 mm and 0.32 mm in RS4-a
and RS4-b, respectively. The measured final average crack spacing was 783 mm in RS4-a
and 995 mm in RS4-b and the measured relative longitudinal movement of the supports
was 0.245 mm and 0.162 mm for RS4-a and RS4-b, respectively.
The crack width history and a comparison between the theoretical and experimental
results for RS4-a and RS4-b are presented in Tables 4.18 to 4.21. The final crack patterns
for Slabs RS4-a and RS4-b are illustrated in Figures 4.24 and 4.25, respectively.
88
Center
CentreLine
Line
C1 C2 C4
w=0.18 mm
w=0.28 mm w=0.29 mm C3
w=0.18 mm
562 mm
1004 mm 1001 mm

C1 28 0.15 0.28
C2 6 0.13 0.29
C3 46 0.10 0.18
C4 46 0.11 0.18
Centre Line
Center Line
C1 C2 C3
w=0.26 mm w=0.32 mm w=0.16 mm
995 mm 1016 mm
89

C1 28 0.16 0.26
C2 7 0.13 0.32
C3 100 0.12 0.16

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-55.4 -45.4
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)

w (mm)
σ*s2 (MPa)
-55.4 -54.1
σ*s1 (MPa)
σ*c1 (MPa)
90
4.4.6 Crack Width
Crack width is an average of every crack measured at five locations across the slab
on each specimen, with the average width for each slab being the sum of all crack widths
divided by the number of cracks.
The first cracking occurred within the first week for all slabs, except for slab RS1-b,
where the first crack appeared within 10 days. The development, extent and width of cracks
were observed and measured carefully with a microscope. The magnitude of crack width
depends primarily on the amount of bonded reinforcement crossing the crack. In addition,
the width of a crack in a restrained member depends on the degree of restraint, the quality
of bond between the concrete and the steel, the size and distribution of the individual
reinforcement bars and the quality of the concrete. Table 4.22 provides a comparison
between the calculated final crack width (obtained using the analytical model described
earlier) and average final crack width measured in the laboratory. The final average crack
width versus steel area is illustrated in Figures 4.26-a and 4.26-b.
0.9
0.8
Average Crack Width (mm)
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1 Theoretical Experimental
0
0 100 200 300 400
Steel Area (m m 2)
Figure 4.26-a Final average crack width vs. steel area for slab series ‘a’
91
0.6
Average Crack Width (mm)

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Theoretical Experimental
0
0 100 200 300 400
2
Steel Arae (mm )
Steel Area
Figure 4.26-b Final average crack width vs. steel area for slab series ‘b’
Table 4.22 Theoretical and experimental values for final average crack width.
Final Average Crack Width, wm (mm)

RS1-a RS1-b RS2-a RS2-b RS3-a RS3-b RS4-a RS4-b
Theoretical 0.19 0.16 0.28 0.26 0.51 0.50 0.18 0.20
Experimental 0.21 0.18 0.3 0.31 0.84 0.5 0.23 0.25
4.4.7 Crack Spacing
The distance between cracks was measured every 50 mm across the slab width and
averaged to obtain the average crack spacing for each slab (s in Figure 4.4). In Table 4.23,
the observed average crack spacing is compared with the predicted average crack spacing
and in Figure 4.27, crack spacing versus steel area is plotted. An increase in the steel area
causes a reduction in the average crack spacing.
Table 4.23 Theoretical and experimental average crack spacing
Average Crack Spacing, srm (mm)

Theoretical 667 500 1000 667 - - 667 667
Experimental 670 403 674 700 - 997 783 995
92
1200
Measuread Crack Spacing (mm) 1000
800
600
400
200
Experimental
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Steel Area (mm2)
Figure 4.27 Crack spacing vs steel area for slabs
4.4.8 Steel Stress
The steel across each crack carries the full restraining force (N) while the stress in the
concrete is zero. Using the final steel strains measured in the vicinity of the first crack, the
maximum stress in each steel bar crossing the crack was determined (σ*s2 in Figure 4.4).
The restraining force was thus determined from the experiments (N = σ*s2 Ast). A
comparison between the theoretical and experimental results for the final steel stress at each
crack (σ*s2 ) are presented in Table 4.24, and Figures 4.28-a and 4.28-b show plots of the
theoretical and experimental values of σ*s2 versus steel area.
Table 4.24 Theoretical and experimental values for steel stress
Steel Stress, σ*s2 (MPa)

Theoretical 245 196 337 236 553 562 261 227
Experimental 273 190 250 290 532 467 270 276
93
600
Steel Stress at the Crack (MPa)

500
400
300
200
100
0
0 100 200 300 400
2
Steel Area (mm )
Figure 4.28-a Steel stress for slab series ‘a’
600
Steel Stress at the Crack (MPa)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 100 200 300 400
Steel Area (mm 2)
Figure 4.28-b Steel stress for slab series ‘b’
4.4.9 Concrete Stress
The concrete and steel stresses adjacent to the crack vary considerably with the distance
from the crack (within Region 2 in Figure 4.4). At any distance greater than so from a crack
(i.e. within Region 1 in Figure 4.4) and at any given time, the concrete and steel stresses
94
(σc1 and σs1, respectively) remain constant until the next crack is approached (Region1 in
Figure 4.4). From the steel strains measured in Region 1 and the average value for these
regions along the steel bar, the steel stress σs1 was calculated and, by enforcing equilibrium
(N = σc1Ac + σs1Ast), the concrete stress away from the crack σc1 was determined. Concrete
stress versus steel area is plotted in Figures 4.29-a & 4.29-b. A comparisons between the
theoretical and experimental results for the final concrete stress σ*c1, are made in Table
4.25.
Table 4.25 Theoretical and experimental values for concrete stress
Concrete Stress, σ*c1 (MPa)

Theoretical 1.67 1.43 1.54 1.23 1.63 1.65 1.66 1.47
Experimental 1.77 1.41 1.13 1.46 1.45 1.31 1.64 1.71
2
1.8
Concrete Stress (MPa)
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0
0 100 200 300 400
2
Steel Area (mm )
Figure 4.29-a Concrete stress for slab series ‘a’
95
1.8
1.6
Concrete Stress (MPa)

1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0
0 100 200 300 400
2
Steel Area (mm )
Figure 4.29-b Concrete stress for slab series ‘b’
4.4.10 The Bond Transfer Length
In a member subjected to pure tension, the stress in the concrete is uniform over the whole
concrete section. It is assumed that a local bond failure occurs at each crack and there are
relative displacements or slip between the steel and the surrounding concrete. Compatibility
of deformation between the two materials is thus not maintained. The bond transfer length
(so in Figures 4.3 and 4.4) is a length of reinforcement adjacent to a crack where the
compatibility of deformation between the steel and concrete is not maintained because of
partially bond breakdown and slip. It is an empirical measure of the bond characteristic of
the reinforcement, incorporating bar diameter and surface texture, etc.
Experimental results show that shrinkage causes the bond to deteriorate at the
concrete-steel interface with a gradual increase in so, with time. From the measured steel
strains in Region 1 (measured by a demec gauge) and obtaining the average value for these
regions along the steel bar, the steel stress remote from the cracks immediately after the
first crack σs1, and after all shrinkage cracking σ*s1, was calculated. Similarly, from the
measured steel strains in Region 2 (measured by electric strain gauges) and obtaining the
96
average value for these strain gauges between the reinforcement bars, the steel stress in the
vicinity of the first crack immediately after the first cracking σs2, and after all shrinkage
cracking σ*s2, was also calculated.
Using equations 4.4 and 4.8, the bond transfer length immediately after the first
crack so, and after all shrinkage cracking s o* , was obtained. The results and ratio of s o* / s o
are presented in Table 4.26.
Table 4.26 Measured no-bond length after first and all shrinkage cracking
Measured Bond Transfer Length (mm)

After first cracking, (so) 261 215 228 201 246 342 256 259
* 366 290 290 292 323 454 332 319
After all shrinkage,( s ) o
( s o* / s o ) 1.4 1.35 1.27 1.45 1.31 1.33 1.29 1.23
From Table 4.26 the average ratio of the final bond transfer length s o* , to the initial
value after first cracking so, is 1.33. Therefore, the final bond transfer length for long-term
calculations may be expressed as
s o* = 1.33s o (4.23)
where, so is the bond transfer length at first cracking given by Equation 4.1
4.5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Results from a series of long-term tests on eight restrained reinforced concrete slab
specimens and accurate measurements of material properties including the creep and
shrinkage characteristics of two concrete batches used in the slabs, are presented in
Sections 4.4.1 to 4.4.10
97
A simple and rational analytical procedure for determining the stresses and strains
after shrinkage cracking in a restrained direct-tension member is also presented. Due to the
random nature of cracking, great accuracy in calculating the crack width and crack spacing
is not achievable. Notwithstanding this, the measured widths of shrinkage cracks, and the
steel and concrete stresses determined from the test data, agree well with the results from
the analytical model. The results are summarised in Table 4.27.
Table 4.27 Summary of the results from long-term restrained concrete slabs

Average crack width Experimental 0.21 0.18 0.30 0.31 0.84 0.50 0.23 0.25
w (mm) Theoretical 0.19 0.16 0.28 0.26 0.51 0.50 0.18 0.20
Average crack Experimental 670 403 674 700 - 997 783 995
spacing, s (mm) Theoretical 667 500 1000 667 - - 667 667
Final steel stress at Experimental 273 190 250 290 532 467 270 276
*
crack, σ s2 (MPa) Theoretical 245 196 337 236 553 562 261 227
Final concrete stress, Experimental 1.77 1.41 1.13 1.46 1.45 1.31 1.64 1.71
*
σ s2 (MPa) Theoretical 1.67 1.43 1.54 1.23 1.63 1.65 1.66 1.47
Bond transfer length Experimental 261 215 228 201 246 342 256 259
so (mm) Theoretical 215 211 257 248 378 379 191 192
Measured final movment of
0.305 0.385 0.309 0.315 0.402 0.419 0.245 0.162
supports, Δu (mm)
From the results presented in Section 4.4 the extent to which shrinkage cracking can
be controlled depends on limiting the desired crack width and the amount and distribution
of bonded reinforcement across the crack.
The final crack width, crack spacing and steel stress at the crack, are dependent on
the steel area (or more precisely, the reinforcement ratio ρ =Ast /Ac). An increase in the
steel area reduces the final crack width and with more cracks developing, reduces the crack
spacing. With an increase in the steel area, the loss of stiffness at first cracking reduces and,
therefore the restraining force after cracking is greater, but stress in the steel decreases at
each crack. With a larger restraining force, the stress in the concrete away from a crack
tends to be higher and consequently further cracking is more likely.
98
The applicability of the simple expression s o = d b / 10 ρ is examined by reference to

results obtained in laboratory tests which are presented in Table 4.27. According to the
results, the mean of Experimental/Theoretical value of the bond transfer length so by the
aforementioned simple expression is 1.021 with a standard deviation of 0.24. Experimental
results also indicate that shrinkage causes a deterioration in bond at the concrete-steel
interface and a gradual increase in the bond transfer length so, with time. The final value for
so after all shrinkage cracking is 1.33 times the initial value after first cracking.
Comparison with requirements of AS3600-2001 (clause 9.4.3.4)
A comparison between the requirements of Australian Standard AS3600-2001 (clause

9.4.34) and the behaviour of restrained slabs from experimental observations are presented
in Table 4.28
Table 4.28 Comparison between AS3600-2001 and experimental observations
Requirement AS3600-2001 (clause 9.4.3.4) Measured behaviour of restrained slabs
Actually provides very little control

ρ ≥ 0.00175 A minor degree of control over
over cracking. Final crack width
(As=105 mm2) cracking
exceeds 1 mm
Confirms the Standard’s suggestion. A

ρ ≥ 0.0035 A moderate degree of control
moderate degree of control over
(As=210 mm2) over cracking
cracking. (Crack widths about 0.4mm.)
Confirms the Standard’s suggestion. A

ρ ≥ 0.006 A strong degree of control over
strong degree of control over cracking.
(As=360 mm2) cracking
(Crack widths less than 0.25 mm.)
For a maximum design crack width of 0.3 mm (as is commonly specified in codes
of practice), it appears that a reinforcement area greater than 270 mm2 ( ρ = 0.0045 ) would
be satisfactory for the restrained slabs tested in this study.
99
Chapter 5, Short-Term Flexural Cracking
CHAPTER 5
SHORT-TERM FLEXURAL CRACKING
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Members subjected to bending moments develop flexural cracks in those regions

subjected to tensile gradient. Unlike pure tension cracks, which are more uniform in
width and extend completely through the members, flexural cracks are tapered and
extend almost to the zero-strain axis (neutral axis). Flexural cracks are almost vertical,
varying from a maximum width at the tensile face to zero near the neutral axis. Crack
spacing is irregular because of random variations in the tensile strength of concrete from
point to point.
The extent of cracking in reinforced concrete flexural members depends mainly

on the non-linear and inelastic properties of the concrete itself. When the applied
loading is insufficient to cause cracking, the short-term behaviour of concrete beams is
essentially linear and elastic. Even in prestressed concrete members, compressive
stresses are rarely high enough to cause significant non-linearity. However, tensile
cracking initiates a marked redistribution of internal stresses and structural behaviour
becomes non-linear.
100
Many variables influence the width and spacing of flexural cracks in reinforced
concrete members and there are a number of theoretical and semi-empirical approaches
for the determination of the crack width and crack spacing. Generally, the width of a
crack depends on the quantity, orientation, and distribution of the steel across the crack
and the reinforcement cover. It also depends on the bond characteristics between the
concrete and reinforcement bars at and in the vicinity of the crack. A local breakdown in
the bond immediately adjacent to a crack complicates modelling.
In this chapter, the results of short-term flexural load tests on 12 prismatic

reinforced concrete specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs) are presented. The tests were
conducted to study the development of flexural cracking under increasing short-term
loads from first cracking through to flexural failure. Crack width, crack patterns,
deflections at mid-span, steel strains and concrete surface strains at the steel levels were
recorded at each load increment in the post-cracking range. The properties of concrete
including compressive strength, tensile strength, and elastic modulus at different ages
were also measured on companion specimens.
Twelve prismatic, singly reinforced concrete specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs), were
cast and moist cured for 28 days. All the specimens were simply supported on a 3.5 m
span and tested to failure to investigate the distribution and extent of primary and
secondary cracking under short-term loading using two equal point loads applied at the
third points on the span, at ages greater than 28 days. Crack widths were monitored on
the side face of the specimens from initial cracking up to a load sufficient to cause the
tensile steel to yield. The schematic diagram of the test set-up is shown in Figure 5.1.
Deflections at mid-span, crack widths, crack patterns, steel strains within the
high moment region, and concrete surface strains at the steel level were recorded at each
load increment in the post-cracking range and development of the primary crack pattern
was monitored throughout the test. The concrete properties including the compressive
strength, the flexural tensile strength and the elastic modulus at different ages were
measured on companion specimens (in the form of standard size cylinders and prisms).
101
Demec targets
Deflection dial gauge (LVDT)
1167 mm 1167 mm 1167 mm
Figure 5.1 Test arrangement for all specimens
The major objectives of the experimental program were:
(a) To gain a better understanding of the mechanisms associated with flexural

cracking, and the influence of those factors that affect the spacing and width of
flexural cracks under short-term loading.
(b) To obtain benchmark, laboratory-controlled data to assist in the development

of rational design-oriented procedures for the control of cracking and the
calculation of crack widths in reinforced concrete beams and slabs.
5.2.1 Test Parameters and Reinforcement layouts
The parameters varied in the tests, including the number and spacing of reinforcement
bars and the concrete cover. Details of the parameters are given in Tables 5.1 and 5.2.
Two identical specimen “a” and “b” were constructed for each combination of
parameters.
The beam specimens were each nominally 3500 mm long by 250 mm wide. The
nominal distance from the beam soffit to the bars was 40 mm for beam series 1 and
102
25 mm for series 2 and 3. Therefore, beam series 1 and 2 were identical except for a
different bottom cover of concrete. The main reinforcement consisted of 2N16 in beam
series 1 and 2, and 3N16 in beam series3.
The slab specimens were each nominally 3500 mm long by 400 mm wide. In all
slabs the nominal distance from the soffit to the centroid of the main reinforcement was
25 mm. Slab series 1, 2, and 3 were each reinforced with 2N12, 3N12, and 4N12
respectively, which changed the bar spacings between 3 different slab series. Details of
the cross-sections and reinforcement layouts for beam and slab specimens (typical) are
shown in Figures 5.2 and 5.3, respectively.
3800
250
(Plan)
High Mom ent Region
P P
1167 1167 1167
11
333
or
250 348
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
DEMEC Targets
(Elevation)
250
(Cross-section)
300
s
N16
cb
cs
Figure 5.2 Dimensions and reinforcement details for beam specimens (typical)
103
3800
400
(Plan)
High Mom ent Region
P P
1167 1167 1167
11
250
161
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
DEMEC Targets
(Elevation)
400
s (Cross-section)
130
N12
cb
cs
Figure 5.3 Dimensions and reinforcement details for slab specimens (typical)
Table 5.1 Details of beams for short-term flexural tests.
Specimen No. of Bar Diam. Steel Area cb cs s

Bars (mm) (mm2) (mm) (mm) (mm)
B1-a 2 16 400 40 40 150
B1-b 2 16 400 40 40 150
B2-a 2 16 400 25 25 180
B2-b 2 16 400 25 25 180
B3-a 3 16 600 25 25 90
B3-b 3 16 600 25 25 90
104
Table 5.2 Details of slabs for short-term flexural tests.
Specimen No. of Bar Diam. Steel Area cb cs s

Bars (mm) (mm2) (mm) (mm) (mm)
S1-a 2 12 226 25 40 308
S1-b 2 12 226 25 40 308
S2-a 3 12 339 25 40 154
S2-b 3 12 339 25 40 154
S3-a 4 12 452 25 40 103
S3-b 4 12 452 25 40 103
All specimens were constructed in 3800 mm long formwork and were simply supported
over a 3500 mm span. The variation of mechanical properties of concrete was measured
on companion cylinders and prisms at ages 7, 14, 17, 28, 31, 42, 48, 55, 61, 62, 63 and
68 days. Eleven DEMEC targets were glued on the side face of each specimen at the
steel level to measure the concrete surface strains and two targets were fixed onto the
top fibre of the side face at mid-span with HBB-X60 non-shrink adhesive (as shown in
Figures 5.2 and 5.3). A demec gauge able to measure in micro strains was used to
measure the deformation between the targets in order to measure the average concrete
surface strains and a microscope with a magnification factor of 40 was used to measure
the crack widths. In order to measure the steel strains in the high moment region, ten
electric resistance strain gauges were attached to one of the main reinforcement bars.
Deflection at mid-span was measured using a Linear Variable Displacement Transducer
(LVDT). The LVDT and resistance strain gauge measurements were retrieved through a
data acquisition system connected to a personal compute, while load was supplied by a
hydraulic jack connected to an electrically powered pressure pump.
Before casting each specimen, the inside surface of the mould was cleaned and
coated with a thin layer of concrete release agent to prevent adhesion of the concrete.
The concrete was placed into the mould in equal layers and compacted by internal
vibration until each surface layer became smooth. Sufficient concrete was placed into
the top layer to overfill the mould when compacted, after which the surface was stripped
off and finished with a steel trowel. The companion specimens were also cast at the
105
same time as the test specimens. Within two hours of casting the specimens were
covered with wet hessian and plastic sheets and left in their moulds for 3 days. After 3
days they were removed and kept moist continuously by a thick covering of wet
hessian. After 28 days the wet hessian was removed and the specimens were identified
and tested at different ages. Each specimen was slowly and gradually loaded to failure
over a period of approximately four hours. Figures 5.4 show views of the experimental
set-up. Each specimen was simply supported at each end before testing (Figure 5.4b),
and then one LVDT was attached at the mid-span (see Figure 5.4c) and linked to a
computer. Demec strain targets were glued to the concrete surface and initial strain
measurements were recorded.
Figure 5.4a General view of test set-up
Figure 5.4b End support for specimens
106
Figure 5.4c LVDT for deflection measurements at mid-span
5.3 TEST RESULTS
Initial readings of the concrete and steel strains and the mid-span deflection were
taken at zero load condition. The load was then applied in 5 kN increments for the beam
specimens and 3 kN increments for the slab specimens until approximately 70% of the
calculated ultimate load was reached. Every crack visible on the surface of the concrete
was measured and the crack pattern was recorded at each load increment. The load was
then increased monotonically in small increments to failure and crack widths and crack
patterns were recorded at each load increment. In this section the experimental results
taken from 6 beams and 6 slabs are presented. These results include the measured
material properties, the width and spacing of flexural cracking under short-term loading,
and deflection at mid-span. The results are discussed in detail and a comparison
between specimens is also made. Graphs of concrete surface strain at steel level are
illustrated in Appendix II. The whole raw data for crack history measured throughout
the experimental programme are presented in Appendix III.
107
One batch of commercially pre-mixed concrete was used to manufacture the test and
companion specimens. Standard concrete cylinders (150 mm × 300 mm and 100 mm ×
200 mm), and prisms (100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm) were used to determine the
compressive strength, the flexural tensile strength, the indirect tensile strength and
modulus of elasticity of the concrete at ages 7, 14, 17, 28, 31, 42, 48, 55, 61, 63, and 68
days. The results are presented in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 Material properties for concrete
Age (days)
Material Properties
7 14 17 28 31 42 48 55 61 63 68
Compressive Strength
21 36 36 36.4 36.6 37.3 39.2 39.2 40.1
(MPa)
Modulus of Rupture
3.9 4.3 4.7
(MPa)
Indirect Tensile Strength
3.1 3.4
(MPa)
Modulus of Elasticity
26930 27195 28920
(MPa)
5.3.2 Beams B1-a and B1-b
Beams B1-a & B1-b containing 2N16 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 40 mm
clear bottom cover were tested at ages 48 and 53 days respectively. The first cracks
appeared in the pure flexure zone within the high moment region (H.M.R.) at loads of
approximately P=25 kN in B1-a and P=30 kN in B1-b. Subsequently, cracks appeared
and the basic primary crack pattern established itself quite rapidly. Secondary cracks
appeared between the primary cracks as the load increased and even a few new cracks
occurred at high overload stages.
In total, 7 primary cracks were located inside the high moment region for B1-a,
and 6 cracks for B1-b respectively, at approximately 70% of the ultimate load. The
measured final average crack spacings at this load stage were 192 mm for B1-a and 186
mm for B1-b. The measured maximum and average crack widths at the bottom fibre of
the beams within the high moment region are plotted against the applied bending
108
moment in Figures 5.5a and 5.5b. The final crack pattern at load level approximately
70% of the ultimate load for beams B1-a and B1-b are illustrated in Figures 5.6a and
5.6b. The crack width history and final crack spacing (distance from centre line for each
crack) within the high moment region are presented in Tables 5.4a and 5.4b, for B1-a
and B1-b, respectively.
60
50
Bending Moment (kNm)
40
30
20
10
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Crack Width (mm)
Figure 5.5a Crack width vs. applied bending moment for beam B1-a
60
50
40
30
20
10
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
Crack Width (mm)
Figure 5.5b Crack width vs. applied bending moment for beam B1-b
109
High Moment Region

Constant Moment Region
11
c5-1 c 6-2 c7-1 c8-1

c 4-1 c9-2
c1-1
c2-1 c3-1 c 3-2 c6-1 348
c9-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Figure 5.6a Crack pattern for beam B1-a (2N16 cb=40 mm) at load stage P=70 kN
Table 5.4a Crack history within the H.M.R for beam B1-a
Load c3-2 c4-1 c5-1 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c8-1

(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
10
20
25 0.08
30 0.08 0.10
35 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.13 0.08
40 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.20 0.18 0.10
45 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.25 0.25 0.13
50 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.28 0.28 0.15
55 0.15 0.13 0.20 0.28 0.28 0.15
60 0.18 0.15 0.23 0.30 0.30 0.15
65 0.20 0.15 0.25 0.33 0.05 0.30 0.15
70 0.23 0.18 0.25 0.33 0.08 0.30 0.15
Distance
from C.L. 578 330 65 118 225 370 573
(mm)
High Moment Region

11
c3-2 c4-1 c5-1 c8-1

c4-2 c6-1 c7-1 c10-1 348
c2-2 c9-1
c2-1 c3-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Figure 5.6b Crack pattern for beam B1-b (2N16 cb=40 mm) at load stage P=70 kN
110
Table 5.4b Crack history within the H.M.R for beam B1-b
Load c3-2 c4-1 c4-2 c5-1 c6-1 c7-1

(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
10
20
25
30 0.05 0.08
35 0.05 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.05
40 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.10
45 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.13
50 0.13 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.15
55 0.15 0.05 0.25 0.23 0.25 0.18
60 0.18 0.08 0.28 0.25 0.30 0.25
65 0.20 0.13 0.28 0.28 0.33 0.28
70 0.23 0.15 0.33 0.33 0.38 0.28
Distance
from C.L. 536 402 276 28 213 396
(mm)
In addition, the average of the observed crack widths at a particular load stage
was compared with the maximum observed crack width at that load stage. The ratio of
maximum crack width to average crack width at load stage P=70 kN was 1.5 for B1-a
and 1.36 for B1-b. Beam series 1 failed in flexure at the pure moment zone, with the
compressive concrete at mid-span crushing (see Figure 5.7). Prior to failure, but after
the tensile steel in the high moment region had yielded, there was a marked increase in
the rate of deflection and deformations at high overload and cracks also began to widen
very considerably at this stage. The failure loads were P=109 kN and P=103 kN for B1-
a and B1-b, and corresponding mid-span deflections were 66 mm and 72 mm,
respectively.
Figure 5.7 Failure of beam B1-b
111
The observed mid-span deflections of beams B1-a and B1-b are plotted against
load in Figures 5.8a and 5.8b, respectively. Initially, the beams were uncracked and
stiff, with further load, cracking occurred when the moment at mid-span exceeded the
cracking moment. In general, when a section cracks, its moment of inertia decreases,
leading to a considerable decrease in beam stiffness. After cracking, beams B1-a and
B1-b exhibited elastic behaviour until eventually the reinforcement yielded at mid-span,
leading to a large increase in deflection with little change in load (flat plastic plateau),
until the compressed concrete at high overload crushed and the beams finally collapsed.
160 steel first yields

140
120
Load (kN)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Deflection (mm)
Figure 5.8a Load-deflection curve for beam B1-a at mid-span

140
120
Load (kN)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Deflection (mm)
Figure 5.8b Load-deflection curve for beam B1-b at mid-span
112
clear bottom cover were tested at ages 42 and 45 days respectively. B2-a and B2-b were
therefore identical to B1-a and B1-b except for reduced concrete cover.
Cracking first occurred at loads of approximately P=30 kN in B2-a and P=25 kN

in B2-b. The number of cracks increased as the applied load increased and at
approximately 70% of the ultimate load, 7 cracks were located inside the high moment
region for B2-a and B2-b. The measured final average crack spacings at this load stage
were 149 mm for B2-a and 163 mm for B2-b. The cracking behaviour of beam series 2
was similar to beam series 1, except, as expected, the average crack spacing and crack
width for B1-a and B1-b were greater than B2-a and B2-b, respectively.
The measured maximum and average crack width at the bottom fibre of beam
series 2 within the high moment region are plotted against the applied bending moment
in Figures 5.9 a and 5.9b. The final crack pattern for beams B2-a and B2-b at
approximately 70% of the ultimate load are illustrated in Figures 5.10a and 5.10b. The
crack width history and final crack spacing inside the H.M.R are presented in Tables
5.5a and 5.5b, for B1-a and B1-b, respectively.
60
50
40
30
20
10
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Crack Width (mm)
113
60

50
40
30
20
10
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Crack Width (mm)
High Moment Region

11
c2-1 c4-1 c5-1 c6-2 c8-2 c9-1

c1-1 c3-1 c4-2 c7-1 c8-1 c10-1 333
c2-2 c6-1 c9-2 c10-2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Load c4-1 c4-2 c5-1 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c8-1

0
10
20
25
30 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05
35 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.08
40 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.08
45 0.15 0.18 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.13
50 0.20 0.08 0.20 0.10 0.15 0.18 0.15
55 0.20 0.08 0.23 0.13 0.18 0.18 0.15
60 0.25 0.10 0.25 0.15 0.18 0.20 0.18
65 0.25 0.10 0.30 0.15 0.25 0.23 0.18
70 0.28 0.10 0.30 0.15 0.25 0.23 0.18
Distance
from C.L. 410 260 90 65 163 375 582
(mm)
114
High Moment Region

11
c2-1 c5-2 c9-1 c10-1

c1-1 c3-2 c8-1
c3-1 c7-1 c8-2 333
c5-1 c6-1
c4-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Table 5.5b Crack history within H.M.R for beam B2-b
Load c3-2 c4-1 c5-1 c5-2 c6-1 c7-1 c8-1

0
10
20
25 0.08
30 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.08
35 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.13
40 0.15 0.10 0.15 0.18 0.08 0.15
45 0.15 0.13 0.18 0.18 0.13 0.18
50 0.18 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.15 0.20
55 0.20 0.05 0.15 0.28 0.28 0.18 0.20
60 0.25 0.08 0.15 0.28 0.33 0.20 0.23
65 0.28 0.08 0.15 0.30 0.38 0.23 0.25
70 0.30 0.13 0.18 0.30 0.43 0.25 0.28
Distance
from C.L. 521 255 220 95 167 402 569
(mm)
The ratio of maximum crack width to average crack width at load stage P=70
kN were 1.36 for B2-a and 1.59 for B2-b.
Beam series 2 deflected similar to beam series 1, and failed in flexure at the pure
moment zone by crushing the compressive concrete above a crack. The failure load was
P=112 kN for B2-a and P=104 kN for B2-b, and corresponding mid-span deflections
were 68 mm and 77 mm, respectively. The load-deflection curves for beam series 2 are
presented in Figures 5.11a and 5.11b.
115

140
120
100
Load (kN) 80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Deflection (mm)

140
120
Load (kN)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Deflection (mm)
clear bottom cover were tested at ages 54 and 55 days respectively. Beams B3-a and
B3-b contained more longitudinal reinforcement than the other beam specimens.
Cracking first occurred approximately at loads of P=45 kN in B3-a and P=30 kN in B3-
b, with 11 cracks located inside the high moment region for B3-a and 12 cracks for B3-
b respectively, at approximately 70% of the ultimate load. The measured final average
crack spacing at this load stage were 109 mm for B3-a and 104 mm for B3-b. The
116
measured maximum and average crack width at the bottom fibre of beam series 3 within
the high moment region are plotted against the applied bending moment in Figures
5.12a & 5.12b. The final crack pattern at approximately 70% of the ultimate load for
beams B2-a and B2-b are illustrated in Figures 5.13a and 5.13b. The crack width history
and final crack spacing inside the H.M.R are presented in Tables 5.6a and 5.6b, for B3-a
and B3-b, respectively. The ratio of maximum crack width to average crack width at
load stage P=85 kN was 1.5 for B3-a and 1.7 for B3-b.
60
50
40
30
20
10
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Crack Width (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Crack Width (mm)
117
High Moment Region

11
c2-3 c5-3 c9-2

c1-1 c2-1 c3-2 c5-1 c6-1 c7-1 c10-2 333
c8-2
c2-2 c4-1 c6-2 c7-2c7-3 c8-1 c10-1
c3-1 c5-2 c9-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Load c3-2 c4-1 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2 c7-3 c8-1
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
10
20
25
30
40
45 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
50 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.08
55 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.10 0.08 0.08
60 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.08
65 0.05 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.15 0.10 0.08
70 0.08 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.18 0.10 0.10
75 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.10 0.05 0.10
80 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.08 0.20 0.10 0.05 0.10
85 0.08 0.18 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.08 0.20 0.10 0.05 0.13
Distance
from C.L. 518 327 225 114 10 117 196 306 428 441 567
(mm)
High Moment Region

11
c3-1 c4-2 c6-1 c6-3 c8-1

c5-1 c5-3 c9-2 c10-1 333
c1-1 c2-2 c7-2 c8-3
c2-1 c2-3 c4-1 c4-3 c6-2 c7-1 c9-1
c5-2 c8-2 c10-2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
118
Table 5.6b Crack history within the H.M.R for beam B3-b
Load c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
10
20
25
30 0.03
40 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
45 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.05
50 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.03 0.08
55 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.08
60 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.08
65 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.10
70 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.03 0.15 0.10 0.10
75 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.05 0.18 0.10 0.10
80 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.20 0.13 0.13
85 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.20 0.13 0.13
Distance
from C.L. 468 386 303 211 115 46 18 142 217 338 457 571
(mm)
Beams B3-a and B3-b containing a low reinforcement ratio (e.g. ρ< 0.02 for
ductility) were constructed without using stirrups in the section. Beam series 3 collapsed
due to shear failure at the supports before the longitudinal tensile steel yielded (see
Figure 5.14). The failure loads were P=138 kN and P=127 kN for B3-a and B3-b and
the corresponding mid-span deflections were 10 mm and 9 mm, respectively. The load-
deflection response of B3-a and B3-b are presented in Figures 5.15a and 5.15b,
respectively.
Figure 5.14 Shear failure of beam B3-b at support
119
160 shear failure

140
120
Load (kN) 100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Deflection (mm)
160 shear failure

140
120
Load (kN)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Deflection (mm)
5.3.5 Slabs S1-a and S1-b
Slabs S1-a & S1-b containing 2N12 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 25 mm
clear bottom cover were tested at ages 56 and 59 days respectively. Slab series 1
contained the least longitudinal reinforcement of the six slab specimens. The load
increment for the slab specimens was 3 kN with cracking first occurring approximately
at loads of P=5 kN in S1-a and P=8 kN in S1-b. The number of cracks increased as the
applied load increased and at approximately 70% of the ultimate load, 10 cracks were
120
located inside the high moment region for S1-a, and 9 cracks for S1-b, respectively. The
measured final average crack spacing at this load stage were 131 mm for S1-a and 128
mm for S1-b. The measured maximum and average crack widths at the bottom fibre of
the slabs within the high moment region are plotted against the applied bending moment
in Figures 5.16a and 5.16b. The crack patterns for both slabs are illustrated in Figures
5.17a and 5.17b, respectively, at approximately 70% of the ultimate load. The crack
width history and final crack spacing (distance from centre line for each crack) within
the H.M.R are presented in Tables 5.7a and 5.7b, for S1-a and S1-b, respectively. The
average of the observed crack widths at a particular load stage was compared with the
maximum observed crack width at that load stage. The ratio of maximum crack width to
the average crack width at load stage P=14 kN was 1.44 for S1-a and 1.55 for S1-b.
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Crack Width (mm)
Figure 5.16a Crack width vs. applied bending moment for slab S1-a
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Crack Width (mm)
121
Figure 5.16b Crack width vs. applied bending moment for slab S1-b
High
High
HighMoment
Moment
MomentRegion
Region
Region
11
c1-1 c 3-2 c 4-2 c6-2 c 7-2 c 8-1 c9-2

c2-2 c 10-1
c2-1 c 3-1 c4-1 c5-2
c7-1 c 8-2 c9-1 161
c5-1 c6-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Figure 5.17a Crack pattern for slab S1-a (2N12 cb=25 mm) at load stage P=14 kN
Table 5.7a Crack history within the H.M.R for slab S1-a
Load c3-2 c4-1 c4-2 c5-1 c5-2 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
5 0.10 0.13
8 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.10 0.18 0.20 0.13 0.10
11 0.15 0.18 0.13 0.25 0.13 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.18
14 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.30 0.18 0.30 0.08 0.33 0.25 0.23
Distance
from C.L. 588 402 329 186 10 113 194 312 414 592
(mm)
High Moment Region

11
c2-1 c3-2 c 4-1 c5-2 c6-1 c 7-1 c8-1 c9-1

c1-1 c3-1 c3-3 c 5-1 c6-2 c7-2 c 8-2 c9-2 c10-1 161
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Figure 5.17b Crack pattern for slab S1-b (2N12 cb=25 mm) at load stage P=14 kN
Table 5.7b Crack history within the H.M.R for slab S1-b
Load c3-3 c4-1 c5-1 c5-2 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
5
8 0.13 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.13 0.08
11 0.23 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.10 0.18 0.10 0.13
14 0.10 0.28 0.13 0.18 0.18 0.13 0.25 0.18 0.18
Distance
from C.L. 525 406 242 116 13 105 257 365 503
(mm)
122
The measured mid-span deflections of slabs S1-a and S1-b are plotted against
load in Figures 5.18a and 5.18b, respectively. As shown, slab series 1 illustrated good
ductile behaviour with an extended flat plateau in the load-deflection curve. The failure
loads were P=22 kN and P=21 kN and corresponding mid-span deflections were 210
mm and 211 mm for S1-a and S1-b, respectively. Slab series 1 failed in flexure in the
pure moment zone, with the compressive concrete crushing above a crack (see Figure
5.19).
50
45
40
35
Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Deflection (mm)
Figure 5.18a Load-deflection curve for slab S1-a at mid-span
50
45
40
35
Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Deflection (mm)
Figure 5.18b Load-deflection curve for slab S1-b at mid-span
123
Figure 5.19 Failure of slab S1-a
Slabs S2-a & S2-b containing 3N12 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 25 mm
clear bottom cover were tested at ages 60 and 61 days respectively. Cracking first
occurred approximately at a load of P=8 kN in both S2-a and S2-b. Twelve (12) cracks
were located inside the high moment region for S2-a, and 9 cracks for S2-b at
approximately 70% of the ultimate load. The measured final average crack spacing at
this load stage was 92 mm for S2-a and 131 mm for S2-b. The measured maximum and
average crack widths at the bottom fibre of the slabs within the high moment region are
plotted against the applied bending moment in Figures 5.20a and 5.20b.
The crack patterns at approximately 70% of the ultimate load for both slabs are
illustrated in Figures 5.21a and 5.21b. The crack width history and final crack spacing
are presented in Tables 5.8a and 5.8b, for S2-a and S2-b, respectively. The ratio of
maximum crack width to average crack width at load stage P=20 kN was 1.9 for S2-a
and 1.4 for S2-b.
124
20
18

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Crack Width (mm)
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Crack Width (mm)
High Moment Region

11
c1-1 c2-2 c3-1 c 4-2 c5-2 c6-2 c6-4 c7-1 c8-1 c10-1
c2-1 c5-3 c6-3
c 4-1 c4-3 c5-1
c6-1
c8-2 c 9-1 c 9-2 161
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
125
Load c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c6-4 c7-1 c8-1
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
5
8 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.08
11 0.10 0.03 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.13
14 0.15 0.03 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.18
17 0.15 0.08 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.05 0.13 0.23
20 0.18 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.05 0.15 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.15 0.25
Distance
from C.L. 483 380 316 200 108 38 49 145 198 228 344 516
(mm)
High Moment Region

c 1-1 c c 2-2 c c 10-2

2-1 c 3-1 c 3-2 c4-1 c 5-1 c5-2 c 6-1 6-2 c c 7-2 c8-2 c9-1 c10-1 161
16
7-1 c 8-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Load c3-2 c4-1 c5-1 c5-2 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
5
8 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
11 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.10 0.08 0.08
14 0.18 0.15 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.10
17 0.23 0.18 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.10 0.05 0.15
20 0.25 0.23 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.20
Distance
from C.L. 534 366 239 99 33 212 331 417 519
(mm)
Slab series 2 deflected similar to slab series 1 and failed in flexure at the pure
moment zone. The failure loads were P=37 kN and P=36 kN and corresponding
deflections were 178 mm and 204 mm for S2-a and S2-b, respectively. The load-
deflection curves for slab series 2 are presented in Figures 5.22a and 5.22b.
126
50
45
40
35
Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Deflection (mm)
50
45
40
35
Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Deflection (mm)
Slabs S3-a and S3-b containing the most longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars 4N12,
with 25 mm clear bottom cover were tested at ages 62 and 63 days respectively.
Cracking first occurred approximately at load of P=8 kN in both S3-a and S3-b. Similar
to slab series 1 and 2 the number of cracks increased as the applied load increased and
at approximately 70% of the ultimate load, 14 cracks were located inside the high
moment region for S3-a, and 12 cracks for S3-b respectively. The measured final
127
average crack spacings at this load stage were 90 mm for S3-a and 117 mm for S3-b.
The ratio of maximum crack width to average crack width at load stage P=26 kN was
1.38 for S3-a and 1.28 for S3-b. The measured maximum and average crack widths
within the high moment region at the bottom fibre of the slabs versus applied load are
illustrated in Figures 5.23a and 5.23b. The crack width history and final crack spacings
are presented in Tables 5.9a and 5.9b.
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Crack Width (mm)
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 Maximum Average
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Crack Width (mm)
The crack patterns at approximately 70% of the ultimate load for both slabs are
illustrated in Figures 5.24a and 5.24b. The crack width history and final crack spacings
are presented in Tables 5.9a and 5.9b, for S3-a and S3-b, respectively.
128
High Moment Region

c 1-1 c2-1 c3-2 c4-2 c5-1 c5-3 c c9-2

c1-2 c3-1 c 4-1 c4-3 c c6-2 6-3 c7-2 c8-2 c 8-3 c c10-2 161
5-2 c6-1 c7-1 c8-1 9-1 c10-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Load c3-2 c4-1 c4-2 c4-3 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c6-3 c7-1 c7-2 c8-1 c8-2
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
5
8 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.05
11 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.03
14 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.03 0.05
17 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.13 0.05 0.05 0.03
20 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.05
23 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.15 0.13 0.08 0.08
26 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.08 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.18 0.13 0.08 0.10
Distance
from C.L. 597 465 339 288 187 111 8 72 158 238 331 460 508 564
(mm)
High Moment Region

11
c1-1 c 2-1 c 5-1 c c 6-2 c 7-1 c8-2 c 0-2
c0-1
c 1-2 c 2-2 c3-1 c3-2 c4-1 5-3 c 7-2 c8-1 c9-2 c10-1
c10-2 161
c4-2 c 5-2 c6-1 c9-1 c 9-3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Load c3-2 c4-1 c4-2 c5-1 c5-2 c5-3 c6-1 c6-2 c7-1 c7-2
(kN) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0
5
8 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05
11 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05
14 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.08
17 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.13
20 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.18 0.13 0.13 0.15
23 0.15 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.18
26 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.13 0.15 0.18 0.23 0.18 0.15 0.20
Distance
from C.L. 575 434 312 214 134 49 77 229 374 478
(mm)
129
The deflection behaviour of slab series 3 was similar to slab series 2 and 3
except that the extended flat plateau in the load-deflection curve of series 3 is smaller
than series 1 and 2. The reason is, by increasing the steel reinforcement ratio, ductility is
reduced but the load capacity of the section is increased. The failure loads were P=50
kN and P=47 kN and corresponding deflections were 136 mm and 156 mm for S3-a and
S3-b, respectively. The mid-span load-deflection curves for slab series 3 are presented
in Figures 5.25a and 5.25b.
50
45
40
35
Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
-30 20 70 120 170 220
Deflection (mm)
50
45
40
35
Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Deflection (mm)
130
5.4 Bond Shear Stress (Instantaneous Behaviour)
The force in the bar is transmitted to the surrounding concrete by bond shear stress τb.
Due to this transfer, the force in a reinforcing bar changes along its length. The transfer
of forces across the interface by bond between concrete and steel is of fundamental
importance to many aspects of reinforced concrete behaviour. Under service conditions
σs< fsy and according to Marti et al, τb=2fct. To investigate the influence of the assumed
bond shear stress on the predicted crack width, three different values for bond shear
stress (τb=fct, τb=2fct and τb=3fct) have been considered. For each assumed bond shear
stress, the crack widths were calculated and compared with the measured crack widths
for each load increment. The results are presented in Tables 5.10 to 5.15. Measured and
calculated maximum crack widths versus steel stress are illustrated in Figs 5.26 to 5.31.
Table 5.10 Measured and calculated maximum crack width for beam series 1
Maximum Crack Width for B1-a & B1-b (mm)

M σ st Measured Calculated
(k Nm) (MPa)
B1-a B1-b τ b =f ct τ b =2f ct τ b =3f ct
17.8 161 0.08 0.07 0.03 0.02
20.7 188 0.10 0.08 0.15 0.08 0.05
23.6 214 0.15 0.13 0.24 0.12 0.08
26.5 241 0.20 0.15 0.34 0.16 0.11
29.4 267 0.25 0.18 0.42 0.21 0.14
32.4 294 0.28 0.20 0.52 0.26 0.17
35.3 320 0.28 0.25 0.61 0.30 0.20
38.2 346 0.30 0.30 0.70 0.35 0.23
41.1 373 0.33 0.33 0.79 0.39 0.26
44.0 399 0.33 0.38 0.88 0.44 0.29
1.00
B1-a B1-b fct 2fct 3fct
0.90
0.80 τ b =f ct
0.70
Crack Width (mm)
0.60
0.50 τ b =2f ct
0.40
0.30
0.20
τ b =3f ct
0.10
0.00
130 160 190 220 250 280 310 340 370 400 430
Steel Stress (MPa)
Figure 5.26 Comparison of different bond stresses for beam series 1
131

M σ st
Measured Calculated
(k Nm) (MPa)
17.8 161 0.08 0.11 0.06 0.04
20.7 188 0.08 0.10 0.19 0.10 0.06
23.6 214 0.13 0.15 0.27 0.13 0.09
26.5 241 0.15 0.18 0.34 0.17 0.11
29.4 267 0.18 0.18 0.42 0.21 0.14
32.4 294 0.20 0.25 0.50 0.24 0.16
35.3 320 0.23 0.28 0.57 0.28 0.19
38.2 346 0.25 0.33 0.65 0.32 0.22
41.1 373 0.30 0.38 0.72 0.36 0.24
44.0 399 0.30 0.43 0.80 0.40 0.27
0.90
0.80
τ b =f ct
0.70
Crack Width (mm)
0.60
0.50
0.40
τ b =2f ct
0.30
0.20 τ b =3f ct
0.10
0.00
130 160 190 220 250 280 310 340 370 400 430
Steel Stress (MPa)

M σ st
Measured Calculated
(k Nm) (MPa)
20.6 126 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.03
26.4 162 0.05 0.15 0.06 0.04
29.3 180 0.08 0.08 0.18 0.09 0.06
32.2 198 0.08 0.10 0.22 0.11 0.07
35.1 216 0.10 0.10 0.25 0.12 0.08
38.0 234 0.13 0.13 0.29 0.14 0.09
41.0 252 0.15 0.13 0.32 0.15 0.11
43.9 270 0.18 0.15 0.36 0.18 0.12
46.8 288 0.18 0.18 0.39 0.19 0.13
49.7 306 0.20 0.20 0.42 0.21 0.14
52.6 324 0.20 0.20 0.46 0.23 0.15
132
0.50
0.45
τ b =f ct
0.40
0.35
Crack Width (mm)

0.30
0.25 τ b =2f ct
0.20
0.15
τ b =3f ct
0.10
0.05
0.00
100 130 160 190 220 250 280 310 340
Steel Stress (MPa)
Table 5.13 Measured and calculated maximum crack width for slab series 1
Maximum Crack Width for S1-a & S1-b (mm)

M σ st
Measured Calculated
(k Nm) (MPa)
S1-a S1-b τ b =f ct τ b =2f ct τ b =3f ct
5.3 194 0.13 0.16 0.08 0.05
7 258 0.20 0.13 0.26 0.14 0.08
8.8 322 0.25 0.23 0.35 0.18 0.12
10.5 387 0.33 0.28 0.46 0.23 0.15
0.50
S1-a S1-b fct 2fct 3fct
0.45
τ b =f ct
0.40
0.35
Crack Width (mm)
0.30
0.25
τ b =2f ct
0.20
0.15
τ b =3f ct
0.10
0.05
0.00
130 160 190 220 250 280 310 340 370 400
Steel Stress (MPa)
Figure 5.29 Comparison of different bond stresses for slab series 1
133

M σ st
Measured Calculated
(k Nm) (MPa)
7 174 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.07 0.04
8.8 218 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.10 0.07
10.5 262 0.18 0.18 0.27 0.14 0.09
12.3 305 0.23 0.23 0.34 0.17 0.11
14 348 0.25 0.25 0.41 0.21 0.14
0.50
0.45
0.40
τ b =f ct
0.35
Crack Width (mm)
0.30
0.25
0.20
τ b =2f ct
0.15
τ b =3f ct
0.10
0.05
0.00
130 160 190 220 250 280 310 340 370
Steel Stress (MPa)

M σ st (MPa) Measured Calculated
(kNm)
7 133 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.03
8.8 166 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.06 0.04
10.5 199 0.10 0.10 0.17 0.08 0.06
12.3 232 0.13 0.13 0.22 0.11 0.07
14 265 0.15 0.18 0.27 0.13 0.09
15.8 298 0.15 0.20 0.32 0.16 0.11
17.5 331 0.18 0.23 0.37 0.19 0.12
134
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35 τ b =f ct
Crack Width (mm)

0.30
0.25
0.20 τ b =2f ct
0.15
0.10 τ b =3f ct
0.05
0.00
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
Steel Stress (MPa)

NOTE: Calculated crack widths presented in this chapter are based on equations which
are presented in Chapter 7, and examples for these calculations are presented in the
Appendices.
The results from a short-term flexural test programme on reinforced concrete beam and
slab specimens were presented in Sections 5.3.1 through 5.3.7. The results are
summarised in Table 5.16.
Table 5.16 Summary of the results from short-term flexural test
Testing age (wmax )f inal (wav e)f inal (s av e)f inal Failure Load
(days) (kN)
wmax / wav e
(mm) (mm) (mm)
Beam 1-a 48 0.33 0.22 192 109 1.5
Beam 1-b 53 0.38 0.28 186 103 1.36
Beam 2-a 42 0.30 0.21 149 112 1.36
Beam 2-b 45 0.43 0.27 163 104 1.59
Beam 3-a 54 0.20 0.13 109 138 1.54
Beam 3-b 55 0.20 0.12 104 127 1.67
Slab 1-a 56 0.33 0.23 131 22 1.44
Slab 1-b 59 0.28 0.18 128 21 1.55
Slab 2-a 60 0.25 0.13 92 37 1.9
Slab 2-b 61 0.25 0.18 131 36 1.39
Slab 3-a 62 0.18 0.13 89 50 1.38
Slab 3-b 63 0.23 0.18 117 47 1.28
135
Cracking Behaviour
When a reinforced concrete beam is subjected to a gradually increasing moment, two

basic types of flexural cracks occur (Beeby, 1970):
As the load is gradually increased, primary cracks occur and penetrate almost to
the neutral axis (ho), after which the primary crack pattern is established and controlled
by the crack height ho. From St. Venant’s principal, the concrete tensile stresses reduce
within the distance ho on both sides of the crack, hence the next crack will form at a
distance from the crack equal to or greater than ho and therefore the minimum crack
spacing is ho and the maximum is 2ho.
Secondary or cover-controlled cracks occur between the primary cracks as the

load is increased. According to the ‘no-slip’ theory, secondary cracks are wedge-shaped
cracks with zero width at the bar surface, that is a linear relationship exists between
crack width and distance from the bar. Thus, the effective crack height is co directly
over the bar, where co is the minimum cover to the tensile reinforcement. Using the
same reasoning the crack spacing for secondary cracks will vary between co and 2co.
The development and width of flexural cracks in each specimen were carefully
monitored under gradually increasing loads up to failure. The first crack appeared in the
pure flexure zone within the high moment region. Subsequent cracks appeared with the
basic primary crack pattern establishing itself quite rapidly. Secondary cracks appeared
between the primary cracks, as the load increased, and a few new cracks occurred at
high overload stages.
A comparison between beam series 1 and 2 shows that increasing the clear
concrete cover increases the average crack spacing. The reason for this is because crack
spacing srm, is inversely proportional to the effective reinforcement ratio ρeff, increasing
the bottom cover increases the effective tension area of the concrete and decreases the
effective reinforcement ratio, which results in larger crack spacing. Since crack width is
directly dependent on crack spacing, this results in a larger crack width in those
specimens with a thicker concrete cover.
136
To investigate the influence of the tensile reinforcement area on crack width, a

comparison of the results between slabs series 1, 2 and 3, containing 2N12, 3N12 and
4N12 bars respectively, shows that increasing the tensile reinforcement area decreases
crack spacing and reduces the crack width (because crack spacing is inversely
proportional to the effective reinforcement ratio).
From a comparison of the results it was also observed that crack widths were
directly proportional to applied load and consequently to stress in the steel. In addition
to the above, the average of all observed crack widths at approximately 70% of the
ultimate load was taken and compared with the maximum observed crack width at that
load stage. The average of all the ratios for various beam and one-way slab specimens
was 1.5.
Deflection
In general, when a section cracks, its moment of inertia decreases, leading to a decrease
in beam stiffness. From plotted mid-span deflection against load curves, deflection
behaviour of all beam and slab specimens under gradually increased loads were
identical, except for B3-a and B3-b (which failed in shear).
Initially, the specimens were uncracked and stiff, but by increasing the load,
cracking occurred when the moment at mid-span exceeded the cracking moment. After
cracking, the specimens exhibited elastic behaviour until the reinforcement yielded at
mid-span, leading to a large increase in deflection with little change in load until the
compressive concrete crushed and the specimens collapsed.
Ductility is an important structural property because it ensures that large

deformations and deflections occur under overload conditions. Good ductility can be
achieved if the quantity of reinforcement is kept small, e.g. ρ < 0.02 and ductile
reinforcement is used. Beams B3-a, and B3-b containing 3N16 and no shear stirrups,
collapsed due to shear failure in the shear span.
137
Bond Shear Stress
Bond can be considered as the shear stress or force between a bar and the surrounding
concrete. The bond shear stress τb depends on several factors, including the tensile
strength and cover of concrete, steel stress, bar size and spacing, confining effects, and
load history. Subsequently, the location, spacing, and width of cracks, the internal
distribution of forces, tension stiffening, and the strength of the member depend directly
on the bond characteristics between the steel and surrounding concrete.
Three different values for bond shear stress have been assumed and the
corresponding crack widths were calculated and compared with the experimental results
for each load increment. It should be mentioned that throughout the test, crack widths
were monitored at two levels on the side of each specimens, i.e., the steel level and
bottom fibre. At load stage P=8 kN (σst=133 MPa), the measured maximum crack
widths at the steel level were 0.03 mm in both S3-a and S3-b, which agrees well with
the calculated maximum crack widths corresponding to the assumed bond shear stress
τb=3fct.
In general, cracking in reinforced concrete is a random phenomenon with every

experimental result subjected to both systematic and random errors. For example,
repeated measurements of the crack widths during each load increment differed, even
when the measurements were performed by the same microscope, under the same
conditions. The measurements varied according to the exact location of the
measurement on the crack, as the crack side faces are irregular and not parallel.
Considering this and comparing the best fit between the calculated values and measured
crack widths, the following expressions for the bond shear stress τb, under short-term
loading and for the different in-service steel stress ranges have been adopted for the
analytical model.
τb=2fct fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa

τb=3fct σs.max < 160 MPa
138
Chapter 6, Long-Term Flexural Cracking
CHAPTER 6
LONG-TERM FLEXURAL CRACKING
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The performance of reinforced concrete structures under sustained loads particularly in

the post-cracking range is an important design consideration. If sections are designed
according to strength requirements only, the behaviour of the structure under sustained
service loads may be unsatisfactory. For example, at service loads, deflections of the
member may be excessively large or the width of the cracks may be unacceptable, even
though the degree of the safety against collapse is satisfactory.
For a concrete structure to be serviceable cracking must be controlled and

deflection must not be excessive. Service load behaviour depends primarily on the
properties of the concrete and these are often not known reliably at the design stage. As
mentioned in the design of concrete structures, it is necessary to check the serviceability
of the structure in the post-cracking range. The behaviour in this range is complicated
by the effects of several factors, which are difficult to assess from analytical
considerations only. Of prime importance are the effects of tension stiffening, random
development of primary and secondary cracks, and the degree of bond breakdown.
139
Little information is available in the literature regarding the time-dependent

development of flexural cracking and the effect of long-term or repetitive loading on
crack widths and crack spacing. According to the existing literature, the increase in
crack width occurs at a decreasing rate with time due to long-term or cyclic loading and
this increase can be up to twice the initial value within a few years (Bate 1963; Brendel
and Ruhle 1964; Lutz, Sharma, and Gergely 1968; Abeles, Brown, and Morrow 1968;
Bennett and Dave 1969; Holmberg and Lindgren 1970; Illston and Stevens 1972;
Holmberg 1973). However, under most conditions, the spacing of cracks does not
change with time at constant levels of stress (Abeles, Brown, and Morrow 1968; Illston
and Stevens 1972; Holmberg 1973). The test results compiled by Illston and Stevencs
(1972) show that, under sustained loads the increase in crack width is caused by
shrinkage of the concrete and by the time-dependent change of curvature. They also
found that, there was a breakdown of bond with sustained loading.
The major objective of the long-term flexural test conducted in this study was to
assess the influence of the factors that affect the width and spacing of flexural cracking
under sustained loads and obtain laboratory controlled data on the time-dependent
response of beams and one-way slabs in order to develop and calibrate a proposed
analytical model.
A total of twelve specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs) with the same cross-section and
details as for the short-term tests were monitored for up to 400 days to measure the
time-dependent development of cracking and deformations under service loads. A
general view of the test specimens is shown in Figure 6.1.
The steel strains within the high moment regions, the concrete surface strains at
the tensile steel level, deflection at the midspan, crack widths and crack spacing were
recorded throughout the testing period. The compressive and tensile strength of the
concrete were measured on companion specimens (in the form of concrete cylinders,
prisms and unreinforced blocks) at various times, together with the elastic modulus,
creep coefficient and free shrinkage in the concrete.
140
Figure 6.1 General view of flexural long-term tests under load
All beam and slab specimens were subjected to different gravity loads,
consisting of self-weight plus superimposed sustained loads via carefully constructed
and arranged concrete blocks supported off the top (of the specimens). To provide the
sustained loading, rectangular and triangular concrete blocks of predetermined size and
weights were cast and weighed prior to the commencement of the test. The blocks were
suitably arranged on the top surface of each specimen to achieve the desired sustained
load level (see Figure 6.2).
Figure 6.2 Loading beam specimens by concrete blocks
141
Two sustained load levels were considered, namely 50% and 30% of the
ultimate design load, and designated load conditions ‘a’ and ‘b’, respectively. The beam
specimens were subjected to two point loads P at the third span points of the beams in
addition to self weight and the slab specimens were subjected to uniformly distributed
sustained loads, UDL + self weight. All measurements were taken within the high
moment region, i.e. the middle third of the span for beams and for slabs where
M ≥ 90% Mmax. For long-term tests the loading arrangement and high moment regions
are shown in Figure 6.3.
a)
High Moment Region
P P W=Self Weight
R R
1167 1167 1167
b) High Moment Region

M≥ 90% Mmax. (Region 2)
UDL+ Self Weight
R R
1167 1167 1167
Figure 6.3 Illustrative sustained loads; (a) beam specimens (b) slab specimens
6.2.1 Test Parameters and Reinforcement Layouts
Details of the cross-section, steel reinforcement layouts and cross-sectional

dimensions for each specimen were presented in Section 5.2 (Note: short-term and long-
term specimens were identical). Details of the parameters varied in the long-term
flexural tests are given in Tables 6.1 and 6.2. All specimens were constructed in 3800
mm long formwork and were simply supported by two short steel columns on a 3500
mm span (Figure 6.4). For both the beam and slab specimens, two identical specimens
142
were constructed for each combination of variables, with one loaded to 50% of its
ultimate capacity (type ‘a’) and one loaded to 30% of its ultimate capacity (type ‘b’).
Table 6.1 Details of beam specimens for long-term flexural test
Specimen No. of Bar Diam. Load(P) cb cs s

Bars (mm) (kN) (mm) (mm) (mm)
B1-a 2 16 18.6 40 40 150
B1-b 2 16 11.8 40 40 150
B2-a 2 16 18.6 25 25 180
B2-b 2 16 11.8 25 25 180
B3-a 3 16 27.0 25 25 90
B3-b 3 16 15.2 25 25 90
Table 6.2 Details of slab specimens for long-term flexural test
Specimen No. of Bar Diam. Load(UDL) cb cs s

Bars (mm) (kN/m) (mm) (mm) (mm)
S1-a 2 12 2.9 25 40 308
S1-b 2 12 1.9 25 40 308
S2-a 3 12 4.9 25 40 154
S2-b 3 12 2.9 25 40 154
S3-a 4 12 5.8 25 40 103
S3-b 4 12 3.9 25 40 103
Figure 6.4 Supports for beams and slabs
143
In total, 12 specimens were cast and tested under sustained loads. Each of the specimens
was moist cured for a period of 14 days and then subjected to a constant sustained load.
Cracking and deformation were monitored throughout the test. For these long-term
tests, the variation of mechanical properties of concrete was measured on companion
cylinders and prisms. To measure the steel strains in the critical moment regions (e.g.
high moment regions, see Figure 6.3), 13 electric resistance strain gauges were attached
to one of the main reinforcement bars. The strain gauges were connected to a HBM
amplifier. To measure the concrete surface strains, 11 DEMEC targets were glued onto
the side face of each specimen at the steel level by using HBB-X60 non-shrink
adhesive. A demec gauge, able to measure in micro strains, was used to manually
measure the deformation between the targets in order to measure the concrete surface
strains, while a microscope with a magnification factor of 40 was used to measure the
crack widths. The development, propagation, extent, and width of cracking were
observed and recorded throughout the test. Dial gauges were attached to the soffit of
each specimen to measure deflection at the middle of each specimen.
The inside surface of the mould was cleaned and thinly coated with a concrete
release agent to prevent adhesion of the concrete. The concrete was placed in the mould
in equal layers and compacted by internal vibration. Each layer of concrete was vibrated
until the surface became smooth in appearance. Sufficient concrete was placed in the
top layer to overfill the mould when compacted, and the surface was then stripped off
and finished with a steel trowel. To measure the concrete material properties,
companion specimens were also cast in the form of cylinders and prisms at the same
time. The companion specimens were of standard size, with cylinders being either 150
mm or 100 mm in diameter and 300 mm or 200 mm high, respectively; the prisms were
100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm, and unreinforced concrete blocks (shrinkage specimens)
were 600 mm × 600 mm × 160 mm. The companion specimens were exposed to the
same environmental, curing, and drying conditions as the test specimens. Creep
coefficient and shrinkage strain for a single batch of concrete was obtained following
the procedures similar to those described in Section 4.3.3. The specimens were left in
their moulds for 3 days, and then removed from the mould and kept continuously moist
144
by a thick covering of wet Hessian to minimise the loss of moisture from the concrete.
After 14 days the covers and wet Hessian were removed, demec strain targets were
glued to the concrete surface and initial strain measurements were recorded. Slab
specimens were uniformly loaded by the concrete blocks using wooden timbers as
loading pads, and each beam specimen was subjected to two concentrated loads by
using two steel channel beams (see Fig 6.2).
6.3 TEST RESULTS
The experimental results taken from 6 beams and 6 slabs are presented in this section.
Results include the measured material properties, the extent, distribution and width of
cracking with time within the high moment regions, and time-dependent deflection at
mid-span. The experimental results for beam and slab specimens are discussed
separately and a comparison of the results is also made. Graphs of concrete surface and
steel strains are illustrated in Appendix II. The raw data measured throughout the
experimental programme are presented in Appendix III.
A single, commercially pre-mixed concrete batch was used for all specimens. The
compressive strength, the flexural tensile strength, the indirect tensile strength and
modulus of elasticity of concrete were measured at 7, 14, 21 and 28 days. Results are
presented in Table 6.3. The measured creep coefficient for concrete loaded at age 14
days and shrinkage strain is presented in Table 6.4 and in Figures 6.5 and 6.6.
Table 6.3 Material properties for concrete
Age (days)
Material Properties 7 14 21 28
Compressive Strength (MPa) 12.9 18.3 23.1 24.8
Flexural Tensile Strength(Modulus of Rupture)(MPa) 3 3.7 4.3 5.6
Indirect Tensile Strength (Brazil test) (MPa) 2 2.6 2.8
Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 21100 22820 23990 24950
145
Table 6.4 Creep coefficient and shrinkage strain for concrete
Age(days) 16 21 27 53 96 136 200 242 332 394
ϕcc (14) 0.14 0.36 0.48 0.92 1.15 1.29 1.4 1.5 1.64 1.71
εsh (×10-6) 14.2 109 179 403 591 731 772 784 816 825
1.8
1.6
1.4
Creep Coeficient
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Age (days)
Figure 6.5 Creep coefficient for concrete
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Age (days)
Figure 6.6 Free shrinkage for unreinforced concrete blocks
The creep coefficient increased quickly for the first few weeks after loading,
with almost 50% of creep occurring in the first 40 days after loading. The final creep
coefficient was 1.71 after 394 days.
146
After the commencement of drying, the shrinkage strain developed rapidly

within the first two or three months and more than 50% of shrinkage occurred during
this period. The maximum measured final shrinkage strain was 825 microstrains.
Beams B1-a and B1-b containing 2N16 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 40
mm clear bottom cover and were subjected to two point loads P, at the third span points
of the beams in addition to self-weight, for a period of 400 days. For B1-a, P=18.6 kN,
and for B1-b, P=11.8 kN.
6.3.2.1 Cracking Behaviour
The development, extent, and width of cracks were observed and measured carefully
immediately after loading and throughout the test period. Of particular interest was the
time-dependent development of cracking and the influence of creep and shrinkage.
Maximum and minimum crack widths were measured within the middle third of the
beams (high moment region) using a microscope with magnification factor of 40.The
maximum and average crack widths within the high moment region versus time are
plotted in Figure 6.7.
0.45
B1-a B1-b
0.4 M ax.
0.35
Crack Width (mm)
0.3 A ve.
0.25
0.2 M ax.
0.15 A ve.
0.1
0.05
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390
Age (days)
Figure 6.7 Maximum and average crack width for beam series 1 (2N16, cb=40 mm)
147
The maximum crack width increased rapidly in the first few weeks of loading
when creep and shrinkage strains were developing rapidly. The rate of increase in crack
width in beam B1-a, with higher sustained loads, is greater than beam B1-b, which
carries lower sustained loads.
At first loading at age 14 days, visible cracks developed and the primary crack
pattern was established. The maximum instantaneous crack widths, which occurred
within the high moment region for B1-a and B1-b, were 0.13 mm and 0.05 mm
respectively. The instantaneous average crack spacing was 215 mm and 227 mm for
B1-a and B1-b, respectively.
The width of cracks gradually increased with time and additional cracks
developed between widely spaced cracks. The final average crack spacing therefore
reduced with time. The maximum final crack widths at age 394 days were 0.38 mm and
0.18 mm, and the final average crack spacings were 164 mm and 186 mm for B1-a and
B1-b, respectively. The ratios of final to instantaneous crack spacing were 0.76 for B1-a
and 0.81 for B1-b. The ratios of maximum final crack width to the final average crack
width were 1.41 and 1.38 for B1-a and B1-b respectively.
The final crack pattern for B1-a and B1-b are illustrated in Figures 6.8 and 6.9,
respectively. The crack width history and final crack spacing (distance from centre line
for each crack) within the high moment region are presented in Tables 6.5 and 6.6, for
B1-a and B1-b, respectively.
High Moment
Constant Region
Moment Region
w=0.28 w=0.28 w=0.38 w=0.3 w=0.28

w=0. 35
w=0.13 w=0.35 w=0.30 w=0.15 348
w=0.15
w=0.08
w=0.13
C4-1 C5-2 w=0.10
C3-2 C5-1 C6-1 C7-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
C7-2
3500
Figure 6.8 Final crack pattern for beam B1-a (2N16, cb =40 mm)
148
Table 6.5 Crack history within the H.M.R for beam B1-a
Age Crak Width (mm)

(days) c 3-2 c 4-1 c 5-1 c 5-2 c 6-1 c 7-1 c 7-2
15 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.13
21 0.15 0.18 0.15 0.20 0.18
31 0.20 0.23 0.10 0.20 0.25 0.23
42 0.25 0.25 0.10 0.25 0.28 0.25
53 0.28 0.28 0.13 0.25 0.30 0.25
70 0.28 0.28 0.13 0.25 0.30 0.25
111 0.28 0.30 0.13 0.25 0.33 0.25
173 0.30 0.33 0.15 0.28 0.36 0.28
205 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.28 0.38 0.28
289 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.28 0.38 0.30 0.05
334 0.36 0.36 0.15 0.28 0.38 0.30 0.10
394 0.36 0.36 0.15 0.28 0.38 0.30 0.10
Distance
fro m C.L. 557 390 210 115 94 304 428
(mm)
High Moment Region

w=0.18
w=0.15 w=0.13
w=0.1 w=0.15 348
C3-2 C4-1 C5-2 w=0.13 w=0.05
w=0.08 w=0.05
w=0.03
w=0.13
w=0.1 C7-1 C8-1 w=0.03
1 2 3 4 C5-15 6C 7 8 9 10
6-1
3500
Figure 6.9 Final crack pattern for beam B1-b (2N16, cb =40 mm)
Table 6.6 Crack history within the H.M.R for beam B1-b
Age Crak Width (mm)

(days) c 3-2 c 4-1 c 5-1 c 5-2 c 6-1 c 7-1 c 8-1
15 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05
21 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.08
31 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.08
42 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.10
53 0.13 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.10
70 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.13
111 0.15 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.13
173 0.15 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.13
205 0.13 0.18 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.15
289 0.15 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.15
334 0.15 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.15
394 0.15 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.15
Distance
fro m C.L. 573 365 147 5 177 325 541
(mm)
149
6.3.2.2 Deflection
By using a dial gauge installed at the middle of each span, deflections were monitored
and recorded immediately after loading and throughout the test period. In Figure 6.10
measured deflections of B1-a and B1-b at mid-span versus time are illustrated.
14
12
10
Deflection (mm)
2
B1-a B1-b
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405
Age (days)
Figure 6.10 Deflection of beam series 1 for two load cases ‘a’ & ‘b’
As shown in Figure 6.10, the deflection at mid-span increased rapidly over the
first 1-2 months after loading and more than 60% of the final deflection occurred within
this period. This rapid increase in deflection is caused by the loss of stiffness resulting
from the development of time-dependent cracking, as well as the increase in
deformation due to creep and shrinkage. The rate of change gradually decreased for the
remaining part of the test. The measured long-term deflections of B1-a and B1-b at age
394 days were 12.06 mm and 7.44 mm respectively, which are 2.44 and 3.76 times the
corresponding instantaneous deflections respectively. The ratio of deflections at
different ages to instantaneous deflection at mid-span for beams B1-a and B1-b are
presented in Table 6.7.
Table 6.7 Ratio of deflections at different ages to instantaneous deflection for beam series 1
Age (days) 14 21 28 45 60 95 122 200 285 330 394
Beam 1-a 1 1.35 1.47 1.68 1.79 1.91 2.03 2.2 2.35 2.39 2.44
Beam 1-b 1 1.53 1.71 2.16 2.41 2.67 2.9 3.27 3.61 6.71 3.76
150
Two identical beams B2-a and B2-b contained 2N16 longitudinal tensile reinforcing
bars with 25 mm clear bottom cover and were subjected to two point loads, P, at the
third span points of the beams in addition to self weight for a period of up to 400 days.
For B2-a, P=18.6 kN, and for B2-b, P=11.8 kN. Therefore, B2-a and B2-b were
identical to B1-a and B1-b except for the reduced concrete cover.
The cracking behaviour of beams B2-a and B2-b was similar to Beams B1-a and B1-b.
But, as expected, the measured maximum instantaneous crack widths for B2-a and B2-b
were smaller than B1-a and B1-b, respectively due to a thinner covering of concrete. In
the author’s view larger bottom cover causes larger crack spacing and since, crack width
is directly dependent on the crack spacing consequently, it results larger crack width in
the specimens with greater bottom cover. This change in the concrete cover did not
affect the final maximum crack width as much as instantaneous behaviour. The
measured maximum and average crack widths for B2-a and B2-b are plotted versus time
in Figure 6.11.
0.45
B2-a B2-b
0.4
M ax.
0.35
Crack Width (mm)
0.3
0.25
0.2 M ax.
A ve.
0.15
0.1
A ve.
0.05
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390
Age (days)
Figure 6.11 Maximum and average crack width for beam series 2 (2N16, cb =25 mm)
NOTE: A few fine cracks occurred after age 173 days and, as a result, the average crack width was
reduced, while the width of initial cracks continued to increase with time by a gradually decreasing rate.
151
Visible cracks developed at first loading where a primary crack pattern was
established. The measured maximum instantaneous crack widths, which occurred within
the high moment region for B2-a and B2-b, were 0.11 mm and 0.05 mm, respectively.
The instantaneous average crack spacings were 210 mm and 322 mm for B2-a and B2-
b, respectively. The width of cracks also gradually increased over time such that the
maximum final crack widths at age 394 days were 0.35 mm and 0.18 mm for B2-a and
B2-b, respectively. The final average crack spacings were 127 mm and 155 mm,
respectively. The ratios of final to instantaneous crack spacing were 0.60 for B2-a and
0.48 for B2-b. The ratios of maximum final crack width to the final average crack width
were 1.84 and 1.80 for B1-a and B1-b respectively. The final crack pattern for B2-a and
B2-b are illustrated in Figures 6.12 and 6.13, respectively. The crack width history are
presented in Table 6.8 for B2-a and Table 6.9 for B2-b.
High Moment Region

w=0.35 w=0.15
w=0.18
w=0.30 w=0.25 w=0.15 w=0.23 w=0.25
w=0.13 w=0.13 333
C4-1 C5-2 w=0.13
w=0.03
w=0.03
w=0.08
w=0.1 w=0.05
C6-1
w=0.03
C3-3 C5-3 C6-2 C7-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
C5-1 C7-2
3500
Age Crak Width (mm)

(days) c 3-3 c 4-1 c 5-1 c 5-2 c 5-3 c 6-1 c 6-2 c 7-1 c 7-2
15 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05
21 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.08
31 0.20 0.08 0.10 0.20 0.13 0.08 0.08
42 0.25 0.08 0.10 0.23 0.13 0.10 0.08
53 0.25 0.08 0.13 0.23 0.15 0.13 0.10
70 0.28 0.08 0.13 0.25 0.15 0.13 0.10
111 0.28 0.08 0.13 0.25 0.18 0.13 0.10
173 0.30 0.10 0.13 0.28 0.20 0.15 0.10
205 0.05 0.36 0.10 0.15 0.03 0.28 0.20 0.15 0.13
289 0.05 0.36 0.10 0.15 0.05 0.30 0.20 0.15 0.13
334 0.08 0.36 0.10 0.15 0.05 0.30 0.25 0.15 0.13
394 0.08 0.36 0.10 0.15 0.05 0.30 0.25 0.15 0.13
Distance
fro m C.L. 544 370 199 151 60 58 254 397 470
(mm)
152
High Moment Region

w=0.13
w=0.05 w=0.08 w=0.05
w=0.15
333
w=0.03 w=0.1 w=0.03
w=0.03 C7-1 w=0.118
5 w=0.08
C3-2 w=0.03
C w=0.08
C4-1 C5-1 5-2 C8-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
C3-3 C4-2 C6-1
3500
Age Crak Width (mm)

(days) c3-2 c3-3 c4-1 c4-2 c5-1 c5-2 c6-1 c7-1 c8-1
15 0.05 0.05
21 0.08 0.08
31 0.08 0.05 0.10
42 0.13 0.05 0.10
53 0.13 0.05 0.10
70 0.13 0.08 0.13
111 0.13 0.08 0.13
173 0.15 0.08 0.15
205 0.05 0.08 0.15 0.10 0.18
289 0.05 0.08 0.15 0.10 0.18
334 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.15 0.05 0.13 0.18
394 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.15 0.08 0.13 0.18
Distance
from C.L. 566 517 378 245 170 79 202 346 566
(mm)
6.3.3.2 Deflection
In Figure 6.14 the measured deflections at mid-span of B2-a and B2-b versus time are
illustrated and as shown, their deflection response was similar to B1-a and B1-b, with
almost the same rate of increase in the first 1-2 months. However, the measured
instantaneous and final deflections of B2-a and B2-b at mid-span were greater than B1-a
and B1-b, respectively. The reason is that a thicker bottom cover increases the effective
tension area of the concrete surrounding the flexural tension reinforcement, which
participates in caring the tensile stress through the concrete section between two
consecutive cracks. The effect of tension stiffening and flexural stiffness of the cross-
153
section is therefore greater in B1-a and B1-b than B2-a and B2-b. The measured long-
term deflections of B2-a and B2-b at age 394 days were 12.42 mm and 7.87 mm
respectively, which are 2.47 and 3.82 times the corresponding instantaneous deflections,
respectively.
14
12
10
Deflection (mm)
8
6
4
2
B2-a B2-b
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405
Age (days)
The ratio of deflections at different ages to instantaneous deflection at mid-span

for beams B2-a and B2-b are presented in Table 6.10.
Age (days) 14 21 28 45 60 95 122 200 285 330 394

Beam 2-a 1 1.35 1.46 1.69 1.82 1.95 2.06 2.25 2.42 2.45 2.45
Beam 2-b 1 1.51 1.71 2.17 2.42 2.69 2.92 3.33 3.65 6.75 3.82
Beams B3-a and B3-b containing 3N16 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 25
mm clear bottom cover were subjected to two point loads P, at the third span points, in
addition to self weight, for 400 days. For B3-a, P=27.0 kN and for B3-b, P=15.2 kN.
Beams B3-a and B3-b contained more longitudinal reinforcement than the other beam
specimens.
154
The measured maximum and average crack widths within the middle third (high
moment region) of the beams B3-a and B3-b are plotted versus time in Figure 6.15.
0.45
B3-a B3-b
0.4
0.35
Crack Width (mm)
0.3 M ax.
0.25
0.2
A ve.
0.15 M ax.
0.1 A ve.
0.05
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390
Age (days)
Figure 6.15 Maximum and average crack width for beam series 3 (3N16, cb =25 mm)
NOTE: A few fine cracks occurred after age 289 days and, as a result, the average crack width was
reduced, while the width of initial cracks continued to increase with time by a gradually decreasing rate.
Similar to beam series 1 and 2, maximum crack width increased rapidly in the
first few weeks of loading when creep and shrinkage strains were developing most
rapidly. Beams B3-a and B3-b had the same cracking behaviour as series 1 and 2
regarding the primary crack pattern at first loading; a gradual increase in crack width
and decrease of average crack spacing with time. The measured maximum
instantaneous crack widths, which occurred within the high moment region for
B3-a and B3-b, were 0.08 mm and 0.05 mm, respectively. The instantaneous average
crack spacing were 230 mm and 228 mm for B3-a and B3-b, respectively.
The measured maximum final crack widths at age 394 days were 0.28 mm and
0.13 mm for B3-a and B3-b, respectively. The final average crack spacings were 121
mm and 133 mm, respectively. The ratios of final to instantaneous crack spacing were
0.53 for B3-a and 0.58 for B3-b. The ratios of maximum final crack width to the final
average crack width were 1.44 and 1.45 for B3-a and B3-b, respectively. The final crack
pattern for B3-a and B3-b are illustrated in Figures 6.16 and 6.17, respectively. The
155
crack width history and final crack spacing within the high moment region are presented
in Tables 6.11 and 6.12, for B1-a and B1-b, respectively.
High Moment Region

w=0.18 w=0.25
w=0.13 w=0.15 w=0.15 w=0.28 w=0.10 w=0.23
w=0.23
w=0.05 w=0.10 w=0.13 w=0.10 w=0.10 333
w=0.13
w=0.08
w=0.05
C3-2 C5-2 C7-2 w=0.08
w=0.03
C7-1
C4-1 C5-1 C6-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
C5-3 C6-2 C8-1
3500
Age Crak Width (mm)

(days) c 3-2 c 4-1 c 5-1 c 5-2 c 5-3 c 6-1 c 6-2 c 7-1 c 7-2 c 8-1
15 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.05
21 0.08 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.05
31 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.08 0.18 0.05 0.08 0.03
42 0.13 0.10 0.05 0.10 0.23 0.05 0.13 0.05
53 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.05 0.13 0.05
70 0.15 0.13 0.05 0.13 0.25 0.08 0.15 0.05
111 0.15 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.28 0.08 0.18 0.08
173 0.18 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.28 0.08 0.18 0.08
205 0.18 0.18 0.10 0.15 0.28 0.10 0.18 0.08
289 0.20 0.25 0.13 0.15 0.28 0.10 0.23 0.10
334 0.23 0.25 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.28 0.05 0.10 0.23 0.10
394 0.23 0.25 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.28 0.08 0.10 0.23 0.10
Distance
fro m C.L. 561 386 235 144 42 109 226 246 359 532
(mm)
High Moment Region

w=0.13
w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.08 333
w=0.05 w=0.03
w=0.03 w=0.03 w=0.08 w=0.05
w=0.03 w=0.13 w=0.03
w=0.08
C4-1 C C6-1 C7-1 C
C3-3 5-1 8-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
C4-2 C5-2 C6-2
3500
156
Age Crak Width (mm)

(days) c 3-3 c 4-1 c 4-2 c 5-1 c 5-2 c 6-1 c 6-2 c 7-1 c 8-1
15 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03
21 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03
31 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.05
42 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.05
53 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.05
70 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.08
111 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.05 0.08 0.08
173 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.08
205 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.10
289 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.10
334 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.13
394 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.13
Distance
fro m C.L. 528 388 270 146 64 47 146 337 538
(mm)
6.3.4.2 Deflection
The measured deflections of B3-a and B3-b at mid-span are plotted versus time in
Figure 6.18.
14
12
Deflection (mm)
10
2
B3-a B3-b
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405
Age (days)
As shown in Figure 6.18, the deflection response of beams B3-a and B3-b was
similar to beam series 1 and 2. Due to greater sustain loads the measured instantaneous
and final deflections of beam series 3 were greater than beam series 1 and 2. The
measured long-term deflections of B3-a and B3-b at age 394 days were 13.3 mm and
157
7.9 mm, respectively which are 2.30 and 4.01 times the corresponding instantaneous
deflections, respectively.

for beams B3-a and B3-b are presented in Table 6.13.
Age (days) 14 21 28 45 60 95 122 200 285 330 394

Beam 3-a 1 1.31 1.4 1.6 1.71 1.82 1.91 2.08 2.24 2.27 2.30
Beam 3-b 1 1.58 1.79 2.27 2.64 2.88 3.13 3.51 3.88 3.96 4.01
Slabs S1-a and S1-b containing 2N12 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 25 mm
clear bottom cover were subjected to uniformly distributed sustained loads for 400 days.
For S1-a, the sustained uniform load was 2.9 kN/m plus self-weight and, for S1-b,
1.9 kN/m plus self-weight. Slabs S1-a and S1-b contained the least longitudinal
reinforcement of all the slab specimens.
The slab lengths were divided into seven different regions namely; Region 1 (where
M≥0.99Mmax), Region 2 (where 0.99Mmax>M≥0.9Mmax), Region 3 (where
0.9Mmax>M≥0.8Mmax), Region 4 (where 0.8Mmax>M≥0.7Mmax), Region 5 (where
0.7Mmax>M≥0.6Mmax), Region 6 (where 0.6Mmax>M≥0.5Mmax) and Region 7 (where
M<0.5Mmax). The development, extent and width of cracks were observed and measured
within Regions 1 to 6 immediately after the first loading and during the reminder of the
test period. To compare the maximum crack width located in different regions with
different moment levels, the measured maximum and average crack widths at
commencement of the test (t=0) and at the end (t=400 days) for slab S1-a are plotted
against the bending moment in Figure 6.19. Maximum and average crack widths at
different regions for slabs S1-a and S1-b are presented in Tables 6.14 and 6.15.
158
7 Avge Max.
Avge. Max.
6
M cr
4
1
t=0 t=400 days
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Crack Width (mm)
Figure 6.19 Maximum and average crack width at t=0 and t=400 days for slab S1-a
Table 6.14 Crack width at different regions for slab S1-a
Slab S1-a (2N12, Load condition ‘a’)

Crack Width (mm)
Mmax= 6.8 kN-m t=0 t=400 days
Region M (kN-m) Max. Avge. Max. Avge.
1 (M≥99%Mmax) 6.73 0.10 0.07 0.20 0.13
2 (M≥90%Mmax) 6.12 0.05 0.05 0.20 0.16
3 (M≥80%Mmax) 5.44 0.05 0.04 0.15 0.13
4 (M≥70%Mmax) 4.76 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.08
Table 6.15 Crack width at different regions for slab S1-b
Slab S1-b (2N12, Load condition ‘b’)

Crack Width (mm)
1 (M≥99%Mmax) 5.25 0.08 0.07 0.15 0.12
2 (M≥90%Mmax) 4.77 0.05 0.05 0.13 0.09
3 (M≥80%Mmax) 4.24 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.09
Figure 6.19 shows that for long-term loading, maximum and average crack
widths are proportional to the bending moment, and the crack width increases linearly
159
by increasing the moment. The results from Tables 6.14 and 6.15 suggest that the
largest percentage increase in crack width is in those regions subjected to low levels of
bending moment, because the cracks take more time to develop.
Similar to the beam specimens, visible cracks were developed at age 14 days
where the primary crack pattern was established at first loading. The measured
maximum instantaneous crack widths within Region 2 (where 0.99Mmax>M≥0.9Mmax),
were 0.10 mm and 0.08 mm for S1-a and S1-b, respectively. The instantaneous average
crack spacings within this region were 138 mm and 191 mm, respectively.
The width of cracks gradually increased with time and additional cracks mainly
due to shrinkage developed within the primary crack pattern. The final average crack
spacing therefore reduced with time. The measured maximum final crack widths at age
394 days within Region 2 were 0.20 mm and 0.15 mm for S1-a and S1-b, respectively,
and the final average crack spacings were 121 mm and 107 mm respectively. The ratios
of final to instantaneous crack spacing were 0.87 for S1-a and 0.56 for S1-b. The ratio
of maximum final crack width to the final average crack width was 1.43 and 1.5 for
S1-a and S1-b, respectively. The final crack pattern for two identical slabs S1-a and
S1-b are illustrated in Figures 6.20 and 6.21, respectively.
0.99 M max
0.9 M max
0.8 M max
0.7 M max
0.6 M max
0.5 M max
w=0.13
w=0.20 w=0.13 w=0.20
w=0.08 w=0.20 w=0.15 w=0.10
w=0.10 w=0.18 w=0.15 w=0.08
w=0.10 w=0.10 w=0.05
w=0.08 w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.05 161
160
w=0.05
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Figure 6.20 Final crack pattern for slab S1-a (2N12, cb =25 mm)
160
0.99 M max
0.9 M max
0.8 M max
0.7 M max
0.6 M max
0.5 M max
w=0.03 w=0.13 w=0.13

w=0.03 w=0.08 w=0.08 w=0.10 w=0.13 w=0.08
w=0.05
w=0.02 w=0.02 160
161
w=0.03 w=0.08 w=0.08
w=0.10 w=0.15 w=0.10 w=0.02
w=0.08
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
Figure 6.21 Final crack pattern for slab S1-b (2N12, cb =25 mm)
6.3.5.2 Deflection
Deflections were monitored and recorded immediately after loading and throughout the
test period by a dial gauge installed at the middle of the each span. In Figure 6.22 the
measured deflections at the mid-span of slabs S1-a and S1-b versus time are illustrated.
Similar to the beam specimens, the deflection at mid-span increased rapidly over
the first 1-2 months after loading with more than 60% of the final deflection occurring
within this period (Figure 6.22). This rapid increase in deflection is caused by the loss
of stiffness due to time-dependent cracking, as well as the increase in deformation from
creep and shrinkage. For the remainder of the test, the rate of change gradually
decreased. The measured long-term deflections of S1-a and S1-b at age 394 days were
25.1 mm and 19.9 mm, respectively which are 3.52 and 5.35 times the correspond
instantaneous deflections, respectively.

for slabs S1-a and S1-b are presented in Table 6.16.
Table 6.16 Ratio of deflections at different ages to instantaneous deflection for slab series 1
Age (days) 14 21 28 45 60 95 122 200 285 330 394

Slab 1-a 1 1.81 1.97 2.37 2.56 2.7 2.75 3.12 3.40 3.5 3.51
Slab 1-b 1 2.01 2.39 3.01 3.33 3.63 4.00 4.62 5.11 5.32 5.35
161
35
30
Deflection (mm)
25
20
15
10
5
S1-a S1-b
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405
Age (days)
Figure 6.22 Deflection of slab series 1 for two load conditions ‘a’ & ‘b’
Two identical slabs S2-a and S2-b containing 3N12 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars
with 25 mm clear bottom cover were subjected to uniformly distributed sustained loads
for 400 days. For S2-a, the sustained uniform load was 4.9 kN/m plus self-weight and,
for S2-b, 2.9 kN/m plus self-weight.
Similarly, the slab length was divided into seven different regions with different
moment levels where the development, extent, and width of cracking was observed and
recorded within Regions 1 to 6 immediately after first loading, and throughout the test
period. Measured maximum and average crack widths located in different regions at
t=0 and t=400 days were plotted against the bending moment for comparison. Figure
6.23 illustrates the maximum and average crack width against the bending moment for
slab S2-a.
Maximum and average rack widths at different regions for slabs S2-a and S2-b
are presented in Tables 6.17 and 6.18.
162
11
10 Avge. Max.
Max. Avge.
9
8
7
6
5
M cr
4
3
2
1 t=0 t=400 days
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Crack Width (mm)
Figure 6.23 Maximum and average crack width at t=0 and t=400 days for slab S2-a
Table 6.17 Crack width at different regions for slab S2 –a

Crack Width (mm)
1 (M≥99%Mmax) 9.70 0.13 0.10 0.23 0.15
2 (M≥90%Mmax) 8.82 0.13 0.12 0.20 0.13
3 (M≥80%Mmax) 7.84 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.16
4 (M≥70%Mmax) 6.86 0.05 0.05 0.15 0.11
5 (M≥60%Mmax) 5.88 0.05 0.05 0.13 0.13
Slab S2-b (3N12, Load condition ‘b’)

Crack Width (mm)
1 (M≥99%Mmax) 6.73 0.08 0.08 0.18 0.13
2 (M≥90%Mmax) 6.12 0.08 0.07 0.15 0.10
3 (M≥80%Mmax) 5.44 0.05 0.05 0.13 0.10
163
Figure 6.23 shows that for long-term loading, maximum and average crack
widths are proportional to the bending moment and the crack width increases linearly by
increasing the moment. Cracking behaviour in these two identical slabs throughout the
test under sustained loads was similar to the slab series 1. For S2-a and S2-b, the
measured maximum instantaneous crack widths within Region 2, (where
0.99Mmax>M≥0.9Mmax), were 0.13 mm and 0.06 mm respectively. The instantaneous
average crack spacings within Region 2 were 135 mm and 148 mm respectively.
The width of cracks and crack spacing changed with time. The measured
maximum final crack widths at age 394 days within Region 2 were 0.23 mm and 0.18
mm for S2-a and S2-b, respectively. The final average crack spacings were 88 mm and
89 mm, respectively. The ratios of final to instantaneous crack spacing were 0.65 for
S2-a and 0.61 for S2-b. The ratios of maximum final crack width to the final average
crack width were 1.64 and 1.63 for slabs S2-a and S2-b, respectively.
The final crack pattern for two identical slabs, S2-a and S2-b are illustrated in
Figures 6.24 and 6.25 respectively.
0.99 M max
0.9 M max
0.8 M max
0.7 M max
0.6 M max
0.5 M max
w=0.18
w=0.08 w=0.10 w=0.23 w=0.15 w=0.2
w=0.08 w=0.13
w=0.18 w=0.2 w=0.15 w=0.10 w=0.13 w=0.1
w=0.13 w=0.08 w=0.05 w=0.08 w=0.18
w=0.15 w=0.13 w=0.05
w=0.10
160
161
w=0.15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
164
0.99 M max
0.9 M max
0.8 M max
0.7 M max
0.6 M max
0.5 M max
w=0.10 w=0.13 w=0.15 w=0.15 w=0.08 w=0.10

w=0.18 w=0.15 w=0.10
w=0.03 w=0.05
w=0.03 w=0.08 w=0.10 w=0.05
w=0.08
w=0.13 w=0.10 161
160
w=0.03 w=0.05 w=0.08
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
6.3.6.2 Deflection
Due to greater sustain superimposed loads (UDL+Self weight); the measured

instantaneous and final deflections of slab series 2 were greater than slab series 1. In
Figure 6.26 the measured deflections of slabs S2-a and S2-b at mid-span versus time are
illustrated. Figure 6.26 shows that the deflection response of slabs S2-a and S2-b was
similar to slabs S1-a and S1-b. The measured long-term deflection of S2-a and S2-b at
age 394 days were 29.8 mm and 21.9 mm respectively, which are 2.8 and 4.94 times the
corresponding instantaneous deflections, respectively. The ratio of deflections at
different ages to instantaneous deflection at mid-span for slabs S2-a and S2-b are
35
30
25
Deflection (mm)
20
15
10
5
S2-a S2-b
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405
Age (days)
165
Age (days) 14 21 28 45 60 95 122 200 285 330 394
Slab 2-a 1 1.46 1.58 1.84 1.97 2.1 2.25 2.48 2.72 2.72 2.75
Slab 2-b 1 1.9 2.3 2.87 3.18 3.5 3.81 4.33 4.88 4.92 4.94
Slabs S3-a and S3-b containing 4N12 longitudinal tensile reinforcing bars with 25 mm
clear bottom cover were subjected to uniformly distributed sustained loads for 400 days.
For S3-a, the sustained uniform load was 5.8 kN/m plus self-weight, and for S3-b, 3.9
kN/m plus self-weight. Slabs S3-a and S3-b contained the most longitudinal
reinforcement within the six slab specimens.
The maximum and average crack width located in different regions with different
moment levels (Regions 1 to 6), measured at the commencement of the test (t=0) and at
the end (t=400 days) are plotted against the bending moment for slab S3-b in Figure
6.27. Maximum and average crack widths at different regions for slab S3-a and S3-b are
presented in Tables 6.20 and 6.21.
9
Avge. Max. Avge.
8 Max.
7
5
Mcr
4
1
t=0 t=400 days
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Crack Width (mm)
Figure 6.27 Maximum and average crack width at t=0 and t=400 days for slab S3-b
166
Table 6.20 Crack width at different regions for slab S3-a

Crack Width (mm)
1 (M≥99%Mmax) 11.13 0.10 0.10 0.25 0.17
2 (M≥90%Mmax) 10.12 0.10 0.09 0.20 0.15
3 (M≥80%Mmax) 8.99 0.08 0.07 0.18 0.15
4 (M≥70%Mmax) 7.87 0.05 0.05 0.18 0.14

Slab 3-b (4N12, Load condition ‘b’)
Crack Width (mm)
1 (M≥99%Mmax) 8.25 0.08 0.07 0.20 0.17
2 (M≥90%Mmax) 7.50 0.05 0.05 0.18 0.13
3 (M≥80%Mmax) 6.66 0.05 0.04 0.13 0.11
Figure 6.27 shows that for sustained loads, maximum and average crack widths
are proportional to the applied bending moment and crack width increases linearly by
increasing the moment. Similarly, the largest percentage increase in crack width is in
those regions which are subjected to low levels of bending moment (0.8Mmax or
0.7Mmax). Experimental observations indicated that the cracking behaviour of slabs S3-a
and S3-b were similar to slabs series 1 and 2. The primary crack pattern was established
at first loading and the measured maximum instantaneous crack widths within Region 2
(where 0.99Mmax>M≥0.9Mmax) were 0.10 mm and 0.05 mm, respectively. The
instantaneous average crack spacing within Region 2 were 153 mm and 141 mm for
S3-a and S3-b, respectively.
The measured maximum final crack widths at age 394 days within Region 2
were 0.22 mm and 0.20 mm for S3-a and S3-b, respectively. The final average crack
spacings were 102 mm and 136 mm respectively. The ratios of final to instantaneous
crack spacing were 0.67 for S3-a and 0.96 for S3-b. The ratios of maximum final crack
width to the final average crack width were 1.47 and 1.43 for S3-a and S3-b,
167
respectively. The final crack pattern for two identical slabs S3-a and S3-b are illustrated
in Figures 6.28 and 6.29, respectively.
0.99 M max
0.9 M max
0.8 M max
0.7 M max
0.6 M max
0.5 M max
w=0.1 w=0.13 w=0.2 w=0.05 w=0.08

w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.25 w=0.18 w=0.1
w=0.18 w=0.18 w=0.1 w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.05
w=0.02 w=0.18
w=0.13
161
160
w=0.15 w=0.15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
0.99 M max
0.9 M max
0.8 M max
0.7 M max
0.6 M max
0.5 M max
w=0.13 w=0.13 w=0.18 w=0.18

w=0.10 w=0.15 w=0.03
w=0.03 w=0.10 w=0.20 w=0.08 w=0.08 w=0.08 w=0.08 w=0.03 160
161
w=0.13
w=0.15 w=0.1 w=0.05
w=0.08
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3500
6.3.7.2 Deflection
By increasing the amount of tensile reinforcing bars the effective flexural stiffness
increases but, since the sustained superimposed loads for S3-a and S3-b (5.8 kN/m and
3.9 kN/m, respectively) were greater than those for slabs series 1 and 2, the measured
instantaneous and final deflections of slab series 3 were greater than slab series 1 and 2.
The measured long-term deflection of S3-a and S3-b at age 394 days were 32.5
mm and 22.9 mm respectively, which are 2.75 and 4.54 times the corresponding
168
instantaneous deflections, respectively. In Figure 6.30 the measured deflections at the

mid-span of S3-a and S3-b versus time are illustrated. The ratio of deflections at
different ages to instantaneous deflection at mid-span for slabs S3-a and S3-b are
35
30
25
Deflection (mm)
20
15
10
5
S3-a S3-b
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405
Age (days)
Age (days) 14 21 28 45 60 95 122 200 285 330 394
Slab 3-a 1 1.54 1.67 1.96 2.1 2.25 2.4 2.61 2.72 2.77 2.79
Slab 3-b 1 1.96 2.19 2.69 2.96 3.21 3.5 3.98 4.35 4.45 4.54
6.4 Bond Shear Stress (Time-dependent Behaviour)
Following the procedures presented in Section 5.5 to investigate the influence of the
assumed bond shear stress on the predicted crack width, three different values for bond
shear stress (τb=fct , τb=2fct and τb=3fct) were considered. Following the CEB proposal
which accounts for the breakdown of tension stiffening under long-term or cyclic
loading, each value was reduced by a factor of one half (τb(t)=0.5fct, τb(t)=fct and
τb(t)=1.5fct) for time-dependent behaviour. According to the assumed bond shear
169
stresses, the crack widths for instantaneous and time-dependent behaviours were
calculated and the results are presented in Tables 6.17 to 6.20. For two different steel
stress ranges, fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa and σs.max < 160 MPa maximum crack widths
versus steel stresses are plotted and compared separately with the experimental results
in figures 6.31 to 6.34.
Table 6.17 Comparison of different bond stresses for beams, instantaneous behaviour
Comparison of Different Bond INSTANTANEOUS BEHAVIOUR

Stresses Bond Stress
σst
Experiment
Mmax τb=3fct τb=2fct τb=fct
kNm MPa wmax (mm) wmax (mm) wmax (mm) wmax (mm)
Beam 1-a 24.91 227 0.11 0.16 0.33 0.13
Beam 1-b 16.97 155 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.05
Beam 2-a 24.76 226 0.11 0.16 0.33 0.10
Beam 2-b 16.83 154 0.05 0.06 0.12 0.05
Beam 3-a 34.6 214 0.09 0.13 0.26 0.08
Beam 3-b 20.76 129 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.05
Table 6.18 Comparison of different bond stresses for slabs, instantaneous behaviour
Comparison of Different Bond INSTANTANEOUS BEHAVIOUR

σst
Experiment
Mmax τb=3fct τb=2fct τb=fct
Slab 1-a 6.81 251 0.09 0.13 0.26 0.10

0.08
Slab 1-b 5.28 195 0.06 0.09 0.17 0.08
Slab 2-a 9.88 248 0.08 0.13 0.25 0.13
Slab 2-b 6.81 171 0.04 0.07 0.13 0.08
Slab 3-a 11.25 215 0.07 0.10 0.20 0.10
Slab 3-b 8.34 160 0.04 0.06 0.12 0.08
170
Table 6.19 Comparison of different bond stresses for beams, long-term behaviour
Comparison of Different Bond TIME-DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

σst
Experiment
Mmax τb(t)=1.5fct τb(t)=fct τb(t)=0.5fct
Beam 1-a 24.91 227 0.24 0.36 0.72 0.38
Beam 1-b 16.97 155 0.18 0.28 0.55 0.18
Beam 2-a 24.76 226 0.21 0.31 0.63 0.36
Beam 2-b 16.83 154 0.16 0.24 0.49 0.18
Beam 3-a 34.6 214 0.14 0.21 0.41 0.28
Beam 3-b 20.76 129 0.11 0.16 0.30 0.13
Table 6.20 Comparison of different bond stresses for slabs, long-term behaviour
Comparison of Different Bond TIME-DEPENDENT BEHAVIOUR

σst
Experiment
Mmax τb(t)=1.5fct τb(t)=fct τb(t)=0.5fct
Slab 1-a 6.81 251 0.13 0.20 0.40 0.20
Slab 1-b 5.28 195 0.11 0.17 0.34 0.15
Slab 2-a 9.88 248 0.13 0.20 0.39 0.23
Slab 2-b 6.81 171 0.10 0.16 0.31 0.18
Slab 3-a 11.25 215 0.12 0.18 0.36 0.25
Slab 3-b 8.34 160 0.10 0.15 0.30 0.20
A comparison of the results in Figures 6.31 and 6.32 shows that for
instantaneous behaviour and the steel stress range fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa, the assumed
bond shear stress τb=2fct; and for the steel stress range σs.max < 160 MPa the assumed
bond shear stress τb=3fct correlate better with the experimental results.
Similarly, based on Figures 6.33 and 6.34, it is concluded that for time-
dependent behaviour and the steel stress range, fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa, the assumed bond
171
shear stress τb(t)=fct; and for steel stresses range σs.max < 160 MPa, the assumed bond
shear stress τb(t)=1.5fct provides the closest agreement with the experimental results.
0.35
Experiment fct 2fct 3fct
τ b =f ct
0.3
Max. Crack Width (mm)
0.25
0.2
τ b =2f ct
0.15
Experiment
0.1
τ b =3f ct
0.05
0
140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Stress (MPa)
Figure 6.31 Comparison of different bond shear stresses for instantaneous behaviour,
fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa
0.14
Experiment fct 2fct 3fct
0.12
τ b =f ct
0.1
0.08
τ b =2f ct
0.06
Experiment
0.04 τ b =3f ct
0.02
0
120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160
Stress (MPa)
Figure 6.32 Comparison of different bond shear stresses for instantaneous behaviour
σs.max < 160 MPa
172
0.8
Experiment 0.5fct fct 1.5fct
0.7
0.6

τ b =0.5f
0.5
0.4
Experiment
0.3
τ b =f ct
0.2
τ b =1.5f ct
0.1
0
140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Stress (MPa)
Figure 6.33 Comparison of different bond shear stresses for time-dependent

behaviour, fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa
0.6
Experiment 0.5fct fct 1.5fct
0.5 τ b =0.5f ct
0.4
0.3 τ b =f ct
0.2 Experiment
τ b =1.5f ct
0.1
0
120 130 140 150 160
Stress (MPa)
Figure 6.34 Comparison of different bond shear stresses for time-dependent behaviour
σs.max < 160 MPa
For a given type of reinforcement the experimental results indicate that the bond
shear stress τb may be considered proportional to fct. According to these results the bond
shear stress may be expressed as follows;
τ b = α 1α 2 f ct (6.1)
where, α1 =3 for σs.max < 160 MPa

α1 =2 for fsy > σs.max ≥ 160 MPa
α2 =1 for instantaneous loads
α2 =0.5 for sustained loads
173
6.5 Effective Tension Area of the Concrete for Beams

The effective tension area of the concrete Act, surrounding the flexural tension
reinforcement and assumed to have the same centroid as that of the reinforcement was
determined from the experimental results using the procedure described here. Following
a procedure similar to that used in the CEB-FIP code (CEB-FIP, Model Code, 1990),
six different thicknesses of the tensile concrete area were trialled and the crack widths
were calculated immediately after first loading and after creep and shrinkage. The
calculated crack widths for the six assumed thicknesses of the concrete tensile zone and
measured crack widths are presented in Table 6.19.
Table 6.19 Comparison of crack widths obtained using six different assumed depths
B1-a B1-b B2-a B2-b B3-a B3-b

Act
wi (mm) w(t) (mm) w i (mm) w(t) (mm) w i (mm) w(t) (mm) w i (mm) w(t) (mm) w i (mm) w(t) (mm) w i (mm) w(t) (mm)
Experiment 0.13 0.38 0.05 0.18 0.11 0.36 0.05 0.18 0.08 0.28 0.05 0.13
2(D-d) x bw 0.16 0.25 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.03 0.06
2.5(D-d) x bw 0.17 0.31 0.04 0.16 0.15 0.22 0.05 0.11 0.10 0.14 0.03 0.07
3(D-d) x bw 0.17 0.34 0.02 0.17 0.16 0.26 0.04 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.03 0.08
3.5(D-d) x bw 0.15 0.41 0.01 0.21 0.15 0.31 0.04 0.16 0.12 0.21 0.03 0.10
[(D-dn)/3] x bw 0.15 0.24 0.05 0.12 0.15 0.22 0.05 0.11 0.10 0.14 0.03 0.07
[(D-dn)/2] x bw 0.16 0.36 0.03 0.18 0.17 0.31 0.03 0.15 0.13 0.19 0.02 0.09
The calculated crack widths obtained using each of the assumed thicknesses of the
concrete tensile zone are compared with the experimental values in Figures 6.35 to 6.40.
0.5
0.45
0.4
Experiment
0.35 Time-dependent
Max Crack Width (mm)
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15 Experiment
Instantaneous
0.1
0.05
0
2(D-d) 2.5(D-d) 3(D-d) 3.5(D-d) (D-dn)/3 (D-dn)/2
Instantaneous Behaviour Time -dependent Behaviour
Figure 6.35 Comparison between different hypothesis for beam B1-a
174
0.25
0.2
Experiment

Time-dependent
0.15
0.1
Experiment
0.05
Instantaneous
0
Figure 6.36 Comparison
2(D-d) 2.5(D-d) between
3(D-d) different
3.5(D-d) hypothesis
(D-dn)/3 for
(D-dn)/2B1-b
Instantaneous Behaviour Time-dependent Behaviour
Figure 6.36 Comparison between different hypothesis for beam B1-b
0.4
Experiment
0.35
Time-dependent
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
Experiment
0.1
Instantaneous
0.05
0
2(D-d) 2.5(D-d) 3(D-d) 3.5(D-d) (D-dn)/3 (D-dn)/2
0.2
Experiment
0.18
Time-dependent
0.16
0.14
Max.Crack Width (mm)
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
Experiment
0.04 Instantaneous
0.02
0
2(D-d) 2.5(D-d) 3(D-d) 3.5(D-d) (D-dn)/3 (D-dn)/2
175
0.3
Experiment
Time-dependent
0.25

0.2
0.15
0.1
Experiment
Instantaneous
0.05
0
2(D-d) 2.5(D-d) 3(D-d) 3.5(D-d) (D-dn)/3 (D-dn)/2
0.14
Experiment
Time-dependent
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
Experiment
Instantaneous
0.04
0.02
0
2(D-d) 2.5(D-d) 3(D-d) 3.5(D-d) (D-dn)/3 (D-dn)/2
A comparison of the results for both instantaneous and time-dependent

behaviour suggests that for B1-a and B1-b the assumed depth of (D-dn)/2, and for B2-
a, B2-b, B3-a and B3-b the assumed depth of 3.5(D-d) provide the closest agreement
with the measured experimental results. Therefore, the effective tension area of concrete
Act, for beam specimens may be expressed as follows:
The lesser of (i) and (ii):
(i): Act = 3.5( D − d )bw (6.2)
⎛ D − dn ⎞
(ii): Act = ⎜ ⎟bw (6.3)
⎝ 2 ⎠
176
where
D = height of section
bw = width of section at the level of the tensile reinforcement
dn = depth of compression zone in a fully cracked section
6.6 Effective Tension Area of the Concrete for Slabs
Generally, in slab specimens with a low reinforcement ratio and a relatively large bar
spacing only an effective area of concrete around each reinforcing bar Act.b, participates
in carrying the tensile stress through the section. Therefore, an effective width of
concrete, beff, should be considered for each reinforcing bar. The effective width for
each reinforcing bar is illustrated in Figure 6.41.
beff beff beff beff

Act,b
2dc
s/2 s s/2 s’ /2 s’ s’/2

(a) (b)
Figure 6.41 Effective width for each reinforcing bar (a) slab section
(b) transformed equivalent section (ACI318)
In order to transform the slab section (Figure 6.41-a) to the equivalent section
as defined in ACI318 (Figure 6.41-b), a reduction factor Rf was developed. The
effective tension area of concrete for each reinforcing bar may be obtained using the
following expression:
Act .b = 2d c beff = 2d c .R f .s = 2d c .s ' (6.4)
where
beff = R f .s = s ' (6.5)
Act.b= effective tension concrete area for each reinforcement bar

dc = distance from the centre of reinforcement bar to extreme tensile fibre
beff = effective width for each reinforcement bar
177
Rf = reduction factor
s = bar spacing
s’ = bar spacing of the transformed equivalent section
The reduction factor Rf, was obtained from experimental results through the
procedures described here. Using the measured crack width for instantaneous and time-
dependent behaviour and the proposed formula for crack width, the measured effective
reinforcement ratio (ρef)measured, for all slab specimens was calculated. By averaging the
measured effective reinforcement ratios for each two identical slabs (i.e. S1-a & S1-b,
S2-a & S2-b and S3-a & S3-b) the average measured effective reinforcement ratio
(ρef)ave, was obtained. According to the ACI318 code the effective reinforcement ratio
(ρef)ACI318, for each identical series was also calculated for comparison. Results are
Table 6.20 Measured and calculated effective reinforcement ratios (ACI318)
S1-a S1-b S2-a S2-b S3-a S3-b

Reinfocement Area
226 226 339 339 452 452
(mm2)
Number of
2 2 3 3 4 4
Reinforcement
Reinforcement
308 308 154 154 103 103
Spacing (mm)
Measured
0.028 0.012 0.0184 0.026 0.0196 0.29
Instantaneous ρef
Measured Time-
0.0189 0.02 0.0151 0.0149 0.015 0.014
dependent ρef
(ρef)ave 0.0202 0.0186 0.0194
(ρef)ACI318 0.0059 0.0118 0.0177
(ρef)ACI318 / (ρef)ave 0.3 0.63 0.91
Comparing the results from Table 6.20 and the relationship between (ρef)ave ,
(ρef)ACI318 and the number of reinforcing bars, the following expression for the reduction
factor Rf, is proposed;
R f = 0.31(nb − 1) ≤ 1 (6.6)
where
nb = number of reinforcing bar (nb ≥ 2).
178
NOTE: Calculated crack widths presented in this chapter are based on equations which
are presented in Chapter 7, and examples for these calculations are presented in the
Appendices.
Results from a long-term flexural test programme on reinforced concrete beams and
slabs were presented in Sections 6.3 through 6.6. The results are summarised in Table
6.21.
Table 6.21 Summary of the results from long-term flexural test

wmin wave wmax srm,ave wmin wave wmax srm,ave
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Beam B1-a 0.08 0.12 0.13 215 0.10 0.27 0.38 164
Beam B1-b 0.03 0.04 0.05 227 0.10 0.13 0.18 186
Beam B2-a 0.05 0.07 0.11 210 0.08 0.19 0.35 127
Beam B2-b 0.03 0.04 0.05 322 0.03 0.09 0.18 155
Beam B3-a 0.03 0.05 0.08 230 0.05 0.16 0.25 121
Beam B3-b 0.03 0.04 0.05 228 0.03 0.09 0.13 133
Slab S1-a 0.05 0.07 0.10 138 0.05 0.14 0.20 121
Slab S1-b 0.05 0.06 0.08 191 0.03 0.10 0.15 107
Slab S2-a 0.05 0.11 0.13 135 0.05 0.14 0.23 88
Slab S2-b 0.03 0.05 0.08 148 0.03 0.11 0.18 89
Slab S3-a 0.05 0.09 0.10 153 0.10 0.15 0.22 102
Slab S3-b 0.03 0.04 0.08 141 0.08 0.14 0.20 136
Crack Width
The development, extent, and width of cracks within the high moment regions were
monitored immediately after first loading and during the test period. Test results show
that in the beam specimens, the maximum crack width within the high moment region
increased rapidly in the first few weeks of loading when the creep and shrinkage strain
developed rapidly. The rate of increase in crack width in the beams with a high
sustained load is greater than for beams with a lower sustained load.
179
To investigate the influence of bottom cover on the crack width, a comparison of

the results between beam series 1 and 2 indicates that because of a thinner concrete
cover, the maximum instantaneous crack widths for B2-a and B2-b were smaller than
for beams B1-a and B1-b, respectively. The reason is that because, crack spacing is
inversely proportional to the effective reinforcement ratio, by increasing the bottom
cover, the effective tension area of the concrete increases and as a consequence the
effective reinforcement ratio decreases which results in greater crack spacing. Since,
crack width is directly dependent on crack spacing, these results in larger crack width in
those specimens with a thicker concrete cover. These changes in the cover did not affect
the final maximum crack width as much as instantaneous behaviour.
In slab specimens, a comparison of results in different regions with different

moment levels shows that under sustained loads, maximum and minimum crack width
are proportional to the bending moment, and crack width increases linearly as the
applied moment increases. Also, the largest increase in crack width occurs in those
regions subjected to low levels of bending moment because cracks take more time to
develop. The average ratio of final maximum crack width to the final average crack
width for all specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs) is 1.5.
Crack Spacing
Experimental results indicate that average crack spacing changes over time and under
sustained loads additional cracks develop between widely spaced cracks within the
primary crack pattern mainly due to shrinkage, and the final average crack spacing
therefore reduces. The final and instantaneous crack spacing and the ratio of final to
instantaneous values are presented in Table 6.22.
Table 6.22 Measured instantaneous and final crack spacing
B1-a B1-b B2-a B2-b B3-a B3-b S1-a S1-b S2-a S2-b S3-a S3-b
Instanteneous Crack
215 227 210 322 230 228 138 191 135 148 153 141
Spacing (srm)inst. (mm)
Final Crack Spacing
164 186 127 155 121 133 121 107 88 89 102 136
(srm)final (mm)
(srm)final/(srm)inst. 0.76 0.82 0.76 0.48 0.53 0.58 0.75 0.56 0.65 0.60 0.66 0.96
180
From Table 6.22, the average ratio of final to instantaneous crack spacings for
6 beams and 6 slabs is 0.67. The final crack spacing my be expressed as
( s rm ) final = 0.67( s rm ) inst . (6.7)
Deflection
Experimental results show that deflection at mid-span increases rapidly over the first 1-
2 months after loading with more than 60% of final deflection occurring within this
period. This rapid increase in deflection is caused by the loss of stiffness due to the
development of time-dependent cracking and the increase in deformation caused by
creep and shrinkage. The rate of change gradually decreases for the remaining part of
the test. The measured instantaneous and final deflections (at t=0 and t=394 days,
respectively) and their ratios are presented in Table 6.23.
Table 6.23 Measured final and instantaneous deflection at mid-span
B1-a B1-b B2-a B2-b B3-a B3-b S1-a S1-b S2-a S2-b S3-a S3-b
Final Deflection (mm) 12.06 7.44 12.42 7.87 13.3 7.90 25.1 19.9 29.8 21.9 32.5 22.9
Instantaneous
4.95 1.98 5.03 2.06 5.81 1.97 7.14 3.72 10.7 4.43 11.8 5.04
Deflection (mm)
Final Deflection / Instan.
2.44 3.76 2.47 3.82 2.3 4.01 3.52 5.35 2.8 4.94 2.75 4.54
Deflection
Table 6.23 shows that the ratio of final to instantaneous deflection for a lower
load condition ‘b’ is greater than the higher load condition ‘a’. This was due to a small
instantaneous deflection under a low level sustained load and the subsequently greater
influence of shrinkage and other load-independent effects.
From a comparison of the results between beam series 1 and series 2 it may be
concluded that the effective tension area of concrete surrounding the flexural tension
reinforcement is greater due to a thicker bottom cover and the effect of tension
stiffening and therefore flexural stiffness of the cross-section is greater in beam series 1
than series 2. Therefore the instantaneous and final deflections of B1-a and B1-b were
smaller than B2-a and B2-b, respectively.
181
Bond Shear Stress
The force in the bar is transmitted to the surrounding concrete by bond shear stress.
Experimental results indicate that bond shear stress τb decreases with increasing steel
stress and reduces under a sustained load. For a given type of reinforcement the bond
shear stress τb may be considered proportional to fct . According to the presented results,
the bond shear stress may be expressed as:
τ b = α 1α 2 f ct (6.8)
where
α1 =3 for σs.max < 160 MPa
α1 =2 for 160 MPa ≤ σs.max < fsy
and

The Effective Tension Area of the Concrete
According to the experimental results presented earlier, the effective tension area of
concrete Act, surrounding the flexural tension reinforcement is assumed to have the
same centroid as the reinforcement, and may be expressed as follows;
For beams, the lesser of (i) and (ii):
(i): Act = 3.5( D − d )bw (6.9-a)
⎛ D − dn ⎞
(ii): Act = ⎜ ⎟bw (6.9-b)
⎝ 2 ⎠
182
For slabs:
Act = 2nb .d c .R f .s (6.10)
where
R f = 0.31(nb − 1) ≤ 1 (Reduction factor) (6.11)
D = depth of section
s = bar spacing
nb = number of reinforcing bar (nb ≥ 2)
183
Chapter 7, Analytical Model for Flexural Cracking
CHAPTER 7
ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR FLEXURAL
CRACKING
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The aim in this chapter is to develop an analytical model for flexural cracking that
describes in appropriate detail the observed cracking behaviour of the reinforced concrete
flexural members tested in this study and presented in Chapters 5 and 6. The crack width
and crack spacing calculation procedures outlined in three international codes, namely
EC2-91, MC-90, and ACI318-99, are presented and crack widths and crack spacings are
accordingly calculated. Then, the results are compared with the proposed analytical model
and the measured experimental values, and discussed in detail separately.
When a reinforced concrete member is subjected to a bending moment as shown in

Figure 7.1-a, two types of stresses (longitudinal and lateral stresses) act on the tensile
stretched zones of the concrete surrounding the tensile reinforcement. As the longitudinal
bending stress acts, the tensile zone undergoes a lateral contraction before cracking,
resulting in lateral compression between the reinforcing bar and the concrete around it.
When a flexural crack starts to develop, this biaxial lateral compression has to disappear at
the crack because the longitudinal tension in the concrete becomes zero. The stress in the
concrete is dynamically transferred to the reinforcing bar and the tensile stress in the
184
concrete becomes zero at the cracked section. The position of the neutral axis rises at the
cracked section in order to maintain equilibrium at that section (see Figure 7.1-a).
C.L.
M M
N.A.
ho
crack 1 srm crack 2
(a)
b b b
dn.ave dn=kd
dg
D d d d
Hc.ef
(b) (c) (d)
Figure 7.1 Flexural cracking in reinforced concrete beams and one-way slabs (a) crack
development geometry (b) section before cracking (c) average cracked section between to
adjacent cracks (d) cracked section
Tensile stress is present in the concrete between the cracks, because tension is
transferred from the steel to the concrete by bond. The distribution of tensile stress in the
concrete and the steel depends on the magnitude and distribution of bond stress between the
cracks. Longitudinal bond stress exists between the concrete and the tensile reinforcement
in the regions adjacent to each crack and this gradually builds up the stress in the concrete
on either side of the crack. Further loading causes the tensile stress to increase until the
tensile strength of the concrete at the next weakest section of the reinforced concrete
member is exceeded and this section also cracks. With increasing load, this process
185
continues until the distance between the cracks is not large enough for the extreme fibre
tensile stress to reach the tensile strength of the concrete and hence to cause cracking. Once
this stage is reached, the crack pattern has stabilized and further loading just widens the
existing cracks. The distance between two adjacent cracks, srm at this stage is called the
stabilized crack spacing. The width of each of the two cracks in Figure 7.1-a is essentially a
function of the difference in elongation between the reinforcing bars and the surrounding
concrete in tension over a length srm.
7.2 FLEXURAL CRACKING MODEL-INSTANTANEOUS

BEHAVIOUR
b
dn.ave
M M
D d
Acti wi srm wi
Hc.ef Ast
bw
(a) Average section after cracking (b) Elevation
b
εoi σoi
κi Ci
kaved
(1-kave)d
σcti
Tcti Tsi
εsi σsi
strain stress force

bw
(c) Average deformation, stresses and forces
Figure 7.2 Analytical model for flexural cracking in a singly reinforced flexural member
in pure bending
186
7.2.1 Description of Model
A simple analytical model has been developed to model flexural cracking in a reinforced
concrete beam or one-way slab in bending immediately after first loading, see Figure 7.2.
The idealized average cracked section shown in Figure 7.2-a consists of the area of
concrete in compression, above the centroidal axis of the cracked section, an intact area of
tensile concrete Acti of depth Hc.ef and width bw located at the level of the tensile
reinforcement, and the area of longitudinal steel reinforcement, Ast. In the proposed
analytical model, it is assumed that the cracked beam consists of two longitudinal
reinforced concrete chords, one representing the compressive zone of depth dn.ave and the
other representing the tensile zone consisting of Acti and Ast (Figure 7.2-a).
The longitudinal chord representing the tensile zone is subjected to an axial tensile
force Ti and is shown in Figure 7.3. At each crack the entire tensile force is carried by the
steel reinforcement and may be obtained from
⎛ My ⎞ M (1 − k )d
Ti = n⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ Ast = n Ast (7.1)
⎝ I cr ⎠ I cr
where Icr is the second moment of area of the fully-cracked transformed cross-section and
kd is the depth to the neutral axis of the fully-cracked cross-section (ie. the section at a
crack where the area of concrete in tension is taken to be zero).
Just before cracking, reinforcement and concrete undergo compatible strains and the
tension chord is free from cracks. The stress in the extreme concrete fibre just prior to
cracking is fct and the stress in the steel is n(=Es/Ec) times the concrete stress at the level of
the steel. Immediately after cracking, the stress in steel is:
Tcr
σs = (7.2)
Ast
187
where
M cr (1 − k ) d
Tcr = n Ast (7.3)
I cr
and Mcr is the bending moment which causes first cracking (i.e. the moment that causes
the extreme fibre concrete stress in the uncracked section to reach fct ).
Ti Ti=Tcti+Tsi
crack 1 sr crack 2
(a)
τb
(b)
σ c < fct
(c)
σ s .max
(d)
Figure 7.3 Tension chord subjected to axial force
At first cracking, the sudden increase in steel stress produces strain in the steel
which is not compatible with the strain in the adjacent concrete and results in widening of
the crack. In a section between two cracks, bond between the concrete and the
reinforcement partially restrains the elongation of the steel and the bond stress τb transmits
a part of the tensile force from the steel bar to the surrounding concrete. At some distance sr
188
from the first crack, strain compatibility is recovered and when the tensile strength in
concrete is again reached a second crack occurs. At a crack, the concrete stress is zero and
the steel stress is:
Ti nM (1 − k )d
σ s , max = = (7.4)
Ast I cr
Midway between two cracks, the tensile stress in concrete has some unknown value
smaller than fct and the steel stress has a value smaller than σs,max, as shown in Figures 7.3-c
and 7.3-d.
The Tension Chord Model, T.C.M (Marti et al, 1998) has been incorporated into the
idealized model of Figure 7.2 to represent the tensile zone of the cracked member.
Obviously, as the applied moment M increases, the tension stiffening effect decreases and
the contribution of the tensile concrete between the cracks to the stiffness of the member
decreases. This phenomenon can be modelled by reducing the effective tensile area of the
concrete, Acti or by reducing the average concrete tensile stress, σcti as moment increases. In
the present study, Acti is assumed to be constant after cracking and independent of the
applied moment and time. However, σcti is assumed to depend on the applied moment and
reduces with time due to creep and shrinkage.
From the experimental study presented in Sections 6.5 and 6.6, the effective tensile
area of concrete, Acti surrounding the flexural tensile reinforcement and having the same
centroid as that of reinforcement may be expressed as follows:
For beams, the lesser of (i) and (ii):
(i): Act = 3.5( D − d )bw (7.5-a)
⎛ D − dn ⎞
(ii): Act = ⎜ ⎟bw (7.5-b)
⎝ 2 ⎠
189
For slabs:
Act = 2nb .d c .R f .s (7.6-a)
where
R f = 0.31(nb − 1) ≤ 1 (Reduction factor) (7.6-b)
D = depth (height) of section

s = bar spacing
nb = number of reinforcing bar (nb ≥ 2)
According to the T.C.M. (Marti et al, 1998), the concrete in the tension chord is
assumed to carry a uniform average tensile stress, σcti. The instantaneous average tensile
stress, σcti under short-term service loads is determined from Equation 3.39 (Section 3.5),
which is repeated here;
τ bi s rm ρ ef
σ cti = (7.7)
db
where
τbi = the short-term bond stress;
ρef = the effective reinforcement ratio (ratio of tensile reinforcement area to the area of
the effective concrete in tension, Ast /Acti);
Ast = cross-sectional area of tensile steel reinforcement;
Acti = intact area of tensile concrete;
srm = average crack spacing; and
db = nominal diameter of the tensile reinforcing bars.
190
The force in the bar is transmitted to the surrounding concrete by bond shear stress,
τb. Due to this force transfer, the force in a reinforcing bar changes along its length. The
bond shear stress depends on several factors, including the concrete tensile strength and
cover, steel stress, bar size and spacing, confining effects and load history. From the
experimental results presented in Section 5.4 and Section 6.4, bond shear stress τb decreases
with increasing steel stress and reduces under sustained load with time. Figure 7.4-a
presents the bond shear stress proposed by Marti et al (1998), where τbi=τbo=2fct is assumed
for the service load range (σs< fsy) and fct is the direct tensile strength of concrete.
(a) (b)
τb τb
τbo=3fct
τbo=2fct τbo=2fct
τb1=fct τb1=fct
fsy σs 160 MPa fsy σs
Figure 7.4 Bond shear stress vs steel stress for instantaneous behaviour
(a) T.C.M (b) in the present study
In Figure 7.4-b the bond shear stress for instantaneous behaviour proposed in the
present study is shown. In accordance with the experimental study presented in Section 6.4,
the bond shear stress may be expressed as follows
τ b = α 1α 2 f ct (7.8)
where
α1 =3 for σs.max < 160 MPa
α1 =2 for 160 MPa ≤ σs.max < fsy
191
and
Due to the assumed bond stress-slip relationship in T.C.M (Marti et al, 1998), the
stress in the tensile concrete increases linearly with distance from the crack reaching a
maximum value midway between the cracks (i.e. at srm/2 from each crack, Figure 7.5).
srm
T T
τb
τb
σc,max
σs,max
σs,min
Figure 7.5 Bond shear stress, concrete and steel stresses in T.C.M. (σs≤ fsy)
The maximum concrete stress between the cracks (Section 3.5.1.1) is given by:
2τ b s rm ρ ef
σ ct ,max = (7.9)
db
192
Since, the concrete tensile stresses cannot be greater than the concrete tensile
strength, the maximum possible crack spacing (srm)max occurs when σct,max just reaches the
tensile strength of concrete, fct ;
2τ b ( srm ) max ρ ef
f ct = σ ct ,max = (7.10)
db
Therefore, the maximum crack spacing is:
f ct d b
( s rm ) max = (7.11)
2τ b ρ ef
If the distance between two cracks just exceeds (srm)max , an intermediate primary
crack will form midway between the existing cracks. It follows that the minimum crack
width (srm)min is one half of the maximum value given by Equation 7.11. The crack spacing
in a cracked specimen may be expressed as (Marti et al, 1998):
s rm = λ ( s rm ) max (7.12)
where
0 .5 ≤ λ ≤ 1 .0 (7.13)
When the average cracked section is subjected to a positive bending moment M,

sufficient to cause cracking in the bottom fibres, the instantaneous strain and stress
distributions are shown in Figure 7.2-c. If the compressive concrete and the steel
reinforcement are both assumed to be linear-elastic, by enforcing both the equilibrium
requirements and the compatibility requirement that the average strain is proportional to the
distance from the neutral axis, the depth to the neutral axis dn.ave may be calculated from:
d n.ave = k ave d (7.14)
where kave can be obtained as follows:
193
From the linear strain diagram, Figure 7.2-c:
ε oi k
= ave (7.15)
ε si 1 − k ave
1 − k ave
ε si = ε oi (7.16)
k ave
Enforcing the equilibrium equations results in
∑M = 0
1 k
M = σ oi k ave d 2 b(1 − ave ) (7.17)
2 3
Substituting σoi=εoiEc in Equation 7.17 and rearranging results in
2M
ε oi = (7.18)
E c k ave bd 2 (1 − k ave / 3)
Equilibrium demands that
∑F x =0
and therefore
1
σ oi bk ave d −σ siAst − σ cti Acti = 0 (7.19)
2
⎛ 1 − k ave ⎞
Substituting σoi=εoiEc and σ si = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ε oi E s in Equation 7.19 gives
⎝ k ave ⎠
194
⎛1 1 − k ave ⎞
ε oi ⎜⎜ Ec bk ave d − Ast E s ⎟⎟ − σ cti Acti = 0 (7.20)
⎝2 k ave ⎠
Substitution of Equation 7.18 into 7.20 and rearranging results in
σ cti Acti d M − σ cti Acti d 2

k 3 ave + k ave + (2nρ )k ave − 2nρ = 0 (7.21)
3M M
a 3 k 3 ave + a 2 k 2 ave + a1 k ave + a o = 0 7.22)
σ cti Acti d M − σ cti Acti d

In which a3 = , a2 = , a1 = 2np , a o = −2np ,
3M M
n = E s / E c and ρ = Ast / bd (7.23)
The value of kave is readily obtained by solving the cubic Equation 7.22.
7.2.2 Calculation of Instantaneous Crack Width
The instantaneous crack width for the reinforced concrete member shown in Figure
7.6 may be represented by the difference between the elongations of the steel, Δes and the
concrete, Δec immediately after cracking at time ‘to’.
Δec w/2 w/2 Δec Δec w/2 w/2 Δec
Δes Δes Δes Δes
srm
Figure 7.6 Elongations of the steel and concrete between two consecutive cracks
in tension chord
195
Assuming that, under service load, both the steel and the concrete behave in a
linear-elastic manner, the stress-strain relationships for steel and concrete are as follows:
σ sm = E s ε sm (7.24)
σ cm = E c ε cm (7.25)
where εsm and εcm are the average steel and concrete strains respectively and are obtained as
described in the following
At M>Mcr, when T ≥Tcr and cracking occurs, the steel stress along the reinforcement
varies from a maximum value at the crack to a minimum value midway between the cracks
(Figure 7.5). The minimum steel stress according to Section 3.5.1.1 is:
nM (1 − k )d 2τ bi s rm
σ s ,min = − (7.26)
I cr db
The average steel stress may be obtained as follows:
σ sm =
1
[σ s,max + σ s ,min ] (7.27)
2
That is
nM (1 − k )d τ bi s rm
σ sm = − (7.28)
I cr db
Therefore, the average steel strain is
σ sm nM (1 − k )d τ bi s rm
ε sm = = − (7.29)
Es E s I cr Es d b
196
and the total elongation of steel for one-half of the crack spacing may be obtained as:
⎛ s ⎞ nM (1 − k )ds rm τ bi srm
2
Δes.i = ε sm ⎜ rm ⎟ = − (7.30)
⎝ 2 ⎠ 2 E s I cr 2Es d b
Similarly, the maximum concrete stress occurs between the cracks and the
minimum concrete stress is zero at the crack (Section 3.5.1.1):
2τ bi s rm ρ ef
σ c ,max = and σc,min=0 (7.31)
db
The average concrete stress is
σ cm =
1
[σ c,max + σ c,min ] = 1 ⎛⎜⎜ 2τ bi srm ρ ef + 0 ⎞⎟⎟ = τ bi srm ρ ef (7.32)
2 2⎝ db ⎠ db
which is identical with Equation 7.7. Therefore
τ bi srm ρ ef
σ cm = σ cti = (7.33)
db
Thus, the average concrete strain is
σ cm τ bi srm ρ ef
ε cm = = (7.34)
Ec Ec d b
and the total elongation of concrete over one-half of the crack spacing may be obtained as
follow:
197
⎛ τ bi s rm ρ ef ⎞⎛ s rm ⎞ τ bi s rm ρ ef
2
= ⎜⎜ ⎟⎜
Δe c.i ⎟ 2 ⎟ = 2E d (7.35)
⎝ d b Ec ⎠⎝ ⎠ c b
The difference between the elongation of steel and concrete represents the slip
between the two materials. Over half of the crack spacing, the maximum slip of steel
relative to the concrete is:
Δ slip = Δe s.i − Δec.i (7.36)
s rm ⎡ nM (1 − k )d τ bi s rm
Δ slip = ⎢ − (1 + nρ ef )⎤⎥ (7.37)
2E s ⎣ I cr db ⎦
Equation (7.37) represents the slip of the reinforcement relative to concrete at the
edge of a segment of length srm. The crack width is the sum of the slip in the two adjacent
half segments. That is
wi = 2Δ slip
and therefore
⎡ τ bi srm
wi =
srm
⎢σ s (max) − (1 + nρ ef )⎤⎥ (7.38)
Es ⎣ db ⎦
Equation (7.38) shows that the instantaneous crack width depends mainly on the
crack spacing srm. When srm=(srm)max, Equation 7.38 gives the maximum crack width, while
the minimum crack width corresponds to srm=(srm)min . It can be seen that the crack width
may be reduced by providing smaller diameter bars or bars having better bond
characteristics.
198
7.3 FLEXURAL CRACKING MODEL-TIME-DEPENDENT

BEHAVIOUR
7.3.1 Time-dependent Analysis of the Average Section:
The time analysis of the average section considered here uses the Age-adjusted Effective
Modulus Method, AEMM (Bazant, 1972) together with a relaxation approach proposed by
Gilbert (1988). In the relaxation procedure, the strain state is assumed to be held constant
throughout a given time interval. If the total strain is held constant and the creep and
shrinkage strains change, then the instantaneous component of strain must also change by
an equal and opposite amount. As the instantaneous strain changes, so too does the concrete
stress. The concrete stress on the cross-section is therefore allowed to vary due to
relaxation. As a result, the internal actions change and equilibrium is not maintained. An
axial force ΔN and a bending moment ΔM must therefore be applied to the cross-section to
restore equilibrium.
The restraining forces –ΔN and –ΔM, which are required to prevent the free
development of compressive creep (in the compressive zone), tensile creep (in the tension
chord) and shrinkage in the concrete, may be calculated as follows (Gilbert, 1988).
If during the time interval (t-to) compressive creep in the compressive zone were not
restrained, the top fibre strain would increase by φεoi and curvature would increase by φкi .
The restraining forces required to prevent this change in deformation are obtained as
follows:
− ΔN creep = − E e ϕ ( Ac ε oi + Bc κ i ) (7.39)
− ΔM creep = − E e ϕ (Bc ε oi + I c κ i ) (7.40)
199
Ec
where, E e = is the age-adjusted effective modulus for concrete;
1+ χ .ϕ
φ is the creep coefficient associated with the time interval t-to;
χ is the corresponding aging coefficient; and
Ac, Bc and Ic are the properties of the concrete compressive zone of depth dn.ave, with respect
B
to the top fibre. For a rectangular compressive zone of depth dn.ave and width b;
1 2 1
Ac = bd n.ave , Bc = bd n.ave and I c = bd n3.ave (7.41)
2 3
If shrinkage strain, εsh, is completely unrestrained and assuming it is uniform over

the section, the shrinkage induced top fibre strain is εsh and the curvature is zero. Therefore,
the restraining forces required to prevent this deformation are:
− ΔN shrinkage = − Eeε sh Ac (7.42)
− ΔM shrinkage = − E e ε sh B c (7.43)
For an average cross section, restraining forces required to prevent tensile creep in
the tension chord must also be included. In the tension chord, the instantaneous average
tensile stress in the concrete, σcti , first applied at time ‘to’, is gradually reduced with time.
Since, the average tensile stress, σct is a function of bond shear stress, τb the change of stress
in tension chord, Δσct(t) may be calculated as follow
τ b (t ) srm ρ ef τ bi srm ρ ef
Δσ ct (t ) = σ ct (t ) − σ cti = − (7.44)
db db
Bond shear stress, τb is a time-dependent function and reduces with time due to
creep and shrinkage. According to Equation 7.8, bond shear stress at time ‘t’ for sustained
loads (with α2 =0.5 ) may be taken as:
200
1
τ b (t ) = τ bi (7.45)
2
Substitution of Equation 7.45 into Equation 7.44 results in
− τ bi srm ρ ef 1
Δσ ct (t ) = = − σ cti (7.46)
2d b 2
Therefore, if creep were not restrained in the tension chord, the tension chord strain would
change by
σ cm Δσ ct (t ) σ σ
ϕ+ χ .ϕ = cti ϕ − cti χ .ϕ (7.47)
Ec Ec Ec 2Ec
The restraining forces required to prevent this deformation (Equation 7.47) are:
σ cti σ cti
− ΔN TC = − E e ϕ . Act + E e χ .ϕ . Act (7.48)
Ec 2Ec
σ cti σ cti
− ΔM TC = − E e ϕ . Act .d + E e χ .ϕ . Act .d (7.49)
Ec 2Ec
The total restraining actions, ΔN and ΔM, are the sum of the restraining actions
associated with compressive creep, shrinkage and tensile creep (of the tension chord).
Summing Equations 7.39, 7.42 and 7.48 gives ΔN and summing Equation 7.40, 7.43 and
7.49 gives ΔM, as follows:
σ cti σ cti
− ΔN = − E e [ϕ ( Ac ε o i + Bc κ i ) + ε sh Ac ] − E e ϕAct + E e χ .ϕ . Act (7.50)
Ec 2Ec
σ cti σ cti
− ΔM = − E e [ϕ ( Bc ε oi + I c κ i ) + ε sh Bc ] − E e ϕActi d + E e χ .ϕ . Act .d (7.51)
Ec 2Ec
201
The change of the top fibre strain with time is
Be ΔM − I e ΔN
Δε o = (7.52)
E e ( Be − Ae I e )
2
and the change of the curvature with time is given by
Be ΔN − Ae ΔM
Δκ = (7.53)
E e ( Be − Ae I e )
2
where Ae , Be and I c are the properties of the fully-cracked age-adjusted transformed

section. For a rectangular section of width b;
Ae = bd n.ave + n Ast (7.54a)
1 2
Be = bd n.ave + n Ast d (7.54b)
2
1
I e = bd n3.ave + n Ast d 2 (7.54c)
3
and n (= E s / E e ) is the age-adjusted modulus ratio.
The change of concrete stress with time at any depth y≤ dn.ave may be calculated as
follow:
Δσ c = − E e [ϕ (ε oi + yκ i ) + ε sh − (Δε o + yΔκ )] (7.55)
And the change of stress in the steel is given by:
Δσ s = E s (Δε o + d s Δκ ) (7.56)
202
7.3.2 Calculation of Time-dependent Crack Width
The crack width at time ‘t’ for the reinforced concrete member shown in Figure 7.6 may be
represented by the difference between the total elongations of steel and concrete at time ‘t’.
7.3.2.1 Elongation of Concrete at Time ‘t’
The initial stress σcti applied at time ‘to’ in the tension chord is gradually reduced with time.
The total concrete strain at time ‘t’ may be expressed as the sum of the strains due to the
initial stress, σcti (both instantaneous and creep), the strains produced by the gradually
applied stress increment, Δσct(t) (both instantaneous and creep) and the shrinkage strain
(Gilbert, 1988):
σ cti Δσ ct (t )
ε c (t ) = (1 + ϕ ) + (1 + χ .ϕ ) + ε sh (t ) (7.57)
Ec Ec
σ cti Δσ ct (t )
ε c (t ) = + + ε sh (t ) (7.58)
Ee Ee
where
Ec Ec
Ee = and Ee =
1+ϕ 1+ χ .ϕ
The change of stress in the tension chord, Δσct(t) at time ‘t’ can be obtained by using
Equations 7.44 through 7.46. Therefore, the total concrete strain at time ‘t’ is given by
substitution of Equation 7.46 into Equation 7.58 :
σ cti σ cti
ε c (t ) = − + ε sh (t ) (7.59)
Ee 2Ee
203
and the total elongation of concrete at time ‘t’ is:
⎛s ⎞
Δec.t = ε c (t )⎜ rm ⎟ (7.60)
⎝ 2 ⎠
By substitution of Equation 7.59 into Equation 7.60 and recalling σcti (from T.C.M) the total
elongation of the concrete at time ‘t’ may be expressed as follow:
τ bi s rm 2 ρ ef τ bi s rm 2 ρ ef ε sh (t ) s rm
Δec.t = − + (7.61)
2d b E e 4 Ee d b 2
7.3.2.2 Elongation of Steel at Time ‘t’
The maximum tensile force carried by the tensile steel at a crack does not change with time
under a constant sustained moment. However, the average tensile force in the steel
increases due to the time dependent reduction in τb. From Equation 7.30, the elongation of
steel at time ‘t’ is equal to
Ts rm τ (t ) s rm 2
Δes.t = − b (7.62)
2 E s Ast 2Es d b
nM (1 − k ) d
where T = Ast
I cr
Substitution of Equation 7.45 into Equation 7.62 results in
Ts rm τ s 2
Δes.t = − bi rm (7.63)
2 E s Ast 4 E s d b
204
7.3.2.3 Time-dependent Crack Width
As mentioned earlier the difference between the elongation of steel and concrete at time ‘t,
represents the slip at time ‘t’:
Δ slip = Δes.t − Δec.t (7.64)
Using Equations 7.61 and 7.63 results in
τ bi s rm 2 τ bi srm ρ ef τ bi s rm ρ ef ε sh (t ) s rm
2 2
Ts rm
Δ slip = − − + − (7.65)
2 E s Ast 4d b E s 2d b E e 4 Ee d b 2
srm ⎡ T τ bi srm ⎤
Δ slip = ⎢ − (1 + 2n* ρ ef − n * ρ ef ) − ε sh (t ) E s ⎥ (7.66)
2 Es ⎣ Ast 2d b ⎦
The crack width at time ‘t’ is:
w(t ) = 2Δ slip (7.67)
srm ⎡ τ b (t ) srm ⎤
w(t ) = ⎢σ s. max − (1 + 2n* ρ ef − n * ρ ef ) − ε sh (t ) E s ⎥ (7.68)
Es ⎣ db ⎦
where
Es Es Ec Ec
n* = , n* = , Ee = and Ee =
Ee Ee 1+ϕ 1+ χ .ϕ
Experimental results show that the average crack spacing srm changes with time.
Under long-term loading more cracks occur within the instantaneous crack pattern due
mainly to shrinkage and, as a consequence, the average crack spacing reduces. From the
205
experimental results presented in Section 6.7, the average ratio of final to instantaneous
crack spacing is 0.67 (see Table 6.22). That is
( srm ) max . final = 0.67( srm ) max .inst . (7.69)
Equation 7.68 shows that the crack width at time ‘t’ depends mainly on the final
crack spacing, srm. In order to calculate the final maximum crack width, the maximum final
crack spacing given in Equation 7.69 should be used in Equation 7.68.
Similar to the instantaneous behaviour, it can be seen that the final maximum crack
width may be reduced by providing smaller diameter bars or bars having better bond
characteristics.
7.4 NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
Sample calculations using the analytical models for instantaneous and long-term crack
width and crack spacing are presented here for Beam B1-a. Calculated and measured values
of crack spacings and crack widths for all beams and slabs tested in this study are presented
in Tables 7.1 and 7.2.
Beam B1-a is a simply supported beam with a span of 3.5m and a cross section
shown in Figure 7.7. It was subjected to its self weight and two concentrated loads at the
third span points. The bottom cover to the reinforcement is 40 mm.
The following input data was measured in the laboratory and has been assumed in
the calculations:
Mmax=24.91 kNm , (Ec)14=22820 MPa , fct=2.8 MPa , Es=2×105 MPa , db=16 mm ,

Ast=400 mm2 , (εsh)394=-720×10-6 mm and, (φ)394=1.71
206
250
P=18.6 kN P=18.6 kN
W=2.09 kN/m
300
R=22.26 kN R=22.26 kN
2N16
1167 1167 1167
40
40
Figure 7.7 Cross-section and elevation - beam B1-a
7.4.1 Instantaneous Behaviour
7.4.1.1 Cracked Section Analysis
Depth of compressive zone, kd and maximum steel stress, σs.max may be calculated
from a cracked section analysis using modular ratio theory as follows:
E s 2 ×10 5
n= = = 8.76
Ec 22820
Ast 400
ρ= = = 0.00533
bd 250 × 300
nρ = 0.0467
k= (nρ )2 − 2nρ − nρ = 0.263
Therefore, the depth of compressive zone is:
d n = kd = 0.263 × 300 = 78.8 mm
207
The second moment of area of the fully-cracked transformed cross-section is:
3
bd n 250(78.8) 3
I cr = + nAst (d − d n ) =
2
+ 8.76 × 400(300 − 78.8) 2 = 212.2 × 10 6 mm 4
3 3
And the maximum steel stress at the crack may be calculated as:
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 24.91 × 106 (1 − 0.263)300

σ s. max = = = 227.5 MPa
I cr 212.2 × 106
7.4.1.2 Effective Tension Area:
The effective tension area of concrete, Acti is the lesser of Equations 7.5-a and 7.5-b as
follows:
Acti = 3.5( D − d )bw = 3.5(348 − 300)250 = 42000 mm 2 (Equation 7.5-a)

and
⎛ D − dn ⎞ ⎛ 348 − 78.8 ⎞
Acti = ⎜ ⎟bw = ⎜ ⎟ × 250 = 33650 mm
2
(Equation 7.5-b)
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
Therefore, Acti =33650 mm2 and the effective reinforcement ratio is:
Ast 400
ρ ef = = = 0.0119
Acti 33650
7.4.1.3 Instantaneous Bond Shear Stress:
From Equation 7.8

α1=2 (σs.max=227.5 MPa)
α2=1 (instantaneous behaviour)
208
the instantaneous bond shear stress is
τ b = α1α 2 f ct = 2 × 1 × 2.8 = 5.6 MPa
7.4.1.4 Calculation of Crack Spacing:
The maximum crack spacing for instantaneous behaviour may be calculated from Equation
7.11:
f ct d b 2.8 × 16
( srm ) max = = = 336 mm
2τ b ρ ef 2 × 5.6 × 0.0119
The minimum and average crack spacing are:
1 1
( srm ) min = ( srm ) max = × 336 = 168 mm
2 2
( srm ) max + ( srm ) min 336 + 168

( srm ) ave = = = 252 mm
2 2
7.4.1.5 Calculation of Crack Width:
Maximum crack width for instantaneous behaviour may be obtained from Equation 7.38:
srm ⎡ τ b srm ⎤ 336 ⎡ 5.6 × 336 ⎤

wi = ⎢σ s. max − (1 + nρ ef )⎥ = 5 ⎢
227.5 − (1 + 8.76 × 0.0119)⎥ = 0.16 mm
Es ⎣ db ⎦ 2 × 10 ⎣ 16 ⎦
This is in good agreement with the measured maximum instantaneous crack width of
0.13mm.
209
7.4.2 Time-dependent Behaviour
7.4.2.1 Bond Shear Stress:
From Equation 7.8

α1=2 (σs.max=227.5 MPa)
α2=0.5 (time-dependent behaviour)
the bond shear stress for sustained loads is
τ b (t ) = α1α 2 f ct = 2 × 0.5 × 2.8 = 2.8 MPa
7.4.2.2 Calculation of Crack Spacing:
The final maximum crack spacing for long-term behaviour may be calculated from
Equation 7.69:
( srm. f ) max = 0.67( srm ) max = 0.67 × 336 = 224 mm
The final minimum and average crack spacing for long-term behaviour are:
1 1
( srm. f ) min = ( srm ) max = × 336 = 168 mm
2 2
( srm. f ) max + ( srm. f ) min 224 + 168

( srm. f ) ave = = = 196 mm
2 2
7.4.2.3 Calculation of Crack Width:
The effective modulus and age-adjusted effective modulus of concrete at time t=394
days are
210
Ec 22820
Ee = = = 8421 MPa
1 + ϕ 1 + 1.71
Ec 22820
Ee = = = 9637 MPa
1 + χ .ϕ 1 + 0.8 × 1.71
and the effective and age-adjusted modular ratios respectively are:
E s 2 ×10 5
n* = = = 23.75
E e 8420.7
E s 2 ×10 5
n* = = = 20.75
E e 9636.8
The final maximum crack width for time-dependent behaviour may be obtained
using the final maximum crack spacing, (srm.f)max by means of Equation 7.68:
srm ⎡ τ b (t ) srm ⎤
w(t ) = ⎢σ s. max − (1 + 2n * ρ ef − n * ρ ef ) − ε sh (t ) E s ⎥
Es ⎣ db ⎦
224 ⎡ 2.8 × 224 ⎤

w(t ) = ⎢⎣227.5 − 16 (1 + 2 × 23.75 × 0.0119 − 20.75 × 0.0119) − (−720 × 10 −6 )2 × 10 5 ⎥
2 × 10 5 ⎦
w(t ) = 0.36 mm
This is in good agreement with the measured maximum final crack width of 0.38 mm.
211
7.5 Crack Width and Crack Spacing Predicted by

International Codes
In this section, the crack width and crack spacing calculation procedures outlined in three
international concrete codes, namely EC2-91, MC-90 and ACI318-99, are presented.
Results are compared with the analytical model proposed here and with the measured
experimental values in Tables 7.1 and 7.2.
7.5.1 Eurocode 2-1991 (EC2-91)
According to EC2-91 the average crack with, wm may be calculated as follow:
wm = srmζε s 2 (7.70)
where
2
⎛ M ⎞
ζ = 1 − β1 β 2 ⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ (7.71)
⎝ M max ⎠
β1 = 1 for high bond bars

β1 = 0.5 for plain bars
β2 = 1 for first loading
β2 = 0.5 for loads applied in a sustained manner
and
εs2 = the maximum steel strain at the crack
srm = the average crack spacing
Mcr = cracking moment
Mmax= maximum moment in the section
212
The code defines the design or characteristic maximum crack width, wk as
wk = β ec .wm (7.72)
where βec is a coefficient relating the average crack width to the design value and equals
1.7 for load induced flexural cracking.
The average final crack spacing, srm is calculated by means of Equation 7.73;
db
srm = 50 + k1k 2 (7.73)
4 ρ ef
where
k1 is a coefficient depending upon bond quality as follows:
k1 = 0.8 for high bond bars
k1 = 1.6 for plain bars
k2 ia a coefficient depending upon the shape of the strain diagram as follows:

k2 = 0.5 in the case of bending without axial forces
k2 = 1 in the case of axial tension
and
db = bar diameter
ρef = the effective steel ratio ( ρ ef = Ast / Acef )
Acef = the effective tension area which is generally equal to the width of the section at the
level of the tensile steel multiplied by 2.5 times the distance from the tension face of the
section to the centroid of Ast . However, the height of the effective area should not be
greater than (D-dn)/3 . That is
1
Acef = 2.5( D − d )bw >
/ ( D − d n )bw (7.74)
3
213
7.5.1.1 Calculation of Crack Width and Crack Spacing for Beam B1-a
The following input data has been assumed in the calculations:
M max = 24.91 kNm , M cr = 14.53 kNm , I cr = 212.2 × 106 mm 4 , D = 348 mm , d = 300 mm ,
d n = 78.8 mm , d b = 16 mm , Ast = 400 mm 2 , Ec = 22820 MPa , s = 150 mm , n = 8.76
The effective tension area and effective reinforcement ratio may be calculated as follows:
i) Acef = 2.5( D − d )b = 2.5(348 − 300) 250 = 30000 mm 2
⎛ D − dn ⎞ ⎛ 348 − 78.8 ⎞
ii) Acef = ⎜ ⎟b = ⎜ ⎟250 = 22440 mm
2
⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎝ 3 ⎠
Therefore
Acef = 22440 mm 2 and
Ast 400
ρ ef = = = 0.0178
Acef 22440
The average final crack spacing is given by Equation 7.73:
db 16
srm = 50 + k1k 2 = 50 + 0.8 × 0.5 = 140 mm
4 ρ ef 4 × 0.0178
By use of Equation 7.71 the coefficient ζ for long-term loading may be calculated as:
214
2
⎛ M ⎞
2
⎛ 14.53 ⎞
ζ t = 1 − β1 β 2 ⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ = 1 − 1 × 0.5⎜ ⎟ = 0.83
⎝ M max ⎠ ⎝ 24.91 ⎠
The curvature at state 2 (fully cracked section) is:
M max 24.91× 10 6
κ2 = = = 5.144 × 10 −6
Ec I cr 22820 × 212.2 ×10 6
The steel strain in state 2 is:
ε s 2 = κ 2 (d − d n ) = 5.144 ×10 −6 × (300 − 78.75) = 1137 ×10 −6

or
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 24.91×10 6 (1 − 0.263) × 300
ε s2 = = = 1137 ×10 − 6
E s I cr 2 ×10 × 212.2 ×10
5 6
The average crack width, wm and design crack width, wk may be obtained from Equations
7.70 and 7.72 respectively;
wm = srmζ t ε s 2 = 140 × 0.83 × 1137 × 10 −6 = 0.13 mm
wk = β ec .wm = 1.7 × 0.13 = 0.22 mm
For short-term behaviour:
2
⎛ M ⎞
2
⎛ 14.53 ⎞
ζ i = 1 − β 1 β 2 ⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ = 1 − 1× 1⎜ ⎟ = 0.66
⎝ M max ⎠ ⎝ 24.91 ⎠
wm = srmζ iε s 2 = 140 × 0.66 × 1138 × 10 −6 = 0.11 mm
wk = β ec .wm = 1.7 × 0.11 = 018 mm
215
7.5.2 CEB-FIP 1990 (MC-90)
According to MC-90, for all stages of cracking the design crack width may be calculated by
means of the following equation:
wk = l s. max (ε s 2 − β mc ε sr 2 − ε cs ) (7.75)
where
ls.max = the length over which slip between steel and concrete occurs and may be
calculated by use of Equation 7.76.
εs2 = the maximum steel strain at the crack
εsr2 = the steel strain at the crack, under a force causing stress equal to fctm within Acef
and may be calculated by means of Equation 7.77.
εcs = the free shrinkage of concrete
βmc = empirical coefficient to assess the average strain within ls.max .
The value of βmc for stabilized cracking are as follows:
βmc.i = 0.6 for short-term or instantaneous loading

βmc.t = 0.38 for long-term or repeated loading
db
ls. max = (7.76)
3.6 ρ ef
f ctm
ε sr 2 = (1 + nρ ef ) (7.77)
E s ρ ef
fctm is the mean value of axial tensile strength and may be estimated from the mean splitting
tensile strength by means of Equation 7.78;
216
f ctm = 0.9 f ct (7.78)
ρef and Acef may be calculated according to the Section 7.5.1.
d n = 78.8 mm , d b = 16 mm , Ast = 400 mm 2 , Ec = 22820 MPa , s = 150 mm , n = 8.76 ,
(εsh)394=-720×10-6 mm
The effective tension area and reinforcement ratio are:
i) Acef = 2.5( D − d )b = 2.5(348 − 300)250 = 30000 mm 2
⎛ D − dn ⎞ ⎛ 348 − 78.8 ⎞
ii) Acef = ⎜ ⎟b = ⎜ ⎟250 = 22440 mm
2
⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎝ 3 ⎠
Therefore
Ast 400
ρ ef = = = 0.0178
Acef 22440
The maximum crack spacing may be obtained by means of Equation 7.76:
217
db 16
l s. max = = = 250 mm
3.6 ρ ef 3.6 × 0.0178
For stabilized cracking the average crack spacing is (Clause 3.2.2):
2
( srm ) ave = × 250 = 167 mm
3
The maximum steel strain at the crack may be calculated as follow:
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 24.91×10 6 (1 − 0.263) × 300

ε s2 = = = 1137 ×10 − 6
E s I cr 2 ×10 × 212.2 ×10
5 6
The steel strain at the crack, under a force causing stress equal to fct may be obtained by
means of Equation 7.77:
f ctm 2.52
ε sr 2 = (1 + nρ ef ) = (1 + 8.76 × 0.0178) = 818 × 10 −6
E s ρ ef 2 × 10 × 0.0178
5
The maximum crack width for short-term loading is:
wk = ls. max (ε s 2 − β mc.iε sr 2 − ε cs ) = 250(1137 × 10 −6 − 0.6 × 818 × 10 −6 + 0) = 0.16 mm
And the maximum crack width for long-term loading is:
wk = ls. max (ε s 2 − β mc.t ε sr 2 − ε cs ) = 250(1137 × 10 −6 − 0.38 × 818 × 10 −6 + 720 × 10 −6 ) = 0.38 mm
218
7.5.3 ACI318-89 and ACI318-99
The American Concrete Institute, ACI controls flexural cracking by limiting the stress in
the steel at a cracked section due to service load to 60 per cent of the specified yield
strength. A parameter z is defined with dimensions of kN/mm as
z = f s 3 d c Ae ×10 −3 (7.79)
where
fs = steel stress at service load, which is calculated for a fully cracked section (state 2);
dc = distance from centre of bar to extreme tension fibre;
Ae = effective tension area of concrete surrounding the flexural tension reinforcement and
having the same centroid as that of reinforcement, divided by the number of bars.
The ACI method is based on the Gergely-Lutz expression for maximum crack
width, wmax. The Gergely-Lutz equation predicts the maximum crack width as:
wmax = 0.011β ac .z (7.80)
The parameter βac is the ratio of the distances from the neutral axis to the extreme tension
fibre and from the neutral axis to the centroid of the main reinforcement and may be
expressed as :
D − dn
β ac = (7.81)
d − dn
219
where
D = overall depth of a cross-section; dn = depth of compression zone in a fully cracked
section; and d = depth to the tensile reinforcement
Derivation of Equation 7.79 involves the assumption that the maximum crack spacing is:
( s rm ) max = 4t e (7.82)
where te is an increased effective cover. Based on the work of Broms and Lutz, the
effective concrete cover is:
2
⎛ s ⎞
te = dc 1 + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ (7.83)
⎝ 4d c ⎠
where‘s’ is the bar spacing
d n = 78.8 mm , d b = 16 mm , Ast = 400 mm 2 , Ec = 22820 MPa , s = 150 mm , n = 8.76
The maximum crack spacing may be calculated by means of Equations 7.83 and 7.82:
2 2
⎛ s ⎞ ⎛ 150 ⎞
te = d c ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟ = (348 − 300) ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟ = 61 mm
⎝ 4 d c ⎠ ⎝ 4(348 − 300) ⎠
220
( srm ) max = 4te = 4 × 61 = 244 mm
The maximum steel stress at the cracked section, fs and the effective area per bar, A may be
obtained as:
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 24.91 × 106 (1 − 0.263) × 300

fs = = = 227 MPa
I cr 212.2 × 106
2 × (348 − 300) × 250

Ae = = 12000 mm 2
2
The parameters z and β may be calculated by use of Equations 7.79 and 7.81 respectively:
z = f s 3 d c Ae × 10 −3 = 227 × 3 (348 − 300) × 12000 × 10 −3 = 18887.2 × 10 −3 kN/mm
D − d n 348 − 78.8
β ac = = = 1.217
d − d n 300 − 78.8
and finally, the maximum crack width for both short-term and long-term behaviour may be
obtained by means of Equation 7.80:
wmax = 0.011β ac .z = 0.011 × 1.217 × 18887.2 × 10 −3 = 0.25 mm
221
A rational analytical model is presented for predicting the crack width and crack spacing
for flexural reinforced concrete members. The analytical model was used to predict crack
width and crack spacing of 12 flexural specimens comprising 6 beams and 6 slabs under
sustained service loads for periods up to 400 days. It should be emphasized that, cracking in
reinforced concrete is a random phenomenon and measured crack widths and crack
spacings in structural members show large scatter. Considering this, good agreement was
obtained between the measured experimental values and the predicted values; both for
instantaneous and time-dependent behaviour (see Figures 7.8 and 7.9).
In order to compare the predicted values with international codes, crack width and
crack spacing were also calculated in accordance with EC2-91, MC-90 and ACI318-
89&99. Comparison between the experimental results, analytical model and international
codes are presented in Tables 7.1 and 7.2 and illustrated in Figures 7.10 to 7.21.
Crack Width
The crack widths calculated in accordance with ACI318 at steel stress levels up to 250 MPa
show that, for short-term cracking, ACI318 overestimates the crack width for both beam
and slab specimens at all steel stress levels (Figures 7.10-a to 7.21-a). Since in this code the
time-dependent effect of shrinkage has not been considered, ACI318 underestimates the
long-term crack width (Figures 7.10-b, 7.12-b, and 7.14-b) except for slabs with widely
spaced tensile reinforcement bars (Figures 7.16-b and 7.17-b). The crack width obtained by
means of the analytical model proposed herein, correlates better than the ACI318 method
with both instantaneous and long-term experimental results at all steel stress levels up to
250 MPa (service load range).
In general, for instantaneous behaviour, EC2-91 predicts crack widths in good

agreement with measured experimental results particularly at steel stress levels lower than
222
200 MPa (Figures 7.11-a, 7.13-a, 7.15-a, and 7.19-a). However, for long-term behaviour, it
underestimates actual crack widths (Figures 7.10-b to 7.15-b, 7.20-b, and 7.21-b) except for
slabs with widely spaced tensile reinforcement bars (Figure 7.16-b). Similar to ACI318, the
proposed analytical model has a better correlation than EC2-91 with the measured
experimental values under service loads.
For instantaneous behaviour, crack widths calculated in accordance with MC-90 at

in-service steel stress levels up to 250 MPa show good agreement with the experimental
results (Figures 7.10-a to 7.21-a). However, for time-dependent behaviour, the method
overestimates the crack width at steel stress levels lower than 200 MPa and for slabs with
widely spaced tensile reinforcement bars (Figures 7.11-b, 7.13-b, 7.16-b, and 7.17-b).
Crack widths predicted by the proposed analytical model are close to the MC-90
predictions, except for slabs with widely spaced tensile reinforcement bars and specimens
at steel stress levels lower than 160 MPa for which, the proposed analytical model shows
better correlation than MC-90 with the measured experimental results.
Crack Spacing
According to Section 6.7, instantaneous crack spacing reduces with time under sustained
load due to creep and shrinkage. The average ratio of final to instantaneous crack spacing is
0.67 (see Table 6.22).
EC2-91 and MC-90 give equations corresponds to the design or characteristic

maximum crack width, wk and consider the limit values of wk under quasi-permanent
loading as satisfactory for reinforced concrete members. Therefore, crack spacing
calculated in accordance with the above mentioned international codes corresponds to the
quasi-permanent loading and underestimate the instantaneous crack spacing, but provides
reasonable agreement with the measured final long-term crack spacing.
223
The crack spacing calculated in accordance with ACI318 overestimates the short-
term crack spacing. However, shows reasonable agreement with the measured final long-
term crack spacing except for slabs with widely spaced tensile reinforcing bars for which,
final crack spacing is overestimated.
Due to the random nature of cracking, great accuracy in calculating the crack
spacing is not achievable. Nevertheless, the instantaneous and final average crack spacings
predicted by the proposed analytical model are in good agreement with the measured
instantaneous and final average crack spacings.
NOTE: As mentioned in Chapter 2, concrete is a heterogeneous mix of materials whose

properties are variable and influenced by many factors. Therefore, predicted values
obtained by the analytical models should not be regarded as exact and are subject to
considerable variability. An assessment of the variability is beyond the scope of this thesis.
224
Table 7.1 Comparison between experimental results, proposed analytical model and international codes for instantaneous behaviour
INSTANTANEOUS BEHAVIOUR
Proposed Analytical Model Experimental Results Eroucode 2-1991 CEB-FIP 1990 ACI318-1999
(srm)min,( mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (srm)max,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm)
B1-a 168 252 336 0.16 215 0.13 140 0.18 167 0.16 183 0.25
B1-b 112 168 224 0.03 227 0.05 140 0.05 167 0.07 183 0.17
B2-a 145 217 290 0.16 210 0.11 132 0.18 153 0.15 167 0.19
B2-b 97 145 193 0.04 322 0.05 132 0.06 153 0.07 167 0.13
B3-a 96 144 192 0.12 230 0.08 103 0.16 99 0.11 120 0.16
B3-b 64 96 128 0.03 228 0.05 103 0.06 99 0.04 120 0.10
S1-a 79 118 157 0.13 138 0.10 142 0.15 169 0.15 249 0.31
S1-b 79 118 157 0.09 191 0.08 142 0.03 169 0.08 249 0.24
S2-a 79 118 157 0.13 135 0.13 109 0.17 108 0.13 148 0.24
S2-b 79 118 157 0.07 148 0.08 109 0.08 108 0.07 148 0.17
S3-a 79 118 157 0.10 153 0.10 92 0.13 78 0.09 121 0.19
S3-b 79 118 157 0.06 141 0.08 92 0.08 78 0.05 121 0.14
(srm)min = minimum crack spacing (mm)

(srm)ave = average crack spacing (mm)
(srm)max= maximum crack spacing (mm)
(w)max = maximum crack width (mm)
225
Table 7.2 Comparison between experimental results, proposed analytical model and international codes for long-term behaviour
LONG-TERM BEHAVIOUR
Proposed Analytical Model Experimental Results Eroucode 2-1991 CEB-FIP 1990 ACI318-1999
(srm)min,( mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (srm)max,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm) (srm)ave,( mm) (w)max, (mm)
B1-a 168 196 224 0.36 164 0.38 140 0.22 167 0.38 183 0.25
B1-b 112 131 149 0.18 186 0.18 140 0.12 167 0.29 183 0.17
B2-a 145 169 193 0.31 127 0.35 132 0.22 153 0.36 167 0.19
B2-b 97 113 129 0.16 155 0.18 132 0.12 153 0.27 167 0.13
B3-a 96 112 128 0.22 121 0.28 103 0.17 99 0.24 120 0.16
B3-b 64 75 85 0.10 133 0.13 103 0.09 99 0.17 120 0.10
S1-a 79 92 105 0.20 121 0.20 142 0.22 169 0.42 249 0.31
S1-b 79 92 105 0.17 107 0.15 142 0.13 169 0.35 249 0.24
S2-a 79 92 105 0.20 88 0.23 109 0.20 108 0.29 148 0.24
S2-b 79 92 105 0.16 89 0.18 109 0.12 108 0.23 148 0.17
S3-a 79 92 105 0.18 102 0.25 92 0.15 78 0.20 121 0.19
S3-b 79 92 105 0.15 136 0.20 92 0.10 78 0.16 121 0.14
(srm)min = minimum crack spacing (mm)

(srm)ave = average crack spacing (mm)
(srm)max= maximum crack spacing (mm)
(w)max = maximum crack width (mm)
226
0.4
0.35
Max. Crack width (mm)
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
B1-a B1-b B2-a B2-b B3-a B3-b
1 2 3 4 5 6
Experimental Results Analytical Model
Figure 7.8-a Comparison between experimental results and proposed analytical model
for beam specimens (Instantaneous behaviour)
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
1
B1-a 2
B1-b 3
B2-a 4
B2-b 5
B3-a 6
B3-b
Figure 7.8-b Comparison between experimental results and proposed analytical model
for beam specimens (Time-dependent behaviour)
227
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
1
S1-a 2
S1-b 3
S2-a 4
S2-b 5
S3-a 6
S3-b
Figure 7.9-a Comparison between experimental results and proposed analytical model
for slab specimens (Instantaneous behaviour)
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
S1-a
1 S1-b
2 S2-a
3 S2-b
4 S3-a
5 S3-b
6
Figure 7.9-b Comparison between experimental results and proposed analytical model
for slab specimens (Time-dependent behaviour)
228
(a)- Instantaneous Behaviour - Beam B1-a (b)-Time-dependent Behaviour - Beam B1-a

0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4
0.35 Experim ental

0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
Experim ental
0.1 0.1
0.05 0.05
0 0
Anal. Model EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99 Anal. Model EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99
1 1
Figure7.10 Comparison between experimental results, analytical model and international codes for beam B1-a
(a)- Instantaneous Behaviour - Beam B1-b (b)-Time-dependent Behaviour - Beam B1-b

0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 Experim ental
0.15
0.1 0.1
Experim ental
0.05 0.05
0 0
Anal. Model EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99 Anal. Maodel EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99
1 1
Figure7.11 Comparison between experimental results, analytical model and international codes for beams B1-b
229

0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4
Experim ental

0.35
0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
Experim ental
0.1 0.1
0.05 0.05
0 0
1 1
(a)- Instantaneous Behaviour - Beam B2-b (b)-Time-dependent Behaviour - Beam B2-b

0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4
0.35

0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15 Experim ental
0.1 0.1
Experim ental
0.05 0.05
0 0
Anal. Model EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99
1 1
Figure7.13 Comparison between experimental results, analytical model and international codes for beam B2-b
230

0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
0.1 0.1
0.05 Experim ental 0.05
0 0
1 1
(a)- Instantaneous Behaviour - Beam B3-b (b)-Time-dependent Behaviour Beam B3-b

0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
Experim ental
0.05 0.05
0 0
1 1
Figure7.15 Comparison between experimental results, analytical model and international codes for beam B3-b
231
(a)- Instantaneous Behaviour - Slab S1-a (b)- Time-dependent Behaviour - Slab S1-a
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
Experim ental
0.15 0.15
0.1 0.1
Experim ental
0.05 0.05
0 0
1 1
Figure7.16 Comparison between experimental results, analytical model and international codes for slab S1-a
(a)- Instantaneous Behaviour - Slab S1-b (b)- Time-dependent Behaviour - Slab S1-b
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4
0.35

0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
Experim ental
0.1 0.1
0 0
Anal. Maodel EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99 Anal. Maodel EC2-91 MC-90 ACI318-99
1 1
Figure7.17 Comparison between experimental results, analytical model and international codes for slab S1-b
232
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.15 0.15
0.1 Experim ental
0.1
0.05 0.05
0 0
1 1
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
Experim ental
0.05 0.05
0 0
1 1
233
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
Experim ental
0.25 0.25
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
0.1 0.1
Experim ental
0.05 0.05
0 0
1 1
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4

0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
Experim ental
0.2 0.2
0.15 0.15
0.1 0.1
0 0
1 1
234
Chapter 8, Summary and Conclusions
CHAPTER 8
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
8.1 SUMMARY
In this study, cracking in reinforced concrete structures with particular emphasis on the
time-dependent development of direct tension cracking due to restrained shrinkage
deformation and the development of flexural cracking due to the combined effects of
constant sustained service loads and shrinkage have been investigated, both experimentally
and analytically.
Eight reinforced concrete slab specimens were restrained at each end and monitored
for more than 120 days to assess the effect of drying shrinkage on direct tension cracking.
A longitudinal restraining force developed gradually due to drying shrinkage. No external
loads were applied to the specimens. The strain in the reinforcement and concrete was
monitored throughout the tests and the age of the concrete when each crack developed, the
crack locations and the gradual change in crack widths with time were recorded. The effect
of varying the quantity, diameter, and spacing of reinforcing steel bars was also studied.
An analytical model previously developed without experimental verification by

Gilbert (1992) to study shrinkage cracking was modified and recalibrated. In this model it
was assumed that the bond transfer length so, in which the concrete and steel stresses vary
on either side of each crack remains constant with time, and the supports of the member
were assumed to be immovable. The results from the experimental program presented in
Chapter 4 suggest that shrinkage causes a deterioration in the steel-concrete bond and a
gradual increase in so with time. Additionally, in practice, the supports of a reinforced
235
concrete member, which provide the restraint to shrinkage, are not immovable. If the
supports of the restrained member suffer a relative movement Δu with time, such that the
final length of the member is (L+ Δu), the final restraining force changes and this affects
both the crack spacing and the crack width.
A series of short-term load tests was conducted on reinforced concrete flexural

members to study the development of flexural cracking under increasing loads. The
location and width of the flexural cracks in every specimen were carefully monitored under
increasing load up to failure. Deflections at mid-span, crack patterns, crack widths, steel
strains, and concrete surface strains at the steel level were recorded in the post-cracking
range, at each load increment. A second series of long-term load tests on reinforced
concrete flexural members was also conducted to study the development of flexural
cracking caused by the combined effects of constant sustained service loads and shrinkage.
Crack development, location, and gradual increase in the width of flexural cracks in each
specimen were carefully monitored throughout the tests to gain a clearer insight into the
mechanisms of flexural cracking and provide data for subsequent use in the development
and calibration of analytical models to simulate flexural cracking with time. Deflections at
mid-span, crack patterns, crack widths, steel strains and concrete surface strains at the steel
level were recorded both immediately after loading and in the long-term after almost 400
days under load. The concrete properties including the compressive strength, the tensile
strength and the elastic modulus of the concrete at different ages were measured on
companion specimens.
An analytical model was developed to simulate instantaneous and time-dependent

flexural cracking. The tension chord model (Marti et al, 1998) was modified and used in the
proposed model to study the tension zone of a flexural member and the effect of creep and
shrinkage with time. The Age-adjusted Effective Modulus Method together with a
relaxation approach proposed by Gilbert (1988) has been used in the time analysis of an
average section. The total restraining actions ΔN and ΔM, for an average cross section, are
the sum of the restraining actions associated with compressive creep, shrinkage, and tensile
creep (of the tension chord).
236
According to the experimental results, bond shear stress τb, reduces under sustained
loads with time and therefore the tensile steel stress increases with time. Based on the
stepped, rigid perfectly plastic bond stress-slip relationship proposed in the tension chord
model and considering the influences of the aforementioned major parameters (load history
and steel stress) on the bond, a new model for the bond stress-slip relationship at service
loads (σs< fsy) was proposed which leads to predictions of crack width and spacing in
reasonable agreement with the experimental observations. Generally, tension stiffening
may be modelled by reducing the effective tensile area of the concrete Act, or by reducing
the average concrete tensile stress σcm as the moment increases. In this study Act is assumed
to be independent of time and constant after cracking. Following the CEB-FIP and ACI318
codes, new models for calculating Act in beam and slab specimens, respectively, were
proposed and calibrated with the test results.
Finally, the crack width and spacing calculation procedures in several major
international concrete codes, including EC2-91, MC-90, and ACI318-99, were assessed and
some deficiencies in the existing approaches exposed. A comparison between the
experimental results, analytical model, and international codes was presented for all beam
and slab specimens for both instantaneous and time-dependent behaviour.
8.2 CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from the work presented in this study:
Restrained shrinkage cracking
Experimental results indicate that shrinkage causes a deterioration in bond at the concrete-
steel interface and the bond transfer length so, increases gradually with time. The final value
for so after all shrinkage cracking occurred was 1.33 times the initial value after first
cracking. The final crack width, crack spacing, and steel stress at the crack, depend on the
area of steel (more precisely, the reinforcement ratio ρ =Ast /Ac). An increase in the area of
steel reduces the final crack width and with more cracks developing, reduces the crack
237
spacing. With an increase in the area of steel the loss of stiffness at first cracking reduces
and therefore the restraining force after cracking is greater, but stress in the steel decreases
at each crack. With a larger restraining force, the stress in the concrete away from a crack
tends to be higher and as a result further cracking is more likely.
A comparison between the requirements of Australian Standard AS3600-2001

(clause 9.4.34) and the behaviour of restrained slabs from experimental observations is as
follows:
• The behaviour of restrained slabs from experiments shows that the Standard’s
suggestion (ρ ≥ 0.00175, As=105 mm2) actually provides very little control over
cracking, with the final crack width exceeding 1 mm.
• The measured behaviour of restrained slabs confirms the Standard’s suggestion
(ρ ≥ 0.0035, As=210 mm2) with regard to a moderate degree of control over
cracking (crack widths about 0.4 mm).
• The measured behaviour of restrained slabs confirms the Standard’s suggestion
(ρ ≥ 0.006, As=360 mm2) with regard to a strong degree of control over cracking
(crack widths less than 0.25 mm).
For a maximum design crack width of 0.3 mm (as is commonly specified in codes
of practice), it appears that a reinforcement area greater than 270 mm2 (ρ = 0.0045) would
be satisfactory for the restrained slabs tested in this study.
The short-term flexural tests
A comparison of the results shows that crack widths are directly proportional to the applied
load and, consequently, to the stress in the tensile steel. A comparison between beam series
1 and 2 demonstrates that increasing the clear concrete cover increases the average crack
spacing. This is because the crack spacing srm is inversely proportional to the effective
reinforcement ratio ρeff. Increasing the bottom cover increases the effective tension area of
the concrete, and decreases the effective reinforcement ratio which results in a larger crack
238
spacing. Since crack width depends directly on crack spacing this results in a larger crack
width in those specimens with a thicker concrete cover. A comparison of the results
between slabs series 1, 2, and 3, containing 2N12, 3N12, and 4N12 bars respectively, also
indicates that increasing the tensile reinforcement area decreases crack spacing and reduces
crack width (because crack spacing is inversely proportional to the effective reinforcement
ratio). In general, when a section cracks, its moment of inertia decreases which leads to a
considerable decrease in beam stiffness.
The long-term flexural tests
The effective reinforcement ratio is one of the most important factors affecting
instantaneous maximum crack widths as indicated in the short-term tests, but crack widths
are less dependent on cover in the long term. It appears that shrinkage increases slip
between the concrete and steel and makes the cracks more parallel sided, which reduces the
dependency of crack width on cover with time. In slab specimens, a comparison of results
in different regions with different moment levels shows that maximum and minimum crack
width under sustained loads are proportional to the bending moment, and crack width
increases linearly as the applied moment increases. Also, the largest increase in crack width
occurs in those regions subjected to low levels of bending moment because cracks take
more time to develop. Experimental results indicate that average crack spacing changes
with time and additional cracks develop under sustained loads between widely spaced
cracks within the primary crack pattern (mainly due to shrinkage), and the final average
crack spacing therefore reduces. The final maximum crack spacing is only about 2/3 of the
instantaneous value; however, the final minimum crack spacing is equal to the short-term
value.
According to the Test results, deflection at mid-span increases rapidly over the
first 1-2 months after loading, with more than 60% of final deflection occurring within this
period. This rapid increase in deflection is caused by the loss of stiffness due to the
development of time-dependent cracking and the increase in deformation caused by creep
and shrinkage. The ratio of final to instantaneous deflection for the lower load condition ‘b’
is greater than for the higher load condition ‘a’. This was due to a small instantaneous
239
deflection under a low level sustained load and the subsequent greater influence of
shrinkage and other load-independent effects. From a comparison of the results between
beam series 1 and 2 it may be concluded that the effective tension area of concrete
surrounding the flexural tension reinforcement is greater due to a thicker bottom cover and
the effect of tension stiffening, and therefore the flexural stiffness of the cross-section is
greater in beam series 1 than in series 2. Therefore the instantaneous and final deflections
of B1-a, and B1-b, were smaller than those of B2-a, and B2-b, respectively.
The analytical models
Rational analytical models are presented for predicting the time-varying width and spacing
of cracks caused by restrained shrinkage in direct tension members, and by bending
moment and shrinkage in reinforced concrete flexural members. It should be emphasised
that cracking in reinforced concrete is a random phenomenon and measured crack widths
and spacing in structural members show large scatter. Considering this, the crack widths
and spacing calculated using the analytical models are in reasonable agreement with the
experimental observations.
The quality of bond between concrete and steel significantly affects crack width and
spacing. Therefore, a realistic modelling of bond between concrete and steel is essential for
the accurate predictions of crack width and spacing. A local breakdown in bond
immediately adjacent to a crack complicates the modelling, as does the time-dependent
change in the bond characteristics caused by shrinkage. Experimental observations indicate
that the bond shear stress τb, decreases with time, probably as a result of shrinkage induced
slip and tensile creep. Shrinkage also causes a gradual widening of flexural cracks with
time. According to the test results, the effective tension area Act of the beam specimens
calculated in accordance with codes (i.e. CEB-FIP, EC2, and ACI318) is underestimated
while the effective tension area of slab specimens, particularly for slabs with a low
reinforcement ratio and a relatively large bar spacing, is overestimated. This results in
unrealistic predictions of crack width and spacing. The new models proposed in this study
for calculating the bond shear stress τb, and the effective tensile area of concrete Act (for
240
beam and slab specimens) lead to predictions of crack width and spacing in good agreement
with the experimental observations.
Regarding the crack width and crack spacing predicted by international codes
ACI318 overestimates crack width for both beam and slab specimens at all steel
stress levels up to 250 MPa and because this code does not consider the time-dependent
effect of shrinkage, it underestimates long term crack width for all specimens except for
slabs with widely spaced tensile reinforcement bars. EC2-91 generally predicts crack width
for instantaneous behaviour, which agrees with the experimental results, particularly at
steel stress levels lower than 200 MPa but underestimates actual crack widths over the long
term, except for slabs with widely spaced tensile reinforcement bars. MC-90 predicts
instantaneous crack width at in-service steel stress levels up to 250 MPa in good agreement
with the experimental results. However, for time-dependent behaviour it overestimates the
crack width at steel stress levels lower than 200 MPa and for slabs with widely spaced
tensile reinforcement bars.
The crack spacing for short-term loading calculated in accordance with ACI318 is
overestimated, but shows reasonable agreement with the measured final long-term crack
spacing except for slabs with widely spaced tensile reinforcing bars. Since, EC2-91 and
MC-90 give equations that correspond to the design or characteristic maximum crack width
wk, and consider the limit values of wk under quasi-permanent loading as satisfactory for
reinforced concrete members, the crack spacing calculated according to them corresponds
to the quasi-permanent loading and underestimates instantaneous crack spacing, but agrees
with the final long term crack spacing.
8.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
The research undertaken in this study has provided a comprehensive set of experimental
data for shrinkage and flexural cracking in reinforced concrete members under service
241
loads. It has also presented rational, design-oriented models for predicting the time-varying
width and spacing of cracks caused by restrained shrinkage in direct tension members and
by combination effects of bending and shrinkage in reinforced concrete flexural members.
Although, the goals of this work have been reached and the objectives have been met, this
does not mean that the task is completely solved, so several areas for future research are
discussed here:
• To reliably predict the time-dependent response of reinforced concrete structures,
accurate modelling of the post-cracking behaviour of the reinforced concrete
members under sustained loads is essential. Further research into the influence of
tensile creep and shrinkage on the tensile zone of the cracked reinforced concrete
members subjected to sustained loads is recommended.
• Creep in the bond between concrete and reinforcement has been investigated only
very little. Since, the characteristics of the bond have a noticeable effect on crack
width and spacing; further study on creep in the bond under sustained loads is
suggested.
• Predicting the crack width depends directly upon crack spacing. Further calibration
of the crack spacing of the tension chord model with more experimental data is
recommended.
• Development and utilization of different instantaneous and time-dependent bond
shear stress-slip models and investigation of the effect of each model on the
instantaneous and time-varying crack width and spacing is also recommended.
• Modification and calibration of the effective tensile concrete area Act, with more
experimental data, particularly for slabs with a low reinforcement ratio and a
relatively large bar spacing.
• Development of an analytical model using the proposed tension chord model (Marti
et al, 1998) to simulate the direct tension member for shrinkage cracking would be
useful.
• Future research on the environmental effects of temperature, humidity, and freezing
and thawing, on the time-varying crack width and crack spacing is also
recommended.
242
REFERENCES
Abeles, P.W., Brown, E.L. and Morrow, J.W. (1968), ‘Development and distribution of
cracks in rectangular prestressed beams during static and fatique loading”, Journal,
Prestressed Concrete Institute, Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 36-51.
ACI 435 (1973), ‘Variability of Deflections of Simply Supported Reinforced Concrete

Beams’, Reported by ACI Committee 435, ACI 435, USA.
ACI Committee 224, (2003), ‘Control of Cracking in Concrete Structures’, ACI Manual of
Concrete Practice Part 2 - 2003, USA.
Alvarez, M. (1998), ‘Influence of Bond Behaviour on the Deformation Capacity of

Structural Concrete’, Report No. 236, Institute of Structural Engineering, ETH, Zurich.
American Concrete Institute (1964), ‘Symposium on Creep of Concrete’, ACI Publication

(SP-9), USA, 160 pp.
American Concrete Institute (1971), ‘Cracking and Ultimate Load of Concrete Slab
Systems’, ACI Publication (SP-30), USA, 382 pp.
AS3600-2001, (2001), ‘Australian Standard for Concrete Structures’, Standards Australia,

Sydney, Australia.
AS/NZS 4671 (2001), ‘Steel Reinforcing Materials’, AS/NZS, Australia
Balazs, G.L. (1993), ‘Cracking analysis based on slips and bond stresses’, ACI Materials
Journals, Vol. 90, No. 4, pp. 340-348.
243
Barnes, R.A. and Mays, G.C. (2001), ‘The transfer of stress through a steel to concrete
adhesive bond’, International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 21, Elsevier Science Ltd,
pp. 495-502.
Base, C.D., Read, J.B., Beeby, A.W. and Taylor, H.P.J. (1966), ‘Investigation of the Crack
Control Characteristics of Various Types of Bars in Reinforced Concrete Beams’, Research
Report No.41.018, Parts 1 and 2, Cement and Concrete Association, London, 75 pp.
Base, G.D. and Murray, M.H. (1978), ‘Controlling shrinkage cracking in restrained
reinforced concrete’, ARRB Proceedings, Vol. 9, Part 4, Australia, pp. 167-173.
Base, G.D. and Murray, M.H. (1982), ‘A new look at shrinkage cracking’, Paper C1358,
The Institution of Engineers, Australia, Civil Engineering Transactions, Australia,
pp. 171-176.
Bate, S.C.C. (1963), ‘A comparison between prestressed concrete and reinforced concrete
beams under repeated loading’, Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers, London,
pp. 331-358.
Bazant, Z.P. (1972), ‘Predictions of concrete creep effects using age-adjusted effective
modulus method’, ACI Journal, Vol. 69, pp. 212-217.
Bazant, Z.P. and Murphy, W.P. (1995), ‘Creep and shrinkage prediction model for analysis
and design of concrete structures – model B3’, Materials and Structures,Vol. 28.
Bazant, Z.P. and Oh, B.H. (1984), ‘Deformation of progressively cracking reinforced
concrete beams’, ACI Journal, pp. 268-277.
Bazant, Z.P. and Oh, B.H. (1984), ‘Deformation of progressively cracking reinforced
concrete beams’, ACI Journal, May-June, pp. 268-278.
244
Bazant, Z.P. and Wittmann, F.H. (1982), ‘Creep and Shrinkage in Concrete Structures’,
John Wiley & sons, Northern Ireland, 363 pp.
Beeby, A.W. (1970), ‘An investigation of cracking in slabs spanning one way’, Cement and
Concrete Assoc., London, TRA433.
Beeby, A.W. (1979), ‘The prediction of crack widths in hardened concrete’, The Structural
Engineers, Vol. 57A, No. 1, London, pp. 9-17.
Bennett, E.W. and Dave, N.J. (1969), ‘Test performances and design of concrete beams
with limited prestress’, The Structural Engineers, London, V. 47, No. 12, pp. 487-496.
Bischoff, P.H. (1995), ‘Influence of shrinkage on tension stiffening’, Proceedings of the

Canadian Society for Civil Engineering Annual Conference, Ottawa, Ont., vol.2,
pp. 433-442.
Bischoff, P.H. (2001), ‘Effects of shrinkage on tension stiffening and cracking in reinforced
concrete’, Can. J. Civ. Eng., Vol. 28, pp. 363-374.
Branson, D.E. (1968), ‘Design procedures for computing deflection’, ACI Journal, Proc.,
Vol. 65, No. 9, USA, pp. 730-742.
Branson, D.E. (1977), ‘Deformation of Concrete Structures’, McGraw-Hill, USA, 546 pp.
Brendel, G. and Ruhle, H. (1964), ‘ Tests on reinforced concrete beams under long-term
loads’, Proceedings, Seventh IABSE Congress, International Association of Bridge and
Structural Engineering, Switzerland, pp. 916-923.
Bresler, B. and Selna, L. (1964), ‘Analysis of time dependent behaviour of reinforced

concrete structures’, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Special Publication SP-9,
pp. 115-128.
245
Broms, B.B. (1965), ‘Crack width and crack spacing in reinforced concrete members’, ACI
Journal, October, Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. 1237-1255.
Carlson, R.W. (1938), ‘Drying shrinkage of concrete as affected by many factors’,

Proceedings, ASTM, V. 38, Part 2, pp. 419-437.
Carreira, D.J. and Chu, K.-H. (1986), ‘Stress-strain relationship of reinforced concrete in
tension’, ACI Journal, No. 83 (1), pp. 21-28.
CEB (1983), ‘Fissuration et Deformation’, Manual du CEB, Ecole Polytechniqe Federale

de Lausanne, Suisse, 232 pp.
CEB, (1985), ‘CEB Design Manual on Cracking and Deformations’, Ecole Polytechnique
Federale De Lausanne, Suisse.
CEB, (1997), ‘Serviceability Models’, Bulletin d’Information No. 235, Comite Euro-
International du Beton (CEB), Lausanne, Switzerland..265 pp.
CEB-FIP (1993), ‘CEB-FIP Model Code 1990-design Code’, Comitte Euro-International

du Beton, Thomas Telford, London.
Chan, H.C., Cheung, Y.K. and Huang, Y.P. (1992), ‘Crack analysis of reinforced concrete
tension members’, Journal of Structural Engineering Div, ASCE 118, pp. 2118-2132.
Choi, C.K. and Cheung, S.H. (1996), ‘Tension stiffening model for planar reinforced
concrete members’, Computers and Structures, Elsevier Science Ltd, Vol. 59, No. 1,
pp. 179-190.
Clark, L.A. and Speirs, D.M. (1978), ‘Tension stiffening in reinforced concrete beams and
slabs under short-term loads’, Tech. Rep. No. 42.521, Cement and Concrete Association,
London.
246
Cope, R.J., Rao, P.V. and Clark, L.A. (1979), ‘Nonlinear design of concrete bridge slabs
using finite element procedures’, CSCE-ASCE-ACI-CEB Int. Symposium, University of
Waterloo, Canada.
Damjanic, F. and Owen, D.R.J. (1984), ‘Practical considerations for modeling of post-
cracking concrete behaviour for finite-element analysis of reinforced concrete structures’,
Proc., Int. Conf. on Comp.-Aided Anal. and Des. Of Concrete Struct., U.K., pp. 693-706.
Davis, R.E., Davis, H.E. and Brown, E.H. (1937), ‘Plastic flow and volume changes of
concrete’, ASTM Proc. 37, pp.317-330.
Davis, R.E., Davis, H.E. and Hamilton, J.S. (1934), ‘Plastic flow of concrete under
sustained stress’, ASTM Proc. 34, Part 2, pp. 354-386.
Desayi, P. and Krishnan, S. (1964), ’Equation for the stress-strain curve of concrete’, ACI
Journal, 39, No. 7, USA, pp. 345-350.
Desayi, P. (1976), ‘Determination of the maximum crack width in reinforced concrete

members’, ACI Journal, Proceedings Vol. 73, No. 8, August, pp. 473-477.
Dilger, w. and Neville, A.M. (1971), ‘ Method of creep analysis of structural members’,
ACI-SP-27-17, pp. 349-379.
Edwards, A.D. and Picard, A. (1972), ‘Theory of cracking in concrete members’, Journal
of the Structural Division, December, pp. 2687-2699.
Eligehausen, R., Popov, E.P., Bertero, V.V. (1983), ‘Local Bond Stress-Slip Relationships
of Deformed Bars Under Generalized Excitataions’, Report No. UCB/EERC 82-23,
Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
247
Eurocode-2 (1991), ‘Design of Concrete Structures’, Part 1, General Rules and Rules for
Buildings, European Prestandard, Brussels, 253 pp.
Faber, O. (1927), ‘Plastic yield, shrinkage and other problems of concrete and their effects
on design’, Minutes of Proc. of the Inst. of Civil Engineers, Part I, London, pp. 27-73.
Favre, R. et al (1983), ‘Fissuration et Deformations’, Manual du Comite Euro-International

du Beton, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Switzerland, 249 pp.
Feldman, R.F. and Swenson, E.G. (1975), ‘Volume change on first drying of hydrate
portland cement with and without admixture’, Cement and Concrete Research, V. 5, No. 1,
pp. 25-35.
fib (2000), ‘Bond of reinforcement in concrete’, State-of-art Report, Bulletin 10, CEB-FIP,
Lausanne, Switzerland.
Floegl, H. and Mang, H.A. (1982), ‘Tension stiffening concept based on bond slip’,
Journal of Structural Engineering Div, ASCE 108, pp. 2681-2701.
Franke, L. (1976), ‘Einfluss der Belastung-Sdauer auf das Verbundverhalten von Stahl in
Beton’, Deutscher Ausschuss fur Stahlbeton, Heft 268.
Gambarova, P., Giuriani, E. (1985), ‘Fracture mechanics of bond in reinforced concrete

discussion, Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, Vol. 111, No. 5, pp. 1161-1164.
Ghali, A., Faver, R. and Elbadry, M. (2002), ‘Concrete Structures’, Third Edition, Spon
Press, London, 584 pp.
Gilbert, R.I. (1983), ‘Deflection calculations for reinforced concrete beams’, Civil
Engineering Transactions, Inst. of Eng., Australia, Vol. CE25, No. 2, pp. 128-134.
248
Gilbert, R.I. (1988), ‘Time Effects in Concrete Structures’, Elsevier Science Publisher, The
Netherlands, 321 pp.
Gilbert, R.I. (1992), ‘Shrinkage cracking in fully restrained concrete members’, ACI
Structural Journal, Vol. 89, No. 2, pp. 141-149.
Gilbert, R.I. (1993), ‘Designing Concrete Structures for Serviceability’, The Munro centre
for Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney,
Australia, 109 pp.
Gilbert, R.I. (1998), ‘Serviceability considerations and requirements for high performance
reinforced concrete slabs’, International Conference on HPHSC, Perth, Australia,
pp. 425-435.
Gilbert, R.I. (1999), ‘Deflection calculation for reinforced concrete structures- why we
sometimes get it wrong”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 96, No. 6, pp. 1027-1032.
Gilbert, R.I. (1999), ‘Flexural crack control for reinforced concrete beams and slabs: An
evaluation of design procedures’, Mechanics of Structures and Materials, Balkema,
Rotterdam, pp. 175-180.
Gilbert, R.I. (2002), ‘Creep and shrinkage models for high strength concrete- proposal for
inclusion in AS3600’, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 2,
Institution of Engineers, Australia, pp. 95-106.
Gilbert, R.I. and Michleborough, N.C. (1990), ‘Design of Prestressed Concrete’, First
Edition, E & FN Spon, Great Britain, 504 pp.
Gilbert, R.I. and Nejadi, S. (2004), ‘An Experimental Study of Flexural Cracking in
Reinforced Concrete Members Under Short Term Loads’, Uniciv Report No. R-434,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 47 pp.
249
Gilbert, R.I. and Nejadi, S. (2004), ‘An Experimental Study of Flexural Cracking in
Reinforced Concrete Members Under Sustained Loads’, Unisiv Report No. R-435,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 59 pp.
Gilbert, R.I. and Warner, R.F. (1978), ‘Tension stiffening in reinforced concrete slabs’,
Journal of the Structural Division, December, ASCE, Vol. 104, pp. 1885-1900.
Gilbert, R.I., Patrick, M. and Adams, J.C. (1999), ‘Evaluation of crack control design rules
for reinforced concrete beams and slabs’, Conference Proceeding, Our Concrete
Environment, Australia, pp. 21-29.
Glanville, W.H. and Thomas, F.G. (1939), ‘Studies in Reinforced Concrete-IV. Further
Investigation on Creep or Flow of Concrete under Load’, Building Research Technical
Paper No. 21, London, 44 pp.
Gosh, R.S. and Malhotra, V. (1979), ‘Use of super-plasticizers as water reducers’, Cement
Concrete and Aggregates, ASTM, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 56-63.
Goto, Y. (1971), ‘Cracks formed in concrete around deformed tension bars’, ACI Journal,
April, pp. 244-251.
Guiriani, E. (1982), ‘On the effective stiffness of a bar in cracked concrete’, Bond in
Concrete, Procedings, Applied Science Publishers. London, pp. 107-126.
Gupta, A.K. and Maesterini, S.R. (1990), ‘Tension-stiffness model for reinforced concrete
bars’, Journal of Structural Engineering Div, ASCE, Vol. 116, No. 3, pp. 769-790.
Gvosdev, A.A. (1966), ‘Creep of concrete’, Mekhanica Tverdogo Tela, Moscow,

pp. 137-152.
250
Hageman, L.J., Murakami, H. and Hegemier, G.A. (1986), ‘On simulating steel-concrete
interaction in reinforced concrete. Part 2: validation studies’, Mechanics of Materials 5,
Elsevier Science Publishers, pp. 187-197.
Hatt, W.K. (1907), ‘Notes on the effects of time element in loading reinforced concrete
beams’, ASTM Proc. 7, pp. 421-433.
Hegemier, G.A. and Cheverton, K.J. (1982), ‘Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Models
for Nuclear Power Plant Applications’, S-Cubed Report No. SSS-R-81-5167, LaJolla, CA.
Hegemier, G.A., Murakami, H. and Hageman, L.J. (1985), ‘On tension stiffening in
reinforced concrete’, Mechanics of Materials 4, Elsevier Science Publishers, pp. 161-179.
Holmberg, A. (1973), ‘Crack width prediction and minimum reinforcement for crack
control’, Dansk Selskab for Byaningsstatik, Copenhagen, V. 44, No. 2, pp. 41-50.
Holmberg, A. and Lindgren, S. (1970), ‘Crack Spacing and Crack Widths Due to Normal
Force or Bending Moment’, National Swedish Council for Building Research, Doc D2,
Stockholm, 57 pp.
Houde, J. and Mirza, M.S. (1972), ‘A Study of Bond Stress-Slip Relationships in Reinforced
Concrete’, Struct. Concr. Series, No.72-8, Structs. Lab., McGill University, Canada.
Hwang, L.S. and Rizkalla, S.H. (1983), ‘Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete in Tension at
Post-Cracking Range’, Engineering Report, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Illston, J. M., Stevens, R.F. (1972), ‘Long-term cracking in reinforced concrete beams,
Proceedings, Institutions of Civil Engineers, Part 2, Vol. 53, pp. 445-459.
251
Illston, J.M. (1965), ‘The creep of concrete under uniaxial tension’, Magazine of Concrete
Research 17, No. 51, pp. 77-84.
Jiang, D.H., Shah, S.P. and Andonian, A.T. (1984), ‘Study of the transfer of tensile forces
by bond’, ACI Journal, May-June, pp. 251-259.
Kaklauskas, G. and Ghaboossi, J. (2001), ‘Sress-strain relations for cracked tensile concrete
from RC beam tests’, Journal of Structural Engineering, January, pp. 64-73.
Kankam, C.K. (1997), ‘Relationship of bond stress, steel stress, and slip in reinforced
concrete’, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 1, pp. 79-85.
Karihaloo, B.L. (1995), ‘Fracture Mechanics and Structural Concrete’, Concrete Design
and Construction Series, Essex, Longman Scientific & Technical, 330 pp.
Kaufmann, W. (1998), ‘Strength and Deformations of Structural Concrete Subjected to In-

Plane Shear and Normal Forces’, Ph.D. Dissertation, Institute of Structural Engineering,
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, 147 pp.
Kheder, G.F. (1997), ‘A mathematical model for the prediction of volume change cracking
in end-restrained concrete members’, Materials and Structures, Vol.30, April, pp.174-181.
Koch, R., Balazs, G.L. (1993), ‘Slip increase under cyclic and long term loads’, Otto-Graf-
Journal, Vol. 4, pp. 160-191.
Kolver, K. (1997), ‘Drying creep of concrete in terms of the age-adjusted effective modulus
method’, Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 49, No. 181, pp. 345-351.
Kwak, H. G. and Song, J. Y. (2002), ‘Cracking analysis of r.c. members using polynomial
strain distribution function’, Engineering Structures, Elsevier Science, pp. 455-468.
252
Leonardt, F. (1977), ‘Nachweis der Gebrauchs faehigkeit’, Vorlesunger ueber Massimbau,
Teil 4, Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Lin, C.S. and Scordelies, A.C. (1975), ‘Nonlinear analysis of r.c. shells of general form’,
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 101, pp. 523-538.
Lorman, W.R. (1940), ‘The theory of concrete creep’, Proceedings ASTM, Vol. 40,
pp. 1082-1102.
Lutz, L.A. and Gegely, P. (1967), ‘Mechanics of bond and slip of deformed bars in
concrete’, J. Amer. Concr. Inst., Vol. 64, No. 11, USA, pp. 711-721.
Lutz, L.A., Sharma, N.K. and Gergely, P. (1968), ‘Increases in crack width in reinforced
concrete beams under sustained loading’, ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 64, No. 9,
pp. 538-546.
MacGregor, J.G. (1992), ‘Reinforced Concrete’, Second Edition, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey, 848 pp.
Manfredi, G. and Pecce, M. (1998), ‘A refined r.c. beam element including bond-slip
relationship for the analysis of continuous beams’, Computers and Structures, Elsevier
Science, pp. 53-62.
Mansur, M.A., Tan, K.H., Lee, S.L. and Kasiraju, K. (1991), ‘Crack width in concrete
members reinforced with welded wire fabric’, ACI Structural Journal, March-April,
pp. 147-154.
Marti, P., Alvarez, M., Kaufmann, W. and Sigrist, V. (1998), ‘Tension chord model for
structural concrete’, Structural Engineering International, 4, pp. 287-298.
253
Marti, P., Sigrist, V. and Alvarez, M. (1997), ‘Minimum Reinforcement of Concrete
Structures’, Report No. 529, Research Grant No. 82/95, Swiss Federal Highway
Administration.
Martin, H. (1973), ‘Zusammenhang Zwischen Oberflachenbescheffenheit, Verbund und

Springwirkung von Bewehrungsstahlen unten Kurzzeitbelastungen’, Deustscher Ausschuss
fur Stahlbeton, Heft 228.
Massicotte, B., Elwi, A.E. and MacGregor, J.G. (1988), ‘Analysis of Reinforced Concrete
Panels Loaded Axially and Transversely’, Structural Engineering Report 161, University of
Alberta, Canada, 254 pp.
Massicotte, B., Elwi, A.E. and MacGregor, J.G. (1990), ‘Tension-stiffening model for
planar reinforced concrete members’, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 116, No. 11,
November, pp. 3039-3058.
Mirza, S.M. and Houde, J. (1979), ‘Study of bond stress-slip relationships in reinforced
concrete’, ACI Journal, January, pp. 19-46.
Mosley, W.H., Hulse, R. and Bungey, J.H. (1996), ‘Reinforced Concrete Design to
Eurocode 2’, MacMillan Press, London, 426 pp.
Murakami, H. and Hegemier, G.A. (1986), ‘On simulating steel-concrete interaction in

reinforced concrete. Part 1: Theoretical development’, Mechanics of Materials 5, Elsevier
Science Publishers, pp. 171-185.
Nawy, E.G. and Blair, K.W. (1971), ‘Further studies on flexural crack control in structural
slab systems. Cracking, deflection and ultimate load of concrete slab systems, SP-30’,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, pp. 1-41.
254
Nejadi, S. and Gilbert, R.I. (2004), ‘Shrinkage cracking and crack control in restrained
reinforced concrete members’, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6, pp. 840-845.
Nejadi, S. and Gilbert, R.I. (2004), ‘Shrinkage Cracking in Reinforced Concrete Members’,
Uniciv Report No. R-433, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 92 pp.
Neville, A.M. (1970), ‘Creep of Concrete: Plain, Reinforced and Prestressed’, North –
Holland Publishing Company, Netherlands, 622 pp.
Neville, A.M. (1995), ‘Properties of Concrete’, Fourth Edition, Pearson Education Limited,
England, 844 pp.
Neville, A.M., Dilger, W.H. and Brooks, J.J. (1983), ‘Creep of Plain and Structural
Concrete’, Construction Press (Longman Group Ltd), 361 pp.
Nilson, A.H. (1971), ‘Bond Stress-Slip Relations in Reinforced Concrete’, Research Report
No.345, Department of Structural Engineering, Cornell University, December, 40 pp.
Nilson, A.H. (1972), ‘Internal measurement of bond slip’, ACI Journal, July, pp. 439-441.
Noakowski, P. (1985), ‘Verbundorrientierte, kontinuierliche theorie zur ermittlung der

rissbereite’, Beton-und Stahlbetonbau, No. 7, pp. 185-190, No. 8, pp. 215-221.
Okumara, H. and Maekawa, K. (1991), ‘Nonlinear analysis and constitutive models of

reinforced concrete’, Tokyo, Japan.
Oluokun, F.A. (1991), ‘Prediction of concrete tensile strength from its compressive
strength: Evaluation of existing relations for normal weight concrete’, ACI Materials
Journal, May-June, pp. 302-309.
255
Ouyang, C., Wollrab, E., Kulkarni, S.M. and Shah, S.P. (1997), ’Prediction of cracking
response of reinforced concrete tensile members’, Journal of Structural Engineering,
January, No. 1, Vol. 123, pp. 70-77.
Park, R. and Pauly, T. (1975), ‘Reinforced Concrete Structures’, John Wiley & Sons, The
United States of America, 769 pp.
Pauw, A. (1960), ‘Static modulus of elasticity of concrete as affected by density’, ACI

Journal, Vol. 57, No. 6, USA, pp. 679-687.
Polak, M.A. and Blackwell, K.G. (1998), ‘Modeling tension in reinforced concrete
members subjected to bending and axial load’, Journal of Structural Engineering,
September, pp. 1018-1024.
Popovics, S. (1973), ‘A numerical approach to the complete stress-strain curve of concrete’,

Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 1, Pergamon Press, USA, pp. 583-599.
Prakash, D. (1976), ‘Determination of the maximum crack width in reinforced concrete

members’, ACI Journal, August, pp. 473-477.
Prasada Rao, A.S., Jayaraman, R., Vimalanandam, V. and Sai Babu, S. (1994), ‘Predicting
creep and shrinkage effects in cracked concrete elements’, Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 120, No. 9, September, pp. 2784-2792.
Rao, P.S. and Subrahmanyam, B.V. (1973), ‘Trisegmental moment-curvature relations for
reinforced concrete members’, ACI Journal, Vol. 70, No. 5, pp. 346-351.
Rehm, G. (1961), ‘Uber die Grunlagen des Verbundes Zwischen Stahl und Beton’,
Deutscher Ausschub fur Stahlbeton, Heft 138.
256
Rheinhardt, H.W. and Cornelli (1984), ‘Post-peack cyclic behaviour of concrete in uniaxial
tensile and alternating tensile and compressive loading’, Cement and Concrete Research,
Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 263-270.
RILEM TC 148-SSC (1997), ‘Strain-softening of concrete in uniaxial compression’,

Materials and Structures, Vol. 30, pp. 195-209.
Rizkalla, S.H. and Hwang, L.S. (1984), ‘Crack prediction for members in uniaxial tension’,
ACI Journal, November-December, pp. 572-579.
Rostasy, F.S., Keep, B. (1982), ‘Time-dependence of bond’, Bond in Concrete,

Proceedings, Applied Science Publishers, London, pp. 183-192.
Scanlon, A. (1971), ‘Time Dependent Deflections of Reinforced Concrete Slabs’, PhD

Thesis, University of Alberta, Canada.
Scanlon, A. and Murray, D.W. (1974), ‘Time-dependent reinforced concrete slab

deflections’, Journal of the Structural Division, September, pp. 1911-1924.
Somayaji, S. and Shah, S.P. (1981), ‘Bond stress versus slip relationship and cracking
response of tension members’, ACI Journal, Proceedings Vol. 78, No. 3, May-June,
pp. 217-225.
Tepfers, R. (1973), ‘ A Theory of Band Applied to Tensile Reinforcement Splices fod Def
Deformed Bars’, Chalmers University of Technology, Division of Concrete Structures,
Publication, No. 73/2.
Tepfers, R. (1979), ‘Cracking of concrete cover along anchored deformed reinforcing bars’,
Concr. Res., Vol. 31, No. 106, pp. 3-12.
257
Tepfers, R. (1980), ‘Bond stress along lapped reinforcing bars’, Magazin of Concrete
Research, Vol. 32, Issue 112, pp. 135-142.
Thorenfeldt, E., Tomaszewicz, A. and Jensen, J.J. (1987), ‘Mechanical properties of high-
strength concrete and application in design’, Proceedings of Symposium Utilization of High
Strength Concrete, Trrondheim, pp. 149-159.
Torres, L.I., Lopez-Almansa, F. and Bozzo, L.M. (2004), ‘Tension-stiffening model for
cracked flexural concrete members’, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 8,
August, pp. 1242-1251.
Trost, H. (1967), ‘Auswirkungen des superpositionsprinzips auf kriech-und relaxation-

probleme bei beton und spannbeton’, Beton-und Stahlbeton bau, 62, No. 10, pp. 230-238,
No. 11, pp. 261-269.
Troxell, G.E., Raphael, J.M., and Davis, R.E. (1958), ‘Long-time creep and shrinkage tests
of plain reinforced concrete’, Proceedings, ASTM, V. 58, pp. 1101-1120.
Uy. B. (1997), ‘Long-term service-load behaviour of simply supported profiled composite

slabs’, Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs Structs & Bldgs, Australia, pp. 193-207.
Van Mier, J.G.M. (1997), ‘Fracture Processes of Concrete’, CRC Press, USA, 448 pp.
Warner, R.F., Rangan, B.V., Hall, A.S. and Faulkes, K.A. (1998), ‘Concrete Structures’,
Addison Wesley Longman, Australia, 974 pp.
Wollrab, E., Kulkarni, S.M., Ouyang, C. and Shah, S.P. (1996), ‘Response of reinforced
concrete panels under uniaxial tension’, ACI Structural Journal, November-December,
pp. 648-657.
258
Woolson, I.H. (1905), ‘Some remarkable tests indicating flow of concrete under pressure’,
Engineering News 54, No. 18.
Wu, Z., Yoshikawa, H. and Tanabe, T. (1991), ‘Tension stiffness model for cracked
reinforced concrete’, Journal of Structural Engineering Div, ASCE 117, pp. 715-732.
Yang, S. and Chen, J. (1988), ‘Bond slip and crack width calculation of tension members’,
ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 85, No. 7, pp. 414-422.
Yankelevsky, D.Z. (1985), ‘Bond action between concrete and a deformed bar- A new
model’, ACI Journal, March-April, pp. 154-161.
Youssef, M. and Ghobarah, A. (1999), ’Strength deterioration due to bond slip and concrete
crushing in modeling of reinforced concrete members’, ACI Structural Journal, November-
December, pp. 956-966.
Zhandarov, S.F. and Pisanova, V. (1997), ‘The local bond strength and its determination by
fragmentation and pull-out tests’, Composites Science and Technology 57, Elsevier Science
limited, pp. 957-964.
Zhang, J., Li, V.C. and Wu, C. (2000), ‘Influence of reinforcing bars on shrinkage stresses
in concrete slabs’, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, December, pp. 1297-1300.
259
APPENDIX I
WORKED EXAMPLES
Appendix I, Worked Examples
SHRINKAGE CRACKING
CALCULATION OF FINAL CRACK SPACING AND CRACK

WIDTH
AI.1 Calculation of Final Crack Spacing and Crack Width for Slab
‘ RS1-a ’
AI.1.1 Using the Analytical Model Presented in Chapter 4
Input Data: L=2000 mm; t =102.2 mm; As =339 mm2; db=12 mm;
ϕ* =0.98; ε*sh = - 457×10-6; ft (7)=1.55 MPa; ft (28)=1.97 MPa;
f′c(3) =8.17 MPa; f′c(28)=24.25 MPa; Ec(3) =13240 MPa;
Ec(28) =22810 MPa, Es=2×105 MPa; and fy=546 MPa.
The concrete area and reinforcement ratio are
Ac = Agross -As = 600×102.2 - 339 = 60980 mm2 and

ρ = As / Ac = 339/60980 = 0.00556
the modular ratio is

n = Es /Ec(3) = 200000/13240 = 15.1
and the distance so, over which the concrete and steel stresses vary, is given by Eqn 4.1:
261
db
so = = 216 mm
10 ρ
The final effective modulus (Eqn 4.14) is
E c (3) 13240
E *e = = = 6690 MPa
1 + φ * 1 + 0.98
and the corresponding effective modular ratio is
Es 2 × 10 5
n* = = = 29.9
E *e 6690
The ratio C1 is given by Eqn 4.6:
2so 2 × 216
C1 = = = 0.0776
3L − 2 s o 3 × 2000 − 2 × 216
and the restraining force immediately after first cracking is obtained from Eqn 4.2 (where ft
is taken as the 7 day value as cracking generally occurs within the first week of drying):
n ρ f t Ac 15.1 × 0.00556 × 1.55 × 60980

N cr = = = 47240 N
C1 + nρ (1 + C1 ) 0.0776 + 15.1 × 0.00556 × (1 + 0.0776)
The concrete stress away from the crack immediately after first cracking is given by Eqn
4.3:
N cr (1 + C1 ) 47240(1 + 0.0776)
σ c1 = = = 0.83 MPa
Ac 609800
and the estimate of the average concrete stress in the period after first cracking is given by
Eqn 4.11:
262
σ c1 + f t 0.83 + 1.55
σ av = = = 1.19 MPa
2 2
For long-term calculations, the final value for the distance so (bond transfer length) may be
calculated as follow:
1.33d b 1.33 × 12
so = = = 287 mm
10 ρ 10 × 0.00556
By trail and error, it is assumed that the number of cracks m=3. This is demonstrated
subsequently. From Eqn 4.18, the final restraining force is
3 × 339 × 200000 × 0.305 (3 × 2000 − 2 × 287 × 3) × 29.9 × 339

N (∞ ) = − (1.19 − 457 × 10 −6 × 6690)
2 × 287 × 3 2 × 287 × 3
= 82930 N
From Equ 4.9 the final steel stress at the cracks is
N (∞ ) 82930
σ s*2 = = = 245 MPa
As 339
and the final steel stress in Region 1 is obtained using Eqn 4.8:
− 2 × 287 × 3 3 × 0.305 × 200000

σ s*1 = × 245 + = −55.7 MPa
3 × 2000 − 2 × 287 × 3 3 × 2000 − 2 × 287 × 3
The final concrete stress in Region 1 is given by Eqn 4.16:
N (∞ ) − σ * s1 As 82930 + 55.7 × 339

σ *
c1 = = = 1.67 MPa
Ac 60980
263
which is less than the final tensile strength taken as the 28 day value (ft(28)=1.97 MPa). If
it is initially assumed that m=2, then σ c*1 ≥ f t (28) and so the initial assumption that m=3 is
correct.
Finally, the average crack width is obtained from Eqn 4.22:
⎡ 1.67 2 ⎤
w = −⎢ (667 − × 287) − 457 × 10 −6 × 667⎥ = 0.19 mm.
⎣ 6690 3 ⎦
AI.1.2 Using the Experimental Results (RS1-a)
The final steel stress at the crack (σ*s2), the final steel stress away from the crack (σ*s1) and
the final concrete stress away from the crack (σ*c1) are determined from the experimental
data as follows:
The average final steel strain, measured by strain gauges at the first crack, is
ε (ave )s 2 = 1367 με
and hence the final steel stress at the crack is
σ s*2 = E s .ε (ave )s 2 = 2 × 10 5 × 1367 = 273 MPa
The final shrinkage-induced restraining force N(∞) is therefore

N (∞) = σ s*2 × As = 274 × 339 = 92680 N
The average final steel strain, measured by the demec targets away from the crack, is
ε (ave )s1 = −239 με
264
and the average final steel stress away from the crack is therefore
σ s*1 = E s × ε (ave )s1 = 2 × 10 5 × (−239) = −47.9 MPa
The steel compressive force at any section away from the crack is
C s = σ s*1 × As = −47.9 × 339 = −16230 N
From equilibrium considerations, the concrete tensile force at any section away from the
crack is
Tc = N (∞) − C s = 92680 − (−16230) = 108910 N
and the final concrete stress away from the crack is therefore
Tc 108910
σ c*1 = = = 1.79 MPa
Ac 60980
AI.2 Calculation of Final Crack Spacing and Crack Width for Slab
‘ RS2-b ’
Input Data: L=2000 mm; t =98.3 mm; As =236 mm2; db=10 mm;
ϕ* =1.16; ε*sh = - 495×10-6; ft (7)=1.60 MPa; ft (28)=2.10 MPa;
f′c(3) =10.7 MPa; f′c(28)=28.4 MPa; Ec(3) =16130 MPa;
Ec(28) =223210 MPa, Es=2×105 MPa; and fy=546 MPa.
265
The concrete area and reinforcement ratio are
Ac = Agross -As = 600 × 98.3 - 236 = 58740 mm2 and

ρ = As / Ac = 236/58740 = 0.00402
the modular ratio is

n = Es /Ec(3) = 200000/16130 = 12.4
and the distance so, over which the concrete and steel stresses vary, is given by Eqn 4.1:
db
so = = 249 mm
10 ρ
The final effective modulus (Eqn 4.14) is
E c (3) 16130
E *e = = = 7470 MPa
1 + φ * 1 + 1.16
and the corresponding effective modular ratio is

Es 2 × 10 5
n* = = = 26.8
E *e 7470
The ratio C1 is given by Eqn 4.6:
2so 2 × 249
C1 = = = 0.0905
3L − 2 s o 3 × 2000 − 2 × 249
and the restraining force immediately after first cracking is obtained from Eqn 4.2 (where ft
is taken as the 7 day value as cracking generally occurs within the first week of drying):
266
n ρ f t Ac 12.4 × 0.00402 × 1.60 × 58740

N cr = = = 32330 N
C1 + nρ (1 + C1 ) 0.0905 + 12.4 × 0.00402 × (1 + 0.0905)
The concrete stress away from the crack immediately after first cracking is given by Eqn
4.3:
N cr (1 + C1 ) 32330(1 + 0.0905)
σ c1 = = = 0.60 MPa
Ac 58740
and the estimate of the average concrete stress in the period after first cracking is given by
Eqn 4.11:
σ c1 + f t 0.60 + 1.60
σ av = = = 1.10 MPa
2 2
For long-term calculations, the final value for distance so (bond transfer length) may be
calculated as follow:
1.33d b 1.33 × 10
so = = = 331 mm
10 ρ 10 × 0.00402
By trail and error, it is assumed that the number of cracks m=3. This is demonstrated
subsequently. From Eqn 4.18, the final restraining force is
3 × 236 × 200000 × 0.315 (3 × 2000 − 2 × 331 × 3) × 26.8 × 236

N (∞ ) = − (1.10 − 495 × 10 −6 × 7470)
2 × 331 × 3 2 × 331 × 3
= 55610 N
From Equ 4.9 the final steel stress at the cracks is
N (∞ ) 55610
σ s*2 = = = 236 MPa
As 236
267
and the final steel stress in Region 1 is obtained using Eqn 4.8:
− 2 × 331 × 3 3 × 0.331 × 200000

σ s*1 = × 236 + = −69.5 MPa
3 × 2000 − 2 × 331 × 3 3 × 2000 − 2 × 331 × 3
The final concrete stress in Region 1 is given by Eqn 4.16:
N (∞ ) − σ * s1 As 55610 + 69.5 × 236

σ c*1 = = = 1.23 MPa
Ac 58740
which is less than the final tensile strength taken as the 28 day value (ft(28)=1.97 MPa). If
it is initially assumed that m=2, then σ c*1 ≥ f t (28) and so the initial assumption that m=3 is
correct.
Finally, the average crack width is obtained from Eqn 4.22:
⎡ 1.23 2 ⎤
w = −⎢ (667 − × 331) − 457 × 10 −6 × 667 ⎥ = 0.26 mm
⎣ 7470 3 ⎦
AI.2.2 Using the Experimental Results (RS2-b)
The final steel stress at the crack (σ*s2), the final steel stress away from the crack (σ*s1) and
the final concrete stress away from the crack (σ*c1) are determined from the experimental
data as follows:
The average final steel strain, measured by strain gauges at the first crack, is
ε (ave )s 2 = 1450 με
and hence the final steel stress at the crack is
268
σ s*2 = E s .ε (ave )s 2 = 2 × 10 5 × 1450 = 290 MPa
The final shrinkage-induced restraining force N(∞) is therefore
N (∞) = σ s*2 × As = 290 × 236 = 68440 N
The average final steel strain, measured by the demec targets away from the crack, is
ε (ave )s1 = −375 με
and the average final steel stress away from the crack is therefore
σ s*1 = E s × ε (ave )s1 = 2 × 10 5 × (−375) = −75.0 MPa
The steel compressive force at any section away from the crack is
C s = σ s*1 × As = −75.0 × 236 = −17700 N
From equilibrium considerations, the concrete tensile force at any section away from the
crack is
Tc = N (∞) − C s = 68440 − (−17700) = 86140 N
and the final concrete stress away from the crack is therefore
Tc 86140
σ c*1 = = = 1.47 MPa
Ac 58740
269
FLEXURAL CRACKING
AI.3 Calculation of the Instantaneous and Time-dependent Crack Width

and Crack Spacing for Slab ‘ S1-a ’
The following input data was measured in the laboratory and has been assumed in the
calculations:
Mmax=6.81 kNm , (Ec)14=22820 MPa , fct=2.8 MPa , Es=2×105 MPa , db=12 mm ,

Ast=226 mm2 , (εsh)394=-825×10-6 mm and, (φ)394=1.71
400 W=2.9+1.55=4.45 kN/m
130
R=7.8 kN R=7.8 kN
25
3500 mm
40
Figure A.I.1 Cross-section and elevation - slab S1-a
Instantaneous Behaviour
- Cracked Section Analysis
Depth of compressive zone, kd and maximum steel stress, σs.max may be calculated
270
from a cracked section analysis using modular ratio theory as follows:
E s 2 × 10 5
n= = = 8.76
Ec 22820
Ast 226
ρ= = = 0.00435
bd 400 × 130
nρ = 0.0381
k= (nρ )2 − 2nρ − nρ = 0.24
Therefore, the depth of compressive zone is:
d n = kd = 0.24 × 130 = 31.3 mm
The second moment of area of the fully-cracked transformed cross-section is:
3
bd 400(31.3) 3
I cr = n + nAst (d − d n ) 2 = + 8.76 × 226(130 − 31.3) 2 = 23.37 × 10 6 mm 4
3 3
And the maximum steel stress at the crack may be calculated as:
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 24.91 × 10 6 (1 − 0.263)300

σ s. max = = = 227.5 MPa
I cr 212.2 × 10 6
- Effective Tension Area:
The reduction factor Rf and effective tension area of concrete, Acti may be calculated by
means of Equations 7.6-b and 7.6-a respectively, as follows:
271
R f = 0.31(nb − 1) = 0.31(2 − 1) = 0.31 ≤ 1 (Equation 7.6-b)
and
Act = 2nb .d c .R f .s = 2 × 2 × (161 − 130) × 0.31 × 308 = 11839.5 mm 2 (Equation 7.6-a)
Therefore, the effective reinforcement ratio is:
Ast 226
ρ ef = = = 0.0191
Acti 11839.5
- Instantaneous Bond Shear Stress:
From Equation 7.8

α1=2 (σs.max=251.7 MPa)
α2=1 (instantaneous behaviour)
the instantaneous bond shear stress is
τ b = α 1α 2 f ct = 2 × 1 × 2.8 = 5.6 MPa
- Calculation of Crack Spacing:
The maximum crack spacing for instantaneous behaviour may be calculated from Equation
7.11:
f ct d b 2.8 × 12
( s rm ) max = = = 157 mm
2τ b ρ ef 2 × 5.6 × 0.0191
The minimum and average crack spacing are:
272
1 1
( s rm ) min = ( s rm ) max = × 157 = 78.5 mm
2 2
( s rm ) max + ( s rm ) min 157 + 78.5

( s rm ) ave = = = 118 mm
2 2
Calculation of Crack Width:
Maximum crack width for instantaneous behaviour may be obtained from Equation 7.38:
s rm ⎡ τ b s rm ⎤ 157 ⎡ 5.6 × 157 ⎤

wi = ⎢σ s. max − (1 + nρ ef )⎥ = 5 ⎢
251.7 − (1 + 8.76 × 0.0191)⎥ = 0.13 mm
Es ⎣ db ⎦ 2 × 10 ⎣ 12 ⎦
This is in good agreement with the measured maximum instantaneous crack width of
0.10mm.
Time-dependent Behaviour
- Bond shear stress:
From Equation 7.8

α1=2 (σs.max=251.7 MPa)
α2=0.5 (time-dependent behaviour)
the bond shear stress for sustained loads is
τ b (t ) = α 1α 2 f ct = 2 × 0.5 × 2.8 = 2.8 MPa
273
- Calculation of Crack Spacing:
The final maximum crack spacing for long-term behaviour may be calculated from
Equation 7.69:
( s rm. f ) max = 0.67( s rm ) max = 0.67 × 157 = 105 mm
The final minimum and average crack spacing for long-term behaviour are:
1 1
( s rm. f ) min = ( s rm ) max = × 157 = 78.5 mm
2 2
( s rm. f ) max + ( s rm. f ) min 105 + 78.5

( s rm. f ) ave = = = 92 mm
2 2
- Calculation of Crack Width:
The effective modulus and age-adjusted effective modulus of concrete at time t=394
days are
Ec 22820
Ee = = = 8421 MPa
1 + ϕ 1 + 1.71
Ec 22820
Ee = = = 9637 MPa
1 + χ .ϕ 1 + 0.8 × 1.71
and the effective and age-adjusted modular ratios respectively are:
274
E s 2 × 10 5
n* = = = 23.75
E e 8420.7
E s 2 × 10 5
n* = = = 20.75
E e 9636.8
The final maximum crack width for time-dependent behaviour may be obtained
using the final maximum crack spacing, (srm.f)max by means of Equation 7.68:
s rm ⎡ τ b (t ) s rm ⎤
w(t ) = ⎢σ s. max − (1 + 2n * ρ ef − n * ρ ef ) − ε sh (t ) E s ⎥
Es ⎣ db ⎦
105 ⎡ 2.8 × 105 −6 5⎤

w(t ) = ⎢⎣251.7 − 12 (1 + 2 × 23.75 × 0.0191 − 20.75 × 0.0191) − (−825 × 10 )2 × 10 ⎥⎦
2 × 10 5
w(t ) = 0.20 mm
This is in excellent agreement with the measured maximum final crack width of 0.20 mm.
AI.3.2 Crack width and Crack Spacing Predicted by International Codes
M max = 6.81 kNm , M cr = 4.9 kNm , I cr = 23.37 × 10 6 mm 4 , D = 161 mm , d = 130 mm ,
d n = 31.3 mm , d b = 12 mm , Ast = 226 mm 2 , E c = 22820 MPa , s = 308 mm , n = 8.76

(εsh)394=-825×10-6 mm
275
- Eurocode 2-1991 (EC2-91)

db 12
i) Acef = 2.5(c + )b = 2.5(25 + )400 = 31000 mm 2
2 2
⎛ D − dn ⎞ ⎛ 161 − 31.3 ⎞
ii) Acef = ⎜ ⎟b = ⎜ ⎟400 = 17292 mm
2
⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎝ 3 ⎠
Therefore
Ast 226
ρ ef = = = 0.0131
Acef 17292
The average final crack spacing is given by Equation 7.73:
db 12
s rm = 50 + k1 k 2 = 50 + 0.8 × 0.5 = 142 mm
4 ρ ef 4 × 0.0131
By use of Equation 7.71 the coefficient ζ for long-term loading may be calculated as:
2
⎛ M ⎞
2
4.9 ⎞
ζ t = 1 − β 1 β 2 ⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ = 1 − 1 × 0.5⎛⎜ ⎟ = 0.74
⎝ M max ⎠ ⎝ 6.8 ⎠
The curvature at state 2 (fully cracked section) is:
276
M max 6.8 × 10 6
κ2 = = = 12.75 × 10 −6
E c I cr 22820 × 23.37 × 10 6
The steel strain in state 2 is:
ε s 2 = κ 2 (d − d n ) = 12.75 × 10 −6 × (130 − 31.3) = 1258 × 10 −6
or
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 6.8 × 10 6 (1 − 0.24) × 130

ε s2 = = = 1259 × 10 −6
E s I cr 2 × 10 × 23.37 × 10
5 6
The average crack width, wm and design crack width, wk may be obtained from Equations
7.70 and 7.72 respectively;
wm = s rmζ t ε s 2 = 142 × 0.74 × 1258 × 10 −6 = 0.13 mm
wk = β ec .wm = 1.7 × 0.13 = 0.22 mm
For short-term behaviour:
2
⎛ M ⎞
2
4.9 ⎞
ζ i = 1 − β 1 β 2 ⎜⎜ cr ⎟⎟ = 1 − 1 × 1⎛⎜ ⎟ = 0.48
⎝ M max ⎠ ⎝ 6.8 ⎠
wm = s rmζ i ε s 2 = 142 × 0.48 × 1258 × 10 −6 = 0.09 mm
wk = β ec .wm = 1.7 × 0.09 = 015 mm
277
- CEB-FIP 1990 (MC-90)

db 12
i) Acef = 2.5(c + )b = 2.5(25 + )400 = 31000 mm 2
2 2
⎛ D − dn ⎞ ⎛ 161 − 31.3 ⎞
ii) Acef = ⎜ ⎟b = ⎜ ⎟400 = 17292 mm
2
⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎝ 3 ⎠
Therefore
Ast 226
ρ ef = = = 0.0131
Acef 17292
The maximum crack spacing may be obtained by means of Equation 7.76:
db 12
l s. max = = = 254 mm
3.6 ρ ef 3.6 × 0.0131
For stabilized cracking the average crack spacing is (Clause 3.2.2):
2
( s rm ) ave = × 254 = 169 mm
3
The maximum steel strain at the crack may be calculated as follow:
278
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 6.8 × 10 6 (1 − 0.24) × 130

ε s2 = = = 1259 × 10 −6
E s I cr 2 × 10 × 23.37 × 10
5 6
The steel strain at the crack, under a force causing stress equal to fct may be obtained by
means of Equation 7.77:
f ctm 2.52
ε sr 2 = (1 + nρ ef ) = (1 + 8.76 × 0.0131) = 1072 × 10 −6
E s ρ ef 2 × 10 × 0.0131
5
The maximum crack width for short-term loading is:
wk = l s. max (ε s 2 − β mc.i ε sr 2 − ε cs ) = 254(1259 × 10 −6 − 0.6 × 1072 × 10 −6 + 0) = 0.15 mm
And the maximum crack width for long-term loading is:
wk = l s. max (ε s 2 − β mc.t ε sr 2 − ε cs ) = 254(1259 × 10 −6 − 0.38 × 1072 × 10 −6 + 825 × 10 −6 ) = 0.42 mm
- ACI318-89 and ACI318-99
The maximum crack spacing may be calculated by means of Equations 7.83 and 7.82:
2 2
⎛ s ⎞ ⎛ 308 ⎞
te = d c ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟ = (161 − 130) ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟ = 83 mm
⎝ 4d c ⎠ ⎝ 4(161 − 130) ⎠
( s rm ) max = 4t e = 4 × 83 = 332 mm
279
The maximum steel stress at the cracked section, fs and the effective area per bar, A may be
obtained as:
nM (1 − k )d 8.76 × 6.8 × 10 6 (1 − 0.24) × 130

fs = = = 252 MPa
I cr 23.37 × 10 6
Ae = 2d c .s = 2 × (161 − 130) × 308 = 19096 mm 2
The parameters z and βac may be calculated by use of Equations 7.79 and 7.81 respectively:
z = f s 3 d c Ae × 10 −3 = 252 × 3 (161 − 130) × 19096 × 10 −3 = 21159 × 10 −3 kN/mm
D − d n 161 − 31.3
β ac = = = 1.314
d − d n 130 − 31.3
and finally, the maximum crack width for both short-term and long-term behaviour may be
obtained by means of Equation 7.80:
wmax = 0.011β ac .z = 0.011 × 1.314 × 21159 × 10 −3 = 0.31 mm
280
APPENDIX II
GRAPHS OF CONCRETE SURFACE AND

STEEL STRAINS
AII.1- Shrinkage Cracking

Appendix II, Graphs of Concrete Surface and Steel Strains
Steel strain by demec (RS1a - 3N12 )

1500
1
1250 2
Strain (microstrain)
3
1000 4
750 5
6
500 7
8
250
9
0 10
11
-250 12
-500 13
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by demec (RS1a-3N12 )

1500 14
1250 15
16
1000
17
750 18
500 19
250 20
21
0
22
-250 23
-500 24
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Age (days)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS1a - 3N12)

2000
11
1750
1500 12
1250 13
1000 14
750 16
500
17
250
18
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (dayes)
Figure AII.1 Steel strain and concrete surface strain versus time curves for slab specimen
RS1-a
282
Steel strain by demec (RS1b - 3N12 )

1800 1
1500 2
1200 3
900 4
600 5
300 6
0 7
-300 8
-600 9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by demec (RS1b- 3N12 )

1500
14
1200 15
16
900 17
600 18
19
300 20
0 21
22
-300 23
24
-600
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS1b - 3N12 )

1400
0
1200 1
1000 2
3
800
4
600
5
400 6
200 7
8
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
RS1-b
283
Steel Strain by Demec (RS2a - 3N10 )

1800 1
1500 2
3
1200 4
900 5
6
600 7
300 8
9
0 10
-300 11
12
-600 13
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Steel strain by demec (RS2a - 3N10 )

1800
1
1500
2
1200 3
4
900 5
6
600 7
8
300
9
0 10
11
-300 12
13
-600
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS2a - 3N10 )

2100
10
1800
11
1500
13
1200
14
900
15
600
16
300
17
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
RS2-a
284
Steel strain by demec (RS2b - 3N10)

1250 1
1000 2
750 3
500 4
250 5
0 6
-250 7
8
-500
9
-750
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 11 12 13 14 15
0 0 0 0 0 0
Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by dem ec (S2b) 1

Concrete surface strain by demec (RS2b-3N10)
2
1750 3
1500
1250 4
1000 5
750
500 6
250
7
0
-250 8
-500
-750 9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
10
Age (days)
11
SteelSteel
strainstrain by electronic
by electric strain strain
gauges guages (S2b)
(RS2b-3N10) 1
2
3000
2500 4
2000 5
1500
7
1000
8
500
0 9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Age (days) 6
RS2-b
285
Steel strain by demec (RS3a - 2N10)

3600 1
2
3000 3
2400 4
5
1800 6
7
1200
8
600 9
10
0 11
-600 12
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by demec (RS3a - 2N10)

3950
12
3300 13
14
2650 15
2000 16
17
1350 18
19
700
20
50 21
22
-600
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS3a - 2N10 )

3500
22
3000
2500 23
2000
24
1500
25
1000
500 26
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Figure A.II.5 Steel strain and concrete surface strain versus time curves for slab
Figure AII.5 Steel strain and concrete surface strain versus time for slab specimens
specimen RS3-a
RS3-a
286

2900 1
2400 2
3
1900 4
5
1400
6
900 7
8
400
9
-100 10
11
-600
23
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by demec (RS3b - 2N10)

3900
12
3400
13
2900
14
2400 15
1900 16
1400 17
18
900
19
400
20
-100 21
-600 22
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (dys)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS3b - 2N10 )

4000
20
3500
3000 21
2500
22
2000
23
1500
1000 24
500
25
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
RS3-b
287
Steel strain by demec (RS4a - 4N10)

1000 1
2
800 3
4
600 5
6
400 7
8
200
9
0 10
11
-200 12
13
-400 14
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by demec (RS4a - 4N10)

1200
15
900 16
17
600 18
19
300 20
21
0
22
-300 23
24
-600 25
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS4a - 4N10)

1800
27
1500 28
1200 31
32
900
33
600 34
300 36
37
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
RS4-a
288

1200
1
1000 2
3
800 4
5
600 6
400 7
8
200 9
10
0 11
12
-200 13
-400 14
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Concrete surface strain by demec (RS4b - 4N10)

1400 15
1200 16
1000 17
800 18
19
600
20
400
21
200 22
0 23
-200 24
-400 25
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
Steel strain by strain gauges (RS4b - 4N10)

1800
21
1500 30
31
1200 32
33
900
35
600 36
37
300 38
39
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Age (days)
RS4-b
289
Steel Pins and Demec Surface Targets (Shrinkage Cracking)

2000
1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12
1000 2660 1000

Slab RS2-b
2000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1000
22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12
23
1000 2660 1000
Slabs RS3-a & RS3-b
2000
7
1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 13
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14
8
1000 2660 1000
Slabs RS1-a, RS1-b & RS2-a
2000
8
7
1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 11 12 13 14
25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15
9
1000 2660 1000
Slabs RS4-a & RS4-b

Steel Pin
Demec Surface Target
290
AII.2- FLEXURAL CRACKING

(Short-term Tests)
Surface Strain for B1-a ( 2N16, Cb=40 mm)

1
5000
2
4000 3
4
3000
5
2000 6
7
1000
8
0 9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10
-1000
11
P (KN)
Figure AII.9 Concrete surface strain at steel level for beam B1-a
Surface Strain for B1-b (2N16 , Cb=40 mm)

1
3000
2
2500
3
2000
4
1500
5
1000 6
500 7
0 8
-500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
Figure AII.10 Concrete surface strain at steel level for beam B1-b
291
Surface Strain for B2-a ( 2N16, Cb=25 mm)

3000 1
2500 2
Strain(microstrain)
2000 3
4
1500
5
1000
6
500
7
0
8
-500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
Surface Strain for B2-b ( 2N16, Cb=25 mm) 1

3000
2
2500 3
2000 4
1500 5
1000 6
500 7
0 8
-500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9
10
-1000
11
P (KN)
292
Surface Strain for B3-a (3N16,Cb=25 mm) 1

2500 2
Strain (microstrain) 2000 3
1500 4
5
1000
6
500
7
0 8
-500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
Surface Strain for B3-b (3N16 , Cb=25 mm)

2500 1
2
2000
3
1500 4
1000 5
6
500
7
0
8
-500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
293
Surface Strain for S1-a (2N12, C b=25 mm)

3000 1
2500 2
2000 3
4
1500
5
1000
6
500
7
0
8
-500 0 5 10 15
9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
Figure AII.15 Concrete surface strain at steel level for slab S1-a
Surface Strain for S1-b (2N12 , Cb=25 mm) 1

3500
2
3000
3
Strain 9microstrain)
2500
4
2000
5
1500
6
1000
7
500
8
0
9
-500 0 5 10 15
10
-1000
11
P (KN)
Figure AII.16 Concrete surface strain at steel level for slab S1-b
294
Surface Strain for S2-a (3N12, C b=25mm)

3000 1
2500 2
2000 3
4
1500
5
1000
6
500
7
0
8
-500 0 5 10 15 20 25
9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
Surface Strain for S2-b (3N12 , Cb=25 mm)

3000 1
2
2500
3
2000
4
1500
5
1000 6
500 7
0 8
-500 0 5 10 15 20 25 9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
295
Surface Strain for S3-a (4N12, C b=25 mm)

3000 1
Strain (microstrain) 2500 2
2000 3
4
1500
5
1000
6
500
7
0
8
-500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
Surface Strain for S3-b (4N12 , Cb=25 mm) 1

3000
2
2500
3
2000
4
1500 5
1000 6
500 7
0 8
-500 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 9
-1000 10
P (KN) 11
296
AII.3- FLEXURAL CRACKING

(Long-term Tests)
1
Surface Strain by Demec (B1-a) 2
600 3
500
Strain (microstrain
4
400
5
300
6
200
7
100
0 8
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
-100 9
Age (days) 10
1
Steel Strain by Straingauges (B1-a) 2
3
2000
Strain (microstrain
4
1500 5
6
1000
7
500 8
9
0 10
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
11
Age (days) 12
13
Figure AII.21 Concrete surface strain and steel strain for beam B1-a
( 2N16, Cb=40mm , 50%Pu )
297
1
Surface Strain by Demec (B1-b) 2
500
3
400
Strain (microstrain
4
300
200 5
100 6
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 7
-100
8
-200
-300 9
Age (days) 10
1
Steel Strain by Straingauges (B1-b)
2
2000 4
5
1500
6
7
1000
8
500 9
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 11
Age (days) 12
Figure AII.22 Concrete surface strain and steel strain for beam B1-b
( 2N16, Cb=40mm , 30%Pu )
298
1
Surface Strain by Demec (B2-a)
2
800
3
Strain (microstrain
600 4
400 5
6
200
7
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 8
-200 9
Age (days) 10
2
Steel Strain by Straingauges (B2-a)
3
2000
4
1500
6
1000
8
500 9
0 10
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Age (days) 12
Figure AII.23 Concrete surface strain and steel strain for beam B2-a
( 2N16, Cb=25mm , 50%Pu )
299
1
Surface Strain by Demec (B2-b)
2
500
3
400
Strain (microstrain
4
300
200 5
100 6
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 7
-100
-200 8
-300 9
Age (days) 10
1
Steel Strain by Straingauges (B2-b)
1200
3
1000
800 5
600
6
400
200
7
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Age (days) 9
Figure AII.24 Concrete surface strain and steel strain for beam B2-b
( 2N16, Cb=25mm , 30%Pu )
300
1
Surface Strain by Demec (B3-a)
2
700
3
600
Strain (microstrain
500 4
400 5
300
200 6
100 7
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 8
-100
-200 9
Age (days) 10
Figure AII.25 Concrete surface strain for beam B3-a ( 3N16 , Cb=25mm , 50%Pu )
1
Surface Strain by Demec (B3-b)
2
400
3
300
Strain (microstrain
4
200
5
100
6
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
7
-100
8
-200
Age (days) 10
Figure AII.26 Concrete surface strain for beam B3-b ( 3N16 , Cb=25mm , 30%Pu )
301
1
Surface Strain by Demec (S1-a) 2
1200
3
1000
800 4
600 5
400 6
200
7
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
8
-200
-400 9
Age (days) 10
Figure AII.27 Concrete surface strain for slab S1-a ( 2N12 , Cb=25mm , 50%wu )
1
Surface Strain by Demec (S1-b) 2
1000
3
800
Strain (microstrain
4
600
5
400
6
200
7
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
-200 8
-400 9
Age (days) 10
Figure AII.28 Concrete surface strain for slab S1-b ( 2N12 , Cb=25mm , 30%wu )
302
1
Surface Strain by Demec (S2-a) 2
1200
3
1000
800 4
600 5
400
6
200
7
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
-200 8
-400 9
Age (days)
10
Steel Strain by Straingauges (S2-a) 2
1800 3
1600 4
1400
5
1200
6
1000
800 7
600 8
400
10
200
11
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
12
Age (days)
13
Figure AII.29 Concrete surface strain and steel strain for slab S2-a
( 3N12 , Cb=25mm , 50%wu )
303
1
Surface Strain by Demac (S2-b)
2
800
700 3
Strain (microstrain
600 4
500
400 5
300 6
200
100 7
0 8
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
-100
-200 9
Age (days) 10
2
Steel Strain by Straingauges (S2-b) 3
2000 4
1800 5
Strain (microstrain
1600
6
1400
1200 7
1000 8
800
9
600
400 10
200 11
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 12
Age (days) 13
Figure AII.30 Concrete surface strain and steel strain for slab S2-b
( 3N12 , Cb=25mm , 30%wu )
304
1
Surface Strain by Demec (S3-a)
2
1000
900 3
Strain (microstrain
800
4
700
600 5
500
400 6
300
7
200
100 8
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
9
Age (days) 10
Figure AII.31 Concrete surface strain for slab S3-a ( 4N12 , Cb=25mm , 50%wu )
1
Surface Strain by Demec (S3-b)
2
600
3
500
Strain (microstrain
400 4
300 5
200
100 6
0 7
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
-100
8
-200
-300 9
Age (days) 10
Figure AII.32 Concrete surface strain for slab S3-b ( 4N12 , Cb=25mm , 30%wu )
305
APPENDIX III
EXPERIMENTAL DATA
Appendix III, Experimental Data
AIII.1- Shrinkage Cracking

Table AIII.1 Steel strain by demec for slab RS1-a
STEEL STRAIN BY DEMEC
Slab RS1-a
Slab S1a ( 3Y12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Da te Temp . Ag e Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ingStra in Rea d ing Stra in
12/ 7/ 01 16 3 385 430 761 445 478 720 725 517 465 352 622 657 756
12/ 7/ 01 16 3 395 433 767 448 484 720 727 516 466 356 631 659 757
13/ 7/ 01 15 4 395 0 432 -6.3 765 -13 446 -13 483 -6.3 721 6.3 727 0 519 18.9 464 -12.6 356 0 636 31.5 658 -6.3 755 -12.6
14/ 7/ 01 15 5 393 -13 431 -13 766 -6.3 444 -25 481 -18.9 720 0 729 12.6 521 31.5 462 -25.2 357 6.3 637 37.8 658 -6.3 753 -25.2
14 6 389 -38 428 -32 763 -25 443 -32 480 -25.2 719 -6.3 733 37.8 520 25.2 461 -31.5 356 0 635 25.2 657 -13 750 -44.1
15/ 7/ 01
16/ 7/ 01 15 7 385 -63 426 -44 762 -32 441 -44 480 -25.2 771 321 785 365 565 309 460 -37.8 355 -6.3 634 18.9 655 -25 750 -44.1
15 8 383 -76 425 -50 761 -38 439 -57 479 -31.5 781 384 795 428 577 384 460 -37.8 354 -13 633 12.6 653 -38 748 -56.7
17/ 7/ 01
18/ 7/ 01 14 9 380 -95 423 -63 759 -50 436 -76 479 -31.5 787 422 803 479 585 435 459 -44.1 352 -25 631 0 649 -63 745 -75.6
20/ 7/ 01 15 11 378 -107 422 -69 757 -63 433 -95 478 -37.8 801 510 816 561 607 573 459 -44.1 348 -50 628 -18.9 647 -76 746 -69.3
22/ 7/ 01 14 13 378 -107 422 -69 758 -57 433 -95 478 -37.8 812 580 827 630 618 643 461 -31.5 349 -44 629 -12.6 646 -82 746 -69.3
23/ 7/ 01 15 14 377 -113 422 -69 759 -50 433 -95 478 -37.8 812 580 827 630 618 643 462 -25.2 349 -44 630 -6.3 646 -82 747 -63
25/ 7/ 01 16 16 375 -126 421 -76 758 -57 431 -107 476 -50.4 816 605 832 662 624 680 462 -25.2 348 -50 630 -6.3 642 -107 746 -69.3
27/ 7/ 01 16 18 378 -107 424 -57 761 -38 435 -82 480 -25.2 822 643 838 699 630 718 467 6.3 352 -25 634 18.9 646 -82 750 -44.1
30/ 7/ 01 15 21 376 -120 422 -69 760 -44 433 -95 480 -25.2 838 743 851 781 647 825 469 18.9 350 -38 634 18.9 645 -88 749 -50.4
1/ 8/ 01 15 23 373 -139 420 -82 759 -50 431 -107 479 -31.5 857 863 869 895 667 951 471 31.5 347 -57 632 6.3 642 -107 746 -69.3
3/ 8/ 01 15 25 370 -158 418 -95 757 -63 427 -132 479 -31.5 863 901 874 926 673 989 469 18.9 343 -82 630 -6.3 640 -120 744 -81.9
6/ 8/ 01 15 28 367 -176 419 -88 760 -44 424 -151 478 -37.8 880 1008 898 1077 696 1134 470 25.2 340 -101 629 -12.6 638 -132 741 -101
8/ 8/ 01 16 30 365 -189 419 -88 760 -44 422 -164 476 -50.4 868 932 888 1014 677 1014 473 44.1 362 37.8 630 -6.3 644 -95 738 -120
10/ 8/ 01 16 32 362 -208 418 -95 760 -44 420 -176 476 -50.4 869 939 889 1021 676 1008 473 44.1 367 69.3 630 -6.3 653 -38 737 -126
14/ 8/ 01 17 36 360 -221 415 -113 758 -57 420 -176 474 -63 866 920 887 1008 673 989 475 56.7 370 88.2 629 -12.6 653 -38 737 -126
17/ 8/ 01 16 39 360 -221 416 -107 759 -50 419 -183 474 -63 885 1040 911 1159 690 1096 476 63 376 126 630 -6.3 660 6.3 736 -132
21/ 8/ 01 16 43 355 -252 425 -50 759 -50 416 -202 471 -81.9 904 1159 927 1260 717 1266 476 63 369 81.9 631 0 670 69.3 735 -139
24/ 8/ 01 16 46 355 -252 433 0 758 -57 413 -221 469 -94.5 903 1153 924 1241 717 1266 476 63 369 81.9 631 0 675 101 733 -151
28/ 8/ 01 15 50 354 -258 432 -6.3 756 -69 412 -227 468 -101 896 1109 916 1191 712 1235 476 63 372 101 630 -6.3 673 88.2 732 -158
31/ 8/ 01 15 53 354 -258 432 -6.3 755 -76 412 -227 468 -101 893 1090 912 1166 708 1210 476 63 372 101 630 -6.3 672 81.9 732 -158
7/ 9/ 01 16 60 354 -258 434 6.3 754 -82 410 -239 467 -107 895 1103 912 1166 711 1229 477 69.3 376 126 628 -18.9 674 94.5 731 -164
13/ 9/ 01 18 66 354 -258 444 69.3 754 -82 410 -239 467 -107 904 1159 918 1203 719 1279 481 94.5 384 176 629 -12.6 676 107 731 -164
24/ 9/ 01 20 77 357 -239 455 139 755 -76 413 -221 470 -88.2 894 1096 901 1096 704 1184 483 107 394 239 629 -12.6 682 145 732 -158
4/ 10/ 01 19 87 357 -239 465 202 755 -76 412 -227 470 -88.2 892 1084 897 1071 701 1166 483 107 401 284 629 -12.6 690 195 732 -158
21 100 379 -101 474 258 755 -76 412 -227 470 -88.2 897 111 902 1103 706 1197 483 107 398 265 629 -12.6 705 290 732 -158
17/ 10/ 01 5
8/ 11/ 01 18 122 397 12.6 485 328 755 -76 410 -239 470 -88.2 890 1071 896 1065 700 1159 483 107 398 265 629 -12.6 720 384 731 -164
307
Table AIII.2 Concrete surface strain by demec for slab RS1-a
S U R F A C E S T R A I N B Y D E M E C
S laSlab
b # 1RS1-a
( 3Y12 ) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Date Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/7/01 16 3 766 676 764 808 744 783 741 313 773 475 763
12/7/01 16 3 767 678 766 810 747 785 743 315 772 476 764
13/7/01 15 4 766 -6.3 675 -18.9 764 -12.6 810 0 745 -12.6 784 -6.3 742 -6.3 315 0 772 0 476 0 761 -18.9
14/7/01 15 5 764 -18.9 673 -31.5 763 -18.9 809 -6.3 745 -12.6 783 -13 741 -12.6 312 -18.9 770 -13 471 -31.5 760 -25.2
15/7/01 14 6 762 -31.5 671 -44.1 763 -18.9 809 -6.3 744 -18.9 782 -19 741 -12.6 310 -31.5 769 -19 473 -18.9 758 -37.8
16/7/01 15 7 760 -44.1 671 -44.1 761 -31.5 806 -25 743 -25.2 832 296 741 -12.6 307 -50.4 766 -38 469 -44.1 756 -50.4
17/7/01 15 8 759 -50.4 669 -56.7 759 -44.1 805 -32 741 -37.8 846 384 740 -18.9 307 -50.4 766 -38 469 -44.1 755 -56.7
18/7/01 14 9 757 -63 668 -63 756 -63 802 -50 737 -63 855 441 738 -31.5 305 -63 764 -50 467 -56.7 752 -75.6
20/7/01 15 11 757 -63 667 -69.3 755 -69.3 802 -50 735 -75.6 873 554 736 -44.1 302 -81.9 763 -57 466 -63 751 -81.9
22/7/01 14 13 757 -63 666 -75.6 755 -69.3 802 -50 735 -75.6 885 630 736 -44.1 303 -75.6 764 -50 467 -56.7 750 -88.2
23/7/01 15 14 757 -63 667 -69.3 756 -63 802 -50 736 -69.3 886 636 736 -44.1 303 -75.6 764 -50 467 -56.7 750 -88.2
25/7/01 16 16 755 -75.6 664 -88.2 755 -69.3 801 -57 734 -81.9 894 687 734 -56.7 302 -81.9 762 -63 465 -69.3 747 -107
27/7/01 16 18 759 -50.4 668 -63 757 -56.7 804 -38 736 -69.3 902 737 739 -25.2 306 -56.7 766 -38 466 -63 752 -75.6
30/7/01 15 21 757 -63 666 -75.6 756 -63 801 -57 734 -81.9 921 857 737 -37.8 303 -75.6 764 -50 466 -63 749 -94.5
1/8/01 15 23 756 -69.3 664 -88.2 755 -69.3 799 -69 732 -94.5 947 1021 735 -50.4 301 -88.2 763 -57 466 -63 747 -107
3/8/01 15 25 752 -94.5 662 -101 751 -94.5 795 -95 729 -113 955 1071 732 -69.3 298 -107 760 -76 464 -75.6 743 -132
6/8/01 15 28 752 -94.5 662 -101 749 -107 795 -95 728 -120 976 1203 732 -69.3 296 -120 760 -76 465 -69.3 742 -139
8/8/01 16 30 748 -120 666 -75.6 745 -132 836 164 725 -139 960 1103 728 -94.5 292 -145 758 -88 465 -69.3 739 -158
10/8/01 16 32 746 -132 669 -56.7 743 -145 848 239 720 -170 961 1109 724 -120 289 -164 755 -107 463 -81.9 735 -183
14/8/01 17 36 746 -132 670 -50.4 742 -151 853 271 719 -176 958 1090 723 -126 289 -164 754 -113 463 -81.9 735 -183
17/8/01 16 39 745 -139 676 -12.6 741 -158 868 365 718 -183 976 1203 723 -126 288 -170 756 -101 463 -81.9 733 -195
21/8/01 16 43 740 -170 681 18.9 736 -189 865 347 712 -221 992 1304 718 -158 281 -214 749 -145 467 -56.7 728 -227
24/8/01 16 46 737 -189 684 37.8 735 -195 872 391 709 -239 992 1304 715 -176 278 -233 746 -164 475 -6.3 725 -246
28/8/01 15 50 736 -195 683 31.5 732 -214 874 403 708 -246 987 1273 714 -183 278 -233 745 -170 476 0 724 -252
31/8/01 15 53 736 -195 683 31.5 734 -202 875 410 709 -239 984 1254 715 -176 279 -227 746 -164 476 0 724 -252
7/9/01 16 60 734 -208 684 37.8 733 -208 882 454 707 -252 994 1317 715 -176 279 -227 744 -176 480 25.2 721 -271
13/9/01 18 66 735 -202 689 69.3 733 -208 891 510 708 -246 1002 1367 716 -170 280 -221 746 -164 492 101 721 -271
24/9/01 20 77 737 -189 695 107 734 -202 903 586 710 -233 998 1342 718 -158 282 -208 748 -151 510 214 720 -277
4/10/01 19 87 736 -195 703 158 730 -227 907 611 705 -265 997 1336 716 -170 278 -233 746 -164 537 384 712 -328
17/10/01 21 100 736 -195 713 221 730 -227 904 592 702 -284 999 1348 714 -183 275 -252 744 -176 574 617 710 -340
8/11/01 18 122 732 -221 730 328 726 -252 902 580 706 -258 993 1310 709 -214 271 -277 740 -202 593 737 708 -353
308
Table AIII.3 Steel strain by strain gauges for slab RS1-a
s la b #RS1-a
Slab 1 (3Y12) S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G A UG E S
Date Temp. A ge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 21 19 12 13 21 19 23
13/7/01 15 4 37 36 25 21 44 31 46
14/7/01 15 5 45 41 29 21 49 38 52
15/7/01 14 6 73 61 29 19 75 73 76
16/7/01 15 7 451 433 430 438 431 439 420
17/7/01 15 8 534 521 525 535 537 540 515
18/7/01 14 9 603 584 585 598 601 605 572
20/7/01 15 11 708 685 692 710 714 754 675
22/7/01 14 13 782 755 765 788 789 864 744
23/7/01 14 14 779 755 767 792 789 870 745
25/7/01 16 16 830 805 836 853 851 936 804
27/7/01 16 18 867 835 867 886 886 985 838
30/7/01 15 21 991 960 999 1021 1022 1129 964
1/8/01 15 23 1148 1113 1156 1182 1186 1300 1117
3/8/01 15 25 1173 1127 1174 1201 1206 1316 1134
6/8/01 15 28 1342 1297 1338 1377 1371 1496 1288
8/8/01 16 30 1277 1252 1219 1260 1126 1223 1058
10/8/01 16 32 1291 1274 1238 1279 1117 1236 1066
14/8/01 17 36 1229 1197 1197 1240 1065 1197 1020
17/8/01 16 39 1413 1392 1354 1406 1214 1384 1166
21/8/01 16 43 1385 1320 1381 1456 1340 1528 1280
24/8/01 16 46 1251 1187 1341 1394 1332 1515 1294
28/8/01 15 50 1213 1143 1324 1379 1305 1472 1265
31/8/01 15 53 1159 1113 1312 1355 1267 1442 1229
7/9/01 16 60 1225 1178 1391 1429 1329 1549 1324
13/9/01 18 66 1251 1230 1446 1512 1393 1614 1395
24/9/01 20 77 1191 1183 1476 1510
4/10/01 19 87 1205 1185 1467 1581
17/10/01 21 100 1251 1233 1632 1670
8/11/01 18 122 1172 1171 1491 1635 Wires have damaged
309
Table AIII.4 Steel strain by demec for slab RS1-b
S T E E L S T R A I N B Y D E M E C
S lSlab
a b # 2RS1-b
( 3Y12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
D ate Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/ 7/01 16 3 318 476 705 645 110 852 748 307 415 726 720 395 850
12/ 7/01 16 3 318 477 708 647 113 854 750 307 418 725 725 397 849
13/7/01 15 4 316 -13 477 0 708 0 647 0 113 0 852 -12.6 748 -12.6 307 0 419 6.3 712 -81.9 726 6.3 395 -12.6 847 -12.6
14/7/01 15 5 314 -25 479 12.6 708 0 645 -12.6 111 -12.6 850 -25.2 749 -6.3 305 -12.6 419 6.3 709 -101 725 0 394 -18.9 844 -31.5
15/7/01 14 6 315 -19 476 -6.3 706 -12.6 643 -25.2 109 -25.2 849 -31.5 749 -6.3 305 -12.6 418 0 707 -113 723 -12.6 395 -12.6 843 -37.8
16/7/01 15 7 312 -38 476 -6.3 710 12.6 646 -6.3 114 6.3 852 -12.6 753 18.9 310 18.9 422 25.2 710 -94.5 727 12.6 398 6.3 843 -37.8
17/7/01 15 8 308 -63 474 -18.9 708 0 643 -25.2 114 6.3 853 -6.3 753 18.9 313 37.8 422 25.2 708 -107 725 0 396 -6.3 840 -56.7
18/7/01 14 9 303 -95 473 -25.2 708 0 641 -37.8 113 0 854 0 754 25.2 317 63 422 25.2 704 -132 723 -12.6 397 0 838 -69.3
20/7/01 15 11 299 -120 472 -31.5 704 -25.2 638 -56.7 111 -12.6 899 284 798 302 361 340 418 0 700 -158 718 -44.1 394 -18.9 834 -94.5
22/7/01 14 13 299 -120 471 -37.8 704 -25.2 638 -56.7 112 -6.3 909 347 807 359 372 410 418 0 700 -158 718 -44.1 394 -18.9 834 -94.5
23/7/01 14 14 300 -113 471 -37.8 705 -18.9 636 -69.3 112 -6.3 910 353 808 365 373 416 419 6.3 699 -164 717 -50.4 394 -18.9 834 -94.5
25/7/01 16 16 299 -120 470 -44.1 703 -31.5 636 -69.3 111 -12.6 913 372 813 397 377 441 420 12.6 700 -158 717 -50.4 394 -18.9 834 -94.5
27/7/01 16 18 302 -101 473 -25.2 706 -12.6 639 -50.4 116 18.9 919 410 819 435 383 479 421 18.9 702 -145 720 -31.5 396 -6.3 836 -81.9
30/7/01 15 21 298 -126 470 -44.1 703 -31.5 636 -69.3 114 6.3 928 466 828 491 392 536 420 12.6 698 -170 717 -50.4 395 -12.6 833 -101
1/ 8/01 15 23 295 -145 470 -44.1 702 -37.8 634 -81.9 113 0 940 542 840 567 406 624 422 25.2 695 -189 714 -69.3 393 -25.2 830 -120
3/ 8/01 15 25 292 -164 469 -50.4 702 -37.8 632 -94.5 113 0 939 536 839 561 405 617 423 31.5 693 -202 714 -69.3 392 -31.5 828 -132
6/ 8/01 15 28 289 -183 469 -50.4 703 -31.5 630 -107 114 6.3 939 536 838 554 407 630 424 37.8 690 -221 715 -63 389 -50.4 825 -151
8/ 8/01 16 30 284 -214 466 -69.3 698 -63 627 -126 258 914 853 -6.3 755 31.5 317 63 426 50.4 689 -227 715 -63 390 -44.1 822 -170
10/ 8/01 16 32 283 -221 467 -63 698 -63 625 -139 276 1027 842 -75.6 745 -31.5 308 6.3 426 50.4 686 -246 715 -63 389 -50.4 820 -183
14/8/01 17 36 282 -227 467 -63 696 -75.6 625 -139 281 1058 839 -94.5 742 -50.4 305 -12.6 426 50.4 686 -246 715 -63 389 -50.4 819 -189
17/8/01 16 39 280 -239 468 -56.7 697 -69.3 625 -139 314 1266 831 -145 737 -81.9 300 -44.1 427 56.7 686 -246 715 -63 389 -50.4 817 -202
21/8/01 16 43 277 -258 467 -63 696 -75.6 623 -151 329 1361 826 -176 722 -176 291 -101 427 56.7 686 -246 715 -63 388 -56.7 816 -208
24/8/01 16 46 273 -284 465 -75.6 694 -88.2 619 -176 327 1348 817 -233 714 -227 287 -126 427 56.7 698 -170 714 -69.3 388 -56.7 810 -246
28/8/01 15 50 272 -290 464 -81.9 695 -81.9 618 -183 326 1342 815 -246 712 -239 286 -132 427 56.7 698 -170 713 -75.6 386 -69.3 810 -246
31/8/01 15 53 272 -290 464 -81.9 695 -81.9 618 -183 320 1304 815 -246 710 -252 286 -132 427 56.7 701 -151 711 -88.2 385 -75.6 809 -252
7/ 9/01 16 60 272 -290 464 -81.9 695 -81.9 618 -183 330 1367 818 -227 707 -271 287 -126 427 56.7 706 -120 710 -94.5 385 -75.6 807 -265
13/9/01 18 66 272 -290 464 -81.9 695 -81.9 618 -183 344 1455 808 -290 697 -334 285 -139 433 94.5 712 -81.9 710 -94.5 384 -81.9 804 -284
24/9/01 20 77 274 -277 465 -75.6 697 -69.3 620 -170 343 1449 803 -321 695 -347 285 -139 435 107 723 -12.6 710 -94.5 384 -81.9 804 -284
4/10/01 19 87 274 -277 465 -75.6 698 -63 620 -170 358 1544 807 -296 685 -410 278 -183 439 132 727 12.6 706 -120 384 -81.9 804 -284
17/10/01 21 100 271 -296 466 -69.3 699 -56.7 620 -170 370 1619 801 -334 678 -454 271 -227 439 132 755 189 704 -132 384 -81.9 802 -296
8/11/01 18 122 271 -296 466 -69.3 699 -56.7 620 -170 376 1657 809 -284 675 -473 265 -265 445 170 775 315 706 -120 384 -81.9 801 -302
310
Table AIII.5 Concrete surface strain by demec for slab RS1-b
Slab RS1-b
S la b # 2 ( 3 Y 1 2 ) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
12/7/01 16 3 754 734 808 653 749 787 610 660 832 759 761
12/7/01 16 3 754 733 808 652 749 787 611 660 829 759 760
13/7/01 15 4 752 -12.6 731 -12.6 807 -6.3 650 -12.6 750 6.3 787 0 610 -6.3 660 0 829 0 756 -18.9 759 -6.3
14/7/01 15 5 751 -18.9 729 -25.2 807 -6.3 648 -25.2 749 0 787 0 610 -6.3 659 -6.3 829 0 756 -18.9 759 -6.3
15/7/01 14 6 749 -31.5 727 -37.8 805 -18.9 647 -31.5 748 -6.3 786 -6.3 610 -6.3 658 -12.6 827 -12.6 752 -44.1 757 -18.9
16/7/01 15 7 749 -31.5 729 -25.2 807 -6.3 647 -31.5 751 12.6 788 6.3 612 6.3 659 -6.3 829 0 754 -31.5 757 -18.9
17/7/01 15 8 748 -37.8 728 -31.5 805 -18.9 646 -37.8 751 12.6 790 18.9 612 6.3 659 -6.3 829 0 754 -31.5 756 -25.2
18/7/01 14 9 746 -50.4 725 -50.4 805 -18.9 646 -37.8 751 12.6 795 50.4 610 -6.3 657 -18.9 827 -12.6 752 -44.1 754 -37.8
20/7/01 15 11 742 -75.6 722 -69.3 800 -50.4 641 -69.3 747 -12.6 841 340 605 -37.8 652 -50.4 822 -44.1 750 -56.7 751 -56.7
22/7/01 14 13 741 -81.9 722 -69.3 801 -44.1 640 -75.6 747 -12.6 852 410 605 -37.8 652 -50.4 822 -44.1 749 -63 750 -63
23/7/01 14 14 741 -81.9 722 -69.3 801 -44.1 641 -69.3 746 -18.9 854 422 605 -37.8 653 -44.1 821 -50.4 749 -63 749 -69.3
25/7/01 16 16 741 -81.9 722 -69.3 801 -44.1 640 -75.6 746 -18.9 860 460 604 -44.1 653 -44.1 821 -50.4 749 -63 748 -75.6
27/7/01 16 18 744 -63 724 -56.7 804 -25.2 643 -56.7 748 -6.3 867 504 607 -25.2 656 -25.2 825 -25.2 752 -44.1 751 -56.7
30/7/01 15 21 742 -75.6 721 -75.6 800 -50.4 641 -69.3 745 -25.2 877 567 602 -56.7 652 -50.4 820 -56.7 748 -69.3 748 -75.6
1/8/01 15 23 739 -94.5 719 -88.2 798 -63 638 -88.2 743 -37.8 894 674 602 -56.7 652 -50.4 820 -56.7 747 -75.6 746 -88.2
3/8/01 15 25 736 -113 716 -107 796 -75.6 635 -107 743 -37.8 893 668 600 -69.3 649 -69.3 818 -69.3 745 -88.2 743 -107
6/8/01 15 28 733 -132 715 -113 795 -81.9 632 -126 742 -44.1 903 731 601 -63 646 -88.2 819 -63 745 -88.2 741 -120
8/8/01 16 30 731 -145 714 -120 795 -81.9 631 -132 740 -56.7 843 353 710 623.7 640 -126 815 -88.2 740 -120 738 -139
10/8/01 16 32 727 -170 710 -145 791 -107 627 -158 736 -81.9 836 309 729 743.4 637 -145 811 -113 737 -139 733 -170
14/8/01 17 36 727 -170 710 -145 790 -113 629 -145 736 -81.9 835 302 733 768.6 637 -145 809 -126 737 -139 733 -170
17/8/01 16 39 725 -183 710 -145 792 -101 628 -151 737 -75.6 833 290 759 932.4 637 -145 810 -120 738 -132 733 -170
21/8/01 16 43 717 -233 704 -183 789 -120 621 -195 735 -88.2 829 265 772 1014 630 -189 802 -170 732 -170 728 -202
24/8/01 16 46 715 -246 704 -183 789 -120 620 -202 740 -56.7 829 265 777 1046 628 -202 800 -183 732 -170 725 -221
28/8/01 15 50 715 -246 704 -183 789 -120 622 -189 740 -56.7 829 265 774 1027 628 -202 800 -183 732 -170 725 -221
31/8/01 15 53 715 -246 704 -183 790 -113 625 -170 741 -50.4 830 271 771 1008 630 -189 801 -176 732 -170 725 -221
7/9/01 16 60 717 -233 705 -176 792 -101 626 -164 745 -25.2 830 271 782 1077 629 -195 800 -183 731 -176 724 -227
13/9/01 18 66 715 -246 704 -183 791 -107 624 -176 749 0 832 284 794 1153 630 -189 803 -164 734 -158 724 -227
24/9/01 20 77 715 -246 705 -176 793 -94.5 627 -158 756 44.1 834 296 800 1191 631 -183 806 -145 736 -145 726 -214
4/10/01 19 87 714 -252 705 -176 793 -94.5 626 -164 766 107 827 252 811 1260 630 -189 805 -151 736 -145 726 -214
17/10/01 21 100 710 -277 703 -189 792 -101 626 -164 812 397 820 208 815 1285 627 -208 804 -158 736 -145 723 -233
8/11/01 18 122 703 -321 698 -221 789 -120 625 -170 819 441 814 170 814 1279 622 -239 800 -183 733 -164 719 -258
311
Table AIII.6 Steel strain by strain gauges for slab RS1-b
s laSlab
b #RS1-b
2 (3Y12 S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G A UG E S
Date Temp. A ge 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 8 10 10 28 6 14 5 4 7
13/7/01 15 4 21 27 29 92 23 54 45 25 33
14/7/01 15 5 30 34 33 172 24 73 49 28 44
15/7/01 14 6 120 52 48 199 32 77 0 54 77
16/7/01 15 7 135 68 69 214 32 81 106 93 117
17/7/01 15 8 81 78 77 210 25 73 144 139 161
18/7/01 14 9 126 88 88 212 26 73 200 195 219
20/7/01 15 11 656 544 528 701 511 554 575 582 587
22/7/01 14 13 615 626 608 748 579 524 619 659 663
23/7/01 14 14 616 625 608 723 574 629 621 655 662
25/7/01 16 16 670 686 669 790 631 675 684 705 717
27/7/01 16 18 692 711 695 824 648 689 707 734 751
30/7/01 15 21 795 819 799 944 746 790 820 837 853
1/8/01 15 23 936 949 928 1075 870 914 962 971 979
3/8/01 15 25 922 945 920 1085 868 914 997 983 990
6/8/01 15 28 1003 1024 1000 1181 968 998 1104 1109 1108
8/8/01 16 30 813 763 740 978 693 738 909 812 797
10/8/01 16 32 811 766 743 994 714 755 985 853 835
14/8/01 17 36 775 744 709 980 700 723 981 808 812
17/8/01 16 39 841 799 742 1043 756 777 1166 917 906
21/8/01 16 43 735 692 635 1064 770 787 1095 994 987
24/8/01 16 46 685 642 588 1060 755 776 1087 971 988
28/8/01 15 50 664 625 570 1037 727 758 1084 942 959
31/8/01 15 53 621 603 549 1016 704 733 1048 895 922
7/9/01 16 60 630 623 570 1052 741 770 1088 944 973
13/9/01 18 66 655 649 583 1083 767 795 1130 966 1007
24/9/01 20 77 680 658 586 1105 773 807 1021 923 1012
4/10/01 19 87 647 625 559 1092 745 781 1041 869 999
17/10/01 21 100 619 685 610 1067 727 743 874 713 864
8/11/01 18 122 566 663 580 1019 681 699 903 653 833
312
S l aSlab
b # 3RS2-a
( 3Y10 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
D ate Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/ 7/01 16 3 729 453 460 765 647 435 445 392 507 855 657 636 723
12/ 7/01 16 3 734 451 470 775 650 446 445 395 512 857 662 638 724
13/7/01 15 4 733 -6.3 450 -6.3 473 18.9 775 0 649 -6.3 445 -6.3 443 -12.6 394 -6.3 511 -6.3 856 -6.3 660 -12.6 638 0 722 -12.6
14/7/01 15 5 729 -31.5 448 -18.9 472 12.6 774 -6.3 648 -12.6 444 -12.6 441 -25.2 392 -18.9 505 -44.1 852 -31.5 657 -31.5 636 -12.6 719 -31.5
15/7/01 14 6 726 -50.4 446 -31.5 471 6.3 773 -12.6 647 -18.9 443 -18.9 440 -31.5 389 -37.8 509 -18.9 853 -25.2 655 -44.1 635 -18.9 717 -44.1
16/7/01 15 7 722 -75.6 455 25.2 472 12.6 774 -6.3 650 0 446 0 447 12.6 395 0 513 6.3 857 0 653 -56.7 636 -12.6 718 -37.8
17/7/01 15 8 720 -88.2 451 0 472 12.6 768 -44.1 648 -12.6 497 321 489 277 444 309 511 -6.3 851 -37.8 649 -81.9 634 -25.2 717 -44.1
18/7/01 14 9 716 -113 453 12.6 471 6.3 768 -44.1 648 -12.6 506 378 504 372 455 378 511 -6.3 848 -56.7 647 -94.5 633 -31.5 715 -56.7
20/7/01 15 11 714 -126 449 -12.6 469 -6.3 764 -69.3 646 -25.2 520 466 509 403 468 460 514 12.6 844 -81.9 644 -113 630 -50.4 712 -75.6
22/7/01 14 13 713 -132 448 -18.9 469 -6.3 763 -75.6 646 -25.2 534 554 521 479 482 548 515 18.9 843 -88.2 645 -107 630 -50.4 711 -81.9
23/7/01 14 14 713 -132 448 -18.9 469 -6.3 762 -81.9 646 -25.2 536 567 523 491 483 554 516 25.2 842 -94.5 645 -107 630 -50.4 711 -81.9
25/7/01 16 16 710 -151 445 -37.8 467 -18.9 763 -75.6 647 -18.9 545 624 536 573 495 630 518 37.8 843 -88.2 645 -107 630 -50.4 712 -75.6
27/7/01 16 18 715 -120 450 -6.3 471 6.3 765 -63 650 0 553 674 538 586 501 668 520 50.4 845 -75.6 645 -107 632 -37.8 712 -75.6
30/7/01 15 21 711 -145 446 -31.5 467 -18.9 760 -94.5 646 -25.2 570 781 555 693 518 775 518 37.8 840 -107 641 -132 628 -63 710 -88.2
1/ 8/ 01 15 23 710 -151 446 -31.5 467 -18.9 758 -107 645 -31.5 594 932 575 819 539 907 519 44.1 837 -126 639 -145 626 -75.6 708 -101
3/ 8/ 01 15 25 709 -158 446 -31.5 466 -25.2 757 -113 646 -25.2 601 977 583 869 548 964 518 37.8 835 -139 639 -145 626 -75.6 709 -94.5
6/ 8/ 01 15 28 705 -183 446 -31.5 465 -31.5 754 -132 647 -18.9 619 1090 601 983 568 1090 519 44.1 833 -151 639 -145 625 -81.9 708 -101
8/ 8/01 16 30 703 -195 448 -18.9 466 -25.2 754 -132 653 18.9 630 1159 619 1096 582 1178 520 50.4 830 -170 640 -139 625 -81.9 707 -107
10/ 8/01 16 32 700 -214 447 -25.2 465 -31.5 751 -151 652 12.6 640 1222 625 1134 591 1235 520 50.4 828 -183 638 -151 625 -81.9 706 -113
14/8/01 17 36 700 -214 447 -25.2 465 -31.5 751 -151 652 12.6 642 1235 626 1140 595 1260 520 50.4 828 -183 637 -158 625 -81.9 706 -113
17/8/01 16 39 698 -227 449 -12.6 466 -25.2 750 -158 654 25.2 661 1355 641 1235 625 1449 522 63 827 -189 637 -158 626 -75.6 704 -126
21/8/01 16 43 694 -252 447 -25.2 463 -44.1 747 -176 653 18.9 630 1159 610 1040 589 1222 545 208 911 340 634 -176 625 -81.9 700 -151
24/8/01 16 46 693 -258 446 -31.5 462 -50.4 745 -189 652 12.6 629 1153 609 1033 587 1210 545 208 916 372 633 -183 623 -94.5 697 -170
28/8/01 15 50 692 -265 445 -37.8 460 -63 744 -195 651 6.3 627 1140 608 1027 584 1191 545 208 918 384 632 -189 622 -101 695 -183
31/8/01 15 53 692 -265 445 -37.8 460 -63 744 -195 651 6.3 627 1140 605 1008 581 1172 545 208 921 403 631 -195 622 -101 695 -183
7/ 9/ 01 16 60 692 -265 445 -37.8 459 -69.3 744 -195 651 6.3 635 1191 611 1046 589 1222 547 221 931 466 630 -202 620 -113 695 -183
13/9/01 18 66 691 -271 446 -31.5 458 -75.6 744 -195 651 6.3 638 1210 619 1096 594 1254 555 271 942 536 630 -202 620 -113 694 -189
24/9/01 20 77 691 -271 446 -31.5 458 -75.6 744 -195 650 0 646 1260 627 1147 601 1298 559 296 949 580 631 -195 620 -113 695 -183
4/ 10/01 19 87 691 -271 446 -31.5 458 -75.6 744 -195 650 0 654 1310 632 1178 608 1342 564 328 955 617 631 -195 620 -113 695 -183
17/10/01 21 100 689 -284 445 -37.8 458 -75.6 744 -195 650 0 665 1380 643 1247 620 1418 569 359 965 680 630 -202 620 -113 695 -183
8/11/01 18 122 689 -284 534 523 470 0 742 -208 650 0 620 1096 603 995 575 1134 569 359 965 680 630 -202 620 -113 695 -183
313
Table AIII.8 Concrete surface strain by demec for slab RS2-a
S laSlab
b # 3RS2-a
( 3Y10 ) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
12/7/01 16 3 573 788 749 922 831 756 775 772 750 763 765
12/7/01 16 3 576 791 749 923 832 755 774 772 750 762 765
13/7/01 15 4 574 -12.6 789 -13 748 -6.3 923 0 830 -12.6 754 -6.3 772 -12.6 772 0 749 -6.3 761 -6.3 763 -12.6
14/7/01 15 5 572 -25.2 787 -25 746 -19 922 -6.3 829 -18.9 753 -12.6 770 -25.2 771 -6.3 747 -18.9 759 -18.9 761 -25.2
15/7/01 14 6 571 -31.5 786 -32 745 -25 920 -18.9 829 -18.9 753 -12.6 769 -31.5 770 -12.6 745 -31.5 757 -31.5 759 -37.8
16/7/01 15 7 570 -37.8 787 -25 746 -19 923 0 831 -6.3 757 12.6 770 -25.2 772 0 749 -6.3 760 -12.6 759 -37.8
17/7/01 15 8 568 -50.4 784 -44 742 -44 920 -18.9 827 -31.5 813 365 768 -37.8 769 -18.9 745 -31.5 757 -31.5 756 -56.7
18/7/01 14 9 568 -50.4 782 -57 742 -44 918 -31.5 825 -44.1 827 454 765 -56.7 767 -31.5 744 -37.8 757 -31.5 756 -56.7
20/7/01 15 11 565 -69.3 779 -76 739 -63 914 -56.7 822 -63 843 554 764 -63 763 -56.7 742 -50.4 752 -63 752 -81.9
22/7/01 14 13 565 -69.3 779 -76 740 -57 915 -50.4 822 -63 857 643 764 -63 763 -56.7 742 -50.4 752 -63 752 -81.9
23/7/01 14 14 565 -69.3 780 -69 740 -57 914 -56.7 822 -63 859 655 764 -63 763 -56.7 742 -50.4 752 -63 752 -81.9
25/7/01 16 16 565 -69.3 780 -69 739 -63 915 -50.4 822 -63 874 750 762 -75.6 764 -50.4 744 -37.8 754 -50.4 753 -75.6
27/7/01 16 18 567 -56.7 782 -57 741 -50 917 -37.8 824 -50.4 882 800 765 -56.7 766 -37.8 746 -25.2 755 -44.1 755 -63
30/7/01 15 21 563 -81.9 778 -82 738 -69 913 -63 818 -88.2 901 920 760 -88.2 761 -69.3 740 -63 750 -75.6 750 -94.5
1/8/01 15 23 563 -81.9 775 -101 736 -82 911 -75.6 817 -94.5 932 1115 760 -88.2 761 -69.3 740 -63 751 -69.3 749 -101
3/8/01 15 25 561 -94.5 775 -101 734 -95 909 -88.2 814 -113 942 1178 757 -107 759 -81.9 738 -75.6 748 -88.2 746 -120
6/8/01 15 28 558 -113 773 -113 732 -107 906 -107 812 -126 966 1329 756 -113 757 -94.5 737 -81.9 747 -94.5 744 -132
8/8/01 16 30 557 -120 774 -107 732 -107 905 -113 811 -132 988 1468 755 -120 757 -94.5 739 -69.3 749 -81.9 743 -139
10/8/01 16 32 554 -139 772 -120 730 -120 901 -139 808 -151 994 1506 751 -145 752 -126 735 -94.5 745 -107 739 -164
14/8/01 17 36 554 -139 772 -120 729 -126 901 -139 807 -158 998 1531 751 -145 752 -126 735 -94.5 745 -107 739 -164
17/8/01 16 39 552 -151 773 -113 728 -132 900 -145 806 -164 1026 1707 750 -151 752 -126 735 -94.5 745 -107 736 -183
21/8/01 16 43 546 -189 766 -158 721 -176 1009 542 793 -246 988 1468 741 -208 745 -170 729 -132 739 -145 730 -221
24/8/01 16 46 544 -202 765 -164 719 -189 1024 636 792 -252 991 1487 738 -227 741 -195 727 -145 737 -158 728 -233
28/8/01 15 50 543 -208 764 -170 718 -195 1028 662 791 -258 990 1481 737 -233 741 -195 727 -145 736 -164 728 -233
31/8/01 15 53 544 -202 764 -170 718 -195 1028 662 791 -258 988 1468 738 -227 744 -176 727 -145 737 -158 729 -227
7/9/01 16 60 544 -202 764 -170 718 -195 1043 756 791 -258 1004 1569 739 -221 744 -176 728 -139 738 -151 729 -227
13/9/01 18 66 543 -208 765 -164 718 -195 1058 851 790 -265 1011 1613 739 -221 744 -176 728 -139 738 -151 728 -233
24/9/01 20 77 544 -202 766 -158 718 -195 1073 945 790 -265 1016 1644 740 -214 745 -170 728 -139 739 -145 728 -233
4/10/01 19 87 543 -208 765 -164 717 -202 1088 1040 786 -290 1028 1720 739 -221 745 -170 728 -139 739 -145 727 -239
17/10/01 21 100 540 -227 765 -164 716 -208 1113 1197 782 -315 1044 1821 738 -227 743 -183 727 -145 738 -151 723 -265
8/11/01 18 122 535 -258 757 -214 706 -271 1101 1121 773 -372 994 1506 727 -296 734 -239 715 -221 798 227 712 -334
314
s laRS2-a
Slab b# 3 S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G A UG E S
Date Temp. A ge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 10 13 9 11 74 17 18
13/7/01 15 4 27 28 14 29 72 23 32
14/7/01 15 5 41 30 17 48 85 30 39
15/7/01 14 6 66 64 12 47 90 45 60
16/7/01 15 7 93 105 17 48 94 96 107
17/7/01 15 8 476 525 384 445 497 533 551
18/7/01 14 9 549 608 446 515 560 626 647
20/7/01 15 11 676 751 547 632 664 776 767
22/7/01 14 13 746 837 613 718 729 868 858
23/7/01 14 14 746 842 613 727 731 871 879
25/7/01 16 16 793 900 658 787 789 940 923
27/7/01 16 18 841 959 697 818 830 989 964
30/7/01 15 21 977 1111 809 951 961 1162 1130
1/8/01 15 23 1158 1303 950 1160 1123 1365 1331
3/8/01 15 25 1182 1335 987 1179 1152 1402 1366
6/8/01 15 28 1392 1561 1293 1504 1330 1621 1591
8/8/01 16 30 1437 1615 1358 1485 1376 1667 1636
10/8/01 16 32 1534 1720 1417 1581 1455 1739 1930
14/8/01 17 36 1451 1649 1326 1458 1399 1648 1523
17/8/01 16 39 1769 1986 1563 1714 1648 1914 1777
21/8/01 16 43 1247 1460 1174 1298 1261 1522 1422
24/8/01 16 46 1259 1457 1143 1267 1268 1517 1502
28/8/01 15 50 1258 1446 1133 1293 1251 1503 1457
31/8/01 15 53 1207 1389 1087 1166 1211 1458 1452
7/9/01 16 60 1376 1549 1214 1293 1350 1598 1615
13/9/01 18 66 1469 1548 1294 1282 1464 1689 1578
24/9/01 20 77 1478 1683 1344 1438 1536 1741 1427
4/10/01 19 87 1550 1773 1381 1708 1580 1821 1510
17/10/01 21 100 1661 1911 1467 1586 1684 1997 1533
8/11/01 18 122 988 1311 958 1013 1132 1405 1009
315
Slab RS2-b
316
Table AIII.11 Concrete surface strain by demec for slab RS2-b
Slab RS2-b
317
Slab RS2-b
318
S lSlab
a b # 5RS3-a
( 2Y10 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 23
Date Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/7/01 16 3 685 325 697 560 531 765 402 623 567 665 881 173
12/7/01 16 3 694 340 695 562 442 772 405 625 572 661 881 174
13/7/01 15 4 694 0 344 25.2 704 56.7 563 6.3 444 12.6 773 6.3 404 -6.3 625 0 572 0 660 -6.3 880 -6.3 174 0
14/7/01 15 5 696 12.6 342 12.6 705 63 559 -18.9 443 6.3 771 -6.3 406 6.3 624 -6.3 570 -12.6 663 12.6 877 -25.2 180 37.8
15/7/01 14 6 699 31.5 341 6.3 706 69.3 555 -44.1 442 0 769 -18.9 407 12.6 623 -12.6 568 -25.2 665 25.2 875 -37.8 186 75.6
16/7/01 15 7 695 6.3 337 -18.9 695 0 546 -101 440 -12.6 812 252 405 0 618 -44.1 564 -50.4 662 6.3 872 -56.7 240 416
17/7/01 15 8 696 12.6 336 -25.2 695 0 544 -113 441 -6.3 836 403 405 0 617 -50.4 563 -56.7 661 0 873 -50.4 259 536
18/7/01 14 9 694 0 333 -44.1 691 -25.2 542 -126 445 18.9 846 466 404 -6.3 615 -63 561 -69.3 659 -12.6 870 -69.3 274 630
20/7/01 15 11 689 -31.5 330 -63 689 -37.8 534 -176 447 31.5 871 624 403 -12.6 605 -126 567 -31.5 659 -12.6 867 -88.2 301 800
22/7/01 14 13 689 -31.5 329 -69.3 689 -37.8 531 -195 447 31.5 887 725 404 -6.3 602 -145 566 -37.8 657 -25.2 866 -94.5 316 895
23/7/01 14 14 690 -25.2 330 -63 689 -37.8 530 -202 447 31.5 889 737 404 -6.3 600 -158 566 -37.8 656 -31.5 866 -94.5 319 914
25/7/01 16 16 698 25.2 335 -31.5 696 6.3 535 -170 457 94.5 901 813 405 0 601 -151 567 -31.5 656 -31.5 866 -94.5 331 989
27/7/01 16 18 696 12.6 337 -18.9 695 0 534 -176 457 94.5 909 863 405 0 600 -158 568 -25.2 655 -37.8 865 -101 339 1040
30/7/01 15 21 692 -12.6 334 -37.8 694 -6.3 530 -202 456 88.2 929 989 404 -6.3 597 -176 565 -44.1 653 -50.4 862 -120 363 1191
1/8/01 15 23 689 -31.5 332 -50.4 692 -18.9 527 -221 456 88.2 956 1159 403 -12.6 594 -195 563 -56.7 651 -63 860 -132 390 1361
3/8/01 15 25 688 -37.8 332 -50.4 691 -25.2 526 -227 458 101 974 1273 403 -12.6 593 -202 562 -63 651 -63 859 -139 409 1481
6/8/01 15 28 686 -50.4 332 -50.4 689 -37.8 522 -252 456 88.2 1003 1455 403 -12.6 591 -214 560 -75.6 649 -75.6 857 -151 440 1676
8/8/01 16 30 683 -69.3 332 -50.4 687 -50.4 520 -265 456 88.2 1020 1562 403 -12.6 588 -233 560 -75.6 650 -69.3 855 -164 460 1802
10/8/01 16 32 681 -81.9 332 -50.4 685 -63 517 -284 458 101 1034 1651 403 -12.6 585 -252 560 -75.6 652 -56.7 854 -170 472 1877
14/8/01 17 36 681 -81.9 332 -50.4 685 -63 518 -277 459 107 1032 1638 404 -6.3 585 -252 560 -75.6 652 -56.7 854 -170 470 1865
17/8/01 16 39 681 -81.9 334 -37.8 683 -75.6 518 -277 460 113 1071 1884 404 -6.3 582 -271 558 -88.2 652 -56.7 854 -170 502 2066
21/8/01 16 43 678 -101 334 -37.8 683 -75.6 516 -290 462 126 1091 2010 405 0 580 -284 555 -107 652 -56.7 851 -189 527 2224
24/8/01 16 46 675 -120 333 -44.1 681 -88.2 514 -302 465 145 1102 2079 405 0 578 -296 554 -113 652 -56.7 849 -202 539 2300
28/8/01 15 50 675 -120 333 -44.1 681 -88.2 514 -302 466 151 1095 2035 406 6.3 577 -302 553 -120 652 -56.7 848 -208 530 2243
31/8/01 15 53 675 -120 333 -44.1 681 -88.2 514 -302 467 158 1090 2003 407 12.6 577 -302 553 -120 651 -63 848 -208 527 2224
7/9/01 16 60 674 -126 332 -50.4 682 -81.9 514 -302 467 158 1106 2104 407 12.6 577 -302 553 -120 651 -63 848 -208 545 2337
13/9/01 18 66 674 -126 332 -50.4 682 -81.9 514 -302 469 170 1121 2199 407 12.6 577 -302 553 -120 651 -63 847 -214 559 2426
24/9/01 20 77 675 -120 333 -44.1 682 -81.9 514 -302 475 208 1132 2268 409 25.2 577 -302 553 -120 650 -69.3 848 -208 570 2495
4/10/01 19 87 675 -120 333 -44.1 682 -81.9 514 -302 475 208 1157 2426 409 25.2 577 -302 553 -120 650 -69.3 846 -221 597 2665
17/10/01 21 100 675 -120 333 -44.1 682 -81.9 514 -302 476 214 1201 2703 409 25.2 576 -309 553 -120 651 -63 845 -227 632 2885
8/11/01 18 122 675 -120 333 -44.1 682 -81.9 514 -302 476 214 1214 2785 409 25.2 576 -309 553 -120 651 -63 845 -227 641 2942
319
Table AIII.14 Surface strain by demec for slab RS3-a
Slab
S la b # 5RS3-a
( 2Y10 ) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
12/7/01 16 3 761 723 757 765 742 767 712 752 816 406 755
12/7/01 16 3 761 718 754 764 742 766 715 754 817 404 755
13/7/01 15 4 761 0 718 0 755 6.3 764 0 743 6.3 768 12.6 714 -6.3 755 6.3 817 0 406 12.6 755 0
14/7/01 15 5 760 -6.3 719 6.3 756 12.6 763 -6.3 743 6.3 768 12.6 713 -12.6 754 0 816 -6.3 405 6.3 754 -6.3
15/7/01 14 6 759 -12.6 720 12.6 757 18.9 762 -13 743 6.3 768 12.6 712 -18.9 753 -6.3 815 -12.6 405 6.3 754 -6.3
16/7/01 15 7 755 -37.8 716 -12.6 753 -6.3 757 -44 738 -25.2 830 403 707 -50.4 749 -31.5 809 -50.4 402 -12.6 748 -44.1
17/7/01 15 8 754 -44.1 715 -18.9 752 -12.6 756 -50 738 -25.2 857 573 705 -63 748 -37.8 809 -50.4 400 -25.2 746 -56.7
18/7/01 14 9 752 -56.7 714 -25.2 750 -25.2 755 -57 736 -37.8 869 649 703 -75.6 747 -44.1 804 -81.9 399 -31.5 745 -63
20/7/01 15 11 748 -81.9 712 -37.8 747 -44.1 752 -76 734 -50.4 898 832 700 -94.5 742 -75.6 803 -88.2 397 -44.1 742 -81.9
22/7/01 14 13 748 -81.9 710 -50.4 745 -56.7 750 -88 733 -56.7 917 951 699 -101 741 -81.9 803 -88.2 395 -56.7 741 -88.2
23/7/01 14 14 748 -81.9 710 -50.4 745 -56.7 750 -88 732 -63 920 970 698 -107 741 -81.9 803 -88.2 394 -63 741 -88.2
25/7/01 16 16 750 -69.3 712 -37.8 747 -44.1 752 -76 733 -56.7 938 1084 700 -94.5 745 -56.7 805 -75.6 397 -44.1 745 -63
27/7/01 16 18 749 -75.6 712 -37.8 747 -44.1 752 -76 734 -50.4 945 1128 700 -94.5 745 -56.7 805 -75.6 397 -44.1 745 -63
30/7/01 15 21 746 -94.5 708 -63 743 -69.3 748 -101 731 -69.3 970 1285 695 -126 741 -81.9 802 -94.5 394 -63 741 -88.2
1/8/01 15 23 742 -120 705 -81.9 741 -81.9 745 -120 726 -101 1002 1487 691 -151 736 -113 798 -120 390 -88.2 737 -113
3/8/01 15 25 740 -132 704 -88.2 739 -94.5 742 -139 725 -107 1022 1613 690 -158 734 -126 796 -132 390 -88.2 736 -120
6/8/01 15 28 739 -139 704 -88.2 737 -107 740 -151 722 -126 1056 1827 687 -176 730 -151 794 -145 388 -101 733 -139
8/8/01 16 30 737 -151 703 -94.5 736 -113 738 -164 718 -151 1075 1947 686 -183 727 -170 794 -145 387 -107 732 -145
10/8/01 16 32 735 -164 700 -113 733 -132 735 -183 714 -176 1090 2041 683 -202 724 -189 790 -170 385 -120 728 -170
14/8/01 17 36 734 -170 700 -113 733 -132 735 -183 714 -176 1091 2048 682 -208 725 -183 790 -170 385 -120 728 -170
17/8/01 16 39 734 -170 700 -113 731 -145 733 -195 712 -189 1135 2325 680 -221 723 -195 789 -176 385 -120 728 -170
21/8/01 16 43 728 -208 697 -132 728 -164 728 -227 706 -227 1166 2520 675 -252 716 -239 784 -208 380 -151 722 -208
24/8/01 16 46 727 -214 695 -145 726 -176 726 -239 703 -246 1182 2621 673 -265 714 -252 783 -214 370 -214 720 -221
28/8/01 15 50 727 -214 695 -145 726 -176 726 -239 702 -252 1181 2615 672 -271 715 -246 782 -221 378 -164 719 -227
31/8/01 15 53 727 -214 695 -145 726 -176 726 -239 702 -252 1176 2583 672 -271 717 -233 782 -221 378 -164 719 -227
7/9/01 16 60 727 -214 695 -145 726 -176 726 -239 702 -252 1202 2747 670 -284 717 -233 782 -221 377 -170 718 -233
13/9/01 18 66 727 -214 695 -145 726 -176 726 -239 702 -252 1222 2873 670 -284 717 -233 782 -221 378 -164 718 -233
24/9/01 20 77 727 -214 697 -132 727 -170 728 -227 704 -239 1242 2999 671 -277 718 -227 783 -214 380 -151 719 -227
4/10/01 19 87 725 -227 696 -139 725 -183 725 -246 701 -258 1270 3175 670 -284 714 -252 781 -227 379 -158 716 -246
17/10/01 21 100 724 -233 696 -139 725 -183 724 -252 699 -271 1324 3515 667 -302 712 -265 779 -239 378 -164 714 -258
8/11/01 18 122 720 -258 691 -170 720 -214 719 -284 692 -315 1355 3711 660 -347 706 -302 772 -284 372 -202 709 -290
320
S la
Slab b# 5
RS3-a S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G UA G E S
Date Temp. A ge 22 23 24 25 26 27
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 13 12 83 36 9
13/7/01 15 4 12 15 58 42 10
14/7/01 15 5 20 21 52 42 14
15/7/01 14 6 85 93 12 11 20
16/7/01 15 7 548 590 489 580 601
17/7/01 15 8 686 739 634 801 776
18/7/01 14 9 780 838 732 890 878
20/7/01 15 11 943 1009 894 1023 1071
22/7/01 14 13 1055 1128 1005 1160 1196
23/7/01 14 14 1057 1130 1004 1197 1199
25/7/01 16 16 1086 1162 1043 1152 1223
27/7/01 16 18 1151 1236 1104 1265 1264
30/7/01 15 21 1306 1405 1269 1367 1422
1/8/01 15 23 1507 1623 1480 1658 1646
3/8/01 15 25 1547 1666 1525 1705 1685
6/8/01 15 28 1792 1936 1767 2013 1920
8/8/01 16 30 1842 1992 1823 2057 1963
10/8/01 16 32 1940 2100 1929 2171 2066
14/8/01 17 36 1829 1966 1820 2080 1920
17/8/01 16 39 2236 2383 2191 2456 2301
21/8/01 16 43 2376 2520 2345 2587 2434
24/8/01 16 46 2341 2528 2354 2573 2444
28/8/01 15 50 2288 2487 2320 2503 2376
31/8/01 15 53 2187 2385 2228 2373 2259
7/9/01 16 60 2383 2636 2445 2526 2253
13/9/01 18 66 2525 2801 2589 2491 2087
24/9/01 20 77 2555 2704 2675 2453 2292
4/10/01 19 87 2670 2877 2783 2486 2170
17/10/01 21 100 2990 2770 3095 2939 2112
8/11/01 18 122 3038 2980 3152 3011 2268
321
S lSlab
a b # 6RS3-b
( 2Y10 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 23
Date Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/7/01 16 3 615 1078 982 105 288 580 455 760 733 650 685 457
12/7/01 16 3 617 1081 990 106 290 577 458 764 735 652 690 456
13/7/01 15 4 613 -25.2 1079 -12.6 989 -6.3 105 -6.3 294 25.2 575 -12.6 459 6.3 764 0 735 0 650 -12.6 689 -6.3 457 6.3
14/7/01 15 5 611 -37.8 1075 -37.8 985 -31.5 100 -37.8 295 31.5 572 -31.5 459 6.3 759 -31.5 729 -37.8 643 -56.7 687 -19 460 25.2
15/7/01 14 6 610 -44.1 1069 -75.6 981 -56.7 95 -69.3 295 31.5 625 302 460 12.6 754 -63 723 -75.6 635 -107 685 -32 505 309
16/7/01 15 7 607 -63 1068 -81.9 980 -63 92 -88.2 296 37.8 644 422 460 12.6 751 -81.9 720 -94.5 632 -126 683 -44 520 403
17/7/01 15 8 606 -69.3 1068 -81.9 979 -69.3 91 -94.5 297 44.1 660 523 459 6.3 748 -101 722 -81.9 632 -126 682 -50 537 510
18/7/01 14 9 605 -75.6 1067 -88.2 978 -75.6 91 -94.5 299 56.7 670 586 459 6.3 745 -120 721 -88.2 630 -139 680 -63 546 567
20/7/01 15 11 603 -88.2 1062 -120 977 -81.9 85 -132 298 50.4 691 718 460 12.6 743 -132 720 -94.5 629 -145 677 -82 565 687
22/7/01 14 13 602 -94.5 1058 -145 975 -94.5 82 -151 298 50.4 706 813 460 12.6 742 -139 720 -94.5 628 -151 775 536 577 762
23/7/01 14 14 603 -88.2 1060 -132 976 -88.2 81 -158 299 56.7 710 838 460 12.6 741 -145 720 -94.5 628 -151 775 536 580 781
25/7/01 16 16 602 -94.5 1059 -139 975 -94.5 80 -164 300 63 717 882 461 18.9 742 -139 721 -88.2 628 -151 775 536 586 819
27/7/01 16 18 604 -81.9 1061 -126 977 -81.9 83 -145 303 81.9 726 939 463 31.5 744 -126 722 -81.9 629 -145 776 542 594 869
30/7/01 15 21 602 -94.5 1059 -139 975 -94.5 82 -151 304 88.2 745 1058 462 25.2 739 -158 719 -101 626 -164 772 517 614 995
1/8/01 15 23 598 -120 1057 -151 972 -113 80 -164 304 88.2 771 1222 463 31.5 736 -176 717 -113 624 -176 769 498 637 1140
3/8/01 15 25 597 -126 1057 -151 972 -113 76 -189 307 107 784 1304 464 37.8 734 -189 717 -113 624 -176 769 498 645 1191
6/8/01 15 28 595 -139 1055 -164 969 -132 73 -208 308 113 809 1462 465 44.1 731 -208 716 -120 624 -176 766 479 673 1367
8/8/01 16 30 592 -158 1055 -164 967 -145 69 -233 310 126 820 1531 467 56.7 729 -221 716 -120 623 -183 764 466 685 1443
10/8/01 16 32 591 -164 1055 -164 966 -151 67 -246 311 132 832 1607 467 56.7 728 -227 715 -126 623 -183 761 447 697 1518
14/8/01 17 36 591 -164 1055 -164 966 -151 67 -246 312 139 830 1594 469 69.3 728 -227 715 -126 623 -183 760 441 700 1537
17/8/01 16 39 590 -170 1055 -164 965 -158 65 -258 314 151 865 1814 470 75.6 727 -233 715 -126 623 -183 759 435 734 1751
21/8/01 16 43 586 -195 1055 -164 964 -164 63 -271 315 158 884 1934 471 81.9 725 -246 715 -126 621 -195 755 410 745 1821
24/8/01 16 46 585 -202 1053 -176 963 -170 62 -277 317 170 890 1972 473 94.5 722 -265 712 -145 620 -202 753 397 757 1896
28/8/01 15 50 584 -208 1052 -183 963 -170 61 -284 319 183 886 1947 474 101 720 -277 710 -158 620 -202 750 378 752 1865
31/8/01 15 53 584 -208 1051 -189 963 -170 61 -284 320 189 883 1928 475 107 720 -277 709 -164 619 -208 750 378 749 1846
7/9/01 16 60 584 -208 1051 -189 963 -170 61 -284 320 189 896 2010 475 107 720 -277 708 -170 618 -214 750 378 764 1940
13/9/01 18 66 583 -214 1051 -189 963 -170 61 -284 326 227 907 2079 478 126 720 -277 708 -170 617 -221 749 372 775 2010
24/9/01 20 77 584 -208 1053 -176 965 -158 62 -277 328 239 915 2129 481 145 722 -265 710 -158 619 -208 749 372 785 2073
4/10/01 19 87 584 -208 1053 -176 965 -158 62 -277 328 239 942 2300 482 151 722 -265 710 -158 619 -208 749 372 810 2230
17/10/01 21 100 584 -208 1053 -176 965 -158 62 -277 330 252 966 2451 482 151 722 -265 710 -158 619 -208 748 365 829 2350
8/11/01 18 122 583 -214 1053 -176 965 -158 62 -277 335 284 904 2060 482 151 722 -265 710 -158 708 353 748 365 781 2048
322
Table AIII.17 Surface strain by demac for slab RS3-b
S l aSlab
b # 6RS3-b
( 2Y10 ) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
12/7/01 16 3 752 895 753 760 968 870 759 679 915 756 689
12/7/01 16 3 754 897 757 762 970 872 762 680 917 760 694
13/7/01 15 4 754 0 897 0 757 0 762 0 972 12.6 872 0 765 18.9 680 0 919 12.6 762 12.6 694 0
14/7/01 15 5 750 -25.2 893 -25.2 754 -18.9 758 -25.2 968 -12.6 868 -25.2 761 -6.3 677 -18.9 915 -12.6 758 -12.6 691 -19
15/7/01 14 6 746 -50.4 889 -50.4 750 -44.1 754 -50.4 966 -25.2 929 359.1 758 -25.2 674 -37.8 911 -37.8 754 -37.8 688 -38
16/7/01 15 7 743 -69.3 884 -81.9 747 -63 750 -75.6 963 -44.1 952 504 757 -31.5 672 -50.4 910 -44.1 753 -44.1 687 -44
17/7/01 15 8 743 -69.3 885 -75.6 749 -50.4 749 -81.9 966 -25.2 971 623.7 756 -37.8 672 -50.4 910 -44.1 751 -56.7 686 -50
18/7/01 14 9 740 -88.2 883 -88.2 747 -63 747 -94.5 963 -44.1 986 718.2 754 -50.4 671 -56.7 909 -50.4 749 -69.3 684 -63
20/7/01 15 11 739 -94.5 881 -101 745 -75.6 746 -101 961 -56.7 1016 907.2 749 -81.9 668 -75.6 905 -75.6 747 -81.9 681 -82
22/7/01 14 13 736 -113 879 -113 741 -101 744 -113 959 -69.3 1031 1002 747 -94.5 666 -88.2 903 -88.2 746 -88.2 678 -101
23/7/01 14 14 736 -113 881 -101 743 -88.2 747 -94.5 961 -56.7 1035 1027 747 -94.5 668 -75.6 904 -81.9 747 -81.9 680 -88
25/7/01 16 16 737 -107 881 -101 743 -88.2 745 -107 961 -56.7 1047 1103 745 -107 665 -94.5 903 -88.2 746 -88.2 679 -95
27/7/01 16 18 739 -94.5 882 -94.5 744 -81.9 747 -94.5 962 -50.4 1054 1147 748 -88.2 668 -75.6 906 -69.3 748 -75.6 681 -82
30/7/01 15 21 735 -120 879 -113 741 -101 744 -113 959 -69.3 1081 1317 747 -94.5 664 -101 903 -88.2 746 -88.2 680 -88
1/8/01 15 23 733 -132 877 -126 739 -113 742 -126 956 -88.2 1112 1512 743 -120 660 -126 900 -107 743 -107 676 -113
3/8/01 15 25 730 -151 875 -139 737 -126 740 -139 955 -94.5 1128 1613 743 -120 660 -126 899 -113 743 -107 675 -120
6/8/01 15 28 727 -170 873 -151 734 -145 737 -158 951 -120 1162 1827 740 -139 657 -145 897 -126 741 -120 673 -132
8/8/01 16 30 725 -183 872 -158 732 -158 736 -164 949 -132 1178 1928 736 -164 654 -164 893 -151 739 -132 670 -151
10/8/01 16 32 723 -195 870 -170 729 -176 733 -183 946 -151 1192 2016 733 -183 652 -176 891 -164 737 -145 668 -164
14/8/01 17 36 723 -195 870 -170 730 -170 734 -176 946 -151 1194 2029 733 -183 654 -164 892 -158 738 -139 669 -158
17/8/01 16 39 722 -202 870 -170 729 -176 733 -183 945 -158 1234 2281 732 -189 651 -183 890 -170 738 -139 667 -170
21/8/01 16 43 716 -239 866 -195 724 -208 729 -208 940 -189 1265 2476 727 -221 646 -214 885 -202 735 -158 662 -202
24/8/01 16 46 714 -252 865 -202 721 -227 727 -221 937 -208 1282 2583 724 -239 645 -221 883 -214 733 -170 660 -214
28/8/01 15 50 713 -258 865 -202 720 -233 727 -221 936 -214 1280 2570 724 -239 646 -214 884 -208 733 -170 660 -214
31/8/01 15 53 712 -265 865 -202 720 -233 727 -221 936 -214 1275 2539 723 -246 646 -214 883 -214 732 -176 659 -221
7/9/01 16 60 712 -265 865 -202 720 -233 727 -221 936 -214 1303 2715 723 -246 647 -208 884 -208 732 -176 660 -214
13/9/01 18 66 711 -271 865 -202 720 -233 728 -214 937 -208 1321 2829 723 -246 648 -202 885 -202 733 -170 660 -214
24/9/01 20 77 713 -258 867 -189 723 -214 730 -202 940 -189 1337 2930 725 -233 650 -189 887 -189 735 -158 661 -208
4/10/01 19 87 712 -265 867 -189 722 -221 728 -214 938 -202 1376 3175 722 -252 646 -214 884 -208 733 -170 658 -227
17/10/01 21 100 709 -284 867 -189 720 -233 727 -221 935 -221 1412 3402 719 -271 645 -221 882 -221 733 -170 656 -239
323
S la
Slab b# 6
RS3-b S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G UA G E S
Date Temp. A ge 20 21 22 23 24 25
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 5 7 6 20 6 1
13/7/01 15 4 3 2 4 42 31 7
14/7/01 15 5 7 5 7 32 18 11
15/7/01 14 6 468 474 492 502 543 502
16/7/01 15 7 607 620 635 658 667 637
17/7/01 15 8 753 767 777 826 801 768
18/7/01 14 9 837 853 861 838 888 858
20/7/01 15 11 998 1017 1021 1029 1046 1018
22/7/01 14 13 1094 1110 1116 1135 1151 1124
23/7/01 14 14 1101 1119 1129 1145 1160 1131
25/7/01 16 16 1159 1167 1166 1153 1176 1162
27/7/01 16 18 1211 1218 1224 1196 1235 1232
30/7/01 15 21 1392 1394 1404 1391 1415 1422
1/8/01 15 23 1585 1578 1582 1550 1614 1626
3/8/01 15 25 1627 1624 1616 1608 1648 1657
6/8/01 15 28 1859 1846 1852 1842 1923 1925
8/8/01 16 30 1919 1898 1908 1950 1972 1977
10/8/01 16 32 2010 1977 1987 1966 2063 2078
14/8/01 17 36 1922 1876 1896 1907 1935 1940
17/8/01 16 39 2251 2203 2242 2289 2345 2362
21/8/01 16 43 2397 2327 2344 2260 2461 2474
24/8/01 16 46 2426 2321 2348 2280 2445 2479
28/8/01 15 50 2408 2269 2299 2270 2397 2408
31/8/01 15 53 2411 2203 2242 2153 2318 2334
7/9/01 16 60 2623 2369 2434 2375 2523 2518
13/9/01 18 66 2697 2483 2558 2512 2678 2667
24/9/01 20 77 2926 2536 2616 2552 2738 2789
4/10/01 19 87 2941 2956 3064 3089 3270 3601
17/10/01 21 100 2905 2918 3042 3033 3249 3581
8/11/01 18 122 2250 2284 2483 2331 2746 3313
324
Slab RS4-a
S la b # 7 ( 4 Y 1 0 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Dat e Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/7/ 01 16 3 794 458 667 803 250 693 497 501 615 406 536 595 573 639
12/7/ 01 16 3 801 465 668 811 254 694 505 512 617 412 543 600 577 641
13/ 7/01 15 4 798 -18.9 462 -19 670 12.6 807 -25 255 6.3 693 -6.3 501 -25.2 507 -32 617 0 410 -13 543 0 598 -13 578 6.3 641 0
14/ 7/01 15 5 798 -18.9 461 -25 674 37.8 809 -13 256 12.6 692 -13 501 -25.2 505 -44 617 0 412 0 545 12.6 597 -19 579 12.6 642 6.3
15/ 7/01 14 6 795 -37.8 458 -44 671 18.9 806 -32 256 12.6 709 94.5 525 126 522 63 639 139 412 0 542 -6.3 593 -44 576 -6.3 637 -25
16/ 7/01 15 7 792 -56.7 454 -69 670 12.6 805 -38 255 6.3 725 195 538 208 541 183 654 233 414 12.6 542 -6.3 593 -44 575 -13 635 -38
17/ 7/01 15 8 790 -69.3 455 -63 669 6.3 804 -44 257 18.9 735 258 548 271 550 239 665 302 417 31.5 540 -18.9 591 -57 574 -19 635 -38
18/ 7/01 14 9 789 -75.6 454 -69 670 12.6 804 -44 260 37.8 740 290 555 315 556 277 672 347 421 56.7 540 -18.9 591 -57 575 -13 633 -50
20/ 7/01 15 11 788 -81.9 454 -69 669 6.3 804 -44 262 50.4 755 384 570 410 572 378 687 441 422 63 540 -18.9 592 -50 575 -13 632 -57
22/ 7/01 14 13 788 -81.9 454 -69 670 12.6 802 -57 262 50.4 764 441 576 447 583 447 698 510 422 63 538 -31.5 591 -57 574 -19 631 -63
23/ 7/01 15 14 786 -94.5 455 -63 670 12.6 802 -57 262 50.4 766 454 577 454 585 460 699 517 424 75.6 539 -25.2 592 -50 575 -13 631 -63
25/ 7/01 16 16 787 -88.2 454 -69 670 12.6 802 -57 264 63 773 498 584 498 591 498 704 548 423 69.3 537 -37.8 592 -50 575 -13 630 -69
27/ 7/01 16 18 787 -88.2 455 -63 671 18.9 801 -63 265 69.3 775 510 586 510 592 504 707 567 422 63 537 -37.8 590 -63 574 -19 629 -76
30/ 7/01 15 21 786 -94.5 453 -76 670 12.6 800 -69 266 75.6 791 611 603 617 610 617 724 674 423 69.3 537 -37.8 589 -69 574 -19 628 -82
1/8/ 01 15 23 783 -113 451 -88 667 -6.3 797 -88 266 75.6 806 706 620 725 629 737 741 781 424 75.6 534 -56.7 587 -82 572 -32 625 -101
3/8/01 15 25 782 -120 455 -63 668 0 796 -95 268 88.2 810 731 624 750 634 769 745 806 426 88.2 533 -63 586 -88 572 -32 623 -113
6/8/ 01 15 28 773 -176 525 378 668 0 791 -126 266 75.6 796 643 611 668 625 712 735 743 426 88.2 530 -81.9 586 -88 572 -32 621 -126
8/8/ 01 16 30 770 -195 538 460 669 6.3 789 -139 264 63 802 680 617 706 631 750 739 769 426 88.2 528 -94.5 585 -95 572 -32 619 -139
10/8/ 01 16 32 770 -195 545 504 669 6.3 787 -151 264 63 798 655 614 687 628 731 736 750 426 88.2 525 -113 585 -95 572 -32 618 -145
14/ 8/01 17 36 772 -183 546 510 668 0 787 -151 264 63 799 662 614 687 628 731 735 743 426 88.2 525 -113 584 -101 572 -32 618 -145
17/ 8/01 16 39 772 -183 565 630 669 6.3 789 -139 264 63 813 750 628 775 640 806 749 832 425 81.9 525 -113 584 -101 572 -32 616 -158
21/ 8/01 16 43 768 -208 576 699 670 12.6 784 -170 264 63 813 750 627 769 641 813 750 838 425 81.9 525 -113 584 -101 574 -19 612 -183
24/ 8/01 16 46 765 -227 578 712 670 12.6 780 -195 262 50.4 795 636 592 548 612 630 726 687 422 63 561 113 584 -101 597 126 610 -195
28/ 8/01 15 50 765 -227 573 680 670 12.6 778 -208 261 44.1 787 586 587 517 606 592 720 649 421 56.7 565 139 584 -101 600 145 609 -202
31/ 8/01 15 53 765 -227 574 687 670 12.6 778 -208 261 44.1 785 573 585 504 604 580 718 636 421 56.7 568 158 584 -101 600 145 609 -202
7/9/01 16 60 765 -227 575 693 670 12.6 777 -214 261 44.1 788 592 589 529 607 599 722 662 421 56.7 572 183 584 -101 600 145 609 -202
13/ 9/01 18 66 764 -233 580 725 670 12.6 777 -214 261 44.1 789 599 591 542 607 599 722 662 421 56.7 579 227 584 -101 607 189 609 -202
24/ 9/01 20 77 764 -233 579 718 671 18.9 778 -208 262 50.4 791 611 596 573 610 617 726 687 422 63 586 271 586 -88 613 227 611 -189
4/10/ 01 19 87 764 -233 590 788 671 18.9 776 -221 262 50.4 792 617 596 573 610 617 726 687 422 63 594 321 586 -88 613 227 611 -189
17/10/ 01 21 100 764 -233 600 851 671 18.9 776 -221 262 50.4 795 636 602 611 617 662 734 737 422 63 605 391 586 -88 624 296 610 -195
8/11/01 18 122 764 -233 605 882 671 18.9 776 -221 262 50.4 797 649 604 624 619 674 737 756 422 63 615 454 586 -88 630 334 610 -195
325
Table AIII.20 Surface strain by demec for slab RS4-a
Slab
S la b # 7RS4-a
( 4Y10 ) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
12/7/01 16 3 756 625 749 777 756 762 644 736 745 919 747
12/7/01 16 3 760 629 753 782 760 767 648 741 750 924 753
13/7/01 15 4 758 -12.6 628 -6.3 753 0 781 -6.3 759 -6.3 767 0 647 -6.3 739 -12.6 747 -18.9 921 -18.9 751 -12.6
14/7/01 15 5 758 -12.6 628 -6.3 755 12.6 782 0 759 -6.3 767 0 647 -6.3 741 0 747 -18.9 922 -12.6 751 -12.6
15/7/01 14 6 754 -37.8 624 -31.5 752 -6.3 787 31.5 757 -18.9 801 214 645 -18.9 739 -12.6 744 -37.8 920 -25.2 748 -31.5
16/7/01 15 7 751 -56.7 623 -37.8 749 -25.2 781 -6.3 757 -18.9 816 309 644 -25.2 738 -18.9 741 -56.7 918 -37.8 746 -44.1
17/7/01 15 8 751 -56.7 623 -37.8 748 -31.5 779 -19 755 -31.5 827 378 644 -25.2 738 -18.9 741 -56.7 917 -44.1 744 -56.7
18/7/01 14 9 750 -63 625 -25.2 749 -25.2 779 -19 754 -37.8 836 435 642 -37.8 736 -31.5 740 -63 918 -37.8 744 -56.7
20/7/01 15 11 749 -69.3 624 -31.5 749 -25.2 777 -32 754 -37.8 854 548 642 -37.8 735 -37.8 740 -63 918 -37.8 743 -63
22/7/01 14 13 747 -81.9 622 -44.1 747 -37.8 776 -38 753 -44.1 863 605 641 -44.1 734 -44.1 738 -75.6 918 -37.8 743 -63
23/7/01 15 14 748 -75.6 625 -25.2 748 -31.5 778 -25 754 -37.8 866 624 642 -37.8 735 -37.8 740 -63 920 -25.2 745 -50.4
25/7/01 16 16 748 -75.6 623 -37.8 747 -37.8 777 -32 752 -50.4 877 693 641 -44.1 735 -37.8 740 -63 919 -31.5 744 -56.7
27/7/01 16 18 746 -88.2 621 -50.4 745 -50.4 776 -38 749 -69.3 880 712 641 -44.1 736 -31.5 739 -69.3 919 -31.5 743 -63
30/7/01 15 21 745 -94.5 620 -56.7 745 -50.4 777 -32 749 -69.3 898 825 640 -50.4 735 -37.8 738 -75.6 918 -37.8 742 -69.3
1/8/01 15 23 743 -107 618 -69.3 744 -56.7 775 -44 745 -94.5 923 983 637 -69.3 731 -63 735 -94.5 916 -50.4 739 -88.2
3/8/01 15 25 740 -126 618 -69.3 743 -63 773 -57 744 -101 927 1008 635 -81.9 728 -81.9 735 -94.5 920 -25.2 738 -94.5
6/8/01 15 28 737 -145 617 -75.6 741 -75.6 770 -76 741 -120 916 939 630 -113 724 -107 732 -113 991 422.1 731 -139
8/8/01 16 30 734 -164 616 -81.9 740 -81.9 768 -88 740 -126 920 964 628 -126 720 -132 727 -145 1003 497.7 728 -158
10/8/01 16 32 730 -189 614 -94.5 737 -101 765 -107 736 -151 918 951 625 -145 717 -151 726 -151 1013 560.7 726 -170
14/8/01 17 36 730 -189 615 -88.2 737 -101 767 -95 735 -158 917 945 625 -145 718 -145 726 -151 1016 579.6 727 -164
17/8/01 16 39 729 -195 615 -88.2 737 -101 764 -113 735 -158 933 1046 625 -145 717 -151 726 -151 1034 693 725 -176
21/8/01 16 43 721 -246 620 -56.7 734 -120 760 -139 730 -189 933 1046 620 -176 712 -183 723 -170 1048 781.2 719 -214
24/8/01 16 46 718 -265 650 132 733 -126 783 6.3 727 -208 914 926 617 -195 709 -202 720 -189 1046 768.6 715 -239
28/8/01 15 50 718 -265 652 145 732 -132 786 25.2 727 -208 912 914 617 -195 709 -202 720 -189 1043 749.7 715 -239
31/8/01 15 53 718 -265 655 164 732 -132 789 44.1 727 -208 911 907 617 -195 710 -195 720 -189 1044 756 715 -239
7/9/01 16 60 718 -265 659 189 731 -139 793 69.3 727 -208 918 951 617 -195 710 -195 720 -189 1046 768.6 715 -239
13/9/01 18 66 717 -271 666 233 731 -139 798 101 726 -214 922 977 617 -195 710 -195 720 -189 1051 800.1 715 -239
24/9/01 20 77 719 -258 675 290 732 -132 807 158 727 -208 925 995 618 -189 713 -176 720 -189 1055 825.3 717 -227
4/10/01 19 87 716 -277 685 353 731 -139 810 176 726 -214 927 1008 615 -208 711 -189 717 -208 1066 894.6 715 -239
17/10/01 21 100 713 -296 698 435 730 -145 817 221 725 -221 933 1046 615 -208 710 -195 715 -221 1075 951.3 713 -252
8/11/01 18 122 707 -334 708 498 724 -183 822 252 719 -258 933 1046 609 -246 705 -227 709 -258 1080 982.8 708 -284
326
Slab
s la b #RS4-a
7 (4Y10) S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G A UG E S
Date Temp. A ge 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 8 9 8 108 0 8 29 9
13/7/01 15 4 2 2 4 113 5 4 196 5
14/7/01 15 5 4 2 10 74 6 3 197 6
15/7/01 14 6 329 311 318 147 294 281 485 328
16/7/01 15 7 423 402 408 250 393 382 572 431
17/7/01 15 8 520 499 495 369 507 495 669 553
18/7/01 14 9 569 549 546 431 562 553 711 618
20/7/01 15 11 681 659 645 585 706 937 794 743
22/7/01 14 13 681 716 705 647 866 985 849 803
23/7/01 14 14 741 719 712 616 788 780 849 797
25/7/01 16 16 788 763 744 662 845 821 877 865
27/7/01 16 18 826 794 777 701 861 846 898 905
30/7/01 15 21 948 912 894 820 1018 966 989 1040
1/8/01 15 23 1073 1050 1036 961 1209 1121 1102 1192
3/8/01 15 25 1055 1055 1043 973 1251 1151 1097 1195
6/8/01 15 28 912 918 934 815 1147 1027 949 1046
8/8/01 16 30 948 949 968 889 1151 1047 966 1095
10/8/01 16 32 994 996 1014 940 1162 1103 995 1133
14/8/01 17 36 947 947 966 865 1241 1054 949 1080
17/8/01 16 39 1126 1127 1151 1048 1395 1298 1111 1280
21/8/01 16 43 1158 1160 1171 1101 1491 1321 1144 1334
24/8/01 16 46 943 967 1046 733 1111 984 859 1044
28/8/01 15 50 926 951 1015 717 1113 971 843 1037
31/8/01 15 53 900 928 982 704 1017 897 823 1018
7/9/01 16 60 981 1011 1063 856 1118 1040 906 1127
13/9/01 18 66 1056 1064 1120 945 1264 1100 955 1199
24/9/01 20 77 1095 1067 1073 1017 1271 1148 980 1228
4/10/01 19 87 1166 1136 1168 1156 1325 1282 1042 1354
17/10/01 21 100 1158 1157 1149 1151 1341 1292 1043 1368
8/11/01 18 122 1092 1109 1032 1104 1361 1345 996 1342
327
Slab RS4-b
S la b # 8 ( 4 Y 1 0 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Date Temp. A ge Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
12/7/01 16 3 749 479 470 377 982 34 409 113 406 126 789 745 702 473
12/7/01 16 3 765 473 480 376 983 23 410 111 400 122 789 744 702 473
13/7/01 15 4 766 6.3 470 -19 478 -12.6 376 0 983 0 28 31.5 408 -12.6 110 -6.3 399 -6.3 120 -13 788 -6.3 744 0 703 6.3 472 -6.3
14/7/01 15 5 765 0 469 -25 478 -12.6 375 -6.3 982 -6.3 30 44.1 406 -25.2 109 -12.6 397 -18.9 119 -19 787 -13 743 -6.3 702 0 471 -12.6
15/7/01 14 6 764 -6.3 468 -32 477 -18.9 374 -13 980 -19 32 56.7 407 -18.9 107 -25.2 395 -31.5 118 -25 787 -13 743 -6.3 702 0 469 -25.2
16/7/01 15 7 758 -44.1 466 -44 476 -25.2 372 -25 978 -32 81 365 443 208 152 258 441 258 112 -63 784 -32 739 -31.5 698 -25 464 -56.7
17/7/01 15 8 760 -31.5 464 -57 477 -18.9 371 -32 978 -32 100 485 459 309 166 347 454 340 110 -76 782 -44 737 -44.1 696 -38 462 -69.3
18/7/01 14 9 760 -31.5 464 -57 476 -25.2 370 -38 980 -19 106 523 464 340 170 372 461 384 110 -76 782 -44 737 -44.1 696 -38 461 -75.6
20/7/01 15 11 757 -50.4 463 -63 473 -44.1 367 -57 980 -19 123 630 477 422 187 479 478 491 112 -63 780 -57 735 -56.7 695 -44 460 -81.9
22/7/01 14 13 755 -63 461 -76 472 -50.4 365 -69 980 -19 133 693 487 485 196 536 488 554 112 -63 779 -63 734 -63 695 -44 458 -94.5
23/7/01 15 14 755 -63 461 -76 473 -44.1 365 -69 981 -13 134 699 487 485 197 542 489 561 111 -69 777 -76 733 -69.3 694 -50 457 -101
25/7/01 16 16 756 -56.7 462 -69 475 -31.5 366 -63 985 12.6 143 756 495 536 207 605 496 605 113 -57 780 -57 735 -56.7 696 -38 460 -81.9
27/7/01 16 18 758 -44.1 463 -63 477 -18.9 367 -57 988 31.5 148 788 494 529 211 630 501 636 117 -32 780 -57 736 -50.4 700 -13 463 -63
30/7/01 15 21 756 -56.7 459 -88 474 -37.8 365 -69 985 12.6 162 876 513 649 224 712 514 718 115 -44 778 -69 732 -75.6 697 -32 458 -94.5
1/8/01 15 23 754 -69.3 457 -101 471 -56.7 362 -88 984 6.3 177 970 524 718 242 825 530 819 114 -50 775 -88 730 -88.2 695 -44 454 -120
3/8/01 15 25 753 -75.6 458 -95 471 -56.7 359 -107 985 12.6 183 1008 530 756 247 857 537 863 115 -44 774 -95 729 -94.5 695 -44 450 -145
6/8/01 15 28 741 -151 520 296 466 -88.2 352 -151 982 -6.3 175 958 525 725 242 825 532 832 117 -32 771 -113 728 -101 695 -44 446 -170
8/8/01 16 30 735 -189 552 498 465 -94.5 350 -164 980 -19 168 914 517 674 235 781 526 794 118 -25 771 -113 727 -107 695 -44 443 -189
10/8/01 16 32 738 -170 558 536 466 -88.2 348 -176 979 -25 167 907 517 674 235 781 525 788 116 -38 770 -120 725 -120 695 -44 440 -208
14/8/01 17 36 742 -145 554 510 466 -88.2 347 -183 978 -32 167 907 517 674 235 781 525 788 115 -44 770 -120 724 -126 695 -44 440 -208
17/8/01 16 39 742 -145 567 592 466 -88.2 346 -189 977 -38 180 989 533 775 248 863 537 863 115 -44 770 -120 724 -126 695 -44 437 -227
21/8/01 16 43 744 -132 580 674 466 -88.2 344 -202 977 -38 185 1021 537 800 253 895 541 888 114 -50 770 -120 724 -126 695 -44 430 -271
24/8/01 16 46 743 -139 589 731 467 -81.9 339 -233 975 -50 190 1052 541 825 258 926 545 914 112 -63 769 -126 721 -145 694 -50 428 -284
28/8/01 15 50 744 -132 583 693 467 -81.9 337 -246 975 -50 187 1033 537 800 255 907 540 882 110 -76 767 -139 720 -151 694 -50 426 -296
31/8/01 15 53 745 -126 579 668 467 -81.9 338 -239 975 -50 185 1021 537 800 254 901 539 876 110 -76 767 -139 720 -151 694 -50 427 -290
7/9/01 16 60 745 -126 584 699 467 -81.9 337 -246 975 -50 189 1046 543 838 260 939 545 914 110 -76 766 -145 720 -151 695 -44 427 -290
13/9/01 18 66 745 -126 590 737 469 -69.3 337 -246 975 -50 196 1090 550 882 267 983 554 970 110 -76 765 -151 720 -151 695 -44 427 -290
24/9/01 20 77 747 -113 598 788 472 -50.4 337 -246 976 -44 199 1109 554 907 271 1008 558 995 112 -63 766 -145 721 -145 696 -38 427 -290
4/10/01 19 87 747 -113 606 838 472 -50.4 337 -246 976 -44 176 964 520 693 240 813 528 806 113 -57 766 -145 721 -145 696 -38 427 -290
17/10/01 21 100 747 -113 612 876 472 -50.4 336 -252 976 -44 179 983 526 731 246 851 533 838 113 -57 766 -145 721 -145 767 410 427 -290
8/11/01 18 122 747 -113 615 895 472 -50.4 336 -252 976 -44 180 989 527 737 247 857 534 844 113 -57 766 -145 721 -145 780 491 427 -290
328
Table AIII.23 Surface strain by demec for slab RS4-b
Slab
S la b # 8RS4-b
( 4Y10 ) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
12/7/01 16 3 764 1050 760 770 760 519 760 757 985 760 767
12/7/01 16 3 765 1053 763 773 762 522 763 759 984 762 770
13/7/01 15 4 766 6.3 1053 0 763 0 774 6.3 762 0 522 0 762 -6.3 759 0 984 0 761 -6.3 770 0
14/7/01 15 5 764 -6.3 1051 -12.6 762 -6.3 773 0 761 -6.3 523 6.3 761 -12.6 758 -6.3 985 6.3 759 -18.9 768 -12.6
15/7/01 14 6 763 -12.6 1049 -25.2 761 -12.6 772 -6.3 760 -13 523 6.3 760 -18.9 757 -12.6 985 6.3 758 -25.2 767 -18.9
16/7/01 15 7 760 -31.5 1045 -50.4 759 -25.2 769 -25 759 -19 571 309 757 -37.8 755 -25.2 982 -12.6 758 -25.2 765 -31.5
17/7/01 15 8 759 -37.8 1044 -56.7 758 -31.5 768 -32 750 -76 585 397 757 -37.8 755 -25.2 982 -12.6 758 -25.2 764 -37.8
18/7/01 14 9 759 -37.8 1042 -69.3 758 -31.5 766 -44 754 -50 593 447 756 -44.1 752 -44.1 981 -18.9 755 -44.1 762 -50.4
20/7/01 15 11 757 -50.4 1043 -63 757 -37.8 765 -50 753 -57 613 573 754 -56.7 751 -50.4 980 -25.2 754 -50.4 760 -63
22/7/01 14 13 756 -56.7 1043 -63 755 -50.4 764 -57 753 -57 624 643 753 -63 750 -56.7 978 -37.8 754 -50.4 760 -63
23/7/01 15 14 755 -63 1041 -75.6 754 -56.7 763 -63 751 -69 624 643 753 -63 751 -50.4 979 -31.5 754 -50.4 761 -56.7
25/7/01 16 16 757 -50.4 1044 -56.7 757 -37.8 765 -50 752 -63 638 731 755 -50.4 752 -44.1 981 -18.9 756 -37.8 763 -44.1
27/7/01 16 18 761 -25.2 1046 -44.1 760 -18.9 767 -38 755 -44 644 769 756 -44.1 754 -31.5 983 -6.3 758 -25.2 765 -31.5
30/7/01 15 21 756 -56.7 1041 -75.6 755 -50.4 764 -57 752 -63 660 869 752 -69.3 750 -56.7 978 -37.8 755 -44.1 760 -63
1/8/01 15 23 753 -75.6 1039 -88.2 752 -69.3 760 -82 748 -88 680 995 748 -94.5 747 -75.6 975 -56.7 752 -63 754 -101
3/8/01 15 25 750 -94.5 1038 -94.5 750 -81.9 759 -88 746 -101 686 1033 748 -94.5 746 -81.9 975 -56.7 752 -63 754 -101
6/8/01 15 28 749 -101 1036 -107 749 -88.2 758 -95 744 -113 681 1002 744 -120 742 -107 975 -56.7 803 258 747 -145
8/8/01 16 30 749 -101 1036 -107 748 -94.5 757 -101 742 -126 677 977 740 -145 739 -126 967 -107 827 410 743 -170
10/8/01 16 32 745 -126 1034 -120 745 -113 754 -120 739 -145 675 964 736 -170 736 -145 966 -113 844 517 742 -176
14/8/01 17 36 745 -126 1033 -126 745 -113 754 -120 739 -145 675 964 736 -170 736 -145 964 -126 848 542 742 -176
17/8/01 16 39 744 -132 1033 -126 744 -120 753 -126 738 -151 689 1052 735 -176 735 -151 964 -126 865 649 741 -183
21/8/01 16 43 739 -164 1028 -158 740 -145 749 -151 734 -176 694 1084 731 -202 731 -176 962 -139 880 743 737 -208
24/8/01 16 46 737 -176 1028 -158 738 -158 748 -158 732 -189 699 1115 729 -214 729 -189 960 -151 888 794 736 -214
28/8/01 15 50 736 -183 1028 -158 738 -158 748 -158 732 -189 698 1109 729 -214 730 -183 960 -151 887 788 736 -214
31/8/01 15 53 737 -176 1029 -151 736 -170 747 -164 732 -189 696 1096 730 -208 730 -183 959 -158 886 781 736 -214
7/9/01 16 60 737 -176 1029 -151 737 -164 748 -158 731 -195 709 1178 728 -221 730 -183 960 -151 896 844 736 -214
13/9/01 18 66 737 -176 1030 -145 738 -158 749 -151 731 -195 718 1235 729 -214 730 -183 960 -151 905 901 736 -214
24/9/01 20 77 738 -170 1032 -132 740 -145 751 -139 733 -183 725 1279 731 -202 732 -170 961 -145 915 964 737 -208
4/10/01 19 87 734 -195 1032 -132 740 -145 755 -113 730 -202 705 1153 727 -227 735 -151 961 -145 922 1008 735 -221
17/10/01 21 100 734 -195 1120 422 737 -164 749 -151 730 -202 712 1197 726 -233 730 -183 958 -164 926 1033 731 -246
8/11/01 18 122 730 -221 1135 517 731 -202 743 -189 723 -246 712 1197 720 -271 723 -227 953 -195 928 1046 726 -277
329
laSlab
b # RS4-b
8 (4Y10 S T E E L S T R A IN B Y S T R A IN G A UG E S
Date Temp. A ge 20 21 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
12/7/01 16 3
12/7/01 16 3 12 87 1 1 2 10 1 1 1 58
13/7/01 15 4 14 86 5 3 24 65 19 5 15 47
14/7/01 15 5 26 55 24 15 8 120 14 14 29 35
15/7/01 14 6 69 41 38 16 32 119 17 14 32 31
16/7/01 15 7 487 327 434 388 390 533 376 426 428 429
17/7/01 15 8 600 433 567 503 408 646 480 531 531 554
18/7/01 14 9 668 501 617 542 500 698 530 582 583 622
20/7/01 15 11 788 610 747 636 551 817 628 690 691 741
22/7/01 14 13 954 674 825 696 727 890 690 757 763 816
23/7/01 14 14 941 677 828 695 736 896 697 760 767 817
25/7/01 16 16 932 720 876 736 790 946 736 804 811 859
27/7/01 16 18 926 766 908 764 824 994 776 842 854 915
30/7/01 15 21 1066 889 1002 873 945 1117 886 950 968 1058
1/8/01 15 23 1226 1072 1146 1013 1092 1263 1020 1083 1109 1225
3/8/01 15 25 1247 1070 1158 1027 1110 1280 1035 1098 1123 1209
6/8/01 15 28 1212 1103 1168 1014 1141 1282 1032 1079 1100 1200
8/8/01 16 30 1202 1081 1121 975 1105 1243 997 1055 1087 1179
10/8/01 16 32 1169 1013 1090 910 1076 1224 979 1030 1050 1167
14/8/01 17 36 1109 935 1019 897 1033 1189 929 991 1012 1106
17/8/01 16 39 1314 1157 1229 1096 1201 1375 1096 1162 1205 1322
21/8/01 16 43 1376 1210 1275 1130 1254 1435 1137 1203 1268 1383
24/8/01 16 46 1359 1209 1245 1110 1254 1423 1126 1194 1262 1365
28/8/01 15 50 1341 1180 1184 1104 1238 1407 1106 1176 1246 1332
31/8/01 15 53 1289 1119 1130 1061 1195 1363 1066 1136 1189 1275
7/9/01 16 60 1395 1224 1187 1151 1304 1490 1180 1244 1298 1408
13/9/01 18 66 1467 1311 1181 1227 1391 1575 1250 1314 1369 1530
24/9/01 20 77 1460 1337 1180 1208 1426 1620 1329 1354 1411 1573
4/10/01 19 87 1317 1130 1008 971 1280 1365 1185 1106 1121 1139
17/10/01 21 100 1381 1136 1079 1082 1328 1473 1209 1204 1234 1152
8/11/01 18 122 1382 1084 1018 1052 1319 1445 1203 1202 1240 1110
330
Table AIII.25 Creep strain and creep coefficient for concrete Batch 1
Shirinkage ( cylinders ) Creep ( under 5 MPa )

BATCH 1 cylinder # 1 cylinder # 2 cylinder # 3 cylinder # 1 cylinder # 2 cylinder # 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 shrinkage strain 1 2 3 4 5 6 total strain
Date Temp Age Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain ( avarage of 1,2,3 Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain ( avarage of 1,2,3 )
7/12/01 16 3 754 750 762 607 760 709 instantanuse strain creep strain creep coeficient
7/12/01 16 3 634 782 753 675 743 744 0 703 645 491.4 687 539 450.5 710 616 450.5 464.1 0 0
13/7/01 15 4 637 782 -9.45 754 676 -6.3 745 744 -6.3 -7.35 696 627 570.2 676 518 551.3 699 604 522.9 548.1 91.35 0.196832579
14/7/01 15 5 634 777 15.75 750 673 15.75 742 741 12.6 14.7 686 612 648.9 664 507 623.7 691 593 582.8 618.45 139.65 0.300904977
15/7/01 14 6 630 771 47.25 745 668 47.25 738 737 37.8 44.1 680 604 693 658 501 661.5 684 586 626.9 660.45 152.25 0.328054299
16/7/01 15 7 627 768 66.15 742 664 69.3 736 735 50.4 61.95 675 596 734 653 492 705.6 679 579 664.7 701.4 175.35 0.377828054
17/7/01 15 8 625 765 81.9 740 662 81.9 734 733 63 75.6 670 592 762.3 647 486 743.4 672 570 715.1 740.25 200.55 0.432126697
18/7/01 14 9 622 762 100.8 737 659 100.8 732 731 75.6 92.4 665 581 812.7 641 477 790.7 666 564 752.9 785.4 228.9 0.49321267
20/7/01 15 11 621 761 107.1 735 659 107.1 730 730 85.05 99.75 661 575 844.2 635 473 822.2 662 558 784.4 816.9 253.05 0.545248869
22/7/01 14 13 620 760 113.4 734 659 110.3 728 729 94.5 106.05 658 569 872.6 631 467 853.7 658 554 809.6 845.25 275.1 0.592760181
23/7/01 15 14 619 758 122.85 732 657 122.9 726 728 104 116.55 656 565 891.5 629 464 869.4 656 552 822.2 861 280.35 0.604072398
25/7/01 16 16 618 757 129.15 734 656 119.7 726 727 107.1 118.65 655 564 897.8 627 462 882 654 549 837.9 872.55 289.8 0.624434389
27/7/01 16 18 618 757 129.15 734 656 119.7 726 728 104 117.6 654 562 907.2 625 461 891.5 653 548 844.2 880.95 299.25 0.64479638
30/7/01 15 21 614 753 154.35 730 651 148.1 722 722 135.5 145.95 647 554 954.5 617 455 935.6 646 541 888.3 926.1 316.05 0.680995475
8/01/01 15 23 611 748 179.55 726 647 173.3 717 717 167 173.25 643 550 979.7 612 450 967.1 641 537 916.7 954.45 317.1 0.683257919
8/03/01 15 25 614 751 160.65 728 648 163.8 719 719 154.4 159.6 640 547 998.6 610 448 979.7 639 534 932.4 970.2 346.5 0.746606335
8/06/01 15 28 609 745 195.3 722 643 198.5 713 714 189 194.25 638 546 1008 608 447 989.1 637 533 941.9 979.65 321.3 0.692307692
8/08/01 16 30 607 741 214.2 719 640 217.4 710 710 211.1 214.2 634 541 1036 604 442 1017 633 530 963.9 1005.9 327.6 0.705882353
8/10/01 16 32 603 737 239.4 715 636 242.6 705 706 239.4 240.45 628 536 1071 598 437 1052 627 524 1002 1041.6 337.05 0.726244344
14/8/01 17 36 604 739 229.95 716 637 236.3 706 707 233.1 233.1 629 535 1071 599 437 1049 629 525 992.3 1037.4 340.2 0.733031674
17/8/01 16 39 599 734 261.45 711 634 261.5 703 704 252 258.3 637 525 1077 583 421 1150 616 518 1055 1094.1 371.7 0.800904977
21/8/01 16 43 595 729 289.8 706 628 296.1 697 698 289.8 291.9 627 515 1140 577 413 1194 608 509 1109 1147.65 391.65 0.843891403
24/8/01 16 46 593 725 308.7 702 624 321.3 693 694 315 315 628 510 1153 574 406 1225 604 504 1137 1171.8 392.7 0.846153846
28/8/01 15 50 593 725 308.7 703 624 318.2 693 694 315 313.95 627 509 1159 573 405 1232 602 505 1140 1177.05 399 0.859728507
31/8/01 15 53 594 726 302.4 705 626 305.6 695 697 299.3 302.4 628 511 1150 574 407 1222 602 508 1131 1167.6 401.1 0.864253394
9/07/01 16 60 593 724 311.85 703 624 318.2 693 695 311.9 313.95 626 508 1166 573 404 1235 598 505 1153 1184.4 406.35 0.875565611
13/9/01 18 66 593 725 308.7 704 625 311.9 695 696 302.4 307.65 626 506 1172 574 399 1247 599 503 1156 1191.75 420 0.904977376
24/9/01 20 77 594 724 308.7 704 625 311.9 694 696 305.6 308.7 626 500 1191 574 394 1263 598 502 1162 1205.4 432.6 0.932126697
10/04/01 19 87 590 720 333.9 700 620 340.2 690 691 333.9 336 620 491 1238 568 386 1307 592 495 1203 1249.5 449.4 0.968325792
17/10/01 21 100 585 715 365.4 694 615 374.9 685 686 365.4 368.55 615 486 1269 562 382 1339 585 490 1241 1283.1 450.45 0.970588235
11/08/01 18 122 580 710 396.9 689 610 406.4 680 681 396.9 400.05 609 481 1304 556 377 1373 580 484 1276 1317.75 453.6 0.977375566
331
Table AIII.26 Shrinkage strain for unreinforced companion specimens-Batch 1
-6
Shrinkage Strain x 10
BATCH 1 specimen # 1 specimen # 2
1 2 3 4 Avarage of 1 & 2
Date Temp Age Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain
7/12/01 16 3 695 749 742 755
13/7/01 15 4 694 747 9.45 740 753 12.6 11.0
14/7/01 15 5 689 744 34.65 736 747 44.1 39.4
15/7/01 14 6 687 739 56.7 731 745 66.15 61.4
16/7/01 15 7 685 739 63 730 745 69.3 66.2
17/7/01 15 8 684 737 72.45 728 743 81.9 77.2
18/7/01 14 9 680 734 94.5 725 740 100.8 97.7
20/7/01 15 11 678 733 103.95 724 739 107.1 105.5
22/7/01 14 13 678 732 107.1 722 737 119.7 113.4
23/7/01 15 14 678 732 107.1 722 736 122.85 115.0
25/7/01 16 16 676 730 119.7 720 734 135.45 127.6
27/7/01 16 18 676 731 116.55 721 735 129.15 122.9
30/7/01 15 21 672 727 141.75 715 729 166.95 154.4
8/01/01 15 23 665 720 185.85 709 721 211.05 198.5
8/03/01 15 25 668 723 166.95 712 725 189 178.0
8/06/01 15 28 664 718 195.3 707 720 220.5 207.9
8/08/01 16 30 661 715 214.2 703 715 248.85 231.5
8/10/01 16 32 658 712 233.1 699 711 274.05 253.6
14/8/01 17 36 659 713 226.8 701 713 261.45 244.1
17/8/01 16 39 655 709 252 696 709 289.8 270.9
21/8/01 16 43 649 702 292.95 689 702 333.9 313.4
24/8/01 16 46 645 698 318.15 683 698 365.4 341.8
28/8/01 15 50 645 699 315 685 698 359.1 337.1
31/8/01 15 53 645 701 308.7 687 700 346.5 327.6
9/07/01 16 60 641 697 333.9 683 697 368.55 351.2
13/9/01 18 66 644 699 318.15 685 699 355.95 337.1
24/9/01 20 77 643 699 321.3 684 698 362.25 341.8
10/04/01 19 87 636 692 365.4 678 691 403.2 384.3
17/10/01 21 100 631 686 400.05 672 685 441 420.5
11/08/01 18 122 625 681 434.7 666 679 478.8 456.8
332
Table AIII.27 Creep strain and creep coefficient for concrete Batch 2
Shrinkage For Cylinders Cylinders Loaded Under 3 Mpa

BATCH 2
Cylinder 1 Cylinder 2 Average 1 & 2 Cylinder 1 Cylinder 2
Average 1 & 2
instantaneous
Date Temp. Age Reading Strain Reading Strain shrinkage strain Reading Strain Reading Strain creep strain creep coefficient
strain
2/02/01 26 3 749 757 total strain
2/02/01 26 3 743 749 0 703.5 287 712 284 285.5 0
2/03/01 26 4 739.5 22 746 19 20.5 688 384 698.5 369 376.5 70.5 0.247
2/04/01 26 5 736.5 41 740.5 53 47 680 435 690.5 419 427 94.5 0.331
2/05/01 27 6 733.5 60 737 76 68 679.5 438 687.5 438 438 84.5 0.296
2/06/01 24 7 729.5 85 733.5 98 91.5 672 485 678.5 495 490 113 0.396
2/07/01 24 8 725.5 110 730.5 117 113.5 667 517 674.5 520 518.5 119.5 0.419
2/08/01 24 9 721.5 135 728 132 133.5 661 554 669 554 554 135 0.473
2/09/01 26 10 719 151 723 164 157.5 653 605 662.5 595 600 157 0.550
2/12/01 25 13 716.5 167 720 183 175 646 649 659 617 633 172.5 0.604
14/2/01 26 15 713.5 186 716.5 205 195.5 642 674 654 649 661.5 180.5 0.630
15/2/01 23 16 712 195 713 227 211 639 693 651 668 680.5 184 0.644
16/2/01 22 17 709.5 211 708 258 234.5 632 737 642 725 731 211 0.739
19/2/01 24 20 707 227 704.5 280 253.5 630 750 639 743 746.5 207.5 0.727
20/2/01 25 21 705.5 236 701 302 269 621 806 635 769 787.5 233 0.816
21/2/01 26 22 707.5 224 704.5 280 252 626.5 772 635.5 765 768.5 231 0.809
22/2/01 26 23 709 214 706.5 268 241 628.5 759 636 762 760.5 234 0.820
24/2/01 26 25 709.5 211 708 258 234.5 625 781 635.5 765 773 253 0.886
26/2/01 27 27 707.5 224 705 277 250.5 623 794 634.5 772 783 247 0.865
28/2/01 28 29 706 233 703 290 261.5 620.5 809 632.5 784 796.5 249.5 0.874
3/01/01 28 30 708 221 705 277 249 622 800 636 762 781 246.5 0.863
3/02/01 26 31 706.5 230 702.5 293 261.5 618 825 631 794 809.5 262.5 0.919
3/04/01 24 33 700.5 268 695 340 304 615.5 841 626 825 833 243.5 0.853
3/06/01 25 35 698.5 280 693 353 316.5 613.5 854 623.5 841 847.5 245.5 0.860
3/08/01 24 37 698 284 693 353 318.5 613 857 622.5 847 852 248 0.869
3/12/01 24 41 698 284 693 352.8 318.15 611 869.4 620 863.1 866.25 262.6 0.920
16/3/01 25 45 694.5 306 690.5 368.6 337.05 602 926.1 611 919.8 922.95 300.4 1.052
22/3/01 22 51 682.5 381 677 453.6 417.375 589 1008 600 989.1 998.55 295.675 1.036
26/3/01 24 55 680 397 673.5 475.7 436.275 587 1021 597.5 1005 1012.725 290.95 1.019
27/3/01 23 56 677 416 670 497.7 456.75 584 1040 594.5 1024 1031.625 289.375 1.014
29/3/01 22 58 676.5 419 670 497.7 458.325 583.5 1043 595.5 1017 1030.05 286.225 1.003
4/02/01 22 62 676.5 419 669 504 461.475 583.5 1043 594.5 1024 1033.2 286.225 1.003
4/06/01 22 66 676.5 419 670 497.7 458.325 582.5 1049 594 1027 1037.925 294.1 1.030
4/11/01 18 71 670 460 664 535.5 497.7 572.5 1112 584 1090 1100.925 317.725 1.113
19/4/01 22 79 678.5 406 673 478.8 442.575 579 1071 592 1040 1055.25 327.175 1.146
274/01 18 87 670 460 664.5 532.4 496.125 577.5 1080 587 1071 1075.725 294.1 1.030
5/05/01 17 95 669 466 664 535.5 500.85 576 1090 584 1090 1089.9 303.55 1.063
5/12/01 15 102 673.5 438 667.5 513.5 475.65 575.5 1093 582.5 1099 1096.2 335.05 1.174
6/06/01 14 127 672.5 444 667 516.6 480.375 579 1071 586.5 1074 1072.575 306.7 1.074
29/6/01 14 150 673.5 438 667 516.6 477.225 574.5 1099 584 1090 1094.625 331.9 1.163
333
Table AIII.28 Shrinkage strain for unreinforced companion specimens-Batch 2
-6
BATCH 2 Shrinkage Strainx10
Date Temp. Age Reading Strain
2/02/01 26 3 753.5
2/03/01 26 4 753 3
2/04/01 26 5 748.5 31
2/05/01 27 6 746.5 44
2/06/01 24 7 742 72
2/07/01 24 8 738 98
2/08/01 24 9 733.5 126
2/09/01 26 10 734.5 120
2/12/01 25 13 724.5 183
14/2/01 26 15 724 186
15/2/01 23 16 721 205
16/2/01 22 17 716 236
19/2/01 24 20 711 268
20/2/01 25 21 709.5 277
21/2/01 26 22 710 274
22/2/01 26 23 714.5 246
24/2/01 26 25 713 255
26/2/01 27 27 712.5 258
28/2/01 28 29 714.5 246
3/01/01 28 30 715.5 239
3/02/01 26 31 708.5 283
3/04/01 24 33 701 331
3/06/01 25 35 700 337
3/08/01 24 37 700 337
3/12/01 24 41 698 350
16/3/01 25 45 695 369
22/3/01 22 51 693 381
26/3/01 24 55 683 444
27/3/01 23 56 679 469
29/3/01 22 58 677 482
4/02/01 22 62 681 457
4/06/01 22 66 681 457
4/11/01 18 71 671 520
19/4/01 22 79 680 463
274/01 18 87 674 501
5/05/01 17 95 673 507
5/12/01 15 102 671 520
6/06/01 14 127 679 469
29/6/01 14 150 675 495
334
AIII.2- Flexural Cracking (Short-term Tests)

Table AIII.29 Crack history for beam B1-a
Short-term Tests, B e a m N o. 1 - a ( 2N16 - Cb=40 mm )
Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No. 4-1 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 6-1
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3 0.08
30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3 0.08
35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 4 0.10 6 0.15
40 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 3 0.08 5 0.13 8 0.20
45 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15 10 0.25
50 0.00 4 0.10 0.00 5 0.13 5 0.13 7 0.18 11 0.28
55 2 0.05 4 0.10 0.00 6 0.15 5 0.13 8 0.20 11 0.28
60 3 0.08 5 0.13 3 0.08 7 0.18 6 0.15 9 0.23 12 0.30
65 3 0.08 5 0.13 5 0.13 8 0.20 6 0.15 10 0.25 13 0.33
70 5 0.13 5 0.13 6 0.15 9 0.23 7 0.18 10 0.25 13 0.33
Distance from C.L.(mm) 1220 985 706 578 330 65 118
Short-term Tests, B e a m N o. 1 - a ( 2N16 - Cb=40 mm )

Crack No. 6-2 Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 9-2
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Srm (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 0.00 4 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 252
35 0.00 5 0.13 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 226
40 0.00 7 0.18 4 0.10 0.00 0.00 226
45 0.00 10 0.25 5 0.13 3 0.08 0.00 226
50 0.00 11 0.28 6 0.15 3 0.08 0.00 226
55 0.00 11 0.28 6 0.15 4 0.10 0.00 226
60 0.00 12 0.30 6 0.15 5 0.13 3 0.08 230
65 2 0.05 12 0.30 6 0.15 6 0.15 3 192
70 3 0.08 12 0.30 6 0.15 6 0.15 4 0.10 192
Distance from C.L.(mm) 225 370 573 752 928
335
Table AIII.30 Crack history for beam B1-b

S h o r t - t e r m T e s t s , B e a m N o. 1 - b ( 2N16 - Cb=40 mm )
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05
35 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 4 0.10 3 0.08
40 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 3 0.08 0.00 5 0.13 5 0.13
45 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 4 0.10 0.00 6 0.15 6 0.15
50 0.00 2 0.05 5 0.13 5 0.13 0.00 7 0.18 7 0.18
55 0.00 3 0.08 6 0.15 6 0.15 2 0.05 10 0.25 9 0.23
60 0.00 4 0.10 7 0.18 7 0.18 3 0.08 11 0.28 10 0.25
65 3 0.08 6 0.15 8 0.20 8 0.20 5 0.13 11 0.28 11 0.28
70 3 0.08 7 0.18 9 0.23 9 0.23 6 0.15 13 0.33 13 0.33
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Srm (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 241
35 5 0.13 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 233
40 6 0.15 4 0.10 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 233
45 7 0.18 5 0.13 0.00 4 0.10 0.00 233
50 8 0.20 6 0.15 4 0.10 5 0.13 3 0.08 233
55 10 0.25 7 0.18 6 0.15 7 0.18 5 0.13 233
60 12 0.30 10 0.25 6 0.15 9 0.23 5 0.13 186
65 13 0.33 11 0.28 9 0.23 10 0.25 6 0.15 186
70 15 0.38 11 0.28 10 0.25 11 0.28 7 0.18 186
Distance from C.L.(mm) 213 396 601 856 1021
336
S h o r t - t e r m T e s t s , B e a m N o. 2 - a ( 2N16 - Cb=25 mm )
Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 2-2 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 4-1 Crack No. 4-2 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 6-1 Crack No. 6-2
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08
35 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 4 0.10 4 0.10 0.00 5 0.13 0.00 4 0.10
40 0.00 3 0.08 3 0.08 5 0.13 5 0.13 0.00 6 0.15 0.00 6 0.15
45 0.00 4 0.10 5 0.13 5 0.13 6 0.15 0.00 7 0.18 4 0.10 6 0.15
50 0.00 5 0.13 7 0.18 6 0.15 8 0.20 3 0.08 8 0.20 4 0.10 6 0.15
55 2 0.05 5 0.13 7 0.18 6 0.15 8 0.20 3 0.08 9 0.23 5 0.13 7 0.18
60 2 0.05 5 0.13 8 0.20 6 0.15 10 0.25 4 0.10 10 0.25 6 0.15 7 0.18
65 3 0.08 5 0.13 10 0.25 7 0.18 10 0.25 4 0.10 12 0.30 6 0.15 10 0.25
70 3 0.08 7 0.18 12 0.30 7 0.18 11 0.28 4 0.10 12 0.30 6 0.15 10 0.25
Distance from C.L.(mm) 1120 968 755 626 410 260 90 65 163
Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 8-2 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. -92 Crack No. 10-1 Crack No. 10-2
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Srm (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
30 3 0.08 2 0.05 0.00 0 0 0 0 245
35 4 0.10 3 0.08 0.00 0 0 0 0 245
40 4 0.10 3 0.08 3 0.08 0 0 0 0 245
45 6 0.15 5 0.13 4 0.10 2 0.0508 0 0 0 164
50 7 0.18 6 0.15 4 0.10 2 0.0508 0 0 0 164
55 7 0.18 6 0.15 4 0.10 3 0.0762 0 0 0 164
60 8 0.20 7 0.18 5 0.13 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 164
65 9 0.23 7 0.18 6 0.15 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 164
70 9 0.23 7 0.18 6 0.15 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 164
337

Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No.4-1 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 5-2
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.08
30 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08 4 0.10
35 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 4 0.10 0.00 4 0.10 6 0.15
40 0.00 3 0.08 5 0.13 6 0.15 0.00 4 0.10 6 0.15
45 0.00 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15 0.00 5 0.13 7 0.18
50 0.00 5 0.13 6 0.15 7 0.18 0.00 5 0.13 9 0.23
55 2 0.05 6 0.15 6 0.15 8 0.20 2 0.05 6 0.15 11 0.28
60 3 0.08 7 0.18 7 0.18 10 0.25 3 0.08 6 0.15 11 0.28
65 4 8 0.20 8 0.20 11 0.28 3 0.08 6 0.15 12 0.30
70 5 0.13 9 0.23 10 0.25 12 0.30 5 0.13 7 0.18 12 0.30
Crack No. 6-1 Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 8-2 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 10-1
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Srm (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 218
35 6 0.15 3 0.08 5 0.13 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 218
40 7 0.18 3 0.08 6 0.15 0.00 4 0.10 0.00 218
45 7 0.18 5 0.13 7 0.18 0.00 5 0.13 0.00 218
50 10 0.25 6 0.15 8 0.20 3 0.08 7 0.18 0.00 218
55 11 0.28 7 0.18 8 0.20 3 0.08 8 0.20 0.00 187
60 13 0.33 8 0.20 9 0.23 5 0.13 9 0.23 0.00 187
65 15 0.38 9 0.23 10 0.25 6 0.15 9 0.23 5 0.13 187
70 17 0.43 10 0.25 11 0.28 6 0.15 9 0.23 6 0.15 187
Distance from C.L.(mm) 167 402 569 736 865 1076
338

Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 2-2 Crack No. 2-3 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No. 4-1 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 5-2 Crack No. 5-3 Crack No. 6-1
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 2 0.05
50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 2 0.05
55 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08
60 0.00 1 0.03 2 0.05 1 0.03 0.00 2 0.05 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 3 0.08 4 0.10
65 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 5 0.13 4 0.10 4 0.10 3 0.08 4 0.10
70 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 6 0.15 4 0.10 5 0.13 4 0.10 4 0.10
75 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 2 0.05 3 0.08 6 0.15 5 0.13 5 0.13 5 0.13 5 0.13
80 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 6 0.15 5 0.13 6 0.15 5 0.13 6 0.15
85 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 7 0.18 5 0.13 6 0.15 5 0.13 6 0.15
Distance from C.L.(mm) 1150 982 874 762 596 518 327 225 114 10 117
Crack No. 6-2 Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 7-2 Crack No. 7-3 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 8-2 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 9-2 Crack No. 10-1 Crack No. 10-2
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
10 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
20 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
25 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
30 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
40 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
45 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 0 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
50 0.00 3 0.08 2 0.05 0 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
55 1 0.03 4 0.10 3 0.08 0 3 0.08 2 0.05 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 0
60 2 0.05 5 0.13 3 0.08 0 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0
65 2 0.05 6 0.15 4 0.10 0 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 0
70 2 0.05 7 0.18 4 0.10 0 4 0.10 4 0.10 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 0
75 3 0.08 7 0.18 4 0.10 2 0.05 4 0.10 5 0.13 3 0.08 1 0.03 3 0.08 1 0.03
80 3 0.08 8 0.20 4 0.10 2 0.05 4 0.10 5 0.13 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05
85 3 0.08 8 0.20 4 0.10 2 0.05 5 0.13 5 0.13 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05
Distance from C.L.(mm) 196 306 428 441 567 682 815 898 1000 1189
339

Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 2-2 Crack No. 2-3 Crack No.3-1 Crack No. 4-1 Crack No. 4-2 Crack No. 4-3 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 5-2 Crack No. 5-3 Crack No. 6-1
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00
40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00
45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00
50 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05
55 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05
60 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08
65 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 5 0.13 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08
70 1 0.03 0.00 3 0.08 3 0.08 6 0.15 3 0.08 3 0.08 1 0.03 5 0.13 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08
75 2 0.05 1 0.03 3 0.08 3 0.08 6 0.15 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 5 0.13 0.00 3 0.08 4 0.10
80 2 0.05 2 0.05 3 0.08 4 0.10 6 0.15 3 0.08 4 0.10 2 0.05 5 0.13 0.00 3 0.08 5 0.13
85 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 4 0.10 7 0.18 4 0.10 4 0.10 2 0.05 5 0.13 2 0.05 3 0.08 5 0.13
Distance from C.L.(mm) 1152 1012 920 799 618 468 386 303 211 115 46 18
Crack No. 6-2 Crack No. 6-3 Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 7-2 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 8-2 Crack No. 8-3 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 9-2 Crack No.10-1 Crack No. 10-2
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
40 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
45 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
50 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 1 0.03 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00
55 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00
60 3 0.08 0.00 5 0.13 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 1 0.03 0.00
65 4 0.10 0.00 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00
70 4 0.10 1 0.03 6 0.15 4 0.10 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 1 0.03 3 0.08 2 0.05 0.00
75 5 0.13 2 0.05 7 0.18 4 0.10 4 0.10 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 0.00
80 6 0.15 2 0.05 8 0.20 5 0.13 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 2 0.05 4 0.10 3 0.08 1 0.03
85 6 0.15 2 0.05 8 0.20 5 0.13 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 3 0.08 4 0.10 3 0.08 2 0.05
Distance from C.L.(mm) 142 217 338 457 571 649 736 858 917 1044 1181
340
Table AIII.35 Crack history for slab S1-a
S h o r t - t e r m T e s t s , S l a b N o. 1 - a ( 2N12 - Cb=25 mm )
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 0.10
8 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 5 0.13 3 0.08 7 0.18 4 0.10 7 0.18
11 0.00 6 0.15 4 0.10 3 0.08 6 0.15 7 0.18 5 0.13 10 0.25 5 0.13 10 0.25
14 5 0.13 9 0.23 6 0.15 5 0.13 9 0.23 10 0.25 7 0.18 12 0.30 7 0.18 12 0.30
Distane from C.L.(mm) 1159 944 838 629 588 402 329 186 10 113
Crack No. 6-2 Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 7-2 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 8-2 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 9-2 Crack No. 10-1
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
5 0.00 5 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
8 0.00 8 0.20 5 0.13 6 0.15 0.00 4 0.10 0 0
11 0.00 10 0.25 7 0.18 10 0.25 0.00 5 0.13 3 0.08 0
14 3 0.08 13 0.33 10 0.25 12 0.30 4 0.10 7 0.18 5 0.13 7 0.18
Distane from C.L.(mm) 194 312 414 592 680 772 905 1054
341
Table AIII.36 Crack history for slab S1-b
S h o r t - t e r m T e s t s , S l a b N o. 1 - b ( 2N12 - Cb=25 mm )
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 5 0.13 2 0.05 2 0.05 4 0.10
11 0.00 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 0.00 9 0.23 5 0.13 5 0.13 6 0.15
14 3 0.08 7 0.18 4 0.10 5 0.13 4 0.10 11 0.28 5 0.13 7 0.18 7 0.18
Distane from C.L.(mm) 1096 921 736 597 525 406 242 116 13
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
8 0.00 5 0.13 0.00 3 0.08 4 0.10 1 0.03 0 0
11 4 0.10 7 0.18 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15 3 0.08 2 0.05 0
14 5 0.13 10 0.25 7 0.18 7 0.18 8 0.20 4 0.10 3 0.08 3 0.08
342
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05
11 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 5 0.13 4 0.10 1 0.03 4 0.10 3 0.08 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05
14 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 5 0.13 6 0.15 1 0.03 4 0.10 4 0.10 4 0.10 0.00 4 0.10
17 1 0.03 3 0.08 5 0.13 7 0.18 6 0.15 3 0.08 5 0.13 6 0.15 5 0.13 0.00 5 0.13
20 2 0.05 4 0.10 6 0.15 10 0.25 7 0.18 4 0.10 6 0.15 6 0.15 5 0.13 2 0.05 6 0.15
Distane from C.L.(mm) 1124 963 791 634 483 380 316 200 108 38 49
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Srm (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
8 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 166
11 1 0.03 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 5 0.13 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 0 125
14 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 4 0.10 7 0.18 2 0.05 2 0.05 1 0.03 0 125
17 4 0.10 2 0.05 0.00 5 0.13 9 0.23 4 0.10 3 0.08 3 0.08 0 125
20 5 0.13 2 0.05 3 0.08 6 0.15 10 0.25 5 0.13 5 0.13 4 0.10 5 0.127 91
343
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05
11 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 5 0.13 5 0.13 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05
14 1 0.03 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 7 0.18 6 0.15 3 0.08 4 0.10 4 0.10
17 3 0.08 4 0.10 5 0.13 3 0.08 9 0.23 7 0.18 5 0.13 6 0.15 6 0.15
20 5 0.13 5 0.13 5 0.13 5 0.13 10 0.25 9 0.23 6 0.15 6 0.15 7 0.18
Load (KN) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Srm (mm)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
8 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 1 0.03 0.00 0 0 175
11 4 0.10 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 0 0 150
14 5 0.13 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 5 0.13 4 0.10 0 0 150
17 7 0.18 4 0.10 2 0.05 6 0.15 6 0.15 5 0.13 2 0.0508 0 131
20 7 0.18 6 0.15 4 0.10 8 0.20 8 0.20 6 0.15 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 131
344
Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 1-2 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No. 4-1 Crack No. 4-2 Crack No. 4-3 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 5-2 Crack No. 5-3 Crack No. 6-1
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 1 0.03 0.00
11 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00
14 0.00 0.00 1 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 4 0.10 0.00 3 0.08 1 0.03 2 0.05 2 0.05
17 0.00 0.00 2 4 0.10 4 0.10 4 0.10 5 0.13 0.00 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 3 0.08
20 1 0.03 0.00 2 5 0.13 5 0.13 5 0.13 6 0.15 2 0.05 5 0.13 3 4 0.10 4 0.10
23 1 0.03 2 0.05 3 6 0.15 6 0.15 6 0.15 6 0.15 2 0.05 5 0.13 4 0.10 5 0.13 5 0.13
26 2 0.05 2 0.05 4 7 0.18 6 0.15 6 0.15 7 0.18 3 0.08 6 0.15 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15
Distane from C.L.(mm) 1138 1006 823 687 597 465 339 288 187 111 8 72
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0
8 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 0 0.00 0.00 0
11 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 2 0.05 0 0.00 0.00 0
14 3 0.08 0.00 4 0.10 1 0.03 2 0.05 0.00 3 0.08 1 0.03 1 0.03 0.00 0
17 3 0.08 1 0.03 5 0.13 2 0.05 2 0.05 1 0.03 4 0.10 2 0.05 2 0.05 1 0.03 0
20 4 0.10 3 0.08 5 0.13 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 5 0.13 2 0.05 2 0.05 2 0.05 0
23 5 0.13 4 0.10 6 0.15 5 0.13 3 0.08 3 0.08 5 0.13 2 0.05 4 0.10 3 0.08 1 0.03
26 5 0.13 4 0.10 7 0.18 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 6 0.15 3 0.08 4 0.10 3 0.08 2 0.05
345
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 1 0.03 2 0.05 1 0.03 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 2 0.05
11 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 2 0.05 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 1 0.03 3 0.08 0.00 3 0.08
14 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 2 0.05 2 0.05 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 2 0.05 4 0.10
17 0.00 1 0.03 2 0.05 3 0.08 4 0.10 5 0.13 5 0.13 4 0.10 3 0.08 4 0.10 3 0.08 5 0.13
20 1 0.03 2 0.05 3 0.08 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15 6 0.15 5 0.13 3 0.08 4 0.10 5 0.13 7 0.18
23 2 0.05 3 0.08 3 0.08 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15 7 0.18 6 0.15 4 0.10 5 0.13 6 0.15 8 0.20
26 3 0.08 4 0.10 5 0.13 5 0.13 7 0.18 8 0.20 8 0.20 7 0.18 5 0.13 6 0.15 7 0.18 9 0.23
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
8 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
11 3 0.08 2 0.05 2 0.05 1 0.03 2 0.05 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
14 3 0.08 3 0.08 3 0.08 2 0.05 3 0.08 0 1 0.03 0.00 0.00 1 0.03 0.00 0.00
17 4 0.10 4 0.10 5 0.13 3 0.08 3 0.08 0 2 0.05 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00
20 5 0.13 5 0.13 6 0.15 3 0.08 4 0.10 0 3 0.08 0.00 0.00 2 0.05 0.00 0.00
23 6 0.15 6 0.15 7 0.18 4 0.10 5 0.13 1 0.03 3 0.08 0.00 2 0.05 3 0.08 0.00 0.00
26 7 0.18 6 0.15 8 0.20 5 0.13 6 0.15 2 0.05 4 0.10 1 0.03 2 0.05 4 0.10 1 0.03 2 0.05
346
Table AIII.41 Concrete surface strain at steel level for beam B1-a (Short-term Test)
BEAM No. B1-a ( 2N16 , C=25mm), SURFACE STRAIN (Microstrain)

P(KN) 1 2 3 4 5 6
Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
0 796 0 772 0 763 0 783 0 794 0 797 0
10 801 31.5 782 63 773 63 792 56.7 802 50.4 806 56.7
20 804 50.4 788 100.8 778 94.5 816 207.9 812 113.4 823 163.8
25 807 69.3 812 252 797 214.2 856 459.9 858 403.2 865 428.4
30 806 63 858 541.8 844 510.3 900 737.1 888 592.2 896 623.7
35 803 44.1 900 806.4 865 642.6 925 894.6 926 831.6 933 856.8
40 803 44.1 932 1008 884 762.3 944 1014.3 939 913.5 939 894.6
45 808 75.6 985 1341.9 920 989.1 984 1266.3 988 1222.2 991 1222.2
50 811 94.5 1021 1568.7 930 1052.1 1010 1430.1 1019 1417.5 1019 1398.6
55 852 352.8 1054 1776.6 950 1178.1 1025 1524.6 1040 1549.8 1050 1593.9
60 870 466.2 1085 1971.9 966 1278.9 1050 1682.1 1077 1782.9 1067 1701
65 884 554.4 1132 2268 1005 1524.6 1075 1839.6 1111 1997.1 1102 1921.5
70 895 623.7 1145 2349.9 1025 1650.6 1096 1971.9 1143 2198.7 1120 2034.9

P(KN) 7 8 9 10 11
Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
0 752 0 778 0 886 0 785 0 788 0
10 759 44.1 785 44.1 892 37.8 791 37.8 782 -37.8
20 759 44.1 802 151.2 902 100.8 792 44.1 775 -81.9
25 766 88.2 838 378 920 214.2 796 69.3 756 -201.6
30 821 434.7 866 554.4 940 340.2 804 119.7 745 -270.9
35 845 585.9 924 919.8 978 579.6 810 157.5 732 -352.8
40 860 680.4 945 1052.1 1001 724.5 822 233.1 725 -396.9
45 894 894.6 980 1272.6 1029 900.9 855 441 718 -441
50 915 1026.9 1015 1493.1 1063 1115.1 882 611.1 707 -510.3
55 938 1171.8 1044 1675.8 1087 1266.3 899 718.2 696 -579.6
60 956 1285.2 1073 1858.5 1113 1430.1 916 825.3 687 -636.3
65 984 1461.6 1105 2060.1 1133 1556.1 943 995.4 675 -711.9
70 998 1549.8 1128 2205 1155 1694.7 955 1071 669 -749.7
347
Table AIII.42 Concrete surface strain at steel level for beam B1-b (Short-term Test)
BEAM No. B1-b ( 2N16 , C=40mm), SURFACE STRAIN (Microstrain)
1 2 3 4 5 6
P(KN) Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
0 690 711 758 777 634 798
10 700 63 725 88.2 765 44.1 785 50.4 640 37.8 806 50.4
20 705 94.5 729 113.4 785 170.1 785 50.4 674 252 816 113.4
25 711 132.3 733 138.6 808 315 830 333.9 709 472.5 852 340.2
30 714 151.2 758 296.1 849 573.3 859 516.6 747 711.9 880 516.6
35 719 182.7 787 478.8 882 781.2 888 699.3 776 894.6 905 674.1
40 724 214.2 801 567 977 1379.7 920 900.9 801 1052.1 926 806.4
45 729 245.7 807 604.8 1014 1612.8 991 1348.2 822 1184.4 957 1001.7
50 737 296.1 811 630 1040 1776.6 1035 1625.4 848 1348.2 978 1134
55 778 554.4 816 661.5 1074 1990.8 1074 1871.1 873 1505.7 1005 1304.1
60 821 825.3 825 718.2 1106 2192.4 1104 2060.1 896 1650.6 1025 1430.1
65 844 970.2 834 774.9 1135 2375.1 1140 2286.9 920 1801.8 1053 1606.5
70 855 1039.5 844 837.9 1165 2564.1 1175 2507.4 961 2060.1 1075 1745.1

7 8 9 10 11
P(KN) Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain
0 774 786 775 799 776
10 781 44.1 793 44.1 780 31.5 802 18.9 768 -50.4
20 790 100.8 805 119.7 784 56.7 809 63 759 -107.1
25 819 283.5 810 151.2 795 126 811 75.6 748 -176.4
30 852 491.4 834 302.4 821 289.8 814 94.5 739 -233.1
35 874 630 878 579.6 845 441 819 126 731 -283.5
40 892 743.4 910 781.2 859 529.2 838 245.7 724 -327.6
45 922 932.4 938 957.6 875 630 872 459.9 716 -378
50 940 1045.8 962 1108.8 890 724.5 892 585.9 710 -415.8
55 959 1165.5 994 1310.4 908 837.9 908 686.7 703 -459.9
60 977 1278.9 1020 1474.2 922 926.1 921 768.6 698 -491.4
65 999 1417.5 1054 1688.4 938 1026.9 941 894.6 690 -541.8
70 1015 1518.3 1080 1852.2 955 1134 955 982.8 682 -592.2
348
1 2 3 4 5 6
0 796 0 772 0 763 0 783 0 794 0 797 0
10 801 31.5 782 63 773 63 792 56.7 802 50.4 806 56.7
20 804 50.4 788 100.8 778 94.5 816 207.9 812 113.4 823 163.8
25 807 69.3 812 252 797 214.2 856 459.9 858 403.2 865 428.4
30 806 63 858 541.8 844 510.3 900 737.1 888 592.2 896 623.7
35 803 44.1 900 806.4 865 642.6 925 894.6 926 831.6 933 856.8
40 803 44.1 932 1008 884 762.3 944 1014.3 939 913.5 939 894.6
45 808 75.6 985 1341.9 920 989.1 984 1266.3 988 1222.2 991 1222.2
50 811 94.5 1021 1568.7 930 1052.1 1010 1430.1 1019 1417.5 1019 1398.6
55 852 352.8 1054 1776.6 950 1178.1 1025 1524.6 1040 1549.8 1050 1593.9
60 870 466.2 1085 1971.9 966 1278.9 1050 1682.1 1077 1782.9 1067 1701
65 884 554.4 1132 2268 1005 1524.6 1075 1839.6 1111 1997.1 1102 1921.5
70 895 623.7 1145 2349.9 1025 1650.6 1096 1971.9 1143 2198.7 1120 2034.9

7 8 9 10 11
0 752 0 778 0 886 0 785 0 788 0
10 759 44.1 785 44.1 892 37.8 791 37.8 782 -37.8
20 759 44.1 802 151.2 902 100.8 792 44.1 775 -81.9
25 766 88.2 838 378 920 214.2 796 69.3 756 -201.6
30 821 434.7 866 554.4 940 340.2 804 119.7 745 -270.9
35 845 585.9 924 919.8 978 579.6 810 157.5 732 -352.8
40 860 680.4 945 1052.1 1001 724.5 822 233.1 725 -396.9
45 894 894.6 980 1272.6 1029 900.9 855 441 718 -441
50 915 1026.9 1015 1493.1 1063 1115.1 882 611.1 707 -510.3
55 938 1171.8 1044 1675.8 1087 1266.3 899 718.2 696 -579.6
60 956 1285.2 1073 1858.5 1113 1430.1 916 825.3 687 -636.3
65 984 1461.6 1105 2060.1 1133 1556.1 943 995.4 675 -711.9
70 998 1549.8 1128 2205 1155 1694.7 955 1071 669 -749.7
349
1 2 3 4 5 6
0 780 786 724 724 788 787
10 786 37.8 798 75.6 730 37.8 730 37.8 795 44.1 796 56.7
20 789 56.7 805 119.7 734 63 735 69.3 805 107.1 806 119.7
25 792 75.6 809 144.9 738 88.2 739 94.5 811 144.9 865 491.4
30 795 94.5 814 176.4 837 711.9 798 466.2 858 441 897 693
35 800 126 848 390.6 845 762.3 827 648.9 882 592.2 924 863.1
40 804 151.2 858 453.6 882 995.4 850 793.8 897 686.7 949 1020.6
45 810 189 879 585.9 912 1184.4 881 989.1 924 856.8 984 1241.1
50 857 485.1 881 598.5 932 1310.4 892 1058.4 947 1001.7 1012 1417.5
55 878 617.4 892 667.8 970 1549.8 918 1222.2 968 1134 1043 1612.8
60 901 762.3 905 749.7 1068 2167.2 935 1329.3 991 1278.9 1084 1871.1
65 950 1071 916 819 1094 2331 950 1423.8 1020 1461.6 1113 2053.8
70 980 1260 930 907.2 1130 2557.8 975 1581.3 1053 1669.5 1148 2274.3

7 8 9 10 11
0 781 798 759 795 783
10 788 44.1 805 44.1 765 37.8 803 50.4 778 -31.5
20 794 81.9 811 81.9 772 81.9 806 69.3 776 -44.1
25 801 126 855 359.1 778 119.7 808 81.9 765 -113.4
30 868 548.1 867 434.7 805 289.8 808 81.9 752 -195.3
35 900 749.7 902 655.2 840 510.3 809 88.2 744 -245.7
40 920 875.7 914 730.8 875 730.8 809 88.2 735 -302.4
45 936 976.5 922 781.2 922 1026.9 813 113.4 727 -352.8
50 956 1102.5 945 926.1 941 1146.6 829 214.2 719 -403.2
55 972 1203.3 963 1039.5 970 1329.3 850 346.5 711 -453.6
60 993 1335.6 996 1247.4 1010 1581.3 880 535.5 705 -491.4
65 1010 1442.7 1010 1335.6 1034 1732.5 895 630 698 -535.5
70 1033 1587.6 1045 1556.1 1058 1883.7 913 743.4 689 -592.2
350
1 2 3 4 5 6
0 781 0 710 0 749 0 781 0 782 0 774 0
10 785 25.2 716 37.8 756 44.1 790 56.7 788 37.8 781 44.1
20 790 56.7 721 69.3 760 69.3 805 151.2 798 100.8 786 75.6
30 794 81.9 730 126 784 220.5 855 466.2 815 207.9 817 270.9
40 792 69.3 771 384.3 845 604.8 884 648.9 922 882 833 371.7
45 792 69.3 798 554.4 858 686.7 895 718.2 945 1026.9 853 497.7
50 791 63 830 756 875 793.8 913 831.6 973 1203.3 868 592.2
55 795 88.2 850 882 893 907.2 924 900.9 998 1360.8 880 667.8
60 799 113.4 874 1033.2 910 1014.3 938 989.1 1022 1512 894 756
65 812 195.3 893 1152.9 927 1121.4 955 1096.2 1051 1694.7 905 825.3
70 825 277.2 913 1278.9 944 1228.5 970 1190.7 1081 1883.7 919 913.5
75 832 321.3 938 1436.4 958 1316.7 989 1310.4 1092 1953 932 995.4
80 847 415.8 962 1587.6 971 1398.6 1007 1423.8 1122 2142 945 1077.3
85 851 441 977 1682.1 984 1480.5 1031 1575 1144 2280.6 953 1127.7

7 8 9 10 11
0 791 0 781 0 829 0 782 0 783 0
10 799 50.4 788 44.1 834 31.5 787 31.5 779 -25.2
20 812 132.3 794 81.9 840 69.3 790 50.4 771 -75.6
30 862 447.3 822 258.3 845 100.8 795 81.9 757 -163.8
40 920 812.7 848 422.1 874 283.5 798 100.8 735 -302.4
45 929 869.4 902 762.3 907 491.4 794 75.6 726 -359.1
50 947 982.8 920 875.7 937 680.4 789 44.1 722 -384.3
55 965 1096.2 935 970.2 958 812.7 790 50.4 716 -422.1
60 988 1241.1 954 1089.9 984 976.5 793 69.3 707 -478.8
65 1006 1354.5 969 1184.4 1010 1140.3 816 214.2 702 -510.3
70 1033 1524.6 991 1323 1032 1278.9 822 252 694 -560.7
75 1057 1675.8 1010 1442.7 1055 1423.8 832 315 685 -617.4
80 1077 1801.8 1026 1543.5 1074 1543.5 855 459.9 676 -674.1
85 1097 1927.8 1046 1669.5 1087 1625.4 868 541.8 670 -711.9
351
1 2 3 4 5 6
0 775 762 760 775 771 783
10 777 12.6 768 37.8 778 113.4 778 18.9 776 31.5 786 18.9
20 780 31.5 775 81.9 783 144.9 781 37.8 783 75.6 792 56.7
30 785 63 782 126 815 346.5 799 151.2 813 264.6 821 239.4
40 788 81.9 798 226.8 832 453.6 841 415.8 855 529.2 866 522.9
45 790 94.5 817 346.5 847 548.1 866 573.3 882 699.3 892 686.7
50 795 126 853 573.3 855 598.5 901 793.8 904 837.9 924 888.3
55 801 163.8 872 693 871 699.3 920 913.5 923 957.6 944 1014.3
60 807 201.6 890 806.4 885 787.5 941 1045.8 942 1077.3 964 1140.3
65 811 226.8 931 1064.7 896 856.8 959 1159.2 960 1190.7 986 1278.9
70 820 283.5 958 1234.8 907 926.1 989 1348.2 981 1323 1010 1430.1
75 827 327.6 980 1373.4 940 1134 1010 1480.5 1000 1442.7 1026 1530.9
80 835 378 1000 1499.4 958 1247.4 1027 1587.6 1020 1568.7 1047 1663.2
85 851 478.8 1017 1606.5 978 1373.4 1045 1701 1036 1669.5 1070 1808.1

7 8 9 10 11
0 793 783 818 780 780
10 798 31.5 789 37.8 823 31.5 784 25.2 774 -37.8
20 807 88.2 796 81.9 827 56.7 790 63 766 -88.2
30 836 270.9 819 226.8 829 69.3 794 88.2 756 -151.2
40 879 541.8 848 409.5 842 151.2 797 107.1 744 -226.8
45 908 724.5 890 674.1 858 252 799 119.7 736 -277.2
50 920 800.1 931 932.4 867 308.7 800 126 727 -333.9
55 937 907.2 953 1071 873 346.5 821 258.3 718 -390.6
60 957 1033.2 975 1209.6 891 459.9 835 346.5 713 -422.1
65 975 1146.6 1001 1373.4 903 535.5 857 485.1 709 -447.3
70 996 1278.9 1021 1499.4 918 630 872 579.6 702 -491.4
75 1014 1392.3 1040 1619.1 926 680.4 887 674.1 698 -516.6
80 1032 1505.7 1062 1757.7 939 762.3 899 749.7 692 -554.4
85 1052 1631.7 1081 1877.4 949 825.3 903 774.9 687 -585.9
352
Table AIII.47 Concrete surface strain at steel level for slab S1-a (Short-term Test)
SLAB No. S1-a ( 2N12 , C=25mm), SURFACE STRAIN (Microstrain)

1 2 3 4 5 6
0 782 0 795 0 780 0 779 0 763 0 780 0
5 789 44.1 803 50.4 791 69.3 788 56.7 773 63 790 63
8 793 69.3 832 233.1 853 459.9 925 919.8 971 1310.4 905 787.5
11 800 113.4 983 1184.4 1023 1530.9 1006 1430.1 1087 2041.2 980 1260
14 889 674.1 1065 1701 1103 2034.9 1103 2041.2 1167 2545.2 1045 1669.5

7 8 9 10 11
0 781 0 790 0 796 0 780 0 782 0
5 880 623.7 803 81.9 805 56.7 786 37.8 772 -63
8 1029 1562.4 911 762.3 859 396.9 790 63 748 -214.2
11 1118 2123.1 978 1184.4 943 926.1 793 81.9 728 -340.2
14 1186 2551.5 1107 1997.1 992 1234.8 911 825.3 715 -422.1
353
Table AIII.48 Concrete surface strain at steel level for slab S1-b (Short-term Test)
SLAB No. S1-b ( 2N12 , C=25mm), SURFACE STRAIN (Microstrain)

1 2 3 4 5 6
0 778 0 783 0 759 0 771 0 738 0 779 0
5 785 44.1 791 50.4 765 37.8 780 56.7 744 37.8 791 75.6
8 789 69.3 820 233.1 843 529.2 850 497.7 920 1146.6 912 837.9
11 796 113.4 860 485.1 934 1102.5 909 869.4 1010 1713.6 999 1386
14 899 762.3 903 756 1061 1902.6 961 1197 1093 2236.5 1070 1833.3

7 8 9 10 11
0 775 0 776 0 805 0 783 0 789 0
5 786 69.3 786 63 814 56.7 788 31.5 782 -44.1
8 1046 1707.3 855 497.7 865 378 791 50.4 749 -252
11 1192 2627.1 892 730.8 951 919.8 795 75.6 723 -415.8
14 1299 3301.2 932 982.8 1012 1304.1 895 705.6 706 -522.9
354

1 2 3 4 5 6
0 760 0 711 0 743 0 771 0 794 0 787 0
8 769 56.7 722 69.3 794 321.3 890 749.7 907 711.9 891 655.2
11 773 81.9 812 636.3 820 485.1 953 1146.6 951 989.1 975 1184.4
14 773 81.9 865 970.2 846 648.9 1048 1745.1 998 1285.2 1048 1644.3
17 803 270.9 909 1247.4 873 819 1112 2148.3 1049 1606.5 1105 2003.4
20 820 378 955 1537.2 899 982.8 1175 2545.2 1100 1927.8 1162 2362.5

7 8 9 10 11
0 791 0 777 0 793 0 782 0 778 0
8 810 119.7 907 819 806 81.9 790 50.4 744 -214.2
11 831 252 965 1184.4 846 333.9 790 50.4 730 -302.4
14 868 485.1 1012 1480.5 920 800.1 799 107.1 713 -409.5
17 897 667.8 1059 1776.6 957 1033.2 823 258.3 701 -485.1
20 922 825.3 1110 2097.9 997 1285.2 878 604.8 684 -592.2
355

1 2 3 4 5 6
0 773 0 777 0 572 0 783 0 779 0 783 0
5 777 25.2 786 56.7 591 119.7 799 100.8 811 201.6 819 226.8
8 781 50.4 829 327.6 639 422.1 845 390.6 880 636.3 885 642.6
11 785 75.6 891 718.2 723 951.3 880 611.1 946 1052.1 980 1241.1
14 821 302.4 919 894.6 785 1341.9 907 781.2 994 1354.5 1035 1587.6
17 839 415.8 950 1089.9 835 1656.9 935 957.6 1046 1682.1 1100 1997.1
20 861 554.4 990 1341.9 886 1978.2 962 1127.7 1100 2022.3 1162 2387.7

7 8 9 10 11
0 820 0 782 0 803 0 785 0 780 0
5 829 56.7 790 50.4 814 69.3 790 31.5 768 -75.6
8 860 252 879 611.1 833 189 794 56.7 756 -151.2
11 890 441 954 1083.6 868 409.5 813 176.4 743 -233.1
14 921 636.3 1001 1379.7 883 504 831 289.8 733 -296.1
17 964 907.2 1054 1713.6 905 642.6 851 415.8 724 -352.8
20 1001 1140.3 1107 2047.5 929 793.8 927 894.6 714 -415.8
356

1 2 3 4 5 6
0 750 0 696 0 773 0 778 0 779 0 777 0
5 755 31.5 704 50.4 783 63 790 75.6 803 151.2 786 56.7
8 758 50.4 707 69.3 812 245.7 850 453.6 868 560.7 812 220.5
11 761 69.3 729 207.9 856 522.9 889 699.3 920 888.3 835 365.4
14 766 100.8 754 365.4 890 737.1 921 900.9 955 1108.8 889 705.6
17 786 226.8 768 453.6 927 970.2 965 1178.1 1035 1612.8 968 1203.3
20 822 453.6 783 548.1 964 1203.3 1051 1719.9 1066 1808.1 1013 1486.8
23 852 642.6 799 648.9 1007 1474.2 1102 2041.2 1104 2047.5 1055 1751.4
26 875 787.5 812 730.8 1052 1757.7 1153 2362.5 1139 2268 1095 2003.4

7 8 9 10 11
0 805 0 781 0 786 0 776 0 783 0
5 823 113.4 793 75.6 793 44.1 780 25.2 775 -50.4
8 844 245.7 856 472.5 805 119.7 784 50.4 762 -132.3
11 893 554.4 898 737.1 821 220.5 787 69.3 752 -195.3
14 932 800.1 924 900.9 868 516.6 819 270.9 739 -277.2
17 950 913.5 965 1159.2 897 699.3 846 441 728 -346.5
20 976 1077.3 1002 1392.3 923 863.1 871 598.5 719 -403.2
23 1007 1272.6 1036 1606.5 950 1033.2 898 768.6 708 -472.5
26 1043 1499.4 1075 1852.2 975 1190.7 922 919.8 698 -535.5
357

1 2 3 4 5 6
0 790 0 782 0 785 0 776 0 807 0 783 0
5 794 25.2 789 44.1 790 31.5 787 69.3 837 189 790 44.1
8 798 50.4 789 44.1 822 233.1 843 422.1 894 548.1 829 289.8
11 802 75.6 810 176.4 877 579.6 881 661.5 936 812.7 884 636.3
14 831 258.3 825 270.9 927 894.6 930 970.2 981 1096.2 988 1291.5
17 843 333.9 836 340.2 966 1140.3 966 1197 1024 1367.1 1033 1575
20 882 579.6 882 630 1002 1367.1 1011 1480.5 1068 1644.3 1079 1864.8
23 912 768.6 910 806.4 1036 1581.3 1049 1719.9 1113 1927.8 1125 2154.6
26 938 932.4 940 995.4 1068 1782.9 1084 1940.4 1157 2205 1168 2425.5
29 948 995.4 1006 1411.2 1105 2016 1120 2167.2 1205 2507.4 1214 2715.3

7 8 9 10 11
0 778 0 781 0 790 0 784 0 793 0
5 793 94.5 790 56.7 799 56.7 788 25.2 782 -69.3
8 852 466.2 851 441 803 81.9 791 44.1 768 -157.5
11 893 724.5 890 686.7 863 459.9 794 63 758 -220.5
14 931 963.9 933 957.6 902 705.6 825 258.3 739 -340.2
17 973 1228.5 972 1203.3 923 837.9 882 617.4 722 -447.3
20 1014 1486.8 1019 1499.4 952 1020.6 904 756 711 -516.6
23 1055 1745.1 1062 1770.3 985 1228.5 926 894.6 700 -585.9
26 1095 1997.1 1103 2028.6 1014 1411.2 948 1033.2 687 -667.8
29 1133 2236.5 1141 2268 1049 1631.7 972 1184.4 675 -743.4
358
AIII.3- Flexural Cracking (Long-term Tests)

Table AIII.53 Raw data for beam B1-a (2N16, Cb=40 mm, P=50% Pu)
CONCRETE SURFACE S T R A I N B Y D E M E C
Beam 1-a ( 2N16 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
Date Temp. Age Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Strain Reading Value
15/3/02 21 14 795 796 797 796 798 805 800 800 795 798 1232 0
15/3/02 21 14 816 902 930 937 967 967 972 934 894 841 1727 4.95
16/3/02 21 15 820 25.2 910 50.4 939 56.7 944 44.1 975 50.4 978 69.3 984 75.6 941 44.1 901 44.1 846 31.5 1787 5.55
17/3/02 21 16 825 56.7 915 81.9 947 107 948 69.3 985 113 983 101 991 119.7 945 69.3 907 81.9 850 56.7 1828 5.96
18/3/02 21 17 828 75.6 919 107 954 151 950 81.9 990 145 987 126 996 151.2 949 94.5 910 100.8 854 81.9 1847 6.15
19/3/02 24 18 830 88.2 921 120 958 176 953 101 997 189 991 151 998 163.8 952 113.4 913 119.7 857 100.8 1859 6.27
20/3/02 23 19 831 94.5 923 132 959 183 953 101 1001 214 992 158 1001 182.7 953 119.7 914 126 859 113.4 1871 6.39
21/3/02 23 20 832 101 925 145 962 202 955 113 1004 233 994 170 1003 195.3 955 132.3 916 138.6 860 119.7 1879 6.47
22/3/02 22 21 829 81.9 924 139 963 208 954 107 1003 227 994 170 1001 182.7 954 126 916 138.6 859 113.4 1899 6.67
23/3/02 22 22 828 75.6 924 139 964 214 952 94.5 1002 221 993 164 1004 201.6 954 126 914 126 856 94.5 1912 6.8
25/3/02 21 24 828 75.6 924 139 966 227 948 69.3 1007 252 992 158 1008 226.8 953 119.7 913 119.7 856 94.5 1948 7.16
26/3/02 23 25 831 94.5 927 158 969 246 951 88.2 1011 277 995 176 1012 252 956 138.6 917 144.9 857 100.8 1951 7.19
28/3/02 23 27 830 88.2 927 158 968 239 950 81.9 1011 277 995 176 1011 245.7 954 126 917 144.9 856 94.5 1960 7.28
31/3/02 21 30 826 63 924 139 968 239 948 69.3 1010 271 994 170 1010 239.4 953 119.7 917 144.9 854 81.9 1979 7.47
4/02/2002 21 32 825 56.7 925 145 972 265 947 63 1014 296 993 164 1013 258.3 952 113.4 917 144.9 854 81.9 1993 7.61
4/04/2002 21 34 825 56.7 925 145 972 265 945 50.4 1014 296 992 158 1013 258.3 951 107.1 917 144.9 854 81.9 2010 7.78
4/07/2002 20 37 826 63 925 145 972 265 944 44.1 1015 302 991 151 1015 270.9 951 107.1 917 144.9 853 75.6 2042 8.1
4/09/2002 20 39 826 63 926 151 973 271 944 44.1 1016 309 992 158 1016 277.2 951 107.1 917 144.9 853 75.6 2049 8.17
4/12/2002 22 42 830 88.2 930 176 979 309 948 69.3 1021 340 997 189 1021 308.7 956 138.6 922 176.4 856 94.5 2054 8.22
15/4/02 21 45 830 88.2 930 176 979 309 948 69.3 1021 340 997 189 1021 308.7 956 138.6 922 176.4 856 94.5 2064 8.32
18/4/02 20 48 829 81.9 930 176 979 309 948 69.3 1021 340 996 183 1021 308.7 956 138.6 922 176.4 855 88.2 2066 8.34
359
23/4/02 21 53 828 75.6 929 170 978 302 947 63 1020 334 995 176 1020 302.4 954 126 921 170.1 853 75.6 2083 8.51
5/01/2002 18 61 825 56.7 925 145 976 290 942 31.5 1018 321 992 158 1018 289.8 952 113.4 918 151.2 849 50.4 2116 8.84
5/08/2002 19 68 824 50.4 924 139 976 290 941 25.2 1018 321 992 158 1018 289.8 952 113.4 917 144.9 848 44.1 2138 9.06
16/5/02 17 76 823 44.1 923 132 976 290 940 18.9 1017 315 991 151 1017 283.5 952 113.4 916 138.6 845 25.2 2152 9.2
27/5/02 15 87 820 25.2 919 107 974 277 937 0 1015 302 988 132 1015 270.9 950 100.8 914 126 841 0 2179 9.47
6/05/2002 15 96 819 18.9 918 101 974 277 936 -6.3 1015 302 987 126 1015 270.9 949 94.5 914 126 840 -6.3 2179 9.47
18/6/02 14 109 818 12.6 918 101 975 284 935 -12.6 1016 309 985 113 1015 270.9 950 100.8 914 126 839 -12.6 2210 9.78
7/01/2002 11 122 812 -25.2 912 63 972 265 928 -56.7 1011 277 980 81.9 1011 245.7 947 81.9 910 100.8 835 -37.8 2235 10.03
15/7/02 13 136 811 -31.5 912 63 974 277 927 -63 1013 290 979 75.6 1014 264.6 947 81.9 910 100.8 833 -50.4 2266 10.34
15/8/02 14 166 815 -6.3 917 94.5 983 334 932 -31.5 1023 353 986 120 1022 315 951 107.1 916 138.6 837 -25.2 2291 10.59
18/9/02 15 200 823 44.1 925 145 994 403 939 12.6 1034 422 994 170 1038 415.8 960 163.8 925 195.3 845 25.2 2320 10.88
30/10/02 20 242 828 75.6 930 176 995 410 942 31.5 1040 460 998 195 1041 434.7 966 201.6 929 220.5 848 44.1 2370 11.38
13/12/02 21 286 836 126 940 239 1007 485 953 101 1050 523 1007 252 1051 497.7 977 270.9 939 283.5 856 94.5 2395 11.63
28/1/03 23 332 845 183 947 284 1018 554 959 139 1055 554 1012 284 1058 541.8 984 315 945 321.3 861 126 2414 11.82
31/3/03 22 394 842 164 945 271 1016 542 957 126 1055 554 1010 271 1055 522.9 983 308.7 943 308.7 858 107.1 2438 12.06
Table AIII.54 Raw data for beam B1-b (2N16, Cb=40 mm, P=30% Pu)
Beam 1-b ( 2N16 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
15/3/02 21 14 795 793 793 795 792 795 792 792 795 792 588 0
15/3/02 21 14 806 810 841 842 805 847 830 847 820 805 666 1.98
16/3/02 21 15 806 0 811 6.3 844 18.9 846 25.2 806 6.3 852 31.5 834 25.2 850 18.9 822 12.6 806 6.3 675 2.21
17/3/02 21 16 810 25.2 815 31.5 848 44.1 851 56.7 808 18.9 861 88.2 837 44.1 854 44.1 826 37.8 809 25.2 684 2.44
18/3/02 21 17 813 44.1 819 56.7 852 69.3 855 81.9 811 37.8 866 120 840 63 859 75.6 829 56.7 812 44.1 688 2.54
19/3/02 24 18 814 50.4 820 63 854 81.9 858 101 813 50.4 870 145 842 75.6 861 88.2 831 69.3 813 50.4 691 2.62
360
20/3/02 23 19 815 56.7 821 69.3 855 88.2 860 113 814 56.7 873 164 845 94.5 863 101 833 81.9 814 56.7 695 2.72
21/3/02 23 20 816 63 822 75.6 857 101 862 126 815 63 875 176 846 101 865 113 835 94.5 815 63 699 2.82
22/3/02 22 21 811 31.5 818 50.4 855 88.2 861 120 809 25.2 874 170 841 69.3 862 94.5 832 75.6 812 44.1 707 3.02
23/3/02 22 22 809 18.9 816 37.8 853 75.6 859 107 806 6.3 874 170 838 50.4 861 88.2 831 69.3 810 31.5 711 3.12
25/3/02 21 24 808 12.6 814 25.2 855 88.2 859 107 806 6.3 877 189 835 31.5 861 88.2 830 63 809 25.2 718 3.3
26/3/02 23 25 808 12.6 814 25.2 858 107 861 120 806 6.3 880 208 837 44.1 864 107 833 81.9 809 25.2 719 3.33
28/3/02 23 27 806 0 812 12.6 858 107 860 113 806 6.3 880 208 838 50.4 864 107 832 75.6 807 12.6 721 3.38
31/3/02 21 30 802 -25.2 809 -6.3 855 88.2 857 94.5 803 -13 879 202 835 31.5 860 81.9 829 56.7 802 -18.9 731 3.63
4/02/2002 21 32 801 -31.5 808 -12.6 856 94.5 857 94.5 801 -25 879 202 834 25.2 860 81.9 828 50.4 800 -31.5 736 3.76
4/04/2002 21 34 800 -37.8 807 -18.9 857 101 857 94.5 800 -32 884 233 834 25.2 860 81.9 828 50.4 800 -31.5 741 3.89
4/07/2002 20 37 798 -50.4 805 -31.5 858 107 856 88.2 797 -50 884 233 834 25.2 860 81.9 827 44.1 799 -37.8 750 4.11
4/09/2002 20 39 797 -56.7 805 -31.5 858 107 856 88.2 797 -50 885 239 834 25.2 860 81.9 827 44.1 799 -37.8 752 4.17
4/12/2002 22 42 799 -44.1 807 -18.9 861 126 858 101 799 -38 887 252 836 37.8 862 94.5 829 56.7 801 -25.2 752 4.17
15/4/02 21 45 799 -44.1 807 -18.9 861 126 858 101 799 -38 887 252 835 31.5 862 94.5 829 56.7 801 -25.2 756 4.27
18/4/02 20 48 796 -63 804 -37.8 859 113 856 88.2 797 -50 885 239 832 12.6 860 81.9 827 44.1 798 -44.1 757 4.29
23/4/02 21 53 793 -81.9 801 -56.7 857 101 854 75.6 795 -63 884 233 829 -6.3 859 75.6 825 31.5 795 -63 763 4.45
5/01/2002 18 61 788 -113 798 -75.6 856 94.5 851 56.7 792 -82 882 221 826 -25.2 857 63 823 18.9 792 -81.9 776 4.78
5/08/2002 19 68 786 -126 796 -88.2 856 94.5 851 56.7 791 -88 882 221 825 -31.5 856 56.7 823 18.9 791 -88.2 780 4.88
16/5/02 17 76 784 -139 794 -101 856 94.5 850 50.4 790 -95 882 221 824 -37.8 856 56.7 823 18.9 788 -107 784 4.98
27/5/02 15 87 780 -164 790 -126 854 81.9 848 37.8 787 -113 880 208 821 -56.7 854 44.1 820 0 786 -120 795 5.26
6/05/2002 15 96 779 -170 789 -132 854 81.9 847 31.5 786 -120 880 208 820 -63 854 44.1 820 0 785 -126 796 5.28
18/6/02 14 109 775 -195 785 -158 855 88.2 847 31.5 782 -145 884 233 818 -75.6 855 50.4 819 -6.3 783 -139 806 5.54
7/01/2002 11 122 770 -227 779 -195 850 56.7 843 6.3 777 -176 880 208 814 -101 852 31.5 815 -31.5 777 -176 814 5.74
15/7/02 13 136 769 -233 779 -195 851 63 842 0 775 -189 880 208 813 -107 851 25.2 815 -31.5 775 -189 822 5.94
15/8/02 14 166 770 -227 780 -189 857 101 847 31.5 776 -183 886 246 814 -101 856 56.7 820 0 778 -170 834 6.25
18/9/02 15 200 775 -195 784 -164 869 176 853 69.3 780 -158 892 284 819 -69.3 863 101 826 37.8 781 -151 843 6.48
30/10/02 20 242 779 -170 787 -145 874 208 854 75.6 785 -126 900 334 823 -44.1 870 145 831 69.3 784 -132 860 6.91
13/12/02 21 286 787 -120 795 -94.5 883 265 864 139 794 -69 909 391 831 6.3 880 208 840 126 792 -81.9 869 7.14
28/1/03 23 332 790 -101 798 -75.6 889 302 870 176 798 -44 915 428 837 44.1 887 252 847 170 797 -50.4 877 7.34
31/3/03 22 394 788 -113 797 -81.9 888 296 869 170 796 -57 912 410 835 31.5 887 252 845 158 795 -63 881 7.44
361
15/3/02 21 14 796 795 799 800 798 799 797 799 794 798 152 0
15/3/02 21 14 814 854 907 926 932 910 902 888 869 842 350 5.0292
16/3/02 21 15 817 18.9 861 44.1 917 63 934 50.4 939 44.1 917 44.1 916 88.2 892 25.2 874 31.5 848 37.8 373 5.6134
17/3/02 21 16 821 44.1 865 69.3 924 107 937 69.3 942 63 921 69.3 925 145 893 31.5 878 56.7 853 69.3 387 5.969
18/3/02 21 17 825 69.3 869 94.5 927 126 942 101 948 100.8 927 107 931 183 897 56.7 881 75.6 857 94.5 393 6.1214
19/3/02 24 18 828 88.2 872 113 930 145 945 120 951 119.7 931 132 935 208 899 69.3 884 94.5 860 113 398 6.2484
20/3/02 23 19 829 94.5 874 126 933 164 946 126 953 132.3 932 139 938 227 900 75.6 886 107 862 126 404 6.4008
21/3/02 23 20 830 101 876 139 936 183 948 139 955 144.9 934 151 941 246 903 94.5 888 120 864 139 410 6.5532
22/3/02 22 21 829 94.5 874 126 935 176 946 126 954 138.6 933 145 949 296 898 63 886 107 862 126 420 6.8072
23/3/02 22 22 828 88.2 872 113 934 170 943 107 953 132.3 930 126 951 309 894 37.8 884 94.5 860 113 426 6.9596
25/3/02 21 24 828 88.2 872 113 934 170 943 107 953 132.3 930 126 954 328 893 31.5 885 101 860 113 437 7.239
26/3/02 23 25 828 88.2 872 113 934 170 943 107 953 132.3 931 132 954 328 893 31.5 885 101 860 113 438 7.2644
28/3/02 23 27 828 88.2 873 120 934 170 943 107 953 132.3 932 139 954 328 894 37.8 886 107 860 113 441 7.3406
31/3/02 21 30 826 75.6 870 101 933 164 940 88.2 951 119.7 930 126 956 340 891 18.9 884 94.5 859 107 453 7.6454
2/04/2002 21 32 826 75.6 870 101 936 183 940 88.2 952 126 930 126 965 397 890 12.6 884 94.5 859 107 461 7.8486
4/04/2002 21 34 826 75.6 870 101 937 189 940 88.2 953 132.3 931 132 966 403 889 6.3 884 94.5 860 113 467 8.001
4/07/2002 20 37 826 75.6 870 101 937 189 940 88.2 953 132.3 931 132 967 410 887 -6.3 884 94.5 860 113 477 8.255
4/09/2002 20 39 827 81.9 870 101 937 189 940 88.2 953 132.3 931 132 967 410 886 -12.6 885 101 860 113 481 8.3566
4/12/2002 22 42 831 107 875 132 942 221 945 120 958 163.8 936 164 972 441 891 18.9 890 132 864 139 482 8.382
15/4/02 21 45 831 107 875 132 942 221 945 120 958 163.8 936 164 972 441 890 12.6 890 132 864 139 487 8.509
18/4/02 20 48 828 88.2 872 113 940 208 943 107 955 144.9 933 145 970 428 888 0 888 120 861 120 489 8.5598
23/4/02 21 53 826 75.6 870 101 938 195 941 94.5 953 132.3 930 126 969 422 885 -18.9 886 107 859 107 498 8.7884
5/01/2002 18 61 824 63 868 88.2 936 183 938 75.6 951 119.7 928 113 972 441 881 -44.1 884 94.5 857 94.5 512 9.144
362
5/08/2002 19 68 824 63 867 81.9 935 176 937 69.3 951 119.7 927 107 972 441 880 -50.4 884 94.5 856 88.2 518 9.2964
16/5/02 17 76 824 63 866 75.6 935 176 936 63 950 113.4 927 107 971 435 880 -50.4 883 88.2 855 81.9 525 9.4742
27/5/02 15 87 822 50.4 863 56.7 932 158 933 44.1 947 94.5 924 88.2 968 416 877 -69.3 880 69.3 852 63 538 9.8044
6/05/2002 15 96 821 44.1 862 50.4 932 158 933 44.1 947 94.5 924 88.2 968 416 877 -69.3 880 69.3 852 63 538 9.8044
18/6/02 14 109 825 69.3 862 50.4 935 176 933 44.1 947 94.5 925 94.5 968 416 875 -81.9 880 69.3 852 63 551 10.135
7/01/2002 11 122 820 37.8 858 25.2 930 145 928 12.6 944 75.6 922 75.6 969 422 870 -113 875 37.8 848 37.8 560 10.363
15/7/02 13 136 820 37.8 857 18.9 930 145 928 12.6 944 75.6 922 75.6 973 447 871 -107 875 37.8 849 44.1 571 10.643
15/8/02 14 166 824 63 861 44.1 934 170 932 37.8 948 100.8 925 94.5 985 523 870 -113 880 69.3 854 75.6 585 10.998
18/9/02 15 200 830 101 867 81.9 945 239 939 81.9 958 163.8 930 126 994 580 874 -88.2 885 101 860 113 597 11.303
30/10/02 20 242 835 132 873 120 949 265 944 113 962 189 935 158 1001 624 881 -44.1 891 139 866 151 617 11.811
13/12/02 21 286 844 189 883 183 958 321 954 176 971 245.7 944 214 1010 680 890 12.6 901 202 876 214 631 12.167
28/1/03 23 332 848 214 890 227 963 353 960 214 978 289.8 950 252 1016 718 895 44.1 907 239 882 252 638 12.344
31/3/03 22 394 845 195 888 214 961 340 959 208 976 277.2 948 239 1014 706 893 31.5 904 221 879 233 641 12.421
15/3/02 21 14 792 791 798 533 794 794 799 795 798 793 4 0
15/3/02 21 14 805 799 845 577 861 836 867 858 819 801 85 2.057
16/3/02 21 15 805 0 799 0 849 25.2 580 18.9 865 25.2 840 25.2 871 25.2 861 18.9 820 6.3 802 6.3 93 2.261
17/3/02 21 16 808 18.9 798 -6.3 855 63 586 56.7 866 31.5 845 56.7 876 56.7 865 44.1 827 50.4 805 25.2 103 2.515
18/3/02 21 17 811 37.8 799 0 860 94.5 590 81.9 869 50.4 849 81.9 880 81.9 869 69.3 830 69.3 807 37.8 107 2.616
19/3/02 24 18 813 50.4 802 18.9 863 113.4 593 101 871 63 852 101 883 100.8 872 88.2 832 81.9 808 44.1 111 2.718
363
20/3/02 23 19 813 50.4 802 18.9 865 126 595 113 872 69.3 854 113 884 107.1 874 100.8 833 88.2 808 44.1 114 2.794
21/3/02 23 20 814 56.7 803 25.2 867 138.6 597 126 873 75.6 855 120 885 113.4 875 107.1 835 101 808 44.1 119 2.921
22/3/02 22 21 814 56.7 796 -19 865 126 595 113 867 37.8 854 113 884 107.1 871 81.9 833 88.2 804 18.9 127 3.124
23/3/02 22 22 813 50.4 794 -32 866 132.3 594 107 865 25.2 854 113 884 107.1 870 75.6 831 75.6 803 12.6 131 3.226
25/3/02 21 24 813 50.4 793 -38 868 144.9 594 107 864 18.9 854 113 884 107.1 869 69.3 832 81.9 802 6.3 139 3.429
26/3/02 23 25 814 56.7 795 -25 871 163.8 597 126 867 37.8 857 132 887 126 872 88.2 835 101 804 18.9 140 3.454
28/3/02 23 27 813 50.4 794 -32 871 163.8 596 120 867 37.8 857 132 886 119.7 870 75.6 834 94.5 802 6.3 143 3.531
31/3/02 21 30 811 37.8 791 -50 870 157.5 595 113 865 25.2 855 120 884 107.1 864 37.8 831 75.6 798 -18.9 152 3.759
4/02/2002 21 32 810 31.5 789 -63 871 163.8 594 107 864 18.9 855 120 883 100.8 863 31.5 831 75.6 796 -31.5 158 3.912
4/04/2002 21 34 809 25.2 788 -69 872 170.1 594 107 864 18.9 856 126 883 100.8 863 31.5 831 75.6 794 -44.1 164 4.064
4/07/2002 20 37 807 12.6 786 -82 874 182.7 594 107 864 18.9 856 126 882 94.5 862 25.2 831 75.6 793 -50.4 172 4.267
4/09/2002 20 39 809 25.2 786 -82 875 189 594 107 864 18.9 856 126 882 94.5 861 18.9 831 75.6 792 -56.7 175 4.343
4/12/2002 22 42 810 31.5 791 -50 879 214.2 599 139 868 44.1 861 158 886 119.7 865 44.1 835 101 794 -44.1 176 4.369
15/4/02 21 45 809 25.2 790 -57 879 214.2 599 139 868 44.1 861 158 886 119.7 865 44.1 835 101 794 -44.1 180 4.47
18/4/02 20 48 807 12.6 789 -63 878 207.9 599 139 867 37.8 861 158 885 113.4 865 44.1 834 94.5 794 -44.1 182 4.521
23/4/02 21 53 805 0 787 -76 877 201.6 598 132 865 25.2 860 151 883 100.8 863 31.5 833 88.2 790 -69.3 188 4.674
5/01/2002 18 61 801 -25.2 783 -101 875 189 595 113 862 6.3 857 132 880 81.9 860 12.6 830 69.3 785 -101 200 4.978
5/08/2002 19 68 800 -31.5 781 -113 875 189 595 113 861 0 857 132 879 75.6 860 12.6 829 63 782 -120 205 5.105
16/5/02 17 76 796 -56.7 781 -113 875 189 593 101 860 -6.3 855 120 877 63 859 6.3 827 50.4 780 -132 211 5.258
27/5/02 15 87 791 -88.2 778 -132 873 176.4 589 75.6 857 -25.2 852 101 874 44.1 855 -18.9 824 31.5 776 -158 222 5.537
6/05/2002 15 96 790 -94.5 776 -145 872 170.1 588 69.3 856 -31.5 851 94.5 873 37.8 854 -25.2 824 31.5 775 -164 222 5.537
18/6/02 14 109 787 -113 775 -151 873 176.4 588 69.3 854 -44.1 851 94.5 873 37.8 853 -31.5 824 31.5 772 -183 233 5.817
7/01/2002 11 122 784 -132 770 -183 870 157.5 584 44.1 849 -75.6 847 69.3 868 6.3 848 -63 818 -6.3 766 -221 241 6.02
15/7/02 13 136 784 -132 767 -202 871 163.8 584 44.1 848 -81.9 847 69.3 867 0 845 -81.9 818 -6.3 764 -233 250 6.248
15/8/02 14 166 787 -113 770 -183 879 214.2 590 81.9 852 -56.7 855 120 870 18.9 848 -63 824 31.5 764 -233 263 6.579
18/9/02 15 200 790 -94.5 774 -158 889 277.2 594 107 856 -31.5 859 145 875 50.4 852 -37.8 830 69.3 768 -208 274 6.858
30/10/02 20 242 794 -69.3 778 -132 896 321.3 600 145 860 -6.3 864 176 879 75.6 858 0 835 101 770 -195 290 7.264
13/12/02 21 286 803 -12.6 788 -69 907 390.6 609 202 870 56.7 873 233 888 132.3 868 63 845 164 779 -139 300 7.518
28/1/03 23 332 807 12.6 794 -32 912 422.1 614 233 877 100.8 878 265 894 170.1 874 100.8 850 195 783 -113 308 7.722
31/3/03 22 394 804 -6.3 793 -38 910 409.5 612 221 875 88.2 877 258 892 157.5 872 88.2 848 183 783 -113 314 7.874
364
15/3/02 21 14 792 792 773 791 795 794 793 796 791 792 1200 0
15/3/02 21 14 852 856 920 908 977 958 900 955 836 838 1781 5.81
16/3/02 21 15 860 50.4 860 25.2 929 56.7 913 31.5 990 81.9 965 44.1 907 44.1 963 50.4 841 31.5 844 37.8 1831 6.31
17/3/02 21 16 866 88.2 866 63 934 88.2 916 50.4 1001 151 970 75.6 912 75.6 973 113 844 50.4 849 69.3 1871 6.71
18/3/02 21 17 870 113 869 81.9 938 113 919 69.3 1005 176 975 107 915 94.5 977 139 847 69.3 853 94.5 1887 6.87
19/3/02 24 18 873 132 871 94.5 940 126 921 81.9 1009 202 978 126 917 107 979 151 848 75.6 856 113 1900 7
20/3/02 23 19 874 139 873 107 943 145 923 94.5 1012 221 980 139 919 120 980 158 859 145 857 120 1916 7.16
21/3/02 23 20 875 145 875 120 945 158 925 107 1014 233 982 151 920 126 982 170 850 88.2 859 132 1934 7.34
22/3/02 22 21 874 139 871 94.5 942 139 921 81.9 1012 221 979 132 916 101 980 158 847 69.3 857 120 1958 7.58
23/3/02 22 22 876 151 868 75.6 943 145 919 69.3 1015 239 978 126 913 81.9 984 183 843 44.1 858 126 1972 7.72
25/3/02 21 24 880 176 868 75.6 943 145 919 69.3 1020 271 979 132 913 81.9 986 195 841 31.5 859 132 1999 7.99
26/3/02 23 25 882 189 869 81.9 946 164 921 81.9 1022 284 981 145 915 94.5 990 221 844 50.4 861 145 2002 8.02
28/3/02 23 27 881 183 868 75.6 946 164 920 75.6 1021 277 980 139 914 88.2 990 221 844 50.4 860 139 2012 8.12
31/3/02 21 29 880 176 865 56.7 944 151 916 50.4 1020 271 978 126 911 69.3 989 214 840 25.2 858 126 2043 8.43
4/02/2002 21 32 881 183 863 44.1 944 151 915 44.1 1027 315 978 126 912 75.6 990 221 839 18.9 859 132 2062 8.62
4/04/2002 21 34 884 202 862 37.8 944 151 914 37.8 1027 315 978 126 911 69.3 992 233 838 12.6 860 139 2078 8.78
4/07/2002 20 37 886 214 861 31.5 945 158 913 31.5 1027 315 978 126 910 63 993 239 837 6.3 860 139 2104 9.04
4/09/2002 20 39 886 214 861 31.5 945 158 912 25.2 1028 321 978 126 910 63 994 246 837 6.3 860 139 2112 9.12
4/12/2002 22 42 890 239 866 63 950 189 917 56.7 1033 353 983 158 915 94.5 998 271 842 37.8 865 170 2116 9.16
15/4/02 21 45 890 239 865 56.7 950 189 915 44.1 1033 353 983 158 915 94.5 998 271 841 31.5 865 170 2129 9.29
18/4/02 20 48 888 227 862 37.8 947 170 912 25.2 1030 334 980 139 912 75.6 995 252 838 12.6 862 151 2133 9.33
23/4/02 21 53 886 214 860 25.2 945 158 909 6.3 1029 328 978 126 910 63 993 239 835 -6.3 860 139 2157 9.57
5/01/2002 18 61 884 202 858 12.6 943 145 906 -13 1028 321 976 113 908 50.4 992 233 832 -25 858 126 2192 9.92
365
5/08/2002 19 68 884 202 856 0 943 145 905 -19 1028 321 975 107 906 37.8 992 233 830 -38 857 120 2208 10.1
16/5/02 17 76 884 202 855 -6.3 942 139 904 -25 1028 321 974 101 905 31.5 991 227 829 -44 856 113 2224 10.2
27/5/02 15 87 884 202 854 -13 940 126 902 -38 1026 309 972 88.2 902 12.6 989 214 827 -57 854 101 2255 10.6
6/05/2002 15 96 884 202 854 -13 940 126 901 -44 1026 309 972 88.2 902 12.6 989 214 826 -63 854 101 2256 10.6
18/6/02 14 109 888 227 853 -19 943 145 900 -50 1031 340 973 94.5 900 0 993 239 826 -63 855 107 2289 10.9
7/01/2002 11 122 885 208 850 -38 939 120 896 -76 1027 315 969 69.3 896 -25.2 990 221 822 -88 852 88.2 2314 11.1
15/7/02 13 136 884 202 850 -38 940 126 895 -82 1027 315 969 69.3 896 -25.2 990 221 821 -95 851 81.9 2337 11.4
15/8/02 14 166 890 239 849 -44 944 151 895 -82 1035 365 974 101 898 -12.6 997 265 820 -101 856 113 2378 11.8
18/9/02 15 200 900 302 852 -25 952 202 900 -50 1045 428 980 139 903 18.9 1008 334 825 -69 866 176 2408 12.1
30/10/02 20 242 905 334 857 6.3 958 239 906 -13 1053 479 987 183 909 56.7 1014 372 829 -44 871 208 2462 12.6
13/12/02 21 286 914 391 865 56.7 966 290 915 44.1 1062 536 995 233 918 113 1022 422 837 6.3 879 258 2499 13
28/1/03 23 332 919 422 870 88.2 972 328 921 81.9 1067 567 1000 265 924 151 1028 460 843 44.1 886 302 2517 13.2
31/3/03 22 394 917 410 868 75.6 971 321 920 75.6 1065 554 999 258 923 145 1026 447 840 25.2 884 290 2532 13.3
15/3/02 21 14 792 795 796 794 752 792 795 792 792 812 733 0
15/3/02 21 14 805 810 844 837 804 864 830 846 811 826 930 1.97
16/3/02 21 15 807 12.6 813 18.9 850 37.8 842 31.5 808 25.2 873 56.7 835 31.5 851 31.5 816 31.5 829 18.9 964 2.31
17/3/02 21 16 811 37.8 816 37.8 855 69.3 847 63 812 50.4 880 101 836 37.8 856 63 822 69.3 832 37.8 988 2.55
18/3/02 21 17 813 50.4 818 50.4 859 94.5 849 75.6 815 69.3 884 126 838 50.4 858 75.6 826 94.5 836 63 998 2.65
19/3/02 24 18 815 63 821 69.3 861 107 851 88.2 817 81.9 887 145 840 63 860 88.2 829 113 839 81.9 1006 2.73
366
20/3/02 23 19 816 69.3 822 75.6 863 120 853 101 819 94.5 890 164 842 75.6 862 101 831 126 840 88.2 1017 2.84
21/3/02 23 20 817 75.6 823 81.9 865 132 855 113 821 107 892 176 844 88.2 864 113 833 139 842 101 1029 2.96
22/3/02 22 21 811 37.8 818 50.4 861 107 852 94.5 813 56.7 890 164 834 25.2 861 94.5 831 126 838 75.6 1048 3.15
23/3/02 22 22 809 25.2 815 31.5 861 107 852 94.5 808 25.2 891 170 832 12.6 860 88.2 831 126 836 63 1058 3.25
25/3/02 21 24 809 25.2 815 31.5 861 107 852 94.5 809 31.5 891 170 832 12.6 860 88.2 831 126 835 56.7 1078 3.45
26/3/02 23 25 810 31.5 817 44.1 864 126 854 107 810 37.8 894 189 834 25.2 862 101 834 145 837 69.3 1079 3.46
28/3/02 23 27 808 18.9 817 44.1 863 120 854 107 809 31.5 894 189 833 18.9 862 101 832 132 836 63 1086 3.53
31/3/02 21 29 805 0 815 31.5 861 107 852 94.5 807 18.9 893 183 830 0 860 88.2 829 113 832 37.8 1109 3.76
4/02/2002 21 32 803 -13 813 18.9 862 113 852 94.5 806 12.6 894 189 829 -6.3 861 94.5 829 113 832 37.8 1123 3.9
4/04/2002 21 34 803 -13 811 6.3 862 113 853 101 805 6.3 894 189 828 -12.6 861 94.5 829 113 831 31.5 1137 4.04
4/07/2002 20 37 801 -25 810 0 861 107 853 101 804 0 894 189 826 -25.2 861 94.5 829 113 830 25.2 1157 4.24
4/09/2002 20 39 801 -25 810 0 861 107 853 101 804 0 895 195 826 -25.2 861 94.5 829 113 829 18.9 1163 4.3
4/12/2002 22 42 804 -6.3 814 25.2 865 132 857 126 808 25.2 899 221 830 0 865 120 833 139 833 44.1 1171 4.38
15/4/02 21 45 803 -13 813 18.9 865 132 857 126 807 18.9 899 221 830 0 865 120 833 139 832 37.8 1180 4.47
18/4/02 20 48 799 -38 810 0 862 113 854 107 804 0 896 202 827 -18.9 862 101 830 120 829 18.9 1184 4.51
23/4/02 21 53 796 -57 807 -19 860 101 852 94.5 802 -12.6 894 189 825 -31.5 860 88.2 828 107 826 0 1202 4.69
5/01/2002 18 61 794 -69 805 -32 858 88.2 850 81.9 800 -25.2 892 176 822 -50.4 858 75.6 827 101 824 -12.6 1253 5.2
5/08/2002 19 68 792 -82 803 -44 858 88.2 848 69.3 798 -37.8 892 176 820 -63 857 69.3 826 94.5 823 -18.9 1266 5.33
16/5/02 17 76 790 -95 801 -57 857 81.9 846 56.7 797 -44.1 891 170 820 -63 857 69.3 825 88.2 820 -37.8 1275 5.42
27/5/02 15 87 787 -113 798 -76 855 69.3 845 50.4 795 -56.7 888 151 817 -81.9 855 56.7 823 75.6 817 -56.7 1302 5.69
6/05/2002 15 96 785 -126 797 -82 855 69.3 845 50.4 794 -63 888 151 817 -81.9 855 56.7 823 75.6 815 -69.3 1302 5.69
18/6/02 14 109 784 -132 796 -88 856 75.6 845 50.4 794 -63 889 158 816 -88.2 856 63 823 75.6 814 -75.6 1330 5.97
7/01/2002 11 122 780 -158 792 -113 852 50.4 842 31.5 791 -81.9 886 139 812 -113 853 44.1 820 56.7 810 -101 1350 6.17
15/7/02 13 136 780 -158 791 -120 852 50.4 841 25.2 790 -88.2 886 139 810 -126 852 37.8 821 63 810 -101 1370 6.37
15/8/02 14 166 780 -158 790 -126 858 88.2 844 44.1 790 -88.2 891 170 810 -126 855 56.7 823 75.6 810 -101 1400 6.67
18/9/02 15 200 785 -126 796 -88 867 145 849 75.6 795 -56.7 900 227 815 -94.5 860 88.2 834 145 814 -75.6 1425 6.92
30/10/02 20 242 789 -101 801 -57 872 176 855 113 800 -25.2 905 258 819 -69.3 866 126 838 170 818 -50.4 1467 7.34
13/12/2002 21 286 796 -57 810 0 882 239 864 170 809 31.5 914 315 828 -12.6 874 176 945 844 825 -6.3 1497 7.64
28/01/2003 23 332 801 -25 816 37.8 888 277 869 202 814 63 919 347 834 25.2 879 208 950 876 831 31.5 1514 7.81
31/03/2003 22 394 798 -44 814 25.2 876 202 867 189 810 37.8 916 328 833 18.9 878 202 948 863 829 18.9 1523 7.9
367
Table AIII.59 Raw data for slab S1-a (2N12, Cb=25 mm, w=50% wu)
Slab 1-a ( 2N12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
15/3/02 21 14 795 793 797 795 794 784 783 790 787 792 272 0
15/3/02 21 14 810 840 910 933 919 869 1003 857 814 804 553 7.14
16/3/02 21 15 812 12.6 845 31.5 921 69.3 941 50.4 926 44.1 876 44.1 1013 63 868 69.3 817 18.9 806 12.6 647 9.53
17/3/02 21 16 820 63 849 56.7 932 139 948 94.5 933 88.2 881 75.6 1024 132 877 126 823 56.7 809 31.5 685 10.5
18/3/02 21 17 824 88.2 854 88.2 938 176 952 120 938 120 887 113 1028 158 882 158 826 75.6 812 50.4 702 10.9
19/3/02 24 18 827 107 857 107 941 195 955 139 941 139 891 139 1032 183 886 183 828 88.2 814 63 712 11.2
20/3/02 23 19 829 120 859 120 944 214 958 158 944 158 895 164 1035 202 888 195 830 101 815 69.3 729 11.6
21/3/02 23 20 830 126 861 132 947 233 961 176 946 170 897 176 1038 221 891 214 833 120 816 75.6 748 12.1
22/3/02 22 21 830 126 860 126 948 239 960 170 948 183 896 170 1035 202 896 246 832 113 811 44.1 778 12.9
23/3/02 22 22 831 132 858 113 953 271 963 189 951 202 890 132 1089 542 899 265 833 120 810 37.8 784 13
25/3/02 21 24 836 164 858 113 957 296 967 214 955 227 893 151 1093 567 902 284 836 139 811 44.1 822 14
26/3/02 23 25 838 176 861 132 959 309 970 233 958 246 895 164 1095 580 904 296 838 151 813 56.7 823 14
28/3/02 23 27 836 164 861 132 957 296 969 227 958 246 894 158 1094 573 904 296 837 145 812 50.4 828 14.1
31/3/02 21 29 833 145 859 120 956 290 967 214 956 233 892 145 1092 561 903 290 834 126 806 12.6 859 14.9
2/04/2002 21 32 834 151 858 113 957 296 968 221 956 233 892 145 1095 580 905 302 834 126 804 0 877 15.4
4/04/2002 21 34 834 151 857 107 959 309 969 227 956 233 892 145 1096 586 906 309 834 126 803 -6.3 884 15.5
7/04/2002 20 37 835 158 858 113 960 315 970 233 957 239 893 151 1096 586 908 321 834 126 802 -12.6 918 16.4
9/04/2002 20 39 835 158 858 113 961 321 970 233 958 246 894 158 1097 592 908 321 834 126 801 -18.9 924 16.6
12/04/2002 22 42 837 170 860 126 964 340 974 258 962 271 897 176 1101 617 912 347 838 151 802 -12.6 925 16.6
15/4/02 21 45 837 170 860 126 964 340 974 258 962 271 897 176 1101 617 912 347 838 151 802 -12.6 936 16.9
18/4/02 20 48 834 151 858 113 961 321 971 239 958 246 895 164 1099 605 909 328 835 132 799 -31.5 935 16.8
23/4/02 21 53 831 132 856 101 959 309 969 227 956 233 892 145 1097 592 907 315 832 113 796 -50.4 958 17.4
1/05/2002 18 61 829 120 854 88.2 958 302 970 233 955 227 892 145 1098 599 908 321 831 107 793 -69.3 992 18.3
368
8/05/2002 19 68 827 107 854 88.2 958 302 969 227 955 227 892 145 1098 599 908 321 830 101 791 -81.9 1004 18.6
16/5/02 17 76 825 94.5 854 88.2 958 302 968 221 955 227 891 139 1098 599 907 315 828 88.2 789 -94.5 1009 18.7
27/5/02 15 87 822 75.6 852 75.6 956 290 967 214 953 214 889 126 1096 586 906 309 825 69.3 785 -120 1027 19.2
5/06/2002 15 96 821 69.3 851 69.3 956 290 967 214 953 214 889 126 1096 586 906 309 824 63 784 -126 1027 19.2
18/6/02 14 109 821 69.3 851 69.3 961 321 971 239 956 233 893 151 1098 599 910 334 823 56.7 782 -139 1029 19.2
1/07/2002 11 122 818 50.4 848 50.4 958 302 967 214 953 214 890 132 1095 580 907 315 820 37.8 779 -158 1045 19.6
15/7/02 13 136 818 50.4 849 56.7 963 334 969 227 955 227 891 139 1105 643 916 372 820 37.8 785 -120 1075 20.4
15/8/02 14 166 824 88.2 854 88.2 974 403 978 284 963 277 898 183 1116 712 926 435 827 81.9 784 -126 1119 21.5
18/9/02 15 200 831 132 866 164 986 479 990 359 974 347 910 258 1130 800 937 504 835 132 787 -107 1149 22.3
30/10/02 20 242 838 176 873 208 993 523 997 403 982 397 917 302 1138 851 945 554 842 176 792 -75.6 1196 23.5
13/12/02 21 286 847 233 882 265 1003 586 1007 466 992 460 925 353 1148 914 956 624 851 233 800 -25.2 1224 24.2
28/1/03 23 332 852 265 887 296 1009 624 1013 504 997 491 930 384 1152 939 960 649 857 271 805 6.3 1257 25
31/3/03 22 394 851 258 885 284 1007 611 1012 498 995 479 928 372 1153 945 961 655 855 258 803 -6.3 1261 25.1
Table AIII.60 Raw data for slab S1-b (2N12, Cb=25 mm, w=30% wu)
Slab 1-b ( 2N12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
15/3/02 21 14 790 796 794 793 796 790 796 791 797 791 151 0
15/3/02 21 14 801 812 836 882 857 876 830 815 806 803 258 2.72
16/3/02 21 15 803 12.6 815 18.9 840 25.2 888 37.8 863 37.8 887 69.3 835 31.5 818 18.9 808 12.6 806 18.9 339 4.78
17/3/02 21 16 807 37.8 824 75.6 847 69.3 894 75.6 868 69.3 898 139 841 69.3 825 63 812 37.8 812 56.7 374 5.66
18/3/02 21 17 809 50.4 827 94.5 853 107 897 94.5 871 88.2 904 176 845 94.5 829 88.2 814 50.4 814 69.3 389 6.05
19/3/02 24 18 811 63 829 107 856 126 901 120 875 113.4 908 202 848 113 831 100.8 817 69.3 816 81.9 397 6.25
369
20/3/02 23 19 812 69.3 830 113 858 139 904 139 877 126 913 233 850 126 833 113.4 818 75.6 816 81.9 410 6.58
21/3/02 23 20 813 75.6 832 126 861 158 908 164 879 138.6 917 258 853 145 835 126 820 88.2 817 88.2 426 6.99
22/3/02 22 21 807 37.8 831 120 862 164 905 145 875 113.4 923 296 851 132 834 119.7 816 63 815 75.6 455 7.72
23/3/02 22 22 806 31.5 831 120 865 183 903 132 874 107.1 929 334 853 145 833 113.4 813 44.1 813 63 469 8.08
25/3/02 21 24 805 25.2 833 132 870 214 903 132 873 100.8 934 365 855 158 833 113.4 810 25.2 813 63 496 8.76
26/3/02 23 25 807 37.8 835 145 873 233 905 145 876 119.7 937 384 857 170 838 144.9 811 31.5 815 75.6 496 8.76
28/3/02 23 27 805 25.2 834 139 873 233 905 145 875 113.4 936 378 857 170 837 138.6 810 25.2 813 63 501 8.89
31/3/02 21 29 798 -19 828 101 871 221 902 126 871 88.2 934 365 854 151 834 119.7 808 12.6 807 25.2 524 9.47
2/04/2002 21 32 796 -32 828 101 872 227 903 132 871 88.2 937 384 855 158 836 132.3 801 -32 806 18.9 539 9.86
4/04/2002 21 34 795 -38 828 101 874 239 903 132 871 88.2 941 410 855 158 836 132.3 789 -107 805 12.6 554 10.2
7/04/2002 20 37 792 -57 827 94.5 875 246 903 132 870 81.9 942 416 855 158 836 132.3 791 -95 802 -6.3 576 10.8
9/04/2002 20 39 791 -63 828 101 875 246 903 132 870 81.9 942 416 855 158 837 138.6 792 -88 802 -6.3 581 10.9
12/04/2002 22 42 793 -50 830 113 878 265 906 151 873 100.8 945 435 858 176 840 157.5 795 -69 804 6.3 582 10.9
15/4/02 21 45 792 -57 829 107 877 258 906 151 873 100.8 945 435 858 176 840 157.5 795 -69 803 0 590 11.2
18/4/02 20 48 788 -82 826 88.2 874 239 904 139 870 81.9 942 416 855 158 837 138.6 792 -88 799 -25.2 589 11.1
23/4/02 21 53 785 -101 822 63 871 221 902 126 867 63 940 403 853 145 835 126 789 -107 796 -44.1 608 11.6
1/05/2002 18 61 781 -126 819 44.1 870 214 900 113 865 50.4 940 403 852 139 832 107.1 786 -126 792 -69.3 638 12.4
8/05/2002 19 68 780 -132 818 37.8 869 208 898 101 864 44.1 941 410 851 132 832 107.1 784 -139 790 -81.9 648 12.6
16/5/02 17 76 776 -158 815 18.9 867 195 897 94.5 862 31.5 939 397 850 126 829 88.2 781 -158 785 -113 652 12.7
27/5/02 15 87 770 -195 810 -13 865 183 895 81.9 859 12.6 938 391 848 113 827 75.6 779 -170 782 -132 684 13.5
5/06/2002 15 96 769 -202 809 -19 865 183 895 81.9 858 6.3 938 391 848 113 827 75.6 777 -183 780 -145 683 13.5
18/6/02 14 109 764 -233 809 -19 868 202 897 94.5 856 -6.3 948 454 851 132 828 81.9 775 -195 778 -158 717 14.4
1/07/2002 11 122 760 -258 804 -50 865 183 893 69.3 852 -31.5 944 428 848 113 824 56.7 771 -221 774 -183 738 14.9
15/7/02 13 136 760 -258 804 -50 867 195 894 75.6 852 -31.5 952 479 849 120 826 69.3 770 -227 773 -189 762 15.5
15/8/02 14 166 756 -284 808 -25 878 265 900 113 856 -6.3 963 548 854 151 831 100.8 770 -227 771 -202 799 16.5
18/9/02 15 200 760 -258 818 37.8 889 334 910 176 862 31.5 976 630 867 233 842 170.1 774 -202 776 -170 828 17.2
30/10/02 20 242 764 -233 824 75.6 893 359 916 214 869 75.6 984 680 875 284 848 207.9 778 -176 780 -145 875 18.4
13/12/02 21 286 770 -195 831 120 902 416 927 284 878 132.3 996 756 885 347 856 258.3 785 -132 786 -107 899 19
28/1/03 23 332 775 -164 836 151 911 473 934 328 884 170.1 1003 800 891 384 861 289.8 789 -107 790 -81.9 931 19.8
31/3/03 22 394 771 -189 835 145 910 466 933 321 884 170.1 1002 794 890 378 860 283.5 787 -120 788 -94.5 935 19.9
370
Slab 2-a (3N12) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
15/3/02 21 14 792 799 797 798 799 800 796 796 795 797 319 0
15/3/02 21 14 809 0 918 898 1036 919 932 959 912 920 800 784 11.8
16/3/02 21 15 812 18.9 930 75.6 905 44.1 1051 94.5 929 63 943 69.3 971 75.6 923 69.3 932 75.6 800 0 858 13.7
17/3/02 21 16 815 37.8 940 139 908 63 1068 202 934 94.5 947 94.5 978 120 929 107 943 145 796 -25.2 899 14.7
18/3/02 21 17 819 63 946 176 914 101 1073 233 939 126 951 120 982 145 934 139 949 183 799 -6.3 915 15.1
19/3/02 24 18 822 81.9 948 189 918 126 1075 246 942 145 955 145 985 164 937 158 952 202 801 6.3 928 15.5
20/3/02 23 19 823 88.2 951 208 921 145 1081 284 945 164 958 164 988 183 941 183 956 227 801 6.3 947 16
21/3/02 23 20 824 94.5 954 227 923 158 1085 309 948 183 960 176 991 202 944 202 960 252 802 12.6 966 16.4
22/3/02 22 21 824 94.5 958 252 924 164 1090 340 949 189 962 189 993 214 945 208 965 284 796 -25.2 996 17.2
23/3/02 22 22 823 88.2 958 252 922 151 1093 359 947 176 962 189 993 214 946 214 966 290 794 -37.8 1013 17.6
25/3/02 21 24 820 69.3 961 271 921 145 1093 359 948 183 960 176 994 221 948 227 971 321 794 -37.8 1043 18.4
26/3/02 23 25 825 101 965 296 924 164 1099 397 953 214 965 208 998 246 951 246 975 347 797 -18.9 1044 18.4
28/3/02 23 27 824 94.5 963 284 925 170 1097 384 953 214 965 208 998 246 950 239 974 340 797 -18.9 1051 18.6
31/3/02 21 30 822 81.9 963 284 924 164 1100 403 951 202 964 202 997 239 949 233 974 340 792 -50.4 1084 19.4
2/04/2002 21 32 822 81.9 970 328 924 164 1109 460 951 202 967 221 1000 258 950 239 980 378 790 -63 1104 19.9
4/04/2002 21 34 822 81.9 971 334 924 164 1111 473 951 202 965 208 1001 265 951 246 981 384 789 -69.3 1123 20.4
7/04/2002 20 37 822 81.9 971 334 924 164 1111 473 951 202 967 221 1002 271 951 246 984 403 789 -69.3 1148 21.1
9/04/2002 20 39 822 81.9 971 334 924 164 1111 473 952 208 966 214 1002 271 951 246 984 403 789 -69.3 1156 21.3
12/04/2002 22 42 824 94.5 974 353 927 183 1115 498 957 239 971 246 1006 296 956 277 987 422 793 -44.1 1159 21.3
15/4/02 21 45 824 94.5 974 353 927 183 1115 498 957 239 972 252 1006 296 956 277 987 422 793 -44.1 1172 21.7
18/4/02 20 48 824 94.5 973 347 927 183 1115 498 958 246 972 252 1006 296 957 284 987 422 792 -50.4 1172 21.7
23/4/02 21 53 822 81.9 973 347 926 176 1115 498 956 233 971 246 1005 290 955 271 986 416 788 -75.6 1198 22.3
1/05/2002 18 61 817 50.4 971 334 921 145 1114 491 953 214 968 227 1002 271 952 252 984 403 782 -113 1235 23.3
371
8/05/2002 19 68 816 44.1 972 340 921 145 1114 491 953 214 967 221 1002 271 952 252 984 403 781 -120 1249 23.6
16/5/02 17 76 815 37.8 972 340 921 145 1114 491 953 214 967 221 1002 271 952 252 984 403 781 -120 1257 23.8
27/5/02 15 87 811 12.6 970 328 918 126 1114 491 950 195 964 202 1000 258 950 239 984 403 778 -139 1296 24.8
5/06/2002 15 96 810 6.3 970 328 917 120 1114 491 950 195 964 202 999 252 950 239 984 403 777 -145 1297 24.8
18/6/02 14 109 808 -6.3 976 365 918 126 1123 548 952 208 965 208 1003 277 952 252 984 403 774 -164 1338 25.9
1/07/2002 11 122 803 -38 974 353 914 101 1122 542 949 189 962 189 1000 258 949 233 984 403 767 -208 1366 26.6
15/7/02 13 136 801 -50 983 410 913 94.5 1130 592 950 195 962 189 1000 258 949 233 995 473 765 -221 1395 27.3
15/8/02 14 166 799 -63 993 473 911 81.9 1139 649 956 233 969 233 1009 315 956 277 1006 542 767 -208 1439 28.4
18/9/02 15 200 818 56.7 1007 561 927 183 1151 725 966 296 980 302 1018 372 965 334 1017 611 773 -170 1472 29.3
30/10/02 20 242 821 75.6 1014 605 931 208 1165 813 973 340 985 334 1025 416 969 359 1025 662 780 -126 1524 30.6
13/12/02 21 286 831 139 1023 662 941 271 1175 876 984 410 996 403 1035 479 982 441 1036 731 791 -56.7 1583 32.1
28/1/03 23 332 841 202 1035 737 949 321 1186 945 994 473 1003 447 1040 510 987 473 1041 762 798 -12.6 1584 32.1
31/3/03 22 394 838 183 1033 725 948 315 1184 932 993 466 1003 447 1040 510 987 473 1041 762 797 -18.9 1597 32.5
Slab 2-b ( 3N12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
15/3/02 21 14 798 799 800 798 797 796 797 800 800 799 2495 0
15/3/02 21 14 803 812 845 885 843 844 874 827 810 803 2938 4.43
16/3/02 21 15 806 18.9 814 12.6 851 37.8 894 56.7 849 37.8 848 25.2 882 50.4 833 37.8 814 25.2 806 18.9 3094 5.99
17/3/02 21 16 808 31.5 820 50.4 856 69.3 904 120 855 75.6 851 44.1 891 107 841 88.2 819 56.7 810 44.1 3178 6.83
18/3/02 21 17 811 50.4 824 75.6 861 101 910 158 860 107 855 69.3 897 145 845 113 823 81.9 814 69.3 3213 7.18
372
19/3/02 24 18 813 63 827 94.5 864 120 913 176 863 126 858 88.2 901 170 848 132 826 101 816 81.9 3237 7.42
20/3/02 23 19 814 69.3 828 101 867 139 916 195 865 139 860 101 903 183 850 145 827 107 817 88.2 3275 7.8
21/3/02 23 20 815 75.6 830 113 870 158 919 214 868 158 863 120 905 195 853 164 829 120 819 100.8 3311 8.16
22/3/02 22 21 813 63 828 101 868 145 921 227 864 132 859 94.5 903 183 851 151 825 94.5 816 81.9 3338 8.43
23/3/02 22 22 813 63 829 107 867 139 926 258 866 145 857 81.9 903 183 853 164 825 94.5 816 81.9 3421 9.26
25/3/02 21 24 813 63 828 101 868 145 930 284 868 158 857 81.9 904 189 854 170 825 94.5 816 81.9 3495 10
26/3/02 23 25 815 75.6 832 126 870 158 932 296 871 176 860 101 907 208 858 195 828 113 818 94.5 3496 10
28/3/02 23 27 814 69.3 833 132 870 158 932 296 871 176 860 101 907 208 858 195 828 113 817 88.2 3511 10.2
31/3/02 21 30 811 50.4 831 120 868 145 931 290 869 164 858 88.2 905 195 857 189 825 94.5 814 69.3 3578 10.8
2/04/2002 21 32 811 50.4 831 120 868 145 936 321 870 170 857 81.9 907 208 858 195 824 88.2 813 63 3620 11.3
4/04/2002 21 34 811 50.4 831 120 868 145 938 334 871 176 857 81.9 908 214 858 195 824 88.2 811 50.4 3665 11.7
7/04/2002 20 37 811 50.4 831 120 868 145 939 340 871 176 856 75.6 908 214 860 208 824 88.2 811 50.4 3722 12.3
9/04/2002 20 39 810 44.1 831 120 868 145 939 340 871 176 856 75.6 909 221 860 208 824 88.2 810 44.1 3737 12.4
12/04/2002 22 42 812 56.7 834 139 871 164 942 359 875 202 860 101 913 246 864 233 827 107 812 56.7 3740 12.5
15/4/02 21 45 810 44.1 834 139 871 164 942 359 875 202 860 101 913 246 864 233 827 107 812 56.7 3765 12.7
18/4/02 20 48 810 44.1 834 139 871 164 941 353 875 202 860 101 912 239 864 233 826 101 811 50.4 3764 12.7
23/4/02 21 53 807 25.2 832 126 869 151 939 340 873 189 857 81.9 910 227 861 214 824 88.2 807 25.2 3818 13.2
1/05/2002 18 61 802 -6.3 829 107 866 132 938 334 870 170 853 56.7 907 208 858 195 821 69.3 802 -6.3 3900 14.1
8/05/2002 19 68 801 -12.6 828 101 866 132 938 334 870 170 851 44.1 906 202 856 183 820 63 798 -31.5 3929 14.3
16/5/02 17 76 798 -31.5 826 88.2 865 126 937 328 868 158 850 37.8 905 195 855 176 818 50.4 795 -50.4 3968 14.7
27/5/02 15 87 794 -56.7 823 69.3 861 101 936 321 866 145 847 18.9 903 183 853 164 814 25.2 792 -69.3 4045 15.5
5/06/2002 15 96 793 -63 823 69.3 860 94.5 936 321 866 145 846 12.6 903 183 853 164 813 18.9 790 -81.9 4044 15.5
18/6/02 14 109 791 -75.6 823 69.3 861 101 943 365 869 164 848 25.2 907 208 856 183 812 12.6 788 -94.5 4119 16.2
1/07/2002 11 122 787 -101 818 37.8 858 81.9 939 340 866 145 845 6.3 904 189 853 164 809 -6.3 785 -113 4183 16.9
15/7/02 13 136 786 -107 820 50.4 857 75.6 948 397 866 145 845 6.3 905 195 855 176 809 -6.3 785 -113 4249 17.5
15/8/02 14 166 789 -88.2 829 107 864 120 955 441 871 176 850 37.8 913 246 863 227 814 25.2 787 -101 4347 18.5
18/9/02 15 200 795 -50.4 840 176 873 176 967 517 882 246 855 69.3 925 321 878 321 825 94.5 797 -37.8 4417 19.2
30/10/02 20 242 800 -18.9 845 208 878 208 974 561 889 290 861 107 931 359 881 340 828 113 799 -25.2 4538 20.4
13/12/02 21 286 810 44.1 855 271 886 258 985 630 898 347 869 158 939 410 890 397 837 170 806 18.9 4650 21.6
28/1/03 23 332 816 81.9 860 302 891 290 990 662 903 378 875 195 944 441 895 428 842 202 810 44.1 4677 21.8
31/3/03 22 394 815 75.6 860 302 890 284 990 662 902 372 873 183 943 435 894 422 841 195 808 31.5 4688 21.9
373
Slab 3-a ( 4N12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection (mm)
15/3/02 21 14 798 800 800 797 798 799 800 797 796 797 2216 0
15/3/02 21 14 830 885 922 924 936 983 889 895 937 810 3288 10.7
16/3/02 21 15 842 75.6 892 44.1 931 56.7 930 37.8 945 56.7 994 69.3 895 37.8 903 50.4 948 69.3 814 25.2 3515 13
17/3/02 21 16 849 120 899 88.2 937 94.5 936 75.6 954 113 1004 132 898 56.7 910 94.5 960 145 818 50.4 3614 14
18/3/02 21 17 852 139 903 113 942 126 940 101 957 132 1010 170 902 81.9 914 119.7 968 195 822 75.6 3662 14.5
19/3/02 24 18 855 158 905 126 945 145 943 120 959 145 1013 189 905 100.8 917 138.6 972 221 824 88.2 3690 14.7
20/3/02 23 19 857 170 907 139 948 164 946 139 962 164 1016 208 907 113.4 919 151.2 974 233 826 101 3740 15.2
21/3/02 23 20 859 183 910 158 951 183 948 151 965 183 1019 227 909 126 922 170.1 978 258 828 113 3788 15.7
22/3/02 22 21 858 176 909 151 950 176 945 132 963 170 1020 233 905 100.8 919 151.2 975 239 824 88.2 3861 16.5
23/3/02 22 22 860 189 909 151 950 176 945 132 963 170 1023 252 904 94.5 919 151.2 975 239 823 81.9 3904 16.9
25/3/02 21 24 861 195 910 158 951 183 945 132 964 176 1024 258 904 94.5 919 151.2 984 296 823 81.9 3980 17.6
26/3/02 23 25 865 221 913 176 955 208 948 151 967 195 1027 277 906 107.1 923 176.4 987 315 827 107 3984 17.7
28/3/02 23 27 864 214 913 176 954 202 949 158 966 189 1027 277 907 113.4 925 189 989 328 828 113 4005 17.9
31/3/02 21 29 862 202 910 158 953 195 947 145 965 183 1027 277 904 94.5 924 182.7 998 384 826 101 4090 18.7
2/04/2002 21 32 862 202 910 158 955 208 947 145 967 195 1031 302 903 88.2 925 189 1006 435 826 101 4140 19.2
4/04/2002 21 34 863 208 910 158 956 214 947 145 968 202 1032 309 902 81.9 925 189 1007 441 826 101 4186 19.7
7/04/2002 20 37 864 214 911 164 956 214 948 151 968 202 1034 321 901 75.6 926 195.3 1010 460 826 101 4252 20.4
9/04/2002 20 39 865 221 911 164 956 214 948 151 968 202 1034 321 901 75.6 926 195.3 1011 466 826 101 4271 20.6
12/04/2002 22 42 869 246 915 189 961 246 952 176 972 227 1038 347 905 100.8 930 220.5 1013 479 829 120 4281 20.7
15/4/02 21 45 869 246 915 189 961 246 952 176 972 227 1038 347 905 100.8 930 220.5 1013 479 828 113 4314 21
18/4/02 20 48 868 239 915 189 961 246 952 176 972 227 1037 340 905 100.8 930 220.5 1012 473 827 107 4313 21
23/4/02 21 53 865 221 912 170 958 227 948 151 970 214 1035 328 902 81.9 928 207.9 1011 466 825 94.5 4376 21.6
1/05/2002 18 61 862 202 909 151 956 214 945 132 967 195 1033 315 899 63 926 195.3 1009 454 822 75.6 4470 22.5
374
8/05/2002 19 68 862 202 908 145 956 214 945 132 966 189 1033 315 898 56.7 926 195.3 1011 466 821 69.3 4507 22.9
16/5/02 17 76 861 195 907 139 956 214 944 126 965 183 1033 315 897 50.4 925 189 1010 460 820 63 4531 23.2
27/5/02 15 87 859 183 905 126 954 202 941 107 962 164 1031 302 895 37.8 923 176.4 1010 460 817 44.1 4631 24.2
5/06/2002 15 96 859 183 904 120 954 202 941 107 962 164 1031 302 894 31.5 923 176.4 1011 466 816 37.8 4630 24.1
18/6/02 14 109 861 195 906 132 958 227 943 120 965 183 1037 340 894 31.5 926 195.3 1024 548 817 44.1 4724 25.1
1/07/2002 11 122 858 176 903 113 956 214 940 101 962 164 1034 321 891 12.6 922 170.1 1022 536 813 18.9 4790 25.7
15/7/02 13 136 865 221 904 120 957 221 940 101 962 164 1036 334 890 6.3 921 163.8 1030 586 813 18.9 4867 26.5
15/8/02 14 166 871 258 911 164 965 271 948 151 969 208 1046 397 890 6.3 928 207.9 1041 655 817 44.1 4978 27.6
18/9/02 15 200 881 321 921 227 975 334 950 164 975 246 1050 422 895 37.8 934 245.7 1055 743 825 94.5 5003 27.9
30/10/02 20 242 887 359 926 258 982 378 959 221 984 302 1060 485 904 94.5 942 296.1 1062 788 832 139 5094 28.8
13/12/02 21 286 896 416 935 315 991 435 970 290 993 359 1071 554 912 144.9 952 359.1 1072 851 841 195 5128 29.1
28/1/03 23 332 903 460 941 353 1000 491 978 340 1000 403 1079 605 918 182.7 959 403.2 1079 895 847 233 5171 29.6
31/3/03 22 394 902 454 940 347 998 479 977 334 999 397 1077 592 915 163.8 957 390.6 1078 888 845 221 5191 29.8
Slab 3-b ( 4N12 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deflection
15/3/02 21 14 799 798 803 800 798 797 767 793 790 791 2141 0
15/3/02 21 14 815 824 849 878 841 878 850 870 825 805 2645 5.04
16/3/02 21 15 817 12.6 829 31.5 852 18.9 887 56.7 847 37.8 884 37.8 856 37.8 876 37.8 830 31.5 808 18.9 2839 6.98
17/3/02 21 16 820 31.5 833 56.7 856 44.1 896 113 851 63 892 88.2 862 75.6 884 88.2 836 69.3 810 31.5 2921 7.8
18/3/02 21 17 823 50.4 837 81.9 860 69.3 901 145 854 81.9 897 120 868 113 889 120 838 81.9 812 44.1 2959 8.18
375
19/3/02 24 18 826 69.3 840 101 864 94.5 904 164 856 94.5 900 139 871 132 892 139 841 100.8 813 50.4 2983 8.42
20/3/02 23 19 827 75.6 842 113 866 107 907 183 858 107 903 158 873 145 895 158 843 113.4 814 56.7 3021 8.8
21/3/02 23 20 829 88.2 844 126 868 120 910 202 860 120 905 170 875 158 897 170 845 126 814 56.7 3064 9.23
22/3/02 22 21 827 75.6 841 107 865 101 910 202 854 81.9 904 164 874 151 896 164 845 126 808 18.9 3128 9.87
23/3/02 22 22 826 69.3 840 101 864 94.5 914 227 852 69.3 903 158 876 164 900 189 846 132.3 806 6.3 3164 10.23
25/3/02 21 24 827 75.6 841 107 865 101 916 239 850 56.7 904 164 878 176 902 202 847 138.6 806 6.3 3228 10.87
26/3/02 23 25 830 94.5 844 126 867 113 919 258 853 75.6 909 195 880 189 905 221 852 170.1 808 18.9 3230 10.89
28/3/02 23 27 829 88.2 844 126 867 113 917 246 853 75.6 908 189 880 189 904 214 852 170.1 806 6.3 3244 11.03
31/3/02 21 29 827 75.6 842 113 865 101 914 227 848 44.1 905 170 878 176 903 208 850 157.5 801 -25.2 3312 11.71
2/04/2002 21 32 826 69.3 841 107 865 101 916 239 846 31.5 907 183 879 183 905 221 851 163.8 798 -44.1 3355 12.14
4/04/2002 21 34 826 69.3 841 107 865 101 918 252 845 25.2 908 189 879 183 906 227 852 170.1 796 -56.7 3394 12.53
7/04/2002 20 37 826 69.3 841 107 864 94.5 919 258 845 25.2 908 189 879 183 906 227 852 170.1 795 -63 3452 13.11
9/04/2002 20 39 826 69.3 841 107 864 94.5 919 258 845 25.2 908 189 880 189 906 227 852 170.1 795 -63 3468 13.27
12/04/2002 22 42 828 81.9 843 120 867 113 921 271 847 37.8 911 208 883 208 908 239 854 182.7 797 -50.4 3473 13.32
15/4/02 21 45 828 81.9 843 120 867 113 921 271 847 37.8 911 208 883 208 909 246 854 182.7 797 -50.4 3499 13.58
18/4/02 20 48 825 63 841 107 864 94.5 918 252 845 25.2 909 195 880 189 906 227 852 170.1 795 -63 3500 13.59
23/4/02 21 53 823 50.4 839 94.5 863 88.2 916 239 842 6.3 907 183 878 176 904 214 849 151.2 793 -75.6 3553 14.12
1/05/2002 18 61 820 31.5 836 75.6 860 69.3 915 233 839 -13 906 176 877 170 903 208 847 138.6 788 -107 3633 14.92
8/05/2002 19 68 819 25.2 835 69.3 860 69.3 915 233 838 -19 906 176 876 164 903 208 847 138.6 785 -126 3663 15.22
16/5/02 17 76 817 12.6 834 63 859 63 914 227 838 -19 905 170 875 158 903 208 845 126 784 -132 3679 15.38
27/5/02 15 87 815 0 832 50.4 857 50.4 912 214 835 -38 903 158 873 145 902 202 843 113.4 780 -158 3760 16.19
5/06/2002 15 96 814 -6.3 832 50.4 856 44.1 911 208 834 -44 903 158 873 145 902 202 843 113.4 779 -164 3761 16.2
18/6/02 14 109 814 -6.3 832 50.4 856 44.1 915 233 833 -50 906 176 877 170 907 233 846 132.3 777 -176 3847 17.06
1/07/2002 11 122 810 -32 828 25.2 853 25.2 911 208 829 -76 903 158 874 151 904 214 844 119.7 773 -202 3905 17.64
15/7/02 13 136 810 -32 828 25.2 852 18.9 915 233 829 -76 904 164 875 158 907 233 845 126 773 -202 3971 18.3
15/8/02 14 166 815 0 834 63 859 63 923 284 833 -50 910 202 883 208 915 284 853 176.4 775 -189 4071 19.3
18/9/02 15 200 821 37.8 844 126 868 120 933 347 839 -13 923 284 891 258 925 347 863 239.4 779 -164 4147 20.06
30/10/02 20 242 828 81.9 852 176 876 170 940 391 846 31.5 931 334 900 315 934 403 871 289.8 785 -126 4265 21.24
13/12/02 21 286 837 139 861 233 885 227 950 454 855 88.2 940 391 909 372 944 466 880 346.5 794 -69.3 4335 21.94
28/1/03 23 332 842 170 867 271 890 258 955 485 860 120 946 428 915 410 950 504 886 384.3 798 -44.1 4385 22.44
31/3/03 22 394 840 158 865 258 889 252 953 473 859 113 944 416 914 403 949 498 885 378 795 -63 4431 22.9
376
Figure AIII.65 Creep strain and creep coefficient for concrete (Long-term Flexural Test)
Shirinkage ( cylinders ) Creep ( under 5 MPa )
Flexural Cracking cylinder # 1 cylinder # 2 cylinder # 1 cylinder # 2
(long-term) 1 2 3 4 shrinkage strain 1 2 3 4 total strain
Date Temp Age Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain avge. 1 & 2) Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain avge. 1& 2
15/3/02 21 14 783 784 781 780 instant. strain creep strain creep coeficient
15/3/02 21 14 772 777 776 779 0 740 745 258.3 731 738 289.8 274.05 0 0.000
16/3/02 21 15 772 777 0 777 780 -6.3 -3.15 741 746 252 732 739 283.5 267.75 -3.15 -0.011
17/3/02 21 16 771 776 6.3 776 779 0 3.15 733 739 299.3 723 733 330.8 315 37.8 0.138
18/3/02 24 17 767 773 28.35 773 775 22.05 25.2 727 735 330.8 719 729 356 343.35 44.1 0.161
19/3/02 24 18 765 771 40.95 771 773 34.65 37.8 724 731 352.8 716 727 371.7 362.25 50.4 0.184
20/3/02 23 19 762 769 56.7 769 771 47.25 51.975 721 728 371.7 713 725 387.5 379.575 53.55 0.195
21/3/02 23 20 760 767 69.3 767 769 59.85 64.575 716 723 403.2 708 720 419 411.075 72.45 0.264
22/3/02 22 21 756 764 91.35 764 766 78.75 85.05 709 715 450.5 700 713 466.2 458.325 99.225 0.362
23/3/02 22 22 752 761 113.4 761 762 100.8 107.1 702 710 488.3 693 706 510.3 499.275 118.125 0.431
25/3/02 21 24 745 754 157.5 754 755 144.9 151.2 694 702 538.7 686 699 554.4 546.525 121.275 0.443
26/3/02 23 25 744 753 163.8 753 754 151.2 157.5 691 700 554.4 684 697 567 560.7 129.15 0.471
28/3/02 23 27 742 751 176.4 751 752 163.8 170.1 689 697 570.2 681 695 582.8 576.45 132.3 0.483
31/3/02 21 29 735 745 217.35 745 745 204.8 211.05 678 685 642.6 670 684 652.1 647.325 162.225 0.592
04/02/02 21 32 729 738 258.3 738 739 245.7 252 670 675 699.3 659 674 718.2 708.75 182.7 0.667
04/04/02 21 34 725 734 283.5 734 734 274.1 278.775 663 669 740.3 652 668 759.2 749.7 196.875 0.718
04/07/02 20 37 720 730 311.85 729 729 305.6 308.7 656 661 787.5 644 661 806.4 796.95 214.2 0.782
04/09/02 20 39 719 729 318.15 728 728 311.9 315 653 659 803.3 641 659 822.2 812.7 223.65 0.816
04/12/02 22 42 719 729 318.15 728 728 311.9 315 652 658 809.6 640 659 825.3 817.425 228.375 0.833
15/4/02 21 45 718 728 324.45 727 727 318.2 321.3 651 657 815.9 639 658 831.6 823.725 228.375 0.833
18/4/02 20 48 716 726 337.05 725 725 330.8 333.9 648 654 834.8 636 654 853.7 844.2 236.25 0.862
23/4/02 21 53 712 722 362.25 722 722 349.7 355.95 642 648 872.6 630 648 891.5 882 252 0.920
05/01/02 18 61 703 712 422.1 712 713 409.5 415.8 630 637 945 615 637 973.4 959.175 269.325 0.983
05/08/02 19 68 697 705 463.05 705 705 456.8 459.9 620 626 1011 605 627 1036 1023.75 289.8 1.057
16/5/02 17 76 693 701 488.25 701 701 482 485.1 615 620 1046 598 621 1077 1061.55 302.4 1.103
27/5/02 15 87 688 696 519.75 696 696 513.5 516.6 608 613 1090 591 616 1115 1102.5 311.85 1.138
06/05/02 15 96 686 694 532.35 694 694 526.1 529.2 606 610 1106 588 614 1131 1118.25 315 1.149
18/6/02 14 109 677 685 589.05 686 686 576.5 582.75 597 602 1159 578 606 1188 1173.375 316.575 1.155
07/01/02 11 122 666 675 655.2 676 675 642.6 648.9 583 586 1254 564 592 1276 1264.725 341.775 1.247
15/7/02 13 136 660 669 693 670 669 680.4 686.7 576 577 1304 555 585 1326 1315.125 354.375 1.293
15/8/02 14 166 655 663 727.65 665 664 711.9 719.775 567 569 1358 546 577 1380 1368.675 374.85 1.368
18/9/02 15 200 652 661 743.4 662 661 730.8 737.1 563 565 1383 542 573 1405 1393.875 382.725 1.397
30/10/02 20 242 650 659 756 660 658 746.6 751.275 557 558 1424 534 566 1452 1437.975 412.65 1.506
13/12/02 21 286 645 653 790.65 655 653 778.1 784.35 549 550 1474 526 558 1503 1488.375 429.975 1.569
28/1/03 23 332 641 648 819 651 650 800.1 809.55 542 543 1518 518 551 1550 1534.05 450.45 1.644
31/3/03 22 394 639 646 831.6 649 647 815.9 823.725 536 538 1553 513 546 1581 1567.125 469.35 1.713
377
Table AIII.66 Shrinkage strain for unreinforced companion specimens (Long-term Flexural Test)
Shrinkage ( unreinforced concrete blocks )
specimen # 1 specimen # 2
Flexural Cracking (long-term) 1 2 3 4
Date Temp Age Reading Reading Strain Reading Reading Strain Avarage of 1 & 2
15/3/02 21 14 787 782 781 781
16/3/02 21 15 788 783 -6.3 782 782 -6.3 -6.3
17/3/02 21 16 785 780 12.6 778 779 15.75 14.175
18/3/02 24 17 781 776 37.8 774 775 40.95 39.375
19/3/02 24 18 779 774 50.4 772 773 53.55 51.975
20/3/02 23 19 777 772 63 770 771 66.15 64.575
21/3/02 23 20 775 770 75.6 768 769 78.75 77.175
22/3/02 22 21 771 764 107.1 763 764 110.25 108.675
23/3/02 22 22 768 761 126 760 760 132.3 129.15
25/3/02 21 24 763 756 157.5 756 755 160.65 159.075
26/3/02 23 25 762 755 163.8 754 754 170.1 166.95
28/3/02 23 27 760 753 176.4 752 752 182.7 179.55
31/3/02 21 29 752 745 226.8 744 745 229.95 228.375
04/02/02 21 32 746 739 264.6 738 739 267.75 266.175
04/04/02 21 34 741 734 296.1 734 735 292.95 294.525
04/07/02 20 37 736 729 327.6 728 729 330.75 329.175
04/09/02 20 39 734 727 340.2 726 727 343.35 341.775
04/12/02 22 42 734 728 337.05 726 727 343.35 340.2
15/4/02 21 45 733 727 343.35 725 726 349.65 346.5
18/4/02 20 48 730 724 362.25 722 722 371.7 366.975
23/4/02 21 53 724 718 400.05 717 716 406.35 403.2
05/01/02 18 61 714 708 463.05 706 706 472.5 467.775
05/08/02 19 68 707 701 507.15 699 699 516.6 511.875
16/5/02 17 76 704 698 526.05 696 696 535.5 530.775
27/5/02 15 87 698 692 563.85 690 690 573.3 568.575
06/05/02 15 96 695 688 585.9 686 687 595.35 590.625
18/6/02 14 109 685 678 648.9 676 676 661.5 655.2
07/01/02 11 122 675 668 711.9 666 666 724.5 718.2
15/7/02 13 136 672 665 730.8 730.8
15/8/02 14 166 667 660 762.3 762.3
18/9/02 15 200 665 659 771.75 771.75
30/10/02 20 242 663 657 784.35 784.35
13/12/02 21 286 660 655 800.1 800.1
28/1/03 23 332 658 652 815.85 815.85
31/03/03 22 394 657 650 825.3 825.3
378
Table AIII.67 Crack history for beam B1-a (Long-term Flexural Test)
B e a m N o. 1 - a
Crack No. B-1 Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No. 4-1 Crack No. 5-1
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 0 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0
22/3/02 21 0 0 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 0
1/04/02 31 0 0 7 0.1778 0 8 0.2032 9 0.2286 4 0.1016
12/04/02 42 0 0 8 0.2032 0 10 0.254 10 0.254 4 0.1016
23/4/02 53 0 0 9 0.2286 0 11 0.2794 11 0.2794 5 0.127
10/05/02 70 0 0 10 0.254 0 11 0.2794 11 0.2794 5 0.127
20/6/02 111 0 0 10 0.254 0 11 0.2794 12 0.3048 5 0.127
22/8/02 173 0 0 10 0.254 0 12 0.3048 13 0.3302 6 0.1524
23/9/02 205 0 0 10 0.254 0 13 0.3302 13 0.3302 6 0.1524
16/12/02 289 0 0 10 0.254 0 13 0.3302 13 0.3302 6 0.1524
30/1/03 334 3 0.0762 5 0.127 11 0.2794 5 0.127 14 0.3556 14 0.3556 6 0.1524
31/3/03 394 3 0.0762 5 0.127 11 0.2794 5 0.127 14 0.3556 14 0.3556 6 0.1524
Distane from C.L.(mm) 1354 1101 840 714 557 390 210
B e a m N o. 1 - a
16/03/02 15 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0
22/3/02 21 6 0.1524 8 0.2032 7 0.1778 0 7 0.1778 5 0.127 0
1/04/02 31 8 0.2032 10 0.254 9 0.2286 0 8 0.2032 7 0.1778 0
12/04/02 42 10 0.254 11 0.2794 10 0.254 0 10 0.254 8 0.2032 0
23/4/02 53 10 0.254 12 0.3048 10 0.254 0 10 0.254 9 0.2286 0
10/05/02 70 10 0.254 12 0.3048 10 0.254 0 10 0.254 9 0.2286 0
20/6/02 111 10 0.254 13 0.3302 10 0.254 0 10 0.254 9 0.2286 0
22/8/02 173 11 0.2794 14 0.3556 11 0.2794 0 11 0.2794 9 0.2286 0
23/9/02 205 11 0.2794 15 0.381 11 0.2794 0 11 0.2794 10 0.254 5 0.127
16/12/02 289 11 0.2794 15 0.381 12 0.3048 2 0.0508 12 0.3048 11 0.2794 5 0.127
30/1/03 334 11 0.2794 15 0.381 12 0.3048 4 0.1016 12 0.3048 11 0.2794 6 0.1524
31/3/03 394 11 0.2794 15 0.381 12 0.3048 4 0.1016 12 0.3048 11 0.2794 6 0.1524
379
Table AIII.68 Crack history for beam B1-b (Long-term Flexural Test)
B e a m N o. 1 - b
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0
22/3/02 21 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0
1/04/02 31 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0
12/04/02 42 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0
23/4/02 53 0 0 0 0 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0
10/05/02 70 0 0 0 0 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0
20/6/02 111 0 0 0 0 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 0
22/8/02 173 0 0 0 0 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 0
23/9/02 205 0 0 0 5 0.127 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 3 0.0762
16/12/02 289 0 0 0 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016
30/1/03 334 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016
31/3/03 394 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016
B e a m N o. 1 - b
Crack No. 6-1 Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 8-1 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 10-1 Crack No. A-10
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 0 0 0
22/3/02 21 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 0
12/04/02 42 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 0 0
23/4/02 53 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 0 0
10/05/02 70 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0 0
20/6/02 111 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0 0
22/8/02 173 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0 0
23/9/02 205 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 0 0
16/12/02 289 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 0 0
30/1/03 334 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 2 0.0508 1 0.0254
31/3/03 394 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 2 0.0508 1 0.0254
Distane from C.L.(mm) 177 325 541 786 1016 1271
380
B e a m N o. 2 - a
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 0 2 0.0508 0 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762
22/03/02 21 0 0 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016
1/04/02 31 0 0 3 0.0762 0 5 0.127 0 8 0.2032 3 0.0762 4 0.1016
12/04/02 42 0 0 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 0 10 0.254 3 0.0762 4 0.1016
23/4/02 53 0 0 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 0 10 0.254 3 0.0762 5 0.127
10/05/02 70 0 0 4 0.1016 0 6 0.1524 0 11 0.2794 3 0.0762 5 0.127
20/6/02 111 0 0 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 0 11 0.2794 3 0.0762 5 0.127
22/8/02 173 0 0 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 0 12 0.3048 4 0.1016 5 0.127
23/9/02 205 0 0 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 14 0.3556 4 0.1016 6 0.1524
16/12/02 289 0 0 5 0.127 0 7 0.1778 2 0.0508 14 0.3556 4 0.1016 6 0.1524
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 5 0.127 1 0.0254 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 14 0.3556 4 0.1016 6 0.1524
31/3/03 394 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 5 0.127 1 0.0254 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 14 0.3556 4 0.1016 6 0.1524
B e a m N o. 2 - a
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0
22/03/02 21 0 5 0.127 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 5 0.127 0
1/04/02 31 0 8 0.2032 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 6 0.1524 2 0.0508
12/04/02 42 0 9 0.2286 5 0.127 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 2 0.0508
23/4/02 53 0 9 0.2286 6 0.1524 5 0.127 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 3 0.0762
10/05/02 70 0 10 0.254 6 0.1524 5 0.127 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 7 0.1778 3 0.0762
20/6/02 111 0 10 0.254 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016 8 0.2032 7 0.1778 3 0.0762
22/8/02 173 0 11 0.2794 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 8 0.2032 7 0.1778 3 0.0762
23/9/02 205 1 0.0254 11 0.2794 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 5 0.127 8 0.2032 8 0.2032 5 0.127
16/12/02 289 2 0.0508 12 0.3048 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 5 0.127 9 0.2286 9 0.2286 5 0.127
30/1/03 334 2 0.0508 12 0.3048 10 0.254 6 0.1524 5 0.127 9 0.2286 10 0.254 5 0.127
31/3/03 394 2 0.0508 12 0.3048 10 0.254 6 0.1524 5 0.127 9 0.2286 10 0.254 5 0.127
381
B e a m N o. 2 - b
Crack No. 1-1 Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No. 3-3 Crack No.4-1 Crack No. 4-2
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22/3/02 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12/04/02 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23/4/02 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/05/02 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20/6/02 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22/8/02 173 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23/9/02 205 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0
16/12/02 289 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 4 0.1016 1 0.0254
31/3/03 394 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 4 0.1016 1 0.0254
B e a m N o. 2 - b
8-1 Crack No. 9-1
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 2 0.0508 0 0 2 0.0508 0
22/3/02 21 0 3 0.0762 0 0 3 0.0762 0
1/04/02 31 0 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0
12/04/02 42 0 5 0.127 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0
23/4/02 53 0 5 0.127 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0
10/05/02 70 0 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0
20/6/02 111 0 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0
22/8/02 173 0 6 0.1524 0 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 0
23/9/02 205 0 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 2 0.0508
16/12/02 289 0 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 2 0.0508
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 5 0.127 7 0.1778 3 0.0762
31/3/03 394 1 0.0254 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 5 0.127 7 0.1778 3 0.0762
Distane from C.L.(mm) 170 79 202 346 566 824
382
B e a m N o. 3 - a
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 1 0.0254 0 3 0.0762
22/03/02 21 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016
1/04/02 31 0 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 0 7 0.1778
12/04/02 42 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0 9 0.2286
23/4/02 53 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0 10 0.254
10/05/02 70 0 2 0.0508 5 0.127 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 2 0.0508 5 0.127 0 10 0.254
20/6/02 111 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 11 0.2794
22/8/02 173 0 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 11 0.2794
23/9/02 205 0 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 5 0.127 7 0.1778 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 0 11 0.2794
16/12/02 289 0 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 8 0.2032 10 0.254 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 11 0.2794
30/1/03 334 2 0.0508 5 0.127 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 9 0.2286 10 0.254 5 0.127 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 11 0.2794
31/3/03 394 2 0.0508 5 0.127 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 9 0.2286 10 0.254 5 0.127 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 11 0.2794
B e a m N o. 3 - a
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 0 0 0 0
22/03/02 21 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 0 2 0.0508 0 1 0.0254 0
12/04/02 42 0 2 0.0508 5 0.127 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0 1 0.0254 0
23/4/02 53 0 2 0.0508 5 0.127 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0
10/05/02 70 0 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0
20/6/02 111 0 3 0.0762 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508 0
22/8/02 173 0 3 0.0762 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508 0
23/9/02 205 0 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0
16/12/02 289 0 4 0.1016 9 0.2286 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0
30/1/03 334 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 9 0.2286 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 1 0.0254
31/3/03 394 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 9 0.2286 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 1 0.0254
383
B e a m N o. 3 - b
Crack No. 2-1 Crack No. 3-1 Crack No. 3-2 Crack No. 3-3 Crack No.4-1 Crack No. 4-2 Crack No. 5-1 Crack No. 5-2
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 0
22/3/02 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 0
1/04/02 31 0 1 0.0254 0 0 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0
12/04/02 42 0 2 0.0508 0 0 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 0
23/4/02 53 0 2 0.0508 0 0 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 0
10/05/02 70 0 2 0.0508 0 0 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 0
20/6/02 111 0 2 0.0508 0 0 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 0
22/8/02 173 0 2 0.0508 0 0 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 0
23/9/02 205 0 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 0 5 0.127 0 5 0.127 0
16/12/02 289 0 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 0 5 0.127 0 5 0.127 0
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 5 0.127 1 0.0254 5 0.127 1 0.0254
31/3/03 394 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 5 0.127 1 0.0254 5 0.127 1 0.0254
B e a m N o. 3 - b
16/03/02 15 0 1 0.0254 0 1 0.0254 0 0 0
22/3/02 21 22 0.0508
0.0508 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 3 0.0762 1.5 0.0381 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 0 0 0
12/04/02 42 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 0 0 0
23/4/02 53 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0
10/05/02 70 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 0 0
20/6/02 111 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 0 0
22/8/02 173 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 0 0
23/9/02 205 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 1 0.0254 0
16/12/02 289 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508 0
30/1/03 334 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 5 0.127 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
31/3/03 394 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 5 0.127 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
384
Table AIII.73 Crack history for slab S1-a (Long-term Flexural Test)
S l a b N o. 1 - a
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0
22/03/02 21 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 1 0.0254
1/04/02 31 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 5 0.127 2 0.0508
12/04/02 42 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 2 0.0508
23/4/02 53 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 3 0.0762
10/05/02 70 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 3 0.0762
20/6/02 111 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 6 0.1524 3 0.0762
22/8/02 173 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016
23/9/02 205 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 0 5 0.127 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016
16/12/02 289 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016
30/1/03 334 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 5 0.127 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 8 0.2032 5 0.127
31/3/03 394 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 5 0.127 4 0.1016 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 8 0.2032 5 0.127
S l a b N o. 1 - a
16/03/02 15 42 0.0508
0.1016 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 0 0 0 0
22/03/02 21 43 0.1016
0.0762 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0
1/04/02 31 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0
12/04/02 42 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0
23/4/02 53 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2.5 0.0635 0
10/05/02 70 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2.5 0.0635 0
20/6/02 111 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0
22/8/02 173 6 0.1524 0 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0
23/9/02 205 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
16/12/02 289 7 0.1778 2 0.0508 5 0.127 5 0.127 8 0.2032 5 0.127 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
30/1/03 334 7 0.1778 2 0.0508 5 0.127 5 0.127 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
31/3/03 394 8 0.2032 2 0.0508 5 0.127 5 0.127 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
385
Table AIII.74 Crack history for slab S1-b (Long-term Flexural Test)
S l a b N o. 1 - b
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 2 0.0508 0 2 0.0508
22/03/02 21 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762
1/04/02 31 0 0 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 0 0 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 3 0.0762
12/04/02 42 0 0 0 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 0 0 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 3 0.0762
23/4/02 53 0 0 0 1.5 0.0381 3 0.0762 0 0 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 4 0.1016
10/05/02 70 0 0 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 0 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 4 0.1016
20/6/02 111 0 0 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 0 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 4 0.1016
22/8/02 173 0 0 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0 0 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 5 0.127
23/9/02 205 0 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127
16/12/02 289 0 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 5 0.127 3 0.0762 6 0.1524
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 1 0.0254 5 0.127 3 0.0762 6 0.1524
31/3/03 394 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 1 0.0254 5 0.127 3 0.0762 6 0.1524
S l a b N o. 1 - b
16/03/02 15 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0 0 0 0
22/03/02 21 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 2 0.0508 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0 0
12/04/02 42 4 0.1016 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0 0
23/4/02 53 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0 0
10/05/02 70 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 1.5 0.0381 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0 0
20/6/02 111 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508 2.5 0.0635 1 0.0254 0 0
22/8/02 173 5 0.127 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 0 0
23/9/02 205 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 0 0
16/12/02 289 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 0 0
30/1/03 334 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254
31/3/03 394 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254
386
S l a b N o. 2 - a
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 5 0.127
22/03/02 21 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 5 0.127
1/04/02 31 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524
12/04/02 42 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524
23/4/02 53 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 0 7 0.1778
10/05/02 70 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 0 7 0.1778
20/6/02 111 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 8 0.2032
22/8/02 173 0 5 0.127 5 0.127 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 8 0.2032
23/9/02 205 2 0.0508 5 0.127 5 0.127 2 0.0508 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 7 0.1778 0 8 0.2032
16/12/02 289 3 0.0762 5 0.127 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 5 0.127 7 0.1778 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 7 0.1778 0 9 0.2286
30/1/03 334 3 0.0762 5 0.127 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 5 0.127 7 0.1778 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 5 0.127 7 0.1778 2 0.0508 9 0.2286
31/3/03 394 3 0.0762 5 0.127 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 5 0.127 7 0.1778 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 5 0.127 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 9 0.2286
S l a b N o. 2 - a
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0
22/03/02 21 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0
1/04/02 31 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508
12/04/02 42 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508
23/4/02 53 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508
10/05/02 70 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508
20/6/02 111 0 5 0.127 5 0.127 0 7 0.1778 7 0.1778 5 0.127 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762
22/8/02 173 0 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 7 0.1778 7 0.1778 5 0.127 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762
23/9/02 205 0 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 7 0.1778 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 3 0.0762
16/12/02 289 0 5 0.127 6 0.1524 0 8 0.2032 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 4 0.1016
30/1/03 334 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 8 0.2032 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016
31/3/03 394 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 8 0.2032 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016
387
S l a b N o. 2 - b
Date Age Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm) Reading W (mm)
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 0 0
22/03/02 21 0 0 0 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508
1/04/02 31 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508
12/04/02 42 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508
23/4/02 53 0 0 0 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016 0 2 0.0508
10/05/02 70 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 5 0.127 0 2 0.0508
20/6/02 111 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 5 0.127 0 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762
22/8/02 173 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 0 5 0.127 0 3 0.0762
23/9/02 205 0 0 0 0 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 1 0.0254 6 0.1524 0 3 0.0762
16/12/02 289 0 0 0 0 5 0.127 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 0 3 0.0762
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 1 0.0254 3 0.0762
31/3/03 394 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 1 0.0254 3 0.0762
S l a b N o. 2 - b
16/03/02 15 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 0 0
22/03/02 21 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 0 0 0
12/04/02 42 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 0 0 0
23/4/02 53 5 0.127 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 0 0
10/05/02 70 5 0.127 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0 0 0
20/6/02 111 5 0.127 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 0 5 0.127 3 0.0762 0 0 0
22/8/02 173 6 0.1524 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 0 5 0.127 4 0.1016 0 0 0
23/9/02 205 6 0.1524 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 1 0.0254 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 0 0
16/12/02 289 6 0.1524 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0
30/1/03 334 7 0.1778 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508
31/3/03 394 7 0.1778 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 2 0.0508
388
S l a b N o. 3 - a
16/03/02 15 0 0 2 0.0508 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0
22/03/02 21 0 0 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 0
1/04/02 31 0 0 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 2 0.0508
12/04/02 42 0 0 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 2 0.0508
23/4/02 53 0 0 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 5 0.127 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 2 0.0508
10/05/02 70 0 0 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 3 0.0762
20/6/02 111 0 0 5 0.127 0 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 8 0.2032 3 0.0762
22/8/02 173 3 0.0762 0 6 0.1524 0 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 5 0.127 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 8 0.2032 3 0.0762
23/9/02 205 3 0.0762 0 6 0.1524 0 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 9 0.2286 4 0.1016
16/12/02 289 3 0.0762 0 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 7 0.1778 7 0.1778 9 0.2286 4 0.1016
30/1/03 334 4 0.1016 1 0.0254 7 0.1778 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 7 0.1778 8 0.2032 10 0.254 4 0.1016
31/3/03 394 4 0.1016 1 0.0254 7 0.1778 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 7 0.1778 8 0.2032 10 0.254 4 0.1016
S l a b N o. 3 - a
16/03/02 15 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0
22/03/02 21 4 0.1016 0 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 1 0.0254 0
12/04/02 42 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0
23/4/02 53 5 0.127 3 0.0762 5 0.127 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0
10/05/02 70 5 0.127 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0
20/6/02 111 5 0.127 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 2 0.0508 0
22/8/02 173 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 0 3 0.0762 0
23/9/02 205 6 0.1524 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 5 0.127 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 0
16/12/02 289 6 0.1524 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016 0 3 0.0762 0
30/1/03 334 6 0.1524 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
31/3/03 394 6 0.1524 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 5 0.127 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
389
S l a b N o. 3 - b
16/03/02 15 0 0 0 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
22/03/02 21 0 0 0 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508
1/04/02 31 0 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 3 0.0762
12/04/02 42 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 3 0.0762
23/4/02 53 0 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 4 0.1016
10/05/02 70 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 4 0.1016
20/6/02 111 0 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 5 0.127
22/8/02 173 0 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 6 0.1524 5 0.127 5 0.127
23/9/02 205 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 5 0.127 4 0.1016 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 5 0.127
16/12/02 289 0 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 5 0.127 6 0.1524 7 0.1778 6 0.1524 6 0.1524
30/1/03 334 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 6 0.1524
31/3/03 394 1 0.0254 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 4 0.1016 5 0.127 5 0.127 5 0.127 7 0.1778 8 0.2032 6 0.1524 6 0.1524
S l a b N o. 3 - b
Crack No. 7-1 Crack No. 7-2 Crack No.8-1 Crack No. 8-2 Crack No. 8-3 Crack No. 9-1 Crack No. 9-2 Crack No. 9-3 Crack No. 10-1 Crack No. A-10
16/03/02 15 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0 1 0.0254 0 0 0 0 0 0
22/03/02 21 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 0 1 0.0254 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/04/02 31 3 0.0762 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 0 0 0
12/04/02 42 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 0 0 0
23/4/02 53 4 0.1016 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 2 0.0508 1.5 0.0381 0 0 0
10/05/02 70 5 0.127 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0
20/6/02 111 5 0.127 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0
22/8/02 173 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 2 0.0508 0 0 0
23/9/02 205 6 0.1524 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 0 0
16/12/02 289 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 0 0 0
30/1/03 334 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254
31/3/03 394 7 0.1778 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 4 0.1016 3 0.0762 3 0.0762 2 0.0508 1 0.0254 1 0.0254 1 0.0254
390

Example 3.16 Design of A Cantilever Reta

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Example 3.16 Design of A Cantilever Reta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TIME-DEPENDENT CRACKING AND

CRACK CONTROL IN REINFORCED

Shamsaddin Nejadi BSc., MSc.

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Surname or Family name: Nejadi

First name: Shamsaddin Other name/s: Shami

Abbreviation for degree as given in the University calendar: Ph. D.

School: Civil and Environmental Engineering Faculty: Engineering

Time-dependent Cracking and Crack Control in Reinforced

Abstract 350 words maximum:

Declaration relating to disposition of project report/thesis

…………………………………………………………… ……………………………………..……………… ……….……………………...…….…

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of completion of requirements for Award:

Registrar and Deputy Principal

THIS SHEET IS TO BE GLUED TO THE INSIDE FRONT COVER OF THE THESIS

I wish to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to my supervisor, Professor

CHAPTER 2 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

CHAPTER 3 INTERACTION BETWEEN CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4 RESTRAINED DEFORMATION CRACKING

CHAPTER 6 LONG-TERM FLEXURAL CRACKING

CHAPTER 7 ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR FLEXURAL CRACKING

CHAPTER 8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Appendix I WORKED EXAMPLES

Appendix II GRAPHS OF CONCRETE SURFACE AND STEEL STRAINS

Appendix III EXPERIMENTAL DATA

A, B, I Area, first moment of area, and second moment of area, respectively,

Ae , Be , I e Properties A, B, and I of the fully-cracked age-adjusted transformed section

Ac Cross-sectional area of concrete

Act.b Effective tension area of concrete for each reinforcement bar

Ae Effective tension area of concrete surrounding the flexural tension

Ast cross-sectional area of tensile steel reinforcement

bw Width of section at the level of the tensile reinforcement

D Overall depth of a cross-section

d Depth to the tensile reinforcement

db Nominal diameter of the tensile reinforcing bars

dc Distance from the centre of reinforcement bar to extreme tensile fibre

dn Depth of compressive zone in a fully cracked section

dn.ave Depth of compressive zone in average cracked section

Ec Elastic modulus of concrete

Ee Age-adjusted effective modulus of concrete

Es Elastic modulus of steel

fc Strength of concrete in compression

fc’ Characteristic strength of concrete in compression

fcm Mean compressive strength of concrete

fct Tensile strength of concrete

fctm Mean value of axial tensile strength

fsy Yield stress of steel reinforcement

Hc.ef Effective height of tensile concrete

Icr Second moment of area of the fully-cracked transformed cross-section

Ie Effective moment of inertia after cracking

kave Ratio of (dn.ave /d)

k1 Coefficient depending upon bond quality

k2 Coefficient depending upon the shape of the strain diagram

Mcr Cracking moment

Ms Applied service moment

N Full restraining force

N(∞) Final restraining force

n Modular ratio of the section

nb Number of reinforcing bar (nb ≥ 2)

n* Effective modular ratio (Es /Ee)

n* Age-adjusted modular ratio ( E s / Ee )

srm Average crack spacing