Ein einheitliches dreiaxiales Bruchkriterium für alle Betone

Die Auswertung zahlreicher mehraxialer Versuche hat ergeben, dass die auftretenden Versagensmechanismen unter mehraxialer Beanspruchung für alle Betonarten prinzipiell gleich sind. Dies gilt sowohl für Normal‐ bis ultrahochfesten Beton, für Leichtbeton als auch für Faserbeton. Das vorgestellte Bruchkriterium orientiert sich an diesen Versagensarten und wird über eine entsprechende Kalibrierung an das Verhalten des jeweiligen Betons angepasst. Im Zuge der Aktualisierung des CEB‐FIP Model Codes 90 wird es Einzug in die Bemessungsvorschriften finden. A Unified Multiaxial Fracture Criterion for all Concretes The evaluation of numerous multiaxial tests has shown that the occurring failure mechanisms under a multiaxial load are basically the same for all types of concrete. This is true for normal to ultra high performance concrete, lightweight concrete, as well as for fibre concrete. The presented fracture criterion is based on these failure types and is adjusted by a corresponding calibration to the behaviour of each concrete. In the course of the upgrade of the CEB‐FIP Model Code 90, it will find entry into the dimensioning specification.     

Thermische Leitfähigkeit von Stahlfaserbeton – eine theoretische Betrachtung

Thermal conductivity of steel fibre reinforced – a theoretical view With respect to fire design of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures the thermal conductivity λ_c is one of the important input variables. In case of an addition of steel fibres, statements are contradictory about how these affect the thermal conductivity, and thus, the fire resistance. Against this background, literature data was sighted and completed by systematically theoretical considerations and an computer‐based evaluation method. On the basis of theoretical considerations for the thermal resistance of concrete, as well as on the numeric model, in general it can be concluded that, for an in practice frequently used fibre dosage of 1 Vol.‐%, the lower and upper curves for the thermal conductivity given in DIN EN 1992‐1‐2:2010 can be applied for normal‐ and high‐strength concretes. However, for other types of concrete which specifically differ from normal‐ and high‐strength concrete in density, kind, size and distribution of pores as well as in physical and chemical water binding capacity separate observations should be made.     

Richtungsanalyse von Fasern in Betonen auf Basis der Computer‐Tomographie

Für die Festbetoneigenschaften von Faserbetonen sind die Fasermenge, Faserorientierung und Faserverteilung ausschlaggebend. Dies macht eine Überwachung dieser Parameter notwendig, sei es zur Qualitätssicherung auf der Baustelle oder im Bereich der Forschung zur Weiterentwicklung solcher Betone. Gegenüber bisher angewendeten Methoden zur Untersuchung dieser Einflussgrößen eröffnet die Computer‐Tomographie die Möglichkeit, für Betone mit Fasern und Gelegen aller Art die Faserorientierung und Faserverteilung im gesamten Volumen eines Probekörpers zu betrachten und zu analysieren. Direction Analysis of Fibres in Concrete on Basis of Computed Tomography Decisive factors for the improvement of the hardened concrete characteristics of fibre reinforced concrete are the fibre‐volumeratio, fibre‐orientation and fibre‐distribution. The application of fibre reinforced concrete mixtures requires an appropriate control of these characteristics in the context of quality control at the building site as well as in research work done to improve this kind of concretes. Compared to the methods used up to now, the computed tomography offers the possibility to examine and analyze fibre‐orientation and fibre‐distribution in the entire volume of a specimen.     

Hinweise für den Ansatz der Betonzugfestigkeit beim Nachweis der Mindestbewehrung für frühen Zwang gemäß Eurocode 2‐2 (DIN EN 1992‐2/NA)

Guideline for the assumption of the effective concrete tensile strength within the minimum reinforcement check due to early cracking according to Eurocode 2‐2 (DIN EN 1992‐2/NA) In December 2015, the A1‐amendment [1] for the German National Annex [2] of DIN EN 1992‐1‐1 was published. The amendment affects among others the assumption of the effective concrete tensile strength within the minimum reinforcement check due to early cracking. The following contribution elucidates the background, why a respective A1‐amendment for DIN EN 1992‐2/NA has not been provided. Furthermore, the main differences between building‐ and bridge constructions are outlined in order to constitute the different approach.