Rechnerische Beurteilung der Schubtragfähigkeit einer Spannbetonbrücke mit geringem Querkraft bewehrungsgrad

Assessment of the shear strength of an existing post‐tensioned concrete bridge with a low amount of shear reinforcement – First application of the ”Flexural Shear Crack“ model in practice In recent years it was reported several times, that within a static assessment according to current standards the shear strength of post‐tensioned bridges, which were built in Austria before 1989, cannot be fulfilled any more. However, test results prove, that especially prestressed structures have additional load bearing capacities, which cannot be reproduced with current calculation models. In the framework of a pilot project a new developed shear model (Flexural Shear Crack Model) was used. In this paper the approach as well as the main results of a statical reevaluation of an existing post‐tensioned road bridge at the Tauern Autobahn A10 will be presented.     

Probabilistische Bemessung von geklebten Anschlüssen im Holzbau

Kleben von tragenden Bauteilen ist im Holzbau auf wenige Anwendungsgebiete beschränkt. Es wird hauptsächlich zur Herstellung von Brettschichtholz oder zur Ertüchtigung bestehender Strukturen eingesetzt. Um Kleben als Alternative zu stiftförmigen mechanischen Verbindungsmitteln einzusetzen, muss die Bemessung geklebter Anschlüsse ermöglicht werden. Holzspezifische Faktoren wie Anisotropie, Streuung der mechanischen Eigenschaften und sprödes Versagen erschweren eine genaue Vorhersage. Aufgrund der auftretenden Spannungsspitzen ist ein deterministischer Spannungsnachweis nicht geeignet. Eine Alternative zur Bestimmung der Tragfähigkeit geklebter Anschlüsse bietet die in diesem Beitrag vorgestellte probabilis tische Methode, die es erlaubt, die Spannungsverteilungen in geklebten Verbindungen mit ihren Spannungsspitzen und die Streuungen der Festigkeitswerte des Werkstoffes zu erfassen. Im Rahmen der vorgestellten Arbeit wurden geklebte Doppel‐Laschenanschlüsse sowohl experimentell als auch numerisch betrachtet, wobei der Einfluss der überlappungslänge, der Klebschichtdicke und des Klebstoff‐E‐Moduls betrachtet wurde. Im Anschluss wurde ein probabilistisches Bemessungsverfahren angewendet und eine gute übereinstimmung zwischen experimentellen und theoretischen Traglasten erreicht. Das Verfahren kann unmittelbar für die Bemessung geklebter Anschlüsse angewandt werden. Probabilistic design of adhesively bonded timber joints. The use of adhesive bonding in structural timber engineering is limited to the production of laminated wood and the toughening of existing structures. To use adhesives as an alternative to mechanical fasteners, an accurate and reliable design method has to be developed. Characteristic material properties of wood such as anisotropy, large scattering of mechanical values and brittle failure complicate the capacity prediction of bonded joints. A deterministic approach is not able to deal with the stress peaks inside the joints. With the probabilistic concept, an alter native solution is presented, which allows for a strength prediction under consideration of the complex stress distributions and the stress peaks in the joint, as well as the scatterings of the mechanical properties of the material. Adhesively bonded double lap joints were investigated both experimentally and numerically under consideration of various parameters such as overlap length, adhesive layer thickness and type of adhesive. The probabilistic design method was applied and good agreement between experimental and theoretical failure loads was obtained. The proposed method has immediate actionable application for the dimensioning of adhesively bonded timber joints.     

Reinforced bending load‐stressed masonry – Suggestions for future designs / Bewehrtes biegedruckbeanspruchtes Mauerwerk – Vorschläge für zukünftige Bemessungen

European standardization bodies are currently working on the amendment to EN 1996‐1‐1, which will also affect the evaluation of reinforced masonry in Germany. For that reason, discussion suggestions are being made here for revisions to lay the groundwork for building materials evaluations and especially, evaluations of bending load‐stressed masonry walls or beams at their serviceability limit state (SLS) for load‐bearing capacities. Information already presented in E DIN 1053‐3:2008‐03 [N3] is being incorporated as well. Characteristic values for the compressive strength of the masonry parallel to the bed joints f_k,∥ are essential for the design of reinforced masonry, although they are currently not included in national application documents for Germany. For the time being, they can be mathematically calculated using conversion factors for the characteristic compressive strength values vertical to the bed joints f_k or by using the declared axial compressive strengths of the masonry units. The ultimate strains for masonry in general should be set consistently at ?_mu = ∣–0.002∣ as several masonry types do not exhibit higher compressive strain values. The use of steel strains higher than ?_su = 0.005 does not change any measurement results. Varying stress‐strain curves of the constitutive equations on masonry under compressive strain (parabolic, parabolic‐rectangular, tension block) lead to differing values of recordable bending moments despite having the same mechanical reinforcement percentage at higher normal forces. Therefore, clear guidelines should be made for the type of applicable constitutive equation for masonry walls under compressive strain. With the introduction of a tension block, the number values of the reduction factors λ for the compression zone height x, which is dependent on limit strains, and where applicable, reduced compressive strength, need to be determined, as with reinforced concrete construction. A modification of the bending moment based on the second order theory according to [N4] is presented for the calculation of reinforced masonry walls in danger of buckling. The use of reduction factors for the load capacity of the masonry cross section, such as for unreinforced masonry, does not appear to be appropriate as buckling safety evidence because here, the design task is the determination of a required reinforcement cross section.