YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Structural Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Structural Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Fatigue of Partially Prestressed Concrete

    Source: Journal of Structural Engineering:;1986:;Volume ( 112 ):;issue: 003
    Author:
    Mohsen El Shahawi
    ,
    Barrington deV. Batchelor
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1986)112:3(524)
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: The fatigue behavior of partially prestressed concrete beams is investigated in a series of tests of bonded post‐tensioned T‐beams. The beams are simply supported with the same overall dimensions, and designed for the same flexural strength. The main parameter in the study is the degree of prestress (from 0.2–1.0). Eight beams are tested in fatigue: Five beams are subjected to a constant load cycle, while the remaining three beams are subjected to cumulative fatigue loading. All beams are initially cracked before the application of repeated loading. Rapid changes in cracking, deflections, and nonprestressed steel stress occur in the early stages of fatigue loading, and are followed by a stable period until just prior to failure. Cumulative fatigue loading always results in reduced life of the member. Fatigue failure is caused by successive fracturing of the non‐prestressed reinforcement; and no failure of pretensioned reinforcement is observed. Crack spacing approximately coincides with shear reinforcement spacing which is constant in the tests, indicating that the latter spacing may have some effect on spacing of cracks. Based on the test results, it is concluded that at present there is no justification for the use of complicated expressions to predict maximum crack width, and that the simple expression proposed by the CEB‐FIP Code gives satisfactory predictions. It appears that a degree of prestress between 0.4 and 0.6 is optimum for satisfactory cracking and fatigue response.
    • Download: (715.9Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      Fatigue of Partially Prestressed Concrete

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/29748
    Collections
    • Journal of Structural Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorMohsen El Shahawi
    contributor authorBarrington deV. Batchelor
    date accessioned2017-05-08T20:51:55Z
    date available2017-05-08T20:51:55Z
    date copyrightMarch 1986
    date issued1986
    identifier other%28asce%290733-9445%281986%29112%3A3%28524%29.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/29748
    description abstractThe fatigue behavior of partially prestressed concrete beams is investigated in a series of tests of bonded post‐tensioned T‐beams. The beams are simply supported with the same overall dimensions, and designed for the same flexural strength. The main parameter in the study is the degree of prestress (from 0.2–1.0). Eight beams are tested in fatigue: Five beams are subjected to a constant load cycle, while the remaining three beams are subjected to cumulative fatigue loading. All beams are initially cracked before the application of repeated loading. Rapid changes in cracking, deflections, and nonprestressed steel stress occur in the early stages of fatigue loading, and are followed by a stable period until just prior to failure. Cumulative fatigue loading always results in reduced life of the member. Fatigue failure is caused by successive fracturing of the non‐prestressed reinforcement; and no failure of pretensioned reinforcement is observed. Crack spacing approximately coincides with shear reinforcement spacing which is constant in the tests, indicating that the latter spacing may have some effect on spacing of cracks. Based on the test results, it is concluded that at present there is no justification for the use of complicated expressions to predict maximum crack width, and that the simple expression proposed by the CEB‐FIP Code gives satisfactory predictions. It appears that a degree of prestress between 0.4 and 0.6 is optimum for satisfactory cracking and fatigue response.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleFatigue of Partially Prestressed Concrete
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume112
    journal issue3
    journal titleJournal of Structural Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1986)112:3(524)
    treeJournal of Structural Engineering:;1986:;Volume ( 112 ):;issue: 003
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian