4.7 Article

Concrete fracture considering aggregate grading

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102833

关键词

Aggregate grading; Statistical analysis; Geometrically similar specimens; Fictitious crack growth length; Maximum aggregate size; Water to cement ratio; Coarse aggregate volume

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51779095]
  2. Science Technology Innovation Talents in Universities of Henan Province [20HASTIT013]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An improved fracture model for concrete is proposed in this study, which combines the advantages of size and boundary effect models to determine material parameters while considering aggregate grading. Through quantitative research, a simple method for determining fictitious crack growth length at peak loads is identified. The study shows that independent fracture toughness and tensile strength of concrete can be determined through curve fitting, taking into account factors such as maximum aggregate size, water to cement ratio, and coarse aggregate volume that affect fracture.
Combining the advantages of the size and the boundary effect models, an improved fracture model for determining the material parameters of concrete is proposed in this paper, considering concrete aggregate grading. The simple method for determining the fictitious crack growth length at peak loads of concrete specimens is identified through quantitative research. The independent fracture toughness and tensile strength of concrete can be determined with the maximum value of correlation coefficients in curve fitting, and the effect of maximum aggregate size, water to cement ratio, and coarse aggregate volume on fracture can be fully considered. A total of 300 self-compacting concrete specimens are used for analysis to verify the applicability and feasibility of the proposed model. The full structural fracture failure curves of concrete with upper and lower limits covering the experimental peak loads are established on the basis of the normal distribution methodology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据