Investig Behavior - HEGGER, VOSS - 2008
Investig Behavior - HEGGER, VOSS - 2008
Investig Behavior - HEGGER, VOSS - 2008
www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct
Abstract
At present there is a rising interest of architects and engineers in the application of Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC) as a construction
material. Filigree, self-supporting and ventilated façade systems are state-of-the-art in the application of TRC. In current investigations potentials
for light-weight structural members are developed. The required models for a secure design of structural members are deduced within the
framework of the research activities in the collaborative research centre 532 at RWTH Aachen University [Collaborative Research Centre 532:
Textile Reinforced Concrete – Development of a new technology. RWTH Aachen University, Germany. http://sfb532.rwth-aachen.de]. The article
outlines fundamental research results as well as their realisation in first applications.
c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Textile reinforced concrete; Fabrics; Fibres; AR-glass; Carbon; Load-bearing behaviour
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 241 80 26830; fax: +49 241 80 22335. To describe the significant influences on the bearing
E-mail address: svoss@imb.rwth-aachen.de (S. Voss). behaviour of the composite building material, some textile
Notations
At cross-section area of the textile reinforcement
Fctu tensile strength of the component
ft tensile strength of the fibre material (= f fil )
k1 factor accounting for the bond behaviour
k0,α factor accounting for the fibre orientation
k f l,ρ factor accounting for bending
σmax axial tensile strength of the fibre material in the
composite
σmax,α tensile strength of the fibre material depending on
fibre orientation α
z internal lever arm
ARov cross-section of one roving
Table 1
Characteristics of the textile reinforcement
Name Material Roving titer Binding type Mesh size 0◦ /90◦ Cross-sectional area 0◦ /90◦ f f il E f il εmax
(−) (tex) (−) (mm) (mm2 /m) (MPa) (MPa) (h)
Fabric 1 AR-Glass 2400 Chain 8/8 105/105 1808 70 000 25.8
Fabric 2 Carbon 1600 Chain 8/8 105/105 3912 235 555 16.5
Fabric 3 AR-Glass 1200 Tricot 8/8 52.5/52.5 2018 70 000 28.8
Fabric 4 AR-Glass 1200 Chain 8/8 52.5/52.5 2018 70 000 28.8
Fabric 5a AR-Glass 2400 Chain 8/8 105/105 1808 70 000 25.8
a epoxy-impregnated; f : tensile strength of the filament; E : Young’s modulus of the filament; ε
fil fil max : ultimate strain.
Fig. 3. Geometry (left) and illustration (right) of a tensile specimen test with photogrammetric measurement.
Table 2
Tensile strength and efficiency of the fabrics in tensile tests on the component
Fig. 4. Textile stress–strain curves of the tensile specimen tests. ultimate strengths owing to the tricot binding which produces
wider open and oval roving cross-sections than Fabric 4 with a
complete activation of the entire reinforcement cross-section chain binding.
is impossible due to the inhomogeneous bond properties The comparison between fabrics Fabric 4 and Fabric 1 which
scattering across the roving cross-section. Exemplarily, the feature a different roving cross-sectional area at otherwise
roving can be divided into at least two groups: the outer and the the same properties makes obvious that the average ultimate
inner filaments [6]. The group of the outer filaments consists of strength of the reinforcement rises with a decreasing roving
fibres which are directly and completely bonded to the concrete titer and thus an increasing ratio between surface and cross-
matrix. The inner filaments do not possess direct contact with sectional area. The unimpregnated glass fabrics failed in the
the matrix, their bond properties are determined by friction tensile specimen test by a successive failure of the filaments,
bond between the filaments. the ultimate load is determined by reaching the ultimate
Fig. 4 shows the influence of the textiles stated in Table 1 strength of the outer filaments. The impregnation with epoxy
on the load-deformation behaviour. The calculated average resin increased the bearing capacity of the reinforcement to
ultimate strengths and the deduced efficiencies k1 (the ratio about 1200 MPa, i.e. to the triple bearing capacity of the
between the calculated average ultimate strength of the unimpregnated AR-glass fabric (Fabric 1). However, at a textile
filaments in the tensile specimen test and the tensile strength tensile stress of about 1000 MPa, starting longitudinal crack
of the filament) are compiled in Table 2. formation was observed. These longitudinal cracks ran along
The bearing strength of the reinforcement which can be the reinforcement layer and led to a gradual splitting of the
activated in the composite section depends mainly on the test specimen. Despite of this mechanism the load could
roving geometry and the penetration depth of the matrix in the subsequently be increased further at a growing longitudinal
roving cross-section. Both factors are decisively influenced by crack formation and opening. The failure of the building
the textile binding type. Fabric 3 reaches significantly higher member occurred upon the splitting off of entire parts of the
J. Hegger, S. Voss / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 2050–2056 2053
Fig. 6. Relation of the ultimate strengths in the tensile and flexural test.
Fig. 8. Prototype (left) and detail (right) of the rhombic framework of textile reinforced concrete.
Fig. 9. Design (left) and prototype (right) of the barrel shell made of textile reinforced concrete.