【作者】 叶献国； 章益民； 种迅； 蒋庆； 黄小坤； 刘刚；

【Author】 Ye Xianguo~(1,2),Zhang Yimin~1,Chong Xun~(1,2),Jiang Qing~(1,3),Huang Xiaokun~4,Liu Gang~4 (1 School of Civil Engineering,Hefei University of Technology,Hefei 230009,China; 2 Anhui Provincial Civil Structural and Material Laboratory,Hefei 230009,China; 3 Key Laboratory of Civil Engineering Safety and Durability of China Ministry of Education,Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084,China;4 China Academy of Building Research,Beijing 100013,China)

【机构】 合肥工业大学土木与水利工程学院； 安徽土木工程结构与材料省级实验室； 清华大学土木工程安全与耐久教育部重点实验室； 中国建筑科学研究院；

【摘要】 进行了12根HRBF500级高强钢筋高强混凝土预应力梁抗弯试验,基于名义拉应力法研究了最大裂缝宽度的计算方法,并将该方法计算的最大裂缝宽度与中美欧混凝土规范计算结果进行了比较。结果表明:引入裂缝间距可以提高名义拉应力法计算裂缝宽度的精度,且计算值总体偏于安全,便于结构设计人员使用;EN1992-1-1:2004计算精度最高,美国AC1318-08精度较低,我国规范计算精度处于两者之间。更多还原

【Abstract】 Based on the flexural test of 12 prestressed concrete beams with HRBFS00 reinforcing bars and high-strength concrete,the nominal tensile stress method for the control of short-term maximum crack width is discussed,and the calculation results of this method is compared with the results calculated using the formulas given in Chinese,American and European concrete codes.The results indicate that the precision of nominal tensile stress method could be proved by inducing the effect of average crack spacing,and the calculation results is inclined to be safe;in the case of the 12 specimens,the European concrete codes EN1992-1-1:2004 has the highest calculation precision,and then is the Chinese concrete code GB 50010—2010,and difference between the test and calculation results of the American code ACI318-08 is the largest.更多还原