• Computers and Concrete
• /
• v.4 no.6
• /
• pp.437-456
• /
• 2007

The shrinkage of large reinforced concrete floors often gives rise to cracking problems. To identify the problematic areas, shrinkage movement analysis is often carried out by finite element method with proper creep and shrinkage models using step-by-step time integration. However as the full stress history prior to the time interval considered is necessary, with the increase in the number of time intervals used, the amount of computations increases dramatically. Therefore a new method using the shrinkage-adjusted elasticity modulus (SAEM) is introduced so that analysis can be carried out using one single step. Examples are presented to demonstrate its usefulness.

• Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.521-529
• /
• 2002

A restraint coefficient for creep and dry shrinkage deformation of concrete in a composite section was derived to calculate the residual stress, and an equation for the loss rate of the pre-compression force was proposed. The derived restraint coefficient was computed by using the transformed section properties for the age-adjusted effective modulus of elasticity. The long-term behavior of complicate composite sections could be analyzed easily with the restraint coefficient. The articles of the current design code was examined for PSC and steel composite sections. The dry shrinkage strains of $150 ~ 200$\times$10^{-6}$ for the computations of the statically indeterminate force and the expansion joint could be under-estimated for less restrained sections such as the reinforced concrete. The dry shrinkage strain of $180$\times$10^{-6}$ for the computation of residual stress in the steel composite section was unreasonably less value. The loss rate of 16.3% of the design code for the PSC composite section in this study was conservative for the long-term deformation of the ACI 205 but could not be used safely for that of the Eurocode 2. For pre-compressed concrete slab in the steel composite section, the loss rate of prestressed force with low strength reinforcement was much larger than that with high strength tendon. The loss rate of concrete pre-compression increased, while that of pre-tension decreased due to the restraint of the steel girder.