<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Widely used crack width calculation models and allowable crack width limits have changed from time to time and differ from region to region. It can be identified that some crack width calculation models consist with limitations for parameters like cover thickness. The current Norwegian requirement for cover thickness is larger than these limitations. The applicability of existing crack width calculation models and the allowable crack width limits must be verified for structures with large cover thickness. The background of crack width calculation models in Eurocode, Model Code 2010, Japanese code, American code and British code have been examined. By comparing the experimental crack widths with the predictions of the aforementioned models, the existing codes can be identified as requiring modification. Considering the durability aspect, it can be identified a long-term study proving that the allowable crack width can be increased with the increase in cover thickness. When considering the aesthetic aspect, the authors suggest categorizing the structures based on their prestige level and deciding the allowable crack widths accordingly. The paper proposes potential solutions for future research on how to improve both crack width calculation methods and allowable crack width limits to be used effectively in structures with large cover thickness.</p></abstract>

Widely used crack width calculation models and allowable crack width limits have changed from time to time and differ from region to region. It can be identified that some crack width calculation models consist with limitations for parameters like cover thickness. The current Norwegian requirement for cover thickness is larger than these limitations. The applicability of existing crack width calculation models and the allowable crack width limits must be verified for structures with large cover thickness. The background of crack width calculation models in Eurocode, Model Code 2010, Japanese code, American code and British code have been examined. By comparing the experimental crack widths with the predictions of the aforementioned models, the existing codes can be identified as requiring modification. Considering the durability aspect, it can be identified a long-term study proving that the allowable crack width can be increased with the increase in cover thickness. When considering the aesthetic aspect, the authors suggest categorizing the structures based on their prestige level and deciding the allowable crack widths accordingly. The paper proposes potential solutions for future research on how to improve both crack width calculation methods and allowable crack width limits to be used effectively in structures with large cover thickness.

Applicability of Existing Crack Controlling Criteria for Structures with Large Concrete Cover Thickness

Department of Mechanical and Structural Engineering and Material Science

Associate Professor., University of Stavanger

Adjunct Professor., University of Stavanger

Department of IMBM. Manager Concrete Technology

Nordic Concrete Research

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Widely used crack width calculation models and allowable crack width limits have changed from time to time and differ from region to region. It can be...

Applicability of Existing Crack Controlling Criteria for Structures with Large Concrete Cover Thickness

Published Online: Jul 17, 2021

Page range: 69 - 91

Received: Mar 15, 2021

Accepted: Jun 16, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ncr-2021-0002

Keywords
reinforced concrete structures, service load, crack width, durability, aesthetic, concrete cover thickness

© 2021 Chavin Nilanga Naotunna et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Applicability of Existing Crack Controlling Criteria for Structures with Large Concrete Cover Thickness

Published Online: Jul 17, 2021

Page range: 69 - 91

Received: Mar 15, 2021

Accepted: Jun 16, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ncr-2021-0002

Keywordsreinforced concrete structures, service load, crack width, durability, aesthetic, concrete cover thickness

© 2021 Chavin Nilanga Naotunna et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Keywords
reinforced concrete structures, service load, crack width, durability, aesthetic, concrete cover thickness