TITLE:
Crack Width Comparison between ACI 318, Eurocode 2 and GB 50010 for Flexural RC Members
AUTHORS:
Guoqiang Liu, Zhiyong Lu
KEYWORDS:
Crack Width, Structure Serviceability, Comparative Analysis
JOURNAL NAME:
Open Journal of Civil Engineering,
Vol.14 No.1,
March
27,
2024
ABSTRACT: Comparative research on different countries’ structural
design codes holds great importance and can gain valuable insights: Awareness of Design Levels,
Identifying Code Deficiencies and Optimizing
Designs. The
crack width of concrete structure is an
important design aspect of the civil design. The four highly recognized and widely used crack width theories are systematically summarized. Based on the mentioned theories and
project practices, American code ACI system, Eurocode 2 1992-1 and
Chinese code GB 50010
have different crack width control requirement and calculation methods. The crack width
control method based on ACI system code has evolved from the Z-factor method to
the steel bar spacing control method which is simple and easy to be adopted for
engineering. Meanwhile, the ACI 224.1R also gives a direct crack width
calculation method consistent with the steel bar spacing control method. The Eurocode 2 and GB 50010
based on the bond-slip & no-slip theory consider much more affecting
factors than ACI for predicting crack width. Taking the crack width calculation
of Tunnel 5 intake as an example, the crack widths of the structure are
calculated according to ACI system
code, Eurocode 2 and GB 50010 respectively, the results show that the crack width results in various codes
are not much different. The EN
1992-1 and GB 50010 results are almost the same which are less than the ACI 224.1Rresults.