The invention relates to a point-supported element or flat concrete ceiling with transverse force and punching shear reinforcement and at least one lattice beam.
In the case of a point supported element or flat concrete ceiling known from EP 1 070 800 B1, in each lattice beam of the transverse force and punching shear reinforcement the upper and/or lower bent portions between the diagonal struts project beyond the continuous upper chord and/or the continuous lower chord, also in order to form efficiently acting concrete anchoring zones in the ceiling. The serpentine diagonal strut sections are bent regularly and in each case have a diagonal strut oriented at 90° to the chords and then a diagonal strut inclined by 45° to the chords, such that, in the end region of a lattice beam extending towards the support, the diagonal strut closest to the support produces upper and lower concrete anchoring zones which are spaced equidistantly from the vertical support axis.
The lattice beams known from EP 2 050 887 B1 for transverse force and punching shear reinforcement of element or flat concrete ceilings lack a continuous upper chord. On the other hand, anchoring elements are provided which are located one behind the other in the longitudinal direction of the lattice beam with free intermediate spacings and to which the upper bent portions of the serpentine diagonal strut sections are secured. In one embodiment (
DE 10 2007 047 616 A1 discloses a lattice beam with two lower chords, a continuous upper chord and two serpentine diagonal strut sections, in which in each case a diagonal strut inclined at 90° relative to the chords follows a diagonal strut inclined at 45°. The concrete anchoring zones formed in the region of the securing points of the diagonal strut inclined at 90° lie above one another without any offset in the lattice beam longitudinal direction.
According to German general building approvals, if lattice beams are used as punching shear reinforcements increase factors result of, for example, 1.25 (Approval Z-15.1-38), 1.6 (Approval Z-15.1-289) and 1.7 (Approval Z-15.1-217) relative to slabs or punching shear reinforcement as a function of lattice beam type. These approvals are based on component testing on portions of ceilings. The increase factors identified are lower than with other known traditional reinforcement systems, such as with double-headed bolts.
Tests with lattice beams as punching shear reinforcement are known from Eligehausen et al. (Beton- and Stahlbetonbau 98 [Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Structures 98], (2003), Issue 6). In these tests steep failure cracks starting from the support edge and pointing away from the support arose in the concrete slab, which the perpendicular bars, close to the support, of the lattice beams intersected only in the upper region or passed through above the lattice beam. The concrete pressure zone in the region of the lattice beam lower chords was severely damaged thereby. The efficacy of the punching shear reinforcement was greatly limited thereby.
With lattice beams according to EP 2 050 887 B1, better reinforcement efficacy and higher increase factors can be achieved relative to the punching shear of concrete slabs than with lattice beams according to EP 1 070 800 B1. However, in modern built structures the requirements for reinforcement efficacy and achievable increase factors relative to concrete slab punching shear may be even higher, and cannot be met with these known lattice beams.
The object of the invention is to provide a point-supported element or flat concrete ceiling with even better reinforcement efficacy and higher punching shear increase factors.
The object addressed is achieved with the features of the different embodiments of the invention.
Due to the specific different inclinations, nonetheless in the same direction upwards towards the support vertical axis, in each case of two successive diagonal struts, of which at least the diagonal strut closest to the support extends at a steeper angle <90° relative to the lower chords than the strut further from the support with its angle ≧45° which is at least 10° flatter. Due to the inclinations in the same direction upwards towards the support, at least in the case of the diagonal strut closest to the support an overhang arises of each upper securing point in the lattice beam longitudinal direction beyond the lower securing point which is less than the height of the lattice beam. This combination of features results, inter alia, in the advantage that a crack in the ceiling extending for example from the vertical projection of a support side face into the ceiling is intersected by the serpentine strut section and propagation is prevented. The concrete pressure zone in the region of the lower chords is not damaged. Overall, the novel lattice beam shape and the arrangement of the lattice beam relative to the support results surprisingly in better reinforcement efficacy and higher increase factors relative to punching shear of concrete slabs may be achieved with such lattice beams than hitherto, which has been confirmed by practical tests in comparison with lattice beams for example according to EP 1 070 800 B1 or EP 2 050 887 B1, without the exact reasons for the improvement being known.
This configuration is not only achieved by the specific angles at least of the diagonal strut closest to the support and subsequent diagonal struts, but may optionally be provided by specific cutting off of prefabricated lattice beams at different points in the longitudinal direction, or result from a combination of these structural measures. This applies to lattice beams with at least one continuous upper chord or with anchoring elements located one behind the other and separated by free intermediate spacings, to which the upper bent portions of the serpentine diagonal strut section(s) are secured, e.g. welded.
Particularly good results have been given in the case of cross-sectionally quadrilateral, polygonal or circular supports when the upper concrete anchoring zone ends approximately with the vertical projection of the support side face or is offset slightly therebeyond towards the support vertical axis, while the lower concrete anchoring zone of the same diagonal strut closest to the support remains in front of the vertical projection of the support side face.
Highly promising results have also been obtained when the lower concrete anchoring zone maintains a distance of only around 2.0 cm from the vertical projection of the support side face, and/or the overhang of the upper concrete anchoring zone beyond the lower concrete anchoring zone corresponds at least approximately to the distance of the lower concrete anchoring zone from the vertical projection of the support side face.
The steeper angle of inclination at least of the diagonal strut closest to the support should amount to between approximately 70° and 85° relative to the lower chords, while the flatter angle of inclination at least of the next diagonal strut away from the support should amount to between 45° and 75°. The steeper the angle of the diagonal strut closest to the support, the steeper the angle of the diagonal strut remote from the support may also be, however in any event around 10° flatter than the steeper angle.
The improved reinforcement efficacy and particular high increase factors may furthermore be achieved when the surface of the diagonal strut and/or of the chords is ribbed. This results in even better engagement with the concrete.
It is additionally specifically important, in order to prevent damage in the concrete pressure zone in the case of the lower chords, for the diameter at least of the lower chords to be greater than the diameter of the serpentine diagonal strut section. The diameter of the lower chords should amount to at least 10 mm, wherein the diagonal struts then for example have a diameter of approximately 9 mm.
In an expedient embodiment with a reinforcement in the support, the overhang of the upper concrete anchoring zone beyond the lower concrete anchoring zone of the diagonal strut closest to the support should correspond at least approximately to the distance of the lower concrete anchoring zone from the vertical projection of the support side face plus a size which corresponds at least to a portion of the size of a concrete cover of a reinforcement in the support.
In an expedient embodiment, the element or flat concrete ceiling is made from prefabricated concrete slabs with a concrete top layer, the lattice beam in question being concreted into the concrete slab. In this case, the overhang of the upper concrete anchoring zone of the diagonal strut closest to the support should correspond relatively exactly to the distance of an edge of the concrete slab from the vertical projection of the support side face and/or at most the distance of the edge of the concrete slab from a reinforcement close to the edge in the support.
In an embodiment with joints between the concrete slabs, the overhang should correspond at most to approximately half the width of a joint between two adjacent concrete slabs.
In an embodiment with anchoring elements, these should be prefabricated shaped parts or chord pieces, which project at both ends in the longitudinal direction of the lattice beam beyond the upper bent portions and thus contribute to the creation of the respective upper concrete anchoring zone.
Further expedient embodiments are described.
The subject matter of the invention is explained below with reference to the drawings, in which:
At least the diagonal strut S1 closest to the support (assuming that the lattice beam 1 extends with its end region shown towards the support) is inclined towards the support T at an angle α1 relative to the lower and upper chords U, O which is smaller than 90° and amounts to between approximately 70° and 85°. The next diagonal strut S2 away from the support is on the other hand inclined in the same direction upwards towards the support T but at a flatter angle α2 relative to the chords O, U which amounts to between approximately 45° and 75°, however is in each case at least 10° flatter than the steeper angle α1. The upper bent portions 11 between the diagonal struts S1, S2 project upwards significantly beyond the upper chord O, while the lower bent portions 12 either end with the lower chords U or project downwards slightly therebeyond (as shown). “In the same direction” is intended to mean here that the angles α1, α2 are <90° and 45°, but different from one another, i.e. the two diagonal struts S1, S2 are inclined upwards and towards the same lattice beam end.
The surface of the serpentine diagonal strut sections D and/or the chords U, O may additionally comprise a rib structure 9 or 8 respectively, for even better anchoring in the concrete. In the end region, for example an end piece 14 of the upper chord O projects beyond the securing point SO, while the lower chords U are cut off for example just behind the lower securing points SU (or are optionally continued, not shown).
In this way, upper and lower concrete anchoring zones VO, VU are formed either by the bent portions alone or with an anchoring element 10 or anchoring element piece 13′ (
Due, inter alia, to the inclinations in the same direction upwards and towards the support T of the diagonal struts S1, S2 and the steeper angle α1 of the diagonal strut S1 closest to the support, in the concrete ceiling BD, in the case of the diagonal strut S1 closest to the support, the upper concrete anchoring zone VO projects in the longitudinal direction of the lattice beam 1 beyond the lower concrete anchoring zone VU in
In the lattice beam in
The diameters of the chords U, O and the serpentine diagonal strut sections D are labeled d1 and d2. In principle, the diameter d1 should be larger than the diameter d2, wherein preferably the diameter d1 of the lower chords U should amount to at least 10 mm and that of the serpentine diagonal strut section D should amount to approximately 9 mm.
In the embodiment of the lattice beam 1 in
In
If concrete slabs 6, as is often conventional, are installed with joints between their edges 4, upper concrete anchoring zones VO of the diagonal struts S1 project beyond two opposing concrete slab edges, and these concrete anchoring zones could collide. Therefore in this case the overhang UV should be limited to approximately half the joint width. The joint width often amounts to 4 cm, but other joint widths are also possible. The overhang in the case of a joint width of 4 cm should then amount to approximately 2.0 cm.
In the punching shear reinforcement B, the embodiment of the lattice beam brings about efficient reinforcement of the concrete pressure zone of the concrete slab and thus prevents premature failure. The nominal yield point of the reinforcement components used may preferably amount to 500 N/mm2. Further material properties correspond to those of conventional reinforcing bars. However, reinforcing bars with other, better material properties may also be used. A combination of the novel lattice beam with other reinforcing elements and the same lattice beams with another arrangement with regard to the load introduction surface or support is possible, for example in a case in which further lattice beams are arranged parallel to the support edge or to the vertical projection of the support side face 3.
The embodiment of the lattice beam 1 in
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
12005851 | Aug 2012 | EP | regional |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2013/062555 | 6/18/2013 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2014/026781 | 2/20/2014 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1335886 | Evers | Apr 1920 | A |
1748423 | Macomber | Feb 1930 | A |
2420860 | Burner | May 1947 | A |
3305988 | Halopoff | Feb 1967 | A |
3400508 | Dietner | Sep 1968 | A |
3930349 | Wellershaus | Jan 1976 | A |
4494349 | Clements | Jan 1985 | A |
4689867 | Tolliver | Sep 1987 | A |
5501055 | Storch | Mar 1996 | A |
6003281 | Pilakoutas | Dec 1999 | A |
6006483 | Lee | Dec 1999 | A |
6056240 | Hagenlocher | May 2000 | A |
7540121 | Haeussler | Jun 2009 | B2 |
8511935 | Thomas | Aug 2013 | B1 |
20080028719 | Rutledge | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20100170194 | Leone | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20120137619 | Martter | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20140059967 | Martter | Mar 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2026425 | Dec 1971 | DE |
3414410 | Oct 1984 | DE |
201 03 059 | Jun 2001 | DE |
10 2007047616 | Apr 2008 | DE |
0781891 | Jul 1997 | EP |
1 070 800 | Jul 2000 | EP |
2 050 887 | Apr 2009 | EP |
2050887 | Apr 2009 | EP |
WO 2009010366 | Jan 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
es@cemet: EPO machine translation EP 2050887 A2 Bauermeister, english only; es@cemet: EPO machine translation EP 2050887 A2 Bauermeister, english and originial. |
European Patent Office search report dated Jan. 22, 2013 in corresponding EPO Application No. EP 12 00 5851.6. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150204074 A1 | Jul 2015 | US |