66 views

Uploaded by Maurício Ferreira

- Post-Tensioning Systems
- Post Tensioning manual
- Concrete Bridge Designer Manual -0721010830
- IRC
- FDOT_844
- PT Foundations
- Adapt Pt Supp
- 21 Design of Long-span Bridges With Conventional Reinforced Concrete Decks
- External Prestressing in Bridges
- Dubai Metro Project
- Hao Investigation of Ultra High Performance Concrete Slab and Normal Strength Concrete Slab Under Contact Explosion
- Design and Construction of Cetina River Arch Bridge
- Appendix E - Glossary
- BS 5628-2-2005--[2014-11-28--03-36-09 AM]
- CE304 Design of concrete structures - II.pdf
- 1.pdf
- F-Art-1
- Reff Aashto t24-Astm C-42
- Reference #06 - JNL-MA97-1 Strand Bond Acceptance Criteria
- High-Temp Mech Proper of Concr by M Bastami

You are on page 1of 21

Received August 7, 1998, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright

1999, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies

unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion

including authors closure, if any, will be published in the September-October 2000 ACI

Structural Journal if the discussion is received by May 1, 2000.

ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

This study presents experimental data of the reinforced concrete

corbels that, after cracking, were strengthened by external

prestressing or passive (nonprestressing) steel bars. The purpose

of the experimental tests was to recognize the influence of external

bars on cracking and on the load-carrying capacity of the tested

specimens. Nine corbels with various shear span-effective depth

ratio (a/d) were tested. The degree of prestress determined by the

value of the prestressing force was assumed constant for all three

tested prestressed specimens. To recognize the effect of

prestressing, the test results of the prestressed corbels were

compared with test results of the ultimate load and cracking of

corbels without strengthening, and also with corbels strengthened

by external barsthe same as the prestressing bars but without

external prestressing. Such passive bars are often used to

strengthen overloaded and cracked reinforced concrete (RC)

corbels. It turned out that the effectiveness of external prestressing

bars was significant, particularly for corbels with greater value

ratio (a/d 1.0). External prestressing is a useful solution for

strengthening corbels and reducing their crack widths. Until now,

there has been no recognition of crack morphology and the load-

carrying capacity of cracked corbels strengthened by external

prestressing bars. The results of the experimental tests also show

that the truss analogy, or shear-friction theory used for designing,

in practice cannot be applied (without modification) to the proper

determination of the ultimate load of the RC corbels strengthened

by external bars.

Keywords: corbels; external prestressing; strengthening; ultimate load.

INTRODUCTION

The experimental data indicate that crack pattern and the

load-carrying capacity of RC corbels depend on the shear

span-to-effective depth ratio (a/d), on the amount of the main

reinforcement, and on the shape and amount of the stirrups.

The first vertical flexural crack (r

1

in Fig. 1) appears at a very

early stage. As shown in Fig. 1, in the corbel subjected to the

vertical load, the first crack appears approximately at the

load V 0.25V

u

(where V is the applied load and V

u

is the

collapse load). This first crack is situated at the face of the

column. Inclined cracks (r

inc

) are developed later when the

vertical load varies between 0.4V

u

to 0.6V

u

. The practice

proves that the strengthening of RC corbels should be done

when inclined cracks start to develop, thus at load V in the

range of 0.5V

u

to 0.6V

u

.

According to Chakrabarti et al.,

1

and Tan et al.,

2

prestressing can delay flexural and shear cracking, so the

same effect can be expected at external prestressing of RC

corbels. External prestressing is more easily executed in

cases where a need of strengthening corbels exists. This

method protects corbels from corrosion, improves their

serviceability, and enhances their load-carrying capacity. In

practice, sometimes strengthening of even noncracked

corbels is needed. The modernization of construction when

the external load will increase is a good example. External

strengthening is relatively simple to carry out, is cost effective,

and is often used in practical cases.

The purpose of the experimental tests described in this

paper is to experimentally evaluate the real effectiveness of

the external prestressing bars used in strengthening the

corbels.

TEST PROGRAM

Nine RC corbels (three sets of three corbels) with various

a/d (a/d = 1.0, 0.6, and 0.3) were tested. From each set one

of three corbels did not have external bars indicating that the

corbel was not strengthened. These three corbels were called

the basic corbels and were described as No. 4. The next three

corbels (No. 2) were prestressed by two external bars (the

diameter of each was d

b

= 25 mm and the yield strength f

py

= 396 MPa). The last three corbels (No. 3) had the same

external two bars as corbel No. 2 had, but these bars were

passive (they were nonprestressed during the test).

Materials

All the specimens were made from the same concrete

mixture. The average concrete cylinder compressive

Title no. 96-S115

Behavior of Corbels with External Prestressing Bars

Experimental Study

by Krystyna Nagrodzka-Godycka

Fig. 1Typical crack pattern of double corbel.

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 1999 1034

strength was f

c

= 25 MPa (f

c

ube

30 MPa) at the time of

the specimen test. Ordinary portland cement 35, natural

sand, and an aggregate of 35 mm maximum size were used

for the concrete mixture (water-cement ratio [w/c] = 0.67).

The wooden forms were placed horizontally when the

concrete was laid.

The yield strength of ribbed steel bars of the diameter d

b

=

10 mm( No. 3) as the main reinforcement was f

ym

= 493

MPa, and for smooth steel bars (as the stirrups) d

b

= 6 mm

was f

ys

= 291.4 MPa. For the corner ribbed bars d

b

= 8 mm

and f

ycorn

was 483 MPa. The yield strength of the longitu-

dinal column bars was 390 MPa (d

b

= 32 mm).

Details of specimens

The shapes of the tested corbels for each Set WI (a/d =

1.0), WII (a/d = 0.6), and WIII (a/d = 0.3), as well as the

arrangement and amount of reinforcement in specimens, are

shown in Fig. 2.

The reinforcement ratio for the main internal reinforce-

ment was equal to = 0.0104.

Instrumentation

The steel strains were measured with electrical resistance

gages for each load increment to the failure. The gage length

was 20 mm. The strain gages were placed on the main rein-

forcement at the face of the column, and in the middle of

distance a (where a is the distance between vertical load and

the column face). As for the stirrups, the strain gages were

mounted at the supporting section (at the column face) and in

the half-length of each stirrup.

The concrete strains were measured with a mechanical

extensometer in the direction of the compressive principal

stresses and along the slope edge of the corbel. The readings

were taken for each load increment until the failure occurred.

The crack pattern was also recorded. Crack widths were

measured with a crack detection microscope with a magnifi-

cation of 40.

Test procedure

First, basic corbels No. 4 from each set were tested. All the

specimens were tested in an inverted position. The corbels

were subjected to vertical load V applied symmetrically at

the upper edge. The load was increased from V = 0 to V =

V

ubc

(where V

ubc

is the ultimate failure load for basic corbel).

When the ultimate load for the basic corbels was determined,

the next two corbels from each set (described as No. 2 or 3)

were tested until their failure. The load increment was

0.1V

ubc

. When the load reached 60% of the ultimate load of

the comparable basic corbel, the tested corbel was unloaded.

Corbels No. 2 (one from each set) were prestressed by two

external bars (d

b

= 25 mm) placed at the upper tension edge

of the corbel on both sides. Prestressing was conducted by

means of special screws, as shown in Fig. 3. At the begin-

ning, the prestressing force in each external bar was 80 kN.

Therefore, the prestressing force was equal to P

S

= 0.53P

y

(where P

y

= A

ps

.

f

py

).

The No. 3 corbels were strengthened by the same two bars

(d

b

= 25 mm); however, they were passive. The tests were

run in the way previously described.

TEST RESULTS

Crack morphology

The width of the first crack appearing at the tension junc-

tion was in a range between 0.04 and 0.1 mm. It depended on

Krystyna Nagrodzka-Godycka is a lecturer in the faculty of civil engineering at the

Technical University of Gdansk, Poland. She received her PhD in 1988. Her research

interests include reinforced concrete and prestressed structures, and behavior of

repaired and strengthened concrete structures.

Fig. 2Details of tested corbels (all dimensions in cm).

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 1999 1035

a/d. Inclined cracks developed in all the tested corbels under

the load V 0.6V

ubc

, and their maximum crack widths were 0.1

mm for Corbels WI and approximately 0.2 mm for Corbels

WII or WIII.

External prestressing (applied for the cracked Corbels WI-

2, WII-2, and WIII-2) caused the cracks to close. Later, when

the load acting on prestressed corbels was increased, the

cracks opened again. The crack widths were smaller,

however, than the corresponding crack widths of the corbels

strengthened by passive bars (WI-3, WII-3, and WIII-3). The

crack patterns of Corbel WI-2(WPS) with a/d = 1.0 (WPS =

corbel with prestressing bars) is shown in Fig. 4.

Figures 5 and 6 present the crack patterns of Corbel WII-

2(WPS) with a/d = 0.6 and for Corbel WIII-2(WPS) with a/d

= 0.3, respectively.

The maximum crack widths for Corbels WI-2, WI-3;

Corbels WII-2, WII-3; and Corbels WIII-2, WIII-3 at the

two levels of the load were V = 0.6

Vu

and V = 0.9V

u

(where

V

u

is the ultimate failure load for the corbel with external

bars), are shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 4Scheme of crack propagation of WI-2(WPS): (a)

at V =0.6V

ubc

; and (b) at V

u

.

Fig. 5Scheme of crack propagation of WII-2(WPS): (a) at

V=0.6V

ubc

; and (b) at V

u

.

Fig. 3Anchorage of external bars for prestressing.

1036 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 1999

Stress-strain and load-carrying capacity

The reason for the failure of Corbel WI and WII sets (a/d

= 1.0 and 0.6) was diagonal splitting, independent from the

type of external bars (prestressing or passive). The mode of

the failure for Corbels WIII (a/d = 0.3) can be described as

the mode between diagonal splitting and shear failure.

The stresses of the main reinforcement of corbels under the

load V = 0.6V

ubc

were averaging between 0.6f

ym

and 0.7f

ym

.

The stresses at the same load in stirrups were 0.8f

ys

and

compressive strains of concrete (

c

) were from 0.6 to 1.0%.

Figures 8 through 10 present the stresses of the main

internal reinforcement of the corbels and the stresses in

external prestressing bars for prestressed corbels (WPS).

At the load V = 0.9V

u ,

the stresses of the internal main

reinforcement close to the tension zone almost reached the

Fig. 6Scheme of crack propagation of WIII-2(WPS):

(a) at V = 0.06V

ubc

; and (b) at V

u

.

Fig. 7Crack widths of tested corbels: (a) at

V = 0.6V

u

; (b) at V = 0.9V

u

.

Fig. 8Stresses of main internal reinforcement and external

prestressing bars for corbel WI-2(WPS).

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 1999 1037

Fig. 9Stresses of main internal reinforcement and external

prestressing bars for Corbel WII-2(WPS).

Fig. 10Stresses of main internal reinforcement and

external prestressing bars for Corbel WIII-2(WPS).

Fig. 11Stresses of stirrups for Corbel WII-2(WPS).

Fig. 12Stresses of stirrups for Corbel WIII-2(WPS).

Fig. 13Stresses of main internal reinforcement and

external passive bars for Corbel WI-3(WPP).

yield stress while the stresses in the external prestressing

bars reached approximately 280 MPa (70% f

py

).

Figures 11 and 12 present the stresses of the stirrups for

the prestressed corbels: WII-2(WPS) and WIII-2(WPS). The

stresses in stirrups at the ultimate failure load reached the

yield stress.

The stresses of the main internal reinforcement and the

external strengthening passive bars of the corbels (WPP) are

shown in Fig. 13 through 15. The test results indicated big

differences between the stresses for prestressing and passive

bars. (70 MPa for the passive bars and 280 MPa for the

prestressing bars).

1038 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 1999

Figure 16 presents the effectiveness of the corbels with the

external bars, expressed as the ratio of the load-carrying

capacity of corbels with external bars to the load-carrying

capacity of basic corbels. Table 1 presents the ultimate

failure load for the tested corbels.

APPROXIMATE CALCULATION

OF LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY OF

PRESTRESSED CORBELS

Comparing the authors test results with the calculated

ultimate load obtained from a few well-known design

methods based on truss model or shear-friction theory, it was

found that the ultimate load could not be properly estimated.

The analysis results of the load-carrying capacity of the

prestressed corbels with external bars based on a few

selected methods

3-7

(the methods are summarized in the

Appendix

*

) are given in Table 2. They prove the methods

overestimate or underestimate the value of the load-carrying

capacity (Table 2).

The test results indicate that both the strain and the stress

increase were greater in the external prestressing bars in

comparison with the external passive bars (Fig. 8 through 10

and Fig. 13 through 15).

The stresses in external prestressing bars reached V

u

0.7f

py

. These stresses were almost half as much as the

stresses in the internal main reinforcement of the prestressed

corbels. At the same load, the stresses in the external passive

bars reached only 0.17f

py

, therefore, they were from six to

seven times less than the stresses of the internal main rein-

forcement of the corbels with external passive bars.

*

The Appendix is available in xerographic or similar form from ACI headquarters,

where it will be kept permanently on file, at a charge equal to the cost of reproduction

plus handling at time of request.

Fig. 15Stresses of main internal reinforcement and

external passive bars for Corbel WIII-3(WPP).

Fig. 16Effectiveness of external bars for tested corbels.

Table 1Experimental ultimate load for tested

corbels

Corbel a/d

Load at failure V

u

,

exp

, kN

WI-4 1.0 250

WI-2(WPS) 1.0 350

WI-3(WPP) 1.0 275

WII-4 0.6 475

WII-2(WPS) 0.6 525

WII-3(WPP) 0.6 500

WIII-4 0.3 650

WIII-2(WPS) 0.3 700

WIII-3(WPP) 0.3 650

Fig. 14Stresses of main internal reinforcement and

external passive bars for Corbel WII-3(WPP).

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 1999 1039

To obtain a reasonable agreement between calculated and

experimental load-carrying capacity, the differences

between the stresses of the internal main reinforcement and

external strengthening reinforcement should be taken into

account. This agreement could be reached assuming a coef-

ficient k = 0.5 reduces stresses in the external prestressing

bars on the load-carrying capacity (Table 3).

Taking this assumption into account, it is possible to estimate

the ultimate load of corbels with a/d = 1.0 according to Kriz

and Raths method

3

and for the shortest corbel (a/d = 0.3)

using Walravens method.

6

In both cases, for the satisfactory

agreement between the calculated and experimental ultimate

load of the corbels, the coefficient k = 0.5, should be

assumed.

The authors procedure,

7

based on Mohrs failure criterion,

could be very useful in the case of strong main reinforce-

ment, when the concrete strength determines the load-carrying

capacity of the corbel. To obtain the properly estimated

calculated load-carrying capacity, the compression zone (c)

should be limited. For example: for the ratio a/d = 1.0

c

max

= 0.4d; for a/d = 0.6 c

max

= 0.6d and for a/d = 0.3

c

max

= 0.9d. For practical purposes, the load-carrying

capacity of the prestressed corbels can be calculated prop-

erly by taking into account limited c

max

and assuming k =

0.5. The results of the calculation are given in Table 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The experimental test results indicate that the effectiveness

of the external prestressing depends on a/d. For a/d = 1.0, the

ultimate load due to prestressing increased by 40%. This

effectiveness decreased with the decrease of a/d. For a/d = 0.6

or 0.3 (shorter corbels), the ultimate load increased by a

maximum of only 12%.

The crack widths due to external prestressing also depended

on a/d. Crack widths decreased with the increase of a/d.

At the failure of the corbels, the yield stresses in each case

were reached in part of the internal main reinforcement, and

horizontal stirrups were placed inside the corbel. The

maximum stresses in external prestressing bars were approxi-

mately 30% smaller than the yield stress (

ps

= 0.7f

py

).

If, assuming for calculation purposes, that stresses in the

internal main reinforcement and external strengthening bars

are equal to the yield stresses, the load-carrying capacity is

overestimated. These improper overestimates could be

particularly large when strengthening the corbels using the

passive bars. Thus, to calculate the load-carrying capacity

of the corbels with external prestressing bars, the stress in

the prestressing bars might be approximately assumed

ps

= 0.5f

py

.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was supported by Grant No. 7-7233-92-03 from the Polish

State Research Committee (KBN), which is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. Chakrabarti, P. R.; Farahani, D. J.; and Kashou, S. I., Reinforced and

Precompressed Concrete CorbelsAn Experimental Study, ACI Structural

Journal, V. 86, No. 4, July-Aug. 1989, pp. 405-412.

2. Tan, K. H., and Mansur, M. A., Partial Prestressing in Concrete Corbels

and Deep Beams, ACI Structural Journal, V. 89, No. 3, May-June 1992,

pp. 251-262.

3. Kriz, L. B., and Raths, C. H., Connections in Precast Concrete

StructuresStrength of Corbels, Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute,

V. 10, No. 1, Feb. 1965, pp. 16-61.

4. Franz, G., Column Corbels, Beton und Stahlbetonbau, V. 71, No. 4, Apr.

1976, pp. 93-102. (in German)

5. Hagberg, T., Design of Concrete Brackets: On the Application of the Truss

Analogy, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 80, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1983, pp. 3-12.

6. Walraven, J.; Frenay, J.; and Pruijssers, A., Influence of Concrete Strength

and Load History on the Shear Friction Capacity of Concrete Members, Journal

of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, V. 32, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1987, pp. 66-84.

7. Nagrodzka-Godycka, K., Contribution to Design of Reinforced Concrete

Corbels under Short-Term Load on Upper Edge, Archives of Civil Engineering

(Warsaw), V. 37, No. 2, 1991, pp. 221-248. (in Polish)

Table 2Comparison of test results with the calculated ultimate load kN

Method corbel a/d

Kriz and

Raths

3

Franzs

4

Hagbergs

5

Walravens

6

Authors

7

V

u, exp

V

u, steel

V

u, concr

V

u, steel

V

u, concr

WI-4 1.0 205 308 287 210 288 288 250

WI-2 (WPS) 1.0 262 552 494 210 486 486 350

WII-4 0.6 287 471 444 326 471 432 432 475

WII-2 (WPS) 0.6 366 776 704 326 654 699 699 525

WIII-4 0.3 379 727 664 428 475 639 639 650

WIII-2 (WPS) 0.3 485 1246 1015 428 659 1246 712 700

Table 3Ultimate load V

u

with k = 0.5 assumption

Method corbel Kriz and Raths

3

V

u, calc

/V

u, exp Walravens

6

V

u, calc

/V

u, exp Authors

7

V

u, calc

/ V

u, exp

V

u, exp

WI-2(WPS)

a/d = 1.0

237 0.68

c = 0.4d

V

u,steel

=442

V

u,concr

= 298

0.85 350

WII-2(WPS)

a/d = 0.6

331 0.63 571 1.09

c = 0.6d

V

u,steel

=644

V

u,concr

= 472

0.9 525

WIII-2(WPS)

a/d = 0.3

438 0.63 576 0.82

c = 0.9d

V

u,steel

=1012

V

u,concr

=610

0.87 700

- Post-Tensioning SystemsUploaded byhasib
- Post Tensioning manualUploaded byimzee25
- Concrete Bridge Designer Manual -0721010830Uploaded byLeung Lui
- IRCUploaded bysurendravaghela
- FDOT_844Uploaded byAnonymous QygYrwL
- PT FoundationsUploaded byEugen Dincu
- Adapt Pt SuppUploaded byLau Kim Hwa
- 21 Design of Long-span Bridges With Conventional Reinforced Concrete DecksUploaded byDr. MOHAMED ALZAIN
- External Prestressing in BridgesUploaded byAntonio Henry
- Dubai Metro ProjectUploaded byMustafa Uzyardoğan
- Hao Investigation of Ultra High Performance Concrete Slab and Normal Strength Concrete Slab Under Contact ExplosionUploaded byPouya Darvish
- Design and Construction of Cetina River Arch BridgeUploaded byjbooysen
- Appendix E - GlossaryUploaded byJunwhan Kim
- BS 5628-2-2005--[2014-11-28--03-36-09 AM]Uploaded bySuzeanni Jalil
- CE304 Design of concrete structures - II.pdfUploaded byVineeth Bava
- 1.pdfUploaded byJose Luis Martinez Saavedra
- F-Art-1Uploaded by010
- Reff Aashto t24-Astm C-42Uploaded byBhavin Shah
- Reference #06 - JNL-MA97-1 Strand Bond Acceptance CriteriaUploaded byAriel Gonzalez
- High-Temp Mech Proper of Concr by M BastamiUploaded byamit_halcrow
- TestUploaded bymcwong_98
- DESIGN OF RC BEAM WITH AND WITHOUT WELDED MESH AS SHEAR REINFORCEMENT IN FLEXURAL AND SHEAR BEHAVIOURUploaded byijaert
- Changes ACI 318-AppUploaded byZhihui Huang
- VSL_News_2002_1Uploaded byDrPadipat Chaemmangkang
- WAI 151 T10 Curved Gdrs_SHUploaded byvrv01
- Intze Tank Theory OnlyUploaded byRagvendra Singh
- A Shear Moment Model for Prestressed Concrete BeamsUploaded bynajdjan
- SE-SPE-03ST-CAL-0001Uploaded byGautham Sathish
- ricehusk ashpavement.pdfUploaded bySiva Ramakrishna
- Chemrite -CNIUploaded byghazanfar

- BASKARAN and MORLEY - Strength Assessment of Flat Slabs on Nonrectangular Column GridUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Parametric Computational Analysis for Punching Shear in RC SlabsUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Apostilha FemUploaded byJerfsonLima
- A Punching Shear Mechanical Model for Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs WithUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- 1998ME_FlaviodeOliveiraCostaUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- One Way Shear Resistance of RC Slabs With Unbraced Stirrups_FINALUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the Static Performance of Innovative Prefabricated Composite ColumnsUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Macr Punching Hoang Pop 2015Uploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Cowan_An Elastic Theory for the Torsional Strength of Reinforced Concrete BeamsUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- REVIEW OF DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR SHEAR AND TORSION.pdfUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Paper HeggerUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Strut-And-tie Modelling of Rc PilesUploaded byAlberto Ruiz-Cabello López
- IPCA Precast Concrete Frames GuideUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- 511-3635-2-PBUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Safe Rc DesignUploaded byKatracho2
- EM 1110-2-2200 - Gravity Dam Design 1Uploaded byPDHLibrary
- Effect of Corner Angle on Efficiency of Reinforced Concrete Joints Under Opening Bending MomentsUploaded byValdemir Colares
- CLIMACO E REGAN_Evaluation of Bond Strength Between Old and New Concrete in Structural RepairsUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Proposed Theory to Determine the Horizontal Shear Between CompositeUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- macr65-0970Uploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Reinforced Brick SlabUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Finite Element Analyses for Limit State Design of Concrete StructuresUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Concentric Punching Shear Strength_LER CAPS FINAISUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- 12-119_Ferreira PhD ThesisUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- BalaguruRecommendations for Design and Construction of High Performance Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites With Multiple Fine CracksUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Flexural Strengthening of Reinforcement Concrete Beams Using HPFRCC and CFRPUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- Effects of Fluidity and Placing Method of HPFRCC on Tensile Performance Test ResultsUploaded byMaurício Ferreira
- An Indeterminate Strut - Tie Model and Load Distribution Ratio for RC Deep Beams (I) - Model and Load Distribution RatioUploaded byMaurício Ferreira

- gt0704Uploaded bypandunugraha04
- Komatsu PC200-6 Shop ManualUploaded byKeron Trotz
- Dixon HF225 Op ManualUploaded byDavid
- EvaporationUploaded byNSBMR
- What is Poisson Ratio_ What's It Application_ - QuoraUploaded bySargunam Sankaravadivel
- RB26 Head PortingUploaded byJam Bab
- 20-30_KVAUploaded byDharani Pathy
- R34_MFDUploaded byJarrard Smith
- 1 Catalogo Durometros de Sobremesa 2014Uploaded bydanielbo2220
- PIPEFITTING (1).pdfUploaded bygobi
- Electric Motors for RoboticsUploaded byMunindar Kumar
- Mixed Finite Element Formulations for Strain Gradient Elasticity Problems Using the Fenics EnvironmentUploaded byvarnis
- CCF17082018_00001Uploaded byJean Robledo
- trane-TCH-50-5047-4 (en)_05012001Uploaded byFrancisco Chamorro
- PETSOC-2009-005Uploaded byLesly Paolita
- 10397_1 en Sealing Solutions for the Machine Tool Industry - Customized Machined Seals and EngineUploaded byufuk7731
- 7 120K SZN1-UP Edicion Set 2012Uploaded byIH Medrano
- Shortening an in-Line Bracelet Using Pulse-Arc Welding TechniquesUploaded byscalenohedron
- EL-GUploaded byJuan Pablo Apaza
- LPD Procedure CompleteUploaded byimupathan
- UL and FM Approved Flexible Sprinkler DropperUploaded bymonsher123
- General Criteria for Elastic StabilityUploaded byMihajloDjurdjevic
- 1998 Volvo S70-V70(2)Uploaded bycosminub
- Isobrugg - Technical 180413Uploaded bymojeebmashal
- B+V_Tong_Manual_BV65Uploaded byegypure
- syllabus_11.pdfUploaded byAranya Bhoumik
- 66-86 Ford BroncoUploaded bytruckshop
- Curriculum -Vitae (Varun)Uploaded byHanamant Kalliguddi
- Angle Grinder 3 601 C88 171 GWS 7-115 230V,GBUploaded bymichaelmangaa
- Wint ReportUploaded byAnurag Kumar