Shear Design of the Hollow core slab according to the Euro code book

© All Rights Reserved

98 views

Shear Design of the Hollow core slab according to the Euro code book

© All Rights Reserved

- Stresses in Beams
- Lifting Trunnion Calculations sample
- BC1-01SingleBox
- Weld Stress Calculations
- Mechanicsofsolids Dec 2010
- Welding Strength Calc( as Per B5950)
- Stuctural Analysis of Helicopter Flight and Hangar Deck
- New Piping Flexibility Rules in ASME B31.3 AppendixP - Becht & Diehl - ASME - 2006
- Die Maintenance Handbook Chapter 5
- Single Box
- Detailed Syllabus of 1st & 10th Sem
- PRECO_English.pdf
- BC1-01SingleBox
- treatiseonmathem00loveuoft
- GP RM E Composite Steel Concrete AASHTO
- 10.1.1.603.532
- [2004] Full-range Behavior of FRP-To-concrete Bonded Joints - Yuan Teng Seracino Wu Yao
- Syllabus
- Notes 21 Primary Stress Loads
- CE474-Ch1-IntroReview.pdf

You are on page 1of 17

Carlos M. Araujo, Msc, PPGEC, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brazil

Daniel D. Loriggio, Dr, Dept. Civil Eng., Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brazil

Jose Camara, Dr, Dept. Engineering and Architecture, Instituto Superior Tcnico, Portugal

ABSTACT

The current design methods for the hollow core shear resistance are derived

from experimental results and elastic theories that are not consistent with the

behavior in the ultimate limit state.

In this paper, an analytical methodology adopted from the modified

compression field theory (MCFT) and safety concepts from Eurocode 2 is

properly presented and evaluated with experimental data available in the

literature, proved to be accurate and simple enough for use in the design.

Comparisons with the codes CSA A23.3 and Eurocode 2 are also presented.

For the validity of the process presented, the support region specific

characteristics of this type of slab, as the anchorage of prestressing strands,

prestressing dispersion and short support lengths, are discussed with nonlinear

numerical models considering the bond between the strand and concrete.

Pg1

INTRODUCTION

The development of building techniques of hollow core slabs allowed its wide use in different

types of structure, although some characteristics of prefabricated elements still cause

uncertainties in the scientific community. The shear strength and failure mechanisms in the

region of support are some of the issues raised including the large proportion of voids in cross

sections without shear reinforcement, the lengths of support usually small, the anchorage of

strands and the dispersion of prestressing force.

The traditional shear strength models are based on elastic theories and empirical results, with

methods costly and not always accurate enough. Accordingly, the application of this

procedure in the design of hollow cores slabs is not appropriate.

In this paper, an accurate and simple enough methodology for use in design, based on

modified compression field theory MCFT [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and safety concepts from Eurocode 2,

is properly presented and verified with experimental and numerical results.

The possible shear failure mechanisms conceptually accepted in hollow cores slabs are shear

tension failure, flexural shear, and anchorage failure of strands. The first mechanism is the

most common in this type of slab, which in a non-fissured region arises a diagonal crack that

propagates toward the support and the compression area, causing a brittle rupture (Fig. 1). In

flexural shear failure, the crack is initiated by a vertical bending crack that develops in a

diagonal crack.

The last mechanism, according with first ideas of JANNEY [7], occurs when bending cracks

happens within the transmission length and a variation of the strand stress could cause the

anchorage failure of strands. This situation is not common in hollow core slabs, where the

prestressing have a good performance in the cracking control. This statement is valid, subject

to compliance with the limits of initial prestressing stress to control the tensile force of

bursting, splitting and spalling.

Pg2

FINITE ELEMENTS MODELS

The numerical models presented in this paper were generated with the non-linear finite

element program ATENA V4 [9]. The hollow core slabs, using equivalent cross sections

(Fig. 3) were modeled with plane quadrilateral isoparametric elements. The constitutive

model adopted for the concrete was SBETA [9] with the fictitious crack model based on the

exponential crack-opening law and fracture energy. The prestressing strands were modeled

with one-dimensional geometry and bond between strand and concrete through bond-slip

relationship shown in Fig. 3 [10]. The Tab. 1 shows the parameters for the definition of this

relationship for concrete with f ck < 60 and 'good' quality of the bond.

In this section are presented three hollow core slabs subjected to shear and bending

moments. The experimental tests have been performed by VTT Building and Transport [11].

The main data are shown in Tab. 2 and load scheme in Fig. 10 (scheme 1).

Symmetry

b

2

4

s

Table 1

s

b

0.8 f cu

Point 1

0.000

Point 2

0.030

Point 3

0.047

Point 4

0.480

0.500

2.000

0.700

0.000

Pg3

Table 2

Characteristic cylinder strength of concrete

Thickness

Cross sectional area

Moment of inertia

Centroid

Minimum web width

Top strands

Bottom strands

Top strands prestressing area

Bottom strands prestressing area

Top strands prestressing stress

Bottom strands prestressing stress

Distance between top strands and the extrados

Distance between bottom strands and the intrados

Specific fracture energy

Span of the slab

Width of support plates

Unit

(MPa)

(mm)

(105 mm2)

(108 mm4)

(mm)

(mm)

(-)

(-)

(mm2)

(mm2)

(MPa)

(MPa)

(mm)

(mm)

(10-5 MN/m)

(mm)

(mm)

VTT33.200

47.5

200

1.19

6.03

103

238

7 12.5

651

1100

40

9.56

4958

40

VTT109.265

51.8

265

1.72

15.0

137

242

10 12.5

930

1000

39

9.44

4957

40

VTT148.320

43.5

320

2.03

25.9

164

263

2 9.3

11 12.5

104

1023

900

1000

49

51

8.40

5945

40

All models showed good agreement with the values measured in the laboratory, as shown in

Tab. 3, and qualitatively, obtained similar results, from which can be drawn some important

conclusions: under the load applied, the prestressing tension had a little variation between the

release of the prestressing and the ultimate load, as well as the bond slips and bond stress; in

the sections close to the application of the loads, the plane section hypothesis is acceptable.

This analysis reaffirms the shear failure mechanisms mentioned in the previous item.

Table 3

Slab

33.200

109.265

148.320

Tests

Fcr: kN Ffail: kN

81

108

178

223

238

Numerical model

Fcr: kN Fm: kN

96

112

188

214

233

Fum/Ffail

1,04

1,06

0,98

Fig. 4 shows the bond slip, bond stress and prestressing stress along the slab for the release of

the prestressing and ultimate load to the slab VTT 109.265, where also shows the values

calculated with the recommendations from Eurocode 2 [12]. The shear failure mechanism in

all examples was shear tension failure, clearly shown in Fig. 5 for the slab VTT 109.265. The

anchorage failure of strands was discarded, for the reason that inside the transmission length

did not show bending cracks and there were compression stress in the bottom side (Fig. 6).

The Fig. 7 brings the longitudinal deformations along the slab to the stages of prestressing

release and ultimate load.

Pg4

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 4. Numerical results of VTT 148.320 (a) Bond slips (b) Bond stress (c) Stress in strands

Pg5

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 6. Principal stress (a) maximum (b) minimum (c) tensors

(a)

(b)

Longitudinal strain (a) on release (b) on ultimate load

Pg6

PROPOSED METHODOLOGY

The methodology presented in this paper is based on the modified compression field theory

MCFT [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], also base of the CSA A23.3 code [13], and the safety concepts from

Eurocode 2 [12].

BASE OF SHEAR RESISTENCE MECANISMS MODEL

The bases of the model, to the case of members without transversal reinforcement and strands

with line geometry, can be seen in Fig. 8 [1]. The free body diagram of this figure cuts the

longitudinal reinforcement, the flexural compression region and follows the angle of the

shear crack diagonal. In this case, the shear is assumed to be carried by aggregate interlock

stress (ci) and shear stress in the flexural compression region. With the equilibrium can be

noted that the horizontal component of shear stresses on diagonal crack causes an increase in

tension in the longitudinal reinforcement, representing one of the causes of shear-moment

interaction. The bending moment is carried by forces Fc and Fs. The dowel action of

longitudinal reinforcement is ignored and the aggregate interlock resistance is estimated at

only in one depth.

For elements without shear reinforcement, as discussed in the previous section, the shear will

be resisted only by aggregate interlock component. Therefore, the shear resistance in the

proposed methodology is taken as:

VRd =

bw d v f ctm

(1)

In Eq 1, the term f ck in the original equation of MCFT [4] was replaced by 2 f ctm and

likewise should not be taken greater than 8 MPa. According to the requirements of Eurocode

2:

Pg7

2

10

(2)

The coefficient models the strain effect, the first term of Eq. 3, and the size effect, the

second term of the same equation. The strain effect is considered by controlling the

longitudinal strain at mid-depth of the member, x, which can be taken as a good

approximation equal to half the longitudinal reinforcement deformation, whereas the concrete

deformation in compression is small compared to steel deformation [4].

0, 40

1300

(1 + 1500 x ) (1000 + s xe )

(3)

Figure 9 shows the deformation of the longitudinal reinforcement due to bending moment

and shear. When cot is taken equal to 2, as suggested by the Canadian code [1], x

deformation can be calculated by Eq. 4. In the methodology presented in this paper for

hollow core slabs, the term (Ec bw d v ) 2 should be added the reinforcement stiffnesses in the

denominator when the design bending moment is greater than the cracking moment, as a

conservative simplify. The term f p0 ( x ) is calculated assuming a linear variation in the

transmission lengths, whereby in the Eurocode 2. According as [4], the shear depth dv and is

taken as 0.9d.

x =

M d d v + Vd Aps f p 0 ( x )

(4)

2 E p Aps

The size effect term is shown in Eq. 5, and crack spacing sx can be taken as the distance

between layers of longitudinal reinforcing bars or equal dv, for member with longitudinal

reinforcement only on the flexural tension side. The maximum coarse aggregate size ag

Pg8

should be taken as zero for high-strength concrete (fck > 70 MPa) or lightweight concrete,

according as [4].

s xe =

where

35s x

0,85s x

15 + a g

(5)

s x d v = 0.9 d

The section which should be checked depends on the type of loading and should be where

the width of the critical shear crack can be satisfactorily represented by the

strain, according Muttoni;Ruiz [14]. In the methodology presented here, was found

appropriate to consider a section distant dv/2 from the application point

of concentrated loads and a section distant dv from the support in the case of uniformly

distributed load.

With the methodology presented in this paper comparisons were made with an experimental

database, meeting in Bertagnoli; Mancini [15], where it was presented a multi-criteria design

process in the company of the Eurocode 2 recommendations. The experimental campaigns

have been performed by VTT Building and Transport (Finland), TNO (Netherlands), TUDelft (Netherlands), Universit dellAquila (Italy), Istituto di Ricerche e Collaudi M.Masini

(Italy).

The 129 hollow core slabs from database were analyzed using the methodology of this paper

and the results presented in Tab. 4 divided into five criteria: laboratory, thickness, load

scheme, type of holes and, cylinder compressive strength of concrete. The same table shows

the relationship between ultimate theoretical load and ultimate experimental load, where the

theoretical load obtained using the mean values and using the design values of the material

properties. For all slabs was taken prestressing losses of 5%. The Tab. 5 shows the results of

specific tests adopted in the numerical analyzes, compared with the CSA and the proposed

methodology.

Figs. 11 and 12 show graphically relationship between ultimate theoretical load and ultimate

experimental load. In the last figure can be seen that any tests has value greater than one.

With the same input data, Bertagnoli; Mancini [15] obtained a mean value of 0.89 with a

coefficient of variation 25% using the mean values and mean value of 0.58 with a coefficient

of variation 22% using the design values.

Pg9

Loading schemes

P/2

L/7.2

P/2

P/2

L/7.2

P/2

L/7.2

L/7.2

L

P/2

P/2

L/8

P/2

L/4

P/2

L/4

L/8

2

L

P/2

a

P/2

P/2

300

P/2

300

3

L

P

a

4

L

P/2

P/2

300

5

L

P

a

6

L

CS

Pg10

Table 4

No.

Total

46

39

16

14

14

13

45

35

24

12

19

1

10

66

25

8

39

90

39

75

15

129

Total

129

Performed

by

Thickness

range

(mm)

Load

scheme

(Fig. 10)

Type of

holes

f ck (MPa)

VTT

TNO

TU-D

USA

MANSINI

155-200

240-260

300-320

360-400

420-500

1

2

3

4

5

6

circular

irregular

fck 60

60 < fck 90

90 < fck 120

CSA

Proposed methodology

Mean

Coefficient

Mean

Coefficient

value

of variation (%)

value

of variation (%)

using the mean values of the material properties

0,84

17,6

0,94

15,9

0,85

18,4

0,98

17,1

0,81

16,0

0,89

13,4

0,68

22,5

0,77

21,1

0,94

17,9

1,00

17,9

0,86

27,9

0,92

28,2

0,80

17,6

0,90

17,0

0,88

18,3

1,00

15,6

0,81

18,0

0,92

16,7

0,90

19,6

0,93

16,4

0,90

19,6

1,02

15,0

1,03

0,0

1,16

0,0

0,81

8,5

0,89

8,3

0,81

20,0

0,92

18,9

0,78

14,5

0,85

12,3

0,96

20,4

1,05

21,7

0,83

23,0

0,95

21,5

0,83

17,9

0,93

16,8

0,84

24,8

0,94

23,4

0,84

16,1

0,93

15,3

0,80

19,2

0,92

18,0

0,83

19,0

0,93

18,0

using the design values of the material properties

0,60

22,1

0,64

19,0

Table 5

Slab

33.200

109.265

148.320

Tests

Fcr: kN

81

223

Ffail: kN

108

178

238

CSA

x (%o)

-0,031

-0,077

-0,088

Fum/Ffail

1,05

0,97

0,83

Proposed

methodology

x (%o)

Fum/Ffail

-0,014

1,09

-0,064

1,00

-0,060

0,90

Pg11

Numerical model

Fcr: kN

96

214

x (%o)

-0,085

-0,083

-0,091

Fum/Ffail

1,04

1,06

0,98

(a)

(b)

ultimate experimental load, where the theoretical load

was obtained using the mean values material properties.

Pg12

(a)

(b)

ultimate experimental load, where the theoretical load

was obtained using the design values of the material properties.

Pg13

USUAL CASES IN DESIGN

In the usual cases of hollow core slabs are used with uniformly distributed loads and with

high values for the ratio L/h between design span and the floor thickness (Fig. 14), where the

stresses verifications in the serviceability limit states are usually the critical cases. Due to the

cross sections characteristics of this type of slab, the behavior in the ultimate limit state

differs from the elements with solid cross section, in that the limits imposed by the shear and

bending moment are closer to the hollow cores.

This behavior can be better understood with the aid of curves of maximum load that each

section allows until to reach the ultimate limit state due to bending moment or due to

shear. Fig. 15 shows these curves for three different cross sections and various ratios L/h. The

cross sections used are the same of the examples presented in the numerical analysis of this

paper. Continuous lines in the charts represent the maximum load in each section limited by

the shear and the dotted line, the maximum load limited by the bending moment. The results

presented are shown for half the structure, taking advantage of its symmetry.

q

x

Pg14

(a)

(b)

(c)

(continuous line) and due to bending moment (dotted line)

(a) VTT 33.200 (b) VTT 109.265 (c) VTT 148.320

Pg15

CONCLUSIONS

The shear failures of hollow core slabs, it always been sudden and brittle, are difficult to be

characterized and measured in conventional laboratory tests. Therefore, the main models

verification applied to these slabs does not match with nonlinear mechanisms present in the

behavior under shear. However, such behavior can be adequately explained with theory for

the shear strength of reinforced concrete presented in Collins et al. [4]. Using this theory,

numerical modeling nonlinear, experimental results and the safety concepts from Eurocode 2

[12], in this paper was possible to propose a methodology for shear verification of hollow

core slabs, bringing as main advantages: it is based on a general theory of shear, applied to

elements of reinforced and prestressed concrete; compared to experimental results and codes,

gives very good results; it has use simple and appropriate to the design; easy to understand.

The nonlinear analyses presented in this paper represent well the behavior of hollow core

slabs. In these analyses, stress variations in the prestressing steel, between the stages of

release and ultimate limit state, are very small and the stresses close to support on the bottom

side of the slab usually are compression. This indicates that an anchorage failure of strands

could not occur and that the stress concentration in the web produces a tension shear failure.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to express their sincere thanks to Coordenao de Aperfeioamento de

Pessoal de Nvel Superior (CAPES) for scholarship granted to the first author of this paper.

REFERENCES

1. Bentz E. C. and Collins M. P. Development of the 2004 CSA A23.3 shear provisions for

reinforced concrete. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 2006, 33, No. 5, 521534.

2. Bentz E. C., Vecchio F. J. and Collins M. P. The simplified MCFT for calculating the

shear strength of reinforced concrete elements. ACI Structural Journal, 2006, 103, No. 4,

614624.

3. Collins, M. P., Mitchell D., Adebar, P., and Vecchio, F. J. A general shear design

method, ACI Structural Journal, V. 93, No. 1, January-February 1996, pp. 36-45.

4. Collins, M. P., Bentz, E. C., Sherwood, E. G., and Xie, L., An adequate theory for the

shear strength of reinforced concrete structures, Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 60,

No. 9, 2008, 635650.

5. Vecchio F. J. and Collins M. P. The modified compression field theory for reinforced

concrete elements subjected to shear. ACI Journal, Proceedings, 1986, 83, No. 2, 219

231.

Pg16

6. Jendele, L., and Cervenka, J., Finite element modelling of reinforcement with bond,

Computers and Structures, 84, 2006, 17801791.

7. Janney , J. R., Nature of bond in pre-tensioned prestressedconcrete, Journal of the

American Concrete Institute, May 1954, Proceedings Vol. 50, p. 717.

8. Fusco, P. B., Tcnica de armar as estruturas de concreto, Editora Pini, So Paulo, 1995.

9. Cervenka J, Jendele L. Atena users manual, Part 17. Prague: Cervenka Consl.; 2000

2002.

10. Bigaj AJ. Structural dependence of rotation capacity of plastic hinges in RC beams and

slabs. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Delft University of Technology,

1999.

11. Pajari, M. Resistance of Prestressed Hollow Core Slabs against Web Shear Failure.

ESPOO, Finland, 2005, VTT Research Notes 2292.

12. Comit Europn de Normalisation. EN 1992-1-1:2004 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete

Structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. CEN, Brussels, 2004.

13. Canadian Standards Association. Design of Concrete Structures. CSA, Mississauga,

Ontario, Canada, 2004. CSA Committee. A23.3

14. Muttoni, A., Ruiz, M. F., Shear Strength of Members without Transverse Reinforcement

as Function of Critical Shear Crack Width, ACI Structural Journal, V. 105, No. 2,

March-April 2008, pp. 163-172.

15. Bertagnoli G., and Mancini, G., Failure analysis of hollow-core slabs tested in shear,

Structural Concrete, 2009, 10, No. 3, pp. 139152.

Pg17

- Stresses in BeamsUploaded byAyad Slaby
- Lifting Trunnion Calculations sampleUploaded byshazan
- BC1-01SingleBoxUploaded byanto_todang
- Weld Stress CalculationsUploaded byMyo Aung
- Mechanicsofsolids Dec 2010Uploaded bysimalaravi
- Welding Strength Calc( as Per B5950)Uploaded byniteshk_45
- Stuctural Analysis of Helicopter Flight and Hangar DeckUploaded bynavalarchmarine
- New Piping Flexibility Rules in ASME B31.3 AppendixP - Becht & Diehl - ASME - 2006Uploaded byAlvin Smith
- Die Maintenance Handbook Chapter 5Uploaded byjcabarcav7953
- Single BoxUploaded bybaptiskeren
- Detailed Syllabus of 1st & 10th SemUploaded byShravani Rao
- PRECO_English.pdfUploaded byAmal Hajar
- BC1-01SingleBoxUploaded bykinarum88
- treatiseonmathem00loveuoftUploaded bylaksh688
- GP RM E Composite Steel Concrete AASHTOUploaded byrammiris
- 10.1.1.603.532Uploaded byDeepakSingh
- [2004] Full-range Behavior of FRP-To-concrete Bonded Joints - Yuan Teng Seracino Wu YaoUploaded byvlad lupasteanu
- SyllabusUploaded bySreedharReddySajjala
- Notes 21 Primary Stress LoadsUploaded byHeronijosh Dg
- CE474-Ch1-IntroReview.pdfUploaded byamit
- Working Stresses of Philippine WoodsUploaded byErwin Ronald Calma
- 17Uploaded byhend mahmoud
- Klu Som Objective QuestionsUploaded byabilash_nivas
- s3 ME KTUUploaded byMuzammil Muhammed
- NovoUploaded byCarol Rezende
- d6850c8997e7b6756c4fc2d2b88363f6Uploaded bySeifeldin Ali Marzouk
- Tratado de La Teoria Matem Elasticidad LOVEUploaded byhernanricali
- Dictaat UK v9Uploaded byselvithimmarajan@gmail.com
- Slab BridgesUploaded byAnujith K Babu
- Project 5Uploaded bysaateh

- IS 456-2000 Indian Standard code book for RCC design guidelinesUploaded bylokesh2325
- Appendi AUploaded byjrandeep
- Mathcad - 2_EN 1992_Beam_Slab & T-Beam_V4Uploaded byjrandeep
- DN-7 StoneUploaded byjrandeep
- Caltrans S4 FoundationsUploaded byasdf ghjk
- List of CIVIL IS Codes Updated as 1st April 2013Uploaded byprabhu81
- 7_EN 1992_Shrinkage & Creep EstimationUploaded byjrandeep
- Low-profile-T45-60(30)-905Uploaded byjrandeep
- How to design to eurocode 2.pdfUploaded byshitturahman1891
- HCS Ultimate Strength of PTUploaded byjrandeep
- 1_Second Order Linear Differential With Constant CoefficientsUploaded byjrandeep
- Model Building Byelass PDFUploaded byAnamika Tiwary
- Eurocodes in Hard Rock Engineering in FinlandUploaded byjrandeep
- How to Design FoundationsUploaded byjrandeep
- Design Calculations in GeotechnicsUploaded bygmazzucco
- Footing With Biaxial MomentsUploaded bysuman33
- Wall Calculation Example EC2Uploaded byKristjan Igasta
- NISTIR 5634 Prediction of Cracking in Reinforced Concrete StructuresUploaded bypmc_lbm4440
- Punching Shear Finland NormsUploaded byjrandeep
- Design of Reinforced ConcreteUploaded byAhmet Derdiyok
- Peikko Group Product Catalog 2014-08-25Uploaded byGoran Višnjarić
- Exemple-Aachen Piraprez EugèneUploaded byanser_ti68400
- Design of Shotcrete Rock Reinforcement in Hard Rock According to EurocodeUploaded byjrandeep
- Rak-83_3100 Fatigue Design Example_1Uploaded byjrandeep
- ETAG 001-Annex C 10-08-01Uploaded byjpjobdu
- Core Wall Sign Conversion ExampleUploaded byjrandeep
- Earth Pressure and Retaining WallUploaded byIon Pusculita

- Catalogue BelgicastUploaded bytangouze
- DSR 2007Uploaded bySarjerao More
- 0032 50 L SP 015 A4 Specification for Insulating JointUploaded byArie Sinardi
- ITP - Concrete Works.pdfUploaded byntah84
- Coating rings and balls.pdfUploaded byAnonymous NxpnI6jC
- AJMUploaded byRavi Ranjan
- Aisi 1044 Carbon Steel (Uns g10440)Uploaded bysatrio satrio
- Weldability of Friction Welding Process for AA2024 Alloy and SS304 Stainless Steel using Finite Element AnalysisUploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Sanders 0102Uploaded byyang2012
- 5-Cold Working BrassUploaded byAhmed Maged
- Part 2 Rules Mat Welding Fiber FrpUploaded byfarhan_82
- ASTM Complete Set (Print)Uploaded byirmuhidin
- 3LPEUploaded byjangdini
- 31-14544-2Uploaded byplasmapete
- Installation and Maintenance of Rigid PipesUploaded byKhairul Anwar
- Example 6.1 - Slab-Simply Supported (One-Way).pdfUploaded bynur
- Civil Works SpecUploaded bySpidy Bond
- Welding Duplex Stainless Steels – a Review of Currernt RecommendationsUploaded byTrushar Parmar
- Vertical Garden GuideUploaded byChantalRoch
- Plastico Asme IxUploaded byAnonymous t0r2yT4
- Acidclean Soak and Cir MethodUploaded byMohan Veerappan
- 2 - API 570 Exam B (150 Q&A)Uploaded byMohammed Kadhim
- Is 8043 Hydrophobic Portland Cement-SpecificationUploaded bytudors19
- Choi-Review on the Jet Grouting MethodUploaded bynumspy
- Simplified TDH WorksheetUploaded bysajay2010
- Thermal Relief ValvesUploaded byKisinda
- Nylofor 3D Multi - ENG_LOWres.pdfUploaded byMar Crucis
- Cost Analysis of Hot-Cold Mix - CopyUploaded byChManikumar
- FCPUploaded bysm_carvalho
- LTRC 08-1ST Final Report 477 Evaluation of Continuity Detail for Precast Pre Stressed GirdersUploaded bywalaywan