Materials: Experimental Analysis of Space Trusses Using Spacers of Concrete With Steel Fiber and Sisal Fiber

materials
Article
Experimental Analysis of Space Trusses Using
Spacers of Concrete with Steel Fiber and Sisal Fiber
Welington V. Silva 1 , Ramon Silva 1, * , Luciano M. Bezerra 1 , Cleirton A. S. Freitas 2 and
Jorge Bonilla 3
1 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Darcy Ribeiro Campus, University of Brasília,
SG12 Building, Brasilia 70910-900, Brazil; welington.vital@gmail.com (W.V.S.); lmbz@unb.br (L.M.B.)
2 Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Cariri – UFCA, Av. Tenente Raimundo Rocha S/N,
Juazeiro do Norte, Ceará 63048-080, Brazil; andre.freitas@ufca.edu.br
3 Group for Numerical Methods in Engineering, University of Ciego de Ávila, Ciego de Ávila 65100, Cuba;
jorgedbr@unica.cu
* Correspondence: ramon.silva@unb.br; Tel.: +55-61-3107-0990

Received: 28 March 2020; Accepted: 1 May 2020; Published: 16 May 2020
Abstract: Space trusses are structural systems, generally made of tubes, used worldwide because of
their advantages in covering long-span roofs. In addition to having a low cost, the truss weight is
relatively reduced. The load capacity of these structures depends also on the strength of their node
connection. Connections made with the superposition of flattened tube ends trespassed by one bolt
are, generally, known as typical nodes. They are inexpensive but present eccentricities that reduce
significantly the strength of such space trusses. To increase the truss load capacity, this research
presents the results of an experimental program to reduce the eccentricities of the typical nodes.
This reduction is done with a new type of spacer made of encapsulated concrete with steel fiber or
sisal fiber. The experimental tests showed that the trusses with typical nodes collapsed under reduced
load by local failure due to high distortions at the nodes. The trusses with encapsulated concrete
spacer showed good results, with an increase in collapse load of 36% and failure by buckling bars.
Keywords: full-scale space truss; steel fiber concrete; sisal fiber concrete; spacer encapsulated with
concrete; connection eccentricity; experimental test
1. Introduction
Space trusses are three-dimensional (3D) reticulate systems used worldwide because of their
advantages in covering large, free spaces. In addition to having low cost, the weight itself is relatively
reduced. Space trusses are versatile in a range of applications, from small ornamental marquees, the
cover of warehouses, gymnasiums, hangars, and shopping centers, to helipads, etc.
Space trusses were copied from nature. The natural elements always seek to minimize stress and
maximize strength in an efficient way, taking advantage of the load capacity of all members of the
body [1,2]. The natural shapes have exceptional stiffness and use minimum materials to obtain the
maximum structural advantage. The natural forms act in the direction of the least force [3].
Humans were quick to copy examples from nature. Examples of three-dimensional modular
structures, produced on an industrial scale, were initiated by scientist Alexander Graham Bell [3–10].
In the first decade of the 20th century, he experienced the use of flat trusses in the manufacture of pipes
and later with the construction of three-dimensional trusses composed of octahedral and tetrahedral
units inspired by the marine shell of Nautilus in an attempt to manufacture light and robust structure
to the displacement. In the year 1907, in Canada, Alexander Graham Bell invented what was, probably,
the first prefabricated 3D space truss structure.
Materials 2020, 13, 2305; doi:10.3390/ma13102305 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2020, 13, 2305 2 of 22
Materials 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 2 3
It It
waswas a structure
a structure mademade
up ofup of modular
modular tetrahedral
tetrahedral elements
elements prefabricated
prefabricated in and
in a factory a factory and
attached
toattached to the construction
the construction site with
site with screws screws
[5]. The [5]. The
structure structure
obtained was obtained was
raised to raised
form to form a 30-
a 30-meter-high
meter-hightower.
observation observation
Despitetower.
Bell’s Despite Bell's in
development development in theofconstruction
the construction of three-dimensional
three-dimensional trusses in the
trusses
early 20thincentury,
the early 20th
they century,
were they were
only used only
broadly inused broadlyafter
architecture in architecture after the
the introduction of introduction
the MERO
of theinMERO
system system in 1943,
1943, considered to be aconsidered
connectiontoofbe a connection
simple execution.ofItsimple execution.
is because It is because
Bell’s connection Bell's
system
connection
was complex. system was complex.
MERO connection MERO used
was widely connection was widely
commercially and was used commercially
developed in Germanyand bywas
developed
Dr. Ing. Maxin Germany by Dr. Ing.
Mengeringhausen Max Mengeringhausen
and Rohbauwwise and
[1,5,11–18] (seeRohbauwwise
Figure 1). [1,5,11–18] (see Figure
1).
Figure
Figure 1. 1. Connection
Connection manufactured
manufactured in 1943,
in 1943, the system
the system more more
widelywidely
used inused
spaceintrusses
space in
trusses in the
the world.
world.
After the invention of the MERO connection, several other systems were patented with the same
principle:
AfterSteel ball, hexagonal
the invention screw, connection,
of the MERO connection several
sleeve, other
and hollow
systemssection bar. Thewith
were patented connection
the same
system with Steel
principle: spherical
ball,nodes showed
hexagonal satisfactory
screw, results
connection in experimental
sleeve, and hollow tests, mainly
section because
bar. bending
The connection
moments
system with were spherical
not mobilized nodes in the
showedconnection. The assembly
satisfactory results insystem is theoretically
experimental simple,because
tests, mainly using
only a torque
bending wrench
moments to tighten
were the boltin[14,19–21].
not mobilized On the
the connection. Theother hand,system
assembly this technology has asimple,
is theoretically high
manufacturing
using only a torque cost aswrench
a disadvantage.
to tighten In thethis
boltway, researchers
[14,19–21]. On theandother
designers
hand, sought to develop
this technology hasa a
connection system withcost
high manufacturing a lower cost that couldInbethis
as a disadvantage. manufactured
way, researchers in small
andmetallurgical
designers soughtcompanies [9],
to develop
and then the typical
a connection system connection
with a lower system costwas
thatdeveloped.
could be manufactured in small metallurgical companies
[9],In
andthisthen
context, the first
the typical typical node
connection connection
system used as an economic alternative in the project was
was developed.
in 1960Ininthis
the context,
United States by Richard
the first Fullerconnection
typical node and Konrad Wachsmann
used in the construction
as an economic alternative in of the
a hangar
project
cover
was at in London
1960 in the airport
United(seeStates
Figure by2a). LaterFuller
Richard in Brazil
andinKonrad
1968, the roof of thein
Wachsmann Anhembi Exhibition
the construction of a
Park was built, in the city of São Paulo (see Figure 2b) with typical connections.
hangar cover at London airport (see Figure 2a). Later in Brazil in 1968, the roof of the Anhembi It became the largest
roof in the world
Exhibition Park in was aluminum
built, in theusingcityspace
of Sãotruss.
PauloThe(seespace
Figure structure
2b) withcovered
typical 70,000 squareItmeters.
connections. became
Later in 1970 roof
the largest in France,
in theengineer
world inStéphanealuminum Duusing
Châteauspace developed
truss. Thealso two alternative
space connections
structure covered 70,000
systems
squarefor spaceLater
meters. trusses [22] (see
in 1970 Figureengineer
in France, 2d). In Italy, in 1980,
Stéphane Duthe VESTRUT
Château systemalso
developed wastwo
widely used
alternative
asconnections
a space truss connection
systems option
for space [23] (see
trusses [22]Figure 2e). 2d). In Italy, in 1980, the VESTRUT system was
(see Figure
The used
widely assembly of thetruss
as a space space trusses with
connection optiontypical connections
[23] (see Figure 2e). uses the overlapping of stamped
bar ends Thejoined
assembly by aofsingle
the spacetrespassing
trusses withbolt.typical
Suchconnections
connections, generally,
uses go against
the overlapping the safety
of stamped bar
recommendations
ends joined by ofa design singlecodes of usingbolt.
trespassing more Such
than one bolt. This system
connections, generally,presents several structural
go against the safety
problems; one of them
recommendations ofisdesign
due to codes
the eccentricities
of using more in the than
typical onenode.
bolt.Eccentricity
This system generates
presents bending
several
moment,
structural increase
problems; in stresses,
one of themand produces
is due to the theeccentricities
failure of theinconnection
the typical at reduced
node. load, therefore,
Eccentricity generates
with an inefficient
bending moment, use of the resistant
increase in stresses, capacity of the bars
and produces the(see Figure
failure of 2c).
the connection at reduced load,
therefore, with an inefficient use of the resistant capacity of the bars (see Figure 2c).
As shown, the first records of the use of space trusses applied as a roofing system date from the
beginning of the
Materials 2020, 20th
13, x2305 century
FOR PEER [7,24]. However, in the following years, several accidents were recorded
REVIEW 23 3ofof2 22
3
with space trusses, due to the progressive collapse of the connections [8,25–30].
As shown, the first records of the use of space trusses applied as a roofing system date from the
beginning of the 20th century [7,24]. However, in the following years, several accidents were recorded
with space trusses, due to the progressive collapse of the connections [8,25–30].
(a) (b) (c)
(a) (b) (c)
(d) (e)
Figure
Figure2.2.Typical
Typicalconnection
connectionmodels
modelsfor forspace
spacetrusses.
trusses.(a)(a)Typical
Typicalconnection
connectionused
usedininthe
theUnited
UnitedStates
States
inin1960.
1960.(b)(b)
Connection
Connectionwith
withflattened
flattened steel
(d) tube
steel tube at the
at theends
ends and
and bolts
boltsin thin-walled
in thin-walled
(e) plate
plateused
used inin
1968.
1968.(c)
(c)Typical
Typical connection with flattened
connection with flattenedsteel
steeltube
tubeatatthethe ends
ends and
and connected
connected with
with a bolt
a bolt usedused in
in 1968.
Figure
1968. (d)2.Connections
Typical
(d) Connections connection
proposed models
by Du
proposed Château
by Du forChâteau
space trusses.
in 1970. (e) (a) Typical
in VESTRUT
1970. connection
system
(e) VESTRUT patented
systemused in the United
connection
patented space inStates
1980.
connection
in 1960.
space (b) Connection with flattened steel tube at the ends and bolts in thin-walled plate used in
in 1980.
As shown,
1968. the first
(c) Typical recordswith
connection of the use ofsteel
flattened space tubetrusses
at the applied
ends andasconnected
a roofingwithsystem date
a bolt usedfrom
in the
2.beginning
Collapses ofinthe
1968. (d) 20th Truss
Space century
Connections [7,24].
and
proposed byHowever,
Eccentricity in the
Correction
Du Château following
in 1970. years, several
(e) VESTRUT system accidents were recorded
patented connection
with space
spaceintrusses,
1980. due to the progressive collapse of the connections [8,25–30].
The first large lattice structure to collapse was the Bucharest Dome built in 1961 [31–34]. The
building known
2. Collapses
Collapses as the Truss
in Space
Space national economy exhibition pavilion in Bucharest, Romania, was designed
2. in Truss and
and Eccentricity
Eccentricity Correction
Correction
by Ferdinand Lederer [35]. It collapsed in 1963, less than two years [33,36] after the inauguration. The
The first
The first large
largelattice
latticestructure
structuretotocollapse
collapsewaswas the Bucharest Domebuiltbuilt in 1961 [31–34].
roof was a symmetrical dome composed of 26 bands ofthe
3D Bucharest
trusses. The Dome
structure in 1961
was used[31–34]. The
to contour
The building
building knownknown as as
the the national
national economy
economy exhibition
exhibition pavilion
pavilion inin Bucharest,
Bucharest, Romania,
Romania, was designed
was designed
a 65-m radius hubcap surface. [32,35,37,38]. Figure 3 shows details of the roof before and after the
by Ferdinand
by FerdinandLederer
Lederer[35].
[35].It It collapsed
collapsed in in 1963,
1963, lessless than
than twotwo years
years [33,36]
[33,36] afterafter the inauguration.
the inauguration. The
collapse that occurred in the welded connections.
The roof was a symmetrical dome composed of 26 bands of 3D trusses. The
roof was a symmetrical dome composed of 26 bands of 3D trusses. The structure was used to contourstructure was used to
acontour a 65-mhubcap
65-m radius radius hubcap
surface.surface. [32,35,37,38].
[32,35,37,38]. Figure Figure
3 shows 3 shows
detailsdetails
of theofroof
the before
roof before
and and
afterafter
the
the collapse that occurred in the welded
collapse that occurred in the welded connections. connections.
(a) (b)
Figure 3. Mechanism of collapse of the Bucharest, Romania, cover in 1963 [32,39], (a) inside view
before collapse, (b) inside view after collapse.
(a) (b)
Figure 3. Mechanism
Figure 3. Mechanismofofcollapse
collapseofof
thethe Bucharest,
Bucharest, Romania,
Romania, cover
cover in 1963
in 1963 [32,39],
[32,39], (a) inside
(a) inside view
view before
before collapse,
collapse, (b) view
(b) inside insideafter
viewcollapse.
after collapse.
construction began in 1960 [40] and was one of the major projects in the city of Hartford at the time,
being completed in 1973. The 3D lattice roof was shaped like pyramids, with dimensions of 9.40 m
by 9.40 m and a height of 6.45 m. The roof was modulated with 12 pyramids in one direction and 10
in the other one, comprising the size of 112.80 m by 94.0 m. In the 1980s, several investigations were
carried out to identify the causes of the accident [25,26,29,35,43,47,48]. Figure 4a shows the roof after
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 4 of 22
the collapse.
In 2020,
Materials the province
13, x FOR PEERof Gerona
REVIEW in Spain, the cover of a sports center, a multisport gymnasium, 23 of 2 3
A coliseum
collapsed. The roofindimensions
the Unitedwere States
50 m collapsed
× 30 m [49].[25,26,40–46] after ofvarious
The connection the doubleshowslayerand
mesh games.
was
Its
the construction
typical began in 1960 [40] and was one of the major projects
A coliseum in the United States collapsed [25,26,40–46] after various shows and games.due
node system with stamped ends; the work was completed in in
2000. the city
However, of Hartford
in 2010, at
Its
the
to time, being
snow
construction completed
overload,
began the in[40]
1973.
structure
in 1960 The 3Done
collapsed,
and was lattice
as roof
of athe was projects
consequence
major shapedof like
plentypyramids,
in the with dimensions
of rotations
city of Hartford in at
thethe
typicalof
time,
9.40 mcompleted
by 9.40
connections
being due m toand
inthe a eccentricities
height
1973. The of3D6.45 m. roof
The roof
contained
lattice was
in the
was modulated
connection,
shaped with
as 12with
shown
like pyramids, pyramids
in Figure in
4b.one of
dimensions direction
9.40 m
and 10
by 9.40In in
mthe
andother
Malaysia, one, of
another
a height comprising
type theroof
of collapse
6.45 m. The sizeinwas
ofspace
112.80 m by
truss
modulated 94.0
withm.12
structure Inpyramids
the 1980s,
occurred inseveral
in the ofinvestigations
citydirection
one Terengganu,
and 10
were
in thecarried
which other out
had aone, to identify the
double-layer
comprising thecauses
size ofof
structure, the aaccident
with
112.80 capacity
m [25,26,29,35,43,47,48].
by 94.0 for 50,000
m. In Figure
soccerseveral
the 1980s, fans. 4a stadium
The shows thecover
investigations roof
were
after
carriedtheout
collapsed collapse.
ontoJune 2, 2009
identify the(see Figure
causes 5) [50,51].
of the accident [25,26,29,35,43,47,48]. Figure 4a shows the roof after
the collapse.
In the province of Gerona in Spain, the cover of a sports center, a multisport gymnasium,
collapsed. The roof dimensions were 50 m × 30 m [49]. The connection of the double layer mesh was
the typical node system with stamped ends; the work was completed in 2000. However, in 2010, due
to snow overload, the structure collapsed, as a consequence of plenty of rotations in the typical
connections due to the eccentricities contained in the connection, as shown in Figure 4b.
In Malaysia, another type of collapse in space truss structure occurred in the city of Terengganu,
which had a double-layer structure, with a capacity for 50,000 soccer fans. The stadium cover
collapsed on June 2, 2009 (see Figure 5) [50,51].
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Collapse
Collapse detail
detail with
with space
space truss,
truss, (a)
(a) details
details of the collapse of the Hartford Civic Center
Coliseum [25], (b) cover collapse after a snowfall in
in Gerona,
Gerona, Spain
Spain [49].
[49].
In the province of Gerona in Spain, the cover of a sports center, a multisport gymnasium, collapsed.
The roof dimensions were 50 m × 30 m [49]. The connection of the double layer mesh was the typical
node system with stamped ends; the work was completed in 2000. However, in 2010, due to snow
overload, the structure collapsed, as a consequence of plenty of rotations in the typical connections
due to the eccentricities contained in the connection, as shown in Figure 4b.
In Malaysia, another type(a) of collapse in space truss structure(b) occurred in the city of Terengganu,
whichFigure
had a4.double-layer structure,
Collapse detail withtruss,
with space a capacity for 50,000
(a) details of the soccer fans.
collapse TheHartford
of the stadiumCivic
coverCenter
collapsed
on June 2, 2009 (see Figure 5) [50,51].
Coliseum [25], (b) cover collapse after a snowfall in Gerona, Spain [49].
(a) (b)
Figure 5. Detail of the collapse of the football stadium roof in Malaysia [52], (a) details of the
construction of the Shah Alam Stadium at Malaysia [5], (b) detail of the roof collapse of the Shah Alam
Stadium at Malaysia [35,50].
In 2012, in the city of Ontario, Canada, in Downsview Park, there was a collapse of a 3D lattice
structure; the park stage collapsed [53]. The connection used was a typical node connection. Figure
6a shows the details of this collapse due to welding failures. In Brazil, accidents also happened in 3D
structures [9,17,24,54–59]. One major accident was the roof of the Manaus Convention Center in April
1994. The most recent was the (a) collapse of the Georgiano Gymnasium (b) in March 2019, after a strong
rain. Figure
This facility
Figure had
5.5.Detail
Detail a capacity
of of
thethe
for 6500
collapse
collapse thefans,
of theoffootball
withstadium
football
stadium
dimensions of 120
roof in
roof in Malaysia
m by [52],
Malaysia 65 m;
[52], (a) details
the
(a)
of
latticeofstructure
thedetails the
construction
collapsed.
of Figure
construction
the Shah Alam6b shows
of theStadium the
Shah Alam node
at Malaysiacollapse
Stadium[5], of this
at Malaysia gymnasium.
(b) detail[5], (b) detail
of the of the roof
roof collapse collapse
of the of the Stadium
Shah Alam Shah Alam at
Stadium at
Malaysia Malaysia [35,50].
[35,50].
In 2012, in the
the city
city of
of Ontario,
Ontario, Canada,
Canada, in Downsview Park, there was a collapse of a 3D 3D lattice
lattice
structure; the park stage collapsed [53]. The connection used was a typical node connection.
structure; the park stage collapsed [53]. The connection used was a typical node connection. Figure Figure 6a
shows
6a showsthethe
details of of
details this collapse
this due
collapse due toto
welding failures.
welding failures.InInBrazil,
Brazil,accidents
accidentsalso
alsohappened
happened inin 3D
3D
structures
structures [9,17,24,54–59].
[9,17,24,54–59]. One major accident
accident was the roof of the Manaus Convention
Convention Center
Center in April
1994.
1994. The most recent was the collapse of the Georgiano Gymnasium in March 2019, after a strong strong
rain.
rain. This facility had a capacity for 6500 fans, with dimensions of 120 m by 65 m; the lattice structure
collapsed. Figure 6b shows the node collapse of this gymnasium.
gymnasium.
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 5 of 22
Materials
Materials 2020,
2020, 13,
13, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 23
23 of
of 2233
ss
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 6.
6. Connection
Connection failure
failure and
and space
space truss
truss rupture,
rupture, (a)
(a) detail
detail of
of the
the failure
failure in
in typical
typical connection
connection at
at
city of Ontario, Canada, (b) gymnasium roof collapse, Brazil [60].
city of Ontario, Canada, (b) gymnasium roof collapse, Brazil [60].
Severalother
Several othercollapses
other collapsesinin
collapses 3D
in 3D
3Dtrusses
trusses
trusses have
havebeen
have observed
been
been observed
observed in theinworld.
in the
the world.However,
world. the ranges
However,
However, the of space
the ranges
ranges of
of
truss
spacestructures
space truss have been
truss structures
structures havereevaluated
have been and some
been reevaluated
reevaluated have
and
and some
somebeen strengthened
have
have been in recent years
been strengthened
strengthened in [61–70],
in recent
recent thanks
years
years [61–
[61–
to increasingly
70],
70], thanks
thanks to robust computer
to increasingly
increasingly robust
robust systems
computer
computer and systems
commercial
systems andandFinite ElementFinite
commercial
commercial Method
Finite (FEM)Method
Element
Element programs
Method and
(FEM)
(FEM)
complex
programs
programs andnonlinear
and complexanalyses [10,30,56,71–82].
complex nonlinear
nonlinear analyses
analyses [10,30,56,71–82].
[10,30,56,71–82].
In summary,
In summary,the
summary, themotivation
the motivationofof
motivation ofthis
thispaper
this paper
paper was
was
wasrelated
related
relatedtotothethe
to fact
the that
fact
fact inexpensive
that
that inexpensive
inexpensive butbut
common
but common
common 3D
trusses
3D present
trusses local
present failure
local at
failuretheir
at connections,
their specifically
connections, in
specifically stamped
in typical
stamped
3D trusses present local failure at their connections, specifically in stamped typical connections, connections,
typical which
connections,
deform
which excessively
which deform
deform causingcausing
excessively
excessively truss collapse
causing truss [83]. This
truss collapse
collapse problem
[83].
[83]. This is explained
This problem
problem is by the geometric
is explained
explained by
by the changes
the geometric
geometric
generated
changes in typical connections [84] due to the flattened ends of the truss
changes generated in typical connections [84] due to the flattened ends of the truss bars and tubes [4],
generated in typical connections [84] due to the flattened ends of the bars
trussand
barstubes
and [4,85,86].
tubes [4],
The increasing
[85,86].
[85,86]. The stresses,stresses,
The increasing
increasing at the stamped
stresses, at
at the ends, reduce
the stamped
stamped ends,the
ends, trussthe
reduce
reduce load
the capacity
truss
truss load [49,55,87].
load capacity
capacity [55],
[55], [49,87].
[49,87].
2.1.
2.1. Correction of
2.1. Correction
Correction of Eccentricity
of Eccentricity
Eccentricity in in Typical
Typical Connections
in Typical Connections
Connections
Many
Many space
Many space
space trusstruss accidents
truss accidents involving
accidents involving typical
involving typical connections
typical connections
connections are are characterized
are characterized
characterized by by
by aaa progressive
progressive
progressive
collapse
collapse triggered
collapse triggered
triggered by by the
by the local
the local collapse
local collapse of
collapse of the
of theconnection,
the connection, not
connection, not to
not tothe ultimate
to the
the ultimatebuckling
ultimate buckling
bucklingof theoftruss
of the bars.
the truss
truss
The
bars.collapses
bars. The involving
The collapses
collapses typical connections
involving
involving typical were a consequence
typical connections
connections were of the stamped
were aa consequence
consequence oftubes
of the overlapped
the stamped
stamped tubes and
tubes
interconnected
overlapped
overlapped and with a single
and interconnected
interconnected withbolt. This produces
with aa single
single bolt. the incompatibility
bolt. This
This produces
produces the of lines passing
the incompatibility
incompatibility of through
of linesthe center
lines passing
passing
of gravity
through of the bars arranged in the diagonals and on the truss edges
through the center of gravity of the bars arranged in the diagonals and on the truss edges (see Figure
the center of gravity of the bars arranged in the diagonals and (see
on Figure
the truss 7). Consequently,
edges (see Figure it
generates
7). eccentricities
7). Consequently,
Consequently, itit generates (see Figure 7a).
generates eccentricities This situation
eccentricities (see (see Figurediffers
Figure 7a). from
7a). This the nodes
This situation idealized
situation differs
differs from in a
from thetheoretical
the nodes
nodes
truss,
idealized
idealizedand,in
inabove all, from
aa theoretical
theoretical the assumptions
truss,
truss, and,
and, above
above all, adopted
all, from
from the in assumptions
the most design offices.
assumptions adoptedItin
adopted ismost
in possible
most designto observe
design offices.
offices.
that
It is there
It is possibleare to
possible two eccentricities:
to observe
observe that
that there E1 , are
there horizontal
are two (stamped region)
two eccentricities:
eccentricities: and E2 , vertical
EE11,, horizontal
horizontal (stamped
(stamped (distance
region)between
region) and
and EE22,,
points
vertical A and
vertical (distance B (see
(distance between Figure
between points 7)). The
points A proposal,
A and
and BB (see developed
(see Figure
Figure 7)). by
7)). The[59], was
The proposal, to correct
proposal, developed the
developed by eccentricity
by [59],
[59], was
was (Eto),
2to
using
correct a
correct thespacer element.
the eccentricity
eccentricity (E In this case,
(E22),), using it is
using aa spacerobserved
spacer element. that
element. In the
In thiseccentricity
this case,
case, itit is correction
is observed
observed that E is
2 the
that made using
the eccentricity
eccentricity an
element
correction that
E 2 provides
is made the
using distance
an elementd equal
that to E
provides
2 between
the the
distancediagonals
correction E2 is made using an element that provides the distance d equal to E2 between the diagonals
d equal and
to Ethe
2 bottom
between chord.
the Thus,
diagonals
points
and
and the A and
the bottom B (Figure
bottom chord. 7a)
chord. Thus, can
Thus, points be considered
points A A and superimposed
and BB (Figure
(Figure 7a)7a) can
can be (Figure
be considered7b).
considered superimposed
superimposed (Figure (Figure 7b).7b).
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 7.
7. Proposal
Proposal to correct the eccentricity [9], (a) typical connection with eccentricity, (b)
(b) correction
Figure 7. Proposal to to correct
correct the
the eccentricity
eccentricity [9],
[9], (a)
(a) typical
typical connection
connection with
with eccentricity,
eccentricity, (b) correction
correction
of
of eccentricity
eccentricity “d
“d == EE22”in
”in the
the connection.
connection.
of eccentricity “d = E2 ”in the connection.
The
The vertical
vertical eccentricity
eccentricity EE22 is
is proportional
proportional to
to the
the angle
angle ϕ,
ϕ, being
being equivalent
equivalent to
to the
the correction
correction
distance d. Figure 8 shows that the measurement of d
distance d. Figure 8 shows that the measurement of d2 is equal to 5t1 of the pipe wall thickness (flange)
2 is equal to 5t 1 of the pipe wall thickness (flange)
d= − 8𝑡 (1)
𝑙√2 − 4𝐸1
Where: E1 Eccentricity due to flattening of the bar; t1 and t2 is the thickness of the tube; H represents
the height of the truss; L the length of the chord; d is the spacer thickness necessary to correct the
eccentricity E2. However, the use of this equation requires that the spacer has sufficient resistance to
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 6 of 22
support the compression force. Thus, concrete is a candidate to be used as a spacer due to its good
resistance to compression. Nevertheless, to avoid concrete cracks, two fiber mix options were
evaluated. One option
The vertical was concrete
eccentricity mixed with to
E2 is proportional steel
thefiber
angle φ, the
and other
being was concrete
equivalent to themixed with
correction
sisal fiber.
distance Both concrete
d. Figure mixtures
8 shows that can be encapsulated
the measurement by to
of d2 is equal cold-formed steel
5t1 of the pipe profiles
wall to restrain
thickness (flange)
tconcrete
1 plus 3t2deformation.
of the pipe wallThe thickness
concrete spacers have thet2function
of the diagonal to eliminate
. Considering the walleccentricity
thicknessesEof
2 (Figure
the same 7)
and prevent
tubes the appearance
(diagonals and chords),ofwe
bending
have amoments
total of 8t.in the connections.
Figure
Figure 8.
8. Trigonometric
Trigonometric relations for typical
relations for typical connection
connection in
in space
space truss.
truss.
2.2. Application of Fiber-Reinforced

Now, trigonometric relationsConcrete
to the two triangles formed in Figure 8 can be applied. The first
triangle is obtained using the E1 side, and the second triangle composed by the base of the D side.
Conventional concrete still has some deficiencies such as low ductility, plastic shrinkage, and
Equating the two triangles, Equation (1) is obtained.
small tension strength. Thus, fiber additions to concrete is common practice, which seeks to reduce
the cracks, improving performance to tensions’ 2HE1forces. The fibers act as connection bridges,
transferring the stresses to another side d of=the√concrete − 8t
matrix, and minimizing stresses at the ends (1)
l 2 − 4E1
of the cracks. The use of discrete fibers is one effective solution to reinforce the matrix for improving
where: E1 Eccentricity
the tensile and flexuraldue to flattening
performances ofof theplain
the t1 and t2 is
bar; concrete. the thickness
Among of the
the fibers, tube;
steel H was
fiber represents
one of
the earliest
height of and is oneLofthe
theit truss; thelength of the chord;
most effective d is the
materials spacer thickness
for improving necessaryproperties
the mechanical to correct and
the
eccentricity E2 . However,
impact resistance the [88].
of concrete use of this
The equation
first requires
structural that
use of thefiber-reinforced
steel spacer has sufficient resistance
concrete was in
to support
1971 for thethe compression
production force. Thus,
of collapsible concrete
panels is a candidate
for a London Heathrow to be used as
Airport a spacer
parking due Since
garage. to its
good resistance
then, this type oftoconcrete
compression. Nevertheless,
reinforcement to avoid
has gained muchconcrete cracks,
interest in thetwo fiber mix industry,
construction options were
and
evaluated. One option was concrete mixed with steel fiber and the other was concrete
also among researchers. Table 1 presents briefly some applications of reinforcement with the addition mixed with sisal
fiber.
of fiberBoth concrete
to the concrete. mixtures can be encapsulated by cold-formed steel profiles to restrain concrete
deformation. The concrete spacers have the function to eliminate eccentricity E2 (Figure 7) and prevent
the appearance of bending moments in the connections.
2.2. Application of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete

Conventional concrete still has some deficiencies such as low ductility, plastic shrinkage, and
small tension strength. Thus, fiber additions to concrete is common practice, which seeks to reduce the
cracks, improving performance to tensions’ forces. The fibers act as connection bridges, transferring
the stresses to another side of the concrete matrix, and minimizing stresses at the ends of the cracks.
The use of discrete fibers is one effective solution to reinforce the matrix for improving the tensile and
flexural performances of the plain concrete. Among the fibers, steel fiber was one of the earliest and it
is one of the most effective materials for improving the mechanical properties and impact resistance of
concrete [88]. The first structural use of steel fiber-reinforced concrete was in 1971 for the production of
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 7 of 22
collapsible panels for a London Heathrow Airport parking garage. Since then, this type of concrete
reinforcement has gained much interest in the construction industry, and also among researchers.
Table 1 presents briefly some applications of reinforcement with the addition of fiber to the concrete.
Table 1. Some fiber concrete applications.
Main Uses of Fiber in Concrete References

Avoid cracking on industrial floors and pavements; [89]
Application in tunnel coverings with shotcrete; [90]
Prefabricated elements such as concrete tubes and thin-walled concrete; [91]
Structural reinforcement of concrete plates with staple fibers and randomly distributed in the
[92,93]
concrete matrix;
Behavior of fiber reinforced concrete for controlling the rate of cracking in canal-lining; [94]
Application of fibers in reinforced concrete of columns to improve resistance to seismic actions; [95]
Reinforcement of mortars for masonry execution; [96]
Reinforcement of reinforced concrete beams; [97,98]
Addition of fiber to improve the toughness of the concrete to exposure; [99,100]
Use of mortar reinforced with steel fiber for seismic reinforcement. [101]
The use of fiber-reinforced concrete has a better deformation capacity, impact resistance, energy
absorption, and tensile strength. This paper proposes to correct the eccentricity of 3D trusses using
concrete with fiber as spacers using two types of fibers: Steel fiber and sisal fiber.
3. Experimental Program and Methods
3.1. Materials Used for Construction of the Spacers

For the construction of the spacers, a composite cement Portland CPIII-40, from the APODI
Company was used. This cement was tested and checked. The granulometry test showed that the
CPIII-40 granulometric distribution obtained was 95% and the cement grains were smaller than 50
µm, with 55% being less than 20 µm. The fine aggregate used in the production of the concretes was a
quartz river sand. This sand has the following characterization: A maximum diameter of 4.80 mm,
a fineness modulus of 2.7, natural moisture of 0.72%, density of 2.6 g/cm3 , and water absorption of
1.19%. The coarse aggregate used was basaltic gravel, with a lamellar shape, the values of a specific
mass, water absorption, and the Los Angeles abrasion test, and granulometry obtained the following
results: Maximum aggregate diameter of 9.50 mm, fineness modulus of 5.93, natural humidity of
1.57%, density of 2.7 g/cm3 , and water absorption of 25%.
3.2. Steel Fiber and Sisal Fiber

The new steel fibers presented in this paper were produced from steel wires with tensile strength
greater the 1000 MPa, manufactured by Dramix®from the company ArcelorMittal Corporation in the
city of Ipatinga, Brazil. For the manufacture of the new steel fibers, a simple tool was used to cut and
bend. The new fiber had a straight section with 25 mm of the length, plus two inclined anchors, in the
shape of a hook at the ends of the fibers. The hook size was 10 mm, so that the total length of the fiber
was 45 mm, similar to the material used in the fiber of the model Dramix®ZC45/0.5.
In the context of the civil construction environmental impact, fibers from natural resources, such
as sisal fiber, appear as an alternative to synthetic fibers. However, the elements incorporating such
technology are still on the market [102]. The sisal fibers used in this work were extracted from Agave
Sisalana plant by a process called decortication. The fibers were received in bundles of long fibers,
approximately 1 meter long. Before cutting them into segments of 45 mm, it was necessary to process
them to remove impurities. The fibers were submerged into water at 70 ± 5 ◦ C for approximately
one hour. After this process, the fibers were air-dried for 48 h and then manually cut. The steel fiber
and sisal fiber, inserted in the concrete matrix, were used with 1% of the concrete volume fraction
the Materials
Materials 2020, 13,Laboratory,
2305 both at the Federal University of Cariri (UFCA). Tables 2 and 3 give
8 ofthe
22
properties of the steel and sisal fibers. Figure 9 shows pictures of these fibers.
(Vf = 1%) [103–106]. The strength ofTable the steel wire was
2. Properties tested
of steel before cutting and bending. All tests
fiber.
for material and mechanical properties’ characterization were
the Materials Laboratory, both at the Federal University of Cariri (UFCA). done in the Structural
Tables 2 and 3 Laboratory
give the and
Commercial
Specifications
in the Materials Laboratory, both at the Federal University
Configuration Propertyof Cariri (UFCA). Tables 2 and 3 give the
Name Values cov
Table 2. Properties of steel fiber.
Density 7860 kg/m³ -
Commercial Table 2. PropertiesUltimate
of steelStrength
fiber. 1130 MPa
Specifications 0.048
Configuration Property
Name Values200 × 10cov
Modulus of Elasticity Specifications 0.077
Commercial Name Configuration Property
Density 7860 kg/m³ MPa -
Ultimate Strength 1130 Values 0.048 cov
MPa
Hooked Ends Strain at proportion
New steel fiber Density 5650
200 7860
× 10kg/m× 310 --
Modulus oflimit
Ultimate Elasticity
Strength 1130 MPa 0.077 0.048
MPa
Hooked Ends
Ends
Poisson´s
Modulus
Strain
ratio
of Elasticity
at proportion 200 × 100.28
3 MPa -
0.077
Hooked
New
New steelsteel
fiberfiber
Strain at
Average proportion
Length-L limitf
5650 ×
565010×
45 10 −6
mm - --
limit ratio
Poisson´s 0.28 -
Nominal
AverageDiameter-D
Poisson´s ratio f
Length-L f 0.50
0.2845 mmmm - --
NominalLength-L
Average
Aspect Diameter-D
ratio (Lff/Df f) 0.50 mm
45 mm 90 - --
Aspect
Nominal ratio (Lf /Df )f
Diameter-D 90
0.50 mm - -
Aspect
Table 3. Properties ofratio
sisal(L f/Df)
fiber. 90 -
Table 3. Properties of sisal fiber.
Table 3. Properties of sisal fiber. Values
Property of the Sisal Fiber Values
Property of the Sisal Fiber Minimum - Maximum
Values cov
Property of the Sisal Fiber Minimum–Maximum cov
Length (mm) Minimum - 45 mm
Maximum cov -
Length
Density
Length (mm)
(g/cm³)
(mm) 45 mm 45 0.75–1.07
mm -- 0.021
Density 3
(g/cm³) 0.75–1.07
0.75–1.07 0.021
0.021
Tensile strength)(MPa)
Density (g/cm 227.80–1002.30 0.182
Tensile strength
Tensile (MPa)
strength (MPa) 227.80–1002.30
227.80–1002.30 0.182
0.182
Modulus of Elasticity (GPa) 10.94–26.70 0.193
Modulus of Elasticity
Modulus (GPa)
of Elasticity (GPa) 10.94–26.70
10.94–26.70 0.193
0.193
Failure
Failure deformation
deformation
Failure deformation (%)(%)
(%) 2.08–4.18 2.08–4.18
2.08–4.18 0.175
0.175
0.175
Water
Water absorption
absorption
Water to to
absorption tosaturation
saturation (%)
(%)(%)
saturation 180.00–250.00
180.00–250.00
180.00–250.00 0.064
0.064 0.064
Diameter
Diameter
Diameter (mm)
(mm) (mm) 0.08–0.030 0.08–0.030
0.08–0.030 0.185
0.185 0.185
(a) (b)
Figure 9. (a) Hooked-end steel fibers, (b) sisal fibers.
(a) (b)
Table 4 presents the compositions and abbreviated names of the three concrete mixes, with water
Figure 9. (a) Hooked-end steel fibers, (b) sisal fibers.
cement ratio of 0.5, used for the manufacturing of the spacers.
Table
Table 44 presents
presents the compositions
compositions and abbreviated
abbreviated names
names of the three concrete mixes, with water
cement ratio of 0.5, used for the manufacturing
manufacturing of
of the
the spacers.
spacers.
Table 4. Dosage used in the experimental procedure for 1 m3 of concrete.
Coarse
Cement APODI Sand Fiber (kg/m3 ) or
Nomenclature Trace by Weight Aggregate Water (l)
(kg/m3 ) (kg/m3 ) (Vf = 1%)
(kg/m3 )
C30 1:2.5:2.34:0.50 351.26 878.15 821.94 175.63 -
C30SteelFiber 1:2.5:2.34:0.50 351.26 878.15 821.94 175.63 78.0 (1%)
C30SisalFiber 1:2.5:2.34:0.50 351.26 878.15 821.94 175.63 14.52 (1%)
After mixing, the workability test was carried out with a slump test before the fresh concrete
was poured into the spacer molds. The average workability of concrete without fiber and with fiber
was around 10 cm (see Figure 10b,c). The concrete mixture was poured into the workability test molds
in two layers. When each layer was completed, the sides of the molds were hammered by a rubber
driver,2020,
Materials to shake
13, 2305the mix and consolidate the layer into the molds. Then the concrete mixture was 9 of 22
compacted using a compact table vibrator. The compactness took approximately 40 s for each layer.
During compaction, air bubbles appeared on the surface as an indication that the unwanted air was
To obtain
taken away. a homogenous concrete mix with sufficient workability, all batching was done by weight.
The concrete was mixed
After that, with an
the surface electrical
of the mixer
concrete was(see Figure
leveled 10a).
off. Thethe
Then, interior surface
specimens of the
were mixer to
covered was
cleaned
prevent and moistened
water beforeAfter
evaporation. placing
24 h,the
thematerials.
specimensBoth
werecoarse
takenand
fromfine
theaggregate
molds andwas placed
placed forand
7
mixed for several minutes into the mixer after the cement was added.
days in a tank, and then for 28 days cured in water with 23 °C temperature and humidity of 76%.
(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure 10.10.Execution
Executionofofconcrete
concretemixes.
mixes. (a)
(a) Inclined-axis
Inclined-axiselectric
electricconcrete
concretemixer,
mixer,(b)
(b)concrete
concretewithout
without
fiber,
fiber, (c)(c) concretewith
concrete withusing
usingfiber.
fiber.
3.3.The materials Test

Experimental wereofmixed until a uniform color was obtained. After that, half of the water quantity
the Concrete
was added and mixed for several minutes, too. After 5 min beating, finally the rest of the water quantity
This study performed a four-point bending test for the determination of the tension softening
was added toand
properties thecurves
mixtureof and mixed
concrete forand
with about 3 min.fiber.
without When Forsteel
eachfiber and sisal
concrete mix, fiber
shown were added
in Table 3, to
the mix, they were uniformly distributed in the layer top of the mixer.
three beam specimens were tested. The beam fabrication and dimensions (width, height, and length,
After mixing,
respectively, 100 the
mmworkability
× 100 mm ×test 400was
mm) carried out with
followed a slump test before
the recommendations ofthe fresh concrete
UNI-11039 was
[107] or
poured
RILEMinto the spacer
TC162-TDF molds.
(2003) The average workability of concrete without fiber and with fiber was
[108].
aroundAfter
10 cmthe
(see
completion cure The
Figure 10b,c). concreteand
of concrete mixture
priorwas poured
to the into the
test, each beam workability
specimen test
wasmolds in two
cut with a
layers.
notchWhen
locatedeach layer was of
at mid-length completed,
the beam.theThesides
notchofwas
theset
molds
withwere hammered
a constant width by
of 4amm
rubber
(seedriver,
Figure to
shake
11a).the
A mix and consolidate the
WDW-300KN-UTMs layer into
computer the molds.
control Thenuniversal
electronic the concrete mixture
testing was compacted
machine using a
with a capacity
compact
of 2000table vibrator.
kN was Thethe
used for compactness
four-point took approximately
bending test. Load was40 s applied
for each under
layer. During compaction,
displacement controlair
bubbles appeared on the surface as an indication that the unwanted air was taken away.
After that, the surface of the concrete was leveled off. Then, the specimens were covered to
prevent water evaporation. After 24 h, the specimens were taken from the molds and placed for 7 days
in a tank, and then for 28 days cured in water with 23 ◦ C temperature and humidity of 76%.
3.3. Experimental Test of the Concrete

This study performed a four-point bending test for the determination of the tension softening
properties and curves of concrete with and without fiber. For each concrete mix, shown in Table 3,
three beam specimens were tested. The beam fabrication and dimensions (width, height, and length,
respectively, 100 mm × 100 mm × 400 mm) followed the recommendations of UNI-11039 [107] or
RILEM TC162-TDF (2003) [108].
After the completion cure of concrete and prior to the test, each beam specimen was cut with a notch
located at mid-length of the beam. The notch was set with a constant width of 4 mm (see Figure 11a). A
WDW-300KN-UTMs computer control electronic universal testing machine with a capacity of 2000 kN
was used for the four-point bending test. Load was applied under displacement control at a speed of
1/1500 of the specimen span length (133 mm) per minute. One Linear Variable Differential Transformer
(LVDT) with a capacity of 100 mm was used to measure the deflection of the center of the beam
specimen during the test. A clip gage was attached at the bottom of the specimen to measure the crack
width at the notch. To determine the compressive strength of concretes, 27 specimens were molded
with 9 specimens for each type of concrete, following the guidelines of [109], with dimensions of 100
mm of diameter and 200 mm of height (see Figure 11b). To obtain the tensile strength of concrete, 9
specimens were molded, with 3 specimens for each type of concrete. The tensile strength was obtained
by means of the tensile test by diametrical compression, according to [110]. Figure 11 illustrates the
specimens for the characteristics of tension and compression concrete properties.
specimen
guidelinesto of measure
[109], with the crack width
dimensions at mm
of 100 the notch. To determine
of diameter and 200 mm the ofcompressive strength
height (see Figure of
11b).
concretes, 27 specimens were molded with 9 specimens for each type of concrete,
To obtain the tensile strength of concrete, 9 specimens were molded, with 3 specimens for each typefollowing the
guidelines
of concrete.of [109],
The with
tensile dimensions
strength of 100 mm
was obtained of diameter
by means of theand 200test
tensile mmbyofdiametrical
height (seecompression,
Figure 11b).
To obtain the tensile strength of concrete, 9 specimens were molded, with 3 specimens
according to [110]. Figure 11 illustrates the specimens for the characteristics of tension for each type
and
of concrete. The
compression tensileproperties.
concrete strength was obtained by means of the tensile test by diametrical compression,
Materials 2020, 13, to
according 2305[110]. Figure 11 illustrates the specimens for the characteristics of tension and 10 of 22
compression concrete properties.
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 11. (a)
(a)Four-point bending test, (b) compression
(b) test, (c) tension indirect(c)test.
Figure Figure
12
Figure 11.11.
shows(a)(a) Four-point
aFour-point
typical bending
failure test, (b)
(b) compression
configuration
bending test, after the test,
compression (c)(c)
tension
four-point
test, indirect
bending
tension test.test.
test,
indirect compression
strength, and tension strength. After failure, it was shown that one large crack existed, accompanying
Figure
Figure
fibers, 12played
12 shows
which showsa ana important
typicalfailure
typical failure configuration
roleconfiguration
in bridging two after
after the
crackthe four-point
four-pointbending
faces. bending test, compression
test, compression
strength,
strength,Due and tension
andtotension strength.
strength.
the bridging After failure,
After failure,
mechanism it was
it was
of fibers, shown
shown
concrete that
withthatone
one
fiber large
can large crack existed,
crack
provide accompanying
existed,performance,
superior accompanying
fibers, which
especially played
under an important
tension, as comparedrole in bridging two crack faces.
fibers, which played an important role in to concretetwo
bridging without
crack fibers.
faces. Figure 13 presents the types of
Duetested.
concrete to the bridging
Figure 14mechanism of fibers, concrete
shows the experimentally with fiber
obtained can provide superior
load-displacement curves. performance,
especially under tension, as compared to concrete without fibers. Figure 13 presents the types of
concrete tested. Figure 14 shows the experimentally obtained load-displacement curves.
(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure 12. 12. Result
Result of of experimental
experimental
(a) tests. (a)
tests. (a) Four-point
Four-point bending
bendingbeam test,
beam
(b) (b)(b)
test, compression
(c) test,test,
compression (c) (c)
tensile
tensile indirect
indirect test.test.
Figure 12. Result of experimental tests. (a) Four-point bending beam test, (b) compression test, (c)
tensile indirect test.
Due to the bridging mechanism of fibers, concrete with fiber can provide superior performance,
especially under tension, as compared to concrete without fibers. Figure 13 presents the types of
concrete tested. Figure 14 shows the experimentally obtained load-displacement curves. 23 of 2 3
Materials 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW
(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure 13. Concrete
13. Concrete types.
types. (a)(a)Concrete
Concretewithout
without fiber,
fiber,(b)
(b)concrete
concretewith
withsisal fiber,
sisal (c) concrete
fiber, with with
(c) concrete
new steel fiber.
new steel fiber.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
20.0 20.0
17.5 Concrete without fiber Vf=0% 17.5
Concrete without fiber Vf=0%

15.0 15.0
12.5 12.5
)
(a) (b) (c)
Figure
Materials 2020, 13. Concrete types. (a) Concrete without fiber, (b) concrete with sisal fiber, (c) concrete with
13, 2305 11 of 22
new steel fiber.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
20.0 20.0
17.5 Concrete without fiber Vf=0% 17.5

15.0 15.0
12.5 12.5
Load (kN) 10.0 10.0
7.5 7.5
5.0 5.0
2.5 2.5
0.0 0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Displacement (mm)
(a)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
60 60
55 Concrete with Sisal fiber Vf=5% 55
40 40
Load (kN)
35 35
30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Displacement (mm)
(b)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
60 60
55 Concrete with Steel Fiber Vf=1% 55
40 40
Load (kN)
35 35
30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Displacement (mm)
(c)
FigureFigure 14. Results

14. Results of of experimental tests.
experimental tests. (a)
(a)Four-point
Four-pointbending beambeam
bending test, (b) compression
test, test, (c) test,
(b) compression
tensileindirect
(c) tensile indirecttest.
test.
The mechanical properties of the reinforced concrete with steel and sisal fibers are in Table 5.
Table 5. Concrete properties.
Splitting Flexural
Compressive Modulus of
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 12 of 22
The mechanical properties of the reinforced concrete with steel and sisal fibers are in Table 5.
Table 5. Concrete properties.
Compressive Splitting Tension Flexural Tension Modulus of

Concrete
Strength Strength Strength Elasticity
Specimen’s
(MPa) cov (MPa) cov (MPa) cov (GPa) cov
C30 29.87 0.46 1.62 0.018 3.67 0.020 19.79 1.53
Materials 2020, 13, x FOR PEER
C30SteelFiber 31.89REVIEW0.66 2.74 0.064 3.84 0.074 20.17 1.84 23 of 2 3
C30SisalFiber 27.06 1.69 2.18 0.187 3.30 0.172 17.32 2.28
It was observed that for the three types of concrete tested the one with steel fiber presented the
best It
behavior in the bending
was observed that for and compression
the three types oftests. The tested
concrete analysis theofone
the with
tenacity showed
steel that concrete
fiber presented the
best behavior in the bending and compression tests. The analysis of the tenacity showed thatwith
with steel fibers reinforcement presented a superior behavior compared to the concrete sisal
concrete
fibersteel
with and without fiber. However,
fibers reinforcement the concrete
presented withbehavior
a superior sisal fiber showed workability
compared difficulties
to the concrete during
with sisal fiber
the execution of the specimens. In this way, the spacers were built with concrete
and without fiber. However, the concrete with sisal fiber showed workability difficulties during the with steel fiber. For
this, two spacers were built: One just with the concrete with steel fiber and the other
execution of the specimens. In this way, the spacers were built with concrete with steel fiber. For this, one concrete
withspacers
two steel fiber
werebut encapsulated
built: One just withby athe
steel cold-formed
concrete profile.
with steel Figure
fiber and the15 presents
other details of
one concrete thesteel
with two
spacers.
fiber but encapsulated by a steel cold-formed profile. Figure 15 presents details of the two spacers.
(a) (b)
Figure15.
Figure 15. Shape
Shape of
of the
the spacers
spacers used
used in
in the
the space
space truss.
truss. (a)
(a) Shape
Shape of
of the
the cold-formed
cold-formed steel
steelwith
with1.5
1.5mm
mm
thickness for encapsulating of the concrete with steel fiber, (b) Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) molds
thickness for encapsulating of the concrete with steel fiber, (b) Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) molds for for
spacers with concrete with steel fiber without the encapsulation of concrete.
spacers with concrete with steel fiber without the encapsulation of concrete.
3.4.
3.4. Procedures
Procedures and
and Instrumentation
Instrumentation of
of the
the Space
SpaceTruss
TrussExperiments
Experiments
To
Totest
testthe
thestrength
strengthof ofspace
spacetrusses
trusses using
using spacers
spacers compared
compared to to space
space trusses
trusses without
without spacers,
spacers,
five specimens with dimensions of 9000 mm by 6000 mm and height
five specimens with dimensions of 9000 mm by 6000 mm and height of 1067 mm were built and tested of 1067 mm were built and
tested
in the in the Structures
Structures Laboratory
Laboratory of the University
of the University of Brasilia
of Brasilia (UnB). (UnB).
Each trussEachspecimen,
truss specimen, with
with spacers
spacers at each typical node for correcting eccentricity E
applied at each typical node for correcting eccentricity E2 (see Figure 8), used 56 spacers. Two
applied 2 (see Figure 8), used 56 spacers. Two
specimens
specimensdid didnot use
not spacers,
use spacers,andandusedused
just the
justtypical node connections.
the typical node connections. One specimen used spacers
One specimen used
made
spacersjust of concrete
made just of with
concretesteelwith
fiberssteel
but fibers
without butthe encapsulation
without of the concrete.
the encapsulation of theTwo specimens
concrete. Two
used
specimens used encapsulated concrete spacers with concrete with steel fibers. Figure 16 shows the
encapsulated concrete spacers with concrete with steel fibers. Figure 16 shows the details of the
prototypes tested.
details of the Figure 17
prototypes shows
tested. the dimensions
Figure 17 shows the of dimensions
the elementsofofthe theelements
space truss, with
of the details
space of
truss,
the
withinstrumentation
details of theand of the experimental
instrumentation and of devices used. All structures
the experimental deviceswere
used. assembled following
All structures werea
sequence of bars to keep the space truss pattern and symmetry. Figure 17
assembled following a sequence of bars to keep the space truss pattern and symmetry. Figure 17 shows some details of the lab
experiments. All prototypes
shows some details of the lab were initially prepared
experiments. on the laboratory
All prototypes were initially floor and thenonlifted
prepared to a short
the laboratory
steel column (Figure 17f). To standardize the tightening of the bolt, all bolts
floor and then lifted to a short steel column (Figure 17f). To standardize the tightening of the bolt, were tightened withalla
50 Nm. The data were obtained by reading the loads in the HMB Catman
bolts were tightened with a 50 Nm. The data were obtained by reading the loads in the HMB Catman panel using the load cells
initially calibrated
panel using andcells
the load the LVDT disposed
initially in four
calibrated andpoints (Figure
the LVDT 17e), where
disposed the forces
in four pointswere applied,
(Figure 17e),
see Figures 16b and 17f. The direction of the application of the loads (Figure
where the forces were applied, see Figures 16b and 17f. The direction of the application of the loads16b) occurred in the same
direction of the
(Figure 16b) gravitational
occurred in the sameforce,direction
so that the
of structure was pulled
the gravitational force,down by the
so that the structure
hydraulicwasjacks that
pulled
were
downfixed on hydraulic
by the the reaction floor
jacks of were
that the laboratory.
fixed on the reaction floor of the laboratory.
floor and then lifted to a short steel column (Figure 17f). To standardize the tightening of the bolt, all
bolts were tightened with a 50 Nm. The data were obtained by reading the loads in the HMB Catman
panel using the load cells initially calibrated and the LVDT disposed in four points (Figure 17e),
where the forces were applied, see Figures 16b and 17f. The direction of the application of the loads
(Figure 16b) occurred in the same direction of the gravitational force, so that the structure was pulled
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 13 of 22
down by the hydraulic jacks that were fixed on the reaction floor of the laboratory.
(a) (b)
Figure 16. Space trusses tested: (a) Dimensions and (b) plan view of the prototypes.
Figure
Materials 13, xSpace
2020,16. trusses
FOR PEER tested:
REVIEW (a) Dimensions and (b) plan view of the prototypes.
23 of 2 3
(a) (b) (c)
(d)
(e)
Figure 17. Cont.

Materials 2020, 13, 2305 14 of 22
(f)
(f)
Figure
Figure 17. 17. Detailofofprototypes:
Detail prototypes: (a)
(a)Space
Spacetruss with
truss typical
with connection
typical without
connection spacer, (b)
without space(b)
spacer, truss
space
with
Figure
truss withspacers
17.
spacersmade
Detail of of encapsulated
prototypes:
made concrete
(a) Space
of encapsulated truss withwith
concrete steel steel
typicalfiber, (c) space
connection
fiber, truss truss
(c)without
space with spacers
spacer, madetruss
(b)spacers
with space of
made
concrete with steel of
fiber, but not encapsulated, (d) length of the steel bars of the space trusses, (e,f)of
of with spacers
concrete withmade
steel encapsulated
fiber, but concrete with
not encapsulated, (d)steel fiber,
length of (c)
the space
steel truss
bars with
of the spacers
space made
trusses, (e,f)
details of
concrete the steel
with instrumentation
fiber, but used.
not encapsulated, (d) length of the steel bars of the space trusses, (e,f)
details of the instrumentation used.
details of the instrumentation used.
4. Results
4. Results of ExperimentalTests
of Experimental Tests
4. Results of Experimental
experimental Tests
TheThefivefive
experimental tests evaluated the load capacity of the space truss, using 4 LVDT with a
tests evaluated the load capacity of the space truss, using 4 LVDT with a
progressive
The five load rate
experimental of 0.20 kN/min and using the HBM Catman system. The using
five testsLVDT compared
progressive load rate of 0.20tests kN/min evaluated the load
and using thecapacity
HBM Catman of the space
system.truss,The five4 tests with a
compared
displacements
progressive load and
rate collapse
of 0.20 loads
kN/min of space
and trusses.
using the Two
HBM experiments
Catman were
system. done
The with
five trusses
tests with
compared
displacements and collapse loads of space trusses. Two experiments were done with trusses with typical
typical connection
displacements without
andspacer.
collapseTwo spacer.
loads Two experiments
of space trusses. were done
Two experiments with space
were done trusses with typical
connection
connection without
corrected with spacer. experiments
spacers made ofwere done
encapsulatedwithconcrete
space trusses withwithtypical trusses with
connection
typical connection without Two experiments were done withwithspacesteel
trussesfiber,withand two
typical
corrected with spacers
experiments were done made of spacers
with encapsulatedthe concreteconcrete
with steel fiber,steeland
fibertwo
but experiments were done
connection corrected with spacers with made ofsame encapsulatedwith concrete with not encapsulated.
steel fiber, and two
with spacers with the
Porotypes with same concrete
typical nodeswith steelany
without fiberspacer
but not to encapsulated.
correct the eccentricity E2 (Figure 8)
experiments were done with spacers with the same concrete with steel fiber but not encapsulated.
Porotypes with typical nodes without any
collapsed with a reduced load compared with the other prototypes spacer to correct with spacers.E2
the eccentricity (Figure
It was 8) collapsed
noticed that
Porotypes with typical nodes without any spacer to correct the eccentricity E2 (Figure 8)
withthe
a reduced load avoided
use of spacers compared localwith the other
distortions prototypes
of the nodes of thewith spacers.
trusses. It was
Typical noticedwith
connection that spacer
the use of
collapsed with a reduced load compared with the other prototypes with spacers. It was noticed that
made
spacers of encapsulated
avoided concrete with
local distortions steel
of the fiber of
nodes achieved the total
the trusses. designconnection
Typical capacity of the with tubes. In these
spacer made of
the use of spacers avoided local distortions of the nodes of the trusses. Typical connection with spacer
cases, the tests
encapsulated led some
concrete with tubes
steel to the achieved
fiber expected global
the buckling
total design limit. The use
capacity of of spacer
the tubes. with
In steel cases,
these fiber- the
made of encapsulated concrete with steel fiber achieved the total design capacity of the tubes. In these
testsreinforced
led the
some concrete
tubes to but not
thetubes encapsulated
expected presentedlimit.a collapse loadofhigher than the trusses without
cases, tests led some to theglobal
expectedbuckling
global buckling Thelimit.
use Thespacer
use ofwith
spacersteel withfiber-reinforced
steel fiber-
spacers,
concrete but
but not smaller than
encapsulated the load capacity of
presented a presented the trusses
collapse load with the
higherload encapsulated
thanhigher
the trusses concrete.
without Figures
spacers, 18
reinforced concrete but not encapsulated a collapse than the trusses withoutbut
and 19 show details of all the tests.
smaller than
spacers, butthe load capacity
smaller than the load of the trussesof
capacity with
the the encapsulated
trusses concrete. Figures
with the encapsulated concrete. 18 and
Figures19 show
18
details
and 19of show
all
0 the tests.
details
20 40 of all
60 the80 tests.
100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
10 10 10 10
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

10 Typical connection space truss without spacer - 1 10 10 Typical connection space truss without spacer - 2 10
8 8 8 8
Applied load (kN)
load (kN)
Typical connection space truss without spacer - 1 Typical connection space truss without spacer - 2
8 8 8 8
6 6 6 6
Applied load (kN)
load (kN)
AppliedApplied
64 64
46 4 6
Load point - 1 Load point - 1
Load point - 2 Load point - 2
42 42
Load point - 3 24 Load point - 3 2 4
Load point
Load point -- 14 Load point - 4- 1
Average Load point
Load point - 2 Average
Load point - 2
20 Load point - 3 20
02 Load point - 3 0 2
0 20 40 60 80 100 Load
120point 140
-4 0 20 40 60 80 100 Load
120 point140- 4
Average
Average
0 Displacement (mm) 0 Displacement (mm)
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
(a) (b)
Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)
(a) (b)
Figure 18. Cont.

Materials 2020, 13, 2305 15 of 22
Materials 2020,
Materials 2020, 13,
13, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 23 of
23 of 22 33
00 20
20 40
40 60
60 80
80 100
100 120
120 140
140
12
12 12
12 00 20
20 40
40 60
60 80
80 100
100 120
120 140
140
14
14 14
14
Typical connection with Spacer fiber concrete -1
10 Typical connection with Spacer fiber concrete -1
10 10
10
Spacer of
Spacer of concrete
concrete with
with steel
steel fiber
fiber encapsulated
encapsulated -1
-1
12
12 12
12
88 88 10
10 10
10
(kN)
(kN)
Load(kN)
Load(kN)
88 88
66 66
Load
Load
66 load Point
Point -- 11 66
load
44 Average
Average 44 load Point
load Point -- 22
Load Point
Point -- 11 44 load Point
load Point -- 33 44
Load load Point
Point -- 44
Load Point
Point -- 22 load
Load Average
22 Load Point
Load Point -- 33 22 22 Average 22
Load Point
Load Point -- 44
00 00
00 00 00 20
20 40
40 60
60 80
80 100
100 120
120 140
140
00 20
20 40
40 60
60 80
80 100
100 120
120 140
140
Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)
(c)
(c) (d)
(d)
(e)
(e)
Figure 18.
Figure
Figure 18. Result
Result of
ofthe
of theexperimental
the experimentaltests.
experimental tests.
tests. (a,b)
(a,b)
(a,b) Space
Space
Space truss
truss
truss without
without
without spacer,
spacer,
spacer, (c) typical
(c) typical
(c) typical connection
connection
connection with
with spacer
with spacer
spacer of concrete
of concrete
of concrete with
with
with steel steel
steel
fiber, fiber,
fiber,
(d,e) (d,e)
(d,e)
space space
space
truss truss
withtruss with
with
spacer spacer of
spacer
of concrete of concrete
concrete
with with
with
steel fiber steel fiber
steel fiber
encapsulated
encapsulated
encapsulated
with withsteel.
with
cold-formed cold-formed steel.
cold-formed steel.
(a)
(a)
Figure 19. Cont.

Materials 2020, 13, 2305 16 of 22
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure19.19.Details
Figure Detailsofofthe
thespace
spacetruss
trusscollapse
collapsemodes.
modes.(a)(a)Collapse
Collapseofoftypical
typicalconnection
connectioncaused
causedbyby
bending moment due to eccentricities, (b,c) failure of the concrete spacer, (d) concrete
bending moment due to eccentricities, (b,c) failure of the concrete spacer, (d) concrete encapsulatedencapsulated
withsteel
with steelfiber.
fiber.
Theexperimental
The experimentalresults
resultsofofthe
thefive
fivetests
testswere
wereplotted
plottedininFigures
Figures1818and
and1919with
withthe
thedetails
detailsofof
theshapes
the shapesofofthe
the trusses after
after the
thecollapse.
collapse.Figure
Figure1818
shows
showsthethe
results for for
results eacheach
prototype tested.
prototype Such
tested.
results are in terms of applied loads vs. displacements at the nodes where loads
Such results are in terms of applied loads vs. displacements at the nodes where loads were applied were applied (See
Figure
(See 16b).
Figure When
16b). using
When spacers,
using collapses
spacers, collapsestook place
took by by
place buckling
bucklingof the bars
of the and
bars andtubes, while
tubes, whilein in
the
trusses without spacers collapse took place by high local distortions of the nodes. In
the trusses without spacers collapse took place by high local distortions of the nodes. In prototypeprototype trusses
with spacers,
trusses no significant
with spacers, distortions
no significant at the
distortions atnodes werewere
the nodes observed. TheThe
observed. experimental results
experimental of of
results the
five tests were plotted in Figures 18 and 19 with the details of the shapes of the trusses after the
collapse. Figure 18 shows the results for each prototype tested.
Such results are in terms of applied loads vs. displacements at the nodes where loads were
applied (See Figure 16b).
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 17 of 22
the five tests were plotted in Figures 18 and 19 with the details of the shapes of the trusses after the
collapse. Figure 18 shows the results for each prototype tested.
Such results are in terms of applied loads vs. displacements at the nodes where loads were applied
(See Figure 16b).
When using spacers, collapses took place by buckling of the bars and tubes, while in the trusses
without spacers collapse took place by high local distortions of the nodes. Only one truss was tested
with spacers made of concrete with steel fiber without the encapsulation of the concrete. In this case,
it was observed that the spacer did not perform well compared with spacers with concrete encapsulated.
The results showed that typical connection without spacers presented the largest local distortions and
deformation, too. In this case, the collapse load average was 7.75 kN, corresponding to 128 mm of
average vertical displacement. For the prototypes with spacers with encapsulated concrete, the average
displacement was 120 mm with the average collapse load of 12.2 kN. Moreover, for the prototypes
with spacers with fiber concrete without encapsulation of concrete, collapses took place at an average
load of 9.70 kN and an average displacement of 132 mm due to failure of the spacer of concrete.
5. Conclusions
Connections made with the superposition of flattened tube ends trespassed by one bolt are known
as typical connections or typical nodes. Trusses with typical connections are widely used in many
countries. They are inexpensive and easy to assemble. However, they offer a risk of collapse due to
the eccentricities in the connection. Many types of collapse in space trusses over the years have been
reported in the literature. A significant number of them took place at the connections. Space trusses
with typical connection present eccentricities. These eccentricities, due to the end-flattened tubes,
produce bending at the typical nodes and reduction of bending stiffness of the tube ends. Typical
connection collapses do not achieve the compressive bearing load capacity, i.e., the buckling limit load
of the tubes.
Typical connections collapse is characterized by excessive distortion at the nodes. This work
reported the results of an experimental program devoted to space trusses with corrections for the typical
connections. In this research, the use of spacers increased significantly the load capacity of the typical
connections. The height and dimension of the spacers were treated in this research, too. A new type of
spacer made of encapsulated concrete was presented. Concrete was encapsulated with cold-formed
steel profiles. Two types of encapsulated concrete were developed: Concrete mixed with steel fiber and
concrete mixed with sisal fiber. The first option showed much better mechanical properties than the
alternative sisal fiber. In that sense, five space truss prototypes tests were performed: (1) Two trusses
with typical connection and no correction of the eccentricities, (2) one truss using spacers of concrete
not encapsulated, just with steel fiber concrete, (3) two trusses with typical connection using spacer of
encapsulated concrete mixed with steel fiber. The tests showed that:
• Spacers can efficiently prevent the premature collapse of space trusses with typical connections,
• The use of spacers of the concrete mixed with steel fiber not encapsulated did not resist the high
stress in the connection and radial cracks were observed at failure, and
• Space trusses with spacers of encapsulated concrete mixed with steel fiber showed 36% greater
load capacity compared to space trusses with typical connections with no eccentricity correction.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Investigation and Data curation, W.V.S.; Investigation, Formal analysis,
Methodology, Writing original draft; R.S.; Investigation, Data curation, L.M.B.; Writing original draft, Writing
review and editing, C.A.S.F.; Validation, Investigation, Writing- review and editing, J.B. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This study was funded by CAPES (the Brazilian Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education
Personnel) and CNPq (the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) for the financial
support for this research and the authors thank the company Exact Engineering for financial support.
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 18 of 22
Acknowledgments: The authors are also very thankful to the Structures Laboratories of the Federal University of
Cariri (UFCA) and of the University of Brasilia (UnB) for all tests performed along this research. The authors
thank the company Exact Engineering for financial support.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Makowski, Z.S.; Ramaswamy, G.S.; Eekhout, M.; Suresh, G.R. Book Review: Analysis, Design and
Construction of Steel Space Frames. Int. J. Space Struct. 2002, 17, 243. [CrossRef]
2. Koushky, A.; Dehdashti, G.; Fiouz, A. Nonlinear Analysis of Double-Layer Grids with Compositive Nodes
under Symmetric and Unsymmetrical Gravity Loads. Int. J. Space Struct. 2007, 22, 133–140. [CrossRef]
3. Makowski, Z.S. Estructuras Espaciales de Acero, 2nd ed.; Editorial Gustavo Gili: Barcelona, Spain, 1972.
4. Gioncu, V. Instability Problems in Space Structures. Int. J. Space Struct. 1985, 1, 169–183. [CrossRef]
5. Makoswski, Z.S. A worldwide review of space structures in sports buildings. Bull. Int. Assoc. Shell Spat.
Struct. 1988, 29, 11–40.
6. Hanaor, A. Characteristics of Prefabricated Spatial Frame Systems. Int. J. Space Struct. 1995, 10, 151–173.
[CrossRef]
7. Chilton, J. Space Grid Structures; Architectural Press: London, UK, 2007.
8. Kato, S.; Kim, J.-M.; Cheong, M.-C. A new proportioning method for member sections of single layer
reticulated domes subjected to uniform and non-uniform loads. Eng. Struct. 2003, 25, 1265–1278. [CrossRef]
9. De Souza, A.S.C. Análise Teórica e Experimental de Treliças Espaciais. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade de Sao
Paulo, de Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2003.
10. Li, H.; Taniguchi, Y. Load-carrying capacity of semi-rigid double-layer grid structures with initial crookedness
of member. Eng. Struct. 2019, 184, 421–433. [CrossRef]
11. Lan, T.T. Space Frame Construction in China. Adv. Steel Struct. 1996, 4, 55–64. [CrossRef]
12. Makowski, Z.S. Development of jointing systems for modular prefabricated steel space structures. Light.
Struct. Civ. Eng. 2002, 1, 24–28.
13. Bangash, M.; Bangash, T. Elements of Spatial Structures—Analysis and Design; Thomas Telford Ltd: New York,
NY, USA, 2003; pp. 10017–12398.
14. Aydincilar, Y. Optimum Design of Double-Layer Grid Systems: Comparison with Current Design Practice
Using Real-Life Industrial Applications. Master’s Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey,
2010.
15. Arekar, V.A.; Bhavsar, B.B. Analytical Study of MERO Connector in Double Layer Grid Structure. IJLTET
2013, 2, 35–42.
16. Mengeringhausen, M. Rohbauwwise. Mero, SISTEMA KK Nodi Sferici e Aste Tubolari, Würzburg, Germany,
2014.
17. Casanova, P.A.A. Estudo Numérico Experimental de Treliças Espaciais Feitas com Tubos de aço com ponta Amassada
e Espaçadores de Madeira para Corrigir as Excentricidades nos nós de Ligação; Biblioteca Central da UNB: Brasilia,
Brazil, 2018.
18. El-Shami, M.; Mahmoud, S.; Elabd, M. Effect of floor openings on the capacity of composite space trusses. J.
King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. 2018, 30, 130–140. [CrossRef]
19. Caglayan, B.O.; Yuksel, E. Experimental and finite element investigations on the collapse of a Mero space
truss roof structure—A case study. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2008, 15, 458–470. [CrossRef]
20. Ebadi, M.; Davoodi, M. Evaluate axial stiffness of the MERO connection, under the effect of hardening the
screw. Int. J. Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2012, 4, 116–122.
21. Piroglu, F.; Ozakgul, K. Partial collapses experienced for a steel space truss roof structure induced by ice
ponds. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2016, 60, 155–165. [CrossRef]
22. Tarczewski, R.; Motro, R. The Beauty of Technical Thought in Architecture—The Lifework of Stéphane Du
Chateau. Int. J. Space Struct. 2015, 30, 203–220. [CrossRef]
23. Dipaola, V.; Prete, G. “PREMIT” System for Space Reticulated Structures Part. I: Geometrical and Structural
Definitions of the Construction System. Int. J. Space Struct. 2002, 18, 31–45. [CrossRef]
24. Sampaio, T.S. Análise Numérica, via MEF, de Ligações em Treliças Metálicas Espaciais. Ph.D. Thesis,
Universidade de Sao Paulo, de Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2004.
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 19 of 22
25. Space Frame Roofs Collapse Hartford Coliseum Following Heavy Snowfalls; ENR: New York, NY, USA, 1978.
26. Zetlin, L. Report of the Engineering Investigation Concerning the Causes of the Collapse of the Hartford Coliseum
Space Truss Roof on January 18; Hartford Press: Hartford, CT, USA, 1978.
27. Parke, G.A.R. The Behaviour of Space Trusses Incorporating Novel Compression Members. Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Surrey, Guildford, UK, 1988.
28. Fan, F.; Cao, Z.; Shen, S. Elasto-plastic stability of single-layer reticulated shells. Thin-Walled Struct. 2010, 48,
827–836. [CrossRef]
29. Fu, F. Structural Analysis and Design to Prevent Disproportionate Collapse; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA,
2016.
30. Dizdar, Ç.; Baran, E.; Topkaya, C. Strength and stiffness of floor trusses fabricated from cold-formed steel
lipped channels. Eng. Struct. 2019, 181, 437–457. [CrossRef]
31. Abedi, K.; Parke, G. Progressive Collapse of Single-Layer Braced Domes. Int. J. Space Struct. 1996, 11,
32. Papadopoulos, C.M.; Loricco, M.T. A Case Study of Symmetry-Adapted Computation: Analysis of the
Bucharest Dome. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing and. Decision Making in
Civil and Building Engineering, Montreal, QC, Canada, 14–16 June 2006; pp. 2842–2851.
33. Yan, J.; Qin, F.; Cao, Z.; Fan, F.; Mo, Y. Mechanism of coupled instability of single-layer reticulated domes.
Eng. Struct. 2016, 114, 158–170. [CrossRef]
34. Zhang, C.; Deng, C. Static behaviors of buckling-monitoring members. Eng. Struct. 2019, 178, 55–69.
[CrossRef]
35. Hamid, Y.S. Progressive Collapse of Double Layer Space Trusses. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Surrey,
Guildford, UK, 2015.
36. Chishti, S. Book Reviews. Int. Stud. 1982, 21, 164–166. [CrossRef]
37. Precupas, V.; Ivan, A.; Ivan, M. Dynamic Analysis of the Dome with Arches and Rings from Romexpo
Bucharest. Int. J. Civ. Environ. Eng. 2012, 6, 246–251.
38. Fredriksson, G.; Herrstrom, M. Stability Analysis of a Large Span Timber Dome. Master’s Thesis, Lund
University, Lund, Sweden, 2017.
39. Han, Q.; Liu, Y.; Xu, Y. Study on the Assembled Hub joints in single-layer reticulated domes. In Proceedings
of the IASS Annual Symposia, International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures (IASS), Beijing,
China, 10–14 September 2017.
40. Fellows, L. Coliseum Roof Collapse; Hartford Civic Center: New York, NY, USA, 1978.
41. Petroski, H. To Engineer is Human: The role of failure in successful design; Martin’s Press: New York, NY, USA,
1985; pp. 198–200.
42. Kaminetzky, D.; Carper, K.L. Design and Construction Failures: Lessons from Forensic Investigations. J.
Perform. Constr. Facil. 1992, 6, 71–72. [CrossRef]
43. Martin, R.; Delatte, N. Another Look at Hartford Civic Center Coliseum Collapse. J. Perform. Constr. Facil.
2001, 15, 31–36. [CrossRef]
44. Delatte, N.J.J. Beyond Failure: Forensic Case Studies for Civil. Engineers; American Society of Civil Engineers:
New York, NY, USA, 2009.
45. Levy, M.; Salvadori, M. Why Buildings Fall Down: How Structures Fail; Norton and Company: New York, NY,
USA, 1992.
46. Sylwester, K.; Edward, H.; Zenon, Z. Failures of building constructions caused by design errors. J.S.M. Forces
2015, 178, 86–99. [CrossRef]
47. Dhingra, A.; Bennage, W. Topological optimization of truss structures using simulated annealing. Eng.
Optim. 1995, 24, 239–259. [CrossRef]
48. Teknik, K. Analyses of compressive elements in the finite element method. Master’s Thesis, Bingol University,
Bingol, Turkey, 2015.
49. Alegre, V.; Ródenas, V.; Villalba, S. Colapso de la cubierta metálica de un polideportivo; patologías singulares
y recurrentes. Rev. ALCONPAT 2012, 2, 37–45. [CrossRef]
50. Michael, A.O.; Razak, A.R. The study of claims arising from building collapses: Case Studies from Malaysia,
Nigeria, Singapore and Thailand. Civ. Environ. Res. 2013, 3, 113–129.
51. Gul, F.A.; Ali, C.M. Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin Stadium Roof Collapse, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia (Lack
of Safety Issues). EPH Int. J. Math. Stat. 2016, 2, 14–43.
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 20 of 22
52. Chiang, J.C.L. Quality Engineering Design and Construction in Malaysia: A Fast Disappearing and
Endangered Commodity? Jurutera 2010, 34–36.
53. Nicholson, K. Stage Design in Fatal Radiohead Concert Collapse Called for Parts that Didn’t Exist, Witness
Says. 2012. Available online: https://www.spin.com/2013/06/live-nation-charged-radiohead-stage-collapse/
(accessed on 23 August 2019).
54. De Souza, A.S.C. Contribuição ao Estudo das Estruturas Metálicas Espaciais. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade de
Sao Paulo, de Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2018.
55. De Magalhães, J.R.M.; Malite, M. Treliças metálicas espaciais: Alguns aspectos relativos ao projeto e à
construção. Cad. Eng. Estrut. 1998, 9928, 30.
56. Muñoz-Rojas, P.A. Análise Não-Linear Geométrica e Material de Treliças Espaciais. Ph.D. Thesis,
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Curso, do Rio Grande do Sul Curso, Brazil, 2001.
57. Rosa, Y.R.D.S. Comportamento De Estruturas Espaciais Metálicas Com Nós De Ligação Do Tipo Ponta
Amassada. Master’s Thesis, Pontifícia Universida de Católica, do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2002.
58. De Souza, A.S.C. Análise Teórica e Experimental de Treliças Espaciais. Cad. Eng. Estruturas. 2006, 8, 31–61.
59. De Freitas, C.A.S. Análise Teórico-Experimental da Conexão Estampada de Treliça Espacial de Aço Sob Carregamentos
Estático e Cíclico; Universidade de Brasília: Brasília, Brazil, 2008.
60. Araújo, W. Ginásio Castelinho. 2019. Available online: http://edwilsonaraujo.com/tag/ginasio-castelinho/
(accessed on 23 August 2019).
61. Cichoń, C.; Corradi, L. Large displacement analysis of elastic-plastic trusses with unstable bars. Eng. Struct.
1981, 3, 210–218. [CrossRef]
62. El-Sheikh, A. Effect of member length imperfections on triple-layer space trusses. Eng. Struct. 1997, 19,
63. Yang, Y.-B.; Yang, C.-T.; Chang, T.-P.; Chang, P.-K. Effects of member buckling and yielding on ultimate
strengths of space trusses. Eng. Struct. 1997, 19, 179–191. [CrossRef]
64. El-Sheikh, A. Failure mode and strength of space truss compression chord members. Eng. Struct. 1999, 21,
65. Murtha-Smith, E. Resistance is due to high factors of safety in the design, or due to the portion removed
being noncritical to the total structural action. This paper examines the vulnerability of space trusses to
progressive collapse. J. Struct. Eng. 1999, 114, 1978–1999.
66. El-Sheikh, A. New space truss system—From concept to implementation. Eng. Struct. 2000, 22, 1070–1085.
[CrossRef]
67. Piroglu, F.; Ozakgul, K.; Iskender, H.; Trabzon, L.; Kahya, C. Site investigation of damages occurred in a steel
space truss roof structure due to ponding. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2014, 36, 301–313. [CrossRef]
68. Augenti, N.; Parisi, F. Buckling Analysis of a Long-Span Roof Structure Collapsed during Construction. J.
Perform. Constr. Facil. 2013, 27, 77–88. [CrossRef]
69. Liu, R.; Xue, S.; Li, X.; Mollaert, M.; Sun, G. Preventing disproportionate displacements in an annular crossed
cable-truss structure. Int. J. Space Struct. 2017, 29, 3–10. [CrossRef]
70. Fu, F.; Parke, G.A.R. Assessment of the Progressive Collapse Resistance of Double-Layer Grid Space Structures
Using Implicit and Explicit Methods. Int. J. Steel Struct. 2018, 18, 831–842. [CrossRef]
71. Guo, Y.-L.; Zhou, P.; Wang, M.-Z.; Pi, Y.-L.; Bradford, M.; Tong, J.-Z. Experimental and numerical studies
of hysteretic response of triple-truss-confined buckling-restrained braces. Eng. Struct. 2017, 148, 157–174.
[CrossRef]
72. De Sousa, W.C.A.; Ikeda, J.I. Análise Não Linear De Estruturas: Aplicação Do Nonlinear Analysis of
Structures: Application to Crisfield’s Arc Length Method. Rev. Eng. Technol. 2017, 9, 148–163.
73. Rashidyan, S.; Sheidaii, M.R. Improving double-layer space trusses collapse behavior by strengthening
compression layer and weakening tension layer members. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2017, 20, 1757–1767. [CrossRef]
74. Wei, J.-P.; Tian, L.-M.; Hao, J.-P. Improving the progressive collapse resistance of long-span single-layer
spatial grid structures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 171, 96–108. [CrossRef]
75. Zeng, Q.; Guo, X.; Huang, Z.; Zong, S. Uniaxial compression bearing capacity of bolted ball-cylinder joint.
76. Saka, M.; Ulker, M. Optimum design of geometrically nonlinear space trusses. Comput. Struct. 1992, 42,
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 21 of 22
77. Zingoni, A. On the symmetries and vibration modes of layered space grids. Eng. Struct. 2005, 27, 629–638.
[CrossRef]
78. Thai, H.-T.; Kim, S.-E. Nonlinear inelastic analysis of space frames. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2011, 67, 585–592.
[CrossRef]
79. Kanno, Y. Worst scenario detection in limit analysis of trusses against deficiency of structural components.
80. Lacerda, E.G.M. Análise Não Linear de Treliça pelo Método dos Elementos Finitos Posicional. Master’s
Thesis, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil, 2014.
81. Oh, J.; Ju, Y.K.; Hwang, K.-J.; Kim, S.-D.; Lho, S.-H. FREE node for a single layer free-form envelope subjected
to bending moment. Eng. Struct. 2016, 106, 25–35. [CrossRef]
82. Martinelli, L.B.; Alves, E.C. Um Sistema para Análise Dinâmica de Treliças Espaciais; CILAMCE: Brasília, Brazil,
2016.
83. Souza, A.S.C.; Gonçalves, R.M.; Maiola, C.H.; Malite, M. Theoretical Analysis of the Structural Performance
of Space Trusses Commonly Used in Brazil. Int. J. Space Struct. 2003, 18, 167–179. [CrossRef]
84. Bezerra, L.M.; De Freitas, C.A.S.; Matias, W.T.; Nagato, Y. Increasing load capacity of steel space trusses with
end-flattened connections. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2009, 65, 2197–2206. [CrossRef]
85. Chan, S.L.; Cho, S.H. Second-order P delta analysis and design of angle trusses allowing for imperfections
and semi-rigid connections. Adv. Steel Constr. 2005, 1, 169–183.
86. Silva, W.V.; Bezerra, L.M.; Freitas, C.A.S.; Silva, R.S.Y.R.C. Experimental analysis of steel space trusses with
correction of the stamped connection with glass fiber reinforced polymer spacer. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Res. Technol.
2018, 1–11. [CrossRef]
87. Levy, R.; Hanaor, A.; Rizzuto, N. Experimental Investigation of Prestressing in Double-Layer Grids. Int. J.
Space Struct. 1994, 9, 21–26. [CrossRef]
88. Mastali, M.; Dalvand, A.; Sattarifard, A.; Illikainen, M. Development of eco-efficient and cost-effective
reinforced self-consolidation concretes with hybrid industrial/recycled steel fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018,
166, 214–226. [CrossRef]
89. Labib, W.; Eden, N.A. Investigation into the Use of Fibres in Concrete Industrial Ground-Floor Slabs; Liverpool
John Moores University: Liverpool, UK, 2006; pp. 466–477.
90. Greenhalgh, J. 20 Years of Fibre Concrete Linings in the UK, Ireland. 2010. Available online: https:
//www.tunneltalk.com/Fibrecrete-Oct10-20-years-of-fibrecrete-in-the-UK.php (accessed on 20 March 2020).
91. Yang, J.; Zhang, H.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Zhang, H. Structural Behavior of Ultrahigh-Performance
Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Thin-Walled Arch Subjected to Asymmetric Load. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2019,
2019, 1–12. [CrossRef]
92. Choi, J.; Zi, G.; Hino, S.; Yamaguchi, K.; Kim, S. Influence of fiber reinforcement on strength and toughness
of all-lightweight concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 69, 381–389. [CrossRef]
93. Atahan, H.N.; Pekmezci, B.; Tuncel, E.Y. Behavior of PVA Fiber-Reinforced Cementitious Composites under
Static and Impact Flexural Effects. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2013, 25, 1438–1445. [CrossRef]
94. Zia, A.; Ali, M. Behavior of fiber reinforced concrete for controlling the rate of cracking in canal-lining. Constr.
Build. Mater. 2017, 155, 726–739. [CrossRef]
95. Pang, Y.; Cai, L.; Ouyang, H.; Zhou, X. Seismic performance assessment of different fibers reinforced concrete
columns using incremental dynamic analysis. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 203, 241–257. [CrossRef]
96. Simoncello, N.; Zampieri, P.; Gonzalez-Libreros, J.; Pellegrino, C. Experimental behaviour of damaged
masonry arches strengthened with steel fiber reinforced mortar (SFRM). Compos. Part. B Eng. 2019, 177.
[CrossRef]
97. Martinola, G.; Meda, A.; Plizzari, G.; Rinaldi, Z. Strengthening and repair of RC beams with fiber reinforced
concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 731–739. [CrossRef]
98. Altun, F.; Haktanir, T.; Ari, K. Effects of steel fiber addition on mechanical properties of concrete and RC
beams. Constr. Build. Mater. 2007, 21, 654–661. [CrossRef]
99. Rashid, M.U. Experimental investigation on durability characteristics of steel and polypropylene fiber
reinforced concrete exposed to natural weathering action. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 250, 118910. [CrossRef]
100. Chen, G.; Yang, H.; Lin, C.; Chen, J.; He, Y.; Zhang, H. Fracture behaviour of steel fibre reinforced recycled
aggregate concrete after exposure to elevated temperatures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 128, 272–286.
[CrossRef]
Materials 2020, 13, 2305 22 of 22
101. Sevil, T.; Baran, M.; Bilir, T.; Canbay, E. Use of steel fiber reinforced mortar for seismic strengthening. Constr.
Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 892–899. [CrossRef]
102. Castoldi, R.D.S.; De Souza, L.M.S.; Silva, F.D.A. Comparative study on the mechanical behavior and durability
of polypropylene and sisal fiber reinforced concretes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 211, 617–628. [CrossRef]
103. Mastali, M.; Dalvand, A.; Sattarifard, A.; Abdollahnejad, Z.; Illikainen, M. Characterization and optimization
of hardened properties of self-consolidating concrete incorporating recycled steel, industrial steel,
polypropylene and hybrid fibers. Compos. Part. B: Eng. 2018, 151, 186–200. [CrossRef]
104. Zhang, H.; Wang, B.; Xie, A.; Qi, Y. Experimental study on dynamic mechanical properties and constitutive
model of basalt fiber reinforced concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 152, 154–167. [CrossRef]
105. Xue, J.; Lavorato, D.; Bergami, A.V.; Nuti, C.; Briseghella, B.; Marano, G.C.; Ji, T.; Vanzi, I.; Tarantino, A.M.;
Santini, S. Severely Damaged Reinforced Concrete Circular Columns Repaired by Turned Steel Rebar and
High-Performance Concrete Jacketing with Steel or Polymer Fibers. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1671. [CrossRef]
106. Smarzewski, P. Processes of Cracking and Crushing in Hybrid Fibre Reinforced High-Performance Concrete
Slabs. Processes 2019, 7, 49. [CrossRef]
107. UNI 11039. Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete—Part I: Definitions, Classification Specification and
Conformity—Part II: Test Method for Measuring First Crack Strength and Ductility Indexes. Italian
Board for Standardization. 2003. Available online: http://store.uni.com/ (accessed on 14 September 2018).
108. RILEM TC 162-TDF: Test and Design Methods for Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete’-Sigma-Epsilon-Design
Method-Final Recommendation. Available online: https://www.rilem.net/ (accessed on 14 September 2018).
109. NBR 5738, Concrete—Procedure for molding and Curing Concrete Test. Specimens; ABNT: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
2015; pp. 1–28.
110. NBR 7222, Mortar and Concrete—Determination of the Tension Strength of Cylindrical Specimens Submitted to
Diametrical Compression—Method of test Descriptors: Mortar Concrete; ABNT: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1993;
pp. 1–22.
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Materials: Experimental Analysis of Space Trusses Using Spacers of Concrete With Steel Fiber and Sisal Fiber

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Materials: Experimental Analysis of Space Trusses Using Spacers of Concrete With Steel Fiber and Sisal Fiber

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

materials

Materials 2020, 13, 2305; doi:10.3390/ma13102305 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)

2.2. Application of Fiber-Reinforced

2.2. Application of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete

Table 1. Some fiber concrete applications.

Main Uses of Fiber in Concrete References

3. Experimental Program and Methods

3.1. Materials Used for Construction of the Spacers

3.2. Steel Fiber and Sisal Fiber

Table 4. Dosage used in the experimental procedure for 1 m3 of concrete.

(a) (b) (c)

3.3.The materials Test

3.3. Experimental Test of the Concrete

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)

17.5 Concrete without fiber Vf=0% 17.5

Concrete without fiber Vf=0%

17.5 Concrete without fiber Vf=0% 17.5

Concrete without fiber Vf=0%

Load (kN) 10.0 10.0

FigureFigure 14. Results

Table 5. Concrete properties.

Table 5. Concrete properties.

Compressive Splitting Tension Flexural Tension Modulus of

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 17. Cont.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Figure 18. Cont.

Figure 19. Cont.

Materials 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 2 3

You might also like