PSI - Issue 64

1038 Veronica Bertolli et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 64 (2024) 1033–1040 6 Veronica Bertolli, Lesley H. Sneed, Francesco Focacci, Tommaso D’Antino/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

Table 1. Values of r and CoV for specimens with the same fiber type for the models considered.

Fiber type

Basalt

Carbon

Glass

PBO

Steel

Statistic CoV CNR-DT 215 (2018) 1.226 0.120 0.945 0.456 1.372 0.302 1.083 0.529 0.704 0.574 ACI 549.4R (2020) 4.252 0.353 2.420 1.485 3.549 0.573 2.131 0.575 3.462 0.741 r CoV r CoV r CoV r CoV r

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

f)

Fig. 3 Comparison between analytical and experimental FRCM shear strength contributions for specimens with a) basalt, b) carbon, c) glass, d) PBO, and e) steel fibers, and f) considering all specimens in the database.

The model by CNR-DT 215 (2018) provided values of r approximately equal to 1 and values of CoV smaller than those obtained by ACI 549.4R (2020) for all types of fiber considered. The model by ACI 549.4R (2020) provided conservative results (i.e., model values were smaller than the corresponding experimental values), since r was greater than 1 for all fiber types considered (Table 1). The model by CNR-DT 215 (2018) had the highest accuracy for carbon FRCM, whereas the model by ACI 549.4R (2020) for PBO FRCM. For the former, r was approximately equal to 1