International RILEM Conference on Material Science – MATSCI, Aachen 2010 – Vol.

I, ICTRC 165

MINIMUM COST DESIGN OF ONE-WAY TRC/RC COMPOSITE

SLABS

I. Papantoniou, C. Papanicolaou, Structural Materials Lab, Civil Engineering Department, University

of Patras, Greece

ABSTRACT: The present study presents the outline and the results of an optimum (minimum
cost) design procedure for one-way RC slabs cast on top of prefabricated Textile Reinforced
Concrete (TRC) Stay-in-Place (SiP) formwork elements. The SiP element is considered to
participate to the load-bearing behaviour of the composite slab. Such slabs may be used as
superstructure systems for short and medium-span bridges and industrial or marine buildings
(for example, used transversely spanning between longitudinal girders). The procedure is
decomposed in two design states: a temporary and a permanent one. During the temporary
state the TRC element is designed to undertake construction loads, as well as the self-weight
of the fresh cast in-situ concrete. During the permanent state the design addresses the
behaviour of TRC/RC composite slab. Design equations conform largely to Eurocode 2.
Materials’ cost functions (for textiles, steel, formwork’s micro-concrete and cast in-situ
concrete) have been derived and are presented in the paper. The design variables vector
includes the geometry of the TRC formwork (different cross-sections are examined), the fibre
and steel reinforcement ratios, the fibre material for the textile reinforcement (grids
considered are of rovings’ orthogonal configuration) and the flexural strength of the micro-
concrete in the SiP formwork. The optimum determination of the design variables leads to the
minimum production cost of the composite slab, while fulfilling simultaneously: (i)
Serviceability Limit State (SLS) and Ultimate Limit State (ULS) design criteria (for both
design states); (ii) Geometric constraints based on construction rules and anthropometric data;
and (iii) General design rules (e.g. desirable mode of failure). Preliminary results indicate that
(the over-conservative) SLS governs the optimum design. Cap-shaped TRC formwork cross-
sections with micro-concretes of moderate tensile strength seem to be favoured.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 TRC Stay in place formwork elements

The use of Stay-In-Place (SiP) formwork elements for the production of composite concrete
slab satisfies a multitude of favourable performance criteria; these criteria are related to
economy (reduced construction time), aesthetics (ready-to-use finished surfaces), improved
mechanical performance (through rigorous quality control) and relatively small environmental
impact. The use of Stay-in-Place formwork elements produced of Textile Reinforced
Concrete can be advantageous compared with SiP structural systems comprising other
materials (e.g. Steel Reinforced Concrete, Fibre Reinforced Concrete or Fibre Reinforced
Polymers), owing to the use of non corroding reinforcement embedded in a thin walled
cementitious product of high load-bearing capacity. Previous works ([Rei00], [Bra04])
investigated two basic types of cementitious Stay-in-Place formwork elements and introduced
the basic principles for this type of elements. This study outlines an optimum (minimum cost)
design procedure for permanent and participating TRC formwork elements taking into
consideration Ultimate Limit State and Serviceability Limit State criteria. Results deriving
166 PAPANTONIOU, PAPANICOLAOU: Minimum Cost Design of one-Way TRC/RC Composite Slabs

from the implementation of the presented optimization procedure are given, indicating the
critical design parameters.

1.2 Design Considerations

The design procedure is decomposed in two stages: a Temporary State (TS) and a Permanent
one (PS) (Fig. 1.1). The Temporary State includes all the actions that are induced onto the
formwork element within the time period between the formwork’s construction and the
completion of in-situ concrete casting. Permanent State includes the dead and live loads
which are induced onto the composite slab during the structure’s life span. During the TS only
the thin-walled element is considered, whereas in the PS the composite slab (TRC + in-situ
concrete topping) is examined. In the present study the uniform load of in–situ concrete and
the live load conditions (provided by EN 1991) are considered to be the design loads for TS.
Design loads for the composite slab are also defined in [EN 1991]. Limited cracking of the
TRC element (the acceptance thereof) during casting of in-situ concrete and the boundary
conditions in effect (e.g. use of propping or not) are crucial factors for the design procedure
and may lead to different design solutions. Hence, the designer should investigate the
possibility of different support scenarios in the TS and the existence of limited cracking in the
formwork prior to in-situ concreting.

Permanent State (PS)

Temporary State (TS)

Fig. 1.1. Design States

2 MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN EQUATIONS

2.1 Resistance capacity of TRC Element (TS)

The flexural strength of the TRC element is determined through a cross section analysis by
implementing a fibre model for the sake of accuracy and flexibility of the programming
procedure. It has been experimentally shown by [Vos06] and [Jes08] that the use of textile
structures with uncoated fibre rovings results in reduced exploitation of the textile due to
insufficient penetration of matrix hydration products into the core of the roving. On the
contrary, TRC composite elements with polymer-coated textile structures exhibit higher
exploitation of the textile’s mechanical properties. By using a simple two-parameter model in
the cross-section analysis [Pap10] the effect of roving’s coating is taken into account when
calculating the tensile resistance capacity of the textile reinforcement. The first parameter, kb,
quantifies the part of the textile reinforcement area that is in good contact with the
cementitious matrix and, therefore, exhibits high bond conditions with the latter, and the
second, ks, accounts for the ‘strain lag’ between inner and outer filaments in uncoated rovings.
International RILEM Conference on Material Science – MATSCI, Aachen 2010 – Vol. I, ICTRC 167

For polymer-coated textiles coefficients kb and ks, are close to unity. Therefore, the maximum
tensile force taken up by the textile reinforcement is given by Equation 2.1.

Ftex = k b A f E f ε f,max + (1 − k b )A f E f (k s ε f,max ) (2-1)

where Ftex Resistance capacity of the textile reinforcement

Af Total textile reinforcement area
Ef Modulus of elasticity of fibrous materials
εf,max Maximum strain of the sleeve filaments

Filaments’ failure strain εf,max is taken equal to 85% (depending on the material [Pap10]) of
the nominal failure strain of the fibrous material and is computed according to Equation 2.2.

f ft
ε f, max = C t (2-2)
Ef

where fft Tensile strength of fibrous material

Ct Reduction coefficient for the tensile strength of fibrous material
accounting for the progressive fibre damage at the cracks’ edges where
either fibre slippage and wear or fibre kinking and crimping occurs.

The shear capacity of the TRC element is calculated following the proposed model by Vos06.

2.1.1 Serviceability Limit State in TS

In the programming procedure, the deflection (in case limited cracking in the TRC element
prior to in-situ concrete casting is allowed) is computed by double numerical integration of
the curvature along the specimen according to [EN 1992]. Deflections prior to cracking are
computed by elastic theory equations. In addition – and in lack of other well-established
formulations – the provisions of EN 1992 are used for the calculation of the crack width in the
TRC element. The calculation demands for a good approximation of the maximum crack
spacing in the TRC element (here assumed to be approx. equal to the height of the formwork).
The validity of this approach remains to be experimentally verified.

2.2 Calculations for the composite element (PS)

The textile reinforcement is treated in the cross-section analysis of the composite element
following the procedure described in the previous section. All other calculations (for
transverse shear, TRC/concrete interface shear, deflections) follow the clauses of EN 1992.
Failure due to punching shear is not taken into consideration. For the calculation of the crack
width the textile reinforcement is treated similarly to the steel of a Steel-Prestressed/Steel
reinforced concrete section according to Eurocode 2; in this sense, steel in the composite slab
is treated as the prestressing steel in the Steel-Prestressed/Steel reinforced concrete section.
168 PAPANTONIOU, PAPANICOLAOU: Minimum Cost Design of one-Way TRC/RC Composite Slabs

3 FORMULATION OF OPTIMUM (MINIMUM COST) DESIGN

3.1 Design Parameters

The optimization process is an iterative process aiming at the minimization of the objective
function, subjected to various constraints. In structural optimization the objective function is
usually the total cost function. Hence, the optimum solution is achieved when the cost is
minimized and all the constraints are satisfied.

The main criterion for the selection of a design variable is the degree of its participation in the
total cost of the element. The global design variables can be classified into two categories:

– The first one includes the parameters that define the section geometry, namely the ratio of
the effective depth of the textile reinforcement (df – measuring from the reinforcement
layer level to the full height of the composite member) to the thickness of the TRC
element, t, and the ratio the effective depth of the textile reinforcement (dff – measuring
from the reinforcement layer level to the height of the TRC element) over t. Local
(geometrical) design parameters are assigned for each type of cross-section considered.
Fig. 3.1 illustrates some sections for use as a SiP TRC formwork element.

– The second category of design variables includes the flexural strength of the fine-grained
concrete and the reinforcement ratios (textile and steel).

Fig. 3.1. Potential SiP-TRC cross sections

3.2 Objective function

In an optimization problem one has to decide about the most decisive parameters that
influence the objective function (in this case the minimum cost function) and draw a line on
the number of important factors considered. It is without doubt that factors such as the
manufacturing process of the textile or of the TRC element itself contribute to the total final
cost of the composite element. Nevertheless, since the optimum design process mainly
addresses the needs of the designer, the manufacturing costs are considered as precast plant-
dependent and cannot be incorporated in a general optimization design process.

In this design process the total cost of the element is the sum of four individual cost
components and is given by the following equation.
International RILEM Conference on Material Science – MATSCI, Aachen 2010 – Vol. I, ICTRC 169

⎡ A A ⎤
C = bd f ⎢C c c + C m m + C s γ s ρ s + C tex γ f ρ f ⎥ (3-1)
⎣ bd f bd f ⎦

where C Total cost per running meter [i.e. (€/m)]

Cc Cost per unit volume of the cast in-situ concrete as a function of its
compressive strength (€/m3)
Cm Cost per unit volume of the fine-grained concrete in the TRC as a
function of its flexural strength (€/m3)
Cs Cost per unit weight of the steel reinforcement (≈ 0.001 €/gr)
Ctex Cost per unit weight of the textile reinforcement (€/gr), equal to k times
Ctex_ref, as mentioned below
Ac, Am Cast in-situ concrete and fine-grained concrete cross-section areas,
respectively
γs, γf Density of steel and fibres in the textile reinforcement, respectively
ρs, ρf Steel and textile reinforcement ratios ( A s / bd f & A f / bd f ), respectively;

where A s the steel reinforcement area, A f the textile reinforcement area parallel to the
length of the element, ℓ, and b the width of slab.

The cost of cast in-situ concrete of normal strength-class (up to C30/37) can be expressed as a
second order polynomial function of its compressive strength. Although the cost of fine-
grained concrete is assumed to be a function of mainly the ratios of polymers (if used) and
fine particles (cementitious or not) in the mix, in this study (and in sake of simplicity) it is
regarded as being dependent solely on the polymer content. Polymer–modified fine–grained
concrete mixes are opted in this work based on their favourable properties, such as improved
workability (self-levelling ability) at low plasticizer contents, reduced shrinkage potential and
enhanced bonding to the textile reinforcement and to other cement-based substrates. Thus, a
relation between the flexural strength of the fine-grained concrete and its cost can be
established. The cost functions for the fine-grained and in-situ concrete are given from
Equations 3.2 and 3.3 respectively. The derivation of equation 3.2 was based on polymer–
modified fine–grained concrete mixes obtained from a pertinent literature review [ASTM].
Equation 3.3 was derived from the current Greek ready-mix concrete market.

C m = 0.9938f t2 + 4.4693f t + 75.2 (3-2)

where ft Flexural strength of the fine-grained concrete (MPa)

C c = -0.0089f c2 + 1.4658f c + 50.98 (3-3)

where fc Compressive strength of the cast in-situ concrete (MPa).

The cost of the textile reinforcement is dependent on a large number of parameters such as:
fibre material (e.g. carbon. glass, aramid, basalt), fibre treatment (sizing, fibre coating), textile
geometry (grid spacing, TEX, rovings’ stitching material and pattern, etc.). The derivation of
a cost function for the textile reinforcement that includes all the above-mentioned parameters
does not lie within the scope of the current study and is against the robustness of the
optimization process. Considering textile structures with orthogonal grid and the 2/3 of the
total fibre mass per square meter in the warp direction the cost relation between different
textile structures, in terms of materials, is given in Table 3.1.
170 PAPANTONIOU, PAPANICOLAOU: Minimum Cost Design of one-Way TRC/RC Composite Slabs

Table 3.1. Relative costs of 2D orthogonal textiles based on limited market data
Carbon AR-Glass Basalt
Relative 5.80*Ctex_ref Ctex_ref 2.20* Ctex_ref

where Ctex_ref Cost per unit weight of AR-Glass textile reinforcement (≈ 0.0192 €/gr).

3.3 Constraints
The mathematical constraints are posed by the demand that all calculated values derived from
the Ultimate Limit State and Serviceability Limit State analyses are lower than or equal to the
ones that cause failure, or are unacceptable in terms of users’ comfort. Geometric-specific
constraints are also imposed on individual cross-sections due to anthropometric restrictions
(that take into account the on-site constructability and site safety).

Table 3.2. Inequality and equality constraints

Limit TRC Element – Temporary State Limit Composite Slab – Permanent State
State State
Expression Limitation for: Expression Limitation for:
(1)
SLS μSd - μcr ≤ 0 Cracking moment ULS μSd - μRd ≤ 0 Bending moment(1)
ULS μSd - μRd ≤ 0 Bending moment(1) ULS vvSd -vvRd ≤ 0 Vertical shear(1)
ULS vvSd - vvRd ≤ 0 Vertical shear(1) ULS viSd -viRd ≤ 0 Interface shear(1)
SLS δf - δflim ≤ 0 Deflection [δflim = ℓ/400] SLS δtot - δlim ≤ 0 Deflection
(2)
ULS wf - wflim ≤ 0 Crack width SLS wtot - wlim ≤ 0 Crack width(5)
ULS εm - εmu = 0 Fine–grained concrete ULS εf - εf,max ≤ 0 Textile strain
strain(3)
ULS εsy - εs ≤ 0 Steel strain(6)
SLS ρfmin - ρf ≤ 0 Textile reinforcement ULS εc - εcu = 0 In–situ concrete strain(7)
ratio(4)
SLS σf – klt·σf,max ≤ 0 Failure mode(8)
n/a Htot - Hf ≥ 50 mm Geometry(9)
(1)
μ and v stand for the normalized moment, M, and shear, V, respectively. Normalization is achieved by
dividing M and V by (b·df·fcd), fcd being the design compressive strength of in-situ concrete. Subscripts Sd and Rd
denote the design values corresponding to the effect of actions and the design values of the corresponding
resistances, respectively; (2)If cracking in the TS is allowed: wflim is given as a percentage (e.g. 30%) of wlim
(maximum crack width allowed in the composite member = 0.3 mm); (3) Limitation that controls the failure mode
of the TRC element due to bending: crashing of the fine–grained concrete (εmu = 0.0035); (4) The minimum
textile reinforcement ratio, ρfmin, corresponds to that necessary to undertake μcr; (5) Crack width in the composite
member, wtot, is given as the sum of the crack widths in both the TS and the PS; (6) εsy stands for steel strain at
yielding; (7) Limitation that controls the failure mode of the composite member due to bending: crashing of the
in–situ concrete (εcu = 0.0035); (8) Stress limitation for the textile reinforcement under sustained (long-term)
loading (klt ranging from 0.25 to 0.50, depending on the fibre material); (9) The minimum thickness of the in-situ
concrete topping (equal to the difference between the height of the composite member, Htot, and that of the TRC
formwork, Hf) should be not less than 50 mm in order to ensure uniform loading distribution.
International RILEM Conference on Material Science – MATSCI, Aachen 2010 – Vol. I, ICTRC 171

4 IMPLEMENTATION OF OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM

4.1 Analysis Assumptions

In this paragraph analysis results derived from the implementation of the previously described
optimization algorithm are presented. Two types of TRC cross sections were examined: a
closed and an open one, as depicted in Fig. 4.1. In the same figure the local geometric
parameters for optimization are shown (α & c). Equation 4.1 describes in vector form the
deign variables subject to optimization.

⎡d d A A ⎤
X opt = ⎢ f , ff , α, c, f , s , f t ⎥ (4-1)
⎣ t t bt bt ⎦

where t Thickness of the TRC element

Section 1 Section 2
α α
c c

Fig. 4.1. Cross sections under examination: Closed (Section 1) and Open (Section2).

The thickness of the TRC element was assumed to be equal to 25 mm (to avoid premature
failure due to accidental actions, e.g. impact) and the width of the slab equal to 1.0 m. In the
present study cracking of the TRC element in the TS was not allowable and a single-span
structural system was considered. Analysis was carried out for one-way slabs with a span
equal to 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 m and for live loads equal to 2.5, 5.0 and 7.5 kN/m2. Also, a
dead load of 2.0 kN/m2 was considered. Material safety factors for concrete and steel were
taken into account according to Eurocode 2. The compressive strength of concrete and the
yield stress of steel were taken equal to 20 MPa and 500 MPa, respectively. Polymer-based
coated textile structures made of carbon, AR-glass and basalt were considered. Coefficients kb
and ks were taken equal to 0.90 and 1.0, respectively. Finally, full composite behaviour of the
slabs was assumed (i.e. interfacial shear slippage was taken equal to zero).

All results presented in this section are the product of the optimization procedure applied for a
given set of conditions, namely span, fibrous material and live load. In Fig. 4.2 the effective
depth of the textile reinforcement in the composite slab for different spans and load levels is
presented. The span to effective depth ratios for the composite slab and the formwork element
in different live load levels are presented in Fig. 4.3. Fig. 4.4 presents the shape of the AR-
Glass-TRC cross section and the effective depth for different spans and a live load equal to
5.0 kN/m2. In Table 4.1 the minimum production cost per running meter of the slab, for the
three types of textiles and for a live load equal to 5.0 kN/m2 is presented. For the same
analysis parameters the textile and steel reinforcement ratios which lead to the minimum cost
solutions are presented in Table 4.2. The respective optimum flexural strength of the
cementitious mortar is presented in Table 4.3.
172 PAPANTONIOU, PAPANICOLAOU: Minimum Cost Design of one-Way TRC/RC Composite Slabs

220 220
Carbon Carbon
Q=7.5

Effective Depth of Textile Reinforcement df (mm)

210 AR-Glass 210 AR-Glass
Q=7.5
Basalt Basalt
200 200
Closed Section Open Section
190 190
180 180
Q=5.0 Q=5.0
170 170
160 160
150 Q=2.5 150
Q=2.5
140 140
130 130
120 2 120
Q Live load in kN/m
110 110
2500 3000 3500 4000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Span (mm) Span (mm)
Fig. 4.2. Effective depth of textile reinforcement in the composite slab for all analysed cases.
Ratio of Span to Effective Depth of Slab & TRC Formwork

45 45
Closed Section Carbon Open Section Carbon
AR-Glass AR-Glass
Basalt Basalt
40
ℓ/dff
40 ℓ/dff

35 35

TRC Formork Element TRC Formork Element

30 30

25 25
ℓ/df Composite Slab ℓ/df Composite Slab

20 20

15 15
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2 2
Live Load (kN/m ) Live Load (kN/m )
Fig. 4.3. Ratio of span to effective depth of textile reinforcement for the composite slab and the
TRC formwork element.
International RILEM Conference on Material Science – MATSCI, Aachen 2010 – Vol. I, ICTRC 173

140 140
Closed Section Open Section
Effective Depth of Textile Reinforcement dff (mm)
130 130

Htot=200 mm,α=225 mm,c=300 mm,C=47.9 €/m Htot=196 mm,α=230 mm,c=337 mm,C=41.6 €/m
120 120

110 110
Htot=181 mm,α=319 mm, c=300 mm,C=43.6 €/m
100 100
Htot=176 mm,α=224 mm,c=350 mm,C=41.8 €/m

90 90

80 80 Htot=155 mm,α=246 mm,c=336 mm,C=36.8 €/m

Htot=157 mm,α=302 mm,c=300 mm,C=40.6 €/m

70 70
Htot= 138 mm,α =75 mm,c=300 mm,C=37.4 €/m
Htot=138 mm,α=160 mm,c=350 mm,C=33.7 €/m
60 60
2500 3000 3500 4000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Span (mm) Span (mm)
Fig. 4.4. Effective depth and cross section of formwork element as obtained by the optimization
procedure for Q = 5.0 kN/m2 and AR-glass textile reinforcement.

Table 4.1. Minimum production cost per running meter of slab for Closed and Open Sections (Live
load = 5.0 kN/m2)
Span Closed Section Open Section
Carbon AR-Glass Basalt Carbon AR-Glass Basalt
(mm) €/m €/m €/m €/m €/m €/m
2500 75.1 37.4 54.4 57.0 33.7 47.9
3000 77.2 40.3 57.1 74.7 36.8 54.7
3500 84.5 43.6 59.2 72.9 41.8 63.8
4000 82.3 49.9 66.4 76.6 41.6 68.2

Table 4.2. Optimum steel and textile reinforcement ratios (Live load = 5.0 kN/m2)
Span Closed Section Open Section
Carbon AR-Glass Basalt Carbon AR-Glass Basalt
1
ρs ρf ρs ρf ρs ρf ρs ρf ρs ρf ρs ρf
(mm) ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰ ‰
2500 1.60 1.80 1.60 1.70 1.60 1.80 1.60 1.30 1.60 1.80 1.60 1.60
3000 1.50 1.50 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.50 1.70 1.40 1.70 1.50 1.80
3500 1.30 1.60 1.20 1.40 1.20 1.40 1.30 1.30 1.20 1.30 1.20 1.30
4000 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.00 1.10 1.30 1.30 1.10 1.20 1.00 1.40 1.50
1 ρf=Af/bdf, ρs=As/bdf
174 PAPANTONIOU, PAPANICOLAOU: Minimum Cost Design of one-Way TRC/RC Composite Slabs

Table 4.3. Optimum flexural strength of the cementitious mortar (Live load = 5.0 kN/m2)
Span Closed Section Open Section
Carbon AR-Glass Basalt Carbon AR-Glass Basalt
(mm) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
2500 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.6 5.6
3000 5.8 6.3 6.5 6.8 7.2 7.2
3500 6.5 6.7 6.7 7.7 7.0 7.3
4000 6.8 6.5 7.1 8.0 7.3 7.9

4.2 Discussion
The derived results indicate that for the specific set of conditions examined:
• For spans higher than 3.0 m and for all load levels considered the total deflection
(deflection at TS + deflection at PS), was the critical performance criterion, which
determined the effective depth of the textile reinforcement not only for the composite slab
but also for the TRC element.
• Another decisive design constraint, which determined mainly the height of the TRC
element, was the demand for the minimum in-situ concrete topping thickness (at least 50
mm of concrete between the top flange of the TRC element and the top surface of the
composite slab so that smooth load distribution and avoidance of stress concentration
phenomena is ensured).
• Open TRC formwork sections lead to lower production costs compared to closed ones.
• Formwork elements of Open section profiles comprising AR-glass textile reinforcement
lead to an overall minimum cost solution.
• The use of AR-glass textile reinforcement leads to the deepest TRC cross sections, in
comparison to other types of textile materials, regardless of the section type selected (i.e.
Closed or Open).
• Larger spans are accommodated through higher flexural strength of the cementitious
mortar in the TRC.

5 CONCLUSIONS
This study presented the outline of an optimization (minimum cost) procedure for one-way
RC slabs cast on top of prefabricated Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC) Stay-in-Place (SiP)
formwork elements. The design for all sets of conditions examined in this work (spans, loads
and textile materials) was proved to be deflection-controlled. Sensitivity analysis (dependent
on different cost functions or propping existence) has to be conducted in order to determine
which design parameters or performance criteria are of crucial importance for the design
procedure. Future work should be focused on the experimental investigation of the degree of
composite behavior of TRC/RC composite slabs (using different types of shear connectors)
and the supplementation of the optimization procedure with durability criteria and long-term
mechanical behaviour constraints.
International RILEM Conference on Material Science – MATSCI, Aachen 2010 – Vol. I, ICTRC 175

REFERENCES

[Rei00] Reinhardt, H.-W.: Integral Formwork Panels Made of GFRC In High Performance Fibre
Reinforced Concrete. ACI-SP 190, p. 77-85, 2000
[Bra04] Brameshuber, W. ET al.: Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC) for Integrated Formworks
In Thin Reinforced Cement-Based Products. ACI-SP 224, p. 45-54, 2004
[Vos06] Voss, S.; Hegger, J.: Dimensioning of Textile Reinforced Concrete. In: Proceedings of
1st International RILEM Symposium Textile Reinforced Concrete, Sep 06-07, 2006,
Aachen, Germany, RILEM Publications, p.151–160.
[Jes08] Jesse, F.; Will, N.; Curbach, M.; Hegger, J.: Load-bearing behavior of Textile Reinforced
Concrete In Textile Reinforced Concrete. ACI-SP 250 p. 59-68, 2008.
[Pap10] Papanicolaou, C.; Papantoniou, I.: Mechanical behavior of Textile Reinforced Concrete
(TRC)/Concrete composite elements. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, Vol. 8
No. 1, p.35-47, 2010.
[EN 1991] Actions on Structures Part 1-1 General actions-Densities, self weight, Imposed loads for
buildings.
[EN 1992] Design of Concrete Structures. Part 1-1 General rules and rules for buildings.
[ASTM] Kuhlmann, A. L. ;Walters, D.G.(editors) :Polymer-Modified Hydraulic Cement Mixtures
Polymer-Modified Hydraulic Cement Mixtures STP 1176.