A framework for predicting the residual load carrying capacity of concrete structures exposed to aggressive environments

Reinforced concrete structures are susceptible to a variety of deterioration mechanisms due to creep and shrinkage, alkali-silica reaction (ASR), carbonation, and corrosion of the reinforcement. The deterioration problems can affect the integrity and load carrying capacity of the structure. Substantial research has been dedicated to these various mechanisms aiming to identify the causes, reactions, accelerants, retardants and consequences. This has improved our understanding of the long-term behaviour of reinforced concrete structures. However, the strengthening of reinforced concrete structures for durability has to date been mainly undertaken after expert assessment of field data followed by the development of a scheme to both terminate continuing degradation, by separating the structure from the environment, and strengthening the structure. The process does not include any significant consideration of the residual load-bearing capacity of the structure and the highly variable nature of estimates of such remaining capacity. Development of performance curves for deteriorating bridge structures has not been attempted due to the difficulty in developing a model when the input parameters have an extremely large variability. This paper presents a framework developed for an asset management system which assesses residual capacity and identifies the most appropriate rehabilitation method for a given reinforced concrete structure exposed to aggressive environments. In developing the framework, several industry consultation sessions have been conducted to identify input data required, research methodology and output knowledge base. Capturing expert opinion in a useable knowledge base requires development of a rule based formulation, which can subsequently be used to model the reliability of the performance curve of a reinforced concrete structure exposed to a given environment.

An experimental study on the load carrying capacity of cold-formed steel studs and panels

A full-scale experimental study on the structural performance of load-bearing wall panels made of cold-formed steel frames and boards is presented. Six different types of C-channel stud, a total of 20 panels with one middle stud and 10 panels with two middle studs were tested under vertical compression until failure. For panels, the main variables considered are screw spacing (300 mm, 400 mm, or 600 mm) in the middle stud, board type (oriented strand board - OSB, cement particle board - CPB, or calcium silicate board - CSB), board number (no sheathing, one-side sheathing, or two-side sheathing), and loading type (1, 3, or 4-point loading). The measured load capacity of studs and panels agrees well with analytical prediction. Due to the restraint by rivet connections between stud and track, the effective length factor for the middle stud and the side stud in a frame (unsheathed panel) is reduced to 0.90 and 0.84, respectively. The load carrying capacity of a stud increases significantly whenever one- or two-side sheathing is used, although the latter is significantly more effective. It is also dependent upon the type of board used. Whereas panels with either OSB or CPB boards have nearly identical load carrying capacity, panels with CSB boards are considerably weaker. Screw spacing affects the load carrying capacity of a stud. When the screw spacing on the middle stud in panels with one-side sheathing is reduced from 600 mm to 300 mm, its load carrying capacity increases by 14.5 %, 20.6% and 94.2% for OSB, CPB and CSB, respectively.

Extending the service life of existing bridges by increasing their load carrying capacity /

Mode of access: Internet.

Bridge live loading assessment and load carrying capacity estimation using health monitoring system and dynamic testing

Peer reviewed

The carrying capacity imperative : assessing regional carrying capacity methodologies for sustainable land-use planning

The global impact of an ever-increasing population-base combined with dangerously depleted natural resources highlights the urgent need for changes in human lifestyles and land-use patterns. To achieve more equitable and sustainable land use, it is imperative that populations live within the carrying capacity of their natural assets in a manner more accountable to and ethically responsible for the land which sustains them. Our society’s very survival may well depend on worldwide acceptance of the carrying capacity imperative as a principle of personal, political, economic, educational and planning responsibility. This theoretically-focused research identifies, examines and compares a range of methodological approaches to carrying capacity assessment and considers their relevance to future spatial planning. It also addresses existing gaps in current methodologies and suggests avenues for improvement. A set of eleven key criteria are employed to compare various existing carrying capacity assessment models. These criteria include whole-systems analysis, dynamic responses, levels of impact and risk, systemic constraints, applicability to future planning and the consideration of regional and local boundary delineation. This research finds that while some existing methodologies offer significant insights into the assessment of population carrying capacities, a comprehensive model is yet to be developed. However, it is suggested that by combining successful components from various authors, and collecting a range of interconnected data, a practical and workable systems-based model may be achievable in the future.

The carrying capacity imperative : assessing regional carrying capacity methodologies for sustainable land-use planning

While some existing carrying capacity methodologies offer significant insights into the assessment of population carrying capacities, a comprehensive model is yet to be developed. This research identifies, examines and compares a range of methodological approaches to carrying capacity assessment and considers their relevance to future spatial planning. A range of key criteria are employed to compare various existing carrying capacity assessment models. These criteria include integrated systems analysis, dynamic responses, levels of risk, systemic constraints, applicability to future planning and the consideration of regional boundary delineation. It is suggested that by combining successful components from various authors, and collecting a range of interconnected data, a practical and workable system-based model may be achievable in the future.

Assessing population limits : a carrying capacity approach to planning

While purporting to enhance Australia’s sustainability, the federal government’s Population Strategy rejects the assessment of the limiting factors to future population growth, thus avoiding urgent threshold issues such as resource depletion and environmental destruction. A more forward-thinking and whole-system perspective would assess and incorporate critical biophysical limits into governance processes with suitable prioritisation. It would encourage communities to examine their individual and collective responsibilities in the context of these limits in order to most equitably optimise outcomes; and it would employ both a resource-based examination of minimum population requirements, and an impact-based assessment of maximum thresholds. This carrying capacity approach to planning could help guide society towards a more sustainable future.

Carrying capacity dashboard analyses : Australian case studies of populations scaled to place

In a globalised world, it makes sense to examine our demands on the landscape through the wide-angle lens of ecological footprint analysis. However, the important impetus towards a more localised societal system suggests a review of this approach and a return to its origins in carrying capacity assessment. The determination of whether we live within or beyond our carrying capacity is entirely scalar, with national, regional and local assessments dependent not only on the choices of the population but the capability of a landscape - at scale. The Carrying Capacity Dashboard, an openly accessible online modelling interface, has been developed for Australian conditions, facilitating analysis at various scales. Like ecological footprint analysis it allows users to test a variety of societal behaviours such as diet, consumption patterns, farming systems and ecological protection practices; but unlike the footprint approach, the results are uniquely tailored to place. This paper examines population estimates generated by the Carrying Capacity Dashboard. It compares results in various scales of analysis, from national to local. It examines the key behavioural choices influencing Australian carrying capacity estimates. For instance, the assumption that the consumption of red meat automatically lowers carrying capacity is examined and in some cases, debunked. Lastly, it examines the implications of implementing carrying capacity assessment globally, but not through a wide angle lens; rather, by examining the landscape one locality at a time.

The essential parameters of a resource-based carrying capacity assessment model : an Australian case study

Carrying capacity assessments model a population’s potential self-sufficiency. A crucial first step in the development of such modelling is to examine the basic resource-based parameters defining the population’s production and consumption habits. These parameters include basic human needs such as food, water, shelter and energy together with climatic, environmental and behavioural characteristics. Each of these parameters imparts land-usage requirements in different ways and varied degrees so their incorporation into carrying capacity modelling also differs. Given that the availability and values of production parameters may differ between locations, no two carrying capacity models are likely to be exactly alike. However, the essential parameters themselves can remain consistent so one example, the Carrying Capacity Dashboard, is offered as a case study to highlight one way in which these parameters are utilised. While examples exist of findings made from carrying capacity assessment modelling, to date, guidelines for replication of such studies in other regions and scales have largely been overlooked. This paper addresses such shortcomings by describing a process for the inclusion and calibration of the most important resource-based parameters in a way that could be repeated elsewhere.

The development of a carrying capacity assessment model for the Australian socio-environmental context

A key aim of this research was to highlight how society's understanding of constraints to the productive capacity of its resource base is vital to its long-term survival. This was achieved through the development of an online model, the Carrying Capacity Dashboard. The Dashboard was developed to estimate how much land Australian populations require for the production of their food, textiles, timber and liquid fuel. Findings reveal that Australia's estimated carrying capacity is currently over 40 million people but longer-term and more regional analyses suggest a much smaller number. Carrying capacity assessment also indicates that optimal resource security is to be found in balancing both small and large-scale self-sufficiency.

Scalar considerations in carrying capacity assessment : an Australian example

Regional resource self-sufficiency has been proposed as a way to improve food security by lessening the demand on long-distance transport. An online tool, the Carrying Capacity Dashboard, was developed for Australian conditions in order to gauge self-sufficiency at three different scales: regional, state and national. It allows users to test a variety of societal behaviours such as diet, biofuel production, farming systems and ecological protection practices. Analysis developed from the Dashboard tests the effects of various resource consumption patterns on land carrying capacity. Findings reveal that Australia’s current carrying capacity is estimated to be over 40 million, but if calculated on a regional basis, this is reduced by almost half.

Climate change impacts on northern Australian rangeland livestock carrying capacity: a review of issues

Grazing is a major land use in Australia's rangelands. The 'safe' livestock carrying capacity (LCC) required to maintain resource condition is strongly dependent on climate. We reviewed: the approaches for quantifying LCC; current trends in climate and their effect on components of the grazing system; implications of the 'best estimates' of climate change projections for LCC; the agreement and disagreement between the current trends and projections; and the adequacy of current models of forage production in simulating the impact of climate change. We report the results of a sensitivity study of climate change impacts on forage production across the rangelands, and we discuss the more general issues facing grazing enterprises associated with climate change, such as 'known uncertainties' and adaptation responses (e.g. use of climate risk assessment). We found that the method of quantifying LCC from a combination of estimates (simulations) of long-term (>30 years) forage production and successful grazier experience has been well tested across northern Australian rangelands with different climatic regions. This methodology provides a sound base for the assessment of climate change impacts, even though there are many identified gaps in knowledge. The evaluation of current trends indicated substantial differences in the trends of annual rainfall (and simulated forage production) across Australian rangelands with general increases in most of western Australian rangelands ( including northern regions of the Northern Territory) and decreases in eastern Australian rangelands and south-western Western Australia. Some of the projected changes in rainfall and temperature appear small compared with year-to-year variability. Nevertheless, the impacts on rangeland production systems are expected to be important in terms of required managerial and enterprise adaptations. Some important aspects of climate systems science remain unresolved, and we suggest that a risk-averse approach to rangeland management, based on the 'best estimate' projections, in combination with appropriate responses to short-term (1-5 years) climate variability, would reduce the risk of resource degradation. Climate change projections - including changes in rainfall, temperature, carbon dioxide and other climatic variables - if realised, are likely to affect forage and animal production, and ecosystem functioning. The major known uncertainties in quantifying climate change impacts are: (i) carbon dioxide effects on forage production, quality, nutrient cycling and competition between life forms (e.g. grass, shrubs and trees); and (ii) the future role of woody plants including effects of. re, climatic extremes and management for carbon storage. In a simple example of simulating climate change impacts on forage production, we found that increased temperature (3 degrees C) was likely to result in a decrease in forage production for most rangeland locations (e. g. -21% calculated as an unweighted average across 90 locations). The increase in temperature exacerbated or reduced the effects of a 10% decrease/increase in rainfall respectively (-33% or -9%). Estimates of the beneficial effects of increased CO2 (from 350 to 650 ppm) on forage production and water use efficiency indicated enhanced forage production (+26%). The increase was approximately equivalent to the decline in forage production associated with a 3 degrees C temperature increase. The large magnitude of these opposing effects emphasised the importance of the uncertainties in quantifying the impacts of these components of climate change. We anticipate decreases in LCC given that the 'best estimate' of climate change across the rangelands is for a decline (or little change) in rainfall and an increase in temperature. As a consequence, we suggest that public policy have regard for: the implications for livestock enterprises, regional communities, potential resource damage, animal welfare and human distress. However, the capability to quantify these warnings is yet to be developed and this important task remains as a challenge for rangeland and climate systems science.

Effect of membrane action on the plastic collapse load of circular orthotropic slabs with fixed edges

In the case of reinforced concrete slabs fixed at the boundaries, considerable enhancement in the load carrying capacity takes place due to compressive membrane action. In this paper a method is presented to analyse the effects of membrane action in fixed orthotropic circular slabs, carrying uniformly distributed loads. Depending on the radial moment capacity being greater or less than the circumferential moment capacity, two cases of orthotropy have been considered. Numerical results are worked out for certain assumed physical parameters and for different coefficients of orthotropy. Variations of load and bending moments with the central deflection are presented.