frequentlyasked questions

Do you also provide static calculations for the constructions?
  • Our civil engineers will answer you for sure a lot of your question concerning dimensions and calculations. We are in contact with excellent offices for structural analysis and will support you in finding the perfect partner.


Which standard can I use to design components with glass or carbon fiber reinforcement?
  • Due to the novel material there are no valid standards for the dimensioning of components yet. Dimensioning can, however, be carried out with the help of the available basic principles. External research institutes have tested and confirmed these principles intensively and in detail.
  • If standards for dimensioning are not used or do not exist, the use of the product in Germany is regulated by general building authority approvals (abZ). A comparable regulation then provides for a European Technical Assessment (ETA).


Is there a design software from solidian?
  • We use an internal tool to make a structural calculcation for inquiries from customers.


Do approvals exist for our products?
  • We do not currently have a general building approval for solidian GRID, but the approval process has already been started. This approval will then regulate a GRID for bending stressed components.
  • In the past, the German Institute for Structural Engineering (DIBt) granted abZ (Approval No.: Z-71.3-39) for the object of approval: solidian sandwich wall with the product solidian GRID Q121/121-AAE-38.


How do I dispose left overs of solidian reinforcements or production waste from concrete part production?
  • The information that we can give is how the wastes are desposed in Germany. According to the German disposal legislation and classification the waste can be classified into three groups:
    • Reinforcements of glass fibers (homogenious): AVV 07 11 03 Glasfaserabfall
    • Reinforcements of carbon fibers (homogenious): AVV 07 02 13 Kunststoffabfälle
    • Reinforcements of glass and carbon fibers (mixed): AVV 17 09 04 Gemischte Bau- und
    Abbruchabfälle mit Ausnahme derjenigen, die unter AVV 17 09 01, 17 09 02 oder 17 09 03 fallen
    solidian has proven the applicability of the classifications for it´s products together with a German lawyer and it´s waste disposal contractor, so that this is actually conforming to the German legislation. Especially in other countries please contact your local waste disposal contractor or other legal partners!


Do have concrete applications reinforced with solidian products have a lower CO2-footprint than steel reinforced concrete products?
  • The evaluation of the CO2-footprint (Global Warming Potential = GWP) or other comparisons to evaluate the sustainability of a product should be done in form of a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of the end product over the whole life cycle. This includes all raw materials and energies that have been used to produce the part, the hole lifetime the part has been used including maintenance and other actions necessary to maintain the usability of the part, the removal phase and the recycling. Solidian is analyzing such life cycles with partners. Our results show that the potentials for reduction of raw materials (up to 50%) and GWP (up to 30%) are different depending on the part that is reinforced. The main advantages of solidians non-metallic reinforcements is the reduction of concrete thickness of the part and resulting the use of less concrete and cement, material that has a high CO2-footprint. Furthermore the use of solidians non-metallic reinforcements may avoid the need to use surface coatings of the concrete parts, due to the ability to create a much finer crack distribution than the use of steel reinforcements. A foot passenger bridge project has used both advantages – reduction of part thickness and abandonment of surface coating – proving the numbers given above.


Do solidian reinforcements have a lower CO2-footprint than steel reinforcements?
  • solidian reinforcements do have a general lower CO2-footprint than stainless steel reinforcements according to our public data. This is already true without taking into account other positive aspects like reduction of cement etc. But for standard steel there is no general answer, who is better, if you are reducing the question down to the mere comparison of the CO2-equivalents of non-metallic and steel reinforcements and not consider the complete lifetime of the concrete part made of it. Standard steel in many cases has a lower CO2-equivalent than non-metallic reinforcements. This depends on the fiber material (carbon or glass), the type of reinforcement (grid or rebar) and the type of standard steel (regional energy mix of production, regional recycling rate). This is one of the reasons why you should not only consider the mere CO2-equivalent of the reinforcement but also evaluate the hole life cycle. Here solidian non-metalic reinforcements help to reduce cement, weight, maintenance and other aspects that realize to reduce the CO2-footprint of the complete concrete part. And this in most cases creates a positive life cycle analysis result for non-metalic reinforcements independent from regional aspects.


Is it possible that solidian supplies LCA-data of their non-metallic reinforcements or the products reinforced with these?
  • solidian is having a look at Life Cycle Analysis of our own products and the customer parts made of it since 2019, so that we learn our impact on sustainability. A part of this work is the determination of necessary material and process data of e.g. production processes, logistic processes and raw materials that are bought from external partners like suppliers. So far we are not allowed to publish all data that we have got from suppliers. Therefore we cannot use all results that we have in public so far. If you have specific interest in such subjects, we ask you to contact solidian and we try to help as far as possible:
  • solidian GmbH, Dr. Thomas Bischoff, thomas.bischoff@solidian.com, phone: +49 7431 10 2530.