Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Nottingham ePrints service makes this work by researchers of the University of
Nottingham available open access under the following conditions.
This article is made available under the University of Nottingham End User licence and may
be reused according to the conditions of the licence. For more details see:
http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/end_user_agreement.pdf
by
October 1977
BEST COPY
AVAILABLE
SYNOPSIS
and the AC1318-71 Building Code, and the new (1977) CIRIA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgments i
Synopsis ii
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background 3
2.1 Introduction 17
3.1 Introduction 31
3.2 Materials 33
3.2.1 Cement 33
3.2.4 Reinforcement 34
3.4.1 Formwork 36
3.6 Testing 40
3.6.2 Test 41
preparation
3.6.3 Test 42
procedures
4.1 Test 44
programme
4.2 Test 45
results
5.1 Introduction 56
Page
6.1 Introduction 72
8.1 Introduction 91
"
8.4 Design 96
example
Page
CHAPTER 1
CHAPTER 2
CHAPTER 3
Page
CHAPTER 4
CHAPTER 5
CHAPTER 6
CHAPTER 7
CHAPTER 8
Page
CHAPTER 9
APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 2
I
As area of main longitudinal reinforcement
"
C2 empirical coefficient in Eqns. (8.1) ang
(8.2) (for deformed bars C2 = 195 N/j2m ;
for bars C2 97.5 N/mm )
plain round =
Pý =2v bD
SS
Vmax9 vx'vms
concrete shear stress parameters and
Vwh' Fwv (Fig. 9.3
steel shear stress parameters
and Eqn. 9.6)
z lever arm
UNITS OF MEASUREMENT
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 BACKGROUND
CHAPTERONE
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1
At a Mechanics Colloquium given at the University of
span across the column free space and carry the building above
foundation; and in bunkers and silos, where the walls may act
1.2 BACKGROUND
$ i8,21
The PCA and other design methods which were
reported. These two test centres, together with the more re-
26
cent work of Crist at New Mexico, have expanded the knowledge
24,
1.2.2.1 de Paiva and Siess's tests
point top loading (Fig. 1.1). The object of the test programme
and their depths varied from 178 mm to 330 mm, to give L/D
where the failure was not clearly either of the former modes.
Ps
= 0.8 (1- o. 6D ) Ps
(1.1)
41
where P' was determined using Laupa's formula for shear
s
stress (vs), as derived from the results of tests on ordinary
P=2v bD
ss (1.2)
in which
(1 + sina0)
Pt =A
bD
The quantity A (1 + sinao) referred to the 'total'
ment.
25
1.2.2.2 Leonhardt and Walther's tests
25
Leonhardt and Walther reported the results of
loaded deep beams, and hence the review here will refer only
tested under this condition; each 1600 x 1600 x 100 mm, with
ranged from 0.125% bD to 0.25% bD. In some beams the main steel
of 5 mm diameter bars.
A
anchorage hooks.
later deep beam tests, it seems likely that shear failure was
26
1.2.2.3 Crist's tests
New Mexico formed the main basis of the deep beam design guidance
s
4
which is given in the current issue of the ACI Building Code
.
There were beams that failed prior to beam yield, and the
no
beams.
xc : d), by
or
V=V+V
u uc us (1.4)
Av 1+L+ Ah 1
Vus = 1.5 fyd /11
svv 12 d sh 12 ld -L
test data.
shear force.
27-32,
of the tests have been published in technical journals
and the new CIRIA design guide contains some design guidance
Qult C1 (1 - 0.35X
- D' ftbD +Cn sin a_
2AY i1. 9ý
D
W2 Qult
27-32
The experimental work which formed the basis
or 1524 mm. The depths of the beams and the geometry of the
L/D and x/D ratios; namely, L/D varied from 1 to 3; x/d from
zero to about 0.025. Both plain round and deformed bars were
400 2
and N/mm respectively. The main longitudinal bars were
15.
anchorage failure.
strength f.
cu
3. The potential diagonal crack is approximately the line
deep beams.
it may not.
CHAPTERTW0
2.1 INTRODUCTION
+ý
2.3 GENERAL COMMENTS
17.
CHAPTERTW0
2.1 INTRODUCTION
9
With the issue of the CIRIA design guide in January
Code 4,
and the PCA ST668; each of which containing some pro-
practice.
some provisions for the design of deep beams with web openings,
5.
2.2.1 The CEB-FIP Recommendations
59
According to the CEB-FIP Recommendations simply
supports.
near each face and surrounding the extreme vertical bars. The
1y.
mesh and b is the beam thickness. The total web steel ratio
is, therefore, 1.0% and 0.8% for'plain and deformed bars respect,
(2.2b), where W/2 equals the column load plus half the total
distributed load.
Moment As
of resistance =x xz
Ym
(where Ym, the factor for is 1.15 for
partial safety material,
Use (11782 2)
24 No. 25 mm diameter bars mm
condition that:
bD fc
Design shear force Yf x20.1
Ym
'. b= 875 mm
.
875 2
i. e., 0.002 x 150 x = 262 mm.
4
Special provisions are given in the 1971 ACI code
Yu V (2.2
u- )
bd
d of the beams are large enough for vu not to exceed the follow-
ing limits:
vu 8 1/d< 2
when
ifwhen
J 2/3 (10 + 1/d) 2G 1/d C5 (2.3 )
vu
concrete is calculated: -
Mu Vud
vc = 3.5 - 2.5 x 1.9 fc+ 2500p
Vud M
u
Ffc, VUd
2.5 .9 + 2500p
M. (2.4)
u
6 (2.4$ ,
strength.
of the vertical web steel should not be less than 0.15 per cent
tal web steel not less than 0.25 per cent of the vertical con-
rlý1/dl+Ah[11_1/dl (vu
- vý)b (2.5)
12 sh 12 f
v Y
beam shown in Fig. (2.2). (In using the ACI code it must be
noted that all equations are intended for use with Imperial
plained later, and only the final result of the flexural cal-
(16336 2).
mm
9200
Design bending moment Mu = 1.4 x x 1150 = 7245 kNIK
Fe
V=8f, (Assuming d: 4500 mm say)
Obd
(fc = 22.5 N/rnm2= 3260 lbf/in2. '. fl= 57.2 lbf/in2= 0.394 N/mm2)
6300 x 103
0.85 bx 500 =8x0.394
b 525 mm say
Mu
3.5 - 2.5
3S
2.5 x 7245 x 103
Vd- _ 63oo x 500
U-
Vud
vc = 2.5 1.9 fC + 2500 p
ri
u
[1.9 6300 x 4500
57.2 16336 2
= 2.5 x + 2500 x 525 x 500 x 7245000 lbf/in
ff-c7l
But 6 =6x0.394 2.36 N/mm2
=
6300 x 103 2
°u = 3.14 h/mm
- o. 5x 525 x 500
same size bars (AWeb) are used in a square patter-i at, say,
'_5.
(3.14 -1
- 2.36)
x 525
10
Aweb = 150mm2
"""
A=0.0015
v x 525 x 150
2
= 178 mm
8.
2.2.3 Portland Cement Association
12
and L
2D (2.6
midspan,
£= and 2L (2.7
2L
8
As regards shear resistance, the PCA document states
3 i1 LD
+ (2.
g b-D q
two beams are then the same. Next, the characteristic ratios
C 600 x31
=
2(2L/3) x 6000 13.3
4800 x3=0.6
ß_D
2(2L/3) x 6000
By visual interpolation
4)
value (see Section 8.10.1 of ACI be f=
code would
s
24000 lbf/in2 = 165 N/mm2. Then
28.
T
As 2610 x 103 = 15818 mm2
s 165
and note the PCA guide requires the main tensile steel
and 11.4.1).
Ffc,
v=1.1 = 63 lbf/in2 = 0.44 N/mm2
b= 1050 mm (say)
The PCA method does not call for web reinforcement. The
5
The CEB-FIP Recommendations published in 1970
,
25,
were based mainly on the tests of Leonhardt and Walther
26, 24,
Grist de Paiva and Siess emphasize shear design and
33P34 (Chapter
Cambridge team 1.2.2.4: Eqn. (1.9)). This
and now forms part of the provisions given in the new CIRIA
design guide.
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 MATERIALS
3.2.1 Cement
3.2.4 Reinforcement
3.4.1 Formwork
3.6 TESTING
CH APT ERTHREE
3.1 INTRODUCTION
has received little attention in the past, and one which may
like geometry and uses of deep beams. Due to the lack of pre-
inforcement.
concrete deep beams and normal weight concrete deep beams. Nine
depth ratios). The main conclusion drawn from the survey was
high shear may significantly do so. For this reason all the
adopted.
3.2 MATERIALS
3.2.1 Cement
used for the manufacture of all beams within each test series,
concrete: -
3.2.4 Reinforcement
bars possessed no definite yield point: for these bars the value
56
accordance with recommendations given by the manufacturers:
are as follows: -
Slump 70 mm
3.4.1 Formwork
a thin release oil and all joint surfaces were liberally coated
than the beam and had screw threaded ends. All joints on the
spread the work load, the aggregates and cement were carefully
horizontal drum mixer. Prior to the first mix, the drum was
the region of the loading points was trowelled smooth and the
lines.
40.
3.6 TESTING
base beam which was then winched along rails into position
jigs were designed which were clamped to each end of the base
beam (Fig-3.2). The jigs ensured that the test beam automatically
beam with Devcon plastic steel (Fig. 3.3). The two outer
reading.
result that all the beams had the similar test age of 28 days
the beam was ready for test: the lateral temporary support
for all the test beams. The load was applied incrementally in
in Appendix 2).
43.
hand lamp and lens, the surface of the beam was inspected to
crack was measured on formation and its position and extent was
A
with the value of the load which was written at the two extrem-
the test rig for storage for a minimum of five weeks, during
CHAPTERF0UR
deep beams (Fig. 4.1 and Table 4.. 1) of span L 1500 mm, overall
shear spans x were used, giving x/D ratios of 0.4 and 0.25
of 6 mm diameter de-
a rectangular-mesh web reinforcement
Chapter 3.
the sequence in which the cracks were observed. and the other
ing point (Fig. 4.4), and that the size, shape and position
(4.5a). 27,28
in Fig. Previous work has demonstrated that
forcement.
as follows: -
4.4: cracks 1 and 2), which were being opened by the applied
of the beam, and crack 6, which initiated from the top surface
and (2) they initiated not from the opening nor from the load-
bearing blocks regions, but from the region between the open-
lower and upper diagonal cracks in the present beams was due
two over its full height. In the second failure mode, desig-
chord into two, whilst that portion of the beam outside the
into:
and
top part of Fig. (4.6b) shows that, in beams having the same
edge cracks.
)O.
ing point along the 'load path'. If this path was inter-
routed, along the paths ABC and AEC in Fig (4.11) When the
the angles which were made with the horizontal, i. e., the
such that the angles 0 and 0ý were little different from the
iveness of the lower path ABC, and when the 'strut' BC failed
shows that where the beams were without openings or where the
such as M-0.4/6 the lower path was clearly not highly effect-
ive (Fig. 4.3): the effect of the web reinforcement was there-
increase the capacity of the upper path and hence the ultimate
Beam M-0.4/4 (Table 4.2: 450 kN) and Beam 0-0.4/4 (Table
of
C1 0.35 D (4
= `1 - D)
ft bD + C2>IA sin2oc . 1)
'ult
ý1 k1X ) ft AD (4.2)
Ault = C1 - 0.35 b k2 D+ C2 sin2ot
k2D
were clear of the 'load path' joining the loading point and
made using Eqn. (4.2), which was based on the proposition that
the lower load path ABC was the primary path and that the web
then as follows: -
cepts the 'load path' joining the load bearing blocks at the
Egn. (4.1)
for a beam without openings using above.
-A
5.1 INTRODUCTION
CHAPTERFIVE
5.1 INTRODUCTION
and since the design of such beams was not yet covered by the
beams was carried out. The purpose of the tests was to provide
deep beams with web openings, and in particular the tests had
four specific aims. The first aim was to check the validity of
that in a deep beam with web openings, there could be two crit-
type and amount of web steel used in the pilot study failed to
confirmation.
57.
overall depth D 750 mm, width b 100 mm, with span lengths L of
1125 mm and 750 mm, giving L/D ratios of 1.5 and 1 respectively.
x/D ratios of 0.3 and 0.2 respectively. The other three beams
The test beams were divided into two groups: the Group
460 2
ment each consisted of 10 mm diameter deformed bars of N/mm
yield strength and the web steel ratio " was as near as possible
constant at 1.2 per cent (Table 5.1) so that the weight of the
web steel in each of these beams was very nearly the same.
" The web steel ratio Pweb was calculated as the ratio
(volume of concrete)
of steel)/(volume
58.
openings 11.12 and 13 were at 175 mm from the beam top. while
that, where the opening was clear of the load path the failure
and 0-0.3/14 clearly shows that in each beam the failure plane
intercepted the load path from the interior of the beam: that
beams with openings Types 4,13*, 16 (Fig. 5.2), but also for
any beam in which the opening encroached into the load path
a very late stage, or might not form until the collapse load
drawn from the pilot tests, namely, that the maximum crack-
crack width.
which shows the crack widths of the four beams with L/D: 1
It can be seen that opening No. 16 led to the widest crack width,
0-0.3/0, in L/D In
and which = 1.5 and x/D = 0.3. the pilot
study only a single L/D ratio of 2 was used and it was not
larly, in Beam W5-0.3/4 where the web steel was used to surround
0.3 mm limit was not exceeded until the applied load reached
580 kN, and, as was noted earlier, the widest cracks were not
(Fig. 4.4: crack 8 and 9), while the horizontal bars restrained
the corner cracks (Fig. 4.4: crack 1 and 2). Similarly, the
effective.
with Fig. (5.6) shows again that the deflections were a result
I
primarily of the effects of cracking within the shear spans.
the deflection plot for Beam W6-0.3/4, which had inclined web
beams broadly confirmed the deduction made from the pilot test
point.
24
that reported by de Paiva
.
to Fig. (5.7a), in
cause some reduction was quite small.
which the ultimate loads are shown against the opening breadth
tests.
ultimate loads were low Table (5.2): Seam W1-0.3/4 (100 kN),
-
(825 kN) and W7-0.3/4 (530 kN), the ultimate loads were much
(595 W.
the same amount of web steel, but the ultimate load of Beam
re, ion above the support and it can be seen that the failure
it is clear that the failure was within the shear span and
cracks and hence changing the failure mode from Mode 3 to Mode
2 (Fig. 4.5).
of any, Beam '.14 (A) with [team 'J4-0.3/4, and so on (Table 5-2)9
71.
and 5.1). The ultimate load recorded for both beams being
benefits still.
C If APTERSIX
6.1 INTRODUCTION
c 11
.1PTERSIX
INTRODUCTION
ment type.
beams (Fig. 6.1 and Table 6.1) of overall depth D 750 mm and
no web reinforcement.
to 0.0065 (Table G. O.
the concrete strengths for each beam are given in Table X6.1).
4.4 crack types 1 and 2), so that the failure mode of each
diagonal cracks with the result that high ultimate loads were
In Beam 'ß'W6-0.3/4 the web steel ratio (Table 6.1) was 1.25%
span.
the two solid beams N0-0.3/0 and :ß, 76A-0.3/0 revealed some
9
beams (CIRIt guide 1977). }however, the these
ovidence of
the 0.3 mm maximum crack width limit was not exceeded until
that the 0.3 mm limit for each beam containing the smaller
0.3 ixi was reached at 350 kN, in Beam W6. ß-0.3/0 containing
it was found that the higher ultimate loads recorded for the
was such that the 'load path' joining the load bearing blocks
CHAPTERSEVEN
reinforcement (Fig. 4.1, Fig. 5.1 and Fig. 6.1), (f) both normal
the lower path should increase with the angle 0. whilst that
`
of the upper path with 0. Let us consider, for the time being,
`Tn
82.
through 380 kN, 280 kN, 260 kN, to 210 kN for Beam 0-0.3/10.
paths in Fig. (7.1) become one, which is the 'natural load path'
joining the loading and reaction points; for such a solid beam,
33
it has been shown that the ultimate shear strength Qult could
D) (%. 1)
Quit C1 (1 - 0.35 ft bD + C2 AÜ sin2a
Egn. (7.1) and the W1/W` ratios for these beams are reasonably
close to unity.
:ý Yk
Qult C1 (1 0.35 ) ft b k2 Df AC2 A pl (7.2)
' kIx 0 sin2ai
2
s W2/2
case may be, and al is the angle between the typical bar and
which was based on the pilot study test data (Chapter 4; Eqn.
4.2), has thus been corrected: in the pilot study the proposed
>A
) ft p
Quit II C1 1-0.35 b k2D + C2 sin2a (7-3)
kD
I- V
in Fig. (7.1), and the factor (1-0.35 kix/k`D) allows for the
71
84.
the diagonal cracks could result in the end portion of the beam
distance y; this suggests that one way to detail the web steel
and lower paths are less efficient in carrying loads than the
load path and to allow for the increase in strength which was
web steel proper; for the main steel X=1; for the web steel
EXA`tl'LE :
Fig. (7.3)"
by the first term on the right hand side of Egn. (7.2)as follows
(1 k1X )
1.35 - 0.35 ft b k2 D
k2D
(1 - 0.35 5
300 )x2.87
= 1.35 x 100 x 300 x 10-3 kN
85.7 kti.
contribution is given by
Xx 300 xAx y1/D x sin2a1
(314.2 71 0x0.64)
=1x 300 x x 10-3
1557 3
+ 1.5 x 300 x (190 t 230 270 480 520 560)x 0.64
0 + + + + x10
(57.1 + 135.6) kN
- 278.4 kN
112 557 kN
From Table (5.1) ft - 2.69 N/mm2 for Beam 0-0.4/O, and since
85.7 2, qf
Qult = x $6 37.1
W2 275 kN.
profile.
to Beam ti: b'1-0.3/4, the computed W2 will be over 800 kN; this
artificially high computed load arises from the fact that the
leave the upper region weak and hence the potential capacity
Table (7.1) shows that for such beam Eqn. (7.2) is grossly
09.
2.0.
the tests, that limit was not reached at a web steel ratio
the scale of the test specimens. The size of the test specimens
using large deep beams has commenced; the test specimens both
(Fig. 5.2) of the present tests. The webs of the beam are rein-
-
PROPOSED METHOD FOR THE DZSIGN OF DEEP BEAMS WITH WEB OPENINGS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
C If APTEREIGHT
A PROPOSED METHOD FOR THE DESIGN OF DEEP DEANS WITH WED OFENINGS
8.1 INTRODUCTION.
1
36,
with openings presents formidable problems but the
material, Y©"
ated value based on the cube strength, for the cylinder splitt-
ing strength which is used in Eqn. (7.1) and (7.2) and which
A3TM 330 - see Chapter 3.5). Taking into account the partial
EC-U5
ft if-
= 0.52 0 42 for normal weight concrete
.
y 1cu
m
ft fcu Ff
0.36 for lightweight concrete
0,1}4 u
ym i. )
>C2
"-u C1 (1-0.35 ffcu bD Ap (8.1)
it x/D) + sin2a
"" Y1 2
Quit C1 (1-0.35 xc2
= kix/k2D)
j1'cu bk2D + Ap sin a1(8.2)
and 0.2< x/D < 0.4. The equations should be applied only to
are covered.
desi; ner should ensure that the factor k2 is not less than
from the concrete term to,; ether with that of the main steel
the regions above and below the opening. For this purpose
5
deep beams by the OED-FIP Recommendations (see
solid
Charter
ensure that both the regions above and below the opehing are
to bend and fix than others. However, where there are re-
steel.
follows: -
f
Design bending moment M=0.75 kD A .m (8.3)
2S
safety factor of 1.4 for loading, the design shear force and
410
12600 a 0.75 x 2600 x As x
1.15 x 10-6
As (As/bD
- 18124 = 0.58%)
2)
Use 6 No. 40 mm bars + 14 No. 32 mm bars (18792 mm
bs 650 mm say
6501 400
5.25 x f1x 195 x 18792 x (say) x sin2al x 10-3
J
(where a1 0 cot-i kix/k2D 65°;
= sin2(z 1a0.82)
than 20: " `pult and therefore a minimum amount of web reinforce-
ý1.5 Y
722 x 103 - x 195 x A. x 81 sin2a1
are uNed to protect the regions above and below the opening:
2 ''` (cot- 1
sin`a1 0.82 as before and sin al = sin 750/1200)
of yi (say yi 1800).
a
From above,
No. 2)
Use 18 25 mm diameter bars (8836 mm "
9.1 INTRODUCTION
9.4 CIRIA GUIDE: PROVISIONS FOR DEEP BE. VIS WITH HOLES
100.
CHAPTERNINE
in some detail.
9
The Guide is based on an exhaustive study of pub-
CEB-FIP 5".
and to the International Recommendations It contains
only those sections of the Guide which are relevant to the ex-
herein and the design loads which would obtain both according
are examined.
9
According to the Guide the 'simple rules' may be
An >M
0 . 87 f ( 9.1 )
yz
for bending are in fact based upon the elastic stress distri-
in rior: n*1 be. ir.; and hc"nce, whet'ier the lever arm is nominally
av).
that intersects the critical diagonal crack (Fig. 9.2) will form
27 34.
an integral part of the shear reinforcement Therefore,
all the main bars provided in accordance with Eqn. (9.1) also act
34
as web bars; that is, to quote Kong, Robins and Sharp "the
2vk /x
V< 2 bh
acae
(9.2)
V< bh v
au (9.3)
1U4.
at the support.
support.
types of concrete.
has been 4
reported that the failure mode in shear in certain
as the shear failure mode in both Kani's and Taylor's tests was
becomes 2.05.
bearing 9.
on support pressures will govern The Giiide re-
exceed 0.4 f.
cu
5.5 of 03'110: namely, 0.25% (for high yield steel) or 0.3% (for
9
Under the supplementary rules the ultimate shear
(9.4) 3304
Equation is based on the analysis of the
27-32:
results of the Nottingham - Cambridge tests it is, in
tended to apply to beams under top loads with clear shear span/
depth ratios (ze/h$)in the range 0.23 to 0.7; this being the
27-32
range considered in the tests The coefficients Al 9
(1.9 ), 34
Equation having been modified by a factor of 0.75
expressed as follows:
limit of 0.4 fcu in the simple rules to 0.6 fcu, provided that
for the reason that the bearing pressures achieved under lab-
9,
oratory conditions may not be achieved, it is thought in
32,
(cf. Chapter 1.2.2.2). %t Nottingham tests have indicated
aid to the designer -ns. (9.3) and (9.4) are re-arranged alge-
design the main steel and web steel using the CIRIA Recommen-
9.
dations
?; ai 12600 k.\m
.4XX2a 2
V 1.4 x2 6300 kN
ýs
0.87 fyz
As )
Provide 24 No. 25 wm diameter bars (11782 cunt; p= 0.497,
=
bh
a
the beam.
9
The 'simple rules' of the Guide are not applicable
9
for concentrated loads, therefore, the supplementary rules
might be used,
yc
Amax
(9.7)
bh
a
111,
shear and the terms in brackets give the contribution from the
main steel, the horizontal web bars. and the vertical web bars
respectively.
6300 103
x > 0.44 x 7.12
500 x 4800
2
vas = 0.86 N/mm
the main steel for bending had been determined from a more
rigorous equation (than Eqn. 9.1) then it would have been necessary
i. e.. V /V = 1.2
The ACI and the CIRIA Guides are reasonably less conservative
and are more consistent; and of the two, the CIRIA Guide as
in the present tests (cf. Fig. 4.2 and 5.2) deemed 'inadmissible
o.re
duced here in Fig. (9.8). The load acting on each pair of no-
direction that would have crossed that region in the solid beam
Uhlmann 13
method described by in 1952. Ulhmann's method was
which are reported herein, would indicate that the CIRIA pro-
35
has been stated that 'the effect of an opening on the ulti-
ing for the direction being considered; (b) is the beam thick-
Fig. (5.1) and Fig. (6. i): web reinforcement Type 5) this
- and
could include the one recom-, ended by CIIIIA (Fig. 9.9) might
-
not be satisfactory).
ultimate strengths.
C11 APTERTEN
10.1 CONCLUSIONS
CHAPTERTEN
10.1 CONCLUSIONS
ily restrictive.
engineering science.
beams:
observations.
design procedure.
AP I' ENDIXONE
Al .2 TEST PROGRAMOME
APPENDIXONE
A1.1).
on deep beam behaviour but it was not clear what effects the
with further tests on compar: tble deep be_t. ns but without web
bar diameter db, 20 db, 15 db. 10 db, or nil, plus one of (25 db
Hence all the embedment lengths used in the tests (except for
the one beam with 25 db+ hook) were substantially less than the
observable.
Fig. (A1.4). shows that the crack widths were usually as wide
control, Fig. (A1.4) shows that the anchorage of tine tension re-
depth. 9
the overall For example, in the new CIRIA design guide
Al
As a (see Chapter 9: Eqn. 9.1)
0. H7 fyz
11. ßt *1 iL CO \T3
firm It 37
conclusions. was observed that:
ten bar diameters was not less efficient than an ACI standard
hook.
evidence from one test programme. The ACI Committee 408 has
lightweight 52
ment in concrete structural elements and the
ACI Committee 439 has also pointed that "there has been
out
deep beams.
APPENDIXTWO
A2.1 INTRODUCTION
X2.2.2 Testing
A2.4 SUMMARY
130.
APPENDIX2
9111
Recent literature surveys have shown that
failure is to be avoided.
of cycles.
more closely spaced near the beam soffit, and (C) An inclined
28,29,31
for static loading condition The web steel ratio
pweb for all the beams was kept constant 0.012, being 3 times
at
A2.2.2 Testing
of 120,000 cycles between the ACI load and 0.5 ACI load. The
load was next increased statically to 1.25 times the ACI load
cycles between 1.25 ACI load and 0.5 ACI. For the first of
the three beams tested, Beam C-2/0.4, the load then in-
was
Beam 1-2/0.4 and ©-2/0.4, but substantially less for Beam C-2/0.4,
.
all three beams, being about 20':. Stage 3 produced much smaller
and that the deflection just prior to collapse was in any case
small, being only about 3 mm in each beam (1/500 times the span).
(Table A2.1).
concrete. In both the previous and the present tests, the main
REFERENCES
325 pp.
pp. 310-312.
December 1963.
1ý.
18. CHOU, L. E.. CONi; %Y, FI. D., and WINTER, G. Stresses
708.
pp. 172-181 .
pp. 172-176.
Illinois, 1961.
Illinois, 1961.
January 1966.
Nottingham, 1969.
Ti2
PP. 619-637.
1970- pp"857-867.
1976.
pp. 581-589.
8 pp.
Concrete Research. Vol. 29s No. 99. June 1977. pp. 81-91.
CONCRETE STRAIN
Cracked Uncracked
`.
STEEL STRAIN
-1
0.15 D
to
0.20D
&Main
steel
O2
::::::::::::::::
Web steel
r'--I
.-
'v
cl
O
N
r
a)
N
O
E
E
In N
QJ t0
C1 ý
E
E
U,
N
.-L
0-25D -0-05L
. -r
0.3D
or 0.3L
whichever
is smaller
2.1(b) Detail at support
SUPPORT LENGTH
600 mm
l 5400mm
2.2(a)
ag General arrangement
4500kN 4500kN
L 16,,
OOmm
L= 6000mm
06
Iy LOAD AT
0.5 BOTTOM
\1/2O
0-4--
0
0.3 c=
w 1o
1/s
Zj
0.2 _ýho
0ý1-ý- L0TOPAT
0'
'"1yt 1
0 3/16 0
11.8 7 15.4
7 98.3 25 48.4
0 3/16 0
10.0 7 27.8
7 98.0 25 51.3
Fan 100.0 52 55.2
COARSE GRADE
FINE GRADE
Cumulative Cumulative
B. S. Sieve Size D. S. Sieve Size
% retained % retained
0 3/16 4.1
I 48.0 7 19.3
7 99.6 25 49.3
100 99.6
Pan 100.0
Fineness modulus = 6.452
ULTIMATE
BAR DIAMETER YIELD STRESS
TENSILE STRESS
mm N/mm2 N/mm2
6 425 614
8 441 643
10 452 634
20 432 602
200
C
J
150
100
Sc
01. Extension
90
0
J0
20
10
"/. Extension
Z
ed
I
otor
gating
Load
beam
Test irary
rt jig
Travell i
beam
Winch
J4
Test Specimen
Dial Gauge
a0 III
Steel Anchor Block
Bearing Bracket
Block
Reaction
Assembly
++ XX
++
Beam " L Web Web f 11 fc xx
x ft""
Ref. No. opening Steel cu
D D 2
R ef. No . iö Nimm N/mm N/mm2
%++
Details of web openings in Figs. 4.2 4.3
are given and
xx
xxfc (300
= cylinder compressive strength mm x 150 mm).
"
Beam notation as in Table 4.1
x 925 mm forxýD=0.25
100x100mm
300mm 700 mm for X/D= 0.40 Bearing blocks
or 188 mm '
,
170mm
6mm DIA.
6mm DIA.
Square stirrups
D 6mm DIA. bars
750
L 1500 mm
NOTES:-
I. Reinforcement details of group 0 beams were as
shown above.
2. Reinforcement details of group M beams include in
addition and as shown below:
(i) A rectangular mesh of 6mm dia. bars at 100mm
vertical spacings and 140mm horizontal spacings
and
(ii) A 6mm dia. rectangular loop to trim each opening.
Xý
a1x
i
C)
U,
a2 D
t- I
n
..
0 kl-
ºi i
k2 DI
0 NO WEB OPENING
1 0.5 0.2 1.0 0.8
2 0.5 0.2 1.0 0.6
3 0.5 0.2 1.0 0.4
4 0.5 0.2 0.75 0.4
5 0.5 0.2 1.0 0.12
6 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.12
7 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.6
8 0.25 0.4 1.0 0.3
9 1.0 0.1 1.0 0.45
10 0.25 0.4 0.63 0.3
11 0.25 0.1 1.0 0.45
12 0.25 0.1 0.63 0.45
13 1.0 0.4 1.0 0.3
M-0.4/4 NI u 4i J u 4i b
1'M1
H_
1Vý"
FIG. 4.3b TYPICAL CRACK PATTERNS AT FAILURE
- GROUP 0 BEAMS
-1
f'////'/2 /
.I
i'ij/
I
(1 ®
'ý
-ý$
K
JI
Z
a
0
J
00
500
-.
z
64 00
0
0 300
J
2 00
00 "2s
M' mm
. -.
Z
0
9
600
Z 500
400
0
ö 300
J
200
100
m
lOOkN
12
1/2
-1
200kN
6 1L4
1/4
3
3/4
400kN
22 8
5
3
46 10
24
After Collapse
(0kN)
$ 100kN
14
14
-200 kN
16
10
26
2 15
al
300kN
After collapse
(OkN)
00
Z
00
v 4 00
0
0 00
J
00 0 ý\ v
00
mm
zY
0
Q'
Oý
J
60,
50
z
. 401
0
30
0
J
20
10 m
6
,5
z
0
ö3
J
2
600
z 500
ö 400 °
ý.ý
ö 300 °
J200
M 0413 0.4
100
mm
14-
6 DO
500
-.
z II
Y4 00
0
0r
ö3 00
J u
oo. ýu
2 00
0 O. 4
00
mm
600
500
z
400
0 h
C)300
200
o' 0.4
100
o
mm
-1
WW
22
0'
E1r-P=2- -º--ý- -ý-ý- -º-#-r-ý E
4
} B' gý
i/i
k2D
W k1 x
22
QI
. 14 Qult
-1
k2 D
++ **
++ Oxx
Beam L x '. eb Beb f fc ft
* D D opening steel cu
Ref. No. ief. No. N/mm2 N/mm2 N/ium2
o
>- O h
ci
xx
++ xx ss
L x Web Web 71 I
Beam fcu fc ft
D D opening steel
s
Ref. No. 2
Ref. No. N/mm2 N/mm N/mm2
+)
ý4
i
H C-U
x
x
O-0.3/2R 1.5 0.3 2 34.2 32.1 2.84
0-0.3/3R 1.5 0.3 3 40.7 35.9 2.54
0-0.3/4R 1.5 0.3 4 45.0 35.3 3.03
0-0.3/5R 1.5 0.3 5 37.3 31.7 3.03
W1-0.3/4 1.5 0.3 4 «1 1.19 39.5 34.2 2.93
W2-0.3/4 1.5 0.3 4 W2 1.19 40.5 34.6 2.96
W3-0.3/4 1.5 0.3 4 w3 1.19 40.9 33.7 2.87
A-0.3/4 1.5 0.3 4 w4 1.24 39.1 33.3 2.89
W5-0.3/4 1.5 0.3 4 115 1.11 36.8 35.3 2.93
w6-o. 3/4 1.5 0.3 4 w6 1.25 37.8 31.9 2.91
117-0.3/4 1.5 0.3 4 ºa7 1.13 37.4 33.0 3.03
W1 (A)+ 1.5 0.3 4 111 1.19 34.5 31.8 2.82
W3 (A) 1.5 0.3 4 113 1.19 34.3 33.6 3.04
114 (A( 1.5 0.3 4 4 1.24 35.2 32.5 2.89
117 (A) 1.5 0.3 4 W7 1.13 37.7 31.9 3.04
+xx
++
++
Details of web openings are given in Figs-5.2 and 5.4
P(fcu (100
= cube strength mm)
j_. 1 16 i 20 mm Dia
L
H
nu h
--T-100X100 mm.
bearing blocks i
W1 QQ W2 QÜ W3 13 []
TYPE TYPE
TYPE
0 we QQ
W4 ED W5
lw TYPE
TYPE TYPE
WM D WM' C, ýJ
W7 QO
NOTES:
(1) Reinforcement details Group 0 Learns (no web reinforcement)
of
as shown in top diagrau above.
(2) Web reinforcement. Tyre W; to W7 consisted of 10 mm diameter
stirrups (web steel ratio : 1.2Sä)
(3) weh reinforcement Tyres WH and ti? t consisted of 6 mm diamuter
stirrups (web steel ratio - 1.13%)
btx
D
750m a2 D
kýx
k2D
750mm i 0i
,o
Ll
W7-0.3/4 W1 (A)
0-0-3/2R
51 N
6 ý6 40 -i
/166 6ý \\
60
Q `0 30
\\. 1
Ob
3O1 tý
b1
80
to
p t,
`O1 40 to
y 44
44
50 54
+a 2e
@t8
a 44
so "©
So 26 42
48
40 30 O
Ov9, 22 34
24
34 22
la ® fat
O +a
OOO©a It
to
i 48
BEAN WN-0.4/18
se
ss ý'
ý
30 ýKy`
se Oso
4
22'ý e so
36
ýc®o
36
22
20 44 30
O r4 3O
44
`$ 2f
!4 40 O \ 20
Oý 20
22 `ý
ýý .9O ýJ`.
yo '- so
)0
BEAM WM - 0.4/18
600
Z 500
Y
-400
300
IZF 0' 5R
4 p-0
3 0"0'
200 a ý6
0 ý
100 E 0
p p'3
3 (5
p-0'
mm
600-
Z 500-
0
400 0 ýVll ßß
300 0 .o
O
J
0 03 0' 3ý11 ý
200 'ý
.
0- '3
100 0.3
mm
0
J
70
60 0o
1ý50
z
40 314
. w5_
3l ýý
030 0
20
0.3
10 mm
600
Z 500
%"400
ö 300
200
100 0.3
mm
Z
4
0
Q
O
J
60(
50(1
40( o
ö
30(
201
O4
10(
O. mm
600-
500.
40
300 -' 0/1
.1mI
200
100
mm
600-
500-
400 Po .ý
o ry
300-
20
10 04
mm
Z
Y
v
01
Q
O
J
Z
Y
v
0
Q
O
J
60
Z 500
Y.
ö 400
o300-
J -
200-
100.0.4 mm
500 -']
-ýsr -
"
-,
a1
- 400
ai varies from
zero to 1.5
0
J
300
200-
11 12345g Opening
ref nos.
0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5
al
(a) Opening breadth increased towards support
(For breadth equal to x, a1 W 1)
%7r
i
50 0
Z
40
k1 varies from
zero to 1.3
0
J
0
30 0
201 I Opening
7894 10
ref nos.
0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3
kj
/1--
1Q"1
++ xx is
s
Beam L x Web Web fcu fcxx ft
D D opening
Ref. No.
lef. No. N/mm2 N/mm2 N/mm2
Ty p e %
s
Beam notation: The letter N signifies normal weight concrete;
a letter 0 before the hyphen indicates no web reinforcement
whilst a letter W indicates the presence of web reinforcement;
the x/D ratio is given after the hyphen, followed by the web-
opening reference number. Thus N'W1-0.3/4 refers to a beam of
normal weight concrete with web reinforcement Type W1 (see
Fig. 6.1 ), having 0.3 type 4.
an x/D ratio of and a web opening
++
++ Details
of web openings are given in Figs-5.2 and 6.2
xx
XX t
= cylinder compressive strength (300 mm x 150 mm)
fc
s"
ft = cylinder splitting tensile strength (300 x 150nm) -
in accordance with [IS 1881
N0-0.3/0 680
No-0.3/4 240
NW1-0.3/4 420
NW2-0.3/4 580
NW3-0.3/4 620
NW4-0.3/4 780
N115-0.3/4 370
NW6-o. 3/4 1o6o
NW7-0.3/4 720
NW6A-0.3/0 1215
Nw6A-0.3/1 1015
Ntit6 A-0.3/4 620
Nw6A-0.3/17 840
NW6A-o. 3/7 930
NW6A-0.3/11 880
Nw6 A-0.3/15 820
NW6A-0.3/0 1.79
W: -0.3,1 1.49
Y 76A-0-3/4 0.91
NW6A-0.3/17 1.24
WA-0-3/7 1.37
NI,T6.A-0.3/11 1.29
NW6 A-0.3/15 1.21
*
Beam notation as in Table 6.1
++ Measured
ultimate loads ult. load of Beam 0-0.3/0
h±-'7
f mrn_ý-
6 mmdi a
D
750mrn Beam thickness
b 100mm
1 H
20 mm dia
u
Z
4-4
1
.1 L 1125 mm 100000
Bearing blocks
NOTES:
- .4
NW6A-0.3/15
not
900
800
700
600
500
3
400 ýI,
0
%1%.
(',/1.-711Z1 5 p
300
2,
--
ö 200 Lio
J N" 0.3 m
100
n
(a) Web steel as in Fig 6.1;x/D= 0.3; opening No 4.
1200
1100
1000
900
800 "Ali
700
600 Q
Z ý'
500
400
0
ö 300
200
0.3
100
0
(b) Web steel Type W6A(Fig 6.1);x/D=0.3; opening varies
1000
900
800
700
h
600
vý
500
400
0
ö 300
"41m
200
100
0
(a) Web steel as in Fig 6.1; x/D=0.3; opening No. 4
1200
1100
1000
9 00
I
800
700
2600
- 500
0
<400
300
200
100
0
(a) Web steel Type W6A(Fig 6.1);x/D=0.3; opening varies
655 +720
0-0.2/0 0.90
s (5.1)
Beam Notation as in Table
t
+Equation (7.1) for beams; (7.2)
used these equations
used for the others
M
Beam notation as in Table (5.2)
NW1-0.3/4 420
"
Beam notation as in Table (6.2)
0
209.
kw 2
Ix -ý
k2 D
E`ý º
f
F4 /B
i
}L Upper Path
ý`2
. D
Lower Path
w
2
Beam thickness
b
y
°C Aw
D
As
I
FIG 7.2(a)
ý lt
X
Yý A
y1
,
Aw
B
k2D
Cý As
,o
x
225
ýcxl=53'
,
10 mm Dia.
0 Stirrups
i
0 O
O
°`ý = 53 20 mm i
,ý
k, x1
225 L 1125
r»-
ft = 2-87 N /Tnm2
b= 100 mm
O
a)
v
z
Y
W2kN (Computed)
v,
0
Symetrical
about
i
4500kN All dimensions
in millimetres
x-1400
Qx 750
1,
a2 D=1000
D= 4800
kxý
1200
k2 D= 2600
,,.,r
or
.
L6 L_
Bea threes)__
b=E
-A
ine
1
TABLE 5 Maximum shear stress parameter, v,,,, (N/mm2)
Concrete grade (%u) º'mrx
15 5.03
20 5.81
25 6.50
30 7.12
40 8.22
12mm &a. bars at 75. cts. 12mm dia bars at 150 cts.
each face each face
I,
II I'
12m ia. sti rr
at 1 C
Required beam
width = 500 mm 4 No. 25 mm dia main
ars (in threes)
- Centreof compression
M
0
Compression
band widths for Actual stress trajectory
-
assessing hole Lt loser to this bne
admissibility M
O
- Compression band
N
O
N
0
J L
Tensionband
Approx to
direction of principal
Effective support length is actual column width, stresses Micateo
c, or 0 2la whichever is the less thus --ý--+-
-1
Compression I Aý
p
bond widths
e
for assessing 0
odmissibihty
BI
0 I
I
0
Tension
band width
a
.
'-- ö-- -ifiký`i\--
Condition of admissibility:
Examples:
o"zst
unitload/2
-0.79 -1.15 -0.73
°
ý. -071
-0.36
Single span
H/L = 2/3 C/L = 1120 / 1-9 /
Two top point loads at
1/4 span (Stresses propor- 0 OSl 0-45L
tional to unit load/span)
I
/
Actual hole
i
L
'+ ""
Beam Embedment fcu rc ft
+Lx
DD N/mm2 N/mm2
Ref. No. Length, mm N/mm2
"
Beam notation: The 0 before the hyphen indicates no
web reinforcement; the x/D ratio is given after the
hyphen, followed by the embedment length in brackets.
For example: 0-0.3(10) refers to a beam having an x/D
ratio of 0.30 and an embedment length of 10 bar diameters.
+fc (300
= cylinder compressive strength mm x 150 mm)
s
Beam notation as given in Table A1.1
ii
Ratio of measured ultimate load (Pult) to computed
flexural design load (Pflex ) using Eqn. (9.1).
317mm or 508mm
6 mm dia at 89 mm centres
E horizontally
E
N Stirrups in Series A
P,
4--
Single bars in Series B
38 mr
2 No 8 mm dia bars
Varies
6 mm dia
Horizontal spacing 152mm
Vertical spacing 76 mm
Stirrups in Series C
Single bars in Series D
2 No 8 mm dia bars
No web reinforcement
E
E 2 No 8 mm dia bars
N
i:Rl
-L
38 mm i r.
952mm or 1524
Varie s
200,
Z
Y
(0) (10
p-O. 55 -0.55
O-O. 55 (h1 ioo
0
O. 4mm
300
200
goo9
r` 0.4 mm
OO O O O O
a a ö 0 o F
O
II 200
h0 [--- III-(1O z
i 0_0.55
5 ýOl
-o-5
O_ 0.551h; IOO Q
O.5 mm
300
200
] O
N
LA
O p
`9
D
i
0
p
IT ý? 0.5 mm
I00
p O
Ö 0 p p p
++f
cylinder splitting tensile strength (300 mm x 150 mm)
t=
- in accordance with ASTri Standard C330.
1A-2/0.4 646
706 283 157
L 15 24mm
38 mm
TYPE A
I
6 mm dia stirrups
Horizontal spacing 152 mm
Vertical spacing 38 mm
and 108 mm
TYPE B
TYPE C
A
V0J"
-2/b"4
600
500
z 400
0
ö 300
J 0.4 1mm
200
100
B-2/b-4. -2i
600
500
LJ
400
300
Cl
ö
0.1
200
J
100
400
`L 10
. 4 .u
Y 30C
// v 0.4 mm
200I
O
J 100
B-2/0.4 B-2/0-4
Seam 0- 3/004
Cl = 120,000 cycl©sP Stave 1
C2 s 150,000 cycles, Stage 2
C3 = 300,000 cycles, 4tae 2
C4 : 100,000 cycles# Stage 3