“050776 Reinforced 2 | Concrete ‘ Structures R. PARK and T. PAULAYye ® | 080776 Reimforced =| B0051670 Concrete : ures RMA LPR R. PARK and T. PAULAY A 8 Department of Civil Engineering, . * University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand "A WELEY-INTERSCIENCE PUBLICATION - JOHN WILEY & SONS * « "New York + London « Sydney - Toronto CF mematiPreface We hope that the content and the treatment of the subject of reinforced concrete structures in this book will appeal to students, teachers, and practi- cing members of the structural engineering profession, The book has grown from two editions of seminar notes entitled Ultimate Strength Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures (Vol 1), printed by the University of Canterbury for extension study seminars conducted for practi- sing structural engineers in New Zealand. Those early editions of seminar notes have been considerably extended and updated. Many years ofexperience in teaching theory and design, and in design and research, have helped to form ideas and to provide background material for the book. ‘The text emphasizes the basic behavior: of reinforced concrete elements and of structures—in particular, their Strength and deformation characteristics Up to ultimate load, It endeavors to give the reader a thorough knowledge of the fundamentals of reinforced concrete, Such a background is essential to a gomplete and proper understanding of building codes and design procedures, The design engineer may be disappointed that the text does notextend into a range of design charts, tables, and examples, Such information is available elsewhere. The main purpose of the text is to bring about 4 basic under- standing of the background to such applied material, The current building code of the American Concrete Institute (ACI318-71) is one of the most widely accepted reinforced concrete codes. Tt has been adopted by some countries and has strongly influenced the codes of Many others, For this reason extensive reference is made to the ACI Provisions, but comparison with other building codes appears where necessary. The book is not heavily code oriented, however. The emphasis‘ison why certain engineer- ing decisions should be made, rather than how they should be executed. It is our belief that engineers should be capable of rationally assessing design Procedures and should not be blind followers of code provisions. The strength and serviceability approach to design is emphasized through- . out the book because we believe that it is the most realistic method, The book commences with a discussion of busic design criteria and thea Preface properties of concrete and steel. The strength and deformation of reinforced concrete structural members with flexure, flexure and axial load, shear, and torsion are then presented in some depth, followed by a discussion of bond and anchorage. The service load behavior of reinforced concrete members is then examined, with emphasis on deflection and crack control. This material is followed by a treatment of frames and shear walls. Because we believe that correct proportioning of components is insufficient to ensure a successful design, the book ends with a discussion on the detailing of structural com- ponents and joints. We have not attempted to treat the design of specific types of structures. ‘Thorough understanding of the behavior of reinforced concrete components and of structural analysis should enable a designer to undertake the design of the common range of structures and to find solutions to special problems. An aspect of the book that distinguishes it from most other texts on rein- forced concrete is the treatment of the effects of earthquake loading and means of achieving design procedures for seismic-resistant structures. Seismic design is assuming more importance with the realization that seismic zones may be more extensive than has heretofore been assumed. Seismic de- sign involves more than a consideration of additional static lateral loads on the structure. Proper attention to details, and an understanding of possible failure mechanisms, are essential if structures capable of surviving major earthquakes are to be designed. Considerations of behavior under intense seismic loading involve an understanding of the deformation characteristics ‘of members and structures in the inelastic range, as well as the development of strength, and these areas are given due regard in the text. A detailed discussion of slabs has been omitted because a book-length treatment is in preparation. We hope that the book will serve as a useful text to teachers preparing a syllabus for undergraduate courses in reinforced concrete. Each major topic has been treated in enough depth to permit the book to be used by graduate students in advanced courses in reinforced concrete. It is hoped that many practicing engineers, particularly those facing the formidable task of having to design earthquake-resistant structures, will also find this book a useftd reference. . We would be grateful for any constructive comments or cri sisms that readers may have and for notification of any errors that they will inevitably detect. The authors have recejfred a great deal of assistance, encouragement, and inspiration from numerous sourees. Thanks are due to our many colleagues at the University of Canterbury, particularly to Prof. H. J. Hopkins, who initiated a strong interest in concrete at this University, to Dr. A. J. Carr, who read part of the manuscript, and to Mrs. Alice Watt, whose patience whenvii typing the manuscript is greatly appreciated. Also, the dedicated technicians of the Department of Civil Engineering of the University of Canterbury and our graduate students have carried the major burden of the testing reported, as well as the photographic and drafting work, and their efforts must be recorded with appreciation. To many professional engineering colleagues in New Zealand, including O. A. Glogau, G. F. McKenzie, and I. C. Arm- strong of the New Zealand Ministry of Works, and consulting engineers A.L. Andrews, J. F. Hollings, R. J. P. Garden, and K. Williamson, we owe a great deal for constructive comment and discussions. To our many colleagues in North America, Europe, and Australia, including M. P. Collins, R. F. Furlong, W. L. Gamble, P. Lampert, J. MacGregor, and G. Base, who read part of the manuscript, and to V. V. Bertero, F. Leonhardt, and H. Risch, we are grateful. Also our thanks are due to our own University of Canterbury, the Portland Cement Association, the American Iron and Steel Institute, the American Society of Civil Engineers, and the American Concrete Institute. Finally, this undertaking could never have been achieved without the Patience, encouragement, and understanding of our wives. R. Park T. PAULaY Christchurch, New Zealand August 197614 Considerations of Member Strength. ones : trier aI ti i “ »,.. Provedures: TBM a “ CSE 1.2" Design for Strength and Serviceabifity 238 1.3 ACE Strength and Serviceability Design Method 7 4 1.3.1. Strength Provisions, 4 41.3.2. Serviceability Provisions, 6 1.3.3. Duetility Provi ions, 7 1.4.1 Development of Member strength, 7 “$4.2 Ideal Strength, 8” » 143° Dependable Strength, 8 1.4.4. Probable Stren, “oa, 1 “Unie Stns Behavior, Wi Stress,Behayi s,, 21:2, Combined 21.3 Concrete 4 Creep of Concrete, 30. 15 Shrinkage of Coneete, 32.2.2 Monotonic Stress Behavior, 37 2.2.3. Repeated Stress Behavior, 40 2.2.4. Reversed Stress Behavior, 40 2.3, References 45 3 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF THEORY FOR FLEXURAL STRENGTH 48 3.1 Basic Behavior Assumptions 48 3.2 Equivalent Rectangular Stress Block 52 3.3 Concrete Strain at the Flexural Strength 54 3.4 Nonrectangular Compressed Areas 56 3.5 Effects of Slow Rates of Loading and of Sustained Load 58 3.6 Summary of Recommendations for the Determination of the Strength of Sections with Flexure and Axial Load . 8 3.7 References 59 4 STRENGTH OF MEMBERS WITH FLEXURE 61 4.1 Rectangular Sections 61 4.1.1 Analysis of Singly Reinforced Sections, 61 4.1.2 Design of Singly Reinforced Sections, 69 4.1.3 Analysis of Doubly Reinforced Sections, 79 4.1.4 Design of Doubly Reinforced Sections, 83 f 42 Tand J Sections 92 4.2.1 Analysis of T and / Sections, 92 4.2.2. Design of T and / Sections, 95 . 4.2.3. Effective Width of TBeams, 99 4.3 Sections Having Bars at Various Levels or Stee! Lacking a Well-Defined Yield Strength 101 4.4 Biaxial Bending of Sections 106, 4.5. Lateral Instability of Beams 113 4,6 References 116 5 STRENGTH OF MEMBERS WITH FLEXURE AND AXIAL LOAD 118 5.1 Introduction 118 5.2 Axially Loaded Short Columns 8 5.3. Eccentrically Loaded Short Columns with Uniaxial Bending 123 5.3.1 Introduction, 123Contents xi 5.3.2 Analysis of Rectangular Sections with Bars at One or Two Faces, 125 5.3.3 Design of Rectangular Scetions with Bars at One or Two Faces, 135 5.3.4 Rectangular Sections with Bars at Four Faces, 143 5.3.5 Sections with Bars in Circular Array, 148 5.3.6 Design Charts and Tables, 152 5.4 Eccentrically Loaded Short Columns with Biaxial Bending 154 General Theory, 154 Approximate Methods of Analysis and Design for Biaxial Bending, 158 5.4.3 Design Charts, 162 5.5 Slender Columns 172 5.5.1 Behavior of Slender Columns, 172 5.5.2. “Exact” Design Approach for Slender Columns, 179 5.5.3 Approximate Design Approach for Slender Columns: The Moment Magnifier Method, 180 5.6 References 192 6 ULTIMATE DEFORMATION AND DUCTILITY OF MEMBERS WITH FLEXURE 195 6.1 Introduction 195, 6.2 Moment-Curvature Relationships 196. 6.2.1 Curvature of a Member, 196 6.2.2 Theoretical Moment-Curvature Determination, 199 6.3 Ductility of Unconfined Beam Sections 203 6.3.1 Yield and Ultimate Moment and Curvature, 203 6.3.2 Code-Specified Ductiity Reqhirements for Beams, 216 6.4 Ductility of Unconfined Column Sections 217 6.5 Members with Confined Concrete 221 6.5.1 Effect of Confining the Concrete, 221 6.5.2 Compressive Stress Block Parameters for Concrete . Confined by Rectangular Hoops, 224 65.3 Theoretical Moment-Curvature Curves for Sections with Confined Concrete, 229 6.6 Flexural Deformations of Members 236xii Contents. 4 6.6.1 Calculation of Deformations from Curvatures, 236 : 6.6.2 Additional Effects on the Deformations of Members 1 Calculated from Curvatures, 237 ‘ + 66.3 Idealized Ultimate Deformations Calculated from : Curvatures, 242 6.6.4 Empirical Expressions for Ultimate Plastic Rotation Calculated from Curvatures, 245 : 66.5 Alternative Approach to the Calculation of Defor- mations Based on the Summation of Discrete Rotations. at Cracks, 250 6.7 Deformations of Members With Cyclic Loading 254 6.7.1 Moment-Curvature Relationships, 254 6.7.2 Load-Deformation Behavior, 264 + 68 Application of Theory 268 6.9 References 268 7 STRENGTH AND DEFORMATION OF MEMBERS WITH SHEAR = 270 7.1 Introduction 271 7.2. The Concept of Shear Stresses - 271 7.3. The Mechanism of Shear Resistance in Reinforced Conerete Beams Without Shear Reinforcement 276 7.3.1 The Formiation of Diagonal Cracks, 276 73.2 Equilibrium in the Shear Span of a Beam, 276 7.3.3. The Principal Mechanisms of Shear Resistance, 278 73.4 Size Effects, 287 7.3.3 Shear Failure Mechanisms, 288 4 7.3.6 The Design for Shear of Beams Without Web Rein- forcement, 291 7.4 The Mechanism of Shear Resistance in Reinforced Concrete Beams with Web Reinforcement 293 7.4.1 The Role of Web Reinforcement, 293 7.4.2. The Truss Mechanism, 294 i 743 The Design for Shear of Beams with Web Rein- . forcement, 299 7.5 The Interaction of Flexure and Shear 301 7 7.5.1 The Effect of Shear on Flexural Steel Requirements, 304 75.2 Shear at Plastic Hinges, 307 7.5.3 Interaction Effects in Deep Beams, 310 ~ |TR 19 The Interaction of Shear, Flexure, and Axial Forces 310 7.6.1 Shear and Axiat Compression, 310. “ 7.6.2 Shear and Axial Tension, 312 Shear Deformations : 3s 7.1.1 “Unegacked Members; 315. - 7.1.2 Shear Deformations in Cracked Members, 316 Interface Shear _ ae 319 7.8.1 Shear Transfer Across Unctacked Concrete Interfaces, 320 7.8.2 Shear Transfer Across Precracked Concrete Interfaces, 321 78.3, Shear Transfer Across Construction Joints, 325” The Effects of Repeated and Cycliv'Loading on Shear Strength 332 7.9.1. Effects on the Web Reinforcement, 332 7.9.2. Effects on Interface Shear Transfer, 335 7.10 Special Members and Loadings 338 7.11 References . 343 8 STRENGTH AND DEFORMATION OF MEMBERS WITH TORSION 346 8.1 Intrediction 346 8.2 Plain Concrete Subject to Torsion 348 8.2.1 Elastic Behavior, 348 8.2.2 Plastic Behavior, 351 8.2.3 Tubular Sections, 354 %&3 Beams Without Web-Rejaforcement Subject to Flexure and Torsion . * 357 8.4 Torsion and Shear in Beams Without Web Reinforcement 359 8.5. Torsion Membets Requiring Web Reinforcement - 361 8.6 Combined Sheat and Torsion in Beams with Web Reinforce- ment . 370 8.7 Combined Flexure and Torsion . 377 88 Torsional Stiffness iS . 383 8.9 Torsion in Statically Indeterminate Structures . 389 8.10 References... Le 390 9 BOND AND ANCHORAGE 392 9.1 Introduction 392 : 7 9.1.1 Basic Considerations, 392...xiv Contests 9.1.2. Anchorage or Development Bond, 393 9.1.3 Flexural Bond, 394 9.2 The Nature of Bond Resistance 394 9.2.1 Basic Features of Bond Resistance, 394 9.2.2 The Position of Bars with Respect to the Placing of the Surrounding Concrete, 397 9.2.3 Bar Profiles and Surface Conditions, 398 9.2.4 The State of Stress in the Surrounding Concrete, 401 9.2.5 The Splitting Failure, 403 9.2.6 Confinement, 404 9.2.7 Repeated and Cyclic Reversed Loading, 404 i 9.3 The Determination of Usable Bond Strength 407 9.4 The Anchorage of Bars 410 9.4.1 Straight Anchorages for Bars with Tension, 410 9.4.2 Hook Anchorages for Bars with Tension, 411 9.4.3 Anchorage for Bars with Compression, 416 9.5 Anchorage Requirements for Flexural Bond 417 9.6 Splices 418 9.6.1 Introduction, 418 9.6.2 Tension Splices, 419 9.6.3 Compression Splices, 421 9.6.4 Mechanical or Contact Spices, 423 9.7 References 424 10 SERVICE LOAD BEHAVIOR 426, 10.1 Service Load Performance 426 10.2 Elastic Theory for Stresses in Members due to Flexure _ 427 10.2.1 Effective Modulus of Elasticity, 427 10.2.2. Elastic Theory Assumptions, 428 10.2.3 Analysis of Beams Using the Internal Couple Approach, 429 10.2.4 Analysis of Beams Using the Transformed Section Approach, 436 10.2.5 Design of Beams Using the Alternative (Elastic Theory) Method, 441 10.2.6 Analysis of Short Columns, 450 10.2.7 Shrinkage Stresses, 457 | | |Contents, xv 10.3 10.4 10.5 Control of Deflections 461 10.3.1 The Need for Deflection Controi, 461 10.3.2. Method of Deflection Control, 463 10.3.3 Calculation of Deflections, 465 10.3.4 More Accurate Methods for Calculating Deflections, 470 Control of Cracking 476 10.4.1. The Need for Crack Control, 476 10.4.2 Causes of Cracking, 477 10.4.3 Mechanism of Flexural Cracking, 479 10.4.4 Control of Flexural Cracks in Design, 490 References 494 11 STRENGTH AND DUCTILITY OF FRAMES 496, Wl W2 11.3 ua 1.5 116 Introduction 496 Moment Redistribution and Plastic Hinge Rotation 496 Complete Anatysis of Frames 502 Methods for Determining Bending Moment, Shear Force, and Axial Force Distributions at the Ultimate Load for Use in Design 505 11.4.1. The Elastic Bending Moment Diagram, 505 11.4.2 The Elastic Bending Moment Diagram Modified for Moment Redistribution, 507 11.43. Limit Design, 512 Limit Design Methods Sas 11.5.1 ACI-ASCE Committee 428 Report, 515 11.52. Available Limit Design Methods, 518 1153 General Method for Calculating Required Plastic Hinge Rotations, 521 11.54 Calculation of Service Load Moments and Stresses, 529 11.5.5 Comments on Limit Design, 544 Design for Seismic Loading 545, 11.6.1 Basic Concepts, 545 . 11.6.2 Displacement Ductility Requirements, 547 11.6.3 Curvature Ductility Requirements, 552 11.6.4 Determining Curvature Ductility Demand of Multi- story Frames Using Static Collapse Mechanisms, 5$4xvi Contents 11.6.5 Determining Curvature Ductility Demand of Mul- tistory Frames Using Nonlinear Dynamic Analyses, 563 11.6.6 Additional Factors in Analysis for Ductility, 568 11.6.7 ACI Code Special Provisions for Seismic Design of Ductile Frames, $80 11.6.8 Discussion of ACI Code Special Provisions for Seismic Design of Ductile Frames, 584 11.6.9 An Alternative Procedure for Calculating Special Transverse Reinforcement for Confinement in the Plastic Hinge Zones of Columns, 591 11.6.10 Earthquake Energy Dissipation by Special Devices, 599 11.6.11 Capacity Design for Seismic Loading of Frames, 600 11.7 References 12 SHEAR WALLS OF MULTISTORY BUILDINGS 12.1 12.2 12.3 124 12.5 12.6 Introduction. The Behavior of Cantilever Walls 12.2.1 Tall Walls Having Rectangular Cross Sections, 611 12.2.2 Squat Shear Walls Having Rectangular Cross Sections, 618 12.2.3 Flanged Cantilever Shear Walls, 627 12.2.4 Moment-Axial Load Interaction for Shear Wall Sections, 629 12.2.5 Interaction of Cantilever Shear Walls with Each Other, 631 Interaction of Shear Walls and Rigid Jointed Frames Shear Walis With Openings Coupled Shear Walls 12.5.1. Introduction, 637 12.5.2. The Laminar Analysis Used to Predict Linear Elastic Response, 638 ; 12.5.3 Elastoplastic Behavior of Coupled Shear Wallls, 641 12.5.4 Experiments with Coupled Shear Walls, 657 12.5.5 Summary of Design Principles, 658 References 13 THE ART OF DETAILING 13.1 13.2 Introduction The Purpose of Reinforcement 610 610 6ll 633. 634 637 660 663 664Contents avi 13.3. Directional Changes of Internal Forces 665 13.4 The Detailing of Beams 669 134,17 Localities for Anchorage, 669 13.4.2 Interaction of Flexural and Shear Reinforcement, 675, 13.4.3 The Detailing of Support and Load Points, 680 13.4.4 Cutting Off the Flexural Reinforcement, 685 13.5. The Detailing of Compression Members 686 13.6 Brackets and Corbels 690 13.6.1 Behavior, 690 13.6.2 Failure Mechanisms, 692 13.6.3 Proportioning and Detailing of Corbels, 694 13.6.4 Other Types of Bracket, 697 13.7 Deep Beams “ 700 13.7.1 “Introduction, 700 ! 13.7.2 Simply Supported Beams, 703 13.7.3 Continuous Deep Beams, 705 13.7.4 Web Reinforcement in Deep Beams, 707 13.7.5 Introduction of Concentrated Loads, 714 13.8 Beam-Column Joints 716 13.8.1 Introduction, 716 13.8.2 Knee Joints, 717 13.8.3. Exterior Joints of Multistory Plane Frames, 726 13.8.4 Interior Joints of Multistory Plane Frames, 736 13.8.5 Suggestions for the Detailing of Joints, 746 13.8.6 Joints of Multistory Space Frames, 750 13.9 Conclusions 758. 13.10 References 758 INDEX 763The Design Approach 1.1 DEVELOPMENT OF WORKING STRESS AND ULTIMATE STRENGTH DESIGN PROCEDURES Several of the early studies of reinforced concrete members were based on ultimate strength theories, for example, Thullic’s flexural theory of 1897 and the parabolic stress distribution theory of Ritter in 1899. However at about 1900 the straight-line (elastic) theory of Coignet and Tedesco became generally accepted, mainly because elastic theory was the conventional method of design for other materials and also because it was thought that the straight-line distribution. of stress led to mathematical simplification. Tn addition, tests had shown that the use of elastic theory with carefully chosen. values for the allowable working stresses led to a structure displaying satis- factory behavior at the service loads and having an adequate margin of | safety against collapse. Thus glastic theary. has been the basis of reinforced concrete design for many years. Recently there has been renewed interest in ultimate ‘strength theory as a basis of design, After more than half a century of practical experience and laboratory tests, the knowledge of the behavior of structural concrete has vastly increased and the deficiencies of the elastic theory (working stress) design method have become evident. This has resulted in periodic adjust- ment to the working stress design method, but it has become increasingly apparent that a design method should be based on the actual inelastic properties of the concrete and steel. Thus ultimate strength design became accepted as an alternative to working stress design in the building codes for reinforced concrete of the American Concrete Institute (ACI) in 1956 and of the United Kingdom in 1957. These two design approaches may be sum- marized as follows. Working Stress Design (Elastic Theory) The sections of the members of the structure are designed assuming straight- line stress-strain relationships ensuring that at service loads the stresses in 12 ‘The Design Approach the steel and the concrete do not exceed the allowable working stresses. The allowable stresses are taken as fixed Proportions of the ultimate or yield strength of the materials; for example, for compression in bending 0.45 of the cylinder strength of the concrete may be assumed. The bending moments and forces that act on statically indeterminate structures are calculated assuming linear-elastic behavior. Ultimate Strength Design The sections of the members of the structures are designed taking inelastic Strains into account to reach ultimate (maximum) strength (ic, the concrete at maximum strength and usually the steel yielding) when an ultimate load. . ©qual to the sum of each service load multiplied by its respective load factor, "is applied to the structure, Typical load factors used in practice are 1.4 for dead load and 1.7 for live load. The bending moments and forces that act on statically indeterminate structures at the ultimate load are calculated assuming lincar-clastic behavior of the structure up to the ultimate load. Alternatively, the bending moments and forces are calculated taking some account of the redistribution of actions that may occur because of the non- linear relationships that exist between the actions and deformations in the members at high loads. Some of the reasons for the trend towards ultimate strength design are as follows: 1. Reinforced concrete sections behave inelastically at high loads; hence clastic theory cannot give @ reliable prediction of the ultimate strength of the members because inelastic strains are not taken into account. For structures designed by the working stress method, thercfore, the exact load factor (ultimate load/servicé load) is unknown and varies from structure to structure. 2. Ultimate strength design allows a more rational selection of the load factors. For example, a low load factor may be used for loading known more exactly, such as dead load, and a higher load factor for less certain loads, such as live load. 3. The stress-strain curve for concrete is nonlinear and is time dependent. For example, the creep strains for concrete under constant sustained stress may be several times the initial elastic strain. Therefore, the value of the modular ratio (ratio of the elastic modulus of steel to that of concrete) used in working stress design is a crude approximation. Creep strains can cause a substantia! redistribution of stress in reinforced concrete sections, and this means that the stresses that actually exist at the service loads often bear little relation to the design stresses, For example, the compression steel in columns may reach the yield strength during the sustained application of serviceDesign for Strength and Serviceability 3 loads, although this occurrence is not evident from working stress analysis using a normally recommended value for the modular ratio. Ultimate strength design does not require a knowledge of the modular ratio. + 4. Ultimate strength design utilizes reserves of strength resulting from a more efficient distribution of stresses allowed by inelastic strains, and at times it indicates the working stress method to be very conservative. For example, the compression steel in doubly reinforced beams usually reaches the yield strength at the ultimate load, but elastic theory may indicate a low stress in this steel. 5. Ultimate strength design makes more efficient use of high strength reinforcement, and smaller beam depths can be used without compression steel. abit, 3 Ape 6. Ultimate strength design allows the designer to assess the ductility of the structure in the postelastic range. This is an important aspect when he considers the possible redistribution of bending moments in the design for gravity loads and in the design for earthquake or blast loading. A 1.2 DESIGN FOR STRENGTH AND SERVICEABILITY More recently it has been recognized that the design approach for reinforced concrete ideally should combine the best features of ultimate strength and working stress design. This is desirable because if sections are proportioned by ultimate strength requirements alone, there is a danger that although the load factor is adequate, the cracking and the deflections at the service loatis may be excessive. Cracking may be excessive if the steel stresses are high or if the bars are badly distributed. Deflections may be critical if the shallow sections, which are possible in ultimate strength design, are used and the stresses are high. Thus to ensure a satisfactory design, the crack widths and deflections at service loads must be checked to make certain that they lie within reasonable limiting values, dictated by functional requirements of the structure. This check requires the use of elastic theory. In 1964 the European Concrete Committee produced its recommenda- tions for an international code of practice for reinforced concrete.** This document introduced the concept of limit state design, proposing that the structure be designed with reference to several limit states. The most impor- tar‘\Jimit states were: strength at ultimate load, deflections at service load, ana crack widths at service load. The approach is gaining acceptance in many countries. Thus ultimate strength theory is becoming the predominant approach for proportioning sections, with elastic theory used only for en- suring serviceability. It is also worth noting that ultimate strength theory has been used for proportioning sections in the USSR and in some other Euro- pean countries for many years. It is likely that the trend toward the use of t4 ‘The Design Approach ultimate strength design will continue, and it is apparent that it may not be many years before the example of the European Concrete Committee is followed and the working stress method disappears from building codes for reinforced conctete. The 1956 and 1963 building codes of the American Concrete Institute allowed the use of either working stress or ultimate strength design. The 1971 ACI code! emphasizes design based on strength with serviceability checks. However, the 1971 code also allows an alternative design method in which the working stress method is used to design beams for flexure and factored-down ultimate strength equations are used to design members for all other actions, It is evident that this alternative method has been retained only in an attempt to keep what has been the conventional design approach. Future ACI codes may omit this alternative procedure completely. It is also of interest to note a change in the terminology in the 1971 ACI code. The world “ultimate” rarely appears. For example, “strength” is written for “ultimate strength.” In this book the strength and serviceability approach of the 1971 ACI code is adopted because it is considered to emphasize the real behavior of reinforced concrete and to be the more logical approach to design. Whenever possible, the background:to the ACI code provisions are outlined. Where necessary, the code provisions are supplemented in the light of new research evidence that has become available, and some comparison with other codes is given. 1.3 ACI STRENGTH AND SERVICEABILITY DESIGN METHOD 1.3.1. Strength Provisions The 1971 ACI code! separates the strength provisions for structural safety into two parts, load factors and capacity reduction factors. Load Factors Load factors are intended to ensure adequate safety against an’ increase in service loads beyond loads specified in design so that failure-is extremely unlikely. Load factors also help to ensure that the deformations at the service load are not excessive. The load factors used for dead load, live load, lateral earth and fluid pressure, and wind and earthquake loading differ in magni- tude. The load factors are different for various types of loading because, Tor Instance, the dead load of a structure is less likely to be exceeded than the prescribed live load. The ultimate load of the structure should at least equal the sum of each service load multiplied by its respective load factor. The 1971 ACI code recommends that the required strength U provided to resistACI Strength and Serviceability Design Method 5 dead load D and live load L be at least equal to U=14D+ 1.7L (i) When wind load W is to be considered in the design the required strength U provided should also be at least equal to U =0,75(1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7W) (1.2) where the case of L having its full value or zero should be checked, and U =09D + 1.3W (1.3) when actions resulting from D and W are of opposite sign. If earthquake load Eisto be included, Eqs. 1.2 and 1.3 should also comply, with 1.1E substituted for W. Strength requirements for other types of loading are given in the code. The load factors as prescribed do not vary with the seriousness of the consequence of failure. For example, one might expect the load factor used for a hospital building to be higher than that for an industrial building. However, it is assumed that the prescribed service loads include the effect of the seriousness of the failure. Nevertheless, the load factors prescribed should be regarded as minimum values. Some increases may be appropriate if the consequences of failure are especially serious or if a reasonable estimate of the service load cannot be made. Capacity Reduction Factors Capacity reduction factors @ are provided to allow for approximations in the calculations and variations in the material strengths, workmanship, and dimensions. Each one of these may be within tolerable limits, but in combina- tion they may result in undercapacity. The basic strength equation for a section may be said to give the ideal strength, assuming that the equation is scientifically correct, that the materials are as strong as specified, and that sizes are as shown on the drawings. The dependable or reliable strength of the section to be used in the design calculations is taken as the ideal strength multiplied by @ where the value for the capacity reduction factor depends on the importance of the variable quantities, Values recommended by the 1971 ACI code are: flexure, with or without axial tension, or axial tension g = 0.90 flexure with axial compression, or axial compression: if'spirally reinforced 9 = 0.75 otherwise 9 = 0.10 (@ may be increased linearly to 0.9 for sections with small axial compression tending to zero) shear and torsion 9 = 085 Other values are given in the code.6 . ‘The Design Approach Additional variables that have been considered in prescribing capacity reduction factors include the seriousness of the consequence of failure of the members with respect to the whole structure, and the degree of warning involved in the mode of failure. Beams have the highest g value because they are designed to fail in a ductile manner with visting of the tension steel, Warning of such a failure would normally be given by considerable cracking and large deflections, and since the variability of steel strength is less than that for concrete, the flexural strength can be accurately predicted. Columns have the lowest p values because they can fail in a brittle way when {h€voncrete strength is the critical factor. Also, failure of a column can mean collapse of the whole structure, and repair of columns is difficult to carry out. Spirally reinforced columns are more ductile than tied columns, hence they have been allocated a higher ¢ value. The g value for shear and torsion is intermediate because the concrete contribution to strength is less critical than in the case of compression members, and the theory predicting the strength is less accurate than that for flexure. In design the ultimate load is calculated on the basis of the dependable strength. On the basis of the ideal strength, the overall safety factor for a structure loaded by dead and live load is 14D + L7L 1 (14) Pe reeeccan On this basis, the overall safety factor against the ideal strength of the section being reached (in the case of flexure, with or without axial tension) varies from 1.56 for L/D = Oto 1.82 for L/D = 4, the higher value properly applying to the higher live load conditions. For members with flexure and axial compression, the overall safety factor varies between 2.00 and 2.34 for L/D between 0 and 4, thus giving greater overall safety to a more critical building clement. The ideal strength is calculated using the specified strengths of the con- crete and thegteel. Because these strength values are normally exceeded in a real structuré, an additional reserve of strength is available. anne 1.3.2 Serviceability Provisions ‘The assessment of the performance of the structure at the service load is an extremely important consideration when members are proportioned on the basis of the required strength. This is because members with small’sections, and sections with little compression steel, can satisfy the strength require- ments but lead to high stresses and deformations at the service load. There- fore, it must be verified that deflections at service load are within acceptable limits. The control of cracking is also very important for the sake of appear- ance and durability. Therefore, the crack widths at the service load shouldConsiderations of Member Strength 1 not exceed specified limits. The acceptable limits for deflections and crack widths are difficult to specify, but recommendations for these are given in the 1971 ACI code.'? 1.3.3 Ductility Provisions A significant consideration that may have to be added to strength and service- ability is ductility. It is important to ensure that in the extreme event of a structure being loaded to failure, it will behave in a ductile manner. This means ensuring that the structure will not fail in a brittle fashion without warning but will be capable of large deformations at near-maximum load carrying capacity. The large deflections at near-maximum load give ample warning of failure, and by maintaining load carrying capacity, total collapse may be prevented and lives saved. Also, ductile behavior of members enables the use in design of distributions of bending moments that take into account the redistribution possible from the elastic bending moment pattern. In areas requiring design for seismic loading, ductility becomes an extremely important consideration. This is BCiuse the present philosophy of codes for seismic loading (e.g., the Uniform Building code!) is to design structures to resist only relatively moderate earthquakes elastically; in the case of a severe earthquake, reliance is placed on the availability of sufficient ductility after yielding to enable a structure to survive without collapse. Hence the recommendations for seismic loading can be justified only if the structure has sufficient ductility to absorb and dissipate energy by post- elastic deformations when subjected to several cycles of loading well into the yield range. To ensure ductile behavior designers should give special attention to details such as longitudinal reinforcement contents, anchorage of reinforce- ment and confinement of pompressed concrete, ensuring that all brittle types of failure (e.g., failure dué to shear) are avoided. The 1971 ACI code’? makes recommendations for longitudinal steel contents that result in ductile sections, and it allows some redistribution of bending moments from the elastic moment diagram. Also, for the first time, the code includes an appendix giving special provisions for seismic design. 1.4 CONSIDERATIONS OF MEMBER STRENGTH 1.4.1 Development of Member Strength In design it is often necessary to evaluate the possible upper and lower bounds of the likely strength of structural components. This is the case when a desired sequence of strength attainment in the members of a structure loaded_ ‘The Design Approach to failure is to be ensured. For example, at a beam-column joint in a continu- ous frame, if a column failure with its possible catastrophic consequences is to be avoided, it is always desirable to develop the strength of the beam before the strength of the column. The avoidance of all types of nonductile failure mode is a particular feature of seismic design. Thus it is important to know the possible variation of the likely strengths of structural members. Real structures contain variations in the strengths of the concrete and steel from the specified values, and there are unavoidable deviations from the specified dimensions because of constructional tole ;. Also, assump- tions have been made in the derivation of the strength equations. Hence it is difficult to calculate exactly the real strength of a structure; but it is possible to define levels of possible strength of members, which can be used in various types of design calculations. The levels of ideal strength, dependable strength, probable strength and overstrength will be defined in the following sections. 1.4.2 Ideal Strength S, The ideal or nominal strength of a section of a member S; is obtained from theory-predicting the failure behavior of the section and on assumed section geometry and specified material strengths. The major part of this book deals with the derivation of the ideal strength, to which other strength levels can be conveniently related. 1.43 Dependable Strength S, Inthestrength provisions described in Section 1.3.1 the purpose of the capacity reduction factor g was outlined. The capacity reduction factor allows the dependable or reliable strengt”7S, to be related to the ideal strength by S, = 9S, fe where 9, the capacity reduction facto, is less than Lie/ Sv 1.4.4 Probable Strength S, wv The probable strength S, takes into accoun{ the fact that the materials strengths are generally greater thant the specified strengths. For example, the yield strength of the steel may be as much as 20% higher than the specified strength and the concrete strength may be as much as 30% higher than the specified concrete strength, or even higher at a greater age or if the material is triaxially compressed. The probable strengths of the materials can be obtained from routine testing, normally conducted during construction of the structure. If the information is required at the design stage, it must be based on previous experience with the materials. The probable strength canEee Set Considerations of Member Strength 9 be related to the ideal strength by S, = 0,5; (1.6) where @, is the probable strength factor allowing for materials being stronger than specified and is greater than 1 : . 14.5 Overstrength S, The overstrength S, takes intq account all the Possible factors that may cause a strength increase. These include a steel strength higher than the specified yield strength plus additional steel strength due to strain hardening at large deformations, a concrete strength higher than specified, section sizes larger than assumed, axial compression in flexural members due to lateral restraint, and additional reinforcement placed for construction purposes or unaccounted for in calculations. The overstrength can be related to the ideal strength by 5,= 9,8, (1.7) where @, is the overstrength factor allowing for all sources of strength in- crease and is greater than 1. 1.4.6 Relationships Between Different Strengths The highest level of protection to ensure that component A which receives load from component B does not fail before the strength of component B is developed is found when the dependable strength of component A exceeds the overstrength of component B, 5,, > S,,. A lower level of protection is given by S,4 > 5,q_ and an even lower level of protection is given by Sas The degree of protection afforded by these cases may best be expressed by the ratio of probable strengths, S,a/Spg» of the two components. For the foregoing levels of protection, high to fow, it will be found from Eqs. 1.5 to 1.7 that Sea, PaSe/ Ppa). Spa > PoaPon (18a) Son Poa Spa/P pu Sop Pon Pa ; a Sua. Spa/%ra_ >i, Seay tenon (1.86) Son Pon Spa/P pn Pn S, S, Sar, cea Sed. Sea Pon 1.80) Son PorSpa/Ppn Siu” Pon ea For example, if 9, = 09, 94 = Gp = 1.1, and @,y = 1.3, the ratios of the probable strength of component A to the probable strength ofw = ‘The Design Approach component B necessary to ensure that component B does not fail are (LL x 1.3)A11 x 09) = 1.44, dd x 13/11 = 1.30, and 1.3/1.1 = 1.18, according to Eqs. 1:84, 1.8b, and 1.8c; respectively, indicating the different levels of protection for component B. 1.8 REFERENCES 1.1 CEB, “ Recommendations for an International Code of Practice for Reinforced Concrete,” ‘Comité Européen du Beton (CEB), Paris, 1964. (English translation available from Cement and Concrete Association, London, 156 pp.) : 1.2 ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-74)," American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1971, 78 pp. 1.3 ICBO, “Uniform Building Code,” 1970 edition, Vol. 1, International Conference of Building Officials, Pasadena, Calif., 651 pp.2 Stress-Strain Relationships for Concrete and Steel 2.1 CONCRETE 2.1.1 Uniaxial Stress Behavior Under practical conditions concrete is seldom stressed in one direction only (uniaxial stress), since in most structural situations the concrete is stressed simultaneously in a number of directions. Nevertheless, an assumed uniaxial stress condition can be justified in many cases. Compressive Stress Behavior The compressive strength of concrete is usually obtained from cylinders with a height to diameter ratio of 2. The cylinders are loaded longitudinally at a slow strain rate to reach maximum stress in 2 or 3 minutes. The normal standard cylinder is 12 in (305 mm) high by 6 in (152 mm) diameter and the compressive strength attained at 28 days usually ranges between 2000 and 8000 psi (13.8 to 55.2 N/mm?). Smaller size cylinders, or cubes, are also used, particularly for production control, and the compressive strength of these units is higher. With appropriate conversion factors obtained from tests, the results from such specimens can be converted into equivalent standard cylinder strength values. Figure 2.1 presents typical stress-strain curves obtained from concrete cylinders loaded in uniaxial compression in a test conducted over several minutes. The curves are almost:linear up to about, one-half the compressive strength. The peak of the curve for high-strength con¢rete is relatively sharp, but for low-strength concrete the curve has a flat-top. The strain at the maximum stress is approximately 0.002. At higher strains, after the maximum stress is reached, stress can still be carried even though cracks parallel to the direction of the loading become visible in the concrete. Concrete tested in flexible testing machines sometimes fails explosively because the concreten ‘Stress-Strain Relationships for Concrete and Steel (40) (eo (20) (10) 0 ‘061 O.0G2 ‘0008 004 ‘Concrete strain Fig. 2.1. Stress-strain curves for concrete cylinders loaded in uniaxial compression. cannot absorb the release in strain energy from the testing machine when the load decreases after maximum stress. A stiff testing machine is necessary to trace the full extent of the descending branch of the stress-strain curve. The modulus of elasticity for concrete E. may be taken as?! E, = w!533/f, psi (2) (1 psi = 0.00689 N/mm), where w is the density of concrete in pounds per cubic foot (1 Ib/ft? = 16.02 kg/m) and f: is the compressive cylinder strength in psi. Equation 2.1, which applies for values of w between 90 and 155 Iby/ft®, was determined by Pauw? from short-term loading tests; it gives the secant modulus at a stress of approximately 0.5f. For normal weight concrete, E, may be considered to be 57,000,/f; psi or 4730,/f; N/mm?. Tests by Risch? have indicated that the shape of the stress-strain curve before maximum stress depends on the strength of the concrete (see Fig. 2.2). However, a widely used approximation for the shape of the stress-strain curve before maximum stress is a second-degree parabola. For example, the often quoted stress-strain curve due to Hognestad? is shown in Fig. 2.3, where f? is the maximum stress reached in the concrete. The extent of falling branch behavior adopted depends on the limit of useful concrete strain assumed. This aspect is further discussed in Chapters 3 and 6 with regard to calculations for the flexural strength and ultimate deformations of members. The maximum compressive stress reached in the concrete of a flexural mem- ber? may differ from the cylinder strength f; because of the difference in size