CIA Seminar - Control of Long-Term Deflection - Brisbane 23 April 2008 Calculation of Long-Term Deflection RL. Gilbert* Centre for Infrastructure Engineering and Safety The University of New South Wales Abstract: This paper outlines appropriate techniques for modelling the various factors that affect in-service deflection of reinforced concrete beams and slabs and a method for the reliable prediction of the final, long-term deflection is presented. The effects of concrete cracking, tension stiffening, creep and shrinkage on cross-sectional stresses and deformation are considered in the modelling, together with the effects of reinforcement quantity and position. The proposed method for deflection calculation is illustrated by example and a comparison between the calculated and measured instantaneous and time-dependent deflections is presented for a variety of reinforced concrete beams and slabs subjected to sustained service loads. * Tan Gilbert is Professor of Civil Engineering and an ARC Australian Professorial Fellow in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of New South Wales. His main research interests are in the area of serviceability of concrete structures, His publications include four books and two hundred and twenty refereed papers in the area of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. He has served on Standards Australia's Concrete Structures Code committee BD- 002 for 25 years and he continues to be actively involved in the development of AS3600. He currently chairs Subcommittee BD-002-06 Serviceability © RL. Gilbert 20081. INTRODUCTION For a reinforced concrete structure to be serviceable, cracking must be controlled and deflections must not be excessive. It must also not vibrate excessively. Design for the serviceability limit states is complicated by the difficulties involved in estimating the non- linear and inelastic behaviour of the structure under sustained service loads. In-service deflections depend primarily on the properties of the concrete and these are often not known reliably at the design stage, The non-linear behaviour that complicates serviceability calculations is due to cracking, tension stiffening, creep, and shrinkage of the concrete. Of these, shrinkage is perhaps the most problematic. Restraint to shrinkage causes time- dependent cracking which reduces member stiffness and gradually reduces the beneficial effects of tension stiffening, It results in a gradual widening of existing cracks and, in flexural ‘members, a significant increase in deflections with time. The problem is particularly difficult in the case of slabs, which are typically shallow, with relatively large span to depth ratios, and are therefore deflection sensitive. It is stiffness rather than strength that usually controls the design of slabs, particularly in the cases of flat slabs and flat plates, In most concrete codes (including the Australian Standard AS 3600-2001'), there are (vo basic approaches for deflection control. The first is deflection control by the calculation of deflection, The second is deflection control by the satisfaction of a minimum depth requirement or a maximum span to depth ratio. This paper is concemned with the former. For deflection control by calculation, the structural designer should first select maximum deflection limits that are appropriate to the structure and its intended use. The calculated deflection must not exceed these limits. AS3600-2001 gives guidance on both the selection of the maximum deflection limits and the calculation of deflection. However, the procedures for calculation of the final deflection of beams and slabs are necessarily design-oriented and simple to use, involving crude approximations of the complex effects of cracking, tension stiffening, concrete creep and shrinkage and the load history. The simplified procedure for calculating the instantaneous deflection in AS3600 was developed from tests on relatively heavily reinforced concrete beams (Branson 7) and often produces inaccurate and unconservative predictions when applied to more lightly reinforced concrete slabs (Gilbert *). In addition, the existing code procedure does not provide real guidance on how to adequately model the time-dependent effects of creep and shrinkage in deflection calculations, The final deflection of a slab depends very much on the extent of initial cracking which, in turn, depends on the construction procedure (shoring and re-shoring), the amount of early shrinkage, the temperature gradients in the first few weeks after casting, the degree of curing and so on, Many of these parameters are, to a large extent, outside the control of the designer. In field measurements of the deflection of many identical slab panels **, large variability was reported. Deflections of identical panels after one year differed by over 100 percent in some cases. These differences can be attributed to the different conditions (both in terms of load and environment) that existed in the first few weeks after the casting of each slab. Serviceability failures of concrete structures involving excessive cracking and/or excessive deflection are relatively common. Numerous cases have been reported, in Australia and elsewhere * * ©, of structures that complied with code requirements but still deflected or cracked excessively. In many of these failures, shrinkage of concrete was primarily responsible or, probably more precisely, failure to adequately account for shrinkage (and Gilbert 1creep) in the design. Clearly, the serviceability provisions in AS3600' must be used with caution and, in many cases, will not adequately model the in-service behaviour of structures. The need for a more reliable deflection calculation procedure has been exacerbated by the introduction in the last decade of higher strength reinforcing steels, The use of higher strength steel usually means that less steel is required for strength and, consequently, less stiffness is available after cracking, leading to greater deflection and wider cracks under service loads. The design for serviceability has increasingly assumed a more prominent role in the design of beams and slabs. This paper outlines appropriate techniques for modelling the various factors that affect in- service deflection of reinforced concrete beams and slabs and a method for the reliable prediction of the final, long-term deflection is presented, The effects of concrete cracking, tension stiffening, creep and shrinkage on cross-sectional stresses and deformation are considered in the modelling, together with the effects of reinforcement quantity and position. The proposed method for deflection calculation is illustrated by example and a comparison between the calculated and measured instantaneous and time-dependent deflections is presented for a variety of reinforced concrete beams and slabs subjected to sustained service loads. 2. THE INSTANTANEOUS DEFLECTION OF A FLEXURAL MEMBER 2.1 Load versus Deflection Response ‘The short-term or instantaneous deformation of a reinforced concrete cross-section subjected to combined bending and axial force can be readily determined using simple Modular Ratio Theory. After cracking, the properties of both the fully-cracked section and the uncracked section are often combined empirically to model tension stiffening and to approximate the average properties of the cracked region. Consider the load-deflection response of a simply-supported, singly reinforced concrete beam or one-way slab shown in Figure 1. At loads less than the cracking load, P, the member is uneracked and behaves homogeneously and elastically, and the slope of the load deflection plot is proportional to the second moment of area of the uncracked transformed section, Iyyc ‘The member first cracks at Pa when the extreme fibre tensile stress in the concrete at the section of maximum moment reaches the flexural tensile strength of the concrete, fa, There is a sudden change in the local stiffness at and immediately adjacent to this first crack. On the section containing the crack, the flexural stiffness drops significantly, but the rest of the member remains uncracked. As load increases, more cracks form and the average flexural stiffness of the entire member decreases. If the tensile concrete in the cracked regions of the beam carried no stress, the load-deflection relationship would follow the dashed line ACD. If the average extreme fibre tensile stress in the concrete remained at fy after cracking, the load-deflection relationship would follow the dashed line AE. In reality, the actual response lies between these extremes and is shown in Figure I as the solid line AB. The difference between the actual response and the zero tension response is the tension stiffening effect (which reduces the instantaneous deflection by 64, as shown in Figure 1). Gilbert zDeflection assuming no cracking / / Actual response 77] PPS Load Concrete caries no F tension anywhere m ‘Concrete carries no tension in the cracked regions 0 Deflection Figure 1: Typical load versus deflection relationship, Tension stiffening is the contribution to the post-cracking stiffhess of the member of the intact tensile concrete between the cracks. At each crack, the tensile concrete carries no stress, but as the distance fiom the crack increases, the tensile stress in the concrete increases due to the bond between the tensile conerete and the tensile reinforcement. As the load increases, the average tensile stress in the conerete reduces as more cracks develop and the actual response becomes approximately parallel to the no tension response (as shown in Figure 1), when the crack patter is fully developed and the number of cracks has stabilized. For slabs containing small quantities of tensile reinforcement (typically 4y/bd < 0.005), tension stiffening may be responsible for more than 50% of the stifliness of the cracked ‘member at service loads and A remains significant up to an beyond the point where the ste! yields and the ultimate load is approached. The keys to predicting the instantaneous deflection are first to evaluate the load required to cause first cracking or, more precisely, the moment to cause first cracking at the critical cross-section, and secondly to model tension stiffening accurately. Both these tasks are not straightforward. Restraint to shrinkage provided by the bonded reinforcement and restraint to shrinkage at the member’s ends can cause significant tension in the concrete in the first few days after casting, Cracking may therefore occur at loads far less than that required to produce an extreme fibre tensile stress equal to the modulus of rupture, fay; in a member without shrinkage. One commonly used approach for modelling tension stiffening in deflection calculations involves determining an average effective moment of inertia (J,) for a cracked member. Several different empirical equations are available for /ys including the well-known equation developed by Branson *, a modified version of which is specified in AS3600 '. Another ‘model for /.y may be derived from the approach specified in Eurocode 2 ’, Branson's equation grossly overestimates the average stiffness of reinforced concrete members containing small quantities of steel reinforcement. The Eurocode 2 approach appears to better model the shape of the load-deformation response of such members after cracking. Recently, Bischoff * proposed an alternative equation for Lg, which is essentially compatible with the urocode 2 approach. Gilbert 32.2 AS83600" According to the most recent revision of AS3600°, the instantaneous or short-term deflection of a beam may be calculated using the mean value of the elastic modulus of concrete at the time of first loading, Ey, together with the effective second moment of area of the member, Jeg. The effective second moment of area involves an empirical adjustment of the second moment of area of a cracked member to account for tension stiffening. For a given cross- section, /yis calculated using Branson’s formula *: Teg = Top + (Tey) (Mex! M chmax a) where J, is the second moment of area of the fully-cracked section (calculated using modular ratio theory); J is the second moment of area of the uncracked cross-section about its centroidal axis; M7 is the maximum bending moment at the section, based on the short-term serviceability design load or the construction load; and Mz, is the cracking moment given by Ma Of cag ~ Fes + P/Ag) + Pe) > 0.0 (2) Z is the section modulus of the uncracked section, referred to the extreme fibre at which cracking occurs; fy is the characteristic flexural tensile strength of concrete; 0% is the ‘maximum shrinkage induced tensile stress on the uncracked section at the extreme fibre at which cracking occurs and may be taken as “| where p, is the web reinforcement ratio (4,+4,,)/b.d and ¢7,is the final design shrinkage strain (after 30 years). The maximum value of [at any cross-section, Jepmar in Eq. (1), is 1 when p = Ay/bd > 0.005 and 0.6/ when p < 0,005. G) ‘The value of Ly for the member is determined from the value of /y-at mid-span for a simple- supported beam or slab. For interior spans of continuous beams or slabs, /yyis half the mid- span value plus one quarter of the value at each support, and for end spans of continuous beams or slabs, is half the mid-span value plus half the value at the continuous support. Fora cantilever, [ys the value at the support The term oz, in Eq. (2) is introduced to allow for the tension that inevitably develops due to the restraint to shrinkage provided by the bonded tensile reinforcement. Eq. (3) is based on the expression proposed by Gilbert '° '', where conservative values were assumed for the elastic modulus and the creep coefficient of conerete and about 70% of the final shrinkage ‘was assumed to have occurred at the time of cracking, This allowance for shrinkage induced tension is particularly important in the case of lightly reinforced members (including slabs) where the tension induced by the full service moment alone might not be enough to cause cracking. In such cases, failure to account for shrinkage may lead to deflection calculations in which cracking is not adequately taken into account and this may lead to gross underestimates of the actual deflection. For heavily reinforced sections, the problem is not as significant, as the service loads are usually well in excess of the cracking load, and tension stiffening is not as significant. Gilbert 42,3 Eurecode 27 It is well known that Branson’s Equation (Eq, 1) overestimates stiffness after cracking for members containing relatively small quantities of tensile reinforcement ** ''. A much better model for Iy-can be developed from the deflection calculation approach in Eurocode 2 °. This approach involves the calculation of the curvature at particular cross-sections and then integrating to obtain the deflection. The instantaneous curvature of a section after cracking « is calculated using KE CK * (1 = OV Kier 4) where ¢is a distribution coefficient taking account of moment level and degree of cracking given by oy 1B, al =| (6) s B= 1.0 for deformed bars and 0.5 for plain bars; f= 1.0 for a single, short-term load and 0.5 for repeated or sustained loading; oi, is the stress in the tensile reinforcement at the load causing first cracking calculated ignoring concrete in tension and ignoring any shrinkage induced tension; o; is stress in the reinforcement at the loading under consideration calculated ignoring conerete in tension; xa, is the curvature at the section ignoring concrete in tension; and kin is the curvature on the uncracked transformed section. If the compressive concrete and the reinforcement are both linear and elastie, the ratio &,/o%: in Eq, (5) is equal to the ratio M, /M7. Using the notation of Eq. (1), Eq. (4) can be re- expressed as M: ) Ed, chy) (6) J For a member containing deformed bars under short term loading, ¢ = 1 - (M./ M!)° and Eq, (6) can be rearranged to give the following expression for Je for short-term deflection calculations: a An equation exactly the same as Eq. (7) was recently proposed by Bischoff ®, For long-term deflection calculations, for a member containing deformed bars ¢ = 1 ~ 0.5(Me/ M!)" and Eq. (7) becomes (8) Gilbert 5The introduction of f; = 0.5 in the denominator of Eq. (8) for long term deflection calculations is tantamount to reducing the cracking moment by about 30% and is a crude way of accounting for shrinkage induced tension and time-dependent crackin; 2.4 Comparisons with Test Data To illustrate the advantages of Eq. (7) over Eq. (1), the measured moment versus instantaneous deflection response for eight simply-supported singly reinforced concrete one-way slabs containing tensile steel quantities in the range 0.0018 < Ay/bd < 0.008 were recently compared with the calculated responses using Egs. (1) and (7) (see Ref, 3). Figure 2 shows the comparisons for two of these slabs, designated SS2 and $3. The slabs were prismatic, of rectangular section 850 mm wide, and contained a single layer of longitudinal tensile steel reinforcement of area 4y. Slab S$2 was 102.0 mm deep, with tensile steel 4,,= 227 mm? (E, = 200000 MPa and f, = 500 MPa) at an effective depth d = 81.7 mm, Slab S$3 was 106.6 mm deep, with tensile steel Ay = 354 mm’ (£, = 200000 MPa and f,, = 500 MPa) at an effective depth d = 85.9 mm. The slabs were simply-supported over a span of 2000 mm and were subjected to a single concentrated load at mid-span. The relevant conerete propert were 8 MPa; E.= 27470 MPa and fury = 4.42 MPa 4 12 |Honetler = 9.23 : —biperimortal == --Uneracked No tension stifening —| AS36003. 1) Brocade 2 (Ea. 7) iespan Moment (km) ° 5 0 5 20 Instantaneous mid-spandeicton (im) (@) Slab $82 (» = 0.00327. 18 16 | Loewe = 14 2 10 a Experimental == =-uneracked Mic-apan Mornent im) No tension sttening AS38600 (Ea. 1) Eurocade 2 (Eg. 7) ° 5 10 15 20 Instantaneous mit-pan deflection (mm) (b) Slab $83 (p = 0.00485). Figure 2: Comparisons between predicted and measured mid-span moment vs deflection curves Gilbor 6For the curves in Figure 2 obtained using Eq, (1), ozs is taken as zero in the estimation of Mon since each specimen was moist cured before testing and little shrinkage had taken place prior to loading. It can be seen that Eq. (1) underestimates the post-cracking instantaneous deflection and Eq. (7) provides much better agreement with the test data, These results were typical of all specimens considered. 3. THE TIME-DEPENDENT DEFLECTION OF A FLEXURAL MEMBER 3.1 Factors Affecting Long-term Defle The deflection of a reinforced concrete beam or slab under a constant sustained load increases with time due to four main effects: 1, time-dependent cracking: a reduction in tension stiffening with time (.c. AB in Figure I decreases with time); sand an increase in curvature on each cross-section with time due to creep of cone Be restraint to shrinkage by the non-symmetrically placed longitudinal reinforcement causing a time-dependent curvature on each section (i.e, shrinkage warping) Under sustained service loads, flexural cracks frequently form with time between the most widely spaced cracks in a cracked tensile region, thereby reducing the average crack spacing with time. In addition, flexural cracks frequently form with time in previously uncracked regions thereby increasing the extent of cracking. This time-dependent cracking causes a time-dependent loss of stiffness and an increase in deflection. Several factors contribute to time-dependent cracking, including tensile creep rupture and tension induced by restraint to shrinkage. By calculating the tension induced by shrinkage on the uncracked cross-section (similar to that given by Eq. 3) and suitably reducing the cracking moment and the effective moment of inertia (Ig), the deflection caused by time-dependent cracking is often combined with instantaneous deflection in long-term deflection calculations Beeby & Scott * '*, Gilbert '* and others have shown that the tension stiffening effect decreases with time under sustained loads, probably due to the combined effects of tensile creep rupture and shrinkage induced micro-cracking around the steel bars, and this must be accounted for in long-term deflection calculations. Beeby & Scott >? reported that their experimental results indicated that tension stiffening reduced by a factor of about 2 within a few weeks of first loading. However, they did not adequately account for shrinkage in the evaluation of the test results and their interpretation of the experimental observations is flawed. Tension stiffening does gradually decrease with time, but not as rapidly as reported by Beeby & Scott. In deflection calculations, this effect may be included by reducing the effective moment of inertia (Jy) for long-term calculations (eg. fs in Eq. 5). Creep of concrete causes a gradual increase in curvature with time on each cross-section and an increase in member deflections. The magnitude of the increase in curvature due to creep depends on whether the cross-section has cracked, the amount and location of the bonded reinforcement and, of course, the material properties, in particular the creep coefficient of the concrete, gic. In addition, the creep induced curvature depends on the load level, the duration of the load and, importantly, the age of the concrete when the load was first applied. Gilbert 7Restraint to shrinkage by the non-symmetrically placed longitudinal reinforcement causes a time-dependent curvature on each section and a significant increase in deflection. This shrinkage warping is greater on a cracked section than on an uncracked section, but is otherwise independent of the level of the sustained load. It does of course depend on the amount and location of the bonded reinforcement, the depth of cracking and the material properties, in particular the final design shrinkage strain, ‘The change of curvature with time caused by both creep and shrinkage on a reinforced concrete cross-section can be determined using a variety of analytical procedures (Gilbert '*), including the Age-Adjusted Effective Modulus Method (AEMM), described in detail on pages 89-102 of Reference 16. Using the AEMM, the strain and curvature on individual cross-sections at any time can be calculated, as can the stress in the concrete and bonded reinforcement. ‘The routine use of the AEMM in the design of concrete structures for the serviceability limit states is strongly encouraged, as it will provide reliable estimates of time-dependent deformation and thereby reduce the incidence of serviceability failures in concrete beams and slabs. Perhaps more importantly, the AEMM provides an insight into how concrete structures, behave under sustained service loads and imparts a much clearer understanding of the time- dependent interaction between the concrete and the steel. It allows the effects of creep and shrinkage of the concrete to be determined in a rational and realistic way. In Figure 3, some typical results obtained using the AEMM for a cracked and an uncracked rectangular cross- section under sustained moments are provided to illustrate the effects of creep and shrinkage on cross-sectional behaviour. Figure 3a shows the cross-sectional details and material properties. Figure 3b shows the stresses and strains on an uncracked cross-section where the sustained moment (50 KN.m) is less that the cracking moment, Note that the initial extreme fibre tensile stress is +2.03 MPa, but, when shrinkage takes place, it increases to ~3.90 MPa (>a). This indicates that time- dependent cracking will occur after some period under sustained load due to shrinkage induced tension. In the absence of shrinkage on this uncracked section, creep causes an increase in curvature from 0.23 x 10° mm‘ to 0.66 x 10° mm’. When shrinkage is included, the curvature increases to 1.23 x 10° mm". On this uncracked section, the shrinkage induced curvature (0.57 x 10° mm") is almost as large as the load induced curvature (initial + creep 0.66 x 10° mm), Figure 3c shows the stresses and strains on a cracked cross-section where the sustained ‘moment (200 KN.m) is greater than the cracking moment. In the absence of shrinkage on this uncracked section, creep causes a decrease in the top fibre concrete compressive stress and an increase in curvature from 2.50 x 10 mm! to 3,78 x 10° mm'!. When shrinkage is included, the curvature increases to 4.94 x 10° mm’, On this cracked section, the shrinkage induced curvature is 1.16 x 10° mm, more than double the shrinkage induced curvature on the unetacked cross-section and similar in magnitude to the increase in load-dependent change in curvature due to creep (1.28 x 10mm’). Gilbert 8fe 300 of Concrete Properties: Characteristic compressive strength, Flexural tensile strength, f'., Elastic modulus, £, = 28,570 MPa; Creep coefficient, @e=2.5; Ageing coefficient, z= 0.8; Shrinkage strain, é, = -0,0006 or zero. 650 600 Reinforcement Properties: Elastic modulus, £, = 200,000 MPa; | oe} 4, 180mm! Yield stress, fy = 500 MPa. (a) Cross-section details and material properties 718 244 9st [8023 1pm! i i J c= 0.66 9410%mm! Fi i ose fi 184-711-158 Section Strain (x 10°) Stress (MPa) Instantancous— — 600 x 10* (b) Stresses and strains on the uncracked section when M = $0 kN.m, 465-1196 -1896 91-101 -133 a> 186 “= = 2.50 10%mm? =3.78x 10%" 494% 10%mm" Section Strain (x 104) Stress (MPa) Instantaneous = = -600 x 104 (©) Stresses and strains on the eracked section when M 100 KN.m, Figure 3: Instantaneous and time-dependent stresses and strains on a rectangular section. Gilbert3.2 AS3600 Approach for Long-term Deflection For the calculation of long-term deflection, two approaches are specified in AS3600-2001 For reinforced or prestressed beams, the creep and shrinkage deflections can be calculated separately (using the material data specified in the Standard and the principles of mechanics). Alternatively, for reinforced concrete beams and slabs, the additional long-term deflection caused by creep and shrinkage may be crudely approximated by multiplying the short-term or immediate deflection caused by the sustained load by a multiplier k., given by Kos = [2-1 2(Ase!Asg)] 2 0.8 o where A,¢ is the area of steel in the compressive zone of the cracked section between the neutral axis and the extreme compressive fibre and the ratio Aj/dy is taken at mid-span for a simple or continuous span and at the support for a cantilever. The use of the deflection multiplier ker (Eq. 9) to estimate the final deflection fails to adequately predict the long-term or time-dependent deflection (the largest portion of the total deflection in most reinforced concrete members). Shrinkage induced curvature and the resulting deflection is not adequately accounted for when using ke, and no account is taken of the actual creep and shrinkage properties of the concrete. The use of the deflection multiplier ke to calculate time-dependent deflections is simple and convenient and, provided the section is initially cracked under short term loads, it sometimes provides a ball-park estimate of final deflection. However, to calculate the shrinkage induced deflection by multiplying the load induced short-term deflection by a long-term deflection multiplier is fundamentally wrong. Shrinkage can cause significant deflection even in unloaded members. The approach ignores the creep and shrinkage characteristics of the concrete, the environment, the age at first loading ete, At best, it must be seen as providing a very approximate estimate. At worst, itis misleading and not worth the time involved in making the calculation, It is, however, not too much more complicated to calculate long-term creep and shrinkage deflections separately. As mentioned previously, well established and reliable methods are available for calculating the time-dependent behaviour of reinforced concrete cross-sections (see Refs. 15 and 16). A refined deflection calculation method suitable for routine use in design is outlined below. 4. RECOMM| (DED APPROACH FOR CALCULATING DEFLECTION 4.1 Instantaneous Curvature The instantaneous curvature x; due to the service moment M at a particular cross-section is K\= M; /Bdlas The effective second moment of area of the member is calculated from L Ig See (10) 1, y M. sae, where J., is the second moment of area of the fully-cracked section (calculated using modular ratio theory); Luncr is the second moment of area of the uncracked transformed cross-section Gilbert 10about its centroidal axis; Mis the maximum bending moment at the section, based on the short-term serviceability design load or the construction load; and Mj. is the cracking ‘moment given by M, UWfay ~ ns + P/Ag) + Pe) > 0.0 ay In Eq, (11), Z is the section modulus of the uncracked section, referring to the extreme fibre at which cracking occurs; /'uy is the characteristic flexural tensile strength of concrete; os is the maximum shrinkage induced tensile stress on the uncracked section at the extreme fibre at which cracking occurs and, for a singly reinforced cross-section, may be taken as 25pu_ pg) | (12) Te30p, os where p, is the web reinforcement ratio Ay/byd and ¢’, is the final design shrinkage strain For other cross-sections, o:, may be determined using the procedure outlined in Reference i ‘The maximum value of J,p at any cross-section, Jefne in Eq. (10), i8 Finer When p = Aylbd > 0.005 and 0.6 hiner when p < 0.005 42 ime-Dependent Curvature At any particular cross-section, the load induced curvature, a(t), (instantaneous plus creep) at any time t due to a sustained service load may be obtained from A(t) = Ki (1+ Qe (4) (13) where x; is the instantaneous curvature due to the sustained service moment M" (ie. x; = M; /Ecly); Que is the creep coefficient at time t; and a is a term that accounts for the effects of cracking and the braking action of the reinforcement on creep and may be estimated from qs. (14a), (4b) or (140). For a cracked reinforced concrete section in pure bending (.M;> Mz»), @ = ot, where = [0.48 p"] [1 + (125 p +0.1)(Aw/As) 7) (14a) For an uncracked reinforced or prestressed concrete section (M} Mc.) = 2, where 1.0 - 15.0 p} [1+ (140 p- 0.1)(Ae/Agd)"?) (140) where p= Ay/b d, and Aq is the equivalent ares of bonded reinforcement in the tensile zone at depth d, (the depth from the extreme compressive fibre to the centroid of the outermost layer of tensile reinforcement). The area of any bonded reinforcement in the tensile zone (including ‘bonded tendons) not contained in the outermost layer of tensile reinforcement (ie. located at a depth dj less than d,) should be included in the calculation of 4,, by multiplying that area by dildo, For the purpose of the calculation of 4,, the tensile zone is that zone that would be in Gilbert Wltension due to the applied moment acting in isolation, Ase is the area of the bonded reinforcement in the compressive zone between neutral axis and extreme compressive fibre. For a cracked, partially prestressed section or for a cracked reinforced concrete section subjected to bending and axial compression, ct may be taken as = ap + (ony = Ndi) (140) where d is the depth of the intact compressive concrete on the cracked section and dj, is the depth of the intact compressive concrete on the cracked section ignoring the axial compression and/or the prestressing force (i.e. the value of d, for an equivalent cracked reinforced concrete section containing the same quantity of bonded reinforcement). Eqs. (14a), (14b) or (140) have been developed as an empirical fit to the results obtained from a parametric study of the creep induced change in curvature of reinforced concrete cross- sections under constant sustained intemal actions using the Age-adjusted Effective Modulus Method (AEMM) of analysis ‘The shrinkage induced curvature on a reinforced concrete section may be approximated by | [é Eo | (1s) D where D is the overall depth of the section and the factor &, depends on the quantity and location of the bonded reinforcement (dy; and. Aye as defined under Eq. (4b) above), and may be estimated from Eqs (16a), (16b), (16c) or (164). For an uncracked cross-section, kj ts Where 4, key = (100 p= 2500 p' [ Ss when p = Agi d, $0.01 (16a) 0s ( \ kn = 40p4 035) (4a [- le when p = A/b d, > 0.01 (16b) \ A For a cracked reinforced concrete section in pure bending, k, ~ k,2, where ; 12 (1-05) 2) (160) \ Nd, For a cracked, partially prestressed section or for a cracked reinforced concrete section subjected to bending and axial compression, k, may be taken as = kes + (k= ksi) (16a) where d,, and d,; are as defined after Eq. (14), Eqs. (15) and (16a) to (16d) have also been developed as an empirical fit to the results obtained from a parametric study of the shrinkage induced change in curvature of a variety of reinforced concrete cross-sections using the Age-adjusted Effective Modulus Method (AEMM) of analysis ” Gilbert 124.3 Deflection Calculations When the load induced and shrinkage induced curvatures are calculated at selected sections along a beam or slab, the deflection may be obtained by double integration. For a reinforced or prestressed concrete continuous span with the degree of cracking varying along the member, the curvature at the left and right supports, x, and x, and the curvature at mid- span x, may be calculated at any time after loading and the deflection at mid-span A may be approximated by assuming a parabolic curvature diagram along the span, ¢ a #10 Ky HH) a7 The above equation will give a reasonable estimate of deflection even when the curvature diagram is not parabolic and it is a useful expression for use in deflection calculations. 43.1 Worked Example A reinforced concrete beam of rectangular section (650 mm deep and 300 mm wide) is simply-supported over a 10 m span and is subjected to a uniformly distributed sustained service load of 16 KN/m. The longitudinal reinforcement is uniform over the entire span and consists of a single layer of tensile reinforcing bars (4 = 1800 mm”) at an effective depth of d = 600 mm. Each cross-section is identical to that shown in Figure 32, Calculate the instantaneous and long-term deflection at mid-span, assuming the following material properties: 2x 10° MPa; f= 32 MPa; f'xs= 3.39 MPa; E = 28,570 MPa; g = 2.5; and For each cross-section, p = py = Ag/bd = 0.01. ‘The section at mid-span: The sustained bending moment at mid-span is M! = 200 KN.m. This fully-cracked cross- section was analysed using the age-adjusted effective modulus method (AEMM) and the instantaneous and final strain and stress distributions under M‘ are illustrated in Figure 3c. The second moments of area of the uncracked transformed cross-section, Juno, and the full- cracked transformed section, Lor, ar Liner = 10,790 x 10° mm* and [-, = 2,800 x 10° mm*, The bottom fibre section modulus of the uncracked section is Z = Iyncr Ys = 34.8 x 10° mm°, From. Eq.(12), = (_25x0.01 “ 1+ 50x0.01 \ 210% x0,0006 | = 2.0 MPa } and the time-dependent cracking moment is obtained from Eq. (11): Mg, = 34.8 x 108 (3,39 - 2.0) = 48.3 KNm. From Eq. (10), the effective second moment of area is 2800x10° 2,925 x 10° mm* af 2800x108 2) 10790x10° 200 Gite 3‘The instantaneous curvature due to the sustained service moment is = 10010" E14, 28570%2925 x10" 39x 10% mm" From Eq, (14a): cy = (0.48 x 0.01°°°J[1 + (125 x 0.01 + 0.19(0/1800)'7] = 4.80. The load induced curvature (instantaneous plus creep) is obtained from Fq. (13) w(t) =2.39 x 10 (1 + 2.5/4.80) = 3.64 x 10° mm This agrees very well with the result obtained from the AEMM analysis illustrated in Figure 3c where k(t) = 3.78 x 10° mm" 0 650 1 39 1800" 600 From Eq.(I6c): k= ra = 1.2 (1-0.5« and the shrinkage induced curvature is obtained from Eq, (1 0» 600% 10-* =1.20 10-6 mm 650 This also agrees well with the result obtained from the AEMM analysis illustrated in Figure 3c where Ke: = (4.94 - 3.78) x 10 = 1.16 x 10° mm! The instantaneous and final time-dependent curvatures at mid-span are therefore 2.39 x 10% mm" and x= x(t) + Kor = (3.64 + 1.20) x 10° mm! = 4.84 x 10% mm’! ‘The section at each support: The sustained bending moment is zero and the section at each support remains uncracked. ‘The load-dependent curvature is therefore zero. However, shrinkage curvature develops wi time, From Eq. (16a): 600 05%650 0.635 k= kes = (100 x 0.01 ~ 2500 x 0.01? \- pd and the shrinkage induced curvature is estimated from Eq. (15): 1, =| 9:93 600%10" 6 55 socom’ 650 This also agrees well with the result obtained from the AEMM analysis illustrated in Figure 3b where Kis = (1.23 - 0.66) x 10 = 0.57 x 10° mm’ Deflections: The instantaneous and final long-term deflections at mid-span, A; and Arr, respectively, are obtained from Eq, (17): 100007 196 (0+ 102.39 + 0)x10 Gitber 40000 96 (0.58-+ 10% 4.84 + 0.58)x10° =51,6 mm span/194) tis of interest to note that using the current approach in AS3600, with k.s = 2.0 (from Eq. 9), the calculated final deflection is (I+ kes) A;= 74.7 mm. 5. COMPARISON WITH TEST DATA 5.1 Experimental program and test results Twelve prismatic singly reinforced concrete specimens (6 beams and 6 slabs) with the cross- sections shown in Figure 4 were cast from the same batch of conerete and moist cured for a period of 14 days prior to first loading (at age 14 days). All specimens were simply-supported over a span of 3.5 m and were subjected to constant sustained service loads for periods of 400 days, Details of each test specimen are given in Table 1 The time-dependent deflection at mid-span of each specimen was measured throughout the test using an LVDT. The compressive strength, tensile strength and elastic modulus of concrete were measured on companion cylinders and prisms at the time of first loading, and the creep and shrinkage characteristics of the concrete were monitored on companion specimens throughout the tests. The sustained load consisted of concrete blocks carefully weighed and arranged to apply the desired constant, sustained load to each specimen. For the six beam specimens, the loading blocks were arranged to impart two equal concentrated loads to the specimen at the third-span points. For the slab specimens, the loading blocks were positioned to simulate a uniformly distributed loading. Full details of the test program are available elsewhere ™, 7% fe Tr z 400m | om | [som 161 mm th L 4, (@) Beams (0) Slabs Figure 4 Details of cross-section for beams and slabs Table 1 Details of beam and slab specimens Beam|No] a ]4]a]a]= Sub]No] 4 ]4]apa]s ‘ars|_mm_| mn? | mm | mm | mm bars} mm | mm? | mm | mm | mm Bra] 2 [16 | 400] 40 | 40 | 150 sta 2 [12 [226] 25 | ao | 308 Bi-b| 2 | 16 | 400} 40 | 40 | 150 si-b| 2 | 12 | 226 | 25 | ao | 308 B22] 2 | 16 | 400] 25 | 25 | 180 sza} 3 | 12 | 339] 25 | ao | 154 p2-b| 2 | 16 | 400} 25 | 25 | 180 3 | 12 | 339 | 25 | 40 | 154 B32] 3 | 16 | 600 | 25 | 25 | 90 4 | 12 | 452} 25 | 40 | 103 pb] 3 | 16 | 600 | 25 | 25 | 90 4 |i | 452 | 2s | 40 [103 Gilbert 15Two identical specimen “a” and “b” were constructed for each combination of parameters, each subjected to a different sustained load level. The “a” specimens were subjected to a constant sustained load sufficient to cause a maximum moment at mid-span of about 50% of the calculated ultimate moment and the “b” specimens were subjected to a constant sustained mid-span moment of about 30% of the calculated ultimate moment. The loads on all specimens were sufficient to cause primary cracks to develop in the region of maximum moment at first loading, In Table 2, the sustained in-service moment at mid-span, M,; the sttess in the tensile steel at mid-span, f,, due to M, (calculated on the basis of a fully cracked section); the calculated ultimate flexural strength, M,, (assuming a characteristic yield stress of the reinforcing steel of 500 MPa); the ratio MM, ; and the cracking moment, M.n (calculated assuming that no shrinkage had taken place prior to loading and that the tensile strength of concrete is 0.6/7.(A) , where (0) is the measured compressive strength at the time of loading in MPa). Table 2 Moments and steel stresses in long-term test specimens Beam] M, | M | fh | M [Min Slab] M, [M | t | M [MIM kNm | km | MPa | kNim | (%) kNm | km | MPa | kim | (%) Bia | 14.0 [24.9 | 227 | 56.2 [443 Si-a | 465 [ 681 | 252 | 13.9 | 49.0 Bib | 140 | 17.0 | 135 | 56.2 | 302 Si-b | 465 | 5.28 | 195 | 13.9 | 38.0 B2a| 13.1 | 248 | 226 | 56.2 | 44.1 s2-a | 4.75 | 987 | 247 | 203 | 48.6 B2-b | 13.1 | 168 | 153 | 56.2 | 29.8 s2-b | 4.75 | 681 | 171 | 20.3 | 33.6 B3-a| 13.7 | 34.6 | 214 | sis | 424 486 | 1135] 216 | 264 | 43.0 3-b | 13.7 | 208 | 129 | sis | 25.5 486 | 834 | 139 | 264 | 316 The measured mid-span deflection vs. time curves are presented in Figure 5, The initial deflection (Ars at first loading, t= 14 days) and the final deflection (Aqgo at t = 400 days) measured at mid-span for each specimen are also shown in Figure 5. P.-L a Ase 25) FSS wo daw 19) “ime oy) f Fine iy = a (y= Sra: an 124 see fp nan ay 2 re Ts Figure 5 Mid-span deflection versus time curves for test specimens Gilbert 16The measured final to initial deflection ratio (Ayoo/A,4) is in the range 2.3 to 2.5 for the beams loaded to about 50% of the ultimate strength and in the range 3.7 to 4.0 for the beams loaded to only about 30% of the ultimate strength, For the slab specimens, the deflection ratio is significantly higher than for the beams, with the ratio in the range 2.7 to 3.5 for the slabs loaded to about 50% of the ultimate strength and in the range 4.5 to 5.5 for the slabs loaded to only about 30% of the ultimate strength. The gradual increase in deflection with time for all specimens is caused by creep, shrinkage warping and time-dependent cracking. The measured ratio of final deflection to instantaneous deflection decreased as the level of applied load increased. This is because more time- dependent cracking occurs in the beams and slabs that are initially less heavily loaded and the ratio of the deflection caused by shrinkage warping to the instantaneous deflection is also significantly larger It is noted that for the slab specimens the span to effective depth ratio is 26.9. For the ‘a’ specimens, where the sustained load was about 50% of the ultimate load, each specimen deflected excessively. The span to measured final deflection ratios for S1-a, $2-a and S3-a are 139, 117 and 108, respectively. Each slab is well outside AS3600’s minimum allowable span to total deflection ratio of 250 and would be unserviceable for most applications. 5.2 Calculated deflection of test specimens To further illustrate the procedure, the final deflection of slab specimen S2-a is calculated here. As given in the previous section, the slab specimen was prismatic with a cross-section 400 mm wide and 161 mm deep and contained tensile reinforcement consisting of 3 ~ 12 mm diameter bars (4, = 339 mm’) at an effective depth d= 130 mm. The specimen contained no compressive reinforcement, The slab span was 3.5 m and the applied load was uniformly distributed. The slab was moist cured for two weeks after casting and, at age 14 days, the sustained load was first applied and testing commenced. The load remained constant throughout the test with the sustained moment at mid-span being 9.87 kNm. At the time of first loading, the relevant material properties '* are E. = 22820 MPa and fi, = 2.57 MPa. The final shrinkage strain and creep coefficient at age 400 days are &, = 825 ie and ge = 1.71. For each cross-section, p = py = Ay/bd = 0.00652, The second moments of area of the uncracked transformed cross-section, yr, and the full-cracked transformed section, J, are Tur = 145 x 10° mm* and Je, = 32.5 x 10° mm*. The bottom fibre section modulus of the uncracked section is Z = Iyer /vp = 1.85 x 10° mm’, From Eq. (12), x a = is ( 2005S. 105 x aszs) = 2.03 MPa 75 5030-00652 y and the time-dependent cracking moment is obtained from Eq. (11): Mc, = 1.85 x 10° (2.57-2.03) = 1.00 kNm. Gilbert 7From Eq, (10), the effective second moment of area of the member for long-term deflection calculations is L 32.510" 32.8x 10° mm* 32.510" Y 1.00 vaso" ass) The instantaneous curvature due to the sustained service moment at mid-span is 9.87 10° > = 13.2 x 10° mort Ely 22820%32.8%10° From Eq, (14a): a) = [0.48 x 0.00652 ]f1 + (125 x 0.00652 + 0.1)(0/339)'7] = 5. The load induced curvature (instantaneous plus creep) is obtained from Eq. (13): (1) = 13.2 x 10 (1 + 1.71/5.94) = 17,0. x 10 mm", . - 0) tot From Eq, (1é6c! Ky = a= 12% (1-052) Ea (160) ° : 660" 130 149 and the shrinkage induced curvature is obtained from Eq. (15): [pea Jeroen : 16 ‘The final time-dependent curvature at mid-span is therefore X= Kt) + Kes = (17.0 + 7.61) x 10° mm! = 24.6 x 10% mm" At cach support, the sustained bending moment is zero and the section remains uncracked. The load-dependent curvature is therefore zero. However, shrinkage curvature develops with time and from Eq, (16a): k= x1 = (1000.00652 ~ 2500 «0,00652")( 132 ~l= ey = 0.335 13 05x61 and the shrinkage induced curvature is estimated from Eq. (15): _ [0.335 x825 x10 —a | 1.72x19*mm! The final long-term deflections at mid-span, Ayr, is obtained from Eq. (17) 35007 96 Mur = (1.72 + 10 24.6 +1.72) «10° = 31.8 mm The calculated long-term or final deflection Avr is in good agreement with the measured final deflection of 29.8 mm. Gilbert 18‘The calculated final deflection of each of the test specimens is compared to the measured value in Table 3. In general the calculations slightly overestimate the measured deflections but agreement is considered to be excellent, with an ideal mean for design purposes and a suitably low coefficient of variation. Table 3 Comparison between calculated and measured final deflections. ‘Specimen Final long-term deflection Gm Measured (mm) _[ Calcutsted (mm) [ MeasCale Bra 12.46 097 Bib 9.74 076 Boa 125 099 B2-b 976 Os B30 13.26 1.00 B3-b 979 O31 Ska 28.71 087 Sib 23.78 ose S2 31.82 098 Sib 25.02 O88 Sa SLU 1.04 Sb 25.58 0.90 Mean 0.90) Coefficient of Variation 99) 6 CONCLUSIONS The in-service behaviour of reinforced concrete flexural members under sustained service loads has been discussed and the main factors affecting the final deflection have been identified. A refined procedure for calculating in-service deflection, both short-term and long-term, has been proposed. The approach effectively and efficiently includes the dominating effects of cracking, tension stiffening, creep and shrinkage and it is ideally suited for design. The method has been illustrated by example and has been shown to be both ‘mathematically tractable and capable of reproducing the observed deformation behaviour of reinforced concrete flexural members. 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The work reported in this paper was supported by the Australian Research Council through @ ARC Discovery Grant (DPO210039) and an Australian Professorial Fellowship awarded to the author. 8 REFERENCES 1. Standards Australia (2001), “Australian Standard for Concrete Structures, AS3600-2001", Sydney, 176 p. 2. Branson, D.E. (1965), “Instantaneous and time-dependent deflections of simple and Continuous reinforced concrete beams”, HPR Report No. 7, Part 1, Alabama Highway Dept. Bureau of Public Roads, Alabama. Gilbert 1912, Gilbert, R.A. (2006), “Reevaluation of deflection prediction for Conerete Beams Reinforced with Steel and Fiber Reinforced Polymer Bars”, Discussion, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 132(8), pp 1328-1330. Sbarounis, J.A. (1984), “Muiti-storey Flat Plate Buildings ~ Measured and Computer One~ year Deflections”, Concrete International, 6(8): pp. 31-35. Jokinen, E.P., and Scanlon, A. (1985), “Field Measured Two-way Slab Deflections", CSCE Annual Conference, Saskatoon, Canada, 16pp. Gilbert, RL. (1999), “The Risk and Responsibility of Structural Engineers — A Case Study of a Structural Failure”, Proceedings of International Congress - Creating with Concrete, Conerete Durability and Repair Technology, Thomas Telford, University of Dundee, Scotland, September, pp 773-783 British Standards (2004), “Eurocode 2: Design of conerete structures Part 1-1: General rules for buildings BS EN 1992-1-1:2004”, English version of European Standard EN 1992-1- 1:2004, European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), Brus: Bischoff, P.H. (2005), “Reevaluation of deflection prediction for concrete beams reinforced with steel and FRP bats”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 131(3), pp 752-767. Standards Australia (2006), “Australian Standard for Concrete Structures, 2006, Pre-Ballot Draft of AS3600, M0603”, Issued April, Sydney (Revision of AS3600-2001) Gilbert, RI. (1999), “Deflection Caleulations for Reinforced Concrete Structures - Why we sometimes get it Wrong”, ACI Structural Journal, 96(6), pp 1027 - 1032. Gilbert R.1. (2003), “Deflection by Simplified Calculation in AS3600-2001 - On the Determination of f2,”, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, Engineers Australia, 5(1), pp. 61-71. Beeby, A.W. and Scott, RH. (2002), “Tension stiffening of zones in reinforced concrete including time-dependent effects of Leeds. nerete ~ Behaviour of tension Draft Report. The University Scott, R-H. and Beeby, A.W. (2005), “Long-term tension stiffening effects in eonerete”, ACI Siruetural Journal, 102(1), pp-31-38. Gilbert, RL. (2004), “Cracking and erack contol in reinforced concrete structures subjected to long-term loads and shrinkage”, 18" Australasian Conf. on the Mechanics of Structures and Materials (ASMSMI8), Univ. of W.A., Pert, Dec., Balkema, the Netherlands: pp. 803-809, Gilbert, RI. (1988), “Time Effects in Concrete Structures”, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 321p. Gilbert, R.. and Mickleborough, N.C. (1997), “Design of Prest ‘Spon, London. 2” Printing, 504p. d Concrete”, E & FN Gilbert, RL. (2001), “Deflection Calculation and Control - Australian Code Amendments and Improvements”, ACI International Special Publication SP 203, Code Provisions for Deflection Control in Concrete Structures, Chapter 4, American Concrete Institute, Editors EG Nawy and A Scanlon, pp 45-78. Gilbert, RA. and Nejadi, S. (2004), “An Experimental Study of Flexural Cracking in Reinforced Concrete Members under Sustained Loads”, UNICIV Report No. R435, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, 59 p. Gilbert 20