You are on page 1of 12

ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL

TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 109-S02

Experimental Study of Dapped-End Beams Subjected to


Inclined Load
by Krystyna Nagrodzka-Godycka and Pawe Piotrkowski
This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation
of the reinforced concrete (RC) dapped-end beams loaded with
inclined forces, compared to identical ones loaded with vertical
forces only. Such a load may occur in, for example, Gerbers joints
or in dapped-end beams supported on corbels, where the vertical
gravitation force is additionally completed with horizontal forces
caused by temperature differences, shrinking, or creeping.
The problem of the state of stresses, cracking, and load capacity
of dapped ends subjected to inclined forces, has not been experimentally sufciently recognized.
In the authors opinion, the results of the presented investigation
establish conclusions that are useful in the theoretical verication
of that type of structure.
Keywords: crack patterns; dapped-end beam; failure mode.

INTRODUCTION
The principal stress trajectories, presented in Fig. 1(a),
show the scale of the stress concentration appearing in the
elastic state in the reentrant corner of a dapped end.
The essential difference between a corbel and a dapped
end is that the diagonal compressive force Cc4 in a corbel
(Fig. 1(b)) nds a stable support in the component force
Cc5 acting in the compressed zone near the edge of the
column. In the case of a dapped-end beam, the vertical
tension force Ts2 is taken over by exible steel bars,
transmitting it into the bottom corner of the beam, where
the state of equilibrium of forces occurs together with
the additional component forces Cc3 and Ts1. The rst
experimental investigations of the dapped-end beams loaded
with vertical forces, and with a combination of vertical and
horizontal forces, were carried out by Mattock and Chan1 and
Mattock and Theryo.2 The results of these investigations
have formed a base to create principles of the design of
dapped-end beamsboth reinforced and prestressed
with a shear span-depth ratio av /dk 1.0. The recent design
recommendations for dapped-end beams in the PCI Design
Handbook,3 applying the shear-friction theory, are based on
Mattock and Chans1 and Mattock and Theryos2 works.
The following experimental investigations, in most cases,
concerned dapped ends subjected to vertical forces.4-7 The
results of these tests are described in detail by Nanni.8
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
Considering the present state of knowledge on dapped-end
beams, the authors decided to carry out experimental
research on these elements from a viewpoint of the inuence
of an additional horizontal force on the morphology of
cracks, the stress state, and on the load-bearing capacity.
The majority of standards recommend the assumption
of the horizontal component as H 0.2FV. ACI 318M-089
(like its earlier version from 2005) does not exclude the
maximum horizontal force H = FV. In the investigation,
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Fig. 1Dapped-end beam supported on corbel: (a) trajectory


of principal stresses in elastic state; and (b) scheme of internal
forces after cracking.
the authors adopted the inclined force resulting from the
relation H/FVu = 0.5, which was similar to Mattock and
Chans1 studies. To compare the specimens loaded with
inclined force, specimens subjected only to the vertical
force FV were also investigated.
BACKGROUND
The majority of European design requirements and standards for reinforced concrete (RC) structures10,11 do not give
the details related to action of inclined forces. In PN-B-

ACI Structural Journal, V. 109, No. 1, January-February 2012.


MS No. S-2008-344.R5 received July 5, 2011, and reviewed under Institute
publication policies. Copyright 2012, American Concrete Institute. All rights
reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the
copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be
published in the November-December 2012 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion
is received by July 1, 2012.

11

Krystyna Nagrodzka-Godycka is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Civil and


Environmental Engineering at the Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, Poland.
Her research interests include shear strength and the strengthening of reinforced
concrete structures.
Pawe Piotrkowski is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Civil and Environmental
Engineering at the Gdansk University of Technology. His research interests include
reinforced concrete structures, especially reinforced concrete dapped-end beams.

Fig. 3Geometry, dimensions, and scheme of investigated


dapped-end beam loads (hk/h = 0.5). (Note: Dimensions in
mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.)

Fig. 4Cracking of dapped-end beam (WB-3-L) loaded with


inclined force (authors research). (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)

As

Fig. 2STM of dapped-end beams according to PN-B03264:200212: (a) suspending vertical reinforcement; and
(b) diagonal reinforcement.
03264:200212 and EC2,11 the problem was considered by
making use of the framework of strut-and-tie models. The
earlier experimental investigations of the authors13 contributed to the recommendations for design of the dapped-end
beams. These recommendations12 were based on two general
truss schemes presented in Fig. 2. In the scheme shown in
Fig. 2(a), vertical stirrups took over the bearing reaction,
whereas in Fig. 2(b), the bent-up bars did so, together with
horizontal reinforcement in both cases.
In addition, the formulas for dimensioning reinforcement
of dapped-ends are given.
The design principles presented in the Polish standard12 apply to dapped end meeting the following conditions: lk hk and 0.3h hk 0.7h, while the width of the nib
and its depth are to satisfy the following conditions
FV,Sd < FV,Rd max = 0.28fcd b dk

12

1
f yd

aV + a
+ 0.5FV ,Sd cot 1 + H Sd
FV ,Sd z

(2b)

where aV is the distance from force axis to the edge of the


undercut (refer to Fig. 2 and 3); zk is the lever arm of internal
forces of the nib, which may be assumed as zk = 0.8dk; and
a is the distance from the vertical undercut edge to the
center of gravity of the suspending reinforcement (refer to
Fig. 2(a) and (b)).
The cross section of the suspending reinforcement in the
form of vertical stirrups should satisfy the following condition

Asw,V

1.3FV ,Sd + 0.3 H Sd

(3)

f ywd

The calculated suspending reinforcement is to be distributed


along the member over a distance not longer than 0.2h,
counting from the undercut edge, where h is the overall
depth of the beam.
While applying the diagonal reinforcement inclined to the
beam axis at the angle , the cross section of bent-up bars
should satisfy the following condition

(1)

The calculated value of concrete cylinder compressive


strength12 fcd, with coefcient cc = 0.85 (fcd 0.85fc), is to
be applied in Eq. (1).
The horizontal dapped-end beam reinforcement should
satisfy the following conditions

As

1
0.5FV , Sd + H Sd
f yd

(2a)

Ast

FV ,Sd
f yd sin

(4)

In the results from the authors investigations, in


dapped-end beams subjected to the inclined forces, very
early cracks occur and their propagation is, to a great
extent, affected by the type of reinforcement. As a result,
a complicated crack pattern occurs, as shown in Fig. 4. An
improper arrangement of the reinforcement causes an earlier
local destruction of concrete and steel yielding as well.
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Table 1Test details


Shear span to effective
depth ratio

Series Beam number Dapped end Type of load


WB-1- L

FV + H

WB-1- P

FV + H

WB-2 - L

FV

1
I
2
WB-2 - P

FV + H

WB-3 - P

FV + H

WB-4 - L

FV

II
4

a, mm (in.)

0.9

60 (2.36)

AsH, mm2
(in.2)

212mm
226 (0.34)
0.9

fy, MPa
(ksi)

387.3
(56.16)

Vertical suspending
stirrups

AsV, mm2 (in.2)

410mm
314 (0.48)

0.8

402.7
(58.39)

100 (3.94)
383.8
(56.65)

810mm
628 (0.95)

381.7
(55.35)

100 (3.94)

WB-4 - P

FV

WB-5 - L

FV + H

116mm
201 (0.305)

WB-5 - P

FV + H

0.8

60 (2.36)
28mm
101 (0.15)

III
WB-6 - L

FV

WB-6 - P

FV

0.9

fy, st, MPa


(ksi)

60 (2.36)

412mm
452 (0.69)
0.9

Main inclined reinforcement

fy, sV, MPa


(ksi)
Ast, mm2 (in.2)

FV

WB-3 - L
3

aV/dk

Main horizontal
reinforcement

60 (2.36)

577.1
(83.68)

48mm
201 (0.31)

577.1
(83.68)

2 16mm
402 (0.61)
1 16mm
201 (0.305)

418
(60.61)

2 16mm
402 (0.61)

Notes: Denotation of reinforcement of Fig. 5; denotation FV + H indicates a nib loaded with inclined force; is bar diameter; 1 mm = 2.54 in.; 1 mm2 = 0.00152 in.2; 1 MPa = 0.145 ksi.

This situation makes the application of the schemes


strut-and-tie model (STM); the stresses in the compressed
concrete diagonal strut crossed by the cracks are adopted,
considering that the concrete efciency factor is
signicantly lower than unity.14-18 Various sources give
differing values of the efciency factor of the concrete
strut.19 As the research20 indicates, the lower-limit value
of , determining the effective compressive strength of
concrete strut, may attain the minimal value = 0.3.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Details of specimens
The experimental program included 12 dapped ends as
both ends of six beams. The geometries of all the beams
denoted with WB-1 and WB-2, WB-3 and WB-4, and
WB-5 and WB-6were identical (Fig. 3). The dapped-end
beams WB-1, WB-3, and WB-5 were loaded with inclined
reaction, whereas the dapped ends WB-2, WB-4, and WB-6
(as references), were loaded with vertical forces. It was
assumed the constant relation H/FV = 0.5 was one-half the
maximal value (H/FV,max = 1.0), according to the provisions
in Section 11.8 of ACI 318M-08.9
On the bottom of the nibs, a 20 mm (0.79 in.) thick steel
bearing plate was strongly fastened by steel rods in concrete
through which vertical and horizontal loads were transferred
to the dapped end.
To resolve the behavior, dapped-end beams with uniform
geometries and with high and low amounts of reinforcement
in the a priori research assumed the ratio of bending
reinforcement SH1 = 0.76% and SH2 = 1.52%. When
specied in this way, the horizontal force As fyd using STMs
(Fig. 2) then calculated the adequate vertical force FV,Sd,
which in turn has been dimensioned web reinforcement
(vertical stirrups and bent-up bars).
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Fig. 5Types of reinforcement for dapped ends: (a) with


vertical suspending reinforcement; and (b) with bent-up bars.

The data concerning the description and denotations of


reinforcement of the tested dapped ends are presented in
Fig. 5, and the detailed data are given in Table 1.
Reinforcement of Beams WB-1 to WB-4 with suspending
vertical reinforcementThe main horizontal reinforcement
13

Fig. 6Reinforcement of tested beams: (a) WB-1 and WB-2


(sH = 0.76%); (b) WB-3 and WB-4 (sH = 1.52%). Dashed
lines denote potential inclined cracks. (Note: Dimensions in
mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.).

Fig. 7Dapped-end beams WB-5-P and WB-6-P reinforced


with bent-up bars: Ast = 16 mm (5/8 in.) for left side and
216 mm (5/8 in.) for right side of beam. (Note: Dimensions
in mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.).
AsH of the dapped ends of Beams WB-1 and WB-2 consisted
of one loop (212) having a diameter = 12 mm (1/2 in.),
whereas the suspending vertical reinforcement AsV of two
stirrups (2 210) had a diameter = 10 mm (3/8 in.)
(Fig. 6(a)). The dapped-end reinforcement AsH of the next
pair of beams, WB-3 and WB-4 (Fig. 6(b)), were twice as
much as the companion pair, and were composed of two
loops (2 212) having a 12 mm (1/2 in.) diameter, whereas
the suspending vertical reinforcement AsV consisted of four
stirrups 4 210 ( = 10 mm [3/8 in.]) (refer to Fig. 6(b)). The
remaining reinforcement in both pairs of beams was identical.
The bars of the exural longitudinal reinforcement of
the beam (220 + 216, where = 20 mm [3/4 in.] and
= 16 mm [5/8 in.]) were anchored by means of steel
plates 20 x 85 x 170 mm (0.79 x 3.35 x 6.7 in.).
The shorter length of the anchorage of the nib exural
reinforcement AsH of Beams WB-1, -2, -3, and -4 on the
left side of the beam (L) assumed the possibility of a crack
running from the reentrant corner of the dapped beam.
Longer reinforcement in the right side of the beam assumed
the possibility of an inclined crack running from the bottom
corner of the beam (diagonal 45-degree dashed line on the
right side of the beam [Fig. 6]).
Reinforcement of Beams WB-5 and WB-6 with bent-up
barsIn Beams WB-5 and WB-6, the suspending diagonal
reinforcement of the dapped ends was a variable parameter.
On the left side of the beams (dapped ends WB-5-L and
WB-6-L), the reinforcement consists of a single bent-up bar
16 mm in diameter (5/8 in.). On the right side (Beams WB5-P and WB-6-P), there were two bars 16 mm (5/8 in.) in
diameter (refer to Fig. 7). The structural reinforcement in
14

Fig. 8Dapped-end beam reinforcement: (a) with vertical


stirrups, WB-3-L; and (b) with bent-up bars, WB-6-L.
bent-up bars consisted of two double-leg stirrups 8 mm
(5/16 in.).
Figure 8 shows examples of two modes of the dapped-end
beam reinforcement.
Test setup
Dapped ends loaded with inclined forceTo cause an
additional horizontal tension, acting simultaneously with
the vertical component, a test stand presented in Fig. 9 was
designed and executed. The load of the beam was transmitted
from two hydraulic jacks by means of a traverse causing the
compressive inclined forces in two bent-up members in a
shape of the letter A. These members passed on inclined
forces F/sin on the bottom steel plates of the nibs. Two
single diagonal telescopic pipes during the test played only
the role of the zero-force stabilizers. In the entire investigation
program, the relation of the horizontal forces to the vertical
ones was adopted as ~0.5, corresponding to = 63 degrees.
Materials
The concrete compressive strength determined from cylinders 150/300 mm (6/15 in.) for Beams 1 to 6 varied between
35.7 to 38.8 MPa (5.18 to 5.63 ksi); hence, the mean value
was fcm = 36.4 MPa (5.28 ksi). The experimentally determined yield strength of reinforcement was approximately
400 and 577 MPa (58.39 and 83.66 ksi), respectively.
Testing procedure
The tested beams were loaded with two concentrated
forces (Fig. 9), whose value was monotonically increased
from F = 0 until failure, with steps of every 5 kN (1.124 kips).
For each load increment to failure, the reinforcement strains
and concrete strains were measured in each dapped-end
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Table 2Experimental and calculated data of failure forces


Experimental vertical and
horizontal failure force

12

FVu, cal,
(Eq. (1)
governs),
kN (kips)

FVu, cal12
FVu, cal12
FVu, cal3 = Vn
*
(Eq. (1a) with
(Eq. (2a), (2b)
PCI
=
govern)
(Eq. (4.6.3.1)
0.6(1 fc/250)), (Eq. (2) + Eq. (4)
governs),
kN (kips)
governs), kN (kips)
kN (kips)

FVu, cal
(Eq. (5)
governs),
kN (kips)

=
FVu,exp/
FVu,calc

Dapped-end
symbol

Fvu,exp,
kN (kips)

Hexp,
kN (kips)

Cracking
force Fv,crack,
kN (kips)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

WB-1- L

65 (14.61)

32.5 (7.31)

10 (2.25)

253.2 (56.9)

130.2 (29.3)

22.66 (5.1)

44.5 (10.0)

58.6 (14.3)

1.11

WB-1- P

70 (15.74)

35 (7.87)

10 (2.25)

253.2 (56.9)

130.2 (29.3)

21.63 (4.9)

44.5 (10.0)

58.6 (14.3)

1.19

WB-2 - L

90 (20.23)

15 (3.37)

255.3 (57.4)

131.1 (29.5)

34.78 (7.8)

65.2 (14.7)

76.8 (18.8)

1.17

WB-2 - P

90 (20.23)

20 (4.5)

255.3 (57.4)

131.1 (29.5)

34.78 (7.8)

65.2 (14.7)

76.8 (18.8)

1.17

WB-3 - L

103 (23.15)

50.2 (11.28)

10 (2.25)

258.2 (58)

132.3 (29.8)

45.56 (10.2)

82.1 (18.4)

93.2 (22.8)

1.11

WB-3 - P

103 (23.15)

50.2 (11.28)

15 (3.37)

258.2 (58)

132.3 (29.8)

45.56 (10.2)

82.1 (18.4)

93.2 (22.8)

1.11

WB-4 - L

135 (30.35)

15 (3.37)

243.3 (54.7)

125.9 (28.3)

57.44 (12.9)

107.7 (24.2)

115.8 (28.3)

1.17

WB-4 - P

140 (31.47)

15 (3.37)

243.3 (54.7)

125.9 (28.3)

57.44 (12.9)

107.7 (24.2)

115.8 (28.3)

1.21

WB-5 - L

86 (19.33)

42 (9.44)

7 (1.57)

275.2 (61.9)

139.5 (31.4)

66.78 (15.0)

63.8 (14.3)

93.3 (22.8)

0.92

WB-5 - P

100 (22.48)

46.2 (10.39)

15 (3.37)

275.2 (61.9)

139.5 (31.4)

124.26 (27.9)

96.0 (21.6)

137.5 (33.7)

0.73

WB-6 - L

119 (26.75)

15 (3.37)

249.7 (56.1)

128.7 (28.9)

82.55 (18.6)

87.7 (19.7)

116.0 (28.4)

1.03

128.7 (28.9)

131.9 (29.6)

171.0 (41.9)

0.94

WB-6 - P

160 (35.97)

15 (3.37)

249.7 (56.1)

141.93 (31.9)

Eq. (1a) FV,Sd < Fv,Rd max = 0.28fcd b dk.

As = Ash + cosAst.

Failure force calculated from Eq. (5) and Fig. 23.

Anchorage failure.
*

beam. Measurements of the width of cracks, together


with recording the crack propagation, were also made.
Crack widths were measured using the microscope with a
magnication of 40.
RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS
Crack pattern
The rst crack in both dapped ends WB-1-P and WB-2-P
occurred in the reentrant corner. On the right side of the
beam (WB-1-P) loaded with inclined force (Fig. 10(a)), the
rst crack was caused by a force of 10 kN (2.22 kips)that
is, 14% of the failure force. In WB-2-P (Fig. 10(b)) under
vertical load, that crack force was doubled and reached
0.22FVu. The crack pattern caused by inclined force was
denitely different from the pattern caused by vertical
force. The inclined force brought about more vertical
cracks concentrated in the reentrant corner zone, whereas
from the vertical force, inclined cracks covered nearly
entire area of the nib and their inclination was smaller
(approximately 30 degrees), only the early cracks occurring
in the reentrant corner had the inclination angle from the
beam axis of approximately 50 degrees.
In the case of dapped ends with high amounts of
reinforcement (Beams WB-3 and WB-4, sH =1.52%),
differences in cracks under inclined and vertical forces
were similar to those with a low amount of reinforcement
of dapped-end beams WB-1 and WB-2 with sH = 0.76%.
The crack pattern of Beam WB-3-L, loaded with inclined
force, is presented in Fig. 4, whereas that of its reference,
Beam WB-4-L, was loaded with vertical force (refer to
Fig. 11). The dapped-end beam, WB-3-L, with an inclined
loaded, cracked under 10 kN (2.25 kips). The dapped ends
of Beam WB-4, identically reinforced and loaded with
vertical force, cracked under 15 kN (3.37 kips) on both
sides. The load-bearing capacity of dapped-end beam WB-4,
loaded with vertical force only, exceeded the capacity of
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Fig. 9Testing stand for dapped-end beam subjected to


inclined force. (Note: Dimensions in mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.)
dapped-end beam WB-3, which was inclined-loaded by
more than 30%.
The recorded force at the appearance of the rst crack and
the load capacity of dapped ends are given in Table 2.
The dapped ends of Beam WB-5, reinforced with bent-up
bars having a 16 mm (5/8 in.) diameter, (WB-5-L: 116, and
WB-5-P: 216), loaded with inclined force, demonstrated
cracking load FV,cr = 7 and 15 kN (1.57 and 3.37 kips),
respectively, and failure load FVu,exp, for WB-5-L (116)
= 86 kN (19.33 kips), and with inclined 216 = 119.0 kN
(22.48 kips) (Fig. 12). In the dapped ends of Beams WB-5-L
and WB-6-L, the bent-up bars did not have the signicant
inuence on the pattern of cracks. The clear difference
occurred mainly in the upper corner where, in the case of
the nib WB-5-L, inclined force resulted in a lack of cracks
in that region. Next, the activity of a major vertical force
FV, without participation of horizontal force H, resulted in a
15

Fig. 10Dapped ends with suspending vertical stirrups and extended length of horizontal
reinforcement anchorage (sH = 0.76%): (a) Beam WB-1-P, loaded with inclined force; and
(b) Beam WB-2-P, loaded with vertical force. (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)

Fig. 11Dapped-end Beam WB-4-L with suspending vertical (sH = 1.52% and ratio aV/dk
= 0.9): (a) crack pattern; and (b) photo after failure. (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)

Fig. 12Dapped-end beams with bent-up bars after failure: (a) WB-5-L loaded with inclined
force (116); and (b) WB-6-L loaded with vertical force (116). (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips).
more intensive cracking of the upper corner, where inclined
cracks of a smaller inclination to the axis of the member
occurred. That crack pattern corresponded very closely
to the trajectory of the principal compressive stress of the
elastic state.
In Fig. 13, the crack width development in the reentrant
corner versus the FV/FVu ratio is shown. In all tested
dapped-ends, cracks with the small width in the reentrant
corner appeared very early, which was expected due to the
maximum concentration of the tension stresses in that region.
The rst cracks appeared in the concrete layer covering the
reinforcement. The width of cracks in the concrete above the
reinforcement was considerably smaller.
Under the service load, which was assumed as 55% of
the design load, the crack width in the reentrant corner was
1.1 mm (0.043 in.) for orthogonal reinforcement, whereas
16

at the bent-up reinforcing bars, it was 0.9 mm (0.035 in.).


It was also noted that the amount of reinforcement did not
signicantly inuence the development of crack width in the
reentrant corner (Fig. 13).
Strains of reinforcing bars
The strains of reinforcing bars were measured on every
loading stage using electric resistance strain gauges with
bases 10 mm (0.4 in.) in length. The readings were recorded
on every loading stage. The location of the measuring
gauges on the steel reinforcement are presented in Fig. 14 to
16. On stirrups and reinforcement loops, a gauge was placed
on each bar in the same cross section (they were denoted
with two numbers).
The main horizontal reinforcement situated closest to the
tensioned edge of nibs WB-1 and WB-2 were yielding at the
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Fig. 13Width of crack development in reentrant corner of


WB beams versus load ratio FV/FVu.

Fig. 14Location of strain gauges on reinforcement of


dapped ends of Beams WB-1 and WB-2. (Note: Dimensions
in mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.)
half of the bearing load capacity (Gauges 1 and 2, Fig. 17). In
turn, the increase of stress of vertical stirrups 4 210 mm
(10 mm = 3/8 in.), was not so signicant (Fig. 18).
The failure in Beam WB-3, at the signicantly higher
failure force, was proceeded by yielding of horizontal
reinforcement and the stirrups (Fig. 19 and 20).
In Fig. 16, the location of measuring bases of the left
dapped ends of Beams WB-5 and WB-6 was presented. The
main suspending reinforcement was, in this case, made of
bent-up bars.
Contrary to the bent-up bars and horizontal reinforcement,
the stresses in stirrups, even at failure (FV/FVu = 1.0), did not
reach yielding (Fig. 21).
Load-bearing capacity
The failure forces for the dapped-end beams are presented
in Table 2.
In Fig. 22, the values of failure forces are given in six
pairs of beams from WB-1 to WB-6, which vary according
to the load acting on dapped ends. For the dapped ends of
Beams WB-1, WB-3, and WB-5, loaded with inclined force,
the relative percentage of the load capacity in reference to
the dapped ends in Beams WB-2, WB-4, and WB-6, loaded
with vertical force only, is given. Symbols on the horizontal
axis indicate two dapped-ends of beam in a given pair,
and the side P refers to the right and L to the left. For
example, symbol WB-3/4-P indicates a pair of right-side
dapped ends of Beam WB-3 loaded with inclined force, and
WB-4 loaded with vertical force. The rst (light) columns
indicate odd-number beams (1, 3, and 5) loaded with
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

Fig. 15Location of strain gauges on reinforcement of


dapped ends of Beams WB-3 and WB-4. (Note: Dimensions
in mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.)

Fig. 16Location of strain gauges on reinforcement of


dapped ends of Beams WB-5 and WB-6. (Note: Dimensions
in mm; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.)

Fig. 17Strains of horizontal reinforcement versus FV/FVu


ratio for right dapped end of Beam WB-1. (Note: 1 kN =
0.2248 kips.)
inclined force. The second (dark) column of each group of
results shows failure forces of the dapped ends loaded with
vertical force only.
In the rst pair of beams, the WB-1 and WB-2 dapped ends
were weakly reinforced with vertical stirrups and horizontal
loops (sH = 0.76%). The failure forces for both dapped ends
WB-2-L and WB-2-P loaded with vertical reaction only were
equal to 90 kN (20.23 kips). The imposition of an additional
17

Fig. 18Strains of stirrups versus FV/FVu ratio for right


dapped end of Beam WB-1. (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)

Fig. 19Horizontal reinforcement strains versus FV/FVu ratio


for left dapped end of Beam WB-3. (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)

Fig. 20Strains of stirrups versus FV/FVu ratio for left


dapped end of Beam WB-3. (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)
horizontal force H 0.5FV, which took place in Beam WB-1,
caused the load capacity decrease in the left-side dapped end
WB-1-L to FVu = 65 kN (14.61 kips). On the right side of
the beam (dapped end WB-1-P), at the horizontal force Hu
18

Fig. 21Strains of reinforcement versus FV/FVu ratio for


dapped-end Beams WB-6-L: (a) horizontal and inclined
(Gauge 4 defected); and (b) vertical stirrups. (Note: 1 kN =
0.2248 kips.)

Fig. 22Failure forces of dapped ends in separate pairs of


beams. (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)
= 35 kN (7.87 kips), the vertical component FVu decreased
to 70 kN (15.74 kips). That meant the load capacity caused
by horizontal load decreased by an average of 25%.
In the following pair of beams (WB-3 and WB-4), with
double the reinforcement ratio (sH = 1.52%), vertical
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012


Fig. 23Internal forces system. (Note: Dimensions in mm;
1 mm = 0.0394 in.)

failure forces for dapped ends increased, respectively, up
to 135 kN (30.35 kips) for WB-4-L and 140 kN (31.47 kips)
for WB-4-P. It was an increase by 50 to 55% in relation to
the dapped ends with the reinforcement ratio sH = 0.76%.
In turn, the load capacity for dapped ends with the
reinforcement ratio sH = 1.52% (Beam WB-3) due to
inclined force decreased by approximately 25%.
In the case of beams reinforced with bent-up bars
(Beams WB-5 and WB-6), the failure forces for dapped ends
with a low amount of reinforcement 116 mm (5/6 in.) for
Beams WB-5-L and WB-6-L were the following: for dapped
ends subjected to the vertical force only, FVu = 119 kN
(26.75 kips), for dapped ends subjected to inclined force,
FVu = 86 kN (19.33 kips). Thus, for weaker reinforcement,
the action of an additional horizontal force caused the load
capacity to decrease by 28%. A double increase of the
bent-up bars 216 mm (5/6 in.) for Beams WB-5-P and
WB-6-P caused the load-bearing capacity for the inclined
load to increase by 16%, whereas for vertical load, the
increase reached 35%.
The design procedure, according to the Polish standard
given in the paper (Eq. (1) through (4)), makes it possible to
separately dimension the different kinds of reinforcement.
In reality, all kinds of reinforcement transfer the load
simultaneously. The bearing load calculated from those
formulas gives the results much lower than the values
obtained from the experimental study. In the authors
opinion, the scheme based on the cracks morphology to
calculate the load-bearing capacity could be used (Fig. 23).
It provides an equation to calculate the load capacity

FVu,cal =

Tij zij
ij

ev +

H
e
FV h

(5)

The experimental and predicted results of the failure load


according to the Polish standard,12 PCI provisions,3 and
Eq. (5) are given in Table 2.
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

CONCLUSIONS
In the dapped-end beam loaded with inclined force, the
crack patterns were different from those observed in
dapped ends loaded with vertical forces;
The cracks width wcr > 0.3 mm (0.012 in.) have
appeared in dapped-end beams under the service load;
Imposing an additional horizontal force equal to
one-half of the component vertical force caused a 25%
decrease of the load capacity;
Doubling the horizontal reinforcement, as well as
suspending vertical stirrups, regardless of the type
of load, increased the load capacity only by approximately 50%;
Experimentally, in the case of main reinforcement
in the form of bent-up bars, an increase of number of
bent-up bars from one 16 mm (5/8 in.) in diameter to
two 16 mm (5/8 in.) increased the load capacity only
by approximately 16% under inclined force, and by
approximately 35% under vertical force;
The failure of dapped ends with high amounts of
reinforcement (sH = 1.52%) most often occurred after
the yielding of both the horizontal reinforcement and
vertical stirrups;
In the case of low amounts of reinforcement (sH =
0.76%), the situation is different. The suspending
reinforcement (bent-up bar and vertical stirrups) did not
reach yielding; and
In the authors opinion, the bearing load capacity FVu,cal
can be calculated using the internal forces system
determined on the basis of the crack morphology.
REFERENCES

1. Mattock, A. H., and Chan, T. C., Design and Behavior of Dapped End
Beams, PCI Journal, V. 24, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1979, pp. 28-45.
2. Mattock, A. H., and Theryo, T. S., Strength of Precast Prestressed
Concrete Members with Dapped Ends, PCI Journal, V. 31, No. 5, Sept.Oct. 1986, pp. 58-75.
3. PCI Design Handbook, Precast and Prestressed Concrete, sixth
edition, Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL, 2004.
4. Hamoudi, A. A.; Phang, M. K. S.; and Bierweiler, R. A., Diagonal
Shear in Prestressed Concrete Dapped-Beams, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings
V. 72, No. 7, July 1975, pp. 347-350.
5. Steinle, A., Zum Tragverhalten ausgeklinkter Trgerenden, Vortrge
Betontag, Deutscher Beton-Verein E.V., 1975, pp. 364-377. (in German)
6. Mader, D. J., Detailing Dapped Ends of Pretensioned Concrete
Beams, MS thesis, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, May 1990,
100 pp.
7. Lu, W.-Y.; Lin, I.-J.; Hwang, S.-J.; and Lin, Y.-H., Shear Strength
of High-Strength Concrete Dapped-End Beams, Journal of the Chinese
Institute of Engineers, V. 26, No. 5, 2003, pp. 671-680.
8. Nanni, A., and Huang, P. C., Validation of an Alternative Reinforcing
Detail for the Dapped Ends of Prestressed Double Tees, PCI Journal,
V. 47, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 2002, pp. 38-49.
9. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318M-08) and Commentary, American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, 2008, 473 pp.
10. DIN 1045-1, Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und Spannbeton
Teil 1: Bemessung und Konstruktion, Deutsches Institut fr Normung, July
2001, 147 pp. (in German)
11. EN 1992-1-1, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete StructuresPart 1:
General Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, Dec. 2004, 225 pp.
12. PN-B-03264, Design of Concrete Structures, PKN, Polish
Committee for Standardization, Warsaw, Poland, 2002, 142 pp. (in Polish)
13. Nagrodzka-Godycka, K., Reinforced Concrete Corbels and
Dapped-End BeamsExperimental Research, Theory and Design, Monograph No. 21, Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdanskiej, Gdansk, Poland,
2001, 263 pp. (in Polish)
14. Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P., The Modied CompressionField Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear,
ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 83, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1986, pp. 219-231.

19

15. Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P., Compression Response of Cracked


Reinforced Concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 119,
No. 12, Dec. 1993, pp. 3590-3610.
16. Cook, W. D., and Mitchell, D., Studies of Disturbed Regions near
Discontinuities in Reinforced Concrete Members, ACI Structural Journal,
V. 85, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1988, pp. 206-216.
17. Foster, S. J., and Gilbert, R. I., The Design of Nonexural Members
with Normal and High-Strength Concretes, ACI Structural Journal, V. 93,
No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1996, pp. 3-10.

20

18. Park, J., and Kuchma, D., Strut-and-Tie Model for Strength Prediction of Deep Beams, ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 6, Nov.-Dec.
2007, pp. 657-666.
19. Schlaich, J., and Schfer, K., Design and Detailing of Structural
Concrete Using Strut-and-Tie Models, The Structural Engineer, V. 69,
No. 6, Mar. 1991, 13 pp.
20. Matamoros, A. B., and Wang, K. H., Design of Simply Supported
Deep Beams Using Strut and Tie Models, ACI Structural Journal, V. 100,
No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2003, pp. 704-712.

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2012

DISCUSSION
Disc. 109-S02/From the January-February 2012 ACI Structural Journal, p. 11

Experimental Study of Dapped-End Beams Subjected to Inclined Load. Paper by Krystyna Nagrodzka-Godycka
and Pawe Piotrkowski
Discussion by Andor Windisch
ACI member, PhD, Karlsfeld, Germany

The authors should be complimented for their interesting


and promising paper.
The description given in the introduction, which reflects
the current conception of the way dapped ends supported on
a corbel work, needs some corrections:
The stress trajectories shown in Fig. 1(a) reveal that
the bottom corner of the beam is quite stressless. The
vertical reinforcing bars carrying tensile force Ts2 do not
transmit any relevant tension there; thus, the inclined
compression force Cc3 does not exist at all. The main
longitudinal reinforcement of the beam (Ts1) could be
bent up. Moreover, Ts1 Ts2; hence, Cc3 might not be
inclined under 45 degrees, even if it did exist. (The identical failure forces of dapped ends L versus P related to
Beams WB-1 to WB4 and the relevant crack patterns
shown in the paper prove this statement.)
If the column is deep enough to anchor the reinforcing
bars resisting Ts4, then no deviation occurs and, hence,
the existence of Cc7 is questionable as well.
The compression force Cc6 does not exist either. Which
forces equilibrate Cc6 at its other end?
At the end of the background section, the authors refer
to the confusion regarding the concrete efficiency factor
n, which reveals the shortages of the strut-and-tie model
(STM). As long as the support plate is well-dimensioned,
the strength of the compression strut will never govern the
failure of any dapped end.
When comparing the failure loads of the dapped ends with
and without horizontal load, it should be considered that the
horizontal force diminishes the horizontal reinforcement,
which equilibrates the bending moment caused by the vertical
load. Therefore, the references to the decreasing capacities
found at the inclined-loaded dapped ends are irrelevant.
The crack widths measured under the assumed serviceload level were quite high. Where were these crack widths
measured? It should be noted that the first layer of the main
reinforcement was placed quite high over the steel plates.
Comparing the crack patterns with the locations of the strain
gauges on the reinforcing bars, the discusser can conclude that
most of the measured strains shown in Fig. 17 through 21 are
not relevant. Only the strains measured with those gauges in
or near the cracks can display the real participation of the
reinforcing bars. Therefore, all conclusions concerning the
stresses in the stirrups should be revised.
The authors are correct that the crack pattern depends on
the loading pattern. Their opinion that the bearing load
capacity can be calculated using the internal forces system
determined on the basis of the crack morphology is correct.
Nevertheless, the form of the free bodythat is, the angle
1, as shown in Fig. 23also depends on the loading
ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2012

pattern, as proven previously by the discusser.21 The authors


are encouraged to continue their promising research.
REFERENCES
21. Windisch, A., Das Modell der charakteristischen Bruchquerschnitte
ein Beitrag zur Bemessung der Sonderbereiche von Stahlbetontragwerken
(The Model of Characteristic Fracture Cross-SectionsA Contribution to
the Design of the D-Regions of Reinforced Concrete Structures), Betonund Stahlbetonbau, V. 83, No. 9 and 10, Sept. and Oct. 1988, pp. 251-255
and 271-274. (in German)

AUTHORS CLOSURE
The authors would like to thank the discusser for his interest
in the paper and provide clarifications to the comments and
questions raised.
Figure 1(a) shows the stress trajectories in the elastic state.
In Fig. 1(b), the authors introduced the internal forces
scheme after cracking of the dapped end reinforced with
vertical suspended stirrups working together with the
main horizontal longitudinal reinforcement. The bottom
corner of the beam is stressless only in the elastic
state on the assumption that its body is isotropic. The
tension force Ts2 (in suspending vertical stirrups) and
the compression force Cc3 exist in this dapped end. The
Cc3 inclination obviously does not have to be equal to 45
degrees. The authors test measurements of the strains
and crack patterns confirm this. This type of scheme
(Fig. 1(b)) was also used in German works.22,23
According to Schlaich,23 the force Ts2 can increase considerably (even to 1.5Fv) in the case of action of a vertical force
with participation of the horizontal force H.
The authors agree with the discussers statement that
diagonal compression force Cc3 and tensile force Ts2 do
not exist if the main longitudinal reinforcement Ts1 is bent
up.22 Bent-up reinforcement controls the width of the
inclined cracks more effectively.
The compression force Cc7 appears in the case of a
one-sided corbel. Additionally, it is caused by the load
of the column. The crack patterns of corbels tested by
Niedenhoff25 confirmed this kind of scheme. This is also
assumed by Schlaich.23
Compression forces Cc5 and Cc6 in the bottom compression node of the corbel are components of the inclined
force Cc4 existing in the compression strut of the
corbel.11,24
Support plate dimensions are one of a few reasons causing
concrete compression failure in the support zone and
concrete strut.
The width of the main cracks was measured by visual
observations of the concrete surface using a microscope
with a magnification of 40. In this study of dapped-end
beams with a low reinforcement ratio, the effective depth dk
901

is assumed constant. The wide cracks in the cover are attributed to its large thickness.
The major strain gauges were located near the cracks;
some of the gauges were in the cracks showing maximum
strains or strains close to maximum.
The authors agree with the discussers opinion that the
inclination of the angle a1 between the diagonal compressive strut and the flexural reinforcement of the beam longitudinal axis also depends on the pattern of the load.

902

REFERENCES
22. Bachmann, H.; Steinle, A.; and Hahn, V., Bauen mit Betonfertigteilen
im Hochbau, Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, Germany, 2010. (in German)
23. Schlaich, J., Zum einheitlichen Bemessen von Sthalbetontragwerken,
Beton- und Sthalbetonbau, No. 4, 1984, pp. 89-96. (in German)
24. Structural Concrete: Textbook on Behaviour, Design and Performance,
Fdration Internationale du Bton (fib), V. 3, 1999, 338 pp.
25. Niedenhoff, H., Untersuchungen ber das Tragverhalten von
Konsolen und kurzen Kragarmen, dissertation, the Universitt Karlsruhe
(TH), Karlsruhe, Germany, 1961.

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2012