21 views

Uploaded by Lê Ngọc-Hà

design shear load

- Composite Plastic Moment Capacity for Positive Bending
- Steel BeamCal - Pointed Load + Beam's Weight
- Bending Moment
- Analysis & Design of Composite & Metallic Flight Vehicle Structures - Abbott - 2017 - Second Edition
- Tutorial
- MAE 3323 Mechanical Design I Syllabus
- Design of Trash Rack
- b. BEAM Gaya Internal, Dia
- Report Static Khawa
- Finite Element Analysis of Deep Beam
- RCC Tbeam
- Torsion
- CARGAS CONCENTRADAS EM LAJES.pdf
- Gate Structures
- Projek Solid Mechanics 1
- SOM
- soal mkm.pdf
- 2199 Advanced Mechanics of Solids [Design for Manufacturing]
- erbau2016
- 62215_toc

You are on page 1of 57

7.1 Introduction

The aim of chapter 4 was to show how to calculate the main reinforcement of a beam

subjected to bending moments and axial forces which give rise to distributions of

normal stresses in cross-sections. The main principle was that steel reinforcement is

provided in those areas where the concrete cracks due to large tensile stresses.

Figure 7.1-1 shows a beam in a four point bending disposition. The central part of the

beam is loaded in pure bending; the longitudinal reinforcement is calculated as indicated

in chapter 4. The two parts of the beam between the concentrated forces and the

supports are subjected to a more complex loading because of the combination of the

bending moment and the shear force. Yet, in the early days of reinforced concrete,

people tried out the behaviour of beams with only longitudinal reinforcement and

observed for increasing loads the appearance of inclined cracks in the zones with shear

loads. Without special reinforcement to bridge the inclined cracks, it is even observed

that failure of the beam is determined by shear: one crack is prolonged suddenly up to

the upper side of the beam which causes the total collapse of the structural element (as

shown in figure 7.1-2). This type of failure happens in a sudden (brittle) way and has

thus absolutely to be avoided. The logical solution is to provide inclined reinforcement,

perpendicular to the cracks (figure 7.1-3), but a valuable alternative is to use vertical

links (or stirrups) which bridge the crack at a certain angle.

Figure 7.1-1

Four point bending test, applied on a beam with only longitudinal reinforcement

7-1

Figure 7.1-2

Typical failure mode for a beam with only longitudinal reinforcement: a shear crack

leads to total collapse in a sudden way

Figure 7.1-3

Two possible solutions to bridge shear cracks; (a) inclined shear reinforcement:

longitudinal bars (main reinforcement on the bottom side) may be bent up to the upper

side of the beam instead of being simply curtailed; (b) vertical shear reinforcement:

links or stirrups

7.2.1 Introduction

Providing shear reinforcement leads to a substantial cost; it is thus useful to analyse the

conditions which may allow omitting this type of reinforcement. This paragraph focuses

on the determination of the shear resistance of members without shear reinforcement.

7.2.2 A starting point: overview of results from theory of elasticity for beams with

continuous, homogeneous, isotropic and elastic materials

The following paragraph presents an overview of main notions and formulas concerning

shear forces and shear stresses in a beam loaded in bending, taken from theory of

elasticity and strength of materials courses. The formulas are valid for homogeneous,

isotropic, continuous and elastic materials. The setting is defined in figure 7.2.2-1.

7-2

Figure 7.2.2-1

Principle figure for the elaboration of the formulas for shear stresses in beams loaded in

bending

longitudinal shear force

rotation equilibrium in a cross-section leads to (figure 7.2.2-2):

Figure 7.2.2-2

Rotation equilibrium in a cross-section of a beam loaded in bending

(7.2.2-1)

the formula of JOURAWSKI for the shear stress in a certain point (or on a certain

level) of the cross-section:

7-3

(7.2.2-2)

with

the y-component of the shear stress on an elementary surface perpendicular to

the x-axis;

V the shear load in the cross-section;

b the width of the cross-section at the level where the shear stress is

determined;

the moment of inertia of the full cross-section with respect to the z-axis (axis

passing through the centre of gravity G);

the static moment of the part of the cross-section situated above the level

where the stress is determined, with respect to the z-axis.

situation, and assuming continuous, homogeneous, isotropic and elastic material, one

obtains the set of trajectories of the principal stresses. The orientation and magnitude of

the stresses are determined in each point with a theory of elasticity approach; MOHRs

circle can be used for graphical representation. Figure 7.2.2-4 presents in a schematic

way the reasoning that permits to determine the principal orientations, the principal

elementary areas and principal stresses in a point A on the NA (x = 0; xy max) and in

point B in the cross-section. It is observed in point A that the principal tensile stress has

the same magnitude as the shear stress and is oriented with an angle of 45 with respect

to the axis of the beam. In punt B, the principal elementary area with the largest

principal tensile stress is much more horizontally oriented. These results help to

understand the crack pattern due to shear load in a beam in reinforced concrete with

only main reinforcement and in which, from a macroscopic point of view, the concrete

may be considered as a homogeneous material: see figure 7.2.2-5.

Figure 7.2.2-3

Principal stress trajectories in uncracked situation (continuous, homogeneous, isotropic

and elastic material)

7-4

Figure 7.2.2-4

Application of MOHRs circle for the identification of the principle tensile stress at the

NA (axis of the beam); deduction of the crack pattern influenced by the presence of

shear

7-5

Figure 7.2.2-5

Figure (a) presents the trajectories of the principle compression stresses in an uncracked

beam; figure (b) presents the experimentally observed crack pattern obtained by a four

points bending test on a beam in reinforced concrete without shear reinforcement

(WIGHT, 2009)

reinforcement)

The appearance of cracks has an important influence on the further distribution of

internal forces. As cracks develop in the lower part of the beam, the NA is shifted

upwards which leads to the vertical elongation of the cracks; these cracks only deviate

towards the 45 orientation on the level of the new NA. This explains why the crack

pattern shown in figure 7.2.3-1 is characterized by much more vertical cracks than the

45 disposition in uncracked material. When load intensity increases, cracking

continues until one crack becomes instable: that means that the crack develops in a

brittle way over the whole depth of the beam. Internal equilibrium is not possible any

more and failure is reached.

Figure 7.2.3-1

7-6

Crack development with increasing load, in a beam in reinforced concrete with main

reinforcement and without shear reinforcement (WALRAVEN, 1995)

Another consequence of the cracking is that equations (7.2.2-1) and (7.2.2-2) are strictly

not valid anymore. Moreover, the stress distribution in the cross-section, in ULS, is non-

linear and is thus highly different from the distribution in uncracked state.

Note:

WALRAVEN (1995) assumes that the following formula still allows

determining a reasonable estimation of the mean" shear stress in a section in

reinforced concrete:

(7.2.3-1)

with

b = the width of the cross-section or the minimum width of the web of I- or T-

beams;

z = the lever arm, which in first approximation can be taken as 0,9.d.

concrete

Figure 7.2.4-1 gives an overview of the different mechanisms which explain the transfer

of the shear load in a beam in reinforced concrete without shear reinforcement.

Figure 7.2.4-1

Mechanisms for shear load transfer in cracked reinforced concrete:

(a) uncracked concrete in compression; (b) tensile stresses at the tip of the crack;

(c) granulate interlocking; (d) dowel action

the uncracked compression concrete in the upper part of the beam (above the

shear crack) is able to transfer high shear loads;

7-7

tensile contact stresses are present at the crack tip as long as both sides are not

separated more than w 0,15 mm (WALRAVEN, 1995). In order to further open

the crack tip, an additional tensile force has to be developed;

the shear displacement of one part of the beam with respect to the other part is

hindered by the mechanical friction resistance provided by the sliding of two

irregular crack surfaces. This is called the aggregate interlocking effect;

the shear displacement of one part of the beam with respect to the other part is

also hindered by the dowel action of the main reinforcement bars. On top of the

local shear resistance of the steel bars, one may also take account of the resistance

to local crushing of the concrete adjacent to the bars: figure 7.2.4-2.

Figure 7.2.4-2

Dowel action of the main reinforcement and resistance to local crushing of the

concrete adjacent to the bars

It can thus be concluded that the following factors determine the shear load bearing

capacity of beams without shear reinforcement:

the concrete class;

the main reinforcement ratio (a larger ratio also leads to smaller crack widths);

the width of the cross-section;

the depth of the cross-section. An important observation is that shear load bearing

capacity indeed increases with depth but less than proportional. This is a well

known phenomenon in the course on failure mechanics: a large crack is more

sensitive for instable elongation than a short crack (small sections are more

efficient to bear shear loads);

an eventual axial force, which may influence the crack width.

7-8

reinforcement

Reference: EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.2

The design value for the shear resistance VRd,c in a beam without shear reinforcement is

determined by means of the following empirical formula:

(7.2.5-1)

(7.2.5-2)

where:

VRd,c is expressed in N;

fck is expressed in MPa;

with d in mm and k 2;

d = effective depth determining the distance between the centre of gravity of the

main reinforcement to the most compressed concrete fibres (top layer of beam);

= smallest width of the cross-section in the tensile area;

< 0,2.fcd

prestressing (positive sign for compressive load);

(expressed in mm2): area of concrete cross-section;

with area of the tensile reinforcement which extends at the least over the

distance d+lbd beyond the section considered (see figure 7.2.5-1). Note: lbd is the

required anchorage length, discussed in chapter 6 in these course notes;

k1 = 0,15;

vmin = 0,035.k3/2.fck1/2;

The introduction of the recommended values k1 = 0,15 , CRd,c = 0,12 and vmin in equations

(7.2.5-1) and (7.2.5-2) leads to the following equations for the design value of the shear

resistance of a beam without shear reinforcement:

7-9

(7.2.5-3)

(7.2.5-4)

Figure 7.2.5-1

Definition of Asl in the formula for the calculation of the shear resistance of a beam

without shear reinforcement: one can only take account of those bars which are

adequately anchored; (a) end support; (b) intermediate support (Figure 6.3 in EN 1992-

1-1:2004)

The verification of the shear load bearing capacity of a structural member without shear

reinforcement is thus performed by the comparison, in the cross-section to be

considered, of the design value of the imposed shear load VEd with VRdc.

7.3.1 Introduction

If preliminary calculation shows that the shear load bearing capacity of the member

without shear reinforcement, is not large enough to withstand the imposed shear force

(thus if VEd > VRd,c), an adequate shear reinforcement is necessary. The shear

reinforcement provides replacement of the shear load bearing capacity which disappears

gradually with growing cracks, the reduction of the thickness of the compressed

concrete arch and the increased crack width which reduces the granulate interlocking

resistance. The presence of shear reinforcement allows to further increase loads while

avoiding catastrophic beam shear failure before the full exploitation of the bending

capacity.

Throughout the years, it was not easy to find an international agreement on a shear

reinforcement calculation model. The models proposed in the CEB-FIP Model Code

(precursor of EC2) and later on in the EC2, have been reworked several times.

The shear reinforcement calculation model has been developed on the basis of

remarkable experimental results.

7-10

7.3.2 Remarquable experimental results

7.3.2.1 Result 1: beams in reinforced concrete may be analyzed by means of an

analoguous truss

Experiments on beams with shear reinforcement (links for example) reveal that the

crack pattern is determined by the presence of the links: figure 7.3.2-1. The cracks in the

zone loaded by shear, show a regular pattern and are even somewhat parallel in long

beams. In between the cracks, compressive concrete struts are identified. The struts

guide the loads applied on the upper side of the beam towards the lower side of the

beam; from there on, the loads are back again transferred towards the upper side by

means of the links; this is a regular process all along the length of the beam.

These experimental observations are the basis of the papers written independently by

the Swiss engineer RITTER in 1899 and the German engineer MRSCH in 1902, in

which they both proposed to describe the shear load transfer in reinforced concrete

beams by means of an analogous truss (WIGHT, 2009).

Figure 7.3.2-1

Schematic representation of the regular crack pattern in a beam in reinforced concrete

with shear reinforcement: identification of an analogous truss. Asw represents the cross-

section of 1 link with two legs

- the non-cracked arch with compressed concrete at the upper side of the

beam, acts as the top compression member of the truss;

- the horizontal tension steel (main reinforcement) acts as bottom chord of the

truss; the distance between top and bottom member is the lever arm z;

- the diagonal compression members inclined at an angle , represent the

concrete compression struts between the (parallel) shear cracks;

7-11

- the transverse tension members in the truss, characterized by the distance

z.cotg between them, represent the shear reinforcement (in this example

composed of vertical links).

7.3.2.2 Result 2: the relationship between imposed shear load and the necessary shear

reinforcement

The area Asv of a vertical member in the truss in figure 7.3.2-1, is equal to:

(7.3.2-1)

with

Asw the cross-section of 1 link (2 vertical legs);

s the distance between adjacent links.

The force that has to be resisted by the vertical member is indeed the shear load V.

Consequently, the tensile stress sv in the vertical member is:

(7.3.2-2)

The steel stress (in the links) has to be limited to the design strength fywd. This reasoning,

fully based on the truss analogy, leads to the value of the maximum shear load that can

be supported:

(7.3.2-3)

However, experimental results (WALRAVEN, 1995) show that the real behaviour does

not fully coincide with the one suggested by the truss analogy. Figure 7.3.2-2 shows, in

a schematic way, the experimentally measured relationship between the steel stress sv

in the shear reinforcement and the applied shear load V; the solid line shows the

experimental relationship while the dashed line shows the relationship according to the

truss analogy via expression (7.3.2-2).

Figure 7.3.2-2

7-12

The steel stress sv in the vertical links in function of the imposed shear load V: solid

line = experimental measurement; dashed line = theoretical relationship according to the

truss analogy

Figure 7.3.2-2 shows that the shear reinforcement is practically not working when

small values of shear loads are applied. Shear reinforcement is only activated (increase

of steel stress sv in the links) from the moment on that a shear crack appears. It is

learned from the experiments that in cracked situation, the imposed shear load V is

transferred by two mechanisms:

- partly by the truss mechanism;

- partly by an extra bearing mechanism, which can be explained by:

the fact that the hinges in the idealized truss system are not

hinges at all in reality; the nodes of the truss transfer also

moments;

crack surfaces are not smooth and straight, but are very irregular

in shape;

a part of the load is transferred by the uncracked compression

arch to the supports and by the dowel action of the main

reinforcement.

The sum of all non-truss mechanisms can be called Vc; it is as if this part of the load

transfer is taken care off by the concrete (c < concrete). It is observed that

- Vc is practically constant during loading, on the condition that the

mechanisms which explain the concrete part Vc are not too much destroyed

by too large crack widths;

- Vc is practically equal to the shear load that causes inclined cracks to appear.

This leads to the assumption that this shear load is nothing else than the

shear load bearing capacity VRd,c of the same beam but without shear

reinforcement.

The experimental result mentioned above, has been confirmed for cross-sections with

various shapes and reinforcement ratios. It is an important result which has lead to the

rule in earlier versions of EC2 (1995, 1998) that shear reinforcement in beams could be

calculated for the shear load (V-VRd,c) only. The actual version of EC2 (2004) adopts

another point of vue (see further).

7-13

Figure 7.3.3-1

Basic model of analogous truss system for the development of the formulas for shear

load verification of a beam in reinforced concrete

Figure 7.3.3-1 presents the general truss model that is used for the development of the

formulas for shear load verification of a beam in reinforced concrete. The inclination

angle of the shear reinforcement with the beams axis is called . For inclined bars:

< 90 (typical 45); for vertical links: = 90. The inclination angle of the cracks, and

thus also the inclination angle of the concrete compression strut, is called . The limit

values for the angle are fixed in the standard:

EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.3(2):

The Belgian ANB takes account of the effect of an eventual axial force or prestressing

force which lead to less inclined cracks; this is illustrated by the principle reasoning by

means of MOHRs circle in figure 7.3.3-2. The ANB defines the limit values for as

follows:

with

(7.3.3-4)

where:

k1, cp, bw, d : defined in paragraph 7.2.5;

7-14

Asw = cross-sectional area of one shear reinforcement: one inclined bar or two

vertical legs of one link;

s = spacing of the adjacent shear reinforcement;

z = lever arm between the compression and tensile members of the truss;

ANB accepts z = 0,9.d if cp = 0;

fywd = design yield strength of shear reinforcement.

With cp non 0, one may even adopt cotg = 3; this assumption corresponds to very

slightly inclined cracks, with an inclination angle of only 18,4.

1 cotg 2 (7.3.3-5)

7-15

Figure 7.3.3-2

Auxiliary reasoning by means of MOHRs circle to show that the presence of

axial compression stresses leads to a less inclined crack angle

7-16

Note:

It is thus observed that the actual standard accepts the choice of rather small

values of the crack inclination angle and thus of the concrete compression

struts in the truss model. The justification for this choice and the discussion of its

consequences is presented further in this chapter.

7.3.4.1 Introduction

The truss model in figure 7.3.3-1 contains four components:

the vertical or inclined tension reinforcement which represent the shear

reinforcement (links or stirrups or inclined bars);

the concrete compression struts, with an inclination angle ;

the compression member on top;

the tension member at the bottom (the bottom chord member).

Design for shear means that each of all four members of the truss is designed strong

enough in order to make the beam able resisting the imposed shear load.

1. The force in the truss member

The assumed truss model is once again presented in figure 7.3.4-1. The method of

sections (method of RITTER) may be applied to determine the force T in the

inclined truss member; vertical translation equilibrium leads to:

(7.3.4-1)

Figure 7.3.4-1

Application of the method of sections (RITTER) to determine the force in the

inclined truss member

7-17

2. The maximum shear load VRd,s that can be resisted by the shear reinforcement

A schematic representation of the truss is shown in figure 7.3.4-2; the figure

shows clearly that each single stirrup or inclined bar that is represented as

inclined truss member (associated with each inclined strut), represents in fact a

series of stirrups or bars distributed along each crack with spacing s.

Figure 7.3.4-2

Auxiliary figure for the determination of the shear reinforcement

The maximum value of the shear load VRd,s that may be resisted by the inclined

tensile truss member is:

(7.3.4-2)

with:

the cross-sectional area of 1 stirrup (2 legs!) or of 1 inclined bar;

the design yield strength of the shear reinforcement;

n the number of links or bars that is distributed along the distance

z (cotg + cotg ). The number is equal to:

sin for the vertical projection.

The formula for the maximum shear load that may be resisted by the shear

reinforcement is thus:

7-18

(7.3.4-3)

(7.3.4-4)

Note 1:

With cp = 0, z = 0,9.d may be assumed.

Note 2:

The earlier versions of the standard (1995, 1998) proposed to apply the

so called standard method in which the inclination angle of all

compression strut was = 45. With this assumption, the formulas are:

- with inclined shear reinforcement:

(7.3.4-5)

(7.3.4-6)

3. The necessary shear reinforcement to resist the imposed shear load VEd

The necessary shear reinforcement per unit length (along the beams axis) can be

deduced from expression (7.3.4-3):

- for inclined shear reinforcement:

(7.3.4-7)

(7.3.4-8)

Note:

The last formula allows to conclude that the choice of a smaller value of

the angle leads to a smaller cross-sectional area of shear reinforcement

7-19

( smaller cotg larger). The adoption of less inclined cracks in the

truss model thus leads to savings in shear reinforcement.

This conclusion can also be explained in another way: if cracks are less

inclined, the principal tensile stress (which is perpendicular to the crack)

is oriented more vertically; this means that vertical stirrups are used

more efficiently which leads to the reduction of the number of stirrups

needed.

1. The force in the truss member

The truss model is shown in figure 7.3.4-3. Vertical translation equilibrium leads

to the identification of the force D in the inclined compression member:

(7.3.4-9)

Figure 7.3.4-3

Application of the method of sections (RITTER) to determine the force in the

inclined concrete compression member

2. The maximum shear load VRd,max that can be resisted by the concrete compression

member

The maximum value of the compression force D that may be resisted by the

inclined concrete strut is equal to the product of the maximum concrete

compression strength with the cross-sectional area of the strut; the last one is

deduced from figure 7.3.4-2: cross-sectional area of the strut = .

The maximum concrete compression strength to be used for the strut calculation,

is defined in EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.3(3) and is limited to v.fcd

with fcd = fck / 1,5 (and not fcd = 0,85 . fck / 1,5 !)

7-20

Note:

It should be remembered here that EN 1992-1-1:2004; 3.1.6 defines fcd as

fcd = cc . fck / c

with cc a factor for which the value 1 is recommended.

In Belgium, the National Annex (NBN EN 1992-1-1 ANB) recommends

the use of the value cc = 0,85 for verification in ULS for axial loads,

bending and combined axial force with bending; for other loading types

(shear and torsion), cc = 1 should be used. This means in practice that

for calculations in accordance with NBN EN 1992-1-1 ANB, the

following design values have to be used for the compressive strength of

concrete:

- for ULS design of the main reinforcement (thus for normal

stresses due to axial loads and bending moments): fcd = 0,85 . fck /

1,5

- for ULS design of shear reinforcement (necessary to take up shear

loads and torsion): fcd = fck / 1,5

(7.3.4-10)

The additional strength reduction factor has to be applied to the concrete design

strength for the calculation of the struts in order to take account of the complex,

two-dimensional stress situation in the struts. Indeed, the struts are intersected by

links or by inclined bars which are loaded in tension; due to the adherence

between steel and concrete, the transverse tensile stresses cause the weakening of

the compressive struts. Formula (7.3.4-10) is the result of experimental tests.

Note:

EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.3(3) stipulates that when the design stress in the

shear reinforcement is less than 80% of fywk, the following values may be

adopted for the reduction factor :

- = 0,6 for fck 60 MPa;

- = 0,9 fck/200 > 0,5 for fck > 60 MPa

The maximum compression force D that can be resisted by the strut is thus:

v.fcd.b.dstrut. The vertical projection of this force is designated in EN 1992-1-

1:2004 with the symbol VRd,max; this force has to be compared to the imposed shear

load VEd.

VRd,max may be further expressed as (see figure 7.3.4-2):

(7.3.4-11)

7-21

with

(7.3.4-12)

or also: (7.3.4-13)

Note 1:

If cp = 0, z = 0,9.d may be assumed.

Note 2:

The earlier versions of the standard (1995, 1998) proposed to apply the

so called standard method in which the inclination angle of all

compression strut was = 45.

- with inclined shear reinforcement:

(7.3.4-14)

(7.3.4-15)

The stress is deduced from expression (7.3.4-12):

(7.3.4-16)

7-22

This formula allows to observe that the choice of a smaller value of inclination

angle leads to larger compression stresses in the concrete strut. This result is

obvious when looking at figure 7.3.4-4: a less inclined strut has to transfer a

larger compression force D in order to generate the same resisting shear force. It

is observed that this does not cause problems in most practical normal cases,

because the stress is in general quite smaller than the acceptable stress v.fcd (see

applications). Yet, problems may arise when small inclination angles are chosen.

Expression (7.3.4-16) also shows that the stress in the concrete compression strut

gets smaller with the use of inclined bars ( < 90).

Figure 7.3.4-4

A less inclined strut has to transfer a larger compression force D in order to

generate the same resisting shear force

Note:

EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.3(3) stipulates that when prestressing is applied,

the value of VRd,max may be increased, in order to take account of the fact

that cracks are closed.

7.3.4.4 The upper chord and the bottom chord of the truss model

1. The forces in the truss members

The forces in the upper and bottom chord can be determined by expressing the

equilibrium of the forces applied to the part of the beam shown in figure 7.3.4-5.

At the level of the considered cross-section, a whole series of compression struts

are cut; all these compression forces have a resultant force which is D and which

is applied at half depth; the magnitude of its vertical component Dy is equal to V.

In the same cross-section, a whole series of tensile reinforcement bars (stirrups or

bars) are cut; the resultant force of all these tensile forces is T, which is applied at

half depth; the magnitude of its vertical component Ty has to be equal to V.

Consequently, the horizontal components are:

7-23

Figure 7.3.4-5

Auxiliary figure for the determination of the member forces in the upper truss

member and in the bottom chord

The other forces that are applied to the isolated left part of the beam, are:

the imposed uniformly distributed load q;

the support reaction force R;

the force Nc in the arch of compressed non-cracked concrete;

the tensile force Ns in the main reinforcement.

The first member of this equation is nothing else than the bending moment Mz in

the considered cross-section, and thus:

7-24

(7.3.4-17)

leads to:

(7.3.4-18)

2. Discussion

The result of expression (7.3.4-18) is important because this shows that, in zones

with shear loads, the force to be transmitted by the main reinforcement does not

only depend on the bending moment Mz; indeed: . The main

reinforcement is loaded by an additional tensile force which increases with

decreasing value of (a disadvantage of choosing less inclined cracks and thus

less inclined concrete struts). The consequences of this observation are illustrated

in a visual way for the particular case with the choices: and

vertical stirrups with = 90 (cotg = 0); expression (7.3.4-18) is than written:

(7.3.4-19)

uniformly distributed load and for a concentrated load.

Figure 7.3.4-6

7-25

Schematic representation of the increase in tensile force in the main

reinforcement due to the shear load, for two beams (a) and (b), and with the

assumptions = 45 and = 90 (vertical stirrups)

In the case of the concentrated load (figure 7.3.4-6(b)), one notes Mz=V.x.

Substitution in expression (7.3.4-19) leads to:

(7.3.4-20)

Expression (7.3.4-20) shows that in order to calculate the force Ns in the section x,

one may not use the bending moment at the distance x from the support, but

instead of that, has to use the bending moment at the distance from the

support. The bending moment diagram has thus to be shifted over the

distance , in unfavourable direction. In the more general case with arbitrary

values of and , the distance over which the bending moment diagram has to be

shifted is .

Note:

The additional tensile force in the main reinforcement disappears when

inclined bars with are used in combination with the

assumption = 45.

3. Prescriptions EN 1992-1-1:2004

The main reinforcement has to be designed for a supplementary force which is

due to the shear load; the problem is due to the fact that the orientation of the

reinforcement does not coincide with the orientation of the principal tensile stress.

EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.3(7) stipulates that the main reinforcement should be

calculated for an additional tensile force Ftd which is due to the imposed shear

force VEd and which may be determined by means of expression (7.3.4-18):

7-26

In practice, the rule just mentioned above is translated into the much more

practical alternative which is called the shift rule: the bending moment diagram

is shifted over the distance al, which also means that the length of the main

reinforcement bars is increased with al at each end. The shifting has thus

essentially consequences for the curtailment of the longitudinal tension

reinforcement. The prescriptions in EN 1992-1-1:2004; 9.2.1.3 can be

summarized as follows:

for structural members without shear reinforcement, the moment curve may

be shifted over the distance al = d;

for structural members with shear reinforcement, the moment curve may be

shifted over the distance al = z/2.(cotg - cotg ). As already said before,

in the absence of axial compression loads, z may be assumed equal to 0,9.d;

the curtailed bars should be anchored with lbd from the point on where the

bars are not useful anymore. The diagram of the resisting tensile forces

should engulf the envelope diagram of the imposed tensile forces, after

application of the shift rule: see figure 7.3.4-7;

the anchorage length of a bent-up bar which contributes to the resistance to

shear, should not be less than 1,3.lbd in the tension zone and 0,7.lbd in the

compression zone.

Figure 7.3.4-7

Envelope diagram for the calculation of structural members subjected to bending,

with indication of the anchorage lengths to be applied

(figure 9.2 in EN 1992-1-1:2004)

7-27

7.3.4.5 Discussion of the variable strut inclination method

The previous versions of the standard (1995,1998) recommended the so called standard

method, which is characterized by the choice of the inclination angle of all concrete

compression struts equal to 45. This assumption leads to a relatively simple

verification of successive cracks with a constant inclination angle, starting with the first

crack for the largest imposed shear load: see figure 7.3.4-8. However, the variable strut

inclination method was also mentioned in parallel to the standard method. The

adoption of smaller strut inclination angles leads to the following effects:

- less shear reinforcement per unit length along the beam;

- more important loading of the concrete compression struts, with higher stress

levels;

- larger shift length al and thus longer main reinforcement bars.

The 2004 version of EC2 does not mention the standard method anymore. Moreover, it

is observed that the standard accepts rather small values for the inclination angle :

EN 1992-1-1: 2004: 45,0 21,8

ANB:

- with cp = 0: 45,0 26,6

- with cp 0: 45,0 18,4

With the new prescriptions, the standard wants to take account of the observation that in

the case of shear failure of the structural member, the most important crack close to the

support and with the highest imposed shear load, is indeed characterized by a smaller

inclination angle; see figure 7.3.4-9. Adopting = 45 in this zone of the structural

member, leads to over-estimation of the necessary shear reinforcement.

Note:

Low inclination cracks only appear with lack of shear resistance. Figure

7.3.4-10 shows the crack pattern in a beam with sufficient shear

reinforcement; the beam has failed in bending and only nearly vertical

cracks are observed in the zone with shear loads.

Finally, it should be stressed that the design of shear reinforcement by means of a truss

model with variable strut inclination, is in full accordance with the principles of plastic

design which occupies a prominent place in the present version of the standard. Design

on the basis of the assumption of a strut inclination which does not fully coincide with

the real inclination, leads to a slightly different failure mechanism: the beam fails in a

way that is determined by the designer. With the adoption of a too small inclination

angle and thus the provision of less shear reinforcement, the designer asks to the

beam for a rearrangement of tasks with a heavier loading of the struts and of the main

reinforcement. Practically speaking, this rearrangement will be visible by a more

expressive development of cracks, because the design now asks for heavier loading of

the struts. The principles of plastic design are discussed in chapter 11 in these course

notes.

7-28

Figure 7.3.4-8

Comparison of truss models with the standard model ( = 45) on one hand and

the variable strut inclination method on the other hand

Figure 7.3.4-9

Shear failure of a beam without sufficient shear reinforcement: the most

important crack, associated with the maximum shear load, is characterized by an

inclination angle smaller than 45

7-29

Figure 7.3.4-10

Crack pattern in a beam subjected to a four point bending test; failure is in

bending and not in shear; shear reinforcement has been well designed

7.4.1 Introduction

This paragraph focuses on the ULS design calculation of shear reinforcement according

to EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2 and the complementary Belgian ANB prescriptions.

7.4.2 Definitions

The verification of shear resistance is based on three design values of resisting shear

forces:

VRd,c design shear resistance of the member in a section without shear

reinforcement. VRd,c is calculated by means of expressions (7.2.5-3) and (7.2.5-4)

in these course notes;

VRd,s design value of the shear force which can be sustained by the yielding

shear reinforcement. VRd,s is calculated by means of expressions (7.3.4-3) and

(7.3.4-4) in these course notes;

VRd,max design value of the maximum shear force which can be sustained by the

member, limited by crushing of the compression struts. VRd,max is calculated by

means of expressions (7.3.4-12) and (7.3.4-13) in these course notes.

VEd is the imposed design shear force in the section to be verified, resulting from

external loading on the structural member.

7-30

7.4.3 The principles of the shear verification procedure

- In the regions of the member where VEd VRd,c no calculated shear reinforcement

is necessary. Yet, when on the basis of the design calculation, no shear

reinforcement is required, minimum (technological) shear reinforcement should

be provided. The minimum shear reinforcement may be omitted in certain special

cases such as:

- slabs where transverse redistribution of loads is possible;

- members of minor importance which do not contribute significantly to the

overall resistance and stability of the structure; example: lintels with span

2 m.

- In regions where VEd > VRd,c sufficient shear reinforcement should be provided in

order that VEd VRd.. VRd is the resisting shear force and is equal to the smallest of

the two values VRd,s and VRd,max.

Important note:

It was already mentioned in figure 7.3.2-2, that there is experimental

evidence for the fact that the shear reinforcement only starts to work

as a member in a truss sytem, for a reduced value of the imposed shear

load. In the previous versions (1995, 1998) of EC2, it was accepted that

the reduction could be taken equal to the shear force VRd,c which is in

fact the shear load resisted without shear reinforcement, by the

following mechanisms:

- the shear resistance of the non-cracked compression concrete arch;

- the granulate interlocking effect along the shear crack;

- the dowel action of the main reinforcement.

It was thus accepted in the previous versions of EC2, in which the

standard method was used for shear verification (struts with constant

inclination angle of 45), to design shear reinforcement for the force

VEd - VRd,c.

This is not the case anymore in the present version (2004) of EC2, in

spite of the experimental evidence shown in figure 7.3.2-2; shear

reinforcement has now to be calculated for the full imposed shear force

VEd. The reason for this is that the present standard does not want to

accumulate too much favourable effects. Indeed, the present EC2

allows adopting small inclination angles in the regions where high shear

loads are applied; this leads already to smaller shear reinforcement

(while causing more severe loading of the concrete struts). EC2 does

not want to accumulate this positive effect on the shear reinforcement

with a second one generated by the reduction with VRd,c of the imposed

shear force VEd.

tensile force caused by shear; in practice, the shift rule is used.

shear force need not to be checked at a distance less than d from the face of the

7-31

support; see figure 7.4.3-1. This rule takes into account that the loads applied

close to the support, are directly transmitted to the support without causing

bending and shear of the beam itself. The shear verification thus starts with the

first crack which is initiated at the tensile side of the beam and which develops

upwards with a certain inclination angle. Any shear reinforcement required in the

first verified section, should continue to the support. On top of that, it should

always be verified that the imposed shear force at the support is not larger than

VRd,max.

Figure 7.4.3-1

In the case of uniformly distributed loads, direct transmission to the support of the loads

applied close to the support may be assumed

Note 1:

For members with inclined chords (upper side and lower side), the value

of VRd should be increased with two additional resisting shear load

components (see figure 7.4.3-2):

VRd = minimum(VRd,s; VRd,max) + Vccd + Vtd

with:

- Vccd = the design value of the shear component of the force in the

compression area, in the case of an inclined compression chord (upper

side);

- Vtd = the design value of the shear component of the force in the

tensile reinforcement, in the case of an inclined tensile chord (lower

side).

7-32

Figure 7.4.3-2

Additional shear resistance due to the presence of inclined chords in structural

members

(adaption of figure 6.2 in EN 1992-1-1:2004)

Note 2:

When loads are applied to the lower side of a structural member,

sufficient vertical reinforcement, in addition to the shear reinforcement,

is needed in order to transfer the loads to the upper side: see figure 7.4.3-

3.

Figure 7.4.3-3

Additional reinforcement is needed to transfer loads applied to the lower side of

the beam to the upper side

Some prescriptions:

- in the regions where VEd VRd,c no calculated shear reinforcement is necessary, but

minimum (technological) shear reinforcement should be provided: see further in

the paragraph on technological prescriptions;

- for the design of the longitudinal reinforcement, the MEd-diagram should be

shifted over a distance al = d in the unfavourable direction;

- for members with concentrated loads applied on the upper side and rather close to

the support, it may be assumed that a part of the load is transferred directly to the

support (without interaction of the beam itself), which gives a reduction of the

imposed shear force VEd. The prescriptions stipulate that when the concentrated

load is applied on the upper side within a distance 0,5d av 2d (see figure 7.4.4-

1) from the edge of the support, the contribution of this load to the shear force VEd

7-33

may be reduced by multiplying the load by the factor = av/2d. This reduction is

only valid provided that the longitudinal reinforcement is fully anchored at the

support. For av 0,5d the value av = 0,5d should be used.

Important remark: the imposed shear force VEd, calculated without reduction by

the factor , should always satisfy the condition:

(7.4.4-2)

compression strut right above the support. Expression (7.4.4-1) is deduced from

expression (7.3.4-13) which defines the maximum shear force that can be resisted

from the point of view of strut failure:

By introduction of the lever arm z taken equal to d and = 45, expression (7.4.4-

1) is obtained, which corresponds to a sort of upper limit for VEd. Indeed, taking

into account the following evolution of the term sin.cos:

sin.cos

45 0,5

40 0,49

35 0,47

30 0,43

one finds the condition VEd ...sin.cos more severe for VEd in order to take into

account that the strut is more heavily loaded in compression when it is less

inclined.

7-34

Figure 7.4.4-1

It may be assumed that a fraction of the loads applied near supports, is

transmitted directly to the support and does not give a contribution to the

imposed shear force VEd, on the condition that the main reinforcement is

sufficiently anchored (figure 6.4 in EN 1992-1-1:2004)

7.4.5 Structural members requiring design shear reinforcement: VEd > VRd,c

In regions where VEd > VRd,c, sufficient shear reinforcement should be provided in order

that VEd VRd. VRd is the resisting shear force and is equal to the minimum of the two

values VRd,s and VRd,max. The formulas for VRd,s and VRd,max are developed on the basis of an

analogous truss model which is once again represented in figure 7.4.5-1.

7-35

Figure 7.4.5-1

Truss model used for the calculation of the shear reinforcement in structural members

(figure 6.5 in EN 1992-1-1:2004)

(7.4.5-1)

(7.4.5-2)

with the additional condition that defines the maximum effective cross-sectional area of

shear reinforcement for = 45 ( cotg = 1 ):

(7.4.5-3)

(7.4.5-4)

(7.4.5-5)

with the additional condition that defines the maximum effective cross-sectional area of

shear reinforcement for = 45 ( cotg = 1 ):

(7.4.5-6)

Just as in the case where shear reinforcement is not necessary, the rule for direct

transmission to the support of a fraction of the loads that are applied near supports, can

be applied here too. The prescriptions stipulate that when the load is applied on the

upper side within a distance 0,5d av 2d (see figure 7.4.4-1) from the edge of the

support, the contribution of the load to the imposed shear force VEd may be reduced by

multiplying the load by the factor = av/2d. This reduction may only be applied if the

main reinforcement is fully anchored above the support. For av 0,5d, the value

av = 0,5d may be adopted.

7-36

Important: the imposed shear force VEd, calculated in this way (thus with application of

the reduction factor ), should satisfy the condition:

where Asw . fywd = the resistance of the shear reinforcement crossing the inclined shear

crack between the loaded areas (see figure 7.4.5-2); only the shear reinforcement within

the central 0,75.av should be taken into account.

Note:

The reduction with the factor may only be applied

- for the calculation of shear reinforcement and not for the strut verification;

- provided that the longitudinal reinforcement is fully anchored at the

support.

Figure 7.4.5-2

Auxiliary figure for the calculation of shear reinforcement with direct strut action close

to the support (figure 6.6 in EN 1992-1-1:2004)

uniformly distributed load and concentrated load

In principle, the largest value of VEd should be considered for the first shear design

calculation. To remember, design of shear reinforcement is performed in ULS; the

design values of the loads have thus to be considered (use of partial safety factors). See

example in figure 7.5.1-1.

7-37

Figure 7.5.1-1

In principle, the largest value of VEd should be considered for the first shear design

calculation; that is the value at the support

7.5.2 Reduction of VEd to take account of direct load transfer to the supports

7.5.2.1 Uniformly distributed load

The shear calculation is performed by considering successive shear cracks, starting with

the first crack in the region with the largest value of the imposed shear force. The crack

is initiated on the tensile side (at the bottom of the beam in figure 7.5.1-1) at the edge of

the support; the crack is assumed to be vertical in the concrete cover, but starting from

the main reinforcement, develops upwards with an inclination angle. In reality, the

crack gets stuck in the concrete compression arch, but in the simplified truss model, the

crack is extended up to the upper side of the beam with a constant inclination angle.

When the first crack is considered with the inclination angle , the assumption is

adopted that the uniformly distributed load to the left of the upper end of the crack is

transferred directly to the support: see figure 7.5.2-1. The first value of VEd to be

calculated is thus the imposed shear force in the cross-section at the distance d.cotg (d

when = 45) from the edge of the support (cross-section C in figure 7.5.2-1). The

value of (VEd)C is equal to the maximum shear force in support A (due to g and Q)

reduced with the portion of shear load due to g over the distance a + d.cotg:

with

a: see determination of the design span for different support conditions in paragraph

2.5.2.2.

7-38

Figure 7.5.2-1

First shear verification in the cross-section with the largest imposed shear force VEd,

taking account of the reduction due to the direct transfer of g to the support

Note:

The adoption of smaller values of (than 45) leads to smaller values of VEd

(see figure 7.5.2-1). But with this assumption, it is very important to verify the

concrete compression strut above the support with the formula:

If this condition is OK, then further comparison of VEd with VRd,c can be

performed.

For concentrated loads which are applied at the distance av from the edge of the support,

with 0,5.d av 2.d, a reduction may be adopted of the imposed shear force. The

contribution of the concentrated force to the shear force VEd may be reduced by

multiplying the concentrated force with the reduction factor = av/2d ( 1). This rule is

independent from the choice of the inclination angle .

Figure 7.5.2-2 shows the example of the concentrated force Q applied within the

distance av = 2.d from the edge of the support. The imposed shear load (VQ)dA in cross-

7-39

section A may be reduced to .(VQ)dA; this means that the difference (VQ)dA - .(VQ)dA is

directly transferred to the support. The shear force (VEd)C to be considered in cross-

section C, at the distance d.cotg from the edge of the support is thus:

Figure 7.5.2-2

Reduction of the imposed shear force due to direct transfer of a portion of the

concentrated force to the support

Important note:

The reduction by means of the factor is not allowed for the verification of the

concrete compression struts. The reduction is only considered for:

- the comparison between VEd and VRd,c;

- the calculation of the shear reinforcement.

It is thus recommended to calculate two distinct values of VEd for further use:

- VEdg in cross-section C (with only the reduction of the contribution of g);

- VEdg+Q in cross-section C (inclusive the reduction of g and Q).

The following verifications have to be performed.

7-40

7.5.3.1 VRd,c

Calculation of the resisting shear force VRd,c. The crack that has to be considered with

(VEd)C in cross-section C, starts from the tensile side at the edge of the support and

develops with an inclination angle up to the cross-section C. This crack is determining

for the area of reinforcement Asl that has to be considered for the calculation of VRd,c.

This value of VRd,c which is calculated in order to be compared with (VEd)C in cross-

section C, has to take account of the main reinforcement that contributes to the shear

resistance by means of the dowel action in the crack. Again, only that reinforcement can

be considered that is sufficiently anchored with lbd beyond the section where the dowel

action takes place; this is thus Asl which continues over the length d+lbd such as pointed

out in figure 7.2.5-1(a) and in the definition of Asl in expression (7.2.5-1).

Is VEd (with reduction of g and Q) VRd,c , then:

- the technological shear reinforcement is sufficient (see further);

- the strut above the support should be verified by means of expression (7.4.4-1):

composed of stirrups.

First, the strut-condition has to be verified. At this stage, if necessary, one can still make

a new choice of the inclination angle :

- with stirrups

(7.5.3-1)

(7.5.3-2)

Next, the necessary shear reinforcement per unit length can be determined by means of

the following formulas:

- with stirrups

(7.5.3-3)

7-41

(7.5.3-3)

Once Asw/s calculated, one has to verify if this reinforcement is at least equal to the

minimum reinforcement ration (see further in detailing of reinforcement). The

practical translation of Asw/s into a suitable diameter and spacing, can be realized by

means of table 7.5.3-1.

Table 7.5.3-1

(mm) 6 8 10 12 14 16

Asw (mm2) 56,5 100 157 226 308 402

s (mm) (mm2/mm)

60 0,942 1,676 2,618 3,770 5,131 6,702

70 0,808 1,436 2,244 3,231 4,398 5,745

80 0,707 1,257 1,963 2,827 3,848 5,027

90 0,628 1,117 1,745 2,513 3,421 4,468

100 0,565 1,005 1,571 2,262 3,079 4,021

120 0,471 0,838 1,309 1,885 2,566 3,351

140 0,404 0,718 1,122 1,616 2,199 2,872

150 0,377 0,670 1,047 1,508 2,053 2,681

160 0,353 0,628 0,982 1,414 1,924 2,513

180 0,314 0,559 0,873 1,257 1,710 2,234

200 0,283 0,503 0,785 1,131 1,539 2,011

250 0,226 0,402 0,628 0,905 1,232 1,608

300 0,188 0,335 0,524 0,754 1,026 1,340

Note:

The additional condition related to the use of the -factor for concentrated loads

should not be forgotten: the imposed shear force VEd, calculated with application

of the -factor, should always respect the following condition:

where Asw . fywd = the force that is generated by the shear reinforcement in this

area (at the support); only the reinforcement in the central part 0,75.av should be

taken into account (see figure 7.4.5-2).

7-42

7.5.4 Verification of further cracks

After the control of the first crack, the second crack has to be verified: as long as

VEd > VRd,c (and a calculated shear reinforcement is necessary), a next crack has to be

verified. In other words: if it is found in the considered cross-section that the calculated

shear reinforcement is larger than the minimum reinforcement, a next crack has to be

verified.

Figure 7.5.4-1 presents the example of an end support, with indication of the cross-

sections C1, C2, C3... that have to be verified successively. The cracks start in the tensile

region at the bottom side of the beam; this determines the areas of the main

reinforcement Asl to be considered in the calculation of VRd,c; see figure 7.2.5-1(a) and

the definition of Asl in expression (7.2.5-1): Asl1, Asl2, Asl3 are the areas of main

reinforcement that continue over the distance d+lbd to the left beyond the cross-sections

that are considered.

Figure 7.5.4-1

The cross-sections to be considered successively in shear verification, in a beam close to

an end support

The first crack is easy to identify on the basis of the cone with direct load transfer to the

support. The first cross-section to be calculated is C1 with (VEd)C1. The crack that

corresponds to this (VEd)C1 starts in the tensile region, at the upper side in C2; this is the

place where the dowel action of the main reinforcement is activated. In accordance with

figure 7.2.5-1(b) and the definition of Asl in expression (7.2.5-1), the main reinforcement

Asl1 should continue over the distance d+lbd beyond C2, in order to assure for 100% the

dowel resistance in C2.

7-43

Figure 7.5.4-2

The cross-sections to be considered successively in shear verification, in a beam close to

an intermediate support

Reference: EN 1992-1-1:2004; 9.2.2

- The shear reinforcement should form an angle between 45 and 90 to the

longitudinal axis of the structural element.

- The shear reinforcement may consist of a combination of:

links enclosing the longitudinal tension reinforcement and the concrete

compression zone: see figure 7.6.1-1;

bent-up bars;

cages, ladders, etc. which are cast in without enclosing the longitudinal

reinforcement but are properly anchored in the compression and tension

zones.

Figure 7.6.1-1

Examples of shear reinforcement (figure 9.5 in EN 1992-1-1:2004)

lap joint on the vertical leg is permitted provided that the link is not required to

resist torsion (see chapter on torsion).

- At least 50 % of the necessary shear reinforcement should be in the form of links.

7-44

7.6.2 Minimum shear reinforcement

The geometric ratio of shear reinforcement is defined as:

(7.6.2-1)

where:

: area of shear reinforcement within length s;

s : spacing of the shear reinforcement measured along the longitudinal axis of

the structural member;

: width (or breadth) of the web of the structural member;

: angle between the shear reinforcement and the longitudinal axis.

(7.6.2-2)

w,min depends of the steel grade of the shear reinforcement and of the concrete class.

Table 7.6.2-1 presents the values for w,min for different combinations.

7-45

Table 7.6.2-1

Values of w,min for different concrete-steel combinations

Steel grade of shear reinforcement

S220 S400 S500 S600

Concrete class (fywk = 220 MPa) (fywk = 400 MPa) (fywk = 500 MPa) (fywk = 600 MPa)

C12/15 (fck = 12 MPa) 1,26E-03 6,93E-04 5,54E-04 4,62E-04

C16/20 (fck = 16 MPa) 1,45E-03 8,00E-04 6,40E-04 5,33E-04

C20/25 (fck = 20 MPa) 1,63E-03 8,94E-04 7,16E-04 5,96E-04

C25/30 (fck = 25 MPa) 1,82E-03 1,00E-03 8,00E-04 6,67E-04

C30/37 (fck = 30 MPa) 1,99E-03 1,10E-03 8,76E-04 7,30E-04

C35/45 (fck = 35 MPa) 2,15E-03 1,18E-03 9,47E-04 7,89E-04

C40/50 (fck = 40 MPa) 2,30E-03 1,26E-03 1,01E-03 8,43E-04

C45/55 (fck = 45 MPa) 2,44E-03 1,34E-03 1,07E-03 8,94E-04

C50/60 (fck = 50 MPa) 2,57E-03 1,41E-03 1,13E-03 9,43E-04

C55/67 (fck = 55 MPa) 2,70E-03 1,48E-03 1,19E-03 9,89E-04

C60/75 (fck = 60 MPa) 2,82E-03 1,55E-03 1,24E-03 1,03E-03

C70/85 (fck = 70 MPa) 3,04E-03 1,67E-03 1,34E-03 1,12E-03

C80/95 (fck = 80 MPa) 3,25E-03 1,79E-03 1,43E-03 1,19E-03

C90/105 (fck = 90 MPa) 3,45E-03 1,90E-03 1,52E-03 1,26E-03

7.6.3 Spacing

7.6.3.1 In the longitudinal direction

The recommended value for the maximum longitudinal spacing sl,max between adjacent

stirrups, is determined by the formula:

The recommended value for the maximum longitudinal spacing sb,max between adjacent

bent-up bars, is determined by the formula:

Table 7.6.3-1 presents some values for bent-up bars with = 45 and vertical stirrups (

= 90).

Note:

The longitudinal spacing between stirrups may be quite large. The earlier

editions of EC2 were more severe at this point, with a maximum value of 300

mm. In practice, it is observed that the spacing criterion of 30 mm is still

adopted in workshops, because of practical considerations in the realization of

the reinforcement cages.

7-46

Table 7.6.3-1

Values of recommended maximum longitudinal spacing sl,max between adjacent bent-up

bars (with = 45) and vertical stirrups ( = 90)

( cotg = 1 ) = 90

( cotg = 0 )

sb,max = 0,6.d.(1+cotg ) sl,max = 0,75.d.(1+cotg )

d sb,max = 1,2.d sl,max = 0,75.d

(mm) (mm) (mm)

400 480 300

600 720 450

800 960 600

1000 1200 750

The transverse spacing of the legs in a series of shear links should not exceed st,max,

determined by the formula:

7.7.1.1 Identification of the problem and the truss analogy

Figure 7.7.1-1 shows a T-beam subjected to simple bending. The NA is situated in

principle in the upper part of the cross-section; the assumption may be adopted that the

flange corresponds to the compression part of the cross-section. The force N' in the

compression zone (distributed over the whole width of the flange) changes over the

distance x with the value:

The indication N'f ( f < flange) corresponds to the compression force in 1 part of the

flange left or right of the web (abstraction is made of an eventually compressed small

part of the web); N'f is thus a fraction of N' as expressed by the formula:

7-47

(7.7.1-1)

The force N'f in 1 part of the flange left or right from the web, changes over the distance

x with the value:

(7.7.1-2)

Figure 7.7.1-1

T-beam loaded in simple bending

One of the two hatched pieces of flange in figure 7.7.1-1 is now isolated: see detail in

figure 7.7.1-2. The difference in compression force (N'f)x has to be equilibrated by the

shear force distributed over the contact surface I-I with area: hf.x.

7-48

Figure 7.7.1-2

Detail: equilibrium of a part of the flange, left or right of the web

The equilibrium equation leads to the expression for the mean shear stress in the

contact surface I-I, in the uncracked elastic phase:

(7.7.1-3)

(7.7.1-4)

If this shear stress is too large, causing the principal tensile stress to reach the tensile

strength of the concrete, cracks will appear with an inclination angle with respect to the

longitudinal axis. Shear reinforcement is necessary in that case, in order to allow the

build-up of the longitudinal forces in the flange. The design of this shear reinforcement

can again be done by means of an analogous truss system in which shear is resisted by

the combined action of struts and tensile rods. Figure 7.7.1-3 shows the decomposition

of the shear force into two forces: a compression force which has to be resisted by the

concrete struts and a tensile force perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the beam.

7-49

Figure 7.7.1-3

Decomposition of the shear force at the level of the contact surface flange-web, into two

forces: a compression force to be resisted by concrete struts and a tensile force

perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the beam, which has to be resisted by steel

reinforcement

It is assumed that the orientation of the compression diagonals in the flange is

characterized by the inclination angle f. As:

(7.7.1-5)

one finds that the transverse reinforcement should be able to transfer a force (indicated

by Freinforcement in figure 7.7.1-3) equal to:

It is assumed that the transverse reinforcement is composed of rods with sectional area

Asf and spacing sf; this means that the ratio Asf/sf represents the transverse reinforcement

per unit length. The necessary reinforcement is thus:

This leads to the transverse reinforcement in the flange per unit length of the beam :

(7.7.1-7)

7-50

or, when expression (7.7.1-2) is used:

(7.7.1-8)

or

(7.7.1-9)

It is also necessary to verify if the concrete struts are able to withstand the imposed

compression force (indicated by Fstrut in figure 7.7.1-3). This means that the

compression stress in the strut should be limited to .fcd.

(7.7.1-10)

zodat

The condition thus becomes:

(7.7.1-11)

or

(7.7.1-12)

7-51

Figure 7.7.1-4

Auxiliary figure for the determination of the width of the compression strut

7.7.1.4 Alternative formulation of the shear problem between web and flanges by means

of the strut and tie method

The following reasoning is based on the philosophy of the strut and tie method, which is

discussed in a separate chapter in these course notes (see further); this method presents a

further generalization of the truss system analogy that was already introduced for the

shear verification of beams loaded in bending.

The analysis of the analogous truss system model, presented in figure 7.7.1.5, reveals

that the upwards inclined compression diagonal in the web makes equilibrium with the

tensile force in the vertical member and the compression force in the flange. In order to

install equilibrium in the flange, the force has to be spread out over the whole width of

the flange (effective width!). A new analogous truss model appears in the flange: the

force spreads out via two compression diagonals ab and ab', which on their turn have to

make equilibrium with the compression forces N'f in the flange. This equilibrium needs

the tensile member bb'. The further development of this model leads to the same

formulas as developed before.

7-52

Figure 7.7.1-5

Transfer of forces in the flange of a T-beam; (a) truss model for beam with

compression flange; (b) top vue of the beam (WALRAVEN, 1995)

The developments presented for the compression flange are also applicable to the

tension flange; see figure 7.7.2-1.

Figure 7.7.2-1

The shear problem in the tension flange

In analogy with expression (7.7.1-4), the shear stress in the contact section II-II in figure

7.7.2-1, is defined by:

(7.7.2-1)

with

= the total area of longitudinal reinforcement in the whole tension

flange;

= the area of the longitudinal reinforcement in the isolated part of the

tension flange.

In analogy with expression (7.7.1-9), the necessary transverse reinforcement per unit

length of the beam, is determined by:

7-53

(7.7.2-2)

Figure 7.7.2-2 presents a model of force transfer in the tension flange and web

(philosophy of the strut and tie method).

Figure 7.7.2-2

Model of force transfer from web to tension flange, based on the philosophy of the strut

and tie method (WALRAVEN, 1995)

7.7.3 Prescriptions concerning the passage from the web to the flanges in T-beams

7.7.3.1 Principles

Reference: EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.4

The shear strength of the flange may be calculated by considering the flange as a system

of compressive struts combined with ties in the form of tensile reinforcement. The

notations in figure 7.7.3-1 have to be applied:

Fd = the variation of the normal force in one part of the flange, over the length x

(notation (Nf)x was used in the text before);

hf = the heigth (or thickness) of the flange at the contact surface between web and

flange;

vEd = the longitudinal shear stress (notation was used in the text before) at the contact

surface between web and flange. Consequently: vEd = Fd / (hf. x);

Asf = the cross-sectional area of one transverse reinforcement bar;

sf = the spacing between the transverse reinforcement bars.

Note:

7-54

The bar which is indicated with the letter B in figure (7.7.3-1) corresponds to

longitudinal reinforcement bars which are eventually present (for example to

take up occasional fixing moments 25% of the moment in the span).

Figure 7.7.3-1

Notations used in the standard for the analysis of the force transfer between web

and flange via compression struts and transverse reinforcement (figure 6.7 in EN

1992-1-1:2004)

For the length x to be used, the standard presents the following recommendations:

- x the half of the distance between the cross-sections with bending

moments M = 0 and Mmax. Example: see figure 7.7.3-2;

- where point loads are applied, the length x the distance between the point

loads.

7-55

Figure 7.7.3-2

Indication of the length x to be used for the calculation of the transverse

reinforcement to assure the force transfer web-flange: in the particular case of a

simply supported beam with uniformly distributed load, there are at least four

regions to be considered

The value for the inclination angle f which determines the orientation of the struts,

should be in accordance with the following conditions:

- for compression flanges

1 cotg f 2 or 45 f 26,5

- for tension flanges

1 cotg f 1,25 or 45 f 38,6

The transverse reinforcement per unit length Asf/sf is determined by means of the

following expression (see also figure 7.7.3-3):

and thus:

or finally:

(7.7.3-1)

The verification of the compression struts is performed in accordance with figure 7.7.3-

3, which leads to the following formula:

7-56

As:

one finds:

(7.3.3-2)

Figure 7.7.3-3

Auxiliary figure for the development of the formulas for the calculation of the

transverse reinforcement to assure the force transfer web-flange and for the

verification of the compression struts

In the case of combined

- shear between the flange and the web, and

- transverse bending (bending in the horizontal plane),

two possible solutions are available:

- the area of steel should be greater than the one given by expression (7.7.3-1);

- half of the area of steel given by expression (7.7.3-1) in combination with the

reinforcement needed to resist transverse bending.

7.7.3.5 Remark

Extra transverse reinforcement (in addition to the normal one for bending) is not

necessary when the following conditions are met:

- vEd 0,4.fctd according to EN 1992-1-1:2004; 6.2.4(6)

- vEd 0,5.fctd according to NBN EN 1992-1-1 ANB:2009; 6.2.4(6)

7-57

- Composite Plastic Moment Capacity for Positive BendingUploaded bykangchin
- Steel BeamCal - Pointed Load + Beam's WeightUploaded byMana Mungkornkrit
- Bending MomentUploaded byhazheer1
- Analysis & Design of Composite & Metallic Flight Vehicle Structures - Abbott - 2017 - Second EditionUploaded byOlli1974
- TutorialUploaded byvarjith007
- MAE 3323 Mechanical Design I SyllabusUploaded byJoyful Joe
- Design of Trash RackUploaded byManmohit Singh
- b. BEAM Gaya Internal, DiaUploaded byAdi
- Report Static KhawaUploaded byMohd Khawarizmi
- Finite Element Analysis of Deep BeamUploaded byakash kumar
- RCC TbeamUploaded byrohit
- TorsionUploaded byAnonymous nQ9Rqm
- CARGAS CONCENTRADAS EM LAJES.pdfUploaded byRicardo Martins
- Gate StructuresUploaded bygrkvani10
- Projek Solid Mechanics 1Uploaded byShaktivell Letchumanan
- SOMUploaded byAbhishekVerma
- soal mkm.pdfUploaded byIbnu Abdillah
- 2199 Advanced Mechanics of Solids [Design for Manufacturing]Uploaded byPraveen Kumar
- erbau2016Uploaded byMario Ravr
- 62215_tocUploaded byyene
- 03 DoubleUploaded byGirma Fikre
- 2467-1-6225-1-10-20130718Uploaded byCuong Tran
- 13ccs321 Computer Aided Advanced Mechanics of MaterialsUploaded byArjunRathod
- dimnsinamento betao_flexaoUploaded byAmbrósio Carlos
- 4 ME Som Model Examination 2013Uploaded byBIBIN CHIDAMBARANATHAN
- 18_chapter 8.pdfUploaded byRouf Un Nabi
- 51e64ae0e4b08833fb23efa5-shkrina-1374061788922-sfbmdiagrams.pptUploaded byAiman Amir
- kucanjeUploaded byBoban
- Mom - AssignmentUploaded bysatishkumarkolluru9809
- 5.BEAM Gaya Internal, DiaUploaded bysutrimo

- Guidebook on Non-Destructive TestingUploaded byMaurice Balkissoon
- Firstname Lastname TMC CVUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- FTM Issue 2012 Rebar ECUploaded byoqusous
- RC Design EC2Uploaded byPicior Cristian
- 2015 Composites Lab2Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Dinamika StrukturUploaded byErik Wahyu Pradana
- 05_EC2WS_Arrieta_Detailing.pdfUploaded byLuigiForgerone
- Design of Anchor Reinforcement in Concrete Pedestals (Ancrage Pieds Colomne Métallique)Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Tuned Mass Damperv2Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Hydro Nepal PaperUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Abstract.edited.docxUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- low eUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Report Geology 1Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Beam Matlab CompareUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- 2015_2DingUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- 2015 Composites Lab1Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- SingaporeUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Onsite-293529Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- RCC 12-Deflection 1Uploaded byEngr Swapan
- Journal of Applied Chemistry Volume 17 issue 9 1967 [doi 10.1002_jctb.5010170901] Young, J. F. -- Humidity control in the laboratory using salt solutions-a revi.pdfUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- GEG-ch2-minerals and rocks-Part I.pdfUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- Questons_exam_MECA-H-411-Vibrations.pdfUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- 30288Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- ABB_1000.PDFUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- 235794741-Check-Purlin-Z-04-08-14Uploaded byLongChau
- Technical Design BriefUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- SinUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- CE5514 Plate and Shell StructuresUploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà
- BendC6St05Uploaded byLê Ngọc-Hà

- Strand7 Concrete Reinforcement AnalysisUploaded byejvdh
- Modulus of Elasticity - Young Modulus for Some Common MaterialsUploaded byozlatan1
- Detection of Underground Cable Fault using ArduinoUploaded byAnonymous kw8Yrp0R5r
- PCTS PAPER NDT Insitu Concrete Strength Assessment UPV SRHUploaded byAdam Papworth
- Zap_Brochure_RevH.pdfUploaded bypaspa
- 2382Uploaded byMuhammad Ahmad
- 2013-Dynamic Response of Alumina Ceramics Impacted by Long Tungsten ProjectileUploaded byvenkatesanjs
- DNVGL-OS-C102.pdfUploaded byHTConsultant
- COMBRI Design Manual Part I EnglishUploaded byJames Ellis
- Shell - Well Engineers NotebookUploaded byHamza Lahbiben
- Slab on GradeUploaded byEnam Bond
- Krok 2014Uploaded byCaecilia Wahyu Wijayaningrum
- A Study on Impact of Polypropylene (Recron-3s) Fibers on Compressive and Tensile Strength of ConcreteUploaded byIJIRST
- FRP FOR EARTHQUAKE DAMAGED STRUCTURESUploaded bySujay Raghavendra N
- eurocode-1Uploaded by^password
- Gl Direct Load Analysis e201803Uploaded bymarchelo896
- 2.3. Purlin System Specific Design.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Firdaus
- bdfhfbhdfgdgUploaded byRomil Sampayo
- Creep and FatigueUploaded byAyush Shah
- Application and Features of Titanium for the Aerospace IndustryUploaded byCláudiaCardoso
- 2014 Short Guide GeotextilesUploaded bymatersci_ebay
- Masterseries Updated-Notes 0CTOBER 2008Uploaded byChristian Nicolaus Mbise
- M312-Report1Uploaded byNoor Liyana Misman
- Propiedad de AleacionesUploaded byWalter Andres Melgar
- Composite Column ConstructionUploaded bynilkanth
- 083b-Filz1Uploaded byCristina Andreea Bitir
- Stud-bolts (NELSON) General InformationUploaded byMbrazao
- Application of Finite Element Analysis Method to Investigate Effect of Blanking Process Variables on SheetUploaded byIJMER
- Duracrete BrochureUploaded byKifayatullahKalwar
- As NZS 2172-2010 Cots for Household Use - Safety RequirementsUploaded bySAI Global - APAC