Analysis and Design of Hammer Head Bridge Pier Using Strut and Tie Method PDF

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF HAMMERHEAD BRIDGE PIER
USING STRUT AND TIE METHOD.
ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF HAMMERHEAD BRIDGE PIER
USING A STRUT AND TIE METHOD.
ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT
A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering (Civil – Structure)
Faculty of Civil Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
DEDICATION
TO MY BELOVED PARENT,
HAJI AHYAT BIN MD. NOR
AND
HAJJAH KAMSIAH BTE BERNEH
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In preparing this thesis, I was in contact with many people, researchers, academicians,
and practitioners. They have contributed towards my understanding and thoughts. In
particular, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my main thesis supervisor,
Associate Professor Ir. Dr. Wahid Omar, for encouragement, guidance, critics and
friendship. I am also very thankful to Mr. Md. Nor, Mr. Jamal from Jurutera Perunding
ZAR for their guidance, advices and motivation. Without their continued support and
interest, this thesis would not have been the same as presented here.
I am also indebted to University Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) for finding my Master

study. Librarians at UTM also deserve special thanks for their assistance in supplying
the relevant literatures.
My sincere appreciation also extends to my friends Ir. Kamaruddin Hassan ( JKR Bridge
Section, Kuala Lumpur), Ir. Che Husni Ahmad (Consultant), Ir. Azli Shah Bin Ali
Bashah (Engineer of Dewan Bandar Raya Kuala Lumpur) and my colleagues who have
provided assistance at various occasions. Thanking to all of you in advanced. I am also
very thankful to Mr. Md. Nor, Mr. Jamal from Jurutera Perunding ZAR who have
provided continued support and assistance in preparing the thesis.
Lastly, I am also deserve special thanks to my beloved wife for her commitment,
encouragement while preparing the works and continued support at various occasions.
iii
ABSTRACT.
The main advantages of truss model are their transparency and adaptability to arbitrary
geometric and loading configuration. In strut-and-tie modeling, the internal stresses are
transferred through a truss mechanism. The tensile ties and compressive struts serve as
truss members connected by nodal zones. The advantages have been thrust into the back
ground by several recent developments of design equations based on truss models,
The present study is focus on developing a uniform design procedure for applying the
strut-and-tie modeling method to hammerhead pier. A study was conducted using
hammerhead piers that were previously designed using the strength method specified by
code. This structure was completed and had put into service. During the inspection,
cracks were observed on the piers. The scope of this study is to highlight the application
of a newer generation strut-and-tie model, which is not practice at the time of the
original design. Depth to span ratios varies from 1.5 to 2.11 and the girders are
transferring loads very close to the support edge, making these hammerheads ideals
candidates for strut-and-tie application. This study only focus on comparison the
reinforcement detail drawing produce previously designed using the strength method,
and reinforcing requirement using strut-and-tie model.
Based on the design studies, a well-defined procedure for designing a hammerhead pier
utilizing the strut-and-tie model was established that may be used by bridge engineers.
There could be numerous reasons for the crack to develop. Shrinkage, stress
concentration or some erection condition may be a few of them.
iv
ABSTRAK.
Kelebihan model “strut and tie ” ia ketelusan melihat kerangka yang di cadangkan dan
memudahkan melihat dan meramalkan kedudukan beban yang dikenakan terhadap
struktur yang di cadangkan.
Analisis mengikut model “strut and tie ” mengunakan kaedah kekuatan mampatan dan
kaedah kekuatan tegangan yang saling bertindak diantara satu sama lain hasil daripada
ikatan disetiap nod. Kebaikan analisis mengunakan kaedah kekuatan mampatan dan
kekuatan tegangan yang saling betindak diantara mereka telah membuat pengkaji cuba
membangunkan kaedah rekabentuk berpandukan kaedah model “strut and tie model”.
Kajian ini menjurus untuk memajukan satu kaedah yang setara untuk merekabentuk
menggunakan kaedah model “strut and tie ” untuk tiang Jambatan berbentuk T. Kajian
ini dikendalikan menggunakan struktur tiang jambatan berbentuk T yang telah
direkabentuk terlebih dahulu menggunakan analisa kekuatan lentur mengikut keperluan
amalan rekabentuk.
Struktur ini telah siap dibina dan dibuka untuk kegunaan lalulintas. Semasa pemerhatian
terhadap struktur tersebut didapati ada beberapa rekahan di permukaan dinding struktur.
Bidang kajian ini adalah untuk menunjukkan penggunaan analisis model “strut and tie
model” yang masih dalam peringkat pembangunan boleh diguna pakai untuk mereka
bentuk struktur tersebut. Nisbah ketinggian dinding tembok dan panjang rasuk adalah
berbeza diantara 1.5 hingga 2.11 dan beban yang terletak diatas rasuk tersebut, hampir
dengan kedudukan tiang rasuk, ini membuatkan struktur tersebut amat sesuai untuk
dianalisis mengunakan kaedah analisis model “strut and tie ”.
v
Hasil daripada kajian rekabentuk ini, satu kaedah rekabentuk mengunakan tindak balas
struktur “strut and tie ” dapat dimajukan untuk dicadangkan untuk merekabentuk
struktur tiang jambatan berbentuk T, yang mana boleh digunakan oleh Jurutera
Jambatan.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

Title Page i
Declaration ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgement iv
Abstract v
Abstrak vi
Table of Content viii – xi
List of Tables xii
List of Figure xiii – ivx
List of Symbols xv – xvi
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Problem Statement 1
1.3 Objective 3
1.4 Scope of Study 3
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 Overview of Strut-and-Tie Model 6
2.3 Adequate Selection of Truss Members 8
2.4 General Strength of Truss Members 12
vii
2.4.1 Strength Requirement 13

2.4.1.1 Rule in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models 13
2.4.1.2 Strength of Tensile Tie 14
2.4.1.3 Strength of Compressive Strut 14
2.4.1.4 Node Strength 16
2.4.5 Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3) 19
2.4.6 Serviceability Requirement (ACI RA.2.1) 19
2.5 Shear Concerns in Strut-and-Tie Models 20
2.6 AASTHO AND LRFD SPECIFICATION
2.6.1 Introduction 23
2.6.2 AASHTO Standard Code Specification
for the Design of Reinforced Concrete
Member 23
2.6.3 Design for Flexure 25
2.6.4 Design for Shear 28
2.6.5 AASHTO LRFD Standard Code
Specification for the Design of Reinforced
Concrete member using
Strut-and-Tie Model 29
2.6.5.1 Compression Struts 30
2.6.5.2 Tension ties 31
2.6.5.3 Nodal Zones 32
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 34
3.2 Description of Design Procedures 36
3.2.1 The Structure Model 36
3.2.2 Load Generation Procedure 37
3.2.3 Analytical Method 39
viii
3.2.4 Strut-and-Tie Model Truss

Background for Hammerhead Pier 40
3.2.5 Pier Design Procedure 40
3.3 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier
Analysis / Design 42
3.3.1 Project Description 42
3.3.2 Original Analysis / Design 42
3.3.3 Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design 42
3.3.4 Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design
For Phase 1 44
For Phase 2 47
For Phase 3 50
For Phase 4 53
3.4 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier
Design Example 62
3.4.1 Design Example 1 62
3.4.1.1 Steel Reinforcement for Main
Tension ties 62
3.4.1.2 Calculation for Inclined Strut 63
3.4.1.3 Secondary Reinforcement 65
Tension ties 68
Tension ties 74
ix

4 RESULT AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction 81
4.2 Analysis of Result 81
4.2.1 Possibility of Cracking 82
4.2.2 Phase Construction 82
4.3 Discussion of Results 83
5 DESIGN RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Introduction 84
5.2 Recommendation Strut-and-Tie
Design Procedure For Hammerhead piers 84
5.2.1 Determination of Load 84
5.2.2 Defining the Truss Model 84
5.2.3 Dimensioning of Tensile Ties,
Compressive Struts and Nodal Zones 86
6 SUMMARY AND CONLUSION

6.1 Summary 89
6.2 Conclusions 90
REFERENCES 93
x
LIST OF TABLES.
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
3.1 Load Cases Definition 39

3.2 Tabulated estimated Load 43
3.3 Tabulated Member Forces For Each Construction Phases 56
xi
LIST OF FIGURES.
FIGURE NO TITLE PAGE
2.1 B-Region and D-Region 7

2.2 ACI Section 10.7.1 For Deep Beam 8
2.3 Example strut-and-tie model, And acceptable Model 10
and Poor Model
2.4 Basic Type of Strut in a 2-D Member 12
2.5 Basic Type of Strut in a 2-D Member 15
2.6 Illustrates some typical example of singular and smeared 18
nodes.
2.7 Inclined cracking 20
2.8 Truss like action 20
2.9 Analogous truss 20
2.10 Truss analogy 21
2.11 Application of sectional design model and strut-and-tie 21
model for series of beams tested by Kani (1979), adapted
from Collins and Mitchell (1991)
2.12 Rectangular Section with Tension Reinforcement Only. 25
2.13 Rectangular Section with Compression and Tension 26
Reinforcement
3.1 Reinforcing pattern provide by original design 35
3.2 3D structure model 37
3.3 Load case condition 38
3.4 3D strut and tie model 41
3.5 2D strut and tie model 43
xii
3.6 Proposed Load Application for Phase 1 44

3.7 Result of Force in Member 45
3.8 Result member deflected shape 46
3.18 Maximum Members Force 61
3.19 Transverse tension in strut between node N1 and N2 67
3.20 Reinforcing pattern analyses using strut-and-tie-model 80
xiii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
a = depth of the compression block

As = the required area of steel
Ac = cross sectional area at the end of Strut
An = area of a Nodal Zone face in which the force is framing,
measured perpendicular to the direction of the force.
b = width of concrete section
bw = the width of web
d = depth from extreme compression fibres to reinforcing steel
D = depth of the nodal zone
DA = available effective depth
DR = Required effective depth
f’c = concrete compressive strength.
fcu = effective compressive strength and
fy = the tie yield strength
Fi = force in strut or tie i
Fn = nominal strength of Strut, Tie, or Node, and
Fu = factored force demand of the Strut, Tie, or Node.
li = length of member i
Mn = nominal moment capacity
Nu = the factored tie force
Pn = nominal resistance of strut or tie
Pu = ultimate capacity of strut or tie
Vc = the nominal shear strength provided by the concrete
Vn = the factored shear force at the section considered
W = width of the nodal zone
xiv
Es = 1.00 for prismatic Struts in uncracked compression zones,

Es = 0.04 for Struts in tension members,
Es = 0.75 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control
reinforcement is included,
reinforcement is not included, and
Es = 0.60 for all other cases.
En = 1.00 if Nodes are bounded by Struts and/or bearing areas,
En = 0.80 if Nodes anchor only one Tie, and
En = 0.60 if Nodes anchor more than one Tie.
I = strength reduction factor,
Hmi = mean strain of member i
Uvi = steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing that strut
Ji = angle between the axis of a strut and the bars
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Strut-and-tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced concrete

elements in which it may be assumed that internal stresses are transferred through a
truss mechanism. The tensile ties and compressive struts serve as truss members
connected by nodal zones. The internal truss, idealized by the strut-and-tie model,
implicitly account for the distribution of both flexure and shear.
1.2 Problem Statement
Three procedure are currently used for the design of load transferred
members such as deep beams:
Empirical design method
Two or three dimensional analysis, either linear or nonlinear
By mean of trusses composed of concrete struts and steel tension ties.
Strut and tie model is considered a rational and consistent basis for designing
cracked reinforced concrete structure. It is mainly applied to the zones where the
2
beam theory does not apply, such as geometrical discontinuities, loading points,
deep beams and corbels.
The main advantage of truss model are their tranparency and adaptability to
arbitrary geomatric and loading configuration. In strut-and-tie modelling, the
internal stresses are tranferred through a truss mechanism. The tensile ties and
compressive struts serve as truss members connected by nodal zones. The
advantages have been thrust into the back ground by several recent developements
of design equations based on truss models,
In 1998, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications (1998) incorporated the

strut and tie modeling procedure for the analysis and design of deep reinforced
concrete members where sectional design approaches are not valid. In most
instances, hammerhead piers can be defined as deep reinforced concrete members
and therefore, should be designed using the strut-and-tie modeling approach.
However, most bridge engineers do not have a broad knowledge on the strut-and-tie
model due to the unfamiliarity with the design procedure. Therefore, it is likely
that, with the formulation of a well-defined strut-and-tie modeling procedure,
practicing engineers will become more comfortable with the design method and
therefore, employ the method more often and consistently.
The succesful application of a strut-and-tie model depend on a reliable

visualization of the path of the force flows. In a typical strut-and-tie analysis, the
force distribution is visualised as compressive struts and tensiles ties, respectively.
3
1.3 Objectives
The specific objectives of the study are:

To ascertain the degree of strut-and-tie modeling implementation.
To compare the flexure and shear reinforcing requirements for typical
hammerhead type bridge piers using both strut-and-tie modeling and standard
sectional design practices, and
To develop a uniform design procedure for employing strut-and-tie
modeling for hammerhead piers.
Most codes of practice use sectional methods for designed of conventional

beams under bending and shear. ACI building Code 318M-95 assumes that flexure
and shear can be handle separately for the worst combination of flexure and shear at
a given section. The interaction between flexure and shear is addressed indirectly by
detailing rules for flexural reinforcement cutoff point.
1.4 Scope of Study
In these study pier caps was designed using the strut-and-tie modeling
procedure and the results compared to the results of the sectional design method. By
comparing the results, the reduction or increase in the flexural steel and the shear
steel can be quantified.
These new procedure can provide rational and safe design framework for
structural concrete under combined actions, including the effects of axial load,
bending and torsion.
4
In addition specific checks on the level of concrete stresses in the member are
introduced to ensure sufficient ductile behavior and control of diagonal crack widths
at service load level.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The strut and tie models have been widely used as effective tools for
designing reinforced concrete structures. The idea of a Strut-and-Tie Model came
from the truss analogy method introduced independently by Ritter [1] and Morsch
[2] in the early 1900s for shear design. This method employs so called Truss
Models as its design basis. The model was used to idealised the flow of forced in
a cracked concrete beam. In parallel with the increasing availibility of the
experimental results and the developement of limit analysis in the plastcity
theory, the truss analogy method has been validated and improved considerably in
the form of full member or sectional design procedures. The Truss Model has also
been used as the design basis for torsion.
Later, Schlaich, et al [3] worked to combined individual research

conducted on various reinforced concrete elements in such a fashion that Strut-
and-Tie modeling could be used for entire structure.
Strut-and-Tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced
concrete elements in which it may be assumed that flexural and shearing stresses
are tranferred internally in a truss type member comprised of concrete
compressive struts and steel reinforcing tension ties. It should be noted that while
the shear design is theoritically couple with the truss model, in most instances
6
designers perform a separate check for providing additional strirrup type shear
reinforcement.
Several theoretical and experimental studies had been carried out to

analyses the phenomenon of the shear failure of reinforced concrete beams.
During the past few years design codes ACI [4] and AASHTO [5] have adopted
Strut-and-tie principles for the design deep beam members. The definition of deep
section provided by these specification classifies most hammerhead piers as deep
beam.
This literature review is conducted to establish the state of knowledge with

regard the possible crack to the hammerhead bridge. The argument has been arise
on theoritical method which are most applicable to this type of structure. Strut-
and-tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced concrete which are
most suitable for the hammerhead bridge pier but a comparison must be made
with beam theory in order to make a comparison with the actual behaviour of the
structure . A comparison will be made on the analytical model on the design the
hammerhead piers using the strength design method as specified by the standard
specification in order to evaluate strut-and-tie modeling. This study will help to
focus on developing design procedure for applying to hammerhead bridge pier.
2.2 Overview of Strut-and-Tie Modeling
Strut-and-Tie Method (STM) has been used for several years in Europe
and had been included in the AASHTHO LRFD [5] Bridge Specification since
1994, it is a new concept for many structural engineers, recommendation for the
used of STM to design reinforced concrete members were discuss by previous
researchers. In selecting the appropriate design approach, focused on
understanding the internal distribution of forces in a reinforced concrete structure
and have defined two specific regions; B-Regions and D-Regions as shown in
Figure 2.1. The B-Regions of a structure (where B stands for Beam, Bending, or
7
Bernoulli Beam theory may be employed) have internal states of stress that are
easily derived from the sectional forces e.g. bending, shear, etc.
Figure 2.1 ( B-Region and D-Region)
For structural members that do not exhibit plane strain distribution, e.g.
the strain distribution is non-linear, the sectional force approach in not applicable.
These regions are called D-Regions (where D stands for discontinuity,
disturbance, or detail). The D-Regions of a structure are normally corners,
corbels, deep sections, and areas near concentrated loads. When D-Regions crack
the treatments used such as "detailing," "past experience," and "good practice"
often prove inadequate and inconsistent Schlaich, et al [3].
Figure 2.2
ACI [4] Section 10.7.1 For Deep Beam: ACI Section 11.8
For L/d < 5/2 for continuous span For L/d < 5 Shear requirement
For L/d < 5/4 for simple span
8
Figure 2.2 provided a simple strut-and-tie model applied to a simply

supported deep beam. In this figure, the lighter shaded region represent concrete
compressive struts, the steel reinforcing bar represent a tensile tie, and the dark
shared regions represent nodal zones.
The tension ties in the truss model may represent one or several layers of
flexural reinforcement in the deep section. The locations of the tension ties
normally are defined at the centroid of reinforcing mat.
2.3 Adequate Selection of Truss Members
The successful application of a strut-and-tie model depends on a reliable

visualization of the paths of force flow. In a typical strut-and-tie analysis, the
force distribution is visualized as compressive and tensile force flows that are
modeled as compressive struts and tensile ties.
The engineering judgment and an iterative procedure required to produce

an adequate reinforcement pattern for a given member. The process of defining
the truss begins by defining the flow of forces in the member and locating the
nodal zones at points where the external loads act and the loads are transferred
between structural members, e.g. the pier cap to pier column or at the supports.
The tension ties and compression struts can then be located once the nodal zones
have been defined.
The tension ties are located at the assumed centroid of tensile reinforcing
beginning and terminating at nodal zones. The compression struts are defined to
coincide with the compressive field and, as with the tensile ties, begin and
terminate at the nodal zones.
9
The truss should exhibit equilibrium at each node and should portray an
acceptable truss model. The good model is should be more closely approach to
the elastic stress trajectories. The poor model requires large deformation before
the tie can yield, break the rule that concrete has a limited capacity to sustain
plastic deformation. Figure 2.3 illustrates the difference between an acceptable
model and a poor model.
Figure 2.3 Example strut-and-tie model, An acceptable Model and Poor Model
(This figure cited from lecture note Dr.C.C. Fu, Ph.D, P.E, University of
Maryland)
In a cracked structural concrete member, loads are tranmitted through a set

of commpressive stress fields that are distributed and interconnected by a tensile
stress fields. The flow of compressive stresses can be idealised using compression
10
members called strut, and tension stress fields are idealised using tension member
called ties. Since reinforced ties are much more deformable than concrete struts,
the model with the least and shortest ties should provide the most favorable
model. Schlaich et al., proposes a simple criterion for optimizing a model that
derived from the principle of minimum strain energy for linear elastic behavior of
the struts and ties after cracking. The contribution of the concrete struts can
generally be omitted because the strains of the struts are usually much smaller
than those of the steel ties. An ideal arrangement of ties and strut to minimise
both the forces in the various component element, and the length of the elements.
This is formulated as a design criterion by as follows. Schlaich, et al [3]
n Fili Hmi = Minimum
Where
Fi = force in strut or tie i
li = length of member i
Hmi = mean strain of member i
Strut-and-Tie Modeling of Structural Concrete by Dr. Quang Quan Liang

at al [6], School of Civil and Enviromental Engineering, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney Australia developed a performance-based strut-and-tie
modeling procedure for reinforced concrete citing the inefficiency of the trial-
and-error iterative process that is based on the designer’s intuition and past
experience. Their optimization procedure consists of eliminating the most lowly
stressed portions from the structural concrete member to find the actual load path.
Liang, et al [6], proposes that minimizing the strain energy is equivalent to
maximizing the overall stiffness of a structure and that the strut-and-tie system
should be based on system performance (overall stiffness) instead of component
performance (compression struts and tension ties).
11
2.4 General Strength of Truss Members
Struts are the compression members of a strut-and-tie model and represent

concrete stress fields whose principal compressive stresses are predominantly
along the centerline of the strut. The idealized shape of concrete stress field
surrounding a strut in a plane (2-D) member, however, can be prismatic Figure
2.4(a), bottle-shaped Figure 2.4(b), or fan-shaped Figure 2.4(c). Struts can be
strengthened by steel reinforcement, and if so, they are termed reinforced struts.
Figure 2.4 Basic Type of Struts in a 2-D Member: (a) Prismatic (b) Bottle-
Shaped (c) Fan-Shaped (This figure cited from lecture note Dr.C.C. Fu, Ph.D,
P.E, University of Maryland)
Ties are the tension members of a strut-and-tie model. Ties mostly

represent reinforcing steel, but they can occasionally represent prestressing steel
or concrete stress fields with principal tension.
As previously stated, the truss model is comprised of tension ties,

compression struts, and nodal zones. For the adequate design of the reinforced
concrete member, the elements of the truss model must be sized. The following
12
sections present the general strength of the tensile ties, compressive struts, and
nodal zones.
2.4.1 Strength Requirement
The American Concrete Institute [4] (ACI) introduces the Strut-and-Tie

Method as a design method for D-Region problems in 2002 edition of ACI 318
Code [4]. The provisions consist of five sections these provisions are summarized
as follows:
2.4.1.1 Rules in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models
In designing using the Strut-and-Tie Method, a Strut-and-Tie Model

representing idealized load-transfer mechanism in the D-Region under
consideration is to be selected (A.2.1). The selected Strut-and-Tie Model should
consists of Struts, Ties, and Nodes (A.2.1) and has to be in equilibrium with the
forces acting on the D-Region (A.2.2). The finite dimensions of Strut-and-Tie
Model components, representing the stress fields of Struts, Ties, and Nodes,
should be considered (A.2.3). Tie stress fields can cross Strut stress fields (A.2.4).
To avoid severe strain incompatibility between Struts and Ties, the angle between
a Strut and a Tie framing into a Node cannot be smaller than 25 degrees (A.2.5).
The Strut-and-Tie Model components must have sufficient capacity to

resist the force demand such that (A.2.6)
IFn UFu
where:
I= strength reduction factor,

13
2.4.1.2 Strength of Tensile Ties
In order to simplify the equilibrium analysis of a strut-and tie model it is

often convinient to combine a number of separate and parallel reinforcing bars
and represent them as a single tie. According to ACI, the tension tie can be
designed with the straightforward approach of dividing the factored tie force by
the yield strength of the reinforcing steel and is expressed as follows (Kuchma
and Tjhin, 2001; ACI, 2001):
As > Nu /I fy
where
Nu = the factored tie force
fy = the tie yield strength
I = resistance factor
As = the required area of steel
The care must be exercised in the strut-and-tie as the real distribution of

bars, of the tensile reinforcement and also in the selection of how to distribute
and anchor the reinforcement. This becomes apparent due to the ability of the
joint or nodal zone to transfer forces between the strut-and-tie is dependent on the
surface area of the reinforcement, the height over which it is distributed, the
length of the node, and the type of anchorage method that is employed. ACI and
AASHTO have provisions, which require the tie reinforcement be distributed
over such a height that if the tie were anchored on the far side of the node that the
nodal stress limit value will not be exceeded (Kuchma and Tjhin, 2001).
14
2.4.1.3 Strength of Compressive Strut
a. Strut Strength (ACI A.3)
Struts are the compression members of a strut-and-tie model and represent

concrete stress fields whose principal compressive stresses are predominantly
along the centerline of the strut. The idealized shape of concrete stress field
surrounding a strut in a plane (2-D) member, however, can be prismatic Figure
2.5(a), bottle-shaped Figure 2.5(b), or fan-shaped Figure 2.5(c) Schlaich at el [7].
Struts can be strengthened by steel reinforcement, and if so, they are termed
reinforced struts.
Figure 2.5 Basic Type of Struts in a 2-D Member: (a) Prismatic (b) Bottle-
Shaped (c)Fan-Shaped
In the design using strut-and-tie models, it is necessary to check that the

crushing of the compressive strut does not occur. Struts are the compression
members of a Strut-and-Tie Model and represent concrete stress fields represent
one dimensional stress fields, which should not exceed the compressive strength
of the concrete. Cracking may develop in bottle shaped elements if no crack
control reinforcement is used.
ACI [4] uses the following formula to limit the compressive stress in the
strut (ACI, 2001).
The nominal strength of a Strut, Fns , is defined as

Fns = fcu Ac
15
where:

Ac = cross sectional area at the end of Strut.
The effective compresive strength, fcu , is defined as

fcu = 0.85Es f’c
where:

f’c = concrete compressive strength.
The ACI [4] code equation accounts for when struts are prismatic, tapered, or
bottle shaped and whether transverse reinforcement is or is not provided. ACI [4]
also gives the following equation for the required amount of crack control
reinforcement:
n Uvi sin Ji U 0.003
where
Uvi = steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing that strut
Ji = angle between the axis of a strut and the bars
2.4.1.4 Node Strength

16
Nodal zones (the joints of the truss) are formed where tension ties,
compression struts, and exterior loads intersect. To allow safe transfer of strut-
and-tie forces through the nodal zones, concrete stress levels must be controlled.
The strength of concrete in the nodal zones depends on Yun and Rameriz [8]
• The confinement of the zones by reactions, compression struts, anchorage
plates for prestressing, reinforcement from the adjoining members and
hoop reinforcement,
• The effects of strain discontinuities within the nodal zone when ties
strained in tension are anchored in, or across, a compressed nodal
zone, and
• The splitting stresses and hook-bearing stresses resulting from the
anchorage of the reinforcing bars of a tension tie in or immediately behind
a nodal zone.
When a node is introduced into a model it is implied that the internal forces
change directions abruptly. In reality, the force changes directions over a certain
length and width. This yields two types of nodes based on the length and width of
the node; singular and smeared. Singular nodes are encountered when forces tend
to be locally concentrated and the deviation of the forces tends to be locally
concentrated. Conversely, if a strut or tie represents a wide stress field the node
can be considered a smeared node. Figure 2.6 illustrates some typical examples of
singular and smeared nodes Schlaich et al.[9].
17
Figure 2.6 illustrates some typical examples of singular and smeared nodes
(Schlaich et al., 1987).
a. Node Strength (ACI A.5)
The nominal strength of a Nodal Zone, Fnn, is defined as

Fnn = fcu An
18
where:

An = area of a Nodal Zone face in which the force is framing, measured
perpendicular to the direction of the force.
The effective compresive strength, fcu, is defined as

fcu = 0.85En f’c,
where:

f’c = concrete compressive strength
2.4.5 Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3)
The Tie reinforcement must be properly anchored in the Nodal Regions at the
ends of the Tie such that the corresponding Tie force can be developed at the
point where the centroid of the reinforcement in the Tie leaves the Extended
Nodal Zone. An extended Nodal Zone is a region bounded by the intersection of
the Effective Strut Width and the Effective Tie Width.
2.4.6 Serviceability Requirements (ACI RA.2.1)
Design based on Strut-and-Tie Models should satisfy the serviceability

requirements provisions in the body of the code can be applied.
19
2.5 Shear Concerns in Strut-and-Tie Models
Truss analogy assumes that a pattern of parallel inclined crack forms in

region of high shear, indicated in Figure 2.7 (Inclined cracking) and that the
concrete in between adjacent inclined cracks can carry an inclined compressive
force, and hence act like a diagonal strut. This suggests that if tranverse stirrups
are provided at a regular interval along the beam, truss like action can be
achieved whereby the main reinforcement provide longitudinal tension chord and
the compressive concrete on the other side of the beam the longitudinal
compressive chord. In the analogous truss shown in Figure 2.8 (Truss like action),
the tranverse reinforcing steel is vertical but clearly truss action can also be
achieved with inclined steel stirrups.
A feature of truss method is that the forces in the stirrups and the diagonal
strut can be determined using simple statics. For example, in Figure 2.9
(analogous truss) the strut is inclined at Tdegrees while stirrup is verticle, so that
the shear force acting in a cross-section is carried by the verticle component of
the diagonal compressive force D:
D sin T = V
Figure 2.7 - Inclined cracking
Figure 2.8 - Truss like action

20
Figure 2.9 - Analogous truss
Figure 2.10 – Truss analogy
By considering the joint in Figure 2.10 (Truss analogy), we can see that
the force Vs in the stirrup is equal to the shear forve. With the stirrup spacing s
and the beam depth d, the number of stirrup n is determine by their spacing s and
the angle T
n = d / s tan T
In common case, the inclined crack cut n stirrups and these together carry
the applied shear force V. Figure 2.11 compares the experimentally determined
shear strength of the series of beam tested using sectional design model and strut-
and-tie models Collins and Mitchell [10]. In these tests, the shear span-to-depth
ratio a/d was varied from 1 to 7 and no web reinforcement was provided. At a/d
values less than 2.5, the resistance is governed by strut-and-tie action, with the
resistance dropping off rapidly as a/d increased.
The test showed that for span-to-depth ratios from 1 to 2.5 the shear is
carried by strut-and-tie action; however, over the 2.5 ratio a sectional model
21
transfers the shearing stress. The findings of Kani et al. [11] would further
support the ability of the truss model to transfer the shear in disturbed regions
near supports and point loads. However, bridge designers are typically
uncomfortable with the idea of not using shear reinforcement and therefore after a
strut-and-tie has been developed most engineers have then also conducted a
sectional analysis to detail additional shear reinforcement.
Figure 2.11 – Application of sectional design model and strut-and-tie model for
series of beams tested by Kani [11], adapted from Collins and Mitchell [10]
23
2.6 AASHTO LFD AND LRFD SPECIFICATIONS
2.6.1 Introduction
With the implementation of the AASHTO LRFD [12] Bridge

Specifications, bridge designers were presented with a new approach in the
design of deep reinforced concrete sections, the strut-and-tie design method.
While strut-and-tie modeling has been employed in the past for various reinforced
concrete designs, the introduction of the AASHTO LFRD [12] Specifications
marks the first time it is presented as a suggested design procedure. This chapter
outlines the procedures used in both the AASHTO [5] Standard Specifications
and the AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications for the design of deep concrete
sections. Additionally, a survey of State Transportation Departments was
conducted to determine design practice currently used for hammerhead type piers.
Results of this survey are summarized in this chapter.
2.6.2 AASHTO Standard Code Specifications for the Design of Reinforced

Concrete Members
Generally, the design strength of a given member is in terms of moment,

shear, or stress. In the strength design method, a nominal strength is calculated
and then reduced by a factor normally expressed as I. Article 8.16.1.2.2 of the
Standard Specifications gives the following strength-reduction factors (for shear
and moment), I, shall be as follows (AASHTO [5]:
(a) Flexure………………………………………. I = 0.90
(b) Shear………………………………………… I = 0.85
• Section 8.16.2 presents several design assumptions used in the strength

design method for reinforced concrete and are as follows:
• 8.16.2.1 The strength design of members for flexure and axial loads shall
be based on the assumptions given in this Article, and on the
24
satisfaction of the applicable conditions of equilibrium of internal

stresses and compatibility of strains.
• 8.16.2.2 The strain in reinforcement and concrete is directly proportional
to the distance from the neutral axis.
• 8.16.2.3 The maximum usable strain at the extreme concrete compression
fiber is equal to 0.003.
• 8.16.2.4 The stress in reinforcement below its specified yield strength, fy,
shall be Es times the steel strain. For strains greater than
thatcorresponding to fy, the stress in the reinforcement shall be considered
independent of strain and equal to fy.
• 8.16.2.5 The tensile strength of the concrete is neglected in flexural
calculations.
• 8.16.2.6 The concrete compressive stress/strain distribution may be
assumed to be a rectangle, trapezoid, parabola, or any other shape that
results in prediction of strength in substantial agreement with the
results of comprehensive tests.
• 8.16.2.7 A compressive stress/strain distribution, which assumes a
concrete stress of 0.85 f'c uniformly distributed over an equivalent
compression zone bounded by the edges of the cross section and a line
parallel to the neutral axis at a distance a = E1c from the fiber of maximum
compressive strain, may be considered to satisfy the requirements of
Article 8.16.2.6. The distance c from the fiber of maximum strain to the
neutral axis shall be measured in a direction perpendicular to that axis.
The factor E1 shall be taken as 0.85 for concrete strengths, f'c, up to and
including 4,000 psi. For strengths above 4,000 psi, fl shall be reduced
continuously at a rate of 0.05 for each 1,000 psi of strength in excess of
4,000 psi but E1 shall not be taken less than 0.65.
25
2.6.3 Design for Flexure
The AASHTO [5] Standard Specifications first presents the maximum

reinforcement for flexural members. Article 8.16.3.1.1 states that the ratio of
reinforcement U provided shall not exceed 0.75 of the ratio Ub that would produce
balanced strain conditions for the section. The portion of Ub balanced by
compression reinforcement need not be reduced by the 0.75 factor. Article
8.16.3.1.2 states that balanced strain conditions exist at a cross section when the
tension reinforcement reaches the strain corresponding to its specified yield
strength, fy, just as the concrete in compression reaches its assumed ultimate
strain of 0.003.
The AASHTO [5] Standard Specifications follow the traditional design

approach for bending in reinforced concrete sections. Three cases are presented in
the Specifications: rectangular sections with tension reinforcement only, flanged
sections with tension reinforcement only, and rectangular sections with tension
and compression reinforcement. The two cases for bending design are illustrated
by Fig. 2.12, Fig. 2.13 respectively.
Figure 2.12. Rectangular Section with Tension Reinforcement Only.

26
Figure 2.13. Rectangular Section with Compression and Tension Reinforcement.
Article 8.16.3.2.1 gives the following equation for the design moment
Bijk y
z
strength, IMn, for rectangular sections with tension reinforcement only:
{F
f M n = As fy d 1 - 0.6
fy
f 'c (2-1)
BJN
where,
F
= f As fy d -
As fy
a
2
a=
0.85 f ' c b (2.2)
B F
The balanced reinforcement ratio, U, is then given by Article 8.16.3.2.2 as:
0.85 b1 f 'c 87, 000
rb =
fy 87, 000 + fy
(2.3)
For instances when the compression flange thickness is less than a (depth
A
HLHL HLE
of the compression block), the design moment strength may be computed by:
f M n = f As - Asf fy d - a 2 + Asf fy d - 0.5hf
(2-4)
where,
Asf =
HL 0.85f 'c b - bw hf
a=
HL fy
As - Asf fy
0.85 f ' cbw
(2-5)
(2-6)
jikzy{B
and the balanced steel ratio is:
rb=
i{jk y
ijk y
z z
{F
bw
b
0.85 b1 f 'c
fy
87, 000
87, 000 + fy
+rf
(2-7)
27
where,
Asf
rf=
bw d (2-8)
Article 8.16.3.4.1 gives the following equation for the design moment
strength, IMn, for Rectangular sections with tension and compression
reinforcement as:
If
jik zy{ ijk y
As - A's
bd
i{jk y
z z
{
³ 0.85 b1
f 'c d'
fy
87, 000
87, 000 - fy
(2-9)
then,
A
HLHL HL E
f M n = f As - A' s fy d - a 2 + A's fy d - d'
(2-10)
where,
a=
HLAs - A' s fy
0.85f ' cb (2-11)
Article 8.16.3.4.2 states that when the value of (As - A's )/ bd is less than
the value required by Eqn. 2-10, such that the stress in the compression
reinforcement is less than the yield strength, fy, or when effects of compression
reinforcement is less than the yield strength, fy, or when effects of compression
reinforcement are neglected, the design moment strength may be computed by the
equations in Article 8.16.3.2 (Eqns. 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3).
Article 8.16.3.4.3 gives the balanced reinforcement ratio Ub for rectangular
rb=
ijk y i{jk y
z
0.85 b1f 'c
fy
z
F i
{ kz
sections with compression reinforcement as follows:
B j y
{ 87, 000
87, 000 + fy
+ r'
f 's
fy
(2-12)
jik z {ijk y
y z
where,
B
f ' s = 87, 000 1 -
{Fd'
d
87, 000 + fy
87, 000
£ fy
(2-13)
28
2.6.4 Design for Shear
Shear design in the Standard Specifications is accomplished by computing

the contribution to the shear capacity from both the concrete and steel. The
Standard Specifications provides the following equation for the design of cross
sections subjected to shear:
Vu £ f Vn (2-14)
where Vu is the factored shear force at the section considered and Vn is the
nominal shear strength computed by:
Vn = Vc + Vs (2-15)
where Vc is the nominal shear strength provided by the concrete in accordance

with Article 8.16.6.2, and Vs is the nominal shear strength provided by the shear
reinforcement in accordance with Article 8.16.6.3. Whenever applicable, effects
of torsion shall be included.
The shear strength provided by the concrete, for members subject to shear
jik### zy{
and flexure only, Vc shall be computed by:
Vc = 1.9 f 'c + 2, 500 r w
Vu d
Mu
bw d
(2-16)
or,
Vc = 2 ### f 'c bw d
(2-17)
where bw is the width of web and d is the distance from the extreme compression
fiber to the centroid of the longitudinal tension reinforcement. For tapered webs,
bw shall be the average width or 1.2 times the minimum width, whichever is
smaller.
Additionally, the Standard Specifications provides the following two notes for the
contribution of concrete shear resistance:
(a) Vc shall not exceed 3 .5e f'cbwd when using more detailed calculations.
(b) The quantity Vud /Mu shall not be greater than 1.0 where Mu is the factored
moment occurring simultaneously with Vu at the section being considered. When
the factored shear force, Vu exceeds shear strength IVc , shear reinforcement must
be provided. The Standard Specifications provides for three cases of
reinforcement. The first is when shear reinforcement is perpendicular to the axis
of the member is used. The amount of reinforcement is then:
29
Av fy d
Vs =
s (2-18)
where Av is the area of shear reinforcement within a distance s.
Vs =
HL
When using inclined stirrups, the amount of required reinforcement is given by:
Av sina + cosa d
s (2-19)
When a single vertical bar or a single group of vertical parallel bars located at the
same distance from the support is used:
Vs = Av fy sina £ 3 ###
f 'c bw d
(2-20)
The Standard Specifications also limit the amount of shear strength that
the steel can provide. Article 8.16.6.3.9 states that shear strength Vs shall not be
taken greater than:
Vs = 8 ###
f 'c bw d
(2-21)
2.6.5 AASHTO LRFD Code Specifications for the Design of Reinforced

Concrete Members using Strut-and-Tie Modeling
The AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications states that strut-and-tie models

may be used to determine internal force effects near supports and the points of
application of concentrated loads at strength and extreme event limit states.
Additionally, the strut-andtie model should be considered for the design of deep
footings and pile caps or other situations in which the distance between the
centers of applied load and the supporting reactions is less than twice the member
thickness. Strut-and-tie modeling is covered by Articles 5.6.3.2 through 5.6.3.6.
As previously mentioned, strut-and-tie modeling implicitly addresses the effects
of both flexure and shear. Axial members in the truss model most explicitly
satisfy force limitations as provided by the following generalized expression:
P r = f Pn (2-22)
where:
Pn = nominal resistance of strut or tie
30
I= resistance factor for tension or compression specified in Article

5.5.4.2, as appropriate
2.6.5.1 Compression Struts
AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications permit the use of either unreinforced

or reinforced compression struts. AASHTO [5] gives the following equation for
the nominal resistance of an unreinforced compressive strut:
Pn = fcu Acs (2-23)
where:
Pn = nominal resistance of a compressive strut
fcu = limiting compressive stress as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.3
Acs = effective cross-sectional area of strut as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.2
AASHTO [5] provides the following equation for the condition where if
the compressive strut contains reinforcement that is parallel to the strut and
detailed to develop its yield stress in compression. For this reinforcing case, the
nominal resistance of the strut shall be taken as:
Pn = fcu Acs + fy Ass

(2-24)
where:
Ass = area of reinforcement in the strut
Acs = effective cross-sectional area of strut as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.2
fcu = limiting compressive stress as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.3
fy = yield strength of steel
The cross sectional area of the compressive strut depends on the geometry
of the reinforcing pattern. Figure 2.15 shows various reinforcing patterns, which
affect the compressive strut’s area. AASHTO [5] states that the value of Acs shall
be determined by considering both the available concrete area and the anchorage
conditions at the ends of the strut, as shown in Fig. 2.15. When a strut is anchored
by reinforcement, the effective concrete area may be considered to extend a
31
distance of up to six bar diameters from the anchored bar, as shown in Fig.
2.15(a). As stated previously, struts represent one dimensional stress fields,
which should not exceed the compressive strength of the concrete. AASHTO [5]
provides the following for limiting compressive stress, fcu:
f 'c
fcu = £ 0.85 f 'c
0.8 + 170 Î 1 (3-25)
where:
HL
e1 = Î s + Î s +0.002 cot2 as (3-26)
and:
Ds = the smallest angle between the compressive strut and adjoining
tension ties
Hs = the tensile strain in the concrete in the direction of the tension tie
f'c = specified compressive strength (ksi)
2.6.5.2 Tension Ties
AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications state that tension tie reinforcement

shall be anchored to the nodal zones by specified embedment lengths, hooks, or
mechanical anchorages. The tension force shall be developed at the inner face of
AE
the nodal zone. The nominal resistance of a tension tie shall be taken as:
Pn = fy Ast + Aps fpc + fy
(2-27)
where:
Ast = total area of longitudinal mild steel reinforcement in the tie
Aps = area of prestressing steel
fy = yield strength of mild steel longitudinal reinforcement
fpe = stress in prestressing steel due to prestress after losses
2.6.5.3 Nodal Zones

32
AASHTO LRFD Specifications state unless confining reinforcement is

provided and its effect is supported by analysis or experimentation, the concrete
compressive stress in the node regions of the strut shall not exceed:
• For node regions bounded by compressive struts and bearing areas:
0.85If’c
• For node regions anchoring a one-direction tension tie: 0.75If’c
• For node regions anchoring tension ties in more than one direction:
0.65If’c
where:
• I = the resistance factor for bearing on concrete as specified in
Article 5.5.4.2.
In detailing the tension tie reinforcement, AASHTO LRFD [12]

Specifications states that the tension tie reinforcement shall be uniformly
distributed over an effective area of concrete at least equal to the tension tie force
divided by the stress limits specified herein.
In addition to satisfying strength criteria for compression struts and

tension ties, the nodal regions shall be designed to comply with the stress and
anchorage limits specified in Articles 5.6.3.4.1 and 5.6.3.4.2. The bearing stress
on the nodal region produced by concentrated loads or reaction forces shall
satisfy the requirements specified in Article 5.7.5.
As with all reinforced concrete sections, crack control reinforcement

should be provided. When employing the strut and tie model, structural members,
not including slabs and footings, should contain a grid of reinforcing bars at each
face of the member, typically referred to as skin steel. AASHTO LRFD [12]
Specifications state that the spacing of the bars in the orthogonal grid shall not
exceed 305 mm. Additionally, the code allows crack control reinforcing that is
located within the tension tie to be considered as part of the tension tie
reinforcing. The ratio of reinforcement area to gross area shall not be less than
0.003 in each direction.
33
Section x-x
a. Strut anchored by
b. Strut anchored by bearing a. Strut anchored by bearing

and reinforcement and strut
Figure 2.1– Compressive Strut anchorage (AASHTO, 1998 [12])

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This structure had been built base on the details drawing indicated in
figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provided by original design). The structure had
been completed and put into service. This structure had been reported to had
severe cracking on the top and side faces of the hammerhead piers.
The scope of this study is to highlight the application of a newer

generation strut-and-tie model, which is not in practice at the time of the original
design. A 3D strut-and-tie model is develope for the analysis of a Bridge
Hammerhead system to explain the cause of cracking. The performance predict
with the model, will simulating with the sequence of construction, and will be
correlate with the field observations. The prediction help us explains the cause of
cracking and concludes that phase construction is its main source.
In developing an approach to rehabilitating the crack structure, the

stiffness of the analytical model needs to be properly select. For this reason,
different levels of stiffness will be use to cover the lower and upper bounds for
both possible crack and uncrack situations. A 3D finite-element solid modeling
will also be conduct. A comparison will be make with the bending theory
behaviour of the structure under various Loading condition and contruction
phases.
35
Figure 3.4 (Reinforcing pattern provide by original design)
The strut-and-tie method is being promoted by the AASHTO LRFD

Specifications for the design of deep reinforced concrete sections. The lack of
36
familiarity with the procedure has caused most practicing engineers, to avoid
implementation of LRFD [5] substructure design. This chapter presents a series of
four design comparisons performed to illustrate the use of strut-and-tie modeling
and to compare these designs with traditional sectional approaches.
The description of the proposed design procedure presents the process of

defining loads and location of loads to produce the maximum moments on the
cantilever of the hammerhead pier. The section for the creation of the truss model
provides background information in truss modeling as well as the procedure used
in the design studies for modeling the hammerhead pier’s internal truss. The final
section in the design procedure is the dimensioning of the compressive struts,
tension ties, and nodal zones. This section also discusses the placement of
reinforcement for the shear and temperature effects.
The design studies provide examples of the strut-and-tie model applied to

previously designed hammerhead piers using bending theory. This will allow for
a comparison of the two designs and their accompanying reinforcing
requirements. Finally, the results of the design studies will be discussed as well as
the trends of industry to embrace the strut-and-tie model as a viable design option
for deep sections.
3.2 Description of Design Procedures
3.2.1 The Structure Model
A three-dimensional hammerhead bridge piers model was developed for

the analysis. The typical model used in the analysis as shown in figure 3.2 (3D
structure model)
37
Figure 3.2 (3D structure model)
3.2.2 Load Generation Procedure
In this study, the self-weights of the bridge deck will apply to the nodes at
the top of bearing pads, the top of the bridge hammerhead, and the top of the
bridge pier, respectively, following the construction process.
The load calculations are summaries in Table 3.1 (Load case condition),
and the location of the load applications are as shown in figure 3.3 (Load case
condition).
38
Figure 3.3 (Load case condition).
The load to be considered in these pier design is the dead load reactions
generated by the superstructure. Members contributing to the dead load reactions
are the beam, intermediate diaphragms, deck, pier diaphragm, parapet, and future
wearing surface.
For the design studies presented in this chapter, only maximum reaction
on the bridge bearing pads was considered. The sequent of load placement is
illustrated in figure 3.3. To simulate the phase construction, the application of
loads to the model followed the sequence of construction.
The analysis of phases 1 loads, only the right portion of figure 3.3 that was
contructed in phase 1 was modeled that is load P1.
39
The analysis of phase 2 loads, only the P1 and P3 that was constructed in
phase 2 was modeled.
The analysis of phase 3 loads, only the P1, P2 and P3 that was constructed
in phase 3 was modeled.
The analysis of phase 4 loads P1, P2, P3 and P4 that was constructed in
phase 4 was modeled.
The phase 4 was considered, construction phase had completed and the
structure are ready to be used.
Table 3.1 Load Case Definition

Load Cases Load Applied Source Of Load Structure Modeled
1 P1 Reaction at support Phase 1
2 P1 + P2 Reaction at support Phase 2
3 P1 + P2 + P3 Reaction at support Phase 3
4 P1 + P2 + P3 + P4 Reaction at support Phase 4
When considering the load distribution to the beams, the maximum

reaction should be placed so that to induce the maximum moment on the
cantilever of the hammerhead pier. For the design study, the maximum moment is
produced by placing the load P1, P2, P3 and P4. The total maximum load are
assume to be the same for these study, these load is assume to be the maximum
load produce at the end of each construction phase.
3.2.3 Analytical Method
The model will be analyse using 3D-Strut-and-tie Model. The predicted

total reinforcement provided at top of the hammerhead can be determine from the
result which will be tabulated for the respective load cases. The observation on
40
the result will be made, and this will explain what is the possible cause of the
cracking of the bridge hammerhead stucture.
3.2.4 Truss Definition Procedure for Hammerhead Pier Caps
In beginning the modeling procedure it is first helpful to locate the nodal

zones in the pier cap. The nodal zones are first defined where external loads, e.g.
beam reactions, act on the pier cap. It should be noted that the compression struts
and tension ties should intersect at the nodal zones and represent the location of
the reinforcing pattern.
3.2.5 Pier Design Procedure
The solution for the truss forces can be accomplished by using a software
program or by performing manual calculations. The truss solution will also aid in
defining the members that are in tension and compression for complex truss
systems. The dimensioning of the compression strut, tension tie, and nodal zones
are governed by Articles 5.6.3.2 through 5.6.3.6 of the AASHTO LRFD [12]
Specifications and were previously discussed in Section 2.6. The typical 3-D
Strut-and-Tie Model used in these analysis as shown in figure 3.4 (3D strut and
tie model)
41
Figure 3.4 (3D strut and tie model)

42
3.3 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier Analysis / Design
3.3.1 Project Description
The structure is comprised of multiple span, and the spans range from 40
meter to 45 meter. The superstructure consists of Hammerhead Pier and Box
girder deck. The deck are sitted on double row of bridge bearing. The piers have
an overall height rangging from 3.5m to 10.0m are positioned on pilecap
foundation that are keyed into bedrock. This structure had been built base on the
details drawing indicated in figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provided by original
design). The structure had been completed and put into service. This structure had
been reported to had severe cracking on the top and side faces of the
hammerhead.
3.3.2 Original Analysis/Design
The original design was conducted using bending theory and the output
result yield the reinforcing pattern as shown in Figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern
provided by the original design). The original analysis yielded hundred of fouthy
number 40mm diameter bars for the tension reinforcing in the pier cap.
Furthermore, the original design also specified double number-five shear stirrups
spaced at 150mm centres. The final design of the pier is shown in Figure 3.1.
3.3.3 Strut-and-Tie Analysis/Design
The strut-and-tie analysis and the pier design were carried out using the
procedure previously defined in this chapter. After performing several iterations a
truss model, illustrated by figure 3.4 (3D strut and tie model). This truss was
considered and had produced optimum result for the hammerhead piers analysis.
The actual bridge loading analysis was not carried out. The load considered to be
acting on the pier are obtain from the calculation which had been carried out
previous designer. The maximum load on the bearing was considered in these
43
analysis, and this load were assume to the the maximum load act on the bridge
bearing for each construction phase as shown in table 3.2 (Tabulated estimated
load). Figure 3.5 (2D strut and tie model) show 2D view of the structure model.
Load Load Applied Esimated Load (kN) Structure

Cases Modeled
1 P1 7000 Phase 1
2 P1 + P3 7000 + 7000 Phase 2
3 P1 + P3 + P2 7000 + 7000 +7000 Phase 3
4 P1 + P3 + P2 + P4 7000 + 7000 + 7000 + 7000 Phase 4
Table 3.2 (Tabulated Estimated Load )
Figure 3.5 (2D strut and tie model)

44
3.3.4 Strut-and-Tie Analysis/Design For Phase 1
The load being applied only to node 2 and 3 of the model and is
considered the completion of Phase 1 construction. The structure model is as
shown on figure 3.6 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 1). The analytical
result is shown figure 3.7 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.8 (Result of
Deflected shape in Member)
Figure 3.6 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 1).

45
Figure 3.7 (Result of Forces in Member).

46
Figure 3.8 (Result member deflected shape).
The truss analysis was performed using the software program STRAP
version 11 and checked by manual calculations. An Excel® spreadsheet was used
for the sizing the reinforcement for the tension ties and calculation of the required
compression area. The spreadsheet is presented in Table 3.3 (Tabulated Member
Forces For Each Construction Face) . The typical calculation procedure are
shown in section 3.4
47
The load being applied only to node 2, 3, 7 and 8 of the model and is
result is shown figure 3.11 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.12 (Result
of Deflected shape in Member)

48

49
Forces For Each Construction Face) . The typical calculation procedure
are shown in section 3.4
50
The load being applied only to node 11 and 12 of the model and is
result is shown figure 4.13 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.14 (Result
of Deflected shape in Member)

51

52
53
The load being applied only to node 2, 3, 7, 8, 28, 27, 25 and 26 of the
model and is considered the completion of Phase 1 construction. The structure
model is as shown on figure 3.15 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 1). The
analytical result is shown figure 3.16 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure
3.17 (Result of Deflected shape in Member)

54

55
56
Table 3.3 Tabulated Member Forces For Each Construction Phases
Member Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Maximum Force

Node Number Member Member Member Member In member at each
Force Force Force Force Section of pier
(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Top longitudinal member
1-2 -31.1 -39.9 -88.8 -18.3 -88.8
19-20 -46.7 -20.9 -54.2 -19.7 -54.2
2-3 -13111 -13195 -13307 -13226 -13307
20-21 -130 -38.6 -13168 -13242 -13242
3-4 -29388 -29565 -29835 -29565 -29835
21-22 -233 -85.8 -29428 -29646 -29464
4-5 -14050 -28160 -28131 -28163 -28163
22-23 -37.7 -74.5 -14121 -28167 -28167
5-6 -14050 -28180 -28131 -28163 -28163
23-24 -37.5 -74.6 -14121 -28167 -28167
6-7 -177 -29565 -29386 -29655 -29655
24-25 -137 -85.7 -304 -29646 -29646
7-8 -84 -13195 -13114 -13226 -13226
25-26 -91.6 -36.6 -112 -13242 -13242
8-9 -71 -39.9 -30.5 -18.3 -71
26-27 -67.7 -20.9 -52.9 -19.7 -67.6
57

(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Bottom longitudinal member
10-11 +6.9 +1.4 +5.8 +1.2 +6.9
28-29 +9.7 +2.6 +6.5 +1.3 +9.7
11-12 +31.5 +41 +87.9 +17.7 +87.9
29-30 +43.7 +23 +55.7 +19 +55.7
12-13 +133.23 +134 +13511 +13430 +13511
30-31 +128 +37.1 +13380 +13446 +13446
13-14 +19321 +10446 +10638 +10394 +19321
31-32 +158 +49.5 +22.7 +10394 +10394
14-15 -8875 +10446 +10207 +10389 +10446
32-33 -208 -49.5 +8892 +10394 +10394
15-16 +76.8 +41 +29.2 +17.7 +76.8
33-34 +91.1 +37.1 +103 +13446 +13446
16-17 +72.6 +41 +29.2 +17.7 +72.6
34-35 +66.8 +1.4 +6 +1.2 +66.8
17-18 +5.5 +1.4 +10.5 +1.3 +10.5
35-36 +7 +2.6 +10.5 +1.3 +10.5
Tranverse member at Node 1

1-10 side +38.1 +33 +32.1 +6.7 +32.1
10-28 bottom +29.9 +32.9 +4.8 -0.21 +32.9
28-19 side +11.7 +39.2 +4.8 +7.5 +39.2
19-1 top +39.2 +33 +3.8 +0.67 +39.2
1-28 diagonal -65.7 -84.9 -25 -0.24 -84.9
58

(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
2-11 side -8 -43.7 -65.4 -16.3 -65.4
11-29 bottom -41.1 -38.7 -6.5 -2.7 -41.1
29-20 side -91 -52.6 -5.3 -22.5 -91
20-2 top -44.5 -38.7 -5.9 -3.7 -44.5
2-29 diagonal +112 +111 +26.2 +8.1 +112
3-12 side -7363 -7423 -7460 -7454 -7460
12-30 bottom -15.5 -3.5 -38.9 -5.8 -38.9
30-21 side -95.2 -48.1 -7297 -7445 -7445
21-3 top -16.2 -4.1 -43.5 -7.2 -43.5
3-30 diagonal +57 +15.3 +143 +22.5 +143
4-13 side +2658.1 +2600 +2707 +2566 +2707
13-31 bottom - - - -
31-22 side +31,3 +13.1 +2642.2 +2593 +2642.2
22-4 top +30.1 +6.7 +82.5 +14.1 +82.5
4-31 diagonal -11.5 -28.6 +316 +58.2 +316
5-14 side -16 -32 -7.5 -17.1 -32
14-32 bottom - - - -
32-23 side -2 -4.1 -32.4 -60.6 -60.6
23-5 top +3.2 +6.3 +13.1 +19.8 +19.8
5-32 diagonal -14.1 -28.2 -58 -87.1 -87.1

6-15 side +22981 +2600 +2459 +2565 +22981
15-33 bottom - - - -
59
33-24 side +300 +484.6 +23816 +2593 +23816

24-6 top +23.4 +6.7 +75.1 +14.1 +75.1
6-33 diagonal +86.4 -28.5 -286 +58.2 -286
7-16 side -60.3 -7423 -7416 -7454 -7454
16-34 bottom +12.2 -3.4 -37.4 +5.8 -37.4
34-25 side +47.1 -48.1 -195 -7445 -7445
25-7 top +12 -4.1 -40.4 +7.2 -40.4
7-34 diagonal -41.7 +15 +136 -22.5 +136
8-17 side -36 -43.7 +6.3 -16.3 -43.7
17-35 bottom +3.2 -38.7 -35.1 -2.7 -38.7
35-26 side +38.3 -52.6 -69.9 -22.6 -69.9
26-8 top -5.8 -38.7 -36.6 -3.7 -38.7
8-35 diagonal -1.4 +111 +92.9 +8.1 +111
9-18 side -30.4 +7.6 +33 -6.7 -30.4
18-36 bottom +3.1 +32.9 +27.9 +0.22 +32.9
36-27 side +51 +39.2 +27.9 -0.22 +51
27-9 top +0.16 +33 +29.9 +0.67 +33
9-36 diagonal -19.2 +60.8 -59.7 +0.24 -59.7
60

(kN) (kN) (kN) (kN)
Inclined member
1-11 +47.3 +60.8 +5.9 +27.9 +60.8
19-29 +1.1 +31.8 +82.4 +29.9 +82.4
2-21 +16358 +16374 +16425 +16434 +16434
20-30 +104 +74.1 +16458 +16458 +16458
3-13 +23612 +23747 +23975 +23833 +23975
21-31 +135 +68.4 +23587 +23797 +23797
4-14 -3054.6 -2917 -3392 -2973 -3392
22-32 -370 -22.2 -3045 -2974 -3045
6-14 +27629 +2917 +2499 +2973 +27629
24-32 +348 +22.2 +2752 +2946 +2752
7-15 +135 +23747 +23605 +23833 +23833
25-33 -66.5 +68.4 +278 +23796 +23796
8-16 +16.2 +16374 +16361 +16439 +16439
26-34 -29.8 +74.1 +74.1 +16458 +16458
9-17 +19.2 +84.9 +45.6 +27.5 +84.9
27-35 +103 +31.8 +80.5 +29.9 +103
61
Figure 3.18 – Maximum Members Force

62
3.4 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier Design Example
3.4.1 Design Example 1
3.4.1.1 Steel Reinforcement for Main Tension ties
a. Reinforcement longitudinal tension ties

Considered member node 2 to node 3 [Phase 3 – Construction]
Required area of reinforcement for ties = Ntie / (I fy)

= 13307x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
Asreq = 41326 mm2
Selected bar size Y = 40 dia.
Number of steel reinforcement required = 41326 / (S x 402/4)
= 52 numbers
According the AASHTO LRFD, the minimum reinforcement for
horizontal tie is
Asmin = 0.03 (f’c / fy) bh
= 0.03 (30 / 460 ) 2000 x 2750
= 10760 mm2 < Asreq OK
b. Reinforcement tranverse tension ties


= 91 x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
= 282 mm2
Selected bar size T = 25 dia.
= 1 numbers
Hence Provide 5 T 25 two-legged

63
stirrup @ 100 = 2 nos @ 0.9m width
52 T 40
2 T 25
3.4.1.2 Calculation For The Inclined Strut
a. Check Of Strut
Considered member node 2 to node 12
The struts will be checked by computing the strut widths and checked
wether they will fit in the space available.
By neglecting the tensioning effects, the average tensile strain in tie BC
can be estimated as
Hs = Ntie(loop) / (Av(tie) x Es)
= 91.0 x 103 / (282 x 200000)
= 0.002 < fy / Es
= 460/200000
= 0.002
H1 = 0.002 + (0.002 + 0.002) cot2 (370)
= 0.011
The grade of concrete use was grade 40 N/mm and the effective strength of the
concrete in the strut is obtained from in AASHTO (Eq. 3.25) as
Ifcu = I f’c/(0.8 + 170H1) < 0.85f’c
= 40 / (0.8 + 170 x 0.011)
64
= 14.98 N/mm2
Required width of strut node 2 to node 12 = Nstrut 2-12 /(I fcu b)
= 16434 x 103 / (14.98 x 2000)
= 549 mm
Taking the length of strut as 2000mm that is half the pier width
dc=549mm
b. Check of Node N1
This node is a CCT type. Its geometry is prescribe by the line of action of
the vertical load of 7000 kN, by the angle of the strut (I=37o), and by the
location of the longitudinal steel reinforcement. In figure 3.7, the node is
bounded by lines AB, BC and CA. The line BC is twice the depth of the resultant
force T, i.e
Lh = 2 x 200 = 400mm
and the other length are
AC = BC / Cos I
= 400/ Cos 37o
= 400 / 0.799
= 500 mm
Which is the minimum size of the bearing plate under load.
65
AC=500mm
3.4.1.3 Secondary reinforcement
a. Reinforcement tranverse to main struts (Pier Web Face node 2 to node 3)
The main inclined strut with compressive force C, required tranverse

reinforcement because the stress fields will splay outwards, as indicated in
figure 3.8 (Tranverse tension in strut between nodes). To take account of the
tensile forces induced, and to provide skin reinforcement to control surface
cracking on the sides of the cross head, a grid of reinforcing steel steel is used,
which consists of vertical and horizontal bars.
Typical calculation:-
Selected Reinforcement Vertical Reinforcement = Y25
Selected Reinforcement Horizontal Reinforcement = Y25
Tensile force per bar = I fy
= 0.5x Sx 252/4 x 460
= 112 kN
A Square grid spacing chosen (subject to checking) = 150 mm
The inclined angle = 370
66
Check For Vertical Member

Horizontal length of strut = 3500mm
Number of vertical bar cutting the inclined
strut in each face = 2 x (3500 / 150)
= 2 x 23 nos.
The width of strut = 3327 mm
Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 2 x 23 x 112 x cos 37
= 4114 kN
Check For Horizontal Member
Vertical length of strut = 1950 mm
Number of horizontal bar cutting the inclined strut in
each face = 2 x (1950 / 150)
= 2 x 13 nos.
The length of strut = 2000mm
Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 2x13 x 112 x cos 37
= 2326 kN
The total tranverse force is thus = 4114 + 2326
= 6436 kN
A simple check is made to ensure that this is adequate for the inclined strut
between nodes N1 and N2.
From the analysis the force in strut member = 16434 kN
The tranverse tensile forcees T = 0.5 x 16434 sin 30
= 4109 kN
The total force required is = 2xT
= 2 x 4109
= 8218 kN
Since total tranverse force less than the force required, therefore either the
grid spacing must be reduced or the bar size increased. Let reduced the grid
spacing,
The required grid spacing = 150 x 8218 / 6436
= 191 mm
At the top of the cross heads the vertical bars are bent over to provide tranverse
reinforcement over the full length.
67
Figure 3.19 (Tranverse tension in strut between nodes N1 and N2)
T 25 - 175 T 25 - 175
2 T 25
68


= 13307x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
Asreq = 92655 mm2
= 75 numbers
horizontal tie is
= 0.03 (30 / 460 ) 2000 x 2750


= 7460 x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
= 23140 mm2
= 48 numbers
69
75 T 40
48 T 25 or
5 T 25 Two legged
stirrup @ 75 c/c
a. Check Of Strut
can be estimated as
= 7460 x 103 / (23140 x 200000)
= 0.002 < fy / Es
= 460 / 200000
= 0.002
H1 = 0.002 + (0.002 + 0.002) cot2 (460)
= 0.006
Ifcu = I f’c/(0.8 + 170H1) < 0.85f’c
= 40 / (0.8 + 170 x 0.006)
= 21.68 N/mm2

70
= 23975 x 103 / (21.68 x 2000)

= 542 mm
dc=542mm
b. Check of Node N1
the vertical load of 7000 kN, by the angle of the strut (I=46o), and by the
location of the longitudinal steel reinforcement. In figure 3.7, the node is
bounded by lines AB, BC and CA. The line BC is twice the depth of the resultant
force T, i.e
Lh = 2 x 200 = 400mm
AC = BC / Cos I
= 400/ Cos 46o
= 400 / 0.695
= 576 mm
71
AC=576mm

reinforcement because the stress fields will splay outwards, as indicated in figure
3.8 (Tranverse tension in strut between nodes). To take account of the tensile
forces induced, and to provide skin reinforcement to control surface cracking on
the sides of the cross head, a grid of reinforcing steel steel is used, which consists
of vertical and horizontal bars.
= 0.5x Sx 252/4 x 460
= 112 kN
72

= 2 x 27 nos.
= 14704 kN
each face = 2 x (2594 / 150)
= 2 x 18 nos.
= 2800 kN
= 17504 kN
(Refer figure 3.19) = 10319 kN
= 2 x 10319
= 20638 kN
spacing,
= 125 mm
73
T 25 - 125
T 25 - 125
48 T 25 or
5 T 25 Two legged
strirrup @ 75 c/c
74


= 28167x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
Asreq = 87475 mm2
= 70 numbers
horizontal tie is
= 0.03 (30 / 460 ) 2000 x 2750


= 2707 x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
= 8407 mm2
= 18 numbers
75
70 T 40
18 T 25 or
5 T 25 Two legged
stirrup @ 100 c/c
a. Check Of Strut
can be estimated as
= 3329 x 103 / (8407 x 200000)
= 0.002 < fy / Es
= 460 / 200000
= 0.002
H1 = 0.002 + (0.002 + 0.002) cot2 (600)
= 0.024
Ifcu = I f’c/(0.8 + 170H1) < 0.85f’c
= 40 / (0.8 + 170 x 0.024)
= 8.197 N/mm2
76

= 3329 x 103 / (8.197 x 2000)
= 204 mm
dc=204mm
b. Check of Node N1
the vertical load of 0 kN, by the angle of the strut (I=60o), and by the location of
the longitudinal steel reinforcement. In figure 3.7, the node is bounded by lines
AB, BC and CA. The line BC is twice the depth of the resultant force T, i.e
Lh = 2 x 200 = 400mm
AC = BC / Cos I
= 400/ Cos 60o
= 400 / 0.952
= 421 mm
77
AC=421mm

reinforcement because the stress fields will splay outwards, as indicated in figure
3.8 (Tranverse tension in strut between nodes). To take account of the tensile
forces induced, and to provide skin reinforcement to control surface cracking on
the sides of the cross head, a grid of reinforcing steel steel is used, which consists
of vertical and horizontal bars.
= 0.5x Sx 252/4 x 460
= 112 kN
78

= 2 x 27 nos.
= 5760 kN
each face = 2 x (2594 / 150)
= 2 x 18 nos.
= 3840 kN
= 9000 kN
(Refer figure 3.19) = 1675 kN
= 2 x 1675
= 3352 kN
spacing,
= 400 mm
79
T 25 - 125
T 25 - 125
18 T 25 or
5 T 25 Two legged
strirrup @ 150 c/c
80
Figure 3.20 (Reinforcing pattern analysed using strut-and-tie model)

CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS OF RESULT
4.1 Introduction
The design study presents a procedure for developing the strut-and-tie

model for hammerhead pier caps. The design procedure addresses the placement
of the loads so as to induce the maximum moment in the cantilever section of the
hammerhead pier. The design procedure also demonstrates the process for
defining the tension ties, compression struts, and nodal zones.
4.2 Analysis of Result
Load cases examined in this study are summarised in Table 3.3. For
convinience of discussion, the numbering definitions of members are shown in
figure 3.8, only a partial model is shown for clarity. The predicted forces of
selected members are summarised in Table 3.3 in column number 6. The
members forces of all four models earlier were examined under all the load cases
to predict the lower and upper bounds of forces. A few observation were made as
folows.
82
4.2.1 Possibility of Cracking
According to the constrution drawings Figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provide by

original design) , the reinforcement povided at the top of the piers was 140
number T 40, the predicted total tension force at the top of the bridge pier
constructed at Phase 3 gives a total tensile force of 29835 Kn which required
reinforcement 150 number T 40. This observation indicates an underdesign of
reinforcement and explained the tranverse cracking at the top of the pier. Along
the web pier component of strut member node 3 to node 13 (diagonal strut), the
total compressived force 23975 kN from calculation this section requires
anticrack T 25 at spacing 125 centres bothways. According to the construction
drawing the reinforcement provide T 25 at spacing 125 centres bothway throught
the web. According to the analysis using the strut-and-ties model at node 3
required more reinforcement due to the tension effect of member node 3 to node
12, which constructed at Phase 3, gives a total tensile force of 7460 kN and
required 48 number T 25 reinforcement Figure 3.20 (Reinforcing pattern analysed
using strut-and-tie model).
According to the construction drawing where the model was analysed

using bending theory, the reinforcement provided was 5 x 2 that were 10 number
of reinforcement within the width of node, which are provided interm of two
legged stirrup at 150 mm centres which is equivalent to 5 number of
reinforcement each row, if consider only half of the beam width. This
observation indicates an underdesign of reinforcement under the bearing pad and
explained the tranverse cracking at web of pier.
5.1.2 Phased Construction
The two observation were made from Table 3.3, First for model Phase 1 and
model Phase 3, the tie forces of member node 3 to node 4 built in Phase 3 are
signnificantly larger than those of their counterparts, member node 21 to node 22,
member node 6 to node 7, member node 25 to node 26. This explains why the
cracking of the pier built in Phase 3 is more severe than the other Phase of
83
constructions. Second for typical Phase 1 construction tie member node 13 to

node 14, tie member node 30 to node 31, which assume nonphased construction
predicted more compressive forces than does the corresponding load in Phase 2,
Phase 3 and Phase 4 construction. This indicated that phased construction is more
critical for cracking than nonphased construction and the phased constuction is
the main cause of the severe cracking of the bridge piers.
The study showed a 3D strut-and-tie model, reliable visualisation of the

paths of force flows. In strut-and-tie model the force distribution is visualised as
compressive and tensile force flows that are modeled as compressive strut and
tensile ties, respectively and this was very usefull in Phases construction.
4.3 Discussion of Results
The strut-and-tie model is a useful model for concrete beam failing in shear with
web reinforcement. The strut-and-tie model illustrates the powerfull truss concept
for reinforced concrete structure in which the compressive stresses are resisted by
the concrete struts and the tensile stresses by the reinforcing ties.
The four cases showed above demostrate that whenever common practice
was used for designing D-regions, the practice leads to deficiencies or
inefficiencies in the design of these commonly occuring and often critical parts of
structures. Due to the inadequacies in common practice, couple with the unlimited
variety of D-Region shapes and loading conditions, it is not surprising that most
structural problem occur in D-Regions.
These case studies showed, the strut-and-tie model required more flexural
steel than the traditional design procedures. As could be seen in figure 3.1
(Reinforcing pattern provide by original design) and the figure 3.20 (Reinforcing
pattern analysed using strut-and-tie model).
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter will address the differences in flexural and shear steel
required by the application of various load condition. Additionally, this chapter
presents a concise procedure for the consistent design of hammerhead piers
which addresses load generation, truss model definition, truss element
dimensioning, and shear design.
5.2 Recommended Strut-and-Tie Design Procedure For Hammerhead Piers
5.2.1 Determination of Loads
The external loads acting on the pier at the nodal zone locations are the
superstructure dead load and live load reactions. Members contributing to the
dead load reactions are the beam, intermediate diaphragms, deck, pier
diaphragm, parapet, and future wearing surface. The dead load reactions should
be calculated for the interior and exterior beams separately due to the difference
in effective slab widths.
5.2.2 Defining the Truss Model
Strut-and-tie models are particularly suitable for designing the disturbed

regions (D-regions) of a concrete structure where the strain distribution is
85
significantly nonlinear, such as at point loads, corbels, deep beams, and

openings. Standard truss models as a special form of STMs or sectional methods
can be used to design the B-regions of a concrete structure where the Bernoulli
hypothesis of plane strain distribution is assumed valid. Strut-and-tie modeling
has been proved to be a rational, unified, and safe approach for the design and
detailing of structural concrete that includes reinforced and prestressed concrete
structures under combined load effects.The first step in defining the truss is
locating the nodal zones. The nodal zones are defined where external loads, e.g.
beam reactions, act on the pier cap and where the stress is transferred from the
cap to the column. The location of the stress path can be assumed to be located
where the reinforcing pattern transfers load from the cap to the column.
The tension ties should be modeled at the predicted location of the tension
reinforcement while the compression struts represent the primary compressive
stress and should be defined accordingly. Both the tension ties and compression
struts should begin and terminate at the nodal zones. The final truss model
should be represented by an acceptable truss model and have the least number of
tensile ties possible.
The geometry of the tension tie is determined by the location of the tensile
reinforcing pattern; therefore, care should be taken to insure that the final
reinforcing pattern represents the tensile tie location in the truss model. For
example, if the flexural reinforcing is assumed to be located three inches from
the face of the concrete, then the tension tie should be modeled at a depth of
three inches. If the location of flexural steel exceeds the three-inch depth, then
the model should be resized based on the new centroid of the reinforcing mat.
The diameter of reinforcing bars used also dictates the depth of the reinforcing
centroid. Smaller reinforcing bars will normally produce a deeper centroid due an
increase in the layers required to accommodate the number of bars, while the
opposite occurs for larger diameter bars. However, care should be taken when
86
specifying the larger diameter bars due to violating flexural steel distribution to
control cracking.
5.2.3 Dimensioning of Tensile Ties, Compressive Struts, and Nodal Zones
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) introduces the Strut-and-Tie

Method as a design method for D-Region problems in the 2002 edition of ACI
318 Code. The provisions consist of five sections these provisions are
summarized as follows:
1. Rules in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models
In designing using the Strut-and-Tie Method, a Strut-and-Tie Model representing

idealized load-transfer mechanism in the D-Region under consideration is to be
selected (A.2.1). The selected Strut-and-Tie Model should consists of Struts,
Ties, and Nodes (A.2.1) and has to be in equilibrium with the forces acting on
the D-Region (A.2.2). The finite dimensions of Strut-and-Tie Model components,
representing the stress fields of Struts, Ties, and Nodes, should be considered
(A.2.3). Tie stress fields can cross Strut stress fields (A.2.4). To avoid severe
strain incompatibility between Struts and Ties, the angle between a Strut and a
Tie framing into a Node cannot be smaller than 25 degrees (A.2.5).
2. Strength Requirements
The Strut-and-Tie Model components must have sufficient capacity to resist the
force demand such that (A.2.6)
IFn UFu
where:
I= strength reduction factor,

87

a. Strut Strength (ACI A.3)
The nominal strength of a Strut, Fns , is defined as

Fns = fcu Ac
where:

Ac = cross sectional area at the end of Strut.
The effective compresive strength, fcu , is defined as

fcu = 0.85Es f’c
where:

The crack control reinforcement requirement is (UvisinJi U0.003, where Uvi is

the steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing the Strut, and is the
angle between the axis of the Strut and the bars.
b. Tie Strength (ACI A.4)
The nominal strength of a non-prestressed reinforcement Tie, Fnt , is defined as

Fnt = As fy
88
where:
As = area of steel reinforcement and
fy = yield strength of steel reinforcement.
c. Node Strength (ACI A.5)
The nominal strength of a Nodal Zone, Fnn, is defined as

Fnn = fcu An
where:
An = area of a Nodal Zone face in which the force is framing, measured
perpendicular to the direction of the force.
The effective compresive strength, fcu, is defined as

fcu = 0.85En f’c,
where:
3. Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3)
The Tie reinforcement must be properly anchored in the Nodal Regions at

the ends of the Tie such that the corresponding Tie force can be developed at the
point where the centroid of the reinforcement in the Tie leaves the Extended
Nodal Zone. An extended Nodal Zone is a region bounded by the intersection of
the Effective Strut Width and the Effective Tie Width.
CHAPTER 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Summary
The idea of the strut-and-tie method came from the truss analogy method
introduced independently by Ritter and Mörch in the early 1900s for shear design
of B-Regions. This method employs the so-called truss model as its design basis.
The model was used to idealize the flow of force in a cracked concrete beam. In
parallel with the increasing availability of experimental results and the
development of limit analysis in plasticity theory, the truss analogy method has
been validated and improved considerably in the form of full member or sectional
design procedures. The truss model has also been used as the design basis for
torsion.
The design study presents a procedure for developing the strut-and-tie

model for hammerhead pier caps. The design procedure addresses the placement
of the loads so as to induce the maximum moment in the cantilever section of the
hammerhead pier. The design procedure also demonstrates the process for
defining the tension ties, compression struts, and nodal zones. In summary, the
following steps are used for the design of hammerhead pier caps by the strut-and-
tie method.
• Determine the reactions of the superstructure based on the
governing load combination.
• Define all nodal zones at the beam reactions and the cap to column
reinforcing locations.
90
• Define the tension ties and compression struts from each nodal
zone and at depths equal to the approximate location of the
reinforcing pattern.
• Check truss continuity at each nodal zone.
• Solve truss internal forces for tension ties and compression struts.
• Determine reinforcing requirements for tension ties and check
compressive strut regions.
• Check stress of nodal zones.
• Revise truss as required.
• Provide shear stirrups and distributed steel for the hammerhead
pier cap.
The design study compares the reinforcing requirements of the original

design with the results obtained in the strut-and-tie modeling method. Based on
the results of the design study and the procedure used in the modeling,
recommendations are proposed for employing the strut-and-tie model to
hammerhead piers. The recommendations include the revising of the truss model
geometry, treatment of reinforcing bars and crack control, the repeating of truss
model geometry and the use of shear stirrups.
6.2 Conclusions
Strut-and-Tie Model is a useful tool for structural engineers. As current

practice is more and more relaying on computer, this will made the designer
slowly forgetting first principle and more and more is guided by codes of
difference standards. Strut- and-Tie Model is providing a way in engineering
visualization, allowing consistent design. It is creating opportunities, to modify
finite element programs to come up with load path and Strut-and-Tie model, and
investigate alternative solution.
91
While Strut-and-Tie is more or less readily available for reinforce concrete

structure, in case of prestress concrete there is a need for further developements.
However at present stage anchorage zones can be modelled on an easy way.
As a statically admissible stress field, a strut-and-tie model has to be in

equilibrium externally with the applied loading and reactions (the boundary
forces) and internally at each Node. In addition, reinforcing or prestressing steel
is selected to serve as the ties, the effective width of each strut is selected, and the
shape of each nodal zone is constructed such that the strength is sufficient.
Therefore, only equilibrium and yield criterion need to be fulfilled for an
admissible strut-and-tie model.
As a result of these relaxed requirements, there is no unique strut-and-tie

model for a given problem. In other words, more than one admissible strut-and-tie
model may be developed for each load case as long as the selected truss is in
equilibrium with the boundary forces and the stresses in the struts, ties, and nodes
are within the acceptable limits.
The AASHTO LRFD [12] Design Code states in Section 5.6.3.1 “The
strut-and-tie model should be considered for the design of deep footings and pile
caps or other situations in which the distance between the centers of applied load
and the supporting reactions is less than about twice the member thickness.” The
commentary further elaborates on the use of strut-and-tie models by pointing out
the shortcomings of traditional design theory. Traditional design theory assumes
that the shear distribution remains uniform and that the longitudinal strains will
vary linearly over the depth of the beam. Furthermore, traditional design theory
does not account for shear, moment, and torsional interaction, which the strut-
and-tie model does take into account (AASHTO, 1998 [5]).
The AASHTO LRFD [5] Specifications promote the strut-and-tie method

as the design method of choice for deep reinforced concrete sections. However,
92
no one has undertaken the task of developing a consistent approach to the design
of hammerhead pier caps employing the strut-and-tie modeling method.
The specific objectives of the study are to compare the reinforcing

requirements of the strength design method AASHTO LRFD [12] for flexure and
shear design with the strut-and-tie modeling method and to develop a procedure
for modeling a hammerhead pier cap that can be applied by practicing engineers.
This work presents a clear and concise procedure for utilizing the strut-and-tie
model for the analysis and design of hammerhead piers. As was stated in section
4.3, an increase in tensile reinforcing was incurred by the AASHTO LRFD [12]
strut-and-tie procedure.
93
REFERENCE
1. Ritter (1899) The Hennebique Design Method (Die Bauweise Hennebique)

2. Morsch (1920) Der Eisenbetonbau-Seine Theorie und Anwendung
(Reinforced Concrete Construction-Theory and Application) 5th
Ed., Witter, Stutgart, V.1 Part 1, 1920, Part 2, 1922
3. Schlaich, J, Schafer, K & Jennewein, M, (1987) Toward a consistent
design of structural concrete , Prestressed Concrete Institute
Journal, Vol 32, No.3, May-June, pp 74-150’
4 ACI Committee 318, Standard Building Code. Strut-and-Tie models. ACI
Concrete International Magazine June 2001, pp. 125-132
5. AASTHO LFD Stantard Specifications, Sixteenth Edition, American
Association os State Highway and Tranportation Officials, Washington,
D.C., 1996.
6. Liang, Q. Q Uy, B., and Steven G.P. “ Performance-Based Optimisation
for Strut-Tie Modeling of Structural Concrete” Journal of Structural
Engineering Vol. 128 June 2002: pp 815-823.
7. Schlaich, J. and Schafer, K., Design and Detailing of Structural Concrete
Using Strut-and-Tie Models, The Structural Engineer, Vol 69, No.6
March 1991, pp. 113-125
8. Yun and Rameriz, (1996) Strength of Struts and nodes in strut-and-tie
model, Journal of Structural Engineering Vol. 122 Jan 1996: p.20-9”.
9. Schlaich, J. Schafer, K., and Jennewein, M., Toward a Consistent Design
of Structural Concrete Institute, Vol. 32, No. 3, May-June 1987, pp. 74-
150.
10. Collin, M. P., and Mitchell, D., 1991, Presstressed Concrete Structures,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
94
11. Kani, M.W,; Huggin, M, W.; and Wiltkopp, P.F., 1979, Kani on Shear in
Reinforced Concrete, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Toronto, Canada.
12 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification, Second Edition, American
Association of State Highway and Tranportation Officials, Washington,
D.C., 1988.

Analysis and Design of Hammer Head Bridge Pier Using Strut and Tie Method PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis and Design of Hammer Head Bridge Pier Using Strut and Tie Method PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF HAMMERHEAD BRIDGE PIER

USING STRUT AND TIE METHOD.

ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT

A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the

Faculty of Civil Engineering

I am also indebted to University Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) for finding my Master

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

2.4.1 Strength Requirement 13

3.2.4 Strut-and-Tie Model Truss

3.4.3.2 Calculation for Inclined Strut 75

4 RESULT AND ANALYSIS

6 SUMMARY AND CONLUSION

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

3.1 Load Cases Definition 39

FIGURE NO TITLE PAGE

2.1 B-Region and D-Region 7

3.6 Proposed Load Application for Phase 1 44

a = depth of the compression block

Es = 1.00 for prismatic Struts in uncracked compression zones,

Strut-and-tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced concrete

1.2 Problem Statement

In 1998, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications (1998) incorporated the

The succesful application of a strut-and-tie model depend on a reliable

The specific objectives of the study are:

Most codes of practice use sectional methods for designed of conventional

1.4 Scope of Study

Later, Schlaich, et al [3] worked to combined individual research

Several theoretical and experimental studies had been carried out to

This literature review is conducted to establish the state of knowledge with

2.2 Overview of Strut-and-Tie Modeling

Figure 2.1 ( B-Region and D-Region)

Figure 2.2 provided a simple strut-and-tie model applied to a simply

2.3 Adequate Selection of Truss Members

The successful application of a strut-and-tie model depends on a reliable

The engineering judgment and an iterative procedure required to produce

In a cracked structural concrete member, loads are tranmitted through a set

Strut-and-Tie Modeling of Structural Concrete by Dr. Quang Quan Liang

2.4 General Strength of Truss Members

Struts are the compression members of a strut-and-tie model and represent

Ties are the tension members of a strut-and-tie model. Ties mostly

As previously stated, the truss model is comprised of tension ties,

2.4.1 Strength Requirement

The American Concrete Institute [4] (ACI) introduces the Strut-and-Tie

2.4.1.1 Rules in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models

In designing using the Strut-and-Tie Method, a Strut-and-Tie Model

The Strut-and-Tie Model components must have sufficient capacity to

I= strength reduction factor,

2.4.1.2 Strength of Tensile Ties

In order to simplify the equilibrium analysis of a strut-and tie model it is

The care must be exercised in the strut-and-tie as the real distribution of

2.4.1.3 Strength of Compressive Strut

a. Strut Strength (ACI A.3)

Struts are the compression members of a strut-and-tie model and represent

In the design using strut-and-tie models, it is necessary to check that the

The nominal strength of a Strut, Fns , is defined as

fcu = effective compressive strength and

The effective compresive strength, fcu , is defined as

Es = 1.00 for prismatic Struts in uncracked compression zones,

2.4.1.4 Node Strength

a. Node Strength (ACI A.5)

The nominal strength of a Nodal Zone, Fnn, is defined as