Build. Sci. Vol. 7, pp. 183-195. Pergamon Press 1972. Printed in Great Britain [ !

I , (K4) I

Strength and Behaviour of

Reinforced Concrete Vierendeel Girders
P. C. VARGHESE*
T. P. GANESAN~"
H. ACHYUTHA~"

This paper deals with an investigation carried out by the authors to study the
behaviour of simple parallel chorded reinforced concrete Vierendeel girders
in their elastic as well as ultimate load conditions. Details of tests carried out
along with measurements and observations made are fully described.
The application of plastic analysis to reinforced concrete Vierendeel girders
has been examined and shown to be feasible when the constituent members of the
girders possess the desirable flexural characteristics. A simple method is
suggested for predicting the exact mode of failure and to calculate the ultimate
load. The validity of the method has been demonstrated from the experimental
results. The predominating influence of depth~span ratio of the girders over their
behaviour in service conditions has been demonstrated and the importance of
selecting a proper depth~span ratio so as to secure the desirable cracking
characteristics and effective stiffness has been pointed out. The comparative
behaviour of Vierendeel girders designed on elastic theory and girders with
arbitrary uniform reinforcements has also been investigated and their relative
advantages discussed.

INTRODUCTION predict the exact mode as well as the ultimate load

of reinforced concrete Vierendeel girders. The
R E I N F O R C E D concrete Vierendeel girders have
investigation provides in addition useful informa-
found interesting applications in the construction of
tion on other aspects such as pattern of cracking,
buildings and bridges. The analysis and design of
crack and yield loads, influence of depth/span ratio
the girders is mostly by elastic theory which assumes
on effective stiffness, etc. The paper describes the
that the material is homogeneous, isotropic and has
salient features of this investigation along with the
linear stress-strain relationship. It is well known
important results and conclusions.
that the actual behaviour of reinforced concrete
structures is very different from that of such idealised
materials. It is therefore desirable that the theo- DETAILS OF GIRDERS A N D L O A D S
retical analyses are checked for performance by
The Vierendeel girders tested in this investigation
actual tests on reinforced concrete structures. In
were all parallel-chorded with four panels. For
particular, very little data are available about the
convenience in test arrangements, the same span
strength and behaviour of reinforced concrete
Vierendeel girders. was adopted for all girders, but the depth alone
was varied to have six different depth/span ratios.
The authors have carried out some theoretical
Thus there were six different types of girders named
and experimental investigations[I-4] to study the
as shown in figure 1 according to their depth/span
elastic behaviour of parallel chorded Vierendeel
girders. This series of laboratory tests on thirty ratio. The horizontal members in all girders had a
cross section 100 x 100 mm 2, while all the vertical
reinforced concrete Vierendeel girders was also con-
ducted by them to study the real behaviour as members were 100x 75 mm z. The overall dimen-
compared to that in theoretical investigations. sional details of the girders tested are summarised
Further as these girders were tested to destruction, in figure 1, while figure 2 indicates the five different
the load-response characteristics, not only in elastic types of nodal ioadings applied in the tests.
range but also in the ultimate load conditions could
be studied. As a result a method is suggested to FABRICATION OF TEST GIRDERS
Details of reinforcements provided for majority
*tProfessor and Lecturers respectively, Department of
Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, of girders of this investigation are shown in figure 3.
India. In general all the horizontal and vertical members
183
184 P . C . I/arghese, I. P. danesan and H, A chyutha

and cured in the same way and tested on the same

......
i, , [ i
,!]
~i ] t
{Vt]rymq from IOcm to
day of testing of the corresponding Vierendeel
}20cm ~l~ndi~g uCon girder.
fyDe of girder)

S-240cm -
247 5cm
Type Of g~rclel Effective depth(¢m]
S ~o
,~ 20
B 3O
" 60
t: 90
~20
Fi,e. 1. Dimensional details of girders.
were reinforced uniformly with 4 Nos. of 6.5 mm
dia. mild steel rods one in each corner of the cross-
section, thus providing equal tensile and com-
pressive reinforcements. All corners were provided
as shown with the nominal diagonal or rigidity bars
of the same diameter. The members were all
provided with closed rectangular stirrups of 3 mm
dia. mild steel wires at a constant spacing of 5 cm.
The yield stress for the main reinforcements varied
from 2142.86 to 5576.92 kg/cm z.
Ordinary portland cement with locally available
river sand and granite coarse aggregates of maxi-
mum size 12.5 mm (½") were used for concrete. A
mix proportion of 1:2:4 by weight with a water-
cement ratio of 0.5-0.55 was used. Mixing was done
in a tilting drum type mixer 5/7 ft z capacity for
ARRANGEMENT FOR TESTS,
MEASUREMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS
The Vierendeel girders were tested in a loading
loom iOcm
frame shown in figure 5 specially fabricated for the
Cross section Cro~ sectio~ purpose. The girder was simply supported on the
of o~
horlzunfa~s verticals longitudinal joists of the frame. The load was
applied by a 50 tons "Simplex" hydraulic jack
through a 5 ton proving ring reading to an accuracy
of 19.05 kg. Single point loads were applied
directly while two-point and three-point loads were
applied through suitable loading beams.
Deflections were measured under each node and
also at mid points between nodes. Horizontal
P
i
p
PI3

2
approximately 2 to 3 min. The cube strength varied
from 268.13 to 474.86 kg/cm 2 depending upon the
age at testing.
P/2
All the specimens were cast in horizontal
position in a suitable mould (figure 4). A clear
cover of 13 mm for all main reinforcements was
secured by means of special cover blocks. Concrete 2 IP

was poured in three layers and compacted by needle

and form vibrators, The specimens were stripped ~/2 I - t ..... ] P/2 ~ Loading _ L 5
from the mould after 24--48 hours of casting and
cured for 28 days with wet gunny bags before testing.
Control specimens were also cast in steel moulds Fig. 2. Details of types oJ loading.

AB CD-~(:Is with 6.Smm

[i " A . . . . j ~ EF-rods wi,h 3.0 mm ~

J Dimensions in cm

sec I-] i-~Esec7_7 [ ~ F secl3-13 Dsecll-ll sec 12-12

I0 ' I0 I0 I0 E ~i

~'b "~ -b- il - - .. . . . ~ ~ i. _

,. ,~ D i ' 12 i

Fig. 3. Details of reinforcements.

 Strength and Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Vierendeel Girdem 185

incremental loading was adopted. Each increment

Fig. 4. MouM used for the casting.
deflections at end verticals were also measured to
assess sidesway under unsymmetrical loads. Dial
gauges with an accuracy of 0.01 mm and maximum
travel of 10-50 mm were used for measuring
deflection.
Maximum fibre strain as well as strain-distribu-
tion across critical sections were measured using a
2" "Demec" strain-gauge with an accuracy of
2-45 x 10-5/ division. Critical sections were taken
outside the corners at a distance equal to depth of
member concerned. In a few cases, the actual strains
in the reinforcing steel was directly measured by
electrical strain gauges pasted on it before casting
the specimen. A strain measuring unit of "Orion"
make reading to an accuracy of 1 x 10- s was used
for the purpose. The actual test setups with different
types of girders under different loadings are shown
in figure 6.
TEST P R O C E D U R E
The test specimen, white washed for better
observations of cracks, etc. was set up on the test
bed true to plumb. The usual gradually applied
was of the order of about ¼ tonne. Before and after
the application of an increment of loading, readings
on all dial gauges and strains were recorded. Then
the faces of the girders were carefully examined for
any cracks with a magnifying glass. Before the
application of next increment, the proving ring was
checked for noting the release of load, if any. The
next increment was then applied slowly and the
procedure repeated.
After the appearance of first cracks which
usually occured on the second to fourth increments,
the progress of cracks was marked on the girder
itself. In all such cases, observations for cracks
were uniformly made before taking deflection and
strain readings. The load level was checked and
made up if necessary before actually recording the
deflections and strains. In all tests, the maximum
load reached with steady pumping of the jack is
taken as the ultimate load of the girder.
PRESENTATION OF TEST RESULTS
AND DISCUSSION
(1) Load-deflection relationship
Typical load-deflection graphs constructed from
experimental results for all girders tested under L2
loading is shown in figure 7. The deflections were
the maximum occuring under the load and measured
almost till failure.
It may be seen that the relationship is not
completely linear, as may be expected in reinforced
concrete structures. Linearity, if any, is very short
lived and is confined to the earliest portion of load-
response characteristics. As the load becomes
higher, the elasto-plastic behaviour is increasingly
apparent. Towards the last stages of loading, the
graphs become almost horizontal. The nature of
load-deflection relationship thus admits an ideali-
sation of an elastic and then a perfectly plastic

Box columns :~4"x3/16" -- 3'0" -

(mode of channels
p

m Holes to adjust the

jjj he,hiofthe -
I]1 Cross Oeom crossbeam .
~L~ 3~f~"x ~" . . zxZx~,
~1~ Hyaraulic jack

III Provin~ rin(j ~'o"

Longitudinal girders ~ ~ L ~ - ~ ~
forming the base for II [I Itl II II V~rendeel specime
*e,**~m, /L__JI ~lL__~lt~_ll ,,.d=~., Lo~i,ud,~,
\Hinged Sup~ ~"~I~-'~=~ Roller support girder

3!0" ~ Pedestal sup[~x~ing Channel

Channel 3"x6"x ~'4 Ion(Jfl~dinal girders ~ 4 " x 3/16
18'0" - -
Front view Side view

Fig. 5. Loading frame and test-set up.

186 P. C. Varghese, 7: P. Ganesan ant~ H. Achyutha

(a) A'- Type girder (d) C-Type girder

under l - 3 loading under L - 4 loading

(b) A- Type girder (e)D-Type girder

A i J:_ under 1_-3 loading

(c) B-Type girder (f) E-Type girder

under L-I loading under L-5 loading
Fb,,. 6. Actual test setups ,/or differem ~,irders and Ioadim,,.~.

behaviour for the girders. Further, these graphs
give a comparative idea of the stiffness of different
types of girders i,e. with different depth/span ratios.
P
It may be seen that for a major portion of the load.
B type girder (depth/span ratio of ~) has the
maximum stiffness--a finding which has also been
confirmed by a separate theoretical elastic analysis. [ 1]

3c (2) Load-strain graphs

E
Typical load vs maximum surface strain graphs
of different girders under a given loading is shown
in figure 8. It was not possible to measure the strain
till the very point of failure due to obvious experi-
mental difficulties. Also many times, the strain
readings were vitiated by sudden formation of cracks
just outside the gauge points. As such very con-
~o, ~, ~ sistent and reliable strain measurements with
Deflect~n at 7, mrn positive indications towards a definite way of
behaviour as in the case of deflection were not
Fig. 7. Load deflection curves for diffbrent~,irdersunder possible. The graphs however indicate the general
L2 loadin~,
 Strength and Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Vierendeel Girders 187

trend of variation of strains. The linear distribution
of strains across sections could be confirmed. The
various critical stages such as cracking, yield of
tensile steel and at times crushing of concrete could
also be identified.
presence of large amounts of direct tensile forces
developed in the bottom chords of Vierendeel
girders with small depth/span ratios. This has also
been verified and confirmed by a separate analysis[l/
by elastic theory.

Girder A'

T..___..., ~ B

T B ~------3"~--------~ I ~°°d-2~'~ ~g
Girder A (;~ ~ , , ~ T6-A'2-L2

]ic}
T B

.... ~](d)
tl ~}',] Load-2229 kg

Girder C
t t TS~C2-L2
!
(>
A

l(e)
T
Girder D

~00 ' 80
T

60 40
-

20
f 51~'~

0
.

20
. .

40
.

60
. Gir;er E

~0
"

I00
l LI J .~ kood-2648 k~
C o r r l p n ~ ----i,,-TerlSlon ~ TI4-E2- L2
No of division in DEMEC di(ll gouge
I Div. = 2 45 10-Sstrom

Fig. 8. Load vs. maximum strains at top and bottom of

critical section of dJfferent girders under LI loading.

(3) Crackpattern and cracking load

The sequence of formation and development of
Fig. 9. Crack patterns of different girders tested under
cracks till final failure by crushing and hinge L2 loading.
formation can be seen in figure 9 for all girders
under a typical loading L2. The numbers indicate
the load level with first cracking and also their The load at first crack was noted in tests, but
development. The hinging sections can be identified these were not very reliable, as they have been
by the crushed concrete at the compression edge noted by visual observations after load stages,
and the tensile cracks directly below the zone of while cracks could have first occured in between
crushed concrete. load stages. So the cracking load was also calcu-
A close examination of figure 9 brings out the lated theoretically[5/as follows. First the cracking
characteristic behaviour of different Vierendeel moment capacities for all critical sections were
girders. For example, in the case of girders with low determined according to elastic theory as follows.
depth/span ratios as A' or A, the cracks are If
distributed over a greater portion of span and also
extend to the full depth of bottom chords. During
M~= cracking moment,
tests these appeared rather suddenly at one stage. ~= modulus of rupture
In the case of girders with larger depth/span ratio,
the cracks are confined to a few definite sections of
z , = modulus of uncracked section including
steel
the panel in shear span and other panels are
practically free of cracks. The cracks are all of m modular ratio
flexural types. Well defined hinge formations at
ultimate failure are seen more clearly. The above and ac~ = cylinder crushing strength, then
distinguishingly different behaviour is due to the M~ = q,Z, (1)
 P. C. Varghese. 7". P. Ganesan and H. Achyutha

where ar is taken depending on a o, as
3000-0 1,20,000
ar- - - ~ - - (2)
42"66 a,~.
Calculation of Z , involves m which is also taken on
empirical basis as
703.2348
m = 6-0+--
O'cy
Then the actual distribution of b e n d i n g m o m e n t
due to unit load was also f o u n d by a n elastic
analysis of the girder. By comparing the two
bending m o m e n t values at all critical sections, the
least load which first causes crack in a n y of the
critical sections is taken as the theoretical cracking
load.
Table 1 shows some typical values of observed
a n d calculated cracking load compared with the
experimental ultimate load. Considering the results
of all the tests in this investigation, it may be stated
that the crack load is on a n average ~th of the
ultimate load. Cracking load is an i m p o r t a n t
criteria for j u d g i n g the service conditions of a
structure. For example in this particular case, the
first cracks will appear at 33.33-50 per cent of the
working load itself, if we choose a load factor of 2
It may be difficult to completely avoid cracking in
these structures. The only thing that can be done
will be to properly distribute the reinforcement so as
to bring their spacing and width within acceptable
(3) limits.
(4) Comparison of yield load with ultimate hind
In the working stress method of design, the max-
i m u m capacity of a structure is taken as the yield
load, i.e. the least load at which any of the critical
section just fails. Failure of a section can be by
crushing of concrete or by yielding of steel as is the
case in this investigation where all critical sections
were under-reinforced. It was difficult to determine
these yield loads experimentally. They were worked
out theoretically by a procedure broadly similar to
that for cracking load. Instead of cracking m o m e n t
capacities of critical sections, their yield m o m e n t
capacities are worked out by usual elastic theory

Table 1. Crackine loads

Type of Cracking load (Kg) Exptl.

S. No. ultimate CCL
Load Girder Calculated E x p t l . load (Kg) EUI.
(CCL) (EUL)

1 A" 300 514 1105 0.272

2 A 305 1029 2572 0.119
3 B 361 772 2572 0.140
4 II C 448 772 2705 0.166
5 D 418 772 2248 0.186
6 E 463 515 2604 0.178

7 A' 510 772 1515 0.337

8 A 385 1030 2515 0'153
9 B 366 1030 1981 0.185
10 1_2 C 408 772 2229 0-183
11 D 453 772 2286 0-198
12 E 450 1030 2648 0'170

13 A' 378 515 1581 0-239

14 A 459 1286 3086 0"149
15 B 556 1286 3467 0.160
16 L3 C 572 1030 2572 0-222
17 D 550 515 3096 0.178
18 E 600 1030 3353 0.179

19 A' 366 772 1486 0"246

20 A 393 772 3601 0.109
21 B 530 1029 3429 0-155
22 L4 C 497 772 2829 0-176
23 D 563 772 2934 0"192
24 E 552 1029 2934 0"188

25 A' 503 772 1867 0.269

26 A 545 772 1753 0-311
27 B 511 772 2953 0"173
28 L5 C 597 1029 1981 0"301
29 D 625 772 2886 0"217
30 E 690 772 2296 0"301
 Strength and Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Vierendeel Girders
i.e. assuming linear distribution of stress and
neglecting tension for concrete in tensile zone. The
yield loads arrived at as above are shown compared
with experimental ultimate loads in Table 2 for
some typical cases. On an average, the yield load
of these Vierendeel girders are about _2 3 of the
experimental ultimate loads. In other words, the
actual strength is 50 per cent more than that taken
in working stress method of design.
(5) Ultimate strength of reinforced concrete
Vierendeel girders
(a) Applicability of plastic analysis. Vierendeel
girders are highly redundant structures. Design by
elastic theory is rather cumbersome. Designing by
plastic analysis may be considerably simpler[6] and
incidentally it can also take advantage of the large
reserve strength present in such structures. First it
had to be decided whether plastic analysis could be
applied at all to reinforced concrete Vierendeel
girders here. The flexural characteristics of the
typical horizontal and vertical members constituting
the Vierendeel girders were studied theoretical-
ly[7, 8] and were also confirmed by separate
bending tests. Typical load-deflection and moment-
rotation graphs obtained in the tests are shown in
figures 10 and 11. These confirm that they behave
in an elasto-plastic manner. The available rotation
capacity over the usual plastic length is consider-
able. From this it was concluded that the con-
stituent members of Vierendeel girders tested here
possess adequate rotation capacity required for
redistribution of moments assumed in plastic
analysis for usual frames.
(b) Calculation of ultimate load. The ultimate
load could therefore be worked out by mechanism
800
600
400
200
I
Io
i ~ I t
20 30 40
Deflection,
Fig lO. Load v s deflection for a typical vertical member
189
method[9]. The Vierendeel girders of this investiga-
tion are all externally determinate and internally
indeterminate to 12th order. The ultimate moment
capacities of horizontals and verticals are unequal.
As such there are 22 possible hinge locations as
noted in figure 12(a). The possible elementary
mechanisms will be 2 2 - 1 2 = 10. Of this, six will
be the infructuous joint mechanisms corresponding
to the six internal nodes. There cannot be any
beam mechanisms, as the loads are all nodal. So
the remaining 4 elementary mechanisms should be
only of panel types as shown in figure 12b to e.
When more than one panel fails, horizontals and
many verticals also will fail in which case, the two
additional combined mechanisms shown in figure
12(f) and (g) should also be considered. Here five
different types of nodal loads have been tried. The
correct mechanism relevant to each type of load is
first tentatively selected as one giving least value for
the ultimate load and then confirmed by yield
criterion and statical admissibility. For example,
considering L1 type loading, from virtual work
principle, for mechanism A
(P,)A - 2L. 0 = (2. M,~. 40) + (2. M,,h. 40)
or
(Pu)a - 4(Muh + Mu'~)
L (4a)
where (P,)~ = ultimate strength corresponding to
mechanism A,
M,h = ultimate moment capacity of hori-
zontal member.
and M,,. = ultimate moment capacity of ver-
tical member.
._ ~7.5
I 2 3 4 ,'4nos. of 6 - 5 r n m ~
I" 60cm - ~" rods
I 1 I
50 60 70 80
mm
190 P. C. l/aryzhese, T. P, Ganesan and H. Achvutha

Proceeding similarly general case of loading. Table 3 shows that the

m o m e n t distribution u n d e r this collapse load is safe
8 Muh
(P,,)H - (4b) and statically admissible. As such for LI type of
L loading, mechanism E is the correct one and
8Muh IP,,h: is the correct collapse load. In this way for
(P,,)c - (4c)
L each of five types of loading, the relevant mode of
failure and the formula for the corresponding
4( M,h + M,,3
(P.)o = (4d) collapse load were determined and tabulated in
L figure 13. F r o m these theoretical ultimate loads are
2(M,h + 2M,,,) worked out and typical results are given in Table 4
(P,,)~: = (4el
L (c) Theoretical and experimental modes ~!
failure. Photos of tested girders under a typical
4(Muh + 3 M,,,I
( P,)r - L (4f) loading L2 are given in figure 14. It is seen that all
the girders have failed by partial collapse. Unlike in
respectively for mechanisms B to F. When Muh is other structures, Vierendee! girders do not develop
taken as 1.5 M.~, as is the case with test girders, before failure all the ( n + I) hinges where n is the
mechanism E gives the least value for P,, which is n u m b e r s of redundants. This type of failure in steel
taken tentatively as the collapse load. In this Vierendeel girders have already been reported[10].
particular case as the load a n d girder are both The actual modes of failure for L2 loading (figure
symmetrical the failure mechanism will also be 14) are the same as the corresponding theoretical
symmetrical. In such a case, the structure becomes mode (No. 2 in figure 13). The same is true in all
determinate a n d the yield criteria can be checked other cases of loadings also except perhaps in a few
by statics itself in a simple m a n n e r or by plastic A ' type girders. Here the failure mode is made
m o m e n t distribution as shown in Table 3 for any obscure by the large n u m b e r s of full depth tensile

Table 2. YieM loa&

Type of Calculated Exptl. ultimate CYL

S. No. . . . . . . . . . . . yield load (kg) load (kg) EUL
Load Girder (CYL/ (EUL)

I A' 1041 1105 0-942

2 A 1593 2572 0'619
3 B 1582 2572 0.615
4 LI C 1619 2705 0.599
5 D 1467 2248 0-653
6 E 1353 2604 0.520

7 A' 755 1515 0"498

8 A 1220 2515 0'485
9 B 1247 1981 0"629
l0 L2 C 1349 2229 0'605
I1 D 1393 2286 0"609
12 E 1362 2648 0"514

13 A" 840 1581 0"531

14 A 1697 3086 0'550
15 B 1759 3467 0"507
16 L3 C 1819 2572 0"707
17 D 1823 3096 0"599
18 E 1913 3353 0.571

19 A' 679 1486 0-457

20 A 1797 3601 0"499
21 B 1495 3429 0"439
22 L4 C 2134 2829 0"754
23 D 1709 2934 0"582
24 E 2190 2934 0-746

25 A' 1187 1867 0"636

26 A 1141 1753 0"651
27 B 1700 2953 0'576
28 L5 C 1244 1981 0"628
29 D 2052 2886 0"711
30 E 1549 2296 0-675
 Strength and Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Vierendeel Girders 191

15000
~ _ Rototio~ over a
length of IOcm

E 1200C 0 ~ 3 .C 0 .,0 0 ©

tJ
o~ 900(

g
EO 600(
3000

I
4096'56XI0~ 8196'72xI0-5 122°J5-08
xI0-~ 1639344xI0 -~
8, Rotation
Fig. 11. Moment-rotation relationship for a typical vertical member.

cracks in the chord members. Also in the case of

No Typesof toadin~ Modeof foilure Theoreticalultiml/te
symmetrical loads, not all girders failed sym- p. iood
metrically, though this is usually the case in experi- 2(M~+2M,, )
ments and this will not in anyway affect the value
of ultimate load. In general, there is exact agree- i 4L $
ment between the modes of failure as predicted by Po
theory and as actually observed in tests.
LIII l L2 ! ~l I I I 8 (M=,+Muh)
(d) Theoretical and experimental ultimate load.
It may be seen from the results of theoretical and
experimental ultimate loads in Table 4 that in Pu"4(M.v+M.h)
majority of cases, their agreement is within 10 per
lllll L3 I~[I LI L
cent and in most of the cases, the calculated value is

23 4}5 67 8 4 I L4 I:l I 1 i (M'+M')

,el o @ ®
(a) !71 ~ ~

8 4(Muv+Muh}
L5 ISI 1 L
(b) ~ ~ Ty~A
I 5' Fig. 13. Abstract of theoretical modes of failure for
different types of loads.

(c) - - ~ TypeB
on the safe side of the actual ultimate load. Thus in
a reinforced concrete Vierendeel girder constituted
(d) ~ - TypeC by the horizontals and verticals with enough
rotation capacity, the ultimate load can be predicted
e 38 to a fair accuracy from the principle of partial
collapse.
(el ~ TypeD
An interesting aspect of Vierendeel girders can be
seen from equations in figure 13. The strength is
8 8 independent of the depth i.e. for a given load
system on a given span, the ultimate load of all
- ---- types of girders from the small to large overall
8 30 depths should be the same. This theoretical con-
clusion is also borne out by the actual test results
(Table 4), if the minor variations due to the
difference in dimensions, strength of concrete and
Fig. 12. Types of possible mechanisms. steel etc. from girder to girder is neglected.
192 P. C, Varghese. T. P. Ganesan and H. Achyutha

Table 3. Plastic moment distribution

!
. . . . . . . . . I[
Moment m I ,. m12 Ill21 17122~ /7123 IH32 [ /?/331 17134 m,~3 I m 4 4 , 11145 IH ~ 4 nl 5 ~.
capacity
(in M,t,) 1-0 I "5 1"5 I "0 15 1.5 1,0 1-5 1.5 1.0 1-5 1.5 1.0
i

For
Loading L 1
.......... I
i. . . . . . . . . . j
Panel i. - 1"75 I+ 1.0 -1.75 ! + 1.75 + 1-75 ,i
Moment +1.0 - 1 - 0 0 - 0'75 -0'25--1"50 I 0 + 1"50+ 0-25 - 1"0 i +0"75+1"0(I t - 1 ' 0 0
i I I

Table 4. Comparison of calculated and experimental ultimate loads

Type o f U l t i m a t e L o a d (kg) Exptl,

S. No.
Load Girder Calculated Exptl. Calculated

1 A" 1633 1105 0'68*

2 A 2393 2572 1'07
3 B 2452 2572 1.05
4 L1 C 2533 2705 1"07
5 D 2379 2248 0"95
6 E 2398 2604 1.09

7 A' 1372 1515 1"10

8 A 2414 2515 1.04
9 B 2146 1981 0"92
10 L2 C 2147 2229 1'04
11 D 2172 2286 1"05
12 E 2415 2648 1"10

13 A" 1791 1581 0"88

14 A 3221 3086 0-96
15 B 3339 3467 1.04
16 L3 C 2329 2572 1-10
17 D 3243 3096 0"96
18 E 3264 3353 1"03

19 A' 1419 1486 1'05

20 A 3299 3601 1'09
21 B 2864 3429 1"20
22 L4 C 3627 2829 0"78
23 D 2869 2934 1-02
24 E 3335 2934 0"88

25 A~ 1659 1867 1"13

26 A 1567 1753 1-12
27 B 2299 2953 1-29
28 L5 C 1896 1981 1"05
29 D 2348 2886 1.23
30 E 2399 2296 0"96

* Failed as a b e a m along t h e central vertical m e m b e r .

 Strength and Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Vierendeel Girders 193

(e) Influence of depth~span ratio. Even though
the depth/span ratio does not influence the ultimate
strength, it influences the behaviour of Vierendeel
girders considerably in other respects. It has been
shown by theory[ll, 1] that in girders of low
depth/span ratio such as A' or A, considerable
(a) Load-1515 KG
n
(b) Load-2515 KG
T6-A2-L2
the characteristic mode of failure with definite and
localised hinge formations as in other types of
girders. Also these direct forces modify the moment
capacities of the chord sections. It can however be
shown[l] that provided the direct forces are within
certain limits with reference to axial load-moment
interaction diagram of chord sections, the loss of
moment capacity in bottom chord will be made up
by the gain in top chord so that the calculated
ultimate load will still substantially remain the same.
For very large direct forces, of course, the ultimate
load may be considerably modified.
Another aspect of behaviour of Vierendeel girders
as influenced by depth/span ratio is that of stiffness.
In general, the stiffness reduces with increase in
depth/span ratio. For better appreciation of this
point, the load-deflection graphs in figure 7 are
redrawn as a function of depth/span ratio and
shown in figure 15. Quantitative comparison of

Joint 2 Joint 3 doint 4

L o a d - 1981 KG
(c) 200000
TT-B2-L2

150000

(d)LOad-2229 KG
T8-C2-L2 E

f O0000 - -

.Load-2286 KG 50°°° i
ej T 9 - D 2 - L 2

02 0 4 0 02 04 02 04

Depth, spon r o t ~

Fig. 15. Deflectionvs. depth~spanratiofor L2 loading.

theoretical and experimental values of deflections

Load-2648 KG
(f) T I 4 - E2- L2
Fig. 14. Actual modes of failure of different girders under
L2 loading.
amount of direct forces are produced in chord
members. These being tensile in bottom chords
cause full depth tensile cracks as can be seen from
figure 14. These additional tensile cracks obscure
was not feasible due to the difficulty of assessing
exactly the flexural rigidities of the sections. The
trends of variations of stiffness with depth/span
ratio were, however, same. Both theoretical and
experimental graphs indicate that Vierendeel girders
with a depth/span ratio around ~ should have the
maximum stiffness.
(f) lnfluence of type of reinforcements. The
Vierendeel girders discussed so far were all chosen
194 P. C. Varghese. 1". P. Ganesan and tt. Achvutha

rather on arbitrary basis. All of them had uniform CONCLUSIONS

reinforcements, having been designed neither on a
particular theory nor for a particular loading. All
the girders failed by partial collapse, leaving a
considerable portion still highly redundant and the
available moment capacities not being utilised fully
at all critical sections. In this connection, it was
interesting to study the behaviour of girder,
designed for a specific load on elastic theory. For
this purpose a " C " type girder (depth/span
ratio = 0.25) was designed on elastic theory for a
central load of 1000 kg and reinforcements pro-
portioned exactly as per the bending moment
distribution. The girder was analysed, tested and
evaluated in the same way as others. The results
were as follows:
There were practically no differences in the
behaviour with respect to load-deflection and
load-strain relationships. The level of cracking
load was almost the same and had the same ratio
to its ultimate load, as in other girders, though the
amount and form of reinforcements in this case
were different. But unlike in other girders, the yield
condition was reached simultaneously at all
critical sections. Further the yield load was the
same as the ultimate load, while in others it was
only 60-70 per cent of the ultimate load. As all
the critical sections failed simultaneously the
ultimate load could be calculated from elastic
theory itself. If so desired, the same mode of failure.
ultimate load etc. could also be arrived at by
plastic analysis. Though the design this way seems
to be the optimum causing uniform failure in
all critical sections, it does not necessarily mean the
best and most economical design in practice. For
proportionate reinforcements as here consume more
labour and cost with no worthwhile increase in
strength. Also provision of such reinforcements
may not always be possible due to the fictitious
nature of the combinations of design loads.
The theory of plastic analysis can be applied to
reinforced concrete Vierendeel girders also, pro-
vided the constituent members possess, as in the
present case adequate rotation capacity required
for redistribution of moments. The numbers of
hinges formed at failure is always less than I n + 11
where n is the numbers of redundants, i.e
Vierendeel girders are found to collapse always by
local failure of one or more panels only. For a given
girder and type of load, it is possible to predict the
exact mode of failure. The ultimate strength can
also be predicted within close limits. For Vierendeel
girders of given span and members of given cross
sectional properties, the ultimate load is indepen-
dent of the depth of the girder. But the depth/span
ratio has considerable influence on the cracking
behaviour and stiffness of the girders, thus affecting
their service conditions. In girders of very 1o~
depth/span ratio, large amount of direct tensile
forces in the bottom chords may produce full-depth
tensile cracks, which should receive proper and
adequate attention in their design and construction.
While the stiffness in general decreases with depth.
span ratio, a girder with a depth/span ratio of about
has the maximum stiffness. For the girders of this
investigation the cracking load is about ~ and the
yield load is about ~ of the ultimate load. A more
balanced design with all critical sections failing
simultaneously can also be made when the rein-
forcements are proportioned as per elastic bending
moment distribution. But the limited number of
tests on this aspect indicate that such a girder need
not necessarily possess any worthwhile overall
economy or advantages over girders with uniform
reinforcements.
Acknowledgements--The authors wish to thank Mr. ~.
Paramasivam, Mr. M. G. Srinivasan and Mr. C. Ganapathy
Chettiar, of I.I.T., Madras for their help in carrying out the
investigations reported in this paper.

REFERENCES
1. T. P. GANESAN, An investigation on strength and behaviour of reinforced concrete
Vierendeel girders, Ph.D. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, May (1969).
2. P. C. VARGtmSE and T. P. GANESAN, Photoelastic analysis of Vierendeel girders, Sym-
posium in analytical, experimental and construction techniques applied to engineering
structures, Warangal, India, February (1971).
3. H. ACHYUTHA,Behaviour of reinforced concrete Vierendeel girders, M.Tech. Thesis.
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, July (1965).
4. N. RAJAC,OPALAN, Experimental investigation on Vierendeel girders using mortar models,
M.Tech. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, June (! 966).
5. N. H. BURNS and C. P. SEIss, Load deformation characteristics of beam-column con-
nections in reinforced concrete, Civil Engineering studies, Structural Research Series
No. 234, University of Illinois, January (1962).
6. A. L. L. BAKER, The Ultimate Load Theory Applied to the Design of Reinforced and Pre-
stressed Concrete Frames, Concrete Publications Ltd., London (1956).
 Strength and Behat, iour of ReinJbrced Concrete Vierendeel Girders 195

7. E. O. PVgANG,C. P. SIESSand M. A. SOZEN, Load-moment--curvature characteristics of

reinforced concrete cross sections, J. Am. Concr. Inst. 61,763 (1964).
8. E. HO6NESTAD,Fundamental concepts in ultimate load design of reinforced concrete
members, J. Am. Concr. Inst. 48, 809 (1952).
9. P.G. HODGE,Jr., Plastic Analysis of Structures, McGraw-Hill, New York (1959).
10. A. W. HENDRY, Plastic analysis and design of mild steel Vierendeel girders, Struct. Eng.
33, 213 (1955).
11. C. V. KLOtJCEK,Distribution of Deformation, Orbis, Prague, Czechoslovakia (1950).

R6sum6--L'article rend compte des recherches faites par les auteurs pour 6tudier le
comportement de poutres Vierendeel de b6ton arm6 de ills parall61es simples dans
leurs conditions d'61asticit6 et de charge extreme. I1 donne tous les d6tails des 6preuves.
des mesures et des observations faites.
Les auteurs ont 6tudi6 l'application de l'analyse plastique aux poutres Vierendeel de
b6ton arm6 et ont reconnu qu'elle est praticable lorsque les parties constitutives de la
poutre poss~dent les caract6ristiques de flexibilit6 d6sirables. Ils sugg6rent une m6thode
simple permettant de pr6dire exactement comment se produira la d6faillance et de
calculer la charge extreme. Les r6sultats exp6rimentaux prouvent la validit6 de la
m6thode. L'inftuence pr6dominante du rapport de profondeur et de port6e des
poutres sur leur comportement en service a 6t6 d6montr6e et les auteurs soulignent
combien le choix correct de ce rapport importe pour assurer les caract6ristiques
d6sir6es de r6sistance au crevassement et de rigidit6 effective. Les auteurs ont aussi
6tudi6 comparativement les comportements de poutres Vierendeel conques d'apr6s la
m6thode 61astique et de poutres ~t armatures uniformes arbitraires et en commentent
les avantages respectifs.

Zusammenfassung--Das Verhalten von Eisenbeton-Vierendeeltrfigern mit einfacher

Parallelgurtung wurde im elastischen Zustand und bei Vollbelastung untersucht. Die
Einzelhaiten der ausgefiihrten Versuche werden mit den erhaltenen Mel3werten und
den Beobachtungen ausfiihrlich beschrieben.
Die Anwendung der plastischen Analyse auf Eisenbeton-Vierendeeltr/iger wurde
untersucht und erwies sich als m6glich, wenn die Einzelteile der Tr/iger die gewiin-
schten Biegeeigenschaften besitzen. Eine einfache Methode wird fiir das Voraussagen
der genauen Art des Versagens und die Berechnung der zum Versagen fiihrenden
Belastung vorgeschlagen. Die Giiltigkeit der Methode wurde durch die Versuch-
sergebnisse bewiesen. Der iiberwiegende Einfluss des Verh~iltnisses yon Tiefe zu
Spannweite der Tr/iger auf ihr Verhalten unter Einsatzbedingungen wurde gezeigt
und auf die Bedeutung der Wahl des richtigen Verh~iltnisses yon Tiefe zu Spannweite
ffir die Gewfihrleistung des wiinschenswerten Bruchverhaltens und der effektiven
Steifigkeit hingewiesen. Das relative Verhalten yon Vierendeeltr~igern, die nach der
elastischen Theorie konstruiert sind, und von Tr~igern mit frei gew~ihlten einheitlichen
Verst~irkungen wurde ebenfalls untersucht und die Vorteile wurden verglichen.