PREDICTING DEFLECTIONS OF REINFORCED

C O N C R E T E BEAMS ANALYTICALLY
By Raed M. Sainra'

ABSTRACT: A rational method of analysis is proposed for the calculation of creep

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

deflections of reinforced concrete beams under sustained service loads. The method
introduces the use of a fictitious modulus relating, for a given section under bend-
ing, the initial stress in concrete with the final strain after a period of sustained
load. The requirements of strain compatibility and equilibrium of a section are
used, in conjunction, to determine the position of neutral axis and strain and stress
distributions after creep. The long-term flexural rigidity of the member, (EI), is
determined from a knowledge of a new neutral axis and a new modular ratio and
is used to calculate the final deflections. The approach for calculating long-term
deflections is similar to the current American Concrete Institute (ACI) procedure
for calculating short-term deflections. The accuracy of the analysis is verified by
comparison with several experimental measurements of beam deflections. The re-
sult is good correlation between the theoretical values and measured values.

INTRODUCTION

The calculation of actual deflections of reinforced concrete beams is mul-

tidimensional and rather involved. In retrospect, most common design codes
employ fairly simple solutions to such a complex problem. The ACI Code
(Building code 1983), for instance, which treats the problem of computation
of deflections in more detail than most other codes, emphasizes the impor-
tance of such factors as time after load and compression reinforcement on
time-dependent or long-term deflections. It also accounts for the effect of
cracking on both short- and long-term deflections. But it ignores the influ-
ence of such important factors as ambient relative humidity, age at loading,
member size (frequently expresssed as the volume-to-surface ratio of the
member), water-cement ratio and cement content for the particular design
and prevailing environmental conditions of the structure at hand. Such a
philosophy has been set by requirements of simplicity and convenience rather
than a convection that the incorporation of such effects in the solution of
the deflection problem has little bearing on the final result.
A procedure is suggested herein for the computation of deflections of beams
that attempts to account for the major factors influencing long-term deflec-
tions while keeping the solution simple. The analytical scheme utilizes the
ACI Code procedure for calculating short-term deflections but proposes a
new approach for estimating long-term deflections, mainly creep deflections.
The inclusion of effects of shrinkage, although it is possible and may be
done indirectly, is indicated but not elaborated upon here. The proposed
approach is compared with laboratory measured deflections of short-term and
sustained loading of beams reported in the literature and a discussion of the
results is made.
'Asst. Prof. Civ. Engrg., Faculty of Engrg. and Tech., Univ. of Jordan, Amman,
Jordan.
Note. Discussion open until October 1, 1989. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on May 24, 1988.
This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 5, May,
1989. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/89/0005-1158/$1.00 + $.15 per page. Paper No.
23492.
i i 50

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 The most important aspect of deflection computation of a reinforced con-
crete beam is the extent of cracking of the beam. Since cracking of a beam
section directly influences its moment of inertia which, in turn, has a sig-
nificant impact on the magnitude of deflection, any attempt at predicting
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

deflections accurately should attentively address the problem of cracking.

The ACI Code suggests the use of an effective moment of inertia, Ie, based
on the work of Branson (163) given by
Mcr
/„ = h+ 1 - I £ I (1)
Ma
where Ig, representing an upper bound value on /, = gross moment of inertia
of the concrete section, neglecting the contribution of the reinforcement; and
/„, representing a lower bound value on /, = moment of inertia of the cracked
transformed section. For a composite material such as reinforced concrete,
the computation of /„ is made possible by first finding an equivalent ho-
mogeneous material, normally plain concrete, though not perfectly homo-
geneous, and then calculating the moment of inertia of the equivalent, so-
called transformed section by a conventional statics procedure.
Prior to calculating /„. however, the position of the neutral axis has to be
determined. This is fairly simple for a rectangular section, singly or doubly
reinforced, and may be found in various textbooks on the subject.
For a singly-reinforced rectangular section, i.e., a section with tension
reinforcement only (see Fig. 1), the following expressions are derived:
The neutral axis depth ratio
*, = [{pnf + 2pn]1/2 _
P« (2)
The cracked moment of inertia
1
l„ = - bihdy + npbd(d - M ) (3)

For a doubly reinforced rectangular section, i.e., a section with compres-

sion reinforcement (see Fig. 2), and neglecting the effect of concrete dis-
placed by the compression steel, the previous expressions assume the fol-
lowing format:

*i = (p + p')V + 2( p + ?4-)n - (p + p> (4)

h^H
*/«

Ail npbd

FIG. 1. Cracked Transformed Section with Tension Reinforcement

1159

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 h^H h^H
cJ~- np'bii _jzzi
M
C.A.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ilL*

FIG. 2. Cracked Transformed Section with Tension and Compression Reinforce-

ment

Icr = - biktdf + npbd(.d - kid)2 + np'bd(k,d - d'f (5)

Following the determination of /„ and knowing the modulus of elasticity

of the concrete Ec, the cracking moment M„, and the applied moment Ma,
the effective moment of inertia of the section /«, is calculated from Eq. 1.
Finally, the short-term deflection is calculated from

A, = £ - ^ - (6)
{EJe)i

BEHAVIOR UNDER SUSTAINED LOAD

In the ACI Code, long-term deflections are obtained by multiplying the

short-term deflections by a factor X given by X = £/l + 50p' where £ =
the load duration factor. Thus X accounts for the effect of the compression
reinforcement and duration of sustained load but neglects all other contri-
butions of ambient relative humidity, member size, and other factors as men-
tioned earlier. This factor was proposed by Branson (1971).
A more rational and better approach is to consider the mechanics of the
cross section by investigating the strain and stress distributions under sus-
tained load and satisfying the requirements of strain compatibility and equi-
librium. To understand what happens more clearly, a brief review of the
behavior of members under sustained load is first presented.
Consider a plain concrete member, such as an axially loaded concrete
column under sustained load. With time, this column displays increased de-
flections, or deformations, because of creep. In a reinforced concrete col-
umn, however, an additional exhibit is redistributed of stresses between con-
crete and steel, the trend being that of a transfer of force from concrete to
the compression steel. Since the stresses in concrete decrease with time as
a result of this transfer of force, elastic and creep recoveries occur in con-
crete and the final deformation of the reinforced column is less than the plain
concrete column. Next, examine what happens in a reinforced concrete beam.
Creep causes two major changes: (1) An increase in the strains in concrete;
and (2) an increase in the depth of the neutral axis, a downward movement
for positive bending, see Fig. 3(b). The strain, and thus the stress, in the
tension steel changes only slightly and some investigators (Pretorius 1985),
realizing that the change is small compared to the increase in concrete
1160

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 -. CO _ 'JIX .
.A , -JJL+AU.

fsnadea;

/ Ut'Ui-Mt
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

^ e , + e cp

Gel
• - & —».
E0U/U8R/UM
batara offar
creap craap

L * 'ci J Mc + M s c t M j f = 0

(c)

FIG. 3. Section under Bending before and after Creep: (a) Section; (6) Strain Dia-
gram; (c) Stress Diagram

compression strain, have assumed it remains constant. This requires that, to

maintain equilibrium, the stresses in the concrete decrease, which would lead
to elastic and creep recoveries of the concrete. Such recovery is further en-
hanced by the presence of compression reinforcement in the section, since
a transfer of force to the compression steel would mean a larger reduction
in the concrete stress, leading to larger immediate and inelastic recoveries.
Thus becomes evident the role of the compression reinforcement in con-
trolling deflections. In the following section, the mathematical modeling of
the structural behavior and the computation of long-term deflection is illus-
trated.

LONG-TERM DEFLECTION: NEW APPROACH

Consider the beam section shown in Fig. 3 again. The immediate strain
and stress distributions are represented by the dashed lines. After some time
t, these distributions change and would now be represented by the solid lines.
The extreme concrete fiber in compression undergoes an increase in strain
€c/ -> ec, and a decrease in stress/„ <-fcl. The stress distribution is initially
linear and remains so after creep since deflections are examined under work-
ing (service) loads, whereby stresses in concrete are expected to remain within
the proportional limit.
The final concrete strain e„ in the maximum compressed fiber may be
expressed as:

ec, = [ed(l + <M] - H ? + J jd^

immediate immediate plus creep. (7)

plus creep recovery strain
strain
where ec, = strain in concrete in the maximum compressed fiber after time
t of sustained load; e„ = immediate strain in concrete in the maximum com-
1161

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 pressed fiber upon application of load; A/, = stress decrement, due to creep,
in the maximum compressed fiber in concrete after time t; and <|>, = creep
coefficient, also called creep factor, at time t defined by the ratio of the
creep strain to the immediate strain.
In selecting a value for cj>„ attention must be given to the specific mix
design as well as the loading and environmental conditions of the structure
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

under investigation. It is in this factor that such effects as ambient relative

humidity, age at loading, and others are included. The choice of <)>, is critical
and should reflect as accurately as possible the conditions of the required
structure. Various empirical procedures may be used to help determine an
appropriate value for <)>,; among those are the ACI ("Prediction of creep"
1971) or CEB {International recommendations 1970) procedures and the Parrot
(1979) procedure, which gives an ultimate value of the creep factor after 30
years of sustained load but does not consider such effects as w/c ratio or
cement content. Eq. 7 may now be expressed as
fa 4// / 1 \
e« = - (1 + <M - j - [1 + ~ 4>,j (8)

where fci = immediate stress in concrete in the maximum compressed fiber

upon application of load, given by e d • Ec, and approximately
"" kf, / i \ 45-
~-d^. = - -T-4>, (9)
2/ Ec
Factoring fd/Ec and rewriting Eq. 8, ec/ is now given by
(i+<w
fc
-fH*< (10)

It is now convenient to define a new parameter E„ for variables that measure

material properties and stress values:

(, + w ¥i I i
-2T-H*
Following that, it is apparent that back substitution in Eq. 10 yields the
following:

*« = 7T • (12)
ticr
The parameter Ecr may be regarded as representing a fictitious modulus for
a beam section with reinforcement, a sort of reduced modulus which ac-
counts for creep and creep recovery effects. The long-term stress in the max-
imum compressed fiber is given by
fc=fci = A/, (13)
The complete analysis required for the establishment of strain and stress
distributions after a period of sustained load involves the following steps:
1. Determine the short-term strain and stress distributions; thus determine k,d,
fc
1162

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 2. Select an appropriate value of the creep factor (jv
3. Assume the stress decrement A/, in the maximum compressed fiber. Then,
knowing Ec, <))„ and/ c ,, substitute in Eq. 11 and determine E„.
4. Calculate the final strain ec, and the final stress / „ in the maximum com-
pressed fiber from Eqs. 12 and 13, respectively.
5. Assume the new depth of the neutral axis k,d. Hence, determine the strain
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

distribution in concrete and, subsequently, the strains in the tension steel eJ( and
the compression steel eJC, are equal to the strains in the concrete at the corre-
sponding levels. Calculate the forces in the section from: Concrete: pc = ( 1 /
2)f a -b- k,d; tension steel: pa = (es,• Es)• Aa\ compression steel: psc = (eJC• Es) • Asc
(neglecting effect of concrete displaced by the steel), where Asl and Asc = the
areas of the tension and compression steel, respectively. Check equilibrium of
forces, pc + ps, + psc = 0 where pc, ps„ zndpsc represent the forces in concrete,
tension steel, and compression steel, respectively. If force equilibrium is not
achieved, revise the assumption of k,d above and repeat the computation until
equilibrium is satisfied.
6. Calculate, for the strain distribution determined in steps 3 - 5 , the magnitude
of the internally resisting moment. Compare with the externally applied moment
to verify that moment equilibrium is achieved. If not, modify the assumption of
A/, in step 3 and repeat the calculation. Iterate on steps 3-6 until both force
equilibrium and moment equilibrium are achieved.
The purpose of this analytical scheme is to predict as accurately as pos-
sible the final curvature 0 , + Qcp [see Fig. 3(b)] since this is directly related
to deflection. The value for the curvature can, therefore, also include the
effects of shrinkage. By integrating curvatures twice along the length of the
member, the deflected shape of the beam may be obtained.
Alternatively, it may be desired to use a procedure for calculating long-
term deflection similar to that suggested by the ACI code for short-term
deflection in which deflections are calculated from, among other variables,
a knowledge of the flexural rigidity EI (see Eq. 6). To predict the new mo-
ment of inertia of the section, consider Fig. 3(a). It is observed that since
the position of the neutral axis has changed ktd —» k, d, force equilibrium
requires that the modular ratio should also change n —» n,. To determine n„
moments of areas are taken about the neutral axis. Thus for a singly rein-
forced section b(k,d)2/2 = n,pbd(d - k,d). From which

A?
n, = • (14)
2p(l - ft,)
A study of this relationship indicates that n, increases rapidly with an in-
crease in k, and reduces with an increase in p. To obtain the long-term mo-
ment of inertia, n, is substituted for n and k, for kt in Eq. 3 and it can be
shown that the resulting term reduces to

(15)
^•-U-eJ-"
This cracked moment of inertia is then used in Eq. 1 to determine (/,,),. The
modulus of elasticity of concrete is then given by

(Ec), = - (16)

1163

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 Hence the long-term flexural rigidity is

(EM, = (/,),•- (17)

n,
The long-term deflection becomes
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Af — A; ' , (1 o)

Eqs. 14-17 have been derived for a rectangular section with tension re-
inforcement only. In a similar manner, expressions may be obtained for a
rectangular section with compression reinforcement, though the results look
more complex. The new modular ratio for such a section is given by

^ (19)
p(l - f c , ) - p ' ( £ , - ^

It is suggested that a numerical value be obtained for n, from Eq. 19 and

then the long-term moment of inertia be calculated from Eq. 5 by using n,
and k, instead of n and kh respectively, since back substitution of Eq. 19 in
Eq. 5 does not condense to a simple expression.

COMPARISON WITH MEASURED RESULTS

A comparison between the deflections computed using the proposed pro-

cedure and measured deflections, reported by Corley and Sozen (1966), Washa
and Fluck (1952, 1956), and Bakoss et al. (1982), is made for simple beams
in Tables 1 and 2 and continuous beams in Table 3. The comparison indi-
cates that the calculated deflections correlate well with the measured de-
flections which, for continuous beams, are reported as the average of the
two spans. Generally, but not entirely, the procedure proposed in this paper
seems to slightly overestimate the deflections. This is more true in the case
of continuous beams than in the case of simple beams. One explanation
could be that the measured values reflect the change in bending moment that
occurs in an indeterminate structure, such as a continuous beam, due to sus-
tained load. In the beams of Washa and Fluck (1956), it was observed that
sustained load caused an increase in observed midlength reaction, in a two-
span beam, which subsequently led to a decrease in the maximum positive
moment of the beam of about 3.5% and an increase in the maximum neg-
ative moment of about 4.5%, for a 1% increase in the midlength reaction.
Both observations, absent in the theoretical case which assumes no moment
change, could contribute to smaller measured deflections when compared
with the calculated deflections.
One source of uncertainty regarding the theoretical deflections is well-
known and is associated with the moment of inertia to be used in the com-
putations involving a continuous beam. In the case of beams subjected to
uniform load, a weighted average value based on the flexural rigidities of
positive and negative regions has been used. This is in accordance with rec-
ommendations made by the ACI (Commentary 1983). However, for beams
under a single heavy concentrated load, such as the case with the Bakoss et
1164

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 TABLE 1, Comon™* 8 "" n * fi«i«>iiintori »nd M««nir«( r»«»i««»i««» nf Simple Beams
with Tension Reinforcement Only
Span = 7 ft (2,134 mm); Loads = Span = 3,750; load =
Two-Point Loads; P/2 = 2,240 lb two-point load; p = 2.6
(10 kN) at 18 in. (457 mm) from kN at third points
Each End (Corley and Sozen 1966) (Bakoss et al. 1982)
Source
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

specifications Beam C1 Beam C3 Beam C4 for beam 1B2

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
b, in. (mm) 3 (76) 3(76) 3(76) (100)
d, in. (mm) 5-3/8 (136) 3-5/8 (86) 3-5/8 (86) (130)
Time under
sustained load 2 years 2 years 2 years 600 days
-e-

3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5

P 0.0137 0.0203 0.0305 0.0174
Ei, psi (MPa) 3.12 x 10" 3.12 X 106 3.12 x 106
(2.2 x 104) (2.2 x 104) (2.2 x 104) (3.12 X 104)
"i 43 59 56 41
A( measured, in. 0.12 0.31 0.24 —
A; measured (mm) (3.0) (7.8) (6.1) (8.9)
Ai calculated, in. 0.13 0.32 0.21 —
A/ calculated (mm) (3.3) (8.1) (5.3) (10.4)
A? measured, in. 0.29 0.68 0.61 —
Ar measured (mm) (7.4) (17.3) (15.5) (25.1)
Af calculated, in. 0.31 0.77 0.64 —
Af calculated (mm) (7.9) (19.6) (16.3) (24.6)

TABLE 2, Comparison of Calculated and Measured Deflections of Simple Beams

with Compression Reinforcement
UNIFORM LOAD (Washa and Fluck 1952)
Short-Term Deflection, A, Long-Term Deflection, A,
in. (mm) t = 2.5 yr, in. (mm)
Beam
designation Measured Calculated Measured Calculated
d) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Al/4 0.53 (13.5) 0.55 (14.0) 0.93 (23.6) 1.01 (25.7)
A2/5 0.62 (15.7) 0.60 (15.2) 1.27 (32.3) 1.36 (34.5)
A3/6 0.67 (17.0) 0.69 (17.5) 1.76 (44.7) 1.92 (48.8)
Bl/4 0.92 (23.4) 1.05 (26.7) 2.01 (51.1) 1.86 (47.2)
B2/4 0.98 (24.9) 1.03 (26.2) 2.56 (65.0) 2.40 (61.0)
B3/6 1.04 (26.4) 0.99 (25.1) 3.46 (87.9) 3.57 (90.7)
Cl/4 1.58 (40.1) 1.44 (36.6) 3.15 (80.0) 3.28 (83.3)
C2/5 1.71 (43.4) 1.80 (45.7) 3.96 (100.6) 4.23 (107.4)
C3/6 1.88 (47.8) 1.93 (44.0) 5.54 (140.7) 5.72 (145.3)
Dl/4 0.41 (10.4) 0.40 (10.2) 1.09 (27.7) 1.21 (30.7)
D2/5 0.56 (14.2) 0.61 (15.5) 1.33 (33.8) 1.25 (31.8)
D3/6 0.70 (17.8) 0.76 (19.3) 1.91 (48.5) 2.05 (52.1)
El/4 2.34 (59.4) 2.12 (53.8) 4.88 (124.0) 4.59 (116.6)
E2/5 2.20 (55.9) 1.94 (49.3) 5.07 (128.8) 5.26 (133,6)
E3/6 2.48 (63.0) 2.65 (67.3) 7.28 (184.9) 6.34 (161.0)

1165

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 TABLE 3. Comparison of Calculated and Measured Deflections of Continuous
Beams

Short-Term Deflection, A, Long-Term Deflection, A,

in. (mm) t = 190 days, in. (mm)
Beam
designation Measured Calculated Measured Calculated
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(a) Source: Washa and Fluck (1956) Two-Span Beams, Uniform Load"
X 1/4 0.56 (14.1) 0.51 (13.0) 1.14(29.0) 1.32 (33.5)
X2/5 0.57 (14.5) 0.54 (13.7) 1.27 (32.3) 1.45 (36.8)
X3/6 0.62 (15.7) 0.68 (17.3) 1.49 (37.8) 1.56(39.6)
Y 1/4 0.89 (22.6) 0.94 (23.9) 1.81 (46.0) 1.74 (44.2)
Y2/5 0.93 (23.6) 0.98 (24.9) 1.96(49.8) 2.21 (56.1)
7 3/6 1.00 (25.4) 1.02 (25.9) 2.36 (59.9) 2.57 (65.3)
Z 1/4 1.04 (26.4) 1.11 (28.2) 2.32 (58.9) 2.08 (52.8)
Z2/5 1.13 (28.7) 1.21 (30.7) 2.67 (67.8) 2.92 (74.2)
Z3/6 1.20 (30.5) 1.14(29.0) 3.14(79.8) 3.51 (89.2)
(b) Source: Bakoss et al. (1982) Two-Span Beams, Central Point Load"
— (4.92) (5.8) (14.97) (16.2)
"Load = X: 190 lb/ft (2.79 kN/m); Y: 146 lb/ft (2.15 kN/m); Z: 68 lb/ft (1 kN/m);
half-span = X: 20 ft (6.06 m); Y: 20.8 ft (6.30 m); Z: 17.5 ft (5.30 m); section = X: 6
in. x 8 in. (152 mm x 203 mm); Y: 5 in. x 12 in. (127 mm x 305 mm); Z: 3 in. x
12 in. (76 mm X 305 mm).
b
Section 100 mm x 150 mm, span = 2 x 3 , 500 mm, 6 kN load.

al. (1982) tests, only the midspan moment of inertia was used. These as-
sumptions, generally known to yield acceptable results, could push the the-
oretical values of deflection in either direction, higher or lower than the
actual deflections, but an examination of Tables 1-3 seems to indicate that
the sources of inaccuracy are small and suggests that this method is satis-
factory for ordinary design situations.
It must also be borne in mind that a great deal lies in predicting as ac-
curately as possible the creep properties, expressed here through a creep
factor, accompanying a particular design situation. In comparing the results
of theoretical deflections calculated using the proposed method with the ex-
perimentally determined deflections of various investigators, a source of dif-
ficulty commonly encountered arises from having to generate the needed
data from limited information, since not all the parameters influencing such
a prediction are always reported. In the course of this investigation, for in-
stance, selecting an approximate creep factor has in some cases been partly
judgmental and may have a bearing on the accuracy of the results.

CONCLUSION

The procedure suggested in this investigation for the calculation of creep

deflections of beams has many advantages. It is simple, rational, requires
little data input, and yields results that check closely with measured values
of deflection. It also has the merit of being analytically based, compared
with a rough ACI recommendation with an empirical basis, which estimates

1166

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 long-term deflections by multiplying the immediate component of deflection,
caused by sustained load, by a fairly approximate multiplier. The task of
writing a computer program embodying the analytical scheme presents little
effort and would greatly enhance the solution.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Bakoss, S. L., et al. (1982). "Long-term deflections of reinforced concrete beams."

Magazine of Concrete Research. 34(121), London, England, 203-212.
Branson, D. E. (1963). "Instantaneous and time-dependent deflections of simple and
continuous reinforced concrete beams." HPR Publication 7, Part 1, Alabama
Highway Dept., Bureau of Public Roads, Ala.
Branson, D. E. (1971). "Compression steel effect on long-time deflections." J. Amer.
Cone. Inst., 68(8), 555-559.
"Building code requirements for reinforced concrete." (1983). ACI318M-83, Amer.
Concrete Inst., Detroit, Mich.
Commentary on building code requirements for reinforced concrete. (1983). ACI 318M-
83, Amer. Concrete Inst., Detroit, Mich.
Corley, W. G., and Sozen, M. A. (1966). "Time-dependent deflections of reinforced
concrete beams." J. Amer. Cone. Inst., 63(3), 373-386.
International recommendations for the design and construction of concrete struc-
tures. (1970). C.E.B. (European Concrete Committee), London, England.
Parrott, L. J. (1979). "Simplified methods of predicting the deformation of structural
concrete." Development Report No. 3, Cement and Concrete Association, Wexham
Springs, England.
"Prediction of creep, shrinkage and temperature effects in concrete structures." (1971).
SP27-3, Designing for effects of creep, shrinkage and temperature in concrete
structures, Amer. Concrete Inst., Detroit, Mich., 51-93.
Pretorius, P. C. (1985). "Deflections of reinforced concrete members: A simple ap-
proach." J. Amer. Cone. Inst., 82(6), 805-812.
Washa, G. W., and Fluck, P. G. (1952). "Effect of compressive reinforcement on
the plastic flow of reinforced concrete beams." J. Amer. Cone. Inst., 49(2), 89-
108.
Washa, G. W., and Fluck, P. G. (1956). "Plastic flow (creep) of reinforced concrete
continuous beams." J. Amer. Cone. Inst., 52(5), 549-561.

APPENDIX II. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

Asc = area of compression steel;

Asl = area of tension steel;
b = width of rectangular concrete section;
d = effective depth of concrete section;
d' = distance from extreme fiber in compression to centroid of
compression steel;
Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete;
E„ = fictitious modulus relating initial stress in concrete with final strain
after creep;
Es = modulus of elasticity of steel;
/„• = immediate stress in concrete, in maximum compressed fiber;
fa = final stress in concrete, in maximum compressed fiber, after creep;
I„ = moment of inertia of cracked transformed section;
/,, = effective moment of inertia of section;

1167

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168

 Ig = gross moment of inertia of concrete section, neglecting contribu-
tion of steel;
ki = ratio of immediate neutral axis depth to effective depth of section;
k, = ratio of final neutral axis depth to effective depth of section, after
creep;
L = beam span;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arba Minch University on 12/25/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Ma = applied moment;
Mcr = cracking moment;
n = modular ratio, before creep;
n, = modular ratio, after creep;
Pc = force in section carried by concrete;
P« = force carried by compression steel;
Ps, = force carried by tension steel;
P = coefficient used in deflection computation reflecting type of load-
ing and continuity;
A/, = concrete stress decrement, in maximum compressed fiber, due to
creep;
A, = short-term deflection;
€c, = immediate strain in concrete;
ecl = total, immediate plus creep, strain in concrete;
esl = final strain in steel, after creep;
6, = initial curvature of section;
Qcp = additional creep curvature of section;
A, = long-term deflection;
X = multiplier used for computing long-term deflection;
£ = time-dependent factor for sustained load;
p = ratio of tension reinforcement;
p' = ratio of compression reinforcement; and
4>, = creep coefficient, ratio of creep strain to immediate strain.

Subscripts
/ = time of initial loading; and
t = time after creep.

litsa

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(5): 1158-1168