TECHNICAL PAPER
Development of
IS:456 Shear Design
Provisions-I: Members
without Shear
Reinforcement
Abstract
One-way shear design provisions of Indian Standard IS:456-
2000 were first introduced in its 1978 version. The empirical
design equations were developed based on the limited test
results available more than 40 years ago. Since then, significant
advancement on the shear strength models has been done
through extensive numerical and experimental studies. As a
result, the shear design provisions of many building codes
worldwide have been updated considering the influence of
many critical parameters on the shear strength of concrete
members. Current shear design provisions of IS:456-2000 do not
explicitly consider the influence of high compressive strengths of
concrete, member sizes, aggregate types and other parameters.
Therefore, there is a need to assess the adequacy and safety of
the shear design provisions of IS:456-2000. In this study, one-
way shear design provisions of various codes of practice have
been reviewed. Various critical parameters influencing the shear
strength of concrete members have been discussed. A simplified
expression has been developed in a more rationalized manner
to predict the concrete shear stress of members without shear
reinforcements. Moreover, guidelines to compute the maximum
value of concrete shear stress have been proposed in order to
avoid the crushing failure of diagonal compression strut in the
concrete members.
Keywords: Beam, Building code, Design, Reinforced concrete,
Shear strength, Stirrups.
1. Introduction
The one-way shear design provisions for the non-prestressed
reinforced concrete (RC) members in the “Indian Standard Code
of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete (IS:456)” have
been remained unchanged since the introduction of 1978 code
(IS:456-1978[1]). The design shear capacity (Vu) of a member
is computed as the sum of the contributions of concrete (Vc),
and shear reinforcement (Vs). Vc is calculated by multiplying the
20 The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020
Dipti Ranjan Sahoo
design concrete shear stress (τc) with the cross-section area (A)
defined as the product of web width (b) and effective depth
(d). The value of τc is determined based on the percentage of
longitudinal steel reinforcement (pt) and the grade of concrete
represented by the characteristic cube compressive strength
(fck). The IS:456-2000[2] provides the values of τc for different
values of fck for the pt values varying in the range of 0.15-3.0%.
The maximum value of fck considered in IS:456-2000[2] is 40 MPa.
The code also limits the maximum value of τc in order to avoid
the occurrence of compression crushing of diagonal struts in the
concrete members.
The values of τc and τc,max recommended by IS:456-2000[2] are
based on semi-empirical expressions proposed by Rangan[3].
The presence of axial compressive forces increases the concrete
shear stress as the formation of diagonal shear cracks gets
delayed. This effect has been recognized in IS:456-2000[2]
through the use of a multiplication factor in the range of 1.0-
1.5 for τc. The shear strength contribution of stirrups (vs) in a
o
concrete member is computed based on a constant 45 -angle
truss model. Though the design provisions of IS:456-2000[2] may
provide a reasonable estimate of shear stress (τc) of concrete
of fck less than or equal to 40 MPa, it is not clear whether the
same expression holds good for members with high-strength
concrete. Also, current shear design provisions of IS:456-2000[2]
do not explicitly consider the influence of size effects, type of
aggregates, and axial tensile force. Therefore, it is necessary
to review the current shear design provisions of various codes
of practice and to assess the adequacy and safety of one-way
shear design provisions of IS:456-2000[2]. Further, shear design
provisions need to be developed considering various critical
parameters. In addition, it is also necessary to review the
provisions related to the maximum concrete shear stress for
high-strength of concrete.
2.  Scope and objectives
The main objectives of this paper are to compare the one-way
shear design provisions of IS:456-2000[2] with those of other

codes of practice for a wide range of material and geometric
parameters of concrete members and to develop the design
provisions for concrete shear stress in a more rational way. The
influence of high-strength concrete, type of aggregate, size
effect and other critical parameters needs to be incorporated
in the shear design provisions. This paper also proposes a
simplified design expression for the maximum concrete shear
stress in order to avoid the crushing failure of web concrete strut
in the shear span regions. The main aim is to develop the shear
design provisions representing the lower-bound estimates of
shear strength of concrete members at their ultimate limit states.
In the companion paper[4], the proposed design provisions
are validated with a large database of shear test results. The
influence of axial loads and the requirements of minimum shear
reinforcement in concrete members have also been presented in
the companion paper[4].
3. Review of Shear Design Provisions
in Various Codes of Practice
There have been significant changes in shear design provisions
in building codes of various countries in the recent years. These
codes consider different approaches to address various critical
issues, such as, the size effect, the effect of axial compression,
the percentage of longitudinal steel, the angle of inclination
of shear crack, and the state of strain in concrete in the shear
design provisions. To assess if and how to update the IS:456-
2000[2] one-way shear provisions for concrete members, the
shear design provisions of selected codes of practice are
examined as discussed in the following section.
3.1 Indian Standard IS:456-2000 (2000)
Total shear strength (Vu) of a RC beam is considered as the sum
of the shear strength contributions of concrete (Vc) and shear
reinforcement (Vs). The Indian Standard code uses the constant
o
angle (45 )-truss model to estimate the shear strength of
transverse stirrups. For vertical shear reinforcement in a concrete
beam, the expression for Vu is given by:
d
Vu = Vc + Vs = τ cbd + 0.87 Asv f yv (1)
sv
where, b is the web width of member, d is the effective depth of
member, Asv is the cross-sectional area of stirrups, fyv is the yield
strength of stirrups, sv is the spacing of shear reinforcements
along the length of member, and τc is the design shear stress of
concrete. The 0.87-factor represents the inverse of the partial
safety factor for steel. The value of τc is computed using a semi-
empirical formula[3] as given below:
τc =
0.85 f c ' ( ) = 0.85
1 + 5β − 1 0.8 f ck ( )
1 + 5β − 1
(2)
6β 6β
TECHNICAL PAPER
fc ' 0.8 f ck bd
β= = (3)
6.89 pt 689 As
Originally, the above equations were derived relating to the
characteristic cylinder compressive strength of concrete (fc').
Later, fc' is replaced by 0.8 fck in the above equations for their use
in the Indian Standard IS:456 code. pt and As are the percentage
and area of longitudinal steel reinforcement in beam. These
design provisions do not consider the size effect and type of
aggregate.
3.2 American Code ACI 318-14 (2014)
One-way shear strength of a member as per ACI 318-14[5] is also
considered as the sum of contributions of concrete (Vc), and
shear reinforcement (Vs). Vs is computed based on a constant
o
angle (45 )-truss model, whereas Vc is taken as proportional to
fc' representing the tensile strength of concrete. ACI 318-14[5]
provides the simplified as well as detailed methods to compute
the design concrete shear strength as summarized below:
Vc = 0.16φλbd fc ' (Simplified method) (4)
0.16λφ bd f ' + 17 p
c t

 V
Vc = Min. 0.16λφ bd fc ' + 17 pt d ud (Detailed method) (5)
 M ud
≤ 0.29λφ bd f '
 c
φ Asv f yv d
Vs = (6)
sv
In the above equations, φ is the strength-reduction factor
(=0.75), λ is the factor account for the light-weight aggregates,
and Vud and Mud are the design shear force and bending moment
demand on the member. The expressions given in Eq. (5)
consider the influence of shear span-to-effective depth (a/d)
ratio and the dowel action of longitudinal tension steel bars in
determining the concrete shear strength. These provisions do
not consider the size effect and aggregate interlock effect. The
value of fc' in the above equations should not exceed 69 MPa.
3.3  Australian Code AS 3600 (2018)/ Canadian
Standard CSA A23.3 (2016)
Shear design provisions of both AS 3600[6] and CSA A23.3[7] are
developed based on modified compression field theory (MCFT)
proposed by Vecchio and Collins[8]. Shear strength (Vu) is taken
as the sum of the contributions from concrete (Vc), and vertical
shear reinforcement (Vs). A summary of shear provisions of both
these codes of practice is given below:
Vc = φc λβ f c′ bdv (7)
The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020 21
 TECHNICAL PAPER

value of fck should not be taken more than 40 MPa. It is worth-

 0.4  1300 
β =    (8) mentioning that BS:8110-1[9] has been withdrawn and has been
 1 + 1500 εx  1000 + k gd dv 
 replaced by Eurocode 2[10].
 35 
k gd =   (9)
 16 + age 
  3.5 Eurocode 2 (EN1992-1-1: 2004)
( M ud dv ) + Vud − V p + 0.5 Nu − Ap f po Eurocode 2 (EC2)[10] recommends different shear design
εx =
(
2 Es As + E p Ap ) (10)
provisions depending on whether, or not, the shear
reinforcements are required in the concrete members.
d
Vs = φs Asv f yv v cot θ (11) Unlike other codes, EC2[10] does not recommend the total
sv
shear strength of a member to be considered as the sum of
o
θ = 29 + 7000ε x ≥ 30 (12) contributions of concrete and shear reinforcements. Instead,
the design shear strength of members not requiring the shear
In the above equations, β is the shear stress coefficient; θ is reinforcements is computed based on the concrete strength
the angle between the diagonal compression strut and the (Vc) and that of members requiring the shear reinforcements is
longitudinal axis of member; εx is the longitudinal strain at
estimated based on the stirrup strength (Vs) as given below:
mid-depth of member, which is taken as one-half of strain in
the longitudinal tension reinforcement; Nu is the axial force
 0.18  1/3  200 
demand; Es and Ep are the Modulus of elasticity of longitudinal 
 1.5 
(
 pt f c′ ) 1 +
 d 
 bd
and prestressing steel, respectively; age is the effective size of Vc = Max.  (15)
3/2
1/2  200 
aggregates; Ap and fpo are the area and design tensile stress of
prestressing tendons; dv is the shear depth (considered as 0.9d);


( )
0.035 f c′ 1 +
 d 
 bd

ϕc and ϕs are the strength-reduction (or capacity-reduction)

  0.9d 
factors for concrete and steel, respectively. These values in CSA 0.8 f yv Asv   cot θ
  sv 
A23.3[7] are considered as 0.65 and 0.85, respectively, whereas Vs = Min. (16)
the AS 3600[6] adopts a value of 0.75 for both these parameters.   0.9d 
α cwb  cot θ + tan θ  v1 f cd
  
When the yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement, fs does
0.6 for f ck ≤ 60 MPa
not exceed 400 MPa and the fc' is less than 60 MPa, the values
o
of β and θ may be taken as 0.18 and 35 , respectively, if the
v1 =  f ck  (17)
 0.9 − 200  >0.5 for f ck ≥ 60 MPa
minimum shear reinforcement is provided in the concrete  
members. The maximum value of fc' in Eq. (7) should not exceed
64 MPa. The value of age should be taken as zero if the value of fc' In the above equations, αcw is the coefficient account for the
is higher than 70 MPa. state of stress in the compression chord, v1 is the strength
reduction factor for concrete cracked in shear, and fcd is the

3.4 British Standard BS:8110-1 (1997) design concrete strength in compression strut. The value of cotθ
is varied between 1.0 and 2.5 and a designer is free to choose
Shear design provisions of BS:8110-1[9] are similar to those of this value. The second expression of Eq. (16) represents the
IS:456-2000[2]. Shear strength contributions of concrete and maximum value of design shear strength in order to avoid the
vertical stirrups can be determined using following expressions:
crushing failure of diagonal compression strut of concrete.
 0.79 pt1/3   400 1/4
Vc =   bd
 1.25   d  (13)
3.6. New Zealand Standard NZS 3101: Part 1
 
(2006)
d
Vs = 0.95 Asv f yv (14)
sv Shear design provisions of NZS 3101:1[11] are similar to that
In the above equations, 1.25 represents the partial safety factor of IS:456-2000[2] in which the shear strength of concrete is
for concrete and the value of pt should not exceed 3%. The value determined as follows:
of (400/d) representing the size effect should not be less than
1. Eq. (13) is applicable for concrete cube compressive strength 0.25
400 
(fck) less than 25 MPa. For the fck value exceeding 25 MPa, the Vc = 0.75ka   vcbd (18)
 d 
expression for Vc is multiplied by a factor (fck/25')1/3. However, the

22 The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020


( 0.07 10 pt ) f c '
vc Min  >0.08 f c ' (19)
0.2 ' provisions gradually increase with the increasing compressive
d
Vs = 0.75 Asv f yv (20)
sv
The value of aggregate type factor, ka is 1 for aggregates of size
less than 10 mm and 0.85 for aggregates of size higher than 20
mm. The factor 400/d representing the size effect of member
should not be greater than 1. For the higher grades of concrete,
the value of fc' in Eq. (19) should not be taken higher than 50
MPa.
4.  Adequacy of shear design
provisions of IS:456-2000
A parametric study is conducted on a RC beam of rectangular
cross-section to assess the adequacy of shear design provisions
of IS:456-2000[2] varying. The main parameters varied are
effective depth, percentage of longitudinal steel, and grade of
concrete. The variation of design shear stress of concrete with
fck in the range of 20-100 MPa is studied keeping the effective
depth (d) as constant for three different values of longitudinal
steel ratio (pt), i.e., 0.6% (low), 1.5%(medium) and 3% (high).
To investigate the influence of effective depth in the range of
150-600 mm on the design shear stress of concrete, a constant
value of 0.6% and three distinct concrete grades (i.e., 25, 50
and 100 MPa) are considered. In the final case, a constant
effective depth of 528 mm and three distinct concrete grades
(as mentioned above) are considered to investigate the variation
of design shear stress with the longitudinal steel ratios. For
all cases, 2-legged 12 mm diameter stirrups are used as the
shear reinforcement at 300 mm on centers along the length
of the beams. The design shear strengths (Vu) of RC beams
predicted using the current provisions of various codes for
varying geometric and material properties are presented in the
following section.
Figure 1 shows the comparison of design shear strengths of
beams of varying grades of concrete. The value of fck is assumed
Figure 1: Variations of code predicted design shear strengths with cube characteristics compressive strengths of RC beams
TECHNICAL PAPER
as 1.25 times the characteristic cylinder strength of concrete,
fc'. The predicted design shear strengths using ACI 318-14[5]
strengths of concrete. The design shear strengths as per NZS
3101[11], AS 3600[6] and CSA A23.3[7] provisions keep increasing
up to a particular value of concrete compressive strength
beyond which the value of design shear strength remains
constant, particularly in the higher grades of concrete. EC2[10]
consistently provide the higher values of design shear strengths
for the normal grades of concrete. It is worth mentioning that
the design shear strengths of EC2[10] is based on the stirrup
o
contribution only and the value of θ is assumed as 21.8 in this
o
study. If this value is taken as 36 (as considered in other design
codes), the design shear strengths would be smaller by 55% of
the values shown in the figure.
IS:456-2000[2] provisions result in the very conservative estimates
of design shear strength of beams of the higher concrete
grades if a low value of pt is chosen. However, as the value of pt
is increased, both BS 8110:1[9] and IS:456-2000[2] codes provide
the higher design shear strengths for high-strength concrete.
If value of pt is taken as 3%, IS:456-2000[2] provides the higher
design shear strengths for all grades of concrete. This shows
that among all other design codes, the design provisions of
IS:456-2000[2] results in the very high values of design shear
strength of members of high-strength concrete if a high value of
longitudinal steel ratio is adopted.
The variation of design shear strengths predicted by various
codes with percentage of longitudinal steel in RC beams is
shown in Fig. 2. IS:456-2000[2] design provisions predicts very
high values of shear strength of beams for pt value exceeding
1% and fck equal to 25 MPa. As the fck value is increased to 50
MPa, IS:456-2000[2] overestimates the design shear strength of
beams for pt value exceeding 2% and provides very conservative
shear strength values for pt value less than 0.5%.
Figure 3 shows the variation of design shear strengths predicted
by various design codes with effective depths of RC beams.
A constant value of pt as 0.6% and three different concrete
The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020 23
 TECHNICAL PAPER
Figure 2: Variations of code predicted design shear strengths with longitudinal steel ratios of RC beams
Figure 3: Variations of code predicted design shear strengths effective depths of RC beams
grades (i.e., 25, 50, and 100 MPa) are considered for varying
effective depths of beams. For fck equal to 25 MPa, IS:456-2000[2]
provisions provide the higher design shear strengths with
the increasing effective depths of RC beams as compared to
other design codes. For fck equal to 100 MPa, the design shear
strength predictions as per IS:456-2000[2] are very conservative
for all values of effective depth of members. For fck equal to 50
MPa also, the design shear strengths predicted by IS:456-2000[2]
are conservative for nearly all values of effective depth.
For high- strength concrete with fck = 100 MPa, the design shear
strengths as per IS:456-2000[2] provisions are very conservative
for pt less than 1.5% and marginally higher for pt value exceeding
3% as compared to other design code predictions. The design
shear strength predictions of many codes are constant over
the entire range of pt for a given value of fck. The design shear
strength as per NZS 3101:1[11] gradually increases till a pt value of
1.5% beyond which this value remains constant for a particular
grade of concrete. Thus, it can be concluded that the current
design provisions of IS:456-2000[2] are inadequate to predict the
shear strengths for a wide range of concrete grades, longitudinal
steel ratios, and member sizes.
24 The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020
5. Development of New Shear Design
Provisions of IS:456
Shear strength of concrete beams is more complex to predict
as compared to those of concrete panels based on which
MCFT for shear strength model is developed. This is because
of the following reasons: (i) longitudinal reinforcements are not
uniformly distributed in beams, (ii) longitudinal strain is varied
in over the depth as well as along the length of members, and
(iii) the presence of flanges and the type of loading/support
conditions results in a complex state of stress distribution.
Therefore, it is fairly reasonable to assume that the concrete
shear strength (Vc) is the sum of contributions of aggregate
interlock (interface shear transfer), shear in compression zone,
dowel action of longitudinal steel, and residual tensile strength
of concrete (Fig. 4). There is no simple method available to
quantify the individual contribution of aggregate interlock (Va),
dowel action (Vd) and other parameters. For simplicity, total
shear strength of concrete members is considered as the sum
of contributions of concrete, shear reinforcement, and the
prestressing steel.
The main parameters considered in this study to predict
the shear strength of concrete members without transverse

Figure 4: Components of shear resistance of a concrete member
reinforcements are compressive strength of concrete,
percentage of longitudinal steel, type of aggregate and size
effect. These four parameters accounts for the shear in the
compression zone, tensile strength of concrete, dowel action,
and aggregate interlock. The influence of these parameters on
the design concrete shear stress τc is discussed in the following
sections.
5.1 Compressive strength of concrete
Concrete shear strength can be determined based on the
assumption that the diagonal cracking strength of concrete
in shear would reach when the principal tensile stress at the
neutral axis of a beam is equal to the tensile strength of
concrete. Characteristic compressive strength is generally
used to estimate the concrete tensile strength as it is difficult
to conduct the direct tension tests on concrete Accordingly,
many design codes have adopted the empirical expressions
to predict the design shear strength of concrete relating to
Figure 5: Relation between (a) concrete shear stress with characteristic cube compressive strength and (b) (a) concrete shear stress
with percentage of longitudinal steel
TECHNICAL PAPER
its characteristic compressive strength. The predicted shear
strengths of RC members developed based on this assumption
have shown reasonably good agreement with the test results
for beams of normal concrete grades. Diagonal tension (or
web shear) cracking in a concrete beam is induced due to the
Poisson’s effect of axial strain in the diagonal compression
struts. This behavior may be better explained by relating it to
the splitting tensile tests on concrete. In general, the splitting
tensile strength of concrete is expressed as k(fck)n, where the
exponent, n generally varies in the range 0.5-0.7[12] and is an
empirical correlation constant. However, the value of n to
represent the splitting strength of concrete cylinders may not
be suitable for the prediction of the diagonal cracking strength
of members because of the different boundary conditions, state
of load application, stress dispersal as well as the presence
of compression zone in the concrete beams under the shear
loading. Further, the increase in concrete compressive strength
does not necessarily result in the increased shear strength
of beams of high-strength concrete . This is because of the
development of smoother shear cracks in the high-strength
concrete, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the interface
shear transfer mechanism.
In order to determine the value of n for fck in the prediction
of diagonal tensile cracking strength of concrete beams, the
variation of τc with fck is plotted for constant values of pt as shown
in Fig. 5(a). The data points represent the median values of τc
predicted by different codes for the pt value in the range of
0.1-3%. These data points are fitted with curves representing the
power functions. It is noted that the value of n in the expressions
ranges between 0.29 and 0.39. The higher values of n are noted
for the cases with either very low (0.1%) or very high (3%) value
of pt, which may be of least practical interest. If these two cases
are excluded, the range of n narrows down to 0.29-0.35 and the
The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020 25
 TECHNICAL PAPER
median value is found to be about 0.33. Therefore, it may be
reasonable to conclude that the design concrete shear strength,
τc is approximately proportional to fck0.33.
5.2 Percentage of longitudinal steel
The median values of τc obtained from various design code
predictions are plotted with the variation of pt for constant
values of fck in order to evaluate the contribution of dowel action
of longitudinal steel to the concrete shear stress. The data
points are fitted with curves representing the power functions in
the form of τc = k(pt)n as shown in Fig. 5(b). The value of n for the
curves is found to be nearly 0.3. For any value of fck, the increase
in the value of τc is gradually reduced at the higher values of
pt. Therefore, the variation of τc is plotted for a maximum pt
value of 2%. Though the observed value of n corresponding to
pt is smaller than that of the fck , in the proposed expression for
τc both parameters pt and fck are combined together keeping
the same value of n as 0.333. This is carried out to develop a
simplified design expression for the concrete shear stress given
by τc∝(fck pt)1/3.
5.3 Depth of member (Size effect)
The member size is an important factor influencing the shear
strength of concrete members without shear reinforcements.
It is evident from many past studies (e.g.,[13-16]) that the shear
strength of RC beams decreases as the effective depth becomes
larger. The average shear stress to cause failure of a RC beam
is reduced by two-third when the value of effective depth is
increased from 200 mm to 3000 mm[17]. The reason of this size
effect may be due to the occurrence of larger width of cracks
in the larger concrete beams. However, it is challenging to
consider this phenomenon in the shear design models. Current
IS:456-2000[2] code does not consider this size effect in the
calculation of design shear strength of beams. Bažant et al.[18]
proposed a size-reduction factor (λs) based on the nonlinear
fracture mechanics to consider the size effect as given below:
1
λs =
d (21)
1+
d0
In the above expression, do is an empirical constant. Some
researchers believe that the reduction in the shear stress is a
consequence of the reduced tensile stress, whereas others
believe that it is a result of the reduced ability to transmit crack
interface shear stresses. Tests by Collins et al.[19] have shown that
the size effect disappears when the longitudinal steel is well
distributed in members without transverse stirrups. In this study,
it is proposed to consider the size effect when the effective
depth exceeds 400 mm. The reduction factor (λs) is given by:
26 The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020
0.25
 400 
λs =   (22)
 d 
5.4  Shear span-to-depth ratio
It is generally accepted that members with shear span-to-depth
(a/d) ratio greater than 2.5 may fail predominately in web-shear
or flexure or combination of these modes. As the value of a/d
ratio decreases, the average shear stress of concrete members
at failure becomes progressively larger than in slender beams.
Shear force in deep beams is directly transferred to supports
through compression struts formed between the loading points
and supports. The formation of direct compression struts
depends on the support conditions. A compression strut forms
when a member is loaded on the top face and supported at the
bottom face. Such deep beams should be designed using the
strut-and-tie model approach rather than the sectional design
procedure.
5.5 Type of aggregate
The shear strength contribution due to aggregate interlock
effect is greatly dependent on the type of aggregate in
concrete. Particularly, in case of light-weight concrete, the
shear cracks may propagate through the aggregates, where
the matrix and aggregates are of similar strengths. In modified
compression field theory (MCFT), the combined effects of
member size and type of aggregate are accounted in the
computation of design shear strengths considering the crack
width and the maximum aggregate size. In the constant-angle
truss model, the influence of type of aggregate on the shear
strengths of concrete is considered by adopting a reduction
factor (λa). In this study, it is proposed to consider the influence
of aggregate on design shear strengths of concrete by adopting
λa, the value of which is taken as 1 for normal-weight concrete,
0.75 for all light-weight concrete, and 0.85 for sand-lightweight
concrete. Linear interpolation between these values may be
adopted based on the absolute volume of normal-weight
aggregate as a fraction of total absolute volume of aggregates.
This approach has been consistently adopted in various design
codes.
6. Proposed Expression for One-way
Shear Design
It is recognized that the one-way shear design provisions
should consider the dowel action, grade of concrete, aggregate
interlock and size effects. The proposed expression to compute
the design shear stress of concrete, τc is given as follows:
 TECHNICAL PAPER

1/3
0.36λa λg λs ( pt f ck )
τc = (23)
γm

Where, Partial safety factor for concrete, γm = 1.5.

1.0 (Normal-weight concrete)

Aggregate type λ = 0.85 (Sand light-weight concrete) (24)
a 
factor, 0.75
 (All light-weight concrete)

Cross-section λ = 0.83 (Rectangular/Square section)

g  (25)
geometry factor, 0.70 (Circular section)

1.0 (d < 400 mm)

Cross-section 
λs = 
( )
0.25 (26)
 400 d
size factor, (d > 400 mm) Figure 6: Comparison of maximum design concrete shear stress
in various codes of practice

Concrete shear strength, Vc is obtained as the product of τc
and sectional area defined (Ac) as the product of width (b) and
effective depth (d) of a rectangular section. For circular section,
the value of b may be taken equal to its diameter. For T-beams,
web width (bw) should be taken as the value of b in determining
the values of τv and τc. In the above equation, it is recommended
that the maximum values of pt and fck should be limited to 2%
and 80 MPa, respectively. The value of pt in circular sections
should be determined based on the depth of neutral axes
computed from the flexural analysis considering the layers of
reinforcing bars in tension as well as compression.
The yielding of shear reinforcements at the ultimate load
condition ensures that the member would fail in a ductile
Table 1: Provisions for maximum shear strength of concrete in
various codes of practice
Design code Design provision
manner. However, concrete shear strength of a beam cannot
increase indefinitely by the addition of excess shear stirrups
because the presence of high shear may cause the crushing
of web concrete along the diagonal compression strut.
Hence, the maximum value of τc is limited by the capacity of
diagonal compression strut in members. Table 1 summarizes
the expression for τc,max as recommended by various codes of
practice. There is a wide variation in the design expressions for
τc,max in the design codes. Figure 6 shows the variation of τc,max
with the characteristic concrete cube compressive strength, fck.
The design expression of IS:456-2000[2] is applicable to concrete
of fck = 40 MPa and provides very smaller value of τc,max in the
higher concrete grades among all design codes. Similarly, the
ACI 318-14[5] also provides very conservative value of τc,max. On
other hand, Australian[6], Canadian[7] and European[10] Standards
provide the higher value of τc,max for fck higher than 60 MPa.
NZS 3101:1[11] provisions result in the higher value of τc,max for fck
smaller than 60 MPa.

=
IS:456-2000 [2] τ c,max (0.85)(0.83)
= 0.8 f ck 0.63 f ck In order to avoid the crushing of concrete in the diagonal
compression strut, a simplified expression for τc,max has been
BS:81110-1 [9] {
τ c,max = Min. 0.8 f ck ,5 MPa}
proposed based on the characteristic compressive strength (fck),
0.9ν 1 f c′ rather than fck, which otherwise represents the concrete tension
τ c,max =
γ c ( cot θ + tan θ ) strength. The proposed expression for τc,max is given as follows:
Eurocode 2 [10]
0.6 for f ck < 60 MPa
ν1 =  0.15 f ck
 0. 9 − 0. 005 f ck > 0.5 for f ck > 60 MPa τ c,max = (27)
γm
ACI 318-14 [5] τ c,max = 0.83φ f c′
Figure 6 also shows the comparison of the proposed expression
NZS:3101-1 [11] {
τ c,max = Min. 0.2 f c′ ,8 MPa} with the design provisions of other codes of practice. The
variation of proposed τc,max with fck matched with other code
 cot θ v  provisions. As expected, the value of τc,max increases linearly with
AS 3600 [6] τ c,max = 0.9φ kc f c′  2 
 cot θ v 
1 + fck. However, this may not be applicable for the beams made
of high-strength concrete where the early failure of concrete
CSA A23.3 [7] =τ c,max (0.25)(0.9
= φ ) f c′ 0.15 f c′
strut may occur in comparison to the normal-strength concrete.

The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020 27

 TECHNICAL PAPER
Hence, it is suggested that the value of fck in Eq. (25) should not
exceed 80 MPa. Thus, the maximum value of τc,max is limited to 8
MPa for the higher grades of concrete.
7.  Summary and Conclusions
There are significant differences in one-way shear design
provisions in various codes of practice. The main parameters
included in these design provisions are the aggregate interlock,
the percentage of longitudinal steel, the member sizes, the
concrete compressive strength, and the angle of diagonal
compression strut. Current design provisions of IS:456-2000
do not consider the influence of higher compressive strength
of concrete, the size effect, and the type of aggregate. A new
simplified expression has been proposed to compute the
design one-way shear stress of concrete considering the above
parameters. The proposed expression does not consider the
dependence on the moment-to-shear (M/V) ratio.
The main findings of this study are as follows:
™™ The value of τc is directly proportional to (fck)n, where the
value of n varies in the range of 0.29-0.35 for the value of
percentage of longitudinal steel ranging between 0.6-2%.
It is proposed to use the value of n equal to 0.333 in the
estimation of design shear stress of concrete.
™™ The value of τc is directly proportional to (pt)n, where
the value of n is nearly 0.3 for the characteristic cube
compressive strength of concrete varying in the range of
20-100 MPa. For simplicity, the value of n corresponding to
pt may be considered as 0.333.
™™ Size effect and type of aggregate influence the shear
stress of concrete and should be included in the design
provisions. In the proposed expression of design shear
stress, these effects are considered by using the reduction
factors.
™™ The maximum design shear stress to avoid the failure
of concrete compression strut in the beam web may be
better related to the compressive strength, rather than the
tension strength of concrete. A simplified expression has
been proposed to estimate the maximum design shear
stress in concrete members.
™™ It is required to validate the proposed design expressions
with the experimental results. The companion paper
presents the validation of shear design provisions with a
large database of shear tests on concrete members.
8. Acknowledgements
Author is thankful to the members of Working Group-3 for the
revision of IS:456-2000 for their comments. The suggestions
28 The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020
and inputs received from Prof. C. V. R. Murty and Prof. Rupen
Goswami, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras are highly
appreciated. Author is also thankful to Prof. B. V. Rangan,
Australia and Prof. Oh-Sung Kwon, University of Toronto,
Canada for their help and support extended in getting the
related research materials. The discussion with Prof. G. S.
Benipal, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi was quite
helpful in developing the design provisions.
References
1. IS: 456-1978 (1979). Code of practice for plain and
reinforced concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.
2. IS: 456-2000 (2000). Code of practice for plain and
reinforced concrete. Fourth Revision, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
3. Rangan, B. V., (1972), “Diagonal cracking strengths in shear
of reinforced concrete beams”, Civ. Engg. Transactions,
Institution of Engineers, Australia, CE 14(1).
4. Sahoo, D. R. (2020) “Development of IS:456 shear design
provisions-II: Members with shear reinforcement.” Indian
Concrete Journal, 94(4),30-40.
5. ACI Committee 318 (2014). Building code requirements
for structural concrete (ACI 318-14) and commentary.
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hill, MI, 520 pp.
6. AS 3600:2018 (2018). Australian Standard concrete
structures. Standards Australian Limited, Sydney, Australia.
7. CSA Committee A23.3 (2016). Design of concrete
structures. Canadian Standards Association Group,
Toronto, ON, Canada.
8. Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P. (1986). “The Modified
Compression Field Theory for reinforced concrete
elements subjected to shear.” ACI Journal Proceedings,
83(2), 219-231.
9. BS 8110:1 (1997). Structural use of concrete-Part 1: Code
of practice for design and construction. British Standards
Institute, London, UK.
10. EN 1992-1-1 (2004). Design of concrete structures, Part
1: General rules and rules for buildings (Eurocode 2).
European Committee for Standardization, Brussels
Belgium, 425 pp.
11. NZS 3101: Part 1, (2006), Concrete Structures Standard,
Part 1- The Design of Concrete Structures. New Zealand
Standards, Wellington, New Zealand.
 TECHNICAL PAPER

12. Behnood, A., Verian, K. P., Gharehveran, M. M. (2015).
“Evaluation of the splitting tensile strength in plain and
steel fiber-reinforced concrete based on compressive
strength.” Construction and Building Materials, 98, 519-
529.
13. Kani, G. N. J. (1967). “How safe are our large reinforced
concrete beams?” ACI Journal, 64 (3), 128-141.
14. Bazant Z. P., and Kazemi, M. T. (1991). “Size effect on
diagonal shear failure of beams without stirrups.” ACI
Structural Journal, 88(3), 268-274.
15. Collins, M. P., and Kuchma, D. (1999). “How safe are
our large, lightly reinforced concrete beams, slabs, and
footings?” ACI Structural Journal, 96(4), 482–490.
16. Muttoni, A., Fernández Ruiz, M. (2008). “Shear strength of
members without transverse reinforcement as function of
critical shear crack width.” ACI Structural Journal , 105(2),
163–172.
17. Shioya, T., Iguro, M., Nojiri, Y., Akiayma, H., and Okada,
T. (1989). “Shear strength of large reinforced concrete
beams.” Fracture Mechanics: Application to Concrete, SP-
118, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich.,
259-279.
18. Bažant, Z. P., Yu, Q., Gerstle, W., Hanson, J. and Ju, W.
(2007). “Justification of ACI 446 code provisions for shear
design of reinforced concrete beams.” ACI Structural
Journal, 104(5), 601-610.
19. Collins, M. P., Mitchell, D., and MacGregor, J. G. (1993).
“Structural design considerations for high-strength
concrete.” Concrete International, 15(5), 27-34.
List of Symbols
Ac = Cross-sectional area of beam
Ap = Area of prestressing steel
As = Area of longitudinal reinforcement
Asv = Area of shear reinforcement
age = Effective aggregate size
b = Width of concrete member
d = Effective depth of concrete member
dv = Effective depth for shear
Es = Modulus of elasticity of longitudinal steel
Ep = Modulus of elasticity of prestressing steel
f c' = Characteristic cylinder compressive strength of concrete
fcd = Design compressive stress in concrete strut
fck = Characteristic cube compressive strength of concrete
fpo = Design axial stress in prestressing steel
fs = Stress in longitudinal steel
fyv = Yield strength of shear reinforcement
Mud = Design bending moment
Nu = Design axial force
pt = Percentage of longitudinal steel
sv = Spacing of shear reinforcement
Va = Shear strength due to aggregate interlock
Vc = Concrete shear strength
Vcc = Shear in compression zone
Vcr = Shear due to residual tensile stress in concrete
Vd = Shear strength due to dowel action
Vp = Shear strength of prestressing steel
Vs = Shear strength of shear reinforcement
Vu = Total shear strength of concrete member
Vud = Design shear force demand
εx = Longitudinal strain in concrete
φ = Strength-reduction factor
φc = Strength-reduction factor for concrete
φs = Strength-reduction factor for steel
γm = Partial safety factor for concrete
λ, λa = Aggerate type factor
λg = Cross-section geometry factor
λs = Cross-section size factor (Size reduction factor)
θ = Angle of shear crack (or compression strut)
τc = Design shear stress of concrete
τc, max = Maximum design shear stress of concrete

Dipti Ranjan Sahoo is working as an Associate Professor in the Department of Civil

Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi. He is a Ph.D. degree holder from Indian Institute of
Technology (IIT), Kanpur and has worked as Post-doctoral Fellow at University of Texas at Arlington, USA. His
research interests are design and behavior of reinforced concrete and steel structures under extreme loadings,
performance-based seismic design, large-scale testing of structures, and passive structural control techniques.
He is a Fellow of Institution of Engineers (India) and a recipient of Young Engineer Awards from Indian National
Academy of Engineers, Institution of Engineers India, Department of Science and Technology, and Department
of Atomic Energy. He has been a member of various committees of BIS codes. Presently, he is serving as a
member of Working Group-2 and Working Group-3 for the revision of IS:456.

The Indian Concrete Journal | APRIL 2020 29