Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 92 S26

    Uploaded by

    picott
    24 views6 pages

    Original Title

    92-S26

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    24 views6 pages

    92 S26

    Uploaded by

    picott

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 6
    ACI STRI Title no. 92-826 URAL JOURNA| TECHNICAL PAPER Longitudinal Steel Limits for Concrete Columns g by Chien-Hung Lin and Richard W. Furlong The current ACI Building Code contains rales tha limi the amount of lon tudinal reinforcement for reinforced concrete columns. Neither the lower bound nor the upper bound values are assciated wit a rational deriva tion, The rational upper limit can be calculated based on steel congestion in the column; i also can be determined based on resistance to cracking of ‘concrete, The lower bound can be derived asthe replacement of he effec tive tension area of concrete to contol crackin: it can also be derived based om shrinkage and creep of concrete 10 contol steel stress under ser vice loads Keywords: columns (supports) cracking (Iraturing) creep properties; reinforced concrete; reinforcing steels; shrinkage: stresses In reinforced concrete design, particularly high-rise build- ings, the amount of longitudinal reinforcement required in the top several floors usually is less than that required as a minimum amount specified in governing building codes. ‘The current ACI code! uses 1 percent as the lower bound ‘This 1 percent was set originally to avoid the development of yield stresses under sustained service load.” But from Refer- ence 3, it was found thatthe longitudinal steel does not yield even with a steel ratio as low as 0.25 percent at service con- ditions. It seems thatthe lower limit could be reduced to a lower reasonable amount, reducing the cost of reinforcement in upper-story columns. In recent years, structural steel rein- forced concrete columns have been used in high-rise rein- forced concrete buildings. The steel ratio in the composite section can be even larger than the 8 percent upper limit in the current ACI code for bar-reinforced columns. The upper bound 8 percent also originally was accepted without a ratio- nal explanation, Congestion of bars, particularly in the zone of lap splices, was cited as the reason for an upper limit to longitudinal reinforcement. No tests with reinforcement ra- tios above 8 percent were available. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE ‘The objective of this study is to derive rational upper and ower bounds to longitudinal reinforcement in concrete col- ‘umns, The upper limit can be obtained by congestion of steel and shrinkage of concrete, while the lower limit is based on ccrack control and yielding of steel under service loads. MAXIMUM STEEL RATIO BASED ON 282 CONGESTION Pethaps the most obvious reason for an upper limit to re~ inforcement is the congestion of space if too many bars are used, Ifit is assumed that all bars are to be placed in one row along the faces of the cross section, current ACI code spac- ing limits for compression members state that clear distance between longitudinal bars shall not be less than 1.5,g,nor 1.5 in, For reinforcing bars no greater than No. 8, the maximum steel ratio for a square column can be calculated as follows ‘As shown in Fig. 1, mis the number of bars per face, dy is the bar diameter, total area of longitudinal steel is A,= (m-1) nd, the cross section area of the column is, Ae (25+mU5+d))° and the maximum steel ratio (m-1ynd ——— “ [25+m(15+d,)] For bars greater than No. 8, the maximum steel ratio can be calculated as from Fig. 2 A= [4+ (2.5m-15)d,)? (m=) xd, —— @ [4+ (25m-1.5)d,}° Table | shows the maximum steel ratio for different bar ize and number of bars on each face. Also shown in the pa- rentheses are the minimum column sizes. As can be seen, ‘ACI Sructaral Jounal, 92, No. 3, Mayne 1998. fRecewed Sop 33,194, and reviewed nde latte publication policies. Copy: sigh © To0s, hnecan Concrete Insitute A rps reserved ecadng the mallag Uf copes anes permission s baie frm he Copyright poprtors.Fertnent sgn ull be pulsed inthe March- Apel 1996 ACI Stara lourmal if ecived yor 11998 ACI Structural Journal / May-June 1995 1NCi member Ohen Hung Lin 0 professor of cil engincering ot National Chg ‘sing Universi Taiwan. Repub of China Me received his MS and PAD degrees ‘rom the Univers of Tens t Austin. His earch interest ince enforced con fretesructre an structural anal Rickard W. Farlong, PAC. Dana J. Douglas Contemal Professor of Cl Eng reerin atthe Univers of Texas at Astin. Wid felons interest in aplication of theory to desig, he isa member of joint ACLASCE Commitee 41, Reinforced Con (ete Columns and ACI Commitee 439, Sel Reinforcement Dr Furlong has also terved ax an ACT director Fig. I—Column with bars no greater than No. 8 pp 25m-1-5)y Fig. 2—Column with bars greater than No. 8 ay(2m-1)+ Fig. 3—Column with splices (bars no greater than No. 8) when bar size increases, the maximum steel ratios increase. For small bars like No. 4,5, and 6, the maximum stee! ratios are around 4 or 5 percent. For larger bars like No. 14 and 18, the ratios can be as high as 9 or 11 percent, Larger steel ratios could be used if more than one row of bars were used along each face, ‘One can use the same approach to determine the maximum steel ratio for nonsquare columns, if the number of bars on each column face is predetermined. If splices are used in a column, then the maximum steel area that can be allowed will be less. If every bar is spliced, Fig. 1 will become Fig. 3. While effective area of steel re- A,= (m-1) nd, the cross section area of the column becomes Age [25+ (2m=1)dy~ 15m)? ‘The maximum steel ratio is ‘Table 1—Maxium steel ratio based on steel congestion Bar size, no No. of bars pe face, mt 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4 ‘ooss | ogai7 | oons | ooao1 | oois7 | 00173 | oor6r 65) oo | 6s | dom | ms | ao | ass, 5 0267 | 00312 | oo38 | a0285 |~ 0026 | 00244 | 0.0726 75) | 3s) | @o | cos) | 225 | assy | assy 6 ‘oos6r [0813 [00401 ‘sa | o0sss | oosis | 0.0204 oo | a7) | os 125) | _a30)_| 475) | 065) 7 Do1s€ | 0.0519 | O.0s01 | 0.0166 [0.0829 | 00395 | a.0x64 was | @13 | doo | a2s | aso | ars | @oo 8 0.0559 | 0.0698 | 0.0808] 0.060 | o.0s10 | 00470 | 0.0830 as) | doo | cas) | aso |_a7s | @0o | as 9 0.063 | oss | o.osas | o.0s90 | o.0540 | 0.0890 | 0.0450 asa) | ors) | asse | cess | asi | @o | eas 10 ‘o.a700 | 0.0742 | aos [0.0620 |~ 0.0560 | 0.05 0.0870 ess) | ans) | ase | 0775 | eos | @ao | o719) iT 0.0765 | 0072 | 00723 [0.0650 [00580 | 0.0530 | 0.0480 wes | 2a) | ase) | cst | 2256 | @60 | cos 1% 0.0939 ‘o.osio | 00712 00630 | 0.0560 | 0.0510 0.13) casas) | 2325) | @76) | G20 | G6.) 18 0.1128) ‘080 | 00770 | 00670 | 0.0600. | 0.0540 1188) G31 | @s7s) | Gass | oo | 4563) ‘Numbers parents ar iim dimensions of spare columns ACI Structural Journal / May-June 1995 283 Table 2—Maxium steel ratio based on steel congestion (with splices) Barz, 0 ‘No of bars per fe, 2 3 a 5 6 7 * 7 aois | 007 | oars [001s [oo | oo [oon ao | os | mo | assy | wo | as | ao 3 ‘0.023 0.024 0022 0.020 0.018 0017 0015 G39 _| dor | as | asey | dss | aia» | ass, 6 ‘002 | 0031 | 0028 ~~ 0025] oars | 0021 | ors am _| dors, | a375 | 6%) | dsr | a2 | e575 a ‘0036 | 0038 | 0034 | 030 | 0027 | 0004 |~ 0022 @iy_| aise | cas | zany | ety | aay | @76 —s ‘006 | 00% | 003 | oss | 00s [ooo | 002s @5 | 020 | ass | aso | es | eo | as 9 ‘oo | 007 | 0082 | 0037 | o0s2 | 0029 | 0026 606 | G30 | dos | Goss | eas | 2875 | c20 10] 0053} ~o.s0|~ 0084 ~}~ oo38 | 0033 | ~ 0.030 | 0027 os) | a4 | ass | e275 | arin | Gt | oss» mn ‘o0s7 | 0053} 004s | 0039 | 0034 | 0030 | 0027 aoa | uso | avs | easy | e949 | G129 | c900, ‘Numbers in parentheses are minimum dimensions of sqaure coluanns ~ eanBeAgPy MAXIMUM STEEL RATIO BASED ON SHRINKAGE 1 OF CONCRETE uc to the effect of shrinkage, the concrete exerts a com- {original pression force on longitudinal steel, but the ste! tries to re- final_| ot ae sist the additional strain, thus producing a tensile force on position “+ concrete. Ifthe tensile force is excessive, cracking might oc- cur. The amount of tensile force depends on the amount of longitudinal reinforcement. Any axial compressive stress in concrete under sustained service load certainly will help re- duce the possibility of cracking. Assume a shrinkage strain of 0.0008.‘ The resisting force due to longitudinal steel is Fig. 4Colunn subjected to shrinkage (0.0008 £,Ayp, when concrete tres to shrink, where E, is Young's modulus of steel. This resisting force is then ap- plied on the transformed section, producing tensile strain e, . (m=) nd, ) explained in Fig. 4. nthe final equilibrium state, the stress c [25+ (2m-1)d,+ 1.5m]? For bars greater than No. 8, the maximum steel ratio can be calculated as (m=) nd -—— @ [443.5md, +2.5d,]° Ps Table 2 shows the maximum steel ratio for different bar size and number of bars on each face of the column. As in ‘Table 1, the minimum column size is shown in parentheses Even with No. 11 bars, the maximum reinforcement ratio that can be used beyond each splice is less than 6 percent. Thus, an effective upper limit to specific longitudinal bars ‘would be 6 percent unless more than one layer of bars is to be used. When bundled bars are used, the ACI code states that “spacing limitations and minimum concrete cover are based on bar diameter d,, a unit of bundled bars shall be treated as a single bar of a diameter derived from the equivalent total area. ” To determine the maximum steel ratio when bundled bars are used, similar procedures as described in this section can be used. 284 in concrete due to the resistance of stee! can be determined as Ee gPy ssh se __, (5) fo" TH p,) mB Al ° where 1 is the ratio of B, to E,, p, i8 the stel ratio. ‘The tensile stress in concrete f., can reach the fracture limit for concrete if values of p, are large enough to resist the shrinkage of concrete. A reasonable upper bound value of £,,= 0.0008 is suggested for concrete‘ in a normally dry en- vironment over a long period of time Compression loading on columns helps keep concrete from cracking, due to shrinkage restrained by reinforcement, and the average service load stress #,¢, must be subtracted from the stress /, before a comparison can be made with any cracking of fracture limit stress. To obtaine, approximately, the following procedure can bbe used. Define the ratio of live load to dead load as X, then 14D +17L= 9U becomes 14D + L7XD= 6U (O} ACI Structural Joumial / May-June 1995 ‘Table 3—Maxium steel ratio based on shirnkage of coneret Api uD os | 1 | 1s | 20 | 25 | 30 3000 | 00719 | 0.0345 | 0460 | O89 | ONS | O0351 3s) | 60 | Gor | @9% | 233) | 220 _ Goo |0,0950 | 0.0700 | o.0sst | o.0sto | o0s6s | 0.0831 eas) | id | x2) | G9 | G3) | 293), ‘3000 | 0.119 | 0.0856 [0.0700 | 0.0609 | 0.0550 | 0.0508 cose) | cer | (602) | a9 | 2p | G66) Good | 0.143 | O01 | O.08i8 | 0.0706 | 0.0633 | 0.0582 i269) |_@21_| 23) | G95 | 605)_| (439) 7000 | 0.169 | 0.117 | 0.0935 | o.os0z | oo7is | 0.0685 cras0) | cor | 83) | on | oa | 612 _ ‘Names in presses af esos in concrete under service dead Toad si where D is the dead load, L isthe live load, U is the ultimate ‘capacity, and @ is the strength-reduction factor. For tied col- tumns, the current ACI code uses 0.56 for ¢. Divide Eq. (6) by the transformed section area of the column, and let e, equal the strain under dead load, with ultimate strength of concrete equal to 0.85,,’, then e, can be calculated as O.476f," * Ca TINE, a ‘The maximum tensile stress that can be produced by shrinkage is the sum of allowable tensile stress in concrete f, and the original compressive stress E.2, . faz Gyr Eee) 8) where f,= 7.5 Jf the tensile strength limit before cracking, Eq, (5) can be rearranged as Sos Eey-h,@—) oy Pe: In the preceding equation, creep of concrete in tension was ignored since it would produce higher maximum stee! ratios. For different live load-to-dead load ratios and f,’, the maxi- ‘mum steel ratios and stresses in concrete under service dead load are shown in Table 3. It should be noted that an upper limit to longitudinal rein- forcement would be in the same range as the limit due to con~ gestion if average permanent load stresses were about 440 psi, or 3,03 MPa (f= 6000 psi and L/D = 3.0). Permanent Toad stresses less than 440 psi should exist only for members in which flexural considerations are more prominent than ax- ial thrust requirements. (Flexural members are expected to crack, but only under load actions, not from shrinkage of concrete.) If axial thrust governs design requirements for longitudi- nal steel, the values of £,¢, will be in excess of 1000 psi (6.895 MPa), and cracking from restrained shrinkage cannot be caused by “over-reinforcement.” Congestion of bars will create lower limits for longitudinal reinforcement in general ACI Structural Journal / May-June 1995 Fig, S—Eifective tension zone LOWER STEEL LIMIT BY CRACK CONTROL One possible reason for establishing a lower limit to lon- gitudinal reinforcement could be justified on the basis of limiting the size of tension cracking. As suggested in Fig. 5, the minimum reinforcement may be derived to replace the effective tensile concrete strength when concrete stress reaches tensile strength 7.5 Jf’. The effective tensile area has been defined as the shaded area in Fig. 5,° where d, is the distance from extreme fiber to the centroid of tension stecl. To replace the tension area by steel at a tensile stress of 7.5 ff? «the following equation applies 2d,b(75,ff)= 0.5p,bhf, (10) where b is the width of the column, pj isthe steel ratio, tis the depth of the column, and f, is the yield strength of the longitudinal steel, psi. ‘When considering a minimum steel ratio, the column probably will have only four bars, and symmetry can be as- sumed. From Eq. (10), the minimum steel ratio is 30d. =e Pe’ Define as the ratio of the distance between compression steel and tension steel to the overall depth of the column f, then (=k an? Substituting for d,, Eq. (10) becomes oe Sane an) Sf Table 4 shows the minimum steel ratio for different y, £.’, and f,. As can be seen, when /,’ increases, minimum p, also increases. Eq, (11) is simple enough to be used as a limit ex- pression in a building code. ‘The value for minimum p, with Grade 60 steel ranges from 0.0014 for large columns of low-strength concrete to 285 Table 4—Minimum steel ratio based on effective tension area west | 4 pst Y os | 06 | 07 | ow | 09 “g,n00 | 3000 | 0.0108 | o.0082 | 0-0062 | o.0aT | O02 4000 | 0.0119 | o.o8s | o.0o71 | 0.0047 | 0.0028 5000_| 0.0133 | 0.0106 | 0.0080 | 0.0053 | 0.0027 ‘0,000 | 3000” | 0.0082 | 0.0066 | 0.0089 | 0.0033 | 0.0016 4000 | 0.0095 | a.0076 | 0.0087 | 0.0038 | 0.0019 5000_| 0.0106 | o.ooss | 0.0064 | 0.0082 | 021 0,000 | 3000” | 0.0068 | 0.0055 | 0.0081 | 0.0027 | 0.0014 4000 | 0.0079 | 020063 | 0.0047 | 0.0032 | 0.0016 5000 | o.008s | 0.0071 | 0.0053 | 0.0035 | o.018 0.0112 for small columns of high-strength concrete. The ‘ACI limit of 0.01 is high, but reasonable for 12-to 24-in. col- umns in buildings. The AASHTO limit of 0.005 likewise is high but reasonable for bridges that have columns generally more than 36 in. thick (y> 0.7 ). MINIMUM STEEL RATIO BASED ON YIELDING OF STEEL As concrete shrinks and creeps, it applies a compression force on longitudinal steel. Thus, the total stress in longitu- inal steel will be the sum of the original stress under service dead load and the stress due to time effect. If the steel ratio is too small, the steel stress might be quite high. To put a lim- it on the final stress in steel, there must be a lower limit of the steel ratio. ‘The stress in steel due to shrinkage and creep will be (refer to Fig. 4) . Suz Ey Oy +2350, ®) a2) in which 2.35 is the creep coefficient.* The stress in steel un- der service dead load is, Sug= MES, (13) ‘The total stress in steel (including live load) is E, (6+ 235¢,—€) +nB.€,(14%) a4) ‘The maximum f, allowed can be expressed as S= Rf as) where 0

    You might also like