ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Title no. 86-S?
Strength of Reinforced Concrete Corbles with Fibers
by Hashim M.S. Abdul-Wahab
The effect of adding steel fibers to reinforced concrete corbels is in-
vestigated by tests on six specimens containing varying amounts of
fibers. The shear span-span ratio was varied also, and all corbels were
tested under vertical loading only. The results obtained from this
study, together with some other available data, indicated a consider-
able improvement in the ultimate load-carrying capacity of corbels
due to the addition of fibers. A comparison between the experimen-
tal results and predicted values by the AC/ Building Code (AC/ 318-
83) provisions for corbels, truss analogy theory, and the method pro-
posed by Falluhi demonstrated the limitations and inadequacy of the
three methods. It was concluded that the ultimate strength of rein-
forced concrete corbels with fibers can be predicted best by adding the
fibers' contribution to strength using the shear friction equation to
the AC/ Building Code provisions.
Keywords: corbels; fiber reinforced concretes; loads (forces); metal fibers; shear
strength; strength; tests.
The use of steel fibers to improve the bending and
shear strength of reinforced concrete members is sup-
ported well by available experimental evidenceY De-
pending upon the amount of fibers, a substantial
increase in the tensile strength of concrete can be ob-
tained by the inclusion of steel fibers in the matrix. The
fibers in the concrete act as crack arrestors and en-
hance the ductility and energy absorption of fiber rein-
forced concrete (FRC) members considerably.
In the case of reinforced concrete corbels that are
considered to act as short cantilever deep beams under
combined bending and shear, special attention must be
given to the problem of the congestion of reinforce-
ment that needs to be provided in the form of main
tension bars (primary reinforcement) and stirrups. The
ACI Building Code (ACI 318-83) 3 stipulates that stir-
rups that have to be included in the corbel must not be
less than 50 percent of the main tension reinforcement.
The idea of reducing the amount of stirrups or even
their total substitution by steel fibers has practical pos-
sibilities.
Recently, Fattuhi 4 •5 reported the results of tests on
plain and steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) cor-
bels under vertical loads, which indicated that the shear
strength of concrete corbels was improved considerably
60
TECHNICAL PAPER
by the addition of fibers but that fibers cannot replace
efficiently the role of conventional primary tension re-
inforcement.
The purpose of this study was to provide further ex-
perimental data on SFRC corbels containing primary
and secondary reinforcement and to check the applica-
bility of the ACI Building Code and the truss analogy
theory, as proposed by Hagberg, 6 to SFRC corbels, as
well as the modified form of the shear-friction formula
that is proposed by Fattuhi. 4 Six concrete corbels con-
taining different steel ratios were tested under vertical
loading only, but with varying shear span-depth ratios.
The experimental results obtained in this study, to-
gether with some of the reported data of Reference 4,
are analyzed and compared with the predicted values
obtained by the three theoretical methods. An alterna-
tive approach for the design of reinforced concrete cor-
bels with fibers is suggested.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
This study investigates the effect of steel fibers on
reinforced concrete corbels and the applicability of the
available design formulas of the ACI Building Code,
truss analogy theory, and the modified shear friction
equation 4 to SFRC corbels. Realistic and safe design
values can be obtained by adding the effect of steel fi-
bers using the shear friction equation to the code val-
ues.
'\
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
Six corbels in two main groups were tested to failure
under vertical loading. In the first three specimens, the
steel fiber ratio (by volume) was varied from 0, 0.5, and
'
1 percent with the shear span-depth ratio aid being
constant at 0.522. In the second group of specimens,
Received Oc1. 27, 1987, and reviewed under Institute publication policies.
Copyright © 1989, American Concre1e lnslilute. All rights reserved, including
the making of copies unless permission is obtained from 1he copyright propri-
etors. Pertinem discussion will be published in 1he November-December 1989
ACt Structural Journal if received by July I, 1989.
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989
 250 JOO 2 50
ACt member Hashim M. S. Abdul-Wahab is Professor at the Building and
Construction Engineering Department, University of Technology, Baghdad,
Iraq. He received his BSc in civil and structural engineering from Birmingham
University, U.K., in 1962 and his M. Eng and PhD degrees in concrete struc-
tures from Sheffield University in 1964 and 1967, respectively. He is the author
of numerous papers on concrete technology and structures. and his research in-
terests include prestressed concrete, joints and connections in precast concrete
structures, and steel fiber reinforced concrete.
1----t--"i~ti~=::;;<:!.+---J.!:::=::;It:;~~ 12 mmflwelded
to primary steel.

the fiber content was kept constant at 1 percent while

2 _ 8 mm J( closed
the shear span-depth ratio aid was varied between 0.30 stirrups.
to 0.57. This is well within the acceptable range sug- 8mm v.
gested by the ACI Building Code3 of aid < 1. The di-
' - - 1 - f - - - - - - 5mm ties
mensions of the corbels as well as the primary and sec- J(
li'i200mm c/c.
ondary (stirrups) reinforcements were kept constant, as
shown in Fig. l. For all corbels, width b = 150 mm
(5.91 in.), height h = 360 mm (14.17 in.), effective ELEVATION
depth d = 324 mm (12.75 in.), and depth at the outer
edge of the bearing area = 180 mm (7 .1 in.). The di-
mensions of the column supporting the two corbels on 800
opposite sides were 150 x 300 x 1000 mm (5.91 x 11.81
x 39.4 in.) and were reinforced with four 16 mm (0.63
in.) diameter bars at the corners and 6 mm (0.24 in.)
diameter ties spaced longitudinally at 200 mm (7 .87 in.)
Jl
center to center. The primary steel was provided by two
12 mm (0.47 in.) deformed steel bars [As = 226 mm 2 PLAN

(0.35 in. 2)), and 8 mm (0.31 in.) diameter shaping bars

were welded to them to hold in position the 8 mm (0.31 Fig. 1-Details of corbel and reinforcement (1 in.
in.) horizontal stirrups [total area, A = 202 mm 2 (0.31 25.4 mm)
in. 2)), as shown in Fig. l. The average yield strength of
the primary steel was./y = 386 MPa (56 ksi) and wasf,..v Table 1 - Details of corbel properties
= 348 MPa (50.5 ksi) for the stirrups. Table 1 shows
the details of corbel specimens.
Fiber
volume, a, aid
v.
cracking,
V,
ultimate,
The fibers used were plain, straight, high-tensile steel, Specimen percent mm ratio kN kN
25 mm (1 in.) long and 0.40 mm (0.016 in.) in diameter AI 0 169 0.522 98.1 186.2
with an aspect ratio of 62.5 and a nominal yield A2 0.5 169 0.522 122.6 225.4
strength of 1177 MPa (170. 7 ksi). The concrete mix A3 1.0 169 0.522 171.7 262
used was 1:1.5:3 (by weight) of ordinary portland ce-
A4 1.0 99 0.306 147.1 314
ment:natural sand:coarse aggregate (crushed gravel)
A5 1.0 141 0.435 147.1 270
with a maximum size of 19 mm (% in.). The water-ce-
ment ratio (wic) of 0.50 was found to give adequate A6 1.0 185 0.571 171.7 220.5
workability for both plain and fiber reinforced con- I in. = 25.4 mm; I ksi = 6.895 MPa; I kip = 4.448 kN.

crete.
A rotary mixer of 0.1 m 3 (3.53 ft 3) capacity was used
in the preparation of the mixes. The cement, sand, and
gravel were mixed thoroughly first. After adding the
water, the fibers were spread gradually over the fresh
concrete with mixing continuing to insure that a ho-
mogeneous mix was obtained. The size of each mix was
designed to make one corbel, six cylinders, three cubes,
and two prisms.
The corbels were cast in a wooden mold and com-
pacted carefully in two layers using a poker vibrator
after each layer was placed. Due care was taken to
avoid fiber balling and to insure good compaction. The
control specimens of 150 x 150 x 150 mm (5.91 x 5.91 x
5.91 in.) cubes, 150 mm (5.91 in.) diameter x 150 mm
(5.91 in.) cylinders, and 100 x 100 x 500-mm (3.94 x
3. 94 x 19. 7-in.) prisms were cast also with each corbel
to determine the compressive and tensile splitting
strength, modulus of rupture, and modulus of elastic-
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989
ity of the composite. The corbels and control speci-
mens were demolded after 24 hr, covered with poly-
thene sheets, and cured under laboratory conditions.
All the corbels were tested at 28 days of age.
The corbels were tested in an inverted position, as
shown in Fig. 2. The vertical load was applied at the
top end of the column using a 2550 kN (573 kip) ca-
pacity hydraulic testing machine. The corbels were
seated on steel roller supports with 180 x 100 x 8 mm
(7 .1 x 3. 94 x 0. 3 in.) bearing plates in direct contact
with the horizontal surface of the corbel. The position
of the supports from the faces of the column (shear
span a) were varied.
The load was applied monotonically in increments
until failure. No horizontal load was applied. Concrete
strain readings on selected points on the faces of the
corbel were taken using a mechanical extensometer
having a gage length of 200 mm (7 .87 in.). The crack-
61
 Table 2 - Summary of test results for control specimens
Compressive Tensile
strength, MPa splitting
Fiber Modulus of Modulus of
volume, Cylinders Cubes strength rupture, elasticity
Specimen percent J: J;, j;',, MPa f., MPa £,, MPa
AI 0 19.57 21.69 2.15 2.9 27,770
A2 0.5 22.63 25.78 3.15 3.4 29,190
A3 1.0 22.0 34.52 2.6 3.95 3!,650
A4 1.0 19.68 35.7 2.5 3.8 29,310
A5 1.0 20.0 27.92 2.4 3.45 28,080
A6 1.0 28.48 36.59 3.1 3.25 30,350
I ks1 = 6.895 MPa.

DE TAIL
_A_

Shear span
distance_a_
-8-.
steel bearmg
plate 180x100x8mm.
is variable
welded to thel-beam web.
E
E
c::.
c::.
"" h=
360mm
see detaii_A_

Fai fur~ plan~

L 300 mm L
l 1

Fig. 2-Loading arrangements (1 in. = 25.4 mm) Fig. 3- Typical failure pattern (Specimen A3)

ing load, crack propagation, and mode of failure were
noted.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Behavior of specimens
All corbels behaved in a similar manner and failure
was a diagonal shear failure. The first cracks to form
were flexural cracks that started at the re-entrant cor-
ner and propagated about halfway through the depth of
the corbel at about half the ultimate shear load. An-
other crack then appeared at the inner edge of the
bearing plate and propagated toward the bottom re-en-
trant corner junction of the corbel to the column face.
For Specimen AI, which had no fiber, cracks were ob-
served at a lower load than for corbels containing fi-
bers, as can be seen from Table l. Fig. 3 shows a typi-
cal failure pattern.
Results obtained from the control specimens for the
mechanical properties of the concrete shown in Table 2
indicated that the amount of steel fiber content had lit-
tle effect on the ultimate compressive strength of the
concrete. However, tensile strength, as given by cylin-
der splitting and modulus of rupture tests, increased by
as much as 44 and 36 percent, respectively, for a l per-
cent fiber content. The improvement in the matrix ten-
62
sile strength is reflected directly in the general behavior
and the load-carrying capacity of corbels tested, which
was influenced significantly by the amount of fiber
content. The higher the fiber content, the greater the
increase in the capacity, with 40-percent improvement
in the ultimate strength obtained for l percent fiber
content.
Analysis of test results
The experimental results obtained from the six cor-
bels tested in this study were analyzed and compared
with predicted values using three different methods, as
shown in Table 3. Predicted values using the ACI
Building Code method 3 are shown in Column 4. The
strength reduction factor ¢ is taken as 1.0. In Column
5, values obtained by the truss analogy method pro-
posed by Hagberg 6 are listed. In Column 6, the pre-
dicted values are obtained by using the following mod-
ified shear-friction equation suggested by Fattuhi 4
where
¢ strength reduction factor (assumed to be 0.85
for shear)
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989
 Table 3 - Experimental and predicted shear strength of corbels tested
Col. I Col. 2 Col. 3 Col. 4 Col. 5 Col. 6 Col. 7 Col. 8 Col. 9
Concrete v" v" v"
strength test test test
v" V, v" V, - - -
J:' test, ACI, truss, (Ref. 4), v" v" v"
Specimen MPa kN kN kN kN ACI truss (Ref. 4)
AI 19.57 186.2 164 195.1 187.2 1.135 0.954 1.005
A2 22.63 225.4 159.4 201.5 225 1.416 1.119 0.998
A3 22.00 262 159.2 199.9 263 1.646 1.31 1.004
A4 19.68 314 191.3 272 263 1.641 1.154 0.837
A5 20.0 270 189.9 222 263 1.422 1.216 0.974
A6 28.48 220.5 147.1 196.1 263 1.499 1.124 1.193
I ks1 = 6.895 MPa; I kip = 4.448 kN.

Table 4 - Properties and shear strength of

SFRC corbels 300

Concrete Fiber v" V, v,

test test test
strength, volume v, - - -
//, Primary VI, test, v, V, v,
Specimen MPa steel percent kN ACI truss (Ref. 4)
AMOOI 28.4 3<1>12.7 mm - 205 1.065 0.910 0.954
AM OFI 28.4 " 0.36 250 1.299 1.112 0.890
CMOOI 19.5 3<1>8 mm - 100.4 1.130 1.124 1.331
CMOFI 19.6 " 0.168 133 1.50 1.407 1.501
CMOF2 21.7 " 0.336 142.4 1.603 1.486 1.399
CMOF3 21.3 " 0.503 167.4 1.885 1.752 1.457
No StiTrups.
ft" = 1650 MPa; /, = 420 MPa; b. = 200 mm; h = 200 mm; a = 100
mm; d = 170 mm; aid= 0.588. bw= 150 mm.
I in. = 25.4 mm; I ksi = 6.895 MPa; I kip = 4.448 kN. ·
a =169 mm.
..
~ 100
"/d= 0 5 2.2

TJ overall fiber efficiency factor (with average

value of 0.1 from test results)
<::
V)

Primary steel' 2 J( 12 mm.

Stirrups : 2 _ 8 mm J(.
l
A.1 total area of fibers at the critical section
.hu ultimate tensile strength of the fiber
p, coefficient of friction (assumed to be 1.4 for
monolithic concrete)
0 o. 5 1 .a
A. area of reinforcement extending across the Fibre volume, Vt ( '/o ).
critical section
.f;. yield strength of the reinforcement Fig. 4-Effect of fiber content on corbel strength for
corbels tested (1 kip = 4. 448 kN)
It may be noted that the effective area of fibers at the consideration. The same variation is observed with the
critical section (TJ A ,1), working in shear friction and re- results of tests reported by Fattuhi and are shown in
sisting diagonal tension as well as direct shear, is ficti- Fig. 5. However, a higher increase in strength is ob-
tious. The empirical coefficient for the overall fiber ef- tained with fiber when no stirrups are used. A 67 per-
ficiency TJ = 0.1, as suggested by Fattuhi, 4•5 takes into cent increase in strength was reported with a fiber con-
account fiber orientation and bond strength but varies tent of 0.5 percent, as compared with the 21 percent
with the amount of fiber content, fiber length, and aid observed in this study.
ratio. Fig. 6 shows the effect of varying the shear span-
The results of six comparable corbels reinforced with depth ratio aid on the ultimate strength of corbels. The
primary steel only, in addition to steel fibers as re- ACI code method is evidently the most conservative of
ported by Fattuhi, 4 are analyzed also and shown in Ta- the three methods used. However, the flexural behav-
ble 4. The predicted values obtained from the three ior of corbels with large shear span-depth ratios is
methods just mentioned are compared with the actual taken into consideration as the minimum value is ob-
values from tests. Details of the calculations using the tained by either the flexural strength, the shear friction
three methods are given in the Appendix. strength, or the maximum allowable shear strength.
Fig. 4 shows the effect of steel fiber content on the The truss analogy method gives closer values to the ex-
ultimate strength of corbels tested. Predicted values by perimental results and follows a similar trend. The pro-
the ACI Building Code method or the truss analogy posed method suggested by Fattuhi and represented by
method remain almost constant because the two test Eq. (I) gives a constant value for all values of aid and
methods do not take the effect of fiber content into can be useful only when aid is between 0.45 to 0.55.
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989 63
 From the results obtained, it is evident that a consid- (2)
erable contribution to the shear resistance of corbels is
made by the steel fibers, depending on the fiber con- where
tent. The strength of reinforced concrete corbels can be
predicted with acceptable accuracy by using the ACI V,d minimum value of the ultimate load for rein-
~ethod. The additional resistance provided by the fi- forced concrete corbels using the ACI Building
bers to shear and diagonal tension can be estimated best Code method
by the arbitrary but commonly accepted use of the Vuf TJ A.JiJ., J1.
shear friction equation. It is applicable to corbels with TJ fiber efficiency factor (assumed to be 0.1)
shear span-depth ratio aid Jess than 1.0. Using the
equation in the form suggested by Fattuhi, the follow- Using Eq. (2), the predicted values of shear strength
ing equation results for tested corbels and those reported by Reference 4 are
shown in Table 5. The results for corbels with fibers (a
total of nine specimens) are compared with actual val-
3 00

S•riesi
Primary stee 1: 3 ;12. 7mm Table 5 - Comparison between actual and
predicted shear strengths of corbels
V,
V, V, V,,
V, ACI fiber ACI+ -test
V,
test, min., only, fiber,
Specimen kN kN kN kN total Remarks
AI 186.4 164 - 164 1.136 Present study
A2 225.6 159.4 44.5 203.9 1.106
A3 262 159.2 88.9 248.1 1.056
A4 314 191.3 88.9 280.2 I. 120
AS 270 189.9 88.9 278.9 0.968
A6 220.5 147.1 88.9 236 0.934
For all corbels: AMOOI 205 192.5 - 192.5 1.065 Reference 4
b w = 2 00 mm.
a =100m AMOFI 250 192.5 33.3 225.8 1.107
----- 1-----
a/d= a. 588.
CMOOI 100.4 98.6 - 98.6 1.018
4---~-----L----~--_L___ J __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

o. 1 0-2 o.3 0-5 CMOFI 133 88.5 15.5 104 1.279

Fibre volume r Vt ( "./o ). CMOF2 142.4 88.8 31.0 I 19.8 1.188

Fig. 5-Effect of fiber content on corbel strength for CMOF3 167.4 88.8 46.5 135.3 1.237
specimens tested by Fattuhi 4 (1 kip = 4.448 kN) I k1p = 4.448 kN.

~oa

3 aa

+----------- -• ...
&--

-·----·---.8
•-~·--·-·--•-·..........__·
.......

...........
'-..._
...... '•----
· - · __. equ.( 1)

--+ equ.( 2)
. test
...................
'.6\--·--8 truss
x---··-----·--x ........
-........_,,
-.......................
X---X ACI

1aa+-------------J-------------J--------------L------------~-----
0·2 a.J 0-~ a. 5 a. 5
Shear Span /depth ratia, a / d

Fig. 6-Effect of shear span-depth ratio on ultimate shear strength of corbels with
fibers (1 kip = 4. 448 kN)
64 ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989
ues and shown in Fig. 7. The tested ultimate load is
generally higher than the predicted failure load. How- /
300 /
ever, a very good correlation, compared with the three /
/
other methods, is obtained using Eq. (2). The average /
/X
ratios of the tested ultimate load to the calculated load /
/ 0
for the nine corbels with fibers were as follows: ~
.:: X /
/
/

Standard ~ /
/
Mean ( V,."J V,,,.,,..) deviation 200 /
/
ACI Code method 1.546 0.171 ~ /
/
0 /
Truss analogy 1.298 0.217 /
Eq. (I) (Reference 4) 1.139 0.255 0 //
0 //
Eq. (2) (proposed) 1.110 0.099
100 /// x Present Study. I
/
// 0 Ref.(~)
It must be noted that in Eq. (1) a strength reduction
//
factor ¢ = 0.85 was used, as proposed by Reference 4. /
If ¢ = 1 is used (which is more appropriate and was /
/
/
used in the calculations for the other methods), the /
/
mean value of the ratio becomes 0.968, and Eq. (1) will "
01L-----------.~----------,-----­ --,------
be unsafe because of the overestimation of the actual o 100 200 300
Vu , Cal., (KN)
strength of the corbels.

CONCLUSIONS
1. The results obtained in this study indicate that a
considerable increase in the ultimate shear strength of
reinforced concrete corbels is achieved by the addition
of moderate amounts of steel fibers. With a fiber con-
tent of 1 percent, an increase of 40 percent in the
strength was obtained.
2. A comparison of test values with those predicted
using the ACI Building Code provisions shows that the
code method becomes too conservative by neglecting
the contribution of fibers to shear strength. The same
is true for the truss analogy method.
3. The shear-friction equation [Eq. (1)] for the pre-
diction of the ultimate strength of corbels, as proposed
by Fattuhi, 4 does not include the effect of the variation
in the shear span-depth ratio aid and can be applicable
only to a very limited range of aid (about 0.45 to 0.55).
4. The proposed method [Eq. (2)] of predicting the
contribution of the fibers to the shear resistance, then
adding it to the predicted values obtained by the ACI
code provisions, is rational and supported strongly by
the available experimental evidence. Safe and economic
corbel design can be made by combining steel fiber
contribution to shear resistance in less congested and
conventionally reinforced corbels.
Fig. 7- Tested ultimate load/calculated ultimate load
using Eq. (2) (1 kip = 4.448 kN)
2. Mansur, M. A.; Ong, K. C. G.; and Paramasivam, P., "Shear
Strength of Fibrous Concrete Beams Without Stirrups," Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 112, No.9, Sept. 1986, pp. 2066-
2079.
3. ·ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Rein-
forced Concrete (ACI 318M-83)," American Concrete Institute, De-
troit, 1983, Ill pp.
4. Fattuhi, N. !., "Corbels with Shear Reinforcement in the Form
of Stirrups or Fibres," Proceedings, 3rd RILEM International Sym-
posium on Developments in Fibre Reinforced Cement and Concrete,
University of Sheffield, July 1986, V. 2, Paper No. 8.8.
5. Fattuhi, Nijad 1., "SFRC Corbel Tests," AC/ Structural Jour-
nal, V. 84, No.2, Mar.-Apr. 1987, pp. 119-123.
6. Hagberg, Thore, "Design of Concrete Brackets: On the Appli-
cation of the Truss Analogy," ACI JouRNAL, Proceedings V. 80, No.
I, Jan.-Feb. 1983, pp. 3-12.
APPENDIX
Sample calculations follow for Specimen A2 for the prediction of
the ultimate shear strength using the ACI Building Code method,'
truss analogy,' and the method of Reference 4 as given in Eq. (1).
The following data are given for Specimen A2:

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Shear span a = 169 mm (6.65 in.)

The experimental work reported in this study was carried out at the Depth of primary steel d, = 324 mm (12.75 in.)
Department of Building and Construction Engineering, University of Depth (from centroid of stirrups) d, = 219 mm (8.62 in.)
Technology, Baghdad, Iraq. The assistance of Messrs. M. Hussain, Width b. = !50 mm (5.91 in.)
M. Mankori, A. Jihad, and S. Salman in conducting the testing pro- Primary steel A, = 226 mm' (0.35 in.')
Area of stirrups A, = 202 mm' (0.31 in.')
gram is gratefully acknowledged.
Strength of concrete !, = 22.63 MPa (3282 psi)
Yield strength of primary steel j, = 386 MPa (56 ksi)
REFERENCES Yield strength of stirrups !,, = 348 MPa (50.5 ksi)
I. Abdul-Wahab, H. M. S.; Al-Ausi, M. A.; and Tawfiq, S. H., Coefficient of friction for normal 1-' = 1.4
"Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete Members under Combined Bend- weight concrete with monolithic
ing, Shear and Torsion," Proceedings, 3rd RILEM International construction'
Symposium on Developments in Fibre Reinforced Cement and Con- Strength reduction factor except in </>=I
crete, University of Sheffield, July 1986, V. 2, Paper No. 8.11. Eq. (I)

ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989 65

 a. ACI Building Code (318-83) method (Section 11.9): The ulti- 2f'-b.d)
mate shear strength of the corbel is taken as the minimum of either ( 1 - F, - tan' (3 +2f'
- -b.a
t a n (3 + I __ O (A. Ia)
F,
the flexural strength, shear friction strength, or the maximum allow-
able shear strength.
d = d,F,, F, + d, F./ F, (A. I b)

I. Horizontal force N,. = 0, therefore area of reinforcement re- a + x/2 cos (3

tan (3, (A.2a)
sisting tensile force A. = 0. d, - x/2 sin (3

2. Flexural strength a + x/2 cos (3

tan (3 , = -:--~~---'-= (A.2b)
· d, - x/2 sin (3

v" · a = </>A,!, Ia F,
x=--- (A.2c)
f.b" sin (3
where Ia is the moment arm of the primary steel.
F,, F,,
v =--+-- (A.3)
" tan (3, tan (3,
</>AJ.
Stress block depth = - --b-
0 .85 f' • where
F,, force in primary steel = 226 x 386 = 87.2 kN (19.6
kips)
1.0 X 226 X 386
F,, force in stirrups = 202 x 348 = 70.3 kN (15. 9 kips)
0.85 X 22.63 X 150
F, total force in reinforcements = F,, + F,, = 157.5 kN
(35 .4 kips)
30.2 mm (1.19 in.) angle of inclination of the resultant compressive con-
crete strut with the vertical column, unknown.

30 2 The value of the angle (3 can be found from Eq. (A. Ia)
and Ia = d I - 2" = 324- 15.1 = 308.9 mm (12.I6 in.)
- 10.94 tan' (3 + 7.285 tan (3 + I = 0 (A. Ia)

1.0 X 226 X 386 X 308.9 d = 277 mm (10.9 in.) (A.Ib)

Hence v" = = 159.4 kN (35.8 kips)
169
The root of the equation gives (3 = 0.595 rads. Using the value of (3,
3. Shear friction strength the rest of the equations are solved. Thus

tan (3, = 0. 66
v" = ll (AJ, + AJ,)
= I .4 (226 X 386 + 202 X 348) tan (3, = 1.0145
= 220.5 kN (49.6 kips)
and V" = 132.2 + 69.3 = 201.5 kN (45.3 kips)
4. Maximum allowable shear strength
The lesser of: c. The method of Reference 4: The strength reduction factor </>was
assumed to be</> = 0.85 in Eq. (I)

V" = 5.5 b_d = 5.5 X 150 X 324

= 267.3 kN (60.1 kips)
For Specimen A2, fiber volume fraction V, = 0.5 percent. Hence, A,1
= 0.005 x 150 x 360 = 270 mm' (0.42 in.'). The nominal yield
strength of the fibers, f," = 1177 MPa (170. 7 ksi). The fiber effi-
ciency factor '1 = 0. I (from tests.) Therefore, the ultimate shear
strength is
b. The truss analogy method:' For the specimens tested, with hor-
izontal reinforcement only and zero horizontal load, the following v" = o.85 (44.49) + 0.85 (220.5)
equations apply = 225 kN (50.6 kips)

66 ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989

 a. ACI Building Code (318-83) method (Section 11.9): The ulti- 2!; b.d) 2f.' b.a __
mate shear strength of the corbel is taken as the minimum of either (1-- - tan' (3 + - - t a n (3 + 1 0 (A. Ia)
F, F,
the flexural strength, shear friction strength, or the maximum allow-
able shear strength.
d = d,F,,I F, + d, F,,l F, (A.Ib)

I. Horizontal force N" = 0, therefore area of reinforcement re- a + x/2 cos (3

tan (3, (A.2a)
sisting tensile force A. = 0. d, - x/2 sin (3

2. Flex ural strength a + x/2 cos (3

tan (3. = -----'-- (A.2b)
. d, - x/2 sin (3

v. · a = </>A,!, Ia
F,
x=--- (A.2c)
f.b., sin (3
where Ia is the moment arm of the primary steel.
F,, F,,
v =--+-- (A.3)
" tan (3, tan (3,
</>AJ,
Stress block depth = ---
0.85 f.' b. where
F,, force in primary steel = 226 x 386 = 87.2 kN (19.6
kips)
1.0 X 226 X 386
F,, force in stirrups = 202 x 348 = 70.3 kN (15.9 kips)
0.85 X 22.63 X 150 F, total force in reinforcements = F,, + F,, = 157.5 kN
(35 .4 kips)
= 30.2mm(1.19in.) angle of inclination of the resultant compressive con-
crete strut with the vertical column, unknown.

30.2 The value of the angle (3 can be found from Eq. (A. Ia)
and Ia = d,- - - = 324- 15.1 = 308.9 mm (12.16 in.)
2
- 10.94 tan' (3 + 7.285 tan (3 + I =0 (A. Ia)

1.0 X 226 X 386 X 308.9 d = 277 mm (10.9 in.) (A.Ib)

Hence v., = 169
= 159.4 kN (35.8 kips)

The root of the equation gives (3 = 0.595 rads. Using the value of (3,
the rest of the equations are solved. Thus
3. Shear friction strength

tan (3, = 0.66

v., = J.L (AJ, + A,j,)
= 1.4 (226 X 386 + 202 X 348) tan (3, = 1.0145
= 220.5 kN (49.6 kips)
and V,, = 132.2 + 69.3 = 201.5 kN (45.3 kips)
4. Maximum allowable shear strength
c. The method of Reference 4: The strength reduction factor</> was
The lesser of:
assumed to be</> = 0.85 in Eq. (I)

V., = 5.5 b_d = 5.5 X 150 X 324

= 267.3 kN (60.1 kips)
For Specimen A2, fiber volume fraction V, = 0.5 percent. Hence, A,1
= 0.005 x 150 x 360 = 270 mm' (0.42 in.'). The nominal yield
strength of the fibers,!,., = 1177 MPa (170. 7 ksi). The fiber effi.
ciency factor '1 = 0.1 (from tests.) Therefore, the ultimate shear
strength is
b. The truss analogy method:' For the specimens tested, with hor-
izontal reinforcement only and zero horizontal load, the following V., = 0.85 (44.49) + 0.85 (220.5)
equations apply = 225 kN (50.6 kips)

66 ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1989