Technical Note

Minimum Steel for Reinforced Concrete Slabs

Subramanian Narayanan, Ph.D., F.ASCE 1

Abstract: Reinforced concrete slabs are often exposed to rain and radiation from the sun, in addition to normal loads, and hence have to be
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

provided with at least the minimum shrinkage and temperature reinforcement. Shrinkage and temperature reinforcement has traditionally
been specified as a certain percentage of the cross-sectional area (about 0.12%–0.18%), which is often empirical. Moreover, this was specified
when M20–M25 concrete and reinforcements of Grade Fe 415 were used, which have since been found to be inadequate by practicing
engineers. Some researchers have found that the reinforcement prescribed in codes has to be increased considerably to avoid cracks
due to shrinkage and temperature effects. Hence, a formula for minimum reinforcement has been developed for slabs, similar to that for
beams, which provides consistent safety against collapse due to cracking. It takes into account factors that may affect the behavior of these
slabs, such as concrete and steel strength and the ratio of depth to effective depth. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000618. © 2021
American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: ACI 318; IS 456; Minimum steel; RC slabs; Shrinkage; Temperature.

Introduction
RC slabs are used in floors and roofs as well as in the foundations
of buildings. In addition to the normally applied loads, these slabs
are exposed to rain or groundwater and the sun’s radiation. Hence,
they have to be provided with at least minimum shrinkage and tem-
perature reinforcement. Shrinkage and temperature reinforcement
requirements for the design of reinforced concrete structures have
been included in several codes and standards. As they were devel-
oped several years ago, these provisions are empirical and based on
a certain percentage of the cross-sectional area (ranging from
0.12% to 0.18%). These provisions have been in use for several
years, without any change and mostly found to be satisfactory.
For example, the corresponding provision in the American Con-
crete Institute code, ACI 318-19 (ACI 2019), has not been modified
since 1928, almost 90 years.
Shrinkage cracks in slabs typically appear throughout the thick-
ness of the concrete section (Babaei and Fouladgar 1997). Thus,
they not only allow the ingress of moisture and deleterious chem-
icals to reach the steel reinforcement but also may result in water
leakage from the upper floor to the lower floor. Such shrinkage
cracks always pose problems with serviceability and durability. To
ensure satisfactory performance of RC structures, the shrinkage
crack widths must be controlled to within acceptable limits.
Reinforcing steel, at close spacing, is often used to control such
cracks in structural slabs and walls. In general, providing a higher
percentage of crack-control steel will lead to the formation of more
cracks but with smaller crack widths. Crack-control steel will ex-
perience much higher tensile stresses at the cracks than at other
locations (Ng and Kwan 2017).
The minimum provisions for steel in the Indian, American,
European, Australian, and New Zealand codes are reviewed. These
minimum steel provisions are empirical and consider concrete and
1
Consulting Structural Engineer, 23 Napa Valley Rd., Gaithersburg, MD
20878. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0355-1206. Email: drnsmani@
gmail.com
Note. This manuscript was submitted on December 2, 2020; approved
on June 1, 2021; published online on August 10, 2021. Discussion period
open until January 10, 2022; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This technical note is part of the Practice Periodical
on Structural Design and Construction, © ASCE, ISSN 1084-0680.
steel of lower strengths, used during the times in which they were
prescribed. However, some studies suggest that the provisions in
these codes are not adequate to resist shrinkage and temperature
stresses (Suprenant 2002; Frosch et al. 2003), because the shrink-
age strains are time dependent and increase with time and concrete
strength. In addition, with the increased availability and use of
high-strength concrete and high-strength steel reinforcements, it
is necessary to modify these requirements. The objective of this
paper is to propose an equation for minimum steel for slabs, includ-
ing concrete and steel strengths as well as the ratio of depth of slab,
D, to effective depth of T-beam or slab, d, (D=d). The equation is
proposed such that the capacity of the section is obtained, which is
about 1.3 times the cracking moment, for a certain percentage of
reinforcement provided.
Shrinkage Strains
While hardening, concrete loses moisture from its fine pores and
shrinks. Shrinkage of concrete will result in tensile stresses, known
as shrinkage stresses. The amount of shrinkage depends on the
water content, aggregate properties, and section geometry. There are
two main types of concrete shrinkage—autogenous shrinkage and
drying shrinkage [Eurocode 2 (CEN 2004); Bamforth et al. 2008].
Autogenous shrinkage is caused by self-desiccation, whereas
drying shrinkage is caused by loss of water due to evaporation.
Autogenous shrinkage is fairly small compared with drying shrink-
age in concrete having a water (w)-cement (c) ratio (w=c) greater
than 0.45, but it can represent 50% of the total shrinkage when w=c
is 0.30 (Bamforth et al. 2008; Yang et al. 2001). Therefore, autog-
enous shrinkage may be greater for high-strength concrete, in
which a low water-cement ratio is used.
The total shrinkage strain, εcs , can be estimated per Clause 3.1.4
of Eurocode 2 as
εcs ¼ εcd þ εca ð1Þ
where εcd =drying shrinkage strain; and εca = autogenous shrink-
age strain.
The ultimate autogenous shrinkage strain at any time, t, days,
εca ðtÞ, is given by Clause 3.1.4 of Eurocode 2 as
εca ðtÞ ¼ β as ðtÞεca ð∞Þ ð2aÞ

© ASCE 06021005-1 Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005

 Table 1. Value for ks in Eq. (3)
s0 (mm) ks
100 1.0
200 0.85
300 0.75
≥500 0.70

where
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

εca ð∞Þ ¼ 2.5ðf c0 − 10Þ × 10−6 ð2bÞ

β as ðtÞ ¼ 1 − expð−0.2t0.5 Þ ð2cÞ

The drying shrinkage strain may be estimated based on

Eurocode 2 as
εcd ðtÞ ¼ ks εcd;0 β ds ðt; ts Þ
where β ds is given by
ðt − ts Þ
β ds ðt; ts Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffi
ðt − ts Þ þ 0.04 s30
ACI 209.2R-08 suggests an average value for the ultimate
shrinkage strain, εshu , as
εshu ¼ 780 × 10−6 mm=mm
where [for Eqs. (2a) and (2c)] fc0 = cylinder compressive strength of
concrete; t = age of concrete at the instant considered (in days); ts =
age of concrete at the beginning of drying shrinkage (or swelling),
i.e., at the end of curing period (because formwork may be assumed
to be removed after approximately one week, ts may be taken as
7 days); ks = parameter depending on the notional size of the cross
section, s0 (Table 1); s0 is the notional size (mm) of the cross sec-
tion ¼ 2Ac =u in which Ac is the cross-sectional area of the concrete
member and u is the perimeter of that part of the cross section
which is exposed to drying (the notional size of a wall drying from
both faces is equal to its thickness); and εcd;0 = nominal unre-
strained drying shrinkage derived from equations in Annex B.2 of
Eurocode 2.
The design values of autogenous shrinkage strain estimated by
using Eq. (2) are shown in Fig. 1. In this figure, M20–M90 indicate
the cylinder strength (Grade) of concrete in MPa. The autogenous
shrinkage strain increases considerably as the strength of concrete
increases from M20 to M90 and also with time.
Thermal Strains
ð3aÞ Fig. 1. Autogenous shrinkage strain in relation to cylinder strength of
concrete.
ð3bÞ If a reinforced concrete slab is allowed to move freely, shrinkage
and temperature changes will not cause much damage to the slab
as shrinkage strains may not induce significant stresses. However,
in reality, any slab will not move freely, as some restraint will
invariably be present. These restraints will restrict the free move-
ð3cÞ ment and are responsible for the stresses developed in the slab
section. Clause 24.4.2 of ACI 318-19 states that when structural
walls, columns, or supports provide significant restraint to shrink-
age and temperature movements, the restraint of volume changes
causes tension in slabs, as well as displacements, shear forces, and
flexural moments in columns or walls. In these cases, it may be
necessary to increase the amount of slab reinforcement as speci-
fied by ACI 318-19 in Clause 24.4.3.2, in both principal direc-
tions. However, ACI 318-19 does not give guidelines on how
much the increase should be. ACI 318-19 also states that the
top and bottom reinforcement are both effective in controlling the
cracks.
Minimum Reinforcement in Beams
Before considering the minimum steel slabs, the minimum steel
provisions of beams are discussed because they are also flexural
members. In Clause 9.6.1 of ACI 318-19, the minimum flexural
reinforcement for non-prestressed concrete beams is given as
pffiffiffiffiffi
0.25 fc0 1.4
As;min ¼ bw d ≥ b d ð5aÞ
fy fy w

The restrained component of the thermal strain, εr , is given by the In addition, the value of fy to be used in Eq. (5a) is limited to a
following equation [Hong Kong Concrete Code (2013)]: maximum of 550 MPa in ACI 318-19.
Clause 26.5.1.1 of IS 456:2000 (BIS 2000) similarly stipulates
εr ¼ 0.8αðT 1 þ T 2 ÞR ð4Þ
0.85
As;min ≥ b d ð5bÞ
where R = restraint factor (taken as 0.2–0.4 for slabs); α = coef- fy w
ficient of thermal expansion of concrete (average value may be
taken as 10 × 10−6 =°C); T 1 = short-term difference between peak where bw = web width; and d = effective depth of a T-beam. For a
hydration temperature and mean ambient temperature; and T 2 = statically determinate T-beam with the flange in tension, bw is the
long-term variation in temperature from ambient to seasonal mini- lesser of the width of flange (bf ) and 2bw .
mum. T 1 can be estimated from tables and charts in CIRIA Guide The value of the cracking moment, M cr , of a flexural member
C766 (Concrete Society 2018). The value of T 1 is based upon the may be calculated as
thickness of the structural member, the cement content, and the type
of formwork. M cr ¼ fr Z ð6aÞ

© ASCE 06021005-2 Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005

 Table 2. Temperature and shrinkage reinforcement in slabs based on gross concrete area
Code specification
ACI 318-19 NZS 3101:2006 AASHTO
IS 456:2000 (Clauses 7.6.1.1 (Clauses 8.8.1 (1996) AASHTO (2017)
Description (Clause 26.5.2.1) and 24.4.3.3) and 2.4.4.4) (Section 8.20) (Section 5.10.6)
1.3
Slabs with mild steel bars 0.0015 Ag 0.0018 Ag 0.7 Ag =fy ≥ 0.0014 Ag ≥264.5 mm2 =m A f > 0.11ðAg =f y Þ
Slabs with high strength deformed 0.0012 Ag 0.0018 Ag 2ðb þ hÞ g y
bars or welded wire fabric
90,000
Spacing of reinforcement (s) mm ≤5d ≤ 300 ≤5D ≤ 450 Smaller of − 2.5cc ≤3D ≤ 450 ≤3D ≤ 450
fs
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

90,000
and
fs

Note: Ag = Gross-area of section; b = breadth of slab; cc = clear cover of reinforcement in mm; D = total depth of slab; d = effective depth of slab; f s = stress in
reinforcement in serviceability limit state in MPa; and f y = yield stress of reinforcement.

pffiffiffiffiffi the modulus of rupture based on ACI 318-19 as fr ¼

Using
0.62 fc0 , M cr is written as
! AASHTO 2017]. Although these empirical values specified in
pffiffiffiffiffi D2 pffiffiffiffiffi
0
Mcr ¼ 0.62 f c 1,000 × ¼ 103.33D2 f c0 ð6bÞ
6
Similarly, the nominal moment capacity of a flexural member
may be calculated per ACI 318-19 (without strength reduction
factor, φ), as (McCormac and Brown 2015)
M n ¼ f y Ast ðd − 0.5aÞ ð7aÞ
where the depth of equivalent rectangular stress block
fy Ast
a¼ ð7bÞ
0.85fc0 B
where Ast = area of tension steel in the cross section; B = breadth of
the slab; d = effective depth of the slab; f y = yield stress of reinforc-
ing steel; and fc0 = cylinder compressive strength of concrete.
The minimum steel reinforcement from Eq. (5a) will result in a
nominal moment capacity, Mn , which will be about twice the crack-
ing moment, M cr , for rectangular beams and will safeguard the
beam against sudden failure due to cracking (Seguirant et al.
2010). The earlier version of ACI 318-89 (ACI 1989) used only
the second expression of Eq. (5a), which is similar to the provision
of IS 456:2000 [Eq. (5b)]. At the time these provisions were de-
rived, Grade 27.5 MPa concrete and Grade 275 reinforcement steel
were considered normal and hence the expression on the right-hand
side of Eq. (5a) resulted in a minimum steel ratio of about 0.005.
For Grade 415 steel and Grade 25 MPa concrete, Eq. (5b) results in
minimum steel of 0.20% of the cross-sectional area, which is about
two-thirds of that calculated using Eq. (5a). Based on the preceding
discussions, the minimum steel requirements of concrete members
should be a function of not only the strength of concrete but also the
strength of reinforcements.
Minimum Steel Requirements of Slabs
Slabs are often exposed to radiation from the sun and develop tem-
perature stresses in addition to shrinkage stresses. Hence, nominal
reinforcements are often provided close to the surface that is being
affected to address temperature and shrinkage. Roof slabs are often
provided with a weathering course and tiles to reduce the temper-
ature stresses. Where shrinkage and temperature movements are
permitted to occur freely, codes specify the amount of shrinkage
and temperature reinforcement, as given in Table 2 [IS
456:2000 (BIS 2007); ACI 318-19 (ACI 2019); AASHTO 1996;
the codes have not been changed for a long time, they have been
used satisfactorily for many years.
Optimal crack control is often achieved by using small bar diam-
eters at smaller spacing (Leonhardt 1988). Clause 7.7.6.2 of ACI
318-19 suggests that such reinforcements should have a maximum
spacing of five times the slab thickness or 450 mm, whichever is
smaller (Table 2). Per Clause 26.3.3(b) (2) of IS 456:2000 (BIS
2007) and Amendment 3 of August 2007, the distance between
shrinkage and temperature reinforcement bars should not be more
than five times the effective depth of slab or 300 mm, whichever
is smaller. According to the ACI 318-19 code, splices and end an-
chorages of shrinkage and temperature reinforcements should be
designed for the full specified yield strength. In one way slabs,
shrinkage, and temperature reinforcement are provided normal
to the flexural reinforcement [over the flexural reinforcement (bot-
tom bars) in the positive moment region and below the flexural
reinforcement (top bars) in the negative moment region].
Usually, slabs and other members are joined rigidly to other
parts of the structure and cannot contract or expand freely. In such
situations, reinforcement beyond that suggested for minimum steel
may need to be provided; otherwise, the slabs will crack due to the
shrinkage stresses. However, analyzing the effects of shrinkage or
temperature change is complicated and neither the IS 456:2000
nor the ACI 318-19 code provides guidelines for determining the
effects due to shrinkage or temperature.
According to Clauses 7.6.1.1 and 8.6.1.1 of ACI 318-19, the min-
imum flexural reinforcement to be provided in slabs is 0.0018 times
the gross concrete area of the section (Table 2). The Commentary to
Clause 8.6.1.1 of ACI 318-19 states that “However, whereas shrink-
age and temperature reinforcement is permitted to be distributed be-
tween the two faces of the slab as deemed appropriate for specific
conditions, minimum flexural reinforcement should be placed close
as practicable to the face of the concrete in tension due to applied
loads.” The Commentary also states that this minimum area of
steel is the same as that prescribed for shrinkage and temperature
reinforcement in Clause 24.4.3.2. This empirically specified area of
steel for deformed bars and the welded-wire fabric has been used
satisfactorily for many years.
In IS 456:2000, the minimum steel requirement of slabs is pre-
scribed in Clause 26.5.2.1 as 0.15% of the gross cross-sectional
area for mild steel reinforcement and 0.12% for high-strength de-
formed bars. Per the Handbook on Indian Standard Code for Plain
and Reinforced Concrete, SP 24:1983 (BIS 1983), this minimum

© ASCE 06021005-3 Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005

 Table 3. Area of reinforcement for crack control and shrinkage as per AS 3600:2018
Ast (mm2 =m width) 100 110 120 130 140
1.75D 175 193 210 228 245
3.5D 375 413 450 488 525
6.0D 600 660 720 780 840
reinforcement required for slabs is less than that required by beams,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
because the overload will be distributed laterally and sudden failure
will be less likely, and hence is based on shrinkage and temperature
effects.
The provisions in NZS 3101:2006 (NZS 2006) include the yield
strength of steel and range between 0.17% and 0.14% of the gross
cross-sectional area for steels of Grade 415–500 MPa. These mini-
mum steel provisions are compared in Table 2.
The commentary to Clause 24.4.3.2 of ACI 318-19 states that
“Previous editions of the code permitted a reduction in shrinkage
and temperature reinforcement for reinforcement with a yield
strength greater than 420 MPa (i.e., Ast;min ¼ 0.0018 × 420=f y ≥
0.0014). However, as the mechanics of cracking suggested that
any increase in yield strength is not beneficial for the control of
cracking, this provision was removed in the 2019 edition. Also, the
0.20% provision for mild steel bar has been removed and 0.18% is
uniformly recommended for all types of reinforcement.”
Interestingly Clause 9.5 of the Australian code, AS 3600:2018
(AS 2018), and ACI 209R-92 (ACI 2008b) provide some guidance
on shrinkage and temperature effects and suggest reinforcement
based on the depth of the slab and environmental exposure condi-
tions ranging from 1.75D to 6D mm2 =m, where D is the depth of
slab (Table 3). According to Gilbert (1992), the shrinkage and tem-
perature reinforcement required for a fully restrained slab could be
double that required by ACI 318-19. Cracks due to restrained dry-
ing shrinkage can be serious, because unlike flexural cracks, they
can extend the full depth of the member (Carino and Clifton 1995;
Babaei and Fouladgar 1997). The minimum steel requirements will
not eliminate shrinkage cracking but will reduce the width of cracks.
Clause 3.5.2 of ACI 224R-01 (ACI 2008a) states that “The min-
imum amount and spacing of reinforcement to be used in structural
floors, roof slabs, and walls for control of temperature and shrink-
age cracking is given in ACI 318-19 or ACI 350-06 (ACI 2006).
The minimum reinforcement percentage, which is between 0.18%
and 0.20%, does not normally control cracks to within generally
acceptable design limits. To control cracks to a more acceptable
level, the percentage requirement needs to exceed about 0.60%.”
Thus, this document says that the shrinkage and temperature
reinforcement needs to be about three times more than the ACI
318-19 minimum to obtain acceptable crack widths (see also
Suprenant 2002, 2016).
Minimum Steel According to Eurocode 2
Per Clause 7.3.2 of Eurocode 2, the minimum reinforcement area
As;min may be calculated as
As;min ¼ kkc Act f ct;eff ðtÞ=σs ð8aÞ
where As;min = minimum reinforcement area; Act = area of the con-
crete within the tensile zone; fct;eff ðtÞ = mean value of the concrete
tensile strength at time, t, when the first crack is expected to occur
(t may be assumed to be 28 days); kc = coefficient which takes into
account the stress distribution within the cross section (kc ¼ 1.0 for
pure tension and kc ¼ 0.4 for bending without normal compressive
© ASCE 06021005-4
Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005
Depth of slab, D (mm)
150 160 170 180 190 200 250
263 280 298 315 333 350 438
563 600 638 675 713 750 938
900 960 1,020 1,080 1,140 1,200 1,500
force); k = coefficient which allows for the effect of non-uniform
self-equilibrating stresses or tensile stresses due to restraint of in-
trinsic deformations (generally k ¼ 0.8, however for rectangular
sections k ¼ 0.8 when depth of the section D ≤ 300 mm, and k ¼
0.5 when D ≥ 800 mm; and k ¼ 1 when tensile stresses are due to
restraint of extrinsic deformations); and σs = yield strength of the
steel. For a slab of depth D ¼ 175 mm, with no axial force, and
assuming k ¼ 1.0, Act ¼ 0.5BD, with kc ¼ 0.4, and fct;eff ð28Þ ¼
0.1fck [for concrete grade less than M60, a value of fct;eff ð28Þ ¼
0.3ðf ck Þ2=3 is specified in Eurocode 2]. Substituting these values in
Eq. (8a), the following equation is obtained:
As;min ¼ 0.02BDf ck =fy ð8bÞ
For fck ¼ 25 MPa and f y ¼ 415 MPa, the steel percentage is
0.06% and for fck ¼ 45 MPa and f y ¼ 415 MPa, the steel percent-
age is 0.11%. These values are found to be much less than those
specified in ACI 318-19 and IS 456:2000.
Brittle Failures in Some Precast Parking Structures
When the ratio of the nominal moment to cracking moment
(M n =M cr ) is less than 1.0, cracking could lead to an immediate
collapse in statically determinate slabs or beam flanges. This fact
was recently confirmed in the experimental study of the collapse
of precast, prestressed double-tee (DT) members in a 1,200-car
parking structure at Harrah’s Cherokee Resort in Cherokee, North
Carolina, US, that occurred February 19, 2015, and April 15, 2016.
The flange slabs of these DT members failed as soon as the first
crack appeared, as shown in Fig. 2 (Lunn et al. 2015; Gamble et al.
2019). Because the flange reinforcement in that project was made
of carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) grids, there may be
other issues connected with these failures. However, the basic prob-
lem was that M n was significantly smaller than M cr .
To avoid such failures as shown in Fig. 2, the minimum
reinforcement in slabs should consider the parameters that influ-
ence the behavior of slabs (e.g., the strength of concrete and steel),
and not simply be specified as a percentage of the area of the slab,
as in the present codes. Hence, a new equation is proposed and is
compared with the provisions of other codes and that proposed by
Gamble (2017).
Recommendations by Other Researchers
Any reinforcement that is provided will not control the crack until
cracks develop in concrete. The reinforcement will not prevent any
cracks, but can control both the crack spacing and crack widths
(Carino and Clifton 1995). Concrete cracks when the maximum
tensile stress in the slab equals the modulus of rupture. Cracking
can be due to applied loads or restraint forces. When a crack devel-
ops in the concrete, there will not be any compatibility between the
steel and concrete. At the crack, the steel reinforcement will carry
the entire tensile stress and the stress in the concrete will be zero
(Gilbert 1992). If the minimum amount of reinforcement is not
provided, the slab will suddenly fail.
Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 2. Failure in a parking garage in North Carolina of a flange slab of double-Tee member with a thickness of (a) 89 mm (3.5 in.); and (b) 120 mm
(4.75 in.). (Images courtesy of Jason Reigstad.)

Frosch et al. (2003) conducted a field evaluation of 20 bridges Table 4. Percentage minimum reinforcement for f y ¼ 415 MPa
in various locations in Indiana, US. They instrumented a typical Concrete strength, f ck 20 MPa 35 MPa
bridge structure to understand the behavior of transverse cracks
Direct tension 0.76 1.08
in a concrete bridge deck. They also conducted an experimental Bending 0.15 0.22
investigation on 10 reinforced concrete slab models. Based on these
investigations, they recommended that the total amount of reinforc-
ing steel to prevent uncontrolled crack growth is
pffiffiffiffiffi Leonhardt (1988) cautioned that when the first crack appears,
f c0 sudden failure of the slab may occur when the force transferred
As;min ¼ 0.50 A ð9Þ
fy g from the concrete to the reinforcement is greater than the strength
of the reinforcement. Cracking can be due to applied loads or
where Ag = gross area of section, mm2 ; As;min = minimum area of restraint forces. To prevent such failures, Leonhardt (1988) sug-
reinforcement in the cross section, mm2 ; f c0 = specified cylinder gested a minimum amount of reinforcement as given in Table 4.
compressive strength of concrete, MPa; and f y = specified yield He also provided a chart that can be used to find the steel stress
strength of reinforcement, MPa. at the first crack and the percentage of minimum reinforcement
This recommendation is based p onffiffiffiffiffi
the tensile strength of con- required to avoid reinforcement yielding when the first crack
crete in direct tension taken as 0.5 f c0 and full transfer of stress occurs.
from concrete to the reinforcement at the location of the crack. For
25 MPa concrete and grade Fe 415 reinforcement, this recommen-
dation results in 0.67% steel in the deck cross section. Recommended Equation for Minimum Steel
Realizing a minimum reinforcement requirement was needed for Slabs
and considering all the controlling factors such as concrete strength,
the yield stress of reinforcement, and the ratio of depth to effective As discussed previously, sufficient steel should be provided such
depth, the following equation was derived iteratively by Gamble that when the first crack occurs the reinforcement will not yield;
(2017): this amount of steel will also control the crack spacing and hence
the crack width. Steel stress at a first crack is given by (Leonhardt
rffiffiffiffiffi rffiffiffiffiffi 1988)
0.0018 × 420 f c0 D fc0
As;min ¼ × × 0.85Ag > 0.0014Ag
fy 30 d 30 σscr ¼ kkc fct ðtÞAct =As;min ð11aÞ
ð10aÞ
where As;min = minimum reinforcement area; Act = area of the con-
which can be simplified to crete within the tensile zone; f ct ðtÞ = concrete tensile strength at
  time, t, days, when the first crack is expected to occur (t may
0.1173 pffiffiffiffiffi0 D pffiffiffiffiffi
As;min ¼ fc Ag > 0.000256 f c0 Ag ð10bÞ be assumed to be 28 days); kc = coefficient which takes into ac-
fy d count the stress distribution within the cross section (kc ¼ 1.0 for
pure tension and kc ¼ 0.4 for bending without normal compressive
where Ag = gross cross-sectional area of the slab; As;min = minimum force); and k = coefficient to address non-uniform self-equilibrating
area of reinforcement in the cross section; f c0 = cylinder compres- stresses (k ¼ 0.8 per Eurocode 2).
sive strength of concrete; D = depth of the slab; and d = effective Eurocode 2 recommends the value for f ct;eff to be taken as the
depth. In Eq. (10a), 0.85 is a correction factor suggested by Gamble mean tensile strength of concrete, fctm . However, according to
(2017) to obtain M n =M cr values greater than 1.0. Comparing Eqs. (9) CIRIA Guide C766 (Concrete Society 2018), there may be reduc-
and (10), Eq. (9) suggests approximately 4.26 times more steel tions in tensile strength due to the combinations of scale effects,
than Eq. (10). tension stiffening, and early age and long-term sustained load

© ASCE 06021005-5 Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005

 Table 5. Comparison of percentage of minimum reinforcement for various concrete and steel strengths, assuming D=d ¼ 1.11
Eq. (10b) with fy (MPa) Eq. (11b) with f y (MPa)
f c0 (MPa) 415 500 550 415 500 550 ACI 318-19 IS 456:2000
25 0.16 0.13 0.13 0.19 0.16 0.15 0.18 0.12
30 0.17 0.14 0.13 0.21 0.17 0.15 0.18 0.12
35 0.18 0.15 0.14 0.22 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.12
40 0.20 0.16 0.15 0.24 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.12
45 0.21 0.17 0.16 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.12
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

pffiffiffiffiffi  
f c0 D
As;min ¼ 0.14 A ≥ 0.0015Ag ð11bÞ
fy d g

Assuming a value for D=d of 1.11, a comparison of minimum

Fig. 3. M n =M cr versus fc0 plot for a slab with D ¼ 175 mm,
d ¼ 137.5 mm, and Grade 415 steel.
effects. Hence, it recommends that the value of f ct;eff be taken as
0.7f ct;eff .
The value of σscr can be assumed to be the yield stress of steel
reinforcement, to prevent yielding when the first crack appears. The
valuepof modulus of rupture per Clause 19.2.3.1 of ACI 318-19 is
0.62 f c0 and kc ¼ 0.4 for bending. Substituting these values, tak-
ing fct as 0.7fct , introducing the D=d term, rearranging Eq. (9a),
and rounding off, the following equation is obtained:
percentage of reinforcement slabs based on Eqs. (10b) and (11b)
and ACI 318-19 and IS 456:2000 provisions is given in Table 5.
As steel strength increases, the required percentage of steel decreases.
The required percentage of steel is higher than that prescribed in
IS 456:2000 for most cases. The ACI 318-19 code governs when
the steel strength is 500 MPa or more and the concrete strength is
less than 35 MPa.
Fig. 3 (Table 6) compares minimum steel requirements according
to ACI 318-19, IS 456:2000, and Eqs. (10b) and (11b), as a M n =M cr
versus fc0 plot, for a slab with D ¼ 175 mm, d ¼ 137.5 mm, and
Grade 415 steel reinforcement. Table 7 compares Mn =M cr values
for the same slab with different fc0 values and Grade 500 steel.
The Mn =M cr values for a slab with D ¼ 175 mm, d ¼
137.5 mm, and Grade 415 reinforcing bars decrease as the strength
of concrete increases both for ACI 318-19 and IS 456:2000 code
recommendations (Fig. 3; Tables 6 and 7). If the minimum
reinforcement ratio per ACI 318-19 is adopted, as the concrete
strength increases, the cracking moment increases significantly
whereas the nominal moment increases only nominally (Gamble
2017). Both Eqs. (10b) and (11b) have Mn =M cr values greater than
1.0 [about 1.11 for Eq. (10b) and about 1.32 for Eq. (11b)]. Fig. 3
shows that using the ACI 318-19 code expression, when fc0 ¼ 25
the value of M n =M cr ¼ 1.11; however, for stronger concretes this
ratio is less than 1.0. IS 456:2000 and Eurocode 2 do not provide
enough safety margin against cracking moment. From Table 7 it

Table 6. Comparison of Mn =M cr for a slab with different f c0 and with D ¼ 175 mm, d ¼ 137.5 mm, and Grade 415 steel
Eq. (10b) Eq. (11b) ACI 318-19
f c0 (MPa) M cr (kN · m) Ast (mm ) 2
M n (kN · m) M n =M cr Ast (mm ) 2
M n (kN · m) M n =M cr Ast (mm ) 2
M n (kN · m) Mn =M cr
25 15.82 315 17.56 1.11 376 20.81 1.31 315 17.57 1.11
30 17.33 345 17.33 1.11 412 22.91 1.32 315 17.64 1.02
35 18.72 372 18.72 1.11 445 24.80 1.32 315 17.69 0.95
40 20.01 398 20.02 1.12 475 26.54 1.32 315 17.72 0.89
45 21.23 432 21.23 1.12 504 28.18 1.33 315 17.75 0.84

Table 7. Comparison of Mn =M cr for a slab with different f c0 and with D ¼ 175 mm, d ¼ 137.5 mm, and Grade 500 steel
Eq. (10b) Eq. (11b) ACI 318-19
f c0 (MPa) M cr (kN · m) Ast (mm2 ) M n (kN · m) M n =M cr Ast (mm2 ) M n (kN · m) M n =M cr Ast (mm2 ) M n (kN · m) Mn =M cr
25 15.82 261 17.56 1.11 312 20.86 1.32 315 21.07 1.33
30 17.33 286 19.27 1.11 342 22.91 1.32 315 21.17 1.22
35 18.72 309 20.85 1.11 369 24.79 1.32 315 21.24 1.13
40 20.01 330 22.32 1.12 394 26.54 1.33 315 21.29 1.06
45 21.23 351 23.70 1.12 418 28.19 1.33 315 21.33 1.00

© ASCE 06021005-6 Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.

Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005

 can be seen that similar M n =M cr values of about 1.11–1.12 are
obtained with Eq. (10b). Using Eq. (11b) we obtain values of
1.32–1.33 when Grade 500 steel is used. The Mn =Mcr values
are improved to 1.33 from 1.0 for the ACI 318-19 code when Grade
500 steel is used.
Clause 5.7.3.3.2 of AASHTO LRFD (AASHTO 2017) states
that the flexural capacity must be greater than the cracking moment
and 1.33 times the factored moment. Also, Clause 9.6.1.3 of ACI
318-19 states that “If As provided at every section is at least one-
third greater than As required by analysis, minimum flexural
reinforcement as per 9.6.1.1 and 9.6.1.2 need not be satisfied.”
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Example
Determine the minimum reinforcement of a floor slab of 3.5 × 9 m.
Use M25 concrete and Grade Fe 415 steel. The designed depth of
slab is 175 mm and the main steel consists of 10-mm bars at a spac-
ing of 150 mm. Hence, the effective depth = 140 mm.
Using the ACI 318-19 Code, the minimum steel = 0.18 ×
2
1,000=100
pffiffiffiffiffi × 175 ¼ 315 mm . The minimum steel per Eq. (11b) =
0.14ð 25=415Þð175=140Þð1,000 × 175Þ ≥ 0.0015ð1,000 × 175Þ¼
369 mm2 >263 mm2 . Using Eq. (11b) results in only 17% more steel
in this case but provides safety against sudden failure when the first
crack appears.
Summary and Conclusions
Reinforced concrete slabs should be provided with at least mini-
mum shrinkage and temperature reinforcement so that they will
not suddenly collapse when the first crack appears in concrete.
Several codes provide empirical provisions for these reinforcements.
They are dependent on a certain percentage of the area of the cross
section (ranging from 0.12% to 0.18%) and have not been changed
in the last several years. Shrinkage strain increases with time and
concrete strength. The minimum steel provision for beams (which
are also flexural members) has recently been revised in ACI 318-19
and has an expression containing the strengths of both concrete and
steel. The current minimum steel provisions for slabs in different
codes have been reviewed. A new equation taking into account the
parameters that will influence the behavior of slabs has been derived
and compared with existing code provisions. Based on this the fol-
lowing conclusions are drawn:
1. Most of the codes specify a percentage of the cross-sectional
area as the minimum steel. These percentages are not based on
any research but are empirical.
2. Reinforced concrete slabs provided with high-strength reinforce-
ment per the current minimum steel provisions, could collapse
at the cracking moment, as was seen in the parking structures
located in North Carolina, US (Gamble et al. 2019).
3. A new equation for the minimum steel of slabs has been derived,
considering all the possible factors (such as concrete strength,
yield stress of reinforcement, and the ratio of depth to effective
depth) that may affect the behavior.
4. As the steel strength increases, the required percentage of steel
decreases. The required percentage of steel is higher than that
prescribed in IS 456:2000 for most of the cases. ACI 318-19
governs when the steel strength is 500 MPa or more and the
concrete strength is less than 35 MPa.
5. The provisions in ACI 318-19 and IS 456:2000 have been com-
pared with the proposed equation as well as with that proposed
by Gamble (2017). The proposed equation provides a consistent
safeguard against sudden collapse due to cracking. This is be-
cause this proposed equation provides nominal moment capacity,
© ASCE
Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005
Mn , values greater than 1.3 times the moment causing cracking,
Mcr , for all grades of steel reinforcement.
6. It is advisable to validate the proposed equation either by
numerical modeling using finite element analysis or by con-
ducting experimental research on slabs with different concrete
and reinforcement strengths.
Data Availability Statement
All the required data is available in the paper itself.
Acknowledgments
I wish to acknowledge with thanks the help of Dr. Adil Dar, Post-
doctoral Research Fellow, Department of Civil & Environmental
Engineering, National University of Singapore, for making the
drawings in this paper. I also thank Diane Harris for fixing issues
regarding the language.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
Ac = cross-sectional area of concrete, mm2 ;
Act = area of concrete within tensile zone, mm2 ;
Ag = gross area of cross section, BD, mm2 ;
As;min = minimum flexural reinforcement for non-prestressed
concrete beam or slab, mm2 ;
Ast = area of tension steel in cross section, mm2 ;
a = depth of equivalent rectangular stress block, mm;
B = width of slab, mm;
bw = web width of T-beam, mm;
D = depth of slab, mm;
d = effective depth of T-beam or slab, mm;
f c0 = cylinder compressive strength of concrete, MPa;
fck = cube compressive strength of concrete, MPa;
f ct;eff ðtÞ = mean value of concrete tensile strength at time, t, MPa;
f r = modulus of rupture of concrete, a measure of tensile
strength, MPa;
f y = yield strength of steel reinforcement, MPa;
k = coefficient to consider reduction in restraint due to
nonuniform and self-equilibrium effect;
kc = coefficient to consider stress distribution within cross
section;
ks = parameter based on notional size of cross section s0 ;
M cr = cracking moment of section, kN · m;
M n = nominal moment capacity of section, kN · m;
R = restraint factor (may be taken as 0.2–0.4 for slabs);
s0 = notional size of cross section, mm ¼ 2Ac =u;
T 1 = difference between peak temperature and mean ambient
temperature, °C;
T 2 = long-term variation in temperature, °C;
ts = age of concrete at the beginning of drying shrinkage,
days;
u = perimeter of that part of cross section which is exposed
to drying, mm;
α = coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete (average
value 10 × 10−6 =°C);
εca ðtÞ = autogenous shrinkage strain at time, t;
εcd ðtÞ = drying shrinkage strain at time, t;
06021005-7 Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.
 εcd;0 = nominal unrestrained drying shrinkage;
εcs ðtÞ = total shrinkage strain at time, t;
εr = restrained component of thermal strain at time, t; and
εshu = average value for ultimate shrinkage strain.
References
AASHTO. 1996. AAHTO Standard specifications for highway bridges.
16th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
AASHTO. 2017. AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. 8th ed.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee" on 08/13/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Washington, DC: AASHTO.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 1989. Building code requirements for
structural concrete (ACI 318-89) (revised 1992) and commentary (ACI
318R-89) (revised 1992). ACI 318-89. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2006. Code requirements for environ-
mental engineering concrete structures. ACI 350-06. Farmington Hills,
MI: ACI.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2008a. Control of cracking in concrete
structures. ACI 224R-01. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2008b. Prediction of creep, shrinkage,
and temperature effects in concrete. ACI 209R-92. Farmington Hills,
MI: ACI.
AS (Standards Australia). 2018. Concrete structures. AS 3600. Sydney,
Australia: AS.
Babaei, K., and A. M. Fouladgar. 1997. “Solutions to concrete bridge deck
cracking.” ACI Concr. Int. 19 (7): 34–37.
Bamforth, P., D. Chisholm, J. Gibbs, and T. Harrison. 2008. Properties
of concrete for use in Eurocode 2. Concrete Center Publication No.
CCIP-029. Surrey, UK: Concrete Centre.
BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). 1983. Handbook on Indian standard
code for plain and reinforced concrete. SP 24:1983. New Delhi, India:
BIS.
BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). 2000. Indian standard code of practice
for plain and reinforced cement concrete. IS 456:2000. New Delhi,
India: BIS.
BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). 2007. Amendment No.3, Aug. 2007
to plain and reinforced concrete-code of practice. IS 456:2000. New
Delhi, India: BIS.
Carino, N. J., and J. R. Clifton. 1995. Prediction of cracking in rein-
forced concrete structures. Rep. No. NISTIR 5634. Gaithersburg,
MD: Building and Fire Research Laboratory, NIST.
© ASCE 06021005-8
Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 2021, 26(4): 06021005
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). 2004. Eurocode 2:
Design of concrete structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings. EN 1992-1-1:2004. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
Concrete Society. 2018. Early-age thermal crack control in concrete.
Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA)
Guide C766. London: Concrete Society.
Frosch, R. J., D. T. Blackman, and R. D. Radabaugh. 2003. Investigation of
bridge deck cracking in various bridge superstructure systems. Rep. No.
FHWA/IN/JTRP-2002/25, SPR 2404. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue Univ.
Gamble, W. L. 2017. “A minimum flexural reinforcement puzzle.” ACI
Concr. Int. 39 (1): 47–49.
Gamble, W. L., G. H. Reigstad, and J. Reigstad. 2019. “Brittle failures in
precast parking structures.” ACI Concr. Int. 41 (9): 32–39.
Gilbert, R. I. 1992. “Shrinkage cracking in fully restrained concrete
members.” ACI Struct. J. 89 (2): 141–149.
Hong Kong Concrete Code. 2013. Code of practice for structural use of
concrete. Hong Kong: Buildings Department.
Leonhardt, F. 1988. “Special report: Cracks and crack control in concrete
structures.” PCI J. 22 (4): 124–145.
Lunn, D., G. Lucier, S. Rizkalla, N. Cleland, and H. Gleich. 2015. “New
generation of precast concrete double tees reinforced with carbon fiber
reinforced polymer grids.” PCI J. 60 (4): 37–48. https://doi.org/10
.15554/pcij.07012015.37.48.
McCormac, J. C., and R. H. Brown. 2015. Design of reinforced concrete.
10th ed., 672. New York: Wiley.
Ng, P.-L., and A. K.-H. Kwan. 2017. “A rigorous analytical model for
shrinkage cracking of reinforced concrete.” Mag. Concr. Res. 69 (3):
120–133. https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.16.00042.
NZS (New Zealand Standards). 2006. Part 1: The design of concrete
structures, part 2: Commentary. NZS 3101:2006. Wellington,
New Zealand: NZS.
Seguirant, S. J., R. Brice, and B. Khaleghi. 2010. “Making sense of mini-
mum flexural reinforcement requirements for reinforced concrete
members.” PCI J. 55 (3): 64–85. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.06012010
.64.85.
Suprenant, B. 2016. “Beware of structural designs that use reinforcing steel
for shrinkage and temperature crack control.” The Voice Newsletter,
June 1, 2016.
Suprenant, B. A. 2002. “Shrinkage and temperature reinforcement—Simple
topic; not-so-simple design issues.” Concr. Int. 24 (9): 72–76.
Yang, Y., R. Sato, and K. Kawai. 2001. “Evaluation of autogenous shrink-
age and drying shrinkage based on bound water content of cementitious
materials.” In Proc., JSCE from Transactions. Tokyo: Japan Society of
Civil Engineers.
Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr.