applied

sciences
Article
Study on an Optimal Strut-And-Tie Model for
Concrete Deep Beams
Haitao Chen 1,2 , Lai Wang 1,2, * and Jitao Zhong 1,2, *
1 Shandong Key Laboratory of Civil Engineering Disaster Prevention and Mitigation,
Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
2 College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Shandong University of Science and Technology,
Qingdao 266590, China
* Correspondence: wlkdtjxy@sina.com (L.W.); zhongjitao@126.com (J.Z.); Tel.: +86-0532-860-57650 (L.W.)




Received: 1 August 2019; Accepted: 29 August 2019; Published: 3 September 2019


Abstract: The optimal strut-and-tie models (STMs) of two typical irregular concrete deep beams
were constructed using evolutionary structural optimization and compared with those of previous
studies. The reinforced concrete deep beam specimens were cast according to the reinforcement
designs guided by different STMs. Eight irregular concrete deep beam specimens were experimentally
investigated under stepped loading, and the differences in the amount of steel used, the load-carrying
capacity, and the failure pattern of the different specimens were analyzed. The results show that
the optimal STMs proposed in this study have significant advantages in terms of cost-effectiveness
and can simultaneously ensure the load-carrying capacity, delay the crack propagation of irregular
concrete deep beams, and reduce the amount of steel used in structural members. Therefore,
they have an important engineering application value for the reinforcement design of irregular
concrete deep beams.

Keywords: concrete deep beam; strut-and-tie model; reinforcement design; experimental study

1. Introduction
As one of the main load-carrying structural members, reinforced concrete deep beams have been
widely used in bridge structures, high-rise buildings, and underground structures. In response to the
need for door and window openings or equipment pipelines, concrete deep beams are often designed as
irregular deep beams with variable cross sections or with openings to meet the functional requirements
more economically and reasonably [1]. In general, the stress distribution is uneven inside an irregular
concrete deep beam, especially at the load points or near abrupt geometrical changes, where the stress
distribution is disorderly and dense, causing the Bernoulli hypothesis to be obviously invalid and the
design theory based on the plane section assumption to no longer be applicable. The strut-and-tie
model (STM) method can be used for the design of concrete structures, especially the design of the
disturbed stress distribution region (D-region), with very good engineering precision [2–4]. Chen et
al. [5] and Novak et al. [6] constructed optimal STMs for concrete deep beams with variable cross
sections and openings and concrete deep beams with rectangular openings according to ACI 318-02 [7].
They then tested the corresponding concrete deep beam specimens. Their results showed that the
STM method can be used for the conservative design of irregular concrete deep beams. Ye and
Meng [8] proposed a calculation method for the STM of reinforced concrete deep beams based on the
STM method in ACI 318-05 [9] and the design formulas in the Chinese Code for Design of Concrete
Structures (GB 50010-2002) [10]; their calculation results are more accurate in reference to the existing
deep beam test results in the literature. To date, the STM method has been included in the specifications
of such countries as the United States, Germany, and Canada [11–13].

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637; doi:10.3390/app9173637 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 2 of 14

STM is a type of truss-like model that conceptually simplifies a concrete structure based on the
stressing mechanism. Specifically, STM simplifies the tensile stress region as a tie, the compressive
stress region as a strut, and the connection between the tie and the strut as a nodal zone. As a result,
it not only makes full use of the tensile properties of steel rebars and the compressive properties of
concrete but also satisfactorily reflects the load transfer mechanism inside a concrete structure.
The construction of an accurate and reasonable optimal STM is not only the primary task of the
design of concrete structures using the STM method, but a better choice for the reinforcement design of
concrete structures. However, in the STM construction process, the analysis of the stress transfer in
irregular concrete deep beams, especially in their D-regions, is often difficult, inefficient, and requires
a designer’s subjective experience, resulting in a somewhat arbitrary model. That is, different designers
can construct different optimal STMs and can also design significantly different reinforcements for the
same irregular concrete deep beam member. Xie and Steven [14] proposed an evolutionary structural
optimization (ESO) method to construct the STM of a concrete member by obtaining the optimal
topology through the gradual removal of inefficient materials. Later, to address the low optimization
efficiency of the ESO method, Yang et al. [15] proposed a bidirectional ESO (BESO) method to both
remove and add material elements in the optimization process; thus method has a better optimization
efficiency but is unstable and prone to oscillation. Herranz et al. [16] improved the STM of Novak et
al. [6] by using the homogenization topology optimization method and proposed the corresponding
optimal STM, which has significant advantages in controlling the width of cracks and reducing the
amount of steel used, as demonstrated by the test results. Victoria et al. [17] generated the optimum
STM for corbels and concrete deep beams with openings using the isolines topology design (ITD)
method and verified the validity of the optimal STM with existing test data. Muttoni et al. [18] noted
that when constructing the optimal STM for concrete structures, it is necessary to repeatedly optimize
and improve the STM. They then gave suggestions on how to obtain the optimum STM. Based on
an existing STM, Ali and White [19] proposed a new STM that can minimize the amount of steel
used in concrete deep beams by adjusting the position and number of struts and ties in the STM;
they also introduced two design parameters, namely, a practical reinforcement design coefficient and
a stress redistribution coefficient. Wang et al. [20] constructed two optimal STMs for the same simply
supported concrete deep beam with an opening and designed the reinforcement using each STM.
The validities of the two optimal STMs were then verified with finite element (FE) analyses.
A properly and reasonably designed STM can effectively reduce the amount of steel used while
ensuring the load-carrying capacity of a structural member. In this study, the STMs of two typical
irregular concrete deep beams (designated as Group A and Group B) were constructed based on the FE
results and the optimal topology. Additionally, the optimal STMs for each group of irregular concrete
deep beams were compared with the STMs previously constructed by other researchers. For each
group of irregular concrete deep beams, a plain concrete deep beam specimen and a reinforced concrete
deep beam specimen according to the reinforcement design and guided by the corresponding STM
were cast and subjected to static tests. Based on the test results, the STMs for each group of irregular
concrete deep beams were comprehensively evaluated.

2. Experimental Design

2.1. Specimen Geometry

The irregular concrete deep beam in Group A is a simply supported concrete deep beam
with variable cross sections and openings and is subjected to a concentrated force at the beam top.
Its geometrical dimensions, constraints, and loads are shown in Figure 1a. The beam has a length of
1143 mm, a depth of 534 mm, and a width of 65 mm, and a design load FA of 40 kN. The irregular
concrete deep beam in Group B is a simply supported concrete deep beam with an opening in the
lower left of the beam and is subjected to a concentrated force on the right side of the beam top.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 3 of 14
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 14

Its geometrical
geometrical 9,dimensions,
dimensions,
Appl. Sci. 2019, constraints,
x FOR PEERconstraints,
REVIEW andand loads
loads areare shown
shown inin Figure1b.
Figure 1b.The
Thebeam
beamhas
hasaalength
3length of
of 14 of
1270 mm, a depth
1270 mm, a depth of 864 of 864 mm, a width of 65 mm, and a design load FB of 100 kN.
B of 100 kN.
geometrical dimensions, constraints, and loads are shown in Figure 1b. The beam has a length of
1270 mm, a depth of 864 mm, a width of 65 mm, and a design load FB of 100 kN.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 1. Geometry
Geometry andanddimensions
dimensionsofof
thethe irregular
irregular concrete
concrete deepdeep beams:
beams: (a) Group
(a) Group A beam;
A beam; (b)
(b) Group
Figure 1. Geometry and dimensions of the irregular concrete deep beams: (a) Group A beam; (b)
B beamB(unit:
Group beammm).
(unit: mm).
Group B beam (unit: mm).
2.2. STM
2.2. STMModel
ModelConstruction
Construction
2.2. STM Model Construction
The optimal
The optimalSTM STMshould
shouldfully
fullyreflect
reflect the load transfer mechanism ofstructural
a structural member.
The optimal STM should fully reflectthe
theload
load transfer mechanism
transfer mechanism ofofa astructural member.
member. To To
To determine
determine the
thethe
load load transfer path in an irregular concrete deep beam and understand the
determine loadtransfer
transferpath
path inin an
an irregular
irregular concrete deep beam
concrete deep beamand andunderstand
understand thethe
corresponding
corresponding
corresponding
stress
stress
stress
distribution
distribution
distributionand
and diffusion, atwo-dimensional
anddiffusion,
two-dimensional
diffusion, aa two-dimensional
planar
planar
planar FEMFEMFEMwas
was
was developed
developed
developed of of
of the
the the two
twotwo groups
groups
groups of
of of irregular concrete
irregularconcrete
irregular concretedeepdeep beam
deep beam examples
beam examples using
examples using ANSYS
using ANSYS software.
ANSYSsoftware.
software. The
The analysis
analysis
The analysis
results areare
results
results are shown
shownshownin Figures
in Figures
in Figures22 and
and 3.3.
2 and3.
MN
MN

MN
MN
MX
MX

MX

MX
Y Y

Y Z X YZ X

Z X (a) Z X (b)
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 2. FE
2. FE analysisresults
analysis results of
of Group
GroupAAirregular concrete
irregular deep
concrete beams:
deep (a) Principal
beams: tensiletensile
(a) Principal stress; (b)
stress;
Principal
Figure 2. FE compressive
analysis stress.
results of
(b) Principal compressive stress. Group A irregular concrete deep beams: (a) Principal tensile stress; (b)
Principal compressive stress.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 3. FE
3. FE analysis
analysis resultsofofthe
results theGroup
GroupBB irregular
irregular concrete
concretedeep
deepbeams:
beams:(a)(a)
Principal tensile
Principal stress
tensile stress
(a) (b)
(b) Principal
(b) Principal compressive
compressive stress.
stress.
Figure 3. FE analysis results of the Group B irregular concrete deep beams: (a) Principal tensile stress
(b) Principal compressive stress.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 4 of 14

It can
Appl. Sci. 2019,be
9, xseen
FOR from Figure
PEER REVIEW 2 that in the Group A irregular concrete deep beams, the principal 4 of 14
tensile stress is high at
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
the bottom of the beam midspan, the middle of the top of the opening, and the
4 of 14
lowerItleftcancorner
be seen from
of the Figure The
opening. 2 that in the
tensile Group
stress A middle
at the irregular of concrete
the top ofdeep beams, is
the opening thetransferred
principal
tensile
diagonally stress to is
thehigh
upper at the
left bottom
corner of
andthe tobeam
the midspan,
upper right the middle
corner.
It can be seen from Figure 2 that in the Group A irregular concrete deep beams, the principal The of the top
principal of the opening,
compressive and
stress
the
at lower
the loading left corner
point isof the
transferredopening.aroundThe thetensile
openingstress andat the middle
diagonally
tensile stress is high at the bottom of the beam midspan, the middle of the top of the opening, and of
toward the top
the of
two the
end opening
supports, is
transferred
the lower
compressive diagonally
left stress
corner to
of is
the the
larger upper
alongThe
opening. left corner
thetensile
transfer andpathto
stress atonthethe
the upper
left side
middle right
of theof corner.
the
top opening, Theopening
of the principal
and the is
compressive stress at
is the loading
concentrated point
at theis transferred
corners of around
the
transferred diagonally to the upper left corner and to the upper right corner. The principalopening, the opening
the concaveand diagonally
corners of toward
the variable the
two
cross end supports,
sections,
compressive and the
stress atthe compressive
supports.
the loading point stress is larger along
is transferred around thethetransfer
openingpath and on the left side
diagonally toward of the
the
opening,
two end and
It cansupports,
be seenthe from
compressive
the Figure
compressive stressin
3 that, is
theconcentrated
stress Group
is larger at the
B irregular
along the corners
concrete
transfer ofpath
deep the opening,
beams,
on theleft
the the
tensile
side concave
stress
of the is
corners
high at of
the the variable
bottom of thecross
beam sections,
and at and
the the
upper supports.
right and
opening, and the compressive stress is concentrated at the corners of the opening, the concave lower left corners of the opening, the tensile
stress
cornersItatcan
of be
thethe seen
upper fromcross
right
variable Figure
corner 3 that,
of in
the opening
sections, and the the Group
diffusesB irregular
supports. diagonally concrete
to the leftdeep beams,
upper partthe and tensile
to thestress
right
is high
support, at the
and bottom
the tensile of the
stress beam
at theand at
lower theleft upper
corner right
of theand lower
opening
It can be seen from Figure 3 that, in the Group B irregular concrete deep beams, the tensile stress left
is corners
transferred of tothe
the opening,
left support the
tensile
and the stress
bottom at the
of upper
the beam right
at corner
the lower of the
right opening
of the diffuses
opening.
is high at the bottom of the beam and at the upper right and lower left corners of the opening, the diagonally
When the to
load the
at left
the upper
top of part
the and
beam to
is
the right
transferred
tensile support,
stress theand
toatboth end
upper the tensile
supports,
right stress
mostof
corner atthe
of lower
theopening left
compressive corner
diffusesstressof isthe opening
transferred
diagonally to the isdiagonally
transferred
left upper to tothe
part the left
right
and to
support
support. and
As athe bottom
result, the of the beam
compressive at the
stress lower
is highright
at of
the the opening.
loading
the right support, and the tensile stress at the lower left corner of the opening is transferred to the leftpoint When
and the
at load
the rightat the top
support. of the
It is
beam
also
support is transferred
relatively
and the high to both
on the
bottom end
of left supports,
the side
beamand most
at the
at the lower of
lower the compressive
right
right corner
of the stress
of theWhen
opening. is
opening.transferred diagonally
the load at the top of the to
the
beam right support. and
Toisaccurately
transferred Asto aboth
result,
endthe
reasonably compressive
obtain
supports, themost ofstress
optimal theSTM, is high
the BESO
compressive at the loading
method
stress was point
usedand
is transferred at the right
todiagonally
optimize the
to
support.
topology It
of is
eachalso relatively
group of high
irregular on the
concrete leftdeepside and
beams at the
based lower
the right support. As a result, the compressive stress is high at the loading point and at the righton the right corner
aforementioned of the FE opening.
analysis [21,22].
The To accurately
corresponding
support. and
optimal
It is also relatively reasonably
high onobtain
topologies thewereleftthe optimal
obtained,
side and atas STM,
shown
the the in
lower BESO
Figure
right method ofwas
4. Figures
corner theused andto
5opening. optimize
6 show the
the topology
stress contour of
plotseach of group
the two of irregular
groups of concrete
irregular deep
concrete
To accurately and reasonably obtain the optimal STM, the BESO method was used to optimize beams
deep based
beams on
with the aforementioned
optimal topologies. FE
analysis
the topology [21,22].
Based on the The
of each corresponding
FE analysis
groupresults optimal
and theconcrete
of irregular topologies
stress contour were
deep plots obtained,
beams of the
based as
twoon shown
groupsthe of in Figure 4. Figures
irregular concrete
aforementioned FE
5deep
andbeams
analysis 6 [21,22].
show with the
The stress
optimal contour plots
topology,
corresponding the of the
optimal
optimal two
STMsgroups
topologies wereof
constructed irregular
in this
obtained, concrete
asstudy
shown areindeep
shown
Figure beams
in
4.Figure with7
Figures
optimal
and
5 and topologies.
are6 designated
show the stress as STM A-04 and
contour theof
plots STM theB-04. In the figure,
two groups the solid
of irregular line is the
concrete deep tie,beams
the dashed with
line is the
optimal strut, and the circle is the joint.
topologies.

(a) (b)
(a) of the irregular concrete deep beams: (a) Group(b)
Figure 4. Optimal topology A beam; (b) Group B
beam. 4. Optimal
Figure 4. Optimaltopology
topologyofofthe irregular
the concrete
irregular deep
concrete beams:
deep (a) Group
beams: A beam;
(a) Group (b) Group
A beam; B beam.
(b) Group B
beam.

(a) (b)
(a) plots of the Group A irregular concrete deep beams(b)
Figure 5. Stress contour with optimal
optimal topology:
topology:
(a) principal
Figure tensile
5. Stress stress;
contour (b) principal
plots principal compressive
compressive
of the Group stress.
stress.
A irregular concrete deep beams with optimal topology:
(a) principal tensile stress; (b) principal compressive stress.
Appl.
Appl.Sci.
Sci.2019,
2019,9,
9,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 55 of
of 14
14

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 5 of 14

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 14

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 6.
6. Stress
Stress contour
contour plots
plots of
of the
the Group
Group BB irregular
irregular concrete
concrete deep
deep beams
beams with
with optimal
optimal topology:
topology:
(a) Principal tensile stress; (b) Principal compressive stress.
(a) Principal tensile stress; (b) Principal compressive stress.

Based
Based onon the
the FEFE analysis
analysis results
results and
and thethe stress
stress contour
contour plots
plots of
of the
the two
two groups
groups of of irregular
irregular
concrete
concrete deep
deep beams
beams with (a)
with optimal
optimal topology,
topology, thethe optimal
optimal STMs (b)
STMs constructed
constructed in in this
this study
study are
are shown
shown
in Figure
in Figure 7 and are designated as STM A-04 and the STM B-04. In the figure, the solid line
line is the tie,
is the
Figure76.and arecontour
Stress designated
plotsas
plots of STM A-04Band
the Group the STM
irregular B-04.deep
concrete In the figure,
beams withthe solid topology:
optimal
optimal topology: tie,
the dashed
the dashed line is
line is
(a) Principal the strut,
the strut,
tensile and
stress;and the circle is the joint.
the circlecompressive
(b) Principal
Principal is the joint.stress.
compressive stress.

Based on the FE analysis results and the stress contour plots of the two groups of irregular
concrete deep beams with optimal topology, the optimal STMs constructed in this study are shown
in Figure 7 and are designated as STM A-04 and the STM B-04. In the figure, the solid line is the tie,
the dashed line is the strut, and the circle is the joint.

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 7.
7.Optimal
Figure 7.STMs
Optimal proposed
Optimal
STMs STMs in
proposed in this
this study:
proposed (a)
(a) STM
in this
study: STM A-04
study: and
and (b)
(a) STM
A-04 A-04
(b) STM
andB-04.
STM (b) STM B-04.
B-04.

Several
Several other
other researchers
researchers havehave alsoalso proposed
proposed their their own
own optimal
optimal STMsSTMs for for the
the two
two groups
groups of of
irregular concrete
irregularconcrete
concrete deep
deep beams
beams
deep investigated
investigated
beams in thisin
investigated this
study
in study
thisand usedand
study those
and used
STMsthose
used to guide
those STMs
STMs to
to guide
guide the
the reinforcement the
reinforcement
design. design.
To facilitate
reinforcement To (a)
To facilitate
a comparative
design. aa comparative
facilitateanalysis analysis
in this study,
comparative in
in this
the two
analysis optimal
this (b) STMs
study,
study, the two
two optimal
the proposedoptimal STMs
by Ley
STMs et
proposed
al. [23]
proposed for
Figureby
by
theLey et
Group al.A[23]
Ley et al.STMs
7. Optimal
for the
irregular
[23] proposed Group
concrete
for the Group A irregular
deep
in thisAstudy: beams
irregular concrete
(a) STM were
concrete deep
selected,
A-04 anddeep beams
as
(b)beams
were
shown
STM B-04.
selected,
in Figure as
8. shown
They
were selected, as shown in in
are
Figure
Figure8.
designated8. They
They are
are designated
as STM A-02 and STM
designated as
as STMA-03,
STM A-02
with
A-02 andtheSTM
and A-03,
joints
STM with
in the
A-03, the
the joints
models
with in
in the
omitted.
joints models
The
the omitted.
two optimal
models omitted. The
STMs
The
two optimal
proposed
two Several by
optimalother STMs
Maxwellproposed
and
STMsresearchers
proposed by by
BreenhaveMaxwell
[24] for
Maxwell the and Breen
Group
and Breen
also proposed B [24] for
irregular
[24]own
their the Group
concrete
for optimal
the Group B
deep
STMs irregular
beams
B irregular
for the twoconcrete
were deep
selected,
concrete
groups deepof
beams
as shown
beams
irregular were
werein selected,
Figure
selected,
concrete 9,as
deepand
as shown
shown
beams in Figure
Figure 9,
are designated
ininvestigated9,asand
andinare
STM are designated
B-02 and STM
designated
this study as
and STM
asB-03,
STM B-02
usedwith
B-02
those and
the STM
STM B-03,
joints
andSTMs in
to this
B-03, with the
model
with
guide the
the
joints
also in
in this
this model
omitted.
joints
reinforcement model also
alsoTo
design. omitted.
omitted.
facilitate a comparative analysis in this study, the two optimal STMs
proposed by Ley et al. [23] for the Group A irregular concrete deep beams were selected, as shown in
Figure 8. They are designated as STM A-02 and STM A-03, with the joints in the models omitted. The
two optimal STMs proposed by Maxwell and Breen [24] for the Group B irregular concrete deep
beams were selected, as shown in Figure 9, and are designated as STM B-02 and STM B-03, with the
joints in this model also omitted.

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure8.
8. Optimal
Optimal STMs
STMs proposed
proposed by Leyet
byLey etal.:
al.: (a)
(a) STM
STM A-02;
A-02; (b)
(b) STM
STM A-03.
A-03.

(a) (b)
Figure 8. Optimal STMs proposed by Ley et al.: (a) STM A-02; (b) STM A-03.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 6 of 14
Appl.
Appl.Sci. 2019, 9, xxFOR PEER REVIEW 666of
of 14
Appl. Sci.
Sci. 2019,
2019, 9,
9, x FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW of 14
14

(a)
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
(b)
Figure
Figure9.9.
Figure Optimal
9.Optimal STMs
OptimalSTMs by Maxwell
proposed by
STMs proposed Maxwell and
and Breen:
Breen: (a)
(a)STM
(a) STMB-02;
STM B-02;(b)
B-02; (b)STM
(b) STMB-03.
STM B-03.
B-03.

2.3.
2.3.
2.3. Reinforcement
Reinforcement
2.3.Reinforcement Design
Design
ReinforcementDesign
Design
Using
Using
Using the
the
Usingthe static
statictruss
static
thestatic trussanalysis
truss
truss analysis method,
analysis
analysis method,
method, the bar
method, the
the bar members
bar members
members and and joints
and
and joints
jointsin
joints in the
inthe
in optimal
theoptimal
the STMs
optimalSTMs
optimal STMsof
STMs of the
ofthe
of the
the
irregular
irregular concrete
concrete
irregularconcrete
irregular deep
deep
concrete deep beams
beams
deep beams were
were
beams were calculated
were calculated and
and checked
checked according
according
calculated and checked according
according to to
to the
the
to the relevant
relevant
the relevant formulas
formulas
formulasin
relevantformulas in
in
in
ACI
ACI 318-14
318-14
ACI318-14
ACI [25].
[25].
318-14[25]. The
[25]. The resulting
The resulting reinforcement
reinforcement
resulting reinforcement designs
designs are
are shown
shown
reinforcement designs are shown
shown ininin Figures
Figures
in Figures
Figures 10 10
10 and
and
10 and 11,
11,
and 11, where
where
11, where the
the
wherethe
the
reinforcement
reinforcementdesigns
reinforcement
reinforcement designsare
designs
designs aredesignated
are
are designatedconsistently
designated
designated consistently with
consistently
consistently with their
their corresponding
correspondingSTMs.
corresponding STMs.
STMs.
STMs.

(a)
(a) (b)
(b) (c)
(c)
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 10. Different reinforcement
Differentreinforcement designs
designsof
reinforcementdesigns Group
ofof Group A beam: (a) Reinforcement design A-02; (b)
Figure
Figure 10.
Figure10.
10. Different
Different reinforcement designs of Group
Group AA
A beam:
beam:
beam: (a) (a)
(a) Reinforcement
Reinforcement
Reinforcement design
design
design A-02;
A-02;
A-02; (b)
(b)
Reinforcement
(b) Reinforcement
Reinforcement design
design A-03;
designA-03; (c)
A-03;
(c) Reinforcement
(c) design
Reinforcement
Reinforcement A-04.
design
design A-04.
A-04.
Reinforcement design A-03; (c) Reinforcement design A-04.

(a)
(a) (b)
(b) (c)
(c)
(a) (b) (c)
Figure
Figure 11.
Figure 11. Differentreinforcement
11. Different
Different reinforcementdesigns
reinforcement designsof
designs ofofGroup
Group
Group B B beam:
B beam:
beam: (a) (a) Reinforcement
(a) Reinforcement
Reinforcement design
design
design B-02;B-02;
B-02; (b)
(b)
Figure
(b) 11. Different
Reinforcement reinforcement
design B-03; designs of Group B beam: (a) Reinforcement design B-02; (b)
Reinforcement
Reinforcement design
design B-03;
B-03; (c) (c)
(c) Reinforcement
Reinforcement
Reinforcement design
design
design B-04.
B-04.
B-04.
Reinforcement design B-03; (c) Reinforcement design B-04.
2.4.
2.4. Specimen Preparation and Installation
2.4. Specimen
Specimen Preparation
Preparation and and Installation
Installation
2.4. Specimen Preparation and Installation
Considering
Considering their relatively small width (65 mm),mm),the specimens were cast with C30 fine C30
aggregate
Considering their
their relatively
relatively small
small width
width (65(65 mm), the the specimens
specimens were were cast
cast with
with C30 fine
fine
concrete, which
Considering
aggregate was directly
their delivered
relatively to
small the casting
width (65 site by
mm), a special
the concrete
specimens mixer
were truck.
cast A
with hand-held
C30 fine
aggregate concrete,
concrete, which
which was was directly
directly delivered
delivered to to the
the casting
casting sitesite by
by aa special
special concrete
concrete mixer
mixer truck.
truck.
concrete
aggregate vibrator
concrete,waswhich
used for
was vibrating
directly during
deliveredthe to
casting process.
theduring
casting At
site bythea same time,
special the corresponding
concrete
A
A hand-held
hand-held concrete
concrete vibrator
vibrator was
was used
used for
for vibrating
vibrating during the
the casting
casting process.
process. At the mixer
At the same truck.
same time,
time,
concrete
Athe test
hand-held cubes were
concrete reserved
vibrator wasfor the
used subsequent
for vibratingconcrete
during material
the property
casting tests.
process. AtThe
theframeworks
same time,
the corresponding
corresponding concrete
concrete test test cubes
cubes were
were reserved
reserved forfor the
the subsequent
subsequent concrete
concrete material
material property
property
and
the reinforcement
corresponding
tests.
tests. The
The frameworks cages
concrete
frameworks and of the
test two
cubes
and reinforcement groups
were
reinforcement cages of irregular
reserved
cages of of the for
the two concrete
the deep
subsequent
two groups
groups of beam specimens
concrete
of irregular material
irregular concrete
concrete deepare shown
property
deep beam
beam
in Figures
tests. The
specimens 12
areand
frameworks 13.
shown To
and
in facilitate
Figures a
reinforcement
12 comparative
and cages
13. To of analysis,
the two
facilitate two
groups
a groups
of
comparative
specimens are shown in Figures 12 and 13. To facilitate a comparative analysis, two groups of irregular
irregular concrete
analysis, twoplain concrete
deep
groupsbeam
of
of
specimens
irregular plain concrete deep beam specimens were also prepared and are designated as specimenof
irregular are
plain shown
concrete in Figures
deep beam 12 and
specimens13. To
werefacilitate
also a
preparedcomparative
and are analysis,
designated two
as groups
specimen
irregular plain concrete deep beam specimens were also prepared and are designated as specimen
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 14

A-01 and
Appl. Sci. specimen
2019, 9, x3637 B-01.REVIEW
FOR PEER The designations of other specimens correspond to those of their respective
77 of
of 14
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, xdesigns.
reinforcement FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 14
A-01 and specimen B-01. The designations of other specimens correspond to those of their respective
deep beam
A-01 and
reinforcement specimens
specimen were
B-01.
designs. Thealso prepared of
designations and are designated
other as specimentoA-01
specimens correspond thoseand specimen
of their B-01.
respective
The designations
reinforcement designs. of other specimens correspond to those of their respective reinforcement designs.

Figure 12. Framework and reinforcement cage of the Group A irregular concrete deep beam
specimens.
Figure 12. Framework and reinforcement cage of the Group A irregular concrete deep beam
specimens.
Figure 12.
12.Framework
Frameworkand
and reinforcement
reinforcement cagecage
of theofGroup
the Group A irregular
A irregular concrete
concrete deep beamdeep beam
specimens.
specimens.

Figure 13. Framework and reinforcement cage of the Group B irregular concrete deep beam
specimens.
Figure 13.
13.Framework
Frameworkandand reinforcement
reinforcement cagecage
of theofGroup
the Group B irregular
B irregular concrete
concrete deep beamdeep beam
specimens.
specimens.
Figure
In the 13.
test,Framework and reinforcement
the specimen was loaded cage
by aof reaction
the Group B irregular
frame and a concrete
hydraulicdeep beam
jack, and a
In the test,
specimens.
displacement the specimen
gauge was usedwas loaded by
to measure a reaction
the frame andof
bottom deflection a hydraulic jack,atand
the specimen theamidspan.
displacement
The
gauge
test Inwas
data the used
were test,tothe
measure
collected by the
specimenforcebottom
was deflection
loaded
sensor ofa the
and abystatic specimen
reaction
informationframeatacquisition
the
andmidspan. The test
a hydraulic
instrument. data
jack,
The were
andtesta
loading diagram is shown in Figure 14a. Because the geometries and sizes of the two groups ofa
In
collected
displacementtheby test,
force
gauge the
sensorspecimen
was and
used ato was
static loaded
information
measure the by
bottoma reaction
acquisition
deflection frame
instrument.
of the and a
The
specimenhydraulic
test
at loading
the jack, and
diagram
midspan. The
displacement
is shown
test data deep
concrete in
were gauge
Figure was
14a.
collected
beam used
Because
by force
specimens towere
measure
the
sensor the bottom
geometries
and
different, a the
static deflection
andspecimens
sizes
information oftwo
of thewere the specimen
groups
acquisition
installed at the midspan.
ofperpendicular
concrete
instrument. deepThe The
beam
to test
the
test data
specimens
loading were
were
diagram collected
different,
is shown by
the force
in sensor
specimens
Figure 14a. and
were a
Becausestatic
installed the information
perpendicular
geometries acquisition
to
andthe
plane of the reaction frame in order to facilitate the installation of the specimens and test equipment plane
sizes instrument.
ofof the
the reaction
two The test
frame
groups of
loading
in order
concrete
and diagram
todeep the
to ensure is
facilitate
beam shown
the
specimens
efficiency in Figure
installation
and were of 14a.
the Because
specimens
safetydifferent, the
the as
of the tests, and geometries
test
specimens equipment
shown inwere and
Figure sizes
and
installedtoof the
ensure two
the
perpendicular
14b. Steel groups
efficiency
pads were placedto theof
concrete
and
plane safety
between deep
of the
the jackbeam
ofreaction
the tests,specimens
as shown
andframe
the in of
top orderwere
in
the to different,
Figure
beam 14b.
facilitate theinstallation
Steel
the
specimen specimens
pads were
as well were
asplaced
of
between installed
the between
specimens perpendicular
the
the bottom jack
and and
oftest the to
topthe
theequipment
specimen of
plane
the
and beam
to of the
ensure
and the base. reaction
specimen
the asframe
well
efficiency in
as order
between
and to
safety facilitate
the
of bottom
the the
tests,ofinstallation
the
as specimen
shown inof the
and
Figure specimens
the base.
14b. Steeland test
pads equipment
were placed
and to ensure
between the jacktheand
efficiency
the topand safety
of the beam of the tests, as
specimen asshown
well asinbetween
Figure 14b. Steel pads
the bottom were
of the placed
specimen
between
and the jack and the top of the beam specimen as well as between the bottom of the specimen
the base.
and the base.

(a) (b)
Figure 14. Diagrams
Diagrams of
(a) of (a)
(a) test
test loading
loading and
and (b)
(b) actual
actual specimen
specimen installation.
(b)
(a) (b)
Figure 14. Diagrams of (a) test loading and (b) actual specimen installation.
Figure 14. Diagrams of (a) test loading and (b) actual specimen installation.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 8 of 14

After being curried for 28 days, each specimen was subjected to stepped static loading using
a 50-t hydraulic jack at an increment of 1 kN per step, which was reduced to 0.5 kN per step after the
design load was reached. The load increment for the plain concrete specimens was 0.5 kN at each
step. Each step of the load was maintained for 0.5 min. During the test, the cracking condition and
morphology of the specimen were observed with a magnifying glass. The crack width was read using
a hand-held crack observation apparatus, and the relevant test data and phenomena were recorded.
A video camera was used to record the entire test process. To facilitate the observation of cracks in the
specimen during the test, a layer of white paint was applied onto the side surfaces of the specimen in
advance, drawing 50 × 50 mm grids.

2.5. Material Property Test

The rebars used for the specimens were of grade HRB335 steel with diameters of 8 mm, 10 mm,
and 12 mm. The tensile testing of the rebars was conducted as per the Tensile Testing of Metallic
Materials Part 1: Method of Test at Room Temperature (GB/T 228.1-2010) [26]. The test data are shown
in Table 1. Three sets of concrete test cubes (150 × 150 × 150 mm), which were reserved during the
casting of the specimens, were cured for 28 days under standard conditions and then tested according
to the Standard for Test Method of Mechanical Properties on Ordinary Concrete (GB/T 50081-2002) [27].
The measured compressive strength was 31.3 N/mm2 and the elastic modulus was 3.10 × 104 N/mm2 .

Table 1. Mechanical properties of rebars.

Diameter (mm) Yield Strength fy,m (MPa) Ultimate Strength fu,m (MPa) Yield Strain εy,m (10−6 )
8 332 420 1661
10 340 511 1701
12 497 626 2483

3. Test Results and Analysis

3.1. Crack Morphology

Figure 15 shows the crack morphology of the Group A irregular concrete deep beam specimens at
failure. In the figure, Cr1 , Cr2 , and Cr3 was the sequence of crack initiation in the specimen. When the
load at the top of the beam specimens in this group passed around the opening on both sides and
was transferred to the two end supports, because the loading point was closer to the left support the
stress on the left side of the force transfer path was relatively higher. The test phenomenon of the plain
concrete specimen A-01 is shown in Figure 15a. The cracks Cr1 and Cr2 were the fracture cracks at the
failure of the specimen, and the other cracks were those generated during the collision and removal of
the specimens after fracture. According to the failure pattern, the weak regions of the specimens in this
group were the region between the upper part of the opening and the loading point as well as the
region between the lower left corner of the opening and the left support.
Because the stress was concentrated at the corners of the opening and the loading point, along with
the proximity of the loading point to the upper left corner of the opening, the concrete between the
upper left corner of the specimen and the loading point cracked first, i.e., crack Cr1 was generated.
When the loading effect became large, the diagonal crack Cr2 was formed between the lower left
corner of the opening and the left support, and crack Cr3 was generated due to the cracking at the
bottom of the beam under tension. In the STM A-02 of this specimen, there are only two horizontal
ties (rebars) limiting the propagation of crack Cr1 , while there are no corresponding orthogonal bar
members (rebars) to limit cracks Cr2 and Cr3 . Eventually, specimen A-02 failed in shear along crack
Cr1 , as shown in Figure 15b.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 9 of 14
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 14

Cr1
Cr1

Cr2

Cr2 Cr3

(a) (b)

Cr2 Cr1 Cr2

Cr3

Cr1
Cr3

(c) (d)
Figure 15. Failure patterns of Group A irregular concrete deep beam specimens: (a) specimen
specimen A-01;
A-01;
(b) specimen A-02; (c) specimen A-03;
A-03; (d)
(d) specimen
specimen A-04.
A-04.

It
It can
can be be seen
seen from from the STM A-03
the STM A-03 that that there
there is is no
no tie
tie placed
placed at at the
the bottom
bottom of of specimen
specimen A-03. A-03.
Therefore, the concrete first cracked at the bottom of the beam
Therefore, the concrete first cracked at the bottom of the beam at the midspan, and the crack at the midspan, and the crack propagated
upward
propagated along the tie along
upward (rebar)the on tie
the(rebar)
right side of the
on the opening
right side ofuntil
the reaching
opening the until left side of the
reaching the opening,
left side
i.e., generating
of the opening,crack i.e., C r1 . Subsequently,
generating crack C crack Cr2 was created
r1. Subsequently, at the
crack Cr2upper right corner
was created at the of the
upperopening.
right
Due to the restriction of the tie (rebar) at the upper right
corner of the opening. Due to the restriction of the tie (rebar) at the upper right corner corner of the opening, crack C r2 of not
did the
continue
opening, to grow.
crack Cr2Whendid not thecontinue
loading to effect
grow. became
When large, the vertical
the loading crack
effect Cr3 was
became large,created between
the vertical the
crack
lower right corner of the opening and the bottom of the beam
Cr3 was created between the lower right corner of the opening and the bottom of the beam at the at the midspan, and the width of this
crack
midspan, increased
and the rapidly.
widthEventually,
of this crackspecimen
increased A-03 failedEventually,
rapidly. due to the fracture
specimen ofA-03
the concrete
failed due at cracks
to the
C r1 and C
fracture , asconcrete
ofr3the shown inatFigure cracks15c.Cr1 and Cr3, as shown in Figure 15c.
In
In thetheSTMSTMA-04 A-04the the barbar
members
members are aresparsely arranged
sparsely and ties
arranged and(rebars) are provided
ties (rebars) at the bottom
are provided at the
of the specimen, the upper part of the opening, and the lower
bottom of the specimen, the upper part of the opening, and the lower left corner of the opening left corner of the opening to limit or delayto
the
limitgeneration
or delay of thecracks.
generation A diagonal
of cracks.crackACr1 was firstcrack
diagonal formed Cr1 inwasthefirst
specimen
formed between
in the the upper
specimen
left cornerthe
between of the
upper opening and theofloading
left corner the opening point. andAs the thediagonal
loadingcrack point. Cr1Aspropagated
the diagonal continuously,
crack Cr1
cracks
propagated Cr2 and Cr3 were formed
continuously, cracksinCthe r2 andupper right formed
Cr3 were part of specimen
in the upper A-04, which
right parteventually
of specimen failed in
A-04,
shear
whichalong crack Cfailed
eventually r1 . Itsin failure
shearpattern
along crack was similar
Cr1. Itstofailure
that ofpattern
specimen wasA-02,
similaras shown
to thatinofFigurespecimen15d.
A-02,Figure
as shown 16 shows
in Figure the crack
15d. morphology of the Group B irregular concrete deep beam specimens at
failure.
FigureThe 16 plain
shows concrete specimen
the crack morphologyB-01 fractured
of the Groupinstantaneously
B irregularfrom the left
concrete deep support
beam diagonally
specimens
to the loading point, as shown by cracks
at failure. The plain concrete specimen r1B-01 fractured C and C r2 in Figure instantaneously from the leftgenerated
16a. The other cracks were support
due
diagonally to the loading point, as shown by cracks Cr1 and Cr2 inAccording
to the collision and removal of the specimen after fracture. Figure 16a.toThe the other
failure pattern
cracks wereof
specimen
generatedB-01, due theto theweak region and
collision of the specimens
removal of thein this group under
specimen the load According
after fracture. were the region to thebetween
failure
the
pattern of specimen B-01, the weak region of the specimens in this group under the load wereright
left support and the lower left corner of the opening, as well as the region between the upper the
corner
region of the opening
between the left andsupport
the loading and point.
the lower left corner of the opening, as well as the region
In the
between theSTMupperB-02, no full-length
right corner of the tie (rebar)
opening is placed
and the atloading
the bottom of the specimen; only a diagonal tie
point.
was placed
In the STM B-02, no full-length tie (rebar) is placed at the the
at the upper right corner of the opening in the left half of bottomspecimen,
of theand a bottle-shaped
specimen; only a
strut
diagonal(orthogonal
tie was placed grid rebars) was placed
at the upper in the of
right corner right
the half of the
opening inspecimen.
the left halfTherefore,
of the specimen,the concrete
and a
at the upper right corner of the opening on the left side of
bottle-shaped strut (orthogonal grid rebars) was placed in the right half of the specimen. Therefore, specimen B-02 cracked first due to
athe
stress concentration, and
concrete at the upper right corner crack C r1 propagated diagonally toward the loading
of the opening on the left side of specimen B-02 cracked first point. This crack was
constrained
due to a stress by the diagonal tieand
concentration, (rebar)
crack in C the upper right diagonally
r1 propagated part of the opening.
toward the Asloading
the loadpoint.increased,
This
the tensile stress at the bottom of the specimen was high, and the
crack was constrained by the diagonal tie (rebar) in the upper right part of the opening. As the load concrete at the bottom of the opening
cracked,
increased,generating
the tensilecracks stress at Cr2theand Cr3 . Specimen
bottom of the specimen B-02 failed
was high,due andto thethefracture
concrete ofatthe
theconcrete
bottom of at
the opening cracked, generating cracks Cr2 and Cr3. Specimen B-02 failed due to the fracture of the
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 10 of 14
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 14

the bottom
concrete of the
at the opening
bottom of thealong cracks
opening Cr2
along and C
cracks r2 ,and
Cr3 when
Cr3,the concrete
when at theatloading
the concrete pointpoint
the loading was
severely crushed.
was severely crushed.

Cr1
Cr1

Cr2

Cr2 Cr3

(a) (b)

Cr1

(c) (d)
16. Failure
Figure 16. Failurepatterns of the
patterns Group
of the B irregular
Group concrete
B irregular deep beams:
concrete (a) specimen
deep beams: B-01; (b) specimen
(a) specimen B-01; (b)
B-02; (c) specimen
specimen B-02; (c) B-03; (d) specimen
specimen B-03; (d) B-04
specimen B-04

The STM
The STM B-03B-03 was
was added
added with with orthogonal
orthogonal ties ties (rebars)
(rebars) at at the
the upper
upper rightright corner
corner ofof the
the opening,
opening,
and full-length ties (rebars) were placed at the bottom of the beam. However, the STM B-03 had
and full-length ties (rebars) were placed at the bottom of the beam. However, the STM B-03 had
relatively poor
relatively poorintegrity,
integrity, i.e.,i.e.,
thetheleft left
and right halveshalves
and right of the model
of the were
model only connected
were by horizontal
only connected by
ties at the bottom.
horizontal ties at theUnder
bottom.the load,
Under because thebecause
the load, weak region
the weakbetween
region thebetween
left support andsupport
the left the loading
and
point was strengthened
the loading by the corresponding
point was strengthened ties (rebars), the
by the corresponding concrete
ties (rebars), at the
the bottom
concreteofatbeam specimen
the bottom of
B-03 cracked under tension, and
beam specimen B-03 cracked under tension, crack C r1 propagated upward along the left edge of
and crack Cr1 propagated upward along the left edge ofthe bottle-shaped
strutbottle-shaped
the (orthogonal grid strutrebars) on thegrid
(orthogonal rightrebars)
side until reaching
on the the loading
right side point. As
until reaching thethe load increased,
loading point. As
the width of crack C increased continuously. Specimen B-03 eventually
the load increased,r1 the width of crack Cr1 increased continuously. Specimen B-03 eventually fractured along the crack into
the left and
fractured rightthe
along parts,
crackasinto
shown the inleftFigure 16c. parts, as shown in Figure 16c.
and right
In the STM B-04, both diagonal and
In the STM B-04, both diagonal and horizontal ties horizontal ties were
were placed
placed in in the
the weak
weak regions
regions between
between the
the
lower left corner of the opening and the left support, as well as between
lower left corner of the opening and the left support, as well as between the upper right corner of the the upper right corner of the
opening and
opening and the
theloading
loadingpointpointtotolimit limitoror
delay
delay thethe
formation
formation of cracks.
of cracks.TheThe full-length horizontal
full-length ties
horizontal
(rebars) at the bottom of the beam and the diagonal ties (rebars) extending
ties (rebars) at the bottom of the beam and the diagonal ties (rebars) extending from the right from the right support to the
upper left corner of the specimen increased the integrity of the STM. No
support to the upper left corner of the specimen increased the integrity of the STM. No visible cracks visible cracks were observed
in specimen
were observed B-04inbelow
specimen95 kN. B-04 Asbelow
the load increased,
95 kN. As thetheloadconcrete
increased,of thethespecimen
concreteatofthetheright support
specimen at
began to collapse. The specimen eventually became unstable due to a
the right support began to collapse. The specimen eventually became unstable due to a local failurelocal failure at the right support,
as the
at shownrightinsupport,
Figure 16d, which was
as shown mainly
in Figure attributed
16d, which was to the thin concrete
mainly attributed cover of the
to the thinscaled
concretespecimen.
cover
of the scaled specimen.
3.2. Mechanical Properties
3.2. Mechanical Properties
The test results of the two groups of irregular concrete deep beam specimens are shown in Table 2.
Pc is The
the cracking load
test results of of
thethe specimen;
two groups ofPdirregular
is the design loaddeep
concrete of the specimen;
beam Pu isare
specimens theshown
ultimate
in
Table 2. Pc is the cracking load of the specimen; Pd is the design load of the specimen; Pu is the
ultimate load-carrying capacity of the specimen; Cw is the maximum crack width of the specimen
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 11 of 14
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

load-carrying capacity of the specimen; C is the maximum crack width of the specimen under the
under the design load; Δd is the midspan w deflection of the bottom of the beam specimen under the
design load; ∆d is the midspan deflection of the bottom of the beam specimen under the design
design load; and Δu is the deflection of the specimen when its ultimate load-carrying capacity is
load; and ∆ is the deflection of the specimen when its ultimate load-carrying capacity is reached.
reached. Theu load-deflection curves are shown in Figure 17.
The load-deflection curves are shown in Figure 17.
Table 2. Test results of the mechanical properties of different specimens.
Table 2. Test results of the mechanical properties of different specimens.
Specimen Pc (kN) Pd (kN) Pu (kN) Cw (mm) Δd (mm) Δu (mm) Pu/Pd
Specimen Pc (kN) Pd (kN) Pu (kN) Cw (mm) ∆d (mm) ∆u (mm) Pu /Pd
A-01 5.5 40 5.5 - - 0.75 0.14
A-01
A-02 5.5
30 40
40 5.5
55 -
0.4 2.25- 0.75
5.70 0.14
1.38
A-02
A-03 30
26 40
40 55
45 0.4
0.5 2.25
2.80 5.70
4.30 1.38
1.13
A-03 26 40 45 0.5 2.80 4.30 1.13
A-04 33 40 59 0.3 2.10 5.60 1.48
A-04 33 40 59 0.3 2.10 5.60 1.48
B-01
B-01 -- 100
100 22
22 -- -- 0.60
0.60 0.22
0.22
B-02
B-02 85
85 100
100 120
120 0.3
0.3 2.69
2.69 3.98
3.98 1.20
1.20
B-03
B-03 91
91 100 136
136 0.4
0.4 2.17
2.17 3.71
3.71 1.36
B-04
B-04 95
95 100 141 -- 2.54
2.54 4.73
4.73 1.41

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 17. Load-deflection
Load-deflection curves
curves of
of the
the specimens:
specimens: (a)
(a) Group
Group A
A irregular
irregular concrete
concrete deep
deep beam
beam
specimens;
specimens; (b)
(b) Group
Group B irregular concrete deep beam specimens.

Table 22and
Table andFigure
Figure17 17
show thatthat
show except for the
except plain
for theconcrete specimens
plain concrete A-01 andA-01
specimens B-01, and
all specimens
B-01, all
had an ultimate load-carrying capacity that exceeded the corresponding
specimens had an ultimate load-carrying capacity that exceeded the corresponding design load, design load, verifying the
effectiveness
verifying of the STM design
the effectiveness of the method.
STM design In the GroupInAthe
method. irregular
Group A concrete
irregulardeep beam deep
concrete specimens,
beam
specimen A-04
specimens, had the
specimen largest
A-04 had thecracking
largestload and ultimate
cracking load andload-carrying capacity, and
ultimate load-carrying its midspan
capacity, and its
deflectiondeflection
midspan at the bottom of bottom
at the the beam ofunder
the beamthe design
underload was theload
the design smallest. Specimen
was the smallest. A-03 had the
Specimen
smallest
A-03 hadultimate load-carrying
the smallest capacity, and its
ultimate load-carrying midspan
capacity, anddeflection at thedeflection
its midspan bottom ofatthe thebeam
bottomat the
of
time of failure was the smallest. Specimen A-02 had the largest midspan
the beam at the time of failure was the smallest. Specimen A-02 had the largest midspan deflection atdeflection at the bottom of
the beam at the time of failure, followed by specimen
the bottom of the beam at the time of failure, followed by specimen A-04. The P /P of
u A-04.
d specimen A-04 was
The Pu /Pd of specimen 10%
and 35%
A-04 waslarger
10% andthan35% thatlarger
of specimens
than that A-02 and A-03, respectively.
of specimens A-02 and A-03, In the Group B irregular
respectively. concrete
In the Group B
deep beams, specimen B-04 had the largest cracking load (95 kN) and
irregular concrete deep beams, specimen B-04 had the largest cracking load (95 kN) and ultimateultimate load-carrying capacity
(141 kN), followed
load-carrying by specimen
capacity (141 kN),B-03. Additionally,
followed by specimenspecimen B-03.B-04 had the smallest
Additionally, crackB-04
specimen width under
had the
the design
smallest load,width
crack and its midspan
under deflection
the design load,at the
andbottom of the beam
its midspan was between
deflection those of
at the bottom of specimens
the beam
B-02between
was and B-03.those The ofPu/Pd of specimen
specimens B-02 andB-04 wasThe
B-03. 21%Pu/Pd
and 5% of larger
specimenthanB-04
thatwas
of specimens
21% and 5% B-02 and
larger
B-03,that
than respectively.
of specimens B-02 and B-03, respectively.
The variationtrends
The variation trendsof of
the the
load-deflection
load-deflection curves of the of
curves irregular concrete concrete
the irregular deep beam specimens
deep beam
in the two groups are essentially the same. The load-deflection curves
specimens in the two groups are essentially the same. The load-deflection curves of specimens of specimens A-02 and A-02
A-04
are closer,
and A-04 are as closer,
are load-deflection curves of curves
as are load-deflection specimens B-02 and B-02
of specimens B-04.and
At B-04.
the initial
At the stage of loading,
initial stage of
that is, from the beginning of loading to the time when cracks occurred in
loading, that is, from the beginning of loading to the time when cracks occurred in the specimens, the specimens, the concrete
resisted
the concretemost resisted
of the load,
mostresulting
of the in essentially
load, resulting thein
same load-deflection
essentially the same curves of different specimens.
load-deflection curves of
However,specimens.
different for concrete deep beams
However, in the deep
for concrete elasticbeams
stage,indue the to the large
elastic stage,shear
due to deformation
the large shear and
deformation and coexistence of the beam action and arch action, the stress in the concrete
compression zone also exhibited a nonlinear distribution. With the generation and development of
cracks, the stress in the specimen was redistributed, and the rebar stress gradually increased,
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 12 of 14

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 14

coexistence of the beam action and arch action, the stress in the concrete compression zone also
forming a “tie”, which together with the concrete soffit between the loading point and the supports
exhibited a nonlinear distribution. With the generation and development of cracks, the stress in the
at both ends constituted a “tied arch” system. The difference in the load-deflection curves of
specimen was redistributed, and the rebar stress gradually increased, forming a “tie”, which together
different specimens was caused by the different reinforcement designs guided by different STMs.
with the concrete soffit between the loading point and the supports at both ends constituted a “tied
arch”
3.3. system.
Amount The difference
of Steel Used in the load-deflection curves of different specimens was caused by the
different reinforcement designs guided by different STMs.
To better assess the economic feasibility of the reinforcement design guided by different
3.3. Amount
optimal of Steel
STMs, Used
a reinforcement design evaluation index, namely, reinforcement efficiency, was
introduced. The calculation equation is as follows:
To better assess the economic feasibility of the reinforcement design guided by different optimal
STMs, a reinforcement design evaluation index, namely,P -P reinforcement efficiency, was introduced.
The calculation equation is as follows: ρs = u 0 (1)
W
Pu −s P0
ρs = (1)
where P0 is the ultimate load-carrying capacity ofWas plain concrete specimen (kN); and Ws is the
where
amount P0ofissteel
the ultimate
used forload-carrying
the specimencapacity
(kg). of a plain concrete specimen (kN); and Ws is the amount
of steel used17
Figure forshows
the specimen (kg). of steel used and the reinforcement efficiency of each irregular
the amount
Figure 17 shows the amount
concrete deep beam specimen in the of steel
group.used and be
It can theseen
reinforcement
from Figure efficiency
18 that of foreach
the irregular
concrete deep
deep beam
beamsspecimen
in GroupinAthe group. ItA-04
specimen can be seen
used thefrom
leastFigure
amount 18 that for the
of steel irregular
(4.74 kg), which concrete
was
deepand
7% beams
26%inlessGroup
thanAthat
specimen A-04 used
of specimens A-02the and
leastA-03,
amount of steel (4.74
respectively. kg), which was
Accordingly, 7% andA-04
specimen 26%
less than that of specimens A-02 and A-03, respectively. Accordingly, specimen
had the highest reinforcement efficiency (11.29 kN/kg), which was 16% and 83% higher than that of A-04 had the highest
reinforcement
specimens A-02efficiency
and A-03, (11.29 kN/kg), which
respectively. For thewas 16% and
irregular 83% higher
concrete than that
deep beam of specimens
specimens in GroupA-02
B,
and A-03, B-04
specimen respectively.
used theFor theamount
least irregularof concrete deep
steel (4.36 kg),beam
whichspecimens
was 22%in Group
and 41% B, specimen
less than that B-04
of
used the least
specimens amount
B-02 of steel
and B-03, (4.36 kg), which
respectively. was 22%specimen
Accordingly, and 41% B-04
less than
had that of specimens
the highest B-02 and
reinforcement
B-03, respectively.
efficiency Accordingly,
(32.33 kN/kg), whichspecimen
was 84%B-04 andhad111%thehigher
highestthan
reinforcement efficiencyB-02
that of specimens (32.33andkN/kg),
B-03,
which was 84% and 111% higher than that of specimens B-02 and B-03, respectively.
respectively. That is, the rebars were most efficiently used in specimens A-04 and B-04, which were That is, the rebars
were most
thus the mostefficiently used in feasible.
economically specimens A-04 and B-04, which were thus the most economically feasible.

(a) (b)
18. Amount
Figure 18. Amount ofofsteel
steelused
usedand thethe
and reinforcement efficiency:
reinforcement (a) Group
efficiency: A irregular
(a) Group concrete
A irregular deep
concrete
beambeam
deep specimens; (b) Group
specimens; B shaped
(b) Group concrete
B shaped deep beam
concrete specimens.
deep beam specimens.

4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
An experimental study was conducted on the strut-and-tie model (STM) of irregular concrete
An experimental study was conducted on the strut-and-tie model (STM) of irregular concrete
deep beams. The main results are summarized as follows.
deep beams. The main results are summarized as follows.
The typology of STM has an important impact on the mechanical performance, failure pattern,
The typology of STM has an important impact on the mechanical performance, failure pattern,
and economic feasibility of the reinforcement design of irregular concrete deep beams. An accurate
and economic feasibility of the reinforcement design of irregular concrete deep beams. An accurate
and reasonable optimal STM plays a decisive role in improving the design and reducing the cost of
and reasonable optimal STM plays a decisive role in improving the design and reducing the cost of
irregular concrete deep beams.
irregular concrete deep beams.
The optimal STMs constructed in this study (STM A-04 and STM B-04) have significant advantages
The optimal STMs constructed in this study (STM A-04 and STM B-04) have significant
in improving the load-carrying capacity and reducing the amount of steel used in structural members;
advantages in improving the load-carrying capacity and reducing the amount of steel used in
they are also beneficial in delaying the crack formation in structural members and reducing the crack
structural members; they are also beneficial in delaying the crack formation in structural members
width. The ultimate
and reducing load-carrying
the crack width. The capacities of the two irregular
ultimate load-carrying concrete
capacities of thedeep
two beams (specimens
irregular concrete
deep beams (specimens A-04 and B-04) designed using the STMs in this study were both more than
41% higher than the corresponding design load, proving the reliability and ability of these STMs in
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 13 of 14

A-04 and B-04) designed using the STMs in this study were both more than 41% higher than the
corresponding design load, proving the reliability and ability of these STMs in generating conservative
designs, which has a practical guiding significance for the reinforcement design of irregular concrete
deep beams.
The STM design method is simple, efficient and can effectively solve the problem of the
reinforcement design for the D-regions of irregular concrete deep beams. It is suggested that
the distribution reinforcement be placed at the loading point and near the supports to not only prevent
a local failure but also be conducive to the force transfer and diffusion of the structural members while
improving their ductility.

Author Contributions: Methodology, L.W.; software, J.Z.; validation, H.C. and J.Z.; investigation, H.C.;
data curation, H.C.; writing—original draft preparation, H.C. and L.W.; writing—review and editing, H.C.;
supervision, L.W.; funding acquisition, H.C. and J.Z.
Funding: This research was funded by Projects of Science and Technology Innovation Fund for graduate students
of Shandong University of Science and Technology (No. SDKDYC180213), National Natural Science Foundation
of China (No. 51808323), Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province (No. ZR2017BEE017) and Scientific
Research Foundation of Shandong University of Science and Technology for Recruited Talents (No. 2017RCJJ049).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Smarzewski, P. Analysis of Failure Mechanics in Hybrid Fibre-Reinforced High-Performance Concrete Deep
Beams with and without Openings. Materials 2019, 12, 101. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Marti, P. Basic tools of reinforced concrete beam design. J. Am. Concr. Inst. 1985, 82, 46–56.
3. Schlaich, J.; Schäfer, K. Towards a consistent design of reinforced concrete structures. IABSE Congress Report
= Rapport du Congrès AIPC = IVBH Kongressbericht, Band (Jahr) 1984, 12, 887–894. [CrossRef]
4. Breen, J.E.; Burdet, O.; Roberts, C.; Sanders, D.; Wollmann, G. Anchorage Zone Reinforcement for Post-Tensioned
Concrete Girders; NCHRP Report; Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, USA, 1994; Available
online: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_356.pdf (accessed on 21 August 2019).
5. Chen, B.S.; Hagenberger, M.J.; Breen, J.E. Evaluation of strut-and-tie modeling applied to dapped beam with
opening. ACI Struct. J. 2002, 99, 445–450.
6. Novak, L.C.; Sprenger, H. Example 4: Deep Beam with Opening. In Examples for the Design of Structural
Concrete with Strut-and-Tie Models, Proceedings of the ACI Fall Convention, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 27 October–1
November 2002; American Concrete Institute: Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2002; pp. 129–143. Available online:
http://worldcat.org/isbn/0870310860 (accessed on 21 August 2019).
7. American Concrete Institute. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary;
ACI: Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2002.
8. Ye, L.P.; Meng, J.; Wang, Y.H. Application of Strut-and-tie Model in Design of Reinforced Concrete Deep
Beams. J. Arch. Civ. Eng. 2009, 26, 81–86.
9. American Concrete Institute. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318M–05) and Commentary;
ACI: Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2005.
10. The State Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Code for Design of Concrete Structures (GB50010-2010);
China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2010.
11. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington, DC, USA,
2007.
12. Deutsche Norm, Concrete, Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Structures-Part 1:3 Design and Construction,
Corrigenda to DIN 1045-1:2001-07; German Institute for Standardisation (Deutsches Institut für Normung):
Berlin, Germany, 2008.
13. Canadian Standards Association (CSA). Design of Concrete Structures for Buildings (CAN3-A23.3-M84); CSA:
Toronto, ON, Canada, 1984.
14. Xie, Y.M.; Steven, G.P. A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization. Comput. Struct. 1993, 49,
885–896. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3637 14 of 14

15. Yang, X.Y.; Xie, Y.M.; Steven, G.P.; Querin, O.M. Bidirectional Evolutionary Method for Stiffness Optimization.
AIAA J. 1999, 37, 1483–1488. [CrossRef]
16. Herranz, U.P.; María, H.S.; Gutiérrez, S.; Riddell, R. Optimal Strut-and-Tie Models Using the Full
Homogenization Optimization Method. ACI Struct. J. 2012, 109, 605–614.
17. Victoria, M.; Querin, O.M.; Martí, P. Generation of strut-and-tie models by topology design using different
material properties in tension and compression. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 2011, 44, 247–258. [CrossRef]
18. Muttoni, A.; Ruiz, M.F.; Niketic, F. Design versus assessment of concrete structures using stress fields and
strut-and-tie models. ACI Struct. J. 2015, 112, 605–616. [CrossRef]
19. Ali, M.A.; White, R.N. Formulation of optimal strut-and-tie models in design of reinforced concrete structures.
Spec. Publ. 2000, 193, 979–998.
20. Wang, C.; Huang, H.; Liu, B.; Xiao, J. Reinforcement design and nonlinear finite element analysis of concrete
deep beam with abnormal opening. Build. Struct. 2015, 45, 525–529.
21. Huang, X.; Xie, Y.M. Evolutionary Topology Optimization of Continuum Structures: Methods and Applications;
John Wiley and Sons Ltd.: Chichester, West Sussex, UK, 2010; pp. 17–38.
22. Sun, X.F.; Yang, J.; Xie, Y.M.; Huang, X.; Zuo, Z.H. Topology Optimization of Composite Structure Using
Bi-Directional Evolutionary Structural Optimization Method. Procedia Eng. 2011, 14, 2980–2985. [CrossRef]
23. Ley, M.T.; Riding, K.A.; Bae, S.; Breen, J.E. Experimental Verification of Strut-and-Tie Model Design Method.
ACI Struct. J. 2007, 104, 749–755.
24. Maxwell, B.S.; Breen, J.E. Experimental evaluation of strut-and-tie model applied to deep beam with opening.
ACI Struct. J. 2000, 97, 142–148.
25. American Concrete Institute. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary;
American Concrete Institute: Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2008.
26. The State Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Tensile Testing of Metallic Materials Part 1: Method of Test
at Room Temperature (GB/T228.1-2010); China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2010.
27. The State Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Standard for Test Method of Mechanical Properties on
Ordinary Concrete (GB/T50081-2002); China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2002.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).