SHEAR S T R E N G T H OF R E I N F O R C E D C O N C R E T E

DEEP BEAMS
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

By Wei Wang, ~ Da-Hua Jiang, ~ and Cheng-Tzu Thomas Hsu, 3

Member, ASCE

ABSTRACT: Formulasto predict the ultimate shear strength of reinforcedconcrete

deep beams are proposed. The derived equations are based on limit analysistheo-
rems and associatedflowrule. The lowest upper-boundsolutionis achievedthrough
the work equation. With the effective strength concept, the materialsare assumed
to be perfectly rigid-plastic. A special constant is introducedto considerthe struc-
tural effect on the effectivenessstrength factor of concrete. For deep beams, this
constant is equal to 1.25 - 0.25k, where k is the shear-span ratio of a deep beam.
The interaction between horizontal and vertical web reinforcementsis carefully
analyzed. It is found that the yield condition of horizontal and vertical web rein-
forcements depends on the ratio of +h and ~., or the degree of horizontal and
vertical web reinforcements.Comparisonswith experimentalwork are performed,
and they show good agreement between the proposed equations and test results.

INTRODUCTION

When deep beams are used, the shear strength is usually the dominant
problem in practical design. The problem has been studied by many re-
searchers both experimentally and theoretically (Klingroth 1942; De Paiva
and Siess 1965; Zsutty 1971; Smith and Fereig 1974; Nielsen 1984; Mau and
Hsu 1989). Several important test results have been reported. The theo-
retical research was more or less limited because of the complexity of the
material and structure. Finite element analysis methods can provide some
very detailed solutions; however, these solutions need more study to be
useful in practical design.
Due to these reasons, the formulas in design codes adopted by different
countries and academic institutes are empirical equations. It is necessary to
provide these formulas with an analytical interpretation and necessary im-
provement. The perfect or ideal plasticity concept has been used recently
to solve reinforced concrete problems in D e n m a r k , Switzerland, the United
States, and China (Nielsen 1984; Nielsen et al. 1978; Chen 1982; Jiang and
Shen 1986).

BASIC THEOREMS AND CONSTITUTIVE LAW OF MATERIALS

Basic Theorems of Limit Analysis
The theorems of limit analysis have been used for decades and can be
established directly for a structure with the following properties:

1. The material exhibits perfect or ideal plasticity, i.e., work hardening

~Doctoral Student, Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., New Jersey Inst. of Tech.,
University Heights, Newark, NJ 07102.
2Prof., Dept. of Struct. Engrg., Tongji Univ., Shanghai, China.
3prof. and Assoc. Chmn. for Grad. Studies, Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg.,
New Jersey Inst. of Tech., Newark, NJ.
Note. Discussion open until January 1, 1994. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The
manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on
February 5, 1992. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.
119, No. 8, August, 1993. 9 ISSN 0733-9445/93/0008-2294/$1.00 + $.15 per
page. Paper No. 3411.

2294

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 or work softening does not occur. This implies that a stress state cannot
move outside the yield surface along any loading path, so the stress vector
in the yielding zone of a structure must be tangential to the yield surface
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

whenever the plastic-strain rates are occurring.

2. The yield surface is convex, and the plastic strains can be derived from
the yield functions through the associated flow rule.
3. Changes in geometry of the structure that occur at the collapse load
are insignificant, i.e., the principle of virtual work can be used.

The collapse load of an idealized structure having the ideal properties

listed is called the limit load.

Upper-Bound Method
The structure will collapse if there is any compatible pattern of plastic
deformation for which the external forces do work that exceeds the internal
dissipation. It is a formal statement explaining that in all the possible collapse
paths, the external force will find the path that needs the minimum work
done to destroy the system.
It is also very interesting to review the lower-bound method that states
if an equilibrium of stress can be found to balance the applied load, and is
everywhere within yielding or at yielding, the structure will not collapse or
will exist just at the point of collapse. In other words, from the point of
view of a system, it will find the maximum capacity to carry the external
load while the external force always finds the most economical way to
destroy the system. In this sense, the two basic theorems explain the laws
of nature.
Theoretically, if the upper-bound solution equals the lower-bound solu-
tion, then the solution is said to be an exact one. But in practice, it is difficult
to find both lower-bound and upper-bound solutions for a structure, es-
pecially for reinforced concrete structures, though it is possible in some
special cases. Consequently, one always tries to find the lowest upper-bound
or highest lower-bound solution instead of finding both. The present analysis
is based on the upper-bound theorem.

Associated Flow Rule

The plastic-strain rate can be written as follows if the plastic-potential
function g(crq) is used (Prager 1952)

~ = ~ og(,,,j) .............................................. (1)

&rq
where ~ j = plastic-strain rate; ~ = nonnegative coefficient, which is
nonzero when plastic strain occurs; and g(%j) = a plastic-potential surface
defined in stress space, so that Og/O~u is in the normal direction of the
surface at point ~ij.
According to (1), the increment of plastic strain is defined by the gradient
of the plastic-potential surface. If the yield surface f(%j) is accepted as the
plastic-potential surface g(~q), then

~] = ~ Of((riJ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
O(Yij
The directional increment of plastic strain is the same as that of the yield
2295

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 surface in the stress space. The flow rule is called associated when the plastic-
potential surface g has the same shape as the yield surface f, as expressed
by (2).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Constitutive Law of Materials

In solving the punching-shear problems, Jiang and Shen (1986) used the
parabolic Coulomb-Mohr intrinsic curve as the yield criterion for concrete.
The parabola shown in Fig. l gives the following relation between shear
stress %t and normal stress % on the yield surface.

(rn l { "~nt~ 2
+ ~;\2f*] = 1 ......................................... (3)

where F = plastic (or effective) tensile strength of concrete; and

1
K = ~ [ m + 2(1 - V-m + 1)] ................................ (4)

f* v~f~
m - - . ............................................. (5)
f* v,f;
where f * = plastic (or effective) compressive strength of concrete; f'c and
f; = compressive and tensile strengths of concrete measured from standard
tests, respectively; and Vc and v, = plasticity or effectiveness factors for
compressive and tensile strengths, respectively.
The reason for using the plastic or reduced strength of material rather
than the ultimate strength of the material will be discussed later.
The value of K is determined by allowing the parabolic intrinsic curve to
be tangential to the Mohr's circle for simple compression. Due to symmetry,
the parabola is also tangential to the Mohr's circle for a simple tension, m
>- 3 is required to allow a Mohr's circle through the point (%, %,) =
( - ~ 0).
When a certain stress M ( % , %,) reaches the parabolic curve, the material

~nt
v c~

v\

ft - fe

FIG. 1. Failure Criterion of Concrete

2296

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 yields. The coordinates % and %, must satisfy (3). The normality condition
requires that the direction of plastic flow be normal to the yield surface.
Thus
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

s
tan c~ = 2K .............................................. (6)
Tnt

where c~ is illustrated in Fig. 1; and 0 < u <- at/2.

When the direction of plastic-strain rate is known, the values of the shear
and normal stresses on the yield surface can be uniquely determined.

% = (1 - K cot2a)ff ........................................ (7)

%, = 2 K c o t ~ f f ............................................ (8)
The corresponding principal stresses are

(J'l = [1 - K(csc c~ - 1)2]f* .................................. (9)

% = [1 - K(csc a + 1)q f* ................................. (10)

The yield locus, when drawn in a principal stress coordinate system, is
shown in Fig 2. The curves representing (9) and (10) are hyperbolic.
When the criterion is used in a plane stress condition, (9) and (10) should
be modified if c~ < % (see Fig. 1). % is in the normal direction of the
parabola at the point where the curve tangent to the Mohr's circle for simple
compression. By assuming that the minimum third principal stress is -fc*,
the yielding surface shown in Fig. 2 is simply capped, and it leads to the
following simple relations:

% = 0 .................................................... (11)

if3 = --f~ ................................................. (12)

0-1
Eq.(O)&(lo)
-- fc ft
7
%

/
FIG. 2. Yield Loci in Principal Stress Space

2297

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 In principal stress space, (11) and (12) correspond to the dotted line in Fig.
2.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

YIELD LINE
To obtain the upper-bound solution, the principle of virtual work is used
here. Formulas corresponding to the Von Mises, Tresca, and Mohr-Cou-
lomb criteria have been developed and given by Chen (1975, 1982). Here,
the energy dissipation in the yield line corresponding to parabolic failure
of plane stress or strain condition is presented in the following.
Consider a plane, homogeneous displacement field in a narrow zone of
the depth ~ between two rigid parts, parts 1 and 2; as shown in Fig. 3. The
strain rate field in the deforming zone is
~ = 0 .................................................... (13)
7.} ,
~P : g sm o~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14)

U
~/~, : 2~py : g cos c~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (15)

where v = the relative displacement rate of the parts 1 and 2; and c~ = the
direction of the displacement. The principal stress are

[ [( ]051
: ]o,j ................. (16)

Substituting (13)-(15) in (16) yields

~_] = ~ Lsin r - ' ....................................

The angle 0 from the x-axis to the first principal direction is

=y

X
Part I

P l a s t i c Sliding Pield f

FIG. 3. Sliding Field between Two Rigid Body Parts

2298

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 tan 20 = ~ - ~yP _ co, o:,an(o+ t .................. (18)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

or
(X "iT
o = ~ + g ................................................ (19)

The energy dissipation per unit volume of the concrete is

Dc(~.) = gl~ + ~3g~ ...................................... (20)
Combining (20) and (17) leads to
1 1
Oc(g~) = ~ vgl(m + sin e0 - ~ vcr3(1 - sin e0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (21)

The energy dissipation per unit volume in (21) is independent of 5, the

width of yield zone. Therefore, theoretically the plastic zone can be con-
sidered as a yield line, or a yield surface in the three-dimensional space.
According to the associated flow rule, the direction of the plastic-strain
rate is determined by the failure surface concept, or
~1 = IX'2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (22)
where u, = the direction of the plastic strain rate, or the c~ shown in Fig.
4; and % = the normal direction of the yield locus, which is c, shown in
Fig. 1. For the plane strain condition, ~2 must be more than 0, but for the

P P

~-d'

Ln/2 ~ : Ln/2 ~ ' 1

P P

FIG. 4. Failure Mechanism of Deep Beam

P P

d'

h d

Ln/2
Ln/e t~ 4 I-b
P P
FIG. 5. Geometry of Deep Beam

2299

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 plane stress condition, it may vary between rr/2 and -~r/2. W h e n % < s0,
the material fails in compression.
The energy dissipation along the yield line p e r unit length and unit thick-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ness can be obtained by substituting (9) and (10) into (21):

Dc = vf*(sin s + K cot s cos c0, ~ -> So . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (23)
vm ,
Dc = - ~ - f , (1 - sin s ) , ~ < So ........................... (24)

Eqs. (23) and (24) give the energy dissipation per unit length in a plane
stress condition. As m e n t i o n e d previously, (9) and (10) can also be applied
to a plane strain condition even when s < s0. In a plane strain condition,
the energy dissipation per unit length can be simplified as
,IT
Dc = v f * ( s i n s + K cot s cos s ) , 0<s--- 2 ................ (25)

UPPER-BOUND SOLUTION OF DEEP-BEAM SHEAR

General Solution
Consider a simply supported, reinforced concrete deep b e a m shown in
Fig. 5 with both horizontal and vertical web reinforcements of ratios Px and
py. A principal inclined crack occurs under the external load P. The angle
between the crack and the external load is 13, while the displacement di-
rection v has an angle s from the crack (see Fig. 4). In this case, the energy
dissipation along the crack or yield line can be written as

8D = Dc + Dsh + Dsv 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (26)

The total energy dissipation along the yield line contains three parts: the
contribution of concrete Dc; horizontal reinforcement Dsh; and vertical re-
inforcement Dsv. A c c o r d i n g to (13) and (14), the contribution of concrete
can be written as
vbh
Dc - f*(sin s + K cot s cos s ) , a > s 0 ............... (27)
COS [~

Dc- vbh rn
cos [3 f* 2 (1 - sin s), s < s0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (28)

where plain stress is assumed.

By considering the deformation of the reinforcement, the energy dissi-
pation of reinforcement can be expressed as

Ds~ v -~-ffoyh tan 13 c o s ( s - 13) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (29)

Dsh = v @ f h y h sin(c~ -- 13) ................................. (30)

where As~, and Ash = the areas of vertical and horizontal reinforcements;
Sv and Sh = the vertical and horizontal spacings of the reinforcement net;
fi,y andfhy = the yield strength of the bars; and v = the rate of displacement.
The rate of work done by the external load is

2300

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 5 W = Pv cos(o` - 13) ....................................... (31)
T h e w o r k e q u a t i o n c a n b e w r i t t e n as
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5W = 8D ................................................. (32)

which leads to

p = bhf* [sin a + k cot a cos ~ + t~, sin [3 cos(o` - [3)

cos 13 cos(o` - 13)

+ +h COS 13 sin(or -- [3)], w h e n o` >- % ...................... (33)

p = bhf* [2 (1 - sin a ) + ~ , sin 13 cos(o` - [3)

cos [3 c o s ( ~ - 13)

+ q~n cos 13 sin(o` - [3)], when a < % ...................... (34)

w h e r e % a n d t~h = d e g r e e s of v e r t i c a l a n d h o r i z o n t a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t s , re-
spectively.

asvfyv . ............................................... (35)

*~ - svbf*,

ashf~h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (36)
*h- shbf*,
T h e lowest u p p e r - b o u n d s o l u t i o n c a n b e o b t a i n e d b y l e t t i n g

OP
-- = 0 ................................................... (37)
oo`

and

OP
-- = 0 ................................................... (38)
0[3
S u b s t i t u t i n g (33) a n d (34) i n t o (37) a n d (38), o n e finds t h e l o w e s t u p p e r -
b o u n d s o l u t i o n as:

p = bhf7 [sin c~ + K cot o` cos o` + % sin o` c o s ( ~ - 13)

cos 13 cos(o, - 13)

+ +h COS 13 sin(o` -- [3)] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (39)

Ktan13 + / ( K tan [3"]2 - -K . .................. (40)

tano` 1 + qJh ~/\1 + ~h] + 1 + +h

q~v sec2[3 - t~h sec2(o` - 13) = sineo` - g cos/o` . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (41)

w h e n o` >- o`o a n d

P = bhf* ] m (1 - sin o`) + *v sin[3 cos(o` - [3)

cos 13 c o s ( ~ - ~) L z
2301

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 ]
+ t~h cos [3 s i n ( a - [3)J ..................................... (42)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tan [3 + G\/sec2[3 - ~2
tan a = 1 - ~2 .............................. (43)

(1 - sin o0sin c, = Oh cos2[3 - t~, cos2(a - [3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (44)

where

G = 1 2t~h .............................................. (45)

m
when a < %.
A s illustrated in Fig. 4, c, should be g r e a t e r than or equal to [3; o t h e r w i s e
the horizontal web r e i n f o r c e m e n t will be in c o m p r e s s i o n when the b e a m is
s u b j e c t e d to shearing.

Analysis of Solution
If the d e g r e e of the r e i n f o r c e m e n t in one direction is much g r e a t e r than
that of a n o t h e r direction, the steel bar in the s t r o n g e r direction m a y not
yield, and will t h e r e f o r e have no c o n t r i b u t i o n to the e n e r g y dissipation. In
this case, the solution can be simplified.

Case 1: Longitudinal Shear Reinforcement Is Overreinforced

In the case w h e r e longitudinal s h e a r r e i n f o r c e m e n t is o v e r r e i n f o r c e d , the
horizontal r e i n f o r c e m e n t m a y not yield. T h e r e f o r e , the c o n t r i b u t i o n of hor-
izontal r e i n f o r c e m e n t to the plastic e n e r g y dissipation will be zero, or
= [3 .................................................... (46)
The virtual w o r k e q u a t i o n then b e c o m e s

p = bhf* (sin c~ + K c o t ~ cos ~ + ~ , sin c0 , c~ -> % . . . . . . . . (47)

COS O~

b__~hf,*__ r., ]
p- [2 (1-sin R) + t~ sin c,] c~< % .............. (48)
COS 0/.

The lowest u p p e r - b o u n d solution is t h e r e f o r e

P
- 2~/K(1 + ,~), *~ -< 2X/K ........................ (49a)
bhf*
P m

bhf* - X / t ~ ( m - t~), - - -> t~, > 2 V ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (49b)

P m m
..................................... (49c)
bhf* 2' ~ > 2
and

/ K
cr = a r c t a n / - ~ ~ 2X/-K ......................... (50a)
Vl +4v'
2302

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 a = arcsin 1 - , ~ .....................
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

To o b t a i n the critical +h value, o n e can let a = [3 in (40) w h e n a <-- s0 or

K tan ~ K tan a K ................... (51)

tan a - 1 + ,-------~ + ~/\l--~-~h/ + 1 + 0~

R e a r r a n g i n g (51) leads to
K
tan2~ - . ..................................... (52)
1 + +h -- 2K
T h e r e f o r e (50a) a n d (50b)
K K
- . .................................... (53)
1 + +v 1 + +h - 2 K
or

t~, -> +v + 2 K for +v -< 2N/-g ............................. (54)

where qJ~, = the critical value of degree of h o r i z o n t a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t above
which the h o r i z o n t a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t will n o t yield.
W h e n ~v > 2X/K, according to (43), o n e has:
_ ~2 tan a = ~hX/secZa - 42 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (55)

B e c a u s e of ~n >- 0 a n d t a n a -> 0, the only solution of the e q u a t i o n is that

~h = 0, or +h = m/2. It m e a n s if the degree of vertical r e i n f o r c e m e n t is
greater t h a n 2X/-R, the critical value of the degree of horizontal reinforce-
m e n t ~ will be the value of m/2.
I n other words, the h o r i z o n t a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t will n o t give any c o n t r i b u t i o n
to the plastic e n e r g y dissipation w h e n it is greater t h a n or equal to either
~v + 2 K or m/2. In this case, the simplified solution of ( 4 9 a ) - ( 4 9 c ) can be
applied to the p r o b l e m .

Case 2: Vertical Stirrup Is Overreinforced

In the case w h e r e the vertical stirrup is o v e r r e i n f o r c e d , the vertical re-
i n f o r c e m e n t m a y n o t yield, i m p l y i n g that it has n o c o n t r i b u t i o n to the plastic
e n e r g y dissipation, from which
[3 = 0 .................................................... (56)
If [3 = 0, the w o r k e q u a t i o n b e c o m e s
P = bhf*(tan e~ + K cot c~ + % t a n c~), q'h <- 2X/K ......... (57a)

P = bhf* [2( 1 - sin~.

cos c~ t + q'htana
] m '
-->--~h>2X/-K
2
.... (57b)

which gives the lowest u p p e r - b o u n d s o l u t i o n as follows:

P
- 2X/K(1 + fl*h)' *h -< 2X/-R ........................ (58a)
bhf*
2303

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 P m
bhf* = X/Oh(m -- *h), ~ >- Oh > 2~/-R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (58b)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

P m m
..................................... (58c)
bhf* 2' *h > 2
The displacement vector angle is determined by

= arctan •/K
1 + t~h' Oh <- 2V'-K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (59a)

o = a csin(1 - >) '

-- -> Oh > 2"~/-K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
(59b)

COEFFICIENT v

The preceding formulas are derived by assuming that the materials are
all rigid-perfectly plastic. However, the concrete is not a perfectly plastic
material; it is a typical brittle material, and has a nonlinear ascending part
and a descending part, as shown in Fig. 6. The slope of the descending part
strongly depends on the strength of the concrete. The greater the strength
is, the larger the slope is and the smaller vc is. vc can be defined as (Exner
1979; Nielsen 1984)

Vc f, ................................... 6o,
where % = the ultimate strain of concrete under uniaxial compression.
To determine the vc value, one can have the area of the rigid-perfectly
lastic stress-strain curve equal to that of the actual stress-strain curve as
shown in Fig. 6. Because the curve of lower-strength concrete is flatter than
that of higher strength concrete, as seen in Fig. 7, the Vc value of lower-
strength concrete becomes greater than that of higher-strength concrete.
According to the statistical analysis the plastic coefficient of concrete under
uniaxial loading, vc can be expressed as (Nielsen et al. 1978)

v~ = 0.8 - f ; ( M P A )
200 ........................................ (61)

SLrain
FIG. 6. Effective Strength of Concrete

2304

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Strain
FIG. 7. Ductility of Concrete Decreases when Its Strength Increases

Oi,ultimate I~2)> I~L)

1
i(~) i(2)

~i,ultimate
FIG. 8. Stress-Strain Curve Corresponding to Different I~

In (61), the plasticity of the concrete decreases when its strength increases.
In an actual concrete structure, it is seldom to find a member subjected
to uniaxial loading. For a deep beam subjected to shear loading, the material
within the shear span is under a biaxial stress state. In this case the stress-
strain curve is very different from the one under uniaxial stress state. Thus
the plastic coefficient vv should be modified by another constant, which
depends on the parameter of the structure--for example, the shear span
ratio X of a deep beam. When the shear-span ratio is smaller, the stress
field within the shear span has a greater tendency to be compressive, or the
first invariant of stress tensor I1 is smaller. In general if/1 is smaller, the
stress-strain curve of concrete will be much flatter after it reaches its ultimate
strength (see Fig. 8). This phenomenon was first indicated by Richart et al.
(1928) with a series of triaxial compression tests of concrete. The biaxial
test of concrete by Kupfer (1969) provided the same result. The test results
indicated that the concrete behaved more plastically under compressive load
2305
J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

TABLE 1. Basic Data and Specimens Used for Comparison Pur ~oses

G E, s a h b d
Number Specimen Ph P~ [MPa (psi)] [MPa (psi)] [GPa (ksi) [MPa (psi)l [m (in.)] [m (in.)l [m (in.)] [m (in.)]
(1) ,(2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1o) (11) (12)
1 1A1-10 0.0215 0.0028 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.685(2,710) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
2 1A3-11 0.0236 0.0028 i 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.030(2,615) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
3 1A4-12 0.0246 0.0028 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 16.065(2,330) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
4 1A4-51 0.0246 0.0028 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.547(2,980) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
5 1A6-37 0.0267 0.0028 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.030(3,050) o.3o5(12.oo) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
6 2A1-38 0.0215 0.0063 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.685(3,145) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
7 2A3-39 0.0236 0.0063 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.754(2,865) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
8 2A4~40 0.0246 0.0063 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.340(2,950) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
9 2A6-41 0.0267 0.0063 i 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.134(2,775) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
I'O
lO 3A1-42 0.0215 0.0125 ! 430.94(62,500) 437,35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.410(2,670) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
O 11 3A3-43 0.0236 0.0125 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.237(2,790) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
12 3A4-45 0.0246 0.0125 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.823(3,020) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
13 3A6-46 0.0267 0.0125 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.927(2,890) 0.305(12.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0:270(11.00)
14 1B1-04 0.0215 0.0024 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 22.064(3,200) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(1&00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11,00)
15 1B3-29 0.0236 0.0024 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.099(2,915) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
16 1B4-40 0.0246 0.0024 1430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.823(3,020) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
17 1B6-31 0.0267 0.0024 i 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.513(2,830) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
18 2B1-05 0.0215 0.0042 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000)

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

19.168(2,780) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
19 2B3-06 0.0236 0.0042 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.996(2,755) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
20 2B4-07 0.0246 0.0042 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 17.479(2,535) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
21 2B4-52 0.0246 0.0042 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.788(3,160) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
22 2B6-32 0.0267 0.0042 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.754(2,865) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
23 3B1-08 0.0215 0.0063 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 16.238(2,355) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
24 3B1-36 0.0215 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.409(2,960) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
25 3B3-33 0.0236 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.996(2,755) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
26 3B4-34 0.0246 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.237(2,790) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
27 3B6-35 0.0267 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.651(2,995) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
28 4B1-09 0.0215 0.0125 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 17.100(2,480) 0.368(14.50) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
29 1C1-14 0.0215 0.0018 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.237(2,790) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
30 1C1-02 0.0236 0.0018 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.892(3,175) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

31 1C4-15 0.0246 0.0018 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 22.685(3,290) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
32 1C6-16 0.0267 0.0018 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.788(3,160) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
33 2C1-17 0~0215 0.0031 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.858(2,880) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
34 2C3-03 0.0236 0.0031 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.237(2,790) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
35 2C3-27 0.0236 0.0031 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.306(2,800) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
36 2C4-18 0.0246 0.0031 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.444(2,965) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
37 3C1-19 0.0267 0.0031 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 20.754(3,010) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
38 3C1-20 0.0215 0.0056 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.030(3,050) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
39 3C3-21 0.0236 0.0056 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) !186.17(27,000) 16.548(2,400) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14..00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
40 3C4-22 0.0246 0.0056 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.272(2,650) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
41 3C6-23 0.0267 0.0056 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.996(2,755) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
42 4C1-24 0.0215 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.582(2,840) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
43 4C3-04 0.0236 0.0063 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.548(2,690) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
44 4C3r28 0.0236 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 19.237(2,790) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
45 4C4-25 0.0246 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 18.513(2,685) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
46 4C6-26 0.0267 0.0077 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 21.237(3,080) 0.457(18.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
47 4D1-13 0.0267 0.0042 430.94(62,500) 437.35(63,430) 186.17(27,000) 16.065(2,330) 0.635(25.00) 0.343(14.00) 0.098(4.00) 0.270(11.00)
48 1-30 0.0052 0.0245 286.83(41,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 21.512(3,120) 0.254(10.00) 0.735(30.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.671(27.40)
ba 49 1-25 0.0063 0.0245 286.83(41,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 24.546(3,560) 0.254(10.00) 0:613(25.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.551(22.50)
r 0.0245 286.83(41,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 21.237(3,080) 0.254(10.00) 0.490(20.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.424(17.30)
O 50 1-20 0.0080
".4 51 1-15 0.0109 0.0245 286.83(41,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 21.237(3,080) 0.254(10.00) 0.368(15.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.301(12.30)
52 1-10 0.0173 0.0245 286.83(41,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 21.650(3,140) 0.254(10.00) 0.245(10.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.181(7.40)
53 2-30 0.0052 0.0086 286.83(41,600) 303.38(44,000) 199.96(29,000) 26.098(3,785) 0.254(10.00) 0.735(30.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.666(27.20)
54 2-25 0.0063 0.0086 286.83(41,600) 303.38(44,000) 199.96(29,000) 18.617(2,y00) 0.254(10.00) 0.613(25.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.544(22.20)
55 2-20 0.0080 0.0086 286.83(41,600) 303.38(44,000) 199.96(29,000) 19.858(2,880) 0.254(10.00) 0.490(20.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.424(17.30)
56 2-15 0.0109 0.0086 286.83(41,600) 303.38(44,000) 199.96(29,000) 22.754(3,300) 0.254(10.00) 0.368(15.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.304(12.40)
57 2-10 0.0173 0.0086 286.83(41,600) 303.38(44,000) 199.96(29,000) 20.133(2,920) 0.254(10.00) 0.245(10.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.179(7.30)

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

58 5-30 0.0114 0.0061 279.94(40,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 18.548(2,690) 0.254(10.00) 0.735(30.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.632(25.80)
59 5-25 0.0124 0.0061 279.94(40,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 19.237(2,790) 0.254(10.00) 0.613(25.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.512(20.90)
60 5-20 0.0141 0.0061 279.94(40,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 20.133(2,920) 0.254(10.00) 0.490(20.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.392(16.00)
61 5-15 0.0170 0.0061 279.94(40,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 21.926(3,180) 0.254(10.00) 0.368(15.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.274(11.20)
62 5-10 0.0234 0.0061 279.94(40,600) 279.94(40,600) 199.96(29,000) 22.547(3,270) o.254(lO.OO) 0.245(10.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.159(6.50)
63 G339.1 0.0259 0.0109 326.13(47,300) 220.64(32,000) 199.96(29,000) 19.927(2,890) 0.203(8.00) 0.221(9.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.178(7.25)
64 G339.3 0.0341 0.0109 304.76(44,200) 220.64(32,000) 199.96(29,000) 20.064(2,910) 0.203(8.00) 0.221(9.00) 0.0735(3.00) 0.178(7.25)
Note: Specimens 1-47 come from Smith and Fereig (1982), 48-62 come from Kong and Robins (1970), and 62-64 come from De Paiva and Seiss (1965).
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

TABLE 2. Ultimate Shear Strength of Deep Beam and Comparison with Theoretical Analysis
Y; Test Calculated
Number [MPa (psi)] [KN (Ib)] [KN (Ib)]
(1) (2) (11) (12) (13)
1 18.685(2,710.00) 161.240(36,350) 126.685(28,481.40) 1.273
2 18.030(2,615.00) 148.341(33,350) 123.803(27,833.49) 1.198
3 16.065(2,330.00) 141.224(31,750) 114.849(25,820.30) 1.230
4 20,547(2,980,00) 170.937(38,430) 134.601(30,261.01) 1.270
5 21.030(3,050.00) 184.080(41,385) 136.591(30,708.35) 1.348
6 21.685(3,145.00) 174.495(39,230) 168.357(37,850.02) 1.036
7 19.754(2,865.00) 170.581(38,350) 160.356(36,051.35) 1.064
8 20.340(2,950.00) 171.915(38,650) 162.854(36,612.97) 1.056
9 19.134(2,775.00) 161.907(36,400) 157.641(35,440.86) 1.027
PO
CO 10 18.410(2,670.00) 161.018(36,200) 187.996(42,265.29) 0.856
0 11 19.237(2,790.00) 172.716(38,830) 194.037(43,623.40) 0.890
CO
12 20.823(3,020.00) 178.543(40,140) 204.906(46,066.95) 0.871
13 19.927(2,890.00) 168.134(37,800) 198.871(44,710.18) 0.845
14 22.064(3,200.00) 147.451(33,150) 131.793(29,629.78) 1.119
15 20.099(2,915.00) 143.559(32,275) 124.189(27,920.25) 1.156
16 20.823(3,020.00) 140.334(31,550) 127.034(28,559.78) 1.105
17 19.513(2,830.00) 153.345(34,475) 121.841(27,392.38) 1.259
18 19.168(2,780.00) 128.992(29,000) 130.603(29,362.29) 0.988

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

19 18.996(2,755.00) 131.216(29,500) 130.013(29,229.57) 1.009
20 17.479(2,535.00) 126.101(28,350) 124.622(28,017.62) 1.012
21 21.788(3,160.00) 149.898(33,700) 139.076(31,267,16) 1,078
22 19.754(2,865.00) 145.227(32,650) 132.579(29,806.36) 1.095
23 16.238(2,355.00) 130.771(29,400) 139.768(31,422.59) 0.936
24 20.409(2,960.00) 158.949(35,735) 170.663(38,368.41) 0.931
25 18.996(2,755.00) 158.349(35,600) 163.818(36,829.62) 0.967
26 19.237(2,790.00) 155.013(34,850) 165.018(37,099.45) 0.939
27 20.651(2,995.00) 166.133(37,350) 171.788(38,621.49) 0.967
28 17.100(2,480.00) 153.456(34,500) 170.871(38,415.14) 0.898
29 19.237(2,790.00) 118.984(26,750) 108.600(24,415.41) 1.096
30 21.892(3,175.00) 123.432(27,750) 118.173(26,567.66) 1.045
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

31 22.685(3,290.00) 6.417 0.477 8.746 1.126 0.687 1.290 0.520 0.520 130.994(29,d50) 120.908(27,182.56) 1.083
32 21.788(3,160.00) 7.108 0.486 8.630 1.106 0.691 1.290 0.520 0.520 122.320(27,500) 117.812(26,486.41) 1.038
33 19.306(2,800.00) 6.095 0.892 8.289 1.048 0.703 1.290 0.520 0.520 124.099(27,900) 121.532(27,322.81) 1.021
34 19.237(2,790.00) 6.703 0.894 8.279 1.047 0.704 1.290 0.520 0.520 103.638(23,300) 121.259(27,261.54) 0.855
35 19.306(2,800.00) 6.690 0.892 8.289 1.048 0.703 1.290 0.520 0.520 115.314(25,925) 121.532(27,322.81) 0.949
36 20.444(2,965.00) 6.737 0.865 8.448 1.075 0.698 1.290 0.520 0.520 124.544(28,000) 125.948(28,315.57) 0.989
37 20.754(3,010.00) 7.288 0.859 8.491 1.082 0.696 1.290 0.520 0.520 124.099(27,900) 127.131(28,581.71) 0.976
38 21.030(3,050.00) 5.829 1.541 8.528 1.089 0.695 1.290 39.690 39.690 140.779(31,650) 148.048(33,284.10) 0.951
39 16.548(2,400.00) 7.272 1.782 7.874 9.979 0.717 1.290 33.180 33.180 124.989(28,100) 130.804(29,407.47) 0,956
40 18.272(2,650.00) 7.182 1.659 8.138 1.023 0.709 1.290 36.320 36.320 127.658(28,700) 137.372(30,883.98) 0.929
41 18.996(2,755.00) 7.635 1.625 8.244 1.041 0.705 1.290 37.280 37.280 137.221(30,850) 140.301(31,542.51) 0.978
42 19.582(2,840.00) 6.049 2.199 8.328 1.055 0.702 1.290 28.160 28.160 146.462(32,950) 159.593(35,879.61) 0.918
43 18.548(2,690.00) 6.835 1.852 8.179 1.030 0.707 1.290 33.180 33.180 128.547(28,900) 144.569(32,502.00) 0.889
44 19.237(2,790.00) 6.703 2.220 8.279 1.047 0.704 1.290 27.630 27.630 152.344(34,250) 157,937(35,507.32) 0.965
45 18.513(2,685.00) 7.131 2.265 8.174 1.029 0.707 1.290 26.470 26.470 152.566(34,300) 154.370(34,705.43) 0.988
46 21.237(3,080.00) 7.202 2.108 8.556 1.093 0.694 1.290 30.480 30.480 159.461(35,850) 167.189(37,587.35) 0.954
47 16.065(2,330.00) 9.651 1.541 7.796 9.966 0.720 1.780 37.210 37.210 87.403(19,650) 105.056(23,618.80) 0.832
48 21.512(3,120.00) 0.737 3.389 8.593 1.100 0.692 0.330 38.580 38.580 238.858(53,700) 296.803(66,727.32) 0.805
oo 49 24.546(3,560.00) 0.849 3.221 8.979 1.165 0.677 0.400 38.530 38.530 224,179(50,400) 272.181(61,191.79) 0.824
o 50 21.237(3,080.00) 1.184 3.540 8.556 1.093 0.694 0.500 35.370 35.370 189.485(42,600) 200.547(45,086.96) 0.945
r 21.650(3,080.00) 1.677 8.556 1.093 0.694 0.670 32.680 32.680 164.131(36,900) 151.749(34,116.27) 1.082
51 3.679
52 21.650(3,140.00) 2.853 3.944 8.611 1.103 0.692 1.000 20.160 20.160 89.405(20,100) 100.599(22,616.58) 0.889
53 19.203(2,785.00) 0.782 1.368 8.274 1.046 0.704 0.330 37.520 37.520 249.088(56,000) 255.410(57,421.34) 0.975
54 18.617(2,700.00) 0.978 1.412 8.189 1.032 0.707 0.400 35.910 35.910 224.179(50,400) 209.736(47,152.98) 1.069
55 19.858(2,880.00) 1.226 1.395 8.367 t.061 0.701 0.500 34.710 34.710 215.283(48,400) 173.841(39,082.89) 1.238
56 22.754(3,300.00) 1.619 1.351 8.755 1.127 0.686 0.670 33.370 33.370 139.667(31,400) 137.459(30,903.52) 1.016
57 20.133(2,920.00) 2.962 1.558 8.405 1.068 0.699 1.000 17.620 17.620 99.635(22,400) 77.389(17,398.66) 1.287

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

58 18.548(2,690.00) 1.689 0.912 8.179 1.030 0.707 0.330 31.800 31.800 239.302(53,800) 257.765(57,950.84) 0.928
59 19.237(2,790.00) 1.846 0,908 8,279 1.047 0.704 0.400 31.290 31.290 208.166(46,800) 210.996(47,436.20) 0.987
60 20.133(2,920.00) 2.095 0.906 8.405 1.068 0.699 0.500 30.370 30.370 172.582(38,800) 163.838(36,834.14) 1.053
61 21.926(3,180.00) 2.512 0.901 8.648 1.109 0.690 0.670 25.120 25.120 127.213(28,600) 118.213(26,576.70) 1.076
62 22.547(3,270.00) 3.690 0.962 8.729 1.123 0.687 1.000 9.340 9.340 77.840(17,500) 63.927(14,372.03) 1.218
63 19.927(2,890.00) 4.934 1.405 8.377 1.063 0.700 0.890 41.650 41.650 84.512(19,000) 75.171(16,899.86) 1.124
64 20.064(2,910,00) 6,049 1.400 8.396 1.066 0.700 0.890 41.800 41.800 101.414(22,800) 75.438(16,959.96) 1.344
Note: x* = ultimate shear strength from test/calculated shear stren t h ; m e a n value 2 = 1.02; and standard deviation, or,,_ ~ = 0.128.
 than under tensile load. According to the research presented in this paper,
another coefficient corresponding to the structural behavior us should be
used to modify the Vc value. The statistical analysis shows that for a deep
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

beam, v, can be expressed as follows:

us = 1.25 - 0.25)~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (62)
where )t = the shear-span ratio, which can be expressed as a / h in Fig. 4.
The final coefficient used to calculate the effective strength of concrete
is the product of these two parameters:
v = Vc'V, ................................................. (63)
f* = vf" .................................................. (64)
In general, the size effect may be taken into account. Since the beams
discussed here are of normal sizes, the size effect may be ignored in this
case.

EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
A total of 64 test specimens reported by Mau and Hsu (1989) are used
here to verify the present theoretical solution. These data were originally
reported by Smith and Vantsiotis (1982), Kong et al. (1970), and De Paiva
and Siess (1965). The test data were selected due to: (1) The test specimens
must fail in web shear mode, not in bearing or flexural modes; (2) the test
specimens must contain at least a minimum amount of transverse web re-
inforcement specified in the American Concrete Institute code ("Commen-
tary" 1989) to render the truss model applicable; (3) the span-depth ratio
a / h must be less than 2; and (4) the test specimens must be simply supported.
Details of specimens are listed in Table 1. Using the ratio of calculated
shear force to experimental shear force as an indicator, the mean and stan-
dard deviation of this ratio for the 64 specimens are 1.02 and 0.128, re-
spectively, as shown in Table 2.

CONCLUSIONS
With effective strength concept, the ultimate shear strength of a reinforced
concrete deep beam can be analyzed by assuming the materials are rigid-
perfectly plastic. The effectiveness factor is a function of both the strength
of concrete and the shear-span ratio.
The plastic coefficient corresponding to structural behavior of a deep
beam, v~, can be simplified as a function of shear span only, and can be
expressed as vs = 1.25 - 0.25X, where k is the shear-span ratio.
The contributions to the shear strength of the deep beam by horizontal
and vertical web reinforcements are a function of their ratio and the rein-
forcement degree.
The proposed formulas to predict the ultimate shear strength of reinforced
concrete deep beam were compared with the experimental results, and they
are in reasonably good agreement.
It is well known that the development of cracking that eventually leads
to failure is basically a fracture mechanics phenomenon, which is scale-
dependent. However, the present plasticity approach does not consider the
size effect, and thus the proposed formulas may be found useful for the
properly reinforced concrete deep beams with normal size.
2310

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 A P P E N D I X I. REFERENCES
"Commentary on building code requirements for reinforced concrete." (1989). A C I
318-89, Am. Concr. Inst., Detroit, Mich.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Chen, W. F. (1975). Limit analysis and soil plasticity. Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Co., Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Chert, W. F. (1982). Plasticity in reinforced concrete. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York,
N.Y.
De Paiva, H. A. R., and Siess, C. P. (1965). "Strength and behavior of deep beams
in shear." J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 91(5), 19-41.
Exner, H. (1979). "On the effectiveness factor in plastic analysis of concrete." Plas-
ticity in reinforced concrete (Reports of the Working Commission), Int. Assoc. for
Bridge and Struct. Engrg., Zurich, Switzerland, 29, 35-42.
Jiang, D. H., and Shen, J. H. (1986). "Strength of concrete slabs in punching shear."
J. Struct: Engrg., ASCE, 112(12), 2578-2591.
Klingroth, H. (1942). Versuche an Stahlbetontragwanden und deren Auswertung.
Beton u. Eisen, 91-98/108-115/130-136 (in German).
Kong, F. K., Robins, P. J., and Cole, D. F. (1970). "Web reinforcement effects on
deep beams." A C I J., 67(12), 1010-1017.
Kupfer, H. (1969). "Das Verhalten des Betons unter zweiachsiger Beanspruchung,"
Techn. Hochsch. Munchen, Lehrstuhl Massivbau Ber., 18
Mau, S. T., and Hsu, T. T. C. (1989). "Formula for shear strength of deep beams."
A C I Struct. J., Sep.-Oct., 516-532.
Nielsen, M. P. (1984). Limit analysis and concrete plasticity. Prentice-Hall, Engle-
wood Cliff, N.J.
Nielsen, M. P., Braestrup, M. W., Jensen, B. C., and Bach, F. (1978). Concrete
plasticity, beam shear, shear in joints, punching shear. Danish Soc. for Struct. Sci.
and Engrg., Copenhagen, Denmark, 129.
Prager, W. (1952). "The general theory of limit design." Proc., 8th Int. Congress
on Appl. Mech., Istanbul, Turkey, 2, 65-72.
Richartm, F. E., Brandtzaeg, A., and Brown, R. L. (1929). "A study of the failure
of concrete under combined compressive stresses. Engrg. Experiment Bulletin 185,
Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.
Smith, K. N., and Fereig, S. M. (1974). "Effect of loading and supporting conditions
on the shear strength of deep beam." Shear in reinforced concrete (SP-42), Am.
Concr. Inst., Detroit, Mich., 3,441-460.
Smith, K. N., and Vantsiotis, A. S. (1982). "Shear strength of deep beams." A C I
J., 79(3), 201-213.
Zsutty, T. C. (1971). "Shear strength prediction by analysis of existing data." A C I
J., 68(12), 138-143.

A P P E N D I X II. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper."

a shear span;
B = risk of failure;
b = width of deep beam;
De, Dsv, Dsh = energy dissipation in concrete and web reinforcements;
d= effective depth of deep beam;
d' = depth of concrete cover;
f'~,f;= compressive and tensile strength of concrete;
f*, f* = effective compressive and tensile strength of concrete;
s G = yield strength of horizontal and vertical web reinforce-
ments;
f(~u) = yield surface in stress space;
g(,~,) = plastic-potential surface;
2311

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312

 h = depth of d e e p b e a m ;
K, m = constants defined in failure criterion of concrete;
P = ultimate shear strength;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UEM - Universidade Estadual De Maringa on 09/20/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Sv~ Sh = spaces between vertical and horizontal web reinforce-

ments;
U -- velocity of plastic deformation;
Ot = n o r m a l direction of failure criterion;
O~o = arcsin ~/-K/(~/-K + 1);
= direction of yield line;
% = plastic shear-strain rate;
= width of plastic area;
5 D = total energy dissipation;
~ W = rate of w o r k done by exernal load;
= plastic-stain rate;
~, ~y = plastic n o r m a l strain rates in x- and y-directions;
~h = function oft%;
0 = angle between x-axis and first principal direction;
k = shear span ratio;
= positive constant in flow law;
P = v c. Vs;
Vc~ lit = plastic coefficients of concrete subjected to compression
and tension;
Vs = plastic coefficient corresponding to structural behavior;
1~1 ~ 1~3 = principal stresses;
(r n = normal stress;
"rnt = m a x i m u m shear strength corresponding to normal stress;
= degrees of vertical and horiontal web reinforcement; and
~ , ~ = critical value of t~, and %.

2312

J. Struct. Eng., 1993, 119(8): 2294-2312