Part 2 EN

2nd Part
Ductility and fracture of reinforced

concrete structural members
2.1 Ductility
2.
Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members
2.1
Ductility
P/Py
The basic reason most buildings do not collapse under seismic action is a material
property called ductility. It is the property of a material to deform permanently without
loosing its strength, i.e. without decreasing its ability to resist during deformation. A
piece of wire, e.g. an office clip bends but not brake. Due to ductility a system
resists mobilizing all its reserves (Fig. 2.1).
3/2
/y
Figure 2.1 Ductility of a steel beam under bending
F[kN]
Ductility of metals occurs due to the relocation of zones of molecules while they are
still bonded with tensile forces. This behaviour occurs under tensile and compressive
stress. Concrete exhibits satisfactory ductility in compression caused only by the
slide mechanism (friction) when it is simultaneously laterally under compression.
When concrete is not laterally compressed it exhibits reduced ductility since the
fracture mechanism is functioning [1] that quickly exhausts the limits of its further
deformation (Fig. 2.2). The behaviour of concrete in tension and in shear is not
ductile but brittle. Deformation mechanisms of concrete will be discussed in a
following chapter.
600
2 slide mechanism
400
200
1 fracture mechanism
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
[]
Figure 2.2 Conventional concrete under compression without (1) or with confinement (2) [14]
89
2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members
Other materials e.g. fiber-reinforced mortars, high-strength concretes (Fig. 2.3)

exhibit ductility under compression and under tension due to the slip (friction) of fibers
within the mortars matrix.
/f c
Ultra high strength Concrete

without fibers (1)
with synthetic fibers (2)
with steel fibers (3)
with a mixture of fibers (4)
1.00
0.75
(4)
0.50
(3)
(2)
0.25
(1)
0
- []
Figure 2.3 Ductility of ultra-high-strength concrete with fibers
Compressive reinforcement used in vertical members (columns, walls) and in beams

as well, increases ductility since it stabilizes the compression zone of concrete.
The soil is ductile [40] as a granular material through friction (Fig. 2.4) effect that
facilitates the smoothening of support reactions in the foundation.
F
F
Figure 2.4 Foundation soil ductility
Ductility is also assured through friction in the case of brick masonry units (Fig. 2.5)
and the pullout of metal elements from the body of concrete (Fig. 2.6).
90
2.1 Ductility
Figure 2.5 & 2.6 Brick wall inelastic deformation and reinforcement pullout from concrete
f c [N/mm]
Generally ductility is connected with energy absorption / dissipation and its

transformation to heat. When gaps occur that have to close during motion reversal
the absorbed energy is reduced (pinching). Metals do not exhibit this effect hence
there is higher energy dissipation without noticeable damages (disruption of the
continuity of structure). In high-strength concretes without confinement ductility is
limited. For this reason fiber-reinforced or even confined concrete is frequently used
(Fig. 2.7).
350
300
UHPC with steel fibers - confined
250
200
150
UHPC without steel fibers - confined
100
50
UHPC with steel fibers - not confined
C25/30
0.005
UHPC without steel fibers - not confined
0.010
0.015
0.020
- [m/m]
Figure 2.7 Ductility of ultra-high-performance concrete with fibres and confinement and cylinder failure
mode
The systems used in earthquake resistant design should have ductility since there is
always the risk of stronger action that will lead them to the inelastic region no matter
how strong we are going to make them. Then the increased energy dissipation ability
offered by ductility will protect the system from damages and collapse. There is no
reason to use even ultra-high strength components since they exhibit brittle
behaviour.
91
Reinforced concrete exhibits ductile behaviour when:

- its longitudinal reinforcement is low (under-reinforced).
- it is over-reinforced transversely (stirrups).
- it sustains limited compressive stress.
- it contains everywhere the minimum constructional reinforcement to be protected
against tensile / shear brittle failure.
- it is confined and has compressive reinforcement in highly compressed zones and
in plastic hinges regions.
- it is appropriately designed as a system, i.e. does not receive major concentrated
deformations in particular positions (ground floor pilotis, short columns).
- reinforcements are sufficiently anchored to prevent loss of concrete cover or
spalling at these positions.
Finally it should be emphasized that current understanding of earthquake resistant
design of structures is the assurance of the ductile behaviour of the system through
the definition of appropriate positions where inelastic deformations will occur. This
method is called capacity design and comprises the basis of many modern
earthquake resistant design Codes (e.g. EC 8, EAK 2003).
2000
1800
Prestress strands
1600
Prestress wires
1400
1200
1000
Prestress bars
800
Bolts
600
S500N
8.8
S500H
S420
400
Fe510
220
Fe360
200
C16/20 (With confinement)
.2.9
-10
260
S220
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Figure 2.8 Steel under tension
92
160
180
200
10
2.1 Ductility
Figure 2.8 illustrates simplified bilinear curves of structural steel, reinforcement steel
and prestressed steel of various quality classes, where relations of elasticity, strength
and ductility under tension are shown. For comparison reasons the concrete under
compression curves of Fig. 2.9 are plotted in the same scale.
-(MPa)
Ductal
200
180
160
140
120
C100/115
100
80
60
40
C30/37
C16/20 ( With confinement)
20
50
C16/20
MB(90)
MB(45)
0
10
-10
Figure 2.9 Concrete and brick wall (MB) under compression
Figure 2.9 illustrates simplified brick wall (MB) bilinear curves under various stress
directions and various quality classes of concrete curves where relations of elasticity,
strength and ductility under compression are shown.
Comparing diagrams 2.8 and 2.9 results that steel ductility under tension and
compression is a multiple of concrete ductility under compression. Concrete in
tension has practically no ductility. Particularly reinforcement steel exhibits a plastic
deformation between 25 to 100 while unconfined concrete does not practically
exceed 4 and this only under compression. If confinement is applied the internal
deformation mechanism of concrete transforms from spalling mechanism to a friction
one and the plastic deformation under compression may reach 50, i.e. increase
more than ten times. In the event of cyclic loading concrete does not return to the
initial condition since it doesnt deform plastically under tension. If it contains
reinforcement it cracks during the reversal of loading and energy dissipation is
93
reduced with the progress of cycles due to the continuously declining contribution of
concrete.
Table 2.1 Indicative property values of materials used in Fig. 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10.
Material
(GPa)
fy or fc
(MPa)
u ()
(45) brick wall
4.5
2.40
(90) brick wall
4.5
C16/20
28
16
3.5
C16/20 (With confinement)
32
23
50
C30/37
32
30
3.5
C100/115
45
100
Ductal
58
200
S220
200
220
180
Fe360
200
235
260
10
Fe510
200
355
220
11
S420
200
420
100
12
S500H
200
500
50
13
S500N
200
500
25
14
bolts 8.8
200
640
120
15
Prestress bars
200
940
50
16
Prestress wires
200
1390
70
17
Prestress strands
200
1600
60
18
GFRP
50
1500
30
19
AFRP
96
2200
24
20
CFRP
175
2800
16
Figure 2.10 illustrates simplified linear curves of fibre-reinforced polymers with

carbon-fibres (CFRP), aramid (AFRP) and glass (GFRP) where the relation between
elasticity and tensile strength is shown. In the same diagram bilinear curves of
structural steel and reinforcement steel are plotted (in the same scale) for
comparison reasons.
94
2.1 Ductility
(MPa)
3000
2800
2600
2400
CFRP
2200
2000
AFRP
1800
1600
1400
GFRP
1200
1000
800
600
S500H
50
400
Fe360
260
200
0
12
16
20
24
28
32
36
40
44
48
52
Figure 2.10 Fibre-reinforced polymers
2.2
Application of plasticity theory to reinforced concrete
The design of a structure aims the resistance to the specified in Codes service loads
with sufficient safety against potential failure. The global safety factor is expressed as
a product of load and materials factors. Considering that service loads assumptions
of Codes are generally conservative the conclusion is that structures have adequate
strength reserves under the actually imposed loads. Other factors producing strength
reserves are members design that frequently is based on stiffness criteria
(deformation, deflection) or architectural ones (binding dimensions). Strength
reserves also have as origin the fact that members design is based on envelopes of
elastic stresses from different loadings. Thus maximum stress in various crosssections does not necessarily result from the same loading and therefore do not
occur simultaneously. Statically overdetermined structures have ample strength
reserves in adjoining members that are activated when overstressed and contribute
to the increase of bearing capacity. What is frequently said that concrete is
generous is therefore directly related also to ductility that allows stress redistribution
among members..
The function of ductility in dynamic loadings is to dissipate energy preventing failure
of the structure that is actually avoiding collapse compensated with some residual
deformations. Efforts to interpret experimental results and understand the function of
ductility leaded early enough (the interwar years) to the development of the theory of
plasticity. Theory of plasticity is today fully documented theoretically and
experimentally and is the unique and basic means for the estimation of the maximum
95
(ultimate) strength of a structure and of a structural system generally. Its basic

differences from the theory of elasticity are illustrated in Figure 2.11.
Elastic stiffness
Plastic strength
My
My : Yield moment
K : Stiffness
Theory of elasticity is based on stiffness

relations
Theory of plasticity is based on strength

relations
Figure 2.11 Elastic stiffness and plastic strength
Therefore is obvious that the most basic factor of the material performance is the
available ductility. It is also essential for the interpretation of the strength of structures
under static loads and understanding the performance of structures under dynamic
stress. Historically academic studies commence with elasticity, the Hookes law and
the explicit elastic analysis of overdetermined structures. Maybe in the future studies
will start from plasticity and the essence of static and dynamic loads with emphasis
on non-linear and dynamic effects in order to understand the real performance of
structures. Calculations may be simpler in theory of elasticity but our aim should be
the deeper understanding of natural phenomena. It is the only way to get to synthesis
and through this to the solution of the practical problems.
Computers today are the most modern analysis tool. Decisions concerning geometry
and materials that will be used for the design of a project are products of a synthetic
procedure demanding knowledge, experience and imagination. The basis for
understanding the performance of a structure under increasing load is theory of
plasticity or better elasto-plasticity combining both theories. In the following a fixed on
both ends beam under uniform load will be analyzed elastically and elasto-plastically
(Fig. 2.12). Under load q fixed-end moment reaches yield limit. The load may be
further increased by 33% to reach plastic strength of the beam. At their ends occurs a
residual plastic rotation.
96
2.2 Application of plasticity theory to reinforced concrete
1.33q
DZ=-1.04 mm
plastic
rotation
hinges
DZ=-2.78 mm
'Rotations'
-0.65%
-1.58%
-10.42 kNm
residual
plastic
rotation
-10.42 kNm
'Moments'
after stress
redistribation
5.17 kNm
10.35 kNm
Figure 2.12 Elastic and elastoplastic analysis of a fixed on both ends beam
Theory of plasticity is strength and not stiffness based like theory of elasticity. Many
reasonable and useful practical conclusions resulted from this theory and these are
the following:
1. upper bound theorem: if a plastic deformation mechanism exists satisfying the

compatibility of deformations and yield conditions then corresponding load is an
upper bound for the strength of the structure (kinematic theorem)
2. lower bound theorem: if an internal forces distribution exists satisfying
everywhere the equilibrium conditions not exceeding anywhere the structural
members strength then the corresponding load is a lower bound for the strength
of the structure (static theorem).
3. Eigen stresses (temperature, prestressing) do not affect the overall strength of
the structure since sufficient ductility is available.
4. addition of new members or strengthening of the existing ones never
decreases the strength of the structure. The resistance of the strengthened
structure is not affected by the fact that strengthening took place later on preloaded members. Essential condition though is the sufficient ductility and the
insignificant increase of masses.
97
5. imposed displacements of supports (settlements etc.) do not decrease the

strength of the structure but simply result to residual deformations, assuming
these inelastic deformations vary within acceptable limits that do not result to
annihilation of ductility and lead to failure and collapse.
6. under a dynamic action (earthquake) on the structure, certain inelastic
deformations occur after the first cycles. After its readjustment and if the new
elastic limits allow it the structure will elastically vibrate within these limits without
any further plastification (shakedown).
The overall strength of a system under static load, such as gravity loads, should have
sufficient safety margins to prevent yield in several positions and form a mechanism.
In a static loading the load is a permanent force of constant value and direction, timeindependent unlike seismic action that is a cyclic imposed displacement.
If a system carrying gravity loads is subjected at the same time to a dynamic stress
(earthquake) its design should assure that members carrying significant gravity loads
will not plastify and if they plastify to have sufficient ductility margins without suffering
strength loss.
The last half of the century the estimation of the ultimate strength of reinforced
concrete structures is based on adequate truss models representing simply internal
forces equilibrium models. Concrete undertakes the function of struts and
reinforcement the function of ties. The scope of design is the selection of
reinforcement cross-sections that will fully cover the tensile forces. Usually during this
procedure neither stresses nor deformations of concrete are checked. The selection
of the exact position of the resultant force of the strut is usually based on empiric
rules (see Figure 2.13).
fc
fc
d z
Q/2
Q/2
fc
fc
fc
Figure 2.13 Struts and ties models (wire frame models or models with thickness for struts)
98
2.2 Application of plasticity theory to reinforced concrete
Nowadays we know that this method is based on lower bound theorem of the theory
of plasticity (static theorem). The validity though of this theorem depends exclusively
on the sufficient ductility of concrete.
Thuerlimann and his associates in Zurich [9, 10, 11, 12, 1, 29, 32] proved during the
period between 65 and 85 after systematic experimental research that in most cases
of practice, up to a rather high (longitudinal) reinforcement ratio, the experimentally
measured strength is really higher than the theoretical lower bound of theory of
plasticity. These cases were described as under-reinforced unlike the overreinforced where concrete fails in a brittle mode at a level lower than the limit
strength according to the theory of plasticity. The question is what is the maximum
reinforcement that distinct under-reinforced and over-reinforced members in
practice? From what factors it depends? What is the available ductility of underreinforced members and how could it be increased? What proportion of the materials
always leads to the optimal performance?
A method widely used for bending with axial force was based on the Bernoulli
hypothesis (plane sections remain plane after bending). The stress-strain curve of
concrete is non-linear (parabolic-linear) and the one of steel elastic ideally plastic.
Failure criterion for concrete is assumed the maximum contraction of the edge fiber
of compression zone. Thus two distinct cases result:
- concrete fracture after yielding of reinforcement and since the steel experienced
large deformation (ductile behaviour).
- early concrete fracture before yielding of reinforcement (brittle behaviour).
In the reality the Bernoulli hypothesis is not verified due to the evident flexural cracks
and the diagonal cracks in the event of flexural shear. Besides this model considers
only the longitudinal and not the transversal deformation of concrete that reaches
significant values in inelastic region and is critical for the strength since it affects the
deformation mechanism of concrete.
Anyway this method introduced the concept of the limitation of inelastic deformations
and exhibits satisfactory correspondence with experimental results. It offers though
no physical explanation for the concrete failure. The physical explanation may result
through the consideration of descending branches and the concentration / increase
of inelastic deformation on a thin zone where the ductility is exhausted (material
instability). Another form of stable inelastic behaviour of concrete under compression
is the one occurring under confinement or generally under lateral compression. Due
to lateral compression the deformation mechanism is transformed from a spalling
mechanism to a slip (friction) mechanism as we will see in the following sections,
99
which is stable and demonstrates significant remaining strength even for

contractions of approximately 4%, i.e. ten times more than that without confinement.
2.3
Inelastic deformation and fracture mechanism of reinforced concrete

under compression
The behaviour of concrete under tension is known that is brittle unless it is fibrereinforced. Therefore in the event of tension the failure criterion is based on the limit
stress. For the case of inelastic deformation under compression extensive
experimental research has taken place in the past where frequently also transversal
deformations have been measured even for high values of deformation.
300
100
300
300
62.5
100
300
100
100
62.5
qs
300
l qc
300
Characteristic are the experiments of Stckl [14] on cylindrical specimens with 150
mm diameter and 600 mm height under axial compression (see Figure 2.14) with or
without spiral confinement reinforcement. The spiral reinforcement was rather dense
with a pitch of 25 mm and sections diameter 5 mm. In the case of confinement the
transversal deformations of concrete were measured at the position of reinforcement
(qs) and at the region between consecutive reinforcements (qc) as well.
150
150
l
qs
qc l qc
qs
Figure 2.14 Specimens of Stckl tests with and without confinement
100
q10
2.3 Inelastic deformation and fracture mechanism of reinforced concrete under compression
20
Spalling
10
Slip
qc
10
qs
20
30
-310
40
q10
Figure 2.15 Transverse deformation of concrete with confinement vs. longitudinal contraction
20
10
Spalling
Slip
0
-310
Figure 2.16 Transverse deformation of concrete without confinement vs. longitudinal contraction
Observing experimental record lead to the conclusion that when transverse

expansion is constrained (see Figure 2.15) concrete demonstrates a completely
different inelastic deformation mechanism than that of when its laterally free (see
Figure 2.16). The ratio of transverse deformation to longitudinal contraction is in the
first case much lower.
For a better understanding of the effect two different deformation possibilities of the
internal structure of concrete are initially examined based on a model (Fig. 2.17 and
2.18). This consists of 4 grains of aggregates lying on the vertices of a rhomb and
the matrix of the bonding mortar (cement paste) filling the intermediate space which
is in charge of the equilibrium of the internal forces of the system. The inclination of
the sides of the rhomb is assumed to be everywhere 2:1.
101
Forces
Slip lines
Figure 2.17 Mechanical model of bond-slip mechanism
Forces
Spalling
Cracks
Figure 2.18 Mechanical model of spalling mechanism
In the presence of lateral restraint (confinement) a slip mechanism occurs (Fig.

2.17). In the slip interfaces occurs only slide and no dilatancy therefore the volume
remains constant.
dV
=0
V
d 1 + d 2 + d 3 = 0
d 3
= 1
d 1 + d 2
(2.1)
(2.2)
Without lateral restraint a spalling mechanism occurs (Fig. 2.18). The relationships
between deformations are derived as follows:
d 3 1
CC' / CB 1 1
=
=
A ' A / AB 2 2
d 1
4
102
(d2 = 0)
2.3 Inelastic deformation and fracture mechanism of reinforced concrete under compression
Superimposing the components of deformation for the other transverse direction

results:
d 3
=
d 1 + d 2
1
4
(d2 0)
(2.3)
3
C
C''
C'
A''
A'
Figure 2.19 Mechanical model of deformation of a spalling mechanism
The dilatancy results as:

dV
= d 1 + d 2 + d 3 = 3d 3 > 0
(2.4)
V
Therefore spalling mechanism exhibits a significant expansion in the volume of the
material.
In the experimental results diagrams of Figures 2.15 and 2.16 the lines resulting from
the sliding and spalling models are plotted as well. The agreement in the case of
sliding (Fig. 2.15) is good enough for values of deformation up to q = 20 and l =
40. The longitudinal elastic deformation of concrete of approximately 3el = 1 is
neglected.
In the second diagram (Fig. 2.16) without confinement the longitudinal elastic
deformation (compressive strain) of 3el = 1 was considered too. We may observe
that spalling mechanism based on the model describes satisfactorily the effect up to
a value of the transverse strain of q = 4. In the following chapters will be proved
that around this value the effect of concentration of deformations in a thin zone starts
therefore further measurements are not reliable due to inhomogenity of the field of
deformations.
103
2.4
Triaxial stress and residual strength
In the following concrete strength is examined. The concrete strength of cylindrical

specimens under uniaxial compression is expressed as fc. Under triaxial compression
(Fig. 2.20) we observe that the presence of the transverse compressive stress
2=1<0 increases the longitudinal resistance 3. It is experimentally confirmed (Fig.
2.21) that when transverse stress is 2<1 (stresses have sign and negative values
represent compression) the intermediate stress 2 does not significantly affect the
resistance 3 (3<2<1<0).
-3/f c
-q/f c
Figure 2.20 Triaxial strength of concrete based on experimental results

1=0
3/f c
1.0
2/f c
1.0
Figure 2.21 Concrete strength in biaxial plane stress
Above properties may be wonderfully demonstrated on a mechanical model (Fig.

2.22). It consists of 4 rods with 2:1 inclination forming a rhomb. Axes of symmetry of
the model coincide with the principal stress directions 1 and 3. The reason for this
specific orientation is that the system expands laterally to the direction with the lower
external compression. Thus is assured that the strength in the model will not depend
on the intermediate stress 2:
104
2.4 Triaxial stress and residual strength
dF3
2
a3
dF1
3
1
a1
Figure 2.22 Mechanical model for the triaxial strength of concrete
dF3
a dF3 d 3
=2 3
=
= 4,
dF1
a1 dF1 d 1
a3
= 2,
a1
(2.5)
Above expression (2.5) shows that longitudinal resistance increases by the quadruple
(in absolute values) of the lower external transverse compression.
However, except external transverse forces there are internal forces as well bonding
the aggregate grains, i.e. intermolecular attractive forces, bonding forces responsible
also for uniaxial strength (Fig. 2.23).
Resistance
to compression
Cohesion
Transverse
compression
3
1
Figure 2.23 Mechanical model for the influence of cohesion and transverse compression to the
compressive strength of concrete
105
With the increase of transverse deformation concrete microstructure experiences

successive tension failures. This leads to a decrease of the total cohesion stress and
correspondingly to the residual stress fc* (Fig. 2.24). In this occasion we talk about
concrete strength loss (descending branch). Important is that the strength component
3 due to transverse compression is not decreased by the increase of the
transversal deformation.
The residual strength under uniaxial compression fc* depends on the maximum
transverse deformation maxq=max(1,2). Thus triaxial compressive strength will be
derived by an expression of the following form:
3 = fc* (max q ) + 3
(2.6)
where fc* (max q ) > 0

To model the residual strength of concrete following simplifications are assumed:
f c*/f c
The strength loss is assumed to occur abruptly when the maximum transverse
deformation reaches the value qR=4 (Fig. 2.24). Until then the residual strength of
concrete under compression is assumed to be equal to the strength of the cylindrical
specimen fc. After the loss of strength the residual strength is assumed to be constant
with a value of fc/2 up to the transverse deformation of qo=20. These values are
documented in the next chapters through experimental results.
1.0
0.5
4=qR
-q10
20=qo
Figure 2.24 Assumption for the residual strength of concrete in relation to the transverse deformation
It remains the modeling of the elastic part of deformations.

It is assumed that concrete behaves linear-elastically up to a compressive strain of
cel=1 when inelastic deformation begins. Thus the elasticity modulus c is
approximated in relation to the compressive strength of cylinder as:
E c = fc / cel = 1000 fc
(2.7)
The transverse elastic deformation in elastic region is assumed to be equal to zero.
106
2.5 Concentration of deformations and fracture
2.5
Concentration of deformations and fracture
Various researchers tried occasionally to measure the inelastic deformations of

concrete on compressed specimens. The difficulty is that these vary from region to
region after the occurrence of the loss of strength (descending branch).
Roy and Sozen in their tests separated the middle part of the prismatic concrete
specimen in two regions for measurements. Through imposed deformation they
managed to trace even the descending branch of the F- curve (Fig. 2.25).
Since the strength loss begins regions 2 and 3 do not any longer demonstrate the
same deformation behaviour (Fig. 2.25). While region 3 exhibits further increase of
the compressive strain, in region 2 takes place a decrease of the compressive strain
(elastic unloading). From the side of mechanical behaviour we may say that inelastic
deformation of the specimen was concentrated in a region with limited dimensions
(region 3). In such cases we discuss about localization of deformations. The energy
quantity consumed in this region for the further disruption of molecular bonds comes
partly from the external force and partly from the elastic energy stored in the rest part
of the specimen as we may conclude from the observed elastic discharge in region 2.
2
3
3
2
10
20
30
40
50
-10
Figure 2.25 Roy and Sozen tests where the differentiation of deformations in regions 2 and 3 were
measured [13]
Based on a simple bar model (Fig. 2.26) we may show that strength loss constitutes
a necessary condition for the concentration of deformations.
equilibrium:
d 2 = d 3
107
material law:
d 2 = e d 2 ,
d 3 = E t d 3
substituting:
E e d 2 = E t d 3
compatibility condition:
dl = 0 = d 2 (l t ) + d 3 t
d 2
t
=
d 3
lt
Substituting :
t
t
=
Ee
lt
(2.8)
in order to get t>0, it should be Et<0 (loss of strength).
2
l
d2=d3
Ee
Et
d2
d3
Figure 2.26 Mechanical model for the concentration of deformations by the occurrence of descending
branch
The shape and the inclination of this zone, where concentration of inelastic
deformations and fracture occurs, will be investigated in the following. To simplify the
problem we assume a uniaxial homogeneous compressive stress field. The boundary
between regions 2 and 3 should be obviously an inclined deformation discontinuity
plane. The increase of inelastic deformations within zone 3 will satisfy the expression
(2.3) (d3/d1)=1/4 for the spalling mechanism while in zone 2 it should be zero. The
inclination of this deformation discontinuity plane may be graphically specified using
Mohrs circle (Fig. 2.27).
The components of deformation in zone 3 should be 1 and 3. Region 2 is assumed
to be undeformable. From the Mohrs circle results:
2
ED DC
ED DC ED
ED
=
=
= 3
=
DC DP
DC DP DP
1
DC
108
(1)
2.5 Concentration of deformations and fracture
tan =
ED
DC
(1), (2)
tan 2 =
and since
(2)
tan = 3
1
1
d 3 1
= tan =
d 1 4
1 1
=
4 2
(2.9)
/2
2=0
A
-3
1
3
- d3 = 1
d1 4
1
Figure 2.27 Deformations discontinuity plane of the spalling mechanism
Therefore Region 3 where the increase of inelastic deformations occur may be

limited by two close parallel deformation discontinuity planes with an inclination of
(equation 2.9) to the direction of compressive stress.
-3
/2
2=0
3
3
t 0
C
3
1
Figure 2.28 Concentration of inelastic deformations zone of the spalling mechanism
109
-3/f c
1.0
0.5
2 : O-A-B-C-D
3 : O-A-B-C-E-F
F
20
110
Figure 2.29 Strength loss diagram
Before the initial strength loss the whole body is governed by homogeneous strain 2
(Fig. 2.28). With the beginning of the strength loss in point B (Fig. 2.29) the inelastic
deformations increase abruptly in a thin zone (zone 3) while in the rest regions
remain constant. Thus, within this zone of concentration of deformations the total
ductility of the material is exhausted.
The slope of the strain discontinuity line is dictated by the proportion between the
inelastic deformation components (d 3 / d 1 ) .
Experimental results prove that the concentration of deformations occurs only in the
spalling mechanism. Such effect does not take place in the slide mechanism.
2.6
Confinement through transverse reinforcement
The ability of concrete to sustain inelastic deformations is of utmost practical

importance. It is a decisive factor for the ultimate strength of the structure and the
further performance of a reinforced concrete structure under seismic loads as well.
Structures with the ability of plastic deformation may undertake seismic or impact
loads without a failure risk. Even non-uniform settlements under above mentioned
conditions do not lead to failure.
In the preceding chapter it was stated that when concretes deformation occurs
through a slide mechanism it possesses the ability for large inelastic deformations.
The deformations of the spalling mechanism are concentrated in a thin zone and lead
after a relatively small inelastic compressive strain to failure.
110
2.6 Confinement through transverse reinforcement
To increase the inelastic deformation ability in practice an adequate reinforcement is

used consisting of closed stirrups. Through the restraint of transversal strain concrete
is deformed inelastically in the event of a slide (friction) mechanism. Simultaneously
the transverse compression contributes to the increase of the concretes resistance
to compression in the longitudinal direction.
The contribution of the transverse reinforcement (stirrups or circular spirals) to the
resistance of concrete is not easy to estimate. The reason is that the stress field due
to the imposed concentrated forces is complex enough and not uniform (Fig. 2.30).
The material performance in inelastic region is also complex since a descending
branch occurs (loss of strength).
Stirrup
Figure 2.30 Trus model diagram of the flow of compressive forces in a confined with ties (stirrups)
square-sectioned prism
In the following, the way the confinement through tie reinforcement (stirrups) acts will
be investigated using simple stress fields in the inner of the body.
In the angles of stirrups concentrated forces are imposed to concrete directed to the
inner of its body. These forces cause a deviation of the longitudinal compressive
forces flow field towards the inner of the body. A transverse compression is resulting
there that deviates for a second time the flow of the field towards the outer surface to
meet the next stirrup. Thus the region between two consecutive stirrups is partially
under tri-axial compression (Fig. 2.31).
The truss of Fig. 2.30 represents the axes of the resultant compressive forces.
Transforming the truss to a stress field we may estimate the concrete stresses (Fig.
2.31). Concrete is imposed horizontally to the tie (stirrups) forces and vertically to the
load resultants.
111
Load
Tie
forces
d
3
2
1
Figure 2.31 Stress field for the assessment of confinement on a square-sectioned prism with stirrups
It is important to observe (Fig. 2.31) that the tri-axial stress in the internal of a body is
caused through the deviation of the uni- or bi-axial stress field.
2.6.1
Prismatic members with confinement
From the stress field of Fig. 2.31 we may verify that the distance between
consecutive stirrups (spacing) does not affect the extent of the region under tri-axial
stress. Critical factor for the extent is the application of the horizontal forces of the
stirrups. In cylindrical test specimens where horizontal force is applied uniformly the
dimensions of the tri-axially stressed region are increased when the spacing of ties is
decreased.
Concrete strength in the bi-axially stressed region longitudinally is limited under large
inelastic deformations to the value of the residual strength (fc/2). In the transverse
direction the strength loss is expected to be less but even there the strength may be
conservatively assumed for practical applications equal to the residual strength fc/2.
For the interpretation of test results the value of the residual strength transversally
may reach the value fc. The influence of these two stress limitations to the
development of the maximum possible transversal compression may be evaluated as
follows:
112
1
'
3
1
'
Figure 2.32 Stress field on the external surface of the square-sectioned prism between two
consecutive confinement ties
The ratio of the principal stresses in the bi-axially stressed region (Fig. 2.32) is
expressed by the following equation:
1 ' sin 2
d
= tan 2 =
=
2
3 ' cos
(2 s)
(2.10)
Critical for the verification of stresses is point K where stresses are double than these
of centre M.
f d
f
d
= c Mq = 3
= c
2 (2 s)
16 s
2
(2.11)
fc
f
Mq = 1 = c
2
2
4
The two limitations are intersecting for:
1 =
(2.12)
s 1
=
(2.13)
d 2
Previous expression indicates that the maximum possible transversal compression
may not further increase for tie spacing s<d/2.
The extent of the tri-axially stressed region in the internal of the body Ac depends
on the form / arrangement of the stirrups. For square stirrups this area may be
determined (Fig. 2.33):
c = 0.20 A c = 0.20 d 2
(2.14)
For large inelastic deformations concrete cover is not taken into account due to the
early concrete spalling. Using other forms of stirrups (Fig. 2.34) the efficiency of the
tri-axial action may be increased.
113
Ac=0.20Ac=0.20d
Figure 2.33 Tri-axially stressed region in a square-sectioned prism
For the assessment of stresses similar fields may be used as in previous example.
The limitations formulae derived are also here valid if d is the distance between two
consecutive points where tie forces are applied.
Square with internal stirrup:
c / A c = 0.56
(2.15)
Hexagon:
c / A c = 0.40
(2.16)
d
d
Ac/Ac=0.56
Ac/Ac=0.40
Figure 2.34 Tri-axially stressed region for various stirrup arrangements
The mean resistance 3 of a prismatic member is expressed by the following

equation:
3 =
fc
c fsl A sl
+ 4 q
+
2
Ac
Ac
(2.17)
where the last term corresponds to the contribution of longitudinal reinforcement.

For the square-sectioned prism with square stirrups from the equilibrium of
transverse forces results:
A sq fsq
sd
Through replacement results the dimensionless form:
q =
114
(2.18)
3
= 0.5 + 0.8q + l
fc
where
(2.19)
q =
A sq fsq
s d fc
(2.20)
l =
A sl fsl
A c fc
(2.21)
and
while previously derived stress limitations are also valid:

if
s
> 0.50 :
d
q <
if
1 d

16 s
(2.22)
s
< 0.50 :
d
q < 0.25
(2.23)
Above relations may be represented graphically (Fig. 2.35).
.25
.20
.15
.10
.05
0
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
s/d
Figure 2.35 Maximum mechanical confinement ratio relation to the stirrups spacing in a square crosssection
Practical conclusions are :

- confinement through polygonal stirrups is more effective when lateral force
application points are closer. This results to the increase of the tri-axially stressed
region in the internal of the body. For this reason frequently multiple ties are used
(external stirrups with internal) or even polygonal ties (with 6-8 vertices) in
corresponding column cross-sections.
115
- lateral pressure may not exceed the limit of q=0.25 (equation 2.23) since bi-axially
stressed regions of the external surface of the prism fail. Therefore the maximum
contribution (increase) of the tri-axial stress due to the compressive resistance for a
square-sectioned prism is 3/fc = 0.800.25=0.20.
- if the distance between two consecutive ties (spacing) is greater than d/2 then
maximum limit for q is (d/s)2/16 (equation 2.22), i.e. for s/d=0.7 the maximum value
of q is 0.128 and the maximum possible contribution of the tri-axial stress effect is
3/fc=0.800.128=0.10. Therefore the distance between consecutive stirrups
should be less than d/2.
- The value of maxq is practically already very high. E.g. if fs/fc=20 then:
s = q
fc q 0.25
=
=
= 1.25%
f s 20
20
if sd=815=120 cm2 then:

As=s120=1.50 cm2,
i.e. 14/8 stirrups with 15 cm leg distance in plan view.
The contribution of tri-axial stress effect will be 3/fc =0.800.25=0.20. Therefore the
main part of the resistance (0.50.fc) is owed to the residual strength when slide
mechanism is developed.
Finally the longitudinal reinforcement contribution for a ratio of 1% is:
3
f
= 1% s = 0.20
fc
fc
The additional contribution of longitudinal reinforcement lies though on its stabilizing

action due to the lateral restraint of concrete in angles.
2.6.2
Cylindrical members with confinement
In the following stress fields in cylindrical test specimens confined with circular
stirrups are discussed. Unlike square-sectioned prisms, critical for the extent of the
tri-axially stressed region (Fig. 2.36) of cylindrical members is the distance between
(spacing) consecutive stirrups (pitch). The area of the region is increased with the
decrease of spacing.
The transverse stress q results from the equilibrium:
116
q =
A sq f sq
(2.24)
s2
sd
4
4q
q
d
3
1
Figure 2.36 Stress field for the assessment of confinement in a cylindrical test specimen with stirrups
The ratio of the area of the tri-axially stressed region to the total area is:
c
2
= [(d s ) d] = (1 s / d) 2
Ac
(2.25)
From the previous equation results the dimensionless mean resistance (strength)
3
(1 s d) 2
= 0.5 + 4 q
+ l
fc
1 s ( 4d)
(2.26)
where q, l are the same expressions used in equations 2.20 and 2.21.
Critical for the verification of stresses is point P (Fig. 2.36) where stress field is uniaxial. This is the reason why transverse compression may not exceed the residual
stress. The maximum transverse reinforcement ratio for square-sectioned prisms
may be consequently calculated as follows:
q =
q fc
fc
=
2 1 s (4d)
(2.27)
therefore:
q < 0.5 s (8d)
(2.28)
117
The total mean resistance (strength) of prismatic and cylindrical test specimens is
graphically represented in relation to the transverse reinforcement for various values
of stirrups spacing ratio s/d (1/2, 1/4 and 1/8). In the diagram of Figure 2.38 stress
limitations are also considered while the contribution of longitudinal reinforcement is
not taken into account.
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
s/d
Figure 2.37 Maximum mechanical confinement ratio stirrups spacing relation in cylindrical test
specimens
Figure 2.38 illustrates also that the resistance (strength) increase due to tri-axial
stress in cylindrical specimens with the same transverse reinforcement ratio q
depends from the s/d ratio as well.
3/f c
2.4
2.0
1/8
1.6
1/4
1.2
1/2
1.0
1/2
.8
fc
1/2
1/2
.5
.4
Residual Strength
.1
.3
.2
fc / 2
.5
.4
q
Figure 2.38 Strength of prismatic and cylindrical test specimens confined with stirrups
118
General conclusions are: concrete compressive resistance (strength) in large

deformations results partially from its residual strength and partially from the
contribution of tri-axial stress. Through the proposed models quantitative indications
for these two effects may result. For the experimental confirmation square-sectioned
specimen tests were evaluated and the contribution of the residual strength varied
between 80 to 90% of the total strength, while in cylindrical specimens tested this
ratio was approximately 45%. In both cases agreement with experimental results was
very good. A further modeling confirmation is the verification of stress limitations
resulting to the stirrup spacing (s/d) and quantity limitation. When above restrictive
conditions where not followed concrete ductility proved to be limited. Experimentally
has been proved that the minimum transverse confinement reinforcement for the
occurrence of a slide (friction) mechanism is approximately q=0.05.
2.7
Deformation and fracture of the compression zone
In the next chapters will be discussed problems where occurrence of strain

concentration leads to brittle fracture of concrete (without residual strength). The
interest will be concentrated on the detection of cases where a member fails before
the development of its full flexural strength (longitudinal reinforcement yield). In these
cases there is no ductility available and they should be treated with special care
because:
- they lead to brittle failure without warning that is dangerous for the safety of the
structure.
- Plasticity theory for the calculation of ultimate strength is not applicable.
- Elastoplastic analysis used for the verification of the structural performance under
earthquake (pushover) is not applicable.
- Measures should be taken during the design or re-design (strengthening) of the
structure to avoid such dangerous for the safety of the structure cases.
At this point it should be emphasized that brittle failure modes should not only be
avoided but sufficient ductility should be assured beyond flexural ultimate strength.
Conditions to assure sufficient ductility are described in aseismic design codes (EAK
2003) and in re-design interventions recommendations ( 2005), based
mainly on empiric relationships derived from the evaluation of experimental results. In
cases of verification of existing structures the detection of probable occurrences of
brittle failure is crucial in order to take all necessary structural strengthening
measures. The typical case of strain concentration in concrete struts is discussed in a
previous chapter, where the assumption was formulated that this concentration
occurs under a critical value of the transverse strain. Furthermore it was pointed out
119
that sufficient condition for its occurrence is that inelastic deformation mechanism of
concrete should be a spalling mechanism and not a slide (friction) mechanism, i.e.
without the presence of transverse compression through confinement.
Strut and tie models to study the mechanical behaviour of reinforced concrete is
commonly known that are used more than half a century. The adequacy of these
models is based on the following facts:
- concrete tensile strength is 10 to 20 times less than its compressive strength. After
the occurrence of tensile failures (cracked state) the reinstalment of a tensile forces
field in concrete is impossible. Therefore compression is not distributed and simple
struts with practically linear stress trajectories are formed (Fig. 2.39).
c<<f c
c<f c
c=f c
t
Figure 2.39 Formation of struts in concrete with increasing compressive stress
- reinforcement elements are bar-shaped and have rather distinct anchorage

positions (nodes of truss models).
- Concrete in compression possesses yet a limited ability for inelastic deformation
while in tension nothing similar happens (brittle behaviour).
The strut strength may be very simply estimated assuming a constant stress fc
(concrete cylinder compressive strength). Rsch [19] performed numerous tests to
specify the compression zone strength (Fig. 2.40). During these tests numerous
unreinforced prismatic concrete specimens with rectangular cross-section were
eccentrically loaded with compressive forces.
120
2.7 Deformation and fracture of the compression zone
x/2 -NR
-NR
fc
d/2
x/2
d/2
b
Figure 2.40 Prisms with rectangular cross-section under eccentric compression according Rsch [19]
d
NR = a 2 b fc
2
or
nR =
NR
2a x
= 1
=
b d fc
d d
This assumption may be verified from the tests (Fig. 2.41). Strength value fc varied
between 10 and 57 N/mm2.
-nR
1.5
1.0
.5
.1
.3
.2
.4
.5
1-x/d
Figure 2.41 Experimental verification of strut strength assuming constant fc strength
Displacements of a reinforced concrete structure may be estimated with sufficient

accuracy using truss models. The distribution of inelastic deformations and therefore
the failure mode of a concrete strut depend directly from the form of cracking of the
member. The analysis of this problem may be based on the examination of two
different effects:
1) converging cracks or theory of the failure angle.
2) dense parallel cracks or theory of curvature.
121
2.7.1
Theory of the bend angle
The first case refers to components where either only one crack is formed (unreinforced components, components without bonded reinforcement, Fig. 2.42) or
more converging cracks (beams, slabs in the vicinity of direct supports, Fig. 2.65).
Concretes inelastic deformation occurs then locally in the front of cracks where a
concentrated change of angle or bend takes place.
A simplified assumption is the formation of a homogeneous deformed region
separated from the neighboring undeformed regions through deformation
discontinuity planes (Fig. 2.42).
2=0
a
-3
x
1
fc
Figure 2.42 Theory of the strut bend angle
Inclination of discontinuity planes is related to the ratio of the strain components

(equation 2.9):
tan = ( 3 / 1 )
1/ 2
The bend angle may be calculated as follows:
a
A'
A
B'
B
A''
/2
1
3
Figure 2.43 Homogeneous deformation region in bend angle theory
122
From the similar triangles (Fig. 2.43) results:

a
A' A' '
AA ' A ' A ' '
=
=
=
,
2AC
AA '
2
AC
a/2
x tan
4x
=
1 and with =
a
2
a
A ' A ' ' = x 1 ,
1/ 2

results:
= 21 tan = 21 3
(2.29)
1
When the maximum inelastic transverse tensile strain 1 reaches the value of 4 a
strain concentration in a thin zone II (Fig. 2.44) occurs leading to brittle failure without
residual strength (Fig. 2.45). Through the previous equations the corresponding
ultimate bend angle of the strut is calculated:
1/ 2
1
R = 2 qR
4
= 24
1
= 4
2
2=0
(2.30)
II
III
x
c
t 0
Figure 2.44 Inelastic deformations concentration zone according to the bend angle theory
c/f c
I : A-C-D-E
II : A-C-D-F-G
III : A-H-B
1.0
0.5
G
20
110
Figure 2.45 Strength loss diagram
123
It should be emphasized that in this case inelastic deformation reaches at once all
over the depth of the compression zone x the critical value of qR=4. This leads to a
sudden formation of the whole deformations concentration zone II and therefore to
the complete failure of the strut. This exceptionally brittle failure mode may be also
verified from the corresponding tests.
2.7.2
2.7.2 Curvature theory
The second case refers to components exhibiting dense parallel cracks practically
perpendicular to the compression zone axis (Fig. 2.46). Typical cases are reinforced
concrete members with good bonded longitudinal reinforcement under pure bending
with or without compressive stress.
fc
Figure 2.46 Strut curvature theory
Inelastic deformations of concrete occur in this case not locally but practically
uniformly distributed along the compression zone. Compression zone is subjected to
a uniformly distributed angle change or a constant curvature /l (Fig. 2.47).
Distribution of inelastic deformations along the depth of the compression zone may
be described accepting the Bernoulli hypothesis (plane sections remain plane after
bending) due to the relatively dense cracking.
Strain components are linearly distributed along the compression zone depth:
x1
=
x1
r
l
where the curvature is:
3 =
(2.31)
1
=
r
l
(2.32)
124
x
3
b
r
x1
x1
b
r/2
Figure 2.47 Compression zone deformations in accordance with the strut curvature theory
When the spalling mechanism is activated (equation 2.3):

3 = (1 + 2 ) 4
and 1=2
and replacing 3 in equation 2.31 results:
x1
(2.33)
l
When the maximum transversal strain 1=2 of the compression zone occurring in the
upper boundary of the cross-section reaches the critical value qR=4 then splitting
of the consecutive layers starts through spalling mechanism. Fracture energy spent
comes partially from the elastic unloading of the upper boundary fibres of the
compression zone (Fig. 2.48).
1 = 2 = 2
t 0
II
1>qR
c<f c
x
1<qR
c=f c
1
3
Figure 2.48 Inelastic deformations concentration zones in accordance with the curvature theory
125
Such splitting effects in compression zone may be observed in corresponding tests.

These effects result to a strength loss of the compression zone represented in the
descending branch of the moment-curvature curve. It should be emphasized that in
this case failure is not sudden and complete as in the first case of converging cracks
but is expressed as a gradual strength loss. This case is more interesting to assure
ductility in the design of reinforced concrete members. Curvature at the beginning of
failure is expressed using conditions 1 = qR = 4 and x1 = x in equation 2.33:
R qR 4 2
=
=
=
l
2x
2x
x
The ultimate plastic rotation due to curvature for a length d (Fig. 2.49) is:
2
R
d =
l
x/d
(2.34)
(2.35)
(Rd/l)10
40
30
20
10
.2
.4
.6
.8
x/d
Figure 2.49 Maximum inelastic rotation for length d according to the curvature theory
When the section has compressive reinforcement and is sufficiently confined to

assure the slide (friction) mechanism the plastic rotation capacity increases
significantly.
2.8
Bending with axial force
In this Chapter analytical relations will be developed for the events when concrete
fails before the steel yields and therefore concrete exhibits a non-ductile behaviour.
Objective is the formulation of simple equations based on a reinforcement
exploitation factor . When this factor has values <1 concrete fails before yielding of
longitudinal reinforcement, while for =1 steel yielding precedes. Objective of the
design or redesign (strengthening, performance improvement) is to avoid values
lower than 1 and generally to assure the members ductility required each time. A
basic remark is that for =1 application of the theory of plasticity is allowed for the
126
2.8 Bending with axial force
estimation of the ultimate strength while for <1 it is not allowed, due to the early
brittle failure of concrete. Besides, using the displacement based elasto-plastic
analysis (pushover) for the seismic performance verification the cases of brittle failure
of concrete are detected. In such cases sufficiency verifications should be based on
forces (strength) and not on deformation criteria. Frequently, the exclusion of brittle
behaviour through appropriate interventions (ductility increase) is required.
Criteria formulation will be dimensionless to allow manual calculations and deeper

understanding of the required proportions, geometrical and strength, between steel
and concrete. It helps the study of solutions using materials with different strength
(composite, fiber-reinforced, ultra high performance concrete, carbon plates) typical
for the sector of interventions.
To derive the equations it is assumed that spacing of cracks is small enough

compared to the depth of the compression zone, applicable for usual conditions of
good bonded reinforcement and relatively large compression zone depths. Thus the
theory of curvature may be applied and the criterion of failure curvature to be used.
Since all values refer to failure index R is omitted for practical reasons. To calculate
the tensile strain of steel the elastic portion of the compressive strain of concrete
should be also considered. To simplify the calculations it is assumed that the
compression zone is subjected to stresses equal to fc and the elastic strain equals
1 (Fig. 2.50).
cel
fc
x
=0
Fs
sl
Figure 2.50 Stress and strain under bending with axial force
127
Additional longitudinal reinforcement strain when concrete fails s is calculated as

follows:
2
(d x ) + ce = (d x ) 1
l
x
s = (2d / x ) 3
[]
s =
or
[]
(2.36)
Steel force Fs when concrete fails consists of two parts:

Fs = Fsp + Fs
where:
Fsp:
is the prestressing force for zero strain of the neighboring concrete and
Fs:
the force increase due to the additional steel strain s
The reinforcement force increase is:

Fs = s Es A s = [(2d x ) 3]
or
Es A s
1000
for s < sy
Fs = A s fs s > sy
(2.37)
where for prestressing reinforcement value fs corresponds to the additional stress

until reinforcement yields (Fig. 2.51). In dimensionless form:
Fs
Es
= [(2d x ) 3]
= [(2d / x ) 3] / sy = < 1, sy
A s fs
1000 fs
[]
otherwise
=1
(2.38)
The factor will be called reinforcement exploitation factor. Over-reinforced members
have <1. Physically means that concrete failure precedes the beginning of
reinforcement yield or that strength is lower than flexural strength. Under-reinforced
members, where steel yields first, have =1.
Two additional dimensionless parameters are introduced for simplification reasons:
the mechanical reinforcement ratio:
=
A s fs
b d fc
(2.39)
the degree of prestress:

=
Fsp
b d fc
sp A sp
(2.40)
b d fc
128
fs
f sp
sp
sp
sy
Figure 2.51 Stress-strain relation of prestressed reinforcement
Formulating equilibrium conditions:

Moments :
M = x b fc d
2
or dimensionless
M
x
x
= m = 1
2
d 2d
b d fc
(2.41)
axial forces: N = Fsp + Fs x b fc

or dimensionless
Fsp
N
Fs
x b fc
=n=
+
b d fc
b d fc b d fc b d fc
n = +
x
x
= + n
d
d
(2.42)
Failure mode verification:

Quantities n, , are given, assume =1 and calculate the x/d ratio:
x
= +n
d
Verification of the validity of relation 2.38:
2 d 1
where sy []
x 3 1 ,
sy
If <1, the initial assumption and the calculated x/d ratio are not valid (over-reinforced
section). If 1 initial assumption is correct and the calculation of x/d ratio is valid
(under-reinforced section).
129
For over-reinforced sections where <1 calculation of x/d may be based on equations
2.38 and 2.42 as follows:
n =
2 d 1 x
x
=
,
3
d
x sy d
sy []
and setting * = /sy we end with the solution of the 2nd order equation:
2
x (n + 3 * )
n + 3 *
=
+ 2 *
d
4
2
The resistant moment m results in both cases from equation 2.41:

1/ 2
m=
x
x
1
d 2d
Examining equation n = + x / d we verify that for prestressed reinforcement

when =1 the sum + is (Fig. 2.51):
+=
Fsp
b d fc
( sp + fs ) A s A s fsp
A s fs
=
=
b d fc
b d fc
b d fc
(2.43)
Therefore prestressing does not affect the yield moment and the same happens in
theory of plasticity for the eigenstresses situations. When <1 (over-reinforced
members) we may confirm that the strength of the section is higher when the
reinforcement is prestressed than when it is untensioned (Fig. 2.54).
In columns and walls reinforcement is arranged symmetrically, i.e. tension and
compression reinforcement are equal. In beams also to increase ductility around
supports compression reinforcement is arranged as well equal at least to half of the
tensile reinforcement.
When compression reinforcement yields and this is what usually happens, this may
be taken into account as follows (Fig. 2.52):
= - Fs
or with dimensionless values:
or
= + Fs
s fs
n = n + where =
b d fc
and
= + Fsd
or
or with dimensionless values m = m
(2.44)
= Fsd
d
d
130
(2.45)
(F's)
's
d
d'
F'sd'
s
M'
+
F's
N'
Figure 2.52 Contribution of compression reinforcement to bending with axial force
The verification of the failure type of the section may be based on n and m as it was
presented up to now for sections without compression reinforcement. If on the
contrary the ultimate moment of the section should be verified then initially it is
assumed n=n-and the ultimate moment m results as the sum of the contribution of
the compression reinforcement to the value of m (without compression
reinforcement).
d
d
The influence of early concrete rupture to the ultimate moment of a member
subjected to bending with axial force may be graphically represented as a relation of
the amount of tensile reinforcement (Fig. 2.53). Values on vertical axis represent the
ratio of the ultimate moment (with limited concrete compressive strain) to the plastic
moment in accordance with the theory of ideally plastic materials (with no limitation of
concrete strain) and on the horizontal axis the mechanical ratio of tensile
reinforcement. Axial force at failure state is used as parameter. For steel is assumed:
m = m +
s = 2105 /mm2,
fs = 460 /mm2
From Figure 2.53 we may verify that for uni-axial bending and reinforcement ratios
up to approximately 0.4 (fs / fc 20, < 2%) critical is steel yield therefore some
ductility is available. In the presence of axial force nR 0.4 always critical is
concrete therefore the available ductility is limited. It should be emphasized that all
these are applicable when concrete compressive strain ductility is low (without
confinement).
The next diagram (Fig. 2.54) represents the favorable influence of prestress to the
resistant moment. This influence takes place only when concrete fails early before
the steel yields (over-reinforced members).
131
-.2
1.0
0.
.4
.2
.6
.8
1.
nR
mR/mpl
-1.
-.8
-.6
-.4
-.2
0.
.2
.4
.6
.5
.5
1.0
1.5
Figure 2.53 Failure moment to plastic moment relation for bending with axial force
For the untensioned steel the same assumptions are made, as in the previous
diagram (Fig. 2.53):
mR/mR(=0)
2.0
.8
1.0
.6
=.4
.2
1.0
0.
.4
.5
1.5
1.0
Figure 2.54 Influence of prestress on the failure moment ratio
We may verify from Figure 2.54 that for usual in practice values, i.e. for =0.1 to 0.4
the favourable influence of prestress to the resistant moment does not exceed 10%.
For under-reinforced members theoretical results are compared with 364
experimental ones (Fig. 2.55). Resistant moment is calculated theoretically from
equations m=0.9 (approximate practical formula) resulting from equations 2.41 and
2.42 for n==0 and =1 and equation 2.46 as well.
132

m = 1
(2.46)
2
It is obvious that both formulae approximate satisfactorily the experimentally

measured failure moments. For a better approximation maybe strain hardening of
steel should be taken into account.
mR
mR=.9
.3
equation 2.46
.2
.1
.1
.3
.2
.4
Figure 2.55 Comparison of experimental results with theoretical curves for under-reinforced members
subjected to bending
Finally, a series of experimental results for over-reinforced elements is evaluated

where concrete is the critical factor (Fig. 2.56). These results are graphically
represented in relation to tensile reinforcement mechanical ratio .
Test specimens of concrete with lower strength (fc < 18 N/mm2) tend to exhibit higher
experimental to theoretical strength ratios (Fig. 2.56). This happens because inelastic
deformation capacity of concrete increases with its strength decrease. For
comparison reasons flexural strength with fc < 18 N/mm2 was calculated for a second
time on the assumption that concrete transversal compressive strain is not 4 but
8 (qR=8). Approximation proved to be much better (Fig. 2.56).
Increase of inelastic deformation capacity with the decrease of strength is
qualitatively confirmed also from uni-axial compression tests as shows Wischers
comparison illustrated in Figure 2.57. When high or ultra-high strength concretes are
used in aseismic design the required ductility should be assured through the
arrangement of the adequate confinement reinforcement.
133
mRex/mRth
1.1
1.0
.9
.5
1.0
f c<18 N/mm
f c>18 N/mm
1.5
Figure 2.56 Comparison of experimental results with theoretical relation for over-reinforced members
under bending
B55
B35
B15
-10
10
Figure 2.57 Ductility of concretes with various strengths [25]
Ductility increase in ultra-high strength concretes is also achieved with the addition of
fibres (metallic or composite).
Finally we may conclude that for the estimation of the ultimate moment of reinforced
and prestressed members, the assumption of a constant stress fc across the width of
compression strut leads to very good results compatible with the experimental ones.
Failure mode depends mainly from the members deformations affected from bond,
134
reinforcements arrangement and the type of stress. For this reason two models are
examined:
The first case of converging cracks leading to local bend of the compressive strut is
applicable on bad bond conditions or near direct supports of beams and slabs.
Inelastic deformations occur locally and lead to a brittle failure of the component.
Applications will be examined in the next Chapter.
The second case of parallel cracks leading to the curvature of the compressive strut
is appropriate for members with good bond conditions subjected to bending with or
without axial force. Inelastic deformation appears to be distributed along the strut and
failure progresses gradually in form of peelings in the most compressed fibre of
concrete. Evaluation of tests confirmed that in under-reinforced members the ultimate
moment in accordance with the theory of plasticity is always achieved. Reinforced
and prestressed concrete members in practice are usually executed as underreinforced in order to have increased ductility. In over-reinforced members where
resistant moment according to the theory of plasticity is not achieved or in
compressed members with symmetrically arranged reinforcement when compressive
stress ratio n>0.40 the theoretical approach presented leads to satisfactory
coincidence with experimental results. Obviously rotational ductility in these cases is
very limited.
2.9
Flexural shear in members without shear reinforcement
To study this problem a simply supported one-span beam is selected with a

concentrated load in its middle. Available is only longitudinal reinforcement in the
bottom tensile flange (Fig. 2.58):
2Q
d
Q
As
Q
b
Figure 2.58 Simply supported one-span beam without shear reinforcement
With the increase of load tensile zone of concrete cracks first in the middle region
and longitudinal reinforcement bears the tensile force. A simplified representation of
the flow of forces may be a truss consisting of struts and ties (Fig. 2.59):
135
Concrete under tension
2Q
Concrete under compression
Reinforcement
Figure 2.59 Flow of forces in a one-span beam without shear reinforcement
In the region between compression and tension flange (region of shear) tensile stress
of concrete is still much lower than its tensile strength. Thus, tensile force of
reinforcement is decreasing through shear coming closer to the support. This forces
transfer reminds the beam bending theory and for this reason we may describe it as
flexural behaviour. Under a specific load concrete experiences tensile failure in the
region of shear. As failure criterion a value for the mean principal tensile stress may
be considered. Such a strength criterion is used also in practice as lower limit of
shear strength (Fig. 2.60).
f ct
Figure 2.60 Lower limit of shear strength and concrete principal stresses
It is experimentally confirmed that the mean shear failure stress depends mainly on
the quality of concrete and the depth of the cross-section. In the following an
experimental relation for the failure shear stress R (equation 2.47) is presented
taking into account the depth of the members cross-section (size effect):
[N/mm2]
R = (0.6 + 0.03fc)(1.2 d)
fc in [N/mm2] and d in [m] (d < 0.6, otherwise d = 0.6)
136
(2.47)
2.9 Flexural shear in members without shear reinforcement
R (N/mm)
2
0 cm
d=1
20
40
>6 0
10
20
40
30
f c (N/mm)
Figure 2.61 Lower shear strength limit of concrete in accordance with equation 2.47
In the event of earthquake (cyclic load) and yield of tensile reinforcement (plastic
hinge formation) Priestley proposes a decrease of above strength proportional to the
required rotational ductility of the cross-section in accordance with relations 2.48.
R = 0.29 fc ,
0 < c < 2
= (0.45 0.08 c ) f c ,
2 < c < 5
= 0.05 fc ,
5 < c ,
fc in [N/mm2]
(2.48)
This gradual strength reduction is useful for the verification of the performance of a
member without or with insufficient stirrups.
R (N/mm)
0.29f c 1.56
1.80
Priestley
1.27
equation 2.47
d=20
0.90
0.43
0.91
0.76
0.58
0.54
0.62
0.68
d=20 cm
0.35
10
C2/
=1%
DIN 1045-1
=1%
20
30
f c (N/mm)
40
d=20 cm
Figure 2.62 Lower shear strength limit of concrete. Comparison of values according to Priestley,
2000 (design level) and DIN 1045-1 (design level)
EC2 / and DIN 1045-1 Codes [16] specify the design values approximately half
than the shear strength stress (Fig. 2.32). The reason is that the values include a
safety factor for the concretes strength considering the broad dispersion of
137
experimental results. American FEMA recommendations for the verification of

columns practically coincide with above equations 2.47 and 2.48.
After the shear failure of concrete, when stress reaches the value =R a new force
transfer system is formed. It is made up by two inclined compression struts and a tie
(the longitudinal reinforcement, Fig. 2.63).
2Q
d
Q
As
Figure 2.63 Flow of forces in a one-span directly supported beam without shear reinforcement
Assuming constant cross-section of the longitudinal reinforcement and good

anchorage at its ends the ultimate moment at the middle-span section should be
always achieved. Experimental research proved that the ultimate load of flexural
strength is not reached in many cases. This leads to the conclusion that above flow
of forces through direct support is subjected to certain restrictions.
Before the clarification of this problem is useful to see which are the cases of shear
failure of concrete prior to the steel yield in the middle-span section. For this reason
the yield stress of the longitudinal reinforcement is used and mean shear stress is
calculated from the equilibrium of moments (equation 2.49):
pl =
or
pl
fs
Q pl
bz
d
l
z fs A s A s fs d
=
lb z
bd l
pl
d
or
= v pl = =
,
fc
l as
(2.49)
where as is the shear ratio.

In Figure 2.64 is plotted for comparison reasons the value R/fs=2.5. This value is
approximately corresponding to a concrete strength fc = 20 N/mm2 and a structural
depth d=250 mm. We may observe in Figure 2.64 that the shear strength of concrete
is sufficient until steel yield for shear ratios as>8 when =2% or for as>4 when =1%
or for as>2 when =0.5% etc.
138
=
1%
(pl / f s)10
10
.5
R/f s []
.25
Shear Strength
of concrete
0
1/8
1/4
1/2
1/1
d/l
Figure 2.64 Concrete shear stress relation to and d/l ratio when flexural strength is reached
Therefore the slenderer the structure and the lower its longitudinal reinforcement ratio
is the easier is the relatively decreased shear force transfer through concretes shear
strength and stirrups could be avoided (e.g. in case of slabs).
On the other hand the alternative shear force mechanism through the direct support
is not always possible as already mentioned. Condition is the avoidance of an early
failure of concrete strut, i.e. prior to the longitudinal reinforcement yield. Critical for
the struts failure is inelastic deformation occurring near node A (Fig. 2.65).
Q
I
A
II
Fs
Q
l
Figure 2.65 Concentration of inelastic deformation in the strut in case of direct support
139
Inelastic deformation due to struts rotation occurs in region I (Fig. 2.65) due to lack of
confinement in accordance with the spalling mechanism. The maximum possible
concentrated rotation (bend) of the strut is R = 4 (equation 2.30)
The angles change may be calculated from the truss, on the assumption of small
deformations, constituting of two parts. The first part is made from the
longitudinal reinforcements elongation s (Fig. 2.66)
=
l
s
d
(2.50)
A
'
d
B'
B''
C
l
Figure 2.66 Struts rotation due to elongation of longitudinal reinforcement at the direct support
The second part appears due to the elastic contraction of the strut ce leading to the
change of its length by BB (Fig. 2.67).
=
l
ce
d
(2.51)
A
''
d
B'
B''
B
C
l
Figure 2.67 Struts rotation due to concrete compressive strain at the direct support
Total rotation angle is calculated by the following equation:

= + =
l
( s + ce
d
140
(2.52)
The mean elastic compressive strain of concrete may reach at the very most
approximately the value of ce = -1. Through the distribution of compressive
stresses in the intermediate region it may even be noticeably lower, i.e.
approximately ce = -0.5. In the following, since all values refer to rupture, index R
is omitted. The additional elongation of longitudinal reinforcements steel s at
concretes rupture is equal to:
d
4d
ce =
1
[]
l
l
From equation 2.53 we obtain the increase of the force in reinforcement:
(2.30, 2.52) s =
or
4 d s A s
1
Fs = s s A s =
l
1000
.
Fs = As fs
when s > sy
(2.53)
when s < sy
(2.54)
where fs is the increase of steel stress until yielding of reinforcement.

In dimensionless form :
Fs
Es
4d
4d 1
=
1
=
1
= < 1,
A s fs l
1000 fs l
sy
sy []
otherwise
=1
(2.55)
Exploitation factor has the same physical significance as in bending. Both concrete
failure modes prior or after reinforcements yielding may be represented by a diagram
(Fig. 2.68). It should be emphasized that factor refers to the direct support. For this
reason it is critical for strength only when shear force transfer through the tensile
strength of concrete is not possible.
sy10
4
<1
S500
StIII
2
=1
StI
0
l/d
Figure 2.68 Flexural reinforcements exploitation factor for the direct support
141
We may observe (Fig. 2.68) that for usual yield limits of steel of approximately 2 to
2.5 the limit of l/d ratio for a viable direct support until yielding of steel is
approximately 1.3 to 1.1. Therefore direct support is practically achievable only for l/d
ratios of approximately 1.0. For higher ratio values shear force transfer should be
effectuated through transverse reinforcement (stirrups). The ultimate load of the
structure may be calculated as follows (Fig. 2.69):
Q
fc
x
fc
Fs
Q
b
Figure 2.69 Strength calculation for a direct support
Using equilibrium conditions we obtain:
and
Q l = z Fs = d Fs
2
Fs = x b fc
(2.56)
In case of prestressing force Fs is made of two parts (Fig. 2.51). Substituting in above
equations we obtain:
Q=
F + Fs
d
(Fsp + Fs ) 1 sp
l
2 b d fc
and in dimensionless form:

vR =
Q
d
+
= ( + ) 1
b d fc
l
2
(2.57)
Kani [26] performed numerous tests on beams without transverse reinforcement. For
the evaluation of these tests following assumptions are made :
mR QR d (1 2) l
=
=
mpl Qpl
d (1 2) l
s = 2 .105 N/mm2 ,fs = 400 N/mm2
142
(2.58)
On the evaluation diagrams (Fig. 2.70 and 2.71) failure lines are also plotted referring
to the shear force transfer through concretes strength.
mR QR
R b zR
l
=
=
R
mpl Qpl ( A s fs l) zpl d fs
(2.59)
assuming: z R z pl
mR / mpl
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
=0.5%
=0.8%
.4
.2
0.
0
as
as
Figure 2.70 Failure moment to plastic moment relation in beams without shear reinforcement
(Kani experiments evaluation) for various longitudinal reinforcement ratios =0.5, 0.8%
Direct support
Change of concrete's
elastic strain
Shear strength of concrete
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
=1.9%
=2.8%
.4
-c
e
.2
as
1.0
1.5
1
0
=
0.5
as
Figure 2.71 Failure moment to plastic moment relation in beams without shear reinforcement
(Kani experiments evaluation) for various longitudinal reinforcement ratios =1.9, 2.8%
143
In the last diagram (Fig. 2.71) for =2.8% two failure curves are presented for
comparison reasons, where the mean elastic compressive strain of concrete ce
varies 50%. It seems that for higher values of the shear ratio as compression
distribution is wider resulting to the decrease of the mean elastic compressive strain
of concrete.
Application of prestressing certainly affects favourably failure load since for the same
strain a greater force corresponds to the reinforcement than the force when it is
untensioned. To evaluate this effect following diagrams 2.72 to 2.74 were prepared
for various values of the shear ratio as. The assumed material parameters are
Es = 2.105 N/mm2, fs = 460 N/mm2 and fc = 20 N/mm2.
Shear strength of concrete
1.0
=.2
mR / mpl
.1
0.
Direct support
.5
as = 1.5
.2
.1
.3
Figure 2.72 Failure moment to plastic moment for beams with shear ratio as =1.5 without transverse
reinforcement, with prestressed longitudinal reinforcement
1.0
mR / mpl
=.2
.1
Shear strength
of concrete
.5
0.
Direct support
as = 2
.1
.2
.3
144
1.0
mR / mpl
=.2
Shear strength
of concrete
.1
.5
as = 3
.1
.2
.3
For low slenderness (as<1.5, Fig. 2.72) the favourable effect of prestressing on the
strength of the structure is relatively low due to the increasing influence of the direct
support. The same also happens for higher slenderness (as>3, Fig. 2.74) due to the
flexural behaviour (shear resistance of concrete). For intermediate values and
especially for high prestressing degrees the result is a significant increase of the
strength of the structure.
2.10
Shear transfer mechanisms shear reinforcement
Shear transfer mechanisms in reinforced concrete members (slabs, beams, columns,

walls) are more than one and usually develop simultaneously. Most important is
always to examine the capacity shear force, i.e. the one corresponding to the flexural
strength of the members and not any value resulting from an elastic analysis. Brittle
failure modes as shear are verified in terms of forces and not in terms of
deformations.
2.10.1 Shear strength of concrete
Shear forces may be transferred through the shear strength of concrete as discussed
in the previous Chapter (Fig. 2.75). In the present Chapter a constant value for the
R/fc ratio will be used for comparison reasons, corresponding to a concrete strength
fc=20 N/mm2 and a structural depth d=40 cm.
R
= v R = 0.05 = 5%
(2.60)
fc
In this case when a plastic hinge is formed a decrease of shear strength results in
accordance with equation 2.48. It is a brittle failure mode. Flexural strength is
reached only when shear strength is sufficient. In practice, shear strength of concrete
145
is utilized in slender beams, slabs, shells and generally in thin structures subjected
mainly to bending, in most cases plane structures.
Fs
V
''Reinforcement's force''
Figure 2.75 Reinforcement force during shear force transfer through the shear strength of concrete
Using equilibrium equations for the example of Figure 2.76:
M = V l
M
l
=
, where as: shear ratio
as =
Vd d
V
A f d
d
= s s = v pl = l = l
=
bd
bd l
fc
l as
(2.61)
That means when flexural strength will be reached the shear force ratio will be:
v pl = l
d l
=
l as
(2.62)
From equation 2.62 results that if the shear strength ratio is vR=0.05 and ratio d/l=1/2
then the maximum longitudinal reinforcement to avoid early shear failure will be:
l
2
v R = 0.05 = 0.10 ,
d
1
corresponding to a geometric longitudinal reinforcement ratio =5.
max l =
In the presence of axial force (Fig. 2.77) the shear force ratio when flexural strength
will be reached will be (n positive in compression):
146
2.10 Shear transfer mechanisms shear reinforcement
Asfs
V
l
Figure 2.76 Shear force transfer through the shear strength of concrete
V
fc
M
d
N
M
fc
Asf s
V
l
Figure 2.77 Shear and compression force transfer through the shear strength of concrete
d
d d
+ n (1 n) = [ l + n (1 n)]
l
l
l
The shear force ratio at failure will be:
v pl = l
vR =
R
d
+ n (1 n)
fc
l
(2.63)
(2.64)
For symmetrically arranged reinforcement on both ends of the member shear force
transferred due to bending is higher (Fig. 2.78):
2M = V I a s =
M
l
=
V d 2d
A f d
V
d
= 2 s s = v pl = 2 l = l
bd
bd l
fc
l as
147
(2.65)
(2.66)
V
Asf s
M
Asf s
V
l
V
Asf s
M
d
Asf s
V
l
Figure 2.78 Shear force transfer through concretes shear strength and additionally through an
inclined compression strut in a member restrained on both ends
2M = V I a s =
M
l
=
V d 2d
A f d
V
d
= 2 s s = v pl = 2 l = l
bd
bd l
fc
l as
(2.65)
(2.66)
Consequently equation 2.62 is applicable again with the only exception that shear
ratio as is half than before.
To reach the flexural strength the shear force ratio at failure will be vR = 0.05 and the
ratio d/l=1/2:
max l =
l
2
vR =
0.05 = 0.05
2d
2 1
corresponding to a geometric ratio 2.5.

In the presence of axial force (Fig. 2.78) the shear force ratio when flexural strength
will be reached will be:
148
v pl = 2 l
n (1 n)
d
d d
+ n (1 n) = [2 l + n (1 n)] = l +
l
l
l
as
2 as
(2.67)
The shear force ratio at failure will be (n positive by compression):

vR =
R
d
n (1 n)
+ n (1 n) = R +
fc
l
fc
2 as
(2.68)
Therefore relatively low longitudinal reinforcement ratios will result to early shear
failure since shear strength of concrete will be exceeded. In slabs with shear ratios as
of approximately 10:
maxl = asvR = 100.05= 0.5,
corresponding to geometric ratio =2.5%, i.e. there is no problem for early shear
failure.
Equations for members without transverse reinforcement (stirrups) of EC2/
2000 [6] and of the new DIN 1045-1 [16] for the verification of failure shear force at
cross-sections level and not members level differentiate in a certain degree.
Specifically EC2 / 2000 provide equation:
VRd1 = (Rd k (1.20 + 40 l ) + 0.15 cp ) b w d
(2.69)
k = 1.60 d 1 (d in m),
cp > 0 for compression, due to load or prestressing,
that could be rewritten to be comparable with the previous approach (equation 2.68):
v Rd1 =
cp
VRd1
= Rd k (1.20 + 40 l ) + 0.15
b w d fc
fc
fc
v Rd1 =
Rd
k (1.20 + 40 l ) + 0.15 n
fc
(2.70)
Equation 2.70 includes the contribution of shear strength of concrete, the influence of
longitudinal reinforcement contributing to direct support formation (see Chapter
2.10.2) and the contribution of a potential compressive stress or prestressing at
cross-sections level. It does not though depend on as ratio that refers to a members
property and therefore does not sufficiently correspond to the mechanical behaviour
as in the case of equation 2.68.
New DIN 1045-1 (07/01) provides for concretes shear stress at designs level
following equation:
Rd,ct = 0.10 k (100 l fck)1/3 + 0.12 cd ,
149
fck [N/mm2]
(2.71)
k = 1+
l=Asl/(bw d) 0.02
200
2 , d in mm
d
and
cd = NEd/Ac, NEd > 0 for compression
d = axial force due to load or prestressing

2.10.2 Direct support
Shear force transfer through direct support clarified in Chapter 2.9 is based on the
formation of an inclined compression strut (Fig. 2.79).
M
V
Fs
V
l
Figure 2.79 Reinforcements force during shear force transfer through direct support
The reason of failure in this case is fracture of the compression strut that happens
due to the concentrated rotation occurring near point A. Magnitude of the rotation
depends on the displacements and may increase through confinement and
compressive reinforcement. Flexural strength is reached only when no early strut
failure occurs.
Direct support conditions occur in short cantilevers, slabs in regions with punching
and generally when inclination of the strut is approximately 45o.
Direct supports function only when displacements of the struts and ties system
remain within certain limits excluding failure of a strut.
The shear force ratio of a member restrained on one end (cantilever) with axial force
when flexural strength will be reached will be (Fig. 2.80):
v pl =
d
(l + n) (1 (l + n))
l
n > 0 for compression
150
(2.72)
M
Fs
V
l
Figure 2.80 Direct support in a restrained on one end member
The shear force ratio of a member restrained on both ends with axial force when
flexural strength will be reached will be (Fig. 2.81):
v pl =
d
(2l + n) (1 (2l + n)) ,
l
n > 0 for compression (2.73)
Fs
Fs
4
fc
N
fc
Fs
Fs
V
l
Figure 2.81 Direct support in a member restrained on both ends
Failure criterion of direct support is expressed by equation 2.55:

Fs
4d 1
=
1
= < 1,
A s fs l
sy
otherwise = 1,
Therefore for ratio d/l=1/2 and yield strain of steel 2:

4 1 1
= 1 =
2 2 2
151
sy []
(2.74)
The conclusion is that in this case the strut fails before flexural strength is reached
when rotation reaches the value =4 . Failure shear force will obviously be higher
if longitudinal reinforcement will be increased since for the same exploitation factor
the reinforcements force Fs=sfs will be higher.
For restrained on one end member-cantilever (Fig. 2.80) the shear force ratio at
failure will be:
d
(l + n) (1 (l + n))
l
For restrained on both ends members (Fig. 2.81) it will be:
vR =
(2.75)
d
(2.76)
(2l + n) (1 (2l + n))
l
New DIN 1045-1 allows the decrease of shear force due to direct support, hence
critical for the design is the cross-section in a distance d from the face of the support.
It is also allowed the decrease of shear force due to concentrated load in a distance
x 2.5d from the support using factor:
vR =
b=x/(2.5 d)
Similar provisions are included in Eurocode 2 and 2003.
(2.77)
2.10.3 Transverse reinforcement (stirrups)
Shear force transfer through transverse reinforcement (stirrups) may be modeled with
Mrsch truss [8] (Fig. 2.82).
M
d
Fs
V
l
Figure 2.82 Transverse reinforcement (stirrups) in a member restrained on one end
152
In this case flexural strength is reached with sufficient stirrups. Stirrups are used in
beams, columns, slabs against punching and also where rotational ductility is
required to assure a kind of confinement.
The shear force ratio transferred through stirrups when the member reaches its
flexural strength will be for members restrained on one end (Fig. 2.82):
v pl =
Vpl
b d fc
= l
d l
=
l as
(2.78)
For members restrained on both ends (Fig. 2.83) the shear force ratio transferred
through stirrups will be double:
v pl =
Vpl
b d fc
= 2 l
d l
=
l as
(2.79)
where shear ratio as will have the half value of that of a member restrained on one
end.
V
Fs
M
d
=45
d
Fs
l
Figure 2.83 Tie reinforcement (stirrups) in a member restrained on both ends
The whole shear force Vpl should be carried by the stirrups within a members length
d assuming that struts inclination is 45o. The required mechanical ratio of transverse
reinforcement will be:
=
and since
A sB f sB
b d fc
(2.80)
As . fsB = Vpl
Vpl
=
= v pl
b d fc
(2.81)
153
We may observe that shear force ratio is equal to the mechanical ratio of transverse
reinforcement. Members restrained on both ends require double stirrups than these
for members restrained on one end.
From equations 2.78 to 2.81 results that the mechanical ratio of the required
transverse reinforcement is equal to the one of the longitudinal reinforcement (for
each flange) divided by the shear ratio:
=
l
,
as
= 45
(2.82)
When compression struts have an inclination lower than 45o the amount of stirrups
required decreases and may reach up to an approximately half value as it is
experimentally proven [28]. Specifically the shear force ratio for variable strut angle
is:
v = B cot , where 2>cot>1 for angles 27<<45.
To calculate angle we specify exploitation factor as follows:

(2.79), (2.83)
v
cot
= B =
1
l
v pl
as
(2.83)
(1)
The permissible inclination of struts may be calculated in accordance with the model
developed for direct support. Strut failure criterion is still valid for this case with
certain comments though on the parameters involved:
+ ce
,
(2.84)
se = 4 tan ce
tan = se
4
where se = sy for untensioned reinforcement and se= spy - sp for prestressed
reinforcement.
Elastic strain of untensioned steel se is equal to its exploitation degree in the specific
position multiplied by the yield strain. For the prestressed reinforcement the
additional elastic strain of prestressing steel se is equal to the exploitation factor
multiplied by the yield strain of the prestressed steel spy minus the prestressing strain
sp. The elastic concrete compressive strain varies around 0.5 , since the struts
stress should not exceed the half of its strength fc. More conservatively we assume
that concretes compressive strain equals 1 and use then equation 2.84 for the
general case of prestressing steel.
l
(2)
(1),(2.84) cot =
as B
cot =
spy
l
4
=
sp + 1 a s B
2 spy + (1 sp )
154
4 a s
=0
l
(3)
Solving equation (3) results:

1 + 1 + 16
=
a s B
sy
l
2 sy
(1 sp ) +
(1 )
sp
or
, for untensioned steel
+ 16
a s
spy
l
2 spy
(4)
, for prestressed steel
(5)
Plotting the relation of cot to the ratio as/l, according equations (4) and (5) for
sy=2.5 and in case of prestressing for spy=8 and sp=5 Figure 2.83a will
result:
12
10
cot
8
ce=1
ce=0
cot=1
prestress
0,95
0,9
0,85
0,8
0,75
0,7
0,65
0,6
0,55
0,5
0,45
0,4
0,35
0,3
0,25
0,2
0,15
0,1
0,05
a s * B / l
Figure 2.83a cot to shear ratio and reinforcements relation for beams
We may observe in Figure 2.83a that for very low values of as/l ratio angle also
takes low values. This happens because longitudinal reinforcement does not yield. In
the same diagram the relation for ce0.0 (very small) is plotted to evaluate the
155
sensitivity of the relation by the mean compressive strain of concrete in the web in
case of untensioned steel (equation 6).
(2.84), (2) 2 sy l = 4 a s l 2 =
4 a s
a s B
= 2
sy l
sy l
(6)
1
0,9
0,8
0,7
v/vpl
0,6
ce=1
ce=0
cot=1
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
9
0,
8
0,
7
0,
6
0,
5
0,
4
0,
3
0,
2
0,
1
as*B/l
Figure 2.83b Failure shear force to plastic strength shear force ratio to shear ratio and
reinforcements relation for beams
When cot=2 line ends at point (0.5,1) while for cot=2.5 line ends at (0.4,1).
Asf s
M
d
V
V
Asf s
l
Figure 2.84 Shear force transfer through direct support and stirrups for short beam restrained on both
ends
156
For short beams (e.g. coupling beams, Fig. 2.84) a combination of direct support and
stirrups truss occurs. Part of the shear force is transferred through the direct support.
If for instance as, sy, l, n0 and are known the shear strength formula will be:
n (1 n)
4
v R = cot +
, where
cot = D
(7)
2 as
( + ) sy + 1
2
1
D = 1
,
as
sy
n = 2 D l + n0 ,
B cot =
l
as
(8)
cot is calculated as follows:

cot =
l
4
=
( + ) sy + 1 a s
D
2 sy + ( D sy + 1)
(8)
2 sy +
4 a s B
=0
l
2 4 as
=0
as
l
2
2 16 a s
2
+ +
sy
as
l
as
=
2 sy
(9)
Physical interpretation of the way forces are transferred and failure modes are useful
at the period of the initial design and in order to decide future interventions as well.
During the design procedure stirrups should never be underdesigned since it is
imperative to remain in elastic state. This is the reason why we regularly use 45o strut
angle, while for the verification of existing structures we may use angles up to 27o
provided that the excessive longitudinal reinforcement (as B 0.2l) does not yield.
Stirrups calculation according to EC2 and is based on following equation:
A sw
(0.90 d) f ywd cot
s
where 0.40 < cot < 2.5,
i.e. 68>>22
VRd3 =
(2.85)
Above Codes provide also an alternative calculation procedure based on a constant

strut angle =45o taking though into account the shear force transfer through the
concretes strength VRd1 (equation 2.69). The resistant shear force results as sum of
two terms:
157
A sw
(0.90 d) f ywd
s
Vcd = VRd1, for action combinations without earthquake
VRd3 = Vwd + Vcd ,
Vwd =
Vcd = 0.30 VRd1, for ductile beams

Vcd = 0.25 VRd1, for ductile walls
Substantially it is an indirect way to consider an angle <45o in accordance with
equation 2.85.
According to new DIN 1045-1 (07/01) compressive field angle is calculated as
follows:
VRd,c = 0.24 fck1/ 3 b w z ,
(2.86)
0.58 cot 1.2 / (1 VRd,c / VEd) 3, i.e. 60 18.5

Stirrups calculation is similar to the one provided in EC2 and 2003.
It is obvious that angle according to DIN decreases when the ratio of VRd,c (shear
force contribution of the concrete section in cracked state) to the design shear force
increases.
During the shear failure verification of a subjected to bending member it should be
verified first which failure mode is critical in order to take the appropriate intervention
measures. Basic criterion is whether flexural strength is reached or early failure
occurs for other reasons. The sequence of verifications is summarized in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 Shear failure modes of members subjected to bending (n<0.10)
Flexural strength
is reached
Shear force is carried

by concrete. Strength
decreases in plastic
hinge
l: mechanical ratio of tensile flange reinforcement

m/v = as = shear ratio
Flexural strength
is not reached
in slender beams or slabs

YES
Concrete shear strength

l/as = vpl < vRd=Rd/f c
NO
Concrete shear
failure
NO
Strut failure due to

rotational "bend"
in short beams
Shear force is
carried by the inclined
concrete strut
Shear
force is carried by stirrups
YES
direct support
= (4d/l - 1) /sy () >1
YES
Stirrups
cot >l/as
: struts angle
or even combined with direct support
158
NO
Stirrups
yield
Shear failure criteria for short beams may be represented in a diagram (Fig. 2.85).
Condition for the applicability of criteria is exclusion of significant compressive stress
(n<0.10) and absolute exclusion of tensile stress. Horizontal axis values represent
shear ratio as and vertical ones the ratio of failure moment to plastic moment. Shear
ratio as for members restrained on one end (cantilever) equals l/d while for members
restrained on both ends l/(2d). Diagram represents the direct support criterion (factor
) separately for cantilevers and members restrained on both ends. Criterion of
concrete shear strength (l/vR ratio) depending on the amount of longitudinal
reinforcement is also represented. The same linear relations are applicable for the
representation of stirrups sufficiency criterion (l/ ratio). In the case of stirrups the
effective mechanical ratio may be assumed even up to double than the actual
provided that it is allowed by the available ductility due to the change of the struts
inclination from 45o to 27o and the increase of the efficiency of stirrups to transfer the
shear force.
=3
l
/
0.67
1.00
l/
=1
mR/mpl
1.33
l/
=5
0.75
0.50
0.25
1.0
2.0
fixed on both ends cantilever

3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
as=M/(Vd)
Figure 2.85 Shear transfer mechanisms diagram for beams. Instead of the shear strength ratio of
concrete vR may be used
Application example :
A short restrained on both ends beam is given with ratio l/d=2/0.60, l=0.20,
=0.08, fc=25 /mm2 and fy=400 /mm2. The question is if plastic moment will be
reached or what will be the mode of early shear failure.
159
as =
l
2
=
= 1.66
2 d 2 0.60
1) direct support:
mR
4 d 1 4 0.60 1
==
1 =
1 = 0.10
mpl
l
2 2
2
2) Concrete shear strength:
vR =
R (0.6 + 0.03 25 ) (1.2 0.6 )

= 0.032
=
fc
25
v pl =
l 0.20
=
= 0.12
as 1.66
l
0.20
=
= 6.25
v R 0.032
m R v R 0.032
=
=
= 0.26
m pl v pl
0.12
3) stirrups (struts angle 45):
l 0.20
=
= 2. 5
0.08
mR v 45 0.08
=
=
= 0.66
mpl v pl 0.12
Adding the contribution of the direct support we obtain:
mR/mpl = 0.66 + 0.10 = 0.76
If we change the angle of struts then:
a s B 1.66 0.08
=
= 0.66
l
0.20
1 + 16 0.66 2.5
= 1.17
2 2 .5
cot =
1.17
= 1.78 = 29
0.66
According to new DIN 1045-1 the angle resulting from the calculation is 32.
160
1.00
(45
)
l/
l/
mR/mpl
=2
.5 0
=1.2
5 (2
7)
6.2
R=
l/v
Stirrups(29)
0.75
0.66
Stirrups ( 45)
0.50
Shear strength of
0.25
concrete
0.26
0.10
Direct support
0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0 as=M/(Vd)
as=1.66
Figure 2.86 Application examples failure modes
2.10.4 Compressive shear
In case of flexural shear in the presence of compressive stress there are certain
minor differentiations in the forces transfer mechanism. Axial compression in columns
may be so high to affect considerably the depth of compression zone and the lever
arm of internal forces.
Inclined compression is transferred in the column in two ways (Fig. 2.87). Through an
inclined strut that does not require stirrups and through a Mrsch truss that requires
stirrups. Critical for the calculation of stirrups is angle of the truss.
From the equilibrium of moments and forces we derive:
d x
d
d
M = ( x b fc ) ( ) + A s fs + s fs
2 2
2
2
N = x b fc + A s fs s fs
where:
=
s
,
sy
161
(1)
(2)
N
V
x
n
AsFs
Asf s
V
Asf s
AsFs
V
N
M
Figure 2.87 Restrained on both ends compressed member with tie reinforcement (stirrups)
(1)
A f 1
x 1
x
= m = (1 ) + s s (1 + )
2
d 2
d b d fc 2
b d f c
m = 0.5 n (1 n) + 0.5 l (1 + )
x
d
where:
n=
(2)
N
x A f
= + s s (1 )
b d fc d b d fc
(3)
(4)
no = n + l (1 )
(5)
From the equilibrium of moments at the ends of the member results:

V l = 2 M v = 2 m
d
l
(6)
162
(3),(6)
vR =
( + 1) n (1 n)
d
(n (1 n) + l (1 + )) = l
+
l
2 as
2 as
(2.87)
x
d
Required stirrups result from the inclination tan of the struts and the tie force:
where:
n=
Fl = l (1 + ) b d fc
B =
(7)
FB
b l fc
(8)
FB
= tan
Fl
(9)
(7),(8),(9)
=
Fl tan l (1 + ) b d fc
( + 1)
=
tan = l
tan
b l fc
b l fc
2 as
(2.88)
Then equation (2.87) becomes:

v R = B cot +
n (1 n)
2 as
(2.89)
Longitudinal reinforcement exploitation factor has values between 1 to -1 and may

be calculated using equation 2.38:
(2.38)
2
1
= 3
n
sy
Equations (5) and (2.38) result to:

( sy l ) 2 + ( sy (no l ) + 3l ) + (3 (no l ) 2) = 0
(2.90)
The value of the exploitation factor results from the solution of the 2nd order
equation. Values sy, l and no are known. We distinguish following cases:
1 , then = 1 tensile reinforcement yields
0 < < 1 tensile reinforcement does not yield
1 < < 0 reinforcement is compressed but does not yield
1 , then = 1 reinforcement yields under compression
163
Inclination tan may not have too small values for reasons of compatibility of
deformations. Specifically tensile reinforcement may not be practically parallel and
close to the strut because this could lead to large displacements, deformations and
rotations. Limitation of rotation of direct support model offers a criterion even for this
case. Equation 2.55 connects the strut inclination with the maximum possible
longitudinal reinforcement strain in case of constant distribution s along the
reinforcement (dash indicates mean value).
4 tan - 1 = s tan =
s +1
4
(10)
The mean strain s is expressed yet through the exploitation factor that was
previously calculated considering also a certain decrease due to the variation of
strain along reinforcement. More conservatively we neglect the decrease of strain:
s = sy
(11)
sy + 1
4
From equation 2.91 results that:
(10),(11) tan =
(2.91)
for =1 (yield under tension) sy=2, tan=3/4=0.75

for =0 tan=0.25
for = -0.5 (n=1, x=d) tan=0
When longitudinal reinforcement is compressed due to the large depth of the
compression zone then it is allowed to assume even null inclination of the strut since
no deformations compatibility problem exists.
Factor may be calculated from equation 2.90 and then cot may be calculated. The
results are illustrated in the next diagram for various values of (Fig. 2.87a). We
may observe that for low longitudinal reinforcement ratios angle takes much lower
values for the same normalized axial compression. The reason is the decreased
contribution of reinforcement in compressive stress and the increase of the
compression zones depth of concrete with a corresponding decrease of factor and
therefore of the angle in accordance with equation 2.91. Required stirrups are also
decreased for a compressive stress ratio nO=1.0 even up to 9 times (Fig. 2.87b). This
explains the fact that columns poor in stirrups under increased compression do not
exhibit shear failure but compression failure during yield or loss of stirrups
anchorage.
164
14,0
12,0
cot
10,0
l=0.10
8,0
l=0.20
l=0.30
6,0
l=0.40
4,0
2,0
0,0
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
n0
Figure 2.87a Angle to compressive stress ratio relation for various values of longitudinal
reinforcement
1,00
0,90
0,80
B*as/l
0,70
0,60
l=0.10
l=0.20
0,50
l=0.30
0,40
l=0.40
0,30
0,20
0,10
0,00
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
n0
Figure 2.87b Required stirrups to compressive stress ratio and l/as ratio relation for various values of
longitudinal reinforcement
165
According to new DIN 1045-1 (07/01) the angle of compressive field is calculated as
follows :
VRd,c = 0.24 fck1/ 3 (1 1.2 cd / fcd ) b w z
(2.92)
where:
cd = NEd/Ac ,
NEd > 0 for compression: axial force due to load or prestressing

0.58 cot (1.2 + 1.4 cd / fcd) / (1 VRd,c / VEd) 3
i.e. 60 18.5
Calculation of stirrups is similar to the EC2 and 2003 one.
It is obvious that angle according to DIN decreases in the presence of prestressing
or compressive axial force. The same also happens when the ratio of VRd,c (shear
force contribution of the concretes cross-section in cracked state) to the design
shear force is increased.
For members with shear reinforcement and axial force Greek Code ( 2000)
provides following equation for the shear force:
A sw
0.90 d fywd cot
s
0.40 < cot < 2.5
VRds =
where:
(2.93)
The same code provides also another procedure for the calculation of stirrups where
struts angle is constant and equals 45o considering also the shear force transfer
through concretes strength VRd1 (equation 2.69). The resistant shear force results as
sum of the two terms:
VRd3 = Vwd + Vcd ,
Vwd =
A sw
(0.90 d) f ywd
s
Vcd = VRd1, for combinations without earthquake

Vcd = 0.90 VRd1, for columns
Vcd = 0.70 VRd1, for walls
It is practically an indirect approach to consider an angle <45 in accordance with
equation 2.93.
Summarizing the various failure modes of a reinforced concrete member restrained
on both ends subjected to flexural shear or combined even with compression we
come to the following conclusions:
1. shear strength of beams (Chapter 2.10.1, 2.10.3) is generally expressed by an
equation of the following form:
166
n (1 n)
v R = max R , B cot +
,
2 as
fc
cot =
4
sy + 1
(2.94)
where the first term depends on the shear strength of concrete (inclined tension), i.e.
on R/fc ratio. In presence of stirrups a (Mrsch) truss is formed where concrete
resists the inclined compression and stirrups the tension. Value of cot for steel
tensile strain sy2.5 and concrete compressive strain ce=1 is 4/3.5. When
longitudinal reinforcement does not yield (se<2.5) cot value may be calculated
(Chapter 2.10.3) and may practically reach values up to cot=4. Stirrups demand for
struts angle 45o is:
=l / as.
The second term does not produce significant tension to concrete and shear is
transferred through an inclined compressive stresses field.
Failure modes are the following:
concretes inclined tension (shear) if:
max R , B cot = R < l

as
fc
fc
stirrups yield if: max R , B cot = cot < l

as
fc
Another brittle failure mode that will be discussed in the next Chapter 2.10.5 is the
failure of the web under compression (in T or I formed cross-sections etc.). It is a
strength loss of the inclined concrete struts due to transverse tensile strain of
approximately 50% of their initial strength. In order to occur this, stirrups yield should
precede (transverse strain >4).
vR =
0.50
(tan + cot )
(2.95)
or according to EC2/
vR =
0.60
(tan + cot )
(2.96)
yielding of longitudinal reinforcement (plastic flexural strength) if:

max R , B cot > l
fc
as
2. In short restrained on both ends members (Chapter 2.10.2) where ratio 4d/l>1, i.e.
shear ratio as<2 part of shear force is transferred through direct support. An
167
inclined strut is formed in concrete from one support to the other. Then the
exploitation factor of the direct support is calculated:
D = (
2
1
1)
,
as
sy
D 1
where
When D=1 longitudinal reinforcement yields and the whole shear force is transferred
through the direct support.
vR =
n (1 n)
2 as
where n=2l+n0 and n0 the external compression.

When the direct support exploitation factor D is smaller than unity:
n = 2 D l + n0
When direct support and stirrups (forming a truss, Chapter 2.10.3) act simultaneously
shear strength formula becomes:
v R = B cot +
n (1 n)
,
2 as
n = 2 D l + n0 ,
and
where
cot =
cot =
4
( + ) sy + 1
D
(2.97)
l
as
where no is the external compression.

Calculation of cot value is described in Chapter 2.10.3 and is similar to the one for
beams.
Failure modes will be the following:
Fracture of the direct support strut when:

< 1,
D
l (1 D )
cot
as
or
(1 D )
Yielding of longitudinal reinforcement when:

= 1, or
D
l (1 D )
cot >
,
as
D < 1 or
> (1 D ), D < 1
3. When compressive stress is increased (compressive shear), i.e. when tensile

reinforcement is not going to yield, then:
2
1
1 B = 3
< 1,
n
sy
168
where B is the exploitation factor of the tensile reinforcement and n is the x/d ratio of
the compression zone given by the following equation:
n = n0 l (1 B ) ,
where n0 is the external compressive stress. The limit value of the compression force
ratio to allow yielding of the tensile reinforcement is calculated as follows:
B = 1 n = n0
2
2
3 = sy n =
n
sy + 3
for S500, sy=2.5 results n=0.36

Therefore for external compression higher than 0.36 will be B<1 and yielding of
tensile reinforcement will not be possible.
This leads to a decreased resistant shear force, i.e.:
where
n (1 n)
v R = max R , B cot +
,
2 as
fc
cot =
4
,
sy + 1
R
l ( B + 1) l
max , B cot
<
2 aS
as
fc
and
n = n 0 l (1 B ) < n 0
(2.98)
cot value may then be very high since factor B is in the denominator and can have
even negative values.
Failure modes are as in the first case:
concretes inclined tension (shear) if:

R
R l ( B + 1)
max , B cot =
<
2 as
fc
fc
( B + 1)
stirrups yield if : max R , B cot = cot < l
2 as
fc
Another brittle failure mode that will be discussed in the next Chapter 2.10.5 is the
failure of the web under compression (in T or I formed cross-sections etc.). It is a
strength loss of the inclined concrete struts due to transverse tensile strain of
approximately 50% of their initial strength. In order to occur this, stirrups yield should
precede (transverse strain >4).
v R = n (0.50 n),
n > 0.25
(2.99)
v R = 0.25,
n 0.25
(2.100)
169
or according to /EC2
v R = 0.30 (1.7 3 n),
n > 0.30
(2.101)
v R = 0.30,
n 0.30
(2.102)
compression zone failure (critical is the concrete under bending) if :

R
l ( B + 1)
max , B cot >
and
2 as
fc
B < 1
yielding of longitudinal reinforcement (flexural plastic strength) if:

max R , B cot > l ,

as
fc
B = 1
Based on above relations several series of experiments were evaluated by various

researchers [47] that showed satisfactory coincidence between theoretical and
experimental results. Most important is that this procedure also detects the expected
failure modes.
Comparison of the results is made for clarity reasons separately for the three different
failure modes, i.e. flexural failure when steel or concrete is critical (Fig. 2.88), yielding
of stirrups (Fig. 2.89), concrete under shear (Fig. 2.90).
1,60
1,40
1,20
Vtest/VR
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
n
Figure 2.88 Comparison of experimental and theoretical values for columns subjected to bending and
axial force when critical is concrete under compression or steel in tension
170
1,60
1,40
1,20
Vtest/Vstir
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
Figure 2.89 Comparison of experimental and theoretical values for columns when critical is yielding of
stirrups
2,00
1,80
1,60
Vtest/Vbeton
1,40
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
Figure 2.90 Comparison of experimental and theoretical values for columns when critical is shear of
concrete
171
Application
Data: a relatively slender column with fairly small compressive load. Let:
d 1
= ,
l = 0.10,
no = 0.40,
sy = 2
l 8
Let =1, i.e. reinforcement yields
(5)
no = n + l (1 ) = n
(2.38)
2
1
2
1
= ( 3)
=(
3) = 1
n
sy
0.40
2
Consequently, assumption =1 was correct

sy + 1 3
tan =
= = 0.75
4
4
Required stirrups will be:
d
1
req = l ( + 1) tan = 0.10 2 0.75 = 0.019
l
8
Shear force ratio will be:
d
1
(n (1 n) + l (1 + )) = (0.40 0.60 + 0.10 2) = 0.055
l
8
Assuming stirrups are taking the whole shear force then the apparent strut inclination
tan would be:
(2.87)
vR =
0.019
=
= 0.34 = 18.7
v
0.055
In accordance with the new DIN 1045-1 angle would be 25o.
B = v tan tan =
2.10.5 Shear / web compression
In the following another type of problems is discussed, where residual strength plays
a significant role. These are cases where concrete under inclined compression is
forced to transverse strain through the tensile reinforcement passing through it (Fig.
2.91). This results to cracks in concrete practically parallel to the compression field,
an effect that leads to a partial loss of its strength.
Such problems occur in webs or flanges of T or I beams and generally in regions of
increased uniform shear stress. Quantitative relations are formulated on a simple
example of a square plate element stressed in its plane with isotropic reinforcement
in two directions subjected to pure shear (Fig. 2.91):
172
+
=45
Reinforced
Concrete
Concrete
Steel
Figure 2.91 Distribution of forces between steel and concrete under pure shear
Concrete
P' Steel
/2
P
= 45
Reinforced
Concrete
s
c
Steel and
Concrete
Figure 2.92 Reinforced concrete pure shear through Mohr circles
For ordinary reinforcement ratios and without additional compressive stress

concretes strength is not critical since it is under-stressed:
=45 :
fs A s = pl b t pl = fs
where
(2.103)
s
bt
pl
= v pl =
fc
b: width , t: plate thickness
c = 2pl = 2fs
c
= 2
fc
e.g. for fs = 400 N/mm2, = 1% c = 8 N/mm2 (c>0 for compression)
173
(2.104)
For variable angle 27o<<45o concrete stress is expressed through equation 2.105
that will be later verified (equation 2.108):
c = (cot + tan )
(2.105)
e.g. for =27 results: c=2.5

Shear tests with or without additional compressive stress performed also Vecchio
and Collins [18] in Canada. Their evaluation showed that where concretes failure
was critical assumption of strength loss under transverse strain of approximately
qR=4 was verified (Fig. 2.93).
Residual strength
cR/f c
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0
12
16
20
q10
Figure 2.93 Evaluation of Vecchio / Collins tests for the strength loss transverse strain relationship
For a maximum compressive strain of concrete equal to the residual stress cR/fc=0.5
and for an angle =45o the maximum permissible mechanical reinforcement ratio
results max = cR/fc/2 = 0.25.
This failure mode may be critical for thin webs of T and I beams and in EC2/ is
provided at design level (fc=fcd):
VRd2
fcd
=
b w z (cot + tan )
(2.106)
fck
0.50 and for fck=20 N/mm2, = 45 is in effect:
200
1
= 0.60 v Rd2 = 0.60 = 0.30 = 30%
2
In accordance with DIN 1045-1 angle may vary between 18.5 60 and is
calculated according to equation 2.92. Factor is replaced by factor c (strut
compressive strength reduction coefficient due to transverse cracking) that takes the
value 0.75. Actually this factor is equivalent to 0.75 x 0.85=0.64 compared to 0.60 of
EC2/ since fcd value in DIN is defined as fcd = fck0.85/1.5.
= 0.70
174
VRd,max
bw z
c fcd
,
(cot + tan )
c = 0.75
(2.107)
In the following we will look at the strains under uniform web shear in order to find
criteria for the limitation of struts angle and calculate the required stirrups.
y
c
Figure 2.94 Concrete stress under uniform web shear
x + y = c
(1)
= tan x =
x = cot x = v cot
x
tan
fc
fc
(2)
= cot y =
= tan y = v tan
y
cot
fc
fc
(3)
(1),(2),(3) c = x + y
= (tan + cot ) = v (tan + cot )

fc
fc
(2.108)
To calculate the corresponding strain of the uniform web shear field the assumptions
for the material laws should be applied.
Steel is not presenting any particular problem in regard to available ductility.
Concrete demonstrates a strength decrease when it is strained transversally to the
direction of the compression field. Therefore transverse tensile strain should be
calculated and used as failure criterion.
175
cR
fc
c
cR=fc
1.0
0.5f c
0.5
fs
sy
20 q
Concrete
Concrete
Steel
Figure 2.95 compressive strength of concrete to transversal strain relationship and elastoplastic
behaviour of steel under tension
Calculation for uniform strain could be based on Mohrs circle assuming that cracks
open perpendicularly to the direction of the compressive field.
/2
y
x
q
c
/2
P
c
y
q
Figure 2.96 Strain under uniform web shear
q = + y + c
(1)
+ c
/2
= cot x
= tan
x + c
/2
(2)
y + c
/2
/2
=
= tan
= cot
q x y + c
/2
(3)
176
(tan + cot )
2
(2),(3)
x + y + 2 c =
(1),(4)
q + c =
(5)
q = x (1 + cot 2 ) + c cot 2
(6)
y = q x c
(7)
(2),(5)
(3),(5)
(4)
(tan + cot )
2
x + c
tan
=
q + c tan + cot
y + c
q + c
cot
tan + cot
q = y (1 + tan 2 ) + c tan 2
(8)
q = y + tan 2 ( y + c ) tan =
(8)
q y
y + c
(2.109)
1st application:
Let max q=20, x=2, the yield point of S400 steel and compressive strain c=1
q = x + x cot 2 + c cot 2
q = x + cot 2 ( x + c )
cot =
q x
x + c
20 2
18
=
= 6 = 2.50
2 +1
3
Therefore cot=2.50 is the limit value while for x=2.5 (S500) cot = 5 = 2.20
When strain in x direction is less, i.e. when compressions origin is an external
compressive load or prestressing force and not the elongated reinforcement then
angle may get much lower values.
2nd application:
Let max q=20, x=0 and compressive strain c=1.

20 0
= 20 4.50
0 +1
Angle may also get small values when excessive reinforcement in x direction is
available and the required strain to assure the equilibrium is decreased (no yield of
the reinforcement in direction x). This event occurs in the next example.
cot =
177
3rd application:
Let max q=20, x=1 and compressive strain c=1.

20 1
19
=
= 9.50 = 3.0
1+ 1
2
EC2 and specify maximum cot value for beams with constant longitudinal
reinforcement equal to 2.50 while with curtailed reinforcement equal to 2.00. New
DIN 1045-1 demands the calculation of cot.
cot =
Concerning (transverse reinforcements) tensile strain along y it results increased in

the q=20 limit state indicating yielding of the transverse reinforcement.
Specifically in the first application for x=2 results y=20-2-1=17, in the second for
x=0 results y=20-0-1=19 and in third for x=1 results y=20-1-1=18.
In the event of seismic cyclic loading, yielding of stirrups is not permissible because
on one hand they cannot return to their initial state and on the other hand it leads to
other failure modes (anchorage failure, concrete cover spalling etc.)
Therefore setting as limit of the longitudinal reinforcements tensile strain the yield
strain of steel results to:
y=2 , x=2 and compressive strain c=1
q=y+x+c =2+2+1=5
cot =
q x
=
x + c
52
=
2 +1
3
= 1 , i.e. =45
3
Therefore earthquake resistant design should be always based on struts angle

=45.
In all previous cases concrete strength of struts is decreased due to transverse strain
up to half of the cylinders compressive strength.
Shear deformation is expressed by the following equation:
= ( x + c ) cot = 2 ( x + c ) cot
2
and also by equation:
= 2 ( y + c ) tan
(1)
(2)
178
Deformations in previous applications are calculated as follows:

1=
2=
3=
2(2+1)2.50= 15= 1.50%

2(0+1)4.50= 9= 0.90%
2(1+1)3.00= 12= 1.20%
Therefore in the limit states examined shear deformation reaches relatively high
values compared to the inelastic deformations due to yield under bending (plastic
hinge). These deformations occurring usually at the bottom of walls should be
considered for the displacement based elastoplastic analysis (pushover).
Axial compression and shear interaction should be verified through the concrete
stresses occurring in the inclined compression field. These stresses may be easily
become critical since the compressive strength of cracked concrete is noticeably
decreased.
In case of compressive shear (see Chapter 2.10.4) a compressive force x is acting
that has an external origin (and not due to the reinforcement along x).
x
= n x = v cot
fc
v=
where
fc
y
= y = v tan
fc
(3)
(4)
c = x + y n x + y = v (tan + cot )
(5)
The maximum compressive stress an inclined strut may sustain due to transversal
strain (cracking) is approximately 0.50 () to 0.60fc (EC2).
Thus inclined struts failure condition results to:
c
0.60 nx + y 0.60
fc
(6)
Inclined fields direction is calculated as follows:

y
v tan
=
= tan 2 tan =
nx
v cot
nx
1
2
(7)
For angles <45, i.e.:

y
tan =
nx
1/ 2
<1
nx > y
179
(8)
When compressive stress is increased, compressive strength of inclined fields

concrete should be verified. Its strength is exceeded when:
nx + y = 0.60 y = 0.60 nx
(9)
From equations (1), (2) and (8), following equation is derived:

v 2 = n x y v = n x (0.60 n x )
(2.110)
If angle =45 then: nx = y = 0.30

If angle <45 (cases examined), then: nx > 0.30
Therefore sustainable shear stress in presence of increased compressive stress is
expressed by equation (2.110).
Presenting relationship -nx in a diagram (Fig. 2.97), we may observe that for values
0.30<nx<0.60 shear strength demonstrates a gradual decrease and becomes zero for
nx=0.60
Concrete strength decrease under transverse tensile strain may be avoided with
densely arranged stirrups or even using steel or concrete jackets. Thus, concretes
transversal strain q will be lower than the limit of 4 and compressive struts strength
loss will not occur:
n x + y = 1. 0 y = 1 n x
(10)
v = n x y = n x (1 n x )
(2.111)
If angle =45 then nx = y = 0.50

If angle <45 (cases examined), then nx > 0.50
For comparison reasons above relation is plotted in the same diagram (Fig. 2.97)
with the previous ones where compressive strength is decreased to 0.50 and 0.60fc.
Required quantity of stirrups to exclude strength loss should be such to prevent
yielding of stirrups.
v = nx y y =
v2
= v tan , where
nx
tan =
v
nx
(11)
Following relation of EC2 and 2003 expresses shear resistance in case of

increased compression:

VRd2,red = 1.67 VRd2 1 cp,eff
fcd
where
< VRd2 ,
cp,eff = (Nsd fyk A s2 / s ) / A c
180
(2.112)
0.6
fc
0.5
q<4
45
=
0.4
4<q<20
0.6f c
0.3
27
= 17
0.5f c
0.2
vR
0.1
2
=2
0.2
=11
d2
,re
d
=6
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
nx
Figure 2.97 Shear resistance decrease of struts field due to compression
The limit of reduced compression with safety factors at design level is:
cp,eff
fcd
0.40
Without safety factors and considering that contribution of compressive reinforcement

has been taken into account in nx value, the same equation may be formulated as
follows:
VRd2,red = VRd2 (1.67 2.5 n x ),
n x = no l
(2.113)
For nx=0.67 results VRd2,red=0. For nx0.27 no shear resistance decrease due to
compression results. In the same diagram relationship of /EC2 is represented.
v Rd2,red = v Rd2 (1.67 2.5 n x )
Example:
Let nx = 0.60 and = 0.15

tan =
0.15
= 0.25, = 14
0.60
y = 0.150.25 = 0.038
181
Rd2,red = 0.30 (1.67 2.5 n x ) (2.114)
If y = 0.02 < 0.038 then stirrups will yield and decreased strength 0.60fc will prevail,
i.e.
max v = 0.60 (0.60 0.60) = 0 ,
therefore compressive shear failure will occur due to struts decreased strength.
2.10.6 Bidiagonal reinforcement
With bidiagonal reinforcement a second shear transfer system is added to the

existing one. Compressive strut obtains higher ductility in case of direct support due
to confinement and compressive reinforcement (Fig. 2.98).
AsDf sD
V/2
V/2
M
V/2
V/2
AsDf sD
Figure 2.98 Bidiagonal reinforcement
I
d
v = 2m
d
l
M = D d = A sD fsD cos d
2M = V I 2m = v
(2.115)
A f
= sD sD cos
2
b d fc
b d fc
m = D cos
(2.116)
d
sin
= 2D cos
= 2D sin
(2.117)
l
cos
Therefore with a mechanical reinforcement ratio D shear force v=2Dsin is
carried, i.e. for:
v = 2m
d 1
1
= sin =
= 0.45
l 2
5
v = 2 0.45 D = 0.90 D
182
2.10.7 Flexural shear applications in short columns
Shear transfer mechanisms may coexist with different contributions depending on the
conditions. Only transfer through the shear resistance of concrete may not coexist
with the direct support, stirrups and bidiagonal reinforcement since these
mechanisms act in cracked state when concrete bears no tension.
Table 2.3 Possible combinations of shear transfer mechanisms (Y=yes, N=no)
Concrete
shear
Concrete
shear
Direct
support
Stirrups
Stirrups
Bidiagonal
reinforcement
Compression
Bidiagonal
Compression
reinforcement
Direct
support
Y
Y
The following several examples are presented to compare shear transfer

mechanisms previously discussed with the expressions of 2000 and EC2:
1st example:
fc=20 /mm2, fy=400 /mm2

l/d=4, n=0.40
l=1% in each flange, l=0.20
In accordance with calculation of shear resistance without safety factors is
based on equation:
v Rd1 =
0.15 cp
Rd c k
(1.20 + 40 l ) +
fc
fc
v Rd1 =
0.26 1.5 1.2

(1.20 + 40 0.01) + 0.15 0.40 = 3.7% + 6.0% = 9.7%
20
183
M
N
V
d
Brittle shear failure

of concrete
V
N
M
Figure 2.99 Column restrained on both ends without stirrups with ratio l/d=4. On the right the principal
compressive and tensile stresses
Based on equations derived from the shear transfer mechanisms, when flexural
strength is reached, shear results as:
d
d
+ n (1 n) = 0.10 + 0.06 = 16%
l
l
Shear force due to concretes shear strength and diagonal compressive strut will be:
v pl = 2 l
vR =
R
d
+ n (1 n) = 0.05 + 0.06 = 11%
fc
l
Therefore an early failure of concrete will occur due to shear (Fig. 2.99).
Direct support may not act since:
4d 1 4 1
1
= 1 = 0
=
l
sy 4 2
184
0,6
0,5
0,4
vpl
vRB
0,3
vRc1
vRc2
vRRd
0,2
VRD
0,1
1,
00
0,
90
0,
80
0,
70
0,
60
0,
50
0,
40
0,
30
0,
20
0,
10
0,
00
n0
Figure 2.99a Comparison of various failure modes of the 1st example. Critical for n0=0.40 is failure of
shear resistance of concrete vRRd=0.11
Vpl
VRRd
VplB
VRc2
VRB
VRc1
VR
VplD
VRDB
VRc2D
VRD
VRc1D
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
00
0,
05
0,
10
0,
15
0,
20
0,
25
0,
30
0,
35
0,
40
0,
45
0,
50
0,
55
0,
60
0,
65
0,
70
0,
75
0,
80
0,
85
0,
90
0,
95
1,
00
n0
Figure 2.99b Critical failure mode in the 1st example is shear resistance of concrete (vRRd) for
n0 0.85 and plastic resistance (vpl) for n0 > 0.85
185
2nd example:
fc=20 /mm2, fy=400 /mm2

l/d=4, n=0.40
M
N
V
d
Flexural strength
V
N
M
Figure 2.100 Column restrained on one end without stirrups with ratio l/d=4 Principal tensile stresses
are decreased compared to these of the 1st example
When no longitudinal reinforcement exists in one end of the member the result
according to the Code will be the same vRd1= 9.7%. Shear force transfer mechanisms
result to equation:
v pl = l
d
d
+ n (1 n) = 0.05 + 0.06 = 11% ,
l
l
R
d
= l = 0.05
fc
l
A 0.05 shear may be marginally carried through shear strength of concrete

and allow the member to reach its flexural strength (Fig. 2.100).
186
3rd example:
fc=20 /mm2, fy=400 /mm2

l/d=2, n=0.40
M
N
V
d
Brittle shear failure
of concrete
V
N
M
Figure 2.101 Column restrained on both ends without stirrups with ratio l/d=2. The principal tensile
stresses are increased compared to these of the 1st example
If the members length is half than the length in the first example. i.e. if it is relatively
l 2
short = , in accordance with the Code applicable will be the same as in the first
d 1
example:
v Rd1 = 3.7% + 6.0% = 9.7% ,
where an increase of Rd is allowed due to direct support with the factor =1.25:
v Rd1 = 3.7% 1.25 + 6.0% = 4.6% + 6.0% = 10.6%
In accordance with the shear force transfer mechanisms following relations for the
flexural strength will be applicable:
d
d
+ n (1 n) =
l
l
1
1
= 2 0.20 + 0.40 (1 0.40 ) = 0.20 + 0.12 = 32%
2
2
Shear force due to shear strength of concrete and diagonal compressive strut will be:
v pl = 2 l
187
vR =
d
R
+ n (1 n) = 0.05 + 0.12 = 17%
l
fc
Therefore an early failure will occur due to shear of concrete (Fig. 2.101).
Direct support may act with exploitation factor:
4 d 1 4 1 1 1
1
=
1 =
=
l
sy 2
2 2
Failure shear force then should be:
d
(2 l + n) (1 2 l n)
l
1
1 1

= 2 0.20 + 0.40 1 2 0.20 0.40 = 12%

2 2
2

vR =
Therefore maximum shear force that could be finally transferred through shear
strength of concrete and the diagonal strut is vR=17%.
Code provisions are conservative for the diagonal strut (a sort of direct support)
considering it only through the increase factor , underestimating its strength (vRd1=
10.6% against vR=17%)
0,6
0,5
vpl
0,4
vRB
vRc1
0,3
vRc2
vRRd
VRD
0,2
0,1
1,
00
0,
90
0,
80
0,
70
0,
60
0,
50
0,
40
0,
30
0,
20
0,
10
0,
00
n0
Figure 2.101a Comparison of various failure modes in the 3rd example. Critical for n0=0.40 is failure
due to shear strength of concrete vRRd=0. 17
188
Vpl
VRRd
VplB
VRc2
VRB
VRc1
VR
VplD
VRDB
VRc2D
VRD
VRc1D
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
00
0,
05
0,
10
0,
15
0,
20
0,
25
0,
30
0,
35
0,
40
0,
45
0,
50
0,
55
0,
60
0,
65
0,
70
0,
75
0,
80
0,
85
0,
90
0,
95
1,
00
n0
Figure 2.101b Critical failure mode in the 3rd example is direct support (vRD) for n0 0.15 and shear
strength of concrete (vRRd) for n0 > 0.15
4th example:
fc=20 /mm2, fy=400 /mm2

l/d=2, n=0.0
M
V
d
Brittle fracture of
the direct support strut
V
M
Figure 2.102 Restrained on both ends member without axial force, without stirrups with ratio l/d=2.
The principal tensile stresses of concrete are negligible
189
In absence of axial force provisions of the Code should result to just:

v Rd1 = 3.7% 1.25 = 4.6%, ( = 1.25)
In accordance with the shear force transfer mechanisms through concretes shear
strength results:
vR =
R
= 5%
fc
Through the direct support a higher value results (Fig. 2.102):

4 d 1 4 1 1 1
1
=
1 =
=
l
sy 2
2 2
vR =
d
1 1
1

(2 l ) (1 2 l ) = 2 0.20 1 2 0.20 = 0.08 = 8%

l
2 2
2

Code provisions are conservative for the direct support considering it only through
the increase factor , underestimating its strength (vRd1= 4.6% against vR=8%).
0,6
0,5
vpl
0,4
vRB
vRc1
0,3
vRc2
vRRd
VRD
0,2
0,1
1,
00
0,
90
0,
80
0,
70
0,
60
0,
50
0,
40
0,
30
0,
20
0,
10
0,
00
n0
Figure 2.102a Comparison of various failure modes in the 4th example. Critical for n0=0.0 is failure due
to direct support of concrete (vRD=0.08).
190
Vpl
VRRd
VplB
VRc2
VRB
VRc1
VR
VplD
VRDB
VRc2D
VRD
VRc1D
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
00
0,
05
0,
10
0,
15
0,
20
0,
25
0,
30
0,
35
0,
40
0,
45
0,
50
0,
55
0,
60
0,
65
0,
70
0,
75
0,
80
0,
85
0,
90
0,
95
1,
00
n0
Figure 2.102b Critical failure mode in the 4th example is direct support (vRD) for n0 0.15 and
concretes shear (vRRd) strength for n0 > 0.15
5th example:
fc=20 /mm2, fy=400 /mm2

l/d=4, n=0.40
l=1% in each flange, l=0.20, =0.10
Adding stirrups with B=0.10 in the column of the first example with a ratio
l 4
= ,
d 1
then in accordance with the Code the resistant shear force results:
v Rd3 = 0.90 ( + v Rd1 ) = 0.90 (0.10 + 0.037 + 0.15 0.40 ) = 18%
In accordance with the shear force transfer mechanisms the flexural strength will be:
d
d
2 l = n (1 n)
l
l
1
1
= 2 0.20 = 0.40 (1 0.40 ) = 0.10 + 0.06 = 16%
4
4
v pl =
191
M
N
V
d
Flexural strength
V
N
M
Figure 2.103 Restrained on both ends column with stirrups with ratio l/d=4
The principal tensile stresses of concrete are negligible
The shear force carried through stirrups and the diagonal strut is expressed by the
following equation. Angle is calculated as: = 37 cot = 1.33
d
v R = cot + n (1 n) = 0.10 1.33 + 0.06 = 19.3% > v pl
l
Therefore stirrups are sufficient to allow the member to reach its flexural strength
(Fig. 2.103). In diagram 2.103a we may observe that for increasing compressive
stress stirrups are no more critical due to the decrease of angle . Thus plastic
strength is reached for all probable compressive stress levels. This should be always
assured for columns through the sufficiency of transverse reinforcement. Thus
decrease of compressive strength (vRc1) occurring when stirrups yield or loose their
anchorage is not critical as well. This detail is not clarified by and EC2.
Specifically it is not clearly emerging that the decrease of shear strength in presence
of increased compressive force is crucial when critical is yielding of stirrups.
Otherwise a column could never bear a normalised compression greater than 0.57
even under a minimal flexural shear stress (equation 2.113).
192
0,8
0,7
0,6
vpl
0,5
vRB
vRc1
0,4
vRc2
vRRd
0,3
VRD
0,2
0,1
1,
00
0,
90
0,
80
0,
70
0,
60
0,
50
0,
40
0,
30
0,
20
0,
10
0,
00
n0
Figure 2.103a Comparison of various failure modes in the 5th example. Critical for n0=0.40 is plastic
strength failure (vpl=0.16).
Vpl
VRRd
VplB
VRc2
VRB
VRc1
VR
VplD
VRDB
VRc2D
VRD
VRc1D
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
00
0,
05
0,
10
0,
15
0,
20
0,
25
0,
30
0,
35
0,
40
0,
45
0,
50
0,
55
0,
60
0,
65
0,
70
0,
75
0,
80
0,
85
0,
90
0,
95
1,
00
n0
Figure 2.103b Critical failure mode in the 5th example is plastic strength reached through the
sufficiency of stirrups.
193
6th example:
fc=20 /mm2, fy=400 /mm2

l/d=2, n=0.40
l=1% in each flange, l=0.20, =0.10
M
N
V
d
Brittle failure of concrete web
under compression
V
N
M
Figure 2.104 Restrained on both ends column with stirrups, with ratio l/d=2
The principal compressive stresses are very high while tensile stresses are negligible
If the columns length was half than the length in the 5th example (short column), in
accordance with the Code:
v Rd3 = 0.90 ( B + v Rd1 ) = 0.90 (0.10 + 0.037 1.25 + 0.15 0.40 ) = 19%
where = 1.25 is the increase factor due to direct support.
Flexural strength according to the shear force transfer mechanisms will be:
1
1
d
d
2 l + n (1 n) = 2 0.20 + 0.40 (1 0.40 ) = 0.20 + 0.12 = 32%
l
l
2
2
Shear force carried through stirrups and the diagonal strut is expressed by the
following equation:
v pl =
v R = + n (1 n)
d
= 0.10 + 0.12 = 22%
l
194
Therefore stirrups yielding will occur. When stirrups yield the inclination of struts
(angle ) changes and becomes smaller. The angle calculated is =37o (cot=1.33)
when:
d
= 0.10 1.33 + 0.12 = 25.3%.
l
Shear force cannot reach this value because before this critical is web failure under
compression (equation 2.99):
v R = cot + n (1 n)
v R = (n (0.50 n))
1/ 2
= (0.40 (0.50 0.40 ))
1/ 2
= 20%.
The corresponding value of angle calculated is =27 (cot=2)

In accordance with EC2/ for the verification of the web under compression
failure the following approximative formula is used:
v R = 0.30 (1.67 2.5 n) = 0.30 (1.67 2.5 0.40 ) = 20%.
The short column failure problem results mainly from the compressive strength of the
webs decrease when stirrups yield. This effect frequently occurs in buildings where
earlier Codes were followed and decreased stirrups are usually 6/30 or 8/30. Next
diagram (Fig. 2.104c) illustrates a typical case with l=0.10, =0.02, as=1 and
R/fc=0.01 due to cyclic loading (equation 2.48).
0,8
0,7
0,6
vpl
0,5
vRB
vRc1
0,4
vRc2
vRRd
0,3
VRD
0,2
0,1
1,
00
0,
90
0,
80
0,
70
0,
60
0,
50
0,
40
0,
30
0,
20
0,
10
0,
00
n0
Figure 2.104a Comparison of various failure modes in the 6th example. Critical for n0=0.40 is failure
due to decreased compressive strength of concrete (vRc1=0.20)
195
Vpl
VRRd
VplB
VRc2
VRB
VRc1
VR
VplD
VRDB
VRc2D
VRD
VRc1D
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
00
0,
05
0,
10
0,
15
0,
20
0,
25
0,
30
0,
35
0,
40
0,
45
0,
50
0,
55
0,
60
0,
65
0,
70
0,
75
0,
80
0,
85
0,
90
0,
95
1,
00
n0
Figure 2.104b Critical failure mode in the 6th example for n0 0.35 is concretes direct support (vRD),
for 0.35 n0 0.55 is the decreased compressive strength of concrete vRc1 and for n0 0.55 is plastic
strength
Vpl
VRRd
VplB
VRc2
VRB
VRc1
VR
VplD
VRDB
VRc2D
VRD
VRc1D
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,
00
0,
05
0,
10
0,
15
0,
20
0,
25
0,
30
0,
35
0,
40
0,
45
0,
50
0,
55
0,
60
0,
65
0,
70
0,
75
0,
80
0,
85
0,
90
0,
95
1,
00
n0
Figure 2.104c Critical failure mode for short column is for n0 < 0.50 concretes direct support (vRD), for
0.50 < n0 < 0.70 is the decreased compressive strength of concrete vRc1 and for n0 0.70 is plastic
strength
196
Conclusions on shear force transfer mechanisms and failure modes from the
previous 6 examples are summarized in the following tables:
2nd Example
1st Example
5%=v'Rth
5th Example
5%
10%
6%=v''Rth
6%
6%
Figure 2.105 Shear force transfer mechanisms in short columns with l/d=4
Table 2.4 Shear force transfer theory and comparison for l/d=4
1st example
Failure
mode
2nd example
Bending
Bending
10%
5%
10%
11%
11%
16%
vR ()
9.7%
9.7%
18%
theor .R /p l
11/16
11/11
16/16
brittle under
cyclic load
Ductile
requir.
vRth
Behaviour
Concrete's shear
5 th example
brittle
To achieve ductile behaviour of reinforced concrete columns small depth of

compression zone, i.e. large cross-sections, confinement, compressive reinforcement
and sufficient quantity of stirrups against shear are required.
197
3 rd Example
4th Example
6 th Example
5%=v'Rth
10%
12%=v''Rth
8%
12%
Figure 2.106 Shear force transfer mechanisms in short columns with l/d=2
Table 2.5 Shear force transfer theory and comparison for l/d=2
3rd example
Failure
mode
Concrete's shear
4th example
Direct support
6 th example
Stirrups yielding
Web compression
req .
20%
12%
20%
vRth
17%
8%
20%
10.6%
4.6%
20%
17/32
8/12
20/32
vR
()
theor.R /pl
Behaviour
brittle
brittle
brittle
Compressive force does not increase flexural strength when compression zones
depth is x>d/2. In such cases a further increase of the compressive force leads to a
decrease of the flexural resistance.
The most dangerous seismic failures occur in columns due to the combination of
compression and shear. Columns are the structural members rehabilitated or even
usually strengthened with jackets after an earthquake. An obvious question is: why
we do not design more resilient columns? Codes provide certain limits for their
compressive stress that are not always sufficient. Basic strength factors of columns
in practice are:
198
1. not being exposed to large inelastic deformations at their bottom and top, i.e. the
building should have stiffening members (walls and cores).
2. not being exposed to huge variations of the compressive force. Tension due to
earthquake should be excluded.
3. compression zone should have small depth, i.e. x/d<0.5 or even x/d<0.33 (do not
ignore the vertical seismic component). In such cases columns have increased
rotational ductility.
4. columns should have stiff foundations that exclude differential settlements during
an earthquake leading to stress redistributions and frequently to their
overloading.
5. to have appropriate proportions of transverse and longitudinal reinforcement
excluding shear failure risk (capacity design).
6. to be appropriately maintained (corrosion, carbonation), without incorporated
drain pipes, free of wounds from installations (electrical, plumbing etc.) and to be
constructed of high strength materials.
7. reinforcements should have sufficient cover (corrosion, anchorage) and well
confined over lapping of longitudinal reinforcement bars.
8. closed stirrups should be well anchored and have dense transverse confinement
reinforcement at the top and the bottom.
9. should not be short, i.e. the length to static depth ratio should not be less than 5,
the relative displacement of their ends should not lead to significant rotation (they
presumably have decreased ductility) and should not be exposed to relatively
large shear forces.
10. longitudinal reinforcement bars should be laterally secured with stirrups to
exclude buckling, spalling of cover and cross-sections reduction.
Very effective treatments of the problem of columns strength against earthquake are
composite solutions either from the beginning or afterwards during a strengthening
(Fig. 2.107). Adding a steel jacket of circular or square cross-section and filling the
gap with an ultra-high strength mortar a very significant increase of the bearing
capacity may be achieved. Specifically the flexural strength factor under axial
compression [5] in the examples of Figure 2.107 is gradually increased from 1.24 to
4.42, 7.72 and up to 10.30 in the last example.
199
N =-100.0 kN
x
M =50.0 kNm
y
TrlFak=1.24 -
Strain []
Stress [N/mm 2]
F [kN], z [m]
-9.1
-3.5
-347.8
-421.2
12? 14
s = 0.07
A = 1847 mm 2
0.09
?c =1.76
?s =1.15
0.08
297.5
347.8
4.5
Stress [N/mm 2]
Strain []
N =-100.0 kN
x
M =50.0 kNm
y
TrlFak=4.42 -
-3.5
-3.3
-3.3
F [kN], z [m]
-204.3
-347.8
12? 14
s = 0.07
A = 1847 mm 2
-1321.5
0.09
?c =1.76
?s =1.15
?a=1.15
0.11
347.8
2.6
2.7
2.8
N =-100.0 kN
x
M =50.0 kNm
y
TrlFak=7.72 -
Strain []
Stress [N/mm 2]
-3.5
-3.3
? 14
? 14
A = 154 mm 2
A = 154 mm 2
879.7
204.3
F [kN], z [m]
-204.3
-1869.3
-347.8
0.13
?c =1.76
?s =1.15
?a=1.15
? 14
? 14
A = 154 mm 2
A = 154 mm 2
0.13
347.8
1097.2
3.5
3.6
N =-100.0 kN
x
M =50.0 kNm
y
TrlFak=10.30 -
? 14
? 14
A = 154 mm 2
A = 154 mm 2
204.3
Strain []
Stress [N/mm 2]
-3.5
-3.4
-3.3
F [kN], z [m]
-204.3
-2245.5
-276.8
0.15
?c =1.76
?s =1.15
?a=1.15
? 14
? 14
A = 154 mm 2
A = 154 mm 2
0.14
347.8
1215.7
4.4
4.5
4.6
204.3
Figure 2.107 Composite columns, where the increase of the safety factor against bending failure is
clear (1.20 4.40 7.70 10.30).
200
At the same time shear failure risk is fully avoided since the steel jacket acts as high
strength transverse reinforcement. Frequently the jacket is not connected at the ends
of the member and the initial flexural yield strength is retained while critical against
brittle failure shear strength is increased.
Composite solutions solve at the same time all column problems and they are easily
implemented since they are combined with the concept of the lost steel formwork.
2.11
Calculation of plastic rotation
Calculation of the maximum possible plastic rotation of a beam, column or wall is

useful in the procedure of elastoplastic analysis for a more reliable investigation of
the seismic structural performance (pushover method). Actually it is a cyclic loading
with residual deformations and therefore modeling only the first branch of the loading
may probably be insufficient. Even though it is useful since it clears the parameters
affecting the event and their quantitative contribution.
When a plastic hinge is formed under flexural shear the plastic rotation limit pl may
be calculated from the shear ratio, the x/d ratio of the compression zone, the
longitudinal and transverse reinforcement, the plastic deformation properties of steel
(yield point, strain hardening, maximum plastic strain) and the properties of concrete
(strength, compressive strain at fracture).
The length Lpl of the plastic hinge is affected by the strain hardening of steel and the
fracture limit t in relation to the force distribution on reinforcement. Specifically the
bigger the slope of the strain hardening branch and the fracture limit is the bigger is
the length of the reinforcement that yields. The slower the force along the
reinforcement, depending on the shear ratio as, changes the bigger is the length of
the reinforcement that yields because the distance between the points with stresses
fy and ft will be obviously longer.
In the presence of high shear stress covered by stirrups converging inclined cracks
occur ending at the compressive zone of concrete. Plastic rotations / curvatures are
concentrated there and concrete is driven to failure. Inelastic compressive strain of
concrete reaches locally very high values depending on confinement through stirrups.
Compressive reinforcement contributes significantly in the improvement of the
rotational ductility. Application of the reinforcements force in the region of the
variable angle struts is practically linear. Therefore force and strain of reinforcement
will be parabolically distributed (Fig. 2.110).
201
Following parameters are assumed known:

avail : available mechanical stirrups reinforcement ratio
as: shear ratio = /(Vd)
l: mechanical ratio of tensile reinforcement
R/fc: shear strength of concrete to compressive strength ratio
x/d: compression zone ratio
cR: fracture compressive strain of concrete, depending on confinement
t: fracture tensile strain of steel
fy: yield stress of steel
y: yield strain of steel
ft: fracture stress of steel
L: cantilever's length up to the point of zero
Calculation of reinforcements force introductory length LF in the variable angle struts
region is based on the maximum angle as follows:
l
as
req
=
= cot , 0.50 cot 2
avail avail
(1)
The limits of cot values are documented on the compatibility of deformations in a

previous Chapter.
If shear stress is carried by the strength of concrete, cracks will form a max angle to
the cantilevers axis and:
R l
cot = min(cot ) = 0.50

(2)
fc a s
Parameter is introduced to simplify the calculations and is the ratio of the
reinforcements force introductory length LF to the cantilevers length (distance of the
section examined from the center of moments):
L F = d cot
L F d cot cot
=
=
= ,
L
L
as
0 1
202
(3)
2.11 Calculation of plastic rotation
Maximum steel strain s at the cantilevers fixed end cross-section examined will be:
s = cR
d x
d
= cR 1 t , s y
x
x
(4)
if s > t, then s=t

c<cR
x
y<s<t
Figure 2.108 Shape of the strain diagram along sections depth
The corresponding steel stress fs in the cross-section examined will be (Fig. 2.109):
fs = fy + ( s y )
ft f y
ft
t y
(5)
ft
fy
fs
arctan
Figure 2.109 Bi-linear - steel diagram
Reinforcements force FF at a LF distance is calculated as follows (Fig. 2.110):

Fs FF = c L2F ,
c =
where
(6)
Parabolas slope at a LF distance equals to the slope of the linear segment :

2 c LF =
FF
L LF
c=
FF
1
2 LF (L LF )
203
(7)
FF
L2F
F
2
= F
2 LF (L LF ) 2 (1 )
Fs FF =
(3),(6),(7)
FF = Fs
2 (1 )
2
(8)
To distinguish the two cases Fy>FF (Fig. 2.110) and Fy<FF (Fig. 2.111) factor * is
introduced:
(8)
FF = Fy
Fs
2 1
= Fy
2
f
2 s 1
f
y
,
=
fs
2 1
fy
fs > f y
(9)
LF
L
''Bond force"
''Reinforcement's force"
FF
Line
Fy
Parabola
Fs
F
y
Lpl
Line
Parabola
''Reinforcement strain"
Parabola
s
Figure 2.110 Yielding of reinforcement in cracked due to shear region (>*)
204
If >* then reinforcements yield force Fy is greater than the force FF acting in
distance LF and reinforcements yielding starts within the length of the parabolic
distribution (Fig. 2.110). In this case, the length of the plastic hinge Lpl results less
than length LF.
(6)
Fs Fy = c L2pl , where c= constant
(7),(8)
c=
F
FF
(1 )
1
1
1
= Fs
= 2s
2
2
2 L (1 )
2 L (1 ) L (2 )
L2pl =
Fs Fy
c
fy
= 1
L f s
L pl
Fs Fy
Fs
(10)
L2 (2 )
1
(2 ) ,
f y < fs
(2.118)
2
Applicable is: pl = max Lpl ,
3
where solidity ratio 2/3 is applicable for the calculation of the area of parabola.
max =
s
d x
2 1 L pl
pl = s
as
x L
3
1
d
(2.119)
If <* then yield force Fy of the reinforcement is less than force FF acting at distance
LF and yielding of reinforcement starts outside the parabolic distribution length on the
linear segment (Fig. 2.111). Length Lpl of the plastic hinge results greater than length
LF.
Fy
Fs + Fs FF
=
L
L L pl
f (2 )
Lpl
= 1 y
L
fs
2
(2.120)
2 1 Lpl
pl = s
as
3 1 x L
d
(2.121)
where solidity factor 2/3 is approximatively applicable for the calculation of the area of
parabola and the trapezoid.
205
LF
L
''Bond force"
''Reinforcement's force"
Fy
Line
FF
Fs
Parabola
Lpl
Line
''Reinforcement strain"
Line
F
s
Parabola
Figure 2.111 Yielding of reinforcement outside the cracked due to shear region (<*)
Evaluation of plastic rotation tests is very difficult because results are strongly
affected by parameters demonstrating great dispersion, such as e.g. shear strength
of concrete and concretes ductility under compression. In the next diagrams
experimental and theoretical values of the plastic rotation are compared. Deviation
from unity is noticeable while variation between 0.70 and 1.80 is not considered as
absolutely satisfactory. For this reason results are represented in three different
diagrams in relation to the parameters on which they depend, specifically the
compression zone depth ratio x/d (Fig. 2.112), longitudinal reinforcement l (Fig.
2.113) and shear ratio as (Fig. 2.114). We may observe that deviation is not
correlated to the various parameters, what means that it is effect inherent or even
inherent to the way measurements in the corresponding experiment were executed.
206
3,00
2,50
pltest/plcalc
2,00
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
x/d
Figure 2.112 Evaluation of plastic rotation experiments in relation to compression zone to sections
depth ratio
3,00
2,50
pltest/plcalc
2,00
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00
0,00
0,05
0,10
0,15
207
0,20
0,25
0,30

Figure 2.113 Evaluation of plastic rotation experiments in relation to the mechanical ratio of
longitudinal reinforcement
3,00
2,50
pltest/plcalc
2,00
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00
0,00
0,50
1,00
1,50
2,00
2,50
3,00
3,50
4,00
4,50
as
Figure 2.114 Evaluation of plastic rotation experiments in relation to the shear ratio
Plotting equations 2.119 and 2.121 in a pl x/d system for the following values:
as=3, cot=1, fy=500 MPa, ft=550 MPa, t=0.050, y=0.0025, cR=0.010 and changing
as in 1.50 and 6.00 we may observe the influence of shear ratio in plastic rotation
(Fig. 2.115). At the same time we may also observe the influence in the length of the
plastic hinge or more precisely in the ratio of the plastic hinge length to the distance
of the section from the zero point of moments Lpl/L (Fig. 2.116).
Applying limits for the maximum plastic rotation in practice, we should bear in mind
that the factors that may lead to considerable differences from theoretical solutions
are many; therefore we should be adequately conservative. Columns seismic
compressive load may not be accurately estimated since it depends on the model
and its boundary conditions that are rapidly changing under cyclic loads. Specifically
redistribution of loads between neighbouring columns due to the smallest differential
settlement of supports during an earthquake lead to significant changes of axial
forces and in addition stability of the plastic hinges compression zone depends on
local indeterminate and therefore unknown conditions (e.g. the presence of a stirrup
in the specific position) and may not be accurately estimated with calculations. The
effect of buckling of compressive reinforcement in the critical region of the
compression zone with a failure of the concrete at the same time occurs very
frequently in practice and in experiments.
208
45,0
40,0
35,0
30,0
as=1.50
pl
25,0
as=3.00
20,0
as=6.00
15,0
10,0
5,0
0,
6
0,
65
0,
7
0,
75
0,
8
0,
85
0,
9
0,
95
0,
5
0,
55
0,
4
0,
45
0,
3
0,
35
0,
2
0,
25
0,
1
0,
15
0,
05
0,0
x/d
Figure 2.115 Influence of the variation of shear ratio in plastic rotation. Plastic rotation in
30,00
25,00
as=1.50
15,00
as=3.00
as=6.00
10,00
5,00
0,
9
0,
95
0,
8
0,
85
0,
7
0,
75
0,
6
0,
65
0,
5
0,
55
0,
4
0,
45
0,
3
0,
35
0,
2
0,
25
0,
1
0,
15
0,00
0,
05
Lpl/L*100
20,00
x/d
Figure 2.116 Influence of the variation of shear ratio in the plastic hinge length
209
Changing angle or better cot in 0.5 and 2.0 we may observe the influence of the
length for the force introduction to the reinforcement depending on the quantity of the
transverse reinforcement (stirrups, Fig. 2.117, 2.118).
40,0
35,0
30,0
25,0
pl
cot=0.5
20,0
cot=1.0
cot=2.0
15,0
10,0
5,0
0,
05
0,
1
0,
15
0,
2
0,
25
0,
3
0,
35
0,
4
0,
45
0,
5
0,
55
0,
6
0,
65
0,
7
0,
75
0,
8
0,
85
0,
9
0,
95
0,0
x/d
Figure 2.117 Influence of angle variation in plastic rotation. Plastic rotation in

30,00
25,00
cot=0.5
15,00
cot=1.0
cot=2.0
10,00
5,00
0,00
0,
05
0,
1
0,
15
0,
2
0,
25
0,
3
0,
35
0,
4
0,
45
0,
5
0,
55
0,
6
0,
65
0,
7
0,
75
0,
8
0,
85
0,
9
0,
95
Lpl/L*100
20,00
x/d
Figure 1.118 Influence of angle variation in the plastic hinge length
210
Changing longitudinal reinforcement steel grade in S500N and S420 we may observe
the influence of the ductility of steel, i.e. of the fracture limit t of steel in the region
where it is critical (Fig. 2.119, 2.120).
80,0
70,0
60,0
50,0
pl
S500N
40,0
S500H
S420
30,0
20,0
10,0
0,
05
0,
1
0,
15
0,
2
0,
25
0,
3
0,
35
0,
4
0,
45
0,
5
0,
55
0,
6
0,
65
0,
7
0,
75
0,
8
0,
85
0,
9
0,
95
0,0
x/d
Figure 2.119 Influence of steel grade in plastic rotation. Plastic rotation in

35,00
30,00
20,00
S500N
S500H
S420
15,00
10,00
5,00
0,
9
0,
95
0,
8
0,
85
0,
7
0,
75
0,
3
0,
35
0,
4
0,
45
0,
5
0,
55
0,
6
0,
65
0,
2
0,
25
0,
1
0,
15
0,00
0,
05
Lpl/L*100
25,00
x/d
Figure 2.120 Influence of steel grade in the plastic hinge length
211
Changing the value of concretes compressive strain in 0.05 and 0.020, e.g. through
confinement, fiber reinforcement or even choosing another concrete class we may
observe the influence of concretes ductility in the region where it is critical (Fig.
2.121, 2.122).
35,0
30,0
25,0
20,0
pl
cR=0.005
cR=0.010
cR=0.020
15,0
10,0
5,0
0,
05
0,
1
0,
15
0,
2
0,
25
0,
3
0,
35
0,
4
0,
45
0,
5
0,
55
0,
6
0,
65
0,
7
0,
75
0,
8
0,
85
0,
9
0,
95
0,0
x/d
Figure 2.121 Influence of concretes fracture limit in plastic rotation. Plastic rotation in
25,00
20,00
15,00
Lpl/L*100
cR=0.005
cR=0.010
cR=0.020
10,00
5,00
0,
05
0,
1
0,
15
0,
2
0,
25
0,
3
0,
35
0,
4
0,
45
0,
5
0,
55
0,
6
0,
65
0,
7
0,
75
0,
8
0,
85
0,
9
0,
95
0,00
x/d
Figure 2.122 Influence of concretes fracture limit in the length of the plastic hinge
212
We may observe that plastic hinges lengths ratio Lpl/L depends on the properties of
steel (strain hardening, fracture tensile strain) when steel is critical and on the x/d
ratio of the compression zone depth and the fracture compressive strain of concrete
cR when concrete is critical.
We may also observe that plastic rotation increases with shear ratio therefore short
members have a very limited rotational capacity.
S500H steel offers more than the double rotational capacity compared to S500N
steel when critical is fracture of steel.
Compression zone depth may vary up to x = 0.15d to achieve maximum rotational
capacity. For values between 0.15d and 0.35d ductility is considerably decreased.
Values x>0.35d are not recommended in order to allow a certain satisfactory
rotational capacity of the system. In the region 0<x/d<0.35 rotation angle for as=1.5 to
6.0, cot=1, cR=0.010 and S500H steel varies approximately between the limits:
[]
pl = 5 to 40
Condition for the validity of above calculations is that deformation should be flexural
(curvature) and not controlled by shear, i.e. stirrups should not yield.
Confinement and compressive reinforcements are also required to allow concretes
compressive strain to reach values of approximately cR=10 to 20. For high
values of concretes compressive strain local spalling of the concrete cover occurs
without any further damage of the confined compression zone. Confinement may
lead to triple and more plastic rotation as we may verify from the diagram of Fig.
2.121.
Summarizing, failure plastic rotation is affected by:
. compression zone x/d ratio depending on following parameters:
- concretes strength
- axial compression
- cross-sectional shape
- compressive reinforcement
. plastic hinge length depending on the following parameters:
- length L = M/V
- transverse reinforcement
- strain hardening of steel
- ductility of steel
213
In the following, relation of plastic rotation to shear ratio as is examined with

parameter the compression zone ratio x/d (Fig. 2.123) for cot=1, S500H steel and
concretes compressive strain at fracture cR=0.010.
We may observe in Fig. 2.123 that FEMA 356 recommendations (Tables 2.6, 2.7,
2.8) present similar values with the diagrams illustrated.
35,0
30,0
25,0
x/d=0.2
x/d=0.3
20,0
pl
x/d=0.4
x/d=0.5
15,0
x/d=0.6
10,0
5,0
6,
5
5,
5
4,
5
3,
5
2,
5
1,
5
0,
5
0,0
as
Figure 2.123 Maximum permissible due to flexural shear inelastic rotation values relationship to shear
ratio as. Plastic rotation in
Literature has numerous analytical formulae for the estimation of plastic rotation
depending on the parameters mentioned above. Dispersion of experimental results is
very high. For practical applications, tables based on the evaluation of numerous
experiments are typically used associating some of the above parameters and
considering adequate safety factors depending on the required performance level
(immediate occupancy-IO, life safety-LS, collapse prevention-CP). A typical example
is, the Tables of the American FEMA 356 recommendations.
214

Table 2.6 Maximum plastic rotation values for beams in accordance with FEMA 356
beams
V

bal
stirrups
IO ()
LS ()
CP ()
10
20
25
10
20
0 .5
10
20
0 .5
15
NC
10
20
NC
1.5
10
0 .5
NC
10
10
0 .5
NC
1.5
fc
4
bd
Table 2.7 Maximum plastic rotation values for columns in accordance with FEMA 356
columns
V
N
A c fc
stirrups
0 .1
0 .1
IO ()
LS ()
CP ()
15
20
12
16
0 .4
12
15
0 .4
10
12
0 .1
NC
0 .1
NC
0 .4
NC
0 .4
NC
bd
fc
4
215

Table 2.8 Maximum plastic rotation values for walls in accordance with FEMA 356
walls
N
t w l w fc
V
t wlw
fc
4
end
column
IO ()
LS ()
CP ()
0 .1
10
15
0 .1
10
0.25
0.25
1.5
0 .1
NC
0 .1
NC
0.25
NC
0.25
NC
where : fc in /mm2
C: conforming constructional arrangements for ductile behaviour
C:non-conforming constructional arrangements for ductile behaviour
bal:reinforcement ratio producing balanced strain conditions
2.12
Punching of slabs
2.12.1 Shear force transfer mechanisms
For the analysis of reinforced concrete slabs Kirchhoffs theory is typically used. It is
a theory of bending of thin plates assuming zero shear deformations as in the NavierBernoulli theory for beams. Solutions in accordance with the theory of plates are
based on homogeneous, isotropic, linearly elastic material. A reinforced concrete
slab is though cracked in many regions due to the relatively low tensile resistance of
concrete. Typical examples are positions where concentrated forces are acting (point
supports, columns of flat slabs etc.) where previous assumptions are not valid.
The flow of internal forces in a reinforced concrete slab may be described similarly to
a reinforced concrete beam through space truss models or simplified models of
membranic shells. Through such models prestressing of slabs may be also faced in
a uniform way.
216
2.12 Punching of slabs
In the first Chapter typical examples of the flow of forces in slabs are examined to
understand the various force transfer mechanisms and the problems of application of
concentrated loads on reinforced concrete slabs. In the second Chapter punching is
discussed as an example of concentration of deformations in concrete. Finally
theoretical solutions are compared to experimental results. The first example is a
circular slab with isotropic bottom reinforcement, simply supported on its perimeter
under uniform load (Fig. 2.124).
l/3
q
d
l
Figure 2.124 Circular reinforced concrete slab under uniform load
For this problem we may figure two different force transfer mechanisms (Fig. 2.125).
Q
l/2
l/2
Figure 2.125 Membranic action (compressive strut) and flexural action (concrete shear)
217
In the left model a slip with no friction between reinforcement and concrete is
allowed. In the right one there is bond between the two materials.
The important difference of these two force transfer mechanisms lies in the shear
force transfer (Fig. 2.125). In the left model it is transferred through the inclined
concrete compressive strut (membranic action) while in the right model through skew
compression and tension or in other words through shear (flexural action) of
concrete. This observation may lead to the conclusion that for the membranic action
there is no sense to verify shear stress.
A further difference in these two actions is located in tensile force distribution in
reinforcement. In the left model it is everywhere constant while in the right one,
reinforcement force is gradually decreasing reaching the support. For this reason
curtailment of reinforcement is possible only in the flexural action. The mean shear
stress may be easily calculated from the equilibrium conditions:
q r2
qr
=
2 r d 2d
The maximum value occurs at the slabs boundary:
(r ) =
(2.122)
ql
Q
l2
,
Q = q
=
(2.123)
4 d ld
4
It is interesting to investigate the level of the maximum value of the mean shear
stress in concrete when ultimate flexural strength is reached. If it is lower than the
tensile strength of concrete then shear force transfer should be effected through the
flexural action. If on the opposite it is higher then shear force transfer in the critical
region may be effected only through membranic action.
(l / 2) =
For a quantitative investigation of the conditions an approximative calculation follows

(Fig. 2.126).
l/6
Q
S Fsy
Fsy
Q
l/2
Figure 2.126 Calculation of flexural strength ultimate loads
218
When reinforcement yields then everywhere:

Fsy d =
Mpl
l,
b
where b is cross-sections width with yield moment pl.
From the equilibrium of moments about point S and using the previous equation:
Mpl
l
= Fsy d = l
6
b
Mpl
Q = 6
b
(2.124)
Substituting equations (2.123), (2.124) the corresponding maximum mean shear

stress may be calculated from the yield moment:
6 Mpl 6 Mpl
d Mpl
Q
=
=
= 6
l b d2
l d l db l db
(l / 2)
d
= 6 m pl = v pl (l / 2)
fc
l
(l / 2) =
with
m pl =
Mpl
b d fc
2
v pl (l / 2) =
A s fs d
=
b d2 fc
(2.125)
results:
d
(l / 2)
= 6 =
,
l as
fc
(2.126)
where as is the shear ratio.

For values from practice:
d 1 R
=
,
= 5%,
l 30 fc
= 0.25 = 1.25%
results
This means that for the above example of the circular slab, simply supported on the
perimeter, under uniform load (Fig. 2.124) shear force transfer through the concretes
shear strength (flexural action) is possible up to a relatively high reinforcement ratio.
In the next example the same circular slab is examined under a circular linear load in
the region of its middle (Fig. 2.127).
The maximum value of the mean shear stress occurs now at the point where the load
is applied:
(rQ ) =
q
Q
=
d 2 rQ d
219
Q = q 2 rQ
(2.127)
rQ
q
d
rP
Figure 2.127 Reinforced concrete circular slab under concentrated load
The ultimate flexural strength may be calculated again through an equilibrium

condition (Fig. 2.128):
rQ
Q
S Fsy
Fsy
Q
rP
Figure 2.128 Calculation of flexural strength ultimate load
Absolutely identically to the previous example:

Fsy d =
Mpl
b
2 rP
Q (rP rQ ) = Fsy d
From above equations results:
Q = 2
Mpl
b
rP
rP rQ
(2.128)
220
Substituting equations (2.127), (2.128) the maximum shear stress may be calculated
from the yield moment:
(rQ )
d
r
= P
fs
rQ rP rQ
or
(rQ )
d
r
rP
= P =
= v pl (rQ )
fc
rQ rP rQ as rQ
(2.129)
We may observe that the resulting shear stress on the perimeter of the slab is:
v pl (rP ) = v pl (rQ )
rQ
=
rP as
For values from practice results:

R
= 5%,
fc
d
= 1,
rQ
rP
1
rP rQ
= 5% = 0.25%
Usually in practice values of geometrical reinforcement ratio are higher. This means
that in many cases shear force transfer through the shear strength of concrete
(flexural action) is not possible. Shear force in such cases may be transferred only
through the membrane action. It should be emphasized that the change of the shear
force transfer mechanism affects a limited only region of the slab in the vicinity of the
point where concentrated load is applied, dominated by high shear stresses (Fig.
2.129). Radius ru where membranic action turns to flexural may be calculated through
the shear failure criterion of concrete.
rQ
A
ru
rP
Figure 2.129 Transition from the flexural to membranic action in punching of reinforced concrete slabs
Another remark on the transfer of compressive and tensile forces to the top and
bottom of the circular slab of the example is that it does not only happen radially but
also tangentially. In such cases we refer to rings under compression and under
tension (Fig. 2.130).
221
t
r
Figure 2.130 Radial and tangential stress components in the center of the circle
From equilibrium condition:

2 r = 2 t t
= t
t
r
(2.130)
For t = r = t (bi-axial uniform compression or tension)
The radial transfer alone should lead to extremely high stresses in the vicinity of the
center of circle. Through the tangential direction the radial direction is significantly
relieved. Remarkable is the fact that only the horizontal components of the internal
forces may be tangentially transferred and not the shear forces.
2.12.2 Punching shear strength of slabs
A more detailed examination of the membrane action of slabs under punching shear
follows. As explained for the beam without shear reinforcement, in the thin zone II of
node A, concentration of inelastic deformations may occur leading to the complete
failure of concrete (theory of the bend angle). This happens when inelastic rotation
(bend) reaches the value =4.
The additional reinforcements tensile strain under the compressed membrane (shell)
at the state of concretes failure is calculated as for beams without shear
reinforcement. In compression shell AC stress is decreased with increasing rate
reaching C. For this reason the mean elastic compressive strain from A to C is
approximatively assumed zero. Since all amounts refer to failure, index R is omitted
for simplification reasons. From equations (2.53) and (2.30) results:
222
Compressed
ring
fc
A
II
x
z
rQ
ru
Figure 2.131 Concentration of inelastic rotation and punching shear failure (bend of the compressive
strut )
s =
d
d
= 4
ru rQ
ru rQ
(2.131)
Failure load of the element under punching shear results through the equilibrium of
moments about point A (Fig. 2.129):
Q . (rP rQ) = Fs z = s Es As z = s Es d 2 rP z
Q
r
= P s E s d 2
(2.132)
z rP rQ
For point C, where the transition from the membrane to flexural action occurs (Fig.
2.131):
ru =
Q
2 z R
(2.133)
where R is the shear strength of concrete (equation 2.47). Substituting equations

(2.131), (2.132) and (2.133) results:
r
Q
= p 2 d2 S
z rp rQ
4
Q
rQ
2 z R
which leads to a second order equation with the unknown variable Q/z:
2
1
Q
rP
d2
Q
Es 4 10 3 = 0

rQ
z 2 rQ R z rP rQ
(2.134)
that can be solved as usual:

1/ 2
2

r
Q
3
= rQ R 1 + 1 + 16 10 Es P

z
rQ R rP rQ

223
(2.135)
Lever arm of internal forces is:

z = d
with
ru =
x
Q r r
= d u Q
2
z 4 rQ fc
(2.136)
Q
1
z 2 R
(2.137)
i.e. in relation to the known amount Q/z. Finally substituting z in equation (2.135) we
may calculate the punching load Q.
For a better understanding of their physical meaning above relations may be

graphically represented (Fig. 2.132). Vertical axis represents the ratio of the failure
load to the ultimate flexural strength in accordance with the theory of plasticity. For
simplification reasons it is assumed that lever arms of the internal forces are in both
cases approximately equal zR = zpl.
The ratio selected corresponds to the exploitation factor of the reinforcement.
QR
= ,
Qpl
=1
(2.138)
The physical meaning of as for beams is that if <1 a brittle punching shear failure
occurs and there is practically no plastic rotation capacity.
Parameters introduced are:
d
rQ
and
rP 1
mm 2
rP rQ R R N
(2.139)
From the diagram of Figure 2.132 we may conclude that with the decrease of d/rQ
ratio or /R ratio exploitation factor of flexural reinforcement is increased.
Practically may increase through application of a column head mushroom.
A slab with a static depth d=200 mm and columns (or heads) diameter 2rQ =400 mm
may be assumed under-reinforced (=1) when the ratio is:
rP
mm 2
< 6 [
]
R (rP rQ )
N
For R = 1.2 /mm2 (fc = 20 /mm2) and
results
rP
1
rP rQ
< 0.72%.
224

1.5
QR / QPl
d/
(2
r
Q
)=
.1
25
1.0
.25
.5
1.
2.00
4.0
.5
15
10
(/R)10 mm/N
20
Figure 2.132 Punching shear load to ultimate flexural strength relation
To increase punching shear resistance and assure some plastic rotation capacity in
under-reinforced regions (<1) following solutions may be used:
1) increase of plastic rotation capacity of the inclined strut through the use of
compressive reinforcement avoiding brittle failure of concrete.
2) avoid occurrence of concentrated rotation (bend) risk using transverse
reinforcement (stirrups) covering completely the shear force corresponding to the
maximum flexural strength. Action of stirrups is illustrated in Figure 2.133:
without stirrups
with stirrups
QR
QR
QR
QR
ru
ru'
Figure 2.133 Action of stirrups against punching
Punching shear verification in accordance with the various Codes usually involves
calculation of the mean shear stress of concrete in a specific distance from the face
of the column. In Eurocode 2 and the Greek Code 2000 distance of the critical
perimeter for punching from the face of the column is defined equal to 1.5d. It is a
225
very reasonable distance since the direct support strut inclination will be
d
1
=
and the tensile reinforcement strain at the state of the rotation
ru rQ 1.50
exhaustion:
1
= 2.67
1.50
This value is higher than the yield strain of even S500 steel therefore flexural strength
is reached without early punching shear failure (reinforcements exploitation factor
=1).
s = 4
A conservative value is assigned to the concrete shear failure stress according to the
Codes that is also correlated to the flexural reinforcement ratio.
VRd1 = Rd (1.20 + 40 l) d
for fck = 20 /mm2 Rd = 0.26 /mm2
The size factor for d=0.20 m is =1.40 and let l = 1%
(2.140)
VRd1
= 0.26 1.40 (1.20 + 0.40 ) = 0.58N / mm 2
d 1
According to our approach R value will be (equation 2.47):
Rd1 =
R = (0.6 + 0.03fc) (1.2 d) = (0.6 + 0.03 20) (1.2 0.2) = 1.2 /mm2
which means that the Code provides a material safety factor of approximately 2.
Finally punching shear experiments performed by various researchers [31, 32, 33,
34, 35 and 36] were evaluated. All experiments performed had isotropic
reinforcement. Graphic representation (Fig. 2.134, 2.135) illustrates 12 cases.
Experiments where the depth of the compression zone was greater than the half of
the cross-sectional static depth are not included. Such cases are not encountered in
practice. For a systematic comparison QRex/QRth ratio is represented first related to
P =
(Fig. 2.134) and afterwards related to 2rQ/d (Fig. 2.135). Modulus of
R rP rQ R
elasticity of steel was s = 2 105 /mm2.
226
QRex/QRth
1.1
1.0
.9
10
15
(/R)10 mm/N
QRex/QRth
Figure 2.134 Evaluation of punching shear experiments based on /R ratio
1.1
1.0
.9
5.0
2.5
2rQ/d
Figure 2.135 Evaluation of punching shear experiments based on 2rQ/d ratio
Comparison of theoretical and experimental results shows in both cases

extremely good coincidence with deviations lower than 10%.
227

Part 2 EN

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Part 2 EN

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2nd Part

Ductility and fracture of reinforced

Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

Figure 2.1 Ductility of a steel beam under bending

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

Other materials e.g. fiber-reinforced mortars, high-strength concretes (Fig. 2.3)

Ultra high strength Concrete

Compressive reinforcement used in vertical members (columns, walls) and in beams

Figure 2.4 Foundation soil ductility

Generally ductility is connected with energy absorption / dissipation and its

UHPC without steel fibers - confined

UHPC without steel fibers - not confined

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

Reinforced concrete exhibits ductile behaviour when:

Figure 2.8 Steel under tension

Figure 2.9 Concrete and brick wall (MB) under compression

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

(45) brick wall

(90) brick wall

C16/20 (With confinement)

Figure 2.10 illustrates simplified linear curves of fibre-reinforced polymers with

Figure 2.10 Fibre-reinforced polymers

Application of plasticity theory to reinforced concrete

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

(ultimate) strength of a structure and of a structural system generally. Its basic

Theory of elasticity is based on stiffness

Theory of plasticity is based on strength

Figure 2.11 Elastic stiffness and plastic strength

2.2 Application of plasticity theory to reinforced concrete

1. upper bound theorem: if a plastic deformation mechanism exists satisfying the

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

5. imposed displacements of supports (settlements etc.) do not decrease the

2.2 Application of plasticity theory to reinforced concrete

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

which is stable and demonstrates significant remaining strength even for

Inelastic deformation and fracture mechanism of reinforced concrete

Figure 2.14 Specimens of Stckl tests with and without confinement

Observing experimental record lead to the conclusion that when transverse

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

Figure 2.17 Mechanical model of bond-slip mechanism

Figure 2.18 Mechanical model of spalling mechanism

In the presence of lateral restraint (confinement) a slip mechanism occurs (Fig.

Superimposing the components of deformation for the other transverse direction

Figure 2.19 Mechanical model of deformation of a spalling mechanism

The dilatancy results as:

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

Triaxial stress and residual strength

In the following concrete strength is examined. The concrete strength of cylindrical

Figure 2.20 Triaxial strength of concrete based on experimental results

Figure 2.21 Concrete strength in biaxial plane stress

Above properties may be wonderfully demonstrated on a mechanical model (Fig.

2.4 Triaxial stress and residual strength

Figure 2.22 Mechanical model for the triaxial strength of concrete

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

With the increase of transverse deformation concrete microstructure experiences

where fc* (max q ) > 0

It remains the modeling of the elastic part of deformations.

The transverse elastic deformation in elastic region is assumed to be equal to zero.

2.5 Concentration of deformations and fracture

Concentration of deformations and fracture

Various researchers tried occasionally to measure the inelastic deformations of

2. Ductility and fracture of reinforced concrete structural members

in order to get t>0, it should be Et<0 (loss of strength).