Composite Strut and Tie Model for Reinforced Concrete Deep Beams
Source abstract
Abstract
Monotonic shear loading tests were conducted on three half-scaled reinforced concrete deep beams with shear span-to-depth ratios of 0.5 to 0.75. The obtained test results were investigated in detail based on the experimental measurements and finite element analysis. From these investigations, a new macro model for deep beams was established. This model is composed of two crooked main struts formed between both beam end sections and branched-off sub struts. The compressive force introduced to main struts balances the flexural compression and the external shear force. The bond stress of the longitudinal reinforcement and the tensile force of the stirrup produce the diagonal compression in the sub strut. Theoretically predicted shear strengths of tested deep beams showed good agreement with experimentally observed shear strengths, where the effective strength of concrete was assumed to be 75% of the cylinder strength.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Structural Load-Bearing Analysis · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Architectural Engineering, Kongju National University, South Korea.
References (15)
Show source-provided references
1. American Concrete Institute, (2008). “Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318M-08) and commentary." Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute.
2. Architectural Institute of Japan, (1990). “Design guidelines for earthquake resistant reinforced concrete buildings based on ultimate strength concept.” Tokyo: Architectural Institute of Japan, 104-150.
3. Architectural Institute of Japan, (1999). “Design guidelines for earthquake resistant reinforced concrete buildings based on inelastic displacement concept.” Tokyo: Architectural Institute of Japan, 138-162.
4. CEB-FIP, (1995). “Model code for concrete structures.” 3rd ed. CEB-FIP International Recommendations, 212-218.
5. Jirsa, J. O., Maruyama, K. and Ramirez, H. (1978). “Development of loading system and initial tests short columns under bidirectional loading.” CESRL Report No. 78-2.
6. Kent, D. C. and Park, R. (1971). “Flexural members with confined concrete.” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 97(ST7), 1969-1990.10.1061/JSDEAG.0002957 ↗
7. Kim, K.-H., Yoshida, A., Sato, Y. and Fujii, S. (2001). “Effect of shear span ratio and reinforcing arrangement on shear and bond capacities of RC beam.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute, 23, 307-312. (in Japanese)
8. Kupfer, H., Hilsdorf, H. K. and Rüsch, H. (1969). “Behavior of Concrete under Biaxial Stress.” ACI Journal, 66(8), 656-666.
9. Nielsen, M. P. (1984). “Limit analysis and concrete plasticity.” Prentice Hall.
10. Park, R. and Paulay, T. (1975). “Reinforced concrete structures.” New York: John Wiley & Sons, 645-660.
11. Paulay, T. (1981). “Simulated seismic loading of spandrel beams.” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, 97(ST9), 2407-2419.
12. Paulay, T. and Binney, J. R. (1974). “Diagonally reinforced coupling beams of shear walls.” ACI Special Publication, 42, 579-598.
13. Popovics, S. (1970). “A review of stress-strain relationships for concrete.” ACI Journal, 67(3), 243-248.
14. Vecchio, F. J. and Collins, M. P. (1986). “The modified compression field theory for reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear.” ACI Journal, 83(2), 219-231.
15. Wong, P. S. and Vecchio, F. J. (2002). “VecTor2 and FormWorks user's manual.” Technical Report, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, Canada, http://www.civ.utoronto.ca/vector/.