Wael Kassem
DOI: 10.1002/suco.201400045
Introduction
Reinforced concrete (RC) deep beams are common structural elements that are often used in pile caps, tanks, folded plates, foundation walls, bins, folded plate roof structures and offshore structures as well as in tall buildings as
transfer girders [1, 2]. They are identified as being relatively short and deep, with a thickness that is small relative to
their span or depth. Owing to the relatively small span-todepth ratio, a complex strain state develops in deep beams
and so traditional sectional design approaches based on
plane sections theory are violated and unsuitable for their
design. Deep beams according to ACI 318-11 [3] are structural members in which either the clear span is 4 times
the overall depth, or the concentrated loads are applied
within a distance 2 times the depth from the face of the
support. They are frequently designed using either semiempirical methods [47], non-linear finite element analysis
[8] or by using compatibility-aided truss models [911], in-
184
2015 Ernst & Sohn Verlag fr Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin Structural Concrete (2015), No. 2
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
the designer to avoid the current tedious and time-consuming computing procedures. The proposed theoretical
model consists of the application of the FA-STM and utilizes a newly proposed formula for the effective transverse
compressive stress acting on the beam web. A design formula for estimating the shear strength of deep beams, and
suitable for implementing in codes and standards, is proposed.
Fig. 1 shows a typical RC deep beam of rectangular crosssection that is loaded on top by two vertical forces Vn
applied at a distance a from the midpoint of the closest
support. The longitudinal main reinforcement of crosssectional area Ast is placed at a distance (hd) from the
beam bottom surface, where d is the effective depth of the
beam and h is the overall beam depth. The beam is reinforced vertically by uniformly distributed stirrups at horizontal spacing Sv in the shear span. The horizontal web reinforcement is provided by uniformly distributed rebars at
the vertical spacing Sh.
According to the RA-STM model proposed by Mau
and Hsu [9], the deep beam within the shear span may be
visualized as an assembly of three different elements: the
top element with a thickness d (equal to distance from
top surface of beam to centre of flexural compression
steel), including the concrete and top compression steel;
the bottom element, consisting of bottom tension steel
only; and the middle element, including web concrete,
Research significance
The aim of the present study is to resolve problems in predicting the shear strength of deep beams by means of an
explicit, sufficiently accurate single expression that allows
Vn
Vn
Asc
d'
Description of model
Diagonal
crack
Av
dv
Sh
h
d
Ah
1
Sv
Web reinforcement
Ast
Ln
c2
lt
c2
l
lt
Shear
element
l f l
Vn
1c
c2
c
12
c
12
1c
c
12
1c
Rebars
1c
c2
Vn
c2
t f t
Fig. 1. Geometry of reinforced concrete deep beam with the stresses in the shear element
185
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
age normal strains in the l and t directions of the two-dimensional deep beam element can be expressed in matrix
form as follows [21]:
where:
l, t smeared uniaxial strain in l and t directions respectively
lt
smear shear strain at l-t coordinate
2, 1 smeared strain in 1-direction and 2-direction respectively
12
smear shear strain at 12 coordinate
l
t
lt
2c
= [ S( )] 1 +
c
12
f
ll
t ft
(1)
where:
[S()]is the transformation matrix defined as [21]:
cos 2( )
sin2( )
2 cos( ) sin( )
2
2
[ S( )] =
2 cos( ) sin( ) (2)
sin ( )
cos ( )
cos( ) sin( ) cos( ) sin( ) cos 2( ) sin2( )
and
l, t normal stresses in the RC element in the longitudinal (horizontal) direction l and transverse (vertical)
direction t respectively (positive for tension)
lt
shear stress at l-t coordinate
l, t reinforcement ratios in l and t directions respectively
fl , ft smeared steel stress in longitudinal and transverse
directions respectively
fixed angle between applied compression stress (2direction) and longitudinal steel bars (assumed to
be equal to the inclination of the line connecting
centre-line of loading plate and centre-line of support)
t
0.5
lt
= [ S( )] 1
0.5
12
(3)
2c = fc [2( 2 / 0 ) ( 2 / 0 )2 ]
( 2 / 0 ) 1
(4a)
2c = fc [1 (( 2 / 0 ) 1/(4/ 1))2 ]
( 2 / 0 ) 1
(4b)
(5a)
f 20
0 = 0.002 0.001 c
for 20 fc 120 (MPa)
80
(5b)
where:
0 concrete cylinder strain corresponding to peak cylinder strength fc
softening coefficient
The constitutive relationship for concrete in tension can
be expressed mathematically using the following [22]:
1c = Ec 1
1 cr
(6a)
1c = fcr cr 0.4
1 > cr
(6b)
(7)
186
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
dinal and transverse strains based on a linear elastic perfectly plastic relationship:
fs = Es s
s y
(8a), (9a)
fs = fy
s > y
(8b), (9b)
The analysis of the FA-STM for predicting the shear capacity of deep beams incorporates 15 unknowns: l, t, lt,
c
2c , 1c , 12
, fl, ft, l, t, lt, 2, 1, 12 and . Twelve equations
have already been defined, including six equilibrium and
compatibility equations and six related to the constitutive
laws of materials. The degree of indeterminacy can be reduced by specifying strain 2 for each load stage and calculating the effective normal stress in the horizontal direction l from the applied axial load N and deep beam
cross-section. Since axial loading is rarely applied to deep
beams, the value of the normal stress l vanishes.
The application of the vertical loads along with the
support reactions creates a large compressive stress field t
normal to the beams horizontal axis which is responsible
for the arch action unique to deep beams. Mau and Hsu [9]
estimated the transverse stress t using a transverse stress
intensity factor K, defined as a function of the shear span to
overall depth ratio a/h and beam effective depth dv, defined in Fig. 1 and expressed mathematically as
t = K lt
K1 =
2dv
h
(10)
a
K1 0 < 0.5
h
K = K2 0.5 < a 2
h
0 >2
h
K2 =
dv
h
l fl + t ft = ( l + t ) ( 2c + 1c )
(12)
c sin(2 ) (13)
l fl t ft = ( l t ) ( 2c 1c ) cos(2 ) 2 12
where
(11)
h 4 2a
a 3 3h
187
260
240
180
195
180
120
60
1000
50
25
0.5
1.0
a/d
1.5
135
Frequency denisty
270
180
90
2
c (%)
800
1000
30
60
90
f`c (MPa)
60
0
500
45
1000 1500
h (mm)
2000
90
60
30
0
120
90
120
120
60
0
2.0
400 600
b (mm)
120
180
200
180
360
240
75
0
0.0
Frequency denisty
4000
Frequency denisty
Frequency denisty
100
2000 3000
a (mm)
65
Frequency denisty
130
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
260
Frequency denisty
Frequency denisty
240
Frequency denisty
Frequency denisty
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
b (%)
195
130
65
0
t (%)
Fig. 2. Histograms of geometric and other properties of the 445 deep beams*
*Note: a, b, c and d are identified in Fig. 1, b is the reinforcement ratio of flexural bottom tensile steel, taken as b = Ast /(bd), c is the reinforcement ratio of
flexural top compression steel, taken as c = Asc /(bd), c is the ratio of vertical web steel (stirrups), taken as t = Av /(bSv), and h is the ratio of horizontal
web steel, taken as h = Ah /(bSh). (Note: 1 MPa = 145 psi, 1 mm = 0.03937 inch)
188
(14)
2i = [Yi ( A0 + A1 X1 + A2 X2 + A3 X3 + + Ap Xp)]
i =1
(15)
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
a
, f , f , f and h resulted
d t yt l yl c
in a robust association (R2 = 0.60) with the transverse
stress intensity factor K for specimens considered in the
second range, see Fig. 3. The stepwise multiple linear regression analysis showed that the transverse stress intensity factor K should best be expressed as shown in Eq.(16)
instead of Eq. (11):
effect of the parameters
a
K3 0 < 0.5
h
K = K4 0.5 < a 2
h
0 >2
(16)
dv
224.445 h 0.006 a 0
h
a
0.045 t fyt 0.012 l fyl +
d
+ 0.003 fc 0.001 h 0
K4 = 1.29 0.62
18
In Eq. (16), fc, fyl and fyt are in MPa, a and h in mm. Solutions with higher-degree polynomials produced a better fit
than Eq. (16), but they were rejected because of their excessive length. Simplicity is a requirement, and as the
complexity of the model increases, so its ability to generalize can be affected by the risk of over-fitting the data [44].
Eq. (16) implies that the transverse stress intensity factor is
dependent on the shear span to overall depth ratio. As the
a/h ratio increases, it is more likely that the effective transverse stress will decrease due to the greater distance between the applied load and the nearest support. However,
the current study revealed that other factors, in addition to
the a/h ratio, affect the factor K and should be considered
when calculating the transverse compressive stress, including longitudinal reinforcement ratio, horizontal shear
reinforcement, concrete strength and size effect. The
shear strength of a deep beam increases with the increase
in the longitudinal reinforcement ratio up to a certain limit depending on the shear span to depth ratio and concrete
compressive strength fc. This may be attributed to the better bond conditions, which results in increases in the
transverse compression in the direct strut and the dowel
action becoming more preponderant in deep beams with
18
10
15
18
R2=0.71
R2=0.28
12
12
12
0
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
5
10
Parameter (K3)
Parameter (K1)
0.0
1.5
0.5
1.0
0.0
1.5
0.2
0.4
0
15
0.6
1.5
R2=0.60
R2=0.40
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
Parameter (K2)
1.5
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.6
Parameter (K4)
Fig. 3. Correlation between transverse stress intensity factor K and four deep beam parameters in Eqs. (11) and (16)
189
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
0<
Model
Sum of
squares
Degree of
freedom
Mean
square
Sig.
a
0.5
h
Regression
Residual
Total
1323.1
547.7
1870.8
6
84
90
264.6
7.4
35.7
.000
a
2
h
Regression
Residual
Total
19.1
12.8
32.0
8
347
355
2.3
.03
64.5
0.5 <
A method of analysis based on the FA-STM and incorporating the newly proposed transverse stress intensity factor was used to predict the shear capacity of the 445 deep
beams for which the experimental results are available in
R2
0.84
0.71
0.77
0.60
.000
Table 2. Shear strength formulae and procedures for calculating shear capacity
where ft is the allowable concrete tensile stress, h and v are the steel ratios of the horizontal and vertical web reinforcement
respectively, is the angle between inclined strut and horizontal direction, n is the modular ratio and fy is the steel yield strength
of the web reinforcement.
3. Hwang and Lee [45]
a
n4 = 0.76 k fc cos + 0.25 h fyh cot + 0.35 v fyv [MPa]
d
a
fc
, = tan 1
,
105
0.9d
n is the modular ratio, a is the shear span, h and v are the steel ratios of the horizontal and vertical web reinforcement respectively,
fyh and fyv are the steel ratios of the horizontal and vertical web reinforcement respectively and d is the beam depth.
Note: 1 MPa = 145 psi, 1 mm = 0.03937 inch
190
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
Strength ratio
( test /calc)
Avg
SD
CoV
Max.
Min.
Current study
1.13
0.33
0.22
2.14
0.5
RA-STM [9]
0.77
0.25
0.33
2.00
0.28
0.76
0.22
0.29
1.62
0.33
Siao [7]
0.85
0.31
0.36
2.33
0.24
0.76
0.26
0.34
2.00
0.40
1.13
0.46
0.41
3.00
0.41
In an attempt to develop a closed-form expression for estimating the shear strength of deep beams which is suitable
for implementation in codes and standards, the laborious
iterative procedures given in the preceding section were
modified. The three equilibrium conditions given in Eq.
(1) were manipulated as follows:
The first two equations may be rewritten using the
Pythagorean identity:
cos 2 =
sin 2 =
where:
c
C1 = c2 12
18
18
12
18
24
12
test (MPa)
30
12
test / calc
Avg= 0.77
CoV= 33 %
30
calc (MPa)
18
30
Siao (1994)
12
18
test (MPa)
24
30
test / calc
Avg= 0.85
CoV= 36 %
18
test (MPa)
24
12
30
12
test / calc
Avg= 0.76
CoV= 34 %
12
18
24
12
18
24
30
test (MPa)
calc (MPa)
18
calc (MPa)
18
12
18
12
30
24
Avg= 0.76
CoV= 29 %
test / calc
24
c
C2 = c2 + 12
30
24
Avg= 1.13
CoV= 22 %
(20)
calc (MPa)
calc (MPa)
K (C1 + l fl ) +
lt = 0.5 2
K (C1 + l fl )2 + 4(C1 + l fl )(C 2 + t ft )
24
(19)
RA-STM
test / calc
(18)
c )(K + f + c + c )
( lt )2 = ( l fl + 2c 12
lt
tt
12
2
24
calc (MPa)
c cos sin )
(K lt + t ft + 2c + 2 12
( 1c 2c )
30
Current study
12
(17)
( 1c 2c )
30
c cos sin )
( l fl + 2c 2 12
test / calc
30
Avg= 1.13
CoV= 41 %
0
test (MPa)
12
18
24
30
test (MPa)
Fig. 4. Shear capacity calculated using the proposed analysis method and different methods versus measured shear strength
191
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
l fyl
l =
fc
and t =
t fyt
(21)
fc
lt = 0.5fc 2
K (1 + l )2 + 4(1 + l )( 2 + t )
where: 1 =
(22)
C1
C
and 2 = 2
fc
fc
t Ct
(23)
test(i)
1
; Avg =
calc(i)
n
S(i); CoV =
i =1
1
n 1
calc fc
(25)
K 2 (0.024 + l )2 +
0.43fc
+
4(0.024 + )(0.049 + )
l
t
192
Design formula
Despite the success of the proposed closed-form expression for predicting the shear strength of deep beams, as
expressed by the minimum coefficient of variation and average strength ratio of unity, when compared with experimental results and other formulae available in the literature, it is not possible to use the expression directly as a
code-oriented design equation. The reason for that is the
exclusion of any factor of safety in the predictions plus the
fact that it leads to a calculated shear strength increase
greater than the measured one for 52 % of the beams. In
order to achieve conservative predictions of shear strength
using the proposed expression, Eq. (26) can be multiplied
by a factor that can increase the average strength ratio
without affecting the coefficient of variation. The factor
value is determined using the Eurocode [47] rules, by leaving no more than 5 % of the specimens on the unsafe side.
The factor value, based on the experimental results of the
445 specimens, was found to be equal to 1.85. Consequently, the characteristic expression obtained in this way
is chosen as a design formula:
K (0.024 + l )
Rk = 0.93fc K 2 (0.024 + l )2 +
0.43fc [MPa] (27a)
+
4(0.024 + )(0.049 + )
l
t
where n is the number of specimens. Earlier studies postulated that the shear strength tends to increase only marginally beyond a certain value [4]. Thus, for practical purposes, the shear strength may also be limited by
calc = 0.5fc
(26)
K (0.024 + l )
Rk = 134.1fc K 2 (0.024 + l )2 +
0.43fc [psi] (27b)
+
4(0.024 + )(0.049 + )
l
t
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
8
test / Rk
4
2
0
25
50
75
100
f`c (MPa)
125
4
2
0
test / Rk
EC2
Avg= 1.90
CoV= 53 %
Avg= 1.85
CoV= 21 %
test /Rk
test /Rk
ACI (318-11)
25
50
75
100
f`c (MPa)
test / Rk
Avg= 2.48
CoV= 81 %
test /Rk
Design Formula
125
4
2
0
25
50
75
100
125
f`c (MPa)
Fig. 5. Effect of concrete strength fc on shear strength predictions using the proposed design formula, ACI Code [3] and Eurocode [47]
50 mm b 915 mm,
178 mm h 2050 mm,
152 mm d 2000 mm,
0.00 % h 3.25 %,
0.00 % c 4.25 %,
0.00 % h 3.20 %,
0.00 % t 2.90 %,
12.5 MPa fc 120 MPa,
280 MPa f yl 1330 MPa and
280 MPa f yt 1050 MPa.
Conclusions
References
1. Rogowsky, D. M., MacGregor, J. G., Ong, S. Y.: Tests of reinforced concrete deep beams. ACI Journal Proceedings, 1986,
83 (4).
2. Islam, R.: Effect of web reinforcement on shear strength of
R/C deep beams. PhD thesis, Division of Civil Engineering,
National University of Singapore, 2003, p. 262.
3. American Concrete Institute: Building Code Requirements
for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary (ACI
318R-11), Farmington Hills, MI, 2011.
4. Mau, S., Thomas, S. T. C.: Formula for the shear strength of
deep beams. ACI Structural Journal, 1989, 86 (5).
5. Mihaylov, B. I., Bentz, E. C., Collins, M. P.: Two-Parameter
Kinematic Theory for Shear Behavior of Deep Beams. ACI
Structural Journal, 2013, 110 (3).
6. Russo, G., Venir, R., Pauletta, M.: Reinforced Concrete
Deep Beams-Shear Strength Model and Design Formula.
ACI Structural Journal, 2005, 102 (3).
7. Siao, W. B.: Shear strength of short reinforced concrete
walls, corbels, and deep beams. ACI Structural Journal, 1994,
91 (2), pp. 123132.
8. Mohammed, A. K., Gomaa, S. T.: Finite element modelling
of deep beams. Computers & Structures, 1993, 48 (1), pp.
6371.
9. Mau, S. T., Hsu, T. T. C.: Shear strength prediction for deep
beams with web reinforcement. ACI Structural Journal, 1987,
84 (6), pp. 513523.
10. Hwang, S.-J., Lu, W.-Y., Lee, H.-J.: Shear strength prediction
for deep beams. ACI Structural Journal, 2000, 97 (3).
11. Park, J., Kuchma, D.: Strut-and-tie model analysis for
strength prediction of deep beams. ACI Structural Journal,
2007, 104 (6).
12. Gupta, A., Rangan, B. V.: High-Strength Concrete (HSC)
Structural Walls. ACI Structural Journal, 1998, 95 (2), pp.
194205.
13. Kassem, W., Elsheikh, A.: Estimation of Shear Strength of
Structural Shear Walls. Journal of Structural Engineering,
2010, 136 (10), pp. 12151224.
14. Mau, S. T., Hsu, T. C.: Shear Behaviour of reinforced Concrete Framed Wall Panels with Vertical Loads. ACI Structural Journal, 1987, 84 (3), pp. 228234.
15. Hsu, T. T. C., Mo, Y. L.: Softening of concrete in low-rise
shearwalls. ACI Journal, 1985, 82 (6), pp. 883889.
16. Joint ACI-ASCE committee 445. SP-273: Further examples for
the design of structural concrete with strut-and-tie models.
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2010.
193
W. Kassem Shear strength of deep beams: a mathematical model and design formula
194
Wael Kassem
Division of Construction Engineering
Umm Al-Qura University
College of Engineering at Al-Qunfudah
P.O. BOX 288, Al-Qunfudah 21912, Saudi Arabia
Tel. 00966 564 780 673
wakassem@uqu.edu.sa