Advances in understanding
shear performance
of concrete structures
D A Kuchma* and M P Collins+
Summary
Recent research has improved our understandingof
the mechanisms of shear resistance, which has
enabled the development of improvedmodels for
predictingshear strength and shear behavior. These
models have been used to develop new and more
rationalshear design expressions, replacing the
complex set of empirical expressionsthat are used in
many codes of practice.They have also been used to
Tarmlnolo~
o
A,
=
=
A, =
bw =
B =
d
dv
shearspan
areaoftheflexural
reinforcement
area of shear reinforcement
= shear width or web width
factor that accounts for the
ability of the cracked concrete
to transmit tension
depth of member (distance
from extreme compression
Rber to center of flexural
reinforcement)
shear depth (often taken as
Id)
=
=
f',
fd
fdmax
f,
jd
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
=
=
=
=
TRADITIONAL
Vc(EMPIRICAL)
+ Vs(45" TRUSS)
modulusofthe
reinforcement
straininRexurai
reinforcement
compressive cylinder
strength
compressive stress in strut
or compressionReid
maximum allowable
compressive stress In strut
or compressionfleld
yield strength of shear
reinforcement
flexural lever arm (often
taken as 0.94
Mu
= factored moment at a
section In a member
Nu = factored axial load a t a
section In a member
$I
= strength reduction factor
pvmin = minimum required
percentage of shear
reinforcement
s
= spacingofshear
reinforcement
9
= angle between principal
compressive stress and
longitudinal axis
= angle between shear crack
gcr
and longitudinal axls
= transversereinforcement
contribution to shear resistance
crack
crackwidth
SHEARPERFORMANCEOFCONCRETESTRUCTURES
thus, a concrete contribution (V,)was added to the
steel contribution (V,from 45" truss). To the practicing
engineer, the design procedure currently used in the
ACI Building Coder11is understood to be an
evaluation of sectional strength where the concrete
contribution to shear resistance is linked to the
diagonal cracking load of the member. The actions of
flexure and shear are handled separately.
The familiar expression used in the ACI Building
Code for the nominal shear strength is given as:
VARIABLE
ANGLE TRUSS
MODEL WITH NO
Vc
v,=
A,f,0.9d cot0
(2a)
36 I
as approximately 0.36 f i :
(2b)
The theory of plasticity on which this approach is
based, assumes that the capacity of the web is reached
at the condition of simultaneous concrete crushing
and yielding of the shear reinforcement.
Consequently, 8 depends on the amount of shear
reinforcement used and can be found using Mohr ' s
circle of stress. Low values of 8 correspond to low
quantities of shear reinforcement. In order to avoid
under-reinforced members, minimum values for 8 are
suggested. In EC2, Part 1,the following limits are
given:
0.4 < cote < 2.5
0.5 < cote < 2.0
VARIABLE
ANGLE TRUSS
MODELS WITH
Vc
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION
362
theory(presented later)19*1.
Except under special
conditions, the angle of the principal compression (8)
will be at an angle to the crack thereby creating a shear
stress on the crack face. The shear strength of a
member without shear reinforcement is predicted to
be dependent on the shear slip resistance along the
crack face. The crack width is conservatively
estimated from the crack spacing and the strain in the
longitudinalreinforcement. For members not
containing shear reinforcement, the crack spacing is
taken as the lesser of the distance between the layers
of crack control reinforcement and the distance
between the flexural reinforcement and the depth of
compression, both divided by the sine of 8. For
members with shear reinforcement, the crack spacing
is taken as 300 mm. The longitudinalstrain is
evaluated from eqn 3a, and the shear strength of the
member is determined using eqn 3b:
6, =
T a b l r I Valurs o f ( ia n d 1 8 f o r i n r m b r r s c o n t a i n i n g a t l r a s t
t h e rniniincim a m o u n t o f s t i r r u p s
Longltudlnal Straln
2
0'
I I1
i 0.100
0.5(Nu+Vu co t8 ) +M , /d v
0.2m
50.80
51.00
S0.71
51.W
52.00
23.10
26.10
30.110
34.00
30.00
38.00
99.00
0.271
0.211
0.200
0.180
0.174
0.143
0.120
23.60
28.00
31.10
34.00
36.00
37.00
36.00
0.216
0.208
0.187
0.181
0.187
0.133
0.112
21.00
29.00
32.00
34.00
38.00
36.10
37.00
0.211
0.203
0.188
0.171
0.160
0.126
0.103
27.60
31.00
33.00
34.00
34.10
31.00
36.0-
0.203
O.lS4
0.174
0.111
0.131
0.100
0.083
30.0'
32.0
33.0
34.0
36.W
38.1'
41.6'
0.191
0.167
0.136
0.126
0.116
0.106
0.104
E S AS
3
.
II II
II
V, =Vc+Vs= , 8 f i b v d v + A , f , d v c o r 9
S
#4
50.26
x lo00
(3c)
STRUTLAND-TIE
METHOD
Besides being a basis for producing sectional shear
design relationships, truss models are powerful tools
for visualizing the flow of forces throughout
continuous mediatis*,i~i.
In this manner, the
simultaneous actions of shear, moment, and axial load
are explicitly considered. The calculated member
forces are the forces to be designed for without the
need for additional detailing rules. In B (beam)
regions, where plane sectionsremain plane, the
parallel chord truss model with parallel diagonal
struts is the most utilized truss model.
In D (disturbed or discontinuity)regions, a truss
model is typically referred to as a 'strut-and-tie model'
and can be used to describe the flow of forces though a
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
125
50.25
50.50
51.00
27O
0.408
29O
0.309
32O
0.283
0.201
41'
0.183
48O
0.153
51
0.183
0.118
59O
88O
0.126
0.084
30
0.384
34O
s 500
0.359
I 1' 1
'lOOo
(3
0.335
s2000 0
41
0.306
37O
34O
0.283
39'
0.248
45'
0.212
53'
0.171
37O
0.235
4 3 O
51.50
52.00
34O
38O
0.214
0.183
38O
0.161
43'
0.158
51O
0.127
45'
0.138
54O
0.108
0.095
0.080
0.084
0.052
58'
::
W31
FRACTURE
MECHANICS
Fracture mechanics has been used to predict the shear
strength of beams. These methods are considered
most applicable for predicting the strength of small
beams that fail by the propagation of a single diagonal
crack. Notable models have been developed by
Hillerborgn61,and by Bazant & Ohr171.Recents
summaries of fracture mechanics methods are
provided by Reinhardtrial and the ACI
Committee 446r191. The methods are numerically
demanding even for simple reinforced structures,
with the unfortunate result that relationships for
predicting strength may appear empirical to many
designers.
SHEAR
IN UNCRACKED FLEXURAL COMPRESSION
ZONE
DOWEL
ACTION
Shear displacement across a crack is resisted in part by
the flexural stiffness of the reinforcement that crosses
the crack. However, this dowel action is usually
limited by the tensile strength of the concrete that
supports the reinforcement. Dowel action is not
considered to be a significant component of shear
resistance unless the member contains a very large
amount of longitudinal reinforcement.
RESIDUAL
TENSILE
STRESSES
INTERFACE
SHEAR TRANSFER
Shear can be transmitted across a crack when the local
roughness of the crack (distances from trough to peak)
363
0.18Jf:
24w
0.3+a+16
ARCH
ACTION
When a load is applied to a member within a distance
equal to about 2.5 times the depth of the member from
a support, a significant portion of the load is carried
directly to the support by a diagonal strut. This is
referred to as arch action and it dominates the shear
behavior of deep members.
SHEAR
REINFORCEMENT
Shear reinforcement is modeled to carry shear as
determined using a 45" or variable angle truss. Shear
reinforcement is also provided to restrain the growth
of inclined cracking. The amount of minimum shear
reinforcement that is predicted to be required depends
on the model that is adopted. It is interesting to note
the differences between international codes. EC2,
Part 1131, recommends that pvmin= 0.11% for normal
strength concrete and 0.1370for higher strength
concrete. MC 90's recommendationris~is closely
linked to the concrete compressive strength, with
0.09% being required for 22 MPa concrete and 0.20%
being required for 67 MPa concrete. The amount
recommended by the ACIrii depends on the strength
of the reinforcement. For regular strength (420 MPa)
reinforcement, 0.08% is required. Recent evidence
suggests that the minimum amount of shear
reinforcement required by the ACI may be
unconservative for higher strength concrete
membersrz71.
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
364
CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION
SIZE EFFECT
SPAN-TO-DEPTH
RATIO
As early as 1907, it was observed that shear strength
increases as the shear span to depth ratio (a/d)
decreases. The explanation is that in stockier
Warehouse Beams
- 0.20
Vcilcuiated here
A
p = *=0.004
f,'= 3500
psi
(24.1 MPa)
2 ksi
-- 5(386
MPa)
(PSI)
1.4-
'\
Air Force
",.
1.2 F=Y=-q*
a = 2.5 mm
1.0 (0.1 In.)
>\
--.
0.15
- 0.10
-\
b =5OIn.
b = 30 In.
' - 0
&(I500
mm)
0.05
d = 118 in,
1 mm)
00
,b J
A b
$0
&
:o
A A
d (Ineheo)
Fig. I influence of member depth and maximum aggregate size on shear stress at failure
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
lb,
1:o
1bO
SHEARPERFORMANCEOF CONCRETESTRUCTURES
members, a larger portion of the load flows directly to
the support by arch action, rather than being carried
across diagonal shear cracks. Empirical sectional force
design procedures often contain a modification factor
which uses a/d as a parameter to account for this effect.
This influence is directly accounted for when the
strut-and-tiemodel is used for the design of members
with lower a/d ratios.
CONCRETE
STRENGTH
longitudinal strain.
It has been observedrsi*ithat beams cast with
longitudinal reinforcement distributed over the depth
of the beam have more closely spaced narrower cracks
(Fig. 2b) and higher shear strengths. This observation
is accounted for in the general method, in which
spacing of the reinforcementrather than overall
member depth is considered to be a more useful
parameter for describing the size effect in shear.
AXIALLOAD
In the general method, the effect of axial tension or
compression is directly considered when evaluating
the longitudinal strain (see eqn 3a) and the angle of
the shear cracks. This information is used to evaluate
the crack width from which the shear resistance is
determined. In the tooth model, the influence of axial
load on the strain at mid-depth has been considered.
The results from a series of experimentsc34-361
substantiate the predictions of the general method
and indicate that the special empirical expressions
used by the ACI can significantly overestimate the
benefit of axial compression and the detriment of axial
tension (Fig.3).
SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS
PERCENTAGE
AND DISTRIBUTION
OF LONGITUDINAL
REINFORCEMENT
365
FOR
D-REGIONS
- B1
OOH
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
366
CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION
SE1OOA
High Strength Concrete, fC = 86 MPa
No Distributed Reinforcement
As = 2800 mm2 (main flexural reinforcement)
d = 920 rnm, b = 295 rnrn
At V = 252 kN, Max. Crack Width = 2.5 mm
SEl OOB
High Strength Concrete, fc = 86 MPa
With Distributed Reinforcement
AS = 2800 mm2 (main flexural reinforcement)
+ 8 x 200 = ls00 mm2distributed reinforcement
d =920mrn, b =295rnm
At V = 343 kN, Max. Crack Width = 0.60mm
--"-r
M/V = 0.315 m
Compression
failure under
combined
2000
4000 6000
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
Equilibrium:
Average Stresses:
PYf,
Geometric Conditions:
Average Strains:
Reinforcement:
c, = (E:,tan20 + E : ~ /) (I + tan2e)
= f , + v cot0 -f1
y, = 2 (4
- c2) tan0
f 2 = v (tan0
+ cote) -fl
367
Stresses at Cracks:
Crack Widths:
w=sgc,
Concrete:
f,
(5- c2)
II
where
0.18p
(sine + c o s 0 )
so = I /
SX
s,
0.8 + 170:,
vcj
0.31
+ a24+ w16
NON-LINEAR
FE MODELS
In order to develop a general non-linear FE model, it is
necessary to be able to determine the average state of
stress corresponding to an average state of strain.
Algorithms based on the modified compression field
theory have been written for this purpose and utilized
in the development of sectional analysisw*i,shell
elernentr481,2-D,and 3-D continuum~91,
frame, and
global shell elementtsoi programs. In the development
of the FE programstsi*i,a secant stiffness formulation
was selected and low-powered elements were chosen.
These allowed for the use of more realistic non-linear
constitutive relationships, that are both numerically
more stable and make it possible to modify existing
linear FE programs with a reasonable amount of
effort. These formulations have now been developed
to account for plastic strain offsets so that these
models can be used to predict the response of
structuresto cyclic loading once there is sufficient
detailed data to support these developments.
As an example of the capabilities of these programs, a
few aspects of a studyrszi conducted to evaluate the
strength of a connection in a concrete offshore
structure are given in the Case study (see box, right).
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION
368
Cracking@ 90 m
Cracldng@ I35 m
Compressive
stresses@ l35m
Conclusions
Models based on the mechanisms of shear
resistance[ss**i
have now reached the point of maturity
at which they can be used as the basis for new more
rational shear design relationships.Strut-and-tie
models offer the design engineer a powerful tool for
visualizing and calculating the flow of forces in
disturbed regions in order to select appropriate
reinforcement.Analytical models for the shear
behavior of cracked concrete, such as the modified
compression field theory, have made it possible to
develop non-linear FE programs that are capable of
predicting the performance of complex reinforced and
prestressed concrete structures.
**
* [PI Vecchlo FJ& Collins MR The modifled compression field theory for
reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear. AClJournol I986 MarchlAprll
2 IS 2 3 I.
Describes an experimentaland analytlcalproject from whlch was dewloped a
complete load-deformationresponse model for dlagonally cracked
reinforced concrete subjected to shear and axlal stresses.
*
**
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556
concrete beams, slabs, and footings?ACI Structumljournol I998 (not yet published).
Describes the influence of several important factors o n shear capacity and
suggests that current ACI design procedures may be less conservative than
desired.
369
[34] Bhide SB & Collins MP. Influenceof axial tension on the shear capacity
of reinforced concrete members. ACI StructumljoumolI 9 8 9 September/
October: 570-58 I.
[35] Adebar PE & Collins MP. Shear design of concrete offshore structures.
ACI Structumljournol I 9 9 4 MaylJune: 324-335.
[36] Gupta P & Collins MR Behavior of reinforced concrete members
subjected t o shear and compression.Repon, Deportment ofcivil Engineering,
UniversityafTomnto. 1993.
[37] Jirsa 10,Breen JE, Bergmeister K, Barton D et al. Experimental
studies of nodes in strut-and-tie models. IABSE Colloquiumon StruaumlConcrete,
Stuttgart, I99 I. 525-532.
[38] MacGregor JG.Reinforced concrete mechonicsond design. 3rd edition.
The report summarizes the state-of-the-art for shear design methods and
models for behavior.
0CONSTRUCTION
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
LIMITEDI998 ISSN 1365-0556