··································································································································································································································
Abstract
A new perspective in the design of reinforced-concrete pile caps is proposed in this paper, where the conventional approach leading
to a reinforcing mesh is replaced by modelling the cap as a strut-and-tie system, in agreement with the strut-and-tie model, STM
proposed by several design codes, ACI 318 included. Twelve RC pile-cap specimens were designed and manufactured. In the first
group of 4 specimens the caps rest on two piles (Group A, axis-to-axis distance 300 mm), while in the second and third groups the
piles are three and four, respectively (Groups B and C, axis-to-axis distance 400 mm). In each group, the first and third specimens
were designed according to the traditional sectional method (reference specimens, with constant depth and lateral shoulders), while
the design of the second and fourth specimens was based on the strut-and-tie method (no lateral shoulders; no corners opposite to the
piles). Needless to say, the nominal design load was the same within each group. The tests clearly show that cap design based on
strut-and-tie systems brings in a sizable reduction in terms of reinforcement amount and cost, accompanied by a less pronounced but
still sizable extra bearing capacity.
Keywords: reinforced concrete, R/C design, pile caps, reduced-scale specimens, strut-and-tie models
··································································································································································································································
*Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Diyala, Baqubah 32001, Iraq (Corresponding Author, E-mail: dr.khattabsaleem@yahoo.com)
**M.Sc. Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Diyala, Baqubah 32001, Iraq (E-mail: mustafa_king3250@yahoo.com)
− 3509 −
Khattab Saleem Abdul-Razzaq and Mustafa Ahmed Farhood
these types of structures is not linear (Merritt and Ricketts, less than 1.0 and a compressive stress under 1.0fc normally can
2001). The STM is an alternative and suitable pile cap design result in ductile failures (Adebar et al., 1990). That is why, designers
procedure that is now confirmed by some codes of practice may believe that the main reinforcing steel bars yields before the
(Adebar et al., 1990; ACI building code 318, 2014; Abdul- compression struts splitting or crushing (Ahmed et al., 2009).
Razzaq et al., 2016; Murthy, 2007; Siao, 1993). Even if further Abdul-Hameed (2015) tested 2-pile cap specimens to investigate
shear verifications are not mentioned in codes when adopting the the effect of transverse horizontal (ρh) and vertical (ρv) shear
STM, it is highly recommended for pile cap design. It is reinforcement ratios, compressive strength of concrete ( fc ′ ), shear
recognized that pile cap shear failure occurs due to longitudinal span to effective depth ratio (a/d), and the longitudinal flexural
splitting in the struts. Strut-and-tie models consider the complete reinforcement ratio (ρ). He concluded that decreasing a/d leads to
flow of forces within the structure to be an idealized truss (ACI an increase in the ultimate shear capacities. Decreasing ρv and
building code 318, 2014). Concrete zones in which unidirectional increasing ρh at the same time leads to an increase in the diagonal
compressive stresses exist are represented with struts, while the cracking shear strength. The ultimate shear strength and the
tensile stresses in the main reinforcement are represented by the diagonal cracking shear strength increase with increasing ρ.
ties. The concrete areas where struts and ties meet are called Finally, he found that increasing fc ′ increases the ultimate shear
nodal zones. Some research reports come to the conclusion that strength.
using strut-and-tie models will result in less main reinforcement Abdul-Razzaq and Jebur (2017) suggested alternatives for the
use to support the same loading by about 10% to 20% (Souza et conventional simply supported deep beams by reinforcing the
al., 2009). Nori and Tharval (2007) reached a completely opposite struts and ties only. The experimental results showed that the
result. This discrepancy may be attributed to concentrating on two conventionally reinforced reference specimens have a greater
main parameters: the bending critical section position (sectional ultimate capacity by about 20% in comparison with the nominal
approach) and the nodal zone position beneath the column design loads of STM, ACI 318M-14. In addition, the proposed
(STM). As a result, it is not easy to assert that the strut and tie specimens in which the reinforcement was limited to the
approach is more cost-effective than the sectional approach, even concrete of the strut-and-tie system showed higher nominal loads
if it can offer a more safe and rational method for pile cap depth than that calculated by STM of ACI 318M-14 but less than that
proportioning for shear. of the conventional reference deep beam cases. The proposed
On the other hand, if a pile cap has very flat compression alternatives presented cost saving, reduction in total weight and
struts, then the internal force flow will be relatively uniform and provided a front side area of about 4 − 27%, 41 − 51%, and 46 −
a sectional force approach would be appropriate. Such a sectional 56%, respectively, in comparison with the reference conventionaly
force approach would assume the shear strength of a pile cap is reinforced deep beams.
proportional to the depth of the section. For slender pile caps Based on the above, the authors re-applied the idea of reinforcing
supported on numerous piles, the Canadian code allows designers the struts and ties, but this time in the reinforced concrete caps.
to use a sectional force procedure similar to the ACI procedure The steps taken here were as follows:
(Adebar et al., 1990). The ACI 318 does not capture the massive 1. Design of the traditional reference pile caps of every group;
pile cap behavior, which is actually rather complex. The models the first and third specimens of each group used the conven-
based on strut-and-tie trusses more precisely characterize the tional reinforcement of two meshes. The thickness and the
massive pile cap behavior (Deutsch and Walker, 1963). When mesh reinforcement were determined using the well-known
using traditional sectional methods that depend on Bernoulli’s traditional sectional method.
hypothesis in the design of massive pile caps, experimental tests 2. Application of the same nominal design load of the refer-
have showed that pile caps that were supposed to fail by flexure ence pile specimens on the STM trusses defined by ACI
have failed by shear. In other words, conventional shear approaches 318-14 (Appendix A) to get the compressive forces in the
can be - to a certain extent- unconservative when used for pile caps. struts and the tensile forces in the ties for the proposed spec-
Overrating the importance of the effective depth - as in the sectional- imens, the second and fourth specimens of each group.
design approach - was the cause of early failures in shear (Souza 3. Determination of the dimensions of the struts and ties using
et al., 2009; Ahmed et al., 2009). the STM of ACI 318-14 for the proposed specimens, the
Some codes of practice, such as the american concrete institute second and fourth specimens of each group.
code (ACI-Code), canadian standards association (CSA), australian 4. Introduction of the reinforcement into the struts and ties, as
standard (AS) and new zealand standard (NZS) are now supporting compressive and tensile members using ACI 318-14 equa-
the STM as an appropriate and alternative pile caps design tions 22.4.2.2 and 22.4.3.1, respectively. The second and
procedure. Shear verification is highly recommended by many fourth specimens of each group are the proposed specimens.
researchers when designing pile caps although it is not The shoulders in which the struts do not pass through were
recommended in these practice codes when designing with omitted to reduce total weight.
STM. The researchers agree on the shear failures in pile caps Accordingly, in this work, the experimental results of reinforcing
being due to the longitudinal splitting of the struts (Adebar et al., struts and ties assisted in verifying the stress paths flow in the
1990; Schlaich et al., 1987; Souza et al., 2007). Therefore, a/d pile caps, in addition to presenting a new perspective on RC pile