Title:
Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Shear Design Methods and Proposed Improvements
Author(s):
Gregoria Kotsovou
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
116
Issue:
2
Appears on pages(s):
41-52
Keywords:
beam/column elements; codes; contraflexure; reinforced concrete; shear design; structural assessment; structural elements
DOI:
10.14359/51712275
Date:
3/1/2019
Abstract:
Through a comparative study with test data obtained from an extensive literature survey, it is found that current code provisions cannot safeguard safe shear design solutions for structural elements exhibiting points of contraflexure. The cause of this is found to be linked with the formulation of the underlying theory, which has been calibrated with data obtained primarily from tests on simply supported beams. It is shown that an improvement can be achieved through the implementation of the detailing of the transverse reinforcement adopted by an alternative design method, which was found to provide a close fit to the test data in all cases investigated.
Related References:
1. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary (ACI 318R-02),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2002, 443 pp.
2. EN 1992-1: 2004, “Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures – Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings,” London, UK, 2004.
3. EN 1998-1: 2004, “Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance – Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings,” London, UK, 2004.
4. Reineck, K. H.; Kuchma, D. A.; Kim, K. S.; and Marx, S., “Shear Database for Reinforced Concrete Members without Shear Reinforcement,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 100, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2003, pp. 240-249.
5. Kotsovos, M. D., “Reinforced Concrete Shear Design: Shortcomings and Remedy,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 114, No. 4, July-Aug. 2017, pp. 1055-1066. doi: 10.14359/51689682
6. Kotsovou, G. M.; Cotsovos, D. M.; and Lagaros, N. D., “Assessment of RC Exterior Beam-Column Joints Based on Artificial Neural Networks and Other Methods,” Engineering Structures, V. 144, 2017, pp. 1-18. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.04.048
7. Kotsovos, M. D., Compressive Force-Path Method: Unified Ultimate Limit-State Design of Concrete Structures, Springer, London, UK, 2014.
8. Kani, G. N. J., “The Riddle of Shear and its Solution,” ACI Journal Proceedings, V. 61, No. 4, Apr. 1964, pp. 269-274.
9. Afaq, A.; Kotsovou, G.; Cotsovos, M. D.; and Lagaros, N. D., “Assessing the Load Carrying Capacity of RC Members through the Use of Artificial Neural Networks,” Proceedings of the 11th HSTAM International Congress on Mechanics, Athens, Greece, 2016.
10. Kotsovos, M. D., and Michelis, P., “Behavior of Structural Concrete Elements Designed to the Concept of the Compressive Force Path,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 93, No. 4, July-Aug. 1996, pp. 428-437.
11. Kotsovos, M. D., and Michelis, P., “Discussion on ‘Behavior of Structural Concrete Elements Designed to the Concept of the Compressive Force Path’ by Mbakogu et al. (ACI Structural Journal, V. 93, No. 4, July-Aug. 1996, pp. 428-437),” ACI Structural Journal, V. 94, No. 3, May-June 1997, pp. 338-341.
12. British Standards Institution, “Eurocode 2 (EC2): Design of Concrete Structures. Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings (DD ENV 1992-1-1), London, UK, 1992.
13. Kotsovos, M. D., and Pavlovic, M. N., Ultimate Limit-State Design of Concrete Structures: A New Approach, Thomas Telford, London, UK, 1999.
14. Kotsovos, G. M.; Zeris, C.; and Pavlovic, M. N., “Improving RC Seismic Design through the CFP Method,” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Structures and Buildings, V. 158, No. 5, 2005, pp. 291-302. doi: 10.1680/stbu.2005.158.5.291
15. Lu, Y.; Hao, H.; Carydis, P. G.; and Mouzakis, H., “Seismic Performance of RC Frames Designed for Three Different Ductility Levels,” Engineering Structures, V. 23, No. 5, 2001, pp. 537-547. doi: 10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00058-4