Title:
How to Model Post-Cracking Torsional Stiffness and Why It Matters
Author(s):
Edvard P.G. Bruun, Allan Kuan, and Evan C. Bentz
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
344
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
49-63
Keywords:
reinforced concrete; torsion; post-cracking stiffness; serviceability; spandrel beam; redistribution
DOI:
10.14359/51728290
Date:
10/1/2020
Abstract:
Post-cracking stiffness is an important parameter in determining the proper distribution of forces in the analysis of statically indeterminate reinforced concrete structures. While the ACI 318-19 code specifies typical values to use in modelling flexural cracking, the same guidance is not available when calculating post-cracking torsional stiffness. This paper presents a summary of the academic literature on the topic as the basis for developing a novel
stiffness-based design procedure, which is then implemented in the design case study of a spandrel beam supporting a cantilevered roof slab. This example demonstrates a situation where a specific torsional stiffness is required to satisfy serviceability requirements. The design method is general and, therefore, applicable to any situation where an accurate measure of torsional stiffness or moment redistribution is required – this removes the need to iteratively model and design to capture post-cracking effects in structural members.
Related References:
1. ACI Committee 318 “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-19) and Commentary (ACI 318R-19),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2019, 623 pp.
2. Fisher, G., (editor), “SP-018: Torsion of Structural Concrete,” ACI Symposium Publication, Vol. 18, 1968. 512 pp.
3. ACI Committee 318 “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-71),” American Concrete Institute, Detroit, MI, 1971, 144 pp.
4. Fisher, G., Szilard, R., Zia, P., (editors), “SP-035: Analysis of Structural Systems for Torsion,” American Concrete Institute Special Publication, Vol. 35, 1973. 438 pp.
5. Collins, M. P. and Lampert, P., “Redistribution of Moments at Cracking - The Key to Simpler Torsion Design?,” ACI Special Publication, Vol. 35, 1973, 343-383.
6. Mitchell, D. and Collins M. P., “Detailing for Torsion,” ACI Symposium Publication, vol. 73, no. 9, pp. 506–511, Sep. 1976.
7. Lampert, P., “Postcracking Stiffness of Reinforced Concrete Beams in Torsion and Bending,” ACI Special Publication, vol. 35, pp. 343–433, 1973.
8. Hsu, T. T. C., “Post-Cracking Torsional Rigidity of Reinforced Concrete Sections,” ACI Journal Proceedings, vol. 70, no. 5, 1973.
9. Bruun, E.P.G., “The Hybrid Panel-Truss Element: Developing a Novel Finite Element for the Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams and Shells,” Master’s, University of Toronto, Canada, 2017.
10. Bruun, E.P.G. and Bentz, E.C., “Experimental Procedures for Displacement-Controlled Pure Torsion Tests on Reinforced Concrete Shells,” in 7th International Conference on Advances in Experimental Structural Engineering, Pavia, Italy, 2017, p. 21.
11. Teng, T. and Teng, S., “Effective Torsional Rigidity of Reinforced Concrete Members,” ACI Structural Journal, vol. 101, no. 2, 2004.
12. Collins, M. P. and Mitchell, D., Prestressed Concrete Structures. Toronto, Canada: Response Publications, 1997.
13. Gouda, M. A., “Distribution of Torsion and Bending Moments in Connected Beams and Slabs,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute, vol 56, no. 2, p. 18, 1960.
14. Kuan A., Bruun, E.P.G., Bentz, E.C., Collins, M.P., “Alternative Design Procedures for Torsion in ACI 318-19: A Comparative Study,” ACI Symposium Publication, vol. 344, pp. 65-92, 2020.