Title:
Neglecting Compatibility Torsions In The Design Of Concrete Structures
Author(s):
Giorgio T. Proestos, Evan C. Bentz, Michael P. Collins
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
344
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
30-48
Keywords:
assessment, compatibility torsion, design, finite element, prestressed concrete, shear
DOI:
10.14359/51728289
Date:
10/1/2020
Abstract:
The traditional approach in the design of reinforced and prestressed concrete building structures has been to design each of the two orthogonal directions independently. In calculating the distribution of moments in a structure, this two-dimensional approach neglects the effects of the intersecting members. That is, in the case of compatibility torsions, the torsional stiffness is neglected. This paper provides a summary of the progression of the ACI code and
commentary pertaining to the zero torsional stiffness assumption and its origins. The paper then introduces a recently developed nonlinear finite element analysis tool, VAST II, capable of predicting the response of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures in three-dimensions. The tool, based on the Modified Compression Field Theory, is capable of modelling entire structures or large portions of structures in order to assess their performance in a manner that accounts for three-dimensional effects, such as compatibility torsions. VAST II is then used to model a case study
transit center. The transit center is a post-tensioned concrete structure that was designed using the traditional approach
of neglecting the effects of compatibility torsions. The results indicate that the traditional approach recommended by
the ACI code and commentary, to neglect compatibility torsions, is appropriate and gives robust designs. The paper concludes by providing recommendations for future studies that could be conducted using three-dimensional nonlinear tools such as VAST II.
Related References:
AASHTO, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and Commentary, Eight edition. American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 2017, pp. 1780.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-71) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 1971.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-77) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 1977.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-83) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 1983.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-89) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 1989.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-95) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 1995.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-63), Detroit: American Concrete Institute, 1963.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 2002, p. 443.
ACI Code Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-19) and Commentary, Farmington Hills, Michigan: American Concrete Institute, 2019, p. 624.
ACI-ASCE Committee 326, “Shear and Diagonal Tension,” ACI Journal Proceedings, vol. 59, no. 2, p. 318, February 1962.
ACI-ASCE Committee 445, Report on Torsion in Structural Concrete, Farmington Hills, Michigan: ACI, 2013, p. 92.
ACI, SP-35 Analysis of Structural Systems for Torsion, Detroit: ACI, 1973, p. 438.
Collins, M. P. and Lampert, P., “Redistribution of Moments at Cracking - the Key to Simpler Torsion Design?” Denver, ACI Symposium, 1971.
Collins, M. P. and Mitchell, D., Prestressed Concrete Structures, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1991, p. 766.
Collins, M. P. and Rabbat, B., “Torsional Design of Prestressed Concrete Elevated Guideways,” University of Toronto, p. 28, 1974, Preprint of paper presented at the VII Congress of the Fédération Internationale de la Précontrainte (FIP), New York, March 1974.
Collins, M. P., Bentz, E. C., Kuan, A. and Proestos, G. T., “Detailing for Torsion Revisited,” Denis Mitchell Symposium, Montreal, 5 May 2017.
CSA A23.3-14, Design of Concrete Structures, Mississauga, Ontario: Canadian Standards Association, 2014, p. 297.
Mardukhi, J., The Behaviour of Uniformly Prestressed Concrete Box Beams in Combined Torsion and Bending, MASc Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, 1973, p. 73.
Mitchell, D. and Collins, M. P., “Diagonal Compression Theory - A Rational Model for Concrete in Pure Torsion,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute, vol. 71, no. 8, pp. 396-408, 1974.
Proestos, G. T., Modelling Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Structures Subjected to Shear and Torsion, University of Toronto, Ph.D. Thesis, November 2018, p. 332. .
Rabbat, B. and Collins, M. P., “A Variable Angle Space Truss Model for Structural Concrete Members Subjected to Complex Loading,” in Douglas McHenry International Symposium on Concrete and Concrete Structures, ACI Publication SP-55, Detroit, 1978.
Rabbat, B. and Collins, M. P., “The Computer Aided Design of Structural Concrete Sections Subjected to Combined Loading,” Computers and Structures, vol. 7, pp. 229-236, 1977.
Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P., “The Modified Compression Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear,” ACI Journal, Proceedings, V. 83, No. 2, Mar. 1986, pp. 219-231.