9

detailing prevented, show the same characteristics of behavior at

failure. Therefore, both types can be treated with the same model.
All of the other current design procedures or proposals
discussed in the next sections have, in one form or another, the truss
model as the fundamental design model for the cases of torsion and/or
shear. The basic differences between them lie in the limitations of the
truss model.
An examination of Fig. 2.1 reveals that some of the components
of the failure mechanism in a beam are not considered in the truss model
in favour of simplicity of the design model. These other components of
the failure mechanism must be considered indirectly either in the
geometry of the truss (compression strut angle) or by additional rules
(e.g., V c-
term
).
In this chapter a review of some of the recent design procedures
for shear and torsion available in codes other than ACI and AASHTO is
~ r r i e d out. After that review, further background for the proposed
design recommendations for reinforced and prestressed concrete members
subjected to shear and/or torsion are given. The detailed
recommendations based on the truss model with variable angle of
inclination of the diagonals as the fundamental design model are given
in suggested design specification language in the next chapter.
The design recommendations proposed in Chapter 3 are illustrated
through a ser ies of design examples worked in Chapter 4. The results
are compared with similar examples designed under the current AASHTO and
ACI design recommendations.
10
2.2 Review of Some Design Procedures
Available or Recommended for
Other Codes
All the design procedures discussed in this report are based on
the variable inclination truss model. The main difference between these
design methods is in the way the actions that are not directly
considered in the truss model are introduced in the design procedure.
These actions are introduced either indirectly in the geometry
of the truss model (by modifying the compression strut angle) or by
allowing an additional concrete contribution <ye-term) to supplement the
truss contribution, but only at certain stages.
2.2.1 CEB-Refined. The CEB-Refined method (22) is based on the
truss model with variable angle of inclination of the diagonal
compression struts at failure. The design procedure can be used for the
design of reinforced and prestressed concrete members subjected to
bending and shear. It can also be applied to the case of torsion and to
the combined cases of bending, shear, and torsion.
In the CEB-Refined procedure the actions neglected in the truss
model are considered indirectly in the geometry of the truss model
(variable angle of inclination of the compression strut) and also by
allowing an additional diminishing concrete contribution, which
approaches zero as the nominal shear stress increases.
The inclination of the compression strut is limited to values of
a between
(2.1)
11
The lower limit on the angle Q'is introduced to control excessive
cracking in the web under service load conditions. Another reason to
limi t the range within which the angle Q'is allowed to vary is that for
yield to be developed in both the longitudinal and transverse
reinforcement, very high strains are required in the reinforcement which
yields first. There are also possibilities of excessive inclined crack
widths when the angleQ'deviates too greatly from 45 degrees (see Report
248-2). The initial shear cracks in reinforced concrete beams are often
inclined at approximately 45 degrees. The development of failure
cracks at other angles requires the transmission of forces across the
initial cracks. Since the capacity for this transmission may be
limited, excessive redistribution of internal forces required by
designing for angles which deviate too greatly from 45 degrees should be
avoided.
In the CEB refined design method the design shear force Vu must
be equal to or less than the sum of the nominal shear resistance Vs
carried by the truss action (inclined concrete struts and steel
reinforcement) and the resistance Vc attributed to the shear resistance
of the concrete flexural compression zone and secondary effects.
Vu Vn = Vs + Vc
(2.2)
The shear carried by the truss is computed using Eq. 2.3.
(2.3)
where As is the cross-sectional area of web reinforcement, fWd is the
design stress of the web reinforcement, i.e., the yield stress divided
12
by a resistance factor, "s" represents the spacing of web reinforcement
(stirrups), 9 is the angle of inclination of the web reinforcement, and
a is the angle of inclination at ultimate of the concrete compression
diagonals. Equation 2.3 for the case of vertical stirrups (9 = 90
degrees) follows directly from Eq. 3.63 of Report 248-2.
v
s
=
A
s
s
fWd (O.9d) cota.
(2.4)
The value of the angle a has to be chosen wi thin the limits
presented in Eq. 2.1. The truss model shows that the chosen angle a
will have direct influence on the design of the longitudinal
reinforcement. An area of longitudinal steel required to balance the
horizontal component of the diagonal compression field due to the
presence of shear must be provided in addition to that required for
flexure.
(2.5)
where f
ld
is the design stress of the longitudinal steel, i.e. the value
of the yield stress divided by the appropriate safety factor. Eq. 2.5
follows directly from Eq. 3.65 in Sec. 3.5.2 of Report 248-2 from
equilibrium considerations for the truss model with variable angle of
inclination.
The concrete contribution term Vc varies linearly with the
intensity of the nominal shear stress [V/bwdJ in the transition range
between the uncracked state and the fully developed truss action in a
manner similar to that discussed in Report 248-3. The CEB proposed