ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Title no. 90-SSS
Bearing Strength of Compressive Struts
Confined by Plain Concrete
by Perry Adebar and Zongyu Zhou
To study transverse splitting of compression struts due to spreading of
compression, concrete cylinders of varying diameters and of varying heights
were loaded over a constant size bearing area. The travel time of an
ultrasonic pulse was used to indicate internal cracking, and measured
cracking loads were compared to finite element predictions.
It was found that when compression struts are confined by plain concrete,
the maximum bearing stress to cause transverse splitting depends on the
amount of confinement, as well as the aspect ratio (height/width) of the
compression strut. Design recommendations are given for the maximum
nodal zone bearing stress to prevent diagonal tension failures in deep
members (disturbed regions) with unreinforced compression struts, A simple
example is provided to illustrate the suggested nodal stress limits for the
design of a pile cap using a strut-and-tie model.
Keywords: building codes; caps (supports); cracking (fracturing); deep beams; footings;
piles; plain concrete; reinforced concrete; shear strength; structural design; tests.
The procedure used to apply strut-and-tie models 1-3 to the
shear design of disturbed regions of a structure can be sum-
marized as follows. Compression struts and tension ties,
interconnected by nodal zones, are used to represent the flow
of internal forces [see Fig. l(a)]. The magnitude of the forces
in these various truss members are determined from statics.
The required amount of concentrated reinforcement is pro-
vided for the tension ties and special consideration is given
to insure that the reinforcement is properly anchored to the
nodal zones. Distributed reinforcement is added to insure
that the structure has sufficient ductility (plasticity) to adapt
itself to the assumed internal force system. Finally, the con-
crete stresses are limited to insure that the tension tie rein-
forcement yields prior to the concrete failing.
What stress limit is appropriate for concrete subjected to
shear depends o~ how much reinforcement is present. If
concrete contains significant reinforcement in the appropriate
directions, thereby providing good crack control, the concrete
compressive stresses can be limited to the crushing strength
of concrete, which depends on the principal tension strain. 3'4
On the other hand, if concrete does not have adequate rein-
forcement for crack control, it may be more appropriate to
limit the concrete stresses depending on the width of diagonal
cracks. 4 For concrete with very little reinforcement or plain
534
TECHNICAL PAPER
concrete, the concrete tensile stresses should be limited so
that diagonal cracking will be avoided. 2 This latter approach
is discussed further.
The discontinuous uniaxial compressive stress field shown
in Fig. l(a) is a highly idealized model of the stresses. In
reality, the compression in the diagonal strut will spread out
to maintain compatibility of the concrete strains. The spread-
ing of the compression will cause biaxial or triaxial com-
pression in the nodal zone, but transverse tension near the
midheight of the strut [see Fig. 1(b)]. A refined truss model,
which includes a tension tie to resist the transverse tension,
is shown in Fig. l(c). Rather than employing such a refined
strut-and-tie model, a simple truss model combined with an
appropriate bearing stress limit can be used. 2 Fig. 2 shows
the influence of the "amount of spreading" on the bearing
stress to cause transverse splitting for a plane stress field.
Based on Fig. 2, Schlaich, Schafer, and Jennewein 2 suggest
that the concrete compressive stresses within an entire dis-
turbed region can be considered safe if the maximum bearing
stress in all nodal zones is limited to 0.6 Jc' (or in unusual
cases 0.4 fc').
The results of an experimental stud/ has demonstrated
that a strut-and-tie model is a more appropriate design method
for deep pile caps than the ACI Building Code6 "two-way
slab" approach because it better represents the observed be-
havior. Unfortunately, it is not always practical to provide
distributed reinforcement (crack control reinforcement) in
pile caps; therefore, the diagonal compression struts which
transfer shear in pile caps are often unreinforced. The ap-
proach of limiting the concrete bearing stresses to avoid
transverse splitting is thus appropriate. The nodal zones of
pile caps are typically well confined by surrounding concrete,
ACI Structural Journal, V. 90, No. 5, September-October 1993.
Received Aug. 19, 1992, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright
© 1993, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies
unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion will
be published in the July-August 1994 ACI Structural Journal if received by Mar. 1,
1994. .
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993
ACI member Perry Adebar is 'an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil
Engineering at University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. He is a member
of ACI Committee 341, Earthqualre Resistant Concrete Bridges; and Joint ACI-ASCE
Committees 441, Reinforced Concrete Columns; and 445, Shear and Torsion.

Zongyu Zhou is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Civil Engineering at

University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. He holds engineering degrees
from Tongji University.

I
i
which suggests a higher limit on the bearing stresses than in i

t
T•VItane
the plane stress case. The ACI Building Code6 allows bearing D•VIslne

stresses as high as 2 x 0.85 fc' = 1.7 fc' if the bearing area is (a)
confined by concrete. However, this limit is intended to
prevent crushing of concrete in nodal zones and does not
preclude a shear failure due to transverse splitting of a com-
pression strut. Of six pile caps which were tested to failure
in a recent study, 5 four failed in shear due to diagonal cracking
in the compression struts prior to the reinforcement yielding.
The average value of the critical bearing stress at failure in
the four pile caps, which were of similar geometry, was 1.2/c',
with a coefficient of variation of 5 percent. What bearing
stress limit is appropriate for compression struts of different
geometry is the focus of the present study.

RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
This paper presents a study on the bearing strength of (c)
concrete compressive struts confined by plain concrete. The L-----'

maximum bearing stress which can be applied to compression

struts of varying geometry, without causing transverse crack- Fig. 1-Strut-and-tie model for a deep beam or pile cap: (a)
the idealized load-resisting truss; (b) linear elastic stress
ing, was determined analytically and confirmed experimen- trajectories with transverse tension due to spreading of com-
tally. pression; (c) refined truss model with concrete tension tie to
The results of this study provide designers with important resist transverse tension
information needed to apply strut-and-tie models to the shear
design of disturbed regions which are confined by concrete,
but which do not have sufficient distributed reinforcement
to insure internal redistribution after cracking.

ANALYTICAL STUDY
To better understand the transverse splitting phenomenon,
idealized compression struts were studied. Linear elastic fi-
nite elements were used to determine the triaxial stresses at
first cracking within cylinders of various diameter D and T...,_.. Cracking
height H subjected to concentric axial compression over a
constant-size circular bearing area of diameter d [see
Fig. 3(a)]. Axisymmetric four-node quadrilateral finite ele- o, 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 9
ments were used. b
The geometry of the problem can be summarized in terms a
of two parameters, namely the ratio of the cylinder diameter
to the loaded diameter Did, and the ratio of the cylinder
height to the loaded diameter Hid. Fig. 3(c) and 3(d) sum-
marize the itfluence of Did and Hid on the bearing stress at
first (internal) cracking, assuming the ratio of compressive
strength to tensile strength of the concrete,fc'!fc' = 15. When
Did= 1, the cylinder is subjected to uniaxial compression,
while when Did>> 1, the compression stresses spread out,
creating triaxial compression close to the loaded surface, and
biaxial tension near the midheight of the cylinder [see Fig.
Fig. 2-Maximum bearing stress to cause transverse splitting
3(b)]. The minimum bearing stress to cause transverse split- in bi~fl stress field (from Schlaich, Sc~iifer; and Jen-
ting is approxi~ately 0.6 fc' at Did = 2 and Hid = 1.5. It is newem
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993 535
 To measure internal cracking within the cylinders, a port-
able ultrasonic nondestructive tester (PUNDIT) was used. The
PUNDIT measures the traveling time of an ultrasonic pulse
whose velocity is proportional to the density of the material.
Fig. 4(c) shows typical measured relationships between the
applied bearing stress and the travel time of the ultrasonic
pulse for 12 in. high specimens. First cracking is believed to
be indicated by the onset of nonlinearity. Fig. 4(d) shows the
(a) (b) . corresponding bearing stress-axial deformation relation-
4
ships.
fb
Hld•10
Fig. 5 and 6 compare the measured cracking loads with
1/ 3 Hld•l
H/d•l
the linear elastic prediction. The tensile strength used in the
H/d-4
prediction,f,' = fc'/13, was chosen since it gives the best fit.
H/dooll Considering that only one parameter (j,'!fc') is adjusted, there
Hld•2 is a very good correlation between the analytical prediction
and the experimental results regard).ng the influence of Did
L_-~-~-~----~-__._-~
(c) o 1-
2 3 4 15 e 7 D& and Hid on the bearing stress to cause first cracking. The
d bearing stress to cause failure of the cylinders is also shown
in Fig. 5 and 6. Note that the experimental results shown in
Fig. 5 for Hid = 2.0 and Did = 1.0 come from standard
llld•7
11/d•l
11/d•l
cylinders subjected to uniaxial compression. The nonlinear
11/d-4
2 PUNDIT readings are believed to be due to microcracking
11/d•S
11/d•l
resulting from the high compressive stresses.

(d)o~~~~--~~~~~~~~~ PREVIOUS STUDIES OF BEARING STRENGTH

o 2 3 4 15 e 7 a a 10 11
H While this study is concerned primarily with the bearing
. d
Fig. 3- Analytical study of transverse tension in triaxial
stress field: (a) definition of geometrical parameters; (b)
typical stress distribution under bearing plate; (c) influence
of confinement; (d) influence of height
interesting to note that for large Did and Hid values, increas-
ing the amount of confining concrete (i.e., increasing Did
and Hid further) does not significantly change the internal
stress flow and hence does not affect the bearing stress which
causes first cracking.
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
To confirm the transverse splitting phenomenon within
compression struts, a series of experiments were conducted
on concrete cylinders. The test setup used is shown in Fig.
4(a) and 4(b). The diameter of the concrete cylinders varied
from6in. (152mm)upto24in. (610mm), while the diameter
of the circular bearing plate was always 6 in. (152 mm). The
height of the specimens varied from 9 in. (230 mm) up to
36 in. (914 mm). Table I summarizes the properties of the
40 different specimens which were tested. Note that 06-12
denotes a 6 in. diameter cylinder which is 12 in. high.
The specimens ~re constructed from two batches of con-
crete. Batch A had a cylinder compressive strength of 30
MPa (4350 psi), while Batch B had a compressive strength
of 20 MPa (2900 psi). Both batches were supplied by a local
ready-mix supplier (25 MPa was specified) and had a maxi-
mum aggregate size of% in. (19 mm). The specimens were
cast in sono-tube forms, which were stripped after about 7
days. The specimens were cured in the laboratory for an
additional 50 to 60 days before being tested.
536
12
stress to cause initial transverse cracking, not bearing failure,
a comparison of the bearing stress which caused failure in
the present tests and the bearing strength predicted by the
ACI Building Code6 indicates that the ACI approach is on-
conservative in the range 1.5 <Did< 3.5. According to the
ACI Building Code, the maximum bearing strength is 0.85
fc', except when the supporting surface area A2 is wider on
all sides than the loaded area A~o when the bearing strength
is multiplied by ...JA2 IA1 , but not more than 2. Note that Did
= ...JA2/A1.
Fig. 7 compares the ACI Building Code6 bearing strength
prediction with tests conducted by Shelson,7 Au and Baird,8
Douglas and Trahair,9 Middendorf, 10 Hawkins, 11 Chen and
Trumbauer, 12 Niyogi, 13 as well as the present investigation.
The ACI prediction is unconservative for quite a number of
the tests, the reasons for which are discussed in the following.
The commentary to the ACI Building Code6 (Section
10.15) makes reference to Hawkins/ 1 who suggested the
following expression for the bearing strength of concrete
fb = fc' +50-{!;' (...JA2IA1 - 1) (1)
wherefc' is in psi. That is, the enhancement in bearing strength
due to confining concrete is proportional to the tensile
strength of concrete. In the ACI Building Code, this equation
has been simplified so that the bearing strength enhancement
is proportional to the concrete compressive strength. Fig. 8
compares the ACI approach with Eq. ( 1) for different concrete
strengths. Note that when the concrete compressive strength
is higher than 5000 psi (34.5 MPa), the original expression
suggested by Hawkins gives lower bearing strengths than the
ACI Building Code. The low strength reduction factor of
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993
 ~,-------------------,

70
• Cracking

(c)
(a)
PUNDIT Transmit Time (mloroHCondo)

~,-------------------·

70

eo 024-12

..•
Displacement (mm)

Fig. 4- Experimental study: (a) schematic of test setup; (b) photo of test set-up; (c) typical load-PUNDIT readings; (d) typical
load-deformation relationships

Table 1 -Surnmarv of 11 results

Specimen Bearing stress at Maximum bearing Specimen Bearing stress at Maximum bearing
designation* Concrete batch cracking, MPa stress, MPa designation* Concrete batch cracking. MPa stress, MPa
06-12-1 A t 29.1 Dl2-18-l B 22.0 43.9
06-12-2 A t 32.7 012-18-2 B 24.4 45.4
06-12-3 A 15.9 28.3 Dl2-18-3 B 19.5 45.4
06-12-4 A 12.2 28.4 Dl2-36-l B 24.4 49.5
06-12-5 A 17.1 31.2 012-36-2 B 26.8 48.3
06-12-6 A t 31.7 012-36-3 B 25.6 43.7
08-12-1 A 24.4 34.4 014-9-1 B 15.9 32.5
08-12-2 A 24.4 35.4 014-9-2 B 14.6 31.7
08-12-3 A 23.2 32.8 Dl4-9-3 B 17.1 33.2
08-12-4 A 24.4 35.6 014-18-1 B 26.8 48.1
08-12-5 A 24.4 36.3 014-18-2 B 25.6 50.0
010-9-1 B 13.4 24.9 014-18-3 B 24.4 48.8
DI0-9-2 B 13.4 30.3 014-36-1 B 34.2 58.1
010-9-3 B 9.8 27.8 014-36-2 B 28.1 53.2
010-18-1 B 18.3 40.0 Dl4-36-3 B 29.3 51.7
DI0-18-2 B 24.4 42.7 Dl8-9-l B 26.8 44.4
010-18-3 B 22.0 41.0 018-9-2 B 19.5 42.2
010-36-1 B 24.4 43.0 018-9-3 B 20.7 44.4
010-36-2 B 19.5 39.5 0-18-12-1 A 26.8 40.2
010-36-3 B 24.4 43.0 0-18-12-2 A 26.8 43.4
012-9-1 B 12.2 30.3 0-18-12-3 A 29.3 42.0
012-9-~ B 12.2 27.1 0-18-12-4 A 29.3 41.7
012-9-3 B 12.2 31.5 018-18-1 B 34.2 61.0
012-12-1 A 26.8 32.4 018-18-2 B 31.7 55.6
012-12-2 A 26.8 34.6 018-18-3 B 29.3 56.9
012-12-3 A 24.4 34.0 018-36-1 B 37.8 71.5
012-12-4 A 24.4 36.0 Dl8-36-2 B 37.8 68.3
012-12-5 A 23.2 33.7 018-36-3 B 39.1 68.3
012-12-6 A 20.7 35.1 024-12-1 A 32.9 59.8
*06-12 denotes D =6 in.; H =12 in. 024-12-2 A 35.4 65.5
t Not measured.
I MPa = 145 osi. 024-12-3 A 34.1 62.0

ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993 537

 80
l Experimental:
fb
I
!,eo •
0
Cracking
Flllure
Hld•1.5
!c'
1 40
~ •
8

•
5

~20 ..--•--' \Predicted CriCking

ft'•1.52MPa
4
01 2 3 4
80
..
80 \ Hld•2.0 . § 3

40 i i•
g~
I'-....___ \Predicted CriCking 2
20
11'•2.30MPa
(Concrete Batch A)
01 2 3 4 ACI code
80

• 0 1~------~~~------~3--------~4------~5

•
-.. \ JA,jA 1
Predleled Cr8Cidng
ft'•1.52 MPa
0 1·~------~2------~3~------~4--~ Fig. 7-- Comparison ofACI Building Code bearing strength
prediction with previous and present experimental results.
80,----------------------------.
8
80 0.70 used in the ACI Building Code for bearing on concrete
partly compensates for this over-simplification.
40
A second factor which contributed to the low experimental
20 • results in Fig. 7 is size effect. The ACI Building Code ap-
proach is based on tests of relatively small specimens, while
0 1~------~~--------3~------~4--~
a number of the data points shown in Fig. 7, including some
D/d
from the present investigation, are from larger specimens.
Fig. 5-Comparison of experimental results and analytical Since bearing failures involve fracture of the concrete due
predictions: influence of confinement for various heights. to indirect tension, there is a significant size effect involved.
Based on the results of 42 double-punch tests, Marti 14 con-
leo Experimental:
cluded that the size effect was in good agreement with
!.eo • C.:ldng Bazant's (nonlinear fracture mechanics) size-effect relation.
Dld•1.17
0 Flilure Thus the bearing strength of concrete is proportional to
§

~
140
._ fi'
· ( 20

ill
"p..-; Ct8cldng
ft'•1.52MPa /boo~ D
1+-
10
00 2 3 4 5 I 7
• ADa (2)

eo Dld•2.0 where Da is the maximum aggregate size and A. is an

~~
40 empirical constant, which varied between 38 and 68.5 in
Marti's tests. For the geometrically identical specimens that
1-
20
lcteder.ckl were made with the same concrete and ranged in size from
11'•1.52 MPa na
8 to 128 times the maximum aggregate size (i.e., the size
00 2 4 5 I 7 8 varied by a factor of 16), the bearing strength varied by a
eo factor of 1.6. 14
Dld•3.0 8 The most important factor to contribute to the actual bear-
eo 0

' ing strength being lower than the ACI Building Code pre-
40
20
G·,_ •
\.Predicted Cnlcldng
ft'•1.52MPa
diction is the geometry of the loading. The majority of the
test results, upon which the ACI Building Code procedure
is based, are from single-punch tests in which the base of
00 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 the specimen is set directly on the lower platen of the testing
H/d machine and the upper platen is used to load the bearing
plate.7- 11 In the present investigation, as well as some previous
Fig. 6-Comparison of experimental results and analytical studies, 12- 14 the specimens were loaded symmetrically using
predictions: influence of height for various degrees of con- bearing plates on both the top and bottom surfaces. In such
finement. double-punch tests, the spreading of the compression at both
538 ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993
 I\ I\ I \
I \ I \ I \
I \ I \ I \

r----1 1---4 1-------\

I
\----1 I
\ I I
I \ I I
I \ I I
I
I
2 I
I
(b) I
I
I
~
I
\ I
\ I

(c)
1
A =2,500 I* (17 MPII) Fig. 9-Simple truss models demonstrating the force flow in:
B = 5,000 I* (34.5 MPa)
(a) single-punch test; (b) short double-punch test; (c) tall
C"' 7,500 pel (51.7 IIPa)
double-punch test.
D"' 10,000 psi (68 IIPII)

3,-------------------------------~

0~----------~----------~ h(ezp)
1 2 3 fb (ACJ)
JA.JA 1
2
Fig. 8- Comparison ofACI Building Code bearing strength
with Hawkins' suggested equation for various concre.te
strengths.

ends of the specimen results in higher tensile stresses at the

midheight, as shown in Fig. 9(b). When the specimens are
relatively tall [Fig. 9(c)], the double-punch tests produce
results similar to the single-punch tests [Fig. 9(a)]. Fig. 10
illustrates that the accuracy of the ACI bearing strength de-
pends on the Hid ratio for double-punch tests. ·

DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Fig. 10-Influence of height on accuracy of ACI Building

Based on the results of the analytical and experimental
studies presented here, it is suggested that when designing
deep members (disturbed regions) without sufficient rein-
forcement to insure redistribution after cracking, the maxi-
mum bearing stress should be limited to
fb ~ 0.6fc' (1 + 2a.~) (3a)
where
a.=0.33("(A21AI-l)~l.O (3b)
~ = 0.33(h/b- 1) ~ 1.0 (3c)
The ratio h/b, which represents the aspect ratio
(height/width) of the compression strut, should not be taken
less than 1 (i.e., ~ ~ 0 ). The parameter a. accounts for the
amount of confinement, while the parameter ~ accounts for
the geometry of the compression stress field.
The lower bearing stress limit of 0.6 fc' is appropriate if
there is no confinement (i.e., '-'Az/Al=1), regardless of the
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993
Code bearing strength prediction of double-punch tests.
height of the compression strut, as well as when the com-
pression strut is relatively short (i.e., h/b = 1), regardless of
the amount of confinement. The upper limit of Eq. (3), 0.6
fc' x 3 = 1.8/c', was chosen to correspond approximately to
the upper limit of bearing strength given in the ACI Building
Code.6 The interaction of confinement and geometry (aspect
ratio) was chosen to give a reasonably simple expression and
yet correspond well with the finite element predictions and
the experimental results. Fig. 11 compares Eq. (3) with the
finite element prediction, while Fig. 12 compares the predic-
tions of Eq. (3) with the experimental results.
As discussed previously, concrete bearing strength is ac-
tually proportional to the concrete tensile strength. If the
concrete compressive strength is significantly greater than
5000 psi (34.5 MPa), Eq. (3) (which is similar in form to the
ACI bearing stress limit) may be unconservative. In that case
a more appropriate limit for the bearing stress is given by
fb ~ 0.6fc' + 72-{j;' (a.~) (4)
539
 fb
f/ ......
,.,.,...;:::'_..-
1..
5'-6"
.. I
......
_,--
.,__
,.,
/
__ /
/ H/d•4
---- T
..... /

--
/
/-
H/d•3

H/d•2

H/d•1
0 D 0
_l
2'-6"

~3·-a·--J
(a)
01 2 3 4 13"
D/d- JA.JA 1
fb

l
fc'

2
I
I
I
I

\~ --------
D/d•2
_C
--c.
3"
I J
40"

\~~'
'- D/d•1

(b) 2X35QK=7QQK

00 2 3 4
H/d T 31.5"
Fig. 11- Comparison of suggested design equation with
analytical results
_l
3
!, (exp) (c) 35QK
/ , (pretl)

Fig. 13-Design example of a two-pile cap: (a) plan view;

2
(b) elevation showing potential diagonal crack; (c) strut-
and-tie model

Design example
A pile cap will be designed to transmit a 700-kip (3113-
kN) ultimate load from a 13-in. (330- mm) square cast-in-
place concrete column onto two 10-in. (254-mm) diameter
0 ,~------~2------~3------~4~----~5
circular precast concrete piles using a strut-and-tie model.
Dfd- JAJA 1 Initial concrete dimensions, which will allow normal con-
struction practice and which are expected to satisfy service-
Fig. 12- Comparison of predictions from suggested design ability and ultimate strength requirements, are chosen based
equation with experimental results on past experience. 1 For pile caps, the CRSI Handbook 15 is
an excellent resource. Fig. 13(a) and 13(b) show the initial

'
where .fc' is in psi. If MPa units are being used, 72 should
be replaced by 6. Note a. and ~ are unchanged and are given
by Eq. (3b) and (3c). Eq. (4) expresses the bearing strength
enhancement in a form similar to what was proposed by
Hawkins 11 in Eq. (1).
To account for size effect, Eq. (4) is divided by the de-
nominator of Eq. (2).
540
concrete dimension chosen for this example.
The strut-and-tie model shown in Fig. 13(c) represents the
assumed flow of internal forces. Since the diagonal compres-
sion struts are inclined at 65 deg, the required tension tie
force Tu = V. /tanO = 350/tan65 = 163 kips (745 kN). The
required amount of tie reinforcement A,= Tul<l>y =163/(0.85
x 60) = 3.2 in. 2 (2062 mm2). Thus four #8 (Grade 60) rein-
forcing bars are provided. To insure sufficient anchorage of
ACt Structural Journal I September-October 1993
the tension tie reinforcement, 180-deg hooks are provided,
as shown in Fig. 13(b).
Pile caps are typically constructed without any transverse
reinforcement or longitudinal reinforcement distributed over
the height, 15 hence they have very little ductility, and the
concrete compressive stresses should be limited by the pro-
cedure given in this paper. The pile cap is to be constructed
with 5000 psi (34.5 MPa) concrete, thus Eq. (3) is appropriate.
The pile cap is not especially large, so that it is reasonable
to neglect size effect.
The geometry of the compression struts is different at the
two nodal zones, therefore an average value is used for the
geometrical parameters in Eq. (3). The amount of confine-
ment at the column nodal zone is such that ...fAz IA1 = 2.3,
while at the pile end ...fA2 /A 1 = 3.0. Using the average value
gives ex= 0.33 (2.66- 1) = 0.55. The dimensions of the com-
pression strut are such that h = 31.5/sin65, b = 6.5/sin65, and
h/b = 31.5/6.5 = 4.85 at the column end and h/b = 31.5/10
= 3.15 at the pile end. Using the average h/b value gives~=
0.33(4.0- 1) = 1.0, and the maximum bearing stress at the
nodal zones must be limited to /b = 0.6 fc'(l + 2
x 0.55 X 1.0) = 1.26 fc'. This gives a maximum column load
of <j> /b Acot = 0. 70 X 1.26 fc' X Acot = 745 kips (3310 kN) >
700 kips (3113 kN), and a maximum pile load of
0.70x 1.26fc'xApue = 347 kips (1541 kN)"" 700/2 = 350
kips (1557 kN). Thus the concrete dimensions shown in Fig.
13 are appropriate.
It is important to note that since the concrete bearing
stresses satisfy Eq. (3), no additional check needs to be made
regarding the sectional shear stresses. Also, since ~ is equal
to 1.0, increasing the depth of the pile cap would not increase
the "shear" strength of the pile cap according to Eq. (3). The
shear strength (maximum pile load) can only be increased
by either increasing the width of the pile cap (i.e., increasing
ex) or increasing the bearing area.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Concrete compression struts which do not contain distrib-
uted reinforcement may not have the necessary ductility to
redistribute the internal stresses after cracking. To prevent
failure of concrete compression struts due to transverse split-
ting, the maximum bearing stress in nodal zones must be
restricted.
When compression struts are confined by plain concrete,
the maximum bearing stress depends on the amount of con-
finement, as well as the aspect ratio (height/width) of the
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993
compression strut. Based on the results of an analytical and
experimental study, design recommendations have been pro-
posed, and a simple design example has been presented to
illustrate the recommended procedure.
The ACI Building Code6 may be unconservative regarding
concrete bearing strength if the concrete is high strength, the
structure is large, or if concentrated loads are applied at both
ends of the stress field.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
1. Marti. Peter, "Basic Tools of Reinforced Concrete Beam Design," ACI
JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 82, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1985, pp. 46-56.
2. Schlaich, Jorg; Schafer, Kurt; and Jennewein, Mattias, "Toward a
Consistent Design of Reinforced Structural Concrete," Journal of
Prestressed Concrete Institute, V. 32, No. 3, May-June 1987, pp. 74-150.
3. Collins, Michael P., and Mitchell, Denis, "Rational Approach to Shear
Design-The 1984 Canadian Code Provisions," ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings
V. 83, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1986, pp. 925-933. .
4. Vecchio, Frank J., and Collins, Michael P., "Modified Compression
Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear," ACI
JoURNAL, Proceedings V. 83, No.2, Mar.-Apr. 1986, pp. 219-231.
5. Adebar, Perry; Kuchma, Daniel; and Collins, Michael P., "Strut-and-
Tie Models for the Design of Pile Caps: An Experimental Study," ACI
Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1990, pp. 81-92.
6. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced
Concrete and Commentary (ACI 318-89/ACI 318 R-89)," American .Con-
crete Institute, Detroit, 1989, 353 pp.
7. Shelson, W., "Bearing Capacity of Concrete," ACI JouRNAL, Proceed-
ings V. 54, No. 5, Nov. 1957, pp. 405-414.
8. Au, T., and Baird, D.L., "Bearing Capacity of Concrete Blocks," ACI
JoURNAL, Proceedings Mar. 1960, pp. 869-879.
9. Douglas, D. J., and Trahair, N. S., "Examination of the Stresses in the
Anchorage Zone of a Post-Tensioned Prestressed Concrete Beam," Magazine
of Concrete Research (London), V. 12, No. 34, Mar. 1960, pp. 9-18.
10. Middendorf, K. H., "Practical Aspects of End Zone Bearing of
Post-Tensioning Tendons," PC! Journal, V. 8, No.4, Aug. 1963, pp. 57-62.
11. Hawkins, Neil M., "Bearing Strength of Concrete Loaded through
Rigid Plates," Magazine of Concrete Research (London), V. 20, No. 62,
Mar. 1968, pp. 31-40.
12. Chen, W. F., and Trumbauer, B. E., "Double-Punch Test for Tensile
Strength of Concrete," Journal of Materials, V. 7, No. 2, June 1972, pp.
148-154.
13. Niyogi, Sanat K., "Bearing Strength of Concrete - Geometric Vari-
ations," Journal of Structural Division, Proceedings, ASCE, V. 99, No.
ST7, July 1973, pp. 1471-1489.
14. Marti, Peter, "Size Effect in Double-Punch Tests on Concrete Cyl-
inders," ACI Materials Journal, V. 86, No.6, Nov.-Dec. 1989, pp. 597-601.
15. CRSI Handbook, Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute, Chicago, 1984,
800 pp.
541
the tension tie reinforcement, 180-deg hooks are provided,
as shown in Fig. 13(b).
Pile caps are typically constructed without any transverse
reinforcement or longitudinal reinforcement distributed over
the height, 15 hence they have very little ductility, and the
concrete compressive stresses should be limited by the pro-
cedure given in this paper. The pile cap is to be constructed
with 5000 psi (34.5 MPa) concrete, thus Eq. (3) is appropriate.
The pile cap is not especially large, so that it is reasonable
to neglect size effect.
The geometry of the compression struts is different at the
two nodal zones, therefore an average value is used for the
geometrical parameters in Eq. (3). The amount of confine-
ment at the column nodal zone is such that .VA2 IA 1= 2.3,
while at the pile end .VAziA1 = 3.0. Using the average value
gives a= 0.33 (2.66- 1) = 0.55. The dimensions of the com-
pression strut are such that h = 31.5/sin65, b = 6.5/sin65, and
h/b = 31.5/6.5 = 4.85 at the column end and h/b = 31.5/10
= 3.15 at the pile end. Using the average h/b value gives~=
0.33(4.0- 1) = 1.0, and the maximum bearing stress at the
nodal zones must be limited to fb = 0.6 fc'(l + 2
x 0.55 x 1.0) = 1.26fc'. This gives a maximum column load
of <j>fbAcol = 0.70 X 1.26// X Acol = 745 kips (3310 kN) >
700 kips (3113 kN), and a maximum pile load of
0.70x 1.26fc'XApile = 347 kips (1541 kN)"' 700/2 = 350
kips (1557 kN). Thus the concrete dimensions shown in Fig.
13 are appropriate.
It is important to note that since the concrete bearing
stresses satisfy Eq. (3), no additional check needs to be made
regarding the sectional shear stresses. Also, since ~ is equal
to 1.0, increasing the depth of the pile cap would not increase
the "shear" strength of the pile cap according to Eq. (3). The
shear strength (maximum pile load) can only be increased
by either increasing the width of the pile cap (i.e., increasing
a) or increasing the bearing area.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Concrete compression struts which do not contain distrib-
uted reinforcement may not have the necessary ductility to
redistribute the internal stresses after cracking. To prevent
failure of concrete compression struts due to transverse split-
ting, the maximum bearing stress in nodal zones must be
restricted.
When compression struts are confined by plain concrete,
the maximum bearing stress depends on the amount of con-
finement, as well as the aspect ratio (height/width) of the
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1993
compression strut. Based on the results of an analytical and
experimental study, design recommendations have been pro-
posed, and a simple design example has been presented to
illustrate the recommended procedure.
The ACI Building Code6 may be unconservative regarding
concrete bearing strength if the concrete is high strength, the
structure is large, or if concentrated loads are applied at both
ends of the stress field.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
1. Marti, Peter, "Basic Tools of Reinforced Concrete Beam Design," ACI
JoURNAL, Proceedings V. 82, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1985, pp. 46-56.
2. Schlaich, Ji:irg; Schafer, Kurt; and Jennewein, Mattias, "Toward a
Consistent Design of Reinforced Structural Concrete," Journal of
Prestressed Concrete Institute, V. 32, No. 3, May-June 1987, pp. 74-150.
3. Collins, Michael P., and Mitchell, Denis, "Rational Approach to Shear
Design-The 1984 Canadian Code Provisions," ACI JouRNAL, Proceedings
V. 83, No. 6, Nov.·Dec. 1986, pp. 925·933.
4. Vecchio, Frank J., and Collins, Michael P., "Modified Compression
Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear," ACI
JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 83, No.2, Mar.-Apr. 1986, pp. 219-231.
5. Adebar, Perry; Kuchma, Daniel; and Collins, Michael P., "Strut-and-
Tie Models for the Design of Pile Caps: An Experimental Study," ACI
Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1990, pp. 81-92.
6. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced
Concrete and Commentary (ACI 318-89/ACI 318 R-89)," American.Con-
crete Institute, Detroit, 1989, 353 pp.
7. Shelson, W., "Bearing Capacity of Concrete," ACI JOURNAL, Proceed-
ings V. 54, No. 5, Nov. 1957, pp. 405-414.
8. Au, T., and Baird, D.L., "Bearing Capacity of Concrete Blocks," ACI
JoURNAL, Proceedings Mar. 1960, pp. 869-879.
9. Douglas, D. J., and Trahair, N. S., "Examination of the Stresses in the
Anchorage Zone of a Post-Tensioned Prestressed Concrete Beam," Magazine
of Concrete Research (London), V. 12, No. 34, Mar. 1960, pp. 9-18.
I 0. Middendorf, K. H., "Practical Aspects of End Zone Bearing of
Post-Tensioning Tendons," PC! Journal, V. 8, No.4, Aug. 1963, pp. 57-62.
11. Hawkins, Neil M., "Bearing Strength of Concrete Loaded through
Rigid Plates," Magazine of Concrete Research (London), V. 20, No. 62,
Mar. 1968, pp. 31-40.
12. Chen, W. F., and Trumbauer, B. E., "Double-Punch Test for Tensile
Strength of Concrete," Journal of Materials, V. 7, No. 2, June 1972, pp.
148-154.
13. Niyogi, Sanat K., "Bearing Strength of Concrete - Geometric Vari-
ations," Journal of Structural Division, Proceedings, ASCE, V. 99, No.
ST7, July 1973, pp. 1471-1489.
14. Marti, Peter, "Size Effect in Double-Punch Tests on Concrete Cyl-
inders," ACI Materials Journal, V. 86, No.6, Nov.-Dec. 1989, pp. 597-601.
15. CRSI Handbook, Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute, Chicago, 1984,
800 pp.
541