CEE140L: BEAM EXPERIMENT

1. Test Set-Up

The beam experiment examines a simply supported RC beam loaded

monotonically to failure at its midpoint, as shown in Figure 1. A string
potentiometer (or alternatively, an LVDT) and LVDS (locations shown in Figure
1) are used to collect data that are converted to displacements and strains,
respectively. Predicted plots for load-displacement (P-δ) and moment-curvature
(M-φ) may be compared to the plots for measured data.

Figure 1 – Test Set-Up Showing Instrumentation and Loading for Simply-

Supported RC Beam
2. Test Predictions

Predicted shear capacity and a predicated moment-curvature plot and load-

displacement plot may be generated for the beam. For all sample computations
herein, consider a 5” by 10.5” RC beam with 2#4 top bars and 2#6 bottom bars and
an assumed concrete cover of 1.5” to the center of the longitudinal bars. Use f’c =
5 ksi and fy = 68 ksi. Note that the beam used for sample computations differs
from the beam used in the experiment.

2.1 Moment-Curvature

This section examines the formulation of a predicted moment-curvature plot for a

given RC cross-section.

2.1.1 Basic Formulation

An approximate moment-curvature relationship can be estimated by computing the

moment and curvature just prior to cracking, just after cracking, at yield of tensile
reinforcement, and at nominal capacity (εc = 0.003).

2.1.1.1 Prior to Cracking

Two approaches, an elastic section approach and a material stress-strain approach,

may be used to determine the moment and curvature prior to cracking. For both
approaches, it is necessary to estimate the rupture stress of concrete. For 5-ksi
concrete, the rupture stress may be estimated as follows:

f r  7.5 f c'  7.5 5000 psi  530.3 psi

2.1.1.1.1 Elastic Section Approach

This method works for linear-elastic, homogeneous material behavior. At low

strains concrete behaves nearly linear-elastically. Since cracking occurs at very
low concrete strains, assuming linear-elastic behavior is appropriate for computing
parameters at cracking. Although reinforced concrete is not homogenous,
transforming the area of steel reinforcement into an equivalent area of concrete
using modular ratios allows the RC cross-section to be analyzed as a homogenous
material.
In order to use the elastic section approach for the RC section just prior to cracking
it is necessary to compute the uncracked moment of inertia. The depth of the
neutral axis (same as the location of the centroid as measured from the top of the
beam) for the uncracked section is computed as follows:
2
Ag  (5")(10.5")  52.5in
2 2
As'  2*(0.20in )  0.40in
2 2
As  2*(0.44in )  0.88in
Es Es 29000 ksi 29000 ksi
modular ratio: n   ksi  7.2
Ec 57 f c' 57 5000 4030.5ksi
2 2
As' equiv.  (n  1) * As'  6.2 *(0.40in )  2.48in
2 2
As equiv.  (n  1) * As  6.2 *(0.88in )  5.456in

 10.5" 
  As  equiv. * 1.5"  As equiv. * 10.5" 1.5"
'
Ag * 
xuncr .   2 
Ag  As' equiv.  As equiv.
2 2 2
(52.5in )* (5.25")  (2.48in ) *(1.5")  (5.456in ) *(9.0")
 2 2 2
52.5in  2.48in  5.456in
 5.43"

The moment of inertia (second moment of area about the centroid) for the
uncracked section is computed as follows (neglecting I0 for the reinforcement,
since the value is very small):

I uncr .  [ I 0  A( xi  x ) 2 ]
2 2
 (1/ 12)(5")(10.5")3  (52.5in )(5.0" 5.43") 2  (2.48in ) *(1.5" 5.43") 2
2
 (5.456 in )(9.0" 5.43") 2
4
 600.0in

The cracking moment is computed as follows:

4
fI f r I uncr . (0.5303ksi )(600.0in )
M cr .  r uncr .    62.8k in
cbot 10.5" xuncr . (10.5" 5.43")
The corresponding curvature just prior to cracking is computed as follows:

M uncr . 62.8k in 1

uncr .   in 4
 0.0000260in
EI uncr . (4030.5 )(600.0 )
ksi

2.1.1.1.2 Material Stress-Strain Approach

The strain distribution on the RC section is linear based on the plane-sections

remain plane assumption. For small strains, concrete stress-strain behavior may be
approximated as linear elastic. Therefore, the concrete stress distribution is also
linear. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between stress, strains, and forces for
the linear-elastic case (small strains) for a doubly reinforced RC cross-section just
prior to cracking.

Figure 2 – Flexural Strains, Stresses, and Forces for an Elastic RC Cross-Section

Note that the bottom concrete stress just prior to cracking is equal to the rupture
stress. Based on the stress distribution, the resultant forces may be computed as
follows:
 1 1
Cc  f c top ctop b  f c xb
2 2
Cs  ( f s  f c @ A' ) As
' ' '
s

1 1
Tc  f c bot cbot b  f r (h  x )b
2 2
Ts  ( f s  f c @ As ) As

An iterative process may be used to determine the neutral axis depth, x, to achieve
section equilibrium. Once a guess of x has been made, the strain distribution is
known, from which the stresses and forces may be computed.

For the sample RC section considered, the neutral axis depth was determined to be
5.43”, leading to the stress, strain, and force distribution shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 – Strains, Stresses, and Forces Immediately Prior to Cracking

The forces shown in Figure 3 may be computed as follows:

1 1 1
Cc  f c top ctop b  f c xb  (0.5680ksi )(5.43")(5.0")  7.71k
2 2 2
2
Cs'  ( f s'  f c @ A' ) As'  [2.958ksi  ( Ec  4030.5ksi ) *( 's  0.000102)]*(2 *0.20in )  1.02 k
s

1 1 1
Tc  f c bot cbot b  f c (h  x )b  (0.5303ksi )(10.5" 5.43")(5.0")  6.72 k
2 2 2
2
Ts  ( f s  f c @ As ) As  [2.687 ksi  ( Ec  4030.5ksi )* ( s  0.000093)]*(2*0.44in )  2.04 k
Note that the concrete stress at the location of the top bars has been subtracted
from the steel stress in the preceding computation to account for the absence of
concrete at the location of top bars.

The resultant forces satisfy equilibrium and the cracking moment is computed as
follows:

 10.5" x 
M cr .  Tc * 10.5"   Ts * (9.0")  Cc * (5.43"/ 3)  Cs * (1.5")
'

 3 
 (6.72 )(8.81")  (2.04 k )(9.0")  (7.71k )(1.81")  (1.02k )(1.5")
k

 62.1k in

The associated curvature is computed as follows:

 c 0.000141 1
uncr .    0.0000260in
x 5.43"

Note that the results for the elastic section approach match the results for the
material stress-strain approach.

2.1.1.2 Immediately After Cracking

Immediately after cracking, the tensile strength of concrete is neglected entirely for
this analysis. This is a simplifying assumption (conservative for design) which
introduces marginal error for the test predications, since the tensile strength of
concrete is small compared to compressive strength (typically on the order of
1/10).

For the example RC cross-section, the cracked neutral axis depth is computed as
follows:
 Ag  (5")( xcr . )
2 2
As' equiv.  (n  1) * As'  6.2 *(0.40in )  2.48in
2 2
As equiv.  n * As  7.2*(0.88in )  6.336in

Ag *( xcr . / 2)  As'  equiv. * 1.5"  As equiv . * 10.5" 1.5"

xcr . 
Ag  As'  equiv.  As  equiv.
2 2
(5")( xcr . ) *( xcr . / 2)  (2.48in )*(1.5")  (6.336in )*(9.0")
 2 2
(5")( xcr . )  2.48in  6.336in
3
(2.5")( xcr . ) 2  60.744in
 2
(5.0")( xcr . )  8.816in

solve quadratic:
2 3
(2.5")( xcr . ) 2  (8.816in )( xcr . )  60.744in  0  xcr .  3.47"

The moment of inertia (second moment of area about the centroid) for the cracked
section is computed as follows (neglecting I0 for the reinforcement, since the value
is very small):

I uncr .  [ I 0  A( xi  x ) 2 ]
2
 (1/ 12)(5")(3.47")3  (5")(3.47")(3.47"/ 2) 2  (2.48in )* (1.5" 3.47") 2
2
 (6.336 in )(9.0" 3.47") 2
4
 273.0in

Using the elastic section approach, the curvature immediately after cracking is
computed as follows:

M cr . 62.8k in 1
cr .   in 4
 0.0000571in
EI cr . (4030.5 )(273.0 )
ksi

2.1.1.3 Tension Steel Yielding

The moment and curvature for tension steel yield may be estimated by assuming
linear-elastic behavior for concrete in compression. This is an assumption that can
be checked based on the value of the outer fiber concrete compressive strain.
The depth of the neutral axis for the cracked RC section (neglecting tensile
strength of cracked concrete) was previously determined to be 3.47”. The yield
strain for fy = 68 ksi reinforcement is computed as follows:

fy 68ksi
y    0.00234in / in
Es 29000ksi

Since plane sections are assumed to remain plane, the outer fiber concrete
compressive strain can be computed as follows:

x  3.47" 
c   y *   0.00234in / in  *    0.00147
in / in

dx  9.0" 3.47" 

Generally, concrete stress-strain behavior may be approximated as linear-elastic up

to strains of about 0.001. In this case, due to the large outer fiber concrete
compressive strain, using a linear-elastic relationship for concrete is not the best
approximation. Section 2.1.2 presents material stress-strain relationships for steel
and concrete that account for nonlinearities; this type of analysis would provide a
more reliable estimate of the yield moment. However, using the linear-elastic
assumption can provide a crude estimate of the yield moment.

2.1.1.3.1 Elastic Section Approach

The moment and curvature computed using an elastic section approach for the
cracked RC section (neglecting the tensile strength of cracked concrete) are
computed as follows:
4
f c top I cr . EI (0.00147 in / in )(4030.5ksi )(273.0in )
My   c c cr .   466.6k in
ctop xcr . (3.47")
My 466.6 k in 1
y   in 4
 0.000424in
EI cr . ksi
(4030.5 )(273.0 )

2.1.1.3.2 Material Stress-Strain Approach

The stress, strain, and force distribution for tension steel yielding is shown in
Figure 4.
 Figure 4 – Strains, Stresses, and Forces at Yielding of Tension Reinforcement

The corresponding moment and curvature are computed as follows:

M y  Ts *(9.0")  Cc *(3.47"/ 3)  Cs' *(1.5")

 (59.8k )(9.0")  (51.4 k )(1.1567")  (8.3k )(1.5")
 466.3k in
 c 0.00147 1
y    0.000424in
x 3.47"

Note that the results for the elastic section approach match the results for the
material stress-strain approach.

2.1.1.4 Nominal Capacity

At nominal capacity (εc = 0.003), tension steel has yielded and the concrete
compressive stress distribution is nonlinear and is approximated by a Whitney
stress block. Per ACI 318-14 Chapter 9 Beams, the Whitney stress block assumes
a uniformly distributed concrete compressive stress of 0.85f’c distributed uniformly
from the outer compression fiber to a depth of a=β1x. For 5-ksi concrete, β1 is
taken as 0.80 per ACI 318-14, Chapter 22 (22.2.2).

Calculations for the nominal capacity of the example RC section are performed
both including and excluding compression steel.
2.1.1.4.1 Singly-Reinforced Section

Neglecting the contribution of compression steel in the determination of nominal

moment and curvature, leads to the following computation for the depth of the
Whitney stress block, a, and the depth of the neutral axis, x:
2
T  As f y  (2 *0.44in ) * (68ksi )  59.84k
C  0.85 f c'ba  0.85*(5ksi )* (5.0") * a  (21.25k / in ) * a

As f y 59.84k
T C  a   2.816"
0.85 f c'b 21.25k / in
a 2.816"
x   3.52"
1 0.80

The corresponding strain, stress, and force distribution is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 – Strains, Stresses, and Forces at Nominal (Singly-Reinforced Section)

The nominal moment and curvature are computed as follows:

M n  Ts * ( d  a / 2)  (59.84 k )(9.0" 2.816"/ 2)  454.3k in

 c 0.003 1
n    0.000852in
x 3.52"
2.1.1.4.2 Doubly-Reinforced Section

Including the contribution of tensile steel causes a slight increase in the nominal
moment capacity. The depth of the Whitney stress block, a, and the depth of the
neutral axis, x, are computed as follows:
2
T  As f y  (2* 0.44in ) *(68ksi )  59.84 k
Cc  0.85 f c'ba  0.85 f c'b1 x  0.85*(5ksi )*(5.0") *(0.80) * x  (17.0k / in )* x
 (x  d ') 
Cs'  As' ( f s'  0.85 f c' )  As' ( Es  's  0.85 fc' )  As'  Es  c  0.85 f c' 
 x 
2  ( x  1.5") 
 (2* 0.20in ) *  (29000 ksi )* (0.003in / in ) *  4.25ksi   34.8k (1  1.5"/ x)  1.7 k
 x 

T  Cc  Cs'  Cc  Cs'  T  0

solve quadratic:
(17.0k / in ) x 2  (26.74k ) x  52.2 k in  0
 x  2.707"

a  1 x  (0.80)(2.707")  2.166"

The corresponding strain, stress, and force distribution is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6 – Strains, Stresses, and Forces at Nominal (Doubly-Reinforced Section)

The nominal moment and curvature are computed as follows:

M n  Ts d  Cc a / 2  Cs' d '  (59.84k )(9.0")  (46.02k )(2.166"/ 2)  (13.82 k )(1.5")  468.0 k in
c 0.003 1
n    0.00111in
x 2.707"

Including compression steel in the computations increased the nominal moment

capacity slightly (by 3.0% in this case).

2.1.1.5 Estimated Moment-Curvature Plot

The moment-curvature pairings just prior to cracking, immediately after cracking,

at tensile steel yield, and at nominal capacity may be used to create the
approximate moment-curvature plot shown in Figure 7.

Approximate Moment-Curvature Plot for Example Beam

500

400

300
Moment (k-in)

200

100

0 0.0004 0.0008 0.0012

Curvature (1/in)

Figure 7 – Approximate Moment-Curvature Plot

2.1.2 Refined Formulation

Material stress-strain relationships for steel and concrete may be used to compute
moment and curvature for any outer fiber concrete compressive strain, εc.

2.1.2.1 Stress-Strain Relationship for Reinforcing Steel

Figure 8 shows the stress-strain relationship for reinforcing steel. Region A

represents linear-elastic behavior. Region B is a stress plateau, where strain
increases without an increase in load. Region C represents the strain hardening
region with an assumed linear modulus, Esh. Region D is another stress plateau,
which continues until rebar fracture occurs.

Each region is defined as follows:

Region A: 0  s   y f s  Es  s
Region B:  y   s   sh fs  f y
Region C:  sh   s   fu f s  f y  (  s   sh ) Esh
Region D:  fu   s f s  fu

For expected material properties for grade 60 reinforcing steel, fy = 68 ksi, fu = 100
ksi, Esh = 1280 ksi, εsh = 0.005, and εfu = 0.03.

Figure 8 – Stress-Strain Relationship for Reinforcing Steel

2.1.2.2 Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete

Figure 9 shows the stress-strain relationship for concrete using the Hognestad
(1955) model. Region A is nonlinear with a parabolic stress-strain relationship
modeled by the following equation:

 2    2 
fc  f  c   c  
c
'
for 0   c   0
  0   0  

Region B represents post-peak strength degradation, where stress is modeled to

decrease linearly for strains in excess of ε0. For the Hognestaad model, the stress
is taken as 0.85f’c at a strain of 0.0035, leading to the following relationship:

 c   0 
f c  f c' 1  0.15 0 for  0  c
    0 

The value ε0 = 0.002 is typically assumed for the Hognestaad stress-strain model,
which leads to ε(fc=0) = 0.012 (Figure 9).

Figure 9 – Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete

2.1.2.3 Moment-Curvature Analysis

Considering the stress-strain relationships presented for concrete and reinforcing

steel, moment and curvature may be computed for any outer fiber concrete
compressive strain, εx, considered for the RC beam. An iterative procedure may be
used to determine the required neutral axis depth, x, to achieve section equilibrium.
The process is best illustrated via example.

For this example, consider again the 5” by 10.5” RC beam with 2#4 top bars and
2#6 bottom bars and an assumed concrete cover of 1.5” to the center of the bars.
Take f’c = 5ksi and use expected material properties for steel. The moment and
curvature for an outer fiber concrete compressive strain εx = 0.005 are desired.
Figure 10 shows the internal strains, stresses, and forces for an initial guess of the
neutral axis depth, x = 2.5”. The concrete compressive zone is divided into slices
to allow piecewise-linear analysis. For this example, five slices are used. Using
more slices provides greater computational refinement.

Figure 10 – Strains, Stresses, and Forces at Outer Fiber Compressive Strain of

0.005

The strain distribution is linear based on the assumption that plane sections remain
plane. Thus, the parameters εx and x are sufficient to describe the strain
distribution completely. For concrete, the stresses at the boundary of each slice are
computed as:
  2    2   2* 0.001  0.001 2 
for  c  0.001, fc  f 
c
' c
     (5 ) * 
c ksi
    3.75
ksi

  0   0    0.002  0.002  
 2    2   2*0.002  0.002 2 
for  c  0.002, fc  f 
c
' c
     (5 ) * 
c ksi
    5.00
ksi

  0   0    0.002  0.002  
 c  0   0.003  0.002 
for  c  0.003, f c  f c' 1  0.15   (5 ) * 1  0.15
ksi
  4.50 ksi
   0     0.002 
 c   0   0.004  0.002 
for  c  0.004, f c  f c' 1  0.15   (5 ) * 1  0.15
ksi
  4.00 ksi
    0     0.002 
 c  0   0.005  0.002 
for  c  0.005, f c  f c' 1  0.15   (5 )* 1  0.15
ksi
  3.50 ksi
    0     0.002 

Approximating the stress variation within each slice as linear leads to the following
computation for concrete compressive forces:

 3.75ksi  x 
C1      0.5"   b  5.0"  4.6875
ksi

 2  5 
 3.75ksi  5.00 ksi  x 
C2      0.5"   b  5.0"  10.9375
ksi

 2  5 
 5.00ksi  4.50 ksi  x 
C3      0.5"   b  5.0"  11.875
ksi

 2  5 
 4.50 ksi  4.00ksi  x 
C4      0.5"   b  5.0"  10.625
ksi

 2  5 
 4.00ksi  3.50 ksi   x 
C5      0.5"   b  5.0"  9.375
ksi

 2  5 

The stresses in the top and bottom steel are computed as follows:

top steel: f s'  E 's  (29000 ksi )(0.002)  58.0 ksi

bottom steel: f s  f y  ( s   sh ) Esh  68ksi  (0.013  0.005) *1280 ksi  78.24 ksi

The corresponding top and bottom bar forces are as follows:

  
2
top steel: C's  f s'  f c @( c s  0.002) * As'  (58.0ksi  5.0 ksi )(0.40in )  21.2 kips
2
bottom steel: T  f s * As  (78.24 ksi )(0.88in )  68.85 ksi

Note that the concrete stress at the location of the top bars has been subtracted
from the steel stress in the preceding computation to account for the absence of
concrete at the location of top bars.

Force equilibrium is checked as follows:

 C  C1  C2  C3  C4  C5  Cs'  68.7 kips

 T  T  68.85kips

Therefore, since T = C within a reasonable tolerance, the initial guess x = 2.5” was
correct for εx = 0.005 and further iteration is not needed to determine the depth of
the neutral axis. In general, if T > C then increase the neutral axis depth for the
next iteration and vice versa.

Once the depth of the neutral axis has been determined via iteration, the moment
and curvature may be computed. For the example problem, the moment and
curvature at an outer fiber concrete compressive strain of εx = 0.005 may be
computed as follows:

M  T *(9.0")  C1 *(2.25")  C2 *(1.75")  C3 *(1.25")  C4 *(0.75")  C5 *(0.25")  Cs' *(1.50")

 533k in
 x 0.005 1
   0.002in
x 2.5"

Using this procedure the moment and curvature may be computed for any outer
fiber concrete compressive strain, εx, for a given RC cross-section.

This procedure may be used to compute moment and curvature at tensile steel
yield. In this way, the yield moment was computed to be 458.4 k-in (curvature is
0.00114 in-1), which is slightly less than the yield moment computed when
assuming linear-elastic behavior in the concrete compression zone; the nominal
moment was computed to be 488.7 k-in (curvature is 0.000432 in -1), which is
larger than the nominal moment computed previously due to the inclusion of
strain-hardening in the tensile reinforcement. Figure 11 shows a complete
moment-curvature plot generated using this refined method. Note that the cracking
moment cannot be determined using this method (and is not included in this plot),
since this method does not include any tensile strength of concrete prior to
cracking.
Moment-Curvature Plot for Example Beam

600

500

400
Moment (k-in)

300

200

100

0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003

Curvature (1/in)

Figure 11 – Refined Moment-Curvature Plot

2.2 Load-Displacement

Assume that the sample RC section considered throughout is used as a simply-

supported beam with a total (support-to-support) span length of 8’ and a vertical
point load, P, at its midpoint. Load and displacement are evaluated at cracking, at
yielding, and for post-yielding.

2.2.1 Cracking

The cracking moment for the section was previously computed to be M cr = 62.8 k-
in. The load that causes cracking, Pcr, is thus computed as follows:

4 M cr 4* 62.8k in
Pcr    2.62k
L 96"

The maximum moment is at the center of the beam; the beam is reaching cracking
only at the midpoint and therefore remains uncracked throughout the span. The
displacement at midspan at cracking, δcr., is computed as follows, using the
equation for a simply-supported beam with concentrated load at mid-span and
uniform EI:

PL3 (2.6167 k )(96")3

cr .   2  0.020"
48EI uncr . 48(4030.5ksi )(600.0in )

The displacement at cracking is very small.

2.2.2 Yielding

The yielding moment for the section was previously computed to be My = 458.4 k-
in. The load that causes yielding, Py, is thus computed as follows:

4M y 4* 458.4k in
Py    19.1k
L 96"

The associated displacement may be computed using the moment-area method to

account for cracked and uncracked portions of the beam. The analysis may be
simplified since the midspan rotation is zero due to symmetry.

Figure 12 – Partitioning of the Moment Diagram at Yielding for Use of the

Moment-Area Method

Figure 12 shows the moment diagram for the simply supported beam at yielding of
tension steel. The deflection computed via the moment-area method is as follows:
 1 M  2   M   1 
 y   * 6.576"* cr .  *  *6.576"    41.424"* cr .  *  6.576" * 41.424" 
2 EI uncr .   3   EI cr .   2 
1 M y  M cr .   2 
  * 41.424"*  *  6.576" * 41.424" 
2 EI cr .   3 
1 62.8k in   62.8k in 
  * 6.576"* 4  
* 4.384"  
 41.424"* 4  *  27.288"
2 4030.5ksi *600.0in   4030.5ksi * 273.0in 
1 458.4k in  62.8k in 
  * 41.424"* 4  *  34.192"
2 4030.5ksi * 273.0in 
 0.0004" 0.0645" 0.2546"

 0.32"

Neglecting the uncracked portion of the beam and computing the deflection as
though the beam were entirely cracked, leads to the following deflection:

PL3 (19.1k )(96")3

y   2  0.32"
48EI cr . 48(4030.5ksi )(273.0in )

The difference is negligible in this case.

2.2.3 Post-Yielding

Post-yield displacement can be computed using a plastic hinge model, as shown in

Figure 13, in which all post-yield deformation occurs due to rigid rotation within
the plastic hinge. The formation of the plastic hinge occurs at midspan, where
moment demand is the largest. The hinge rotation,  plastic , is computed as follows:

 plastic  (  y ) * L p

where Lp is the length of the plastic hinge,  is the curvature at the moment of
interest, and y is the yield curvature. The plastic rotation is assumed to occur
about the midpoint of the plastic hinge. Based on the beam geometry, the
corresponding deflection for the given rotation may be computed as follows
(Figure 13):

 plastic Lbeam
 plastic  *
2 2
 Figure 13 – Plastic Hinge Model for Simply-Supported Beam

The total displacement is the sum of the linear and nonlinear displacement:

total   y   plastic

For the example problem, the load when the simply supported beam reaches the
nominal moment at midspan is computed as follows:

4 M n 4* 488.7 k in
Pn    20.3625k
L 96"

Assuming a plastic hinge length, Lp = h = 10.5”, the midspan deflection at nominal

is computed as follows:

 plastic Lbeam (  y ) * L p Lbeam

 plastic  *  *
2 2 2 2
in 1 1
(0.00114  0.000432in ) *10.5" 96"
 *
2 2
 0.18"

n  total   y   plastic  0.32" 0.18"  0.50"

Similarly, for an outer fiber concrete compressive strain of єc=0.005, the moment
and curvature were previously computed to be M(єc=0.005) = 533 k-in and φ(єc=0.005) =
0.002 in-1, leading to P(єc=0.005) = 21.2083 k and δ(єc=0.005) = 0.72”.
2.2.4 Load-Displacement Plot

The resulting P-δ plot for the example problem is estimated in Figure 14 using the
four previously mentioned data points (cracking, yield, nominal, єc=0.005).
Load-Displacement Plot for Example Beam

25

20

15
Load, P (kips)

10

0 0.25 0.5 0.75

Displacement, d (inches)

Figure 14 – Approximate Load-Displacement Plot

2.3 Shear Capacity

The shear capacity of an RC cross-section is determined in accordance with ACI

318-14 Section 22.5 as follows:

Vn  Vc  Vs

where Vc is the nominal shear strength provided by concrete and Vs is the nominal
shear strength provided by shear reinforcement.

Vc is computated in accordance with ACI 318-14 as:

Vc  2 f c' bw d
where λ is equal to 1.0 for normal weight concrete, f’c is the compressive strength
of concrete in psi, bw is the beam width, and d is the depth from the outer
compression fiber to the beam tension steel.

Vs is computed in accordance with ACI 318-14 as:

Av f yt d
Vs 
s

where Av is the area of shear reinforcement within the spacing s, and fyt is the yield
stress of transverse reinforcement.

For the example beam without stirrups, the shear capacity is computed as follows:

5000 psi
Vn  Vc  2 f c' bw d  2*(1.0)* * (5.0") *(9.0")  6.4k
1000 psi / ksi

If #3 grade 40 stirrups spaced at 4.0” were used in the example beam, the shear
capacity is computed as follows:
2
Av f yt d 2* (0.11in ) * (40ksi ) *(9.0")
Vs    19.8k
s (4.0")
Vn  Vc  Vs  6.4k  19.8k  26.2k
3. Experimental Results

3.1 Moment-Curvature

The hydraulic jack is used to apply load monotonically at the midspan of the
simply-supported RC beam. A load cell is used to measure the experimental load
exerted on the beam by the hydraulic jack. The measured load is used to determine
the experimental moment as follows:

PL
M
4

The horizontal LVDTs are used to determine curvature. The LVDTs measure
voltage, which is converted to displacement via a calibration factor. The measured
strain equals the displacement divided by the gauge length (pin-to-pin length) of
the LVDT.

Figure 15 – Determination of Curvature from LVDT Strains

Since the montonic, midspan loading is upward, the top LVDT measures tensile
strain while the bottom LVDT measures compressive strain (provided the neutral
axis for the cross-section is not below the lower LVDT). The experimental
curvature is computed as follows:

top  bot .
exp 
d LVDT
where dLVDT is the vertical distance between the top and bottom LVDTs. Note that
this equation was set up to yield positive curvature when tensile strain is taken
positive and compressive strain is taken negative. Figure 15 illustrates
geometrically the relationship between LVDT strains and section curvature.

A link apparatus, Figure 16, is used to magnify the strains. Magnifying the strains
serves to minimize the influence of noise. Referring to Figure 16, the lowermost
horizontal link is rigid (no axial deformation), meaning that the lowermost pins do
not move. The two pins just above the lowermost pins embed into the beam and
displace due to the strain at this location in the beam. This displacement causes a
rigid rotation about the lowermost pins as seen in Figure 16. This rigid rotation
causes the uppermost pins to translate, creating a measured displacement in the
LVDT. By similar triangles, the measured strain is determined from the beam
strain as follows:

b
 meas.     beam
a

Figure 16 – Beam Link Strain Amplification Apparatus

3.2 Load-Displacement

The applied load is measured via a load cell, and the the midspan displacement is
measured using a vertical LVDT. Both the load cell and the LVDT measure
voltage, which is converted to force and displacement, respectively, via a
calibration factor.
3.3 Shear Force

The experimental shear in the beam may be determined from the measured applied
load using statics. Since the vertical load is applied at midspan, the maximum
shear demand in the beam is Vu=P/2 as seen by the shear diagram in Figure 17.

Figure 17 – Shear Diagram for the Simply-Supported Cantilever with Midspan

Point Load