Design of Non-Flexural Members

by Strut & Tie Modeling

THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

Dr. Ray Su
Department of Civil Engineering
office: HW 6-6, Tel. no.: 2859 2648
Email: [email protected]
Design of Non-Flexural Members by
Strut & Tie Model
References:
J. Schlaich, K. Schäfer and M. Jennewein (1987) ‘Toward a Consistent Design of
Structural Concrete’, Journal of Prestressed Concrete Institute, 32(3), 74-150.
J. Schlaich and K. Schäfer (1991) ‘Design and Detailing of Structural Concrete Using
Strut-and-tie Models’, The Structural Engineer, 69(6), 113-125.
R. Park and T. Paulay (1975) Reinforced Concrete Structures, Wiley, New York 624.183P23
D.S. Prakash Rao (1995) Design Principles and Detailing of Concrete Structures, 624.1834 P89
McGraw-Hill, New Delhi.
J.G. MacGregor (1997) Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design, Prentice Hall
(Third Edition). 624.18341 M147

American Concrete Institute (2002) Examples for the design of structural concrete with
strut-and-tie models, Farmington Hills, Mich. : American Concrete Institute.
624.1834 A51 C02
Free software for Computer Aided Strut and Tie Design CAST
http://engineeringsoftwares.blogspot.hk/2007/02/cast-strut-tie.html

2
Design of Non-Flexural Members by
Strut & Tie Model
References:
R.K.L. Su and A.M. Chandler (2001) ‘Design Criteria for Unified Strut and Tie
Models’, Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, 3(3), 288-298.
R.K.L. Su, P.C.W. Wong and A.M. Chandler (2003) ‘Design of Non-Flexural
Components Using Strut and Tie Models’, Transactions of The Hong Kong
Institution of Engineers, 10(1), p31-37.
R.K.L. Su, P.C.W Wong and A.M. Chandler (2005), Application of strut-and-tie method
on outrigger braced core wall buildings, Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on Tall Buildings (ICTB-VI) From Engineering to Sustainability, 6 - 8
December 2005, Hong Kong, p80-85.
R.K.L. Su and D.W.T. Looi (2016), Revisiting the unreinforced strut efficiency factor,
ACI Structural Journal, 113(2), p301-312.

3
Crack

4
 5mm crack width

4-5m
Long
cantilever

Crack at a beam-column joint

5
An elevated track under construction
crashed down and five workers were
killed.

Delhi Metro accident

in India July 2009
6
Delhi Metro accident
in India July 2009
7
Pillar cap Overloading /
collapsed insufficient
tension lap

A strut &
Tie model

Crack

Delhi Metro accident

in India July 2009
8
Introduction
• Majority of defects and accidents reported in RC structures are
attributed to faulty detailing rather than to errors made in the
structural analysis or standard design.
• The most common problems are failures in the areas of
statically or geometrical discontinuous regions, such as
– at junctions of members (beam/beam, beam/column);
– where members change shape (step in beam, change in column
section);
– where concentrated loads are applied (e.g. transfer beams/ plates);
– where the depth of a member is similar to, or greater than, its
length (pile cap, deep beams, squat walls, corbels, nibs)
– where openings through members.
• The standard bending theory and detailing methods may not
be applied.

9
Example of Problematic RC Details

Transfer plate (or pile cap)

T

2500 to 3000
Lateral force Where does the
T tensile force go?
T

T T Columns / piles

Bending Moment

T
A better RC detail
C T C T
T

T T

Use truss analogy to visualize the internal load transfer. 10

 The angle
is too
small
e.g. < 30o

Leads to strain incompatibility A modified strut

between the tension tie and and tie model
compressive strut

Cracks will form A better RC detail

11
 Experimental tests indicate
Cracks
that the modified RC detail
form
performs much better than
the original detail and has
much less inclined cracks
in joint.

Typical RC detail A modified RC detail

Lack of the diagonal tie

12
 Point Load

A nib

A better RC detail
Point Load

Depth of the moment arm

Effective length
of the cantilever
In strut and tie models, the internal forces in a region are represented as
compressive concrete struts tied together by tensile ties (i.e. the reinforcement)
which act together like a truss.
HK concrete code: cl. 6.5.1.3 (b) the maximum design ultimate bending moment is the
distance from the line of action of the load to the nearest vertical leg of the links in the 13
beam member from which the nib projects times the load.
 Example of Truss Analogy

(a) Inclined cracking compressive strut

cracks

(b) Truss-like action

BS8110/ HK Code suggested 50% of tension steel

should be extended into the support for simply supported beam?

(c) Analogous truss

R
R shear bending & bending 14
only shear only
 Short Cantilever Deep Pile Cap

P
P=350kN
400 x 600dp
T
no curtailment T Sufficient
2000 of rebar anchorage,
check
Bending bearing
BMD
M  PL
stress at
 700kNm
the bend
z  0.83d SD
540 mm
M
F  1545kN
z Tensile stress in bar
Tensile stress in bar
Shear Resisting Resist
bending shear
Fs
P
A shrift of
z tensile force
45o

Fs=350 kN

Truss analogy Truss analogy 15

Historical Development
• Ritter and Morsch (1912) proposed a simple truss model as an
approach to visualize the internal forces in cracked beams.
• Slater and Richart (1927) in the United States developed more
sophisticated truss models with inclined stirrups and the
compressive struts at angles other than 45 degrees.
• Rausch (1929) considered that a reinforced concrete beam with
closed stirrups running around all faces could effectively resist
torsion by means of space-truss action.

Failure mode of
beam under torsion

16
Historical Development
• Leonhardt (1965) and Thurlimann (1983) demonstrated that strut
and tie models could be successfully applied to design deep
beams and corbels.
• Schlaich (1987) and his co-workers generalized the strut and tie
models to solve a number of non-flexural components
• It has been included in the Australian Standard AS3600, CEB/FIP-
Model Code 2010, Eurocode 2, Norway Standard NS3473E,
Canadian Standard 2004, New Zealand Standard NZS3101: Part 1
and 2-2006, and American Standard ACI 318-14.

17
Lower Bound Theorem
• The theoretical basis of the truss analogy is lower bound
theorem of plasticity
• A stress field that satisfies equilibrium and does not violate
yield criterion at any point provides a lower-bound
estimation of the capacity of rigid-plastic materials
• However, concrete only has a limited capacity to sustain
plastic deformation and is not a rigid-plastic material
• Hence crushing of concrete (e.g. struts and nodes) should
not occur prior to yielding of reinforcement (i.e. ties or
stirrups)
• The compressive stress of struts and nodes need to be
limited
• Bond slip failures need to be avoided
• More than one admissible strut and tie model may be
developed.

18
Bernoulli Hypothesis
• Bernoulli hypothesis states that: “Plane sections remain
plane after bending”
• Bernoulli hypothesis facilitates the flexural design of
reinforce concrete structures by allowing a linear strain
distribution for all loading stages, including ultimate flexural
capacity.
• In these regions, stresses and stress trajectories present a
fairly smooth pattern.

Strain distributions according

to Bernoulli hypothesis

19
B- & D- Regions for Various Types of
Members
• The terms B-region (B for Bending or Bernoulli) and D-region (D
for Disturbance or Discontinuity) are used to distinguish between
the regions in a concrete structure where the simple methods of
flexural analysis can be applied and where they should not be
applied.
• An advantage of dividing a structure into B- and D- regions is that
the attention of the designer is focused on the potential weak
spots which require special attention in detailing and design.

Examples of B- and D- regions

D
D B B D

20
St. Venant’s Principle
• St. Venant’s Principle states that: The localized effects
caused by any load acting on a body will dissipate or
smooth out within regions that are sufficiently away
from the location of the stress concentration
• It is assumed that the local stresses are negligible at
such distance which is approximately equal to the
maximum distance between the equilibrium force
themselves.

F/2

h
h/2 F
F/2
σ0

h σ0

Zone of body affected by self equilibrium forces

applied to surface

21
Defining the Boundaries of B & D
Regions
Example column with concentrated loads
The division of the boundaries of D-regions can be accomplished by using
the Saint-Venant’s principle
F F/h F
F

d=h D D region D

= + B
zero = B
stress

D D region D
h
under
uniform
load
Loads and support Self-equilibrium
reactions applied in state of stress
accordance with the
Bernoulli hypothesis
22
Typical D-regions
(A) Geometrical Discontinuities (similarly for stress concentration
effects due to abrupt change in geometry)

h1 h2 h

h1 h2 h h

h2
h
h2 h1
h
h1

23
Typical D-regions
(B) Statically Discontinuities

h h

2h

24
Typical D-regions
(C) Geometrical and Statically Discontinuities

h h

h h

25
Design of B & D Regions
• The design of B (Bernoulli or Beam) region is well
understood and the entire flexural behaviour can
be predicted by simple calculation
• Even for the most common cases of D (Disturbed
or Discontinuity) regions, engineers’ ability to
predict capacity is either poor (empirical) or
requires substantial computation effort (finite
element analysis) to reach an accurate estimation
of capacity

26
Basic Concepts of Strut & Tie Model

The stress distribution in a structure is idealized as a

system comprising of

Strut Compression Concrete

Member

Tie or Stirrup Tension Reinforcement

Member

Node Connection Concrete

27
Strut and Tie Design Flow Chart

Define Structural System

Determine Loads and Reactions
Estimate Dimensions and Member Sizes

Define B- and D- Regions in Structures

Design B-Regions by Other Methods

Develop Strut & Tie Model for D-Regions

Element Forces and Forces and The Details/

Dimensions Stresses in Stresses in Check
Nodes Struts Anchorage
28
Prerequisites
• Equilibrium must be maintained
• Forces in struts and ties are uni-axial
• External forces apply at nodes
• Prestressing is treated as load
• Tension in concrete is neglected
• Detailing for adequate anchorage

29
Methods for Formulation of Strut and
Tie Models
• Elastic analysis based on stress
trajectories
• Load path approach
• Standard models

30
Elastic analysis based on stress
trajectories
A deep beam subjected Display the stress field of the Various S&T models
a concentrated load. principal stresses. can be derived.

tension Model 1

compression Model 2 31
Load Path Approach
• Isolate D-region and calculate the internal stresses on the
boundaries of the element
• The load paths begin and end at the center of gravity of the
corresponding stress diagram.
• The load paths tend to take the shortest possible
streamlined way in between the centers of the stress
diagrams.
• The strut and tie in general should meet at safe angle that
is about 45o, whenever possible. Angles smaller than 25o
are unrealistic or involve high incompatibility of strains.

32
Example 1

A B A B
q q c.g. c.g.
q

Load path
C C strut

T T

A B A B A tie B

Define the geometry, Connect the load paths of Simplify it to a strut

loading and reactions the related loads. and tie model
Introduce forces T and C
for equilibrium
33
Example 2 (Tutorial)

F F F

T T

C C

q q q
F B1 B2 B1 =B2 F B1 B2
Define the geometry Connect the load paths of Simplify it to strut and
and loading the related loads. tie model
Introduce forces T and C
for equilibrium
34
Example 3 - Beam with opening

D
D B B D

• Separate into B and D-regions

D-region with opening 35

• Separate into different D-regions
• Calculate the boundary forces

• Construct the load path

36
 Comments on Load-Path method

To take into account the practicable and workable reinforcement

layout, we may have the following considerations.
• The arrangement of the rebar should satisfy the practical
requirements of simple construction, that is, using straight bars
with a minimum number of bends, laid out in orthogonal
arrangement parallel to the edges of the structures, whenever
0.2-0.4% of possible;
the sectional• The edges and surfaces of the structure should be fitted with
area and less near-surface reinforcement (distribution bars) in order to control
than 300 cracking;
mm spacing.
• In the cracked state, the reinforcing bars will channel the flow of
More steel is
tensile forces. In order to get a more realistic load, it is therefore
required if
essential to introduce, in the modelling stage, the form of tension
concrete
ties whenever their position is known in advance.
grade > 45

37
Comments on Load-Path method
• The arrangement of reinforcement should ideally be designed to
cover the effects due to various load cases.
• The formation of cracks and the plastic deformation of the
structural material will redistribute the internal forces which
would derivate from the prediction on the basis of the theory of
elasticity.
• In selecting the model, it is useful to realize that the structure
tends to carry the loads with the least internal forces and the
least possible deformations.
• Since reinforced ties are much more deformable than concrete
struts, the model with the least and shortest ties will be the best.
The product of the tie length li and the tensile forces Ti can be
used as a simplified criterion for optimizing a model:
Ti li = minimum

38
Example: Two different strut-and-tie models for the same structure. The good
model (a) has shorter ties than the bad model (b)

q q

(a) good (b) bad

39
Comments on Load-Path method
• In strut and tie modeling, a small number of forces
is used to represent the continuous stress
distributions in a real structure. Care must be
taken to choose an appropriate number of forces to
suit the situation.
• At the boundary between a D-region and a B-
region the distributed stresses have to be
represented by a statically equivalent set of
discrete forces. The situation is illustrated in the
following diagram for a single end anchorage in a
prestressed beam.

Inadequate modelling Unnecessary complex Adequate modelling

(No transverse tension) modelling
sufficient to capture the
general behavior of structure
40
 Comments on Load-Path method
• To control the crack width of the compressive strut,
it is recommended to either choose a model where
the reinforcement intersects the crack at angles as
close to 90o as possible.

Example : Risk of unacceptable crack widths at discontinuities.

0.2-0.4%
steel for
crack
control

Single cracks issuing from the Internal transverse crack

re-entrant corners from concentrated load
applied within a wall.

41
Standard Strut and Tie Models
Corbel/ halving joints and anchorages

42
Standard Strut and Tie Models
Beam column joints

43
Standard Strut and Tie Models
Wall and foundation joints

RC detail

44
Standard Strut and Tie Models
Stepped beams

45
Standard Strut and Tie Models
Cranked beams

Small step Large step Large step

46
Standard Strut and Tie Models
Wall /deck openings

If tension
steel is not
sufficient

47
 Standard Strut and Tie Models
Coupling beams and deep beams

Very short

Short

Medium-length

48
Standard Strut and
Tie Models

Tall Building with outrigger

49
Global Structural Behaviour

M a  Foa sin a B
M b  Fob sin b B

Fa1  Fa 2  2 Foa cos a

Fb1  Fb 2  2 Fob cos b

cos b
Foa  Fc
cos b sin a  sin b cos a 
Fa1 cos a
Fob  Fc
θa Ma cos b sin a  sin b cos a 
Foa wind or
seismic Fa2
load Fb1 Shear reversal
θb Fob Fc Fb2
Mb

Bending moment Shear force

in core wall in core wall 50
Idealized Strut-and-tie Model for Outrigger

Compressive strut
Tension tie

Shear force
reversal

Shear connectors

Force equilibrium at the connections

of the cast in outrigger truss

51
Openings Through the Core Wall

B/2
D-region
- local thickening of the
(major openings walls at the D-region
through the core may help to reduce the
wall within this adverse effect caused
region should be by stress concentration
avoided) around the openings
B/2

52
 Standard Strut and Tie Models
Reinforcement details

Unbalanced
moment
s

L Ties
Hoop-bearing Splitting-tensile
stress stress

Anchorage length s
Bar anchorage
Lap length = L+s
Cl. 8.7.2(d) the clear transverse distance between two lapping bars should
not be greater than 4ϕ or 50 mm, otherwise the lap length should be
increased by a length equal to the clear space exceeding 4 ϕ or 50mm
Cl.8.7.4.1 Where the diameter, ϕ, of the lapped bars is greater than or equal to 20 mm, the transverse
reinforcement should have a total area, Ast (sum of all legs parallel to the layer of the spliced
reinforcement) of not less than the area As of one spliced bar (∑Ast ≥ 1.0As). 53
Struts chord

Diagonal
strut

• Compressive struts fulfil two functions in

Strut and Tie Models
– They serve as the compression chord of the
truss mechanism which resists moment
– They serve as the diagonal struts which
transfer shear to the supports
• Diagonal struts are generally oriented
parallel to the expected axis of cracking

54
Types of Struts
For dimensioning, the various cases of stress fields, including
those of the B-regions, may be covered by means of three
typical configurations, namely;
• The bottle-shaped stress field
• The fan-shaped stress field
• The prismatic stress field

Bottle-shaped Fan-shaped Prismatic

55
Bottles

• A bottle-shaped stress field occurs wherever a distributed

stress field is balanced with a narrower, more concentrated
stress field. For example, this situation arises at the end of
anchorage in a prestressed beam. In any bottle-shaped field
there are associated transverse tensile stresses (i.e. bursting
stress) which have to be carried either by the concrete in
tension, or by specially introduced transverse reinforcement.

transverse
tensile stress generated

P
σ=P/A

56
 The bottle-shaped stress field occurs in many design situations and often
explains the need for transverse reinforcement in compressive concrete to
control the cracks which tend to develop parallel to compressive stresses.

Cracks Compressive
stress fields

57
Fans
• A fan-shaped stress field can occur where a force is
introduced and channelled through an element
which is itself fan-shaped. The fan is fundamentally
different to the bottle in which no transverse
tensile stress field exists.

No transverse tensile stresses

58
Prisms
• The prism is the simplest compressive stress field.
Without any narrowing or splaying of the stress
trajectories, there are no associated transverse
tensile stresses induced in the concrete. Prisms
occur in B-regions in the compressive flange of a
beam. They can also develop in a web where a
parallel pattern of inclined cracks has formed.
The prismatic stress field is assumed to occur in a
simple compressive strut.

No transverse tensile stresses

59
 Experimental study of strength of strut

Schematic diagram of test

i. Varying strut angles (30°, 45° & 60°) OR a/d (1.73, 1.0, 0.5)
ii. Varying concrete strength (30 MPa, 60 MPa and 90 MPa)
60

8
Experimental study of strength of strut
The design detail of specimens
Cage to
protect
NODES at
loading
point and
support

61
 Strength of strut

Test matrix
Type L, L’, a, anc., H stirrups V stirrups Long. ρ, h Long., z, a/z θ, fcu ,

mm mm mm mm bars. % mm mm ° MPa

C30-1.7 2000 1600 600 100 R8@80 R10@110 6 T10 1.00 135 336.5 1.78 29.3 34.1

C60-1.7 R10@70 4 T16 1.71 110 330.5 1.82 28.8 64.7

C90-1.7 R10@55 6 T16 2.57 145 308.1 1.95 27.2 89.5

C30-1.0 1750 1300 300 150 R10@80 6 T12 1.44 147 339.2 0.88 48.5 34.8

C60-1.0 R10@55 6 T16 2.57 145 330.7 0.91 47.8 66.1

C90-1.0 R10@40 4 T16 3.05 146 317.1 0.95 46.6 97.0

2 T20

C30-0.5 1585 1170 170 115 R10@110 6 T12 1.44 147 341.5 0.50 63.5 33.9

C60-0.5 R10@60 4 T16 1.71 110 336.7 0.50 63.2 65.3

C90-0.5 R10@50 6 T16 2.57 145 353.8 0.48 64.3 92.6

62
Strength of strut
Failure pattern

63
Strength of strut
shear strain deformation field at different shear stress state

~70-80%
of peak
load

64
Strength of strut

The strut efficiency factor is found to be 0.6.

fcu
Nominal strut
efficiency factor =0.6
fstrut = 0.6 fcu,k / 1.5
= 0.4 fcu,k

R.K.L. Su and D.W.T. Looi (2016), Revisiting the unreinforced strut efficiency
65
factor, ACI Structural Journal, 113(2), p301-312.
Strength of strut

The strut efficiency factor does not depend on a/z ratio.

fcu
Nominal strut
efficiency factor =0.6 fstrut = 0.6 fcu,k / 1.5
= 0.4 fcu,k

a/z
27o 45o 56o 63o Strut angle
R.K.L. Su and D.W.T. Looi (2016), Revisiting the unreinforced strut efficiency
66
factor, ACI Structural Journal, 113(2), p301-312.
Nodes
• Nodes are the connections of struts and ties in truss
models.
• There are two main types of nodes, they are concentrated
nodes and smeared nodes. The concentrated nodes are
idealized as points whereas the smeared nodes is spread
and may extend throughout a significant part of the D-
region.
Type of nodes

CCC CCT CTT TTT

67
Concentrated Nodes and Smeared Nodes
Idealized model Actual behaviour

Uniform load on a
Smeared node
deep beam
Bottle-shaped str
Conc. node

Uniform load on a deep

beam with single central
Smeared node
support Bottle-shaped str
Conc. node

Without steel bars

Opposing concentrated Conc. node

Bottle-shaped str
loads on a deep beam Smeared node
Bottle-shaped str
Conc. node
68
Concentrated Nodes and Smeared Nodes

• The smeared nodes are rarely of concern in

design (don’t need to design normally)
• Concentrated nodes are often the most highly
stressed and hence most critical parts of the D-
region. Bearing plate
• In determining the size and shape of a
concentrated node the locations of individual
reinforced bars and the size of any adjacent
bearing plate have to be considered carefully.
• When the node contains steel bars which have
to be anchored, the anchorage length also has
to be considered in relation to the magnitude of
the node.
• The shape and size of the node are likely to Check anchorage length
govern the size of the adjacent struts.

69
Node in Hydrostatic & Force Equilibrium
Node in Hydrostatic Equilibrium Node in Force Equilibrium
a2 is known a1 & a2 are known

a3 C1 a3 C1

σ a1 σ1
σ σ3 a1

C3 C3 α

σ σ2 C2
C2
a2 a2

force C3 C2 C1
  =σ×b C3=(C12+C22)1/2
size of node a3 a2 a1
a3=a1cosα+a2sinα
a2
a1  C1
C2 σ3=C3/(a3×b) 70
Strength of Nodes
The strength of concrete in the nodal zones depends on a number of
factors such as
Tensile strain at node
• the confinement of the zones by the reactions, would weaken its strength
compression struts, anchorage plates for
prestressing, reinforcement from the adjoining
members, and hoop reinforcement;
• the effects of strain discontinuities within the
nodal zone when ties strained in tension are
anchored in, or cross, a compressed nodal zone;
and Increase the anchorage
• the splitting stresses and hoop-bearing stresses length
resulting from the anchorage of the reinforcing
bars of a tension tie in or immediately behind a
nodal zone.

Splitting
stresses
Hoop-bearing stress
71
Design Strength of Node
The Design Strength of Node can be expressed as,

f node   n f cu (2)

where n is the node efficiency factor given in Table 1.

Table 1. Node efficiency factor

Condition Node efficiency factor (n)
of Node
Triaxial CCC 0.55
Uniaxial CCC 0.45
CCT 0.40
CTT 0.36
Minimum 0.28
Partial safety factor of 1/0.67 is allowed

Type of nodes

72
CCC CCT CTT TTT
Design Strength of Bearing
When the size of support is smaller than that of the node, higher stresses would be
developed at the bearing face. A plinth is introduced to spread the load.

Bearings and plinths

Node
A2
2 A1 < A2
Plinth 1 > 2
Bearing 1
1 2
A1
73
Stress developed on the bearing
Lateral Confinement

Lateral confinement can increase the compressive strength and hence the
bearing stress of concrete.

Loaded area
concrete face

Confinement by the Confinement by the

surrounding concrete reinforcement

74
 Design Strength of Plain Concrete Node
with Bearing Plate
Sectional
According to CoP for Precast Concrete Construction 2016
area A
(cl.2.7.9.4), the design ultimate bearing stress is based on the weaker
of the two bearing surfaces and is calculated as follows:

•0.4 fcu for dry bearing on the concrete;

•0.6 fcu for bedded bearing on concrete; or
•0.8 fcu for contact face of a steel bearing plate cast into a member or
support, with each dimension not exceeding 40% of the
Loaded area Ab corresponding concrete dimension.

Halving Joint bedding Pile cap

direct in
contact of
concrete faces Steel H pile

Dry bearing Bedded bearing Cast-in-plate

75
Design Strength of Ties
• The strength of a steel tie may be taken as 0.87fy, where 0.87 is
the partial safety factor of steel reinforcement as according to
British Standard BS8110 or Hong Kong Code.
• For control cracks at compressive struts, a minimum
reinforcement of 0.4% should be evenly distributed at each
face of the section considered.
• For beam sections the amount of minimum compressive
reinforcement could be reduced to 0.2%, as suggested in Table
9.1 of Hong Kong Code (Table 3.27 of BS8110).
• For brackets, corbels or nib design, to improve crack control, a
minimum amount of horizontal steel equal to 50% of the main
tensile reinforcement should be distributed over 2/3 (close to
the tension side) of the effective depth of the section
considered (cl. 9.8.3 Hong Kong Code).

76
Comments on Ties

RC detailed according to the

simplified S&T model.

main rebar As

2/3d
d

50% As

Tensile stress will generate To control cracking of

Simplified
in bottle-shaped strut and compressive strut during
S&T model
wide cracks will form. working condition, add
horizontal steels to lower
the stresses for the critical
reinforcement.
77
Unreinforced Concrete
The strength of the ties solely provided by the tensile strength of the
concrete for tie without reinforcement is not recommended. Progressive
type of failure may occur.

Example 1. Beam subject to bending

Tensile stresses migrating from a failure zone into adjoining area
may result in (zipper-like) progressive failure

compression
The induced tensile stress
keeps increasing, crack
would propagate
continuously
Crack occur at tension
tension zone

78
Anchorage
Safe anchorage of ties in the node has to be assured ; to achieve this,
• The use of minimum radii of bent bars and anchorage Effective area
lengths of bars should follow the code recommendations. =a×w
• The tension tie reinforcement must be uniformly Not advised
distributed over an effective area of concrete which is at
least equal to the tie force divided by the concrete stress a
limit for the node.
• The anchorage begins where the transverse compression
stress trajectories meet the bars and are deviated.
Smaller
• The anchorage must be located within and ‘behind’ the diameter
nodes. rebars

• If the required anchorage length is insufficient, the bar

La
may be extended beyond the node region.
Anchor
block
La
79
Anchorage

Case 1: Anchorage of reinforcement within the node

Rebar dia. 
Tie force sn
Depth
Node of node
sn
Conc. load
sn ≤ 3 
Depth of node

80
Anchorage

Case 2: Anchorage of reinforcement within the node using a plinth

Rebar dia. 
Tie force

Node

≥ 30o A plinth
Conc. load

Depth of node

If the bursting stress is high, additional longitudinal steel should

be provided in the nodal region.

81
Anchorage

Case 3: Anchorage of reinforcement behind a node

Back
face of
Tie force Reinforcing bars node

Node

Anchorage length lb

The tensile forces introduce behind the node can resist the
remaining forces developed within the nodal regions.

82
Anchorage

Case 4: The node is wider than the bearing

Extended
nodal zones

Transverse Transverse reinforcement Transverse tension

tension

bearing
Tie bars Node Node

Provided anchorage length ≥ lb+be be Transverse

PLAN reinforcement
lb - ultimate anchorage bond length
ELEVATION SECTION

In such case, transverse reinforcement (i.e. the horizontal legs

perpendicular to the tie bars) should be added to resist the
bursting stress and transverse tension developed. 83
Design Example 1- Design of deep
beam subjected to unequal
concentrated loads
In this example, a 400 mm wide and 4000 mm deep rectangular deep beam subjected to
two ultimate concentrated loads, 3000 kN and 6000 kN respectively as shown in Figure
1 is considered. The characteristic cube strength of concrete fcu = 45 MPa and yield
strength of ribbed steel bar fy = 500 MPa are assumed.

Figure 1. Deep beam subjected to two

unequal concentrated loads.
84 self-
(Note: For simplicity, the uniform
weight of beam is neglected)
Following the procedures of STM described, the design of the deep beam can be
accomplished in the following steps.

Step 1. Isolate non-flexural component

As the distributed regions due to the concentrated forces and reactions, assumed
equal to the lateral dimension of 4m, are almost overlapping with each other, the
whole deep beam is considered as a D-region.
Step 2. Compute the internal forces on the boundaries of D-region

By considering the global equilibrium of the applied and reaction forces, the support
reactions at A and B are found to be 3941 kN and 5059 kN, respectively.

Maximum bearing stress is therefore equal to 5059×103/(400×1400) = 9.0MPa. From

cl.2.7.9.4, CoP Precast Construction 2016 (or cl.5.2.3.4, BS8110), the allowable
bearing stress is 0.4×45 = 18 MPa (assuming dry bearing) which is greater than the
bearing stress of 9.0 MPa.

The maximum bearing stress at the loading point is 6000×103/(400×850) = 17.6 MPa.

Referring to Table 1, the node efficiency factor with uniaxial CCC condition is 0.45.
The allowable bearing stress is then 0.45×45 = 20.25 MPa which is greater than the
bearing stress of 17.6 MPa.
85
 Step 3. Idealize the deep beam by STM

The idealized STM for the deep beam is shown in Figure 2.

3200 3800 3200

3000 kN 6000 kN17.6 MPa< 0.45×45=20.25 MPa

D a
γ
C
4000

β α
a1.6a
A B
Legend 700
700 Strut
3941 kN Tie 5059 kN 9 MPa
< 18 MPa
Figure 2. Idealized STM of deep beam.

86
 Table 1. Node efficiency factor
Condition Node efficiency factor (n)
of Node
Triaxial CCC 0.55
Uniaxial CCC 0.45
CCT 0.40
CTT 0.36
Minimum 0.28
Partial safety factor of 1/0.67 is allowed

87
Step 4. Dimension and check of struts, ties and nodes

Due to the presence of a tension tie, the nodal zone stress at the beam support is
0.4fcu according to Table 1, under CCT condition.
The strength of strut, according to Equation (1) is 0.4 fcu which is the same as
the design strength of nodes.
The horizontal compressive force at node D is equal to the tensile force at node B.
When the depth of node D is equal to ‘a’, the depth over which the tie force
distributed is also a.

From the geometry, tan α = [4000-(a+a)/2]/(3200-850/4) 3200

The tie force AB = 5059/tan α = 5059×2988 / (4000-a).
6000 kN

D a
C = 0.4 fcu × a
As the allowable stress at node B is limited to 0.4×45 = 18 MPa,
therefore, the tension stress in the tie AB should be
850/4
AB≦ 18×103×(a×400)×10-6 α
a1.6a
5059×2988/(4000-a) ≦ 18×10-3×(a×400) B
T = 0.4 fcu × a 700

Solving the above equation, the minimum a is 621 mm and α = 48.5o. 5059 kN

88
Step 4. Dimension and check of struts, ties and nodes

Having determined α = 48.5o, by equilibrium of the nodes,

the tie force AB=5059/ tan α = 4476 kN

and the strut force DB=5059/ sin α = 6754 kN.

By the Pythagoras theorem, the strut force AC = √(AB2 + 39412) = 5963 kN.

By considering the equilibrium of node C,

the strut force CD = √[(3941-3000)2 + AB2] = 4574 kN.

3200 3800 3200

3000 kN 6000 kN

D a
C γ
AB C
4000 3941-3000 kN

β α 5059 kN
α
1.6a
a
A B
A Legend B 700
700 Strut
89
3941 kN Tie 5059 kN
Choosing reinforcement for tension tie

The tensile force at the main tie has been found to be 4476 kN, hence the required area of
steel is equal to As = 4476×103/(0.87×500) = 10,289 mm2.

Providing 15T32 bars (Aspro’= 12,060 mm2) will be sufficient.

(a)
As the minimum depth of the nodal zones A and B is 621 mm (say 620 mm),
the vertical spacing between the main reinforcement should be equal to 120 mm as shown
in Figure 3.

Note that as the required development length (according to Table 8.4, HK Code) for T32
bars is 33D=33×32 = 1056 mm, the tension tie can be transferred to the nodal zone within
the bearing length of 1400 mm.

70

Effective depth of nodal

4@120 zone = 620 mm
Figure 3. Arrangement of tension ties.
90
70
91
Checking stresses at nodes and struts

As node C is an internal node (smeared node), the dimensions of compressive struts

joined at this node can be chosen such that the node and the strut stresses are all less
than the corresponding allowable values. Further check for this node is not required.

At node D, the nodal zone is in equilibrium under a hydrostatic stress condition.

The length of the faces of the nodal zone must be proportional to the loads applied to
these faces and the faces must be perpendicular to the loads.
a a /cosα
Thus the stress in all struts at Node Zone D is equal to
α
f1 = 6754×103/(400×621/cosα) = 18.0 MPa

Crushing strength of struts = 0.4×45 =18 MPa which is the 6754 kN

same as the stress of strut (18.0 MPa).

92
 6754kN

Checking stresses at nodes and struts

α=48.5o
At the bottom of strut DB, the stress in the strut is a= 620
=980
B
f2 = (6754×103)/ [400×(620×cos48.5o+1400×sin48.5o)] = 11.6 MPa 1400

which is less than the ultimate compressive strength of strut (i.e. 5059 kN

18 MPa).

Node in Force Equilibrium

a1 & a2 are known

a3 C1

C3=(C12+C22)1/2
σ1
a3=a1cosα+a2sinα σ3 a1
σ3=C3/(a3×b)
C3 α

σ2 C2
93
a2
The required steel for distribution bars is 400×1000×0.2%= 800mm2/metre. Using
T10-200 each face and both ways is sufficient. The R.C. detail for the deep beam is
summarized in Figure 4.

A
CLof support CL of s upport
4T16 T10-20 0 E. F.
T10-200E.F.

5T10-U Bars A-A

3T32(5 Layers) 5T10-U Bars
A

Figure 4a. RC details for deep beam by STM approach.

94
Design Example 2 - Design of Dapped-
end beam subjected to uniformly
distributed load

Dapped-end beams are commonly used in pre-cast concrete structures. Such a beam
subjected to a factored uniform load of 130 kN/m over a span of 6.5 m is shown in
Figure 5. As in the previous example, the characteristic cube strength of concrete fcu
= 45 MPa and yield strength of ribbed steel bar fy = 500 MPa are assumed.
W = 130kN/m
400

2T16
150
400
d = 640
80kN
300 4T32

422kN
Section at midspan
Span = 6500

Figure 5. Simply supported dapped-end beam subjected to uniformly distributed load.

95
(wl2)/8 First, the B-region at the mid-span of the beam is designed. The ultimate moment is
equal to 130×6.52/8 = 686 kNm. Following the Hong Kong code (cl.6.1.2.4), the
moment arm z= 564 mm and the required area of longitudinal steel is 2791 mm2.
Providing 4T32 with steel area of 3216 mm2 is enough.

Following the procedures of STM, the design of the D-region of the dapped-end
beam can be accomplished in the following steps.

Step 1. Isolate the non-flexural component

The D-region of the dapped end of beam can be identified by Saint–Venant’s

Principle as shown on Figure 6(a), the length of the D-region is equal to 700 mm
which is same as the depth of the section.

CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2013, cl 6.1.2.4

M M
K As 
bd 2 f cu 0.87 f y z
d
 K 
z  d  0.5  0.25  
 0.9 
http://www.bd.gov.hk/english/documents/code/CoP_SUC2013e.pdf 96
Step 2. Compute the internal forces on the boundary of D-region

By considering the equilibrium of the D-region, the shear V, moment M, and axial force P
are found to be 318 kN, 296 kNm and 80 kN respectively over the section of the beam as
shown in Figure 6a.

W = 130kN/m

150 M
400
P
80kN V
300

422kN

100 700

Figure 6a The inter-boundary resultant forces at the D-region of dapped end beam;

97
Step 3. Idealize the dapped-end beam by STM

MacGregor (1997) reviewed different idealized STM involving vertical ties for the design
of dapped-end beams. The one with minimum tensile forces developed at the horizontal tie
and vertical hanger links is chosen and is shown in Figure 6b.

494kN

50.6o

574kN

Figure 6b The idealized STM.

98
 Step 4. Dimension and check of the struts, ties and nodes

The internal truss forces determined by static joint equilibrium method are summarized in
Table 4. The tension ties, nodes and compression struts will be designed in turn.

494kN

50.6o

574kN

Table 4. Internal Truss Forces at Dapped End Beam

Members AB AD EF DF CF CD BC BE BD
Force (kN) +550 -432 +410 -354 -365 +576 -446 +285 +115

Note: (+ve) =compression, (-ve) = tension

99
Design of tension ties

AD: 432×103/(0.87×500) = 993 mm2,

try 4T20 (Aspro. = 1256 mm2)

CB: 446×103/(0.87×500) = 1025 mm2,

try 3T16 closed stirrups (Aspro. = 494kN
1206 mm2)

CF: 365×103/(0.87×500) = 839 mm2,

50.6o
area of 4T32 bars is sufficient but
anchorage will need to be checked 574kN

DF: 354×103/(0.87×500) = 813 mm2,

try T12-8 legs (Aspro. = 904 mm2)

100
 Design of nodal zones

At Nodal Zone A, assuming that a 320mm long steel angle across the tension
width of beam is to be used at the support, the ultimate bearing stress for bedded
bearing on concrete is 0.6fcu (cl.2.7.9.4, CoP Precast Construction 2016 or
cl.5.2.3.3, BS8110) and the required bearing length = 422×103/(0.6×45×320) = 48
mm, provide a 100×100×15 mm thick angle. (If cast in plate is used, the bearing
stress can go up to 0.8fcu.)
B 4T16

2T16 U bars

2T16
frame bars 4T20 welded
welded to angle to angle
Greater than 73mm 432kN D

(to be discussed) A
Greater than 48mm T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links

422kN50
C
T20 –U bar 4T32
850

101
Design of nodal zones

As the allowable nodal stress factor is 0.40 (Table 1. with CCT condition), the
required depth of the nodal zone = 432×103/(0.40×45×320) = 75 mm less than 100
mm. Therefore the provided angle is sufficient.

Table 1. Node efficiency factor

Condition Node efficiency factor (n)
of Node
Triaxial CCC 0.55
Uniaxial CCC 0.45
CCT 0.40
CTT 0.36
Minimum 0.28
Partial safety factor of 1/0.67 is allowed

102
 Design of nodal zones

At Nodal Zone B, because of a concern about spalling of the concrete cover, the concrete
outside of the anchoring tension tie reinforcement is neglected. The required width of
the nodal zone = 446×103/(0.40×45×320) = 77 mm. A spacing of 75mm between the 3T16
closed stirrups will provide a nodal zone width of 2×75+16 =166 mm, which is
conservative.
320
B 4T16

2T16 U bars Cover = 40 mm

Node B
2T16
4T20 welded
frame bars 446kN to angle
welded to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links
50

C
T20 –U bar 4T32 400
850

103
Design of nodal zones

Nodal Zone C anchored two tension ties, hence, the allowable nodal stress factor is 0.36
according to Table 1 under CTT condition. The required depth of the node is
365×103/(0.36×45×320) =70 mm. To achieve this nodal zone depth, provide T20
horizontal U-bar with 50mm spacing above the layer of T32 bars.

Table 1. Node efficiency factor

Condition Node efficiency factor (n)
of Node
Triaxial CCC 0.55
Uniaxial CCC 0.45
CCT 0.40
CTT 0.36
Minimum 0.28
Partial safety factor of 1/0.67 is allowed

104
Design of nodal zones

Nodal Zone C anchored two tension ties, hence, the allowable nodal stress factor is 0.35
according to Table 2 under CTT condition. The required depth of the node is
365×103/(0.35×45×320) =72mm. To achieve this nodal zone depth, provide T20 horizontal U-
bar with 50mm spacing above the layer of T32 bars. (32/2+50+20/2=76mm > 72mm OK)

B 4T16

2T16 U bars

2T16
frame bars 4T20 welded
welded to angle to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links
365kN
50

C
T20 –U bar 4T32
105
850
 Design of nodal zones

The anchorage of tension tie CF in node C can be checked according to cl. 8.4.4 HK Code
(or cl.3.12.8.4 BS8110). As the T32 bars emerge from Nodal Zone C, they can resist a
tension force of 224 kN (from limited bond force =[2×75+16]×[0.5×√45] ×32π×4) which
is insufficient for transferring the tensile force of 365 kN. Adding a T20 U bar will be
capable of resisting a tension of 2×341×0.87×500×10-3= 297 kN. Hence the total tensile
capacity at face of nodal zone = 224+297 =521 kN which is greater than 365 kN. To
anchor the additional U bar, extend the T20 bar at least (33D, see Table 8.4 HK Code)
beyond the nodal zone (275+16+3320=826 mm) and far enough for the T32 bars to be
capable of carrying the 365 kN tie force on their own.
B 4T16

2T16 U bars

2T16
frame bars 4T20 welded
welded to angle to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links 251kN Tension lap
Anchorage by bearing
50
Anchorage by bond
210kN C 365kN
T20 –U365kN
bar 4T32
106
850
107
Check compressive struts

As the compressive strut CD represents a fan-shape region of radiating struts, further

checks of strut stress at node D are not required. The strut stress at the base of the fan
is:
fs=576×103/[320(76cos50.6o+166sin50.6o)] = 10.2 MPa Node in force equilibrium
The design strength of the strut is equal to 0.4fcu= 0.4×45 = 18 MPa which is greater
than the strut stress fs.

B 4T16

2T16 U bars

2T16
frame bars Fan-shaped 4T20 welded
welded to angle to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links 50.6o
50

C
T20 –U bar 4T32
108
850
Node in Force Equilibrium
Node in Force Equilibrium
a1 & a2 are known

a3 C1

σ1
σ3 a1

C3 α

σ2 C2
a2

C3=(C12+C22)1/2
a3=a1cosα+a2sinα
σ3=C3/(a3×b) 109
Check compressive struts

At Node B, the node is in equilibrium under a hydrostatic stress condition, hence, the
length of the faces of the nodal zone must be proportional to the loads applied to these
faces and the faces must be perpendicular to the loads. As the longitudinal width of
node B is equal to 166 mm (=2×75 mm+16 mm, see Figure 7a), the width of bearing
surfaces of struts at Node B is:

lAB = [550/(446+68)]×166 mm = 177 mm

Thus the stress in all struts at Nodal Zone B (neglecting concrete cover) equals
fs = 550×103/(177×320) = 9.7 MPa which is less than the strut capacity of 18 MPa.
(446+68)×103/(320×166)
B 4T16 =9.7 MPa
2T16 U bars

2T16 550kN
4T20 welded
frame bars 446+68kN to angle
welded to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links
50
110
C
T20 –U bar 4T32
Check compressive struts

The other struts meeting Node B will have the same compressive stress, hence they
will not be critical.

At node A, when the design nodal stress is 0.40fcu, the required depths of the node
are 75 mm and 73 mm in the vertical and horizontal directions respectively. As
100×100×15 mm thick angle is provided, the stresses in the node and strut are not
critical, further checks of the strut stress at node A are not required.

B 4T16

2T16 U bars

2T16
frame bars 4T20 welded
welded to angle to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links
50

C
T20 –U bar 4T32
111
850
 Other detailing considerations

To improve crack control, provide a minimum amount of horizontal reinforcement

parallel to the primary tensile tie rebars in the region above the support. The required
area of additional reinforcement = 0.5As = 0.5×4×314 =628 mm2. Try 2T16 U bars.
Distribute over two-third of the effective depth at least 33D (=3316=528 mm) beyond
face of dap.
To improve the support conditions for the highly stressed compressive struts AB and
EB, use two additional T16 top longitudinal bars in the region of node B. The RC
detail of dapped end beam is shown in Figure 7.
B 4T16 2T16
E 2T16
2T16 U bars
2d/3 50% As
2T16
4T20 welded
2T16
frame bars
welded to angle to angle 2T16
D
4T20
A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links
2T20 4T32
50
Frame bars C
T20 –U bar 4T32
850

112
 B 4T16

2T16 U bars

2T16
frame bars 4T20 welded
welded to angle to angle
D

A
T16-75 T12-150 (4legs)
closed
links
50

C
T20 –U bar 4T32
850

Figure 7a. RC detail at dapped end by STM.

113
 2T16

T10 - 4 legs

4T20

T12-175 (2legs).

4T32

Figure 7b. RC detail at dapped end by conventional inappropriate approach.

114
Discussion
The above two examples are redesigned following the local design
code (or BS8110) and local detailing practices. The associated RC
details are shown in Figure 4b and Figure 7b respectively. Significant
differences in STM details and conventional details are observed and
are summarized below:

115
 A
CLof support CL of s upport

4T16 T10-20 0 E. F.
T10-200E.F.
• Smaller size reinforcement bars
of T32 rather than T40 are used
for the deep beam by adopting
the STM approach. This was to
ensure that sufficient anchorage
length for T32 bars could be
developed within the bearing
5T10-U Bars A-A (node) region. Premature
A
3T32(5 Layers) 5T10-U Bars anchoring failure could be
avoided.
• The main longitudinal
Figure 4a. RC details for deep beam by STM approach. reinforcement is distributed
B
within a region of 600mm
CL of support C
L of support depth, rather than around
4T32 T16-275E.F. 300mm depth, in the case of the
STM approach and the
conventional approach,
T10-150S.S.
respectively. The nodal stress
was reduced by choosing deeper
anchors at supports and hence
avoided overstressing in the
STM.
B-B

B 2T40 4T40 4T40

Figure 4b. RC details for deep beam by conventional approach. 116

Discussion
• All the main reinforcements are extended into the nodal zone using the STM
approach without any curtailment of bars. Using the conventional flexural theory
without considering the high internal shear load (which also requires longitudinal
steel to take up the induced tensile force, Schlaich et al, 1987), the variation of
tensile force in main reinforcements was misunderstood to follow the distribution of
the bending moment diagram i.e. zero at supports and gradually increasing up to a
maximum value at the section with maximum point load. It is clear from the
prediction of STM that uniform tensile tie force would be developed within the
whole length of the reinforcement ties, as strut action rather than beam action is
predominant.
• Rogowsky and MacGregor (1986) considered similar deep beams and compared the
internal stress distribution in longitudinal bars computed by STM and determined
from experimental results and confirmed the accuracy of STM. It is important to
aware that the same principle (i.e. do not curtail the main tension reinforcements
unless shear induced tension has been duly considered) is applied for structures with
high shear loads such as pile caps and transfer structures to avoid premature yielding
of main reinforcement.

117
Discussion
• For the dapped-end beam in Example 2, a steel angle together with welded ties
is used to strengthen the bracket in the STM approach to prevent bearing type
of failure.

Corner
failure

118
Discussion
• In STM approach, a group of vertical hanger ties (T16-75 closed links)
near the bracket is used to pick up the vertical forces from the bottom
to the top of the beam. However, similar measure was not implemented
in the conventional approach. When the associated STM is developed,
bond failure is likely to occur due to insufficient developed length for
the 4T32 bars to transfer the vertical force to the inclined strut. It
should be emphasized that this failure of bond could lead to
catastrophic collapse of the whole pre-cast beam.

Bond slip
failure and
crack induced

119
Discussion
• In the STM detail, additional horizontal bars were distributed over
two-thirds of the effective depth of the bracket. Those additional bars
can effectively prevent the vertical interface crack developed between
the bracket and the full-depth of beam.

Additional
horizontal
bars can avoid the
interface crack between
the dap and the full depth
beam

120
Discussion
• It is noted that an alternative arrangement of using inclined links at the
dapped end is recommended by BS 5400. The experimental results by
Mattock and Theryo(1986) found that this arrangement also performs
satisfactorily. However, designers should ensure that the inclined links
and the horizontal tension bars can be properly anchored into the
dapped-end region by providing sufficient anchorage lengths.

Tensile force generated

due to shrinkage or
temperature effects

Insufficient
anchors for
tension bars
121
Discussion
Superposition of Forces
P1

P1+P2

= + =
P2

122
Discussion
Superposition of Forces
P1 P1 Any problem???

P1+P2 P1+P2

= P2
+ P2
=

Some Nodes and struts are overloaded

(yield condition violated)

Determine P1 and P2 by lower Superimpose P1 and P1232 to get

bound theorem separately the load capacity of the beam
Superposition of Forces
Correct procedure
Conduct force superposition before checking the
strength of each component

P3 P3

P3 < P1+P2

124
Discussion
• The successful use of the Strut and Tie Model requires an
understanding of basic member behavior and good engineering
judgement.
• In reality, there is almost an art to the appropriate use of this technique.
• The Strut and Tie Model is definitely a design tool for thinking
engineers, not a cookbook analysis procedure.
• The process of developing an strut and tie model for a member is
basically an iterative procedure.

125
 The End

Wish you all a Happy

Lunar New Year !
126
Assignment
Please complete questions 1, 2 and 4, Exercise – Strut and Tie
Model and submit the answers to Moodle by 11 pm, 7th
October 2016.

For the strength of the struts and nodes in questions 2 and 4,

please refer to the course notes.

Q1
Q2

Q3

127
References and recommended reading
* Special interest
[1] British Standards Institution (BSI). Eurocode 2, Design of
Concrete Structures, Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings (DD
ENV 1992-1-1: 1992), Commission of the European Communities, 1992.
* [2] Canadian Standards Association (CSA). Design of Concrete
Structures (CAN3-A23.3M94), Structural Design, Rexdale, 1994.
[3] Committee BD/2. Australian Standard, Concrete Structures (AS
3600-1994), Standards Association of Australia, 1994.
[4] Concrete Design Committee. The Design of Concrete Structure
(NZS 3101: Part 1 and 2: 1995), New Zealand Standard, 1995.
* [5] Comité Euro-international du Béton. Bulletin d’information
No.213/214, CEB-FIP Model Code 1990, Thomas Telford, 1993.
[6] Ritter W. Die Bauweise Hennebique, (The Hennebique Method of
Construction) Schweizerische Bauzeitung, (Zürich): 33(7): Feb. 1899, 59-61.
[7] Mörsch E. Der Eisenbetonbau-seine Theorie und
Anwendung,(Reinforced Concrete Construction-Theory and Application) 5th
Edition, Wittwer, Stuttgart, Vol.1, Part I 1902, Part 2, 1922.

128
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
[8] Rausch E. Berechnung des Eisenbetons gegen Verdrehung und
Abscheren (Design of Reinforced Concrete for Torsion and Shear), Julius
Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1929.
[9] Slater, Lord and Zipprodt. Shear tests of reinforced concrete
beams, Technical papers, US bureau of Standard: 314, 1927.
[10] Richart and Larsen. An Investigation of Web Stresses in
Reinforced Concrete Beams, University of Illinois Engineering
Experimental Station Bulletin: 166, 1927.
[11] Rüsch, H. Über die Grenzen der Anwendbarkeit der
Fachwerkanalogie bei der Berechnung der Schubfestigkeit von
Stahlbetonbalken (On the Limitations of Applicability of the Truss
Analogy for the Shear Design of RC Beams), Festschrift F. Campus ‘Amici
et Alumni’, Université de Liège, 1964.
[12] Kupfer H. Erweiterung der Möhrsch’schen Fachwerkanalogie
mit Hilfe des Prinzips vom Minimum der Formänderungsarbeit
(Expansion of Mörsch’s Truss Analogy by Application of the Principle of
Minimum Strain Energy), CEB Bulletin: 40: Paris, 1964.

129
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
[13] Leonhardt F. Reducting the shear reinforcement in reinforced
concrete beams and slabs, Magazine Concrete Research: 17(53):
December 1965, p187.
* [14] Marti P. Basic tools of reinforced concrete design, ACI Journal:
82(1): January-February 1985, 46-56.
* [15] Collins MP and Mitchell D. A rational approach to shear design –
the 1984 Canadian Code Provisions, ACI Journal: 83(6): November-
December 1986, 925-933.
* [16] Rogowsky DM and Macgregor JG. Design of reinforced concrete
deep beams, Concrete International: Design & Construction: 8(8): August
1986, 49-58.
* [17] Schlaich J, Schäfer K and Jennewein M. Toward a consistent
design of structural concrete, PCI Journal: 32(3): May-June, 1987, 74-150.
[18] Adebar P, Kuchma D, and Collins MP. Strut-and-tie models for
the design of pile caps: experimental study, ACI Structural Journal: 87(1):
January-February, 1990, 81-92.
[19] Adebar P and Zhou L. Design of deep pile caps by strut-and-tie
models, ACI Structural Journal: 93(4): July-August, 1996, 437-448.
130
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
[20] Alshegeir A and Ramirez JA. Strut-tie approach in
pretensioned deep beams, ACI Structural Journal: 89(3): May-June, 1992,
296-304.
[21] Siao WB. Strut-and-tie model for shear behavior in deep beams
and pile caps falling in diagonal splitting, ACI Structural Journal: 90(4):
July-August 1993, 356-363.
[22] Tan KH, Weng LW and Teng S. A strut-and-tie model for deep
beams subjected to combined top-and-bottom loading, The Structural
Engineer: 75(13): 1997, 215-225.
[23] Ove Arup & Partners. The design of deep beams in reinforced
concrete (CIRIA Guide 2), London, Construction Industry Research &
Information Association, January, 1977.
* [24] MacGregor JG. Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design,
Prentice Hall (Third Edition), 1997.
[25] Hwang SJ, Yu HW and Lee HJ. Theory of interface shear
capacity of reinforced concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE:
126(6): June 2000, 700-707.
[26] Hwang SJ, Fang WH, Lee HJ and Yu HW. Analytical model for
predicting shear strength of squat walls, Journal of Structural
131
Engineering-ASCE: 127(1): January 2001, 43-50.
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
[27] Nielsen MP, Braestrup MW, Jensen BC and Bach F. Concrete
plasticity, beam shear in joints – Punching shear, Special Publication of
the Danish Society of Structural Science and Engineering, Technical
University of Denmark, Copenhagen, 1978.
* [28] Foster SJ and Gilbert RI. The design of nonflexural members
with normal and high-strength concretes, ACI Structural Journal: 93(1):
January-February 1996, 3-10.
[29] Ramirez JA and Breen JE. Proposed design procedure for
shear and torsion in reinforced and prestressed concrete, Research Report
248-4F, Center For Transportation Research, University of Texas at Austin,
1983.
[30] Ramirez JA and Breen JE. Evaluation of a modified truss-
model approach for beams in shear, ACI Structural Journal: 88(5):
September-October 1991, 562-571.
[31] Alshegeir A. Analysis and design of disturbed regions with strut-
tie methods, PhD thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Ind., 1992.
* [32] Vecchio FJ and Collins MP. Modified compression field theory
for reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear, ACI Journal
Proceedings: 83(22): March-April, 1986, 219-231.
132
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
* [33] Warwick W and Foster SJ. Investigation into the efficiency
factor used in nonflexural member design, UNICIV Report No. R-320,
School of Civil Engineering, University of New South Wales, Kensingto,
July 1993.
[34] Bergmeister K, Breen JE and Jirsa JO. Dimensioning of the
nodes and development of reinforcement. Report IABSE Colloquium
Structural Concrete, Stuttgart, Germany, 1991, 551-556.
[35] British Standards Institution (BSI). Code of Practice for Design
and Construction (BS8110 Part 1), British Standard, Structural Use of
Concrete, 1997.
[36] National Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Code for
design of concrete structures (GBJ 10-89), New World Press, 1994.
[37] ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-95) and Commentary (ACI 318R-95), American
Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1995.
[38] MacGregor JG. Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design,
Prentice Hall, 1988.

133
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
* [39] Schlaich J and Schäfer K. Design and detailing of structural
concrete using strut-and-tie models, The Structural Engineer: 69(6): 1991,
113-125.
[40] Jirsa JO, Breen JE, Bergmeister K, Barton D, Anderson R and
Bouadi H. Experimental studies of nodes in strut-and-tie models, Report
IABSE Colloquium Structure Concrete, Stuttgart, Germany, 1991, 525-
532.
[41] Foster SJ. Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Deep
Beams, PhD dissertation, School of Civil Engineering, University of New
South Wales, August 1992.
* [42] Foster SJ and Gilbert RI. Strut and tie modeling of non-flexural
members, Australian Civil/Structural Engineering Transactions: CE39(2
and 3): 1997, 87-94.
* [43] Hawkins NM. Bearing strength of concrete loaded through rigid
plates, Magazine of Concrete Research (London): 20(62): March 1968, 31-
40.
* [44] Adebar P and Zhou L. Bearing strength of compressive struts
confined by plain concrete, ACI Structural Journal: 90(5): September-
October 1993, 534-541.
134
Cont’d of References and recommended reading
* Special interest
* [45] Kupfer H and Hilsdorf HK. Behavior of concrete under biaxial
stresses, ACI Journal: 66(8): August 1969, 656-666.
* [46] Yun YM and Ramirez JA. Strength of struts and nodes in strut-
tie model, Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE: 122(1): January 1996,
20-29.
[47] Yun YM. Design and Analysis of 2-D Structural Concrete with
Strut-Tie Model, PhD thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Ind. 1994.
[48] L’Hermite R. Idées acturlles sur la technologie du béton.
Documentation Technique du Bâtiment et des Travaux Publics (1955).
* [49] Canadian Portland Cement Association, Concrete Design Handbook,
Ottawa (1995).

135
Node in Hydrostatic Equilibrium

C3
force C3 C2 C1
 
size of node a3 a2 a1
a3
a2
a1  C1
C2
C1 a1

a2

136
C2
Load Paths under Orthogonal Winds

Lateral
force

compression

(a) Lateral force direction parallel to the outrigger tension 137

Load Paths under Orthogonal Winds
Walls may be cracked if
Lateral insufficient horizontal steel is
force provided.
compression tension

(a) Lateral force direction perpendicular to the outrigger 138

 Openings Through the Core Wall

major Disturbance
openings B/2 zone
through
core wall
within the
disturbance
region
should be
avoided if B/2
possible.

B B

139
 ACI EC CSA
0.68 0.672 0.442
0.544 0.571 0.390
0.408 0.504 0.338

Euro code BS EN 1992-1-1:2004

1
0.85 x (1-fck’/250)
0.75

Canadian Standard 04
0.85
0.75 x 0.65 x fc’
0.65

140