Chapter 5

Applications of the LP
After the formation of the linear programming problem in chapter 4,

we need to see how the LP can be applied on different structural

elements, and that is what this chapter will be occupied with.

5.1 APPLICATION ON ORDINARY BEAMS

Beams are constituted generally of B-regions, D-

regions appear near the points where concentrated

loads and/or reactions are applied. As indicated in

chapter 2, strut-and-tie models in beams are actually

truss models. Figure 5.1.a demonstrates the truss

model introduced by Morsch for the ordinary beam

shown in figure 5.1.

b
P

Figure 5.1 simple supported beam subjected to a concentrated load at

its center.

48
The value of the objective function for the truss model presented by

Mörsch equals 7.42.

strut
tie
Figure 5.1.a truss model presented by Mörsch
Objective function equals 7.42

The truss model introduced by Mörsch was based on the following

assumptions:

 The truss compression and tension members are parallel to each

other, and reflect around the center line of the beam.

 The angle of inclination of the traverse reinforcement with the

longitudinal reinforcement is 90 o.

Figure 5.1.b shows the optimum model (BSTM ) for the same beam

shown in figure 5.1 . On this model the value of the objective function

equals 6.73, which is less that the value obtained from the Mörsch

truss model.

49
 strut
tie
Figure 5.1.b The BSTM
Objective function equals 6.73

Although that the BSTM is more economical by nearly 10.3% , but

Mörsch’s model is used till now in practice, due to the difficulty of

the fitting of 45 degree stirrups.

Another example to verify the economy obtained if stirrups are placed

at 45 degree, can be shown for the continuous beam of figure 5.2, if

the Mörsch model is applied on this beam, Figure 5.2.a , the value of

the objective function is 5.13 , while this value is reduced to 4.46 from

the BSTM shown in figure 5.2.b. In other words an economy of 15%

can be obtained.

50
 P P

l l

Figure 5.2 Beam having two equals spans

Ties Struts

Figure 5.2.1 Mörsch model for figure 5.2

Objective function equals 5.13

Ties Struts

Figure 5.2.2 BSTM for figure 5.2

Objective function equals 4.46

5.2 APPLICATION ON DEEP BEAMS

51
Deep beams are structural elements loaded as beams but having a

large depth/thickness ratio and a shear span/depth ratio not exceeding

2 to 2.5 (see figure 5.3). Floor slabs under horizontal loads, wall slabs

under vertical loads, short-span beams carrying heavy loads, and some

shear walls are examples of this type of elements. Because of the big

ln / h value in deep beams, the Bernoulli hypothesis is no longer

applicable and in the design of these members it must take into

account the nonlinear strain distribution (D-regions ).

l / h  2.0 l / h  2.5

(a) h (b) h

l l l

Figure 5.3 Slenderness limits of deep beams

(a) simply supported (b) continuous span

The use of strut-and-tie models for deep beams become very

applicable, because of the efficiency of those models in representing

the behavior of different structural elements. A study presented by (Ali

et al ) showed on a study on 28 simply supported deep beams tested to

prove that strut-and-tie models give a lower bound solution, The

ultimate capacity obtained from experimentally tests were compared

52
to ultimate capacities obtained in different codes of practice, the best

results were achieved from the strut-and-tie models.

For the deep beam subjected to two concentrated loads shown in

figure 5.4 , the majority of researchers adopt the model shown in

figure 5.4.a and on which the objective function value ( Z ) equals

0.84 , a more economical model ( Z =0.66 ) shown in figure

5.4.b is proposed by the BSTM under the same

concrete, steel and loading conditions, besides the

economy the proposed model transfers the loads

directly from the points where the concentrated loads

are applied to the supports.

P P

Figure 5.4 Simple supported deep beam subjected to two concentrated

points of loading

53
 Ties

Struts

Figure 5.4.a Strut-and-tie model proposed by literatures

Z = 0.84

Ties

Struts

Figure 5.4.b BSTM Z = 0.66

Walls of water tanks are actually deep beams, if its required to present

the strut-and-tie model for this case, two models can be proposed, the

54
first one is shown in figure 5.5, the Z value for this model is 3.84 , the

second one is shown in figure 5.6 of Z = 2.82 , the these models are

not very usual in engineering practice, but they are interesting in the

theoretical side.

Strut Tie

P P
0.75 l

05 l l 05 l

Figure 5.5 Deep beam with lower points of loading. (poor model)
Z = 3.84

55
 Strut Tie

0.75 l
P P

05 l l 05 l

Figure 5.6 Deep beam with lower points of loading. (good model)
Z = 2.82

For the deep beam applied to a concentrated load at the middle of its

span shown in figure 5.7 , the most adequate strut-and-tie model is

illustrated figure 5.8 . It can be observed that the load path is the

shortest possible, the objective function equals 0.66 . This is the same

model found in literature for the case shown in figure 5.7 .

56
 P

Figure 5.7 Deep beam subjected to a concentrated at middle .

P
2l /3

Strut Tie

Figure 5.8 BSTM Z = 0.66

5.3 APPLICATION ON DEEP BEAMS WITH OPENINGS

57
A very common strut-and-tie model of a deep beam

with a big opening near the support is the one

presented in figure 5.9 . This model has been studied

by Schafer and Schlaich who suggested the use of the

model shown in figure 5.9.c , obtained from the overlap

of the two models in figures 5.9.a and 5.9.b each one

carrying a portion (50% ) of the total loading.

0.7

P=3000KN

4
0.

4.7

1.5

0.5

0.5 1.5 5.0 0.5

4.5 2.5

Figure 5.9 Deep beam with an opening near the support .

58
 0.7

P=1500KN

4
0.
4.7

1.5

0.5

0.5 1.5 5.0 0.5

4.5 2.5

Figure 5.9.a Strut-and-Tie model 1 for deep beam with an opening

near the support considering 50% of the loading.

Objective function Z = 16.4

0.7

P=1500KN
4
0.

4.7

1.5

0.5

0.5 1.5 5.0 0.5

4.5 2.5

Figure 5.9.b Strut-and-Tie model 2 for deep beam with an opening

near the support considering 50% of the loading.

Objective function Z = 24.18

59
 0.7

P=3000KN

4
0.
4.7

1.5

0.5

0.5 1.5 5.0 0.5

4.5 2.5

Figure 5.9.c Strut-and-Tie model 3 for deep beam with an opening

near the support overlapping models 1 and 2 .

The BSTM according to the value of Z should be model 1, but

because that the opening needs be protected by reinforcement it is

recommended as BSTM the model shown in figure 5.10 , having an

objective function of 52.18.

60
 Strut Tie

Figure 5.10 BSTM for the deep beam shown in figure 5.9

5.4 APPLICATION ON BEAMS WITH DAPPED ENDS

Dapped-end beams are reinforced concrete members where the ends

are reduced in depth. These beams are normally used to support cranes

in industrial buildings, structural testing laboratories, and precast

plants. Dapped-end girders are also used in parking structures and

long-span bridges. In the Confederation Bridge, for example, the

middle part of every other span is a dapped-end girder.

61
Because of the reduced dimensions of the section and the high shear

stresses at the supports, the design of dapped-end beams requires

special consideration.

In general dapped ends height (hd) equals h (beam) /2 and ld=hd .

Figure 5.11 shows two types of dapped ends of beams, rectangular and

trapezoidal.

Strut-and-tie models are used to develop the different geometrical

arrangements of the reinforcement. The strut-and-tie method can help

to identify locations where the anchorage of reinforcement is vital and

may dictate the overall capacity of the member.

hd

ld
(a) (b)

Figure 5.11 Two types of dapped ends of beams

According to Leonhardt and Mönning the stress fields in a dapped end

having (hd) = h (beam) /2 form an angle of 45° with the horizontal,

this angle decreases if hd < h/2 and the stresses fields becomes more

flat and as a result more critical. It is favorable to slope the end away

from the critical face of the beam because the slope reduces the

tensions caused by cracks see figure 5.12.a.b.c.

62
The reinforcement of the dapped ends of beams could be of sloped or

vertical stirrups, care should be given so that horizontal reinforcement

should be well anchored at the left part of the beginning of the support

support, figure 5.12.d and e .

hd<h/2
hd=h/2

45o 20o
h

h
(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e)
Figure 5.12 Stress fields and reinforcement of dapped ends

Schlaich and Schafer suggested the model illustrated in figure 5.13.c

which is a combination of the two models shown in figure 5.13.a

(vertical tie) and 5.13.b (sloped tie), each model of the figure below

carried a portion of the total force (30%).

1

2

(a) (b)

63
 (c)

Figure 5.13 Combination of two model lading to

Schlaich and Schafer model

On a study presented by Yosaki Nagato and Melo Souza on 3 beams

of dapped ends each one modeled with a different strut-and-tie model,

every beam had different length of longitudinal reinforcement the

beams were tested to evaluate the efficiency of such models and to

compare the results with theoretical researches .

All the beams had the same dimensions ; a rectangular cross section of

500*200mm a total length of 2600mm, the dapped end was of

240mm in height and 300mm in length.

In each model the distances a and b were kept constant.

The strut-and-tie models used in each beam are illustrated in figures 5.14 , 5.15

and 5.16.

64
 P

a
b

a b
Figure 5.14 Model # 1 for beam #1

P
a
b

a b
Figure 5.15 Model # 2 for beam #2

65
 P

a
b

a b
Figure 5.16 Model # 3 for beam #3

The experimental rupture load was in all the models greater to the maximum

theoretical load. The average percentage value of the experimental load to the

theoretical load varies from 1.35 to 1.43. figures 5.17 , 5.18 and 5.19 below shows

the dapped ends beams loaded to be experimented.

Figure 5.17 Beam # 1 loaded to be experimented.

66
 Figure 5.18 Beam # 2 loaded to be experimented.

Figure 5.19 Beam # 3 loaded to be experimented.

From the load values obtained, it can be concluded that the strut-and-

tie models have proved their efficiency in design of reinforced

67
concrete structural elements, since all the models gave load values

greater than the theoretical results.

As a result, all the models used were good, but if we want to compare

economically between them the BSTM procedure can be used. If the loading

values were kept constant also the same concrete and steel were used the

following results have been obtained :

BSTM Procedure
Model Number Z value
Model # 1 2.19
Model # 2 2.36
Model # 3 2.42

From the BSTM results we can conclude that the using of model # 1

will give good rapture load besides that is the more economical.

68
For long dapped ends Yosaki Nagato and Melo Souza proposed the

model shown in figure 5.20 the value of the objective function

( Z ) for this model equals 2.76 .

Using the BSTM procedure gives better results (from the economical

view of point ) since the Z value equals 1.68 . (see the model shown in

figure 5.21 ) .
l/3
l/2

l l/3 2l l/3 l

Figure 5.20 Nagato and Melo Souza’s model

l /3
l /2

l 4l /3 4l /3 l

Figure 5.21 BSTM

Again as beams the BSTM requires reinforcing the element with 45°

stirrups, while researchers recommend the use 90° stirrups.

69
 5.5 APPLICATION ON JOINTS OF MOMENT FRAMES

Stiffness of the connection in a moment frame (MF) has a major

impact on the lateral-load resistance of such structures. For this

reason, the joint has been identified as the “weak-link” in MF

structures. During an earthquake, connection damages can lead to

substantial drifts and can increase the possibility of building collapse

due to what is called the “P-delta” effects.

The major influence of beam-column connections on the structural

reliability and seismic performance of reinforced concrete structures

has became more evident after the 1989 Loma Prieta, the 1994

Northridge earthquakes, the Kobe earthquake of Japan, and the August

1999 Earthquake in Turkey. Post earthquake reports of the Loma

Prieta, indicated that one of the main reasons behind the collapse of

the Cypress Viaduct bridge, and the damage of the China Basin is the

failure of connections. A site survey, conducted by Mosallam A. et

al , of several parking structures in the Los Angeles in January 1994

following the Northridge earthquake, indicated that collapse of several

portal frame structures were mainly due to the failure of beam-column

and column-base connections (see Figure 5.22 below).

70
 Figure 5.22 : Typical Exterior (Knee)
Frame Connection Failure
[Northridge Earthquake, January 1994]

Designing beam-column joints is considered to be a complex and

challenging task for the structural engineer. This is because although

the sizing of the connection is determined by the size of the framing

members, these joints will be subjected to a different set of loads from

those used in designing both the column and the beams. For example,

it is necessary to provide a relatively large number of transverse

reinforcement (in form of steel stirrups) to control cracks and to

71
provide adequate confinement to the joint. These stirrups are difficult

to be placed in the very limited joint zone and can generally result in

improper compaction of concrete at the connection area.

The corners of moment frames (figure 5.23 ) are constituted of D-

regions and strut-and-tie models can be used for the design procedure

after isolating the corners from the rest of the structure, the internal

stresses working in the surroundings of the D-regions should be

substituted by concentrated forces so that the finite element analysis

could be carried out.

hb

hc

Figure 5.23 Corner (shaded area) in a moment frame.

For corners of moment frames were the height of the beam equals the

height of the columns Schlaich proposed the modes shown in figure

72
5.24 and for this case BSTM propose the model shown in figure 5.25

having a z value of 1.61.

Figure 5.24 Strut-and-tie models proposed by Schlaich

for corners of MF

73
 P

l/3
P

l/3 l

Figure 5.25 BSTM proposed for corners of moment frames where the
height of the beam equals the height of the column

If the dimensions of the beams and columns are not equal Schlaich

proposed the model shown in figure 5.26 having an objective function

of 4.97. The BSTM for the same structural element is shown in figure

5.26, on this model Z equals 4.55.

74
 P

l
P
l

l/3 l

Figure 5.26 Schlaich proposed model for corners of moment frames

where the height of the beam don’t equal the height of the column.

75
 P

l
P
l

l/3 l

Figure 5.27 BSTM proposed for corners of moment frames where

the height of the beam don’t equal the height of the column.

Although the models for corners of MF above presented are good

models but it is better to reinforce the beam to decrease the

concentration of stresses in this area. A model that satisfy the beam

reinforcement is illustrated in figure 5.28, for this model Z equals

2.87.

76
 P

P
l

l/3 l

Figure 5.28 BSTM proposed for corners of moment frames where

beams are reinforced.

The model of figure 5.28 involves stirrups placed at 90° another

model (see figure 5.29 ) can be formed if stirrups are placed at 45° ,

on the second model Z equals to 1.25.

77
 P

P
l

l/3 l

Figure 5.29 BSTM proposed for corners of moment frames where

beams are reinforced.

5.6 APPLICATION ON BRACKETS OR CORBELS

Brackets or corbels are short cantilevers projecting from the face of columns to

support heavy concentrated loads or beams reactions. They can be of rectangular

shape where the tension values are constant through its width (from the point

where loads are applied to the point where cracks start to develop) or of

trapezoidal shape (which consumes less concrete), in figure 5.30 it can be seen

both of corbels shapes in addition to the reinforcement detailing for the

trapezoidal shape.

78
 Fd Fd
a a
a
h1
h
h d
Fd

(a) (b) (c)

5.30 Brackets shapes and reinforcement detailing.

Although brackets and corbels are constituted of D-regions as deep

beams but they differ in that design calculations for horizontal forces

in brackets (corbels) must be made.

Adequate attention of the corbel or bracket detailing is of major

importance, because its failure is generally attributed to improper

detailing that does not achieve full anchorage development of the

reinforcing bars .

If the ratio of the shear arm or span (a ) to the corbel depth (d ) is less

than one the strut-and-tie model can be used .

When a/d is greater than 1 brackets can be considered as cantilevers .

For a rectangular bracket subjected to an axial force at its top Schlaich

and Schafer proposed the model shown in figure 5.31 .

79
 Figure 5.31 Schlaich and Schafer’s Model

Using the BSTM results in the model shown in figure 5.32 which is

similar to the model presented by Schlaich and Schafer and for this

model the Z value equals to 21.2 .

0.75 l 0.75 l

80
 Figure 5.32 BSTM for a bracket subjected to an axial load at its top.

For the bracket shown in figure 5.33.a subjected to an axial force

along its height Schlaich and Schafer proposed the model illustrated in

figure 5.33.b which for safety reasons was the result of the

overlapping of the models 5.33.c (which was carried out considering

60% of the applied load for the dimensioning of the horizontal

reinforcement) and 5.33.d (considering 60% of the applied load for the

dimensioning of the inclined reinforcement).

Fd

(a) (b)

81
 0.6 Fd

0.6 Fd

(c) (d)

Figure 5.33 Schlaich and Schafer model for a bracket subjected to an

axial load along its height.

Using the BSTM for the case of brackets shown in figure 5.33.a

results in the model shown in figure 5.34, which is the same model of

figure 5.33.b presented by Schafer and Schlaich.

l l

Figure 5.34 BSTM for the bracket shown in figure 5.33.a .

82
Finally it must be remembered that individually different boundary

conditions of brackets leads to a different strut-and-tie models.

Chapter 6

Conclusions And Suggestions

6.1 CONCLUSIONS

The BSTM optimization method formulated in the basis of choosing

the more economical model from the initial model thrown has been

presented in this work. Using this method aids the designer to

distinguish among the proper strut-and-tie models available for the

same structural element from an economical point of view.

83
For some structural elements as beams with holes, beams of dapped

ends, and corbels some researches or international codes suggest for

better representation of the behavior of the structure the overlap of

two simple models each one carrying a portion of the total applied

load. In BSTM procedure the optimum model was obtained

considering the overlapped model as initially model.

The presented procedure is a powerful tool that leads to the

knowledge of the reinforcement location and in the detailing of

structural elements that have no defined models as deep beams with

holes. After obtaining the optimum model it will become clearly

where reinforcement must be placed.

It should be noticed also that the BSTM is not always the model

which is performed in the site, that is because certain models in spite

of being the more economical but they are difficult to carry out, for

example in the case of continuous beams an economy of 15% can be

obtained if stirrups are 45o placed but the workers generally have no

specialized skills, more time will be needed to perform the required

detailing (increasing the hours of work ) and the achievements in cost

will vanish .

84
When its related to cost reduce problems, linear programming had

proved its efficiency, and LP will be vital for the future of engineering

with the increasing search of the more economical projects.

6.2 SUGGESTIONS

The system developed is still limited for the editing of models, a

suggestion for prospected work is to execute a graphical tool that aids

editing of models and the introducing of elements of variable cross-

sections.

Another suggestion is the implementation of routines in the system

that calculate the dimensions of the strut and nodes also the

reinforcement size so we can obtain a complete procedure that obtains

the optimum model and estimates the member dimensions.

85