CIVL6003 – Advanced Reinforced

Concrete Structure Design

THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

Ir Dr. Ray Su
Department of Civil Engineering

(office: HW 6-6, Tel. no.: 2859 2648

Strut & Tie Modelling - 04 Email: klsu@hku.hk)
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. The characteristic cube strength of concrete fcu = 45 MPa and yield strength
of ribbed steel bar fy = 500 MPa are assumed.

Bedded
bearing is
assumed.

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

2
(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.

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 
https://www.bd.gov.hk/en/resources/codes-and-references/codes-and-design-manuals/index.html

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
3
which is same as the depth of the section.
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.

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

4
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.

Figure 6b The idealized STM.

5
 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.

Table 4. Internal Truss Forces at Dapped End Beam

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

6
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. = 1206
mm2)

CF: 365×103/(0.87×500) = 839 mm2,

area of 4T32 bars is sufficient but
anchorage will need to be checked

DF: 354×103/(0.87×500) = 813 mm2,

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

7
 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.

Greater than 73mm 432kN

(to be discussed in next slide)
Greater than 48mm

422kN

8
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

9
Design of nodal zones

At Nodal Zone B, because of a concern about spalling of the concrete cover, the concrete
outside the closed stirrups 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

Cover = 40 mm
Node B
446kN

166 400

10
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. (32/2+50+20/2=76mm > 70mm
OK)

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

11
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. (32/2+50+20/2=76mm > 70mm
OK)

76 365kN

12
 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 = [0.5×√45]×166×32π×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 2×314×0.87×500×10-3= 273 kN. Hence the total tensile
capacity at face of nodal zone = 224+273 =497 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 (166+3320=826 mm, say 850 mm) and far enough for the T32
bars to be capable of carrying the 365 kN tie force on their own.

273kN Tension lap

Anchorage by bearing
365kN
Anchorage by bond
224 kN
166 13
14
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.

Fan-shaped

50.6o

15
Node in Force Equilibrium
Node in Force Equilibrium
a1 & a2 are known

a3 C1

σ1 a1
σ3
C3 α

σ2 C2
a2

C3=(C12+C22)1/2
a3=a1cosα+a2sinα
σ3=C3/(a3×b) 16
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, 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.

166 (446+68)×103/(320×166)
=9.7 MPa

177
550kN
446+68kN

17
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.

18
 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.

2d/3 50% As

Frame bars

19
Figure 7a. RC detail at dapped end by STM.

20
Figure 7b. RC detail at dapped end by conventional inappropriate approach.

21
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:

22
 • 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
(node) region. Premature
anchoring failure could be
avoided.
• The main longitudinal
Figure 4a. RC details for deep beam by STM approach. reinforcement is distributed
within a region of 600mm
depth, rather than around
300mm depth, in the case of the
STM approach and the
conventional approach,
respectively. The nodal stress
was reduced by choosing deeper
anchors at supports and hence
avoided overstressing in the
STM.

Figure 4b. RC details for deep beam by conventional approach. 23

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.

24
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.

25
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.

26
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.

27
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

28
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 P2 29 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

30
Discussion
• The successful use of the Strut and Tie Model requires an
understanding of basic member behavior and good engineering
judgement.
• Without detailed calculation, the load path method can help to identify
the critical tension load paths in D-regions.
• In reality, there is almost an art to the appropriate use of Strut and Tie
Modeling 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.

31
 Hope you find the materials useful!

The End

Wish you all a Happy

Lunar New Year !
32
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.

33
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.

34
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.
35
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
36
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.
37
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.

38
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.
39
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).

40