Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285739286
CITATIONS
READS
19
31
2 authors, including:
Khaldoun Rahal
Kuwait University
50 PUBLICATIONS 550 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
TECHNICAL PAPER
INTRODUCTION
In the general case of loading, a beam cross section can
be subjected to a maximum of six stress resultants (in the
orthogonal system of coordinates) as shown in Fig. 1.
Three forces and three moments are possible: two shearing
forces Vy and Vz (along the minor and major axes), two bending
moments My and Mz (along the minor and major axes), an axial
force N (tension or compression), and a torsional moment T.
Amongst these stress resultants, the combination of the torsional
and the bending moments may be critical in the design.
In the current ACI Code,1 the interaction between torsion
and bending is implied in clause 11.6.3.7, which requires
increasing the amount of longitudinal steel to accommodate
torsion along with the other stress resultants. On the other
hand, Clause 11.6.3.1 limits the torsional shear stress level to
avoid concrete crushing before reinforcement yielding. ACI
Eq. (11-18) and (11-19) of this clause do not account for the
additional compression component caused by the bending
moment. The combination of the compression caused by
torsion, bending, and shear can be critical, especially in thinwalled sections.
The current AASHTO2 and Canadian3 (CSA-A23.3)
codes include an alternative shear and torsion design method
based on the equations of the Modified Compression Field
Theory (MCFT). 4,5 This method, named the General
Method,6,7 accounts in a rational way for how shear and
torsion affect the stresses in the longitudinal steel in the cross
section. Similar to ACI, however, it does not account for how
the compression due to the combination of bending, torsion,
and shear affects concrete crushing.
In all three Code methods,1-3 the equations are suitable for
designing sections subjected to shear, bending moment, axial
load, and torsional moment. They are not suitable, however,
for analysis of unsymmetrically reinforced sections if both
flexural and torsional moments are acting. Moreover, the
ACI Structural Journal/March-April 2003
157
Ultimate capacity
Experimental
Calculated
Ratio,
exp/calc
Experiment
Model
367
1.09
CC
CC
86
367
0.91
CC
CC
124
206
1.14
CC
CC
Beam
fc , MPa
TBO1
19.5
401
TBO2
19.7
78
334
TBO3
19.1
143
232
TBO4
20.4
149
117
136
109
1.08
CC
CC
TBO5
20.6
143
35
125
31
1.12
LY
CC
TBU1
34.8
551
543
1.02
LY
LY
TBU2
34.8
104
439
127
536
0.82
CC
LY
TBU3
34.8
207
327
204
322
1.01
CC
CC
TBU4
34.8
195
147
209
158
0.93
TY
CC
TBU5
34.8
175
41
169
44
0.93
TY, LY
CC
TBS4
15.5
125
108
108
100
1.12
TY, LY
CC
TBS1
28.0
209
164
179
144
1.15
TY
CC
TBS2
32.9
216
169
197
161
1.07
TY, LY
CC
TBS3
45.8
245
186
244
186
1.00
TY, LY
CC
TB5
37.6
236.7
231
1.03
LY
LY
TB3
33.7
28.1
195.4
32
220
0.89
LY, TY
LY, TY
TB2
45.0
53.2
157.3
58
172
0.92
LY, TY
LY, TY
TB1
40.3
62.4
72.8
72
84
0.87
TY
TY
TB4
35.6
64.9
75
0.86
TY
TY
Average
1.00
COV
10.6%
TY = transverse steel yielding before concrete crushing; LY = longitudinal steel yielding before concrete crushing; and CC =
concrete crushing before yielding of reinforcement.
fc
M
NOTATION
=
=
Mcalc =
Mexp =
My =
Mz =
N
=
T
=
Tcalc =
Texp =
Vy =
=
Vz
cen =
L
=
t =
y =
z =
=
REFERENCES
1. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary (318R-02), American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 2002, 443 pp.
2. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials,
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and Commentary, SI
Units, Second Edition, Washington, D.C., 1998, 1091 pp.
3. CSA Standard, Design of Concrete Structures (A23.3-94), Canadian
Standards Association, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada, 1994, 199 pp.
4. Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P., Modified Compression Field Theory
for Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear, ACI Structural Journal, V. 83,
No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1986, pp. 219-231.
5. Vecchio, F. J., and Collins, M. P., Predicting the Response of Reinforced
Concrete Beams Subjected to Shear Using the Modified Compression Field
Theory, ACI Structural Journal, V. 85, No. 4, May-June 1988, pp. 258-268.
6. Collins, M. P.; Mitchell, D.; Adebar, P. E.; and Vecchio, F. J., A General
Shear Design Method, ACI Structural Journal, V. 93, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1996,
pp. 36-45.
7. Rahal, K. N., and Collins, M. P., Background of the General Method
of Shear Design in the 1994 CSA-A23.3 Standard, Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering, V. 26, No. 6, 1999, pp. 827-839.
8. Mitchell, D., and Collins, M. P., Diagonal Compression Field Theory
A Rational Model for Structural Concrete in Pure Torsion, ACI JOURNAL,
Proceedings V. 71, No. 8, Aug. 1974, pp. 396-408.
9. Onsongo, W. M., The Diagonal Compression Field Theory for
Reinforced Concrete Beams Subjected to Combined Torsion, Flexure, and
Axial Load, PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1978, 246 pp.
10. Rahal, K. N., and Collins, M. P., Analysis of Sections Subjected to
Combined Shear and TorsionA Theoretical Model, ACI Structural Journal, V. 92, No. 4, July-Aug. 1995, pp. 459-469.
11. Mardukhi, J., The Behavior of Uniformly Prestressed Concrete Box
Beams in Combined Torsion and Bending, MASc thesis, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1974,
73 pp.
12. Vecchio, F. J., and Selby, R. G., Towards Compression Field Analysis
of Reinforced Concrete Solids, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE,
V. 118, No. 6, pp. 1740-1758.
13. Selby, R. G., and Vecchio, F. J., Non-Linear Finite Element Analysis
of Reinforced Concrete Solids, MASc thesis, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, 1990.
14. Selby, R. G., and Vecchio, F. J., Three-Dimensional Constitutive
Relations for Reinforced Concrete, Publication No. 93-02, Department
of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada,
Nov. 1993.
165