Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No.

2, 309-319, June 2005 / Copyright 2005 Japan Concrete Institute 309

Scientific paper

Prediction of Behavior and Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete

Beams Using Nonlinear Strut-Tie Model Approach
Young Mook Yun1 and Chang-Geun Cho2

Received 8 November 2004, accepted 15 February 2005

Abstract
Numerous analytical techniques, analytical theories, and analytical/design models have been proposed for the rational
shear designs and shear behavior examinations of reinforced concrete beams. However, since shear design regulations
in design codes are primarily based on experimental observations along with the elastic beam theory, the regulations
may not accurately represent the true shear behavior of general reinforced concrete beams. Accordingly, much attention
has been focused on the development of a general and consistent model or method. In this study, the strength and be-
havior of four reinforced concrete beams tested to shear failure were estimated using a nonlinear strut-tie model ap-
proach. Based on the strut-tie model analysis results, the validity of the nonlinear strut-tie model approach in the rea-
sonable design of reinforced concrete beams and in the accurate examination of many shear-related failure phenomena
was evaluated.

1. Introduction ment of rational analytical and design approaches appli-

In spite of many decades of experimental research and
the use of sophisticated analytical tools including the
tooth analogy (Kani 1964), the arch analogy (ASCE-ACI
1973), fracture mechanics (Hillerborg et al. 1976), the
compression field theory (Collins 1978), and the truss
analogy (Ritter 1899; Morsch 1920; CEB-FIP 1978; Ra-
mirez & Breen 1991), the shear failure mechanisms of
reinforced concrete beams have not yet been perfectly
understood. Recently, nonlinear finite element analysis
techniques with great enhancement of computer tools
both in hardware and software have also been employed
in the analysis and design of reinforced concrete beams.
In addition, the shear design concepts of structural con-
crete in many design specifications have been based
mainly on the experimental and analytical data derived
from the elastic beam theory. Thus, the design concepts
cannot rationally reflect the true shear behavior of rein-
forced concrete beams in structural design. To improve
the shortcomings of the design specifications the tempo-
rary and restricted methods that were highly dependent
on the formulas directly fitted from the test results of
experimental models have been adopted in current design
codes. However, since the experimental models were
obtained from some particular types of specimens with
many limitations as laboratory works, their experimental
results could not be utilized in common practices all the
time. Therefore, attention has been given to the develop-
1 mate limit states: the occurrence of a nodal zone failure
Associate Prof., Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
E-mail:ymyun@knu.ac.kr
2
Research Associate, Research Institute of Disaster
Prevention, Kyungpook National University, Daegu,
Korea.
cable to general structural concrete members.
One of the rational approaches is the use of strut-tie
models (Schlaich et al. 1987; MacGregor 1997; Tjhin &
Kuchma 2002). In this approach, a portion of a structure
or whole structure is modeled as a system of struts and
ties. The struts represent compressive forces in the con-
crete and the ties tension forces in the reinforcing bars. A
force path composed of struts and ties is visualized and
reinforcing bar requirements and concrete compressive
stresses are determined. This approach promotes a better
understanding of force transfer mechanisms and im-
proves the designers ability to handle unusual circum-
stances. In the current study, the strength and nonlinear
behavior of four reinforced concrete deep beams tested to
shear failure were evaluated using the nonlinear strut-tie
model approach (Yun 2000a) that is known to overcome
the limitations of the conventional strut-tie model ap-
proaches. By comparing the analytical results obtained
from the nonlinear strut-tie model approach with the ex-
perimental results of the four reinforced concrete deep
beams, the capability and effectiveness of the nonlinear
strut-tie model approach in explaining the ultimate fail-
ure phenomena and predicting the design strength of
structural concrete was examined. In the analysis of the
beams using the nonlinear strut-tie model approach, the
nonlinear load-strain and load-deflection relationships,
including load redistribution mechanisms, were obtained
from the finite element analysis of the selected beam
strut-tie models, and the ultimate strengths of the beams
were determined using the following criteria for the ulti-
mechanism, the instability of a selected strut-tie model
due to a strength reduction of struts and ties during the
incremental loading steps, and the violation of strut-tie
models geometric compatibility condition. Since the
cross-sectional areas of struts and the shapes of nodal
310 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005
zones in the strut-tie models change according to the in-
ternal member forces of struts and ties, an iterative algo-
rithm is required in the strut-tie model analysis of the
beams. Therefore, an interactive computer graphic pro-
gram NL-STM (Yun 2000b) implementing the iterative
algorithm was used in this study.
2. Nonlinear strut-tie model approach
Selecting a strut-tie model using the conventional strut-
tie model approach is an iterative process. In this process,
the first step is to select the initial truss model. The next
step is to calculate the effective strengths, cross-sectional
areas, and the member forces of struts and ties. The last
step is to examine the conditions of geometric compati-
bility and nodal zone strength of the strut-tie model. If
the cross-sectional areas of two almost parallel concrete
struts placed side by side overlap with each other or the
dimensioned strut-tie model is not compatible with the
actual size of the structural concrete, the strut-tie model
itself and/or its geometry must be modified and the pro-
cedure repeated until a satisfactory solution is obtained.
Selecting a strut-tie model using the nonlinear strut-tie
model approach is also an iterative process. However,
unlike the conventional strut-tie model approach, the
nonlinear strut-tie model approach incorporates nonlinear
techniques in the selection, analysis, and verification
processes of a strut-tie model to eliminate the limitations
of the conventional strut-tie model approaches relating to
the behavior and strength predictions of structural con-
crete and the design of structural concrete which experi-
ences nonlinear behavior. The approach also incorporates
Fig. 1 Algorithm for ultimate strut-tie model analysis of structural concrete.
additional positioning of concrete ties and steel struts at
the locations of steel ties and concrete struts, respectively.
A flow chart for the ultimate strut-tie model analysis of
structural concrete using the nonlinear strut-tie model
approach is shown in Fig. 1. Detailed descriptions of the
approach will be introduced in the ultimate strength
analysis of the four reinforced concrete beams tested to
shear failure.
3. Summary of previous shear test results
Four rectangular reinforced concrete beams with differ-
ent stirrup detailing, fabricated and tested to failure at
Purdue University (Anderson & Ramirez 1987), were
considered in this study. The shear span to depth ratio of
the beams was equal to 2.15. The tensile reinforcement
consisted of 2D32 (or 2D29) and 2D25 deformed bars
arranged in two layers, and the compressive reinforce-
ment consisted of 2D25 deformed bars. The detailing for
the specimens and the strain gage locations on the stirrup
legs and longitudinal bars are shown in Fig. 2. The de-
tailed information on the test specimens is given in Table 1.
In Beam 1, flexural cracks occurred in the region of
constant moment at a load of 44.5kN. At a load of
177.9kN both flexural-shear cracks formed and web-
shear cracks developed at 222kN. Failure occurred at a
load of 478.6kN when the web-shear crack extended
from the support to near the loading plate. Figure 3(a)
shows the detailed crack pattern at failure. The shaded
region near the applied load represents the concrete fail-
ure zone. In Beam 3, flexural cracks occurred in the con-
stant moment region at a load of 44.5kN. At a load of
 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005 311

Fig. 2 Detailing of beam specimens.

Table 1 Material information of beam specimens.

Beams Top Steel Bottom Steel Web Steel
(fc) Bars E0 fy Bars E0 fy Stirrup E0 fy
2D25 203.4 427.5
1(39.0) 2D25 203.4 427.5 D10 206.8 534.3
2D32 189.6 499.9
2D25 203.4 427.5
3(42.8) 2D25 203.4 427.5 D10 206.8 534.3
2D32 189.6 499.9
2D25 203.4 427.5
8(33.9) 2D25 203.4 427.5 D10 206.8 534.3
2D32 189.6 499.9
2D25 193.1 517.1
10(31.0) 2D25 193.1 517.1 D10 206.8 544.7
2D29 189.6 496.4
Units for Eo, fcand fy: MPa103, MPa and MPa

177.9kN both flexural-shear and web-shear cracks devel-
oped. Failure occurred at a load of 511.1kN when the
inclined crack extended from the support to near the
loading plate. Figure 3(b) shows the detailed crack pat-
tern at failure. In Beam 8, flexural cracks occurred in the
constant moment region at a load of 44.5kN. At a load of
133.4kN both flexural-shear and web-shear cracks devel-
oped. Failure occurred prematurely at a load of 359.9kN
when the 2D25 compressive longitudinal bars buckled
and cracked the concrete in the flexural compression
zone near the concentrated load. Figure 3(c) shows the
detailed crack pattern at failure. In Beam 10, the initial
flexural crack formed at a load of 89.0kN. At reaching a
load of 133kN, some flexural shear and web-shear cracks
occurred. The failure of Beam 10 occurred at a load of
386.6kN when the inclined crack extended from the sup-
port to near the loading plate. Figure 3(d) shows the de-
tailed crack pattern at failure.
4. Strut-tie model prediction of test results
4.1 Selection of strut-tie model
In selecting the strut-tie models of the four beams, the
locations of the steel reinforcements were used to deter-
mine the locations of the steel ties, while the directions of
compressive principal stresses were used to determine
the locations and orientations of concrete struts. The fi-
nite element analysis of Beam 1 considering it as plain
concrete indicated that each point load was carried to the
nearest support by a combination of a single diagonal
strut and arch action due to the presence of stirrup rein-
forcements, as shown in Fig. 4. The arch was constructed
using multiple concrete struts following the trajectories
of compressive principal stresses. The flexural compres-
sive zone between the point loads was modeled as a hori-
zontal concrete strut. The shear spans were divided into
three equal zones and transverse steel ties were placed at
the center of each zone representing the stirrup rein-
312 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005
(a) Beam 1
(b) Beam 3
(c) Beam 8
(d) Beam 10
Fig. 3 Detailed crack plots for beam specimens.
forcements in that zone. Longitudinal steel ties were
placed at the centroid of longitudinal reinforcements.
Additionally a steel strut representing the compressive
flexural reinforcements was placed at the location of the
horizontal concrete strut in the flexural compression zone.
Additionally longitudinal concrete ties were placed at the
locations of the longitudinal steel ties since they could
resist tensile forces before they were cracked. The struts
crossing each other in the center of the model, with neg-
ligible stiffness, were placed to stabilize the model. Fig-
ure 5 shows the selected strut-tie model for the beam.
The shapes of the strut-tie models for the other beams for
the evaluation of the behaviors and shear strengths were
very similar to the Beam 1 strut-tie model. The additional
concrete ties and steel strut were also considered in the
models.
4.2 Effective strengths and cross-sectional ar-
eas of struts and ties
The effective strengths of the concrete struts were ini-
tially determined using the procedure proposed by Yun
and Ramirez (1996), wherein the principal stress ratios of
the finite elements modeling the struts and deviation an-
gles between struts and compressive principal stress tra-
jectories were implemented, and then later modified us-
ing the procedure proposed by Yun and Choi (2001),
wherein the degree of confinement in relation to the rein-
forcement details was considered. Since the confining
forces of tensile reinforcing bars act passively on the
beams, the effective strength of concrete struts located at
confining regions can be expected to increase. Table 2
lists the effective strengths of concrete struts of the Beam
1 strut-tie model subjected to its ultimate load. The effec-
tive strengths of the concrete struts of the strut-tie models
for the other beams were determined by the same way.
The tensile strength of concrete was taken as the effec-
tive strength of concrete ties and the yield strength of
steel was taken as the effective strength of steel ties and
steel struts. After fixing the cross-sectional area of the
steel strut that was additionally placed at the location of
the horizontal concrete strut in the flexural compression
zone, the cross-sectional areas of the concrete struts,
Astrut , and steel ties, Atie , in the selected strut-tie models
were determined using the algorithm (Yun 2000a) that
requires only a few iterations within the effective
strength limits to satisfy the following conditions.
Prs s Astrut f s (1a)
Prt t Atie f t (1b)
where Prs and Prt are respectively the design forces of
struts and ties, f s and f t are respectively the effective
strengths of struts and ties, and s and t are respec-
tively the strength reduction factors of struts and ties
which are equal to 1 in the strut-tie model analysis of
concrete members. The structural analysis of the strut-tie
model itself, the cross-sectional areas of the steel ties
determined previously were set as the same as the areas
of reinforcing bars located at the effective width of each
steel tie. The cross-sectional area of a concrete tie was
taken from the circular concrete areas around the steel
reinforcing bars, as shown in Fig. 6. The circular areas
should not overlap with each other. Table 3 lists the
cross-sectional areas of struts and ties of the beam strut-
tie models subjected to their ultimate loads. Figure 7
shows the dimensioned geometry of the Beam 1 strut-tie
model subjected to its ultimate load.
 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005 313

Table 2 Coefficient of effective strut strength v (=fcs/fc) in beam 1 strut-tie model subject to experimental failure load.
Strut No. v Strut No. v
8,15 0.97 23,27 0.99
9,14 0.96 24,26 1.00
10,13 0.92 25 1.00
11,12 0.52 29,30 0.96
22,28 0.95 - -
fc: uniaxial concrete strength

Fig. 4 Compressive principal stress flow of beam 1 subject to experimental failure load.

Fig. 5 Strut-tie model for beam 1 subject to experimental failure load.

x>y x>y>z
Fig. 6 Effective cross-sectional area of concrete tie.

4.3 Nonlinear analysis of strut-tie model itself figure was formulated as (Saenz 1964):
To represent the complete nonlinear behavior and redis-
tribution of internal forces in the reinforced concrete E0
f = (2)
beams, the external loads were applied incrementally E0
1 + ( 2) + ( )2
with twenty loading steps in the finite element material Es cs cs
nonlinear analysis of the strut-tie model itself. At each
loading step, the tangent modulus of a concrete strut was where Eo and Es are the initial and secant tangent
computed from its nonlinear stress-strain relationship modulus of elasticity respectively. The stress-strain rela-
employing the effective strength f cs and its correspond- tionship of a steel tie was assumed to be bi-linear model-
ing peak strain cs of a concrete strut, as shown in Fig. ing the elastic and strain-hardening plastic stress-strain
8(a). The shape of the stress-strain relationship in the relationship of the steel bar, as shown in Fig. 8(b). The
314 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005

Table 3 Cross-sectional areas of struts and ties in beam strut-tie models subject to experimental failure loads.
Beams
1 3 8 10
Ele. No.
1-7 23.1 23.1 23.1 23.1
8,15 83.8 82.6 75.5 92.6
9,14 95.5 94.2 85.8 105.0
10,13 90.92 89.0 81.4 99.2
11,12 130.2 128.8 116.2 142.0
22,28 38.3 37.8 34.3 41.8
23,27 99.7 98.0 89.9 110.2
24,26 152.2 149.5 137.4 168.5
25 217.8 214.7 131.6 176.6
29,30 139.8 134.8 114.1 124.7
33** 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2
34*-40* 45.6 45.6 45.6 45.6
Unit for area: cm2; *: concrete tie; **: steel strut

Fig. 7 Dimensioned strut-tie model for beam 1 subject to experimental failure load.

(a) Concrete Strut (b) Steel Tie (c) Concrete Tie

Fig. 8 Assumed stress-strain relationships of concrete strut, steel tie, and concrete tie.

tangent modulus of a steel tie before and after yielding
was obtained from the slopes of two straight lines. When
the stresses of a strut and a tie reached respectively its
peak stress f cs and its ultimate stress f ult , it was as-
sumed that the stiffness of the strut and the tie became so
small that the strut and the tie could not carry further
resisting forces. For a concrete tie, the tensile stress-
strain fracture relationship, as shown in Fig. 8(c), was
employed to represent the cracking phenomenon. After
perpendicular cracking in a concrete tie, the tensile stress
of the concrete tie releases to zero. The incremental load-
ing step in which a perpendicular crack occurs in a con-
crete tie was computed by checking the stress state of the
plane finite elements modeling the concrete tie. The
stress state was determined using the finite element mate-
rial nonlinear analysis of the concrete member consid-
ered as the plane plain concrete.
According to the results of the finite element material
nonlinear analyses of the strut-tie model themselves, the
two load transfer mechanisms, the arch action mecha-
nism constructed by the combination of the vertical steel
ties representing the stirrups and multiple concrete struts
following the compressive principal stress trajectories
and the single diagonal strut mechanism constructed by
the main diagonal strut which connects the loading points
to the supports, were effective in carrying the applied
load prior to the yielding of the stirrups. In Beam 1, stir-
rup ties 17 and 20 yielded when the external load reached
 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005 315

at 407.0kN. When a load of 450.1kN, the main diagonal
struts 29 and 30 reached their peak stresses, and the stiff-
ness of the struts was so small that those struts could not
carry any additional load at the subsequent loading steps.
In contrast, the arch struts with yielded stirrups continued
to carry the load up to failure. Figure 9 shows the strain
behaviors of the longitudinal tensile reinforcements in
the beams. The strain behaviors evaluated by the nonlin-
ear strut-tie model approach compared well with the ex-
perimental results. It is understood that the reason for the
nonlinear load-strain relationships is the redistribution of
internal forces in the strut-tie models caused not only by
the inelastic behavior according to the nonlinear stress-
strain relationships of steel ties and concrete struts, but
also by the inability to resist additional loads for the main
diagonal struts and the concrete ties after they reach their
peak compressive and tensile strains, respectively.
4.4 Strength verification of nodal zone
Despite the advantages of the strut-tie model approach,
portions of them lack adequate definition and have not
been extensively verified for use in designs. One of the
specific areas in which further research is required is
nodal zones. Even though nodal zones are critical parts
of a strut-tie model, they are not fully understood as yet.
Before the strut-tie model approach can be practically
implemented to various regions of structural concrete,
aproper way of checking the strength limits of nodal
zones to allow safe transfer of strut and tie forces through
nodal zones must be established.
In this study, the bearing capacities of the nodal zones
in the beam strut-tie models were verified using finite
element material nonlinear analyses of the nodal zones
considering them as plain plane concretes with the failure
criteria incorporating the different state of stresses (Yun
& Ramirez 1996; Yun 2000a). The approaches for evalu-
ating the safety and bearing capacity of nodal zones in a
strut-tie model up to present time, which check the con-
crete compressive stresses in the nodal zone boundaries,
do not ensure the safety of nodal zones. On the contrary,
the present approach has advantages over the other ap-
proaches in that it permits us to examine the nodal zone
strength more accurately.
In the finite element material nonlinear analysis, the

600 600

500 500

400 400
Load (kN)
Load (kN)

300 300

200 Test 200 Evaluated

Evaluated Test
100 100

0 0
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Steel Strain(mm/1000mm) Steel Strain(mm/1000mm)

(a) Beam 1, Gage 17 (b) Beam 3, Gage 17

500 500

400 400

300 300
Load (kN)

Load (kN)

200 Evaluated 200 Evaluated

Test Test

100 100

0 0
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Steel Strain(mm/1000mm) Steel Strain(mm/1000mm)

(c) Beam 8, Gage 16 (d) Beam 10, Gage 16

Fig. 9 Strain behaviors of steel in beams.

316 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005

concept of equivalent uniaxial strain, hypo-elastic and the cantilever regions should not occur and the angle
incremental orthotropic stress-strain constitutive model, between neighboring nodal zone boundaries should not
smeared cracking model, and tensile stress-strain-fracture be an obtuse angle, following the suggestion of Yun
relation were employed. In the finite element modeling, (2001). When the applied load reached 94% of the ex-
the effect of reinforcing bars (steel ties and/or steel perimental failure load, a crushing mechanism at the
struts) lying inside and/or outside a nodal zone on the nodal zone boundary constructed by the concrete strut 12
nodal zone behavior and strength was taken into account occurred, indicating the strut compression failure that
by considering the reinforcing bar forces as the passive occurred in the test along with a shear compression fail-
forces acting to the finite element nodes of the nodal ure. The directions of the compressive principal stress
zone. Steel tie and steel strut forces were imposed on the flows were close to those of the corresponding region of
finite element nodes of a nodal zone with consideration Beam 1, shown in Fig. 4. The maximum compressive
of reinforcing bar detailing and bar development length. principal stress at the nodal zone when the failure
Figure 10 illustrates the imposing method of a steel tie mechanism occurred was 1.14 f'c.
force in a nodal zone. The development length of a ten- Similarly, the bearing capacities of the nodal zones
sile reinforcing bar was measured from the boundary of under the loading plates for Beam 3, 8, and 10 were also
the nodal zone. The steel strut force was evenly distrib- verified. When the applied loads reached about 95%,
uted along the development length of the compressive 123%, and 99% of the experimental failure loads in
steel representing the steel strut. When a failure mecha- Beam 3, 8, and 10, respectively, the failure mechanisms
nism occurred at a nodal zone, it was assumed that the occurred. The maximum compressive principal stresses
nodal zone could not resist any more forces of struts and were 1.12 f'c, 1.03 f'c, and 1.12 f'c, respectively. The
ties framing into the node. The failure mechanism at a crushed concrete regions at the nodal zones predicted by
nodal zone was classified as two categories. The one was the present model were almost identical to the experi-
the crush of concrete at the boundary surface of the nodal mental results, and the flows of the compressive principal
zone as shown in Fig. 11(a), and the other was the pro- stresses at the nodal zones were also well agreed with
gressive cracking of concrete from one side to the oppo- those obtained from the finite element plane stress analy-
site side of the nodal zone as shown in Fig. 11(b). The sis of the beams.
failure criteria judging the crushing and cracking of con-
crete were determined from the biaxial failure envelope 4.5 Prediction of shear strength
of concrete. The criteria for the ultimate limit state in the nonlinear
Since the failure in Beam 1 occurred when the flexural strut-tie model approach were: (1) the occurrence of a
compression zone near the north point load was crushed nodal zone failure mechanism, (2) the instability of the
along with the web-shear crack spanning from the sup-
port to the concentrated load penetrating the compression
zone, the bearing capacity of the nodal zone under the
north point load was verified. After determining the con-
figuration of the nodal zone based on the dimensioned
strut-tie model that could carry the maximum load in a
stable status without the violation of the strut-tie models
geometric compatibility condition, the finite element grid
was laid out on the nodal zone. The axial forces in the
individual struts and applied loads were divided into their
components. These forces were then applied as concen-
trated loads at the nodes of the finite elements bordering
each strut and the loading plate. The axial force of the Fig. 10 Strut and tie forces imposed on finite element
steel strut placed at the flexural compression zone be- nodes of nodal zone.
tween the two point loads was evenly distributed to the
finite element nodes located along the development
length of the compressive steel representing the steel
strut. As boundary conditions, a hinge at the finite ele-
ment node where the center lines of struts and ties meet
and vertical rollers at the finite element nodes of the
nodal zone boundary constructed by the loading plate
were imposed. Figure 12 illustrates the configuration of
the nodal zone in Beam 1, the crushed shapes according
to load levels, and the compressive principal stress flows.
As shown in Fig. 12(a), the geometric shape of the nodal (a) Crushing failure (b) Cracking failure
zone, initially determined by connecting the intersection
points of the uniaxial stress fields, was modified so that Fig. 11 Failure mechanisms in nodal zones.
 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005
(a) Geometrical shape of nodal zone
(b) Finite element model
(c) Crushed and cracked shapes according to load levels.
(d) Compressive principal stress flows
Fig. 12 Strength evaluation of critical nodal zone in
beam 1.
selected strut-tie model due to the strength reduction of
struts and ties during the incremental loading steps, and
317
(3) the violation of the strut-tie models geometric com-
patibility condition. The failure strength of the four
beams predicted by the nonlinear strut-tie model ap-
proach, Zutty's formula (Zutty 1971), modified compres-
sive field theory (Vecchio & Collins 1986), EC2 code
(1991), CEB-FIP code (1993), and ACI 318-02 (2002)
are presented in Table 4.
5. Summary and conclusions
In the present study, the strength and nonlinear behavior
of four reinforced concrete deep beams tested to failure
with the ratio of the shear span to depth equal to 2.15
were evaluated using the nonlinear strut-tie model ap-
proach. The behavior of concrete beams in the ultimate
limit state was largely governed by two mechanisms in-
volving a single main diagonal strut between the concen-
trated load and the support and a series of arch struts
supported by vertical stirrups. According to the strut-tie
model analyses of the deep beams, both the arch struts
and single main diagonal strut were active in carrying the
applied load prior to the yielding of vertical steel ties
(stirrups). The main diagonal strut reached its ultimate
strength shortly after the yielding of the stirrups and did
not carry any further load at the subsequent loading steps.
Consequently, a second mechanism involving the arch
struts and other diagonal struts, which interacted with the
yielded stirrups, continued to carry additional load up to
failure. Prior to failure, the stirrups sustained a certain
amount of load after yielding, even though they experi-
enced a large strain history, and significant diagonal
cracks opened parallel to the main diagonal strut; this
then reduced the effective area of the main diagonal strut.
The failure mechanism consisting of a series of arch
struts was thus reasonable and more practical than the
single diagonal strut mechanism. The predicted results
showed that the behaviors of the longitudinal reinforce-
ments in the selected strut-tie models were in good
agreement with the test results. Likewise, the nonlinear
analyses of the strut-tie model themselves using the in-
cremental loading procedure explained clearly the load
transfer and load distribution mechanisms of the beam
strut-tie models.
The bearing capacities of the critical nodal zones were
verified following the procedure employed in the nonlin-
ear strut-tie model approach. In the approach, the nodal
zones were considered as plane stress problems whose
boundaries were initially determined by the intersection
of the stress fields framing into each node and modified
so that the cantilever regions should not occur and the
angle between neighboring nodal zone boundaries should
not be an obtuse angle. A steel tie was considered as the
equivalent strut acting on the node in an opposite direc-
tion to the tie. A steel tie could also be incorporated as
forces/unit length when developed through the node.
Finite element nonlinear analysis of the plain concrete
nodal zone was then conducted until the nodal zone be-
came unstable due to the development of a failure
318 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005

Table 4 Predicted shear capacity of beams.

(a) Predicted by nonlinear strut-tie model approach
Criteria for Determining Ultimate Strength Ppredicted
Beams (*)/Ptest, (**)
SS GC NS Ptest
1 1.45, GC - - 0.94
3 1.40, SS - - 0.95
8 1.70, GC - - 1.23
10 1.45, GC - - 0.99
(*): Maximum load that can be applied to beam strut-tie models; **: Cause for not exceeding (*); SS:
Structural Stability; GC: Geometrical Compatibility; NS: Nodal Zone Strength; STM = strut-tie model

(b) Comparison
Vpredicted / Vtest
Vtest
Beams Zsutty MCFT EC2 CEB-FIP ACI* Current
(kN)
[20] [14] [7] [6] [1] Approach
1 478.6 0.87 0.74 1.07 1.06 0.77 0.94
3 511.1 0.82 0.69 1.03 1.04 0.73 0.95
8 359.9 1.13 1.00 1.35 1.32 1.01 1.23
10 386.6 1.03 0.92 1.21 1.17 0.93 0.99
*: detailed equation for nominal shear strength of concrete was used.

mechanism. The results of nodal zone analyses showed
that the failure modes of the critical nodal zones were
similar to the test results, indicating that the procedure
implemented in the nonlinear strut-tie model approach
was reasonable.
The ultimate strengths of the reinforced concrete deep
beams were predicted using the nonlinear strut-tie model
approach in which the strengths of the beams were de-
termined by employing three ultimate limit state criteria:
the occurrence of a nodal zone failure mechanism, the
violation of strut-tie models stability condition, and the
violation of strut-tie models geometric compatibility
condition. The predicted shear capacities of the rein-
forced concrete deep beams determined using the nonlin-
ear strut-tie model approach compared better with the
test results than those determined using the Zuttys ex-
perimental equations, EC2 code, CEB-FIP code, the
modified compression field theory, and ACI 318-02 code.
In the case of Beam 8, in agreement with the results of
other methods, the shear strength of the beam predicted
using the nonlinear strut-tie model approach was higher
than the experimental failure strength determined by the
premature failure due to the buckling of longitudinal
compressive reinforcement. If there was no buckling of
the compressive reinforcement, the experimental failure
strength of Beam 8 should be higher since the compres-
sive strength of concrete in Beam 8 was higher than that
of Beam 10.
From the evaluation of the test results, it can be con-
cluded that the nonlinear strut-tie model approach can
provide simple and accurate solutions for a large number
of analysis situations by describing the essential aspects
of structural behavior and predicting the ultimate
strengths of structural concrete. It also allows for the
conceptual representation of the complex concrete and
reinforcing steel interactions, and permits the study of
localized effects through the bearing capacity verification
of nodal zones. The detailed framework provided by the
nonlinear strut-tie model approach for the evaluation of
the behavior and strength of reinforced concrete deep
beams is strong motivation for its application with other
reinforced concrete structural members.
References
American Concrete Institute. (2002). Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-02)
and Commentary (318R-02). American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
Anderson, N. S. and Ramirez, J. A. (1987). Effect of the
Detailing of Stirrup Reinforcement on the Ultimate
Strength and Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Members Failing in Shear. Publication No. CE-STR-
87-2, School of Civil Engineering, Purdue Univ.,
Indiana.
ASCE-ACI Committee 426. (1973). The Shear Strength
of Reinforced Concrete Members. ASCE Journal of
Structural Division, 99(6), 1091-1187.
Collins, M. P. (1978). Toward a Rational Theory for RC
Members in Shear. ASCE Journal of Structural
Division, 104(4), 649-666.
Comite Euro-International du Beton. (1978). Shear and
Torsion. CEB, Paris, CEB Bulletin 12.
Comite Euro-International du Beton (CEB) - Federation
International de la Precontrainte (FIP). (1993). Model
Code 1990, 1993, (MC90). Thomas Telford, London.
Eurocode No. 2. (1991). Design of Concrete Structures,
Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings.
Thomas Telford, London.
Hillerborg, A., Modeer, M. and Petersson, P. E. (1976).
Analysis of Crack Formation and Crack Growth in
Concrete by Means of Fracture Mechanics and Finite
Elements. Cement and Concrete Research, 6, 773-
782.
Kani, G. N. J. (1964). The Riddle of Shear Failure and
 Y. M. Yun and C-G. Cho / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 3, No. 2, 309-319, 2005
Its Solution. Journal of American Concrete Institute,
64(4), 441-467.
MacGregor, J. G. (1997). Reinforced Concrete -
Mechanics and Design. Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey.
Morsch, E. (1920). Der Eisenbetonbau-Seine Theorie
und Anwendung (Reinforced Concrete Construction-
Theory and Application). 5th Edition, Wittwer,
Stuttgart, Vol. 1, Part I.
Ramirez, J. A. and Breen, J. E. (1991). Evaluation of a
Modified Truss-Model Approach for Beams in Shear.
ACI Structural Journal, 88(5), 562-571.
Ritter, W. (1899). Die Bauweise Hennebique
(Hennebiques Construction Method). Schweizerische
Bauzeitung (Zurich), 17, 41-43, 49-52, 59-61.
Schlaich, J., Schaefer, K. and Jennewein, M. (1987).
Towards a Consistent Design of Structural Concrete.
Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, 32, 74-
150.
Saenz, L. P. (1964). Equation for the Stress-Strain Curve
of Concrete. Discussion of paper by P. Deasyi and S.
Kirshnan, Journal of American Concrete Institute, 61,
1229-1235.
Tjhin, T. N. and Kuchma, D. A. (2002). Computer-
Based Tools for Design by Strut-and-Tie Method:
Advances and Challenges. ACI Structural Journal,
319
99(5), 586-594.
Vecchio, F. J. and Collins, M. P. (1986). The Modified
Compression Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete
Elements Subjected to Shear. Journal of American
Concrete Institute, 83(2), 219-231.
Yun, Y. M. and Ramirez J. A. (1996). Strength of Struts
and Nodes in Strut-Tie Model. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, 122(1), 20-29.
Yun, Y. M. (2000a). Nonlinear Strut-Tie Model
Approach for Structural Concrete. ACI Structural
Journal, 97(4), 581-590.
Yun, Y. M. (2000b). Computer Graphics for Nonlinear
Strut-Tie Model Approach. Journal of Computing in
Civil Engineering, ASCE, 14(1), 127-133.
Yun, Y. M. and Choi, M. S. (2001). Evaluation of
AASHTO LRFD Specifications on Post-tensioned
Anchorage Zone. Journal of Korean Society of Civil
Engineers, 21(3), 317-330.
Yun, Y. M. (2001). Strut-Tie Model Approaches for
Analysis and Design of Structural Concrete. Lecture
Notes, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Kyungpook
National University, Daegu, Korea.
Zutty, T. C. (1971). Shear Strength Prediction for
Separate Categories of Simple Beam Tests. Journal of
American Concrete Institute, 68(2), 138-143.