High-Performance High-Strength Concrete: Design Recommendations

by B. Vijaya Rangan

igh-performance high-strength concrete (HPHSC) is defined as concrete that meets special performance and uniformity requirements which cannot always be achieved by using only the conventional materials and normal mixing, placing, and curing practices. 1 The performance requirements may include ease of placement and compaction without segregation, enhanced shortterm and long-term mechanical properties, high-early-age strength and long life in severe environments. HPHSC is usually proportioned with a low water-tocementitiousmaterials ratio and has a high compressive strength in the range of 50 to 100 MPa (7 to 15 ksi). The supplementary cementitious materials may include blast furnace slag, fly ash, or silica fume, which are used either as cement replacement or as additives to the concrete mixture. Considerable information is already available in the literature regarding HPHSC. 2-9 Several codes have design proposals to include HPHSC. 10-13 The aim of this paper is to review the existing information and to suggest certain proposals for the design of HPHSC beams, columns, and walls. These proposals cover concrete grades in the range of 20 to 100 MPa (3 to 15 ksi).

Ec = (3320 f' + 6900) (/2300)1.5 c

Eq. 1

where f c' is the cylinder compressive strength in MPa and is the density of concrete in kg/m3 . Eq. 1 is incorporated in the Canadian and New Zealand Standards.11,12 In the absence of measured values Eq. 1 is therefore recommended. Limited data on Poissons ratio of HPHSC indicate that a suitable value may be taken as 0.2. Tensile strength The tensile strength test data usually show a large scatter. A number of equations have been proposed in the literature. The following expressions given in the codes14,15 may be used to obtain lower bound estimates: Principal tensile strength = 0.4 f' c Flexural tensile strength = 0.6 f' c Eq. 2 where f ' is expressed in terms of MPa. c To allow for restrained shrinkage and temperature effects in members with large surface area such as slabs and walls, the flexural tensile strength may be taken as 0.3 fc' as rec ommended by the Canadian Standard.11 Shrinkage and creep Limited data available in the literature show that shrinkage of HPHSC is similar to other concretes. Therefore, the design data given in the codes may be used to estimate the final shrinkage strain of HPHSC.13,14 Limited data indicate that the creep coefficient (i.e., the ratio of creep strain to elastic strain) of HPHSC is significantly smaller than that of other concretes. More data are urgently needed to formulate design rules. Durability and specification A primary consideration in the utilization of HPHSC is the durability of concrete to resist aggressive environments. The minimum compressive strength and minimum cover requirements specified in codes alone are not sufficient to produce durable HPHSC mixes. Many other requirements, such as minimum and maximum cement content, maximum watercement ratio, aggregate quality, shrinkage limit, curing requirements, water permeability, and resistance against chemical attack, should be included in the formulation of a specification for HPHSC mixes. Field measurement of specified properties is essential to ensure that the required performance criteria are met.

Material properties
Mix proportions and curing The mix proportions of HPHSC vary depending on the availability of local materials. General guidelines on proportioning of HPHSC are available. 2,3 It is, however, necessary that the designers should work closely with the local ready-mix plants to produce the optimum mix required for their project. A great deal of cooperation and team effort between the engineer, owner, contractor, and concrete producer are essential for the successful application of HPHSC. Curing conditions have a significant influence on the properties of HPHSC. If HPHSC is allowed to dry out before completion of curing there is a degradation of its properties. An adequate curing regime for at least seven days is therefore recommended. Modulus of elasticity and Poissons ratio Extensive data on the modulus of elasticity Ec of HPHSC are reported elsewhere.1-5 Measured values show good correlation with the expression:

November1998

63

Fire performance Test data show that the fire performance of HPHSC is significantly different to that of other concretes especially between room temperature and about 450 C (840 F). 16,17 The current code provisions regarding fire protection may not be applicable in the case of HPHSC. It has been pointed out that HPHSC is more susceptible to explosive spalling failure and compressive strength loss when exposed to temperatures above 300 C (570 F) than other concretes. Insufficient information is available and more research is urgently needed.

Maximum tensile steel ratio If we take cu = 0.003, the depth of neutral axis at balanced failure d nb is given by: d nb = [0.003/(0.003 + y )]d Eq. 7 where y is the yield strain of reinforcing steel and d is the effective depth. When fy = 400 MPa (58 ksi), d nb = 0.60 d and f y = 500 MPa (73 ksi), dnb = 0.55d. To ensure a ductile failure, codes and standards limit the depth of neutral axis d n to a value smaller than dnb . In the Australian Standard, 14 d n is limited to a maximum of 0.4d. If we take d n = 0.4d, for a reinforced concrete rectangular section with tensile steel only, the maximum tensile steel ratio max is given by: max = 0.4 f c /f y ' Eq. 8 When f c' = 80 MPa (12 ksi), from Eq. 3 and 4, = 0.65 and = 0.75. For fy = 400 MPa (58 ksi), from Eq. 8 we get max = 0.039, or 3.9 percent. In other words, for HPHSC large values of max are possible. In the New Zealand Standard,12 max is taken as 0.025 when designing for seismic effects. Minimum tensile steel ratio To prevent a brittle failure at first cracking, the tensile steel ratio should not be less than a minimum. In the Canadian Standard, 11 the minimum area of tensile steel Ast min is given by: Ast min = 0.2 f ' b t D/fy c Eq. 9 where f ' is the cylinder compressive strength in MPa, bt is c the width of the tension zone of the section under consideration and D is the overall depth of beam. In the New Zealand Standard,12 Ast min is given by: Ast min /b w d = min = (0.25 f c )/f y ' Eq. 10 where b w is the width of the web. Both Eq. 9 and 10 are similar and acceptable. The format of Eq. 10 follows the current practice14,15 and this expression is therefore recommended. According to Eq. 10, when f c = ' 30 MPa (4 ksi), min = 1.4/fy and when fc' = 80 MPa (12 ksi), min = 2.2/fy . Shear strength The shear design provisions contained in the Australian Standard14 can be used for HPHSC beams. Accordingly, the ultimate shear strength V n of a reinforced concrete beam with vertical stirrups and carrying no axial force is given by: Vn = (Vc + Vs ) Vmax where: ' Vc = 1 b v d o (Ast f c /bv d o)1/3 1 = 1.1 (1.6 d o /1000) 1.1 Eq. 12 Eq. 13 Eq. 11

HPHSC beams
Flexural strength The flexural strength of a beam is customarily calculated by assuming a linear strain distribution over the depth of the section and considering the equilibrium of forces and moment.18 To apply this procedure, two factors require attention. First, the ultimate concrete compressive strain cu at which extreme compression face of the member reaches failure should be known. Secondly, the actual distribution of compressive stresses in the concrete should be defined. Although the ultimate compressive strain varies with concrete strengths, a value equal to 0.003 represents the test results satisfactorily. The scatter of test data does not justify a variation of the strain with the concrete compressive strength.2 This value is specified in several codes.12,14,15 In the Canadian Standard,11 cu is taken as 0.0035. In codes and standards, the actual distribution of compressive stresses in the concrete is replaced by an equivalent rectangular stress block. The stress block has a uniform stress of 0.85 f c' and a depth less than the neutral axis depth. It is generally accepted that the uniform stress should be smaller than 0.85 f ' for HPHSC. In the New Zealand Standard,12 the depth c of equivalent rectangular stress block is taken as times the depth of neutral axis and the uniform stress is taken as fc' where: = 0.85 0.008 ( f' 30) c within the limits 0.65 0.85 and = 0.85 0.004 ( f ' 55) c Eq. 4 within the limits 0.75 0.85. Note that = 0.85 when fc' 55 MPa (8 ksi) and = 0.75 when f c' 80 MPa (12 ksi). In the Canadian Standard,11 and are given by the following: = (0.85 0.0015 f ' ) 0.67 c = (0.97 0.0025 f c ) 0.67 ' Eq. 5 Eq. 6 Eq. 3

The minimum values of 0.67 do not apply until f c > 125 MPa ' (18 ksi). In Eq. 3 to 6, f ' must be substituted in MPa. c Beams designed in practice are under-reinforced and their flexural strength is controlled by the yield force in the tensile steel. The values of rectangular stress block parameters will therefore have insignificant effect on the design calculations. From this viewpoint, any of the above proposals will be suitable. Eq. 3 is similar to the expression given in the current codes14,15 and Eq. 4 reflects the observed test trend. Therefore Eq. 3 and 4 together with cu = 0.003 are recommended.
64

here, f' is the cylinder compressive strength in MPa, bv is the c effective width of web, d o is the distance from the extreme compression fiber of the concrete to the centroid of the outermost layer of tensile reinforcement, and Ast is the crosssectional area of longitudinal reinforcement in the tension zone and fully anchored at the cross section under consideration. Eq. 12 may be suitably modified for prestressed concrete beams or when there is axial force.14 The shear strength is limited to a maximum value: ' Vmax = 0.2 f c bv do Eq. 14
ConcreteInternational

Also, the shear force Vs resisted by vertical stirrups is given by: Vs = Asv f y (do /s) cot Eq. 15

where Asv is the area of vertical stirrups, s is the spacing of stirrups, and is the angle between the axis of the concrete compression strut and the longitudinal axis of the beam, taken to vary linearly from 30 deg when Vu = Vmin to 45 deg when Vu = Vmax . The area of minimum shear reinforcement may be taken as: 11 Asv.min = 0.06 f' sbv /fy c Eq. 16

Reinforcement details Test results available in the literature2,5,18 show that the nominal spacing of closed ties as specified in codes and standards may not be adequate for HPHSC columns. In the Canadian Standard, 11 the tie spacing in HPHSC columns is reduced by 25 percent when fc' > 50 MPa (7 ksi). Accordingly, the spacing of closed ties or the pitch of a helix used as lateral reinforcement in HPHSC columns should not exceed the smaller of 0.75 times the least lateral dimension of the cross section of the member or 12 times the smallest longitudinal bar diameter. The closed ties must be provided with 135 deg hooks. Other reinforcement details of HPHSC columns may be in accordance with the current practice given in the codes and standards. Columns in combined bending and compression The strength of a HPHSC column subjected to combined axial compression and bending moment when there is tension over part of the cross section is calculated by assuming a linear strain distribution over the depth of the section and considering the equilibrium of forces and moment. Similar to the case of beams, the failure concrete strain cu is taken as 0.003 and the compression zone concrete is represented by the equivalent rectangular stress block as defined by the parameters and given by Eq. 3 and 4. The strength interaction diagram for a HPHSC column is then obtained in the usual manner.18 The equivalent rectangular stress block concept may be valid up to the point on the strength interaction diagram when the depth of neutral axis d n is equal to the depth of extreme layer of tensile steel d o measured from the compression face. For d n > d o, the rectangular stress block concept is not applicable. This part of the interaction diagram is usually approximated by a straight line between pure axial load capacity (0, Po) and the point corresponding to d n = d o.18

Then, the shear strength of a beam that contains this minimum shear reinforcement, designated as Vmin , is given by: Vmin = Vc + 0.10 f' bv do c Eq. 17

where f c' is expressed in terms of MPa. The design requirement is: V u V n Eq. 18

where Vu is the design (factored) shear force and is the strength reduction factor. The shear strength calculated by the above design provisions has shown good correlation with the test strength of 147 HPHSC beams.19 The mean value of test/calculated strength was 1.22 with a coefficient of variation of 36 percent. The large coefficient of variation (see Fig. 1) was due to the considerable scatter in measured shear strength of test beams.19

HPHSC columns
Pure axial load capacity The axial load capacity Po under concentric compression is usually given by: Po = 0.85 f ' (Ag As ) + f y As c Eq. 19

P o = f' (Ag As) + fy As c

Eq. 20

where is given by Eq. 4. In Eq. 20, the factor replaces 0.85 in Eq. 19 to account for the observed reduction in the strength of HPHSC columns provided with nominal quantity of transverse reinforcement. A similar but more conservative approach is adopted by the Canadian Standard.11 Eq. 20 together with Eq. 4 is recommended. Note that when fc' 55 MPa (8 ksi), = 0.85 and Eq. 20 becomes Eq. 19.

Test shear capacity (kN)

where Ag is the gross concrete area and As is the area of longitudinal steel. Well-confined HPHSC columns may reach strength in excess of that predicted by Eq. 19. Extensive test data reported by Cusson and Paultre20 show that Eq. 19 may be acceptable provided that the column cross section contains at least eight evenly distributed longitudinal bars. In the New Zealand Standard,12 Po is taken as:

Predicted shear capacity (kN) Fig. 1 Correlation of shear strength of HPHSC beams predicted by the Australian Standard. 19

November1998

65

Slender columns Slender HPHSC columns may be proportioned using the moment magnifier method given in the codes and standards. However, the empirical expressions given in the codes and standards invariably result in very conservative designs especially for HPHSC columns. The procedure presented elsewhere is therefore recommended.9 This procedure has shown good correlation with 143 test column results, the mean value of test/calculated failure load was 1.08 with a coefficient of variation of 12 percent.21 According to this procedure, if Pu is the factored axial load at an equivalent eccentricity e then the co-existing magnified factored moment Me is given by: M e = Pu (e + y + cp) Eq. 21

is less than or equal to unity and is taken as negative when the column is bent in single curvature and positive for double curvature. 14,15 Also, the creep deflection cp of the column that is treated as an additional eccentricity in Eq. 21, may be calculated by: cp = tot e Eq. 28

where tot is the total deflection of the column due to sustained load and e is its elastic component. These deflections are given by the following expressions:22 tot = e/[(Pc /P ) 1] where: Pc = 2 ( EI/L e2) EI = Ec Ig /(1 + 0.8 c c) = [0.6 + (eb /8 e)] 1.0 Eq. 29 Eq. 30 Eq. 31 Eq. 32

In Eq. 21, the deflection y at failure may be approximated by the following: For Pu P b y = yb ( Po Pu )/( Po Pb ) For Pu Pb y = yo + (yb yo) (Pu /Pb ) where: yb = (0.003 + y) Le2 / 2d o yo = 1.6 y L2 /2 do e Eq. 24 Eq. 25 Eq. 23 Eq. 22

P is the axial thrust due to sustained loads, cc is the creep coefficient, and eb is the value of e corresponding to balanced failure in combined axial compression and bending. Also, e = e/[(Pc o /P ) 1] where Pco = 2 c g /L2 e Eq. 33 Eq. 34

Pb is the particular axial load strength at balanced failure conditions, is the strength reduction factor, P o is the axial load capacity under concentric compression given by Eq. 20, Le is the column effective length, y and fy are, respectively, the yield strain and the yield strength of reinforcing steel, and d o is the depth of extreme layer of tensile steel measured from the compression face. In Eq. 21, the equivalent eccentricity e may be taken as: e = km M 2 /Pu Eq. 26

where M2 is the value of the larger factored end moment, km is given by: k m = (0.6 0.4 M 1 /M 2 ) 0.4 Eq. 27

That is, e is the particular value of tot when cc = 0. Based on the preceding information, the following steps are proposed for the design of HPHSC slender columns in braced frames: Select a trial cross section for the column. Calculate the effective length L e of the column using the methods given in the codes.11-15 Calculate the eccentricity e by Eq. 26. Calculate the design strength interaction diagram for the column cross section using the equivalent rectangular stress block as defined by Eq. 3 and 4. Calculate cp by Eq. 28, 29, and 33 and y by Eq. 22 or 23. For these values of e, y , and cp, and given value of Pu , calculate Me by Eq. 21. Check whether the design strength of the column cross section is adequate to resist the combined effect of the factored actions Pu and Me . The preceding design method is illustrated below.

Design example
Fig. 2 is a cross section of a reinforced rectangular HPHSC column. All are Y28 bars (area of each bar = 620 mm 2 [1in. 2 ]) used in the Australian practice. The column is bent about the major axis and must carry an axial compressive (factored) force Pu = 5000 kN (1124kips) at an equivalent eccentricity e = 95 mm (3.74 in.). The effective length Le = 10 m (33 ft), sustained axial load P = 3000 kN (675 kips), Ec = 36,500 MPa (5.3 106 psi), and Es = 200 103 MPa (29 106 psi). Take fc' = 80 MPa (12 ksi), fy = 400MPa (58 ksi), y = 0.002, creep coefficient cc = 1.5 and strength reduction factor = 0.6. Check the adequacy of the cross section to carry the design loads. = 0.85 0.004(80 55) = 0.75 Eq. 4: = 0.85 0.008(80 30) Eq. 3: = 0.45 < 0.65, take = 0.65
ConcreteInternational

and M 1 is the smaller factored end moment. The ratio M1 /M2

Fig. 2 Example column.

66

Eq. 20:

Po = 0.75 80(450 600 14 620) + 14 620 400 = 19,151 kN (4309 kips) P o = 0.6 19,151 = 11,491 kN (2585 kips)

Balanced failure From Fig. 2, the depth of extreme layer of steel from compression face do = 540 mm (21.3 in.). For balanced failure, take that the steel in this layer just yields, i.e., 5 = y = 0.002. From strain diagram, d n = [0.003/(0.003 + 0.002)](540) = 324 mm (12.8 in.) In these calculations, compression is taken as positive. 1 = (0.003/324)(324 60) = 0.0024 > y , 1 = 400 MPa (58ksi) 2 = (0.003/324)(324 180) = 0.0013, 2 = 267 MPa (39ksi) 3 = (0.003/324)(324 300), 3 = 44 MPa (6.4 ksi) 4 = (0.003/324)(324 420), 4 = 178 MPa ( 26 ksi) 5 = 0.002, 5 = 400 MPa ( 58 ksi) From Fig. 2: Cc = 0.75 80 0.65 324 450 = 5686 kN (1278 kips) F1 = 4 620 400 = 992 kN (223 kips) F2 = 2 620 267 = 331 kN (74 kips) F3 = 2 620 44 = 55 kN (12 kips) F4 = 2 620 (178) = 221 kN (50 kips) F5 = 4 620 (400) = 992 kN (223 kips) Equilibrium of forces gives: Pb = 5686 + 992 + 331 + 55 221 992 = 5851 kN (1316 kips) Pb = 0.6 5851 = 3511 kN (790 kips) By summing moments about the plastic centroid: Mb = 5686(300 0.65 324/2) + 992(300 60) + 331(300 180) + 55(300 300) + (221)(300 420) + (992)(300 540) = 1107 + 238 + 40 + 0 + 27 + 238 = 1650 kNm (1218 ft-kips) Mb = 0.6 1650 = 990 kNm (730 ft-kips) eb = 1650/5851 = 282 mm (11.1 in.) Magnified moment M e Eq. 24: yb = (0.003 + 0.002)(10 103 )2/(2 540) = 94 mm (3.7 in.) Since Pu > Pb : Eq. 22: y = 94(11,491 5000)/(11,491 3511) = 76 mm (3.0 in.) Eq. 32: = 0.6 + (282/8 95) = 0.97 Eq. 31: EI = 0.97 36,500 112 450 6003 /1 + (0.8 1.5) = 130,355 10 9 mm 4 (313 106 in.4) Eq. 30: Pc = 2 130,355 109/(10,000)2 =12,866 kN (2895 kips) Eq. 29: tot = 95/[(12,866/3000) 1] = 29 mm (1.1 in.) Eq. 34: Pco = 0.97 2 36,500 112 450 6003/(10,000)2 = 28,305 kN (6369 kips) Eq. 33: e = 95/[(28,305/3000) 1] = 11 mm (0.4 in.) Eq. 28: cp = 29 11 = 18 mm (0.7 in.) Eq. 21: Me = 5000 (95 + 76 + 18) = 945 kNm (697 ft-kips) Adequacy of cross section It is necessary to check whether the cross section is adequate to carry the combined effect of axial thrust Pu = 5000 kN (1125 kips) and magnified moment Me = 945 kNm (697 ftkips). Note that Me /Pu = 945/5000 = 189 mm (7.4 in.) < eb; therefore the type of failure will be primary compression and
November1998

the neutral axis depth dn will be greater than the value calculated for balanced failure. Another point on the strength interaction diagram is calculated when d n = d o = 540 mm (21.2 in.). For this value of dn , from the strain diagram (Fig. 2): 1 = (0.003/540)(540 60) = 0.0027, 1 = 400 MPa (58 ksi) 2 = (0.003/540)(540 180) = 0.002, 2 = 400 MPa (58 ksi) 3 = (0.003/540)(540 300) = 0.00133, 3 = 267 MPa (39 ksi) 4 = (0.003/540)(540 420) = 0.00067, 4 = 133 MPa (19 ksi) 5 = 0, 5 = 0 From Fig. 2: Cc = 0.75 80 0.65 540 450 = 9477 kN (2132 kips) F1 = 4 620 400 = 992 kN (223 kips) F2 = 2 620 400 = 496 kN (112 kips) F3 = 2 620 267 = 331 kN (74 kips) F4 = 2 620 133 = 165 kN (37 kips) F5 = 0 Equilibrium of forces gives: Pn = 9477 + 992 + 496 + 331 + 165 + 0 = 11,461 kN (2579 kips) Pn = 0.6 11,461 = 6877 kN (1547 kips) By summing moments about the plastic centroid: Mn = 9477(300 0.65 540/2) + 992 (300 60) + 496 (300 180) + 331(300 300) + 165 (300 420) + 0 (300 540) = 1180 + 238 + 60 + 0 20 0 = 1458 kNm (1076 ft-kips) Mn = 0.6 1458 = 875 kNm (646 ft-kips) The strength interaction diagram between this point (Mn = 875, Pn = 6877) and the balanced failure point (Mb = 990, Pb = 3511) may be conservatively approximated as a straight line. The equation of this straight line is given by: (Mn 875) / (990 875) = (Pn 6877) / (3511 6877) or M n = 875 + (6877 Pn )/ 29.3 For this example column, if we substitute P n = Pu = 5000kN (1125 kips) in the above expression M n = 939 kNm (693ft-kips) which is close enough to Me = 945 kNm (697ft-kips). Therefore the column cross section shown in Fig. 2 is acceptable.

HPHSC walls
Flexure and shear strengths The flexural strength of HPHSC walls may be calculated by the usual theory of reinforced concrete sections subjected to combined bending moment and axial compression (see previous section on HPHSC columns). In an earlier paper, strength equations for the shear design of structural walls made of all grades of concrete were developed.23 The predictions from the equations correlated well with test results; the mean of test/calculated shear strengths was 1.09 with a coefficient of variation of 12 percent. Accordingly, the shear strength Vn of a wall is given by: Vn = twd w ( l f l y + Nu /Ag ) tan Vmax Eq. 35 where t w is the wall thickness, d w is the horizontal length of wall between centers of end elements, Lw is the length of wall, l = Al /tw L w , Al is the area of vertical steel in wall on both faces in length L w , fly is the yield strength of vertical steel, Nu is the design ultimate compressive load on wall, and Ag is the gross concrete area of wall cross section. In Eq. 35, is the inclination of concrete strut (failure plane) to the longitudinal axis given by:
67

tan = d w /Hw

Eq. 36

References
1. Russell, H. G., High-Performance Concrete From Buildings to Bridges, Concrete International, V. 19, No. 8, August 1997, pp. 62-63. 2. ACI Committee 363, State-of-the-Art Report on High-Strength Concrete, ACI Journal, V. 81, No. 4, July-August 1984, pp. 364 - 411. 3. FIP-CEB, High-Strength Concrete: State of the Report, FIP, London, 1990. 4. Choy, R. S., High-Strength Concrete, Technical Report No. TR/F112, Cement & Concrete Association of Australia, Sydney, May 1988. 5. High-Strength Concrete, Cement & Concrete Association of Australia, June 1992, 31 pp. 6. Lloyd, N. A., and Rangan, B. V., High-Strength Concrete: A Review, Research Report No. 1/93, School of Civil Engineering, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, January 1993, 132 pp. 7. ACI-ASCE Committee 441, High-Strength Concrete Columns: State of the Art, ACI Structural Journal, V. 94, No. 3, May-June 1997, pp. 323335. 8. Collins, M. P.; Mitchell, D.; and MacGregor, J. G., Structural Design Considerations for High-Strength Concrete, Concrete International, V. 15, No. 5, May 1993, pp. 27 - 34. 9. Rangan, B. V., Applications of High-Strength Concrete (HSC), Chapter 7, Large Concrete Buildings, Longman, 1996, pp. 158-182. 10. Norwegian Standards, Concrete Structures, Design Rules, NS3473, 1989. 11. Standards Council of Canada, Design of Concrete Structures for Buildings, CAN3-A23.3-M94, Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale (Toronto), Canada, December 1994, 199 pp. 12. Standards Association of New Zealand, Concrete Structures NZS 3101 - Part 1: Design, 1995. 13. Eurocode No. 2, Design of Concrete Structures. Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, Commission of the European Communities, ENV 1992 - 1.1, December 1991, 253 pp. 14. Australian Standard for Concrete Structures, AS 3600, Standards Australia, Sydney, 1994, 155 pp. 15. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-95) and Commentary (ACI 318R-95), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, 1995, 369 pp. 16. Phan, L. T., Fire Performance of High-Strength Concrete: A Report of the State-of-the-Art, Report No. NISTIR-5934, National Institute of Standards and Technology, December 1996, 105 pp. 17. Phan, L. T.; Carino, N. J.; Duthinh, D.; and Garboczi, E. (Editors), International Workshop on Fire Performance of High-Strength Concrete, NIST Special Publication 919, National Institute of Standards and Technology, September 1997, 164 pp. 18. Warner, R. F.; Rangan, B. V.; Hall, A. S.; and Faulkes, K. A., Concrete Structures, Addison Wesley Longman, Melbourne, 1998, 975 pp. 19. Kong, P. Y. L., and Rangan, B. V., Reinforced High-Strength Concrete (HSC) Beams in Shear, Australian Civil/Structural Engineering Transactions, V. CE 39, No. 1, 1997, pp. 43-50. 20. Cusson, D., and Paultre, P., High-Strength Concrete Columns Confined by Rectangular Ties, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 120, No. 3, March 1994, pp. 783-804. 21. Basappa Setty, R. H., and Rangan, B. V., Failure Load of HighStrength Concrete (HSC) Columns under Eccentric Compression, Australian Civil/Structural Engineering Transactions, V. CE39, No. 1, September 1996, pp. 19-30. 22. Rangan, B. V., Strength of Reinforced Concrete Slender Columns, ACI Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 1, January-February 1990, pp. 32-38. 23. Rangan, B. V., Rational Design of Structural Walls, Concrete International , V. 19, No. 11, November 1997, pp. 29-33. Received and reviewed under Institute publication policies.

within the limits 30 deg 60 deg, where Hw is the height of wall. To ensure yielding of vertical steel, the shear strength is limited to a maximum of Vmax given by: ' Vmax = k 3 f c tw d w sin cos /(1.14 + 0.68 cot2 ) Eq. 37 where k3 is the reduction factor to relate cylinder strength to in situ concrete strength and is given by:8 k 3 = 0.6 + (10/f ' ) 0.85 c Eq. 38 In addition to vertical steel, the wall must also contain horizontal steel. For adequate control of cracking due to restrained shrinkage and temperature effects, the minimum value of horizontal steel ratio is taken as 1.4/fsy, where fsy is the yield strength of horizontal steel. This value is recommended by the Australian Standard 14 for restrained slabs when moderate degree of control over cracking is required. It is also necessary to ensure that the vertical steel ratio l is not less than 0.0025 for crack control purposes. Furthermore, the spacing of bars should not exceed the lesser of 2.5tw or 500 mm (20 in.).14,15 The preceding design equations were illustrated by an example in Ref. 23.

Conclusions
Based on this brief state-of-the-art report of the design of high-performance high-strength concrete structural members, the following suggestions for HPHSC with compressive strength in the range of 20 to 100 MPa (3 to 15 ksi) are made: 1. The modulus of elasticity of HPHSC may be estimated using Eq. 1. 2. Eq. 2 provides a lower bound of tensile strength of HPHSC. 3. The final shrinkage strain of HPHSC may be estimated using the design data given in the codes.13,14 4. The final creep coefficient of HPHSC is significantly smaller than that of other concretes. 5. The flexural strength of HPHSC beams and columns may be calculated by taking the ultimate concrete compressive strain cu as 0.003 and by using an equivalent rectangular stress block for the compression zone concrete. The depth of the stress block is taken as times the neutral axis depth and the uniform stress is fc' , where and are given by Eq. 3 and 4. 6. The maximum and the minimum tensile steel ratios of HPHSC beams may be taken as given by Eq. 8 and 10. 7. The shear design provisions given in the Australian Standard14 may be used for HPHSC beams provided that the minimum area of shear reinforcement is taken as given by Eq. 16. 8. The pure axial load capacity of HPHSC columns may be calculated by Eq. 20 where is given by Eq. 4. 9. Slender HPHSC columns may be designed using the procedure described in the paper. 10. The shear strength of HPHSC walls may be calculated by Eq. 35.

ACI Fellow B. Vijaya Rangan is Professor and Head of Civil Engineering, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia. He is an associate member of several ACI Committees, including 435, Deflection of Concrete Building Structures; and Joint ACI-ASCE Committees 441, Reinforced Concrete Columns, and 445, Shear and Torsion. He is also a member of Standards Australia Committee on Concrete Structures.

68

ConcreteInternational