49

contribution in the transition state that the value of ~ may be used

as an approximation of the shear strength of reinforced concrete beams
without web reinforcement prior to diagonal cracking. Thus, this
constitutes a safe lower bound approximation for the concrete
contribution in the uncracked state.
In Fig. 2.13b, the concrete diagonal tensile strength vcr is
influenced by the factor K. Thl.irlimann (24) suggests a value of
(1/3)v
max
as the limiting value between the uncracked and the transition
state. This implies that a value of K equal to 2 should be used.
However, based on the evaluation of the concrete contribution in
the uncracked and transition states conducted in Sec. 3.8 of Report
248-3 for the case of prestressed levels in various members, it seems
more appropriate to maintain the level of K as a variable function of
the prestress level in the cross section, such that K is then evaluated
using Eq. 2.48 but should not be taken larger than 2.0. Shown in Figs.
2.14a and 2.14b are the proposed additional concrete contributions in
the uncracked and transition states for reinforced and prestressed
concrete members. These values are based on the evaluation of test
results conducted in Sec. 3.8 of Report 248-3 and are slightly more
conservative than the values proposed in the CEB Refined Method and the
Swiss Code, but have the same general form. These values may be used
for combined actions of shear and torsion but the contribution to each
action must be prorated and the sum of these contributions must not
exceed the additional concrete contribution.
50
Vc= .
uncracked transition Full truss
Vc:-
L
(6.jfc-V)
2
(a) Reinforced concrete one-way members
Vc
uncracked transition Full truss
K (2-v% ) 1-----_
vc=t [(2+ K)2.jk-V]
1.0s K S 2.0
(b) Prestressed concrete one-way members
Fig. 2.14 Proposed concrete contribution in the
uncracked and transition states
v
v
51
As previously mentioned in Report 248-3, the introduction of
other regulatory provisions such as requirement of a minimum amount of
web reinforcement tend to obscure the actual additional concrete
contribution to the shear strength of the member in the uncracked and
transition states. However, this confusion can be avoided by
recognizing that the minimum amount of web reinforcement requirement is
introduced for a completely different purpose. Such reinforcement
greatly increases ductility and provides toughness and warning. It
serves as a backup to the concrete tensile contribution in lightly
loaded members.
2.3.1 Reevaluation of the Truss Model Predictions with the
Additional Proposed Concrete Contribution in the Transition State. The
proposed concrete contribution in the uncracked state, thoroughly
evaluated in Sec. 3.8 of Report 248-3, was shown to be an adequate and
safe value for members with no web reinforcement.
Since the concrete contribution is set equal to zero for members
in the full truss state, the evaluation of the accuracy of the truss
model predicted ultimate strength has been already conducted in Report
248-3 for those members in the full truss state at failure.
The eval uation of members in the transition state is conducted
in the following manner:
1. The shearing stresses due to shear and/or torsion are computed
for each member using Eqs. 2.45 and 2.46 with the respective
test values of the shear force and/or the torsional moment.
2. The computed value of the shearing stress at failure is then
compared with the proposed concrete contribution shown in Fig.
2.14 and the additional concrete contribution to the shear
strength of the member is computed. For the case of combined
52
actions, the shear stresses due to shear and torsion are added
and the concrete contribution v
c
' is evaluated. The concrete
contribution for the case of combined shear and torsion is then
prorated part to shear and part to torsion as a function of the
relative shear and torsional stresses acting on the member.
3. The computed values of shear force and/or torsional moment
resisted by the concrete, computed in step 2, are then
subtracted from the test values of the shear force and/or
torsional moment. With these reduced values of shear and/or
torsion an evaluation procedure similar to the one used in Secs.
3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 of Report 248-3 for the cases of torsion,
torsion-bend ing, torsion- bend ing-shear, and bend ing-shear is
then ut i11 zed so as to show that in fact by usi ng the proposed
values of the concrete contribution for reinforced and
prestressed concrete members failing in the transition state the
truss model design approach yields adequate safe results.
The analysis conducted in Chapter 3 of Report 248-3 on test data
of 104 members subjected to pure torsion revealed that all of them were
in the full truss state. Thus, the results presented in Sec. 3.2 and
3.7 of Report 248-3 remain the same.
In the case of combined torsion and bending, the analysis of the
test data from 54 specimens shown in Secs. 3.3 and 3.7 of Report 248-3
revealed that 18 specimens were in the transition state. The results of
the evaluation of the truss model including the concrete contribution in
the transition state are shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
As can be seen by the values of the mean and standard deviation
of the dispersion index I, the truss model together with the proposed
values of the concrete contribution in the transition state are in
excellent agreement in the case of members subjected to torsion and
bending failing in the transition state.
In the case of combined torsion-bending-shear, the test data of
the 80 specimens analyzed in Secs. 3.4 and 3.7 of Report 248-3 was