Stresses in Deep Beams Analyzed Using Finite Difference Method

STRESSES IN DEEP BEAMS
A.A. Mufti
by
Aftab A. Mufti, B.E.
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies

and Research in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Engineering.
Department of Civil Engineering,

McGill University,
Montreal.
July, 1965.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
ii
NOTATION
iii
CHAPTER 1.
INTRODUCTION
Object of Investigation
CHAPTER 2.
HISTORY
CHAPTER 3.
T'F ORY
Finite Difference Method
10
Stress Function at the Boundary and

Outside the Boundary
13
Stress Function Inside the Boundary
14
Relaxation Method
15
Application of the Finite Difference

Method to a Square Plate
17
Application of the Finite Difference

Method to a Rectangular Plate
25
The Effect of the Size of Net on Load

Representation
CHAPTER 4.
EXPERIMENT~
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
29
37
Steel Beam
37
Plastic Deep Beam
39
Concrete Deep
43
Bea~
Test Specimen
43
Material
43
Experimental Set Up
44
Position of Strain Gauges
45
Casting
47
Strain Gauges
47
Details of Reinforcement
48
Tests
50
Discussion of Resulta
52
Suggested Design Procedure for Reinforced

Concrete Deep Beams
70
Elastic Range
70
Ultimate Load
74
CHAPTER 5.
CONCLUSIONS
79
CHAPTER 6.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
81
Al?PENDICES
A.
STRAIN ENERGY METHOD TO DETERMINE STRESSES IN

DBEP BEAMS
82
B.
ELASTIC STABILITY OF DEEP BEAMS
92
C.
PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE
93
Compression
93
Tension
93
D.
PROPERTIES OF STEEL USED IN CONCRETE DEEP BEAMS
97
E.
PROPERTIES OF STEEL USED IN STEEL PLATE
99
F.
SAMPLE GALCULA.TIONS
REFERENCES
101
106
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to

the following:
Professer
~.
Gersovitz under whose direction and valuable
advice the work was carried out;

Professor L.G. Jaeger and Professor P.J. Harris for their
suggestions on the finite differenc method and programming the
FORTRAN, respectively;
Messers ~. Cockayne, P{McGrath, and
w.
Lambert, labor-
atory technicians1 for their generous help in carrying out the tests;
Mr. Saurindranath Majumdar, Graduate Student, for his

discussions and suggestions;
My wife, Janet, for her help in the preparation of
this thesis
.e
ii

by
Aftab A. Mufti
M.Eng.
Department of Civil
Engineering and
Applied Mechanics
ABSTRACT
Tests were carried out on
~eep
beams of steel and concrete.
The distribution of the horizontal stresses for each test has been
plotted and the expected magnitude at different points on a section
were calculated.
A theory based on the theory of elasticity, both for steel
and concrete, and ultimate load for the concrete has been developed.
The resulta have been compared with data obtained from experimenta.
The agreement between theoretical and experimental resulta is within
reasonable leeway.
iii
NOTATION
Rectangular co-ordinates
Airy stress function
Normal components of stress parallel to the x-y axes
Shearing stress component in rectangular co-ordinates
Unit elongation in the x-y directions
Unit shear strain
Modulus of elasticity
Modulus of rigidity
Poisson's ratio
Strain in concrete and steel
Ultimate strain in concrete
Working, yield, and ultimate stress
Steel area
Displacement components in x and y co-ordinates
Opera tor
l2.
Clear span
Thickness of beam
Vertical load
iv
a,b
Width of load V
Total tensile force
Total compressive force
Any positive integer
2L
Length of beam
Strain energy
\in
'L
~J c<~
.. ,..ocf Parameters
Constants corresponding to any value of n
Additional important symbols are defined where they are introduced.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
A deep bearn may be defined as one whose depth to span ratio is
;?-
1/ 2
Beams of such dimension, both in steel as well as concrete,
often arise in the construction of shear walls, anchor blocks in prestressed concrete beams, foundation walls, sides of bins, hipped plate
construction, etc.
In all these cases, design based on the elementary
theory of straight line distribution of bending stress in a horizontal

direction (known as Navier's Hypothesis) will be in serious error.
To
see how the limitation of Navier's Hypothesis is exceeded the principal

assumptions made in the above theory are considered.
These assumptions
are:
1
a)
Material obeys Hooke's Law.
b)
Plane section remains plane before and after bending, i.e.

the effect of shear on the section is neglected.
c)
The vertical stresses are neglected, i.e.

~:0.
*-'ll. "" -'Ed)
( 0"'-x.. -
'V <S'"(t)
The plane section rotates about a neutral axis, thus a

neutral plane exists.
Thus a linear distribution of strain with increasing distance

from the neutral plane is determined.
Experimenta show that it is quite
justifiable to make the above assumptions as far as shallow beams are

concerned.
It has been proved that vertical stresses in shallow beams
can be neglected at a distance which is not in the immediate vicinity

of the applied load.
of the beam.
This distance is determined to be twice the depth
2
2
For the warping of a cross section Timoshenko writes "A more

elaborate investigation of the problem shows that the warping of cross
sections also does not substantially affect the strain in longitudinal
fibres if a distributed load acts on the beam, and the shearing force
varies continuously along the beam.
In the case of concentrated loads
the stress distribution near the loads is more complicated, but this
deviation from the straight line law is of a local type."
It becomes clear that the assumptions are valid as far as
distribution is considered away from localized force.
Venant's Principle
In view of Saint
which states that "If the forces acting on a small
portion of the surface of an elastic body are replaced by another

statically equivalent system of forces acting on the same portion of the
surface, this redistribution of loading produces substantial changes in
the stresses locally, but has a negligible effect on the stresses at
distances which are large in comparison with the linear dimensions of
the surface on which the forces are changed. 11
The dimensions of deep
beams are such that to neglect the effect of vertical stresses will
cause serious errors.
Thus the theory applied to determine the stresses
in deep beams differs from that of straight line distribution.
However
this theory will be used for comparison.

A deep beam is essentially a plate loaded in its own plane,
being such it could occur as a plate with
1)
an infinite span with periodic loading,
2)
an infinite span with constant load,
3)
a finite span with periodic loading,
4)
a finite span with constant load.
It is cmparatively easy to satisfy boundary conditions in the .first two

cases.
In the last two cases boundary conditions are not so easily
satisfied.
Object of Investisation
The purpose of the investigation of stresses in deep beams was
to develop a theory for the design of reinforced concrete deep beams
within the elastic limit.
A theory was developed for an ideal elastic
material.
The application of the theory was carried out on a steel plate
loaded on the two ends of the top edge and supported at two points at
the bottom edge.
The theory was applied, with reasonable assumptions,
to reinforced concrete deep beams loaded at the centre of the top edge
and supported at the ends of the bottom edge.
The experimental and
theoretical results were compared and a design procedure was proposed,

The theoretical design of reinforced concrete deep beams based
on the ultimate load was experimentally investigated and a design procedure was developed.
4
CHAPTER 2
HIS TORY
The departure of stresses in deep beams from that of a straight
line distribution is well known.
In 1932 Dischenger
presented a paper
which dealt with stresses in a continuous deep beam using Fourier series.
The Portland Cement Association 5 adopted the same procedure and published
a paper dealing with the design of deep girders and added the solution
of simply supported deep beams.
beams with equal spans.
Bay
solved the case of continuous deep
With depth equal to or greater than the span,
he used the same solution as used by Filon7 and he concluded that a

continuous deep beam with a depth greater than its span bas the same
distribution of horizontal stresses as a beam whose depth is equal to
its span.
This confirms the resulta obtained by Dischenger.

Chow, Conway, and Winters
used the method of strain ertergy and

9
finite difference as first discussed by Bortsch and used by Bay and

H abet 10 in the analysis of a deep beam with simple supports.
The deep beam action in anchor blacks of prestressed conorete
beams was investigated by Geer 11 and he wrote "The builders of the John
R. Bridge near Detroit, Michigan, found that every test beam for that
project, when loaded to destruction, failed in tension in the end black

at its junction with the
I~section.
These beams were made of precast
blacks.
United States Navaf2research investigators found the same type
of failure in monolithic concrete beams.
Although the presence of
tension in the ends of prestressed concrete beams had been known for a
long time, these failures were of interest as they showed a marked departure from the pattern of stresses in theories and methods proposed by
authoritles in the field."
Lambert
13
performed experimenta on deep beams using the
photoelastic method, and Kaar

surface of a deep beam.
14
using strain gauges mounted on the
CHAPTER 3
THE ORY
The distribution of stresses in deep beams is considered in the

xy plane which coincides with the plane of the beam.
Since stresses in
the z direction are zero at the boundary and very small inside the
boundary, hence they are neglected.
fied by c::> x,
r:::sy,
The state of stress is then speci-
"Txy, and is known as plane stress.
lt is assumed
that these components do not vary with z.

Derivations of formulae of the theory of elasticity are given
below.
If an element of a beam is considered, then it has to satisfy
two conditions.
These conditions are:
a)
Equi librium
b)
Compatibility
These arise from the consideration that the beam is stationary

and every small element is continuous.
a)
Equilibrium
Body forces being constant can be dropped.
t
~
H---~
T~-t
~+?~?fiC. d.~
'et~
Resolving in x direction for unit thickness and simplifying
Similarly in y direction
(2.)
+
It is obvious now that there are two equations and three
unknowns.
Renee the problem is indeterminate and has to be solved by
consideration of displacements.
b)
Compatibility
, ~4
..!
--l
t o - - - - clx. + ll + U. d..~
direct strain
-t'Xt.~
l:>liC..
( p:,l- .2.)
= change in length
original length
cu.
~'X..
'?JI/
(4)
"bj
shear strain = change in right angle
+
Differentiating ( 5)
with respect to
::x. o.nc:l
~.
and substituting
~)
-.5 '1-x..'j
( 4)
and
~v
?Pu.
!)X.'ilj
-\-
~ :>l
'"t'l~'j
..St..,c..
")~ ~j
""4!1~~
(6~)
<!:tl o:;
"'t.:;
l>x.. ...
'')
Applying Hooke's Law
-t. :x...
-t.~
j_
_})~,:~)
(o-"lt.
E.
:-
( 0";:~ - \)a-x.)
"{"(.a
... -G1-
l'X.j
where
2(1+Y)
Equation (6b) then can be written after substitution and taking the
1
factor out
(7tA.)
If the first equation of equilibrium is differentiated with respect to

x, and the second with respect to y and added, the equation then reduces
to
2. -iT?<.'d
'a'X.o~
= - ( "?J-a.IS'7(.
>-x,.2.
+ ~e-l!
'"b(t:a.
Equating (7a) with Qb), the final equation becomes
(7c)
Thus combining both conditions and simplifying the equation

arrived at is sufficient to give the distribution of stress in twodimensional problems.
Such an equation satisfies all the conditions.
Namely equilibrium, at the boundary as well as inside the boundary,

together with compatibility.
It has been shown that a solution of two-dimensional problems
reduces to the integration of the differentia! equation of equilibrium

together with the compatibility equation and the boundary conditions,
The usual method of solving these equations is by introducing
a new function, called stress function.
This stress function was intro15

duced in the solution of two-dimensional problems by G. B. Airy The
Airy stress function is chosen in such a way that the conditions of
equilibrium and compatibility are satisfied.
if
o::::s-';1(..
~ri
-e ~2
o-~
1;..~
This can be easily checked
(<!a.)
-= -Gi
a. x..a.
'='
(~b)
?JJ-:l.Jtf
--.
a.)C.aa
(SC)
Equation (7c) is written as
=0
or
(8d)
=0
This is the fourth order partial differentia! equation known as the

biharmonic equation.
If a stress function for a particular problem is found, then
the appropriate differentiation will give the required stress at a given
point.
The stress function is found in two ways.
energy, and the other by the numerical
method~ 6
One by minimizing
The first one is too
10
long and laborious involving Fourier series and hyperbolic function,
whereas the numerical method is direct and calculations are much simpler
on account of computer analysis.
The numerical method reduces partial
differential equations into simple 1inear simultaneous equations for every

point.
Thus the n linear simultaneous equations for n unknowns .can be
written and these can be solved by either point or block relaxation.
Alternatively, the matrix written for these simultaneous equations can
be fed into a computer with instructions to give the invert of it.
Both
methods were used and it was found that the computer is much more accurate
and very fast.
Relaxation after some time becomes very hard to converge
and residues keep coming back from adjacent points.
This was tried
solely for experience.

A discussion of finite difference method, relaxation and
programming the computer fo11ows.
Finite Difference Method
11
It seems that the first application of finite difference
equations in elasticity is due to C. Runge

method in solving torsional problems.
17
who, in 1908, used this
He reduced the problem of sol-
ving Poisson's equation to the solution of a system of linear algebraic

18
equations. Further progress was made by L.F. Richardson in 1910. He
used a certain iteration method to solve these algebraic equations and
he obtained the approximate solution of the stresses in dams due to
gravity forces and water pressure.
In 1918, Liebmann
19
gave a method
of iteration for algebraic equations and showed that the procedure did
converge to the required resulta.
Wolf
20
in 1926.
H. Marcus
21
This was further discussed by F.
Its application in the theory of plates was due to
in 1919, and H. Hencky
22
in 1922. 11
23
The development
11
and its application in recent times is due to R.V. Southwell and his
colleagues.
Consider a curve
iation of
= f(x,y),
keeping y constant.
The var-
with respect to x is plotted.
Let ~O' ~l' ~ 3 , ~5, ~ 9 be values of ~ at ~

first derivative of
distance apart.
The
between point 0 and point 1 will be approximately
The rate of change of the first derivative with respect to x is the

curvature or second derivative and in numerical form at point 0 is
(~~
(~\:,
(~~)o\
~
Bence proceeding in the same way
( da.$2S )
'dx.l- \
95o - 2 )/5
s:zSs
gz..
('kA)
12
If differentiation is carried out twice again then
('le)
=
~
In a similar consideration of
tive of
and y with the y axis, the fourth deriva-
with respect to y is
{FIC. tl)
b~o - cf..1J2. - 4~+ + <j,, +
The fourth derivative of
20 ~O
8 ( ~~
16z. + (13
ti,
with respect to x and y is
-t
04) -t 2 (~r. 1" f/J1 1' ~- '1' ~1) T ( (J,o t ~~~
p,,_ +~~)
(94,)
Thus a partial differentia1 equation has been reduced to an a1gebraic

equation at that point at which it has to be satisfied.
is connected with all neighbouring points 1 to 13.
Figure 5.
The point 0
This is shown in
13
12- 2
10 2
( I=IG
5 )
Stress Function at the Boundary and Outside the Boundary

To find the boundary values of the stress function
~'
integra te twice, appropriately, the known stress conditions at the

boundary.
For example if c>x..
with respect to y,
~'s
= ~flf
0 '2.
is known, then integrating twice
values are determined.
In order to define the first, second and higher derivatives

of
with respect to x and y near the boundary, it is necessary to assume
fictitious values of
derivative of
values of
outside the boundary.
For example if the fourth
with respect to x and y is to be determined, then the
at "a" and "b" are required.

1114
L~
This is shown in Figure 6.
14
The magnitude of these values is calculated by extrapolation, i.e.
These values of
are adjusted as the shape of the stress function is
understood.
Stress Function Inside the Boundary
Once the values of the stress function are obtained outside
and on the boundary, then it is only necessary to write reduced finite
difference biharmonic equations for every cross point.
The usual method of getting such points is to divide the surface
of a bearn into small square nets.
considerations.
The size of the net depends on several
The foremost of them being the accuracy required.
It is
apparent that while reducing the fourth order partial differential equation to a finite difference equation, a better approximation to slope will
be achieved if the two points are.taken closer.
affect the second, third and fourth derivatives.
size of the net the greater the accuracy.
Consequently it will
Thus the smaller the
The second consideration is
from the loading conditions at the boundary.
The size of the net is so
chosen that the equilibrium of the system is satisfied,

discussed later while deriving the stress function.
This will be
For the boundary
itself both of these conditions are important when the equation is

solved by relaxation as well as by computer analysis.
After deciding the size of the net, the equations concerning
the points of the net are written down.
The form of equation h
as (9h).
It is readily seen that if there are n points then it is possible to

write n equations.
points in them.
solved by either
These individual equations will have neighbouring
Therefore they are simultaneous equations and can be
15
i)
ii)
computer analysis, or
relaxation.
Computer Analysis
This method of solving simultaneous equations is called Gauss
Jordan with interchange.
Thorpe
24
The subroutine was programmed by Professor
The full programme containing main, subroutine and data is
attached with the thesis.
The data cards consist of simultaneous equat-
ions written in the form of a matrix.
The last column of this matrix
has the right hand column vector of the simultaneous equations.

sign of this vector remains unchanged.)
(The
When the whole programme is
complete, the invert of the given matrix is obtained with the last
column consisting of the values of the stress function.
Once the stress
function is obtained the stress distributions in a deep bearn are known.

Relaxation Method
In this method the same simultaneous equations are solved by
reducing the residues.
The procedure is to guess the values of the stress
function for different points.
These values are kept to the left of the
square grid above the given points.
Once the shape of the function is
guessed, the values are substituted in the equation (9h).

residue will not be equal to zero.
Usually the
This residue is kept to the right of
the net and the full operation is complete.
The highest residue point
is then the starting point and it is made to vanish by increasing or

decreasing the values of the stress function for that point.
called point relaxation.
This is
At certain times it is convenient to reduce
the residues at the different points at the same time.
Such an operation
requires adjustment of residues of different points simultaneously.
This
is called block relaxation since points may be chosen to form a square

or rectangular block,
16
The method discussed will converge very slowly as residues
from adjacent points will always alter the value of the central points.
It was found that it takes several weeks to solve this problem by this
method if sixty simultaneous equations had to be solved.
Whereas the
computer takes only a few minutes to solve these equations and only one
or two days are required to program.
The accuracy in the latter case
is about seven decimal places but in the case of relaxation it is very

laborious to go beyond the third decimal place.
Once all the values of
at points of net are obtained by
either of the abovementioned methods, then the stresses by finite

difference can be computed as
('')
The theory developed in this chapter is applied to study

stress distribution in deep beams.
The beams selected have different dimensions and are loadd
and supported by different methods.
A brief description of the study
which will follow in detail is given below.

a)
Square deep beam loaded at the centre, simply supported
17
at the ends.
b)
Rectangular plate loaded at the centre and simply
supported from the edges at the quarter points of the span.

The analysis in the beginning is general and the specicific
dimensions decided from the experimental point of view are substituted
in the general formulae in the end.
This analysis is followed by the investigation of the effect
of the size of the net on the finite difference loading.
square deep beam is investigated.
Only the
The method is general and could
be applied to any finite difference loading.
~plication
of Finite Difference Method to a Square Plate Loaded at
Centre
Due to symmetry only half of the beam will be considered.
Boundary Values of
The calculations are started from origin O.

From x
=0
to x
=L
a~
=0
Since vertical stresses as well as shear stresses are zero

in this region, therefore
18
<:r"<j-
~~
=0
(14)
0 1'-'J.
Also
7.i/
i;rj;
::'
~S)
=0
<:Jx2!)d
Therefore
of/;
::
a x...
c,
(1')
C1 -x. +Ca
(17)
He nee
t~
'L
bt
2L
2L
(1=1&
Shifting the
c1
= c2 = 0
7)
(0 - x) plane to lie with 0 = c1x + c 2 plane,
could be made,or otherwise, since the stress is a second
derivative of the stress function hence c
ozS
"dx...
~
fi)
and c
will vanish.
Therefore
('<aa.)
(le 6)
(liC)
19
From x
=L
= L,
- a to x
=0
The vertical stresses are
( lCf)
(z.o)
Substituting values of
at
=L
- a
i.e.
fl) -
and
the values of c
expression of
and c
are obtained.
Inserting these values in an
gives
0~
"O(f =
pJ -
-aas
?(.a.
- at:L T
From x= L, y = 0 to y
.)
= 2L
(22. (:4)
~x.. + L (L.-t:t)
ott-
+ .JL (L-a) x..

ac
0,1:
JL (L -~ :z.
( 2..2.. ';)
2at
Since the horizontal stresses and shear stresses are zero on

this side, the re fore
<::T'X..
also
7~
0~
od
~
ox...
{tJ
-$RJ
'"2>~2..
=::'
-;:,2{25
? >,..:?:> 'j
"::!
(:.&3t.!)
(2.3!,)
c,
( 2.<q <!.)
C:;,-
(Z~")
~(/ +
c,
(2\e)
At y == 0 and x = L., the boundary values of rA1 ~)
d.X.
and
0~
'OJ
are,
20
of/>
v
- -1::.
ad
ox..
p5
Va.
=:
i"E
Renee the slope and the stress function remain constant.

Therefore
b(.?J
a~
= _y_
1::.
a-x-
va.
21::
Stress function at x = b to x
= L,
= 2L
The vertical stresses and shear stresses are zero.

Therefore
0"'~
-e~
;j
T~
and
(.26c:t)
= c''1
(2~6)
( 2G<:)
':
c'l
,PJ
c,:..
c,o
(2GtJI..)
At x = L, y = 2L
C::>/i
~~
o,t5
=.
0~
(:na.)
_y_
(27b)
t;
va.
-21::.
{?.7c)
Therefore
-T
og
0~
fJ -
(28a)
-~x..
!:
( .z. e~
-rf(L-v
(28':)
21
At
=b
From x
=0
to x
(2.tfh)
(2.9')
= b, y = 2L
The vertical stresses are

The re fore
ML
a X-
!!/)__
O::J
rj;
At x
=b
v
= - bt
v x..+
- ___
bt
and the shear stresses are zero.
c,,
( .3ob)
-- + c,, x. -r
= -v
bt
x_2.
2.
c,2.
the boundary values are inserted for fit and Qll

O'X.
constants c
11
(2t1a)
t:
.:.
o_y
~)
orjJ
(L -
1:
-e~
a x..
J!.f?_ +
and c
12
Hence c
11
and c
12
~~ to
"a
obtain the
can be found.
Therefore
- - ;{_
1::
0
( 31 b).
( ~\C).
Thus the stress function at the boundary is solved and this is a true
value.
Suitable dimensions of a square deep bearn are selected.
are,
These
22
= 72 inches
length
height
= 2L
thickness
2L
72 inches
= 4
inches.
There are two reasons for the selection of such dimensions.

1.
These dimensions of deep beams are often used for concrete
shear walls, and anchor blocks in prestressed concrete beams.

2.
These dimensions were suitable for the experimental set
up.
Values Outside the Boundary and Inside the Boundary

The bearn is divided into 6 in. x 6 in. nets and the points on
which ~ is required are numbered.
The points which are outside the
boundary are obtained from the known properties of a curve such as

slope and second derivative.
Thus the points which are parallel to the
horizontal side will have the same values of
4=
tby
o.
4v
as
61
to
66
since
Similarly the same will be true for the top values of " outside
the boundary.
is -
Whereas on the vertical side of the boundary, the slope
all along the vertical side.
So it is a reasonable approximation
to take values of " corresponding to the points inside the boundary as

~
61
- 3 due to the decreasing slope.

When all the required values of " are obtained, the sixty-six
equations are written and then solved by computer.
The results of the
unknown values of " are shown in Diagram 1 and tabulated in Table 1.
23
~6
~1
0.000
-15
r/JII
-1
!4-a
-1-5
~i3
~/
-t
~-3
-J./5
t-8
-M5
~,-&
-/.
ft.,-3
4-3
-t.S
~~
0o~
0/A:;
0.000
o.ooo o.ooo o.ooo
~116
r/J,s
NOTE,_
ALL THE COEFFlCI ENTS
MULTl PLlED B';J
y
DIAGRPd'-1
0o~
6;3
-'S'
f4;d
-15
~3
f4r3
r$1/f
~~
o.ooo
f4,,
-loS
O?.
~/
e
n = line
m = colm.
13n2
0n3
O.Ol58285v
1.5257877v
3.0020614v
4.371810lv
5.3644868v
5. 7130538v
0zm
0.01857 57 v
1. 5015204V
2. 8906860v
4.0914646v
4.9242938v
5.2196047v
~3m
o.0015784v
1.4234054V
2,6966940V
3.7372773V
4,4J03395V
4. 6736957v
~4m
-0.0277430v
1.3134433V
2,460772lv
J.3549613V
3.9296423v
4. 1283684V
~Sm
-0.0616904v
1.1901325v
2.2064910"\Y
2.9624306V
3.4321657v
J.5919532V
~6m
-0.0971681 v
1.0610407V
l.9381992v
2. 5570972v
2. 9284128v
3.0525518v
~7m
-0.1397 686v
0. 917 67 24"1
1. 6422017v
2. 1236933v
2.4012437v
2. 4921719v
~Sm
-o. aosss14 v
O. 7048650v
1.2907870v
1.6471841v
1.8394593v
L 9003674v
~9m
-o. 2841992 v
0.4782342v
O. 9104408v
1.1419568v
1.2501150v
1.2889865v
0tom
-0.3517438v
o. 2596223v
0.5299024v
o. 6433627v
0.6889928v
o. 7013269v
~llm
-0.3905918 v
0.0813901v
O.l951448v
-0.2196592v
0.2237545v
O. 2241148v
0nm
'\m
0nt
TABLE Ir
0n4
0ns
0n6
The Values of Stress Function at Cross Points

N
.po.
25
A Rectangular Plate Loaded at Tips and Supported at Two Points
#.j
T
H
(rf(;
sJ
Due to symmetry only half the plate will be considered starting

from origin.
From x
=0
to x
= -L2
'
=0
The vertical stresses and shear stresses are zero,

i.e.
cr:l
= --.:~
<=>x.
)~
-~sz)
- =
Therefore the slope is
and the stress functton
Taking
From x
~
l;l(.
From x
=0
to x
= -L2
an d~
!'>c:f are zero.
= 2L
to x =
2L +
a'l(,.~(j
(SZ. b)
26
(65)
and
Integrating once with respect to x
"'~'X- -
- ::L -t... +
at
c~
Integrating with respect to x once again
Inserting the boundary condition at x

fnserting in expression for
~::
7a
j.> =
At x = (
V -x_~
2Qt;
~ =
o'L
and solving for c
and
4,
~
o?(.... = aj_1: (.b.-x.)
.a
:t.f:. ;(.. _ VL2.
-t2.41: .,..~ Sa~"'
2 + a ) the values of ~ and
~-
= 2L
and
:s! are
~
_J:.
1::
L
2
From x=-+ a
~ =0
Therefore
Tx.d
also
~
ox...
..
fJ
( .3'1~
Cs
Cs x.-
C't;
Inserting the boundary conditions at x
=i
and inserting their values in expression of
( 3'7~)
+ a then solving for c
and c
(t{-<)b) .
27
(4-oej
At x
+ ~ + a, y
-
the values of
~ and its derivatives are
+ J... + a,
From x =
=0
y = 0 to y = H
Therefore the appropriate integration gives values of
and
(l-3b)
Therefore at x ==
~J1
and
i + J + a,
=0
inserting the boundary conditions of
, c 7 and c 8 are obtained,
The re fore
00
(~)
-o
~
':)x_ --~
1::
(44c.)
Values of
and its first derivatives are constant along the vertical edge
of the plate.
From x =
..2 +
a to x =
..2
=H
'::5~ = - :!.._
CI=
28
c10 X-
=- - -v -'X,'- +
t:ll::
Solving at x
=~ +
~.
are
p5
2.
c,,
a for known conditions of boundary, the values of
~2.. + Lr... 1:y_
==- -
2a 1.:
~J ~
;:,'(..
1- (..!!+ 4.)\7'~ )(. + [L)f_ 1;r (b.a. ... 1~~1..,.

.k: (.b.+ at~
~
ea1:
...., 1:
.a..
241::
-Jt <4 +a./-~ f)(-4 + aJ]j
:a.
(+sa)
(+s-b)
-Q~
ad
=~
At x
1>
the values of
= -
a(6
x._
~szS
a1
!l._+
(;QI:
~ and its derivatives are
f-.t
1::
+ 1..
t:lll;-
(-.ta. +ttJj\l ~ L
~r-!.
(b +t+A)1
t .r (b +4'2.- ~4.
L 1::
/J 2.01: a. / 8'cl/:
2..
1.
~L- (?+~)2- [-!- (.f_,.t~)]j

==0
=0
From x = 0 to x =
~ ,
y =
-Vertical_ and shear stresses are zero, therefore
Integrating twice with respect to x,
j/J =
C!.,2 x.. -+ c,~
(4b~
29
also
c,2.
otb
ax....
-af>
- c*
?f
Inserting the values of
(471>)
~' ~; ~
at x
= ~2
as these are the same as
approached from both sides
=0
=
The following dimensions are taken in accordance with the
experimental set up of the steel plate analyzed theoretically.
Taking a= 3", t
= 1",
H = 12", L
= 18", ~ = 42",
~= 2"., ,f = 12".
The network of the plate and the variation of the stress function on the
boundary is shown in Diagram 2 and Table II.
~
Values Outside the Boundary and Inside the Boundary

The
values inside the boundary are calculated by relaxation
and those outside the boundary by extrapolation, in a similar method as

calculated for a square beam.
The Bffect of the Net on Load Representation
It is now discussed how the size of the net affects the equilibrium and the stress distribution.
The dimensions of the beam whose net representation is discussed
are 6 ft. x 6 ft. x 4 in.
If a load is taken half-way between the net,
the effect of the imbalance force will be as follows:
30
uJ
-4
. t:
'Q
:!
'E
8.
"'1
~
'6..
.,"!
li\
'?
-s.
ft
'Q.
<(
ti
....
CLJ.
-J.
~
1
()
~
1
Il')
"''
Il)
1'
oL
0
<(
-
;;1)
,...
'Q
z
Ul
>
!:!
1.1.
u.
d)
LU
"
1()
.....
1
..
1
"'f
10
ii
l}.
UJ
:t
.....
'!1
...J
..
\~
1
J.
....
1
t)
"6-
:z
...1
<(
A
w
...1
:::)
0nm
n = line
m = colm.
0nt
~n2
~n3
0n4
0ns
0n6
0tm
-12.1501 v
-11.8600v
-11.8991v
-11.8501v
-11.8000v
-11. 7498v
0zm
-12.1000v
-11.3100v
-11.4010v
-11.3902v
-11.3799v
-11.350lv
0Jm
-12.0001 v
-10. 5600v
- 9. SOOOv
- 9. 5004v
- 9.0000v
- 8. 7000v
04m
-11. 9499v
- 9.9401v
- s.oooov
- 5.4995v
- 5.4939v
- 5. OOOOv
05m
-ll.SOOOv
- 9. 5200v
- 7 .OOlOv
- 5.0003v
- 3.6939v
- 2.300lv
TABLE II:
Stress Function for the Steel Plate - Stage Two
w
....
~n7
~n8
~n9
~n10
~n11
~n12
~lm
-11. 7000v
-11. 6990v
-11. 6893v
-11. 6788v
-11. 6501v
-11.6200v
~2m
-10. 9893v
-10. 7989v
-10. 6010v
-10.4986v
-10.4003v
-10.3000v
~3m
- 8.0007v
- 7.4998v
- 7.6001v
- 7.5600v
- 7.5502v
- 7.4499v
~4m
- 4.3001v
- 3.9843v
- 3. 9989v
- 4.0499v
- 4.0000v
- 4.0800v
~Sm
- 1.1993v
- 1.0102V
- 0.9968v
- O. 9932v
- o. 9909v
- 0.9703v
~nm n
= 1ine
m = colm.
TABLE II (continued)
l.o.l
N
33
Taking a= b =
Z=
9 in., and
the size of the net; a= 6 in., and
using the equation of finite difference for stress at a point.
Tabulation of values of
x - 18
11
~~
x, and
~ = 0
~- 0
~--
mv
q_.. -
1
36v
<::5i.= -
36v
= 24"
=0
= 30
.. --v
11
~~.
4
36
~ =--V
x= 3611
l'-.1.....1.....&...1....1-l.-~;._._..............,._..
l.Da.~
(J.J;f:.ua.l
(i=l(s q)
Total upward force
= area
of finite difference diagram x thickness
26
.. -24
1
That is to say 2V of load has been increased.

Now consider the top of the beam.
The values of
x= 2411
... .!lv
8
x= 18"
-- 32.8 v
~- 0
x= 12 11
= l2.v
8
<5ic. ... -
1
288
6"
~ .. 50
~--
2s8v
= 00 11
~ "" 54
CS...=-
288
x=
x
~lt. ..
will be
34
(PIG!D)
Total downward force
= area
CEN Rt
\NE
x thickness
=v.
1
Therefore the difference is V.

equilibrium.
This means that the system
i~
not in
Although the difference is small as far as equilibrium is
concerned, as was discussed in the introduction, the
~tress
distribution
in a beam was a function of the loading and a slight shift in magnitude

as well as in dimension can change the stress distribution near the area
where the load is applied.
lndeed, if the equations were to be solved by
relaxation it would take considerable time to converge due to its nonequilibrium condition.
A better method will be to choose nodal points .
in auh a way that these concide with
~he
end points of the load, in
this way equilibrium is completely satisfied.

To investigate this method, a
= b = 3L
is taken
and~=
L
2a = 6,
i.e. the net dimensions are still the same only the loaded areas are changed.
a.c +rA.a '-
Loa..di~
J=,,. uTe )>IS:I=ER.f.NC~ L.O"~'

(Ft(j-
11)
35
Tabulation of stresses and stress function.

~
~a
values
0
x in inches
18
--196 v
24
3
--v
8
1
--48
v
30
3
--v
2
1
--48
v
36
Total upward force
=-
V.
Similarly for the top of the be am
~'~"~'"f cl'rFe.Y~
L.cO<J, ,,..
(!="tG
12)
Tabulation of stresses and stress function.
If values
e"'~
x in inches
6V
1
--v
48
1
--V
48
.2.v
2
1
--v
96
12
45
8
18
36
Therefore the total downward force
= -v.
Thus the condition of equilibrium is satisfied by taking the

net in this way.
37
GHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTS, DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
Experimenta on deep beams of different materials and different
dimensions were conducted.
The materials used were:
1)
steel
2)
plastic
3)
reinforced concrete.
The whole programme was divided into three stages.

stage a plastic deep beam with
11
In the first
stress-coat 11 was tested in order to have
sorne idea of where the maximum tensile stresses existed,
The second
stage was to test a steel deep bearn with strain gauges mounted on it,
This was performed since the theory of elasticity could be accurately
applied to a rnaterial like steel which is homogeneous and isotropie.
These two stages of the programme initially provided an understanding of
the stress distribution in a deep bearn, and gave sorne confidence in its
application to a non-homogeneous rnaterial.
Since the ultimate goal was
the third stage, that is to find the stress distribution in a reinforced

concrete deep bearn, the first two stages were of very great value as
they did give a basic understanding and furnished a comparison of the
various methods of solving the simultaneous equations.
These will be
discussed as they arise in the different stages.

The discussion of the first two stages follows with the experimental resulta at the end of the chapter.
1.
Steel Deep Beam

The steel used was structural steel of grade CSAG 40.41959.
The properties of the steel concerning the maximum stresses and modulus
of elasticity are given in the Appendix& The deep beam's dimensions are
38
shown in Figure l2a along with positions of the strain gauges.
!
2..
...,__ 1
' 1----
18 1
a-;.'
~a
1.-- a. -
..._,JI
r.-'///.1.1
___.
R4sut
UFFF.
...___ _ _ _ _ 4:.1!
(FIG. 12o.)
The cantilever portion which has a span of 12 inches and
depth
of 12 inches has the dimensions of a deep beam since the ratio of depth
span
:::>.!..
2
The beam was tested under the Emery patent machine which has a range of load
from 0 to 100,000 pounds.
a rolled steel
Vf=
The load was transferred to the beam by means of
section whose supports, 18 inches appart, acted as
loads for the base of the beam.
The whole arrangement is shown in Figure
12aand also in Plate 1.

The load was varied from 10,000 to 50,000 pounds.
The maximum
load of 50,000 pounds was chosen so as to keep the stresses within the
elastic limit.
Since the stresses were proportional to the load at any
given point, therefore only the calculation for the 50,000 pound load was
38a
PLATE 1:
Experiment al set up of the s t eel pla t e
39
done.
The graph of experimental and theoretical resulta is shown in
Graph I, and the results are shown in Table III.

It was unfortunate that due to accidental breakage of the
strain gauges at the bottom of the beam, the strain measurements at this
point were not taken.
However, since the total internat tensile force
must be equal to the total internat compressive force, the last stress
was calculated from this consideration.
Examination of Graph I
shows that the finite difference curve
and the experimental curve are quite close, but the straight tine stress
distribution assumption is very erroneous.
at one point was quite erratic.
The finite difference curve
Perhaps a very smooth curve could have
been obtaineq as given by computer analysis, if the relaxation had been

carried on further.
The labour involved in relaxing the equations and programming
for the computer was compared, and it is suggested that the labour
required to programme the computer is not only negligible but the resulta
thus obtained are much more accurate.
where the value of
This can be seen in Tables I and II
is obtained up to seven places of the decimal.
On the whole, the experiment on the steel beam gave a good
preliminary understanding of the problem and with good experimental

agreement provided the confidence to proceed to the concrete deep beams.
2.
Plastic Deep Beam

The investigation of the principle tensile stress pattern was
carried out by the brittle coating method.
This is a very well known
method and is possibly one of the oldest methods used to determine the
stresses experimentaly.
in abundance.
Technical literature on this method can be found
The method of applying a brittle coat on a surface of any
Stress Obtained from Different Methods in lbs. per sq. in.No ..
Depth in inches
Experimental
12
2450
17 50
2600
10
3050
2580
1740
1310
1250
870
- 800
- 750
-1800
-1250
- 870
-2320
-2500
-1740
- 100
- 250
-2600
TABLE III:
Finite
Difference
Straight Line
Distribution
Stress Distribution in Steel Plate at

a Section 4" from the Vertical Edge
_p.
l-'
42
structure or part of a structure, or on a model representing.the structure,

is general and can be applied to any structural material.
It is prefer-
able to use a model constructed of plastic such as acrylic (Plexiglass

plastic).
The plastic is preferable since it has a low modulus of elas-
ticity and a high tensile stress.

1)
modulus of elasticity
2)
tensile stress
Specifie properties of acrylic are:
= 0.38
x 10
2
lbs/in ,
= 14,000 lbs/in 2
Thus due to the first property of acrylic even a small stress

such as 380 lbs/in
will produce cracks on the brittle coat.
, the experimental investigation on an acrylic deep beam,
~\n
..
the
bearn tested had, dimensions the same as those of the steel plate tested.
The standard method of applying the stress coat and loading the specimen
was followed.
Plates 2 and 3 show the principle tensile stress distribution.
The cracks
i~~bhe
"l"#
layer of the stress coat started near the
extended i~ide the bearn.
s~ports
and
Thus a general pattern of the tensil stress
distribution was obtained with a high concentrated tensile stress area.
42a
PLATE 2t
Tensile crack pat t ern near top support
PLATE 3:
Tensile crack pattern near centre line
43
3.
Experimental Work of the Concrete Deep Eeam

The square deep beam (72 in. x 72 in. x 4
in.)~
analysed for
the stress distribution by finite difference method in Chapter 3, was

experimentally investigated.
The investigation was carried out on two
concrete beams both having the same dimensions but with different distribution of steel.
The different distribution of steel was provided
to determine the effect of the steel distribution on
~~
after concrete
cracks.
The properties of the concrete material and the steel bars
were determined by conducting tests on twelve concrete cylinders and
six steel bars.
These properties are given in Appendices C and D.
The experimental set ups of the two concrete beams are shown in Figure
13.
Figures 14 and 15 show the position of the strain gauges.
Test Specimen
The dimensions and the reinforcement of the two beams were
as follows:
Beam A with economical1y distributed steel (shown in Figure 17)
dimensions
72 in. x 72 in. x 4 in.
reinforcement
1/4 in. diameter.
Beam B with uniformly distributed steel (shown in Figure 16)

dimensions
72 in. x 72 in. x 4 in.
reinforcement
1/4 in. diameter.
Materials
a)
Concrete
The concrete used was a high strength (5,500 psi) concrete. The
maximum size of the aggregate was
/2 in.
The sand used was fine sand.
The weights of the ingredients of the concrete per cubic foot conforming
44
0
1
~~--~~---------------Fig. 13
Set-up showing central load and supports
45
Beam B
a"
.~
1~
1i'
L
L.
1:5 ~
Gauges on Concrete
Gauges on Stee 1 Bars
.a"
+
9'
+5''
Je"
-t-L
..,...
aa"
"'1
Fig.
14
Strain gauge layout on concrete and steel bars
46
Beam
Gauges on
Concrete
'li
,.J
'12.'
+
11.1
---
Gauges on
Steel Bars
--
......
...
IS
Fig.
11
15
Strain gauge layout on concrete and steel bars
,~.,
47
to A. S. T.M. Standards were as follows:
J f'ent
lngred
Size
Weight per" cu. ft.
Cement
680 lbs.
2 ..
Sand
35 mesh
3.
Stone
A-
1 /4
in.
610 lbs.
112
in.
910 lbs.
1570 lbs.
Water
4..
300 lbs.
The properties of the concrete in tension and compression are given in

Appendix
c.
b)
Steel
steel used was intermediate grade with yield stress of
59 1 000 psi, ultimate stress of 76,000 psi, and percentage elongation
of 15%.
The steel bars were
1
/4 in. in diameter.
The properties of
the steel bars are given in Appendix D.

Casting
."
.. ,.
beams were cast by Francon Limited.
' deiivered
They were
\
to the Strngth of Material.s Laboratory after 30 days of casting.

Strain gauges
The strain gauges we r e mounted on the surfaces of both aides
of the concrete bearn and on the reinforcing bars at the position as shown
in Figures 16 and 17 and also Plates 4 and 5..
The reason both sides'
surfaces were used to mount the gauges was to avoid the transverse bending
effe ct.
The strain gauges mounted on the surface of the concrete bearn
were Budd Metalfilm strain gauges type C6-1161-B with a gauge length of
1 in.
Thi s gauge length was prefe rre d in order to avoid the possibility
of the gauge being mounted on a stone (aize l/2 in.)
These gauges were
cemented to the surface with Bl2 cement manufactured by the Budd Company,
47a
PLATE 4:
Strain gauges on concrete surface
PLATE 5:
Strain gauge on a s t eel bar
48
Beam B
,.,./
n
Hor1ZOn tal b ar s l d.~a. a t 3" c 1c
"?2
-vz..''
.....
1
li
lt
t"'~
1!' Cover
12
Fig.
16
Details of steel bars for Beam B
,,
Vel,tica1 Bars
-?;" ' dia. at

3'' c/c
49
Beam
Vertical
4l"
dia. Bars at 7" c/c
'
\.
~
v"., ~ f'-; "'7'._,.
t9
J,
1<-
711_.. jor.-
'? Il-Il le- 7''"""' ~ 7''~ ~7"~
v"__,_ Ir 7''--;;. ~
"'
1,;
"'
~9
~
1/
~//
72
...
1~/
..
"':If
...
Ho
\
.~~JI'
r;,v
...
..,,-2,11
'}''
#'4''
't
T llf
4-
,J,2..
~1
:a.~
~Il
~'i..''
11('1
Fig.
17
Details of steel bars for Beam A
izgntal
1 n
dia.
1.-- ba s
--.!':loo'
50
the suffix 12 indicating the setting time of the cement in hpurso

The strain gauges mounted on the steel bars were Budd Metalfilm strain gauges type C6-141-B.
The gauge length was
/4 in.
The
glue used was Eastman 910.

The mounting of the gauges was done in a standard procedure.
These gauges were wired to the Baldwin Strain Indicator which
recorded the strains directly in micro in./in.
Two dummy gauges were used, mounted on a steel bar and a concrete
cylinder.
These materials were the same as used for the reinforced
concrete beam.
The dummies were used to compensate for the strains due to
variation in the temperature during the experiment.

The mounting of strain gauges on the steel bars gave strains
which were used to determine the stresses in the bars and concrete.
BecausP. of the low strength of the concrete in tension, it is liable to
crack, a~q once the concrete crack~ the strain gauge is ~n off as seen
in Plate 6 and it becomes dead.
~,
Whereas strain gauges mounted'on
the
steel give strain until the steel yields.

Tests
Both beams were tested under the Baldwin Testing Machine.
The
beams were simply supported on a steel plate of dimensions 12 in. x 4 in.

x 2 in., at each end, as shown in Figure 13 and Plate 7 "
These plates
rested on rollers which provided the rotati.on of the plate in order not
to lift the end edges of the beam and change the support conditions.
The load was applied on the plate of dimensions 24 in.x 4 in. x 2 in. at
the top and it was transferred to the beam by means of the plate.
The
beams were centred in the testing machine and plumbed vertically.

The leads of wires extending from the gauges were soldered to
the switch boxes, these switches were connected to the Baldwin Strain
SOb
PLATE 6:
PLATE 7:
A strain gauge torn by crack in concrete
A simple suppor t at bottom edge
51
Indicator.
The gauges were balanced by applying and releasing a small load.
The loading scale 0 - 400,000 lbs. was selected.
The load was increased
in increments of 10,000 lbs. up to 35,000 lbs. after this load the

increments were increased to 35,000 lbs.
This larger increment in the
latter case was taken because of the manual operation of the Baldwin
Strain Indicator.
In the manual operation it takes at least 1/2 minute
to balance and take the reading of a gauge.
For this particular case
40 gauges were used and for readings of one increment 20 minutes were
required.
As the load was increased the cracks were observed.
No visible
crack was detected with the naked eye up to the load of 120 kips.
It
could be possible that microscopie cracks iR the concrete were produced

before this load.
fact
cra~'efore
The experimental results show that the concrete did in
this load was reached.
~ver
at 120 kips load
the
visible crack was across the whole thickness of the beam and extended
upwards about 15 to 18 in. from the bottom edge with increments of the
load after 120 kips.
This crack rapidly increased upward until it
reached about 1 to 1 1/2 in. from the top edge at the load of 140 kips.
Each increment of the load above 140 kips made this crack widen from the
bottom edge until the failure occured at the load of 185 kips when the
bars at the bottom edge broke.
Similar observations were recorded for the other beam except
that it failed at an ultimate load of 210 kips.
51a
PLATE 8:
Crack pattern of
bearn A
.,
1
1.
PLATE 9:
l'
Crack pattern of
1.
bearn B
"'
,,
52
Discussion of the Resulta
The curves of the distribution of ~ at the centre line
section and for a section 18 inches from the edge as determined by the
experimental results are compared with those determined by the finite
difference method and the straight line distribution.
These curves
are shawn in graphs 2 to 8.

The graphs corresponding to the loads of 30 kips, 65 kips,
and 95 kips show that the ~~ distribution at the centre and at a
section 18 inches from the edge, as determined by the experimental tests
and the finite difference method, are generally in good agreement.
Both
these distributions of ~~ differ from that of the straight line.
At
the centre line section, the curves obtained by the experimental results
and the finite difference method
C)~
have
"J)"
shape.
The magnitude of
at the top and bottom edges by the finite difference method and
experimental results is almost twice the magnitude of
~~
by straight
line distribution.
At the section 18 inches from the vertical edge the shape of
the curves by the finite difference method and the experimental results
is similar to the shape of the centre l!ne distribution of
that 3 inches near the top edge
C)~
cr~,
except
(compressive) reduces from its max-
imum value to a very small value of tension.
The change of the shape is
due to the effect of the vertical stresses which influence

influence is severe near the top horizontal edge.
tJ~.
This
Comparison of the
curves by the finite difference method and experimental resulta to the

straight line distribution at this section
shows a marked difference.
On examining the curves for the loads of 30 kips, 65 kips,
95 kips, 115 kips and 165 kips, the following is deduced.

1)
Curves (finite difference and experimental) of CJ>t-corres-
53
ponding to the load of 30 kips in graph no. 2 show that the maximum
tensile stress is below the ultimate tensile stress of the concrete.
Therefore the total tensile force is taken by the concrete.
2)
The curves of
cr~
corresponding to the load of 65 kips in
graph no. 3 show that the maximum tensile stress is approaching the
ultimate tensile stress of the concrete.
Here also the total tensile
force is taken by the concrete.

For these two loads it is to be expected that the stress distribution based on the theory of elastic displacements will give satisfactory resulta.
The justification of the statements that the total
tensile force is taken by the concrete (i.e. steel does not contribute
any strength to take tensile force and could be assumed ineffective)
before the concrete cracks, is given below.
Force taken by concrete
The contribution of the steel to the total tensile force before
the concrete cracks is examined for a section at the centre of beam B.
The curve corresponding to the load of 65 kips is considered.
The tensile
forces are calculated:

a)
Concrete -
21
x 450 x 21 x 4
18,900 lbs.
b)
Steel.
Steel bars taking linear distribution of the strains in the

bars between the one near the edge and the one 9 inches above it.
54
Table Showing Forces per Bar

Strain in
micro-in/in.
Stress in
lbs/in2.
18
540
27
72
2160
108
125
3750
187
178
5340
276
Bar No.
Therefore, total force
Force in lbs,.
x area
F ;;
J,.
598 lbs.
These two contributions of the tensile forces are compared

with the force obtained by the finite difference method ..
Total tensile force
= 21
=
x 405 x 21 x 4
17,010 lbs.
The comparison of the result shows that the force taken by the steel
can be neglected before the concrete has cracked.
c)
The theoretical graph corresponding to the load of 95 kips
for bearn B at the centre line shows that
~~
at the bottom edge has
exceeded the ultimate tensile stress of the concrete.

by the experimental resu1t.
This is verified
The result indicates that the concrete has
cracked and the tensile force is transferred from this cracked section
of the concrete to the bar at the bottom edge.
The theoretical force (i.e. tensile force between the height
of the section where
cf~
exceeds the ultimate stress of the concrete)
is checked with the force in the bar.

Theoretical tensile force
530 x 4 x 1.5
3,180 lbs.
55
Centroid of tensile force
O. 7 5 in.
Force in the bar
57,210 x
2,860 lbs.
1.5 in.
Centroid of tensile force
.os
This indicates that when the concrete cracks the steel bar present in
this area takes up the force and the centroid of the tensile force
changes a small amount.
of
C)(..
This change does not affect the distribution
appreciably.
d)
The graph corresponding to the load of 115 kips indicates
that the distributions of
~as
obtained by the experimental resulta
and the finite difference method at the centre section differ from each
other.
The further investigation of the experimental resulta shows
that the bar near the bottom edge has yielded.
Therefore strain is no
longer proportional to stress and the theory of elasticity cannat be

applied.
This is the reason that the finite difference distribution
of C)(..differs from the experimental.
The effect of this change is
observed at the section 18 inches from the edge.

e)
The graph corresponding to the 155 kips load shows that
more bars have yielded.
57
A section at the centre
a]
Depth in
inches
lbs/in
by
lbs/in 2 by
lbs/in
by
straight line
fini te diff.
experimental
- 95.5
- 190 .. 0
-155.0
12
- 69.0
24
36
22.0
7.5
- 34.7
3.6
5.5
8.7
- 12.8
43.5
20.0
10.0
- 26.6
61.5
76.0
60.0
48.9
70.5
100.0
165.0
210.0
A section 18 inches from the edse
b]
Depth in
inches
lbs/in 2 by
lbs/in
by
lbs/in
by
straight line
finite diff.
experimenta 1
- 48.0
- 87.5
- 91.2
12
- 35.0
- 34.1
- 28.6
24
- 17.5
36
- 11.20
- 12 .. 60
43.5
10.0
61.5
38.0
- 10.0
30.0
- 15.20
28.0
70.5
50.0
141.0
200.0
TABLE IV:
7.5
C:SX..istribution of Beam B, Load 30 kips
7.25
59
a]
Depth in
lbs/in
lbs/in
by
by
lbs/in
by
straight line
finite diff.
experimental
- 95.5
- 190.0
- 114.0
12
- 69.0
24
inches
22.0
36.0
- 34.7
3.6
5.7
36
8.7
12.4
48
34.7
8.1
14.2
62.5
76.5
60.0
62.4
70.5
100.0
165.0
240.0
A section 18 inches from the edge
b]
Depth in
inches
lbs/in
lbs/in
by
straight line
by
finite diff.
lbs/in
experimental
- 48.0
- 87.5
- 114.0
12
- 35.. 0
- 34.1
24
- 17.5
36
41.4
7.5
10.0
- 11.2
17.3
0.08
22.3
48
17.5
62.5
38.0
35.0
22.8
70.5
50.0
141.0
200.0
TABLE V:
G"~Distribution
by
of Beam A, Load 30 kips
61
a]
Depth in
inches

lbs/in2 by
lbs/in 2 by
lbs/in 2 by
straight l ine
finite diff.
experimental
- 200
- 375.0
- 376.0
12
- 150
24
36
48.0
75
7.9
18 .. 9
41 .. 0
29.5
28.9
43.5
48
61.5
70.5
152
125.0
90.0
220
350.0
450.0
b]
Depth in
inches
3
12
24
36
22.0
lbs/in
by
straight l ine
- 100
75
25.0
lbs/in
by
lbs/in
experimental
- 200.0
- 236.0
74.0
89.5
16.3
26.8
24.4
31.2
43.5
24
18.0
61 .. 5
70.5
76
50.0
46.0
llO
300 .. 0
380.0
TABlE VI:
by
finite diff.
38
0
34.2
6"lL Distribution of Bearn B., Load 65 kips
63
a]
Depth in
lbs/in 2 by
lbs/in
by
lbs/in
by
finite diff.
experimental
- 37 5.0
48.0
- 368.0
71.0
75
7.9
21.4
36
18.9
16.5
48
75
17.4
62.5
175
70.5
220
135.0
37 5.0
inches
3
straight l ine
12
- 200
- 150
24
b]
Depth in
inches
3
12
24
36
46.0
118.0
440.0
lbs/in
by
lbs/in
by
lbs/in
by
finite diff.
exper irnen ta 1
- 100
- 200.0
- 200.0
straight l i ne
75
38
74.0
16.7
16.3
24.4
62.5
23.4
48
0
38
62.5
87
75.0
64.0
70.5
110
325.0
385.0
0 .. 17
38.0
TABLE VI : rrx..Distribution of BeamA,, Load 65 kips
65
a]
Depth in
inches
1bs/in
by
straight l i ne
lbs/in
lbs/in
by
finite diff.
experimental
- 300
- 600.0
- 680.0
12
- 210
24
- 105
36
27.6
35.0
17 5.0
160.0
315
460.0
70.5
inches
21.5
230
61.5
Depth in
11.6
89.0
64.0
70
b]
70.0
37 .o
43.5
fs = 572.10

2
by
2
1bs/in by
straight l ine
finite diff.
experimental
1bs/in
lbs/in
- 150
- 300.0
- 328.0
12
- lOS
- 104.0
- 110.0
24
36
by
53
0
23.7
35.5
39.0
39.0
43.5
35
61.5
115
80.0
74.0
70.5
158
420.0
455.0
50.0
TABLE VIII: C:SX...Distribution of :Seam
:s,
53.5
Load 95 kips
by
67
a]
Depth in
inches

2
by
lbs/in2 by
straight Une
finite diff.
experimental
lbs/in
lbs/in
- 360
- 67 5.0
- 823.0
12
- 270
24
- 135
36
85.0
32.5
200.0
14.0
by
33.5
50.0
43.5
70
61.5
275
185.0
fs = 11010
fs = 23110
70.5
560
650.0
fs = 59000
b]
Depth in
inches
lbs/in
by
straight l ine
lbs/in
by
lbs/in
finite diff.
experimental
- 180
- 360.0
- 218.0
24
- 135
- 131.0
- 170.0
12
68
28.7
43.0
45.0
36
by
62.5
62.5
43.5
35
61.5
138,'
120.0
- 152.0
74.0
70.5
180
540.0
455.0
TABLE IX: CI?LDistribution of Beam B, Load 115 kips
69
a]
lbs/in
Depth in
inches
by
straight l ine
lbs/in
by
finite diff.
lbs/in
experimental
- 260
- 443.0
- 364.0
12
- 185
92
- 181.0
- 195 .. 0
40.0
58.5
- 450.0
58.0
- 167 .o
100.0
24
36
43.5
60
61.5
200
140.0
70.5
270
890.0
TABLE X:
Cfx..
17.5
= 10770
Distribution of Beam B, Load 165 kips
70
Suggested Design Procedure for Concrete Beams

A)
Elastic Range Design

The distribution of the stresses in any deep, reinforced concrete
beam is determined by the finite difference method, assuming that the

reinforcement is ineffective before the cracking of the concrete in
tension (as discussed in Discussion of the Results).
The concrete is very
strong in compression and therefore the beam's design is controlled by the

allowable tensile stress.
This allowable tensile stress should be equal
to the maximum tensile stress found by the finite difference method.

Therefore
c. v
C = coefficient found by the finite difference method.
V = vertical load.
~ = allowable tensile stress (stress is linearly proportional
to strain).
Example
C :::
as found for the 6' x 6' x 4" by finite difference
1
/{;;)_
method at the bottom edge.
Therefore
JI:
c =
4oo
""/62
This obviously is a very conservative load ensuring

no tensile cracks.
cracking of the
l.H 00
(50)
that there will be
Renee the design is very uneconomical.
co~crete
/6.s
The initial
in tensile zone does not necessarily mean that
the whole section will collapse, because as soon as the concrete cracks
the tensile force is transferred to the reinforcement.
A second method will be to determine the stresses on the
maximum tensile stressed section.
The reinforcement is provided as the
71
variation of the tensile stresses on that section.

If the conventional method of the placing of the steel is
1
adopted (i.e. providing all the steel at 1 /2 inches from the horizontal edge) the total tensile force will be
==
&; A.s
allowable stress in the steel
4s=
total area of the reinforcement.
The effect of the shift of the tensile force will have either one of two
effects.
The forced shifting of the tensile force from its original
centroid will compel the point of action of the compression to move lower
down in order to maintain the externat statical moment.
There is no math-
ematical proof for the above statement but in case it did occur this
would mean that the total compressive stress distribution would be different from the one analysed.
The other effect that it might have is to
assume that neither the point of action of the tension moves nor that of
the compression.
Therefore the lever arm will increase, for the externat
statical moment the tension and compression should reduce.
This will
cause the distribution of the stresses to differ from the one analysed.
A more appropriate way of placing steel will be to make use of
the fairly linear distribution of cr~ in the tension zone and provide
uniformly distributed steel..
The amount of steel is determined by assum-
ing that concrete has cracked in the tensile zone and the total tensile
force is taken by the steel (as discussed in Discussion of the Results).
Therefore
f::.
1s
A.s
Ji
= allowable stress in the steel
As = total steel area in tension
-r = total
tensi le force.
(52)
72
The steel area thus determined is uniformly distributed in the tensile

zone.
The distribution of steel in the above manner ensures that the
centroid of the tensile force and its magnitude will remain the same as
The reinforcement for beam B was placed in the way deter-
was analysed.
mined above.
The
/4 inch diameter bars were used at 3 inches centre to
centre throughout the section.

The comparison of the equations (51 ) and (5L) shows that the
amount of steel required by equation
by equation (51 ).
(5~)
is twice the amount provided
Therefore the amount of steel provided by equation
(52) is uneconomical and over conservative.
This is due to the steel
bars near the neutral axis which do not take as much load as the bars
near the edges.
To minimize the conflicting magnitude of the amount of
steel determined by these two
equations~
ding to the variation of the stresses.
the steel is distributed accorThis could be accomplished in
either of two methods.

One method will be to divide tensile load area into a number
of parts and for these different parts the corresponding forces are
calculated.
These forces will be assumed to be concentrated at the
centroid of the part of that
area~
therefore the steel required for this
small part of the area will be
Such distribution of the steel will give more steel at the bottom edge
of the beam and less near the neutral axis.
This
method~
although very
economical, is laborious for design purposes.

The other
method~
which is preferred from the design point of
view, is to take the average steel distribution as given by equations

(51) and
(52).
This amount is divided into two equal parts, the first
73
part is laid as uniformly distributed steel.
The other part is laid with
spacing which varies linearly with increasing distance from the bottom
edge of the beam.
This is shown in the figure below.
) Y2- As
Such distribution of steel ensures that the maximum stress will remain
below the allowable stress in the bar near the edge.
This can be
verified.
The steel per unit height of the beam from the bottom edge is
(53)
Steel provided by equation (52) at unit height is
a.s
Therefore the steel provided by the method suggested above is 12.5% more
for the unit height from the bottom edge than as given by equation (52),
and the total amount of steel is 25% less than that provided by equation
(52).
This method was used to determine the distribution of the steel
in the tensile area for beam
The spacing of the steel bars was inc-
reased to 5 inches centre to centre in the compression zone.

economical method was used.
Thus an
74
The experimental resulta show that although beam A had less
reinforcement than beam B, it was relatively stronger in ultimate loadtaking capacity.
B.
Ultimate Load Design
An attempt is made to analyse the concrete deep beam with

ultimate load theory.
Certain assumptions are made based on the
observation of the experiment performed on two 72 in. x 72 in. x 4 in.

concrete deep beams.
These assumptions are:
a)
The percentage of reinforcement is low (2% to 1.5%)
b)
The maximum compressive strain of concrete is .003 inch

per inch.
c)
Linear distribution of the strains in the steel with

increasing height from the bottom edge.
d)
The strain at the bottom edge bar reaches approximately

the ultimate strain.
(In the case of intermediate grade
14%).
e)
Rectangular distribution of the stress in compression.
The conditions (b), (c), and (d) will determine the compatibility of the strains.
This will further indicate the number of the
bars which have yielded.

In addition to these assumptions, the statical conditions
should always be satisfied (i.e. equilibrium of the moments and the
forces).
Ultimate Load of Beam A
75
The Strain Diagram
d..-c
t
Strain in concrete
at ultimate
Strain in steel
at ultimate
From similar triangles

d - c
Therefore
0.14
.003
47
1.5"
This indicates that all the bars below c have yielded.
Checking the bar
4.5 inches from the edge

0.14
= 7i).'S"""
.0065
This is greater than the yield strain which is
59000 x 1030
.002
Applying one of the equilibrium equations that the total tensile force is
equal to the total compressive force
fy As
f'c x a x b
fy As
b x f~
68000
22000
3"
76
a,.
J,
.ra,,.
c
t
~- K- ~.
~
ri
= Total resultant tensile force

in steel bars
1<.
c = Total compressive force in

concrete
k
= Centroid of the tensi le forces

in steel bars
Fig.
Depth of be am
= Depth of compressive force
18
The representation of forces at ultimate load

for ultimate design
77
The centroid of the forces in the steel bars is obtained by taking the
moment about the bottom edge.
k
23 x 1.5 + 253 x 3
23
34.5
Applying the second equation of equilibrium that the externat moment

should be equal to the internal moment.of resistance.
M.R
= T x lever arm
=
Lever arm
T
d -
k - 1. 5
= Total tensile force
Externat moment
Therefore
= 12V
68,000 x 36.0
3
204 kips.
The ultimate load for this beam from the experimental resulta was 185 kips.
Ultimate Load of Beam B
The Strain Diagram
~l_
T
1
d-e
hs.
tc
Strain in concrete
at ultimate
Strain in steel
at ultimate
From the strain diagram, c is determined as before to be

c
= 1.5
inches.
Renee, all the steel bars are at yield.
Equilibrium of the internal forces:
The total tensile force
A
s
1.0 x 59,000
The total compressive force
f'c x a x b
591000
22,000
2.6 in.
59,000 lbs.
78
The centroid of the tensile forces of the bars is, taking the moment
about the bottom edge,
=
31.0 in.
Therefore
lever arm
72 - (31.0 + 1.3)
39.7
Therefore the external moment should be equal to the moment of the

resistance.
M.R
59,000 x 39.7
B M = 12 vu 1t
59,000 x 39.7
12
200 kips
The u1timate load by the experimental results was 210 kips
79
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
1.
The assumption of the straight line distribution of deep beams is
erroneous and should not be used.
Deep beams should be analysed by
either the strain energy method or the finite difference method.

2.
The finite difference method is very useful in solving the partial
differentia! equations of the Theory of Elasticity.

3.
Deep beams constructed from high strength concrete can be analysed
using the Theory of Elasticity.

4.
High strength concrete in deep beams is advantageous.
concrete cracks the steel takes the whole tensile force.
After the
This force
remains in equilibrium with the compressive force in the concrete.

/
The high compressive strength of concrete ensures that most of the bars
yield and due to this condition the ultimate load is increased.
S.
The fairly linear distribution of the tensile stresses below the
lowest neutral axis makes the distribution of the steel in this area
simplified.
6.
Any section of concrete deep beam has very low stresses in the
middle two thirds of its cross-section, therefore the tensile stresses

are taken by the concrete and there is no necessity for providing
reinforcement in that area.
7.
The concrete can take the compressive stresses, therefore there
is no necessity of providing steel in that area, only temperature reinforcement may be provided.
8.
The percentage of reinforcement should be low, about 2 percent or
below so that sudden failure of the concrete is avoided and at the same
time, the yielding of all the bars is accomplished.
9.
It is relatively simpler to design the section by ultimate load.
80
Ultimate design as used for ordinary reinforced concrete beams may be
used for deep reinforced concrete beams with low percentage of steel
81
CHAPTER 6.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
1.
The effect on ~"'ll.
and 1-x..d for the different depth to span
ratios should be investigated for various types of loading for the

concrete deep beam.
2.
The effect of varying the percentage of reinforcement should be
studied.
3.
The diagonal distribution of the steel should be investigated.
No rigorous analysis has been made to determine the ultimate load
of deep beams.
It is felt that ultimate design of deep beams is simpler
then elastic design.
The elaborated program for testing of a series of
deep beams of steel and concrete shuld be carried out for the different
conditions of boundary and loading.
The ultimate load design may give
reasonably accurate results.

4.
For the determination of the stress trajectories throughout the
beam experimentally, the rosettes may be used, preferably 45 degree

rosettes at the desired points.
5.
The model analysis of a deep beam is suggested.
6.
A deep beam with holes should be investigated using the finite
difference method
82
APPENDIX
STRAIN ENERGY METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE STRESSES IN DEEP BE.AMS
The strain energy method was used to solve the stresses in the
steel plate.
In Chapter 2, this steel plate was analysed for stress
distribution by the finite difference method.
In Chapter 4 the experi-
mental determination of the stresses was discussed.
The energy method
will be kept general in the beginning and the specifie dimensions w-ill
be used in the expression at the final stage of the derivation of the
formula.
A deep beam can be analysed for determination of the stresses
~
by following the steps given below.
T
1
/3
~----;---------------------~.0
1-'E:----
2 l.a. _____..o-1
2.L
The vertical stresses, i.e. in the direction of the

represented by Fourier series.
y-axi~
are
Due to the symmetry about the y-axis only
the even terms of the series will remain.

At the horizontal edge y
2V
2L
At.the horizontal edge
=~
~if ~:
y=-~
..
:..so<(2L.:ill.-)
s,..,ot~] CO$"<')(. (H)
83
-~
where
C>(
l.L
~ 4V
L-
Cl(,
'Y\= 1
rcosc:o<(2.~2.~o..)s,"'~(AJco~~~ (oo)
.o.. L
lT'V\,
The deep beam problem is of the nature of a two-dimensional

problem of the theory of elasticity, the stress function will be a
function of x and y only.
(S~
==
The stress function selected should satisfy the biharmonic

equation developed in Chapter 2, and the boundary conditions in arder
to determine the stresses.
The substitution of the stress function
reduces the biharmonic equation to an ordinary fourth arder differentia!

equation.
The standard solution of this equation is

~
00
= 2._ [ AVI + D, ~) Cosi,O( (1
+ ( C WJ +
,B\'1 ~)
S1Yl
~Of~
h:\
The stress function will be
(s4)
The stresses are obtained by the appropriate differentiation.
00
crx. _
A'YI ~ ~ + 2 BYI CO() Cos.~ O(i + ( Bo 0(:1~) Sr'V'II, oc~
2._ [ (
11..: 1
84
0.0
= -2 v - 2_ [C V\ Cos"'~ -t
2 L
+ c~ s.V\h 0(~
Bon() s~Vl~o(~
YI '
(60)
00
2._~ AYI0(1.-+ sV\~) Si~~ 0(~
t' (
em 0( -&)
Ces!,
oc:~
'V\ ... 1
---(61)
The arbitrary constants A , B , C and D are determined from

n
n
n
n
the boundary conditions.
At the top and bottom edges y
stress conditions are known.
(55) and Txy
~'
the four
These are CS'Cl as given by equations (54-),
= O..
The constants are
(62.)
(64)
(65)
85
The investigation of the stress function shows that the
stresses at the boundary y =
x
are compatible but at the boundary
= ! L they are incompatible. The correction to the stress function
is made by making the stresses compatible at x

The magnitude of
C)~
at x
= L
= L.
by taking the first four
terms of the Fourier series is
~'X-=. ~tA'I\&><2.+ 2.BV\o<) ~~o<~
+ ( BVI"'\... ~)S1'1~~+(CV\c:l'(\lj)l'\l'()
V\= 1
The arbitrary constants
An'
Bn,
Cu,
the equations (b'l.), (~), (b4-) and (t-5).
and Dn are determined from

The polynomial form of the
equation ( ~) is
((Q1)
The P, Q, R, S and T are calculated from the five values of

points y
= 0,
y =
and y
of these values in equation

T
~X.
at
= ~ from equation <~'-). Substitution
('1 )
gives five simultaneous equations

(67a)
0.575
64P + 16Q + 4R + S
- 64P + 16Q - 4R + S
512P + 64Q + 8R + S
- 512P + 64Q - 8R + S
= -
3580
(67b)
1910
(67c)
= -
20000
(67d)
19500
(67)
86
The solution of these equations gives

p
= -37
Q=
12.2
= -92.2
-1030
0.57 5
Therefore <:S"'-,(.. at x + L is
The compatibility of stresses at x

removing
L is achieved by
This is accomplished by calculating a new stress
~~.
function which will give

effect to
=+
crx..
cr~
at x
by equation (&tl).
=~
L having exactly the reverse
The new stress function is super-
imposed on the first as a correction to give the stresses which are

compatible with boundary conditions.
The new stress function is det-
ermined in the form of infinite series.

<:.'l()
}Z)o
The
~O
+ 2_ O(V\ ~'Il
term of the new stress function is to give the specified
stresses at x
=~
L, the remaining terms of the stress function will
satisfy all the boundary conditions.
The constants
o< 1,
0( , etc. are
determined by minimizing the strain energy.

The strain energy of a body subjected to stresses in two
dimensions, with
a unit
thickness is given by
(701)
87
Stresses in a body are independent of the elastic constants in a simply
connected boundary.
Therefore
=0
is substituted in equation
(~~
to simplify the calculation
('70~
Substituting
0''(...
~Sl$
-
-e~:a..
cr~
:rx.~
l..J_
~$2S
a "X...
- -~rf>
~x.."Set
~ 2.
2: IJ(~r
x.'- + ( ~s
CI<J"" -t2(Ciot.:>)j-}
1
cJ.~
&..a- . (1oc.)
Substituting
Li
--
The strain energy is minimized by differentiating U with

respect to constant
o(p
Where P is subscript indicating the number
of the term of the stress function the differential

to zero.
The expression is deduced to be
~~p
is equated
88
0<::1
rn~~ LO('l ~
\{~ ~~~\
~~ J 111 6 ~=' ~~Y
.l..J\o;c: '~~\
+2.
(~f/;p
' 2 -.'>-dV\ ~ ~ &.~
-;,x.~
"a-~'a(t
V\:1
The differentiation is carried under the integral sign.
~O =
f(y) is
substituted.
The first few terms of equation (9q) will give sufficiently
accurate resulta.
Thus if p terms are chosen, p simultaneous equations
wi 11 result
The first term is taken as
~
4
~
= _ J_ [~1.01.. ._ 12.'2. j_.;. Gf2.~ +
L.
(L
12 t.2:2oL'b
rpo
This gives O'"x_ as given by equation (bf!).

The remaining terms are as
CkO
2.. rA.
~.:
0{"'
Substituting in equation (12) given, one solution of this is
Therefore the new stress function is
('72)
89
Therefore 0"':(.. is
- - '!__
L
[37. 0
\d __
12.2 '!:_ + ct2.s '3-:>:>-+ lo:,o

~
~..,2. v c-i: -L.._).. ( s:f_ o~ \:: )

~
J.
':j
lJ
_ o. '575]
(7&)
Subtraction of this 'C5-t- from the c::::>y_ as given by equation
(51=1 )
results a correct solution.

Graph 9 and Table XI show, a comparison of the values of the
horizontal stresses obtained by the different methods.
The values of
the ~~ determined by the strain energy method are higher compared to

those obtained experimentally and by the finite difference method.
If a comparison is made between the finite difference and
the strain energy methods as to the amount of time and effort required
for the solution, the finite difference method is recommended, partieularly when a
co~puter
is available.
Horizontal Stress ~xJDbtained from Different Methods in lbs. per sq. in.
No.
Depth in inches
Finite Difference
Energy
Straight Line
Distribution
Experimental
12
1750
7500
2600
2450
10
2580
3750
1740
3050
1250
1140
870
1310
- 7 50
- 650
- 800
-1250
-1250
- 870
-1800
-2500
-4000
-1740
-2320
- 250
- 100
-2600
- 100
TABLE Xl:
Horizontal Stress in Steel Plate by Energy Method

at a Section 4n from the Vertical Edge
\0
,.....
92
APPENDIX
ELASTIC STABILITY OF DEEP BEAMS
To check the design of a deep beam for its buckling load, the
approximate formula as developed by Timoshenko for a panel loaded in its
own plane and simply supported on its aides is used.
conservative results for a deep beam.
This formula gives
The minimum permissible thickness
b' is given by
(11)
b' ;?0.06 L
K
where
Length
Height
H
and K is a funtion of L given in the following table.
H
L
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
= 22.2
10.9
6.92
4.23
3.45
3.29
3.40
3.68
1. 6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.7
3.45
3.32
3.29
3.40
3.32
3.29
L' =
K =
App1ying to the square, concrets
deep beam 72" x 72" x 4" as
mentioned in Chapter 3:
H
= 72 11
1.0
3.29
b ' ? 0.06
;;?
H
L
72
J3.29
Il
2.3n
(b
'::
Therefore the beam is sa fe in buck ling.
4-.o)
93
APPENDIX
PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE
1.
Compression Test
Nine concrete cylinders 6 x 12 inches, cured and capped
according to A.S.T.M. designation Cl92 were tested in a compression

tester to determine the elastic properties of the concrete in compression.
The cylinders were tested according to A.S.T.M. designation
C39-61.
The compressometer was used to record the longitudinal and the
lateral elongations.
A typical graph of the longitudinal strain is plotted against
the compressive stress.
The curve is linear up to 75% of the compressive
stress.
The following results were obtained from the test.
Modulus of Elasticity
Maximum Ultimate Stress
Average
2.
6
= 3.8 x 10
E
<:::::i' ult
-y
5500 p.s.i.
= 0.13
Tension Test
Three concrete cylinders 6 x 12 inches, cured and strain-
gauged at the end faces were tested for tension in the Baldwin testing
machine.
5TEE L
LOA'D.
PLA\f.
~.t.--- SiANl).
95
A typical set-up is shown in Figure 20.
When the uniformly
distributed load in the longitudinal direction is applied, the uniform

tension
~X.
diameter.
is produced with uniform compression on the vertical
The magnitude is given by
c:5"t.
Tr.DL
6V
(19)
l'\ DL
The strain corresponding to ~C
t2.
corresponding to
~t
tx_ net
The total
t")(.
is determined as
therefore
will be by law of superposition.

tx.total
-'V<S
E
was determined by the strain gauges mounted
both si des of the cylinder.
on
The positions of these gauges are shown in
Figure 20.
A typical graph of the ~X. and the
~net is drawn.
The
beginning of the curve is linear and gives the magnitude of E , ..,_the

~\'\,,
At higher stresses Et....,~,oYI
same value as given by the compression test.

varies from point to point.
The following results were obtained.
CS"" ult
E
initial
462 lbs/in
7 .s
2.0
106
3.9
97
APPENDIX
TEST OF THE
INCH DIAMETER STEEL 'BARS IN TENSION
Three reinforcing
! inch diameter bars of intermediate grade
steel were tested for tension in the Riehle testing machine.

were obtained by a strain gauge placed on the bar.
The strains
The graph of the
strain against the stress was plotted. This is shown in Graph 12.
The following resulta were obtained.
Yield Stress
Ultimate Stress
30 x 10
0&
59000 p. s. i.
- c:5'"t(J.t =
76000 p.s.i.
p.s.i.
99
APPENDIX E
PROPERTIES OF THE STEEL USED IN THE STEEL PLATE
Six coupons
21
Reihle testing machine.

automatica11ye
inch diameter were tested for tension in the

The extensometer was used to record the strains
The graph of the strain versus the stress was plotted.
This is shawn in Graph 13.

The fol1owing results were obtained.
Yie ld Stress
csa =
3
44 x 10 p .. s. i.
Ultimate Stress
CJw..t-
62 x 103 p.s.i.
30 x 10
p.s.i.
101
.APPENDIX
THE SAMPLE CALCULATIONS FOR 'S'x_
The calculations of CS"'x.. stresses for Beam A at the centre lina

for the load of 301 000 lbs. by different methods follow:
The general equations relating the stresses and the strain in
the two dimensions are
(~)(._))~_j)
(SI~)
E.
(~- ))~~)
The se can be written as
\"5X_
(.SI
(t'X..-+ ))~~)
E.
('82o)
(\-l:)
cr~
(t~ +
(1-'il)
))tx_)
taking
J)
a. q
)C
= o. 1~
b
\o
Therefore
where
and
ty
the strain in the x direction
the strain in the y direction.
The averages of the strain on both sides of the beam are given
as tx and ty
For the tensile stress the stress-strain graph is used to
determine the stresses.

~~ at 3 inches depth
tx
-28
+ 23
2
10
-6
= -
2.5 x 10-
ty -331 2- 70 10-6 = - 200.5
b)
10 -6
102
using the stress-strain formulae.
rS
The re fore
3.9 (-2.5 -(0.13) (200.5))
-114 lbs/in
c:>x..at 12 inch depth

t
C)~
24
+ 20 10 6 = 22
= - 163 2=
63 10- 6
x 10-
x 10- 6
= -113
3. 9 (22 - (.13) (113))
36 lbs/in
~~at 24 inch depth

t
13
-114 - 56
\5x_""
cs-x_
+ 12 10-6 = 12.5
x 10
-6
-85 x 10-6
3. 9 (12. 5 - (O. 13) (85))
S. 7 lbs/in
at 36 inch depth
4 - 4
2
~~
c:s;_ at
-42 - 7
2
-25.5
3.9 (0 - (0.13) (25.5))
-12.4 lbs/in
48 inch depth
From the stress-strain graph of the concrete in tension corr-
esponding to a strain of -4
~
6"x... at
-14.2 lbs/in
60 inch depth
<0""><- = 62.4 lbs/ in
CS""K.. at
corresponding to
==
16
72 inch depth
\5"')(..
240 lbs/in
corresponding to
106
103
Finite difference method
=
The first suffix of
second the column.
The
11
indicates the horizontal line and the
~~~ is the distance between two co1umns or linas
(from Table I).

~x_ at the top edge
O""x,.
""
5.7130- 12 +5.7130
36
=- 240 lbs/in
v = -0.574 v
2
72
x_ at 12 inch depth
~~=
=
~~
-22 lbs/in
72
at 24 inch depth
a-~=
=
~~
= -o.os3
5.7130- 10.4400 + 4.6740 v

36
2
4.6740 - 8.2600 - 3.5920

36
3.6 1bs/in
.0088 x 72
-.0209 x 72
-.0192
at 36 inch depth
3.5919- 6.1051 + 2.4921
36
-8.7 lbs/in
D-x_ at 48 inch depth
ISX..=
=
~
2.4922 - 3.8007 + 1.2889

36
-8.1 lbs/in
x 72
at 60 inch depth
1.2889 - 1.4026 + 0.2241
36
2 -
0 11 x 72
104
=
c>~
45 .. 5 lbs/in
at 72 inch depth
~~
-
0.2241 - 0 + 0.2241
36
v 2
0.448
v
72
Straight line distribution

The shallow beam theory formula ia diractly used.
The details
are available in any book on elementary theory of strength of materials.
(S+)
Therefore
total externat moment at any section
distance from the neutral axis
moment of inertia about the neutral axis
thickness
depth.
at the centre will be
12V x y
1 xbxd 3
12
12 x 30000 x y x 12
4 x 72 x 72 x 72
lnaerting the different values of y in inchea
~~~ = - 105 p.s.i.
cs;.l.+ . . crtl~-
69 p. s. i ..
-34.7 p.s.i.
0
105
34.7
p.s.i.
69.0
_p.s.i.
105 p. s. i.
106
REFERENCES
1.
Hooke, R. "De Potentia Restitutiva" 1678 1 as reported by S. Timoshenko in History of Strength of Materials, I, p. 18,
1953.
2.
Timoshenko,
s.
and MacCullough 1 G., "Elements of Strength of
Materials" 3rd. Ed .. p. 141, 1949.

3..
Saint-Venant, Mm Savants Etrangers
4.
Dischinger 1 F. "Beitrag zur Theorie der Halbscheibe und des Wand-
Vol. 14, 1855.
artigen Balkans", Publications International Assoc. for

Bridge and Structural Engineering I, 1932, p.69-93.
5.
"Design of Deep Girders", Pamphlet No. ST66, Concrete Information

Structural Bureau, Portland Cement Assac., Chicago, Ill.
6.
Bay, H., "Die Schiefen Hauptzugspannungen beim Eisenbetonbalken",

Ingenieur-Archiv. Vol. 4, 1933, p.244.
7.
Filon, L.N.G., "On an Approximate Solution of the Bending of a

Beam of Rectangular Cross-section under any System of
Load" 1 Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., London, Series A, Vol.
201, p.63, 1903.
8.
Chow, L., Conway, H.D., and Winter, G. "Stresses in Deep Beams",

A.s.c.E., Vol. 118, p.686, 1953.
9.
Bortsch, R. 1 "Die Ermittlung der Spannungen in Be liebig Begrenzten

Scheiben", Aus den Sitzungsberichten der Akademie der
Wissenschaften in Wien, Math.-Naturwiss. Klasse, Abt1g.
11a, Vol. 138 1 nos. 1 and 2, 1929.
10.
Habe1, A., "Zwei Spannungsaufgaben des Bunkarbaues", IngenieurArchiv., Vol. 5 1 no. 4 1 p.265-274, 1934.
11.
Geer, E., "Stresses in Deep Beams", A.c.I. Vol. 311 Pt. 2 1 p.651,
1959-1960.
12.
Steel, R.K., and Libby, J.R., "Preliminary Tests of Prestressed

Concrete at the
u.s.
Naval Civil Engineering Research
and Evaluation Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California",

Proc. 1st
u.s.
Conf. on Prestressed Concrete, Cambridge,
Massachussetts, 1951, p.231-240.

13.
Lambert, R.H., "An Investigation of Maximum Bending in Simple

Beams with Small Span to Depth Ratio" 1 M.Sc. Thesis
Lehigh University, 1940, p. 86.
107
14.
Kaar, P.H., "Stresses in Centrally Loaded Deep Beam.s", Proc. Soc.

for Experimental Stress Analysis, Vol. 15 1 no. 11 p.77 1
1957.
15.
Airy, G.B., Brit. Assoc. Advancement Sei., Report 1862.
16.
Southwell, R.V., "Relaxation Hethods in Theoretica1 Phyaica",

p.60 1 Oxford University Press, New York, 1946.
c., z.
Math. Phys., Vol. 56 1 p.225 1 1908.
17.
Runge 1
18.
Richardson, L.F., Trans. Roy. Soc., Series A, Vol. 210 1 p.307 1

1910.
19.
Liebmann, H., Sitzber. Bayer. Akad. Wiss., 1918 1 p.385.
20.
Wolf,
21.
Marcus, H., Armieter Beton, 1919 1 p.l07.
22.
Bencky, H.,
F., z.
angew. Math. Mech., Vol. 6 1 p.ll8, 1926.
z.
angew. Math. Mech., Vol. 11 p.81 1 1921 and Vol. 2 1
p.s8, 1922.
23.
Timoshenko,
s. and Goodier,
J.,
"The Application of Finite Diff-
erence Equations in Elasticity". Theory of Elasticity

2nd Ed. p.461.
24.,
Thorpe, W.D., "Call Invert". The progranme to solve simultaneous

equations, Computing Centre, McGill University.

Stresses in Deep Beams Analyzed Using Finite Difference Method

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stresses in Deep Beams Analyzed Using Finite Difference Method

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STRESSES IN DEEP BEAMS

STRESSES IN DEEP BEAMS

Aftab A. Mufti, B.E.

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies

Department of Civil Engineering,

Finite Difference Method

Stress Function at the Boundary and

Stress Function Inside the Boundary

Application of the Finite Difference

Application of the Finite Difference

The Effect of the Size of Net on Load

DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

Plastic Deep Beam

Position of Strain Gauges

Suggested Design Procedure for Reinforced

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

STRAIN ENERGY METHOD TO DETERMINE STRESSES IN

ELASTIC STABILITY OF DEEP BEAMS

PROPERTIES OF STEEL USED IN CONCRETE DEEP BEAMS

PROPERTIES OF STEEL USED IN STEEL PLATE

The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to

Gersovitz under whose direction and valuable

advice the work was carried out;

Mr. Saurindranath Majumdar, Graduate Student, for his

STRESSES IN DEEP BEAMS

Tests were carried out on

beams of steel and concrete.

Additional important symbols are defined where they are introduced.

Beams of such dimension, both in steel as well as concrete,

In all these cases, design based on the elementary

theory of straight line distribution of bending stress in a horizontal

see how the limitation of Navier's Hypothesis is exceeded the principal

Material obeys Hooke's Law.

Plane section remains plane before and after bending, i.e.

The vertical stresses are neglected, i.e.

*-'ll. "" -'Ed)

The plane section rotates about a neutral axis, thus a

Thus a linear distribution of strain with increasing distance

Experimenta show that it is quite

justifiable to make the above assumptions as far as shallow beams are

It has been proved that vertical stresses in shallow beams

can be neglected at a distance which is not in the immediate vicinity

This distance is determined to be twice the depth

For the warping of a cross section Timoshenko writes "A more

In the case of concentrated loads

which states that "If the forces acting on a small

portion of the surface of an elastic body are replaced by another

The dimensions of deep

Thus the theory applied to determine the stresses

in deep beams differs from that of straight line distribution.

this theory will be used for comparison.

an infinite span with periodic loading,

an infinite span with constant load,

a finite span with periodic loading,

a finite span with constant load.

It is cmparatively easy to satisfy boundary conditions in the .first two

In the last two cases boundary conditions are not so easily

A theory was developed for an ideal elastic

The theory was applied, with reasonable assumptions,

The experimental and

theoretical results were compared and a design procedure was proposed,

solved the case of continuous deep

With depth equal to or greater than the span,