ACI352R-91

(Reapproved 1997)

Recommendations for Design of Beam-Column Joints in

Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structures
Reported by ACI-ASCE Committee 352

Clarkson W. Pinkham Norman W. Hanson

Chairman Secretary

James K. Wight
Subcommtttee Chairman

J. D. Artstizibal David A. Hunter Mehdi Saiidi

Vitelmo V. Bertcro James 0. Jima Donald R. Strand
Marvin E. Criswell Cary Kopczynski S. M. Uzumeri
Ahmad J. Durram Donald F. Meinheit Sudhakar P. Verma
Mohammad R. Ehsani John J. Otrembiak Lormg A. Wyllie, Jr.
Edward S. Hoffman Robert Park Liandc Zhang

Committee members voting on the 1991 revisions:

James K. Wight Mohammad R. Ehsani

Chairman Secretary

Ahmad J. Durrani
Chairman, Editorial Subcommittee

James R. Cagley Donald F. Meinheit Gene R. Stevens

Marvin E. Criswell Jack P. Moehle Donald R. Strand
Luis E. Garcia Clarkson W. Pinkham S. M. Uzumeri
Cary S. Kopczynski Mehdi Saiidt Sudhakar P. Verma
Michael E. Kreger Mustafa Seckin Loring A. Wyllie, Jr.

These recommendations an a revision of earlier recommendations from concrete; connections; earthquake resistant structures; hooked reinforce-
this committee. Recommendations are given for member proportions and ment; joints (junctions); reinforced concrete; reinforcmg steels; shear
reinforcement dctaiL requind for satisfactory confiement of the column strength; stresses; structural design; structures.
core i n the joint region. adequate joint shear strength, the proper ratio of
column-moment strength versus beam-moment strength at the joint, and CONTENTS
development of reinforcing bars either terminating in or passing through
the joint. Commentary is provided to amplify the recommendations and Chapter l-Introduction and scope, p. 352R-2
identify available reference material.
1. l-Introduction
The recommendations are based on laboratory testing as well as field
1.2-Scope for concrete
studies and provide a state-of-the-art summary of current information.
Amas needing research aw identified. Design examples are presented to
1.3-Scope for Type 2 joints
illustrate the USC of the design ncommcndations.
Chapter 2-Classification of beam-column joints, p.
Keywords: beam-column joints, anchorage (structural); beams (sup- 352R-2
porta); bond (concrete to reinforcement); columns (supports); confined 2. l-General
AC1 Commtttee Reports, Gurdes, Standard Practtces, and Commentarms 2.2~Definition
ate intended for guidance in planning, designing, executing, and inspecting
construction. This document is intended for the use of individuals who
are competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its con-
tent and recommendations and who will accept responsibility for the AC1 352R-91 became effectwe June I. 1991 and vqer\ede\ ACI 152R-85 Numer-
application of the material it contains. The American Concrete Institute out edmwal and m~ncr nw,\,cm\ were made to the report Reference\ have teen
disclaims any and all responsibility for the stated principles. The Institute added and updated
Copyrnght 8 1997, Amencan Concrete InWute
shall not be liable for any loss or damage arising therefrom. All right\ raewedmcludmg rights of reproduction and w e !nany form or by any
Reference to this document shall not be made in contract documents. If means. mcludmg the makmg of copes by any photo proce\\, or by electrow or
items found in this document are desired by the Architect/Engineer to be mechanical &we, printed. written. or oral, or recordmg for wund or w\uaI reproduc-
a part of the contract documents, they shall be restated in mandatory lan- tmn or for u\e I any knowledge or retrieval \y\tem or dewce. unle\\ perm,\\mn ,n
guage for incorporation by the Architect/Engineer. wrung IF obtanud from the copyright proprietor+
-________ -..-.A
352R-1
352R-2 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
(a) Exterior (b) Interior
Fig. I.l-Typical beam-to-column connections
Chapter 3-Design considerations, p. 352R-3
3. l-Critical sections
3.2-Forces
3.3-Serviceability
3.4-Strength considerations
Chapter A--Nominal strength considerations, p. 35214
4. I-Compression
4.2-Transverse reinforcement
4.3~Shear for Type 1 and Type 2 joints
4.4-Flexure
4.5-Development of reinforcement
Chapter 5-Notation, p. 352R-9
Chapter &References, p. 352R-10
Appendix A-Areas needing research, p. 352R-12
Appendix B-Design examples, p, 3521-13
CHAPTER l-INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE*
l.l-Introduction
These recommendations are for determining joint propor-
tions and design of the longitudinal and transverse reinforce-
ment at the intersection of beams and columns in cast-in-
place concrete frame construction. The recommendations
are written to satisfy strength and ductility requirements re-
lated to the function of the joint,
In the past, the design of joints in monolirhic reinforced
concrete srrucrures was primarily limited to satisfying an-
chorage requirements for rhe reinforcement. Because of the
use of high-strength materials (concrete and steel), smaller
member sections, and larger reinforcing bars, special atten-
tion to rhe design and detailing of the joint has become more
important. In many designs, column sizes may be defined by
the requirements of joint detail design. Attention is focused
on the joint to ensure proper structural performance under
all loading conditions that may reasonably be expec&d lo
occur and to alert the designer to possible congestion of re-
inforcement.
*Design recommendations of Committee 352 are set in standard
and explanations follow each section in italic type.
This report considers typical beam-column joints in cast-
in-place reinforced concrete structures, as shown in Fig. 1.1.
Specifically excluded from these recommendations are slab-
column joints and precast structures where connections are
made near the beam-to-column intersection. Design exam-
ples illustrating the use of these recommendations are given
in Appendix B.
The material presented here is an update of a previous re-
port from ACI-ASCE Committee 352.49 A partial listing of
research information available to the committee at that time
is given in References l-38. Research information available
in References 39-66 and Chapter 2 1 of AC1 3 18 have been
received during the updating of these provisions. This report
addresses joints in both seismic and nonseismic regions,
whereas Chapter 2 1 of AC1 3 18 addresses only joints in seis-
mic regions.
l&-Scope for concrete
These recommendations apply only to structures using
normal weight concrete in the joints.
1.3-4cope for Type 2 joints
For Type 2 joints as defined in Section 2.1, only joints in
which the column width is equal to or greater than the beam
width are covered by these recommendations.
For Type 2 joints, the recommendations provide guidance
only in cases where the beam bars are located within the col-
umn core. All currently available research results are for
connections where the beam width is less than or equal to the
column width and the beam centerline passes through rhe
column centroid. Connecrions where the beam centerline
does norpass through the column centroid are included ifall
beam bars are anchored in or pass through rhe column core.
However, the torsion resulting from this eccentricity should
be considered. Connections where the beam bars pass out-
side the column core are excluded for Type 2 joints because
of a lack of research data on rhe anchorage of such bars un-
der large load reversals.
CHAPTJXR 2-CLASSIFICATION OF
BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS
2.1-General
Structural joints are classified into two categories, Type 1
and Type 2, based on the loading conditions for the joint and
the anticipated deformations of the joint when resisting lat-
eral loads.
2.1.1 Type I - A Type 1 joint connects members de-
signed to satisfy AC1 318 strength requirements and in
which no significant inelastic deformations are anticipated.
2.1.2 Type 2 - A Type 2 joint connects members desig-
nated to have sustained strength under deformation reversals
into the inelastic range.
The requirements forjoints are dependent on the deforma-
tions at the joint implied by rhe design loading conditions.
Typical examples of each joint type are:
Type 1 is a joint in a continuous moment resisting struc-
type: commentary
ture designed on the basis of strength without considering
 BEAM-COLUMN
special ductility requirements. Any joint in a typical frame
designed to resist gravity and normal wind loads would fall
into this category.
Type 2 is a joint that connects members that are required
to dissipate energy through reversals of deformation into the
inelastic range. Joints in moment resisting frame structures
designed to resist earthquake motions, very high winds, or
blast effects are of this category.
2.2-Definition
A joint is defined as that portion of the column within the
depth of the beam(s), including the slab, that frame into the
column.
CHAPTER 3-DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
3.1-Critical sections
A beam-column joint should be profirtioned to resist the
forces specified in Section 3.2 at the critical sections. The
critical sections for transfer of member forces to the joint are
at the joint-member interfaces. Critical sections for shear
forces within the joint are defined in Section 4.3.1. Critical
sections for bars anchored in the joint are defined in Section
4.51.
Design recommendations are based on the assumption
that the critical sections are immediately adjacent to the
joint. Exceptions are made for joint shear and reinforcement
anchorage. Fig. 3.1 shows the joint as a free body with forc-
es acting on the critical sections.
3.2-Forces
3.2.1-The joint should be designed for the interaction of
the multidirectional forces which the members transfer to the
joint including axial loads, bending, torsion, and shear.
These forces are a consequence of the effects of externally
applied loads as well as those resulting from creep, shrink-
age, temperature, or settlement.
The joint should resist all forces that may be transferred
by adjacent members, using those combinations that pro-
duce the most severe force distribution at the joint, including
the effect of any member eccentricity. Forces produced by
deformations resultingftom time-dependent effects and tem-
perature should be taken into account. For Type 2 joints the
design forces that the members transfer to the joint are not
limited to the forces determinedfrom a conventional analy-
sis, but should be determinedfrom the nominal strengths of
the members as defined in Section 3.2.2. Strength reduction
fators are not used.
33.2-At every joint, consideration should be given to de-
termine which members will reach initial flexural yielding
due to gravity loads, lateral loads, and secondary effects, and
the design forces in the flexural reinforcement at the mem-
ber-joint interfaces should be determined using the stress a&
where fy is the specified yield strength of the reinforcing bars
and a is a stress multiplier
ForType 1 a;l 1.0
JOINTS 352R-3
Ccl TCl
(a) Due to Gravity Loads (bl Due to Loteml Loads
Fig. 3.I-Planarjointforces. T = tension force, C = com-
pression force, V = shear force, subscript b for beam and
subscript c for column
ForType a;r 1.25
The analysis of the forces acting on a Type 1 or Type 2
joint is identical. For Type 2 joints for which the sum of the
column flexural capacities exceed the sum of the beamflex-
Ural capacities along any principal plane, the forces in Fig.
3. I(b) representing tension and compressionfrom the beams
should be based on the area of steel provided and the speci-
jIed yield stress modiJied by a. The corresponding column
forces are then a function of the column axial load and the
moments and shears required to keep the connection in equi-
librium. For Type I joints [represented in Fig. 3.1(a)], the
same approach is used unless the column sections reach
their capacities before the beam sections. In the latter case,
the columns are assumed to be at their flexural capacities,
with due consideration of column axial load, and the beam
moments and shears have magnitudes required to keep the
joint in equilibrium.
The factor a is intended to account for the following: (a)
the actual yield stress of a typical reinforcing bar is com-
monly 10 to 25 percent higher than the nominal value, and
(b) the reinforcing bars will strain harden at member dis-
placements only slightly larger than the yield rotation. A re-
search studyS demonstrates typical laboratory results for a
statically determinate test specimen. The results, which were
discussed in detail in a previous committee report show a
significant increase in steel stress above the actual yield
stress attributable to strain hardening when plastic hinging
occurs. A value of a = 1.0 is permitted for Type I joints be-
cause only limited ductility is required in members adjacent
to this type of joint. As pointed out in the previous committee
report, a value of a = 1.25 should be regarded as a mini-
mum for Type 2 joints. For reinforcing steels whose proper-
ties are not controlled properly, a value of a larger than the
recommended minimum may be appropriate.
3.3-Serviceability
Cracking and concentrated rotation are to be expected near
the joint faces where bending moments usually reach their
maximum values. The section proportions of the framing
members at the joint should satisfy the requirements of AC1
3 18 for cracking and deflection under service loads.
 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE

of column reinforcement should be distributed around all pe-

rimeter faces of the column core. Further, the center-to-cen-
ter spacing between adjacent longitudinal bars should not
exceed the larger of either 8 in. (200 mm) or one-third of the
column diameter or cross section dimension in the direction
the spacing is being considered. In no case should the spac-
ing exceed 12 in. (300 mm).
Research on c01umn~~~~~ 2s*29*31 subjected to severe load
reversals has shown that a uniform distribution of the col-
(0) Plon view of iti with umn longitudinal reinforcement area improves confinement
komsinbo xondy
BIy g~;~uSJing of the column core. The requirements of this section are in-
tended to insure a relatively uniform distribution of the lon-
gitudinal bars in Type 2 joints.
A
1 4.2-Transverse reinforcement
SC byr0.75hy
4.2.1-Type 1 joints
4.2.1.1-Transverse reinforcement, as defined in Sec-
-7-T Y

tX
bY hY
~ J4
Al
(b) ~onmvJ tf j$syE
providing c&f inement
Fig. 4.l-Dejnition of adequate lateral confining members
Serviceability requirements are intended primarily for
members meeting at a joint. No additional requirements over
those given in ACI 318 are specified. However, the designer
should consider the possible ejfect of joint rotations on
cracking and defection.
3.4-Strength considerations
All joints should be designed, according to Chapter 4, to
resist the most critical combination of forces as defined in
Section 3.2.
CHAPTER ANOMINAL STRENGTH
REQUIREMENTS
4.l-Compression
4.1.1-Transmission of the column axial load through the
joint region requires adequate lateral confinement of the con-
crete in the column core by a combination of longitudinal
column reinforcement plus either transverse members fram-
ing into the column or transverse reinforcement, as defined
in Section 4.2, or both.
4.1.2-Longitudinal column reinforcement passing
through the joint should satisfy Sections 10.9.1 and 10.9.2,of
AC1 318.
For Type 1 joints, longitudinal column bars may be offset
within the joint. The provisions of AC1 3 18 for offset bars
should be followed.
For Type 2 joints, longitudinal column bars extending
through the joint should not be offset at the joint and the area
tion 4.2.1.3, should be provided through the total depth of the
joint except for locations or in directions as defined in Sec-
tion 4.2.1.2.
4.2.1.2-Within the depth of the shallowest member
framing into the joint, the following exceptions to Section
4.2.1.3 are permitted:
a) Where beams frame into all four sides of the joint and
where each beam width is at least three-quarters of the
column width and does not leave more than 4 in. (100
mm) of the column width uncovered on either side of
the beams, Section 4.2.1.3 does not need to be satis-
fied.
b) Where beams frame into only two opposite sides of the
joint and the beam widths are at least three-quarters of
the column width and no more than 4 in. (100 mm) of
the column width remains uncovered on either side of
the beams. Section 4.2.1.3 does not need to.be satisfied
in the direction perpendicular to the two sides of the
joint into which the beams frame. Transverse rein-
forcement satisfying Section 4.2.1.3 should be pro-
vided in the direction parallel to those two sides.
The primary junction of ties in a tied column is to prevent
the outward buckling of the .column longitudinal bars and to
provide some confinement to the column core. For Type 1
joints, ties may be omitted within the joint ifthere are trans-
verse membersframing into the joint that are of a sulficient
size to effectively replace the cot@ement provided by ties.
Some typical cases are shown in Fig. 4.1.
4.2.1.3-Transverse reinforcement should satisfy Sec-
tion 7.10 of AC1 3 18 as modified in this section. At least two
layers of transverse reinforcement should be provided be-
tween the top and bottom levels of beam longitudinal rein-
forcement of the deepest member framing into the joint. The
center-to-center spacing should not exceed 12 in. (300 mm).
If the beam-column joint is part of the primary system for re-
sisting nonseismic lateral loads, the center-to-center spacing
of the transverse reinforcement should not exceed 6 in. (150
mm). To facilitate placement of transverse reinforcement in
Type 1 joints, cap or split ties may be used provided the lap
length is sufficient to develop the tie strength.
 BEAM-COLUMN
When required, ties in the joint should satisfy the require-
ments of ACI 318 for tied columns plus additional recom-
mendations which confSte the column bars through the joint.
When ties are recommended in a joint which is part of the
primary system for resisting nonseismic lateral loads, the
recommended spacing is limited to 6 in. (150 mm), center to
center, to provide additional confinement to the joint.
4.2.2-Type 2 joints
4.2.2.1-When spiral transverse reinforcement is used,
the volumetric ratio P,~ should be
(4.1)
but should not be less than that required by AC1 3 18.
4.2.2.2-Where rectangular hoop and crosstie trans-
verse reinforcement as defined in Chapter 2 1 of AC1 3 18 is
used, the total cross-sectional area in each direction of a sin-
gle hoop, overlapping hoops, or hoops with crossties of the
same size should be at least equal to
s,,hf,
A,, = 0.3? (A/A, - 1) (4.2)
Jyh
but should not be less than
s,,hf,
A, = 0.09 - f . (4.3)
Jyh
The speci$ed reinforcement is expected to provide ade-
quate conf%tement to the joint during anticipated earthquake
loading and displacement demands. The provided confine-
ment is also expected to be sufficient for necessary force
transfers within the joint. Eq. (4.1) and (4.2) are the same as
those given in Chapter 21 of ACI 318. The coefficient 0.09 in
Eq. (4.3) was selected based on the observed improved be-
havior of tied columnP*29*31 which have properly detailed
hoops and crossties.
4.2.2.LLFor joints connecting members which are part
of the primary system for resisting seismic lateral loads, the
center-to-center spacing between layers of transverse rein-
forcement (hoops or hoops and crossties) sh should not ex-
ceed the least of one-quarter of the minimum column
dimension, six times the diameter of longitudinal column
bars to be restrained, or 6 in. (150 mm). Crossties, when re-
quired, shall be provided at each layer of transverse rein-
forcement. The lateral center-to-center spacing between
crossties or legs of overlapping hoops should not be more
than 12 in. (300 mm) and each end of a crosstie should en-
gage a peripheral longitudinal reinforcing bar.
4.2.2,AIf a joint connects members which are not part
of the primary system for resisting seismic lateral loads, but
the members must be designed to sustain reversals of defor-
mation in the inelastic range for deflection compatibility
with the primary system for resisting seismic lateral loads,
JOINTS 352R-5
the vertical center-to-center spacing between layers of trans-
verse reinforcement s,, should not exceed the smaller of one-
third of the minimum column dimension or 8 in. (200 mm).
In the design of building systems resisting earthquake
forces, it is assumed that loads have been reduced to a level
wherein member forces are determined by elastic theory.
The inelastic response that is expected at the anticipated lev-
el of earthquake excitation is provided for by the special de-
tailing of the members and joints which comprise the
primary system for resisting seismic lateral loads. Members
which are not included in this system should also be capable
of undergoing the same deformations as the primary system
without a loss of vertical load strength. Thus, members
which are not part of the primary system should be either
flexible enough to respond elastically to the anticipated
ground motion (not the reduced seismic design lateral forc-
es) or else the nominal hooping recommended in Section
4.2.2.4 should be provided to minimize joint deterioration.
The limitations on size and spacing of transverse rein-
forcement given in this section, when combined with the lim-
itations of Section 4.1,2 for spacing of longitudinal bars in
Type 2 joints, are intended to create a steel gridwork capa-
ble of adequately confining the column core. Crossties are
required to maintain the stiffness of the sides of the grid-
work.
4.2.2.5-Transverse reinforcement, as defined in Sec-
tions 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2, should be provided unless the joint
is confined on all sides by structural members which satisfy
Section 4.2.1.2(a), in which case the reinforcement should
not be less than half that required in Sections 4.2.2.1 and
4.2.2.2. Spacing limitations of Sections 4.2.2.3 and 4.2.2.4
apply regardless of confinement conditions.
Recent research result$8*32*33~46*48*56~62 have shown that
smallerpercentages of transverse reinforcement can be used
when adequately sized transverse members are present.
4.2.2.6-All hoops should be closed with hooks of not
less than 135 deg at their ends and 6 bar-diameter extensions.
Single leg crossties should have a 135 deg bend with a 6 bar-
diameter extension on one end and the other end may have a
standard tie hook, as defined in Section 7.1 of AC1 318. If
used, the 90 deg ends should be alternated on opposite faces
of the column. In exterior and comer joints, the crossties
should be arranged such that the 135 deg bend is at the exte-
rior face of the joint.
Recommended shapes of closed hoops and single leg
crossties are shown in Fig. 4.2. The preferred shape for a
single leg crosstie would have a 135 deg bend at both ends.
However, installation of such crossties usually is dift?cult. A
standard 90 deg tie hook is permitted, but does not provide
effective anchorage because the extension beyond the bend
runs along the outside edge of the confined column core.
Further, a shorter extension is permitted for the 90 deg bend
because increasing the extension would offer only a slight
improvement. Thus it is recommended that when a 90 deg
bend is used it should be alternated on opposite faces along
the column. However, in the case of exterior and comer
joints, where the loss of cover could affect the anchorage of
252R-6 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
b
(0) Closed Hoop
(b) Single Leg Cross Tie
Fig. 4.2-Requited dimensions of
tmnsverse reinforcement
cross ties at the 90 deg be& it is recommended that only 135
deg bend be used at the exterior face of the joint.
4.2.2.7-Transverse reinforcement layers required in
the joint should be extended into the columns above and be-
low the joint as required by Chapter 21 of AC1 318. Trans-
verse reinforcement as required by Chapter 21 of ACI 318
should also be provided in the beams adjacent to the column.
Minimum distances for extending the joint transverse re-
inforcement into the columns to provide confinement to the
column core above and below a joint are given in Section
21.4.4.4 of AC1 3 18. The committee has reservations about
the adequacy of the specified extensions,26 such as at the top
story or at the base of a first story column, where the poten-
tial flexural hinging zone may extend further into the story
height than the minimum distances specified. In such cases
the joint transverse reinforcement should be extended to cov-
er the entire potential flexural hinging zone.
4.3-Shear for Type 1 and Type 2 joints
4.3.1-For joints with beams framing in from two perpen-
dicular directions, the horizontal shear in the joint should be
checked independently in each direction. The design shear
force V,, should be computed on a horizontal plane at the
midheight of the joint by considering the shear forces on the
boundaries of the free body of the joint and the normal ten-
sion and compression forces in the members framing into the
joint as specified in Section 3.2.2. The following equation
should be satisfied
Table l-Values of y for beam-to-column joints
Joint classificaton
Joint type ( a ) I n t e r i o r 1 (b) E x t e r i o r 1 ( c ) C a n e r
1 24 20 I5
2 20 I 15 12
(4.4)
where + = 0.85 and V,, the nominal shear strength of the joint
is
V = YE (psi) bj h
vn = 0.083~8 (MPa) bj h (4.5)
where b, is the effective joint width and h is the thickness of
the column in the direction of load being considered.
The effective joint width bj should be taken as
U+, + bc)
bj= 2 (4.6)
but not greater than column width b, or greater than beam
width bb plus half the column depth h on each side of the
beam. The term b* is the width of the beam in the ditection
of loading. Where beams of different width frame into oppo-
site sides of the column in the direction of loading, bb should
be taken as the average of the two widths.
The constant y for Eq. (4.5) is given in Table 1 and de-
pends on the joint classification, as defined in Section 4.3.2.
and joint type, as defined in Chapter 2. The value for the
compressive strength f, in Eq. (4.5) should not be larger than
6000 psi (42 MPa).
4.3~An interior joint has horizontal members framing
into all four sides of the joint. However, to be classified as an
interior joint for Table 1, the horizontal frame members
should cover at least three-quarters of the width of the col-
umn and the total depth of the most shallow horizontal mem-
ber should not be less than three-quarters of the total depth
of the deepest horizontal member framing into the joint. If
the four horizontal members do not satisfy this requirement,
then the y value for this joint should be selected from Col-
umn (b) of Table 1.
An exterior joint has at least two horizontal members
framing into opposite sides of the joint. However, to be clas-
sified as an exterior joint for Table 1, the widths of the hori-
zontal frame members on the two opposite faces of the joint
should cover at least three-quarters of the width of the col-
umn and the total depth of these two members should be not
less than three-quarters of the total depth of the deepest
member framing into the joint. If the two horizontal frame
members do not satisfy this requirement, then the 7 value for
this joint should be selected from Column (c) of Table 1.
All other joints should be classified as comer joints when
selecting a value for yin Table 1.
 BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS 352R-7

The geometric descriptions of interior, exterior, and cor-

ner joints are given in Fig. 4.3.
Column
Not all joints which have horizontal membersframing into ams
all four sides of the joint can be classified as interior joints
when using Table I. If the dimensions of the horizontal mem-
bers do not satisfy the given requirements, then a lower val-
+
ue of y ir specified. Similarly, not all joints which have
horizontal members framing into two opposite sides of the (a 1 Interior
joint can be classified as exterior joints when using Table 1.
Again, if the dimensions of the horizontal members do not
satisfy the given requirements, then a lower value of y is
specified.
Although the joint may be designed to resist shear in two
perpendicular horizontal directions, only one classification
is made for a joint. That is, only one value for y is selected
from Table I for the joint, and that value is used when check-
(b.! I Exterior (b. 2) Exterior
ing the joint shear capacity in both directions.
The concrete compressive strength in Eq. (4.5) is limited
to 6OOOpsi (42 MPa) because only limited research data are
available on the behavior of connections constructed using Column
Column Beam
higher strength concrete.38
The normal procedure for calculating the horizontal de-
Beams
sign shear in an interior and an exterior joint is shown in
Fig. 4.4. The procedure for determining the joint width in + I-
cases when the beam width is less than the column width is (c. t 1 Corner (c.2) Corner
shown in Fig. 4.5.
In cases where the beam centerline does not pass through
Fig. 4.3-Geometric description of joints
the column centroid, torsion may occur. At the present time,
there is insufficient research on eccentric .connections to de-
velop specific design recommendations, but such eccentrici- h=%lfCbL-%

ties have resulted in apparent increased earthquake

damage. The designer should consider the possible conse-
quences of member eccentricities on jointperformance when
designing and detailing the joint.
The design philosophy embodied in Eq. (4.5) is that during
anticipated earthquake loading and displacement demands,
the joint can carry the specified shearforces if the concrete
within the joint is adequately confined. To provide this con-
finement, Sections 4.1 and 4.2 contain recommended details A22
for column longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the I t
joint region. Joint Elevation Beom Section
Some researchers2.43 have pointed out the need to consid-
Fig. 4.4-Evaluation of horizontal joint shear
er also vertical shear forces in the joint. It is expected that
the recommendations for the distribution of the column lon-
gitudinal reinforcement given in Section 4.1.2 will provide
adequate vertical reinforcement in the joint to carry that
component of joint shear.
The shear provisions adopted by Committee 352 are in-
tended for limited displacement and rotation levels and also
anticipate the beneficial effects of load redistribution in a re-
dundantframe structure. Committee 352 has also addressed
the construction problems resulting frDm congestion of rein-
forcement in beam-column joints.

4.AFlexure
4.4.1-Flexural design of members at the joint should be Plan Views
based on the provisions of AC1 3 18. Fig. 4..5-Determination of effective joint width b,
352R-5 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
Fig. rC.&Critical section for development of beam rein-
forcement terminating in the joint
4.4.2-For Type 2 joints which are part of the primary sys-
tem for resisting seismic lateral loads, the sum of the nomi-
nal moment strengths of the column sections above and
below the joint, calculated using the axial load which gives
the minimum column-moment strength, should not be less
than 1.4 times the sum of the nominal moment strengths of
the beam sections at the joint. For joints with beams framing
in from two perpendicular directions, this ratio should be
checked independently in each direction.
4.4.3-For Type 2 joints which are not part of the primary
system resisting seismic lateral loads, the ratio of column to
beam moment strengths should be greater than 1.0. If this
provision is not met, transverse reinforcement as specified in
Section 4.2.2.5 should be used both above and below the
joint and should extend a distance at least equal to twice the
effective depth of the column cross section, both above and
below the joint boundaries.
The requirement that the sum of the nominal moment
strengths of the column sections above and below a Type 2
joint be 40 percent greater than the nominal moment
strengths of the beam sections framing into the joint is in-
tended to produceflexural hinging in the beams rather than
in the columns, as is normally preferred in the seismic design
of moment resisting reinforced concrete frame structures.
Therefore, the 1.4 factor is a minimum value and a higher
value could be necessary to develop beam hinging in struc-
tures with heavily reinforced slabs. Appropriate slab width
should be included in calculating the beam moment
strengths. Recent studiesf 7.42-44.~,48.Y-S~S8.8.60.62.63 hve shown
the presence of a slab to have a significant e@ect on the per-
formance of connections. The committee continues to review
this data. However, at this time there is no clear consensus
on the effective width of slab to use in determining the beam
flexural strength.
For portions of the structure which are not part of the pri-
mary system resisting seismic lateral loads, column hingmg
due to a severe earthquake is not critical as long .as proper
transverse reinforcement is used. In certain cases, frames
are designed with deep long-span beams and relatively small
columns. It is recommended that such frames not be part of
the primary system resisting seismic lateral loads.
4X-Development of reinforcement
4.5.1 Critical sections for development of beam reinforce-
ment-The critical section for development of reinforce-
ment should be taken at the face of the column for Type 1
joints and at the outside edge of the column core for Type 2
joints.
During intense seismic loading, moment reversals are to
be expected at beam-to-column joints which cause stress re-
versals in the beam and column longitudinal reinforcement
at the connection. Research results have shown that the
concrete cover over the column bars quickly becomes inef-
fective for bar development in Type 2 joints. Thus, the criti-
cal section for development is taken at the face of the
confined column core (see Fig. 4.6).
4.5.2 Hooked bars terminating in the joint
4.5.2.1 Bar sizes should not exceed No. 11 and hooks
should be located as far from the critical section as possible.
The minimum development length I,,,,, as defined in the fol-
lowing sections, should not be less than 8db or 6 in. (150
mm>.
4.5.2.2 For Type 1 joints, the development length l& of
a bar terminating in a standard hook should be computed as
follows
f,Wd,
dh =
SOR(psi)
fyNWd,
1 dh = (4.7)
4.2K(MPa)
a) For No. 11 and smaller bars, if side cover normal to the
plane of the hook is not less than 2V2 in, (65 mm) and
cover on the bar extension beyond the hook is not less
than 2 in. (50 mm), lclhr as given in Eq. (4.3, may be
multiplied by 0.7.
b) For No. 11 and smaller bars, if the hook is enclosed ver-
tically or horizontally within ties or stirrupties which
are provided along the full development length at a
spacing not greater than 3d,, where db is the diameter
of the hooked bar, then l,,, as given in Eq. (4.7). may
be multiplied by 0.8.
c) Where reinforcement in the flexural member is pro-
vided in excess of that required for flexural strength
and anchorage for fy is not specifically required, ldA, as
given in Eq. (4.7), may be reduced by the ratio
A,(required)/A,(provided).
4.5.2.3-For Type 2 joints, all terminating bars should
be hooked within the transverse reinforcement of the joint
using a 90 deg standard hook, The development length, mea-
sured from the critical section as defined in Section 4.5.1,
should be computed as follows
dh =
I
75 fi(psi)
 afr (MPW,
(4.8)
dh =
6.2fl(MPa) h (co1 1 ,-----j
I

4.5.2.AIf transverse joint reinforcement is provided at

a spacing less than or equal to three times the diameter of the
bar being developed l,,,, as given in Eq. (4.8), may be multi-
plied by 0.8.
4.5.2.5-For multiple layers of reinforcement, the bars
in each layer must satisfy the given criteria.
For most Type 1 and all Type 2 exterior connections, bars Fig. 4.7-Bond stress on straight bar passing through the
joint
terminating at a connection will be anchored using a stan-
dard hook as defined by ACI 318. The tail extension of the
hooks should project toward, and usually through, the mid-
4.5.4 Beam and column bars passing through the joint-
height of the connection. The required development length is
For Type 1 joints, no recommendations are made.
given by Eq. (4.7) and (4.8), which were derivedfrom work
For Type 2 joints, all straight beam and column bars pass-
done by A CI Committee 408.22.
ing through the joint should be selected such that
Eq. (4.7) is a combination of the provision in ACZ 318,
Sections 12.5.2 and 12.5.3.1. Sections 4.5.2.2(a), (b), and(c) h(column)/d&ieam bars) 2 20
are identical to Section 12.5.3.2, 12.5.3.3, and 12.5.3.4 of
AC1 318. The differences between Eq. (4.7) and (4.8) reflect h(beam)/d,(column bars) 2 20
several factors including: (I) the hook in a Type 2 joint must
be enclosed, within the confined core so the 0.7 factor of Sec- Various researchers14~19~3~33*~~s1@ have shown that straight
tion 4.5.2.2(a) is included, (2) an increase in length is fac- beam and column bars may slip within the beam-column
tored into the equation to reflect the detrimental effects of joint during a series of large moment reversals. As shown in
load reversals, and (3) the increase in stress under large Fig. 4.7, the bond stresses on these straight bars may be very
deformations is included with the fator 01. Section 4.5.2.4 large. The purpose of the recommended value for h/d, is to
reflects the beneficial effects of very closely spaced trans- limit slippage of the beam and column bars through the con-
verse reinforcement. In most cases, the spacing of transverse nection. Slip of reinforcing bars is not usually accounted for
reinforcement will be greater than specified in Section in normal design. However, when modeling a frame struc-
4.5.2.4 to avoid congestion problems. ture for inelastic dynamic analysis, this slippage should be
4.5.3-Straight bars terminating in Type 1 joints considered. To reduce the bond stresses to a value low
4.5.3.1-Straight bars should be No. 11 or smaller and enough to prevent bar slippage under large load reversals
the development length for a straight bar terminating in the would require very large connections. A thorough treatment
connection should be taken as of this topic is found in Reference 38.
l = fYWAt,( in.*)
d
CHAPTER r--NOTATION
25 &(psi)

A, = area of individual bar

A, = area of column core measured from outside edge to
(4.9) outside edge of either spiral or hoop reinforcements
A, = gross area of column section

but not less than Ash = total cross-sectional area of all legs of hoop rein-
forcement, including crossties, crossing a section
having a core dimension h
OLMBkfd;(psi) [O.O58d,(mm)&(MPa)]
b, = design width of beam
Eq. (4.9) assumes the bar is contained within the core of b, = width of column transverse to the direction of shear
the column. Any portion of the straight embedment length b) = effective width of joint transverse to the direction of
not within the confined core should be increased by 30 per- shear
cent. db = nominal diameter of bar
a) If the depth of concrete cast in one lift beneath the bar f, = specified compressive strength of concrete in the
exceeds 12 in(300 mm), l,, should be increased by 30 joint
percent. = specified yield strength of reinforcement
b) Where reinforcement in the flexural member is pro- ;h = specified yield strength of hoop and crosstie rein-
vided in excess of that required for flexural strength forcement
and anchorage for fY is not specifically required, I,+ may & = specified yield strength of spiral reinforcement
be reduced by the ratio A,(required)/A,(provided). h = full deoth of column or full deuth of beam
h t, = core dimension of tied column, outside to outside
edge of bar, perpendicular to the transverse rein-
forcement area A,* being designed
ld = development length for a straight bar
ldh = development length for a hooked bar, measured
from the critical section to the outside end of the
hook
WI = nominal moment capacity of section
4 = increased moment capacity of section when using a
> 1.0
sh = center-to-center spacing of hoops or hoops plus
crossties
Vii = nominal shear strength of joint
VU = design shear force in joint
a = stress multiplier for flexural reinforcement at joint-
member interface
Y = shear strength factor reflecting confinement of joint
by lateral members
PS = ratio of volume of spiral reinforcement to total vol-
ume of core (out-to-out of spirals)
4 = strength reduction factor
CHAPTER 6-REFERENCE!3
Referenced standard
AC1 Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for
Reinforced Concrete (AC1 3 18-89), American Concrete In-
stitute, Detroit, 1989,353 pp.
Cited references
1. Hanson, Norman W., and Connor, Harold W., Seismic
Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints,
Proceedings, ASCE V. 93, STJ, Oct. 1967, pp. 533-560.
2. Higashi, Y ., and Ohwada, Y., Failing Behaviors of Re-
inforced Concrete Beam-Column Connections Subjected to
Lateral Loads, Memoirs No. 19, Faculty of Technology,
Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1%9, pp. 91- 101.
3. Ohno, K., and Shibata, T., On the Damage to the Ha-
kodate College by the Tokachioki Earthquake, 1968, Pro-
ceedings, U.S.-Japan Seminar of Earthquake Engineering
with Emphasis on the Safety of School Buildings, Sendai,
Sept. 1970, pp. 129-144.
4. Hanson, Norman W., Seismic Resistance of Concrete
Frames with Grade 60 Reinforcement, Proceedings, ASCE,
V. 97, ST6, June 1971, pp. 1685-1700.
5. Megget, L. M., and Park, R., Reinforced Concrete Ex-
terior Beam-Column Joint Under Seismic Loading, New
Zeulund Engineering (Wellington), V. 26, No. 11, Nov. 15,
1971, pp. 341-353.
6. Renton, G.W., The Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Beam-Column Joints under Cyclic Loading, ME thesis,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, 1972. ~ AC1 JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 75. No. 11, Nov. 1978, pp. 585-
7. Park, R., and Sampson, Richard A., Ductility of Rein-
forced Concrete Column Sections in Seismic DesTgn, AC1
JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 69, No. 9, Sept. 1972, pp. 543-55 1.
8. Wight, J. K., and Sozen, M. A., Shear Strength Decay
in Reinforced Concrete Columns Subjected to Large Deflec-
tion Reversals, Report No. SRS 403, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign,
Aug. 1973,290 pp.
9. Uzumeri, S. M., and Se&in M., Behavior of Rein-
forced Concrete Beam-Column Joints Subjected to Slow
Load Reversals, Publication No. 74-05, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Mar. 1974,84 pp.
10. Park, R., and Thompson, K. J., Behavior of Pre-
stressed, Partially Prestressed, and Reinforced Concrete In-
terior Beam-Column Assemblies under Cyclic Loading:
Test Results of Units 1 to 7, Research Report No. 74-9, De-
partment of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, 1974.42 pp.
11. Hawkins, N. M., Kobayashi, A. S., and Fourney, M.
E., Revetsed Cyclic Loading Bond Deterioration Tests,
Structures and Mechanics Report No. SM 75-5, Department
of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle,
Nov. 1975.
12, Priestly, M. J. N., Testing of Two Reinforced Con-
crete Beam-Column Assemblies under Simulated Seismic
Loading, Report No. 5-7511, New Zealand Ministry of
Works and Development, Wellington, 1975.
13. ACI-ASCE Committee 352, Recommendations for
Design of Beam-Column Joints in Monolithic Reinforced
Concrete Structures, AC1 JOURNAL, Proceedings V, 73, No.
7, July 1976, pp. 375-393.
14. Meinheit, D. F., and Jirsa, J. 0.. The Shear Strength
of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints, Report No.
77- 1, Department of Civil Engineering, Structures Research
Laboratory, University of Texas at Austin, Jan. 1977.
15. Fenwick, R. C., and Irvine, H. M., Reinforced Con-
crete Beam-Column Joints for Seismic Loading,* Report
No. 142, University of Auckland, Mar. 1977.
16. Lee, Duane L. N., Wight, James K., and Hanson, Rob-
ert D., RC Beam-Column Joints under Large Load Rever-
sals, Proceedings, ASCE, V. 103, ST12, Dee, 1977, pp.
2337-2350.
17. Uzumeri, S. M., Strength and Ductility of Cast-In-
Place Beam-Column Joints, Reinforced Concrete Srruc-
rures in Seismic Zones, SP-53, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, 1977, pp. 293,350.
18. Vallenas, J., Bertero, V. V., and Popov, E. P., Con-
crete Confined by Rectangular Hoops Subjected to Axial
Loads, Repot7 No. UCB/EERC-77/13, Earthquake Engi-
neering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley,
Aug. 1977,114 pp.
19. Briss, G. R., Paulay, T., and Park R., The Elastic Be-
havior of Earthquake Resistant R. C. Interior Beam-Column
Joints, Report No. 78-13, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, Feb. 1978.
20, Paulay, T., Park, R., and Priestly, M. J. N., Reinforced
Concrete Beam-Column Joints Under Seismic bActions,
593.
21. Gill, W. D., Park, R., and Priestly, M. J. N., Ductility
of Rectangular Reinforced Concrete Columns With Axial
Load, Research Report No. 79- 1, Department of Civil En-
gineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, Feb.
1979, 136 pp.
 BEAM-COLUMN
22. AC1 Committee 408, Suggested Development,
Splice, and Standard Hook Provisions for Deformed Bars in
Tension, (AC1 408.1R-79), American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, 1979,3 pp.
23. She&h, S. A., and Uzumeri, S. M., Properties of Con-
crete Confined by Rectangular Ties, AICAP-CEB Sympo-
sium on Structural Concrete Under Seismic Actions (Rome,
May 1979), Bullefin dlnfortnution No. 132, Comite Euro-In-
ternational du Deton, Paris, Apr. 1979, pp. 53-60.
24. Bertero, V. V., Popov, E. P., and Forzani, B., Seismic
Behavior of Lightweight Concrete Beam-Column Subas-
semblages, AC1 JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 77, No. 1, Jan-
Feb. 1980, pp. 44-52.
25. Sheikh, Shamim A., and Uzumeri, S. M., Strength
and Ductility of Tied Concrete Columns, Proceedings,
ASCE, V. 106, ST5, May 1980, pp. 1079-1102.
26. Selna, L., Martin, I., Park, R., and Wyllie, L., Strong
and Tough Concrete Columns for Seismic Forces, Proceed-
ings, ASCE, V. 106, ST& Aug. 1980,~~. 1717-1734.
27. Scott, B. D., Park, R., and Priestly, M. J. N., Stress-
Strain Relationships for Confined Concrete, Research Re-
port No. 80-6, Department of Civil Engineering, University
of Canterbury, Christchurch, 1980, 106 pp.
28. Meinheit, Donald F., and Jirsa, James 0, Shear
Strength of R/C Beam-Column Connections, Proceedings,
ASCE, V. 107, ST1 1, Nov. 1982, pp. 2227-2244.
29. Scott, B. D., Park, R., and Priestly, M. J. M., Stress-
Strain Behavior of Concrete Confined by Overlapping
Hoops at Low and High Strain Rates, AC1 JOURNAL, Pro-
ceedings V. 79, No. 1, Jan-Feb. 1982, pp. 13-27.
30. Zhang, Liande, and Jirsa, J. O., A Study of Shear Be-
havior of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints, PMF-
SEL Report No. 82-1, University of Texas at Austin, Feb.
1982.
31. Park, Robert, Priestly, M. J. Nigel, and Gill, Wayne D.,
Ductility of Square-Confined Concrete Columns, Pro-
ceedings, ASCE, V. 108, ST4, Apr. 1982, pp. 929-950.
32. Ehsani, M. R., and Wight, J. K., Behavior of Exterior
Reinforced Concrete Beam to Column Connections Subject-
ed to Earthquake Type Loading, Report No. UMEE 82R5,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Michigan,
AM Arbor, July 1982,243 pp.
33. Durrani, A. J., and Wight, J. K., Experimental Ana-
lytical Study of Internal Beam to Column Connections Sub-
jected to Reversed Cyclic Loadings, Report No. UMEE
82R3, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mich-
igan, Ann Arbor, 1982,275 pp.
34. Rabbat, B. G., Daniel, J. I., Weinmaun, T. L. and Han-
son, N. W., Seismic Behavior of Lightweight Concrete Col-
umns, PCA Construction Technology Laboratory/National
Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., Sept. 1982. (Avail-
able as PB83-204 891 from NTIS.)
35. Code of Practice for the Design of Concrete Struc-
tures, (NZS 3101, Part 1:1982), Standards Association of
New Zealand, Wellington, 1982, 127 pp.
36. Commentary on The Design of Concrete Structures,
(NZS 3101, Part 2:1982), Standards Association of New
Zealand, Wellington, 1982, 156 pp.
JOINTS 352i?-11
37. Suzuki, N., Otani, S., and Aoyama, H., The Effective
Width of Slabs in Reinforced Concrete Structures, Truns-
action of the Japan Concrete Institute, V. 5, 1983, pp. 309-
316.
38. Zhu, Sosngchao, and Jirsa, James O., A Study of
Bond Deterioration in Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column
Joints, PMFSEL Report No. 83- 1, Department of Civil En-
gineering, University of Texas at Austin, July 1983.
39. Aoyama, H. Overview of the Japanese Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints
and Design Examples, Paper prepared for the U.S.-N.Z.-Ja-
pan Seminar on the Design of Reinforced Concrete Beam-
Column Joints, Monterey, California, July 30-Aug. 1, 1984.
40. Kanada, K., Kondo, G., Fujii, S., and Morita, S., Re-
lation Between Beam Bar Anchorage and Shear Resistance
at Exterior Beam-Column Joints, Transaction of the Japan
Concrete Institute, V. 6, 1984, pp. 433440.
41. Kanada, K., Fujii, S., and Morita, S., Effect of Joint
Shear Reinforcement on Behaviors of Exterior Beam-Col-
umn Joints under Reversed Cyclic Loadings, Transaction
of the Japan Concrete Institute, V. 7, 1985, pp. 559-566.
42. Aoyama, H., Problems Associated with Weak-
Beam Design of Reinforced Concrete Frames, Journul of
the Faculty of Engineering, The University of Tokyo (B), V.
38, No. 2, 1985, pp. 75-105.
43. Paulay, T., and Park, R., Joints in Reinforced Con-
crete Frames Designed for Earthquake Resistance, Re-
search Report 84-9, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, June
1984.
44. Leon, R. T., The Effect of Floor Member Size on the
Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints,
Proceedings, 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engi-
neering, San Francisco, July 1984, pp. 445-452.
45. Yoshimura, M., and Kurose, Y., Inelastic Behavior of
the Building, Earthquake Effects on Reinforced Concrete
Structures, U.S.-Japan Research, SP-84, American Con-
crete Institute, Detroit, 1985, pp. 163-201.
46. Joglekar, M., Murry, P., Jirsa, J., and Klingner, R.,
Full Scale Tests of Beam-Column Joints, Earthquake Ef-
fects on Reinforced Concrete Structures, U.S.-Japan Re-
search, SP-84, American Concrete Institute, Detroit 1985,
pp. 271-304.
47. Zerbe, H, E., and Durrani, A. J., Effect of a Slab on
the Behavior of Exterior Beam to Column Connections, Re-
port No. 30, Department of Civil Engineering, Rice Univer-
sity, Houston, Texas, March 1985.
48. Ehsani, M. R., and Wight, J. K., Effect of Transverse
Beam and Slab on the Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Beam-to-Column Connections, AC1 JOURNAL, V. 82, NO. 2,
March-April 1985, pp. 188- 195.
49. ACI-ASCE Committee 352, Recommendations for
Design of Beam-Column Joints in Monolithic Reinforced
Concrete Structures, AC1 JOURNAL, V. 82, No. 3, May-June
1985, pp. 266-283.
50. Sattary-Javid, V., and Wight, J. K., Earthquake Load
on R/C Beams: Building Versus Single Beam, Journal of
Structurull Engineering, ASCE, V. 112, No. 7, July 1986, pp.
352~.12 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
14;13-1508.
5 1. Otani, S., Kitayama, K., and Aoyama, H., Beam Bar
Bond Requirements for Interior Beam-Column Connec-
tions, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Fun-
damental Theory of Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete,
Nanjing Institute of Technology, China, Sept. 1986.
52. Abdel-Fattah, B. and Wight, J. K., Study of Moving
Beam Plastic Hinging Zones for Earthquake-Resistant De-
sign of R/C Buildings,* ACI Structural Journal, V. 84, No.
1, Jan.-Feb. 1987, pp. 3 l-39.
53. Ehsani, M. R., Moussa, A. E., and Vallenilla, C. R,,
Comparison of Inelastic Behavior of Reinforced Grdinary-
and High-Strength Concrete Frames, AC1 JOURNAL, V. 84,
No. 2, March-April 1987, pp. 161-169.
54. Fujii, S., and Morita, S., Behavior of Exterior Rein-
forced Concrete Beam-Column-Slab Subassemblages under
Bi-Directional Loading, Paper Prepared for the U.S.-N.Z.-
Japan-China Seminar on the Design of R.C. Beam-Column
Joints for Earthquake Resistance, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand, Aug. 1987.
55. Kitayama, K., Otani, S., and Aoyama, H., Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Connections with
Slabs, Paper Prepared for the U.S.-N.Z.-Japan-China Sem-
inar on the Design of R.C. Beam-Column Joints for Earth-
quake Resistance, University of Canterbury, Christchurch,
New Zealand, Aug. 1987.
56. Durrani, A. J., and Wight. J. K., Earthquake Resis-
tance of Reinforced Concrete Interior Connections Including
a Floor Slab, ACI Structural Journal. V. 84, No. 5, Sept.-
Oct. 1987, pp. 400-406.
57. Aktan, A. E., and Bertero, V. V., Evaluation of Seis-
mic Response of RC Buildings Loaded to Failure, Journal
ofStructural Engineering, ASCE, V. 113, No. 5, May 1987,
pp. 1092-l 108.
58. Durrani, A. J., and Zerbe, H. E., Seismic Resistance
of R/C Exterior Connections with Floor Slab, Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 113, No. 8, Aug. 1987,
pp. 1850-1864.
59. Otani, S., Li, S., and Aoyama, H., Moment-Red&i-
bution in Earthquake Resistant Design of Ductile Reinforced
Concrete Frames, Transaction of the Japan Concrete Insti-
tute, V. 9, 1987, pp. 581-588.
60. Pantazopoulou, S. J., Moehle, J. P., and Shahrooz, B.
M., Simple Analytical Model for T-Beam in Flexure,
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 114, No. 7,
July 1988. pp. 1507-1523.
61. Kokusho, S., Hayashi, S., Wada, A., and Sakata, H.,
Elastic and Plastic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beam
in Consideration of Axial Restriction Effect of Deforma-
tion, Report of the Research Laboratory of Engineering
Materials, Tokyo Institute of Technology, No. 13, 1988, Na-
gatsuta, Yokohama 227, Japan, pp. 253-270. w effects of floor slabs, and different anchorage lengths for
62. French, C. W., and Boroojerdi, A., %ontribution of
R/C Floor Slab in Resisting Lateral Loads, Jdumal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 115, No. 1, Jan, 1989. pp.
1-18.
63. Ammerman, 0. V., and French, C. W., R/C Beam-
Column-Slab Subassemblages Subjected to Lateral Loads,
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 115, No. 6,
June 1989, pp. 1298-1308.
64. Leon, R.T., Interior Joints with Variable Anchorage
Length, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 115,
No. 9, Sept. 1989, pp. 2261-2275.
65. Zerbe, H.E., and Durrani, A.J., Seismic Response of
Connections in Two-Bay R/C Frame Subassemblies, Jour-
nal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 115, No. 11, Nov.
1989, pp. 2829-2844.
66. Pat&e, P. et al.,Seismic Response of Reinforced
Concrete Frame Subassemblages - A Canadian Perspec-
tive, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, V. 16, No. 5,
1989, pp. 627-649.
APPENDIX A-AREAS NJIEDING RESEARCH
To help identify areas where research is needed, the com-
mittee contacted some 60 design firms asking their views on
needed research topics. The following list is based on the
opinion of the committee members and designers. The order
of the items listed is arbitrary.
AJ-Connections with beams wider than columns
The current recommendations are based on results of tests
of connections where the column width is equal to or greater
than the beam width. This allows all of the beam longitudinal
reinforcement to be located within the column longitudinal
reinforcement. Information is needed on the behavior of con-
nections where beams are wider than columns and beam lon-
gitudinal reinforcement cannot be placed within column
longitudinal reinforcement.
AZ-Effect of eccentric beams
All connections tested to date have included concentric
beams where the axes of the cohunn and beams are coinci-
dent. Connections in which beam axes are eccentric to the
column axis are also common. This type of connection is fre-
quently used in exterior frames of buildings where beams
frame into columns such that the outside faces of beams and
columns are flush. It is not clear to what extent the presence
of torsion and the increase of associated stresses will affect
the capacity of these connections.
A&-Biaxially loaded joints
Only limited research44*46J3 is available on the effects of
biaxial loading on joint behavior. This research indicates that
for small columns the loss of section due to comer spalling
combined with the loss of bond and slip of the highest
strained bars can lead to premature column failure. Research
is needed to clarify biaxial joint behavior, particularly with
reference to larger column sizes, different beam geometries,
both beam and column bars.
A.&Relocation of plastic hinges away from the joint
Limited resultsS2 are available for the capacity of joints
where the hinging region has been moved away from the
joint. Guidelines are needed for proper detailing to move
 BEAM-COLUMN
plastic hinges away from the face of the column and for eval-
uating the capacity of the connection when such details are
used.
AS-Fiber reinforcement in the joint
Using fiber reinforcement may be an effective way to re-
duce the required confinement steel in the joint or to increase
the maximum allowable shear capacity of the beam-column
joint. Experimental data are needed to quantify these effects.
A.&High strength concrete in the joint
Current limitations on allowable joint shear stresses are
based on tests of normal weight and typical strength con-
crete. The compressive strength of the concrete used in test
specimens varied from 3500 psi (24 MPa) to approximately
5500 psi (38 MPa). In recent years high-strength concrete,
with compressive strengths up to 19,000 psi (130 MPa), has
been used in construction of columns, Clearly, these recom-
mendations were not developed for such high-strength con-
cretes. Research is needed to evaluate the behavior and
capacity of high-strength concrete joints.53
A.7-Knee joints
The majority of beam-column joint studies reported are
limited to connections in which the column continues above
and below the joint. Knee joints, which are usually present at
the roof level of a building, require special attention because
both column and beam longitudinal reinforcement may ter-
minate at that point and usually are anchored in the joint. Ex-
perimental data are particularly needed for cyclically loaded
specimens.
A.g-Behavior of indeterminate systems
Experimental results for beam-column joints have been
primarily obtained from tests of statically determinate joint
assemblies. There is a need to establish the effect of force re-
distribution and joint deformation on the behavior of statical-
ly indeterminate structural systems.65
A.9-Lightweight aggregate concrete
Additional studies are needed to evaluate all aspects of
joint behavior where various types of lightweight aggregate
concrete is used.+
A.l&Effect of slabs
The contribution of the slab to stiffness and strength of
connections has been investigated in a number of recent
stUdies.37,4244,47,48~5*~~~62,63~~ However, no definitive con-
clusions have been developed on how the presence of a slab
affects the requirements for confinement and the moment ca-
pacities of the beams.
A.ll-Steei congestion
Type 2 connections in many structures require a signifi-
cant amount of steel, thus making the construction process
very difficult. Means to reduce steel congestion need to be
studied and recommendations need to be made.
JOINTS 332~.13
A.12-Distribution of plastic hinges
Not all the joints within a structure located in an area with
high seismicity will experience significant inelastic defor-
mations. Guidelines are needed to identify Type 2 joints
within a structure without having to do a comprehensive in-
elastic analysis.
A.13-Limit on joint shear
The current limits on joint shear are overly conservative in
the opinion of many designers for certain combinations of
configurations, size of members, material strengths, etc.
More experimental studies are needed to determine if these
limits can be raised.
A.14-Joints in existing structures
Joints in structures built prior to the development of cur-
rent design guidelines do not conform to the cumnt require-
ments. These joints need to be studied in detail to establish
their adequacy.
APPENDIX B-DESIGN EXAMPLES
Four design examples are presented. Each example pre-
sents given member sizes and reinforcement and demon-
strates the application of the committees joint design
recommendations. In all of the examples, it is assumed that
the joints are part of the primary structural system for resist-
ing lateral loads, that is, wind loads for Type 1 joints and
earthquake loads for Type 2 joints. The examples are similar
to those used in the first committee report. I3 A short discus-
sion of how the changes in the committees recommendations
affected the design of these joints is given at the end of this
appendix.
DESIGN EXAMPLE l-EXTERIOR TYPE 1 JOINT
umn, 24X 24 with 12 No. tl ban
spondfel Bmm, IS x 30
with 3 No. 10 bon, top.
I
\Normol Boom. OlX26
with 4 No. t I bon, top
Nomol Bwm
PLAN VIEW
OF CONNECTION
352~.14 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE

Column longitudinal reinforcement (Section 41.2) Joint shear strength

The indicated arrangement of twelve No, 11 bars is accept- This is an exterior Type 1 joint which meets the geometry
able. restrictions of Section 4.3.2. Therefore, use y = 20 from Ta-
ble 1.
Transverse reinforcement (Section 4.2.1)
A permissible arrangement of No. 4 ties is shown. Spacing bi = (24 in. + 21 in.)/2 = 21.5 in.
between sets of ties should be less than or equal to 6 in. (Sec- = 20 8 bj h(c01)
vri
tion 4.2.1.3).
vrl = 20 &%&i (22.5 in-)(24 in.)
Joint shear force (Section 43.1) V = 683,000 lb = 683 kips
Shear is not a problem in the transverse (spandrel) direc- cbvn = 0.85 (683 kips) = 581 kips > 315 kips (OK)
tion because large unbalanced moments are not anticipated
in this direction. For shear in the normal direction, the max-
Hooked bar anchorage (Section 4.5.2.1)
imum possible joint shear is a function of the flexural capac-
ity of the beam normal to the connection.

T
-mi --
The reduction factor of Section 4.5.2.2(a) applies, so

mod I& = (26.8 in.)(0.7) = 18.7 in.

12
Available space = 24 in. - 1.5 in. (back cover) - 0.5 in. (tie
diameter)
= 22 in. (OK)
1,
DESIGN EXAMPLE 2-INTERIOR TYPE 1 JOINT
,C&unn, 24 X 24 dth 8 Ma I4 bofs

r; 4000 ps ham, 12 X 24*

a = A,afy= 4 1.56 in.* ( I .O) (60 ksi) fy*eo ksl

with 3 No. IO bars, top,
and 3 No. 9 tars. battun
0.85f,b 0.85 (4 ksi) (21 in.)

5.24 in.
4( 1.56 in.*)( 1.0)(60 ksi)

Iu, = 8490 k-in. = 708 k-ft

v co1 = M&eam)/l2 ft = 59.0 kips
PLAN VIEW
Joint shear OF CONNECTION

Longitudinal &am

Column longitudinal reinforcement (Section 4.1.2)

The arrangement of eight No. 14 bars shown above is ac-
ceptable.

Transverse reinforcement (Section 4.2.1)

Neither beam covers three-quarters of the column width.
Therefore, typical transverse reinforcement is required. A

Vu (joint)
permissible arrangement of No. 4 ties is shown. Spacing be-
tween sets of ties should be less than or equal to 6 in. (Sec-
tion 4.2.1.3).
Tu = A, a& = 374 kips Shea+-Shear is not a problem because large unbalanced
V,(ioint) = T,, - Vcor = 3 15 kips moments are not anticipated in either direction.
 BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS 352R-15

Anchorage-Top beam bars should be continuous through Column, 24 X 24 with 12 No. I I &S
the joint. It is recommended that bottom bars also be contin- f, = 4ooo psi
uous through the joint because the joint is part of the primary fy = 60 ksi Spandrel Beam, 18 X 30
with 3 No. 10 bars, top
system for resisting lateral loads. and 3 No. 8 ban, bottom
Before starting the examples for Type 2 joints, it is impor-
tant to point out that to satisfy the anchorage and shear re- \Normol Beam, 21 X 28
quirement.& a designer will probably have to use larger with 5 No. 10 bars, top
column sections than have previously been required. Wider ond 3 No. 10 bon, bottom
beam sections will be necessary to cover the column faces Anticipated change-Change the top reinforcement in the
and thus allow the use of higher shear stress values.
spandrel beam from three No. 10 to four No. 9 to satisfy Se&
Table B. 1 is based on anchorage requirements for bars ter- tion 4.5.4 (Table B.2).
minating in a joint (Section 4.5.2). Table B.2 is based on re-
quirements for the ratio of joint dimensions (actually beam
and column dimensions) to the diameter of beam and column i-+Spondd f3aam
bars (Section 4.5.4). These tables should be useful for select- PLAN VIEW OF
ing main reinforcing bar diameters and joint dimensions. THE JOINT
Values for Cd,, were calculated from Eq. (4.8) using 01= 1.25, saonl
No. 4 tias
fY = 60 ksi and& = 4000 psi. In Table B. 1, an extra 3$ in. ~=6*
has been added to Idh to determine the minimum column di-
mension required to anchor a given bar. The quantity 3$ in. \ fjatisfks oil of tha
raquimmanfs of
comes from two times the clear cover (typically lYz in. front saetion 4.2.2.3
and back) plus one tie-bar diameter. The 20 percent reduc-
tion factor for close spacing of transverse reinforcement is
included in Column 5 of Table B. 1.
Column longitudinal reinforcement (Section 4.1.2)
The arrangement of twelve No. 11 bars acceptable.
Table B.1Minhnum column depth for Qpe 2 joints
based on anchorage of terminating beam longitudinal
reinforcement Transverse reinforcement (Section 4.2.2)
Provided
h(min) for column
syz db in. &,, in. For column hoops at a For column hoops at a Ash = 4 legs (0.20 in?/leg)
No. (i) (2) (3) spacing > 3db. in. (4) spacing 5 3db in. (5)
A sh = 0.80 in.2 (each direction)
6 0.750 11.9 15.4 13.0
7 0.875 13.8 17.3 14.6
8 1.00 15.8 19.3 16.1 from Eq. (4.2)
9 1.13 17.8 21.3 17.8
10 1.27 20.1 23.6 19.6
11
A sh
1.41 22.3 25.8 21.3

sr=03(6in.) (21in.) (4ksi) (24in.)2

lhble B.2-IMmhnum column or beam depth for Qpe 2 A .
joints based on size of longitudinal reinforcement 60ksi [(21 in.j2-l
h(min) for column based on size of heam
longitudinal reinforcement of h(min) for heam Ash = 0.771 in.2 < 0.80 in.2 (OK)
based on size of column longitudinal
Bar size. No. dt,. in. reinforcement. in.
6 0 750 15.0
from Eq. (4.3)
7 0:875 17.5
8 1.00 20.0 s,,hf,
9 1.13 22.6 A sh = o.og- = 0.756 in? < 0.80 in.2 (OK)
10 I .27 25.4
f yh
11 1.41 28.2
14 1.69 33.9 Shear (Section 4.3)
For the bending analysis which follows, ignore the effect
of compression reinforcement and assume, in most loca-
DESIGN EXAMPLE ?-EXTERIOR TYPE 2 JOINT tions, d = h - 2.7 in. In locations where there is interference
between bars from the normal and spandrel beams, assume d
Preliminary design = h - 3.7 in. in the spandrel beam.
352R-16 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE

Normal direction Spandrel direction

1 \ Assumed
~kE:c%
1 rlc
t2
Points in
the Cobmn

%i = As,afy
M,(beam) = Asa&( d - 4)

Aslafy 4 1.00 in.* ( 1.25) (60 ksi)

= 5Asort;
1 . 2 7 in.* ( 1 . 2 5 ) ( 6 0 k s i ) aI = 0.85f,b= 0.85 (4 ksi) ( 18 in.)
a
OMf,b - 0.85 (4 ksi) (21 in.)
41 = 4.90 in.
= 6.67 in.
Ki
a
= (4.00 in.*)( 1.25)(60 ksi) 26.3 in. - T
M,,(beam) = (6.35 in.*)( 1.25)(60 ksi)
(25.3 in. - 6.67 inA) Ki = 7 160 k-in. = 596 k-ft
M,(beam) = 10,500 k-in. = 872 k-ft
VCO1 = M,(beam)ll2 ft = 72.6 kips Similarly

Joint shear Mni = 4590 k-in. = 383 k-ft

Then

0 col. V,/=(M; +M,;/12ft=81.6kips

Joint shear

Vu (joint)
F Vu (joint)
T,, = A, c$, = 476 kips
V,(joint) = T,, - Vco, = 404 kips

Joint shear strength-The spandrel beam dimensions are

sufficient for classifying this as an exterior joint, so use y = TUl = (4.00 in.*)( 1.25)(60 ksi) = 300 kips
15 (Table 1). c u2 = Tl42 = (2.37 in.*)( 1.25)(60 ksi) = 178 kips
V,(joint> = T,, + Cu2 - Vco, = 3% kips
bj = (bb + bc)/2 < bb + 2[h(CO1)/21
= (21 in. + 24 in.)/2 = 22.5 in. (governs) In this direction, bj = (18 in. + 24 in.)/2 = 21.0 in. (gov-
V, = Y &m bj h(COl) ems), and
= 15 dm (22.5 in.)(24 in.) +V, = (0.85)( 15) Am(21 in.)(24 in.) ab
= 512,000 lb = 512 kips
$V,= 0.85 (5 12 kips) = 435 kips > 404 kips (OK) = 406 kips > 396 kips (OK)
 BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS 352R-17

Flexural strength ratio (Section 4.4.2) Preliminary design

When determining the column flexural strength, the axial
load was assumed to be zero (conservative for this check).
Column, 24*X 24 with 6 No. 14 hors
Also, a was set equal to 1 .O for this calculation. Using these
assumptions, M,, = 848 k-ft. Transverse Beam, 12 X 24
The beam flexural strengths have been found earlier using with 3 No. 10 bars, top
ond 3 No. 9 bars, bottom
a = 1.25. Those beam strengths will be divided by 1.25 to
obtain an approximate value for the beam flexural strength if Beam, t6 X 26
a = 1.0. If the strength ratio is close to the allowable value, with 4 No. Ii bars, top
a more accurate determination of the beam flexural strength 4 No. 10 hors, bottom
for a = 1 .O could be made.
Anticipated changes
Normal direction
1. Change column to 28 x 28 in. and use twelve No. 11
bars. The dimension increase is required to satisfy shear and
M,, I 872 k-ft/l.25 = 698 k-ft bar development requirements. The increase in the number
of longitudinal bars is required to give a more uniform distri-
Spandrel direction bution of longitudinal steel.
2. Change longitudinal beams to 21 x 30 in. and use five
M,,, z 596 k-ft/1.2.5 = 477 k-ft
No. 10 bars as top reinforcement. The beam width is in-
Mn2 z 383 k-ft/l.25 = 306 k-ft creased to help satisfy confinement and shear requirements.
The beam bar diameters are decreased to satisfy Section
Strength ratio check 4.5.4 and the beam depth is increased to satisfy Section 4.5.4
Normal direction for the column bars.
3. Change transverse beams to 21 x 28 in. and use the same
I;M, (col) 2(848) reinforcement. The width is increased to help satisfy con-
= - = 2.43 > 1.4 (OK)
q 0-d 698 finement and shear requirements and the beam depth is in-
creased to satisfy Section 4.5.4 for the column bars. The
depth of the transverse beams is set differently than the depth
Spandrel direction of the longitudinal beams to avoid reinforcing bar interfer-
CM, (col) 2(848) ence.
= 2.17 > 1.4 (OK)
=f, (b-) = 477+306
Tlormu 6ooq 21-x 25
PLAN VIEW OF with 3 No. IO bars. tOP
No. 9 bon. bottc4n
Hooked bars terminating in a joint (Section 4.5.2) REVISED JOINT
Only the No. 10 bars for the normal beam need to be
checked. Referring to Table B. 1, the required column dimen-
NO. 4
sion is 23.6 in., which is less than the provided dimension of 46
24 in. c
udiml born, 2rx30-
5 No. IO ban. IDO
!j&fi;din all the and 4 No. IO bms, bona
mqulmmonl of
wcWm 4.2.2.3
Beam and column bars passing through the joint (Sec-
tion 4.5.4)
The No. 9 bars in the spandrel beam govern the column Column longitudinal reinforcement (Section 4.1.2)
size The indicated arrangement of twelve No. 11 bars is accept-
able.
h(co1) > 20 (1.13 in.) = 22.6 in. < 24 in. (OK)
Transverse reinforcement (Section 4.2.2)
The total beam depths are governed by the column bars Provided A,, = 4 legs (0.20 in.*/leg) = 0.80 in.* (each di-
rection).
h(beams) > 20 (1.41 in.) = 28.2 in. = 28 in. (say OK) Because beam dimensions satisfy Section 4.2.2.5, the val-
ue for Ash obtained from Eq. (4.2) and (4.3) may be reduced
by 50 percent in the joint.
DESIGN EXAMPLE 4-INTERIOR TYPE 2 JOINT From EZq. (4.2)
352%18 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE

A sh = 03(6)
-
(25) (4bi) (28)*
60ksi (25)*
-[ -1 1 = 0763in2
* *
The beams have been made wide enough to classify this as
an interior joint, so y = 20 (Table 1)

From Eq. (4.3) bi = (28 + 21 in.)/2 = 24.5 in. c bb + 2[h(col)L?]

A sh = 009(6) (25) (4W = 0900in2 wfl = (0.85)(20) ../m (24.5 inJ(28 in.)sb
* 60ksi
= 738 kips > 713 kips (OK)

Required As,, = 0.5 (0.90 in?) = 0.45 in.2 c 0.80 in2 (OK) Flexural strength ratio (Section 4.4.2)
Thus, for this joint the maximum allowable spacing (6 in.) Using the same assumptions used in Example 3, the col-
and the minimum tie size for a No. 11 bar govern the design. umn flexural strength is M, = 1070 k/ft.
Beam flexural strengths for a = 1.0 am approximated as
Shear (Section 4.3) was done in Example 3. Only the longitudinal beams need to
Clearly the longitudinal direction is critical because of the be considered because they are stronger than the transverse
larger beam steel area and the larger beam depth. Using the beams
same assumptions for the flexural analysis as were made in
the previous example. &I,,, 5951 k-ftA.25 = 761 k-ft
Mn* z 782 k-ftD.25 = 626 k-ft
ZM,, (col) 2 (1070)
Flexural strength ratio =
M,, (bei- = 761 + 626

= 1.5 > 1.4 (OK)

Beam and column bars passing through the joint (Sec-

tion 43.4)
The column dimension is governed by the largest beam
bar

h(co1) > 20 (1.27 in.) = 25.4 in. < 28 in. (OK)

M,; =
5( 1.27 in?)( 1.25)(60 ksi) 27.3 - 9 > Beam depths are controlled by the column bars
A4,; = 11,400 k-in. = 951 k-ft
M,,; = 4( 1.27 in?)( 1.25)(60 ksi)( 27.3 in. - q) h(beam) > 20 (1.41 in.) = 28.2 in. I 28 in. (say OK)

lu,; = 9380 k-in. =782 k-ft Comparison to the results of the previous committee re-
Vco1 = (Mn{ + M,i )/12 ft = 144 kips pod
For Type 1 joints, use of the new committee design recom-
mendations led to no changes from the prior committee
co1 reportI for these design examples. For the Type 2 joint ex-
/
amples there were some significant differences. Changes
were required in the column (joint) size for Example 4, and
for Examples 3 and 4 there was a large decrease in the re-

cu27 STTU, quired amount of transverse reinforcement in the joint.

These changes clearly reflect the committees current philos-
ophy of requiring larger columns (joints) and less transverse
reinforcement. Other significant changes were the increases
in beam widths to better confine the joint and decreases in
A Vu (joint) beam bar sizes to reduce the tendency of bars to slip through
the joint during earthquake-type loading.
TIll = 5 (1.27 in.2)( 1.25)(60 ksi) = 476 kips
c = Tu* = 4 (1.27 in.*)( 1.25)(60 ksi) = 38 1 kips
SI METRIC TABLES AND EXAMPLE
V$oint) = T,,, + C,,z - Vcol = 713 kips
Tables B. 1 (metric) and B.2 (metric) are given to aid in the
Vn = Y ,& bj h(COl)
selection of joint dimensions when using standard metric
 BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS 3!52&19

bars. In Column 4 of Table B. 1 (metric), an extra 95 mm has Notes on joint geometry--Dimensions of the spandrel and
been added to 1, when determining the minimum column normal beams, when compared to the column dimensions,
dimension required to anchor a given bar. This quantity rep- allow this joint to be classified as an exterior joint. The rein-
resents two times the clear cover (typically 40 mm) plus one forcement in the normal beam satisfies the requirements of
tie bar diameter ( 15 mm). The 20 percent reduction factor for Section 4.5.2.3 [Column 4 of Table B.l (metric)]. The rein-
close spacing of transverse reinforcement is included in Col- fofcement in the spandrel beams satisfies the requirements of
umn 5 of*Table B.l (metric). Section 4.5.4 [Table B.2 (metric)].
Transverse reinforcement (Section 4.2.2)
Table B.l (metric)-Minimum column depth for Qpe 2 The arrangement of twelve No. 35 bars is acceptable.
joints based on anchorage of terminating beam bars
I Column longitudinal reinforcement (Section 4.1.2)
Bar h(min) for column
size. db. & Provided
No. mm mm For column hoops at a For column hoops at a
(2) (3) swing > 34, (mm) (4) spacing 5 3db. (mm) (5) Ash = 4 legs (200 mm2ileg)
(1)
Ash = 800 mm2
15 16.0 236 331 320
20 19.5 287 382 325 From Eq. (4.2)
25 25.2 371 466 392
30 29.9 440 535 447

[ - -1
35 35.7 526 621 516

Table B.2 (metric)-Minimum column or beam depth A sh = 03(150)

*
(520) (30) (600)2 1 =582=2
400
for Qpe 2 joints based on size of longitudinal (520) *
reinforcement
< 800 mm2 (OK)
h(min) for column based on size of beam
longitudinal reinforcement or h(min) for From JZq. (4.3)
beam based on size of column longitudinal
Bar size, No. d,,,mm reinforcement, mm
15 16.0 320
20 19.5 390
25 25.2 504
30 29.9 598
35 35.7 714
45 43.7 874 = 527 mm2 < 800 mm2 (OK)
Design example 3 (metric) is included to show the use of
Shear (Section 4.3)
metric dimensions and units for beam-column joint design.
For the bending analysis, ignore the effect of compression
This example is very similar to Example 3.
reinforcement and in most locations assume d = h - 70 mm.
In locations where there is interference between bars from
DESIGN EXAMPLE 3 (METRIC)-EXTERIOR
the normal and spandrel beams, assume d = h - 100 mm in
TYPE 2 JOINT
the spandrel beam.
Column, 600mm X 6OOmm, with 8 Normal Direction*
f:=3ohlPa I/

co1
No. 35 bors
Inflection
Spandrel beam, 450mm X 750mm. Point
with 4 No. 30 bars, top \

T
and 3 No. 25 bars, bottom

Normal beom, 5OOmm X 750mm,

w i t h 6 No. 30 bars, top
o n d 4 No. 30 hors, bottom
3.5 m
1 MA

PLAN VIEW O F JOINT

No. (5
at 150
1
I
Inflection
Point
col

(Assumed)
l 1 MPa = 1 N/mm
2!52R-20 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE

Joint shear
M,,(bem)=A,afy (d-i)

a
Asafy
6 700 mm2 ( 1.25) (400 MPa)
=0.85f,b= 0.85 (30 MPa) (500 mm)
= 165mm
M,(beam) = (4200 mm2)( 1.25)(400 MPa)

( 680 mm-y)
Vu (joint)
M,,(beam)=1.25x109N~mm=1250kN~m
Vco1 = Mn(beanQl3.5 m = 359 kN
Joint shear
bafy 4 700 mm2 (1.25) (400 MPa)
col. Ql
0 =0.85f,b= 0.85 (30 MPa) (450 mm)

= 122mm

VTu = (2800 mm2)( 1.25)

122 mm
(400 MPa)( 650 mm - -
2

Vu (joint) = 3 500mm2 (1.25) (400MPa) =654mm

T,=A,af,=21OOkN a2
0.85 (30 MPa) (450 mm) *
V,,(joint) = T,, - Vcor = 1740 kN
Joint shear srrengrh-As previously determined, this is an wli = (1500mm2)(1.25)
exterior joint, so use y = 15 (Table 1) 65.4 mm
(4OOMPa)(650mm--
2 >
bi = (bb + bJ2 < bb + 2[h(co1)/2]
= (500 mm + 600 mm)/2 = 550 mm (governs) =463x106N.mm=463kN.m
v, =O.O83 Y off bjh(COl) V CO1 = (M,,; + M,; )/3.5 m = 368 kN
= 0.083 (15) &if%ii% (550 mm)(600 mm) TIll = (2800 mm2)( 1.25)(400 MPa) = 1400 kN
C u2 = Tu2
= (1500 mm2)( 1.25)(400 MPa) = 750 kN
=2250x 103N=2250kN
V,(joint) = T,,, + Cu2 - Vcor = 1780 kN
W = 0.85 (2250 kN) = 1910 kN > 1743 kN (OK)
Spandrel direction In this direction, bj = (450 IIUII + 600 mm)/2 = 525 IYUII
Inflection (governs), and

Point \

T
$V, = (0.85)(0.083)( 15) d%%l% (525 mm)(600 mm)
=2150x 103N=2150kN> 1780kN(OK)

Flexural strength ratio (section 4.43)

When determining the column flexural strength, the axial

3.5m
load was assumed to be zero (conservative for this check),
and a was set equal to 1.0 for this calculation. Using these
assumptions, M, = 1075 kN . m.
The beam flexural strengths have been found earlier using
a = 1.25. Those beam strengths will be divided by 1.25 to
1 obtain an approximate value for the beam flexural strengths
when a = 1 .O.

lnf lectioh Normal direction

Paint M,1125OkN.rn/1.25= 1OOOkN~m

 BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS 352R-21

Spandrel direction CM (col)

= ;gyy;;8 = 1.99 > 1.4 (OK)
M,,, z 867 kN . m/l.25 = 694 kN . m CM, (t-4

Mn~~485~.m/1.25=388kN.m
Hooked bars terminating in the joint and beam and col-
umu bars passing through the joint (Sections 4.5.2 and
Strength ratio check
4.5.4)
As mentioned previously, the joint dimensions were se-
Normal direction
lected to satisfy these requirements which are summarized in
CM,, (col) Tables B.l (metric) and B.2 (metric).
= 2 YE) = 2.15 > 1.4 (OK)
=f,, (b=W
This report was submitted to letter ballot of the committee and approved in accor-
Spandrel direction dance with Institute procedures.