PREFACE

Considerable advances have been made in recent years

in general problen1s of the shear strength of reinforced
concrete. As a result of a decade of research in the
U.S.A. and elsewhere, improvements were made in the shear
clauses of the ACI Code in 1963 and similar amendments
have been made in the 1965 revision of the National
Building Code.
A completely satisfactory theory of shear and
diagonal tension in reinforced concrete has not, however,
yet been achieved, particularly with respect to beams with
web reinforcelnent. A number of authorities are making an
attack on this subject and a notable contribution is being
made by Fritz Leonhardt and Rene Walther at Stuttgart,
Germany.
Their paper "Contribution to the Treatment of Shear
in Reinforced Concrete" has been translated by Professors
J.P. Verschuren and J.G. MacGregor at the University of
Alberta. This work was hitherto not available in English
and the Division of BUilding Research, concurring in the
opinion that the information it contains is important to
Canadian engineers and BUilding Code authorities, agreed
to have it included in the NRC series of N.R.C. Technical
Translations.
The Division records its appreciation to Professors
Verschuren and MacGregor for this translation.

Ottawa R.F. Legget

February 1965 Director
 NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA

Technical Translation 1172

Title: Contribution to the treatment of shear in reinforced

concrete
(BeitrMge zur Behand1ung der Schubprob1eme im
Stah1betonbau)

Authors: F. Leonhardt and R. Walther

Reference: Beton- und Stah1betonbau, (12): 277-290, 1961; (82) ..:.

32-44, (3): 54-64, (6): 141-149, (7): 161-173, ( )
184-188, 1962

Translators: J.P. Verschuren and J.G. MacGregor, Department of

Civil Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta
 INDEX

Tit le Source Page

I INTRODUCTI ON December 1961, pp 277-280 1

II TEST RESULTS

1. Tests for High Shear Stresses

December 1961, pp 280-290 13

2. Influence of the Moment-Shear Relationship on the Shear

Carrying Capacity for Rectangular Beams Without Shear
Reinforcing Under the Influence of Point Loads and
Uniform Loads
February 1962, pp 32-38 36

3. The Influence of the Bond of the ｾ ｯ ｮ ｧ ｩ ｴ ｵ ､ ｩ ｮ ｡ Reinforcing

on the Shear Carrying Capacity for Rectangular Beams Without
Shear Reinforcing
February 1962, pp 38-44 46

4. Influence of the Absolute Beam Height on the Carrying

Capacity Uader Shear
March 1962 pp 54-58 53

5. Tests on Plate Strips Without Web Reinforcing

March 1962 pp 59-64 63

6. Tests on Rectangular 3eamE with Different Methods of

Shear Reinforcing
June 1962 pp 141-149 74

7. Influence of the Web Width on the Shear C;Y"rying Capacity

of T-Beams with Weak Stirrup Reinforcing
July 1962 pp 161-173 89

III SUMMARY AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS

August 1962 pp 184-188 108

References 119

Notations 121

Figures
 10 INTRODUCTION

(December 1961, Pages 277 -280)

1, On tl!.e T!!!2,0rtance of the Shear 3tress in Reinforced Concrete Beams

Up to now shear problems in reinforced concrete were judged by the shear

stress TO ｾ , thus according to a stress magnitude derived only from the shear
bz
force, One must consider this shear stress -rO quite thoroughly to correctly grasp

its actual meaning for reinforced concrete beams. Therefore we will start from the

bef'.ding theory for a beam of a brittle building material such as concrete, in the

uncracked situation and r evi ew what is known.

In a beam, loads cause a system of principle tensile and compression

stresses which change in magnitude and direction at different levels of the cross-

section. In general, to obtain the stresses theoretically, an orthogonal coordinate

system x-y is established, which leads to the usual stress formulas<f'i = M.y/J

and Ixy QS / Jb. From.:::r; and I xy the magnitude and direction of the principa 1

stresses are de t ermi.ned , The shear stress r-:xy shows that the principal s t r e s s e s

do not lie in the directions of the coordinate system, but that they are inclined.

For failure of the concrete, ｾ ｢ itself does not govern since the

ｳ ｾ ･ ｡ stress hypothesis, that is the assumptio2 that failure is caused by maximum

shear stresses, does not apply to brittle building materials as is known. On the

other hand, the principal tensile stresses govern for the crack formation of the

brittle concrete. The principle tensile stresses ｾ depend on the combination of

moment and shear force. Only the maximum tensile stress at the extreme fibres,

which we call the bending tensile stress, is determined by the moment only because

at the extreme fibres I is = O. On the other hand the neutral surface (crx = 0)

1,
 2.

is a fibre where the principal stresses depend only on the shear force; therefore

the magnitude of the shear stress ｾ in the neutral surface is equal to the principal

stresses, which have an inclination of 45 degrees there. In most cases however,

the principal stresses at the neutral s urf ac e are not the maximum values of the

principal stresses for that particular section, so that ｾ is neither decisive

for the crack formation nor for the carrying capacity. Usually the cracks start

from the tensile boundary, as do the inclined shear cracks. Only in special cases

(beams with very thin webs, cross-sections with large shear force and small moment),

the principal stresses ｾ in the neighborhood of the neutral surface can be de-

cisive for the crack formation.

Usually the stress component ｾ is neglected for the practical bending

theory of beams. However it is present everywhere where outside loads are applied

approximately perpendicular to the axis of the beam, especially in the vicinity

of the reactions and the point loads ｷ ｨ ･ ｲ ･ becomes a compression stress. In

these regions the principal tensile stresses become smaller and are flatter and

the principal compression stresses are larger and steeper.

If we go to the combined building material, reinforced concrete, and

load the beams so far that cracks occur in the concrete tensile zone (Case II),

then the interior stress distribution is really changed. Ie cannot be derived

theoretically exactly since the interior stresses in Case II depend on the crack

pattern and the arrangement of the reinforcing according to size, direction and

distribution. A theoretical treatment of the interior stresses is only possible

with rough approximations.

Generally it is assumed that the neutral surface is the same for shear

and bending and that below the neutral surface no concrete tensile stresses occur.

On the other hand it means that the statical moment S and the shear stresses
 3.

below the neutral surface must be constant and that the principal stresses must

be inclined under 45 degrees with respect to the longitudinal reinforcing (Fig. 2);

7Q = QSO/bJ = Q/bz.
II
These relations have been known a long time. E. Morsch discussed them

in detail and using them derived his well known design rules for the shear reinforcing

for reinforced concrete beams, which he confirmed by numerous pioneering tests. His

rules are based on the truss analogy where the forces corresponding to the principal

tensile stresses are carried by the inclined rods while the principal compression

stresses are carried by the strips of concrete between the cracks.

Equilibrium of the interior forces computed according to Figure 2)however J

is only then possible if one has inclined rods at 45 degrees spaced closely together

and also shear cracks at 45 degrees. As soon as the cracks deviate from the 45

degree direction and become steeper, as is the case for large stretches of a beam

in the region of larger moment and smaller shear forces, then the compression strips

at 45 degrees are not possible any more. Immediately the interior stress relations

in the concrete strips between the cracks must really change. In spite of this,

for inclined rods and approximately vertical bending cracks or for inclined cracks

and vertical stirrups, carrying actions as in a truss are possible. However, if one

has only stirrups as shear reinforcing in the region of almost vertical bending

cracks then no truss action can occur. We know that then the beams carry their loads

as arches or frames with tensile rods; the largest part of the shear force is then

absorbed in the compression zone by inclination of the resultant D (Fig. 3), thus

there I becomes large while 'r below the neutral surface becomes almost zer o , Such

carrying actions occur even partly in the case of the relations of Fig. 2. The

carrying capacity of the bending compressive zone is weakened however by a large

stress component ｾ .
 4.

For the truss analogy one should note that we have an internally statically

indeterminate truss with members that cross several times and with chords stiff

against bending whereby the tensile members are more elastic than the compression

strips and thus show larger deformations. As soon as one considers the compatibility

relations of this truss one finds that the stiffer compression strips must always

carry more load than the more elastic tensile diagonals, whereby the chord is stressed

under bending. The compression stress strips advantageously are supported by the

stirrups that surround the concrete cross-section. For full shear reinforcing, the

larger horizontal component of the forces in the compression strips caused the

tied-arch action to occur, even in the region of inclined cracks and inclined rods.

For this reason cross-section of the tensile rod and thus also the steel stress

of importance. It is obvious that it is important to carryon a large part of

the lower reinforcing rods to the supports and to anchor them there faultlessly.

When the beams are less slender, the tied-arch action plays a larger

role, because then the arch or the frame respectively becomes very capable of carry-

ing loads without help of the truss action. From this it follows that short beams

under shear are less dangerous than was to be expected from the truss analogy and

from the magnitude of 10.

"
In 1955 in the Material Testing Laboratories in Zurich, R. Walther

(Ref. 1) proved with shear tests the dependency of this tied-arch action of the

lower reinforcing rods on the bond quality for the case of shear reinforcing with

stirrups and inclined rods (Fig. 4). In the lower reinforcing rods of all beams

for higher loads considerable tensile stresses were present close to the supports.

For polished round steel the pure tied-arch occurred and the cracks showed no

noticeable inclination.

That the truss action does not develop completely even when inclined

rods and stirrups are provided for the complete sheas also follows from the steel
stresses measured on the inclined rods (Fig. 5). Before occurrence of the

cracks the stresses lie at ｮ ｾ (n times the concrete tensile stress), but in

Case II after cracking they stay with good bond far under the values computed with

-r 0' even if one considers the action of dr

y
above the supports.

Hence actually in Case II, ｾ is neither similar to the principal

tensile stress nor to the principal compression stress. This fact must be con-

sidered especially if one investigates the safety against shear failure. One must

say--and following test results will prove ｴ ｨ ｩ ｳ Ｍ Ｍ ｴ ｨ ｡ ｴ ｾ is not a suitable criterion

for the safety against shear failure. Anyway in the case of the brittle building

material concrete there is no shear strength in the sense of a property of the

building material. Even for marked shear loading no shear failures occur in the

concrete but separation failures perpendicular to the principle tensile stress.

Usually the compression trajectories are steep arches and the tension trajectories

in the reach of the large tensile stresses are very flat.

The design and the type of shear reinforcing according to the rules

specified by E. MHrsch on the other hand always leads to a sufficient safety against

shear failure. Because of this fact, which is confirmed by practical experience,

there would be absolutely no motivation to consider the shear problems again if

we did not know that the safety factor against shear failure for this type of rein-

forcing is considerable and often many times too high. Because of the introduction

of the high allowable steel stresses and the ribbed reinforcing rods with much better

bond than before, new relations were created>in addition)whose action on the shear

behavior must be proven again with tests. However, the basis for the new studies

are the possible simplifications and savings for the shear reinforcing which will

be shown at the end of these articles.

2. Observations About the Present Allowable Limits for the Shear Stress ｾ ｯ

In the Specifications DIN 1045, 1075, 4227 etc. two limits for the
 6.

allowable ｾ are shown for each concrete strength:

1. A lower limit below which no amount of the shear reinforcing is required.

2. A top limit which may never be exceeded and thus determines the smallest

allowable cross-sectional dimensions of the concrete.

Thus, when the shear stress {- in a beam stays below the lower limit

then the shear reinforcing is left to the designer without computed proof.

Slowly it has come into use that especially for plates in this region absolutely

no shear reinforcing is used while one uses very few stirrups for beams.

Up to now nobody has proven whether sufficient shear safety exists for

all possible types of loading with this type of reinforcing, especially when the

main reinforcing is only partly carried on up to the supports. Tests on this,

therefore, were urgently required. They show that ｾ ｏ under the failure load for

B300 and reinforcing steel IIIb, can lie between 14 and 94 kg/cm 2, while the allow-

able /(0 = 10 kg/cm 2.

The top limit is set rather low, for example for B300 at 20 kg/cm 2.

Thereby one had in mind the principal tensile stresses and the tensile strengths

or the somewhat higher assumed "shear strength" and i t was further believed that

because of this low limit of ｾ the beam would stay crack-free in the shear span.

Thereby was forgotten that the principle tensile stress for a positive moment al-

ready is larger a bit below the neutral surface and that it quickly exceeds the

tensile strength of the concrete in the extreme fibres in all cases and that cracks

occur there.

It is difficult to understand why the allowable stresses are limited

according to the tensile strength of the concrete for the fibres in the neutral

surface when we do not do this for the fibres lying below this and there simply

assume a cracked tensile zone. This assumption is also a basis for the design of

the shear reinforcing. If we allow cracks for the extreme fibres and take care by
 .,! ,

sufficient reinforcing that they stay very small under working load, then we mLst

also allow the same privilege for the fibres that lie somewhat higher and there

also allow that the tensile stresses and respectively the tensile forces are givea

a 3citable reinforcing. We will show that for suitable reinforcing the shear cracks

are less wide than the bending cracks. However, in thin webs for ample protection

of ｴ ｨ iLclined tensile forces by inserted steel, not the concrete tensile strength

but the concrete compression strength becomes governing? because the concrete strips

between the shear cracks fail under compression. In one of the following tests with

beams of B300 failure in the web by inclined compression was reached for a load

that corresponded to ｾ = 180 kg/cm 2 and thus 9 times the allowable ｾ

I O· Hence

tte allowable ｾ values can be put higher than up to now.

In the earlier choice of the top to limits, construction considera-

tions also played a role, without doubt. ｾ values are, as a result, such that for

common beams the webs must be chosen sufficiently thick that it can contain the

reinforcing easily and that the concrete in the webs can be poured and vibrated

without difficulty. Today these points of view are not valid any more in most cases.

Especially in prefabrication of beams, thin webs are used where the concrete between

the steel forms is compacted with vibrators on the outside, In France where one

is not hampered by the low 1'0' for example, it has been proven, that for beams with

long span lengths, very thin webs can be poured faultlessly. For a sensible design

of beams where the shear forces are very high, compared to the moments especially

for highly loaded box beams, as for example first floor walls of high-rise ｢ ｵ ｩ ｬ ､ ｾ ｮ ｧ

with high supporting loads, again and again the low ｾ limit has been considerable

obstacle in the later years. There were cases where beam webs or lower flanges,

must be over one meter thick, entirely because of the allowable "]- 0 although 30

to 40 centimeter thickness was sufficient and would not ｨ ｾ ｶ lead to difficlllties

in reinforcing and pouring.

 8.

As a pre-requisite for an increase of the allowable ｾ ｏ however, the

influence of the type of reinforcing and the direction of the reinforcing on the

inclined compression stresses must be investigated so that the top limit of JrO'

as long as one wishes to stay with this computed value of the shear stress, is

determined such that a sufficient safety is always available.

The following tests therefore must also consider the question of the

top --r 0 limit.

3. The Question of the Future Design According to Shear Failure Load.

The above considerations show already that the present design of our

reinforced concrete beams on shear. based on the computed shear stress ｾ with

two allowable ｾ limits cannot be satisfactory. The tests described later on

showed this especially clearly since the computed ｾ under failure loads for

example for concrete strengths B300 varied between 14 and 180 kg/cm 2. Today we

know that the shear failure safety, if no shear reinforcing is present, in spite

of the low bottom ｾ limit, is not sufficient in many cases and that in other

cases. with or without shear reinforcing, the safety against shear failure becomes

much larger than is actually required.

The bending failure loads can be computed beforehand rather precisely

today and many countries have already changed to design for bending according to

the ultimate load method, thus according to a load, P kr• at a critical deformation

or the failure load, PU, with a certain safety factor. This step is also intended

in Germany. However, it is very unsatisfactory if for one beam we must use two

different design methods, the ultimate load method for bending and allowable stresses

for shear. For that reason there exists a pressing necessity to learn to compute

the shear failure load somewhat precisely beforehand. The shear failure of beams

of reinforced concrete or prestressed concrete was the subject of much research,

mostly foreign, in recent years. (Ref. 2-6) Almost all this work led to the knowledge
 9.

that not only the shear force, Q, by itself governs, but that the complete force

picture in the section, represented by N, M, Q, for bending without longitudinal

force and preferab1v the ratio ｾ deserves a decisive meaning as a shear failure
J Qh
criterion. Thereby the carrying capacity under shear is determined by a moment,

the "shear fai lure moment" Msu.

M a
To some extent this ratio Qh' which corresponds to the ratio h for point

loads has been labelled the shear span length, which is unproper since it is a

dimension-less quantity. "

A. Rusch chose the expression shear slenderness, which

is better. We will here speak simply of the moment-shear-ratio or M ratio to avoid

Qh
this uncertainty.

With this ratio M the reduction of the strength of the bending compression
Qh
zone ever the shear crack can be expressed, since there not only ｾ acts but

at the same ｰ ｯ ｩ ｮ ｴ ｾ thus a two axial stress condition exists, or expressed

differently, the compression resultant D is inclined because of the arch ｡ ｣ ｴ ｩ ｯ ｮ

"
with vertical component Dv or LQ as already shown by Morsch.

R. Walther used these relations in his thesis (Ref. 7) in a proposal for

a stear failure theory, which is marked especially by the fact that a deformation

condition for the shear region was drawn up which considers the influence of the

amount of reinforcing and its bond strength. The compatibility of the deformations

plays a role in all our beams and influences the interior forces. For bending)the

､ ･ ｾ ｯ ｲ ｭ ｡ ｴ ｩ ｯ condition gives us the location of the neutral surface, for bending with

shear force similar conditions must hold. The shear failure theory of Walther

likewise is based on equilibrium and compatibility conditions with which the actually

reduced neutral surface height as compared to bending, in the shear zone is determined.

These thoughts appeared so enlightening and logical to the senior author

that he, together with R. Walther, set out to conduct tests to build up this shear

theory in the Otto-Graf-Institute of the University Stuttgart. Therefore these tests

 10.

are primarily arranged such that a single parameter for the shear failure theory

could be obtained.

ｾ ａ ｣ ｣ ｯ ｲ ､ ｩ ｮ to the present conditions the shear failure theory of Walther

will be pub Lis'he d directly in connection with the following test results. It
" '

gllows design ｏ the basis of ｳ ｾ ･ ｡ failure load and therefore is linked sensibly

to ｃ ｾ ｾ de s i gn fdr ｄ ｾ ､ ｩ ｮ ｧ

4. Test P:a::1

ｲ ｾ ｲ ｳ of all the test plan contained several series with simple rectangular

beams with'Jlt shear reinforcing in order to explain the variables especially importart

for the shear failure theorY,such as ｾ ･ ｩ ｮ ｦ ｯ ｲ ｣ ｩ ｮ ratio, bond}and type of loading.

For that purpose, beams without shear reinforcing are especially suited, because

the different magnitudes of influence can be investigated somewhat separately. In

addition to that, such tests are very necessary from the point of view of the pre-

sently so numerous massive plates without shear reinforcing. The different influence

of the moment-shear-ratios was studied in numerous tests with changeable ｾ ｨ

Also the influence of the absolute magnitude of the beams must be che ck ed

with these tests, since it is connected to the bond strength.

"
E. Morsch already investigated several types of shear reinforcing of

stirrups and bent-up rods and came to the conclusion that distributing of the forces

that must be picked up approximately 1/3 to stirrups and 2/3 to inclined rods gives

the best solution of the shear safety. Since ｾ ｨ ｯ ｳ tests, there ｾ .: t ha t

show that vertical stirrups by themselves approximately give the same failure lead

as the mentioned distribution (Ref. 8). Also in the U.S.A. it was proven repeatedly

that stirrups by themselves are quite favourable, which can add to a simplification

of the shear reinforcing. Today this possibility is especially important since the

ratio of wages to building materials has gone up. Correspondingly, tests on rec-

tangular and T-beams with different shear reinforcing were added, which shall show
 11.

whether a better shear carrying capacity can be achieved with bent up rods, vertical

or inclined stirrups and which part each of these types of shear reinforcing adds

to the shear carrying capacity.

It is known that in many cases the complete coverage of the shear forces

"
according to Morsch by stirrups and inclined rods, thus the so called complete shear

protection, is not necessary. The shear failure theory will make it possible to

ascertain the required amount of shear reinforcing for a certain safety. Numerous

test results published in this article will be quoted to confirm the new theory.

From several tests of other research workers (Ref. 9) it appears that the

shape of the cross section has a noticeable influence on the shear carrying capacity.

The shear failure theory of Walther indicates that the width of the compression zone

is more important than the web width. A few tests were carried out on this question

also.

From the point of view of rewriting DIN 1045 it was very important for

the authors to carry out tests, to determine the top allowable limit of the shear

stress ｾ ｏ according to the points mentioned in Section 2, as a function of the

prism compression strength of the concrete. Because of the urgency of this question

the information on these tests is given priority.

Firstly only short duration tests under statical loading were carried

out because the influence of long duration load or a variable load is sufficiently

known from numerous other tests, so that the safety against disadvantageous actions

of those influences can be obtained from the known reduced values for an order of

size.

It was preferred to carry out these tests with Rippentorstahl because

this is used mainly in construction in Germany. In the case of stirrups,

Rippentorstahl III b• smooth round steel I and smooth round steel III b were compared,

because for stirrups quite often smooth steel is still used.

 12.

For the concrete)B300 and B225 were chosen because these concrete strengths

are used mainly. A fundamental reduction of the concrete strengths for tests to

2/3 of the theoretical value, as is promoted so often presently, the author con-

sidered unsuitable here, because the determination of the actual safety becomes more

difficult. Such a reduction is justified where the failure of the steel governs and

the concrete serves as a agent for the behaviour of the steel, thus for example

for the anchorage of steel but not however where the failure of the concrete itself

determines the carrying capacity, as is the case in most of the following shear tests.

The spread of the concrete strength is considered for design by a higher safety

factor in the form of a reduced concrete strength, which will also allow the influences

of long duration load, fatigue, construction and such to be included. It must not

be overlooked that different concrete properties as for example, shrinkage, plasticity,

or the ratio between tensile and compression strength are improved by reduction

of the concrete strength of the test beams under certain circumstances.

The following test results are limited to the important data, results

and conclusions. The complete test results will be published in the research

volume of the German Committee for ReinforcedlConcrete.

 II. TEST RESULTS

1. TESTS FOR HIGH SHEAR STRESSES

(December 1961, Pages 280-290)

1.1 The Test Beams

1.11 Shape and Design - The top shear stress limit ｾ =ｾ which leads

to destruction of the concrete by inclined compression, was expected in a magnitude

that corresponds approximately to the compression strength of web, thus approximately

0.6 ｾ or about 150 kg/cm 2 for B300. To achieve failure because of inclined com-

pression, the test beams must be constructed such that under working load, very

high shear stresses of approximately 65 kg/cm 20ccur. Such values can be produced

for box beams, however, there the vertical stresses <ry disturbed the desired

trajectory picture. Therefore T-beams were chosen with a wide top flange ascompression

chord and a closely reinforced tension flange to prevent an early destruction under

bending. The web was kept comparatively thin in comparison to these flanges, without

interfering with the regular installation of stirrups made up of two sections. Thus

resulted the beams shown in Fig. 6 with somewhat unusual cross section which should

not be considered as examples of beams for practical purposes; the 10 cm thick web

must be considered much more as a model of a thin plate under high shear stress or

a web in a long beam with box cross section.

Also it was desired that over a large distance the possibly principal

stresses would be practically equal and at the neutral surface inclined under 45 0.

This can be achieved most simply by symmetrical two point loading, whereby the

distance between the support and load in this case was equal to three times the

ｵ ｳ ｾ ｢ ｬ height, to obtain a sufficiently long zone free from load introduction

disturbances.

13.
 14.

These large beams designated with Tl and T 2 were constructed and tested.

They were different in arrangement but not in amount of shear reinforcing.

1.12 Web Reinforcing - The web of beam T l is reinforced with vertical

stirrups 12 rom spaced 8 cm apart. The stirrups cross-section corresponds to complete

"
shear protection according to Morsch for a working load of about 100 tons. At the

top the stirrups are bent transversely in the flange and at the bottom they are bent

t9 the outside to surround part of the longitudinal rods, thus they are at top and

bottom anchored faultlessly. The diagonal stirrups were connected to the longitudinal

rods with wire only and thus not welded. Obviously the diagonal stirrups do not

slide with good bond of the longitudinal rods and with sufficient shear reinforcing.

In the right half of the beam ribbed Torstahl was used and in the left half smooth

Torstahl. The latter were manufactured specially by HUttenwek Rheinhausen and in

fact were formed so cold that practically the same stress-strain curve occurred

as for ribbed steel. Thus for the stirrups only the quality of the bond was changed

in both beam halves.

The web of beam T 2 had inclined stirrups, 12 rom of reinforcing-steel III B

spaced 11.2 cm apart with an inclination of 45 0 and as above, designed for complete

shear protection. The stirrup shape is the same as for beam T l. Again in the left

beam half smooth rods and in the right beam half ribbed rods were used. In the

region between the applied loads the inclined stirrup web reinforcing was abandoned

completely.

It should be noted that no additional longitudinal reinforcing was used

in the web although without doubt they must be installed for the practical case.

This was done so that the compaction with submerged vibrators was not unnecessarily

hard in the thin web and also to study the action of the stirrups alone.

1.13 Supports - At the beam end the unfavorable case of a support from

the side with added concrete transfer supports was chosen so that the favorable
 IS.

action of ｾ
y in the zone of the support was reduced and the anchorage of the

main reinforcing rods was tested under unfavorable conditions.

As a result, the 1 m wide and 25 em thick transverse beams at the supports

are stressed highly under shear. Since the span length is small compared to the

height we have a pure shear case. Incidentally it could be shown here again that

for this type of shear it is better to use horizontal reinforcing rods in several

layers together with a few stirrups and not bent-up rods under 60 0 as is advised

frequently. For this, compare the tests of Leonhardt-Andra on the divided anchorage

of concentrated stress cables (Ref. 10).

1.14 Chord Reinforcing - As tensile reinforcing, 16 - 26 mm 0, rippentorstahl

III b rods were installed close to each other in the bottom flange and all rods were

carried straight to the beam ends. Bent-up rods would have been a disturbance in

the thin webs. At the cantilevered ends it was observed whether slip occurred which

generally was to be expected for the very small distance of the end plane of the

beams from the support line and for the type of support. Since anchorage failure was

undesirable on the other hand the ends of the rods were threaded and an anchor plate

installed. However, the anchor nuts had spacing between the anchor plates and were

only to be tightened in case of necessity. The lower reinforcing is surrounded

with stirrups, ｾ 10 mm spaced 16 respectively 22 cm in transverse direction. The

15 cm thick compression flange had the same transverse reinforcing and a weak

longitudinal reinforcing.

1.15 Computed Values of the Allowable Working Load, Bending Failure Load,

Stresses, etc. -

Cross-section values: Fe = 85.0 cm2 (16 0 26 mm BSt III b)

x = 34.1 cm

z = 75.1 cm
 16.

Own weight: g = 1.05 tim (including loading structure)

Allowable working load: Mg+p 122.6 tm (based on DIN 1045 with

a llowab 1e <::1b = 90 kg/ cm2)

ｾ = 117.9 tm
Allowable utilizable load: 2P = 94.3 t

Qp 47.15 t

Qg 3.15 t

Qg +p = 50.3 t

Combined working load: 2 Pkr + G ｾ Ｑ Ｐ Ｐ t

Carrying moment when yield

point reached in tension chord:

ｾ ｫ = Fe A .2 .Z 85 x 4.0 x 0.75 255 tm

whereby c5b -::::: 160 kg/ cm2

Corresponding carrying load: 2 P ｾ Ｑ Ｙ t

Stresses under working load (computed according to DIN 1045)

Bending stress at extreme fibre:

a llowab 1e ｾ = 90 kg/ cm2

1916 kg/cm 2 (allowable ｾ

Shear stress at support:

7; = ｾ = 67 kg/cm 2
bo Z

allowable /0 = 20 kg/cm 2
Design of the stirrups:

Shear force : T = % bo L = 67 x 10 x 100 = 67 tim

Beam T1: vertical stirrups
T = 67 27.9 cm2/m
FeBU = allowable ｾ 2.4

o 12 BSt III b, e =8 cm, available Fe 27.2 cm2

 17.

Beam T 2: inclined stirrups

67 2
required FeBU .r-r: = 19.8 em ;
2.4 v "-
o 12
BSt III b, e = 11.2 cm, available Fe 20.0 cm 2
(Additional information computed by J.G. MacGregor

I 3,629,000 cm4 Ytop = 29.8 em

Q 51,490 cm3 Ybottom = 60.2 cm)

1.16 Construction of the Beams - The beams were poured upside down, thus

with the tension flange at the top, whereby the concrete for the web was poured

between the reinforcing rods through the holes for the vibrator. Thus, the main

reinforcing represented the unfavorable case of top steel.

To pour the web as accurately as possible with respect to dimensions they

were formed with [350 steel beams. On the other hand this meant that the side

supports could only be added later on whereby the construction joint was just in

the regiun of the highest shear stresses. Thanks to suitable additional reinforcing

this did not lead to damage.

1.2 Building Materials

1.21 Steel - The stress-strain diagram of the ｾ 26 mm ｾ rippentorstahl

of the longitudinal reinforcing and of the stirrups, ｾ 12 rnm, is shown in Fig. 7.

The cross-sectional area of the stirrups, determined from the weight,

was somewhat less for the smooth rods than for the rippentorstahl (see TABLE I).

TABLE I: Properties of the reinforcing steel

Type of Steel No. Measured E'l orrga t Lon

ｾ cross-sectiona 1 ｾ Ｎ ｾ at failure E
rnm area rnm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 % kg/cm 2

Smooth torstahl 12 109 4270 5490 14.8 2.10 x 10 6

(60,900psi) (78,000)
Rippent rstahl 12 116 4350 5470 17.0 2.10 x 10 6
(62,000) (77,900)
Rippentorstahl 26 529 4740 5600 1) 2.08 x 106
(67,"500) (79,900)
1) Several failures near the clamps
 18.

1.22 Concrete - For both beams a concrete strength B300 at age of 28 days

was planned. To keep the increase in strength during the three days of the test as

small as possible an early strength portland cement 2475 was used.

The aggregate, washed Rhine gravel, was divided in 4 grain sizes, 0/3,

3/7, 7/15 and 15/30 rom. Quartz powder 0/0.02 mm increased the fines. The mortar

proportion 0/7 mm amounted to 71%. The composition of the concrete and important

technilogical data are summarized in TABLE II.

TABLE II

PROPERTIES OF THE CONCRETE

Beams Tl T2

Cement 230 kg/m 3 230 kg/m 3

Water 199 liters /m3 207 liters/m 3

Quartz powder 118 kg/m 3 118 kg/m 3

Water-cement ratio
with respect to cement .57 .59
and quartz powder

Slump test 35 cm, 40 cm.

Air -pore ratio 3.0% 2.6%

Weight of 1 cu. meter

of compacted concrete 2250 kg. 2250 kg.

at day of test 298 kg/cm 2 269 kg/cm 2

(age 28 days) (4250 psi) (3840 psi)

(bending tensile strength) 40 kg/cm 2 36 kg/cm 2

(570 psi) (512 psi)

The cube strength Pw was determined from 20 test cubes 20 x 20 x 20 cm.

and the bending tensile strength Pbz was determined from prisms 10 x 10 x 53 cm.

The stress-strain diagram of the concrete shown in Fig. 8 was obtained

from two prisms of 10 x 10 x 53 cm.

 19.

1.3 The location of the points where measurements were taken and the method of

measuring

The large dimensions of the test beams allowed extensive measurements to

determine the pattern of stresses and deformations. .

For each beam. measurements

were taken at approximately 350 places to which during the loading were added

approximately 300 locations for reading the crack widths at three elevations. To

keep the duration of each load increment short, 12 assistants were used for the

readings.

Detailed information about the location and meaning of the single measure-

ment points, dispensed with here on a plan, can be obtained later from the complete

test results mentioned in the beginning.

1.31 For the stirrups the elongation was obtained with plastic elongation

measuring devices and strain gages. For the measurement of the plastic elongation

over a gage length of 20 em, measurement points were used for each beam half for

T l at 10 stirrups each at three locations and for T 2 at 8 stirrups each at three

locations. The gage points were drilled in the stirrups before they were placed

in the concrete and little tubes filled with paraffin were applied. After pouring

of the concrete the gage points could be reached by the gages by removing the

parraffin. Accuracy was approximately ± 0.02 ｾ ｏ ｏ

On 6 stirrups 4 or 5 strain gages (in beams T l and T 2 respectively) were

glued in milled slots of width of 1 rom (in the reinforcing rods themselves) and

covered with araldit for closure and electrical insulation. Accuracy was approximately

+0.01 crfoo.
1.32 On the chord reinforcing, strain gages were installed in slots, 2

each at the quarter points and in the neighorhood of the support and 4 each in the

middle of the beam.

1.33 On the concrete in the zone of the web at 6 sections for each beam
 w.
half 3 rosettes with 4 rays with glued-on measurement plates were installed for

measurement of elongation. Because of the expected disturbances because of cracks

the smallest available gage length of 5 cm was chosen. For the analysis only the

compression direction inclined under 45 0 gave usable results.

1.34 Likewise the elongations of the concrete in the compression flange

and in the tension chord were determined with gages over the entire length of both

chords with gage lengths of 20 and 50 cm. Between and very close to the loads the

transverse distribution of the longitudinal elongations was also measured.

1.35 The deflections were measured with a precise level. Accuracy was

approximately ±D.l mm.

1.36 The formation of cracks on the concrete surfaces covered with chalk

were followed accurately with a magnifying glass. The crack widths were measured

with a microscope (reading 1/100 mm) at three elevations: at the elevation of the

main ｲ ･ ｩ ｮ ｦ ｯ ｲ ｣ ･ ｭ ･ ｮ ｴ at the transition from tensile chord to web and in the middle of

the web. The cracks were numbered in the order of their occurrence (numbers in

circles in Figs. 10 and lU and their ends marked with the load in tons present at

that time.

1.37 At the anchorage the cantilevered ends of the main reinforcing rods

were tested for slip with a few dial gages. It was shown for sure that the anchorage

stayed in full effect up to failure of the beams.

1.4 Loading

Because of the many measurements a beam test lasted for three days.

The load was applied twice in increments of 20 tons each, and the load was taken

off in between. Since the measurements lasted approximately 45 minutes for each

loading, a time influence on the concrete deformations, especially for higher

loads, therefore could not be avoided. During all pauses, and also during the

night, the load was taken off the beams. Fig. 9 shows a beam in the 1500 ton
 21.

MAN testing machine.

1.5 Test Results

We want to consider the test results of both beams T l and T 2 simultane-

ously because useful information can be obtained thatway. The crack patterns

after failure are showp. in Figs. 10 and 11.

1.51 Failure Loads

Beam Concrete Fai lure Max. at fai lure

Load
ｾ
Strength Test Converted
/31# eP kg/cm 2 toBw = 300
kg/cm 2 t

298 160 111 112

269 232 160 178.5

1.52 The Causes of Failure - As expected for both beams the concrete

failed in the web under the inclined compression, where the concrete scaled off

at the surface and fell to pieces in thin segments (Fig. 12 and 13). Indications

of buckling of the concrete strips could not be determined and was also not ex-

pected since the thin web was held by the high tensile stresses of the stirrups.

Since the failure load for T2 was higher than for Tl in spite of the same cause of

failure the stress of the concrete in the webs for vertical stirrups must be larger

than for inclined stirrups as was confirmed by the following measurement results.

1.53 The Inclined Compression Stresses in the Web - From the many concrete

elongations measured on the web, with the help of the stress-strain diagrams (Fig. 8),

the compression stresses under approximately 45 0 between the inclined cracks could

be obtained. In Fig. 14 the average values, outside the load introduction zones,

are shown as a function of the load. The measurement locations which were not

disturbed by cracks and which were used to give the average values are shown in

Fig. 14.
 22.

We find confirmed that the inclined compression stresses are much larger

for vertical stirrups (T 1), approximately 1.5 times, than for inclined stirrups.

This ratio corresponds somewhat to the ratio of the failure loads.

For both beams, at failure, inclined compression stresses ｾ (as

principa 1 compre s sian stress) in the order of the prism compression strengths were

reached:

.8513'# = 253 kg/cm 2, average <7I"I approximately 220 kg/cm 2

T 2: f3p = .85 J3 tAl = 228 kg/cm 2, average <7Ii approximately 230 ｫ ｧ Ｏ ｣ ｭ Ｒ . .

This proves, that the inclined concrete strips are more or less under

pure compression and that the stresses obtained from the elongations at failure

correspond closely with the strengths. This is important, because the magnitude

of c1Ii deviates considerably from values computed according to the truss analogy.

In Fig. 15 the stresses and the internal forces are derived that follow

from the equilibrium conditions under the assumption that the chord forces are

horizontal and that the shear force accordingly is taken care of in the web only.

Subsequently the inclined compression stresses for the case of inclined stirrups

under 45 degrees were equal to ｾ for vertical stirrups, however, 2 ｾ ｏ thus twice

as large. These theoretical values are also shown in Fig. 14.

It is interesting that the measured inclined compression stresses in

the case of inclined stirrups lie approximately 50% higher than the 1-0 values,
while the stirrup stresses, as we will see later on, reach only approximately 80%

of the corresponding computed values. Thus we find, as mentioned in the beginning,

that the stiffer compression strips are stressed more than the flexible tension

rods.

These somewhat unexpected conclusions still need an explanation,

since at first they seem to be contrary to the customary equilibrium conditions.

*For beam T 2, ｾ was extrapolated linearly from the last measured value.
 23.

Next one must consider that the inclined compression stresses shown in Fig. 14

are in fact average values of a complete shear span, but that each measurement point

used for the average value lies in a zone undisturbed locally by cracks. Between

the branches of a single crack, where measurements were not possible, there is no

doubt that the inclined compression stresses are smaller. With it also the combined

average value of <r.[I over the complete shear span becomes less than the value showTI.

For beam T l with vertical stirrups this could be the principal reason for the

difference (approximately 15%) between the computed and the measured cr.rI' This

influence is also present for T Z' and in fact much stronger, because of the greater

number of shear cracks; however here also the stirrup stresses playa role. From

Fig. 15 (left below) it can be seen that the vertical component of D and Zs to-

gether must be equal to Q. Since the measured force ZQo only amounts to 80% of the

theoretical value, the difference of 20% must necessarily be carried by the inclined

compression strips. Since the resultant of D and Zs then deviates from the vertical,

merely means that the tension chord is loaded somewhat more and the compression chord

however is loaded somewhat less than corresponds to the theory. For vertical stirrups

(Fig. 15 right) the stirrup stress has no influence on the inclined compression

stresses. Therefore the differences between the computed and the measured values

for T l are smaller than for T 2.

1.54 Stresses in the 3tirrups - First we consider the average values of

the stirrup stresses which can be obtained from the elongations in the central

reach between support and load (Fig. 16) and compare them with the stresses computed

according to the classical shear theory.

-;-
-- _ 0
l.oo'eB - ｾ Ｂ Ｇ
".,.. FeB
whereby FeB = cross-sectional area of a stirrup

a = stirrup spacing in the direction of the beam axis

inclination of the stirrups with respect to the beam axis

 24.

The stirrups, each with three locations for elongation measurements, used

to obtain the average value are sketched in Fig. 16.

For both beams the stirrup stresses up to failure load stay clearly under

the computed values, namely for beam T l around 750 kg/cm 2 and for T 2 at approximately

600 kgicm 2. For the working load this corresponds to a difference of approximately

30% and 25% respectively and approximately 20% for 1.7 times the working load. At

the failure load of beam T l the stress of the vertical stirrups amounted to an

average of 3300 kg/cm 2; for the failure load of T 2 the inclined stirrups were stress-

ed to an estimated value of 4400 kg/cm 2, while the theoretical value lies much

higher, namely at 5700 kg/cm 2. The pattern of the stress curve shows that the

stirrups were already somewhat in the plastic zone.

When the stresses in the stirrups stay under the computed value this is

only possible when, even for such a strong shear reinforcing, a part of the shear

force is still carried by the frame with the tensile rod action. This is confirmed

by the increased stresses in the tension chord and in the compression strips.

The inclined stirrups or ribbed steel show a somewhat higher stress than

those of smooth steel, while for the vertical stirrups a reversed tendency was

observed. These differences can be attributed to certain coincidences of the

crack formation but also to the fact that the smooth stirrups withdraw somewhat

from carrying the force by a small slippage or that these rods have a somewhat

smaller cross-section than the ribbed ones. For the inclined stirrups mainly the

bond and for the vertical stirrups mainly the smaller cross-section accounted for

the different behavior.

In Fig. 17 the stress pattern of a few stirrups is shown with small

deviations smoothed out. The locations for the measurements are marked with 0

(top), m (middle) and u(bottom). The solid lines refer to the ribbed stirrups

and the dotted lines the smooth stirrups. Accordingly the inclined stirrups carry

considerably more in the boundary zones of the shear spans than the vertical
 25.

stirrups which, as we will see later on, is also shown clearly in the deflection

and the crack formation, In the lower load increments the vertical stirrups are

under compression, In the middle of the shear span, a stress decrease from below

to above is seen in all stirrups, The decrease in stress is small, however, so

that the anchorage of the stirrups, even for ribbed rods. above and below without

question must be insured against slipping as in the test either with hooks or by

perpendicular bends.

1.55 The stress in the tension and compression chord - Next we consider

again the theoretical chord forces in Fig. 15 for the different trusses and we see

that in the shear span (Q active) because of the different diagonal forces,

different chord forces are developed for vertical sections. Only for stirrups at
M
45 0 • may we expect equal chord forces D = Z =-- ; for vertical stirrups D, Z and

Q differ. The horizontal tension force in the web. mentioned in the book by E.

Rausch (Ref. 11), ｷ ｾ ｩ ｣ had to be taken by horizontal web reinforcing, was only

present there because arbitrary equal chord forces were assumed. This however

is impossible, ｢ ･ ｣ ｡ ｾ ｳ the fibres at the neutral surface did not elongate and a

horizontal reinforcing therefore is not stressed under tension. The equilibrium

condition is satisfied much more by the difference between D and Z. which came to

light clearly in beam T l, In the region of pure bending (Q = 0), between the

loads P, again both the chord forces must be equal but opposite,

The readings show that the boundary stresses at the compression chord

(Fig. 18) decrease faster towards the outside than was to be expected from the

bending moment curve. In the neighborhood of the support in the compression chord

even considerable tension stresses and cracks occur, which can be attributed to

the arch action. which shows itself much better for vertical stirrups than for

inclined stirrups. Clearly it is shown that in the undisturbed shear span the

horizontal compression force for vertical stirrups is smaller than ｾ by approximately

z
Q That the compression stresses in the middle of the beam for T are larger than
2 l
 26.

those for T 2, can be explained from the fact that the compression zone for T l is

decreased by the shear cracks that penetrate beyond the bending-zero-line (see

Fig. 10).

In Fig. 18 are also shown the elongations measured across the cracks at

the tension chord. They are corresponding to Fig. 15, larger in the shear span

for T l than for T 2. Accordingly vertical stirrups decrease the load in the compression

chord in the shear spans and increase the load in the tension chord.

For construction members under shear, for which the inclined compression

brings on the failure, inclined stirrups are to be advised according to 1.53, while

for the many cases where the shear failure occurs because of destruction of the

compression zone, vertical stirrups with their action to decrease the load in the

compression chords, can be advantageous. Noteworthy are the peaks in elongation in

the tension chord, clearly visible under the loads for T l. They can be attributed

to local bending deformations because of the vertical compression of the web Ｈ Ｍ

compare Fig. 17, Stirrup 3); in the case of inclined stirrups they are relieved

by the stirrup forces at these points. Also one must imagine two opposite compression

strips between the loads that contribute to the peak and then at L reduce the
2
M
tension force to the value , which are somewhat equal for T
l
and T
2·
z
In Fig. 19 the compression stresses in the middle of the beam are shown as

a function of the load. The difference between T l and T 2 is already confirmed. On

the other hand, it must be considered why the measured values are above the computed

ones, when the opposite could be expected from statics, for example with respect

to the equilibrium of the internal forces for non-linear stress distribution above

the neutral surface. Time influences can hardly be governing since the plastic

deformations for prisms and the beam tests were approximately equal. The elongations

over the width of the compression flange were also somewhat equal. We suspect that

ｴ ｨ ･ ｾ € diagram used for the computation of stresses from strains, which was
 27.

derived from a prism compressed in the center differs from the behavior of a bending

boundary zone. At failure the maximum €b averages at about only Ｒ Ｏ ｾ while for bending

in a rectangular section values up to 3%oand more can be reached. The stress-strain

diagram for the extreme fibres of the bending compression zones can run flatter

than for the case of the prism tests. The bending stresses computed from the prism

test are then somewhat too high. However, this suspicion must still be proven.

The highest compression stress was with approximately 225 kg/cm 2 for beam T 2 close

to the compression strength so that the bending failure was not very far from the

shear failure.

The shear stresses in the longitudinal reinforcing in the middle of the

beam at the quarter points, and in the neighborhood of the supports are shown in

Fig. 20. The values in the middle of the beam for both beams correspond closely to

the computed values. At the quarter points, thus in the shear span, the difference

as expected according to Fig. 15 shows clearly. For beam T 2 the measured stresses

correspond to the values computed from Z =ｾ , while for T l they correspond approximately
z
M
to Z = - ｾ Immediately next to the supports the difference disappears. The
z 2
compression strips of the frame are already supported on the tension rod before the

support whereby the shear forces partly through the stirrups are guided again to the

compression chord. The steel stress at failure was 3600 kg/cm 2, in T l and was estimated

at 4900 kg/cm 2 for T2' thus for T 2 we were close to bending failure.

1.56 Cracks - For both beams the cracks in the shear zone extend over the

complete web height almost exactly at 45 0 and only transfer to vertical bending

cracks in the tension chord (Figs. 10 and 11). Because of the side supports the in-

clined cracks continue up to these supports and vertical compression stresses, ｾ

because of the reaction,arehardly noticeable in the crack pattern. Superficially

no difference is to be seen between the cracks for inclined or vertical stirrups.

However, as soon as we consider the sum of the crack widths measured in the middle
 28.

of the web (Fig, 21) a large difference in the action of both stirrup directions

is shown: the crack widths for all load increments are three times as large for

vertical stirrups than for inclined stirrups, Smooth and ribbed stirrups gave

almost equal crack widths; only for very high loads of beam T 2 did cracks for the

smooth stirrups become clearly wider.

In Fig, 22 the maximum and the average values of the shear cracks in the

middle of the web are compared with those in the tension chord between the loads.

Accordingly the shear cracks for inclined stirrups are generally finer than the

bending cracks while the relationship is reversed for vertical stirrups. For in-

clined stirrups the average and maximum crack widths measured under working loads

are 0.03 and 0.9 mm respectively, far under the amounts considered safe in bend-

ing tension zones. Even for vertical stirrups, the corresponding values, of 0,10

and 0.24 mm, lie still in the 'allowable" range. Thus in both cases we have to do

with small crack widths in the web so that such high shear stresses in reinforced

concrete beams as considered from the point of view of the cracks, are safe. We

will see that thick bent-up rods in thick webs can give large shear cracks. Thus

distributed reinforcing chosen here, is a condition for the observed favorable

behavior,

1.57 Deflections - According to the given explanations it is understand-

able that for vertical stirrups larger deflections were measured than for inclined

stirrups. The difference amounts to approximately 35% in the middle of the beam

and in the top load increment even up to 45% (Fig. 23).

The deflections 01 and 01" at a distance of one meter from the support

shown in Fig. 23, show that ribbed stirrups gave smaller deformation than smooth

ones, the difference being more pronounced for inclined stirrups than for vertical

ones.

1.58 Side Support and Anchorage - The side supports at the beam ends
 29.

showed, even for the highest loads, only single fine vertical bending cracks, and

no inclined shear cracks, which can be attributed to the suitable reinforcing with

horizontal and vertical stirrups mentioned in the beginning. This is also the

basis therefore that the longitudinal reinforcing, in spite of the supports at the

sides of the beams and in spite of short anchorage length, did not show any slip.

Therefore the nuts, installed at the cantilevered rod ends for cases of emergency,

that were not tight up to the anchor plate did not have to be tensioned.

1.6 French Tests for High Shear Stresses by l.R. Robinson

In 1960 l.R. Robinson (Ref. 12) carried out tests with 9 beams to deter-

mine the top shear stress limits. The beams had the dimensions shown in Fig. 24

with only a 6 cm thick web and were loaded in the left quarter points with a single

load. At the supports and at the load points the thin web was stiffened with 8 cm

wide ribs, which had as a result that the vertical ｾ ｙ compression stresses

because of the force introduction in the web, hardly acted. Because of the load

position, a low moment shear ratio of 2 occurred at the left and at the right the

ratio was 6.

The reinforcing is shown in Fig. 25; it is in so far uncustomary since

the stirrups consist only of one rod that lies in the middle of the web and is

anchored at the ends with hooks (hook diameter 50, hook end = 50). These hooks

lie in longitudinal direction and partly overlap each other and surround the

transverse reinforcing which was installed for each second stirrup. The transverse

reinforcing consisted of a closed ring, ｾ rom, which goes around the longitudinal

rods in the tension chord and thus is very strong. The results obtained with this

uncustomary web reinforcing is very educational.

The longitudinal reinforcing consists for all beams of two smooth rods,

ｾ 40 rom, SrI, with large end hooks and closed transverse reinforcing in the

anchorage zone.
 30.

The stirrups consisted partly of smooth Stahl III (denoted DyR), partly

of non-ribbed Torstahl (T), vertically in beam N, and inclined under 45 0 in beam I.

They consisted of 0 ｾ Ｎ Ｌ ｾ fc: ""'ive beams and of 10 mm for four bb.:-,S, whereby the

stirrup spacing was chosen such that there was an approximately equal shear reinforc-

ing ratio, which should lead, for the assumed failure load of 30 tons, to a stirrup

stress in the order of magnitude of the yield point (approximately 4000 kg/cm 2),

The classical method of computations with n = 15 gave a neutral surface

height of x = 20 cm and an internal moment arm of z 31,4 cm so that for P = 30

tons a steel stress in the tension chord of 2000 kg/cm 2 existed, Thus the tension

chord reinforcing was only stressed half as much as the stirrups,

The test results are summarized in Table III,

For the first beam NR8 the concrete strength amounted to only 182 kg/cm 2

so that the failure load was very low, For the other beams with vertical stirrups

the failure occurred because of the inclined compressions in the web, whereby the

inclined compression stresses reached approximately the value of the prism strength,

i.f one assumes again that the inclined compression stress for vertical stirrups is

given approximately by ｾ = Ｒ ｾ For sufficient concrete strength a failure

load was reached for which the short stirrups showed a computed stress of 4000

kg/cm 2.

For the tests with the inclined stirrups the web did not fail but rather

the concrete in the compression plate, although shear stresses ｾ with magnitudes

of from 156 to 179 kg/cm 2 were reached for B240 to B320 concrete, and the computed

stirrup stresses reached were 5300 to 5800 kg/cm 2, and thus lay above the nominal

yield point,

Because of the large difference in concrete strengths, the influences of

different diameters and profiles of the stirrups unfortunately could not be obtained

simply,
 Table III - Summary and Analysis of Robinson's Tests

!
Computed
Shear Reinforcing Measured Values Shear Stresses Stresses
at fai lure,

,I I

eo
c:
C1l
I-l
'+-l
0
C1l
I-l
-l,j
CIl
ｉ Ｍ ｬ
I
' tllu' " ｾ
U ...-l
::l
C1l...-l
::l
''"
'+-l C1l
u I
C1l
0... I-l 'r.z..;v' " ｾ Ｇ -l,j
I-l
U
tf.l
-
U ｾ ｲ Ｎ ｺ Ｎ Ｎ « I I
I

I ｾ "or" i
Abllaod ') r•• R belm
IZl l'R p. Bruch.. 2 T. I)
Vcnueh Nr.
Slahl a
I'l')' fl.. RiB Bruch art
r·- 0 Q
t:
eretec nilS
ｾ ｧ Ｏ ｣ ｭ
a. a.

mm em % ｾ ｧ Ｏ ･ ｭ I I
I ｾ ｧ ｬ ･ ｭ ｾ ｧ ｬ ･ ｭ ｾ ｧ Ｏ ･ ｭ ｾｧＯ･ｭ I kg!'"" i
NR8 ...........
ｾ
IZl 8 Ruodltahl 3 2,78 182 3,5 16 .....
ｾ u 64 0,83 14 1060 9S 2300 I
rii e
NR 10 ..........

NT 8-1 .........
l%l
;;
'"
ｾ

...';:
IZl 10 Ruodllahl

IZl 8 Tonlahl
4

3
3,29

2,78
290

243
6

8
30

28 .. :a
ｾ
"0

§
Q

ｾ
D
120

III
0.98
1,07
24

32
2000

1870
177

165
37(111

ｾＨｬｬｨ
!
iI
NT 8-2 .........
.; IZl 8 Tonlahl 3 2,78 248 7 28 :3c _!t
HI 1,05 28 1870 165 ｾＨｉＨｬｩ I
I

NTIO .......... IZl 10 Tonlahl 4 3,29 207 6,5 22

- ,a
.:l H8 ｊ Ｎ ｾ 26 1470 130 ｾ Ｗ Ｐ Ｑ Ｑ ,

-
I
IR8 ...........
.....
.0; ｾ IZl 8 Ruodllahl 4 2,95 315 7 40 ......!i
D
.c..!!
159
ｾ
28 26jO 236 S-W!l I
IR 10 .......... '"
..a I
j=
IZl 10 Ruodltahl

8 Torllahl
6

4
3,10

2,95
324 5 45 ..a' ...,_
.c
u
-
"'"
u
179
-.
.. _C
<J)
ｾ ｾ 20 3000 266

23(1
ＵｾＢＨ
S3(1lJ
i
i
ｾ ｾ
lIT8 ............ IZl 242 7 39 IS6 28 ｾ Ｖ ｕ Ｈ J
Jl i '5
'a !
ITIO ........... " IZl 10 Torotahl 6 3.10 306 7 Ｔ "0 175 2U 2 lHU 260 571\(1
w
1) Schubbewehruogsgrad 1'. _ F •. '. y _ Bilgeloeiguog o
b,· a' •• 0 y >
I) Q - 3/4· p.; b. - 6 em; 1 _ 31,4

I) fl. - 0,85· fl.

I) Recheawene oaeh klulbcher Theorie mit n _ IS aUI Brueblul
 31.

Robinson also determined that the cracks in the web up to failure load

remained remarkably fine. He determined the development of the cracks with

especially sensitive tenso-meters from the unsteadiness of the load-strain curve.

The shear stresses 70 corresponding to crack load, are shown in Table III. The

cracks became visible only for approximately 1.4 to 2 times the crack load.

Shortly before failure load the largest crack width for vertical stirrups amounted

to 0.31 to 0.45 mm; for inclined stirrups 0.06 to 0.37 mm. Almost all cracks went

right and left of the load over the complete web height approximately under 45 0 .

The French tests also show how strongly the web stress depends on the

reinforcing direction and for the rest confirm the test results mentioned under I.,

although here much more favorable reinforcing ratios were available. It must be

marked as unexpected, but apparently it is not necessary to swing the stirrups

around the tension reinforcing, but that much more a hook anchorage independent

of the tensile reinforcing is sufficient to carry the diagonal tensile forces over

to the chord reinforcing. This could be important for new ideas for possible types

of reinforcing under shear. One must consider however that such types of reinforcing

assume a good concrete, which was shown with the failure of the beams of B180.

Robinson speaks in his final summary of a rehabilitation of the "swimming rods"

"
(e.g. hooked stirrups) which Morsch based on his test correctly labeled as useless.

In MBrsch's tests, on one hand the concrete quality was low and on the other hand

the anchorage zone of the inclined rods was not specially reinforced transversely.

Nevertheless the test results of Robinson today justify consideration of swimming

shear rods under the condition of a good anchorage in transversely reinforced con-

crete as a possible constructive solution of shear reinforcing.

Furthermore it is important to consider that this type of force transfer

also acts satisfactorily for unfavorable ratios of the bond for the tensile chord

reinforcing; the smooth rods ｾ 40 mm in the rather small beams are actually un-
 32.

favorable from this point of view. For larger applications one will always, in fact,

have better ratios for the bond for the tensile chord reinforcing.

1.7 Results of the Tests for High Shear Stresses

1. Summary of the Main Test Results

Vertical and inclined stirrups are stressed approximately equally for equal

shear reinforcing ratios and namely in the middle of the shear span is approximately

80% of the computed values.

The inclined principal compression stresses ifII are larger than the

computed shear stresses; for vertical stirrups ｩ ｦ ｉ ｉ 2.1 ｾ ｏ for inclined stirrups

Oil :::. 1.5 ｾ ｏ

Because of the stress the web zone failed under inclined compression when

the actual all reached the prism strength of the concrete.

The stress of the compression chord is larger for inclined stirrups than

for vertical ones while the reverse holds for the tension chords.

The shear crack widths are reduced to 1/3 for inclined stirrups as compared

to vertical stirrups and are smaller than for bending cracks.

Inclined stirrups give smaller deflections than vertical and smooth ones

and somewhat larger deflections than ribbed stirrups.

2. Allowable Shear Stresses ｾ

Although the inclined compression stresses 011' as we saw, deviate

considerably from the shear stresses computed according to the classical formula
Q
ｾ =bZ as the slope of the web reinforcement changes. We shall make use of this
o
conventional value for the determination of the allowable stress for structural

elements under high shear. If one introduces a reduction factor of 0.85 each because

of the scatter of concrete strength and because of the time influence of the load

duration, and if one desires a factor of safety against failure of 2.1 the following

values are obtained:

 33.

Shear reinforcing approximately in the direction of ｾ ｉ Ｎ Ｈ ［ ［ Ｚ ［ 1.510

, ｾ failure -C::,Bp

Allowable "7""0 = 0.85 x O. 85P p /2,

= 0.23/", P
1.5 x 2.1
Shear reinforcing deviating up to 45 degrees from the direction of err:
ｾ ｾ
II - 2.1 ""0

Allowable rO = 0.85 x 0.85 ｾ

0.16 ｾ
2.1 x 2.1

Since these values are very high as compared to the present allowable

ｾ ｏ it will be suited in first instance to choose a somewhat more careful limit

for allowable 70 until sufficient practical experience has been collected.

Shear reinforcing in Deviating up to 45 0 from

direction of err direction of ｾ

(Deviation± 150) Allow 70 = 1/9 ;8p

Allow f o = 1/6 Pp
One has then, even for complete duration load and not completely reached

concrete strengths, at least a safety of 3; for short time overloading and satis-

factory concrete strengths a safety against shear failure by inclined compression

of approximately 4.2.

1.8 Design and Type of Shear Reinforcing

Under high shear the shear reinforcing should be designed in the usual

way according to the truss analogy, thus for complete shear protection, also when

the allowable <r:e B "u is actually not used completely. It is advisable to lie the

shear reinforcing in the direction of the ｰ ｲ ｩ ｮ ｣ ｩ ｰ ｾ tensile stress (Case I at the

elevation of the centroid). It is advisable to use stirrups only (thus not stirrups

and bent-up rods together) and to anchor the stirrups by surrounding the chord rein-

forcing or by bending perpendicularly in the compression chord or by hooks. Ribbed

 34.

rods are better for stirrup and chord reinforcing.

The shear reinforcing can deviate up to approximately 45% from the

direction of the principal stress when 70 lies below the limits mentioned before.

Also here only stirrups are sufficient. However they must be suitably integrated

into a grid by longitudinal rods. The basic rule of the "distributed reinforcing" -

small rod diameters and small spacing of the rod, leads to a specially favorable

result for the crack width for the shear reinforcing; that means the cracks remain

very fine.

1.9 Practical Information

One could be afraid that the design of the concrete section with the

mentioned high allowable 7Q would lead to construction difficulties, in which

for example the placing of the reinforcing and pouring becomes more difficult.

Naturally the practical points of view must be considered. In fact, allowable

10 does not mean that this value must be used completely in every case. The

high allowable 7Q should only allow a more favorable design of the concrete than

up to now for beams with a large span length or a specially heavy load. There

they lead to much better conditions, also for construction, than the low ?Q in

connection with the present method of shear reinforcing. An example illustrates

this:

In ｰ ｲ ｡ ｣ ｴ ｩ ｣ difficulties often exist in the foundation walls of high-

rise buildings where large loads are to be carried. Say that such a wall is to

be reinforced for?Q = 20 kg/cm 2 with a thickness of 90 cm, thus for a shear

force of 180 tons per meter. If we choose four-sectional stirrups, 12 cm, a = 25

cm, then we must choose 8 0 26 every meter as inclined rods, bent up from the chord

reinforcing or add them (Fig. 26). These inclined rods, which usually line up

uniformly above each other, give difficulties when pouring the concrete.

However if we design the same walls with the same load for 10 60

kg/cm 2 then b becomes 30 cm. For this high 70 the reinforcing must lie in the
 35.

direction of the tensile forces, that means we must choose inclined stirrups.

This gives two-sectional stirrups, 0 18 rnm, a = 9 cm. They must be knitted to-

gether sUitably with horizontal rods. The chord reinforcing consists now only

of straight rods and can be distributed over a wider chord zone. This shear rein-

forcing, limited to two nets at an easy distance, of purely equal rods without

doubt is actually easier to install than the four-sectional stirrups and inclined

rods. The amount of reinforcing remains the same, the amount of concrete is

however reduced to 1/3. The concrete of the wall can be installed easily and be

compacted with vibrators. The high allowable ""0' used with sense, in connection

with narrower stirrup reinforcing thus leads to a simpler and easier construction

than the earlier methods of construction. One considers especially the more

favorable crack behavior when the necessary reinforcing must keep together smaller

concrete sections and the more favorable ratios for internal stresses due to

temperature and shrinkage cracks for smaller concrete dimensions.

The increased allowable 1'0 has special meaning for hollow beams with

large span lengths which are also under torsion so that the shear stresses must

be added from two sources. There is no doubt that thereby the same laws hold as

resulted from these beam tests.

Final Remarks for the Tests I.

The shear tests for large beams under high shear were financed from

means of the Ludwig Bauer Stichtung of the firm Ludwig Bauer Stqttgart from research

grants of the Baden WUrbe,berger Wirtschatt Ministeriums and the German Ausschusses

fUr Stahlbeton. For the generosity of these research funds the above mentioned

deserve thanks and recognition of the technical world and the building industry.

The tests were carried out in the Department of the Ot r c -Gra f.e Inst Lt ut e under

Prof. Dr. G. Weil. Installation and analysis of the tests were done by the author

together with Dipl. Ing.W. Dilcher. Several gentlemen of the Chair for Massivbau

assisted. To all our thanks.

 2. INFLUENCE OF THE MOMENT-SHEAR-RELATIONSHIP ON THE SHEAR CARRYING CAPACITY

FOR RECTANGULAR BEAMS WITHOUT SHEAR REINFORCING UNDER THE INFLUENCE

OF POINT LOADS AND UNIFORM LOAD

(February 1962, Pages 32 - 38)

2.1 Research Program, Beams and Method of Loading

2.11 Program - The influence of the moment-shear-relationship, M , a

Qh
very important criterion for the shear carrying capacity, has been investigated

for point loads and uniform loads on rectangular beams, all with the same cross-

section (19 x 32 cm) and reinforced with 2 0 26 rom rippentorstahl BstIIIb in the
longitudinal direction. To avoid anchorage failure rather long cantilvered beam

ends with stirrups as reinforcing were employed, although stirrups were not used

in the main beam.

In the case of the beams with point loads, ｾ was changed such that the
Qh
distance a between the symmetrical load points and the supports was different.

Now ｾ is equal to the so-called related shear span to depth ratio, a/h. The
Qh
distance a' between the two point loads was chosen small and equal for all beams.

Thus different span lengths resulted and also different slenderness ratios for

the beams. It should be pointed out however, that the distance between the two

loads and with it the slenderness ratio of the beams have no influence on the

shear carrying capacity with this method of loading the beam, provided the weight,

g, of the beam itself is neglected. The left load distribution plate (7.5 x 19 cm)

was smaller than the right one (13 x 19 cm) to find out if different local pressures

had any influence.

In the case of uniform load just the span length was changed. The load

was distributed uniformly over the entire beam surface by using fire hose filled
36.
 37.

with water. The hose was restrained in the transverse direction by steel beams;

thus disturbances because of local higher or different pressures were avoided

(Fig. 28). Under the action of the shear the fire hose will deform easily in

longitudinal direction so that the steel beams did not apply any pressure in the

longitudinal direction. To limit the loaded area to the area between the supports,

the top surface of the beams was made somewhat higher between the supports.

Most of the beams were built in duplicate or taped at the place where

breaking first occurred and then loaded further until failure at the other end.

2.12 Beam Data - The material properties and the exact dimensions of

the beams as well as their age at the time of the test can be found in Tables

IV and V. The concrete was proportionately sand-rich (60% from a to 7 mm) with

Z = 290 kg/m 3 PZ 475 and

w = .68. The beams were kept moist and tested without
Z

any time for drying to avoid shrinkage influences.

2.13 Load Duration Increment - The beams were loaded in increments of

approximately lila of the expected breaking load, each one for approximately only

30 minutes. Next the load was taken off fast and after that the beam was loaded

up to the next increment in the load. The duration of the test up to failure

took only 6 hours on an average. Therefore the tests are concerned with short

duration experiments. The load speed with increments in load amounted to around

5 t/min.

2.2 Observations

Since in the present case especially, the load at failure and the type

of failure are of interest, the time-consuming measurement of the width of the

cracks was neglected and only the pattern of cracks for the single load steps

was recorded. The deflections were measured in the middle of the beam and depend-

ing on the length of the beam at different point in between.

 ".beU., IV. 'Ver.urbe .n Reebteekb.lken mit .......1 Ela.llell ••teD

ｾ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I f I
2. 3 i 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 \ 18
Umrechnung d. Veeeuchserge hniss e auf die ｂ ･ ｺ Ｎ ｕ ｬ Ｚ ｰ ｲ ･ ｾ ｬ ｩ ｧ ｫ ｻ Ｂ ｩ
\ 19 20
I . 21 \----..:.:

l
M B d
mi«ich.. Q"'7"h Biege- ruchzuatan Pw = 350 kg/em' u. ｍ ｩ ｬ ｬ ･ ｬ ｷ ･ ｲ ｬ ｢ ｩ ｬ ､ ｵ ｮ bei doppelten Yersuchcn Bruch.

nung I a a' n ｾ I' fJ.. = s. h

RiO';;jnt t» I QUi) I < 1)
0
I Msu
')
Ｇ ｬ bctwcer
･ ､ ｾ ｫ ｴ ｩ ｯ J)ｮ Ｂ e» I Msu') I QUi) I r ') ,
0
") I a.. ')
Bemeekueg

ｾ em , em , % I kglem' I - I tm It' I ｾＯ･ｭ -, tm I - I t I tm I t h/em'j! - I - j--

ｾ ｾ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ I :::: I ｾ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ I ::::: I :::: I :::: I :
0.90 0,27 0,36

2. 1.15 ｏ Ｌ ｾ 0.35 ::. I I :::: I ::: I ::: I :::: I :::: I ::::: I :::: I ::::: I
3 1,45 Ｐ Ｎ Ｕ 0,37 27 19 2.07 355 2,0 1,88 30,0 15.00 35.5 8.10 1.00 30.0 8,10 15,00 35,5 2.26 S

I: 16,4') 8.32 19.8 5,58 5,H 8,59 20,3 1,60 S

4 1.70 0.67 0,36 27 19 2,07 355 2,5 2,48 1.00 16.95
r: 17,5 8.87 21.0 5.90

1: 12,0') 6,15 14.6 4.93 5,55 6,98 16,$ 1,56 S

5 1.95 0,81 0,33 27 19 2,07 355 3.0 2,18 1.00 13.65
r: 15.3 7.80 18,6 6,27

1: 12,0') 6,20 14,7 6,72 1,07 6,58 15,6 1.98 S

6 1.35 1,10 0,35 27 19 2.07 355 4.0 2,44 1.00 12.75
r: 13,5 6.95 16.4 7.42
Scblagar-tige r
1-1
1-2.
3.10
3.l0
1,35
1,35
ｏ Ｌ ｾ
ｏ Ｌ ｾ
27.8
27,8
19
19
2,01
2,01
372
372
5,0
5.0
1,55
1,48
12.2
13.4
6.35
6.95
14,8
16,0
8,42
9.22
0.92 11.80 8,08 6,1l 14,5 2.26 L S Bruch

8-1
8-2
3,60
3,60
1,62
1,62
0,36
0,36
27,8
27,4
19
19
2,01
Ｒ Ｌ Ｐ
373
373
6,0
6,0
1.57
1,40
12,8
12.8
6.70
6.70
15,4
15.5
10.61
10.61
0.93 11.90 9,% 6':. ｉ ｦ Ｌ 2,77 l S
Scblagartiger
Bruch

9-1 5,80 1,89 2.02 17,3 Ｑ 2,04 382 7,0 2.16 11.1 6.00 14.0 11.U 0.94 10,50 10,18 5,6( Ｑ ｾ Ｌ Ｒ Ｌ Ｙ B
9-2 5.80 1,89 2.02 27.3 19 2.04 394 7.0 1,88 11.1 6.00 14.0 11.14

10-1 .,70 2,16 0,40 27.2 19 2.05 361 8,0 2.17 9,6 5.15 12,1 10.79 9,75 ll,OO S,.22 12,i 3.08 B
0.97
1J-1 4,70 2,16 0,40 27.2 19 2,05 361 8,0 2.06 10,5 5.60 13.2 11.76

I) Eig=rwicht de. Balkea mit 0.15 tIm berilekoichtigt I) Balken nach Eintritl dee Scbcbbrucbs auI dee einen Seite ban. S) Der Reduktiowbeiwert berilcksicbtigt die au bohe Schubbeuchlast,
dagiert und bis aum Bruch der anderen Seite wehee belustet Belonlestigk.eil und die Abweicbungen. in der Hebe fo' • .- zul. GelJr4uctbLul lBlt:guns;)
I) 5 _ Schubbrueh: B _ Biegebeucb

Tabelle V. Venue-he aD ｒ ･ ｾ ｨ ｴ ･ ｣ ｫ ｢ ｡ ｬ ｾ ･ ｬ mit Cleirhlaat

1 4 I 6 8 I 9 I I I 10 11 12 I 13 I Ｑ I 15 16 17 I 18 ｾ 20 I 2l I 22 I 23 I 24 I 25 I 26 I 27 I 28 I 24 I 30

I , I I RiO.
Beucheuarend

:. I ｾ Iｾ I' fJ .. ' 1) moment

I %=0
<,') I lb,Jul'.
Iｾ Ｇ Ｚ Ｚ Ｉ I
ITTI I Qu') M
Pu I pu') Mu')
MR') = 1/2 tiona- pu') M3U')1 Qu')
I I . % %.

I 1 V'h beiwerl l ) "-XU .%=-k.

m em em 1% kg/ern,l t , tim t I tim I t I ｾ ｧ Ｏ ･ ｭ tm. I em 'ern'I---1 lim I tm I t I

lijl . 1,50 , 29.0 19,0 5,17 1,87 418 0,5 1,41 54,6 36.73 27,55 60,6 10,34 60 6,21 9,91 5,51 12,1 S
11,18 65 9,33 10,98 3.98 8,6
0,80 30,65 I 8,35 3,80 I 22,95 54,1 Ｔ ｾ Ｌ 8,62 2,42
S
lij: 1.50 29.6 19,0 5.06 1,88 418 0.5 1,30 59,1 39.75 29,80 64.0

Ｑ ｾ 403 1.13 40,0 20,25 20,25 46,5 10,12 67 4,94 9,03 6,69 15,6 S
1.00 27.3 19,0 7,32 2,04 0.5
31,6 16.05 16.05 37,7 8,03 77 7,57 7,60 3.69 8.7
0,94 17,00 I 1,19 4,1.'; I 17,00 (0,3 34,8 8,50 2,38
S
Ｑ ｾ 2.00 27.2 18,9 7.35 2,06 ｾ Ｐ 0.5 1,38

Ｑ ｾ 1,19 27.0 11,12 13,90 32,5 8,69 90 7,55 8.03 3,90 9.1 S
2.50 27,3 19,0 I 9, 15 1 2,04 409 0.8 0.93 10,35 I 1':4 4,H 112.93 30,6 27.3 8,10 Ｒ ｾ
Ｑ ｾ 2.50 27,2 18,9 9.18 2.06 409 0,8 27,0 11.12 13,90 32,6 8,69 80 5,55 7,56 5,00 11,7 S

Ｑ ｾ
ｉ ｾ
3.00
3,00
I 27.3
27.3
19,0 111,00
19,0 11.00
I 2,04
2,0·\
397
397
0,9
0,9
1,91
1.91
20,5
20,6
7'13110'70
7,16 10,75
25,0
25,1
8,02
8,06
95
90
6,49
5,77
6,95
6, 77
3,92
ｾ Ｌ Ｓ
9,1
10,0
0,94 6.74 I 6,11 3,88 I 10,10 23," 21,8 7,58 2,12
5
S

Ｑ ｾ
Ｑ ｾ
4,00
4,00
27,2
27,3
19.0
18,9
11,71
11,65
2,05
2,05
420
420
1,1
1,1
2,85
1,95
18,0 4,77
19,21 5,08
9,55
10,15
22,5
23,8
9,55
10,16
I 85
100
4,28
5,50
6,39
7.62
5,49
5,08
12,9
11,9 0.92 4,52 I 6,43 I 4,85 Ｙ Ｎ Ｐ %1,1 20,0 9.0,1 Ｒ Ｌ Ｕ
S
S
schlagartiger
Bruch
w
......
5,00 27,3 19.0 18,J2 2.01 414 2,60 18,0 3,85 9,63 22,6 12.0-1 85 3,92 6,78 6.35 14,9 S
>
ｾ 1.25 0.93 3,55 I 6':6 I 5,85 8.87 21,0 19,9 10,95 3,07
Ｑ ｾ 5.00 Ｒ Ｗ Ｌ 18,9 18,2; 2,05 414 1,25 1,91 18.0 3,83 9,58 22,5 11,97 85 3,90 6,75 6,32 14,8 S

I 2,05 389 1,4 2,18 16,1 2,92 8,75 20,6 13,12 1/2 B seblagart iger
Ｑ ｾ 6,00 27.3 18.9 122,00
Ｑ ｾ 6,00 27,.l 18,9 21,90 2,0-1 389 1,1 1,40 16,0 2,90 8,70 20,5 13,05 72 3,04 5,51 I 6,62 15,5 0,95 2,77 I 5,2.5 I 6,30 8,31 19,7 18,8 Ｑ Ｒ Ｌ ｾ 3,50 S Bruch

1) Eigengewicht dee Balken ":- Ecwlcht der Belastungselnrlcbtung ') Der Heduktfcasbeiweet beruck..!dchtigt die eu hebe Schu bbeuchl.. t
') S ... Schubbeucb ; B"""" Biegebeucb
ｂ ･ ｴ ｯ ｮ ｦ ･ ｳ ｵ ｾ ｫ Ｎ ･ ｩ Ｎ und die Abwciehucgen in der Hche
Ｑ Ｉ ﾷ ｅ Ｎ ｩ ｧ ･ ｬ ｊ ｧ ･ ｷ ｩ ｣ ｾ +ｂｾｉｾＮＧ［ｬｬｬＨｬｧｩ･ｩｮｲｩ｣ｨｴｵｉＱ eingerechnet fo) • - zwasltigc l,;ebrauchslllSL (bi.ltgung)
 38.

2.3 Test Results

2.31 Type of Failure and Location of the Planes of Failure

2.311 Point Loads - The row of pictures in Fig. 29 shows the pictures

of the cracks after the failure in the case of point loads. For the shortest

beam 1, the shear fa ilure is steep because there the stress components a- y be-

tween load and support allows the direction of the principle tensile stresses

to become flatter than 45 0 . For beam 2 and 3, the shear cracks that lead to

failure, extended under the load into the zone of pure bending, because the bend-

ing compressive strength is increased directly under the load because of the load

pressure. Although the concrete was destroyed in the zone of pure bending it must

be considered a shear failure because the height of the zone of compression due

to bending was decreased much more by the shear crack than by the bending cracks.

For beams 1 - 5 the shear cracks developed beyond the bending cracks

only for a proportionally high load. In beams 5 - 8 shear cracks developed partly

out of the bending cracks and partly they were formed new at an angle ｾ ｩ ｧ ｨ

across already present bending cracks. In the top region they were very flat,

because the compression strips of the frame were very flat for slender beams, and

because the crack can only develop under these compression strips.

As soon as the shear crack opens for a higher load, part of the shear

force is transferred to the lower reinforcing bars. Because of this the concrete

cracks off, along the reinforcing or below the reinforcing, up to the supports.

This action is enhanced at the moment of failure.

The location of failure is always close to the place where the load is

app lied, wher e M reaches its maximum value. For -M ｾ 7 the beam pairs 9 and
Qh Qh
10 failed in bending and in this case because of crushing of the concrete before

the yield point of the reinforcing steel was reached. Therefore, for those beams

the limit M was reached, for which shear failure is to be expected.

Qh
 39.

For the beams 1 - 6 the critical cracks proceeded slowly over several

load increments until the compression zone was destroyed. For the beam pair 7

and 8 on the other hand, failure occurred suddenly because of a flat shear crack

that occurred suddenly. Thus with respect to shear failure slender beams without

shear reinforcing behaved less favorably in the case of point loads far from the

supports as compared to loads close to these supports or for shorter beams. Later

on we will see that to avoid a shear failure in the case of slender beams on the

other hand, less shear reinforcing is needed than for the short beams where the

ratio of shear to bending failure load lies lower without shear reinforcing.

For these tests no influence of the different widths of the load distribu-

tion plates (7.5 cm as compared to 13 cm) on the crack and failure behavior could

be determined.

2.312 Uniform Load - The picture in Fig. 30 show the crack patterns

at failure in the case of uniform load. Here the critical shear cracks are closer

to the supports and depending on the slenderness of the beams, run to different

depths. They extend considerably higher up and therefore reduce the height of

the compression zone more than the bending cracks, that means, the neutral surface

must be computed according to different formulas for shear cracks than in the

case of predominantly bending.* In general failure occurred when the bending

compression zone, reduced by the shear cracks, gave up.

For the beams of span length of 6 meters (s lenderness l/It ｾ 20), for

the first beam a shear failure occurred, for the second beam a bending failure,

so that for the 6 meter beams the limit between shear and bending failure for

uniform load was reached for the chosen ratios. Fig. 31 shows the location of

the failure in the compression chord for different span lengths. It is located

*That shear cracks go up higher than bending cracks has been explained by Mr.
E. Mgrsch in his book "Der Eisenbeton".
 40.

a distance of 2h to 3.5h from the support so that, for the time being, it is found

that critical M = 9 - .27 1. We will use this value later on.

Qh h
2.32 Anchoring - Slip - In none of the tests could a slip of the ends

of the reinforcing steel before failure be measured. Only for the very short

beams 11/1 and 11/2 was an average movement of .18 rom with respect to the end of

the beam observed after failure occurred. However this must be considered a re-

sult and not a cause for the failure.

2.33 Shear Strength and the Shear Stress JrO - Tables IV and V give

us the strengths of the beams and in the columns 15 - 20 and 20 - 27, respectively,

the measured failure load and the shear forces computed from these loads have been

re-calculated and averaged to confirm to a uniform concrete strength ｾ = 350

kg/cm 2 in order to compare them.

It can be seen that the shear force, that was reached at shear failure,

is far from constant; as a matter of fact QU varies in the broad limits between

5.22 to 39.60 t and ｾ correspondingly between 12.4 to 94.2 kg/cm 2. Also the

shear failure moments H$u (moment at the top end of the shear crack at the loca-

tion ｾ ｕ are not of equal magnitude, although less variable than the QU' If

one excludes the very short beams with ｾ ｾ Ｑ Ｎ Ｕ because the vertical stresses at
h
the reactions lets one expect a higher /o,the values of ,.. 0 still lie between

12.4 and 54.4 kg/cm 2. The favorable action of the formation of an arch or frame

with tension rod reaches up to a slenderness of from 8 - 10. Only after that the

ｾ values are somewhat equally low.

2.331 Point Loads - For point loads these differences are especially

obvious. The shear forces and with it the shear stresses ｾ are maximum for

short beams and are reduced quickly with increased slenderness. From ｾ
= 4 .
Qh
QU is approximately constant and corresponds to ｾ = kg/cm 2 (Case II) and 14.8

kg/cm 2 (Case I) respectively. These values are still below the tensile strength
 41.

of the concrete, which can be averaged at about 30 kg/cm 2. Even in the case of

beams without shear reinforcing, there is no direct relationship between the com-

puted values of ｾ ｯ reached at shear failure, and the tensile strength of the

concrete.

From other tests, mentioned later on, it could be determined that the

value of ｾ computed for the failure load depends also on the shape of the cross-

section, the absolute value of the cross-sectional area as well as on the reinforc-

ing ratio and the bond strength. Therefore with so many variables it is difficult

to obtain the actual principal tensile stresses and their direction.

In general the shear failure moment 115 u was considered for the carrying

capacity tests for shear failure. These are shown in Fig. 32 as a function of

M
The high values in case of short distances between the loads or for the
Qh
short beams are a result the arch action and of the strength of the compressive

zone under the favorable cry under the load. The minimum of the shear failure

moments lies between M

Qh ' theMsU increases gradually until the bending failure

moment at ｾ
Qh
>6 is reached and becomes the determining factor. From ｾ
Qh
= 4

onJthe shear force that can be carried is not noticably influenced by the moment.

2.332 Uniform Load - For the beams with uniform loads we first consider

the relationship between the distance between the supports and the shear stresses

ｾ values decrease asymptotically with increasing distance between the supports

from a value of approximately 55 kg/cm 2 for ｾ 1.50 m to approximately 20 kg/cm 2 .

Since the inclined principal tensile stresses Grl in the zone of the support are

decreased by the vertical load introduction stresses G':Y' also the t-o values
h
a distance and h from the support have been shown in Fig. 33, in the region
2
where (5"';j is reduced greatly. In the left portion these curves are, although

flatter, not constant. Once more it is shown that the shear stresses or shear

forces by themselves are no criterion for shear failure. Only for the beams
 42.

with ｾ ｾ 12 , where failure occurred suddenly with the first shear crack, can
h
ｾ be considered as the governing factor; however here also they are approxi-

mately 18 kg/cm 2 which is far below the average concrete tensile strength of 30

It is easy to recognize the tied-arch action for the short beams from

the pattern of shear cracks, that run very flat high under the arch. For the

more slender beams the portion of the beam above the arch breaks off suddenly

at the end and the arch loses its support. A few stirrups near the supports

should be sufficient to avoid the sudden and dangerous shear cracks for such

low shear stresses.

It is known that the tied-arches are very sensitive for loads on one

side only and in addition to this one must be afraid of low ｾ at failure.

This type of experiments are not yet available.

It should be noticed that the lower ｾ

r 0
values for uniform load are

approximately 40% greater than for point loads. This difference is due partly to

the influence of the moment: for point loads the shear failure occurs in the

neighborhood of the loads, thus in the region of the greater moments, while the

location of failure for uniform load lies near the supports, thus at small M.

Moreover the continuous cry under the distributed load p acts favorably on

the compressive strength in the boundary zone.

The opposite influence of moment and shear force can also be seen in

Fig. 34, where both forces in the failure cross-section are shown as a function

of the moment-shear-ratio. For low M, Q is large and for a large M, Q is small.

Thus, the moments increase linearly with M ,the shear forces on the other hand
Qh
decrease in approximately the same ratio. Differently from the beams with
M
symmetrical point loads, the critical values of Qh here are not determined by

the load position but they must be determined later on from the distance ｾ
 43.

of the failure ｣ ｲ ｯ ｳ ｳ Ｍ ｾ ･ ｣ ｴ ｩ ｯ which leads to certain spread with the development

of the destroyed compressive zone.

2.34 .
Shear Crack Load - It must still be determined whether the shear

cracking load actually depends upon ｾ or the inclined principal tensile stresses

in Case I or whether the bending moment plays a role here also. However it is

difficult to define the shear cracking load since often shear cracks in the beginning

develop gradually from bending cracks. For that purpose we consider arbitrarily

that load (or respectively the corresponding ｾ ｯ for which the principal shear

crack is pushed up to half the usable height. It is clear that these ｾ crack

vary in between broad limits. For example for the slender beams 7 and 8 with point

loads they lie in the order of 10 kg/cm 2 while they increase to 27 kg/cm 2 for the

shorter beams.

From this we must conclude that also the formation of shear cracks is

influenced by the magnitude of the bending moment and with it by the extension

of the steel in the cross-section of the crack. This can also be seen from the

order of magnitude of ｾ crack, The concrete tensile strength amounts to

approximately 30 kg/cm 2 which is considerably above the average minimum values of

of about 9 kg/cm 2 obtained here. In Case II the principal stresses

crac k
could not be computed exactly without consideration of the deformation.

2.35 Achieved Safety

2.351 Safety at the Allowable Load under Bending According to DIN 1045 -

In Tables IV and V the ratios s = (shear failure load)/(allowable working load in

bending according to DIN 1045) are shown; for the denominator the real concrete
M
strength was used. The lowest value occurs for beam 5 with point load and -- = 3
Qh
and is only s = 1.56, thus lies far under the value 3 that we have required up to

now for short duration tests and which corresponds somewhat to the available factor

under bending of approximately 2.9 (compare beams 9 and 10).*

*Lately D = 2.1 is considered for unannounced fortune, whereby however only 0.7 p P
as value of the concrete strength is used for computations, so that for tests again
approximately S 2.1 = 3 became necessary.
0.7
 44.

The summary shows that the bending moments at failure for uniform loads

on a average are 15% greater than for point loads, because for uniform load the

compression zone under the bending is preserved by the vertical pressures p and

reinforced by them. In addition the maximum moment for two point loads reaches

over a larger stretch than for a uniform load and the probability of maximum MB

and a local defective location coinciding is therefore greater for the case of point

loads.

One can certainly not use the favorable action of the uniform load for

the design according to carrying capacity since this hardly occurs in practice

in this pure form.

2.352 Safety Factor in the Allowable 10 According to DIN 1045 - Accord-

ing to DIN 1045 for B 300 the highest allowable value in beams for 10 is 8 kg/cm 2

without having shear reinforcing. For B 350 therefore we must consider an allowable

10 = 8.3 kg/sq. cm , For a safety factor of 3 agains t failure no va lue for ?Q

can lie under 24.9 kg/cm 2.
down to 12.4 kg/cm 2 for
10 down to 19.7 kg/sq.cm for
M
For points loads we had from Qh ? 2.5 on lower values
M
- greater or equal to 2.5 and for uniform loads, values
Qh
PIA greater or equa 1 to 10. Therefore, especia lly for

point loads the necessary safety is not reached with the specifications in DIN 1045

for the allowable to'

A safe region is shown clearly for ｾ less than 2 or for uniform load
Qh
for ht less than 8, consequently for so-called short beams or loads near the supports
the allowable ｾ can be increased without shear disturbance, while it must be re-

duced from t he limits mentioned above until shear failure evidence can be controlled

reliably. In actuality however the short beams are longer than the total zone of

St. Venant of force introduction, in which 7'0 becomes theoretically smaller also.

2.36 Deflections - For the lower load levels the deflection-load diagrams

show lower values than can be expected theoretically (for example according to Ref.
13). With a higher load they exceed the values computed from bending only, especially

for short beams, because for these short beams considerable shear deformations occur

which can reach the magnitude of the bending deformations shortly before failure.

The shear deformations, however, only show up when the working load is exceeded.

Figure 35 ｳ ｨ ｾ ｷ a characteristic load-deflection curve (Beams 3, 5, 7/1 and 10/1).

 3. THE INFLUENCE OF THE BOND OF THE LONGITUDINAL

REINFORCING ON THE SHEAR CARRYING CAPACITY FOR

RECTANGULAR BEAMS WITHOUT SHEAR REINFORCING

(February 1962, Pages 38-44)

3.1 Arrangement of the Tests, Beams and Method of ｌ ｯ ｡ ｾ ｩ ｮ ｧ

For eight beams with equal span lengths, equal cross-section areas,

equal concrete strengths Pw and equal reinforcing ratio /" only the quality of

the bond of the longitudinal reinforcing and the method of loading was changed. The

beams contained no shear reinforcing, but beam ends protruded far over the supports

to avoid anchoring failures. The anchoring zone, however, did not have any stirrups.

The quality of the bond was changed on one hand by the number and diameter

of the rods and on the other hand by the condition of the surface of the rods. It

is known that the bond is better if the rods are thinner, because the ratio between

circumferential area and cross-sectional area becomes greater. Therefore the beams

were reinforced as follows: Beams indicated by the number 1 each with a few thick

rods (for example 2 ｾ 25 mm which gave concentrated reinforcing. Beams indicated

by the number 2 with several thin rods (for example 2 ｾ 14 + 3 ｾ 16 mm) distributed

or loose reinforcing (compare Table VI). Beams indicated by letter A contained

rods with a ribbed surface (rippentorstahl BST IIIb). Beams with the letter B on

the other hand were reinforced with cold drawn machine steel ST 37K. This steel

is round and has a very smooth mirror like surface (compare Fig. 36).

In order to anchor the smooth rods faultless at their ends ribbed pieces

of rod were welded on.

Half the beams were loaded with two point loads in accordance with Fig. 37,

again with different widths of the load distribution plates. For these beams the

46.
 47.

letter E is used. The moment shear ratio ｾ was 2.78 and thus lies in the range

especially dangerous for shear. The other beams were tested with uniform load

(beams with letter G).

The data on the beams are shown in Table VI col. 1 to 7.

The four beams of each series were poured simultaneously in steel forms

to exclude the difference in concrete strengths. The reinforcing steel was located

at the bottom during pouring. The concrete was compacted with vibrators. The

beams were kept under moist cloth and after that kept at a relative humidity of

approximately 60% in the laboratory and tested at an age of from 28 to 30 days.

Thus similar effects of shrinkage are possible.

The concrete had a normal composition with 251 kg/m 3 cement PZ 375 with

a water-cement ratio of 0.75.

The strength obtained from 24 cubes and 24 prisms showed a small scatter.

At time of testing the strength of the cubes had an average value of JS?w = 252

kg/cm 2 (Maximum value 269, lowest value 231 kg/cm 2). The tensile strengths under

bending lie on an average at ｾ ｢ = 41.4 kg/cm 2.

The stress-strain curves for both types of steel showed no noticable

difference in the reach of steel stresses that occurred at shear failure. The

machine steel 8T 37K however had a noticably higher yield point )?0.2 than the

torstahl ｂ Ｘ IIIb (Fig. 38).

3.2 Measurements and Test Procedure

Measured and observed were: pattern of cracks for all load increments;

crack widths at the elevation of the reinforcing and for the shear cracks at half

the effective height; deflection in the middle of the beam and at quarter points

with dial gages.

 47A

Table VI Results of Beam Tests With Different Bond

H
QJ
ｾ
r-l W QJ
QJ
QJ QJ
c S
C\l
ｾ
ｾ 'M ｾ
tf)
0
Cl
QJ
c: QJ
H
4-l H r-l QJ w
0 0 H C\l ｾ QJ
4-l QJ ｾ QJ H
QJ c: ..c 'M s 0
c
0..
:>-.
'M
QJ § =' C\l
0" 'M 0.. 0 Fai lure
E-< 0:: Z WCl U

_I ｾ ｾ ｜ Ｍ Ｍ __ L_4Ｍ S.ahl
Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｚ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｌ
---- . _ , - - - _ . -_.-
ｾ ｾ
IIdoll Druch
Mllm
ilqui.
Ilee, S\ahborte An ..hl valenz.. I) ,1.. (Hio. Pu '\'U M su I a, \llrnOh.

I
I' I,max
(3
I dureh-
ｮ Ｇ ｈ ｾ Ｎ Ｌ Ｌ ｾ Ｈ Ｂ
glinJil:) IIrlllnr.he

. _-I mm .' Iｫ ｧ ｩ Ｂ ｭ ｾ
.o 'm I • no 'm ｫｾＯ･ｮｯＧ ｫｾｬｯｭ I -

E AI 2 ",24+1 (3 t. 22,1 1,0'1 ｾ Ｎ Ｇ ｩ 1,71 11,9 0,75 4,46 14,0 2020 S

.§ } Rippen •
lorlllohl
Point loads EA2 ｾ Ｐ ｂ Ｋ ｊ Ｈ Ｓ ｊ ｴ 1.,1 1,811 Ｒ ｾ Ｌ 2,21 15,2 0,75 5,70 17,9 2590 S
ｾe EIlI 2 (325 25,0 1.91 ｾ 1,63 :!3,1 - - 27,2 4080 D
;;:"
} hlenkee
SlAhl
En 2 S. 37 K .014+1(311 1·1,4 1.811 z:a t.rn 20,2 0,75 7,58 23,8 3460 S

G A I 2(3U+I(36 22.1 I,ll" ｾ Ｎ ｪ Ｚ 1,40 25,0 0,67 5,57 29,S 2860 S

} Hippen.
n lonlahl
GA2 20 14+ 3(316 15,1 1,011 2j3 2,17 29,6 0,72 6,83 34,9 3450 S
Uniform Loads ｾ Gill 2025 25,0 1,'11 253 1,1·1 3·1,.1 - - 40,S 4010 n
<3 } blenker
Slllhi
G 112 SI:17 K ;014+1 eJ16 14,4 2:il 1.47 38.8 - - 45.8 4590 II
1) '\'Iuivoi -nzdurclunceser t e A -- I01/I(3

1) Equivalent diameter:
 48.

For the beams E one increment in load amounted to 2P = 1.55 t: , for the

beams G, p • .f was 3.10 t for each load increment. The load duration for each

increment was approximately 30 minutes. After each increment the load was taken

off and loaded again starting at zero for the next increment. The load speed was

approximately 5 t/min.

3.3 Results of the Failure Tests

In Table VI are shown the loads for which the first bending crack occurred

and the failure loads. In addition, the location of the top end point of the shear

cracks is indicated with Xu the shear failure moment about this end point is given.

Further, the computed shear stress ｾ and the steel stress cJE were obtained

from the load at failure according to the classical theory. Three of the beams

indicated a failure under bending and the other five clearly a shear failure.

The pattern of cracks for the beams tested with point loads can be found

in Fig. 39 and for uniform load in Fig. 40. The numbers in circles give the order

of occurrence of the cracks; the other numbers indicate the load increments for

which a crack had advanced to the indicated location.

 49.

Information about the widths of the cracks can be obtained from Figs.

41 and 42, where the observed crack widths in 1/100 mm are indicated for each load

increment. In the diagram at the right we find the sum of the crack widths for the

single load increments.

3.4 Evaluation of the Test Results

If the beams reinforced with rippentorstahl are considered first, it is

found distributed reinforcing with the thin rods gave clearly higher shear failure

loads than the concentrated reinforcing with a few thick rods. For point loads

the load at failure was increased by 28%, for the uniform load by 18%. This re-

sult is notable since the bond strength was not changed by the different state of

the surface but only by the choice of diameter and the number of rods, although not

greatly. Thus for rippentorstahl one can cause an increase in the shear failure

load simply by improving the bond by distributing the reinforcing.

On the other hand, however, the beams with the smooth round steel in

fact show higher failure loads than the corresponding beams with ribbed rods. At

first this is surprising and unbelievable. Closer examination of the results will

make this clear; the pictures show that the beams with smooth thick rods (EB 1 and

GB 1) did not fail because of shear, but because of bending although no shear reinforc-

ing was installed. At the bottom the cracks do not show any inclination and branch

out somewhat at the location of the neutral surface as we know from other tests for

vanishing bond (Ref. 14). In the shear span there are no cracks at all. This is

a clear sign that no shear stresses worth mentioning occurred and thus no critical

inclined principal tensile stresses developed. Hence, the beam action according

to the beam-bending theory was absolutely not realized here, because the shear force

between the reinforcing rods and the concrete was not present as a result of the

defective bond. Under the distributed load, therefore, a tied-arch must be formed

and under the point loads a frame with tensile rod, with the result that the steel
 50.

stress in the tensile rod does not decrease towards the support so that a large

tensile force must be anchored there. For beam GB 1 this led to an early anchoring

failure, which explains that the failure load was lower here than for beam GB 2.

For the latter developed, in the top of the beam a tensile crack because of the

point of application of the force in the tensile rod above the support being far

from the middle.

For the beams with several thin, smooth rods under uniform load (GB 2)

we have the same picture of bending failure with only very few cracks; on the

other hand for point loads (GB 2) a shear crack developed from the bending crack

that occurred ultimately in the shear zone, which led quickly to shear failure.

This shows therefore, that for the six thin rods already the small adhesion be-

tween steel and concrete led partly to beam action and to shear stresses and in-

clined principal tensile stresses. Had we avoided the adhesion ｣ ｯ ｭ ｰ ｬ ･ ｴ ･ ｬ then

failure under bending would surely have occurred.

Although for the defective bond fewer cracks developed, naturally the

crack widths were larger than for the other beams (Fig. 41 and 42). If one com-

pares the crack widths for equal load increments, one finds crack widths 8 to 10

times more that means the defective bond is already useless from this point of

view, which of course is well known.

How is it possible then that beams reinforced with small round steel

have less danger of shear failure and carry more load than beams with a good bond

of the reinforcing?

To explain this, once more we must point out that for beams with shear

cracks the neutral surface in fact becomes higher than for bending cracks, which

here too can be seen clearly (compare Fig. 39 and 40). The height of the shear

cracks depends very much on how wide the shear crack opens at the reinforcing

(Fig. 43). There the bond is destroyed over short stretches and larger crack
 51.

widths are formed (compare the last load inrrement of beams GA 1, GA 2 and EA 2).

Here the deformation cannot be rated any more as elongation, it is much more a

flow which we will indicate by 6Su . It causes a rotation of both beam parts

about the top end of the shear cracks which we call shear rotation (Ref. 14).

This deformation of the tensile zone corresponds to a deformation of a portion of

the length of the compression zone which for the greatest part is already in the

plastic zone. The opening of the shear cracks at the reinforcing causes the advance-

ment of the cracks higher up and with it the strong decrease in the height of the

compression zone, which causes the beams to fail earlier under shear than under

bending.

The flow 6s u at the tension side depends on the steel strain €e and

on the bending moment at this location and especially on the bond strength. The

shear crack opens more when the bond is pODrer. From this we can see that with

active bond the better bond the load carrying capacity with respect to shear increases.

It can also be seen that the computed shear stresses ｾ and the resulting principal

stresses err for this type of shear failure are not governing by themselves, but

that the shear strength in fact depends on the strength and magnitude of the shear

compression zone which depends on M and Q and on the shear deformation, hence

depends on the reinforcing ratio and the bond strength. The introduction of a

deformation condition for the carrying load under shear, which considers the bond

strength, is therefore important.

3.5 Deflections

The difference in the action of the beam in the case of a change in the

bond strength is also noticable if the deflections are considered (Figs. 44 and 45).

For the lower load levels the deflections for the beams with rippentorstahl are less

than for beams with smooth reinforcing. For higher loads the reserve is the case.

This is because for the ribbed rods, shear cracks and distinct shear deformations
 52.

are formed, while those supplementary deformations are not present in the case of

pure arch or frame action. It should also be mentioned that the compression zone

in the latter case does not become so small as is the case when shear cracks

occur.

The conentrated reinforcing with fewer rods led to greater deflections

for both types of steel and methods of loading, than the distributed reinforcing

with more, thin rods.

3.6 Results

From the tests the following conclusions can be ､ ｲ ｡ ｷ ｮ

1. The shear carrying capacity is increased with the improvement of the bond.

The distribution of the reinforcing in a greater number of correspondingly

thinner rods has a favorable action in this case just as it has in the

case of predominantly bending stresses, especially with respect to the

width of the cracks.

2. For a quickly disappearing bond (smooth rods) no shear cracks, but only

wide bending cracks develop. The beams carry their load as a frame or

an arch with tensile rod. However, this type of carrying action only

develops fully for small slenderness and symmetrical loading and for

additional anchorage. The favorable influence on the carrying capacity

for the case of reinforcing wich smooth steel rods as observed here,

therefore is not usable practically.

3. The bond strength affects the shear deformations and the height of the

shear compression zone. Therefore for the compucations of the failure

under shear load it is advisable to consider the influence of the bond

strength by a corresponding deformation law.

Further research in this direction, for example with round steel, with

mill coating, or with corrugated construction steel material and such is desirable.
 4. INFLUENCE OF THE ABSOLUTE BEAM HEIGHT

ON THE CARRYING CAPACITY UNDER SHEAR.

Check on the similarity principle for shear tests

(Rectangular beams without shear reinforcing).

(March 1962 Pages 54-58)

4.1 Introduction

For the numerous shear tests, carried out earliermainly in the United

States, it is noticable that always beams of approximately 30 centimeters usable

height and a length of from 2 to 3 meters were tested. The question arises if

the results of these laboratory tests are also valid for larger structures es-

pecially since a few countries have derived empirical formulas for the design from

these tests. Therefore we must prove if the principals of similarity are applicable

for shear tests to failure.

For bending the similarity laws say that the obtained bending moment
MU
are constants for geometrically similar beams of

equal building material. Therefore it must be verified if this also holds for the

obtained shear failure moment MSU and for the shear stress ｾ

4.2 Test Arrangement and Data on the Beams

Two series of tests were carried out (Fig. 46 and 47).

Series D - Completely similar beams of different dimensions with equal

amounts of reinforcing; rod diameter proportional to the outside dimensions, so

that the number of rods is unchanged.

Series C - Similar beams of different dimensions with equal reinforcing and

equal rod diameter, so that the number of rods varies.

53.
 TABLE VII Results of Similarity Tests

TabeOe VII. ErgebDi .. e der Ahnliebkeitlvenuebe

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20

RiBoUlt8l1d l) Bruobzu:nal1d

Be .. I G h b F. lL Il..
M
""Q""h
MR Il•• o.
Biege- Balkea ZUltand Pu Qu T, M 6U a..u l ) M6U Mittel
.
1l
5t III b rill. (mit 1
W- e
moment .. ｾ 7,5) .. _7,5
=
m m om era % kglom' 1m kg/oml t t ·kg/om" 1m kglom' kglom'

Dill 0,52 0,21 7,0 5,0 2 e 6 1,71 447 3,00 0,051 80,2 450 1,49 0,74 24,8 0,156 4340 63,4 S
} 63,1
D 1/2 0,52 0,21 7,0 5,0 6 1,71 447 3,00 0,047 74,1 416 1,47 0,73 24,4 0,154 4280 62,8 S
2 "

ＴＸ
D 2/1 1,04 0,42 14,0 10,0 2 " 12 1,66 449 3,00 0,252 50,0 281 4,32 2,16 18,:1 0,91 3230 46,S S
}
D 2/2 1,04 0,42 14,0 10,0 2 " 12 1,66 449 3,00 0,235 46,S 262 4,74 2,37 19,9 0,99 3520 SO,S S
D 3/1 1,56 0,63 21.0 15,0 2 " 18 1,62 464 3,00 0,756 44,6 251 9,46 4,73 17,7 2,98 3190 45,0 S
} 43,3
D 3/2 1.5" 0,63 21,0 15,0 2 " 18 1,62 464 3,00 0,693 40,8 230 r.9,08 4,37 16,3 2,75 2940 41,6 S
I. 8,40
D 4/1 2,0& 0,84 28.0 20,0 2 " 24 1,67 425 3,00 1,55 38,2 215 15,10 7,55 15,9 6,34 2780 40,4 S
D 4/2 2,08 0,84 28,0 20,0 1,67 425 3,00 1,30 32,2 181 r.14,O 7,27 15,3 6,10 2680 38,9 } 39,6 S
2 " 24
1.15,1
C 1 1,00 0,45 IS 10 1 e 16 1,33 471 3,00 0,13 (21,7)') 109 4,40 2,20 Ｑ Ｗ 0,99 3740 44,0 S
(eine Lage)

C 2 2,00 0,90 30 15 3 e 16 1,33 471 3,00 1,76 54,6 335 13,20 6,60 17,5 5,94 3760 44,0 S
(eine Lage)

C 3') 3,00 1,35 45 20 6 e 16 1,33 471 3,00 3,98 44,0 264') 20,2 10,35 13,7 13,97 2940 34,5 S
(owei Lagon)

C 41 ) 4,00 1,80 60 22,S 9 rzI 16 1,33 471 3,00 9,90 50,2 298') 30,0 15,50 13,7 27,90 2960 34,5 S
(elrei Lagon)

') Belaltung,einriohtung + Eigengewiobt mit 0,5 t berli....iobtigt ') 1m 5ebwerpunl<t dOl' Bewe........
•) Be1aatun5seinriebtung + Eigengewiebt mit 1,0 t berlio"'iebtigt
.) Entn liebtbarer Rill ') Niedriger Wert wahnc:beinlieb auf Beoebidigunc beim AUUClhaiea BUrliebulilhraa

1) Applied Load + own weight with O.St considered

3) First Visible Crack
\Jl
4) In Centroid of Reinforcement,
5) Lower valve probably attributable to damage that occurred when forms were removed. ｾ
 54.

The beams have a slenderness of Ｍｨｾ 100 = 6.7. They are reinforced with
,5
straight longitudinal rods of rippentorstahl and have no shear or anchorage rein-
a
forcing. The load was applied at two symmetrical points with a ｾ h = 3. The

cimensions can be found in Table VII. For Series D the geometric dimensions are

proportional as Dl/D2/D3/D4 = 1/2/3/4. Correspondingly, longitudinal reinforcing

of 2 rods of rippentorstahl (B ST IIIb) were used with diameters of 6 rom, 12 rom,

18 rom, 24 rom, which gave a constant reinforcing ratio of ｾ ｾ Ｑ Ｎ Ｖ Ｕ Ｅ The anchorage

length behind the supports amounted to approximately 16 diameters. Also the steel

plates under the point loads and above the supports (put on with mortar) were

modified according to the similarity ratio. Two beams of each dimension were built

and tested.

For Series C larger dimensions were chosen whereby the actual outside dimensions,

that is the usable height, span length and distance between the loads are in the

same proportion as for Series C and thus Cl/C2/C3/C4 = 1/2/3/4. To save bUilding

materials the ratios of the width were fixed at 1/1.5/2/2.25, which plays an un-

important role for the similarity consideration. For all beams C the longitudinal

reinforcing consisted of 16 rom rippentorstahl which gave a rod number ratio of

1/3/6/9 for the constant reinforcing ratio of "Jt- = 1. 33%. Here, to obtain as

nearly as possible, equal (but not similar) bond and anchorage ratios for the longi-

tudinal reinforcing, a constant overhang of 25 cm approximately equal to 16 diameters

and a uniform bottom steel cover of 2 cm was chosen. Because of the different

number of reinforcing layers the beam heights D deviate somewhat from the similarity

principle.

All beams of one series were poured at the same time with the same concrete.

The forms for beams and cubes were removed after one day. Then the beams

were kept seven days under moist cloth and after that until time of testing at 28

days, kept at approximately l8°C and 60% relative humidity. The beams were loaded
 55.

with two synunetrical point loads in from 6 to 9 load increments and the loads

were taken off between each increment. For every principal and intermediate load

the deflections at ｾ and I.

7
'+
and the crack advancement was recorded.

The tests of a beam took approximately 4 hours.

4.3 Building ｍ ｡ ｴ ･ ｲ ｾ ｡ ｬ

Stee1- The properties of the rippentorstahl used here are shown in

Table VIII. The stress-strain diagram is not shown since the steel stresses used

for failure generally were be l ow the 13 0.2 limit.

TABLE VIII

Properties of the Rippentorstah1 nSt lIIb

Nominal diameter Cross-sectional fto.t. Ｏ Ｓ

area mm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2

6 30 4600 5640

12 116 4350 5470

16 199 4330 5400

18 255 4210 5370

24 469 4480 5660

Concrete - In Table IX the composition and the strength of the concrete

are given. For Series D, that contains beams of very small dimensions, the maximum

size of the aggregate was limited to 15 mm. Correspondingly more cement was added,

as compared to the sand-rich concrete of Series C, to ｲ ･ ｡ ｣ a somewhat equal

strength. A modification of the maximum size of aggregate in the same ratio as

the beams would not be realistic since large and small structures are built with

somewhat equal size of aggregate. Besides we want to use similar building materials.

For Series D the cubes were adjusted to the size of the test beams.

Only a small correlation was shown between the cube strength and the cube size;
 56.

the single values certainly scatter.

TABLE IX

Composition and Strength of the Concrete

Series D Series C
Aggregate 0/3 nnn 34% 43%
3/7 nnn 26% 17%
7/15 nnn 40% 22%
15/30 mm - 18%
I Cementkg/m 3 373 297
:Water Cement Factor 0.49 0.62
Age of Test ｾ Ｒ days ｾ Ｒ days

Cube Strength ａ ｶ ･ ｲ ｡ ｾ ａ ｶ ･ ｲ ｡ ｾ
I (Beam Size) kg/cm 2 kg/em kg/cm 2 kg/em
j
IDl: 7/7/7 cm - 4 Tests: 403-561 447 - -
D2: 10/10/10 cm3- 6 Tests: 421-483 449 - -
D3: 12/12/12 cm3- 5 Tests: 447-485 464 - -
D4: and Series C
20/20/20 cm3 5 Tests: 395-448 425 i l l Tes ts: 442-517 471 I
ｾ ｂ ･ ｮ Ｎ ､ ｩ ｮ Tensile
I
IStrength 5 Tests: 49,4-51.9 50.7 5 Tes ts: 46.4- 51. 3 48.4.J

4.4 Test Results

4.41 Cracks Fig. 48 shows the cracks for the beam series D (Fig. 46).

It can be seen that for geometrically similar beams and similar material a roughly

similar crack pattern occurs. For all beams between 11 and 14 cracks formed at

the elevation of the reinforcing that is, the average distance between cracks was

about 5 rod diameters, and was somewhat proportional to the outside dimensions.

The same holds for the length of the crack for corresponding load increments,

whereby it shows, that the shear cracks again advance higher than the bending

cracks.

The proportions lie completely different for Series C (Figs. 47 and 49),

where the rods of equal diameter were used in a number corresponding to the con-

stant reinforcing ratio. According to H. RUsch (Ref. 15) the distance between
>1'"_ ｾ
cracks actually depends on the so-called circumferential percent rate V - ｾ
 57.
'0 = Z tJ = /fZ(J The term ｾ is constant for all beams in Series C, therefore
Fb Fb
one should expect somewhat equal distance between cracks and a number of cracks

proportional to the span length. According to Table X this is not completely right.

TABLE X

r".<l ·lre
1'1
Beam Span Length for bh = 34,5 kg/cm 2 At Fai lure
m Average
Number Average Number
Distance Distance

Cl 1 7 12 6 12

C2 2 23 8 18 8

C3 3 21 10 21 10

C4 4 29 10 29 10

In spite of a lar ger number of cracks, the distance between cracks

remains constant, because the new cracks form only towards the support.

In spite of equal diameter and equal lower steel cover the bond strength

was not accordingly completely equal, which also influences the carrying capacity

(see 4.42). The concrete tension areas per single rod was larger for Beam Cl with

concrete width b c = 8.4 cm than for the other beams which had b c = 3.3 cm for C2,

5.0 cm for C3, and 5.8 cm for C4. The tensile force that must be transferred

by a single rod through the bond to the concrete and which is needed to build the

next crack, and the necessary transfer length accordingly was larger for beam Cl

and beam C2. That this tendency is somewhat reduced for beams C3 and C4 is because

for two and three reinforcing layers the crack area per rod is reduced strongly.

For the largest beams C4 the first visible crack penetrated only up to the average
d
reinforcing layer, thus up to 10 ' for CIon the other hand up to approximately
d
For several reinforcing layers on the other hand, the bond strength be-
3
comes less which opposes a reduction of the distance between cracks with the

proportionate crack area. In spite of the difference in the distance between

the cracks it is shown clearly that for bond strength that does not change accord-
 58.

ing to scale but is approximately constant (Series C), the distance between

cracks is not proportional to the dimensions of the beam. The difference with

Series D is clear.

The relationship between bond strength and crack formation can also

be seen from the tensile stresses in the steel, computed for the load that causes

cracking, and from the bottom of the concrete (assumption Case 1, n = 7.5). It

should be understood that the research information for the loads and stresses

under cracking concern the visibility of the cracks and not the occurance. In

fact the actual load for cracking to occur often lies lower and cannot be deter-

mined or defined easily.

Therefore, only in Series D do the bending tensile stresses corresponding

to crack load apparently decrease so strongly with increased beam dimensions

(Table VII, Col. II). Since the distance between cracks and the size of the

crack area are approximately proportional to the outside dimensions, the width

of the bending cracks must be in a somewhat similar proportion. Hence for small

beams the cracks are visible later than for the larger beams. In addition to

this, the absolute beam size for larger beams can lead to larger shrinkage stresses

which also participate in a reduction of tr bz with increasing beam size.

The fact that the bond strength and the distribution of the reinforcing

apparently influences the formation of the first cracks, is shown in Series C

by the J? bz values, which are reduced only slightly in spite of large changes

in the dimensions with increasing size* with equal sized bars.

4.42 The Carrying Capacity Under Shear - As expected all beams failed

by destruction of the shear compression zone, the bond being destroyed shortly

before failure by horizontal cracks along the reinforcing from shear cracks up

*The unbelievable low value for Cl can be attributed to damage when the forms
were taken off; a belief which is strengthened by the fact that over two further
load increments no wider crack formed.
 59.

to support.

The results of the failure test are given in Table VII Cols. 13 to 18.

Differently from the experiences for bending tests, here the related
M
moment at failure (Col. 18) mSU =ｾ (which has a dimension of a ｳ ｴ ｲ ･ ｳ is not
bh 4
constant.

For Series D (complete similarity), mSU decreased with increased size

of the beam, from 63.1 kgjcm 2 by 37% to 39.6 kgjcm 2. Therefore the usual similarity

laws do not hold for shear failure.

Similarly for beams with equal diameter of the rods (Series C), mSU de-

creased with the size of the beam, but the difference between the smallest and

the largest beams was considerably less than in Series D being only 21%.

How can these phenomena be explained? An analogy of the formation of

cracks (4.41) does not help because there in fact we have to do with bending cracks

while here the principal shear cracks, that show little difference on the outside,

are governing. Here we must look much more at the knowledge about the influence

of the bond obtained in Section 3.

There we determined that a shear crack advances higher when the bond is

poorer (difference between beams with distributed and concentrated reinforcing).

This was illustrated by the picture of the shear rotation (Fig. 43). The deforma-

tion Dsu down below at the shear crack depends on the steel elongation and the bond

strength and also on the following variables:

where: steel strain

ｾ rod diameter

)C surface area of the rod

ｾ = cylinder strength of the concrete as governing factor

of the bond strength specially for shear connections

P- reinforcing ratio.
 60.

On the other hand also, the size of the beam must playa role, because

for large beams and good bond no doubt more cracks participate in the shear de-

formation than for small beams. Hence Dsu increases with the actual size and we

can say with the length fd of the inclined cracks.

For further equal variables we have to consider two influences. To wit,

size of the region destroyed by the shear cracks, and the bond strength which,

for these tests, depends mainly on the magnitude of the rod diameter. How these

two influences depend on each other is unknown up to now.

Based on these and many foreign tests R. Walther developed the following

empirical relationships:

k1 = a value for the influence of the remaining parameters

From this the following can be derived:

Series D - ｾ and Q both increase proportional to the beam dimensions, but

DsU increases more than proportionally. For large beams the shear cracks penetrate

therefore proportionally further than for small beams and the related shear moment

mSu becomes smaller.

Series C - Since equal diameter rods were used here, ｾ and with it also

Dsu must increase somewhat proportional to the beam size, that means, the lower

mSu values must be constant. However this is right only for the two small and

for the two large beams while the difference between those two separate groups

still amounts to 21%. This can be explained partly from the difference in bond

strength which is influenced by the number of reinforcing layers.

Comparing analogous beams of Series C and D

m
D2 with h 14 cm SU 48.5 kg/cm 2 1.22
D4 h 28 cm mSU 39.6 kg/cm Z
m
C1 with h 15 cm SU 44 kg/cm 2 1.00
44 kg/cm 2
C2 h 30 cm mSU
 61.

it can be seen that the beam size only partly, but the bond strength mainly deter-

mine the difference in carrying capacity under shear.

For the range tested here we come to the following conclusion:

For complete similarity and therefore changable bond strength the carrying

capacity under shear decreases with increasing beam size. For external

similarity but constant bond strength the carrying capacity under shear

stays rather independent of the beam size.

However for complete similarity the reduction in carrying capacity

under shear is not proportional to the absolute size, but follows more a curve

(Fig. 50), from which we can determine that from h ｾ 40 cm. on the reduction is

not important. This knowledge is important and also comforting for the application

of the test results in practice.

Since for construction members under tension the rod diameter is limited

more and more to approximately 26 to 30 rom, the reduction in carrying capacity

under shear for larger beams is further limited.* Therefore the results from shear

tests on beams with h ｾ 25 cm. can be applied approximately to larger construction

members. On the other hand empirical formulas such as, for example, those derived

from small reinforced gypsum model tests by G. Brock (Ref. 16) are not correct with-

out further information.

4.43 ｓ ｨ ･ ｡ Stress ｾ - Here the shear stress ｾ is proportional to

mSU ' because the load location was always the same. However, we want to consider

the actual magnitude of Jro. For the concrete strength B425 this is sometimes

very low. For D4 ｾ = 15.3 kg/cm 2. For the comparable beams No.5 of Section

2 (Table IV) we found minimum ｾ = 14.6 kg/cm 2 for B355 hence again there was

no increase corresponding to the concrete strength.

* This is also confirmed by unpublished tests of H. RUsch.

 62.

The stress ｾ lies even lower for the beams C3 and C4 ( ｾ = 13.7
2
kg/cm ), although the distributed reinforcing is favorable for the bond strength

and the concrete strength of ;9w 471 kg/cm 2 was high.

Therefore, especially for good concrete, one should work with ｾ

values at failure that lie even under those of Sections 2 and 3 when no shear

reinforcing was present and an unfavorable ｾ was acting. This is a new indica-
Qh
tion that a design with the usual a llowab Le 7 0 can give insufficient safety,

here for example V = 1.2 instead of 2.1.

 5. TESTS ON PLATE STRIPS WITHOUT SHEAR REINFORCING

(beams with very flat rectangular cross section)

(March 1962, Pages 59 - 64)

5.1 General

Frequently in practice, plates or slabs are constructed without shear

reinforcing, where the thickness d in fact is smaller than for the beam tests of

Sections 2 to 4. Therefore an additional 14 plate strips were tested to determine

how far the shear failure information obtained from the beam tests is applicable

for plates and whether a similar dependency exists between the important variables.

Correspondingly the following were varied:

M
Moment shear ratio Qh

Principal reinforcing ratio fk

Bond (different ｾ for constant fL )

Usable height h.

5.2 The Plates and the Load

Fig. 51 shows the type of plate and the application of the load. The

dimensions of the plate strips and the reinforcing are given in Table No. XI. The

concrete strengths should lie at the bottom limit for concrete used in high rise

construction; it was ｾ w = 152 to 164 kg/cm 2. For comparison, two plates (P8 and

P9) were constructed from B300.

All plates were reinforced with straight rods of rippentorstahl (BSt III b)

without hooks and without bending the rods up or stirrups. The rods were in longi-

tudinal and lateral direction and had an anchorage length beyond the support of

20 cm. For lateral reinforcing in all the plates, rods of ｾ 8 rom, spaced ｾ 20 cm.

apart, were installed. The plate supports of multiple rollers stretched over the

63.
 Table XI Dimensions and Results of Shear Tests on Plates

'-'
co 4-<
en
"0 :)
.u o .u
C ｾ en en
ｾ c:: ,-..,
ｾ
t>::l (1) CIl (1)
00 u 0 "0 00E-< (1) E-<
C co
l-< H
'M
.u
(1) 4-<
0
(1) (1) (1) c .....
'M '-' l-< l-< l-< .u 'M .u ,-.., ..0 (1) en
ｾ
u
c:: U 'M ::l ::l ::l
..... ｾ ::l"O co en co ..... (1)
(1) (1) "0 ..... (1) ..... 0 0. C ;>., 00 'M
co S rqen C 'M 0. 'M 'M ..... E (1) (1) co
'M
C l-<
l-< 0 I,..oUco 0 co ;>.,co co ..... 0..0 00"0
l-<
co 'M (1)
U ｾ ｵ ｅ Ｍ ＼ ｾ <C > en en
ｾ
U '-' <c'-'
-
, , , , I
9 I
10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 . 19 I
eo I
21 , I
"3

Rill. Brochzustaod rechn. Veranderlic-he dee e inz elneu

al>:RiB Bruch
j bl ) hi) a F. Il- (3 .. moment (Zu-
lIf Bruch- .ul M u' ) p..::.r. Versucb sreihe n
aul .') a.v l )
11'1,,') Q:"""h art') [Hie- .lter

---
n<2l arand
I)
Pu
I
Qu')
I To') I Ms u')
Scite 11'1 8 ' )
gucg)
M
Q"i; 11'-1
Vee-
bund Ih I (3.
---
I 00
I em
I
em
I em I-mm I 0/
/0 I kg/em' I 1m I kg/em' I - I t
I t I kg/em' I 1m
I - I - I tm
I I kg/em' I tm I Tage I I I I- - -
P 1 1.50 50,2 14.3 49 3x 12 0,47 152 1,24 48,9 3,5 9,65 5,10 (7.9 ) 2,50 B - 0,86 2,91 5780 2,1 26 0
P 2 I 1.50 50,3 I 14.2 49 I 6x 12 0,95 152 1,54 54,8 3,5 15,00 7,77 12,6 3,81 S I L 1,08 3,54 4860 3,5 25 0 0 I 0
P 3 1.50 50,2 14,2 49 7 X 12 i.u 152 1.64 56,5 3,5 16.00 8,27 13,6 4.06 S E 1,13 3,60 4530 3,8 26 0 0
P 4 Ｑ ｾ Ｕ 50.0 14.5 49 9x 12 1,40 164 1.49 47,0 3.5 20,00 10,28 16,8 5.04 5 L 1,25 4,03 4480 4.8 32 0 0
P 5 1,50 50,3 14,5 49 12 X 12 1,86 152 2,48 70,8 3,5 20,00 10.28 17,0 5,04 5 E 1,36 3.71 3460 5,0 27 0 +
P 6 1.50 49,9 14,2 49 4x 18 1,43 164 1,34 43,4 3,5 17,40 8,97 15.1 4,40 V E 1,20 3,65 3850 4,5 32 0
P 1 1,50 50,3 14,3 49 2x26 1,48 164 1,49 46,7 3,5 15,00 7,78 12,9 3,81 V E 1,24 3.06 3010 5,0 33 0
P 8 1,50 50,2 14,8 49 6x 12 0,91 306 2,12 78,8 3,5 18.00 9,28 14,4 4,55 5 E 1,92 2,37 4980 4,3 21 0
P 9 1,50 50,0 14.6 49 12x 12 1,86 306 3,11 105,9 3,5 21,00 10,78 17,9 5,28 5 E 2,29 2,31 3010 7,3 22 +
P 10 0,95 50,3 10,2 35 5 X 12 1,10 140 1,00 54,9 3,5 11,70 6,04 13,8 2,12 5 E 0,58 3,64 4780 1.9 27 0
Pll 2,00 49,8 18,3 63 9 X 12 i.n 155 i50 74.1 3,5 19,90 10.32 13,3 6,51 5 E 1,86 3,50 4320 6,4 29 0
P12 1,20 50,1 14,2 35 6x 12 0,95 155 l,85 65,0 2,5 20,00 10,24 16,1 3,58 S E 1.07 3,34 4460 3,5 28 0
P13 1.70 50,2 14,3 63 6x 12 0,94 ISS 2.01 '73,0 4,5 -
I
6,59 (10,6) 4,15 B 3,5 28

I
1,09 3,82 5350 0
P14

1)
2,00 49.9 14,4 56 6x 12 0,94 ISS 1,72 60,0 I 4,0
[12,60
14,00 7,34 (lI,8) 4,11 B - I 1,10 3,75 5230 3,5 t 28 0 I
Dimensions at failure section 5) S = shear failure load/allow working load in bending
2) Computed considering dead load of plate from DIN 1045
and weight of the loading apparatus 6) Computed with allow = 60(100) kg/cm 2 according to drb
3) Computed according to DIN 1045 as DIN 1045
=ｾ with n = 15 7) Obtained at failure in failure section
o b
8) Obtained graphically according to ｍ ｾ ｲ ｳ ｣ with Cl'
4) B = bending failure, S ｾ shear failure max Eb = 0.003
.l:-

V = bond failure
 65.

total plate width of 50 cm (Fig. 51). The load was applied on one end as a point

load (load plate 8/8/2 cm respectively 6/6/2 cm put on with 5 rom cement mortar)

and on the other end as a line load (load plate 50/4.5/1.0 cm), both at an equal

distance Q from the support. The load was applied in approximately 8 increments,

and the load was taken off before every increment. The load speed was approximately

5 t/min.

Measurements - Besides determination of the loads for cracking and failure

the following measurements were carried out:

deflection with Ames dials at ｾ and ｾ

2 4
crack pattern

crack width (just for plates P4, P6 and P7 with different bond

rods with ｾ 12, 18 and 26 rom)

5.3 The Material

Steel Stress-strain diagrams obtained from test pieces of the steel

used (BSt IIIb) are shown in Fig. 52 for the appropriate ｾ

Concrete - At the same time the concrete was used for a mixing test,

which was carried out according to the specifications* with a stiff concrete S

and a water-rich concrete W. The specifications prescribed S = 300 kg/m 3 cement

with round aggregate and for W, on the other hand, 200 kg/m 3 cement and crushed

rock of size from 7 t.o 30 rom. Corresponding mixtures were produced according to

Table XII.

For the aggregate of both concrete types, the sieve curves approached

each other (Fig. 53).

During pouring of the plates the reinforcing rods were at the bottom.

The concrete was vibrated. For eight days the plates were covered with moist

cloth, and then stored dry up to testing at age of 21 to 33 days (Table XI, Col.

22) except the bending prisms which were cured moist up to testing according to
Ｊ ｇ ｾ ｴ ･ Ｍ ｒ ｩ ｣ ｨ ｴ Ｑ ｩ ｵ ｩ ･ fur Betonmischer" - the Highway Research Group April 1953.
 66,

DINI0480

From the mixture W, 18 cubes 20/20/20 em and 9 prisms 53/10/10 em were

prepared and from the mixture S, 6 cubes but no prisms. Their strengths were

determined at the day the plates were tested. The average values are shown in

Table Xl , The scatter for all cub es and cylinders tested on one day was small.

5.4 Computed Working Load and Failure Load under Bending

5.41 Allowable working load according to DINI045 (bending). - The

allowable bending moments are ｓ ｨ ｏ ｗ ｾ in Table XI Col. 18.

The allowable concrete cornp r e s s Lon stress with allowable o-B = 60 kg/cm 2

for B160 and respectively 100 kg/cm 2 for B300 is governing for all plates. The
shear failure load
ratio S = was computed here just as it was
allowable work load (bending) DINI045
for beams and is shown if: Table XI, CoL 19).

TABLE XII

Concrete S Concrete W

Number of mixtures 1 5

Used for p i.at 28 P8 and P9 All other plates

Cement 300 kg/m 3 PZ 275 200 kg/ cm3 PZ 27 5

Aggregate (Divided according Washed Rhine gravel Rhine sand 0-7mm

to size) sand Basalt split 7-30mm

Quartz powder 4/0 (refering to 4% (same)

weight of aggregate)

Water-cement-ratio
(quartz powder addition 0.78
cons idered)

Mixing time 50 sec. 50 sec.

Washability penetration s lump test

J.. = 4,5 em 0.... = 48 ---51 em.

ｾ Ｍ Ｂ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
 67.

5.42 Computed Bending Failure Loads - The bending failure loads were

"
obtained with Morsch graphical method (Ref. 17) in which the stress-strain diagrams

of the steel are used. The shortening at failure of the concrete was assumed as

0.3% and the stress distribution in the concrete compression zone was assumed

according to the tests of RUsch (Ref. 18).

5.5 Results of the Tests

The actual data of the tests are given in Table XI Cols. 9, 10, 12-15.

A few pictures of failure are given in Fig. 54.

5.51 Types of Failure - Most of the plates failed in shear and it is

interesting to note usually at the end of the concentrated point load. The shear

crack propagated on both sides of the point load beyond the location of the load

toward the middle of the beam (Fig. 54), thus towards a zone where the vertical

stresses ｾ introduced by the load are not active any more. Directly under the

load the concrete was kept by the pressure of the load so that there the line of

failure runs outside the load (as considered from the support). Again the inclined

shear cracks before failure advanced higher than the bending cracks. Once more

it is shown therefore that the shear failure for rectangular cross-sections is

often related to the bending failure: in both cases the structure gives up when

the boundary concrete stresses reach the compressive strength. However, the active

concrete compressive zone is reduced more by the shear crack than by the bending

crack and thus the shear failure occurs before the bending failure load is reached.

Thereby naturally the magnitude of the bending moment must playa governing role.

For plates P2 and P4 the shear failure occurred at the end of the line

load directly next to the distribution plate. Since no special reason is apparent

for this different behavior at failure as compared to the other plates it must be

assumed that the shear carrying capacity is not much different for both methods of

loading and that small local differences in the concrete strength could give the
 68.

decisive factor for failure on one or the other end.

Because of the larger bond stresses and the smaller concrete cover, in

the case of the plates with the thicker rods (P6 with 4 ｾ 18 mm and P7 with 2 ｾ

26 mm) anchorage failures occurred, whereby the concrete at the bottom of the

plate scaled off along the reinforcing rods.

Plates with moment-shear ratios greater than 4 (P13 and P14) and plate

PI with a lower reinforcing ratio f'-- = .47 percent failed under bending (Fig. 54),

whereby the yield point of the steel was exceeded.

5052 Influence of the Moment Shear Ratios - Tests P2, P12, P13 and P14

showed the influence of the moment shear ratios. The stress ｾ reached at failure

and Msu (shear failure moment) are shown relative to ｾ in Fig. 56. Those curves

correspond to the trend observed in narrow beams (compare Fig. 32), that is ｾ 0

decreases with increasing M while Msu increases, whereby the changes of t;o
Qh
are a bit larger as those of the moment.

The transfer from shear to bending failure occurred at M = 4. For

Qh
M
the beam tests described under II, 2 this limit was Qh = 7. The reason for this

difference is that the reinforcing ratio P: and the steel diameter for the plate

strips was less than for the beams (p.-plate = .94'70, ftbeams = 2.07%, ｾ ｰ ｬ ｡ ｴ = 12 mm,

ｾ ｢ ･ ｡ ｭ = 26 mm) 0 We found already that shear failures occur earlier when the

reinforcing ratio is greater and when the bond is poorer, that is when the steel

diameters are larger. With larger ｾ we could also have expected shear failure for
ｾ
Qh
>4 for the p late strips 0

The smallest value for 1; 0 at shear failure of 12.6 kg/cm 2 gives an

insufficient safety factor of only 1.58 compared to the allowable lower shear stress

limit of 8 kg/cm 2 Ｈ ｾ = 152 kg/cm 2) without shear reinforcement in DINl045 for

B160. The same is valid for plates of B300 (P8 and P9) which had (; 0 values at

failure of 14.4 and 1709 kg/cm 2, respectively, compared to an allowable ｾ 0 of

 69.

5.53 Influence of the Reinforcing Ratio - For Plates 1 to 5 with

M = 3.5 and 2
? w = 155 kg/cm rippentorstahl with 3, 6, 7, 9,
and 12 ｾ 12 mm
Qh
rods were used in the series, which corresponded to reinforcing ratios of .47%,

.95%, 1.11%, 1.40% and 1.86%.

Except for plate PI with ｾ = .47%, which failed under bending, shear

failures occurred, in which the shear failure load and with it the shear failure

moment MSU as well as the 1; 0 values reached at failure increased gradually with

increased reinforcing ratio up to fL = 1.40. A further increase of ｾ to 1.86%

did not give any more increase in the shear carrying capacity (Fig. 57).

Again we must recognize that besides Q, the bending moment M also has

an influence, and that the shear failure is related to the bending failure as

long as the final failure occurs because of the destruction of the concrete com-

pressive zone. Here also the shear cracks penetrated faster and higher towards

the compressive zone than the cracks in the pure bending region. The shear Q

as respectively 6M produces high bond stresses along the main reinforcing which

leads to a positive slip between steel and concrete during and after formation of

the cracks which finally becomes larger than in the zone of pure bending and clearly

causes a "shear rotation". The opening of the cracks depends on the steel strain

and thus on the moment and other factors.

The steel stresses computed from the failure load are shown in Col. 20

of Table XI and in Fig. 57. They decrease gradually with increasing ｾ the de-

formations thus become smaller and Msu can become larger because the shear crack

does not advance up quite so fast.

5.54 Influence of the Bond - For the plates P4, P6 and P7 the bond for

approximately equal ｾ 1.5% was changed by the choice of different diameters

(9 ｾ 12, Fe = 10.17; 4 ｾ 18, Fe = 10.16; 2 ｾ 26, Fe = 10.62 cm2). Thereby the

 70.

failure moments decreased with increased Q namely from 5.04 tm to 4.40 tm to 3.81 tm.

Therefore the quality of the bond influences the failure load considerably more

for failure under shear than for bending. Comparison of the failure loads is surely

insofar not completely decisive if anchoring failures occur for the larger diameters

(Fig. 55). But on the other hand the tendency found here is confirmed by the test

results shown in Section II, 3 and by the comparison of deflections and the crack

widths.

5.55 Crack Behavior - In Figs. 58 and 59 are shown the magnitude and

the sum of the crack widths vs. the load. As expected, both diagrams show a

distinct increase of the crack widths with increased diameter for equal ｾ

Correspondingly the neutral surface must also have moved towards the compression

zone which explains the difference in failure load.

5.56 Influence of the Actual Thickness of the Plates or Height of the

Beams (Similarity Tests)- To supplement the tests on the validity of the similarity

laws mentioned in Part 4, three geometrically similar plates with equal building

materials with ratios of P10/P3/Pll = 5/7/9 were constructed whereby the plate

width was kept constant with 50 cm. The number of rods was chosen according to

the similarity law that is 5 Q 12 mm, 7 Q 12 mm and 9 Q 12 rom which gave a uniform

reinforcing ratio of 1.11% for the three plates. Since b is constant, the bond

strength decreases somewhat with the number of rods, that is with smaller distance

between the rods; however the influence for equal diameters cannot be significant.

According to the similarity laws (compare Sec. II, 4) only for plates

with equal bond (equal Q), the stresses especially the 1: 0 leading to failure,

should be constant. Approximately this is the case; nevertheless the ratio of

ｾ 0 shows for P10/P3/Pll = 13.8/13.6/13.3 kg/cm 2, a weak reduction with increased

usable height, which also corresponds to the shear failure moments obtained from

bh 2.
 71.

5.57 Influence of the Concrete Strengths - For the plates P2 and P5

with B150 a comparison test with B300 was carried out (P8 and P9). For the failure

loads (Table XI) it is seen immediately how little the shear carrying capacity in-

creased when the concrete compressive strength was doubled (Fig. 60): for the

plates with }L= .93% (P2 and P8) the increase in carrying capacity only amounted

to 20%, for ｾ 1.86% (P5 and P9) even only 5%. On the other hand we expect, based

on theory and also from other tests (Ref. 19), an increase in shear carrying capacity

with approximately ｾ ｷ Comparison with beam tests described in Parts 2 and 3

shows that the failure loads obtained here with B300 are absolutely not too low,

but rather that plates with B150 showed an uncustomary high shear carrying capacity;

according to Fig. 32 of Part 2 a shear stress (; 0 = 16.1 kg/cm 2 was to be expected

for beams with ｾ = 2.07%, ｾ 26 mm, ｾ w = 350 kg/cm 2 and ｾ = 3.5; Plate P9 with

P: = 1.86/0, ｾ 12 mm, ｾ w = 306 kg/cm 2 and ｾ = 3.5 can be compared to this beam,

but shows in spite of the lower concrete strength a 1: 0 = 17.9 kg/cm 2 at failure.

The corresponding plate P5 with ｾ w = 152 kg/cm 2 reached a ' t 0 = 17.0 kg/cm 2,
which even compared to the other plate tests is rather too low.

From this we must determine that the usual ratio of cube strength to

strength of the bending compressive zone with shear consideration is not applicable

for B150 with crushed basalt used here, which probably goes back to its increased

plastic deformation ability. This is also confirmed by the result from the plate

strips destroyed under bending, where measured failure loads lie approximately 20%

higher than the values computed with maximum Eb = 0.3% and ｾ = .85 ?> w: Also

the bond action could have been increased because of interlocking action of the

angular crushed basalt with the ribs of the steel. Also it can be recognized from

these tests that even under concentrated load the shear carrying capacity of plate

strips is greater than that for beams. In spite of this increase the plates P8

and P9 with 1L 0 = 14.4 and 17.9 gave too Iowa shear safety factor compared to
 72.

the allowable value of 10 kg/cm 2 for B300 in DINl045.

5.58 Deflections - The results of the deflection measurements, for the

time being for one variable, are shown in Fig. 61 to 63. The values computed

for M only according to (Ref. 13), are shown dotted. Again in the lower reaches

of the load the measured deflection does not reach the computed value, while it

exceeds it for increased load because of the shear deformation.

Fig. 61 shows that, as expected, the deflection increases for smaller

reinforcing ratios which is shown here especially distinctly, because the reinforc-

ing ratios were only changed by the number of rods and not by the use of different

diameters, that means that the bond properties were hardly changed.

In Fig. 62 are shown the deflections for different bond strengths. They

clearly increase with reduced bond strengths for growing diameter for equal rein-

forcing ratio. This corresponds to the observed crack widths (Figs. 58 and 59).

For plates with fewer rods and proportionally larger diameters fewer wide cracks

occur which caused the larger deformations.

In Fig. 63 the deflections for plates with different concrete strengths

were compared, namely for the plate pair P2 and P8 with ｊ ｌ ｾ Ｐ Ｎ Ｙ and P5 and P9

with ｾ 1.86%. In both cases the deflections for B150 in fact are larger than

for B300 which can be attributed to a difference in the ｾ Ｍ curve and the bending

tensile strengths of the concrete as well as to the difference in bond strength.

5.59 Safety Obtained from Allowable Bending Moment - Col. 19 in Table

XI shows that the shear failure load, in spite of the partly lower (; 0 generally

lies above 2.1 times the allowable working load for design under bending according

to DINl045. If one compares the shear failure moment (Col. 15) with the compuced

carrying load moment (Col. 21) one finds only two values for P6 and P7 under

those and namely for the case of anchoring failures. Thus in spite of the low ｾ 0'

the safety against shear failure is not far under the bending failure safety.
 73.

The actual bending failure moments here surely were actually higher than the com-

puted ones (up to 20%) because of the mentioned special properties of the crushed

basalt concrete.

It should be noted that the shear safety becomes considerably lower if

the reinforcing is not extended completely up to the supports but is bent up

according to the bending moment curve.

 6. TESTS ON RECTANGUlAR BEAMS WITH DIFFERENT METHODS

OF SHEAR REINFORCING

(June 1962, Pages 141 - 149)

6.1 Introduction

For the shear tests described in Chapter I the large influence of the

stirrup inclination on the shear failure load and on the shear deformations for

plate beams with thin webs was indicated. In the next series this influence will

be tested for rectangular beams in which perpendicular and 45 degree stirrups,

with two different distances and also bent up rods (each designed for equal shear

force) are compared. We are concerned here with preliminary experiments.

6.2 Beams

The series contains 7 beams with point loads and 4 beams with uniform

loads for ｾ ｾ Ｗ Ｎ described below.

T.ype 0 f L oa d B earn N o. Sh ear R･ ｾ . f ｯ ｲ ｣ ｾ ｮ

El Bars bent up at 45 0

E2 Inclined stirrups 45 0 : Spaced

far apart

E3 Spaced close together

Single Load
E4 Spaced far apart
E5/l Vertical stirrups: Spaced close together
E5/2 Spaced close together

E6 No shear reinforcing (for comparison)

Gl Bars bent up at 45 0

G3 Inclined stirrups 45 0 closely spaced

Uniform Load
G5 Vertical stirrups, closely spaced

G6 No shear reinforcing

74.
 75.

The E and G beams with equal numbers were reinforced similarly with a

constant distance between the stirrups and the bent up bars. Therefore for beams

with uniform load the shear reinforcing was not stepped up according to the shear

force.

6.21 Dimensions and Reinforcing - The dimensions of the beams and the

longitudinal reinforcing was the same for all beams (Fig. 64 and Table XIII). The

reinforcing ratio of 2.47% would lead one to expect a failure of the compressive

zone before yielding of the tensile rod. The anchorage length of the rods was

chosen to be 50 cm which was sufficient to prevent a failure of the anchoring.

F
All beams must have the same reinforcing ratio Pi = es The difference
s ba€>in t)
in ｾ s in Table XIII, Cols. 5 and 6, occurred because the measured value of the

cross-sectional area deviated considerably from the theoretical values. The stirrups

are of ribbed torstahl BStlllb on one end and smooth round steel BStI on the other

end. Therefore the carrying capacity of the stirrups on each end was approximately

in the ratio of the yield points of the steel 2.6/4.3 .6.

The shear reinforcing of the beams El and Gl consists at each end of

three bent up rods ｾ 16 BStlllb that give a double supporting system. There are

no stirrups although they are prescribed for beams, however, we wanted to investigate

the action of bent up bars and stirrups separately.

Beam E2 is reinforced with 45 0 , inclined stirrups ｾ 10 mm spaced at 20

cm. At the top, the stirrups are closed and wired to 2 construction rods ｾ 10

of BStlllb. At the bottom they go around the bottom rods ｾ 20 and there also

they are only connected with wire. For beams E3 and G3, 45 0 stirrups ｾ 8mm at a

distance of 12.5 cm are installed.

Beam E4 had vertical stirrups ｾ 10mm at a distance of 14 cm ( ｾ 20 cm/J:2)

of ｾ 8 rom at a distance of 9 ern Ｈ ｾ Ｑ Ｒ Ｎ cm J2).

The beams E6 and G6 used for comparison did not contain any shear reinforc-
 Tabelle XIII.

Zusammenstellung der Scbubvenuche mit versebledeeea Schubbewehrunglartea

Abmeasungen: ':::::1 2,00 m; b .... 19 em; d _ 32 em; " _ 21 em

Zugbewehnmg: 2 til 20 m.m +3 til 16 mm BSt IIIb; I' - 2,47%

Druekbewehrung: 2 til 10 mm BSt IlIb; 1" _ 0,33%

I I I ｾ ｉ ｾ I I I J ｾＭＢＧＭｌＢＧＭＭｊＭＭＭＢＧＭＭＭ
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 25
--- I---
Scbub- zulaE) Cebeauebsleeraustacd RiOla.t Bruchlastzuetand
Beton-
Be·
Schubbewchrung bcwehrungsgrad
F.. gute (extra- cr,
max
recbn. au zul. all a,.
M R ' JI des
reebn. a,.
TIez. policrt] PrJ
Ius tung I Iiuks reehrs ｊ Ｎ Ｑ Ｇ ］ ｾ Ｎ ｳ ｩ ｮ
flw cntspr c-
,UV+J'l ) Po.. uute r
g+p
r (Sebuhbewebrung) rechn.O'.. (Bie. Bal. MrJ " link.t I reebte • = MＮ ｾ ..
ｦｉ Brucbart und Bruchunache

'" mm 21 mm link, I rec hts chend Pw links I recbu link.t I reebee gun g) kena
us. I
I ns- III b 0(, 0/
.0 ':>.g/cm: kg/cm 1 1m t kg/em' kg/em: kg/cm t kg/em t tm kg/em! t tm kg/em' kg/em'

E 1 I 3 '" 16 BS, 111b

aulgebogen 45°
0,59 0,59 I 336 109 I 3,96 10,56 1415 12,6 2140 1,12 1,90 45,S M,I 12,79 40,51 6860 3,23
Schubbruch
Zer st or ung de r Druckzone eeben
der Lasleinuogung
Schubbrueb auf del' Seite mit
45° Di..ig-e]
39,0 - B 3,37 Bugeln aus ns. 1 bei 34,1 t,
E2 0' 10 I 0' 10 0,60 0,63 380 120 4,35 11,60 1555 13,8 2300 2190 0,61 1,10 1,48 36,4
37,2)')
14,62 46,5
(6750)1)
7380
(S 3,22) ;-;ach dem Baud agieren Bie;e-
a = 20 em a = 20 em
brueb in Balkerrmit te,
ec
ｾ

0; Schubbruch Buf dee Seite mit

E3 ｾ I: c 8
45 0 Bagel
I e 8 0,54 0,72 352 112 4,06 10,80 1450 12,9 2400 1800 0,58 1,33 1,55 37,0
37,7
14,12 44,9 - 5160
B 3,48 ｮ ｩ ｩ ｾ ｣ ｴ au. BSt I bei 37,2 t,

1ｾ ｉ E
a = 12.5 em
Vceukale Dugel
a:::::l 12,5 em
(37,2)') (8250)1) (S 3,41) Nacb dem Bandagieren Biege-
brueh in Balkenmitte.

E4 1:1--= c
a = }4. em
10 e 10
a = 14em
I 0,60 0,64 380 120 1,35 11,60 1555 13,8 2300 2160 0,61 1,34 2,10 50,1 37,S 14,06 44,6 7430 6960 3,23 Biegebrucb

Verrikcte Biigel
E 5/1 0'0
a = gem
I a = gem
c 8 0,53 0,71 380 120 4,35 11,60 1555 13,8 2600 1950 0,54 1,23 1,55 37,0 37,8 14,18 45,0 8490 6340 3,26 Biegebrueb

Sehubbcucb (ohne Scbubbeweb-

E6 - - - 352 112 4,06 10,80 1450 12,9 - - - - 1,55 37,0 18,6 6,98 22,1 - - 1,72
rung)
Schubbrueb auf del' Seite mit

E 5/2 Ii- ｾ 2,0<

Vcrttkale Bugel
08
0= 9cm 8 I '"
0,53 0,71 352 112 4,06 14,76 1450 17,6 3320 2480 0,42 0,97 2,01 48,0 52,8
(34,1)')'
ｾ Ｔ Ｌ Ｒ 62.8 -
(7650)1)
8840 B 3,51 Biigeln au. ns. I bei 34,1 t,
(S 2,31)") ｾ ach dem B;lo.Jagierec. Btege-
a = gem

I I 1
brueh io. Bulkeemirte,

G1
3 c 16 BS, IIIb 0,59 0,59 380 120 4,35 17,40 1555 20,7 3040 ')
0,79')
I 2,01 48,0 61,S 15,38 73,2 10700') 3,53 Biegebruch
aulgcbog en 45 0 (1750)')
.,.: 0
45 Hugel 3000 .) ｾ Ｒ Ｕ S} 60,2
G3 i! :1 I c 8 0,54 0,72 332 108 3,92 15,68 1100 18,7 0,47 1,06 1,53 36,S 15,05 71,6 11450') 8600') 3,84 Biegebruch
.:: fiCI_ a = '"12.5
8
em' a = 12,5 em (1730)') (1300)')
Ｎ Ｎｾｾ
Ycrttkcle Bugei 3050 .)
G5 :3 a 0,71 3,92 18,7 2280 ') 0,46 1,05 1,55 37,0 59,3 14,83 70,S 3,79 Blegebreeh
0'8 I Z8 0,53 332 108 15.60 1·100 11500') 8580')
-1-" a = 9 em a = gem
(1760)') (1320)')
Sebubbrueb [ebee Scbuhbeweb-
G6 - - - 332 100 3, 92 1 15,68 1400 18,7 - - - - 2.62 62,6 40,1 10,03 47,8 - - 2,56
rung]
I I
1) Druc kbewchr-ung hcrGcbichtigt. '} Miulerc Bugelspunnung '} Nachdem die Buge l auf dee Scite mit DSl I i0.9 FlieDco. gcretec warec (klalfende I) Zu Iriih bandagiert. Schubbrucblast wue wahracheiu lich bedeuteed bcbee,
=) Errechnct im Abst and hJ2 vorn Auflager. maxl"s
Scbubrisse} wurde dee Balken auf diesel' Seite bandagiert.
a., '=t:s 2 !-'.'

'-l
0\
 77.

ing.

6.22 Working Load and Corresponding Stresses - The working load P g+p

and the corresponding Mg+p (Table XIII, Co1s. 9 and 10) were computed such that

the allowable ｾ under bending was reached, according to the classical reinforced

concrete theory (n = 15). Since the concrete strength of the beams was greater

than the value of JBw = 300 kg/cm 2 considered in DIN1045, ｾ was linearly extra-

po1ated corresponding to the particular ;?w' The construction reinforcing at the

top (2 0 10 BStlllb) was considered in computing the stresses. The stresses com-

puted with this working load are shown in Table XIIICo1s. 11 to 14.

The theoretical stirrup stresses can be obtained from the formula:

ｾ ｳ ｾ
ｾ

For the beams with point load the theoretical cr;s is constant over the total

shear zone ( ｾ is constant; ｾ is constant) while the stress of the shear

reinforcing for uniform load Ｈ ｾ = ｶ ｡ ｲ ｩ ･ ｳ ［ ｾ = constant) is different from

section to section. The ｾ values of Table XIII (Col. 13 and 14) refer to a

section a distance ｾ from the support. For comparison the average value over the
2
total reach of shear are shown in brackets. Comparison with allowable stirrup

ｳ ｴ ｲ ･ ｳ ｳ ･ ｳ ｾ ｬ ｬ ｯ a;/comp ｾ Ｉ Ｈ ｃ Ｐ Ｑ ｓ 15 and 16) shows that the torstah1 stirrups

(BStlllb) correspond to complete shear safety in DIN1045, while for the stirrups

of BStI only 40 to 60% of the complete shear safety was reached.

6.23 Construction of the Beams - The beams were poured in steel forms;

their outside dimensions therefore only deviate about one rom from the theoretical

values. Each group of four beams were poured simultaneously in such a way that

the mixtures from the 150 litre mixers was distributed uniformly in all four beams.

At the same time 16 cubes 20 x 20 x 20 cm and 16 10 x 10 x 53 cm3 prisms were

poured. The concrete was compacted with a 5 cm vibrator. The tensile reinforcing

was at the bottom while the beam was poured. After two days the forms were

taken off the beams, cubes and cylinders and they were kept moist for 7 days at
 78.

approximately l8 0C under a wet cloth. After that the beams were kept at 18 0 and

60% relative humidity and tested at an age of from 27 to 30 days.

6.24 Building Materials

Steel The properties of the steel used is shown in Table XIV.

Some of the cross-sectional areas deviate considerably (up to 22%) from the

theoretical value which was considered for the computed values in Table XIII.

TABLE XIV Propert ies of the Steel

Nominal Theoret ical Area Yield pt. 0.270 Tensile elongation

No. diameter
nnn
Area
nnn
nnn 2 ».
kg/nnn 2
limit
ｊ Ｓ ｾ Ｎ
strength at fai lure
;31 ｾ Ｏ
kg/mm2 kg/nnn 2 %

Round Steel 8 50.3 45.4 27.3 38.0 24

BStI 10 78.5 80.1 26.1 36.5 36

Rippentorstahl 8 50.3 61.0 1) 46.5 57.8 15.6

10 78.5 85.3 1) 43.0 52.6 15.4

16 201 199]) 43.3 54.0 13.6

BStlIIb 20 314 334 1) 43.4 52.2 2)

1) - Comput ed from the weight of the test rods using tr= 7.8 /cm 3

2)- Repeated failure inside the clamp of the machine

 79.
CONCRETE

Concrete Mix Proportions

Aggregate Size, mm 0/3 3/7 7/IS lS/30
(Series E) 4310 17% 2210 18%

Cement 289 Kg/m 3

Water 216 1/m 3
Water-Cement Ratio 0.7S
Weight 2310 Kg/m3

Concrete Strength at 28 days

Average of 12 to 16 Single Values
Strength (Kg/cm 2) Coefficient of Variation
Beam El )
E3 ) )5 w = 348 4.8%
ES/2) IS bz = 46.3 6.9%
E6 )

Beam E2 )
E4 ) p w = 380 3.0%
ES/l) P bz = 41.S 6.8%
Gl )

Beam G3) J3 w 332

= 4.6%
GS) j3 bz = 41.1 8.4%
G6)

6.3 Testing

The loading and the supporting of the beams was the same as for the

beam tests described in Chapters 2 or 3.

The E beams, where a direct imminent shear failure at the end with the

stirrups of BStI was shown by the wide opening of the shear cracks, were bandaged

or held together thereafter the load was taken off with vertical rods and loaded

further till failure (Fig. 6S) which generally occurred under bending because of

the complete shear safety availability at the other end.

Load increments of P = 3.lt for the point loads and ｰ 6 . 2 t f or un i -

form load were chosen.

The measurements taken were: the crack and failure loads, the crack

widths at the height of the center of gravity of the tensile reinforcing, the
 80.

crack widths at half beam height in the shear span and the deflection in the

middle of the beam and at quarter points.

6.4 Test Results

6.41 Failure Load and Cause of Failure

Point Load Beams- For the point load beams the pictures of failure

(Picture 66) show bending failure, except beams El and E6 for E2, E3, E5/2 a

shear failure was avoided, however, only because the ends reinforced with stirrups

of BStI were bandaged.

For Beam El (bent up bars) a shear failure occurred; in fact the concrete

compressive zone next to the location of the load above the main shear crack gave

up although the shear reinforcing was designed sufficiently according to DINl045

(compare Table ｘ ｉ ｾ Gols. 15/16 Line 1). One can attribute the early failure

of this beam to the unfavorable distribution of the inclined rods in the cross-

section in the case of the bent up bars, the lack of stirrups with their embracing

action and the weakening of the weakening of the tension chord because of the bent

up bars.

For Beam E2 9 the end with the inclined stirrups of BStl had shown wide

shear cracks at a load of P = 37.2, so that this value can be assumed approximately

as the shear failure load. After bandaging, bending failure occurred for P = 39.0t.

For Beam E3 the inclined stirrups of BStl began to yield for a load of

P = 37.2t. After bandaging the failure load of 37.7t was reached; thus the closer

stirrups of BStI practically were sufficient to produce a bending failure although

they represent only a safety factor against shear according to DINl045 of 0.58.

The fact that Beam E3, in spite of lower concrete strengths and smaller

ｾ ｳ carried somewhat more shear than E2, shows the favorable action of small

stirrup spacing. Thereby the stirrups with their embracing action reach somewhat

closer to the endangered zone of the load.

 81.

For Beams E4 and E5/l with vertical stirrups, the bending failure load

was reached without bandaging. The vertical stirrups of BStI thus led to a higher

shear carrying capacity than the corresponding inclined stirrups. This can be

attributed to the fact that the shear compressive zone, which governs here for the

failure, is embraced more actively by the straight stirrups than by the inclined

ones. Further we can see from the equilibrium conditions Chapter I, Fig. 15),

that the compression resultant for perpendicular as compared to inclined stirrups

is smaller by Q/2 and therefore reduces the stress on the shear compressive zone.

Beam E5/2 was tested with a distance from load to support of (L= .55m,
0-
thus with h = 2. The left end (stirrups of BStI) was bandaged at a load of P = 34.1 t

which apparently was a bit hasty because for the smaller ｾ =ｾ a higher shear
h Qh
failure load than for E5/l was to be expected. Also the deformations and cracks

show that for 34.1 t no shear failure was present yet. The failure load of

Pu = 52.8 t showed approximately the same bending failure moment as for the other

beams. After the bending compressive zone had given up, in the part without the

stirrups between the loads a diagonal crack occurred.

Beam E6 (no shear reinforcing) failed under shear for a load of 18.6 t

by destruction of the compressive zone next to a load point.

Beams with Uniform Load - Fig. 67 shows pictures of the failures for

beams with uniform load. All beams with shear reinforcing failed in bending

approximately for equal load of pJC = 60 t. As for E5/2, for Beam G5 an inclined

crack occurred after bending failure in that part without stirrups. For Beam G6

a shear failure occurred at pi = 40.1 t by destruction of the concrete compressive

zone a distance of 2 to 2.5 h from the support.

While for beams with point loads, which failed under bending, an average
s = bending failure load s reached
value of 3.37 was obtained for the ratio
allowable working load,

the value 3.72 for the beams with uniform load. Therefore also here we observe
 82.

the strengthening action of the load pressure on the bending compressive strength.

6.42 Crack Pattern for the Beams - The first bending crack occurred for

all beams at approximately the same load, from which the bending tensile strengths

of the concrete can be computed on an average, as ｾ ｢ = 43.2 kg/cm 2 (tensile and

compression reinforcing with n = 7.5 considered) (compare Table XIII, Col. 18).

The same value was obtained from the bending cylinders with ｾ bz = 43.0 kg/cm 2.

The pattern of bending cracks was approximately the same up to failure

for all beams.

However, a difference was shown in the crack pattern in the shear zone

for the different methods of shear reinforcing.

The different steel strengths of the stirrups only give differences in

the sums of the crack widths (Fig. 68) after the yield point of the BStI was

reached. The direction and spacing of the stirrups are already of influence on

the crack width under the working load, both at the height of the tension reinforc-

ing and at a height of £ (Fig. 69).

2
The most favorable crack pattern is shown for Beams E3 and G3 with

closely spaced stirrups at 45 0 (Fig. 69). Beams with point loads, E2 (inclined

stirrups, large distance), E5/2 (vertical stirrups, narrow spacing) and E4

(vertical stirrups, wide spacing), were approximately the same with respect to

the crack width.

Beams El with 3 bent up rods showed the largest crack width sum. This

can be ascribed to the unfavorable distribution of the shear reinforcing in the

cross-section as well as to the weakening of the tensile zone and the larger ex-

tension at the beginning of the shear crack connected with it.

For uniform load the difference in crack widths between the different

methods of shear reinforcing are more pronounced than for point loads (Fig. 69).

In the region of the working load, the largest crack widths for all beams
 83.

were approximately .04 to .08 rnrn under the value of .2 rnrn considered allowable.

The condition of the crack widths in different beams at half beam height

is hardly distinguishable from that at the height of the reinforcing; however in

the lower load increments the cracks are in fact wider than at h/2 (on the average

more than twice as wide). The values are given here compared to the lower crack

widths in Fig. 70 only for Beam E2. While the crack widths at the end with stirrups

of BStlllb grow approximately linearly up to the higher load increments, they

increase very rapidly in the case of the stirrups of BStI from about P = 30 t

because of exceeding of the yield point.

For higher loads the crack widths at h/2 increase faster than at the

height of the tensile reinforcing also for stirrups of BStlllb.

6.43 Stirrup Stresses and Stirrup Anchorage - Although stirrup elongations

were not measured for this series, the loads for which the StI stirrups reached

the yield point give a measure of the stirrup stress. For those loads the computed

stirrup stress was obtained (Table XIII Col. 22). The ratio of those computed

values to the yield point shows that the stirrups of BStI were only stressed with

about 1/3 of the computed stress. In section 7 we will see further indications of

the way the stirrups are stressed.

The higher strengths of the stirrups of Stlllb acted favourably.

The stirrups at 45 0 showed no sliding along the ribbed longitudinal

rods at their anchorage in the tension chord, as is often feared. This observa-

tion is important particularly because here no additional transverse reinforc-

ing of the tension chord was available as for the test beams in Section 1.

6.44 Deflections - For the beams with point loads the influence of the

different types of shear reinforcing on the deflection is hardly noticeable (Fig. 71).

For moderate shear stresses, the influence of the shear deformations on the de-

flections is still small.

 84.

For beams with uniform load the deflections for inclined stirrups are

somewhat smaller than for vertical stirrups (Fig. 72). The beams with bent-up

bars clearly shows the largest deflection.

Beams E6 and G6 show, after occurence of the shear cracks, quickly in-

creasing deflections because of the shear deformation which reaches approximately

the magnitude of the bending deformation shortly before failure.

6.5 Preliminary Results

Although we only have preliminary tests for this series, it can be ob-

served that the value of the different types of shear reinforcing can be graded

as below (best method first):

l. Inc lined stirrups, small distance between stirrups.

2. Vertical st irrups, small distance between st irrups.

3. Inclined st irrups, usual distance between st irrups .

4. Vertical st irrups, usual distance between stirrups.

5. Bent-up inc lined bar s .

The first shear tests of C. Bach and O. Graf in 1909 already (ref. 20)

show, that thin stirrups closely spaced bring the largest increase in shear carry-

ing capacity. For stirrups 0 5 BStI, a = 10 cm in 40 cm high beams an increase

in carrying load of 3431 kg. was reached per 1 kg stirrup weight for stirrups

ｾ 10 rom only 1343 kg per kg stirrup weight. Again, the small spacing between

stirrups must be indicated as favourable.

For moderate shear stresses of T 0 = 40 to 70 kg/cm 2 at failure,

the difference between inclined and vertical stirrups is not so noticeable, as for

the test beams (I-beams) in Section 1, so that in practice in most cases in the

future, vertical stirrups can be used favorably. If shear failure is caused by

the destruction of the compression zone, vertical stirrups are even adviseable

because they embrace the compressive zone better and because the compressive
 85.

force D at the endangered location remains smaller than for inclined stirrups

(Fig. 15). Clearly it is shown that even for rectangular beams endangered by shear

with ｾ ｾ or l/h ｾ Ｗ web reinforcement for half the shear was sufficient to
Qh
bring about failure under bending.

That the bent-up bars behave worse than the stirrups is understandable

according to the present knowledge of the influence on crack width and distance.

For a single rod in the middle of the cross-section and thus spaced widely, worse

cracks were to be expected than for closely spaced rods close to both borders of

the cross-section. The large cracks indicate more shear deformation, thus more

shear rotation, faster upward propagation of the shear cracks and an enhanced

danger of shear failure.

Compared to the tensile forces computed from the frame analogy, the

very small stirrup forces (about 1/3) indicate that in spite of complete shear

.reinforcing a larger part of the shear force is carried by the arch-tensile-rod

action, that is, the resultant compression must be inclined strongly. This is

only possible when the tensile force in the tensile chord does not decrease with

the moment but in fact is larger near the support than according to the beam theory.

A strong weakening of the tensile chord because of bent-up rods therefore must be

recognized as unfavourable, because then the shear crack width is already influenced

unfavourably by the steel elongation at the beginning of the shear crack.

In addition to this, the bent-up bars tend to crack the concrete in

longitudinal direction at the bending locations, they do not surround the concrete

and also do not actively help to connect the compression plate to the beam web.

Hence, for I-beams used frequently in practice, the value of the bent-up rods for

the shear safety is less than for rectangular beams.

Anyway this can be found in earlier tests as shown below.

6.6 Reference to Earlier Tests With Half Shear Safety

"
In the old shear tests of C. Bach, O. Graf and E. Morsch, which go
 86.

back to the year 1910 and which have been published in the volumes of the

"Deutschen Ausschusses fUr Eisenbeton" (German Committee for Reinforced Con-:rete),

the question of a partial shear safety was often considered. Mgrsch developed his

general requirements of complete shear safety from these shear tests. If we con-

sider these tests with our present knowledge, we find that at that time the crack

pattern and the crack loads were very much influenced by the poor bond of the thick,

smooth, round rods Ｈ ｾ Ｒ Ｖ Ｍ Ｔ Ｐ ｭ ｭ Ｉ In many cases absolutely no shear failure occurred,

but an anchorage failure because of cracking of the concrete in longitudinal direc-

tions. Mgrsch paid much attention to the results of the slipping of the longitudinal

reinforcing but only to explain the so-called secondary shear cracks that showed

up over the primary ones in the outer regions of the beam. (compare ref. 8, p. 117).

These secondary shear cracks occurred nowhere for the tests described here. The

bond has, as has been shown, a noticeable influence on the shear failure safety.

Therefore the results of the earlier tests cannot be applied without criticism to

the present conditions. This was one of the reasons that lead the authors to carry-

ing out new test series.

In those earlier tests, however, there are beams that carried more with

half shear safety than with complete shear safety, and it pays to consider these

again from the point of view of the value of the shear reinforcing methods. This

concerns beams Nos. 1124 and 1132 of so-called construction concrete (Bauwerksbeton)

of the often referred to additional tests in volume 48 of the firm Wayss and Freytag

(ref. 8, p . 196-218).

Beam 1124 (Fig. 73) had complete shear safety with bent-up rods ｾ 26 mm

and stirrups ｾ 8, a = 18 cm. Between the two point loads no stirrups were placed.

Beam 1132 (Fig. 72) had half shear safety only with stirrups ｾ 12, a = 15

cm. Here also the stirrups were omitted between the loads. At the top the smooth

stirrups were just bent rectangularly, thus according to our present knowledge they
 87.

were not anchored faultlessly in the top chord.

The concrete strength was practically the same for both beams, namely

ｾ ｾ 117 respectively 116 kg/cm 2.

Beam 1132 carried, with half shear safety, P = 75 t; beam 1124, in spite

of complete shear safety carried somewhat less with 73.5 t. Actually, Mgrsch

attributed the difference to a somewhat higher yield point for the longitudinal

reinforcing for beam 1132 as compared to beam 1124 Ｈ ｾ ｓ 2720 as compared to 2320

kg/cm 2 for rods ｾ 26 mm. and 2835 as compared to 2510 kg/cm 2 for rods ｾ 28 mm).

However, if we consider the pictures of failure and the described failure

pattern (Fig. 75 and 76), then we see that for beam 1124 a bending failure occurred

without complete participation of the top compression plate. Mgrsch wrote that a

connection between web and flange was destroyed more and more and one recognizes

clearly, over a long length, the horizontal cracks between web and flange. The

top view of the flange shows how the anchorages of the bent-up rods led to cracks

in the flange. Between both loads it can be seen clearly that only the middle part

of the flange between the ｬ ｯ ｮ ｧ ｩ ｴ ｾ ､ ｩ ｮ ｡ cracks on the web were destroyed under com-

pression. Therefore the flange had cooperated poorly for bending failure, which

led to a reduction of the internal moment arm z. Therefore the bending failure

moment was interfered with. The yield point of the longitudinal reinforcing must

absolutely be exceeded for a failure moment Mu = 56.7 tm.

However, the pictures of failure of beam 1132 (Fig. 76) show clearly a

shear failure. At the right half, above the shear crack the bending compressive

zone is broken upwards next to the load(in the middle of the photograph). For

the higher load increments the secondary shear cracks in the top of the web occurred

over the primary principal shear cracks, which only then develop when the main shear

reinforcing slips, thus when the bond failed. Already for 35 t slip cracks next to

tensile rods showed up. The accumulation of the anchorage hooks, led then to the
 88.

cracks that indicated an anchorage failure. However the slip of the main rein-

forcing in the concrete is the actual reason for the opening of the shear cracks

and for an early shear failure, as it will not occur anymore for the present ribbed

reinforcing rods.

There was not yet any danger of bending failure here because the flange

was connected quite well to the web thanks to the strong stirrups which held safely

between the loads up to occurrence of shear failure although the necessary stirrups

were not present. The main reinforcing had not yet reached the yield point for a

failure moment of 57.8 tm, it occurred only for M 59.3 tm. The difference in the

yield point of the main reinforcing had increased the bending failure loads so far

that here a shear failure could occur, which however is not yet a proof for the

necessity of complete shear safety.

 7. INFLUENCE OF THE WEB WIDTH ON THE SHEAR CARRYING CAPACITY

OF T-BEAMS WITH WEAK STIRRUP REINFORCING

(July 1962, Pages 161 - 173)

7.1 Introduction

According to the present specifications, which limit the allowable shear

stress entirely by the allowable shear stress ｾ 0' we can assume that the shear

carrying capacity for T-beams must be proportional to the web width b O for further

equal variables. In fact the tests of ｍ ｾ ｲ ｳ ｣ and Graf described in Volume 10

DA fEb (Ref. 20) which were the basis for DIN 1045, indicate an approximately linear

relationship between failure load and web width (Fig. 77). Really there it con-

cerned, as indicated in (Ref. 21), not an actual shear failure but an anchorage

failure which in the beginning can be distinguished by the crack and failure picture.

The next series of tests shall indicate the actual influence of the web width bO

excluding anchorage disturbances. The beams were reinforced with vertical stirrups

only which were designed for half the shear force. The loadings, slenderness and

main reinforcing ratios were chosen such that according to the present knowledge

as much as possible a distinct shear failure danger was present.

7.2 Tests and Data on the Test Beams

Two series were tested: Series ET Point Loads - T-Beams, four each

Series GT Uniform Loads - T-Beams, six each

The dimensions, the reinforcing and the method of loading can be found

in Fig. 78.

Starting from a rectangular cross section b = 30 cm, d = 35 cm (Beam No.1)

the web width was decreased to 15 cm, to 10 cm and 5 cm and the width of the 7.5 cm

thick compression flange was held constant at b = 30 cm. For the beams with only
89.
 90.

a 5 em. web width a low flange of 10 em width was necessary to accommodate the

longitudinal reinforcing.

For the series E both point loads were placed a distance a = 1.05 m from

the support which corresponds for shear for a still unfavourable M/Qh = a/h 105/30

3.5. The slenderness of the beams, governing for uniform load, amounted to l/h = 10.

The tensile reinforcing of all beams consisted of 4 straight rods Q 20 mm

of Rippentorstahl (BSt IIIb). The reinforcing ratio amounted to ｾ 100 Fe/bh =

1.36%. The anchorage length with 20 em was more than the required length of 6d

6 x 2.0 - 12 em. for concrete ribbed rods. To avoid anchorage failures the cantilevered

beam ends were reinforced with 4 additional stirrups Q 6 St IIIb.

Shear reinforcing consisted throughout of double vertical stirrups of

round steel Q 6 mm (BSt I) that embraced the longitudinal reinforcing and were bent

perpendicularly at the top or provided with hooks. For beams with point loads the

stirrup spacing in the span was uniform with a = 11 em; for the beams with uniform

load the stirrups were distributed with an equal number in one half of the beam

corresponding to the shear diagram, and in the other end however with equal a = 15 em,

to test the influence of the simple distribution of stirrups often chosen in practice

(Fig. 78). The cross section of the stirrups corresponds only to approximately 45%

of the required shear safety according to DIN 1045 for the allowable working load.

Since beams GT 3 and GT 4 failed early under shear in the beam half with equal

stirrup distances, later on two further test beams were constructed where the

distance between stirrups on both sides was incremented according to the shear

diagram (GT 3/2 and GT 4/2).

7.21 Computed Stresses under Working Load

The working load was taken to be the allowable load g ｾ p according to

the classic reinforced concrete theory (n = 15) according to DIN 1045.

 Tabelle XV. Zusernmenstcllung dee Ergebnisse dee Schubversucbe BDT -Bclkee mit veranderlicbce Stegbrene

Abme,nuagea:' = 3,00 m; b = 30 cm; do = 7.5 em Zugbewehruug : 4" 20 BSt II1b mit F. = 12,2'1 eme, It = Ｑ Ｎ Ｓ Ｖ ｾ ｾ I}
I' = 0,20 m; d = 35 em; h = 30 em Druckbewehrung: 2 C 8 BSt 1I1b mit F/ = 1,2:2 em I, p' = ｏ ｴ ｂ ｾ ｾ I)

4 J 5 I 6 1- 7 I 8 1 9 i 10 I II 1 12 I L3 I L\. I 15 I 16 I L7 I 18 1 19 I 20 2L 22 23 Ｒ

Rechenweete lur aul. 0" each DI:'i 1015. mit n = 1.; Yeesuchscegcbnis
Sehubbeweheung

Rez.
Bela-
stung bo p. aul. 0"
0 .. 1)
rechn.
rechn. Gtnu
un tcr g+p
zul. CJt TJ u3 )
rechn, ovnu
ｾ Ｇ flJll rJb, l'y Qu4 ) I b:i.m
"j
My
bzw.
rechn. 5= Brucbart
(Inter- lU g jo p Pg+ p unter To (il;e. (Bal. Bruch ,Usc
GtDi,i ;\1,.
licks
I eecb rs po llert]
JUg+'P
links I rech ta links I eech ts
gung) ken)
I b;L
Bruch
recht s ｾ

, I, I,
em , Ikg/cm'I ks/em'l ,m-I I kg/em' Tｫ Ｎ Ｏ ･ ｾ I kl!/cm r tm I k.g/em' I I k.g/eml tm I kg/em' I
ET1 30 o 6 BS, I 285 96 5,08 9,68 1630 6,3 3460 0,·10 0,·10 2,!5 30,0 28 1·1,45 L8,7 Ｑ ｾ Ｌ Ｙ LO 200 ｾ Ｎ Ｙ Biegebruch
'"
..;
• = 11 em 1 '0
ET2 15 ,. 285 96 4,80 9,14 15LO U,8 32·10 0,43 0,43 1,79 36,0 26,3 L3,45 34,6 14,02 9500 2,93 Sehubbruch. Zerstorung dee Druck.
!I zone uebeu Laareintr-agun g
• I.e:
·
ET 3 10 285 96 4,67 8,90 L470 L7,2 3L60 O,H ｏ Ｌ ｾ 1,63 40,0 25,5 13.00 50,0 L3,55 9 L60 2.90 Schubbruch. ｆ ｬ ｩ ･ ｬ ｬ ｾ dee Bugel, dane
" ZerstonlDg des StegbctonJ und del
] Drucluoae

ET4
•
iJ 5 285 96 4,50 8,58 1400 33,0 3030 0,16 0,46 1,05 30,6 19,8 10,LO 77,0 LO,50 7050 2,33 Schubbruch. Zerstorung des ｓ ｬ ･ ｧ ･
" - nacb dem FlieOea dee Bugel
I I
GT1 30 iii 6 BS, I Die5elbe 251 87 4,60 12,28 1480 8,0 5-100') 3000 0,26') 0,46 2,55 35,S 48,0 24,60 32,3 LM5 12000 4,01 Biegebruch
• = 15 em ｂ ｵ ｾ ･ ｬ ｡ ｮ ｺ ｂ ｨ
linlu
..
-
GT2 15 eutapre... 251 87 4,35 11,60 1370 H,9 5040 2800 0.28 0,50 2,21 4'1,5 46,0 23,45 60,4 17,59 II 300 4,04 Blegebruch
0 cbeud dee
GT 3/1
/I
LO .. Querkrolt.
linie ver...
HI 87 4,22 11,28 1330 21,7 4880 2710 0,29 0,51 1,50 36,8 34,4 17,60 67,7 13,20 8450 3,L2 I Sebubbrucb. Zeratceung des Steges
uacb dem FlieOea dee Bugel, reil-
-/.e: teilt weuel'VerankerungJbruch

GT4/1
ｾ
· 5 .. 251 87 4,08 10.90 1270 41,S 4660 2590 0,30 0,54 1,16 33,8 29,4 15,05 110,8') 11,29 7 150 2.76 Scbubbruch. Zeestdeung des
uaeb dem FlieBeD dee Bagel
St eges

GT 3/2
<3 10 Dieselbe Btlgelanzahl wie 287 97 4,67 12,45 1470 24,0 3000 3000 0,'16 0,46 1,35 33,L 47,2 24,00 92,3 18,00 II 300 3,85 Biegebrueh
bei GT 1-4 rechts und
GT4/2 5 link5 eetsprechead rler 287 97 4,53 12,08 1420 46,1 2890 2890 0,48 0,48 0,71 20,6 36,0 18,35 135,2') 13,76 8780 3.04 Sehubbruch. Schlagartige Zerstorung
Q-Li.a..ie verteilt del Steges duecb scbielea Decck

. It
•) t>ezogeD oul b. .) sui. a,BO - 1400 kg/om'. I) "" AbolAlld 2' vom AulIage r.
I) zuL rJ. _ 2400 kg/om'. I) Eigeoagewioht be1'iieksiehtigt. .) _beD de. AullagerventirkuDg.

-
\0
 92.

TABLE XVI Composition and

Strength of the Concrete

Cement PZ475 226 Kg/m3

Quartz powder 120 Kg/m3
Water 199 Kg/m3

Water/Cement Ratio (to Cement and Quartz Powder Combined)

0.58
Flow 35 cm
Air Content 2.3%
Weight of consolidated concrete 2270 Kg/m

Average Strengths
Kg/cm 3 Beams ET Beams GT Beam GT/2

ftw 285 251 287

,t!p 230 207 227

Pbz 41.9 37.9 45.4

flc 262 267

ftc /,8w 0.92 0.93

,8 p //sw 0.81 0.80 0.79

 93.

Governing is the allowable ｾ b , which here was interpolated linearly

for the actual available concrete strength between the values for B 225 and B 300

(compare column 7 in Table XV). The working load moments (M g ｾ p) are shown in

column 8. Since the computed neutral surface for Case II lies below the compression

flange, the working load moments decrease for equal concrete strengths with the re-

duction of the web width.

At the working load the main reinforcing was stressed approximately 60%

of the allowable with ｾ = 1400 kg/cm 2 as compared to the allowable q- e = 2400

kg/cm 2.

This overdesigning of the longitudinal reinforcing increases the bending

carrying capacity more than the shear carrying capacity, and as desired, also the

shear failure danger. The shear stresses ｾ 0 (Column 11) for both rectangular

beams with r 0 = 6.3 kg/cm 2. (ET 1) and ro 8.0 kg/cm 2 (GT 1) respectively

lie lower, and for the beams with very thin webs (ET 4: ｾ = 33.0 kg/cm 2;

GT 4/2: ｾ 0 46.1 kg/cm 2) in fact higher than the top shear stress limits of 20

kg/cm 2(for B 300) specified in DIN 1045. The computed stirrup stresses (Column 12

and 13) depend only little on the web width. They lie intentionally far over the

allowable stress of 1400 kg/cm 2 for St I, with about 3000 kg/cm 2. For beams with

uniform load the computed ｾ ･ ｂ at the end with equal stirrup spacing lies even

over 5000 kg/cm 2 near the supports.

7.22 Construction of the Test Beams

Same conditions as under 6.23.

7.23 Materials

Steel - In Fig. 79 the properties and the stress strain diagrams of the

steel are shown (every average value from two tensile tests). Half of the test

rods of St I were equipped with two small gauge points as on the stirrups for the
 94.

measurement of the plastic elongation. For equal Fe 30 rnm 2 , with gauge point,

a srna ller ｾ S and ｾ z was obtained.

Concrete - The aggregate - washed Rhine gravel - were divided into four

size groups and put together corresponding to the sieve curve in Fig. 80. Quartz

powder 010.02 rnm supplemented the concrete in the very fine grains region. Thus

the concrete was mortar rich and not especially good. Properties and strengths

of the concrete are shown in Table XVI. The cylinder strength f3 c was obtained

from cylinders (0 15 cm, H = 30 cm). The average values were obtained from 3 to 12

single values.

The stress-strain diagram for the concrete was obtained from two prisms 10 x

10 x 53 cm compressed in the middle (Fig. 81).

7.3 Test Arrangement

7.31 Measurements - The following measurements were carried out:

Crack and failure loads;

Elongation of the stirrups with measurements of plastic set (gauge length

10 cm);

Shortening of the compressive zone at the beam top with plastic set

measurements (gauge length 10 and 5 cm);

Shortening of the concrete in the web in the direction of the inclined

compression under 45 0 with plastic set measurements (gauge length 10 cm);

Slip of the longitudinal reinforcing at the front end of the beams with

dial gauges (accuracy 1/100 mm);

Deflection of the beams at 1/8 points with dial gauges (1/100 rnm);

Crack pattern and crack width (accuracy 1/100 mm) at the height of the

tensile reinforcing and in the middle of the web.

Location and identification of locations where measurements took place

are shown in Figs. 82 and 83.

 95.

In the stirrups small gauge points were applied for the points of the

instrument to measure the elongations and can be reached from the outside through

litt Le pipes.

To obtain the inclined compressive stresses in the middle of the compressive

zone in the web, the little measurement plates were only applied in unloaded situation

after formation of the shear cracks.

7.32 Load Arrangement - The point loads were introduced over the complete

flange width by steel plates 12 x 4 x 30 cm3 placed in a thin mortar bed. The uniform

load was distributed over a width of 19 cm and over a length of 3 meters with 2

fire hoses filled with water according to Fig. 28 (p. 32). The supports consisted

of rollers on each end and could rotate freely and move in a longitudinal direction.

The load was applied in increments each of approximately 1/8 of the bend-

ing failure load with unloading in between each load increment (load duration for

each increment approximately 30 minutes).

7.4 Test Results

7.4.1 General, Crack and Failure Behavior - Three kinds of failure were

observed:

1. Bending failure; destruction of the concrete in the reach of maximum M

under bending compression.

2. Shear Bending Failure; destruction of the bending compressive zone at the

end of the main shear cracks.

3. Failure of the Web

(a) Under inclined compression; the inclined principal compressive stresses

"f:ii 2 Go reach the concrete compressive strength.

(b) Because of yield of the stirrups the web zone was deformed strongly

so that the inclined concrete strips were stressed additionally under bending and

therefore were destroyed for \ l II less than ｾ b .

 96.

Figs. 84 and 85 show the cracks and the kind of failure for the tested

beams.

The rectangular beams failed under bending for both types of loads al-

though the shear cracks penetrated very high up and the shear reinforcing was

greatly underdesigned according to present rules. Also the beam with uniform load

GT 2 with b o = 15 em and GT 3/2 with b o = 10 em failed under the bending. For

beam GT 3/1, which corresponded to beam GT 3/2 except for the stirrup placing,

the web at the end with equal spacing of the stirrups was destroyed by yielding

of the stirrups. Failure under inclined compression in the web occurred for all

beams with only 5 em web width (GT 4/1, GT 4/2 and ET 4). For the beam with point

loads ET 2 (b o = 15 em) a shear bending failure formed. A limiting case between

the types of failures 2 and 3 occurred for the beam with point load ET 3 with

bo = 10 em; the carrying capacity of the compression zone was exhausted (exceed-

ing the failure strain ｾ greater than 0.003 immediately next to the load

plate) and at the same time destruction of the web in the left beam end had occurred.

The pattern and spacing of shear and bending cracks depended only

slightly on the web width and type of load; nevertheless, for the beams with thin

webs, as expected, more bending and shear cracks formed than for rectangular beams.

7.4.2 The Load Carrying Capacity of the Beams (Dependency on the Web

Width) In order to compare the carrying capacity of the tested beams better

in Table XVII, the results of the failure tests were computed by linear interpolation

to correspond to a strengtht?w 270 kg/cm 2.

The failure loads are plotted against the web width in Fig. 86. Above

all, they are not noticeably reduced in case of a reduction in the web width but

stay approximately constant to b o = 15 em for uniform load and even up to b o = 10 em

for point loads. Only when the web fails under inclined compression, thus failure

type No.3, is a clear reduction in the failure load to be observed. As long as

 97.

the compressive stresses in the web are not governing, the web width is only

of small influence even when they are reduced as compared to the complete

cross section of 1/2 or 1/3 respectively, as in the above case.

Those results differ clearly from those of the year 1911 in Volume 10

of DAfEb by C. Bach and O. Graf (Fig. 77).

The maximum shear stresses Iro ' ｾ Ｈ ｆ ｩ ｧ 87) reached at failure, decreased

steadily with increased web width with shear failures from 127 kg/cm 2 (GT 4/1) to

33 kg/cm 2 (ET 2). For GT 3/2 with b o = 10 cm a bending failure still occurred

although 0'
87 kg/cm 2.

The failure moments (Table XVII, column 4) are again actually larger

for uniform load than for point loads; for bending failure by about 40%. This

is due to the support of the compression zone by the uniform load and the dis-

turbance free load introduction.

We still want to compare the failure moments for the beams with uniform

loads that failed under bending. They were:

GT 1 b o 30 cm; MU 19.83 tm)

)
GT 2 b o 15 cm; MU = 18.90 tm ) Bending Failure Moments
)
GT 3/2 b o = 10 cm; MU = 16.97 t m)

We recognize that the bending fai lure load depends on the width of

the web; partly because at failure the neutral surface lies in the web and partly

because shear deformation had a clear influence which can be derived from the de-

flections which for GT 3/2 at P = 40 t were 50% larger than for GT 1 (See Fig. 99).

Therefore the bending cracks clearly penetrated higher up in GT 3/2 than in GT 1 and 2.

7.4.3 Factor of Safety - In Column 23 of Table XV the ratio s = (failure

load)lall.working load under bending according to DINl045) was introduced which

can be considered as the safety against failure for the design according to

allowable stresses.
 98.

Tllhl"l1(" XViI. ｂ ｬ Ｇ Ｂ ｜ ｬ ｲ ｨ ｨ ｜ Ｚ Ｇ Ｂ ｴ ｷ ｦ Ｇ Ｑ ｜ Ｇ nllf ｉ Ｑ ｲ ｬ Ｎ ｕ ｦ Ａ Ｚ Ａ ｬ ｲ Ｈ Ｇ ｾ ｴ ｪ ｾ ｫ ･ ｩ {J. = 270 kg/em' ｵ ｭ ｓ ｦ Ｂ ｲ ｾ ､ Ｇ Ｂ ･

t:if!:rnf;r".·jl'ht herue1c:..,ichtigt

1-;-1 I I
;;::::;.-/ I 2

ｾｾｲＭＭﾷｬｴｬ I
brr-it e .
J\-r"IJ7.w.
J\rs ," )
6

0'11') = 2 r.
Hruchar t I)

- finlkrn

HI
El' ｾ
('Ill

no
15
tl

H.16
i
lin

r.ro 32,6
kg/em'
...- - - - - t - - - - - j - - - - -
17,7 );.4
65,5
niegung 1
Scbuh 2
ｮ 10 12.Rl 47,S %.0 Schub 2 u 3b
EH 9,95 n,o IJ'1I6,\) Schub 3b
GT l 30 Ｑ Ｙ Ｌ ｒ 34,6 69,'; Biegung 1
GT2 15 10,90 65,0 130,0 mcgung 1
GT ｾ Ｏ 10 B.lO 146,0 Schub 3b
GH/I 12,12 1.9,1 230,2 Schub 3.
GT ｾ Ｏ 10 16,97 07.0 174,0 Biegung 1
GT4/2 5 J2,96 127.6 255,2 Schub 3.
II Ddinilion eiehe Absehnh.t 7.11.
I) l"nl=rlohrc echiele Druekapnnnung Jrf'miiO Ah ... clmiU. IT,I, Ilild 15.
'I (;roOI('5 MOIll,,"l in Hnlkcnmitt e brim Bruch unahhiingig von dcr Beuchstelle.

T.h,lI, XVII

2 ()S/l Tosn = Qsnlfoo l

(t) (kg/em')

ET I 19,1 19,1
t:T2 f}.1t 12.9
f:T:1 7.0 16,4 i.M. - 14 kg/em'
ET,I 'l.lI 15.5
<;T I ｾ l,(i 16.1
vrz Iｾ Ｎ ｦ 16.2
<;T l/I (••0 ra.t i,M. -16 kg/em'
GT'I/I -1,(1 17.9
 99.

The factor of safety is remarkably high for both types of loading, which

can be attributed mainly to the strong underestimation of the bending compressive

zone for design with allowable ｾ for a straight line variation of ｾ ｢

It also must be noted that the safeties against failure for the first

three beams with point loads can hardly be distinguished from one another although

ET 1 failed under bending and ET 2 and ET 3 on the other hand failed under shear.

Hence, in spite of the slight stirrup reinforcing, the shear carrying capacity

was only slightly lower than the bending carrying capacity. Only for the 5 cm web

was the safety against failure reduced notably (s = 2.33) because the web failed

under inclined compression. Nevertheless safety against failure of s = 3.04 for

Beam GT 4/2 with b o = 5 cm must be considered as remarkably high especially since

maximum 1: 0 under working load amounted to 46.1 kg/cm 2.

7.4.4 Inclined Compressive Stresses in the Web - The compressive stresses

were computed with the ｾ E curve on Fig. 81 from the shortening measured at 45 0

in the compression zones bounded by the shear cracks. These values are subject to

error because the region over which measurements were taken cannot be relied upon

to give the average of the inclined compressive stresses because of the irregular

pattern of cracks. In spite of this the values for the ｰ ｯ ｩ ｮ loads (Fig. 88) are

close to theoretical values which can be estimated as ｾ ｉ ｉ = 2 ｾ 0 for vertical

stirrups according to Fig. 15. For ET 4 the largest inclined compressive stress

became 150 kg/cm 2 at failure of the stirrup which corresponds to Ｐ Ｎ Ｖ Ｕ ｾ ｰ

For the beams with uniform loads also (Fig. 89) the inclined compressive

stresses lie close to the theoretical ｾ ｉ ｉ values for the thin webs; while for

the thick webs in fact they stay below that. The maximum value was 220 kg/cm 2 in

the web of GT 4/2, or 0.9fp' That such high inclined compressive stresses were

reached is astonishing when one considers that the shear reinforcing was very weak

in the destroyed zone of Beam GT 4/2 (about 40% of the number of stirrups according
 100.

to DIN 1045).

In the case of the beams with uniform load the location of the shear

failures were in the neighborhood of the supports, thus in a zone of large shear

force and small moments. For the beams with point loads the locations of failure

were further in and higher up where in addition to the shear forces, still larger

moments were available which partly explains why the ｾ ｉ ｉ Ｌ remained noticably

below the prism strength. The compression supports were stressed additionally

under bending at their top ends, doubtlessly because of the large shear deforma-

tions and especially the stirrup elongations.

7.4.5 Stress on the Stirrups - In Figs. 90 and 91 the measured stirrup

stresses are shown as a function of the load. For the beams with point loads the

four stirrups B4 to B7 on each end (Fig. 82) came close to the average value; for

beams with the uniform loads, on the other hand, only the 4 stirrups B3 to B6

(Fig. 83) at the end with the incremented stirrup spacing approached the average.

Therefore the stress in the stirrups for both types of load depends very much on

the web width. In thick webs the stirrups only carry anything for higher loads,

because the shear crack formation, which depends on ｾ 0, begins later than for

the thin webs. Also, after the shear cracks occur, the stirrup stresses stay lower

in fact for thick webs than for thin webs. Compared to what can be expected from

the truss analogy, the stress curves run approximately parallel, a great distance

apart.

Apparently it is so that also under higher loads, the larger rigidity of

the compression members, including the inclined compression members between the

shear cracks, together with the tensile rod, hardly allows the weak tensile members

of the stirrup to carry anything, hence the frame with tensile rod action governs

and the truss only comes in the picture for thin webs, where the compression members

are not so stiff any more. Thus a large part of the shear force is carried again
 101.

by the arch or the frame. This carrying action develops better for uniform load

than under point loads, which can be seen from the uniform distances of the

stress lines ｾ ･ BU in Fig. 91.

Now it is very noticable that the stirrup stresses, for the beams with

very thin webs also (b O =5 cm, thus b

6), stay far under the computed
bO
\J e, B"u and at working load reach only 24% for point loads and only 40% for uni-

form load (decreasing up to failure). For the large beams Tl of Chapter II Section
b
1 for point loads at 15, stirrup stresses of 72% of the computed values were
bO
b
obtained. A dependency of the stirrup stress on bO shows clearly.
Only for ET 2, ET 3, ET 4 and GT 2 was the yield point of the stirrups

reached. The inclination of the 1rBU line corresponds approximately to the com-

puted stress increase for point loads; for uniform load it is generally lower,

which can be attributed to the q-y due to the load.

In Figs. 92 and 93 it can be seen how the stirrups were stressed differently

along the beam. The values of adjoining stirrups vary considerably, partly because

of the position and length of the shear crack. If we draw smooth curves through

the observed points then here also it becomes clear that the stirrup stresses in-

crease a lot with the reduction in web width. In the neighborhood of the supports

and in the neighborhood of the point of introduction of the point loads they are

small, partly even negative, because there the inclined principal tensile stresses

were reduced by the vertical \Jy of the force introduction. For beams with uni-

form load it can be seen that the stirrup stresses remain lower for incremented

stirrup distances (Fig. 93 left), according to the shear diagram, than for equal

distances (Fig. 93 right) .

The differences between incremented and equal stirrup distances are

shown in Fig. 94 for Beam GT 3. There the average stirrup stresses for the

undisturbed shear region C are shown as a function of the load. The difference
 102.

amounts to 50% which naturally effect the shear carrying capacity.

If one chooses equal stirrup spacing, then apparently the available

stirrup distance in the neighborhood of the support is governing for the shear

carrying capacity and not the absolute number of stirrups.

For beams with uniform load we see from Fig. 93 that the stress in the

stirrups decreases more towards the middle in the left half of the beam than in

the right half, although the stirrup spacing with a = 18 to 33 cm over the central

zone at the left is larger than at the right where a is constant at 15 cm. From

this, it can be seen that the stirrups in the center portion are stressed less,

the closer the stirrups are and the smaller the shear deformations are in the

principal shear zone. Therefore equal stirrup distance has little use.

7.4.6 Stirrups Close to the Supports - The large difference in the

failure loads of the beams GT 3/1 and 3/2, which differ only because of the stirrup

spacing, must be considered especially since it gives us an important result. The

failure loads corresponding to ｾ = 270 kg/cm 2 are:

Stirrup Spacing
Beams Left near Supports Failure Load

GT 3/1 Far 37.0 t

GT 3/2 Close 44.5 t

Fig.95 shows the quite different crack pattern. For GT 3/1 the fewer

stirrups close to the support were not sufficient to pick up the inclined compression

forces of the concrete strips between the shear cracks that start at the bottom

chord and so to speak bying them to the top; the main reinforcing was pressed down-

wards and thus shear failure was reached. For Beam GT 3/2 on the other hand, the

closer stirrups safeguarded the compression strips so that a bending failure developed.

Thus we see that close to the supports, close spacing of the stirrups is

important so that each of the narrow compression strips can find its anchor. Thereby
 103.

the stirrups can be weak. This close stirrup spacing is expecially important for

partial shear safety, because this is only then applicable when the web thickness

still results in a strong frame action. However, the frame consists of several

compression supports at the beam end. Bent-up rods are not suitable here because

they do not embrace the strips that are supported on the tensile reinforcing. The

narrow stirrup spacing in the region of the support also serves to help prevent

anchoring failure.

We must conclude from the test results that the proposal (Ref. 23) to

cut off the shear diagram at an angle in the neighborhood of the support because

of the q- y from the force introduction and thus to reduce the shear reinforcing
there, reduces the safety against shear failure and therefore is to be rejected.

7.4.7 Shear Crack Development - In addition the load and shear stresses

ｾ 0 SR' that led to the forming of shear cracks, can be determined from the

stirrup-stress curves (Fig. 90 and 91) where the straight branch of the ｾ Ｍ

line is intersected with the abcissa. This led to the following result when Case

II was assumed to obtain ｾ O.

The values for the beams with uniform load are somewhat larger than for

beams with point loads because of ｾ in spite of the lower concrete strengths.

It would be more correct to compute the principal tensile stresses in the uncracked

situation here. Nevertheless they lie only 5 to 10% above the ones computed for

Case II depending on web width. Thus, once more the inclined principal stresses

which led to the shear crack development did not reach the tensile strength of the

concrete which can be assumed here at approximately 25 to 28 kg/cm 2.

Note:

The stress lines of the stirrups (Fig. 90 and 91)can be approximated

by the following formula:

 104.

For Point Loads ｾ

To - ｾ ｓ
e B"u
.P-BU

For uniform load q- e B"u = 7:0 - T o SR - IJ)r

';uBU

The first formula corresponds approximately to the American specifications

for reinforced concrete and prestressed concrete according to which only part of

the shear force or the principle tensile stress respectively must be covered by the

shear reinforcing. There, in the shear diagram a strip of constant width can be

subtracted as was also allowed very early in the construction of reinforced contrete

by the Prussian specifications but which was corrected1y objected to by Mgrsch.

Such formulas lead to the false impression that the concrete can accept tensile

stresses after the shear cracks are formed. In actuality, however, the stirrup

stresses are not reduced because of the participation of the web on the inclined

tension, but because of the larger stiffness of the inclined compression strips

which are approximately proportional to bOo

For stirrup design based on the difference ｾ - ｾ crack the number

of stirrups depends to an unproportionate1y large degree on the web width. For

our tests, for web widths up to approximately 15 cm, absolutely no shear reinforcing

would have been necessary, while for beam GT 4/2, 50% more stirrups should have

been installed than actually were available. However the tests show clearly

that such a design for thin webs makes no sense and is dangerous for stronger

webs.

Therefore we will deduce other factors for the possible reduction in

shear reinforcing from the test results.

7.4.8 Stress on the Compression Chord - The compression stresses at the

top surface of the beams will be given in the research articles of DAfSt at pub1ica-

tion of the complete test value.

 105.

7.4.9 The Crack Pattern of the Beams - The crack pattern can be seen in

the failure pictures 84 and 85. The thinner the web the more shear cracks with

an inclination of approximately 45 0 • Only between the two point loads and in a

region of approximately L/5 in the middle of the beams with uniform loads do we

have approximately vertical bending cracks.

Although the reinforcing is not distributed especially well with 4Q 20,

very fine bending cracks with an average spacing of 6 to 8 cm occurred. Under

working load the width of the bending cracks were .06 mm maximum. A difference

of these crack widths because of the different types of loading or the web width

was not determined. Naturally the crack load (compare Table XV Col. 18) decreases

with the web thickness.

The shear cracks on the other hand show a strong relationship to the web

width. A comparison of bending and shear cracks of the ET series (Fig. 96) shows

that for rectangular cross section (ET 1) the sum of the shear crack widths

(measured at half web height) in fact is smaller than the measured sum at the

height of the reinforcing in the same area. For Beam ET 2 these sums of crack

widths are approximately equal to the higher load ranges. For Beam ET 3 and

especially for Beam ET 4 the sum of the shear crack widths is a multiple of the

sum of the bending crack widths.

The change in the steel stresses in the stirrups (Fig. 90 and 91)

corresponds completely with the increase in crack width; as soon as the stirrup

stresses, increase the cracks open. When the beams start to yield, wide shear

cracks occur.

Beams under uniform load show the same picture (Fig. 97). Since for the

GT beams the same number of stirrups but not the same stirrup arrangement existed

in the right and left ends, the sum of the crack widths on each end is compared

in Fig. 97. For Beam GT 1, no difference in the sum of the crack widths shows
 106.

because the stirrups were only stressed a small amount. For all the other beams

the crack widths at the end with the equal stirrup spacing in fact are larger

which corresponds to a higher steel stress (compare Fig. 91). However, under work-

ing load the largest shear crack widths stayed under 1.0 mm (except GT 4/1 with

,13 mm), which means the stirrup reinforcing was sufficient to avoid unallowable

wide shear cracks, even for thin webs,

7.4,10 Deflection - The deflections (Fig. 98 and 99) clearly show a

dependency on web width and on stirrup arrangement which can be attributed to the

shear defo "mations , One should especially notice the difference in deflection be-

tween beams ｾ 3/1 and 3/2 and beams GT 4/1 and 4/2 because this also confirms the

good action of closely spaced stirrups near the support. The influence of the

shear deformation becomes very clear if one draws upwards, starting from the center

ordinate, the bending line for a certain load increment according to Figs. 100 and

101. The beams of the E series show an increase in deflection of 50%; those of

the G series of 80% because of the shear deformation caused by the smaller web

thickness are for the G series because of unfavorable stirrup arrangement. Naturally

these shear deformations actually have no part in the reduction of the shear carry-

ing capacity with web thickness.

7,4,11 Anchorage of the Longitudinal Reinforcing - Anchorage failure

with an anchor length of 10 cm with stirrups was not counted on; correspondingly

no slip was shown at the reinforcing rods. Bar slip only occurred for Beam GT 3/1

in which a bar displacement of 0.01 mm was measured under the load of 30 tons and

after failure of 0,07 mm, This partial failure of the anchorage can be attributed

here to the horizontal cracks above the reinforcing in the region of strong shear

cracks which formed at the end with equal stirrup spacing because of yield of the

stirrups (compare Fig, 95).

 8. CONCLUSION TO CHAPTER II -- TEST INFORMATION

Tests II, 2 to II, 7 were carried out in the Otto-Graf-Institute

(Technische Hochschule Stuttgart) in the department under Professor Doctor Engineer

G. Weil by a group headed by one of the two authors. The test program was arranged

by the authors. For the tests and the analysis of the tests co-workers of the

Institute and of the University of the first-mentioned author have participated.

The author and the technical world is grateful to those associated with the work

for their troubles and consideration.

The funds that such tests require these days were made available with

foresight and in a thankful way by the Science Ministry of the Baden-Wurttenberg

county, by the cement association and by the building industry of Baden-Wurttenberg.

The reinforcing steel for all tests was supplied without cost by the Betonstahl-

Gemein-Schaft Deutscher HUttenweke, the cement by the firm C. Schwenck, Ulm, and

the Portland Cement Plant, Heidelberg. The authors hope that they have used the

funds to the advantage of the construction world and that the test results will be

used soon advantageously in the specifications to lead to simplifications and savings.

107.
 III. SUMMARY AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS

(August 1962, Pages 184 - 188)

1. Types of Shear Failure

We differentiate between the following types of shear failures:

1.1 Shear Bending Failure - The shear cracks go up so high that the

compression zone gives up quickly; this occurs especially for beams without or

with partial shear protection, but also for complete shear protection above in-

between supports of continuous beams.

1.2 Failure of the Web -

(a) Under inc lined compression for large t: 0, whereby the governing

inclined compression stress depends greatly on the direction of the web reinforcing.

(b) Because of too much stress on the shear reinforcing (occurs only

for reduced shear protection ratio). Under certain circumstances the compression

flange can also be destroyed later on.

1.3 Yield of the Anchorage of the Chord Reinforcing - This leads to

the destruction of the web or the compression plate before an actual shear failure

occurs.

Cracking off of the concrete of the web at locations where the rods are

bent up can also occur.

2. Influences on the Shear Carrying Capacity

The shear carrying capacity* of reinforced concrete beams depends on

the following magnitudes and influences:

*In the following diagrams the shear carrying capacity is shown as a function of
the obtained shear failure moment Msu Msu respectively.
or
bh 2

108.
 109.

2.1 The Concrete Strength - For shear bending failures the shear

carrying capacity, in a similar manner as for pure bending carrying capacity,

increases approximately with 3!t?p (Fig. 102). For failure under inclined

compression (lo2a) on the other hand a more linear dependency is to be expected.

202 On Reinforcing ｲ ｡ ｴ ｩ ｯ - Of the bending reinforcing and with it

on the elongation of the rods at cracks in the shear reach (Fig. 103).

2.3 The Quality of the Bond Between Reinforcing and Concrete - even

when ribbed rods are usued exclusively. For example, changing the longitudinal

reinforcing from 0 26 to 0 16 mm rods of the same area caused increases in the

shear carrying capacity from 15% to 28%. Therefore for high strength steel the

distribution of the reinforcing with closely spaced thin rods is not only favorable

because of the crack widths but also for the shear carrying capacity (Fig. 104).

2.4 The Stepped-up Bending Reinforcing - The influence of the elongation

(202) shows that bending-up the reinforcing according to the bending moment curve

for beams with or without reduced shear protection gives a smaller shear carry-

ing capacity than if the rod3 are carried on straight above the supports (test

results on this will follow).

2.5 The Quality of the Anchorage of the Reinforcing Rods Anchorage -

Anchorage failures were avoided knowingly for the tests mentioned here.

However, the necessity of a good anchorage should not be overlooked

because the steel stresses up to the end support do not reduce according to

the moment. Even a small slip leads to an premature failure somewhat similar

to a shear failure, It was shown that the anchorage length with ribbed rods

according to the temporary specifications (October 1954) with a4 = 6 0 is not

sufficient for rods spaced close together without shear reinforcing. This

anchorage length should be incremented according to the concrete strength.

 110.

2.6 The Shape of the Cross-Section - Beams with thin webs (high 17 0)
give smaller shear failure loads than those with thick webs because with the de-

creased stiffness of the inclined compression strips the reinforcing is stressed

more. The influence, however, is not linear (Fig. 105).

2.7 The Absolute Cross-Section Height d or h - Low cross-sections show

proportionally greater shear carrying capacity than high ones (Fig. 106). The

limit of this influence lies approximately at d = 40 cm. For h = 7 cm. the relative

shear carrying capacity was approximately 50% larger than for h 28 cm. For

testing, therefore, test beams that are too small cannot be used if one wants to

obtain absolute values of the carrying capacity that should also hold for larger

dimensions.

2.8 Tne Type of Load is of Great Influence - For all tests uniform

load led to from 20 to 40% larger shear carrying capacity, if we reconsider the

magnitude of the shear force Q as criterium. This comes from the influence of

the moment (larger for point loads than for uniform loads at the location of shear

failure) and from the load pressure which strengthens the compression zone. However,

since the working load in actuality usually is not a uniform load with uniform load

pressure, no general use can be made of the favorable results for this type of

loading so that the results for point loads should be considered for design. Tests

with partial sketches loaded uniformly are not yet available.

2.9 The Moment-Shear Ratio ｾ - which follows from the type of load and
Qh
the type of support. For shear bending failure the shear crack at the location

with large ｾ goes high up until the bending compression zone fails, thus, Q does

not alone govern but always Q and M combined. For a given Q, shear failure occurs

earlier when the moment that acts at the same time is larger. The ｾ at the section
Qh
which forms the top end of the shear failure governs. The shear force reached at

failure decreases with increasing ｾ , whereby the curves (Fig. 107) are steep to
Qh
 Ill.

M ｾ 3 and then become flat to reach their minimum at M = 7 to 8, assuming

Qh Qh
that the reinforcing is so strong that a bending failure does not occur beforehand.
. M M
Two regions can be recognized, the first ｷ ｾ ｴ strong dependency on Qh up to Qh = 3,

rhe second with a small influence of M for approximately constant maximum Qu'

For uniform load the limit between the two reaches is determined more
1
by the slenderness; for the tests it lies at h = 12 (Fig. 108).
There is no doubt that the enlarged shear carrying capacity for small ｾ
Qh
comes from the fact that a larger part of the shear force is picked up by the tied-

arch or frame action (the larger ratio of span length of the arch to height of the

arch, the stronger the inclination of the resultant compression). From this it can

be concluded that loads near the supports are less dangerous for shear failure than

loads at Ｇ ｘ Ｎ ｾ Ｓ ｨ

One is inclined to limit this region by a slenderness, thus to say that

short beams or box beams can be loaded higher in shear without shear reinforcing

than slender beams. However this is wrong for partial uniform loads or point loads,

ｷ ｾ ･ ｲ the higher shear carrying capacity also forms for slender beams when the load

is close to the support. Thus one cannot replace the criterion M by the slenderness
Qh
of the beam.

As long as rhe shear safety is established with the aid of the value of

the allowable To, one can consider the influence of ｾ

Qh
such that a l l.owab Le "10

for M o to 3 decreases and for ｾ » 3 is constant.

Qh Qh
For shear failure of beams with t 7 4 the section directly near the

support is never governing, but for uniform load always a section that lies from

2.0h to 3.Sh away from the support and for point loads the section next to the point
M
load which gets the least favorable
Qh
3. The Required Shear Protection Ratio

After the magnitude of M and Q, the necessary shear reinforcing for the
 112.

required safety depends on the stiffness ratios of the respective parts of the beam.

If we use the truss analogy, the statically determinate truss cannot be assumed, but

rather the many times statically indeterminate truss with different stiffness of

the tensile and compression members, the compression chord, the many inclined com-

pression strips, the stirrups and the principal tensile reinforcing must be assumed.

Depending on these stiffness ratios a transition forms from the arch action to the

truss action. Often the arch action must be supported slightly by the truss action

to avoid a shear failure.

It is easy to recognize, that in most practical cases for rectangular

sections or for T-beams a lower ratio of shear protection is sufficient according to

the present rules with web width designed with allowable ｾ O. If we consider the

covering of the comrlete ｾ 0 diagram with stirrups and inclined rods according

to E Mgrsch as 100% shear protection then often a 30 to 50% shear protection is

sufficient.

Primarily, the loads are carried off by the tied-arch-action which gives

a stiffer carrying action than the truss with the tension members that can be

elongated very much. The shear reinforcing only then begins to act when the tied-

arch-action is disturbed by the shear cracks. But also then in the truss the in-

clined compression strips are stiffer than the tension rods formed by the shear

reinforcing, so that a part of the arch action exists further; thus the shear force

does not go completely to the plentiful rods but partly to the compression chord,

and also for I sections to the tension chord.

The predominance of the tied-arch-action for the usual cases requires

that the main reinforcing (tensile band) is extensively carried on out to the supports

For a decreased shear protection suitable stirrups are better than bent-up rods.

However, the required shear protection ratio is not only dependent on Q

or ｾ but also on the moment. Therefore it will not be simple to obtain it for
 113.

sure. For this further tests are in progress. For the shear bending failure

a method will be shown using the shear failure theory of Walther. As long as one

does without the allow3ble stresses for the working load the required shear protection

ratio can be made approximately dependent on ｾ 0 if the stress q-e of the bending

reinforcing, which expresses the influence of the M active at the dangerous section,

is considered at the same time. However the L:o value beyond which complete shear

protection is desired is still to be investigated.

Tests 11.1 and 11.7 have given sufficient information on the top limit

of ｾ which cannot be allowed to be exceeded according to failure type 1.2a.

For high shear stresses and complete shear protection the truss action governs,

so that the inclined compression stresses can be computed sufficiently safely with

the aid of the simple truss theory with additions for the consideration of the

stiffness ratios. Surely in this one must consider that the full compression

strength of the concrete in the inclined compression strips can only develop

when the strips have a stiff support above and below, as it was given for tests

11.1 by the chord reinforced transversely and the closely spaced stirrups. For

widely spaced stirrups no full usage of the compression strength in the inclined

strips is possible as was explained in Section 4.

The tensile stresses in the shear reinforcing remain approximately 20%

below the values obtained from the truss theory even for very high shear stress, so

that the reinforcing designed for full shear protection is always sufficient.

Also for complete shear protection and higher shear stresses the modifica-

tion of the bending tensile reinforcing according to the bending moment curve

cannot be carried on too far, because also here a part of the shear force is

carried off over the tied-arch-action, and therefore the tension zone should not

be weakened too much in the neighborhood of the supports. For vertical stirrups

in a vertical section, Z is larger than B (compare Fig. 15).

 114.

4. The Suitable Use of the Shear Reinforcing Methods

The tests and the ineterpreted considerations show that narrowly spaced

thin stirrups are far superior to generally large bent-up bars as shear reinforcing(*)

because they lead to smaller crack widths and smaller shear deformations and increase

the shear carrying capacity. Bent-up rods lead to large shear cracks. This does

not mean chat bene «up rods should not be used anymore; surely for continuous beams

designers will be ｰ ｬ ･ ｡ ｳ ｾ to use them as before for coverage of the bending moment

curve.

However, as soon as the shear protection is decreased, stirrups must be

used because they are more suitable to pick up the inclined compression strips

than inclined rods because they embrace the main reinforcing which, above all,

supports the concrete strips. Actually for every strip, especially in the region

of the support, a stirrup should be there to serve as support. For T-beams the

stirrups are also necessary for a good shear connection between compression flange

and web. The required narrow stirrup spacing can easily be achieved with welded

reinforcing grating (for example bent-up construction steel mats), if one does not

favor Wendel-stirrups for small beams.

For the usual beams vher e reduced shear protection is allowable, stirrups

by themselves without bent-up rods are sufficient. Thanks to the web reinforcing

a part (1/3 to 1/2 depending on shear protection ratio) of the chord rods can end

in the tension region with sufficient anchorage length. Therefore, one can frequently

reinforce solely witn straight rods and stirrups and save bending up the rods with-

out using more steel. This simplification of the reinforcing is really advantageous

in the case of high wages.

Stirrups inclined at 45 0 or, in general, stirrups in the direction of

the principle tensile stresses for case I, at the height of the neutral surface

have the most favorable action and lead to the smallest shear cracks. As long as
(*) The favorable action of very thin closely spaced stirrups was established by
C. Bach and O. Graf in 1909 (Ref. 20).
 us.
the inclined compression stresses are not governing with regard to the shear carry-

ing capacity no large difference was shown as compared to the easier to use vertical

stirrups. Up to a certain ｾ 0 ' therefore, one can use vertical stirrups. However,

if ｾ 0 goes beyond that, then one must use inclined stirrups which cause the in-

clined compression stresses in the web to be decreased. For webs or lamella under

high shear the inclined stirrups also should be preferred because of the smaller

shear crack widths which result. The construction advantages are shown in Fig. 26

of (Vol. 12 Beton und Stahlbetonbau 1961).

The tests showed that 45 0 stirrups should not be especially attached

to the ribbed chord rods if they embrace the chord reinforcing.

The action of the stirrups to embrace the concrete is favorable in the

tension chord for the introduction of the inclined compression forces in the rein-

forcement and :inthe compre ssion chord for the increase of the carrying capacity. Bent -up

rods on the other hand have a splitting and therefore disadvantageous action.

The stirrup width should be considered more than it has been up to now.

In the tests only rather narrow webs with bO = 30 cm were treated. One can expect

that the stirrups for wider webs would show a similar good action, because then

the inclined compression supports so to speak are only supported at the side where

the stirrup forces act (Fig. 109)" One can consider them as small boxed beams and

their carrying capacity is created then when the concrete fails in the region of

the support because of local pressure, in cases influenced by splitting actions.

This consideration lets one expect that the largest stirrup width b B should be

made dependable on the inclined compression stress ｾ II and thus also on 7: O·

If one wants to make use of a very high ｾ 0 then one must use stirrups closely spaced

transverse to the beam axis, for example at 20 cm one must reinforce thick webs

with three or four sectional stirrups as we have done it up to now for wide beams.

If ( ; 0 and thus ｾ II is small then stirrups spaced at 40 cm or more can be chosen.

 116.

On the other hand the transverse distance shall not be larger than the beam height

h. The support of the inclined compression strips requires also longitudinal rods

in the stirrup corners which continue to the supports; therefore these corner rods

should never be bent-up.

Above and below the stirrups should always be well anchored. At the top,

open stirrups without hooks should be classified as defective even for ribbed rods.

At least at the top one chould bend them through 90 0 , or better, supply them with

hooks. Also for stirrups mats the top bend is advised; at least a longitudinal rod

for anchorage should be welded on near the top stirrup end.

Only small differences showed up between ribbed and smooth stirrups if they

were anchored at the ends.

For the stirrups, the steel qualities III and IV with their allowable

ｾ can be used if they are closely spaced (10 to 20 cm).

5. Proposal for Allowable Shear Stresses and the Corresponding Shear Protection

Ratios

As long as directions for shear failures have not been introduced in the

future one should design the shear reinforcement for working loads with allowable

shear stresses 0 0 . For the allowable T 0 the test results require a chart
M
modified more than up to now, which contains the influence of Qh' and which avoids

the unnecessary jump from none to complete shear protection when the lower limit

is exceeded. To achieve this a dependency of the allowable (;' 0 on ｾ

Qh
or kmust be introduced as shown in the tests. This dependency does not have to be

considered in practice when ｾ exceeds the previous limiting value.

For the allowable Y 0, the ratio and the type of shear protection one

can introduce four regions:

1. Lower region with low T: 0 (dependent on ｦ p) no shear reinforcing in

slabs; for beams thin stirrups without calculations, with the spacing

ｾ d ｾ Ｔ cm ,
 117.

2. Middle regions, approximately up to the present top limit of (; 0

with a shear protection which increases linearly with L: 0 from 20%

to 100%; shear reinforcing preferably with vertical stirrups, with a

spacing ｾ ｾ < 30 em, longitudinal tensile reinforcing not incremented

or only slightly.

3. Top region, approximately up to TO = 0.14 ｾ p with reinforcement for

the complete shear made up of stirrups or stirrups and inclined rods.

Stirrup spacing as in middle reach.

4. Extreme region, approximately up to L 0 = 0.18 (3 p with complete shear

protection of inclined stirrups spaced closely together, approximately

in the direction of the principal tensile stresses at the height of the

neutral surface for Case I, with an allowable deviation in direction of

+15 to +20 0 •

The allowable shear stresses and the corresponding shear protection ratios are

shown in Fig. 110 for B300. For the other concrete strength the limiting values

of the reaches are shown on scales to the left of the diagram. The best is to

draw such a table for every concrete strength. The required shear protection can

be read off immediately for the available ｾ 0 for a maximum Q.

M
If l: 0 lies above the valid limit ing value of a region for Qh '7 3, or
1 ｾ 8 then one proves, if ｾ in the region endangered by shear or ｾ lies such
h Qh
that higher values are allowable and determines the required shear protection ratio

for the points established by ｾ or ｾ and [; 0 in the diagram of Fig. 110. This

proposal does not consider several influences established by the tests, such as, for

example, reinforcing ratio and bond quality, to obtain a rule as simple as possible

for practice but still safe.

The limiting values of the lower reaches lie a bit too high in comparison

to the test results if based on a safety of 2.1 for sudden failure. The so far
 118.

favorable experiences without shear reinforcing for still higher values encouraged

this. For all other values a safety factor of at least 3 is to be expected.

The chord reinforcing must consist of ribbed or profiled steel. For

smooth round steel only the regions 1 and 2 can be used with a 20% reduction in

allowable ｾ O.

This proposal is considered to be a basis for discussion and it will be

desirable to obtain opinions, especially from practicing engineers.

The test results have led to knowledge which allows considerable saving

and constructive simplications for the shear reinforcing which can be used with

this proposal.
 REFERENCES

1. Walther, R.: tiber die Bearrspruchung der Schubarmierung von Eisenbetonbalken

Schweiz. Bauzeitung 1956, Heft 1. S.8: Heft 2, S. 13 u. Heft 3. S.34.

2. Laupa, A.. Siess, Ch.P., Newmark, N.M.: Strength in Shear of reinforced concrete
beams. University of Illinois Bulletin, No. 428.

3. Moody, K.G., Viest, I.M., ｅ ｾ ｴ ｮ ･ ｲ R.C., Hognestad, E: Shear strength of rein-

forced concrete beams. Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Dec. 1954,
Jan., Feb., March 1955.

4. Guralnick, S.A.: Shear strength of reinforced concrete beams. Proceedings

of the American Society of Civil Engineerings, St. 1, Vol. 85, 1959.

5. Sozen, M.A., Zwoyer, E.M., Siess, C.P.: Strength in shear of beams without
web reinforcement, University of Illinois Bulletin,No. 452.

6. RUsch, H., Vigerust, G.: Schubsicherung bei Spannbeton ohne Schubbewehrung.

Deutscher Ausschus fttr Stahlbeton 1960, Heft 137.

7. Walther, R.: The ultimate strength of prestressed and conventionally reinforced

concrete under the combined action of moment and shear. Lehigh University,
Fritz Laboratory Report 223.17, Oct. 1957.

8. Morsch, E.: Der Eisenbetonbau, seine Theorie und Anwendung, Sechste Auflage.
1. Band. 2. ｾ ｡ ｬ ｦ ｴ
S 216. Stuttgart 1929, Konrad Wittwer.

9. Gyengd, T .. Egresi, M.: tiber die Biegeschubfestigkeit der Stahlbeton-Plattenbalken

Bautechnik 1960, Heft 11, Nov. 1960.

10. Leonhardt, F., Andra, W.: ｆ ｾ ｣ ｨ ･ ｲ ｶ ･ ｲ ｡ ｮ ｫ ･ ｲ ｵ ｮ groBer Vorspannkabel. B.u.St. 1958.

Heft 5 u.9.

11. Rausch, E,: Drillung (Torsion), Schub and Scheren im Stahlbetonbau. Dusseldorf
1953, Deutscher Ingenieur Veriag GmbH.

12. Robinson, J.R.: Essais ｾ lieffort tranchant de poutres ｾ ｾ ｭ mince en ｢ ｾ ｴ ｯ ｡ ｲ ｭ ｾ

Annales des ponts et chausse2s, Mars - Avril 1961.

13. Leonhardt, F.: Angangliche und nachtragliche Durchbiegungen von Stahlbeton-

balken im Zustand II.B.u.St. 1959, Heft 10.

14. Walther, R.: Zum Problem der Schubsicherheit im Spannbeton. Schweizer Archiv
fur angewandte Wissenschaft und Technik, Nr. 9, 25. Jahrgang, 1959.

15. Rusch, H.u. Rehm, G.: Notes on crack spacing in members subjected to bending
RILEM-Symposium, Stockholm 1957, Vol. II, S.525.
 120.

16, Brock, G.: Effect of shear on ultimate strength of rectangular beams with tensile
reinforcement. ACI Journal, January 1960, Nr. 7.

17. Morsch, E.: Die Ermittlung des Eruchmomentes von Spannbetonbalken, B.u.St. 1950
Heft 70

18. Rusch. H.: Versuche zur Festigkeit der Biegedruckzone. Heft 120 d. DAfSt.,
Berlin 1955.

19. Maodyo K,G.: An investigation of reinforced concrete beams failing in shear.

ｾ ｨ Ｎ ｄ Thesis, University of Illinois 1953.

20. Bach. C., u. Graf. 0.: Versuche mit Eisenbeton-Balken zur Ermittlung der Wider-
standstahigkeit ｶ ･ ｲ ｳ ｣ ｨ ｩ ･ ､ ･ ｮ ｾ Bewchrung gegen Schubkrafe. Deutscher AusschuB fur
Eisenbeton Heft 10.

21. Leonhardt, F., u. Walcher, R.: Versuche an Plattenbalken mit hoher Schubbeanspru-
churrg Heft des JeL,t&chen Aus s chus s es fur Stahlbeton in Vorbereitung.

22. Bay, H.: Schubbewehrung und Bruchsicherheit beim Stahlbetonbalken, B.u.St.

1957, S. 161.

23. Bay, H.: Die Schubkraftflacte und ihre Verminderung durch die lotrechten Balken-
pressungen, B.a.St. 1955, 3.79.

24. Moody) K.G.: An investigation of reinforced concrete beams failing in shear.

Ph.D. Thesis, Univ er s Lt y of Illinois, 1953.

25. Clark, A of.: I:i.agoLal t ens i on in reinforced concrete beams. ACI Journal, October
1951, Proc. Val. 48.
 NarATIONS 121.

The original German notation has been retained throughout. A list

of these symbols is presented with the corresponding Canadian units in brackets.

a = stirrup spacing in the direction of the beam axis, (s)

a = shear span length, (a)

b beam width, (b)

bo = web width, (b ")

B= nominal concrete strength in Kg/cm 2, e.g. B300

bending tensile strength of concrete, (f r)

compression strength of concrete by cylinder or prism, (ft)

cube strength of concrete, Ｈ ｦ ｾ

/?z ultimate steel strength, Ｈ ｦ ｾ

PO.2 0.2 percent offset yield strength, (f y)

D compression chord force, (C)

€ = strain, (c)

Eb concrete strain

€e = steel strain

Fb area of concrete

Fe area of stee 1, (As)

h beam height, (h)

J moment of inertia, (I)

1 = span length, (1)

Mg = dead-load moment

Ms u shear-failure moment

msu non-dimensional shear-failure moment

n = modular ratio, (n)

p load per unit length

 122.

2P = applied load in 2-point loaded beams

Q shear i ng force, (V)

S statical moment of cross-section, (Q)

s = shear safety factor = (shear failure load)j(allowable working

load in bending according to DIN104S).

u = perimeter of reinforcement, Ｈ ｾ ｏ

Xu = location of top end of shear crack in uniformly loaded beam.

Z force in tension chord, (T)

z = moment lever arm, (jd)

0= inclination of the stirrups with respect to the beam axis

o reinforcement diameter

reinforcement ratio, (p)

ｾ = stirrup reinforcement ratio, (r)

norma 1 stress

principal tensile stress

o--rI principal compression stress

stress in concrete

ｾ stress in .steel
e

cr;Bu stress in stirrups

cr: vertical stresses near reactions and load

y

ｾ ｯ ｭ ｩ ｮ ｡ shear stress, (v)

 METRIC EQUIVALENTS
123
The following is not part of this standard, but metric equivalents of all
the dimensional val ucs in this code and metric conversions of non-
homogeneous equations arc given below for the convenience of users.
Note that concrete strengths arc based on standard 6 x 12-in. (15 x 30-
cm) cylinders and steel strengths upon the minimum specified yield
strength.

METRIC EQUIVALENTS OF DIMENSIONAL UNITS

Length Stress (pressure)
English Metric English Metric
1 in. 2.54 em 1 psi 0.07031 kg per sq em
150 psi 10.5 kg per sq em
0.01 in. 0.25 mm
0.015 in. 0.38mm 200 psi 14.1 kg per sq em
0.04 in. 1.02 mm 350 psi 24.6 kg per sq em
% in. 6.35 mm 500 psi 35.2 kg per sq em
ｾ in. 9.52 mm
2,500 psi 176 kg per sq em
¥z in. 1.27 em
1.90 em 3,000 psi 211 kg per sq em
% in.
1 3/8 in. 3.49 em 3,500 psi 246 kg per sq em
1% in. 3.81 em 4,000 psi 281 kg per sq em
2 in. 5.08 em 5,000 psi 352 kg per sq em
2% in. 6.35 em
3 in. 7.62 em 10,000 psi 703 kg per sq em
3% in. 8.89 em 16,000 psi 1,125 kg per sq em
4 in. 10.16 em 17,000 psi 1,195 kg per sq em
5 in. 12.70 em 18,000 psi 1,266 kg per sq em
6 in. 15.24 em 19,000 psi 1,336 kg per sq em
8 in. 20.32 em
10 in. 25.40 em 20,000 psi 1,406 kg per sq em
12 in. 30.5 em 1,687 kg per sq em
24,000 psi
18in. 45.7 em
30,000 psi 2,109 kg per sq em
20 in. 50.8 em
33,000 psi 2,320 kg per sq em
24 in. 61.0 em
30 in. 76.2 em 40,000 psi 2,812 kg per sq em

1ft 0.3048 m 50,000 psi 3,516 kg per sq em

3ft 0.914 m 60,000 psi 4,219 kg per sq em
10 ft 3.05 m
75,000 psi 5,273 kg per sq em
12 ft 3.66 m
87,000 psi 6,117 kg per sq em
12 ft 6 in. 3.81 m
38.1 m 145,000 psi 10,195 kg per sq em
125 ft
29,000,000 psi 2,039,000 kg per
Weight* sqem
lIb per ell ft 0.016 t per ell m
70 Ib per ell ft 1.121 t per ell m Temperature
90 lb per ell ft 1.442 t per ell m 40 F 4C
145 Ib per ell it 2.323 t per ell m 50 F 10C
155 Ib per ell it 2.482 t per ell m 100 F 38C
150 F 65C
·t = 1000 kg

Cylinder Bar size and area

6 x 12 in. 15 x 30 em Bar Diameter, Area,
Size mm sq em
#2 6.35 0.32
Shear and tension #3 9.52 0.71
"VV psi = 0.265 "VV kg per sq em #4
#5
12.70
15.88
1.29
2.00
#6 19.05 2.84
Moment of inertia #7 22.22 3.87
1 in.' = 41.62 em' #8 25.40 5.10
#9 28.65 6.45
#10 32.26 8.19
Wire size #11 35.81 10.06
#10 Wire 3.43 mm diameter #14S 43.00 14.52
#4 Wire 5.72 mm diameter #18S 57.33 25.81

From: American Concrete Institute Standard Building Code, 1963

 Direct ion of ｾ (Compression Stresses)

c J
124
I I
ｾＮ｟ｉｔＭｾｉＧＭＭﾷＺ｣ＮＭＮＬ｟ＭＭＮＮＡＮＮＮ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｌ Ｎ Ａ Ｍ Ｌ Ｎ Ｎ Ｍ

ＺＺＯＰ｜Ｆ､ｃｾｾｾ .
ｴ ｾ Ｇ Ｚ ｊ ｴ Ｑ ｔ ｾ ﾫ ｴ ｾ ｾ Ｇ ［ Ｇ Ｑ __ｾ ｾ
, I I / d,-a
I I Hichlllngronif
I
1 2 JＨ Ｎ ｾ ｬ ｉ ｧ ｳ ｰ ｡ ｮ ｮ ｬ ｬ ｮ ｧ ･ ｮ

Na rma/3pannungen uno ｊ ｣ Ｌ ｾ ｵ ｢ ｳ ｰ ｡ ｮ ｮ ｵ ｮ Ａ ｊ ･ Norma I and S hear Stresses

Schf/iH 1-1 ii-if J-J

Principal St res s es f./auplspunnungen
Ｇ Ｚ ｜ ｉ ;ｵ ｾ Ｏ1\ ｾ ｲ li-d,
ｾ .. Ｚ
ｪ ｾ ｾ +

Fig. I Magnitude and direction of the principal stresses for beams with
uniform load in Case I.

Fig. 2 Idealized stress Jistribution in Case II. = - a-rI = '-0 only <If
possible if cracks as well as shear reinforcing are at 45 degrees.

ｾＺ kleine't'
Possibly Small ,-

Fig. 3 Arch and frame action: the shear stresses are limited to the
compression zone.
 125

ｲ ｲ ｴ ］ ｾ ］ ］ ］ ｩ ］ ］ Ｚ ［ Ｚ Ｚ ｾ =f
.1 1
1 rJot" --7°-l
h
I- UtO iJ

ｾ Ｋ ｴ Ａ Ｚ Ｚｳ Ａ ｾ Ｚ Ｚ
I -. I ..ZOOO
I
J;110

f-to.ot
I

/
ｲｾＧＺＯＮ
n
Ｎ Ｎ Ｌ Ｌ

I"
L--. ｾＮ］ＮＡＡ
ｾ
EJ
'ti JOOO' ｾ［［Ｎ］］ＺＺＮＺｧＮＭＭＭ
fOOO. - - gloHer Hunris/oM,poller!
Smooth polished round
- - 0 Tors/ohf fO
- - - steel
SOOO - - - eng geripp/er Hanris/oM Round steel with closely
}(f1lcmz
"I' ((jelflnrlesfongenJ
spaced ribs (shrinkage ｲ ｯ ､

Fig. 4 The stresses in the main reinforcing do not decrease according to

the bending moment curve, they depend on the bond strength (according
to tests by R. Walther).

Computed Stress of the Deflections

._ without ｾ
Working Load ..----and ｷ ｾ ｴ ｨ Deduc t i on of Stirrups and
----,---,---,,..,0,,'_-, Sup p 0 r t s
kg/err!
soo/;

'1000

!JOOO
Stresses Value of n times the inclined
ｾ<:>...
-s ZOOO
tensile stresses in
concrete

o 110 JO If{} SoiGO

Be/as/ung P Load P
- - gloHer Hundsfohf,polfer!
--- Iorslcbl
- - cn.q gerippfer Hund-daM
( (jf,wmdes/ongen)

Fig. 5 The stresses in the bent-up inclined rods remain under the
computed stresses (according to tests by R. Walther).
 f10. ,e
i
ｾ
,j.:i::,
5¢1fJ SID/o
T il ｾ I: 1 l: I II I ij II I ! II I I: I r.l,
I .... -r
Ｑ ｾ Ｌ Ｚ ｬ ｩ ｩ ｬ ｬ Ｇ
ｴ ｾ '[tIl ｉ ｉ ｾ ｊ
I

ｾi "-'J'\Iｾ
a _.'
Ｍ Ｇ ｴ ｌ Ｎ ［ ｾ ｟ ［ ｟ ｟ ｟ ｟
a 18 8 8.1,
','
i

Ｇ _ _ｾ
Ｘ Ｑ Ｘ Ｑ ｾ Ｎ

ｾ ｟ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ Ｌ ［ Ｇ ｴ ｾ ｾ ｢ ［ Ｊ Ｙ ｾ ｾ
ＭｾｪＭｾＧｔ］ＺＺｉｌＮＭｴＺＺＱｴＺＺＺＺＺＺ］ＺＺｴ _'i=:

/
-"
Ｂ ｾ ｾ
ｈ Ｍ ｙ glatle Bdge, SI Dt0 i I '\
16026SID/O gerippte BOgei StDtb
ｾ Ｍ .-o.r-'-',0717 f--C /?t'..ｾ ｴ ｣ . ./ 5;';;,rv?S
Ｒ ｓ Ｇ ｾ

Schnitta-a
ｾｾ
-/-----11
ｾ Ｂ Ｚ Ｌ 7"1 ....... .,,;...1.1 Ｚ Ｍ Ｉ

1
Schmit 0-0 Schm'tt c-c

:]!sC---
f----150 I' 150 ·1

I,Ｌ Ｌ .,.,+ R
i I "'10 a-16,m

l ｾ Ｂ ｾ ［ ［ ｾ ｢ Ｆ ｅ ｾ Ａ Ｚ ｾ ｭ Ｍ ｾ I1
ｾ ｾ ｾ
II ｾ
ｾ
I
- -
1,10 je2¢
:I:

.:
ｾ

ｾ ｷ ｬ ｾ Ｌ ｭ ｬ ｬ
, ,

11
e¥'"IOSIUfO
I
" , .,>
¥'!f¢ '6StPlO
'\G -, " i I '" "
8ugel '"10 SID/0
"'----r----- 25 Z5
SO
ZS ZS
SO
a-16cm
25 i--- 80 -------1
g e;:;t-l
Balken T2
p

:;:
a

1 Ｎ ｾ Ｑ ｾ Ｌ ｾ ｾ ｾ ＿ Ｐ ｾ ＿I ｨ ｾ ｩ Ｌ Ｌ Ｖ Ｆ Ｈ ｾ ｾ Ｂ ｡ Ｅ ｦ Ｇ
!/iaiie Bugel 012 SID/IJ gerippte Bugel (>12Stm 0
!-""-'co7.¥- J!IIy3,cO
L..c

Fig. 6 The test beams Tl and T2 under high shear to determine the ｾ limit.
I--'
f\)
m
 II;:::I--------r-------,--------- Hi
127

stoo ｾ ,
I ｾ Ｚ Ｚ ﾱ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ［ ［ ｾ Ｂ ｓ ｔ ｏ ;ｨ laｦ 171,"1ｦ ｩ
¥ooo i

i
ｾ ｊ ｏ ｏ ｏ .: - I

i
____ J.
2000
ii
i
I I
1000 . ·1··
I
1 I

I
o 10 ,s
£
20

Fig. 7 Stress-strain diagram of the reinforcing steel of beams T.

ZSO..-----.---.,-------r---,----,
kg/em
ｚ ｏ ｏ ｾ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ

QS 10 ZS
Oehnungen c .
Fig. 8 Stress-strain diagram of the concrete of beams T, obtained
from prisms pressed in the center.

Fig. 9 Beam Tl in the testing machine with measuring apparatus

and crew.
Fig. 10 Crack pattern of beam T l after shear failure in the web, at the left ribbed,
and at the right smooth, stirrups.

Fig. 11 Crack pattern of beam T 2 after shear failure in the web, at the left ribbed,
and at the right smooth, stirrups.

f-J
ro
CD
 129

Fig. 12 Partial picture of the web zone of beam Tl destroyed by

inclined compression.

Fig. 13 Partial picture of the web zone of beam T2 destroyed by

inclined compression.

,f0Measurement point for Tl (Vertical Stirrups)

ｾ Ｎ ｍ ･ ｡ ｳ ｵ ｲ ･ ｭ ･ ｮ point for T2 (Inclined Stirrups)
ｾ Ｎ
f6,----nT""---.--.-------,--,---,--,---:>r -,-----,----r-, Other
Average ｶ ｡ ｬ ｵ ･ ｳ ｾ ｾ measuring
of the inc 1ine ｾ \: ｊ Ｎ Ａ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ａ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ａ ｾ ］ ］ Ｚ Ａ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ａ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ］ ＭＭＭＭＭｲＭＺ｣ＭＭＪＢＢＷＢＧＭＭＭｪＭＭＭＭＭＭＫＭＭＭＭＭＭＺＺ［ｾ
compression j-i- points not
stresses in the ｬ
used be-
cause of
web Ａ cracks
ｾ
lBo
ｾ
1Ｇ ｏ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｴ Ｍ ｾ Ｇ Ｑ Ｇ Ｍ ｾ Ｂ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ
ｾ fO

Fig. 14 Average value of the inclined compression stresses in the

webs for beams Tl and T2 and comparison with the stresses
70 and 270 and respectively obtained from the equilibrium
conditions (see Fig. 15).
 Internal Forces at Inclined Section (M and Q
act at Section area)

Inclined Stirrups Vertical Stirrups

ｳ ｣ ｨ ｲ ｪ ［ 8dgel 'nnere /r'rdffe 11m Jchragschnilf Ｂ Ａ Ｇ ｾ ｾ ｍ ･ Ｘ Ｈ ｪ ｧ ･
(M lind () imSclmill a-a a,?§mfel7lf)
Ib
J
!a
I
-.
ｾ

z
D
a

ｺ
/of
0.a-T
H
-T -Q
a
0.a.-Y-T
M
H e
Zq - T - I i
ｾ

"IL
ｾ

Z
I
a!
j

Zs -aii" z,- Q
L_,. ｾ
I
ai
Schubbewehrungsgrad: Shear Reinforcement Ratio
_ -"'s _
Il-s - Q'a.SlnY -!J.8

Q 'to
drs - IJ.s & b. ｾ - 1J.8

Internal Forces on Vertical Section

Ja itinere /(rdfle 11m fer/tka/sclwlt: ｾ

ｾ -$
YlQ 011. - : 011. -
ｯ
ｚ
Za - 4- Za - Jt. + 4- o
Os -}iT
a Os - O· iT
ZII Za

Inclined Principal Compressive Stress

r- ｾｳＮＺＮＺ［｣ｨＮＺＮＺｩ･ＮＺＮＺｦ･ＺＮＮＺＮｦＨＺＮＮＺＮＮＺＺ｡ｵｰｦ､ｲｵ｣ｫｳｰｱＯｩｮｬＯｮ

I dJl - O•.Qz - ｾｩ II dJl - 6 -&- I &7:.

Fig. 15 Forces and stresses derived from the equilibrium conditions for beams with inclined and
vertical stirrups respectively under the assumption that the chord forces ar'e
horizontal.

t--'
\.,-J
o
Ｇ ｾ ｏ ｏ ｏ 131

Fig. 16 Comparison of the measured

stresses in the stirrups with
the computed stresses as a
function of the load (average
value from nine locations for
measurement in the middle of
the shear reach).

I
1000 ............. ---

_oj
I

0 80 120 lGO lOll t

ias! Zp

;,j'.f!<,i - p fig a;, /Ja ｲ ［ ｜

Ｌ ｜ ｾ ｜ ｪ o"il ,｜ ｾ ［ ｜ - ....

"'\
.

'\Ｍ Ｍ ｉＧ｜｜ｾＭＭ -
\ >\

Ｂ ［ ｾ ｴ
f- -
Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ .--- -_.
Ｇ ｜ ｜
Ｍ ｉ Ｇ ｜ ｾ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ -1--. --.--_._- .- ----
ｉ Ｍ Ｏ Ｍ Ｍ ｾＩ Ｇ ｜
--- '1\-:-'｜ Ｂ
ＬｾＬｾ］
ｾ ｦ ｜ -f-- - -- -_. 1 -
-- f - ｾ Ｇ ｻ ｾ Ｌ ｾ -- - - - ' -- -/-- Ｍ ｾ ｾ
ｾ Ｇ -,ｾｾ ｾｾ
'\
__ /--/-- 0> ..' \ . " \ ._- /---
.... ｜ ｜
ＬＧ
ｻ Ｇ ｾ ｜
Ｌ Ｌ ｾ ' Ｂ ｬ Ｎｾ
/-- '-t -
..
ｾ ｾ ---- I - oo

ｾ ｾ "';:;:-- \
ｾ
ｉ ｾ j\ｾ
/--

ｉ｜｜
f'
}--

ｲ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ
u 21/0/5-- _';3 f!! ., '::3;" Ｎ

\ ptf?U 2/dd;Jao.";j f-- ｉ ., \

ｉｾｾｾ
\ \ \
-
\ \
｜ \ \'1
1-
ｾ 1\ 'll r--
ｾ Ｅ
ＧｾｴＧＺｺＮＮ
ｬ
1\ I,
ｉ f---'
Ｌｾ -- 'I'I -
ｾ ｟
I
ｉ ｾ ｾ
｜

Fig. 17 Summary of the steel stresses at different elevations in the web at any
time in comparison to the computed stress.
 1)2

Compression Flange

Concrete Stress

ｚ ｬ ｬ ｱ ｾ ｵ ｲ Tension Chord
Strain in
Bottom Flange

Numbers in Brackets Number of Measurement Points

Fig. 18 Boundary stresses of the concrete in the compression flange for two
load increments, 2P = 100 tons and 160 tons. Boundary elongations
of the concrete at the tension chord measured across the cracks,
gage length 50 em.

ｚ ﾥ ｏ ｾ Ｍ Ｂ Ｂ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｂ ｔ Ｂ Ｂ
kg/em'
zoo

'ｾ " reo ---

'"
ｾ
1t f301--1----1----+----+__.,.
Concrete "t
Compressive ｾ '" 801--+--+--+
ｾ
Stresses
""
o 80 leO
lOJI 31'

Fig. 19 Boundary stresses of the concrete of the compression flanges at L

2
 1:33

¥UDU -
0------> T1 (YtrllkllllJiij,""1J

¥U 80 1i'0
/'OS/ Zp

Fig. 20. Average steel stresses in the chord reinforcing at L L 'and near
the support. 2 4

Sum of Crack Widths

in Shear Span Measured
in Middle of Web in
1/100 mm

/'os/ zp

Fig. 21 Sum of the crack widths in the reach of the shear zone, measured
in the middle of the web for beams Tl and T2.
 so,

30
.':;:

Maximum Crack widths ｾ

1; to
""r.=
><
<:J 10
E

C 1¥1J

JS
--r
I

<:
F 20
0
ｾ I
':;:
Average Crack Widths c 1., ..
:.!
oj
.0
""
c.: ｉ

.'

Fig. 22 Comparison of the maximum and the average crack widths in the
shear reach with the crack widths in the tension chord.
 135

II
til
ｾ If if, if,
mm
- I g/oHt Bu!!eI /
20
.,M,
0; f1J
MppI, BiJ¢
0, JJ",
1/
I
' - T1 T2 J /
1&
" - - geripple Bilge!
<>--- g/o/Ie . / J
/

/ I
ｾ
ｾ
ｉ ｪ Ｍ ｾ ｾ
ｾ
?L >-
ｾ f 4; J'
/
4;
0,-
) / ｾ ｜ ｾ Ｈ V
ｾ｜｜Ｇ｜ｴＭ
8
VJ T
ｩ ｙ /"r.V
/"

IvV ｾ/ V
,J
ｲ ［ ｾ
7'
ｾ
\\ltO

/ ｾ ../' ----

ｾ ｾ
ｾ

u 90 80 1Z0 100 tOO t

l.as] e ,0

Fig. 23 Comparison of the deflection of beam T l and T 2, Influence of

direction and profile (smooth, ribbed) of the stirrups.
 Ansiehf
ja hI, !e ,
!h Id
I
lID
136
Ｍ Ｍ Ｗ Ｐ
--_._ t;: .... I
I
:>:!
I
I Rl
I
J 8J 8 101 ---fIJI
I I
1a ilJ III
Sdmtlt a-a IJ-b a-d.
1:: 30

ｾ ｾ
...,c

ｾ
--<

-I:>:
I <1-'1
;
,.
ｾ
..'-0
1
ｾ ｾ
.
<0
'"
ｾ ｾ
to
Ｍ ｾ Ｕ Ｐ ｾ ｾ
<0
-SO '" J8

Fig. 24 The test beams of J.R. Robinson

ｾ
tzBuge/- _
;8,a-J
ｾ

P Selin/if b-a

J/¥p
Ba/ken mif Jehrdgbiige/n IRe
::1
;0,0,-0
7;6
;0
rs
;8 - --
13 Bu'",e "-/_H
;8.a-¥

M
f Selin/if b-b

8
HO ;;1-'
;0 - -
-

Fig. 25 The reinforcing of the test beams of J.R. Robinson

 1. Shear Reinforcing, Present Method. Allow ｾ 20kg/cm 2

137
1. Schubbewcnrun!l. bish ｾ ｲ ｩ Ａ Ａ Art sot. to 60 Kg/em '

I
-1
I
,
Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ ｊ Ｂ Ｂ Ｍ Ｍ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｾ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｩ ｟
I
.--f.--r---l---v:-I----f--+-----f-jl-·b
I II

'Uw ｾ
II I I II"

Ｇ ｗ ｕ I

ｾ
,forizonlolsennlH
..._.,
a-o - - - - - - 1

I'y-
ｬＮｾ］ ｜l.
ＮＧ Bvoel Iii'.

I: Ｎ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ .. c. ._..,

Yerdtc!JIvng des Belons milTovclruH/ern erschwerl,/mne !lloHe Hul/e%sst

Compaction of Concrete with Vibrators is Difficult
Not easily reached space for vibrator

2. Shear Reinforcing Only with Inclined Stirrups Allow ?O 60 kg/cm 2

2. Sehubbewehrung nurr.uISellrogbiJle1n zu! to-60KI/cm1

.9
.... ｾ Ｎ ｟ ｪ Ｗ ｾ Ｉ ｾ

Vibrating Space
20 cm wide

HiJllel!losse
T- sC,U., ·ff - 1.91 tim

Fib. 26 Comparison between two walls with equal shear carrying capacity.
Top wall designed with allowable 76 = 20 kg/cm 2 with old shear
reinforcing method. Lower wall designed with allowable JrO = 60 kg/cm 2,
new shear reinforcing method.
 a

",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. Ｂ Ｎ ｾ
ｾ
H_"
ｾ
I'
｡ .'0======1 IL-l
"""¢;''''' "Do .m rrrr
Querschnilt

1ｯｾｾｾｾｾ 1 I I I 1I

., ｾ o,scmH6rtei i
i
L Jt1,.
.
I I I I I
］ ］ ］ ｾ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ］ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｚ ｾ ｚ Stl/[b.--r""1 "7 I

---+--
Stohlplolte o-10cm
ｾ -Ncdelloger .
l,---t== l/¥ 010 llf l/¥ --- ". ll¥ =:1

Fig. 27 Tests of rectangular beams with point loads.

Querschnift

feuerwehrsch/iiuche mit IP fIfO

Sfahlp/atte.
SOmm ｾ
ｉ ｉ Ｈ ｾ Ｍ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
l1e8rohmen -

- - - - - - - - - - o + o l · - r -l

Fig. 28 Tests of rectangular beams with point loads.

f-J
\,;.J
OJ
 r ｾ
B...

_ .I
1
I I

no

0,90
I
I m
CI

0.27
I
I, -
M/O·lt

1,0

LLJ
2 1,15 0.40 1,5
5 1,45 0,54 2,0
4 1,70 0.67 2,5
Fig. 29 5 1.95 0.81 3,0
6 2.35 1,10 4,0
7/1 UO l,SS 5,0
8/1 5.60 1,62 6,0
Crack and failure
pictures of beams L'9-J 10/1
9/1
4.70
5,80
2,16
1,89
8,0
7,0

with points loads

(the numbers indicace
the load in tons for
which a crack penetrated
up to the indicated location).
The Beams 4 to 6 were taped at
the destroyed side after failure
Load was . reached and loaded
again up to failure at the
other side.

f--J
VJ
\0
r
32
l Z7
Bee.

-
11/ 1
[2/ 1
I
I m
I

1,50
2,00
I
I
Zu

0,60
0,67
I IIfIQ' n')
I -
6,21
4,94

LL19-1ｾ
13/1 2,50 0,90 7,55
11/ 1 3,00 0.95 6,49

• • lj/l 4.00 0.85 4.28

16/1 5,00 0.85 3,92
17/ 2 6,00 0,72 3,04
17/ 1 6,00

.) im Bruchquerlchaitt

Fig, 30 Crack and failure pictures of beams with uniform loads (the numbers indicate
I-'
the load in tons for which a crack penetrated to the indicated location; the
numbers in circles at the bottom of the beam indicate the order in which the o+=-
cracks occurred).
 1,00
In
/
I'-"'"'
-...... ｾ 141
J 0,00 - -
1/ <,
0/ r-, T

WiD

0
1/
c:z
o o 2 J 5 6 In 7

o 5 10 15 25
Z/h

Fig. 31 Beams with uniform load; location of the point of failure

Xu as a function of the span length ｾ or the slenderness!
h

8olkenNr. 1
15
2 J • 5 G 7 s 9

kg/cm 1 tm
"--- +--+-- --+---+---+-----1$

9 ｾ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｪ Ｍ ,-,\-- ｾ Ｍ ｑ ｕ ･ ｲ ｬ ｲ ｲ ｡ ｦ ｾ odel'Sc1IubsfJOflflung 'to 10

I'

2 -- ｾ

o °L-...L--L--l----,J,--+----::-----!:-----;!sO
2 .I • 5 6 7
l1on l'!f1tenschubY1!f'hiiltnis th
Fig. 32 Beams with point loads: moment and shear force at failure as a
function of M
Qh.
 til I
142
¥m'
50
f-o :-.. I

-',.z:-h/z ,\
I

. I .

Il'
z-h
ｾ ｉ
-
r-.......::
ｾ
1
to
I

o
I

I J
, 5 m G
! I L
o s f5
ｾ
.20
10 Llh

Fig. 33 Beams with uniform load: computed value of the shear stresses
\rO = ｾ ) at failure a distance x = 0, x = h and x = h from
bz 2
the support as a function of the span length j or the slender-
ness .1'.
h

f2 .J!-
....... ｾ
ｾ ｫ .f5
ｴ .,¥
- Ｇ ｾ ｦ
ｾ
ｾ ｱ ｾ Ａ ｗ Ｇ 0

Qu
of2
ｾ
ｦ ﾥ ｾ

"""rr-
BalkenNr.

o Z J ¥ 5 G 7 8
"'omenlenscl1ubYeJ'M/lnis ｑ

Fig. 34 Beams with uniform load: moment and shear force at the failure
section as a function of M .
Qh
 ZZ,5r---....."...,--.--.,..-----r----,----,-----,
mm

I
I
17,5

15,0

gemessene
j Werle
I
- ----,---
i

5,0 ... ..
ＭＭｾＭｾＭ］
o 5 10 15 ZO Z5 t JO
last P

Fig. 35 Deflection in the middle of the beam for four

characteristic point load beams. Comparison of
computed (according to Reference 13) with
observed values.

Fig. 36 Condition of the surface of the used steel with

different bond. Rippentorstahl StllIb; smooth,
drawn machine construction steel St37K.
 YerllJlungsplalie 7"9'200_" 144

IPIfO
ｾ ｾ ［ ［ ［ ｲ INP ZZIJ
ZF!w'we/ndlI""""
(mil WaSSlf'"rIilHI

ｾ ｵ ･ ｲ Ｄ ｣ ｨ Ｂ lie der Dalken

GAl.fAl GOlfO' GDzEBz
HZf
1'fJ6
ｔ｝ｉｾ＾
I::; ｾ ｾ ｾ
ｌ ｾ Ｂ Ｎ Ｎ
2"'"
HI6
fl;;::
ｾＯＯ
.__.•'
1::;1
Z"'E5 ｾ ｛ ｉ >,
＼ 5"'"
''''6

Nipper/lars/aM Blanker Rundslahl DIn! Proftliet'U179

Fig. 37 Test arrangement and dime,sions of the beams with different

bond on the longitudinal reinforcing.

kg/em 2
__ St37K !/!25mm

ｉ
ｾ ｾ
ｓ ｴ Ｓ Ｗ ｋ ﾢ Ｑ ｾ ｭ ｭ
Torsfohf ｓ ｴｊｊｬＶｴＯＩＲｾｭｭ
ｾ Torsfoh/ StIJIht/)1'fmm
./
'1-000 ｾ

3000
f - - - - f-
V -1/ fｾ
ｾ ｾ ｾｾ
Ａ
-.l-------1----+-----1

Ｏ Ｑ Ｐ Ｐ Ｐ ｾ ］ Ｎ Ｎ ｟ ｟ Ｌ ｬ ｟ ｾ Ｍ ｟ ｬ ｟ Ｎ ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ ｟ ｟ ｟ ｟ Ｚ ｟ Ｋ Ｍ ｟ ｟

-V/
o 2 3 S %0 6
e

Fig. 38 Stress-strain diagram for the steel used in the series

with different bond.
Fig. 39 Crack pattern and failure pictures for point loads with different bond. I--'
+=-
(Numbers in circles equal number of occurrence of the cracks. Other \.Jl
numbers equal load increment for which a load has penetrated to the
indicated location load increment p = 1.55 tons.)
 146

'0
co
o
.-I
 P-pl
+ lYz +

I Ｚ ｉ Jｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ａ Ｍ ﾧ ｓ Ｈ Ｍ Ａ Ｎ Ｎ IＭ ｌ Ｍ -I
PI2 I

ｾ
/
Ｏ / ｾ
/
GAl
ｾ
/ / JLJ.........!.I
:

f 1.1 • , I f I', I I I r I li".0.

r der/liBbreifen in last- Ut t tierRJBbrtifen in
Lost- P de
ｾ ＿ ｦ ｜ ｾ ｾ ｾ Ｑ Ｐ Ｑ
IIf8breilen in I!tOOIllfl!. ｾ
t n*-!"" 1!100mm sture ｾ Ian' 1/I00mm '
sfefe in

3 V,65 7.0
r 3
ｾ J
1--4-
3
L I I 7-'-·'
ｾ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｂ
L
--"::r--l--'T- 'or -0" -0" 6 11
J5
Ii 6,20 1000 3 Ii I 5 ｉ ｩ 16 , ｾ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ［ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ 60
92
5 7,75 1290 3 .5 ｾ 5 I! 5 3 Ｎ Ii 35
5 ｟ ｾ Ｎ
ｾ
Iff
6 9,30 1570 2 ---.!. ｾ ｾ 5l-.l , -ｾ -'l .5 Jf 'A 55 Jf5l 2DJ
7 10,85 Ｑ Ｘ ｾ J 6 5 • 7 7 7 .5 6 2 7 6 5 3 Ii 2 §. 73 JTt&:i. <, 50

I EAt
ｾ
;;;a;UIi!/\
_._----
ｬ
....
1. TUO
I I I·
ｉ ｊ ｦ ｊ
I I • I • I iii
153 1 9 2 6
I
f
I
7 n
i
1617
j i /\:
I ｾ ＾. / /

ｾ. /
Ｂ,
/

Ii 6.20 1000 ｾ Ｈ ｾ Ｉ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ
!7 H ［ ｾ ｰ ｾ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｚ
5 7,75 1290 Ii 5 5
6 9,30 1570 3 5 I 6 -r6
7 10,85 18'i/J 'i Ii 5 1 8
ｩ
sＭ Ｍ ［ ｨ ｾ ｩ ｾ ｴ ｟ Ｑ Ｍ ｾ ｾ ｨ ｾ ｋ ［ ｾ ｾ ｾ ［ｾｾ
8 12,110 2100 6 8 5 8!to
9 13,85 2380 13 11 Ii -8 -1-10 Ie

1£8' ZS
4= ( ! j J Ii 2
ｾ Jf ZS
I
ｾ
ｾ ｾ ｾ
ｲ ［ Ｑ I,Ｉ 1 7
ｉ
6
----?- ____lip I 7'iO I J 15 ｾ __. ｟ Ｖ Ｌ Ｑ ｌ ｾ Ｑ .:..._ _ｾ _ｾ Ｍ Ｍ
Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ］ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ
.

-+-
--+-
ｾ ｾ775ｾ Ｐ 129.
ｴ Ｇ 7
__;'/0 15iO 9
13
71
V J 1000
_L. 1MIl. .13.81J_1f!
!J,JIJ 2
If- . V2
19,
2¥lI-------_'=:
38ｾ _----
k •
li5
!J1

1\-
66
23 §- ..

ｾ Ｒｉ Ｕ Ｍ
10,85 1M 80 i.---I..::.. 1M{). ,Jlff.1L J3
ｾ 8 lNa---zioq -?, 22 28 1 '1-'1 ,52 130

-H'ij= 23,0
Ｌ2,,0
ｾｾ
25
23
If.J
00 =
=.
II.!
125 ｾ __ JEM.o 211J0651\ I ¥5 .3i ｾ 181
--fa -iV 7
Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ ﾷ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ
13
Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｈ ｾ Ｍ ｾ ｦ Ｔ Ｚ ｜ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｾ __- Ｑｾｾ
. 228

ll=-'
21 75
r-W- \I'
==-
V 15.
ｾ 'i
•
35
V5 ----55!\' $0
105
ｦﾣ col 2&6

+ ｾｾｾ ｾ ｲｾ ｾ ｾ
ｾ OJ.
1.7<
_Ii,
Ii
-
53 ., ｾ ｬ ｬ
110
110 = 26
.---L.. 27.90 3210 125
-.1fl_J..1,,§Jl..J.§10 JJP.
\
\
1
1 75 .
130
17C
J16
JItS

Z( [ ｬ ｾ
ＧＯ

41 ｾ '} \'\ '" I ｾ

I 3=' -. I I
/ /

1£82 /

C8Z ' "

ZS .-J 5 2 J}, 3 f ZS
I I I .....- ..__
. ' -__
3 I ¥,6S 7M ｾ J Ｌ Ｌ
v ?K
7
+-- 3
ｾ Ｒ
9,JIJ
I 650
1000 5
In 5----4f
- -5 -------
- 88 .>
1/
7 <,5 - - - -ｾ - - -
I
32
-"-I •1 ｾ:1 5 ｾ 121iO 1380 101 - - - -1 R 7 5 59
ｾ
Ii5 7.75
510 1290
1000 5 0 15 3V
5 9,30 1570 To' 58 5 IHO 1750 25 5 ' 17 16 8 -------!f, 105

ｾ
II - - - -
ｾ!!.Iｾ 25
» 2100 ｾ ｄ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ 20 ｾ 10 ---iq

Ｇ
ＱＰｾＸ mo 13 - - -·'1 - - ; } ---R- r1§60 E=> 136
7 5 'i/J ---1
-.,1 _ Ｇ Ｌ ｾ ff}l\ _ _ ｩ ｏ ｉ

" "" ｾ ｾ "K · Ｓ.Atｾ Ｓ%1\ﾣ

7 2170 ｾ 30 32 16 171
8 1{,O 2/00 18 15 133
ＮＮｩｔ
Ｎ
---.-iil_ - -I 8 2¥,80 28'i/J 50 ｾ ｾ , 551\ 12 10 ===I- 216
9
10
13,95 2380 3., 12 ------ JJ
15.50 2650 50' - - - / 1 - - - 3 5 --
1 ---30
s» 10
21 ----71
6Q __
_
m
212 §ifＭ Ｑ ｾ ｾ ｾ --¥-I'
9
10 ｾ
Jf
V
50
90 85
---10
85 \-----i5 13
'----,3
2
=. 2.9
321i
ZV5 70 105 13 1
12 Ｇ Ｑ ｩ -fl/Ia Ｍ Ｔ 18ｾ .
-4- 'i IJO J'"
12 18.60 3210 8sl 8 28
31 78 ｾ 290 3 ｉ ｾ 120 \, 115 1 1 liSt

Fig. 41 Crack widths of beams with point loads with Fig. 42 Crack widths of beams with uniform loads
different bond (compare equal load increments) with different bond (compare equal load }-I

increments) . +=-
---.,J
 148

Fig. 43 Deformation in the shear

failure zone (shear
rotation) .
'%"
Ilild 43. Vcrrormungen in dee Schubbrucheene [Sehubrotatlen]

Ｑ ｇ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ［ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ ｟

mm
I

I
1 2 [ - - - - - - + - - - - - - 1 - - - - glaffer Rundslalll;-:--,---_ _-l
Bewehrllng konzenlrierl

Fig. 44 Deflections of beams with

§'
-!;» point load with different
ｾ Ｘ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ .. glaller ｒ ｵ ｮ ､ ｳ ｬ ｡ ｨ ｬ ｟ Ｇ Ｍ ［ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ _ __1 bond.
ｾ ｉ Ｆ ｾ ｾ ｀ ｾ
ｾ I I

¥f-------t---/-l-r- Beweh,,,ng allfgelOSI--t---

.i: I

RiPpenlarsrah/1 i
Bewehrllng konzenlrierl I
I I

a 10 20 30 t
Las! P
BUd 44. Durcbbiegungcn der Eineellaetbalkeu mit untcrachkdliehem Verbund

1G,--------,------,.------,------,
I
glatter /fllndslalll
mm Bewellrllng allfgelosl

glaller Rundslalil
Bewehrllng kanzenlrierf.
I
ｾ
Rippenlorslall/
g, Bewehrung konzentrier. Fig. 45 Deflections of beams
Ｍ
ii Ｘ Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｨ ｾ ｲ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ with uniform load with
ｾ different bond.

a 10 20 30 t
Last p-L
 ] ""SllI/'
30
Ｂ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｘ Ｑ ---I- - - - - 8 1 i - - - - - - -·1
I

-1-----------608 - - - Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｂ

Fig. 46 Dimensions of the beams of Series D. Complete similarity (ratio

1:2:3:4); equal building material.

Ｑ ｾ Ｑ ｇ ｓ ｦ ｬ ｉ ｬ

- - - - ·.....Z5
r----- 13S - - ﾷ ｾ ﾱ Ｎ Ｓ Ｐ ﾱ Ｍ .. Ｍ Ｑ Ｓ Ｕ ｾ Ｍ
! -
I
.0I-j I I
ｾ ｾ C31 I, C_,GSlmb
ｾ I
I<>L_gJ
I
｢ tiJO56.SW- .Z5:E--
- 180
..
300 ｾ ｚ Ｕ
..I. *0 ....t. 180
I I I
,
elf I I 9nGSIJlIb
.-J I
L
Ｍ ｺ Ｕ ｦ Ｍ ｾ ------------- - *00 ':;If ZS.

Fig. 47 Dimensions of beams of Series C. Equal diameter (G 16 mm) for

constant = 1.33%; number of rods variable similarity ratio
1:2:3:4 (width 1:1.5:2:2.5); equal building material.
Fig. 48 Crack figures of Series D (complete
similarity). Load increments: Dl:
.25 tons, D2: .75 tons, D3: 1.2
tons, D4: 2.0 tons

I-'
V1
o
Fig. 49 Crack figures of the Series C. (Similar
test beams however with equal rod diameter
for equal reinforcing ratio ｾ Ｉ

I-'
V1
I-'
 152

I
I Fig. 50 Decrease of the obtained
I shear failure moment
Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｬ Ｍ Ｎ Ｍ Ａ ｾ ｟ ｟ ｟ mSU = MSU/bh 2 with in-
creasing beam dimensions
(Series D with complete
similarity) .
o 7 ern /8

o qs u
l

Einu//osl
PloHt '-'-Zem P/z
odtr a-a-Zem
Fig. 51 Dimensions and loading of
the plate strips.

i Ouerbtwehrung L '

a--J ［ Ｘ Ｘ ｭ ｭ ｾ ｾ ｍ a
L. ..I

GOOO

kg/em:
5000 ...- l--
- ｾ ｚ ｇ ｭ ｭ

mmm
I---

- -
;; mmm

ｾ ｏ ｏ ｏ

ｾ ｊ ｏ ｏ ｏ f-
'I
Ｍ Ｍ
V-

1----.
I

_-r 1---

I
I
-.-
Fig. 52 Stress strain diagram
of the rippentorstahl
used (Test Series p.
Plate Strips).

3000
-+- I

7000

o 5 70 1.'S 0 35 D/DD J.'0

c

Fig. 53 (Omitted) Sieve curve for the aggregate used for the test for Plate
strips.
 153

Fig. 54 Characteristic
failure pictures for
the tests for Plate
Strips.

Fig. 55 Crack patterns

on the bottom of the
Plate Strips with
changeable bond (dif-
ferent ｾ for constant
ｾ Ｉ p4 with Ｙ ｾ Ｑ Ｒ p6
with Ｔ ｾ Ｑ Ｘ P7 with
Ｒ ｾ Ｒ Ｖ
 Pli! r»
im
s----
Ｎ _r- I- I
M i __ -<>
su

Fig. 56 Moments and shear

stresses at failure as
a function of ｾ
Qh
f-----I------

I
o
M
BUd 56. Momente und SebublpoDDUDgen beim Drueb in AbbiIDgigkeit von Qh

P1 Pi! PJ PS
1m kg/em l

--
G GOOO
c _ deU
.....

HSV
ｉ ｙ
- ----..." Fig. 57 Shear failure moment
and steel stresses as
/' a function of the rein-
forcing rat io /.L .
Biegebruch SchulJbruc!l

o aS ｾ 1.5 glo ｾ

BiJd 57. Scbubbruehmemente und Stahlepennungen in Abhiingigkeit vom Bewehrung8grad IA

5U,----,-----r--,----,---,---,---,---
I
PloHe PI;; 9nZ Ie -10,17cm
• I' G I;;'IS • - IO,IG • '
• 1'7 ｽ Ｚ ｾ ｴ • - IO,C6·
fO
RJfJbreilen gemesun In flol/en-
tubs« aufI/nleruile
I I
I :
ｾ , !

ｾ JOf----+--- --+--f--
-!;
ｾ
1;
ｾ
Fig. 58 Maximum crack width as
ci:
ｾ
ｾ
ｾ
to
-t- I
a function of the load
(plate strips with
changeable bond; different
Q for constant //..1.. )

o 8 Ii! It
[,osl P
Bild 58. Maximale RiDbrehe in Abhiingigkeil dee Delo8lung [Ple ttenateeifen mit veriiadtr·
lichem Verbund; veesehledene " bel JL -= konatant]
 ｚ ｏ ｏ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ -,-,.----,----,--...,----,
I 155
1---'----1--------1 -:j--
PloHe Pf Ｙ U fe - 1001um'
IGO • PG fns • -laIC·
• P7 tnc • - lact •
RifJlJreilen gemessen-in Plal/en-
ｾ

rｴ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｏ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ
oellse aufUn/emile

ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｦ Fig. 59 Sum of the crack widths

as a function of the
load (plate strips with
ｾ changeable bond; different
"" 80 f----+---+--
ｾ (J for constant p- )
ｾ

.0 Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ［ ｲ ｌ ｢ ｲ ｌ Ｍ ｾ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ Ｋ

o e It 1&
/'osl P
BUd 59. Summe der RiObreiten in Abhiingigkeit dee Beisilung (PlatteD,8treilen mit ver-
inderlichem Verbund; verschiedeae 0 bell' => konslant)

pg
PS
.0
PH
Pff po--
Fig. 60 Shear failure moments
as a function of concrete
strength
--
o SO 100 ISO EOO ESO JOO/fl
jJw
DiJd60. Schcbbruehmerneut.e in Abhiingigkeit von der Detonre.tigkeit

140 , - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - , -
HF
mm f - ｬ ｲ -ctoEe.Fezth-;l
Plolte P, p. - % o.n
• piJ • - 0.95 ..
• P3 • - UI ,-
• N • - 1.90 ｾ
• PS • - 1.8&' Fig. 61 Measured and computed
/ deflections for plate
strips with different
reinforcing ratios /u

gerechnele H'crfe f
,,5 -/''---+(fiir Bicf!!!...nfl o//einj

o 10 IS Eol
/'osl P
llild 61. Grmrlulene und I;ucclmrte ｄ ｵ ｲ ｣ ｨ ｬ Ｉ ｪ ｣ ｾ ｵ ｮ hri IJlatlenslrei£en mit verecbiedeeea
ｮ ･ ｷ ｣ ｨ ｲ ｵ ｮ ｧ ｾ ｧ ｲ ｯ ｴ ..-n (.1
 Pf 156
mm I
Pfolle P. 9H! fe-Io.l7cml
• Pc H 18 H - 1O,1S •
• P7 lns· - 100Sl •

ｾ ｓ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ

o 5 10 IS
tos! P

Fig. 62 Measured and computed deflections for plate strips with

different bond (different ｾ for constant ｾ )

Ｑ Ｐ Ｇ Ｐ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｟

mm flaHe Pl Pw- 152 kg/cmI /1-0.95

ｾ
o
+
! • P8 • -JOG·
• P5 • -15l·
·'P6 • -JOG·
• -0.;'
• -1,8S
• -tBG
7,sl--------,------.-----...--rf'<;:---=------t----j
'E§
ｾ
ｾ
'!:::
ｾ ｓ Ｎ !-------j--------t-t,if---

ｾ
s
ｾ
J:
Z.Sl---

o 10 15 to 21
last P

Fig. 63 Measured and computed deflections for plate strips of

different concrete strengths.
 P-p·l 157

£1 ｊ ＼ Ｏ ｊ Ｑ Ｕ
fil
ｾ ］ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ［ ］ ］ ｾ ｾ ］ ］ Ｚ ｬ ｾ ］ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ］ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ｾ ｾ Ｇ ］ ］ ］ ］ Ｚ Ｚ ｩ ］ ］ ］ 8.St.HI b

6
t<f>20m B.St.HI b
+J<f>16mmB..St.HIb

£6
66

Fig. 64 Dimensions and reinforcing of beams with different shear

reinforcing.

Fe s = Cross-Section area of bent up bars or of 2 or more

legged stirrups

a Spacing of stirrups or bent up bars along beam axis

Inclination of stirrups or inclined bars.

Fig. 65 Test installation: beams bandaged after wide opening of the

main shear crack in the end with the stirrups of BStI and
loaded further up to bending failure.
 158

Bandagierung = taping

Fig. 66 Crack and failure pictures of beams with point loads

with different shear reinforcing (numbers in circles =
crack ｮ ｵ ｭ ｢ ･ ｲ other numbers = load increment for which
a crack penetrated to the indicated location, one load
increment P = 3.1 tons).
 159

Fig. 67 Crack and failure pictures of beams with uniform load

with different shear reinforcing (numbers in circles
are crack numbers; other numbers are load increments
for which a crack penetrated to the indicated location,
one load increment ｰ = 6.2 tons).

70 ;-----,-----,...-----r----...,

601------'-----'-;-------;:----'-------t-----I--I

ｾ 501--------r------r----+---.1----I--I
ｾ
ｾ Do/ken EJ

ｾ ¥OI-----+---------+------t--+f---I
ｾ
ｾ
ｾ
ｾ 3Of-----+----+-----H-----I
s
tii

/!Ol-----+----+-_._-'l---t-----I

fOf-----+---r+-----+------t

o 80 JO fO
last P

Fig. 68 Comparison of the sum of crack widths in the shear zone

for stirrups of BStI and of BStIIIb for beam E3
(Measured at the location of the tensile reinforcing).
 160
Einze//us/bo/ken 6/l!ich/asltJo/ken
500i--r;::;==::;r::;:;:::::J;"---' Ｕ Ｐ Ｐ Ｑ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ ［ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ［ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ｃ ］ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ Ｚ ｃ ］ ｾ Ｑ Ｍ Ｑ Ｑ
$umme der RilJbrci/en
'100 1-----1----1---+-----1
E6.
ｾ I
!::> I
ｾ 300r---+-----)

Ii I
ｾ Ｒ Ｐ Ｐ Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｑ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ａ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ
ｾ
1001------i--

o 30 t '10 o i!O JO I/O 5(} t ｾ

last P-p·l
50
Imill/ere Ri8breifenl Imill/ere RilJbreilen I
-.61
+ 63
D G5
• 66

I
I .66 ｾ Ｖ

10
,
i
I /..- /"/ :>
Ｚ ｾ ｾ Ｖ
ｾ ｾ

o 10 o 10 2G' 30 '10 50 t Ii!

lost P=p·l
80,----,.------r.-----,------,
II
701------+--1-+----+-----1
EGI I

i I EI/

IgriJOle RiObreiterJ I
I
II 65

.§ I/Ol-----j-----j
J
ｾ
Ｎ

J..
/
ｾ 30

o 10 20 30 o 10 2,1 30 '10 so t &

last P last P=p·l

Fig. 69 Crack widths (measured at the location of the longitudinal

reinforcing). Combined average va lue of the left and right
shear reaches, also for different steel strength of the
stirrups.
 70
161

Pit Pit I./B.Sf.I

GO
B.Sf.I + + B. Sf. DI b
b-'- '-'
Ｍ ［ ｧ Ｌ Ｇ Ｍ Ｎ Ｍ ｾ Ｂ Ｂ
r r r r. :J Z
' ,,ｾ Ｍ
50
8u/ken £3
®

_rR.Sf.I
I
/

ZO
｟ Ｏ
.¥ pf.Sf.DIb

Ｐ Ｎ ｶ ｾ ｦ rB.Sf.DlO

ｾ ...
/" "A
. / ,j)o"

.i$ 3
10
....... ｾ ........
... ......

-: ｾ
ｾ
o 10 30 30 "C '10
last P

Fig. 70 Comparison of the maximum crack widths for stirrups of BStI and
BStlllb measured at location of the tensile reinforcing (1)
and at half the height of the beam (2).
16',------,..-------r------,-------,
EJ/Z
mm

1¥'I------L------f---------j----t----j
t!t

ｾ tOf---------j,-------j-----l----I-f---l
Ｎ

ｾ
ｾ
.S; 8 1 - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - j - - - - - - + - - : : - : - f / y-----i
t'
Ｎ
ii
ｾ Ｖ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｪ ｲ ｬ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ ｻ ｬ ｾ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ

Ｒ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｑ ｨ ......- - _ _ _ t - - - - - - t - - - - - - - - I

o 10 20 JO t
lost P

Fig. 71 Load deflection diagram for beams with point loads with
different shear reinforcing.
 162

ｦ ｇ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｟ ｟ ｟ ｟ ｊ ｾ ｾ

mm

f¥r-----'---;-----'---+----+----\-c--I----1

.. ｦ ｏ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ ｟ ｟ ｟ ｊ Ｎ ｫ Ｍ Ｍ ｟
;t:;
i1i
ｾ
ｾ
.!is 8 r - - - - t - - - - - t - - - + _ - - - I - - - I - + - + - - - - - - j
§'
Ｎ
ｾ
Jl ｇ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｔ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｪ Ｔ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｾ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ ｊ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ

Ｌ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ ｴ ｩ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ

Ｒ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ

o f(J 20 30 W 50 GO
last P·p·l

Fig. 72 Load deflection diagram for beams with uniform loads with
different shear reinforcing.
 163

J5 Ｍ Ｍ ｊ Ｎ ｉ Ｍ ｾ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ 1.50 -----00-1------- tSO - - - - - . . J - - . - _

I PI; PI2
L_

1 !
- ---k-------------t---------.-.---.--- -.
, ! Ｇ ｾ

--- - - - (JS - - - - - - - - 1

BUd 73. Venuehoholken Ｑ Ｑ Ｒ de. E'cQnauncove.ouehe .u lIeft ｾ dee DAlE (volle Schuboicberung)

Fig. 73 Test Beam 1124 of the supplementar¥ tests of Vol. 48

of DafE (complete shear protection)

f-
Jf
1· (SO
J;12 t50
gl2
.
I I 1I
- .IF!
I

((
i /">26 ｾ

C'- ｾｪｪＡｬ･ｉｍＲＮ｡ＭＱｓＨＩＱ I ｜ Ｒ ［ Ｇ Ｒ Ｖ ｾ Ｒ ［ Ｇ Ｒ

Bild Ｗ ｾ Venucbobalken 1132 de. Erginauncove.ouche au Heft ｾ deo DAlE (halb< Scbuboloberung)

Fig. 74 Test Beam 1132 of the supplementary tests of Vol. 48

of DafE (half shear protection)
 164

Fig. 75 Failure pictures of Beam 1124

Fig. 76 Failure pictures of Beam 1132

 30000
ｂ ｏ Ｏ ｫ ｾ ［ -［ 165
20000
I-- -
I
,------ Biige/n

/
/ V
.c: -
/ohneBiige/
10000

:
o S101sz0cmJO
Sfegbreife &0

Fig. 77 Relationship between failure load and web width

(tests of ｍ ｾ ｲ ｳ ｣ and Graf from Vol. 10 of DAfE)

P/2 pI2
- - - - - t - - - - 105 • I

- - - - 300 Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
Bo/ken st

Bo/ken -----;;-----;------- 300 Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｇ Ｂ Ｇ

st /2 P-p·l

Querschnifie aile Biigel "'6 Sf I

8o/ken 1
b-'--30

Fig. 78 Dimensions and reinforcing of the test beams with

different web widths
 S(JIJ(J r-----,-----,---...,-----,-------,r---------,

lrg/cm1
ssrm) "'2Jmm
166
<,
ﾥ ｏ ｏ ｏ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ

ｊ ｏ ｏ ｏ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ ｩ ｬ Ｂ ｾ

Fig. 79 Stress-strain diagram of

20ool----h'-----+------,4-----+----1-------J the steel used.

1000
/
/
/
5 0 011
0 2 .J Ii 6
e
DUd 79. Sp.llDuDg,..D ehnunge-Diagramme dee verweadetee Slihle

/(Of'f1zusammensefzung der gesamlen Zuscklage o/JOmm

noch DIN 10'15

Fig. 80 Sieve curve of the aggregate

used.

15 JO
o.z mm ftfaschenwpitl! Lochdurchmesser der Siebe
gl!Samte 2uschliigl! 0/30mm
BiJd 80. SiebliDie de. verwendeten Zu.eblag..olfo

JOO

ky/cm,2

250
b -/27 kg/cm 1
200
Einzi!llasfbalken
-::--- ｾ

Pp -/07 kg/cm Z -
ｾ0Gleichlastbalken
Ｍ Ｍ Fig. 81 Stress-strain diagram of

b 150 ｾ the concrete

100
/,
V
50 I
o
V 0,5 1,0 1,5
e
2,1) 2,5 0/00 J,o
DiM 81. Spannung"..Delmung e- niogramm del Betons
 167

, .B'/J,SI9 i9.51 10'51 /2 1/3.51 /7.5 1 " 5 "

Ｂ Ｇ ｅ Ｎ Ｌ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｊ ｴ Ｔ ｾ Ｎ Ｎ Ｌ Ｎ Ｎ ｡ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｎ Ｋ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｂ Ｂ v, -
ｴ ｯ Ｍ ｬ Ｎ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｣ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ ｟ - - - - - . - -,.- JOO
I'
1'5
•
1'5 1'5 I
. ..• Ｍ 1/ to.J.tles
a •
I
iHessung
SdTlllflfl
Drou rSII:ht

1fo-IS01 -0 17.c-ldol 0

Hessufl!1 tier8elonkiirZlKlfl
I

'Rissemessun!1® ｾ ｾ

Fig. 82 Arrangement of the measurement points for beams with

uniform load with different web widths.

I
9. 10 n
10 trl 10
37 37
liessufll til!!' 8etonlriirzII7g

Nissemtssung ®
....--l: /?iSSemeSSUfl!1(J)

Fig. 83 Location of the measurement points for beams with

concentrated loads with different web widths.
Fig. 84 Beams with point loads with different web widths after failure (numbers
in circles = crack number in order of occurrence, other numbers = load f-'
0\
for which a crack penetrated to the indicated location). OJ
 169

Fig. 85 Beams with uniform load with different web widths after
failure (numbers in circles = crack number in order of
occurrence, other numbers = load for which a crack
penetrated to the indicated location).
 170
'V
t
:J-T-T--V
I I I 1
I
ＱｾＧｇｲＲ
GT1(J)
•
" I
6T3/2q2 .t/ .
Fai lure Load Ｂ ｾ ｪ /.ｇ ｔ (JTIf/I@
ｊ Ｏ ｦ
P u or P u £
JJ / ｾ •
Ｎ ｾ ｩ ｩ fT3@ ETI(j)
.>J---;;; [tl/@- @u.@-

Ｎｾ

5 10 15 30 25 em 3D
SteglJreite 00

Fig. 86 Relationship between failure loads (based on J9w = 270 kg/cm 2)

and web widths. The numbers in circles behind the beam
identification indicates the type of failure (definition
see Section 7.41)

200

750
I
T T
I
t
I/lTII/I@
.'. ＶｔｉｉＯＱ｀ｦ
:JO
Shear ing Stress '0 flTJ/3(j)

ｉ ｾ ［ ｾ ｾ Ｇ
ETII@'

50

ETT"'-
®u.@

I
,f!3@
---. I-- --- 6TI(j)
r---:-.
ofTl(j)1
i
5 10 15 30 25 em J()
SteglJreite 00

Fig. 87 Computed shear stresses at failure as a function of the

web width of the beams (based on Pw = 270 kg/cm 2). The
numbers in circles behind the beam numbers indicate the
type of failure (definition see Section 7.41)
 171
25D,------,---,.------r---"""T-"------,..----....

ｬ ｲ ｋ ｊ ｬ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ ｟ ｟ Ａ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ ｉ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
- - - - redm. JVl!r'te
- - gemessene Werle

It
.... ETJ
T--

s 10 15 20 is 010
ius! P-p'l

Fig. 88 Comparison between the measured inclined compressive

stresses crrr
in the web with the theoretical value
< arr= 2 70) for beams with point load with different
web widths

zso
kli
ｾ zoo
.\11
t,'" ---- rectm. Werle
--gemessen, Werl,

i 150

l ｾ
100
+11..
ｾ
.!l!
ｾ so
+'j!'I
IlL

0 5 20

Fig. 89 Comparison between the measured inclined compressive

stresses <rII in the web with the theoretical values
<c:rrr= 27-0 , a distance!! from the support) for
2
beams with uniform load with different web widths.
 .1500 ,---..,.---
K;/Cm l
f3s
ｉ Ｍ Ｂ Ｍ ｾ ｾ Ｍ
.1000 ｉ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ ｔ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｴ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ

I
I
I
t500 I - - - - - t - - - : ' - - - - I - - -
I
I

tOOO I-------,I+-----I--I-----J'----- H'-----1-------i

t::l" Fig. 90 Average stirrup stresses
ｾ B for beams with point loads
'"ｾ 15001-----'+---+---t-----;IIk--f------oF-----+---!---I
I
with different web widths
ｾ I as a function of the load.
Oil I
ｾ
ｉ I The eight stirrups used to
I
10001---f--+- obtain the average value are
I
shown in the beam sketch.
/
ｅ ｔ Ｑ
500 I I
1·+
/ .ｾ
a =-!I!_-+
ｙ Ａ •
B-Biegebf'ut:h
$ - Schubbf'UcI1
Ｍ ｓ ｏ ｏ ｏ Ｇ Ｇ Ｚ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ ｌ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ
6 12 18 2'1 t .10
LastP-p·l
BUd 90. MittJere Dugebpannungeq bet Eineelfestbalken mit verschledeuen Stegbrelten
in Abhiingigkeit VOq dee Delostung
Die aur Mittelwerr.hildung hcrungezogenen B HUgel sind in dee Balkenskiz'Ze elageteegeu

3500,----......".-,....---------,.-------,---..,.---.
p-p·t
K!T/cm
Ps
JOOO

I
I 8
250011---I1----J'-4---1---=!=+------i-

Ｒ Ｐ Ｐ Ｐ Ｇ ｦ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｋ ｾ Ｍ ｴ Fig. 91 Average stirrup stresses for

I beams with uniform load with
I
I different web widths as a
function of the load. The
average value was obtained
from the four stirrups in the
fOOOf-----:'-+--I't1 end with variable stirrup
distance shown in the sketch.

I
6 12 18 ZIf 30 36 IfZ t ¥8
Last pap·t
DUd 91. Mittlere ｈ ｵ Ｎ ｧ ､ ｈ ｰ ｄ ｮ ｲ ｈ ｬ ｮ ｾ ･ bei GlcichIR""blllkl:"u mit verechiedeneu Stegbreuee in
ａ ｬ ｩ ｬ ｬ ｩ ｩ ｮ ｲ ［ ｩ ｾ ｫ ｣ ｩ v un dr-e BdaelulIg
Zur Milte1werllJihlung wurdcu die in de r Sk iaz e ｲ ｩ ｮ ｾ Ｈ Ｌ ﾷ ｉ Ｌ Ｎ Ｈ Ｇ ｩ ｃ Ｇ ｨ ｬ ｬ ｬ ﾷ Ｈ ｃ <1 Uiiset nul dcr Sehe mit
vnrinhlcm ]JiiselClhsland ht'rm'gf'Zllgf"D
 IT::>

Fig. 92 Stirrup stresses along the

beams with point load for
the load P = 12 tons and
P _ 18 ｾ ｯ ｮ ｳ For a clear
respresentation the stress
curves are shown idealized
(average value from adjoining
measurements).

BUd 92. BUgelepBnnungen entlnng dee Einzelfustbulken bel der LR9l P 12 t und P = 1:·1 =:I

Zur Uberaiehtliehen Durstellung wurdc dcr Spcnnungsvcrlauf idcalieier t dargeslellt pfinrl.

weete nus bcuccbbneten Messuugen]

Fig. 93 Stirrup stresses along the

beams with uniform load for
a load pi= 12 tons and
pi= 18 tons. For a clear
representation the stress
curve was drawn idealized.
The ｳ ｹ ｭ ｢ ｯ ｬ ｳ for the measured
values on the single beams
are shown next to the cross
section.

Dild 93. ｄ ｏ ｊ ［ Ｂ ･ ｬ ｦ ｬ ｰ ｡ ｮ ｮ ｵ ｮ ｾ ｾ ｾ ｣ ｬ ｬ ｬ ｬ ｡ ｮ (ler ｇ ｬ ｪ ｾ ｩ ､ ､ .tlmlken Ill'i r-iuer- Lnst. r'

.:=r J 2 t und ['I

Zur ubeeslctn llclreu ｬ ＾ ｩ Ｑ ｲ Ｚ Ｍ ｬ ｴ ､ ｬ ｵ ｬ ｬ ｲ ｟ wllrde d cr ｾ ｉ ｮ ｮ ｵ ｬ ｬ Ｚ Ｍ Ｇ ［ ｾ Ｂ ｉ Ｇ ｲ Ｑ ［ Ｇ ｜ ｬ idculi-..i cr t Ｔ Ｂ ｩ ｮ ｦ Ｎ ｾ ｉ Ｚ ｦ Ｇ ｩ ､ Ｌ ｊ Ｑ Ｈ ｾ ﾷ

,

Syrnbol., fOr die Mellwcrtc t!"r cinJ'.dnl·n Ijulk m sind m-hcn den (}ul'rloichnitten cin:;ft
 174

I I I I
I I I I
I I I I

I I I II !
k!l/tm z
- Biigelrerteilung !lleicIJmii8ig "'---0ScllublJrocIJ rechts
6ei ｊ Ｇ ｉ ［ t
JOOO f--- D - - O Biigelrerteilun!l ･ ｮ ｴ ｓ ｦ ｋ Ｇ ･ ｣ ｨ ･ ｮ ､ ｾ Ｇ Ｇ Ｋ Ｍ Ｏ ｟ Ｍ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
der Querkl'Oftlinie I/
Hiltel ii6er BereicIJ c
I /
;500 f-------/--+-----j----t-JL---r-t--t--- 1-----1
I If /
Fig. 94 Average value of
/ J the measured stirrups
ｾ
!Ii
1/1/
(1500 i - - - - + - - - t - - _ f i _ - - - r f - - - + - - t - - - + - - - - - - - I
stresses in the zone c
for different arrangement
of the stirrups for beam

II
ｾ

Q;j
Ｚ with uniform loads GT3.

1/ V
500 / /

J;/V
o ---.,

6 12 18 2'1 JO J6 '2 t '18

last P-p'l

Fig. 95 Crack and failure

pictures for different
stirrup distribution
(equal web Width, equal
number of stirrups).
 175

00 I I
$umme der RiBbreilm $umme der RiOlJreilm
(linker Schubbereich) (linker SchulJlJereic!lJ
z50
• ETt • ETt
00
-tr» 1----+ + ET Z +---I-----i"---h----I
-ETJ -ETJ
AET!/- AET!/-
ｾ

'00
ii
ｾ
ｾ
15 1
:

ｾ
v:
V
.N
ｾ ..,;::
ｾ ....w

....." Ｚ Ｎ ｾ
0
60 I I
moximole RiObreiten
(linker Schubbereic!l)
50

I
I
ｾ
ｾ ｾ
to ｾ
ｾ
ｾ
Ｎ
ｾ W ｾ Ｎ
o ｾ ｾ ..... I

JO
milllere RiBbreiten
(linker Schubbereich)

I
I
I
ｾ
ｾ
111 ....:::::
ｾ
ｾ A ｾ
I
ｾ ｾ

ｾ Ａ［ｏｾ［Ｚｏﾷ
.. i
o 5 to 15 to t 10 15 Z5
lostP-p·l iast Pr-p-l

Fig. 96 Comparison of crack widths for beams with point loads with
different web widths
 176

¥OO

ｾ ·6T1
ｾ JOO + 6TZ -+--+--+-+--+--+--l
ｾ
.1;; • 6TJ -1---+---1--+--t-----if---1
.. 6T¥
'" --- -----:;:l:1---+--1---+-----+----+--++---I
1
ｾ
200
ｾ ［ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ -"---+--+--+---"--1-1--+--\
100
ｉ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ ｟ Ｍ Ｂ Ｌ ｾ Ａ ｉ
l' ';;::'l""=-4'------c

0
¥DO
+

.1;;
+

100

oI..o;;!!==----J.L-l.._--'--------"_---L_-'-------'---'
50
I I I I I I I
maximale RtBbrei/en maximale RiBbreilen I
a-yariabe/ -- -
- - a - ranobe!
I
I /
r-- 1---c-, - ｉ Ｍ
..... 1
ｾ ｉ
I
+
I - -ｴ Ｍ ｾ .;g,- Ｍ ｾ
l6StY
ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ

-- f-- ｾ ｾ v·
ｾ ----r- r-- ;-Pi-- I - - I--- ｾ
ｉ Ｍ ｾ ｌ Ｍ ｢
ｾ Ｕ ｃ ｉ ｬ Ｑ ｾ
.;;;- V ｾ｜ｉ
I - -ｉ Ｍ ｾ Ｌ
ｾ
----
ｾ I--
..). ...... ｾ ｏ Ｏ 1/+ Ｏ Ｚ
10
:5\7 ｾ Ｚ
--ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ
I,.o-
"/':-P::J.?-t ::;:0.
o
¥D
I I I
mil//ere RiBbreifen 1---+--1--+ miff/ere RiBbrei/en -+--+----1
a-variabe/ a- rariobe'
-T-
- - _"t;I_
1-f.-- --r-- r-r-r-r--r-

--- +

l
f---- - 1--- f------
-S'I
- _-BL
ｾ
10I - - Ｌ Ｍ
II
--
!.-= ;:;-? . 1-+-

= ;-;=Zi
..-::;
..ｾ Ａ
o s W • M H m M wtMO S
las/ P-p·l

Fig. 97 Comparison of the crack widths for beams with uniform

loads with different web widths
 mm ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
r---r • 177
tr
. -1
+

71
• ETt
+ETz ,
·fTJ
AET. ｾ l
ｾ Ｏ A
/
Fig. 98 Comparison of the deflection

10
1/1// in the middle of the beam
for different web widths

Ｗｪ
I 17 (beams with point loads)
I
'C;I
ｾ
.!i!1 /
ｾ
ｾ
I ｉｾｾ ｾ
5
ｾ
ｾ
gJ !
o
ｾ 5
:10 15 ZO 15 t Jo
lost P-p·l
Bild 98. Verglcich der Derebbteguag in B.lkenmitte bei vereebledeeee Stegbreiten
(EiDz.IJ••t-Balkea)

mm

.STt
+STz
.STJ/t o fiTJ/2 Fig. 99 Comparison of the deflection
AST./t A fiTII/z in the middle of the beam for
different web widths (beams
with uniform loads)

a :0 20 30 t 50
las: P·p·l
 178

Fig. 100 Deflect'ｾ ｯ

tons for b curve for P -
loads . earns with .- 12
. ｷ ｾ ｴ diff ｰ ｯ ｾ ｮ
ｷ ｾ ､ ｴ ｨ erent web

Fig. 101 Deflect'i on

tons fo
un'f
curve for
r beams w·
i. orm loads
ｰ ｾ
. I t h the
IJ
24
web width s ｷ ｾ ｴ diff erent

o------L- I
 60 ----"l

P
I
I
50 -_.-
I . ｾ • 179
1/0-- - ...
I

y;. •

• VerSllc!Je Yon Nandy {2¥} Fig. 102 Relationship between shear-

carrying capacity and
NSf£. _ k
bl/
,YiJ'P concrete strength

t j
I I
o 100 200 300 '100 kg/emz 500
Prismendruckfesligkeil fl p

Fig. 103 Re1at ionship between shear-

carrying capacity and
longitudinal reinforcing
ratio

o as 1,0 1,5 2,0

Liingsbewehrungsgrad ,u.
nild 10J. Abhiingigkr:il der Ｕ ｣ ｨ ｵ ｵ ｴ ｲ ｮ ｇ ｲ ｩ ｩ ｨ ｩ ｾ ｫ ｴ Ｚ Ｇ ｩ vom J.iinJ::,,·Ur.wdlrung"gud

12,,0

,0
.... ;

ｾ Ｎ ,
/,u-1,'I3% I
,0

6y-
ｉＧｾＬｊＢﾷ ｾ Ｑ Ｌ Ｘ Ｘ
I i
I
Fig. 104 Relationship between shear-
carrying capacity and bar
diameter for certain rein-
forcing ratios.
'1;0

• fersucITe an Plalfen I!
,0 A fersucITe on Bolken -------]

I j
o 10 20 30 '10 mm 5.
Ourchmesser
Bild 104. Abhii.ngigltt:it der ｓ ｣ ｨ ｵ ｬ ｊ ｌ ｲ ､ ｊ ［ ｲ ｪ ｪ ｬ ｴ ｩ ｾ ｫ ･ ｩ vnm Slol"lurdulI('uu be! beltimmlt m
ｬ ｬ ｣ ｷ ｣ ｨ ｲ ｵ ｮ ｧ ｾ ｧ ｲ ｵ
 35 180
t I I I l
ｾ 25
;;

0-
] 20
:J
30

=tr 1--
---lr-'1J-1j

e I
T-----\ 61,'<h""Im'kM
1- 7
I
•

ｾ 15 /L---: . I
ｾ ! I i
1
i .!
• •
ｩ ｾ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ I i / I

COr " 1 finzel/oslba/ken

a /"'" I
"ｾ
Ｕ ｾ ｾ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ 'I

I
a s 10 15 20 25 em .30
$fegbreife lJo

Fig. 105 Relationship between shear-carrying capacity and

web width b o for equal compression chord width b.

Ｑ ｯ Ｎ Ｐ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｇ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｲ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｎ Ｌ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ _ _Ｍ Ｎ Ｍ ｟ ｾ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｌ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｌ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ

\ I I
''-.!

Ｂ ｾ Ｚ ｦｾﾷＭﾷｆｾ［
....
ｾ
ｾ I I
__ .Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｾ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ ｾ ｾ
P.- 1,66%brw.1.JJ %
{ 1-----+----+-------1-__ Ｎ
C
-cs
"'g
.::l""
1f;0

I
c: yon leonhordl--::/;:;;::T-
<i,
<:>
ｾ
-<>
z, ---+ ----,--- : ｾ ｾ ｾ Ｑ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｋ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ
i
I
I
I
I I
0 10 30 30 ｾ 60 em 70
lIulzhiJhe h

Fig. 106 Relationship between shear-carrying capacity and

absolute value of the beam height h.
 100.----,----,------,---r---,---,---,------,

181

Fig. 107 Relationship between shear

carrying capacity and moment
shear ratio M
Qh

o 2 J ¥ 5 6 7 8
l1omenfen-Schub- Verhiil/nit ｑ
BUd 107. Abhiingigkeit de. Srhubt.agliihigkeit vom Momenten·Srhubvr.hiiltail M/Q"

60

k!//cm Z
I I
50
ｾ G/eich/oslbo/ken

\
\, • Fig. 108 Relationship between shear-
carrying capacity and slender-
1'.
'---. ｾ
•
ness of beams for uniform load.

o 5 10 15 20 25
Sch/ankheil 11k
Bild 108. Abhinglgkeit der ｓ ｣ ｨ ｵ ｢ ｴ Ｎ ｡ Ｌ ｅ Ｚ ｛ ［ ［ ｨ ｩ ｧ ｾ ＼ ｩ von de. Srhlsnkheit de. Balken. hei
ｫｬ･ｴｾｈｴｬｪｲｬｦｩＺｾｾ ｴ ｾ ｾ "

,,..

-_._-_._----

'Risse
sc.iete Oruckstrebe
-,==lJ:==ltt==ti.t=:;zti:::=
sid
I- bo -I' -i Fig. 109 The inclined compression
lo/recht noc/lgieblg
strips suspended from the
:,1,1 1'1'1, Hit' nn B'l;!"h, OIlIfg:I·lliill:.:1 ,..､ ｬ ｩ ､ l)rlld...... ｬ ｮ ﾷ ｬ ｬ i'll ｷ ｩ eiu nn den Ed,,-
i .-llg ·.;1iib.'1l gl"la;':t>r1,"r " ..... I,lrl ｩ ｾ ｴ Triih"r. lIl'> ,111'-h'j'Ochf"nliq;:rndf"" ｉ Ｎ ｩ ｩ ｦ ｬ ｾ Ｎ ｳ Ｇ ｩ ｩ ｬ ｮ stirrups is like a box beam
;'::fohrl1 11:11°11
placed at a corner longitudinal
rod, the in-between longitudinal
rods are elastic.
 182

zu/ To Fur 8 300 Schubsicherungsgrod

I 1---100 %---
5 'If/. (H)
JJ 00 88
kfflcm 2 /j ,r/j r{r/ ｲ ｾ Ｈ

27 59 72
0

36 (36)
-(j)--
Ｑ Ｓ ［ ｾ
3:5

23 '12 5'1 30 =vo//e Schubsicherunq=

(18) (J3) ('12)
J0
ｾ
0- -
'
...." '
" ｾ <,
...........
2'1)
<, <,
," ," " "" " ｾ 100%

15 es JO
, , " , <,.... r'-,", <, " ---- -- --
ｾ
Ii
20 40' ,
-,
-- --- - - 80%
,
'J, ,, "
<, ""
fGI
ｾ
(10) (12)
, , -, , I j1 I
<,
<, -- -- ---1--- I I I
<, <, lei/weise I I I I

ｾ
f--- -- 600/. f - - - $chubsicherungl I
,,
15
'" ｉ " r-;
<, <,

r-.
"

--f-. ,- --- I - -
I--
1--
'100/0
I-yorzugslfeise milBiige/n
I I II I
I
I
I

0
<,
ｾ ｉ ｉ ｉ
I I I I I I
ｉ ｉ ｉ I
"....l(8) I I 1 I 1
200/0 -Lt"T-L-l----,
I I I I I I 1
I I 1 ,I I I I I I
5 I I I kem I I I I I
(]) I Schubsicherungsnochweis
I I I I I I I I I I
I : I I : I : : : :
2 J 020'100060100
$chubsicherung in 0/0
I I !! I ! I t I •
2J 1/56 7891011121Jl
h
Dild lID Vonchlog Cur, ｾ ｾ ＬＺｾｪＢＡﾣＬｯｬＺ［｣
mn,x.Q un? Ｎ Ｌ ｚ ｴ ｬ ｂ ｾ ｬ ｾ ＿ Ｌ ｲ ｙ ［ ｣ Ｌ ｓ ｣ ｨ ｵ ｨ Ａ ｩ ｣ ｨ ･ ｲ ｾ ｮ ｾ ｾ ｧ ｲ ｡ ｃ Ｈ ｪ D 300 und gerippte Uing••
bcwehTUDij. r·llr uH')('re ｕ ･ ｴ ｯ ｮ ｾ ｩ ｬ ｴ ｦ Ｂ ｉ ｈ ｮ ｾ Ａ ｬ ｴ Ｇ ｬ eltteprechende Fefcln geeetclmet werden,

Fig. 110 Proposal for the allowable 7Q as a function of the

maximum Q and the corresponding shear protection ratio
for B300 and ribbed longitudinal reinforcing. For other
concrete strengths corresponding tables must be drawn.
 ,,,-1
c

7,?,:){5!
- ,.... i
!
(..,'/!t; I -s sso
I ＯＧＯＯＯ
,
,,,'. .:,.. iO,.. ,1".,..:: II? 60
I.-'
I
»r
.L/lo )
70 / ｾ Ｎ ＿ Ｚ Ｚ ｾ Ｍ Ｍ Ｏ ｴ ｊ ｾ Ｎ ﾷ Ｎ Ｎ Ｌ ...
ｾ ｩ ＿
(

I
I
,0;;,
I 1.::c,J
I
Ｓ ｾ Ｇ ｊ Ｚ ［
"'..- I 7?o /»:s SI,3
I

Ｎ Ｚ Ｚ e I
I
I
"'1'"
..;> Ｌ 770 •ｾ
ｾ
ii,

/1,>7:
II ｾ i
' I ,I ,i , t
•
I
r
,

, ｾ

A
'71.. r.I , ;
(ｴ ｾ Ｈ Ｌ
!I (.71 0)
(5%)
l.\
"
[:
;' j'.
'
.
,
..
ｾ 'I:At. _
I
I
I "'-
k Ｌ,;--,'."
ｉ '>,
I ! "

'<=_,. i-'_ ..

'--
._--_.. - -- - - Ｇ Ｎ /1'
l
ｾ
3.. r . :""- i
cl4 i
: .. .J lO
#
4d1 \' -," 't., -< _ !

,/

(,30) i (oJ;»
1 t·_ r. ｾ ｾ
" I ( I
i'a5 I'\,
I
.: ""
"
" <,__ j
I -.- -- -, I
/t
1

I "" '..
:''',: 0"\
I ..... -. <, ｾ -,!
.... ! -.
I

I
--="-" ,
I

I i-. "---- i------; ...- i

II iｾ -;/11-- ｾ --- -
! I I
i
'iii I (/)
I ,' i.
I I

L:':; "
II !: I
I , 'V

I I
!'
I
II ..? ..'./ _ Ｌ Ｎ ｾ..
_ '....
ｾ
:
, I
.:»
,
.
:__,_,_
-ei.
.. _..
»>
｟
'! i

,.
•.
c,
/ i! t ;"";
.;..-,:, .r : 1" :... ' .r .,,'c; .... 1,,1• ｾ
... •

, r:»
-, '/ ｾ }' Ｏ /2. ,,,,, Ｏ ...
-:- Ｌ

Fig. 110A Proposal for the allowable ｾ in English units for f c 4260 p s.L
and ribbed longitudinal reinforcing.

:---1
'!J
\;i