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
February 1965
R.F. Legget
Director
Title:
Authors:
Reference:
Translators:
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA
Technical Translation 1172
Contribution to the treatment of shear in reinforced
concrete
(BeitrMge zur Behand1ung der Schubprob1eme im
Stah1betonbau)
F. Leonhardt and R. Walther
Beton- und Stah1betonbau, (12): 277-290, 1961; (82) .. :.
32-44, (3): 54-64, (6): 141-149, (7): 161-173, ( )
184-188, 1962
J.P. Verschuren and J.G. MacGregor, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta
Tit le
I INTRODUCTI ON
II TEST RESULTS
INDEX
Source
December 1961, pp 277-280
Page
1
1. Tests for High Shear Stresses
December 1961, pp 280-290
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
3. The Influence of the Bond of the Reinforcing
on the Shear Carrying Capacity for Rectangular Beams Without
Shear Reinforcing
February 1962, pp 38-44
4. Influence of the Absolute Beam Height on the Carrying
Capacity Uader Shear
March 1962 pp 54-58
5. Tests on Plate Strips Without Web Reinforcing
March 1962 pp 59-64
6. Tests on Rectangular 3eamE with Different Methods of
Shear Reinforcing
June 1962 pp 141-149
13
36
46
53
63
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
References
Notations
Figures
108
119
121
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 ~ , thus according to a stress magnitude derived only from the shear
bz
force, One must consider this shear stress -r
O
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, ~ b y itself does not govern since the
s ~ e a r 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 ~ 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 (cr = 0)
x
1,
2.
is a fibre where the principal stresses depend only on the shear force; therefore
the magnitude of the shear stress ~ O 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 urface are not the maximum values of the
principal stresses for that particular section, so that ~ O 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 ~ in the neighborhood of the neutral surface can be de-
cisive for the crack formation.
Usually the stress component ~ 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 w h e r e ~ 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 ~ .
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 (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 above the supports.
y
Hence actually in Case II, 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 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
In the Specifications DIN 1045, 1075, 4227 etc. two limits for the
6.
allowable ~ O 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 ~ 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 it was further believed that
because of this low limit of ~ O 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 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 = 180 kg/cm
2
and thus 9 times the allowable
tte allowable values can be put higher than up to now.

I O
Hence
In the earlier choice of the top to limits, construction considera-
tions also played a role, without doubt. 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
with high supporting loads, again and again the low 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 lead to difficlllties
in reinforcing and pouring.
8.
As a pre-requisite for an increase of the allowable ~ 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 ~ O with
two allowable ~ O limits cannot be satisfactory. The tests described later on
showed this especially clearly since the computed ~ O 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 ~ O 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 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 acts but
at the same thus a two axial stress condition exists, or expressed
differently, the compression resultant D is inclined because of the arch
"
with vertical component D
v
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
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.
to the present conditions the shear failure theory of Walther
will be pub Lis'hed directly in connection with the following test results. It
" '
gllows design the basis of failure load and therefore is linked sensibly
to de s i gn fdr
4. Test P:a::1
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 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
Also the influence of the absolute magnitude of the beams must be check 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 tests, there .: 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 ~ 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 = 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 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
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
action of ~ in the zone of the support was reduced and the anchorage of the
y
IS.
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, ~ 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 cm
2
(16 0 26 mm BSt III
b)
x = 34.1 cm
z = 75.1 cm
Own weight: g = 1.05 tim (including loading structure)
16.
Allowable working load: M
g
+
p
122.6 tm (based on DIN 1045 with
a llowab 1e <::1b = 90 kg/ cm
2)
~ = 117.9 tm
Allowable utilizable load: 2P = 94.3 t
Q
p
47.15 t
Q
g
3.15 t
Q
g
+
p
= 50.3 t
Combined working load: 2 P
kr
+ G ~ 1 0 0 t
Carrying moment when yield
point reached in tension chord:
whereby
~ k r = Fe A.2 . Z
c5b -::::: 160 kg/ cm
2
85 x 4.0 x 0.75 255 tm
Corresponding carrying load: 2 P ~ 1 9 1 t
Stresses under working load (computed according to DIN 1045)
Bending stress at extreme fibre:
a llowab1e ~ = 90 kg/ cm
2
1916 kg/cm
2
(allowable ~
Shear stress at support:
7; = ~ = 67 kg/cm
2
bo Z
allowable /0 = 20 kg/cm
2
Design of the stirrups:
Shear force : T = % b
o
L = 67 x 10 x 100 = 67 tim
Beam T1: vertical stirrups
T
FeBU = allowable ~ e
= 67
2.4
27.9 cm
2/m
o 12 BSt III
b,
e = 8 cm, available Fe 27.2 cm
2
17.
Beam T
2:
inclined stirrups
required FeBU
67 2
. r-r: = 19.8 em ;
2.4 v "-
o 12 BSt III
b,
e = 11.2 cm, available Fe
(Additional information computed by J.G. MacGregor
20.0 cm
2
I
Q
3,629,000 cm
4
51,490 cm
3
Ytop = 29.8 em
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 ~ 26 mm ~ rippentorstahl
of the longitudinal reinforcing and of the stirrups, ~ 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
~ . 2 ~
E'l orrgat Lon
~
cross-sectiona 1 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)
10
6
Rippent rstahl 12 116 4350 5470 17.0 2.10 x
(62,000) (77,900)
10
6
Rippentorstahl 26 529
4740
5600 1) 2.08 x
(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
Cement
Water
Quartz powder
Water-cement ratio
with respect to cement
and quartz powder
Slump test
Air -pore ratio
Weight of 1 cu. meter
of compacted concrete
at day of test
(age 28 days)
(bending tensile strength)
T
l
T
2
230 kg/m
3
230 kg/m
3
199 liters /m
3
207 liters/m
3
118 kg/m
3
118 kg/m
3
.57 .59
35 cm, 40 cm.
3.0% 2.6%
2250 kg. 2250 kg.
298 kg/cm
2
269 kg/cm
2
(4250 psi) (3840 psi)
40 kg/cm
2
36 kg/cm
2
(570 psi) (512 psi)
The cube strength P
w
was determined from 20 test cubes 20 x 20 x 20 cm.
and the bending tensile strength P
bz
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 ~ 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 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
Strength Load
Test Converted
/31# eP
kg/cm
2
to Bw = 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 (as
principa 1 compres 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
T2: f3p = .85 J3tAl = 228 kg/cm
2,
average <7Ii approximately 230 ...
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 for vertical stirrups, however, 2 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,
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 ZQ only amounts to 80% of the
o
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.
whereby
-;-
-- _ 0
l.oo'eB - ~ " ' B
".,.. FeB
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), had to be taken by horizontal web reinforcing, was only
present there because arbitrary equal chord forces were assumed. This however
is impossible, 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 by approximately
z
Q
2
That the compression stresses in the middle of the beam for T
l
are larger than
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 ( - ~
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
tension force to the value
M
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
t h e ~ - 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 2 / ~ l 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 = ~ , while for T
l
they correspond approximately
z
M
to Z = -
z
~
2
Immediately next to the supports the difference disappears. The
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, ~ ,
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 ~ 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, ~ 8 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,
~ 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 ~ . , ~ ; 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 ~ I = 2 ~ , 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 ~ 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
,
I
eo
-l,j
I C1l '+-l C1l CIl
c: I-l 0 I-l
I
''''"
::l ::l
''''"
u
u U ...-l C1l...-l '+-l C1l
I
tll C1l
''''"
I-l
0... I-l ;v -l,j U
I
tf.l U r.z..
-
I
IZl Abllaod l'R p. Bruch..
')
2 T. I)
r R belm
I "or" i
I'l')' fl.. art
Q
t:
eretec nilS a. a.
Vcnueh Nr.
Slahl a RiB Bruch
r-
0
mm em
% I I
I
I kg!'"" i
NR8 ........... IZl 8 Ruodltahl 3 2,78 182 3,5 16
.....
64 0,83 14 1060 9S 2300 I

u
rii e
NR 10 ..........
'"
IZl 10 Ruodllahl 4 3,29 290 6 30 Q 120 0.98 24 2000 177
37(111
! l%l

"0 D I
NT 8-1 .........
;;
IZl 8 Tonlahl 3 2,78 243 8 28
..
III 1,07 32 1870 165 i
...
:a
NT 8-2 .........
';:
:3 !t
I
.;
IZl 8 Tonlahl 3 2,78 248 7 28 HI 1,05 28 1870 165 I
c _
- ,
NTIO .......... IZl 10 Tonlahl 4 3,29 207 6,5 22
.:l a
H8 26 1470 130 ,
I
IR8 ........... .0; IZl 8 Ruodllahl 4 2,95 315 7 40
D .!i
159

28 26jO 236 S-W!l I .....-

..... .c..!!
i '"
u "'"
IR 10 .......... ..a I IZl 10 Ruodltahl 6 3,10 324 5 45 ' ... 179
.. C
20 3000 266
j=
- u

i
.c ,
- .
lIT8 ............ 8 Torllahl 4
..a _
<J) _
23(1 S3(1lJ J
Jl i
IZl 2,95 242 7 39

IS6
'5
28
!
'a
ITIO ...........
"
IZl 10 Torotahl 6 3.10 306 7
"0
175 2U 2
lHU 260
571\(1
1) Schubbewehruogsgrad 1'. _ F . '. y _ Bilgeloeiguog
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
w
o
>
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 ~ 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 i f I I ~ 2.1 ~ O ' for inclined stirrups
Oil :::. 1.5 ~ 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 ~ O
Although the inclined compression stresses 011' as we saw, deviate
considerably from the shear stresses computed according to the classical formula
Q
~ O =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:
Shear reinforcing approximately in the direction of
33.
1.510
0.16
, 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:

II - 2.1 ""0
Allowable rO = 0.85 x 0.85
2.1 x 2.1
Since these values are very high as compared to the present allowable
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
direction of err
(Deviation 150)
Allow f
o
= 1/6 Pp
Deviating up to 45
0
from
direction of
Allow 70 = 1/9 ;8p
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:
B
"
e u
is actually not used completely. It is advisable to lie the
shear reinforcing in the direction of the 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 p r a c t i c ~ 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, ~ was changed such that the
Qh
distance a between the symmetrical load points and the supports was different.
Now ~ 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
Z
= .68. The beams were kept moist and tested without
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
Bemeekueg
0,36
0.35
0,27

0.90
1.15 2.
2. I 3 i 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I 8 I 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 I 13 I 14 I 15 I 16 I 17 \ 18 \ 19 f 20 I 21 \----..:.:
l
M B d Umrechnung d. Veeeuchserge hnisse auf die I .
miich.. Q"'7"h Biege- ruchzuatan Pw = 350 kg/em' u. bei doppelten Yersuchcn Bruch.
nung I a a' n I' fJ.. = s. RiO';;jnt t I QUi) I < 1) I Msu
')
e I Msu') I QUi) I r ') , ") I a.. ')
h 0 bctwcer J) 0
em , em , % Ikglem' I - I tm It' I -, tm I - I t I tm I t h/em'j! - I - j--
::. I I :::: I ::: I ::: I :::: I :::: I ::::: I :::: I ::::: I I :::: I I ::::: I :::: I :::: I :
2.26 L S
2,77 l S
3
4
5
6
1-1
1-2.
8-1
8-2
9-1
9-2
10-1
1J-1
1,45
1.70
1.95
1.35
3.10
3.l0
3,60
3,60
5,80
5.80
.,70
4,70

0.67
0,81
1,10
1,35
1,35
1,62
1,62
1,89
1,89
2,16
2,16
0,37
0,36
0,33
0,35


0,36
0,36
2.02
2.02
0,40
0,40
27
27
27
27
27.8
27,8
27,8
27,4
17,3
27.3
27.2
27.2
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19

19
19
19
2.07
2,07
2,07
2.07
2,01
2,01
2,01

2,04
2.04
2.05
2,05
355
355
355
355
372
372
373
373
382
394
361
361
2,0
2,5
3.0
4.0
5,0
5.0
6,0
6,0
7,0
7.0
8,0
8,0
1,88
2,48
2,18
2,44
1,55
1,48
1.57
1,40
2.16
1,88
2.17
2.06
30,0
I: 16,4')
r: 17,5
1: 12,0')
r: 15.3
1: 12,0')
r: 13,5
12.2
13.4
12,8
12.8
11.1
11.1
9,6
10,5
15.00
8.32
8.87
6,15
7.80
6,20
6.95
6.35
6.95
6.70
6.70
6.00
6.00
5.15
5.60
35.5
19.8
21.0
14.6
18,6
14,7
16.4
14,8
16,0
15,4
15.5
14.0
14.0
12,1
13.2
8.10
5,58
5.90
4.93
6,27
6,72
7.42
8,42
9.22
10.61
10.61
11.U
11.14
10.79
11.76
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.92
0.93
0.94
0.97
30.0
16.95
13.65
12.75
11.80
11.90
10,50
9,75
8,10
5,H
5,55
1,07
8,08
9,%
10,18
ll,OO
15,00
8,59
6,98
6,58
6,1l
6':.
5,6(
S,.22
35,5
20,3
16,$
15,6
14,5


12,i
2.26
1,60
1,56
1.98

3.08
S
S
S
S
B
B
Scblagar-tige r
Bruch
Scblagartiger
Bruch
I) Eig=rwicht de. Balkea mit 0.15 tIm berilekoichtigt I) Balken nach Eintritl dee Scbcbbrucbs auI dee einen Seite ban.
dagiert und bis aum Bruch der anderen Seite wehee belustet
S) Der Reduktiowbeiwert berilcksicbtigt die au bohe
Belonlestigk.eil und die Abweicbungen. in der Hebe
Schubbeuchlast,
fo' .- zul. GelJr4uctbLul lBlt:guns;)
I) 5 _ Schubbrueh: B _ Biegebeucb
Tabelle V. Venue-he aD mit Cleirhlaat
1 4
I 6 8 I 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 I
13 I I 15
16 17 I 18 20 I 2l I 22 I 23 I 24 I 25 I 26 I 27 I 28 I 24 I 30
I
M3U')1 Qu') I
"-XU .%=-k.
I tm I t I
lim
pu')
lb,Jul'.
tiona-
beiwerl
l
)
'ern'I---1
1
M
V'h
tm. I em
Beucheuarend
I
Mu') I
% = 1/2 %.
<,')
%=0

Pu I pu') I Qu') I
t I tim I t I
fJ ..
kg/ern,l
I'
1%
I , I I RiO.
ITTI
' 1) moment
I
MR')
I .
t , tim em
:. I I
em m
6,00 27.3 18.9 122,00 I 2,05
6,00 27,.l 18,9 21,90 2,0-1
4,00 27,2 19.0 11,71 2,05
4,00 27,3 18,9 11,65 2,05
5,00 27,3 19.0 18,J2 2.01
5.00 18,9 18,2; 2,05
9,55 I 85
10,16 100
12.0-1 85
11,97 85
13,12 1/2
13,05 72
w
......
>
schlagartiger
Bruch
seblagart iger
Bruch
S
S
S
S
S
S
5
S
S
S
S
S
B
S
2,12

2,38
3,50
2,42
3,07

7,58
9.0,1
8,62
8,10
8,50

10,95
21,8
20,0
27.3
34,8
19,9

18,8
21,0
30,6
23,"
%1,1
54,1
19,7
(0,3
8,31

8.87
4,1.'; I 17,00
4,H 112.93
3,88 I 10,10
3,80 I 22,95
4,52 I 6,43 I 4,85
2,77 I 5,2.5 I 6,30
3,55 I 6':6 I 5,85
6.74 I 6,11
30,65 I 8,35
10,35 I 1':4
17,00 I 1,19
0,94
0.93
0.92
0,80
0.93
0,95
0,94
12,1
8,6
15,5
15,6
8.7
9.1
11,7
9,1
10,0
12,9
11,9
14,9
14,8
5,51 I 6,62
6,39 5,49
7.62 5,08
6,78 6.35
6,75 6,32
9,91 5,51
10,98 3.98
9,03 6,69
7,60 3.69
8.03 3,90
7,56 5,00
6,95 3,92
6, 77
3,92
3,90
6,49
5,77
4,28
5,50
6,21
9,33
4,94
7,57
7,55
5,55
3,04
95
90
60
65
67
77
90
80
8,69
8,69
8,02
8,06
10,34
11,18
10,12
8,03
25,0
25,1
22,5
23,8
20,6
20,5
22,6
22,5
60,6
64.0
46,5
37,7
32,5
32,6
54,6 36.73 27,55
59,1 39.75 29,80
40,0 20,25 20,25
31,6 16.05 16.05
27.0 11,12 13,90
27,0 11.12 13,90
20,5 7'13110'70
20,6 7,16 10,75
18,0 4,77 9,55
19,21 5,08 10,15
18,0 3,85 9,63
18.0 3,83 9,58
16,1 2,92 8,75
16,0 2,90 8,70
2,18
1,40
2,60
1,91
2,85
1,95
1,91
1.91
1,41
1,30
1.13
1,38
1,19
1.25
1,25
1,4
1,1
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.8
0,8
0,9
0,9
1,1
1,1
389
389
420
420
414
414
418
418
403

409
409
397
397
19,0 111,00 I 2,04
19,0 11.00 2,0\
19,0 I 9,
15
1 2,04
18,9 9.18 2.06
19,0 5,17 1,87
19,0 5.06 1,88
19,0 7,32 2,04
18,9 7.35 2,06
3.00 I27.3
3,00 27.3
1.00 27.3
2.00 27.2
2.50 27,3
2.50 27,2
. 1,50 , 29.0
1.50 29.6
lijl
lij:












1) Eigengewicht dee Balken ":- Ecwlcht der Belastungselnrlcbtung
+ eingerechnet
') Der Heduktfcasbeiweet beruck..!dchtigt die eu hebe
und die Abwciehucgen in der Hche
Schubbeuchl..t
fo) - zwasltigc l,;ebrauchslllSL (bi.ltgung)
') S... Schubbeucb ; B"""" Biegebeucb
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 ~ i g h t
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
Qh
reaches its maximum value.
M
For - ~ 7
Qh
the beam pairs 9 and
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 ~ 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 ~ = 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 ~ o 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 ~ U ) are not of equal magnitude, although less variable than the QU' If
one excludes the very short beams with ~ ~ 1 . 5 , 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
~ 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 ~ o are maximum for
short beams and are reduced quickly with increased slenderness. From ~ = 4 .
Qh
Q
U
is approximately constant and corresponds to ~ = 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 ~ o ' 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 ~ 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 11
5 u
was considered for the carrying
capacity tests for shear failure. These are shown in Fig. 32 as a function of
M
Qh
The high values in case of short distances between the loads or for the
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
M
moments lies between Qh ' theMsU increases gradually until the bending failure
moment at ~ >6 is reached and becomes the determining factor.
Qh
From ~ = 4
Qh
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
~ o values decrease asymptotically with increasing distance between the supports
from a value of approximately 55 kg/cm
2
for ~ = 1.50 m to approximately 20 kg/cm
2
.
Since the inclined principal tensile stresses Grl in the zone of the support are
decreased
a distance
by
h
2
the vertical load introduction stresses G':Y' also the t-
o
values
and h from the support have been shown in Fig. 33, in the region
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 ~ ~ 12 , where failure occurred suddenly with the first shear crack, can
h
~ o 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 ~ o at failure.
This type of experiments are not yet available.
It should be noticed that the lower ~ values for uniform load are
r 0
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 ~ U
43.
of the failure 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 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 for which the principal shear
crack is pushed up to half the usable height. It is clear that these 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 crack, The concrete tensile strength amounts to
approximately 30 kg/cm
2
which is considerably above the average minimum values of
k
of about 9 kg/cm
2
obtained here.
crac
In Case II the principal stresses
strength was used.
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
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
as value of the
approximately S
is considered for
concrete strength
2.1 = 3 became
0.7
unannounced
is used for
necessary.
fortune, whereby however only 0.7 p P
computations, so that for tests again
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 M
B
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
lie under 24.9 kg/cm
2.
had
M
lower can For points loads we from
Qh ? 2.5 on
values
down to 12.4 kg/cm
2
for
M
equal to 2.5 and for uniform loads, values
-
greater or
Qh
10 down to 19.7 kg/sq.cm for 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'
for
A
t
h less
safe region is shown clearly for ~ less than 2 or for uniform load
Qh
than 8, consequently for so-called short beams or loads near the supports
the allowable ~ 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 s h ~ w s 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 o a ~ i n g .
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 ~ 25 mm which gave concentrated reinforcing. Beams indicated
by the number 2 with several thin rods (for example 2 ~ 14 + 3 ~ 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 ~ h 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 ~ b Z = 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 8 ~ 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

r-l W QJ
QJ
c S
QJ QJ
C\l

'M
tf) Cl c:
0 QJ
H
QJ
4-l H
r-l QJ w
0 0 H C\l
QJ
4-l QJ

QJ H
QJ
c: ..c 'M
s
0
0.. 'M

='
C\l c
:>-.
QJ
0" 'M
0..
0
E-< 0:: Z WCl U
Fai lure

----
._,---_. -_.-
IIdoll
Mllm
Druch
,1.. (Hio. Pu
I
'\'U M
su
I,max I
a,
\llrnOh.
glinJil:) IIrlllnr.he
I 'm
I

no 'm I
-
1,71 11,9 0,75 4,46 14,0 2020 S
2,21 15,2 0,75 5,70 17,9 2590 S
1,63 :!3,1 - - 27,2 4080 D
z:a t.rn 20,2 0,75 7,58 23,8 3460 S
1,40 25,0 0,67 5,57 29,S 2860 S
2j3 2,17 29,6 0,72 6,83 34,9 3450 S
253 1,11 31,.1 - - 40,S 4010 n
2:il 1.47 38.8 - - 45.8 4590 II
I,ll"
I'
.'
.o
1,0'1
1,011
1,'11
1.811
1.91
1,811
25,0
22,1
mm
1.,1
11,4
I
ilqui.
valenz..I)
dureh-

S.ahl
An..hl
(3
S\ahborte Ilee,
_I __L_4
G A I
} Hippen.
2(3U+I(36 22.1
n

GA2
lonlahl
20 14+3(316 15,1
Uniform Loads
<3
Gill
} blenker
2025 25,0
Slllhi
G 112 SI:17 K ;014+1 eJ16 14,4
1) '\'Iuivoi -nzdurclunceser t e A -- I01/I(3
. _-
I
E A I
} Rippen
2 ",24+1 (3 t.
.
Point loads

EA2
lorlllohl

"
EIlI
} hlenkee
2 (325
e
;;: SlAhl
En 2 S. 37 K .014+1(311
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 ~ 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.
shear failure
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
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 c o m p l e t e l ~ 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 ~ o 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 d r a w n ~
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
M
U
similarity laws say that the obtained bending moment
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 M
SU
and for the shear stress ~ .
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
M
M R Il
Be.. I
""Q""h
o. .
G h b F. lL Il..
Biege- Balkea ZUltand
.
Pu Qu T, M 6U a..u
l
) M6U Mittel 1l
5t III b rill. (mit 1
W-
e
moment .. ~ 7,5) .. _7,5
=
m m om era
% kglom' 1m kg/om
l
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
} 63,1
S
D 1/2 0,52 0,21 7,0 5,0
2 "
6 1,71 447 3,00 0,047 74,1 416 1,47 0,73 24,4 0,154 4280 62,8 S
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
} 4 8 ~
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
} 43,3
S
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
} 39,6
S
D 4/2 2,08 0,84 28,0 20,0
2 " 24
1,67 425 3,00 1,30 32,2 181 r.14,O 7,27 15,3 6,10 2680 38,9 S
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 1 7 ~ 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 4
1
) 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
) Be1aatun5seinriebtung + Eigengewiebt mit 1,0 t berlio"'iebtigt
.) Entn liebtbarer Rill
') 1m 5ebwerpunl<t dOl' Bewe........
') Niedriger Wert wahnc:beinlieb auf Beoebidigunc beim AUUClhaiea BUrliebulilhraa
1)
3)
4)
5)
Applied Load + own weight with O.St considered
First Visible Crack
In Centroid of Reinforcement,
Lower valve probably attributable to damage that occurred when forms were removed.
\Jl
~
54.
The beams have a slenderness of 100 = 6.7. They are reinforced with
,5
straight longitudinal rods of rippentorstahl and have no shear or anchorage rein-
forcing. The load was applied at two symmetrical points with a
a
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 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 l8C 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 and
I.
7 and the crack advancement was recorded.
'+
The tests of a beam took approximately 4 hours.
4.3 Building
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.
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 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 Cement kg/m
3
373 297
:Water Cement Factor 0.49 0.62
Age of Test days days
Cube Strength

kg/cm
2

I (Beam Size) kg/cm
2
kg/em kg/em
IDl: 7/7/7 cm
j
- 4 Tests: 403-561 447
- -
D2: 10/10/10 cm
3-
6 Tests: 421-483 449 -
-
D3: 12/12/12 cm
3-
5 Tests: 447-485 464 - -
D4: and Series C
20/20/20 cm
3
5 Tests: 395-448 425
ill Tes ts: 442-517 471
I
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'"_
cracks actually depends on the so-called circumferential percent rate V -
The term ~ is constant for all beams in Series C, therefore
'0 =Z tJ =/fZ(J
Fb Fb
one should expect somewhat equal distance between cracks and a number of cracks
57.
proportional to the span length. According to Table X this is not completely right.
TABLE X
r".<l lre
Beam Span Length
1'1
34,5 kg/cm
2
At Fai lure
for bh
=
m
Number Average Number Average
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
3
For several reinforcing layers on the other hand, the bond strength be-
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 = ~ (which has a dimension of a s t r e s ~ 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
~ rod diameter
)C surface area of the rod
~ p = 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 f
d
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:
k
1
= a value for the influence of the remaining parameters
From this the following can be derived:
Series D - ~ d 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, ~ d 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
D2 with h 14 cm
m
SU 48.5 kg/cm
2
1.22
D4 h 28 cm
mSU
39.6 kg/cm
Z
C1
with
h 15 cm
m
SU 44 kg/cm
2
1.00
C2
h 30 cm
mSU
44 kg/cm
2
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 ~ 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 ~ 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 h e a ~ Stress ~ O - Here the shear stress ~ O 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 ~ O = 15.3 kg/cm
2.
For the comparable beams No.5 of Section
2 (Table IV) we found minimum ~ O = 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.
The stress ~ O lies even lower for the beams C3 and C4 ( ~ O = 13.7
62.
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 ~ O
values at failure that lie even under those of Sections 2 and 3 when no shear
reinforcing was present and an unfavorable ~ 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 ~ 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 ~ 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 (BS
t
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 ~ 8 rom, spaced ~ = 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-<
"0 .u o .u
en C en en
c:: t>::l

,-.., (1) CIl (1)

00 u 0
"0 00E-< (1) E-<
C co 'M (1) 4-< (1) (1) (1)
c .....
'M '-' l-< H .u l-< 0 l-< l-< .u 'M .u ,-..,
..0
(1) en
c:: U 'M ::l ::l ::l ::l"O co en co ..... (1)
u (1) (1) "0 ..... (1) ..... ..... 0 0. C ;>.,
'M 00 'M
co S rqen C 'M 0. 'M 'M .....
E
(1) (1) co l-< C l-<
l-< 0 I co 0 co ;>.,co co
.....
0..0 00"0 co 'M (1)
U ,..oU <C U '-'
<c'-' > en en
"3 21 eo 19 18 17 16 IS 14 13 12 11 10 9
-
, , , , I I
. I I
,
I
Brochzustaod rechn.
Veranderlic-he dee einz elneu
Rill. al>:RiB
lIf Bruch-
Bruch
.ul M u' ) p..::.r. Versucbsreihen j
b
l
) hi) a F. (3 .. moment
.') a.v
l
) Il- (Zu-
Q:"""h
I I
I Msu')
art')
aul
[Hie- .lter
11'-1 I h I
11'1,,') arand Scite
11'18 ' ) M
Vee- n<2l
I)
Pu Qu') To') gucg)
Q"i; bund
(3.
---
---
I
00
I
em
I
em
I
em
I-mm I
0/
I kg/em' I 1m Ikg/em' I -
I
t
I
t I kg/em' I 1m
I
-
I
-
I
tm
I
Ikg/em' I tm I Tage
I I I I
/0
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
I
-
0,86 2,91 5780 2,1 26 0
P 2 1.50 50,3 14.2 49 6x 12 0,95 152 1,54 54,8 3,5 15,00 7,77 12,6 3,81 S L 1,08 3,54 4860 3,5 25 0 0 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 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
I
63 6x 12 0,94 ISS 2.01 '73,0
I
4,5
[12,60
6,59
I
(10,6) 4,15 B
-
I
1,09 3,82 5350 3,5
t
28 0
I
P14 2,00 49.9 14,4 56 6x 12 0,94 ISS 1,72 60,0 4,0 14,00 7,34 (lI,8) 4,11 B
-
1,10 3,75 5230 3,5 28 0
1)
2)
3)
4)
Dimensions at failure section
Computed considering dead load of plate
and weight of the loading apparatus
Computed according to DIN 1045 as
= with n = 15
o b
B = bending failure, S shear failure
V = bond failure
5)
6)
7)
8)
S = shear failure load/allow working load in bending
from DIN 1045
Computed with allow drb = 60(100) kg/cm
2
according to
DIN 1045
Obtained at failure in failure section
Obtained graphically according to with
max Eb = 0.003
Cl'
.l:-
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
and
the following measurements were carried out:
deflection with Ames dials at
2
crack pattern

4
crack width (just for plates P4, P6 and P7 with different bond
rods with 12, 18 and 26 rom)
5.3 The Material
Steel Stress-strain diagrams obtained from test pieces of the steel
used (BS
t
IIIb) are shown in Fig. 52 for the appropriate
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
fur Betonmischer" - the Highway Research Group April 1953.
was computed here just as it was
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 cubes 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 h O W ~ l in Table XI Col. 18.
The allowable concrete cornpr 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 =
allowable work load (bending) DINI045
for beams and is shown if: Table XI, CoL 19).
TABLE XII
Number of mixtures
Used for p i.at 28
Cement
Aggregate (Divided according
to size)
Quartz powder
Water-cement-ratio
(quartz powder addition
cons idered)
Mixing time
Washability
Concrete S
1
P8 and P9
300 kg/m
3
PZ 275
Washed Rhine gravel
sand
4/0 (refering to
weight of aggregate)
50 sec.
penetration
J.. = 4,5 em
Concrete W
5
All other plates
200 kg/ cm
3
PZ 275
Rhine sand 0-7mm
Basalt split 7-30mm
4% (same)
0.78
50 sec.
s lump test
0.... = 48 ---51 em.
~ - " ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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
~ y
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 18 mm and P7 with 2
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 reached at failure
and Msu (shear failure moment) are shown relative to in Fig. 56. Those curves
correspond to the trend observed in narrow beams (compare Fig. 32), that is 0
M
decreases with increasing 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%, = 12 mm,
= 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 we could also have expected shear failure for
>4 for the p late strips 0
Qh
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
= 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 0 of
69.
5.53 Influence of the Reinforcing Ratio
-
For Plates 1 to 5 with
M
= 3.5 and
?
= 155 kg/cm
2
rippentorstahl with 3, 6, 7, 9, and 12
~
12 mm
Qh
w
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 ~ = .47%, which failed under bending, shear
failures occurred, in which the shear failure load and with it the shear failure
moment M
SU
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 ~ 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 ~ ' 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 ~ = 1.5% was changed by the choice of different diameters
(9 ~ 12, Fe = 10.17; 4 ~ 18, Fe = 10.16; 2 ~ 26, Fe = 10.62 cm
2).
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 ~ .
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
~ 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 ~ = 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 ~ w ' 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 ~ = 2.07%, ~ 26 mm, ~ w = 350 kg/cm
2
and ~ h = 3.5; Plate P9 with
P: = 1.86/0, ~ 12 mm, ~ w = 306 kg/cm
2
and ~ h = 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 ~ 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 ~ p = .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 and P5 and P9
with 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 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 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 described below.
R . f
Sh N B f L d T.ype 0 oa earn o. ear
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 ~ 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 ~ 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 ~ 10 mm spaced at 20
cm. At the top, the stirrups are closed and wired to 2 construction rods ~ 10
of BStlllb. At the bottom they go around the bottom rods ~ 20 and there also
they are only connected with wire. For beams E3 and G3, 45
0
stirrups ~ 8mm at a
distance of 12.5 cm are installed.
Beam E4 had vertical stirrups ~ 10mm at a distance of 14 cm ( ~ 20 cm/J:2)
of ~ 8 rom at a distance of 9 ern ( ~ 1 2 . 5 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%
1 2 3
I
4
I
5
I
6 7 8

11
I
12 13
I
14
I
15
J
16 17 18 19

25
--- I---
Scbub-
Beton-
zulaE) Cebeauebsleeraustacd RiOla.t Bruchlastzuetand
Schubbewchrung bcwehrungsgrad
gute
(extra- recbn. au zul. all
M
R
'
JI
a,.
reebn. a,. cr,
TIez.
Be F.. policrt]
,UV+J'l ) Po..
max
rechn.O'..
des PrJ
MrJ "
uute r
(Sebuhbewebrung) (Bie. Brucbart und Bruchunache
Ius tung I Iiuks
I
reehrs flw
cntsprc-
g+p
r
gung)
Bal.
link.t I reebte = M..
'" mm
21 mm link,
I rec hts
chend Pw links
I
recbu link.t I reebee kena
us. I ns- III b 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' .0
I
3 '" 16 BS, 111b
I I3,96 40,51
Schubbruch
E 1
aulgebogen 45
0,59 0,59 336 109 10,56 1415 12,6 2140 1,12 1,90 45,S M,I 12,79 6860 3,23 Zer st or ung de r Druckzone eeben
der Lasleinuogung
45 Di..ig-e]
Schubbrueb auf del' Seite mit
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 Baudagieren Bie;e-
a = 20 em a = 20 em
ec
brueb in Balkerrmit te,

Schubbruch Buf dee Seite mit 0;

45
0
Bagel
E3 I:
c 8 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 au. BSt I bei 37,2 t,
1
a = 12.5 em a:::::l 12,5 em
(37,2)') (8250)1) (S 3,41) Nacb dem Bandagieren Biege-
brueh in Balkenmitte.
E
Vceukale Dugel
E4
1:1--=
c 10
I e 10
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
a = }4. em a = 14em
Verrikcte Biigel
E 5/1 0'0
I 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
a = gem a = gem
E6 - - - 352 112 4,06 10,80 1450 12,9 - - - - 1,55 37,0 18,6 6,98 22,1 - -
1,72
Sehubbcucb (ohne Scbubbeweb-
rung)
Vcrttkale Bugel
Schubbrueb auf del' Seite mit
E 5/2 Ii- 2,0<
2,01 48,0 52,8 62.8 - 8840 B 3,51 Biigeln au. ns. I bei 34,1 t,
08
I '" 8
I
0,53
I
0,71 352 112 4,06 14,76 1450 17,6
1
3320 2480 0,42 0,97
(34,1)')' (7650)1) (S 2,31)") ach dem B;lo.Jagierec. Btege-
a = gem 0= 9cm
brueh io. Bulkeemirte,
3 c 16 BS, IIIb 3040 ')
I
G1
aulgcbogen 45
0 0,59 0,59 380 120 4,35 17,40 1555 20,7
(1750)')
0,79') 2,01 48,0 61,S 15,38 73,2 10700') 3,53 Biegebruch
.,.: 45
0
Hugel
3000 .) S}
G3
i! :1 '" 8 I c 8
0,54 0,72 332 108 3,92 15,68 1100 18,7
(1730)') (1300)')
0,47 1,06 1,53 36,S 60,2 15,05 71,6 11450') 8600') 3,84 Biegebruch
.:: CI_
a = 12.5 em' a = 12,5 em
fi
Ycrttkcle Bugei
G5 :3 a 0' 8
I Z 8
0,53 0,71 332 108 3,92 15.60 1100 18,7
3050 .) 2280 ')
0,46 1,05 1,55 37,0 59,3 14,83 70,S 11500') 8580') 3,79 Blegebreeh
-1-" a = 9 em a = gem
(1760)') (1320)')
G6
I
- -
I
- 332 100
3,
92
1
15,68 1400 18,7 - - - - 2.62 62,6 40,1 10,03 47,8 - -
2,56
Sebubbrueb [ebee Scbuhbeweb-
rung]
1) Druc kbewchr-ung hcrGcbichtigt.
=) Errechnct im Abst and hJ2 vorn Auflager.
'} Miulerc Bugelspunnung
maxl"s
a., '=t:s 2 !-'.'
'} Nachdem die Buge l auf dee Scite mit DSl I i0.9 FlieDco. gcretec warec (klalfende
Scbubrisse} wurde dee Balken auf diesel' Seite bandagiert.
I) Zu Iriih bandagiert. Schubbrucblast wue wahracheiulich bedeuteed bcbee,
'-l
0\
6.22
77.
ing.
Working Load and Corresponding Stresses - The working load P
g
+
p
and the corresponding M
g
+
p
(Table XIII, Co1s. 9 and 10) were computed such that
the allowable 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, 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:


For the beams with point load the theoretical cr;s is constant over the total
shear zone ( is constant; is constant) while the stress of the shear
reinforcing for uniform load = = constant) is different from
section to section. The values of Table XIII (Col. 13 and 14) refer to a
section a distance from the support. For comparison the average value over the
2
total reach of shear are shown in brackets. Comparison with allowable stirrup
a;/comp 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 cm
3
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
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 Area nnn
2
.
limit strength at fai lure
nnn nnn kg/nnn
2
J 3 ~ . 2
;31
~ / "
kg/mm
2
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
78.
79.
CONCRETE
Concrete Mix Proportions
Aggregate Size, mm
(Series E)
0/3
4310
3/7
17%
7/IS
2210
lS/30
18%
Cement
Water
Water-Cement Ratio
Weight
289 Kg/m
3
216 1/m
3
0.7S
2310 Kg/m
3
Concrete Strength at 28 days
Average of 12 to 16 Single Values
Strength (Kg/cm
2)
Coefficient of Variation
6.3 Testing
Beam El )
E3 )
ES/2)
E6 )
Beam E2 )
E4 )
ES/l)
Gl )
Beam G3)
GS)
G6)
)5w = 348
IS bz = 46.3
p w = 380
P bz = 41.S
J3 w = 332
j3 bz = 41.1
4.8%
6.9%
3.0%
6.8%
4.6%
8.4%
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 p ~
form load were chosen.
6 . 2t f or uni -
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 ~ I 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
~ s ' 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 ~ = ~ 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
P
u
= 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
value of 3.37 was obtained for the ratio
s = bending failure load
allowable working load,
s reached
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 ~ b z = 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 ~ 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 inclined 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
~ 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 ~ ~ 3 or l/h ~ 7 , 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 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 26 mm
and stirrups 8, a = 18 cm. Between the two point loads no stirrups were placed.
Beam 1132 (Fig. 72) had half shear safety only with stirrups 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
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 2720 as compared to 2320
kg/cm
2
for rods 26 mm. and 2835 as compared to 2510 kg/cm
2
for rods 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 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 ~ 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 ~ r s c h 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 b
O
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 ~ = 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 ~ 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
I' = 0,20 m; d = 35 em; h = 30 em
Zugbewehruug : 4" 20 BSt II1b mit F. = 12,2'1 eme, It = I}
Druckbewehrung: 2 C 8 BSt 1I1b mit F/ = 1,2:2em I, p' = I)
23 22 2L 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 4
Rechenweete lur aul. 0" each DI:'i 1015. mit n = 1.; Yeesuchscegcbnis
Sehubbeweheung
I "j Rez.
Bela-
b
o aul. 0"
0 ..
1
)
rechn. Gtnu zul. CJt TJ u
3
)
flJll rJb, l'y
Qu
4
) b:i.m
My rechn.
5=
stung
p.
rechn. bzw.
Brucbart
I
lUg jo p Pg + p To
un tcr g+p
rechn, ovnu
(il;e. (Bal. Bruch
GtDi,i ;\1,.
(Inter- unter ,Usc
licks eecb rs
pollert] links I rech ta links I eech ts
gung) ken)
I b;L
Bruch

JUg+'P recht s
I k.g/eml tm Ikg/em' I tm I k.g/em' I kl!/cm
r
I kg/em' T I Ikg/cm'I ks/em'l ,m-I I 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
1
28
' 0
11,45 L8,7 LO 200 Biegebruch
'"
= 11 em
ET2
..;
15 ,. 285 96 4,80 9,14 15LO U,8 3210 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-agung
ET 3
I.e:
10 285 96 4,67 8,90 L470 L7,2 3L60 O,H 1,63 40,0 25,5 13.00 50,0 L3,55 9 L60 2.90 Schubbruch. 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
- 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
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. 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 ISebubbrucb. Zeratceung des Steges
-/.e:
linie ver... uacb dem FlieOea dee Bugel, reil-
teilt weuel'VerankerungJbruch
GT4/1

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 St eges
uaeb dem FlieBeD dee Bagel
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
) t>ezogeDoul b.
I) zuL rJ. _ 2400 kg/om'.
.) sui. a,BO - 1400 kg/om'.
I) Eigeoagewioht be1'iieksiehtigt.
. It
I) "" AbolAlld 2' vom AulIager.
.) _beD de. AullagerventirkuDg.
\0
-
Cement PZ475
Quartz powder
Water
TABLE XVI Composition and
Strength of the Concrete
226 Kg/m
3
120 Kg/m
3
199 Kg/m
3
92.
Water/Cement Ratio (to Cement and
Flow
Air Content
Weight of consolidated concrete
Quartz Powder Combined)
0.58
35 cm
2.3%
2270 Kg/m
0.80 0.79
Average Strengths
Kg/cm
3
Beams ET
ftw
285
,t!p
230
Pbz
41.9
flc
262
ftc /,8w
0.92
,8 p //sw
0.81
Beams GT
251
207
37.9
Beam GT/2
287
227
45.4
267
0.93
93.
Governing is the allowable ~ 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
~ 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 ~ e = 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 ~ 0 (Column 11) for both rectangular
beams with r 0 = 6.3 kg/cm
2.
(ET 1) and r
o
8.0 kg/cm
2
(GT 1) respectively
lie lower, and for the beams with very thin webs (ET 4: ~ o = 33.0 kg/cm
2;
GT 4/2: ~ 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 ~ e B U 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
measurement of the plastic elongation. For equal Fe
94.
30 rnm
2
, with gauge point,
a srna ller ~ S and ~ 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 cm
3
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 ~ 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
b
o
= 10 em; the carrying capacity of the compression zone was exhausted (exceed-
ing the failure strain ~ b 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 Ir
o
' ~ ( F i g . 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; M
U
19.83 tm )
)
GT 2 b
o
15 cm; MU =
18.90 tm ) Bending Failure Moments
)
GT 3/2 b
o
= 10 cm; M
U
=
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. nllf {J. = 270 kg/em'
t:if!:rnf;r".jl'ht herue1c:..,ichtigt
I 2 1-;-1
;;::::;.-/ I
brr-it e .
finlkrn ('Ill tl
-
...-----t-----j-----
I 6 I
Hruchart I)
niegung 1
Scbuh 2
Schub 2 u 3b
Schub 3b
Biegung 1
mcgung 1
Schub 3b
Schub 3.
Biegung 1
Schub 3.
);.4
65,5
%.0
IJ'1I6,\)
69,';
130,0
146,0
230,2
174,0
255,2
kg/em'
0'11') = 2 r.
17,7
32,6
47,S
n,o
34,6
65,0
1.9,1
07.0
127.6
H.16
i r.ro
12.Rl
9,95

10,90
B.lO
12,12
16,97
J2,96
J\-r"IJ7.w.
J\rs , " )
lin
no
15
10
5
10
30
15
10
HI
El'

EH
GT l
GT2
GT
GH/I
GT
GT4/2
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 l,(i
16.1
vrz I
16.2
<;Tl/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 for a straight line variation of
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 = 5 cm must be considered as remarkably high especially since
o
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 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 loads (Fig. 88) are
close to theoretical values which can be estimated as = 2 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
For the beams with uniform loads also (Fig. 89) the inclined compressive
stresses lie close to the theoretical 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 ~ I I , U 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 ~ 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 ~ e ' 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
\J B"
e, u
and at working
b
bO
load reach only 24%
6), stay far under the computed
for point loads and only 40% for uni-
form load (decreasing up to failure). For the large beams Tl of Chapter II Section
shows clearly.
15, stirrup stresses of 72% of the computed values were
b
b
O
the stirrup stress on
b
1 for point loads at
b
O
obtained. A dependency of
Only for ET 2, ET 3, ET 4 and GT 2 was the yield point of the stirrups
reached. The inclination of the 1r
B
Uline 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 ~ w = 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
~ 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 ~ - p
line is intersected with the abcissa. This led to the following result when Case
II was assumed to obtain ~ O.
The values for the beams with uniform load are somewhat larger than for
beams with point loads because of ~ y 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:
For Point Loads
~ B"
e u
To - ~ S R
.P-BU
104.
For uniform load q- B"
e u
= 7:
0
- T oSR - 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 ~ O - ~ O 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 ~ T 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:
capacity
Msu
*In the following diagrams
the obtained shear failure
the shear carrying
moment Msu
or
bh
2
108.
is shown as a function of
respectively.
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 r a t i o ~ - 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
earlier when the moment that acts at the same time is larger.
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 ~ - 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 ~ h 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
The ~ at the section
Qh
which forms the top end of the shear failure governs. The shear force reached at
failure decreases with increasing ~ , whereby the curves (Fig. 107) are steep to
Qh
is close to the support.
Ill.
M 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 strong dependency on Qh up to Qh = 3,
rhe second with a small influence of M for approximately constant maximum Q
u'
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
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
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,
the higher shear carrying capacity also forms for slender beams when the load
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 such that a l l.owabLe "10
Qh
for M
Qh
o to 3 decreases and for 3 is constant.
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
load which gets the least favorable
M
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 ~ O. If we consider the
covering of the comrlete ~ 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 ~ o 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 ~ 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 ~ o 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 p l e a s ~ d 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 ~ 0 ' therefore, one can use vertical stirrups. However,
if ~ 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 b
O
= 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 ~ II and thus also on 7: O
If one wants to make use of a very high ~ 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 ~ 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
~ e 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 00. 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 ~
Qh
or kmust be introduced as shown in the tests. This dependency does not have to be
considered in practice when ~ O 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 f ~ p) no shear reinforcing in
slabs; for beams thin stirrups without calculations, with the spacing
~ d ~ 4 0 cm ,
M
for Qh '7 3, or
or ~ lies such
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 ~ ~ < 30 em, longitudinal tensile reinforcing not incremented
or only slightly.
3. Top region, approximately up to TO = 0.14 ~ 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 ~ 0 for a maximum Q.
If l: 0 lies above the valid limit ing value of a region
1 ~ 8 then one proves, if ~ in the region endangered by shear
h Qh
that higher values are allowable and determines the required shear protection ratio
for the points established by ~ h or ~ 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 ~ 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., 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. 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.: 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 lieffort tranchant de poutres mince en
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.
Thesis, University of Illinois 1953.
20. Bach. C., u. Graf. 0.: Versuche mit Eisenbeton-Balken zur Ermittlung der Wider-
standstahigkeit 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, Univer s Lt y of Illinois, 1953.
25. Clark, Aof.: 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
b =
o
B =
beam width, (b)
web width, (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, ( f ~ )
/?z ultimate steel strength, ( f ~ )
PO.2
0.2 percent offset yield strength, (f
y)
D compression chord force, (C)
=
Eb
e =
Fb
Fe
h
J
1
=
M
g
=
M
s u
msu
n
=
strain, (c)
concrete strain
steel strain
area of concrete
area of stee 1, (As)
beam height, (h)
moment of inertia, (I)
span length, (1)
dead-load moment
shear-failure moment
non-dimensional shear-failure moment
modular ratio, (n)
p load per unit length
2P = applied load in 2-point loaded beams
122.
Q shear i ng force, (V)
S statical moment of cross-section, (Q)
s =
u =
Xu =
shear safety factor = (shear failure load)j(allowable working
load in bending according to DIN104S).
perimeter of reinforcement,
location of top end of shear crack in uniformly loaded beam.
Z force in tension chord, (T)
z =
0=
o
=
o--rI

e
cr;Bu
cr:
y
moment lever arm, (jd)
inclination of the stirrups with respect to the beam axis
reinforcement diameter
reinforcement ratio, (p)
stirrup reinforcement ratio, (r)
norma 1 stress
principal tensile stress
principal compression stress
stress in concrete
stress in .steel
stress in stirrups
vertical stresses near reactions and load
shear stress, (v)
METRIC EQUIVALENTS
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
123
Length
English
1 in.
0.01 in.
0.015 in.
0.04 in.
% in.
~ B in.
z in.
% in.
1
3
/ 8 in.
1% in.
2 in.
2% in.
3 in.
3% in.
4 in.
5 in.
6 in.
8 in.
10 in.
12 in.
18in.
20 in.
24 in.
30 in.
1ft
3ft
10 ft
12 ft
12 ft 6 in.
125 ft
Weight*
lIb per ell ft
70 Ib per ell ft
90 lb per ell ft
145 Ib per ell it
155 Ib per ell it
t = 1000 kg
Stress (pressure)
Metric English Metric
2.54 em 1 psi 0.07031 kg per sq em
0.25 mm
150 psi 10.5 kg per sq em
0.38mm
200 psi 14.1 kg per sq em
1.02 mm
350 psi 24.6 kg per sq em
6.35 mm
500 psi 35.2 kg per sq em
9.52 mm
1.27 em
2,500 psi 176 kg per sq em
1.90 em
3,000 psi 211 kg per sq em
3.49 em
3,500 psi 246 kg per sq em
3.81 em
4,000 psi 281 kg per sq em
5.08 em 5,000 psi 352 kg per sq em
6.35 em
7.62 em 10,000 psi 703 kg per sq em
8.89 em 16,000 psi 1,125 kg per sq em
10.16 em
17,000 psi 1,195 kg per sq em
12.70 em
18,000 psi 1,266 kg per sq em
15.24 em
19,000 psi 1,336 kg per sq em
20.32 em
25.40 em
20,000 psi 1,406 kg per sq em
30.5 em
24,000 psi 1,687 kg per sq em
45.7 em
50.8 em
30,000 psi 2,109 kg per sq em
61.0 em
33,000 psi 2,320 kg per sq em
76.2 em
40,000 psi 2,812 kg per sq em
0.3048 m
50,000 psi 3,516 kg per sq em
0.914 m
60,000 psi 4,219 kg per sq em
3.05 m
3.66 m
75,000 psi 5,273 kg per sq em
3.81 m
87,000 psi 6,117 kg per sq em
38.1 m
145,000 psi 10,195 kg per sq em
29,000,000 psi
2,039,000 kg per
sqem
0.016 t per ell m
1.121 t per ell m
Temperature
1.442 t per ell m
40 F
4C
2.323 t per ell m
50 F
10C
2.482 t per ell m
100 F
38C
150 F
65C
Shear and tension
"VV psi = 0.265 "VV kg per sq em
Moment of inertia
1 in.' =41.62 em'
Cylinder
6 x 12 in.
Wire size
#10 Wire
#4 Wire
15 x 30 em
3.43 mm diameter
5.72 mm diameter
Bar size and area
Bar Diameter,
Size mm
#2 6.35
#3 9.52
#4 12.70
#5 15.88
#6 19.05
#7 22.22
#8 25.40
#9 28.65
#10 32.26
#11 35.81
#14S 43.00
#18S 57.33
Area,
sq em
0.32
0.71
1.29
2.00
2.84
3.87
5.10
6.45
8.19
10.06
14.52
25.81
From: American Concrete Institute Standard Building Code, 1963
Norma I and S hear Stresses
Direct ion of (Compression Stresses)
c J
I I

..
__
, I I / d,-a
I I I Hichlllngronif
1 2 J
Narma/3pannungen uno
124
Principal
Schf/iH 1-1
St res s es f./auplspunnungen
lid,
; 1\ -
..
+
ii-if J-J
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. <If = - a-rI = '-0 only
possible if cracks as well as shear reinforcing are at 45 degrees.

kleine't'
Possibly Small ,-
Fig. 3 Arch and frame action: the shear stresses are limited to the
compression zone.
125
Smooth polished round
steel
Round steel with closely
spaced ribs (shrinkage
rJot" --7-l
h
iJ
n
I
J;110 I

.11
1
=f
I- UtO
/
I -. I ..ZOOO f-to.ot
I" 'ti JOOO'
L--. EJ fOOO. -- gloHer Hunris/oM,poller!
--0 --- Tors/ohf fO
SOOO - -- eng geripp/er Hanris/oM
}(f1l
cm
z
"I' ((jelflnrlesfongenJ
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).
Value of n times the inclined
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)
'1000
!JOOO

<:>...
-s ZOOO
Computed Stress of the Deflections
._ without
Working Load ...----and Deduc t i on of Stirrups and
----,---,---,,..,0,,'_-, Supp 0 r t s
kg/err!
soo/;
Stresses
Fig. 5 The stresses in the bent-up inclined rods remain under the
computed stresses (according to tests by R. Walther).
8ugel '"10 SID/ 0
a-16cm
-r


-"
SO
Schm'tt c-c
I' 150 1
"'10 a-16,m
51fJ SID/o
IOSIUfO
I
'6StPlO
_'i=:
'\ /
16026SID/O gerippte BOgei StDtb
/?t'.. .../ 5;';;,rv?S
I
Schmit 0-0

f----150
I i

II
- -
1
1,10
je2
:I:
, ,
e'"
" ,
.,>
'!f
'" "
25 Z5
SO
ZS ZS
....
I
I

.:
I r.l,

i ,j.:i::,
f10. ,e
il I: 1 l: I II I ij II I ! II I I: T
I

i "-'J'\I '[tIl
i
a _.' a 1
8 8
8.
1
,
',' __

glatle Bdge, SI Dt0 i
.-o.r-'-',0717 f--C
7"1 ....... .,,; ...1.1
Schnitta-a -/-----11
1
I, .,.,+ :]!sC--- R
I
l

'\G 11
-, i I
"
"'----r-----
25 i--- 80 -------1
g e;:;t-l
Balken T2
gerippte Bugel (>12Stm0
J!IIy3,cO
I
L..c
!/iaiie Bugel 012 SID/IJ
!-""-'co7.-
a
1

p
:;:
Fig. 6 The test beams Tl and T2 under high shear to determine the limit.
I--'
f\)
m
127
; la 171,"1
Hi
II;:::I--------r-------,---------
stoo ,
I
ooo i

.:
i
- I
2000
1000
o
I
1
10
,s

i
____J.
i
i
i
I
. 1
I
I
I
20
Fig. 7 Stress-strain diagram of the reinforcing steel of beams T.
..
10 ZS
Oehnungen c
QS

ZSO..-----.---.,-------r---,----,
kg/em
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 T
2
destroyed by
inclined compression.
Other
measuring
points not
used be-
cause of
cracks
point for T
l
(Vertical Stirrups)
point for T
2
(Inclined Stirrups)
fO
,f0Measurement


f6,----nT""---.--.-------,--,---,--,---:>r -,-----,----r-,
Average
of the inc1ine \:
compression j-i-
stresses in the
web

lBo

Fig. 14 Average value of the inclined compression stresses in the

webs for beams T
l
and T
2
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)
Vertical Stirrups

Inclined Stirrups
8dgel
Ib !a D
a J I
-.
z
'nnere /r'rdffe 11m Jchragschnilf
(Mlind() imSclmill a-a a,?mfel7lf)
0.
/of 0. M a
a-T a.-Y-T
H H e
- T - Q Zq - T - Ii
Zs -aii" z, - Q

"IL
a!
j

I
Z
L_,.
I
ai
Schubbewehrungsgrad:
_ -"'s _
Il-s - Q'a.SlnY -!J.8
Shear Reinforcement Ratio
Q
drs - IJ.s & b.
'to
- 1J.8
J
a
YlQ

ZII
Internal Forces on
itinere /(rdfle 11m fer/tka/sclwlt:
011. - : 011. - -$
Za - 4- Za - Jt. + 4-
a
Os -}iT Os - O iT
Vertical Section

o
Za
Inclined Principal Compressive Stress
r-
I dJl - O.Q
z
- II dJl - 6 -&- &7:. I
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

I
1000
............. ---
_oj
I
0 80 120 lGO lOll t
ias! Zp
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).
\
\

'::3;"

,
-1--.
. -
....


--.--_._- .-
----



-- -_. 1-
-/--
'\

/---
-,

/-- '-t-
oo
'
\
/--
}--
j\
u 21/0/5--
_';3
f!! .,
\ ptf?U 2/dd;Jao.";j
f--
.,
\
\

-
\
\

1-
1\'ll
r--

\ \'1

1\


I,
f---'

-- 'I
' -

I
I


;,j'.f!<,i -pfiga;, /Ja
o"il
'\ "'\
\ >\
- f- -
.---
-_.


--- '1\-:-' -f-- -
-- f- -- ---' --

__/--/-- 0> ..'\ ."\ ._-
....

..
---- I-

"';:;:--

f'
Fig. 17 Summary of the steel stresses at different elevations in the web at any
time in comparison to the computed stress.
1)2
Concrete Stress
Strain in
Bottom Flange

Compression Flange
Tension Chord
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.
leO
lOJI 31'
80 o

kg/em'
zoo
'" reo ---
'"

1t f301--1----1----+----+__.,.
"t
'"
801--+--+--+

""
Concrete
Compressive
Stresses
Fig. 19
Boundary stresses of the concrete of the compression flanges at L
2
0------> T1 (YtrllkllllJiij,""1J
UDU -
U 80 1i'0
/'OS/ Zp
1:33
Fig. 20. Average steel stresses in the chord reinforcing at L
the support. 2
L 'and near
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 T
2.
30
so,
.':;:
Maximum Crack widths ~
1; to
"" r.=
><
<:J 10
E
11J C
JS
--r
I
<:
I
F
20
0
~
.'
':;:
c 1., ..
:.!
oj
.0
""
c.: I ~
Average Crack Widths
Fig. 22 Comparison of the maximum and the average crack widths in the
shear reach with the crack widths in the tension chord.
135
l.as] e ,0
u
If
if,
/
if,
-
Ig/oHt Bu!!eI
MppI, BiJ II
I
.,M,
0;
f1
J
0, JJ",
0
1/
/
'- T1 T2
J
"-- geripple Bilge!
/
/
<>--- g/o/Ie
.
J
/ I
?L


>-
f
4; /
4;
J'
0,-
)
/


V
V
J
T
/"
V
/"r.
Iv
V

,J
\\lt
O

/
V /
7'
../'

----
90 80 1Z0 100 tOO t
8
1&
2
til
mm
Fig. 23 Comparison of the deflection of beam T
l
and T
2,
Influence of
direction and profile (smooth, ribbed) of the stirrups.
Ansiehf
136
ja hI !e !h
Id
,
I
,
lID
t;:
--_._....
I
:>:!
I
I
Rl
I
I
J
8J
8 101 ---fIJI
I I
III 1a ilJ
Sdmtlt a-a IJ-b a-d.
1::
30
--<

...,c
-I:>:
<1-'1

I
;

, .. 1
'"
to
<0
. . '-0
'"

<0
-SO J8
Fig. 24 The test beams of J.R. Robinson

tzBuge/- _
;8,a-J

P Selin/if b-a
::1
M
f Selin/if b-b
;;1-'
HO -
;0 - -
;0,0,-0
Ba/ken mif Jehrdgbiige/n IRe
J/p
7;6
8
;0
rs
;8 - --
13 Bu'", e"-/_H
;8.a-
Fig. 25 The reinforcing of the test beams of J.R. Robinson
1. Shear Reinforcing, Present Method. Allow 20kg/cm
2
137
1. Schubbewcnrun!l. bish Art sot. to 60 Kg/em
'
I II II I I II"
'Uw
I
-1
I
,

I
.--f.--r---l---v:-I----f--+-----f-jl-b
I
,forizonlolsennlH a-o
..._., ------1
Bvoel Iii'.
I'y- l.
I: ..c. ._..,
Yerdtc!JIvng des Belons mil TovclruH/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
HiJllel!losse
T- sC,U., ff - 1.91 tim
Vibrating Space
20 cm wide
2. Sehubbewehrung nurr.uISellrogbiJle1n
zu! to-60KI/cm1
.9
....
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.
Querschnilt
Stl/[b.--r""1 "7 I
a I'
.'0======1 IL-l
",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. H_" """;''''' "Do.m rrrr
1 1 I I I 1 I
I I I I I

., o,scmH6rtei i L Jt1,.
Stohlplolte o-10cm i .
-Ncdelloger .
l,---t== l/ 010 llf ---+-- l/ --- ". ll =:1
Fig. 27 Tests of rectangular beams with point loads.
Querschnift
feuerwehrsch/iiuche mit IPfIfO
Sfahlp/atte.
SOmm

l1e8rohmen -
----------o+ol-r-l
Fig. 28 Tests of rectangular beams with point loads.
f-J
\,;.J
OJ
f--J
VJ
\0
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
8,0
7,0
0.27
0.40
0,54
0.67
0.81
1,10
l,SS
1,62
2,16
1,89
0,90
1,15
1,45
1,70
1.95
2.35
UO
5.60
4.70
5,80
B... I I I CI I M/Olt
_ I no I m I -
. ,
1
2
5
4
5
6
7/1
8/1
10/1
9/1
r
~ 1
LLJ
L'9-J
Fig. 29
Crack and failure
pictures of beams
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.
r
l
Bee.
I
I
I
Zu I IIfIQ' n')
-
I
m
I
m
I
-
32
Z7
11/ 1 1,50 0,60 6,21
L
~
[2/ 1 2,00 0,67 4,94
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
L19-1
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
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
cracks occurred).
I-'
+=-
o
141
6 In 7 5 J 2
/
I'-"'"'
-......

--
1/
<,
0/
r-,
1/
T
c:z
0
o
WiD
o
In
1,00
J 0,00
o 5 10
Z/h
15 25
Fig. 31 Beams with uniform load; location of the point of failure
Xu as a function of the span length or the slenderness!
h
9 s 7 G
+--+----+---+---+-----1$

9 ,-,\-- odel'Sc1IubsfJOflflung 'to 10
I'
2 --
8olkenNr. 1 2 J 5
15
kg/cm
1
tm
"---
7 2 .I 5 6
l1on
l'!f1tenschubY1!f'hiiltnis
th
L-...L--L--l----,J,--+----::-----!:-----;!sO
o
Fig. 32 Beams with point loads: moment and shear force at failure as a
function of M
Qh.
til
I
m' f-o
:-..
I
50
I
,\
.z:-h/z
-',
..
I .

z-h
Il'
r-.......::

-
1
to
I
I
o
o s
I J
! I L
10 Llh
,
f5
5 m G
.20
142
Fig. 33 Beams with uniform load: computed value of the shear stresses
\rO = ) 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
8 7
Z J 5 G
"'omenlenscl1ubYeJ'M/lnis
0
f2 .J!-

....... .f5 .,

- 0 of2
Qu

BalkenNr.
"""rr-
o
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
Z5 t JO
- ----,---
i
... ..
- - ~ - ~ - = -
10 15 ZO
last P
5
gemessene
Werle
j
I
o
5,0
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_"
IPIfO
INP ZZIJ
ZF!w'we/ndlI""""
(mil WaSSlf'"rIilHI
144
lie der Dalken
GAl.fAl GOlfO' GDzEBz
HZf 2"'" fl;;:: Z"'E5 5"'"
1'fJ6 I::; HI6 1::;1 >, ''''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

Torsfohf

Torsfoh/ StIJI
ht/)1'fm
m
./
'1-000
f--- - f- -1/ f -.l-------1----+-----1
3000 V



- /
V
o 2 3
e
S %0 6
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.
(Numbers in circles equal number of occurrence of the cracks. Other
numbers equal load increment for which a load has penetrated to the
indicated location load increment p = 1.55 tons.)
I--'
+=-
\.Jl
146
'0
co
o
.-I

t tierRJBbrtifen in
1/I00mm '
Iff
2DJ
50
5
Jf5l
JTt&:i. <,
--"::r--l--'T- 'or -0" -0" 6 11
J5
, 60
92
P-pl
IGAl JLJ.........!.I : J I -I
last- Ut
sture Ian'
1--4-
3 I I 7-'-' L
L

/ /
/
/ /
PI2+ I lYz +
f 1.1 , I f I', I I I r I li".0.
Lost- P de

r der/liBbreifen in
sfefe in t
n*-!"" IIf8breilen in I!tOOIllfl!.
1!100mm
3 V,65 7.0
r
3

J
Ii 6,20 1000 3 Ii I 5 16
5 7,75 1290 3 .5 5 I! 5 3 Ii 35
6 9,30 1570 2 ---.!.

5
l-.l

,-
-'l
.5 Jf 'A 55
7 10,85 J 6 5

7 7 7 .5 6 2 7 6 5 3 Ii 2
. 73
!J1
130
2&6
J16
JItS

/
/ ,
.
181
. 228
k
li5

1 I, 7 6
.
19,
.. _----
1\-
ll=-'
I C8Z '" 41 '} \'\ '" I
+--
I 650
---- ------.>
1/
<, -------
I
3 9,JIJ 1000 5 5 8 7 5 32
121iO 1380
In 5
8 10
1----
1
R
7 5 59
5 IHO 1750 25 5
----4f
' 17 16 8
-------!f,
105
---R-
r160 2100

20

10
---iq
E=> 136
7 2170

30 32
---1
16 171
8 2,80 28'i/J 50

, 551\ 12 10 ===I- 216
9
if
---I' Jf
50
---10
\-----i5
'----,3 =. 2.9
10 V 90 85 85 13 2 321i
-4-
-fl/Ia
'i
IJO 70 105 13 1 J'"
12 18 . 3 120 \, 115 1 1 liSt
__. .:...__ _
J !J,JIJ 1000 2 2lI-------_'=:
_L. 1MIl. .13.81J_1f! If- . V2 38
i.---I..::.. 1M{). ,Jlff.1L J3 1 '1-'1 ,52
__ JEM.o 211J0651\ I 5 .3i
__--
.---L.. 27.90 3210 125 \ 1 col 130
-.1fl_J..1,,Jl..J.10 JJP. \ 1 75 . 17C
7
?K
3V
58

133
m
212
ZV5
290

/ /
/

/ /
.

v
:1 5
-"-I 0
1
15
To' !!.I 25
-'1 --;} 'i/J
---.-iil_ -.,1 _ ff}l\ ____
- - I 6Q __
-- ----71 _
78
I I I I I I I iii I I i j i /\:
1. TUO 153 1 9 2 6 f 7 n 1617
I EAt ;;;a;UIi!/\ I
...._._----
18' 4= (! j I
ZS J Ii 2 Jf ZS
182 Z( [ I
ZS .-J 5 2 J}, 3 f ZS
3 I ,6S I 7M I J I .....- ..__ .'-__
Ii 510 1000 I 3=' -. 5 7.75 1290 5
5 9,30 1570 II ----
7 mo 5 13 --
8 1{,O 2/00 18 15
9 13,95 2380 3., 12 ------ JJ s 10
10 15.50 2650 50' ---/1 ---351 ---30 21
" "" "K 28
12 18.60 3210 8sl 8 .At %1\ 31
----?-
____lip I 7'iO I J

15
-+-

71
775 129. 7 13 V
--+-
__;'/0 15iO 9 23
-
66
22

28 80

10,85 1M
8 lNa---zioq -?, 25

If.J
=
II.!
--fa
-H'ij= 7
23 00 =. 125
-iV 2,,0 V
21

75
\
13
r-W-
23,0 'i 35 $0
=-
15.

V5 ----55!\' 105
I'
=

+
OJ.

_Ii, 53

110
=
1.7< Ii
-
.,
110 26
Ii
6.20 1000

5 7,75 1290 Ii 5 5
H
6 9,30 1570 3 5 I 6 -r6
7 10,85 18'i/J 'i Ii 5 1 8 !7
8 12,110 2100 6 8 5 8!to
9 13,85 2380 13 11 Ii -8 -1-10 Ie s
Fig. 41 Crack widths of beams with point loads with
different bond (compare equal load increments)
Fig. 42 Crack widths of beams with uniform loads
with different bond (compare equal load
increments) .
}-I
+=-
---.,J
'%"
Ilild 43. Vcrrormungen in dee Schubbrucheene [Sehubrotatlen]
148
Fig. 43 Deformation in the shear
failure zone (shear
rotation) .

Fig. 44 Deflections of beams with
point load with different
bond.
t 30 20
Las! P
10 a
I
I
12[------+------1---- glaffer Rundslalll;-:--,---__-l
Bewehrllng konzenlrierl
mm
'
-!;
.. glaller ___1

I I
.i: I
f-------t---/-l-r- Beweh,,,n
g
allfgelOSI--t---
RiPpenlarsrah/1 i
Bewehrllng konzenlrierl I
I I
BUd 44. Durcbbiegungcn der Eineellaetbalkeu mit untcrachkdliehem Verbund
1G,--------,------,.------,------,
Fig. 45 Deflections of beams
with uniform load with
different bond.
t 30
I
glatter /fllndslalll
Bewellrllng allfgelosl
20
Last p-L
glaller Rundslalil
Bewehrllng kanzenlrierf.
I
Rippenlorslall/
Bewehrung konzentrier.
10 a
mm

g,

ii

] ""SllI/'
30
1

----81i -------I ---I-
-1-----------608 ---
Fig. 46 Dimensions of the beams of Series D. Complete similarity (ratio
1:2:3:4); equal building material.
9nGSIJlIb

----.....Z5
.0I-j
r----- 13S - - ..
I
I
I

C31
I
C_,GSlmb
I
,
_gJ
t
5
6.SW
.Z5:E--
..
300
iJO -
- 180
*0 180
..I.
....t.
I
I
I
elf I
,
I
.-J
I
L
------------- -
*00 ':;IfZS.
! -
I

I<>L

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 ~ ) .
I-'
V1
I-'
I
I
I

o
o
7
qs
u
l
ern /8
Fig. 50
152
Decrease of the obtained
shear failure moment
mSU = MSU/bh
2
with in-
creasing beam dimensions
(Series D with complete
similarity) .
Einu//osl
PloHt '-'-Zem P/z
odtr a-a-Zem
i Ouerbtwehrung L'
a--J a
L. ..I
Fig. 51 Dimensions and loading of
the plate strips.
Fig. 52 Stress strain diagram
of the rippentorstahl
used (Test Series p.
Plate Strips).
'0
1.
c
70 5

- I---
-
mmm
-
l--
...-
;;
mmm
V- I
_-r
1--- -.-
'I
f- 1----.
I
I
-+-
I
'S 0 35 D/DD
J.
o
7000

GOOO
3000
kg/em:
5000

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 for constant
p4 with p6
with P7 with

Pli! r
im
s----
_r- I-
I
M
su
i __-<>
Fig. 56 Moments and shear
stresses at failure as
a function of
Qh
f-----I------
I
o
M
BUd 56. Momente und SebublpoDDUDgen beim Drueb in AbbiIDgigkeit von Qh
Fig. 57 Shear failure moment
and steel stresses as
a function of the rein-
forcing rat io /.L .
PS
kg/em
l
GOOO
Pi! PJ
a
P1
c _ deU
-.....-

-
HSV ----..."
/'
Biegebruch SchulJbruc!l
S 1.5
glo
o
1m
G
BiJd 57. Scbubbruehmemente und Stahlepennungen in Abhiingigkeit vom Bewehrung8grad IA
5U,----,-----r--,----,---,---,---,---
Fig. 58 Maximum crack width as
a function of the load
(plate strips with
changeable bond; different
Q for constant //..1.. )
It Ii! 8
[,osl P
-t-
I
I
PloHe PI;; 9nZ Ie -10,17cm
'
I' G I;;'IS - IO,IG
1'7 - IO,C6
RJfJbreilen gemesun In flol/en-
tubs aufI/nleruile
I I
I :
, !
fO
o

JOf----+--- --+--f--
-!;

1;

ci:
to

Bild 58. Maximale RiDbrehe in Abhiingigkeil dee Delo8lung [Ple ttenateeifen mit veriiadtr
lichem Verbund; veesehledene " bel JL -= konatant]
155
Sum of the crack widths
as a function of the
load (plate strips with
changeable bond; different
(J for constant p- )
Fig. 59
1& It e
/'osl P
o
.0
IGO
-,-,.----,----,--...,----,
I
1---'----1--------1 -:j--
PloHe Pf U fe- 1001um'
PG fns -laIC
P7 tnc - lact
RifJlJreilengemessen-in Plal/en-
oellse aufUn/emile

r

"" 80f----+---+--

BUd 59. Summe der RiObreiten in Abhiingigkeit dee Beisilung (PlatteD,8treilen mit ver-
inderlichem Verbund; verschiedeae 0 bell' => konslant)
o

PS
pg
.0
PH
Pff
po--
--
SO 100 ISO EOO ESO JOO/fl
Fig. 60 Shear failure moments
as a function of concrete
strength
jJw
DiJd60. Schcbbruehmerneut.e in Abhiingigkeit von der Detonre.tigkeit
Fig. 61 Measured and computed
deflections for plate
strips with different
reinforcing ratios /u
Eol IS
gerechnele H'crfe f
-/''---+(fiir Bicf!!!...nfl o//einj
10
/'osl P
HF
f - -ct
o
E
e
.Fezth-;l
Plolte P, p. - o.n%
piJ - 0.95 ..
P3 - UI ,-
N - 1.90
PS - 1.8&'
/
o
,,5
mm
140 ,---------r---------,-----------,-
llild 61. Grmrlulene und I;ucclmrte hri IJlatlenslreien mit verecbiedeeea
..-n (.1

I
Pfolle P. 9H! fe-Io.l7cml
Pc H 18 H - 1O,1S
P7 lns - 100Sl
mm
o 5 10
tos! P
IS
Pf
156
Fig. 62 Measured and computed deflections for plate strips with
different bond (different for constant )

to 21 15 10
last P
!
flaHe Pl P
w
- 152 kg/cmI /1-0.95
o P8 -JOG -0.;'
+ P5 -15l -1,8S
'P6 -JOG -tBG
o
Z.Sl---
mm
7,sl--------,------.-----...--rf'<;:---=------t----j

'E

'!:::
!-------j--------t-t,if---
s

J:
Fig. 63 Measured and computed deflections for plate strips of
different concrete strengths.
1
fil
6
66
P-pl

8.St.HI b
6
t<f>20m B.St.HI b
+J<f>16mmB..St.HIb
157
Fig. 64 Dimensions and reinforcing of beams with different shear
reinforcing.
F
es
= 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.
Fig. 66
158
Bandagierung = taping
Crack and failure pictures of beams with point loads
with different shear reinforcing (numbers in circles =
crack n u m b e r ~ 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 p ~ = 6.2 tons).
70 ;-----,-----,...-----r----...,
Do/ken EJ
601------'-----'-;-------;:----'-------t-----I--I
~ 501--------r------r----+---.1----I--I
~
~
~ OI-----+---------+------t--+f---I
~
~
~
~ 3Of-----+----+-----H-----I
s
tii
/!Ol-----+----+-_._-'l---t-----I
fOf-----+---r+-----+------t
fO JO o 80
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).
Einze//us/bo/ken
160
5(} t
lost P=pl
i!O JO I/O
last P-pl
Imill/ere RilJbreilenI
-.61
+ 63
D G5
66
I
I .66

/..-
/"
:>
i
I
/
,

10 2G' 30 '10 50 t Ii! o

o
6/l!ich/asltJo/ken
10
50

30 t '10
Imill/ere Ri8breifenl
$umme der RilJbrci/en
10 o
o
1001------i--
500i--r;::;==::;r::;:;:::::J;"---'
'100 1-----1----1---+-----1
E6.
I
!::> I
300r---+-----)
I Ii

so t &
65
J
/
J..
2,1 30 '10
last P=pl
10 o
. I/Ol-----j-----j

30
EI/
30 20
last P
IgriJOle RiObreiterJ I
I
I
I
10 o
I
I
701------+--1-+----+-----1
EGI I
i I
80,----,.------r.-----,------,
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.
161
Pit Pit
I./B.Sf.I
B.Sf.I + + B. Sf. DI b
b-'- '-' r r r r. :J Z
' , ,
8u/ken 3

_rR.Sf.I
I
/

. pf.Sf.DIb

rB.Sf.DlO
./ ,j)o"
/" "A
...
.i$ 3
....... ........

... ......
-:
10 30 30 "C '10
50
o
ZO
70
GO
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
tOf---------j,-------j-----l----I-f---l

.S; 81------1-------j------+--::-:-f/ y-----i

t'

ii

...... --___t------t--------I
o 10 20
lost P
JO t
Fig. 71 Load deflection diagram for beams with point loads with
different shear reinforcing.
162

mm

fr-----'---;-----'---+----+----\-c--I----1
..
;t:;
i1i

.!is 8r----t-----t---+_---I---I-+-+------j
'

Jl

o
f(J 20 30 W
last Ppl
50 GO
Fig. 72 Load deflection diagram for beams with uniform loads with
different shear reinforcing.
163
PI2
J5 1.50 -----00-1------- tSO -----..J--. - _
I PI;
L_
1 !
- ---k-------------t---------.-.---.--- -.
, !
--- - -- (JS --------1
BUd 73. Venuehoholken de. E'cQnauncove.ouehe .u lIeft dee DAlE (volle Schuboicberung)
Fig. 73
Test Beam 1124 of the supplementar tests of Vol.
of DafE (complete shear protection)
48
f-
Jf
1
(SO
J;12
t50
gl2
.
I
I
1
I
.IF!
i
I
-
/">26

((
C'-
I
Bild Venucbobalken 1132 de. Erginauncove.ouche au Heft deo DAlE (halb< Scbuboloberung)
Fig. 74
Test Beam 1132 of the supplementary tests of Vol. 48
of DafE (half shear protection)
Fig. 75 Failure pictures of Beam 1124
Fig. 76 Failure pictures of Beam 1132
164
30000
20000
10000

V
I--
- ,------
Biige/n -
I
/
/
.c:
/ohneBiige/
-
:
165
o S101sz0cmJO
Sfegbreife &0
Fig. 77 Relationship between failure load and web width
(tests of and Graf from Vol. 10 of DAfE)
P/2 pI2
-----t---- 105 I
Bo/ken st
---- 300
P-pl
-----;;-----;------- 300
Bo/ken
st /2
Querschnifie
8o/ken 1
b-'--30
aile Biigel "'6 Sf I
Fig. 78 Dimensions and reinforcing of the test beams with
different web widths

166
Fig. 79 Stress-strain diagram of
the steel used.
ssrm) "'2Jmm
<,
1000
/
/
/
0 2 .J Ii 5
0
011 6
e
20ool----h'-----+------,4-----+----1-------J

S(JIJ(J r-----,-----,---...,-----,-------,r---------,
lrg/cm
1
DUd 79. Sp.llDuDg, ..Dehnunge-Diagramme dee verweadetee Slihle
/(Of'f1zusammensefzung der gesamlen Zuscklage o/JOmm
noch DIN 10'15
Fig. 80
Sieve curve of the aggregate
used.
o.zmm ftfaschenwpitl!
15
Lochdurchmesser der Siebe
gl!Samte 2uschliigl! 0/30mm
JO
BiJd 80. SiebliDie de. verwendeten Zu.eblag..olfo
Fig. 81 Stress-strain diagram of
the concrete
,2
b -/27 kg/cm
1
Einzi!llasfbalken
-::---


P
p
-/07 kg/cm
Z
-

0Gleichlastbalken
/,
V
I
V
0,5 1,0 1,5 2,1) 2,5
0/00 J,o
o
50
100
JOO
250
200
ky/cm
b 150
e
DiM 81. Spannung"..Delmunge-niogramm del Betons
167
Hessufl!1 tier8elonkiirZlKlfl
I
1fo-IS01 -0 17.c-ldol 0
, . B'/J,SI9 i9.51
10'51
/2 1/3.51 /7.5 1"5" 1'5 1'5 1'5 I I
v, - I' . .. 1/ iHessung
-----.- -,.- JOO a to.J.tles SdTlllflfl
DrourSII:ht
'Rissemessun!1
Fig. 82 Arrangement of the measurement points for beams with
uniform load with different web widths.
....--l: /?iSSemeSSUfl!1(J)
37
I
9. 10 n
10 trl 10
37
liessufll til!!' 8etonlriirzII7g
Nissemtssung
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
for which a crack penetrated to the indicated location).
f-'
0\
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).
Fai lure Load
P
u
or P
u

'V
I
I I
1
t
:J-T-T--V
GT1(J) I
" I

6T3/2q2 .t/ .

/. (JTIf/I@
JJ /

fT3@
ETI(j)
.>J---;;; [tl/@- @u.@-

170
5 10 15 30
SteglJreite 0
0
25 em 3D
Fig. 86 Relationship between failure loads (based on J9
w
= 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)
I I
t T
T
I/lTII/I@

'0 flTJ/3(j)
ETII@'

0 6TI(j)
ETT"'-
,f!3@
---
r---:-.
u.@
---.
I--
ofTl(j)1
I i
5
750
200
:JO
.'.
Shear ing Stress
5 10 15 30
SteglJreite 0
0
25 em J()
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-"------,..----....

- - - - redm. JVl!r'te
--gemessene Werle
s 10
It
.... ETJ
T--
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

zoo
.\11
t,'"
---- rectm. Werle
i
--gemessen, Werl,
150
l
100

+11..

+'j!'I
.!l!

so
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.
Fig. 90 Average stirrup stresses
for beams with point loads
with different web widths
as a function of the load.
The eight stirrups used to
obtain the average value are
shown in the beam sketch.
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
B-Biegebf'ut:h
$ - Schubbf'UcI1
/

I
I
500 I I
1+
/ ..
a =-!I!_-+
10001---f--+-
t500 I-----t---:'----I---
.1500 ,---..,.---
K;/Cm
l
f3s

.1000
I
I
I
tOOO I-------,I+-----I--I-----J'----- H'-----1-------i
t::l"

'" 15001-----'+---+---t-----;IIk--f------oF-----+---!---I

Oil

.10 t 2'1 6

12 18
LastP-pl
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
Fig. 91 Average stirrup stresses for
beams with uniform load with
different web widths as a
function of the load. The
average value was obtained
from the four stirrups in the
end with variable stirrup
distance shown in the sketch.
8
p-pt
I
I
I
I
I
fOOOf-----:'-+--I't1
250011---I1----J'-4---1---=!=+------i-

3500,----......".-,....---------,.-------,---..,.---.
K!T/
cm
Ps
JOOO
6 12 18 ZIf 30
Last papt
I
36 IfZ t 8
DUd 91. Mittlere bei GlcichIR""blllkl:"u mit verechiedeneu Stegbreuee in
v un dr-e BdaelulIg
Zur Milte1werllJihlung wurdcu die in de r Sk iaze <1 Uiiset nul dcr Sehe mit
vnrinhlcm ]JiiselClhsland ht'rm'gf'Zllgf"D
BUd 92. BUgelepBnnungen entlnng dee Einzelfustbulken bel der LR9l P =:I 12 t und P = 1:1
Zur Uberaiehtliehen Durstellung wurdc dcr Spcnnungsvcrlauf idcalieier t dargeslellt pfinrl.
weete nus bcuccbbneten Messuugen]
Fig. 92
IT::>
Stirrup stresses along the
beams with point load for
the load P = 12 tons and
P _ 18 For a clear
respresentation the stress
curves are shown idealized
(average value from adjoining
measurements).
Dild 93. (ler .tlmlken Ill'i r-iuer- Lnst. r' .:=r J2 t und ['I ,
Zur ubeeslctnllclreu wllrde d cr idculi-..i cr t
Syrnbol., fOr die Mellwcrtc t!"r cinJ'.dnln Ijulk m sind m-hcn den (}ul'rloichnittencin:;ft
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 for the measured
values on the single beams
are shown next to the cross
section.
174
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
Fig. 94 Average value of
the measured stirrups
stresses in the zone c
for different arrangement
of the stirrups for beam
with uniform loads GT3.
I I I II !
k!l/tm
z
ScllublJrocIJ rechts
- Biigelrerteilung!lleicIJmii8ig "'---0 6ei t
JOOO f--- D--O Biigelrerteilun!l
der Querkl'Oftlinie I /
Hiltel ii6er BereicIJ c
I /
;500 f-------/--+-----j----t-JL---r-t--t--- 1-----1
I If /
/ J
1/1/
II
1/ V
500 / /
J;/V
o ---.,
!Ii

(1500 i----+---t--_fi_---rf---+--t---+-------I

Q;j
6 12 18 2'1 JO
last P-p'l
J6
'2 t '18
Fig. 95 Crack and failure
pictures for different
stirrup distribution
(equal web Width, equal
number of stirrups).
175
$umme der RiOlJreilm
(linker SchulJlJereic!lJ
ETt
1----++ ETZ+---I-----i"---h----I
-ETJ
AET!/-
00
I I
$umme der RiBbreilm
(linker Schubbereich)
50
ETt
00
-tr
-ETJ
AET!/-

:
v:
'00



V
ii
15
1
..,;::
.N

....w
....."
0
z
o Z5 10 15
iast Pr-p-l
to t to 15
lostP-pl
5
milllere RiBbreiten
(linker Schubbereich)
I
I
I


....:::::
111
A

.. i
I I
moximole RiObreiten
(linker Schubbereic!l)
I
I
I

..... I
o
JO
to
50
60
Fig. 96 Comparison of crack widths for beams with point loads with
different web widths
176
+
+
I I I
maximale RiBbreilen
I
-- -
-- a - ranobe!
/
..... 1
I
-

+

l6StY v
I--
I---
V
I--
.;;;-
..). ...... 1/+

I,.o- :5\7

"/':-
P::J.?-t ::;:0.
1---+--1--+ miff/ere RiBbrei/en -+--+----1
a- rariobe'
6T1
+ 6TZ -+--+--+-+--+--+--l
6TJ -1---+---1--+--t-----if---1
.. 6T
--- -----:;:l:1---+--1---+-----+----+--++---I
-"---+--+--+---"--1-1--+--\
l'
';;::'l""=-4'------c
I I I
mil//ere RiBbreifen
a-variabe/
1-
f.--
-T-
r-r-r-r--r-
--r--
--
_"t;I_
f---- -
l
1---f------ ---
-S'I
-
_-BL

I--

--
;:;-?
1-+-
II
;-;=Zi
!.-= .
..
..-::;
=
I I I I
maximale RtBbrei/en
a-yariabe/
I
I
r--1---c-,
I--


.;g,-
--
f--
r--
Pi--

----r-

;-
I--

----

--
o s W M H m M wtMO S
las/ P-pl
10
10
o
D
oI..o;;!!==----J.L-l.._--'--------"_---L_-'-------'---'
50
100
.1;;
OO

JOO

.1;;
'"
1
200

100
0
DO
+
Fig. 97 Comparison of the crack widths for beams with uniform
loads with different web widths
177
Fig. 98 Comparison of the deflection
in the middle of the beam
for different web widths
(beams with point loads)
o 10 15 ZO
lost P-pl
5 o
mm

~ - - - - -
r---r
tr
+
-1
..
ETt
+ETz
,
71
fTJ
~ l
AET.
A
~ / ~
/
1/
1//
10
I
7 j ~
17
I
/
'C;I
.!i!1
~
~ I
I ~ ~
~
~ I
I
5
gJ
~ 7
~
~ . !
:
15 t J
Bild 98. Verglcich der Derebbteguag in B.lkenmitte bei vereebledeeee Stegbreiten
(EiDz.IJt-Balkea)
mm
a :0
.STt
+STz
.STJ/t
AST./t
o fiTJ/2
A fiTII/z
20 30
las: Ppl
t 50
Fig. 99 Comparison of the deflection
in the middle of the beam for
different web widths (beams
with uniform loads)
o------L- I
Fig. 100
Fig. 101
178
Deflect'
tons for b curve for P -
loads . earns with .- 12
. diff
erent web
Deflect' i on
tons fo curve for IJ
un'f r beams w 24
i. orm loads . I t h the
web width diff
s erent
Fig. 102 Relationship between shear-
carrying capacity and
concrete strength
'100 kg/emz 500
VerSllc!Je Yon Nandy {2}
NSf. _ k ,YiJ'
bl/ P
t j
I I
200 300
Prismendruckfesligkeil fl
p
100
y;.
o
60
----"l
I
P
I
I
50
-_.-
I

179
.
1/0--
- ...

o as 1,0 1,5 2,0

Liingsbewehrungsgrad ,u.
Fig. 103 Re1at ionship between shear-
carrying capacity and
longitudinal reinforcing
ratio
nild 10J. Abhiingigkr:il der vom J.iinJ::,,Ur.wdlrung"gud
Fig. 104 Relationship between shear-
carrying capacity and bar
diameter for certain rein-
forcing ratios.
'10 mm 5. 20 30
Ourchmesser
10 o
,0
,0
....

;
,
/,u-1,'I3%
I
,0
I
i
6y-
I

'1;0
I fersucITe an Plalfen
!
,0 A fersucITe on Bolken -------]
I
j
12,
Bild 104. Abhii.ngigltt:it der vnm Slol"lurdulI('uu be! beltimmlt
m

180
I
I I
l
---lr-'1J-1j
=t 1--
1
- 7
I

r
T
-----\ 61,'<h"" Im'kM
e I
I
5 /L---: .
!
!
I i

i .


i
/
I
I
a /"'"
I
finzel/oslba/ken

'I
I
35
t
30
25
;;
] 20
:J
0-
1

1
" COr 1
"

a s 10 15 20
$fegbreife lJ
o
25 em .30
Fig. 105 Relationship between shear-carrying capacity and
web width b
o
for equal compression chord width b.
60 em 70
30 30
lIulzhiJhe h
10
....

{
1f;0
C
-cs
"'g
""
.::l
<i,
z,
<:>

-<>
0
\ I I
''-.!
__ .
I I P.- 1,66%brw.1.JJ %
1-----+----+-------1-__
I
c:yon leonhordl--::/;:;;::T-
---+ ----,--- :
i I I I
I I
__
Fig. 106 Relationship between shear-carrying capacity and
absolute value of the beam height h.
181
Fig. 107 Relationship between shear
carrying capacity and moment
shear ratio M
Qh
8 7 J 5 6
l1omenfen-Schub- Verhiil/nit
2 o
100.----,----,------,---r---,---,---,------,
BUd 107. Abhiingigkeit de. Srhubt.agliihigkeit vom MomentenSrhubvr.hiiltail M/Q"
60
k!//cm
Z
50
I I

G/eich/oslbo/ken
\
\

,
1'.
'---.

Fig. 108 Relationship between shear-

carrying capacity and slender-
ness of beams for uniform load.
o 5 10 15
Sch/ankheil 11k
20 25
Bild 108. Abhinglgkeit der von de. Srhlsnkheit de. Balken. hei
"
,
,..
sid
-_._-_._----
'Risse
sc.iete Oruckstrebe
-,==lJ:==ltt==ti.t=:;zti:::=
:,1,1 1'1'1, Hit' nn B'l;!"h, OIlIfg:Illiill:.:1
i .-llg .;1iib.'1l gl"la;':t>r1,"r " ..... I,lrl
I- b
o
-I' -i
lo/recht noc/lgieblg
,.. l)rlld...... i'll eiu nn den Ed,,-
Triih"r. lIl'> ,111'-h'j'Ochf"nliq;:rndf""
;'::fohrl1 11:1111
Fig. 109 The inclined compression
strips suspended from the
stirrups is like a box beam
placed at a corner longitudinal
rod, the in-between longitudinal
rods are elastic.
182
5
zu/ To Fur 8 300
Schubsicherungsgrod
I
1---100%---
5 'If/. (H)
2
/j ,r/j r{r/
0 -(j)--

36 (36)
:5
0
30
0-
=vo//e Schubsicherunq=
-

' "
...........
"
.... ' <,
2'1)
" "
<, <,
100%
" "
"
Ii
,
"
,
" .... ", "
-- -- -- --
, , ,
r'-, <,
0
40
' ,
<,

-,
<, ""
-- --- -- 80%

,
'J <,
j1 I I
<,
-, "
-- -- ---1---
I I I
, , , ,
'"
<, <,
f---

-- 600/.
lei/weise I I I I
, ,
f--- $chubsicherungl I I
" r-;
, "
I--

, 1--
I-yorzugslfeise milBiige/n I
<, <,
--f-. ,-
---
I--
'100/0
I I II I I
0
r-. <,

"....l(8)
I I I I I I I
200/0
I I 1 I 1
-Lt"T-L-l----,
I I I I I I 1
I I 1 ,I I I I I I
(])
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 : : : :
J
15
3
2
27 59 72
JJ 00 88
kfflcm
15 es JO
fGI (10) (12)
23 '12 5'1
(18) (J3) ('12)
2 J 020'100060100
$chubsicherung in 0/0
I I !! I ! I t I
2J 1/56 7891011121Jl
h
Dild lID Vonchlog Cur, mn,x.Q un? D 300 und gerippte Uing
bcwehTUDij. rllr uH')('re 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.
,0;;,
1.::c,J
,
,,,'. .:,.. iO,.. ,1".,..:: II? 60
r
...
'-- - - /1'
._--_.. -- - ,/
/t
-.- -- -, I 1
,
I
i
I I
I
' i.
, I I
L
:' :; " : . '! i
, I , :__,_,_.. _.. .
.: -ei. > ,. c,
.;..-,:, .r : 1" :... ' .r .,,'c; .... 1,,1 ...
, r:
,,,,, ...
-:-
/2.

}'
'/ -,
SI,3

ii,
r
I I ,
I t i
'I, i
/1,>7:
A
, I, ,
'71.. I , r. ;
l.\ [: ' ,
" ;' j'. . ..
I "'- I ! " .. 'I:At. _
k ,;--,'." '<=_,. i-'_
l :""- '>, i !
\' -, " 't., -< _
i'a5 I'\, .: "" " <,__ j
I " I
I "" '.. I 0"\
I
:''',: <, ! --="-"
.....-. -,
.... ! -. I
I i-. "---- i ------; ...-
I i -;/11-- --- -
I !
iii
'i I (/)
I !: I, 'V
I !' I
I I _'....
I
I I ..? ..'./ _ ..
/ i! t ;"";
/
-s sso
770
4d1
r.
" I ( I
/:s
(5%)
,,-1
, c
7,?,:){5!
(..,'/!t; I
- ,.... i
!
I
I .-' 70
I
.L/lo
) (
I
I
I
I

I
7?o "'..-
I
I
e
I "'1'" I ..;>
(
!(.710 )
I
I
I
cl4
i 3.. r . #
: .. .J lO
(,30)
i (oJ;
1 t_
Fig. 110A Proposal for the allowable in English units for f
c
and ribbed longitudinal reinforcing.
4260 p s.L
:---1
'!J
\;i