Suggested Approach Based On ACI Code For Maximum Bending Capacity Of Singly And Doubly Reinforced Concrete Beam

Sections
K. S. Youkhanna *
*

Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Duhok, Duhok, IRAQ e-mail: kanaansliwo@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT In structural engineering, a need to check the analysis and design calculations using another approach arises. Structural engineer, sometimes, needs as soon as possible to know the maximum bending capacity of a specific beam section, as a result, he needs approaches that require simplified calculations. It is believed, that the present research serves for the above objectives. The method of the ACI code in analysis of singly and doubly reinforced concrete beam sections is reviewed as background of analysis. New suggested approach for the analysis of singly and doubly reinforced concrete beams, based on ACI method, is presented. Theoretical formula to calculate optimum reinforcement is presented. A factor relating maximum and optimum tensile reinforcement is suggested. Also simple formulas are presented to calculate maximum flexural capacity of singly and doubly reinforced concrete rectangular beam sections. Applicable tables and figures are presented to be used with the suggested approach. Numerical examples verify that the suggested approach is simpler compared to the original ACI code approach.

KEYWORDS: Singly Reinforced Beam; Doubly Reinforced Beam; Tension Steel; Compression Steel; Maximum Bending Capacity.

INTRODUCTION The universal nature of reinforced concrete construction stems from the wide availability of reinforcing bars and of the constituents of concrete (gravel, sand, water and cement), from the relatively simple skills required in concrete construction (Macgregor & Wight, 2005). Concrete is a material obtained by permitting a carefully proportioned mixture of cement, sand and gravel or other aggregate, and water to harden in forms of the shape and dimensions of the desired structure. It is used in one form or another for almost all structures, large or small. It is also very durable and fire resistant when specification and construction procedures are met. Steel in compression zone is used for many reasons, among them are reducing sustained load deflections, increasing ductility, changing the mode of failure from compression to tension and ease of fabrication to hold the stirrups (Macgregor & Wight, 2005). Since 1963, the ultimate-strength design method has rapidly gained popularity. With this method (now called strength design), the working loads are multiplied by certain load factors, the members are then selected so they will theoretically just fail under the factored loads. One of the most important members in reinforced concrete buildings is the beam which we are going to deal with for the case of singly and doubly reinforced. For verification, alternate approaches are always required in analysis and design.

It is believed that this research may be considered as an aid in the analysis and design of reinforced concrete beams and this is the objective of this study.

ACI CODE APPROACH In this research, the basis of analysis is ACI code approach. The mathematical concept of optimum steel is used to derive simplified theoretical approach, as an alternative approach, to find the maximum bending moment capacity of singly and doubly reinforced concrete sections making use of maximum applicable values for steel suggested by the approach of the ACI Code.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Singly Reinforced Beam Reference is made to Fig. (1) which represents Whitney (Whitney, 1942) equivalent rectangular stress block.

b c d As N.A

0.85 f 'c

a =1c

C= 0.85 f 'c ab As fy

Fig. (1) Singly reinforced rectangular beam.

The nominal moment can be written as (Ferguson, 1981; McCormac, 1998; Nilson et al., 2004) a M n = As f y (d ) (1) 2 A And = s (2) bd As f y And a = (3) 0.85 f 'c b For balanced failure (McCormac, 1998; Nilson et al., 2004): f' 600 ) (4) b = 0.85 1 c ( f y 600 + f y ACI Code (ACI318M, 2008) limits the percentage of steel to: (5) max = 0.75 b in which , 1 is to be taken equal to 0.85 for fc up to and including 30 MPa. For fc above 30 MPa , 1 is calculated from Eq.(6) but shall not be taken less than 0.65 (McCormac, 1998) ( f 'c 30)(0.05) (6) 1 = 0.85 1 7 Substituting Eq.(3) into Eq.(1) and simplifying:

) A2 s 1.7 f `c b To get optimum reinforcement (Aso) that gives optimum flexural capacity (Mno) : M n = ( f y d ) As (
2

fy

(7)

fy Mn (8) = ( f yd ) ( ) As As 0.85 f `c b Equating Eq.(8) to zero, we obtain f 'c Aso = 0.85( )bd (9) fy Comparing Eq.(9) with Eq.(2), the optimum percentage of reinforcement is: f 'c o = 0.85( ) (10) fy Now, let the factor F be (A ) ( )max F = s max = (11) ( Aso ) ( )o From which: ( As )max = F . Aso (12) Substituting Eq.(4) into Eq.(5) then Eq.(5) and Eq.(10) into Eq.(11), we get: 600 F = 0.75( ) (13) 600 + f y 1 From Eq. (13), it can be seen that the factor F depends only on fc and fy . As a result, we construct Table (1) to find F for different values of on fc and fy .

Table (1) Factor "F".

fc fy MPa 275 300 15 350 450 fc fy MPa 275 300 31 350 450 fy MPa 275 300 45 350 450 fc F 0.437 0.425 0.403 0.364 F 0.433 0.421 0.399 0.361 F 0.382 0.371 0.352 0.318 fc fy MPa 275 300 20 350 450 fc fy MPa 275 300 35 350 450 fy MPa 275 300 50 350 450 3 fc F 0.437 0.425 0.403 0.364 F 0.419 0.407 0.386 0.349 F 0.364 0.354 0.335 0.303 fc fy MPa 275 300 30 350 450 fc fy MPa 275 300 40 350 450 fy MPa 275 300 55 350 450 fc F 0.437 0.425 0.403 0.364 F 0.400 0.389 0.369 0.334 F 0.345 0.336 0.318 0.288

We conclude from Table (1) that for values of f c less or equal to 30 MPa, the factor F takes the same value regardless of fy values. Hence, Table (1) may be replaced by Table (2).

Table (2) Factor "F ".

fy (MPa) 275 300 350 450 30 0.437 0.425 0.403 0.364 31 0.433 0.421 0.399 0.361 fc 35 0.419 0.407 0.386 0.349 (MPa) 40 0.400 0.389 0.369 0.334 45 0.382 0.371 0.352 0.318 50 0.364 0.354 0.335 0.303 55 0.345 0.336 0.318 0.288

Substituting Eq.(9) into Eq.(12) then this into Eq.(7), a simple formula can be derived to calculate maximum flexural capacity of a singly reinforced concrete rectangular section as a function of the factor F : ( M n )max = 0.425 f 'c bd 2 ( 2F F 2 ) (14) Where F is a factor from Table (2) or from Fig. (2) that is drawn for specific values of fy .

Fig.(2) Factor "F" for different values of f'c and fy.

fy = 275 MPa 0.45 0.4 Factor (F) 0.35 0.3 0.25 20 25 30 35 f'c (MPa) 40 45 50 fy = 350 MPa fy = 450 MPa

350

Fig.(2) Factor F.
Another formula, based on ACI code approach, for maximum bending capacity, may be derived if Eq.(4) is substituted into Eq.(5), then this into Eq.(2), after which Eq.(2) is substituted into Eq.(3) and Eq.(1) to get: 382.5 1bd 2 f `c 382.5 1 ( M n )max = [1 ] (15) (600 + f y ) 1.7(600 + f y ) Numerical examples show that the application of the suggested Eq. (14) is more convenient due to its simplicity and requires less mathematical work and less variables to deal with.

Doubly Reinforced Beam Simplified approaches are used widely in design to simplify the rigorous analysis (Hayder et al., 2004; Andrea et al., 2007). In Practice, the design of beams is greatly facilitated by the use of aids (Nilson et al., 2004).
The basis of analysis of reinforced concrete beam section with compression steel (doubly reinforced) is shown in Fig.(3) (Nilson et al., 2004). In this study, an attempt is made to study the case where tension and compression reinforcement are both reaching yield stress (fy). For such case, the bending moment capacity (Mn) of a reinforced concrete beam with compression steel may be represented as (Ferguson, 1981; Nilson et al., 2004; Nawy, 2005; PCA, 2008 ):

b d' A's d N.A As c a =1c

0.85 f 'c A's fy a

0.85 f 'c

A's fy

+
(As - A's) fy

d - d' A's fy

As fy

Fig. (3) Doubly reinforced rectangular beam.

a M n = ( As A's ) f y (d ) + A's . f y (d d ' ) 2

(16)

Where:
a= ( As A 's )fy 0.85f 'c b = ( ')fy d 0.85f 'c

(17)

And:
As bd A' '= s bd

(18) (19)

Maximum percent of steel in doubly reinforced concrete beam section is:

max

= 0.75 b + '

(20)

Where b is the balanced steel ratio and is given in Eq.(4). Substituting Eq.(17) into Eq.(16) and simplifying:
M n = R1 As R3 ( As )2 + 2 R3 As A's R2 A's R3 ( A's )2

(21)

Where:
R1 = f y .d R2 = f y .d ' R3 = ( fy)
2

(21-a) (21-b) (21-c)

1.7 f 'c b

Now, optimizing Eq.(8) (i.e. to find the optimum steel Aso ), by taking the derivative of (Mn) with respect to (As) and then equating to zero (Fong et al., 2003):

M n = R1 2 R3 As + 2 R3 A' s = 0 As
From which the optimum steel Aso will be: R Aso = A' s + 1 2 R3

(22)

Substituting Eq.(21-a) and Eq.(21-c) into Eq.(22) and dividing by (bd), the optimum ratio of reinforcement will be:

o = '+

0.85 f 'c fy

(23)

Now, let the ratio of maximum to optimum be denoted as R:

R=

As max max = o Aso

(24)

From which

As max = R. Aso

(25)

Substituting Eq.(4) into Eq.(20), then substituting Eq.(20) and Eq.(23) into Eq.(24) and simplifying, we get:

R=

F + . ' 1 + . '

(26)

Where ( F ) is a factor relating the maximum tensile reinforcement to optimum reinforcement for singly reinforced concrete beam section given in Eq.(13) and in Table (2), and is fy (27) = 0.85 f 'c

Substituting Eq.(22) into Eq.(25) and simplifying:

As max = R( A' s +

R1 ) 2 R3

(28)

Substituting Eq.(28) into Eq.(21) and introducing the effect of strength reduction factor () and simplifying, the suggested formula for maximum ultimate bending moment will be:
M u max = K o .b.d 2 K 1 .b.d .d '

(29)

Where
Ko =

( f y )2
1.7 f 'c

( R 1)( ' ) 2 + . f y . R.( ' ) + 0.425 . R. f 'c

(30)

And
K1 = . f y (' )

(31)

Where R is from Eq.(26). Values of the factor (Ko) are given in Table (3) for some of the applicable values of fy and f 'c. Values of the factor (K1) are given in Table (4) also. Both Tables (3) & (4) are for the case where f s = fy.

' 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01

Table (3) Factor Ko. f 'c = 20 (MPa) f 'c = 30 (MPa) Ko Ko fy (MPa) fy (MPa) 275 350 450 275 350 450 3.521 3.304 3.066 5.192 4.844 4.453 3.702 3.520 3.337 5.372 5.067 4.733 3.876 3.740 3.615 5.552 5.280 5.006 4.052 3.963 3.890 5.722 5.507 5.283 4.231 4.181 4.172 5.906 5.725 5.564 4.412 4.403 4.440 6.079 5.945 5.836 4.585 4.628 4.724 6.266 6.167 6.111 4.770 4.846 4.993 6.441 6.391 6.391 4.948 5.068 5.278 6.618 6.604 6.660 5.128 5.293 5.545 6.796 6.833 6.949
7

f 'c = 35 (MPa) Ko fy (MPa) 275 350 450 5.781 5.384 4.950 5.953 5.603 5.217 6.127 5.823 5.488 6.291 6.032 5.763 6.478 6.257 6.042 6.655 6.470 6.309 6.834 6.684 6.579 7.014 6.917 6.85 7.180 7.136 7.131 7.363 7.340 7.412

Table (4) Factor K1.

For all values of ( f 'c fy (MPa) ' 275 350 0.0005 0.124 0.158 0.001 0.248 0.315 0.002 0.495 0.630 0.003 0.743 0.945 0.004 0.990 1.260 0.005 1.238 1.575 0.006 1.485 1.890 0.007 1.733 2.205 0.008 1.980 2.520 0.009 2.228 2.835 0.01 2.475 3.150 ) 450 0.203 0.405 0.810 1.215 1.620 2.025 2.430 2.835 3.240 3.645 4.050

Figures (4), (5) and (6) show the relationship of factor (R) and the compression steel ratio ('). Figure (7) shows the relationship of factor (K1) and the compression steel ratio ('). Figures (8), (9) and (10) show the relationship of factor (Ko) and the compression steel ratio (').
Substituting Eq.(20) into Eq.(17) and the result to be substituted into Eq.(16) and making use of Eq.(4), the maximum bending moment capacity of doubly reinforced beam section, according to ACI code approach, may be found to be: M u max = 0.6375 . f 'c b.d 2 [ 1 H 0.375( 1 H ) 2 ] + . ' f y b.d (d d ' ) (32) Where

600 (33) 600 + f y Comparing Eq. (32) with Eq. (29), it can be seen that the suggested equation [Eq. (29)] is simpler than Eq. (19) and it is to be applied using Tables (3) and (4) for the values of (f 'c and fy) indicated in the tables. Tables (3 & 4) may be expanded for other values of (f 'c and fy). H= CONCLUSIONS 1. Simple formulas are derived to calculate maximum flexural capacity of singly and doubly reinforced concrete rectangular sections. 2. Another formula is derived to calculate optimum tensile reinforcement and optimum flexural capacity of singly reinforced concrete rectangular section. 3. A factor F relating maximum reinforcement to optimum one is presented for singly reinforced section, this factor depends on fc and fy only. 4. A factor (R) relating the maximum and optimum steel reinforcement is presented for doubly reinforced section. 5. Applied tables and figures are provided to be used with the derived simple formulas.
8

Fig.(3) Relationship of factor "R" and compression steel ratio.

0.55 Factor ( R ) 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 Compression Steel Ratio ( ) (')

f 'c = 20 MPa
fy = 275 MPa 350 450

Fig.(4) Relationship of factor R and compression steel ratio.

Fig.(4) Relationship of factor "R" and compression steel ratio.

0.55

f 'c = 30 MPa
Factor (R) 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 Compression Steel Ratio

fy = 275 MPa 350 450

(')

Fig.(5) Relationship of factor R and compression steel ratio.

Fig.(5) Relationship of factor "R" and compression steel ratio.

0.55

f 'c = 35 MPa
0.5 Factor (R)

0.45

fy = 275 MPa 350 450

0.4

0.35 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 Compression Steel Ratio

(')

Fig.(6) Relationship of factor and compression steel ratio.

Fig.(6) Relationship of factor "K1" and compression steel ratio.

4.5 4 3.5 Factor (K1) 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 Compression Steel Ratio (')

For all values of (f 'c)

fy = 450 MPa 350 275

Fig.(7) Relationship of factor K1 and compression steel ratio.

10

Fig.(7) Relationship of factor "Ko" and compression steel ratio.

7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 0

f 'c = 35 MPa 30 25 fy = 275 MPa

0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01

Factor (Ko)

Compression Steel Ratio

(')

Fig.(8) Relationship of factor Ko and compression steel ratio.

Fig.(8) Relationship of factor "Ko" and compression steel ratio.

7.5 7 6.5 6 Factor (Ko) 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 Compression Steel Ratio

f 'c = 35 MPa 30 25

fy = 350 MPa (')

Fig.(9) Relationship of factor Ko and compression steel ratio.

11

Fig.(9) Relationship of factor "Ko" and compression steel ratio.

7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 Compression Steel Ratio

Factor (Ko)

f 'c = 35 MPa 30 25

fy = 450 MPa

(')

Fig.(10) Relationship of factor Ko and compression steel ratio.

REFERENCES
ACI318M (2008), Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, USA. Andrea Dall'Asta, Laura Ragni, Alessandro Zona (2007). Simplified Methods for Failure Analysis of Concrete Beams Prestressed with External Tendons, Journal of Structural Engineering, 133(1), 121-131. Ferguson, Phil M. (1981), Reinforced Concrete Fundamentals, 4th Ed., SI Version John Wiley & Sons, New York. Fong, C. F., Kee, D. De., Kaloni, P. N. (2003), Advanced Mathematics for Engineering and Science, World Scientific Publishing Co. Hayder A. Rasheed, Hasan Charkas, Hani Melhem (2004), Simplified Nonlinear Analysis of Strengthened Concreet Beams Based on a Rigorous Approach, Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(7), 1087-1096. Macgregor, J. G., Wight, J. K. (2005), Reinforced Concrete, Mechanics and Design, 4th Ed. Pearson Prentice Hall. McCormac, Jack C. (1998), Design of Reinforced Concrete, 4th Ed., Addison-Wesley Longman, Inc., California. Nawy, E. G. (2005), Reinforced Concrete, A Fundamental Approach, 5th Ed., ACI 318-05 Code Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall International Series. Nilson, A. H., Darwin, D., Dolan, CH. W. (2004), Design of Concrete Structures, 13th Ed., McGraw Hill Book Company. PCA (2008), Notes On ACI 318-08 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, Portland Cement Association, 10th Ed. U.S.A. Whitney , C. S. (1942), Plastic Theory of Reinforced Concrete Design, Transactions ASCE, 107, 251-326.

12