Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No.

3, 395-408, October 2007 / Copyright 2007 Japan Concrete Institute 395

Scientific paper

Shear Mechanism of Reinforced Concrete T-Beams with Stirrups

Withit Pansuk1 and Yasuhiko Sato2

Received 11 April 2007, accepted 30 June 2007

Abstract
As is well known, in the current design code, the shear strength of beams can be calculated based on the modified truss
theory, which cannot take into account the effects of the top flange area of T-beams. Reported experimental data show that
the top flange has an effect on the shear capacity of T-beams with shear reinforcement. To predict the shear capacity of
T-beams more precisely, the effect of the concrete top flange area on the shear resisting mechanism must be clarified.
Comparison of test results for rectangular and T-beams yielded insights into the shear resisting mechanism of T-beams.
Verification and clarification of the shear resisting mechanism of T-beams were performed based on the 3D nonlinear
finite element code (CAMUI). Finally, a simplified method for determining the failure criteria for shear of RC T-beams is
proposed.

1. Introduction T-beams (Taub and Neville 1960; Bresler and Macgregor

In the slab-beam-girder construction system, the beams
are usually built monolithically with a slab. Hence, the
portion of concrete slab effectively connected together
with a beam can be considered as the flange projecting
from each side of the beam. At the same time, the part of
the beam at the bottom of the slab is working as the web
or stem of the T-shaped beam (hereafter, T-beams).
This type of beam is widely used in engineering struc-
tures, for example RC bridges and building structures.
A monolithic multiple T-section, which has several
stems and includes the entire one-way slab that spans
transversely between the stems as its flange, is usually
used in the construction system. For design work, the
multiple T-section is divided into individual T-sections
that have a portion of the slab as flanges. For negative
bending moment, the flange is on the tension side of the
neutral axis, and thus the T-section is in effect a rectan-
gular section. For positive bending moment, the flange
does provide considerably more compression area. Just
how much of the slab projecting from the stem may be
considered as part of the individual T-section, as well as
the methods of design and analysis for flexural strength,
are clearly defined and appear in the current design codes
(ACI 1999; Eurocode 2 1992; JSCE 2002). On the other
hand, for the shear issue, the situation is completely
different. As is well known, in the current design codes,
shear strength can be calculated based on the modified
truss theory, which cannot take into account the effects of
the top flange of T-beams. However, the literature in-
cludes reports that the area of the top flange has an effect
on the shear capacity and resisting mechanism of
1
Doctoral course student, Division of Built Environment,
Hokkaido University, Japan.
E-mail:withit@eng.hokudai.ac.jp
2
Associate Professor, Division of Built Environment,
Hokkaido University, Japan.
1967; Moayer and Regan 1974). Only a small number of
studies have so far been done in an empirical way to
consider the existence of top flanges in design (Leon-
hardt 1965; Regan and Placas 1970; Hoang 1997). To
predict the shear capacity of T-beams more precisely, the
effect of top flanges on the shear resisting mechanism
must be clarified.
This study first examines how the top flange affects
the shear capacity of RC T-beams with and without shear
reinforcement based on data analysis using previous
experimental results. The comparison of the test results
of rectangular and T-beams yielded insights into the
shear resisting mechanism of T-beams. Verification and
clarification of the shear resisting mechanism of T-beams
were performed using a home-made nonlinear finite
element program. Finally, a simplified method for de-
termining the failure criteria for shear of RC T-beam is
proposed.
2. Shear capacity of RC T-beams observed
in previous studies
To confirm the factors and variables that affect the
shear-resisting mechanism of beams, the data observed
in the previous studies were collected and divided into
small groups with similar beam parameters, and only the
data of T-beams with different flange widths were con-
sidered. The selected data included only simple-span
beams that failed in shear failure mode under one or two
symmetrical concentrated loads. The relevant informa-
tion pertaining to sources of data, geometry, materials,
and number of beams is summarized in Table 1.
From Fig. 1, in the case of T-beams without shear re-
inforcement, the ratio of flange width to web width
(bf/bw) has almost no effect on the ultimate shear capacity
of T-beams. In the case of T-beams without shear rein-
forcement whose a/d ratio is greater than 3.4, it was
reported that beams failed immediately after the occur-
396 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007

rence of a diagonal shear crack without compression
failure in the compression zone. As a result, the flange
can be considered not to affect the shear capacity of
T-beams. Fig. 2, on the other hand, shows that in the case
of T-beams with shear reinforcement, shear strength of
reinforced concrete T-beams increases as the ratio of
flange width to web width becomes large. As a result,
this study will focus only on the effect of concrete top
flanges on the shear resistance of T-beams with shear
reinforcement in webs whose a/d ratio is greater than 2.4.

3. Experimental program
Table 1 Experimental data of T-beams.
wfw Amount 3.1 Specimens and materials
Test series a/d There were no existing tests for T-beams using the
(MPa) of data
Moayer and presence of the flange area as the experimental parameter.
2.4 - 3.5 0.7 - 1.1 4 Also, the comparison of important beam behavior such
Regan (1974)
Ferguson and as concrete strain and stress development in the shear
3.4 - 6.2 - 8 reinforcement between rectangular and T-beams could
Thompson (1953)
Al-Alusi (1957) 3.4 - 6.5 - 8 not be found in previous research. As a result, two rein-
Placas and Regan forced concrete beams of rectangular and T-shaped sec-
3.4 - 3.6 0.4 - 1.2 19 tions were tested in this study. The rectangular beam
(1971)
Withey (1908) 3.0 0.5 - 1.4 8 measured 3800 150 350 mm (length width
Taub and Neville height) and had an effective depth of 300 mm. The cross
3.0 0.3 - 1.3 7 section of the T-shaped section was almost the same as
(1960)
that of the rectangular beam; only a concrete flange was
Note: a = shear span; d = effective depth; w = shear
attached in the top position of a whole long beam. The
reinforcement ratio; fw = yield strength of shear rein-
cross sections of both specimens are shown in Fig. 3. The
forcement; fc = concrete compressive strength = 11 to
stirrups in the tested part had a spacing of 110 mm, while
57 MPa; l = tension reinforcement ratio = 0.01 to 0.05
stirrups were placed more heavily in the remaining parts
of the beam to ensure shear failure within the tested part.
The full details of their dimensions, arrangement of re-
5 inforcing steel and loading condition are shown in Fig. 4.
a/d = 3.4-3.6 Both specimens had the same tension and compression
Shear strength (MPa)

4 a/d = 5.5-6.5 reinforcement, four D25 and two D10 bars, respectively.
Shear reinforcement was D6 stirrup with a closed-hoop
3 shape. The concrete cylinder strength (fc) for each
specimen was 35 MPa. The tension reinforcement ratio
2 (l) and shear reinforcement ratio (w) were 4% and 0.4%,
respectively. The properties of the steel used are given in
1 Table 2.

0
4 5
bf/bw 300
Fig. 1 Shear strength of T-beams without shear rein- 75
forcement. 150
150
5 Covering = 20
Shear strength (MPa)

4 S1 S2

3 Fig. 3 Cross sections (unit: mm).

2
Table 2 Properties of bars.
1 a/d = 3.0-3.6, wfw = 0.3-0.7 Bar Area Yield point Elastic modulus
a/d = 2.4-3.6, wfw = 1.0-1.4 No. (mm2) (MPa) (MPa)
0
2 3 4 6 31.67 300 165000
bf/bw 10 71.33 360 192000
Fig. 2 Shear strength of T-beams with shear reinforce- 25 506.7 400 178000
ment.
 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007 397

P/2 P/2
1050 900 1050

350

110@9 450 75@14

50@8
3000 400
Fig. 4 Loading condition and rebar arrangement (unit: mm).

3.2 Test method and measurement

Both specimens were tested in a 1000 kN capacity hy- Stirrup No. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
draulic testing machine in a simply supported condition
over a span of 3000 mm. The load was applied through a
steel loading beam with the spherical bearing unit at both
load points. Steel plates 90 mm wide by 15 mm thick
were used to distribute loads and support reactions. For Strain gage on tension bar
both specimens, the load was applied in 10-kN incre-
ments until 180 kN and released until zero. The load was Strain gage on stirrup
applied in the same increments again until failure. After
each load increment was stabilized, strains in the tension
reinforcement and stirrup, concrete strains in the top part
of the beam, and deflections were measured, and crack Fig. 5 Location of strain gages and reference number of
patterns were noted. stirrups.
Strain gages were attached to measure strain in each
stirrup at distances of 60, 130 and 220 mm above the
centroid of the tension reinforcement for both specimens.
Also, strain gages were attached to measure strains in
tension bars at distances of 350, 525, 700, 965 and 1500
mm from the support for checking yielding of the bars
and drawing the strain distribution on the beam sections. 55
The locations of the strain gages and reference number of 15
stirrups for both specimens are shown in Fig. 5. In the 50
experiment, two types of strain gages for concrete,
Y
placed inside the concrete and on the concrete surface,
were installed into both specimens for measuring strains = Gages placed on
in the direction parallel to the tension bars. The measured
sections are at the area near the loading plate (at the surface
Z
location of stirrup No. 1 in Fig. 5) and the middle of the X = Gages placed
shear span (at the location of stirrup No. 5 in Fig. 5). The
locations of the concrete strain gages at both sections are 25 inside concrete
shown in Fig. 6. 15 70
Fig. 6 Locations of gages at sections of stirrup No. 1 and 5
4. Outline of finite element analysis (unit: mm).

4.1 Outline of analysis

In the present study, a three-dimensional nonlinear finite
element code (CAMUI) developed at Hokkaido Univer-
sity was used. In this analysis, three-dimensional 20 node
iso-parametric solid elements, with 8 Gauss points were
adopted for the representation of the reinforced concrete
elements. The nonlinear iterative procedure was con-
trolled by the modified Newton-Raphson method. In this
procedure, the convergence was satisfied by the ratio of
(Residual force)2 to (Internal force)2 becoming less
than 10-6. Also, the calculation process was moved to the
next step when the ratio was not satisfied over 200 cycles
of repetition.
The 3D elasto-plastic and fracture model (Maekawa et
398 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007

al. 1993) that considers the effect of confinement, de-

formability and bi-axial compression in the concrete
constitutive law was used for the concrete model before
cracking. In this model, stresses and strains were repre- f
sented by an equivalent stress and equivalent strain,
respectively. The adopted failure criteria that acted in
agreement with Niwas model in tension-compression f c/
domains and Aoyagi and Yamadas model in ten-
sion-tension domains were extended to 3D criteria by
satisfying boundary conditions (Takahashi et al. 2005).
When the first crack occurs, the strains in the global
coordinate system are transformed into the strains in the 10%
0 u
local coordinate system (called crack coordinate system). p
In the case of the second crack, one of the two axes in the
plane coincides with the direction of the intersecting line Fig. 7 Compression model by fracture energy concept.
between the first and second crack plane. Two local
systems share one of their axes and another axis in the
principal stress and principal strain. Compressive
plane is in the direction where the crack opens. Consti- strength is reduced according to the magnitude of tensile
tutive models were applied in the directions parallel and strain in the direction normal to the crack.
normal to the crack planes. After calculating stresses
After peak stress, the effect of crack on compres-
from the strains in the crack coordinate system, the
sion-softening is considered by the linear descending line
stresses were retransformed into stresses in the global
(Fig. 7). In this model, compressive stress is reduced to
coordinate system and superimposed.
zero at limited strain u. However, the reduced stress has
The tension-softening model proposed by Reinhardt et a limit that is 10% of the compressive strength. The
al. (1986) is adopted. The model is expressed as the gradient of strain softening is defined by the compressive
following relationship between , the tensile stress car-
fracture energy (Gfc) consumed in compressive stress
ried by concrete, and , the crack opening displacement.
parallel to the crack in the tension-compression area. The
3 fracture energy for compression is determined by Na-

= 1 + c1 exp c2
ft 0

0

( 3
)
1 + c1 exp( c2 )
(1) kamuras equation (Nakamura et al. 1999).
0

G fc = 0.88 f c' (5)

where c1 = constant, 3.00 for normal concrete; c2 = con-
stant, 6.93 for normal concrete; 0 = the critical crack
opening (crack width at zero stress), 0.16 mm; and ft =
concrete tensile strength.
This model is a function of stress-crack opening dis-
placement. Consequently, strain in the direction normal
to the crack is transformed into crack opening dis-
placement by multiplying the crack spacing. The crack
spacing observed in the experiment was used in this
study.
The ascending part of the Vecchio & Collins model
(Collins et al. 1996) was applied for the two-dimensional
concrete model in a plane parallel to the crack, as shown
in Fig. 7.
f c'
2
= 2
0 0
= 0.8 + 170 t
0 = 2 f c' / Ec
where fc = concrete compressive strength; t = tensile
strain in normal direction to crack plane; 0 = strain at
peak stress; and Ec = Youngs modulus for concrete.
This model is expressed as the relationship between
The limit strain for compression (u) is calculated from
(Sato et al. 2004),
2G fc p
u = + (6)
peak leq 2
where p = compressive strain at peak stress; peak = fc/;
and leq = equivalent length assumed to be the length of
the element, 50 mm.
Shear transfer stresses were calculated using the model
proposed by Li & Maekawa (1989). The smeared con-
cept of considering concrete and steel reinforcement
together as the reinforced concrete element is used in the
finite element code so the bond between the concrete and
steel reinforcement can be considered to have perfect
(2)
rigidity.
4.2 Analyzed specimen
(3)
Figure 8 shows the finite element mesh of a quarter
model for saving calculation time and memory usage in
(4) the computation process. Fix conditions are given at the
symmetry plane and loading points. For the XY plane of
symmetry, only the Z-direction is fixed while for the YZ
plane, the X-direction is fixed. The beams are simply
supported beams subjected to two-point monotonic
loading. In the analysis, the enforced displacements were
 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007 399

given at the loading points, which were the nodes of steel

element attached to the specimen (Fig. 8). In the nu- Y
merical results, softening of concrete in the concrete Restricted in plane
compression zone around the loading point in the flex-
ure-shear region was observed at peak load. Thus the
failure mode can be designated as shear compression
failure. Z

5. Results and discussion

= Steel element
5.1 Load-deflection relationship and shear ca- = RC element X
pacity
Figure 9 shows the experimental and computed = Concrete element
load-deflection curves for specimens S1 and S2. It is very Fig. 8 Finite element mesh.
clear from the curve that the load-deflection relationship
of the RC T-beam is changed because of the existence of 400
the concrete top flange. The shear strength of the T-beam

Applied load (kN)

is also higher than that of the rectangular beam. The FE
results show the same tendency. Moreover, it can be seen 300
that the ultimate load is well predicted by the FE code.
The difference of the initial stiffness between the nu- 200
merical and test results in Fig. 9 can be observed. The Test (S1)
reason for this difference may be the time dependent
100 FEM (S1)
effects of concrete, the unexpected displacement at the
supporting points, and the calculation algorithm by the
Test (S2)
modified Newton-Raphson method, which always tends
FEM (S2)
to be stiffer than the actual response. Some examples of 0 5 10 15 20
well-predicted results with the same FE program were Deflection (mm)
also shown in previous work (Pansuk et al. 2004, 2006). Fig. 9 Load-deflection curves.

5.2 Crack patterns and failure mechanism

The crack patterns of S1 and S2 are shown in Figs. 10
and 11, respectively. These figures show that the first
diagonal shear cracks were initiated in each shear span of
beams at angles 45o to 65o to the horizontal axis of the
beam. Subsequently, additional diagonal cracks were
formed with flatter angles as the load increased. The A (Test result at failure)
cracks extended up to the soffit of the flange in S2 (Fig.
11) and propagated into the direction of the connection
zone between the flange and web. The effect of this
horizontal crack in the T-beam on the shear resisting
mechanism will be discussed later. At ultimate load,
cracks were formed in the compression-zone concrete
B (FE result at failure)
near the loading point, parallel to the top-fiber of the
beam in the experiment. These cracks coalesced, result-
Fig. 10 Crack pattern of S1 (test and analysis).
ing in shear-compression failure of the compression-
zone concrete for both tested specimens.
A similar crack propagation process can be obtained Gauss points, where a crack occurred precisely around
from the FE results. Moreover, the propagation of the the loading point. The analytical failure process and
horizontal crack in the analysis can be confirmed by the crack pattern show that the numerical method in this
increment of strain in the vertical direction of the Gauss study can satisfactorily evaluate the shear compression
points near the connection zone of the flange and web at failure characteristic.
the load step corresponding to the test result, as shown in
Fig. 12. The load drops after the shear crack reaches the 5.3 Stress development in specimens
compression zone of the beam in the analysis. This fail- A typical pattern of the stress variation in stirrups for
ure process is observed in both analyses. A softening increasing loads was measured by the strain gages. The
curve is observed in the computed normal compressive stresses plotted are the average for 2 locations of the
stress-strain or shear stress-strain relationship at the stirrups. The location and reference number of stirrups
400 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007

the rectangular beam at around 250 kN of the applied

load. At the same load level, correspondingly, the shear
crack propagated horizontally below the concrete top
flange at the same location of the considered locations
(Figs. 5 and 11C). The lower stress of the stirrup in the
A (Test result until 250 kN)
T-beam can be considered to be due to the change in
shear resisting mechanism, which will be discussed later.
In order to compare the test results with the
smear-concept FE results, the average stresses of Gauss
points from solid elements at the location corresponding
to two considered stirrups were used. Analyzed and
measured average stresses from locations between stir-
B (FE result until 250 kN) rups No. 1-2 and No. 4-5 were compared as shown in Fig.
13. This figure shows that the FE results can predict the
Horizontal crack stress development in stirrup and the turning point of the
shear resisting mechanism well.
A comparison between analyzed and measured aver-
age strains in the direction parallel to the tension bars
from the concrete strain gages placed in the compression
area of both specimens is shown in Fig. 14. In order to
C (Test result at failure) compare the test results with the smear-concept FE re-
sults, the average strains of Gauss points from solid
Horizontal crack elements and strain gages were used. The FE results can
be said to be able to predict strain development in the
compression area of both sections well (sections 1 and 2
are at the location of stirrup No. 1 and 5, respectively, see

D (FE result from 250 kN up to maximum load) 400

Turning point of
Fig. 11 Crack pattern of S2 (test and analysis). shear mechanism
Applied load (kN)

300

0.003 200
Test (S1)
0.002
Vertical strain

100 Test (S2)

FEM (S1)
0.001 FEM (S2)
0 0 100 200 300 400
Stress in stirrup (MPa)
-0.001 A (Location between stirrups no. 4 and 5).

-0.002 Measured Gauss points 400

0 1000 2000
Distance from beam edge (mm)
Applied load (kN)

300
Fig. 12 Strain condition of element near connection zone
Turning point of
between flange and web at 250 kN (not in scale). 200 shear mechanism
Test (S1)
100 Test (S2)
whose strains were measured in the experiment are FEM (S1)
shown in Fig. 5. From Fig. 13, the average stresses of FEM (S2)
two selected stirrups from two locations (No. 1-2 and No. 0 100 200 300 400
4-5) were compared. Figure 13 shows that the average Stress in stirrup (MPa)
stresses of stirrups for both specimens are almost the B (Location between stirrups no. 1 and 2).
same at the initial condition. After that, the average stress
of the stirrup in the T-beam becomes lower than that in Fig. 13 Stress development in stirrups (S1 and S2).
 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007 401

400 Figs. 5 and 14). Moreover, it can be observed from both

the test and FE results that the average stress in the
Applied load (kN)

compression area of the T-beam is smaller than that in the

300 rectangular beam due to the presence of a concrete top
flange.
200
5.4 Variation of beam and arch action by stress
Test (Section 1)
distribution on sections
100 FEM (Section 1)
Shear force (V) can be expressed by two components:
Test (Section 2)
arch action and beam action. At any location in a beam
FEM (Section 2)
0 when a moment gradient dM/dx is present, these two
-0.002 -0.001 0 effects are combined to give the total shear resistance.
Concrete strain For a cracked concrete member, these components can be
A (Concrete strain in S1)
written as follows:
400
dM
V= and M = T jd (7)
dx
Applied load (kN)

300
where T and jd are the tensile force in the bottom chord
and lever arm, respectively. Thus
200
Test (Web) d ( jd ) dT
V =T + jd (8)
100 FEM (Flange) dx dx
Test (Web)
FEM (Flange) The first term of the previous equation refers to the
0 arch action, while the second term describes the truss
-0.002 -0.001 0 action. These two effects can be evaluated between two
Concrete strain
known sections along the length of the beam, thus Eq. (7)
B (Concrete strain in S2 (from section 1))
can be rewritten as
Fig. 14 Strain development in compression area of
jd T
specimens. V =T + jd (9)
x x
By using the strain gage data in the concrete and ten-
sion bars at sections of stirrup No. 1 and 5 (Fig. 15), the
50 kN
300 strain distribution on both sections can be drawn. By
Beam height (mm)

100 kN
150 kN indicating the location of the neutral axis at different load
164 kN steps and knowing the applied shear (V), all terms of Eq.
200 (8) are known. Beam action variations for increasing
shear force in both specimens were calculated from both
the experimental results and the FE results between two
100 sections and are shown in Fig. 16. Figure 16 shows that
shear force starts out being carried entirely by the beam
-3000 -1500 0 1500 3000 action but ends with the arch action being predominant
Concrete strain
A (Specimen S1)
200
Shear resisting force (kN)

Total shear force

300 S1 (Test)
Beam height (mm)

150 S2 (Test)
S1 (FEM)
200 100 S2 (FEM)
50 kN
100 kN
100 150 kN 50
194 kN Beam action
-3000 -1500 0 1500 3000
Turning point
Concrete strain 0 50 100 150 200
B (Specimen S2) Applied shear force (kN)
Fig. 15 Strain distribution on sections. Fig. 16 Shear resisting components.
402 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007
for the T-beam. The load at which the beam and arch
actions became different for two specimens corresponds
to the turning point observed from the stress in stirrups.
This result also shows the change of the governing re-
sisting mechanism due to the presence of the concrete top
flange.
6. Shear resisting mechanism of T-beam
6.1 Truss and arch action in T-beam
From both the experimental and numerical results, it can
be considered that the shear resisting mechanism of the
T-beam is almost the same as that of the rectangular
beam before the appearance of the horizontal crack. In
this state, the beam action is governed by the truss
mechanism. After the shear crack propagates horizon-
tally below the concrete top flange, the stirrup stress of
the T-beam becomes less than that of the rectangular
beam. This can be considered to be due to the change of
the governing shear resisting mechanism inside the beam
from the truss mechanism to the arch mechanism. This is
already confirmed by the comparison of shear resisting
components (Fig. 16). In the arch mechanism, the con-
crete area on the top flange of the T-beam can provide the
additional area of the compression zone.
6.2 Change in governing mechanism due to
horizontal crack
From the experimental and numerical observation, the
factor that controls the change of the governing mecha-
nism of the T-beam from the truss mechanism to the arch
mechanism is the propagation of the horizontal crack
along the connection zone between the web and flange of
the T-beam. The experimentally observed crack patterns
indicate that the compression zone of the T-beam in-
cluding the flange area can obstruct the continuous and
instant propagation of diagonal cracks. Pimanmas and
Maekawa (2001) reported that the diagonal cracks are
unable to successfully penetrate across the plane with the
low normal and shear traction transfer ability. The exis-
tence of a top flange in the T-beam provides an additional
resisting area so the discontinuity of average stress in the
compression zone at the connection zone between the
flange and web of the T-beam can be found. Because of
this difference in average stress, the diversion of crack
propagation occurs in the connection zone between the
flange and web of the T-beam.
The change in governing mechanism due to horizontal
cracking can be verified with 3D FEM. Numerical
analysis of the specimen with bond-linkage elements was
conducted to simulate the effect of the horizontal crack.
This specimen had the same size and material properties
as specimen S1.
The bond-linkage element used in this study is a layer
element containing four Gauss points. In analysis,
bond-linkage elements were installed at the position
where the horizontal cracks were observed from the
experiment using specimen S2 (along the connection
zone between the flange and web, see Fig. 17). The
stiffness of the bond-linkage elements was initially set to
the same value as the stiffness of concrete. Horizontal
cracking was simulated by the sudden reduction of the
shear transfer stress of bond-linkage elements at a given
strain level in the vertical direction after shear crack. The
shear transfer stresses were calculated using Li and
Maekawas model (1998). From Fig. 18, after the shear
transfer stress of bond-linkage elements is reduced
(horizontal crack is assumed to have occurred in the
analysis), the stress of stirrups in the beam with the
horizontal crack truly becomes lower than that in the
beam without such crack at the same load level. This
confirms the influence of the horizontal crack as the
governing factor for the shear mechanism of T-beams.
After the change in the governing shear resisting
mechanism from truss action to arch action, it can be
considered that the top part of the T-beam above the
horizontal crack plays a very important role with regard
to additional shear resistance. To confirm this hypothesis,
the stress condition of elements in the compression zone
at the location of stirrup No. 1 (Fig. 5) after the formation
of the horizontal crack was investigated. It was found
that the average principle stress of Gauss points from all
elements above the horizontal crack increased for
specimen S2 as shown in Fig. 19. The increment of av-
erage principle stress after the horizontal crack is also
observed for specimen S1 with a simulated horizontal
crack (Fig. 19). The increase in resisting stress in the
Gauss points
Install
Bond-linkage element
Fig. 17 Bond-linkage element and installed location.
400
Applied load (kN)
300
200
100
S1 (FEM)
S1 (FEM)-with crack
0 100 200 300 400
Stress in stirrup (MPa)
Fig. 18 Stirrup stress after simulated crack.
 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007 403

400 the T-beam with the widest top flange. Generation of a

stronger arch flow in the T-beam with larger compression
Applied load (kN)

zone can be considered. This leads to the increase in

300 shear strength of the T-beam after the flange width is
enlarged, as shown in Fig. 24.
The numerical investigation shows that the horizontal
200
crack cannot be observed in T-beam with the neutral axis
located in the flange area (specimens T3 and T4, see Fig.
100 S1 (FEM)
S1 (FEM)-with crack
S2 (FEM) 450 600
0 10 20 30 40 50 75 95
108
Average stress (MPa)
Fig. 19 Average stress on compression zone. NA. NA.
150 150
400
T1 T2
Applied load (kN)

300 300 300

150 124 140
200 250
150
100
S1 (FEM)
S1 (FEM)-with crack T3 T4
0 5 10 15 20 Fig. 21 Addition numerical specimens (unit: mm).
Deflection (mm)
Fig. 20 Load-deflection curves after simulated crack. 0.003

0.002 S1
compression zone of specimen S1 with the artificial S2
Vertical strain

horizontal crack cannot improve the total shear capacity T1

of this specimen (Fig. 20) because there is no additional 0.001
T2
resisting area from the concrete top flange to reduce the
average stress, so the failure stage of the compression 0
zone is reached before the arch action can be developed
to as great an extent as in a normal T-beam. -0.001

-0.002 Measured Gauss points

6.3 Effect of flange width and thickness on the 0 1000 2000
turning point Distance from beam edge (mm)
To show the effect of flange width and thickness on the Fig. 22 Strain condition of element near connection zone
formation of the turning point and the increment of the between flange and web at 250 kN.
shear strength of the T-beam through the arch mechanism,
four additional numerical specimens, shown in Fig. 21,
with a wider and thicker concrete top flange, were ana- 400
Applied load (kN)

lyzed. These specimens had the same material properties

as specimens S1 and S2. Figure 22 shows that the in- 300
crease in flange width has almost no additional effect on
the characteristic of the horizontal crack, as shown by the
strain condition of the element near the connection zone 200
S1
between the flange and web. Correspondingly, the turn- S2
ing point of the governing mechanism for all T-beam 100 T1
specimens was observed at almost the same load level
T2
from the stirrup stress, as shown in Fig. 23. After the
turning point, the average stress of the stirrup in the 0 100 200 300 400
T-beam becomes lower than that in the rectangular beam, Stress in stirrup (MPa)
and the lowest average stirrup stress can be observed in Fig. 23 Comparison of stirrup stresses.
 404 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007

21) as shown by the strain condition of element near the

connection zone between the flange and web (Fig. 25). 400
Without the horizontal crack, the change of the govern-

Applied load (kN)

ing mechanism disturbing stirrup stresses cannot be 300
observed, as shown in Fig. 26. A T-beam can be consid-
ered the same as a rectangular beam of bf = bw if the
neutral axis is located in the top flange zone. As a result, 200 S1
the ultimate strength of the T-beam is almost constant S2
after the flange thickness is enlarged below the neutral 100 T3
axis location, as shown in Fig. 27. T4
0 10 20
Deflection (mm)
400 Fig. 27 Comparison of load-deflection curves.
Applied load (kN)

300 6.4 Stress distribution and failure criteria of

T-beam
200 S1 In order to predict the ultimate capacity of beams, the
stress distribution on the beam section located closest to
S2 the loading point was investigated. Because of symmetry,
100 T1 the investigated Gauss points were chosen from only one
T2 half of the beam and were divided into a top layer and a
0 10 20 second layer, as shown in Fig. 28. Figures 29, 30 and 31
Deflection (mm) show the distribution of the normal stress and shear stress
Fig. 24 Comparison of load-deflection curves. along the top flange of the selected T-beam (T2) from the
Gauss points shown in Fig. 28. Stresses are shown at
three load levels: before ultimate load (300 kN), at the
0.003
S1
0.002 S2 Top layer
Vertical strain

T3 Second layer
0.001 T4
0

-0.001

-0.002 Measured Gauss points Distance from

0 1000 2000
Distance from beam edge (mm) center
Fig. 25 Strain condition of element near connection zone
between flange and web at 250 kN. Fig. 28 Location of measured Gauss points.

400 300 kN
Normal stress (MPa)

30 398 kN
Applied load (kN)

390 kN
300
x
200 S1
S2 20
100 T3
T4
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300
Stress in stirrup (MPa) Distance from center (mm)
Fig. 26 Comparison of stirrup stress. Fig. 29 Distribution of normal compressive stress x.
 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007 405

peak load (398 kN), and just after the peak load (390 kN).
The distribution of stresses can be seen to change with 12
the load level. After the turning point of the governing

Maximum stress (MPa)

resisting mechanism, the development of stress (y and 10
xy) in the flange zone decreases but a concentrated in- Changes
crease of stress can be observed from the zone at the 8 after
center of the beam. Just after the peak load, softening of
some Gauss points is observed followed by the redistri- 6 turning
bution of both normal and shear stresses to nearby Gauss S1
points at the following calculation step. The redistribu- 4 point
S2
tion of stresses after the peak load can be considered to
2 T1
have no effect on the ultimate capacity of the beams and T2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
10 Average stress (MPa)
300 kN Fig. 33 Shear stress distribution at failure section.
8
Normal stress (MPa)

398 kN
390 kN
6 the stress distribution at the ultimate state to be the most
important predictor of the shear capacity of beams.
Changes after To simply evaluate the failure criteria of the compres-
4
turning point sion zone of T-beams with different flange widths, the
y shear stress distribution on the top flange of T-beams at
2
failure load is considered, as shown in Fig. 32. The
maximum shear stresses at failure can be seen to be al-
0 100 200 300 most at the same level for all specimens. Moreover, the
Distance from center (mm) development of shear stress decreases with the distance
Fig. 30 Distribution of normal compressive stress y. from the beam center and becomes almost constant with
a small value of shear stress at some distance. To define
10 the value and distance at which shear stress becomes
constant, observation of additional analytical specimens
300 kN is necessary. Finally, the failure criteria of computed
8 398 kN
Shear stress (MPa)

specimens can be shown by the relationship between the

390 kN maximum and average stress on the top flange at failure
6 load, as shown in Figs. 33, 34, 35 and 36. The maximum
Changes after stress is averaged from Gauss points located inside web
4 zone but the average stress is averaged from all Gauss
turning point points located in the top flange. Figure 33 shows that the
xy
2 maximum shear stresses at failure are almost at the same
level for all specimens but the average shear stresses at
failure become smaller with increases in flange width.
0 100 200 300 This provides a clear explanation of the increase in shear
Distance from center (mm) strength of T-beams due to increases in top flange area.
Fig. 31 Distribution of shear stress xy. Moreover, the change of the slope of the relationship in
12 Fig. 33 for T-beam specimens (specimens S2, T1 and T2)
confirms the importance of the turning point of the shear
10 S1
resisting mechanism in T-beam. Figures 34 and 35 show
Shear stress (MPa)

S2 that the maximum normal compressive stresses x and y

8 T1 at the failure zone are different for different top flange
T2 widths and the highest normal compressive stresses x
6 and y at failure can be observed from rectangular
End of web

4 specimen (S1 - without flange). The maximum com-

pressive stress x is greater than the concrete compres-
2 sive strength (35 MPa). This can be explained by the
confinement stresses acting on other directions of the
failure zone. The relationship of normal compressive
0 100 200 300 stress z representing the confinement stress due to the
Distance from center (mm) top flange is shown in Fig. 36. Figure 36 shows that the
Fig. 32 Comparison of shear stress distribution.
406 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007

confinement stress (z) is smaller for the rectangular
beam (S1). The maximum normal compressive stress z
at failure is almost at the same level for all T-beam
specimens. Finally, it can be said that the exact failure
criteria of the failure zone of the T-beam has to be con-
sidered three-dimensionally. Moreover, the shear stress
and the confinement stress (z) at the ultimate state are
50
Maximum stress (MPa)
the main parameters indicating failure of the T-beam
section.
From the stress distribution on the concrete top flange,
the compression failure of concrete in the compression
zone can be considered to take place in an area ap-
proximately defined by the shaded part of the section in
Fig. 37. The actual normal stress distribution (x) is not
uniform throughout the shaded area. The term effective
width of a T-beam in shear can be defined as be = A/hf
(Fig. 38), where A is the area of the shaded part of the
cross section in Fig. 37, and hf is the thickness of the top

40 flange below which the horizontal crack occurs. The

average normal stress distribution is assumed to be uni-
30 form throughout the effective area.
From the force equilibrium conditions, the ultimate
capacity of beams is controlled by the smaller value
20 S1 between the compressive strength of the top strut (C) and
S2 the diagonal strut (N), as shown in Fig. 39. The failure of
10 T1 the top strut represents the shear compression failure
T2 mode, and the failure of the diagonal strut represents the
web crushing failure mode. The strength of the top strut
0 10 20 30 40 50 can be calculated based on the failure criteria expressed
Average stress (MPa) by the relationship between the maximum and average
Fig. 34 Normal compressive stress (x) distribution at stresses on the top flange at failure in this study. Further
failure section. analysis of these systems will be the subject of continu-
ing work.
10
Maximum stress (MPa)

6
bf / 2
4 S1
S2
2 T1
T2
hf
0 2 4 6 8 10
Average stress (MPa)
Fig. 35 Normal compressive stress (y) distribution at
failure section. Fig. 37 Cross section of T-beam with effective area in
shear (shaded area = A).
6
S1
Maximum stress (MPa)

5 S2
4 T1
be = A/hf
T2
3
2
1
hf
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Average stress (MPa)
Fig. 36 Normal compressive stress (z) distribution at Fig. 38 Effective width of T-beam in shear.
failure section.
 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007 407

V ACI Committee 318, (1999). Building code
C requirements for structural concrete (318M-99) and
NA N
d Al-Alusi, A. F. (1957). Diagonal tension strength of
T reinforced concrete T-beams with varying shear span.
a ACI Journal, 53(5), 1067-1077.
V Bresler, B. and Macgregor J. G. (1967). Review of
Fig. 39 Strength of concrete strut for a concentrated load
near a support.
7. Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn based on the
findings of this study:
(1) Increases in the flange width of a T-beam give higher
shear capacity with a nonlinear relationship for the
T-beam with shear reinforcement. In the case of a
T-beam without shear reinforcement, however, the
width of the flange has almost no effect on shear
capacity.
(2) The existence of a concrete top flange has a signifi-
cant effect on the shear behaviors of RC T-beams. In
view of the good correlation between the nonlinear
finite element analysis and the experimental results, it
would seem that these effects can be simulated well
by the finite element code (CAMUI).
(3) The governing shear resisting mechanism of a
T-beam is changed from the truss mechanism to the
arch mechanism because of the formation of a hori-
zontal crack along the boundary between the top
flange and the web. After the turning point of the
shear resisting mechanism, the shear behaviors of RC
T-beams such as stirrup stress and concrete stress in
the compression zone are different from those of
rectangular beams.
(4) In the arch mechanism, the concrete area on the top
flange of a T-beam can provide an additional area for
the compression zone so the average stress at failure
can be reduced and the shear capacity of the T-beam
can be improved.
(5) Increases in flange width have no effect on the for-
mation of the turning point. On the other hand, the
inclusion of a flange increases the ultimate shear
strength, but only down to a certain width. Above this
width, the effect of the flange area on the shear
strength is less significant. A full investigation on the
effect of the geometrical parameters on shear capac-
ity is to be the subject of further research.
(6) A simplified method for determining the failure cri-
teria of the compression zone of a T-beam for shear is
proposed. Accompanied by the force equilibrium
conditions, a simplified concept for the evaluation of
the shear strength of a T-beam can be proposed.
Verification of this simplified method will be the
subject of continuing work.
References
commentary (318RM-99). American Concrete
Institute, Michigan.
concrete beams failing in shear. ASCE Journal of the
Structural Division, 93(1), 343-372.
Collins, M. P., Mitchell, D. and Macgregor, J. G. (1993).
Structural design considerations for high-strength
concrete. Concrete International, 15(13), 27-34.
Collins, M. P., Mitchell, D., Adebar, P. and Vecchio, F. J.
(1996). A general shear design method. ACI
Structural Journal, 93(1), 36-45.
Eurocode 2, (1992). Design of concrete structures.
European Prestandard ENV 1992-1-1.
Ferguson, P. M. and Thompson, J. N. (1953). Diagonal
tension in T-beams without stirrups. ACI Journal,
49(3), 665-675.
Hoang, L. C. (1997). Shear strength of non-shear
reinforced concrete elements, part 2 T-beams.
Technical University of Denmark, Department of
Structural Engineering and Materials, Report No. 29,
Lyngby.
JSCE (2002). Standard Specifications for Concrete
Structures Structural Performance Verification.
Tokyo, Japan.
Leonhardt, F. (1965). Reducing the shear reinforcement
in reinforced concrete beams and slabs. Magazine of
Concrete Research, 17(53), 187-198.
Li, B., Maekawa, K. and Okamura, H. (1998). Contact
density model for stress transfer across crack in
concrete. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering,
University of Tokyo (B), 40(1), 9-52.
Maekawa, K., Takemura, J., Irawan, P. and Irie, M.
(1993). Triaxial elasto-plastic and fracture model for
concrete. JSCE Journal of Materials, Concrete
Structures and Pavements, 18(460), 131-138.
Moayer, M. and Regan, P. E. (1974). Shear strength of
prestressed and reinforced concrete T-beams. Shear
in Reinforced Concrete, ACI Special Publication 42, 1,
183-213.
Nakamura, H. and Higai, T. (1999). Compressive
fracture energy and fracture zone length of concrete.
Seminar on post-peak behavior of RC structures
subjected to seismic loads JCI, 2, 259-272.
Pansuk, W., Sato, Y., Ueda, T. and Takahashi, R. (2004).
Investigation on shear capacity of reinforced concrete
T-beams using 3D nonlinear finite element analysis.
JSCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 50(A),
991-998.
Pansuk, W., Sato, Y., Shionaga, R. and Walraven, J. C.
(2006). FE analysis of ultra high performance fiber
reinforced concrete. EURO-C 2006 Computational
Modelling of Concrete Structures, Mayrhofen 27-30
408 W. Pansuk and Y. Sato / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 3, 395-408, 2007
March 2006, Great-Britain: A.A. Balkema Publishers,
397-404.
Pimanmas, A. and Maekawa, K. (2001). Influence of
pre-crack on RC behavior in shear. JSCE Journal of
Materials, Concrete Structures and Pavements,
50(669), 277-291.
Placas, A. and Regan P. E. (1971). Shear failure of
reinforced concrete beams. ACI Journal, 68,
763-774.
Regan, P. E. and Placas, A. (1970). Limit-stage design
for shear in rectangular and T beams. Magazine of
Concrete Research, 22(73), 197-208.
Reinhardt, H. W., Cornelissen, H. A. and Hordijk, D. A.
(1986). Tensile tests and failure analysis of concrete.
ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 112(11),
2462-2477.
Sato, Y., Tadokoro, T. and Ueda, T. (2004). Diagonal
tensile failure mechanism of reinforced concrete
beams. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology,
2(3), 327-341.
Takahashi, R., Sato, Y., Konno, K. and Ueda, T. (2005).
3D nonlinear punching shear simulation of
steel-concrete composite slab. Journal of Advanced
Concrete Technology, 3(2), 297-307.
Taub, J. and Neville, A. M. (1960). Resistance to shear
of reinforced concrete beams Part 2Beams with
vertical stirrups. ACI Journal, 57, 315-336.
Withey, M. O., (1908). Tests of plain and reinforced
concrete: Series of 1907. Bulletin of the University of
Wisconsin, Engineering Series, 4 (2), 1-66.