Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam

(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)

1


CURVATURE DUCTILITY OF
REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM



Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal



ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to examine the influence of three variables on curvature ductility of
reinforced concrete beams. A computer program was developed to predict moment-curvature
and available curvature ductility of reinforced concrete beams with or without axial loads. Ten
beams with different variables were analysed using the program. The variables measured are
concrete strength, amount of longitudinal reinforcement and spacing of transverse
reinforcement. The input consists of beam geometry, material properties and loading. A
confined stress-strain curve for concrete proposed by Saatcioglu and Razvi (1992) is applied in
the program, while, steel stress-strain model is adopted from BS 8110 (British Standard
Institution 1985). Computer analysis indicates that the curvature ductility increases with the
increase of longitudinal reinforcement and concrete strength. On the other hand, the spacing of
transverse reinforcement does not have any significant influence on the curvature ductility.

Key words : computer analysis, curvature ductility, moment-curvature, reinforced concrete
beams

1. INTRODUCTION
Ductility of reinforced structures is a desirable property where resistance to brittle
failure during flexure is required to ensure structural integrity. Ductile behaviour in a structure
can be achieved through the use of plastic hinges positioned at appropriate locations
throughout the structural frame. These are designed to provide sufficient ductility to resist
structural collapse after the yield strength of the material has been achieved. The available
ductility of plastic hinges in reinforced concrete is determined based on the shape of the
moment-curvature relations.
Ductility may be defined as the ability to undergo deformations without a substantial
reduction in the flexural capacity of the member (Park & Ruitong 1988). According to Xie et
al, (1994), this deformability is influenced by some factors such as the tensile reinforcement
ratio, the amount of longitudinal compressive reinforcement, the amount of lateral tie and the
strength of concrete. The ductility of reinforced concrete section could be expressed in the
form of the curvature ductility (

):
y
u

=
where
u
is the curvature at ultimate when the concrete compression strain reaches a specified
limiting value,
y
is the curvature when the tension reinforcement first reaches the yield
strength. The definition of
y
shows the influence of the yield strength of reinforcement steel


Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
2
on the calculation of

, while the definition of

u
reflects the effect of ultimate strain of
concrete in compression.
Park & Paulay

(1975) have suggested that the yield curvature of a reinforced concrete
section is taken when the tension steel first yields. Assuming an under-reinforced section,
first yield will occur in the steel, then the moment and curvature are:

M
y
= A
s
f
y
d''
d k E
f
d k
s
y sy
y
) 1 ( ) 1 (
=

=



where k = {( + ')
2
n
2
+ 2 [ + ('d/d)]n} - ( + ')n, = A
s
/bd is the tensile reinforcement
ratio, ' = A
s

/bd is the compression steel ratio, n = E

s
/E
c
= modular ratio, E
s
, E
c
is the
modulus elasticity of the steel and the concrete, d'' is the distance from centroid of
compressive forces in the steel and concrete to the centroid of tension.
The ultimate curvature of reinforced concrete section is defined as the maximum value
of concrete strain at the extreme compressive fibre. It can be written as:

M
u
= 0.85 f'
c
ab(d-a/2) + A's f
y
(d-d')
a c
c c
u
1

= =
where
b f
sf A Asf
a
c
y y
' 85 . 0
'
=
where f
y
is the steel yield strength, f'
c
is the concrete compressive strength,
1
is the depth of
the equivalent rectangular stress block. ACI 318-71 (Park & Paulay 1975) conservatively
recommends a value of 0.003. In Eurocode 8 ENV 1994-1-3 (European Committee for
Standardization 1994) the nominal value of ultimate concrete strain (
cu
) for unconfined
concrete needed to calculate Conventional Curvature Ductility Factor (CCDF) is 0.0035,
while implicitly for confined concrete it is larger than 0.0035.
Theoretical moment-curvature analysis for reinforced concrete structural elements
indicating the available flexural strength and ductility can be constructed providing that the
stress-strain relations for both concrete and steel are known. Moment-curvature relationship
can be obtained from curvature and the bending moment of the section for a given load
increased to failure.













Figure 1. A trilinear moment-curvature relationship (Park & Paulay 1975).

First
yielding

First
cracking
Moment
(M)
Curvature
( )

Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)


3
A trilinear moment-curvature relationship shown in Figure 1 is defined by the points
of cracking and yielding. Uncracked, cracked and yielded behaviors are depicted by straight
lines. Park & Paulay (1975) found that the curve is linear in its initial stage, and the
relationship between moment M and curvature is given by the classical elastic equation:

EI = MR = M/
where EI is the flexural rigidity of the section.
Based on the procedures proposed by Park & Ruitong (1988), the moment,
corresponding to the chosen value (
cm
) and axial load (P) is obtained by taking moments of
the internal forces.
where f
ci
is the concrete stress in the i-th layer, f
sj
is the steel stress in the j-th layer, A
ci
is the
area of concrete in the i-th layer, A
sj
is the steel stress in the j-th layer, d
i
and d
j
are the the
distance of the centroid of i-th layer for concrete and of j-th lamina for steel, from reference
axis for moment calculation, n is the number of layer of concrete, m is the number of layer for
steel.
The curvature is given by:
c
cm

=
where
cm
is the concrete strain in the extreme compression fibre, c is the neutral axis depth.
The variables affecting curvature ductility may be classified under three groups (after
Derecho 1989), namely 1) loading variable such as the level of axial load; 2) geometric
variables such as the amount of tension and compression reinforcement, amount of transverse
reinforcement and the shape of the section; and 3) material variables such as the yield strength
of reinforcement and characteristic strength of concrete.
The objective of this study is to analyse curvature ductility of 10 beams with three
different variables. A computer program was developed to establish ductility analysis for
those reinforced concrete beams. The software, referred to CD Analysis, provides moment-
curvature analysis and curvature ductility analysis.


2. METHODOLOGY
Many variables influence the curvature ductility of reinforced beams and the presented
numerical analysis is done on specimens that are designed to address some of them. The
parametric study has been carried out for all the specimens. The effect of different variables
is studied by varying one variable at a time, keeping the value of other variables fixed. The
summary of the specimen properties is given in Table 1.
The variables studied in the presented test program are as follows 1) concrete
compressive strength (f
cu
). The test specimens contained four types of compressive strength.
The compressive strength (f
cu
) ranged between 20-35 MPa; 2) longitudinal reinforcement ratio
('/). The longitudinal reinforcement consisted of tension and compression reinforcement
and was varied between 0.25 to 1.00. The reinforcement ratios were calculated as A
s
/bh;
where A
s
is the area of reinforcing steel; b and h are width and height of the concrete section,
respectively; 3) spacing of confinement reinforcement. The stirrups spacing were taken
between 50-150 mm. Ten beams with 77 x 130 mm in cross section and 1320 mm length were
investigated in this research.
j sj sj
m
j
i ci ci
n
i
d A f d A f M

= =
+ =
1 1


Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
4
085
Confined
Unconfine

f'
cc
0.85f'
c
f'
co
0.85f'
c
0.20f'
c

01

85

20
Stress
(f )
Strain

Table 1. Specimen properties
Beam
No.
f
cu

(MPa)

Diameter
of tensile
reinforce-
ment (mm)

Diameter of
compression
reinforce-
ment (mm)
' '/
Diameter
of
stirrups
(mm)
Spacing
of
stirrups
(mm)
1 25 2#6 0.00704 2#6 0.00704 1.0 3 75
2 25 2#8 0.01263 2#6 0.00710 0.55 3 75
3 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
4 25 2#12 0.02898 2#6 0.00725 0.25 3 75
5 20 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
6 30 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
7 35 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
8 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 50
9 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 100
10 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 150

A computer program was run to estimate moment-curvature relationship and curvature
ductility of reinforced concrete section. The program incorporates effect of concrete
confinement. In this research, stress-strain curve of confined concrete was adopted from
Saatcioglu and Razvi (Saatciouglu & Razvi 1992). The assumed stress-strain curve of steel
reinforcement from BS 8110 (British Standard Institution 1985) is modified to simplify the
analysis.
Saatcioglu & Razvi (1992)

proposed a stress-strain relationship which is applicable to
any cross sectional shapes and reinforcement arrangement used in practice. The stress-strain
curve consists of a parabolic ascending branch followed by a linear descending segment as
shown in Figure 2. This part is constructed by defining the strain corresponding to 85% of the
peak stress. This strain level is expressed in terms of confinement parameters. A constant
residual strength is assumed beyond the descending branch, at 20% strength level.









Figure 2. Stress-strain relationship for concrete confined by circular spirals
(Saatcioglu & Razvi 1992).

The equations relating to the various segments of the stress-strain curve are shown below:
The parabolic part:

Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)


5
For 0
c

1

The linear part:
For
1

c

20

For
c

20

f
c
= 0.20f'
cc

where
K
= k
1
f
le
/f
cc

k
1
= 6.7(f
le
)
-0.17

f
le
= k
2
f
l
f'
cc
= f'
c
+ k
1
f
1e

for a rectangular section :


f'
cc
= f'
c
+ k
1
f
1e

o
= 0.002

1
=
o
(1+5K)

85
= 260
1
+
85

where f'
c
is the unconfined strength of concrete;
c
, f
c
is the strain and corresponding stress
from stress-strain curve;
1,

85
is the strain corresponding to the peak stress and 85% of the
peak stress, for confined concrete;
o,

o85
is the strain corresponding to the peak stress and
85% of the peak stress, for unconfined concrete;
20
is the strain at 0.20 of maximum stress
on the falling branch of stress-strain curve for unconfined concrete; f
1
is the uniform confining
pressure (MPa); f
le
is the equivalent uniform pressure (MPa); f
lex
is the effective lateral
pressures acting perpendicular to core dimension b
cx
; f
ley
is the effective lateral pressures
acting perpendicular to core dimension b
cy
; A
s
, f
yh
is the area and yield strength of transverse
reinforcement; b
cx
, b
cy
is the core dimensions of rectangular section; s is the centre to centre
cc
K
c c
cc c
f f f

|
|

\
|

|
|

\
|
=
+ ) 2 1 (
2
1 1
2 '

cc cc
c
cc c
f f f f ' 20 . 0 ' 15 . 0 '
1 85
1

=


( )
cy cx
s
b b s
A
+

=
cy
b
cx
b
cy
b
ley
f
cx
b
lex
f
le
f
+
+
=
c
yh s
l
b s
f A
f
sin
=
0 . 1
1
26 . 0
1 1
2

|
|

\
|
|
|

\
|
|

\
|
=
f s
b
s
b
k
c c


Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
6
distance of tie spacing; s is the spacing between laterally supported longitudinal
reinforcement.

In this research, a simple bilinear idealisation of the steel stress-strain relationship is
adopted in which no strain hardening of the material is taken into account (Figure 3) from BS
8110 (British Standard 1985). BS 8110 idealises an identical behaviour of the steel in tension
and compression, as being linear in the elastic range up to the design yield stress of f
y
/
m

where, f
y
is the characteristic yield stress, the partial safety factor
m
= 1.15.
Inputs for the program are beam geometry, material properties and axial loading.
Geometric data for a beam consist of width (b = 77 mm), depth (h = 130 mm), concrete cover
= 9 mm, the ratio of the amount of longitudinal reinforcement ('/ = 0.025-1.0) and the
spacing of transverse reinforcement (s = 50-100 mm). While, material properties include
Young's Modulus (200 MPa), concrete compressive strength (f
cu
= 20-35 MPa), yield strength
of reinforcing steel (250 MPa), modulus elasticity of steel (E
s
= 200,000 Mpa) and maximum
elongation of steel reinforcement grade 250 is 0.22 (BS EN 10002 1992).
The computational procedure for obtaining the curvature ductility from the moment-
curvature behaviour of cross section is as follows (Saatcioglu & Yalcin 1999). Firstly,
calculate the ultimate axial load (P
o
) that the section can carry using
P
o
= (A
c
- A
s
)(maximum stress of concrete) + A
s
f
y

where A
c
is the gross area of core concrete for confined section, A
s
is the area of longitudinal
steel, f
y
is the yield strength of longitudinal steel. If the given axial load is less than the
ultimate axial load (P
o
), the process will continue to the next step.
Then, analysis is conducted for the strain at the extreme compressive fiber as if the
section is loaded under once axial load without any moment. The strain profile is established
for the value of fibre strain. It is assumed that strain has a linear variation over the beam cross
section. The section is divided into rectangular strips (lamina) for the purpose of calculating
compressive forces in concrete as shown in material models described in Figure 4. Figure 4
shows a rectangular section with stress and strain diagram, and the forces acting on the cross
section. Corresponding stresses in concrete and steel are determined from its appropriate
stress-strain models. Internal forces in reinforcing steel are calculated.
Once internal forces are computed, the axial force is calculated. The moment-
curvature curve is plotted from the values of moment and curvature. Curvature at each section
is obtained from the moment-curvature relationship. The sectional analysis continues until
either the yield condition of steel is being satisfied at this particular iteration or the ultimate
condition has reached. If the yield condition is satisfactory, the present curvature is set as
Figure 3. Design stress-strain curve from BS 8110 (British Standard Institution 1985)

Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)


7
yield curvature. If the ultimate condition has reached, curvature ductility of the section can be
determined. The results are presented in a tabulation form in term of moment-curvature values
and a value of curvature ductility of a section. Program flowchart is in Figure 5.







Figure 4. Section with strain, stress and force distribution.

Once internal forces are computed, the axial force is calculated. The moment-
curvature curve is plotted from the values of moment and curvature. Curvature at each section
is obtained from the moment-curvature relationship. The sectional analysis continues until
either the yield condition of steel is being satisfied at this particular iteration or the ultimate
condition has reached. If the yield condition is satisfactory, the present curvature is set as
yield curvature. If the ultimate condition has reached, curvature ductility of the section can be
determined. The results are presented in a tabulation form in term of moment-curvature values
and a value of curvature ductility of a section. Program flowchart is in Figure 5.


3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The numerical model was employed to analyse the ten beams. The program output
consists of numerical results and curvature ductility values. The parameters considered were
included in the ductility computation. The effects of the major variables on moment-curvature
curves are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Confinement reinforcement spacing. Figure 6 shows comparison of moment-curvature
relationship for four beams having the same concrete strength and the same amount of
longitudinal reinforcement but different confinement reinforcement spacing. With confining
the section, the ultimate compressive strain and ductility is increased. The yield and maximum
moment capacity of the section remain unaltered because the stress-strain model used in the
numerical analysis assumes that shape of the initial ascending segment of stress-strain curve is
unchanged with the amount of transverse steel. The curvature at yield does not show any
significant change with the amount of transverse steel reinforcement. On the other hand, the
ultimate curvature increases because the compressive strain also increases.
Shin et al, (1989) have reported their test results on ultra high strength concrete beams
for specimens having the same concrete strength and the same amount of longitudinal
reinforcement but different confinement spacing. They found that a closer spacing has a
contribution to postpone the buckling of the compressive reinforcement, and failure takes
place in tension steel, hence there is no effect on ductility. Therefore, it is assumed in the
current study that there is no effectiveness of a closer confinement spacing.
0.85f'c
h
b
Section Idealised
section

c
Neutral
axis
f
s1
f
s2
c
Assumed
strain
profile
Actual
strain
profile

s
Strain Stress
c1
c2
c3
c4
S1
S2
M
P
h/2
Internal
Forces
External
Forces
M


Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
8
Start
i) Geometry geometry (width, depth, cover,
etc.) of the section,
ii) material specification (grade of concrete
and steel, Young's modulus for steel),
iii) axial load on the section (P), and
iv) strain increment in the extreme
compression fibre ( ).
c

Calculate the strain ( cp) on
the section under axial load
Set strain at the top most fibre
c = cp + c
A
i) Divide the section into laminae
ii) Depending on c and , and assuming linear
variation in strain, calculate strain at the middle of
each laminae
iii) Calculate the stress on each lamina, using the
stress-strain model for concrete
iv) Also, calculate the stress in steel
Calculate axial force on the section (Pcal)
Calculate moment (M) on the section
Is y > 0.0
?
NO
Is the yield
condition of steel
achieved ?
y =
YES
Set the ultimate conditions
NO
Continue




Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)


9


Figure 5. The program flow chart for the moment-curvature calculation









Figure 6. Computed moment-curvature curves for different spacing of confinement
reinforcement.




0.00E+00
5.00E+05
1.00E+06
1.50E+06
2.00E+06
2.50E+06
3.00E+06
3.50E+06
4.00E+06
4.50E+06
0.00E+00 1.00E-04 2.00E-04 3.00E-04 4.00E-04 5.00E-04 6.00E-04
Curvature (rad/mm)
M
o
m
e
n
t

(
N
m
m
)
Beam 3
Beam 8
Beam 9
Beam 10
(s = 75 mm)
(s = 50 mm)
(s = 100 mm)
(s = 150 mm)


Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
10
0.00E+00
5.00E+05
1.00E+06
1.50E+06
2.00E+06
2.50E+06
3.00E+06
3.50E+06
4.00E+06
4.50E+06
0.00E+00 1.00E-04 2.00E-04 3.00E-04 4.00E-04 5.00E-04 6.00E-04
Curvature (rad/mm)
M
o
m
e
n
t

(
N
m
m
)
Beam 3
Beam 5
Beam 6
Beam 7
Concrete compressive strength. The comparison of the moment-curvature curve for
specimens having the same confinement reinforcement spacing and amounts of longitudinal
reinforcement but different concrete strength is shown in Figure 7. The figure shows that for a
member with lower strength exhibits less curvature at ultimate than a member with higher
strength does. It is evident that the curvature at yield decreases and the curvature at ultimate
increases with high characteristic strength of concrete. The curvature corresponding to
moment appears to increase slightly for the higher members. The higher strength concrete
members are stiffer than lower strength concrete members, because the flexural rigidity (EI)
of concrete increases with strength (Xie et al, 1994). Mandal (1993) also reported that
increase in the characteristic strength of concrete increases the neutral axis depth, hence
increases the moment capacity of the section. It can be assumed that there is significant
change with an increase in the concrete strength.








Figure 7. Computed moment-curvature relationship curve for different concrete
strength

Longitudinal reinforcement ratio. Figure 8 shows comparison of moment-curvature
curve for four beams with the same concrete strength and confinement reinforcement spacing
but different amounts of longitudinal reinforcement. The parameter '/ varying from 0.25 to
1.0, was found to be the important factor in determining the shape of moment-curvature
curves.
Beam 4 in Figure 8 shows the lowest curvature ductility, refers to over reinforced
condition. With increase in the amount of tension steel, the depth of neutral axis increases. At
yield, in longitudinal steel is fixed stress and neutral axis depth increase with the curvature. At
ultimate condition, the strain at the maximum compressive fibre of concrete is fixed, so the
curvature at ultimate decreases. As a result, the curvature ductility decreases. Shin et al,
(1989); Xie et al, (1994), reported that member with high values of '/ undertaking large
curvature at relatively constant level of moment before the ultimate load was attained. On the
other hand, although the beam with low values of '/ was able to sustain increasing
moments, but only a small curvature can be achieved before the ultimate condition.
On the other hand, beam 1 shows the highest curvature ductility refers to under
reinforced condition. For the very low amount of tension steel, the ultimate condition may
arrive due to fracturing of tension steel. In this case the strain at tension steel is fixed at
ultimate condition, hence, the curvature at ultimate increases. As a result, the curvature
ductility increases with decrease in the amount of tension steel.
(fcu = 25 MPa)
(fcu = 20 MPa)
(fcu = 30 MPa)
(fcu = 35 MPa)

Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)


11
0,00E+00
1,00E+06
2,00E+06
3,00E+06
4,00E+06
5,00E+06
6,00E+06
0,00E+00 2,00E-04 4,00E-04 6,00E-04 8,00E-04 1,00E-03 1,20E-03 1,40E-03 1,60E-03 1,80E-03
Curvature (rad/mm)
M
o
m
e
n
t

(
N
m
m
)
Beam 1
Beam 2
Beam 3
Beam 4










Figure 8. Computed moment-curvature curves for different longitudinal
reinforcement ratios.

Available curvature ductility of the beams that calculated using the CD program is
listed in the Table 2. The table generally shows that for the same amounts of longitudinal and
confinement reinforcement. Curvature ductility rise gradually as the concrete strength
increases from 20-35 MPa. Thus, the ductility of high strength concrete beams was generally
higher than those of beams with moderate concrete strength. For the same concrete strength,
the curvature ductility increase drastically as the ratio of '/ increases. Finally, the results did
not show the expected effect of decrease spacing in confinement reinforcement on curvature
ductility.
In seismic design it would appear to be reasonable to aim at an available curvature
ductility factor of at least 10 when
cu
= 0.004 is reached in the potential plastic hinge regions
of beams (Park & Ruitong 1988). According to Dowrick (1987), during a severe earthquake
the curvature ductility (

) available at the reinforced concrete beams section may be in the

range of 10 to 20.

Table 2. Properties and curvature ductility from experimental and computation results
of reinforced concrete beams (steel reinforcement with f
Y
= 250 MPa).

Beams
f
cu

(MPa)
Longitudinal
bars dia.
(mm)
'/
Stirrups
spacing
(mm)
Numerical
Curvature
Ductility ( )
1 25 6 1.0 75 108.83
2 25 8 0.55 75 53.65
3 25 10 0.36 75 21.84
4 25 12 0.25 75 11.597
5 20 10 0.36 75 17.023
6 30 10 0.36 75 26.99
7 35 10 0.36 75 32.057
8 25 10 0.36 50 27.295
9 25 10 0.36 100 19.138
10 25 10 0.36 150 17.833
('/ = 1.0)
('/ = 0.55)
('/ = 0.36)
('/ = 0.25)


Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
12
Beams have a higher curvature value compared to columns because they are designed
to fail in a ductile manner with yielding of the tension steel. Although some codes of practice
require the available ductility for beams in seismic design, the values will generally be
exceeded during a severe earthquake (Park & Paulay 1975). The available curvature ductility
values arising from CD Analysis are ranging from 11-108. It is evident that the available
curvature ductility from CD analysis fits the ranges of ductility values according to some
findings from previous research.


4. CONCLUSION
The effect of geometric and material variables on the available curvature ductility of
reinforced concrete beam can be readily assessed using Curvature Ductility Program. As
expected it was found that, with other variables held constant, the available curvature ductility
factor is increased if the longitudinal reinforcement ratio is increased and the concrete
compressive strength is increased. While, there is no significant increase if the confined
reinforcement spacing is decreased.


REFERENCES

British Standard Institution, BS 8110: Part 1: 1985. Structural Use of Concrete, London: BSI.
1985.
Dowrick, D.J., 1987. Earthquake Resistant Design, Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons.
European Committee for Standardization, Eurocode 8: 1994.Design provisions for earthquake
resistance of structures Part 3: Specific rules for various materials and elements.
Mandal, P., 1993. Curvature ductility of reinforced concrete sections with and without
confinement, Master Thesis Department of Civil Engineering, Kanpur: Indian Institute
of Technology Kanpur.
Park, R. & Paulay, T., 1975. Reinforced Concrete Structures, Canada: John Wiley & Sons.
Park, R. & Ruitong, D., 1988. Ductility of doubly reinforced concrete beam section, ACI
Structural Journal 85: 217-225.
Saatcioglu, M. & Razvi, S.R., 1992. Strength and ductility of confine concrete columns, ASCE
Journal Structural 106: 1079-1102.
Saatcioglu, M. & Yalcin, C., 2000, Inelastic analysis of reinforced concrete columns,
Computer and Structures 77 [online], London: Elsevier Science Ltd. Available at:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00457949> [Accessed 29 August
2000].
Shin, S., Ghosh, S.K. & Moreno, J., 1989. Flexural ductility of ultra high strength concrete
members, ACI Structural Journal 86: 394-400.
Xie, Y., Ahmad, S., Yu, T., Hino, S. & Chung, W., 1994. Shear ductility of reinforced
concrete beams of normal and high strength concrete, ACI Structural Journal 91: 140-
149.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This article is a part of MSc Dissertation of Structural Engineering. The author wish to
acknowledge the financial support given by Engineering Education Development Project
ADB-INO 1432. Special thanks are due to the technical staff of the Structural Laboratory of

Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)


13
Civil & Structural Department, UMIST, Manchester, i.e. John Mason, Steve Edwards, Paul
Nedwell, and John Wall for their kind assistance throughout the project.


RIWAYAT PENULIS
Monita Olivia MSc, adalah staf pengajar pada Jurusan Teknik Sipil Fakultas Teknik
Universitas Riau, Pekanbaru.
Parthasarathi Mandal PhD adalah staf pengajar pada Civil & Structural Engineering
Department, UMIST, Manchester, United Kingdom.