You are on page 1of 269

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

AS 3600 Supplement 1:2014

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Concrete structuresCommentary
(Supplement to AS 36002009)

This Australian Standard Supplement was prepared by Committee BD-002, Concrete


Structures. It was approved on behalf of the Council of Standards Australia on 6 November
2014.
This Supplement was published on 5 December 2014.

The following are represented on Committee BD-002:

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Australian Building Codes Board


AUSTROADS
Bureau of Steel Manufacturers of Australia
Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia
Concrete Institute of Australia
Consult Australia
Engineers Australia
La Trobe University
Master Builders Australia
National Precast Concrete Association Australia
Steel Reinforcement Institute of Australia
University of Melbourne
University of New South Wales
University of Western Sydney

Standards Australia wishes to acknowledge the participation of the expert individuals that
contributed to the development of this Supplement through their representation on the
Committee.

Keeping Standards up-to-date


Australian Standards are living documents that reflect progress in science, technology and
systems. To maintain their currency, all Standards are periodically reviewed, and new editions
are published. Between editions, amendments may be issued.
Standards may also be withdrawn. It is important that readers assure themselves they are
using a current Standard, which should include any amendments that may have been
published since the Standard was published.
Detailed information about Australian Standards, drafts, amendments and new projects can
be found by visiting www.standards.org.au
Standards Australia welcomes suggestions for improvements, and encourages readers to
notify us immediately of any apparent inaccuracies or ambiguities. Contact us via email at
mail@standards.org.au, or write to Standards Australia, GPO Box 476, Sydney, NSW 2001.

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

AS 3600 Supplement 1:2014

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Concrete structuresCommentary
(Supplement to AS 36002009)

First published in part as MP 28.C41975.


MP 28.C9 first published 1975.
MP 28.C10 first published 1975.
MP 28.C26 first published 1975.
MP 28.C6 first published 1977.
MP 28.C11 first published 1977.
MP 28.C12 first published 1977.
MP 28.C12 first published 1977.
MP 28.C13 first published 1977.
MP 28.C14 first published 1977.
MP 28.C15 first published 1977.
MP 28.C19 first published 1978.
MP 28.C21 first published 1978.
MP 28.C22 first published 1978.
MP 28.C23 first published 1978.
MP 28.C25 first published 1978.
The preceding Standards revised, amalgamated and
redesignated AS 3600 Supplement 11990.
Second edition 1994.
Third edition 2014.

COPYRIGHT
Standards Australia Limited
All rights are reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or copied in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without the written
permission of the publisher, unless otherwise permitted under the Copyright Act 1968.
Published by SAI Global Limited under licence from Standards Australia Limited, GPO Box
476, Sydney, NSW 2001, Australia
ISBN 978 1 74342 915 0

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

PREFACE
This Commentary was prepared by Standards Australia Committee BD-002, Concrete
Structures, to supersede AS 3600 Supp 11994. It provides detailed background
information to the fourth edition of the Concrete Structures Standard, AS 36002009. This
is the third edition of the Commentary, which was first published in 1990. While it is
intended that this Commentary be read in conjunction with AS 36002009, it does not form
an integral part of that Standard.
The objectives of this Commentary are to
(a)

provide background reference material to the Clauses of the Standard;

(b)

indicate the origin of particular requirements;

(c)

indicate departures from previous practice; and

(d)

explain the application of certain Clauses.

The paragraph numbers of this Commentary are prefixed with the letter C and refer
directly to the respective clause numbers of AS 3600 (e.g. C1.1 refers to Clause 1.1).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

To avoid possible confusion between Commentary and Standard Clauses that are crossreferenced within the text, Commentary clauses are referred to as Paragraph C.... This is
in accordance with Standards Australia policy.
Where appropriate, each Section of the Commentary concludes with a list of references that
are cross-referenced numerically in the text, e.g. (Ref. 6) or (Refs. 6, 7 and 8). In some
sections, additional references for further reading, or as a lead to specialist literature, have
also been listed.
As noted in the Preface to AS 36002009, the new edition of the Standard is a revision of
the third edition, AS 36002001, which incorporates Amendments published in 2001 and
2004, as well as changes and updates that take account of the significant developments that
have occurred over the past decade in construction practice and theory. The main changes
are listed in the Preface to AS 36002009. Background information on these changes is
given in this new edition of the Commentary, as well as on Clauses that have remained
largely unchanged from the previous edition of the Standard. The opportunity has also been
taken to include improvements suggested in the interim by users.
Like the Standard itself, this Commentary is an ongoing work-in-progress. Suggestions for
improvements to both the Standard and to the Commentary, in regard either to content or to
clarity of wording, are therefore welcomed by Standards Australia.

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Standards Australia wishes to acknowledge and thank the members of BD-002 and its
subcommittees who have contributed significantly to this Commentary:

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

H. Backes
G. Brock
T. Cao
J. Forbes
S.J. Foster
P. Gabor
R.I. Gilbert
S. Guirguis
E. Holdsworth
K. Kavani
A.E. Kilpatrick
M. Manning
S. Manwarring

G McGregor
P. Mendis
R. Munn
S. Munter
M. Patrick
A. Paul
R.J. Potter
V. Sirivivatnanon
T. Thomas
B.Uy
I. Vavilov
R.F. Warner

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

CONTENTS
Page
SECTION C1 SCOPE AND GENERAL
C1.1 SCOPE AND APPLICATION ..................................................................................... 8
C1.2 NORMATIVE REFERENCES .................................................................................... 9
C1.3 EXISTING STRUCTURES ....................................................................................... 10
C1.4 DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................................. 10
C1.5 CONSTRUCTION ..................................................................................................... 10
C1.6 DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................... 10
C1.7 NOTATION ............................................................................................................... 10

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

SECTION C2 DESIGN PROCEDURES, ACTIONS AND LOADS


C2.1 DESIGN PROCEDURES .......................................................................................... 12
C2.2 DESIGN FOR STRENGTH ....................................................................................... 14
C2.3 DESIGN FOR SERVICEABILITY ........................................................................... 20
C2.4 ACTIONS AND COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS .................................................. 25
SECTION C3 DESIGN PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS
C3.1 PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE ................................................................................ 30
C3.2 PROPERTIES OF REINFORCEMENT .................................................................... 44
C3.3 PROPERTIES OF TENDONS ................................................................................... 47
C3.4 LOSS OF PRESTRESS IN TENDONS ..................................................................... 49
C3.5 MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR NON-LINEAR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ....... 56
SECTION C4 DESIGN FOR DURABILITY
C4.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................. 60
C4.2 METHOD OF DESIGN FOR DURABILITY ............................................................ 60
C4.3 EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATION .............................................................................. 62
C4.4 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE FOR EXPOSURE
CLASSIFICATIONS A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 AND C2 .................................................. 65
C4.5 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE FOR EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATION U ..... 66
C4.6 ABRASION ............................................................................................................... 66
C4.7 FREEZING AND THAWING ................................................................................... 66
C4.8 AGGRESSIVE SOILS ............................................................................................... 67
C4.9 RESTRICTION ON CHEMICAL CONTENT IN CONCRETE ................................ 68
C4.10 REQUIREMENTS FOR COVER TO REINFORCING STEEL AND TENDONS .... 68
SECTION C5 DESIGN FOR FIRE RESISTANCE
C5.1 SCOPE ....................................................................................................................... 73
C5.2 DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................... 73
C5.3 DESIGN PERFORMANCE CRITERIA .................................................................... 74
C5.4 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR BEAMS .............................................. 79
C5.5 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR SLABS ............................................... 81
C5.6 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR COLUMNS ........................................ 82
C5.7 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR WALLS .............................................. 83
C5.8 INCREASE OF FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) BY USE
OF INSULATING MATERIALS .............................................................................. 85

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Page
SECTION C6 METHODS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
C6.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................. 87
C6.2 LINEAR ELASTIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................... 88
C6.3 ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF FRAMES INCORPORATING SECONDARY
BENDING MOMENTS ............................................................................................. 91
C6.4 LINEAR ELASTIC STRESS ANALYSIS................................................................. 92
C6.5 NON-LINEAR FRAME ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 92
C6.6 NON-LINEAR STRESS ANALYSIS ........................................................................ 93
C6.7 PLASTIC METHODS OF ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 95
C6.8 ANALYSIS USING STRUT-AND-TIE MODELS ................................................... 97
C6.9 IDEALIZED FRAME METHOD OF ANALYSIS .................................................... 97
C6.10 SIMPLIFIED METHODS OF FLEXURAL ANALYSIS .......................................... 99

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

SECTION C7 STRUT-AND-TIE MODELLING


C7.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 106
C7.2 CONCRETE STRUTS ............................................................................................. 108
C7.3 TIES ........................................................................................................................ 111
C7.4 NODES .................................................................................................................... 112
C7.5 ANALYSIS OF STRUT-AND-TIE MODELS ........................................................ 114
C7.6 DESIGN BASED ON STRUT-AND-TIE MODELLING ........................................ 114
SECTION C8 DESIGN OF BEAMS FOR STRENGTH AND SERVICEABILITY
C8.1 STRENGTH OF BEAMS IN BENDING ................................................................. 116
C8.2 STRENGTH OF BEAMS IN SHEAR ..................................................................... 125
C8.3 STRENGTH OF BEAMS IN TORSION ................................................................. 138
C8.4 LONGITUDINAL SHEAR IN COMPOSITE AND MONOLITHIC BEAMS ........ 140
C8.5 DEFLECTION OF BEAMS..................................................................................... 142
C8.6 CRACK CONTROL OF BEAMS ............................................................................ 149
C8.7 VIBRATION OF BEAMS ....................................................................................... 153
C8.8 T-BEAMS AND L-BEAMS .................................................................................... 154
C8.9 SLENDERNESS LIMITS FOR BEAMS ................................................................. 154
SECTION C9 DESIGN OF SLABS FOR STRENGTH AND SERVICEABILITY
C9.1 STRENGTH OF SLABS IN BENDING .................................................................. 159
C9.2 STRENGTH OF SLABS IN SHEAR ....................................................................... 161
C9.3 DEFLECTION OF SLABS ...................................................................................... 163
C9.4 CRACK CONTROL OF SLABS ............................................................................. 166
C9.5 VIBRATION OF SLABS ........................................................................................ 172
C9.6 MOMENT RESISTING WIDTH FOR ONE-WAY SLABS SUPPORTING
CONCENTRATED LOADS .................................................................................... 172
C9.7 LONGITUDINAL SHEAR IN COMPOSITE SLABS ............................................. 173
SECTION C10 DESIGN OF COLUMNS FOR STRENGTH AND SERVICEABILITY
C10.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 175
C10.2 DESIGN PROCEDURES ........................................................................................ 177
C10.3 DESIGN OF SHORT COLUMNS ........................................................................... 179
C10.4 DESIGN OF SLENDER COLUMNS ...................................................................... 179
C10.5 SLENDERNESS ...................................................................................................... 183
C10.6 STRENGTH OF COLUMNS IN COMBINED BENDING
AND COMPRESSION ............................................................................................ 184
C10.7 REINFORCEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR COLUMNS ..................................... 186
C10.8 TRANSMISSION OF AXIAL FORCE THROUGH FLOOR SYSTEMS................ 192

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Page
SECTION C11 DESIGN OF WALLS
C11.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 197
C11.2 DESIGN PROCEDURES ........................................................................................ 197
C11.3 BRACED WALLS ................................................................................................... 199
C11.4 EFFECTIVE HEIGHT ............................................................................................. 199
C11.5 SIMPLIFIED DESIGN METHOD FOR BRACED WALLS SUBJECT
TO VERTICAL COMPRESSION FORCES ............................................................ 199
C11.6 DESIGN OF WALLS FOR IN-PLANE SHEAR FORCES ..................................... 200
C11.7 REINFORCEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR WALLS .......................................... 201

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

SECTION C12 DESIGN OF NON-FLEXURAL MEMBERS, END ZONES AND BEARING


SURFACES
C12.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 202
C12.2 STRUT-AND-TIE MODELS FOR THE DESIGN OF NON-FLEXURAL
MEMBERS .............................................................................................................. 202
C12.3 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS CONCRETE NIBS
AND CORBELS ...................................................................................................... 203
C12.4 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STEPPED JOINTS IN BEAMS
AND SLABS ........................................................................................................... 204
C12.5 ANCHORAGE ZONES FOR PRESTRESSING ANCHORAGES .......................... 206
C12.6 BEARING SURFACES ........................................................................................... 208
C12.7 CRACK CONTROL ................................................................................................ 209
SECTION C13 STRESS DEVELOPMENT OF REINFORCEMENT AND TENDONS
C13.1 STRESS DEVELOPMENT IN REINFORCEMENT ............................................... 211
C13.2 SPLICING OF REINFORCEMENT ........................................................................ 222
C13.3 STRESS DEVELOPMENT IN TENDONS ............................................................. 224
C13.4 COUPLING OF TENDONS .................................................................................... 226
SECTION C14 JOINTS, EMBEDDED ITEMS AND FIXINGS
C14.1 JOINTS .................................................................................................................... 228
C14.2 EMBEDDED ITEMS............................................................................................... 232
C14.3 FIXINGS ................................................................................................................. 233
SECTION C15 PLAIN CONCRETE PEDESTALS AND FOOTINGS
C15.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 234
C15.2 DURABILITY ......................................................................................................... 234
C15.3 PEDESTALS ........................................................................................................... 234
C15.4 FOOTINGS.............................................................................................................. 234
SECTION C16 SLAB-ON-GROUND FLOORS, PAVEMENTS AND FOOTINGS
C16.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................... 236
C16.2 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................ 236
C16.3 FOOTINGS.............................................................................................................. 236

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Page
SECTION C17 MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
C17.1 MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE
AND GROUT .......................................................................................................... 237
C17.2 MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCING
STEEL ..................................................................................................................... 239
C17.3 MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR PRESTRESSING
DUCTS, ANCHORAGES AND TENDONS ........................................................... 241
C17.4 CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR JOINTS AND EMBEDDED
ITEMS ..................................................................................................................... 244
C17.5 TOLERANCES FOR STRUCTURES AND MEMBERS ........................................ 244
C17.6 FORMWORK .......................................................................................................... 245

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

APPENDICES
CA REFERENCED DOCUMENTS ............................................................................... 249
CB TESTING OF MEMBERS AND STRUCTURES.................................................... 250
CC REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURES SUBJECT TO
EARTHQUAKE ACTIONS .................................................................................... 250

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

STANDARDS AUSTRALIA
Australian Standard
Concrete structuresCommentary
(Supplement to AS 36002009)

S E C T I O N

C 1

S C O P E

A N D

G E N E R A L

C1.1 SCOPE AND APPLICATION


C1.1.1 Scope

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Most concrete structures in Australia are designed and constructed to comply with the
National Construction Code (NCC) (Ref. 1) and for such structures the design requirements
are set out in the NCC and in AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 2). The Concrete structures Standard,
AS 36002009, which sets out minimum provisions for the design and construction of
concrete structures in Australia, is called up by the NCC so that compliance with the
requirements of the BCA is deemed to be satisfied by following the provisions of this
Standard.
AS 36002009 covers reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. It does not provide
rules for all plain concrete structures, as was the case in previous editions; only rules for
plain concrete footings and pedestals are given. The exclusion of mass concrete structures
recognizes the fact that they are generally outside the range of normal structures. The
treatment of plain concrete members in the Standard is thus limited, and other design
criteria, not covered therein, will usually need to be considered in the design of plain
concrete members and structures.
The first Note to Clause 1.1.1 points out that much of the content of the Standard is based
on general principles and, therefore, may be applicable to design situations not specifically
covered by the Standard.
In the preparation of a Standard such as this, a certain level of knowledge and competence
of the users has to be assumed. As indicated by the second Note, it is assumed that the users
would be professionally qualified civil or structural engineers experienced in the design of
concrete structures, or equally qualified but less experienced persons working under their
guidance. Therefore, it is intended that the Standard be applied and interpreted primarily by
such persons. Similarly, it is intended that the construction of the structure be carried out
and supervised by suitably qualified persons using appropriate quality control systems.
C1.1.2 Application
This Clause places various restrictions on the materials that can be used in conjunction with
AS 36002009.
A lower limit on concrete compressive strength of 20 MPa is imposed because strength
grades less than this are not normally suitable for structures. In AS 36002009, the upper
limit for the concrete compressive strength is 100 MPa, a strength that can be achieved in
commercial premix production plants around Australia and for which concrete properties
are specified in the Standard. The design procedures in the Standard apply to structures
with concrete strengths within these limits. This is not to suggest that concretes with greater
strength cannot be produced commercially or not be used in the construction of concrete
structures; however, when used in such situations, the applicability of the rules given in the
Standard needs to be checked.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Concretes made from naturally occurring Australian coarse aggregates have surface-dry
densities falling in the range 2100 kg/m3 to 2800 kg/m3. Lightweight structural concretes in
Australia generally use naturally occurring sands combined with manufactured lightweight
aggregates, for which the surface-dry density is seldom less than 1800 kg/m 3. Density limits
for structural concretes have been set accordingly.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Chemical, mechanical and dimensional requirements for steel reinforcement having lower
characteristic yield/proof strengths (fsy) of 250 MPa, 300 MPa or 500 MPa are given in
AS/NZS 4671 (Ref. 3). The number corresponding to fsy is also termed the strength grade.
AS/NZS 4671 defines three ductility classes distinguished in requirements by the letters L
(low), N (normal) and E (earthquake), placed immediately after the strength-grade
number. For each ductility class, different minimum values for uniform elongation/strain
and maximum stress-to-yield/proof-stress ratio apply. The latter class (E) is specifically for
use in New Zealand in accordance with NZS 3101 (Refs 4 and 5), and is not referenced in
the Standard.
On account of its low ductility, reinforcing steel of Ductility Class L has some design
restrictions placed on its use when acting as longitudinal tensile reinforcement compared
with Class N reinforcing steel. These design restrictions are given in later clauses of the
Standard, and are intended to prevent the Class L reinforcing steel from being used in any
situation where it is required to undergo large plastic deformation under strength limit state
conditions. By large plastic deformation it is meant reaching longitudinal tensile strains at
any point along the bar or wire in excess of the uniform elongation. The uniform elongation
corresponds to the onset of local necking when the maximum stress is reached in the bars.
Moreover, at strains in excess of the uniform strain a reinforcing bar would be in a state of
incipient failure due to bar fracture. Premature fracture of the reinforcing bars at a critical
section of an indeterminate member could prevent the formation of a complete collapse
mechanism and thereby unduly weaken the member. This should be avoided.
The Standard does not provide any rules for special types of reinforcement such as steel
fibres, polypropylene fibres, stainless steel reinforcement and carbon-fibre-based
reinforcement materials. This is partly due to the limited application of these reinforcement
types at the time of the preparation of the Standard, because of their cost and/or limited
availability, and partly because of the limited data available, which is needed to develop
general design provisions. Advice on the use of steel-fibre-reinforced concrete can be found
in Ref. 6. Because of their low modulus of elasticity, polypropylene fibres are not suitable
as structural reinforcement for concrete to carry applied loads; however, they can be useful
in controlling early-age shrinkage cracking. Stainless steel reinforcement may be used in
aggressive marine environments to overcome the difficulties associated with providing
appropriate concrete quality and cover to protect normal reinforcing steel (Refs 7 and 8).
Designers should ask suppliers for data on the appropriate material properties for the
situation in which they propose to use this reinforcement.
C1.1.3 Exclusions
The exclusions of this Clause recognize the fact that separate Standards have now been
developed for a range of specific structures.
C1.2 NORMATIVE REFERENCES
Normative references, by virtue of being called up in this Standard, are mandatory and have
to be complied with to satisfy the provisions of this Standard and, by association, the NCC.
The documents listed in Appendix A are normative references. Designers, specifiers,
contractors and supervisors should be aware that alternative specifications are not to be
substituted for these normative Standards.
The references listed in Appendix A of the Standard are subject to revision from time to
time. A check can be made with Standards Australia as to the currency of any Standard
referenced therein.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

10

C1.3 EXISTING STRUCTURES


The evaluation of an existing structure for strength and serviceability may be made using
the general principles of structural mechanics, together with information provided in this
Commentary, as appropriate. Additional information may be obtained by testing to
Appendix B, which is normative and deals with the testing of members and structures.
C1.4 DOCUMENTATION
The information applicable to most members may be shown in only one of the drawings,
usually the first sheet, or cited in the project specification as appropriate (Refs 9 and 10).
C1.5 CONSTRUCTION
The extent of supervision and inspection on a project will depend on its importance and
complexity. Any structure that is large (i.e. extensive in plan area and/or above five storeys
in height) or contains tendons that are stressed, is considered to be complex and should be
supervised by a person responsible to a qualified engineer and experienced in the
supervision of comparable structures.
In addition, the works should be inspected at specified stages by a suitably qualified person.
If any doubt arises during construction regarding a design matter, or the interpretation of
the documents, the contractor, supervisor, inspector or their representative should refer it to
the designer for resolution.
Suitable site records of the project should be kept during construction and be available for
inspection during the progress of the work, and after completion of the work.
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Such records should include, as appropriate


(a)

quantity, grade, ductility class and type of reinforcement and grade and type of
tendons;

(b)

each date on which concrete was placed and the corresponding location of that
concrete in the structure;

(c)

the results of all tests on the test samples of concrete together with the locations in
the structure of the batches sampled, and copies of the suppliers identification
certificates;

(d)

details of all prestressing and grouting operations; and

(e)

as-constructed drawings, specifications and issued instructions.

C1.6 DEFINITIONS
No comment is made here on the definitions included in the Standard. However, comment
is given in later clauses on some terms and definitions, as appropriate, where they are first
used.
C1.7 NOTATION
Most items of notation in the Standard have been in use for some years, and are not
discussed here. However, new notation has been introduced into a number of clauses of
AS 36002009 and such notation is discussed in the Commentary of the relevant clauses.
For example, a range of new capacity reduction () factors for strength design has been
introduced in Section 2 of the Standard and these factors are discussed in Paragraph C2.2 of
this Commentary.
The principles that have been used in developing the notation are broadly in agreement with
those of ISO 3898 (Ref. 11) which specifies only the general terms. The particular terms
used in AS 36002009 have been derived using these principles.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

11

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

National Construction Code, BCA, Volumes 1 and 2, Australian Building Codes


Board, Canberra, 2014.

AS/NZS 1170.0, Structural design actions: Part 0: General principles, Standards


Australia, Sydney, 2002.

AS/NZS 4671, Steel reinforcing materials, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2001.

NZS 3101.1, Concrete structures Standard, Standards New Zealand, Wellington,


2006.

NZS 3101.2, Concrete structures Standard, Commentary on the Design of Concrete


Structures Standards New Zealand, Wellington, 2006.

Bton, fib Model Code 2010, Bulletins 55 and 56, Fdration Internationale du Bton,
Lausanne, Switzerland, 2011.

BS 6744:2001+A2:2009, Stainless steel bars for the reinforcement of and use in


concrete. Requirements and test methods. BSI, 2001.

BS EN 10088-1:2005, Stainless steelsList of stainless steels, BSI, 2005.

CIA Z06Reinforcement Detailing Handbook, Concrete Institute of Australia,


Sydney, 2010.

10

AS/NZS 1100.501, Technical drawing, Part 501: Structural engineering drawing,


Standards Australia, Sydney, 2002.

11

ISO 3898:1997, Bases for design of structuresNotationsGeneral symbols,


International Organization for Standardization, Switzerland, 1997.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

12

S E C T I O N C 2
D E S I G N P R O C E D U R E S,
A C T I O N S A N D L O A D S
C2.1 DESIGN PROCEDURES
The aim of structural design is to provide a structure that has adequate strength, is
serviceable, robust and durable, and serves its intended function while satisfying various
other relevant requirements such as ease of construction and overall economy.
The procedures presented in Section 2 of AS 36002009 deal with the design of concrete
structures for strength and serviceability, earthquake actions, robustness, durability and fire
resistance, and are in accordance with the requirements of the NCC (Ref. 1) and
AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 2). For those structures that fall outside the jurisdiction of the NCC,
the general design requirements are set out in AS/NZS 1170.0. Information on design loads
and design actions, in addition to the information in Clause 2.4, are to be found in relevant
subsequent Parts of AS/NZS 1170 series (Refs 3 to 5).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

No mention is made in the NCC, or in AS/NZS 1170.0, of ease of construction or


economy as design requirements. These are regarded as matters for the building owner,
the client, the designer and the building contractor. How a particular structure needs to be
detailed to be easy to construct and the measures to be taken to ensure that it is
economical are not therefore covered in AS 36002009. Nevertheless, designers should
be aware of the importance of these matters and address them in each specific design case.
Designers should take account of all relevant design limit states and other criteria that apply
to a particular structure by considering it in its own environment and in the context of the
use to which it will be put, even when these considerations are not covered in the Standard.
In Section 2 of AS 36002009, major changes have been made to the contents in order to
conform to AS/NZS 1170.0. Furthermore, this Section has been extended to include a range
of new, alternative check procedures for the strength design of structures and members.
C2.1.1 Design for strength and serviceability
Clause 2.1.1 calls up AS/NZS 1170.0, which specifies the general principles for design. The
procedures specified in Clause 2.1.1 apply to the complete structure and also to its
component members.
During construction there may be critical periods for the partially built structure when
unusual loads and/or load paths are called into play and the members may not have reached
their full design strength. Designers need to consider these situations.
A structure has adequate strength and is serviceable if the probability of structural failure
and the probability of loss of serviceability are both acceptably low throughout its intended
life. AS/NZS 1170.0 provides only limited requirements for design for serviceability, both
for structures covered by the NCC and those outside its jurisdiction. Many limit states for
serviceability are seen as not being a matter for regulation within the NCC, and for those
structures outside its jurisdiction, the requirements will usually be peculiar to the specific
structure. Nevertheless, the Standard provides requirements for specific aspects of
serviceability that relate to concrete structures.
The Standard also permits testing of a structure in lieu of calculation to check that the
strength and serviceability requirements can be achieved. See also Appendix CB of this
Commentary.
C2.1.2 Design for earthquake actions
There is a major change inherent in this Clause which is not immediately obvious from the
wording. There has been a major revision of AS 1170.4 in the period between the previous
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

13

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

edition of AS 3600 and the publication of the 2009 edition of the Standard. The 2009
edition has been written to be consistent with the 2007 edition of AS 1170.4 (Ref. 5). This
latter document was initially intended to be a joint Standard that would apply to both
Australia and New Zealand, but differences in the seismicity of the two countries, the type
of earthquake experiencedintraplate (Australia) versus interplate (New Zealand)and the
design approaches used in the two countries meant the attempt to produce a joint Standard
was abandoned. Nevertheless, AS 1170.4 does move significantly closer to the New
Zealand earthquake Standard than previous versions and inherently moves towards a
capacity design approach, although this is not explicitly stated.
AS 1170.4 introduced some new concepts that make use of the structural ductility factor
( ), and structural performance factor (Sp) which are defined therein; however, values for
and Sp for concrete structures are given in Appendix C of the Standard. Designers are
reminded that AS 1170.4 contains some general detailing requirements as well as those
defining the magnitude of the forces that are to be applied to the structure and these need to
be read in conjunction with the requirements of the Standard (AS 36002009).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The reference to these factors in this Clause indirectly reminds designers that the magnitude
of earthquake loading is affected by the structure itselfits mass, stiffness and ductility
as well as by the magnitude of the event, the proximity of the structure to it and the site
conditions.
The Note to the Clause highlights the move towards the New Zealand capacity design
approach. If the designer wishes to assume high values for the structural ductility factor
( > 3), AS 1170.4 requires that the New Zealand Standards be used. This has significant
implications because the New Zealand concrete structures Standard, NZS 3101 (Ref. 6),
introduces different material requirements, design procedures, detailing requirements and
construction procedures compared to those in AS 3600 and designers need to be aware of
this.
C2.1.3 Design for robustness
Robustness is one of the prerequisites of structural safety (Ref. 7). It is the requirement that
a structure be able to withstand local damage caused by accidents or unforeseen events
without progressive collapse. The Standard requires that concrete structures be designed to
be robust in accordance with Section 6 of AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 2) where it states that the
structure shall be detailed so that it can withstand an event without being damaged to an
extent disproportionate to that event. A structure is to be designed such that should a local
accident occur, the damage is contained within an area local to the accident or, should one
member be removed, the remainder of the structure would hang together and not precipitate
a progressive collapse. This requires that the structural members and the connections
between them have adequate ductility (Ref. 7).
The Standard does not specify any quantitative measures of robustness to be used in
structural design. Beeby (Ref. 7) has proposed an approach whereby robustness is
quantified in terms of a structures ability to absorb energy and examples of the use of
Beebys approach are available in Ref. 8.
Other sources of design information on the topic are the Designers Guide to Eurocode 1
(Ref. 9), Ref. 54 and PCA Notes on ACI 318-08 (Ref. 10).
C2.1.4 Design for durability and fire resistance
Durability and fire resistance are critical considerations for many structures and represent
limit states that have to be considered by the designer. They need to be satisfied
concurrently with the other design requirements and criteria.
A durable structure is generally interpreted as meaning one that can withstand the wear
and deterioration to be expected during its design life without the need for undue
maintenance. In the past, durability had been considered to lie outside the scope of the
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

14

NCC; however, in 2002, the Australian Building Codes Board published guideline
document Durability in Buildings (Ref. 11), which provides designers with the various
approaches that can be taken to achieve adequate durability for a given structure. Specific
guidance for concrete structures with respect to durability is provided in the Standard (see
Section 4) because it is recognized that, while concrete structures will deteriorate with time
and their strength and structural behaviour will be adversely affected, they should continue
to function satisfactorily until the end of their design life.
The detailed rules for design for fire resistance are given in Section 5 of the Standard.
C2.1.5 Material properties
This Clause draws the attention of designers to the necessity of adopting appropriate values
of material properties in both analysis and design. In particular, the new non-linear strength
design procedures require the use of the mean concrete strength rather than the traditional
characteristic strength. The Standard now allows a wider range of strength design
approaches to be used (see Clause 2.2) compared to previous editions and, in Section 3,
appropriate material properties to be used in design are specified and these are intended to
be used in the absence of more accurate test data.
Concrete is unlike many other materials in that its design properties vary with time. These
properties are affected by how, and for how long, the concrete is cured. The material
properties that are used in the design should therefore reflect those of the concrete in the
structure at the appropriate age.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C2.2 DESIGN FOR STRENGTH


Clause 2.2 of the Standard introduces a major development in the design of concrete
structures in Australia. In Clauses 2.2.2 to 2.2.6, details are given of five alternative
checking procedures that may be used in the strength design of concrete members and
structures. Each alternative checking procedure is paired with one of the five alternative
methods of analysis that are covered in Section 6. These new strength check clauses
acknowledge the existence of sophisticated and accurate methods of analysis that have
become available, such as linear and non-linear finite element analysis, and for the first
time provide checking methods in AS 3600 that allow these powerful methods of analysis to
be employed in design in appropriate circumstances.
Clause 2.2.2 deals with the normal ultimate strength method that has been in use for many
years, and which requires a linear elastic analysis of the structure. The checking procedure
in Clause 2.2.3 is to be used when a linear elastic stress analysis is undertaken using linear
finite elements. Clause 2.2.4 gives details of the strength checking method to be employed
when strut-and-tie methods are used for design. Clauses 2.2.5 and 2.2.6 give the checking
procedures to be adopted when non-linear methods of analysis are used, including, for
example, a non-linear finite element analysis.
It is important to note that the design checks covered in Clauses 2.2.2, 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 use
characteristic values of both the concrete compressive strength and the steel yield stress.
The first two checking procedures apply to analytic methods that, in effect, assume linear
material behaviour in the structure and rely on elastic analysis and limit states design
concepts, even when some redistribution of the elastically determined stress resultants is
assumed in the design. The situation is similar for the checking method to be used with
strut-and-tie methods of analysis. The values for the appropriate capacity reduction ()
factors quoted in Clauses 2.2.2, 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 are generally quite similar. For example a
value of about 0.6 applies in situations where failure is triggered by concrete in
compression, or the failure of the member is non-ductile. A value of 0.8 applies for ductile
failures, such as flexural failure of an under-reinforced member constructed with Class N
steel in tension.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

15

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The check procedures and the values of the reduction factors are rather different in
Clauses 2.2.5 and 2.2.6, which apply when non-linear methods of analysis are used for
design and non-linear structural behaviour is assumed to occur at high overload. In these
cases, mean values for the material properties and strengths have to be used in the design
check calculations, and not the characteristic values. This is because a single overall, global
safety factor has to be used when non-linear relationships exist between overall system
behaviour and individual material properties. In the linear design methods the use of
characteristic values for the material strengths effectively introduces partial safety factors
for each material.
If non-linear behaviour becomes a matter of concern in a special structure, then a sensitivity
study should be undertaken, in which analyses are carried out for a range of different input
values of the material properties and strengths. In order to achieve comparable global
factors of safety against failure for all the available methods, the values of the reduction
factors used in Clauses 2.2.5 and 2.2.6 are somewhat lower than the values used for the
linear methods.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

It is important to note that the nomenclature and notation for the specific reduction factors
vary according to the checking method. In particular, the notation used in Clause 2.2 for the
various reduction factors is as follows:
(a)

is the capacity reduction factor to be used in the normal ultimate strength design
method specified in Clause 2.2.2;

(b)

sys is the system strength reduction factor to be used in the collapse load design
method specified in Clauses 2.2.5 and 2.2.6;

(c)

s is the stress reduction factor to be used for design based on stress analysis, as
specified in Clause 2.2.3; and

(d)

st is the strength reduction factor to be applied to the strength of struts and ties in the
strut-and-tie design method specified in Clause 2.2.4.

The general terminology and notation of AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 2) are used throughout
Clause 2.2, where the term design action refers not only to design loads, but also to any
other actions that may have to be considered by the designer, such as imposed
deformations, temperature gradients and the like. The design action to be used in the design
calculations will be the most severe combination of factored actions, as defined in
AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 2).
The term design action effect refers typically to the internal stress resultants, such as
moments, shears, etc., that are induced in critical regions of the structure by the design
actions, but may also refer to other relevant effects, such as stresses or strains or
deformations.
C2.2.1 General
The first paragraph of this Clause specifies strength design be carried out using the strength
checking procedures detailed in Clauses 2.2.2 to 2.2.6. The second paragraph permits
designers to use the most appropriate strength checking procedure for each member,
without having to use the same method for other members within the structure and for the
structure as a whole. Nevertheless, the design has to satisfy a general check on equilibrium
for the structure and its components, as well as for compatibility.
C2.2.2 Strength check procedure for use with linear elastic methods of analysis, with
simplified analysis methods and for statically determinate structures
This Clause incorporates the strength check procedure that designers will be familiar with
from previous editions of the Standard. It is based on checking the strength of the member
at critical, nominated cross-sections. This is the normal ultimate strength design method and
will be used for most routine design. While the method is essentially unchanged from
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

16

previous editions of AS 3600, the terminology and notation have been altered to conform to
AS/NZS 1170.0. The general statement of the strength design requirement is:

Ru E d
The symbol Ru is the ultimate strength of the section (for example, the bending strength of a
beam section) and Ed is the design action effect induced by the strength design load
condition (for example, the design ultimate bending moment in the section). The factor is
the capacity reduction factor. In this strength check, the characteristic material strength
properties have to be used to determine the strengths of cross-sections and local regions.
The strength check thus consists of comparing the design ultimate strength of the crosssection or local region of the member with the design action effect, calculated from the
design ultimate load condition by elastic analysis (or an equivalent simplified method) of
the overall structure.
In the specific case of a check for moment capacity of a beam section, for example, the
design check becomes:

M u M *
where M* is the moment calculated to act at the section when the structure is subjected to
the strength design action combination as specified in AS/NZS 1170.0. The elastic analysis
used to evaluate M* is carried out in accordance with Section 6. The section ultimate
strength in bending (Mu) is determined using ultimate strength theory in accordance with
Section 8.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The capacity reduction factor () takes the following into account:


(a)

Variations in material strength, material properties, position of reinforcing and


prestressing steel, dimensions of members and homogeneity.

(b)

Differences between the ultimate strength obtained from tests and the ultimate
strength of the member in the structure.

(c)

Inaccuracies in the design equations related to local member behaviour and overall
structural behaviour.

(d)

Degree of ductility in relation to the action effects being considered.

(e)

Importance of the member in the structure and the consequences of its failure.

The values of the capacity reduction factors () given in Table 2.2.2 are similar to those in
the 2001 edition of AS 3600. In most instances, the factor is assigned a single value
between 0.6 and 0.8, depending on the type of action effect. In some cases, the Ductility
Class (N or L) of the longitudinal tensile reinforcement is required to be considered also in
the 2009 edition.
The behaviour of concrete members subjected to axial force without bending [row (a) of
Table 2.2.2]) is assumed to be ductile if they are subjected to tension and contain Class N
longitudinal tensile reinforcement and/or prestressing tendons ( = 0.8), but non-ductile if
they are subjected to tension and contain Class L longitudinal tensile reinforcement
( = 0.64), or if the members are subjected to pure axial compression ( = 0.6).
Members in bending without axial tension or compression and containing Class N
longitudinal reinforcement and/or tendons [(row (b)(i)] are assumed to behave in a ductile
manner, provided the neutral axis parameter (kuo) does not exceed 0.36. In this case,
= 0.8. More-heavily reinforced sections with larger values of kuo are considered less
ductile, and decreases linearly from 0.8 to 0.6 as kuo increases from 0.36 to 0.545. When
kuo exceeds 0.545, = 0.6. Balanced failure occurs when Grade 500 MPa steel
reinforcement is used and the value of kuo = cu/(cu+sy) = 0.545, with concrete extreme
fibre compressive strain, cu = 0.003 and the tensile steel at depth do at yield strain
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

17

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

sy = 0.0025. The corresponding curvature at such a cracked section is 0.0055/do. The


ductility limit of kuo = 0.36 corresponds to a curvature at the ultimate limit state of
0.0083/do (50% higher than that at balanced failure).
For under-reinforced sections in bending without axial tension or compression and
containing Class L tensile reinforcement [row (b)(ii)], the tensile reinforcement can fracture
at an ultimate curvature less than that reached using Class N reinforcement, and therefore
sections are assumed to be non-ductile. The maximum value of is reduced from 0.8 to
0.64 for cross-sections containing Class L longitudinal tensile reinforcement.
For sections subjected to bending combined with axial force and containing Class N
reinforcement and/or tendons, the relevant values of are given in rows (c)(i) and (d),
where varies from 0.6 to 0.8. For sections subjected to bending combined with axial force
and containing Class L reinforcement, the relevant values of are given in rows (c)(ii) and
(d) vary from 0.6 to 0.64.
The note to the table addresses the design of members involving mixed construction where
Class L reinforcement (mesh) together with Class N reinforcement (bars) and/or
prestressing tendons are used as longitudinal tensile reinforcement in the design for strength
in bending, with or without axial force present. It is recommended that the maximum value
of for calculating the member design strength be limited by the presence of the Class L
reinforcement and taken as 0.64.
Shear and torsion in reinforced members attract an intermediate value of = 0.7. Sections
in bearing are treated as non-ductile with a value of = 0.6, as are all plain concrete
members and fixings subjected to bending, shear and axial force.
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C2.2.3 Strength check procedure for use with linear elastic stress analysis
This check procedure allows members or regions to be designed on the basis of critical
stresses, calculated by elastic analysis using, for example, linear finite elements. Design
situations are thus catered for where it is not possible to use the simple ultimate strength
design method detailed in Clause 2.2.2. This can occur, for instance, in the design of a
complex three-dimensional region of a structure, such as a joint, where it is not possible to
identify simple cross-sections (such as exist in a beam or column) nor the design moments
and shears acting on the sections.
The maximum stresses are determined from an elastic stress analysis assuming an
uncracked structure. The analysis is carried out for the critical combination of the design
loads for strength.
The calculated maximum compressive stresses in the concrete are not to exceed the limiting
stress s 0.9 f c as specified in Clause 2.2.3(b). The symbol is a factor to be applied to the
compressive strength and is described below whilst s is a stress reduction factor whose
values are given in Table 2.2.3. In this strength design check, the stress reduction factor s
plays a comparable role to that of the strength reduction factor in design based on elastic
analysis, as previously discussed in Paragraph C2.2.2.
With regard to the calculated tensile stresses, reinforcement or tendons are included to carry
all of the internal tensile forces, calculated by integrating the tensile stresses. In
determining the required steel areas, the value chosen for the steel stress is not to exceed
the yield stress (fsy or fpy ) reduced by the stress reduction factor s. Some averaging of the
tensile stresses is allowed by Clause 2.2.3(d) over an area appropriate to the size of the
region being considered. The size of the area over which tensile stresses are to be averaged
is a matter of engineering judgement and is dependent on the size of the region and the
nature of the stress distribution. No hard and fast rules can be provided.
As an elastic analysis does not allow for assessment of strains normal or transverse to the
direction of principal compressive stresses, an efficiency factor is applied to the allowable
compressive stress to account for the disturbing effect of transverse tensile strains on the
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

18

compressive strength of concrete. This effect was documented as early as 1977 by Robinson
and Demorieux (Ref. 12) but was first quantified, and is best known, from the publications
of Vecchio and Collins (Refs 13 and 14) who first proposed the modified compression field
theory (MCFT).
While there are a number of variants of the efficiency factor, the model proposed by Collins
and Mitchell (Ref. 15) has generally withstood the test of time and has been incorporated
into the Canadian code of practice, Design of Concrete Structures for Buildings, since 1984
(Ref. 16). Based on the panel tests of Vecchio and Collins (Ref. 14), Collins and Mitchell
proposed that:

1
0.8 + 170 1

where 1 is the major principal strain normal to the direction of the compression field.
A plot of the MCFT against test data is shown in Figure C2.2.3 (labelled Vecchio and
Collins, 1986), together with other alternative predictions.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

When adopting a plastic design procedure on top of an elastic analysis, the transverse strain
is required to be sufficiently large for the ductility demands of the structure or member to
be met. The factor takes account of the effect of transverse strain on the strength of the
concrete or, if the element is in a tri-axial compressive state, the effect of any confinement
on the concrete strength.
The value of = 0.6 is calibrated for a maximum angle of crack rotation from the angle at
the initial cracking (elastic) condition to that at the ultimate (plastic) condition of 15. If
the rotation of the cracks is greater than 15, the factor = 0.6 may be unconservative. A
more refined evaluation of the parameter is given in the fib Model Code (Ref. 17) as
follows:
(a)

If no reinforcement has yielded and at least one principal stress is tensile:

1.18
1.0
1.14 + 0.00166 si

where si is the maximum tensile stress (in MPa) in any layer of reinforcing steel.
(b)

If one or more layers of reinforcement has yielded:


= 1 0.032| pl el|

1.18
1.14 + 0.00166 f sy

where pl is the compression field angle with respect to x-axis at the ultimate limit
state, and el is the first cracking angle with respect to the x-axis.
In a two dimensional model, if both principal stresses are compressive, may be taken as
1.0 or determined using a refined model based on the bi-axial stress condition.
Clause 2.2.3(b)(ii) allows for cases where confinement reinforcement is used locally to
strengthen the concrete in compression as, for example, the concrete behind a prestressing
anchoring plate where local stresses may be high. In this case, the effective confining
pressure (fr.eff) may be calculated using the model provided in Clause 10.7.3.3 and the axial
stress obtained from a modified form of the equation proposed by Richart et al. (Ref. 18):
fo = 0.9 f c + Cfr.eff

fo
Cf
2 or = 1 + r.eff 2
0.9 f c
0.9 f c

where C = 4 for f c 80 MPa and C = 3 for f c >80 MPa (Ref. 19).


Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

19

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Other suitable models for determining the efficiency of confinement and the effective
confining pressure provided by confining reinforcement include those of Sheikh and
Uzumeri (Ref. 20) and Mander et al. (Ref. 21).
Further information may be obtained from Foster and Marti (Ref. 22), Foster et al. (Ref. 23)
and fib Bulletin 45 (Ref. 24).

1. 2

1.0

0. 8

2m a x

0.6

Ve c c hi o
a n d C o lli n s
19 8 6

0.4

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

0. 2
C o llin s
1978
0

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

1 X 10 3

FIGURE C2.2.3 INFLUENCE OF A TRANSVERSE TENSILE STRAIN ON THE


COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

C2.2.4 Strength check procedure for use with strut-and-tie analysis


This Clause allows designers to use analysis and design methods based on the strut-and-tie
approach, according to the provisions given in Clause 6.8, Section 7 and Clause 12.2 of the
Standard. Designers should consult the Commentary on those Sections for a detailed
discussion on the background to each Clause and the methodology. Clause 2.2.4 specifies
how the design check is to be carried out when strut-and-tie analysis is used to check the
design strength of the steel ties, the concrete struts and the concrete nodes within a member
or a region of a structure. The strength reduction factor st is applied both to the forces in
the struts and ties and to the stresses in the nodes.
C2.2.5 Strength check procedure for use with non-linear analysis of framed
structures
The strength checking procedure given in Clause 2.2.5 allows design to be based on a
collapse load analysis. This is quite different to the ultimate strength design procedure
covered in Clause 2.2.2. In ultimate strength design, the structure is assumed to behave
elastically in order to evaluate the stress resultants (i.e. the action effects) such as the
internal moments, shears, torsions and axial forces at individual cross-sections of beams,
columns and slabs. The ultimate strengths of the individual cross-sections are then
determined on the assumption of local inelastic behaviour. In collapse load design, a nonlinear analysis is undertaken for the entire structure in order to calculate the load at which
the structure will collapse (Ru.sys). The design load capacity of the entire structure is then
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

20

compared directly with the critical design ultimate load combination. A system strength
reduction factor syst is applied to the calculated load capacity to obtain the design load
capacity. The design check therefore becomes

sys R u.sys E d
where Ed is the design action effect for the critical load combination.
It is important to note that in the non-linear analysis employed to evaluate the load capacity
Ru.sys, mean values (not characteristic values) of the material properties are used. Therefore,
values for the system reduction factor are somewhat different to the values of the capacity
reduction factor specified in Clauses 2.2.2 to 2.2.4, where characteristic values of material
properties are used in design.
C2.2.6 Strength check procedure for use with non-linear stress analysis
The strength checking procedure given in Clause 2.2.6 allows design to be based on a nonlinear stress analysis using, for example, non-linear finite elements. If the analysis takes full
account of the non-linear behaviour of the materials at collapse, as well as any geometric
non-linear effects, then this analysis, similar to the one dealt with in Clause 2.2.5, provides
a detailed treatment of the conditions at failure of the structural system and delivers a value
of the collapse load. The design check specified in Clause 2.2.6 is similar to that in
Clause 2.2.5. The values for the system (capacity) reduction factor, given in Table 2.2.5, are
also applicable.
C2.3 DESIGN FOR SERVICEABILITY

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C2.3.1 General
In order to satisfy the design requirements relating to serviceability, a concrete structure
must be serviceable and perform its intended function throughout its working life. Unlike
strength, design for serviceability is not covered in the NCC (National Construction Code)
regulations. This places greater responsibility on designers as, together with the owner/user
of the facility, they have to identify the appropriate serviceability criteria to be met.
Further, at the design/planning stage, it needs to be recognized that meeting the relevant
criteria will frequently involve controlling the construction techniques and practices as well
as carrying out particular design procedures. In some instances, the serviceability limit
states can be the controlling criteria, e.g. no cracking permitted in the walls, floors and
roofs of a facility used for testing of pathogenic organisms. In other cases, the required
performance criteria can be equally demanding, e.g. limiting surface flatness in specialist
warehouses, limiting vibrations in hospital wards, limiting deflections in the floors of a
manufacturing facility and controlling surface defects, such as cracking and crazing, in
monumental-type structures.
In general, design for serviceability is covered by AS/NZS 1170.0, which applies to
structures constructed from all materials. Additional criteria, such as the criteria provided in
Clauses 2.3.2 and 2.3.3, are applicable to concrete structures or members, although some
guidance is also provided on matters that have wider application, e.g. deflections likely to
cause problems with the ponding of water. The limits or values quoted have been derived
from experience and observation of behaviour of typical concrete building structures in the
past. Consequently, whether or not the limits are appropriate for current buildings and
practices is a matter of engineering judgement based on experience, and should be
evaluated in terms of the particular structure under review.
Excessive deflection and/or excessive cracking should not impair the function of the
structure or be aesthetically unacceptable. Excessive deflection should also not cause
unintended load paths, such as occurs when a deflecting slab begins to bear on a nonloadbearing partition. Cracks should not be unsightly or wide enough to lead to durability

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

21

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

problems. In addition, vibration should not cause distress to the structure or discomfort to
its occupants. If required, other serviceability design criteria should be considered.
Design checks for the serviceability limit states involve appropriate consideration of the
time-dependent deformation of the structure, including the effects of cracking, tension
stiffening, creep and shrinkage of the concrete.
C2.3.2 Deflection
The material in this Clause has been subject to frequent refinement for over 30 years.
Nevertheless, the provisions have very limited precision. It can be expected that evaluation
of experience gained from structures built to comply with this new edition of AS 3600 will
lead to further amendments in the future.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The mechanisms that govern deflection of concrete members need to be understood by


designers and contractors. Final deflections consist of an elastic component due to the
application of the permanent and applied actions (sustained dead and live loads), a
shrinkage component that develops progressively as the concrete loses moisture, and a
creep component that develops as the concrete matrix gradually deforms and adjusts to the
sustained actions. All of these components depend significantly on the extent of cracking,
including early age thermal cracking, cracking caused by construction loads, restrained
shrinkage cracking and cracking caused by external loads. The situation is further
complicated by the fact that the properties of the concrete change over time (e.g. strength
and elastic modulus tend to increase with time, as do the magnitudes of creep and shrinkage
strain, but the rates of shrinkage and creep tend to diminish with time). Information on the
changes in concrete properties with time is provided in Section 3 and its Commentary.
In general, the later the actions are applied to a concrete member, the smaller will be its
deflections; mature concrete is stronger and stiffer and the time-dependent deformations are
less.
There are three main types of deflection problems that may affect the serviceability of a
concrete structure:

Type 1where excessive deflection causes either aesthetic or functional problems;

Type 2where excessive deflection results in unintended load paths or damage to


either structural or non-structural elements attached to the member; and

Type 3where dynamic effects due to insufficient stiffness cause discomfort to


occupants (Ref. 25).

Examples of deflection problems of Type 1 include visually unacceptable sagging


(or hogging) of slabs and beams, and ponding of water on roofs. Type 1 problems are
generally overcome by limiting the magnitude of the final long-term deflection (referred to
as the total deflection in Table 2.3.2) to some appropriately low value. The total deflection
of a beam or slab in a building is usually the sum of the short-term and time-dependent
deflections caused by the permanent (dead) load (including self-weight), the prestress
(if any), the expected in-service live load and the load-independent effects of shrinkage and
temperature change.
A total deflection limit that is appropriate for the particular member and its intended
function has to be selected by the designer. The selected limit should be appropriate for the
structure and its intended use, but in no case is the limit to be greater than span/250 for a
span supported at both ends and span/125 for a cantilever (see Table 2.3.2). For example, a
total deflection limit of span/250 may be appropriate for the floor of a car park, but would
be totally inadequate for a gymnasium floor that is required to remain essentially plane
under service conditions and where functional problems arise at very small total
deflections. In some situations, the limit of span/250 may not be sufficient to meet
particular aesthetic or functional requirements such as visual sagging and ponding of water.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

22

Examples of Type 2 problems include deflection-induced damage to ceiling or floor


finishes, cracking of masonry walls and other brittle partitions, improper functioning of
sliding windows and doors, tilting of storage racking and so on. To avoid these problems, a
limit has to be placed on that part of the total deflection that occurs after the attachment of
the non-structural elements in question, i.e. the incremental deflection. This incremental
deflection is the sum of the long-term deflection due to all the sustained loads and
shrinkage, the short-term deflection due to the transitory live load and the short-term
deflection due to any dead load applied to the structure after the attachment of the nonstructural elements under consideration, together with any temperature-induced deflection.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For roof or floor construction supporting masonry partitions, the incremental deflection that
occurs after the attachment of the partitions should not exceed span/500 (span/250 for a
cantilever) when provision is made to minimize the effect of deflection on the partition.
When no such provision is made, the incremental deflection should be limited to span/1000
(span/500 for a cantilever). For members supporting other brittle finishes (or attached to
other non-structural elements that are likely to be damaged by large deflection), the
incremental deflection that occurs after the attachment of the brittle finish should not
exceed span/500 (span/250 for a cantilever) or the limit specified by the manufacturer
whichever is the more severe. For members supporting brittle partitions or finishes, this
criterion will usually be more severe than the limit on total deflection, unless provision is
made to minimize the effect of the movement by detailing joints and delaying the erection
of the brittle elements until a substantial part of the long-term deflection has occurred. This
latter precaution may not be practical if speed and flexibility of construction are desired.
Type 3 deflection problems include the perceptible springy vertical motion of floor systems
and other vibration-related problems. Very little quantitative information for controlling
this type of deflection problem is available. For a member subjected to vehicular or
pedestrian traffic, a maximum limit of span/800 (span/400 for a cantilever) is imposed on
the immediate deflection caused by imposed loads (including live load and dynamic
impact). This limit provides a minimum requirement on the instantaneous stiffness of the
member that is deemed to be sufficient to avoid Type 3 problems. Such problems are
potentially the most common for prestressed concrete floors, where load balancing is often
employed to produce a nearly horizontal floor under the sustained load and the bulk of the
final deflection may be due to the transient live load. As such structures are often uncracked
at service loads, the total deflection is small and Types 1 and 2 deflection problems are
easily avoided.
The total deflection is measured from the as-cast position and the Standard does not provide
specific guidance on the treatment of camber that could be used to eliminate the effect of
part or all of the total deflection and possibly permit more slender members, particularly for
longer spans. However, if camber is used to meet the total deflection limit and the stiffness
of the member is thereby reduced, then care should be taken to check the incremental
deflection, the imposed action deflection, the support rotations, and the possibility of
excessive vibration.
Appropriate methods for deflection control are specified in the Standard as follows:

Beam deflection by refined calculation .................................................. Clause 8.5.2

Beam deflection by simplified calculation ............................................. Clause 8.5.3

Deemed to comply span-to-depth ratios for reinforced beams ................ Clause 8.5.4

Slab deflection by refined calculation .................................................... Clause 9.3.2

Slab deflection by simplified calculation ............................................... Clause 9.3.3

Deemed to comply span-to-depth ratios for reinforced slabs .................. Clause 9.3.4

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

23

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Deflections due to lateral loading may be the critical serviceability consideration for
unbraced frames in multistorey buildings. The maximum limit on the inter-storey lateral
drift of 1/500 of the storey height is intended to provide appropriate stiffness and
serviceability for most multistorey buildings and unbraced framed structures under the
design lateral loads for serviceability.
C2.3.3 Cracking
C2.3.3.1 General
The control of cracking under service conditions is required for aesthetics, as well as for
durability. Cracks should not adversely affect the appearance of the structure or be wide
enough to facilitate the corrosion of reinforcement. In the Standard, crack control is deemed
to be provided by the satisfaction of certain minimum reinforcement requirements,
appropriate detailing of the reinforcement and, in the case of flexural cracking, by limiting
the stress in the reinforcement crossing the crack to some appropriately low value. The
limiting steel stress depends on the maximum acceptable crack width for the structure and
that, in turn, depends on the structural requirements and the local environment. The
Standard does not require calculation of crack widths.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The deemed-to-comply provisions for crack control in the Standard are intended to ensure
that the maximum final crack width will not exceed about 0.3 mm. This limit for crack
width is thought to be appropriate for most structures, but smaller limits may be appropriate
for structures in aggressive environments, e.g. marine structures, for liquid-retaining
structures, and for monumental structures requiring an exceptionally high quality finish.
Where a concrete surface is located in a sheltered environment and cracking will not be
visible, a significantly larger limit on the maximum crack width would be acceptable.
Some recommended upper limits on maximum crack widths for serviceable reinforced
concrete structures are given in Table C2.3.3.
These recommended crack widths are consistent with a design life of 50 years 20%. For
different design lives, these crack widths do not apply.
TABLE C2.3.3
RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM FINAL DESIGN CRACK WIDTHS (REF. 25)
Environment
Sheltered environment
(where crack widths will not
adversely affect durability)

Exposed environment

Design requirement

Maximum final crack width,


(w*)
mm

Aesthetic requirement

where cracking could adversely


affect the appearance of the structure

distant in buildings

0.5

close in buildings

0.3

where cracking will not be visible


and aesthetics are not important

0.7

Durability requirement

where wide cracks could lead to


corrosion of reinforcement

0.3

Aesthetic requirement

Aggressive environment

monumental structure requiring high


quality finish

0.2

Durability requirement

where wide cracks could lead to


corrosion of reinforcement

0.30 (when c # 50 mm)


0.25 (otherwise)

c # is the concrete cover to the nearest steel reinforcement.


www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

24

C2.3.3.2 Control of cracking


The deemed-to-comply design requirements for crack control as outlined elsewhere in the
Standard, are referred to here.
The requirements for control of load-induced cracking are as follows:

For reinforced concrete beams in tension and bending ............................ Clause 8.6.1

For prestressed concrete beams in bending .............................................. Clause 8.6.2

In the side face of beams ......................................................................... Clause 8.6.3

At openings and discontinuities in beams ................................................ Clause 8.6.4

For flexure in reinforced concrete slabs .................................................. Clause 9.4.1

For flexure in prestressed slabs ............................................................... Clause 9.4.2

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The requirements for the control of shrinkage and temperature-induced cracking are:

General requirements for slabs ............................................................. Clause 9.4.3.1

Reinforcement in the primary direction of a slab .................................. Clause 9.4.3.2

Reinforcement in the secondary direction of an unrestrained slab ......... Clause 9.4.3.3

Reinforcement in the secondary direction of a restrained slab .............. Clause 9.4.3.4

Reinforcement in the secondary direction of a partially restrained slab ..Clause 9.4.3.5

In the vicinity of restraints ...................................................................... Clause 9.4.4

At openings and discontinuities .............................................................. Clause 9.4.5

In restrained walls ................................................................................ Clause 11.7.2

The detailing requirements for crack control in walls are specified in Clauses 11.7.1 to
11.7.4, while the crack control provisions for non-flexural members and in the disturbed
regions in the vicinity of concentrated loads are given in Clause 12.7.
The control of plastic shrinkage cracking, settlement cracking and early thermal cracking in
the pre-hardened concrete is outside the scope of the Standard; however, it is recommended
they be adequately controlled by appropriate specification of the concrete and appropriate
measures taken during construction to control the evaporation of bleed water and the heat of
hydration. Early thermal cracking is likely in a concrete member if it has a cross-section
greater than 400 400 mm and a thermal gradient of greater than 20C occurs between the
core and the surface of the member. A series of preventative/controlling measures are
possible, ranging from adjusting the materials used, specifying suitable concrete mix
proportions, using insulated formwork and using reinforcement/fibres.
C2.3.4 Vibration
This Clause requires that designers consider vibration in concrete structures and members.
Generally, vibration is likely to be a controlling consideration where

rhythmic loads are generated by people jumping in unison, e.g. in gymnasia or


grandstands;

mechanical plant imparts vibrations to the structure;

vibrations are generated by people walking in buildings, such as hospitals, where the
occupants may be especially sensitive to vibration; or

in tall structures subjected to dynamic wind loading.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

25

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The design of structures subject to dynamic loads, such that the vibrations generated do not
exceed acceptable levels, is a complex subject. Refs 26 to 38 provide an introduction to the
specialist literature in this field. Essential to the solution is a detailed understanding of both
the magnitude and nature of the applied dynamic loads (harmonic, transient, or random
force) and the magnitude of the mass, stiffness and damping characteristics of the structure,
as well as the acceptability criteria relevant to the type of structure under consideration.
Among the dynamic loads that may require consideration for the serviceability limit state
are
(a)

pedestrian traffic on suspended floors and footbridges (Refs 26 to 38);

(b)

wind loads on structure (Refs 39 and 40);

(c)

service loads due to plant and manufacturing processes, e.g. forging hammers,
generators, presses, etc. (Refs 41 to 45);

(d)

adjacent road or rail traffic (Refs 46 and 47); and

(e)

blasting (assuming a nearby quarry) (Refs 48 and 49).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Where a structure supports vibrating machinery (or any other significant dynamic load) or
where a structure may be subjected to ground motion caused by earthquake, blast or
adjacent road or rail traffic, vibration control becomes an important design requirement.
This is particularly so for slender structures, such as tall buildings or long-span beams or
slabs.
Vibration is best controlled by isolating the structure from the source of vibration. Where
this is not possible, vibration may be controlled by limiting the frequency of the
fundamental mode of vibration of the structure to a value that is significantly different from
the frequency of the source of vibration. When a structure is subjected only to pedestrian
traffic, 5 Hz is often taken as the minimum frequency of the fundamental mode of vibration
of a beam or slab and methods for vibration analysis are described in Refs 32 to 36.
The designer should be careful to use appropriate acceptability criteria in judging the
adequacy of the design: AS 2670.1 (Ref. 50) and AS 2670.2 (Ref. 51) provide some
guidance. The difficulties of obtaining precise information on the dynamic loads, and of
finding relevant acceptability criteria, mean that the designer is unlikely to obtain solutions
with the same degree of confidence that applies to static loading situations.
C2.4 ACTIONS AND COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS
C2.4.1 Actions and loads
The nomenclature for loads and loading is consistent with that in AS/NZS 1170.0 and
follows that adopted by ISO. The actions (loads) to be used for the design of concrete
members are also set out in AS/NZS 1170.0.
Accidental loading includes collisions, explosions, subsidence of subgrades, extreme
erosion and cyclonic storms in regions not normally exposed to them.
The deemed to comply wind loads in AS 4055 (Ref. 52) may be used for housing where the
limitations of that Standard apply; however, there may be advantages in using the more
rigorous wind load procedures from AS/NZS 1170.2 (Ref. 4), especially for larger housing
estates.
C2.4.2 Combinations of actions and loads
Generally, the combinations of actions (loads) used for the design of concrete members are
set out in AS/NZS 1170.0; however, it does not prescribe specific combinations for
serviceability and the designer should consult the Commentary to that Standard for
guidance.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

26

AS/NZS 1170.0 makes reference to the individual material Standards for the combinations
to be used when a member is prestressed. Therefore, these combinations are specified in
this Clause.
C2.4.3 Construction effects
Designers should be aware that the way a concrete structure, especially a multistorey
building, is propped and stripped will have a significant effect on the loads generated in the
members during construction and will also have a major influence on the deflected shape of
the structure. Precast members, are subsequently made composite with an in situ slab or
topping, are frequently required to carry construction loads (including the weight of the wet
concrete of the slab or topping) before composite action is established. This may have a
significant effect on deflection calculations at service loads, in addition to strength
implications. Some guidance on construction loads is provided in AS 3610 (Ref. 53), with a
minimum of 1.0 kPa to be used for personnel and equipment and 4.0 kPa for stacked
materials. The document also emphasizes the need for careful assessment of the loads
induced by floor-to-floor propping in multistorey construction (see also Paragraph C17.6.2).
C2.4.4 Arrangements of vertical loads on continuous beams, frames and floor systems

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

This Clause is new to AS 3600 and applies both to strength design and serviceability
design. It draws attention to the difficulty faced by designers because of the many different
patterns of vertical loads that may have to be considered in order to determine the peak
design action effects (maximum design moments, shears, etc.) in critical sections and
regions of a complex structural system.
It is important to understand that the Clause gives a list of only the minimum necessary load
patterns that have to be considered. Other load patterns may need to be considered
depending on the nature of the applied loading and the layout of the structure. The key to
interpreting Clause 2.4.4 correctly is contained in the lead-in sentence to Items (a), (b) and
(c), which states clearly and unambiguously: The loading arrangements to be considered
shall include at least the following:. This interpretation is reinforced by the Note at the end
of the Clause, which states: The load arrangements listed are the minimum to be
considered for design ..
In a three-dimensional structure with multiple spans in both directions and with multiple
floors, a consideration of the all-spans-loaded pattern and the alternative-spans-loaded
(chequerboard) pattern is always necessary, but these two patterns are not necessarily
critical and many others may have to be investigated in order to identify the critical pattern
that produces peak action effects in any particular region.
For dead loads, Item (a) refers only to the case of all spans loaded, but states that this has to
be considered as a minimum. Other more critical situations may arise, for example during
construction, and will need to be investigated as necessary.
Item (b) applies to the simple but unusual situation in design where, for live load, the
pattern of loaded and unloaded spans is invariable.
Item (c) deals with the more usual case of variable live loads acting on either twodimensional or three-dimensional systems. Notwithstanding the minimum requirements
specified in Item (c), in complex design situations, many alternative arrangements of the
loads will usually have to be evaluated systematically and exhaustively in order to identify
the critical design action effects.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

27

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

National Construction Code BCA, Volumes 1 and 2, Australian Building Codes


Board (ABCB), Canberra, ACT, 2014.

AS/NZS 1170.0, Structural design actionsGeneral principles, Standards Australia,


Sydney, NSW, 2002.

AS/NZS 1170.1, Structural design actionsPermanent, imposed and other actions,


Standards Australia, Sydney, 2002.

AS/NZS 1170.2, Structural design actionsWind actions, Standards Australia,


Sydney, 2011.

AS 1170.4, Structural design actionsEarthquake actions in Australia, Standards


Australia, Sydney, NSW, 2007.

NZS 3101 Concrete structures standardThe design of concrete structures,


Standards New Zealand, Wellington, NZ, 2006.

BEEBY, A.W., Safety of structures, and a new approach to robustness. The Structural
Engineer, Vol 77, No. 4, 1999, pp. 16-21.

GILBERT, R.I., DuctilityA Prerequisite for Robustness. Proceedings of the


Concrete Institute of Australias Seminar on Design of Robust Structures. Sydney,
CIA, 25 February 2009.

GULVANESSIAN, H., FORMICHI, P. and CALGARO, J.-A., Designers Guide to


Eurocode 1: Actions on Buildings EN 1991-1-1 and-1-3 to -1-7 Thomas Telford,
2008.

10

PCA Notes on ACI 318-08 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete with
Design Applications, Portland Cement Association 2008.

11

Durability in Buildings, Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB), Canberra, ACT,


2003.

12

ROBINSON, J.R. and DEMORIEUX, J-M., Essais de Modles dme de Poutre en


Double T, Annales de lInstitut Technique du Btiment et des Traveaux Publics,
No. 354, Srie: Bton No. 172, Oct 1977, pp. 7795.

13

VECCHIO, F.J. and COLLINS, M.P., The Modified CompressionField Theory for
Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear, ACI Journal, Vol. 83, No. 22,
MarApr. 1986, pp. 219231.

14

VECCHIO, F.J. and COLLINS, M.P., The response of Reinforced Concrete to InPlane Shear and Normal Stresses, Publication No. 82-03, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, March 1982.

15

COLLINS, M.P. and MITCHELL, D., Rational Approach to Shear DesignThe 1984
Canadian Code Provisions, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 83, No. 6, Nov-Dec 1986,
pp. 925-933.

16

CSA 84, Design of Concrete Structures for Buildings, CAN3-A23.3-M84, Canadian


Standards Association, Ontario, 1984, 281 pp.

17

fib Model Code, Fdration Internationale du Bton Switzerland, 2010.

18

RICHART F. E., BRANDTZAEG A., and BROWN, R. L., The failure of plain and
spirally reinforced concrete in compression. "Bulletin 190, University. of Illinois,
Engineering Experimental Station, Champaign, Ill., 1929.

19

FOSTER, S.J, LIU J. and SHEIKH, S.A., Cover Spalling in HSC Columns Loaded in
Concentric Compression, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 12,
1998, pp. 14311437.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

28

20

SHEIKH, S.A. and UZUMERI, S.M., Analytical model for concrete confinement in
tied columns, Journal of Structural Engineering., ASCE, Vol. 108, No. 12, 1982,
pp. 2703-2722.

21

MANDER J.B., PRIESTLEY M.J.N. and PARK R., Theoretical Stress-Strain Model
for Confined Concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114, No. 8,
1988, pp. 18041825.

22

FOSTER, S.J. and MARTI, P., Design of Reinforced Concrete Membranes using
Stress Analysis, 17th Australasian Conference on the Mechanics of Structures and
Materials, Gold Coast, Australia, 12-14 June 2002, pp. 327332.

23

FOSTER, S.J., MARTI, P. and MOJSILOVI, N., Design of Reinforced Concrete


Solids Using Stress Analysis, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 100, No. 6, 2003,
pp. 758-764.

24

BULLETIN 45, Practitioners, Guide to Finite Element Modelling of Reinforced


Concrete Structures, Fdration Internationale du Bton, Lausanne, Switzerland,
2008.

25

GILBERT, R.I. and RANZI, G., Time-dependent Behaviour of Concrete Structures,


Spon Press, London, 2011.

26

WHEELER, J.E., Prediction and Control of Pedestrian Induced Vibrations in


Footbridges, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. ST9, September
1982.

27

McCORMICK, M.M. and MASON, D., Office Floor VibrationDesign Criteria and
Tests, Noise Shock and Vibration Conference, Monash University, 1974.

28

ELLINGWOOD, B. and TALLIN, A., Structural Serviceability Floor Vibrations,


Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 110, No. ST2, February 1984.

29

ALLEN, D.E., RAINER, J.H. and PERNICA, G., Vibration Criteria for Long-Span
Concrete Floors, ACI Special Publication No. 60, Vibrations of Concrete Structures
No. SP-60, American Concrete Institute, Detroit.

30

ALLEN, D.E. and MURRAY, T.M., Design Criteria for Vibrations due to Walking,
Engineering Journal, 4th Quarter, American Institute of Steel Construction, 1993,
pp. 117-129.

31

ALLEN, D.E. and PERNICA, G., Control of Floor Vibrations, Construction


Technology Update No.22, National Research Council of Canada, 1998, pp. 1-8.

32

IRWIN, A.W., Human Reactions to Oscillations of Buildings, Build International,


Vol. 8, 1975, pp. 89102.

33

IRWIN, A.W., Human Response to Dynamic Motion of Structures, The Structural


Engineer, Vol. 56A, No. 9, September 1978.

34

MICKLEBOROUGH, N.C. and GILBERT, R.I., Control of Concrete Floor Slab


Vibration by L/D Limits, Proceedings, 10th Australasian Conference on the
Mechanics of Structures and Materials, University of Adelaide, August 1986,
pp. 51-56.

35

WILFORD, M. and YOUND, P., A Design Guide for Footfall-induced Vibrations of


Structures, The Concrete Centre, Camberley, UK, 2006.

36

AALAMI, B.O., Vibration Design of Concrete Floors for Serviceability, Technical


Note, ADAPT Software, 2008, pp. 1-20.

37

NAEIM, F., Design Practice to Prevent Floor Vibrations, Structural Steel


Educational Council, 1991, pp. 1-25.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

29

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

38

MAST, F.O.R., Vibration of Precast Prestressed Concrete Floors, PCI Journal,


November-December 2001, pp. 76-86.

39

HANSEN, R.J., REED, J.W. and VAN MARCKE, E.H., Human Response to WindInduced Motion of Buildings, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 99,
ST7, 1973.

40

ASCE, Monograph on Planning and Design of Tall Buildings, Volume PC,


Chapter 13, Motion Perception and Tolerance, American Society of Civil Engineers.

41

BAKER, J.K., Vibration Isolation, Engineering Design Guides No. 13, OUP, 1975.

42

Building Research Station Digests, Vibrations in Buildings1, Digest 117, May


1970, Vibrations in Buildings2, Digest 118, June 1970.

43

STEFFENS, R.J., Structural Vibration and Damage, Building Research Establishment


Report, 1974.

44

MAJOR, A., Dynamics in Civil Engineering, Vols 1 to 4, Akademiai Kiado,


Budapest, 1980.

45

MacINANTE, J.A., Seismic Mountings for Vibration Isolation, John Wiley and Sons,
New York, 1984.

46

TYNAN, A.E., Ground Vibrations, Australian Road Research Board, Melbourne,


Special Report No. 11, 1974.

47

HOLMBERG, R., Vibrations Generated by Traffic and Building Construction


Activities, Swedish Council for Building Research, Stockholm, 1984.

48

MAINSTONE, R.J., The Hazard of Internal Blast in Buildings, Building Research


Establishment, UK, Current Paper CP 11/73, 1973.

49

GOLDBERG, J.L. and DREW, P., The Response of High Rise and Domestic
Buildings to Ground Vibration from Blasting, Paper for 10th International Congress
on Acoustics, CSIRO, Division of Applied Physics Sydney, 1980.

50

AS 2670.1, Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibrationGeneral


requirements, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2001.

51

AS 2670.2, Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibrationContinuous and


shock-induced vibration in buildings (1 to 80 Hz), Standards Australia, Sydney, 1990.

52

AS 4055, Wind loads for housing, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2012.

53

AS 3610.1, Formwork for concreteDocumentation and surface finish, Standards


Australia, Sydney, 2010.

54

VERGE, G.C. and GAMBLE, S.N., Progressive collapse provisions for large panel
buildings, ACSE 50th Anniversary Conference, June 1983.

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL

EN 1992-1-1: Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures Part 1-1: General rules


and rules for buildings, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2004.

ACI 318M-08, Building Code requirements for reinforced


Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 2008.

ACI SP-75, Fatigue of Concrete Structures, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,


1982.

www.standards.org.au

concrete,

ACI

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N

30

C 3

D E S I G N P R O P E R T I E S
M A T E R I A L S

O F

INTRODUCTION
Throughout this Section, the designer is given the option of either
(a)

using the prescribed value of a particular material property (or material


characteristic); or

(b)

determining the particular property or characteristic by testing.

The latter is clearly the more reliable way of determining material properties for use in
design, but may not always be the most practical or economical option. The alternative
adopted should be appropriate to the desired accuracy.
C3.1 PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

One of the most significant changes to the Standard is the increase in scope to include high
strength concretes up to 100 MPa. As a consequence, the models for determining the
prescribed concrete properties have changed significantly from previous editions of the
Standard.
The prescribed values of the concrete properties are approximate. They are typical values,
providing a ballpark estimate that is usually sufficient for most applications; however, the
prescribed values may overestimate or underestimate the actual values, by as much as 30%,
and designers should consider the consequences of such uncertainty. Where accuracy of the
design value selected for a particular material property is important and the consequences
of an inaccurate estimate are severe, the option of undertaking tests on concrete that is, as
far as possible, the same as that intended to be used in the structure should be considered.
Alternatively, better estimates of material properties may be available from historical
records of concrete at a specific location or from a particular supplier.
The strength and deformation characteristics of concrete are required in most aspects of
structural design. The characteristic compressive strength of concrete is a measure of
concrete quality (certainly not the only measure) and plays an important role in the design
of structures for durability. While not significantly affecting the ultimate strength in flexure
of a beam or slab, the magnitude is more important with regard to strength in shear and
torsion and has a much greater influence on the strength of columns and walls in
compression. The concrete properties greatly affect the in-service behaviour of structures.
In particular, the tensile strength of concrete, the elastic modulus, the creep coefficient and
the shrinkage strain all have a significant effect on the deformation of a concrete structure
at the serviceability limit states and on the extent and severity of cracking.
The elastic modulus is required in the analysis of structures to estimate the stiffness of each
member and to determine the internal actions in an indeterminate structure. It is also
required to estimate the instantaneous deformations caused by the internal actions and the
stresses induced by imposed deformations. The tensile strength of concrete is required to
determine the extent of cracking due to applied load, applied deformation and restraint. The
creep coefficient associated with a particular time period and a particular loading regime is
required to estimate the time-dependent deformation of the structure, and the magnitude and
rate of shrinkage strain is required to predict the development of load-independent
deformations with time and the onset of time-dependent cracking.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

31

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C3.1.1 Strength
C3.1.1.1 Characteristic compressive strength
As in previous versions of the Standard, the strength of concrete is specified in terms of the
lower characteristic compressive cylinder strength at 28 days ( f c ). This is the value of
compressive strength exceeded by 95% of all standard cylinders tested at 28 days after
casting under standard laboratory conditions.
The standard strength grades are 20 MPa, 25 MPa, 32 MPa, 40 MPa, 50 MPa, 65 MPa,
80 MPa and 100 MPa. The strength grades 80 MPa and 100 MPa have been introduced for
the first time into the Standard. While normal strength grades (20 MPa to 50 MPa) may be
considered as Normal Class Concrete specified only in terms of characteristic compressive
strength, the higher strength grades (65 MPa to 100 MPa) are Special Class Concretes
requiring additional specification (for example, workability, water/binder ratios, types and
quantities of admixtures, water-reducing agents, aggregate type, shrinkage requirements and
so on).
In lieu of adopting a standard strength grade for the characteristic compressive strength
(assuming the concrete is adequately cured and is compliant with AS 1379), f c may be
determined statistically from compressive cylinder tests carried out in accordance with
AS 1012.9.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.1.1.2 Mean in situ compressive strength


In the Standard, the ratio of the mean value of cylinder strength ( f cm ) to the lower
characteristic strength is taken to be 1.25 for a strength grade of 20 MPa reducing linearly
to 1.10 for a strength grade of 100 MPa, i.e. f cm = (1.2875 0.001875 f c) f c . The in situ
compressive strength of concrete (i.e. the compressive strength of the concrete in the
structure on site) is taken to be 90% of the cylinder strength. The mean value of cylinder
strength ( f cm ) and the mean in situ strength ( f cmi ) corresponding to the standard strength
grades are shown in Table C3.1.1.2.
TABLE C3.1.1.2
MEAN CYLINDER AND IN SITU CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTHS AT 20 DAYS
f c )

20

25

32

40

50

65

80

100

Mean cylinder strength (f cm )

25

31

39

48

59

75

91

110

Mean in situ strength (f cmi )

22

28

35

43

53

68

82

99

Characteristic cylinder strength (

C3.1.1.3 Tensile strength


The uniaxial tensile strength (fct) is the maximum stress that concrete can withstand when
subjected to uniaxial tension. Direct uniaxial tensile tests are difficult to perform and tensile
strength is usually measured via either flexural tests on prisms (in accordance with
AS 1012.11) or indirect splitting tests on cylinders (in accordance with AS 1012.10). In
flexure, the apparent tensile stress at the extreme tensile fibre of the critical cross-section
under the peak load is calculated assuming linear elastic behaviour and the calculated value
is taken to be the flexural tensile strength (or modulus of rupture), fct.f. The flexural tensile
strength (fct.f) is significantly higher than fct due to the strain gradient and the post-peak
unloading portion of the stress-strain curve for concrete in tension and, typically, fct is about
50% to 60% of fct.f. The indirect tensile strength measured from a split cylinder test (fct.sp) is
also higher than fct (usually by about 10%) due to the confining effect of the bearing plate in
the standard test.
The Standard permits fct to be determined from either the measured values of fct.f or fct.sp
using the relationships fct = 0.6 fct.f or fct = 0.9 fct.sp.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

32

In the absence of more accurate data from testing, for design purposes where standard
curing is specified, the lower characteristic 28 days flexural tensile strength ( f ctf ) and the
lower characteristic 28 days uniaxial tensile stress ( f ctf ) may be taken as f ctf = 0.6 f c and
f ct = 0.36 f c .

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

FL E XU R A L T EN S IL E ST R EN GT H ( MPa)

The mean and upper characteristic values may be estimated by multiplying the lower
characteristic values by 1.4 and 1.8, respectively. The scatter of test results, together with
the prescribed values of flexural tensile strength, is shown in Figure C3.1.1.3 (from Ref. 1).

10
U p p e r c h a r a c te r i s ti c te n s il e
s t r e n g th
8
M e a n te n s il e s tr e n g th
6

4
Pr e s c r ib e d l owe r c h a r a c te r i s ti c
te n s il e s tr e n g th ( 0.6 fc )
R a n g e of te s t
d a t a ( R e f. 1)

0
0

20

40

60

80

10 0

CH A R ACT ER I ST I C C O M PR ES S I V E ST R EN GT H, f c ( M Pa)

FIGURE C3.1.1.3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH


AND FLEXURAL TENSILE STRENGTH (Ref. 1)

The lower characteristic tensile strength is appropriate for use in serviceability calculations
when the loss of stiffness due to cracking is to be determined; however, in some situations,
it is more appropriate to use either the mean or the upper characteristic tensile strength in
design calculations. For example, in the calculation of the minimum ultimate bending
strength of a beam in accordance with Clause 8.1.6.1, it may be unconservative to use the
lower characteristic tensile strength in the determination of (Muo)min. Clearly, in members
where the tensile stresses caused by restrained shrinkage are low or where early age
cracking has not occurred, the use of the lower characteristic tensile strength implies that
95% of all members would fail to satisfy the requirement that (Muo)min be greater than
1.2 Mcr.
C3.1.2 Modulus of elasticity
The value of the elastic modulus Ecj at an appropriate age may be determined by tests in
accordance with AS 1012.17. Alternatively, prescribed values may be obtained from one of
two specified expressions: one for low to normal strength concrete where f cmi 40 MPa and
the other for higher strength concrete, where fcmi > 40 MPa. The first expression, originally
proposed by Pauw (Ref. 2), appears in earlier editions of the Standard for all concrete
strengths, but has been shown to overestimate the elastic modulus for high strength concrete
(Ref. 3). The second expression was proposed by Gilbert (Ref. 3) and provides a better
estimate of the elastic modulus for high strength concrete, as shown in Figure C3.1.2(A).
The prescribed values for Ecj for in situ normal weight concrete ( = 2400 kg/m3) at age
28 days for each of the standard strength grades are given in Table 3.1.2.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

33

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The elastic modulus defines the linear relationship between stress and instantaneous strain
for stress levels less than about 0.4fcm for normal strength concrete ( f c 50 MPa) and less
than about 0.6fcm for high strength concrete (50 < f c 100 MPa) and for stresses applied
over a relatively short period (say up to 5 min). It increases with time as concrete gains
strength and stiffness. It is common practice in design to assume that Ec is constant with
time and equal to its value calculated at the time of first loading.

6 0,0 0 0

E c j ( M Pa)

5 0,0 0 0

4 0,0 0 0

3 0,0 0 0

L EG EN D:

Wo r l d Towe r
Q1
AS 3 6 0 0 -20 01

20,0 0 0

AS 3 6 0 0 -20 0 9

10,0 0 0
30

50

70

90

110

13 0

15 0

FIGURE C3.1.2(A) PRESCRIBED ELASTIC MODULUS VERSUS


TEST DATA (Ref. 4)

The prescribed values of Ecj specified in the Standard will usually be in the range 20% of
the actual value, depending, among other things, on the aggregate type and quantity and the
rate of application of the load. The effect of aggregate type on elastic modulus is illustrated
in Figure C3.1.2(B) (Ref. 5).

EL AST I C M O D U LUS ( MPa)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

f c m ( M Pa)

50,0 0 0

4 0,0 0 0
G r a ni te
3 0,0 0 0

S a n d s to n e
L i m e s to n e

20,0 0 0
0.4

0. 5

0.6

0.7

0. 8

WAT ER - CEMEN T R AT I O

FIGURE C3.1.2(B) EFFECT OF AGGREGATE TYPE ON


ELASTIC MODULUS (Ref. 5)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

34

In general, the faster the load is applied, the larger is the value of Ecj. For stresses applied
over a longer time period (say up to one days duration), significant increases in
deformation occur due to the rapid early development of creep. Yet, in a broad sense, loads
of one days duration are usually considered to be short-term and the effects of creep are
often ignored. This may lead to significant error. If short-term deformation is required after
1 day of loading, it is suggested that Ecj be reduced by about 20% to account for early creep
(Ref. 6). Typical variations in Eci with time are shown in Table C3.1.2.
Carse and Behan (Ref. 7) showed that the formula proposed by Pauw for (Ref. 2) Ecj may be
used to determine the elastic modulus at any age, provided the average compressive
strength at that age is used. The same is true for the expression for high strength concrete.
Carse and Behan also showed that a better prediction can be made if the aggregate type,
aggregate-cement ratio, and the curing regime are all known.
TABLE C3.1.2
INCREASE IN ELASTIC MODULUS WITH AGE OF
CONCRETEEcj()/Ecj(28)
Age of concrete in days ()
Cement type
3

28

90

360

Ordinary Portland cement

0.70

0.84

1.0

1.11

1.15

High early strength cement

0.77

0.87

1.0

1.06

1.10

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.1.3 Density
The prescribed value for the density of plain normal-weight concrete is 2400 kg/m3.
Alternatively, the density may be determined by tests in accordance with either
AS 1012.12.1 or AS 1012.12.2. For the calculation of loads, the mass of concrete members
should include an allowance for reinforcement and tendons and a unit weight of 25 kN/m 3 is
usually taken for both reinforced and prestressed concrete.
C3.1.4 Stress-strain curves
The Standard specifies that, if required, the stress-strain curve for concrete may be
determined from test data or may be assumed to be of curvilinear form defined by
recognized simplified equations. The Standard further specifies that, for design purposes,
the shape of the uniaxial stress-strain curve used to model in situ concrete be adjusted so
that the maximum stress is 0.9 f c . This is in recognition that on-site conditions of
compaction, curing and exposure may not be as favourable as those for a cylinder prepared,
cured and tested in a laboratory environment. Where mean values rather than characteristic
values are required, the shape of the stress-strain curve used to model in situ concrete
should be adjusted so that the maximum stress is fcmi.
Numerous equations describing the curvilinear stress-strain relationship for concrete in
compression are available in the literature, including Refs 8 to 18. Thorenfeldt et al.
(Ref. 13) showed that the stress-strain curve for conventional and high strength concretes
can be represented by

= cp

n
n 1 + nk

. . . C3.1.4

where = c /cp; c is the concrete strain; cp is the strain corresponding to the peak in situ
stress (cp); n is a curve fitting factor given by n = Ec/(Ec Ecp); Ec is the modulus of
elasticity of the concrete (specified in Clause 3.1.2); Ecp = cp/cp and k is a decay factor for
the post peak response and increases with concrete strength. When cp, k = 1 and, when
> cp, Collins and Porasz (Ref. 14) proposed that k = 0.67 + cp/62 1.0, where cp is in
MPa.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

35

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Based on data by Setunge (Ref. 17) for Australian concretes, Attard and Stewart (Ref. 18)
recommend that the strain at peak stress be taken as cp = 4.11 0cp.75 /Ec where cp and Ec are
in MPa. A family of stress strain curves (one curve for each standard strength grade)
obtained from Equation C3.1.4 (with cp = 0.9 f c ) is plotted in Figure C3.1.4. When
modelling the mean stress-strain relationship of in situ concrete, cp should be taken as fcmi.

10 0

ST R ES S, c ( M Pa)

80

60

40

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

20

0
0

0.0 01

0.0 0 2

0.0 0 3
ST R A IN,

0.0 0 4

0.0 0 5

0.0 0 6

FIGURE C3.1.4 COMPRESSIVE STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR CONCRETE.

C3.1.5 Poissons ratio


The specified value for Poissons ratio for concrete is v = 0.2. Alternatively, Poissons ratio
may be determined by tests in accordance with AS 1012.17. The value of 0.2 is a typical
value specified in many codes and Standards. Poissons ratio is required as input when
designing using either linear or non-linear stress analysis.
C3.1.6 Coefficient of thermal expansion
The specified value for the coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete is 10 106/C
within a range of 20%. Alternatively, the coefficient of thermal expansion may be
determined from suitable test data.
The value of 10 106/C is that specified in the fib Model Code (Ref. 19) and should be
satisfactory for most structural calculations; however, the coefficient varies over a wide
range, depending on the aggregate type, the volume of the cement paste and the degree of
saturation of the concrete. An indication of how the type of aggregate affects the coefficient
is given in Table C3.1.6. These are average values for the aggregate types quoted, all other
factors being constant.
The coefficient of thermal expansion for saturated concrete is about 2 106/C less than
that for partially dry concrete.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

36

TABLE C3.1.6
COEFFICIENT OF THERMAL EXPANSION
OF CONCRETE*
Type of aggregate
(fine and coarse)

Coefficient of thermal
expansion of concrete
10 6 per C

Quartzite
Sandstone
Sand and gravel

12.8
11.7
10.8

Granite
Basalt
Expanded clay and shale

9.5
8.6
7.6

Limestone
Clinker

6.8
5.9

* From Table 30.2 of Concrete Technology and Practice,


W H Taylor, 4th Edition 1982.

C3.1.7 Shrinkage

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Shrinkage of concrete is the time-dependent strain in an unloaded and unrestrained


specimen at constant temperature. It is important to distinguish between plastic shrinkage,
chemical shrinkage, thermal shrinkage and drying shrinkage. Plastic shrinkage occurs in the
wet concrete before setting, whereas chemical, thermal and drying shrinkage all occur in the
hardened concrete after setting.
Drying shrinkage is the reduction in volume caused principally by the loss of water during
the drying process. It increases with time at a gradually decreasing rate and takes place in
the months and years after casting. The magnitude and rate of development of drying
shrinkage depend on all the factors that affect the drying of concrete, including the relative
humidity, the mix characteristics (in particular, the type and quantity of the binder, the
water content and water-to-cement ratio, the ratio of fine-to-coarse aggregate, and the type
of aggregate), and the size and shape of the member (Refs 20 to 22).
Chemical (or autogenous) shrinkage results from various chemical reactions within the
cement paste and includes hydration shrinkage that is related to the degree of hydration of
the binder in a sealed specimen with no moisture exchange. Chemical shrinkage occurs
rapidly in the days and weeks after casting and is less dependent on the environment and
the size of the specimen than drying shrinkage.
Thermal shrinkage is the contraction that results in the first few hours (or days) after setting
as the heat of hydration gradually dissipates. The term endogenous shrinkage is used to
refer to that part of the shrinkage of the hardened concrete that is not associated with drying
(i.e. the sum of autogenous and thermal shrinkage).
Drying and autogenous shrinkage both increase with time at a decreasing rate. Drying
shrinkage may continue for many years depending on the size and shape of the specimen,
but autogenous shrinkage is essentially complete at about 50 days after setting.
Drying shrinkage is dependent on the rate and magnitude of water loss from the hardened
concrete. All else being equal, drying shrinkage increases when the water-cement ratio
increases, when the relative humidity decreases and when the ratio of the exposed surface
area to volume increases. Temperature rises accelerate drying and, therefore, increase
shrinkage. By contrast, endogenous shrinkage increases as the cement content increases and
the water-cement ratio decreases. In addition, endogenous shrinkage is not affected
significantly by the ambient relative humidity.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

37

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The effect of a members size on drying shrinkage should be emphasized. For a thin
member, such as a slab, the drying process may be complete after several years, but for the
interior of a larger member, the drying process may continue throughout its lifetime. For
uncracked mass concrete structures there is no significant drying (shrinkage) except for
about 300 mm from each exposed surface. By contrast, the chemical shrinkage is not
affected by the size and shape of the specimen.
Shrinkage is also affected by the volume and type of aggregate. Aggregate provides
restraint to shrinkage of the cement paste, so that an increase in the aggregate content
reduces shrinkage. Shrinkage is also smaller when stiffer aggregates are used,
i.e. aggregates with higher elastic moduli. Thus shrinkage is considerably higher in
lightweight concrete than in normal weight concrete (often by more than 50%).
C3.1.7.1 Calculation of design shrinkage strain

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For estimating the design shrinkage strain of concrete (cs), one of three approaches may be
used. The first approach is to determine cs from measurements on similar local concrete.
The second is to determine cs by measuring the shrinkage strain that develops in a standard
prism after eight weeks of drying in accordance with AS 1012.13 and then determining the
final long-term value. The third approach is to calculate cs using the procedure outlined in
Clause 3.1.7.2.
The first and second options will give a more reliable value than the third. The second
option involves the standard shrinkage test, where the shrinkage of a prism, of length
280 mm and with cross-section 75 mm by 75 mm, is measured over a period of 56 days at a
relative humidity of 50%. The results of such a test may be used to estimate the long-term
design shrinkage (the 30 year value) of a particular element in a structure using the model
outlined in Clause 3.1.7.2. An example of this calculation is provided in
Paragraph C3.1.7.2.
C3.1.7.2 Design shrinkage strain
With the inclusion of high strength concrete in the Standard, the model for shrinkage in
previous editions was found to be inadequate, as it essentially accounted only for drying
shrinkage. It also ignored the concrete strength, predicting the same shrinkage strain for
20 MPa through to 65 MPa concrete, despite the large differences in water:cement ratio. For
high strength concrete, drying shrinkage is less than for normal strength concrete, but
autogenous (or chemical) shrinkage is significantly more. The predictive model adopted in
the Standard was originally developed by Gilbert (Ref. 3) for estimating the shrinkage
strain in normal and high strength concrete. The model divides the total shrinkage strain
(cs) into two components, the autogenous shrinkage strain ( cse) and the drying shrinkage
strain (csd) (i.e. cs = cse + csd).
The autogenous shrinkage is assumed to develop exponentially, rapidly approaching a final
value *cse , which varies linearly with the concrete strength, ranging from *cse = 10 106
when f c = 20 MPa to *cse = 250 106 when f c = 100 MPa. In the first month after
setting, 95% of the autogenous shrinkage is assumed to have occurred. Unlike drying
shrinkage, the autogenous shrinkage is assumed to be independent of both the
environmental conditions and the size and shape of the concrete member.
At any time (t) after the commencement of drying, the drying shrinkage strain is given by
*
csd = k1 k 4 (1.0 0.008 f c) csd.b

. . . C3.1.7.2(1)

The symbol *csd.b depends on the quality of the local aggregates and, in the absence of test
data, is 800 106 for Sydney and Brisbane, 900 106 for Melbourne and 1000 106
elsewhere.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

38

The expression in brackets accounts for the effect of concrete strength (or water to cement
ratio) on drying shrinkage, ranging from 0.84 when f c = 20 MPa to 0.20 when
f c = 100 MPa.
The factor k1 describes the development of drying shrinkage with time and accounts for the
dependence of drying shrinkage on the size and shape of the member. It is calibrated in
terms of the hypothetical thickness (th) in mm and the time (t )after the commencement of
drying, in days. The hypothetical thickness of a concrete member is the ratio of the crosssectional area of the member to half the perimeter of the cross-section exposed to the
atmosphere. The rate of development of drying shrinkage, as well as the final magnitude,
increases as the hypothetical thickness reduces. The factor k1 is given by
k1 =

1t 0.8

. . . C3.1.7.2(2)

t 0.8 + 0.15t h

where 1 = 0.8 + 1.2e 0.005th .

For specimens with unknown quality aggregate (i.e. with *csd.b = 1000 106) and with
th = 200 mm, the shrinkage strain components predicted by the above model at 28 days after
the commencement of drying and after 30 years (t = 10 950 days) are given in
Table C3.1.7.2. Note that, at an age of about one month, the design shrinkage strain
increases with increasing concrete strength, but the final shrinkage after 30 years decreases
with increasing concrete strength.
It is well known that, in addition to the environment, the water-cement ratio and the size
and shape of the specimen, shrinkage is also highly dependent on the amount and type of
aggregate and the proportions of the binder. The influence of aggregate type on shrinkage is
shown in Figure C3.1.7.2(A) (taken from Ref. 20) for concretes of fixed mix proportions
but with different aggregates, and stored in air at 21C at 50% relative humidity.

16 0 0

S a n d s to n e
G r ave l

S H R IN K AG E ST R A IN (10 - 6 )

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The factor k4 depends on the environment, ranging from 0.7 for an arid environment
(with average relative humidity 50%) to 0.5 for a tropical or near-coastal environment
(with average relative humidity 70%).

Basalt

120 0

G r a ni te
800

L i m e s to n e
Quartz

400

0
10

10 0

10 0 0

10 0 0 0

T I M E (d ays) ( l o g s c a l e)

FIGURE C3.1.7.2(A) EFFECT OF AGGREGATE TYPE ON SHRINKAGE (Ref. 20)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

39

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

TABLE C3.1.7.2
DESIGN SHRINKAGE STRAIN COMPONENTS
(th = 200 mm and *csd.b = 1000 10-6)
Environment

Arid

Interior

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Temperate

Tropical

www.standards.org.au

Shrinkage strain components

f c

t = 28 days

t = 10950 days (30 years)

MPa

cse

csd

cs

25
32
40

25
45
65

225
210
190

50
65
80
100

95
135
180
235

25
32
40

cse

csd

cs

250
255
255

25
45
70

685
635
580

710
680
650

170
135
100
55

265
270
280
290

100
145
190
250

510
415
310
170

610
560
500
420

25
45
65

210
195
175

235
240
240

25
45
70

635
590
540

660
635
610

50
65
80
100

95
135
180
235

160
125
95
55

255
260
275
290

100
145
190
250

475
385
290
160

575
530
480
410

25
32
40

25
45
65

195
180
165

220
225
230

25
45
70

585
545
500

610
590
570

50
65
80
100

95
135
180
235

145
115
85
50

240
250
265
285

100
145
190
250

440
355
260
150

540
500
450
400

25
32
40

25
45
65

160
150
140

185
195
205

25
45
70

485
455
420

510
500
490

50
65
80
100

95
135
180
235

120
100
70
40

215
235
250
275

100
145
190
255

370
295
220
115

470
440
410
370

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

40

The method outlined in the Standard requires only a short calculation, but designers should
be aware the estimate of cs is within a range of 30%. Comparisons of the predictions made
using the method with shrinkage measured over 30 years and reported by Brooks (Ref. 21)
are shown in Figure C3.1.7.2(B).

S H R IN K AG E ST R A IN (x10 - 6)

120 0
10 0 0
800
600
400
20 0
0
10

10 0

10 0 0

10 0 0 0

TIME (days) (log scale)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

L EG EN D:
25 MPa ( AS 3 6 0 0 -20 0 9)

E x p e r i m e nt a l ( R ef. 21)

50 M Pa ( AS 3 6 0 0 -20 0 9)

E x p e r i m e nt a l ( R ef. 21)

FIGURE C3.1.7.2(B) PREDICTED VERSUS EXPERIMENTAL


SHRINKAGE-TIME CURVES

Because details of the mix proportions and aggregate type are not included in the prediction
model for shrinkage, a better estimate of cs will usually be determined from long-term tests
on samples kept in the same environmental conditions as the concrete in the structure and
made from concrete that is similar to that intended to be used in the structure.
Relationship between 56 days shrinkage measured in accordance with AS 1012.13 and the
design shrinkage strain (cs) is considered below.
A good estimate of the final design shrinkage strain in a particular member can be obtained
from the results of a standard 56 days shrinkage test. The standard test is conducted on a
75 mm 75 mm 280 mm prism at a relative humidity of 50%. For the standard test
specimen, the hypothetical thickness is th = 37.5 mm, k4 = 0.7 and, from
Equation C3.1.7.2(2) at 56 days, k1 = 1.466.
To illustrate the procedure, consider the following example calculation:
In a standard prism of concrete with f c = 40 MPa, if the shrinkage strain measured
after 56 days is 650 106, determine the final design shrinkage strain (cs) after
30 years in a 200 mm thick slab of the same concrete in a temperate inland
environment and drying from both the top and bottom surfaces.
All the autogenous shrinkage will have occurred at 56 days and for 40 MPa concrete,

cse = (0.06 f c 1.0) 50 10 6 = 70 10 6


According to the Standard, the autogenous shrinkage that would have occurred within
the first 7 days of wet curing is cse [1 e(0.1 7)] = 0.5cse. The remaining
autogenous shrinkage, which occurred after 7 days, and, therefore included in the
56 days shrinkage measurement, is 0.5cse = 35 106. The drying shrinkage strain at
56 days is therefore
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

41

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

csd = cs 0.5 cse = 615 10 6


and, the basic drying shrinkage ( *csd.b ) may now be determined from the following
Equation:
*
csd = k1 k 4 (1.0 0.008 f c) scd.b
*
= 1.466 0.7 (1 0.008 40) scd.b
= 615 10 6

. . . C3.1.7.2(1)

*
6
Therefore, csd.b = 881 10 .

For the 200 mm thick concrete slab, th = 200 mm, k4 = 0.6 and from the following
*
6
Equation at 30 years (t = 10 950 days), k = 1.22. With csd.b = 881 10 , the final
1

drying shrinkage is obtained from Equation C3.1.7.2(1):


*
csd = k1 k 4 (1.0 0.008 f c) csd.b

= 1.22 0.6 (1 0.008 40) 881 10 6 = 439 10 6

. . . C3.1.7.2(2)

With the autogenous shrinkage strain equal to 70 106, the final design shrinkage
strain is:

cs = cse + csd = 509 10 6

. . . C3.1.7.2(3)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.1.8 Creep
When concrete is subjected to a sustained stress, creep strain develops gradually with time.
Creep increases with time at a decreasing rate. In the period immediately after first loading,
creep develops rapidly, but the rate of increase slows appreciably with time. Creep is
generally thought to approach a limiting value as the time after first loading approaches
infinity. About 50% of the final creep develops in the first 2 to 3 months and about 90%
after 2 to 3 years. After several years under load, the rate of change of creep with time is
very small. Creep has its origins in the hardened cement paste and is caused by several
different mechanisms (Ref. 6).
Many factors influence the magnitude and rate of development of creep, including the
properties of the concrete mix and its constituent materials. In general, as the concrete
quality increases, the capacity of concrete to creep decreases. For a particular stress level,
creep in higher-strength concrete is less than that in lower-strength concrete. An increase in
either the aggregate content or the maximum aggregate size reduces creep, as does the use
of a stiffer aggregate type. Creep also decreases as the water-to-cement ratio is reduced.
Creep depends on the environment and increases as the relative humidity decreases. Creep
is also greater in thin members with large surface area-to-volume ratios, such as slabs;
however, the dependence of creep on both the relative humidity and the size and shape of
the specimen decreases as the concrete strength increases. Near the surface of a member,
creep takes place in a drying environment and, therefore, is greater than in regions remote
from a drying surface. In addition to the relative humidity, creep is dependent on the
ambient temperature. A temperature rise increases the deformability of the cement paste
and accelerates drying, and thus increases creep.
In addition to the environment and the characteristics of the concrete mix, creep depends on
the loading history, in particular the magnitude of the stress and the age of the concrete
when the stress is first applied. When the sustained concrete stress is less than about 0.5 f c
(and this is usually the case in concrete structures at service loads), creep is proportional to
stress and is known as linear creep. The age of the concrete when the stress is first applied
has a marked influence on the magnitude of creep. Concrete loaded at an early age creeps
more than concrete loaded at a later age (Ref. 22).

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

42

C3.1.8.1 General
The capacity of concrete to creep is usually measured in terms of the creep coefficient,
given the symbol cc in the Standard. In a concrete specimen subjected to a constant
sustained compressive stress 0, first applied at age 0, the creep coefficient at time (t) is the
ratio of creep strain (cc) to instantaneous strain (e) at that time and is given by cc = cc/e.
Therefore, the creep strain at time (t) is:

cc = cc e = cc 0 / E c

. . . C3.1.8.1

For stress levels less than about 0.5 f c , the creep coefficient is a pure time function,
independent of the applied stress, and the creep coefficient increases with time at an everdecreasing rate. As time approaches infinity, the creep coefficient is assumed to approach a
*
final value, cc
= cc ( ) , which usually falls within the range 1.5 to 4.0 (Ref. 22). In
design, the Standard specifies that the value of the elastic modulus (Ec) in
Equation C3.1.8.1 is the 28 days value.
Another measure of the capacity of concrete to creep is known as specific creep. Specific
creep is the creep strain per unit stress and, from Equation C3.1.8.1, is equal to the creep
coefficient divided by the elastic modulus.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.1.8.2 Basic creep coefficient


The most accurate way of determining the final creep coefficient is by testing or by using
results obtained from measurements on similar local concretes. Testing is often not a
practical option for the structural designer. In the absence of long-term test results, the final
creep coefficient may be determined by extrapolation from relatively short-term test results,
where creep is measured over a relatively short period (say 28 days) in specimens subjected
to constant stress. Various mathematical expressions for the shape of the creep coefficient
versus time curve are available from which long-term values may be predicted from the
short-term measurements. The longer the period of measurement, the more accurate are the
long-term predictions. Some of the more useful expressions for cc are presented in Ref. 6.
If testing is not an option, the Standard specifies a procedure to provide a quick and
approximate estimate of the design creep coefficient.
The Standard defines the basic creep coefficient ( cc.b ) as the mean value of the final creep
strain to elastic strain for a standard specimen (i.e. a 100 mm diameter cylinder with
hypothetical thickness, th = 50 mm at a relative humidity of 70%) under a constant
compressive stress of 0.4 f c first applied at age 28 days. Prescribed values of cc.b for each
standard strength grade of concrete were proposed in Ref. 3 and are given in Table 3.1.8.2,
where values range from cc.b = 5.2 for 20 MPa concrete to cc.b = 1.5 for 100 MPa
concrete. Alternatively, the basic creep coefficient may be obtained from measurements on
similar local concrete or determined by testing standard 100 mm diameter cylinders in
accordance with AS 1012.16.
C3.1.8.3 Design creep coefficient
The Standard permits the creep coefficient at any time (cc) to be calculated from the basic
creep coefficient using any accepted mathematical model of the development of creep strain
with time, provided the model is calibrated so that it predicts the final creep coefficient for
a 100 mm thick cylinder loaded at 28 days at a relative humidity of 70% to be equal to cc.b.
The prescribed model for calculating the design creep coefficient at any time was first
proposed by Gilbert in Ref. 3 and involves multiplying the basic creep coefficient by four
different factors: k2, k3, k4 and k5.
The factor k 2 (graphed in Figure 3.1.8.3) describes the development of creep with time
(t in days) and is similar, but not identical, to the shrinkage factor k1 and is given by

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

43

k2 =

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

2 t 0 .8

. . . C3.1.8.3(1)

t 0.8 + 0.15t h

where 2 = 1.0 + 1.12e 0.008th


The factor k3 depends on the age at first loading (). Prior to Amendment No. 2 of the
Standard a tri-linear relationship was given in Figure 3.1.8.3(B). The sudden change in
direction of the relationship at ages 28 days and 365 days was a somewhat unrealistic
approximation, as was the constant value of k3 at ages greater than 365 days. The following
expression for k3 is an improvement and is more convenient for inclusion in mathematical
modelling of the creep coefficient (Ref. 22):
k3 =

2 .7
1 + log( )

. . . C3.1.8.3(2)

The factor k4 is identical to that specified for drying shrinkage and accounts for the
environment, while the factor k5 accounts for the reduced influence of both the relative
humidity and the specimen size on the creep of concrete as the concrete strength increases
(or more precisely, as the water-binder ratio decreases).

The above discussion is concerned with compressive creep. In many practical situations,
creep of concrete in tension is also of interest. Tensile creep plays an important part in
delaying the onset of cracking caused by restrained shrinkage. The mechanisms of tensile
creep are different from those of compressive creep, but at the same stress levels the
magnitudes are similar. In design, it is usual to assume that the creep coefficients in tension
and in compression are identical. Although not strictly correct, this assumption simplifies
calculations and does not usually introduce serious inaccuracies.

4.0
CR EEP COEF F I CI ENT

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

A family of creep coefficient versus duration of loading curves obtained using the
prescribed model is shown in Figure C3.1.8.3 for a concrete specimen located in a
temperate environment, with a hypothetical thickness th = 150 mm, concrete strength
f c = 40 MPa and loaded at different ages ().

h = 150 m m; f c = 4 0 MPa;

3. 5

Te m p e r ate e nvi r o n m e nt

3.0
2. 5
2.0
1. 5
1.0
0. 5
0.0

=14

10

24

84

10 0

20 0

500

10 0 0

10 0 0 0

AG E (d ays) ( l o g s c a l e)

FIGURE C3.1.8.3 TYPICAL CREEP COEFFICIENT VERSUS TIME CURVES (Ref. 5)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

44

It must be emphasized that creep of concrete is highly variable with significant differences
in the measured creep strains in seemingly identical specimens, tested under identical
conditions (both in terms of load and environment). The model for the design creep
coefficient in Clause 3.1.8.3 does not account for such factors as aggregate type, cement
type, cement replacement materials and more, but it does provide a ball-park estimate of the
creep coefficient for both normal and high strength concrete with a range of approximately
30%. The Standard cautions that this range may be exceeded where the temperature is
greater than 25C for a prolonged period or when the sustained concrete stress exceeds
about 50% of the characteristic strength of concrete.
C3.2 PROPERTIES OF REINFORCEMENT
C3.2.1 Strength and ductility

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

As a transition stage, at the time when the Australian construction industry was moving to
higher grade 500 MPa reinforcing steels with the new ductility classes defined in
AS/NZS 4671:2001 (Ref. 23), the 2001 edition of AS 3600 accommodated the use of
reinforcement produced in accordance with superseded Australian Standards AS 1302,
AS 1303 and AS 1304, provided the reinforcement satisfied the new ductility requirements.
All references to these superseded Standards and the corresponding 400 MPa and 450 MPa
strength grades have been removed in AS 36002009 as these steels are no longer
produced.
The introduction of ductility class responded to the growing awareness of the different
performances of hot-rolled bar and cold-rolled wire meshes in reinforced concrete. The
ductility Class N or L relates to a minimum characteristic value of uniform elongation,
su = 0.05 and 0.015, respectively, and a minimum tensile strength to yield stress ratio,
fsu/fsy = 1.08 and 1.03, respectively. The uniform elongation su is the strain at peak stress
fsu. It should be noted that the superseded Standards had no minimum requirement for su.
Grade 500 MPa, Class L bars are used to produce fitments, or welded mesh incorporating
either plain or ribbed bars, which may be used as longitudinal, shear or secondary
reinforcement. Class L longitudinal reinforcement may only take the form of welded mesh.
Class N bars are used for longitudinal reinforcement and fitments and are normally
Grade 500 (deformed). Class N Grade 250 plain (R250) may also be used for fitments and
deformed D250N12 bars for special applications such as swimming pools. Class N bars of
limited sizes may also be used to produce welded mesh for specific projects.
Reflecting the new steel properties defined in AS/NZS 4671, the Standard now recognizes
that reducing the ductility of the longitudinal tensile reinforcement can adversely affect the
behaviour of reinforced-concrete flexural members while approaching ultimate load. The
Standard specifies that Class L reinforcement be not used in situations where the
reinforcement is required to undergo large plastic deformation under strength limit state
conditions.
This is accounted for elsewhere in the Standard, including
(i)

a reduced strength reduction factor (compared to Class N reinforcement);

(ii)

not to be used if plastic methods of design are used; and

(iii) not to be used if the analysis has assumed some measure of moment redistribution.
Engineering design issues arising from the application and effects of Class L reinforcement
have been discussed in a number of papers, including Refs 24 to 39.
The need to distinguish between these two classes of steel reinforcement arose from
research which showed that there was reduced rotation capacity in continuous reinforcedconcrete slabs or beams incorporating low ductility steel reinforcement. This led to the
development of design rules to differentiate between the two levels of steel ductility,
particularly with regard to the allowable redistribution of bending moments.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

45

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

In design, the strength of reinforcing steel is taken as the lower characteristic yield strength
(fsy). AS/NZS 4671 requires steel manufacturers to collect and maintain long-term quality
data for yield stress, tensile strength to yield stress ratio, and uniform elongation.
Acceptance of reinforcement should be conditional on compliance with AS/NZS 4671,
which requires Class N and Class L steel to be weldable. Reinforcing steels conforming to
AS/NZS 4671 are deemed weldable under the conditions specified for each class in
AS 1554.3.
C3.2.2 Modulus of elasticity
The modulus of elasticity of reinforcing steel (Es) is the slope of the initial elastic part of
the stress-strain curve, when the stress is less than fsy , and may be taken to be
200 103 MPa, irrespective of the type and Ductility Class of the steel. Alternatively, Es
may be determined from standard tests.
The elastic modulus in compression is taken to be identical to that in tension.
C3.2.3 Stress-strain curves

For example, D500N reinforcing bars supplied in original straight lengths that were not
coiled subsequent to having been hot-rolled exhibit an observable yield plateau. An
example of such a curve for a D500N quenched and self-tempered bar is shown in
Figure C3.2.3(A), which was obtained from a standard tensile test. In contrast, coiled
D500N reinforcing bars that are straightened when processed, or D500L ribbed bars
produced by cold-reducing coiled plain structural-grade rod which is subsequently recoiled
and then straightened just prior to being welded into mesh sheets, do not exhibit an
observable yield plateau, and therefore the proof stress (0.2% offset) has to be used.
Examples of such curves for a D500N microalloy bar and a D500L bar (both bars tested
straight after final processing) are also shown in Figure C3.2.3(A).
For non-linear and other refined methods of analysis, actual stress-strain curves, using mean
rather than characteristic values, should be used. The actual curves for a variety of steels
are shown in Figure C3.2.3(A).

10 0 0

ST R ES S ( MPa)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Reinforcing bars are produced using different physical processes, which can significantly
affect the shape of the stress-strain curve.

50 0 N
m i c r o a llll oy
800
bar

50 0 N q
qu
uenched
a n d s e l f-te m p e r e d
bar

600
400

50
5
00L bar

20 0
0
0

10

12

14

ST R A IN (%)

FIGURE C3.2.3(A) ACTUAL STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR REINFORCING STEELS


(Ref. 40)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

46

For design purposes, the general stress-strain curves for Ductility Class L or Ductility
Class N reinforcing bars can be idealized using the bilinear relationships shown in
Illustrations (a) and (b) of Figures C3.2.3(B), respectively, where sy is the design yield
stress (=500 MPa), su is the design tensile strength (which equals 1.03sy or 1.08sy for
Ductility Class L or N reinforcement, respectively), and Es is the modulus of elasticity
(=200 GPa) before yielding. Yield strain ( sy) equals sy/Es = 500/200000 = 0.25%
irrespective of the steel ductility class, and steel fracture is assumed to occur when the
tensile strain reaches uniform elongation, su (=1.5% or 5.0% for Ductility Class L or N
bars, respectively) corresponding to the onset of necking at peak tensile force.

T EN S IL E ST R ES S ( MPa)

Alternatively, the shape of the stress-strain curve for reinforcement may be determined
from tests. Any recognized formula suitably calibrated to approximate the shape of the
actual curve may be used. Idealized bilinear relationships are a suitable simplification.

600
50 0

s u = 515 M Pa

400

s y = 50 0 M Pa

300

s u = 1. 5%

20 0

S l o p e E s = 20 0 G Pa

10 0
0
0

0
1
2
3
4
5
s y = 0. 25% T EN S I L E ST R A I N (%)

T EN S I L E ST R A I N (%)
(a) Cl a s s L b a r s

T EN S IL E ST R ES S ( MPa)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

s y = 0. 25%

600
50 0
400
300

s u = 5 4 0 M Pa
s y = 50 0 M Pa
s u = 5%

20 0
10 0

S l o p e E s = 20 0 G Pa

( b) Cl a s s N b a r s

FIGURE C3.2.3(B) DESIGN TENSILE STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR REINFORCING


BARS WITH STANDARD DUCTILITY LIMITS

C3.2.4 Coefficient of thermal expansion


The coefficient of thermal expansion may be taken to be 12 106/C or may be determined
from available and appropriate test data.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

47

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C3.3 PROPERTIES OF TENDONS


C3.3.1 Strength
The values of the minimum characteristic breaking strength (fpb) in Table 3.3.1 are
reproduced from AS/NZS 4672.1 (Ref. 41) and are calculated from the characteristic
minimum breaking force of each type and dimension of tendon. AS/NZS 4672.1 has
replaced AS 1310, AS 1311 and AS 1313. The characteristic minimum breaking force of a
wire, strand or bar is that value below which 5% of all actual breaking load test results fall.
The characteristic breaking strengths of a wider range of wire, tendon and bar diameters are
provided in AS/NZS 4672.1.
The steel used for tendons has no distinct yield point and the standard defines the yield
strength of tendons (fpy) as the 0.1% proof stress as specified in AS/NZS 4672.1. In the
absence of testing, prescribed values of fpy are specified as a fraction of fpb
(e.g. fpy = 0.82 fpb for all grades of strand).
C3.3.2 Modulus of elasticity
The prescribed values of the modulus of elasticity of the various tendon types specified in
this Clause are taken from AS/NZS 4672.1. Alternatively, the elastic modulus may be
obtained by measuring the elongation of sample pieces of tendon over a gauge length
specified in Table 1.1 of AS/NZS 4672.1 in direct tension tests. The Standard cautions that
the prescribed or measured values of elastic modulus may vary by up to 10% and possibly
more when a multi-strand or multi-wire tendon is stressed as a single cable.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Variations in elastic modulus of the tendon will affect the calculated extension of the
tendon during the stressing operation and this has to be considered appropriately both in
design and during construction.
C3.3.3 Stress-strain curves
The shape of the stress-strain curve for tendons may be determined from tests. Typical
curves for various types of tendons are shown Figure C3.3.3. Alternatively, a recognized
simplified equation (such as that given in Ref. 42) suitably calibrated to approximate the
shape of the actual curve may be used in design.
For non-linear and other refined methods of analysis, actual stress-strain curves, using mean
rather than characteristic values, should be used.
For design and construction purposes, the maximum jacking and other forces are generally
obtained from the manufacturers literature. The actual stress-strain curve of the material
supplied should be used to calculate the elongation during jacking.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

48

20 0 0

7 wi r e o r di n a r y s tr a n d

18 0 0
py

16 0 0

S t r e s s - r e li eve d w i r e

ST R ES S ( MPa)

14 0 0
py

120 0
10 0 0

H ot- r o ll e d a ll oy b a r
py

800
600
400
20 0

0.0 01

0.01

0.0 2

0.0 3

0.0 4

0.0 5

0.0 6

0.07

STR AI N ( mm/ mm)

FIGURE C3.3.3 TYPICAL STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR TENDONS

C3.3.4 Relaxation of tendons

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.3.4.1 General
The initial stress level in the prestressing steel, after the prestress is transferred to the
concrete, is usually in the range 60% to 75% of the tensile strength of the material. At such
high stress levels, high strength steel creeps. At lower stress levels, such as is typical for
non-prestressed steel, the creep of steel is negligible. If a tendon is stretched and held at a
constant length (constant strain), the development of creep strain in the steel is exhibited as
a loss of elastic strain, and hence a loss of stress. This loss of stress in a specimen subjected
to constant strain is known as relaxation. Relaxation in steel is highly dependent on the
stress level and increases at an increasing rate as the stress level increases. Relaxation in
steel also increases rapidly as temperature increases.
The Standard is applicable to low-relaxation wire, low-relaxation strand and alloy-steel
bars. Low-relaxation tendons are achieved by heat-treating the tendon while maintaining
high longitudinal tensile strain.
C3.3.4.2 Basic relaxation
Basic relaxation is defined as the loss of stress in a tendon initially stressed to 0.8fpb and
held at constant strain for a period of 1000 h at 20C. It is expressed as a percentage of the
initial stress and is determined in accordance with AS/NZS 4672.1. Maximum values of the
relaxation at 1000 h, at various initial stress levels and at 20C, are specified in
AS/NZS 4672.1 and are given in Table C3.3.4.2. Test values may be significantly lower
than these maximum values.
The mandatory initial stress level of 80% of the characteristic minimum breaking force
applies to low-relaxation wire and low-relaxation strand, but testing can also be specified at
70% and/or 60% of fpb; however, the Standard requires relaxation testing of bars and
as-drawn (mill coil) wire be at 70% of the characteristic minimum breaking force.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

49

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

TABLE C3.3.4.2
RELAXATION AT 1000 h FOR LOW
RELAXATION WIRE, STRAND AND BAR (T = 20C)
percent
Tendon stress as a proportion of f pb

Type of tendon

0.6

0.7

0.8

Stress-relieved wire

1.0

2.0

3.0

Strand

1.5

2.5

3.5

Hot-rolled alloy bar

1.5

4.0

C3.3.4.3 Design relaxation


The procedure specified in this Clause permits the estimation of the relaxation (or loss of
stress) as a percentage of the initial stress in the tendon at any time after initial stressing. It
is calculated as the product of the basic relaxation (Rb) and three factors k4, k5 and k6. The
coefficients k4 and k5 are best fit curves from experimental data. The coefficient k6, for the
effect of temperature, is adapted from Ref. 43.
Typical values of design relaxation for low-relaxation wire, strand and bars at 20C are
given in Figure C3.3.4.3.

L EG EN D:
S t r a n d,
S t r a n d,
W i r e,
W i r e,
B a r,
B a r,

D ES IG N R EL A X AT I O N, R (%)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

pi
pi
pi
pi
pi
pi

=
=
=
=
=
=

0. 8p b
0.7p b
0. 8p b
0.7p b
0.7p b
0.6p b

(Cu r ve
(Cu r ve
(Cu r ve
(Cu r ve
(Cu r ve
(Cu r ve

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)

6
1

24 0 0 0 0 h
(10 0 0 0 d )

4
5

3
2

2
4

1
6

10

10 2

10 3

10 4

10 5

10 6

D U R AT I O N O F PR EST R ES S IN G FO RCE ( h o u r s)

FIGURE C3.3.4.3 DESIGN RELAXATION FOR LOW RELAXATION STRESS-RELIEVED


WIRE, STRAND AND ALLOY BARS

C3.4 LOSS OF PRESTRESS IN TENDONS


C3.4.1 General
The losses of prestress that occur in a tendon are categorized as either immediate losses or
time-dependent losses.
The immediate losses are the difference between the force imposed on the tendon by the
hydraulic prestressing jack and the force in the tendon immediately after transfer at a
particular point along its length. There are a variety of causes of immediate losses
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

50

depending on the method and equipment used to prestress the concrete, including losses due
to elastic shortening of the concrete, draw-in at the prestressing anchorage, friction in the
jack and along the tendon, deformation of the forms for precast members, deformation in
the joints between elements of precast structures, relaxation of the tendon between the time
of stressing the tendon and the time of casting the concrete and temperature changes that
may occur during this period. The Standard also includes as an immediate loss, any
additional loss of prestress that may occur due to curing at elevated temperatures.
The time-dependent losses are the gradual losses of prestress that occur with time over the
life of the structure. These include losses caused by the gradual shortening of the concrete
at the steel level due to creep and shrinkage, relaxation of the tendon after transfer and
time-dependent deformation that may occur within the joints in segmental construction.
The accuracy required of the calculation should be assessed and, if necessary, a check made
of the effect of one loss on others and the stage at which each loss occurs.
The Standard cautions that for structures designed to operate at elevated temperatures (in
excess of 40C), the increased losses of prestress due to the elevated temperatures be
carefully assessed and reference be made to specialist literature on the effects of elevated
temperatures on the deformational characteristics of concrete and prestressing steel.
C3.4.2 Immediate loss of prestress

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.4.2.1 General
The magnitude of the immediate losses is taken as the sum of the calculated losses caused
by each relevant phenomenon. Where appropriate, the effects of one type of immediate loss
on the magnitude of other immediate losses should be considered. For example, in a
pretensioned member, the loss caused by relaxation of the tendon prior to transfer of
prestress will affect the magnitude of the immediate loss caused by elastic deformation of
the concrete.
C3.4.2.2 Loss of prestress due to curing conditions
Curing at elevated temperatures prior to transfer can increase the magnitude and rate of
development of relaxation in a pretensioned tendon and thereby increase immediate losses.
In a post-tensioned member, curing at elevated temperatures can also affect relaxation but
this is in the hours and days after transfer and the resulting losses are classified as timedependent losses rather than immediate losses.
C3.4.2.3 Loss of prestress due to elastic deformation of concrete
For pretensioned members, the change in strain in a tendon immediately after transfer
caused by the elastic shortening of the concrete is equal to the instantaneous strain in the
concrete at the steel level. The corresponding loss of stress in the tendons at transfer is
therefore the product of the modular ratio (Ep/Ecj) and the stress in the adjacent concrete. In
the estimation of the loss due to elastic deformation of the concrete, it will usually be
sufficient to assume that a group of tendons is located at its centroid. In locations where
tendons are widely spaced, it may be necessary to calculate elastic shortening losses for
individual tendons, or small groups of tendons.
For post-tensioned members with one tendon, or with two or more tendons stressed
simultaneously, the elastic deformation of the concrete occurs during the stressing operation
before the tendons are anchored. In this case, elastic shortening losses are zero. In a
member containing more than one tendon and where the tendons are stressed sequentially,
stressing of a tendon causes an elastic shortening loss in all previously stressed and
anchored tendons. Consequently, the first tendon to be stressed suffers the largest elastic
shortening losses and the last tendon to be stressed suffers no elastic shortening losses at
all. Elastic shortening losses in the tendons stressed early in the prestressing sequence may
be reduced by re-stressing the tendons (prior to grouting of the prestressing ducts).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

51

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

It is relatively simple to calculate the elastic shortening losses in an individual tendon of a


post-tensioned member provided the stressing sequence is known. For most cases, it is
sufficient to determine the average loss of stress as (n1)/2n times the product of the
modular ratio (Ep/Ecj) times the average concrete compressive stress (P/A), where n is the
number of tendons. In post-tensioned members, the tendons are not bonded to the concrete
until grouting of the duct occurs sometime after the stressing sequence is completed. It is
the shortening of the member between the anchorage plates that leads to elastic shortening,
and not the strain at the steel level, as is the case for pretensioned members.
C3.4.2.4 Loss of prestress due to friction

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Two sources of friction loss have to be calculated, viz:

Friction in the jack and anchorage This type of friction loss is directly proportional
to jack pressure and depends on the type of jack and anchorage system used. It is
usually allowed for during the stressing operation and is generally relatively small.

Friction along the tendon In post-tensioned members, friction losses occur along the
tendon during the stressing operation. Friction between the tendon and the duct
causes a gradual reduction in prestress with the distance along the tendon from the
jacking end (Lpa). The coefficient of friction between the tendon and the duct depends
basically on the condition of the surfaces in contact, their structure and their
preparation. Frictional forces depend on the way in which the prestressing tendon is
formed and housed, i.e. the cable profile. Therefore, the magnitude of the friction loss
depends on the total angular change of the tendon over the length Lpa, as well as the
size and type of the duct containing the tendon. Equation 3.4.2.4 provides an
estimation of the stress in the tendon at any point and, by rearranging, the loss of
prestress due to friction may be taken as

p.friction = pj pa = pj (1 e

( tot + p Lpa )

. . . C3.4.2.4

The value of the friction curvature coefficient ( ) may vary appreciably with the amount of
rust on the tendon and the method of construction. With tendons showing a high but still
acceptable amount of rusting, the value may increase by 20% for bright and zinc-coated
metal sheathing. If the wires or strand in contact in the one duct are stressed separately,
may be greater than the values given in the Standard and should be checked by tests. For
external tendons passing over machined cast-steel saddles, may increase markedly for
large movements of tendons across the saddles.
The sum in radians of the absolute values of successive angular deviations of the tendon is
tot and is calculated from the changes in slope of the tendon over the length Lpa. Care
should be taken during construction to achieve the same cable profile as assumed in the
design.
The symbol p accounts for the angular deviation (in radians/m) due to wobble effects in the
straight or curved parts of the tendon and depends on the rigidity of the sheaths, on the
spacing and fixing of their supports, on the care taken in placing the prestressing tendons,
on the clearance of tendons in the duct, on the stiffness of the tendons, and on the
precautions taken during concreting. The most important parameter affecting the rigidity of
the sheaths is their diameter. In segmental construction, the angular deviation per metre (p)
may be greater in the event of mismatching of ducts and the designer should allow for this
possibility.
For unlined ducts, in the absence of other data, p may be taken as 0.008 for ducts formed
by bars and 0.024 for ducts formed by inflatable tubes.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

52

C3.4.2.5 Loss of prestress during anchoring


In post-tensioned members, some slip or draw-in occurs when the prestressing force is
transferred from the jack to the anchorage causing an additional loss of prestress in the
vicinity of the anchorage. The amount of slip (slip) depends on the type of anchorage. For
wedge-type anchorages used with strand, the slip may be as high as 6 mm. The loss of
prestress caused by this slip decreases with distance from the anchorage due to friction and,
for longer tendons, may be negligible at the critical design section, but for short tendons, it
may be significant (Ref. 44).
The loss of tension in a post-tensioned tendon caused by slip at the anchorage is opposed by
friction in the same way as the initial prestressing force is opposed by friction, but in the
opposite direction, i.e. and p are the same. The variations of prestressing force along a
member due to friction before anchoring the tendon (calculated using Equation 3.4.2.4) and
after anchoring are shown in Figure C3.4.2.5, where the mirror image reduction in
prestressing force in the vicinity of the anchorage caused by slip at the anchorage is shown.
The slope of the draw-in line adjacent to the anchorage has the same magnitude as the
friction loss line but the opposite sign (Ref. 44). It follows that tendons with a small drape
(and therefore small ) will suffer anchorage slip losses over a longer length of tendon than
tendons with a large drape (larger ).
If is the slope of the friction loss line (i.e. the friction loss per unit length), the length of
the draw-in line caused by a slip or draw-in at the anchorage of magnitude slip is
E p Ap slip

. . . C3.4.2.5(1)

and the immediate loss of prestress at the anchorage caused by slip is

p.di = 2Ldi

. . . C3.4.2.5(2)

The immediate loss of prestress near an anchorage may be determined from geometry using
Figure C3.4.2.5. At a distance of more than Ldi from the live end anchorage, the immediate
loss of prestress due to slip is zero.

Pr e s tr e s s i n g fo r c e

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Ldi =

Fr i c ti o n
loss line

A p p.d i

A p p.f r i c t i o n

D r aw- i n li n e
Ldi

Distance from anchorage

FIGURE C3.4.2.5 VARIATION OF PRESTRESSING FORCE IN A POST-TENSIONED


TENDON NEAR THE ANCHORAGE (Ref. 44)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

53

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C3.4.2.6 Loss of prestress due to other considerations


The Standard lists five other possible causes of immediate losses, which should be
considered where appropriate. They apply particularly for precast and segmental
construction and for any structure in which heat treatment is used at any time during the
construction process or when the structure is to be exposed to significant temperature
changes during construction.
C3.4.3 Time-dependent losses of prestress
C3.4.3.1 General
In addition to causing time-dependent increases in deflection or camber, both compressive
creep and shrinkage cause gradual shortening of a concrete member and this in turn leads to
time-dependent shortening of the prestressing tendons and a consequent reduction in the
prestressing force. These time-dependent losses of prestress are in addition to the losses
caused by steel relaxation. They may adversely affect the long-term serviceability of the
structure and should be accounted for in design.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The sub-clauses of Clause 3.4.3 relate specifically to the calculation of the time-dependent
losses of tensile force in the prestressing tendon, using the relevant material properties
already specified; in particular, the design shrinkage strain of concrete (Clause 3.1.7), the
design creep coefficient of concrete (Clause 3.1.8) and the design relaxation of the tendon
(Clause 3.3.4). The consequent loss of compressive stress in the concrete and the increase
in compressive stress in the non-prestressed reinforcement may then be calculated.
For members containing only tendons, the loss in tensile force in the tendons is simply
equal to the loss in compressive force in the concrete. Where the member contains a
significant amount of longitudinal non-prestressed reinforcement, there is a gradual transfer
of the compressive prestressing force from the concrete into the bonded reinforcement.
Shortening of the concrete, due to creep and shrinkage, causes a shortening of the bonded
reinforcement and, therefore, an increase in compressive stress in the steel. The gradual
increase in compressive force in the bonded reinforcement is accompanied by an equal and
opposite decrease in the compressive force in the concrete. Therefore, the loss in
compressive force in the concrete is considerably greater than the loss in tensile force in the
tendon.
The immediate strain and stress distributions [at time 0 immediately after the application of
both prestress and the applied moment (Mo) and the long-term strain and stress distributions
after creep and shrinkage at time (k)] on a prestressed concrete beam cross-section
subjected to a small constant sustained bending moment (Mo) are shown in Figure C3.4.3.1
(taken from Ref. 22). Note that the stress in the tendon reduces with time from 1300 MPa to
1099 MPa (a 15.5% loss), while the bottom fibre compressive stress in the concrete reduces
from 10.28 MPa to 4.61 MPa (a 55% loss). Suitable techniques for determining the timevarying stresses and strains on a prestressed concrete cross-section are given in Ref. 22.
The time-dependent losses also interact with each other, and this interaction may have to be
considered when the sum of all the losses is determined. For example, the loss in tendon
force due to creep and shrinkage of the concrete decreases the average force in the tendon
with time, and this in turn reduces the relaxation loss (Refs 22, 44, 45).

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

54
450
50
A g r o s s = 25 4,0 0 0 m m 2

A s (1) = 120 0 m m 2
450
C e ntr o i d of g r o s s
s e c ti o n

780
900

850

I g r o s s = 22, 50 0 x 10 6 m m 4
(wi th r e s p e c t to c e ntr o i d a l a x i s)
A ll di m e n s i o n s i n m illi m e tr e s

M o = 110 k N m

A p (1) = 10 0 0 m m 2

E c ( 0) = 3 0 0 0 0 MPa; c c = 1. 8;
c s = 4 0 0 10 - 6 ;
E s = E p = 20 0 0 0 0 MPa; R = 2%

A s (2) = 24 0 0 m m 2

P i n it i a l = 13 0 0 k N.

(a) C r o s s - s e c ti o n d e t a il s a n d m ate r i a l p r o p e r ti e s
- 373

+0.13 +0. 81

+26.9

s1 = 1. 3 (- 81.1)
-0.641 10 -6 mm-1

-0.411 10 -6 mm-1
p = 13 0 0 (10 9 9)

- 9 50

-10. 28 - 4.61

S tr a i n (x 10 - 6 )

S e c ti o n
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

-343

s2 = - 6 4. 5 (-18 4)

S tr e s s ( M Pa)

( b) Ini ti a l a n d l o n g -te r m s tr e s s a n d s tr a i n di s tr ib u ti o n s

DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED

FIGURE C3.4.3.1 TIME-DEPENDENT CHANGE IN STRESSES IN CONCRETE


AND STEEL (Ref. 22)

C3.4.3.2 Loss of prestress due to shrinkage of the concrete


If a concrete member of length L contained no bonded reinforcement (or bonded tendons)
and was unrestrained at its supports and along its length, the member would shorten due to
shrinkage by an amount equal to csL. If the member contained an unbonded post-tensioned
tendon with an anchorage at each end of the member, the tendon would shorten by the same
amount and the loss of prestress in the tendon due to shrinkage (ignoring the effects of
friction) would be constant along its length and equal to

p.cs = E p cs

. . . C3.4.3.2(1)

In concrete structures, unrestrained contraction is unusual. Reinforcement and bonded


tendons embedded in the concrete provide restraint to shrinkage and reduce the shortening
of the member. This in turn reduces the loss of prestress in any tendon within the member.
If the reinforcement and bonded tendons are symmetrically placed on a cross-section so that
the resultant restraining force is axial, the change in strain in a bonded tendon due to
shrinkage and the corresponding loss of stress in the tendon may be expressed as follows
(Ref. 22):

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

55

p.cs =

cs
1 + n e As / Ag

p.cs =

and

E p cs
1 + n e As / Ag

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

. . . C3.4.3.2(2)

. . . C3.4.3.2(3)

where As is the area of bonded reinforcement; Ag is the gross area of the cross-section; ne is
the effective modular ratio, Es/Ee; and Ee is the effective modulus of concrete given by

Ee =

Ec
1 + cc

. . . C3.4.3.2(4)

Equation C3.4.3.2(3) is simplified in the Standard by setting the effective modular ratio to
ne = 15 (in Equation 3.4.3.2). This is equivalent to setting Ee = 13 330 MPa and, for 40 MPa
concrete with Ec = 32 800 MPa (see Table 3.1.2), the corresponding creep coefficient is
cc = 1.46.
In most practical situations, the bonded reinforcement and bonded tendons are not
symmetrically located on the cross-section and the restraining force is not axial. In this
case, the restraining force will induce a curvature on the section and the change of strain
and the loss of prestress in the tendon will depend on its position on the cross-section. A
suitable method for undertaking an analysis to determine the time-dependent loss of
prestress on a general prestressed concrete cross-section is presented in Sections 5.1 to 5.4
of Ref. 22.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C3.4.3.3 Loss of prestress due to creep of the concrete


Creep strain in the concrete at the level of the bonded tendon depends on the stress history
of the concrete at that level. Because the concrete stress varies with time (due to timedependent losses of prestress as well as the time-varying nature of the external loads), a
reliable estimate of creep losses requires a detailed time analysis of the cross-section. Such
an analysis is described and illustrated by example in Sections 5.1 to 5.4 of Ref. 22.
An approximate and often very conservative estimate of creep losses may be made by
assuming the concrete stress at the tendon level remains constant with time and equal to the
value ci calculated using the initial prestressing force (prior to any time-dependent losses)
and the sustained portion of all the service loads. With this assumption, the creep strain that
develops in the concrete at the tendon level and the corresponding loss of prestress due to
creep are given by:

cc = p.cc = cc ( ci / E c ) and

. . . C3.4.3.3(1)

p.cc = Ep cc ( ci / Ec )

. . . C3.4.3.3(2)

As mentioned previously, the restraint to creep (and shrinkage) caused by the bonded
reinforcement reduces the compressive prestressing force on the concrete with time and the
stress in the concrete at the tendon level is never constant. Therefore the above equations
will always overestimate creep losses. In recognition of this and in the absence of a more
refined analysis, the Standard now permits a reduction of 20% in the creep losses calculated
using Equation C3.4.3.3(2). That is, the creep loss may be taken as

p.cc = 0.8E p cc ( ci / E c )

. . . C3.4.3.3(3)

C3.4.3.4 Loss of prestress due to tendon relaxation


The loss of stress in a tendon due to relaxation depends on the sustained stress in the steel.
Owing to creep and shrinkage in the concrete, the stress in the tendon decreases with time
at a faster rate than would occur due to relaxation alone. Since the steel strain is reducing
with time due to concrete creep and shrinkage, the relaxation losses are reduced from those
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

56

that occur in a constant strain relaxation test. With the design relaxation (R) determined
from Clause 3.3.4.3, the percentage loss of prestress due to relaxation may be calculated
from Equation 3.4.3.4. This generally provides a quite conservative estimate of relaxation
losses, but for low-relaxation tendons, the approximation is reasonable.
C3.4.3.5 Loss of prestress due to other considerations
Time-dependent deformation in in situ concrete joints of precast, segmental structures can
cause additional time-dependent losses of prestress in tendons passing from segment to
segment and, where appropriate, need to be considered in design. In addition, where loads
are not permanent but are frequently and regularly applied, such as the weight of vehicles in
a car park, the resulting concrete creep may be significant and its effect on time-dependent
losses should be considered.
C3.5 MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR NON-LINEAR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
When non-linear analysis is used in design, it is appropriate to use mean values of material
properties, rather than characteristic values, together with recognized and accepted
expressions for the constitutive relationship of each material (see Paragraph C6.5.4).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

RAPHAEL, J.M., Tensile Strength of Concrete, ACI Journal, 81(2), MarchApril


1984, pp. 15865.

PAUW, A, Static Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete as Affected by Density, ACI


Journal, Proceedings, 57(6), December 1960, pp. 67987.

GILBERT, R.I., Creep and Shrinkage Models for High Strength Concrete
Proposals for inclusion in AS 3600, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering,
IE Aust, 4(2), December 2002, pp 95106.

FRAGOMENI S., BAWEJA D. and MENDIS, P., Measured and predicted axial
shortening in tall buildings: Recent research findings, Concrete Solutions 09, 24th
Biennial Conference of the Concrete Institute of Australia, Sydney, 2009.

GILBERT, R.I., AS 3600: Whats New? Whats Different, Lecture 3, Concrete


Institute of Australia, National Seminar Series, 2009.

GILBERT, R.I., Time Effects in Concrete Structures, Elsevier Science Publishers,


Amsterdam, 1988, 321 pp.

CARSE, A. and BEHAN, J.E., Static Chord Modulus of Elasticity of High Strength
Concrete in Uniform Compression and Flexure, Proceedings, Tenth ARRB
Conference, Sydney, Vol. 10, Part 3, August 1980, pp. 4656.

DESAYI P. and KRISHNAN S., Equation for the Stress-Strain Curve of Concrete,
ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 61, March 1964, pp 345350.

Deformability of Concrete StructuresBasic Assumptions, Bulletin DInformation


No. 90, Comit Europen du Bton, 1973.

10

WANG, P.T., SHAH, S.P. and NAAMAN, A.E., High-Strength Concrete in Ultimate
Strength Design, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, No. ST11,
1978, pp. 176173.

11

Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings, The European Standard EN 1992-1-1:2004. European Committee for
Standardisation (CEN), Brussels, 2004.

12

POPOVICS, S., A Review of Stress-Strain Relationships for Concrete, ACI Journal,


Vol. 67, No. 3, Mar. 1970, pp. 243248.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

57

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

13

THORENFELDT, E., TOMASZEWICZ, A. and JENSEN, J.J., Mechanical


Properties of High Strength Concrete and Application in Design, International
Symposium on Utilization of High Strength Concrete, Stavanger, Norway, June 1987,
pp 149159.

14

COLLINS, M. P. and PORASZ, A., Shear Strength for High Strength Concrete,
Bulletin No. 193, Design Aspects of High-Strength Concrete, Comit EuroInternational du Bton (CEB), 1989, pp. 7583.

15

ATTARD, M.M. and SETUNGE, J. The Stress Strain Relationship of Confined and
Unconfined Normal and High Strength Concretes, University of new South Wales,
UNICIV Report No. R-341, 1994.

16

AHMAD, S.H. and SHAH, S.P., Structural properties of high strength concrete and
its implication for precast prestressed concrete, PCI Journal, Nov Dec 1985,
pp. 91119.

17

SETUNGE, S., Structural Properties of Very High Strength Concrete, PhD Thesis,
Monash University, Australia.

18

ATTARD, M.M. and STEWART, M.G., An improved stress block model for high
strength concrete, Research Report No. 154.10.1997, Department of Civil, Surveying
and Environmental Engineering, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia, 1998,
42 pp.

19

fib Model Code 2010, Bulletins 55 and 56, , Fdration Internationale du Bton,
Lausanne, Switzerland, 2011.

20

NEVILLE, A.M., Properties of Concrete, Pitman (3rd Edition), London, 1981.

21

BROOKS, J.J., 30-year creep and shrinkage of concrete, Magazine of Concrete


Research, Vol. 57, No.9, November 2005, Paris, France, pp 545556.

22

GILBERT R.I. and RANZI G., Time-dependent Behaviour of Concrete Structures,


Spon Press, London, 2010.

23

AS/NZS 4671:2001, Steel Reinforcing Materials, Standards Australia, Sydney 2001.

24

PATRICK M., TURNER M.D. and WARNER R.F., Utilisation of Ductility of


500 MPa Steel Reinforcement in Reinforced Concrete Structures Designed to
AS 36002001, Proc 20th Biennial Conference, Concrete Institute of Australia,
Perth, September 2001.

25

TURNER M.D, Introduction of 500 MPa Reinforcing Steel and its Effect on
AS 3600, Proceedings 19th Biennial Conference, Concrete Institute of Australia,
Sydney, 1999.

26

PATRICK, M., AKBARSHAHI, E. and WARNER, R.F., Ductility Limits for the
Design of Concrete Structures Containing High-Strength, Low-Elongation Steel
Reinforcement, Proceedings. Concrete 97 Conference, Concrete Institute of
Australia, May 1997, pp. 509517.

27

GILBERT, R.I. and SAKKA, Z.I., The effect of reinforcement type on the ductility
of suspended reinforced concrete slabs, Journal of Structural Engineering, American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Vol. 133, No. 6, 2007, pp. 834843.

28

GRAVINA, R.J. and WARNER, R.F., Evaluation of the AS 3600 Design Clauses for
Moment Redistribution and Minimum Ductility Levels, Australian Journal of
Structural Engineering, Institution of Engineers Australia, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003,
pp. 29-36.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

58

29

SIDDIQUE, U., GOLDSWORTHY, H, and GRAVINA, R.J., Ductility of 500 MPa


Class L Mesh and Possible Support Settlement Effects, 18th ACMSM Conference,
December, 2004, pp. 873-878.

30

SAKKA, Z.I., and GILBERT, R.I., Effect of Reinforcement Ductility on the Strength
and Failure Modes of One-way Reinforced Concrete Slabs. UNICIV Report
No. R-450, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, October 2008.
(http://vm.civeng.unsw.edu.au/uniciv/R-450.pdf).

31

SAKKA, Z.I., and GILBERT, R.I., Effect of Reinforcement Ductility on the Strength,
Ductility and Failure Mode of Continuous One-way Concrete Slabs subjected to
Support Settlement, Part 1. UNICIV Report No. R-451, University of New South
Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2008. October. (http://vm.civeng.unsw.edu.au/uniciv/
R-451.pdf).

32

SAKKA, Z.I., and GILBERT, R.I. Strength and Ductility of Corner Supported Twoway Concrete Slabs Containing Welded Wire Fabric. UNICIV Report No. R-453,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. October 2000.
(http://vm.civeng.unsw.edu.au/uniciv/R-453.pdf).

33

SAKKA, Z.I., and GILBERT, R.I. Ductility of edge-supported two-way concrete


slabs containing Class L reinforcement. UNICIV Report No. R-454, University of
New
South
Wales,
Sydney,
Australia.
May
2009.
http://vm.civeng.unsw.edu.au/uniciv/
R-454.pdf).

34

PATRICK, M., WHEELER, A., TURNER, M., MARSDEN, W. and SANDERS, P.


Improved Simplified Design Methods for Reinforced Continuous Beams and OneWay Slabs, and Two-Way Slabs Supported on Four Sides, Proc. Concrete '05
Conference, Concrete Institute of Australia, 2005.

35

MUNTER, S., PATRICK, M. and RANGAN, B.V., Review of Australian SupportSettlement Tests on Continuous, One-Way Reinforced-Concrete Slabs incorporating
Low-Ductility Reinforcement, 5th Civil Engineering Conference in the Asian Region
and ASEC (Australian Structural Engineering Conference) 2010.

36

MUNTER, S. and PATRICK, M., SRIAs Class L Mesh Elevated Slab Tests:
Part 1AObjectives, Design & Details, ASEC (Australian Structural Engineering
Conference) 2012.

37

MUNTER, S. and PATRICK, M., SRIAs Class L Mesh Elevated Slab Tests:
Part 1BObservations and Results, ASEC (Australian Structural Engineering
Conference) 2012.

38

MUNTER, S. and PATRICK, M., SRIAs Class L Mesh Elevated Slab Tests:
Part 2AStrength Design to Concrete Structures Standard AS 36002009, ASEC
(Australian Structural Engineering Conference) 2012.

39

MUNTER, S. and PATRICK, M., SRIAs Class L Mesh Elevated Slab Tests:
Part 2B Comparison of Design Strengths to AS 36002009 with Test Results,
ASEC (Australian Structural Engineering Conference) 2012.

40

Smorgon ARCReinforcement Handbook, November 2001.

41

AS/NZS 4672.1, Steel prestressing materials Part 1: General requirements, Standards


Australia, 2007.

42

LOOV, R.E., A general equation for the steel stress for bonded prestressed concrete
members, PCI Journal, Vol. 33, 1988, pp. 108137.

43

BATE, S.C.C. and CARSON, R.A., Effect of Temperature on Prestressing Wires,


Conference on Prestressed Concrete Pressure Vessels, I.C.E., London, March 1967.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

59

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

GILBERT, R.I. and MICKLEBOROUGH, N.C., Design of Prestressed Concrete,


Spon, London, 1997.

45

WARNER, R.F. and FAULKES, K.A., Prestressed Concrete, 2nd Edition,


Appendix A: Creep and shrinkage in a prestressed section with reinforcing steel,
Pitman, 1986.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

44

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N

60

C 4

D E S I G N

F O R

D U R A B I L I T Y

INTRODUCTION
Durability has been recognized as a major design consideration in Australian Standards for
many years. In this Section, the requirements for durability design have been collated and
placed to highlight the significance of durability as an important design criterion.
Clause 1.6.3.27 defines durability as the ability of a structure and its component members
to perform the functions for which they have been designed, over a specified period of time,
when exposed to their environment. The expected wear and deterioration may include the
influences of weathering, chemical attack and abrasion. Durability of concrete is a complex
process involving a large number of important interrelated factors (Refs 1 and 2), such as
(a)

attention to design details, including reinforcement layout, concrete quality,


appropriate cover and provision for shedding of water from exposed surfaces;

(b)

good mix design; and

(c)

appropriate construction practices, including adequate fixing of reinforcement and the


placing, compacting and curing of the concrete.

The Standard specifies requirements for only some of these areas. Refs 2 to 6 should be
consulted for further information.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C4.1 GENERAL
This Section provides minimum requirements for durability under the specific conditions
considered. It is emphasized that these are minimum requirements and may not be sufficient
in some situations. The provisions are formulated for a limited range of environments that
constitute a limited number of types of attack; for example, corrosion of reinforcement,
abrasion and sulfate attack.
Significant advances have been made in design life modelling for maritime and inland
structures (Refs 6, 7 and 8); however, no quantitative modelling is available for structures
exposed to aggressive soils. This revision of the Standard takes into consideration such
advances but does not specifically include design life as an input parameter. Therefore, the
requirements have been formulated for buildings with a normal design life of 40 to
60 years. For monumental structures, more stringent requirements should be adopted and
for temporary structures less rigorous requirements may be acceptable.
Reactions between the alkalis in the concrete and reactive silica, or other alkali-reactive
constituents in aggregates, are also possible causes of deterioration. They are collectively
known as alkali-aggregate reactions (AAR). The reaction and its products are sensitive to
the presence of moisture. In the presence of moisture, the products can swell and occupy a
greater volume than the initial constituents. This can lead to cracking and generate further
deterioration of the concrete due to other mechanisms such as corrosion of the
reinforcement depending on the resulting crack width. Conditions for AAR to occur
together with the recommended measures for controlling and managing the risk of damage
due to AAR are discussed in Ref. 9.
C4.2 METHOD OF DESIGN FOR DURABILITY
This Clause sets out the procedure for design for durability, that is, the determination of the
exposure classification followed by consideration of the concrete quality, chemical content
and cover.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

61

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The Standard recognizes that corrosion of reinforcement is the most common and prevalent
form of durability failure. This can manifest itself as any one, or a combination of, surface
staining, cracking along reinforcement close to a surface and spalling of a surface.
For simplicity, the process of corrosion can be divided into two phases: initiation and
propagation. Generally the reinforcement is protected against corrosion by the alkalinity of
the concrete surrounding it. The initiation phase is the period over which this alkalinity is
reduced to the level where active corrosion can commence. The propagation phase is the
time from commencement of corrosion to the stage where corrosion products cause a failure
in the surrounding concrete.
In the initiation phase, the protection afforded by the alkalinity of the concrete can be
reduced by two processes: carbonation (neutralization of the high pH by infiltration of
atmospheric carbon dioxidea slow, continuous process) and ionization (an increase in the
concentration of reactive ions such as chlorides, a relatively rapid, somewhat random
process).
In the propagation stage, the reinforcement will corrode at a rate that depends on the
availability of oxygen and moisture, the temperature of the concrete, the presence of
reactive ions and residual alkalinity.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The durability provisions of this Standard for a concrete structure with respect to corrosion
of the steel reinforcement include both the initiation phase and propagation stage of the
deterioration.
It follows from the above that the time to initiation and the subsequent rate of corrosion will
depend to a large extent on the environment to which a concrete surface is exposed. For a
given quality and thickness of cover, hot, humid seaside environments lead to more rapid
corrosion rates than cooler, dry inland environments. Thus, for a given durability level,
exposure to the former environment will require larger covers and better quality concrete
than exposure to the latter environment.
Chloride ions can be introduced into the concrete by way of admixtures, contaminated
aggregates, salt depositions on reinforcement and formwork, or they can permeate into the
hardened concrete during acid etching or from salt spray deposited on the member surface.
Therefore, limitations are placed on the quantity of chlorides that can be introduced into the
fresh concrete from any source (see Clause 4.9 of the Standard).
The procedure given in the Standard for durability design is firstly to classify the severity
of the environment to which the concrete surfaces are exposed. For that exposure
classification, a minimum concrete quality is specified by strength and, where
reinforcement is to be protected, a minimum cover is then required. The basic principle is
that where corrosion of the reinforcement, once initiated, is likely to be fast, higher levels
of protection are required. More severe environments require increasingly better protection
and this is reflected by the requirement for better quality concrete and larger covers.
However, there is a limit to cover depth particularly where specification requirements also
mandate a maximum crack width for flexural members under serviceability conditions.
There is much evidence to suggest that when sufficient concrete quality (i.e. low concrete
permeability) and cover to reinforcement are provided, crack widths of up to 0.4 mm
generally do not adversely affect reinforcement corrosion, particularly if the cracks cross
the reinforcement and do not run along the bar (Refs 10 to 14). Accordingly, the Standard
places no direct restrictions in design on the maximum crack width at a concrete surface,
irrespective of the exposure classification (see also Paragraph C2.3.3.1).
Because strength can be easily specified and measured, the concrete grade has been adopted
as a quality criterion; however it should be remembered that the concrete grade is at best
only an indirect measure of concrete quality from a durability viewpoint (Refs 15 and 16),
in reality reflecting the quality of concrete after 28 days curing in a fog room. This amount
of curing is seldom achieved on the site. Research has shown the importance of early,
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

62

continuous curing (Refs 17 and 18) and this is the basis for the curing requirements for
concrete in the various exposure classifications (Clauses 4.4 and 4.5). The findings also
stressed that, after initial curing, further improvement in concrete properties due to
exposure to the weather is doubtful, being highly dependent on the orientation of the
member and local climatic conditions.
Appropriate exposure classifications for sulfate exposure are specified in Clause 4.8.
Covers for given exposure classifications, depending on the chosen concrete quality, are
specified in Clause 4.10.
Requirements for abrasion resistance and exposure to freezing and thawing are additional to
the general requirements of Clause 4.3.1. For example, a concrete pavement would have to
satisfy the requirements for abrasion resistance (Clause 4.6) and may, depending on its
location, also need to satisfy the requirements for freezing and thawing (Clause 4.7) in
addition to the requirements given in Clauses 4.3 to 4.5.
C4.3 EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATION
C4.3.1 General
An important part of the durability provisions in the Standard is the system of exposure
classification. While the classification focuses on conditions leading to corrosion of
reinforcement, guidance is also given regarding the severity of attack on the concrete itself.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Definitions of environmental conditions are consistent with the general concepts given in
AS/NZS 2312 (Ref. 19). The classifications may be summarized as follows:
(a)

Exposure Classifications A1 and A2relatively benign environments, such as in the


interior of most buildings, or in inland country towns remote from the coast, where
the provision of adequate cover will give satisfactory performance. For these
exposures, carbonation-induced corrosion of steel reinforcement would likely be the
main mechanism of deterioration for above-ground concrete elements.

(b)

Exposure Classifications B1 and B2moderately aggressive environments, such as


locations close to the coast, for which protection can be satisfactorily provided by a
combination of appropriate concrete quality and associated cover. The relevant
mechanisms of deterioration of reinforcement for above-ground concrete elements are
typically chloride-induced corrosion, carbonation-induced corrosion and possibly a
combination thereof. For a B2 exposure classification, chloride-induced corrosion of
steel reinforcement is likely to be the predominant deterioration mechanism.

(c)

Exposure Classifications C1 and C2the most aggressive environments for which


guidance is given on concrete quality and cover. Such locations include structures
directly adjacent and exposed to the coast or structures subject to regular spray
(comprising of heavy loads of chlorides) generated by onshore winds. Chlorideinduced corrosion of steel reinforcement is hence the principal mechanism of
deterioration.

(d)

Exposure Classification Uenvironments for which the Standard gives no guidance.


They may be more severe than exposure Classification C2, or as benign as exposure
Classification A1. The designer has to quantify the severity of the exposure and
choose methods of protection relevant to that exposure.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

63

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

In defining these exposure classifications, the effect of climate on the rate of carbonation
(and therefore, the time to initiation of corrosion) and its effect on the rate of corrosion
once initiated has been taken into consideration. For example:
(i)

In climates of high humidity or tropical conditions, although subsequent curing by


weather may be better and carbonation might be slower, the presence of moisture and
probable chlorides means that corrosion, once initiated, could proceed at a rapid rate.

(ii)

In a dry climate, although the rate of carbonation might be high, the propagation of
the corrosion, once initiated, proceeds at a slow rate.

In practical terms, the climatic conditions are less significant than proximity to the coast.
The closer to the sea, the more severe the exposure tends to be, with wind-driven spray
imposing a heavy load of chlorides on exposed concrete. In some circumstances, the limit
of 1 km for B2 exposure classification should be increased (see Note 5 of Table 4.30). For
example, many locations in NSW are known to be influenced by strong NE winds which
carry chlorides well inland. On the other hand, high coastal cliffs may offer some
protection. The protected conditions inside the reef in northern Queensland do not seem to
lead to such severe conditions as those experienced in areas adjacent to exposed seas but
the 1 km limit would still be prudent in such cases.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Guidance with regard to possible extent of severity of airborne salt deposit in different
locations may be obtained from AS 4312 (Ref. 20).
Structures actually built in the water are covered in Table 4.3. Structures occasionally
subject to direct contact by the sea or constructed over water should be assessed by the
designer as to the appropriate classification of B2 or C1. In situations where such surfaces
of a maritime structure are exposed to regular wetting and drying, the appropriate
classification may necessitate a C2 exposure classification.
The emission of certain pollutants by industry is known to increase the risk of degradation
of the concrete or corrosion of reinforcement. Industrial plants burning sulfide-containing
fuels, or emitting acidic gases, may be considered a severe risk and subject to the
industrial classification. The 3 km limit given in Note 4 to Table 4.3 represents a
reasonable estimate, but engineering judgement should be used giving consideration to the
nature and scale of the industrial pollutants and the prevailing wind directions.
Contact with liquids is a difficult area in which to provide firm classifications. Fresh water
can cause significant leaching of the partly soluble concrete components, as can repeated
exposure to condensation. Running water and frequent wet-and-dry cycles in waterretaining structures can also cause physical and chemical degradation. These problems can
become additive to those associated with reinforcement corrosion. The Standard proposes a
range of classifications, based primarily on experience, that depend on the type of structure.
Exposure to salt in the spray zone near seawater is classified as C1 and surfaces in the
tidal/splash zone in salt water are classified as C2. The more-moderate exposure of being
permanently submerged in seawater is classified as B2. Despite the high content of sulfates
and chlorides in seawater, an extra level of protection is provided by the formation of an
impermeable surface layer of carbonates, and the lack of dissolved oxygen, particularly at
depth.
Exposure to sulfate-bearing soils has been included in this revision. The exposure has been
classified with respect to presence of magnesium ions because of the severe nature of attack
in the presence of sulfates. For soils containing more than 1000 ppm (or 1000 mg/L) in
groundwater of magnesium, the exposure is classified as U, which requires the designer to
assess and choose the appropriate methods of protection. Guidance can be found in Refs 21
and 22. Where magnesium content is less than 1000 ppm, the specific protective measures
are given in Clause 4.8.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

64

The protection offered by an impermeable membrane under a slab on the surface of the
ground in non-aggressive soils should provide an environment equivalent to
classification A1.
For practical reasons, only one grade of concrete will be used in any member, and this
grade is determined by the most severe exposure classification for any of the surfaces (see
Figure C4.3.1).
Care should be exercised when assessing the ability of a surface coating to protect the
surface during the life of the structure. Originally, it was hoped that a definition of
impermeability could be produced to aid in this; however, this has proved to be too
difficult, firstly, to define an appropriate test method and, secondly, to determine suitable
limiting values.
The choice of a suitable coating is outside the scope of the Standard, but the designer
should be aware that an inadequate, incorrectly applied or poorly maintained coating may
lead to more rapid degradation than no coating at all (Ref. 23).

Pr ote c tive m e m b r a n e

Exposure
B2

Pa r a p e t p o u r e d
s e p a r a te l y f r o m r o of

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C o n c r e te G r a d e 4 0
fo r B2 o r G r a d e 32 i f
Cl a u s e 4. 3. 2 a p p li e d
Exposure
A1

Exposure
B2

C o n c r e te G r a d e
4 0 fo r B2

FIGURE C4.3.1 SELECTION OF CONCRETE GRADE

C4.3.2 Concession for exterior exposure of a single surface


This Clause permits a lower grade of concrete to be used throughout members (such as, a
concrete slab and beam placed in a single pour) where the controlling exposure is on a
single surface. An illustration of the interpretation of this Clause is shown in Figure C4.3.2.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

65

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Exposure
A1
Fl a s hi n g

Pe r m i t te d c ove r
I n c r e a s e d c ove r
p r efe r r e d

C o n c r e te G r a d e 25
Eq u a l s i d e c ove r s p r efe r r e d

In c r e a s e d c ove r r e q u i r e d
fo r c o n c r e te G r a d e 25
Exposure
A1
Pe r m i t te d c ove r

Exposure
B1

FIGURE C4.3.2 ILLUSTRATIONS OF CONCESSION FOR EXTERIOR EXPOSURE OF


AN EDGE OR SINGLE SURFACE

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C4.4 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE FOR EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATIONS


A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 AND C2
For classifications A1 and A2, the requirements for concrete are a minimum strength grade
of 20 MPa and 25 MPa, respectively, and an initial continuous curing period of not less
than three days. As an alternative to continuous curing for three days, a minimum average
compressive strength of 15 MPa is required to be achieved at the time of form or mould
removal and termination of curing. This latter option generally controls the removal of
forms.
For classifications B1, B2, C1 and C2, the strength and curing requirements are a minimum
f c (of 32 MPa, 40 MPa, 50 MPa and 50 MPa, respectively) and an initial continuous curing
period of not less than seven days. Again, a minimum average compressive strength is
required to be achieved at the time of form or mould removal and termination of curing (in
general, two standard strength grades below the minimum requirement for f c ). As stated
above, minimum strength typically governs the time of form stripping.
The addition of fly ash, slag or amorphous silica to Portland cement may decrease the
permeability and improve the long-term durability of concrete made with such blends
(Ref. 22), provided appropriate adjustments have been made to the mix design by the
supplier and proper compaction and curing have been carried out on site; however, these
supplementary materials (particularly fly ash and slag) may also reduce the rate of strength
gain of the concrete at early ages. For normal-class concrete where early-age strength is a
design or construction consideration (for example, for control of cracking, excessive
deflection, early stripping or prestressing), it is recommended that the early-age option
given in AS 1379 (Ref. 24) be specified, that is, the addition of the suffix E3 (at age 3 days)
or E7 (at age 7 days) to the grade designation. This should ensure that both the strength and
durability requirements of this Standard can be satisfied by normal-class concrete made
from a wide range of blended cements.
Where the special-class concrete is required, additional parameters are also to be specified
by the designer, namely cement type and content, taking due account of the nature and
severity of the environmental exposure. As a guide, Table C4.4 sets out suggested minimum
cement content for special-class concretes, although the amount actually required will
depend on the type of cement and type of aggregates being used.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

66

TABLE C4.4
MINIMUM CEMENT CONTENTS FOR
SPECIAL-CLASS CONCRETE
Exposure
classification

Required minimum
f c MPa

Minimum cement content


kg/m 3

B1
B2

32
40

285
330

C1
C2

50
50

400
400

C4.5 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE FOR EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATION U


Exposure classification U will include a range of exposures from more severe than C2 down
to those as benign as A1. In many cases, classifications ranging from A1 to C2 may be
selected, based on the principles of Clause 4.3. Guidance on appropriate measures for some
severe exposures is given in the following References:
Durability in general ................................................................................................. Ref. 2.
Liquid-retaining structures ...................................................................................... Ref. 25.
Salt water (marine exposure) ................................................................. Refs 26, 27 and 28.
Sulfates ....................................................................................................... Refs 29 and 30.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Acids, sulfuric acid, carbonic acid and soft water .................................................... Ref. 31.
C4.6 ABRASION
Abrasion of industrial floors is a common cause of serviceability failure. Compressive
strength was selected as the most important, readily specified parameter, but consideration
should also be given to methods of construction (Refs 2 and 32), since abrasion resistance is
strongly influenced by curing and surface finish as well as compressive strength.
The Clause specifies additional requirements for abrasion exposure. That is, the concrete is
required to satisfy the requirements for other exposure criteria as presented in Clause 4.3.
For example, concrete for a reinforced concrete external pavement subject only to light,
pneumatic-tyred traffic, but located in the coastal zone, would have to comply with the
requirements for B2 and those requirements would take precedence. On the other hand, for
an internal factory floor subject to medium to heavy pneumatic-tyred traffic, the
requirements for abrasion with respect to minimum concrete characteristic compressive
strength under this Clause would take precedence.
C4.7 FREEZING AND THAWING
The role of air entrainment in providing resistance to freeze thaw degradation is well
established and this Clause presents the range of values usually accepted in practice. In
general, the larger the nominal aggregate size, the lower the required amount of entrained
air to give the desired protection.
Severity of exposure is also dependent on the presence of moisture on the surface prior to
freezing (Ref. 33).
If the surface is also subject to abrasion, the upper values of air entrainment given may be
too high to permit the desired abrasion resistance to be achieved. If so, an intermediate
value should be chosen.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

67

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C4.8 AGGRESSIVE SOILS


C4.8.1 Sulfate and acid sulfate soils
The Standard focuses on groundwater containing sulfates (or sulfides that may oxidize to
sulfates) that can attack concrete in a rapid and destructive manner. Groundwater containing
high levels of chlorides or organic matter can also be destructive. Higher quality concrete
can provide some protection, but for groundwater containing more than 1000 ppm of
magnesium content, special cements and other protective methods are needed. If the sulfate
soils contain more than 1000 ppm of magnesium (Ref. 21), Portland sulfate-resisting
cement and other protective methods will be needed (Refs 22 and 29).
Water soluble sulfate content of natural soil and the sulfate content of the groundwater may
be determined from AS 1289.4.2.1 (Ref. 34). Sulfate content of the soil is reported in these
methods as a percentage of the original oven-dry soil mass (that is, ppm in the current
Table) and of the groundwater in mg/L (that is, also ppm in Table 4.8.1).
Testing for pH may be undertaken in accordance with AS 1289.4.3.1 (Ref. 35).
It is implied by Table 4.8.1 that the more severe condition of sulfate content and pH
concentration, where both have been assessed, would determine the appropriate exposure
classification for the specified concrete.
Sulfate attack is less of a problem in clay soils because of their low permeability.
The influence of the type of cement and the pH of the environment on sulfate resistance has
been researched intensively and is well documented (Ref. 29). A performance-based
specification for sulfate-resisting concrete has also been developed (Refs 30 and 36).
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C4.8.2 Saline soils


Salts exist not only in coastal regions, but are present throughout the landscape, including
the drier inland areas of Australia. Sources of salinity include naturally occurring salts from
marine sediments, salts released from the process of soil/rock weathering, salts transported
from the ocean and deposited by rainfall, or use of recycled grey water containing salts.
Problems with salinity are generally linked to the groundwater system, as water both
dissolves and transports the salts through the soil. Saline groundwater can reach the footing
system through rising groundwater table levels or by capillary suction of the soil, which
may raise water by up to 2 m depending on the soil type (mainly clays).
Salinity can be measured in two ways: the saturated extract electrical conductivity (ECe),
which involves saturating the soil with water and then measuring the electrical
conductivity. This procedure takes into account the soil texture as the sample is not broken
down by mixing with water.
Extract electrical conductivity (EC), where the soil is mixed with water in the ratio of 1 part
soil to 5 parts water (1:5), and the electrical conductivity are measured.
As the soil texture affects the conductivity, conversion factors are then used to estimate the
saturated extract electrical conductivity (ECe), of the actual soil. The latter is a quicker test
as the soil is mixed with water and time is not spent waiting for the soil sample to become
saturated.
While salinity levels are generally low enough not to have any effect on the concrete, some
increase in strength and cover are required for more saline soils, as specified in Table 4.8.2.
For highly saline and acidic soils, it is recommended that both isolation of the concrete
from the soil and increased strength and cover requirements be adopted to reduce the risk of
damage. For further guidance, see Ref. 37.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

68

C4.9 RESTRICTION ON CHEMICAL CONTENT IN CONCRETE


The limits on the chemical content are specified in AS 1379 (Ref. 24). This not only
enables consistency in the specified limits but also ensures that restrictions on chemical
content apply to all concretes.
The protection of reinforcement by the provision of an adequate cover of dense concrete
relies primarily on the protection afforded by the alkalinity of the concrete. This protection
will prevent the initiation of corrosion until carbonation has advanced close to the steel
surface, which usually takes decades; however, if chloride-ions are present, corrosion can
be initiated even in an alkaline environment. Moreover, chloride-ions accelerate the
corrosion process so their presence should be minimized.
An upper limit of sulfur trioxide (SO 3) by mass of cement has been set in AS 1379 (Ref. 24)
to minimize the expansive influence of sulfate on the concrete. This includes the sulfate in
the cement as well as aggregates and water. Great care should be taken when rock waste
from mining is used as an aggregate. Many mineral ores include sulfides that oxidize to
sulfates.
C4.10 REQUIREMENTS
TENDONS

FOR

COVER

TO

REINFORCING

STEEL

AND

C4.10.1 General

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The cover to reinforcement or tendons in a structure has to be large enough to


(a)

ensure that the concrete can be satisfactorily placed and compacted (specified in
Clause 4.10.2);

(b)

provide protection against corrosion of reinforcement or tendons (specified in


Clauses 4.8 and 4.10.3); and

(c)

provide the required fire resistance period for the structure (specified in Section 5).

The designer should select a value for cover that satisfies all of the above requirements.
C4.10.2 Cover for concrete placement
Attention is drawn to the fact that larger covers than those given in the Standard may need
to be specified for other reasons; for example, the use of bundled bars, congestion due to a
number of reinforcement layers, or the configuration of narrow webs and large prestressing
ducts.
In addition to the requirements of this Clause, increased cover to top reinforcement may
also be necessary to provide for a wearing surface (see Clause 4.6) or to achieve a required
surface finish (e.g. surface texturing).
C4.10.3 Cover for corrosion protection
C4.10.3.1 General
As explained in Paragraph C4.2, the protection of the reinforcement is provided by a
combination of concrete quality and thickness of cover.
In Clauses 4.10.3.2 to 4.10.3.4, the covers quoted assume that the placing tolerances
specified in Clause 17.5.3 are met. If there is doubt that these can be achieved on the
project, then larger covers should be specified to account for the increased tolerance.
It has been confirmed that failure to achieve or maintain specified or required covers is the
most common cause of reinforcement corrosion problems. This can be due to either faulty
fabrication or faulty placement of the reinforcement, or to dislodgment of the reinforcement
while concrete is being placed. The former causes can be minimized by ensuring that
adequate inspections of the reinforcement and cover are made before concrete is placed.
The latter cause can be similarly minimized if the means of preventing movement of the
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

69

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

reinforcement, relative to the forms, are properly checked at the same time and, in addition,
if positive measures are taken on site to prevent construction personnel from walking on or
otherwise dislodging reinforcement that has been satisfactorily placed and fixed.
Where the cost of future rehabilitation of concrete damaged by reinforcement corrosion is
likely to be substantial, designers should seriously consider specifying, in addition to the
above, a system for checking the covers actually achieved after the concrete has been
placed and appropriate courses of action if they are found to be unsatisfactory. Such a
specification would need to consider acceptable means of cover measurement (chases, cover
meters, etc.), methodology of measurement (random, grid points, etc.) and relevant criteria
for acceptance or rejection (for example, 95% within a given area is acceptable) (Ref. 38).
C4.10.3.2 Standard formwork and compaction
The designer is responsible for specifying appropriate concrete cover to reinforcement and
tendons. Table 4.10.3.2 and Table 4.8.2 identify a lower bound of required cover that has to
be provided where standard formwork on site and compaction techniques are practised.
In general, covers increase as the severity of the exposure increases. Provision has been
made to permit reduced covers in situations where concrete grades higher than the
minimum specified for the exposure classifications are used. Table 4.10.3.2 uses the
approach developed by Guirguis (Ref. 39). The bracketed values below the stepped line can
be used only in situations covered by Clause 4.3.2.
Table 4.8.2 does not permit a reduction in minimum cover in situations where concrete
grades higher than the minimum specified for the exposure classification are used.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C4.10.3.3 Required cover where repetitive procedures or intense compaction are used in
rigid formwork
The reduced cover permitted applies to members such as those manufactured in some
precast construction. The format follows the same approach as given in Clause 4.10.3.2.
Lower values reflect better concrete quality (better compaction) and better construction
tolerances on member dimensions and reinforcement positioning usually achieved in these
circumstances. For some concretes, it is possible to achieve intense compaction by means
other than intense vibration.
Where a designer permits the use of Table 4.10.3.3, the specification should require the
contractor (and also the manufacturer when precast production is undertaken off-site) to
demonstrate that the concrete compaction is appropriate to achieve the intended concrete
strength grade and that the positioning of reinforcement and tendons is controlled and
securely fixed to withstand the compaction process. An inspection and test plan should be
in place to ensure this higher level of control is actually achieved.
Where a concrete surface is exposed to saline soils, Table 4.8.2 does not permit a reduction
in cover either in situations where concrete grades higher than the minimum specified for
the exposure classification are used or where intense compaction or self-compacting
concrete is adopted in rigid formwork.
C4.10.3.4 Required cover where self-compacting concrete is used
Where concrete members are cast with self-compacting concrete, the cover requirements for
rigid formwork may be adopted, provided cover requirements for screeded surfaces of such
members are in accordance with cover to reinforcement provisions for standard formwork.
It is implied by the Standard that self-compacting concrete can produce a high quality
concrete member (see Refs 40, 41, and 42).
C4.10.3.5 Cast against ground
The increase in cover caters for the irregularity of such surfaces. A lower value is given
where a damp-proof membrane is used because of the protection provided to the concrete.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

70

C4.10.3.6 Structural members manufactured by spinning or rolling


As noted in Clause 1.1.3, the requirements of the Standard do not take precedence over the
design requirements and materials specifications set out in other Australian Standards.
Further, where a spun or rolled member is to be used, for example, as a pier or column in a
building, the provisions of the Standard would still apply, including the cover requirements
determined from Clauses 4.8, 4.10.2 and 4.10.3.
Where the manufacturer can demonstrate to the designers satisfaction that the cover
provisions of another product Standard will achieve an equivalent or better outcome with
respect to both exposure classification and design life as required by AS 36002009, these
alternate cover provisions may be adopted.
For concrete exposed to saline soils, the minimum cover requirements in Table 4.8.2 will
continue to apply irrespective of the cover provisions specified elsewhere and are
dependent on the soil electrical conductivity. Table 4.8.2 may only be waived where it can
be demonstrated that a suitable cover of clean backfill will protect the exposed concrete
surface and, that this backfill will not subsequently be contaminated.
All other provisions of the Standard are to be met.
C4.10.3.7 Embedded items cover
See Paragraph C14.2.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

GUIRGUIS, S., Durability of Reinforced Concrete Structures: The Australian


Experience, Second CANMET/ACI International Conference on Durability of
Concrete, Montreal, Canada, 1991, Supplementary Papers, pp. 1-27.

CIA Z 07 Durable Concrete Structures, Recommended Practice, Concrete Institute


of Australia, Sydney, 2001.

ACI 201.2R01, Guide to Durable Concrete, Manual of Concrete Practice, American


Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2003.

CIA Z13 Performance Criteria for Concrete in Marine Environments,


Recommended Practice, Concrete Institute of Australia, Sydney, 2001.

Chloride Resistance of Concrete, Cement, Concrete & Aggregates Australia, (CCAA)


Sydney, 2009.

Enhancing reinforced concrete durability: Guidance on selecting measures to


minimising the risk of corrosion of reinforcement, Technical Note No. 61, Concrete
Society, UK, 2004.

CAO, H.T. and SIRIVIVATNANON, V., Service Life Modelling of Crack-freed and
Cracked Reinforced Concrete Members subjected to Working Load, Proceedings CIB
Building Congress 2001, Wellington, New Zealand, 2-6 April, 2001.

PARROTT, P.J., Design for Avoiding Damage Due to Carbonation-Induced


Corrosion, Proceedings Third CANMET/ACI International Conference on Durability
of Concrete, Nice, France, May 1994, pp. 283298.

HB 79, Alkali Aggregate ReactionGuidelines on Minimising the Risk of Damage to


Concrete Structures in Australia, Cement & Concrete Association of Australia and
Standards Australia, Sydney, 1996.

10

BEEBY, A.W., Concrete in the OceansCracking and Corrosion, Technical Report


No. 1, 1978.

11

BROWNE, R.D., Low Maintenance ConcreteSpecification versus Practice?, Paper


presented at Maintenance of Maritime and Offshore Structures, Institution of Civil
Engineers, London, February 1986.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

71

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

12

GJORV, O.E., Steel Corrosion in Concrete Structures Exposed to Norwegian


Maritime Environment, A Concrete International, Vol. 16, April 1994, pp. 35-39.

13

WILKINS, N.J.M. and SHARP, J.V., Localised Corrosion of Reinforcement in


Marine Concrete, in Corrosion of Steel Reinforcement in Concrete, eds. Page CL,
Treadaway K.W.J. and Bamforth P.B., Society of Chemical Industry, Elsevier
Applied Science, 1990. Pp. 318.

14

SCHIESSL, P. and RAUPACH, M., Laboratory studies and calculations on the


influence of crack width on chloride-induced corrosion of steel in concrete, ACI
Materials Journal, January-February 1997.

15

HO, D.W.S. and LEWIS, R.K., The specification of concrete for reinforcement
protectionPerformance criteria and compliance by strength, Cement and Concrete
Research, Vol. 18, No. 4, 1988, pp. 584594.

16

SIRIVIVATNANON, V. and CAO, H.T., Binder Dependency of Durability Properties


of HPC, Proceedings of the Canadian International Symposium on High Performance
Concrete and Reactive Powder Concrete, Sherbrooke, Canada, Volume I, 1620
August 1998, pp. 227-243.

17

HO, D.W.S. and LEWIS, R.K., Concrete quality after one year of outdoor exposure,
Durability of Building Materials, Vol. 5, 1987, pp. 111.

18

SIRIVIVATNANON, V., MAK, S. L. and GOWRIPALAN, N., Effect of Water and


Steam Curing on Long-term Performance of Concrete, Proceedings 8th CANMET/ACI
International Conference on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in
Concrete, SP, Edited by V.M. Malhotra, USA, May 2004.

19

AS/NZS 2312, Guide to the protection of structural steel against atmospheric


corrosion by the use of protective coatings, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2002.

20

AS 4312, Atmospheric corrosivity zones in Australia, Standards Australia, Sydney,


2008.

21

LAWRENCE, C.D., Sulphate attack on concrete, Magazine of Concrete Research,


Vol. 42, No 153, 1990, pp. 249264.

22

Concrete in aggressive ground, BRE Special Digest 1, Building Research


Establishment (BRE) Construction Division, 2005.

23

HO, D.W.S. and LEWIS, R.K., Warning: Surface treatment of dry reinforced
concrete, Concrete Institute of Australia News, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1982.

24

AS 1379, Specification and supply of concrete, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2007.

25

AS 3735, Concrete structures retaining liquids, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2001.

26

Design and Construction of Concrete Sea Structures, FIP Commission on Concrete


Sea Structures, Fourth Edition, Thomas Telford Ltd, 1985.

27

SIRIVIVATNANON, V., SCMLooking Forward, Concrete Institute of Australia


SeminarDemands on Cementitious Binders for 21st Century Concrete, Sydney,
Sept. 2002.

28

BAWEJA, D., ROPER, H., and SIRIVIVATNANON, V., Specification of Concrete


for Marine Environments: A Fresh Approach, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 96, No. 4,
July 1999, pp. 462470.

29

CAO, H.T., BUCEA, L., RAY, A. and YOZGHATLIAN, S., The effect of cement
composition and pH of environment on sulfate resistance of Portland cements and
blended cements, Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 19, 1997, pp. 161171.

30

Sulfate-resisting Concrete, Technical Note TN 68, Cement, Concrete & Aggregates


Australia, Sydney, 2011.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

72

31

GUIRGUIS, S., Durability of Concrete Structures, Technical Note TN 57, Cement


and Concrete Association of Australia (CCAA), Sydney, 2004.

32

KETTLE, R. and SADEGHZADEH, M., The Influence of Construction Procedures on


Abrasion Resistance, Katherine and Bryant Mather International Conference on
Concrete Durability, ACI SP100, Vol. 2, 1987, pp. 13851410.

33

ACI 318-11, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2011.

34

AS 1289.4.2.1, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposesSoil chemical


testsDetermination of the sulfate content of a natural soil and the sulphate content
of the groundwaterNormal method, Standards Australia, Sydney, 1997.

35

AS 1289.4.3.1, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposesSoil chemical


testsDetermination of the pH value of a soilElectrometric method, Standards
Australia, Sydney, 1997.

36

SIRIVIVATNANON, V., BUCEA, L. and KHATRI, R., Australian PerformanceBased Specification for Sulphate Resisting Concrete, 21st Biennial Conference,
Concrete Institute of Australia, Brisbane, 1719 July 2003.

37

CCAA, Guide to Residential Slabs and Footings in Saline Environments, Cement,


Concrete & Aggregates Australia, Technical Note T56, Sydney, 2005.

38

SIRIVIVATNANON, V. and CAO, H.T., The need for and a method to control
concrete cover, Proceedings of the Second International RILEM/CEB Symposium on
Quality Control of Concrete Structures, Belgium, June 1991.

39

GUIRGUIS, S., A Basis for Determining Minimum Cover Requirement for


Durability, Katharine and Bryant Mather International Conference on Concrete
Durability, ACI SP100 Vol. 1, 1987, pp. 447467

40

ACI 237R, Self-Consolidating Concrete, American Concrete Institute, 2007.

41

BS EN 206-9, Concrete, Part 9: Additional rules for self-compacting concrete (SCC),


British Standard Institute, 2010.

42

CIA Z 40, Super-Workable Concrete, Concrete Institute of Australia, Sydney, 2005.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

73

S E C T I O N

C 5
D E S I G N F O R
R E S I S T A N C E

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

F I R E

INTRODUCTION
For a discussion of the design of buildings against fire, the various approaches to achieve
the desired life safety and the relationship between the rules in this Section of the Standard
and the requirements of the NCC (Ref. 1) are presented in Fire Safety of Concrete Buildings
(Ref. 2).
Designers need to be aware that this Section of the Standard has been significantly changed
in Amendment 2 to the Standard published in March 2013.
This edition of the Standard has adopted Eurocode 2 Part 1-2 and background documents
(Refs. 3 and 4) as the basis for many of the rules and tabular data in this Section. Users who
are familiar with earlier versions of the Standard will note that values in the tables and
figures sometimes specify different values from those in earlier versions. This revision of
the data reflects in part the availability of later research findings and also developments in
interpretation of it.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C5.1 SCOPE
By using this Section of AS 36002009 designers are choosing to follow the deemed-tosatisfy approach as prescribed in the NCC (Ref. 1). Designers need to be aware that
Section 5 contains a number of limitations, which means that not all members can be
designed using the tabular data provided or the calculation methods. In these cases the
designer will have to use an Alternative Solution or fire tests as set out in the NCC. (This is
discussed further in Paragraph C5.3.1)
Building regulations are mainly concerned with ensuring the life safety of the occupants of
a building, including firefighters and occupants of adjacent buildings, in the event of a fire.
Along with other requirements, the building is required to have appropriate structural
adequacy, which involves using passive fire protection methods (e.g. particular
arrangements of non-combustible or fire-retardant building elements to prevent the spread
of fire). It is these methods that are the basis for the fire-resistance requirements in this
Section.
In the NCC (Ref. 1) the specification of various fire resistance levels (FRLs) in relation to
standard fire test conditions ensures that relatively higher or lower levels of fire resistance
are achieved by various types of construction. This Section gives rules whereby concrete
members can be proportioned and detailed to satisfy the requirements for particular FRLs.
C5.2 DEFINITIONS
By and large, definitions align with those in the NCC (Ref. 1) and other Australian
Standards relating to fire resistance. Discussion, if any, on the various terms is given in the
commentary relating to the Clause where they are first used.
A major change to previous versions of the Standard is the definition of the cover required
to achieve a fire resistance period (FRP). The requirement is now defined by axis distance
(as), the distance from the exposed surface of the concrete to the centre of a longitudinal
reinforcing bar or prestressing strand. In previous versions of the Standard it was cover to
the surface of the bar. Where there are groups of bars of the same type, an average axis
distance is defined.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

74

C5.3 DESIGN PERFORMANCE CRITERIA


C5.3.1 General performance criteria
To adequately design for fire, designers need to refer to both Section 5 of the Standard and
the NCC (Ref. 1). The NCC sets out the performance requirements for most buildings in
Australia and also provides procedures to meet those performance requirements.
The NCC allows for the design to follow one of three approaches for fire design:

Alternative solutions

Fire testing including interpretation of fire tests

Deemed-to-satisfy solutions, e.g. using Section 5 of the Standard

Design for fire-resistance following the deemed-to-comply path specified in the NCC
considers that three limit state criteria are relevant to the assessment of the performance of
a building being: Insulation; Integrity; and Structural Adequacy. These may be divided into
two groups:

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Fire separationto prevent fire spread by hot gases of flames or ignition beyond the
exposed surface. These are relevant only to elements required to have a fireseparating function (e.g. roof slabs, floor slabs and some walls). Where columns and
beams form part of these members (e.g. walls), they are also required to satisfy these
criteria.

Insulationthe ability of a separating element of building construction, when


exposed to fire on one side, to restrict the temperature rise of the unexposed
face below specified levels.

Integritythe ability of a separating element of building construction, when


exposed to fire on one side, to prevent the passage through it of flames and hot
gases and to prevent the occurrence of flames on the unexposed side.

Structural adequacyability to maintain structural function. This applies to all


structural members.

The NCC specifies for the various elements of construction in the building the required
FRL, and hence the required relevant FRPs. The Standard provides for these FRPs to be
determined by either tabulated data or methods of calculation.
The tabular methods are defined in Clauses 5.3 to 5.7 where the effects of flexure, shear,
torsion and anchorage are automatically included. These tables follow Eurocode 2 (Ref. 3)
which indicates that the tables attempt to limit the temperature in reinforcement to 500 C
and in prestressing tendons to 350 C to provide the structural adequacy requirements for
fire design. Based on the strength loss charts shown in Figure C5.3.1(C), this would
indicate the strength of the reinforcing steels at the minimum average axis distance from the
exposed surface to be in the range of 0.55 to 0.6 of normal temperature strength.
Tabular solutions are provided for all slabs and beam elements; however, for walls and
columns only a limited range of situations are covered (e.g. only braced columns with
limitations on height and load eccentricity are provided for). For columns outside these
limits, a calculation method as described below may be used.
Prediction by methods of calculation assume the designer has appropriate information on
the thermal properties of the materials being used over the range of temperatures being
examined and the loss of strength of the materials with temperature rise. This data is not
provided in Section 3. Little, if any, data is available on the thermal properties of Australian
concretes and reinforcing materials and the variation of physical and mechanical material
properties with increase in temperature. It is recommended that designers adopt data from
overseas, appropriate to the materials they propose to use [e.g. that given in Eurocode 2
(Ref. 3)], a sample of which is shown in Figures C5.3.1(A), C5.3.1(B) and C5.3.1(C).
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

75

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The coefficient k in the following charts is the strength reduction factor for the relevant
material property for each chart as a function of the temperature . Note that the tensile
strength of concrete reduces much more quickly than compressive strength as the
temperature rises. Usually the curve for siliceous aggregates should be used when applying
Figure C5.3.1(A).

0. 8

k c,

0.6

1 N o r m a l we i g ht c o n c rete
with s ili c e o u s ag g re g ate s

0.4

2 N o r m a l we i g ht c o n c rete
with c a l c a r e o u s a g g r e g ate s

0. 2

0
0

20 0

400

600

800

10 0 0

120 0

FIGURE C5.3.1(A) STRENGTH REDUCTION FOR CONCRETE IN COMPRESSION


WITH TEMPERATURE RISE

1.0

0. 8

k c ,t ,

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

, C

0.6

0.4

0. 2
0.0
0

10 0

20 0

300

400

50 0

600

, C

FIGURE C5.3.1(B) STRENGTH REDUCTION FOR CONCRETE IN TENSION WITH


TEMPERATURE RISE

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

76

1.0

1
0. 8
2

k s ( c r ), k p ( c r )

3
0.6

1 Re info rcing ste e l


2 Pre s tre s s in g s te e l ( b a r s)
3 Pre s tre s s in g s te e l (wi re s a n d
s t r a n d s)

0.4

0. 2

0
0

20 0

400

600

800

10 0 0

120 0

c r, C

FIGURE C5.3.1(C) STRENGTH REDUCTION FOR REINFORCING STEEL,


PRESTRESSING BARS AND PRESTRESSING WIRES AND STRANDS

The fire load combination should be taken as defined in AS 1170.0 (Ref. 5).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Acceptable calculation methods are defined in Section 4 of Eurocode 2 (Ref. 3). A brief
outline of what is involved in the simplified methods defined in Clause 4.2 as follows:

Annex B provides two simple calculation methods that use normal section strength
calculation methods based on reduced strengths of materials, depending on the
duration of the fire and the temperature to which each material is exposed.

The temperature profile for the member has to be determined. Sample profiles that
cater for many design situations are provided in Annex A. These will vary depending
on the number of sides exposed to fire. Slabs will be exposed on one side; beams
normally on three sides; walls on one or two sides; and columns on one or more sides,
depending on their position (e.g. within a wall).

From the temperature profile, the temperature of each reinforcing element and the
concrete can be determined, e.g. corner bars in a beam or column will have a larger
strength reduction than bars further along a side away from the corner as they are
heated from two sides. This difference must be allowed for.

From the temperatures the strength of each reinforcing and concrete element may be
determined.

The capacity reduction factors defined in Table 2.2.2 of the Standard should be used
in the fire design in lieu of Eurocode material factors.

Section capacities are calculated based on the logic in Sections 8 and 9 of the
Standard using these reduced material strengths.

Reinforcing elements near a heated surface will have reduced tensile and compressive
strength. Reinforcing elements away for the heated faces will have reduced or no
strength reduction. So, for a beam with the reinforcement near the heated face, the
member strength will reduce basically in proportion to the reduction in the strength of
the reinforcing elements.

A zone of concrete at the fire-exposed face is assumed to have no strength at


temperatures over 500C. Concrete further from the exposed face then has reduced
strength with the strength reduction reducing as the temperature reduces with distance

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

77

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

from the exposed face. For calculations with the compression concrete zone exposed
to the fire, this will result in a significant reduction in the effective depth of the
member and also in the design lever arm. For slabs and beams exposed to fire on one
face only, this reduction in lever arm will combine with tension-reinforcing elements,
which have no reduction in yield strength to give the section capacity at these
sections.

As is discussed in Paragraph C5.4.1 for indeterminate members, significant


redistribution of the applied moments will be caused by the temperature differential
in beams and slabs. As well, the section strengths in negative and positive moment
zones will differ greatly from the normal temperature values. The designer may need
to allow for further redistribution of the actions under fire loading to match the
member capacities to the design moments. The analysis should take into consideration
the stress-strain curves of the steel reinforcement and/or tendons and rotational
demand on critical moment regions to accommodate the required amount of moment
redistribution. Clause 4.2.1 and Annex E provide a simplified method for the design
of beams and slabs using the reduced section capacities calculated above and
allowing for the redistribution required. Use of the simplified design method does not
allow the reduction of minimum section dimensions required in the tabular design
methods, it only provides the possibility of a reduction in the allowable axis distance.

The effect of these rotations may be reduced or even eliminated by terminating all of
the support reinforcement where it is no longer required for ultimate flexure
(nominally 0.3 L into the span). Under fire loading, the plastic hinges will then occur
at these locations and the continuity moment from the thermal gradient will be
reduced or eliminated, reducing the need for plastic redistribution. The support
reinforcement must then be checked for strength under fire conditions as a cantilever
from the support with a point load at the end from the simply supported slab spanning
between these plastic hinge locations. Extra reinforcement may be required depending
on the locations of the plastic hinges in the span and the reduction in section capacity
due to the temperature effect on the concrete in the compression zone. The simply
supported span between the plastic hinges must then be checked for positive
(sagging) bending capacity taking account of the reduction in strength of the bottom
reinforcing steel due to its elevated temperature. At end columns, the support point
for the sagging portion of the span is normally assumed to be the column.

For members exposed on all sides to fire, such as columns, there will be a reduction
in the concrete strength and lever arm as well as reductions in reinforcing element
strength for both compression and tension reinforcing elements, all combining to give
a severely reduced section strength.

Shear design is based on the normal shear strength formulae with the associated
reduced material strengths but note that the concrete tensile strength loss is far more
severe than the concrete compressive strength loss. Concrete shear capacity (Vuc) has
a concrete compressive strength term, but this actually is used to represent the tensile
strength of concrete. In determining shear strength, the f c component should use the
tensile strength reduction factor, not the compressive strength reduction factor in
determining Vuc. Annex D provides rules for the calculation of shear capacity under
fire situations.

Designers should be aware that other methods of calculation, apart from Eurocode 2
Part 1-2 mentioned in the Note, may be used provided they properly allow for all of the
load and strength effects caused by the elevated temperatures in a fire situation and new
methods are being developed all the time.
The risk of concrete spalling at elevated temperature should be considered when designing
structural elements especially using high-strength concrete ( f c > 50 MPa). Fire-induced
spalling of concrete is a phenomenon whereby pieces of hardened concrete explosively
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

78

dislodge or fall off the fire exposed surface of a concrete member during rapid high
temperature exposure.
Disintegration of concrete due to spalling can cause a serious reduction in the cross-section
of structural elements and could lead to early catastrophic failure. The depth of spalled
concrete can exceed the cover to the main reinforcement, whether or not spalling occurs in
a particular situation and the extent of spalling have a random element in them. Therefore
major concrete Standards do not cover specific design rules for spalling.
Some general observations on spalling (Refs 6 to 8) are summarized below:

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The tendency for spalling is high when

the element is made of high-strength concrete rather than normal strength concrete;

the cover to the reinforcement is increased, especially more than about 40 mm;

the moisture content of the concrete is high;

the temperature rise of the fire is rapid and concrete is subjected to a high thermal
gradient;

the concrete is subjected to compressive stress; or

when concrete is subjected to a hydrocarbon fire compared to a standard fire.

Many experimental studies (Refs 6 to 8) have shown that the use of polypropylene fibres in
the concrete mix reduces the tendency for spalling. This is due to the fact that the
polypropylene fibres melt during the fire, thus increasing the internal voids of the concrete
and decreasing the vapour pressure build-up within the concrete. A dosage rate of 1.2 kg/m 3
of 6 mm monofilament polypropylene fibres is recommended in Ref. 6 to reduce the level
of spalling. A study reported in Ref. 9 showed different degrees of spalling but no
catastrophic structural failures in various concrete tunnel linings exposed to simulated
hydrocarbon fire.
C5.3.2 General rules for the interpretation of tabulated data and figures
The Tables and Figures use average axis distance, to define proximity of the bar or tendon
to the heated surface, not cover. Axis distance has been chosen for two reasons. Firstly,
it preserves consistency with the source document avoiding the Committee having to choose
a bar diameter on which to determine covers; and secondly, it eliminates any confusion
between cover for fire resistance and that for corrosion protection and/or placement of
concrete.
In determining the cover for a reinforcing bar or tendon, it is necessary to check for the
controlling effect from the following:

Average axis distance for fire design.

Clear cover for exposure/durability (Section 4).

Clear cover for concrete placement (Clause 4.10.2 Note that this Clause involves a
consideration of both minimum cover and nominal bar size.)

Clearance from other bars, etc.

C5.3.3 Increase in axis distance for prestressing tendons


The decrease in strength for prestressing tendons (bars, wires or strands), for a given rise in
temperature, is larger than that for reinforcing steel [see Figure C5.3.1(C)]. Thus increased
cover is specified to limit the temperature rise in the tendon to give broadly similar
performance in fire between reinforced and prestressed members.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

79

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C5.3.4 Dimensional limitations to achieve fire-rating


The requirements of this Clause reflect dimensional limitations of the hollow-core slabs and
walls and ribbed members which were used to derive the tabulated data. A manufacturer of
a particular product that does not comply with these limitations may have the performance
of that product assessed by test in accordance with the NCC (Ref. 1).
C5.3.5 Joints
Limited data on the fire behaviour of joints is available in the literature (Ref. 10). This data
tends to be dated, that is it reflects the use of materials that are no longer manufactured or
permitted to be used (e.g. asbestos-based sealants), and should be interpreted with caution.
Data on current materials and techniques is available from some manufacturers. This is
seldom generic. Further, the actual test conditions need to be reviewed to ensure that the
data supplied is applicable to the specific design situation envisaged.
C5.3.6 The effect of chases
Chases in any member will reduce the overall member dimensions and possibly also reduce
the axis distance to reinforcement over limited areas. Generally the effect of a relatively
shallow chase on a normal beam or column will have marginal effect on the FRP for
insulation. Its effect on the FRP for structural adequacy will depend on its direction and
extent. As stated, empirical rules are provided in Clause 5.7.4 for the case of walls.
C5.3.7 Increasing FRPs by the addition of insulating materials

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Insulating materials applied to the surface of the member may be used to increase the FRP
however the designer needs to be aware of the specific FRP requiring increase and the
direction of fire attack. For example:

The FRP for insulation of slabs may be increased by applying the insulating materials
to either the top or soffit of the slab. Similarly the FRP for insulation for walls may
be applied to either side of the wall.

The FRP for structural adequacy for slabs can be increased only by applying the
insulating material to the face exposed to the fire and limit the temperature rise in the
concrete. Therefore, increasing the depth of a flat slab by providing an integral
topping will not satisfy these criteria. See also Clause 5.8 and the associated
commentary.

C5.4 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR BEAMS


C5.4.1 Structural adequacy for beams incorporated in roof or floor systems
The Tabular data from Eurocode 2 (Ref. 3) repeated in the Tables has been plotted to give
the respective Figures. Thus the rules for interpolation apply to both charts and tables.
This Clause assumes that the floor or roof beams are heated from below and, therefore in
general, three sides of the beam will be heated but the reinforcement or tendons in the top
of the beam will be largely protected by the floor slab. It is assumed that the element is free
to expand laterally.
For simply supported beams, the temperature differential between the top and bottom of the
beam will cause positive curvature resulting in a downward deflection, but it will not
induce any stress into the member or result in any redistribution of moments. The loadcarrying capacity of the element is reduced as the temperature in the longitudinal
reinforcement and/or tendons increases and the strength of the reinforcement and/or tendons
falls [see Figure C5.3.1(C)].

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

80

The Tables and Charts present acceptable combinations to provide the required FRP. From
a design viewpoint to provide adequate strength in a fire situation, either the bottom
reinforcement temperature has to be controlled by limiting axis distance and/or the area of
the bottom reinforcement has to be increased to provide the necessary tensile force at the
available tensile strength.
Both the beam width and cover to the longitudinal bottom reinforcement or tendons are
important in restricting the rise in temperature in this reinforcement and/or tendons. The
temperature rise will be greatest in the bottom corner bars or tendons as these items are
being heated from two faces. Bars or tendons in the centre of the beam will be subject to
heating only from the bottom. The wider the beam the less will be the overall reduction in
strength of the reinforcement/tendons as proportionately less bars and tendons will be
affected by fire from two surfaces and the average temperature of the bars and tendons will
be less.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Smaller covers for given FRPs are required for continuous beams compared to simply
supported beams. There are two reasons for this:
1

The strength of positive moment sections is reduced as for simply supported beams.
At negative moment sections, the reinforcement strength is not affected but the
concrete strength reduces with rising temperature and a zone of concrete at the
surface loses all strength, thus reducing the effective depth of the section and the
lever arm and the section strength. But the overall strength reduction is not as severe
as for positive moment sections, especially as the beam depth increases. Moment
redistribution towards the negative moment face results in an increased overall
capacity for continuous beams.

As for the simply supported beams, when heated from below, the underside of a
continuous beam expands more than the top causing downward curvature of the beam.
In this case, the restraint by the supports will restrain this downward curvature
resulting in negative moments along the length of the beam and axial forces in the
columns. When added to the moments from the fire load combination, this will
increase the negative moments and reduce the positive moments in the frame. The fire
loading effect could be sufficient to result in no tension in the bottom of the beam,
especially in internal spans. The positive moment capacity can still be utilized;
however, once plastic hinges form in the negative moment zones (at internal columns)
and the resulting rotation at these negative moment zones results in the redistribution
of any further load effects to the positive moment sections.

The combination of these effects is shown diagrammatically in Figure C5.4.1 for the case of
a two-span beam.
With the expansion of the beam and reduction in negative bending strength at the supports,
it is possible that a plastic hinge will first be formed at the centre support. In this case
collapse occurs when the maximum positive bending moment equals the reducing positive
bending strength.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

81
0. 3 L e f f

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

0.4 L e f f

0. 3 L e f f

2
3

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

LEGEND:
1 Diagram of bending moments for the actions in a fire situation at t = 0.
2 Envelope line of acting bending moments to be resisted by tensile reinforcement according to AS 3600 for
ambient temperature conditions.
3 Diagram of bending moments in fire conditions with moment redistribution towards the negative moment
zones due to thermal effects.
4 Envelope lone of resisting bending moments allowing for the reduction in capacity in a fire situation.

FIGURE C5.4.1 ENVELOPE OF RESISTING BENDING MOMENTS OVER SUPPORTS


IN FIRE CONDITIONS

C5.4.2 Structural adequacy for beams exposed to fire on all sides


The requirements in this Clause recognize that higher temperatures will be experienced by
the top surface and hence in the top reinforcement compared to those experienced by a
beam heated from below where this top surface is protected by a slab.
C5.5 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR SLABS
C5.5.1 Insulation for slabs
The values in Table 5.5.1 are the same as those in Table 5.7.1 Fire resistance periods
(FRPs) for insulation for walls. This reflects the understanding that the insulation
performance of concrete is independent of the orientation of the test sample.
C5.5.2 Structural adequacy for slabs
The less stringent requirements for continuous slabs compared to simply supported slabs
reflects similar behaviour to that for beams. The less stringent requirements for two-way
slabs compared to one-way slabs are related to their superior performance in fire tests.
The dimensional requirements for ribbed slabs are less stringent than those for beams,
compare Table 5.4.1(A) with 5.5.2(C) and Table 5.4.1(B) with 5.5.2(D). This is considered
to be due to a number of factors including the load-sharing between the ribs.
It can be observed that there is no thickness requirement for structural adequacy for solid
and hollow core slabs supported on beams or walls and for one-way ribbed slabs (slabs
would have to meet the requirement for insulation) whereas there is for flat slabs and flat
plates. This reflects a concern regarding the shear capacity of these slabs over the column.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

82

The requirement in Clause 5.5.2(b) regarding 20% of top reinforcement (or for prestressed
slabs 20% of the total force) to be continuous over the entire span and concentrated in the
column strip for FRPs 90 min and above is based on testing sponsored by the German
Research Foundation in 1990-1992 at Institut fur Baustoffe, Massivbau und Brancschutz of
the Technical University of Braunschweig (Ref. 4). This found that, under fire loading,
there was little or no positive moment in the column strip and, consequently, top
reinforcement was required over the full length of the top surface of the span in the column
strip. (The prestressed slabs tested used unbonded post-tensioning.) Note that this
requirement was introduced in AS 36002009 to align with Eurocode 2 (Ref. 3) and the
clause wording made consistent in the latest amendment.
In fire design, the development of plastic hinges in the support zones of indeterminate
members provides the rotations required to mobilize the bottom reinforcement at mid-span
noting that the strength of this reinforcement is reduced significantly over time by heating
from the fire. The plastic hinges at the supports should have sufficient rotation capacity to
enable the achievement of the overall member capacity. The tables for slabs and beams
were developed on the assumption that these rotations would be able to occur in a ductile
manner.
Eurocode 2 (Ref. 3) in Clause 5.7.3 Continuous solid slabs, which was extensively used in
the development of the fire design rules in the Standard, requires a minimum area of top
reinforcement equivalent to 0.005Ac to be provided over internal supports in one-way and
two-way continuous slabs under certain conditions to ensure that this ductile rotation
capacity is available.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

This is not a requirement of AS 36002009; however, additional research is being carried


out on this issue.
C5.6 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR COLUMNS
C5.6.1 Insulation and integrity for columns
No Commentary.
C5.6.2 Structural adequacy for columns
Standard tabular solutions for columns are provided only for braced columns that comply
with the limits specified in Clause 5.6.3 on column height, load eccentricity and minimum
number of bars and in Clause 5.6.4 on eccentricity and slenderness.
The Note gives designers advice on how to proceed if the column falls outside the
limitations in the Clause.
This Clause clarifies when a blade column can be treated as a wall in terms of fire design,
which has caused difficulties in the past. The Clause also specifies how such a wall is to be
reinforced.
C5.6.3 Restricted tabular method to determine structural adequacy for columns
The attention of designers is drawn to the restrictions placed on the physical dimensions of
the column and load eccentricity to enable this Clause to be used.
This Table has been modified in the latest amendment. The vertical columns are now
defined as N f* / N u . This change was made to make the table in the Standard consistent
with the source document.
The design axial load in the fire situation ( N f* ) is specified in Clause 4.2.4 of
AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 5) as [G, thermal actions deriving from the fire, 1Q]. Usually for
columns any increase in axial load due to restraint of thermal expansion is ignored.
Figure C5.6.3 indicates how the ratio of N f* / N u is to be determined.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

83

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Lie (Ref. 11) discusses the influence of a number of variables on the fire-resistance of
concrete columns based on fire tests on 41 full-size columns carried out by the National
Research Council of Canada and the Portland Cement Association. He states Of the
variables studied .. load, cross-sectional area for similar shapes, and type of aggregate
have the largest influence on the fire resistance .. the use of carbonate aggregate, instead
of silicious aggregate, will substantially increase the fire resistance of the column.
Rectangular columns also produced fire resistances that are substantially higher than those
of square columns of the same thickness.
It is thought that the improved performance of rectangular columns compared to square
columns is due in part to the reduced influence the corner longitudinal bars have on the
performance.
Most of the important factors identified by Lie (Ref. 11) are taken into account in the
tabular data.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

A X I A L LOA D, k N

Mu , Nu

M f *, N f *

M O M EN T, k N m

L EG EN D:
Minimum
Decompression
Balanced

FIGURE C5.6.3 DETERMINING THE RATIO OF N *f / Nu

C5.6.4 General tabular method to determine structural adequacy for braced columns
The comments made under Paragraph C5.6.3 for Clause 5.6.3 of the Standards are also
applicable to this method.
The headings of the second column and definition of in Table 5.6.4 were changed in
Amendment 2 to make them consistent with the source document.
C5.7 FIRE RESISTANCE PERIODS (FRPs) FOR WALLS
C5.7.1 Insulation for walls
The values in the Table are the same as those in Table 5.5.1 Fire resistance periods (FRPs)
for insulation for slabs. This reflects the understanding that the insulation performance of
concrete is independent of the orientation of the test sample.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

84

The Clause provides values for walls symmetrical about the centre axis and the result is
independent of the direction of attack.
NOTE: Where it is necessary to increase the FRP by adding insulation to the wall then the
direction of fire attack will influence the result (see Paragraph C5.8).

C5.7.2 Structural adequacy for walls


In Table 5.7.2, for intermediate values of the utilization factor

N f* / N u linear

interpolation is permitted. Where the utilization factor is 0.1 then structural adequacy of a
wall will be considered to be achieved by satisfying Clause 5.7.1.
These requirements along with the limitations inherent in Section 11 (e.g. the limitations in
Clause 11.1) imply that requirements are not provided for all wall types, member sizes or
fire exposure conditions. (Section 11 and this Section are based on planar walls and do not
consider curved or tapered walls.) In multistorey buildings, most walls will be continuous
throughout the height of the building. In this situation the cold walls above and below the
heated compartment will provide restraint to the heated wall, reducing the effective height
of the heated wall.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

There is no general limitation placed on the slenderness for walls as there is for columns
(see Clause 10.5.1). As the effective height increases for a given thickness of wall, the
ultimate load (Nu) reduces so that the effect of slenderness is taken into account in this
manner.
In Clause 11.5 the limitation placed on the effective height to thickness ratio (H we/tw)
relates to the use of the simplified method of design of walls. It is not over-ridden by the
requirements in Section 5. Designers are reminded that Clause 5.7.3 imposes a maximum
value on the ratio of effective height to thickness of 40 except where the lateral support at
the top of the wall is provided by an element not required to have an FRL.
The CCAA publication in Clause 8.3.2 (Ref. 2) discusses various models that have been
developed to simulate the performance of concrete walls under fire. It also suggests in
Clause 8.3.4 a simple method of assessing the fire resistance using effective sections.
C5.7.3 Effective height limitations for walls
The FRP for structural adequacy for walls is very sensitive to the slenderness ratio
(Ref. 11); however, where the top of the wall can be considered to be supported and
restrained during the fire this limitation can be ignored.
C5.7.4 Other requirements for walls
The requirements for recesses given in the subclause follow those given in AS 3700
(Ref. 12). These rules were established empirically and are repeated in this Section because
it is believed that concrete members would perform no worse than masonry members in
these respects.
C5.7.4.1 Recesses for services in walls
(No Commentary)
C5.7.4.2 Effect of chases on structural adequacy of walls
(No Commentary)
C5.7.4.3

Effect of chases on integrity and insulation of walls

(No Commentary)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

85

C5.8 INCREASE OF FIRE


INSULATING MATERIALS

RESISTANCE

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

PERIODS

(FRPs)

BY

USE

OF

C5.8.1 Increase of FRP by the addition of insulating materials


C5.8.1.1 General
The application of a topping to the top surface of a slab will increase only the FRP for
insulation. The application of the insulation material to the surface(s) of the member closest
to the fire is required to lower the temperatures in the bottom longitudinal reinforcement
and concrete to increase the FRPs for structural integrity and insulation.
In the case of walls which generally may be exposed to fire on either face, to comply with
the requirements of Clause 5.3.7 that insulation has to be added to the face exposed to fire,
insulation will have to be added to both faces. For walls forming the sides of a fire-isolated
passageway or shaft, insulation may be required only on the outside of the passageway.
C5.8.1.2 Acceptable forms of insulation
(No Commentary)
C5.8.1.3 Thickness of insulating material
(No Commentary)
C5.8.1.4 Reinforcement in sprayed or trowelled insulating materials
(No Commentary)
C5.8.2 Increase of insulation period of slabs by application of toppings
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(No Commentary)
REFERENCES
1

National Construction Code, BCA Building Code of Australia Volumes 1 and 2.


Australian Building Codes Board, Canberra, ACT, 2014.

Fire Safety of Concrete Buildings T61. Sydney, Cement Concrete & Aggregates
Australia (2010).

Eurocode 2 Design of concrete structures, Part 12: General rules for structural fire
design EN 1992-1-2, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2004.

Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structure, Part 12: General rules for structural fire
design, Background Documents to EN1992-1-2, European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels, 2004.

AS/NZS 1170.0 Structural design actionsGeneral principles, Standards Australia,


2002 Sydney, NSW.

GUSTAFERRO, AH. and ABRAMS, MS. Fire tests of joints between precast
concrete wall panels: Effect of various joint treatments PCI Journal Vol. 20 No. 5
SeptemberOctober 1975.

Fire Safety of Concrete Buildings, Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia, 2010.

Ngo, T., Fragomeni, S., Mendis, P. and Ta, B., Testing of normal and high strength
concrete walls subjected to both standard and hydrocarbon fires, ACI Structural
Journal, Vol. 110:3, pp. 503510, MayJune , 2013.

Sanjayan, G., Adverse effects in high strength concrete when exposed to fire,
Concrete in Australia, June, 2011.

10

Khatri, R.P., Bucea, L. and Sirivivatnanon, V., Protection for Concrete Tunnel
Lining in Fire, Proceedings Concrete 2005, Melbourne, Australia, 1619 October
2005.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

86

11

LIE, T.T., Fire Resistance of Reinforced Concrete Columns: A Parametric Study


Journal of Fire Protection Engineers, Vol. 1 No. 3 1989, p121130.

12

AS 3700, Masonry structures, Standards Australia, 2011.

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL


OMEAGHER, A. J. and Bennetts, I. D. Behaviour and design of concrete walls in
fire Fire Safety Journal 17, 1991, pp. 315335.

AS 1530.4 Methods for fire tests on building materials, components and structures
Fire-resistance test of elements of construction, Standards Australia (2005), NSW.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

87

S E C T I O N

C 6

M E T H O D S O F
ANAL YSIS

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S T R U C T U R A L

C6.1 GENERAL
C6.1.1 Basis for structural analysis
The 2009 edition of AS 3600 allows various methods of structural analysis to be used as the
basis for carrying out design checks for strength and serviceability. The full list of the
allowable methods is given in Clause 6.1.3. Clause 6.1.1 requires that all of these methods
of analysis, even the semi-empirical ones mentioned in Clause 6.1.3, be used in accordance
with the basic principles of structural mechanics and, by implication, with a proper
understanding of those principles.
C6.1.2 Interpretation of the results of analysis
Simplifying assumptions and idealizations are inevitably used in the development of any
method of structural analysis. This Clause emphasises that the designer needs to consider
carefully the design implications of all such simplifications and idealizations. The Note is a
reminder that the same consideration should also be given to any computer software used in
the design calculations.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.1.3 Methods of analysis


This Clause provides the full list of the methods of analysis that may be used as the basis
for design checks for strength and serviceability. The methods that assume elastic behaviour
are listed first, Items (a) to (d), and the simplified, approximate methods last, Items (j)(i)
and (j)(ii). The methods that assume non-linear behaviour at overload are included in the
middle of the list, Items (e) to (h). The non-linear methods of analysis listed at Items (e) to
(h) provide a more accurate representation of behaviour at overload and at collapse than do
the elastic methods and the simplified methods. Plastic collapse methods of analysis for
slabs, continuous beams and frames are included in this group. Analysis based on model
tests is also included at Item (i) in the list, with detailed requirements outlined in
Appendix B.
C6.1.4 Geometrical properties
The definitions provided in this Clause are used mainly in the analysis of two-way floor
slabs, and are illustrated in Figures 6.1.4(A) and 6.1.4(B).
The definitions of Column strip in Clause 6.1.4.1, Design strip in Clause 6.1.4.2, Middle
strip in Clause 6.1.4.3 and Transverse width in Clause 6.1.4.5 embody all the rules
necessary for laying out the various strips needed for the design and detailing of two-way
slab systems. If the support grid is not rectangular throughout (i.e. one or more columns are
offset), the transverse widths of the strips will vary along the affected spans, as shown in
Figure C6.1.4. This will affect both the load and the stiffness of those spans.
The definition of Span support in Clause 6.1.4.4 is applicable to both beams and slabs. It is
used for determining the critical section for negative moment (Clause 6.2.3) and for
defining the design span to be used in the simplified method of Clause 6.10.4.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

88
L3
L3
4

L4
(L 3 + L 4)
4

L6
2

L5

L4 + L5
4

Column
strip

L2

( (
L5
4

Design
edge
strip

L6
4

Mi d dl e
strip

L6
Design
i n te r n a l
strip

L6
4
L7
4

Column
strip

L1

L2
4

Mi d dl e
strip

L7
L7
4

Column
strip

Design
edge
strip

L7
2

NOTE: L1 = L 2 = L 3 = L 4; L 4 < L 6 < L 5; L 7 L 6

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

FIGURE C6.1.4 DESIGN, COLUMN AND MIDDLE STRIPS IN IRREGULAR CASES

C6.2 LINEAR ELASTIC ANALYSIS


C6.2.1 General
Concrete structures behave in a linear elastic manner only under small, short-term loads. As
the load increases, cracks develop in the peak moment regions, and the behaviour becomes
increasingly non-linear. In the case of an indeterminate structural system, the distribution of
moments departs more and more from the initial linear elastic distribution. Nevertheless,
Clause 6.2.1 allows the use of linear elastic methods to determine the moments, shears, etc.,
at both the serviceability and strength limit states.
While overall elastic behaviour is assumed in the structural analysis to determine moments
in the overloaded structure, as the basis for ultimate strength design, local inelastic action is
at the same time assumed in Clause 8.1 for the strength design of individual cross-sections.
Provided the structure is ductile, this apparent inconsistency is justified by the lower bound
theorem of plasticity. Design experience confirms that the approach is safe and conservative
for strength design. Some considerable redistribution of the moments is implicitly being
relied on when strength design is based on elastic analysis. For this reason, an upper limit
of 0.36 is effectively placed on the neutral axis parameter (kuo) in Clause 8.1.5.
Notwithstanding the above, the Standard allows the use of Class L reinforcement as main
tensile reinforcement if a linear elastic analysis is performed without assuming moment
redistribution.
C6.2.2 Span length
The span of a flexural member used in the structural analysis when considering equilibrium
and static compatibility requirements is taken as the distance between the centre-lines of the
supports. The finite size of supporting members is taken into account by Clause 6.2.3,
which defines the critical negative moment section for strength design. Critical sections for
shear design are specified in Clause 8.2.4.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

89

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C6.2.3 Critical sections for negative moments


This Clause takes account of the finite size of supports, supporting columns and the like.
These requirements have tended to become more stringent in successive standards. They are
based on experience gained from the design of actual structures.
C6.2.4 Stiffness
When an elastic analysis is used, reasonable assumptions need to be made for stiffness of
all members according to the limit state being considered. For the reasons given in
Paragraph C6.2.1, the choice of member stiffness is not critical provided adequate ductility
is ensured. In an analysis for strength, a stiffness of 0.8EcI for columns and 0.4EcI for
flexural members will usually be satisfactory, and should not lead to excessive ductility
demand. Using I (the gross second moment of area) in estimating the flexural rigidity for
both columns and flexural members would also be acceptable for most structures.
For estimating the torsional stiffness of a structure, see Paragraph C8.3.2.
The choice of member stiffness for serviceability design, and in particular for deflection
control, is a far more critical issue than for strength, as is emphasized in Paragraph 6.2.5.
C6.2.5 Deflections
This Clause draws attention to various non-linear effects that need to be taken into account
when the elastic method of analysis is used for deflection calculations. These effects need
to be considered when Clause 6.1.2 is applied to interpret the results of an elastic analysis
undertaken to evaluate deflections. The relevant paragraphs in Paragraphs C8.5 and C9.3 of
this Commentary are also pertinent.
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.2.6 Secondary bending moments and shears resulting from prestress


When prestress is applied to an indeterminate structure, the support restraints are likely to
induce hyperstatic reactions, and hence secondary moments and shears, and other stress
resultants (Ref. 1). These secondary effects have to be taken into account in designing the
structure for strength and serviceability. At service load, highly prestressed concrete
structures usually remain uncracked, but prestressed members may crack under service load
conditions. Nevertheless, for serviceability design, it is reasonable to determine the
hyperstatic reactions and secondary moments and shears by elastic analysis of the
uncracked structure.
At high overload, conditions are different. In structures with good ductility, the hyperstatic
reactions and secondary bending moments have no effect on load-carrying capacity.
Nevertheless, a conservative approach is taken in this Clause to cover the possibility of
limited ductility, and that the presence of secondary moments is taken into account in the
ultimate strength calculations.
C6.2.7 Moment redistribution in reinforced and prestressed members for strength
design
C6.2.7.1 General requirements
If the load on a statically indeterminate structure is increased progressively from a low
value to a relatively high value, the behaviour changes from elastic to inelastic and there is
a corresponding change in the relative magnitude of the moments at critical sections. In
other words, a redistribution of the internal moments occurs. If the structure is ductile, the
moments eventually change from an initial linear elastic distribution to a fully plastic
distribution, with plastic hinges forming in the peak moment regions to produce a
mechanism.
In structures with limited ductility, the amount of redistribution that can occur will depend
on the ductility of critical members and cross-sections.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

90

In all structures, the following two conditions have to be met:


(a)

The bending moment distribution has to be statically admissible, that is equilibrium


of the whole structure and of each member has to be satisfied.

(b)

The rotation capacity of critical regions has to be sufficient to enable the assumed
distribution of moments to be developed at the ultimate load.

This is acknowledged by the general requirements of Clause 6.2.7.1.


C6.2.7.2 Deemed-to-comply approach for reinforced and prestressed members
The extent to which moment redistribution can occur depends on the ductility, or potential
for plastic deformation, in peak-moment regions. When the ultimate strength of a crosssection is reached and the concrete in the compressive zone crushes, the neutral axis
parameter (k u) may be used as an approximate measure of section ductility. The larger the
value of ku, the more heavily reinforced is the cross-section and the less potential there is
for the section to deform plastically and allow moment redistribution to take place in the
member.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For low ku values, the curvature at the strength limit state is large and, provided the
reinforcement is ductile, considerable redistribution can take place. If the tensile steel
fractures before the concrete in the compression zone crushes, the neutral axis parameter k u
is no longer relevant since failure occurs before the limiting concrete strain is reached, the
capacity of the section to deform plastically is reduced and moment redistribution is not
permitted. Therefore, it has been considered prudent to limit the type of reinforcement
permitted when moment redistribution is assumed. Thus, according to Clause 6.2.7.2(a),
only Ductility Class N reinforcement (or tendons) may be used as main reinforcement when
moment redistribution is assumed in the design.
For design purposes, moment redistribution is taken as a percentage increase or decrease in
the elastically determined bending moment at a particular cross-section, with an appropriate
adjustment of the bending moment at all other sections so that the resulting bending
moments and shear forces are in equilibrium with the external loads.
Clause 6.2.7.2 provides a simplified alternative approach for designers to the first principles
approach of Clause 6.2.7.1. It defines an allowable design space within which moment
redistribution is allowed. Specifically, a range of values of moment redistribution is
allowed, depending on the value of ku.
Up to 30% redistribution is allowed by Clause 6.2.7.2(c) provided ku is not greater than 0.2
in the peak-moment regions. Designers should nevertheless note that the choice of 30%
redistribution may well result in undesirable cracking and deformations at the serviceability
limit states.
For ku values in excess of 0.4, no moment redistribution is permitted, and the design has to
be based on the elastic distribution of moments. The value of 0.4 was suggested by the
results of computer studies.
For intermediate values of ku between 0.2 and 0.4, the limit of the allowable moment
redistribution is interpolated linearly between 15% at ku = 0.2 and zero at ku = 0.4. It should
be understood that this linear variation does not represent any causal relationship between
ku and moment redistribution. It simply specifies a safe design space in this region.
The design space defined in Clause 6.2.7.2 is shown in Figure C6.2.7.2. It was obtained
from theoretical analyses of the collapse behaviour of continuous reinforced concrete and
prestressed concrete members and frames. Details of these analyses are given in Refs 2, 3
and 4. The design requirements of this Clause are comparable to, but not identical with,
those in other design Standards, and have provided a simplified basis for design for more
than 20 years.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

91

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The design space in Figure C6.2.7.2 has been formatted in such a way that designers can
safely choose any desired moment redistribution between 0% and 30%, provided ku does
not exceed 0.2. The theoretical analyses in fact suggested that even larger redistributions
might be possible at lower values of k u, but 30% was chosen as a reasonable practical upper
limit. The reduction in allowable moment redistribution as ku values increase above 0.2
reflects decreasing section ductility.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

PERCEN T MOMEN T
R ED I ST R IBU T I O N

The theoretical analysis did not address the case of concrete floors lightly reinforced with
Class L (mesh) reinforcement, when the longitudinal tensile steel can fracture before the
concrete in the compressive zone crushes. In this case, the average ultimate curvature of
critical moment regions is reduced, which reduces the amount of moment redistribution that
can occur and therefore Figure C6.2.7.2 is not applicable. Moment redistribution should not
be assumed in design when Class L (mesh) longitudinal reinforcement is used, unless the
general requirements of Clause 6.2.7.1 can be shown to be satisfied.

30
U n s afe
S afe

15

design space
0
0

0.1

0. 2

0. 3

0.4

N EU T R A L A X I S PA R A M E T ER , k u

FIGURE C6.2.7.2 PERMISSIBLE MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION

C6.3 ELASTIC ANALYSIS


BENDING MOMENTS

OF

FRAMES

INCORPORATING

SECONDARY

C6.3.1 General
Under lateral or asymmetrical vertical loading, unbraced (sway) frames move laterally. If
the frame is slender, the change in geometry results in secondary moments. A second-order
elastic analysis may be used to determine the secondary moments due to the resultant lateral
translation of the frame members. Such analyses are generally iterative in nature, and are
best undertaken by computer.
Clause 10.2.2 provides a strength-design method for columns in frames analysed in
accordance with this Clause. For sway deflections greater than Lu/250, the columns in the
frame may fail by instability before the cross-sections reach ultimate strength (Ref. 5),
hence this limitation on relative displacement.
C6.3.2 Analysis
In a second-order elastic analysis, the designer should use member stiffness as appropriate
to the strength limit state. MacGregor and Hage (Ref. 5) found that a reasonable estimate
for the cross-sectional stiffness in a second-order analysis would be 0.4EcIf for the flexural
members and 0.8EcIc for the columns (where If and Ic are based on the gross cross-sections).
Alternatively, values determined from Clause 8.5.3.1 may be used for beam stiffness.
The stiffness of a member may be reduced by axial compression, particularly for very
slender members. This reduction may be determined using the traditional stability functions
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

92

C and S (Ref. 6), or approximations to these using the effective length factor (k) for the
members (Ref. 7). For most practical frames, reasonable results can still be obtained if this
reduction in stiffness is neglected.
C6.4 LINEAR ELASTIC STRESS ANALYSIS
C6.4.1 General
Most concrete structures are designed using a linear analysis of some kind that is overlayed
with a plasticity-based design approach (derived from either the upper- or lower-bound
theories of plasticity). This is the case also for a design based on linear elastic stress
analysis.
The behaviour of a concrete structure and the transfer of internal stresses to its various
parts, as loading progresses, is complex. Nevertheless, provided that the resulting product is
ductile and robust, complexities such as cracking, tension stiffening, bond behaviour, creep,
and shrinkage (etc.) are readily accommodated. This is one of the significant advantages of
ductile reinforced concrete design over other forms of construction.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.4.2 Analysis
Dimensioning of structures based on linear analysis of frames is commonplace in design;
less common is detailing of concrete plates, shells and membrane type structures. It is in
some of these structures where designers can benefit most by linear elastic stress analysis as
the basis of design. To adopt the method, stresses from any loading states need to be
resolved, a load path determined and suitable failure criterion applied. For example, for use
with a two-dimensional analysis, a Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion, with zero tension
condition, is commonly adopted for the concrete and is combined with a plastic yield
condition for the reinforcing steel and tendons. For further reading on the application of
linear stress analysis, see Refs 8 to 12.
C6.4.3 Sensitivity of analysis to input data and modelling parameters
Clause 6.4.3 requires the designer to test the sensitivity of their solution to the input data; in
particular the ductility demand of the solution should not exceed that which can be
provided. To ensure that the ductility demand is met, the direction of principal stresses in
the concrete at the strength limit state should not differ from the elastic solution by more
than 15. If a value greater than 15 is adopted, detailed calculations should be undertaken
to justify the higher value. Further information can be found in the fib Model Code 2010
(Ref. 12) and in Paragraph C2.2.3.
C6.5 NON-LINEAR FRAME ANALYSIS
C6.5.1 General
A non-linear frame analysis relies on accurate mathematical modelling of non-linear
material behaviour as well as taking account of the equilibrium of the structure and its
component members in the deformed state. In practice, the analysis of structural behaviour
at this level of complexity is undertaken using a computer and appropriate software.
At the present time, use of this method will usually be restricted to exceptional structures;
however, this Clause makes provision for the expected future situation in which refined
computer programs will become readily available and will allow non-linear analysis to be
used for routine design situations.
When non-linear analysis is undertaken for structures with thin columns, allowance should
be made for an initial eccentricity (crookedness) in the columns.
Clauses 6.5 and 6.6 both deal with non-linear methods of analysis, and the wording is
similar in each clause of the Standard. The comments provided in Paragraph C6.6 are also
relevant to Clause 6.5.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

93

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C6.5.2 Non-linear material effects


In concrete structures, non-linear structural behaviour arises primarily through non-linear
behaviour of the component materials, i.e. the concrete, the steel reinforcement and the
prestressing tendon. While the behaviour of the steel reinforcement becomes non-linear
only at overloads and strength limit state conditions, the behaviour of concrete is non-linear
under service loads, as well as at overloads. This Clause lists the various sources of
material non-linearity.
C6.5.3 Non-linear geometric effects
In this Clause, attention is drawn to the fact that non-linear effects in concrete structures
may also arise from geometric non-linearities when the individual components are
relatively slender.
C6.5.4 Values of material properties
When structural behaviour is significantly non-linear, changes in input parameters may
have non-proportional effects on the output and it is for this reason that mean values of all
relevant parameters, such as material strengths and material stress-strain relations, are to be
used in non-linear analysis, especially when the analysis is used to evaluate strength and
load capacity of a structure. To test the reliability of the results of a non-linear analysis a
sensitivity analysis is to be undertaken, in which the key input variables are altered
systematically.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.5.5 Sensitivity of analysis to input data and modelling parameters


The requirement in Clause 6.5.5 is similar to that in Clause 6.6.5, which applies to nonlinear stress analysis. The detailed explanation given in Paragraph C6.6 applies equally to
non-linear frame analysis.
C6.6 NON-LINEAR STRESS ANALYSIS
This Clause, which is new to AS 3600, allows designers to use non-linear finite element
analysis as the basis for the design of concrete structures. Non-linear stress analysis, like
non-linear frame analysis, allows the load capacity of the structure to be determined, and
used directly in strength design checks. Much of the wording in Clause 6.6 parallels that of
Clause 6.4 for linear elastic stress analysis. The comments in Paragraph C6.5 also apply to
Clause 6.6, and vice versa.
The finite element (FE) method has become a popular method of structural analysis. The
appeal of the method lies in the capability to analyse beams, plates, shells, two-dimensional
plane stress elements, as well as three-dimensional solids, all within the same analysis
package. Computer-based numerical simulation becomes necessary in more geometrically
complex structures where experimental investigations are time consuming, expensive and
often impractical.
Non-linear FE analysis (NLFEA) of concrete and reinforced concrete structures has been
under steady development for some decades. Today, the FE method provides a powerful
numerical tool that is able to simulate structural behaviour if appropriate modelling
approaches and material laws are used. Commercial computer programs, featuring a variety
of concrete constitutive models, are commonly available and implementation of guidelines
into Standards, such as AS 3600, reflects progress in the field. In everyday engineering
practice, the use of non-linear stress analysis in the design of concrete structures remains an
emerging field and a great degree of care and experience is needed for its correct
application.
The challenge in numerical modelling of reinforced concrete arises from its composite
nature. Important aspects such as cracking, crushing, tension stiffening, compression
softening, aggregate interlock, creep, shrinkage and bond-slip give rise to non-linear
behaviour of reinforced concrete members.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

94

A key requirement of AS 3600 for the use of numerical models (Clause 6.1.2) is:
Irrespective of the method chosen for the structural analysis, the simplifications,
idealizations and assumptions implied in the analysis shall be considered in relation to the
real, three-dimensional nature of the structure when the results of the analysis are
interpreted.
One of the fundamental assessments that must be made of any model is its suitability for
undertaking the analysis, and this is most important if implementing a non-linear stress
analysis. Before assessing a structure or structural element, it is mandatory that a
practitioner first evaluate the programs capability and for designers to ask themselves the
question does this program work for my problem? This process is depicted in Sargents
circle for model validation (Ref. 13) and is shown in Figure C6.6(A) as adapted by Lee and
Kuchma (Ref. 14). The important validation process, described in Figure C6.6(B) (Ref. 15),
requires that sufficient simulations be undertaken against problems of a similar type to that
being designed, and with simulations representing all potential failure modes, to first
validate the suitability of the model. Further guidance on the use of NLFEA for design of
concrete structures, and on the validation processes can be found in the fib Bulletin 45
(Ref. 11).

R e a li t y of i n te r e s t

C o n c e ptu a l m o d e l
va li d ati o n

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

A b s tr a c ti o n a n d m o d e li n g
Va li d ati o n o r
p r e di c ti o n

C o n c e ptu a l m o d e l

Simu
ull a
ati
tion
S of t wa r e i m p l e m e n
ntt ati
a ti o n

C o m p u t a ti o n a l m o d e l
Ve r i f i c ati o n

FIGURE C6.6(A) SARGENTS CIRCLE FOR MODEL VALIDATION (Ref. 14).

The Standard requires that the designer investigate the model sensitivity to the material
property inputs (for example compressive and tensile strength, shear retention, fracture
energy, and so forth) and also to any modelling parameters and assumptions (such as
meshing and boundary conditions). Constitutive models often require a number of
properties not directly specified in the Standard, such as fracture energy or strength under
bi- or tri-axial stresses, and guidance from the literature is needed. Such properties need to
be considered in the sensitivity study and in the model validation process described above.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

95

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C a l i b r a t i o n ( L eve l I )
M ate r i a l l eve l c a lib r ati o n

M e c h a ni c a l c h a r a c te r i s ti c s
of c o n c r e te a n d s te e l
Modelling

M i n o r a d j u s tm e n t s

Va l i d a t i o n ( L eve l I I )
El e m e nt l eve l va li d ati o n

Comparison with results from


ex p e r i m e nt a l e l e m e nt te s t s
(e g. s h e a r p a n e l s)
Application

Ve r i f i c a t i o n ( L eve l I I I )
S tr u c tu r a l l eve l ve r i f i c ati o n

C o m p a r i s o n wi th m e m b e r te s t s
s i m il a r to th at b e i n g d e s i g n e d
(e g. l ate r a l l oa d te s t s o n wa ll s)

FIGURE C6.6(B) CALIBRATION, VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION PROCESS FOR


ESTABLISHMENT OF MODEL RELIABILITY (Ref. 15)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Clause 6.6 also describes the non-linear material and geometric effects to be considered in
the non-linear analysis. These are
(a)

the non-linear relationship between stress and strain for the reinforcement and/or
tendons and the concrete;

(b)

cracking of the concrete;

(c)

the tension stiffening effect in the concrete between adjacent tensile cracks;

(d)

creep and shrinkage of the concrete;

(e)

relaxation of tendons; and

(f)

effects of geometric non-linearity.

While not all of these effects are relevant to a given structure, the designer needs to
determine which of these effects are significant and to confirm that the selected analysis
(generally with respect to the constitutive model) will account for them.
Despite the great advances achieved in the field of concrete constitutive modelling, a
unique and complete all-in-one constitutive model for reinforced concrete is yet to be
developed. As a result, it is up to the designer to determine, prior to carrying out the
analysis, which effects are significant in the structure being designed and to ensure that the
selected material constitutive model can be demonstrated to adequately cover these effects
(Ref. 15).
C6.7 PLASTIC METHODS OF ANALYSIS
C6.7.1 General
Plastic methods of analysis may be used in the design of concrete structures at the strength
limit state, provided the cross-sections at the critical sections in the structure have adequate
ductility. An exact solution for the collapse load of a structure is obtained if all of the
following three criteria are satisfied:
(a)

The structure is in equilibrium.

(b)

The yield criterion is satisfied at every point (and every cross-section).

(c)

A collapse mechanism exists that is compatible with the support conditions.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

96

Any solution that satisfies Items (a) and (b) (i.e. equilibrium and the yield criteria) is known
as a lower bound solution and will lead to the prediction of a safe collapse load. For
example, a safe lower bound solution will be obtained for a beam or slab that is designed
using elastic analysis (thus providing a solution that satisfies equilibrium) and where the
factored design ultimate moment (M*) at every cross-section does not exceed the design
strength (thus satisfying the yield criterion). Any solution, that only satisfies Items (a) and
(c) (i.e. equilibrium and a collapse mechanism) is known as an upper bound solution and
will lead to the prediction of an unsafe collapse load (since the yield criterion may be
violated at some cross-section). The exact solution is obtained when the highest lower
bound solution coincides with the lowest upper bound solution.
When designing for the strength limit state, whether using an upper bound or a lower bound
method of analysis, the member may be required to undergo significant moment
redistribution and, therefore, Ductility Class N reinforcement and/or tendons are required.
Where plastic methods of analysis are used in design for the strength limit states,
alternative methods of analysis are required when considering deflection and crack control.
Reinforcement designed using plastic methods may not be sufficient to satisfy the design
requirements for serviceability and care should be taken to ensure that the reinforcement
layout ensures satisfactory behaviour under service loads.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.7.2 Methods for beams and frames


In the plastic analysis of beams and frames, plastic hinges are assumed to occur in the
critical moment regions. Collapse will eventually occur when sufficient plastic hinges
develop to form a mechanism. The number of hinges required to form the mechanism
depends on the degree of indeterminacy. For indeterminate members, as load is increased,
the first hinge will develop at one of the critical sections (depending on the distribution of
reinforcement). As the load is increased further, the moment at the first hinge remains at its
peak value and redistribution of moments occurs as the load is shed to the less heavily
stressed regions. A second hinge will occur, provided the first hinge has sufficient rotation
capacity to accommodate the increase in load. Thereafter, each hinge will need to have
sufficient rotation capacity to ensure that sufficient hinges develop to facilitate collapse and
that the plastic collapse load of the structure is reached.
The rotation capacity of a plastic hinge, depends on the ultimate curvature ( u ) that can be
reached on the cross-section and the length of the plastic hinge ( l h ). For beams and frames
containing Class N reinforcement, in the absence of more detailed calculations, the hinge
length may be taken equal to the effective depth of the member and the maximum ultimate
curvature is the slope of the strain diagram corresponding to the ultimate strength of the
cross-section (determined in accordance with Clause 8.1.2).
The rotation required at each plastic hinge to achieve the full plastic redistribution may be
calculated from geometry by assuming all the deformation at collapse is accommodated at
the hinges and the beam or frame between adjacent hinges is rigid.
C6.7.3 Methods for slabs
C6.7.3.1 Lower-bound method for slabs
As slabs usually contain relatively small quantities of tensile reinforcement (with kuo
typically less than 0.2), the moment-curvature graph for a typical slab cross-section
containing Class N reinforcement has a long, almost flat plateau as the moment approaches
Muo. In addition, one-way continuous and two-way slabs are statically indeterminate and are
capable of undergoing significant redistribution of moments. Plastic methods of analysis
therefore are eminently suitable for slabs, including lower bound methods such as
Hillerborgs Strip Method (Refs 16 and 17). An important practical advantage is that the
methods can be applied to slabs of irregular and complex shapes. Thus, they may be used to
analyse slabs that could not be analysed by the methods given in Clauses 6.9.5, 6.10.3 and
6.10.4.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

97

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

For more detailed information on lower-bound methods of analysis for slabs, see Refs 16 to
22.
C6.7.3.2 Yield line method for slabs
The yield line method is an upper bound method for calculating the collapse load of a
reinforced concrete slab. The procedure is described in detail by Johansen (Refs 23 and 24).
Yield lines (or plastic hinge lines) develop in the slab as the load approaches the collapse
load eventually reducing the slab to a mechanism. The yield lines divide the slab into rigid
segments. At collapse, each rigid segment rotates about an axis of rotation that is either a
fully supported edge or a straight line through one or more point supports. All deformation
is assumed to take place on the yield lines between the rigid segments. Each yield line
pattern (or collapse mechanism) for a particular slab must be compatible with the support
conditions.
The principle of virtual work is used to determine the collapse load corresponding to any
possible yield line pattern. The correct collapse mechanism corresponds to the yield line
pattern with the lowest collapse load.
For more detailed information on the yield line method for slabs, see Refs 22 to 26.
C6.8 ANALYSIS USING STRUT-AND-TIE MODELS

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.8.1 General
Since it was promoted in the 1980s by Marti (Refs 26 and 27) and Schlaich et al. (Ref. 28),
the strut-and-tie method of analysis has gained continuing acceptance; it now appears in
most national codes and standards. While the method was in Section 12 of AS 36002001,
it has been expanded and extensively modified in AS 36002009 and Section 7 is devoted
to the strut-and-tie method. The strut-and-tie approach formalizes the design methodology
that is based on a designer-selected load path.
As strut-and-tie modelling is founded in the theorem of lower-bound plasticity, it is
required only to satisfy equilibrium and yield criteria; the requirement of mechanism does
not have to be satisfied. This can lead to many allowable solutions where different
arrangements of struts and ties can be used to provide the path through the structure,
member or element from the applied loads to the boundaries or supports.
C6.8.2 Sensitivity of analysis to input data and modelling parameters
While strut-and-tie modelling is safe, it is recognised that the assumption that reinforced
concrete is perfectly plastic is limited. Thus, in Clause 6.8.2, it is a requirement that
designers consider the sensitivity of their solution in light of its ductility demand. See also
commentary to Section 7.
C6.9 IDEALIZED FRAME METHOD OF ANALYSIS
C6.9.1 General
The idealized frame method is a simplified form of the equivalent frame method given
earlier editions of the Standard. One of the important simplifications is the elimination
the concept of the equivalent column. The designer performs a linear elastic analysis
the idealized frame and is given a free choice in the assumptions made in the calculation
the relative stiffness of members.

in
of
of
of

C6.9.2 Idealized frames


In this method, a building is idealized into two sets of parallel two-dimensional frames
running in two orthogonal directions through the building. Each frame consists of the
footings, the vertical (or near vertical) columns connected together by the horizontal (or
near horizontal) beams at each floor height. The beams are an idealization of the strip of
floor of width on each side of the column-line equal to half the distance to the adjacent
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

98

parallel row of columns. They include any floor beams forming part of the floor and
spanning in the direction of the frame. The member stiffnesses are estimated and the frames
are analysed under the design loading using linear-elastic frame analysis.
C6.9.3 Analysis for vertical loads
This clause refers back to Clause 2.4.4 where the minimum requirements for vertical
loading on the idealized frame are outlined. To determine the internal actions in a frame
caused by vertical loads, the designer may analyse the entire frame, or analyse the frame
one storey at a time. A sub-frame consisting of the entire floor, together with the columns
above and below the floor, can be analysed, assuming the columns are all fixed at their
remote ends. To determine the forces and moments in a column at a particular level, the
sub-frame shown in Figure C6.9.3 may be considered.

Column being considered

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

FIGURE C6.9.3 COLUMN SUB-FRAME

The elongation or shortening of a beam or slab due to axial loads may be neglected in the
analysis, as can deflection due to shear; however, axial shortening of the columns and the
resulting actions induced in the floor system cannot be neglected. The live load reduction is
permitted and the Standard requires that the maximum and minimum actions caused by
partial imposed loading on a span be considered. On no account shall the shear force due to
imposed (live) loading on any section be taken as less than one quarter of the maximum
shear force caused by uniformly distributed imposed loading.
C6.9.4 Analysis for horizontal loads
Sub-frames are not permitted when considering horizontal loads. The entire idealized frame
is required to be analysed under the action of horizontal loads, with the horizontal beams
and slabs assumed to act as rigid horizontal diaphragms distributing the horizontal load to
the frames.
C6.9.5 Idealized frame method for structures incorporating two-way slab systems
C6.9.5.1 General
This Clause applies to reinforced and prestressed concrete idealized frames, where the floor
members incorporate either flat slabs and plates, ribbed slabs, waffle slabs, recessed slabs,
slabs with openings or beam-and-slab systems, including band beams. The estimation of
member stiffness is not critical provided adequate ductility is ensured. In an analysis of an
idealized frame for strength, a stiffness of 0.8EcI for columns and 0.4 EcI for the floor
cross-section will usually be satisfactory, and should not lead to excessive ductility
demand. Further, using I (the gross second moment of area) in estimating the flexural
rigidity for both columns and flexural members would also be acceptable for most
structures (Ref. 1). When such an idealized frame analysis is used to check bending
strength, an equilibrium load path is established, which will prove to be a satisfactory basis
for design, provided the slab is ductile and the moment distribution in the real slab can
redistribute towards that calculated in the analysis. For these reasons, Ductility Class N
reinforcement and/or tendons only are permitted.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

99

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C6.9.5.2 Effective width


When designing the idealized frame, the effective width of the horizontal floor members is
required to be the width of the design strip (Lt) as defined in Clause 6.1.4.2 for flat slab
floors and, for T-beams and L-beams spanning between the columns of the idealized frame,
the effective width as defined in Clause 8.8.2.
C6.9.5.3 Distribution of bending moments between column and middle strips
The moments in the idealized frame at the critical sections of the horizontal floor members
are distributed across the floor slab into the column and middle strips, as defined in
Clauses 6.1.4.1 and 6.1.4.3, respectively. Studies have shown that the performance of
reinforced concrete flat slabs, both at service loads and at overloads, is little affected by
variations in the proportion of the total frame moment that is assigned to the column strip
(Ref. 30), provided the slab is ductile and capable of the necessary moment redistribution.
The Standard specifies that the column strip be designed to resist the total negative and
positive moments at each section multiplied by a column strip moment factor taken within
the ranges given in Table 6.9.5.3.
C6.9.5.4 Torsional moments
In the case of beam-and-slab construction, test results (Ref. 31) have shown that most of the
moment is transferred directly to the column and the spandrel (edge) beams are subjected to
very little torsion. For serviceability reasons, the Standard requires that at least minimum
torsional reinforcement be provided in the spandrels (i.e. both closed fitments and at least
one longitudinal bar at each corner of the fitment).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C6.9.5.5 Openings in slabs


Provided the plan dimensions of any opening in the floor slab are less than the limits
specified in Items (a) to (c) and provided the opening does not compromise the shear
strength near a support, the Standard permits the analysis of a slab with an opening using
Clause 6.9.5, provided the reinforcing bars interrupted by the opening are distributed to
each side of the opening.
C6.10 SIMPLIFIED METHODS OF FLEXURAL ANALYSIS
C6.10.1 General
The simplified methods of analysis contained in this Clause lead to approximate and
conservative solutions that are simple to use and appropriate for a wide range of structures.
C6.10.2 Simplified method for reinforced continuous beams and one-way slabs
This Clause provides a simple, approximate and conservative method for evaluating the
bending moments and shear forces in certain continuous reinforced-concrete beams and
one-way slabs of uniform cross-section (Ref. 32). Limitations on the dimensions of adjacent
spans, the nature of the applied loading and the reinforcement arrangements are specified in
Clause 6.10.2.1.
If moment reversals occur during construction caused by temporary propping or similar
actions, a separate (additional) analysis will be required.
Note that the moment values at different cross-sections are not statically compatible and so
should not be used for deflection calculations in deflection-sensitive structures, as this
approach would be too conservative (see Clause 9.3.3).
A numerical study has been undertaken to determine the design action effects appropriate
for reinforced continuous beams and one-way slabs incorporating Ductility Class L (mesh)
longitudinal tensile reinforcement (see Ref. 33).

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

100

C6.10.3 Simplified method for reinforced two-way slabs supported on four sides
The design bending moments for strength may be determined using the simple moment
coefficients given for two-way slabs supported on four sides by beams or walls. For slabs
containing Class N reinforcement, the design moments at mid-span in each direction are
calculated from M x* = x Fd L2x and M y* = y Fd L2x , where Fd is the uniformly distributed
design load per unit area, Lx is the shorter of the two orthogonal effective spans, and x and
y are moment coefficients given in Table 6.10.3.2(A). The moment coefficients are derived
from yield line analysis and may be expressed as follows:
2

x
x

2 3+

y =
2
9 y

. . . C6.10.3(1)
and

L
2 1 x
Lx y
Ly
x =
+ 2
Ly
3 y

. . . C6.10.3(2)

where

x (y) = 2.0 if both short (long) edges are discontinuous


= 2.5 if one short (long) edge is discontinuous
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

= 3.1 if both short (long) edges are continuous


In the yield line derivation of these equations, the negative design moment at a continuous
edge is taken as 1.33 times that of the positive mid-span moment in the direction considered
and, at a discontinuous edge, the negative moment is taken as 0.5 times the mid-span value.
Table 6.10.3.2(B) may be used for the design of uniformly loaded two-way slabs
continuously supported on four sides. The moment coefficients were derived from linearelastic analysis (Ref. 33), with the torsional moments accounted for using the Wood-Armer
equation (Refs 20, 32 and 34). The analysis assumes limited redistribution is available from
the elastic condition and accounts for the limitations of the assumptions stated in
Clause 6.10.2.1 of the Standard.
The values in Tables 6.10.3.2(A) and 6.10.3.2(B) should not be used for deflection
calculations (see Clause 9.3.3).
For the purposes of calculating the shear forces in a slab or the forces applied to the
supporting walls and beams, the Standard specifies that the uniformly distributed load on
the slab be allocated to the supports as shown in Figure C6.10.3.4.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

101

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014


D e c r e a s e l oa d by 20%

Ed g e of s u p p o r ti n g
b e a m o r wa ll u n d e r

Increase
l oa d by 10%

(a) A ll e d g e s c o nti n u o u s

Decrease
l o a d by 25%

( b) O n e e d g e di s c o nti n u o u s

Increase
l oa d by 10%

(c) Ad j a c e nt e d g e s di s c o nti n u o u s

FIGURE C6.10.3.4 ALLOCATION OF SLAB LOADS TO SUPPORTS

C6.10.4 Simplified method for reinforced two-way slab systems having multiple spans

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Two-way slab systems may be analysed for bending moments and shear forces either by the
simplified method given here in Clause 6.10.4 or by the idealized frame method given in
Clause 6.9.
Two-way slab systems are statically indeterminate to a large degree and can exhibit
considerable variation in redistribution of moments from the uncracked state to final
maximum capacity (Refs 35 and 36). Tests on edge panels (Refs 31 and 37) have not only
confirmed this but have indicated that when approaching maximum load capacity, the
distribution of moments is controlled largely by the distribution of steel in the slab. Thus, in
the analysis stage, there is no unique moment field that the designer needs to determine.
Within wide limits, whatever moment the designer adopts should be acceptable for
determining the flexural strength of the slab, provided equilibrium is satisfied and the slab
is ductile.
Furthermore, the flexural strength of the slab is enhanced significantly by the development
of very large in-plane forces (membrane action) as the slab approaches failure. In the case
of slab-beam systems, this increased flexural strength is very significantly larger than the
value calculated by ignoring the effect of in-plane forces. Tests (Ref. 31) have shown that
even in the case of a flat-plate floor, the in-plane forces significantly increase the flexural
strength of the slab.
The designer is reminded that a more important consideration in the safety (and robustness)
of a flat-slab system is in the transfer of forces from the slab to the support by a
combination of flexure, shear and torsion (see Clause 9.2).
C6.10.4.1 General
Limitations are imposed here on the use of the simplified method given in Clause 6.10.4
(formerly known as the direct design method).

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

102

C6.10.4.2 Total static moment for a span


The slab is analysed one panel at a time. The total static moment (Mo) in each direction in
each panel is calculated as follows:

Mo =

Fd Lt L2o
8

. . . C6.10.4.2

where Fd is the uniformly distributed design load per unit area; Lt is the width of the design
strip; and Lo is the effective span. The total static moment is then shared between the
supports (negative moments) and the mid-span (positive moment), as shown in
Figure C6.10.4.2.

FdLt

Lo
- MR

- ML

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Mo

+ MM

B e n di n g m o m e nt
diagram

FIGURE C6.10.4.2 TOTAL STATIC MOMENT FOR A SPAN

C6.10.4.3 Design moments


At any critical section, the design moment is determined by multiplying Mo by the relevant
factor given in Tables 6.10.4.3(A) or 6.10.4.3(B). It is permissible to modify the design
moments so determined by up to 10%, provided the total static moment for the span is not
reduced. At any interior support, the floor slab should be designed to resist the larger of the
two negative moments determined for the two adjacent spans, unless the unbalanced
moment is distributed to all adjoining members in accordance with their relative stiffnesses.
C6.10.4.4 Transverse distribution of the design bending moment
The positive and negative design moments are distributed to the column and middle strips
using the column strip moment factor specified in Table 6.9.5.3.
C6.10.4.5 Moment transfer for shear in flat slabs
For the purposes of designing a flat slab for punching shear at the supporting columns, the
bending moment transferred from the slab to the column ( M V* ) shall be taken as the
unbalanced bending moment at the support. A minimum value for M V* at an interior column
is specified in Equation 6.10.4.5. For an edge column, M V* is equal to the design moment at
the exterior edge of the slab and may be taken as 0.25 times the total static moment for the
end span calculated using Equation C6.10.4.2.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

103

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

GILBERT, R.I. and MICKLEBOROUGH, N.C., Design of Prestressed Concrete, 2nd


Printing, E&FN Spon, London, 1997.

WARNER, R.F. and YEO, M.F., Ductility Requirements for Partially Prestressed
Concrete, Proceedings, NATO Advanced Research Workshop, Partial Prestressing,
from Theory to Practice, St-Rmy-ls-Chevreuse, Nijhoff, 1984, pp. 315326. (Also
available as Research Report No. R61, Department Civil Engineering, University of
Adelaide.)

WARNER, R.F., Computer Simulation of the Collapse Behaviour of Concrete


Structures with Limited Ductility, in Computer Aided Analysis and Design of
Concrete Structures, Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Computer Aided Analysis and Design
of Concrete Structures, Split, Yugoslavia, 1721 Sept. 1984, pp. 12571270.

WONG, K.W., YEO, M.F. and WARNER, R.F., Analysis of Non-linear Concrete
Structures by Deformation Control, First National Structural Engineering
Conference, Melbourne, IE Aust., August 1987, pp. 181185.

MacGREGOR, J.G. and HAGE, S.E., Stability Analysis and Design of Concrete
Frames, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. ST10, 1977,
pp. 19531971.

HORNE, M.R. and MERCHANT, W., The Stability of Frames, Pergamon Press,
Oxford, 1965.

FRASER, D.J., Evaluation of effective length factors in braced frames, Canadian


Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 10, 1983, pp. 1826.

MARTI, P., Design of Concrete Slabs for Transverse Shear, ACI Structural Journal,
Vol. 87, No. 2, 1990, pp. 180190.

FOSTER, S.J., MARTI, P. and MOJSILOVIC, N., Design of Reinforced Concrete


Solids Using Stress Analysis, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 100, No. 6, 2003,
pp. 758764.

10

FOSTER, S.J. and MARTI, P., Design of Reinforced Concrete Membranes using
Stress Analysis, 17th Australasian Conference on the Mechanics of Structures and
Materials, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia, 1214 June 2002, pp. 327332.

11

fib Bulletin 45, Practitioners Guide to Finite Element Modelling of Reinforced


Concrete Structures, (Eds Maekawa K., Vecchio F. and Foster S.J.), Fdration
Internationale du Bton, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2008, 337pp.

12

fib Model Code for Concrete Sructures 2010, Fdration Internationale du Bton,
Lausanne, Switzerland, 2013.

13

VV 10, Guide for Verification and Validation in Computational Solid Mechanics,


ASME PTC 60 Committee, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York,
2006.

14

LEE, H.H. and KUCHMA, D., Validation of a Computational Model for Structural
Concrete: A Case Study, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 2011.

15

WATT, T., FOSTER, S.J., and KAYVANI, K., Evaluation of AS 36002009


Provisions for Design by Nonlinear Stress Analysis, Proceedings Concrete Institute of
Australia (CIA) Biennial Conference, Perth, Western Australia, 12-14 October 2011.

16

HILLERBORG, A., Strip Method of Design, Viewpoint Publication, Cement and


Concrete Association, London, 1975.

17

HILLERBORG, A., Strip method design handbook, First edition, Spon Press, London,
1996.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

104

18

RANGAN, B.V., Limit States Design of Slabs Using Lower-Bound Approach,


Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, Feb. 1974, pp. 373389.

19

FOSTER, S.J., KILPATRICK A.E. and WARNER R.F., Reinforced Concrete Basics,
2nd Ed., Pearson Australia, 2010.

20

WOOD, R.H. and ARMER, G.S.T., The Theory of the Strip Method for Design of
Slabs, Proc. ICE, London, Vol. 41, Oct. 1968, pp. 285311.

21

KEMP, K.O., A Strip Method of Slab Design with Concentrated Loads or Supports,
The Structural Engineer, Vol. 49, No. 12, 1971, pp. 543548.

22

PARK, R. and GAMBLE, W.L., Reinforced Concrete Slabs, John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., New York, 2nd Ed., 2000.

23

JOHANSEN, K.W., Yield-line Theory, Cement and Concrete Association, London,


1962.

24

JOHANSEN, K.W., Yield-line formulae for slabs, Cement and Concrete Association,
London, 1972.

25

JONES, L.L. and WOOD, R.H., Yield-line Analysis of Slabs, Thames and Hudson,
London, 1967.

26

MARTI, P., Basic Tools of Reinforced Concrete Beam Design, ACI Journal, Vol. 7,
No. 1, 1985, pp. 4656.

27

MARTI, P., Truss Models in Detailing, Concrete International, American Concrete


Institute, Vol. 7, No. 12, 1985, pp. 6673.

28

SCHLAICH, J., SCHFER, K., and JENNEWEIN, M., Toward a Consistent Design
of Structural Concrete, Special Report, PCI Journal, Vol. 32, No. 3, MayJune 1987,
pp. 74150.

29

WARNER, R.F., RANGAN, B.V., HALL, A.S. and FAULKES, K.A., Concrete
Structures, Longman Cheshire, Pearson Education, Melbourne, 1998.

30

GILBERT, R.I., Effect of Reinforcement Distribution on the Serviceability of


Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs, Proceedings of the 9th Australasian Conference on
the Mechanics of Structures and Materials, University of Sydney, August 1984,
pp. 210214.

31

RANGAN, B.V. and HALL, A.S., Forces in the Vicinity of Edge Columns in Flat
Plate Floors, Volume 1Tests on R.C. Models, UNICIV Report No. R-203, The
University of New South Wales, Kensington, Jan. 1983, 240pp.

32

WOOD, R.H., The Reinforcement of Slabs in Accordance with a Pre-determined


Field of Moments, Concrete, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1968, pp. 6976.

33

PATRICK, M., WHEELER, A., TURNER, M., MARSDEN, W. and SANDERS, P.


Improved Simplified Design Methods for Reinforced Continuous Beams and Oneway Slabs, and Two-Way Slabs Supported on Four Sides. Proceedings, Concrete
2005, The Biennial Conference of the Concrete Institute of Australia.

34

ARMER, G.S.T., Correspondence, Concrete, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1968, pp. 319320.

35

NETH, V.W., DE PAIVA, H.A.R. and LONG, A.E., Behavior of Models of a


Reinforced Concrete Flat Plate Edge-Column Connection, ACI Journal, Vol. 78,
No. 4, 1981, pp. 269275.

36

WIESINGER, F.P., Design of Flat Plates with Irregular Column Layout, ACI Journal,
Vol. 70, No. 2, 1973, pp. 117123.

37

RANGAN, B.V. and HALL, A.S., Moment Redistribution in Flat Plate Floors,
ACI Journal, Vol. 81, No. 6, 1984, pp. 601608.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

105

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL


WHEELER, A. and PATRICK, M., Amendment of simplified methods in AS 3600
2001 for reinforced continuous beams and one-way slabs, and two-way slabs
supported on four sides. Research Report No. CCTR:007, Centre for Construction
Technology and Research, University of Western Sydney, May 2004.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N

106

C 7

S T R U T - A N D - T I E

M O D E L L I N G

C7.1 GENERAL
In non-flexural members or in non-flexural regions of members where abrupt changes in
geometry or load continuity occur, the Euler-Bernoulli hypothesis of plane sections
remaining plane breaks down. Load discontinuities might be the result of external loads,
reactions or, in case of prestressed structures, end zone loads. The entire structural member
might become a single non-flexural region, or might consist of a mix of non-flexural and
flexural regions. The extent of a non-flexural region may be approximated by using
St. Venants Principle, i.e. localized effects of abrupt load and geometry changes diminish
sufficiently at a distance equal to one member depth away from the discontinuity. In
concrete structures, it is recommended that this zone be taken as between 1.0 and 1.5 times
the depth of the member (Refs 1, 2, 3). Some typical examples of discontinuity regions are
illustrated in Figures C7.l(A) and C7.1(B).
Non-flexural regions may be modelled using a hypothetical truss model, where members in
compression are referred to as struts, members in tension are called ties and members are
connected at nodes. The size of the struts, ties and nodes are defined by the area of concrete
required for the safe transfer of forces through the structure or structural element.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Creating a layout of struts, ties and nodes and dimensioning are the major design steps for a
strut-and-tie model (STM). Fitting an STM within the given concrete dimensions and
reinforcement details is a major step in the strength evaluation process.
An STM should satisfy the self-explanatory requirements listed in Items (a) to (h). The
introduction of a minimum angle of 30 between the axes of struts and ties entering a single
node [Item (g)], limits the level of strain incompatibility between the compressive and
tensile members. The minimum angle between struts and ties ensures the clear separation of
compressive and tensile strains between struts and ties entering at the same nodes. Item (h)
reduces the minimum angle to 20 in prestressed concrete members to accommodate the
usually flatter compressive trajectories that may be obtained from the combined effects of
external loads and prestressing forces. Further background to the history of the development
of STM is given in Foster et al. (Ref. 4).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

107

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

h1
h2

h1

h2
(a)

(b)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

h1

h2
h

h2

h1

(c)

(d)

FIGURE C7.1(A) ELEMENTS WITH GEOMETRIC DISCONTINUITIES

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

108

h
h

h
(a)
h

h
( b)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

h
(e)
h

h
(c)

h
(d )

< 4h

< 4h
(f )

FIGURE C7.1(B) ELEMENTS WITH GEOMETRIC AND LOAD DISCONTINUITIES

C7.2 CONCRETE STRUTS


C7.2.1 Types of struts
Compressive stress fields try to diverge. If, and only if, they cannot diverge due to the
geometry, a prismatic strut develops. If the stress field along the strut axis can
uninterruptedly diverge in a constant angle, a fan-type compression field results (as shown
in Figure 7.2.1). If the compressive stress field, or strut, is free to diverge laterally but is
forced by the geometry at both ends into narrower fields, a bottle-shaped strut develops. If
forced at one end, such as often occurs for a prestressing anchorage, a one-half bottle
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

109

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

compressive stress field occurs. Such curved compressive stress trajectories may be
approximated by polygonal forces with small changes in strut angles. At the points of each
angle change, transverse forces are introduced to reinstate the equilibrium. Viewed from the
axis of the strut, angle changes can be either convex [Figure C7.2.1(left)] or concave
[Figure C7.2.1 (right)] attracting transverse compressive or tensile forces, respectively.

C
C

: Convex
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

: Concave

FIGURE C7.2.1 TRANSVERSE FORCES IN BOTTLE-SHAPED STRUTS

C7.2.2 Strut efficiency factor


The strut efficiency factor modifies the strut strength to compensate for the weakening
effects of the tension fields crossing the unconfined concrete. For prismatic struts, there are
no angle changes in compressive trajectories, therefore transverse tension fields do not
develop, and the efficiency factor could be set to 1.0. When fan and bottle type of struts
apply, the efficiency factor is calculated using Equation 7.2.3. Ref. 5 contains a summary of
the wide range of efficiency factors proposed by different researchers over the last two
decades. This Standard has adopted the formula proposed by Foster and Malik (Ref. 5),
which is based on the Collins and Mitchells expression (Ref. 6). The factor also
compensates for the difference between the assumed idealized perfect plastic behaviour and
the real properties of the concrete. The calibration of the strut efficiency factor (s) is
shown in Figure C7.2.2 for test data for non-flexural members (Ref. 5). In Figure C7.2.2, k3
is the ratio of the in situ strength of the concrete to that obtained from a standard cylinder
test and is taken to be k3 = 0.9.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

110

1.6
1.4
1. 2

Te s t d at a

k 3 s

1
0.8
0.6
k 3 s

0.4
0. 2
0

AS 3 6 0 0 -20 0 9: k 3 s

0.5

1.5

2.5

cot

FIGURE C7.2.2 COMPARISON OF STRUT EFFICIENCY VERSUS STRUT ANGLE

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C7.2.3 Design strength of struts


The ultimate design strength of a strut is the product of the smallest cross-sectional area of
the concrete strut at any point along its length, the strength reduction factor, strut efficiency
factor and the in situ strength of the concrete relative to that of a cylinder cured and tested
under standard conditions.
The strut strength may be increased by properly placed and detailed longitudinal
reinforcement and enclosed in fitments transverse to the struts main axis, in accordance
with the design rule of Section 10 of the Standard.
C7.2.4 Bursting reinforcement in bottle-shaped struts
Due to angle changes in compressive trajectories, transverse tensile or compressive forces
develop (see Figure C7.2.1). The low tensile strength of the concrete makes the transverse
tensile forces more critical. If the forces that lead to splitting are greater than one half of the
capacity of the strut to resist splitting (i.e. greater than 0.5Tb.cr), adequate reinforcement is
required to carry the tensile loads and to ensure that in-service cracking is controlled. Struts
unreinforced for bursting failure may be used, for example as is often the case in pile caps,
provided the bursting forces are kept below the threshold value of 0.5Tb.cr.
The minimum bursting force will be the greater of
(a)

the transverse cracking force along the struts longitudinal section, which is assessed
at the elastic case of tan = ; and

(b)

the force required for equilibrium of the bottle-shaped strut at service (tan = ) and
at ultimate (tan = 1/5).

Strut-and-tie models (STMs) are used to design for the strength limit states usually well
after the onset of cracking. Usually, they are not appropriate for structural behaviour and
design under service load conditions; however, the equilibrium-based models provide
information about internal cracking and about the corresponding cracking forces. In turn,
the latter forces are directly linked to the ultimate bursting forces. This is particularly
important as a splitting of a strut can significantly reduce the strut capacity, resulting in a
premature and brittle compressive failure with little warning signs of distress.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

111

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

It is important to differentiate between the angles of divergence under serviceability and


ultimate conditions. Figures 7.2.4(A) of the Standard and Figure C7.2.1 of this Commentary
provide a graphical presentation and explanation of the bursting forces in a bottle-shaped
strut. The minimum requirements for the angle of divergence of the strut are tan = and
tan = 1/5 for serviceability and ultimate conditions, respectively. The maximum value of
the stress in the transverse steel at service loads is given in Clause 12.7. For the vast
majority of design situations, where crack control is needed, the serviceability criteria will
govern bursting steel requirements.
Where transverse reinforcement is unidirectional, it should have greater capacity than the
bursting force. Ideally, unidirectional bursting reinforcement should be perpendicular to the
plane of cracking, otherwise the component of the bursting force component orthogonal to
the reinforcement has to be resisted by aggregate interlock of the concrete and dowel
action. Aggregate interlock capacity largely depends on the concrete mix, matrix properties,
shrinkage and other factors. Therefore, the unpredictable contribution of aggregate interlock
should be minimized. For this reason, the Standard introduces a limitation on the 1 angle
between the strut axis and the unidirectional reinforcement; that is 1 should not be less than
40. For orthogonal reinforcement, the resultant of the two directional reinforcement
capacities should be greater than the bursting force. Bursting reinforcement has to be
adequately detailed and fully developed at the nodal points, where it is required for
equilibrium. It should be equally distributed along the strut axis in the bursting zones and
centred about each half bursting force component, Tb/2 [see Figure 7.2.4(A)].
C7.3 TIES

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C7.3.1 Arrangements of ties


Ties consist of reinforcement, prestressing tendons or any combination of them. The
dimensions of the surrounding concrete are governed by the node dimensions, which, in
turn, have to be sized on the basis of safe nodal force transfer. Arrangement of
reinforcement and/or prestressing tendons within the surrounding concrete should provide a
resultant force that coincides with the axis of the tie. The tie reinforcement should be
distributed evenly through the node. Reinforcement and tendons within the tie zone have to
be adequately detailed in accordance with Section 13 of the Standard. Since the tie force
between two nodes is constant, the reinforcement and tendons should run uninterruptedly
along the tie axis and should be fully developed at, and everywhere between, the connected
nodes.
C7.3.2 Design strength of ties
The capacity of the reinforcement equals the product of the cross-sectional area and yield
strength of the reinforcement. Tie forces in post-tensioning tendons have two components:
the first component represents the effective prestress force in the tendons after all the
losses, the second component is the incremental force in the tendons due to the external
loads. The sum of the stresses from the two force components should not be higher than the
yield strength of the tendons. The tie strength has to be multiplied by the appropriate
capacity reduction factor given in Table 2.2.4 of the Standard. Tendons located in the tie
zone may be grouped together and, for simplicity, treated as a single large tendon. The
effective prestress force within the tie zone should include the effects of other prestressed
tendons located outside of the tie zone.
C7.3.3 Anchorage of ties
As stated in Paragraph C7.3.1, the tie force along the tie axis is constant; therefore,
reinforcement and tendons should be fully developed beyond the centre of the nodes and in
accordance with Section 13 of the Standard. In addition, at least one-half of the
development length of the bars and/or tendons has to be provided beyond the node.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

112

C7.4 NODES
C7.4.1 Types of nodes
At least three forces should act on a node to achieve equilibrium. The node types described
in the Standard are CCC, CCT and CTT nodes and indicate the type of forces entering the
particular node. For the purposes of the Standard, a CCC node is defined as one where all
members entering the node are compressive, irrespective of the number of struts entering
the node (three, four or more). A CCT node is where any one member entering the node is a
tie, and a CTT node is where two, or more, ties enter the node (again irrespective of the
total number of members entering the node; three, four or more).
The concrete performance under compression is excellent but in tension its strength is
negligible. Because of these facts, it is important to indicate the minimum number of
beneficial strut forces and the exact number of tie forces adversely affecting the node
capacities. This becomes obvious from the node strength calculation, which is essentially
similar to the strut capacity calculation.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Nodes can be hydrostatic or non-hydrostatic. These represent a tangible difference in


building the STM. All the forces entering a hydrostatic node have to be perpendicular to the
node faces. The length ratio of the node faces is the same as the ratio of the strut forces.
Therefore, the forces entering the node do so without any shear component and the
compressive stresses on each node face of the node are identical. This is the basic
requirement of the hydrostatic stress condition [see Figure C7.4.1(A)]. Design of
hydrostatic nodes is more straightforward than design of non-hydrostatic nodes, but the
forces entering the node may not be concurrent, which makes them less suitable for use
with truss analysis software.
While less efficient, non-hydrostatic nodes [see Figure C7.4.1(B)] allow straight connection
since forces perpendicular to the node faces are not a requirement and shear components are
dealt with in the node design. Establishing the geometry of the model and the nodes is much
easier but the detailed calculations for the node design are more complex. Non-hydrostatic
nodes are the most common choice for designers when utilizing truss analysis software. For
further details, see Ref. 7.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

113

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

1, 2

1, 3

C 1, 2

C1

C2

C 1, 3

C3

1, 2

1, 3 = 1

C 1, 2 + C 1, 3 = C 1
C 1: C 2 : C 3 = 1: 2 : 3
3

C 1, 2 : C 1, 3 = 1, 2 : 1, 3

C2
1
C2
C1

c2
C3

ru

t2

St

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

FIGURE C7.4.1(A) FORCE ENTERING A HYDROSTATIC CCC NODE

C1

Node

S tr
trut 1

c1

tr

ut

c3

C3
3

FIGURE C7.4.1(B) FORCE ENTERING A NON-HYDROSTATIC CCC NODE


www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

114

C7.4.2 Design strength of nodes


Ties joining a node reduce the compressive strength of the node, which is the basis for the
introduction of n. This is due to the high level of strain incompatibility between the joining
ties and struts. Strength enhancement by the use of confinement reinforcement is allowed.
Stress-strain curves gained from various experiments suggest an upper limit of confinement
effectiveness. The limit in the Standard is set to st 1.8 f c , which coincides with the
condition for yielding of confinement reinforcement. The strength enhancement due to
confinement may be taken as

f co = f + ke Cfr
where f co is the strength of the confined concrete; k e is an efficiency factor determined in
accordance with the principles of Clause 10.7.3; C = 4 for concrete strengths less than
80 MPa and C = 3 for concrete strengths of 80 MPa or more; and fr is the pressure applied
by the confinement reinforcement, also calculated in accordance with the principles of
Clause 10.7.3.
If confinement reinforcement is used to increase the capacity of a node
(a)

only the concrete that lies within the centre line of any confinement steel should be
considered in determining the nodal capacity; and

(b)

the potential for spalling of the cover under service loading due to straining of the
confining reinforcement needs consideration.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C7.5 ANALYSIS OF STRUT-AND-TIE MODELS


The basic principles of structural analysis and interpretation of results are valid for STMs.
By definition, STMs follow a designers selected load path. As compatibility of
deformations is not considered, however, there can be many different models that can be
made applicable to the structure, yielding different results for the truss layout and forces.
Their impact on the actual detailing and performance of the structural member is very
important. It is good practice to keep the inelastic deformations to a minimum and, since
strains in ties are much higher than those of the struts, it is generally sufficient to minimize
overall length of the ties (Ref. 1). The designer must check the rationality and the structural
sensitivity of the model. In more complex cases, it is prudent to find out the principal
compressive stress trajectories using linear finite element analysis (Ref. 7) and use these as
a starting point for building the STM.
C7.6 DESIGN BASED ON STRUT-AND-TIE MODELLING
STMs are useful when designing for strength at the ultimate limit state. For serviceability
conditions, in the early stage of crack development, their use is limited. It is a good practice
to check serviceability conditions with a linear elastic method. STMs are ideal for the
design of anchorage zones. Furthermore, STMs have been successfully used in non-flexural
members and non-flexural regions of members, such as nibs, corbels and half-joints.
REFERENCES
1

SCHLAICH, J., SCHFER, K., and JENNEWEIN, M., Toward a Consistent Design
of Structural Concrete, Special Report, PCI Journal, Vol. 32, No. 3, 1987,
pp. 74150.

FOSTER, S.J. and ROGOWSKY, D.M., Splitting of Concrete Panels under


Concentrated Loads, Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Vol. 5, No. 6,
Nov. 1997, pp. 803815.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

115

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

FOSTER, S.J. and ROGOWSKY, D.M., Bursting Forces in Concrete Members


Resulting from In-plane Concentrated Loads, Magazine of Concrete Research,
Vol. 49, No. 180, Sept. 1997, pp. 231240.

FOSTER, S.J., KILPATRICK, A.E. and WARNER, R.F., Reinforced Concrete


Basics: Analysis and design of reinforced concrete structures, 2nd Ed., Pearson
Australia, 2010.

FOSTER, S.J. and MALIK, A.R., Evaluation of efficiency factor models used in
Strut-and-Tie modelling of non-flexural members, Journal of Structural Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 128, No. 5, 2002, pp. 569577.

COLLINS, M.P. and MITCHELL, D., A Rational Approach to Shear DesignThe


1984 Canadian Code Provisions, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 83, No. 6, 1986,
pp. 925933.

fib Bulletin 45, Practitioners guide to finite element modelling of reinforced concrete
structures (Eds Maekawa, K., Vecchio, F. and Foster), Fdration Internationale du
Bton, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2008, 337pp.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL

LEONHARDT, F. and MNNIG, E., Vorlesungen ber Massivbau, Dritter Teil:


Grundlagen zum Bewehren im stahlbetonbau, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg,
1977.

CSA A23.3, Design of Concrete Structures, Canadian Standards Association, Ontario,


2004.

ROGOWSKY, D.M. and MacGREGOR, J. G., Shear strength of deep reinforced


concrete continuous beams, University of Alberta, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Structural Engineering Report, No. 110, Nov. 1983.

MARTI, P., Basic Tools of Reinforced Concrete Beam Design, ACI Journal, Vol. 7,
No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1985, pp. 4656.

MARTI, P., Truss Models in Detailing, Concrete International, American Concrete


Institute, Vol. 7, No. 12, Dec. 1985, pp. 6673.

FOSTER, S.J., Design of Non-Flexural Members for Shear, Journal of Cement and
Concrete Composites, Vol. 20, No. 6, 1998, pp. 465475.

GABOR, P. and KRIBANANDAN, G., Design and construction of transfer structures


for the 77 storey Telecom Headquarters, CIA seminar proceedings, Perth WA,
October 1997.

MacGREGOR, J.G., Challenges and Changes in the Design of Concrete Structures,


Concrete International, Feb. 1984, pp. 4852.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N C 8
S T R E N G T H

116

D E S I G N O F B E A M S F O R
A N D S E R V I C E A B I L I T Y

C8.1 STRENGTH OF BEAMS IN BENDING


C8.1.1 General
Clause 8.1 provides requirements for the design of flexural members based on an analysis
of cross-sections for equilibrium and for compatibility. The fundamental underlying theory
is that of the EulerBernoulli hypothesis that plane sections remain plane.
C8.1.2 Basis of strength calculations
The two basic conditions of static equilibrium and strain compatibility have to be satisfied.
Tests have confirmed that the strain distribution, on average, is essentially linear over the
cross-section. The strains in both the reinforcement and the concrete are assumed to be
directly proportional to the distance from the neutral axis. This assumption enables the
strain distribution to be defined. The stress distribution (and hence actions) for the crosssection may be determined from the strain distribution with the use of appropriate stressstrain relationships for the steel and concrete, such as those provided in Section 3 of the
Standard.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The concrete tensile strength has little influence on the ultimate capacity in pure bending,
or in combined bending and axial compression (Section 10) and may be ignored.
The strength in pure bending of an under-reinforced beam is governed by the strength of the
tensile reinforcement and is relatively insensitive to the assumed shape of the stress-strain
relationship for concrete in compression. When ductile reinforcement is used, the strength
in bending is reached when the concrete in the compressive zone finally crushes well after
the tensile steel yields.
For members containing Class N tensile reinforcement, if a rectangular stress block
modelling approach is adopted (see Paragraph C10.6.2) or if the compressive stress-strain
relationship adopted for the concrete has a curvilinear ascending branch followed by a
constant value of stress equal to the peak stress, the result of the model is somewhat
insensitive to the limiting value chosen for the extreme fibre strain in the concrete at
failure; the Standard adopts a value of 0.003. If using a curvilinear model for both the
ascending and descending branches of the compressive stress-strain relationship (for
example, the model described in Paragraph C3.1.4), the strain at the extreme compressive
fibre at ultimate should be selected such that the moment on the section is maximized when
the rules of equilibrium and strain compatibility are applied.
For members containing Class L tensile reinforcement, fracture of the reinforcement may
occur at the critical crack before the extreme fibre compressive strain reaches 0.003. In
reality, the extreme fibre compressive strain is likely to be much less than this value, often
not exceeding a value of 0.001 in lightly reinforced sections.
While the strength of a member is not particularly sensitive to the limiting extreme
compressive fibre strain, the calculation of the corresponding ultimate curvature is. A
reasonably accurate estimation of the ultimate curvature is required for the determination of
deformations beyond yielding of the reinforcing steel or for calculations of ductility and
robustness. For determining curvature at the critical cracked section at ultimate for
members with Class L reinforcement, the conditions at the section corresponding to the
point of fracture of the reinforcing steel need to be determined and this requires
consideration of strain localization in the tensile steel at the cracks (see Refs 1 and 2).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

117

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C8.1.3 Rectangular stress block


For sections where the crushing of the concrete in the compressive zone occurs at the
ultimate limit state, irrespective of the actual compressive stress distribution in the
concrete, an equivalent rectangular distribution of compressive stresses may be determined
such that
(a)

the total volumes under the true and equivalent rectangular stress blocks are equal;
and

(b)

the centroid of the equivalent rectangular stress block lies at the centroid of the true
stress block.

The relationship between the true and rectangular stress blocks is shown in Figure C8.1.3.
Point (a) is necessary to ensure equilibrium of forces and point (b) for moment equilibrium.
Three parameters are required to define the equivalent rectangular stress block (see
Figure C8.1.3), namely k1, k2 and k3. For a given stress-strain relationship, and assuming
that plane sections remain plane, k 2 (= /2) is determined such that the location of the
centroids of the true and rectangular stress blocks coincide. Equilibrium of forces is then
applied to determine k1 such that the volumes under the true and rectangular stress blocks
are equal. The k3 parameter represents the ratio of the strength of the in situ concrete to that
of the standard cylinder; k3 is taken as 0.9 in the Standard.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

cu

k 3 f c

k 1 k 3 f c

k 2d n

k 2d n
dn

dn

Strain

Tr u e S t r e s s
Block

Eq u i va l e n t
Rectangular
Stress Block

FIGURE C8.1.3 EQUIVALENT RECTANGULAR STRESS BLOCK

As the concrete strength increases, the generalized stress-strain curve becomes increasingly
triangular. For the case of a triangular stress-strain relationship, again assuming that plane
sections remain plane, equilibrium gives = 2/3 and k1 = 3/4. These limits are absolute if a
rational model is to be established and, thus, for all strengths of concrete:

0.67 2 = k1k3 0.67


For under-reinforced sections incorporating low levels of longitudinal tensile reinforcement
where the steel can reach its ultimate tensile strength (fsu) at the reinforcing steel tension
strain limit (su), before the concrete in the compressive zone reaches the concrete
compression strain limit, cu = 0.003, the shape of the true stress block shown in
Figure C8.1.3 is closer to triangular. In this case, it is still sufficiently accurate for design
purposes to assume an equivalent rectangular stress block when calculating Muo; however,
the depth of the neutral axis (dn) and the slope of the strain diagram, i.e. curvature (Ku),
calculated from such an analysis will not be correct. The curvature at the ultimate limit state
may be more accurately determined by calculating the extreme concrete fibre strain
(c < cu) such that equilibrium of longitudinal forces is satisfied, with the strain in the
extreme longitudinal tensile steel assumed to equal su dependent on its ductility class.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

118

C8.1.4 Dispersion angle of prestress


Prestress concentrated in anchorage disperses into the slab, as shown in Figure C8.1.4. In
the absence of detailed calculation, the Standard adopts a conservative value for the angle
of dispersion of 30 either side of the centre-line of the applied prestress. In trade literature,
less conservative values of as high as 120 (60 either side of the centre-line) have been
recommended and = 90 is commonly adopted (Refs 3 and 4).

R e g i o n s n ot p r e s tr e s s e d
i n di r e c ti o n p a r a ll e l to
c o n c e ntr a te d te n d o n s

Fr e e e d g e

FIGURE C8.1.4 PLAN DISPERSION OF PRESTRESS INTO FLOOR SLAB

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.1.5 Design strength in bending


The importance of ductility in reinforced concrete slabs has been well established (Refs 1
and 5). Ductility provides alternative load paths as cross-sections and regions reach the
ultimate limit state. It is also essential for robustness and the ability to absorb energy. A
structure should be as ductile as possible so that adequate warning of incipient collapse is
given by large deflections and crack widths. Ductility also enables a redundant structure to
redistribute the bending moments under external actions to the greatest advantage as well as
providing a safer structure under blast or earthquake loading. The Standard requires that
ductile cross-sections be used wherever possible.
There are two essential requirements for satisfactory flexural strength design of beams (or
slabs) at the ultimate limit state, viz.
(a)

the cross-section design strength in bending has to equal or exceed the design bending
moment at every section along the member for positive or negative bending or both;
and

(b)

the assumptions of the cross-section analysis used to determine the cross-section


design strength in bending along the member have to be valid.

Item (a) involves the method of structural analysis used to calculate the design bending
moment field. For indeterminate members, moment redistribution normally arising for a
number of reasons, including inaccuracies in modelling flexural stiffness or from changing
boundary conditions due to support settlement, will create ductility demand on the critical,
peak moment regions. Ductility demand for load cases considered in a design, but not due
to accidental or undetermined cases, may be reduced if internal moments are not
redistributed in design, which is required by the Standard when low ductility (Ductility
Class L) longitudinal tensile reinforcement is used.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

119

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

As a further measure to account for the limited rotation capacity of critical regions in
indeterminate members incorporating low-ductility (Ductility Class L) reinforcement, the
maximum value of capacity reduction factor ( ), has been reduced from 0.8 to 0.64, as
defined in Table 2.2.2(b)(ii). The value of is further reduced to 0.6 if the critical regions
are over-reinforced, which is the same as that for concrete in pure compression [see
Table 2.2.2(a)(ii)].
In the case of beams containing Ductility Class N reinforcement, ductility can be directly
related to the quantity of tensile reinforcement in the cross-section and hence the neutral
axis depth (kud). The moment-curvature relationship for a beam segment is shown in
Figure C8.1.5(a), and the distribution of longitudinal stress and strain under ultimate
strength conditions on a ductile (under-reinforced) beam cross-section, where the steel is
at yield, and an over-reinforced beam cross-section, where the steel is below yield, are
well known and are shown in Figure C8.1.5(b). Curvature capacity reduces as the amount of
tensile steel increases, and hence ku, increases (Ref. 6).
If the strength reduction factor of 0.8 is to be adopted for a member in flexure, the Standard
requires that the member be ductile. Under-reinforced members with 500 MPa grade
Class N tensile reinforcement are deemed to be ductile if the neutral axis depth parameter is
not greater than kuo = 0.36. The value of 0.36 is selected as being two-thirds of the depth of
the neutral axis at the balanced failure condition for 500 MPa grade reinforcing steel.
Note that this value has been reduced from 0.4 used in earlier editions of Standard, which
had been determined for 400 MPa grade reinforcing steels.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Cross-sections with kuo > 0.36 cannot always be avoided with certain types of structural
elements such as some prestressed and/or precast elements. If such members are to be used,
the following points should be borne in mind:
(i)

Only those simplified methods of flexural analysis based on assuming zero moment
redistribution should be used to determine the design action effects for the members;
that is, the design action effects in Clause 6.10.2 and the bending moment coefficients
in Table 6.10.3.2(B) for rectangular slabs supported on four sides.

(ii)

The curvature capacity of cross-sections is enhanced by the addition of compressive


reinforcement and it is prudent to provide a minimum amount equal to, or greater
than, an area of 1%, calculated on the area of concrete in compression, to reduce the
likelihood of the brittle mode of failure usually associated with over-reinforced
sections. The longitudinal compressive reinforcement has to be laterally restrained by
fitments against buckling as specified in Clauses 8.1.10.7 and 8.1.10.8 as appropriate.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

120
0.003
k ud

s < sy
Over-reinforced

(i) Over reinforced

MOMENT

Ductile
b

k ud

0.003
C

R
M

M
s > sy
CURVATURE ( 1 )
R

(a) Moment-curvature

(ii) Ductile

(b) Stress-strain

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

FIGURE C8.1.5 MOMENT-CURVATURE AND STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS

For members in which kuo > 0.36, the value of the capacity reduction factor () is reduced
below 0.8 for Class N reinforcement and tendons [row (b)(i) of Table 2.2.2] and below 0.64
for Class L reinforcement [row (b)(ii) of Table 2.2.2] to account for the reduction in
ductility. The value of has a lower limit of 0.6, which is the same as that for concrete in
pure compression.
It is important to recognize that the moment-curvature relationships plotted in
Figure C8.1.5(a) are an average for a segment taken across multiple cracks and that the
strain in the tensile bar reinforcement taken at a crack may be many times larger than the
average strain. This is a result of strain localization (see Refs 1 and 2).
For reinforced concrete beams and columns it is important to recognize that the Euler
Bernoulli hypothesis that plane sections remain plane is only true on average (that is, for
strains measured over multiple cracks on the tensile side and beyond the crushing region on
the compressive side of the neutral axis.) Strain localization is a condition where a large
variation of strains occurs as a result of a local event. In the context of cracked reinforced
concrete, strain localizations occur in both the concrete as it crushes and in the reinforcing
steel as it passes through a crack. Using a tension chord model and the known properties of
the reinforcement, the concrete and the cross-section (Ref. 2), the average strain across
multiple cracks (ave) is given by the following:

ave = s.cr / SLF


where s.cr is the strain in the reinforcing steel at the cracked section and SLF is a strain
localization factor. Typical values for the SLF for reinforced concrete beams and one-way
slabs range between 5 to 8 (Ref. 2).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

121

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C8.1.6 Minimum strength requirements


C8.1.6.1 General
When a reinforced concrete beam or slab is required to support only a low level of
(ultimate) design load it may be uncracked under service load conditions. This may occur,
for instance, in beams that, for architectural or other reasons, are much larger in crosssection than that required by strength considerations; however, the (ultimate) flexural
capacity of a section (M uo) is evaluated on the basis of a cracked cross-section. For small
amounts of flexural reinforcement, this capacity could be less than the cracking moment
(Mcr) and, on cracking, fracture of the reinforcement may occur, resulting in a brittle and
sudden failure. To prevent this, the flexural capacity is required to be at least 20% greater
than the cracking moment, calculated using the lower characteristic flexural tensile strength
). Initially, the use of the lower characteristic tensile strength may
of the concrete ( f ct.f
appear non-conservative and that the mean or even upper characteristic value may be more
appropriate; however, the estimate of (Muo)min ignores the tensile stress that inevitably
develops due to the restraint to shrinkage and temperature changes (i.e. cs = 0) and reduces
the moment required to initiate flexural cracking.
For statically indeterminate members, this requirement may be waived provided it can be
shown that the collapse load of the member is not reduced or that cracking would not cause
a sudden collapse, such as may happen if the longitudinal reinforcement fractures. In this
case, consideration should be given to the effects of strain localization (Refs 1 and 2).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For reinforced concrete, rectangular T- and L-sections (which contain no prestressing),


deemed to comply equations are provided that satisfy the minimum flexural capacity
requirement (Ref. 7).
C8.1.6.2 Prestressed beams at transfer
Prestressed beams may fail during transfer if the force in the prestressing cable is sufficient
to cause the concrete to crush. Consequently, the capacity reduction factor () is set to 0.6,
which is consistent with a compression failure in the concrete (see Table 2.2.2).
In the load combination of Clause 2.4, a factor of 1.15 is applied to the maximum
prestressing force (Pjm) that occurs during the jacking operation at the section under
consideration. The factor of 0.6 is applied to the strength of the concrete section (Nu) in
combined compression and bending (if appropriate). When calculating the moment on the
section at transfer, a load factor of 0.9 is applied to the self-weight moment if it reduces the
risk of failure or 1.15 if it increases the risk of failure. The design requirement is:

0.6 N u 1.15Pjm
A procedure for checking this strength requirement is described in Ref. 3.
As an alternative, the second paragraph provides a deemed to comply provision that the
strength at transfer may be deemed to be adequate if the extreme fibre compressive stress is
limited to 0.5fcp when the stress distribution is uniform or 0.6fcp when the distribution is
triangular. For this check, a load factor of 0.9 is applied to the self-weight moment if it
reduces the risk of failure or 1.15 if it increases the risk of failure.
C8.1.7 Stress in reinforcement and bonded tendons at ultimate strength
The equation for pu is based on the recommendations made by Mattock (Ref. 8) and has
not changed from previous editions of the Standard. It gives a consistent estimate of the
maximum stress in the tendons at ultimate, with or without additional non-prestressed
tensile and compressive reinforcement. The equation is a conservative approximation to the
more accurate calculation based on strain compatibility and equilibrium but is valid only if
the effective prestress after all losses ( p.ef) is not less than 0.5fpb.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

122

C8.1.8 Stress in tendons not yet bonded


The expression for pu has not changed from previous editions of the Standard and was
taken from the 1983 edition ACI 318 (Ref. 9). The formula for pu in Item (a) is a
conservative estimate, based on test results (Ref. 10) and recommendations made by ACIASCE (Ref. 11). Test results (Ref. 12) indicate that the stress in unbonded tendons at the
ultimate condition is overestimated by the equation in Item (a) for members with a span-todepth ratio greater than 35 (one-way slabs and two-way slabs) and the equation in Item (b)
is a better estimate for pu for such members.
The value for pu should not be taken to be greater than fpy.
C8.1.9 Spacing of reinforcement and tendons
This Standard allows the designer to decide on the minimum distance between bars, ducts
and tendons and consideration needs to be given to placement of the concrete and its
compaction. As a guide for conventional concrete and construction, the clear spacing
between bars (or bundled bars) should be the greater of 1.5 times the size of the largest
aggregate particle, 1.5 times the diameter of the vibrator and 30 mm.
The maximum spacing between bars is based on crack control considerations in accordance
with Clause 8.6.1(b).
C8.1.10 Detailing of flexural reinforcement and tendons
Reinforcement and tendons are required to be detailed so that the steel stresses assumed in
design can be developed in the actual structure. The development of stress in reinforcement
and tendons is required to comply with Section 13.
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.1.10.1 General procedure for detailing reinforcement and tendons


Flexural reinforcement may be curtailed in regions where it is no longer required to carry
stress. The theoretical cut-off point for a tensile reinforcing bar or tendon is that point along
a beam where the bar or tendon is no longer required to carry tension. The tensile
reinforcement should be carried past the theoretical point of cut-off by a distance of at least
D + Lst for reinforced beams and D + Lpt for pretensioned beams (see Figure C8.1.10.1).
The development length for a reinforcing bar (Lst) at the theoretical cut-off point is
specified in Clause 13.1.2.4 and should not be less than 12db. For post-tensioned beams, the
termination point of the tendons at an internal anchorage should be determined using the
truss analogy.
The designer should be aware that development length requirements need to be satisfied for
all sections along the beam.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

123

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014


D

Hy p oth e ti c a l b e n di n g m o m e nt
Enve l o p e di s p l a c e d D e i th e r
s i d e of m a x i m u m +ve a n d -ve
B e n di n g m e m o m e nt

A st
D + Lst

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

+
A st

+
A st

+
A st
4

NOT E: L s t = Te n si le developme nt le ng t h 12 d b
A s+t = A r e a of t e n si le r ei n force me nt for m a x i mu m p osit ive b e nd i ng mome nt
A st = A r e a of t e n si le r ei n force me nt for m a x i mu m negat ive b e nd i ng mome nt

FIGURE C8.1.10.1 DISPLACED BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM

C8.1.10.2 Distribution of reinforcement


The width and distribution of flexural cracks in the top flange of a beam subjected to
negative bending moment is greatly influenced by the distribution of the tensile
reinforcement. It has been shown to be undesirable to concentrate all of the tensile
reinforcement within the web, as illustrated in Figure C8.1.10.2(a), as the cracks in the
flanges will be larger. Furthermore, compaction of the concrete within the web may be
impeded by lack of clearance for a vibrator. A better arrangement is illustrated in
Figure C8.1.10.2(b), where a proportion of the flexural reinforcement is spread into the
flange. If heavy shear reinforcement is required, it is desirable to place the major part of the
flexural reinforcement within the web, in which case additional bars should be placed in the
flanges to control flexural cracking.

(a) U n d e s i r a b l e

( b) Pr e fe r r e d

FIGURE C8.1.10.2 REINFORCEMENT DETAILS

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

124

C8.1.10.3 Continuation of negative moment reinforcement


In the negative moment region adjacent to an internal support, not less than one-third of the
negative moment reinforcement required at the support should extend at least a distance D
past the point of contra-flexure. The point of contra-flexure referred to here is the original
undisplaced point of contra-flexure determined by analysis. This Clause caters for the fact
that the bending moment diagram calculated for a continuous member is almost certainly
not the same as in the real structure. Cracking, creep and shrinkage of the concrete cause
the point of contra-flexure to move continuously with time even under constant sustained
loads.
C8.1.10.4 Anchorage of positive-moment reinforcement

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Sufficient anchored reinforcement (or tendons) is required to carry all the longitudinal
tensile forces acting at a simple support. This includes the force V* cot v/ arising from the
so-called truss analogy. This force is the design value of the longitudinal component of
the inclined compressive strut that carries the applied load to the support of a beam. Where
additional longitudinal tensile forces exist, such as those arising due to torsion or restraint,
they too need to be carried by adequately anchored reinforcement. The shear (V*), is
generally calculated at a distance do from the face of the support, or at the face of the
support where diagonal cracking can take place at the support or extend into it.
A minimum amount of anchored tensile reinforcement is also required at a simple support.
The Standard requires either at least one-half of the tensile reinforcement required at midspan to extend past the face of the support for a length of at least 12db, or at least one-third
of the tensile reinforcement required at mid-span extend past the face of the support for a
length of at least 8db + D/2. These minimum requirements are relaxed at a continuous or
rotationally restrained support, where the positive moment reinforcement is generally
located in the compressive zone and a full anchorage is not required. Nevertheless, a
minimum of one quarter of the positive moment reinforcement is required to extend past the
face of the support. For slabs subject to one-way shear (beam shear) and where no shear
reinforcement is required, the minimum extension may be reduced below 12db (see
Clause 9.1.3.1).
C8.1.10.5 Shear strength requirements near terminated flexural reinforcement
Wherever longitudinal flexural reinforcement is terminated in a tension zone, a primary
crack is likely to occur at the discontinuity. This crack tends to be wider than adjacent
primary cracks and, if it becomes inclined due to the presence of shear, may lead to
premature shear failure (probably due to a reduction in aggregate interlock). The Standard
requires that this effect be assessed and accommodated in design. Three alternative deemedto-comply approaches are specified: the first places a limit on the amount of tensile
reinforcement that can be terminated within any distance 2D along the beam; the second
involves providing at least 50% more shear capacity than that required if no flexural bars
were terminated; and the third involves including additional shear reinforcement (A sv.min.)
for a distance D along the terminated bar from the cut-off point.
C8.1.10.6 Deemed-to-comply arrangement of flexural reinforcement
The deemed-to-comply arrangements are illustrated in Figure C8.1.10.6.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

125

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014


0. 3 L n

A s t n e g a t i ve
4

No cog required

0. 2 L n

A s t n e g a t i ve
2
B a l a n c e of
A s t n e g a t i ve

12d b

12d b

A s t n e g a t i ve
2

A s t n e g a t i ve
B a l a n c e of A s t n e g a t i ve

0.1L n
m a x.

0.1L n
m a x.

4
i n to s u p p o r t

Cl e a r s p a n ( L n )
Simple support

Continuous support

FIGURE C8.1.10.6 DEEMED-TO-COMPLY ARRANGEMENTS OF FLEXURAL


REINFORCEMENT

C8.1.10.7 Restraint of compressive reinforcement


The longitudinal compressive bars required for strength in a beam are to be restrained by
fitments in the same way as the longitudinal compressive bars in a column in order to
eliminate premature outwards buckling of the bars.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.1.10.8 Bundled bars


The requirements for bundled bars are the same as in previous editions of the Standard and
experience has shown that they result in satisfactory structural behaviour.
C8.1.10.9 Detailing of tendons
As for reinforced concrete beams, the hypothetical bending moment diagram obtained by
displacing the calculated positive and negative moment envelopes by a distance D, as
shown in Figure C8.1.10.1, are to be used when designing the anchorage requirements and
debonding details for prestressed concrete members. In addition, a minimum amount of
anchored tensile reinforcement is also required at a simple support. At least one-third of the
tendons required at the section of maximum moment in a pretensioned member are required
to be continued to the end of the member without debonding (see also
Paragraph C8.1.10.4).
Where tendons curve in plan, the effect of the resulting transverse forces imposed on the
beam have to be considered in design.
C8.2 STRENGTH OF BEAMS IN SHEAR
C8.2.1 General
As (flexural) shear without torsion is by far the most common design situation, the
requirements have been written for that situation. This simplifies the procedure for shear
design. Where torsion is present, separate and additional requirements, which interact with
the shear requirements, have to be taken into account.
The requirements of Clause 8.2.1 also cover flexural shear (or beam shear) in slabs.
C8.2.2 Design shear strength of a beam
The shear strength (Vu) is assumed to be the sum of the shear strength provided by the
concrete (Vuc) and the strength provided by the shear reinforcement (Vus). This traditional
approach deals efficiently with the design for shear in reinforced and prestressed beams.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

126

A semi-rational modelling approach is adopted where the concrete component is obtained


using an empirical formula while the steel component is determined using a variable-angle
truss-analogy method (Refs 11 to 13). Where torsion is present in beams requiring shear
reinforcement, Vuc should be taken as zero.
C8.2.3 Tapered members
*
) may be reduced by
For determining V*, the shear force from the sectional analysis ( Vsect

any favourable contributions resulting from any inclined tension chords ( V tf* ) and
compression chords ( V cf* ), as shown in Figure C8.2.3. Any unfavourable contributions from
*
.
inclined chord forces are to be added to Vsect

V c*f
M s*e c t
V*

N s*e c t

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

V s*e c t

V t*f

FIGURE C8.2.3 SHEAR FORCES IN TAPERED MEMBERS

C8.2.4 Maximum transverse shear near a support


This Clause defines the position at which the design shear force is to be determined.
Usually, it is at a distance equal to do from the face of the support [Illustrations (a) and (b)
of Figure C8.2.4]. Distributed loads acting on the beam between the support and the critical
section may generally be disregarded. Large concentrated loads between the support and the
critical section may be treated by using a strut-and-tie analysis.
In circumstances, where a failure surface can develop within the support area, the critical
section is to be taken at the face of the support. A typical case is illustrated in
Figure C8.2.4(c) for a hanger support.

C r i ti c a l s e c ti o n
d0

d0

(a) En d s u p p o r t

d0

( b) Inte r i o r s u p p o r t

C r i ti c a l s e c ti o n
(c) H a n g e r s u p p o r t

FIGURE C8.2.4 POSITION OF CRITICAL CROSS-SECTION

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

127

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C8.2.5 Requirements for shear reinforcement


Concrete beams can possess considerable shear strength without shear reinforcement, with
contributions from friction along the cracked surface due to slip along the surface
(aggregate interlock), resistance provided in the uncracked flexural compressive zone and
dowel action provided by the longitudinal reinforcing steel. Cracking resulting from
restrained shrinkage and restrained thermal deformations have been responsible for a
number of shear failures in members without shear reinforcement. Since shear failure can
be quite sudden, the Standard adopts a conservative approach to the calculation of the
strength of beams without shear reinforcement.
It is good practice to use adequately anchored stirrups even in areas of low shear,
particularly when tensile steel quantities are relatively high and cross-section ductility is
required. Notwithstanding, the Standard does not require shear reinforcement in regions of
low shear in a shallow beam (where D 750 mm) (i.e. wherever V* 0.5Vuc). Although
permitted by the Standard, beams without shear reinforcement are not recommended.
C8.2.6 Shear strength limited by web crushing

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

In the truss analogy shown in Figure C8.2.6, the shear in a beam is carried by tension in the
vertical stirrups and by compression in the inclined concrete struts between the inclined
cracks in the web of the beam. If excessive shear reinforcement is included, shear failure
will occur by crushing of the concrete in the inclined strut before the steel in the stirrup has
yielded. This undesirable and often explosive failure has to be avoided. This Clause places
an upper limit on the shear strength of a beam to ensure that compressive failure of the
concrete web strut does not occur and that shear failure will in fact be precipitated by
yielding of the reinforcement (Ref. 14).
A reduction in the width of the web, to allow for grouted ducts, is included. This was
proposed by Leonhardt (Ref. 15) and supported by tests by Clark and Taylor (Ref. 16). For
ungrouted ducts, the reduction should be for the full duct diameter.
Where a prestressing force is inclined to the axis of the member, the vertical component of
the prestressing force (Pv) usually opposes the applied shear force and is included as a
positive part of the capacity of the cross-section. In situations where the vertical component
of the prestressing force increases the applied shear, the component Pv in the equation for
Vu.max. has to be included as a negative quantity.

C o m p r e s s i ve to p
c h o r d (c o n c r e te)
Inclined
we b s tr u t s
(c o n c r e te)

Ve r ti c a l ti e s
(s ti r r u p s)

Te n s il e b ot to m c h o r d ( A s t )

FIGURE C8.2.6 THE TRUSS ANALOGY (Ref. 17)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

128

C8.2.7 Shear strength of a beam excluding shear reinforcement


C8.2.7.1 Reinforced beams
This empirical equation is of the same form as in previous editions of AS 3600, but with
some significant changes. The equation is similar to that developed by Zsutty (Ref. 18) and
has been modified to suit AS 3600. The formula was checked against, and found to agree
with, experimental data (Ref. 19). On the basis of 367 test results, selected for the
reliability of the test from 25 different sources, taken from the University of Toronto
dataset (Ref. 20), it was found that, for those tests that satisfied code limits on
reinforcement quantities and with span to depth ratios greater than 2.5, the mean value of
experimental load over predicted load was 1.14, with a coefficient of variation of 21%.
The formula takes account of the following parameters, which influence the strength of a
beam without shear reinforcement:
Proportion of tensile steel (Ast/bvdo) This parameter has been shown by many
investigations to be of major importance in the shear strength of beams. The designer
should be aware that it is the tensile steel provided in the shear zone that is critical and the
proper anchoring of the steel is to be considered. The effect of this parameter on the
strength is shown in Figure C8.2.7(A).

FAILURE STRESS (MPa)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

2.0

1. 5

1.0

E x p e r i m e nt a l
trend

0. 5

0.0
0.0 0

0.01

0.0 2

0.0 3

0.0 4

0.0 5

PR O P O R T I O N O F ST EEL ( A s t /b v d o )

FIGURE C8.2.7(A) EFFECT OF STEEL PROPORTION ON THE SHEAR CAPACITY OF


BEAMS WITHOUT SHEAR REINFORCEMENT

For reinforcing bars and prestressing tendons to be considered to be effective in


contributing to the shear performance at a design cross-section, each bar or tendon is to
extend a sufficient distance past that design cross-section to develop the tension force
required in flexure at the design cross-section at a distance D from that cross-section in the
direction of reducing moment, as shown in Figure C8.2.7(B) below. This is to satisfy the
tension tie requirement inherent in the truss analogy model for shear design.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

129
L s y.t
d

V*

L s y.t

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

45

45

45
A st

A st

A st

V*

L s y.t

V*

A - s e c ti o n c o n s i d e r e d

FIGURE C8.2.7(B) DEFINITION OF Ast

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Concrete strength ( fc ) The variation of shear capacity is represented by a cube root of


the concrete strength (Ref. 21). In normal strength concrete, the shear failure surface tends
to go around the higher strength aggregate particles with failure through the weaker
cementitious matrix. This is not the case in high strength concrete, however, in which the
strength of the cementitious matrix is higher than that of the aggregate particles. In this
case, the shear failure surface tends to cut through the aggregate particles leaving a more
smooth surface and hence less friction opposing sliding on the crack. The concrete strength
at the transition between these conditions depends largely on the type and strength of the
aggregate used. The formula in the Standard is capped at a concrete strength of
f c = 64 MPa , with the cube root rounded to 4 MPa.
Size effect factor (1) The influence of the depth of the beam on the shear strength has
long been recognized. An example is given by Chana (Ref. 22), and is illustrated in
Figure C8.2.7(C) for a series of geometrically similar beams. The format of this factor is
based on the CEB Model Code (Ref. 23) and is based on a conservative analysis of test
data. A lower limit of 1.1 was adopted; however, subsequent test data on much larger beams
than were available at that time have shown that, for members with less than minimum
shear reinforcement, the lower limit is unconservative. Figure C8.2.7(D) shows a
comparison of the 1 factor for the data set considered by Lubell et al. (Ref. 24). In this data
set, beams unreinforced for shear and of depths up to 3 m were available. Thus, in the 2009
edition of the Standard, the lower limit for 1 was reduced to 0.8 for members with less than
minimum shear reinforcement.
The size effect is attributable to the size of the aggregate particles and the crack opening
displacement at the point of failure (Refs 13, 25 and 26) and is less significant in members
with minimum shear reinforcement, or greater, and where the reinforcement is spaced at
centres of 300 mm, or less. In this case, the limit of 1.1 is appropriate.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

130

AVERAGE SHEAR STRESS ( V

V
bd ), MPa

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

2.0
Test results

1.5

1.0
0

100

200

300

400

TOTAL DEPTH (D), mm

FIGURE C8.2.7(C) EFFECT OF BEAM DEPTH ON SHEAR STRENGTH FOR


GEOMETRICALLY SIMILAR BEAMS (Ref. 22)

2. 5

1. 5

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

2.0

AS 3 6 0 0 - 20 01

1.0
0. 5
0.0

AS 3 6 0 0 - 20 0 9
0

50 0

10 0 0

150 0

20 0 0

250 0

3000

FIGURE C8.2.7(D) EFFECT OF BEAM DEPTH ON SHEAR STRENGTH OF BEAMS


UNREINFORCED IN SHEAR

Axial force factor (2) The factor is normally unity but, for members subject to
significant axial tension, it reduces as the crack widths become wider and the aggregate
interlock reduces. For beams subject to significant axial tension in addition to bending, the
factor is less than 1.0. For beams subject to axial compression, the factor is greater than 1.0.
If the beneficial effects of axial compression are included and 2 > 1.0, only the
compression caused by permanent loads should be included in the calculation and then with
a load factor less than unity. Beams restrained by shear walls or infill structures may need
special consideration of the likely tensile restraint forces. If in doubt, Vuc should be taken as
zero.
Shear-span to depth effect factor (3) This is an established parameter for the influence
of proximity of the load to the support. The factor is unity at sections greater than 2do from
the face of the nearest support, but for sections closer to the support and, where the applied
loads and the support are oriented so as to create diagonal compression adjacent to the
support, 2 increases up to a maximum of 2 at do from the face of the support. This is a
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

131

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

conservative factor and can be related to test results as shown in Figure C8.2.7(E). Note
that for loads within a distance D from the support, the factor becomes large. Alternatively,
strut-and-tie modelling may be applied for a more accurate treatment.

10
Deep beam
9
8

E X PER IMEN TA L ( 3 )

7
6
5
4
3

AS 3 6 0 0

3
2
1
0

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

a
d

FIGURE C8.2.7(E) EFFECT OF LOAD PROXIMITY TO THE SUPPORT ON BEAM


SHEAR STRENGTH

C8.2.7.2 Prestressed beams


The concrete contribution to the shear strength of a prestressed beam is dependent on
whether the inclined crack is a flexure-shear crack or a web-shear crack. Flexure-shear
cracks begin as flexural cracks and become inclined as they propagate into the web of the
beam. Web shear cracks occur in regions of high shear and low moment and usually in
members with thin webs. They occur when the principal tensile stress in the web of a beam
exceeds the direct (uniaxial) tensile strength of the concrete.
The equation for Vuc for flexure-shear cracking in prestressed beams has been kept similar
to that for reinforced beams for simplicity. For prestressed beams, the flexure-shear
strength is derived using the shear strength formula given for reinforced beams, increased
by the decompression shear (Vo). Also included is the vertical component of the
prestressing force (Pv). Where Pv opposes the applied shear force, it is included as a
positive part of the capacity of the concrete cross-section. In situations where Pv increases
the applied shear, it has to be included in Equation 8.2.7.2(1) [and in Equation 8.2.7.2(3)]
as a negative quantity. The equation has been checked against experimental data (Ref. 27).
C8.2.7.3 Secondary effects on Vuc
This requires the designer to consider the influence of possible secondary effects on shear
strength. Creep can relieve the concrete of compression and restraint to shrinkage and
temperature changes can induce significant tensile forces in the concrete. These effects may
reduce the load at which inclined cracks occur and may also increase the width of inclined
cracks with time, thereby reducing the aggregate interlock and the contribution of the
concrete to the shear strength (Vuc). If the magnitude of the tensile forces can be estimated,
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

132

the 2 factor may be used to include these effects. If in doubt, the value of Vuc should be
taken as zero.
C8.2.7.4 Reversal of loads and members in torsion
Where cracking can occur in regions that are normally in compression, such as in cases of
load reversal or from torsion where cracks can be wide at ultimate, there is considerable
doubt as to the reliability of values of Vuc specified elsewhere in Clause 8.2.7. In such
cases, Vuc is to be assessed by more rigorous calculation or taken as zero.
C8.2.8 Minimum shear reinforcement
As shear cracks form suddenly and in a brittle manner, sufficient shear reinforcement is
needed to guard against immediate failure at the onset of shear cracking. If the quantity of
shear reinforcement is too small, the reinforcement will yield immediately after the inclined
crack forms and the beam will fail. To avoid this, AS 36001988 adopted the ACI 318-71
(Ref. 28) provision, which required a minimum amount of shear reinforcement equal to
(converted to metric units)

Asv.min = 0.35

bv s
f sy.f

where bv and s are in mm, fsy is in MPa and Asv.min in mm2.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For a value of v = 45, as used in the ACI Code, this minimum amount corresponds to a
nominal force to be resisted by the reinforcement of s bv s, where s = 0.35 MPa. As the
stress needed to form the inclined crack increases with concrete strength, the limit on s has
been amended in AS 36002009 to be the greater of 0.06 f c and 0.35 MPa . The limit on s
for the standard strength grades are given in Table C8.2.8.
TABLE C8.2.8
NOMINAL SHEAR STRESS LIMIT FOR MINIMUM
SHEAR REINFORCEMENT s = Asv.minfsy.f/(bvs)

f c , MPa
s , MPa

20

25

32

40

50

65

80

100

0.35

0.35

0.35

0.38

0.42

0.48

0.54

0.6

C8.2.9 Shear strength of a beam with minimum reinforcement


The shear strength of a beam with minimum shear reinforcement is derived by adding the
shear strength contributed by the minimum area of shear reinforcement (Asv.min), given in
Clause 8.2.8, to the shear strength of the concrete section without reinforcement (Vuc). In
calculating the minimum shear strength, to provide consistency with Clause 8.2.10(a), the
strut inclination angle is taken as v = 30. With the area of shear reinforcement,
Asv.min = s bvs/fsy.f where s = max [ (0.06 ( f c ), 0.35)] MPa, the minimum shear strength
becomes

Vu.min = Vuc + max (0.06 f c , 0.35) bv z cot 30


where z is the internal lever arm between the flexural compressive force and the flexural
tensile force.
In the Standard, the approximation z do is used and the horizontal projection of the
inclined shear crack is taken as do cot 30.
C8.2.10 Contribution to shear strength by the shear reinforcement
The strength of a beam with shear reinforcement has been the subject of extensive research
(Ref. 29). The increase in strength with shear reinforcement ratio is shown in
Figure C8.2.10.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

133

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The assumption that the concrete contribution to the shear force (Vuc) remains constant after
inclined cracking, and equal to its value immediately before cracking, is convenient from a
design point of view as it eliminates any discontinuity in the design. In reality, the concrete
contribution decreases with higher shear forces and this effect is included in the CEB-FIP
method (Ref. 23).
Truss theories (e.g. Ref. 30) usually give a range for the truss angle, which becomes more
restricted with higher shear forces. In more severe cases, the truss angle is limited to about
45. In AS 3600, a procedure was adopted where Vuc is taken as constant but the truss angle
is explicitly stated and increases with increasing shear.
The method is a hybrid but gives reasonable results as shown in Figure C8.2.10.
Experimental results were obtained from Ref. 19.
It is noted that the inclination of the compressive strut v is expressed as a function of the
design shear (V*). This is most convenient in a design situation when the amount of shear
reinforcement (Asv) is being calculated. If, on the other hand, the shear strength of an
existing beam with known transverse reinforcement quantities is to be calculated, the
following expression may be more useful:
Asv Asv.min

Asv.max Asv.min

v = 30 + 15
where

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Asv.max =

bv s
f sy.f

Vuc
0.2 f c b d and
v o

Asv.min = max (0.06 f c ,0.35)

www.standards.org.au

bv s
f sy.f

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

134

Experimental values

0.3

Nielsen truss
Collins truss
AS 3600

b w df c'

Vu

0.2

0.1

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

A vf y

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

b w sf c'

FIGURE C8.2.10 EFFECT OF SHEAR REINFORCEMENT ON


SHEAR STRENGTHCOMPARISON OF PROPOSALS

C8.2.11 Hanging reinforcement


When the support is at the soffit of a beam or slab, as shown in Figure C8.2.11(A)(a), the
diagonal compression passes directly into the support. When the support is at the top of the
beam, as shown in Figure C8.2.11(A)(b), the diagonal compression will need to be carried
back up to the support via an internal tie as shown. It is essential that adequately anchored
reinforcement be included to act as the tension tie (termed hanging reinforcement in the
Standard) and that the reinforcement pass into and be anchored within the support.
Support

Inte r n a l tie
requiring
hanging
r e i nfo r c e m e nt

Support
(a)

( b)

FIGURE C8.2.11(A) SUPPORT POINTS (Ref. 17)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

135

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Consider the suspended slab supported from above by the upturned beam shown in
Figure C8.2.11(B). The horizontal component of the diagonal compression being delivered
at the support of the slab has to be resisted by the bottom slab steel. The vertical component
of the diagonal compression (i.e. the reaction from the slab) has to be carried in tension up
to the top of the upturned beam. This tension force has to be carried across the unreinforced
surface indicated in Figure C8.2.11(B)(a). The concrete on this unreinforced surface may
not be able to carry this tension and, if cracking occurs, premature and catastrophic failure
could occur. The detail shown in Figure C8.2.11(B)(b) overcomes the problem. The
diagonal compression from the slab is now resisted by the stirrups in the upturned beam
(acting as hanging reinforcement). No longer is there an unreinforced section of concrete
required to carry tension. The vertical and horizontal members of the analogous truss have
been effectively connected.

U n r e i n fo r c e d

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

( i ) In c o r r e c t d e t a il

( ii ) C o r r e c t d e t a il

FIGURE C8.2.11(B) SUSPENDED SLAB SUPPORTED FROM ABOVE BY


UPTURNED BEAM (Ref. 17)

Where a primary girder supports a secondary beam, and the secondary beam frames into the
side of the primary girder, hanging reinforcement is required. Consider the connection
shown in Figure C8.2.11(C). The reaction from the secondary beam (R*) is delivered to the
primary girder at the level of the bottom steel. This reaction should be carried by hanger or
suspension reinforcement up to the top of the girder where it can be resolved into diagonal
compression in a similar way to that of any other load applied to the top of the girder. For
the reasons discussed in the previous paragraph, the bottom reinforcement in the secondary
beam should always pass over the bottom reinforcement in the primary girder. The
reinforcement details of the primary girder, together with its truss analogy, are shown in
Figures C8.2.11(C)(b) and C8.2.11(C)(c).
The suspension reinforcement is additional to the transverse reinforcement required for
shear in the primary girder and has to be located within the secondary beam/primary girder
connection. The area of additional hanging reinforcement (Asr) required to carry the
factored reaction R* is given by

Asr =

R*
st f sy

where st = 0.7 (for strut and tie action) and fsy is the characteristic yield stress of the hanger
reinforcement.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

136

Pr i m a r y g i r d e r

Secondary beam
C o m p r e s s i o n s tr
trut in secondar y
Suspension
R*
( i ) S e c ti o n

Secondary beam

Fi tm e nt s

S u s p e n s i o n r e i nfo r c e m e nt

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

( ii ) Pr i m a r y g i r d e r - El evati o n

R*
( iii ) Pr i m a r y g i r d e r - Tr u s s a n a l o g y

FIGURE C8.2.11(C) BEAM-TO-BEAM CONNECTION (Ref. 17)

C8.2.12 Detailing of shear reinforcement


C8.2.12.1 Types
The types of reinforcement that may be used as shear reinforcement are restricted in this
Clause. Specifically, bent up bars are not allowed because of difficulties in anchorage,
potential crack control problems and the likelihood of the concrete splitting in the plane of
the bends (Ref. 15).
The strut and tie model for shear adopted in the Standard assumes that all bars crossing a
crack are at yield and, for all bars to be at yield, some will be required to undergo large
plastic deformation. The possibility of fracture of one or more of the bars before adjacent
bars have yielded has to be avoided.
C8.2.12.2 Spacing
The requirement for maximum spacing ensures that a potential failure surface (inclined
crack) intersects one or more stirrups and reduces the concentration of compressive forces
in the web strut. For lower shears, the failure surface is flatter (Ref. 31) and the inclined
compressive forces are more moderate, thus a relaxation of the limit to 0.75D or 500 mm is
permitted when V* Vu.min.
In regions of high shear, it is desirable to use multi-leg stirrups when more than two
longitudinal tensile bars are used. Multi-leg stirrups should be used in members with wide
webs to avoid the undesirable distribution of diagonal compression shown in
Figure C8.2.12.2. For this reason, the maximum spacing of shear reinforcement across the
width of a member is the smaller of 600 mm and D.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

137

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Cd

Cd

Ts

Ts

C r a c ks
Compression strut
(a) El eva ti o n

Rigid

Ts

Fl ex i b l e

( b) C r o s s - s e c ti o n

FIGURE C8.2.12.2 UNDESIRABLE DISTRIBUTION OF DIAGONAL COMPRESSION


DUE TO WIDE FITMENTS (Ref. 32)

C8.2.12.3 Extent
The Clause provides in part for possible inaccuracies in analysis and atypical failure
mechanisms, as well as considerations arising from truss-analogy theory. It is consistent
with the requirements of Clause 8.1.10.1 (see also C8.1.10.1).
C8.2.12.4 Anchorage of shear reinforcement

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

It is essential that shear reinforcement be adequately anchored. This Clause states the
minimum requirements for this purpose.
The flow of internal forces in a beam can be idealized as a parallel chord truss as illustrated
in Figure C8.2.6. The compressive top chord and the diagonal web strut are the concrete
portions of the truss while the tensile bottom chord and vertical web ties are the steel
reinforcement. The diagonal compression (in the concrete web strut) can only be resisted at
the bottom of the beam at the intersection of the horizontal and vertical reinforcement (that
is, at the pin-joints of the analogous truss). It is evident that the tension in the vertical tie is
constant over its entire height (that is, from the pin joint at the bottom chord to the pin joint
at the top chord). Therefore, adequate anchorage of the stirrups will need to be provided at
every point along the vertical leg of the stirrup. When calculating the shear strength
provided by the stirrups, it is assumed that every vertical stirrup leg crossed by an inclined
crack is at yield, irrespective of whether the inclined crack crosses the stirrup at its middepth or close to its top or bottom. The anchorage of the vertical leg of a stirrup may be
achieved by a standard hook or cog complying with Clause 13.1.2.7 or by welding of the
fitment to the longitudinal bar or by a welded splice.
Ideally, stirrups should be anchored in the compression zone where anchorage conditions
are most favourable. At ultimate loads, when diagonal cracks have developed, the
compression zone may be relatively small. Therefore, stirrup hooks should be as close to
the compression edge as cover requirements allow. Stirrups depend on this transverse
pressure for anchorage. It is common practice to locate the stirrup hooks near the top
surface of a beam, even in negative moment regions. When the top surface is in tension, the
discontinuity created by a stirrup and its anchorage may act as a crack initiator. Therefore, a
primary crack frequently occurs in the plane of the stirrup hook and anchorage is lost. As a
consequence, in these regions, the beam may possess less than its required shear strength.
It is good practice to show the location of the stirrup hooks on the structural drawings and
not to locate the hooks in regions where transverse cracking might compromise the
anchorage of the stirrup.
Stirrup hooks should always be located around a larger diameter longitudinal bar, which
disperses the concentrated force at the anchorage and reduces the likelihood of splitting in
the plane of the anchorage. Longitudinal bars are in fact required in each corner of the
stirrup to distribute the concentrated force applied to the concrete at each corner. It is
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

138

essential that the stirrup and stirrup hook fit snugly and be in contact with the longitudinal
bars in each corner of the stirrup.
In Figure C8.2.12.4, some satisfactory and some incorrect stirrup arrangements are shown.
Stirrup hooks should be bent through an angle of at least 135. A 90 bend (a cog) will
become ineffective should the cover be lost, for any reason, and will not provide adequate
anchorage. The Standard states that fitment cogs are not to be used when the cog is located
within 50 mm of any concrete surface.
In addition to carrying diagonal tension produced by shear, and controlling inclined web
cracks, closed stirrups also provide increased ductility by confining the compressive
concrete. The open stirrups depicted in Figure 8.2.12.4(b) are commonly used, particularly
in post-tensioned beams where the opening at the top of the stirrup facilitates the placement
and positioning of the post-tensioning duct along the member. This form of stirrup does not
provide confinement for the concrete in the compression zone and is undesirable in heavily
reinforced beams where confinement of the compressive concrete may be required to
improve ductility of the member.

Te n s i l e l a p p e d
s p li c e

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(a) In c o r r e c t

( b) U n d e s i r a b l e

C o m p r e s s i ve s i d e

Te n s il e s i d e
(c) S ati s fa c to r y

FIGURE C8.2.12.4 INCORRECT, UNDESIRABLE AND SATISFACTORY


FITMENT ANCHORAGES (Ref. 17)

C8.2.12.5 End anchorage of mesh


(No Commentary).
C8.3 STRENGTH OF BEAMS IN TORSION
C8.3.1 General
This Clause has been written to cover the design of beams subjected to torsion and any
combination of bending and shear. The strengths in bending and in shear, without torsion,
are determined from Clause 8.1 and Clause 8.2, respectively. It is noted that when torsion is
present in beams requiring shear reinforcement, the contribution of the concrete to the shear
strength has to be ignored.
C8.3.2 Secondary torsion
Compatibility torsion (called secondary torsion in the Standard) is treated in the manner
proposed by Collins and Mitchell (Ref. 30).
In a statically indeterminate structure where alternative load paths exist and the torsional
strength of a member is not required for equilibrium, the torsional stiffness of the members
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

139

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

may be disregarded in analysis. In the real structure, where members do have torsional
stiffness, torsion may develop. Provided the member is ductile, redistribution will occur
when torsional cracks develop and the compatibility torsion in the member will reduce
significantly. Compatibility torsion may be treated in design by providing sufficient
compatibility reinforcement to ensure torsional cracks are controlled at service loads. The
minimum quantity of reinforcement for compatibility torsion is specified in Clause 8.3.7
and the detailing requirements are specified in Clause 8.3.8.
A common example of compatibility torsion occurs in a spandrel beam supporting the edge
of a monolithic floor slab in a building structure. The floor loading causes torsion to be
applied along the length of the beam. The Standard permits a designer to disregard the
torsional stiffness of the spandrel beam in the structural analysis, and therefore disregard
torsion in the spandrel, and to rely on redistribution of internal forces to find an alternative
load path. In the real structure, torsion will develop in the spandrel beam before cracking.
When torsional cracking occurs, the torsional stiffness of the spandrel drops significantly,
and therefore the restraint provided to the slab edge is reduced. Additional rotation of the
slab edge occurs, reducing the negative moment in the slab and the torsion in the spandrel;
however, full redistribution will only occur if the structure possesses adequate ductility and
it may be accompanied by excessive cracking and large local deformations. Hence, the need
for a minimum quantity of ductile torsional reinforcement (Refs 4, 33 and 34).
C8.3.3 Torsional strength limited by web crushing

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

A simple upper limit Tu.max, consistent with the shear limit, is placed on the torsional
moment to avoid web crushing. This limit is conservative. For combined shear and torsion,
a linear interaction is assumed. The formula for Jt for solid rectangular sections has been
amended from the previous edition of the Standard.
C8.3.4 Requirements for torsional reinforcement
The components Tuc and Tus are the contributions of the concrete and steel reinforcement,
respectively, to the strength of the member in torsion without any shear force. Likewise, Vuc
and Vus are the strengths of the member in shear without any torsion. The values obtained
from Clause 8.2 for Vuc and Vus and from Clause 8.3.5 for Tuc and Tus, depending on the
absence or presence of torsional reinforcement, are as follows:
(a)

Where torsional reinforcement is not required, the linear interaction given is more
conservative than other theories.

(b)

Where torsional reinforcement is required, the conservative assumption is made that


the concrete contribution to the torsional strength is zero. Sufficient torsional
reinforcement consisting of closed and anchored stirrups of bar cross-sectional area
(Asw) at spacing (s) calculated in accordance with Clause 8.3.5(b) is required such that
Tus T*. The required torsional reinforcement is in addition to the reinforcement
required for shear calculated in accordance with Clause 8.2 (remembering that when
torsion is present Vuc should be taken as zero).

C8.3.5 Torsional strength of a beam


(a)

The torsional strength of a concrete beam without torsion reinforcement is largely


related to onset of torsional cracking, which is deemed to occur when the maximum
principal tensile stress exceeds the tensile strength of the concrete.

(b)

For a beam with closed fitments, the torsional strength is calculated from a variable
angle truss formulation with the angle of the torsional compressive struts taken as
equal to v, as determined from Clause 8.2.10. This represents a change from
AS 36002001 where the angle of the torsional struts was independent of that for
shear. While the theory of plasticity allows for such apparent contradiction in the
summation of the component solutions (flexure, shear and torsion), in the three
dimensional truss model on which the approach is based only one angle exists.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

140

C8.3.6 Longitudinal torsional reinforcement


The expressions given in this Clause for the additional longitudinal steel required for
torsion (additional to that required for bending and/or axial force) are obtained from the
variable angle truss formulation (see Refs 21 and 30).
C8.3.7 Minimum torsional reinforcement
The minimum quantity of closed ties and longitudinal reinforcement has to be provided in
order to maintain some torsional capacity of the section if cracking does occur and to
provide crack control at the serviceability limit states.
C8.3.8 Detailing of torsional reinforcement
Torsional reinforcement has to be detailed to ensure that a minimum number of legs of the
hoop reinforcement cross potential torsional cracks and that the full yield capacity of these
bars can be developed.
The longitudinal reinforcement should be detailed consistently with the design truss model,
with the longitudinal stringers located in the corners of the section.
C8.4 LONGITUDINAL SHEAR IN COMPOSITE AND MONOLITHIC BEAMS
C8.4.1 General
This Clause covers longitudinal shear design at the interface of precast concrete sections
and cast-in-place flanges or toppings and at flange to web connections of integrally cast
beam and slab construction.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.4.2 Design shear stress


The design longitudinal shear stress taken at the junction of a web and flange (*), may be
determined with reference to Figure C8.4.2 and the following:
(a)

For the case where the concrete compressive stress block lies within the flange, the
longitudinal design shear stress through section - may be approximately obtained
by taking moments about O on the left-hand face of the element and gives
C = V *

L
z

. . . C8.4.2(1)

where C is the change in the compressive force on the section over the length of L;
V* is the factored design shear force acting on the section; and z is the internal lever
arm between the centroids of the tensile and compressive forces.
The longitudinal design shear force per unit length (q*) through section - is
then

q * = C / L = V * / z

. . . C8.4.2(2)

and the longitudinal design shear stress is

* =
(b)

q* V *
=
bw bw z

. . . C8.4.2(3)

Where the compressive stress block lies within the web, the design longitudinal shear
force per unit length through the interface of the flange and web is approximated as
that given by Equation C8.4.2(3) multiplied by , where is the ratio of the
component of the compressive force that lies above the web-flange interface relative
to the total compressive force acting on the section.

When the flange is in tension, * is calculated also from Equation 8.4.2(3) but with the
proportionality factor calculated in terms of the tensile forces.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

141

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C +

Ds
1

1
2

d
V* +

Interface reinforcing
A sf spaced at s

T
bw

Area above section 1

A1 = bt

Area above section 2

A2 = bDs

V*

T +

FIGURE C8.4.2 SHEAR STRESS ON A LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF


LENGTH, L (SHOWN FOR FLANGE IN COMPRESSION)

C8.4.3 Shear stress capacity

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The design shear strength is due to


(a)

the clamping effects produced by the shear reinforcement;

(b)

the direct shear resistance provided by dowel effect and aggregate interlock; and

(c)

transverse pressure across the interface.

The clamping effect assumes that a crack occurs along the interface and shear transfer is
achieved by reinforcement crossing the crack. Any relative longitudinal displacement is
accompanied by a perpendicular displacement, which is proportional to the roughness of the
interface. This creates a tensile strain locally in the reinforcement and a force normal to the
shear plane. The maximum value of this force is equal to the area of the reinforcement (Asf)
over a spacing (s) times the yield strength of the reinforcement (fsy.f).
Reinforcement supplied for the purpose of this Clause will need to be fully anchored either
side of the shear plane to enable the yield strength to be achieved. Shear and torsion
reinforcement supplied to meet the requirements of Clauses 8.2 and 8.3 and which crosses
the shear plane may be taken as part or all of the area Asf.
The shear resistance is equal to the clamping force times the coefficient of friction ().
Frictional shear resistance may be increased by direct transverse pressure provided by
permanent unfactored distributed loads (gp). Shear resistance, in addition to the frictional
shear resistance, is provided by interlocking aggregates placed in direct shear along the
interface. The two forms of shear resistance are reflected by the coefficients and kco in the
shear strength equation. The design shear strength equation provides for both longitudinal
shear components. Resistance provided by dowel action of the shear reinforcement is not
easily calibrated and may be assumed to be incorporated in the first term.
The maximum yield strength of the shear reinforcement should be limited to 500 MPa as
there is no research evidence available to show that the full clamping force can be
developed when higher yield strength shear reinforcement is used. Very close spacing of
large diameter shear reinforcement may have the same effect as high yield shear
reinforcement. That is, the clamping force equal to the yield capacity of the shear
reinforcement may not be developed. Again, there is no research evidence on the effect of
size and spacing of shear reinforcement on the clamping force.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

142

C8.4.4 Shear plane reinforcement


This Clause specifies the maximum spacing of shear reinforcement to ensure that contact
pressure is developed at the interface. The Clause should be read in conjunction with
Clause 8.4.5, which provides for minimum thickness of topping.
C8.4.5 Minimum thickness of structural components
This Clause is primarily concerned with thin toppings whose uniformity of thickness may
be difficult to maintain and the curing of which needs to be carefully controlled. It may not
be possible to place and anchor interface shear reinforcement in a thin topping so that the
longitudinal shear strength will rely on the bond developed between the concrete and the
interface roughness.
C8.5 DEFLECTION OF BEAMS

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The strength of a reinforced or prestressed concrete beam depends primarily on the strength
of the steel reinforcement; however, the deflection of a beam depends to a much larger
extent on the deformational properties of the concrete, including the elastic modulus, the
creep coefficient, the shrinkage strain and, importantly, the tensile strength. These concrete
properties are much more variable than the strength of steel. They vary with time and are
dependent on the environmental conditions, particularly the degree of exposure and the
relative humidity.
The non-linear behaviour that complicates serviceability calculations is due to cracking,
tension stiffening, creep, and shrinkage of the concrete. Of these, shrinkage is perhaps the
most problematic. Restraint to shrinkage causes time-dependent cracking, which reduces
member stiffness and gradually reduces the beneficial effects of tension stiffening. In
addition, shrinkage in members with eccentric reinforcement results in a time-dependent
curvature on each cross-section and an additional increase in deflection with time.
In addition to the deformational characteristics of the concrete, many of the other factors
that affect the final deflection of a beam are not known reliably at the design stage,
including the magnitude and age of application of the construction loads, the environmental
conditions at the time of casting, the curing regime and the in-service load history. As a
consequence, the calculation of deflection and the design for serviceability are less certain
than the design for strength, and designers should be aware of the limitations and
approximations of the various design approaches (Ref. 35).
C8.5.1 General
A three-tiered approach is specified for the control of deflection. The top tier involves the
estimation of beam deflection by refined calculation (Clause 8.5.2), while the middle tier
involves the calculation of deflection by simplified calculation (Clause 8.5.3). In each of
these approaches, the designer needs to ensure that the calculated deflection is less than the
appropriate deflection limit for the member determined in accordance with Clause 2.3.2.
The bottom tier for deflection control, and by far the simplest approach, involves the
satisfaction of the maximum span-to-depth ratio specified in Clause 8.5.4. According to this
approach, there is no requirement to calculate deflection, provided the beam effective depth
exceeds the minimum specified value; however, the use of any of these procedures, without
critical assessment and appropriate consideration of the factors that affect deflection, may
not eliminate deflection problems.
C8.5.2 Beam deflection by refined calculation
This Clause provides for refined methods of deflection calculation based on a rational
quantitative assessment of the factors that affect deflection, including

the loss of stiffness caused by cracking;

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

143

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

the stiffening effect of the tensile concrete between the cracks in the tensile regions of
the beam (i.e. the tension-stiffening effect);

the estimated or measured creep and shrinkage characteristics of the concrete;

the expected load history;

the expected construction methodology; and

the possibility of deflection of formwork and settlement of supports during


construction.

After these effects have been included in the estimates of curvature at critical crosssections, the deflection at any stage in the beams history may be calculated by integration
of the relevant curvature diagram. Calculations may be made using a variety of analytical
techniques, ranging from hand calculations to non-linear finite element analysis to be
included.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(a)

Cracking and tension stiffening Cracking of a reinforced or prestressed concrete


beam reduces the stiffness of the member. An accurate assessment of the onset and
extent of cracking is necessary for reliable prediction of deflection, but such an
assessment is not a straightforward task. Cracking frequently occurs when
construction loads are applied to beams at relatively young ages when the concrete
tensile strength is relatively low. Cracking is also caused by load independent effects,
such as the restraint to shrinkage and temperature variations provided at the supports
of a member, or by the embedded reinforcement. These forms of restraint frequently
induce tension that leads to time-dependent cracking. They may cause extensive
cracking, even before the design service loads are applied to the structure. For
example, cracking in slabs exposed to direct sunlight at an early age may occur before
the formwork is removed due to a combination of early shrinkage and a sudden
temperature change. Severe cracking problems caused by excessive early shrinkage
associated with inadequate curing and rapid drying have been observed, even in
situations where laboratory tests showed that the concrete did not have a high final
shrinkage strain.
When cracking is identified, the loss of stiffness depends on the magnitude and
distribution of the tensile reinforcement and on the level of prestress. For reinforced
concrete in particular, the loss of stiffness due to cracking also depends on the
contribution of the tensile concrete between the cracks in the tensile zone. This
tension stiffening effect depends on the maximum tensile stress in the steel and
decreases with increasing steel stress levels (Refs 35 to 39). Tension stiffening is
most significant for lightly reinforced members (Ref. 40).
Unless better information exists for the calculation of deflection, it is prudent to
assume that the member has been previously subjected to its maximum short-term
service load or the design construction load, whichever is greater. The effects of
shrinkage and temperature changes on cracking should also be appropriately
considered. It is generally unwise to assume that a reinforced concrete beam will
remain uncracked throughout its design life and to use the gross section properties in
the calculation of either short-term or long-term deflection (Ref. 41). In most
situations, cracking is inevitable in reinforced concrete beams.

(b)

Shrinkage and creep properties of the concrete The creep and shrinkage
characteristics of concrete depend on the concrete mix proportions, the environment
and the size and shape of the member and are difficult to predict accurately at the
design stage. The estimation of the creep coefficient for a particular loading period is
given in Clause 3.1.8 and for the prediction of the magnitude and rate of development
of the shrinkage strain is given in Clause 3.1.7.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

144

A comprehensive treatment of effects of creep and shrinkage on the deflection of


concrete beams is provided in Ref. 35. Creep causes a time-dependent increase in
curvature on each loaded cross-section and, hence, a time-dependent increase in
deflection. The change in curvature due to creep is restrained by bonded
reinforcement, and so the long-term creep-induced curvature depends on the amount
and location of bonded reinforcement on the cross-section. Shrinkage is also
restrained by the bonded reinforcement. In addition to the tensile stresses caused by
restraint to shrinkage and the consequent increase in cracking with time, shrinkage on
a cross-section containing non-symmetrically placed reinforcement leads to a
shrinkage-induced curvature, and this results in a further change in deflection. The
shrinkage-induced curvature is greater on an initially cracked cross-section than on an
uncracked cross-section of the same dimensions and may cause a very significant
long-term deflection that is independent of the sustained load level.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(c)

Expected load history The loading used in the design for serviceability should be
carefully considered. AS/NZS 1170.0 (Ref. 42) provides details on the serviceability
loads and load combinations for use in design. Underestimates of the design service
loads can result in structures that deflect excessively and, at the other extreme,
overestimates of the design service loads can result in uneconomically conservative
designs.
Sustained loads on some members change as the structure deflects. For example, if a
masonry partition without any openings is built on top of a concrete beam, the beam
may deflect away from the rigid partition with time. The partition may begin to span
as a self-supporting deep beam and the partition loads will be transferred to the
concrete beam only near its ends. In the calculation of the long-term deflection of the
beam, it would be unrealistic to assume the partition load was uniformly distributed
over the entire span throughout the beams design life.
A further aspect of loading that should be considered is the load history. The age at
first loading is particularly important. Creep is larger when concrete is loaded at a
younger age, and the creep deflection of a beam is larger the earlier the member is
loaded. For the purposes of calculating the extent of cracking and the degree of
tension stiffening, construction loading and early stresses caused by shrinkage and
temperature effects may be of paramount importance.

(d)

Expected construction procedure Where possible, deflection calculations should


include realistic estimates of the on-site conditions during construction and take
account of the likely construction methodologies. The deflection of a structure
depends on the support conditions at the various stages of construction, as well as the
construction loads. Designers should take care to specify suitable stripping times,
adequate back propping, effective curing procedures and rigorous on-site supervision.
Conservative assumptions here may be just as costly as unconservative assumptions.

(e)

Deflection of formwork Where the formwork for a beam is supported off suspended
floors or beams below, the deflection of the supporting structure should be included
in the estimate of deflection of the supported beam or slab. This is particularly
important for flat slabs in multi-storey buildings, where significant initial deflection
can be built in a slab when the weight of the wet concrete causes the supporting floors
below to deflect.

A suitable design approach for the calculation of beam deflection by refined calculation is
described in Refs 35 and 43.
C8.5.3 Beam deflection by simplified calculation
C8.5.3.1 Short-term deflection
In the simplified deflection calculation procedure, the deflection that occurs immediately
after the application of the external service loads and the prestress (if any) is required to be
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

145

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

calculated using the mean value of elastic modulus of the concrete (Ecj), determined in
accordance with Clause 3.1.2 and an effective second moment of area of the member (Ief).
In addition to the cross-sectional dimensions and the amount and distribution of
reinforcement, the magnitude of Ief depends on the extent of cracking and the level of the
applied loads. The effective second moment of area of the member accounts for the
stiffness provided by the tensile concrete in the uncracked regions of the beam and the
tension stiffening effect provided by the tensile concrete between the primary cracks in the
cracked regions of the beam.
The value of Ief for a particular beam is determined as the weighted average of the value
obtained for the critical cross-sections. For a simply supported beam, the weighted average
value of Ief is the value at mid-span. For interior spans of continuous beams, Ief is half the
mid-span value plus one quarter of the value at each support, and for end spans of
continuous beams, Ief is half the mid-span value plus half the value at the continuous
support. For a cantilever, Ief is the value at the support.
For any particular cross-section
Icr < Ief I

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

where I is the second moment of area of the uncracked cross-section and Icr is the second
moment of area of the fully cracked cross-section (obtained by ignoring the tensile concrete
on the cracked section). For the calculation of both I and Icr, the transformed cross-section
is used, where the area of each reinforcement bar or bonded tendon on the cross-section is
transformed into an equivalent area of concrete located at the level of the reinforcement bar
or tendon.
Several different empirical equations are available for Ief at a cross-section, including the
well-known equation developed by Branson (Refs 44 and 45) and included in ACI 318
(Ref. 46) and previous editions of AS 3600. Another model for Ief was recently proposed by
Bischoff (Ref. 38) and may be derived (Ref. 40) from the deflection calculation procedure
specified in Eurocode 2 (Ref. 47). This model has been shown (Refs 40 and 48) to provide
much better predictions of the short-term deflections of both simply supported and
continuous members.
A modified, and significantly more realistic version of Bransons equation, is specified in
Equation 8.5.3.1(1):

I ef = I cr + ( I I cr )( M cr / M s* ) 3 I ef.max
The effect of this Equation on the shape of the average instantaneous moment-curvature
relationship of a typical cross-section is illustrated in Figure C8.5.3.1. The curve OAB
describes the average curvature taken over a gauge length containing several primary
cracks. At moments less than the cracking moment (Mcr), the member is uncracked and the
moment-curvature relationship is essentially linear (OA in Figure C8.5.3.1) with a slope
corresponding to the flexural rigidity of the uncracked transformed section (EcjI).
When the moment reaches the cracking moment (Mcr) [i.e. when the extreme fibre tensile
stress caused by bending and restraint to shrinkage reaches the flexural tensile strength,
( f ct.f )], primary cracks form at reasonably regular centres and the average moment
curvature relationship becomes non-linear. When a primary crack develops, there is a
sudden change in the local stiffness at and immediately adjacent to each crack. At a section
containing a crack, the tensile concrete carries little or no stress, the flexural stiffness drops
significantly and the local moment-curvature relationship on a cracked cross-section
follows the dashed lines AAC (when M Mcr) in Figure C8.5.3.1. The slope of line OAC
represents the flexural rigidity of the fully cracked transformed cross-section (EcjIcr).
After cracking, at typical in-service moment levels (e.g. when in Figure C8.5.3.1), the
average flexural rigidity of the cracked region of a beam including the tension stiffening
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

146

effect (EcjIef ) is the slope of the line OX in Figure C8.5.3.1 and is between EcjI and EcjIcr
depending on the magnitude of the applied moment.
When the maximum moment caused by the short-term serviceability load is not much larger
than the cracking load (i.e. when the ratio M cr / M s* in Equation 8.5.3.1(1) is not much less
than 1.0), Ief is closer to I than to Icr and the tension stiffening effect is large. When the
maximum short-term service load is much larger than the cracking moment [i.e. when the
ratio M cr / M s* in Equation 8.5.3.1(1) is small], Ief approaches Icr and the tension stiffening
effect is small. At any particular moment level, the horizontal distance between the curve
OAB and the line OC is the reduction in curvature caused by the stiffening effect of the
tensile concrete.

assuming
no cracking

B C

Ac tu a l r e s p o n s e

M O M EN T

EcjI

M s*
A

Mcr

EcjIcr

C o n c r e te c a r r i e s n o
te n s i o n

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

EcjIef

CU RVAT U R E

FIGURE C8.5.3.1 MOMENT VERSUS AVERAGE INSTANTANEOUS CURVATURE


OF A REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM SEGMENT

For lightly loaded cross-sections, where the cracking moment is greater than the maximum
short-term service moment, the maximum value of Ief [i.e. Ief.max in Equation 8.5.3.1(1)] is I
when the reinforcement ratio p = Ast/bd 0.005 and 0.6I when p < 0.005. This latter value
is an attempt to account for the large loss of stiffness that may result in a lightly reinforced
member if it is unexpectedly cracked due to accidental overload or subjected to other
unanticipated effects (Refs 35 and 40).
In the determination of Mcr in Equation 8.5.3.1(1), account should be taken of the
compressive stresses induced by prestress (if any) at the extreme fibre where cracking
occurs and the tensile stress that develops due to the restraint to shrinkage provided by the
bonded tensile reinforcement. The maximum shrinkage-induced tensile stress on the
uncracked section at the extreme fibre at which cracking occurs ( cs) is introduced to allow
for the reduction in the cracking moment, which inevitably occurs because of the restraint
to shrinkage provided by the bonded tensile reinforcement. Shrinkage-induced tension often
causes extensive time-dependent cracking, particularly in lightly loaded members (Ref. 49).
This time-dependent cracking may occur weeks and months after the member is first loaded
and needs to be accounted for if a meaningful estimate of deflection is required.
In the absence of more refined calculation, the Standard provides a revised expression for
cs (given the symbol fcs in the previous edition of the Standard). The revised expression for
cs is based on the expression originally proposed in Ref. 41 for singly reinforced
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

147

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

rectangular sections, where conservative values were assumed for the elastic modulus and
the creep coefficient of concrete and about 70% of the final shrinkage was considered in the
calculation of Mcr. The expression has been modified to accommodate the inclusion of
compressive reinforcement (Ref. 50). The calculation of cs for more general cross-sections
is discussed in detail in Ref. 51. Where appropriate, the additional tension that may arise
due to restraint to shrinkage provided by the supports of a beam should also be taken into
account.
The allowance for shrinkage-induced tension is particularly important in the case of lightly
reinforced members (including slabs) where the tension induced by the full service moment
alone might not be enough to cause cracking. In such cases, failure to account for
shrinkage-induced cracking may lead to gross underestimates of the actual deflection. For
heavily reinforced sections, the problem is not as significant, because the service loads are
usually well in excess of the cracking load and tension stiffening is not as significant.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The tensile stress that develops in a reinforced concrete member due to the restraint to
shrinkage provided by the steel reinforcement not only reduces the initial cracking moment
at first loading, but it causes time-dependent cracking to occur in the first few months after
loading, thereby expanding the cracked regions and reducing tension stiffening. This, in
turn, reduces stiffness and increases deflection. The simplified method for deflection
calculation in the previous edition of the Standard often failed to account adequately for
shrinkage-induced cracking in the first few months under load and, as a result, the approach
was not always conservative, particularly for lightly reinforced members. The revised
expression for cs in the Standard provides an improved estimate of the effects of
shrinkage-induced cracking on deflection.
For reinforced members only, alternative simplified expressions for calculating Ief are given
in the Standard as Equations 8.5.3.1(2) and 8.5.3.1(3). These expressions depend only on
the reinforcement ratio (p = Ast/befd), the concrete strength ( f c ) and the flange width to web
width ratio ( = bef/bw) (Ref. 55). These approximate values of Ief are independent of the
level of the applied moment and are approximately equal to Icr.
Therefore, in many situations, tension stiffening is significantly underestimated and the
predicted short-term deflection will be conservative.
C8.5.3.2 Long-term deflection
For the calculation of long-term deflection, two alternative approaches are specified.
For reinforced and prestressed beams, the shrinkage and creep components of the long-term
deflection may be calculated separately using the material data specified in the Standard
and the principles of mechanics. The shrinkage component of the long-term deflection may
be readily determined from the shrinkage-induced curvatures calculated at the critical
sections along the span of the beam using the design shrinkage strain (cs) specified in
Clause 3.1.7. The creep component of long-term deflection may be obtained from the creepinduced curvatures at the critical sections under the sustained service loads using the creep
coefficient for concrete (cc) specified in Clause 3.1.8. Reliable procedures for the
calculation of the shrinkage- and creep-induced curvatures on a cross-section and the
resulting long-term deflection components are outlined in Refs 35 and 43. The loss of
stiffness that may occur in reinforced concrete beams under sustained loads due to timedependent cracking, caused primarily by restraint to shrinkage, has been included in the
procedure for the calculation of short-term deflection in Clause 8.5.3.1 through the
inclusion of cs in the estimation of the cracking moment.
Alternatively, for reinforced concrete beams and slabs, the additional long-term deflection
caused by creep and shrinkage may be approximated by multiplying the short-term or
immediate deflection caused by the sustained load by the deflection multiplier kcs. The
deflection multiplier depends on the ratio Asc/Ast, where Asc is the area of the longitudinal
reinforcement in the compressive zone of the cracked section (i.e. between the neutral axis
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

148

and the extreme compressive fibre of the cracked cross-section) and Ast is the area of the
tensile reinforcement. The ratio Asc/Ast is determined for the cross-section at mid-span for a
simple or continuous span and at the support for a cantilever. For a singly reinforced beam
(i.e. where Asc = 0 at the critical section), the deflection multiplier kcs = 2 and reduces to a
minimum value of kcs = 0.8 when the ratio Asc/Ast = 1.
In the case of prestressed concrete members, where the effects of prestress may balance a
significant portion of the sustained service loads, the use of the deflection multiplier is not
permitted. Prestressed beams may suffer significant long-term deflection, even if the shortterm deflection due to the sustained loads is effectively eliminated, and the long-term
deflection due to creep and shrinkage has to be calculated separately.
The use of the deflection multiplier k cs to calculate time-dependent deflection is simple and
convenient and, provided the section is initially cracked under short-term loads, it will
usually provide a reasonable estimate of the long-term deflection of a reinforced concrete
beam; however, the shrinkage-induced deflection is not related to the short-term deflection
caused by sustained loads and the use of the long-term deflection multiplier to account for
shrinkage deflection is not rational. Shrinkage can cause significant deflection even in
unloaded members. The approach ignores many of the factors that influence the final
deflection, including the creep and shrinkage characteristics of the concrete, the
environment and the age at first loading. At best, it should be seen as providing an
approximate estimate of long-term deflection and should be used only when an accurate
estimate of long-term deflection is not required.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.5.4 Deemed to comply span-to-depth ratios for reinforced beams


This approach was originally proposed in Refs 52 and 53, based on a model developed in
Ref. 54. The approach eliminates the need to calculate deflection and therefore is attractive
because of its simplicity.
The maximum deflection of a beam under the action of a uniformly distributed load may be
expressed in the form
=

k 2 ( Fd.ef ) L4ef
E c I ef

where Fd.ef is the effective design load per unit length; Lef is the effective span; and k2 is the
appropriate deflection constant that depends on the support conditions of the beam and may
be derived from elementary principles.
For example, for a simply supported beam k2 = 5/384. For a continuous beam, k2 depends on
the relative stiffness of the spans and on the loading pattern and may be readily calculated
from an elastic analysis. For beams with equal adjacent spans and carrying the same
uniformly distributed load on every span, k2 = 1/384 for an interior span and k2 = 2/384 for
an end span. For uniformly loaded continuous beams, where the imposed live load does not
exceed the permanent dead load, where the ratio of the longer to the shorter of two adjacent
spans does not exceed 1.2 and where the end spans are not longer than the adjacent interior
span, the Standard suggests that the value of k2 may be taken as k2 = 1.5/384 for an interior
span and k2 = 2.4/384 for an end span.
In the above equation, the effective second moment of area may be expressed as
Ief = k1befd3, and re-arranging gives
k ( / Lef )bef E c
Lef / d = 1

k 2 Fd.ef

1/ 3

Values for k2 specified in the Standard are as noted above and values of k1 are approximated
using the simplified expressions proposed in Ref. 55 and previously included in
Clause 8.5.3.1. If the designer selects a maximum permissible deflection () for the
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

149

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

member, the corresponding maximum effective span to depth ratio (Lef/d) is obtained. The
accuracy of the estimate of Lef/d given by the equation depends upon the accuracy adopted
in determining k1 and k2. As noted in Paragraph C8.5.3.1, the expressions for k1 generally
underestimate tension stiffening and, therefore, are conservative.
The effective design load (Fd.ef) is specified for calculating either the total deflection or the
deflection that occurs after the attachment of partitions (i.e. the incremental deflection)
taking into account the short-term serviceability loads (g + sq) and the long-term
serviceability loads (kcsg + kcslq) with the time effects included using the long-term
deflection multiplier k cs (specified in Clause 8.5.3.1). The effective design load for
incremental deflection assumes that the total long-term deflection due to creep and
shrinkage under dead load occurs after the attachment of the partitions. This is a
conservative assumption, as part of this long-term deflection is likely to have occurred prior
to the fixing of the partitions.
The equation for the limiting effective span to depth ratio (Equation 8.5.4) involves no
approximations other than those implicit in the values selected for k1 and k2 and, of course,
the assumptions associated with the use of the deflection multiplier kcs; however, the
assumed value for Ief (= k1befd3) is close to Icr and this is generally conservative. With the
member assumed to be heavily cracked, the use of kcs = 2 will usually overestimate longterm deflection. With these assumptions, satisfaction of the limiting span-to-depth ratio will
ensure in-service deflections less than the maximum desirable value, often significantly less
than the maximum value.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.6 CRACK CONTROL OF BEAMS


Reinforced concrete elements crack wherever the tensile stress in the concrete reaches the
tensile strength of the concrete. Concrete tensile stress at any location in a concrete
structure may be caused by a number of factors, including the applied loads, restrained
shrinkage, temperature changes (including early-age cooling), support settlement and so on.
Cracks formed by axial tensile forces and restrained shrinkage (direct tension cracks) often
penetrate completely through a member. Cracks caused by bending (flexural cracks) occur
at the tensile face when the extreme fibre tensile stress reaches the tensile strength of the
concrete.
Flexural cracks propagate from the extreme tensile fibre through the tensile zone and are
arrested at or near the neutral axis. Flexural cracks increase in width as the distance from
the tensile reinforcement increases and tapers to zero width near the neutral axis. A linear
relationship is generally assumed to exist between the crack width at the side or soffit of a
member and the distance from the bar. In general, the spacing between flexural cracks is in
the range 0.5 to 1.5 times the depth of the member.
Many variables influence the width and spacing of cracks in reinforced concrete members,
including the magnitude and duration of loading, the quantity, orientation and distribution
of the reinforcing steel, the cover to the reinforcement, the slip between the tensile
reinforcement and the concrete in the vicinity of the crack (which depends on the bond
characteristics of the reinforcement), the deformational properties of the concrete (including
its creep and shrinkage characteristics) and the size of the member. Considerable variations
exist in the crack width from crack to crack and the spacing between adjacent cracks
because of random variations in the properties of concrete.
Restraint to shrinkage is provided by the bonded reinforcement in a reinforced concrete
member, with the concrete compressing the reinforcement as it shrinks and the
reinforcement imposing an equal and opposite tensile force on the concrete at the level of
the steel. This internal tensile restraining force is often significant enough to cause timedependent cracking. In addition, the connections of a concrete member to other parts of the
structure or to the foundations also provide restraint to shrinkage. The tensile restraining
force that develops rapidly with time at the restrained ends of the member usually leads to
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

150

cracking, often within days of the commencement of drying. In a restrained flexural


member, restraint to shrinkage causes a gradual widening of flexural cracks and a gradual
build-up of tension in the uncracked regions, which may lead to additional cracking. The
influence of shrinkage on flexural and direct tension crack widths should be considered in
the design for crack control.
There are two broad approaches that are specified in design Standards for crack control:

The first involves the calculation of maximum crack width using a specified,
deterministic procedure, with the intention to control cracking by limiting the
calculated crack width to some appropriately low value. The procedures specified for
the calculation of crack widths in many design Standards are overly simplistic and
often fail to account adequately for the gradual increase in crack widths with time due
to shrinkage. For this reason, the Standard does not require that crack widths be
calculated.

The second approach to crack control is a deemed to comply approach involving the
satisfaction of certain detailing requirements, including maximum specified spacing
between the bonded reinforcement bars and maximum specified concrete cover, and
by limiting the stress in the bonded reinforcement crossing a crack to some
appropriately low value. The limit on the tensile steel stress imposed in design
depends on the maximum acceptable crack width. If the maximum acceptable crack
width is increased, the maximum permissible tensile steel stress also increases. The
Standard adopts this approach for the control of cracking in direct tension and
flexural members; however, no attempt has been made to provide designers with the
flexibility to consider a range of acceptable crack widths.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.6.1 Crack control for tension and flexure in reinforced beams


For members subjected to axial tension and bending, where the axial tension dominates and
the whole of a particular cross-section is in tension, the Standard defines the resultant
action primarily as tension. Where flexure predominates and the tensile stress distribution is
triangular with some part of the cross-section in compression, the resultant action is defined
primarily as flexure. The deemed-to-comply crack control requirements specified in this
clause have been adapted from the approach outlined in Eurocode 2 (Ref. 47). Irrespective
of the importance of the structure, the maximum crack width requirements and the exposure
condition, cracking in reinforced concrete beams is deemed to be controlled if each of the
following is satisfied:
(a)

The minimum reinforcement requirement The minimum quantity of tensile


reinforcement required in a beam for crack control is that required to provide the
minimum ultimate bending strength (Muo)min specified in Equation 8.1.6.1(1). The
magnitude of (Muo)min is 20% higher than the cracking moment specified in
taken as the characteristic tensile strength
Clause 8.5.3.1, with cs set to zero and f ct.f
of the concrete (see discussion in Paragraph C8.1.6.1).
This requirement ensures that a lightly loaded member has an adequate reserve of
strength if unexpected cracking occurs and applies to tension members, as well as
flexural members.

(b)

Maximum cover requirement Crack widths increase as the distance from the
reinforcing bar increases, and crack widths on the concrete surface become
aesthetically unacceptable when the concrete cover becomes too large. It is noted that
the 100 mm limit applies to the axis distance and not to the clear concrete cover.

(c)

Maximum spacing requirement Crack widths depend on the proximity to the nearest
bar and when bars are spaced further apart than 300 mm, crack control may be
compromised.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

151

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

When considering the maximum cover and spacing requirements, bars with a diameter less
than half the diameter of the largest bar in the tensile zone should be ignored, as they may
not be effective in controlling cracking. In addition, for T-beams and L-beams, where the
tensile zone is located in the flange (such as over an internal support in a beam and slab
floor), additional reinforcement required for crack control should be distributed across the
full width of the effective flange.
The stress in the tensile steel on the cracked section caused by the serviceability design
actions is to be limited to the values specified either in Table 8.1.6(A) or Table 8.1.6(B).
For beams primarily in tension, cracking is controlled by selecting a bar diameter small
enough to satisfy the requirements of Table 8.1.6(A). For beams primarily in flexure,
cracking is controlled by selecting either a bar diameter small enough to satisfy the
requirements of Table 8.1.6(A) or a centre-to-centre bar spacing small enough to satisfy the
requirements of Table 8.1.6(B). When determining the centre-to-centre bar spacing, bars
with a diameter less than half the diameter of the largest bar in the tensile zone are to be
ignored.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The calculated steel stress ( scr) is the steel stress on the cracked section due to the quasipermanent service loads. When determining the steel stresses ( scr and scr.1), the
*
corresponding in-service bending moments ( M s* and M s.1
), should be calculated from an
appropriate elastic analysis (linear or non-linear). They should not be determined by scaling
down from moments determined at the strength limit state, where plastic redistribution of
moments may have been assumed.
The maximum steel stresses specified in Tables 8.6.1(A) and 8.6.1(B) are intended to
ensure that maximum crack widths will not exceed about 0.4 mm. They have been
determined from the procedure for calculating crack widths in Eurocode 2 (Ref. 47), where
the crack width in a reinforced concrete member is calculated from

w = sr.max ( sm cm )

. . . C8.6.1(1)

where sr.max is the maximum crack spacing; sm is the mean strain in the reinforcement at the
design loads, including the effects of tension stiffening and any imposed deformations; and
cm is the mean strain in the concrete between the cracks.
The difference between the mean strain in the reinforcement and the mean strain in the
concrete may be taken as

sm cm =

scr
Es

kt

ct

(1 + n eff ) 0.6 scr


E s eff
Es

. . . C8.6.1(2)

where kt is a factor that depends on the duration of load and equals 0.6 for short-term
loading and 0.4 for long-term loading; n is the modular ratio Es/Ec; ct is the mean value of
the axial tensile strength of concrete at the time cracking is expected; eff is the effective
reinforcement ratio (= Ast/Ac.eff); and Ac.eff is the effective area of the tensile concrete
surrounding the tensile reinforcement of depth equal to 2.5 times the distance from the
tension face of the section to the centroid of the tensile reinforcement [i.e. 2.5(Dd)], but
not greater than (D kd)/3 or D/2.
The maximum crack spacing is given by

sr.max = 3.4c + 0.425k1k2 d b / eff

. . . C8.6.1(3)

where c is the clear cover to the longitudinal reinforcement; k1 is a coefficient equal to 0.8
for deformed bars and 1.6 for plain round bars or wires; k2 is a coefficient that takes into
account the form of the strain distribution on the cross-section and equals 0.5 for bending
and 1.0 for direct tension; and db is the average bar diameter for the tensile reinforcement.
By selecting a desired maximum crack width of 0.3 mm, and making conservative
assumptions concerning the magnitude of ct, Ec, d/D and other input parameters, the values
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

152

for limiting steel stress specified in Tables 8.6.1(A) and 8.6.1(B) have been determined.
Calculating crack widths using Equation C8.6.1(1) is approximate. This method of
calculation makes an approximate allowance for tension stiffening and does not consider
the role of shrinkage in opening cracks with time (other than a reduction in the factor kt for
long-term loading). For this reason, it is expected that the maximum final crack width in
beams designed to just satisfy the stress limits in Tables 8.6.1(A) and 8.6.1(B) will be
closer to 0.4 mm than to 0.3 mm. Alternative methods for calculating crack widths are
presented in Ref. 35, where the limitations of the Eurocode 2 approach are discussed.
C8.6.2 Crack control for flexure in prestressed beams

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

When flexural cracking occurs in a prestressed concrete beam, the loss of stiffness is less
sudden than for a reinforced concrete beam with the same area of tensile reinforcement, and
the change in the tensile steel stress is relatively small. At first cracking, the axial
prestressing force on the concrete controls the propagation of the crack and, unlike cracking
in a reinforced concrete beam, the crack does not suddenly propagate over much of the
cross-section and the change in strain at the tensile steel level is much less. Cracks become
deeper only as the load increases and the loss of stiffness due to cracking is far more
gradual than for a reinforced member. Therefore, after cracking, prestressed beams behave
better than reinforced concrete beams, with less deformation and with finer, less extensive
cracks. Flexural crack control in prestressed concrete beams is not usually a critical design
consideration if bonded reinforcement is provided in the tensile zone.
If the maximum tensile stress in the concrete is less than 0.25 f c , the section is considered
uncracked and no further consideration needs to be given to crack control. When calculating
the maximum tensile stress in the concrete, in addition to the stresses caused by the shortterm service loads and the prestress, the loss of compressive stress in the concrete due to
the restraint provided by the bonded reinforcement to creep and shrinkage deformations of
the concrete should be considered.
If the maximum tensile concrete stress is above 0.25 f c , then bonded reinforcement and/or
bonded tendons are required by the Standard to be provided near the tensile face with a
centre-to-centre spacing not exceeding 300 mm. In addition, one of the following
alternatives has to be satisfied:
(a)

The calculated maximum flexural tensile stress at the extreme concrete tensile fibre is
to be less than 0 .6 f c .

(b)

The increment in the tensile stress in the steel near the tension face, as the applied
load increases from its value when the extreme fibre is at zero stress (the
decompression load) to the full short-term service load, is to not exceed the maximum
value given in Table 8.6.2.

Crack control is deemed to be provided in Item (a), if the maximum tensile stress calculated
on the uncracked transformed cross-section does not exceed the lower characteristic
flexural tensile strength of the concrete. In this case, cracking may still occur, but the
change in tensile concrete and steel strains will not be great and crack control will not be a
problem, provided some bonded steel at a spacing less than 300 mm is located in the tensile
zone.
The alternative provision for crack control in Item (b) is to limit the change in stress that
occurs in the tensile steel due to cracking to a maximum value that depends on the diameter
of the bonded reinforcement or tendons. The values given in Table 8.6.2 are similar to the
maximum steel stresses given in Table 8.6.1(A) for reinforced concrete beams. At the
decompression moment in a beam, the stress in the non-prestressed reinforcement will be
compressive and so the final maximum tensile steel stress in a prestressed beam is limited
to a value that is less than the value that is permissible in a reinforced concrete beam.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

153

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Considering that prestressed beams generally perform better than reinforced beams after
cracking, the crack control provisions for prestressed beams are conservative.
C8.6.3 Crack control in the side face of beams
The width of a flexural crack at the surface of the tensile reinforcement is usually very
small, but as the distance from the tensile steel increases so too does the crack width.
Where the depth of a beam exceeds 750 mm, the flexural cracks may become excessively
wide on the side faces of beams in the mid-depth regions away from the longitudinal tensile
reinforcement, unless some additional crack control reinforcement is provided in the side
faces of the beam. The Standard specifies additional longitudinal reinforcement (in the form
of 12 mm diameter bars at 200 mm centres or 16 mm diameter bars at 300 mm centres) to
be placed in the side faces of such beams over the depth of the beam, and at least from the
neutral axis of the cracked section to the level of the tensile reinforcement. The first of
these side face bars should be located no further than 200 mm for 12 mm bars (or 300 mm
for 16 mm bars) above the main tensile reinforcement.
This additional longitudinal side face reinforcement, together with the minimum transverse
shear reinforcement, is not only considered adequate for flexural crack control on the side
faces of beams, it will also assist in limiting the width of any shrinkage-induced cracking in
regions of low moment.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C8.6.4 Crack control at openings and discontinuities


Openings and discontinuities can be the cause of stress concentrations that may result in
diagonal cracks emanating from re-entrant corners. Additional trimming bars are required at
holes and discontinuities to control these cracks. A suitable method of estimating the
number and size of the trimming bars is to postulate a possible crack and to provide
reinforcement to carry a force at least equivalent to the area of the crack multiplied by the
mean direct tensile strength of the concrete (Ref. 18). For crack control, the maximum
stress in the trimming bars should be limited to 250 MPa.
While additional reinforcement is required for serviceability to control cracking at
re-entrant corners, it should not be assumed that this same steel is satisfactory for strength.
When openings are located in the shear zone of beams, for example, the strength of the
beam should be carefully calculated, as any contribution by the concrete to the shear
capacity will be lost. Analysis using strut-and-tie modelling is a convenient method to
visualize the flow of forces required to establish a viable load path. Appropriate
reinforcement patterns should be detailed to achieve this load path and to provide adequate
strength. Additional trimming bars may also be required for crack control under service
loads.
C8.7 VIBRATION OF BEAMS
As outlined in Paragraph C2.3.4, vibration can usually be controlled by limiting the
frequency of the fundamental mode of vibration of the structure to a value markedly
different from the frequency of the source of vibration. Alternatively, and ideally, the
structure and the source of vibration should be dynamically isolated from one another. If
this is not possible, either the structure or the source (or both) may be suitably damped to
reduce the magnitude of the structural vibrations to acceptable levels (Ref. 56).
The susceptibility of a beam to excessive levels of vibration depends on its physical
properties, such as mass and frequency, and also upon the nature of the dynamic forces
applied. For example, long-span lightweight beams are much more likely to experience
excessive vibrations from pedestrian traffic than short-span relatively stocky beams. On the
other hand, machinery placed on and supported by short-span beams may have an
operational frequency close to the natural frequency of the beam, resulting in excessive
vibration, while the same machine supported on a long-span beam may result in minimal
vibration.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

154

As a consequence, no simple design rules have been formulated to cover the range of
possible situations. Therefore, the designer is therefore referred to the list of references
noted in Clause C2.3.4.
C8.8 T-BEAMS AND L-BEAMS
C8.8.1 General
At the interface of the web and flange of both monolithic and isolated T-beams and
L-beams, the longitudinal shear stress capacity (u) should be not less than the design
shear stress (*). The capacity comprises contributions from the concrete and any stirrups
that cross the interface.
For isolated T- and L-beams where load is applied to the flange, an additional check should
be made on the flexural shear capacity of the flange at the critical sections indicated in
Figure C8.8.1.

d
d

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C r i ti c a l
s e c ti o n

FIGURE C8.8.1 CRITICAL SECTIONS FOR FLEXURAL SHEAR IN THE


FLANGE OF ISOLATED T- AND L-BEAMS

C8.8.2 Effective width of flange for strength and serviceability


T-sections and L-sections occur when a flange and web act together structurally, often as a
result of being cast together (monolithic). Under positive bending, longitudinal compressive
stresses are produced in the flange at the top of the cross-section. Because of shear lag,
these stresses reduce in magnitude with the distance away from the web. To facilitate the
design process, a width of flange is chosen over which the longitudinal stresses are assumed
to be essentially constant. This effective width (bef), depends on the type of loading on the
beam and various geometrical parameters. Transverse bending moments in the flange also
affect the effective width.
For simplicity, a conservative effective width, which is constant along the span, is used in
all strength and serviceability calculations. It is a function of the web width (bw) and the
distance a between the points of contraflexure along the beam. For simply supported beams,
a may be taken as approximately equal to the span L, whilst for continuous beams, a may be
taken as 0.7L for interior spans. For an end span of a continuous beam, Eurocode 2
(Ref. 47) gives the distance to the point of contraflexure, (a), as approximately 0.85L.
A maximum limit on the overhanging part of the effective flange equal to half the clear
distance to the next member is specified.
C8.9 SLENDERNESS LIMITS FOR BEAMS
A slender beam lacking lateral support is prone to lateral torsional buckling, if the flexural
stiffness in the loaded plane of bending is very much greater than its lateral stiffness.
Therefore, adequate lateral restraint should be provided to ensure that the flexural capacity
of the member is not reduced by buckling. Particular attention should be paid to any lateral
eccentricity of loading that may cause bending about the weak axis or torsion. Care should
be taken to minimize lateral bending in precast beams during handling operations.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

155

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

In the beams final in situ position, lateral restraint will normally be provided by
construction attached to the compression zone of the beam. In the case of beams whose
webs are upstanding, lateral restraint is provided by the slabs attached to the tension zone
through the moment developed between the slab and beam.
The deemed-to-comply provisions in Clauses 8.9.2 and 8.9.3 apply to reinforced concrete
beams and are based on the provisions of CP110 (Ref. 57). Their development assumes that
the beam is not subjected to a significant axial force, the ends of the beam are restrained
against rotation and, in other than the case of pure bending, the loads are applied along the
centre-line of the beam or at the centroid.
Simply supported and continuous reinforced concrete beams with L1 D / bef2 60 are not
normally considered to be slender. For slender beams L1 D / bef2 should not exceed 600.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

GILBERT, R.I. and SMITH, S.T., Strain localization and its impact on the ductility of
reinforced concrete slabs containing welded wire reinforcement, Journal of Advances
in Structural Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2006, pp. 117127.

FOSTER, S. and KILPATRICK, A., The use of low ductility welded wire mesh in the
design of suspended reinforced concrete slabs, Australian Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2008, pp. 237247.

WARNER, R.F., FAULKES, K.A. and FOSTER, S.J., Prestressed Concrete, Pearson
Australia, 2012.

GILBERT, R.I. and MICKLEBOROUGH, N.C., Design of Prestressed Concrete,


Unwin Hyman, London, (2nd Printing, E&FN Spon, London, 1997).

BEEBY, A.W., Ductility in Reinforced Concrete: Why is it Needed and how is it


Achieved? The Structural Engineer, Vol. 75, No. 18, Sept. 1997, pp. 311318.

FOSTER, S.J., KILPATRICK, A.E. and WARNER, R.F., Reinforced Concrete


Basics, 2nd Ed., Pearson Australia, 2010.

KILPATRICK, A.E., Minimum Reinforcement for Flexural Strength of Reinforced


Concrete Sections, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2002,
pp. 107120.

MATTOCK, A.H., Modification of ACI Code Equation for Stress in Bonded


Prestressed Reinforcement at Flexural Ultimate, ACI Journal, Vol. 81, No. 4, August
1984, pp. 331339.

ACI 318-83, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete ACI Committee
318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1983.

10

YAMAZAKI, J., KATTULA, B.T. and MATTOCK, A.H., A Comparison of the


Behaviour of Post-Tensioned Prestressed Concrete Beams With and Without Bond,
Report SM69-3, University of Washington, College of Engineering, Structures and
Mechanics, Dec. 1969.

11

Tentative Recommendations for Concrete Members Prestressed with Unbonded


Tendons (ACI 423.1R-69), ACI-ASCE COMMITTEE 423, ACI Journal, Vol. 66,
No. 2, 1969.

12

MOTAHEDI, S. and GAMBLE, W.L., Ultimate Steel Stresses in Unbonded


Prestressed Concrete, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, No. ST7,
1978, pp. 11591165.

13

COLLINS, M.P., MITCHELL, D. and BENTZ, E.C., Shear Design of Concrete


Structures, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 86, No. 10, 2008, pp. 3239.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

156

14

RANGAN, B.V. and HALL, A.S., Shear and Torsion Rules in the SAA Concrete
Code, Biennial Conference, Concrete Institute of Australia, Adelaide, June 1981.

15

LEONHARDT, F., Das Bewehren von Stahlbetontragwerken, Beton-Kalender, W.


Ernst and Sohn, Berlin, Part II, 1971 pp. 308398.

16

CLARKE, J.L. and TAYLOR, H.P.J., Web crushingReview of research, Technical


Report 42.509, Cement and Concrete Association, London, 1975.

17

GILBERT, R.I., Design Guidance to AS 36002009, Lecture 8, Detailing of


Reinforcement to AS 36002009, Concrete Institute of Australia, National
Education Seminar, Nov. 2011.

18

ZSUTTY, T.C., Beam Shear Strength Prediction by Analysis of Existing Data, ACI
Journal, Vol. 65, No. 8, 1968, pp. 943951.

19

WALSH, P.F., The Analysis of Concrete Beam Shear Test Data, CSIRO Australia,
Division of Building Research, Report 9, 1973.

20

COLLINS, M.P., BENTZ, E.C. and SHERWOOD, E.G., Where is Shear


Reinforcement Required? A Review of Research Results and Design Procedures, ACI
Structural Journal, Vol. 105, No. 6, 2008, pp. 590600.

21

WALSH, P.F., Shear and Torsion Design, Civil Engineering Transactions, IE Aust.,
Vol. CE 26, No. 4, 1984, pp. 314318.

22

CHANA, P.S., Some Aspects of Modelling the Behaviour of Reinforcement Concrete


Under Shear Loading, Cement and Concrete Association, Tech. Report 543, July
1981.

23

CEB/FIP, Model Code for Concrete Structures, Comit Euro-International du Bton,


Bulletin dInformation, Vol. N124/125E, April 1978.

24

LUBELL, A., SHERWOOD, T., BENTZ, E. and COLLINS, M.P., Safe Shear Design
of Large, Wide Beams, Concrete International, American Concrete Institute, Vol. 26,
No. 1, 2004, pp. 6778.

25

COLLINS, M.P., BENTZ, E.C. and SHERWOOD, E.G., Where is Shear


Reinforcement Required? A Review of Research Results and Design Procedures, ACI
Structural Journal, Vol. 105, No. 5, 2008, pp. 590600.

26

SHERWOOD, E.G., BENTZ, E.C., and COLLINS, M.P., Effect of aggregate size on
the beam-shear strength of thick slabs, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 104, No. 2, 2007,
pp. 180190.

27

RANGAN, B.V., Shear Strength of Partially and Fully Prestressed Concrete Beams,
Civil Engineering Transactions, IE Aust, Vol. CE21, No. 2, 1979, pp. 9297.

28

ACI 318-71,
Building
Code
Requirements
for
Reinforced
Concrete,
ACI COMMITTEE 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1971.

29

The Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Members, ACI-ASCE Committee 426,


Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 99, No. 6, June 1973, pp. 10911187.

30

COLLINS, M.P. and MITCHELL, D., Shear and torsion design of prestressed and
non-prestressed concrete beams, PCI Journal, Vol. 25, No. 5, 1980, pp. 32100.

31

NIELSEN, M.P., BRAESTRUP, M.W., JENSEN, B.C. and BACH, F., Concrete
Plasticity, Danish Society for Structural Science and Engineering, Technical
University of Denmark, Special Publication, October 1978.

32

PARK, R. and PAULAY, T., Reinforced Concrete Structures, John Wiley and Sons,
1975 (Chapter 13The Art of Detailing).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

157

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

33

HSU, T.T.C. and HWANG, C., Torsional Limit Design of Spandrel Beams, ACI
Journal, Proceedings Vol. 74, No. 2, 1977, pp. 7179.

34

MANSUR, M.A. and RANGAN, B.V., Limit Design of Spandrel Beams, Civil
Engineering Transactions, IE Aust, Vol. CE23, No. 1, 1981, pp. 713.

35

GILBERT, R.I. and RANZI, G., Time-dependent Behaviour of Concrete Structures,


Spon Press, London, 2010.

36

GILBERT, R.I. and WARNER, R.F., Tension Stiffening in Reinforced Concrete


Slabs, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, ST12, 1978, pp. 1885
1900.

37

BISCHOFF, P.H., Effects of shrinkage on tension stiffening and cracking in


reinforced concrete, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2001,
pp. 363374.

38

BISCHOFF, P.H., Reevaluation of deflection prediction for concrete beams


reinforced with steel and FRP bars, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE,
Vol. 131, No. 5, 2005, pp. 752767.

39

SCOTT, R.H. and BEEBY, A.W., Long-term tension stiffening effects in concrete,
ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 102, No. 1, 2005, pp. 3139.

40

GILBERT, R.I., Tension Stiffening in Lightly Reinforced Concrete Slabs, Journal of


Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 133, ST6, 2007, pp. 899903.

41

GILBERT, R.I., Deflection Calculations for Reinforced Concrete Structures Why


We Sometimes get it Wrong, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 96, No. 6, 1999, pp. 1027
1032.

42

AS/NZS 1170.0, Structural design actionsGeneral principles, Standards Australia,


Sydney, NSW, 2002.

43

Gilbert, R.I., Instantaneous and Time-Dependent Deflection of Reinforced Concrete


Flexural Members, Concrete Forum, Journal of the Concrete Institute of Australia,
Vol. 1, No. 1, 2008, pp. 717.

44

BRANSON, D.E., Instantaneous and Time-Dependent Deflections of Simple and


Continuous Reinforced Concrete Beams, Report No. 7, Alabama Highway Research
Report, Alabama Highway Department, Bureau of Public Roads, August 1963,
pp. 178.

45

BRANSON, D.E., Design Procedures for Computing Deflections, ACI Journal,


Vol. 65, No. 9, 1968, pp. 730742.

46

Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08), and Commentary,
ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2008.

47

EUROCODE 2, Design of concrete structures Part 1-1: General rules for buildings,
British Standard BS EN 1992-1-1:2004, European Committee for Standardisation
(CEN).

48

KILPATRICK, A.E. and GILBERT, R.I., Prediction of Short-term Deflections in


Reinforced Concrete One-way Continuous Members, Concrete Solutions 09, 24th
Biennial Conference of the Concrete Institute of Australia, 17-19 Sept. 2009, Sydney,
paper 1b-3, 9pp.

49

GILBERT, R.I. and GUO, X.H., Time-dependent Deflection and Deformation of


Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs An Experimental Study, ACI Structural Journal,
Vol. 102, No. 3, MayJune 2005, pp. 363373.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

158

50

PATRICK, M., Beam deflection by simplified calculation: including effect of


compressive reinforcement in formula for cs in draft AS 3600, BD-002 Committee
Document.

51

GILBERT, R.I., Deflection by Simplified Calculation in AS 36002001 On the


Determination of fcs, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, IE Aust, Vol 5,
No. 1, 2003, pp. 6171.

52

GILBERT, R.I., Deflection Control of Reinforced Concrete Slabs, Civil Engineering


Transactions, IE Aust., Vol. CE25, No. 4, 1983, pp. 274279.

53

RANGAN, B.V., Deflections of Reinforced Concrete Beams, Civil Engineering


Transactions, IE Aust., Vol. CE27, No. 2, 1985, pp. 216224.

54

RANGAN, B.V., Maximum Allowable Span/Depth Ratios for Reinforced Concrete


Beams, Civil Engineering Transactions, IE Aust., Vol. CE24, No. 4, 1982, pp. 312
317.

55

KILPATRICK, A.E., k1 Factor for L/d Ratios for Reinforced Concrete T- and
L-beams, Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2003,
pp. 197210.

56

IRWIN, A.W., Human Response to Dynamic Motion of Structures, The Structural


Engineer, Vol. 56A, No. 9, 1978, pp. 237244.

57

Code of Practice for the Structural Use of Concrete, CP110: Part 1: 1972, British
Standards Institution, London, 1972.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL

HANSELL, W. and WINTER, G., Lateral Stability of Reinforced Concrete Beams,


ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 56, No. 3, 1959, pp. 193214.

SANT, J.K. and BLETZACKER, R.W., Experimental Study of Lateral Stability of


Reinforced Concrete Beams, ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 58, No. 6, 1961,
pp. 713736.

MASSEY, C., Lateral Instability of Reinforced Concrete Beams Under Uniform


Bending Moments, ACI Journal, Vol. 64, No. 3, 1967, pp. 164172.

MARSHALL, W.T., A Survey of the Problem of Lateral Instability of Reinforced


Concrete Beams, Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 43, July 1969,
pp. 397406.

MAST, R.F., Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams, Part 1, PCI
Journal, Jan-Feb 1989, pp. 3453.

MAST, R.F., Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams, Part 2, PCI
Journal, Jan-Feb 1993, pp. 7088.

STRATFORD, T.J. and BURGOYNE C.J., Lateral stability of long precast concrete
beams, Proceedings of ICE, Structures and Buildings, Institution of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 134, May 1999, pp. 169180.

REVATHI, P. and MENON, D., Slenderness Effects in Reinforced Concrete Beams,


ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 104, No. 4, 2007, pp. 412419.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

159

S E C T I O N C 9
S T R E N G T H

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

D E S I G N O F S L A B S F O R
A N D S E R V I C E A B I L I T Y

C9.1 STRENGTH OF SLABS IN BENDING


C9.1.1 General
The provisions for the minimum flexural reinforcement in reinforced concrete slabs
generally follow the requirement of Clause 8.1.6.1. These have been formulated to include
the parameters of effective depth ratio, together with the concrete tensile strength and steel
yield strength. Antecedent versions of these provisions had assumed constant values for
these parameters.
As the collapse mechanisms of two-way slabs are different to those of one-way slabs and
beams, modifications have been made for the minimum flexural reinforcement that relates
to two-way action. Minimum values of the reinforcement ratio for two-way slabs supported
by columns at their corners and two-way slabs supported on four sides by beams and walls
are given in Tables C9.1.1(A) and C9.1.1(B), respectively.
TABLE C9.1.1(A)
MINIMUM VALUES OF Ast/bd FOR TWO-WAY REINFORCED SLABS
SUPPORTED BY COLUMNS AT THEIR CORNERS (fsy = 500 MPa)

fc MPa

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

D/d

20

25

32

40

50

65

80

100

1.1

0.00156

0.00174

0.00197

0.00220

0.00246

0.00281

0.00312

0.00348

1.2

0.00185

0.00207

0.00235

0.00262

0.00293

0.00334

0.00371

0.00415

1.3

0.00218

0.00243

0.00275

0.00308

0.00344

0.00392

0.00435

0.00487

1.4

0.00252

0.00282

0.00319

0.00357

0.00399

0.00455

0.00505

0.00564

1.5

0.00290

0.00324

0.00367

0.00410

0.00458

0.00522

0.00580

0.00648

TABLE C9.1.1(B)
MINIMUM VALUES OF Ast/bd FOR TWO-WAY REINFORCED SLABS
SUPPORTED BY BEAMS OR WALLS ON FOUR SIDES (fsy = 500 MPa)

fc MPa

D/d

20

25

32

40

50

65

80

100

1.1

0.00123

0.00138

0.00156

0.00174

0.00195

0.00222

0.00247

0.00276

1.2

0.00147

0.00164

0.00186

0.00208

0.00232

0.00265

0.00294

0.00328

1.3

0.00172

0.00193

0.00218

0.00244

0.00272

0.00311

0.00345

0.00385

1.4

0.00200

0.00223

0.00253

0.00283

0.00316

0.00360

0.00400

0.00447

1.5

0.00229

0.00257

0.00290

0.00324

0.00363

0.00414

0.00459

0.00513

C9.1.2 Reinforcement and tendon distribution in two-way flat slabs


Peak bending moments occur in the vicinity of supporting columns (Refs 1 to 3) that are
significantly larger than the average value for the column strip. Test data has also indicated
that concentrating the negative reinforcement near the column increases the stiffness of the
slab-column connection and increases the punching shear strength of the slab in the vicinity
of the column.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

160

C9.1.3 Detailing of tensile reinforcement in slabs


The general requirements for detailing of the reinforcement are provided in Clause 9.1.3.1.
Deemed-to-comply provisions are provided in subsequent clauses. In each case, the
reinforcement extensions are related to the clear span between supports.
C9.1.3.1 General procedure for arrangement
The requirements of this Clause are consistent with those specified in Clause 8.1.10 for
beams.
C9.1.3.2 Deemed-to-comply arrangement for one-way slabs
Figure 9.1.3.2 shows an arrangement that satisfies the general requirements of
Clause 9.1.3.1 and also corresponds with the simplified method of analysis in
Clause 6.10.2.
C9.1.3.3 Deemed-to-comply arrangement for two-way slabs supported on beams or walls
For two-way slabs supported by beams or walls, the bending moments are based on the
shorter clear span. Illustrations (a) and (b) of Figure C9.1.3.3 illustrate the choices
available. The minimum reinforcement required in Clause 9.1.3.3(e) is specific to control
cracking in the corner due to restraint against uplift and high twisting moments in the slab
corners.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

E
D

0. 3 D

0.1A

0. 3 C

0.1C

0. 3C
C

0. 3 D

C
0.1D

0. 3C
0. 3 D
F

0. 3 F
G

0. 3 C

0.1C

0.1F
0.1F

0.1F

0. 3 F
H

(a) N e g ative r e i nfo r c e m e nt

( b) Po s i tive r e i nfo r c e m e nt

FIGURE C9.1.3.3 REINFORCEMENT DETAILING FOR TWO-WAY SLABS SUPPORTED


BY BEAMS OR WALLS

C9.1.3.4 Deemed-to-comply arrangement for two-way flat slabs


In two-way flat slabs and flat plates, bending moments are related to the longer span. For
reinforcement extensions, the clear span in the direction of the applicable reinforcement is
to be used.
It should be noted that the negative reinforcement need not be cogged if adequate anchorage
can be otherwise obtained.
C9.1.4 Minimum reinforcement for distributing loads
This reinforcement is required to provide sufficient strength to permit the distribution of
concentrated loads (see Clause 9.6) across the slab and to avoid excessive cracking that may
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

161

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

result from its absence. It also will increase the punching shear strength of the slab in the
region of a concentrated load. Reinforcement that satisfies the shrinkage and temperature
requirements of Clause 9.4.3 will normally be adequate.
C9.1.5 Spacing of reinforcement and tendons
The specified spacing of the reinforcement, ducts and tendons needs to be sufficiently large
to permit proper placement and compaction of the concrete, taking due account of the
dimensions of the member, the properties of the concrete and the method of compaction of
the concrete. The maximum spacing of reinforcement and tendons is generally that
necessary to ensure adequate crack control. In prestressed slabs subjected to uniformly
distributed loads, where non-prestressed reinforcement is not required for crack control, the
designer has to ensure that the plain concrete between the tendons can safely distribute the
loads between tendons. This requirement of the Standard may be satisfied if the spacing
between tendons does not exceed 8 times the slab thickness in a one-way or two-way edge
supported slab, 6 times the slab thickness in the column strip of a flat slab and 10 times the
slab thickness in the middle strip of a flat slab.
C9.2 STRENGTH OF SLABS IN SHEAR
C9.2.1 Definitions and symbols

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

When calculating the average value of do around the shear perimeter (dom), the geometry of
the assumed critical shear surface needs to be taken into account. In many cases, it will be
easier to calculate the effective area of the critical shear surface (u.dom) as the sum of a
number of simple rectangular areas ([ui .d oi ]) rather than calculating u and dom separately.
For example, in Figure C9.2.1, which represents an edge column in a flat plate with
spandrel beams, the critical shear area around the column is equal to 2[bwdo.b + (y + dom /2bw)do.s] + (x + dom)do.s. This value of udom may be used directly in the calculation of Vuo
from Clause 9.2.3.
Openings in a slab near a column support or concentrated load can reduce the critical shear
perimeter. When any part of an opening in a slab is located within a distance 2.5bo from the
critical shear perimeter, where b o is the width of the opening as defined in
Figure 9.2.1(A)(b), the critical shear perimeter is reduced in accordance with
Figure 9.2.1(A)(b).

dom
2
dom
2

d o. s

d o. b

dom
bw
y
x

FIGURE C9.2.1 EFFECTIVE AREA OF CRITICAL SHEAR SURFACE

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

162

C9.2.2 Strength
Shear failure can occur in two different modes. Firstly, a slab could act as a wide beam and
fail in beam-type flexural shear. In such cases, Clause 8.2 applies and particular note should
be taken of the waiver given in Clause 8.2.5 that applies to slabs. Secondly, in the vicinity
of a support or concentrated load, a slab could fail by punching a truncated cone or
pyramid around the support or loaded area. In this second mode of failure, the extent of
bending moment transferred from the slab to the support M V* has a marked influence on the
design capacity.
C9.2.3 Ultimate shear strength where M V* is zero
When no moment is transferred to the support, the shear capacity (Vuo) is given by either
Equations 9.2.3(1) or 9.2.3(2). These equations were adopted from ACI 318 (Ref. 4). They
imply that the shear stresses are distributed uniformly around a critical perimeter and that
failure occurs when these stresses reach a value equal to (fcv + 0.3cp).
Where shear reinforcement, in the form of closed fitments, shear studs, shear heads and the
like, is provided, the value of f is taken as 0.5 f . The upper limit on V in this case
c

cv

uo

avoids a web crushing failure.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C9.2.4 Ultimate shear strength where M V* is not zero


Where the moment transfer to the column is not zero, the punching shear capacity is given
by the equations in this Clause. These equations are based on the model shown in
Figure C9.2.4, as well as on the results obtained from large-scale tests (Refs 1 to 3 and 5).
The model shown in Figure C9.2.4 illustrates the situation in the vicinity of an edge column
with a spandrel beam. To be consistent with the model used in the calculation of Vuo, it is
assumed that the critical section for failure is at a distance do/2 away from the face of the
column. Here M V* and V* are respectively the bending moment and the shear force
transferred to the column from the slab at the ultimate limit state. The shear force is
transferred partly by V2 at the front face with the remainder transferred by V1 at each side
face. The moment transfer occurs partly as the yield moment (M2) of the slab reinforcement
at the front face of the critical section, some occurs due to the eccentricity of the shear force
(V2), whilst the remainder is transferred as torsional moments (T1) at each side face. At an
interior column, transfer of forces also occurs at a back face of the critical section. At a
corner column, there is only one side face. At an edge column where M V* acts parallel to
the edge of the floor, there are front and back faces and one side face.

CL of s p a n

L1
b1

CL of s p a n

b2

d o /2
T1

d o /2

T1
V1

Ed g e o r s p a n d r e l

V1
M 1, V 2

Column

FIGURE C9.2.4 FORCES AT THE EDGE OF A FLAT PLATE FLOOR

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

163

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

A punching shear failure is caused either by the failure of the torsion strip (or the spandrel
beam if any) at the side face in combined torsion and shear, or by the failure of the slab
strip at the front face (and the back face, if any) in shear.
The strength of the torsion strip (or the spandrel beam) at the side face in combined torsion
and shear is many times the value calculated for isolated beams (Refs 1 to 3 and 5). When
subjected to torsion, an isolated beam undergoes an increase in length due to the warping of
the cross-section and opening of inclined cracks. When such a beam is part of a floor
system, the monolithic slab provides considerable resistance to the beam lengthening. The
torsion strip at the side face is in a situation similar to a beam in an integrated floor system.
Tests (Refs 1 and 2) have shown that, because of the slab restraint, the measured cracking
torque of the torsion strip at the side face of the critical section is approximately six times
the value obtained for an isolated beam. At failure, the measured strength in combined
torsion and shear of the torsion strip at the side face that contained closed ties is about four
times that of a similar isolated beam. These beneficial effects of slab restraint are included
in the strength equations (Ref. 5) given in this Clause.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

From the failure mechanism discussed above, one of the most important factors that govern
the punching shear strength is how the torsion strip (or the spandrel beam) resists the
combined effects of the torsion and shear acting on it. Where there are no closed fitments in
this torsion strip (or the spandrel beam), the torsion and shear is to be resisted by the
concrete alone. Where the torsion strip (or the spandrel beam) contains closed fitments, the
load-carrying mechanism and hence the strength equations are different. Therefore, strength
equations are given for four different cases.
When the strength equations were compared with test results (Ref. 5), the predicted
strengths were found to be conservative and significantly influenced by the boundary
conditions of the test specimens.
C9.2.5 Minimum area of closed fitments
This is consistent with the minimum shear reinforcement requirement of Clause 8.2.8 in
which bv has been set equal to y1 and Asv = 2Asw, since the reinforcement is to be provided
in the form of a closed fitment with two legs.
C9.2.6 Detailing of shear reinforcement
The detailing requirements for the shear reinforcement are broadly consistent with the shear
and torsional reinforcement provisions for beams given in Clauses 8.2.12 and 8.3.8,
respectively.
In Figure 9.2.6, the longitudinal bars shown in each corner of the stirrups are shown
diagrammatically as small dots inside the corners of the closed fitments. In practice, each
longitudinal bar in the corner of a stirrup should be in contact with both the vertical and
horizontal legs of the stirrup and have a diameter at least as large as the diameter of the
stirrup.
C9.3 DEFLECTION OF SLABS
C9.3.1 General
A three-tiered approach is specified for deflection control of slabs. The top tier involves the
estimation of slab deflection by refined calculation (Clause 9.3.2), while the middle tier is
the calculation of deflection by simplified calculation (Clause 9.3.3). In each of these
approaches, the calculated deflection should be less than the appropriate deflection limit for
the slab, selected in accordance with Clause 2.3.2. The bottom tier for deflection control of
reinforced concrete slabs is the satisfaction of the maximum span-to-depth ratio specified in
Clause 9.3.4. In this approach, there is no requirement to calculate deflection provided the
effective depth of the slab exceeds the minimum specified value.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

164

The use of any of these procedures, without critical assessment and appropriate
consideration of the factors that affect deflection, may not eliminate deflection problems.
Slabs are typically thin and relatively flexible structural members and deflection is often the
critical design consideration when determining the appropriate slab thickness.
C9.3.2 Slab deflection by refined calculation

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Methods for the calculation of slab deflection by refined methods range from numerical
models, including complex, non-linear, finite element packages and frame analysis
packages using the stiffness method of analysis, to more approximate methods more
suitable for hand or spreadsheet calculation. Irrespective of the analysis technique, account
has to be taken of two-way action, the expected load history, and the various sources of
material non-linearity including cracking, tension stiffening, and the time-dependent effects
of creep and shrinkage (see also Paragraph C8.5.2).
The finite element method is perhaps the most powerful, and potentially the most accurate,
tool for the analysis of concrete slabs. The basic method is well established and has been
described in many textbooks. Since the early 1970s, many investigators have developed
non-linear finite element models to study the short-term service load behaviour of
reinforced concrete slabs. A number of researchers extended their models to handle the
time-dependent effects of creep and shrinkage (e.g. Refs 6 to 10). Numerous commercial
finite element software packages are now available to undertake non-linear analysis of
reinforced and prestressed concrete slabs at service loads. The treatment of cracking,
tension stiffening, and the time-dependent effects of creep and shrinkage in these computer
packages ranges from rational and reliable to crude and unreliable. Users of any commercial
program should be aware of the assumptions made in the modelling of material nonlinearity, particularly relating to cracking, creep and shrinkage, and make a rational
assessment of the reliability of the output.
Finite element modelling of two-way slab systems, even with the most reliable of software,
is time consuming and generally unsuitable for routine use in structural design; however, it
is a useful research tool to examine the effects of various parameters on slab behaviour and
to generate the parametric data necessary for the development of more simple, designoriented refined procedures for the estimation of slab deflections. Such parametric studies
have been reported elsewhere (Ref. 8) and have led to the development of simplified,
design-oriented methods for the deflection control of slabs (Refs 10 and 11). A method
suitable for hand or spreadsheet use for deflection control by refined calculation is outlined
in Refs 10 and 12.
C9.3.3 Slab deflection by simplified calculation
For one-way and two-way slabs with various support conditions and subjected to uniformly
distributed loads, an equivalent beam (or one-way slab strip) is specified such that the
calculated deflection of the equivalent beam is assumed to be the same as the deflection of
the actual slab. The simplified calculation procedure specified in Clause 8.5.3 is to be used.
For a one-way slab, the equivalent beam is simply a prismatic slab strip of unit width
running in the direction of the slab span and with the same support conditions as the actual
slab.
For a rectangular two-way slab panel supported on four sides, the equivalent beam is a
prismatic 1 m wide slab strip running on the centre-line of the slab panel in the short span
direction. The span of the equivalent beam is the shorter effective span (Lx) and its support
conditions are the same as the slab in that direction. Part of the transverse service load (ws)
on a two-way edge-supported slab is carried by bending in the x direction (wsx), part by
bending in the y direction (wsy) and part by twisting moments in the slab (wsxy). If twisting
is ignored (i.e. wsxy is taken as zero) and the deflections of a pair of beams at right angles
through the centre of the slab panel are equated (see Figure C9.3.3), that part of the total

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

165

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

service load carried in the short-span direction by the equivalent beam is wsx = w s ,
where

= L4y /(L4x + L4y )


and , which depends on the slab-edge conditions (continuous or discontinuous), is given in
Table 9.3.3.

Ly = l o n g s p a n

Lx = shor t span

1m

Pa n e l i s c o nti n u o u s l y
s u p p o r te d a l o n g a ll e d g e s

Eq u i va l e nt s l a b s t r ip

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

FIGURE C9.3.3 ORTHOGONAL SLAB STRIPS IN AN EDGE-SUPPORTED SLAB


(Ref. 12)

Because torsional stiffness of the slab is ignored, deflection of the equivalent beam will
usually be a conservative estimate of slab deflection. Techniques have been developed for
the inclusion of the torsional stiffness of edge-support slabs (Refs 13 to 15) if greater
accuracy is required.
The method assumes unyielding edge supports. If this is not the case, deflection of the
supporting members should be added to the slab deflection to obtain overall deflections.
For continuous two-way flat slabs, to estimate mid-span deflection on the column line in the
long-span direction, the equivalent beam is the column strip in the idealized frame spanning
in the long-direction as described in Clause 6.9. The moment diagram used for deflection
calculations at service loads may be obtained from the idealized frame method (Clause 6.9).
The procedure was formalized by Nilson and Walters (Ref. 16) where the entire load on the
panel is carried by the idealized frame and the portion of the frame moment assigned to the
column strip depends on the location of the section in question and the relative stiffness of
the structural elements forming the idealized frame.
If the flat slab contains drop panels or column capitals, the thickness of the equivalent beam
near the supports and the dimensions of its supports should be increased to model the
stiffening effect of drop panels or column capitals.
C9.3.4 Deemed to comply span-to-depth ratio for reinforced slabs
For a reinforced concrete one-way slab, or a multi-span flat slab of uniform cross-section,
fully propped during construction, subjected only to uniformly distributed loads and where
the imposed live load (q) does not exceed the permanent dead load (g), the deflection is
deemed to be satisfactory if the limiting span-to-depth ratio given in Equation 9.3.4.1 is not
exceeded. This equation was developed by Gilbert (Ref. 15) from Equation 8.5.4 for beams
(originally proposed by Rangan in Ref. 17).
The factors k3 and k4 in Equation 9.3.4.1 are factors that account for the influence of
reinforcement level and support conditions on the final deflection, and are a simplification
of the rather complex expressions for k1 and k2 in Equation 8.5.4. Slabs that are
appropriately sized for deflection control typically have reinforcement ratios (p = Ast/bd) in
the primary span direction in the range 0.0025 to 0.006. In this reinforcement range, the
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

166

effective second moment of area is not as dependent on the level of reinforcement as for the
higher reinforcement ratios more typical of beams. The factor k1 (in Equation 8.5.4) is taken
to be constant for slabs and equal to k1 = Ief/bd3 = 0.036, while the factor k2 (in
Equation 8.5.4) is taken as 5/384 for a simply supported slab, 2.6/384 for an end span of a
continuous slab and 1.5/384 for the interior span of a continuous member.
With these approximations and rearranging Equation 8.5.4, k3 is specified as

k3 = 1.0 for one-way slabs;

k3 = 0.95 for a multi-span two-way flat slab without drop panels; and

k3 = 1.05 for a multi-span, two-way flat slab with drop panels.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The factor k4 is taken as

k4 = 1.4 for a simply-supported span;

k4 = l.75 for an end span; and

k4 = 2.1 for an interior span of a continuous slab where the ratio of the longer to the
shorter of two adjacent spans is not greater than 1.2 and where no end span is longer
that an interior span.

For a two-way slab, rectangular in plan, continuously supported on all four edges by beams
or walls, subjected to uniformly distributed loads and where the imposed live load (q) does
not exceed the permanent dead load (g), the limiting span-to-depth ratio is also given by
Equation 9.3.4.1, with k3 = 1.0 and k4 is taken from Table 9.3.4.2. For slabs supported on
four sides, the torsional stiffness of the slab has been included in the calibration of the slab
system factor k4. The calibration of the values for k4 given in Table 9.3.4.2 was performed
using a non-linear, finite-element, slab-simulation model, which is described in Refs 8
and 15.
Deflection control of cantilever slabs cannot be guaranteed using limiting span-to-depth
ratios because of their sensitivity to rotation at the support.
This deemed-to-comply approach is attractive because of its simplicity and, if it always led
to appropriately proportioned and serviceable beams and slabs, it would be ideal for use in
routine design; however, for floor systems in buildings, it may lead to conservative designs
and unnecessarily thick floor slabs in some situations.
C9.4 CRACK CONTROL OF SLABS
C9.4.1 Crack control for flexure in reinforced slabs
The procedure for flexural crack control of slabs follows the same approach as for beams
and involves limiting the maximum steel stress on the cracked section under short-term
service loads to a maximum prescribed value, as well as the satisfaction of several detailing
requirements. The approach is similar to the deemed-to-comply approach in Eurocode 2
(Ref. 18).
For flexural crack control in slabs, several requirements have to be satisfied:
(a)

The quantity of tensile reinforcement has to exceed the minimum quantity required
for strength; that is, the ultimate strength of the cross-section has to exceed 1.2 times
). For
the cracking moment (which for a reinforced concrete cross-section is 1.2Zf ct.f
two-way reinforced concrete slabs, this requirement is deemed to be satisfied if the
tensile reinforcement ratio in each direction at any point (Ast/bd) is not less than
(i)

/ f sy for slabs supported by columns at their corners; and


0.24( D / d ) 2 f ct.f

(ii)

/ f sy for slabs supported by beams or walls on four sides.


0.19( D / d ) 2 f ct.f

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

167

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

(b)

The centre to centre spacing of bars in each direction near the tensile face of the
member is to not exceed the lesser of 2Ds or 300 mm. Tensile bars with a diameter
less than half the diameter of the largest bar in the section should not be considered in
the determination of bar spacing.

(c)

The calculated tensile steel stress on the cracked section ( scr), caused by the design
moment at the serviceability limit state produced by the quasi-permanent loads, is to
not exceed the larger of the maximum steel stresses given in Table 9.4.1(A) for the
largest diameter bar in the tensile zone or Table 9.4.1(B) for the largest centre-tocentre spacing of adjacent parallel bars in the tensile zone (ignoring bars with a
diameter less than half the diameter of the largest bar in the section).

(d)

The calculated steel stress (scr.1) caused by the serviceability loads (with load factor
s = 1.0) is to not exceed 0.8fsy, irrespective of the maximum bar diameter on the
cross-section or the maximum centre-to-centre spacing of the tensile bars.

The maximum steel stresses specified in Tables 9.4.1(A) and 9.4.1(B) are intended to
ensure that maximum crack widths will not exceed 0.4 mm.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

When determining the steel stresses (scr and scr.1), the corresponding in-service bending
*
moments M s* and M s.1
should be calculated from an appropriate elastic analysis (linear or
non-linear). They should not be determined by scaling down from moments determined at
the strength limit state, where plastic redistribution of moments may have been assumed.
Limiting steel stresses for crack control for a range of crack widths are shown in
Table C9.4.1 and have been obtained using the approach outlined in Paragraph C8.6.1 for
determining the crack width (w) from Equations C8.6.1(1) to C8.6.1(3). The values shown
in columns 2, 3 and 4 of Table C9.4.1 were obtained for slabs of thickness less than
300 mm, with a single layer of tensile bars, concrete cover c = 25 mm, modular ratio
= 3.0 MPa.
n = Es/Ec = 8 and concrete tensile strength f ct.f
Also shown in Table C9.4.1 are the corresponding maximum steel stresses specified in
Table 9.4.1(A) of the Standard. For the range of variables considered here, the values in the
Standard appear to be calibrated for a design crack width of between 0.2 mm and 0.3 mm;
however, Gilbert and Ranzi (Ref. 10) have shown that the Eurocode 2 (Ref.18) approach for
calculating crack widths [Equations C8.6.1(1) to C8.6.1(3)] underestimates the effects of
drying shrinkage and, therefore, may underestimate the final maximum crack width in slabs.
With this unconservatism in mind, it is expected that the maximum final crack width in
slabs that have been designed to just satisfy the steel stress limits of Tables 9.4.1(A) and
9.4.1(B) will be between 0.3 and 0.4 mm.
TABLE C9.4.1
MAXIMUM STEEL STRESSES FOR FLEXURAL CRACK CONTROL
Maximum steel stress for flexural crack widths w
Maximum bar (in accordance with Equations C8.6.1(1) to C8.6.1(3)
diameter (d b )
w = 0.2 mm
w = 0.3 mm
w = 0.4 mm
mm
Maximum steel stress ( st ), MPa

www.standards.org.au

Maximum steel
stress
(specified in
Table 9.4.1(A)
MPa

350

430

500

375

310

390

460

345

10

280

360

420

320

12

260

330

390

300

16

230

290

340

265

20

210

270

320

240

24

200

250

300

210
Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

168

C9.4.2 Crack control for flexure in prestressed slabs


See Commentary in first two paragraphs of Paragraph C8.6.2.
If the maximum tensile stress in the concrete is less than 0.25 f c , the section is considered
uncracked and no further consideration needs to be given to crack control. When calculating
the maximum tensile stress in the concrete, the loss or compressive stress in the concrete
due to the restraint provided to the creep and shrinkage deformation of concrete by the
bonded reinforcement, the supports and adjacent parts of the structure should be considered,
in addition to the stresses caused by the short-term service loads and the prestress.
If the maximum tensile concrete stress is above 0.25 f c , then bonded reinforcement and/or
bonded tendons are required to be provided near the tensile face with a centre-to-centre
spacing not exceeding 300 mm or 2Ds. In addition, one of the following alternatives is to be
satisfied:
(a)

The calculated maximum flexural tensile stress at the extreme concrete tensile fibre is
to be less than 0.6 f c .
or

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(b)

The increment in the tensile stress in the steel near the tension face, as the applied
load increases from its value when the extreme fibre is at zero stress (the
decompression load) to the full short-term service load, is to not exceed the maximum
value given in Table 9.4.2.

If Item (a) is satisfied, cracking may occur, but the change in tensile concrete and steel
strains will not be great and crack control will not be a problem, provided some bonded
steel at a spacing less than 300 mm or 2Ds is located in the tensile zone.
The maximum steel stresses specified in Table 9.4.2 are similar to the maximum steel
stresses given in Table 9.4.1(A) for reinforced concrete slabs. At the decompression
moment in a slab, the stress in the non-prestressed reinforcement will be compressive and
so the final maximum tensile steel stress in a prestressed slab is limited to a value that is
less than the value that is permissible in a reinforced concrete slab. Considering that
prestressed slabs generally perform better than reinforced slabs after cracking, the crack
control provisions for prestressed slabs are conservative.
C9.4.3 Crack control for shrinkage and temperature effects
If concrete slabs are free to shrink, without restraint, shrinkage of concrete will not cause
cracking. However, this is almost never the case. The contraction of a slab is often
restrained by its supports or by the adjacent structure. Bonded reinforcement also restrains
shrinkage. Each of these forms of restraint involve the imposition of a gradually increasing
tensile force on the concrete, which may lead to time-dependent cracking (in previously
uncracked regions) and a widening of existing cracks. Restraint to shrinkage (or changes in
temperature) is probably the most common cause of unsightly cracking in concrete
structures.
Excessively wide cracks in floor systems and walls may often be avoided by the inclusion
of strategically placed contraction (or control) joints, thereby removing some of the
restraint to shrinkage and reducing the internal tension. When cracking does occur, in order
to ensure that crack widths remain acceptably small, adequate quantities of well-anchored
reinforcement need to be included at every location in the structure where significant
tension is expected.
The advent of shrinkage- or temperature-induced cracking depends on the degree of
restraint to the imposed deformations, the extensibility and strength of the concrete in
tension, tensile creep and the load-induced tension existing in the member. Cracking can
only be avoided if the gradually increasing tensile stress induced by shrinkage (or
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

169

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

temperature change), and reduced by creep, is at all times less than the tensile strength of
the concrete. Although the tensile strength of concrete increases with time, so too does the
elastic modulus and, therefore, so too does the tensile stress induced by restraint to
shrinkage. Furthermore, the relief offered by creep decreases with age. The existence of
load-induced tension in uncracked regions accelerates the formation of time-dependent
cracking. Therefore, in many cases, shrinkage cracking is inevitable. To control shrinkage
cracks, an adequate quantity and distribution of anchored reinforcement needs to be
included to ensure that the crack widths remain small and the structure remains serviceable.
The tensile restraining force that develops rapidly with time at the ends of a restrained slab
usually leads to cracking, often within days of the commencement of drying. Thin floor
slabs and walls in buildings are particularly prone to significant cracking resulting from
restrained shrinkage and temperature changes. The width of such a crack depends on the
quantity, orientation and distribution of the reinforcing steel crossing the crack. It also
depends on the deformation characteristics of the concrete and the bond between the
concrete and the reinforcement bars at and in the vicinity of each crack.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Direct tension cracks due to restrained shrinkage and temperature changes frequently lead
to serviceability problems, particularly in regions of low moment. Such cracks usually
extend completely through the thickness of the restrained member and are more parallelsided than flexural cracks. If uncontrolled, these cracks can become very wide and lead to
waterproofing and corrosion problems and may even compromise the integrity of the
member.
Consider a reinforced concrete member that is prevented from shortening by its supports or
by adjacent parts of the structure. As the concrete shrinks, an axial tensile restraining force
(Nt) develops with time. When the concrete stress caused by Nt first reaches the tensile
strength (fct) at a particular section, cracking occurs. The magnitude of Nt after cracking and
the crack width depend primarily on the amount of bonded reinforcement crossing the
crack. If the member contains no longitudinal steel, cracking causes the restraining force
(Nt) to drop to zero and a wide, unsightly crack results. If the member contains only small
quantities of reinforcement (p = As/bD <0.002 when fsy = 500 MPa), the steel at the crack
yields, the crack opens widely and the restraining force drops to a small fraction of its value
prior to cracking. If the member contains relatively large quantities of reinforcement
(p > 0.01 when fsy = 500 MPa), the steel at each crack does not yield, the crack width
remains small and, because the loss of member stiffness at cracking is not great, the
restraining force remains high. Therefore, members containing large quantities of steel are
likely to suffer many cracks, but each will be small and well controlled. For intermediate
steel quantities (0.002< p < 0.01 when fsy = 500 MPa), cracking causes a loss of stiffness, a
reduction of Nt and a crack width that may or may not be acceptable.
Evidence of direct tension type cracks are common in reinforced concrete floor systems.
For example, consider a typical one-way beam-slab floor system. The load is usually
carried by the slab in the primary direction across the span to the supporting beams while,
in the orthogonal direction (the secondary direction), the bending moment is small.
Shrinkage is the same in both directions and restraint to shrinkage usually exists in both
directions. In the primary (or span) direction, shrinkage will cause small increases in the
widths of the many fine flexural cracks and may cause additional flexure type cracks in the
previously uncracked regions. In the orthogonal secondary direction, which is in effect a
direct tension situation, shrinkage generally causes a few widely spaced cracks, which
penetrate completely through the slab. Frequently, more reinforcement is required in the
secondary direction to control these direct tension cracks than is required for bending in the
primary direction. With regard to cracking, shrinkage is potentially a greater problem when
it is not accompanied by flexure.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

170

C9.4.3.1 General
When determining the amount of reinforcement required in a slab to control shrinkage- and
temperature-induced cracking, the Standard requires that account be taken of the influence
of bending, the degree of restraint against in-plane movements and the exposure
classification in accordance with Clauses 9.4.3.2 to 9.4.3.5.
The Standard recognizes that shrinkage and thermal effects in thick members are a surface
phenomenon and that only the zone of concrete within 250 mm from a concrete surface
needs to be considered in determining the reinforcement requirements to control shrinkage
and temperature-induced cracking in a slab greater than 500 mm thick.
C9.4.3.2 Reinforcement in the primary direction
The primary direction in a one-way slab is the direction of the span. For a two-way slab,
both orthogonal span directions may be considered as primary directions. In these
directions, tension caused by shrinkage and temperature change in the concrete is
accompanied by bending and part of the cross-section will be in compression. Cracks will
be essentially flexural and the minimum amount of reinforcement required for bending
(specified in Clause 9.1.1) applies. In addition, the area of steel in the primary direction is
required to be at least 75% of the area of reinforcement specified in the secondary direction
in Clauses 9.4.3.3, 9.4.3.4 or 9.4.3.5 for an unrestrained slab, a restrained slab and a
partially restrained slab, respectively.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C9.4.3.3 Reinforcement in the secondary direction in unrestrained slabs


If a slab is unrestrained, shrinkage and temperature deformations are free to occur and
cracking due to restraint is eliminated. Distribution reinforcement may be required when a
slab is subjected to non-uniform loads and so the specified minimum area of reinforcement
in the secondary direction is required.
For precast, prestressed flooring systems, where the width of individual precast elements is
less than 2.5 m, the requirements for reinforcement in the secondary direction may be
waived. This waiver does not apply to in situ concrete toppings.
C9.4.3.4 Reinforcement in the secondary direction in restrained slabs
Where the ends of a slab are restrained and the slab is not free to expand or contract in the
secondary direction, the minimum area of reinforcement in the restrained direction depends
on the degree of crack control required, the exposure classification and the level of average
prestress after all losses (cp = Pe/bD).
Where a strong degree of control over cracking is required for appearance or where cracks
may reflect through finishes, the minimum area of reinforcement in the secondary direction
of a restrained slab is (As)min. = (6.02.5cp)bD 103. For reinforced concrete slabs (with
cp = 0), this corresponds to a minimum reinforcement ratio As/bD = 0.006, with the
reinforcement shared between the steel layers close to each surface of the slab. This
minimum amount of reinforcement applies, for example, to a restrained slab in a building in
exposure classification A1 or A2 where visible cracks could cause aesthetic problems or
cause cracking to brittle floor finishes. This minimum amount of reinforcement is always
required in the secondary direction of a restrained slab in exposure classifications B1, B2,
C1 and C2, because in these environments a strong degree of crack control is always
required for durability.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

171

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

For a restrained slab in either exposure classifications A1 or A2, where a moderate degree
of control over cracking is required, (As)min = (3.52.5cp)bD 103. For reinforced
concrete slabs (with cp = 0), this corresponds to a minimum reinforcement ratio of 0.0035,
with the reinforcement shared between the steel layers close to each surface of the slab.
This minimum amount of reinforcement applies, for example, to a slab where cracks are
inconsequential or hidden from view, such as an interior slab that is to be covered by a floor
covering or a false ceiling. With this amount of steel in the secondary direction of a
restrained slab, final crack widths of between 0.5 mm and 0.7 mm may be expected for
usual levels of shrinkage.
For a restrained slab fully enclosed within a building, except for a brief period of weather
exposure, and where a minor degree of control over cracking is required,
(As)min = (1.752.5cp)bD 103. This minimum area of steel is the same as that required in
the secondary direction of an unrestrained slab and, in fact, provides very little control over
cracking as the steel will usually yield when the first crack appears. Therefore, this
minimum value should only be adopted in an unrestrained direction, or in a restrained slab
in a temporary structure where wide unsightly cracks can be tolerated or for a slab with
closely spaced control joints that effectively eliminate restraint.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The areas of reinforcement specified in this Clause are minimum areas. It is recommended
that the area of reinforcement provided always exceed these minimum values. The stated
values are independent of the level of shrinkage in the concrete or the temperature changes
likely to be experienced by the slab. In some situations, therefore, the specified minimum
values may not be adequate for crack control, particularly when the concrete shrinkage is
high, and a more detailed analysis of restrained shrinkage cracking may be required.
Suitable techniques for determining crack widths in the secondary direction of fully
restrained and partially restrained slabs are presented in Refs 10, 19 and 20.
C9.4.3.5 Reinforcement in the secondary direction in partially restrained slabs
In situations where slabs are poured monolithically with walls, large beams or footings,
without expansion or contraction joints, they should be regarded as restrained slabs. In wide
one-way spanning slabs and in slabs on ground, the central area of the slabs will be almost
fully restrained irrespective of the edge restraints. A slab that has some restraint, but can
contract or expand significantly, may be regarded as partially restrained. The Standard
requires that the minimum area of reinforcement in the secondary direction of such a slab
be assessed with due consideration of the requirements of Clauses 9.4.3.3 and 9.4.3.4.
Guidance on the calculation of the width and spacing of shrinkage-induced cracks in
partially restrained slabs is provided in Refs 10 and 20. When in doubt about the level of
restraint of a slab, it is prudent to assume that the slab is fully restrained.
C9.4.4 Crack control in the vicinity of restraints
Proper account has to be taken of the stress distribution in the vicinity of restraints.
Consideration should be given to strain compatibility to ensure adequate reinforcement is
provided to control cracking to the desired degree, based on exposure classification and
functional requirements.
C9.4.5 Crack control at openings and discontinuities
Openings and discontinuities in slabs are the cause of stress concentrations that may result
in diagonal cracks emanating from re-entrant corners. Additional trimming bars are required
at holes and discontinuities to control these cracks. A suitable method of estimating the
number and size of the trimming bars is to postulate a possible crack and to provide
reinforcement to carry a force at least equivalent to the area of the crack multiplied by the
mean direct tensile strength of the concrete (Ref. 21). For crack control, the maximum
stress in the trimming bars should be limited to 250 MPa.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

172

While additional reinforcement is required for serviceability to control cracking at


re-entrant corners, it should not be assumed that this same steel is satisfactory for strength.
In suspended slabs, for example, where an opening is small, it is usually sufficient for
bending to place additional steel on either side of the opening equivalent to the steel that is
to be terminated at the face of the opening. Of course, where an opening is located in the
critical shear zone adjacent to a column, the effect of the opening on the punching shear
strength of the slab has to be carefully considered. Where an opening in a slab is large, the
analysis of the slab should account for the size and shape of the opening. Plastic methods of
design, such as the yield line method or the simplified strip method, are convenient ways of
designing such slabs, provided the slab is ductile. Finite element modelling based on linear
elastic behaviour of uncracked sections using a commercially available software package
offers a convenient way to design such areas of a slab, particularly under serviceability
conditions, but also for ultimate strength.
C9.5 VIBRATION OF SLABS
See Paragraph C8.7. To minimize vibration due to pedestrian traffic, suggested maximum
span-to-depth ratios for two-way slabs are given in Ref. 22.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C9.6 MOMENT RESISTING WIDTH FOR ONE-WAY SLABS SUPPORTING


CONCENTRATED LOADS
In some instances, suspended slabs are required to support a load concentrated over a small
area relative to the size of the slab, which may arise from equipment, plant, safes or the
like. Such a load produces bending moments in both directions with a consequent dishing of
the slab in the immediate vicinity of the load. For a one-way slab, a strip of width bef is
considered to be effective in carrying the load to the supports (see Figure C9.6) and is used
to determine the requisite longitudinal flexural reinforcement and the deflection of the slab.
Whilst this is based on load tests to failure of one-way slabs of single span, its extension to
multiple spans may be deemed to be reasonable.
The maximum longitudinal bending moment is equal to that which would be obtained if the
load were distributed as a line load across the effective width. For solid slabs, the transverse
bending moment per unit width may be shown to be up to one-third of this value.
The flexural shear capacity of the strip at the supports should be checked in accordance
with Clause 8.2 whilst the punching shear capacity of the slab in the vicinity of the load
should be checked using the provisions of Clause 9.2.
Fully anchored lateral flexural reinforcement parallel to the supports and across the width
bef should be provided to promote the distribution of the load across the strip (Clause 9.1.4).
This is to accommodate the significant transverse bending moments and improve the
punching shear strength. This reinforcement should be not less than one-half of that of the
longitudinal reinforcement and extend bef/2 in the slab span direction on both sides of the
load.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

173

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014


Ln
a

Ca s e (a)

b ef

Load wi dth
Load

Support
under
S L A B S PA N

Load
Ca s e ( b)

b ef

Load wi dth

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

U n s u p p o r te d
slab edge

Load
Slab

Support
under

FIGURE C9.6 EFFECTIVE WIDTH OF A SLAB CARRYING A CONCENTRATED LOAD

C9.7 LONGITUDINAL SHEAR IN COMPOSITE SLABS


See Paragraph C8.4.
REFERENCES
1

RANGAN, B.V. and HALL, A.S., Forces in the Vicinity of Edge Columns in Flat
Plate Floors Volume 1Tests on R.C. Models, UNICIV Report No. R-203, University
of NSW, Jan. 1983, 240pp.

RANGAN, B.V. and HALL, A.S., Moment and Shear Transfer Between Slab and
Edge Column, ACI Journal, Vol. 80 No. 3, 1983, pp. 183191.

HALL, A.S. and RANGAN, B.V., Forces in the Vicinity of Edge Columns in Flat
Slab Floors, Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 35, No. 122, 1983, pp. 1926.

ACI 31883
Building
Code
Requirements
for
Reinforced
Concrete,
ACI COMMITTEE 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1983.

RANGAN, B.V., Punching Shear Strength of Reinforced Concrete Slabs, Civil


Engineering Transactions, IE Aust., Vol. CE29, No. 2, 1987, pp. 7178.

SCANLON, A. and MURRAY, D.W., Time-Dependent Reinforced Concrete Slab


Deflections, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, No. ST9, 1974,
pp. 19111924.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

174

GILBERT, R.I. and WARNER, R.F., Time-Dependent Behaviour of Reinforced


Concrete Slabs, Proceedings of the International Association of Bridge and Structural
Engineering, P-12/78, Zurich, Feb. 1978, pp. 112.

GILBERT, R.I., Time-Dependent Behaviour of Structural Concrete Slabs, PhD


Thesis, University of New South Wales, 1979, 361pp.

CHONG, K.T., FOSTER, S.J. and GILBERT, R.I., Time-Dependent Modelling of RC


Structures using the Cracked Membrane Model and Solidification Theory, Computers
and Structures, Vol. 86, No.1112, 2008, pp. 13051317.

10

GILBERT, R.I. and RANZI, G., Time-dependent Behaviour of Concrete Structures,


Spon Press, London, 2011.

11

GILBERT, R.I., Deflection Control of Slabs Using Allowable Span to Depth Ratios,
ACI Journal, Vol. 82, No. 1, 1985, pp. 6772.

12

GILBERT, R.I., Serviceability Design for deflection and crack control, Concrete
Institute of Australia, Lecture 6 Design for deflection control Part 2: Refined
procedures, and Lecture 7 Deflection calculation for two-way slabs, National
Education Seminar Series, 2010.

13

EWELL, W.W., OKUB, S. and ABRAMS, J.I., Deflections in Gridworks and Slabs,
Transactions, ASCE, Vol. 117, 1952, p. 869.

14

FURR, W.L., Numerical Method for Approximate Analysis of Building Slabs, ACI
Journal, Vol. 3, No. 6, 1959, p. 511.

15

GILBERT, R.I., Deflection Control of Reinforced Concrete Slabs, Civil Engineering


Transactions, IE Aust, Vol. CE25, No. 4, 1983, pp. 274279.

16

NILSON, A.H. and WALTERS, D.B., Deflection of Two-Way Floor Systems by the
Equivalent Frame Method, ACI Journal, Vol. 72, No. 5, 1975, pp. 210218.

17

RANGAN, B.V., Maximum Allowable Span/Depth Ratios for Reinforced Concrete


Beams, Civil Engineering Transactions, IE Aust, Vol. CE24, No. 4, 1982,
pp. 312317.

18

EUROCODE 2, Design of Concrete Structures Part 1-1: General rules and rules
for buildings BS EN 1992-1-1:2004, (Incorporating corrigendum January 2008),
European Committee for Standardization, 2004.

19

GILBERT, R.I., Shrinkage Cracking in Fully-Restrained Concrete Members, ACI


Structural Journal, Vol. 89, No. 2, 1992, pp. 141149.

20

NEJADI, S. and GILBERT, R.I., Shrinkage Cracking and Crack Control in Restrained
Reinforced Concrete Members, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6, 2004,
pp. 840845.

21

BEEBY, A.W., An Investigation of Cracking in Slabs Spanning One Way, Cement


and Concrete Association, London, TRA 433, 1970.

22

MICKLEBOROUGH, N.C. and GILBERT, R.I., Vibration Control of Two-way


Suspended Concrete Slabs, UNICIV Report R-223, School of Civil Engineering, The
University of New South Wales, 1985.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

175

S E C T I O N C 1 0
S T R E N G T H

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

D E S I G N O F C O L UM N S F O R
A N D S E R V I C E A B I L I T Y

C10.1 GENERAL
C10.1.1 Design strength

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The primary bending moments in a structure may be obtained by a linear elastic analysis.
For slender structures, additional secondary bending moments result from the change in
geometry of the structure, particularly for unbraced frames of the type shown in
Figure C10.1.1(A)(b). The additional secondary moments in a column include the product
of the axial force and the lateral deflection between the ends of the column (for both braced
and unbraced columns). These moments have to be included in the total moment to be
resisted by the column at any section along its length.
A simple example of a braced column loaded at a constant eccentricity is shown in
Figure C10.1.1(B)(a). If the column is short, the lateral deflection () is negligible, and the
critical section at the centre of the column is subject to an axial force (N) and a moment
(Ne). The maximum value of the axial force (N) is reached at point A on the axial force
versus moment interaction diagram defining the strength of the column section as shown in
Figure C10.1.1(B)(b). For a slender column, the lateral deflection () and the secondary
moment (N) are significant and the critical section at the mid-height of the column is
subject to the axial force (N) and a moment of N(e + ). Therefore, the value of the
maximum axial force is reached at point B on the interaction diagram. The reduction in load
capacity from A to B (or the increase in moment from A to B) is referred to as the
slenderness effect.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

176
Fn

Fn

Po i n t s of
c o ntr af l exu r e

Fn

Shear
wa ll

Le

Le

Le

Pi n n e d b a s e

Fi xe d b a s e
(a) B r a c e d f r a m e
Fn

Fn

Fn

Fn

Ef fe c tive
l e n g th L e

( b) U n b r a c e d f r a m e

FIGURE C10.1.1(A) FRAME TYPES AND DEFORMATIONS


N

N
Shor t column strength

A'

A X I A L LOA D

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

S i d e sway

M = N (e + )

N xe

Nx

Slender column
s t r e n g th
B

Loa d - m o m e nt
c u r ve

0
M O M EN T

N
(a) Fo r c e s i n a d ef l e c te d c o l u m n

( b) Ef fe c t of N - m o m e nt o n c o l u m n s tr e n g th

FIGURE C10.1.1(B) DEFORMATION EFFECTS FOR BRACED COLUMNS


Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

177

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C10.1.2 Minimum bending moment


The minimum eccentricity of 0.05D provides for imperfections in straightness during
construction. It is required for the determination of the strength of an axially loaded
member with very small, or zero, end moments.
C10.1.3 Definitions
C10.1.3.1 Braced columns
For a braced frame of the type shown in Figure C10.1.1(A)(a), the change in overall
geometry (e.g. horizontal deflection of the floors) is negligible and the only secondary
moments that need to be taken into account are due to lateral deflection between the ends of
columns.
C10.1.3.2 Short columns
Depending on the column length, distribution of bending moment and level of axial force,
there is a considerable range of columns for which the additional bending moments due to
slenderness effects are negligible and can be taken as zero. These columns are deemed to be
short (see Clause 10.3).
C10.2 DESIGN PROCEDURES
C10.2.1 Design procedure using linear elastic analysis

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The majority of framed structures in reinforced and prestressed concrete are analysed by
first-order linear elastic analysis. In such analyses, the change in geometry of the frame
under loading is assumed to have a negligible effect on the magnitude and distribution of
axial forces, shear forces and primary bending moments.
For the simple portal frame loaded as shown in Figure C10.2.1(a), the principle of
superposition may be used and the lateral deflection calculated as 1.
Additional moments are induced by the action of the vertical forces acting on the actual
lateral displacement (1 + 2), e.g. the maximum secondary moment due to slenderness at
the top of column CD is given by VR2 (1 + 2).
The design procedure to be adopted is as follows, depending on the relative slenderness of
the column:
(a)

For short columns, as defined in Clause 10.3, the secondary displacement effects are
negligible and hence the columns may be designed on the basis of primary moments
alone. Many columns will fall into this category.

(b)

For slender columns, the additional bending moments resulting from the deformations
are taken into account by multiplying the design primary bending moments by a
moment magnifier. Moment magnification is based on an elastic buckling analysis,
using the effective length concept [e.g. the equivalent pin-ended column CD shown
in Figure C10.2.1(b)] and given in Clauses 10.4 and 10.5.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

178

N*

N*

N*

N*

F h*

F h*

D
(a) Fi r s t- o r d e r a n a l ys i s
1
N*

F h*

N*

2
N*

C
Le

VL2

VR2

N x b e n di n g m o m e nt = V R 2 ( 1 + 2 )
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Pi n

Pi n

( b) S e c o n d o r d e r : N x

FIGURE C10.2.1 FIRST- AND SECOND-ORDER ANALYSES

C10.2.2 Design procedure incorporating secondary bending moments


A second-order elastic analysis in accordance with Clause 6.3, often referred to as a P
analysis, may be carried out to determine the secondary bending moments due to changes in
frame geometry. Most second-order analyses are iterative in nature and require a computer
program. For buildings that can be modelled by a set of rectangular equivalent frames,
Smith (Ref. 1) has devised a simple non-iterative analysis that requires only minor
modifications to the stiffness matrix used in conventional first-order elastic analyses. The
method is ideally suited for microcomputers.
Second-order methods determine the secondary moments at the ends of the column.
Secondary moments arising from the action of the axial force on the lateral deflection
between the ends of the column still have to be accounted for using the moment magnifier
(b), determined in accordance with Clause 10.4.2.
C10.2.3 Design procedure using rigorous analysis
A rigorous structural analysis is required to take into account all relevant non-linear
material properties and non-linear geometric effects, including initial crookedness. While
such analyses enable the axial force and bending moment, caused by the design loading for
the appropriate limit state, to be determined for every section of the column, they are
complex in nature and require careful implementation and interpretation. The methodology
for use of non-linear frame analysis is provided in Clause 6.5 of the Standard.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

179

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C10.3 DESIGN OF SHORT COLUMNS


C10.3.1 General
For short columns, no moment magnification due to slenderness is assumed to occur and the
interaction diagram defining the strength of a section may be used directly. Many
reinforced columns used in current practice will come into this category. For braced
columns bent in single curvature ( M 1* / M 2* = 1) or, for unbraced columns, there is always
some magnification irrespective of the column slenderness. The slenderness limit of 25
ensures that the additional bending moments are less than 10% (i.e. < 1.10) and may be
neglected.
For columns with small bending moments, for which the minimum value of 0.05DN* has to
be taken, a column bent in nominal double curvature can snap through into the single
curvature mode. It is conservative to assume the column is initially bent in single curvature
by taking ( M 1* / M 2* = 1) .
The design equations were revised for the Standard with consideration to high strength
concrete. The relationships improve the predictions for most columns that are subjected to a
moderate axial ratio (0.8 N*/Nuo 0.5) over that of the previous Standard. Further
information on the development of this Clause can be found in Ref. 2.
C10.3.2 Short column with small compressive axial force
It is generally conservative to ignore the small axial force of 0.1 f c Ag and design the

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

column for bending only (i.e. as a beam) as small axial forces usually increase the moment
capacity of reinforced concrete sections.
C10.3.3 Short braced column with small bending moments
For the situation presented in Items (a) to (e) of the Clause, the bending moment in the
column is small. The reduction in axial load capacity to 0.75Nuo is to account for moments
(which have been neglected) that arise from asymmetrical loading on the adjacent beams of
similar length and is deemed to comply with the provisions of Clause 10.1.2 of the
Standard. This Clause does not apply to edge columns unless the only flexural members
loading the column run parallel to the edge.
C10.4 DESIGN OF SLENDER COLUMNS
C10.4.1 General
The Standard adopts the moment magnifier method for inclusion of second order effects in
slender columns. The moment is magnified by a factor to account for the second order
moment. The additional moment after magnification is deemed to be equal to the axial force
in the member multiplied by the maximum deflection of the member.
C10.4.2 Moment magnifier for a braced column
The value of the braced moment magnifier (b) depends on the ratio of the axial load (N*)
to the buckling load (Nc) of the braced column and on the ratio of the end moments
( M 1* / M 2* ) . Note that the design moment is taken to be the largest bending moment
multiplied by the magnifier.
Moment magnification for a pin-ended column is shown in Figure C10.4.2. If the value of
k m/(lN*/Nc) is less than unity, the maximum moment occurs at the end of the column and
b = 1.0 (i.e. no magnification). A lower limit of 0.4 is placed on k m for columns bent in
double curvature where 0.5 < M 1* / M 2* 1.0. Where the maximum moment due to transverse
loading occurs between the ends of the column, this moment will be amplified by the axial
force. In the absence of more accurate calculations, k m may be taken as unity (Ref. 3).
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

180

The accuracy of the moment magnifier method has been verified by Smith and Bridge
(Ref. 4) and the reliability checked by Bridge and Pham (Ref. 5). The method is accurate
for columns with a slenderness ratio L/r 40, which would cover most practical cases of
braced columns. For L/r ratios above this limit, the method becomes increasingly
conservative particularly for columns with small end moments. In the study by Smith and
Bridge (Ref. 4), the columns were taken as pin-ended with end eccentricity of loading. In
reality, the ends of the column will not be pinned but will be subjected to some degree of
rotational end-restraint depending on the stiffness of members framing into the column
ends. This can affect significantly the pattern of moments; however, the accuracy of the
effective length of an equivalent pin-ended column, to account for the effects of end
restraints has been closely examined by Lai et al (Ref. 6). The effective length method
gives reasonable predictions of magnified moments, provided conservative estimates of the
effective length are made.

N*

N*
M 1*

M 1*

M 1*

M 1*
M * = b M 2*
km

b
N *y
MC

y
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

M 2*

km

0.6

N*
NC
0.4

M 1*
M 2*

M 2*

M 2*

M 2*

BMD
N*
(a) S i n g l e c u r vatu r e

BMD
N*
( b) D o u b l e c u r vatu r e

FIGURE C10.4.2 MOMENT MAGNIFICATION FOR PIN-ENDED COLUMNS

C10.4.3 Moment magnifier for an unbraced column


As the columns in a building are normally tied together by the floor slabs and beams,
failure of a structure in the sideway mode, as shown in Figure C10.4.3, can only occur by
the relative translation of each floor as a whole in the horizontal plane. In the case of a
rectilinear building frame, the relative horizontal displacement should be the same between
the ends of all the vertical members within a storey, provided the floors are not subjected to
significant rotation on plan view.
The value of the sway moment magnifier (s) for all columns within a storey depends on
the ratio of the sum of the axial forces (N*) and the sum of the elastic critical buckling
loads (Nc) for all columns within the storey, as one column cannot sway unless they all
sway; however, an individual column within a storey may be very slender and highly
loaded, in which case the braced mode of buckling may be critical. Therefore, it is
necessary to calculate the braced moment magnifier (b) for each individual column. The
larger of the values s and b is taken as the moment magnifier.
The above procedure requires a storey-by-storey check to evaluate s . An alternative
procedure is to use a frame magnifier (s) based on the elastic critical buckling load factor
(uc) of the entire frame. Hence, s is taken as a constant value for all columns in the frame.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

181

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

In calculating uc, the stiffness of the members should be appropriate to the limit state being
considered. MacGregor and Hage (Ref. 7) have proposed values of 0.4EcIf and 0.8EcIc for
the flexural members and columns respectively. While computer methods are generally
required to establish elastic critical buckling loads for frames, reasonable estimates for
rectangular frames may be obtained using manual methods (Ref. 8), or a simple adaptation
of a linear elastic frame analysis (Ref. 9).
The accuracy of moment magnifier methods for this case has been checked by Lai and
MacGregor (Ref. 10) and by Smith (Ref. 1). The use of a storey-by-storey magnifier gave
more accurate predictions than the frame magnifier, which was conservative for most of the
columns; however, the frame magnifier may be particularly useful for frames with a
mixture of elements, as the stabilizing effect of the stiffer elements on the more slender
elements is taken into account. Structures with partial restraint against sway can also be
accommodated.
The moment magnifier method should only be used where s < 1.5. Above this value, the
failure mode may be one of instability before the strength of the section at the point of
maximum moment is reached (Ref. 7). In such cases, the design should be revised, or a
rigorous analysis used.

F h10

Unbraced
columns

Fh9

N*

N*

N*

N*

F h 6 +F h7+F h 8 +F h 9 +F h10

Fh8

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

F h7

S to r ey 6

Fh6

All columns s =

1
N *
1
N c

Each column M * = s M *2 or b M *2
FIGURE C10.4.3 SIDESWAY MODEINTER-STOREY DEFORMATIONS

C10.4.4 Buckling load


The buckling load (Nc) of a column may be expressed in terms of the effective length (Le)
and the stiffness (EI) by

N c = 2 EI / L2e

. . . C10.4.4(1)

The stiffness is affected by the non-linearity of the stress-strain relationships for the
concrete and reinforcement, the distribution of flexural cracking, the tension stiffening
between cracks, creep effects and the level of axial load and moment applied to the column.
The value of EI directly affects the moment magnifiers s and b and any assessment should
also give a good fit to experimental results at ultimate strength, for both reinforced and
prestressed concrete members.
The secant stiffness EI at ultimate strength may be determined for any point on the axial
load-moment interaction diagram using the elementary equation

EI = M u /
www.standards.org.au

. . . C10.4.4(2)
Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

182

where is the curvature at ultimate strength of the cross-section and is given by

= cu /(k u d )

. . . C10.4.4(3)

where cu is the maximum concrete strain at ultimate strength and kud is the neutral axis
depth.
Studies by MacGregor et al (Ref. 11), Menn (Ref. 12) and Oelhafen (Ref. 13) have
suggested that a single representative value of EI might be calculated at the balanced
point on the interaction diagram (tension steel just at yield). For multiple layers of
reinforcement, combinations of prestressing tendons or mixed tendons and reinforcement,
the balanced definition cannot be upheld and needs to be replaced by a curvature concept
using the effective depth from Clause 1.6.3. Taking cu = 0.003 and a neutral axis depth
kudo = 0.545do (which corresponds to the balanced condition for a cross-section with a
single layer of tensile reinforcement of Grade 500 steel) then

= 0.003/ 0.545d o = 0.0055/ d o

. . . C10.4.4(4)

and hence

EI = 182d o M ub

. . . C10.4.4(5)

where Mub is the moment corresponding to a neutral axis depth of kudo = 0.545.
The value of EI implied in the Standard is

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

EI = 182d o M ub / (1 + d )

. . . C10.4.4(6)

The value of corresponding to Mub (axial force of Nub) is 0.6.


The term (l + d) effectively reduces the value of EI to account for creep due to sustained
load. This is the simple effective modulus approach and while it cannot correctly model the
complex nature of creep, this factor gives a correct trend when compared to analyses and
tests of columns under sustained load (Ref. 14). Creep effects need not be considered for
short columns where lateral creep deformations are small and columns with large moments
where axial forces are small by comparison.
C10.5 SLENDERNESS
C10.5.1 General
The moment magnifier method should not be used for columns with a slenderness ratio
(Le/r) exceeding 120. Test results are not available in this range and the prediction of the
instability failure mode will depend on accurate estimates of the stiffness of the column.
A rigorous analysis is the only method as yet available. Most practical columns will be
below this limit.
C10.5.2 Radius of gyration
Although the radius of gyration of a cross-section consisting of two elastic materials can be
calculated from their individual elastic moduli, second moment of areas and cross-sectional
areas, the approximations given in the Standard are within 10% of the calculated values for
most practical cross-sections and material properties.
C10.5.3 Effective length of a column
A compression member in a rigid jointed frame will be restrained at its ends by adjacent
members connected to the ends of the column. The end restraint may be both rotational ( 1,
2) and translational (T) and may be modelled as shown in Figure C10.5.3.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

183

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The compressive axial load at buckling (Nc) is defined as

N c = 2 EI / L2e = 2 EI /(kLu ) 2

. . . C10.5.3(1)

where k is the effective length factor that defines an effective length (Le) in terms of the
actual unsupported length (Le = kLu) and can also be expressed as
k = (/Lu)(EI/Nc)

. . . C10.5.3(2)

It should be noted that k is not only a function of the properties of the column (E, I, Lu) but
also the buckling load (Nc). Bridge and Trahair (Ref. 3) showed that the effective length
factor (k) can be defined in terms of the three end restraints 1, 2 and T of Figure C10.5.3.
For braced columns in frames fully braced against sidesway, T may be taken as infinite
and k may be expressed purely in terms of the end rotational restraint coefficients ( 1 and
2) as indicated by Figure 10.5.3(B) of the Standard.
For unbraced columns in frames unrestrained against sidesway, T may be taken as zero for
each column if all columns are assumed to be critically loaded so that no column can
provide translational restraint to any other. In general this will not be the case but assuming
T = 0, then k may be expressed purely in terms of the end rotational restraint coefficients
(1 and 2) as indicated by Figure 10.5.3(C) in the Standard.
The effective length factors, given in Figure 10.5.3(A) for columns with simple end
restraints, have been derived assuming fixed ends can have some rotation and pinned
ends have some fixity in a manner similar to that provided in Clause 10.5.6.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

If the buckling load of a column (Nc) has been determined by analysis, the effective length
factor may be calculated from Equation 10.5.3(2).

N*

M* B

F* h

2
A
EI

M* A

F* h
N*

(a) Model

(b) Member

FIGURE C10.5.3 COLUMN END RESTRAINT MODEL

C10.5.4 End restraint coefficients for regular rectangular framed structures


In the derivation of the expression for the end restraint coefficients, two assumptions have
been made. Firstly, the axial forces in the beams and slabs are small and may be taken as
zero (i.e. no reduction in the flexural stiffness of these members). Secondly, it is assumed
that all columns are equally critically loaded. Therefore, the end rotational restraints are
provided by the beams only and are shared between the column above and below in
proportion to the column stiffnesses.
For braced frames with the far end of the beams rigidly connected to columns, the beams
are bent in symmetrical single curvature [Figure C10.1.1(A)(a)] and this is taken as the
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

184

basic stiffness mode. For unbraced frames, the beams are bent in reverse curvature
[Figure C10.1.1(A)(b)] and this is taken as the basic stiffness mode. Other end conditions
are accounted for by the fixity factor () in Table 10.5.4.
C10.5.5 End restraint coefficients for any framed structure
This Clause defines the end restraint coefficient in its general form. Examples of its use
have been described by Fraser (Ref. 15) and Bridge (Ref. 8). The process is iterative but
gives reasonable estimates of effective length factors (k) for structures outside the
assumptions used in Clause 10.5.4.
C10.5.6 End restraint provided by footings
These values recognize the fact that neither zero nor full rotational restraint is achievable in
practice at a column-footing connection.
C10.6 STRENGTH
COMPRESSION

OF

COLUMNS

IN

COMBINED

BENDING

AND

C10.6.1 Basis of strength calculations


The two basic conditions of static equilibrium and compatibility of strains have to be
satisfied. Furthermore:
(a)

Tests have confirmed that the strain distribution, on average, is essentially linear over
the cross-section. The strain in both the reinforcement and the concrete are assumed
to be directly proportional to the distance y from the neutral axis where

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

= y
and is the curvature.
This assumption enables the strain distribution for a cracked section to be defined.
With appropriate stress-strain relationships for the steel and concrete, the stress
distribution and hence actions on the cross-section can be determined.
(b)

The concrete tensile strength has little influence on the capacity in combined bending
and compression.

(c)

Where curvilinear stress-strain curves, based on the characteristic cylinder strength


( f c ) of concrete at 28 days, are used in design, the maximum stress is taken as 0.9 f c ,
to account for the difference between the strength of the concrete in situ to that
obtained from the standard cylinder test. A set of stress-strain curves for concrete in
compression are given in Paragraph C3.1.4. If a curvilinear stress-strain model is
adopted for design, the limiting strain in the extreme compressive fibre of 0.003 does
not apply.

(d)

To guard against buckling of compressive reinforcement, it is prudent to limit the


maximum compressive steel strain to this value, particularly in the absence of any
special provisions for restraint of this reinforcement.

(e)

For sections subject to high axial load, the concrete cover spalls from the section as
the ultimate load is approached exposing the confined core (Ref. 16). The exact point
at which spalling will occur is a function of the applied axial load, relative to the
moment on the section, and the degree of confinement provided to the section core.
Higher levels of confinement lead to spalling of the cover concrete at lower axial
loads. The rectangular stress block model in the Standard includes this effect (see
Paragraph C10.6.2.2). If a curvilinear model is used, the effect on sectional strength
of cover spalling needs to be considered.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

185

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C10.6.2 Strength of cross-sections calculated using the rectangular stress block


C10.6.2.1 General
This Clause introduces the key point of the MN interaction diagram and provides reference
to subsequent clauses where these points can be calculated.
C10.6.2.2 Squash load (N uo)
The maximum stress for concrete is reached at a strain of approximately 0.0025,
irrespective of the concrete strength grade. By limiting the concrete strain (and hence the
steel strain) to this value, it is assumed that the ultimate strength of a column in pure
compression is reached when the maximum stress in the concrete is reached, taken as 1 f c .
This will be the case provided the steel yields at or below a strain of 0.0025, i.e. steels with
a yield stress less than or equal to 500 MPa.
For higher yield steels, the maximum value of Nuo will occur at strains higher than 0.0025
and may be determined provided the concrete stress-strain relationship for strains greater
than 0.0025 is known.
The factor 1 in Equation 10.6.2.2 of the Standard includes two components: the in situ
strength factor for the concrete (taken as 0.9) and a factor to account for spalling of the
cover concrete as the applied axial load nears ultimate. The spalling factor is constant for
concrete strengths of less than 50 MPa and equals 0.85/0.9, but reduces for higher strength
concrete. The combined reduction of the in situ strength factor and spalling factor is
sufficiently close to the factor for 2 given in Clauses 8.1.3(b) of the Standard that a single
relationship has been adopted, differing only in the lower limit.
Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C10.6.2.3 Decompression point


The decompression point is the point on the MN interaction diagram defined by the
combination of moment and axial force that produces a triangular compressive strain
distribution over the entire cross-section, with a strain equal to cu = 0.003 at the extreme
compressive fibre and zero at the extreme tensile fibre.
C10.6.2.4 Transition from decompression point to squash load
The interaction diagram is assumed to be linear between the decompression point and the
squash load. This is a conservative assumption that has proved to be adequate.
C10.6.2.5 Transition from decompression point to bending strength
For the background to the rectangular stress block model adopted by the Standard, see
Paragraphs C8.1.2 and C8.1.3. The model validation is reported in Ref. 17.
C10.6.3 Design based on each bending moment acting separately
Where the calculated primary end moments are less than the minimum moment (0.05DN*)
about both principal axes, the column is essentially axially loaded and need only be
designed for the minimum moment considered separately for each axis.
Where the moments are relatively small about one principal axis compared to the other,
they do not significantly reduce the strength about the other axis and each axis may be
treated independently. The question is How small is small? The answer is indicated by
Figure 10.6.3 and is equivalent to the axis of bending being rotated through an angle of
approximately 0.2 radians (12) from the principal axis.
C10.6.4 Design for biaxial bending and compression
This form of interaction equation has been used for concrete, structural steel and composite
columns. A diagrammatic representation of the interaction is shown in Figure C10.6.4.
Much attention has been given to varying the value of n to fit a wide range of experimental
or theoretical results and the expression adopted for n gives reasonable results for
reinforced concrete sections.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

186

The design bending moments ( M x* and M y* ) should include the additional bending moments
produced by slenderness effects. If only a linear elastic analysis has been performed, the
moments should be magnified by the appropriate magnifier (b or s) determined from
Clause 10.4.

N*

M ux

Mx n

M ux

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

M uy
O

My n

M uy

1.0

Mx

M xy

My

FIGURE C10.6.4 INTERACTION DIAGRAM FOR BIAXIAL BENDING

C10.7 REINFORCEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR COLUMNS


C10.7.1 Limitations on longitudinal steel
The minimum requirement of 1% reinforcement given in Item (a) of the Clause provides
resistance to accidental bending where calculation may show no bending exists. It also
provides some restraint to creep and shrinkage deformations and is usually sufficient to
avoid yielding of the longitudinal reinforcement due to shrinkage and to creep under
sustained service loading.
For a column with 1% steel and Grade 20 concrete, the steel provides about 17% of axial
load capacity. It is logical that for columns that are made larger for reasons other than
strength, the steel percentage may be reduced to less than 1% provided the steel carries at
least 15% of the design axial force (N*). For such lightly loaded members, creep strains
will be small and the arguments for the minimum levels of reinforcement relating to creep
under sustained loads are not usually applicable.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

187

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Tests have indicated that columns with more than 4% steel perform satisfactorily; however,
as indicated by Item (b) of the Clause, careful attention to the disposition of the steel is
essential where this occurs if proper placement and compaction of the concrete is to be
achieved. For heavily reinforced columns, particular attention should be paid to steel
congestion at lapped splices and at the column-floor intersections. The use of mechanical
splices should be considered.
C10.7.2 Functions of fitments
Fitments serve a multiplicity of purposes. They act as restraint against buckling of the
longitudinal reinforcement, leading to premature failure of the section. They also provide
confinement to the core of the section, as well as providing for strength in shear and
torsion. While the fitments can simultaneously fulfil one or more of these purposes, the
quantity of fitment steel required for each purpose should be determined and the fitments
provided in the column should satisfy the most onerous of these requirements.
C10.7.3 Confinement to the core
C10.7.3.1 General requirements
Robustness and ductility are important issues and when it comes to the detailing of all
concrete, members and columns are no exception. However, extra attention is required in
the detailing of the tie reinforcement in high strength concrete (HSC) columns due to the
more brittle nature of the concrete with increasing strength, as seen in Figure C3.1.4.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The principle behind the development of these clauses is that a similar level of ductility will
be maintained in columns and structures fabricated from HSC to that in columns fabricated
from conventional strength concretes, where from long experience performance is known to
be satisfactory. The reasons for this are two-fold (Ref. 18)
(a)

ductility of structures is an important aspect of design and, as there is limited


experience in the behaviour of structures constructed with HSC, member ductility
should not be reduced beyond our experience; and

(b)

in the earthquake Standard AS 1170.4 (Ref. 19), seismic design does not need to be
considered for structures, provided the structural ductility factor ( ) is not less than 2
for ordinary moment resisting frames (OMRFs). In this case, the additional attention
to detailing of the critical sections of HSC columns is required to ensure that this
minimum condition is met.

Additional ties are required for the case of 65 MPa concrete columns over and above that
required by the 2001 Standard. It is important here to recognize that the test data used to
justify the provisions of the previous editions of the Standard were largely adopted from
rules that were established from the tests of Hognestad (Ref. 20) where the concrete
strength did not exceed 40 MPa. The extension to 50 MPa (let alone 65 MPa) was already
beyond the test data from which the rules were established. Therefore the confinement
provisions for HSC are extended to the case of columns constructed of 65 MPa concrete in
the 2009 revision.
The Standard meets the above demands through two provisions. Firstly, a sufficient level of
detailing in critical regions to ensure that sufficient warning of distress is provided through
excessive deflections, cracking, etc.; and, secondly, with a penalty for non-ductile elements
through the provisions in the capacity reduction factors ().
While many definitions/measures for ductility exist, that adopted in the development of the
Standard, is the I10 index, where I10 is calculated similar to that set out in ASTM C1018
(Ref. 21) for the measurement of toughness. In the context of ductility, the I10 parameter is
the area under the load versus strain curve at a strain of 5.5 times the yield strain, relative to
the area under the curve for a strain equal to the yield strain and where the yield strain is
taken as 1.33 times the strain corresponding to a load on the ascending curve of 0.75Pu
(Ref. 22). The area under the load versus strain curve up to 5.5 times the yield strain is
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

188

chosen such that for a perfectly elasto-plastic material I10 = 10, while for a perfectly elasticbrittle material I10 = 1. In moving towards the use of higher strength concretes, the design
philosophy is to maintain a certain minimum level of ductility consistent with that inferred
by the minimum detailing provisions of previous versions of the Standard and this is taken
as an I10 value of 5.6, with I10 = 5.6 being the assessment of the ductility of a 50 MPa
column with minimum confinement as provided by the 2001 Standard. To achieve an I10 of
5.6, an effective confining pressure on the core of 0.01 f c is needed in critical regions.
Ductility in columns is derived from confinement provided by the fitments and is a function
of the yield strength of the fitments, the concrete strength, the volumetric ratio of fitment
reinforcement and their arrangement. The effect of fitment arrangement on providing
confinement to the columns core and, hence, on ductility of the section, is shown in
Figure C10.7.3.1.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Design for confinement to the core of columns is required in a section that fails in a primary
compression mode and is subjected to high stress; that is, in dominantly compression
regions where plastic hinges are required to form. Research by Mendis and Kovacic
(Ref. 23) has shown that where the axial force on a section is less than 0.3 f c Ag , no special
provisions are needed to obtain a sufficiently ductile section for non-seismic design over
and above those detailed for restraint of the longitudinal reinforcement. In addition, no
additional provision for tie or helix reinforcement is required over and above that required
for restraint of the longitudinal reinforcement where the bending stress in the section is less
than 60% of the capacity of the section. The application of Clause 10.7.3.1 is summarized
in the MN interaction plot shown in Figure 10.7.3.1(A). In the unhatched regions, the
section stresses, or confinement demands to ensure an adequate level of ductility, are
sufficiently low that no additional attention is needed other than limits on the spacing of the
tie reinforcement. This limit is that the spacing of the ties or helix reinforcement is not to
exceed the lesser of 0.8 times the depth of the section in the direction of the bending being
considered and 300 mm. For design action effects on a section that lies within the hatched
region, ties or helices are provided such that the minimum effective confinement pressures
are applied to the section at the strength limit state and with the maximum tie spacing (s)
the lesser of <0.6D and 300 mm, where D is measured with consideration to the axis of
bending being considered.
Figure 10.7.3.1(B) in the Standard illustrates the location of the special confinement regions
in typical columns in double and single curvature.
This Clause only deals with the design for fitments for the provision of confinement to the
core in HSC columns. The designer should also pay due consideration to other design
provisions in the Standard that require dimensioning of fitments such as, for example, the
design for shear and for restraint of longitudinal bars against buckling. In some
circumstances, these other design conditions may require closer spacing, or greater areas of
reinforcement or variations of the detailing of the fitments specified in Clause 10.7.3.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

189

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Ef fe c tive l y
c o nf i n e d c o r e

( b) C i r c u l a r s e c ti o n s

Ef fe c tive l y
c o nf i n e d
core
C ove r

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Po o r l y
c o nf i n e d
core

(a) S q u a r e

(c) 3 D vi ew of s q u a r e c o l u m n

FIGURE C10.7.3.1 EFFECTIVELY CONFINED AREAS IN TIED COLUMNS

C10.7.3.2 Calculation of core confinement by rational calculation


Confinement of the core may be determined using models that consider triaxial stress
conditions. Such models are to take into consideration the effectiveness of fitments in
providing the confining pressure needed to meet the requirements of Clause 10.7.3.1.
C10.7.3.3 Calculation of core confinement by simplified calculation
A number of authors (Refs 24 to 27) have indicated that ductility is a function of the
confinement parameter S f sy.f / f c , where S is the lateral reinforcement volumetric ratio,
fsy.f is the yield strength of the fitments and f c is the concrete strength. Razvi and
Saatcioglu (Ref. 27) suggested that this parameter be multiplied by a second parameter
representing the efficiency of the fitment arrangement. For circular and rectangular
sections, the efficiency of the confining steel is given by the following:
For circular columns with tie or spiral reinforcement, assuming a parabolic arch between
the ties with a 45 tangent slope [following the concept advanced by Sheikh and Uzumeri
(Ref. 28)], the confinement effectiveness factor is

s*
k e = 1
2d s

. . . C10.7.3.3(1)

where s * is the clear spacing between the fitments or spirals as used by Mander et al
(Ref. 29) and ds is the diameter of the fitment or spiral reinforcement.
In the design model s* is replaced by the centre-to-centre spacing of the fitments, s.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

190

For square or rectangular sections a modified form of the Sheikh and Uzumeri (Ref. 28)
model is used with the confinement effectiveness parameter given by

1
k e = 1
6 AC

w
i =1

2
i


s*
1
2b
c

s*
1
2d c

. . . C10.7.3.3(2a)

where wi is the ith clear distance between adjacent tied longitudinal bars, bc and dc are the
core dimensions to the centre-line of the fitments across the width and depth of the section,
Ac = bcdc and n is the number of spaces between tied longitudinal bars (and equals the
number of tied bars).
In the Standard this is simplified to

nw 2
s
s
1
1

k e = 1

6
A
2
b
2
d
C
c
c

. . . C10.7.3.3(2b)

where n = number of tied longitudinal bars and w = average clear spacing between adjacent
tied longitudinal bars.
The relationship between the ductility index and the effective confinement parameter is
given in Foster and Attard (Ref. 30) as

ke s f sy.f / f c = 1.7 I10 / 1000

. . . C10.7.3.3(3)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The confining pressure applied to a section is obtained by cutting the section and applying
statics across the section, as demonstrated for some common cases in Figure 10.7.3.3.
For a rectangular column (Figure 10.7.3.3) the confining pressure applied to the section
is
f r.xx =

nly Ab.fit f sy.f


bc s

f r.yy =

nlx Ab.fit f sy.f


dcs

. . . C10.7.3.3(4)

where fr.xx is the confining pressure applied to a cut on the xx plane [Figure 10.7.3.3(d)],
fr.yy is the confining pressure applied to a cut on the yy plane, nlx and nly are the number of
fitment legs in the x and y directions, respectively, and Ab.fit is the cross-sectional area of a
single fitment leg.
For rectangular sections, the volumetric ratio of the ties is given by:

s =

Ab.fit ( n ly d c + n lx bc )
bc d c s

. . . C10.7.3.3(5)

For symmetrically reinforced square columns and for rectangular columns with
frx = fry = fr

f r = 0.5 s f sy.f

. . . C10.7.3.3(6)

It can be shown that this is equally applicable to the case of circular sections with circular
fitments or spiral reinforcement. For sections where frxfry the confining pressure may
conservatively be taken as fr = min. (fr.xx, fr.yy).
The effective confining pressure applied by the steel fitments on the core of a reinforced
concrete column (at the point of yielding of the fitments) may be expressed in the form

k e f r = 0.5k e s f sy.f

. . . C10.7.3.3(7)

where, for the purposes of this equation, it is assumed that fr.xxfr.yy.


Using this it can be shown that

k e f r = 1.7 I10 f c / 2000


Standards Australia

. . . C10.7.3.3(8)
www.standards.org.au

191

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

As noted above, AS 36002001 had an implied level of ductility for columns derived from
the detailing requirements of the fitments. An evaluation of the studies by Ghazi (Ref. 31)
and Zaina (Ref. 32) indicate a level I10 = 5.6 for a 50 MPa column fabricated to the
minimum detailing requirements of the Standard. Maintaining a similar level of ductility for
HSC columns dictates that more stringent design rules are required for HSC columns than
for conventional strength columns.
Taking I10 5.6 as a sufficient level of ductility in non-seismic regions gives an effective
confining pressure requirement of

ke f r = 0.01 f c

. . . C10.7.3.3(9)

Note that higher values are required for seismic regions where the ductility index
requirement as obtained from AS 1170.4 (Ref. 19) is such that > 3.
For a rectangular section with a width of core bc and depth of core dc, the solution to the
spacing of fitments equation may be obtained from

s = (bc + d c + R) (bc + d c + R) 2 4bc d c )

. . . C10.7.3.3(10)

where

R=

2 0.01 f cbc d c
PQ

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

P =1

. . . C10.7.3.3(11)

nw 2
6 Ac

. . . C10.7.3.3(12)

nlx Ab.fit f sy.f nly Ab.fit f sy.f


Q = min
,

bc
dc

. . . C10.7.3.3(13)

where nlx is the number of fitments cutting a section taken through the width of the section
and nly is the number of fitments cutting a section taken through the depth of the section.
For the case of a symmetrically reinforced square section, this becomes:

s = 2bc + R ( 2bc + R ) 2 4b C2

. . . C10.7.3(14)

For the case of a diamond tie arrangement [Figure 10.7.3(3c)], the values of nlx and nly in
this equation are replaced with the equivalent component acting normal to the direction of
the cutting plane. For a circular section take P = 1 in and replace bc with ds and dc with ds in
the equations above.
C10.7.3.4 Deemed to comply core confinement
The deemed-to-comply provisions for a square section member are obtained by assuming
ke = 0.15n/(n/4 + 1) and taking the number of legs crossing the cutting plane as n/4 + 1.
When these assumptions are substituted into the effective confinement requirement of
ke f r = 0.01 f c , we obtain (with bc = dc):

15nAb.fit f s y.f
f cbc

For a rectangular section, the


Equation C10.7.3.4 is replaced with

. . . C10.7.3.4
core width dimension in the denominator
Ac to give Equation 10.7.3.4(1) in the Standard.

of

For a circular section, the confinement efficiency factor is assumed as k e = 0.5; for two
fitment bars passing through the section cut, Equation 10.7.3.4(2) in the Standard is
obtained. The equations will generally, but not always, lead to more conservative solutions
than for the simplified calculation procedure.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

192

C10.7.4 Restraint of longitudinal reinforcement


The requirements of Clause 10.7.4 of the Standard ensure satisfactory performance of
columns at the strength limit state. At overload, the longitudinal compressive reinforcement
is likely to buckle if unrestrained and the rules are derived from practical limits to provide a
minimum control to prevent such buckling.
In cases where improved robustness or ductility is needed and where buckling of the
longitudinal reinforcement can lead to a brittle response of the member, the spacing of
fitments should be reduced at critical sections where hinges can form.
C10.7.5 Splicing of longitudinal reinforcement
Clause 10.7.5 ensures that at any cross-section of a column there is always a minimum
tensile strength provided by continuous reinforcement, regardless of whether tension is
calculated to occur or not.
C10.8 TRANSMISSION OF AXIAL FORCE THROUGH FLOOR SYSTEMS

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Since the development of HSC and its use in columns, the interface region of the higher
strength column concrete with the lower strength slab concrete has been problematic.
Figure C10.8(A)(a) shows a typical column-edge slab interface and in Figure C10.8(A)(b)
the resulting sandwich joint with a part of the concrete through which axial forces are to be
transmitted is of a lower strength.
Seminal research by Ospina and Alexander (Ref. 33) showed that the strength and
behaviour of column-slab joints is significantly affected by the load on the slab, in that it
produces tensile strains in the negative moment (top) reinforcing steel with confinement
limited to the lower section of the slab where compressive struts enter [Figure C10.8(B)].
This is important as, until this research, tests had only been conducted on systems with
unloaded slabs (and hence unrealistic conditions). These tests, together with those on corner
columns of Lee and Mendis (Ref. 34), had shown the existing rules could lead to
significantly non-conservative results. Thus, in light of this research, the rules in
AS 36002001 were reviewed and appropriately modified.

Dc

Dc
High-strength
c o n c r e te c o l u m n

N o r m a l - s t r e n g th
c o n c r e te s l a b

Dc

Dc
High-strength
c o n c r e te c o l u m n

N o r m a l - s t r e n g th
c o n c r e te s l a b
b

Ds

a
Ds

(a) Ed g e p a n e l

( b) R e s ul ti n g c o l u m n s l a b
s a n dwi c h j o i nt

FIGURE C10.8(A) TRANSMISSION OF COLUMN LOADS THROUGH FLOORS


(Ref. 33)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

193
Joint region

C o n c r e te s l a b

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014


H i g h - s t r e n g th c o n c r e te c o l u m n
Te n s i o n i n to p s l a b
r e i nfo r c e m e nt

N e g a tive
b e n di n g m o m e nt

Ef fe c tive c o m p r e s s i o n s tr u t

FIGURE C10.8(B) FORCES IN SLAB ENTERING THE COLUMN-SLAB SANDWICH


CONNECTION (Ref. 33)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

In the AS 36002009 provisions, the full column strength may be used in all cases if the
strength of the column does not exceed 1.33 times the strength of the slab. This allows for
the concrete in columns to be one strength grade higher than that of the slab. For greater
differences, additional calculations are required to determine the effective strength ( f ce ) of
the concrete at the column-slab or column-beam joints.
The strength of a column in the joint region is a function of the strengths of the column and
slab concrete, the quantity of longitudinal reinforcing steel passing through the connection,
the geometry of the connection, its location in the structure (corner, edge or interior), the
influence of the load on the slab in generating the forces acting on the joint and the tensile
strains in reinforcement passing through the joint. As few column-slab tests have been
undertaken for interior slab-column joints where the slab is loaded, and fewer still on edge
and corner slab-column connections, a conservative approach is adopted for the design of
these elements.
Where an axial force in a column is transmitted through floor concrete of lower strength,
and the strength of floor concrete is less than three-quarters of that of the column, an
increased area of longitudinal reinforcement may be placed through the joint to effectively
replace the reduction in capacity from the influence of the weaker concrete. In this case,
additional tie reinforcement should also be placed through the connection to confine the
weaker concrete and provide ductility to the joint that is under a high stress relative to its
cylinder strength.
Another procedure sometimes used in construction is that of puddling, in which column
strength concrete is placed within the slab-column connection and the surrounding region.
Since both column and slab concrete are to be cast simultaneously, special care has to be
taken to avoid placement of the weaker concrete within the joint region. The puddled
column concrete should occupy the full slab thickness and extend beyond the face of the
column the greater of 600 mm and twice the depth of the slab or beam at the column face.
Proper vibration of the column and slab concretes is needed for optimal melding at the faces
of the two materials. This method carries with it the additional logistical problems of
having two different strength grades of concrete on site during the one pour. Thus,
extensive planning and a high level of on-site supervision and quality control are needed if
adopting this process.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

194

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

SMITH, R.G., Simplified Analysis of the P- Effect in Slender Buildings, Top-Tier


Design Methods in the Draft Unified Concrete Code, Lecture 6, Postgraduate Course,
University of Sydney, 1984, pp. 6.16.49.

WHEELER, A. and BRIDGE, R.Q., Effects of High Strength Concrete on Column


Slenderness, School of Engineering, University of Western Sydney, Report
CCTR004, 2003.

BRIDGE, R.Q. and TRAHAIR, N.S., The Effects of Translational Restraint on Frame
Buckling, Civil Engineering Transactions, IE Aust, Vol. CE19, No. 2, 1977,
pp. 176183.

SMITH, R.G. and BRIDGE, R.Q., (1984), The Design of Concrete Columns, TopTier Design Methods in the Draft Unified Concrete Code, Lecture 2, Postgraduate
Course, University of Sydney, 1984, pp. 2.12.95.

BRIDGE R.Q. and PHAM L., Safety Indices for Reinforced Concrete Beam-Columns,
Civil Engineering Transactions, IE Aust, Vol. CE29, No. 1, 1987, pp. 4046.

LAI, S.M.A., MacGREGOR, J.G. and HELLESLAND, J., Geometric Non-Linearities


in Non-Sway Frames, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. ST12,
1983, pp. 27702785.

MacGREGOR, J.G. and HAGE, S.E., Stability Analysis and the Design of Concrete
Frames, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. ST10, 1977,
pp. 19531970.

BRIDGE, R.Q., Effective Lengths and Elastic Critical Buckling, Top Tier Design
Methods in the Draft Unified Concrete Code, Lecture 5, Postgraduate Course,
University of Sydney, 1984, pp. 5.15.57.

HORNE, M.R., An Approximate Method for Calculating the Elastic Critical Buckling
Loads of Multi-Storey Plane Frames, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 53, No. 6, 1975,
pp. 1826.

10

LAI, S.M.A. and MacGREGOR, J.G., Geometric Non-Linearities in Unbraced


Multistorey Frames, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. ST11,
1983, pp. 25282545.

11

MacGREGOR, J.G., OELHAFEN, U.H. and HAGE, S.E., A Re-examination of the EI


Value for Slender Columns, Symposium on Reinforced Concrete Columns, ACI
SP 50, Detroit, Michigan, 1975.

12

MENN, C., Symposium on the Design and Safety of Reinforced Concrete


Compression Members, IABSE, Quebec, Canada, 1974.

13

OELHAFEN, U.H., Prestressed Concrete Compression Members, Prestressed


Concrete Lecture 14, Postgraduate Course, University of Sydney, 1979, pp. 14.1
14.39.

14

ACI 318R-77, Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete,


American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1977.

15

FRASER, D.J., Evaluation of Effective Length Factors in Braced Frames, Canadian


Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 10, 1983, pp. 1826.

16

FOSTER, S.J., On Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Columns: Cover Spalling,


Steel Fibers and Ductility, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 98, No. 4, 2001, pp. 583589.

17

FOSTER, S.J., Design and Detailing of High Strength Concrete Columns, School of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of New South Wales, UNICIV
Report R375, 1999, 36 pp

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

195

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

18

FOSTER, S.J., Detailing of High Strength Concrete Columns to AS36002009,


Concrete in Australia, Concrete Institute of Australia, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2009,
pp. 3746.

19

AS 1170.4, Structural design actionsEarthquake actions in Australia, Standards


Australia, Sydney, 2007

20

HOGNESTAD, E., A Study of Combined Bending and Axial Load in Reinforced


Concrete Members, Bulletin No. 399, University of Illinois Engineering Experiment
Station, 1951, 128pp.

21

ASTM C1018-97, Standard Test Method for Flexural Toughness and First-Crack
Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (Using Beam with Third-Point Loading),
1992, pp. 514520 (withdrawn).

22

FOSTER, S.J. and ATTARD, M.M., Experimental tests on eccentrically loaded high
strength concrete columns, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 94, No. 3, 1997, pp. 2295
2303.

23

MENDIS, P. and KOVACIC, D.A., Lateral reinforcement spacing for high-strength


concrete columns in ordinary moment resisting frames, Journal of Structural
Engineering, IE Aust, Vol. 2, 1999, pp. 95104.

24

MARTINEZ, S., NILSON, A.H., and SLATE, F.O., Spirally Reinforced HighStrength Concrete Columns, ACI Journal, Vol. 81, No. 5, 1984, pp. 431442.

25

BJERKELI, I., TOMASZEWICZ, A. and JENSEN, J.J., Deformation Properties and


Ductility of Very High Strength Concrete, Utilization of High Strength Concrete Second International Symposium, SP-121, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
Michigan, 1990, pp. 215238.

26

SUGANO, S., NAGASHIMA, T., KIMURA, H., TAMURA, A. and ICHIKAWA, A.,
Experimental Studies on Seismic Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Members of High
Strength Concrete, Utilization of High Strength Concrete - Second International
Symposium, SP-121, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1990,
pp. 6187.

27

RAZVI, S.R. and SAATCIOGLU, M., Tests of high strength concrete columns under
concentric loading, Dept. Of Civil Eng., University of Ottawa, Report OCEERC
96-03, 1996, 147pp.

28

SHEIKH, S.A. and UZUMERI, S.M., Analytical model for concrete confinement in
tied columns, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. ST12, 1982,
pp. 27032722.

29

MANDER, J.B., PRIESTLEY, M.J.N., and PARK, R., Theoretical stress-strain model
for confined concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114, No. ST8,
1988, pp. 18041825.

30

FOSTER, S.J. and ATTARD, M.M., Strength and Ductility of Fibre Reinforced High
Strength Concrete Columns, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127,
No. 1, 2001, pp. 2834.

31

GHAZI, M., Behaviour of eccentrically loaded concrete columns under confinement,


PhD thesis, The School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of
New South Wales, 2001.

32

ZAINA, M., Strength and ductility of fibre reinforced high strength concrete
columns, PhD thesis, The School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The
University of New South Wales, 2005.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

196

33

OSPINA, C.E. and ALEXANDER, S.D.B., Transmission of High Strength Concrete


Column Loads Through Concrete Slabs, Structural Engineering Report No. 214,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Alberta, Canada, 1997.

34

LEE, S.C. and MENDIS, P., Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Corner Columns
Intersected by Weaker Slabs with Different Thicknesses, ACI Structural Journal,
Vol. 101, No. 1, 2004, pp. 1118.

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL


BRIDGE, R.Q. and SEEVARATNAM, K., The Definition of a Short Column in
Reinforced Concrete Construction, First National Structural Engineering Conference,
IE Aust, Aug. 1987, pp. 495499.

CHEN, W.F. and ATSUTA, T., Interaction Equations for Biaxially Loaded Sections,
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 98, No. ST7, 1972, pp. 10351052.

ACI 318R-83, Commentary on ACI 318-83, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,


Michigan, 1983.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

197

S E C T I O N

C 1 1

D E S I G N

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

O F

W A L L S

C11.1 GENERAL
This Clause defines the scope of the application of Section 11. It recognizes that not all
wall types and all design-loading situations are covered. For the wall types covered it
specifies the design rules to be used for specified loading situations. Designers should
understand that when the wall type falls outside those covered (e.g. curved walls) or the
type of loading differs from those covered, the wall should be designed using the
Alternative Procedures path given in the NCC (Ref. 1).
As written, the Clause is unclear as to whether walls covered under Item (b) have to comply
with Clause 11.7 or not. It is recommended that these walls do comply with the provisions
of Clauses 11.7.1, 11.7.2 and 11.7.3 as well as the requirements of Clause 11.1(b).
While the Clause restricts the application of the rules presented in Section 11 to a specific
range of walls, these rules are often used for the design of other plate-like reinforced
concrete elements where in-plane actions are present (e.g. slabs acting as floor diaphragms),
for which the Standard otherwise gives no guidance. In this case, designers should use only
those clauses that are applicable for the design situation considered.
C11.2 DESIGN PROCEDURES

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C11.2.1 General
This Clause deals with the non-uniform distribution of axial stress due to combined action
of axial forces and in-plane bending moments applied to a braced wall.
This Clause assumes that longer walls have already been divided into design segments to
keep the ratio of the highest and lowest stresses along the length of each segment to a
reasonable level. This is illustrated by two examples in Figure C11.2.1 relevant to the cases
of Items (a) and (b), respectively.
It is also expected that the designer will consider slenderness effects as appropriate. In the
case of Item (b), the slenderness effects may be included by considering the design axial
strength of the wall (for example, according to Clause 11.5.1) in developing the design
rectangular compressive stress blocks that together with the design tensile capacity of
reinforcement, need to balance the applied ultimate loads. This is illustrated in
Figure C11.2.1.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

198
N 1*
N *2
N *3

Wa ll
segment

Wa ll
segment

Wa ll
s e g m e nt

N * = N *1 + N 2* + N 3*

(a)
3
2
1
N 1*

N * = N *1 + N 2* - T *

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

N *2

M * = N *1 1 + N 2* 2 - T * 3
T*

Wa ll
segment

Wa ll
segment

Wa ll
segment

( b)

FIGURE C11.2.1 SUBDIVISION OF WALLS INTO DESIGN SEGMENTS

C11.2.2 Groups of walls


This Clause is applicable to interconnected walls surrounding stairwells, services cores and
lift cores of multi-storey buildings. A typical arrangement is depicted in Figure C11.2.2.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

199

C o u p li n g
beam

Wa ll

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Wa ll

Wa ll

Ve r ti c a l s h e a r fa c e

FIGURE C11.2.2 TYPICAL CORE WALL ARRANGEMENT

C11.3 BRACED WALLS


This Clause sets out the requirements for a wall to be considered as braced for the
purposes of Section 11. It has implications on the overall scope of the Section as well as in
the application of particular clauses.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Item (b) imposes a design strength requirement on the connections to ensure that they have
a reserve of strength above that required by the structure and members. These loads should
not be applied as lateral loads to the whole structure.
C11.4 EFFECTIVE HEIGHT
This Clause gives provisions for two-way buckling behaviour of walls where more than two
lines of lateral restraint are present at edges of the wall element. Equations 11.4(1), 11.4(2)
and 11.4(3) are based on similar provisions given in Eurocode 2 (Ref. 2).
The requirements for taking into account the effect of openings are based on similar
provisions in Eurocode 2 (Ref. 2) and EN 1992-3 (Ref. 3).
C11.5 SIMPLIFIED DESIGN METHOD FOR BRACED WALLS SUBJECT TO
VERTICAL COMPRESSION FORCES
C11.5.1 Design axial strength of a wall
The design equations are similar to those given in BS 8110-1 (Ref. 4) for short and slender,
braced, plain-concrete walls.
C11.5.2 Eccentricity of vertical load
The minimum eccentricity for a wall is consistent with that required for a column.
Interpretations of the requirements for eccentricity are illustrated in Figure C11.5.2.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

200
a 1 /3

t w /3

a 2 /3
N

tw

a2
a1
tw

(a)

( b)
CL

CL

N f r o m f l o o r s a b ove

Fl o o r c o nti n u o u s ove r wa ll
N
N f r o m thi s f l o o r

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

tw
tw
(c)

(d )

FIGURE C11.5.2 ECCENTRICITY OF VERTICAL LOADS

C11.6 DESIGN OF WALLS FOR IN-PLANE SHEAR FORCES


Shear in the plane of the wall is likely to be a controlling criterion in walls with a small
height-to-length ratio. For walls with Hw/Lw > 1, the controlling criterion is more likely to
be flexure. Note that throughout this Clause, Hw is the overall height of the wall.
C11.6.1 Critical section for shear
Similar to that for beams (Clause 8.2.4), loads applied within a short distance from a
boundary support are taken to the support through arch action. Thus, sections closer to the
supporting boundary than that provided by the Clause have a significant enhancement in
their strength and under normal loading conditions are not required to be checked. In the
case where large loads enter the member in this region, or for the case of hanging loads (as
depicted in Figure C.8.2.4), the strength should be checked through strut-and-tie modelling
in accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the Standard.
C11.6.2 Strength in shear
The design strength is the sum of the resistances provided by the concrete and the wall
reinforcement.
The upper limit on the ultimate shear strength has been made consistent with that for beams
(see Clause 8.2.6). It is higher than the value of 0.83 f c (0.8Lw t w ) permitted by ACI 318
(Ref. 5).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

201

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C11.6.3 Shear strength without wall reinforcement


Equation 11.6.3(1) was developed from tests done on short, squat walls (Ref. 6). This
equation is valid for walls with Hw/Lw 1.3.
Equation 11.6.3(2) has been developed from that given in ACI 318 (Ref. 5), which is based
on tests of tall slender walls, and noting that for most walls the axial load effect can be
neglected and also conservatively assuming that the shear force is concentrated at the top of
the wall. It should not be used when Hw/Lw 1.
C11.6.4 Contribution to shear strength by wall reinforcement
Barda et al (Ref. 6) showed that for short squat walls, horizontal reinforcement is less
effective than vertical reinforcement in resisting shear forces. Conversely, for high walls
the reverse is true. The requirements of this Clause reflect this change in efficiency.
C11.7 REINFORCEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR WALLS
C11.7.1 Minimum reinforcement
Minimum horizontal and vertical reinforcement is to be provided for control of shrinkage
and thermal effects. Due to the axial stresses induced by the compressive load, less
reinforcement is needed in the longitudinal (loaded) direction than in the transverse
(unloaded) direction. The Clause recognizes that shrinkage and thermal effects in thick
members are a surface phenomenon by restricting the maximum thickness used in
calculating the reinforcement requirements to 250 mm.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C11.7.2 Horizontal reinforcement for crack control


Reinforcement for crack control is similar to that required for slabs and reflects the same
philosophy (see Paragraph C9.4.3).
C11.7.3 Spacing of reinforcement
Requirement for two grids of reinforcement on each face of the wall applies to walls
subjected to tensile stresses and those designed using two-way buckling provisions of
Clauses 11.4(b) and 11.4(c).
C11.7.4 Restraint of vertical reinforcement
The provisions under Item (b) are similar to those given in ACI 318 (Ref. 5).
REFERENCES
1

National Construction Code, BCA Volumes 1 and 2, Australian Building Codes Board
(ABCB), Canberra, 2014.

Eurocode 2, Design of Concrete StructuresPart 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings EN 1992-1-1 (Incorporating corrigendum January 2008), European
Committee for Standardization, 2004.

EN 1992-3, Design of Concrete Structures, Part 3: Liquid retaining and containment


structures, European Committee for Standardization, 2006.

BS 8110-1, Structural use of concrete, British Standards Institution, London, 1997.

ACI 318M-08, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete,


ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2008.

BARDA, F., HANSON, J.M. and CORLEY, W.G., Shear Strength of Low-Rise Walls
with Boundary Elements, Reinforced Concrete Structures in Seismic Zones, SP-53,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit 1977, pp. 149202. Also Research and
Development Bulletin RD043, O1D, Portland Cement Association.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N C 1 2
M E M B E R S ,

202

D E S I G N O F N O N - F L E X U R A L
E N D Z O N E S A N D B E A R I N G
S U R F A C E S

C12.1 GENERAL
Section 12 provides for the design of members where the Bernoulli-Euler hypothesis that
plane sections remain plane does not hold true. Clause 12.1.1 defines the limit of flexural
action for cantilever, simply supported and continuous members that can be designed using
beam theory. Members having a lower span-to-depth ratio than those defined in the Clause
are termed non-flexural.
The design of deep beams, pile caps, corbels, continuous nibs and stepped joints differs
from the design of flexural members as the distribution of strains through the depth of
sections in the disturbed regions, D-regions, is not linear. The designer should recognize
that there is a gradual transition from full flexural action to non-flexural action and the
change from one action to the other is not abrupt.
Three alternative design methods are allowed: linear stress analysis, strut-and-tie modelling
and non-linear stress analysis, although considerable care is needed in the application of the
latter (see Paragraph C6.6). A combination of the three methods rather than the alternative
use of them provides a great potential for independent checking or improved detailing.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C12.2 STRUT-AND-TIE MODELS FOR THE DESIGN OF NON-FLEXURAL


MEMBERS
Strut-and-tie modelling is the most utilized method for the design on non-flexural members
and may be used in conjunction with the provisions of Section 7 of the Standard. Load may
be transferred from the point of action to the supports in non-flexural members in a number
of ways. The Type I model provides the most direct way of transferring the loads; that is,
by means of major struts between the points of action and the supports (the points of
reaction). The Type III model, at the boundary of flexural behaviour, utilizes a series of
minor struts and corresponding hanging reinforcement to transfer external loads to the
supports. The Type II model is the combination of Types I and III and represents a
transition between the two. In this case, both major struts and a series of minor struts
together with hanging reinforcement are provided to ensure the safe load path. Ref. 1
recommends the adoption of the different model types based on the following conditions:
Type I ....................................................................................................................... a/z 1
Type II .............................................................................................................. 1 < a/z 3
Type III .................................................................................................................. a/z > 3
where a and z are the shear span and internal lever arm, respectively.
In Model Type II distribution of the load carried by the major and minor struts may be
decided by the designer with the help of a simple linear interpolation:
TW = 1.37 [(a/z) 1] F
where T W is vertical component of the forces carried by the minor struts and F is the total
vertical component of the external loads transferred through shear span.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

203

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Strut-and-tie modelling is based on the use of lower bound theorem of plasticity; stresses
derived from the model satisfy the equilibrium and yield conditions. A lower bound
solution gives a safe load path, provided the member or element has sufficient ductility to
meet the redistribution demand on it at ultimate. Ductility of the structural members
increases with the increase of the load portion transferred by minor fan type struts and the
corresponding hanging reinforcement.
C12.3 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUOUS CONCRETE NIBS
AND CORBELS
The intent of the additional requirements is to ensure that corbels and nibs are correctly
detailed. The requirements have been developed from tests at several different laboratories
(Ref. 2). Corbels and nibs are non-flexural (D) regions within the structure, where detailing
needs more careful consideration. Usually loads transferred through these structures are
historically increasing due to more developed construction technology, longer spans,
significantly less movement joints and other functional and economic considerations.
Obtaining sufficient anchorage within the available dimensions of corbels and nibs can be
demanding and carful detailing is required. Known horizontal outward forces acting on the
corbels or those due to the imperfect behaviour of the slip joints have to be resisted and
transferred by properly detailed reinforcement.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The requirements of the Clause are illustrated in Figures C12.3(A) and C12.3(B). The
following should also be noted:
(a)

The equilibrium requirements of the strut-and-tie model at the node, where the
external load acts, demand that the tie be fully developed and careful attention to
detailing is needed to ensure that the full tie capacity is reached. Vertical or
horizontal loops are recommended only in case of smaller (maximum 16 mm
diameter) bars. In case of heavier ties, welded cross-bars may be used, with the crossbar size at least equal to that of the tie reinforcement.

(b)

Direct tension can develop in a nib as a result of restraint of movements induced by


temperature and/or shrinkage, due to creep associated with prestress and from
deflections. The degree of restraint depends on the interface material, if any, its
design for movement and the flexibility of the supporting structure. The provision in
this Item of the Clause for a minimum tension force at the support recognizes that
most bearing materials in building construction offer some resistance to translational
movement and can stiffen with time. The minimum value is equivalent to a
coefficient of friction of 0.2 between the supported member and the nib.

(c)

The design of nibs and corbels should consider the rotation of flexural member being
supported, the construction tolerances and the imperfect bearing behaviour. The rules
reflect the lack of redundant behaviour and alternative load paths and to assure the
proper function of the supports.

(d)

To avoid any loss of bearing surface and to maintain appropriate durability,


adequately spaced reinforcement should be placed close to the outside face of the nibs
and a chamfer should be formed.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

204
Bearing pad

A st

V
Fh

Fh

We l d e d b a r wi th
equal or bigger
di a m e te r th a n A s t
0. 5D

Bend commences

d0

M a i n s te e l h o o ke d
d ow n i n ve r ti c a l
p l a n e. B e n d s h o u l d
n ot p a s s u n d e r
b e a r i n g p l a te

H o r izo nt a l s ti r r u p s
e q u a l to at l e a s t
0. 5 A s t d i s t r ib u te d
ove r 0.67D

Strut

FIGURE C12.3(A) ILLUSTRATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR CORBELS

A s sum e d p o s i ti o n of re ac ti o n

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Bearing pad

10 0 m m
m i n.

FIGURE C12.3(B) ILLUSTRATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR NIBS

C12.4 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STEPPED JOINTS IN BEAMS AND


SLABS
The design of stepped joints as short cantilevers results in a large amount of horizontal
reinforcement. The external loads are transferred from the half joints back to the main
concrete structure by the major diagonal concrete struts [Figures C12.4(A) and C12.4(B)].
The horizontal balance of the node (A) where the vertical external load changes direction to
enter the diagonal strut can only be achieved through appropriate ties. The other end of the
diagonal strut, node (B), can only reach vertical balance with the help of hanger
reinforcement that has to be positioned as close as possible to the vertical step line.
The half joint ties have to be fully developed between the nodes (A) and (D), as indicated in
Figure C12.4(A). At node (A), welded cross-bars or horizontal or vertical U bars provide
the development. At the other end, an appropriate bar length, determined in accordance with
Section 13 of the Standard, is extended beyond node (D) to provide the development
needed.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

205

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Detailing of such members needs to be carefully considered to ensure that the reinforcement
can be correctly placed and anchored while still permitting proper placement and
compaction of the concrete. The following also should be considered:
(a)

Restraint of movements due to imperfect sliding behaviour and associated friction


results in horizontal forces. Assessment of those forces should be on a case by case
basis. However, the Standard requires a minimum value of 20% of the vertical force.

(b)

The vertical components of prestressing forces may be disregarded in the design of


stepped joints.

(c)

The strut-and-tie model of a stepped joint indicates [see Figures C12.4(A) and
C12.4(B)] that the tie force continues beyond the hanging reinforcement in order to
achieve nodal equilibrium, and the tie force needs to be fully developed beyond the
node. The length of the tie needs to be sufficient to meet the demand of the strut-andtie model adopted but is not to be taken as less than a length D, plus a development
length, beyond the step. The development length is determined in accordance with
Section 13 of the Standard.

(d)

Placement of hanger reinforcement should prevent crack propagation and spalling. In


case of heavy and multi-layer hanger reinforcement, lighter diagonal reinforcement
should be positioned with the minimum cover close to the corner of the stepped joint
to control crack development.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C
C
D

Ph

H
C
Pv

T
T

C
T
T

D eve l o p m e nt
length
L EG EN D:

= C = S tr u t
= T

= Tie

= D eve l o p m e nt l e n g t h

FIGURE C12.4(A) EXAMPLE OF STRUT-AND-TIE MODEL FOR A STEPPED JOINT

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

206
Diagonal strut

We l d e d
anchor

ra

ck

Half
joint tie

Compression
r e i nfo r c e m e nt

Ph
Fi tm e nt s
Pv
Te n s i o n
r e i nfo r c e m e nt
H a n g i n g r e i nfo r c e m e nt

FIGURE C12.4(B) HALF JOINT REINFORCEMENT DETAILS

C12.5 ANCHORAGE ZONES FOR PRESTRESSING ANCHORAGES

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C12.5.1 General
This Clause is concerned with the D-region that is in close proximity of anchorage zone of
a prestressed member. Beyond the prestress anchorages, the D-region provides the
transition space where the concentrated prestress forces have dispersed to a linear stress
condition, in accordance with Bernoullis simple beam theory. The transition zone, or Dregion, connects the anchorage zone with the B-region. The force redistribution in the Dregion leads to the development of transverse tensile stresses, which has to be determined
and reinforced. If uncontrolled, the potential of transverse splitting or bursting, and
therefore the development of a longitudinal splitting plane is high.
The requirements of this Clause apply to single anchorages. In more complex situations,
Section 7 of the Standard may be used, with due consideration given to equilibrium and
compatibility during each stage of prestressing.
Where two or more anchors are planned, the designer should give a clear stressing sequence
that keeps possible crack formations to a minimum.
C12.5.2 Reinforcement
The analysis of stresses in an end zone is a complex three-dimensional problem. The
approach taken is that reinforcement is to be provided in two orthogonal directions to carry
both components of the transverse tensile forces.
Figure C12.5.2 shows different anchorage zones of post-tensioned beams. Illustration (a)
deals with a single centrally positioned anchorage, Illustration (b) shows an anchorage with
a small eccentricity, Illustration (c) has a single anchorage with large eccentricity while
Illustration (d) shows two symmetrically placed anchorages at large spacing. Details (i), (ii)
and (iii) in all illustrations show the strut-and-tie model, the forces on the free body
segments and the transverse stress distribution at different long-sectional levels,
respectively.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

207

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014


y

P/2

A
h/4
P/2

P/2

H h h/2
P/2

B
P/2

P/2

Mt

x /H

H/4

0.5

1. 0

H
(i)

( ii )

( iii )

(a)
H

S y m e tr i c a l
prism

I d e a lize d s tr e s s
d i s t r ib u t i o n o n
sy m m e tr i c a l p r i s m

(i)

( iii )

( ii )

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

( b)

Tu

Tu

Cu

Cu

(i)
(c)

P/2

C
T

P/2

P/2

P/2

P/2

P/2

C
C

(i)

MC

C
( ii )

(d )

FIGURE C12.5.2 SOME COMMON PRESTRESSING ANCHORAGE ZONES

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

208

Illustration (a) shows a very simple strut-and-tie model and Lyengars transverse stress
distribution diagram. Bursting forces are centred at a distance of approximately 0.5H to
0.7H behind the anchorage (Refs 3 and 4).
Illustration (b) shows a relatively small eccentricity. Assuming a central anchorage position
within a symmetrical prism, the design could be referred back to that of Illustration (a) with
the bursting force centred at approximately 0.5 to 0.7 times the height of the effective
prism.
Illustration (c) shows an anchorage with large eccentricity. The strut-and-tie model
illustrates the internal load path within the D-region. The longitudinal stress diagram at the
Bernoulli region boundary has three force components: P, Tu and Cu. The forces Tu and Cu
have the same absolute values with different signs, thus balancing each other. The third
internal component balances the prestress force (P). The strut-and-tie model shows that the
internal tensile force is close to the loaded face of the anchorage and for effective crack
control, the reinforcement should be placed as close to the surface as possible.
Illustration (d) deals with a symmetrical widely spaced anchor arrangement. Both the free
body segment and the strut-and-tie model show the position of the tie and the corresponding
reinforcement.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C12.5.3 Loading cases to be considered


The designer is required to establish the stressing sequence within a group of anchorages to
avoid unnecessary cracking. Once the sequence has been established critical stages of the
stressing operation should be checked individually, together with the final completed staged
stressing. Current practice is usually for stressing with a single jack. It is generally good
practice to commence the stressing sequence at the anchors centrally placed in the group
and then move outwards to the anchors most distant from the centre.
C12.5.4 Calculation of tensile forces along line of an anchorage force
The calculation is based on the theory of a symmetrical prism, as shown in Illustration (c)
of Figure C12.5.2. The concept of the symmetrical prism is often useful for estimating the
magnitudes of the transverse tensile forces, and the lengths over which transverse tensile
stresses occur, at sections immediately behind anchorages. The state-of-the-art design is
towards use of the strut-and-tie models, which, together with the adoption of a symmetrical
prism, generally provide for good results.
C12.5.5 Calculation of tensile forces induced near the loaded face
The calculation is based on the free body segment method illustrated in illustration (d)(ii) of
Figure C12.5.2. Alternatively, the strut-and-tie method gives appropriate information about
the position and magnitude of the tie forces.
C12.5.6 Quantity and distribution of reinforcement
This Clause provides requirements for the stress limit in reinforcement and the distribution
of reinforcement. Special care should be taken about the development length and the
requirement of providing constant tie capacity between two nodes.
A limit of 150 MPa in the reinforcing steel is applied in recognition of the strong degree of
crack control needed to avoid strength and in-service issues in critical anchorage regions of
prestressed concrete members.
C12.6 BEARING SURFACES
The design bearing stress may be increased due the confining influence of the surrounding
concrete.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

209

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C12.7 CRACK CONTROL


The lower bound plastic methods described in Section 12 for the determination of internal
stress resultants in non-flexural members at the strength limit are not appropriate for the
accurate determination of stress resultants under service loads where crack control is a
design requirement. Therefore, the determination of stress in the reinforcement under
service loads by assuming the same load paths as that assumed at overloads is, at best, very
approximate. As a consequence, the deemed-to-comply steel stress limits for crack control
specified in Clause 12.7 are considerably more conservative than those specified for
flexural crack control (in Clauses 8.6 and 9.4) where the stress in the reinforcement at
service loads may be determined more accurately.
REFERENCES
1

FOSTER, S.J., KILPATRICK, A.E. and WARNER, R.F., Reinforced Concrete


Basics, 2nd Ed., Pearson Australia, 2010.

JENSEN, J.F., Plastic Solutions for Reinforced Concrete Beams in Shear, IABSE
Colloquium, Plasticity in Concrete, Copenhagen, 1979.

FOSTER, S.J., and ROGOWSKY, D.M., Splitting of Concrete Panels under


Concentrated Loads, Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Vol. 5, No. 6, Nov.
1997, pp. 803815.

FOSTER, S.J., and ROGOWSKY, D.M., Bursting Forces in Concrete Members


resulting from In-plane Concentrated Loads, Magazine of Concrete Research,
Vol. 49, No. 180, 1997, pp. 231240.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL

International Recommendations for the Design and Construction of Concrete


Structures, Comit Europen du Bton, Fdration Internationale de la Prcontrainte,
Appendix 3, Information Bulletin No. 73, June 1970.

A guide to the design of anchor blocks for post-tensioned prestressed concrete,


Construction Industry Research and Development Association, London, 1976.

WARNER, R.F., FAULKES, K.A. and FOSTER, S.J., Prestressed Concrete, 3rd Ed.,
Pearson Australia, 2012.

KONG, F.K. and SHARP, G.R., Structural Idealization for RC Deep Beams with Web
Openings, Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 29, No. 99, 1977, pp. 8191.

LEONHARDT, F., The Art of Reinforcing Concrete, Beton-und Stahlbetonbau,


Vol. 60, No. 8 and No. 9, 1965.

REYNOLDS, G.C., The Strength of Half Joints: Reinforced Concrete Beams,


Technical Report 42.415, Cement and Concrete Association, London, 1969.

SOMERVILLE, G., The Behaviour and Design of Reinforced Concrete Corbels,


Technical Report 42.472, Cement and Concrete Association, London, August 1972.

CLARKE, J.L., Behaviour and Design of Small Nibs, Technical Report 42.512,
Cement and Concrete Association, London, March 1976.

MARTI, P., Basic tools of reinforced concrete beam design, ACI Journal, Vol. 82,
No. 1, 1985. pp. 4656.

MARTI, P., Truss models in detailing, Concrete International, American Concrete


Institute, Vol. 7, No. 12, 1985, pp. 6673.

ROGOWSKY, D.M. and MacGREGOR, J.G., Shear strength of deep reinforced


concrete continuous beams, University of Alberta, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Structural Engineering Report, No. 110, Nov. 1983.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

210

ALLEN, C.H., Reinforced concrete to CP110 simply explained, Cement and Concrete
Association, London, 1974.

ACI 318RM-83, Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Reinforced


Concrete, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1984.

fib Bulletin 45, State-of-art report; Practitioners guide to finite element modelling of
reinforced concrete structures, Fdration Internationale du Bton, 2008.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

211

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N C 1 3
S T R E S S D E V E L O P M E NT
R E I N F O R C E M E N T A N D T E N D O N S

O F

INTRODUCTION

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The key to good detailing of a concrete structure is the provision of adequate anchorage for
the reinforcement and tendons. Satisfaction of the provisions of many sections in the
Standard depends on it, including the following.
(a)

Clause 1.4: The information to be included on the drawings includes the size, quantity
and location of all reinforcement, tendons, fixings, the associated concrete cover to
each; the location and details of any splices, mechanical connections and welding of
any reinforcement or tendons.

(b)

Clause 7.3: Anchorage of ties when using strut and tie modelling.

(c)

Sections 8 and 9: The provision of adequate strength of beams and slabs in bending,
shear and torsion and the corresponding requirements for detailing of flexural
(in Clauses 8.1.10 and 9.1.3) and shear and torsion reinforcement (in Clauses 8.2.12,
8.3.8, 9.1.3 and 9.2.6).

(d)

Sections 10 and 11: Reinforcement requirements in columns and


(Clauses 10.7.4 and 11.7), including splicing of column bars (Clause 10.7.5).

(e)

Anchorage zones for prestressing anchorages (Clause 12.5).

(f)

Construction requirements for reinforcement and prestressing steel (Clauses 17.2 and
Clause 17.3).

walls

C13.1 STRESS DEVELOPMENT IN REINFORCEMENT


The provisions for the stress development in reinforcement have been substantially revised.
A review of the available research from Australia and overseas, as well as comparisons with
other major international standards such as ACI 318M (Ref. 1) and Eurocode 2 (Ref. 2),
confirmed that the requirements in Section 13 of AS 36002001 for calculating
development and lap lengths for small diameter bars in slabs may underestimate the
required lengths, particularly when the bar spacing exceeds 150 mm, and produced
inconsistent factors of safety (Refs 3 and 4). It was also noted that the provisions of
AS 36002001 did not account for the industry wide change from 400 Grade to 500 Grade
reinforcing steel. A survey of the use of the AS 36002001 design method also showed
that Australian practice has been improved by adopting a more unified and consistent
approach (Ref. 5).
The revised provisions have been developed from the methods in ACI 318 and Eurocode 2
(Refs 1 and 2), but with some significant changes that lead to more consistent agreement
with the available test data. The revisions also provide the flexibility to take into account
the beneficial effects on stress development of confinement by transverse reinforcement and
transverse compressive pressure.
Recent Australian bond test data has been used to compare the design requirements for
spliced bar ductility in AS 36002009 and ACI 318 (Ref. 6). Application of the new
design method in the Standard to account for the beneficial effects of transverse
reinforcement is described in Ref. 5.
C13.1.1 General
When designing a reinforced concrete member for the strength limit states, it is assumed
that the stress in the tensile reinforcement at the critical section can reach the yield stress,
(fsy), and can sustain this level as deformation increases (Ref. 7). The development of the
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

212

specified stress may be obtained by embedment of the steel in concrete so that stress is
transferred past the section by bond, or by some form of mechanical anchorage. The
Standard specifies a minimum length, called the development length (Lsy.t), over which a
straight bar in tension is to be embedded in the concrete in order to develop the yield stress
in the bar.
The provision of anchorage lengths in excess of the specified development length for every
bar at a critical section or peak stress location ensures that an anchorage or bond failure
does not occur before the design strength at the critical section is achieved.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

At an anchorage of a deformed bar, the deformations bear on the surrounding concrete and
the bearing forces (F) are inclined at an angle to the bar axis as shown in
Figure C13.1.1(a) (Ref. 7). The perpendicular components of the bearing forces exert a
radial force on the surrounding concrete. Tepfers (Refs 8 and 9) described the concrete in
the vicinity around the bar as acting like a thick walled pipe as shown in Figure C13.1.1(b)
and the radial forces exerted by the bar cause tensile stresses that may lead to splitting
cracks radiating from the bar if the tensile strength of the concrete is exceeded. Bond failure
is often initiated by these splitting cracks within the development length Lsy.t of an anchored
bar [Figures C13.1.1(c) and (d)] or within the lap-length (Lsy.t.lap) at a lapped tension splice
[Figure C13.1.1(e)]. Transverse reinforcement across the splitting planes [Atr in
Figures C13.1.1(c) and (e)] delays the propagation of splitting cracks and improves bond
strength. Compressive pressure transverse to the plane of splitting delays the onset of
cracking in the anchorage region thereby improving bond strength.

T
Te n s i l e s t r e s s e s

(a) Forces exerted on concrete by a deformed bar in tension

A tr

( b) Te n s i l e s t r e s s e s i n c o n c r e te

A tr

S p li t ti n g c r a c ks
(c) H o r izo nt a l s p li t ti n g d u e
i n s u f f i c i e nt b a r s p a c i n g.

(d ) Ve r ti c a l s p li t ti n g d u e to
i n s u f f i c i e nt c ove r

(e) S p li t ti n g ( b o n d ) fa il u r e
at a l a p p e d s p li c e.

FIGURE C13.1.1 SPLITTING FAILURES AROUND DEVELOPING BARS

In the derivation of expressions for the development length, an average ultimate bond stress
(fub) is assumed at the interface between the concrete and the reinforcing bar, even though
extreme variations in local bond stresses exist along the development length, particularly in
the vicinity of flexural cracks. The average ultimate bond stress is affected by numerous
factors including

the type of reinforcing bar (ribbed or deformed bars have a much higher value of fub
than plain round bars);

the condition of the steel surface (a slightly rusted surfaces may be better than a
bright surface);

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

213

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

the degree of compaction of the concrete surrounding the bar (bottom bars usually
have better bond than top bars);

the concrete strength (the bond strength increases with the concrete strength); the
number of cracks that cross the bar within the anchorage length (the more cracks the
lower the average ultimate bond stress);

the magnitude and spacing of lateral reinforcement (the more lateral reinforcement
within the development length the higher the bond strength);

the magnitude of pressure normal to the developed bar (compressive pressure


improves bond strength);

the concrete cover; and

the distance to the next parallel bar (increases in the effective undisturbed concrete
area around the bar improves confinement and increases bond strength).

For a reinforcing bar of diameter db, the design resistance at a development length is the
maximum ultimate bond force that can develop over the development length multiplied by a
capacity reduction factor (= 0.6), i.e. dbLsy.t fub. This force-resisting bond failure is to
be not less than the maximum bar force tending to cause bond failure, i.e.
( As f sy = f syd b2 / 4) . Therefore:
Lsy.t

d b f sy
4 f ub

. . . C13.1.1

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C13.1.2 Development length for a deformed bar in tension


C13.1.2.1 Development length to develop yield strength
For the determination of the development length of a deformed bar in tension (Lsy.t),
designers are given the option of using the basic development length (Lsy.tb) calculated in
accordance with Clause 13.1.2.2 or a refined value (less than or equal to Lsy.tb), where
advantage is taken of the beneficial effects of transverse reinforcement and/or transverse
pressure in accordance with Clause 13.1.2.3.
C13.1.2.2 Basic development length
Equation 13.1.2.2 for the determination of the basic development length (Lsy.tb) is similar in
form to that given in Equation C13.1.1, with the average design ultimate bond stress
directly related to the tensile strength of concrete and modified by coefficients of varying
form and complexity to account for the factors affecting bond strength. Although not
specified in the Standard, the average design ultimate bond stress associated with the basic
development length is:

f ub =

k2
(0.5 f c )
k1 k 3

. . . C13.1.2.2

Factor k1:
Factor k1 accounts for the reduction in bond strength that may occur when bars are located
in the top of a member with more than 300 mm of concrete cast below the bar. The
reduction in bond strength of these bars is due to settlement of fresh concrete and an
accumulation of bleed water along the underside of the bar and, accordingly, the specified
value of k1 = 1.3. For all other bars, k1 = 1.0. Previous versions of the Standard and
ACI 318 (Ref. 1) have set the possible critical depth at 300 mm of concrete cast below the
bar. There is evidence that bond loss can occur with even shallower concrete depths.
Indeed, Eurocode 2 (Ref. 2) sets the cut-off depth at 250 mm. Note that the value of k1 has
been increased to 1.3 from the value of 1.25 set in AS 36002001. This brings the factor
into line with the value set in ACI 318 and closer to the value of 1/0.7 set in Eurocode 2.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

214

The factor applies only to horizontal bars in slabs, walls, beams and footings. It does not
apply to sloping or vertical bars, to fabric, or to fitments. The factor k1 is not applied to the
extension lengths of reinforcement specified in Clauses 8.1.10 and 9.1.3. Where transverse
tension may cause cracking along the development length of the bar being anchored, it is
recommended that the value of k1 be increased by at least 30%.
Factor k2:
Factor k2 accounts for the increase in average ultimate bond stress as the bar diameter
decreases. A linear relationship between k2 and bar diameter is assumed, with k2 = 1.2 when
db = 12 mm and reducing to k2 = 0.92 when db = 40 mm. The relationship between k2 and db
is the same as that specified in Eurocode 2, except that in Eurocode 2, the factor only
applies to bar diameters in excess of 32 mm.
Factor k3:
Factor k3 accounts for the area of undisturbed concrete around the bar being anchored. It
depends on the dimension cd specified in Figure 13.1.2.3(A). For straight bars, cd is the
smaller of the clear cover to the nearest concrete surface or half the clear distance to the
next parallel bar developing stress, and it represents the thickness of the concrete annulus
surrounding the bar as shown in Figure C13.1.2.2. This annulus should not encroach on the
relevant annulus surrounding an adjacent bar, or extend beyond the nearest concrete
surface. For straight bars, the factor k3 is identical to the factor specified in Eurocode 2 to
account for the effective concrete cover to the bar, with k3 = 1.0 when cd db and reducing
linearly to k3 = 0.7 as cd increases from db to 3 db. When cd > 3 db, k3 = 0.7.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C l e a r s p a c i n g < 2c
B a r d i a m e te r d b

C l e a r s p a c i n g 2c

C ove r, c

C ove r, c
(2c d + d b)

(a) W h e n c d e q u a l s th e c l e a r c ove r

(2c d + d b)

( b) W h e n c d e q u a l s h a l f t h e c l e a r s p a c i n g

FIGURE C13.1.2.2 THE EFFECTIVE CONCRETE ANNULUS AROUND EACH BAR


DEVELOPING STRESS

The minimum value of Lsy.tb of 29k1db is based on the formula 0.058dbfsy (Ref. 10) for a
characteristic yield stress of 500 MPa duly increased by the factor k1.
In Equation C13.1.2.2, the splitting tensile strength of concrete is taken to be 0.5 f c .
Because of the lack of data available for development lengths of bars in high strength
concrete, the value of f c used in this equation should not be taken as greater than 65 MPa.
That is, for concrete strengths exceeding 65 MPa, f c should be taken to be 65 MPa when
calculating the basic development length.
When bars are epoxy-coated, the average ultimate bond stress is significantly reduced.
Accordingly, the basic development length calculated from Equation 13.1.2.2 is required to
be multiplied by an additional factor of 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars. Similarly, if lightweight
concrete is used or if the structural element is built with slip forms, the basic development
length calculated from Equation 13.1.2.2 is required to be multiplied by an additional factor
of 1.3.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

215

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The development length of a bar Lsy.t may be taken to be equal to the basic development
length for every bar in the structure. However, for some bars with confinement provided
within the development length by transverse reinforcement or transverse pressure, a refined
development length smaller than the basic development length may be possible using the
provisions of Clause 13.1.2.3.
C13.1.2.3 Refined development length
The refined development length (Lsy.t) is the product of the basic development length and
two additional factors k4 and k5.
Factor k4

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Factor k4 accounts for the increase in the average ultimate bond stress when transverse
reinforcement crosses the splitting planes within the development length as shown in
illustrations (c) and (e) of Figure C13.1.1. The factor depends both on the total area of
transverse reinforcement along the development length (Atr), the area of the bar being
anchored (As) and the position of the transverse bar in relation to the anchored bar.
Transverse reinforcement is only effective in reducing the development length if it crosses
the potential splitting plane and is located between the bar being anchored and the nearest
concrete surface. With the spacing of the transverse reinforcement known and the basic
development length already determined, the number of transverse reinforcing bars within
the development length is readily calculated. When no transverse reinforcement exists,
k4 = 1.0. As the amount of effective transverse reinforcement within the development length
increases, k4 reduces. On no account should k4 be taken to be less than 0.7. The factor k4 is
similar to that specified in Eurocode 2 (Ref. 2) to account for the beneficial effects of
transverse reinforcement.
Factor k5
Factor k5 accounts for the beneficial effects of transverse compressive pressure (p).
Transverse pressure along the development length and perpendicular to the plane of
splitting delays the formation of splitting cracks and thereby increases the average ultimate
bond stress within the development length. When p = 0, k5 = 1.0 reducing linearly to a
minimum value of k5 = 0.7 when p = 7.5 MPa.
In the determination of the refined development length, the product k3 k4 k5 should not
be less than 0.7. This is a safeguard against combinations of variables that are outside the
ranges of the available test data.
Example calculation:
Consider the development length required for the two terminated 28 mm diameter bottom
bars in the beam shown in Figure C13.1.2.3.
Take fsy = 500 MPa; f c = 32 MPa, cover to the 28 mm bars of c = 40 mm, and the clear
spacing between the bottom bars of a = 60 mm. The cross-sectional area of one N28 bar is
As = 620 mm 2 and, with N12 stirrups at 150 mm centres, Atr = 110 mm2.
In this example:
For bottom bars:
k1 = 1.0.
For 28 mm diameter bars:
k2 = (132 28)/100 = 1.04.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

216

The concrete confinement dimension, cd = a/2 = 30 mm (see Figure C13.1.2.2), and


therefore
k3

= 1.0 0.15(30 28)/28 = 0.99

The basic development length is therefore


Lsy.tb =

0.5 1.0 0.99 500 28


1.04 32

= 1178 mm ( > 29 k1 d b )

The minimum number of stirrups that can be located within the basic development length
is 7. Therefore, Atr = 7 110 = 770 mm2. Taking Atr.min = 0.25As = 155 mm2, the
parameter is:
= (770 155)/620 = 0.99.
From Figure 13.1.2.3(B), K = 0.05 (for the two interior bars) and therefore
k4 = 1.0 0.05 0.99 = 0.95.
It is assumed that in this location the transverse pressure perpendicular to the anchored bar
(p) is zero, and hence k5 = 1.0.
From Equation 13.1.2.3: Lsy.t = k4 k5 Lsy.bt = 0.95 1.0 1178 = 1120 mm.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Of course, the strength of the beam needs to be checked at the point where the two bars are
terminated (at Lsy.t + D from the constant peak moment region, as shown in
Figure C13.1.2.3).

P
A
12 m m s ti r r u p s at 150 m m c tr s
Two te r m i n ate d b a r s

L s y.t + D

A
El eva t i o n

Section A-A

FIGURE C13.1.2.3 DEVELOPMENT LENGTH OF 28 mm BOTTOM BARS

C13.1.2.4 Development length to develop less than the yield strength


The average ultimate bond stress is assumed to be the same as that determined in
Clauses 13.1.2.2 and 13.1.2.3, irrespective of the stress required to be developed in the
anchored bar. For example, if the tensile stress to be developed in the bar is 0.5fsy, then the
development length required (Lst) is 0.5Lsy.t. On no account should the development length
be less than 12db except as permitted for slabs in Clause 9.1.3.1(a)(ii).
When calculating st, the capacity reduction factor ( ) should be included. If T* is the
calculated design ultimate tensile force in the reinforcement caused by the factored design
loads, then the design equation for the strength limit state is

T * st Ast

C13.1.2.4(A)

and therefore

st

T*
Ast

C13.1.2.4(B)

This Clause is not applicable to the calculation of lapped splice lengths. Only full-strength
lap splices are permitted by the Standard.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

217

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C13.1.2.5 Development length around a curve


This Clause distinguishes between a curved bar and a bent bar. The specified minimum
internal curve diameter (10db) provides a practical maximum limit on the curvature of a
curved bar. When the internal diameter of the curve is greater than or equal to 10db, a
curved length of bar may be considered to behave like a straight bar as far as stress
development is concerned without causing either excess bearing stress inside the bend or
separation between the bar and the concrete on the outside of the bend.
C13.1.2.6 Development length of a deformed bar with a standard hook or cog
This Clause is similar to the corresponding clause in previous editions of the Standard,
except that Figure 13.1.2.6 has been introduced to clarify the meaning. In essence, the
standard hook or cog is considered to provide a little over 50% of the development length,
with the bar being fully anchored at a distance 0.5Lsy.t or 0.5Lst, as applicable, measured
from the outside of the standard hook or cog.
If the hook or cog is located in a compressive zone and the plane of the hook or cog is
exposed to transverse compressive pressure, this Clause is conservative. The Standard
assumes that the vertical leg of a stirrup, anchored by a standard 135 hook in the
compressive zone of a beam, is fully anchored at all points along its length.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C13.1.2.7 Standard hooks and cogs


Standard 180 and 135 hooks, and 90 cogs [see Figures C13.1.2.7(A), C13.1.2.7(B) and
C13.1.2.7(C)] dimensioned according to the steel lengths given in Table C13.1.2.7 meet the
appropriate requirements of Clause 13.1.2.7. They are the minimum lengths that physically
can be bent on a bending machine; lengths shorter than these should be specified with
caution as they would not provide the necessary anchorage assumed in Clause 13.1.2.6, and
illustrated in Figure 13.1.2.6.
The length of bar required to make a hook is generally less than the straight bar
development length because a hook makes use of bearing pressure inside the bend. The
length of a 135 hook should be the same as that for a 180 hook.
TABLE C13.1.2.7
MINIMUM LENGTH OF BAR REQUIRED TO FORM
A STANDARD HOOK OR COG
D500N bar
diameter d b
mm

Pin diameter factor


k p (Pin diameter
db = kpdb)

180 hook
a
mm

135 hook
b
mm

90 cog
c
mm

10

4 for fitments

100

120

140

105

130

155

4 for fitments

110

130

155

115

145

170

4 for fitments

120

150

185

130

165

205

4 for fitments

140

180

220

150

200

245

4 for fitments

170

220

265

180

240

295

28

210

280

345

32

240

320

395

36

270

355

440

40

300

395

490

12
16
20
24

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

218

dp
a

FIGURE C13.1.2.7(A) 180 HOOK

dp
b

FIGURE C13.1.2.7(B) 135 HOOK

dp

FIGURE C13.1.2.7(C) 90 COG

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C13.1.3 Development length of plain bars in tension


The average ultimate bond stress of a plain bar in tension is significantly less than that of a
deformed bar. For plain bars in tension, the development length is taken as 50% greater
than the basic development length of a deformed bar and no reduction in development
length due to confinement by either transverse reinforcement or transverse pressure is
permitted.
C13.1.4 Development length of headed reinforcement in tension
This Clause specifies the development length of a headed bar when the cross-sectional area
of the head is at least 10 times the cross-sectional area of the bar. The requirements in
ACI 318 (Ref. 1) are less restrictive. With the limitations imposed in Items (a) to (e) of
Clause 13.1.4 of the Standard, ACI 318 specifies that the development length for a
deformed headed bar, measured to the inside face of the head (as shown in Figure C13.1.4),
is given by

Lsy.t.bar = 0.19 f sy d b /

f c

. . . C13.1.4

where f c is to not be taken greater than 40 MPa.


In this Standard, Lsy.t.bar is taken as 40% of the required full development length (Lsy.t).
C r i ti c a l s e c ti o n

L s y.t . b a r

FIGURE C13.1.4 DEVELOPMENT OF A HEADED BAR


Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

219

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C13.1.5 Development length of deformed bars in compression


The anchorage of a deformed bar in compression is generally less than that in tension. The
reduction in average ultimate bond stress caused by flexural and direct tension cracking
does not occur and, in addition, part of the force in the bar may be transmitted by end
bearing of the bar.
C13.1.5.1 Development length to develop yield strength
For the determination of the development length of a deformed bar in compression (Lsy.c),
designers are given the option of using the basic development length in compression (Lsy.cb)
calculated in accordance with Clause 13.1.5.2 or using a refined value (less than or equal to
Lsy.cb) where advantage is taken of the beneficial effects of transverse reinforcement
(usually in the form of spirals or fitments) in accordance with Clause 13.1.5.3.
C13.1.5.2 Basic development length
The basic development length of a deformed bar in compression specified by
Equation 13.1.5.2 is similar to that specified in ACI 318 (Ref. 1). Values are provided in
Table C13.1.5.2 for Grade 500 MPa reinforcement, where for concrete strengths exceeding
25 MPa the basic development length for a deformed bar in compression is 21.75db.
TABLE C13.1.5.2

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

BASIC DEVELOPMENT LENGTHS IN COMPRESSION


(Lsy.cb), mm, FOR 500 GRADE DEFORMED BAR
Concrete
Grade
MPa

Bar diameter, mm
12

16

20

24

28

32

36

40

20

300

395

495

590

690

790

885

985

25

265

355

440

530

620

705

795

880

32

265

350

435

525

610

700

785

870

C13.1.5.3 Refined development length


The basic development length of a bar in compression (of cross-sectional area As) may be
reduced by 25% (by the introduction of k6 = 0.75), if sufficient transverse reinforcement
confines the bar within the basic development length.
At least 3 transverse bars are required within the basic development length and are required
to be located outside the bar being developed, that is between the bar being developed and
the nearest concrete surface. In addition, the total cross-sectional area of these transverse
bars divided by the transverse bar spacing (Atr/s) is required to be greater than As/600. If
this is not the case, k6 = 1.0 and the development length of the bar in compression is equal
to the basic development length specified in Clause 13.1.5.2.
The maximum spacing of transverse bars required within the development length to satisfy
the requirements for k6 = 0.75 is given in Table C13.1.5.3.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

220

TABLE C13.1.5.3
MAXIMUM SPACING OF TRANSVERSE BARS WITHIN
DEVELOPMENT LENGTH WHEN k6 = 0.75
Diameter of
anchored bar
mm

Maximum transverse bar spacing, mm


Transverse bar diameter, mm
6

10

12

16

20

12
16
20

105
150
160

105
150
190

105
150
190

150
190

190

24
28
32

150
135
125

190
230
215

190
275
250

190
275
315

190
275
315

36
40

115
120

185
185

240
215

355
285

360
400

C13.1.5.4 Development length to develop less than the yield strength

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

To develop a compressive stress less than the yield stress, the required development length
is proportional to the stress to be developed. For example, if the compressive stress to be
developed in a bar is 0.5fsy, then the development length required (Lsc) is 0.5Lsy.c; however,
on no account should the development length in compression be less than 200 mm. When
calculating sc, the capacity reduction factor is to be included (see Paragraph C13.1.2.4).
Where a bar in compression is bent for construction purposes, such as a 90 bend for a
starter bar within a footing, the straight embedment into the footing is required to be not
less than Lsy.c, as shown in Figure C13.1.5.4.

L s y. c

N ot c o n s i d e r e d to b e ef fe c ti ve

FIGURE C13.1.5.4 DEVELOPMENT LENGTH IN COMPRESSION

C13.1.6 Development length of plain bars in compression


For plain bars in compression, the development length is taken as twice the development
length of a deformed bar (i.e. 2Lsy.c or 2Lsy.cb, as appropriate). Although the Standard does
not exclude the reduction in development length due to confinement by transverse
reinforcement, it is recommended that for plain round bars k6 be always taken as 1.0.
C13.1.7 Development length of bundled bars
The increases in development length when bars in compression are bundled compensate for
the reduced bar perimeter in contact with the surrounding concrete. (See also
Clauses 8.1.10.8 and 10.7.4.3 of the Standard.)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

221

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C13.1.8 Development length of welded plain or deformed mesh in tension


C13.1.8.1 Development length to develop yield strength
Three alternative procedures for anchoring welded wire mesh are specified, depending on
the number of cross-bars (or cross-wires) located within the development length.
C13.1.8.2 Two or more cross-bars within development length
This is a deemed-to-comply requirement in which a value is not placed on the development
length. The yield stress of plain and deformed bars (or wires) is deemed to be developed if
that portion of the bar that extends past the critical section contains at least two cross-bars,
the first of which is located at least 50 mm from the critical section and the spacing between
the cross-bars in the development length is not less than 50 mm for deformed bars and
100 mm for plain bars. These deemed-to-comply requirements developing the wires in mesh
are based on tests by Australian mesh suppliers and were reported to Standards Australia by
the representatives of Steel Reinforcement Institute of Australia (SRIA) and Bureau of Steel
Manufacturers of Australia (BOSMA).
C13.1.8.3 One cross-bar within development length

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

When only one cross-bar is located within the development length, the length of the
anchored bar, measured from the critical section to that cross-bar is required to be not less
than the basic development length (Lsy.tb) specified in Equation 13.1.8.3. On no account
should Lsy.tb be taken as less than 100 mm for deformed mesh and 150 mm for plain mesh. It
is noted that, in this case only, the length of the anchored bar beyond the critical section is
to actually exceed the basic development length.
The basic development length for a number of common wire sizes and spacings for
Grade 500 deformed wire mesh when only one bar is located in the development length,
calculated using Equation 13.1.8.3, is shown in Table C13.1.8.3.
TABLE C13.1.8.3
BASIC DEVELOPMENT LENGTH (Lsy.tb)[mm] FOR GRADE 500
DEFORMED MESHONE CROSS-WIRE IN DEVELOPMENT LENGTH
( f c ), MPa

Wire diameter d b
mm/wire spacing s m
mm

20

25

32

40

50

65

80

100

6.75/100
6.75/200

130
100

116
100

103
100

100
100

100
100

100
100

100
100

100
100

7.6/100
7.6/200

165
100

147
100

130
100

117
100

104
100

100
100

100
100

100
100

8.6/100
8.6/200

211
106

189
100

167
100

149
100

133
100

117
100

106
100

100
100

9.5/100
9.5/200

258
129

230
115

204
102

182
100

163
100

143
100

129
100

115
100

10.7/100
10.7/200

327
163

292
146

258
129

231
116

207
103

181
100

163
100

146
100

11.9/100
11.9/200

404
202

361
181

319
160

286
143

256
128

224
112

202
101

181
100

Concrete strength grade

C13.1.8.4 No cross-bars within development length


When no cross-wires are located within the development length, the development lengths of
the bars and wires being anchored are treated in the same way as any other deformed (or
plain) bar or wire.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

222

C13.1.8.5 Development length to develop less than the yield strength


The development length required to develop a tensile stress ( st) less than the yield stress is
to be calculated from the basic development lengths obtained from Clauses 13.1.8.3 or
13.1.8.4 by multiplying by st/fsy. The development length provided should be not less than
100 mm for deformed mesh and 150 mm for plain mesh.
When calculating st,
Paragraph C13.1.2.4).

the

capacity

reduction

factor

should

be

included

(see

C13.2 SPLICING OF REINFORCEMENT


C13.2.1 General
All splices are required to be designed to develop the yield strength (fsy) of the bars or
mesh, irrespective of their location in the structure. Splices may be made by physically
welding the bars being spliced together, by using an appropriate form of mechanical
coupler, by end bearing (in the case of compression splices) or by lapping the bars by the
specified lap length (Lsy.t.lap).
Clause 1.4 requires designers to specify on the drawings the actual location and details of
any splices. Splices are permitted only in these locations.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For tensile lap lengths, where deformed reinforcing bars of different sizes are lap-sliced in
tension, the lap splice length should equal the larger of the tensile lap splice length for the
smaller bar, or the tensile development length for the larger bar (see Paragraph C13.2.2).
For compressive lap lengths, where deformed reinforcing bars of different sizes are lapspliced in compression, the lap splice length should equal the larger of the compressive lap
splice length for the smaller bar, or the compressive development length for the larger bar
(see Paragraph C13.2.4).
When selecting the type of splice and the splice location, consideration should be given to
the placement and compaction of the concrete in order to satisfy the requirements of
Clause 17.1.3.
Clause 13.2.1(d) relates to direct tension members, such as the tension members of a truss
or in members requiring hanging reinforcement (see Clause 8.2.11), where the entire
internal action at the strength limit state is to be carried by the reinforcing steel in tension.
This rule does not necessarily apply to all the ties in a member designed by strut-and-tie
modelling.
Because of a lack of reliable test data, lapped splices are not permitted for bar diameters
exceeding 40 mm [Clause 13.2.1(e)]. Large diameter bars need to be spliced by other
means, including by welding or by using appropriate mechanical couplers.
To avoid possible brittle fracture of the bar, welding at a splice should not be located within
3db of that part of a bar that has been bent and re-straightened [Clause 13.2.1(f)].
For steel fixing purposes, it is common practice to overlap bars that are parallel but which
are not specifically transferring force from one to the other. This would include the overlap
of top steel in beams near midspan, or tie bars supporting the main negative steel in a oneway slab. These overlaps are not splices and should not be considered as such. In these
situations, a very short overlap is all that is required.
C13.2.2 Lapped splices for bars in tension
The requirements for lapped splices in tension have changed from those in AS 36002001.
Both contact and non-contact lapped splices are permitted. Contact splices are those where
the two bars being spliced are in physical contact with each other. Non-contact splices are
those where the two bars being spliced are physically separated. At a lapped splice, the bars
should be overlapped by a length not less than Lsy.t.lap, which is the development length in
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

223

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

tension (calculated in accordance with Clause 13.1.2.1) multiplied by the factor k7. In no
case should the value of Lsy.t.lap be less than 29 k1db.
The requirements for tension splices in narrow elements, such as beam webs and columns,
are different from those for splices in wide elements, such as slabs, band beams, walls and
blade columns. In the latter, the resultant tensile forces on each side of the splice are
concentric (or very close to it). In the former, the resultant forces may be eccentric.
For splices in wide elements or members with the spliced bars located in the plane of the
wide element, the factor k7 is generally equal to 1.25, except at locations where the
maximum tensile stress in the lapped bars does not exceed 0.5fsy and not more than half the
tensile reinforcement is being spliced, in which case k7 = 1.0.
For splices in narrow elements or members, the lap length should be not less than that
required for a wide element and the length Lsy.t + 1.5sb, whichever is the larger, where sb is
the clear distance between bars of the lapped splice when that spacing exceeds 3db and
equals zero when the clear spacing is less than or equal to 3db.
C13.2.3 Lapped splices for mesh in tension
The requirements for lapped splices in mesh are based on tests by Australian mesh suppliers
and reported to Standards Australia by the representatives of SRIA and BOSMA.
C13.2.4 Lapped splices for bars in compression

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The minimum length of lapped splice for bars in compression is 40db, except where
sufficient confinement is provided in the form of stirrups or fitments or helical
reinforcement the minimum length may be reduced to 32db but not less than 300 mm.
In compression members with at least 3 sets of stirrups or ties within the lap length, the
minimum lap length may be taken as 32db if the stirrup or tie spacing is less than that given
in Table C13.2.4.
TABLE C13.2.4
RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM SPACING OF
TRANSVERSE BARS (mm) TO SATISFY THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CLAUSE 13.2.4(b)
Diameter of
spliced bar
mm

Maximum transverse fitment spacing, mm


Transverse fitment diameter, mm
6

10

12

16

20

12
16
20

160
140
90

160
225
250

160
225
290

225
290

290

24
28
32

60
45
35

170
125
95

250
180
140

350
325
250

350
420
390

36
40

30
20

75
60

110
90

195
160

305
250

To justify the reduction of minimum lap length to 32db in a helically tied compressive
member, at least 3 turns of the helix are required within the lap length and the amount of
helical reinforcement (Atr/s) is to be not less than (nAb/6000), where Atr is the area of the
helical bar, s is the spacing of successive turns of the helix, and nAb is the total area of all
the bars spaced uniformly within the helix.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

224

C13.2.5 Lapped splices for bundled bars


The factors increasing the lap length for bundled bars compensate for the fact that part of
the perimeter of each bar in the bundle will not be in contact with the surrounding concrete.
Bundled-bar splices require careful planning to ensure that all splices do not occur at one
cross-section (see Clause 10.7.4 generally, and Clause 10.7.4.3 in particular; see also
Clause 8.1.10.8.)
C13.2.6 Welded or mechanical splices
The design requirements concerning strength and serviceability design criteria for welded
or mechanical splices are explained in Refs 11 and 12.
C13.3 STRESS DEVELOPMENT IN TENDONS
C13.3.1 General

At s t r e n g th li m i t s t a te
pu

ST EEL ST R ES S

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The length required to develop a particular force in a pretensioned tendon may be obtained
using the bi-linear relationship shown in Figure C13.3.1. The transmission length (Lpt),
required to develop the effective prestress in the tendon ( p.ef), and the development length
(Lp) required to develop the stress in the pretensioned tendon at the ultimate limit state
(pu), may be determined from substantiated test data or from Clauses 13.3.2.1 and 13.3.2.2,
respectively. This idealized variation of stress in the tendon may be used for analysing
sections within the developing region near the end of a pretensioned member (Refs 13
and 14).

Pr e s t r e s s o n l y

p.e f

D i s t a n c e f r o m f r e e e n d of te n d o n
0.1L p t

Lpt
Lp

FIGURE C13.3.1 IDEALIZED BI-LINEAR RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STEEL STRESS


AND DISTANCE FROM FREE END OF A PRETENSIONED TENDON

C13.3.2 Transmission lengths of pretensioned tendons


C13.3.2.1 Transmission lengths of pretensioned tendons
In pretensioned concrete, the tendons are usually tensioned within the forms in a casting
bed. The concrete is then cast around the tendons and, after the concrete has gained
sufficient strength, the tendons are released and the prestressing force is transferred to the
concrete. The transfer of prestress occurs at the ends of the member, with the steel stress
varying from zero at the end of the tendon to the prescribed level of prestress at some
distance in from the end of the member. The distance over which the transfer of prestress
takes place is the transmission length and it is within this region that bond stresses are high.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

225

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The transmission length depends on the quality of bond between the tendon and the
concrete, as well as on the level of prestress.
The main mechanisms that contribute to the development of stress along the transmission
length are chemical adhesion, friction at the steel-concrete interface, and mechanical
interlocking of concrete and steel, which is associated primarily with deformed wire or
twisted strand. When the tendon is released and the prestressing force is transferred, there is
a small amount of slip at the end of the tendon. This locally eliminates the bond for a short
distance along the tendon at the released end, after which the bond stress develops rapidly.
Accordingly, the Standard specifies that the stress in the tendon over the first 10% of the
transmission length be zero.
The transmission length and the rate of development of the steel stress along the tendon
depend on many factors, including the diameter and type of the tendon, the surface
condition of the tendon, the degree of concrete compaction and the degree of cracking
within the anchorage zone, the method of release of the tendon and the concrete strength. In
the absence of test data, the Standard specifies in Table 13.3.2 minimum values of the
transmission length for use in design. These values are independent of the level of initial
prestress and ignore the level of cracking and degree of compaction within the anchorage
zone. A better estimate of transmission length may be obtained from recommendation based
on appropriate test data and by reference to specialist literature (including Refs 13 to 16).
For seven-wire strand, ACI 318 (Ref. 1) specifies that Lpt = (p.ef/21) db. This corresponds
to the value of 60db specified in Table 13.3.2 when the effective stress in the tendon after
short term losses is 1260 MPa.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C13.3.2.2 Development length of pretensioned strand


The length of the tendon from its end to the critical cross-section, where the ultimate stress
in the tendon (pu) is required, has to be greater than the minimum development length (Lp)
as given by Equation 13.3.2.2, the illustration of which is shown in Figure C13.3.1. Lp is the
sum of the transmission length (Lpt) plus the additional bonded length necessary to develop
the increase of steel stress from p.ef to pu. Equation 13.3.2.2 is a rearrangement of the
expression specified in ACI 318 (Ref. 1), which was based on tests of members with 6.4,
9.5 and 12.7 mm diameter strands for which the maximum value of pu was 1900 MPa
(see Refs 17 to 19).
Where debonding of a strand is specified near the end of a member, and the design allows
for tension at service loads within the development length, the minimum development
length of the debonded strand is 2Lp. This is based on early tests on members with
debonded strands (Ref. 17).
C13.3.2.3 Development length of pretensioned wire
(No Commentary)
C13.3.2.4 Development length of untensioned strand or wire
Where a prestressing tendon is not initially stressed, that is, it is used in a member as nonprestressed reinforcement, and the tendon is required to develop its full characteristic
breaking strength (fpb), the minimum development length required on either side of the
critical cross-section is 2.5 times the minimum transmission length specified in
Table 13.3.2.
Care should be taken in these situations if an abrupt change in the effective depth of the
tendon occurs due to an abrupt change in the member depth, such as the situation illustrated
in Figure C13.3.2.4. In these locations, it may not be possible to develop the full strength of
the initially, untensioned tendon. Local bond failure may occur in the vicinity of the step,
limiting the stress that can be developed in the tendon. Such a situation may develop if the
calculated stress change in strand required in the region of high local bond stresses exceeds
about 500 MPa (Ref. 20).
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

226

Lo c a l r e g i o n of h i g h b o n d s t r e s s

Ini ti a ll y u nte n s i o n e d s tr a n d
El evati o n

FIGURE 13.3.2.4 POTENTIAL LOCAL BOND FAILURE IN STEPPED MEMBER WITH


UNTENSIONED TENDONS

C13.3.3 Stress development in post-tensioned tendons by anchorages


The critical loading stage for post-tensioned anchorages occurs during the tendon
tensioning operation. This clause reflects the requirements in AS/NZS 1314 to ensure an
adequate factor of safety against anchorage failure, which can be catastrophic.
Bonded tendons undergo little strain change due to transient loads (e.g. live load) since
bending moments are typically small at the anchorage locations; unbonded tendons
however, undergo cyclic strain variations along their entire length, including at anchorages.
C13.4 COUPLING OF TENDONS
(No Commentary)

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

ACI 318M-08, Metric Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and
Commentary, ACI COMMITTEE 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
Michigan, 2008.

Eurocode 2, Design of Concrete Structures Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings EN 1992-1-1 (Incorporating corrigendum January 2008), European
Committee for Standardization, 2004.

GILBERT, R.I., Comparing tensile reinforcement anchorage in US, European and


Australian Standards, Concrete in Australia, Concrete Institute of Australia, Vol. 33,
No. 3, 2007, pp. 3340.

GILBERT, R.I., The new anchorage and splice length provisions in AS 3600
A comparison with other codes and experimental data, Proceedings, Concrete 07,
23rd Biennial Conference of the Concrete Institute of Australia, 1820 October 2007,
Adelaide, pp. 487496.

MUNTER, S., GILBERT, R.I. and PATRICK, M., New Design Rules and Tables for
Development and Lap Splice Lengths in accordance with AS 36002009. Concrete
2011.

MUNTER, S., PATRICK, M. and RANGAN, B.V. A Review of Recent Australian


Bond Test Results and the New Stress Development Design Rules of AS 36002009,
ASEC 2010.

GOTO, Y., Cracks formed in concrete around deformed tension bars, ACI Journal,
Vol. 68, No. 4, 1971, pp. 244251.

TEPFERS, R., Cracking of concrete cover along anchored deformed reinforcing bars,
Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 31, No. 106, 1979, pp. 312.

TEPFERS, R., Lapped tensile reinforcement splices, Journal of the Structural


Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, ST1, 1982, pp. 283301.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

227

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

10

REYNOLDS, C.G., Bond Strength of Deformed Bars in Tension, Symposium on


Concrete, IEAust, Perth, NCP 83/12, 1983, pp. 6569.

11

PATRICK, M., BERRY, P. and BRIDGE, R.Q., Strength and Ductility of


Mechanically Spliced Bars, Concrete 01, 2001.

12

PATRICK, M., BERRY, P., ZHANG, L. and MARSDEN, W., Important New Design
Provisions for Mechanical and Welded Splices in AS 3600, Concrete 03, 2003.

13

MARTIN, L. and KORKOSZ, W., Strength of Prestressed Members at Sections where


Strands are not Fully Developed, PCI Journal, Vol. 40, No. 5, 1995, pp. 5866.

14

PCI DESIGN HANDBOOK: Precast and Prestressed Concrete, 6th Ed., MNL-120-4,
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, 2005, pp. 427 to 429.

15

ROSE, D.R. and RUSSELL, B.W., Investigation of Standardized Tests to Measure the
Bond Performance of Prestressing Strands, PCI Journal, Vol. 42, No. 4, 1997,
pp. 5680.

16

LOGAN, D.R., Acceptance Criteria for Bond Quality of Strand for Pretensioned
Concrete Applications, PCI Journal, Vol. 42, No. 2, 1997, pp. 5290.

17

KAAR, P. and MAGURA, D., Effect of Strand Blanketing on Performance of


Pretensioned Girders, PCI Journal, Vol. 10, No. 6, 1965, pp. 2034.

18

HANSON, N.W. and KAAR, P.H., Flexural Bond Tests Prestressed Beams, ACI
Journal, Vol. 55, No. 7, 1959, pp. 783802.

19

KAAR, P.H., LA FRAUGH, R.W. and MASS, M.A., Influence of Concrete Strength
on Strand Transfer Length, PCI Journal, Vol. 8, No. 5, 1963, pp. 4767.

20

GILBERT, R.I., Unanticipated bond failure over supporting band beams in grouted
post-tensioned slab tendons with little or no prestress. Bond in Concrete, Fourth
International Symposium, 1720 June 2012, Brescia, Italy.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N

228

C 1 4

J O I N T S , E M B E D D E D
A N D F I X I N G S

I T E M S

C14.1 JOINTS
C14.1.1 General
Joints in concrete structures provide articulation to accommodate shrinkage and temperature
change and to accommodate movement resulting from unequal loading of adjoining
elements or from differential foundation conditions. On-site construction joints allow stopstart placement of concrete to suit site construction associated among other things to
finishing times and concrete placement rates. Where there is a disruption to concrete
operations, these joints allow subsequent placement of fresh concrete against previously
hardened concrete without detrimental effects.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Joints can control unsightly and potentially damaging cracking, reducing expensive repair,
where cracking could result in subsequent loss of strength, serviceability and durability.
Cracking can initiate reinforcement corrosion in exposed environments, resulting in a loss
of effective reinforcement. In precast concrete construction, the gap between precast
elements is usually sealed for weatherproofing. This sealing operation may also provide
improved fire resistance, better acoustic performance or increased chemical resistance.
Irrespective of their advantages, joints should be avoided where practicable, as they do
represent an initial cost and may be a continuing expense requiring maintenance,
particularly when either not designed or constructed correctly. They can also be a visual
distraction in some structures. Typically, the cost to repair a damaged edge to a joint can be
many times more than the cost of its original construction.
This Commentary does not provide recommendations for design for joints, which is the
responsibility of the designer; however, it does provide useful information in carrying out
such designs and lists references that may be of assistance (see Refs 1 to 9). Prior to
AS 36001988, joint type was not differentiated. In 1988 the Concrete structures
Standard identified both a movement joint and a construction joint, which has now been
further elaborated upon in this current revision.
C14.1.2 Construction joints
When construction is interrupted sufficiently for concrete to set (for example, 30 min or
longer) or at the end of a scheduled concrete placement operation, a construction joint
should be formed. Such joints should be planned where possible to coincide with a
movement joint in order to reduce unnecessary potential regions of weakness in a concrete
element and also for cost considerations. In addition, a joint should be located where
bending moments are minimized and the shear force is modest; however, this may not
always be possible, particularly in vertical construction where the joint is usually at the
underside of the supporting member and formed as a kicker above floor height level.
Construction joints should be straight and continuous and no closer in parallel than 1.5 m to
any other joint. The formed concrete face should be vertical (in a slab or beam) and cast to
a rough finish. Surface laitance, cement paste and fines should be removed, aggregate
exposed without undercutting the matrix, and the joint should not be primed with mortar or
grout. Suitable treatments to obtain such a finish could involve gentle air jetting or by
brushing, aided by a soft water spray, up to 4 h from concrete placement. (Wire brushing
should not be used until much later and up to 24 h from placement to minimise risk of
surface damage.). Hand-held percussion tools are more appropriate only after three days.
Contamination with oil and other detrimental materials from such mechanical equipment is
to be avoided.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

229

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The requirement to thoroughly clean the previously formed concrete surface prior to placing
fresh concrete is to ensure adequate bond is achieved and to prevent any deleterious
material compromising the finished joint. (In some cases, it may be necessary to wet the
hardened face prior to further concrete placement.) Continuity of reinforcement across the
joint can be maintained by using either split or slotted formwork. Alternatively, deformed
bars fully lapped to the reinforcement in both the hardened concrete and the fresh concrete
may be fixed in position. A keyed joint may also be formed in a vertical face and is a
preferred addition in concrete members subject to heavy cyclic loading and where the
member thickness is more than 200 mm.
The current Standard expands on joint design, given in previous editions.
C14.1.3 Movement joints

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Movement joints encompass a wide range of joint types adopted in many structures
including buildings, pavements and industrial floors and in precast construction. Movement
joints can provide isolation between a column or machinery base and a surrounding
concrete floor pavement, allowing independent vertical and horizontal articulation as a
result of uneven foundation settlement or loading conditions. These joints can reduce
restraint and allow longitudinal shortening (and, in some exterior exposure or high
temperature environments, expansion) of an element resulting from shrinkage, creep and
diurnal effects. Movement joints control the frequency and width of random cracks
associated with such volume changes. Although the concrete will still crack, the size and
spacing of finer cracks between formed joints can be better managed.
Joints should be straight and continuous and it is important that where a joint is constructed,
it extends through any attached cladding or finish to ensure unsightly and uncontrolled
cracking does not eventuate. Horizontal displacement at the joint may be initiated by
reducing member thickness, typically by 25% or more (of the thinner member thickness) at
the required joint location. Such joints are usually formed by saw cuts (of 3 mm to 5 mm
width) or by placement of an insert (a pre-moulded strip) into the concrete or by a groove
creating a line of weakness in thinner members. Where saw-cutting is adopted, cuts can
either be made by dry cut or by water injection saws. Early-entry dry-cut saws (that is, less
than 4 h from concrete finishing) are typically limited to a 30 mm deep cut and use
diamond-impregnated blades and skid plates to control spalling. Conventional wet-cut saws
are utilized at later entry times but are capable of cutting deeper, up to 300 mm or more. A
saw-cut should be made as soon as possible after concrete placement and within 4 h to 6 h
(and sometimes up to 12 h in cold weather) of concrete finishing to diminish the risk of
uncontrolled cracking.
Alternatively, a movement joint may extend throughout the member depth, providing
complete concrete, reinforcement and tendon discontinuity. Dowels can be used where load
transfer is necessary across the joint; for example, to maintain alignment between adjacent
reinforced concrete segments or where the expected horizontal movement under wheeled
traffic is expected to be around 1 mm or more. Reinforcement is then terminated in each
concrete element and load transferred across the joint interface by means of these equally
spaced dowels. In members of at least 150 mm thickness, dowels may sometimes be used in
conjunction with a female to male key; however, reliance on a key joint alone (or solely
aggregate interlock) is not always possible and the use of dowels becomes essential. The
effectiveness of aggregate interlock reduces at the joint width as the horizontal design
movement increases beyond 1 mm (that is, around 3 m joint spacing) and becomes minimal
at an opening width of 2 mm. A similar observation can be made of keyed joints (without
dowels) where the increasing opening width diminishes the joints load transfer ability.
Dowels are usually made from plain undeformed mild steel bar (R250N) and are centred on
the joint interface. Dowels need to be horizontal to this line of movement to ensure
unhindered opening and closing of the joint is possible. They are typically 450 mm in
overall length and fixed at a spacing of 300 mm. The dowel diameter should be at least
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

230

20 mm in lightly loaded slabs and, for concrete members 200 mm and thicker, the dowel
diameter should be not less than one-eighth of the thinner member depth. The dowel bar on
one side only of the joint will be treated with a bond-breaking compound or sleeved to
allow slip (and thence capped at that end to make up for the expected movement). These
bars are sometimes galvanized and even of stainless steel in extreme durability
environments. Square dowels cushioned on the vertical sides by a compressible material
may be used where movement in two directions is anticipated, such as may occur in
concrete slabs on ground that are post-tensioned or in longitudinal joint applications.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Joint spacing is a very important consideration in the design. As a rule, joints are not
designed into suspended reinforced and prestressed concrete slabs as the amount and
location of reinforcement or level of prestress respectively controls crack width and spacing
and consequently concrete placement is typically planned to complete a floor level in one,
sometimes two, operations. Where they are needed in such applications, joints are usually
supported along building grid (for instance, column) lines.
In pavements, joint spacing in unreinforced concrete should be separated at no greater than
25 times the member thickness and unreinforced concrete panels should preferably be
square in shape, the ratio of the long side to the short panel side being limited to at most
1.5. (L- and T-shaped panels are also preferred as square members, wherever practicable.)
Such joint spacing should ensure aggregate interlock of the concrete where the reduction in
member thickness is between one-quarter and one-third at the joint location. Where the
concrete is reinforced and the percentage of reinforcement is in the order of 0.002Ag,
control of volume change induced cracking is limited and it is desirable that the spacing
between joints not exceed 5 m to 6 m with similar aspect ratios to that of unreinforced
elements being adopted. Reinforcement in the member (except in very thick concrete
elements) should be located as close to the exposed weather face as is permissible having
consideration to cover to steel reinforcement. At re-entrant corners, additional
reinforcement diagonal across the corner is recommended to prevent the development and
concentration of tensile stresses.
Where the level of reinforcement is increased to accommodate wider joint spacing, joints
should be spaced at no more than 15 m intervals in order to avoid unacceptably wide joints
and to control expansion. (Note that reinforcement levels in excess of 0.006Ag may
eliminate a contraction joint completely.) In pavements, it is common to limit longitudinal
joints i.e., a joint at right-angles to the transverse joint and typically parallel to the direction
of traffic, to a maximum spacing of 5 m. This long-strip methodology is now more
commonly used for constructing industrial pavements in lieu of a chequer-board method as
it reduces the number of sides to match to two and there are fewer joints to design for load
transfer.
The maximum joint width should always be calculated for both opening and closing
(particularly in concrete exposed to high thermal temperatures or exposed for long periods
to weather as in footpaths and cycleways). Therefore, the required joint opening is a
summation of the overall design-expected movement plus an allowance for construction
tolerance and, in some instances, for rotation resulting from beam or slab deflection. As
joints become wider and subject to repetitive loading, it may be necessary to protect the
concrete edges from spalling by means of filling the joint to restore surface continuity or
reinforcing the joint edge. According to ACI 360 (Ref. 4), an infill semi-rigid epoxy or
polyurea material of a Shore Hardness of 80 (to ASTM D 2240) can provide sufficient
shoulder support to the joint edges; however, complete filling the joint in this manner can
only occur where further long-term movement is not anticipated.
Alternatively, steel angles level with the surface (to avoid bumping) may be used. An edgethickening of a pavement may also be provided to assist in load transfer or, alternatively, a
subgrade beam system may be incorporated under the slab to provide necessary edge
support.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

231

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

It is emphasized that there are substitutes to movement joints. A designer can increase the
quantity of reinforcement or prestressing to control cracking or adjust the depth and type of
foundation to control differential settlement between members. Construction may delay the
completion of concrete placement by utilizing pour strips as temporary joints (allowing
concrete on each side to shrink with minimum constraint prior to infilling with concrete). In
this latter case, the time delay between placement of these strips and the subsequent infill is
important as over half of concrete shrinkage can occur within the first week or so and, by
delaying final placement for a number of weeks, the overall design movement can be better
controlled.
It is important in the design of any structure to investigate the sensitivity of the structure to
movement as early as possible in the planning stage. The resulting forces and movements
can often be controlled by a combination of suitably located joints and reinforcement
detailing and foundation design.
The current Standard expands on joint design, given in previous editions.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C14.1.4 Joint fillers and sealants


In simple joints where movement is expected to be minimal or the joint function is
predominantly isolation, preformed bitumen-impregnated, plain fibre materials (for
example, self-expanding cork) or compressible foam may be sufficient. Such materials
require only a minimum of site fabrication. Malfunction of these simple fillers usually
results in the seal failing to generate sufficient contact pressure under repeated cycles of
opening and thus over time can allow the ingress of deleterious materials and possible
breaking of the joint edge under repetitive wheel loading. Even where more expensive fieldmoulded sealants are poured or gunned into the joint, these sealants may also require
maintenance (and possible replacement) at shorter intervals than the design life of the
member or structure and consideration needs to be given to joint location to permit such
maintenance to be carried out.
Where weatherproofing is required to the sides of a precast concrete panel or where entry of
materials into a joint could affect the life cycle function of a structure or for fire resistance,
acoustic insulation or for chemical resistance, a higher generation product (and therefore
more costly material) is warranted to reduce frequency of repair or replacement. These
sealants should be inserted such that the sealant depth is equal to or greater than one-half
the joint width (or 10 mm where the joint width is less than 20 mm) but usually no more
than the joint width to ensure longevity of the application. For example, a low cost filler or
backing-rod in a joint may stop around 10 mm below the finished concrete surface. A
debonding material (for example, bond-breaking tape) can then be installed and the more
expensive sealant poured or gunned into the remaining gap to finish flush with the surface.
It is important that the underside of the sealant be prevented from adhering to the
underlying concrete base or filler whilst still adhering to the side of the concrete faces
subjected to movement.
Polyurethanes are very popular as joint sealants in concrete construction available in both
one and two parts, fast and standard cure and with fire rating, acoustic rating and potable
water and sewage certification. They have replaced polysulfides in the marketplace, which
may not be fire-rated, can require a primer and have a slower application time.
Polyurethanes are installed where fire endurance is needed (for instance in precast panel
construction) and to provide an acoustic seal to a designated acoustic sound transmission
class. Silicone is used in structural glazing applications with its excellent ultraviolet light
resistance an advantage.
Acrylic (water-based) sealants are also widely specified but are commonly limited to
internal low movement joints and can have poor long-term performance. Acrylics can be
applied in areas of low movement but away from direct ultraviolet exposure. Over time they
may suffer unacceptable shrinkage on curing, resulting in a loss of joint geometry, and
impair fire rating and acoustic performance.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

232

Epoxies can be very effective in joint filling, particularly where the joint may be subject to
repetitive wheel loading that can damage the joint edges. A suitable Shore A hardness (at
least 80) should be specified for such applications. The curing of epoxies is independent of
site conditions when used as a two-pack application; however, it is important to remember
that the degree of available movement is limited with epoxies and, where used, their
installation should hence be delayed as much as possible to diminish such subsequent
movement. Irrespective, some epoxy re-grouting of the joint may be anticipated where
movement is subsequently encountered.
Finally, a waterstop may be installed to provide a physical barrier to the progression of
water through a joint. A waterstop can be vulnerable to damage (that is, it may move or
buckle) during construction and concrete can thus be difficult to compact around the
waterstop profile.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Irrespective of what sealant is selected, it is important in order to ensure a good joint seal
eventuates that
(a)

the concrete be clean and dry and the surface temperature above 5C;

(b)

the sealant is not placed against fresh concrete as bubbling can result with a
subsequent loss of adhesion;

(c)

the sealant only adheres to the sides of the concrete joint and not the base; (foam
backing rods in precast panel construction or bondbreaking tape should be used to
prevent this base adhesion);

(d)

the depth of the sealant preferably be no less than half the joint width and not greater
than the joint width;

(e)

the sealant is not to be subject to in-service conditions and loading until they have
adequately cured (standard curing polyurethanes and acrylics can require a number of
days to cure properly, even where the sealant surface may harden relatively quickly.);
and

(f)

the sealant matches the required colour system for the surrounding pavement sealants
are now available in a range of colours.

Dry jointing systems are also available, particularly in some precast facade applications (for
example, rubber or PVC baffles in an open drain-type joint). These systems require good
tolerance in panel manufacture and the use of a rear internal air seal.
C14.2 EMBEDDED ITEMS
Common embedment items in concrete are bar chairs. They are used to space the
reinforcement off the forms to achieve the minimum cover required by the designer. It is
important that the bar chair material, geometry, stiffness, and fastenings to the forms be
compatible with the requirements for minimum cover to reinforcement and tendon and be
compatible with the performance of the concrete in terms of durability.
In aggressive environments (for example exposure classifications B2, C1 and C2) it is
important that the spacer material has good adhesion to the concrete and has similar
properties in terms of thermal expansion and deterioration to the base concrete.
The types of bar chairs generally available include plastic-tipped steel bar chairs, plastic bar
chairs, mortar block bar chairs (often termed aspros) and concrete block bar chairs.
The first three of these are the type of chairs generally used in non-aggressive
environments. Care is required with the use of the mortar block type chairs as these are
generally made from a relatively porous mortar that is likely to allow moisture and chloride
ingress at a more rapid rate than the base concrete.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

233

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

In aggressive environments it is recommended that concrete block bar chairs be used. These
should be made from the same concrete as the concrete being used on site and the surfaces
of the block should be suitably rough (that is, exposing aggregate to about 5 mm depth) to
ensure good adhesion to the surrounding concrete.
Item (a) of Clause 14.2.2 in the previous Standard has been expanded in this Clause whilst
Items (b) and (c) were moved to Clause 4.10.3.7. These changes were made so that this
Clause was in a more appropriate position to simplify the interpretation for the designer.
C14.3 FIXINGS
Where the connections between members are not monolithic, this Clause ensures that the
general philosophy of providing for the ductile behaviour of members at ultimate load
conditions extends to each part of the connection.
Although not specifically mentioned, where the member being connected is required to
have a particular fire resistance level (FRL), it would also be expected that the fixing would
inherently have at least the same fire resistance or be suitably protected from fire by other
means.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Reinforcing steel should not be used directly as a lifting device particularly if it has already
been bent, hot or cold, in the zone where lifting hooks or slings will be attached. Coldbending inherently implies that the bar has been strained beyond its yield point causing
damage to the surface of the steel. Hot-bending is likely to alter the crystal structure of the
steel. Both bending methods can have unpredictable results during a lifting operation where
very heavy loads with impact are involved.
Tilt-up construction requires tailor-made fixings and lifting points, as well as properly
designed and detailed instructions on their location in each panel. The force required to
separate stack-cast panels should be allowed.
REFERENCES
1

ACI 302.1R-04,
Guide
for
Concrete
Floor
and
Slab
Construction
ACI Committee 302, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2004.

BUSSELL, M.N. and CATHER, R., Design and Construction of Joints in Concrete
Structures, CIRIA Report No 146, 1995.

Engineers Essentials: Cracks and Crack Control, Cement and Concrete Association of
Australia, Vol. 4, No. 1, Sydney, 2001.

CCAA, T48, Guide to industrial floors and pavementsDesign, construction and


specification, Cement, Concrete and Aggregates Australia, Sydney, 2009.

CCAA, T51 Guide to Residential Streets and Paths, Cement, Concrete and
Aggregates Australia, Sydney, 2004.

Design of Joints in Concrete Buildings, Current Practice Note 24, Concrete Institute
of Australia, Sept. 1990.

DELATTE, N., Concrete Pavement Design, Construction and Performance, Taylor


and Francis, New York, 2007.

Joint Sealants: A Grass Roots Look, National Precast Concrete Association of


Australia, National Precaster, No. 21, Sept. 1999.

RUTH, J., Movement Joints: A Necessary Evil, or Avoidable?, Large Concrete


Buildings (Editors: B.V. Rangan and R.F. Warner), 1996.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N C 1 5
P E D E S T A L S

234

P L A I N C O N C R E T E
A N D F O O T I N G S

C15.1 GENERAL
The limitation on unsupported height is similar to that in ACI 318 (Ref. 1). It is assumed
that the pedestal is the up-stand from a footing (pad or strip) and the limitation would
prevent the clause being extended to cover plain concrete walls. The Commentary to
ACI 318 (Ref. 1) suggests that the limitation need not apply if the pedestal is restrained by
soil; however, this is not recommended as backfilling around the pedestal will not always
provide adequate lateral restraint.
Plain concrete slabs-on-ground and pavements should comply with the provisions of
Section 16.
For the design of plain concrete piles reference should be made to appropriate geotechnical
literature.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C15.2 DURABILITY
Plain concrete members will generally be in contact with the soil and this exposure will
govern the durability design. Nevertheless, as with a reinforced member, the exposure on
all surfaces should be assessed; for example, the top surface of a footing may be subject to
abrasion. Although the concrete may not have to protect any reinforcement, Section 4 of the
Standard provides appropriate guidance where the attack is to the concrete (e.g. sulfate
attack) and the adoption of Type SR cement and protective coatings.
In cases where the member contains reinforcement, although this reinforcement is not
considered in assessing the strength of the member, the reinforcement is to be protected as
required in Section 4.
C15.3 PEDESTALS
The provisions of this Clause are based on those in the Canadian Standard (Ref. 2).
The requirement for minimum eccentricity is greater than the eccentricity requirement for
columns and walls.
C15.4 FOOTINGS
C15.4.1 Dimensions
The requirements are based on the Canadian Standard (Ref. 2) and aims to ensure that a
reasonable depth of concrete is present to allow good construction practices to be followed.
The reduction in depth by 50 mm, for a member cast against the ground, is to allow for
unevenness and/or incorrect levels being used and is similar in intent to that for concrete
cover in these cases (see Clause 4.10.3.5).
C15.4.2 Strength in bending
The gross section properties, reduced as required in accordance with Clause 15.4.1, should
be used. The positions of critical sections follow those given in ACI 318 (Ref. 1).
C15.4.3 Strength in shear
The equations have been developed to be consistent with the values used for beams and
slabs in shear.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

235

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

REFERENCES
1

ACI 318M-08, Metric Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and
Commentary, ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan,
2008.

CAN/CSA-A23.3-04, Design of
Association, Ontario, Canada, 2004.

Structures,

Canadian

Standards

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Concrete

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

236

S E C T I O N C 1 6
S L A B - O N - G R O U N D F L O O R S ,
P A V E M E N T S A N D F O O T I N G S
C16.1 GENERAL
The range of members envisaged to be covered by this Section extends from external
pavements and trafficked areas around a building to industrial floors cast on the ground and
basement slabs in a multistorey building. The members may be unreinforced, reinforced or
prestressed.
Section 16 of the Standard does not apply to residential slabs and footings, which are
covered by AS 2870 (Ref. 1) (see Clause 1.1.3 of the Standard).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C16.2 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS


The design of pavements and industrial slabs on ground is a specialized area and the
loadings tend to be outside those specified in AS/NZS 1170.1 (Ref. 2). The effects of soilstructure interaction are varied and will depend on the type of structure being designed. For
example the bending moments and shears in an industrial floor will depend on the soil
properties, the depth of the soil and the type and magnitude of the loading. Additional
interaction effects such as the friction between sub-grade and the slab may be important. In
some cases, it may be desirable to isolate the slab from the structure above and the footings
below. Generally, the utility of the floor will be affected by factors such as differential
movement at joints, warping of the slab and cracking. Therefore, these factors need to be
considered in the design. There is a range of techniques for dealing with these matters, e.g.
joint design, joint spacing, amount of reinforcement and use of prestressing (see Ref. 3 and
Paragraph C14.1). Factors affecting the amenity of the building also need to be taken into
account (e.g. moisture migration and drainage).
The design of plain concrete pavements subject to traffic loading also is a specialized area
and reference should be made to the Austroads design guide (Ref. 4).
C16.3 FOOTINGS
Designers have the option of designing the footing as reinforced or not; that is, ignoring the
effect of any reinforcement for the strength design of the member. The Clause directs the
reader to other Clauses in the Standard for certain requirements. Note that if the footing
contains reinforcement regardless of whether or not such reinforcement is taken into
account in the design for strength, the member should be designed as a reinforced member
taking into consideration the requirements of Section 4 for durability.
REFERENCES
1

AS 2870, Residential slabs and footings, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2011.

AS/NZS 1170.1, Structural design actionsPermanent, imposed and other actions,


Standards Australia, Sydney, 2002.

CCAA, T48 Guide to industrial floors and pavementsDesign, construction and


specification, Cement, Concrete and Aggregates Australia, Sydney, 2009.

Austroads, Pavement Design: A guide to the structural design of road pavements,


Association of Australian and New Zealand Road Transport and Traffic Authorities,
Sydney, 2004.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

237

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S E C T I O N C 1 7
M A T E R I A L A N D
C O N S T R U C T I O N R E Q U I R E M E N T S
C17.1 MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE
AND GROUT
C17.1.1 Materials and limitations on constituents
Requirements for the constituent materials of concrete are given in AS 1379 (Ref. 1).
Attention is drawn to the fact that AS 2758.1 (Ref. 2) is not self-sufficient as a specification
reference for aggregates because of the options provided in it. Hence, a project specification
will need to refer not only to AS 2758.1 but also to the specific options selected from that
Standard as being appropriate for the project.
C17.1.2 Specification and manufacture of concrete

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The requirements specified in AS 1379 (Ref. 1) for normal-class concrete have been
formulated so that it is suitable and can be easily specified for most concrete construction.
Essentially, it is concrete that is specified by selecting, for a small number of required
parameters, values from a limited series of standardized options. The primary parameters
and options are
(a)

a standard characteristic 28 days compressive strength, selected from 20 MPa,


25 MPa, 32 MPa, 40 MPa, 50 MPa, 65 MPa, 80 MPa and 100 MPa;

(b)

a standard slump, selected from 40 mm, 60 mm, 80 mm and 100 mm; and

(c)

a standard maximum nominal size of aggregate, selected from 10 mm, 14 mm and


20 mm.

Other required parameters are method of placement, project assessment, air entrainment and
3 days or 7 days average compressive strengths, as appropriate for the particular project.
AS 1379 (Ref. 1) also places limitations on the early strength of different concrete grades
and this may have the effect of limiting the proportions of supplementary cementitious
materials that can be used in normal-class concrete.
AS 1379 (Ref. 1) requires concrete to be classified as special-class if it differs from normalclass concrete in any one of the following ways:
(i)

The value of one or more of the primary parameters is different from the standard
values (e.g. 45 MPa strength or 25 mm slump).

(ii)

A different primary
Clause 17.1.6.3).

parameter

is

specified

(e.g.

flexural

strength,

see

(iii) Additional parameters are specified (e.g. colour control).


(iv)

Limitations different from, or additional to, those required for normal-class concrete
are specified (e.g. maximum shrinkage strain of 600 106).

Clause 4.4 of this Standard also requires concrete subject to exposure classifications B2, C1
and C2 to be specified as special-class.
Strength grades are generally designated by the numerical value of the 28 days strength
with the prefix N or S to indicate Normal-class or Special-class respectively (e.g. N25,
S40). For further information see AS 1379 (Ref. 1).
AS 1379 (Ref. 1) covers both specification and manufacture, including guidance to site
personnel for ordering specified concrete. Manufacturing aspects include storage and
batching of ingredient materials, mixing and delivery of fresh concrete, and requirements
for the accuracy and performance of associated plant and equipment.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

238

C17.1.3 Handling, placing and compacting of concrete


Handling in this context is taken to be the on-site activities involved in the conveying of
concrete from the point of acceptance (supply) from the manufacturer to the point of
discharge into the forms, to distinguish them from delivery, which is part of the supply
contract.
The requirements of this Clause have been written largely in performance terms.
Prescriptive material is inappropriate and properly belongs in the project specification.
The properties of the hardened concrete and the performance of the resulting member are
greatly affected by the manner in which the operations of handling, placing and compacting
of the concrete are carried out (Ref. 7). Therefore, it is essential to ensure that these
operations are carried out correctly in accordance with good practice.
Provision to enable full compaction to be carried out should be ensured by adequate
detailing at the design stage. Different projects and different types of member will require
different methods of compaction, and specific requirements for these should be set out in
the specification for each project.
C17.1.4 Finishing of unformed concrete surfaces

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Requirements for integrally formed surfaces, including tolerances, are given in AS 3610.1
(Ref. 3). This Clause applies to unformed surfaces of fresh concrete which may be
integrally finished by a variety of methods to obtain specified surface shapes and textures.
It does not apply to finishes applied after the concrete has hardened.
Because the textures of unformed surfaces are not only project specific but can also be area
or member specific, it is essential that appropriate tolerances be given in the project
specification for the corresponding specified integral finishes and hence inappropriate for
any particular values to be stated in the Standard. When specifying tolerances for surface
shape and uniformity, consideration will need to be given to cover requirements for
reinforcement or tendons in addition to considerations of surface texture and the nature of
any applied surface coverings such as vinyl flooring or carpet.
C17.1.5 Curing and protection of concrete
C17.1.5.1 Curing
The wording draws attention to the purpose of curing, such as to promote and continue the
hydration of the cement, to delay the onset of early drying and to control early-age
cracking. For the promotion of hydration, this requires the addition of water for concretes
with a water-cement ratio less than about 0.4 and the retention of water in concretes with
higher water-cement ratios. Concrete should not be allowed to dry out during the curing
period.
This Clause is written in performance terms. To emphasize the importance of curing, the
Clause requires the curing regime for the various sections of the structure to be specified.
Techniques for curing concrete surfaces that have been found to be satisfactory are as
follows:
(a)

Ponding or continuously sprinkling with water.

(b)

Spraying the surface with water shortly after the initial set and covering with an
impermeable membrane, e.g. plastic sheet. Re-spraying of the surface with water may
periodically be required to maintain a continuous moist environment.

(c)

Covering the surface with an absorptive cover and keeping it continuously wet.

(d)

Spraying the surface shortly after the initial set with a curing compound conforming
to AS 3799 (Ref. 4).

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

239

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The importance of the initial moist curing, and the fact that subsequent wetting of the
concrete, if it has dried out, is not anywhere near as effective in developing durability
resistance, has been stressed by Ho and Lewis (Ref. 5).
The specific requirements for hot and cold weather conditions are given in Refs 6 and 7.
C17.1.5.2 Protection
This Clause draws attention to the necessity for protecting the concrete from the time it is
cast until it has reached its design strength. Appropriate protection measures will vary from
using wind breaks, sun shades and spraying the surface of the fresh concrete with aliphatic
alcohols to prevent plastic shrinkage cracking; to casting under cover to avoid rain damage
and covering with insulation; or to heating the member to avoid frost damage.
C17.1.6 Sampling and testing for compliance
The Standard requires that all concrete used in a structure, which is specified by grade or
characteristic compressive strength, be subject to production assessment by the
manufacturer. In addition, project assessment is required for special-class concrete
specified principally by strength but is optional for normal-class concrete.
The two possible situations for production assessment are covered by Clauses 17.1.6.2 and
17.1.6.3. Clause 17.1.6.2 applies to all normal-class concrete and to special-class concrete
where the 28-days compressive strength is specified as the controlling parameter. Item (b)
applies if project assessment is either required (special-class concrete) or specified (normalclass concrete). Clause 17.1.6.3 applies only to special-class concrete when principal
criteria other than 28 days compressive strengths are specified.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C17.1.7 Rejection of concrete


The Clause covers both plastic and hardened concrete. For plastic concrete there is a
limitation on the period when the Clause is applicable, that is, after mixing but before site
handling is commenced. Three criteria are specified for rejection to be considered. Note
that the Clause only says may be rejected. Engineering judgement is required for the
rejection of concrete.
For hardened concrete, again three broad criteria are formulated for rejection. These criteria
are related primarily to the structural performance and behaviour of the member. It will be
necessary to specify additional criteria to cover architectural considerations.
Clause 17.1.7.2 specifies when concrete is liable for rejection and Clause 17.1.7.3 sets out
criteria which, if satisfied, will allow this concrete to be accepted. If these criteria cannot be
met, then the concrete has to be rejected.
C17.1.8 Requirements for grout and grouting
Note that the limitation on chloride-ion content is expressed differently and is more
stringent for grout. This value has been adopted from Ref. 8.
Guidance on grouting of post-tensioning ducts and ground anchors is given in Ref. 9. To
improve the consistency of grout and to reduce sedimentation, methyl cellulose may be
used as an admixture to grout, though it is outside the scope of AS 1478.1 (Ref. 10).
C17.2 MATERIAL
AND
REINFORCING STEEL

CONSTRUCTION

REQUIREMENTS

FOR

For information that is required to be shown in the drawings, the designer should refer to
Clause 1.4. Illustrative details are given in Refs 11 and 12.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

240

C17.2.1 Materials
C17.2.1.1 Reinforcement
In Australia, reinforcing steel is either low ductility (Ductility Class L) or normal ductility
(Ductility Class N). Reinforcement that does not comply with all the requirements of
AS/NZS 4671 is not to be used.
Grade 500 MPa, Ductility Class L bars are used to produce fitments, or Ductility Class L
welded mesh incorporating either plain or ribbed bars may be used as main, shear or
secondary reinforcement. Ductility Class N bars are normally Grade 500 (deformed), or
Grade 250 plain bars (R250) for fitments or deformed bars (D250N12) for special
applications like swimming pools (see also Clause 1.1.3). Ductility Class N bars of limited
sizes may also be used to produce welded mesh for specific projects.
Mixing Ductility Class L and N reinforcing steels together as longitudinal reinforcement
can occur in practice; for example, when Ductility Class N bars are tied to Ductility Class L
mesh to provide additional primary steel tensile capacity. In this case, the Standard requires
the designer to treat all of the main reinforcement as if it were Ductility Class L (see
Table 2.2.2).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Regarding the rule that Ductility Class L reinforcement shall not be substituted for
Ductility Class N reinforcement unless the structure is redesigned, the selection of the
Ductility Class for reinforcement is an important and far-reaching design decision. It should
not be changed without considering the full design implications or without knowledge of
the original design assumptions. It is the intention here, that any substitution of Ductility
Class L reinforcement for Ductility Class N reinforcement has to be made only by the
individual or organization that takes responsibility for the final structural design.
Because of the length of the material required, helices are best made from steel in coils.
C17.2.1.2 Protective coatings
Galvanizing in either hot-dipped or cold-paint form has been used for this purpose and
epoxy coating is common in the USA (Refs 13 to 16). When galvanized reinforcement is
used, passivation of the coating is required to avoid zinc-alkali reaction with wet cement.
Some passivation materials are known to be injurious to health, so care must be taken in
their handling and application. If bars are to be bent before galvanizing, the pin diameter
should be as large as possible, consistent with the concrete dimensions, to reduce the effect
of strain-ageing of the bent section. As most coatings will be subsequently damaged by
cutting or bending, patching will be required. The use of coatings does not eliminate the
need to comply with Section 4 of the Standard.
C17.2.2 Fabrication
The tolerances within which reinforcement must be fabricated are intended to ensure
concrete cover over the steel.
Example:
Beam fitment, R10 bar with 30 mm cover [see Clause 17.2.2(a)(ii)(B)].
For a 400 300 beam, the scheduled dimensions would be 340 240 mm. Fabricated
dimensions would range between 340 240 maximum to 330 230 minimum, i.e.
10 mm less all around.
For the effect of placing tolerances, see Paragraph C17.5.3.
C17.2.3 Bending
The recommended pin diameters take into account the influence of bending on both the
mechanical properties of the steel and the interaction between the steel and the concrete.
The smaller values for fitments allow the main steel to be fixed into corner bends.
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

241

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

Incorrect bending of deformed bars can lead to various types of damage, such as crushing of
the deformation ribs or excessive strain-ageing. The minimum pin diameters permitted by
this Standard are the same as those given in AS/NZS 4671 (Ref. 17) for compliance with
the bend test. Ref. 16 provides practical guidance for both factory and on-site bending.
In the case of fitments and bars and where, from the metallurgical point of view, positive
identification of the steel type is possible, tighter bend diameters are feasible. When based
on appropriate test data, such tighter bends may be specified where approved by the
designer.
The strength of all Grade 500 bars and wire reinforcements is reduced by excessive heating.
The value of 250 MPa as a yield strength limit after heating is based on test data. Grade 250
bars are not affected to any great extent by heating and air cooling (Ref. 16.)
C17.2.4 Surface condition
Rust and millscale has little effect on bond (Refs 18 and 19). Moderate rusting has been
shown to improve bond (Ref. 20).
C17.2.5 Fixing
See Paragraph C14.2.
C17.2.6 Lightning protection by reinforcement
Electromagnetic shielding of communications equipment may also require special detailing
of joints and connections.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C17.3 MATERIAL
AND
CONSTRUCTION
REQUIREMENTS
PRESTRESSING DUCTS, ANCHORAGES AND TENDONS

FOR

The subclauses herein are much reduced in detail compared with the requirements laid out
in previous concrete Standards, which reflected the infancy of prestressed concrete at that
time. Industry now has considerable knowledge and experience in this field so that these
subclauses have been scaled down accordingly. Prestressing procedures are now treated in a
similar fashion to those required for reinforced concrete construction and the format follows
that adopted for reinforcement.
C17.3.1 Materials for ducts, anchorages and tendons
C17.3.1.1 Ducts
Ducts have to be sufficiently rigid so that they do not deform during construction and do
not impede the insertion of tendons and free flow of grout. The internal dimensions of a
duct should exceed the corresponding external dimensions of the tendon by 5 mm or more
except in unusual circumstances.
C17.3.1.2 Anchorages
(No Commentary)
C17.3.1.3 Tendons
(No Commentary)
C17.3.2 Construction requirements for ducts
C17.3.2.1 Surface condition
Bond between ducts, grout and surrounding concrete is important to ensure the design
assumption of strain compatibility between these elements is maintained in practice.
Attention should be given to the cleanliness of the ducts.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

242

C17.3.2.2 Sealing
Care should be taken to prevent entry of cement paste during concreting and loss of grout
during grouting. Paste entry would increase friction losses during strand tensioning and
grout loss will leave voids that would compromise tendon durability.
Care should also be taken to prevent unintentional interconnection of closely spaced ducts,
particularly at joints in precast segmental construction.
C17.3.2.3 Fixing
Unintentional deviation of duct profiles from theoretical profiles results in additional
friction losses during tendon tensioning.
C17.3.3 Construction requirements for anchorages
C17.3.3.1 Fixing
Incorrect alignment of the anchorage can induce unwanted bending moments into the
member and may lead, in shallow members, to the failure of the end zone. It is also
necessary for the concrete to be fully compacted around the anchorage. Reinforcement for
bursting and spalling forces needs to be detailed at the design stage to facilitate concrete
placement and compaction.
It is important that joints between the anchor and both the formwork and the duct be
effectively sealed against entry of mortar during concreting. If leakage into the duct occurs,
additional friction losses may be expected and difficulty in tendon insertion may be
experienced.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

C17.3.3.2 Surface condition


(No Commentary)
C17.3.4 Construction requirements for tendons
C17.3.4.1 Fabrication
Where tendons are to be cut, the following should be observed in order to minimize tendon
damage and prevent tendon slippage at anchorages:
(a)

(b)

Mechanical cutting Where mechanical cutting is required


(i)

the cutters should be of an approved type; and

(ii)

care should be taken to ensure any abrasive disc does not come within 25 mm
of any part of the anchorage, except that this distance may be reduced in special
cases.

Flame cutting If flame cutting is permitted


(i)

there should be an excess of oxygen in the flame;

(ii)

care should be taken to ensure that the flame does not come within 40 mm of
any part of the anchorage, except that this distance from the anchorage may be
reduced in special cases;

(iii) for pre-tensioned strands, the flame has to gradually heat a localized length of
strand, causing it to relax prior to flame cutting; and
(iv)

it should not be used for cutting off the surplus ends of anchored multi-wire
strand.

C17.3.4.2 Protection
Surface damage of tendons may result in premature failure during tensioning.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

243

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C17.3.4.3 Surface condition


The following points are offered as guidelines:
(a)

Prestressing bars should be inspected for superficial tears and nicks, which, if found,
may be filed smooth with a fine-cut half-round file.

(b)

A strand that has come unravelled should not be used.

(c)

Where they have been stored on site for a prolonged period before installation, the
tendons should
(i)

be inspected to ensure that they are not pitted, damaged or defective; and

(ii)

if necessary, be tested to determine whether or not the physical properties of the


tendons have been impaired.

C17.3.4.4 Fixing
Tendon fixing tolerances of Clause 17.5.3 have to be observed in order to prevent
additional friction losses and unanticipated tendon eccentricities. Curved tendons exert
radial forces on ducts when tensioned.
C17.3.4.5 Tensioning

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The measurement of the jacking force is by means of the jack pressure, with the tendon
extension being used only as a check against a significant error caused by, for example (but
not limited to), cement paste blockage of ducts, wrong size tendon being used, dead-end
anchorage slippage, etc. Reliance is placed on jack pressure because
(a)

stressing gauges and jacks can be readily calibrated directly for force;

(b)

variations of friction in the duct or anchorage from assumed values leads to


uncertainties in the amount of extension as a measure of the tendon force; and

(c)

strand properties can vary within a single coil for example, in diameter due to die
wear used in drawing strand wires during manufacture.

The job specification should call for an up-to-date calibration certificate for each stressing
gauge to ensure that the required force is being applied.
C17.3.4.6 Maximum jacking force
(No Commentary)
C17.3.4.7 Grouting
Grout vents should be used to facilitate venting of air and continuous filling of ducts from
one end. Tendons with large drapes (for example bridges) or vertical tendons are
susceptible to fluid-filled voids forming within the ducts if grout mixture bleed is not
controlled. Ref. 9 provides additional information, which may be useful for job
specifications.
C17.3.5 Construction requirements for unbonded tendons
Unbonded tendons are allowed but only in slabs on grade, as some loss of prestress in this
application is unlikely to lead to catastrophic collapse; however, adequate protection
against corrosion of the tendons is still required to ensure that sufficient serviceability and
strength capabilities will be maintained over the life of the structure.
Unbonded tendons may be used in bridges provided suitable tendon corrosion protection
measures are provided. Additional information may be found in AS 5100.5 (Ref. 21).

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

244

C17.4 CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR JOINTS AND EMBEDDED


ITEMS
In general, the designer is allowed considerable freedom in the design and placement of
joints.
Where possible, all the requirements should be shown in the drawings at the design stage to
obviate the necessity for clarification during construction.
For further information on joints and embedded items see Paragraph C14.
C17.5 TOLERANCES FOR STRUCTURES AND MEMBERS
C17.5.1 General

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Tolerances are considered in two categories. The first category specified is for tolerances
on position and sizes of structures and their members, to ensure that the strength
requirements of the Standard are not adversely affected. These should be regarded as
absolute maximum values, as smaller values are expected and usually achievable with
normal good building practice.
The second category, for which values are not specified in the Standard, applies to
serviceability, constructability, or aesthetic considerations and, as indicated in the Clause,
these will generally need to be more stringent than the first category. Because surface
tolerances are usually project specific, particularly unformed surfaces, it is essential that
appropriate values be given in the project specification, as required by the second paragraph
of Clause 17.5.1. When specifying tolerances, it is most important to ensure they are
adequate and possible to achieve. In this regard it should be realized that errors in
measurements may vary by up to 3 mm if carried out by a licensed surveyor to 10 mm if
carried out by a semi-skilled tradesman.
Other factors that will need to be covered in a project specification include methods of
measuring tolerances, the basis for acceptance and rejection of completed work, and when
and what number of measurements are to be made. Useful information in this respect is
given in Ref. 21.
C17.5.2 Tolerances for position and size of structures and members
The philosophy behind Clause 17.5.2 is that measurements can only be made to the surfaces
of members and it is unreasonable to use tolerances to centre-lines. Any point on the
surface of a member (Clause 17.5.2.1) has to lie within a tolerance-sphere from its specified
or theoretical position. For buildings up to 20 storeys, this sphere is of radius 40 mm. This
precludes the building being built in the wrong location and puts an absolute limit on out of
plumb. The datum needs to be clearly specified, and measurements made at an appropriate
time and in an appropriate manner to exclude secondary effects such as thermal building
movement.
Clauses 17.5.2.2, 17.5.2.3 and 17.5.2.4 ensure that variation in dimensions, when measured
within the building on completed members, are within acceptable tolerances. The Clauses
specifically cover plumb, specified dimensions of members, and surface alignment. For
cross-sectional dimensions, differentiation has not been made between fully formed
members (column cross-section) and partially unformed members (top surface of slab).
Measurements of suspended floor flatness need to be made before formwork is slackened to
avoid secondary effects of slab deflections.
C17.5.3 Tolerance on position of reinforcement and tendons
In Clause 17.5.2, the tolerance is specified as a deviation which means that the position
and size of a member is effectively an equal plus or minus tolerance. By contrast, in
Clause 17.5.3, the tolerance on the location of reinforcement or tendons is related to the
cover to the nearest surface. Therefore, the negative values indicate that the specified cover
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

245

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

can be reduced by the tolerance. The cover requirements specified in Section 4 take into
account the possibility of reduced cover due to the negative tolerances allowed in this
Clause by having an undersized tolerance included in the values of cover given in
Clause 4.10.3.
Using the beam fitment example given in Paragraph C17.2.2, the fitment dimensions after
fabrication are in the range
340 240 mm maximum to 330 230 mm minimum.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The allowable placing envelope for the scheduled size of 340 240 mm would therefore be
340 5, +10 and 240 5, +10, and since the negative sign means decrease in cover, this
becomes 345 245 max. 330 230 min., as shown in Figure C17.5.3.

S m a ll e s t s c h e d u l e d f i tm e nt s ize,
3 3 0 m m x 23 0 m m (a n d m i ni m u m
p l a c i n g e nve l o p e)

M a x i m u m p l a c i n g e nve l o p e
3 4 5 m m x 24 5 m m

M a x i m u m s c h e d u l e d f i t m e nt s ize,
3 4 0 m m x 24 0 m m

S p e c i f i e d c o n c r e te s ize,
400 mm x 300 mm

FIGURE C17.5.3 TOLERANCE ENVELOPE ON REINFORCEMENT

C17.6 FORMWORK
C17.6.1 General
As far as is consistent with the requirements of the design, the details of concrete surfaces
should permit the use of simple formwork and facilitate its release and removal.
The designer should be responsible for determining and specifying stripping times, spans
between supports for back propping and re-shoring applications.
Arris and re-entrant corners should be sharp, except where chamfered, and filleted or
rounded arris and re-entrant corners should be specified by the designer. The angle between
any face and the direction of release of formwork from that face, or stripping taper,
together with the nature of the formwork will determine the quality of that face. It is
preferable that the stripping taper be not less than 1 in 12.
C17.6.2 Stripping of forms and removal of formwork supports
C17.6.2.1 General
Although the use of re-shores in suspended work is permitted, note that it changes the load
distribution on the floor system.
In some multistorey work, particularly where the live load is less than the mass of the slab,
there is considerable danger of overloading the slab during construction. In such cases,
extreme caution is needed to ensure that no floor in the supporting group becomes
overloaded.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

246

C17.6.2.2 Removal of formwork from vertical surfaces


In elements in which off-form surface colour control is important, forms need to remain in
contact for comparable times for visually associated surfaces. Stripping times need to take
account of this requirement, but still have to conform to the minimum times given.
C17.6.2.3 Stripping of soffit forms from reinforced beams and slabs where control
samples are available
(No Commentary)
C17.6.2.4 Stripping of soffit forms from reinforced slabs of normal-class concrete
Where forms are stripped early, leaving undisturbed shores in place, the spans between
shores, or between supports and the adjacent shores, are limited by the requirement to avoid
cracking of the concrete member. The design moments to be used in those calculations are
those due to the self-weight of the member and the maximum construction live loading.
Table 17.6.2.4 has been restricted to the case of slabs only, because of the wide variations
in size and shape that occur with beams.
C17.6.2.5 Removal of formwork supports from reinforced members not supporting
structures above

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Because of the large number of variables involved in the calculation of the cracking and
deflection behaviour of concrete members, it is not possible to produce a comprehensive
table giving periods for removal of formwork supports that would accurately cover all
cases.
In Table 17.6.2.5, no distinction is made between removal of supports from slabs or beams
and no limits are given for span/depth ratios, on the assumption that the member has been
properly sized and reinforced for the design loads and the span.
The periods shown are based on the additional assumption that the concrete will have
reached 85% of its characteristic compressive strength by the given periods, if the average
ambient temperature over that period is within the stated range. The values given are
considered safe and conservative for this assumption.
C17.6.2.6 Removal of formwork supports from reinforced members in multistorey
structures
Multistorey work presents special conditions, particularly in relation to early removal of
forms and formwork supports. Re-use of form material and their supports is an obvious
economy. Furthermore, the speed of construction customary in this type of work provides
the additional advantage of permitting other trades to follow concreting operations from
floor to floor as closely as possible; however, the temporary support of immature concrete
is necessarily supplied by lower floors that may not be designed for these loads. For this
reason, support is to be provided by a sufficient number of floors to develop the necessary
capacity to carry the imposed loads without excessive stress or deflection in any of them.
Reshores or undisturbed supports are required not to be removed within 2 days of the
placing of any slab directly or indirectly supported by such supports. Detailed procedures
for removing formwork supports are given in AS 3610.1 (Ref. 3).
C17.6.2.7 Stripping of forms and removal of supports from soffits of prestressed concrete
slabs and beams
(No Commentary)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

247

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

C17.6.2.8 Control tests


Control tests for assessing timing for the removal of formwork or stressing of posttensioning tendons may be specified. Where specified, a procedure for curing and testing
such test specimens should be provided in the contract documents. It should also be noted
that where these test procedures vary from the requirements of AS 1379 (Ref. 1), the test
data provided may not agree with that from tests carried out according to AS 1379, and are
purely to assist with estimating the in situ strength of concrete supporting engineering
decision making with respect to formwork removal.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

REFERENCES
1

AS 1379, Specification and supply of concrete, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2007.

AS 2758.1, Aggregates and rock for engineering purposesConcrete aggregates,


Standards Australia, Sydney, 1998.

AS 3610.1, Formwork for concrete, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2010.

AS 3799, Liquid membrane-forming curing compounds for concrete, Standards


Australia, 1998.

HO, D.W.S. and LEWIS, R.K., Concrete Quality as Measured by Water Sorptivity,
Civil Engineering Transactions, IEAust, V ol. CE26, N o. 4, 1984, pp. 306313.

ACI 305R-10, Guide to Hot Weather Concreting, ACI Committee 305, American
Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2010.

ACI 306R-10, Guide to Cold Weather Concreting, ACI Committee 306, American
Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 2010.

Practical Design of Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Structures Based on the


Ceb-Fip Model Code (Mc78): Fip Recommendations, Thomas Telford Ltd, London,
1984.

CIA Z3, Grouting of prestressing ducts, Concrete Institute of Australia, Sydney,


2007.

10

AS 1478.1, Chemical admixtures for concrete, mortar and groutAdmixtures for


concrete, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2000.

11

CIA Z6, Reinforcement Detailing Handbook, Concrete Institute of Australia, Sydney,


2010.

12

AS/NZS 1100.501, Technical drawingStructural engineering drawing, Standards


Australia, Sydney, 2002.

13

AS/NZS 4680, Hot-dip galvanized (zinc) coatings on fabricated articles, Standards


Australia, Sydney, 2006.

14

Standard Specification for Hot-dip Galvanizing, Galvanizers Association of Australia


Melbourne.

15

ASTM A775/A775M-07b, Standard Specification for Epoxy-Coated Steel Reinforcing


Bars, American Society for Testing Materials, Pennsylvania, 2007.

16

Fabrication and site handling of reinforcing bars, Technical Note 4, Steel


Reinforcement Institute of Australia, Sydney, www.sria.com.au, November 2007.

17

AS/NZS 4671, Steel reinforcing materials, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2001.

18

KEMP, E.L., BREZNY, F.S. a n d UNTERSPAN, J.A., Effect of Rust and Scale
on the Bond Characteristics of Deformed Reinforcing Bars, ACI Journal, Vol. 65,
No. 9, 1968, pp. 743756.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

248

19

REJAB, H.M. and KESLER, C.E., Effect of Rust on Bond of Welded Wire
Fabric, Technical Bulletin No. 265, American Road Builders Association,
Washington DC, 1968.

20

ORCHARD, I.M., Realistic Tolerances for In-Situ Concrete Work, Construction


Review, Vol. 54, N o. 4, Nov. 1981.

21

AS 5100.5, Bridge designConcrete, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2004.

ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL


Transporting, Placing and CuringHow They Affect the Properties of Concrete,
Seminar organized by BMI Limited, Cement and Concrete Association of Australia,
Concrete Institute of Australia and the University of New South Wales, School of
Civil Engineering, Sydney, 34 August 1982.

The Effect of Initial Rusting on the Bond Performance of Reinforcement, CIRIA


Report No. 71, ISSN0305-408X.

Design to AS 3600:2001 of Suspended Concrete Floors Reinforced with Class L


Mesh, Technical Note TN6, Steel Reinforcing Institute of Australia, July 2008.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

249

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

APPENDIX CA

REFERENCED DOCUMENTS

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(No Commentary)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

250

APPENDIX CB

TESTING OF MEMBERS AND STRUCTURES


CB1 GENERAL
Proof-testing of a completed part or whole structure has been incorporated into concrete
Standards for nearly half a century and is an accepted technique to validate a design.
AS CA2, SAA Code for Concrete in Buildings (1963), provided guidelines for proof
testing, which still existed in the 1994 edition of the Concrete structures Standard.
Significant changes occurred with the publication of the subsequent 2001 edition for both
testing of a structure (or prototype) and in testing of hardened concrete (Ref. 1) Minimal
changes have occurred since that time with the release of this most recent 2009 edition of
the Standard.
Appendix B is a normative appendix and therefore is an integral part of the Concrete
structures Standard.
CB2 TESTING OF MEMBERS

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

CB2.1 Purpose of testing


Load testing of a structure is considered where the structure has already been constructed
and there is a requirement to assess its adequacy with respect to a strength limit state or
performance in service, usually where requested by the asset owner. Alternatively, testing
may be undertaken on two or more prototypes for the subsequent manufacture of precast
items as part of a planned production run.
Paragraph B3 of Appendix B outlines requirements for proof testing of a completed
structure (or part thereof). The Paragraph was originally written for flexural members but
the principles may be applied to other members. As explained in the Commentary to the
1994 edition of the Standard, a proof test is used to evaluate the strength and serviceability
of a particular structure. It is used when there is some doubt about the adequacy of a
structure that has been designed and constructed in accordance with the Standard. It is not
intended to be used as a method of avoiding the design provisions of the Standard. Other
similar structures cannot be accepted on the basis of a proof test on one sample structure
(Ref. 2).
Paragraph B4 of Appendix B provides requirements for prototype testing of productionstyle structural units; basically, members produced by precast manufacturers and
transported to a site or members manufactured on site and thence lifted into position.
CB2.2 Test set-up
Test loads are required to simulate the load effects associated with the intended design load
combinations. Loading points to the structure should be unyielding (and, therefore, are
usually made of steel) and faced with 20 mm to 25 mm thickness of rubber packing in
complete contact with the structure (typically of a minimum hardness equivalent to Shore A
of 55). The loading points should be firmly fixed to prevent their movement and to ensure
that the load is evenly distributed over the full area of the rubber packing.
The mechanism supporting the load cells at loading points should be of sufficient capacity
and rigidity to apply the load in the required manner without deformation in any parts,
which would appreciably affect the validity or accuracy of the load measurement. The loads
should be applied, measured and recorded to an accuracy of 3%. The foundation
supporting the loading rig (providing leverage to the load cells) should be fixed and
unyielding (Ref. 3).
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

251

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

It is important that temporary supports of sufficient strength be in place during testing in


case of unexpected failure.
CB2.3 Test load
Test loads may be calculated to meet the requirements of Clause 2.2 of the Standard for
ultimate strength and Clause 2.3 for serviceability. Load should be applied at a uniform rate
and should not exceed 1% of the maximum load at any loading point per second. Loading
should be applied to maintain proportionality of loads, when more than one load is applied
in any testing regime, and in accordance with the relevant design load combination (Ref. 3).
CB2.4 Test deflections
The recorded data will permit the development of a load deflection curve for the structure
or member. Time of each recorded measurement should be logged. A measurement of
deflection should be taken at least every 10% loading increment during the application of
the test load.
CB3 PROOF TESTING
CB3.1 Test procedures
The test procedure now requires that the entire load be sustained rather than 90% of the
design load for strength as outlined in editions of the Standard prior to 2001. A normal
structure is expected to have strength in excess of the design load and, if the structure
satisfies the proof test, then it can be expected to be safe in service.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

CB3.2 Criteria for acceptance


The application of loading for a minimum period of 24 h is unchanged from previous
editions of the Standard; however, in the 2009 edition both acceptance criteria for strength
and serviceability are provided, whereas previously deflection was the sole limiting
criterion.
Further, recovery of deflection where the deflection limit is exceeded in the test is no longer
a basis of acceptance.
CB3.3 Damage incurred during test
The load level required by the test for strength is high and significant damage is possible.
An unacceptable result may be recorded where the supervising engineer is of the opinion
that any member has badly cracked during the testing program and may be subject to
collapse if loading is continued. Cracking, particularly in shear or torsion, should be
carefully assessed.
Although not directly stated, it is implied that a badly cracked or spalled member subject to
test loads for serviceability can also be considered to have failed irrespective of whether the
criteria for acceptable deflection was met.
CB3.4 Test reports
The report should also include identification of the place and time of testing and any
information regarding material properties used to construct the member(s) tested (where
such data is available); in particular, concrete strength, reinforcement type, cover to
reinforcement, bar diameter and location, any visible evidence of distress; and reference to
this Appendix of the Standard.
CB4 PROTOTYPE TESTING
This Paragraph applies to the assessment of factory-style production of similar units, where
the design has not been carried out for each unit in accordance with the usual requirements
for strength and serviceability. Because of this lack of design justification, the test load has
to take into account variability in the loads likely to be encountered by the structure and
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

252

variability in the load capacity of the non-tested members. For this reason, the load level is
higher than the design load of the strength limit state identified in Section 2 of the Standard
(and similarly also higher for the serviceability condition).
CB4.1 Construction of prototypes
It is important that the prototypes to undergo testing are produced from materials that
comply with the provisions of AS 3600 and that each test specimen is made with due
consideration to the manufacturing process proposed to be used during production. For
strength, such considerations include the yield strength of reinforcement and concrete
strength as measured in the prototype to that expected in production, as well as the
measurement of critical dimensions and cover to reinforcement and tendons checked during
manufacture to identical locations in the test prototype. These strength criteria (qualitative
indicators) will vary depending upon whether the critical loading condition of a test set-up,
for example, is governed by flexure or by shear.
CB4.2 Number of prototypes
Theoretically, the specimens should be drawn at random from an actual production run, but
Paragraph B4.2 permits the testing of prototypes of the kind of element expected to be
produced and thence monitored to key indicators during manufacture.
A minimum of two prototypes are required to be tested.
CB4.3 Test load

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The multiplying factor in Table B4.3 should reflect the variability in production and, where
these target qualitative indicators are not achieved, retesting may be warranted or an
adjustment made to the production run load classification.
Therefore, the actual value of the load will depend upon the number of tests and the
anticipated variability in the governing strength parameters for the type of production
prototype. Simple members are typically less variable and a coefficient variation of 10% to
15% may be practicable. For more complex structures, this figure could rapidly increase
from 20% to 25%.
For serviceability loads, a general multiplying factor of 1.2 has been adopted for simplicity;
however, Paragraph B4.5(a) still requires some assessment of variability to be determined
and thence monitored during production to ensure that the set lower and upper band limits
are not exceeded.
The test load should reflect the same load conditions as would be expected to eventuate in a
design by calculation undertaken in accordance with the Standard. In order to replicate
these conditions, it is likely more than one test load will be applied simultaneously (and
proportionally) during a test and, that more than one set of test load(s) will be required to
ensure all relevant design load combinations are satisfied.
Test loads should be applied gradually to the prototype in accordance with Paragraph B2.
Load should be applied at a uniform rate and proportionality of loading maintained, when
more than one load is applied in any testing regime, and in accordance with the relevant
design load combination.
CB4.4 Test procedure
In conducting a test, the position of members to a fixed datum should be determined and
then re-measured after the load is removed. Any variance should be measured and recorded.
Any damage (including spalling and cracking) should also be recorded.
CB4.5 Criteria for acceptance
It is important the test specimens reflect actual production with respect to performance. If
material properties, cover requirements and dimensional accuracy achieved during
Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

253

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

production are not consistent with the boundary limits reflected in the test specimens for
strength and for serviceability, as appropriate, then it will be necessary to re-conduct the
testing or amend the load classification of the production run.
In addition, the tested prototypes will need to sustain the strength limit state test load (or
loads) for a minimum prescribed period and for each respective combination of test load(s)
reflecting the required design load combinations calculated in accordance with Section 2 of
the Standard. Alternatively, where acceptance for serviceability is specified, each test
prototype is required to sustain the serviceability test load(s) for a minimum prescribed
period without exceeding the design serviceability parameters appropriate to the member, as
identified in Clause 2.3.
Quality assurance requires that the identified parameters governing the testing regime be
monitored during production to ensure the test prototypes reflect the production run,
irrespective of whether a serviceability or strength limit state is tested as an alternative to
calculation. Routine testing to failure of members of large production runs will provide
valuable information for calibrating production with test results.
CB4.6 Test reports
The report should also identify each qualitative indicator measured during the testing
program governing the relevant limit state, the associated coefficient of variation adopted
for each set of indicators (for serviceability and strength as applicable) and the manner in
which routine production will be monitored to identify any deviation from the performance
anticipated as a result of this testing.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Separate indicator sets are required for each limit state associated with, for example,
serviceability, shear and flexural strength.
CB5 QUALITY CONTROL
CB5.1 General
Australian Standards incorporating a manufacturing component require demonstration of
compliance with the respective Standard. This can be achieved by statistical sampling of
production, independent certification of product or by assurance using the acceptability of
the suppliers quality system.
Irrespective of which method of compliance is adopted, a test and inspection plan should be
developed clearly identifying the qualitative indicators to be monitored during production
for the relevant limit state condition and also identifying the required frequency of
inspection and testing.
CB5.2 Statistical sampling
Key qualitative indicators the subject of a sampling plan may include, but not limited to
(a)

reinforcement yield or proof stress, and tensile strength;

(b)

reinforcement uniform stain or elongation;

(c)

concrete strength;

(d)

dimensions at critical locations (e.g. for negative and positive bending moment and
shear, for deflection); and

(e)

cover to reinforcement and tendons at similar critical locations to (d).

These parameters within the production sampling plan will differ depending on the
respective design limit state represented by the test program.
In addition, an upper and lower bound may also apply to a qualitative indicator to ensure
the requirements for the respective limit state is achieved.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

254

CB5.3 Product certification


The purpose of product certification is to provide independent assurance of the claim by the
manufacturer that products comply with the stated Standard. The certification scheme
should meet the criteria described in HB18.28 (Ref. 4) in that, as well as testing from
independently sampled production and subsequent verification of conformance, it requires
the manufacturer to maintain effective quality planning to control production.
The certification scheme serves to indicate that the products consistently conform to the
requirements of the Standard.
CB5.4 Quality system
Where it can be demonstrated that an audited and registered quality management system
complying with the requirements of the appropriate or stipulated Australian or international
Standard for a suppliers quality system or systems, this may provide the necessary
confidence that the specified requirements will be met. The quality assurance requirements
need to be agreed between the customer and supplier and should include a quality or
inspection and test plan to ensure product conformity.
CB6 TESTING OF HARDENED CONCRETE IN PLACE
CB6.1 Application

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

The purpose of this Paragraph is to allow an assessment to be made of the actual strength of
the concrete as placed, compacted and cured. Concrete that has failed to comply with
AS 1379 (Ref. 5) for compliance with grade cannot be classified as deemed to comply by
subsequent testing of the hardened concrete in place.
The purpose of this assessment of the in situ concrete strength is to determine, in
conjunction with calculations, whether the structure itself is acceptable, whether further
testing is required (i.e. proof-testing), if the structure should be strengthened or, as a last
resort, demolished and rebuilt.
There is an increasing trend in the specification of concrete in that assessment of
performance is based on samples cut from the work or from prepared sample panels made
on site. This technique is especially relevant when in situ properties depend to a higher
degree on workmanship or site modification to mix design.
CB6.2 Preparation of samples
Paragraph B6.2 of Appendix B does not provide a complete description of the test methods.
The designer is referred to ASTM C1140 (Ref. 6) for preparing and testing specimens from
shotcrete test panels and ASTM C42 (Ref. 7) for preparing and testing drilled cores and
sawed beams of concrete.
CB6.3 Non-destructive testing
The use of non-destructive test methods to assess the in situ quality of concrete in lieu of
the testing of cores and beams can be more efficient and does not compromise the integrity
of the structure. Non-destructive testing may be used to assess in situ concrete strength,
gauge potential durability and determine other properties (such as the presence of cracks
and voids).
Commonly used techniques are
(a)

rebound hammer;

(b)

penetration resistance;

(c)

in situ abrasion;

(d)

pull-out;

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

255

(e)

break-off;

(f)

radiographic;

(g)

ultrasonic pulse velocity;

(h)

echo impact;

(i)

acoustic emission; and

(j)

resonant frequency.

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

All non-destructive testing requires expert analysis to interpret results and to estimate
strength or other properties of the member. Improved accuracy may be possible where more
than one method is used in combination, for example, as reported by RILEM using a
combined rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse method testing procedure (Ref. 8). The
coefficient of variation for a single method can be in the order of 20% to 25% whereas for a
combined test approach this variation may be reduced to 10% to 15%.
The essential criteria for establishment of beneficial combinations (Ref. 1) are as follows:
(i)

Each method provides different properties that affect the parameter (e.g. concrete
strength).

(ii)

Each method should be suitable for testing different sizes and shapes of structures.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(iii) Special sample preparation should not be required.


(iv)

Test methods should be quick to carry out.

(v)

Test methods should provide results to a similar level of accuracy.

(vi)

Tests should not affect the structural performance of the structure, or part thereof,
under test.

A review of non-destructive test methods can be found in Neville (Ref. 9).


CB6.4 Tests on samples taken from the structure
CB6.4.1 Test requirements
It is preferable that parties agree on the location of cores to be taken remembering that
cores can weaken a structure, and should be taken at non-critical locations. In taking cores,
the top layer of the concrete should be avoided as it is usually of lower strength. [This
potential region of lower strength is typically the top 50 mm of a slab or beam, or the upper
20% of a concrete lift (up to a maximum limit of 300 mm).] Site records, visual inspections
and even possibly non-destructive testing will assist in determining appropriate locations.
Where there is doubt or disagreement, the advice of the designer should be given
precedence in extraction locations.
The test requires a minimum of three samples to be taken. In addition, it is recommended
that at least two cores be taken from each known batch of concrete comprising the structure
(or part thereof) under investigation. Where there is more than one batch involved in the
member, it is preferable that each batch be separately assessed.
Cores should be not less than the greater of 75 mm in diameter or 2.5 times the nominal
coarse aggregate size and the length to diameter ratio after trimming should be 2.0 (and
under no circumstance outside the range of 1.0 to 2.0). Samples should be taken by
experienced personnel.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

256

Prior to trimming, cores should be examined for acceptance and inspected for the following
(Ref. 10):
(a)

The size and position of any significant voids (i.e. voids larger than 5 mm) or areas of
poor compaction.

(b)

Cracks (by moistening the surface). Any cracks found should be trimmed or the core
rejected.

(c)

Reinforcement. If more than one bar is observed or the bar diameter is more than
20 mm or the bar is not perpendicular to the core axis, the core should be rejected.

(d)

Deviation of the core diameter greater than 2 mm from either end diameter. Again the
core should be rejected.

(e)

Any other defect noted.

It is recommended that, after trimming, the core length be not less than one diameter and
the ends be at right angles to the core axis with no bulges. The maximum departure from
square at each end should not exceed 2 nor be convex or concave by more than 2 mm.
CB6.4.2 Interpretation of results

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

ACI 318 (Ref. 11) deems mean core strength of not less than 0.85 f c as evidence of
adequate concrete strength, after testing of at least three cores and correcting for nonstandard dimensions. Furthermore, no single core is to be less than 0.75 f c . Similarly,
AS 1379 (Ref. 5) requires concrete represented by sample to also be at least 0.85 f c for
acceptance.
Expressed in the convention of the paragraph above, the ACI factor is equivalent to a mean
strength uplift of around 1.18 and is consistent with the presented 1.15 factor of
Paragraph B6.4.2.
When using test data from another member of known concrete strength to assess the
strength of the concrete in a similar member, the designer should have a high level of
confidence that both members are identical with respect to concrete strength, as
constructed. Otherwise, the member under investigation should be cored or subject to
extraction of beam specimens and the strength of the concrete determined in accordance
with the option in Item (a) only.
REFERENCES
1

MUNN, R., MANWARRING, S. and McGUIRE, P., A review of prototype and in situ
testing methods to assess structural performance, Concrete 99 Our Concrete
Environment, Concrete Institute of Australia, 1999.

AS 3600 Supplement 1, Concrete StructuresCommentary


AS 36001994), Standards Australia, Sydney, 1994.

AS 1597.2, Precast reinforced concrete box culverts, Part 2: Large culverts (from
1500 mm span and up to and including 4200 mm span and 4200 mm height),
Standards Australia, Sydney, 1996.

HB18.28, Conformity assessmentGuidance on a third-party certification system for


products, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2005.

AS 1379, Specification and supply of concrete, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2007.

ASTM C1140, Standard Practice for Preparing and Testing Specimens from
Shotcrete Test Panels, American Society for Testing Materials, Pennsylvania, 2003.

Standards Australia

(Supplement

to

www.standards.org.au

257

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

ASTM C42/C42M-13, Standard Test Method for Obtaining and Testing Drilled Cores
and Sawed Beams of Concrete, American Society for Testing Materials,
Pennsylvania, 2011.

Draft recommendation for in situ concrete strength determination by combined nondestructive methods, RILEM Committee 43-CND, RILEM Materials and Structures,
Vol. 26, 1993, pp. 4349.

NEVILLE, A. M., Properties of concrete, Fourth Edition, (Longman Group Limited)


UK, 1995.

10

CIA Z11, The Evaluation of Concrete Strength by Testing Cores, Concrete Institute of
Australia, Sydney, 2002.

11

ACI 318M-11 Metric Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and
Commentary ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan,
2011.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

258

APPENDIX CC

REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURES SUBJECT TO EARTHQUAKE ACTIONS


CC1 GENERAL
This Appendix has been written to align with AS 1170.4 (Ref. 1) and users of this Standard
are assumed to be familiar with the provisions of that Standard. The Commentary to this
Appendix is limited to providing commentary on the provisions in this Appendix and does
not cover matters specified in AS 1170.4. Reference should also be made to the
Paragraph C2.1.2 (Commentary on Clause 2.1.2).
Generally, plain concrete members should not be used to support earthquake loadings as
their behaviour under earthquake actions is likely to be unsatisfactory. Failure is likely to
be of a brittle nature during the first loading cycle when either the load or strain capacity of
the member is exceeded. Thus the member will be unable to provide resistance or support
for the following reverse loading or subsequent cycles; however, plain concrete pedestals,
pavements and footings complying with either Section 15 or 16 are deemed to satisfy the
requirements for earthquake design. This is because such members are of limited height,
supported by the ground, and lightly loaded. Therefore, their failure is unlikely to cause
collapse of the whole structure and/or result in loss of life.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

This Paragraph sets out the broad principles adopted in drafting this Appendix. Where the
value of the structural ductility factor () is taken as:
(a)

2.0it is assumed that the standard of detailing implicit in the main body of the
Standard will provide satisfactory behaviour under the level of earthquake loading
anticipated in Australia.

(b)

2.0 < 3.0extra detailing is required depending on the structural system adopted
and these extra requirements are set out in this Appendix.

(c)

>3.0AS 1170.4 requires that the New Zealand Standards be used. This requirement
has significant implications for concrete structures because the New Zealand
Concrete Structures Standard (Ref. 2) introduces different material requirements,
design procedures, detailing requirements and construction procedures compared to
AS 3600.

CC2 DEFINITIONS
Definitions generally align with ISO usage and/or NZS 1170.5 (Ref. 4). Any discussion on
the various terms is given in that relating to the paragraph in this Appendix where they are
first used.
CC3 STRUCTURAL
DUCTILITY
PERFORMANCE FACTOR (Sp)

FACTOR

()

AND

STRUCTURAL

The values in Table C3 for the structural ductility factor and structural performance factor
have been derived from similar factors in previous editions of the Standards. They are
believed to be conservative. Research is proposed to refine the values of the current factors
by calculating the effective ductility of concrete structures subject to the level of earthquake
forces likely to be experienced by structures in Australia. The values in Table C3 will be
reviewed when the results are available.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

259

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

The Note below Table C3 reflects the requirement of AS 1170.4 (Ref. 1) in that where a
structural ductility factor () with a value greater than 3 is adopted in design, the structure
has to be designed in accordance with NZS 1170.5 (Ref. 3). This requirement implies that
when this option is used for concrete structures the structure has to be designed in
accordance with NZS 3101 (Ref. 2). See Paragraph CC1.
CC4 INTERMEDIATE MOMENT-RESISTING FRAMES (IMRFs)
CC4.1 General
Generally, the rules in this Paragraph have been based on the requirements given in
ACI 318 (Ref. 4) for frames in regions of moderate seismic risk.
Ductility Class L (mesh) reinforcement is excluded from being used as flexural
reinforcement in IMRFs under earthquake loading because of its reduced ductility
compared with Ductility Class N (mesh or bar) reinforcement. Note that the Standard does
not address the use of Ductility Class E reinforcement (see Clause 1.1.2). The chemical,
mechanical and geometric properties of Ductility Class E reinforcement have been
developed to meet the requirements of New Zealand Standards and should be used only in
accordance with those Standards (see Ref. 5).

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Rigid elements (members) may be incorporated into a structure in one of two ways, so
that
(a)

the frame is free to move independently of the rigid element while supporting and
restraining it under the influence of earthquake actions; or

(b)

the rigid element braces the frame or a portion of it.

If solution (a) is adopted, then sufficient clearance or movement capacity should be


provided by sealants between the rigid element and the structural frame. The ties and
supports should also be able to accommodate the movement of the frame under the
earthquake actions (Ref. 6).
If solution (b) is adopted, then the structure no longer complies as an IMRF and needs to be
designed as braced by the element using the appropriate and Sp values. This is true even
where the rigid element may not extend to full storey height. In these situations the
effective height of the columns may be reduced, higher shears and bending moments
induced into the columns and the ductility of the frame adversely affected (Ref. 4).
CC4.2 Beams
CC4.2.1 Longitudinal reinforcement
Under the action of an actual earthquake, flexural members will be subjected to a number of
reversals of bending moment. For this reason, both the top and bottom faces of the member
are required to be continuously reinforced. The effect of reversing moments will generally
be concentrated at the junctions with the supporting members and a minimum positive
moment strength requirement at the face of the support provides for this. Consequently,
provision will need to be made to ensure that all longitudinal reinforcement is anchored
beyond the support face so that it can develop the yield strength of the bars at the face.
Special requirements are given to inhibit the possibility of non-ductile failure at splices.
CC4.2.2 Shear reinforcement
To minimize the risk of brittle shear-type failures under earthquake actions, closed ties are
specified in the regions subject to reversing moments.
CC4.3 Slabs
CC4.3.1 General
In slabs, continuity of bottom reinforcement is required for the same reasons as for beams.
www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

260

CC4.3.2 Reinforcement detailing in flat slabs


Providing continuity of bottom reinforcement is particularly important in flat slabs. Bottom
bars from adjacent spans should be lap spliced in both the column and middle strips, along
the line of support at right angles to the strips.
Note that the moment referred to in Items (a) and (b) of Paragraph C4.3.2 of Appendix C of
the Standard is the moment transferred from the slab to the column for the earthquake
loading combinations and not necessarily the slab design moment. The requirements of this
paragraph are illustrated in Figure CC 4.3.2.

b1
bt

bt + 3D

Column strip
A ll r e i n fo r c e d to r e s i s t M v*
to b e p l a c e d i n c o l u m n s tr ip

R e i nfo r c e d to r e s i s t s l a b m o m e nt
b u t n ot l e s s t h a n h a l f of r e i nfo r c e m e nt
in column strip

NOT E: Ap pl ie s t o b ot h t op a nd b ot t om rei n force me nt.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

(a) To p vi ew of c o l u m n

To p a n d b ot to m r e i nfo r c e m e nt to
d eve l o p f s y a t f a c e of s u p p o r t
N ot l e s s th a n o n e -fo u r th of
to p r e i nfo r c e m e nt at s u p p o r t

N ot l e s s th a n o n e -thi r d of
to p r e i nfo r c e m e nt at s u p p o r t
N ot l e s s th a n h a l f b ot to m
r e i nfo r c e m e nt at m i d s p a n
(i) Column strip

To p a n d b ot to m r e i nfo r c e m e nt to
d eve l o p f s y a t f a c e of s u p p o r t

N ot l e s s th a n h a l f b ot to m
r e i nfo r c e m e nt at m i d s p a n
( ii ) Mi d dl e s tr ip
( b) S e c ti o n s

FIGURE CC4.3.2 REINFORCEMENT DETAILING FOR FLAT SLABS


Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

261

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

CC4.4 Columns
Like beams, the critical region for columns is adjacent to their connection with the lateral
framing members, and close spacing of transverse fitments is specified. Note that under
earthquake loading, transverse shears will be induced in the column and the column should
be designed as a beam for these.
CC4.5 Column joints
At joints between columns and horizontal members framing into them, the concentration of
earthquake-induced axial forces requires the provision of confinement reinforcement to the
joint core to minimize the risk of localized bursting failure. This confinement is provided
by the continuation of the column reinforcement, including fitments, throughout the depth
of the joint. The reduction allowed by the second paragraph applies only for the depth for
which equal resistance to joint rotation is provided in at least two directions at right angles.
Where beams in two directions intersect at a column there can be a considerable
concentration of vertical and horizontal reinforcement. Therefore, designers will need to
exercise considerable care in their detailing of these regions to ensure that all the required
reinforcement can be located and fixed and that the concrete can be placed and compacted
within and around the joint core.
CC4.6 Prestressed IMRFs
CC4.6.1 General

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

ACI 318 (Ref. 4) gives no specific requirements for prestressed members in earthquakeresistant structures. These requirements are the same as those in the 1988 edition of
AS 3600 Appendix A (Ref. 7) for members containing tendons.
Tendon anchorages and development lengths are excluded from column joint cores and
critical shear planes because these regions will be subject to additional bursting and
splitting stresses under earthquake loading.
CC4.6.2 Connections
(No Commentary)
CC4.6.3 Supports
(No Commentary)
CC4.6.4 Prestressed beams
The minimum flexural strength requirement in Item (a) reflects that in Clause 8.1.6.1 of the
Standard. By ensuring that the section cracks before the flexural strength of the member is
realized, this minimizes the risk of non-ductile behaviour. The factor of 1.1 allows for overstrength of the concrete and the relatively lower ductility of prestressed members compared
with reinforced members. Likewise, the shear reinforcement requirements are more
stringent that those in Paragraph C4.2.1 of Appendix C of the Standard.
CC4.6.5 Prestressed columns
(No Commentary)
CC4.6.6 Beam-column joints
Tests conducted by Park and Thompson (Ref. 8) indicated that the presence of a central
tendon through the joint core enhances its seismic behaviour, although not preventing
strength degradation in all cases.
It is suggested that for the best overall performance of regions subject to reversing
moments, a minimum of three tendons, distributed at the top, centre and bottom of the
section, should be used.

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

262

CC5 DUCTILE SHEAR WALLS


CC5.1 General
In general the rules in this Paragraph have been based on the requirements given in ACI 318
(Ref. 4) for the particular member type.
CC5.2 Reinforcement
(No Commentary)
CC5.3 Boundary elements
The additional requirements consist mainly of the provision of boundary elements at
discontinuous edges and an increase in the minimum reinforcement ratio in the vertical
direction. It should be understood that the stress of 0.15 f c in Item (b) does not necessarily
describe the actual state of stress that may develop at the extremity but is merely a criterion
for determining when a boundary element is required.
As noted in the definition of a boundary element [Paragraph C2.1 of Appendix C of the
Standard], this requirement does not necessarily specify an increase in the thickness of the
wall, merely that a particular area be designed and detailed to resist the specified axial
forces. Some examples of typical boundary elements are shown in Figure CC5.3.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Because the horizontal wall reinforcement acts as shear reinforcement, it is recommended


that it be terminated with a standard hook or cog around a vertical bar, particularly where
the termination is in a boundary element.

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

263

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

S p e c i a l ve r ti c a l b o u n d a r y e l e m e nt

A n c h o r a g e to d eve l o p e f s at thi s p o i nt

(a)

C o l u m n (r e i nfo r c e m e n t n ot s h ow n)

A n c h o r a g e to d eve l o p e f s at thi s p o i nt

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

( b)

FIGURE CC5.3 TYPICAL BOUNDARY ELEMENTS

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia

AS 36002009 Supp 1:2014

264

REFERENCES
1

AS 1170.4, Structural design actionsEarthquake actions in Australia, Standards


Australia, Sydney, 2007.

NZS 3101.1 & 2, Concrete Structures Standard, Standards New Zealand, Wellington,
2006.

NZS 1170.5, Structural design actionsEarthquake


Standards New Zealand, Wellington, 2004.

ACI 318M-11, Metric Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and
Commentary, ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan,
2011.

Seismic Detailing for Reinforced Concrete Buildings


Reinforcement Institute of Australia, www.sria.com.au.

DOWRICK, D.J., Earthquake Resistant Design Manual for Engineers and Architects,
John Wiley and Sons, UK, 1977.

AS 3600, Concrete structures, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2009.

PARK, R. and THOMPSON, K.J., Behaviour of Prestressed, Partially Prestressed and


Reinforced Concrete Interior Beam-Column Assemblies Under Cyclic Loading: Test
Result of Units 1 to 7, Research Report 74g, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, New Zealand, September 1974

actionsNew

Australia,

Steel

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

in

Zealand,

Standards Australia

www.standards.org.au

Standards Australia
Standards Australia develops Australian Standards and other documents of public benefit and national interest.
These Standards are developed through an open process of consultation and consensus, in which all interested
parties are invited to participate. Through a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commonwealth Government,
Standards Australia is recognized as Australias peak non-government national standards body. Standards Australia
also supports excellence in design and innovation through the Australian Design Awards.
For further information visit www.standards.org.au

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

Australian Standards
Committees of experts from industry, governments, consumers and other relevant sectors prepare Australian
Standards. The requirements or recommendations contained in published Standards are a consensus of the views
of representative interests and also take account of comments received from other sources. They reflect the latest
scientific and industry experience. Australian Standards are kept under continuous review after publication and are
updated regularly to take account of changing technology.

International Involvement
Standards Australia is responsible for ensuring the Australian viewpoint is considered in the formulation of
International Standards and that the latest international experience is incorporated in national Standards. This role is
vital in assisting local industry to compete in international markets. Standards Australia represents Australia at both
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

Sales and Distribution


Australian Standards, Handbooks and other documents developed by Standards Australia are printed and
distributed under licence by SAI Global Limited.

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

For information regarding the development of Standards contact:


Standards Australia Limited
GPO Box 476
Sydney NSW 2001
Phone: 02 9237 6000
Fax: 02 9237 6010
Email: mail@standards.org.au
Internet: www.standards.org.au
For information regarding the sale and distribution of Standards contact:
SAI Global Limited
Phone: 13 12 42
Fax: 1300 65 49 49
Email: sales@saiglobal.com

ISBN 978 1 74342 915 0

Accessed by SMEC Australia Pty Ltd on 09 Mar 2015 (Document currency not guaranteed when printed)

This page has been left intentionally blank.