Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Effective shear stiffness of diagonally cracked reinforced concrete beams

Zuanfeng Pan a,, Bing Li b, Zhitao Lu c
a

College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, PR China

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 639798 Singapore, Singapore
c
School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, PR China
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 20 November 2012
Revised 11 October 2013
Accepted 14 October 2013
Available online 16 November 2013
Keywords:
Reinforced concrete beam
Diagonal crack
Deection
Shear deformation
Minimum crack angle
Variable angle truss model
Constant angle truss model

a b s t r a c t
Beam deections in cases of diagonal and bending cracking of reinforced concrete (RC) beams can be
attributed equally to shear and exural deformations. However, the extent of contribution by shear
deformation is hard to quantify and is often underestimated in practical design. To address this, a quantitative analysis of the effect of shear deformation was conducted, considering the effect of tension stiffening after diagonal cracking, and a formula to derive effective shear stiffness is proposed. Five RC beams,
comprising of three RC T-section beams with thin web and two RC rectangular beams, were tested to verify the theoretical models with minimum crack angle and total deection as key points of comparison.
The fully cracked responses were analyzed using truss model analogies while exact models applied
depended on the crack angle. Results show that shear contribution to the total deection in the diagonally cracked RC beam is signicant.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The design of reinforced concrete (RC) structures should take
into account both the ultimate limit state and serviceability limit
state requirements. It is accepted that the stiffness of a beam
comprises exural and shear stiffness; exural stiffness being the
predominant contributor. However, for beams with thin webs,
the shear contribution is larger, especially after the formation of
diagonal cracks.
Prior to cracking, the shear stiffness, Kv1, can be calculated via
the elasticity method, as follows,

K v 1 GAv  0:417Ec Av

However, after the development of diagonal cracks, Eq. (1) is no

longer suitable for calculating shear deformation due to the Poisson
ratios weakening effect on the second principle stress which leads
to the redistribution of transverse stress to shear reinforcements.
While there are numerous shear design codes for concrete
structures, most are based upon shear strength, neglecting the effect of shear stiffness on the total deection. ACI [1], AASHTO [2],
EC code [3], etc. did not include the inuence of shear deformation.
Timoshenko and Gere [4] believed that, for the concrete beams
with l/h P 10, the shear deformation is negligible prior to diagonal
cracking; but after cracking, the shear deformation should be taken
Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 02165987826.
E-mail address: panzuanfeng@gmail.com (Z. Pan).
0141-0296/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.10.023

into account, with the inuence increasing over time. Leonhardt

and Walther [5,6] indicated that for concrete beams with l/h ranging from 5 to 12, shear deformation were between 0.2 and 3.0
times that of the exural deformation.
Compared to the sound understanding of exural behavior of
RC beams, shear mechanics is not as clearly elucidated [7]. The
truss model analogies, such as the traditional 45 truss model, constant angle truss model (CATM), variable angle truss model
(VATM), compression eld theory (CFT), modied compression
eld theory (MCFT), and softened truss model (SFT), have greatly
inuenced the shear design procedure for predicting the ultimate
shear strength of RC beams since the beginning of last century
[8,9]. Pauley [10] and Kim and Mander [11] analyzed the shear
stiffness of shear wall beam and columns using VATM. Collins
[12] developed CFT to determine the shear behavior, and later
MCFT [13] was presented. VecTor2 [14] and Response 2000 [15]
programs based on MCFT can also be used to calculate the load
displacement curve of a RC beam subjected to the combination
of axial load, shear and exure. Nie and Cai [16] carried out an
experiment on long-term deection, utilizing the truss analogy to
analyze the shear deformation. By multiplying the shear force resisted by stirrups by 0.5 and ignoring the concrete contribution
to shear, the calculated values were close to the test data. Rahal
[17] proposed a simple empirical equation for the calculation of
the post-cracking shear modulus, given in the form of the tangent
slope of the shear stressstrain curve. Debernardi et al. [18] carried
out an experiment involving six RC I-section beams with thin web

96

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

Nomenclature
a
Acm
As
Av
b
d
dv
Ec
Es
f2
fc0
fe
fm
fsx
fsz
fv
fy
fvy
G
h
Kv1
Kv2
Kvc
Kvc0
l0
n

length of shear span

sectional area of compression chord
sectional area of longitudinal reinforcement
effective shear area, Av = bdv
web width of beam
effective depth of the beam
effective shear depth taken as exural lever arm which
need not be taken less than 0.9d
modulus of elasticity of concrete
modulus of elasticity of reinforcing steels
compressive stress in the inclined concrete strut
cylinder strength of concrete
measured displacement
calculated exural displacement using the minimum
exural stiffness
tensile stress in the longitudinal steels
tensile stress in the transverse steels
Calculated shear deformation
yielding stress of longitudinal reinforcing steels
yielding stress of transverse reinforcing steels
shear modulus of concrete
height of beam
elastic shear stiffness
fully diagonally cracked shear stiffness
shear stiffness of VATM
shear stiffness of CATM
span of beam
=Es/Ec

to study the shear strain in the B-regions of beams. Recently, Navarro-Gregori et al. [19] presented a model (PR model), which was
based upon the Timoshenko Beam Theory, with the additional
inclusion of a variable shear correction factor in the term that depended on the section shear deformation for the analysis of RC
beams under the axial, bending, and shear forces.
In the present paper, the concept of effective shear stiffness is
proposed and an explicit formula is derived. Three RC T-section
beams with thin web and two RC rectangular beams were studied
experimentally to determine the contribution of shear to the total
deection. Both experimental results and theoretical calculations
indicated that the effect of shear deformation should be taken into
account due to the presence of shear cracks, especially for RC
beams with thin webs and low span-to-depth ratios.

nls
s
V
Vcr
Vt
Vy
Vu

a
dc
ds
dv
dv1
dvy

e2
ex
ez
h
h0
k

m
qs
qv

=EsAs/(EcAcm) = nAs/Acm
spacing of stirrups
applied shear force
cracking shear force
shear force resisted by the truss model
applied shear force when stirrup yields
shear strength
=arctan(dv/a)
vertical displacement induced by the compression of
strut in CATM
elongation of the transverse steels in CATM
shear deformation of RC beam
shear deformation of RC beam subjected to the cracking
shear load, Vcr
shear deformation of RC beam subjected to shear force
when stirrup yields, Vy
compressive strain in the inclined concrete strut
tensile strain in the longitudinal steels
tensile strain in the transverse steels
angle of the inclined strut in cracked concrete with respect to longitudinal axis of member in VATM
angle of the inclined strut in cracked concrete with respect to longitudinal axis of member in CATM
shear span to effective depth of section
applied shear stress
ratio of area of longitudinal reinforcement to beam
effective sectional area
volumetric contents of transverse reinforcement

dashed line ABD in Fig. 1. In reality, the actual response is as shown

in Fig. 1 as the solid line AC. The difference between the actual response and the zero tension response is the tension stiffening effect which is the contribution to the post-cracking stiffness of the
beam of the intact tensile concrete between the inclined cracks.
As the shear force increases, the average tensile stress in the concrete decreases as more diagonal cracks develop and the actual response becomes approximately closer to the no tension response
(as shown in Fig. 1,when the stirrups yield and the inclined crack
width becomes large, and the interlock mechanism is assumed to
be ignored). To simplify the calculation for effective shear stiffness,
an assumption is made that the shear load-deformation is idealized as the straight solid line AD instead of the curved line AC
shown in Fig. 1. As shown in Fig. 1, the slope of AD can be written
as:

2. Effective shear stiffness

Before the development of shear cracks, the shear stiffness of RC
beam, Kv1, can be considered to be constant, shown by Eq. (1). After
cracking diagonally, the shear stiffness decreases due to the presence of more shear cracks as the shear force increases. Consider
the shear forcedeformation response of a RC beam shown in
Fig. 1. As the applied shear force is less than the cracking shear
force, Vcr, the beam is uncracked diagonally and behaves elastically,
and the slope of the shear load-deformation curve is Kv1. The RC
beam rst cracks diagonally at Vcr when the principal tensile stress
of concrete reaches its tensile strength. There is a sudden change in
the local stiffness at and immediately adjacent to this rst inclined
crack. In the regions with inclined cracks, the shear stiffness drops
signicantly; and as shear force increases, more inclined cracks
form and the shear stiffness of the entire shear span decreases. If
the tensile concrete in the diagonally cracked regions carried no
stress, the shear forcedeformation relationship would follow the

Shear force
Uncracked response

Fully cracked response: concrete

carries no tension in the crack
regions
C D

Vy

Actual
response

Yielding
Idealized
response

V
V cr
K v1

Simplified
tension stiffening

K veff
K v2

v1

vy

Shear deformation

Fig. 1. Shear force versus shear deformation relationship.

97

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

kAD

V y  V cr
Vy
Kv2

 KVvcr1

Then, the effective shear stiffness which is the slope of the

straight line OP can be obtained as follows:

K v eff

V cr
Kv1

cr
VV
kAD

V cr
Kv1

V


cr
VVV
y V cr

Vy
Kv2

 KVvcr1

The key to predicting the shear deformation is rst to evaluate

the shear force required to cause the rst diagonal crack, followed
by calculating the applied shear force when stirrup yields, Vy accurately; and to model the fully diagonally cracked shear stiffness,
Kv2, reasonably. In 1962, it was suggested by ACI-ASCE Committee
326 [20] that the concrete contribution to shear, Vc was assumed to
be equal to the cracking shear load, Vcr. A semi-empirical and semitheoretical equation for predicting Vcr was proposed as follows,


q
q
Vd
V cr 0:16 fc0 17qs
bd 6 0:3 fc0 bd SI units : MPa;mm 4
M
It is unrelated to the transverse reinforcement, is not affected by
the follow-up loading process. This concept is still in use today [1].
Before cracking diagonally, the stirrups are not stressed, and after
cracking, the concrete contribution here remains constant
throughout the monotonic loading process. Therefore, Vy can be
calculated as follows,

V y V cr bdv qv fv y cot h

regions of shear span can be distinguished as B-regions and D-regions as shown in Fig. 2. In Fig. 2, VA means using variable angle
truss model to analyze the shear behavior for D-regions, while
CA represents constant angle truss model for B-regions. Using the
combined truss model (Fig. 2a) to analyze the shear behavior is relatively complicated. To simplify the analysis, only one type of the
truss model (CATM or VATM) is adopted based on the minimum inclined crack angle h. If h satises the relationship, dv cot h < a, the
shear behavior of the beam can be calculated by CATM; whereas
if dv cot h P a, VATM should be employed. Therefore, the focus of
the present paper is to determine the minimum inclined crack angle h.
3.1. Shear stiffness Of CATM
If k is high, the inclined cracks are roughly parallel to each other
in a RC beam, allowing for the application of CATM in the analysis
of shear behavior. The shear deformation of the truss is caused by
the elongation of transverse ties and the compression of the inclined struts, as shown in Fig. 3. The length of the diagonal concrete
strut is dv/sin h0, the width of the diagonal concrete compression
strut is dv cos h0; under shear force, V, the compressive strain of
the inclined strut, ec, is obtained.

ec

V
Ec bdv sin h0 cos h0

Therefore, the shortening of the diagonal compressive strut,

Dc, is

Dc ec

dv
V

sin h0 bEc sin2 h0 cos h0

3. Fully diagonally cracked shear stiffness, Kv2

The lateral displacement induced by the compression of struts,
dc, under shear force, V, is as follows,

dc

Dc
V

sin h0 Ec b sin3 h0 cos h0

The elongation of the transverse steels, ds, is

ds

fsz
dv V
V
dv

Es Asv 0 Es qv b cot h0
Es

ct dc ds =dv cot h0

B-regions

D-regions

VATM

CATM

VATM

(a) Combined truss model for high

dv

D-regions

The corresponding shear rotation, ct, is then calculated by dividing the sum of Eqs. (8) and (9) by the longitudinal length of a single
crack (dv cot h0), thus,

10

D-regions

dv

The truss model method is employed to calculate the fully diagonally cracked shear stiffness, Kv2. A basic premise is required in
the solving process of Kv2 using CATM or VATM, which is that that
the inuence of the tensile stresses in the cracked concrete between the inclined cracks does not account for. It is well known
that two standard regions were dened by Schlaich et al. [21] in
concrete structures, namely B-regions (where B stands for beam
or Bernoulli) and D-regions (where D stands for discontinuity, disturbance or detail), respectively. In B-regions, Bernoullis hypothesis of plane strain distribution is assumed valid, while in D-regions,
the strains along the height of the section is disturbed. The common D-regions exist near concentrated loads, in deep beams, in
shear span of beams with low shear span to effective depth of
section, k, near openings and other discontinuities. This concept
can also be used in the study on the shear behavior of RC beams.
In a RC beam under two symmetrically concentrated loads, the

VATM

(b) Variable angle truss

model for low

Fig. 2. Truss analogy modeling shear span with different k. (a) Combined truss model for high k. (b) Variable angle truss model for low k.

98

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

c1



0:06 0:73
df 1 dv cot3 a

Ec Acm Es As

Therefore, the shear stiffness of the truss model is:

ct

nqv Ec Av cot2 h0
1 nqv csc4 h0

13

3.3.2. Calculation of exural drift angle

The exural deformation is induced by the deformations of the
longitudinal chords (AB, BC, CD, EF, FG, and GH). The axial stiffness
of the upper chords (AB, BC, and CD) and the bottom chords (EF, FG,
and GH) are EcAcm and EsAs, respectively. Where, Acm represents the
sectional area of compression chord; As represents the sectional
area of longitudinal reinforcement. If the VATM shown in Fig. 4 is
subjected to a unit shear force, the deformations of the upper
and bottom chords are listed in Table 1. Therefore, the exural
deformation of the VATM under the unit shear force, df1, which is
the total deformations of the longitudinal chords is:

Fig. 3. Constant angle truss model.

K v c0

1
1 4nqv 1 0:39cot2 a

K vc
nqv Ec Av cot2 a

11

Eq. (11) is identical to the expression developed by Kim and Mander

[11].

14

Then, the exural drift angle, hf1, can be obtained by dividing

the exural deformation by the horizontal length of the truss,
that is:

hf 1



df 1
0:06 0:73
cot2 a

Ec Acm Es As
dv cot a

15

3.2. Shear stiffness Of VATM

The variable angle truss model (VATM) shown in Fig. 2b can
applicably represent a diagonally cracked RC beam with low k.
VATM using two-point Gauss quadrature [11,22] as shown in
Fig. 4 provides a simple and sufciently accurate tool to determine
the post-cracking stiffness and deformation in shear and exure,
and its shear stiffness [22] can be expressed as:

K vc

3.3.3. Calculation of minimum inclined crack angle, h

When a unit shear force is applied to the variable angle truss
with two-point Gauss quadrature, the external work done, EWD,
is the total drift angle of Eqs. (13) and (15). In order to determine
the minimum inclined crack angle, h, letting a = h in Eqs. (13)
and (15), the external work can be written as follows,
2

nqv Ec Av cot2 a
2

1 4nqv 1 0:39cot2 a

12

3.3. Determination of minimum inclined crack angle, h

The minimum inclined crack angle h is a key in the analyses as it
determines which type of truss will be utilized to model the shear
behavior. The simplied truss model with two-point Gauss quadrature is used to determine h, as shown in Fig. 4, and it is statically
determinate. Through the static equilibrium of nodal forces, each
member force can be determined. It is believed that the minimum
inclined crack angle, h depends on both exure and shear components and will occur at an inclination that requires the minimum
potential energy.
3.3.1. Calculation of shear rotation
Assuming a unit shear force is applied to the truss shown in
Fig. 4, using Eq. (12), the shear rotation can be obtained as follows,

EWD

1 4nqv 1 0:39cot2 h
0:06nls 0:73cot2 h

2
nqs Ec bh0
nqv Ec Av cot h

16

Through differentiating Eq. (16) with respect to h and minimizing the external work done leads to h inducing the minimum
energy,

dEWD=dh 0

17

Thus,

20
10:25 3
0:06nls 0:73
0:61

nq bh
6 A
7
h arctan 4@ v 14q ns 0 A 5
v

18

qv nAv

where nls = EsAs/(EcAcm). There is a constraint about h as predicted by

Eq. (18). It is known that if k is low, a part of shear will be transmitted directly through the loading-point to the support-point, forming
a concrete strut which is termed as arch action. Therefore, the
minimum crack angle h should be greater than arctan(dv/a). In addition, Eq. (18) is considered too complicated to use, and the inuence
of each factor on the shear deformation cannot be directly reected.
Eq. (18) can be simplied by assuming that the compression zone of
the section equals to 0.35d [23]. Thus, Eq. (18) can be expressed as
follows,

2
h arctan 4

!0:25 3
0:77 0:66
nqs
5 and h P arctandv =a
4 nq1

19

Fig. 4. Variable angle truss model by two-point Gauss quadrature.

From Eq. (19), it can be described that the minimum crack angle
mainly depends on the ratio of longitudinal steels, qs and volumetric contents of transverse reinforcement, qv. In addition, the
concrete strength has a little inuence on h. As noted previously,
if h obtained by Eq. (19) is less than arctan(dv/a), VATM is used.

99

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

Table 1
Chord deformations of VATM by two-point Gauss quadrature.
Member

Force
F

Unit load
f

Length
l

Rigidity
EA

Deformation
F/(EA)

AB
BC

0
0.106Vs cot a

0
0.106 cot a

0.21dv cot a
0.58dv cot a

EcAcm
EcAcm

CD

a
 V s cot
2

 cot2 a

0.21dv cot a

EcAcm

0:0525V s dv cot3 a
Ec Acm

EF

V s cot a
2

cot a
2

0.21dv cot a

EsAs

0:0525V s dv cot3 a
Es As

FG

0.894Vs cot a

0.894 cot a

0.58dv cot a

EsAs

0:4636V s dv cot3 a
E s As

GH

Vs cot a

Vs cot a

0.21dv cot a

EsAs

0:21V s dv cot3 a
E s As

0:0065V s dv cot3 a
Ec Acm

Letting h = arctan(dv/a), the shear stiffness can be calculated by Eq.

(12). On the other hand, if h given by Eq. (19) is greater than
arctan(dv/a), CATM would be used. When using CATM, the cracking
angle, h0 (or angle of the inclined concrete strut) needs to be
re-determined.
3.4. Determination of constant crack angle h0
The shear stiffness of the CATM by Eq. (11) has an unknown variable, h0. The equilibrium of average stress and compatibility of
deformation in CFT [12] can be used to determine the constant
h0. Eqs. (20)(22) summarize the equilibrium of average stress of
the CFT, which can also be seen in Fig. 5. The shear stress, m, applied
to the cracked RC web produces compressive stress, f2 in the inclined concrete strut at h0 from the longitudinal direction, tensile
stresses, fsz and fsx in the transverse steels and longitudinal steels,
respectively.

qv fsz fcz v tan h0

20

qs fsx fcx v cot h0

21

f2 v tan h0 cot h0

22

Furthermore, the compressive strain of the inclined concrete

strut, e2, the tensile strain of the stirrup, ez, and the tensile strain
of the longitudinal steels, ex, (shown in Fig. 6a) must satisfy the
condition of deformation compatibility. From Mohrs circle of
strain (Fig. 6b), the following equation can be obtained,

tan2 h0

ex e2
ez e2

23

It should be noted that calculation of shear deformation is

mainly used within the serviceability state of the concrete structure (before the steels yield, the inclined concrete struts behave almost linearly), which means e2 = f2/Ec, fsx = nEcex and fsz = nEcez. For

f sz
f cz

shear stress

(b) Mohrs circle of

concrete average strain

Fig. 6. Compatibility of deformation. (a) Strains in cracked concrete. (b) Mohrs

circle of concrete average strain.

simplication, by substituting fsz = nEcez, fsx = nEcex, e2 = f2/Ec into

Eqs. (20)(22), combined with Eq. (23), we can get

2
h0 arctan 4

!0:25 3
s
5

1 n1q
1 nq1

24

Eq. (24) is the same as the equation developed by Collins [12]. From
Eq. (24), the most signicant factors affecting h0 are qs and qv, while
the concrete modulus of elasticity has little effect. h0 increases as qv
increases, while it decreases as qs increases. If qv equals to qs, then
the value of h0 is 45. Technically speaking, in order to induce the
minimum energy, the components with greater stiffness will have
to share more loads. For RC beams, qs is usually larger than qv,
therefore, h0 should be less than 45. Compared with Eq. (19), h0
for the CATM is slightly greater than the value predicted by
Eq. (19). Due to the cracking angle changing from 25 to 45, thus,
h0/h  1.061.09.
The expressions for fully diagonally cracked shear stiffness
mentioned above are valid only for RC beams with vertical stirrups.

4. Experimentation verication

f cx

v sz

4.1. Design of beam specimens

normal stress

f sx
2

s sx

(a) Free body diagram

(a) Strains in cracked concrete

(b) Mohrs circle of

concrete average stress

Fig. 5. Equilibrium of average stress. (a) Free body diagram. (b) Mohrs circle of
concrete average stress.

The experiment was conducted on two groups of beams,

which consisted of three RC beams with thin web, a height of
600 mm and a span of 3600 mm, as well as two similar RC rectangular beams with a height of 450 mm and a span of 4000 mm.
The concrete strength, cross-sectional dimension, and longitudinal reinforcement were the same for each group of specimens.
In group 1, the spacing of the stirrups and the shear span varied;
while in group 2, all the details of the two beams were the same.
The details of the ve specimens are shown in Figs. 7 and 8, and
in Table 2.

100

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

500

Dial indicator
2
3
3600

20

200

100

2-Dia.14
Dia.8@s

100
2-Dia.14
6-Dia.22
2-Dia.8

100

600

600
380

200
50 50

180

4000

200

100

20

80

4-Dia.14

260

11

(a) Load condition and arrangement of

measurement

(b) Beam cross section

Fig. 7. Design of beam specimens of Group 1. (a) Load condition and arrangement of measurement. (b) Beam cross section.

2Dia.22

225

1000

1000

225

Dia.8@200
450

5Dia.22

200

Dial indicator

2
4000

250
11

(a) Load condition and arrangement of measurement

(b) Beam cross section

Fig. 8. Design of beam specimens of Group 2. (a) Load condition and arrangement of measurement. (b) Beam cross section.

Table 2
Details of beam specimens.
Group

No.

fc0 (MPa)

d (mm)

a/d

L1
L2
L3

62.0
62.0
62.0

546
546
546

1.92
1.92
1.47

L4
L5

37.0
37.0

400
400

2.50
2.50

Longitudinal steel

Stirrup

Vcr (kN)

Vu (kN)

fy (MPa)

As

fvy (MPa)

s (mm)

qv (%)

373
373
373

2380
2380
2380

360
360
360

150
200
150

0.67
0.50
0.67

100
100
120

497
425

366
366

1900
1900

469
469

200
200

0.20
0.20

110
110

Noted: the symbol means the beams are not applied to failure.

4.2. Material properties, instrumentation and test procedure

In group 1, the longitudinal tensile steels consisted of two bar
types: six Dia. 22 mm deformed bars with the yield stress fy = 373
MPa, and two Dia. 8 mm plain bars with the yield stress
fy = 360 MPa; the Dia. 8 mm plain bars with the yield stress
fvy = 360 MPa were used for the stirrups. In group 2, the longitudinal reinforcement consisted of ve Dia. 22 mm deformed bars with
the yield stress fy = 366 MPa; the Dia. 8 mm plain bars with the
yield stress fvy = 469 MPa were used for the stirrups. The maximum
aggregate size for the two groups of specimens was 20 mm, and
the 28-days characteristic compressive strength of concrete fc0 of
group 1 and group 2 were 62.0 MPa and 37.0 MPa, respectively.
The specimens were symmetrically loaded at two points, and
the shear span for each beam is shown in Figs. 7 and 8. The two
jacks in Group 1 were controlled by one hydraulic pump, to apply
the two shear forces equally and symmetrically. Before recording
the test data, loads up to 50kN were applied on the beams to make
sure that the instruments were working well. Then, the beams
were released, and the experimental observations were recorded.
Instrumentation was provided to mainly measure the applied
loads and beam deections. Under each jack, one pressure
transducer was installed to record the applied shear force. For

Fig. 9. Locations and shapes of the inclined cracks of the three T-section beams.

101

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

31

29

(a) L4

(b) L5

500

500

400

400

Shear force (KN)

Shear force (kN)

Fig. 10. Locations and shapes of the inclined cracks of the two rectangle beams. (a) L4. (b) L5.

300
200

Test data at left

Test data at right
m

100

300

200

Test data
m

100

m+v

m+v
0

0
0

10

12

14

Displacement at load point (mm)

10

12

14

Displacement at midspan (mm)

(a) Load-displacement at load points

(b) Load-displacement at mid-span

Fig. 11. Loaddisplacement of Beam L1. (a) Loaddisplacement at load points. (b) Loaddisplacement at mid-span.

the three T-section beams, ve Linear Variable Differential Transformers (LVDTs) were installed to measure deections below the
mid-span, two load points, and two supports of the RC beams.
For the two rectangular beams, three LVDTs were set up to measure deections below the mid-span and two load points of the
beams. No LVDTs were installed below the supports as the deections were minimal.
4.3. Discussion of the test results

4.3.2. Comparison of the displacements

The measured and calculated deections below the mid-span,
and the two load points of the ve beams are shown in

500

500

400

400

Shear force (KN)

Shear force (kN)

4.3.1. Locations and shapes of the inclined cracks

The locations and shapes of the inclined cracks on the ve
beams are shown in Figs. 9 and 10. From Fig. 9, the appearances
of the inclined cracks of the three beams were approximately symmetrical, which indicates that the method of loading synchronization by one hydraulic pump was effective. The inclined crack near
the loading point had a high angle, and the crack angle decreased
as the distance to the loading point increased until the cracks were

almost parallel to each other. The measured Vcr of L1 and L2 was

approximately 100 kN, and that of L3 was 120 kN, and that of L4
and L5 was 110 kN, as shown in Table 2.
From Eq. (19), the CATM was selected to analyze the shear
behavior of Beams L1, L2, L4 and L5, while the VATM was used
for Beam L3. The measured minimum crack angles of Beams L1,
L2, L3, L4 and L5 were 32, 29, 35, 31, and 29, respectively.
The corresponding calculated values by Eqs. (19) and (24) for the
ve tested beams were 33.1, 31.3, 32.1, 30.3, and 30.3, respectively. Therefore, the differences between the test angles and the
calculated of the Beams L1, L2, L4 and L5 are very small, while that
of Beam L3 is slightly larger, which is 2.9. This slightly larger difference might be due to the low k and the width of the base plates
of the load points and supports being ignored.

300
200

Test data at left

Test data at right
m

100

300
200

Test data
m

100

m+v

m+v
0

0
0

10

12

14

10

12

14

Displacement at load point (mm)

Displacement at midspan (mm)

(a) Load-displacement at load points

(b) Load-displacement at mid-span

Fig. 12. Loaddisplacement of Beam L2. (a) Loaddisplacement at load points. (b) Loaddisplacement at mid-span.

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

500

500

400

400

Shear force (KN)

Shear force (kN)

102

300
200

Test data at left

Test data at right
m

100

300
200

Test data
m

100

m+v

m+v
0

0
0

10

12

10

12

Displacement at load point (mm)

Displacement at midspan (mm)

(a) Load-displacement at load points

(b) Load-displacement at mid-span

250

250

200

200

Shear force (kN)

Shae force (kN)

Fig. 13. Loaddisplacement of Beam L3. (a) Loaddisplacement at load points. (b) Loaddisplacement at mid-span.

150

100

Test data
m

50

150

100

Test data
m

50

m+v

m+v

12

15

Displacement at mid-span (mm)

12

15

Displacement at mid-span (mm)

(a) L4

(b) L5

Fig. 14. Loaddisplacement of Beams L4 and L5 at mid-span. (a) L4. (b) L5.

Figs. 1114. From Figs. 1114, the exural deection fm is calculated by the method of ACI 318R-08, and the shear deformation
fv is calculated by the effective shear stiffness mentioned above.
Its worth noting that the measured Vcr and Vy, if any, can be used
directly during the calculation of Kveff by Eq. (3).

From Figs. 1113, the calculated exural deformations by the

method of ACI 318R-08 for Beams L1 to L3 are obviously smaller
than the measured. This indicates that in some cases, there may
be some risks in underestimating the actual deections using ACI
318R-08 which does not consider the contribution of shear to the

Table 3
Comparison between measured and calculated values.
Resources

No.

fc0 (MPa)

b  h (mm)

l0/d

qv (%)

qv (%)

Nie [16]

B1
B2
B3
B5
B6

30.4
30.4
30.4
32.8
32.8

200  400

2.5

5.45
5.45
5.45
5.45
5.45

0.25
0.25
0.50
0.50
0.50

2.5
3.4
2.5
2.5
2.5

Pan [24] and Lu [25]

B30-2
B30-3
B30-4
B30-5
B30-9
B30-11
B60-2
B60-3
B60-4
B60-6
B60-8
B60-11
B60-13
B80-2
B80-3
B80-4
B80-6
B80-8

34.4
44.0
44.0
39.2
35.2
33.5
58.0
50.0
50.0
47.0
56.0
55.0
56.0
52.0
60.0
65.0
54.0
56.0

200  400

3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
2.2
1.5
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
2.2
1.5
3.06
3.06
3.06
2.2
1.5

5.50
5.50
5.50
5.50
4.00
2.75
5.50
5.50
5.50
5.50
5.50
4.00
2.75
5.50
5.50
5.50
4.00
2.75

0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25

2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
1.31
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.03

Noted: V is the corresponding shear force used to calculate the shear deformation.

Vcr (kN)

V (kN)

fm (mm)

fv (mm)

fv/fm

fe (mm)

fm fv
fe

67.5
73.5
77.5
82.5
81.0

110
105
110
110
130

2.3
1.9
2.3
2.3
2.7

1.0
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.8

0.435
0.368
0.174
0.217
0.296

2.9
3.0
2.4
2.5
3.1

1.138
0.867
1.125
1.120
1.129

59.6
60.0
60.0
60.1
96.1
88.4
75.1
75.8
80.2
89.9
60.3
117.8
114.3
80.0
70.7
75.1
123.7
112.3

150
150
150
150
150
150
180
180
180
140
140
200
200
180
180
200
200
200

3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
1.2
0.4
3.7
3.8
3.8
4.1
2.9
1.5
0.5
3.8
3.7
4.1
1.5
0.5

2.1
1.9
1.9
2.2
1.0
0.7
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.4
0.9
2.4
2.3
2.6
1.3
0.9

0.636
0.594
0.594
0.667
0.833
1.750
0.622
0.605
0.605
0.488
0.621
0.933
1.800
0.632
0.622
0.634
0.563
1.800

7.8
6.6
6.9
6.9
2.3
0.8
7.5
7.8
8.2
7.2
5.7
3.0
1.1
7.7
7.8
8.6
2.9
1.1

0.692
0.773
0.739
0.797
0.957
1.375
0.800
0.782
0.744
0.847
0.825
0.967
1.273
0.805
0.769
0.779
0.966
1.273

Z. Pan et al. / Engineering Structures 59 (2014) 95103

deections. Furthermore, the curves of loaddisplacement of

Beams L1 and L2 have a distinct inection point, which means
the stiffness descends abruptly after cracking, while that of L3 is
inconspicuous due to the low k (=1.47). It is well known that as k
becomes lower, more shear force will be transmitted directly to
the support by a compressive strut rather than truss model analogy. Therefore, under the condition of relatively low k, the inection point of the loaddisplacement curve is not so distinct after
cracking diagonally.
From Fig. 14, the exural deections calculated by the ACI
method was slightly larger than the test results. In addition, the
contribution of shear was very small, compared with the exural
deection. This is because the two rectangular beams have greater
l0/d, k and b, compared with the three T-section beams.

103

From a series of experiments conducted in this study, it was

noted that the observed and calculated minimum crack angles
were comparable. Furthermore, for the T-section beams, the
contribution of the shear to the total deection was found to be
up to 50% of the exural deection. There may be some risks in
underestimating the actual deections using the calculated deformations by the method in ACI 318R-08, which does not consider
the contribution of shear to the deections. While for the rectangular beams with great l0/d, k and b, the shear deformation had little
effect on the total deection. Furthermore, the presented method
of effective shear stiffness was compared to available data, and
the theoretical results are shown to be consistent with the behavior observed experimentally.
References

4.4. Other experimental verication

The theoretical approach proposed above has been compared
with numerous of existing test data [16,24,25] and its performance
has been seen to be satisfactory. Table 3 lists the comparative results, in which fe means the experimental deections. Overall, the
average value of calculated deformation by the proposed approach
to the tested deformations is 0.937, and its coefcient of variation
is 0.214. There are two major reasons that account for the this.
First, it is worthwhile to note that for the beams with a small ratio
of shear span to effective depth of section k or deep beams, the
hypothesis that the plane section remains plane is not satised,
and shear is directly transmitted to the supports by the arch action.
The contribution of arch action to shear is not accounted for, therefore, the shear stiffness maybe underestimated for RC beams with
small k. Take Specimens B30-11 and B80-8 in Table 3 for example,
the calculated total deformations are larger than the observed. Second, given the complexity of shear failure mechanisms involving a
multitude of often interrelated factors in RC beams, that test data
of shear behavior of RC beams show great discreteness. Even
allowing for the shear deformation, the calculated deection is still
less than the test data in some cases, however, the proposed approach can improve the precision of calculated deection. For the
beam with low k, fv/fm is around or more than one, thus, the contribution of shear to the deection is the same as, or even larger than
that of bending.
5. Conclusions
A theoretical calculation method for effective shear stiffness is
proposed upon the basis of the truss model after considering the
tension stiffening effect. A reasonable assumption as shown in
Fig. 1 is made to simplify the calculation for effective shear stiffness, and its value is between the elastic shear stiffness and fully
diagonally cracking shear stiffness. With the development of
diagonal cracks, the shear transfer mechanism would be correspondingly altered, and the fully cracked response is analyzed
using truss model analogies. CATM and VATM can be applied in
B-regions and D-regions, respectively to calculate the shear behaviors of RC beams. For each model, explicit formulas were provided
to calculate the shear stiffness. The selection of truss model used
can be determined by the minimum crack angle which was determined via the principle of minimum potential energy. The inclination angle on the strut varies directly with the volumetric content
of the stirrup but inversely with the ratio of longitudinal steel.

[1] ACI Committee 318. Building code requirements for structural concrete
(ACI318-08) and commentary (ACI 318R-08). Farmington (MI): American
Concrete Institute; 2008.
[2] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Ofcials (AASHTO).
AASHTO LRFD bridge design specications. 4th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO;
2007.
[3] CEN. EN 1992-1-1. Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures - Part 1-1:
general rules and rules for buildings. Brussels: CEN; 2004.
[4] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Mechanics of materials. New York: D. Van Nostrand
Company; 1972.
[5] Leonhardt F, Walther R. The stuggard shear tests, 1961. Cem Concr Res
1964;111:1134.
[6] Leonhardt F, Walther R. Versuche an plattenbalken mit hoher
schubbeanspruchung. DAfStb 1967;152:172.
[7] Kuo WW, Cheng TJ, Hwang SJ. Force transfer mechanism and shear strength of
reinforced concrete beams. Eng Struct 2010;32(6):153746.
[8] ASCE-ACI Committee 445. Recent approaches on shear design of structural
concrete. J Struct Eng ASCE 1998;124(12):1375417.
[9] Li B, Tran CTN. Reinforced concrete beam analysis supplementing concrete
contribution in truss models. Eng Struct 2008;30(11):328594.
[10] Pauley T. Coupling beams of reinforced concrete shear walls. ASCE J Struct Div
ASCE 1971;97(3):84362.
[11] Kim JH, Mander JB. Inuence of transverse reinforcement on elastic shear
stiffness of cracked concrete elements. Eng Struct 2007;29(8):1798807.
[12] Collins MP. Towards a rational theory for RC members in shear. J Struct Div
ASCE 1978;104(4):64966.
[13] Vecchio FJ, Collins MP. The modied compression eld theory for reinforced
concrete elements subjected to shear. ACI J Proc 1986;83(2):21931.
[14] Won PS, Vecchio FJ. VecTor2 & form works users manual [EB/OL]; 2002.
<http://www.civ.utoronto.ca/vector/>.
[15] Bentz EC. Sectional analysis of RC members. Ph.D. thesis. Canada: University of
Toronto; 2000.
[16] Nie J, Cai CS. Deection of cracked RC beams under sustained loading. J Struct
Eng 2000;126(6):70816.
[17] Rahal KN. Post-cracking shear modulus of reinforced concrete membrane
elements. Eng Struct 2010;32(1):21825.
[18] Debernardi PG, Guiglia M, Taliano M. Shear strain in B-regions of beams in
service. Eng Struct 2011;33(2):36879.
[19] Navarro-Gregori J, Miguel PF, Fernandez MA, Marti-Vargas JR. A theoretical
model for including the effect of monotonic shear loading in the analysis of
reinforced concrete beams. Eng Struct 2013;52(7):25772.
[20] ACI-ASCE Committee 326. Shear and diagonal tension. ACI J Proc 1962; 59(1):
130, 59(2): 277334 and 59(2): 352396.
[21] Schlaich J, Schfer K, Jennewein M. Toward a consistent design of structural
concrete. J Prestress Concr Inst 1987;32(3):74150.
[22] Kim JH, Mander JB. Truss modeling of reinforced concrete shear-exure
behavior. Technical report MCEER-99-0005. New York: Multidisciplinary
center for earthquake engineering research, State University of New York at
Buffalo; 1999.
[23] Muttoni A, Ruiz MF. Shear strength of members without transverse
reinforcement as function of critical shear crack width. ACI Struct J
2008;2:16372.
[24] Pan B. Research on shear capacity of high strength concrete beams. Master
thesis. China: Hunan University; 2009.
[25] Lu Y. Theoretical and experimental research on shear capacity of high strength
concrete beams with high strength stirrups. Ph.D. thesis. China: Hunan
University; 2008.