ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Title no. 84-S45
Reinforced Concrete Corbels - Simplified
·.~
by Himat Solanki and Gajanan M. Sabnis
Various methods are used in designing reinforced concrete brackets.
This paper demonstrates the simplifications of truss analogy. A sum-
mary of previous work is reviewed. The proposed method was devel-
oped using a simplified approach with truss analogy. Test series of 16
investigations are analyzed and calculated according to the proposed
method. Two examples demonstrate the recommended design proce-
dure. Some recommendations for the detailing are also discussed.
Keywords: brackets; corbels; detailing; reinforced concrete; structural design;
theories.
The load-carrying capacity of reinforced concrete
corbels may be calculated by several methods. They in-
clude the shear-friction approach, 14 the truss analogy ,S· 9
the geometrical method of force distribution, 10. 12 and
the theory of plasticity.ll· 15 The shear friction method is
adopted in the ACI Building Code 16 and is generally
used in the U.S., while the other methods are used in
the European countries.
In the U.S., a traditional approach has been either
empirical or semi-empirical, consistent with large num-
bers of test results. On the other hand, a mathematical
model describing the mechanism of the member has
more advantages. One can calculate the ultimate ca-
pacity effectively and simply and also dimension and
detail the member economically.
In this paper a simplified, practical, and safe design
approach is presented in calculating the ultimate load
capacity of reinforced concrete corbels. The results are
compared with the data obtained from 398 tests in 16
different investigations to indicate the effectiveness of
this approach.
THEORY
The proposed structural model is based on the one by
Leonhardt and Monning 17 and simplified using Steinle's
approach. 18 It is assumed that concrete acts as inclined
lamellas between the cracks, transmitting only the
compression forces. Other assumptions made are as
follows:
1. Any shear transfer across the crack caused by
either aggregate interlock or dowel action is neglected.
428
TECHNICAL PAPER
2. Local effects such as those caused by reactions and
loads are neglected.
3. Equilibrium condition must be fulfilled.
4. Failure occurs due to crushing of concrete or
yielding of steel.
5. The tensile strength of concrete is neglected.
6. The concrete strength is assumed equal to the cyl-
inder strength, and the maximum strain in the concrete
is equal to 0.003.
7. The mathematical mode must comply with the ge-
ometry of the member; this applies particularly to the
reinforcement and its anchoring.
It should be noted that most of the above assump-
tions are made in general analysis theory of reinforced
concrete structures (e.g., References 3 through 6); the
other assumptions are essentially conservative in na-
ture.
The state of forces at failure is shown in Fig. 1. This
converts concrete into an inclined strut. The following
equation of equilibrium then can be written
D·x= V,,·a+Nu·t:.h (1)
where x = perpendicular distance of the force-inclined
strut = 0.9adl../(0.9d)Z + a 2 (see Fig. 1) and D = as-
sumed force of strut in compression and comes out to
be 0.25bd ({3J,_') based on References 17, 19, 20, and
21
where b width of corbel
d effective depth of corbel
compressive strength of concrete
fi
/31 multiplier of J: as in ACI 318-83
Equivalent rectangular concrete stress distribution as
per the ACI Building Code is assumed. Accordingly, /3~
shall be taken as 0.85 for strengths f' up to 4000 psi
Received June 9 1986 and reviewed under Institute publication policies.
Copyright© 1987,'Amerlcan Concrete Institute. All rights reserve<;~. includin_g
the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copynght propn-
etors. Pertinent discussion will be published in the July-August 1988 ACI
Structural Journal if received by Mar. I, 1988.
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1987
ACJ member Himat Solanki is a senior project manager at Smally, Wellford &
Nalven, Inc., Consulting Engineers in Sarasota, Fla. He has published several
papers in technical journals on reinforced and prestressed concrete. He is a
member of joint ACI-ASCE Committee 343, Concrete Bridge Design; ACI
Committee 435, Deflection of Concrete Building Structures; and the CEB·
Commission V Serviceability (Deflection of Reinforced Concrete Structures).
Gajanan M. Sabnis, FACI, has been a professor of civil engineering at How-
ard University, Washington, D.C., since 1974. Dr. Sabnis is known for his work
with local, national, and international activities in the education, research, in-
dustrial, and professional fields of concrete and structural engineering. He is
also a senior partner in a U.S. firm that specializes in construction engineering
of large water-treatment plants and buildings, rehabilitation of old structures,
investigations, and construction inspection and management. Dr. Sabnis has
authored several books and publications. He is chairman of ACI Committee
444, Models of Concrete Structures, and a member of ACI Committee 364,
Rehabilitation, and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445, Shear and Torsion.
(27 .6 MPa) and is reduced at a rate of 0.05 for each
1000 psi (6.9 MPa) of strength in excess of 4000 psi
with the lower limit of 0.65. V,, N" = ultimate design
shear and transverse force on corbel.
Substituting the value of x and Din Eq. (1)
ANALYSIS OF TESTS
Results of tests from I6 available references 1•3•5•7•10•22. 31 •35
were compared to the results obtained using Eq. (4) de-
veloped in this paper. The tests cover a/ d values from
0.08 to 1.02 and reinforcement ratios from 0.18 to 3.25
percent.
Some specimens had eccentricity [Fig. 3(a)] and in-
clined shear reinforcement [Fig. 3(b )] . The ultimate
load was calculated based on the concrete cylinder
strength. Where required, the cylinder compressive
strength f: was taken to be equal to 0.85 f:ubc or equal
to f;,,,m, as the case may be. Fig. 4, 5, and 6 show the
plots calculated and experimental shear force V" of
reinforced concrete corbels and was found to be in rea-
sonably good agreement within ± 30 percent. The sta-
~----~=-------~Vu

bd(f;)
-- =-
4.45 ( Nu flh)
I +- · - ..)(0.9)2 + (a/d) 2 (2)
V" {1, V" a
O."'d h d
Eq. (2) can be simplified by assuming fihla = 0.3

bd U:') = 4.45 (I + 0.3 N") ..)(0.9)2 + (a! d)z (3)

v" {1, v"
It may be noted that for the values of N,/ V,, chang-
ing from 0 to 0.2, a corresponding change in bd.JJ: IV,,
is 0 to 6 percent; therefore, the term with horizontal
force N" and V,, in Eq. (2) could be ignored
bdfi 4.45 r70.-=-,--~~
- = - v'(0.9)2 + (a/d) 2 (4)
V,, {1,

Eq. (4) is similar to the equation proposed by Fig. ]-Geometry, forces, and equilibrium conditions
Wommelsdorff2' and may be used to estimate the value (Reference 17)
of d.
Niedenhoff, 5 Mehmel and Becker, 7 and Steinle' 8 have
also proposed the following equations \
·~ 'I
-·-·- ~I!:F 7
I .
v- ----- ~r ~

b~; l1 + 0.6I (~}J (~)

>i
2 7 -···- 12.~~ 16
= : (Reference 5) (5) -- PIWPO~E.D
I
I

2.8 (t + l!_)
I
bdf' = (Reference 7) (6)
I
I
V,, {1, d 10 I
I
I
\
bdf' 3.57 \
(Reference 18) (7) \
V,, {11 \,

The comparison of Eq. (4) with the preceding equa-

tions is shown in Fig. 2.
From Fig. 2, it can be seen that the proposed curve .- --·
...........
_.---<:..._ - - - - - - - - - - -
--
:: ...---··..ot::--··-·--·---··-·--···-·--
is very similar to the M/B curve, i.e., Eq. (6). This
curve gives lower value of f: bdl V,, while the N curve
[Eq. (5)] gives higher value off: bd/V", when aid is less
than approximately 5.75. It is interesting to know that
whenf: bd/V, equals 5.75, all three curves give almost o~----~----,o~.~----~~--~~~.o----~,2~1~--~~~

the same value of aid; thereafter, the FIN curve gives "/4
a much lower value of a/d. Fig. 2-P/ot ofa/d versus f;bd/V"
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1987 429
tistical analysis of these tests indicated the mean value d = 97,400 X 5.5
of 0.996, a variance of 0.109, standard error of 1.8 4000 X 14
percent, and standard deviation of 0.33.
= 9.6 in. (244 mm)
DESIGN EXAMPLE 1 (Reference 34)
V" = 97.4 kips (433 kN) .f' = 5000 psi (34.5 MPa) Used = 11 in. (279 mm)

Nu = 34 kips (151 kN) fY = 60,000 psi (414 MPa) A = V,,·a + Nu (h-d)

v rp·jd]y
a = 3 in. (76 mm) b = 14 in. (356 mJ;D)
[¢ = 0.85, hid = 1.1; and jd
Fig. 2 ignores N,, knowing that N,/V., = 0.35, and = (0. 78) X 11 (Fig. 2, Reference 17)]
estimating]; bdiV,, equals 5.5 [using Eq. (3)], then 97,400 X 3
0.85 X (0.78) X 11 X 60,000
= 0.75 in. 2 (484 mm 2)
An = --t
N
rjJ
(ACI Building Code)
y

34,000 - . 2 2

0 _85 X 60,000 - 0.667 m. (431.3 mm)

Total A, = 0.75 + 0.667 = 1.417 in. 2 (914.2 mm 2). Use
two # 8, A, = 1.57 in. 2 (1010 mm 2). Check min.
Pmin = 0.04 .f~ I ]y (ACI Building Code)
= 0.0267
As = 0.0267 X 11 X 14 = 0.41 in. 2 (264 mm 2 )

Section 11.9 .4 of the Commentary of the ACI Build-

ing Code indicates a provision of horizontal ties to pre-
vent a premature diagonal tension failure. This shear
reinforcement will be
An 0.5 (A, - A")
= 0.5 (1.57 - 0.667)
= 0.454 in. 2 (293 mm 2)
Use three# 3 stirrups.

EXAMPLE 2 (Reference 31) (Eccentric load)

V,, 500 kN (112.4 k) .f' 23 N/mm 2 (3335 psi)
Fig. 3(a)-Eccentric loading (Reference 31) 0 J;, = 240 MPa (34.8 ksi)

d h

Vu, TE:.O,T (HE.Tii!IC. TOH.O,)

Fig. 3(b)-lnclined shear reinforcement (Reference 10) Fig. 4- Tested ultimate load versus calculated load (t)
430 ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1987
 a 200 mm (7.9 in.) e = 90 mm (3.5 in.) corbel. The front edge of this plate should not be ex-
tended beyond the center of curvature of the loop re-
b = 300 mm (11.8 in.) inforcement.
It is recommended that some reinforcement be used
J: bd
From Fig. 1, let - - 5.25
= in the compression zone. Area of such reinforcement
V,,
should not be less than 0.5 percent of the area of
d = _so_o_,o_o_o_x_5_.2_5 compression strut.
380 mm (15.0 in.)
23 X 300
CONCLUSIONS
Use 500 mm (19.7 in.) The proposed equation can be used to formulate a
general design approach covering the practical range of
a' .Ja2 + e2
.J202 + 92 = 21.93 em (8.6 in.)
500,000 X 21.93 17~ . .../..
A,=
. I ...
.'·fl....
0.85 (0.178)(50) 240
1378 mm 2 "" 1401 mm 2 (21.3 in. 2) 1..0

Pmin == 0.04 Ji ljy = 0.003833 (ACI Building Code) ~·

...,.,o • • •

.';.
2
Al'lnin = 632 mm (9.8 in. in. )
2

.
12~

, ,, / /
DETAILING OF CORBEL
Detailing of the member is essential in anchoring the
reinforcement. 24 Adequate recommendations on detail- 100
.... . ..
. _,;..... .-·. _.
/ /
ing are given by Horacek 34 and Leonhardt and Mon- / ~ • /I"
ning.35
The anchorage of primary tension reinforcement may .J
<
1,)
,.., ..; .• /
·/ 'T't:~
•
F1IOOI'1•
12.EP" I
be a welded-on anchorage plate or a thick transverse /. ~ ~~F I W/...,TlfP_2UPA,

bar. It is preferable to use bent reinforcement, but it

may not always be more convenient and economical. ~· ''·"'"'•"". '"' "
A recommended detail, based on the tests conducted
by Horacek, is shown in Fig. 7.
It is also essential that the main reinforcement be ex-
tended outside the bearing plate due to relatively large
~·
12~ 1~0

radius of bend. This problem may be avoided by using

smaller diameter bars.
Fig. 6- Tested ultimate load versus calculated load
It is preferable to use the load-bearing plate approx-
(Kips)
imately 2 in. (51 mm) shorter than the width of the

700 e
....
.,0 •
8
•
?00

..
"f~f'"ROM:
e REF ...,
zoo C!) ~EF 21
X fl.~ ... l)
• IZ.E.P" 2:~
c i!.!:.F .31
B tU:.F 27
100 4 51!~F 2-' (Q) WIDER COIZ&E:L 3 "TO 5 'TIMES p!AM.
OF MAIN BAR(SJ
(b) HAI:ItOIJ COR&~L

100 •oo 400 700

Fig. 5- Tested ultimate load versus calculated load

(kN) Fig. 7-Recommended detailing for vertical loads
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1987 431
a! d values from 0. I to I .0 and applicable to combina-
tion of horizontal and/or inclined reinforcement as well
as eccentric loads.
When aid < 0.5, some stirrups along with main re-
inforcement should be considered. Higher percentage
of steel will result in failure before the yield stress
is reached in steel. The percentage of steel improves
with increasing concrete strength to achieve the yield
stress. It should also be noted that, in case ·of vertical
load V,, only, the cracked plane with maximum shear
stress is at I 7 deg to the vertical plane.
Detailing of the corbel should comply with the struc-
tural model, in particular the anchorage of the rein-
forcement at the corbel end and in the column, as well
as the location and dimensions of the bearing plate
where the loads are transferred to the corbel.
Finally, it may be concluded that the proposed
method is simpler than the other available approaches.
The shear friction theory, for example, is restricted to
aid < 0.65, and the ratio of shear stress to concrete
strength is limited to 0.35, i.e., V,,!f' :::;; 0.35.
REFERENCES
I. Kriz, L. B., and Rath, C. H., "Connections in Precast Concrete
Structures-Strength of Corbels," Journal, Prestressed Concrete In·
stitute, V. 10, No. I, Feb. 1965, pp. 16-61.
2. Mast, Robert F., "Auxiliary Reinforcement in Concrete Con-
nections," Proceedings, ASCE, V. 94, ST6, June 1968, pp. 1485-
1504.
3. Hermansen, Bj,srn R., and Cowan, John, "Modified Shear-
Friction Theory for Bracket Design," Aci JouRNAl., Proceedings V.
7 I, No. 2, Feb. 1974, pp. 55-60.
4. Shaikh, A. Fattah, "Proposed Revisions to Shear-Friction Pro-
visions," Journal, Prestressed Concrete Institute, V. 23, No.2, Mar.-
Apr.l978,pp.l2-21.
5. Niedenhoff, H., "Investigations on the Load Bearing Behavior
of Corbels and Short Cantilevers (Untersuchungen uber das Tragver-
halten von Konsolen und Kurzen Kragarmen)," Dr.-lng. disserta-
tion, Technische Hochschule Karlsruhe, 1961.
6. Franz, G., "Corbels on Columns (Stutzenkonsolen)," Beton und
Swhlbetonbau (Berlin), V. 71, No.4, 1976, pp. 95-102.
7. Mehmel, A., and Becker, G., "Shear Design of Short Cantile-
ver (Zur Schubbemessung des Kurzen Kragarmes)," Der Bauingen-
ieur (Heidelberg), V. 40, No.6, 1965, pp. 224-231.
8. Hagberg, T., "Corbel Design (Zur Bemessung der Konsole),"
Beton und Stahlbetonbau (Berlin), V. 61, No.3, 1966, pp. 68-72.
9. Commissie All, "Short Deep Beams and Short Corbels (Ged-
rongen balken en korte Consoles)," Report No. 47, Commissie voor
Uitvoering van Research Betonvereniging, Zoetermeer, Feb. 1971, 152
pp.
10. Czkwianianc, A., et al., "Proportioning of Short Cantilever by
the Geometry Method of Force Distribution (Wymiarowanie Krot-
kich Wspornikow metoda geometryeznego rozktadu sit)," Inzynieria
Budownicto (Warsaw), No.9, 1974, pp. 402-405.
II. Hagberg, Thore, "Design of Concrete Brackets: On the Appli-
cation of the Truss Analogy," Aci JouRNAL, Proceedings V. 80, No.
I, Jan.-Feb. 1983, pp. 3-12.
12. Hagberg, T., "Design of Concrete Brackets (Dimensjonering av
betong konso!ler)," S!NTEF Rapport STF65 A 77033, Nordisk Be-
tongforskningsseminar-Skjaer i betongkonstrksjoner, NTH,
Trondheim, Apr. 1977, pp. 6-32.
13. Jensen, B. C., "Reinforced Concrete Corbels (Armerede be-
tonkonsoller)," Axel Nielsen A/S, Odense M., Aug. 1981, 235 pp.
14. Jensen, B. C., "On the Ultimate Load of Reinforced Concrete
Corbels," DIALOG 1-82, Miscellaneous Papers in Civil Engineering,
Danish Engineering Academy, Lyngby, Apr. 1982, pp. 119-137.
432
15. Jensen, B. C., "Reinforced Concrete Corbels-Some Exact
Solutions," Final Report, IABSE Colloqium on Plasticity in Rein-
forced Concrete (Copenhagen, 1979), International Association for
Bridge and Structural Engineering, Zurich, 1979, V. 29, pp. 293-300.
16. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Rein-
forced Concrete (ACI 318-83)," American Concrete Institute, De-
troit, 1983, Ill pp.
17. Leonhardt, F., and Manning, E., Lectures on Concrete Con-
struction {Voresung uber Massivbau), Part 2, Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1975.
18. Steinle, A., "The Problem of Minimum Dimensions of Cor-
bels (Zur frage der Mindestabmessungen von Konsolen)," Beton und
Stahlbetonbau (Berlin), V. 70, No.6, 1975, pp. 150-153.
19. Ulitsky, I. 1., Reinforced Concrete Construction, Kiev Book
Factory, Kiev, 1972. (in Russian)
20. Walther, R., "Calculation of the Shear Strength of Reinforced
and Prestressed Concrete Beams by the Shear Failure Theory (uber
Berechung der Schubtragfahigkeit von Stahl-und Spannbeton-balken
Schubbruch-theorie)," Beton und Stahlbetonbau (Berlin), V. 57, No.
II, Nov. 1962, pp. 261-271.
21. Wommelsdorff, 0., Reinforced Concrete: Design and Con-
struction {Stahlbetonbau: Bemessung und Konstruktion), Part 2,
Werner-Verlag GmbH, Dusseldorf, 1980, pp. 156-163.
22. Jonsson, E., and Svare, T., "Tests on Brackets in Concrete
(Provebelastning av betong Konsoller)," Report No. 2, Norge
byggforsknings Jnstitut, Oslo, 1976, 32 pp. plus Appendix.
23. Clarke, J. L., "Behaviour and Design of Small Continuous
Corbels," Technical Report No. 42-513, Cement and Concrete As-
sociation, Wexham Springs, Mar. 1976, II pp.
24. Robinson, J. R., "Reinforcement of Short Cantilevers (L'Ar-
mature des Consoles Courtes)," Theorie und Praxis des Stahlbeton-
baues, W. Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 1969, pp. 67-73.
25. Jensen, J. F., and Jensen, B. C., "Study of Reinforced and
Plain Concrete Corbels (Forsog med armerede og uarmarede beton-
konsoller)," Bygningsafdelingen, Danmarks Ingenoirakademi,
Lyngby, Oct. 1981, 56 pp. plus Appendix.
26. Mattock, Alan H.; Chen, K. C.; and Soongswang, K., "The
Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Corbels," Journal, Prestressed
Concrete Institute, V. 21, No.2, Mar.-Apr. 1976, pp. 52-77.
27. Jorgensen, N. A., "Reinforced Concrete Brackets (Armerede
betonkonsoller)," Sektionen for Konstruktionsmekanik, Danmarks
Inginorakademi, Bygningsfdelingen, June 1979.
28. Pederson, E. S., and Simonsen, M., "Analysis of Corbels
(Bareevnen af Konsoller med Stobeskel)," Lab 61, Danmarks lngi-
norakademi, Bygningsafdelingen, Lyngby, June 12, 1981.
29. Dragsholt, P., and Heltso, M., "Analysis of Reinforced Con:
crete Corbels (Jernbetonkonsollers baereevne)," Dan marks Ingino-
rakademi, Bygningsafdelingen, Copenhagen, 1961, 32 pp. plus Ap-
pendix.
30. Hung, H. L., "Experimental Research on Short Reinforced
Concrete Brackets (Recherche Experimentale sur des Consoles
Courtes et Beton Arme)," Annates, lnstitut Technique du Batiment
et des Travaux Publics (Paris), No. 270, June 1970, pp. 73-74.
31. Paschen, Heinrich, and Malonn, Hermann, "Investigations
into the Behavior of Rectangular and Ring-Like Consoles with Par-
ticular Reference to Eccentric Loads (Vorschlage zur Bemessung
rechteckiger und kranzf6rmiger Konsolen insbesondere unter exzen-
trischer belastung aufgrund neuer Versuche)," Bulletin No. 354,
Deutscher Ausschuss fur Stahlbeton, Berlin, 1984, pp. 95-134.
32. Holmberg, A., "Study of Beam Supports and Column Capitals
in Prefabricated Structures (Studium av balkupplag och Pelarhuvu-
den vid montagebyggad)," Nordisk Betong (Stockholm), No.4, 1959,
pp. 349-354.
33. Neville, Gerald B., Editor, Notes on ACI 318-83, Building
Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete, with Design Applica-
tions, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, 1984, 830 pp.
34. Horacek, E., "Load Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Corbels
(Unosnost zelezobetonovych konzol)," Inzenyrske Starby (Prague),
1962, p. 182.
35. Leonhardt, F., and Monning, E., Lectures on Concrete Con-
struction {Vorlesungen uber Massivbau), Part 3, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 1977, 246 pp.
ACI Structural Journal I September-October 1987