ChapterS

Reinforced concrete beams-

the serviceability limit states

Preliminary note: Readers interested only in structural design to BS 8110

may concentrate on the following sections:
(a) Section 5.3: Deflection control in design (BS 8110).
(b) Section 5.4: Crack control in design (BS 8110).

5.1 The serviceability limit states of deflection and

cracking
The deflection of a structure or any part of a structure must not adversely
affect the appearance or efficiency of the structure; similarly, any cracking
of the concrete must not adversely affect its appearance or durability.
Lately the serviceability of concrete structures has become a much more
important design consideration than in the past, mainly because more
efficient design procedures have enabled engineers to satisfy the ultimate
limit state requirements with lighter but more highly stressed structural
members. For example, during the past few decades, successive British
codes have allowed the maximum service stress in the reinforcement to be
approximately doubled in design.
Of the serviceability limit states, those of excessive flexural deflection
and of excessive flexural cracking are currently the two that normally
must be considered in design [1-4]. In day-to-day practical design, the
serviceability limit state requirements are met by the following straight-
forward procedures:
(a) Deflections are controlled by simply limiting the span/depth ratios, as
explained in Section 5.3.
(b) Crack widths are controlled by simply limiting the maximum spacings
of the tension reinforcement, as explained in Section 5.4.
However, an engineer's work is not confined to the simple task of
complying with code requirements. There are times when he needs to
estimate how a particular structure will behave; there are times when he
needs to predict the deflections of a structure, for comparison with site
measurements, for example. Therefore, in this chapter we shall also
explain the analytical methods for calculating the magnitudes of deflections

F. K. Kong et al., Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1987
 Elastic theory: cracked, uncracked and partially cracked sections 157

and crack widths, should special circumstances warrant such calculations to

be done. Serviceability is concerned with structural behaviour under
service loading, and service loading is sufficiently low for the results of an
elastic analysis to be relevant. Therefore in the next section, we shall give
an account of the elastic theory for reinforced concrete beams, leading to
concepts and results which have applications in deflection and crack-width
calculations.

5.2 Elastic theory: cracked, uncracked and partially

cracked sections
In this section we shall describe the elastic theory for reinforced concrete
for three types of member sections: the cracked section (Case 1), the
uncracked section (Case 2) and the partially cracked section (Case 3). Case
1 is the classical elastic theory for reinforced concrete, which once occupied
a central position in design but which has little direct application today; it
is, however, still of some use in crack-width calculations (see Section 5.6).
Case 2 is important in prestressed concrete design (see Chapters 9 and 10),
and Case 3 is currently used for calculating deflections (see Section 5.5).

Case 1: The cracked section

Figure 5.2-1(a) shows the cross-section of a beam subjected to a bending
moment M. The following simplifying assumptions are made:
(a) Plane sections remain plane after bending. In other words, the strains
vary linearly with distances from the neutral axis. (For a critical
review of the research on strain distribution, see Reference 5.)
(b) Stresses in the steel and concrete are proportional to the strains.
(c) The concrete is cracked up to the neutral axis, and no tensile stress
exists in the concrete below it. (For this reason, the section in Fig.
5.2-1(a) is referred to as a cracked section.)
From assumption (a), the steel strains can be expressed in terms of the
concrete strain Ec on the compression face (Fig. 5.2-1(b )):
X - d' d- X
t:'s =- X ec•·
- es =-X- E:c (5.2-1)

From assumption (b) the concrete stress lc on the compression face, the
tension steel stress Is and the compression steel stress ~~ are
(5.2-2(a))
~~ = Est:~ = acEct:~ (5.2-2(b))
Is = EsE:s = acEcE:s (5.2-2(c))
where Es and Ec are the moduli of elasticity of the steel and concrete
respectively and ac is the modular ratio Esl Ec.
Since in Fig. 5.2-1(b) the concrete below the neutral axis is to be
ignored (assumption (c)), the effective cross-section is that of Fig.
5.2-2(a). From the condition of equilibrium of forces,