SP 42-6

Contribution Of Aggregate lnterlocl< And

Dowel Forces To The Shear Resistance
Of Reinforced Beams With Web Reinforcement

By
R.N. Swamy and A. D. Andriopoulos

Synopsis: Tests are reported to determine the contribution of

aggregate interlock and dowel forces to the shear resiGtance of
reinforced concrete beams with web reinforcement. The phenomena of
aggregate interlock and dowel action are shown to be interdependent.
The net shear carried by this .interface phenomena depends on the
amount of tension steel, the web reinforcement, the moment-shear
ratio and the concrete Btrength. The Bhear tranGfer through
aggregate .interlock and dowel action iB maximum for beams without
web reinforcement. 'rhe provision of shear reinforcement results .in
the transfer of shear forceB to stirrups and .in subGtantial
reductions in the Bhcar carried per se by aggTegate .interlock and
dowel action. 'rlw shear carried by these two .interface phenomena
is predicted statistically.

Keywords: aggregate .interlock; beams (supports); cracking;

dowels; failure; loadB (forces); moment distribution; reinforced
concrete; reinforcing steels; shear transfer; streBs analysis;
web reinforcement.

129
130 shear in reinforced concrete

ACI member R, Narayan S11amy is Senior Lecturer in the Department of

Civil and Structural Engineering, University of Sheffield, England,
A member of ACI Committees 544 and 548, Dr, Swamy's main field of
interest is in material behavior and structural design.

After taking his bachelor's degree from Greece, Dr, Alexios Dionysios
Andriopoulos took his Master's and Ph.D. degrees from the
Universities of Leicester and Sheffield respectively working in
collaboration 11ith the Senior Author, During his national service,
Dr. Andriopoulos was associated with the University of Salonika.

IN'l'HODUCTION

The difficulty in assessing the individual contributions to

shear of aggregate interlock and dowel forces in a normal
reinforced beam lies mainly in the difficulty in establishing these
contributions quantitatively. The results obtained from simplified
model tests may not represent the actual stress conditions existing
in a cracked reinforced beam. Further, it is possible that the
effects of aggregate interlock and dowel forces are not simply
additive, but that there can be an interaction between the two, where
the action of one parameter influences the action of the other. For
example, the breakdown of dowel resistance of the tensile steel
induces a higher width of diagonal crack, because the section is able
to rotate more about the head of the crack; the aggregate interlock
forces are dependent on the crack width and crack rotation, and its
contribution will thus be influenced by the action of the dowel forces.

In a previous paper (1), the shear contributions of aggregate

interlock and dm10l action in beams with vertical and inclined
stirrups 11ere reported, It was then shown that in beams with shear
reinforcement, a proportion of the shear carried by the stirrups was
due to the interface shear transferred through aggregate interlock
and dowel action, The provision of web reinforcement in a beam
resul t·s in decreasing the effects of dowel action per se, since the
stirrups tend to prevent the main reinforcement from splitting from
the surrounding concrete, At the same time, the stirrups help to
contain the crack, which results in a smaller diagonal crack width,
and as such it should increase the contribution of the aggregate
interlock forces, However, the provision of shear reinforcement
also decreases the rotation of the cracked section about the top of
the diagonal crack, thus decreasing the shear displacement along tho
crack, The net influence on the shear carried by aggregate
interlock forces will thus depend on the amount and spacing of the
web reinforcement, and the position of the stirrups in relation to
that of the critical diagonal crack, The net interface shear
transfer may then well decrease with the provision of high amounts of
web reinforcement,
 shear resistance 131

In this paper the shear carried by each of the componentE: viz the
concrete compreosion zone Vc' the web reinforcement Vv' the
aggregate interlock va, and dowel action vd is discussed in relation
to the total shear force V carried by the beam with web
reinforcement. In the tests reported, the amount of tension steel
(f %) , the moment-shear ratio (a/d), the amou~t of \veb ~einforcernent
(rf ) and the concrete strength were systernatlcally varled, and the
yv
effects of these factors on the shear contributions of aggTegate
interlock and dowel forces are discussed, Because of the inter-
dependent nature of the shear carried by thene two phenomena, the
combined contribution of aggregate interlock and dov1el forces io
considered as one variable. However, the individual contributions
of V /V and V /V with load are considered \·lherever appropriate, by
d a ·
examining the deformation characterintics of the beam,

All the beams tests in this program were subjected to static

loading only. The effects of suntained loading and of cyclic
loading with or without reversals are not considered,

EXPEfliHJi:N'l'AL PHOGRAM

The experimental work consisted of tests on 87 beams with a wide

range of values of percentage of tension steel, moment-shear ratio,
concrete strength, and web reinforcement GO that the shear
contributions of the concrete co1npression zone, web reinforcement,
aggreGate interlock and dov10l action could be studied under a wide
range of variables, In particular, the effects of the combination
of low and high percentages of tension steel ;d th high yield rleforr.Jed
bars as ntircups (i.e, high rf yv ) ,. and the combination of high
percentage of tension steel, high concrete strength and high rf
yv
value were investigated, All the beams tested represented one-half
scale models of normal laboratory prototypes, These models have
been shown to simulate well the cracking, deformation and strength
characteristics of laboratory prototypes in every respect (2),

Detailn of 'l'ests
-----------------
The tests reported in this paper are divided into two series,
Series A consisted of 32 rectangular beams of which four had no web
reinforcement, 2Jj had vertical stirrups only and four had both bent-
up bars and vertical stirrups. All the beams of this series had the
same cross-sectional area and effective depth (FIG, 1). Beams
without web reinforcement and beams vd. th vertical stirrups had
tension steel.of f = 1.97%. Beams with bent-up bars had a
percentage relnforcement of 1, 75%. 'fhe heams were tested at moment-
shear ratios of 2, 3, 4 and 6,

All the beams for each a/d ratio were cast simultaneously; the
beams with bent-up bars 1verc also cast together, 'l.'he concrete cube
132 shear in reinforced concrete

strength in the beams averaged )6.6N/mm2 (5300 psi) corresponding to

a cylinder strength of 29.3N/mm 2 (4240 psi). The rf value of
web reinforcement varied from O.l3N/mm 2 (19 psi) to 3. roN/n11n 2
(457 psi). 'l'he diameter of the stirrups was varied, and the
stirrups had different yield stresses. The spacing of the first
stirrup from the nearest support (sl) varied from 0.125 d to o. 75 cl,
while the spacing of the remaining stirrups (s) varied from 0.25 d
to O. 75 d. 'l'he details of the beams arc shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 1
and •rables l and 2.

Series C consisted of 55 beams. 'l'he beaTJls had different

cross-sectional al.'eas and diffel.'ont effective depths (FIG. 3). 'rf10
pol.'contago of longitudinal Teinforcement in the beams val.'iod from
f = 0.199% to f = 3.95%. A numbol.' of beams ~lel.'e tested with
diffol.'ont rf values; for each rf value, tho beams were tested
yv yv
at different a/d ratios ranging from 2 to 6. The stirrup spacing
was kept constant at o. 75 d for all 1JOams of this seri~s, while tho
rf values rangi!d from O.l4N/mm2 (20 psi) to 8.4N/mm (1197 psi).
yv
The concrete cube strength varied from 22.2N/nllll 2 (3210 rmi) to
)6N/nllll 2 (5225 psi), and a limited number of tests were carried out
with beams having a cube streng~h of 72.5N/rnm 2 (10,500 psi). Details
of the tests are shown in l~IGS. l and 3 1 and TablOFJ l and 2.

Materials 1 Instrumentation and 'l'osting

The materials for concrete and steel reinfol.'oement used in these

tests Hero tho same as those reported earlier (1). In addition to
annealed mild steel wires Hith diameters varying from gage number 1
(7.62mm diameter, 0.3 in,) to gage nwnber 18 (1.22mm diameter,
0.048 in.), hot-rolled deforMed bars Here also used as Hob
reinforcement.

'l'ho boamu and the control tent specimens •·1ere all cast in stool
molds and cured in the laboratory under r>nver. The bemm Hero
tested at 28 clays over the same span. The loads Here applied at
tHo points, and their positionu varied to suit tho a/d ratio,

All the beams Here extensively instrumented to compute the shear

contributions of the various components. Readings of deflection,
strain and crack width were measured at every loau stage throughout
tho loading range. l"IGS. 4 and 5 sho•,o~ the instrumentation ur<ocl for
tho beams of Series A and C ronpectivoly.

The strains in tho tension steel were measured at several points

along the span using electric rooistance gages. 'l'he concrete
compressive strains were measured in tho shear and pure bending
regions on oi thor side of each of the load point with DeiW'C
extemwmeter. In addition, the longitudinal concrete strainn Here
measured at various depths along one or t110 adjacent sections near
tho head of tho diagonal crack. The ntrains in ••eb reinforcement
werc mcasu_red partly by electric rosiutance gages, and partly by Demec
 shear resistance 133

extensometer on the concrete surface at the same transverse section

as the stirrups. The correlation between these two latter strain
measurements was established by a large nt~ber of joint
measurements.

INTERDJi:PJi.'NDENCE 01~ AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES

Before considering the interface shear transfer, obtained from

tests, through aggregate interlock and dowel action, it is necessary
to consider the interdependence of these two shear contributions.
There can be no dowel forces acting until the diagonal crack reaches
the main reinforcement level. In the initial stages of diagonal
crack formation therefore, the contribution from aggregate interlock
action pref].ominates. There is thus a time lag between the aggregate
interlock and d0wel forces coming into action.

When the diagonal crack forms, the available area of

interlocking aggregates depends on the length and width of the crack.
For the same crack width, the longer the crack, the greater the
contact area. As the external shear force is increased, the crack
opens up and the shear displacement along the beam increases, and a
higher force is exerted on the interlocking particles. At the same
time the diagonal crack increases both in its length and its width;
thus on one hand the number of possible interlocking aggregates along
the crack's path increases, while on the other the contact area of
the interlocking particles decreases. Whether this results in a
net increase or decrease of the forees carried by aggregate
interlock will depend on the geometry of the crack. (i.e. the failtrre
plane), the grading of the aggregates, and the shear displacement
along the crack.

If it is asswned that the force exerted on the aggTegates is

proportional to the shear displacement along the crack /).C, then
v'2
f).c 2 = /). + /). H2 where /). V and /). H are the vertical and
horizontal components of /).C and represent displacements between two
points initially on opposite sides of the crack. The measured
crack width can then be taken to represent the horizontal component
/).II of the shear displacement /). C along the crack.

The area of interlocking particles is a function of the crack

width, while the force applied on these aggregates .is a function of
the shear clisplncement along the crack, /).c. Both the crack l·lidth
and the shear displacement along the craek depend on the section's
rotation, and are proportional to it. However, they are not
equally proporticmal, i.e. the reduction in the arna of interlocking
aggregates is not equivalrmt to the increase in the force applied
to the remaining interlocking particles. This is confirmed by the
measurements of /).Hand /). V which show that the ratio /).H/ /).V (at
failure) varied from 4 to 0.44, and during the loading of the beam,
this value was not equal to 1 (3). When one considers that although
/).II increases, and the area of contact of the available particles
decreases, new par.ticles begin interlocking as the crack propagates;
134 shear in reinforced concrete

it is then obvious that lifhether the net force carried by the aggregate
interlock will increase or decrease will depend on the crack
characteristics of any particular beam.

Once the diagonal crack has traversed the beam's section, no new
aggregates can interlock (unless another crack appears at that stage),
so any further load application resulting in increasing the beam's
rotation, and consequently the diagonal crack width, will reduce the
contact area of the interlocking aggregates. The increased
rotation is, however, accompanied by increased shear displacement,
and a greater force exerted on the interlocking aggregates. When
the crack reaches the tensile steel, there is a tendency for the
concrete to split at that level due to the dowel action of the
longitudinal reinforcement. Once splitting starts, the diagonal
crack ~ridth increases at a higher rate than before, so the
possibjlity of the aggregate interlock forces decreasing becomes
higher. If the dowel action contributes to the shear force carried
by the beam, increasingly as the load increases, the combined action
of vd + va should be increasing all the time, if va remains
constant or increases from the time Vd starts acting. If Va
decreases due to the effects the action of vd brings, then
Vd + Va would decrease or remain constant depending on the
relative magnitude of Va/Vd i.e. vThether Va decreases at a
higher rate than vd or the decrease in va is compensated for by
an increase in vd.

The relative shear contributions of aggregate interlock and

dowel action and their combined contribution will thus depend
primarily on the development of the diagonal crack both in the web
and at the level of the tension steel, and hence on the runount of
tension steel, the moment-shear ratio, the amotunt and position of
web reinforcement, and concrete strength. The hazards and
limitations of trying to separ~te the effects of aggregate interlock
and dowel action are far too obvious.

TEST RESUL'l'S AND DISCUSSION

From the tests reported in this paper, a large amount of data

was obtained. However, only the more important results relevant
to the paper are discussed here. To present a whole picture, the
shear force carried by the concrete compression zone, the web
reinforcement, and the aggregate interlock and dowel forces are
presented for the various beams tested in this program. The
discussions, however, are mainly confined to the shear contributions
through aggregate interlock and dowel action.

In the data presented her<>, the shear carried by the compression

zone V0 was calculated using a computer analysis from the measured
 shear resistance 135

longitudinal strains at one or two different sections at the head of

the critical diagonal crack and at different levels over the depth of
the beam. The basis for the calculations has been reported
earlier (1). In beams with web reinforcement, the shear carried by
the stirrup Vv was obtained directly from the measured strains on
the stirrup or the adjacent concrete surface, and from the known
stress-strain relations of the web steel. The contribution from
aggregate interlock and dowel action was computed on the basis
reported earlier (1), but the three components did not always add up
exactly to the imposed shear. While the computations of Vc and Vv
are more reliable, there are inherent difficulties in separating and
computing Vd and Va , and their calculated contributions are
therefore likely to be less than their real values. Since the
external shear cannot be exceeded by the sum of the individual
contributions and since the computations of Vc and Vv are
inherently more reliable than Vd and Va' the combined
contribution of Vd + Va shown in the various figures in this
paper are obtained directly from equilibrium relationships:

v + va ) - for beams without web steel-(1)

and,

v vc + V )- for beams with web steel -

a
(2)

Beams Without Web Reinforcement

For beams without web reinforcement, the distribution of

Vd + Va/V is shown in FIG. 6 for two percentages of tension steel
and for two modes of shear failure. The results are plotted against
the total shear carried by the beam and the diagonal crack width.

It is seen that the shear contributions from aggregate

interlock and dowel forces remain practically constant (within 5%)
for beams failing in shear proper and shear compression. This
varies from about 85% for a beam with 1.9% tension steel failing by
strut action at a/d = 2 to about 65% for a beam with 3.95% tension
steel and failing in shear compression (a/d = 4). The fact that
Vd + Va/V remains practically constant implies that the reduction
in Va after the diagonal crack has reached the tension steel is
made up by a corresponding increase in vd. The precise stage when
the dowel forces begin to act is, hOiofever, difficult to assess.

The contribution from aggregate interlock and dowel action

obtained from these tests is compatible witq that reported by
Taylor (4). In Taylor's tests, this contribution varied from about
50 - 75 per cent of the imposed shear, but it is likely that these
forces are underestimated in his tests since the shear displacements,
136 shear in reinforced concrete

from which the aggregate interlock and dowel forces were computed,
were only measured after the formation of the cracks, The high
proportion of the interface shear transfer in beams tested at
a/d 2 is not surprising considering the fact that these beams
loaded close to the supports are able to carry very high shear stresses
after extensive cracking, and the shear is transmitted through strut
action,

Beams With Web Reinforcement

The distribution of the shear carried by the concrete

compression zone Vc' the web reinforcement Vv' and the combined
aggregate interlock and do1~el forces Va + Vd, and their
proportions in relation to the total shear force V on the beam is
shovm in FIGS, 7 to 10, In all these figures, the beam number, the
mode of failure, the rf value and the percentage of tension
yv
steel are shown, These figures are not necessarily typical diagrams
of the various shear contributions since these depend on many factors,
as discussed earlier, and naturally vary from beam to beam,
Nevertheless, they show some of the important trends in the shear
contributions of the various components in beams with web
reinforcement due to the influence of the mode of failure,
percentage of tension steel and amount of web reinforcement.

The shear force carried by the concrete compression zone shown

in these figures was computed from the longitudinal strains
measured along a number of rows of gages measured at one or two
transverse sections near the head of the diagonal crack (see FIGS, 4
and 5 for position of gages), The strains were measured at every
load stage, From the known values of strain and Young's Modulus of
the concrete, the shear stress at each level was obtained by
numerical integration, and the total shear force carried by the
compression zone by integrating down to the neutral axis, A
computer program was used for these two calculations, The shear
carried by the web reinforcement was also obtained from strain
measurements. Although the shear contributions from Vc' Vv and
Vd + Va are presented here to complete the picture of shear
transfer., the discussion is mainly confined to the shear transfer
through aggregate interlock and dowel forces,

'l'he figures show two general trends of variation of vd + v

a
with v. Firstly, vd + Va /V decreases continuously as the load
increases (FIG, 7). Secondly, vd + ViV
decreases with v up
to a certain value, and then remains constant or increases again
(FIG, 8), The interdependence of Vd and Va has been discussed
earlier, In general, Vd does not begin to act until the diagonal
crack reaches the level of the longitudinal steel and there is a
time lag between the beginning of the active life of Va and Vd'
 shear resistance 137

It is difficult to establish the load stage when Vd starts acting,

but this is considered to correspond to the load stage when
Vd + Va/V reaches a minimum value.

The decrease of Vd + Va /V continuously 1vi th V generally

occurred in all the three main modes of failure, namely, in shear
(FIG. 7), in diagonal tension (FIG. 10 beams 05 and 06), and in
flexure (FIG. 8 beam J2). In shear failures~ the mobilization of the
aggregate interlock and dowel forces depends on the amount of tension
steel and shear reinforcement, (FIGS. 7 and 9). As the amount of
web steel increases, the reduction in the interface shear transfer
stabilizes and begins to increase again (FIG. 7 beam J3 and FIG. 9
beam X3). In both the diagonal tension and flexural modes of
failure, the main contribution to Vd + Va comes from aggregate
interlock forces- in diagonal tension failures (FIG. 10), fracture
occurs suddenly once the critical diagonal crack becomes well defined
and reaches the tension steel. In flexural failures, the
continuous decrease in the interface shear transfer occurred in those
beams where the flexural capacity of the beam was reached before any
significant dowel cracking occurred. In both these cases, there
was little mobilization of the shear transfer by dowel action.

The second pattern was generally observed in beams failing in

shear, and also in flexure. In shear failures, the change in the
nature of the interface shear contribution depended on the amount of
web reinforcement (rf , FIGS. 7 and 9) and the amount of tension
yv
steel (FIGS. 7 and 9). Obviously, the amount of web reinforcement
is a significant factor, and there is probably a minimum rf value
yv
before this change in the pattern of the shear contribution could be
achieved.

The increase in Vd + va after reaching a minimum is mainly

due to the dowel forces. It is likely that in these beams,
reaches a maximum prior to or near the failure load, and additional
shear contributions occur from new diagonal cracks forming. In
flexural failures, both trends of variation of Vd + Va were
observed. This depends on the amount of web reinforcement provided
in relation to the minimum required to produce flexural failure;
the second pattern of variation of Vd + Va was generally
observed in beams where the ~1eb reinforcement provided was greater
than the minimum required for flexural failure (see Table 3, which
follows). In these beams flexural failures occurred with increasing
degrees of ductility, and this enabled an increasing mobilization of
the aggregate interlock and dowel forces.

It is seen that only genural conclusions can be drawn from these

test results, since the mPchanism of aggregate interlock and dowel
forces depends on so many interdependent parameters, and tt.e same
crack configuration cannot always be reproduoed even in two supposedly
138 shear in reinforced concrete

identical beams, Nevertheless, the pattern of shear contributions

th_rough these two interface phenomena is clear and consistent when
all the data are considered as shown later in 'l'able 3.

Influence of Diagonal Crack Hidth

'l'he variation of aggregate interlock and dowel forces with

diagonal crack width is shown in Jo'IG, 11, Again, it \·/Ould be wrong
to asswne that FIG, 11 is typical; rather it emphasizes the influence
of the amount of web reinforcement and the moment-shear ratio for a
given amount of tension steel on the diagonal cracking
characteristics, and hence on the shear transfer through these cracks,

The :-Jhnar contributions of the hto identical (except for web

steel) beams 02 and X2 perhaps clearly illustrate the effect of the
cracking configuration on the mobilization of the aggregate interlock
and do\o/el forces, Beam Q2 had a lm~ rfyv value (0,3N/mrn2, 44 psi),
and developed two distinct diagonal cracks and considerable dowel
cracking all of vthich remained largely independent of each other;
consequently the do\o/e,l forces were able to transfer shear as much as
through aggregate interlock, Beam X2 had a high rf value
(1.9N/mm , 275 psi) anu the one diagonal crack and dow~ crack-ing
2
developed into consjderable well crushing with the result that both
the aggrr.gate interlock and dowel forces Here unable to develop fully
their resources, '.!'he resulting differerlCe in the inteJ:>face shear
transfer i.n the two beams io clear, and emphasizes t'1e ovt>rriding
influence of web <mrl dowel cracking on the ability for shear transfer
through cracks,

The results 8hown in FIG. 11 and other sjmilar data not

reproduced here showed that in.itialJy the shear contributions from
Vel + Va decrcaoed as the crack width increasec1., 'l'hifl stage
represents tho action of the aggTegate interlock only, while the
rising part of the curve includeD i;he effects of clmvel action too,
For beams failing .in flexure, the rate of d.ecrear;e of V /V with
a
the crack w.iuth was generally found higlwr than for beams failing in
shear, for the same jncrernent .in crack width, This coulcl be because
beams fa.il.ine .in shear have a nmalJer rf value, allowing a higher
yv
rotation of the section about tho head of the crack, ancl connequently
a higher shear displacement along the crack, and a higher force wafl
thus exerted on the interloek.i.ng aggTegates, 'l'he control of
diagonal crack through a high rf value .is therefore not
yv
necossaril;y- beneficial so far aH tlw contribution of a{Sgregate
.interlock forces i8 concerned, This is also .inferred !'rom the fact
that the distribution of vel + V /V .i.s hjgher for beams Hithout
a
web reinforcc~>rnent than for beams with web rejnforcement (flee Jo'IG, 6
and also Hef, 1), The primary aim of design should be to mobilize
the highe8t possible contribution of Vd + Va l·d th t!lC beam
failing in flexure,
 shear resistance 139

Influence of Mode of Failure

From all the test results, the general trend of distribution of

Va/V, Vd/V and Vd. + Va/V as the shear force V increases is shown
in FIG. 12 for beams without and with web reinforcement. In the
figures, the horizontal axis V is intended to provide more an
indication of the duration the force vd or va acts (which depends
on V) rather than the actual values of load on the beam. The
individual lines correspond to the three types of failure which
ultimately occur.

For beams without and with 1mb reinforcement, Va/V generally

decreases with load; only the rate of decrease is higher for the
former due to the absence of any form of restraint to the opening of
the crack. There can be slight increases in the shear contributions
of the aggregate interlock forces if the beam fails in shear
compression.

The variation of V d/V vii th load follows the same pattern for
beams without and 11i th web reinforcement. The rate of increase in
beams with web reinforcement as well as the final value of Vd is
lower than that of beams 11ithout wP.b reinforcement, due to the action
of stirrups in preventing the concrete from splitting from the main
reinforcement.

The combined contribution of Vd + Va/V for beams with web

reinforcement follows the same pattern as Va /V up to the load when
the dowel force starts acting. li'rom then onwards, + Va/V
Vd
depends on many parameters, which will influence Vd/V and Va/V.
For beaJDs without web reinforcement, Vd + Va/V remains
approxjmately constant as the load increases; in such beams the time
lag in the commencement of the actions of Va and Vd is smaller
than in beams with web reinforcement. Beams with a small amount of
web reinforcement or widely spaced stirrups are likely to show
similar distributions as those failing in shear compression. For
beams failing soon after the appearance of the djagonal crack,
V d + Va/V decreases as V increases since the mobilizat.Lon of V d
cannot be effectively quantified.

It will be unrealistic to pretend that FIG. 12 represents an

exact variation of the interface shear transfer phenomena. The
uncertainties surrounding these distributions should not be under-
estimated, and the distrihutions shovm in FIG. 12 are at best only a
guide to the actual distributions.
140 shear in reinforced concrete

Influence of 4ggregate Interlock and Dowel Forces at Collapse

The combined contribution of aggregate interlock and dowel forces

to the ultimate shear strength of beams with f = 1.97% and
f = 3.75% is shown in Table 3. These combined contributions are
calculated from the known shear force on the beam and the shear
contributions of the concrete compression zone and the web
reinforcement. The Table shows the influence of rf values of
0 - 82.5N/mm2 (0 - 1197 psi), tension steel, moment-s~ar ratio and
the mode of failure on the shear contributions of aggregate interlock
and dowel forces.

It is seen clearly that the maximum aggregate interlock and

dowel force contribution occurs in beams without web rei1~orcement
and varies from about 9o% for a beam failing by strut action at
a/d 2 to about 5o% for a beam failing in diagonal tension at
a/d 6. 'Ihe provision of even a small amount of web
reinforcement results in a considerable reduction of the aggregate
interlock ann dowel force contribution per se due to the shear transfer
to the stirrups reported earlier (1). Their contribution decreases
progressively ~litb further increase in the amount of web
reinforcement, reaching a minimum value with flexural failure.
Increasing the amount of web reinforcement beyond the minimum
required for flexural failure can produce slight increases in the
shear contributions of aggregate interlock and do~1el forces as
discussed earlier; however, such increases may be marginal in
normal beams except in structural elements such as corbels and pile
caps where substantial improvements in interface shear transfer could
be obtained.

Influence of Web Reinforcenent

The influence of web reinforcement (rf ) on the shear

yv
contributions o.f aggregate interlock and dowel forces is shown in
FIGS. 13 and 14. '.!'he data sh011 that .for a given a/d ratio and
percentage of tension steel, Vd + Va/V decreases ~lith increasing
rf value and then becomes relatively constant. The shea.r
yv
transfer through aggregate interlock and dowel action is maximum for
beams without web reinforcement and small a/d ratio, ranging from
about 9o% for a/d 2 to 5o% for a/d 6. The provision of
shear reinforcement results in tho transfer of shear forces to the
load carried by the stirrups (1), with a consequent decrease in the
shear carried per se by aggregate interlock anrl do~1el action,
especially so for beams failing in shear. Upon commencement of
flexural failures, their contribution levP-ls off to about lo% - 2o%
and remains rather unaffected by any additional increase in rf
yv
except for beams loaded close to the supports.
 shear resistance 141

Influence of Moment-Shear Ratio and Tension Steel

The influence of moment-shear ratio and tension steel on the

shear contributions from aggr<~gate interlock and dowel action is shown
in FIG. 15. '!'heir combined contribution decreases almost linearly
with a/d ratio. l~or beams 1~ith web reinforcement and tested at
a/d 2, Vd + Va/V varied from about 75% t" 2oujo depending on
the rfyv value. 'l'he rate of decrease of Vd + Va/V with a/d
is higher for beams with ~1eb reinforcement than for beams without
web reinforcement. The ra.te of decrease of Vd + Va/V with a/d,
however, appears to be independent of the actual rfyv value.

The effect of the amount of tension steel in relation to rf

yv
can also be seen from FIG. 15. For small rf values (up to about
0.62N/mm 2 , 90 psi), the shear contribution fro;;aggregate interlock
and dowel forces is higher for beams with f = 1.97%, wh.i.le for
higlwr values of rf this contribution "is higher for beams with
yv
f = 3.95%. This figure clearly shows the intPrdependence of
aggregate interlock and dov•el action phenomena - the former depends
more on the web reinforcement, Hhile the latter is influenced more
by the tension steel, and at some stage, the action of one
predominates over that of the other.

Prediction of Shear li'o-rce Carried by Aggregate Interlock and Dm1el

Action

Because of the numerous factors which influence aggregate

interlock and dowel action, and because of their interdependent
nature, a multiple regression analysis approach was used to quantify
the shear carried by these tHo phenomena. For beams without web
reinforcement, the contribution of the concrete compression zone was
used to predict the contribution of Vd + Va/V:

3flOOA
X 100 100 - 0.061 J~ X UW X (585 ~ - 292) (3)

The range of variables for. which eq'..lation (3) holds good is

2 ~ a/d ~ 6
lOOA
1% ~ __s~4%
bd

3500 psi ~ Uw ~ 10,000 psi

For beams with web reinforcement, different forms of equations were

tried, and the proposed equation is given by:
142 shear in reinforced concrete

20.) x (lOOA /bd)0.45 x (U )0.?35

S VI
X 100 (4)

The range of variables fo:r which equation (4) holds good is

2 ~ a/d ~ (,

lOOA
_ _ s ~
1~9'1% ~ bel 3.95%

3500 psi ~ uw ~ 5300 psi

60 psi ~ rf ~ ll97 psi

yv

The X2 test was used to check tbe goodness of fit of the

theoretical and. experimental values. Doth <~qua tions ( 3) and ( 4)
gave statistically acceptable results, for a 95% confidence level.

The variation of + Va /Vu with rfyv for all the beams of

Vd
Table 3 is shown in FIG. 16. The line separating shear and
flexural failures relates the rrd nimmn contribution of a.ggregate
interlock and dowel forces for beams failing in sheal'. 'l'he equation
for the minimnm contribution of aggregate interlock and dmwl forces
for a beam failing in shear is given by:

8 + 0.092 rf
yv
.E; 3!3 (5)

where
A X f
60 psi .E; r.f
v yY
yv lJ X S

14 ~

Equation (5) iB a compatibility equation that states that i f the beam

fails in flexure, i;he maximum contribution of tho aggregate interlock
and dowel forces will never exceed the value set by it.
 shear resistance 143

CONCLUSIONS

The major conclusions obtaineCl from the results of these static

loading tests are given below, '!he effects of sustained loading
and of cyclic loa•l.ing with or 1vi thout reversals have not been
considered .in this p1•oject,

1. The phenomena of aggregate interlock and dO\vel action are

interdependent and not easy to separate. There is a time lag,
in tHrms of the development of the diagonal crack, between the
commencerr:ent of aggregate interlocking action, and that of the
dmvel forces, In the initial stages of diagonal crack
formation, the aggregate interlock action predominates while
in the later stages o.f its d•welopment the influence of dowel
forces predominates,

2. Numerous factors such as the extent of web and dowel cracking,

the rotation of the cracked sngments and the shear displacement
influence the relative shear contribution of both the aggregate
interlock and dowel forces, It is therefore difficult to
separate the effects of one from the other, and attempts to
determine the value of one by .isolating the other from
simplified tests could be ·.nisleadi.ng. In quantitative terms,
the net shear carried by this interface phenomena depends on
the amount of tension steel, the amount (i.e. uize and spacing,
and hence ·the position of stirrups in relation to the
intersection of the diagonal crack with longitucU.nal steel) of
YTeb reinforcement, the moment-shear ratio and the concrete
strength.

3. In beams 1vith web reinforcemont, tHo general trends of

variation of tho shear carried by aggTegate interlock and
dowel forcen lvere observed, In diagonal tension failures,
this contribution decreased continuously vd.th load; in shear
failures, the contribution reached a minimum and. then remained
constant or shO\ved a sli~>:ht increase. In flexural failures
both trends vTere observed,

4. The shear transfer through aggregate interlock and dowel action

is maximum for beams 1v.i thout vTeb reinforcement. Jt varies
from almost 90% for a beam with 1,97% tension steel tested at
a/d 2 to about 50% for a beam with 3.95% tension steel and
failing in diagonal tension at a/d 6,
5. 'l'he provision of even a small amount of web reinforcement
resulted in the transfer of shear forces to the load carried by
the stirrupn, with a conseqt:ent decrease in the shear carried
per se by aggregate interlock and dowel .forces. This shear
contribution decreased progrens.ively with further increase i.n
the amount of web reinforcement.
144 shear in reinforced concrete

6. Upon commencement of flexural failure, the shear carried by

aggTegate interlock and dowel forces levels off to about 10 -
20% and remains rather unaffected by any additional increase in
rf • In beams loaded close to snpports suc~1 as corbels and
yv
pile caps, however, substantial improvements in interface shea.r
transfer could be obtained by fu:rthe:r increases of rfyv •

7. The shear carried by aggregate interlock and dowel forces

initially sholofed a decrease with increase in diagonal crack
width, and then increased ag~Jn. 'l'he decreasing part
represents thc1 action of aggcegate interlock ,,,hile ·~he rising
part of the curve sho11s the influence of dmvel forces.

8. The combined. shea-r. carried by age;rega:l;e inte:do0k ar1d do~rel

forces decreased almost linearly with the l!loment-shear ratio.
The rate of this decrease was higher for beams without web
reinforcement than for beams with \·reb reinforcement. The rate
of decrease oalso appeared to be imlependent of the actual
rf value.
yv
9. The arnmmt of tension steel i.n relation to the amotmt of treb
reinforcement influenced the shear carried by agg·regate
interlock and do·vrel forces. Por small rf values (up to
2 yv
o.62N/mm , 90 psi), this shear contribution wau higher for beams
vrith f = 1.97~~. while for hig:1er vabes of rfyv , this
contribution 1-1as higher for beamB with f = 3.95%.

10. The shear force carried by aggregate intm·lock and do•rel forces
in a beam 11-i.thout and with ~reb r.einforcer1ent, and the minimum
shear contribution for a beam failing in shear can bE·
predicted :1tatisticaJJy.

RElllERJ~\CES

1. Swarny, H.N. an•l Anrlriopoulos, A.D., "Influence of Ag·g.regate

Interlock an,l Dowel l'orcHs on ::Jtirrup Loa.d Capacity", Researeh
Report, Department of Civil Engineering, U1oiversity of Sheffield.

2. Swarw, R.N. and Qm:·eshi, S.A., "Stre1!gth, Cracking and

De.formai;ion SimiJ.itude in Reinforced T-Bearos Under IJending a-:1d
Shear.", ACI Journal, ProceBdi11gs v. 68, No. 3, Ha.rcl1 1971,
P1.J• 187-195.

3. Taylor, II.P.J., "Further Tests to Dete:ruine Shea:r· Stresn in

Heinfo:!:'ced Concrete Beams", •rechnical Hep0rt 438, c,,ment and
Concrete Association, Londrm, Feb. 1970, pp. 27.

4. Taylor, li.P.J,, "I1westigation o.f the Forces Carried Across

Cracks in Reinfcrced Concrete Beams L'l Shear by Interlock o.f
Ag-gregate II' Teclm5 cal Repo~·t 42 .lj 47' c.~ment a;'ld Concrete
Association, London, Nov. 1970, pp. ?2.
 shear resistance 145

NOTATION

a Shear span

A Area of tension steel

s
A Area of web reinforcem0nt (i.e. one leg)
v
b - Width of beam

d Effective depth

f Yjeld stress of web reinforcement

yv
h Total depth

v cr Nominal shear stress at diagonal cracking

Nominal shear stress at failure

r Web steel ratio, 2A /b.s.

v
s Spacing of web reinforcement

Sl Position of first stirrup from nea"t'est support

U1.1 Cube st~ength

V Total shear force

VA, Shear ca:r:cied by aggregate interlock

Vc Shear carried b,Y concrete compression ,-,one

V Shear .force at diagonal cracking

or
Vd Shear carried by aowel actjon

Vu Ultimate shear force

Vv Shear carried hy 1·1eb rPinforcement

AC Shear diBplacr-1ment along crack

AH Horizontal component of AC
AV Vertical component of AC
PercPntage of tension steel, As /b.d.
f
 TABLE 1 Details of Test Beams
...
~
en
I

1---
Beam b d h a/d l As
_______
p fy u stirrup
w gg.ge_J.lo
Diam IA
i v
f
yv
s1 s I rf_:!...._ en
::r
CD

No. ins ins ·ins 'ins 2 ; % psi psi ins !ins2 psi ins ins I psi ...
Ill

- I : SERIES A ...2!.:::1
NW2 3 3.74 4.50 2 0.221 1.97 ·62898 '5300 : - - - - - I - : 1270 :::1
0'
c2
R2
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
" "
!I !I
8
5
0.160
:0.212
:o.o4o
!0.070
26320 1.378 2.756
32000 2.756 2. 756 272
...
n
CD
B2 " " " " " " " " 3 0.252 :0.100 26000 1.378 2. 756 313 0..
J2 " " " " " " " " 10 :o.125 :o.o24 36721 0.478 0.945 315 n
N2S24 " " " " " " " " 3 ·0.252 •0.100 26000 0.945 1.890 457 0
:::1
N2S48 · "
NW3 3
"
"
"
"
"
3
"
"
"
"
"
62898
"
5332 -
" "
-
"
-
"
-
1.890 1.890
- -
457
0 1
...
n
CD
C3 " " " " " " " " 13 :0.092 0.013 39200 1.378 2.756 63 al'
R3 " " " " " " " " 9 :o.142 0.032 29772 2.756 2.756 114
J3 !I !I !I !I !I !I !I !I 10 i0.125 ·0.024 36721 0.944 1.889 158
B3
N3
A3
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
~ "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
5
3
1
[0.212
!0.252
:o.3oo
'0.070
.0.100
0.141
32000 1.378 2.756
26000 2. 756 2. 756
23ooo 1.378 2.756
273
313
393
l
I NW4 3 3.74 4.50 4 0.221 :L97 62898 5200 - : - - - - - 0 I
! C4 !I II I! II !I !! !I !I 17 !0.056 0.004 40650 1.378 2.756 24
i R4 " " " " " " " " 11 !0.115 ·0.020 36970 2. 756 2. 756 92
: J4 11 11 II 11 11 : 11 11 11 12 :0.104 0.017 41100 0.944 1.889 123
! B4 " " " " " i " " " 7 ~0.175 0.048 22400 1.378 2.756 130
I N4
A4
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
"
!I
!"
I !I
"
!I
"
!I
5
1
io.212
10.300
i0.07o
:0.141
32ooo 2.756 2.756
23000 1.378 2.756
310
393
I NW6 3 3.75 4.50 6 0.221 11.97 62898 '540C - i - ' - - - - 0
I c6
J6
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
I"
"
"
"
" 18 io.04B io.oos 430oo 1.378 2.756 19
! R6 !I !I !I !I !I !I !I I' "
!I
15
13
•0.072
0.092
:o.008 3940C C.944 1.889
!0.013 39200 12.756 2.756
57
63
B6 " " " " " 9 :o.142 !o.o32 j29772 1.378 2. 756 114
I N6 11 " 11 " "
1 "
"
"
11
"
" 7 o.l75 !o.o48 1 224oc 2.756 2.756 130
._Af " " " " " ! " " l " 4. .0.228 :o.oso :22500 11.378 12.756 1 218 I
 TABLE 1 (Continued)

Beam b d , h :a/d As p fy uw stirrup Diam Av fyv s1 s • rfyv

gage no

No. !ins ins :ins i ini % psi psi ins ins 2 , psi ins ins psi
I . ' I I

BB2 1 3 3. 74 : 4.5o; 2 o.196' 1. 75 62ooo 53oo: 5 o.212 . o.o1o. 32ooo 2. 756. 2. 756 212
BB3 II II '! 3 II II II II I 9 0.142 0.032. 29772 2.756 2.756: 114
BB4 I" " " 4 II II " " 11 0.115 0.020 36970 2.756 2.759 q2
BB6 I II II II 6 " " II : " 13 0.092 0.013 39200 2.756 2.756j 63
: SE::UES c I

1 Group C1 i
D2 6 8.180 9 2 0.098 0.199 62000 5226: 0
E2 II II
" ., 61714 ::l.300 i 0.141 23000 6.135
" .," 1 6.135i 88.23
G2 " " "
II tt i 11
t 0.375 0.221 64000 6.135 6.135: 384
D3 6
II
8.180 9., 3 0.098j 0.199\61714 3211J - - - - 0
E3 " " " " 1 " " 1 0.300 0.141 23000 6.135 6.135 88.23
G3 " " " " " I " " 2.
8 0.375 0.221 64000 " " 384
Group C2 I !
H2 I 4 ! 5.250 6 2 i o.o98 o.466l61714 476o - - - - - - o
12 I" I " " ., i II " ! II " 15 0.072 0.008 39400 3.937' 3.937' 20.32 <n
K2 II : ., " II I " II I " ., 1::l 0.125 0.024 36721 II : II 57.33 :::T
CD
I2 i II ! II II II ! II II II II 1 0.300 0.141 23000 II i " 206.00. Q)

~ I " ! " !I 3 . " " • " n - - - - - 0 ""'

13 ~II ~ II II II ! II II II II I 15 0.072 0.008 39400 3.937~ 3.937 20.32 ""'
CD
<n
K3 I" I II iII II I II II II II! 10 0.125 0.024 36721: II II i57.33, c;;·
I3 i II I II i II II i " " II ,, : 1 :J.300 0.141 23000 I " II 206.00; S'
::;
C')

Group C3 I ! I I i I i CD

M2 13 13.74014.50 2 0.098 0.873t61714 3211: - - - - j - - 0 .....

S2 J " j II ' II II ; II " i II 5226 15 0.072 0.008 39400 2.805. 2.805· 38 ~
--.J
 _.
TABLE 1 (Continued) ~

!. T-r . 00

I
Beam 1 b
!
I
:
d I h i a/dl
I
As
t

j p 1 fy u1; stirru.p
.
Dla:n
i
i Av [ fyv I s1 s • rfl
yvi Cl>
::r
ga.ge no I I
CD
No. l ins! ins l ins I
J ins
2
% I psi
i
I psi l
'
hs
I .
I lns 2
psi ins i ins ~~i_ ...
Cl

I
II I j
...
:::::1
Group C3 (cont.) I ~­
P2 3 3. 740 4.50 2 lo.098 0.873161714 i 52261 8 o.16o o.o4o 1 2632o 2.8osl' 2.8o5 ~ 125 :::::1
02 t 0.250 0.098 57000 664
0.~98
" " " II I II
3211r
M3 3 3.740 4.50
?. !'
0.873161714 3211[ - - -
11

-
.,

- 0 ...
C3'
(')
n n
S3 1! 1t II I
52261 15 0.072 0.008 39400 2.305 2.805 38 CD
c..
P3
I
11 I 11 11 tf "
tt I n I 11 I
8 0.160 0.040 26320 11 11 125 (')
03 tl i n II " II II tr I 11
32111 1
4 0.250 0.098 57000 " 11 664 0
1 :::::1
M4
S4
I' 3 13.740 .4.50
" j " 11
4 10.098
II
0.873161714 32111
5226· 15
- -.
0.072 10.008! 39400
-~--
2.805 2.805
0
38
...
(')

CD
r+
P4 l "i " " 11 11 11 11
5226 8 0.160 0.040 26320
I
11 11 125 CD
04 : "I " " II 11
3211 t 0.250 o.o98 57ooo 11 11 664 .
Group C4 1

02
I
11
1801.
3 15.11
I
6 ! 2 10.614 13.950163000 I 5087
11 11 11 51331
-
13
-
0.092
I -
0.013
- - - ; o
39200 3.937 3.937: 44
I j
I
I
II ' II II

~ II II II II II 4690 II II 8 0.160 0.040 26320 11 ! 89 II

Y2 II II II II II 4690 I II II 5 0.212 0.070 32000 . III i 1;12 II i

X2
W2
U2
11

II
11
11

11
I
I
I
11

II
11

11
11

11
11

11
11

11
3640
3640
5087
*t '
1 0.300
0.250
I 0.375
0.141
0.098
0.221
23000 I 11
57000 I
64000
.,

II
! 275
I 473
!1l97
"
I
I
'
I - - -
" II II II II • II II II

T3 315.1801 6 3 0.614 3.950! 63000 5087 - - ! 0

03
Z3
II

II
II
11
II
11
II
11
II 11
11
II
11
5133
4690
II I 13
8
0.092
0.160
II

!0.040
-
0.013
126320 I
1
39200 13.93713.937
11
II
:. 44
I 89
!
I
Y3 11 I 11 ! 11 11 11 I 4690 5 0.212 I0.070 32000 [ i 192 i
I
II II II II

X3 I ! 3640 1 '! 0.300 I0.141 123000 ! l

i 275 l
I
11 II II 11
II II II II II

! I ! I 473
i
W3
U3
II

II i•
II

II j
~
11

II 11
II

11 11
II

I
3640
I 11 • 5037:'
II II 1

18 4
0.250
: 0.375
I 0.098
I 0.221
I
1 5'7000
l 64000
• I
j' 11
II

II '1197
•
'
II
·
!
I
~
 TP3LE 1 (Continued)

Beam b l d h i a/d J As p ; f ~ u,. stirrup l! Diam A.v f s1 s rf

yv
Y 1 gage no yv
. 2 . 2
i!~·-
No. ins• ins ins ~ns % psi psi ins ~ns psi ins ins psi
! Gro'.l.p C4 (Cont.)
I
i T4 3 1 5.18 6 4 0.614 3.95
63000; 5087' - - - - - - 0
I 04. " ! II
II I 5133• 13 0.092 0.013' 39200 3.937 3.937 44
II
4690 8 0.160 · 0.040 26320 89
ff
II II

" 4690: 5 0.212 0.070 32000 II II 192

*i
II

I W4
X4 II

II II : ii
II II II
3640
3640;
1 0.300 ·
0.250 l
0.141
0.09.5
23000
57000
II

11
II

11
27'5
473
1 U4 II 5087 0.375 1 0.221 i 64000 II II 1197
l T5 3 5.18. 6 5 l 0.614 3.95 63000! 5087 - - - - - - 0
Q2.
I
II II II
5133' 13 0.092' 0.013 39200. 3.937 3-937. 44
Z5 II I!
II
4690 l 8 0.160 0.040 26320 II II . 89
Y5 II
4690 5 0.212: 0.070 32000 II II i 192
I W5
1
X5
• .
II

j
3640
3640 *1 0.300
0.250 ~
0.141
0.098
23000
57000
II

II
II

n
275
473
i T6 3 5.18· 6 6 0.614: 3-95: 63000'15087 - - - - - - 0
1 o6 II • II II II II II 5133 13 0.092 0.013 39200 3-937 3.937 44
I Z6 II II II II 11 11 I 5133 8 0.160 0.040 26320 II II • 89
f Y6 II
II II II II II II 5133 I 5 0.212 0.070 32000 II II 192 en
:::r
x6 5133 1 0.300 0.141 23000 275 (1)
1
i U2 3 5.18
II II

6
II

2
II II II I

0.614 3-95 63000110500 i 0.375 0.220 64000

II

3.937
II

3-937 1197 ......

C)

I U3 3 '' 63000

-
n n n n u " " rl n n 11 (1)
en
! U4 IT 11 IT 4 f! ft rt , fl n II 11 1f n H 1!
c;;·
W2 3 5.18 6 2 0.614 3-95: 63000!10500 t 0.250 0.098 57000 3.937 3.937' 473 C)

iW3 l " " ' " 3 " " ! " !I " " 11
" " " "
::::l
0
: W4 _i tl : 11 ~ n ~ 4 II n i fT
tf fl I! 1! n I! 11 fl (1)

1 in = 25.4 mm 2 .....
1 psi = 0.0069 N/mm -ll>o
tO
150 shear in reinforced concrete

TABLE 2 Shear Force and Nominal Shear Stress at

Diagonal Cracking and Collapse for the
Beams tested

Beam No, vcr vu v

cr v
u rfyv Mode of
Failure
--
1bf 1bf psi psi
SERIES A ( p = 1. 97"/o)
NV/2 3000 6750 267 602 0 s
C2 2750 5500 245 490 127 s
H2 3000 7500 267 668 272 F
B2 3000 7150 267 637 313 F
J2 3000 ,6750 267 602 315 F
N2,S24 3000 8000 267 713 457 F
N2,S48 3000 8050 267 717 457 F

Nll/3 2750 3000 245 267 0 s

C3 2700 3500 240 312 63 s
H3 2750 4050 245 361 114 s
J3 2700 4600 240 410 158 s
B3 2750 4600 245 410 273 F
N3 2750 4750 245 426 313 F
A3 2750 4475 245 399 393 F

NW4 2750 2750 245 245 0 DT

C4 3050 3050 272 272 24 DT
R4 2750 3700 245 330 92 F
J4 2700 3500 241 312 123 F
134 2750 3500 245 312 130 F
N4 2850 3500 254 312 :no F
A4 2900 3550 258 316 393 F
Ni/6 2200 196 0 F
C6 2620 234 19 F
J6 2300 212 57 F
H6 2400 214 63 F
B6 2380 212 114 F
 shear resistance 151

Table 2 (Cont.)
Beam No, vcr vu vcr vu rfyr Mode of
Failure
lbf lbf psi psi psi

113 2220 2220 198 198 0 F

S3 2665 385 38 F
P3 2430 217 125 F
03 2185 195 664 F

M4 1650 147 0 F
S4 2380 212 38 F
P4 1870 167 125 F
04 2755 245 664 F
Group C4 ( p = 3.95%)
T2 5500 11500 354 740 0 s
02 ~750 10000 306 643 44 s
-
Z2 5000 10000 322 643 89 s
Y2 5500 8000 354 515 192 s
X2 4820 9250 310 595 275 s
W2 4650 9500 300 611 473 s
U2 5750 12500 370 804 1197 s
T3 4000 5250 257 338 0 s
03 4500 5700 289 367 44 s
Z3 ~650 6250 300 402 89 s
Y3 4750 6500 306 418 192 s
x·~ 3'740 7500 ;;:·,l.C ,[83 215 ~,

'113 3420 8250 220 531 4'i3 l•'

U3 3750 90()\' /.~.~. ~·7S1 1197 F

T4 3500 5'750 225 241 0 s

04 4000 4500 257 290 44 s
Z4 3900 5750 250 370 89 s
Y4 4000 7625 257 491 129 F
X4 3110 7000 200 450 2'75 F
'114 3250 6000 209 386 473 F
U4 3625 6000 233 386 1197 F
152 shear in reinforced concrete

'rAl31E 2 (cont. )
Beam No. vcr vu v
cr v
u rfyv Mode of
failure
1bf 1bf psi psi psi
N6 2840 253 130 F
A6 2210 197 218 F

Bl32 3250 6175 289 550 272 F

BB3 2750 4000 245 356 114 F
BB4 3000 267 92 F
BB6 2000 178 63 F
SEHms c
Group C1 ( p = 0.199%)
D2 4250 5005 86 102 0 s
E2 3750 5240 76 106 88 F
G2 3750 4230 76 86 384 F

D3 3235 66 0 F
E3 3295 67 83 F
G3 3275 67 384 F
Group C2 ( p = 0.466%)
H2 3500 5070 167 241 0 s
12 5175 246 20 I<'
K2 4960 236 57 F
12 4865 232 206 F

H3 2865 136 0 F
13 2975 142 20 F
K3 2850 134 57 F
13 3140 150 206 F
Group C3 ( p = 0.873%)
r.l2 4170 4170 372 372 0 F
S2 4320 385 38 F
P2 4~55 397 125 F
D2 3745 334 664 F
~
 shear resistance 153

~~able 2 (Cant, )

Beam No. vcr vu v

cr v
u rfyv Node of
Failure
lbf lbf psi psi psi
T5 4000 4000 257 257 0 D'r
25 4250 4250 273 273 44 D'r
Z5 3750 5200 241 335 89 F
Y5 4000 5500 257 354 192 F
X5 3500 5000 225 322 275 F
}1,
V/5 3750 5500 241 354 473

T6 3950 3950 254 254 0 DT

06 3750 241 241 44 DT
-Z6 3750
3820 4675 245 301 89 F
4750 245 305 192 F
Y6 3820
4500 220 290 275 F
X6 5420
Beams 1'/i th u1, = 10500 psi
1600 340 1029 1197 s
U2 5300
283 676 1197 F
U3 4400 10500
273 515 1197 F
U4 4250 8000
989 472 S'
5900 15375 380
~12
280 740 473 F
4350 11500
vr3 473 F
BOOO 257 515
V/4 4000
\
F - flexural fallure
S - shear failure
]. lbf o= 4,448N
2
1 psi ~ 0.0069 N/mm
154 shear in reinforced concrete

TABLE 3
Contribution of Dowel Forces and Agg:regate Interlock to the Shear
Strength of the Beam

p 1.97% p = 3.95%

Concrete Concrete
:d~~~ Vd+Va
ct-. C]) 'HCD
0 8 Strength -v:; 0 8 Strength
Beam rfyv vu CDrl
'<:! ·rl Beam rfyv CDrl
'<:! •rl
u u
~
0 ttl
r,. w ~~ w
psi % psi psi % psi
N2 0 88 s 5300 T2 0 86 s 5087
C2 12'7 56 s II
02 44 69 s 5133
R2
B2
2'12
313
20
17
F II
z2 89 55 s 4690
F II
Y2 192 36 s 4690
J2 315 20 F II
X2
N2,S24 457
275 41 s 3640
47 F 11
W2 4'73 38 s 3640
~2,S48 457 49 F II
U2 1197 j8 s 508'7
NW3 0 78 s 5332 T3 0 7'7 s 508'7
C3 63 56 s II

R3 114 32 s ,, 2.3 44 51 s 5133

J3
Z3 39 35 s 4690
158 24 s II
Y3 192
B3 273 16 F II
27 s 4690
X3 275 20 F 3640
N3 313 17 F II

A3 W3 473 28 F 3640
393 25 F II
U3 1197 27 F 508'7
NW4 0 72 D'r 5000
C4 24 T4 0 68 s
47 Dr II
04 508'7
R4 92 20 44 30 s 5133
F II
Z4
J4 123 16 89 20 3 4690
F II
Y4
B4 130 13 192 11 F 4690
F II
X4 275
N4 310 6 F II 14 F 3640
A4 393 10 W4 4'73 20 F 3640
F " U4 1197
T5
05
0
21
60
F
DT
5087
5087
\
44 17 DT 5133
T'6 0 50 DT
06 5087
NOTE s H 15
Shear- proper , sh ear compress1on DT 5133
DT = Diagonal tension
F = Flexure
1 psi = 0.0069 N/~n 2
 shear resistance 155

3" 3'
I
3'
·I I I -,--

"1 _, %'D

"• -
3·74

SERIES A
t~
( lin .. 25·4mm)
D
l:n4 4·5"

II
SERIES A SERIES C
Vertical stirrups only s. 0·75d
0·125d~ SI~0-75d
0· 25d ~ s ~ 0·75d
FIG.I. DETAILS OF TEST BEAMS OF SERIES A AND LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF BEAMS OF SERIES C

I '"" .... -6~4·

~---~'='""'"'- /1·2%"
I
%·2 o;d.3
Vertical stirrups-gage No.5 Vertical stirrups- gage No.9
Spacing ol vertical stirrups • 0·75d Spocingol vertical stirrups • 0·75d
8= 58° 0=45°

1i~~1~1 ..,I___ ....I I

~ f-- --~~;~;:~/~':"- -~=:J
%•4 O.I.Ja6
Vcr tical stirrups- go~e No.ll Vertical stirrups-gage No.l3
Spacing of vertical sttrrups • 0·75d Spacing ot vertical stirrups:::.0·75d
Oa45° 8,•58° 0 2 .,45°
FIG.2 LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF BEAMS OF SERIES A WITH BENT-UP BARS
156 shear in reinforced concrete

•. I

{[] Cl C2 CJ C4

NOTE: Ola. of stirrups is

variable
Cl Q.JOO''<D<0·375"
c2 oo12• < oc;o-Joo•
CJ 0.072" <; 0 c;0-250"
C4 0·092"<;Dc;0·37S"
FIG.J DETAILS OF TEST BEAMS OF SERIES C I I in • 25·4 mm )

:z" , .. I , .. 2"

l l.LT .l
.7

•• ·1S·:
·~
..• ~~· l )
t

e DEMEC DISC NOTE I. Similar instrumentation for other shear span

2. For beams without stirrups similar instrumentation
• DEMEC DISC
(except lor stirrups)
'!;&'Is• ELECTRIC FOIL GAGE
I in=25·4mm

FIG. 4 POSITION OF STRAIN GAGES FOR BEAMS OF SERIES A

 External st·

H II II II

e Demec disc For groupC3,d 1=-0·75, d2."'0·75, d3 &J.OO, d4 =1·00

• Demec disc For groups Cl, C2, C4. d,= d 1=-d3."'d~=I·OO"
- Electrical gage
"'::::r
I in;25·4mm CD
Q)

""'
""'CD
FIG.S POSITION OF STRAIN GAGES FOR BEAMS OF SERIES C
..."'
~-
Q)
:::l
(")
CD

.....
(11
-...!
158 shear in reinforced concrete

Vd + Va x 100 Vd VVg X 100

v
90 90

8 NW2 80 NW3
Shear proper Shear compression
0 /da 2 70 0 /d =3
f =1·970/o ;0 = 1·97%
6 60

50 50

40 40
V llbsx 10 3 1
3 4 5 6 7 I 2 3 4
-~15,....--~20'::::-----::2'::-5----=3~0-- V I KN) ----,!----:':::---:-!:----- V IKNl
2 5 6 9 II 1725 J/1000'' S ~~~~S 1/IOOd'
--.Ofc:S+-4·15~-:-+-·--l27...,5+-4-62-5::---- C' W. ---~4----- c.w.
·025 ·5 mm
·125 ·225 ·425 mm ·OS

NOTE C.W. is th~ diagonal crock width !or the load shown
~ X 100 vd ~ Va X 100
90 90

80 80 80
T2 T3 .........
Shear proper
70 70 Shear compr~ssion 70
0 1/d & 2
o;d m 3
60 ;o = 3·95% 60 ;o. 3·95% 60 T4
Shear compression
50 50 50 %a4
;o .. 3·95%
40 4 4
V llbs x 103 1 V llbs x 103) V llbsx 103 )
6 7 8 9 10 3 4 5
3 4 2
30 35 40 45 VI KN) ---:-\s=---='2o~,d25,.....v I KN) --,I~O.--oloiS,.--~20V( KN )
.<
I 4 5 7 9 12 1315 1720 lfoOOO" I I 2060 II' Aooo• I 11/1000''
1111111111 cw cw cw
·025 ·125 .225 325 ·425 · · ·025 1·50 · · 0·025 m~ ·
0·1 ·175 ·DO ·375 ·500 mm ·50 mm

FIG. 6 THE SHEAR CONTRIBUTION OF AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL

FORCES IN BEAMS WITHOUT WEB REINFORCEMENT (/'•1·97°/o&3·95°/o)
V c 'Yv. Vd + Va Yc, Yv, Vd +Va Yc • Vv • Vd + Va
KN (lbsxl03) ( lbs x lo3) ( lbsx103 )
2J J 4

101- 2
3
C3
shear

j/'
rfyv= 63ps1
=1·970/o

Yv
4

2
r /
shear
rfyv= 114 psi
3 /' =-1·970/o /! V... +V~

/ .xf'v..
4

2
I J3

I 11 Vc 1V(Ibsxi03 ) 'V~l v~ V(lbsxlo3) ·v.~ I

11 Vc Yllbsxlo3)
2 3 4 I 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 5
V(KN) V(KN) VIKN)
10 20 10 20 10 20
-•Vc/.V
0/oV 0/oV -xVvfV
0/o V

~
- • Vd+V0 /V

50-I sJ ~ 4 so
40-l 40-l '-\.. 40

30

r ~."
301 "'
;:;
CD
20 20-1 I \ 2 Q)
.....
10-l
101
X . 101 "
.....
CD
"'
v .. ., I I I I I
V(lbsxlo3l
I I I I
Vllbsxlo3)
I
.....
"'
Q)
2 3 4 I 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 5 ~
C1
CD

FIG.7 INTERACTION OF SHEAR FORCES CARRIED BY CONCRETE COMPRESSION ZONE, _.

WEB REINFORCEMENT, AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES FOR BEAMS C1
tt)
OF SERIES A ( o/d = 3 )-SHEAR FAILURE
 ....
a>
0
Yc,Yv ,vd + Ya Vc, Yv,Vd + Ya Yc ,Vv , Vd + Ya

'j ,,. , , ,
(KN) (lbs x 103 J ( lbs x lo3J (KNJ( lbs x 10 3 J
C2 R2
"'
:::r

~H
sh~ar flexure:
5 CD
rtyv = 272psi J2 Sl)
2'*- ;0 =1·970/o /' =1·97°/o flexurtZ ....
4 4 rfyvK315 psi ::::;
/' =1·97°/o ....

-
3 Vd+Va 3 CD
Yv
10~ 2 2 ...---
::::;

....0
(")
V(lbsxlo3J Yc V(lbsxi0 3 J CD
.L-..1.. a.
3 4 5 6 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 4 s 6 (")
V(KN) V(Kfj:l) 0
I I ~Nl ::::;
10 20 10 20 30 10 20 (")
0 /oV 0 /oV -•Vc/V ....
CD
.....

v
-xYv/Y 0/oV CD

:~
60 -•vd+Va/V 60
50
"\ \~ so
40 40

~ r.,,,.,,o',
30
30
20
20
10 10
~103) V(lbs xlcrJ
I I I I I I I
2 3 4 s 6 I 2 3 4 s 6 7 2 3 4 5 6

FIG.B INTERACTION OF SHEAR FORCES CARRIED BY CONCRETE COMPRESSION ZONE, WEB REINFORCEMENT,
AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES FOR BEAMS OF SERIES A ( 0/d=2 J SHEAR AND
FLEXURAL FAILURE
Vc,Vv,Vd+Va Vc~Vv,Vd + Va Yc:,Vy,Vd+V0
(KN)(Ibs X 103) (lbs X 103) llbs x~l

j
I
301
Q3 Y3 X3
shear 6 shear 6 shear
rtyv•44 psi rtyv=l92 psi r1yv • 275 psi
/' =3·95°/o 5 / ' •3·95°/o 5 /' = 3·950/o

4 4

3 3

2 2

Vc I Vc
V(lbsx~l V(lbsxlo3J
----L...
2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 2345678
V(KN) I v lKN) I I • V(KNI
10 20 20 30 10 20 30
O/oV 0 /oV 0 /oV
I
60
~ 50

40
~ 3
en
:::;

20
1 I 20
Cl)

....
Q)

....
IO
hbs xiO~ 10
1 1 1 Vll1bsxl1o J
1
3
1
10
V (lbs x lo3J
Cl)
en
en
23456 1234567 2 3 5 6
...J...___J_
7 8 6i
:::::1
n
Cl)
FIG.9 INTERACTION OF SHEAR FORCES CARRIED BY CONCRETE COMPRESSION ZONE, WEB REINFORCEMENT,
AGGREGATE INTERLOCK, AND DOWEL FORCES FOR BEAMS OF SERIES C ( 0/d =3 I SHEAR FAILURE
......
0)
......
162 shear in reinforced concrete

Vc,Vv,Vd +Va
II<N) llbs x 10 3 1
30 7 Y4
6 flu:urc
rfyv•l92 psi
\rbVv,Vd +-Vo
llbs x roll ~c1 b": ~VIb) i'o
20 5 jl• 3·95°/o 06
QS
4 diagonal tcnsio diagonal tension
rtyv•44psi
J )~v;9::L~~ jJ •l 95°/o dtVo
Vy
v,
Vllbsxroll Vllbsx ro3J Yc 1
~lbsx1031
3 4 •
VIKNI
rO 10
., v

so .____

i
40

30

10
VCibsx10 3 l
3 4

FIG.IO INTERACTION OF SHEAR FORCES CARRIED BY CONCRETE COMPRESSION ZONE,

WEO REINFORCEMENT,AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES FOR BEAMS
OF SERIES C (O/d•4,5&61 FLEXURAL AND DIAGONAL TENSION FAILURES

v + v
7~.,~ v~xroo
70
•• J Q2 X2
She or
""~
11yv•44psi
ttyv•275psi
,A • 3·950/o
f'• 395°/o
cyd. 2
o/d•2

20
10

B 12162024283236 12 16 20 24 26 32
• - DIAGONAL CRACK WIDTU .._., DIAGONA CRACK WIDTH
~·100 O·lmm
1100
O~mm

60
\_/
X3 V4
fluurr Fluuu
'ryv•275psi ftyv•l92psi
so ,IJ• 3·950/o ~· 3·950/o
40 G/d•J %•4
30 30\
20 20
10 10 ~
L . _J.__J____J___
2 0 12 16 20 4 0 12 16
O~= DIAGONAL CRACK WIDTU or;;;; DIAGONAL CRACK WIDTH

FIG.U INFLlJENCE OF DIAGONAL CRACK WIDTH ON THE SllEAR CONTRIBUTION FROM AGGREGATE
INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES.
 shear resistance 163

Btoms w1\h web rcinlorumcnt

sc Shear compr~uion
Vd i- Va dl [)i<J90J1ol trnsion
-v- I Fluuu
NOTE . Distributions not to seal,
_______ .,
..________ dl

£horns without rcinlorumcl'lt

FIG.I2 RELATIVE SHEAH CONTRIBUTIONS OF AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES FOR
BEAMS WITHOUT AND WITil WEB REINFORCEMENT

Vd i-Va + Va
Vd Vd + Va
~ xiOO v;;j\ X 100 ---v-j\ X 10 0
100 100 100
0/d •4
80 BO s 80 dt _,D ~ 1·97°/o
60 60 60 s• sh~Zar failure

40 40 dt. diagonal tension failure

40
20 20 20
•tyvlpsi I
00

FIG.I3 INFLUENCE OF WEB REINFORCEMENT ON THE SHEAR CONTRIBUTION OF AGGREGATE

INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES FOR jl• 1·97°/o
 _.
0)
-'="
Vd + Va xiOO Vd+ Va X 100 Vd+ Vax 100
~
Cll
Vult Vult '::T
10 10 100 CD
C)
a/cs-2 a/d=3 a/d= 4 .....
8
,.0 =3·95 Ofo 1 = 3·950/o 80
s ,IJ = 3·95°/o :::l
.....

20 20
60-1\

4
s - shear failure
dt - diagonal tension failurv:
-
~.
:::l
0
.....
C")
CD
c..
0 rfyv(psi) rfyv (psi I C")
0 L..-....1....---l_..J.......---1-..J.......- 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 00 100 200 300400500 :::l
C")
rwv (N/I}Im 2 1 I I rwvCN(mm2 1 rf1yv CN/rym 2 1 .....
I I 1 1 CD
r+
I 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 CD
vd + v.0 Vd + Va xiOO
- - - xl00
Vult Vult
100 100
a/d=5 o;d=6
80
;o =3-950/o SO-l jl=3·95°/o
60 dt 60
dt s-sheor failure
40 40 dt-diogonol tension
failure
20 20-t \ dt
rfyvCpsil
0~ 1bo
FIG. 14 INFLUENCE OF WEB REINFORCEMENT ON THE SHEAR CONTRIBUTION OF
AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES FOR ,;o =3·95°/o
 shear resistance 165

Vd + Va
-v-x100
ult
- - ;e= 3·9S 0 /o
100
- - - /'"' 1·97°/o
5 - 5h~a r failur~
dt- diagonal t~nsian fallur~
90 xs Numb~r in ( l is rfyv valu~ in psi.
5 '
''
80
xs
' '5x,
\ s '
\ ' 'xdt(O)
70 s \ s
\
\
60 v\
\
5 \
dt
so \
(Ol
\
\
\
40 ,s
5 X(44)

30

20

10

OL---~~--~~--~----~----~----~-------
0 2 3 4 s 6

FIG. IS INFLUENCE OF TENSION STEEL AND MOMENT-SHEAR RATIO

ON THE SHEAR CARRIED BY AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND
DOWEL FORCES
 _.
Vd +Va x 100 ~

•;..2}
0')
~
•
+ a/d=3 jl= 1·750/o "'CD
::::;
100 4 a/d=4 :l)
.....
0
%~2} :::;
90 e a/d=3 t=3·950fo .....
CD

80
i: Q

s
a/d=4
denotes shear failure
:::;
.....
0
.....
(")
CD
70 c.
(")
0
:::;
60 (")
.....
....
CD
CD
50

40 s

30

20

10
A
rfvv (psi l
00 100 200 300 400 500 600
1 I I I I I I I

0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0 2·5 3·0 3·5 4·0 rfyv!N/mm2)

FIG.I6 CONTRIBUTION OF AGGREGATE INTERLOCK AND DOWEL FORCES TO THE

SHEAR RESISTANCE OF BEAMS