HBRC Journal (2018) 14, 450–465

Housing and Building National Research Center

HBRC Journal

http://ees.elsevier.com/hbrcj

FULL LENGTH ARTICLE

Proposed formula for design of deep beams with

shear openings
M.A. Ibrahim, A. El Thakeb, A.A. Mostfa, H.A. Kottb *
Faculty of Engineering, Al-Azhar University, Egypt

Received 28 January 2018; revised 13 May 2018; accepted 26 June 2018

KEYWORDS
Solid deep beams;
Deep beams with shear
openings;
Proposed shear reinforce-
ment;
Finite element modeling;
Predicting shear strength of
deep beams with shear
openings
Abstract This research presents an analytical study to verify the experimental study of new models
for reinforcing deep beams with different shear openings, in addition to proposing a formula for
calculating the shear capacity of such beams.
The results of the analytical study demonstrated the efficiency of the proposed nonlinear finite
element (NLFE) model by close matching the carrying capacity of the tested beams and their com-
parative analyzed by the ABAQUS program. The analytical program included representing a 14-
specimens study with two different concrete strength and three different sizes of shear openings.
The comparison revealed the accuracy of the analytical model in the representation of solid deep
beams and deep beams with shear openings; including predicting the fracture load, the behavior of
these beams, in addition to the crack pattern and stresses of the proposed reinforcement configura-
tions.
Using both of ABAQUS program and specifications of the ACI 318-14 (ACI Committee 318,
2014), a parametric study was developed to investigate the relationship between shear strength of deep
beams with different sizes of shear openings and shear opening ratio to the total area of shear zone.
Based on this parametric study, a dimensionless equation for calculating the shear strength of
deep beams was obtained, which can be utilized in the design of such beams having same shear
span-to-depth ratio and opening maximum size of 0.15 relative to shear zone.
Ó 2018 Housing and Building National Research Center. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is
an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Introduction

The finite element analysis (FEA) has wide applicability in

* Corresponding author at: 58 Al-Ottor 1 St., Faisal-Giza 12558, structural engineering field, it can deal with models of various
Egypt. boundary conditions, unusual geometry, and different loading
E-mail addresses: mrazik@azhar.edu.eg (M.A. Ibrahim), cases.
hanyghazalah@azhar.edu.eg (H.A. Kottb). Nonlinear strain distribution along deep beam depth must
Peer review under responsibility of Housing and Building National be taken in consideration to understand the behavior of deep
Research Center. beams with opening. Using FEA in studying the effect of
web openings on the load capacity and behavior of reinforced
concrete deep beams overcome that issue.
The ACI 318-14 [1] and ECP 203-2007 [2] define the deep
Production and hosting by Elsevier
beam with two conditions as follow: beam with shear
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2018.06.001
1687-4048 Ó 2018 Housing and Building National Research Center. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings 451

span-to-depth ratio less than or equal to 2 or beam with clear Concrete damaged plasticity (CDP) model and utilized material
span less than or equal to four times its height. properties
ACI 318-14 [1] illustrated the method of strut-and-tie for
designing and detailing of solid deep beams which based on In this study concrete damaged plasticity (CDP) model will be
balancing between forces in a chosen truss model unlike orig- used to represent concrete behavior in finite element analysis
inal beam theory in the shallow beams. using ABAQUS program.
Strut-and-tie method has difficulties in choosing the opti-
mum truss model for complicated structures and predicting
the mode of failure.
Previous researches concentrated upon studying the effect
of opening existence on the load capacity of the deep beam
such as;
Campione and Minafo [3] tested twenty deep beams with
and without openings in flexure under four-point loading to
investigate the effect of Circular openings. They found that
the effect of hole in deep beams depends on its position, they
also suggested equation to determine the transverse tension
of reinforced/unreinforced concrete struts.
Mohamed et al. [4] verified a finite element (FE) model
using concrete damaged plasticity in ABAQUS program with
previous experimental results, then parametric study was pre-
sented to obtain the optimum reinforcement distribution and Fig. 3 Definition of concrete compression behavior in ABAQUS
recommendation for the maximum depth of the opening rela- analysis user’s guide [6].
tive to the deep beam depth.
El-Demerdash et al. [5] made verifications on previous
experimental results by FEA using ANSYS program. 60

50

40
Stress (Mpa)

30

HSC
20
NSC

10

0
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003 0.0035 0.004 0.0045

Fig. 1 Definition of tension stiffening model for concrete based Compressive strain
on stress-strain relation, ABAQUS Analysis user’s guide 2016 [6].
Fig. 4 Compressive stress–strain relationship representing con-
crete in ABAQUS FE model after Hognestad [8].
5

4.5

3.5
Stress (Mpa)

3
HSC
2.5
NSC
2

1.5

0.5

0
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001 0.0012 0.0014
Tensile strain

Fig. 2 Definition of used tension stiffening for concrete in Fig. 5 Identical stress–strain relationship for reinforcing steel
current study according to Nayal and Rasheed 2006 [7]. bars in ABAQUS FE model.
452 M.A. Ibrahim et al.

Fig. 6 Location of installed strain gauges and web reinforcement details for solid deep beams NSD and HSD.

Fig. 7 General layout and section details for all deep beams with openings.

Fig. 8 Location of installed strain gauges and reinforcement details for all reference deep beams with openings.
Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings 453

Fig. 9 Reinforcement details for all deep beams with openings reinforced with embedded struts.

Fig. 10 Reinforcement details for all deep beams with openings reinforced with intensify ties in shear zone.

Table 1 Comparison between analytical and experimental results for all deep beams in the study.
No. Specimen Pu (kN) Deflection at ultimate load D(mm)
Pexp. PABAQUS PABAQUS/Pexp% Dexp. DABAQUS DABAQUS /Dexp %
1 NSD 455 484.58 106.50 6 5 83.33
2 NLR 270 277 102.95 5.02 4 79.68
3 NLS 357 327 91.60 3.77 3.5 92.84
4 NLT 381 405 106.30 5.8 5 86.21
5 HSD 552 560 101.45 3.58 3 83.80
6 HLR 270 272 100.74 5.13 4 77.97
7 HLS 369 315 85.37 4.41 3.5 79.37
8 HLT 407 438 107.62 6.1 4.8 78.69
9 HMR 325 306.3 94.25 5.1 4 78.43
10 HMS 400 437 109.25 3.75 3.60 96
11 HMT 422 462 109.48 5.9 5.5 93.22
12 HSR 440 423 96.14 5.09 4.1 80.55
13 HSS 623 600 96.31 5 4.7 94.00
14 HST 554 485 87.55 6.2 5 80.65
Average 99.66 84.65
454 M.A. Ibrahim et al.

The CDP model has the ability to simulate the inelastic in ABAQUS for two concrete strengths 40 and 53 MPa as
behavior of concrete in both compression and tension using described in Fig. 2.
damaged parameters. Where:

Tension stiffening relationship for concrete rt0 , is the cracking stress of concrete.
ecr , is the cracking strain of concrete.
Post-failure stress-strain relation can be obtained by drawing
the relation between post-failure stresses rto and cracking ABAQUS requires defining of the tensile damage
strain, e
ck parameters, it automatically converts the cracking strain
t .
The cracking strain is defined as the total strain minus the values to plastic strain values using the relationship in
elastic strain corresponding to the undamaged material; that Eq. (1)
is, e
ck ¼ et  eel0t , where eel0t ¼ rt =E0 , as illustrated in Fig. 1.
t dt rt
The modified tension stiffening model by Nayal and e
pl ¼ e
ck  ð1Þ
t t
ð1  dt Þ E0
Rasheed [7] was chosen to model the tensile stress-strain curve

700

600
Ultimate loads (kN)

500

400

300

200

100

0
NSD NLR NLS NLT HSD HLR HLS HLT HMR HMS HMT HSR HSS HST
Solid Group A (NSC deep Solid Group B (HSC deep Group C (HSC deep Group C (HSC deep
NSC beams with large HSC beams with large beams with Medium beams with Small
deep openings) deep openings) openings) openings)
beam beam
Specimens

Fig. 11 Comparison between ultimate loads of the experimental study.

NSD (Exp.) NSD (FEM)

Fig. 12 Crack pattern of solid deep beam NSD vs FEM tension damage.
Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings 455

NLR (Exp.) NLR (FEM)

Fig. 13 Crack pattern of deep beam NLR vs FEM tension damage.

NLS (Exp.) NLS (FEM)

Fig. 14 Crack pattern of deep beam NLS vs FEM tension damage.

NLT (Exp.) NLT (FEM)

Fig. 15 Crack pattern of deep beam NLT vs FEM tension damage.

456 M.A. Ibrahim et al.

Compression behavior for concrete strain related to the undamaged material, e
in c ¼ ec  eel0c , where
e0c ¼ rc =E0 , as illustrated in Fig. 3 (see Fig. 4).
el

Compression hardening data are given in terms of an inelastic ABAQUS requires defining of the compressive damage
strain, e
in
c instead of plastic strain, e
pl
c . The compressive
parameters, it automatically converts the crushing strain
inelastic strain is defined as the total strain minus the elastic values to inelastic strain values using the relationship in Eq. (2)

HSD (Exp.) HSD (FEM)

Fig. 16 Crack pattern of deep beam HSD vs FEM tension damage.

HLR (Exp.) HLR (FEM)

Fig. 17 Crack pattern of deep beam HLR vs FEM tension damage.

HLS (Exp.) HLS (FEM)

Fig. 18 Crack pattern of deep beam HLS vs FEM tension damage.

Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings 457

dc rc Stress- strain relationship at any point from e0 to ecu can be

e
in ¼ e
cr  ð2Þ
c c
ð1  dc Þ E0 obtained by Eq. (4)
"
2 #
Modeling of stress-strain curve in compression for concrete ec ec
rc ¼ f0c 2  ðec  e0 Þ ð3Þ
e0 e0
Hognestad [8] Model was chosen as follow:
Compressive stress at any point can be defined using Eq. (3)  
ec  e0
within range of 0 to e0 (strain at peak stress) which equals to rc ¼ f0c 1  0:15 ðe0 < ec  ecu Þ ð4Þ
2f0c ecu  e0
e0 ¼ Ec

HLT (Exp.) HLT (FEM)

Fig. 19 Crack pattern of deep beam HLT vs FEM tension damage.

HMR (Exp.) H MR (FE M)

Fig. 20 Crack pattern of deep beam HMR vs FEM tension damage.

HMS (Exp.) HMS (FEM)

Fig. 21 Crack pattern of deep beam HMS vs FEM tension damage.

458 M.A. Ibrahim et al.

HMT (Exp.) HMT (FEM)

Fig. 22 Crack pattern of deep beam HMT vs FEM tension damage.

HSR (Exp.) HSR (FEM)

Fig. 23 Crack pattern of deep beam HSR vs FEM tension damage.

HSS (Exp.) HSS (FEM)

Fig. 24 Crack pattern of deep beam HSS vs FEM tension damage.

Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings 459

HST (Exp.) HST (FEM)

Fig. 25 Crack pattern of deep beam HST vs FEM tension damage.

Fig. 26 Load-displacement response for beams NSD, NLR, NLS, and NLT in both experimental and FEM.
460
Material properties for reinforcing steel in the FE model
Stress-strain relationship is bilinear isotropic elastic–perfectly
plastic for rebar and identical in tension and compression as
shown in Fig. 5.
Finite element modeling of reinforced concrete deep beams
Three-dimensional, eight node, solid element C3D8; was used
to simulate concrete. 2-node truss element T3D2 was used to
simulate reinforcing steel bars, it has ability to be embedded
inside the concrete.
Bonding between concrete and reinforcing steel bars was
executed by embedded constraint technique in Abaqus, which
consider concrete block as host region and steel bars as embed-
ded region.
Fig. 27 Load-displacement response for beams HMR, HMS, HMT, and HSR in both experimental and FEM.
M.A. Ibrahim et al.
Verification of the finite element model with experimental results
The experimental study was designed to observe the effect of
shear openings on strength of deep beams and efficiency of
two proposed shear reinforcement in Ph.D study [9].
All tested deep beams have the same full span length, depth,
and shear span length, the only two differences between
N-prefix and H-prefix specimens are width of the beam and
main tie steel, dimensions of all deep beams are 1200  600
 120 mm for all beams with H-prefix and 1200  600 
150 mm for all beams with N-prefix and main tie reinforced
with 3U16 mm in the H-prefix deep beams while it 2U16 mm
in the N-prefix deep beams.
Deep beams of H-prefix have concrete strength of
41 MPa, while beams with N-prefix have concrete strength
of 53 MPa.
Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings
Figs. 6–10 illustrate the section dimensions and reinforce-
ment details of the tested deep beams in the Ph.D experimental
program [9,10].
Deep beams end with R-letter refer to reference deep beams
with shear openings which are reinforced with U6 mm in both
horizontal and vertical edges of the shear openings.
Deep beams with middle letter of L, M, and S refer to
dimensions of the shear openings, which are 180  200 mm,
150  150 mm, and 120  100 mm in vertical and horizontal
directions, respectively.
Deep beams end with S-letter indicate to reinforcing the
shear zone with embedded struts in addition to U12 mm bars
adjacent to opening edges in the horizontal direction and
U10 mm bars in adjacent to opening edges in the vertical
direction.
All embedded struts in deep beams with opening are 4U12
mm, which have ties of U6 mm@ 50 mm and inclination with
horizontal direction of 24°, 26°, and 31° in case of large, med-
ium, and small openings.
Deep beams end with T-letter indicate to reinforcing the
shear zone with U8 mm@ 30 mm short ties below and above
the opening along shear zone in addition to U12 mm bars adja-
cent to opening edges in the horizontal direction and U10 mm
bars in adjacent to opening edges in the vertical direction.
Table 1 shows comparison between results of experimental
program and finite element modeling using ABAQUS
program.
Fig. 11 illustrate the efficiency of the proposed additional
reinforcement on the shear strength of deep beams in that
study.
From Table 1, it can be observed that FE model gave quite
precise prediction of ultimate loads of deep beams without and
with shear openings.
The average ratio between FE and experimental ultimate
loads is 99.66% which indicate the efficiency of the utilized
FE model in simulating of deep beams with openings.
Fig. 28 Load-displacement response for beams HSS and HST in both experimental and FEM.
461
Despite of lower values of mid-span deflections in FE
model relative to experimental ones, load-deflection responses
revealed same trend of each other’s.
Comparison between cracking pattern of FE model and
experimental results
Figs. 12–25 show the crack pattern of the deep beams in the
experimental program in comparing with the tensile damage
of the FE model (DAMAGET) which indicates cracks in the
FE model due to tensile stresses.
The following figures show almost matching with each
other.
In the solid deep beams and deep beams with small open-
ings, existence of flexural cracks is obtained in both of experi-
mental and FE model.
Comparison between load-displacement responses in both
experimental study and finite element model
Figures from 26 to 28 illustrate the comparison between load-
mid span deflections in experimental and FE model using
ABAQUS program.
Differences between the two relations were considered due
to limitations on concrete to deform with damage technique in
ABAQUS program and the existence of openings which limit
mid-span deflections.
But in general, both of FE and experimental responses have
the same trend.
Efficiency of proposed reinforcement configurations in FEM
The efficiency of the new reinforcement configurations, of the
deep beams with shear openings, can be obtained due to yield-
ing of those reinforcement component.
462 M.A. Ibrahim et al.

(a) NLS

(b) HMT

(c) HMS

Fig. 29 Stresses in the proposed reinforcement models for beams (a) NLS, (b) HMT, and (C) HMS in the FEM.
Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings
(a) HSS
(b) HST
Fig. 30 Stresses in the proposed reinforcement models for beams (a) HSS and (b) HST in the FEM.
Figs. 29 and 30 show the stresses of the proposed reinforce-
ment models of the deep beams with openings.
Parametric study
To define the shear strength of the deep beam with shear open-
ings, it first requires knowing the utilized provisions in design-
ing of its similar solid deep beam.
In this parametric study, the ACI 318-14 [1] was used to
pre-dimensioning and designing of the solid deep beams and
all its requirements were satisfied.
Web reinforcement ratio, main tie reinforcement ratio, and
strength of both concrete and steel were constant in all sizes.
Large, medium, and small shear opening dimensions are
designated to be (0.3 d  0.5 X), (0.25 d  0.375 X), and (0.2
d  0.25 X) in the vertical and horizontal direction
respectively. studied deep beams.
463
Where:
Ao is the area of the shear opening equal to x multiplied by
h
Is the horizontal dimension of the shear opening in deep
beam.
h is the vertical dimension of the shear opening in the deep
beam.
Asz is the total area of the shear zone, equal to a multiplied
by d.
a defines the shear span which is the horizontal dimension
of the overall shear zone in the deep beams (regions from
support to concentrated load).
d is the vertical dimension of the shear zone in deep beams,
it equal the overall depth of the deep beam.
Table 2 illustrates all specifications and dimensions of the
464 M.A. Ibrahim et al.

Table 2 Properties and dimensions of studied deep beams in parametric study.

FEM ACI Shear strength relative
318-14 to solid deep beam
Scale No. Specimen Designation f’c Area of Area of shear Ao/Asz Load Load Po/PS
Factor (MPa) opening x*h zone a*d (mm2) ratio (kN) (kN)
(mm2)
Size 1 1 HSD Solid deep beam 50 0 240,000 0 544.00 394
2 HLR deep beam with 36,000 240,000 0.15 249.00 0.4577
large openings
3 HMR deep beam with 22,500 240,000 0.09375 314.20 0.5776
medium openings
4 HSR deep beam with 12,000 240,000 0.05 390.00 0.7169
small openings
Size 1 HSD 50 0 540,000 0 1542.00 1202
1.5 2 HLR 81,000 540,000 0.15 971.15 0.6268
3 HMR 50,625 540,000 0.09375 1090.20 0.7036
4 HSR 27,000 540,000 0.05 1195.20 0.7713
Size 2 1 HSD 50 0 960,000 0 1549.50 1669
2 HLR 144,000 960,000 0.15 997.00 0.6434
3 HMR 90,000 960,000 0.09375 1081.80 0.6982
4 HSR 48,000 960,000 0.05 1225.00 0.7906
Size 3 1 HSD 50 0 2,160,000 0 5500.00 3686.3
2 HLR 324,000 2,160,000 0.15 3901.00 0.7093
3 HMR 202,500 2,160,000 0.09375 4240.50 0.7710
4 HSR 108,000 2,160,000 0.05 4496.29 0.8175
Size 4 1 HSD 50 0 2,160,000 0 6900.00 4949.27
2 HLR 576,000 3,840,000 0.15 4816.00 0.6980
3 HMR 360,000 3,840,000 0.09375 5240.50 0.7595
4 HSR 192,000 3,840,000 0.05 5498.00 0.7968
**Shear opening size was limited by 0.3d  0.5a in the vertical and horizontal directions respectively.
***Rectangular openings have limitation on aspect ratio (h/x) of 1.2
*
Size 1 represents beam dimensions of 1200  600  120 mm. size 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 represent scale factors of 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 of size 1.

0.90 2. X-Axis represent the ratio between area of shear opening

and the total area of the shear zone.
0.80

0.70 The lower bound of the relation can be obtained by the fol-
lowing equation, y ¼ 0:836  2:57x, if we substitute y parame-
0.60  
ter by PPOS and x parameter by AASZ
O
the equation will be in the
0.50 Size 1  
po/ps

Size 1.5 y = -2.5704x + 0.8358 following form PPOS ¼ 0:836  2:57 AASZ
O
, which give prediction
0.40
Size 2
Size 3
of the ultimate load of deep beams with shear opening relative
0.30
Size 4 to the strength of solid deep beam.
0.20 Where:
0.10
Ps and Po are the shear strength of the solid and deep beam
0.00 with shear openings similar to it.
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 Ps will be substituted with the shear strength of deep beam
Ao/Asz pffiffiffiffiffi
according to ACI 318-14 [1] which is V n ¼ 0:83 f 0c bd
Fig. 31 Relationship between load capacity and the area of
opening ratios (5 different sizes). It led to the following dimensionless formula
pffiffiffiffi

Po ¼ 0:83 f0c bd 0:836  2:57 xh

Fig. 31 is X-Y plot, which illustrates the relationship
between the following:
1. Y-Axis represent the ratio between load capacity of the
deep beam with different opening sizes and the load capac-
ity of the solid deep beam.
ad
The proposed equation applies in any deep beams with
shear openings which have the same shear span-to-depth ratio
(a/d) equal to 0.67.
To verify this equation with other experimental results,
Yang et al. [11] tested deep beam with shear span-to-depth
ratio of 0.7 which is almost equal studied a/d ratio.
Proposed formula for design of deep beams with shear openings
Table 3 Comparison between proposed equation and experimental results, Yang et al. [11].
No Specimen f0 c (MPa) Area of opening x*h (mm) Area of shear zone a*d (mm)
1 UH7F3 80.4 210  180 420  560
*
a/d ratio equal to 0.7.
The specifications of the tested deep beam (UH7F3) in
Yang et al. [11] and comparison with proposed equation were
illustrated in Table 3.
Table 3 shows the applicability of the proposed equation in
case of different concrete strength, opening size, and width of
the deep beams.
It worth noted that this deep beams have no transverse web
reinforcement, which give indication of the majority of the fac-
tor of opening size ratio as in the proposed equation.
The previous proposed equations, such as Kong and Sharp
[12], give very conservative prediction of the strength of deep
beams with shear openings as certified in Kottb [9] because
of underestimating the strength of deep beams with shear
openings.
It also important to point that there is need to derive addi-
tional formulas for different a/d ratios to provide full design
aid.
Conclusions
 Efficiency of the FE model, in simulating reinforced con-
crete deep beams with shear openings, was proved by
matching with experimental ultimate loads by 100%.
 FE model gives almost similar crack patterns to the exper-
imental ones and the same trend of the load-displacement
response, with differences in case of deep beams with shear
openings.
 The method of embedded strut is more effective in case of
angle of inclination more than 30°.
 Steel bars adjacent to the shear openings are the most
important component in the two proposed reinforcement
models.
 Stresses in the reinforcement bars at shear zone certify the
efficiency of the proposed models.
 ACI 318-14 [1] gave reasonable prediction of the ultimate
load of high strength concrete solid deep beams with ratio
of (P Exp: =P ACI ) equal to 1.36.
 The lower bound of the parametric study resulted in an
pffiffiffiffiffi xh
applicable equation P o ¼ 0:83 f 0c bd 0:836  2:57 ad
which recommended in the design of such beams in case
of similar shear span-to-depth ratio.
 Parametric study revealed that as size of deep beam
increases, conservatism of shear strength is obtained,
465
Experimental Proposed Equation Comparison
Load (kN) Load (kN) P Equ/PExp
263.60 282 1.07
especially in case of openings with area equal to 0.15 of
shear zone.
 The proposed equation gives reasonable prediction of shear
strength of deep beams with shear openings having size up
to 0.15 of shear zone area.
 The proposed equation has limitation on rectangular open-
ing aspect ratio (h/x) not more than 1.2.
References
[1] ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for structural
concrete (ACI 318-14) and commentary (318R-14). Farmington
Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute; 2014. p. 524.
[2] ECP 203 Egyptian Code of Practice: Design and construction of
reinforced concrete structures, 2007, 454.
[3] G. Campione, G. Minafò, Behavior of concrete deep beams with
openings and low shear span-to-depth ratio, Eng. Struct. 41 (3)
(2012) 294–306.
[4] A.R. Mohamed et al, Prediction of the behavior of reinforced
concrete deep beams with web openings using the finite element
method, Alexandria Eng. J. 53 (2014) 329–339.
[5] W.E. El-Demerdash et al, Behavior of RC shallow and deep
beams with openings via the strut-and-tie model method and
nonlinear finite element, Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 41 (2) (2016) 401–
424.
[6] Abaqus Analysis User’s Manual – Abaqus version 6.10 (2016)
along year 2017 at http://abaqusdoc.ucalgary.ca/books/usb/
default.htm?startat=pt05ch21s02abm42.html.
[7] R. Nayal, H.A. Rasheed, Tension stiffening model for concrete
beams reinforced with steel and FRP bars, J. Mater. Civil Eng.
19 (6) (2006) 831–841.
[8] E. Hognestad, A study of combined bending and axial load in
reinforced concrete members, Univ. Illinois Bull. 49 (1951) (22).
[9] H.A. Kottb, Effect of openings in reinforced concrete deep
beams, Ph.D. thesis, Al-Azhar University, Faculty of
Engineering, Civil Engineering Department 2017 (submitted
for publication).
[10] M.A. Ibrahim et al, Experimental study of new reinforcement
details for reinforced concrete deep beams with shear opening,
Civil Eng. Res. Magaz. (CERM) 40 (1) (2018) 347–367.
, [11] Yang et al, The influence of web openings on the structural
behavior of reinforced high-strength concrete deep beams, Eng.
Struct. 28 (13) (2006) 1825–1834.
[12] F.K. Kong, G.R. Sharp, Structural idealization for deep beams
with web openings, Magaz. Concr. Res. 29 (99) (1977) 81–91.