ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 301

ACI Structural Journal, V. 105, No. 3, May-June 2008.

MS No. S-2006-346 received August 21, 2006, and reviewed under Institute publication
policies. Copyright 2008, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the
making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent
discussion including authors closure, if any, will be published in the March-April
2009 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received by November 1, 2008.
TECHNICAL PAPER ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL
Excessive cracking is one of the common causes of damage in
concrete structures and results in huge annual cost to the construction
industry. Most of the current design approaches for crack control
are empirical and based on observed crack widths in laboratory
specimens tested under short-term loads. Most approaches fail to
adequately model the increase in crack width that occurs with time
due to shrinkage. In this paper, an alternative design method for
flexural crack control that overcomes many of the limitations of the
current code approaches is proposed. The proposed method takes
into account the time-dependent development of cracking and the
increase in crack widths with time due to shrinkage. The crack
width calculation procedure has been shown to provide good
agreement with the measured spacing and width of cracks in a
variety of slabs and beams tested in the laboratory under sustained
service loads.
Keywords: crack control; creep; flexural cracking; reinforced concrete;
serviceability; shrinkage.
INTRODUCTION
Current design procedures to control cracking in concrete
structures using conventional steel reinforcement are overly
simplistic and often fail to adequately account for the
gradual increase in crack widths with time due to shrinkage.
The bonded reinforcement in every reinforced concrete
beam or slab provides restraint to shrinkage, with the
concrete compressing the reinforcement as it shrinks and the
reinforcement imposing an equal and opposite tensile force
on the concrete at the level of the steel. This internal
restraining tensile force is often significant enough to cause
time-dependent cracking. In addition, the connections of a
concrete member to other parts of the structure or to the
foundations also provide restraint to shrinkage. The tensile
restraining force that develops rapidly with time at the
restrained ends of the member usually leads to cracking, often
within days of the commencement of drying. In a restrained
flexural member, shrinkage also causes a gradual widening of
flexural cracks and a gradual build-up of tension in the
uncracked regions that may lead to time-dependent cracking.
Cracks occur at discrete locations in a concrete member,
often under the day-to-day service loads. The width of a
crack depends on the quantity, orientation, and distribution
of the reinforcing steel crossing the crack. It also depends on
the deformation characteristics of the concrete and the bond
between the concrete and the reinforcement bars at, and in
the vicinity of, the crack. A local breakdown in bond at each
crack complicates the modeling, as does the time-dependent
change in the bond characteristics caused by drying
shrinkage and tensile creep. Great variability exists in observed
crack spacing and crack widths and accurate predictions of
behavior are possible only at the statistical level.
Most of the current design approaches for crack control
specified in building codes are empirical
1-3
and are based on
observed crack widths in laboratory specimens tested under
short-term loads. These approaches also specify certain
detailing requirements, including maximum limits on both
the center-to-center spacing of bars and on the distance from
the side or soffit of the member to the nearest longitudinal
bar. These limits do not generally depend on any of the
factors that affect the size and location of cracks. The codes
of practice
1-3
also specify a minimum quantity of tensile
reinforcement in those regions of the member where
cracking is likely under service loads and maximum limits
are placed on the tensile steel stress on a cracked section
depending on either the bar diameter or the bar spacing.
2,3
The existing code approaches,
1-3
however, fail to adequately
account for the increase in crack width that occurs with time
due to shrinkage.
This paper outlines a design method for flexural crack
control that overcomes many of the limitations of the current
code approaches. The proposed method is based on a
recently developed procedure
4
for the calculation of the
maximum final crack spacing and crack width in a beam or
slab and takes into account the time-dependent development
of cracking and the increase in crack widths with time due to
shrinkage. The crack width calculation procedure has been
shown to provide good agreement with the measured spacing
and width of cracks in a variety of slabs and beams tested in
the laboratory under sustained service loads.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
Excessive cracking resulting from either restrained
deformation or external loads (or both) is one of the most
common causes of damage in concrete structures and results
in huge annual cost to the construction industry. Current
design procedures to control cracking using conventional
steel reinforcement
1-3,5
do not adequately account for the
gradual increase in crack widths with time due to the effects
of shrinkage.
6
This paper provides a rational method for
designers to control flexural cracking in reinforced concrete
beams and slabs and thereby improve the serviceability of
concrete structures.
FLEXURAL CRACKING MODEL
Recently, Gilbert
4
proposed a model for predicting the
maximum final crack width, w*, in reinforced concrete flexural
members based on the Tension Chord Model of Marti et al.
7
The model was shown to provide good agreement with the
measured final spacing and width of cracks in a range of
reinforced concrete beams and slabs tested in the laboratory
under sustained service loads for periods in excess of 400 days.
6
The notation associated with the model is shown in Fig. 1.
Title no. 105-S29
Control of Flexural Cracking in Reinforced Concrete
by R. Ian Gilbert
ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 302
In the following, Gilberts model is used to develop a
simple procedure to ensure that the final maximum flexural
crack width in a beam or slab is less than a selected
maximum design crack width, w
max
.
Consider a segment of a singly reinforced beam of rectan-
gular section subjected to an in-service bending moment M
s
greater than the cracking moment M
cr
. The spacing between
the primary cracks is s, as shown in Fig. 1(a). A typical cross
section between the cracks is shown in Fig. 1(b) and a cross
section at a primary crack is shown in Fig. 1(c). The cracked
beam is idealized as a compression chord of depth c and
width b and a cracked tension chord consisting of the tensile
reinforcement of area A
s
surrounded by an area of tensile
concrete A
ct
as shown in Fig. 1(d). The centroids of A
s
and
A
ct
are assumed to coincide at a depth d below the top fiber
of the section.
For the sections containing a primary crack (Fig. 1(c)),
A
ct
= 0 and the depth c and the second moment of area about
the centroidal axis, I
cr
, may be determined from a cracked
section analysis. Away from the crack, the area of the
concrete in the tension chord of Fig. 1(d) (A
ct
) is assumed to
carry a uniform tensile stress
ct
that develops due to the
bond stress
b
that exists between the tensile steel and the
surrounding concrete.
For the tension chord, the area of concrete between the
cracks, A
ct
, may be taken as
A
ct
= 0.5(h c)b
*
(1)
where b
*
is the width of the section at the level of the
centroid of the tensile steel (that is, at the depth d). At each
crack in the tension chord of Fig. 1(d),
st1
= T/A
s
,
c
= 0, and
(2)
As distance z from the crack increases, the stress in the
steel reduces due to the bond shear stress
b
between the steel
and the surrounding tensile concrete. For reinforced concrete
under service loads, where
st1
is less than the yield stress f
y
,
Marti et al.
7
assumed a rigid-plastic bond shear stress-slip
relationship, with
b
= 2f
ct
at all values of slip and where f
ct
is the direct tensile strength of concrete. In reality, the
magnitude of
b
is affected by steel stress, concrete cover,
bar spacing, transverse reinforcement (stirrups), lateral
pressure, degree of compaction, and size of bar deformations.
In addition,
b
is likely to be reduced with time by tensile
creep and shrinkage. Experimental observations by Gilbert
and Nejadi
6
and others indicate that
b
reduces as the stress
in the reinforcement increases and, consequently, the tensile
stresses in the concrete between the cracks reduces (that is,
tension stiffening reduces with increasing steel stress).
Gilbert
4
proposed that
b
=
1

2
f
ct
, where
1
depends on
the steel stress at the crack (and varies from 3.0 at low stress
levels to 1.0 at high stress levels); and where
2
= 1.0 for
short-term calculations and
2
= 0.5 for long-term calculations.
These values of
1
and
2
where calibrated to provide
agreement with the results of a detailed experimental study
of cracking in reinforced concrete beams and slabs under
both short-term and long-term sustained loads.
6
To avoid the
discontinuities in
1
, it is herein assumed that
1
is independent
of steel stress and equal to 2.0 (as proposed by Marti et al.
7
).
That is, for short-term calculations, the bond stress
b
= 2.0f
ct
and, for long-term calculations in the determination of the
final maximum crack width,
b
= 1.0f
ct
.
An elevation of the tension chord is shown in Fig. 2(a) and
the stress variations in concrete and steel in the tension chord
are illustrated in Fig. 2(b) and (c), respectively. Following
the approach of Marti et al.,
7
the concrete and steel tensile
stresses in Fig. 2(b) and (c), where 0 < z s/2, may be
expressed as
(3)
where
tc
is the reinforcement ratio of the tension chord
(= A
s
/A
ct
) and d
b
is the reinforcing bar diameter. Midway
between cracks, at z = s/2, the stresses are
T
nM
s
d c ( )
I
cr
---------------------------A
s
=

stx
T
A
s
-----
4
b
z
d
b
---------- - and
cx
4
b

tc
z
d
b
------------------ = =
R. Ian Gilbert is a Professor of civil engineering and an ARC Australian Professorial
Fellow in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia. His research interests include serviceability and the
time-dependent behavior of concrete structures.
Fig. 1Cracked reinforced concrete beam and idealized
tension chord model.
1
Fig. 2Tension chordactions and stresses.
7
ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 303
(4)
The maximum crack spacing immediately after loading
s = s
max
occurs when
c2
= f
ct
, and from Eq. (4)
(5)
where
b
= 2.0f
ct
. The minimum spacing is half the
maximum value, that is, s
min
= s
max
/2.
The instantaneous crack width w
i
is the difference between
the elongation of the tensile steel over the length s and the
elongation of the concrete between the cracks and is given by
(6)
Under sustained load, additional cracks occur between
widely spaced cracks (usually when 0.67s
max
< s s
max
).
The additional cracks are probably due to the combined
effect of tensile creep rupture and shrinkage. As a consequence,
the number of cracks increases and the maximum crack
spacing reduces with time. The final maximum crack
spacing s
*
is only approximately 2/3 of that given by Eq. (5),
but the final minimum crack spacing remains approximately
1/2 of the value given by Eq. (5).
As previously mentioned, experimental observations indicate
that
b
decreases with time, probably as a result of shrinkage-
induced slip and tensile creep. Hence, the stress in the tensile
concrete between the cracks gradually reduces. Further,
although creep and shrinkage will cause a small increase in
the resultant tensile force T in the real beam and a slight
reduction in the internal lever arm,
8
this effect is relatively
small and is ignored in the tension chord model presented
herein. The final crack width is the elongation of the steel
over the distance between the cracks minus the extension of
the concrete caused by
cx
plus the shortening of the
concrete between the cracks due to shrinkage. For a final
maximum crack spacing of s*, the final maximum crack
width is
(7)
where
sh
is the shrinkage strain in the tensile concrete (ve);
n = E
s
/E
e
; E
e
is the effective modulus given by E
e
= E
c
/(1 +
cc
);
E
c
and E
s
are the elastic modulus of the concrete and the
elastic modulus of steel, respectively; and
cc
is the creep
coefficient of the concrete.
A good estimate of the final maximum crack width is
given by Eq. (7), if s* is the maximum crack spacing after all
time-dependent cracking has taken place, that is, s* =
0.67s
max
. If s
max
is given by Eq. (5), s* may be taken as
(8)
By rearranging Eq. (7), the steel stress on a cracked section
corresponding to a particular crack width w* is given by

st2
T
A
s
-----
2
b
s
d
b
---------- - and
c2
2
b

tc
s
d
b
------------------ = =
s
max
f
ct
d
b
2
b

tc
--------------- =
w
i
s
E
s
-----
T
A
s
-----

b
s
d
b
------- 1 n
tc
+ ( ) =
w*
s*
E
s
-----
T
A
s
-----

b
s*
d
b
----------- 1 n
tc
+ ( )
sh
E
s
=
s*
d
b
6.0
tc
-------------- =
(9)
By substituting Eq. (1) and (8) into Eq. (9) and selecting a
maximum desired crack width in a particular structure w*,
the maximum permissible tensile steel stress can be obtained.
COMPARISON WITH TEST DATA
A total of 12 simply-supported beams and one-way slabs
were subjected to constant sustained service loads for a
period of 400 days by Gilbert and Nejadi.
6
Full details of the
test program and test results are available elsewhere.
6
Each
specimen was prismatic, with a rectangular cross section
(b = 250 mm [9.8 in.] and d = 300 mm [11.8 in.] for the six
beams and b = 400 mm [15.8 in.] and d = 130 mm [5.1 in.]
for the six one-way slabs) and a span of 3500 mm (138 in.),
and was carefully monitored throughout the test to record the
time-dependent deformation, together with the gradual
development of cracking and the gradual increase in crack
widths with time. The parameters varied in the tests were the
shape of the section b/d, the number of reinforcing bars, the
spacing between bars s
b
, the concrete cover c
t
, and the
sustained load level.
Details of the 12 specimens are provided in Table 1. All
specimens were cast from the same batch of concrete and all
the tests commenced when the specimens were 14 days old.
The measured elastic modulus, compressive strength, and
tensile strength of the concrete at the age of first loading
were E
c
= 22,820 MPa (3310 ksi), f
c
= 18.3 MPa (2650 psi),
and f
ct
= 2.00 MPa (290 psi) and the measured creep coefficient
and shrinkage strain associated with the 400-day period of
sustained loading were
cc
= 1.71 and
sh
= 0.000825.
The measured and predicted final maximum crack widths
are compared in Table 2. The mean value of predicted-to-
measured final maximum crack widths (w*/w
max
) is 1.54 and
the coefficient of variation is 21.4%. Considering the
variability of cracking in concrete and the requirement for
conservatism in design-oriented equations such as Eq. (7), the
agreement with test data is considered to be entirely satisfactory.
MAXIMUM STEEL STRESS FOR CRACK CONTROL
The model outlined in the previous section is herein used
to examine the effects of various parameters on the
maximum tensile stress permitted in the main longitudinal
f
st
w*E
s
s*
-------------

b
s*
d
b
----------- + 1 n
tc
+ ( )
sh
+ E
s
=
Table 1Details of test specimens
6
Beam
d
b
, mm
No. of bars
A
s
, mm
2
c
t
, mm
s, mm
f
st
, MPa
B1-a 16 2 400 40 150 227
B1-b 16 2 400 40 150 155
B2-a 16 2 400 25 180 226
B2-b 16 2 400 25 180 153
B3-a 16 3 600 25 90 214
B3-b 16 3 600 25 90 129
Slab
d
b
, mm
No. of bars
A
s
, mm
2
c
t
, mm
s, mm
f
st
, MPa
S1-a 12 2 226 25 308 252
S1-b 12 2 226 25 308 195
S2-a 12 3 339 25 154 247
S2-b 12 3 339 25 154 171
S3-a 12 4 452 25 103 216
S3-b 12 4 452 25 103 159
Note: 1 MPa = 145 psi; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.
304 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008
tensile reinforcement if the maximum crack width is to be
limited to a preselected value w*. The maximum permitted
steel stress is determined using Eq. (9).
Crack control in reinforced concrete slab
Consider a one-way reinforced concrete slab of thickness
h containing a single layer of longitudinal tensile bars of
diameter d
b
at a bar spacing s
b
. The clear cover to the
reinforcement from the tension face is c
t
. The area of
tensile reinforcement per unit width of the slab is A
s
and it
is located at an effective depth of d (= h c
t
d
b
/2) from the
compressive face of the slab. The characteristic compressive
strength of the concrete is f
c
. Unless noted otherwise, the slab
dimensions and material properties are taken as h = 200 mm
(8 in.); d
b
= 12 mm (0.5 in.); c
t
= 20 mm (0.79 in.); w* =
0.35 mm (0.0138 in.); f
c
= 32 MPa (4640 psi); E
c
= 28,600 MPa
(4140 ksi);
cc
= 2.5;
sh
= 0.0006; f
ct
= 2.04 MPa (296 psi);
and E
s
= 200 GPa (29,000 ksi).
In Fig. 3, the effect of bar diameter on the maximum
permissible steel stress is shown. For a given bar spacing, an
increase in bar diameter results in an increase in A
s
and an
increase in the maximum steel stress required to produce a
crack width of 0.35 mm (0.0138 in.). Of course, under a
particular in-service sustained moment, an increase in bar
diameter results in an increase in A
s
and a reduction in
crack width.
The effect of varying the slab thickness on the maximum
permissible steel stress for a slab containing 12 mm (0.5 in.)
diameter tensile bars is shown in Fig. 4. The slab depth has a
marked influence on the maximum steel stress required to
produce a maximum particular crack width, with the
maximum steel stress increasing as the slab depth decreases.
Figure 5 shows the effect of changing the bar diameter, but
at the same time adjusting the bar spacing so that the area of
tensile reinforcement remains constant. For a given reinforce-
ment ratio (A
s
/bd), if the bar diameter is reduced (that is,
smaller diameter bars at closer centers are used), the
maximum steel stress required to limit the maximum final
crack width increases. In this case, the slab thickness was
200 mm (8 in.) and the maximum final crack width was 0.35 mm
(0.0138 in.). Of course, under a particular in-service
sustained moment, using smaller diameter bars at closer
centers will result in a reduction in crack width.
Table 2Measured
6
and predicted maximum
crack widths at 400 days
Beam
Maximum steel
stress f
st
, MPa
Maximum crack width, mm
Ratio
w*/w
max
Measured
w
max
Predicted w*
(Eq. (7))
B1-a 226 0.38 0.383 1.01
B1-b 154 0.18 0.304 1.69
B2-a 225 0.36 0.382 1.06
B2-b 153 0.18 0.303 1.68
B3-a 213 0.28 0.239 0.85
B3-b 128 0.13 0.180 1.39
Slab
Maximum steel
stress f
st
, MPa
Maximum crack width, mm
Ratio
w*/w
max
Measured
w
max
Predicted
w* (Eq. (7))
S1-a 252 0.25 0.412 1.65
S1-b 195 0.20 0.347 1.73
S2-a 247 0.23 0.272 1.18
S2-b 171 0.18 0.216 1.20
S3-a 216 0.20 0.183 0.92
S3-b 159 0.15 0.154 1.03
Note: Mean (w*/w
max
) = 1.54; and coefficient of variation (w*/w
max
) = 21.4. 1 MPa =
145 psi; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.
Fig. 3Effect of bar diameter on maximum permissible
steel stress.
Fig. 4Effect of section depth on maximum permissible
steel stress.
ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 305
For a slab containing 12 mm (0.5 in.) diameter bars, the
effect of varying the maximum desired crack width w* is
shown in Fig. 6. As the permissible crack width increases,
the maximum permissible tensile steel stress also increases.
For exposure classifications where crack widths have no
influence on durability, the selection of a maximum desired
final crack width w* of 0.30 to 0.35 mm (0.012 to 0.014 in.)
will generally be acceptable from the point of view of
aesthetics and the cracks will not detract from the appearance of
the structure. Where the crack will not be visible and
aesthetics is not important, a wider crack may be acceptable
perhaps up to 0.55 mm (0.022 in.). Where durability is an
issue, the maximum desired final crack may be as low as
0.15 mm (0.006 in.) in aggressive environments but not
greater than 0.3 mm (0.012 in.).
The effect of variations in the final shrinkage strain on the
maximum permissible steel stress is shown in Fig. 7 for a
200 mm (8 in.) thick slab containing 12 mm (0.5 in.) diameter
bars. As expected, as the final shrinkage strain increases, the
maximum permitted tensile steel stress decreases. Of course,
under particular in-service conditions, an increase in the
final shrinkage strain results in wider cracks.
The effect of varying the concrete strength on the
maximum permissible tensile steel stress is shown in Fig. 8
for a 200 mm (8 in.) thick slab containing 12 mm (0.5 in.)
diameter bars. It is assumed herein that the concrete strength
only affects the tensile strength, the elastic modulus, and
the creep coefficient. In all cases, the final shrinkage was

sh
= 0.0006. Clearly, the concrete strength does not
significantly affect the maximum tensile steel stress required
for crack control.
Design example
Consider a 150 mm (5.91 in.) thick, simply-supported one-
way slab located inside a building. With appropriate regard for
durability, the concrete strength is selected to be f
c
= 32 MPa
(4640 psi) and the cover to the tensile reinforcement is taken
to be 20 mm (0.79 in.). The final shrinkage strain is taken to
Fig. 5Effect of bar diameter and reinforcement ratio (A
s
/ b
d
)
on maximum steel stress.
Fig. 7Effect of final shrinkage strain on maximum
permissible steel stress.
Fig. 6Effect of maximum final crack width on maximum
steel stress.
306 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008
be
sh
= 0.0006. Other relevant material properties are E
c
=
28,600 MPa (4140 ksi); n = E
s
/E
c
= 7.00;
cc
= 2.5; f
ct
=
2.04 MPa (296 psi); and E
s
= 200 GPa (29,000 ksi). The
effective modulus is therefore E
e
= E
c
/(1 +
cc
) = 8170 MPa
(1180 ksi) and the effective modular ratio n = E
s
/E
e
= 24.5.
The tensile face of the slab is to be exposed and the maximum
final crack width is to be limited to w* = 0.3 mm (0.0118 in.).
After completing the design for strength and deflection
control, the required minimum area of tensile steel is 650 mm
2
/m
(0.307 in.
2
/ft). Under the full service loads, the maximum in-
service sustained moment at midspan is 20.0 kNm (14.7 kipft).
The designer must select the bar diameter and bar spacing so
that the requirements for crack control are also satisfied.
Case 1Use 10 mm (0.394 in.) bars at 120 mm (4.72 in.)
centers, that is, A
s
= 655 mm
2
/m (0.309 in.
2
/ft) at d = 125 mm
(4.92 in.).
Referring to Fig. 1, elastic analysis of the cracked section
gives c = 29.6 mm (1.16 in.) and I
cr
= 50.3 10
6
mm
4
(121.0 in.
4
). The maximum in-service tensile steel stress on
the fully-cracked section at midspan is calculated using
Eq. (2) and is
st
= T/A
s
= 7.00 20 10
6
(125 29.6)/
50.3 10
6
= 265 MPa (38.4 ksi).
The area of concrete in the tension chord is obtained using
Eq. (1) and is A
ct
= 60,200 mm
2
(93.3 in.
2
). The reinforcement
ratio of the tension chord is
tc
= A
s
/A
ct
= 0.0109. With the
final bond stress taken as
b
= 1.0f
ct
= 2.04 MPa (296 psi) and
the maximum final crack spacing obtained from Eq. (8) as
s* = 10/(6.0 0.0109) = 153 mm (6.04 in.), the maximum
permissible steel stress required for crack control is obtained
using Eq. (9).
f
st
0.3 200 000 ,
153
----------------------------------
2.04 153
10
------------------------- 1 24.5 0.0109 + ( ) + =
0.0006 200,000 = 310 MPa (45.0 ksi)
The actual stress at the crack
st
= 265 MPa (38.4 ksi) is
less than f
st
= 310 MPa (45.0 ksi) and, therefore, cracking is
easily controlled.
Case 2Use 12 mm (0.472 in.) bars at 170 mm (6.69 in.)
centers, that is, A
s
= 665 mm
2
/m (0.314 in.
2
/ft) at d = 124 mm
(4.88 in.).
For this section, c = 29.6 mm (1.17 in.) and I
cr
= 50.1
10
6
mm
4
(121 in.
4
). The maximum in-service tensile steel
stress on the fully-cracked section at midspan is
st
= T/A
s
=
263 MPa (38.1 ksi). The area of concrete in the tension chord
is A
ct
= 60,200 mm
2
(93.3 in.
2
). The reinforcement ratio of
the tension chord is
tc
= A
s
/A
ct
= 0.0111. With
b
= 1.0 f
ct
=
2.04 MPa (296 psi) and s* = 12/(6.0 0.0111) = 181 mm
(7.13 in.), the maximum permissible steel stress required for
crack control (obtained using Eq. (9)) is f
st
= 251 MPa
(36.4 ksi), which is just less than the actual maximum stress
at the crack
st
= 263 MPa (38.1 ksi). Therefore, the final
maximum crack width may just exceed the desired
maximum of 0.3 mm (0.012 in).
Case 3Use 16 mm (0.630 in.) bars at 300 mm (11.8 in.)
centers, that is, A
s
= 670 mm
2
/m (0.317 in.
2
/ft) at d = 122 mm
(4.80 in.).
For this section, c = 29.5 mm (1.16 in.) and I
cr
= 48.7
10
6
mm
4
(117.0 in.
4
). The maximum in-service tensile steel
stress on the fully-cracked section at midspan is
st
= T/A
s
=
266 MPa (38.6 ksi). The area of concrete in the tension
chord is A
ct
= 60,270 mm
2
(93.42 in.
2
) and the reinforcement
ratio of the tension chord is
tc
= A
s
/A
ct
= 0.0111. With
b
=
1.0f
ct
= 2.04 MPa (296 psi) and s* = 16/(6.0 0.0111) =
240 mm (9.45 in.), the maximum permissible steel stress
required for crack control is f
st
= 169 MPa (24.5 ksi) (Eq. (9)),
which is much less than the actual steel stress due to the
sustained moment of
st
= 266 MPa (38.6 ksi). Therefore,
crack control is not adequate and the maximum final crack
width will exceed 0.3 mm (0.012 in.).
By contrast, the procedures for crack control specified by
ACI 318-05,
1
Eurocode 2,
2
AS3600,
3
and Gergely and Lutz
5
all suggest that cracking is adequately controlled in all three
of the aforementioned cases. Each of these methods does not
adequately account for the time-dependent increase in crack
widths due to shrinkage. It is not surprising that excessively
wide cracks are a common serviceability problem in many
reinforced concrete structures throughout the world.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The procedure outlined previously provides a simple and
reliable approach to crack control and has been proposed for
inclusion in the next edition of the Australian Standard for
Concrete Structures, AS3600. In the design for crack
control at the serviceability limit state, the designer must
select the maximum desired final crack width in the structure
and then ensure that the tensile steel stress on the cracked
section under the sustained service load is less than the
maximum value f
st
given by Eq. (9). The approach has been
shown to provide good agreement with measured final crack
widths in beam and slab specimens under sustained service
loads for a period of 400 days.
Sensible detailing should always be specified for crack
control. For example, the distance from the side or soffit of a
beam to the center of the nearest longitudinal bar should not
exceed approximately 100 mm (4.0 in.) and the center-to-
Fig. 8Effect of concrete strength on maximum permissible
steel stress.
ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 307
center spacing of bars near a tension face of a beam or slab
should not exceed approximately 300 mm (12 in.).
4
For exposure classifications where crack widths have no
influence on durability, the selection of a maximum desired
final crack width w* of 0.3 to 0.35 mm (0.012 to 0.014 in.)
will generally be acceptable from the point of view of
aesthetics and the cracks will not detract from the appearance of
the structure. Where the crack will not be visible and
aesthetics is not important, a wider crack may be acceptable
perhaps 0.5 to 0.6 mm (0.02 to 0.025 in.). Where durability
is an issue, the maximum desired final crack may be as low
as 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) in aggressive environments but not
greater than 0.3 mm (0.012 in.).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The support of the Australian Research Council through an ARC
Discovery Grant and an ARC Australian Professorial Fellowship is
gratefully acknowledged.
NOTATION
A
ct
= area of concrete in tension chord, mm
2
(in.
2
)
A
s
= area of tensile reinforcement, mm
2
(in.
2
)
b = width of compression chord, mm (in.)
b* width of section at level of centroid of tensile reinforcement,
mm (in.)
c = depth of compression chord or compression zone, mm (in.)
c
t
= clear cover to tensile reinforcement, mm (in.)
d = effective depth to centroid of tensile reinforcement, mm (in.)
d
b
= bar diameter, mm (in.)
E
c
= elastic modulus of concrete, MPa (ksi)
E
e
= effective modulus of concrete, MPa (ksi)
E
s
= elastic modulus of steel reinforcement, MPa (ksi)
f
c
= characteristic compressive (cylinder) strength of concrete,
MPa (psi)
f
ct
= direct tensile strength of concrete
f
st
= stress in tensile steel at crack, MPa (ksi)
f
y
= yield stress of steel reinforcement, MPa (ksi)
h = overall depth or thickness of beam or slab, mm (in.)
I
cr
= second moment of area of cracked transformed section, mm
4
(in.
4
)
M
cr
= cracking moment, kNm (kipft)
M
s
= in-service bending moment, kNm (kipft)
n = modular ratio (E
s
/E
c
)
n = effective modular ratio (E
s
/E
e
)
s = crack spacing, mm (in.)
s* = final crack spacing, mm (in.)
s
b
= center-to-center spacing between bars, mm (in.)
T = total tensile force in tension chord, kN (kips)
w* = maximum final crack width, mm (in.)
w
i
= maximum initial crack spacing (at first loading), mm (in.)
z = distance along tension chord, mm (in.)

sh
= shrinkage strain of concrete

cc
= creep coefficient of concrete

tc
= reinforcement ratio of tension chord (A
st
/A
ct
)

c
= stress in concrete, MPa (psi)

c2
= tensile stress in concrete in tension chord midway between cracks,
MPa (psi)

ct
= uniform average tensile stress in concrete in tension chord,
MPa (psi)

st1
= stress in reinforcement in tension chord at crack, MPa (ksi)

st 2
= stress in reinforcement in tension chord midway between cracks,
MPa (ksi)

b
= average bond stress, MPa (psi)
REFERENCES
1. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (318R-05), American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2005, 430 pp.
2. BS EN 1992-1-1:2004, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures
Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for
Standardization, CEN, Brussels, 2004, 224 pp.
3. Standards Australia Committee BD-002, Australian Standard for
Concrete Structures (AS3600-2001), Standards Australia, Sydney,
Australia, 2001, 176 pp.
4. Gilbert, R. I., Cracking and Crack Control in Reinforced Concrete
Structures Subjected to Long-Term Loads and Shrinkage, 18th Australian
Conference on the Mechanics of Structures & Materials (ASMSM18), V. 2,
A. J. Deeks and H. Hao, eds., the Netherlands, 2004, pp. 803-809.
5. Gergely, P., and Lutz, L. A., Maximum Crack Width in Reinforced
Concrete Flexural Members, Causes, Mechanism, and Control of
Cracking in Concrete, SP-20, American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, MI, 1968, 244 pp.
6. Gilbert, R. I., and Nejadi, S., An Experimental Study of Flexural
Cracking in Reinforced Concrete Members under Sustained Loads,
UNICIV Report No. R-435, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 2004, 59 pp.
7. Marti, P.; Alvarez, M.; Kaufmann, W.; and Sigrist, V., Tension Chord
Model for Structural Concrete, Structural Engineering International, Apr.
1998, pp. 287-298.
8. Gilbert, R. I., Time Effects in Concrete Structures, Elsevier Science
Publishers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 1988, 321 pp.