Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
3R-07
First Printing
September 2007
www.concrete.org
ISBN 978-0-87031-254-0
ACI ITG-4.3R-07
D. Kirk Harman
Adolfo Matamoros
Michael A. Caldarone
Daniel C. Jansen
Andrew W. Taylor
Other contributors
Dominic J. Kelly
Andres Lepage
ACI ITG-4.3R presents a literature review on seismic design using highstrength concrete. The document is organized in chapters addressing the
structural design of columns, beams, beam-column joints, and structural
walls made with high-strength concrete, and focuses on aspects most relevant
for seismic design. Each chapter concludes with a series of recommended
modifications to ACI 318-05 based on the findings of the literature review.
The recommendations include proposals for the modification of the equivalent rectangular stress block, equations to calculate the axial strength of
columns subjected to concentric loading, column confinement requirements,
limits on the specified yield strength of confinement reinforcement, strut
factors, and provisions for the development of straight bars and hooks.
An accompanying standard, ITG-4.1, is written in mandatory language
in a format that can be adopted by local jurisdictions, and will allow building
officials to approve the use of high-strength concrete on projects that are
being constructed under the provisions of ACI 301, Specifications for
Structural Concrete, and ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete.
ITG 4 has also developed another nonmandatory language document:
ITG-4.2R. It addresses materials and quality considerations and is
the supporting document for ITG-4.1.
Keywords: bond; confinement; drift; flexure; high-strength concrete; highyield-strength reinforcement; seismic application; shear; stress block; strutand-tie.
Henry G. Russell
CONTENTS
Chapter 1Introduction, p. ITG-4.3R-2
1.1Background
1.2Scope
Chapter 2Notation, p. ITG-4.3R-4
Chapter 3Definitions, p. ITG-4.3R-7
Chapter 4Design for flexural and axial loads
using equivalent rectangular stress block,
p. ITG-4.3R-7
4.1Parameters of equivalent rectangular stress block
4.2Stress intensity factor 1
4.3Stress block depth parameter 1
4.4Stress block area 1
4.5Limiting strain cu
4.6Axial strength of high-strength concrete columns
4.7Comparison of different proposals for rectangular
stress block
4.8Recommendations
Chapter 5Confinement requirements for beams
and columns, p. ITG-4.3R-19
5.1Constitutive models for confined concrete
5.2Previous research and general observations
5.3Equations to determine amount of confinement
reinforcement required in columns
ACI ITG-4.3R-07 was published and became effective August 2007.
Copyright 2007, American Concrete Institute.
All rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any form or by any
means, including the making of copies by any photo process, or by electronic or
mechanical device, printed, written, or oral, or recording for sound or visual reproduction
or for use in any knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless permission in writing
is obtained from the copyright proprietors.
ITG-4.3R-1
ITG-4.3R-2
ITG-4.3R-3
ITG-4.3R-4
Ab,max
Acc
Ach
Acv
Ag
Ash
Asp
Ast
Asv
Aswb
Asww
Ate
Atr
Av
Aw
av
b
bc
=
=
bw
CHAPTER 2NOTATION
cross-sectional area of largest bar being
developed or spliced, in.2 (mm2)
cross-sectional area of structural member
measured center-to-center of transverse
reinforcement, in.2 (mm2)
cross-sectional area of structural member
measured out-to-out of transverse reinforcement,
in.2 (mm2)
gross area of concrete section bounded by web
thickness and length of section in direction of
shear force considered, in.2 (mm2)
gross area of concrete section, in.2 (mm2). For
hollow section, Ag is area of concrete only and
does not include area of void(s)
total cross-sectional area of transverse reinforcement (including crossties) within spacing s and
perpendicular to dimension bc , in.2 (mm2)
cross-sectional area of transverse reinforcement crossing potential plane of splitting of
bars being developed or spliced, in.2 (mm2)
total area of nonprestressed longitudinal
reinforcement (bars or steel shapes), in.2 (mm2)
total area of vertical reinforcement in structural
wall, in.2 (mm2)
total area of vertical reinforcement in boundary
element of structural wall, in.2 (mm2)
total area of vertical reinforcement in web of
structural wall, excluding the boundary
elements, in. 2 (mm2)
sum of areas of tie legs used to provide lateral
support against buckling for longitudinal bars
of column, in.2 (mm2)
total cross-sectional area of all transverse
reinforcement within spacing s that crosses
potential plane of splitting through reinforcement
being developed, in.2 (mm2)
area of shear reinforcement with spacing s, in.2
(mm2)
gross cross-sectional area of structural wall,
in.2 (mm2)
shear span, equal to distance from center of
concentrated load to either: a) face of support for
continuous or cantilever members; or b) center of
support for simply supported members, in.
(mm)
width of compression face of member, in. (mm)
cross-sectional dimension of column core
measured center-to-center of outer legs of
transverse reinforcement comprising area Ash,
in. (mm)
web width or diameter of circular section, in.
(mm)
distance from extreme compression fiber to
neutral axis, in. (mm)
cmin + db /2 = spacing or cover dimension, in.
(mm)
c1
c2
cb
cc
ccb
=
=
cmax
cmin
=
=
cp
cs
=
=
csfw
csi
cso
=
=
DRlim
d
=
=
db
ds
EEp
Es
fc
fco
fp
fpc
=
=
fs
ft,l
ft,t
fu
fyl
fyt
fyt,l
fyt,t
ha
hcol
hw
=
=
=
hx
Ktr
Ktr
k1
k2
k3
kcc
kd
kj
ks
lb
ld
ldh
lo
lw
Mexp
Mncol
nL
P
Po
s
=
=
=
=
so
Tb
Ts
td
V
=
=
Va
Vall
Vc
=
=
Vn
Vs
=
=
Vt,l
Vt,t
vc,all
wst
1
=
=
=
ITG-4.3R-5
ITG-4.3R-6
sh
st
fc
nl,strut =
nl,truss =
s
sc
ta
lim
yield
u
1
cu
=
=
=
lim
o
s
y
=
=
=
lim
u
=
=
=
vj
p
=
=
=
=
area
tc
t,l
t,t
vol
vr
wt
CHAPTER 3DEFINITIONS
area transverse reinforcement ratioratio of the area
of transverse reinforcement crossed by a plane perpendicular
to the legs of the transverse reinforcement to the area of
reinforced concrete along that plane.
axial load ratioratio of axial load to the product of
compressive strength of concrete and the gross area of
concrete cross section.
confinement indexproduct of transverse reinforcement
ratio (either by area or by volume) and the yield strength of
the transverse reinforcement, divided by the compressive
strength of concrete.
curvature ductility ratioratio of mean curvature at
failure in the plastic hinge length to curvature at the onset of
section yielding. In the case of reinforced concrete columns,
the majority of researchers referenced in this document
define failure as a 20% reduction in lateral load resistance.
displacement ductility ratioratio of displacement at
failure to displacement at the onset of member yielding. In
the case of reinforced concrete columns, the majority of
researchers referenced in this document define failure as a
20% reduction in lateral load resistance.
ductilityability of a reinforced concrete member to
maintain its strength when subjected to repeated load reversals
beyond the linear range of response.
interstory driftrelative lateral displacement between
two adjacent stories of a building imposed by the design
earthquake.
interstory drift ratioratio of interstory drift to story
height.
killed steelsteel made by completely removing or tying
up the oxygen in the liquid steel through the addition of
elements such as aluminum or silicon before the ingot
solidifies, with the objective of achieving maximum uniformity
in the steel.
limiting driftdrift corresponding to a 20% reduction in
lateral load resistance of a reinforced concrete member subjected
to load reversals with increasing maximum displacements.
limiting drift ratioratio of limiting drift to column
height.
limiting strainmaximum strain at the extreme concrete
compression fiber of a flexural member at the onset of
concrete crushing, cu.
volumetric transverse reinforcement ratioratio of the
volume of transverse reinforcement confining the concrete
core of a potential plastic hinge region to the volume of
concrete inside the confined core.
CHAPTER 4DESIGN FOR FLEXURAL
AND AXIAL LOADS USING EQUIVALENT
RECTANGULAR STRESS BLOCK
It is common practice for structures assigned to a high
Seismic Design Category (SDC) to proportion the majority
of the structural elements of the lateral force-resisting system
so that the axial load demand remains below the balanced
axial load. For these elements, variations in the shape of the
stress block related to the compressive strength of the
concrete do not have a significant effect on the calculated
ITG-4.3R-7
ITG-4.3R-8
( fc in psi)
(4-1)
( fc in MPa)
ITG-4.3R-9
0.01f c
1 = 0.85 --------------- 0.67
1000
1 = 0.85 0.0015f c 0.67
( fc in psi)
(4-2)
( fc in MPa)
(4-3)
0.0275 ( f c 8000 )
1 = 0.85 ----------------------------------- 0.75 for fc > 8000 (fc in psi)
1000
(4-4)
(4-5)
ITG-4.3R-10
( fc in psi)
(4-8)
( fc in MPa)
(4-6)
Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu (2004) developed a rectangular stress block for high-strength and normal-strength
concretes based on a large volume of experimental data and an
analytical stress-strain relationship. They suggested varying
1 with concrete compressive strength to reflect the change in
the shape of the stress-strain relationship. Accordingly
1 = 0.85 (fc 4000) 105, 0.72 1 0.85 (fc in psi)
(4-7)
( fc in psi)
(4-9)
( fc in MPa)
(4-10)
(4-11)
ITG-4.3R-11
ITG-4.3R-12
(4-12)
ITG-4.3R-13
(4-13)
k3 = 0.90
(4-14)
A
k4 = c + (1 c) -----c 0.95
Ag
(4-15)
A
-----c 0.6
Ag
(4-16)
ITG-4.3R-14
f c
c = 1.1 --------------- 0.8 (fc in psi)
20,000
(4-17)
f c
- 0.8 (fc in MPa)
c = 1.1 -------138
The product k3k4 can be as low as 0.61 for 18,000 psi
(124 MPa) concrete and Ac /Ag = 0.6, which is 28% below
the 0.85 value suggested by ACI 318-05 for normal-strength
concrete columns, as reproduced in Eq. (4-12). Instead of
detailed computation of the coefficient k4, as outlined
previously, a conservative, but simple, approach was
recommended for convenience in design by Ozbakkaloglu
and Saatcioglu (2004). They suggested that the product k3k4
be taken as 0.85 for fc of up to 6000 psi (41 MPa), and be
reduced by 0.017 for every 1000 psi (6.9 MPa) increase over
6000 psi (41 MPa), up to 18,000 psi (124 MPa). The
researchers identified the premature cover spalling as a
phenomenon that is prevalent in concentrically loaded highstrength concrete columns. For columns subjected to bending
and axial load, Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu (2004) indicated
that the critical compression side of the cover would deform
toward the core concrete, which would restrain the cover
against buckling.
Park et al. (1998) indicated that the axial strength of
columns subjected to compression is
Po = 1 fc (Ag Ast) + fy Ast
(4-18)
(4-19)
ITG-4.3R-15
Fig. 4.12Error parameter EEp in estimates of column strength (Bae and Bayrak 2003).
similar levels of conservatism for all levels of concrete strength.
The model proposed by Azizinamini et al. (1994) increasingly
underestimated the column strengths for concrete compressive
strengths beyond 13,000 psi (90 MPa). Bae and Bayrak noted
that the data they used lacked a significant number of test
results with high axial loads (small eccentricities). When
axial loads are high, the different models provide significantly
different predictions. They also noted that in seismic
applications, the concern is not with high axial loads, but
with relatively low axial loads (high eccentricities).
Ozbakkaloglu and Saatcioglu (2004) compared column
interaction diagrams based on the rectangular stress blocks
of ACI 318-05, CSA A23.3-94, and those proposed by
Ibrahim and MacGregor (1997) and Ozbakkaloglu and
Saatcioglu (2004).
The comparisons, shown in Fig. 4.13, indicate that the
interaction diagrams generated by the equivalent rectangular
stress block of ACI 318-05 and that proposed by
ITG-4.3R-16
ITG-4.3R-17
Table 4.1Summary of parameters 1 and 1 defining different rectangular stress blocks investigated in
parametric study
Concrete compressive strength, psi (MPa)
Equivalent rectangular stress block parameter
4000 (28)
1
1
6000 (41)
1
1
8000 (55)
1
1
10,000 (69)
1
1
12,000 (83)
1
1
15,000 (103)
1
1
ACI 318-05
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.75
0.85
0.65
0.85
0.65
0.85
0.65
0.85
0.65
0.82
0.85
0.88
0.85
0.80
0.85
0.85
0.75
0.78
0.85
0.81
0.65
0.76
0.80
0.78
0.65
0.75
0.75
0.74
0.65
0.73
0.75
0.70
0.65
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.75
0.85
0.65
0.85
0.65
0.75
0.65
0.60
0.65
ITG-4.3R-18
(4-20)
(4-21)
ITG-4.3R-19
ITG-4.3R-20
ITG-4.3R-21
ITG-4.3R-22
ITG-4.3R-23
For rectangular columns, the minimum amount of reinforcement required by ACI 318-05 is given by Eq. (21-3) and (21-4)
f c A g
Ash = 0.3sbc ---- -------- 1
f yt A ch
f c
Ash = 0.09sbc ---f yt
ITG-4.3R-24
Ate
(5-1)
(5-2)
The area of a tie leg Ate required to tie the longitudinal bars
reliant on it is defined as
A st f yl
A te = 10 -----------s
f yt
1 A st f yl s
A te = ------ ----------- --------16 f yt 100
(5-3)
where
=
l
Ast =
(5-4)
lm 0.4
(5-5)
(5-6)
(5-7)
high-strength concrete columns with rectilinear normalstrength reinforcement ( fyt < 72,500 psi [ fyt < 500 MPa])
that contained 200, 138, 180, and 167% of the confining transverse reinforcement required by ACI 318-05. These columns
achieved curvature ductility ratios of 17, 14, 21, and 14,
respectivelyall below or very close to the limit of 20 that
they suggested as a performance criterion.
It was concluded by Li and Park (2004) that the amount of
confining reinforcement required by ACI 318-05 was
inadequate to achieve curvature ductility ratios of 10 under
high axial loads.
Li and Park proposed the following expression for the
amount of confinement needed for columns with rectilinear
normal-yield-strength ( fyt < 72,500 psi [ fyt < 500 MPa])
reinforcement
A sh
A ( u y 33 l m + 22 ) f c P u
------- = -------g- ---------------------------------------------------- ----- --------------sb c
A ch
f yt f c A g
f c
= 91 ----------1450
(5-15)
and
= 91 0.1fc
(fc in MPa)
(5-16)
(5-8)
where
= 117 when fc < 10,000 psi (70 MPa)
( fc in psi)
ITG-4.3R-25
(5-9)
i 0.85f c
--------------------- 0.4
f yt
(5-17)
Ag
------- 1.5
A ch
(5-18)
and
f c 2 f c
= ------------ ---------- + 539.4 when fc 10,000 (fc in
648.6
15.2
psi)
(5-10)
(5-11)
where
= 1.1 when fc < 11,600 psi (80 MPa)
(5-12)
(5-13)
and
f yt f c A g
where
(5-19)
(5-20)
ve
where
(5-14)
2
bc
k ve = 0.15 ------sh x
(5-21)
ITG-4.3R-26
(5-22)
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-23)
(5-24)
(5-25)
(5-26)
ITG-4.3R-27
Coefficient ,
circular sections
vr
10
12
vr
0.15
0.18
0.09
0.12
vr
0.25
0.30
0.15
0.20
c
tr = ----------------------- --- 1 0.8f pc f yt
(5-27)
ITG-4.3R-28
Drift demand can be greater than that computed in accordance with Sections 12.8.6 and 12.9.2 of ASCE/SEI 7-05
because of the drift computation procedure that is implemented
in ASCE/SEI 7-05. The most frequently used drift computation
procedure in ASCE/SEI 7-05 (Section 12.8.6) involves an
elastic analysis of the building structure using design-level
earthquake forces. The design-level earthquake forces
specified in Section 12.8.3 of ASCE/SEI 7-05 are obtained
from an elastic design response spectrum that produces a
seismic response coefficient Cs (Section 12.8.1), which is
inversely proportional to the response modification factor R.
Because proportioning the strength of the structure on the
basis of reduced earthquake forces does not reduce the drift
demands (Shimazaki and Sozen 1984; Shimazaki 1988;
Lepage 1997; Browning 2001; Matamoros et al. 2003), the
reduced displacement demands computed based on the
forces specified in Section 12.8 of ASCE/SEI 7-05, with the
inclusion of the coefficient R must be adjusted to obtain
reasonable estimates of the displacement demands caused by
the design earthquake. This is accomplished in Sections
12.8.6 and 12.9.2 of ASCE/SEI 7-05 through the use of the
deflection amplification factor Cd. Current values of R and
Cd specified in Table 12.2-1 of ASCE/SEI 7-05 for special
reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames are 8 and 5.5,
respectively. There is a significant body of research based on
nonlinear analyses of reinforced concrete frames and physical
tests of small-scale specimens in earthquake simulators
showing that these two factors are approximately equal for
special reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames if the
stiffnesses of the frames used in the linear analysis are
calculated on the basis of cracked section properties (Shibata
and Sozen 1976; Shimazaki and Sozen 1984; Lepage 1997;
Browning 2001; Matamoros et al. 2004). Consequently, drift
demands in special moment-resisting frames calculated
using the R and Cd factors specified in Table 12.2-1 of
ASCE/SEI 7-05 may underestimate the drift demand associated
with the design earthquake by as much as 45%.
Also, as hinges form in columns, the nonlinear response
tends to concentrate drift demands in the stories between
plastic hinges in columns rather than distributing them
evenly over the height of a building, as an elastic analysis
would indicate. In special reinforced concrete moment
frames, however, the strong column-weak beam provision
guards against plastic hinges within columns from being
close to one another, that is, plastic mechanisms over only a
few stories, where large drifts are concentrated.
One of the criteria that must be considered in establishing
a limiting drift for the purpose of determining the amount of
confinement in columns is the performance objective
outlined by design codes. The general goals of the code
provisions, though not specifically stated, are to provide life
safety in the design-level earthquake and collapse prevention
for the MCE (BSSC 2004). The amount of confinement is
primarily determined by the need for providing life safety in
the design earthquake while considering collapse prevention
in the MCE. The drift demand from the MCE may be as high
as 50% greater than the drift demand from the design-level
earthquake.
k ve tc
f s = E s 0.0025 + 0.213 ------------- f
f co
yt
(5-28)
ITG-4.3R-29
ITG-4.3R-30
(5-29)
ITG-4.3R-31
(5-30)
ITG-4.3R-32
(5-31)
f yt A ch
k A g f c
ITG-4.3R-33
(5-35)
(5-36)
where
(5-32)
ve
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-37)
Pu
0.2
----------A g f c
(5-38)
and
where
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-33)
and
Pu
0.2
----------A g f c
(5-34)
ITG-4.3R-34
(5-39)
A g f c
f yt A ch
(5-40)
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-41)
Pu
0.2
----------A g f c
(5-42)
where
and
f Ag
Pu
c = 0.2 ----c- ------- 1 ----------f yt A ch A g f c
(5-43)
where
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-44)
Pu
0.2
----------A g f c
(5-45)
and
In SI units:
The use of transverse reinforcement with a specified
yield strength of up to 830 MPa should be allowed to
meet the confinement requirements for high-strength
concrete columns. The yield strength of the reinforcement can be measured by the offset method of ASTM A
370 using 0.2% permanent offset;
For columns with concrete compressive strength greater
than 55 MPa and rectilinear transverse reinforcement, the
area ratio of transverse reinforcement shall not be less
than that required by the following equation
f c A g
Pu
c = 0.3 ---- -------- 1 ----------f yt A ch A g f c
(5-46)
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-47)
where
Pu
0.2
----------A g f c
(5-48)
A g f c
f yt A ch
(5-49)
Ag
------- 1 0.3
A ch
(5-50)
(5-51)
(6-1)
and
Pu
0.2
----------A g f c
ITG-4.3R-35
(6-2)
where
and
ITG-4.3R-36
Fig. 6.2Effect of different parameters on test/estimate ratios for shear strength using
ACI 318-05 Eq. (11-3). Data set compiled by Reineck et al. (2003). (Note: The calculated
ACI shear strengths did not consider the limit of 100 psi (8.3 MPa) on the term f c . The
dashed line in each figure represents linear regression best fit of the data.)
capacity of the struts. Equation (6-1) shows that a reduction
in the strut angle leads to an increase in the shear force
carried by the reinforcement, increasing the effectiveness of
the transverse reinforcement.
After inclined cracking occurs, the force carried by the
concrete is expected to decrease with increasing compressive
strength due to reduced aggregate interlock. The opposite
occurs with the force carried by the reinforcement through
the truss mechanism, which is expected to increase due to the
higher strength of the concrete in the struts of the web. Consequently, one of the most significant concerns in calculating the
shear strength of members with high-strength concrete is
preventing the sudden failure of members with relatively small
amounts of transverse reinforcement, for which the maximum
shear force that can be carried by the truss mechanism is
similar to or smaller than the shear force corresponding to
inclined cracking. In members with high amounts of transverse
reinforcement, theory suggests that the reduction in the shear
force carried by the concrete is offset by an increase in the
effectiveness of the transverse reinforcement.
6.1Shear strength of flexural members without
shear reinforcement
Figures 6.2 and 6.3 show the effects of different parameters
on the test/calculated ratio obtained with Eq. (11-3) and (11-5)
of ACI 318-05 for nonprestressed beams without transverse
reinforcement
V c = 2 f c b w d
V c = 0.17 f c b w d
(f c in psi)
(f c in MPa)
V u d
V c = 1.9 f c + 2500 w -------- b w d 3.5 f c b w d ( f c in psi )
Mu
V u d
- b w d 0.29 f c b w d ( f c in MPa )
V c = 0.16 f c + 17.2 w -------
Mu
Test results presented in Fig. 6.2 and 6.3 are from the database of shear tests developed by Reineck et al. (2003).
Although the figures indicate that there is no bias with
respect to the compressive strength of concrete, they show a
significant problem for members with light amounts of
longitudinal reinforcement.
Collins and Kuchma (1999), Nilson (1994), Ahmad et al.
(1986), and Ahmad and Lue (1987) point out that this
problem is of most significance for lightly reinforced slender
beams with high-strength concrete. Figures 6.2 and 6.3 also
show that the shear strength of members without transverse
reinforcement may be affected by the effective depth of the
member (Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445 1998). Although
there is considerable debate about the proper model to quantify
the effect of size (Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445 1998),
Collins et al. (1993) stated that tests of high-strength
concrete beams conducted by Kuchma et al. (1997) showed
that this effect is not significant if longitudinal reinforcement
is distributed throughout the depth of the member. The report
by Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445 (1998) summarizes
several equations that have been proposed to more accurately
reflect the effects of compressive strength, longitudinal
reinforcement ratio, and effective depth on shear strength of
members without transverse reinforcement.
ITG-4.3R-37
Fig. 6.3Effect of different parameters on test/estimate ratios for shear strength using
ACI 318-05 Eq. (11-5). Data set compiled by Reineck et al. (2003). (Note: The calculated
ACI shear strengths did not consider the limit of 100 psi (8.3 MPa) on the term f c . The
dashed line in each figure represents linear regression best fit of the data.)
ITG-4.3R-38
bw s
= 0.062 f c ------f yt
(f c in psi)
ACI 318 Eq. (11-13)
(f c in MPa)
(f c in psi)
(6-3)
(f c in MPa)
9
s = ---------3 f
c
1.7
s = ---------3 f
c
ITG-4.3R-39
(f c in psi)
(6-5)
(f c in MPa)
(6-6)
(f c in psi)
(f c in MPa)
(6-7)
(6-8)
(6-4)
and in members with transverse reinforcement
4.6
t = ----------------------------------------5
6.5 + 0.13cot st
(6-9)
(6-10)
ITG-4.3R-40
(Fig. 6.5(a))
(6-14)
cot
cott --------------st2
(Fig. 6.5(b))
(6-15)
and
Fig. 6.5Strut and compression field angles for structural
walls as defined by Von Ramin and Matamoros (2006).
Ramin and Matamoros (2004, 2006) indicated that the
strength of the strut must be reduced to reflect interaction
with the tie. Von Ramin and Matamoros (2004, 2006)
proposed the following expression for the interaction factor
( s f c f t, t ) ( s f c f t, l )
ta = -------------------------------------------------------2
( s f c ) f t, t f t, l
(6-11)
(Fig. 6.5(a))
(6-16)
(Fig. 6.5(a))
(6-17)
and
where ft,l and ft,t are the stresses imposed on the concrete by
the compression fields associated with reinforcement
oriented in directions parallel to and perpendicular to the
main longitudinal tie. These stresses are calculated based on
the assumption of a uniform compression field (Von Ramin
and Matamoros 2006) as
t, t f yt, t
f t, t = ---------------2
sin t
(6-12)
(6-18)
and
f t, l
t, l f yt, l
= ---------------2
cos l
Va = s fc wstbsinst
(6-19)
(6-13)
where wst is the strut width, and b is the width of the structural
member. Based on the geometric configuration of the node,
the width of the strut w is given by
wst = hacosst lbsinst
(6-20)
with ha = 2cb = twice the cover of the longitudinal reinforcement and lb is the dimension of the loading plate or support
in the axial direction of the member.
In the case of squat walls in which designers include the
strength provided by the transverse reinforcement, contrary
to expectations, Eq. (6-11) will result in a significant reduction
in the calculated strength of the strut. In structural walls with
those characteristics, the amount of transverse reinforcement
needed to avoid a reduction in shear strength after inclined
cracking is very large. A larger nominal shear strength may
be obtained by neglecting the effect of the transverse reinforcement in the calculation of the strength of the wall, which is
consistent with the behavior observed in tests. In those cases,
although the amount of transverse reinforcement does not
(6-21)
(6-22)
(6-23)
p = 1 + 2 (P/Ag fc )0.35
(6-24)
where
(6-26)
ITG-4.3R-41
(6-27)
(6-28)
ITG-4.3R-42
(6-29)
(6-30)
(6-31)
(6-32)
4
sh = 1 ------------------------- 2
M Vd + 1
(6-33)
where
where
vc, all
M
=
=
b
j
=
=
(6-34)
where
fc = 1 fc /30,000 0.6
( fc in psi)
fc = 1 0.005 fc 0.6
1
t = --------------------------------3
1 + 0.1cot st
(6-35)
( fc in MPa)
(6-36)
(6-37)
ITG-4.3R-43
ITG-4.3R-44
(7-1)
(7-2)
(7-3)
(7-4)
ld
c
----- = -------------------------------------------------------- (f c and f y in psi)
db
c + K tr
70 ----------------------
db
42f y
---------- 2210 t e
f 1 4
ld
c
----- = ------------------------------------------------------- (f c and f y in MPa)
db
c + K tr
70 ----------------------
db
(7-5)
where
c = cmin + 0.5db
(7-6)
ITG-4.3R-45
c max
= 0.1 --------- + 0.9 1.25
c min
(7-7)
(7-8)
A sp
14
- + 66 f c
Tb = 2177t d -----(Tb in lb, td in in., Asp in in.2, and fc in
(7-13)
psi)
Ktr = (6.25tdAtr /sn)
td = 0.78db + 0.22
(db in inches)
td = 0.03db + 0.22
(db in mm)
(7-9)
and
(c + Ktr )/db 4.0
(7-10)
db
c
l
0.4f y
----d- = ---------- 20 t e (f c and f y in MPa)
f 1 4
db
c
(7-11)
db
c
l
0.6f y
----d- = ---------- 30 t e (f c and f y in MPa)
f 1 4
db
c
(7-12)
t d A sp
14
Tb = -------- + 1 f c (Tb in kN, td in mm, Asp in mm2, and fc in MPa)
500- -----n
(7-14)
(7-15)
ITG-4.3R-46
(7-20)
In inch-pound units:
Lap splices of flexural reinforcement shall be permitted
only if hoop or spiral reinforcement is provided over the lap
length. When the value of f c exceeds 100 psi, ld shall be
(7-16)
(1 kj 4)
l dh
k d = 0.038 ----- + 0.54 1.0
db
(7-17)
(7-18)
(7-19)
0.46d s
k s = 0.7 + --------------- 1.0
2
db
=
=
7.3Recommendations
Research in bond and development of reinforcement
(McCabe 1998) indicates that design expressions based on
the square root of the compressive strength of the concrete
may be unconservative for compressive strengths greater
than 10,000 psi (69 MPa). Research by Azizinamini et al.
(1993, 1999b) and Zuo and Darwin (2000) showed that the
two main alternatives to correcting this problem were to
increase the development length or to add transverse reinforcement. The main advantage of the latter approach is that it
improves the behavior of the spliced or developed bars
because failure is significantly more ductile. This is particularly
advantageous in seismic design.
Zuo and Darwin (2000) proposed a relationship between
bond force and compressive strength to the 1/4 power based
on a statistical study of monotonic tests of beams without
transverse reinforcement and with concrete compressive
strengths up to 16,000 psi (110 MPa). Their study concluded
that the best fit between bond force and compressive strength
for members with transverse reinforcement was obtained for
compressive strength raised to the power of 3/4, compared
with the compressive strength raised to the power of 1/4 for
members without transverse reinforcement.
Because ductile behavior is preferable in earthquake-resistant
design, it was decided that the use of transverse reinforcement
would be the preferable of the two alternatives. Therefore,
the recommendation by Azizinamini et al. (1999a) was
adopted as the basis for the proposed addition to Chapter 21
of ACI 318-05. Consistent with the approach adopted in ACI
318-05, the design recommendation adopted by the
committee did not include any limitations to its applicability
related to use of epoxy coating. It is important to note,
however, that the recommendation by Azizinamini et al.
(1999a) was based primarily on test results from uncoated
bar splices in elements with concrete compressive strength of
up to 16,000 psi (110 MPa). At the time the recommendation
was adopted by the committee, there was a paucity of
experimental results from splices of epoxy-coated bars with
transverse reinforcement in elements with high-strength
concrete, and from uncoated and epoxy-coated bars terminated
using standard hooks in high-strength concrete.
The proposed recommendation is stated in the following:
where
cc
ITG-4.3R-47
ITG-4.3R-48
( fc in psi)
(8-1)
(8-2)
ITG-4.3R-49
depth to beam bar diameter in these two tests were 13.6 and
15.7, below the limit of 20 specified by the design provisions
of ACI 318-05 and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 352 (2002).
The average ratio of measured to calculated strength was
1.31 for the entire group of exterior joint tests, and the
average joint shear coefficient vj was 20.8 compared with
the value of 15 given in ACI 318-05 and the design provisions
of Committee 352.
Of the 22 specimens evaluated, the majority did not
comply with the code requirements for exterior connections,
namely that there should be a minimum of two beams on
opposite sides of the column with widths of at least 75% of
the column width. The strict interpretation of this requirement
would have led to classifying the specimens as corner
connections and adopting a shear coefficient vj of 12.
Noguchi et al. (1998) presented an overview of experimental
research on connections in Japan. The total number of
specimens with concrete compressive strength over 8700 psi
(60 MPa) was 110, with 76 simulating interior connections,
and 28 specimens simulating exterior joints without transverse beams.
Noguchi et al. (1998) concluded that the provisions for
calculating joint shear strength in ACI 318-89 (same as those
in ACI 318-05) provided conservative results for the tests
carried out in Japan. The mean value of the joint shear
strength measured experimentally was approximately
proportional to the compressive strength raised to the power
0.72. The ACI provisions, which assume that joint shear
strength increases with the square root of the compressive
strength, resulted in a safe lower-bound estimate of strength.
8.3Shear strength of interior joints
Saqan and Kreger (1998) had only four test results from
specimens simulating interior joints. All specimens
sustained joint shear strengths higher than the nominal
values calculated according to ACI 318-05, despite having
lower amounts of transverse reinforcement than dictated by
ACI 318-05 and the design provisions of Committee 352,
and despite not meeting the requirement that beams extend
over at least 75% of the width of all column faces. They
concluded that on the limited basis of these four tests, the
design provisions for joint shear strength in ACI 318-05 and
those proposed by Committee 352 provided safe estimates of
strength for concrete compressive strengths of up to 15,000 psi
(103 MPa). The evaluation of test results by Noguchi et al.
(1998) also led to the conclusion that the ACI design provisions
yielded conservative estimates of strength for concrete
compressive strengths up to 17,400 psi (120 MPa).
8.4Effect of transverse reinforcement on
joint shear strength
The amount of transverse reinforcement in the exterior
joint specimens reviewed by Saqan and Kreger (1998)
ranged from 0.07 to 2.02 times the amount required by
ACI 318-05. They found no discernible correlation between
joint shear strength or mode of failure and the amount of
transverse reinforcement. Of the 22 specimens evaluated by
Saqan and Kreger, only five had an amount of transverse
ITG-4.3R-50
where the coefficient c = 3.0 for hw /lw 1.5, 2.0 for hw /lw
2.0, (fc and fy in psi) where the coefficient c = 0.25 for
hw /lw 1.5, 0.17 for hw /lw 2.0, (fc and fy in MPa) and
varies linearly in between.
The minimum amount of web reinforcement required by
the code is l = t = 0.0025, with a maximum spacing
between bars of 18 in. (457 mm).
In slender walls, the flexural behavior of the walls is most
important. The minimum amount of longitudinal reinforcement
is specified to prevent premature failure due to rupture of the
reinforcement. The significance of this problem is greater for
walls made with high-strength concrete because the depth of
the neutral axis decreases and the strain demand in the
reinforcement increases with compressive strength.
Another mode of failure that the code intends to prevent,
or at least postpone, through the use of special boundary
elements at the edges of structural walls is crushing of the
concrete in the compression zone due to flexural demands.
According to ACI 318-05, compression zones shall be
reinforced with special boundary elements in areas where
lw
c ----------------------------, h 0.007
600 ( u h w ) u w
(9-1)
(9-2)
ITG-4.3R-51
1
lim = --- 0.0025 ( l w 0.5h w ) + 2 -----ulw
hw
(9-3)
(9-4)
ITG-4.3R-52
(9-5)
( fc in psi)
(9-6)
( fc in MPa)
vn = 2 f c + n fy 8 f c (psi)
vn =
(9-7)
f c /6 + n fy 2 f c /3 (MPa)
(9-8)
A swb + A sww
wt = ---------------------------Aw
(9-9)
where
where
wt
Aw
Aswb
=
=
=
ITG-4.3R-53
ITG-4.3R-54
(10-1)
(10-1)
(10-2)
(10-2)
(21-XX)
(21-YY)
(21-ZZ)
(21-WW)
ITG-4.3R-55
(21-AA)
(21-6)
fy db
l dh = --------------------14
650f c
(21-BB)
ITG-4.3R-56
(A-3)
Acknowledgments
Thanks are due to the Carpenters Contractors Cooperation
Committee, Inc., of Los Angeles, Calif., for sponsoring
Innovation Task Group 4 and to Joseph C. Sanders for acting
as liaison with that group. The members of ITG 4 are
indebted to the following individuals for their review of
portions of this document and for their constructive
comments: R. J. Frosch, M. E. Kreger, D. A. Kuchma, J. M.
LaFave, J. A. Ramirez, J. W. Wallace, and S. L. Wood. O.
Bayrak is owed many thanks for his input related to stress
block parameters. M. Saatcioglu made numerous contributions
related to stress block parameters and column confinement,
which are gratefully acknowledged.
CHAPTER 11CITED REFERENCES
Abrams, D. P., 1987, Influence of Axial Force Variations
on Flexural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 84, No. 3, May-June, pp. 246-254.
ACI Committee 301, 2005, Specifications for Structural
Concrete (ACI 301-05), American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, Mich., 49 pp.
ACI Committee 318, 1983, Building Code Requirements
for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-83), American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 155 pp.
ACI Committee 318, 1989, Building Code Requirements
for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-89) and Commentary
(318R-89), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
Mich., 347 pp.
ACI Committee 318, 2002, Building Code Requirements
for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary
(318R-02), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
Mich., 443 pp.
ACI Committee 318, 2005, Building Code Requirements
for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary
(318R-05), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
Mich., 430 pp.
ACI Committee 363, 1992, Report on High-Strength
Concrete (ACI 363R-92), American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, Mich., 56 pp.
ACI Committee 408, 2003, Bond and Development of
Straight Reinforcing Bars in Tension (ACI 408R-03), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 49 pp.
ACI Innovation Task Group 4, 2006, Materials and
Quality Considerations for High-Strength Concrete in
Moderate to High Seismic Applications (ITG-4.2R-06),
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 26 pp.
Ahmad, S. H.; Khaloo, A. R.; and Poveda, A., 1986,
Shear Capacity of Reinforced High-Strength Concrete
Beams, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 83, No. 2, Mar.Apr., pp. 297-305.
Ahmad, S. H., and Lue, D. M., 1987, Flexure-Shear Interaction of Reinforced High-Strength Concrete Beams, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 84, No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 330-341.
Ahmad, S. H., and Shah, S., 1982, Stress-Strain Curves
of Concrete Confined by Spiral Reinforcement, ACI
JOURNAL , Proceedings V. 79, No. 6, Nov.-Dec., pp. 484-490.
Aoyama, H., 1993, Design Philosophy for Shear in
Earthquake Resistance in Japan, Earthquake Resistance
ITG-4.3R-57
ITG-4.3R-58
Elwood, K., and Moehle, J., 2005, Axial Capacity Model for
Shear-Damaged Columns, ACI Structural Journal, V. 102,
No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 578-587.
Elzanaty, A. H.; Nilson, A. H.; and Slate, F. O., 1986,
Shear Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Beams Using HighStrength Concrete, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 83, No. 2,
Mar.-Apr. pp. 290-296.
Fafitis, A., and Shah, S. P., 1985, Lateral Reinforcement
for High Strength Concrete Columns, High Strength
Concrete, SP-87, H. G. Russell, ed., American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 213-232.
Fasching, C. J., and French, C. E., 1998, Effect of HighStrength Concrete (HSC) on Flexural Members, HighStrength Concrete in Seismic Regions, SP-176, C. W. French
and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 137-178.
Foster, S. J., and Attard, M. M., 1997, Experimental Tests
on Eccentrically Loaded High-Strength Concrete Columns,
ACI Structural Journal, V. 94, No. 3, May-June, pp. 295-303.
Fujii, S.; Noguchi, H.; and Morita, S., 1998, Bond and
Anchorage of Reinforcement in High-Strength Concrete,
High-Strength Concrete in Seismic Regions, SP-176, C. W.
French and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 23-43.
Ghosh, S. K.; Domel, A. W.; and Fanella, D. A., 1995,
Design of Concrete Buildings for Earthquake & Wind Forces,
2nd Edition, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Ill.
Ghosh, S. K., and Saatcioglu, M., 1994, Ductility and
Seismic Behavior, High Performance Concrete: Properties
and Applications, S. P. Shah and S. H. Ahmad, eds.,
McGraw Hill, 388 pp.
Hibi, J.; Mihara, Y.; Otani, S.; and Aoyama H., 1991,
Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns Using High
Strength Concrete after Flexural Yielding, Transactions of
the Japan Concrete Institute, V. 13, 1991, pp. 395-402.
Hofbeck, J. A; Ibrahim, I. O.; and Mattock, A. H., 1969,
Shear Transfer in Reinforced Concrete, ACI JOURNAL ,
Proceedings V. 66, No. 2, Feb., pp. 119-128.
Hognestad, E., 1951, A Study of Combined Bending and
Axial Load in Reinforced Concrete Members, Bulletin
Series No. 399, University of Illinois Engineering Experiment
Station, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, Ill., 128 pp.
Hognestad, E.; Hanson, N. W.; and McHenry, D., 1955,
Concrete Stress Distribution in Ultimate Strength Design,
ACI JOURNAL , Proceedings V. 52, pp. 455-479.
Hokuetsu Metal Co., 1990, Design and Construction
Guidelines for Reinforced Concrete Beams and Columns
using High-Strength Shear Reinforcement UHY Hoops. (in
Japanese)
Hsu, L. S., and Hsu, C. T., 1994, Complete Stress-Strain
Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Under Compression,
Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 46, No. 169, pp. 301-312.
IBC, 2003, International Building Code 2003, published
in cooperation by BOCA, ICBO, and SBCCI, International
Code Council, Falls Church, Va., 632 pp.
Ibrahim, H., and MacGregor, J., 1994, Flexural Behavior
of High-Strength Concrete Columns, Report No. 196,
ITG-4.3R-59
ITG-4.3R-60
Nilson, A., 1994, Structural Members, High Performance Concrete: Properties and Applications, S. P. Shah
and S. H. Ahmad, eds., McGraw-Hill.
Nishiyama, M.; Fukushima, I.; Watanabe, F.; and Muguruma, H., 1993, Axial Loading Tests on High-Strength
Concrete Prisms Confined by Ordinary and High-Strength
Steel, Proceedings of the Symposium on High-Strength
Concrete, Norway, pp. 322-329.
Noguchi, H.; Fujii, S.; and Teraoka, M., 1998, Shear
Strength of Beam-Column Joints with High-Strength
Materials, High-Strength Concrete in Seismic Regions,
SP-176, C. W. French and M. E. Kreger, eds., American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 329-356.
Otani, S., 1995, Use of High-Strength Lateral Reinforcement
in Japanese RC Construction, Proceedings, Samsung
Forum on Tall Buildings, Seoul, Korea.
Otani, S.; Teshigawara, M.; Murakami, M.; and Okada, T.,
1998, New RC Design Guidelines for High-Rise Reinforced
Concrete Buildings using High-Strength Materials, HighStrength Concrete in Seismic Regions, SP-176, C. W. French
and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 405-417.
Ozbakkaloglu, T., and Saatcioglu, M., 2004, Rectangular
Stress Block for High-Strength Concrete, ACI Structural
Journal, V. 101, No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 475-483.
Ozcebe, G.; Ersoy, U.; and Tankut, T., 1999, Evaluation
of Minimum Shear Reinforcement Requirements for Higher
Strength Concrete, ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 3,
May-June, pp. 361-368.
Ozden, S., 1992, Behavior of High-Strength Concrete
under Strain Gradient, MA thesis, University of Toronto,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Park, R., 1998, Design and Behavior of RC Columns
Incorporating High-Strength Materials, Concrete International, V. 20, No. 11, Nov., pp. 55-62.
Park, R., and Priestley, M. J. N., 1982, Ductility of
Square-Confined Concrete Columns, Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, V. 108, No. 4, pp. 929-950.
Park, R.; Tanaka, H.; and Li, B., 1998, Flexural Strength
and Ductility of High-Strength Concrete Columns, HighStrength Concrete in Seismic Regions, SP-176, C. W. French
and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 237-257.
Pastor, J.; Nilson, A.; and Slate, F., 1984, Behavior of
High-Strength Concrete Beams, Research Report No. 84-3,
Department of Structural Engineering, Cornell University,
Ithaca, N.Y.
Popovics, S., 1973, Analytical Approach to Complete
Stress-Strain Curves, Cement and Concrete Research, V. 3,
No. 5, pp. 583-599.
Quintero-Febres, C. G., and Wight, J. K., 2001, Experimental Study of Reinforced Concrete Interior Wide BeamColumn Connections Subjected to Lateral Loading, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 98, No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 572-582.
Rangan, B. V.; Saunders, P.; and Seng, E., 1991, Design
of High-Strength Concrete Columns, Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Concrete Structures and Innovations in Design,
Concrete Columns Using High Strength Concrete, Transactions of the Japan Concrete Institute, V. 12, pp. 323-330.
Saqan, E. I., and Kreger, M. E., 1998, Evaluation of U.S.
Shear Strength Provisions for Design of Beam-Column
Connections Constructed with High-Strength Concrete,
High-Strength Concrete in Seismic Regions, SP-176, C. W.
French and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 311-328.
Sargin, M.; Ghosh, S. K.; and Handa, V., 1971, Effect of
Lateral Reinforcement Upon the Strength and Deformation
Properties of Concrete, Magazine of Concrete Research,
V. 23, No. 75-76, pp. 99-110.
SBCCI, 1994, Standard Building Code, Southern
Building Code Congress, Birmingham, Ala.
Schade, J. E., 1992, Flexural Concrete Stress in High
Strength Concrete Columns, MASc thesis, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada, 156 pp.
Sezen, H., 2002, Seismic Response and Modeling of
Reinforced Concrete Building Columns, PhD dissertation,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, Calif.
Sheikh, S.; Shah, D.; and Khoury, S., 1994, Confinement
of High-Strength Concrete Columns, ACI Structural
Journal, V. 91, No. 1, Jan.-Feb., pp. 100-111.
Sheikh, S. A., and Uzumeri, S. M., 1982, Analytical Model
for Concrete Confinement in Tied Columns, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 108, No. 5, pp. 2703-2723.
Shibata, A., and Sozen, M., 1976, Substitute-Structure
Method for Seismic Design in Reinforced Concrete,
Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, V. 102, No. ST3,
pp. 1-18.
Shimazaki, K., 1988, Strong Ground Motion Drift and
Base Shear Strength Coefficient for R/C Structures,
Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan, pp. 165-170.
Shimazaki, K., and Sozen, M., 1984, Seismic Drift of
Reinforced Concrete Structures, Technical Research
Report of Hazama-Gumi Ltd., pp. 145-166.
Shin, S. W.; Kamara, M.; and Ghosh, S. K., 1990, Flexural
Ductility, Strength Prediction, and Hysteretic Behavior of
Ultra-High-Strength Concrete Members, Proceedings of
the Second International Symposium on High-Strength
Concrete, SP-121, W. T. Hester, ed., American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 239-264.
Slater, W., and Lyse, I., 1931a, Progress Report on
Column Tests at Lehigh University, ACI JOURNAL,
Proceedings V. 2, No. 6, June, pp. 677-730.
Slater, W., and Lyse, I., 1931b, Progress Report on
Column Tests at Lehigh University, ACI JOURNAL,
Proceedings V. 2, No. 7, July, pp. 791-835.
Standards Association of New Zealand, 1995, Concrete
Design Standard, NZS 3101:1995, Part 1 and Commentary on the Concrete Design Standard, NZS 3101:1995, Part
2, Wellington, New Zealand.
Sugano, S.; Nagashima, T.; Kimura, H.; Tamura, A.; and
Ichikawa, A., 1990, Experimental Studies on Seismic
Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Members of High Strength
ITG-4.3R-61
Concrete, Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on High-Strength Concrete, SP-121, W. T. Hester, ed.,
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich.,
pp. 61-87.
Sumitomo Electrical Industries Ltd., 1989, Design and
Construction Guidelines for Reinforced Concrete Beams and
Columns using High-Strength Shear Reinforcement SumiHoops. (in Japanese)
Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd., 1989, Design and
Construction Guidelines for Reinforced Concrete Beams
and Columns using High-Strength Shear Reinforcement
D-Hoops. (in Japanese)
Sun, Y. P., and Sakino, K., 1993, Ductility Improvement
of Reinforced Concrete Columns with High-Strength
Materials, Transactions of the Japan Concrete Institute,
V. 15, pp. 455-462.
Sun, Y. P., and Sakino, K., 1994, Effect of Confinement
of Transverse Reinforcement on the Axial Behavior of
Concrete, Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute, V. 16,
No. 2, pp. 449-454.
Swartz, S.; Nikaeen, A.; Babu, H.; Periyakaruppan, N.;
and Refai, T., 1985, Structural Bending Properties of
Higher Strength Concrete, High Strength Concrete, SP-87,
H. G. Russell, ed., American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, Mich., 288 pp.
Thomsen, J., and Wallace, J., 1994, Lateral Load
Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns Constructed
Using High-Strength Materials, ACI Structural Journal, V. 91,
No. 5, Sept.-Oct., pp. 605-615.
Thorenfeldt, E., and Drangsholt, G., 1990, Shear
Capacity of Reinforced High-Strength Concrete Beams,
Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on
High-Strength Concrete, SP-121, W. T. Hester, ed., American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 129-154.
Tokyo Steel Co., 1994, Design and Construction Guidelines for Reinforced Concrete Beams and Columns using
High-Strength Shear Reinforcement SPR785. (in Japanese)
Uribe, C., and Alcocer, S., 2001, Comportamiento de
Vigas Peraltadas Diseadas con el Modelo de Puntales y
Tensores, Informe Tcnico CI/EIG-1012001, Centro
Nacional de Prevencin de Desastres, Mxico, 248 pp. (in
Spanish)
Vecchio, F.; Collins, M.; and Aspiotis, J., 1994, HighStrength Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear, ACI Structural Journal, V. 91, No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 423-433.
Von Ramin, M., and Matamoros, A., 2004, Shear
Strength of Reinforced Concrete Members Subjected to
Monotonic and Cyclic Loads, SM Report No. 72, University
of Kansas Center for Research, Inc., Lawrence, Kans., 517 pp.
Von Ramin, M., and Matamoros, A. B., 2006, Shear
Strength of Reinforced Concrete Members Subjected to
Monotonic Loads, ACI Structural Journal, V. 103, No. 1,
Jan.-Feb., pp. 83-92.
Wahidi, S. A., 1995, Strength and Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns Made from High Performance
Materials, PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, Tex., 299 pp.
ITG-4.3R-62
Wallace, J. W., 1998, Behavior and Design of HighStrength RC Walls, High-Strength Concrete in Seismic
Regions, SP-176, C. W. French and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 259-279.
Wallace, J. W., and Moehle, J. P., 1992, Ductility and
Detailing Requirements of Bearing Wall Buildings,
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 118, No. 6,
pp. 1625-1644.
Walraven, J.; Frenay, J.; and Pruijssers, A., 1987, Influence
of Concrete Strength and Load History on the Shear Friction
Capacity of Concrete Members, PCI Journal, V. 32, No. 1,
Jan.-Feb., pp. 66-84.
Warwick, W. B., and Foster, S. J., 1993, Investigation
into the Efficiency Factor Used in Non-Flexural Reinforced
Concrete Member Design, UNICIV Report No. R-320,
School of Civil Engineering, University of South Wales,
Kensington.
Watanabe, F., and Ichinose, T., 1991, Strength and
Ductility Design of RC Members Subjected to Combined
Bending and Shear, Preliminary Proceedings, International
Workshop on Concrete Shear in Earthquakes, University of
Houston, Houston, Tex., pp. IV4-1 to IV4-10.
Watanabe, F., and Kabeyasawa, T., 1998, Shear Strength
of RC Members with High-Strength Concrete, HighStrength Concrete in Seismic Regions, SP-176, C. W. French
and M. E. Kreger, eds., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 379-396.
Watanabe, F., and Muguruma, H., 1988, Toward the
Ductility Design of Concrete Members (Overview of
Researches in Kyoto University), Proceedings of Pacific
Concrete Conference, New Zealand, pp. 89-100.
As ACI begins its second century of advancing concrete knowledge, its original chartered purpose
remains to provide a comradeship in finding the best ways to do concrete work of all kinds and in
spreading knowledge. In keeping with this purpose, ACI supports the following activities:
Technical committees that produce consensus reports, guides, specifications, and codes.
Spring and fall conventions to facilitate the work of its committees.
Educational seminars that disseminate reliable information on concrete.
Certification programs for personnel employed within the concrete industry.
Student programs such as scholarships, internships, and competitions.
Sponsoring and co-sponsoring international conferences and symposia.
Formal coordination with several international concrete related societies.
Periodicals: the ACI Structural Journal and the ACI Materials Journal, and Concrete International.
Benefits of membership include a subscription to Concrete International and to an ACI Journal. ACI
members receive discounts of up to 40% on all ACI products and services, including documents, seminars
and convention registration fees.
As a member of ACI, you join thousands of practitioners and professionals worldwide who share a
commitment to maintain the highest industry standards for concrete technology, construction, and
practices. In addition, ACI chapters provide opportunities for interaction of professionals and practitioners
at a local level.
www.concrete.org
www.concrete.org