Serviceability design load factors and reliability assessments for reinforced concrete containment structures

1998 ◽  
Vol 179 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bong Koo Han ◽  
Afredo H.-S Ang
Author(s):  
Elsayed Ismail ◽  
Mohamed S. Issa ◽  
Khaled Elbadry

Abstract Background A series of nonlinear finite element (FE) analyses was performed to evaluate the different design approaches available in the literature for design of reinforced concrete deep beam with large opening. Three finite element models were developed and analyzed using the computer software ATENA. The three FE models of the deep beams were made for details based on three different design approaches: (Kong, F.K. and Sharp, G.R., Magazine of Concrete Res_30:89-95, 1978), (Mansur, M. A., Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings, 2006), and Strut and Tie method (STM) as per ACI 318-14 (ACI318 Committee, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI318-14), 2014). Results from the FE analyses were compared with the three approaches to evaluate the effect of different reinforcement details on the structural behavior of transfer deep beam with large opening. Results The service load deflection is the same for the three models. The stiffnesses of the designs of (Mansur, M. A., Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings, 2006) and STM reduce at a load higher than the ultimate design load while the (Kong, F.K. and Sharp, G.R., Magazine of Concrete Res_30:89-95, 1978) reduces stiffness at a load close to the ultimate design load. The deep beam designed according to (Mansur, M. A., Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings, 2006) model starts cracking at load higher than the beam designed according to (Kong, F.K. and Sharp, G.R., Magazine of Concrete Res_30:89-95, 1978) method. The deep beam detailed according to (Kong, F.K. and Sharp, G.R., Magazine of Concrete Res_30:89-95, 1978) and (Mansur, M. A., Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings, 2006) failed due to extensive shear cracks. The specimen detailed according to STM restores its capacity after initial failure. The three models satisfy the deflection limit. Conclusion It is found that the three design approaches give sufficient ultimate load capacity. The amount of reinforcement given by both (Mansur, M. A., Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings, 2006) and (Kong, F.K. and Sharp, G.R., Magazine of Concrete Res_30:89-95, 1978) is the same. The reinforcement used by the STM method is higher than the other two methods. Additional reinforcement is needed to limit the crack widths. (Mansur, M. A., Design of reinforced concrete beams with web openings, (2006)) method gives lesser steel reinforcement requirement and higher failure load compared to the other two methods.


1982 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 431-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sher Ali Mirza ◽  
James G. MacGregor

This paper documents the assumptions and analyses made in the derivation of resistance factors for reinforced concrete design compatible with the load factors in the National Building Code of Canada. Based on existing data on the variability of concrete and steel dimensions, statistical estimates were made of the variability of the strength of reinforced concrete members. These data plus statistical descriptions of loadings were used in a first-order, second moment analysis to compute resistance factors. These have been proposed for inclusion in the CSA A23.3 Code and are currently under study by the CSA Technical Committee on Reinforced Concrete Design.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document