• Computers and Concrete
• /
• v.17 no.5
• /
• pp.673-692
• /
• 2016

In the standards, minimum reinforcement ratios are presented as the least reinforcement ratios that bearing elements should have in a way to include all systems and in general. However, naturally these general minimum ratios might be presented as being lower than the normally required reinforcement ratios by criteria such as system size, bearing system arrangement, section situation and distributions of the elements and earthquake effect. In this case, minimum reinforcement ratios may remain as meaningless restrictions. Then grouping the criterion that might affect reinforcement ratios according to certain parameters and creating minimum reinforcement ratios regarding preliminary design will provide ease and safety during the project designing. Moreover, it will enable fast and simple examinations in the beginning of project control and evaluation process. By means of the data which could be defined as "preliminary design & minimum reinforcement ratios", a more realistic and safe restriction compared to general minimum reinforcement ratios could be presented. As a result of numerous comprehensive studies, reinforcement ratios to include all certain systems might be obtained. Today, thanks to the development level of finite elements programs which can make reinforced concrete modelling, with the studies that are impossible to carry out beforehand, this deficiency in the minimum reinforcement ratios in the standarts may at least be partially made up with the advisory regulation of preliminary design & minimum reinforcement ratios. As the structure of the system to be examined and the diversity of the parameters range from the specific to the general, preliminary design & minimum reinforcement ratios will approximate to general minimum reinforcement ratios in real terms. By focusing on a more specific system structure and diversity of the parameters, preliminary design and even design reinforcement ratios will be approximated. In this preliminary study, a route between these two extremes was attempted to be followed. Today, it is possible to determine suggested practical ratios for project designs through carrying out numerous studies.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 1999.10a
• /
• pp.445-448
• /
• 1999

The minimum shear and torsional reinforcement provisions in ACI 318-95 are still empirical. This paper describes the derivation of a rational approach for minimum shear and torsional reinforcement in beams so as to preclude brittle failure in shear and torsion. This is ensured by specifying that the beam's ultimate capacity of shear and torsion should be greater than its cracking shear and torsion. The formula presented herein for computing minimum shear and torsional reinforcement shows the need for modification of current provision for the minimum shear and torsion reinforcement.

• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.21 no.6
• /
• pp.35-43
• /
• 2017

The minimum reinforcement ratio is an important design factor to prevent a brittle failure in RC flexural members. A minimum reinforcement ratio is presented by assuming an effective depth of cross-section and moment arm lever in CDC and KHBDC. In this study, it suggests that a rational method for minimum reinforcement ratio is calculated by material model and force equilibrium. As results, a minimum reinforcement ratio using a p-r curve in KHBDC is evaluated about 52~80% of recent design code's value and it induces an economical design. And also, a ductility capacity in case of placing this minimum reinforcement amount is evaluated about 89% of recent design code's value, but ductility in a member is 7 or more, so it has a sufficient ductility capacity. Therefore, it is judged that a minimum reinforcement ratio using p-r curve has a theoretical rationality, safety and economy in a flexural member design.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.56 no.2
• /
• pp.317-340
• /
• 2015

Design codes have specified the minimum shear reinforcement requirement for reinforced concrete (RC) and prestressed concrete (PSC) members to prevent brittle and premature shear failure. They are, however, very different from one another, and particularly, ACI318 code allows the required minimum shear reinforcement to be reduced in PSC members, compared to that in RC members, by specifying the additional equation for PSC members whose basis is not clear. In this paper, the minimum shear reinforcement ratio for PSC members was proposed, which can provide a sufficient reserved shear strength and deformation capacity. The proposed equation was also verified by the test results of PSC specimens lightly reinforced in shear, comparing to design codes and other proposed equations from previous studies.

• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.35-44
• /
• 2017

In this study, steel fiber-reinforced concrete beams with ordinary steel reinforcements, that are below minimum steel reinforcement amount specified in domestic concrete structure design code, were tested in flexure until failure. Steel reinforcement ratio considered were 44%, 66%, 78% and 100% of the minimum steel reinforcement. Considered steel fiber volume fractions were 0.25%, 0.50%, 0.75% and 1.00%. In results, it is confirmed that steel fibers greatly improve crack performance. Also, the steel fibers contributed to increment in yield load not in ultimate load. But the increment was not greater than the reduction by steel reinforcement reduction. The use of steel fibers in RC beams lightly reinforced below the minimum reinforcement ratio specified design code reduced ductility greatly. Consequently, steel reinforcement ratio in steel fiber-reinforced beams lightly reinforced below the minimum steel reinforcement should be increased in order to enhance proper ductility.

• Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute
• /
• v.25 no.6
• /
• pp.641-648
• /
• 2013

Current design codes regulate the minimum torsional reinforcement requirement for reinforced concrete members to prevent their brittle failure. The minimum torsional reinforcement ratio specified in the current national code and ACI318-11, however, have problems in the minimum longitudinal reinforcement ratio for torsion, the equilibrium condition in space truss model, and a marginal strength, etc. Thus, in order to overcome such shortcomings, this study presents a rational equation for minimum torsional reinforcement ratio that can provide a sufficient margin of safety in design. The minimum torsional reinforcement ratio proposed in this study was compared to the test results available in literature, and it was confirmed that it gave a proper margin of safety for all specimens studied in this paper.

• Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.211-218
• /
• 2014

In the design of reinforced rectangular concrete beam structure, the minimum amount of flexural reinforcement is required to avoid brittle failure. KCI code is based on concept of ultimate strength and usually used as a model code. But bridge design code enacted by Ministry of land, transportation and maritime affairs in 2012 is based on concept of limit state and similar to Euro code EN 1992-2. This means that the minimum reinforcement presented in both design codes has different origination and safety margin. When rectangular concrete beams with minimum reinforcement are designed according to EN and KCI codes, the amount of minimum reinforcement specified in EN code is only 76% of that in KCI code. This makes the design engineers to be confused. In this study, flexural tests were conducted on nine beams with the two different minimum reinforcement specified in KCI and EN design codes. In results, the measured ratios of nominal strength to crack strength from the test were about 25% greater than those evaluated from the equations presented in KCI and EN codes. The EN beams having only 76% of the minimum reinforcement for the KCI beams were fractured by rupture of steel reinforcement but in ductile manner. It is confirmed that the minimum reinforcement concrete beams designed according to both codes have enough safety margin in flexural capacity and moreover in ductility.

• Computers and Concrete
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.149-171
• /
• 2012

The problem of a concrete cross section under flexural and axial loading is indeterminate due to the existence of more unknowns than equations. Among the infinite solutions, it is possible to find the optimum, which is that of minimum reinforcement that satisfies certain design constraints (section ductility, minimum reinforcement area, etc.). This article proposes the automation of the optimum reinforcement calculation under any combination of flexural and axial loading. The procedure has been implemented in a program code that is attached in the Appendix. Conventional-strength or high-strength concrete may be chosen, minimum reinforcement area may be considered (it being possible to choose between the standards ACI 318 or Eurocode 2), and the neutral axis depth may be constrained in order to guarantee a certain sectional ductility. Some numerical examples are presented, drawing comparisons between the results obtained by ACI 318, EC 2 and the conventional method.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2002.05a
• /
• pp.253-258
• /
• 2002

An evaluation equation of the minimum shear reinforcement content for reinforced concrete beams was theoretically proposed. The proposed equation takes into account the effects of compressive strength of concrete, longitudinal reinforcement content and shear span ratio. The proposed equation was compared with the current ACI 318-99 and CSA A23.3-94 codes.

• Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute
• /
• v.16 no.6 s.84
• /
• pp.795-803
• /
• 2004

To prevent the shear failure that occurs abruptly with no sufficient warning, the minimum amount of shear reinforcement should be provided to reinforced concrete(RC) beams. The minimum amount of shear reinforcement of RC beams is influenced by not only compressive strength of concrete but also shear span-to-depth ratio and ratio of tensile longitudinal reinforcement. In this paper, 14 RC beams were tested in order to observe the influences of shear span-to-depth ratio, ratio of tensile longitudinal reinforcement, and compressive strength of concrete. The test results indicated that the rate of shear strength to the diagonal cracking strength of RC beams with the same amount of shear reinforcement increased as the ratio of tensile longitudinal reinforcement increased, while it decreased as the shear span-to-depth ratio increased. The observed test results were compared with the calculated results by the current ACI 318-02 Building Code and the proposed equation.