A Comparative Study of Various Methods Involved in Design of Reinforced Concrete Beams with Web Openings
Keywords:
Concrete beam, Mat lab, Plasticity, Truss, Web openingAbstract
A design problem involving design of beam with an opening has been solved as an explanation for the different methods. The design of beam with web openings is done from various methods like plasticity truss method, plastic hinge method, traditional design approach, IS code and AIJ method. After the designing part comparisons have been drawn between the various methods. These comparisons give a clear idea of the pros and cons of these methods. MATLAB as well as Microsoft Excel have been used as a programming tool. It has been concluded that the Plasticity Truss Method provides a more conservative design approach than the Plastic Hinge Method. However the plasticity truss method requires more longitudinal reinforcement in the chord members as compared to the plastic hinge method. In this study, It has been calculated reinforcements for two beams with small opening and large opening respectively, under its ultimate load, for different longitudinal locations of the opening and different lengths of opening. The variations in area of steel have been recorded and explained for variations in these parameters. Two design methods, Traditional Design Method and Plasticity Truss Method, have been used for the beam with small opening, and compared. Beam with large opening has been designed using Plasticity Truss Method and ACI 318. This work also presents the comparison of reinforcements obtained in above case using IS456 and ACI 318. The results have been compared through graphs and possible reasons of difference in results of two theories have been mentioned. This study shows the reinforcement detailing required near the opening region of a beam, which focuses on crack control along with strengthening beam in flexure and shear.
Downloads
References
ACI 318 (1995), Building code requirements for reinforced concrete and commentary, Farmington Hills, MI: American ConcreteInstitute.
ACI-ASCE Committee-426 (1980), “The shear strength of RC members.” (ACI 426R-74), J Structure Engineering, ASCE 99(6),1168–71.
Ahmed A., Fayyadh M. M., NaganathanS. and Nasharuddin K., (2012), “Reinforced concrete beams with web openings: A state of the art review.” Materials and Design 40,90–102
Al-Shaarbaf , I. A. S., Al-Bayati, N. A. M. and Al-Kaisy ,D. I. A. (2007). “Non-linear finite element analysis of reinforced concrete beams with large opening under flexure.” Engineering Technology 25(2),210–28.
Architectural Institute of Japan (1988), AIJ Standard for “structural calculation of reinforced concretestructure.” [6] Architectural Institute of Japan (1994), AIJ standard for “structural calculation of reinforced concretebuilding.” [7] Barney G. B., Corley W. G., Hanson J. M. and Parmelee R. A. (1977), “Behavior and design of prestressed concrete beams with large web openings.” PCI Journal 22(6),32–61. [8] Hegger J. and Bertram G. (2008), “Shear carrying capacity of ultra-high performance concrete beams.” Tailor Made Concrete Structures Walraven&Stoelhorst, London,341-7. [9] Ichinose T. and Yokoo S. (1990), “A shear design procedure of reinforced concrete beams with web openings.” Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Japan, Architectural Institute of Japan,319–22.
Javad V. A. and Morteza H. A. (2004), “Effect of small circular opening on the shear and flexural behavior and ultimate strength of reinforced concrete beams using normal and high strength concrete.” In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver,Canada,3239.
Kennedy J. B. and Abdalla H. (1992), “Static response of pre stressedgirders with openings.” J Structure Engineering, ASCE 118(2),488–504.
