PSI - Issue 42

Rami A. Hawileh et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 42 (2022) 1198–1205 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

1202

5

= 0.3 ′ 2/3 =

(12) (13) (14)

= [1 + 0.5 ℎ ( − 1)/ ] [ ] 2 + [1.5 ℎ [ − 1] + (600 + ′ ′ )] − 600 + 3.6. Ramadan et al. (2022) = (0.17 √ ′ )( + 2 ′ ) + ( ) + ( ) ′ ′ ′ = 0.0

(15)

(16)

where, = ≤ 5 ; = ℎ ℎ ≤ 1 ; L’ = is the left/right protruded part of the flange (mm) ≤ 2 3.7. Thamrin et al.(2016) Thamrin et al. (2016) proposed a model for T-beams without stirrups: = 1 7 ( √ ′ + 120 )

where, = 1.0 + ( ℎ 4 2 ) 4. Results and Discussion 4.1. Assessment of shear design models

(17)

The shear capacity of the 21 RC T-beams was calculated by means of the nine models presented in this paper. It should be noted that Eq. 3 of the (ACI 318-19 (2019)) model was considered for all specimens, whereas Eqs. 1 and 2 were not used for the specimens that did not include internal steel stirrups. In a similar manner, Eq. 17 by Thamrin et al. (2016) predicted the capacity of the specimens without steel stirrups. All other shear design models were considered for all specimens. The experimental shear capacity values ( V ( exp ) ) of the T-beam specimens were obtained from the literature. Table 2 summarizes the results in terms of the average ratio of experimental shear capacity ( V ( exp ) ) to predicted shear capacity ( V ( pred ) ) and the corresponding standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (COV). In addition, the maximum and minimum values of the ratio of V ( exp ) to V ( pred ) are also tabulated. To visualize the results, Fig. 1 shows the ratio of V ( exp ) to V ( pred ) in the form of bar graphs for all the specimens divided into two groups (without stirrups and with stirrups). It should be noted that the bar graphs with ratio of V ( exp ) to V ( pred ) above 1.0 shows that the shear predictions for these specimens were safe and conservative.

Table 2. Results of the assessment of the shear capacity models

ACI318 19

ACI318 19

ACI318 19

CSA 23.3-04

BS 8110 1:1997

Eurocode2 (2004)

Zararis et al. (2006)

Ramadan et al. (2022)

Thamrin et al. (2016)

Design Model

Equation

1

2

3

4

5

9

10

16

17

Mean ( V ( exp )

( pred ) )

2.57 0.95

2.41 0.84

3.58 2.23

1.90 0.70

3.55 2.20

3.89 2.40

1.45 0.54

1.62 1.26

4.67 2.44

/ V

SD

COV (%)

37

35

62

37

62

62

37

78

52

Max Min

4.20 1.24

3.87 1.19

7.93 1.19

3.55

7.81

8.58 1.34

2.43 0.63

4.39 0.56

7.39 1.44

1.1

1.2