National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

NCHRP Report 549: Simplified Shear Design of Structural Concrete Members (2006)
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)

Citation Manager

Hawkins, Neil M, Kuchma, Daniel A, Mast, Robert F, Marsh, M Lee, Reineck, Karl-Heinz, Transportation Research Board. "1.2.7 Design Cases." NCHRP Report 549: Simplified Shear Design of Structural Concrete Members. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2006.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
17
bottomleft bottomright
Page
17
Front Matter (R1-R9)
Summary (1-4)
1.1.1 Summary of the LRFD Sectional Design Model (S5.8.3) (5-9)
1.1.2 Basis of the LRFD Sectional Design Model (10-10)
1.1.3 Comparison of AASHTO LRFD and AASHTO Standard Specifications (11-11)
1.2.1 Development of Traditional U.S. Code Provisions for Shear (12-13)
1.2.3 Other Approaches and Design Provisions (14-14)
1.2.4 Factors Influencing Shear Resistance (15-15)
1.2.6 Analysis Tools (16-16)
1.2.7 Design Cases (17-17)
1.3.2 Research Approach and Project Tasks (18-19)
2.1.1 Type 1: Empirical Relationships Designed to Fit Test Data (20-20)
2.1.3 Type 3: Relationships Derived from Comprehensive Behavioral Model (21-22)
2.2 Comparison of Shear Design Methods (23-25)
2.3 Evaluation of Shear Design Methods Using Test Database (26-27)
2.4 Results of Survey of Practice (28-29)
2.5 Criteria for Proposed Simplified Provisions (30-30)
3.1.1 Basis of Proposed Simplified Provisions (31-31)
3.1.2 Proposed Simplified Provisions (32-32)
3.3 Discussion of Design Examples (33-35)
3.4 Evaluation of Simplified Provisions with Selected Test Data (36-36)
3.5 Comparison of Required Strength of Shear Reinforcement in Design Database (37-40)
3.6.2 AASHTO-Standard Specifications - > LRFD Proposed Simplified Provisions (Modified Standard) (41-41)
3.7.2 Maximum Shear Design Stress Limit (42-42)
3.7.4 Evaluation of Change Proposals using Design Cases Examples (43-44)
3.8 Utilization of NCHRP Process 12-50 (45-46)
4.1.2 Role of Experimental Research and Field Experience (47-47)
4.1.4 Differences in Shear Design Provisions (48-48)
4.2 Recommended Research, (49-49)
Notation (50-52)
References (53-54)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (55-55)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 17
17 Figure 15. Influence of concrete strength on shear capacity. useful for predicting the capacity for the types of members effort required to use these tools to obtain an evaluation of for which no experimental test data is available. Before the the shear capacity. Some of the most promising available use of any analytical tool, the accuracy and reliability of the tools are Response 2000 (15), ABAQUS (47), VecTor2, tool must first be assessed by making comparisons with DIANA (48), and ATENA (49). existing experimental test data. A further consideration is the 1.2.7 Design Cases A further way to evaluate design methods is to compare the required strengths of shear reinforcement (pv fy Av fy /bv s) by the different design methods for a large database of design cases. Ideally, these cases would represent the range and fre- quency of members built using the given design provisions. Comparing the required amount of shear reinforcement by dif- ferent design approaches for each design case can reveal where prospective provisions may be unconservative or overly con- servative. It is also useful to compare these required strengths of shear reinforcement ( pv fy) with the strength determined using analysis tools such as Response 2000. 2 Shear Strees, V/(bv d v) (MPa) 1.5 CSA 1994 As = 1.95% Experimental bw d 1 M/V = 0.635 m 0.5 ACI code 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Axial Tension Stress, N/(bv dv) (MPa) Figure 16. Influence of axial compression on shear capacity. Figure 17. Influence of axial tension on shear capacity.