DISCUSSION

Disc. 102-S01/From the January-February 2005 ACI Structural Journal, p. 3

Shear Strength of Joints in Precast Concrete Segmental Bridges. Paper by Xiangming Zhou, Neil Mickleborough,
and Zongjin Li

Discussion by Guenter Rombach and Angelika Specker

Professor, Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, Germany; Doctorate, Boeger + Jaeckle Consultant Engineers, Germany

In their paper, the authors showed some interesting results joints. To consider the problems, it is necessary to reduce the
of load tests of specimens with single and multiple shear ultimate shear capacity of epoxy joints. Also, the formula
keys. It may be surprising that the design for shear in used in AASHTO is valid for dry joints only. Therefore, for
segmental bridges is still not clarified whereas many such epoxy joints, the discussers’ “dry” formula should underes-
bridges have already been built. timate the ultimate shear strength because of the improved
The discussers would like to add some aspects that are not load distribution by using epoxy joints as opposed to dry
fully taken into account in this paper. First, our design joints. As it can be seen, this is true until the thickness
formula is not based on numerical analyses only. Tests on exceeds a value of 2 mm, but these improvements cannot be
single and multiple keys, both dry as well as glued, were considered in calculations because of the problems that may
done to calibrate the finite element model. The behavior of occur on site.
the joint and the ultimate load were well predicted. For this
reason, the model is used to develop a design formula. For dry joints, the authors show that the shear capacity of
The problem of design formulas is to consider the situation keys in three-keyed joints is lower than for single-keyed
on site that always results in imperfections. This is done by joints. The discussers’ formula and the AASHTO formula
safety coefficients. While developing the design formula are based on a linear correlation between the number of keys
effects of imperfections are investigated numerically, it can be and the maximum shear capacity. For this reason, it is
shown that imperfections have a great importance on the shear possible that both our formula as well as the AASHTO
capacity of joints. Especially for dry loads, the contact formula underestimate the shear capacity of single-keyed
between the surfaces is important to transfer the loads. For this dry joints but overestimate the shear capacity of multiple-
reason, a relatively high value for the safety coefficient should keyed dry joints. Because our formula is more conservative
be used. The discussers suggest a coefficient of γ = 2.0. than the AASHTO formula, the overestimation of our
The authors confirm the importance of imperfections formula (3.2 to 53.7%) is much less than that of the
because the measured shear capacity of keys in three-keyed AASHTO formula (19.7 to 61.8%). The decrease in shear
joints was always lower than those in single-keyed joints. capacity of keys in three-keyed joints can be due to the fact
This is true for dry joints. Using epoxy, the influence of that the number of imperfections is higher when using
imperfections is reduced because of a more uniform distri- multiple keys because the probability of defects is higher. In
bution of stresses among the keys. However, epoxy joints the discussers’ formula, imperfections are considered by
have many other problems, such as an improper use on site using a safety coefficient. In future work, it would be inter-
or very brittle failure behavior. The authors show that shear esting to specifically investigate the effects of imperfections
capacity decreases when the epoxy thickness amounts to to define an economic safety coefficient. By using a value of
more than 2 mm. This cannot be controlled on site. For this γ = 2.0, the discussers’ formula is able to calculate the shear
reason, the discussers’ design formula is not valid for epoxy capacity sufficiently.

Disc. 102-S01/From the January-February 2005 ACI Structural Journal, p. 3

Shear Strength of Joints in Precast Concrete Segmental Bridges. Paper by Xiangming Zhou, Neil Mickleborough,
and Zongjin Li

Discussion by José Turmo, Gonzalo Ramos, and Ángel C. Aparicio

Civil Engineering School, Castilla-La Mancha University, Spain; Visiting Faculty at Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, India; Civil Engineering School, Technical University of
Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain

The authors present a great work, with an impressive some remarks based on previous research, just in case it
number of experimental results, and should be congratu- could be useful to the authors and readers in general.
lated. Experimental research on dry and epoxied multiple- In the introduction of the article, it is stated that the shear
key joints is very scarce, and to the discussers’ knowledge, keys serve three functions: aligning the segments during
it is the first time such tests have been performed on high- erection, transferring the shear force between segments
strength concrete specimens. during service, and ensuring durability of the tendons against
Nevertheless, the discussers have some comments and corrosion. However, the crucial function of resisting shear
suggestions. It is the intention of this discussion to express during the construction of balanced cantilever bridges, when

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005 901

the epoxy has not hardened and acts like a lubricant, is not The generally accepted statement that the strength of an n-
mentioned. Stating that keys help prevent corrosion of the key joint will roughly be n-times the strength of a single-key
internal tendons is not a very accurate assertion; the corrosion joint relies on the plastic behavior of the joint. This plastic
protection relies on other techniques such as the use of epoxy behavior depends on two main factors: the strength of the
in the joints, the sealing of the ducts at the joints with concrete and the compressive stresses acting at the joint. The
compressed neoprene o-rings, and the duct injection. higher the concrete compressive strength, the more brittle
Also in the introduction, the AASHTO formula for the the material; thus, the high compressive strength of some
design of the keyed joints is claimed to be empirical, whereas concrete used in the test programs will also affect the
it is completely theoretical. From a presumed simple state of behavior of the three-key specimens. At the same time, the
stresses within the key, when subjected to axial and shear higher the confinement stresses at the joint, the more plastic
forces, Roberts and Breen20 deduced the formula later its behavior. Due to this fact, Roberts and Breen also limited
adopted by AASHTO, stating that a key fails when the the validity of their formula to joints where the actuating
maximum principal tensile stress equals the concrete tensile compressive stress is greater than 0.7 MPa. This stress level
strength. Regarding the content of the same paragraph, it is is generally lower than the one actuating in a real structure.
worth noting that a shearing-off failure along the keys only The low confinement stress would explain the huge differ-
occurs when the shear span-depth ratio (a/d) is extremely ences between the AASHTO predictions and the tests on
low (a/d < 0.5),20 as in shear panel tests, whereas in beam multiple-key specimens. Actually, when a higher compressive
tests, shear failure involves a diagonal cracking within the stress is acting at the joint, the AASHTO formula proves to be
segment.21,22 At the same time, in shear panel tests, failure very accurate for predicting the strength of panel tests with
does not occur only through the shearing-off of the keys, as multiple-key joints (up to seven keys).3,22 Average
flexural and compressive failures in the keys have been also compressive stresses in the mentioned panel tests range
recorded in such tests.21 The discussers agree with the between 2.9 and 3.9 MPa (References 3 and 22, respectively).
authors that even if a diagonal shear failure is more likely to The second point of the conclusions is very controversial.
occur in a real bridge, the shearing-off of the joint is also to There, it is stated that the dry joints had an ultimate strength
be checked and that reliable design formulas should be able of approximately 20 to 40% less than the epoxied joints.
to do so. Comparing Fig. 11(a) and (b), completely different conclusions
It is very difficult to extract definite conclusions from the can be reached. In such figures, the normalized shear strength
test program because the object of the research is very from the single-key dry joint specimens is systematically
dependent on the concrete tensile strength. This magnitude higher than the strength from the single-key specimens with
can be derived from the concrete compressive strength with a 1 mm epoxy joint. Also, from the comparison of these
a significant scatter, which of course will be more important figures, similar conclusions can be obtained for the case of
for concrete compressive strength in the range of 30 to 80 MPa, the normalized shear strength of the three-key specimens
as those considered in the test program. In this manner, the compressed up to 1 MPa.
comparison of the results is also difficult because compressive Regarding the second point of the conclusions, another
stresses for multiple-key specimens (ranging from 0.5 to issue that is not sufficiently explained is the fact that specimens
2 MPa) are systematically lower than in single-key specimens with a thicker epoxy layer (3 mm) have a worse behavior
(ranging from 1 to 4.5 MPa). The compressive stresses than specimens with a thinner one (2 mm). Common sense
observed in the tests seem to also be very low, especially for (and FEM analysis22) suggests that the softer the contact
multiple-key specimens, where the most common service between two adjacent keys is, the more uniform the distribution
compressive stresses in a concrete box girder bridge is above of shear stresses among the keys is and, hence, the shear
an average of 0.15fc′ . capacity of the joint should be higher. Shear transfer in a
Regarding the experimental results and analysis, some joint with several keys can be regarded as analogous to an
points should be discussed. The AASHTO code proposes elastic force transfer in a lap joint with several bolts;
Eq. (5) to estimate the shear capacity of the joints in PCSB depending on the stiffness of the bolts, shear is transferred in
(without safety factor). This formula is the one provided by a different way. If very stiff fasteners are provided, the shear
Roberts and Breen20 and it depends on the tensile strength of flow will concentrate in the extreme bolts. On the other hand,
the concrete. Actually, this formula was deduced for flexible fasteners will lead to an equally distributed shear
concrete with a compressive strength up to 55 MPa.20 In transfer among the bolts. In the same manner, the thicker the
such concrete classes, the tensile strength was derived from epoxy layer, the softer the connection, the more homoge-
the compressive strength through the following nondimen- neous the shear distribution, and the higher the shear
sional formula (in psi) capacity of the joint. The tests prove that this statement is
true when comparing results from 1 and 2 mm-thick epoxy
f t = 7.5 f c′ (8) joints. Contrarily, tests results do not support this analogy
when comparing results from 2 and 3 mm-thick epoxy joints.
As test results show unexpected trends, some physical
In Reference 5, Eq. (5) does not distinguish between
phenomenon should be counterbalancing the beneficial
strength levels. This formula, however, was not proposed for
effect of a more equally distributed shear transfer along the
high-strength concrete. Hence, the fact that the grade of
3 mm-thick epoxy joint. It is thought that it would be very
some test specimens is greater than 55 MPa should have been
convenient for the scientific and technical communities if the
taken into account when checking the accuracy of Eq. (5). It
authors could explain such a physical phenomenon.
could be wise to use the tests on the one hand for checking
the accuracy of Eq. (5) for conventional strength concrete
(fc′ < 55 MPa) and on the other for evaluating its applica- REFERENCES
20. Roberts, C. L., “Measurement Based Revisions for Segmental Bridge
bility for predicting the shear strength of joints made with Design and Construction Criteria,” PhD dissertation, The University of
high-strength concrete (fc′ > 55 MPa). Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex., Dec. 1993.

902 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005

 21. Ramírez-Aguilera, G., “Behavior of Unbonded Post-Tensioning Specker was intended for dry joints and could not accurately
Segmental Beams with Multiple Shear Keys,” master’s thesis, The University predict the loading-carrying capacity for epoxied joints.
of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex., Jan. 1989.
22. Turmo, J., “Flexure and Shear Behavior of Segmental Concrete Several points have brought up by discussers Turmo,
Bridges with External Prestressing and Dry Joints,” PhD dissertation, ETS- Ramos, and Aparicio, which are: 1) the keys’ function; 2) the
ICCP de Barcelona, Dept. Ing. de la Construcción, July 2003. (in Spanish) derivation of AASHTO formula, valid concrete strength
range for the formula, and failure mode of different keys; 3)
AUTHORS’ CLOSURE magnitude of the confining stress of specimens and its influence
The authors thank the discussers for their meaningful on shear behavior of multiply-keyed joints; 4) the comparison
comments and suggestions. of shear strength of dry and epoxied joints; and 5) the influence
Rombach and Specker mainly discussed the issues of epoxy layer thickness.
involved in their design formula: 1) the derivation and appli- The keys in segmental bridges may have many functions.
cability (Eq. (7)); 2) consideration of safety factor to take Epoxy provides waterproofing of the joints for bridges.5
matching imperfections into account; and 3) single-keyed Thus, using epoxy, consequently epoxied joints, can reduce
and multiple-keyed joint application. and/or prevent corrosion of the internal and external tendon
There are mainly three methods to derive design formulas in segment bridges. Certainly there are many other tech-
for concrete structural members of segmental bridges. One is niques that can achieve these targets, such as the sealing of
purely from regression analyses of experimental results, the ducts at the joints and the duct injection. The authors
such as those presented by Buyukozturk, Bakhoum, and agree that epoxy can also serve as a lubricant during placement
Beattie;6 the second one is from numerical analyses with a of segments, behaves as a seal to avoid cross-over during
finite element model calibrated by experimental work, such grouting of internal tendons, and provides some tensile
as those addressed by Rombach and Specker;10 the last one strength across the joint.5
may be totally based on an analytical model, but this method AASHTO’s equation for shear design of keyed joints was
is very limited. The authors did address that Rombach and derived with guidance from work by Mattock,25 and confirmed
Specker’s formula (Eq. (7)) was based on numerical analyses by test data from the experimental programs of Koseki and
in the Introduction of the paper. The authors also stated in the Breen,3 and Buyukozturk, Bakhoum, and Beattie.6 It is not to
Shear Capacity of Joints section of the paper that Rombach say that the formula is completely theoretical. Although web
and Specker’s formula (Eq. (7)) is “mainly” based on their shear cracking and flexural shear cracking may occur in
numerical simulations (third paragraph, left column of p. 9). segmental bridges, it is well recognized that the most likely
Rombach and Specker have conducted a small number of tests failure mode of keyed joints in precast concrete segmental
on dry and epoxied joints in segmental bridges.23,24 They bridges is the shearing-off of the keys along the joint plane.3,6
found that the models used in practical design, for instance, A keyed-joint can be considered under two-dimensional
those of AASHTO,5 were obtained from experiments and stresses. The stress along the longitudinal direction is some-
described by simple analytical formulas.23,24 Due to the limi- times called confining stress. For the authors’ experiments, due
tations in experimental measurements, they concluded that to the limitation of the testing facility and the relative large size
numerical calculations were required to investigate the shear of the specimens, the confining stresses applied on the
capacity of the joints.23,24 From this point of view, they also specimens could only reach 5 MPa for single-keyed
built a finite element model and verified the model by their joints and 2 MPa for three-keyed joints. It should be
experimental results.23,24 noted that most of the specimens were tested under a
In the discussed paper, the authors presented their experi- confining pressure greater than 0.7 MPa, which was regarded
mental results and compared them with the predictions from as the valid lower-bound confining pressure when using
design formulas proposed by AASHTO and Rombach and Roberts and Breen’s design formula—the origin work of the
Specker,10 respectively, which were the only available AASHTO design formula (Eq. (5) or (6)). 5 Based on
formulas for design of shear capacity of joints in segmental observation of the large difference between the experimental
bridges at that time according to the authors’ knowledge. and the predicted values by the AASHTO formula, it has been
The authors found that there was a significant difference in found that ultimate shear strengths of multiple-keyed joints can
ultimate shear strength between measured and predicted also be influenced by the fixing imperfections between
results. Based on the observation of shear-off failure mode multiple-keyed joints. As proof, the authors cite that the shear
and analyses by separating the shear contribution of the capacity per key in multiple-keyed dry joints is always lower
contact flat parts in vertical direction from other parts of the than that in single-keyed dry joints. On the other hand, epoxy
joint, the authors pointed out that the shear capacity per key can largely reduce the fixing imperfections, so that the shear
in multiple-keyed dry joints was systematically lower than capacity per key in multiple-keyed epoxied joints is comparable
that in single-keyed dry joints; in epoxied joints, the difference to that in single-keyed epoxied joints.
became smaller. The authors attributed the differences to the Though AASHTO’s formula (Eq. (5)) is based on the work
matching imperfections existing between the keys. As of Roberts and Breen,20 which was deduced for concrete with
Rombach and Specker have pointed out in their discussion, a compressive strength generally less than 55 MPa according to
both their formula (Eq. (7)) and the AASHTO formula Turmo, Ramos, and Aparicio in their discussion, AASHTO5
(Eq. (5) or (6)) are based on a liner correlation between the does not distinguish between strength levels. In fact, if one
number of keys and the shear capacity of the joint. Certainly takes the limit of the concrete strength, 55 MPa, as the design
it is difficult to consider the matching imperfection in compressive strength fck, and assume that the compressive
numerical analyses, as well as in practical design formulas, strength has a normal distribution with mean value fcm and
but the matching imperfections may always occur in practice standard deviation σ, it should exist fcm = fck + 3σ, where σ
so that it leads to a lower shear capacity of joints than that equates to 4 MPa, according to British standard. Therefore, the
predicted by most design formulas and analytical models. It applicable mean compressive strength is 67 MPa. Besides,
is understandable that the model proposed by Rombach and most of the specimens tested by the authors had a compressive

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005 903

strength of less than 55 MPa. Certainly, there were 16 speci- presence of a different epoxy layer thickness. This may be
mens having a compressive strength between 55 to 60 MPa, because that the variation of epoxy layer thickness increases
and only two specimens had a compressive strength greater than as the thickness of epoxy layer increases, especially if this
60 MPa. The authors did not intend to perform tests of keys could lead to an accumulation of geometric errors. The vari-
made of high-strength concrete. Actually, most of the specimens ation of epoxy layer thickness can lead to more matching
were cast with commercial concrete, Grade 30 or 50 concrete imperfections and, thus, a lower shear capacity of epoxied
widely used in Hong Kong. Only one specimen (M3-D-K1- joints. Epoxy normally has a lower elastic modulus (around
1; refer to Table 1) was made of in-house high-strength 6 GPa) and brittle failure mode. Also, the shear stress
concrete, which was deliberately tailored to achieve high increases with the epoxy thickness at a horizontal portion of
strength and examine its shear behavior in segmental joints. the joint. Thus, more deformation will be generated in the
The second point of the conclusions summarizes the epoxy layer that can lead to fracture of the specimen. It is
“apparent” experimental results—the overall shear questionable to treat epoxy layers as ductile springs in
capacity—of dry joints and epoxied joints, that is, the ulti- numerical analyses.
mate shear strength of the joints, in the unit of kN, including Though a lot of segmental bridges have been built and are
the contributions of both the contact flat part in vertical open for traffic, there is still very limited research, especially
direction and the keys. This point is based on the ultimate experimental work, on the design of keyed joints in such
strength values in Table 1. However, in Fig. 11, the normal- bridges. From the authors’ point of view, there is still far from
ized shear capacity per key is obtained by subtracting the adequate research in this area. Certainly there are many contro-
contribution of the contact flat part in vertical direction from versial points on the available research. The authors believe that
the ultimate shear strength. This part has a high percentage these points will be clarified as more and more research is done
for epoxied joints, and a lower percentage for dry joints. on shear behavior of joints in segmental box bridges.
During testing, the authors found that epoxied joints with
REFERENCES
3 mm-thick epoxy bonding layers showed lower shear 23. Rombach, G. A., and Specker, A., “Numerical Modelling of Segmental
capacity than those with 1 or 2 mm-thick epoxy layers (refer Bridges,” Proceedings of the European Conference on Computational
to Table 1). Based on these data, the authors drew the conclu- Mechanics, W. Wunderlich, ed., Munich, Germany, Aug. 31 to Sept. 3, 1999.
sion that a 3 mm-thick epoxy layer may bring worse 24. Rombach, G., and Specker, A., “Finite Element Analysis of Externally
Prestressed Segmental Bridges,” Proceedings of the Fourteenth Engineering
behavior than a thinner (1 or 2 mm) epoxy layer. Buyukoz- Mechanics Conference, J. L. Tassoulas, ed., Austin, Tex., May 21-24, 2000.
turk, Bakhoum, and Beattie6 have also found that the 25. Mattock, A. H., “Design Proposals for Reinforced Concrete Corbels,”
epoxied keyed joints exhibit different shear strength in the PCI Journal, V. 21, No. 3, May-June 1976, pp. 18-42.

Disc. 102-S04/From the January-February 2005 ACI Structural Journal, p. 31

Long-Term Tension-Stiffening Effects in Concrete. Paper by Richard H. Scott and Andrew W. Beeby

Discussion by Je Il Lee, Young Hak Lee, and Andrew Scanlon

PhD student, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa.; Associate Director, Dong Yang Structural Engineers Co. Ltd., Seoul, Korea; Professor and Head of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, Pennsylvania State University

The authors have reported some very interesting data on

the behavior of axially loaded reinforced concrete prisms in
tension. As the authors point out, the tension stiffening effect
decays with time. This decay can be attributed largely to
tensile creep in the concrete between cracks. Analogous to
the gradual transfer of stress from concrete to steel in the
compressive zone due to creep, the stress in concrete in
tensile zones also decreases due to creep, transferring stress
to the embedded tensile steel.
An analysis of one of the authors’ specimens was
performed using the approach proposed by Cho iet al. 7 Fig. A—Bilinear tensile stress-strain relation.
Tension stiffening is modeled using a simple bilinear stress-
strain relationship as shown in Fig. A. The same relationship where
was used for time-dependent response employing the age- Ec = elastic modulus before cracking;
adjusted effective modulus approach to account for creep. An Ec = effective elastic modulus after cracking;
iterative procedure is employed in which the secant modulus Ect = effective elastic modulus including cracking and
of elasticity for the concrete is adjusted after cracking to creep;
follow the descending branch. The secant modulus is further fcr = tensile strength of concrete;
reduced under sustained load as determined by the age- εcr = tensile strain at cracking;
adjusted effective modulus to account for tensile creep. α = tension stiffening factor;
β = tension stiffening parameter; and
χ = aging factor (assumed = 0.8).
Ec A comparison between the author’s experimental results
E c = αE c, E ct = ---------------------
- (1)
( 1 + χφ t ) and the analytical results is shown in Fig. B for a specimen

904 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005

 Fig. C—Nonlinear-type tension stiffening effect.

Fig. D—Variation of concrete tensile stress with time for

Specimen T16R1.

Fig. B—Comparison between analytical and experimental tension stiffening can largely be attributed to creep. In the
results. authors’ view, the situation is rather more complex and,
though creep clearly has some influence, we are inclined to
under time-dependent incremental load. The agreement is believe that cumulative damage is the major contributor.
fairly good at the second increment of load. On initial The authors have carried out a detailed analysis of the long-
loading, the analytical response is too stiff, while at the upper term behavior of the specimens described in the paper, and the
load level, the analysis results are too flexible. Clearly, better results from this analysis will be published in a paper that has
correlation could be obtained by replacing the post-peak now been accepted for publication.11 For the specimen
response with a nonlinear function that initially decreases considered in the contribution (Specimen T16R1), the total
more rapidly, but at higher strains, increases at a slower rate long-term increment in strain over time was 264 × 10–6. Of
as indicated in Fig. C. Several proposed functions of the this, 90 × 10–6 can be easily shown from the stress distributions
nonlinear type are compared by Fields and Bischoff.8 In this along the bar to result from the formation of new cracks,
analysis, the simple ACI 209R9 creep function developed for leaving 160 × 10–6 for possible creep deformation. The
comparison was used. Better correlation may be obtained method of gauging the specimens means that the stress in the
using a more sophisticated creep function.10 concrete surrounding the bars can be calculated at each load
For flexural members, the decay in tension stiffening may stage. While there was a sharp peak in the concrete stress at
be fairly rapid; however, the time-dependent response will each stage when loading was applied, this rapidly dropped to
still be largely determined by creep of concrete in the a value between 0.5 and 0.3 MPa (Fig. D). On average, the
compressive zone so that the incremental deflection may still assumption of stress in the concrete of approximately 0.5 MPa
be the desired criterion to satisfy. seems reasonable. This stress remained on the specimen for
97 days. Assuming a value for tensile creep of twice the
REFERENCES value for compressive creep, the creep strain under this stress
7. Choi, B.; Scanlon, A.; and Johnson, P. A., 2004, “Monte Carlo Simu-
lation of Immediate and Time-Dependent Deflections of Reinforced calculated using the method given in Eurocode 25 results in
Concrete Beams and Slabs,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 101, No. 5, Sept.- an approximate creep strain of 62 × 10–6. The authors would
Oct. 2004, pp. 633-641. say that this is close to a worst case and it leaves another
8. Fields, K., and Bischoff, P. H., “Tension Stiffening and Cracking of
High-Strength Reinforced Concrete Tension Members,” ACI Structural
98 × 10–6 of strain to be accommodated by other mecha-
Journal, V. 101, No. 4, July-Aug. 2004, pp. 447-456. nisms. Though we cannot offer any detailed proof, it is our
9. ACI Committee 209, “Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage and Tempera- opinion that this is probably due to the extension of internal
ture Effects in Concrete Structures (ACI 209R-92),” American Concrete cracking within the specimens. If this is true, then creep, in
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1992, 48 pp.
10. Ostergaard, L.; Lange, D. A.; Altoubat, S. A.; and Stang, H., “Tensile
this case, is only directly contributing about a quarter of the
Basic Creep of Early-Age Concrete Under Constant Load,” Cement and total long-term deformation and the remainder is due to
Concrete Research, V. 31, No. 12, 2001, pp. 1895-1899. cumulative internal damage.

AUTHORS’ CLOSURE REFERENCES

The authors would like to thank the discussers for their 11. Beeby, A. W., and Scott, R. H., “Mechanisms of Long-Term Decay
interest in our paper. The discussers state that the decay in of Tension Stiffening,” Magazine of Concrete Research. (in press)

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005 905

Disc. 102-S10/From the January-February 2005 ACI Structural Journal, p. 93

Use of Fiber-Reinforced Polymers in Slab-Column Connection Upgrades. Paper by Baris Binici and Oguzhan
Bayrak

Discussion by K. Sissakis and S. A. Sheikh

Structural Engineer, Halsall Associates Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto

The discussers would like to extend their appreciation to

the authors for presenting their work on the use of FRP for
strengthening two-way slabs in shear. This discussion is
written to bring notice to the work that was carried out on
this topic at the University of Toronto in 2000 and 200220,21
and has not been referred to in the paper.
In a pilot test series, three slab specimens retrofitted with
CFRP were tested and compared with a control specimen20
in an effort to validate the concept of stitching the slabs with
FRP to enhance their punching shear capacity. All the slab
specimens were 1500 x 1500 mm (59 x 59 in.) in plan and
150 mm thick (5.9 in.), and tested under displacement-
controlled concentric load applied at the center of the
specimen on an area of 200 x 200 m (7.9 x 7.9 in.). Figure A
shows details of the specimen and the test machine with a
specimen simply supported on all four sides similar to those
shown in Fig. 1 of the paper. Slab specimens in the pilot test
series were reinforced with short strands of CFRP laminate
that were passed once through the holes cast in the slab and
had their ends adhered to the top and bottom surface of the
slab for anchorage (Fig. B(a)). Large sheets of CFRP
laminate were later installed on the top and bottom surface
to ensure anchorage to the concrete (Fig. B(b)). The results
showed a substantial increase in the shear capacity and
ductility of the slabs due to FRP retrofitting and validated the
hypothesis of upgrading the slabs with FRP for punching
shear (Fig. C). The experiments also found partial separation
of the CFRP laminates from the concrete surface during
testing and considerable increases in flexural stiffness and
strength due to the added CFRP laminates on the top and
bottom surface of the slab specimens. An increase in the
flexural capacity was not considered to be desirable for this
application, especially if the upgrade is to enhance seismic
resistance of slabs. In addition, the bond between FRP and
concrete was a major concern. These issues were addressed
in the next series of tests.21
Further work was carried out on 28 slab specimens of the
same dimensions as those of the pilot series.21 Twenty-four
of these specimens were retrofitted with CFRP and tested
under concentric load. All the slab specimens were cast with
one of the four patterns of holes shown in Fig. D. The
number of concentric shear-reinforcing perimeters parallel
to the loading plate periphery varied between 3 and 6. The
major improvement from the pilot series was the change in
the retrofit procedure. The slabs were effectively stitched
with continuous strings of carbon FRP passing through
paired holes and anchored at the ends (Fig. E). The solid
rings of CFRP reinforcement minimized the dependence on
bond between the concrete and the FRP laminate and
avoided increases in flexural strength and stiffness. Figure F
compares the behaviors of four slab specimens with different
reinforcing configurations each retrofitted with CFRP in six
shear reinforcing perimeters and a control specimen in which
no shear reinforcement was used. The load has been normalized Fig. A—Specimen details and test setup.

906 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005

 Fig. D—Shear reinforcement configurations and assumed
critical shear section perimeters.

Fig. B—CFRP application of slab specimens in pilot

studies.

Fig. E—Slab specimen D4 before and after CFRP application.

Fig. C—Load-deformation curves for pilot test series.

with respect to bod√fc′ to compare specimens with different

concrete strengths in the entire test program and corresponds
to the cumulative shear stress at a distance of d/2 from the
bearing plate periphery. The retrofitted slab specimens
demonstrated increases in shear strength and ductility of up
to 82% and 768%, respectively, over that of their respective
control specimens.
An increase of 57.5% in the load-carrying capacity of
slabs as a result of similar FRP retrofitting observed by the
authors in their tests (Fig. 5 of the paper) is comparable to Fig. F—Load-deformation curves for slab specimens with
that observed in the Toronto tests. six shear reinforcing perimeters and control specimen.

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005 907

 Fig. H—Strengthening patterns and details used by Binici.24

kept constant at 1.76%. CEB-FIP MC 9022 and BS 8110-

9723 consider the punching shear resistance as a function of
longitudinal reinforcement ratio. Hence, it is well
established that punching shear strength of flat plates is
significantly influenced by the flexural reinforcement ratio.
Fig. G—Strengthening patterns and details used by Sissakis.21 2. Detailing—Improving the punching shear strength of
slab-column connections was only one of the two important
goals of our research. The second and equally important goal
REFERENCES
was to improve the post-punching capacity. As such, the
20. Sissakis, K., “The Use of CFRP Strands to Improve the Punching
Shear Resistance of Concrete Slabs,” BASc thesis, Department of Civil authors developed anchorage details that are drastically
Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Apr. 2000. different than those employed by the discussers. Figure G
21. Sissakis, K., “Strengthening of Concrete Slabs for Punching Shear illustrates the anchorage details21 and CFRP application
with CFRP Laminates,” MASc thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, used by the discussers. Figure H demonstrates the way in
University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Feb. 2002. which the CFRP stirrups were externally installed in our
experimental program. The purpose of our CFRP
AUTHORS’ CLOSURE installations was not only to improve the strength of the slab-
The authors thank the discussers for their contribution and column connection but also to create a tightly knit array of
for highlighting the oversight on the authors’ part for failing CFRP stirrups to engage more flexural reinforcement into
to refer to their work.20,21 The authors are also glad to have the punching cone for improved dowel resistance. As
this opportunity to clarify the differences between their work discussed in our research,6,24,25 additional dowels improve
and the results reported in our original paper. Although the the residual capacity after punching. This characteristic is of
differences are not limited to the issues discussed as follows, paramount importance to mitigate progressive collapse. The
the authors consider the following to be significant: risk of progressive collapse is reduced by minimizing the
1. Geometric properties—The discussers indicate that magnitude of the load that will be shed to neighboring
their specimens were 59 x 59 x 6 in. whereas the specimens connections at punching shear failure. Figure 12 of
tested in our research measured 84 x 84 x 6 in. These Reference 25 clearly illustrates the efficacy of two different
dimensions indicate a difference of approximately 45% in details anchoring the same amount of vertical CFRP
the shear span-depth ratio. This significant difference is also reinforcement in improving the punching shear capacity.
reflected in the moment-shear ratios calculated at the critical Hence, it is very clear that the anchorage of vertical CFRP
perimeter for both bending axes. The different loading plate reinforcement plays an important role in enhancing the
sizes used by the discussers (8 in.) and the authors (12 in.) punching shear strength and post punching behavior. It is
result in significantly different bo/d ratios in the two test important to observe that the external CFRP stirrup
series. An examination of Reference 21 indicates that the installation technique used in our research involved
discussers used two flexural reinforcement ratios: 1.49% and providing multiple anchorage paths for most, if not all, of the
2.23%. The flexural reinforcement ratio used in our tests was discrete vertical CFRP reinforcement locations. The

908 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005

anchorage details used by the discussers (Fig. G) are multiple anchorage paths was studied systematically under a
fundamentally different in nature and need to be evaluated in variety of loading conditions. In addition, design, detailing
view of this observation. and application guidelines were provided as a result of this
3. Instrumentation—Although the discussers, like the comprehensive research study.6,24-26
authors, used a test setup similar to the one used by Elstner
and Hognestad18 in 1956, the instrumentation used in the REFERENCES
authors’ study6,24,25 was different. Because the corners of 22. CEB-FIP, “Model Code 1990,” Bulletin D’Information No. 203-305,
the simply supported slabs lift up when concentrated loads The International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lausanne, Switzer-
land, 1990.
are applied at the center of slab specimens, the support 23. BS 8110-97, “Structural Use of Concrete,” British Standards Institu-
movements in the authors’ research24 were monitored at the tion, London, 1997.
center of the four sides, directly above the rollers. The 24. Binici, B., “Punching Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete
support movements were monitored at the four corners of the Slabs Using Fiber Reinforced Polymers,” dissertation, The University of
slabs tested by the discussers.21 The displacements Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex., 2003, 279 pp.
25. Binici, B., and Bayrak, O., “Use of Fiber-Reinforced Polymers in
measured at the corners of slab specimens include uplift of Slab-Column Connection Upgrades,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 102, No. 1,
corners and support settlements/movements. It is not Jan.-Feb. 2005, pp. 93-102.
possible to separate these two displacement components. 26. Binici, B., and Bayrak, O., “Upgrading of Slab-Column Connections
It is important to recognize that the external CFRP stirrup Using Fiber-Reinforced Polymers,” Engineering Structures, V. 27, No. 1,
installation patterns developed in our research6,24,25 were Jan. 2005, pp. 97-107.
27. Stark, A.; Binici, B.; and Bayrak, O., “Seismic Upgrade of Rein-
later used to evaluate the performance of slab-column forced Concrete Slab-Column Connections Using Carbon Fiber-Rein-
connections subjected to shear and unbalanced moment26 forced Polymers,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 102, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2005,
and seismic loads.27 As such, the importance of providing pp. 324-333.

Disc. 102-S17/From the January-February 2005 ACI Structural Journal, p. 159

Experimental Study on Seismic Behavior of High-Performance Fiber-Reinforced Cement Composite

Coupling Beams. Paper by B. Afsin Canbolat, Gustavo J. Parra-Montesinos, and James K. Wight

Discussion by Thomas Paulay

ACI Honorary Member, Professor Emeritus, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

The motivation for this discussion stems from some 40 years

of interest in the seismic design of reinforced concrete
coupled walls. It was interesting to learn about beneficial
effects of fiber reinforcement. However, it was disap-
pointing that issues of behavior, necessary for engineering
understanding, and determination of nominal strengths,
necessary for the applications in design of experimental
findings, were not addressed in the paper. It is hoped that the
comments offered may encourage the authors to revise some
of their conclusions and remind designers of important
behavioral features applicable to coupling beams.
1. The identification in the mid-60s of the inappropriateness
of established procedures, relevant to the prediction of the
nominal strength of conventionally reinforced squat coupling
beams (Fig. 1(a)), then initiated some research. Among speci-
mens tested in New Zealand, four were geometrically similar
to those shown in Fig. 1(a) and 2(b). In 1969, that study Fig. A—Conventionally reinforced coupling beam.
concluded that such elements possess limited seismic
displacement and energy dissipation capacity.
Sources of ductility in such beams were traced by exten- bodies A to B, no failure along any diagonal crack occurs. In
sive strain and displacement measurements (Park and Paulay the absence of steel strain reversals, significant strength can
1975). Features, partly illustrated in Fig. A, demonstrated be extracted from such beams only when an imposed seismic
that, contrary to the conformity with the illusory deformation displacement is larger than the previously accumulated
configuration perceived by the authors in Fig. 2, all hori- plastic deformations. The results are a dramatic reduction of
zontal bars over the clear span s of squat beams were stiffness and inferior energy dissipation.
subjected only to tension. Identified internal forces, associated with the nominal
The consequently greatly reduced bond transfer along strength of the anti-symmetric panel, are recorded on the
horizontal bars implies that traditionally defined shear left-hand side of Fig. A. In spite of the total horizontal
stresses are insignificant. Diagonal compression stresses internal forces, Cc =Ts + Ts′ , being larger than those derived
along trajectories (sketched in Fig. A) rather than shear for ordinary beam sections, because of the reduced internal
stresses, initiated a potential diagonal failure crack. When lever arm z, nominal strength is reduced. Relative displacements
vertical stirrup reinforcement is provided to transfer without of the right-hand boundary of the beam, based on Villiot’s
yielding the maximum shear force V between the triangular technique, and their components, ∆c and ∆t , respectively, are

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005 909

also shown. After a few inelastic displacement reversals, the
entire shear force V needs to be transferred by friction across
previously extensively cracked compression zones. All spec-
imen in which diagonal tension failure was prevented, failed
by sliding shear (Park and Paulay 1975) with subsequently
mobilized dowel mechanism having inadequate shear
strength.
2. The negative outcome of the studies summarized previ-
ously prompted a search for radical changes in the detailing
of coupling beams. This led to the experimental work of
Binney reported in 1974, and its further exploitation by
Santhakumar, using tests of coupled walls. The vastly supe-
rior performance of such coupling beams resulted in the
abandonment in New Zealand (1973) of conventionally rein-
forced beams. The relevant local code in 1982 formally
restricted their use. Much earlier than 1999, several astute Fig. B—Diagonally reinforced coupling beam.
American structural consultants adapted diagonally rein-
forced coupling beams in their buildings. As Fig. B shows,
the behavioral model used in New Zealand was that of
symmetrical diagonal steel bracing, capable of sustaining
large inelastic strains both in tension and compression.
During the first tensile strain excursion beyond yield, the
concrete surrounding the diagonal compression bars (shown
by the shaded area in Fig. B) contributes to force transfer. At
this stage, diagonal compression bars perform in the elastic
domain. The associated components and beam displace-
ments, at the onset of yielding along the tension diagonal,
∆vy and ∆hy, are identified in Fig. B. This enables the
nominal yield chord rotation, θby = ∆vy /s, and shear stiffness,
kb = Vy /∆vy = (2Tssinα)/∆vy, of such beams to be realisti-
cally estimated. Bar elongation due to uniform yield strains Fig. C—Drift relationships.
along a diagonal, with some allowance of strain penetration
into the anchorage regions in the walls (Paulay 2002a), is
denoted as ∆t. After the first reversal of inelastic seismic ment demands can be readily estimated. Deformations
displacements, the diagonal bars in compression replace the controlling the performance of a coupled wall system are
contribution to strength of the surrounding concrete. Hence generally those of the important elements, the walls.
the shortening of the compression diagonal is ∆c ≈ 0. Energy A critical quantity is the maximum story drift θw along
dissipation is furnished only by the diagonal bars, leading to their height. A typical moderate value of 1.5% is used herein
a Ramberg-Osgood type of hysteretic response. As expected, to illustrate the associated demand θb imposed on the critical
inelastic deformations will be proportional to post-yield beam. A free but astute choice of the strength of the coupling
tensile strains imposed. A displacement ductility, µ∆b = ∆vu/ beams, possibly uniform over the height of the building,
∆vy , in the order of 15 can be sustained without approaching determines the preferred location of the maximum story drift
an acceptable limit on steel tensile strains, for example, 5 to (Paulay 2002a). Using the notation given in Fig. C, the ratio
6%. ω of critical beam and wall drifts is
Any horizontal reinforcement, for example, that placed in
an integral adjacent floor slab, is activated by the elongation, ω = θb /θw = 1 + (lw + c1 – c2)/s
∆hu = µ∆b ∆hy , of these beams. Hence, beam strength will
increase. However, as in conventionally reinforced coupling where c1 and c2 are the estimated neutral axis depths of the
beams, this strength enhancement diminishes when subse- elastic but cracked wall sections, respectively. Using relative
quent inelastic displacement demands become less than the dimensions, approximating those used in Fig. 4 (lw = 3.4s, c1
maximum previously imposed.
= 0.34s, and c2 = 0.68s), one finds that ω ≈ 4. The chord rotation
Ties around a bundle of diagonal bars were never intended of the coupling beam θb = 4 × 1.5% = 6% is thus well in
to provide confinement (Park and Paulay 1975). The sole
excess of that achieved in the reported tests. Conventionally
purpose of such reinforcement, sometimes in the form of
reinforced coupling beams, with or without fibers, cannot
rectangular spirals, was to prevent premature buckling of
bars subjected to significant inelastic compression strains. accommodate such chord rotations.
Admittedly, fiber reinforcement could replace this function.
The comparison in Table 3 of shear stresses sustained is REFERENCES
inappropriate. As Fig. A and particularly Fig. B imply, such Park, R., and Paulay, T., 1975, Reinforced Concrete Structures, John
Wiley & Sons, 786 pp.
stresses are generally negligible or nonexistent.
Paulay, T., 2002a, “The Displacement Capacity of Reinforced Concrete
3. Displacement (drift) capacities observed by the authors Coupled Walls,” The Journal of Earthquake, Wind and Ocean Engineering,
are of paramount interest. They should be compared with V. 24, pp. 1165-1175.
likely displacement demands. With the use of simple rela- Paulay, T., 2002b, “A Displacement Focused Seismic Design of Mixed
tionships (Paulay 2002b), identifiable in Fig. C, displace- Building Systems,” Earthquake Spectra, V. 18, No. 4, pp. 680-718.

910 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005

 AUTHORS’ CLOSURE showed that HPFRCC coupling beams with simplified diag-
The authors would like to thank the discusser for his onal reinforcement exhibited higher shear strength and stiff-
comments on the paper as well as his discussion of the ness retention.” Thus, it should be clear that the authors are
behavior of conventionally and diagonally reinforced proposing a coupling beam design that does not require the
coupling beams. The authors are somewhat confused, use of transverse reinforcement around the diagonal rein-
however, about some of the discusser’s comments and forcement to prevent buckling of those bars. In addition to
believe that he misinterpreted the conclusions presented in simplifying the reinforcement detailing in reinforced
the paper. The following explanations should be able to clear concrete coupling beams, HPFRCC materials were also
up his concerns. intended to enhance damage tolerance and increase shear
The main motivation for the study presented by the resistance in reinforced concrete coupling beams subjected
authors was to simplify the construction of coupling beams to displacement reversals.
in earthquake-resistant coupled wall systems and not to The discusser mentions that “ties around a bundle of diag-
develop an alternative design because current design provi- onal bars were never intended to provide confinement.”
sions have been shown to lead to adequate coupling beam Regardless of the discusser’s intentions during his research
behavior under displacement reversals. In fact, since the on coupling beams, the authors strongly believe that trans-
1960s, experimental results have clearly shown that the use verse reinforcement around diagonal bars of reinforced
of diagonal reinforcement leads to superior behavior of concrete coupling beams is required not only to provide
coupling beams under pushover-type loading, as well as lateral support to the diagonal bars, but also to provide
under displacement reversals, when compared to conven- confinement to the concrete. In fact, Paulay and Binney
tionally reinforced coupling beams (that is, beams with (1974) concluded the following. “To prolong the effective
distributed horizontal and vertical reinforcement). In their contribution of coupling beams during catastrophic earth-
experimental study on the behavior of coupling beams and quake, the confinement of the concrete within the cage of the
coupled walls under pushover-type loading, Luisoni, diagonally placed group of bars is imperative.” This seems
Somenson, and Ungaro (1970) indicated that the combina- to be in agreement with the authors’ claim.
tion of diagonal reinforcement with vertical stirrups repre- With regard to the discusser’s criticism of the authors’
sented the most efficient design for RC coupling beams. discussion on average shear stresses sustained by reinforced
Paulay (1971) and Paulay and Binney (1974) showed that concrete and HPFRCC coupling beams, the authors believe
the use of diagonal reinforcement also leads to far superior that the use of average shear stresses allowed a comparison
behavior in coupling beams compared to conventionally of test results with code-specified shear stress limits, as well
reinforced coupling beams when subjected to displacement as a fair comparison of the shear resistance of the four
reversals. As pointed out by Paulay and Binney, however, coupling beam specimens tested as part of their investigation.
hoops or spirals are required to provide lateral support to the The term “shear stress,” whether appropriate or not, has long
diagonal bars, which substantially complicates the construction been used in design codes worldwide, including the ACI
of the coupling beams. Building Code and the New Zealand Code. It is worth
The design of diagonally reinforced coupling beams, as mentioning that the maximum shear allowed by the 2005
per the ACI Building Code (ACI Committee 2005), involves ACI Building Code in coupling beams is based on an
the use of reinforcement cages consisting of at least four average shear stress. Further, the fact that the width and
diagonal bars and closely spaced transverse reinforcement, amount of diagonal reinforcement of Specimens 3 and 4
similar to that used in critical regions of reinforced concrete (HPFRCC coupling beams) were approximately 3/4 of those
columns. This creates construction difficulties, particularly in Specimen 1 (diagonally reinforced concrete coupling
in the region where the two diagonal reinforcement cages beam), and still the HPFRCC coupling beams exhibited a
intersect. Further, the widening of the coupling beam is often peak strength approximately 70% greater than that of the
required to accommodate the two diagonal reinforcement diagonally reinforced concrete coupling beam indicated that
cages. Thus, the main goal of the authors was to develop a the HPFRCC materials contributed significantly to beam
coupling beam design that could be more easily constructed, shear resistance prior to complete fiber pullout. Thus,
while exhibiting a behavior that was at least comparable to expressing the results in terms of average shear stress was
that of well-detailed diagonally reinforced coupling beams. found more suitable for evaluating the shear resistance of
The authors find the discusser’s criticism on the use of HPFRCC coupling beams, as well as for easy comparison of
conventionally reinforced coupling beams (with or without the measured shear strengths with the maximum shear stress
fibers) irrelevant because the authors are not recommending value permitted in the ACI Code.
the use of conventionally reinforced high-performance fiber- The discusser’s comments on drift capacity versus
reinforced cement composite (HPFRCC) coupling beams, as demand are particularly interesting. In Table 3 of the paper,
the discusser seems to believe. In fact, in the abstract, the specimen drift capacities, based on the widely used criterion
following statement was provided: “It was also observed that of a maximum acceptable strength decay rate of 20%, were
diagonal reinforcement is necessary to achieve large given. Specimen 4, however, exhibited a stable hysteretic
displacement capacity.” Further, in the Summary and Conclu- behavior up to 4.5% and 5.5% drift in the positive and nega-
sions section of the paper, it was made clear that the use of tive loading directions, respectively, even though the
HPFRCC materials allowed the elimination of transverse strength decay slightly exceeded 20%, and a strength equal
reinforcement around diagonal bars, but not the diagonal to 80% of the peak strength when failure occurred at 8.0%
reinforcement itself, as evidenced by the following statements: drift, which was due to fracture of the diagonal reinforcement.
“The use of advanced fiber cementitious materials allowed Thus, for the design scenario that the discusser describes, the
the elimination of the transverse reinforcement typically authors believe that the behavior of Specimen 4 was satisfactory.
required around the diagonal bars for confinement, thus As mentioned in the paper, Specimen 1 (diagonally rein-
simplifying the beam construction process. The test results forced concrete coupling beam) sustained a peak displace-

ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005 911

ment demand of 4.0% drift, at which point no clear though the corresponding value of drift was not available,
indication of failure was observed. However, as shown in yielding of diagonal reinforcement in short coupling beams
Fig. 9(b) of the paper, this specimen was already severely generally occurs at displacements below 1.0% drift.
damaged at 3.5% drift. Specimen 4 tested by the authors sustained over 15 cycles of
It is worth mentioning that Coupling Beams 317 (span- inelastic displacement reversals up to 5.5% drift and a final
depth ratio of 1.3) and 395 (span-depth ratio of 1.0) tested by push to 8.0% drift. This drift capacity is similar to that of
Paulay and Binney (1974), which contained diagonal Coupling Beams 317 and 395 tested by Paulay and Binney,
reinforcement and hoops around the diagonal bars, exhibited even though Specimen 4 was subjected to a much more
drift capacities of approximately 6.0% and 5.3%, respectively, severe displacement history.
even though the loading regime was substantially less severe In summary, the authors believe that the results from their
than that applied to Specimen 4. For example, Coupling investigation support the conclusion that the use of high-
Beam 317 exhibited a significant strength decay after four performance fiber-reinforced cement composites (HPFRCCs)
inelastic displacement cycles, only two of them representing allows the elimination of transverse reinforcement around
inelastic displacement reversals. It is worth emphasizing that diagonal bars in reinforced concrete coupling beams. In
the span-depth ratio of Coupling Beam 317 was 30% larger addition, the HPFRCC materials were shown to contribute
than that in Specimen 4. Coupling Beam 395, on the other significantly to coupling beam shear resistance prior to
hand, failed after two full cycles in the inelastic range with a complete fiber pullout, and led to superior damage tolerance
peak drift demand in the negative loading direction of compared with regular concrete coupling beams (with or
approximately 0.3%, which implies that this coupling beam without diagonal reinforcement).
was primarily tested under a cyclic unidirectional displacement
history. Further, a diagonally reinforced coupling beam with REFERENCES
a span-depth ratio of 1.0 tested by Tassios, Moretti, and ACI Committee 318, 2005, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
Bezas (1996) exhibited significant shear strength decay after Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (318R-05),” American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 430 pp.
being subjected to three cycles at a displacement ductility Paulay, T., 1971, “Simulated Seismic Loading of Spandrel Beams,”
level of 3.0 (three times the yield displacement). Even Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, V. 97, No. ST9, pp. 2407-2419.

912 ACI Structural Journal/November-December 2005