Punching Shear Strength of Voided Slabs On The Elastic Bases

Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00546-y
RESEARCH PAPER
Punching Shear Strength of Voided Slabs on the Elastic Bases

Hadi Azizian1 · Mohammad Ali Lotfollahi‑Yaghin2 · Alaeddin Behravesh1
Received: 9 January 2020 / Accepted: 11 November 2020

© Shiraz University 2021
Abstract
This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation on the punching shear strength and failure mechanism of
one solid and four voided biaxial slabs under a concentrated load applied at the center of the slab (built on a soil subbase
acting as support). In the voided biaxial slab specimens, the first row of spherical void formers was placed at the distances
of d, 1.5d, 2d, and 2.5d from the column edge. The punching shear capacity, failure mechanism, and failure angles of the
specimens were studied. Then an accurate theoretical equation was formulated for estimating the punching shear capacity
of voided slabs. The peak punching shear capacity in the voided slabs, which was only 1.87% lower than that of the solid
slab It was found that the punching shear capacity of a voided slab in which spheres are placed at the distance 2d from the
column edge are close to the solid slab. Therefore a critical distance and theoretical equation for punching shear of voided
slabs were proposed. to evaluate the precision of the proposed theoretical equation, the results were compared with the
experimental data. On average, the punching shear capacity estimates of the proposed equation for the voided slabs and the
solid slab were respectively 3.31% and 1.62% different from the corresponding experimental values. The results demonstrate
the fairly good accuracy of the presented analytical equation.
Keywords Punching shear capacity · Solid and voided biaxial slab · Subbase · Physical model · Theoretical equation ·
Traditional plastic spherical void formers
1 Introduction of slabs and, similar equation was proposed for controlling

the punching shear resistance in slabs and foundations. Also,
The structure designers recently have showed more interest building codes assume the same punching angle for both
to use voided slabs. Using the void formers, the unnecessary sides regardless of member length, thus effectively ignoring
concrete could be eliminated in slabs and foundations. Such that punching angles may vary if one side is longer than the
elimination reduces the cost and weight of these structural other side. According to Iranian Concrete Code (2001), and
systems and improves the structural capacity of the slabs in the standards of American Concrete Institute (2014), the
long spans. Meanwhile the performances of voided slabs in angle of expansion of punching damage is assumed to be
punching shear are the main concern. 45 degrees, but this angle may be different in foundations
Punching shear failure is an important mechanism of as they do not have the same depth and reinforcement ratio.
failure in slabs and foundations. The combination of the Schnellenbach-Held and Pfeffer (2002), Schnellenbach-
shear and compression stresses, originate this mechanism Held and Aldejohann (2005) conducted experimental and
around concrete slab-column junction, while this mecha- numerical research on punching shear capacity of voided
nism complete with truncated cone shaped rupture of con- slabs. In their study to determine the effect of cast mode
crete. The majority of researches has studied different type on deflection, failure mechanism, and bearing capacity of
these slabs a series of cast-in situ and precast voided and
solid slabs were considered. Abramski et al. (2010) investi-
* Mohammad Ali Lotfollahi‑Yaghin gated the effect of arrangement and spacing between voided
[email protected]
spheres on punching shear capacity and, the results were
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Mahabad Branch, Islamic compared with a solid slab. Meisami et al. (2015) concluded
Azad University, Mahabad, Iran that voided slabs are more prone to failure than solid slabs.
2
Civil Engineering Faculty, University of Tabriz, Research has shown that the angle of the conical punching
5166616471 Tabriz, Iran
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
shear failure surface in slabs vary from 22° to 45°. Sucharda using elasticity theory was proposed by Westergaard
et al. (2018) convinced that adding shear rebars can increase (1923, 1925, 1926) and (1927). Westergaard’s theory
the punching shear capacity of solid slabs. The study of Vali- assumes a homogeneous, isotropic and elastic slab placed
vonis et al. (2017) on the punching shear capacity of voided on a (Winkler 1867) subgrade. The (Winkler 1867) sub-
biaxial RC slabs, showed that uniformly orthogonal voided grade is an ideal subgrade that exerts at all points a ver-
slab specimens had 18% higher punching shear capacity than tical reactive pressure proportional to slab deformation.
non-orthogonal specimens. Also, the experimental punch- However, since the materials are assumed to be linearly
ing shear capacity values were consistent with the results of elastic and the design conditions are based on the tensile
the method proposed of EC2, although they were 10–30% strength of the concrete, the slabs designed by this method
lower than the computational values obtained from the EC2 are very thick. Winkler subgrade acts as a linear spring
method. Valivonis et al. (2017) proposed different methods with the constant stiffnes, which is known as the modulus
for calculating the punching shear capacity of slabs. But of subgrade reaction (Winkler 1867). Hegger et al. (2006,
these methods are based on several different assumptions. 2007, 2009) and Kumer and Hoque (2015) experimentally
According to these assumptions, the critical punching shear investigated the punching shear in slabs and foundations
perimeter varies between d and 2d from the columns edge placed on sand subgrades.
where, d is the effective depth of cross-section of the slab. Muttoni (2008) based on the mechanical explanation of
Estimating the punching shear perimeter has considerable punching shear in slabs, proposed a formulation for failure
impact on the calculation of punching shear capacity espe- criterion of punching shear of slab. The suitability of pro-
cially for voided slabs. According to the EC2 (2004) method, posed equations were evaluated for design and assessment
the critical punching shear perimeter is at a distance of 2d of structures (Muttoni et al. 2013).
from the column edge (Fig. 1). Fernández Ruiz and Muttoni (2009) studied the appli-
Janulikova and Mateckova (2016) conducted experimen- cations of critical shear crack theory to punching of rein-
tal tests on the concrete slab without shear reinforcement forced concrete slabs with transverse reinforcement. Based
and, the interaction between the slab and the subgrade soil on the limitations of such approach, they proposed new
during were observed. theoretical model for strength and ductility of shear-rein-
Most of the slabs failed by punching shear mechanism forced slabs.
meanwhile, dimension and shape of punching shear areas Using experimental tests on 20 slabs, Fernandez et al.
were studied and compared with the design methods used (2013) studied the effect of various integrity reinforcement
in EC2. layouts reinforcement on the post-punching behavior of
It was concluded that the experimental punching shear flat slabs. The researcher proposed a mechanical model for
force was greater than the one obtained using the EC2 design of integrity reinforcement that accounts for the influ-
method. The method for designing slabs on subgrades ence of flexural and integrity reinforcement.
Despite extensive research has carried out on the punch-
ing shear, but still some aspect of such phenomenon need
more consideration. Furthermore during experimental test,
applying a distributed load on the slab while maintaining the
balance of the column would require sophisticated equip-
ment. Therefore, the present study was performed with an
alternative method, which involved placing the slab and the
column inversely on a uniformly grained subbase (surface
footing) and applying the axial loading to the column. Using
this technique, the punching shear resistance and the failure
mechanism of solid and voided biaxial slabs were investi-
gated. The loading include a point load which monotonically
applied at the center of slabs (on the subbase as support).
The study also examined the effect of the distance of the first
row of traditional spherical void formers from the column
edge on the punching shear capacity, failure mechanism,
failure surface angles, and critical failure perimeter and area
in voided biaxial slabs. Ultimately, the paper presents some
suggestions regarding the distance of traditional spherical
Fig. 1 EC2 model for punching shear at the ultimate limit state void formers from the column edge and the best theoretical
(Eurocode 2 2004) equation for the estimation of punching shear capacity.
13
2 Experimental Test spherical void formers were placed at distances of d, 1.5d,

2d, and 2.5d, from the column edge. All slabs were of size
2.1 Test Specimens 1300 × 1300 mm, with a thickness of 120 mm and an effec-
tive depth of 100 mm. All voids were formed using ordinary
The tests of this study were performed on four voided slab plastic spherical void formers with a diameter of 70 mm.
specimens (S1, S2, S3, and S
4) and one solid slab specimen The spheres were placed with a spacing of 20 mm, giv-
(R) serving as the control. In the voided slab specimens, ing a center-to-center distance of 90 mm (Figs. 2 and 3).
The alignments and intersection points were set-out using
Fig. 2 a Arrangement of bending reinforcements in the specimen R, b Setting-out alignments and intersection points with mason’s line, c An
overview of the voided slabs
13
Fig. 3 Details of spherical
void formers in the voided slab
specimens S1, S2, S3 and S4
(dimensions in millimeter)
13
Table 1 Mix design of the concrete used in the slabs

Water(kg/ Cement (kg/m3) Gravel (m3) Sand (m3) Water/ Fineness Dmax Aggre Slump(mm)
m3) cementi- module (mm)
tious
175.49 443 902 910 0.4 3 19 65
Fig. 4 Average results of 35 4
mechanical tests: a compres- 30 3.5
sive strength of the concrete, b 3
25
Stress (MPa)
tensile strength of the concrete,
Stress(MPa)
2.5
c tensile strength of the rebar 20
2
15
1.5
10 1
5 0.5
0 0
-0.001 0.001 0.003 0.005 0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003
Strain Strain
(a) (b)
700
600
500
Stress(MPa)
400
300
200
100
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Strain
(c)
mason’s line. The slabs were made of ordinary concrete with Table 2 Specifications of the concrete used in the slabs
the mix design given in Table 1. To measure the mechani-
Sample, Concrete Concrete Concrete Poisson’s Density
cal properties of the concrete, five cylindrical specimens mm strength Young’s tensile ratio (kg/m3)
of size 30 × 15 mm were made during the construction of modulus strength
slabs and tested at the age of 28 days. Figure 4a shows the fc, MPa Ecm, GPa fr, MPa ʋ
compressive stress–strain curve of the concrete. Accord-
Cylinder, 31.77 25.47 3.57 0.15 2400
ing to the compressive strength test, the mean compressive ø150,
strength of the cylindrical specimens was 31.77 MPa. The h = 300
mean tensile stress–strain curve of the concrete specimens
which obtained from splitting test on cylindrical concrete
specimens, is illustrated in Fig. 4b. The tensile strength tests
showed that the specimens had a mean tensile strength of Table 3 Specifications of the rebars used in the slabs
3.57 MPa. The mechanical properties of the concrete are Diameter Steel Mean Mean Poisson’s Density
listed in Table (2). Figure 4c displays the stress–strain curve Young’s yield tensile ratio (kg/m3)
modulus strength strength
of the rebars used in the slab (D8), which had a mean char-
acteristic yield strength of 383.062 MPa and a mean ten- Es, GPa fy, MPa fr, MPa ʋ
sile strength of 576.547 MPa. The slabs were fitted with 8 201.45 383.062 576.54 0.3 7850
both longitudinal and transverse steel reinforcements. The
13
mechanical properties of the slab reinforcements are given

in Table (3). The rebars at both bottom and top of the cross-
section were 8 mm in diameter. The thickness of protective
concrete layers (cover) was 25 mm in all testing specimens.
2.2 Test Setup
A cubic box of size 1330 × 1330 × 500 mm was deployed to

work as a formwork for the slab platform. A sponge of size
370 × 340 × 340 mm was installed in the middle of this box
to create an empty space underneath the column. This space
was created because the slab was fairly thin and would not
act as a perfectly rigid wedge. Therefore, the slab placed
on soil would experience a small deflection under loading,
which would stiffen the bottom of the column and give it
extra strength, causing it to act as a stiff enough body. In
other words, the stiffness of the soil under the column’s area,
would cause it to carry most of the load on the column,
thus making it impossible to determine at which load the Fig. 6 Set up the tests
slab undergoes shear failure. Also, allowing a part of the
column load to be carried by the soil beneath the column
footing and, other parts of the load to be carried by other classified as SP (poorly graded sand). As shown in Figs. 6
sections of the soil would make it practically impossible to and 7, the solid slab (R) and the voided slabs (S1, S2, S3,
determine exactly shear failure load outside the shear line. S4) were placed on the prepared subbase, which was acting
But emptying the space beneath the footing and placing as the support. A metal piece of size 250 × 100 × 100 mm
low-strength materials in this area ensures that most of the was placed at the center of the slab to act as the column. The
column load is carried through punching shear, which allows monotonic loading was performed with a 200-ton hydraulic
the test to show at which load the slab undergoes punching computer-controlled loading system. The load applied to the
shear failure. Therefore, to reduce the test error, a sponge column was increased at a rate of 1kN/sec until reaching the
was placed beneath the footing to create this empty space. punching shear capacity.
The box was then filled with uniform granular soil up to a
height of 37 cm, which was the height of the upper surface
of the sponge. The soil gradation test was performed using
the dry method. The gradation curve obtained for the soil
is illustrated in Fig. 5. Given the uniformity and curvature
coefficients of the soil (Cu < 6 and Cc < 1 or Cc > 3), it was
120
100
Percent Passing
80
60
40
20
0
0.01 0.1 1 10
D(mm)
Fig. 5 Gradation curve of the soil placed in the subbase Fig. 7 Schematic testing equipment
13
250 only a 3.42% difference in the punching shear capacity (on

average). It can be observed that the punching shear capacity
200 of the voided slabs has increased with increasing distance
of their plastic spheres from the column edge, ultimately
Load(kN)
150
peaking at a distance of 2d, when it is only 1.87% lower than
100 R EXP the punching shear capacity of the solid slab. Therefore, it
S1 EXP can be concluded that 2d is the best sphere-column distance
S2 EXP
50 S3 EXP for minimizing the difference between the punching shear
S4 EXP capacities of voided and solid slabs and that this distance
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
can be considered as the critical distance, a conclusion that
Displacment(mm) is consistent with EC2 (2004) guidelines.
As shown in Fig. 9, which illustrates the response curve
Fig. 8 Load-displacement curve obtained from the loading test of the ultimate punching shear capacity of the voided slabs
in terms of the spheres’ distance from the column edge and
the corresponding curve for the solid slab, these curves con-
2.3 Experimental Results verge when the distance of spherical void formers from the
column edge is ≥ 2d.
2.3.1 Load–Displacement
2.3.2 Slab Failure Mechanism
Using the data acquired from actuator stroke, the applied
load and displacement of specimens at the loading area As previously stated, upon reaching the ultimate load, the
were obtained. As shown in Fig. 8, the load–displacement slabs underwent a punching shear failure. The failed slabs
response curves of all specimens exhibit the signs of elas- were examined to determine the type and location of the
toplastic behavior. The curves of all slabs have roughly the cracks. A notable observation made in this examination
same initial slope as this slope depends on the slab stiffness
and the load type. In all slabs, elasto-plastic deformation
began at approximately 100kN and the specimen experi-
enced punching shear at the ultimate load. The failure of
the specimens was abrupt and occurred at the ultimate loads
of 179.34kN for S 1, 195.02kN for S
2, 198.94kN for S 3,
206.78kN for S 4 and 209.72kN for R. The measured force
decreased immediately after the failure. Table 4. presents
the ultimate punching shear capacity of each specimen and
the corresponding vertical displacement deduced from the
load–displacement curve. These results show a 14.48% dif-
ference between the punching shear capacity of the solid
slab and that of the voided slab with the spheres placed at
the distance d from the column edge. This means that using
this voided slab design has decreased the punching shear
capacity. However, placing the first row of spheres at a dis- Fig. 9 Comparison of ultimate punching shear capacity of the tested
tance of 1.5d or higher from the column edge has led to solid and voided slabs
Table 4 Ultimate punching Support type Specimen Punching shear Specimen age at test- 1
E %
shear capacity of each capacity (kN) ing [days]
specimen and corresponding
displacements Soil S1 179.34 28 14.48
S2 195.02 28 7.00
S3 198.94 28 5.14
S4 206.78 28 1.40
R 209.72 28 –
Ave(S2 − S4) = 4.51%
(1) Er =
Punching shear capacityR−EXP −Punching shear capacityS−EXP
Punching shear capacityR−EXP
× 100
13
Fig. 10 Specimen R: a before the autopsy, b after the autopsy and the measured punching shear angle
Fig. 11 Specimen S1: a before the autopsy, b after the autopsy and the measured punching shear angle
was that the failure zone was asymmetric, even though the slabs. The findings suggest that at the beginning of load-
slab geometry, reinforcement, and load were symmetrical. ing, cracks emerge at the slab surface and grow vertically
There were several sets of cracks in the lower surface of in the form of punching shear damage. Whereas, because
the slab, which can be seen in Figs. (10a), 11, 12, 13 and of the presence of bending reinforcements, which increase
(14a). These figures display the final crack patterns in the the tensile strength of the slab, the yielding line starts to
13
follow on oblique path, which leads to ductile flexural irregular shape can be the result of material heterogene-
failure. Thus, the failure mechanism shifts from punch- ity. Also, there was no cracking on top of the slab surface.
ing shear to flexural mode. Eventually, the crack grows To investigate the angle of the slabs after punching shear,
from the middle of the slab toward its edges. The tested the specimens were inspected precisely. Using the point
solid and voided biaxial slabs showed flexural failure with of intersection of the punching shear failure at the bottom
irregular elliptical shapes in their lower sections. This
13
surface of the slab to the outer edge of the column in the distances was placed in relation to EC2 (2004) and the slope
upper side, of each point was calculated. The evaluation of these values is
The base points for measuring the punching shear angle on given in the Table 5, so the mean distance of the points marked
A-A and B-B sections were defined as shown in Figs. (10b), on the shapes was 210 mm and the mean slope of shear cracks
11, 12, 13 and (14b). As instructed in EC2 (2004), the ideal- was 26.42°. From Table 5 and Figs. (10b), 11, 12, 13 and (14b)
ized model of the final punching shear condition was overlaid it can be concluded that the critical shear crack zone at the
on the actual image of the specimens. The areas marked in stress level is averages 2.16d from the edge of the column,
Figs. (10b), 11, 12, 13 and (14b) are the loaded area (Yellow which is generally very close to the EC2 (2004) design code.
square), the theoretical critical perimeter according to EC2
(2004) at the distance 2d from the edge of the loaded area at 3 Perimeter and Area of the Failure Zone
the reinforcement surface (B, black dashed line), the experi- of the Slabs
mentally obtained critical area perimeter at the reinforcement
surface (C, green dashed line), and the crack growth path (D, In order to compare the extent of damage in the tested
red curve). The theoretical critical area perimeter (B) was com- solid and voided slabs, the perimeter and area of the fail-
pared with the critical area perimeter in the specimens (C). ure zone in the tested slabs were also investigated. The
There were no cracks on the upper surface of the concrete results of this investigation are presented in Table 6. The
slab, but the cracks had propagated through the cross-section results show that moving the spheres away from the col-
until reaching the reinforcement and the lower surface of the umn edge increases the perimeter and area of the
punching
slab. The theoretical slope according to EC2 was ϴ = arctan zone, but this trend stops as soon as the spheres’ distance
(d/2d) = 26.6°. This slope is guided from the edge of the loaded from the column edge exceeds the critical distance, i.e.
area to a distance of 2d, where d is the distance between the 2d. Beyond the critical distance from the columns edge,
top surface and the reinforcement. The slope of the developing the critical perimeter and area approach their final values,
critical shear cracks between the column edge and the flex- which are very close to the corresponding values for the
ural reinforcement level was measured according to (10b) to solid slab. Owing to beyond the said critical threshold,
(14b). For this purpose, 4 points were selected at the flexural there is an average difference of about 6.18% between the
reinforcement level for each slab with an effective depth of punching shear perimeter of the voided slab and that of
100 mm and the distance from the edge of the column was the solid slab, which means they become fairly similar in
calculated. Then the ratio of effective depth of slab to these this respect.
13
Table 5 Distance of shear cracks from column edge and mean cracks distance from column edge and punching inclination
Specimen Marked points Distance of the crack from In tension face Angle of inclination (°) Average value for Distance of the
the column edge (mm) crack from the column edge (mm)
R P1R 215 2.15d 24.9 230

P2R 221 2.21d 24.3
P3R 244 2.44d 22.2
P4R 240 2.40d 22.6
S1 P1S1 202 2.02d 29.9 202
P2S1 215 2.15d 31.7
P3S1 208 2.08d 31.1
P4S1 184 1.84d 29.8
S2 P1S2 232 2.32d 23.3 206
P2S2 203 2.03d 26.2
P3S2 211 2.11d 25.3
P4S2 180 1.80d 29.1
S3 P1S3 214 2.14d 25.0 206
P2S3 202 2.02d 26.3
P3S3 209 2.09d 25.5
P4S3 200 2.00d 26.6
S4 P1S4 217 2.17d 25.1 205
P2S4 209 2.09d 25.5
P3S4 204 2.04d 26.5
P4S4 191 1.91d 27.6
Ave distance = 210 mm Ave = 2.10d Ave failure angle = 26.425
d (effective depth of slab) = 100 mm
Table 6 Punching shear perimeter and area of the slabs and compari- ABA (1)
son of the critical perimeter in the solid and voided biaxial slabs Min: VC1, VC2 and Vc3
Specimen Area (mm2) Perimeter(mm) %Er1
(1.1)
� � √� �
VC1 = 1 + 2∕𝛽C 0.2𝜙C fc b0 d
R 245401.33 1927.83 –
S1 228921.23 1785.81 7.36
(1.2)
�� √� �
VC2 = 𝛼s d ∕b0 + 1 0.2𝜙C fc b0
S2 232317.73 1799.32 6.66
S3 232763.35 1812.73 5.97
233037.14 1836.13 4.75 (1.3)
√� �
S4 Vc3 = 2 × 0.2𝜙C fc b0 d
Ave(S2 − S4) = 6.18%
(1) Er =
PerimeterR−EXP −Perimeter S−EXP
× 100 b0 = 4(c + d) (1.4)
PerimeterR−EXP
ACI (2)
4 Comparison of the Result of a Solid Min: VC1, VC2 and Vc3
Laboratory Sample with the Punching √� �
VC1 = 0.17(1 + 2∕𝛽)𝜆 f�c b0 d (2.1)
Shear Regulations Relationships
(2.2)
�� √� �
The equations provided in ABA (2001), ACI318-14 (2014) VC2 = 0.083 𝛼S d ∕b0 + 2 𝜆 f�c b0 d
and Eurocode (2004) for checking the punching shear
capacity(VC) are as follows (1),(2) and (3) √� �
VC3 = 1∕3𝜆 f�c b0 d (2.3)
13
Table 7 Comparison of the punching shear capacity values obtained from the Solid laboratory model With the codes relations, ACI, Europe
EC2, and ABA
Vc (kN)
Specimen Exp ACI %Er1 EC2 %Er2 ABA %Er3
R 209.72 150.400 28.28 182.23 13.1 180.480 13.94
(1) Er =
Punching shear capacityEXP −Punching shear capacityACI
Punching shear capacityEXP
× 100
(2) Er =
Punching shear capacityEXP −Punching shear capacityEC2
× 100
(3) Er =
Punching shear capacityEXP −Punching shear capacityABA
× 100
b0 = 4(c + d) (3.3) 5 Conclusions
When the first row of spherical void formers was placed at

EC2(3) a distance of 1.5d or higher from the column edge, on aver-
age, there was only a 3.42% difference between the punching
VC = 0.18K(100𝜌f�c )1∕3 bo d (3.1) shear capacity of the voided slab and that of the solid slab.
The punching shear capacity of the voided slab increased with
the distance of spheres from the column edge (D), but reached
bo = 4(c + 𝜋d) (3.2)
a peak at D ≈ 2d and did not change with further increase in
The experimental punching shear results of specimens this distance. Therefore, it can be concluded that the punch-
were compared with ABA (2001), ACI-318 (2014) and EC2 ing shear capacity of a voided slab in which D = 2d will be
(2004). Acceptable agreement was found between the test acceptably close to that of a similar solid slab. Hence, D = 2d
results and EC2 (2004). can be considered as the critical distance for spherical void
In the above equations (1), (2) and (3) bo is the punching formers, a conclusion that is consistent with EC2 guidelines.
control perimeter, K is the size effect factor, ρ is the average For the voided slabs in which the spheres’ distance from
reinforcement ratio, f′c is the characteristic strength of the the column edge (D) was ≥ 2d, the punching shear capacity
concrete, d is the effective depth of the slab, λ is the concrete estimates of the proposed equation were averagely 3.31%
density factor equal with 1 for a normal-weight concrete, βC different from the corresponding experimental values. For
is the ratio of the long to short side of the column, αS is 40 the solid slab, this difference was only 1.62%. These small
for interior columns, 30 for edge columns and 20 for corner differences illustrate the fairly good accuracy of the analyti-
columns and VC is the punching shear capacity. cal equation proposed in this paper.
The results of the study and evaluation of the punching The response curve of the ultimate punching shear capac-
shear capacity of the Two-way solid slab in laboratory models ity of the voided slabs in terms of the spheres’ distance from
were compared with the theories proposed in the American, the column edge and the corresponding curve for the solid
European and Iranian codes. In order to evaluate and study slab became convergent for D values of ≥ 2d).
the accuracy of this research, the amount of punching shear After moving the spheres farther away from the column
capacity for sample R was calculated and compared with the edge than 2d, the perimeter and area of the punching zone
result obtained from the physical model and, ACI (2014), EC2 became almost constant and the punching shear capacity
(2004) and ABA (2001) codes relations. The results of this approached its maximum value. When the spheres’ distance
study, presented in Table (7), the confidence threshold in ACI from the column edge (D) was higher than the critical distance
(2014) with a solid slab punching shear capacity of about (2d), on average, there was only 4.99% difference between the
29% with the EC2 (2004) of about 13% and with the ABA punching shear perimeter of the voided slab and that of the
(2001) of about 14% are considered, which indicates that the solid slab, which means they were fairly similar in this respect.
relationship between EC2 (2004) and ABA (2001) codes and
laboratory results in this study is closer.
13
It was found that the punching shear strength of the speci- Janulikova M, Mateckova P (2016) Experimental testing of punching
mens the results of this study, the confidence threshold in shear resistance of concrete foundations. In: Proceedings of the
2nd Czech-China scientific conference, pp. 357–364
ACI (2014) codes with a solid slab punching shear capacity Kumer SK, Hoque M (2015) Punching shear behavior of RC column
of about 29% with the EC2 equations of about 13% and with footing on stabilized ground. Int J Eng Technol Manag Appl Sci
the Iranian relationship of about 14% are considered, Com- 3:246–253
paring to the other codes, the results obtained based on the Meisami MH, Mostofinejad D, Nakamura H (2015) Strengthen-
ing of flat slabs with FRP fan for punching shear. Compos
EC2 (2004) and ABA (2001) showed more variances with Struct 119(2):305–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct
the experimental results .2014.08.041
Muttoni A (2008) Punching shear strength of reinforced concrete slabs
References without transverse reinforcement. ACI Struct J 4:440–450
Muttoni A, Ruiz MF, Bentz E, Foster S, Sigrist V (2013) Background
to fib model code 2010 shear provisions-part II: punching shear.
Abramski M, Albert A, Pfeffer K (2010) Experimental and numercial Struct Concr 14(3):204–214
investigations of load-bearing of reinforced concrete slabs using Schnellenbach-Held M, Aldejohann M (2005) Products-Biaxial Hol-
spherical void formers. Beton-und Stahlbetonbau 105(6):349–361 low Slabs. Theory and Tests. BFT-Betonwerk Fertigteil Technik
ACI Committee 318 (2014) Building code requirements for structural 71(10):50–59
concrete and commentary, ACI 318-14 and 318R-14. American Schnellenbach-Held M, Pfeffer K (2002) Punching behavior of biaxial
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 2014 hollow slabs. Cement Concr Compos 24(6):551–556
Eurocode 2 (2004) Design of concrete structure, part 1-1: general rules Sucharda O, Smirakova M, Vaskova J (2018) Punching shear fail-
and rules for buildings, EN 1992-1-1. European Committee for ure of concrete ground supported slab. Int J Concr Struct Mater
Standardization, Brussels, Belgium 105(6):349–361. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40069-018-0263-6
Fernández Ruiz M, Muttoni A (2009) Applications of the critical shear Valivonis J, Skuturna T, Daugevicius M (2017) Punching shear strength
crack theory to punching of R/C slabs with transverse reinforce- of reinforced concrete slabs with plastic void formers. Constr
ment. ACI Struct J 106:485–494 Build Mater 145(4):518–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu
Fernández Ruiz M, Mirzaei Y, Muttoni A (2013) Post-punching behav- ildmat.2017.04.057
ior of flat slabs. ACI Struct J 110:801–812 Westergaard HM (1923) On the design of slabs on elastic foundation
Hegger J, Sherif AG, Ricker M (2006) Experimental investigations on with special reference to stresses in concrete pavements. Ingen-
punching behavior of reinforced concrete footings. ACI Struct J ioren 12, Copenhagen
103(4):604–613 Westergaard HM (1925) Theory of stresses in road slabs. In: Proceed-
Hegger J, Ricker M, Ulke B, Ziegler M (2007) Investigations on the ings 4th annual meeting, highway research board, Washington DC
punching behavior of reinforced concrete footings. Eng Struct Westergaard HM (1926) Stresses in concrete pavements computed by
29:2233–2241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.11.012 theoretical analysis. Public Roads 7(2):25
Hegger J, Ricker M, Sherif AG (2009) Punching strength of reinforced Westergaard HM (1927) Analysis of stresses in concrete roads caused
concrete footings. ACI Struct J 106(5):706–716 by variations of temperature. Public Roads, 8(3)
Iranian Concrete Code of Practice (ABA) (2001) Planning and manage- Winkler E (1867) Die Lehre von Elastizitat und Festigkeit (on Elastic-
ment organization. PN. 120 ity and Fixity). Dominicus, 182
13

Punching Shear Strength of Voided Slabs On The Elastic Bases

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Punching Shear Strength of Voided Slabs On The Elastic Bases

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Punching Shear Strength of Voided Slabs On The Elastic Bases

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering