Structural behaviour of indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams with shear reinforcement and asymmetric loading

Despite statically indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams being commonly used in most reinforced concrete structures, a limited number of studies have been conducted to explore their behaviour. In addition, there have been no studies that have investigated asymmetric loading ratios on multi-span continuous beams. To address this, two nominally identical indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams were tested, and their behaviour was evaluated using discrete and distributed sensing. The beams had two spans, were continuous across the central support, and had a point load applied at the centre of each span. The applied load on each span was increased at the same rate up to a service load of 200 kN (approximately 60 % of first yield). After that, the load on one span was held constant while the load on the other span was increased until failure. There was a 12 % difference in load carrying capacity despite the beams being nominally identical, which was thought to be due to the formation of a shear hinge in one of the beams. Crack development, which may have been influenced by shrinkage behaviour, may have played a role in the formation of the shear hinge. The Canadian concrete code (CSA A23.3) shear prediction, which predicted a ductile flexural failure, was found to be unconservative, with both beams being shear critical. The beam with the shear hinge had the lower test-to-predicted ratio of 0.72. • Tested reinforced concrete continuous beams with three supports and two spans. • 12 % difference in load carrying capacity despite being nominally identical beams. • Canadian reinforced concrete design code shear prediction may be unconservative. • Shear hinge prevented full central support moment capacity being achieved. • Cracking behaviour contributed to differences in ultimate behaviour.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Engineering Structures
Published
2025-08-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2025.121103
Primary Topic
Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Structural behaviour of indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams with shear reinforcement and asymmetric loading

Joshua E. Woods, Jacob Yager, Evan C. Bentz, Neil A. Hoult
Engineering Structures
Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
article

Structural behaviour of indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams with shear reinforcement and asymmetric loading

Joshua E. Woods, Jacob Yager, Evan C. Bentz, Neil A. Hoult
article en

Abstract

Despite statically indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams being commonly used in most reinforced concrete structures, a limited number of studies have been conducted to explore their behaviour. In addition, there have been no studies that have investigated asymmetric loading ratios on multi-span continuous beams. To address this, two nominally identical indeterminate continuous reinforced concrete beams were tested, and their behaviour was evaluated using discrete and distributed sensing. The beams had two spans, were continuous across the central support, and had a point load applied at the centre of each span. The applied load on each span was increased at the same rate up to a service load of 200 kN (approximately 60 % of first yield). After that, the load on one span was held constant while the load on the other span was increased until failure. There was a 12 % difference in load carrying capacity despite the beams being nominally identical, which was thought to be due to the formation of a shear hinge in one of the beams. Crack development, which may have been influenced by shrinkage behaviour, may have played a role in the formation of the shear hinge. The Canadian concrete code (CSA A23.3) shear prediction, which predicted a ductile flexural failure, was found to be unconservative, with both beams being shear critical. The beam with the shear hinge had the lower test-to-predicted ratio of 0.72. • Tested reinforced concrete continuous beams with three supports and two spans. • 12 % difference in load carrying capacity despite being nominally identical beams. • Canadian reinforced concrete design code shear prediction may be unconservative. • Shear hinge prevented full central support moment capacity being achieved. • Cracking behaviour contributed to differences in ultimate behaviour.

Engineering StructuresVol. 343
University of Toronto (CA), Queen's University (CA)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.