Bridges Section Project Note 23/89 Desiga of Halving Joint 1. cs 4 Introduction Ref, 1 Clause 7.2.4.2 gives @wo alternative methods for the design of halving joints for precast beams at the ultimate limit state, The design approach is discussed in detail in Ref. & P,104/105. ‘The following paragraphs are intended to elaborate the design aspects which have not been covered by the two references. Limiting Dimension of Halving Joint Neither ref. 1 nor ref. 4 provides @ clear guidance on the Limit of the ratio of a/d for the design of halving joint where “a” is the distance between the line of action of the load and the shear stirrup of the main beam; “d” is the effective depth of the halving joint at the root of the joint. For a truss theory to be applicable, the compression strut should be inclined at not less than 45° to the horizontal, i.e. a/d $1 (Ref. 6 Clause 11.9.1). Similar truss analogy for the design of pile cap also employs the same slope angle criteria (Ref. 7 P.189). Therefore, when determining the geometry of the halving joint, the criteria of a/d $ 1 should be borne in mind. Effective Width of Walving Joint * The British Code (Ref. 1) does not provide any guidance on the determination of the effective width of a continuous balving joint supporting discreted vertical loads. The recommendation in P.519 of Ref. 3 should be adopted to determine the effective widths of the halving joint to resist either flexural stress or shear stress. asga ty 2 250 [8 j2-5a | [Bem e fagtoiaet beat} Flexure ‘Shear Figs 1 Ultimate Shear Resistance of the Section The maximum ultioate shear resistance is given as 4v bd, in Ref. T Clause 7.2.4.2. This should be replaced by vba, Ss ° explained in Ref. 4 P.105, eelSell 5.1.2 d.1.3 5.2 Shear Resistance of Halving Joint Provided by Concrete It may be possible that the shear resistance of concrete is greater than the applied load and hence shear reinforcement as required in paragraph 6 is not necessary. The evaluation of the shear resistance of concrete is discussed below. Meinigused. concrete Evaluate the effective width (be) of the halving joint as outlined in paragraph 3. Estimate the ultimate shear stress, v.,, of the main beam in accordance with Ref. 1 Clause 5.3.3.2 The adjustment for the effective depth (~% ) should be allowed for where appropriate, However, the enhanced shear strength of clause 5.3.3.3 is not applicable fron an inspection of the potential shear failure plane. ‘The shear resistance of the concrete section is given by Vebedg: fiestressed concrete The shear resistance of the concrete section shall be evaluated in accordance with Ref. | aieuse 6.3.4 using the vhole shear lag section for flexural in compression and the whole section for axial compression to determine £ |. The recommendation in paragraph 3 above is applicable f€r the determination of the effective breath which should be used to substitute “b’ in Ref. 1 clause 6.3.4,Resistance to Shear by Inclined, Vertical or Horizontal Links Ref. 1 and 4 recommend that the vertical load be resisted in shear by either inclined or vertical links. Considering a 45° ‘hear crack, both verticad and horizontal shear links will provide the same resistance. dowever, horizontal links are much easier to be placed in this usually congested area. It is suggested that the recommendation of Ref. 3 be followed if inclined links are not used. Moreover, if a/d is greater than unity, vertical Links should be used and should be designed in accordance with Ref. 1 Clause 7.2.4.2. Provision of Horizontal Reinforcement Ref. 2 clause 2.4.1.5 suggests the use of horizontal reinforcement, forming the tension member of the truss, to resist the horizontal load. A similar approach is proposed in Ref. sie 4 stirrup for main beart wT { died in paragraph 2 omy | Ae rrvetenre gM LL tan atte = x Fe 1 Te (es jad aad CR DY ry (Ree. BD As shown in Fig. 2, the two reference give similar anount of reinforcement. Hence either method is acceptable, It should also be noted that Ref. 4 also recoumends the provision of horizontal reinforcement to resist the moment at the root of the halving joint which is the same as that suggests in Ref.3. Shear Resistance of the Main Beam Wenger reinforcement vithin a distance equal to the effective web depth centered, ghout the concentrated lead should be Provided (Ref. 3). "Mkt is not neceseary to superimpose the tanger reinforcement ead the main beam flexural shear weinforcenent. he provision should be based on the larger of the two requirements.9. O21 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 27 The following Rrocedure is recommended "for the design of halving tjoint Check that a/d is less than unity Determine the effective breath of the joint to resist flexural and shear effect. Calculate the maximm ultimate shear resistance and the ultimate shear resistances Check requirement of shear reinforcement. Provide inclined Jinks or horizontal links (neglect the shear resistance of the concrete section) to resist shear force. Alternatively a combination of 50% share could be adopted. careful detailing and checking of concrete bearing stress within the bends of the links is essential. check flexural reinforcement requirement. Estimate the requirement of hanger reinforcement and compare with the flexural shear provision in the main beam. Provide appropriate reinforcement. Finally, evaluate the ultimate resistance in accordance with Ref. 5 for two different cracked paths as modified in Fig. 3 and 4, Calculate P, @ and d_ for each case by considering the vertical, horizontal and rolationat equilibrium of the free body. The concrete stress shall be taken as 0.4 £, <= 7 L crack path) oak Fig. 3 : ca 2 |= crack path “4 a el | in > Fig. 410. Reference “BS5400: Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges, Part 421984" British Standards Institution, 2, “Structural Joints in Precast Concrete’ The Institution of Structural Engineers: 3. MIRZA SA, URLONG RW and MA JS, “Flexural Shear and Ledge Reinforcenent in Reinforced Inverted T-Cirder” ACL Structural Journal :September ~ October 1988. 4, CLARK LA, “Concrete Bridge Design to BS5400" Construction Press, London and New York : 1983 5. REYNOLDS, GC, “The Strength of Half-Joint in Reinforced Concrete Beams” C & CA Technical Report TRA4I5: 1969. 6. “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete, ACL 318M-83° American Concrete Institution: 1984. 7. ALLEN AH, “Reinforced Concrete Design to BS8110, Simply Explained” E § FN SPON: 1988. CCU /cxe/ it Dated: 17th January 1989