Jurusan Teknik Sipil - FTSP USAKTI

Struktur Beton Bertulang - 1

Term 2 : Okt. – Des. 2017

Session 02:
Panjang Penyaluran Besi Tulangan

Sugeng Wijanto, Ph.D.

24 November 2017
 Development, Anchorage and Splicing of Reinforcement

References :
1. SNI 2847-2013 Pasal 12 and
ACI 318M-08 Chapter 12
2. Reinforced Concrete by Wight and
MacGregor 6th Ed. Chapter 8
Placing Rebar on Project Site
Bond Forces Acting on Tension Steel Rebar

Bond forces acting on steel

M+

Reinforcement in tension area

GENERAL: A basic requirement in reinforced concrete :
* There is a bond between reinforcement
w and the surrounding concrete.
* No slip of the steel bar relative to its
surrounding concrete under service load.
Critical Section
* Bars should be anchored by
w embedment beyond the point where the
loading causing maximum tension, in a
distance adequate to develop the full
tensile capacity of the bar.

ΔT = u  db ΔL1
Anchorage bond in tension bars
ANCHORAGE BOND
w
A B C The moment capacity of a beam is also
depending on the embedment
lengths of steel bars in both directions.
L1 L2
L1 L2 Segment A-B :
u  db2 u 
T = fs
4 u  db L1 = fs db 2
4
A B B C
Thus the development length ℓd required for the anchoring of
bars acting at yield stress is : fy db
Development length ℓd =
4 uu
Where :
uu = ultimate bond stress capacity over the nominal surface area  db L1
db = diameter of bar
fy = yield stress of bar
FLEXURAL BOND
As moment varies along a span, the
D D’ tensile force in the steel also varies;
C this induces a longitudinal interaction
A B dz
between the bars and the surrounding
concrete, known as flexural bond.
The bending moment MD equals the
dz
u internal forces C and T times the moment
TD TD’
arm between them, thus :
D D’
MD M D’
Flexural bond in a tension bar TD = and TD’ =
arm arm
From horizontal force equilibrium : u  db dz = TD - TD’.
Substituting both equations gives :
MD - MD’ 1 dM 1 V
u = dz = =
 db (arm) dz  db (arm)  db (arm)
BOND FAILURE
Plain Bar
* Relatively smooth bars was thought of as an adhesion between
concrete paste and the surface of the bar. In fact, even with low
tensile stress there would be sufficient slippage to break the
adhesion immediately adjacent to a crack in the concrete.
* Shrinkage can also cause frictional drag against the bar.
Deformed Bar
* Were designed so that there would be less reliance on
friction and adhesion (though they still exist) and more
reliance on the bearing of the lugs against the concrete.
* Bond failure in normal weight concrete is nearly always a
splitting failure.
Splitting Failure
Concrete splits into two or three segments due to the wedging
action of the lugs against the concrete.
Final splitting failure

Whole layer suddenly

splits after initial
horizontal splits at sides

First splitting V-notch failure Side-split failure

Splitting cracks and ultimate splitting failure modes

(a) On bar (b) On concrete (c) Components on

concrete
Forces between bar and concrete
 Note :
In beams with large cover, there may tend to
Air pockets h
be air pockets at the underside of bars cast in
the top of beams. The lugs bearing against
the concrete may crush it and result in a
pullout failure without splitting the concrete.
b
* Because of the complex interrelationship between bond,
shear and moment, present design practice makes use of
a large number of experimental studies.

* In general, bond strength is directly proportional to f’c

and inversely proportional to the bar diameter.
Concrete Cylinder Hypothesis for Splitting Failure
The action of splitting arises from a stress
condition to a concrete cylinder surrounding
a reinforcing bar and acted upon by the
(c) Components on
outward radial components of the bearing concrete
forces from the bar.
s Cs1 > Cb,
Cs1 db Cs2 Cs2 db Cs1 Cs2 > Cb
Cs Cs Cs Cb > Cs  C = Cb
db db
 C = Cs Cb
Failure plane

Cb If Cs is only slightly greater than Cb 

secondary splitting will be side.
Side-split type of failure If Cs significantly greater than Cb 
secondary splitting will be side and
through the bottom cover
(V-notch failure)
Dasar Perencanaan :

SNI 2847-2013
Pasal 12: Penyaluran dan Sambungan
Tulangan

ACI 318M-08/11
Chapter 12: Development and Splices of
Reinforcement
Development of Negative Moment Reinforcement

Ref. SNI 2847-2013

Basic Development Length (ℓd) For Tension Reinforcement

Ref. SNI 2847-2013

Basic Development Length (ℓd) For Tension Reinforcement
Simple Expression of Development Length (ℓd) For Tension

f’c = 25 MPa and fy = 400 MPa

ℓd = 47 db ~ 73 db

Ref. ACI 318m-08, Chapter 12

Basic Development Length (ℓd) For Compresion Reinforcement

ℓdc = 0,24 db fy  0.043 db fy ; dan ℓdc > 200 mm

λ  fc’
900 Hook

1800 Hook
Modified Factor ℓdh =
ℓdh =

ℓdh
Development of Flexural Reinforcement In a Typical Continuous Beam

= 1/2 wL

Deflected shapes
Shear force diagram

= 1/2 wL

= 1/8 wL2

A B C Bending moment diagram

Section of Bottom
Reinforcement
MOMENT CAPACITY DIAGRAM – BAR BENDS AND CUTOFFS
At point a, the location where
A B C
the fifth bar terminates, this
2 bars 4 bars Point a 5 bars bar has zero embedment -
length to the left and thus has
A B C
CL of span zero capacity. Proceeding to
the right from point a, the bar
may be counted on to carry
a tensile force proportional
Section A-A Section B-B Section C-C to its embedment from point a
Ld up to the development length
b
Ld ℓd, where :
a
Mcap of 5 bars fy db
Ld ℓd = 4 u
Mcap of 4 bars u

Mcap of 2 bars Point b represents the point

where the fifth bar is anchored
a distance ℓd and can there-
Moment Capacity Diagram fore carry its full tensile capacity.
 Uniformly distributed load

2 bars 4 bars 5 bars d

Cross section
at midspan

CL of
Moment CL of span
support capacity
diagram, Ld b Mcap of 5 bars (Mn)
Mn
Ld B Mcap of 4 bars (Mn)
A
Theoretical cut-off point
Ld d or 12 diam
C Actual factored moment diagram, Mu (design moment)
Theoretical cut-off point Mcap of 2 bars (Mn)
d or 12 diam
Mu is zero at centerline of simple support

Verification of bar cutoffs with the moment capacity diagram

Development of flexural
Reinforcement in a
typical continuous beam
Design For Tension Anchorage:
Example 8-1 (MacGregor):

Material : lightweight conc. fc = 20 MPa ; fy = 420 MPa

Top of the cantilever beam stressed to their yield strength
Concrete cover 40 mm;
Stirrups D10-180 fy = 300 MPa Vertical wall steel
D13-300 fy = 420 MPa
 Find the anchorage length of a straight bar
Step 1: Find the spacing and confinement case

The clear side cover to D25 in the wall

= 40 + 13 = 53 mm ≈ 2.12 db 3 D-25
The clear spacing of the bars in the wall
area = (400 – 2 (40+13) – 3 x 25)/2
= 109.5 mm ≈ 4.38 db
There are no stirrups or ties in the wall, but
there are D13-300 vertical bars outside of the
3D25 bars in the cantilever. Since the clear
spacing between the bars is not less than 2 db
and the clear cover to the D25 exceeds db, this  fy Ψ t Ψ e 
ld   db
is case 2, and for D25,  1.7λ f ' 
 c 
SNI 2847-2013 Chapter 12.2.2 applies
Step 2: Compute the development length
 fy Ψ t Ψe 
ld    db
 1.7λ f ' 
 c 
Where
ψt = 1.3 because there will be more than 300 mm of fresh
concrete is cast below the development length or splice.
ψe = 1.0 the bars are not epoxy-coated bars.
ψs = 1.0.
λ = 0.75, concrete is sand lightweight

 fy Ψ t Ψ e   420x1.3x1 
ld    d  25  2390mm
 1.7λ f '  b  1.7x0.75x 20 
 c 

The bars must extend 2390 mm into the wall to develop

the full yield strength
Step 3: Compute the development length
(Alternative use Eq 12-1 ACI 318-08 / SNI 2847-2013)
 
 
 fy Ψ t Ψ e Ψ s 
d   db
 
 1.1λ fc '  c b  K tr  
Where   d 
  b 
ψt = 1.3 ; ψe = 1.0 ; ψs = 1.0 ; λ = 0.75,

cb is the smaller of :

a. The distance from the centre of the bar to the nearest conc.
surface (the side cover is) = 40+13+25/2 = 65.2 mm
b. Half the centre-to-centre spacing of the bars
= 0.5x(400-2x65.2)/2 = 67.4 mm
→ Therefore cb = 65.2 mm
Ktr Formula:
40 Atr
K tr 
sn
Where
s = spacing of the transverse reinf. within the development
length = 300 mm
Atr = total cross sectional area of reinf crossing the plane of
splitting within the spacing s (one vertical D13-300)
each face = 2 x 3.14/4 x 132 = 265.3 mm2
fy = 420 MPa
n = number f bars being anchored = 3

40 Atr 40x265.3
K tr    11.79mm
sn 300x3
The term,
(cb+Ktr)db = (65.2+11.79)25=3.08, this value shouldn't more than 2.5
 Substituting:

 
 
 fy Ψ t Ψ e Ψ s   420x1.3x1x 1 
d   db   25  1480mm

 1.1λ fc '  c b  K tr
  1.1x0.75x 20 x2.5 
 d  
 
  b 

The bars must extend 1480 mm (say 1.5 m) into the wall to
develop the full yield strength

In this case, there is a large differences between ℓd computed

from both formulas. This is because the first formula by using
(cb+Ktr)db equal to 1.5.
In the second formula, it is actually equal to 2.5
Design For Tension Anchorage:

Figure: The anchorage length of a straight bar

 Any Question ?

Let us be more prepared for your future

Information from ACI 318M-08, SNI 2847-2013, Reinforced Concrete by Wight and
MacGregor 6th Ed., data were used in this presentation, their contributions are
gratefully acknowledged