PUNCHING SHEAR STRENGTH OF COLUMN

FOOTINGS IN ACTUAL DESIGN CODES AND THEIR

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Zoran Boni1, Verka Prolovi1, Neboja Davidovi1, Rijad ii2
1

The Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture / University of Ni / Serbia

zoran.bonic@gaf.ni.ac.rs
2
The Faculty of Mining, Geology and Civil Engineering /University of Tuzla/ BiH

Abstract
The paper presents a review of calculation of punching shear according to actual design
codes and review the experimental tests in the field of punching shear of reinforced concrete
column footings worldwide. The experiments on footings have been rare so far, and they were
performed in laboratories, where soil was simulated in various ways. The goal of this research
is to perform the punching shear experiments in the circumstances which are as close as
possible to real conditions both in terms of the footings, and in terms of the soil. In the paper,
the fundamental concept of preparation of experimental tests that were carried out on the test
specimens column footing on the real soil under ultimate load has been presented. The test
specimens have been described, as well as the applied materials, preparation of the subgrade
soil, measuring equipment, and planned testing method. Investigation would indicate the
parameters whose influence is dominant in the course of punching shear of column footings
and these parameters should be focused on in the further research.
Keywords - column footing, punching shear strength, design code, experiment

INTRODUCTION

In statical sense column reinforced concrete footings are slabs loaded by dead-weight, by
pressure forces from the structure, and by reactive distributed load of the soil. Bending of the
footing due to reactive load leads to emergence of cracks in concrete and in case of heavy
loadings to extrication of a body whose form is something between the truncated pyramid
and the truncated cone from the footing. In the literature it is said that there was punching of
footing. Checking of security of footings to punching is an obligatory part of footing design
and focuses on control of the shear stress in the control cross-section. Factorized shear force
should be determined by subtracting the part of soil reaction within the control cross-section.
The subtracted value differs depending on the methods of calculation, adopted position and
shape of control cross-section, and varies in the regulations of individual countries. Most
codes do not distinguish between punching of the flat slabs and of the footings .
In the further text, the punching control according to our Code on technical standards for
concrete and reinforced concrete (1987), Eurocode 2, 2.04.01 84, BS 8110-1:1997,
DIN 1045-1 (2008) and ACI 318-02 will be presented.
Experimental investigations conducted at the Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture
of Nis, financed by Ministry of Science and Technological Research of Republic of Serbia,
will be presented. The aim of this project is to identify behavior of the shallow foundations

made of reinforced concrete rested on deformable subgrade and loaded by controlled

external load up to failure, using theoretical and experimental means.

CALCULATION OF PUNCHING SHEAR ACCORDING TO

ACTUAL DESIGN CODES

The fact that none of calculation models is generally accepted has led to considerable
variation in the recommendations of actual international and national codes. In most of the
them semi-empirical method of critical cross-section is represented. This method is based on
the assumption that the footing is punched when a vertical fracture cross-section throughout
the perimeter of penetration body is formed near the column. This cross-section is called a
critical or control section.
Based on this, the punching calculation (which is a mandatory part of the calculation of slabs
and foundations) comes down to the control of shear stress in the critical section, and
compare the shear calculating stress in the control section cal , at some distance from the
edges of the column, with the the punching shear resistance v . If the requirement cal v
is fulfilled there is no danger of punching, otherwise reinforcement should be mounted to
prevent punching.

Fig. 1. Column punching through footing

According to Fig. 1 design shear stress at the critical section is calculated according to
the formula

cal

Pu ,red

(1)

Ocs d

where:
O cs is the circumference of control section
d

is the static height of the cross-section (medium value of static heights in both
directions)

Pu ,red is the factorized normal force in the column reduced for the part of soil reaction

under the punching element calculated according to the expression

Pu ,red Pu Fb n

(2)
where:

Pu is the factorized normal force transferred to the footing through the column

 n net reactive soil pressure from the force in the column

Fb surface area of the punching element in the plane of the reinforcement
It should be noted that at floor slabs there is no reduction in the column normal force given
in Eq. (2).
Punching shear resistance v is adopted depending on the compressive strength of concrete,
coefficient of reinforcement with longitudinal reinforcement tasked to receive the bending
tensile forces, and dimensions of the slab, that is, foundations. The values of these
parameters have not been given precisely in the theory of reinforced concrete, so they are
given in the codes as empirical parameters based on experiments. The codes treat the
influence of these parameters in various ways, and in some of them, some of the mentioned
parameters are omitted. Further on, a review of the following regulations will be given:
European EN 1992-1-1:2004 and CEB-FIP MODEL CODE 1990, hereinafter Eurocode 2
Model Code 90; British BS 8110-1:1997, hereinafter BS 8110; American ACI 318-02:2002,
hereinafter ACI 318; German DIN 1045-1:2008-08, hereinafter DIN 1045-1; Russian
2.04.01 84, hereinafter and our Code for Concrete and reinforced concrete of 1987,
hereinafter BAB-87.
Influence of concrete compressive strength, expressed through the characteristic strength of
concrete cylinder under pressure f c , in Eurocode 2, BS 8110, DIN 1045-1 and Model
Code 90 is taken by the term 3 f c , and in ACI 318 by the term f c . The exception is the
Russian code and our PBAB 87 which do not take the compressive strength as a
concrete characteristic but tensile strength (), i.e. permissible tensile stress (BAB 87).
When it comes to the influence of percentage of reinforcement usage on bending , which
reduces the openings of initial cracks in the lower zone of the foundations, and decelerates
propagation of a diagonal crack towards the column, some of the codes such as BS 8110,
Eurocode 2, Model Code 90 and DIN 1045-1 assume its influence by the term 3 , while
ACI 318, and BAB 87 do not take this parameter into account. The influence of
dimensions is expressed through statical (effective) height of the slab (foundations) d which
are not treated by and BAB 87, while the other codes take it into calculation in
various ways.
As opposed to other codes, where the punching security control is performed on the basis of
factorized force in the column, in BAB 87 control is performed on the basis of the force in
the exploitation phase, that is on the basis of theory of permissible stresses.
The basic difference between the codes is in the different assumptions of position and shape
of the cross sections, as it can be seen in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Control cross-sections in different codes depending on the effective slab height d

As the area of the base of punching element directly depends on the position and shape of the
control cross-section, the reduced factorized normal force Pu,red will significantly vary in
calculation of punching shear based on the different codes.
Certain codes do not distinguish between punching of floor slabs and of the foundations,
using the same expressions in both cases (BAB-87), while Eurocode 2, Model code 90, DIN
1045-1 and treat this problem and allow the possibility of reduction of punching force
by subtracting the part of reactive pressures under the punching element. Eurocode 2 permits
that the critical cross section of the foundations is at distance smaller than 2.0d, while DIN
1045-1 prescribes that for foundations the area for reduction of ultimate force in the column
Pu, of the area inside the critical cross-section is assumed.
BAB-87 prescribes only punching control of floor slabs, while calculation of shallow
reinforced concrete foundations is not mentioned. For this reason, in our professional
publications, the foundation footing punching shear control is conducted on the basis of
Leonhardt (Prolovi, 2001), thus overcoming the incompleteness of BAB 87.
In the further text, the methods of punching shear calculation of the mentioned codes will be
presented.

2.1 Code for technical norms for concrete and reinforced concrete
(BAB1987)
This code prescribes punching control of floor slabs only. It is assumed that the critical cross
section is circular and that it is at a distance of h s/2 from the edge of the column having a
circular cross section and the diameter ds (Fig.3.).

Fig. 3. Position of control cross-section of BAB (1987)

If the cross-section of the support (column) has a rectangular form with b and d sides,
then, at determining the shear stress cal , into the calculation is introduced a substitution
column with diameter d 1.13 b d . If the longer side of the rectangle is more than 1,5
times longer than the shorter side, it can be entered into calculation that the longer
side is not more than 1,5 times longer than the shorter side.
If in the critical cross-section the shear stress cal , determined according to the
expression

cal
satisfies the condition:

Tmax
Ocs hs

cal

2
1 a
3

(3)

no special calculation reinforcement for reception of tensile forces due to the action
of transverse force Tmax is necessary.
When the shear stress cal is within the range

2
1 a cal 2 b
3

(4)

special transverse reinforcement must be mounted for reception of tensile forces due to
the action of transverse force Tmax.
The following state is not permissible

cal 2b .

The limits of permissible main tensile stresses a and b are given in the function of
the concrete class, and the method of determination of coefficients 1 and 2 ,
depending on the type and arrangement of the reinforcement is defined by the article 221 of
the code.
Behavior of reinforced concrete slabs is similar to behavior of mushroom slabs, which allows
using of the same principles in punching control of the foundations. In the professional literature,
control of reinforced concrete footings to punching is a mandatory part of calculation based on
the Leonhardt theoretical assumptions.

2.2 Eurocode 2
According to Eurocode 2, the punching shear resistance should be controlled in the cross
-section which is at a distance of 2.0d from the edge of the column. The control cross section
is circular for the circular cross-section columns, while for those of the rectangular for, it
appears as a rectangle with rounded edges. Design shear stress cal is compared to the
punching shear resistance v Rd ,c given by the term :

v Rd ,c C Rd ,c k ( 100 t f ck )1 / 3

2d
2d
v min
a EC 2
a EC 2

(5)
where:

aEC 2 is the distance from the edge of loaded surface to the observed control cross section
C Rd ,c 0.18 / c where c is the safety factor for concrete (1.5)

k 1

200
2.0 (d in mm)
d

f ck is compressive strength of concrete for cylinder

 t is reinforcement coefficient
1/ 2
is minimal shear strength of concrete
vmin 0.035 k 2 / 3 f ck

d is static height of foundations

If cal vRd ,c it is necessary to install reinforcement.
The calculation is determined by the cross-section in which the punching strength value is
the lowest. It is permissible that the pressure of the soil within the control circumference is
subtracted from the punching force.

2.3 2.04.01 84
By the Russian regulations the foundation punching control is defined in detail. The
punching element is assumed to be a truncated pyramid whose smaller (upper) base is equal
to the area of the column, and the lateral sides of the pyramid are at the angle of 45 0 to the
horizontal. The calculation value of permissible punching force F is determined by the
expression:

F Rbl u m h0
(6)
where:

is the coefficient of concrete having the value 1.0 for the normal weight concretes
Rbl is the calculation strength of concrete to axial tension which is assumed depending on
the concrete class with the corresponding working conditions coefficients (types of
load, environment in which the element is located, concreting method )

u m is mean circumference of upper and lower bases of the punching pyramid defined by
the expression

u m 2( bc l c 2 h0 )
(7)
Where bc and lc are dimensions of the column and h0 - effective (static) height of the
slab.
During the punching control, the surface envelope of the truncated cone is substituted by the
surface area of a parallelepiped whose sides are at h0 / 2 from the edges of the column, so
the punching control conducted in this way can be compared to the control base on ACI 31802. The code provides guidelines that for the foundations a relevant Pu ,red is obtained by
reducing the force in column Pu for the net average reactive pressure of soil beneath the
lower basis of the punching pyramid.

2.4 BS 8110-1:1997

The British standards prescribe that shear stresses are calculated for the cross-section which
is at a distance of 1.5d from the perimeter of loaded surface. The critical cross-section has a
rectangular form. It is also permissible to reduce the shear force for the value of reactive
pressure of soil calculated for the area within the critical cross-section, loaded by evenly
distributed load.
If the shear stress along the critical cross-section is lower than the punching shear resistance
vc the reinforcement for reception of punching shear forces is not necessary. Here, vc is given
by the expression:
1

0.79
A
400 4 f cu 3
vc
( 100 s ) 3 (
) (
)
m
bv d
d
25
(8)
Where:

m is a partial safety factor (usually 1.25)

As
is reinforcement coefficient
bv d
f cu is the compressive strength of concrete which should be assumed to be maximum of
40MPa, while for the values lower than 25MPa this article should be omitted.
1/ 2
Maximal shear stress is also limited by the value 0.8 f cu
, i.e. vale of 5.0MPa along the
column circumference.

2.5 DIN 1045-1 (2008)

Punching control according to DIN 1045-1 (2008) is conducted analogous to Eurocode 2
provided that the critical cross-section is at a distance of 1.5d from the edge of the column.
Concrete punching shear resistance (without the punching reinforcement bars) used for
calculation shear stress cal is calculated as:

0.21

l k ( 100 l f ck )1 / 3

vRd ,ct
(9)
Where:

c is the partial safety coefficient for concrete which is assumed by Eurocode 2 and DIN
1045-1 as equal to 1.50

l 1.0 for normal weight concrete

While other values are identical to Eurocode 2. As opposed to Eurocode 2 this Code provides
guidelines to obtain relevant Pu ,red for foundations by reducing the force in the column
Pu for the net average reactive pressure of the soil 0 over the area 0.5 Acrit .

2.6 ACI 318 02

As it can be seen in the Fig.2. ACI 318 02 assumes the critical cross-section at d/2 from the
edge of the column, and its form corresponds to the shape of the column. It is permissible
that the punching force is reduced for the part of soil reaction beneath the punching element.
Calculation shear stress cal (here designated as vu ), should be smaller than the
calculation shear resistance v c :

vu vc
(10)
Where:

v c is the nominal concrete punching shear strength

is reduction coefficient (0.75)

Calculation shear stress in the control cross section cal , is obtained for the ultimate normal
force Pu calculated with coefficients 1.4 for constant and1.6 for variable load.
The concrete punching strength resistance vc is the lowest value obtained from the
following expressions

v c 0.083( 2

4
) f c'
c

v c 0.083 s
2
b0

f c'

[MPa]
[MPa]
v c 0.332

f c'

(11)
Where:

s is the parameter assuming the value 40 for internal, 30 for external and 20 for corner
columns
c is ratio of the longer to the shorter side of concentrated load or reactive surface
f c' is compressive strength of concrete for the cylinder

A separated foundation footing is considered rigid, with even pressure on the soil for
concentrated centric load. It is permissible to reduce the shear force for the value of effective
soil pressures inside the circumference of control cross-section.
If v u v c shear reinforcement must be installed.

3 EXPERIMENTAL ORGANISATION
According to the scientific literature data, only a few experiments with footings in real soil
were performed until now (Hegger et al., 2006, 2007). Main reason for that is considerable
material cost and complex organization of the experiment, so in the majority of other
experiments natural subgrade soil under footing simulated by springs (Talbot, 1913), by
small hydraulic jacks or by simple line load on the contact surface of the footing (Hallgren et

al., 1998). Considering this, it was decided to perform the experiment on the natural
subgrade soil, in real conditions in situ, with footings test specimens and corresponding
load. Complexity of the whole problem required serious preparation and detailed planning.
Basic concept of the preparation plan should encompass:

selection of the appropriate site for the performing of the experiment

selection of the appropriate site for the performing of the experiment

number of the test specimens footings, their size, type, and quality of the material
(concrete and reinforcement), way of manufacturing

perceiving of all parameters of the subgrade soil and of the footing that should be
identified in advance, or measured during the experiment

analysis related to the way of the mode of footing loading, selection of the loading
equipment

selection of the equipment for measuring and tracking down all scheduled
parameters in the subgrade soil and in the footings

identification of the financing plan and providing the necessary financing resources,
manpower, and necessary accessory and transport devices

approximate time needed for all phases during the experiment

During the selection of the appropriate site for performing of the experiment, it had to be
considered the available area for manufacturing the test specimens and available area for the
very carrying out of the experiment with previous subgrade preparation, then the needed
machinery for subgrade preparation and transport, manpower, and the most suitable
conditions for the test equipment setting and tracking of the experimental process.
Experimental investigations were carried out at the asphalt and concrete base Niskogradnja
A.D., Ni, which was the participant in the project. The researchers had at their disposal the
needed machinery, labor, and space and material for subgrade preparation.
Table 1. Properties of tested column footings (literature data)

Author
Hegger and
Ricker(Hegger 2006,2007)
Timm(Timm, 2003)
Hallgren(Hallgren 1998,2002)

Year

No.

Geometry of footing
Dimension
Effective
Shape
[mm]
depth [mm]

2005 sand in the box

quadratic

2003

line

10

1998

line/surface

14

quadratic 760 to 1080

quadratic
and
850 to 960
circular

surface

13

quadratic 1500 to 3000 320 to 800

surface

11

rectangul 1500 to 1800 193 to 343

Dieterle and
Rostasy(Hegger 2006,2007) 1987
Kordina and

Type of
load/support

1981

900

150 to 250
172 to 246
273 to 278

Nlting(Hegger 2006,2007)
Dieterle and
Steinle(Hegger 2006.2007) 1981
Rivkin(Rivkin 1967)
Richart(Hegger

2006,2007)

Talbot(Talbot 1913)

ar
surface

quadratic 1800 to 3000 700 to 740

1967

surface/clay
and sand

quadratic

1948

spring

149

1913

spring

650 and
1000

quadratic
and
610 to 3000
circular

20
quadratic
(in punching)

120
200 to 740

1520

250

Experimental research conducted in 2009 (Boni 2010, 2011) envisaged production of a

model in situ with previous preparation of the subgrade with determined geomechanical
characteristics and with production of test specimens - column footings of specified
dimensions and defined characteristics of concrete and reinforcement. Fig. 4 provides a
scheme of the structural assembly used for the experiment. Assembly consisted of the
test frame, test specimens, hydraulic jack, and prepared soil.

Fig. 4. Scheme of the experimental setup

Fig. 5. Frame lowered in the pit

3.1 Test frame

The frame with steel plate bottom is laid into the prepared footing pit, 4.0x5.0 m in base, and
3.0 m deep. Soil material is placed over the bottom of the frame, with dimensions of
3.5x3.5.0 m in base; the soil has layers of specified thickness, compacted to the required
value of compressibility modulus.
Truss structure of the frame, as well as its dimensions should provide undisturbed formation
of sliding surfaces in the soil beneath the foundations, should, in the course of loading, the
soil failure precedes the punching shear.
This allowed foundations testing with completely realistic boundary conditions in terms of
soil and also comparison and verification of earlier testing results in laboratories with testing
in situ.

3.2 Test specimens

The selected footing dimensions are 85x85 cm at the layout and correspond to the
experiments of Kinnunen and Hegger (for the purpose of result comparison), and also
correspond to the capacity of available measuring equipment (1000 kN). Dimensions and
characteristics of footings as well as the arrangement of measuring points of reinforcement
strain are given in the Table 2 and Fig. 6.
For construction of the footings a three-fraction concrete with maximum grain size of 16 mm
and standard Portland cement was used. Concrete compressive strength at the time of footing
testing was obtained from the test cube specimens, having a side of 15 cm and the standard
cylinder specimens, and their averaged values calculated for the cube with side of 15 cm are
given in Table 2.
For reinforcement of the footings, 8 mm diameter rebars were used, and the percentage of
reinforcement was approximately 0.4% for all footings. The characteristics of used steel
were determined on three samples of used reinforcement. The obtained values were: tensile
strength fsu = 653 MPa, yield point fsy = 570 MPa and corresponding yield strain 2.7.

Table 2 Achieved characteristics of test footings

TI

20

17.5

Concrete
strength
fc,cube
[MPa]
38.37

TII

15

12.5

TIX

12.5

TX

Footin
g No.

Footing Effective
height
depth
h [cm]
d [cm]

Yield stress of Modulus of

reinforcement compressibilit
fsy [MPa]
y MS [MPa]

Ultimate
load
[kN]

570

54.0/61.2

1001/906*

38.37

570

76.7

1050

10.0

21.25

570

48.0

430

17.5

15.0

21.25

570

39.5

656

TXI

15

12.5

19.29

570

46.0

451

TXII

15

12.5

10.0

570

37.5

440

During the first test, the column failed at the load of 1001 kN. After a new column was constructed,
the footing was punched through at the load of 906 kN.
**

Footings TIII-TVIII were not broken, as their bearing capacity was higher than the capacity of the
equipment (1000 kN).

Fig. 6. Dimensions of tested footings and position of measuring points of steel and concrete
strains

3.3

Soil characteristics

The material excavated from the footing pit was replaced by river gravel whose particle size
distribution is given by Fig. 7 (Davidovi 2010). Gravel was placed in 30 cm thick layers,
and compaction of every layer was done by vibro-plate. Compressibility of each layer was
controlled by the circular plate test.
The measured average values of the modulus of compressibility (M S) by layers were in the
range 43.3 to 66.7 MPa which corresponds to the usual compressibility of subgrade soil.
Before each footing testing the compressibility of soil beneath the footing was controlled,
and it varied between 37.5 MPa and 76.7 MPa for different footings.

Fig. 7. Designed granulometric composition of foundation pit filling material

Fig .8. Arrangement of pressure gauges

3.4 Testing procedure

Footing is placed on the soil surface and loaded by vertical centric force which is applied by
a hydraulic jack positioned between the cross-beam and the footings (Fig. 9.). For footing
loading, a hydraulic jack with the capacity of 1000 kN was used, applying the load in load
steps of 50 kN. The load was kept constant at every load step until the total consolidation of
the ground at that load was achieved. The consolidation was registered by observing the
process of vertical displacements of points at the footing corners and on the column of the
footings.
The experiment should determine the influence of key parameters on the foundation
punching mechanism, such as: type and characteristics of subgrade, irregularity of contact
pressures, concrete compressive and tensile strength, position of reinforcement, applied
reinforcement percentage etc.
During the experiment, the following parameters were measured per second: dilatations in
reinforcement and concrete of the footings, vertical displacement of points at the footing
corners and on the column of the footings, intensity of applied force during loading, and
value of contact pressures beneath the footings. Further, the resulting strains in concrete and
reinforcement of the foundations will be presented.

Fig .9. Experimental setup, general view

3.5

Strains in concrete and reinforcement of the foundations

In order to analyze the behavior of the foundations during loading, one should see Fig. 10. to
Fig.15, which provides a parallel display of strains in concrete and reinforcement for

characteristic values of applied force. Observing these figures, one may conclude that
maximum strains in concrete are registered by the measuring tape immediately near the
column (measuring point 1 in Fig. 6.), while maximum strain are measured by the measuring
points in the axis of the column or immediately adjacent to the column (measuring points 2
or 3 in Fig. 6.).

Fig .10. Comparative review of strains in reinforcement and in concrete of footing TII

Fig .11. Comparative review of strains in reinforcement and in concrete of footing TI-10

Fig .12. Comparative review of strains in reinforcement and in concrete of footing TIX

Fig .13. Comparative review of strains in reinforcement and in concrete of footing TX

Fig .14. Comparative review of strains in reinforcement and in concrete of footing TXI

Fig .15. Comparative review of strains in reinforcement and in concrete of footing TXII
The registered strains in concrete considerably differ from those recorded by Hegger and
others. Namely, Hegger recorded mostly concrete compression strains with very small tensile
strains of massive foundations, while in this case, in almost all the foundation types (except
TII foundations) apart from compressive strains, also the significant tensile strains were
recorded.
Comparison of obtained strains in reinforcement and strains in foundation reinforcement
examined by Hegger and other shows a fairly well congruence. In both experiments,
maximum strains were detected in the column zone, in the axis or on the edge of the column.
For three foundation types (out of five) which were examined by Hegger, there was
reinforcement yield prior to punching, while in this case, there were reinforcement yield in
cases out of 8. However, great strains were detected even in those foundations whose
reinforcement did not start to yield, so it may be concluded that only the eccentricity of
applied force is the reason for absence of yield strains. This indicates the importance of
reinforcement in the footing punching process, so it is necessary to analyze its influence
through the applied percentage of reinforcement, arrangement of reinforcement and
mechanical properties of reinforcement (yield limit).

CONCLUSION

The conducted experimental research made it possible to observe considerable differences in

punching shear of column footings on gravel, tested in realistic conditions in situ, in
comparison to the earlier researches which were performed in simulated conditions in
laboratories.
On the basis of the results of conducted experimental research and subsequent analysis, the
following conclusions can be drawn:

The largest strain of reinforcement in all the examined footings are registered at the
measuring points immediately next to the column or in the column axis

In the footings which failed by punching shear, strains in reinforcement reach the
yield point, or they are close to it, so it can be said that footing punching shear is
related to generation of large strains in reinforcement
The highest strains in concrete (both compressive and tensile) were achieved at
measuring points immediately next to the column, while the remaining measuring
points registered progressive decrease of strain as the distance from the column
increases.

Acknowledgement: The paper is result of the investigation in the projects TR 36028

financed by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Serbia

REFERENCES
ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02)
and Commentary (318R-02), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 2002,
443 pp.
Boni Z, Vacev T, Prolovi V, Mijalkovi M, Danevi P: Mathematical modeling of
materially nonlinear problems in structural analyses (part II application in contemporary
software), Facta universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Ni.
Vol. 8, N 2, p. 201-210.
Boni Z: A contribution to the failure calculation theory by punching shear of column
footings resting on deformable subgrade soil, PhD thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering and
Architecture, Ni, Serbia, 2011, p. 182 (in Serbian).
CEB FIP model code 1990, Comite Euro-International du beton, Thomas Telford, 1998.
Code for technical norms for concrete and reinforced concrete ( BAB 1987), (in Serbian).
Davidovi N, Boni Z, Prolovi V, Mladenovi B, Stoji D: A comparative theoretical
experimental analysis of settlements of shallow foundations on granular soil, Facta
universitatis, Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Ni. Vol. 8, N 2, p.
135-143.
Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1.1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings,
Final Draft. Brussels, 2002, 226 pp.
Hallgren M, Bjerke M: Non-linear finite element analyses of punching shear failure of
column footings, Cement & Concrete Composites 24, 2002, p. 491496.
Hallgren M, Kinnunen S, Nylander B: Punching shear tests on column footings, Nordic
Concrete Research 21(1), 1998, p.124.
Hegger J, Sherif AG, Ricker M: Experimental Investigations on Punching Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Footings, ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006, p. 604-613.
Hegger J, Ricker M, Ulke B, Ziegler M: Investigations on the punching behavior of
reinforced concrete footings, Engineering Structures 29, 2007, p. 22332241.
Prolovi V.: Fundiranje I, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Ni, Serbia, 2003.
(in Serbian).
Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Design according to DIN 1045-1, InfoGraph,
Dortmund, Germany, 2010.

 .: , , , 1967 (in Russian).

Talbot, AN: Reinforced Concrete Wall Footings and Columns under Concentrated Loads.
Research and Development Bulletin D47, Illinois, 1913.
Theodorakopoulos DD, Swamy RN: Ultimate punching shear strength analysis of slab
column connections, Cement & Concrete Composites 24, 2002, p. 509-521.
Timm, M, Durchstanzen von Bodenplatten unter rotationssymmetrischer Belastung. PhD
thesis, Institut fr Baustoffe, Massivbau und Brandschutz, Technical University of
Brunswick, Brunswick, Germany, 2003, 159 pp. (in German).