ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012 677

Title no. 109-S59

ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER
ACI Structural Journal, V. 109, No. 5, September-October 2012.
MS No. S-2010-374 received November 28, 2010, and reviewed under Institute
publication policies. Copyright 2012, American Concrete Institute. All rights
reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the
copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be
published in the July-August 2013 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received
by March 1, 2013.
Design of Thick Concrete Plates Using Strut-and-Tie Model
by E. Rizk, H. Marzouk, and R. Tiller
A strut-and-tie model is developed to model the punching shear
behavior of thick concrete plates. This model provides a quick and
simple approach to punching shear behavior. It is applicable to both
normal- and high-strength concrete under symmetric and nonsym-
metric loading with and without shear reinforcement. The strut-
and-tie model for symmetric punching consists of a bottle-shaped
compressive zone in the upper section of the slab depth, leading to
a rectangular-stress compressive zone in the lower section depth.
An equation based on failure criteria for the strut-and-tie method
is used to model the behavior in the lower compressive stress zone.
Another strut-and-tie model is also developed to rationally model
nonsymmetric punching shear behavior due to unbalanced moment
transfer and symmetric punching behavior of concrete slabs
with shear reinforcement. The results of the strut-and-tie models
for symmetric and nonsymmetric loading with and without shear
reinforcement were compared to experimental test results performed
and published by others. The results of the strut-and-tie models
showed excellent agreement with available test results.
Keywords: punching and bottle-shaped strut; shear reinforcement; size
effect; splitting bond stress; strut-and-tie model; thick plates.
INTRODUCTION
Conventional design methods for concrete plates consider
potential punching failures in the vicinity of concentrated
loads. Nominal shear stresses at well-defned critical sections
are limited to guard against such failure modes. According
to this method, the nominal shear stress due to gravity load
is determined at an assumed vertical critical section around
the column. The shear stress should be limited to a nominal
shear strength that is usually assumed to be a function of
concrete strength and geometric parameters. Although such
a method lacks physical reality, it is simple and leads to
reasonable estimates if properly formulated.
The current research presents a rational and simple strut-
and-tie model to evaluate the ultimate punching shear
capacity of both normal- and high-strength concrete slabs
subjected to symmetric and nonsymmetric loading. The basis
of this model was developed earlier by the rational classical
model developed by Kinnunen and Nylander.
1
Slabs with
shear reinforcement were also considered under symmetric
loading. The strut-and-tie models were compared to experi-
mental test results reported in the literature and were verifed
using different design codes equations.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
Rational models and design formulas for punching shear are
based on the results of experimental tests performed mostly
on thin slabs. The few available tests performed on thick slabs
exhibit a notable size effect. As a consequence, there is a need
for a rational model that correctly describes and accounts for
size effect. This paper presents rational yet simple practical
strut-and-tie models to evaluate punching shear capacity of
thick concrete plates. The proposed models account for the
size effect factor. The proposed models were verifed using
experimental test results available from the literature.
PREVIOUS RESEARCH
A strut-and-tie model was recommended by Tiller
2
to
evaluate the punching shear capacity of concrete slabs. The
model provides a quick and simple approach to evaluate the
punching shear capacity of concrete slabs. It is also appli-
cable to both normal- and high-strength concrete under
symmetric and nonsymmetric loading with and without shear
reinforcement. Marzouk et al.
3
proposed an enhanced strut-
and-tie model to evaluate the minimum shear reinforcement
required to prevent brittle shear failure of thick concrete
plates in the vicinity of concentrated loads. The proposed
model has been used to evaluate the punching shear capacity
of thick plates. The strut-and-tie model for symmetric
punching consists of a bottle-shaped strut in the tension
zone of the plate, leading to a rectangular-shape strut in
the compressive zone. Inclined shear cracking develops in
the bottle-shaped strut prior to failure in the compressive
zone. Cracking in the bottle-shaped strut is related to the
splitting tensile strength of the concrete. Ultimate punching
failure occurs in the rectangular-stress zone by a high radial
compressive stress failure (Fig. 1). An equation based on
failure criteria for the simple strut-and-tie model is used
to evaluate the ultimate punching capacity of thick plates.
The plates thickness could be considered as the boundary
between thin and thick plates. Plates with 250 mm (10 in.)
thickness and greater could be considered as thick plates.
Another variable that has a signifcant effect on the shear
strength of concrete plates is the shear span-depth ratio (a/d).
According to Hallgren,
4
slender slabs are those slabs with
an a/d of more than 3 to 4. This ratio could be used to distin-
guish between thin and thick plates.
Fig. 1High radial compression stress failure mechanism.
678 ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012
E. Rizk is a Postdoctoral Fellow at Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. Johns,
NL, Canada, and is an Assistant Lecturer at Menoufa University, Shibin El Kom,
Egypt. He received his BSc and MSc from Menoufa University in 1999 and 2005,
respectively, and his PhD from Memorial University in 2010. His research interests
include cracking of offshore structures and shear strength of two-way slabs.
ACI member H. Marzouk is the Chair of the Civil Engineering Department at Ryerson
University, Toronto, ON, Canada. He received his BSc from Cairo University, Giza,
Egypt, and his MSc and PhD from the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK,
Canada. He is a member of ACI Committees 209, Creep and Shrinkage in Concrete,
and 213, Lightweight Aggregate and Concrete. His research interests include struc-
tural and material properties of high-strength concrete, lightweight high strength,
creep, fracture mechanics, and fnite element analysis.
R. Tiller is President and CEO of Tiller Engineering Inc., a professional structural
engineering consulting frm based in St. Johns, NL, Canada. He received his BEng
and MEng from Memorial University of Newfoundland. His research interests include
practical, simplifed structural analysis methods.
Muttoni and Schwartz
5
assumed that the shear strength
of concrete slabs is reduced by the presence of a critical
shear crack that propagates through the slab into an inclined
compression strut carrying the shear force to the column. The
current research presents a continuation to research done by
Marzouk et al.
3
The presented work contains general strut-
and-tie models that could be applied to predict the ultimate
punching capacity of thick plates with and without shear
reinforcement under symmetric and nonsymmetric loading.
Size effect
For design engineers, the size effect is a compelling
reason for using fracture mechanics. The size of the fracture
process zone is represented by a material property called the
characteristic length, l
ch
. It expresses the fracture proper-
ties of the concrete, such as the modulus of elasticity E
c
;
fracture energy G
f
; and tensile strength f
ct
, where f
ct
is the
direct tensile strength of concrete as determined by the direct
tension test
6
or any other fracture mechanics test
2
c f
ch
ct
E G
l
f
= (1)
where G
f
is defned as the amount of energy required to cause
one unit area of a crack, so that it can be obtained as the area
under the load-crack width curve. It should be noted that
the characteristic length can be calculated using Eq. (1). A
higher value of l
ch
refects that the material is less brittle and
a smaller value means that the material is more brittle.
Empirical equations to predict characteristic length
To obtain the value of characteristic length l
ch
, the modulus
of elasticity of concrete E
c
, fracture energy G
f
, and concrete
tensile strength f
ct
, should be measured experimentally. In
the absence of experimental data reported in the original
papers, however, accepted empirical equations were used
to predict the characteristic length using the compressive
strength of the concrete as given by Eq. (2) and (3). Several
researchers have proposed empirical code-like equations to
predict the characteristic length using only the compressive
strength of the concrete. Two of such equations are those of
Hilsdorf and Brameshuber
7
and Zhou et al.
8
Hilsdorf and Brameshuber
7
proposed the following formula
( )
0.3
600 (mm)
ch c
l f

= (2a)
(2b)
( )
0.3
105.1 (in.)
ch c
l f

=
Zhou et al.
8
developed a simple equation, based on curve
ftting, as follows
3.84 580 (mm)
ch c
l f

= +
(3a)

0.00104 22.83 (in.)
ch c
l f

= +
(3b)
Hence, the results of those investigations suggest that
the characteristic length could be based on the concrete
compressive strength. Equation (3) was used in this paper.
STRUT-AND-TIE MODEL FOR PUNCHING SHEAR
OF CONCRETE SLABS
Bottle-shaped strut
Figure 1 shows the general punching shear behavior of a
uniformly loaded slab supported by a circular column. The
applied uniform load can be replaced by an equivalent load
P
eq
. The inclined shear crack that develops from the top
surface at an angle q and forming the critical section is shown.
Punching of the slab occurs when the concrete in the ulti-
mate failure zone fails by a high concrete compression stress.
For normal-strength concrete, the angle of inclination q is
experimentally determined to be between 26 and 30 degrees,
whereas for high-strength concrete, the angle varies
between 32 and 38 degrees as determined through experi-
mental testing by Marzouk and Hussein.
9
Hegger et
al.
10
found that the observed angle of the failure cone is
approximately 45 degrees in all tested footings. This failure
angle seems to be steeper than that for a fat slab. Hallgren et
al.
11
found that the shear crack propagated from the plane of
the fexural reinforcement to the slab-column root was at an
angle of approximately 50 to 60 degrees, measured between
the shear crack and the horizontal plane. This is a consider-
ably steeper angle than the shear crack angles observed in
punching shear tests of more slender slabs.
Figure 2 shows the stress felds in the slab due to
symmetric punching shear. The crack zone is made up of a
bottle-shaped compression feld in which the splitting tensile
strength of the concrete perpendicular to this feld controls
cracking. The ultimate failure zone is a rectangular-shaped
compression feld. From these stress felds, a refned strut-
and-tie model is developed, as indicated in Fig. 3.
The bottom node represents the bearing at the column
head. The top node represents the physical surface failure
crack and also represents the stress concentration at the
crack perimeter. The bottle-shaped strut could be assumed
to exit at the slab-column connection based on the shape
of punching shear cracks that develop in the vicinity of the
slab-column connection at a load level less than the ultimate
punching shear load. Narrow plate-like rectangles represent
the stress feld near the column.
ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012 679
Shear cracking, crack zone
A refned strut-and-tie model can be developed in the
upper zone of the proposed model (Fig. 3). Two compres-
sion struts radiate at dispersion angles of approximately 2:1
(as proposed by Schlaich and Weischede
12
) from the angle
of inclination q. The compression forces are held together
by two perpendicular tensile forces in the concrete. Cracking
occurs when the stress in these tensile zones equals or exceeds
the splitting tensile strength of the concrete f
sp,t
, given by
the CEB-FIP 1990
13
model code. The punching shear cracks
started to develop in the crack form at a load level less than
the ultimate punching shear load. The punching shear crack
load can be established by equating and solving the inclined
truss shown and comparing the tension force to the f
sp,t
of
the concrete.
Punching failure mechanism, ultimate failure zone
Punching shear failure occurs when the concrete in
compression in a rectangular stress feld near the column
fails by a high radial compressive stress. The variable P
ult
denotes the corresponding ultimate punching shear capacity.
The basis of this approach has been successfully devel-
oped by the rational model developed by Kinnunen and
Nylander.
1
This approach is used as the basis in the proposed
strut-and-tie model to determine the ultimate punching
capacity of a slab under symmetric loading.
High radial compression stress failure mechanism
The rectangular stress compression zone in the vicinity of
a circular column is shown in Fig. 1. The column force P
ult

is transferred to the slab via inclined radial forces that must
pass under the root of the shear crack. The crack is assumed
to have propagated down to the neutral axis at fexure in
the radial direction. The radial compressed concrete strut
is assumed to form an imaginary conical shell strut with
constant thickness at an angle inclination of q/2. Punching
shear failure is assumed to occur when the stress in the
conical shell strut reaches the value of the crushing strength
of cracked concrete f
cu
and can be determined in accordance
with CSA-A23.3-04
14
as follows
1
0.85
0.8 170
c
cu c
f
f f

=
+
(4)
where e
1
is the principal tensile strain in cracked concrete
due to factored loads; e
1
= e
s
+ (e
s
+ 0.002)cot
2
q
s
; q
s
is the
smallest angle between the strut and the adjoining ties; and
e
s
is the tensile strain in the tie inclined at q
s
to the strut.
The Canadian Code equation (Eq. (4)) considers the strain
compatibility of the struts and the strain softening of diago-
nally cracked concrete. The refned strut-and-tie model of
Fig. 3 shows the complete force felds developed due to
symmetric punching. Equilibrium equations can be devel-
oped in the vertical direction, horizontal direction, and due
to the moment developed due to the individual forces acting
at their respective distances from the column face. The equa-
tion for equilibrium in the vertical direction determines P
ult
,
the ultimate punching shear load. The ultimate punching load
P
ult
can be determined from the maximum concrete stress f
cu

acting on the thickness of the conical shell strut. This can
be expressed as the total compression force C
T
around the
periphery of the circular column and is equal to the bearing
area of the conical shell strut periphery multiplied by the
maximum concrete strength allowed in the strut. The vari-
able C
T
is the periphery bearing area times concrete strength,
or C
T
= (perimeter of cone times thickness of strut face)
concrete strength, where

2
Perimeter of cone
tan
y
D

= +


(5)
sin / 2
Thickness of strut face
sin
y
=

(6)
Concrete strength = f
cu
as per Eq. (4).
2 sin / 2
sin / 2 tan sin
ult
T cu
P y y
C D f
1 _
+
1
,
]
(7)
Introducing the term (l
ch
/d)
0.33
to account for the size
effect, Eq. (7) can be written as follows
Fig. 2Stress felds generated in slab-column connection
after cracking.
Fig. 3Refned strut-and-tie model for symmetric punching
of concrete slab.
680 ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012

( )
0.33 2 sin / 2
/
sin / 2 tan sin
ult
T cu ch
P y y
C D f l d
1 _
+
1
,
]
(8)
Solving for P
ult

0.33
2 sin / 2
( / ) sin / 2
tan sin
ult cu ch
y y
P D f l d

= +


(9)
where y is the depth of the compression zone; l is the
inclined length of the crack zone (length of strut) calculated
using Eq. (10); y
1
is the distance from the neutral axis to the
center of the lower tensile force calculated using Eq. (11);
and D is the diameter of the column. (A square column can
be replaced in the equation by an equivalent circular column
with the same perimeterthat is, D = 4C/)

sin
d y
l

=

(10)

1
sin
6
l
y

=
(11)
Depth of compression zone
The ability to determine the depth of the compression
zone accurately at failure is the key to any satisfactory theory
for ultimate strength. The height of the compression stress
zone y is determined based on the position of the neutral
axis (NA) in a reinforced concrete fexural member under
elastic conditions. There is a strong moment-shear interac-
tion infuencing both the NA depth and the failure mode
of the slab. Based on a simplifed method proposed by
Theodorakopoulos and Swamy,
15
the NA depth for an ordi-
nary reinforced concrete slab in the elasto-plastic stage has
been suggested to be calculated using the harmonic mean
given by
2
s f
s f
y y
y
y y
=
+
(12)
where y
s
is the depth of the compression zone of the shear-
critical section at punching; and y
f
is equal to the depth of the
compression zone at fexure.
Depth of shear-critical section
Theodorakopoulos and Swamy
15
found that for test slabs,
which showed yielding of reinforcement in the vicinity of
the column before punching, the quantity f
cu
/rf
y
varied from
5.0 to 9.0, with the majority of values varied between 6.0 and
8.0, where f
cu
is the cube concrete strength and f
y
is the steel
yield stress. For such slabs, the researchers
15
assumed that
the depth of the compression zone of the shear-critical
section at punching y
s
is equal to the depth of the compres-
sion zone at fexure y
f
under the condition of local yielding
of the reinforcementthat is
s f
y y y = = (13)
If the average value of the quantity f
cu
/rf
y
is assumed equal
to 7.0, it could be easily shown that y
f
= 0.25d, which implies
that the value of the shear-critical section is equal to 0.25d as
well (Eq. (13)). Hence, the value of the shear-critical section
could be assumed to be equal to
0.25
s
y d =
(14)
It should be noted that, after considering the separate
action of the two critical sections (shear- and moment-crit-
ical sections), it is only the depth y
f
that is infuenced by
any variation in concrete properties, steel amount, and steel
properties, whereas the depth y
s
is unaffected.
Depth of fexural critical section
The computation of the NA depth of the fexural critical
section y
f
is based on the classical procedure for fexure used
for normal-density concrete, except that the steel strain-
hardening effect is recognized. For simplifcation, the NA
depth of the fexural critical section y
f
could be calculated
as follows
1
0.8
y
f
c
f
y d
k f

(15)
1
/ 3
0.67 ,
3680
c cu o
o
cu
f A
k


= =

(16)
where r is the fexural reinforcement ratio; e
cu
is the ultimate
concrete strain; e
o
is the concrete strain at the level of the end
of the rectangular concrete stress block; k
1
is a factor that
denotes the equivalent rectangular compressive stress block
parameter given by BS 8110-97
16
; and f
y
is the steel yield
strength. The coeffcient A = 1 for normal-density concrete.
STRUT-AND-TIE MODEL FOR SLABS WITH
SHEAR REINFORCEMENT
The proposed strut-and-tie model for concrete slabs
with punching shear reinforcement consists of decen-
tered fan-shaped compression struts oriented at angles q =
25 to 65 degrees.
17
Therefore, shear reinforcement is effec-
tive for a distance 2d from the face of the column. The shear
reinforcement bars act as vertical tension ties in the model.
The top tension tie (fexural reinforcing mesh) effectively
ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012 681
anchors the horizontal component of the fanned struts. Nodal
zones are developed at the intersection of the struts and ties.
The strut-and-tie model is solved by calculating P
ult
, the
equivalent force resulting from the load on the slab. The
true strut-and-tie model for this situation extends around
the periphery of the column in a three-dimensional (3-D)
cone shape. However, it is proposed for simplicity to solve
the strut-and-tie model in a two-dimensional (2-D) manner.
Therefore, P
ult
is based on a contributing effective width to
each row of punching shear reinforcement.
The proposed strut-and-tie model is shown in Fig. 4(a).
This is the sum of two models. One model uses a direct
compression strut running from the load to the support. This
conical-shape strut carries a shear V
c
. It should be noted that
the actual profle of the compression strut is not a straight
line, but instead it tends to take a parabolic arch profle; for
simplicity, the compression strut will be assumed to take a
straight pass. The second model uses the shear reinforce-
ment as vertical tension members and has compression fans
under the load and over the support. The vertical force in
each shear reinforcement row is computed assuming that the
shear reinforcement has yielded. The vertical force compo-
nent in each of the small compression struts must be equal
to the yield strength of its shear reinforcement for the joint
to be in equilibrium.
The compression struts radiating from the load point
intersect the shear reinforcement at the level of the centroid
of the fexural steel because a change in the force in the fex-
ural steel is required to equilibrate the horizontal compo-
nent of the force in the compression strut. The force in the
fexural steel is increased at each vertical tie by the hori-
zontal component of the compression diagonal intersecting
at that point.
The ultimate punching load P
ult
can be determined from
the maximum concrete strength f
cu
acting on the thick-
ness of the conical shell strut. This can be expressed as the
total reduced compression force V
c
around the periphery of
the circular column and is equal to the bearing area of the
conical shell strut periphery multiplied by the maximum
concrete strength allowed in the strut plus the contribution
of the yielded shear reinforcement V
s
.
0.75
ult c s
P V V = +
(17)

0.33
,
2 sin( / 2)
0.75
tan sin
( / ) sin( / 2) 0.9 cos
ult
cu ch v ywd ef
y y
P D
f l d A f

= +


+
(18)
where A
v
f
ywd,ef
cosq is the total force in the transverse
shear reinforcement inside an assumed failure plane. The
constant (0.75) is a reduction factor to account for the
reduced punching shear stress for slabs with shear reinforce-
ment.
17
The failure plane is assumed to be inclined at an
angle q to the slab axis and the stirrups inclined at a right
angle to the slab axis (Fig. 4). The effective design strength
of the punching shear reinforcement f
ywd,ef
is calculated
according to the EC2
18
provisions as follows

,
250 0.25
1.15
y
ywd ef
f
f d = + (19)
NONSYMMETRIC PUNCHING SHEAR OF
CONCRETE SLABS
Lateral loads and unbalanced gravity loads cause transfer
of moments between the slab system and supporting
columns in slabs without beams along the column line; the
transfer of the moment from the slab to the column requires
special consideration. North American design codes specify
that a portion, M
fb
, of the total unbalanced moment, M
f
, be
considered as transferred to the columns by fexure; and
Fig. 4Strut-and-tie model idealization for slabs with shear
reinforcement: (a) equivalent compressive felds; (b) force
carried by concrete V
c
; and (c) force carried by shear reinforce-
ment V
s
.
682 ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012
the balance, M
fv
, through shear and torsion, as given by the
following equations
fb f f
M M = (20)
( )
1
fv f f
M M =
(21)
1
2
1
2
1
3
f
b
b
=
+
(22)
where M
fb
is the portion of the moment transferred by fexure;
M
fv
is the portion of the moment transferred by shear; M
f
is
the total unbalanced moment transferred to columns; and
b
1
and b
2
are the widths of the critical section for shear,
measured in the direction of the span for which moments are
being determined, and transverse to it, respectively.
For square and circular columns, g
f
= 0.6. Based on test
results and experience, the width of the slab considered
effective in resisting the moment M
fb
is taken as the width
between lines at a distance 1.5h on either sides of the column
or column capital. Hence, this strip should have adequate
fexural reinforcement to resist this moment. The section
considered for moment transfer by eccentricity of shear
stress is at a distance d/2 from the periphery of the column
or column capital. The shear stresses are introduced because
the moment transfer must be added to the shear stresses due
to the vertical support reaction.
Strut-and-tie approach: concrete slabs
The strut-and-tie model developed previously to model
symmetric loading situations is used in conjunction with
an interaction equation to describe nonsymmetric punching
shear behavior due to moment transfer. The interaction
equation approach has been used in the past by Siao
19
and
Broms.
20
The proposed interaction equation is given by the
following equation
1.0
ult ult
P Pe
P M
+
(23)
where P is the applied shear force; P
ult
is the ultimate
punching shear failure load as determined by Eq. (9) or (18);
e is the eccentricity of the applied shear force; M
ult
is the
ultimate moment resistance of the slab = moment resistance
due to fexure; M
rb
+ moment resistance due to shear stress
acting at the critical section M
rv
; and M
rb
is the moment
resistance of the slab due to fexure given by the following
expression, assuming that all fexural reinforcements within
the effective transfer width reached yield
2
1
1.7
y
rb y t
c
f
M f b d
f

(24)
where r is the ratio of tension slab reinforcement within
the effective transfer width; f
y
is the yield strength of slab
reinforcement; b
t
is the effective transfer width (C + 1.5h on
each side of the column); d is the slab effective depth; and f
c

is the compressive strength of concrete.

rv v o
M M = (25)
where
1
2
1
1
2
1
3
v
b
b
=
+
(26)
g
v
= 0.4 for a square column.
( )
1
1
1
0.5
c
o
v
v J
M
C d
=
+
(27)
where v
c
is the shear strength (stress) of concrete.
( )
ult rb rv
M M M = + (28)
The eccentricity e can be determined by dividing the
applied moment by the shearing force; J
1
is a property of
the critical shear section analogous to the polar moment
of inertia; and C
1
is the dimension of the column side in
the direction of the span. A comparison of the strut-and-
tie model and the interaction approach to experimental test
results performed by others and different codes of practice
are given in the following section.
PROPOSED STRUT-AND-TIE MODEL VERSUS
DIFFERENT DESIGN CODE PREDICTIONS
The following sections summarize comparisons of the
predictions obtained using the strut-and-tie models devel-
oped in the previous sections for the punching resistance
shear of concrete slabs and the predictions obtained using
different design equations. These predictions are compared
to published test results of experimental work conducted and
reported by different researchers in past literature.
Symmetric punching shear of concrete slabs
A total of 244 experimental data on interior slab-column
connections subjected to symmetrical punching were
collected and reviewed. All specimens were reinforced
concrete slab-column connections without drop panels,
ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012 683
column capitals, or any type of shear reinforcement. Speci-
mens cast with lightweight concrete were excluded. The
collected experimental results are available in the literature
and were conducted by different researchers.
1,4,9,17,21-39
The
concrete compressive strength f
c
for the analyzed database
ranges from 13 to 120 MPa (1885 to 17,400 psi) and the
ratio of tension reinforcement r ranges from 0.25 to 5%,
while the slab effective depth d ranges from 35 to 500 mm
(1.4 to 20 in.).
Table 1 provides the mean value (the ratio of V
Test
/V
STM
),
the standard deviation, and the coeffcient of variation of the
strength ratio obtained by a strut-and-tie model (Eq. (9)). The
mean of V
Test
/V
STM
is 1.00, and the coeffcient of variation of
23% for the analyzed data is still better than the North Amer-
ican codes. These coeffcients of variation are fairly small
in spite of the simplicity of the equation. The mean value
provided by BS 8110-97
16
is near unity, whereas the mean
value provided by CEB-FIP 1990
13
is 0.95. This means that the
estimated values are close to experimental values. The coef-
fcients of variation in BS 8110-97
16
and CEB-FIP 1990
13
are
small13%. The coeffcient of variation of ACI 318-08
40
is
Table 1Analytical results
Equation Mean
Standard
deviation
Coeffcient of
variation, %
V
Test
/V
ACI 318-08
1.03 0.28 27
V
Test
/V
BS 8110-97
1.02 0.13 13
V
Test
/V
CEB-FIP-90
0.95 0.13 13
V
Test
/V
STM
1.00 0.23 23
27%, which implies that the precision of the equation is not
satisfactory. In some cases, ACI 318-08
40
underestimates the
punching shear values by more than 50% and, in other cases,
the ACI 318-08
40
equation overestimated the punching shear
capacity by more than 50%.
The predictions for the ACI 318-08,
40
BS 8110-97,
16

CEB-FIP 1990,
13
and proposed strut-and-tie model versus test
results is shown in Fig. 5. The fgure implies that the values
calculated by the ACI 318-08
40
equation are higher than the
tested values and are scattered. The proposed rational simpli-
fed equation based on the strut-and-tie model has a consider-
ably small coeffcient of variation, and most engineers can
easily apply this equation to the design of slabs.
Nonsymmetric punching shear of concrete slabs
Table 2 summarizes the predictions of the proposed inter-
action equation approach developed for this situation of
nonsymmetric punching shear compared with published
test results conducted and reported by others. The strut-
and-tie model (Eq. (9)) in conjunction with the interaction
equation approach yields excellent results when compared
to the available test results. The mean of V
Test
/V
STM
is 1.09,
and the coeffcient of variation is 13% when compared
to 15 reported test results. The strut-and-tie model approach
was, as per the symmetric loading situation, comparable
to test results over the full range of concrete strengths and
reinforcing ratios indicated.
The results, in summary, indicate that the strut-and-tie
model, in conjunction with the interaction equation, ratio-
nally describes the punching behavior of a slab under the
application of a load at an eccentricity.
Fig. 5V
Test
versus V
eq
obtained from different code equations: (a) ACI 318-08; (b) BS 8110-
97; (c) CEB-FIP 90; and (d) STM Eq. (10). (Note: 1 kN = 0.2248 kips.)
684 ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012
Punching shear of concrete slabs with punching
shear reinforcement
Table 3 summarizes the results of the proposed strut-and-
tie model compared to experimental test results conducted
and reported by others. The test results used are for either
shear stud rails or T-headed shear studs because these are
considered to be the only practical shear reinforcement
types to be used in concrete slab construction. For the
limited test results examined, the ultimate punching shear
capacity as calculated by the strut-and-tie model shows
close agreement with test results. The mean of V
Test
/V
STM
is
0.96, and the coeffcient of variation is 14% when compared
to 11 reported test results.
In summary, the strut-and-tie model for punching shear
behavior of slabs with shear reinforcement is a rational
model based on the actual slab-reinforcement behavior. It
is an effective and practical means of analyzing slabs with
shear reinforcement.
CONCLUSIONS
The phenomenon of punching shear behavior of
concrete slabs of various compressive strengths can be
adequately modeled using a strut-and-tie model.
For symmetric loading situations, the punching shear
behavior can be modeled using a strut-and-tie model.
The ultimate punching slab capacity can be predicted
using elastic theory equations based on the classic
Kinnunen and Nylander
1
plate theory rational model
and concrete failure criteria, and is adjusted to account
for size effect.
The proposed strut-and-tie models for punching shear
compare quite well with experimental test results. For
symmetric punching using the proposed model, the
overall average theory/test ratio is 1.00 with a coeff-
cient of variation of 23% when compared to 244 experi-
mental test results. This gives strong support to the
ability of the theory to explain the structural behavior of
concrete slabs. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
Table 2Strut-and-tie model for nonsymmetric punching shear: comparison with published test results
Authors Slab No. d, mm C, mm r, % f
c
, MPa f
y
, MPa e, mm M
ult
, kN.m P
Test
, kN P
Test
/P
STM
Moe
22
M2A 114 305 1.50 15.5 481 185 110 213 1.10
M7 114 254 1.34 25.0 328 61 75 311 1.08
M6 114 254 1.34 26.5 328 168 76 239 1.15
M8 114 254 1.91 24.6 328 437 97 150 1.03
M10 114 254 1.91 21.1 328 307 94 178 1.07
Ghali and Elgabry
41
SM1.5 122 305 2.00 39.9 476 1031 198 129 0.88
SM1.0 122 305 1.33 33.4 476 988 136 129 1.17
Marzouk et al.
42
NNHS1.0 125 250 1.00 36.2 460 550 100 130 0.99
NHHS1.0 125 250 1.00 35.3 460 550 100 135 1.04
Hawkins et al.
43
6AH 133 305 0.60 31.3 472 584 98 169 1.35
9.6AH 133 305 0.96 30.7 415 584 116 187 1.34
14AH 133 305 1.40 30.3 420 584 143 205 1.27
6AL 133 305 0.60 22.7 472 130 92 244 1.05
9.6AL 133 305 0.96 28.9 415 130 115 257 0.87
14AL 133 305 1.40 27.0 420 130 139 319 0.99
Notes: 1 MPa = 145 psi; 1 kN = 0.2248 kips; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.; 1 kN.m = 8851 in.-lb.
Table 3Strut-and-tie model for slabs with shear reinforcement: comparison with published test results
Authors Slab No. f
c
, MPa f
y
, MPa C, mm d, mm Shear reinforcement type
P
STM
,
kN P
Test
, kN P
Test
/P
STM
Van Der Voet et al.
44
MV2 29.5 331 250 113 T-headed 560 602 1.08
MV4 31.3 344 250 113 T-headed 594 588 0.99
MV5 36.5 339 250 113 T-headed 672 592 0.88
Marzouk and Jiang
17
HS22 60.0 450 250 120 T-headed 576 605 1.05
HS23 60.0 450 250 120 T-headed 576 590 1.02
Birkle and Dilger
37
2 27.7 488 250 124 Stud rail 925 634 0.69
4 36.1 488 250 124 Stud rail 795 574 0.72
8 35.0 531 300 190 Stud rail 1058 1050 0.99
9 36.1 531 300 190 Stud rail 1058 1091 1.03
11 30.0 524 350 260 Stud rail 1625 1620 1.00
12 33.8 524 350 260 Stud rail 1409 1520 1.08
Notes: 1 MPa = 145 psi; 1 kN = 0.2248 kips; 1 mm = 0.0394 in.
ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012 685
model appears to be equally valid for high- and normal-
strength thick and thin concrete slabs.
For nonsymmetric loading situations, the strut-and-
tie model developed to describe symmetric punching
is used in conjunction with an interaction equation to
model the punching behavior.
A strut-and-tie model consisting of fan-shaped compres-
sion struts held in place by tension ties can be used to
describe the situation where shear reinforcement is present.
The work done in this investigation could be expanded
to include other punching shear situations in slabs.
These include exterior column situations in building
construction, different types of slab systems such as
hat slabs with drop panels, punching shear for offshore
concrete structures, and punching shear related to drop-
ping objects on concrete slabs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are grateful to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada (NSERC) for providing the funds for this project.
NOTATION
a = shear span
b
ef
= effective width of bottle-shaped strut
b
min
= width of bearing area
C = side length of square column
C
T
= total compression force acting on thickness of conical shell strut
around periphery of circular column
D = diameter of column
d = effective depth of slab
f
c
= uniaxial compressive strength of concrete (cylinder strength)
f
ck
= characteristic compressive strength of concrete in MPa
f
ct
= tensile stress in concrete
f
ctm
= mean value of concrete tensile strength at time that crack forms
f
cu
= limiting compressive stress in concrete strut or cube
concrete strength
f
sp,t
= splitting bond stress
f
y
= yield stress of steel
f
ywd,ef
= effective design strength of punching shear reinforcement
h = slab height
k
1
= maximum concrete stress-block parameter
l = length of strut from face-to-face of nodes
l
ch
= characteristic length
P
eq
= equivalent load
P
ult
= denotes corresponding ultimate punching shear capacity
failure mechanism
s = spacing between peripheral lines of vertical members
t = thickness of strut
V
c
= nominal shear strength provided by concrete
V
STM
= predicted punching load estimated by strut-and-tie model
V
Test
= test punching failure load
V
u
= ultimate punching shear
y = depth of fexural compression zone in slab (depth of neutral plane)
y
f
= depth of compression zone of fexural critical section
y
s
= depth of compression zone of shear-critical section
y
1
= distance from NA to center of lower tensile force
e
1
= principal tensile strain in cracked concrete due to factored loads
e
cu
= ultimate concrete strain
e
o
= concrete strain at level of end of rectangular concrete stress block
g
f
= factor used to determine unbalanced moment transferred by
fexure at slab-column connections
g
v
= factor used to determine unbalanced moment transferred by
eccentricity of shear at slab-column connections
q = angle of inclination of normal to crack to x reinforcement
q
s
= smallest angle between strut and adjoining ties
r = fexural reinforcement ratio
REFERENCES
1. Kinnunen, S., and Nylander, H., Punching of Concrete Slabs without
Shear Reinforcement, Transactions of the Royal Institute of Technology,
Stockholm, Sweden, 1960, 112 pp.
2. Tiller, R., Strut-and-Tie Model for Punching Shear of Concrete Slabs,
masters thesis, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial
University of Newfoundland, St. Johns, NL, Canada, 1995, 103 pp.
3. Marzouk, H.; Rizk, E.; and Tiller, R., Design of Shear Reinforce-
ment Using a Strut and Tie Model, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering,
V. 37, No. 2, 2010, pp. 181-194.
4. Hallgren, M., Punching Shear Capacity of Reinforced High Strength
Concrete Slabs, doctoral thesis, Department of Structural Engineering,
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 1996, 206 pp.
5. Muttoni, A., and Schwartz, J., Behavior of Beams and Punching in
Slabs without Shear Reinforcement, IABSE Colloquium, V. 62, Zrich,
Switzerland, 1991, pp. 703-708.
6. Marzouk, H., and Chen, Z., Fracture Energy and Tension Properties
of High-Strength Concrete, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering,
ASCE, V. 7, No. 2, 1995, pp. 108-116.
7. Hilsdorf, H., and Brameshuber, W., Code-Type Formulation of Frac-
ture Mechanics Concepts for Concrete, International Journal of Fracture,
V. 51, 1991, pp. 61-72.
8. Zhou, P.; Barr, B.; and Lydon, F., Fracture Properties of High Strength
Concrete with Varying Silica Fume Content and Aggregates, Cement and
Concrete Research, V. 25, No. 3, 1995, pp. 543-552.
9. Marzouk, H., and Hussein, A., Experimental Investigation on the
Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Slabs, ACI Structural Journal, V. 88,
No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1991, pp. 701-713.
10. Hegger, J.; Ricker, M.; and Sherif, A., Punching Strength of Reinforced
Concrete Footings, ACI Structural Journal, V. 106, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2009,
pp. 706-716.
11. Hallgren, M.; Kinnunen, S.; and Nylander, B., Punching Shear Tests
on Column Footings, Nordic Concrete Research, Publication No. 21, Oslo,
Norway, 1998, pp. 1-22.
12. Schlaich, J., and Weischede, D., Detailing of Concrete Structures,
Bulletin dInformation 150, Comit Euro-International du Bton, Paris,
France, 1982, 163 pp.
13. Comit Euro-International Du Bton-Fdration de la Prcontrainte
(CEBFIP), Model Code 1990, Bulletin DInformation No. 203-305, Laus-
anne, Switzerland, 1990, 462 pp.
14. CSA-A23.3-04, Design of Concrete Structures for Buildings,
Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, ON, Canada, 2004, 258 pp.
15. Theodorakopoulos, D., and Swamy, R., Ultimate Punching Shear
Strength Analysis of Slab-Column Connections, Cement and Concrete
Composites, V. 24, No. 6, 2002, pp. 509-521.
16. BS 8110-97, Structural Use of Concrete, BS8110: Part 1Code
of Practice for Design and Construction, British Standards Association,
London, UK, 1997, 168 pp.
17. Marzouk, H., and Jiang, D., Experimental Investigation on Shear
Enhancement Types for High-Strength Concrete Plates, ACI Structural
Journal, V. 93, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1997, pp. 49-58.
18. EN 1992-1-2, Eurocode 2, Design of Concrete StructuresPart 1-1:
General Rules and Rules for Buildings, Comit Europen de Normalisa-
tion, Brussels, Belgium, 2004, 230 pp.
19. Siao, W., Punching Shear Resistance of Flat Slabs: A Beam-
Strip Analogy, ACI Structural Journal, V. 91, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1994,
pp. 594-603.
20. Broms, C., Punching of Flat PlatesA Question of Concrete Prop-
erties in Biaxial Compression and Size Effect, ACI Structural Journal,
V. 87, No. 3, May-June 1990, pp. 292-301.
21. Elstner, R., and Hognestad, E., Shearing Strength of Reinforced
Concrete Slabs, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 53, No. 1, Jan. 1956,
pp. 29-58.
22. Moe, J., Shearing Strength of Reinforced Concrete Slabs and Foot-
ings under Concentrated Loads, Bulletin D47, Portland Cement Associa-
tion Research and Development Laboratories, Skokie, IL, 1961, 130 pp.
23. Yitzhaki, D., Punching Strength of Reinforced Concrete Slabs, ACI
JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 63, No. 5, May 1966, pp. 527-540.
24. Mowrer, R., and Vanderbilt, M., Shear Strength of Lightweight
Aggregate Reinforced Concrete Flat Plates, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings
V. 64, No. 11, Nov. 1967, pp. 722-729.
25. Kinnunen, S.; Nylander, H.; and Tolf, P., Investigations on Punching
at the Division of Building Statics and Structural Engineering, Nordisk
Betong, No. 3, 1978, pp. 25-27.
26. Magura, D., and Corley, W., Tests to Destruction of a Multipanel
Waffe Slab Structure, Full-Scale Testing of New York Worlds Fair Struc-
tures, Publication 1721, V. II, Building Research Advisory Board, National
Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, 1969, pp. 10-135.
27. Regan, P.; Walker, P.; and Zakaria, K., Tests of Reinforced Concrete
Flat Slabs, CIRIA Project No. RP 220, Polytechnic of Central London,
London, UK, 1979, 217 pp.
28. Rankin, G., and Long, A., Predicting the Punching Strength of
Conventional Slab-Column Specimens, Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers, V. 82, Part 1, 1987, pp. 327-346.
686 ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2012
29. Tolf, P., Plattjocklekens Inverkan p Betongplattors Hllfasthet vid
Genomstansning Frsk med Cirkulra Platter, Bulletin No. 146, Depart-
ment of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal Institute of Tech-
nology, Stockholm, Sweden, 1988, 64 pp.
30. Gardner, N., Relationship of the Punching Shear Capacity of Reinforced
Concrete Slabs with Concrete Strength, ACI Structural Journal, V. 87, No. 1,
Jan.-Feb. 1990, pp. 66-71.
31. Mongai, G., A Critical Review of the Symmetric Punching Shear
of Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs, masters thesis, University of Ottawa,
Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1990, 252 pp.
32. Tomaszewicz, A., Punching Shear Capacity of Reinforced Concrete
Slabs, High Strength Concrete, SP2-Plates and Shells, Report 2.3, Report
No. STF70 A93082, SINTEF Structures and Concrete, Trondheim, Norway,
1993, 36 pp.
33. Ramdane, K., Punching Shear of High Performance Concrete Slabs,
Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Utilization of High
Strength High Performance Concrete, Paris, France, 1996, pp. 1015-1026.
34. Kevin, K., Infuence of Size on Punching Shear Strength of Concrete
Slabs, masters thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada, 2000,
92 pp.
35. Guandalini, S., and Muttoni, A., Symmetrical Punching Tests on
Slabs without Transverse Reinforcement, Test Report, cole Polytech-
nique Fdrale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2004, 85 pp.
36. Sundquist, H., and Kinnunen, S., The Effect of Column Head and
Drop Panels on the Punching Capacity of Flat Slabs, Bulletin No. 82,
Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Royal Institute of Tech-
nology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2004, 24 pp.
37. Birkle, G., and Dilger, W., Infuence of Slab Thickness on Punching
Shear Strength, ACI Structural Journal, V. 105, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2008,
pp. 180-188.
38. Marzouk, H., and Hossin, M., Crack Analysis of Reinforced
Concrete Two-Way Slabs, Research Report RCS01, Faculty of Engi-
neering and Applied Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St.
Johns, NL, Canada, 2007, 159 pp.
39. Rizk, E.; Marzouk, H.; and Hussein, A., Punching Shear of Thick
Plates with and without Shear Reinforcement, ACI Structural Journal,
V. 108, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2011, pp. 581-591.
40. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary, American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, 2008, 473 pp.
41. Ghali, A., and Elgabry, A., Tests on Concrete Slab Column Connec-
tions with Shear-Stud Reinforcement Subjected to Shear-Moment Transfer,
ACI Structural Journal, V. 84, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1987, pp. 433-442.
42. Marzouk, H.; Emam, M.; and Hilal, M., Effect of High-Strength
Concrete Columns on the Behavior of Slab-Column Connections, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 93, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1996, pp. 545-554.
43. Hawkins, N.; Bao, A.; and Yamazaki, J., Moment Transfer from
Concrete Slabs to Columns, ACI Structural Journal, V. 86, No. 6, Nov.-
Dec. 1989, pp. 705-716.
44. Van Der Voet, A.; Dilger, W.; and Ghali, A., Concrete Flat Plates
with Well-Anchored Shear Reinforcement Elements, Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering, V. 9, No. 1, 1982, pp. 107-114.