Detailing Corner

Truss Bars (Bend Type 15)

ince 1946,1 the reinforcing bar fabrication

industry has used a common set of bar bend types
to describe and fabricate various reinforcing bar
configurations. Each bend type is identified with a
number and each segment of the bend type requiring a
dimension is represented with a letter. Figure 1 shows
examples of the first nine typical bar bend types
used today.2
Bend Type 15 (Fig. 2), also known as a truss bar or a
galloping truss bar, requires a series of bends. Although
truss bars are now rarely used in reinforced concrete
building construction, a few state departments of
transportation (DOTs) continue to use this bar
configuration for flexural reinforcement for bridge decks
(Fig. 3). In this months Detailing Corner, we discuss the
early beginnings and some of the issues concerning truss
bars, and we suggest an alternate bar configuration.

truss bars in Fig. 4(b) through (d). Usually, straight bars

were combined with bent-up bars, as shown in Fig. 4(b)
and (c).
The inclined portion of a truss bar was typically bent up
at an angle of between 30 and 45 degrees from the horizontal. It was recognized that having a bend that was too sharp
would result in high compressive stresses in the concrete
within the bend area.
Wherever practical, the top segment was placed to be
continuous over the supports of multiple spans. To provide
the required amount of shear reinforcement within a
given area along the member, designers used multiple
small-diameter bars, bent up at various locations, rather

Early Beginnings and Designing with

Truss Bars

Franois Hennebique (1842-1921) was a French engineer

who patented a reinforced construction system in 1892 in
which separate elements such as beams and columns were
integrated into a single monolithic element.3 Hennebique
was likely the first person to use stirrups and bent-up bars
in reinforced concrete construction.
The basic premise of truss bars and bent-up bars was to
use one piece of reinforcing steel to provide reinforcement
in various locations of the member:
A horizontal top segment for negative-moment flexural
reinforcement near a support;
An inclined segment for shear reinforcement near a
support; and
A horizontal bottom segment for positive moment
flexural reinforcement near the midspan.
Figure 4 shows various layouts of reinforcement, with

DETAILING CORNER

Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B,

Details of Concrete ReinforcementConstructibility, has developed forums
dealing with constructibility issues for
reinforced concrete. To assist the Committee with disseminating this information, staff at the Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a regular series of
articles. If you have a detailing question you would like
to see covered in a future article, please send an e-mail
to Neal Anderson, CRSIs Vice President of Engineering, at nanderson@crsi.org with the subject line
Detailing Corner.

Concrete international july 2013

45

Detailing Corner
than using fewer large-diameter bars. Vertical stirrups were
also added to the reinforcement layout.

Tests on Truss Bars as Shear

Reinforcement

Tests conducted by Regan and Khan5 indicated the

following behavioral issues with truss bars used as
shear reinforcement:
Truss bars are somewhat less effective than vertical
stirrups as shear reinforcement;
If truss bars are used, they should be used in
combination with the minimum amount of vertical
stirrups as required by code; and
From strain measurements, 45-degree bends at the
top and bottom of the inclined portions provide
relatively little anchorage, especially at high shear forces.
Therefore, the horizontal portions should be detailed
to provide, as a minimum, the full tension
development length.

Issues Concerning Truss Bars

Truss bars can be a challenge to fabricateproduction

can even raise safety concerns. They also create tolerance
issues during fabrication and while placing in the field.
During the bending operation in the fabricators shop, a
truss bar becomes more difficult to handle as it is advanced
along the bending table and the length of bar extending
past the bend point causes the bar to sweep over a
progressively wider arc. As a safety precaution, fabrication
operations are typically slowed down to reduce the
possibility of injuries among shop personnel.
Reinforcing bar fabrication tolerances vary depending
on the specific segment in the bend type and the bar size,
but the tolerance is generally 1 in. (25 mm) for bar sizes
No. 3 through No. 11 (No. 10 through No. 32). This is also
the tolerance on the overall length of a bent bar. As more
bends are incorporated in the bend configuration, variances
in the dimensions will accumulate and the 1 in. (25 mm)
tolerance becomes more difficult to meet. In an effort to
stay within fabrication tolerances, some fabrication software
programs will determine the running distances from the far
left end of a truss bar (origin line) to certain key bend
points, as shown along the bottom in Fig. 5. By matching
these calculated distances with the distances measured
on the fabricated bar, the fabricator is able to make

Fig. 1: Examples of bar bend Types 1 to 9 (after Reference 2)

46

july 2013 Concrete international

Fig. 2: Continuous truss bar (Bend Type 15) (after Reference 1)

Detailing Corner

Fig. 3: Example of truss bars used in a bridge deck. To maintain cover tolerance (normally +0 in. [+0 mm] for bridge decks), top
horizontal segments may need to be shifted slightly relative to the bottom horizontal segments

adjustments, when necessary, to stay within the overall

length tolerance. Note that the series of distances in Fig. 5
are measured to alternate bend points. In some shops,
distances may be measured to every bend point to ensure
the overall length tolerance is met.
Truss bars are typically supported on the bottom
segments using slab bolsters. To keep the truss bars upright,
the top segments are tied to other reinforcement such as
transverse top bars. Because the segments of the bar
configuration are attached to each other, any adjustment in
position for one segment can impact the position of the
whole bar and the other segments. This can make it difficult
to meet placing tolerances.
Its worth noting that some State DOTs specify a 1/2 in.
(15 mm) tolerance on the height (the H dimension in
Fig. 2) of truss bars. This tight tolerance allows the top cover

to be maintained (for protection of the bars against

corrosion) without having to laterally shift the top segments relative to the bottom segments.

Length Limitations

The overall length of a truss bar is limited by two factors:

the stock length of the reinforcing bars stored at the fabricators shop and transportation length restrictions. Although
stock length varies by shop, the maximum stock length for
reinforcing bars is generally 60 ft (18.3 m). From the
standpoint of transporting truss bars by truck, the overall
length is generally limited to a maximum of 45 to 47 ft
(13.7 to 14.3 m).
If the required length must exceed these limits, two or
more truss bars must be lap-spliced in the field. Unless this
arrangement has been covered on the structural drawings,
Concrete international july 2013

47

Detailing Corner
the detailer normally will issue a Request for Information
(RFI) to the licensed design professional to approve lapping
multiple truss bars. The engineers response must also
indicate where the bars are to be lapped: at the bottom D
segments or at the top E segments (Fig. 2). An example
RFI would be:
The truss bars (Bend Type 15) required in the bridge deck
cannot be fabricated in one piece as shown on the contract
drawings. We intend to supply multiple truss bars (15s) lapped
together to achieve the required overall length (O dimension).
Please verify this is acceptable and if so, provide a sketch
indicating how the truss bars need to be lapped. This sketch
should depict lap length and lap position (top legs or
bottom legs).
Once the RFI is approved, the specific configuration
will be included on the fabricators placing drawings to
make it clear to all concerned how the truss bars are to
be lapped.

Alternative to Truss Bars

Apparently, truss bars are still used in bridge decks

because of the perceived cost savings in steel material and,
more succinctly, the placing costs; placing half of the bars
is viewed to be a cost savings. However, this notion discounts the fact that tolerances are more difficult to main-

tain, both in fabrication and in placement, and shop

production can be slowed.
Rather than using truss bars, the engineer should
consider using separate pieces of reinforcing bars to provide
the top and bottom reinforcement. Bars can include
standard hooks at the discontinuous end spans if needed
for anchorage. If reinforcement is required for shear, it can
be provided by vertical stirrups. This simpler, alternate
arrangement avoids the fabrication, transportation, and
placing issues that have been covered herein.

Summary

Although truss bars have declined in use, a number of

State DOTs still include them in their deck slab designs for
flexural reinforcement. Using straight or hooked reinforcing
bar pieces and vertical stirrups instead of truss bars would
help alleviate a number of issues, including maintaining
fabrication and placing tolerances. More importantly,
avoiding the use of truss bars can result in a safer
environment in the fabricators shop.
References

1. Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315, Proposed Manual of Standard

Practice for Detailing Reinforced Concrete Structures (ACI 315-46),
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1946, 55 pp.
2. Manual of Standard Practice, Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute,
Schaumburg, IL, 2009, 144 pp.
3. Turneare, F.E., and Maurer, E.R., Principles of Reinforced Concrete
Construction, first edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1907,
317 pp.
4. Sutherland, H., and Reese, R.C., Introduction to Reinforced Concrete Design, second edition, third printing, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York, 1945, 559 pp.
5. Regan, P. E., and Khan, M. H., Bent-Up Bars as Shear Reinforcement (SP 42-11), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI,
1974, pp. 249-266.
Thanks to Robbie Hall of Gerdau, and Anthony Felder and Neal
Anderson of CRSI for providing the information in this article.

Fig. 4: Different arrangements of reinforcing steel, with and

without truss bars (after Reference 4)

Selected for reader interest by the editors.

Fig. 5: Truss bar with distances measured from left end to key bend points (Note: 1 ft = 0.3048 m; 1 in. = 25.4 mm)

48

july 2013 Concrete international