Design Guidance Note
No. 2
Critical Steel Ratios for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures
Critical steel ratios should be used for the design of reinforced concrete elements that are subjected to high restraint, e.g. joint-
free construction or walls that are cast on large foundations. This paper describes the procedures for calculating critical steel
ratios. It highlights that these ratios are now approximately 3% to 6% higher than previous design guidance. It also stresses the
importance of controlling cracking due to restrained movement of mature concrete
CONTROL OF CRACKING BY REINFORCEMENT
Basic Principles
Concrete tends to contract as its temperature drops from the
hydration peak to ambient. This contraction starts at early-age and
continues through to long-term. Shrinkage can also increase the
amount of contraction significantly.
The basic principles for controlling cracking by reinforcement are
illustrated in Fig 1. If the concrete is restrained so that contraction
cannot occur, tensile stress gradually builds up. When the tensile
stress exceeds the capacity of the concrete section, a crack occurs.
Movement at the crack relieves some of the stress but as the
contraction continues the stress also continues to build up. The
reinforcement will yield if it is weaker than the cracking force and all
future contraction movement will be concentrated at the crack. The
crackwidth will gradually increase with continued contraction (Fig 1a).
a. Too Little Reinforcement b. Enough Reinforcement
Fig 1. Control of Cracking by Reinforcement1
However, if the reinforcement is stronger than the cracking force, it
will remain elastic and a new crack will form at the next weakest
cross-section, as contraction increases. This process continues until
enough cracks have formed to absorb the total amount of contraction
(Fig 1b). The cracking in the first model is uncontrolled, but it is
controlled in the second model.
Fundamental Criteria
The amount of reinforcement required to control cracking of concrete
is subject to two criteria, namely:
a. Controlling cracking by ensuring that the reinforcement does not
yield and therefore distributes the cracks evenly.
b. Limiting crackwidths to a specified value.
Only the first criterion is discussed in this design guide. The
procedures for limiting crackwidths are described in a separate paper.
Control of Cracking by Reinforcement
The ratio of reinforcement to control cracking can be derived from
first principles by making the strength of the reinforcement at least
equal to the strength of the concrete as follows:
Reinforcement capacity, Fs= As.fs (1)
Uncracked concrete capacity, Fc= Ac.fct [1+ρ(αe –1)] (2)
Equating (1) and (2) and neglecting the term ρ(αe –1) as small gives,
As.fs = Ac.fct, which results in:
ρ = fct/fs (3)
where ρ = reinforcement ratio, As/Ac
fct = tensile strength of concrete
fs = yield strength of reinforcement
αe = modular ratio
TENSILE STRENGTH OF CONCRETE
Early-Age Concrete
The early-age (3-day) tensile strength, fct,ea, may be estimated from
Eqns (3.1) and (3.2) of EC22: namely:
fct,ea = (βcc(t))α.fctm = 0.598fctm (4)
where fctm = mean value of axial tensile strength of mature concrete
Hyder Consulting
PC File Ref: DesignGuidanceNoteNo-02-0A
βcc and α are coefficients based on the age of concrete
Mature Concrete
The tensile strength of mature concrete is specified by EC22 as:
fctm= 0.30(fck)0.67 for fck ≤ C50/60 (5a)
fctm= 2.12ln[1+(fck+8)/10] for fck > C50/60 (5b)
where fctm = tensile strength of mature concrete
fck = specified 28-day cylinder strength
CRITICAL STEEL RATIO
Probability of Cracking
Uncontrolled cracking of concrete due to restrained movement can
result in wide cracks with serious structural implications. Therefore,
the occurrence of this type of cracking should be designed to be
relatively improbable. The criterion suggested here is at least the
95% confidence limit, i.e., less than 1:20 failures.
Critical Steel Ratio for Early-Age Concrete
The early-age critical steel ratio, ρcrit, derived from Eqns (3) and (4)
is:
ρcrit = fct,ea/fyk = 0.598fctm/fyk (6)
where fct,ea = early-age tensile strength of concrete
A full probability analysis, which accounts for variations in concrete
tensile strength and the distribution of reinforcement yield strength, is
presented in C6603. The equation used in the C6603 analysis for the
concrete tensile strength is:
fct,ea = fct(3).kis.ks.ka (7)
2
where fct(3) = 3-day tensile strength in accordance with EC2
kis = factor for in-situ effects, including temperature rise
ks = factor for reduced tensile strength under sustained
loading
ka = factor to allow for cracking at ages other than 3 days
The C6603 probability analysis shows that the values for critical steel
ratios derived from Eqn (6) for early-age concrete are safe at
confidence levels better than 98%.
Correction Factors for Mature Concrete
Alexander1 and C6603 suggest that a reduction factor of 0.8 be
applied to fctm to allow for the reduction of concrete tensile strength
under sustained loading. The resulting critical steel ratio for mature
concrete derived from Eqns (3) and (5) is:
ρ'crit = fct/fs = 0.8fctm/fyk (8)
Comparing the values derived from Eqn (8) with those derived from
the full probability analysis presented in C6603 indicates that the Eqn
(8) values for mature concrete are safe at confidence levels better
than 98%.
DESIGN GUIDANCE
Critical Steel Ratios
Values of the critical steel ratio for various concrete strengths derived
from Eqns (4) to (8) are shown in Table 1.
Design Process
The design process for elements subject to direct tension has been
consolidated into the flowchart shown in Fig 2. The flowchart shows
that the risk of early-age cracking should be assessed first and once
this is proved to be satisfactory, then the risk of late-life cracking
should be assessed.
Page 1 of 3
Issue 01: Jan-2007
 Design Guidance Note No. 2 (contd)

Specified Strength Class, fck/fck,cube 28/35 35/45 40/50 50/60 60/75 70/85 80/95 90/105
Early-Age Tensile Strength, fct,ea = 0.592fctm 1.67 1.94 2.13 2.47 2.61 2.76 2.89 3.02
ρcrit = fct,ea/fyk 0.335% 0.389% 0.425% 0.494% 0.521% 0.552% 0.579% 0.604%
Late-Life Tensile Strength, fctm 2.80 3.25 3.55 4.13 4.35 4.61 4.84 5.04
ρ'crit = 0.8fctm/fyk 0.486% 0.565% 0.618% 0.717% 0.757% 0.802% 0.842% 0.877%
Table 1. Early-Age and Mature Concrete Tensile Strengths and Associated Critical Steel Ratios (better than 98% Fractiles)

Code requirements
Clients requirements Establish the requirements
• Durability
• Aesthetics for crack width
• Tightness class

Define allowable crack widths for

early age and long-term effects

Element
geometry Restraint
Assess the risk and
extent of early-age cracking
Concrete Casting
mix conditions

Cracking likely

Cracking
unlikely Check ρcrit using early-age tensile
Strength - increase if necessary

Crack width
Assess risk of
less than Calculate early-age crack width
late life cracking
specified

Crack width greater than specified

Check ρcrit using
late life tensile
Strength - increase Review options Review options
if necessary

Crack width OPTIONS

Calculate late
greater than
life crack width
specified Increase reinforcement

Reduce T1 by mix modification or cooling

Crack width
less than
Reduce αc and improve εctu by specification of
specified aggregate type

Reduce restraint by adjusting element size,

DESIGN pour sequence, movement joints
COMPLETE
Fig 2. Flowchart showing the Design Process for the Control of Early-Age and Late-Life Cracking in Concrete3

The key omission from current codes of practice or industry-standard
publications is where ρ is greater than ρcrit but less than ρ′crit. Then
the cracks which were controlled for early-age contractions could
become uncontrolled for all further contraction movement. However,
if ρ is greater than ρ′crit, new cracks form in addition to the original
ones and both old and new cracks are controlled. This omission
should be addressed by the publication of CIRIA Report C6603.
KEY QUESTIONS
The key questions raised by Alexander1 are summarised below.
Are we misled by BS 8110?
In BS 81104, the only references to minimum reinforcement are
0.13%bh in bending and 0.45%Ac in direct tension. The 0.13%bh
ratio is significantly less than the Table 1 values. Furthermore, the
0.45%Ac ratio is generally thought to apply to structural tension
members such as hangers and not to members where the tensile
stress arises from temperature or shrinkage contraction. Neither of
these ratios are related to the tensile strength of the concrete,
whereas Eqn (3) shows that it should be directly proportional to it.
A comparison can also be made with the design of continuous
reinforced concrete pavements, for which the Highways Agency5
specifies 0.6% reinforcement in a single layer at the mid-depth. This
is similar to the critical steel ratio in Table 1 for typical UK concrete
strengths.
Do We get a False Sense of Security from BS 8007?
BS 80076 considers design to resist early-age contractions by using
Eqn (3) to derive the critical steel ratio, with fy = 460 MPa, but it
does not describe how the early-age tensile strength of concrete, fct,

Hyder Consulting Middle East Page 2 of 3

PC File Ref: DesignGuidanceNoteNo-02-0A Issue 01: Jan-2007
 Design Guidance Note No. 2 (contd)
6
is established. However, for Grade 28/35 concrete, BS 8007 uses fct with uncontrolled cracking, but this may be due to the high ratios of
= 1.6 MPa, which leads to a critical steel ratio: steel provided to satisfy the 0.2 mm crackwidth criterion.
Nonetheless, it would be prudent to design for fck/fcu = 8/10 MPa
ρcrit = 1.6/460 = 0.35%
above the specified value to allow for mean strengths achieved on
The early-age analysis, based on Eqn (6), results in percentages in site.
the third row of Table 1 which are similar to BS 80076. However, the
A NEW DESIGN PHILOSOPHY?
analysis for mature concrete results in Table 1 values that are
approximately 40% higher than 80076. There is no new design philosophy. The Hyder approach in the
Middle East remains unchanged. This approach is to provide the
BS 80076 is written for reservoirs, i.e., tanks full of water.
minimum concrete thickness needed for satisfactory structural
Consequently, there should be small temperature variations and little
performance at ultimate limit state - the 250 mm thickness from BS
long-term shrinkage, indeed there is often long-term expansion due
81026 is usually a reasonable guess for basement walls. Crack
to the presence of water. It is assumed implicitly in BS80076 that
control reinforcement in accordance with this design guide should
subsequent contractions will be less than the relief of early-age
then be provided. Critical steel ratios are obtained from the third row
contractions by creep. The important behaviour of mature concrete
of Table 1 if early-age contractions are restrained or the fifth row if
in piled raft foundations, basements and similar structures is
the mature concrete will be restrained.
therefore ignored.
DESIGN GUIDANCE
Poor Guidance for Basements and Similar Structures?
Use the EC22 equations as modified below:
In the UK, British Standards 80076, 81027 and 81104 all contribute
relevant material, but even so piled raft foundations; basements and a. Calculate the early-age critical steel ratio, ρcrit, from Eqn (6):
similar structures are not properly covered. In particular, the
ρcrit = 0.598fctm/fyk (6)
importance of considering contraction in mature concrete is ignored.
Industry guides such as CIRIA reports 918 and 1399 similarly miss b. Calculate the late-life critical steel ratio, ρ'crit, from Eqn (8):
this important point. The minimum percentages of reinforcement in
ρ'crit = 0.8fctm/fyk (8)
mature concrete are shown in the fifth row of Table 1. It is evident
that they are much higher than current general practice. c. Design for concrete strengths fck/fcu = 8/10 MPa above the
specified value to allow for mean strengths achieved on site.
Good News from EC2?
REFERENCES
Clause 7.3.2 of EC22 includes a provision for minimum
reinforcement, “if crack control is required”. It presents a formula 1. Alexander, A J, ‘Why does our concrete still crack and leak?’, The
which reduces to Eqn (3) for rectangular sections in direct tension. Structural Engineer, 84, No 23/24, 5 Dec 2006
The full probability analysis presented in C6603 demonstrates that 2. EC2, EN 1992-1-1, ‘Eurocode 2 Design of concrete structures
critical steel ratios derived from Eqns (6) and (8) are safe at Part 1: General rules and rules for buildings’, British Standards
confidence levels better than 98% for early-age movements and Institution, 2004
late-life movements. Consequently, the EC22 equations are safe, 3. C660, ‘Early-age thermal crack control in concrete’, Report C660,
although Eqn (8) shows that EC22 may overestimate the critical steel Construction Industry Research and Information Association,
ratio for mature concrete by 25%, if the 0.8 reduction factor for Draft of report to be published Feb 2007
sustained loading is not used. 4. BS 8110-1, ‘Structural use of concrete, Part 1 Code of practice
for design and construction’, British Standards Institution, 1997
Why are Anderson’s1 Steel Ratios High?
5. ‘Design manual for roads and bridges’, V7, section 2, part 3,
The critical steel ratios derived by Anderson1 are approximately 28% notes on figure 2.5, Highways Agency
higher than those shown in Table 1. Anderson1 increases the 6. BS 8007, ‘Design of concrete structures for retaining aqueous
concrete tensile strength to change the value from mean to 95% liquids’, British Standards Institution, 1987
fractile. However, he neglects the reduction in concrete tensile 7. BS 8102, ‘Code of practice for protection of structures against
strength under sustained loading. C6602 suggests that a reduction water from the ground’, British Standards Institution, 1990
factor, ks = 0.8, be used for sustained loading for early-age 8. CIRIA 91, ‘Early-age thermal crack control in concrete (revised
movements. It also suggests that this be reduced to 0.6 for late-life edition)’, Report 91, Construction Industry Research and
movements. The lack of commensurate reduction factors in Information Association, 1992
Anderson’s1 paper probably explains the higher critical steel ratios. 9. CIRIA 139, ‘Water-resisting basement construction: a guide’,
Report 139, Construction Industry Research and Information
Do We have Problems with Current Hyder Designs?
Association, 1995
Current Hyder design practice is based on Eqn (3) using yield
strength, fy = 460 MPa, and the following equation for the early-age REVISION HISTORY
strength: Issue Description By Date
0.7
fct,ea= 0.12(fcu) (9)
A comparison between current Hyder practice and Table 1 indicates
that the Hyder values are 3-6% lower than those suggested in Table 0A Draft for comment AGMF Jan 2007
1. However, it appears that the 0.2 mm crackwidth design criterion
has resulted in steel ratios that are similar to those stipulated in
Table 1.
For example, the steel ratios provided for Grade 35/45 concrete for
Dubai Festival City vary from 0.47% for areas of low strain to 0.60-
0.90% for areas of high strain. This indicates that there should be
few problems associated with existing Hyder designs that use the
0.2 mm crackwidth criterion. Furthermore, in the Middle East, early-
age movements tend to dominate. The early-age load combination,
(high) contraction/(low) fct,ea, usually exceeds the late-life load
combination, (relatively low) contraction/(high) fctm.
Should We Design for a Maximum Concrete Strength?
Average compressive strength on site tends to be 8/10 MPa above
the specified minimum. This suggests that an upper limit should be
used for crack-control design. Table 1 indicates that the minimum
reinforcement ratio will be underestimated if the compressive
strength is too high. However, Hyder have had few problems to date

Hyder Consulting Middle East Page 3 of 3

PC File Ref: DesignGuidanceNoteNo-02-0A Issue 01: Jan-2007