Concept

Cracked section — where it appears

A section with its tension zone deleted, whose neutral axis is the root of a quadratic rather than the centroid of an area. Its stiffness is a third or less of the uncracked value, and the hogging region of a continuous beam cracks first — so a real structure has redistributed some moment before any load reaches the design value.

Named by 12 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The neutral axis is wherever the first moment vanishes. A 300 by 500 section with 1200 mm² of steel at a depth of 450, carrying 150 kNm after the tension side has cracked. The neutral axis is no longer at mid-depth: it has risen to 137.0 mm from the top, which is where the first moment of the compression zone plus the transformed steel vanishes. The compression is 18.0 N/mm² at the top fibre and the steel carries 309 N/mm²; the resulting couple is 371 kN on a lever arm of 404 mm, which multiplies back to the 150 kNm applied. The uncracked section would have had 3422×10⁶ mm⁴ against the cracked 1139×10⁶ — a loss of 67% of the stiffness.

When half the section has given up

Bending theory puts the neutral axis through the centroid. That is a consequence, not a rule — and when the tension side cracks, the same reasoning moves the axis somewhere else entirely.

sections · Bending stress
The deflection that arrives years late. The multiplier on a concrete member's deflection under a sustained load, against time. The elastic deflection arrives on the day the load does and is the 1.0 at the left. After a year it has been multiplied by 3.00, after five years by 3.29, and it approaches 3.38. Nothing has been added to the load and nothing about the strength has changed: this is a serviceability failure arriving on a structure that passed every strength check on the day it was built.

The deflection that arrives three years late

A concrete beam that passes every check on the day it is built goes on deflecting for a decade, and ends up three times where it started. Nothing about the load changed, and nothing about the strength was ever in question.

materials · Creep
The same strain, two moduli, and a width multiplied to say so. A timber section with a steel plate in it, carrying 20.0 kNm. Plane sections stay plane, so the strain at a height is the same in both materials; Hooke's law then puts the stresses in the ratio of the moduli, which here is 19.09. Multiplying the stiffer material's WIDTH by that ratio gives a fictitious section of one material with the same neutral axis and the same forces — 595.2×10⁶ mm⁴ of it, against 351.0 for the same shape with the moduli ignored. The steel plate is 3.8% of the area and carries 43% of the moment, at 96 N/mm² against the timber's 5.0. The transform is not an approximation: it is compatibility and Hooke's law written down.

A section made of two materials, one of them pretended away

Multiplying a material's width by the ratio of the moduli produces a fictitious section of one material with the right neutral axis and the right forces. It is not a trick — it is compatibility and Hooke's law written down — and it says a stiff material takes what its modulus asks for.

sections · Transformed section
One of these two curves is a stiffness and the other is a statement of statics. The torque a spandrel beam carries, against how much of its torsional stiffness is left. The rising curve is compatibility torsion — a floor beam framing into the side of the spandrel, which shares its fixed-end moment of 197 kNm between the spandrel's torsional stiffness and its own flexural one. Uncracked, the spandrel takes 51% of it, or 100 kNm; at a quarter of that stiffness it takes 21%, or 41 kNm, and the floor beam picks up what was shed. The flat line is equilibrium torsion — a canopy cantilevering 2.2 m off the same spandrel, whose 116 kNm is fixed by statics and contains no stiffness at all. The first can be designed away by accepting a rotation. The second cannot be designed away by anything.

The torsion that goes away if you let it

A spandrel beam attracts a torque in proportion to its own torsional stiffness. Crack it and the stiffness falls by a factor of four, the torque falls with it, and nothing has failed — because the floor beam it was competing with picks up exactly what was shed. A canopy hung off the same spandrel is a different animal entirely.

internal-forces · Compatibility torsion
The cut that severs the stirrups is the cut that counts them. A cracked web drawn as the truss it has become: a tension chord along the bottom, a compression chord along the top, concrete struts between the cracks and stirrups crossing them. The free body is a cut parallel to the cracks, which over a lever arm of 495 mm severs z·cot θ/s = 8.3 stirrups at cot θ = 2.5. Every one of them is at yield, so the shear is their number times their strength, and flattening the crack raises the count rather than the strength. The same cut passes through the bottom chord, which is where the chord force the moment diagram does not contain comes from.

The beam that becomes a truss

Once a web has cracked in shear there is no shear stress field in it any more. There are concrete struts, two chords and whatever crosses the cracks, and the angle of those cracks is not a property of the material — it is something the designer chooses, and every quantity in the beam moves when it changes.

internal-forces · Shear truss analogy
The beam is stiffer than its cracked section and softer than its gross one. Moment against mid-span deflection for a 300 × 550 mm beam spanning 8.0 m, with the two bounds it lies between. The uncracked line is what the gross transformed section gives; the cracked line is what the section at a crack gives; and the curve between them is the member, because between the cracks the concrete is still carrying tension and the average curvature is not either section's. At the service load the deflection is 23.2 mm — span over 345 — against 8.3 uncracked and 25.2 fully cracked, a factor of 3.03 between the bounds. The interpolation ζ = 1 − β(M_cr/M)² sits it 88 per cent of the way across, and β falls from one to a half under sustained or repeated load because the bond that does the dragging deteriorates.

Stiffer than its cracked section says

At a crack the concrete below the neutral axis has gone and the steel carries the tension alone. Between the cracks it has not gone — bond drags it back into tension, the steel strain drops, and the curvature averaged over a length of beam is neither section's.

deflection · Tension stiffening
Eight slices is enough, and nobody would have guessed it. The error in a cracked section's moment capacity against the number of strips it was integrated with, for a 300 × 450 mm section with 1200 mm² of steel, measured against the same computation at 2048 strips. The point of the fibre method is that it contains no formula: slice the section, give every strip the strain the assumed curvature puts it at, move the neutral axis until the axial force balances, and sum. It handles a cracked section, a confined one, a prestressed one and a composite one with the same twenty lines. The discretisation costs 1.4% at 2 strips and 0.088% at 8 — and the convergence is not smooth, because what the error actually depends on is where the neutral axis falls relative to a strip boundary rather than on the strip count as such.

The section calculation with no formula in it

Every ordinary section result is a closed form, and each was derived once for one arrangement of material. Slice the section instead, give each strip the strain a curvature puts it at, and move the neutral axis until the axial force balances — and the same twenty lines answer for a cracked section, a confined one, a prestressed one and a composite one, having been told nothing about any of them.

sections · Fibre model
The neutral axis is wherever the first moment vanishes. A 300 by 600 section with 1800 mm² of steel at a depth of 540, carrying 250 kNm after the tension side has cracked. The neutral axis is no longer at mid-depth: it has risen to 234.5 mm from the top, which is where the first moment of the compression zone plus the transformed steel vanishes. The compression is 15.4 N/mm² at the top fibre and the steel carries 301 N/mm²; the resulting couple is 541 kN on a lever arm of 462 mm, which multiplies back to the 250 kNm applied. The uncracked section would have had 6673×10⁶ mm⁴ against the cracked 3809×10⁶ — a loss of 43% of the stiffness.

Where the steel is, not how much of it

A section in bending resists a moment with a couple, and a couple is a force times a distance. The force is bought — it is an area of steel at a stress. The distance is free, decided by where the bars were put, and it is the variable almost nobody optimises because it does not appear on an order.

sections · Lever arm
The least reliable number in the material decides the answer, briefly. What a twenty per cent error in the concrete's tensile strength does to a computed deflection, against how far past cracking the beam is. Well past the cracking moment it does almost nothing — at 1.9 times M_cr the spread is 56 per cent — because the section is nearly fully cracked and the interpolation has run out. Just above cracking it does everything: at 1.19 times M_cr the same twenty per cent moves the deflection by 3658 per cent. Tensile strength is the property with the widest scatter and the least direct test, and a beam designed to sit near its cracking moment has put the answer on it.

The curvature nobody applied

Concrete shrinks as it dries, by about half a millimetre in every metre. In a symmetrically reinforced member that is a shortening and nothing else. In a member with more steel in one face than the other — which is every beam and every slab — the steel holds one side back and the section bends, with no load on it at all.

deflection · Shrinkage curvature
The middle third, computed. The kern of a 300 × 600 mm rectangle, computed by asking, for every direction, how far the resultant can move before the far face would be pulled. It reaches ±100.0 mm vertically and ±50.0 mm horizontally, which are h/6 and b/6 exactly, and the region between is a rhombus rather than the ellipse the two numbers suggest — a resultant on a diagonal has less room than either axis allows.

The strength thrown away on purpose

Masonry, concrete and soil are all analysed as though they had no tensile strength whatever. Each of them has some. The decision to set it to zero is the single most consequential modelling assumption in the subject, it is safe for one kind of check and unsafe for another, and almost nothing that uses it says which.

materials · No tension
A strength with no mechanism in it, made of four. The shear a member carries with no links in it, split into the mechanisms that carry it, against the member's effective depth on a logarithmic axis. The three bands are calibrated to Taylor's measured shares at one 300 mm × 500 mm member and are then evaluated everywhere else, so the shape of the total is a prediction. Aggregate interlock is the band that dies: it depends on how tightly the crack faces are held together, crack width grows with member depth, and it falls from 62% of a shallow member's strength to 22% of a deep one's. That decay is the whole of the size effect, and the dashed line is the design code's fitted k = 1 + √(200/d), which knows nothing about interlock and falls by a factor of 1.52 where the model falls by 2.05 over the same twentyfold range. Dowel action is why the expression contains the flexural reinforcement ratio, which nothing in a truss analogy would predict.

The strength with no mechanism in it

A concrete member with no links in it carries shear, and the expression that says how much is three variables raised to fitted powers with a size term in front. There is no free body anywhere in it. What it is fitting is a competition between four things that carry shear across a crack, and only one of them explains why a deeper member is worse at it.

internal-forces · Concrete shear
The dimension the capacity rides on is not a drawn dimension. Moment capacity of a 225 mm slab against the cover to the reinforcement. The line is very nearly straight, because capacity is A_s·f_yd·z and z is about 0.9d — so the capacity is proportional to a dimension that is not on the drawing. What is on the drawing is the overall depth, and the effective depth is what the cover, the link and half a bar diameter leave of it: 225 − 30 − 0 − 8 = 187 mm here. Every one of those three is a site tolerance rather than a design decision. Ten millimetres of bar position is 5.7% of this slab's capacity and 1.8% of a 600 mm beam's — the same workmanship costs 3.0 times as much in the shallow member, and the shallow member is the one whose steel is walked on before the pour.

The dimension nobody can measure

Every flexural capacity in reinforced concrete is proportional to the effective depth, and the effective depth is not on the drawing. It is what is left of the thickness after a cover, a link and half a bar diameter have been taken off it — and each of those is a site tolerance. In a slab, ten millimetres of workmanship is six per cent of the strength.

sections · Effective depth

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Modular ratioServiceabilityBondCreepLever armNeutral axisPlane sectionsReinforcementSecond moment of areaTransformed sectionCurvatureDeflection

All concepts