Structural Engineering & Statics
where the load goes
Concept

Size effect — where it appears

The fall in nominal strength as geometrically similar specimens are made larger, which contradicts the idea that a strength is a material property. It exists where failure is brittle and disappears where it is plastic, so reinforcement removes it along with the brittleness.

Named by 20 essays across 5 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A check made on a perimeter, not on a section. One bay of a flat slab, 7.2 m square, on a 400 × 400 mm column. The heavy closed line is the control perimeter, 2d from the column face with its corners rounded at that radius — 4427 mm long against 1600 mm round the column itself. The shaded area inside it delivers no shear across it and is subtracted from the load; everything outside arrives through the perimeter. At 12 kN/m² that is 604 kN across 4427 × 225 mm, a shear stress of 0.606 N/mm² against a resistance of 0.658.

A check made on a perimeter, not on a section

Every shear check in this collection is made on a plane cut through a member. A slab sitting on a column has no such plane, because the shear leaves in every direction at once — so the check is made on a closed line, and a line grows with the column while the load grows with the square of the bay.

internal-forces · Punching shear A strength that is a property of the specimen. Nominal strength against size for geometrically similar specimens of one material. On the left the specimen is too small for a crack to run and the strength is a plateau — a plastic limit, and the regime laboratory specimens sit in. On the right a crack releases more energy than it consumes as soon as it starts and the strength falls as the inverse square root of size, which is the regime real structures sit in. The turn happens at D₀ = 120 mm. A 100 mm specimen reads 3.10 N/mm² and a 1500 mm member of the same material carries 1.14: the test overestimates the structure by a factor of 2.71.

The bigger one is the weaker one

Two geometrically similar beams of the same concrete should fail at the same nominal stress, because a strength is supposed to be a material property. They do not. The large one fails at less, and the reason is that a crack releases energy in proportion to a volume and consumes it in proportion to an area.

materials · Size effect Deflection goes as the fourth power of the span. Deflection against span for a constant load intensity and section, with two slower relationships drawn faintly behind it for comparison: the load itself, which grows in proportion to the span, and the bending moment, which grows as its square. Doubling the span multiplies the deflection by sixteen, while the moment only quadruples.

The weight that has to be known before it can be found

Every other load arrives from outside and can be looked up. A structure's own weight depends on how big it is, and how big it is depends on the load — so the first calculation on any project is a fixed point, and the fraction of a member spent carrying itself turns out to be the square of its span as a fraction of a span it can never reach.

equilibrium · Dead load The characteristic strength, which nothing was measured at. A lognormal population of strengths with a mean of 30 N/mm² and a coefficient of variation of 0.15. The characteristic value is the 5% fractile — 23.2 N/mm², which is 77% of the mean, and which need not be the strength of any specimen that was tested. Dividing it by 1.50 gives 15.5, and the shaded sliver below that is the fraction of the population that would fail to reach it: 6.4e-6, or one in 155,818. A factor applied to a fractile is not covering the scatter, because the scatter has already been spent getting to the fractile.

The strength no specimen had

A material property is written into a calculation as a number, and a material does not have one. It has a population of strengths with a mean and a spread, and the number used is a low fractile of that population — a value that need not have been measured, that most of the material exceeds, and whose distance below the mean is decided entirely by the scatter.

materials · Characteristic strength 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 base plate, and when the bolts start working. A 500 × 500 mm plate carrying 600 kN and 180 kN·m, so the resultant sits 300 mm from the centre against a kern of 83.33 mm. The plate is in bolts engaged: bearing over 150.88 mm at a peak of 20 N/mm², with the holding-down bolts carrying 154.42 kN. The plate lifts at 50 kN·m and crushes at 126 kN·m, and the bolts are not needed until 150 kN·m.

The failure that is in the concrete

An anchor bolt is a steel component and its capacity is usually decided by something else entirely — a cone of concrete pulled out around it, failing in tension, in a material every other calculation on the project has assumed cannot take tension at all. The exponent in the capacity says so: it is not the square the geometry implies.

connections · Anchor breakout 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 A bearing capacity is a mechanism, and here it is. Prandtl's collapse mechanism under a 3.0 m footing in a soil of 32° friction. A rigid wedge is driven down with the footing at 61° to the horizontal; a fan of radial shear turns the stress through exactly ninety degrees on a logarithmic spiral whose growth rate is tanφ; and a passive wedge at 29° has to be pushed up and out of the way. Nothing here is empirical — every angle is a function of φ alone — and the mechanism reaches 15.9 m from the centre, which is 10.6 times the footing's half width. That is why two footings closer together than about four widths do not have separate bearing capacities.

The ground is a mechanism

Bearing capacity is met as a formula with three terms and a table of coefficients, and that presentation hides what it is. Underneath is a plastic collapse mechanism — a rigid wedge, a fan of radial shear on a logarithmic spiral, and a passive wedge that has to be pushed up and out of the way — and every coefficient in the table is a property of that one drawing.

equilibrium · Bearing capacity The steel that is sized by the concrete. Ultimate moment of a 1000 × 400 mm section against the area of tension steel in it, with the moment that cracks the section drawn across. The cracking moment is 77.2 kNm and contains no steel at all — it is f_ctm times the gross section modulus, 2.90 N/mm² times bh²/6 — so it is a horizontal line, and every section to the left of where the two meet is one whose first crack is its failure. The crossing is at 507 mm², and rearranging the two expressions gives 0.245·(f_ctm/f_yk)·bd against the 0.26 the codes print — the constant is a section modulus divided by a lever arm and not a fitted number. The rule as printed asks for 538 mm² here, which is 6% more than the derivation needs, and that margin is the whole of the safety in a check whose failure mode is sudden.

The steel the concrete asks for

Every other bar in a concrete member is there because of an action. This one is there because of the member itself — enough steel that the cracked section can carry more than the moment that cracked it, so that the first crack is not also the failure. The requirement contains no load, and both of its consequences run the wrong way round.

sections · Minimum reinforcement The strength that does not keep pace. Concrete's mean tensile strength against its characteristic compressive strength, with the ratio of the two on the same axis, scaled. The tensile strength goes as f_ck^⅔, so it rises from 1.57 to 5.04 N/mm² over a sixfold rise in the compressive strength, and the ratio between them falls from 11.1% at C20 to 6.0% at C80 — a factor of 1.83. Nothing in a bending or a column calculation ever uses the lower curve, and everything that decides a transition does: when the section cracks, how much minimum steel it needs, how far a bar has to be lapped, what a member without links carries. So a stronger concrete needs more minimum reinforcement, longer laps and a bigger crack-control check, in a member whose ultimate capacity has barely moved. Its real scale is a length: E·G_F/f_ct² is 299 mm here, which is the size at which a member stops behaving plastically and starts behaving like a fracture problem.

The strength that is never used

Concrete's tensile strength appears in no bending calculation, no column calculation and no shear calculation with links in it. The whole design philosophy is that it cracks and the steel takes over. And it decides where nearly every transition in the subject sits — when a section cracks, how much minimum steel it needs, how far a bar has to be lapped, what a member without links can carry, and how wide a crack opens.

materials · Tensile strength The ductility number depends on the ruler. Elongation after fracture against the gauge length it was measured over, in units of √S₀. A tensile specimen extends uniformly until the ultimate load and then localises into a neck, so the total is a strain (16 per cent here) plus a length (7.2 mm), and dividing a length by the gauge length is what makes the curve fall. At the two standard gauges the same steel reports 27.5 per cent over 5.65√S₀ and 21.8 over 11.3√S₀ — a ratio of 1.264, and 42 per cent of the first number is a property of the specimen rather than of the material.

The ductility that depends on the ruler

Percentage elongation after fracture is the most quoted ductility measure in the subject and one of the least well defined. A specimen stretches uniformly until the ultimate load and then localises, so the number is a strain plus a length — and dividing a length by the gauge length makes the answer a property of the specimen.

materials · Gauge length Flattening the truss saves stirrups and crushes the web. Two capacities against the angle of the cracks, for a web 350 mm wide with a lever arm of 630 mm. The rising line is the stirrups: a cut along the crack severs z·cot θ/s of them, so flattening the crack from 45° to cot θ = 2.5 takes the 315 kN they carry to 787 — 2.5 times as much from the same steel. The falling line is the concrete strut, whose stress is V(cot θ + tan θ)/b_w z and therefore least at 45°. They do not cross in this range, so the stirrups govern throughout and the angle is a free choice.

The angle is a choice, not a property

The truss inside a cracked concrete web has a strut angle, and nothing measures it. The designer picks it, the stirrup requirement falls as it flattens, the web stress rises, and every choice in between is a different structure that carries the same load.

internal-forces · Concrete shear Three specimens cannot see the tail. The factor k applied to the sample's own scatter when a characteristic value is estimated from n specimens. With the scatter known in advance it is z·sqrt(1 + 1/n) and barely moves; with the scatter estimated from the same n results it is the Student t quantile instead, and it runs from 7.73 at two specimens to 1.73 at 30. At n = 4 the characteristic strength comes out at 23.8 N/mm² against 27.9 for a population known exactly — 15% lower, for a material that is identical. A small test programme does not report a worse estimate of the strength; it reports a worse strength.

The strength that belongs to the test programme

A characteristic strength is a fractile of a distribution, and a distribution estimated from four specimens is not the same object as one known exactly. The same material tested four times reports a strength 15 per cent below what it reports when its scatter is known — and nothing about the material differs.

materials · Characteristic strength A check made on a perimeter, not on a section. One bay of a flat slab, 7.2 m square, on a 400 × 400 mm column. The heavy closed line is the control perimeter, 2d from the column face with its corners rounded at that radius — 4427 mm long against 1600 mm round the column itself. The shaded area inside it delivers no shear across it and is subtracted from the load; everything outside arrives through the perimeter. At 12 kN/m² that is 604 kN across 4427 × 225 mm, a shear stress of 0.697 N/mm² against a resistance of 0.658.

Turn the column, and the slab passes

A flat slab that is comfortable under gravity fails its punching check the moment a moment arrives at the column, and nothing about the load has changed. The fix is not more concrete. It is the column's plan shape and, at equal area, which way round it is turned — worth more than adding half again as much column.

internal-forces · Punching shear What a crack makes of a notch, against how sharp the notch is. The fatigue notch factor against the root radius, at a fixed elastic factor of 3 in a 430 MPa steel. K_t is a property of the shape and does not move along this axis at all — the dashed line — while the factor fatigue actually feels climbs toward it from below. At a 1 mm root the answer is 2.40, which is 30 per cent of the notch relieved; at 0.1 mm it is 1.38, and a notch that concentrates by 3 elastically is barely felt. Nothing has changed about the stress field: what has changed is that the peak is confined to a smaller volume than the material's own process size, so the crack starts against an average rather than against a maximum.

The notch a crack does not feel in full

The elastic concentration factor is a property of shape and knows nothing about size, which is what makes it so useful and so misleading. A fatigue crack starts against an average over a volume the material owns, so two notches with the same factor and different radii have different fatigue strengths — and the stronger the steel, the less of that relief it gets.

materials · Stress concentration The magnification a crack sees is a ratio, not a depth. The stress magnification at a weld toe against the crack's depth as a fraction of the plate's thickness, on BS 7910's two-branch fit. It is a function of a/t alone, because a weld's own size scales with the plate it is on, so the elevated field is geometrically similar. The dots are the same absolute starting flaw of 0.20 mm in plates of 12, 16, 25, 40, 60, 80, 100 mm: the flaw does not move and its magnification runs from 1.81 to 3.50. A fixed flaw in a thicker plate is a smaller fraction of it, which puts it deeper inside the raised field rather than nearer the edge of it.

The rule that points sideways

Every fatigue code puts the same detail in a thicker plate into a lower category, by a factor of (25/t) to the power 0.2, and explains nothing. It is a strange rule: a detail's strength made to depend on a dimension at right angles to the crack. Integrate a crack through a weld toe's own stress field and the rule falls out — same form, same sign, and an exponent of 0.13 against the design code's 0.2. Remove the toe's magnification and the effect reverses.

materials · Fatigue Between the two lines, a curve below both. The stress at which a plate of grade 355 steel of toughness 100 MPa√m, with an edge-crack factor of 1.12 fails, against the length of the crack in it on a logarithmic scale. Dashed: the fracture-mechanics line, the toughness over Y√(πa), and the yield stress; the usual check takes whichever is lower. Solid: Dugdale's strip-yield model, in which a thin strip ahead of the crack yields and the two mechanisms act together. The two dashed lines cross at the transition length, 20.1 mm, and there the strip-yield stress is 288 N/mm², 0.81 of both: the lower of the two simple answers overstates the plate by 23 per cent. At 20 mm the strip-yield stress is 289 N/mm² against 355 N/mm². Far from the crossing on either side the curve joins the line it approaches.

The crack between the two checks

A cracked plate is checked twice: once for fracture, as if the steel could not yield, and once for yielding, as if the crack could not grow, and whichever answer is lower is taken. Each check is right far from the other. Where they cross — at a crack of twenty millimetres in an ordinary structural steel — the plate fails at four fifths of both, because a strip of yielded steel ahead of the crack is by then two and a half times as long as the crack itself, and neither check has a place for it.

materials · Fracture

The toughness that belongs to the plate

A steel's cleavage toughness is measured on a specimen 25 mm thick, and a crack through a plate starts at the weakest spot its front passes through — so a crack through a 60 mm flange samples more weak spots than the test did, and is less tough, and one through a 12 mm web samples fewer. Put each plate's own toughness into the strip-yield assessment and the simple check, which overstates a cracked plate by 23 per cent at the specimen's thickness, overstates a 60 mm flange by 36 per cent and a 100 mm plate by 45, while a thin web pays much of the strip-yield debt back.

materials · Fracture

Two welds, and the one that decides

A member welded twice has two soft zones in series. If they were identical, both would reach their ultimate strength at the same load and the member would stretch twice as far as with one weld before either necked. They are never identical, and the flat top of an aluminium zone's stress–strain curve means that a second zone five per cent stronger than the first gives only sixty per cent of its stretch. Every weld added makes the member weaker, by the statistics of its weakest link, and more ductile, by less than it would if the welds matched.

materials · Heat-affected zone

Named alongside it

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

Characteristic strengthDuctilityTensile strengthLoad pathPunching shearBrittle failureEffective depthFree bodyReinforcement ratioStrut-and-tieAggregate interlockBond

All concepts