TECHNICAL NOTE ADDRESS COWI A/S

Parallelvej 2
2800 Kongens Lyngby
SHEAR CAPACITY OF A Denmark

HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION TEL

FAX
+45 56 40 00 00
+45 56 40 99 99

JOINT IN AN INCLINED BRIDGE WWW cowi.com

WEB
FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY

CONTENTS
1 Introduction 1

2 Shear capacity of construction joint 2

2.1 Research 2
2.2 Eurocode guidelines 4
2.3 Inclined bridge web 5

3 Calculation example 10
3.1 Interface perpendicular to web edges 10
3.2 Horizontal interface 11

4 Conclusion 12

5 References 12

1 Introduction
Large concrete members are usually cast in sections and connected through a
construction joint (also often referred to as interface joint, shear plane or slip
plane). The construction joint has to transfer the forces across the joint including
the interface shear.

In design of concrete box girder bridges longitudinal construction joints are

typically placed between the top slab and the web and between the web and the
bottom slab, see Figure 1.

PROJECT NO. Internal

DOCUMENT NO.

VERSION 3.0
DATE OF ISSUE 2. Mar. 2015
PREPARED UGJ
CHECKED MCJ
APPROVED ROUL
2/13 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS

Construction joint

Web

Construction joint

Figure 1- Typical positions of construction joints in top and bottom of web

The contractor usually prefers horizontal construction joints in the inclined web.
This implies that out of plane effects will be introduced due to the inclined in-plane
axial force and the inclined reinforcement. The shear capacity of horizontal
construction joints in an inclined web is not covered in AASTHO LRFD, in
Eurocode (2005a, 2005b) or in FIB Model Code (2010a, 2010b).

In case that the guidelines in the codes are applied on horizontal construction joints
in an inclined web as if it was a construction joint perpendicular to web sides, the
derived shear capacity will be overestimated for moderate web inclinations and
seriously overestimated for large web inclinations.

The purpose of this technical note is to show how a horizontal construction joint in
an inclined bridge web influence the construction joint capacity. In the note a
modification of the shear strength formulation given in Eurocode (2005a) has been
proposed. The formulation in AASTHO LRFD and FIB Model Code (2010a,
2010b) may be modified along similar lines.

2 Shear capacity of construction joint

2.1 Research
The first published research on this subject was done by Birkeland and Birkeland
(1966). They introduce the shear-friction approach which was supported
experimentally by Hofbeck et. al (1969). The shear-friction approach assumes that
slip occurs between the faces of the construction joint and forces the faces apart
(movement both parallel and perpendicular to the crack surface). The resulting slip
will cause the reinforcement crossing the crack to act in tension which due to
equilibrium clamps the two parts together, see Figure 2. The clamping force on the
interface may also be provided by external compression stress denoted σ.
 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 3/13

Figure 2-Shear-friction (Wight and MacGregor, 2012)

The shear friction approach was subjected to further research in the beginning of
the 70s. Here the shear-friction approach was found rather conservative and a
modified shear friction method was proposed which beside the shear-friction
contribution to shear capacity also included a cohesion term, see ASCE-ACI
committee 445 (1998) and Walraven et al. (1987) for details.

The load-carrying capacity of construction joints has also been researched

analytically by use of the theory of plasticity (see Jensen (1977) and Nielsen and
Hoang (2011)). It is interesting to notice that the analytical models based on
plasticity render similar results to the shear-friction approach. Therefore the shear-
friction approach can be regarded to be an upper-bound solution within the more
general plasticity approach.

In Eurocode (2005a) the shear capacity of the interface is based on the plasticity
approach but with experimentally determined parameters of cohesion and friction.
In Eurocode (2005a) the shear capacity formulation consists of a) an adhesive
bonding contribution and b) a mechanical interlocking contribution and c) a shear-
friction contribution.

Likewise Eurocode (2005a) the FIB Model Code (2010a, 2010b) is based on the
plasticity approach, where the shear capacity is given as a adhesive bonding and
mechanical interlocking contribution, a shear-friction contribution and a dowel
action contribution, see Figure 3. Whilst it is considered a fact that there is an
interrelationship between clamping forces from shear-friction and dowel action. It
is noted that Eurocode (2005a) as well as AASTHO the dowel action contribution
to the shear capacity is ignored. In FIB Model Code (2010) interaction coefficients
between shear-friction and dowel action are given.
4/13 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS

Figure 3- Dowel action (FIB Model Code, 2010a)

2.2 Eurocode guidelines

In Eurocode (2005a) the shear capacity of interface is given in clause 6.2.5. Here it
should be checked that vEdi ≤ vRdi where vEdi, given in (1), is the design value of the
shear stress in the construction joint and vRdi is the shear resistance in the
construction joint.

VEd
v Edi = (1)
zbi

Where

VEd is the total shear force in the section

z is the lever arm of the composite section

bi is the width of the construction join

The design shear resistance vRdi at the construction joint is given as shown in (2).
The shear capacity consists of two parts – one that reflects adhesive bonding and
mechanical interlocking and one that takes into account shear-friction due to axial
load and reinforcement.

Adhesive bonding and Shear-friction due to axial

mechanical interlocking load and reinforcement

vRdi = cfctd + µσ n + ρf yd (µ sin α + cos α ) ≤ 0.5νf cd (2)

Where

are cohesion and friction factors which depend on the roughness of the
c and µ
interface

fctd is the design tensile strength of concrete

σn Stress per unit area that can act simultaneously with the shear force,
positive for compression such that σn< 0.6fcd and negative for tension.
When σn is a tensile force then the part cfctd should be taken as 0.

ρ =As/Ai

Αs is the cross-sectional area of reinforcement crossing the interface

Αi is the area of the construction joint

α is defined in Figure 4
 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 5/13

ν is the effectiveness factor given as 0.6(1-fck/250), fck in MPa

Figure 4- Interface according to Eurocode (2005a)

The cohesion c and the friction coefficient µ is in Eurocode (2005a) stated to be

depended of the surface classification as given in Table 1.

Table 1- Surface classifications according to Eurocode(2005a)

Surface Cohesion c Friction Comments

classification coefficient µ

Very smooth 0.025 to 0.10 0.5 A surface cast against steel, plastic
or specially prepared wooden
moulds

Smooth 0.20 0.6 A slipformed or extruded surface,

or a free surface left without
further treatment

Rough 0.40 0.7 A surface with at least 3mm

roughness at about 40mm spacing,
achieved by ranking, exposing of
aggregate or other method giving
an equivalent behaviour.

Intended 0.50 0.9 A surface with indentions

complying with Figure 4.

Intended surface classification is by

COWI assumed for situations where
aggregate is exposed to 5mm or
more in roughness by e.g. water
jetting.

2.3 Inclined bridge web

The Eurocode (2005a) shear capacity in a construction joint given in (2) is not
valid for a horizontal construction joint placed in an inclined bridge web. The
reason for that can be found in the fact that the shear-friction contribution in (2)
requires that the axial load is perpendicular to the construction joint and that the
reinforcement is perpendicular to the construction joint or inclined in the direction
of the shear force VEd. Therefore it is necessary to modify the shear-friction
contribution part in (2). This will be done in this section based on the sketch of the
sectional forces in Figure 5 (out of plane shear has been ignored because it usually
found to be small).
6/13 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS

a) Elevation b) Section

Figure 5- Interface shear in an inclined bridge web

The longitudinal interface shear stress τul may be expressed by the longitudinal
shear force per length, Vul, divided by the horizontal width of the interface bw/sinβ:

Vul V sin β
τ ul = = ul (3)
bw / sin β bw

The axial in-plane force N per length introduces a stress perpendicular to the
construction joint of:

N sin β N
σN = = sin 2 β (4)
bw / sin β bw

and a transverse shear stress τNt to the construction joint of:

N cos β N
τ Nt = = cos β sin β (5)
bw / sin β bw

The shear reinforcement which is assumed to be in-plane of the web and inclined
with the angle α in the interval 45° ≤ α ≤ 90° (as required in Eurocode, 2005a),
introduces a normal stress σAs,n perpendicular to the construction joint equal to:

As f yd sin α sin β As f yd
σ As,n = = sin α sin 2 β (6)
bw / sin β bw

and a transverse shear stress τAs,t to the construction joint of:

As f yd sin α cos β As f yd
τ As, t = = sin α cos β sin β (7)
bw / sin β bw
 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 7/13

Further, due to the inclination α of the shear reinforcement, part of the interface
shear τas,l is carried in the reinforcement, namely:

As f yd cosα As f yd
τ As,l = = cos α sin β (8)
bw / sin β bw

Now it is possible to express the resulting shear stress in the longitudinal and
transverse direction. This is done in (9) and (10):

Vul As f yd
τ Edl = τ ul − τ As, l = sin β − cosα sin β
bw bw
(9)
(
= Vul − As f yd cosα ) sinb β
w

N As f yd
τ Edt = τ Nt + τ As, t = cos β sin β + sin α cos β sin β
bw bw
(10)
(
= N + As f yd sin α ) cos βb sin β
w

The resulting shear stress τEdi to be resisted can then in the intervals 0°< β ≤ 90°
and 45° ≤ α ≤ 90° be found to be:

τ Edi = τ Edl
2
+ τ Edt
2

2 2

(
=  Vul − As f yd cosα
sin β  
) (
 +  N + As f yd sin α
bw  
cos β sin β 
bw
 )
  (11)
sin β
=
bw
( ) ((
Vul − As f yd cos α 2 + N + As f yd sin α cos β 2 ) )

By applying (4) and adding (6) and the cohesion part of (2) the capacity of the
construction joint τRdi can be written as:

τ Rdi = cf ctd + µσ N + µσ As
N As f yd
= cf ctd + µ sin 2 β + µ sin α sin 2 β (12)
bw bw

= cf ctd +
µ
bw
(
sin 2 β N + As f yd sin α )

By requiring that τEdi ≤ τRdi and solving the requirement with respect to τul as
defined in (3) the solution in (13) can be obtained for the shear capacity of a
horizontal construction joint in a inclined bridge web:

2 2
µ cos β sin β 
τ ul

bw
(  
)
≤ cf ctd + sin 2 β N + As f yd sin α  −  N + As f yd sin α
bw
(  )
    (13)
As f yd
+ cosα sin β
bw
8/13 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS

In the case that β = 90° and 45°≤ α ≤90° solution (13) can be simplified to:

µ
τ ul ≤ cf ctd +
bw
(N + As f yd sin α ) + Asbf yd cosα (14)
w

which corresponds to the solution given in Eurocode (2005a).

In the case that α = 90° and 0°< β ≤90° which is the typical case for reinforcement
in an inclined bridge web, solution (13) can be reduced to:

2 2
µ cos β sin β
τ ul

(
≤  cf ctd + sin 2 β N + As f yd
bw
)
 
(
 −  N + As f yd
  ) bw


 (15)
   

For the solutions given in (13), (14) and (15) the maximum capacity of the
construction joint τul,Rdmax is in the theory of plasticity (assuming plane stress
condition) limited to

τ ul ≤ τ ul,Rd max = 0.5νf cd (16)

whilst it is a pre-condition that the reinforcement does not yield.

The solution for τul given in (13) is shown in Figure 6 versus the web inclination
β for the fixed parameters shown in the caption below the figure.

An interesting result is obtained in Figure 7. Here τulRd given in (13) has been
multiplied with 1/sinβ and normalised with τulRd at β=90° for the fixed parameters
shown in the caption below the figure. The figure indicates how much the shear
capacity reduces when β decreases. The reason (13) has been multiplied with
1/sinβ is that the shear stress action τul (3) in the construction joint will decrease
simultaneously with decrease of β due to construction joint area increase.
 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 9/13

τulRd [MPa]
5.00

4.50

4.00

3.50

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
β in [°]

N=0.0 MN/m N=0.2 MN/m N=0.4 MN/m

Figure 6- Solution (13) versus the web inclination β for the parameters: bw=400mm, c=0.45,
m=0.7, α=90°, As=4.2mm2/mm, fctd=1.90MPa, fyd=435MPa, fcd=33.3MPa,
N={0.0MN/m, 0.2MN/m, 0.4MN/m}

τulRd /τulRd,β=90°
1.00

0.90

0.80

0.70

0.60

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 β in [°]

N=0.0 MN/m N=0.2 MN/m N=0.4 MN/m

Figure 7- τulRd given in (13) multiplied with 1/sinβ and normalised with τulRd at β=90 versus the
web inclination β for the parameters: bw=400mm, c=0.45, m=0.7, α=90°,
As=4.2mm2/mm, fctd=1.90MPa, fyd=435MPa, fcd=33.3MPa, N={0.0MN/m, 0.2MN/m,
0.4MN/m}
10/13 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS

3 Calculation example
In the following example a construction joint in a bridge web with bw=400mm
should be verified for a compressive force N=1.0MN/m and a corresponding shear
force Vul=2.0MN/m. The construction joint can either be placed horizontally or
perpendicular to the web edges. The bridge web is inclined with the angle β=67.5°
with horizontal. Along the construction joint T20 stirrups spaced 150mm are
provided and the reinforcement is not in-plane inclined i.e. α= 90°.

In the calculation it can be assumed that the construction joint is rough. The
concrete strength is C50/60 and the reinforcement yield strength is fyk=500MPa.
The safety factors and material factors should follow the prescriptions in Eurocode
(2005a). Special requirements in national annexes are not taken into account.

Data:

f ck 50
f cd = = = 33.3MPa ;
γc 1.5

 f ck   50 
ν = 0.61 −  = 0.61 −  = 0.48
 250   250 

0.7 ⋅ 0.30 ⋅ ( f ck )2 / 3 0.7 ⋅ 0.30 ⋅ (50 )2 / 3

f ctd = = = 1.9 MPa
γc 1.5

f yd 500
f yd = = = 435MPa ;
γs 1.15

c = 0 .4 ; µ = 0 .7

3.1 Interface perpendicular to web edges

Calculation, α = 90° and β =90°:

Reinforcement area:

2π ⋅ 20 2 / 4 mm 2
As = = 4 .2
150 mm

Longitudinal shear stress:

2.0 sin 90o = 5.0 MPa

τ ul =
0.4

Shear capacity (15):

 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 11/13

2 = 5.7 MPa
 
sin 2 90o (1 ⋅1000 + 4.2 ⋅ 435)
0.7
τ ul,Rd =  0.45 ⋅1.9 +
 400 

Max shear capacity (16)

= 8.0 MPa
τ ul,Rd max = 0.5 ⋅ 0.48 ⋅ 33.3

Utility ratio:
= 0.88
τ ul
UR =
min(τ ul , Rd ,τ ul , Rd max )

3.2 Horizontal interface

Calculation, α = 90° and β =67.5°:

Reinforcement area:

2π ⋅ 20 2 / 4 mm 2
As = = 4 .2
150 mm

Longitudinal shear stress:

2.0 sin 67.5o = 4.62 MPa

τ ul =
0.4

Shear capacity (15):

2
 
sin 2 67.5o (1 ⋅ 1000 + 4.2 ⋅ 435)
0.7
 0.4 ⋅1.9 +
 400  = 4.32 MPa
τ ul ,Rd = 2
 cos 67.5o sin 67.5o 
−  (1 ⋅ 1000 + 4.2 ⋅ 435) 
 400 

Max shear capacity (16)

= 8.00 MPa
τ ul,Rd max = 0.5 ⋅ 0.48 ⋅ 33.3

Utility ratio:
= 1.07
τ ul
UR =
min(τ ul , Rd ,τ ul , Rd max )
12/13 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS

4 Conclusion
The purpose of this technical note has been to present a solution for the shear
capacity of a horizontal construction join in an inclined bridge web. The derived
solution has been done as a modification of the formula given in Eurocode(2005a)
and the general solution can be found in (13).

It should be noted that out of plane shear has been ignored in solution (13).

5 References

ASCE-ACI committee 445 on shear and torsion (1998), Recent approaches to

shear design of structural concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering,
124(12):1375-1417

Birkeland, P. W. and Birkland, H. W. (1966). Concrete in precast concrete

construction. ACI Structural Journal, 63(3):345-368

Eurocode (2005a) , EN 1992-1-1, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures -

Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for
Standardization, CEN, Brussels

Eurocode (2005b) , EN 1992-2, Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures -

Concrete Bridges - Design and detailing rules, European Committee for
Standardization, CEN, Brussels

Fib Model Code (2010a), Fib Bulletin No. 65: Model Code 2010 - Final draft,
Volume 1, International Federation for Structural Concrete

Fib Model Code (2010b), Fib Bulletin No. 65: Model Code 2010 - Final draft,
Volume 2, International Federation for Structural Concrete

Hofbeck, J. A., Ibrahim, I.A. and Mattock, A. H. (1969). Shear transfer in

reinforced concrete, ACI Structural Journal, 66(2):119-128

Jensen, B. C. (1977), Some applications of plastic analysis to plain reinforced

concrete, Institute of building design, report no 123, Technical University of
Denmark, PhD thesis.

Nielsen, M. P. and Hoang, L.C. (2011), Limit Analysis and Concrete Plasticity,
CRC Press, Third Edition

Walraven, J., Frénay J. and Pruijssers, A. (1987). Influence of concrete strength

and load history on the shear friction capacity of concrete members, PCI journal
21(1):66-84.

Wight, J.K. and MacGregor, J. G. (2012), Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and

 SHEAR CAPACITY OF CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 13/13

Design, Pearson, Sixth edition