PROCEEDINGS PAPER

Connections in Precast Concrete

StructuresStrength of Corbels
by L. B. Kriz and C. H. Raths*

SYNOPSIS
This paper describes a project directed toward development of design
criteria for reinforced concrete corbels. Part 1 contains these design criteria,
together with design aids and design examples. Part 2 describes the tests
on which the proposed criteria are based, involving 124 corbels subjected
to vertical loads only and 71 corbels subjected to combined vertical and
horizontal loads. Part 3 contains the discussion and analysis of the experimental data and the derivation of the design equations. Detailed test data
are given in an appendix.
INTRODUCTION

A series of investigations of connections in precast concrete structures is in progress at the Research

and Development Laboratories of
the Portland Cement Association.
The three previous papers in this
series, collectively entitled "Connections in Precast Concrete Structures,"
have been concerned with the
strength and behavior of continuity
connections in double-tee floor construction', with the bearing strength
of column heads supporting precast
beams2 , and with the strength and
behavior of scarf joints in beams and
* Formerly, Development Engineer and
Associate Development Engineer, respectively, Structural Development Section,
Portland Cement Association Research
and Development Division, Skokie, Illinois.
16

columns3. This paper deals with the

development of design criteria for
the strength of corbels which protrude from the face of a column.
PART 1DESIGN OF CORBELS

Background
Corbels projecting from the faces
of columns are used extensively in
precast concrete construction to support primary beams and girders.
Typical applications of corbels may
be found in the Prestressed Concrete Institute manual of connection
details4.
Until recent years little research
had been available on the strength
of corbels. In the United States it
has been customary to design them
as short cantilevers, using the flexural
and shear design equations derived
for beams of more normal proporPCI Journal

lions. Since the assumptions made in

deriving these equations are not
valid for deep beams, it is not surprising that corbel brackets designed
by these equations can have varying
safety factors. The tests described in
Part 2 of this paper show that design
on this basis will lead to questionably safe designs when the amount
of tension reinforcement exceeds
about one percent, and also if shear
reinforcement is necessary and is
provided in the form of vertical stirrups. In addition, corbels have in
general been designed for vertical
loads only, although horizontal
forces caused by restrained creep,
shrinkage, and temperature deformations of the beams supported by the
corbels are often important indeed.
Tests described in Part 2 of this
paper have shown that such horizontal forces can substantially reduce the vertical load-carrying capacity of corbels. This effect has also
been evidenced in the field where
some corbels carrying light vertical
loads were damaged by horizontal
restraint forces.
In Europe the design of corbels
has been based mainly on the investigations of Rausch 5'6 . These design
procedures involve the "straight-line"
method of design for flexure, and the
provision for bent bars to resist all
shear forces.
In 1961, Niedenhoff7 suggested
that a corbel acts essentially as a
simple truss composed of two members: a horizontal tension member,
i.e. the tension reinforcement, and
an inclined concrete compression
strut. On the basis of an experimental investigation, Niedenhoff proposed that the depth of the equivalent truss be taken as 0.8 times the
total depth of the corbel. These assumptions form the basis of Niedenhoff's working load design proceFebruary 1965

dure.
A series of tests conducted at the
University of Illinois 8' 9' 10.11 involved
the strength of deep beams. A deep
beam, loaded by a concentrated load
at midspan and supported by concentrated reactions at the ends, acts
essentially as a double corbel protruding from opposite faces of a
column. However, the number of
specimens tested under concentrated
loads was not sufficient to lead to
design procedures for corbels. These
tests, together with recent tests of
short cantilevers made at the University of Texas 12, will be referred
to later.
The tests recently carried out in
the PCA Structural Laboratory, and
reported in this paper, have been
specifically concerned with corbels
in which the ratio of the shear span
to the effective depth of the bracket
at the column face was less than
unity. One hundred ninety-five corbels were tested, of which 124 were
subject to vertical load only and 71
to combined vertical and horizontal
loads. The variables included in the
tests were: size and shape of corbel,
amount of main tension reinforcement and its detailing, concrete
strength, amount of stirrups, ratio
of shear span to effective depth, and
the ratio of the horizontal force to.
the vertical force.
The design criteria set out below
are based on a study of the results of
these tests; they have also been
checked against the results obtained
from the tests at the Universities of
Illinois 8' 9,10.11 and Texas 12. In the development of such design criteria,
numerous plots and numerical computations were made to compare
observed performance with various
empirical expressions. Considerable
use was made of electronic computation to arrive at suitable ultimate
17

strength design equations

Proposed Criteria for the
Design of Corbels
1. Notation

A3 = area of tension reinforcement, in.2

A, = total area of horizontal
closed stirrups, in.2
a = shear span, i.e. distance
from column face to resultant of vertical load, in.
b
= width of corbel, in.
d = effective depth of corbel
measured at column face,
in.
= concrete cylinder strength,
psi
Vf' = relationship expressed in
psi, so that \/f = 60 psi
for f = 3600 psi
H/V = ratio of horizontal load to
vertical load
= reinforcement ratio at colp
umn face,
A3+A,

bd

whenH/V=

0, i.e. vertical loads only,

p=

vu

AS-

when H/V does

equal zero, i.e.

combined vertical
and horizontal loads
= nominal shear stress at
ultimate strength, psi,
vu bd

V,4 = vertical load at ultimate

strength, i.e. shear at ultimate strength, lb
= capacity reduction factor

with the provisions of these proposed

criteria should be considered applicable to the design of corbels.
3. Safety Provisions and
Design Loads

(a) Strength should be computed

in accordance with the provisions
of section 4.
(b) The coefficient 0 should be
0.85.
(c) The strength capacities of corbels so computed should be at least
equal to the total effects of the design loads required by Section 3(d).
(d) The design loads to be used
in the design of corbels should equal
the design loads specified in Section
1506 of the ACI Building Code (ACI
318-63), multiplied by 4/3.
4. Strength Computations

(a) When special provisions are

made so that a corbel is subject to
vertical loads only, the ultimate design load capacity may be calculated by:
Vu = ca [6.5bd Vf (1 0.5a /a)

1
1000 1/3
where p p(A3 + A,,)/bd does not exceed 0.02, and A does not exceed A8.
(b) In all other cases the ultimate
design load capacity may be calculated by:
V. = 016.5bd A f- (1 - 0.5d/a)
p)(1/3 + 0.4H/V)

(1000
"`^l'10

1
(2)

0.8 H/V

where p = A 8 /bd does not exceed

0.013.

2. Scope

5. Minimum reinforcement

(a) These provisions apply to corbel brackets having a shear span to

depth ratio, a/d, of less than unity.
(b) Provisions of the ACI Building
Code (ACI 318-63) not in conflict

(a) The amount of tension reinforcement A 8 should be not less than

0004bd.
(b) Closed horizontal stirrups
should be provided having a total

18

PCI Journal

Note:
Distance "x' should be great
enough to prevent contact
between outer corbel edge
and beam due to possible rotations

Same
Bar
weld
^
Size
Detail A

Unrestrained
Precast
Beam

Restrained
Precast
Beam

Elastomeric Pad
2"min.-

A.m

Beam
Reinforcement
Not Shown

Steel R
5

2min., }

"min.

8 min. '

see A

h s min.
rh/2 min. s

h y

see A

j h/2 min. s
f

vy
(A) Corbels Subject To
Vertical Load Only

(8) Corbels Subject To

Vertical Load And Restrained
Creep And Shrinkage Force
Steel lk s Welded Or Not Welded

Fig. 1Recommended Corbel Details

cross section A not less than 0.5A8

6. Detailing of Corbels`

(a) The tension reinforcement

should be anchored as close to the
outer face of the corbel as cover requirements permit, by welding a
cross-bar to the ends of the tension
reinforcing bars. The size of the
cross bar should be at least equal
to the maximum size for bar used
as tension reinforcement.
(b) The closed horizontal stirrups
should be distributed over the up-

* The requirements of Section 6 are illustrated,in Fig. 1.

February 1965

per two thirds of the effective depth

at the column face.
(c) The total depth of a corbel
under the outer edge of a bearing
plate resting on the corbel should
be not less than half the total depth
of the corbel at the face of the column.
(d) The outer edge of a bearing
plate resting on a corbel should be
placed not closer than 2 inches to
the outer edge of the corbel.
(e) When corbels are designed to
resist horizontal forces, steel bearing
plates welded to the tension reinforcement should be used to transfer
the horizontal forces directly to the
tension reinforcement.
19

7. Bearing Stresses
(a) The bearing stresses at ultimate strength beneath a bearing
plate resting on a corbel should be
not more than O.5 f.'..
Discussion of Proposed
Design Criteria
Safety Provisions and Design Loads

The proposed safety provision and

design loads are in agreement with
the philosophy concerning safety
provisions and design loads of Part
IV-B, Ultimate Strength Design, of
the ACI Building Code (ACI 318-63).
Since a corbel is primarily a shear
transfer device, and since its ultimate strength is governed by shear
strength, it is considered appropriate
to use the value (A = 0.85 specified
in ACI 318-63 for ultimate strength
governed by shear and diagonal tension.
The design loads specified for
corbels are made one third greater
than those specified for the design
of members in ACI 318-63 for two
reasons. First, in corbels having less
than about one percent of tension
reinforcement, yield of the reinforcement occurs before the ultimate
strength of the corbel is developed.
The ratio of the load at which yield
occurs to the ultimate load can vary

between % and 1. The load factors

proposed will provide an adequate
factor of safety against yield of the
reinforcement, thus insuring serviceability of the corbels under moderate
overloads. Second, it is considered
good practice that the strength of
a precast concrete structure should
be governed by the strength of the
members and not by the strength
of the connections between members. Since a corbel forms part of
the connection between a beam and
a column it should be made stronger
than either the beam or the column.
Use of the proposed design loads
will assure this.
Strength Computations

The equations for ultimate strength

presented in Section 4 and Part 3 are
based on a study of the results of
tests of 195 corbels carried out at the
PCA Structural Laboratory. Eq (2)
reduces to Eq. (1) when H/V is zero.
However, the different definitions of
reinforcement ratio p in Eqs. (1) and
(2) should be noted. Whereas stirrups
make a considerable and consistent
contribution to the strength of a
corbel subject to vertical load only,
their contribution to the strength of
a corbel subject to combined vertical
and horizontal loads is smaller and
more variable. It is therefore considered sounder for the present not

Table 1Comparison of Test and Calculated Strengths

Source
PCA
PCA
PCA
PCA
PCA
U of P'10'1'
U of Pa
U of T'
20

Type of Specimen
Corbels without stirrups
Corbels with stirrups
Corbels without stirrups
Corbels without stirrups
Corbels with stirrups
Deep beams
Beams with aid = 1.33
Short cantilevers aid < 1.10

I Number of

H/V

Specimens
78
10
25
21
4
23
14
6

0
0
1/z

1
1
0
0
0

Average
V test
I V talc
1.02
1.11
1.05
1.21
1.42
1.01
1.14
1.03

Standard
Deviation
0.119
0.084
0.132
0.216
0.134
0.168
0.066

PCI Journal

to rely on their contribution when

designing a corbel subject to combined loading.
Eqs. (1) and (2) have been used
to calculate the strengths of 181
members tested at PCA, the University of Illinois, and the University
of Texas. Tests involving local failures resulting from inadequate reinforcing details were excluded. A
summary of the results of this application of the proposed equations is
set out in Table 1. In these calculations, 0 was taken equal to 1.0,
since accurate values of material
properties and of dimensions were
known.
The application of these equations
is simplified considerably by the use
of design aids which are presented
following this discussion.

Minimum Reinforcement
The minimum amount of tension
reinforcement is specified to insure
against too rapid opening of cracks
after first cracking. The lower the
amount of tension reinforcement, the
lower is the ratio of load at yield
of tension reinforcement to ultimate
load.
Closed horizontal stirrups are required in all corbels to eliminate
the possibility of a sudden explosivetype failure of the corbel, which can
occur in a corbel without stirrups.

Detailing of Corbels
The correct detailing of corbels is
fully as important as the over-all
design of the reinforcement. Almost
invariably, distress of corbels in the
field can be traced to poor detailing.
If the tension reinforcement is not
effectively anchored close to the
outer face of the corbel, the full
strength potential of the reinforceFebruary 1965

ment cannot be developed and failure will occur at a lower load than
indicated by Eqs. (1) and (2). The
recommended form of anchorage
using a bar welded across the ends
of the tension reinforcement is
shown in Fig. 1. A frequently used
detail for the main tension reinforcement is shown in Fig. 2(a). However,
in order to conform to Section 801
of the ACI Building Code which
specifies minimum bend radii for
reinforcing bars, the bars are actually bent as shown in Fig. 2(b). Failure has then been observed, both in
the field and the laboratory, to occur
on the surface indicated in Fig. 2(b),
the tension reinforcement being bypassed completely. Welding of the
bearing plate to the main reinforcement when horizontal forces act is
specified to eliminate the possibility
of a local failure of the concrete between the bearing plate and the reinforcement.
The horizontal stirrups are located
so that they will be as effective as
possible, both from consideration of
ultimate strength and for control of
diagonal cracks. A suitable spacing
of stirrups, s, is given by

3(n a1
where n is the number of stirrups
used. The stirrups should be placed
in the corbel beginning at a distance
s from the tension reinforcement.
Horizontal stirrups are used rather
than vertical stirrups because of the
steep inclination of the diagonal
cracks. These cracks can in some
cases be almost vertical.
The limiting proportions of a corbel, and the limiting location of
the bearing plate, are both recommended to insure against local failures of the concrete before the p021

H ^

PotenSiaf
Failure
Surface

(a) As Drawn

(b) As Bent

-H^

HE--

(c) Cracking In Corbel

With Too Shallow
An Outer Face

(d) Cracking In Corbel

With Outer Face
Of Sufficient Depth

Fig. 2Corbel Details

tential strength of the corbel has

been developed. If the outer face of
the corbel is made too shallow, the
principal diagonal crack will take a
course as shown in Fig. 2(c), and
will intercept the sloping face of
the corbel, resulting in instantaneous
failure. If the outer face is sufficiently deep, however, the principal
diagonal crack will take a course as
shown in Fig. 2(d). In this case a
diagonal concrete compression strut
is formed as indicated, and a further
increase in load may be possible
after formation of the crack. Location of the bearing plate too close
22

to the outer face of the corbel can

result in a bearing failure beneath
the plate at relatively low intensities
of stress. This is particularly the case
if the load on the bearing plate becomes eccentric. It is essential to insure that rotation of the end of a
beam due to deflection under load
shall not result in the beam bearing
on the outer edge of the corbel.
Bearing Stresses

Use of the maximum bearing stress

of 0.5 f ' is contingent upon compliance with the requirements of Section 6(d). Bearing failures were exPCI Journal

perienced at stresses lower than 0.5f

in corbels loaded through bearing
plates located closer to the outer
face than two inches.
Design Aids and Design Examples
Design Aids

Design aids have been prepared

to facilitate the use of Eqs. (1) and
(2).
Eq. (1) may be written:
Vu = cpbd Vf^ F l F 2

(1a)

where F l = 6.5 (1 0.5 d !'), and

F2 , = (1000p)113

Values of F l and F 2 are listed in

Tables 2 and 3.
Similarly, Eq. (2) may be written:
Vu = cbbd '/f ,' F l F3

where F3

= (1000p s
aiv

Vu

= 3 -(1.5D + 1.8L)
=2.OD+2.4L

(2a)

= 2.0(24) + 2.4(37.5)
H/V )

V,, = 138 kips

Values of F 3 are listed in Table 4.

Using Eqs. (1a) or (2a), and Tables
2, 3, and 4, Vu may be readily evaluated for given values of b, d, f
p, a/d, and H/V. The use of the
tables is illustrated in the following
examples.
Since both p and a/d can be
varied independently, design of a
corbel must be by successive trials.
This process is simplified by use of
the design chart given in Fig. 3. It
is proposed that corbels be designed
by successive trials using the design
chart, and that the strength of the
final design be checked using either
Eq. (1a) or (2a), whichever is appropriate. Use of the chart and
equations in this manner is illustrated in the examples.

Example 1

A typical interior corbel shown in

Fig. 4(a) projects from a 14 x 14-in.
February 1965

square tied column. It supports a

50-ft span prestressed girder carrying a live load of 1500 lb/ft and a
dead load of 960 lb/ft. Design the
corbel for the vertical reaction from
the girder, assuming that suitable
bearings are provided to eliminate
horizontal restraint forces, and that
the corbel does not have to resist
wind or earthquake forces. Intermediate grade reinforcement is used
and f = 5000 psi. Tolerance gap between beam end and column face is
one inch.
Design Loads.
Dead load reaction = 24 kips
Live load reaction = 37.5 kips
Ultimate design load,

Determine shear span "a".

a = 2 (tolerance gap between
beam and column)
+ 1/2 (bearing plate width)
Bearing plate width = V.
b(f1%2)
_ 138,000
2500 = 3.9 in., say 4 in.
14 X
a= 2(1)+4/2=4in.

Estimate depth d.
a/d is generally between 0.15 and
0.4; assume a/d = 0.3, hence d =
13.3 in.
Determine v,, = V,4/bd.
Vu

138,000
= 741 psi
14 X 13.3

Find required p from design chart.

Enter chart at vu = 741 psi, proceed horizontally to f ' = 5000 psi,
vertically to a/d = 0.3, horizon23

Table 2-Values of F, = 6.5 (1 - 0 5d1a)

a/d

0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

6.50
6.49
6.30
5.85
5.35
4.87
4.45
4.08
3.77
3.49

6.50
6.49
6.26
5.80
5.30
4.83
4.41
4.05
3.74
3.46

6.50
6.48
6.22
5.75
5.25
4.79
4.37
4.02
3.71
3.44

6.50
6.47
6.18
5.70
5.20
4.74
4.34
3.98
3.68
3.42

6.50
6.45
6.14
5.65
5.15
4.70
4.30
3.95
3.65
3.39

6.50
6.44
6.09
5.60
5.10
4.66
4.26
3.92
3.62
3.37

6.50
6.41
6.05
5.55
5.06
4.61
4.22
3.89
3.60
3.34

6.50
6.39
6.00
5.50
5.01
4.57
4.19
3.86
3.57
3.32

6.50
6.36
5.95
5.45
4.97
4.53
4.15
3.83
3.54
3.30

6.50
6.33
5.90
5.40
4.92
4.49
4.12
3.80
3.52
3.27

Table 3-Values of
p

F_

Table 4-Values of
p

H/V

0.0150
0.0155
0.0160
0.0165
0.0170
0.0175
0.0180
0.0185
0.0190
0.0195
0.0200

2.12
2.15
2.19
2.22
2.26
2.29
2.32
2.35
2.38
2.41
2.44

F2
2.47
2.49
2.52
2.54
2.57
2.60
2.62
2.64
2.67
2.69
2.71

(1000p)(1/3+OAN /V)
F3 =(10)o.sr /V

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.08 0.95
1.14 1.00
1.19 1.06
1.25 1.11
1.30 1.16

0.83
0.89
0.94
0.99
1.04

0.73
0.78
0.83
0.88
0.92

0.64
0.69
0.74
0.78
0.83

0.57
0.61
0.66
0.70
0.74

0.50
0.54
0.58
0.62
0.66

0.44
0.48
0.52
0.55
0.59

0.38
0.42
0.46
0.49
0.53

0.34
0.37
0.40
0.44
0.47

1.50
1.55
1.59
1.63
1.68

1.34 1.20
1.39 1.25
1.43 1.29
1.48 1.34
1.52 1.38

1.08
1.12
1.16
1.21
1.25

0.97
1.01
1.05
1.09
1.13

0.87
0.91
0.95
0.99
1.02

0.78
0.82
0.85
0.89
0.93

0.70
0.73
0.77
0.80
0.84

0.62
0.66
0.69
0.73
0.76

0.56
0.59
0.63
0.66
0.69

0.50
0.53
0.56
0.59
0.62

1.89
1.93
1.96
2.00
2.04

1.72
1.75
1.79
1.83
1.86

1.56
1.60
1.63
1.67
1.71

1.41
1.45
1.49
1.53
1.56

1.28
1.32
1.36
1.40
1.43

1.17 1.06
1.20 1.10
1.24 1.13
1.27 1.16
1.31 1.20

0.96
1.00
1.03
1.06
1.10

0.87
0.91
0.94
0.97
1.00

0.79
0.83
0.86
0.89
0.92

0.72
0.75
0.78
0.81
0.84

0.65
0.68
0.71
0.74
0.77

2.07
2.10
2.14
2.17

1.90
1.93
1.96
2.00

1.74
1.78
1.81
1.84

1.60
1.63
1.66
1.70

1.46
1.50
1.53
1.56

1.34
1.38
1.41
1.44

1.23
1.26
1.30
1.33

1.13
1.16
1.19
1.22

1.04 0.96
1.07 0.98
1.10 1.01
1.13 1.04

0.87
0.90
0.93
0.96

0.80
0.83
0.86
0.88

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.0040
0.0045
0.0050
0.0055
0.0060

1.40
1.46
1.52
1.57
1.62

1.23
1.29
1.34
1.40
1.45

0.0065
0.0070
0.0075
0.0080
0.0085

1.67
1.72
1.76
1.81
1.85

0.0090
0.0095
0.0100
0.0105
0.0110
0.0115
0.0120
0.0125
0.0130
24

F2

0.0095
0.0100
0.0105
0.0110
0.0115
0.0120
0.0125
0.0130
0.0135
0.0140
0.0145

1.59
1.65
1.71
1.76
1.82
1.87
1.91
1.96
2.00
2.04 ,
2.08

0.0040
0.0045
0.0050
0.0055
0.0060
0.0065
0.0070
0.0075
0.0080
0.0085
0.0090

F,=(1000p)113

0.4

PCI Journal

rn

tally to H/V = 0 and vertically

downward to the p scale.
p = 0.98% OK since it is < 2.0%,
and >A 8 +A,=0.4%+ 0.4%
2
0.6%.
Select A8, A,,, and corbel dimensions.
AB +A _ 1.5 A,
bd - bd,

if A,, is made equal to 0.5A8.

Hence
A8 = 0.0098 x 14 x 13.3/1.5
= 1.22 in.2
Use 4- #5 bars.

A,= 0.61 in.2

Use 2-#4 bar closed stirrups.

Stirrup spacing (2-#4 stirrups)

s 3 \ n+
= 2.96 in.

30133/

Use 3 in. ctrs. from tension

reinforcement.

Allowing 1 in. cover to reinforcement, over-all depth of corbel

=1+0.3+13.3=14.6 in.
Use 15 in.

Length of corbel
= 2 + (bearing width) + (clearance)
=2+4+1=7 in.

Use 8 in.

Check design.
d = 15.0- 1.0 - 0.62/2 = 13.7 in.
a/d= 4.0/13.7=0.29
_ As +A, _ 2.04
bd
14x13.7-1'06%

26

Fl FZ

Example 2

Redesign the corbel of Example

1 assuming that a bearing shoe in
the prestressed girder is welded to
the corbel, and because of this, a
horizontal force of 45 kips will occur
due to restraint of creep and shrinkage deformation of the girder. This
example is illustrated by Fig. 4(b).
From Example 1, V,, = 138 kips,
and a = 4 in.
Section 1506(a)5, of the ACI
Building Code (ACI 318-63), requires that the effects of creep and
shrinkage be considered on the same
basis as the effects of dead load,
when calculating the design ultimate
loads. Hence the load factor for the
horizontal restraint force will be:
4 (1.5) = 2.0
H. =

2.0(45) = 90 kips

therefore
H/V

Depth of outer face of corbel, say

half over-all depth at column face,
15/2=7.5in.

V. = Abd

Using Tables 2 and 3 to obtain

Fl and F2
V,, 0.85x14x13.7xV5000
x5.90x2.19
= 149 kips OK, greater than
required design load.
The details of this corbel are
shown in Fig. 4(a).

(1a)

90/138=0.65

From the design chart, the value

of v,, corresponding to the maximum
allowable p (= 1.3%), H/V of 0.65,
an assumed a/d of 0.3, and f ' of
5000 psi, is about 460 psi.
Therefore
d = Vu - 138,000
v,,b
460 x 14

_ 21.4 in.

now
a/d =

4/21.4 = 0.19
PCI Journal

Z^ x 4' x 14"
Elostomeric
Pod
2
gt ^

Steel x 14

Lubricated
I"
j4574_

Pod

48

3" Welded #5

3"

Welded #8
2"

15

4 4 Ties

At 3" c to c
^.

Weldedd To
*8 Bars

2"

23"
#4 Ties
At3"ctoc

#q

#4
14x14 in.
Col.
i
Example

# 1

14x14 in.
Col.

Detail

(a)

Example *2
(b)

Detail

Fig. 4Corbel Details for Example Problems

Determine p from the design chart

for vu = 460 psi, f = 5000 psi, a/d =
0.19 and H/V = 0.65.
p = 1.07% OK since it is > 0.4%
and < 1.3%
Select A0, Av , and corbel dimensions.
p = A8 /bd

Hence
A0 = pbd= 0.0107X 14 X 21.4
= 3.20 in.2
Use 4 #8 bars.
A,,, = A3 /2 = 1.60 in.2
Use 4#4 bar closed stirrups.

Stirrup spacing (4#4 stirrups)

s=

21

1 ) =

2(

2.88 in. Use/3-in.. cen ters.

Assuming a 1-in, thick bearing
plate welded to the main tension
reinforcement, over-all depth of
corbel:
h 1+0.5+21.4== 22.9 in.
Use 23 in,

Length of corbel will be as in

Example 1, 7 in.
February 1965

Check design.
d = 23 1 - 0.5 = 21.5 in.
a/d = 4/21.5=0.19
p = A 8 /bd = 3.16/(14 x 21.5)
= 1.05%
V u = bbd -1 f ,' F l F 3
(2a)
Using Tables 2 and 4 to obtain Fl
and F3
Vu = 0.85 x 14 x 21.5 x x/5000
x 6.33 x 1.21
= 139 kips OK, greater than design load
The details of this corbel are
shown in Fig. 4(b).
Special Note

It should be noted that the addition of the horizontal restraint force

has necessitated an increase in depth
of the corbel of 53 percent and an
increase in main tension reinforcement of 162 percent. It is clear,
therefore, that for safety, a realistic
estimate must be made of any horizontal forces that may act on a
corbel. If special provision is not
27

made to eliminate the horizontal restraint forces by using lubricated

sandwich pads at one end of each
girder, it is proposed that H/V
should be assumed in design to be
at least 0.5, unless the horizontal
force is calculated.
PART 2TESTS OF CORBELS

Scope

Three series of tests were made:

(a) exploratory tests, (b) tests of corbels subjected to vertical loads only,
and (c) tests of corbels subjected to
combined vertical and horizontal
loads. The exploratory tests involved
testing procedures and reinforcing

detailing. The other two series involved a systematic investigation of

the effect of different variables on
the strength and behavior of corbels.
The variables considered in the
tests were: reinforcement ratio, concrete strength, ratio of shear span to
effective depth, amount and distribution of stirrup reinforcement, size
and shape of corbel, and the ratio
of the horizontal applied load to the
vertical applied load. The range of
the variables is indicated on Fig. 5.
Test Specimens

All specimens consisted of a length

of 8 x 12-in, column with two corbels

12

^a

Range of Variables
a - 2.75 to 12.5 in.
b -Sin.

54

h - 18 to 45 in.

72

h' - 6 to 26 in.

ti - 6 to 24 in.
f^- 2110 to 6680 psi
p-0.21 to 1.86%
fy- 39.9 to 95.8 ksi
Fig. 5Corbel Test Specimen
28

PCI Journal

arranged symmetrically, as shown

in Fig. 5. With the exception of certain specimens in series (a) the main
tension reinforcement consisted of
straight deformed bars anchored by
bars of equal diameter welded across
their ends, as shown in Fig. 6. Corbels with horizontal stirrups were
detailed as shown in Fig, 6(b). Corbels to be subjected to combined
vertical and horizontal loading were
provided with grooved bearing
plates welded to the tension reinforcement as shown in Fig. 6(c). The
detailing of the reinforcement of the
corbels in the exploratory series (a)
was as indicated in Fig. 7.
The dimensions of the individual
specimens and the material properties are set out in Tables Al through
A4 appended to this paper.

Materials and Fabrication

All concrete was made with Type
I portland cement. The coarse aggregate was a gravel of 3/4 -in, maximum
size, and the fine aggregate was
Elgin sand. The concrete slumps
varied from 1% to 3 in. An air-entraining agent was added to produce
4 to 6 percent air. One batch of
concrete was used for each specimen, with the exception of two
large specimens, which required two
batches each. Three 6 x 12-in, cylinders were taken from each batch for
determination of concrete strength.
The specimens and test cylinders
were moist cured for three days under a plastic cover, and then stored
at 70'F and 50 percent relative humidity, and were tested at six days.
The concrete cylinder strengths

Fig. 6-Reinforcement Details of Test Corbels

February 1965

29

a.nus+ea.^

Type BI, Gent Reinf.

^r.avffi.eoso^-

Type WC, Welded Cross Bar Reinf

Type WI, Welded Cross Bar

And Welded
Inclined Bar Reinf.

(b)

(c)

(a)

Fig. 7Detailing of Corbel Reinforcement in Auxiliary Test Series

varied from 2110 psi to 6680 psi, as

given in Tables Al through A4.
The reinforcing steel conformed to
ASTM Designation A305 for deformations. The steel yield strengths
were determined from tension tests
of 30-in, coupons taken from each
reinforcing bar used; the yield
strength varied from 39,900 psi to
95,800 psi, and are given in Tables
Al through A4.
Instrumentation
The corbels were instrumented
with SR4-A-12 strain gages mounted
on the reinforcement and with SR4A-9-4 strain gages mounted on
the concrete. This instrumentation
varied according to the purpose of
individual tests.

tered under the loading platen of

a million-pound testing machine was
used to support the corbels. To assure adequate bearing capacity of
the legs of the U-frame, the top of
the legs was armored by steel
plates. These plates were carefully
aligned in the forms of the U-frame
before placing the concrete to provide parallel bearing surfaces.
The corbels were subjected to various combinations of vertical and
horizontal loads. The loads were increased in increments until failure.
After each load increment the development of cracks was observed
and marked on the specimens. All
strain measurements were recorded
continuously by strip-chart strain recorders

Test Procedures
Vertical Loading Only
For convenience all corbels were
tested in an upside-down position........
The corbels were loaded through
A heavily-reinforced U-frame cen- - steel. bearing 'plates placed symmet30

: - PCI Journal

Machine
Load

8 Plywood
Load
Measuring
Cell

ISteel l^-'s

Half Round
On Opposite
Side

2 Plywood

Fig. 8Vertical Loading of Corbels

rically on the top of the corbels as

shown in Fig. 8. The length of the
bearing plates was equal to the
width of the corbels. The width w
was either 3 or 5 in. and the thickness of the plates was 1 or 1% in.
To eliminate restraint of deformations, a half-round and a round bar
were placed between the bearing
plates and another set of steel plates
which rested on the supporting
U-frame. The load was applied to
the bottom of the column stub by
the testing machine platen.
To assure uniform load distribuTop refers to the position in a structure
and not to the position of the. specimen
in the testing machine. This convention
is used throughout this paper.

February 1965

tion on all bearing areas, new plywood inserts were used in each test.
A 3/a -in, plywood sheet was placed
between the column bottom and the
testing machine platen, '/s-in, plywood sheets between the corbels and
the bearing plates, and -in. plywood sheets between the U-frame
and the second set of steel plates.
After the application of the first
10,000 lbs, the machine platen was
blocked to prevent its rotation.
In the first five tests the load applied to the corbels was checked by
load measuring cells to establish
that the load was distributed equally
to the two corbels. Since the two
loads did not differ by more than
two percent, the use of these load
31

measuring cells was discontinued in

further tests. The two test setups
are shown schematically in Fig. 8.
Fig. 9 shows the test setup used for
the tests involving vertical load only.

Fig. 9Test Setup for Vertical Load Only,

H/V = 0

Three tests were made to determine whether a column load carried

from upper floors influenced the
strength of the corbels. In these
tests a load was applied to the top
of the column stub by a 100-ton
hydraulic ram. A constant ratio of
the machine load to the ram load
was maintained throughout each of
these tests. The loading of the ram
was controlled by the oil pressure
indicator but the load was also continuously monitored by a load-measuring cell placed between the ram
and the column top. This test setup
was similar to that shown in Fig. 9,
except for the 100-ton hydraulic ram
which was within the U-portion of
the test frame.
32

Combined Vertical and

Horizontal Loading

The horizontal forces which develop in precast beams as a result

of restrained volume changes were
simulated by horizontal forces applied at the level of the top of the
corbels. To permit a direct transfer
of the horizontal forces to the tension reinforcement, the 3-in, bearing
plates were welded to the reinforcing bars. The horizontal forces were
applied by four or six hydraulic rams
to a set of loading plates, and transferred to the bearing plates through
milled shear keys. The hydraulic
rams were positioned on each side
of the corbels in such a manner that
the resultant of the ram loads was
at the level of the top of the corbel.
The frictional restraint to lateral deformations was eliminated by placing 2-in, diameter round bars between the loading plates and the
steel plates on the supporting
U-frame.
The rams used for applying the
horizontal forces were calibrated so
that the loads could be correlated
with the oil pressure. The operation
of the rams during testing was
checked by load measuring cells
which indicated that the errors in
the load as determined from the oil
pressure were less than one percent.
Therefore, the use of the load-measuring cells was discontinued.
The vertical load was applied in
the same manner as in the tests of
corbels subjected to vertical loads
only. A constant ratio between the
vertical and the horizontal loads was
maintained throughout each test.
The loading system for combined
horizontal and vertical loading is
shown in Fig. 10.
Test Results
The principal data obtained in
PCI Journal

column. Therefore, subsequent tests

were performed with loads applied
to the corbels only.
Detailing the Corbel Reinforcement

Fig. 10Test Setup for Combined Horizontal

and Vertical Loading, H/V does not equal zero

Test of corbels reinforced conventionally according to Fig. 7(a) have

shown the weakness of such detailing when loads were applied close
to the outer edges of the corbels.
These corbels failed along a surface
following the bends of the reinforcement, Fig. 11, indicating that the

these tests have been listed in Tables

Al through A4 appended to this
paper. Other data are reproduced
where appropriate in the discussion
of the behavior of the corbels set
out in Part 3.
PART 3BEHAVIOR OF CORBELS

Series (a)Exploratory Tests

Effect of Additional Column Loads

Three tests were made on pairs of

identical specimens. One of each of
the companion specimens was subjected to vertical loads applied to
the corbels only, while the other
specimen was subjected also to an
additional load applied at the top
of the column stub. The pertinent
data are given in Table 5. These
tests show that the strength of the
corbels is not significantly influenced
by the additional load carried by the

Fig. 11Conventionally Reinforced Corbel, Type

BI, Loaded Near Outer Edge. Failure Plane
Follows Bend Radius

Table 5Effects of Additional Column Load

Specimen
4
5E
15
6E
24
7E
February 1965

Concrete
Strength, f'
psi
3520
4010
4500
4140
4250
4490

Effective Depth
Shear Span

Load per
Corbel at
Ultimate, kips

Additional
Column
Load, kips

0.171
0.171
0.370
0.370
0.372
0.372

99.9
114.3
72.0
63.9
88.8
109.3

0
114.0
0
48.0
0
110.0
33

reinforcement was not fully effective

and that it even created a possible
source of weakness. Measurements
of the strains in the reinforcement
along the compression side indicated
only small compressive stresses
throughout the length of the reinforcement.
Previous tests of corbels and of
deep beams 8' 9.11 and the tests reported herein, show that the stresses
in the tension reinforcement of a
corbel do not vary significantly along
its length between the face of the
column and the point of load application. Consequently, high bond
stresses exist in the outer parts of
the tension reinforcement and may
lead to bond failures. Such bond
failures were observed in tests of
deep beams$. The anchorage of the
bars can be assured by cross-bars
welded to the ends of the tension
reinforcement as shown in Fig. 7(b).
This method proved satisfactory and
subsequent tests were made on specimens reinforced with straight tension bars anchored by the welded
cross-bars.
Tests of corbels with inclined compression reinforcement welded to
the ends of the tension reinforcement, Fig. 7(c), show the compression reinforcement contributes little
to the strength of the corbels. Therefore, compression reinforcement was
not used in further tests.
The strength of corbels with the
three types of reinforcement is compared in Table Al. The specimens
designated by letters WC had tension reinforcement with welded cross
bars,. Fig. 7(b), specimens BI had
bent reinforcement, Fig. 7(a), and
specimens WI had compression reinforcement and cross-bars welded
to the ends of the tension reinforcement, Fig. 7(c).
The- arrangement and amount of
34

reinforcement in the column has

little influence on the strength of the
corbels projecting from the column,
as may be seen in Table Al. Thus,
the amount of column reinforcement
used in subsequent tests was that
which would prevent failure of the
column portion of the test specimens.
Series (b)Corbels Subject to
Vertical Loads Only
Behavior Under Load

Initially the corbels behaved elastically, and the stress in the main
tension reinforcement was proportional to load. In all the tests, the
first cracks to appear were flexural
cracks starting at the junction of
the horizontal face of the corbel and
the face of the column. After formation of these cracks the tension
reinforcement stress increased much
more rapidly. Typical relationships
between applied load and force in
the tension reinforcement are shown
in Fig. 12. Subsequent development
of the cracks depended primarily on
the reinforcement ratio and the ratio
of the shear span to the effective
depth, and was also closely related
to the mode of failure.
`Four principal types of failure
were observed, as described below.
Flexural TensionA flexural
tension failure occurs by crushing
of the concrete at the bottom of the
sloping face of the corbel after extensive yielding of the tension reinforcement. Such a failure is illustrated in Fig. 13(a). The appearance
of a corbel after a flexural tension
failure is characterized by very wide
flexural cracks.
Flexural CompressionA flexural compression failure occurs when
crushing of the' concrete takes place
at the bottom of the corbel before
PCI Journal

200

CD
C-

180

o.

hI

160
140

120

Y 100

mo

10

/e

Eq.(4)

a/d
h = 18".
f'4000 psi
NO STIRRUPS

30

40

50

a/d
! ///
%/
/e
///
o 0.20
i/
//
h = IS ! 0.30-t^= 4000 psi a .0.37---

STIRRUPS

60

70

0.14
0.30-e 0.53--0

e
0

//\\
/
1

ee

a e. e

20

w e n^
20 c^

e.^

40

o
0

0
10
A sfs , KIPS

20

30

40

Fig. 12Relationship Between Applied Load and Tension Steel Force, Vertical Load Only

0.59-----

50

60

70

(a) Tension Failure (FT)

(b) Compression Failure (FC)

Fig. 13Flexural Failures, H/V = 0

extensive yielding of the reinforcennent has occurred. The tension reinforcement stress at failure is either
below or just at the yield point and
the flexural cracks, while well developed, have not opened excessively. Such a failure is illustrated in
Fig. 13(b).
Diagonal SplittingThe diagonal splitting mode of failure is
shown in Fig. 14(a) and 14(b). The
flexural crack pattern was well developed before the diagonal splitting
of the concrete, which occurred
along a line extending from the bearing plate toward the junction of the
sloping face of the corbel and the
face of the column. A corbel with
such a crack usually fails by shearcompression of the concrete compression zone, as in the corbel shown
in Fig. 14(b).
Shear FailureShear failures
were characterized by the develop36

ment of a series of short inclined

cracks along the plane of the interface between the column and the
corbel, as may be seen in Figs. 15(a)
and (b). The final failure was by
shearing along this weakened plane,
and the appearance after failure can
be seen in Fig. 15(b).
Secondary Modes of Failure
Failures which did not involve the
deepest section of the corbel at the
column face were considered . seeordary modes of failure. These were
of two types: (a) the splitting away
of a portion of the concrete due to
a major crack intersecting the sloping face of the corbel, as seen in Fig.
16(a), and (b) bearing failures of
the concrete beneath the bearing
plate, as seen in Fig. 16(b). Both
types of secondary modes of failure
occurred at loads lower than those
at which failure would have occurred by one of the principal modes
PCI Journal

(a)

(b)
Fig. 14Diagonal Splitting Failures (DS), H/V = 0

(b)
Fig. 15Shear Failures (S), H/V = 0

February 1965

37

(b) Bearing Failure (B)

(a) Corbel End Failure (CE)

Fig. 16Secondary Modes of Failure, H/V = 0

of failure had the secondary failures been prevented.

Discussion of Behavior

To understand the behavior of

corbels and to arrive at design equations, extensive plotting of test data
was made. During such studies,
further tests were conducted to cover
adequate ranges of the significant
variables. Empirical design equations were gradually arrived at by
numerous comparisons of observed
properties to those computed by
various expressions. An LGP-30 electronic computer was used in these
studies.
The relationships between tension
reinforcement force and applied load
shown in Fig. 12 are for corbels
made from concrete with a strength
of about 4000 psi. Similar relationships were found to hold for corbels
without stirrups made from 2000 and
6000-psi concrete. It was not con38

sidered necessary to test corbels with

stirrups made from concretes having
strengths other than 4000 psi. It was
found that the tension reinforcement
force, A Sf s, is a function of the applied load, V, of the ratio of shear
span to effective depth, a/d, and of
the concrete strength f r . The relationship between load V and tension
force A sf s can be idealized as shown
in Fig. 17. The linear part of the
Ultimate

Va
Initial
Yield
VY.

v,

V=V,+mAsfs

.Initial
Cracking

A sfs FORCE IN TENSION REINFORCEMENT

Fig. 17Idealized Relationship Between Applied

Load and Force in Tension Reinforcement

PCI Journal

relationship between first cracking

and yield of the reinforcement can
be represented by the equation:
V=V+mA 3f8(3)
where V = applied load
Vo = nominal cracking load
m = slope
The nominal cracking load, V 0 , and
the slope, m, are both functions of f
and a/d. These functions can be
expressed as:
1/3
44
f
V0 bd (a/d)v
(a%d) Ci

and m

f^

3 1000

X p'/f' /1000

Substituting for Vo and m in Eq. (3)

above yields:

2
f^ pf
+ 31000 C^

1/3

C^
(4)

where C, = 1 for vertical loads only

C2 = 0.8(10) 13d when there
are no stirrups
= 0.25(10)'" when there
are stirrups
Eq. (4) may be used to calculate
the nominal shear stress, v, at working load by substituting the allowable steel stress for f8j and can be
used to calculate the nominal shear
stress at yield of the tension reinforcement, v,, by substituting fy for
f8.
Eq. (4) has been used to calculate
the nominal shear stress, v, at yield
of tension reinforcement in those
corbels tested in which yielding occurred. The average value of (v0
test/va calc) given in Table A2 is
1.06 and the standard deviation is
0.135. When the computed steel
stress, fsu, given by Eq. (5) below
was less than the yield point of the
steel used, no value for vy calc is
February 1965

f' 1/3
4.4
f8u = vu (a/d),, (a
^
d ) Cl ]
1.5C^

C2

V - 4.4
f'
v=
bd
(a/d)^ a/d

given in Table A2.

Eq. (4) can also be used to define whether or not the tension reinforcement will yield prior to the
corbel developing its ultimate
strength. If the nominal shear stress
at ultimate strength is v,,, (= V,,/bd),
then transposing Eq. (4) and substituting v for v yields:

(5)

in which the stress, vu may be calculated from Eq. (7).

The tension reinforcement will
yield if f3 .0 calculated using Eq. (5)
is equal to or greater than the yield
point stress f,.
To facilitate the use of Eqs. (4)
and (5), values of C l and C2 have
been listed in Tables A7 and A8
appended to this report.
For purposes of practical design,
it should usually not be necessary to
check the stress in the tension reinforcement. As indicated in the discussion of design criteria in Part 1,
yield of the tension reinforcement
will usually take place at % to 1
times the ultimate load. The proposed ultimate strength procedure
accounts for this by specifying load
factors 1/ greater than those used
for the individual precast members.
Ultimate Strength

The ultimate strength equation

must of necessity be empirical because of the complexity of the state
of stress in the corbel. Several conclusions concerning the effect of individual variables on the strength of
corbels can be drawn on the basis
of the experimental data presented
herein. These conclusions, together
with the requirements of the laws of
39

similitude, lead to a suitable form

for the ultimate strength equation.
The ultimate strength of a corbel,
Vu, is a function of its width b and
effective depth d, of the reinforcement ratio, p (= A $/bd), of the concrete strength f ' and of the ratio
of the shear span to the effective
depth, a/d. From the laws of similitude it is concluded that the ultimate
strength, V,4 , must be directly proportional to the width b and to the
effective depth d. The tests have
shown that the strength is also proportional to. Accordingly, the
strength may be expressed in
terms of the non-dimensional ratio
Vu/bdV/f^. This ratio must be a function of the remaining two variables,
a/d and p.
The tests show that increasing the
a/d ratio lowers the corbel strength,
V,,. The maximum strength is obrepretained for a = 0, while a
sents the condition of pure bending..
Hence, V,, = 0 when a = -. The
variation of the strength with a/d
can be represented by a term of the
form K l (1 K2dia) where K2 is less
than unity.
These tests also show that the
strength increases when the reinforcement ratio increases. The effect
of the reinforcement ratio can be
expressed by the term K3 pK 4. The
foregoing analysis leads to the expression:
= QO

Vu
bd

, = K l (1 Kea /a) K3p x4

\'T=

(6)

The constants Kl and K 3 need not

be known separately and may be
combined into a single coefficient.
Statistical analysis of the test data
resulted in the following equation:
v______ V.

'j= 6.5 (1 - 0.5d / a) (I000p) 1"3 (7)

'lf'

40

Multiplying both sides of Eq. (7)

by bdVV,' and introducing the
strength reduction factor di yields

Eq. (1) of the proposed criteria for

design of corbels.
Eq. (7) was used to calculate the
nominal shear stress at ultimate
strength, v u , for all corbels subjected
to vertical loads only, and the results of these calculations are listed
in Table A2. Excluding those specimens which experienced secondary
failures by bearing or splitting off
of the corbel end, the average value
of (v test/v s calc) was found to be
1.02, and the standard deviation
0.119.
Analysis of data from tests of corbels with horizontal stirrups shows
that the stirrups are as effective in
resisting vertical loads as is the main
tension reinforcement. Accordingly,
the strength of a corbel with horizontal stirrups and subject to vertical
loads only can be calculated using
Eq. (7) but calculating p on the
basis of the total cross section of
tension and stirrup reinforcement,
i.e. p = (A, + A)/bd. The calculated
ultimate strengths of corbels with
stirrups and subject to vertical loads
listed in Table A4 were determined
in this manner. The average value of
(vu test/vu calc) was 1.11 and the
standard deviation 0.084.
Fig. 18 shows a graphical representation of Eq. (7), together with
the corresponding test values. The
test results from corbels which experienced secondary failures are not
included in this figure.
In Table A5 comparisons have
been made between data obtained
by other investigators at the Universities of Illinois and Texas, and
the ultimate strengths calculated
using Eq. (7). A satisfactory agreement is found.
PCI Journal

3.4
V

3.2
3.0

(1/3+0.4 H/Vi

ft
L

(10)o.8H/V

bd f-6.5(I- 0.5d/a)

0
0

o
0

2.8

2.6

0
0

0
0

24
0

2.2

2.0
8

l.8
LU
0
1.6

tr

0
0

o 0
1.4

0.6
04
0.2
^
q

0
0
0
0

00

1.2

0.8

0
0

1.0

0
00
0

0
g

ZS

4.\1
^

I
0t

H/V
0

f/s
2

10
12
1000 p

14

0
I/2
I/I

16

18 20I

Fig. 18Ultimate Strength of Corbels

February 1965

41

Series (c)Corbels Subject to

Combined Vertical and
Horizontal Loads

tween applied load and tension reinforcement force for corbels subjected to combined loading are
shown in Fig. 19.
The function for v derived from
the data shown in Fig. 19, and from
other similar data not presented
here, takes the form:

Discussion of Behavior

The addition of outward horizontal forces to the vertical loads

does not change the essential characteristics of behavior, which can
still be represented by the idealized
diagram of Fig. 17. However, the
functions for V 0 and m must be modified to account for the lower values
of the nominal cracking load V 0 and
of the slope m observed in data from
tests of corbels subject to combined
loading. Typi cal relationships be-

V=

V _
bd
f
a%d)1/Cl

4.4
'2

f' pfs

+3

1000

1 + 2H7

C2

(8)

3 V 1^ 1000

120
V

V
loo

--H
h

E4 (8)

80
V 2
h_18

60

fJ4000 psi

oo

^c

No Stirrups

40

'

^/ '

^G
A
Ql
^^'

20
A

0
Eq. (8)

H-I
V

60

0.37
0.62 ---

h=18

f^= 4000 psi

ao

No Stirrups

20

o
^^
o

o _ ^

s/ o

20

30

a.v11
0

10

40

50

A sfs , KIPS

60

70

80

90

100

Fig. 19Relationship Between Applied Load and Tension Steel Force,

Combined Vertical and Horizontal Loading
42

PCI Journal

where C1 = 1.5 (a/d) 2 / 3 , and C2 =

0.7 (10) 012d, whether stirrups are
present or not. Eq. (8) reduces to
Eq. (4) when H/V = 0, i.e., for vertical load only. However, it should be
noted that coefficients C l and C2
must then be as defined earlier for
Eq. (4).
Eq. (8) has been used to calculate
the nominal shear stress v, at yield
of the tension reinforcement in those
corbels tested in which yield of the
tension reinforcement occurred. The
results are given in Table A3. The
average value of (vy test/vu calc)
was 1.04 for H/V = 1/z, and 0.92 for
H/V = 1h, the standard deviations
being 0.088 and 0.084 respectively.
As before, by equating Eq. (8)
to the nominal shear stress at ultimate strength, vu, and transposing,
the reinforcement stress at ultimate
strength, f can be determined.
f8

=[

(fl

a/d

4.4
f
3 V1000} (a/d)'

vuf1 +2H
l

1/3

Cl

1.5502

p Vf' /100u

(9)

where Cl and C2 are as defined for

Eq. (8) above, and v,, is obtained
from Eq. (10) below. Values of C1
and C2 are also listed in Tables A9
and A10 appended to this report.
For purposes of practical design,
yield of the tension reinforcement
may again be accounted for by the
use of load factors 1/3 greater than
those specified for individual members.
Ultimate Strength

The principles used in the derivation of the ultimate strength equation for corbels subjected to vertical
loads only apply also to the derivation of an ultimate strength equation for corbels subject to combined
February 1965

horizontal and vertical loads. The

ultimate strength Vu must again
be proportional to b and d, and
it may be assumed that it is also
proportional to Vf'. The ratio
V/bd \If,; is then a function of
a/d, p and H/V, which should reduce to Eq. (7) when H/V = 0, i.e.
for vertical loads only. The following equation ! was established after
study of the test data, having in
mind the above requirements.
vu

= bd = 6.5 elf, (I 0.5d /)

(

/1000,,.,)(1/3
!11
l

+ 0.4H1V)

0)0.sH /v

(10)

Eq. (10) was used to calculate the

nominal shear stress at ultimate
strength for all corbels subjected to
combined vertical and horizontal
loads, and the ultimate shear stresses
so calculated are set out in Table
A3. Eq. (2) of the proposed design
criteria is based on Eq. (10). Excluding those specimens which experienced secondary failures (i.e., by
bearing or by splitting off of the
corbel ends), the average value of
(vu test/vu talc) was 1.05 for H/V =
%, and 1.21 for H/V ='h, the standard deviation being 0.132 and 0.216,
respectively.
The appearance of typical corbels
after failure under combined loading
is shown in Figs. 20 and 21.
A limited number of corbels with
stirrups were tested under combined
loading, and the results are given in
Table A4. It was found that the
stirrups did not increase the resistance of a corbel to combined loading
by as large a proportion as was the
case with a corbel subject to vertical
load only. Also, the contribution of
the stirrups was more erratic, viz.
corbels 13S and 14S with 0.34% and
43

0.93% of stirrup steel, respectively,

and all else the same, gave ultimate
shear stresses of 260 and 273 psi.
The effectiveness of the stirrups is
also apparently a function of the
a/d ratio and of the H/V ratio. A
considerable program of tests would
be necessary to assess the influence
of the various factors which apparently influence the effectiveness of
stirrups in a corbel subject to combined loading. For the present it
was decided that any contribution
from the stirrups should be regarded
as reserve strength, and should not
be taken into account in design.
Stirrups do lead to a more ductile
form of failure, and hence it was
concluded that a minimum amount
of stirrups should always be provided.
Fig. 20Flexural Yielding Failure Followed by
Crushing of the Concrete (FT), H/V = 1

Secondary Failures

Fig. 21Shear Failure (S), H/V = 1/2

44

The following comments apply to

both vertical load only and to combined vertical and horizontal loading.
Corbel End FailureIn certain of
the tests the depth of the outer
face of the corbel was deliberately
varied in order to determine the
minimum depth necessary to prevent
the occurrence of a secondary failure
by splitting away of a portion of the
concrete at the tip of the corbel. It
was found that this type of failure,
as shown by Fig. 22, did not occur
in those corbels having a depth below the outer edge of the bearing
plate greater than about 0.5 the
depth of the corbel at the face of
the column.
Bearing Failure--Crushing of the
concrete below the bearing plate occurred in some of the tests. The
bearing stress, fbu, a t ultimate
strength of the corbels is listed in
Table A6. Bearing failures occurred
PCI Journal

Fig. 22Corbel End Failure (CE), H/V

=7

at stresses as low as 0.34f', when the

load was applied near the outer edge
of the corbel in a combined loading
test. However, if the outer edge of
the bearing plate was at least 2 in.
from the outer face of the corbel,
then bearing failures did not occur at
bearing stresses less than 0.5 f' N detailed study of bearing stresses was
not made. It is believed that 0.5 f '.
is a suitably conservative value.
CONCLUDING REMARKS

The experimental evidence presented in this paper indicates that

the nominal ultimate shear stress, vu,
in corbels with a shear span to effective depth ratio less than one may
exceed the maximum shear stress
allowed by Chapter 17 of the ACI
Code (ACI 318-63) for beams with
a/d ratio greater than one.
The nominal ultimate shear stress
in a corbel is a function of the ratio
of the shear span to the effective
February 1965

depth, of the reinforcement ratio, of

the concrete strength, and of the
ratio of the horizontal and vertical
components of the applied loads.
Horizontal forces acting outward
from the column significantly reduce
corbel strength, and must be considered in the design of a corbel
unless special provisions are made
for free movements of the supported
beams.
Tension reinforcement and horizontal stirrups are equally effective
in increasing the strength of a corbel
subject to vertical loads only. However, the effective amount of reinforcement is limited.
Loads carried by a column do not
affect the corbel strength, nor does
the amount or arrangement of column reinforcement.
The results of this investigation
have been used as a basis for the
formulation of "Proposed Criteria for
the Design of Corbels" which is presented in Part 1 of this paper.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work described herein was

carried out in the Structural Laboratory of the Portland Cement Association under the direction of Eivind
Hognestad and Alan H. Mattock.
Contributions were made by several
members of the laboratory staff. Particular credit is due Bernard J.
Doepp, William Hummerich, Jr.,
David C. Yates and Kenneth Hirte
for the laboratory work involved.
NOTATION

The notation of the ACI Building

Code (ACI 318-63) is used wherever
applicable. The letter symbols used
in this paper are defined below:
A8 = area of tension reinforcement, in.2
A = area of horizontal stirrups, in.2
45

b
d

fbe

f$
fs^

Iv
fl,
fC

= shear span measured from

the face of the column to
the resultant of applied
load, in.
= width of corbel, in.
= effective depth of the centroid of tension reinforcement at the column face,
in.
= bearing stress at ultimate
strength, psi
= stress in tension reinforcement, psi
= stress in tension reinforcement at ultimate strength,
psi
= stress in horizontal stirrups, psi
= yield stress of reinforcement, psi
= concrete cylinder strength,
psi

= relationship expressed in
psi, so that /f " = 60 psi
for f' = 3600 psi
H/V = ratio of horizontal and
vertical components of
applied loads
h
= over-all depth of corbel at
column face, in.
h'
= depth of corbel outer
face, in.
n
= number of horizontal
closed stirrups
p = reinforcement ratio = (A8
+ A)/bd when H/V =0
= A, /bd when H/V does
not equal zero.
= center to center spacing
S
of stirrups, in.
V
= applied vertical load, lb
V
= nominal shearing stress =
V
bd' psi
V0
= nominal cracking load, lb
Vu
= ultimate vertical load, lb
vu
= nominal ultimate shearing
stress = Vu/bd, psi
Vile

46

V5 = vertical load at initial

yielding of tension reinforcement, lb
va = nominal shearing stress at
initial yielding of tension
reinforcement = V5/bd,
psi
w
= width of bearing plates,
in.
cA
= capacity reduction factor

REFERENCES

1. Rostasy, F., "Connections in Precast

Concrete StructuresContinuity in
Double-T Floor Construction," Journal
of the Prestressed Concrete Institute,

Vol. 7, No. 4, August 1962, pp. 18-48;

PCA Development Department Bulletin D55.
2. Kriz, L. B., and Raths, C. H., "Connections in Precast Concrete Structures
Bearing Strength of Column Heads,"
Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, Vol. 8, No. 6, December 1963,

pp. 45-75; PCA Development Department Bulletin D73.

3. Gaston, J. R., and Kriz, L. B., "Connections in Precast Concrete Structures
Scarf Joints," Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, Vol. 9, No.
3, June 1964, pp. 37-59; PCA Development Department Bulletin D79.
4. "Connection Details for Precast-Prestressed Concrete Buildings," PCI
Committee on Connection Details, Prestressed Concrete Institute, October
1963.
5. Rausch, E., "Berechnung der Abbiegungen gegen Abscheren" (Design of
Bent Bars for Shear), Der Bauingenieur, Vol. 3, No. 7, Berlin, April 1922,
pp. 211-212.
6. Rausch, E., "Beanspruchung auf Abscheren im Eisenbetonbau," (Shear in
Reinforced Concrete Structures), Der
Bauingenieur, Vol. 12, No. 32/33, Berlin, August 1931, pp. 578-581.
7. Niedenhoff, H., "Untersuchungen Uber
Das Tragverhalten von Konsolen and
Kurzen Kragarmen," (Investigations of
Behavior and Strength of Corbels and
Short Cantilevers), Desertation, Technische Hochschule Karlsruhe, 1961,
115 pp.
8. Austin, W. J., Egger, W., Untrauer,
PCI Journal

R. E., and Winemiller, J. R., "An Investigation of the Behavior of Deep

Members of Reinforced Concrete and
Steel," Air Force Special Weapons Center Report AFSWC-TR-59-18 (1960).
(Also Civil Engineering Studies, Structural Research Series No. 187, Department of Civil Engineering, University
of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, January
1960, 103 pp).
9. Untrauer, R. E., and Siess, C. P.,
"Strength and Behavior in Flexure of
Deep Reinforced Concrete Beams Under Static and Dynamic Loading," Air
Force Special Weapons Center Report
AFSWC-TR-61-47, Vol. 1 (1961). (Also
Civil Engineering Studies, Structural
Research Series No. 230, Department
of Civil Engineering, University of
Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, October 1961,
167 pp.; Untrauer, R. E., University
of Illinois PhD Thesis, 1961).
10. dePaiva, H. A. R., and Siess, C. P.,
"Strength and Behavior in Shear of
Deep Reinforced Concrete Beams Under Static and Dynamic Loading," Air
Force Special Weapons Center Report

AFSWC-TR-61-47, Vol. 2 (1961). (Also

Civil Engineering Studies, Structural
Research Series No. 231, Department
of Civil Engineering, University of
Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, October 1961,
252 pp.; dePaiva, H. A. R., University
of Illinois PhD Thesis, 1961).
11. Dill, A. F., and Siess, C. P., "Behavior
of Simple and Restrained Deep Reinforced Concrete Beams Under Static
Loading," Research and Technology
Division, Air Force Weapons Laboratory, RTD TDR-63-3092, March 1964,
250 pp. (Also Dill, A. F., University
of Illinois PhD Thesis, 1963).
12. Unpublished data on tests of short
cantilever beams supplied by the University of Texas.
13. Moody, K. G., Viest, I. M., Elstner,
R. C., and Hognestad, E., "Shear
Strength of Reinforced Concrete
Beams, Part 1Tests of Simple
Beams," Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Proceedings, Vol. 51,
December 1954, pp. 317-332; Reinforced Concrete Research Council Bulletin No. 6.

Presented at the Tenth Annual Convention of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, Washington, D.C., September 1964

February 1965

47

cc

Table Al-Exploratory Test Results

No. Type

fy, fsutest, vytest, vycalc, vntest, vucalc, vytest utest v utest f'c
ksi ksi
psi
psi
psi
psi
vycalc vncalc (vltest)WC/

h, h', a,
in. in. in.

d,
in.

p,
%

a/d

fc,
psi

24.1
24.1
24.1

0.62
0.62
0.62

0.249
0.249
0.249

4850
4190
4440

52.5
48.5
44.9

*
34.0
44.9

*
726

6o5
539
520

778
429
751

689
640
659

1.40

1.13
0.67
1.14

47.5
43.0
44.9

45.3
43.0
44.9

648
726

611
480
507

64o
648
755

684
624
641

1.35
1.43

0.94
1.04
1.18

Effect of Reinforcing Details

421
lEl
2E1

WC
BI
WI

26
26
26

li

9.5
9.5
9.5

29
3E1
4E

WC
BI
WI

26
26
26

26
12
12

6.0
6.o
6.0

24.1
24.1
24.1

0.62
0.62
0.62

0.249
0.249
0.249

3730
3980
4200

11
11

1.00
0.59

1.01

1.00
0.98

1.11

Effect of Additional Column Load

4
5BI, ?

WC
CL 100%

18

18

9
9

2.75
2.75

16.1
16.1

0.93
0.93

0.171
0.171

3520
4oio

43.6
44.5

43.6
*

777
*

777
889

797
851

0.97
1.04

1.00

15
6E

WC
CL 75%

18
18

6
6

6
6

16.2
16.2

0.48
0.48

0.370
0.370

4500
4140

48.1
48.1

48.1
48.1

405
478

472
456

556
493

622
597

0.86
1.05

0.89
0.82

1.00

24
7E

WC
CL 100%

18
18

9
9

6
6

16.1
16.1

0.93
0.93

0.372
0.372

4250
4490

47.3
44.5

42.5
44.5

770

731
716

691
850

753
774

1.08

0.92

1.00

726
772
659

669
685
681

1.08
1.13
0.97

1.00

1.10

1.07
0.92

1.20

Effect of Column Reinforcement

8BI
9EIA
1oE}

WC
CR 3-#9
CR 6-49

26
26
26

16
16
16

9.5
9.5
9.5

24.1
24.1
24.1

0.62
0.62
0.62

0.394
0.394
0.394

4580
4790
4750

46.5
53.3
46.5

*
*
*

*
*

NOTES:

ro

,( = 12 in. and b = 8 in. for all specimens

WC = welded cross-bar tension reinforcement
BI = inclined bar formed by bending tension reinforcement
WI = inclined bar welded to WC tension reinforcement
CL-% additional column load, % indicates ratio of column load to corbel load
CR = No. following CR indicates reinforcing bars in 8xl2" column
1 w = 5 in. (in all other cases w = 3 in.)
? column failed
not measured or inconclusive test data

540
608
549

1.17
1.12

WNr 0'0 CO-IO

"Nr

Oto0-)^vYi 0WNG 1001

O \Y W-) O\V

No r

FCOWr-F'-lr

0-I t'

0 -

OOH F' WW5OW

O\

CO
1 V1 ^^ I I I N 1 100 1 COO
CO

O V,1
011 CO 0
'p ^0'0 H N 1+
.1 CO
OS 5.15 '45r-W
H VI 0
0 0 C1 0-150 050M. to
It

Q\FF-J
N W NFL FF F'F- 4'4040054 -1
F . F^FFFF Y'mom'
W -^1 N COF'^n505F
N r r r -mil FFFN
,
0-1505050-450
00
40':1
Ik ^k Wyk
*5005550050)500550
W
0 N) OS ON O\W WW W 050I50 NN OJ N) W N 0 H 0 0 O-1 0 0 CO FOW O\W OW lb
CS

CO
CO #* I ^k * 1 I NS
W

p^ m
^p 50504050504040404050
o 40501F
b
404050505040504040
F
FO^F'501505050500550

4 COF" F" O^F"WWW
N) -^5DC MVN+I N N WH5Ni -0410 V
WI OH'D 0PO400 500-I05-44010 N)-S0 V. ^_
^O^I MN
0000000000 0000000000
0000000000 0000000000
V 5010,50404050404040
0 mom--" v
- Wi ON S40404040'.n
-iW-- SnCCOHHH--3 -401--W-4WIFi 50 -J Vi
F 0111
W so 0 '.45050505110505 05. W'015005500 COt) WNW COO H000 - 1 00 NW 05110\50OW

OOO^D'D

R r

0O
OOCOS T T F"O.054"00
. .40005400
. 040400050.0540404
.. . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. .050s
. .40400
. . .OS .OS .404'
r r r r r r r r Oo o r r r r r r NNNNNNNNNNNNr r r r r r r r NNN
000Hrrt- H HOO 0000000000 OOOOOOOOOH HHHHOOOOOO
N 5050V1W N NN COW W F
)5n'1 N OD CO
OJ CO CO H0 H 4 40'0'000N
5050 Vl F-'0 OS ANN N N)
a
0
0000000000 0000000000
0000000000 0000000000
" .NF' ^ W
_l ^l
-4 50
V
r+ \ri+ H l~-' lril J Y
i1 i1 O t
^ ^ v J W
.t ^
%
lriI W
^O ^ ^ ^N
WNN00^NOHO
SO NNN W W W -7 ^7p00000 00 F~-'
F"O\O5

'0 C\0,^0.OS 0. CONONORa,CN a\^GOa\a,m^a\aNCD a\a\G\a\mC\mON^^ I

FWWWd O\'.41

9961 x-nnnrgaj

F'.

'.O 'O 'O 05 05 05 Q\ OS OS O\ 0505 OS O\ OS COOS O\ OS OS O\ OS O\ O\ OS OS 050.05 F N N N IN N N N N N N

0000000 0000000000 0000000000 -1 -i^1-4-4-4-4^-.7-,7
'.0505050511511 W W W W

6J'

^ rn I I^ II

O NV 00.0050

r HH F'OOOI-

0
0 n CC

r H 11 11 11

113
In, U1 U1 NIm, W NG1 IS, 8 8 N EH"1 8 m 888 Vd18 N 88 E m 1

mw U1 w UI to w UI CAN

M
F"G
^m ^D

rrr000roor HOOOHHOOOO Orrrr

1.+ oorrr. Orr
p rot
p p prp ^<K<
WF'^4050 NH'O-4 -4N WN10 Irl ern 01^01W ^fi CO
OX
W-I'.4I 0105.110)500
-I OJT 1^-'I m

I w

Or H 00 r
rl
O

F N 501Wi SO" COO W -4 vii H ^ W NFCO H a\ 000-1 r NCH 100+ III

^N O

F'^F'N^O VI^ON O^Vr1^0H-W1N^'1NVt O OOOs4FF^ COO 0 05050-I 101050 ION IDN

h

N N^^^ON^O

SO

F F F F W W W
-7 -7 0, O\ OO OO cm -1 f' F
'.n
O^ r rn^G'<
CO to to laIt1* I+ I a-4 .0 r r -mot m I^-.i '01N Io r I0 o SO Ian r -4 m m m 41
n
lo IA Fn Io la Ian Ire 1* -1CO
rC h`
0
515 or oW 50H O H W F 5O N pOOC

01

0NN O

WFFFFF'F'Nr
W -J0V
WiW NN
^' f f Ir l^

VNN O^ OAT 0\0000 n

I )00 X000000 O\FH 00 'O T0I VW

OHO

wI N

p'. 0 10 c<<
1 **5 1 * Q>'n N
N * 0 Y m
cNF
-4H V1 -1 -a 0V

00000
11)W1
O \n
F' t"W 1

FinWWwwWW
41-101001 by <<<
rnoo w Ian 1In Is- Ian Is- to boo Ho o
w
Is- o o rnv
wi
^ r

1 ) 1 II

Ol F' F
'01 o1010N
01001(0
i> Ian bn m o I lug Ia Ian la Ls- IIn^
'n,

1111

01Or0
0
00 0-]Wo
F"

c+
HI') OJ
O wn N
01)

20
Cn cdi]Um

^yw
CO+1n 0fnw mmm mm m c^]CO^J[O.W

N
20020
V'L
J1 ai 08jm 0 o
ddm

0000000000 0000000000 H000000000 0 0 o r V r O O r o 10<0<

^m^o m-^^^nrn wio rn^^o^rnrnm^o o^-imrn^^^^rn v,mworrw^o i-^^o
^rrnw
^Y^wor ^nWNFmo>woo^n ^o^om^w,t^nr^^ m^oN^o^ov,mw^o w N^+

N
0

-0-4001-4-4 0
0)N O^OJW^1 ^1 ^10^0^0101 'd 0<
0i+N rnlV+N ^^^N ^^O HIVp^0^0 001 010101 Vt 0101 .0
00-fl ^^^^n^ ^^n HO 0J -00001 wo ' '0 0001 01\10w
r r

vt
vt F^1
of F t-O'.pn
u, w F' 00414101 4 10-001 1041.041000 -F w vi 41^1 -1 00 000 01 0-4 0 'd G<
VY
Fop ^1'. p 0 N O V Vi OJ V -'O
W W OJ N N W W O -1 F" N J O -1 V V V Y w W N ^l O In CI'01-40,01.0 HAD O NV H0000 H"00 '-0 00 0F01101 r-F--7 0 0 -10,0H FNr 1000
m

11111111

FWW WWWNNNN NNN00W 000F 00 F-0-0<-0.00 N wW FF F m^

W C-^O F'^n ^1 O^ F' O^-^l ^n ^D w F WHO Y Y O^ O^ F
w F' F'^1 ^.n ^n W F F N V * * p^ N * v^ vt # F 011
WO 00'..n FW r OJ O, 11)-fl F -1 100,0 W V -1 '000'.0)00000-a W
0101 F.1 F F+. m

W-ak

F V OVFi VFiN
11001N FVFi o W.0W N0W Fl F
lW
^FN 01-fl VFi 01 001 V
Fi W
Iff M
WWWW^I -1V 000WWOWH)0010100 ww 010010001-fl F"O FFW V^F-vi <- I.

0000000000
0000000000 0000000000
0000000000
N ^M

N N NIV FF'FFFF FwW F FW WWF wWw .001.0000.0 F'FFFW C'w FFF

0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000

^D
F F F' O O H V r \10 N N N N H FF-' V VON N 00-0.0-00000
0 0 0 - - -aF '0'0'000'0'0'01.0
^o ^
^v,v1F0c--HHI-- ^--- H IYYwwv
01 FF000*<4'0

H0
N Y Y N v ^1 V V V r Y Y Y r Y r r Y r V Y V r N N N N N N Y V V Y V V r Y N V V
O V O O O O r V V V V Y Y O O O O O O O 000000000H r Y Y r r r O O O O
FM 6 F10^0 NNt' Wm mO^O^O^O^0^^1.^p ^p ^p ^0 WW F'.F'FN NNN(D O W p^O^ p^^p.
^O
F"W O>w^nFFF'\p o, a\NNNNNWw wWWNNMJ ^00 F F'FF'O^O^O^NNNW

NNNNFFNNNNHYYNNNNNNVVVVNNNYYVNNNNYrVNNNr
O FFFVVFF'O 0O^O^FFFF'F00
00000 .0

O^ww W N N H000
0000000000
0000000000
0 1.00
O--- V 1 V i 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- ^n V t V t v^ ^n ^n --- vt o m

000^O^NN O\a\

0-4--fl-a-a--a--a

jeuano j KM

Table A2-Test Results for Vertical Load Series (concluded)

CD

So

NO

h, h',
in in.
in.

d,
in.

p,
%

20.1
16.0
16.2
16.1
16.0
24.2
24.1
24.1
20.2
20.1
16.0
16.2
16.1
16.0
24.2
24.1
24.1
20.2
20.1
16.0
16.2
16.1
16.0

0.94
1.23
0.48
0.93
1.23
0.48
0.93
1.24
0.49
0.94

0.298
0.297
0.525
0.528
0.531
0.144
0.145
0.145
0.297
0.298
0.297
0.525
0.528

a,
in.

f',
psi

f7,
ksi

test, v test,
psi
sksi

v calc, v test, v calc,

psi
psi
psi

v test
y
vyCale

vtest
u
vcalc
u

1.10

1.07
1.06
1.03
1.14
0.97
1.25
0.95
0.84
1.07
1.20
1.11
0.96
1.11
1.29
1.14
1.19
0.93
0.97
1.14
1.23
0.94
0.92
1.04

Typ
Failures

r
cry
02

811
821
831
841
85 1
861
871
881
891
9o 1
911
921
93 1
941
951
961
97-1
981
991
loos
1011

1021
1o51

22
6
6
18
18 18
18 18
18 18
6
26
6
26
26 26
6
22
6
22
6
18
18 18
18 18
18 18
6
26
6
26
26 26
6
22
22
6
6
18
18 18
18 18
18 18

6.0
4.75
8.5
8.5
8.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
6.0
6.0
4.75
8.5
8.5
8.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
6.0
6.0
4.75
8.5
8.5
8.5

1.23
0.48
0.93
1.23
0.48
0.93
1.24
0.49
0.94
1.23
0.48
0.93
1.23

0.531

0.144
0.145
0.145
0.297
0.298
0.297
0.525
0.528
0.531

2570
2110
2310
2290
2170
4180
3880
3820
4010
4240
4060
4160
3980
3940
6310
6430
6420
6610
6570
6430
6370
6680
6590

44.6
45.1
45.8
47.3
44.6
46.3

44.3
47.5
44.8
46.5
46.7
45.8
47.5
46.7
45.3
46.5
44.3
44.5
46.5
47.5
46,3
46.5
47.5

44.6

672

45.8
42.5

386
-

46.3
38.1
34.0
44.8
46.5

826
557
964

36.3

31.1

45.3
45.8
47.5
42.5
45.3
46.5
32.5
44.5
46.5
47.5
46.3

46.5
47.5

347
699
826
1300
619
902
1340
386
699
922

610
4
285
470
A

694
4
487
791
"
370
610
d

815
4
4
603
967
4
451
763
'

NOTES:
Types of Failure (see Figs. 13 to 16)
B - Bearing
CE - Corbel End, crack intersecting inclined Coos
DS - Diagonal Splitting
FC - Flexural Compression
FT - Flexural Tension
5 - Shear
,( = 12 in, and b = 8 in. for all specimens unless otherwise noted
not measured or inconclusive test data
For 39 specimens Avg. vytest/vyCale = 1.06, Standard Deviation = 0.135;
For 78 specimens Avg. v test/v ucelc = 1.02, Standard Deviation = 0.119. (Failure types B and CE excluded.)
A w ="5 in. (in all other cases w = 3 in.)
AL = 6 in. and b = 16 in.
(= 24 in.

02
r

fau calculated smeller than Py

672

659

397
543
495
878
804
774
681
967
961
497
699
888
981
1300
1110
787
1150
1340
602
754
922

627
623
386
478
510
703
845
923
634
805
864
518
631
687
864
1o90
1200
813
1000

1o90
641
817
889

1.35
1.19
1.14
1.22
0.94
1.14
1.01
1.03
0.93
0.85
0.91
-

FC
FC
FC
FC
FC
S

S
S
FC
S

S
DS
Ds
DS
S
S
S
5
DS

FC
DS
DS

Table A3-Test Results for Combined Load Series

(H/V = 1/2)
h,

h',

a,

in,

in.

in.

in.

18
22
26
18
22
26
18

6
6
6
6
6
6
6

2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75

16.2
20.2
24.2
16.1
20.1
24.1
16.1

0.48
0.38
0.32
0.93
0.75
0.62
1.86

0.170
0.136
0.114
0.171
0.137
0.114
0.171

113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120

22
26
18
22
26
18
22
26
18
22

6
6
6
'6
6
6
6
6
6
6

2.75
2.75
6.0
6.o
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.o
6.o
6.o

20.1
24.1
16.2
20.2
24.2
16.1
20.1
24.1
16.1
20.1

1.49
1.24
0.47
0.38
0.32
0.93
0.75
0.62
1.86
1.49

0.137
0.114
0.370
0.297
0.248
0.372
0.298
0.249
0.372
0.298

121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130

26
18
22
26
18
18
22
26
26
18

6
6
6
6
6
18
6
6
26
6

6.o

l0.0

24.1
16.2
20.2
24.2
16.1
16.1
20.1
24.1
24.1
16.1

1.24
0.48
0.38
0.32
0.93
0.93
0.75
0.62
0.62
1.86

0.249
0.617
0.495
0.413
0.621
0.621
0.497
0.415
0.415
0.621

131
132
133
134

18
22
26
26

18
6
6
26

l0.0
10.0
10.0
10.0

16.1
20.1
24.1
24.1

1.86
1.49
1.24
1.24

0.621
0.497
0.415
0.415

No.
l04
105
l06
107
108
l09

110
ill
112

10.0

10.0

10.0
l0.0
l0.0
10.0
10.0
10.0.

d,

p,

a
d

fc',

fy,

fsutest, vytest,

vytest

vutest

psi

'`Tycalc

vucalc

434
384
358
621
515
519
932

380
427
305
534
466
445
788

1.05
1.08
1.06
1.06
1.07

1.14

1.17
1.16

246
223
215
405
344
343
?

793
726
376
334
339
483
451
454
815
715

678
650
334
314
318
446
424
419
674
634

?
185
188
181
301
357
286
277
282
z

596
211
209
207
236
344
270
244
337
324

586
234
260
255
326
383
326
334
357
518

426
280
279
458

537
527
521
528

vycalc, v test, vucalc,

psi

ksi

ksi

psi

psi

psi

4210
3860
4040
4080
3860
4240
4250
3900
4310
4400
4320
4950
3870
3880
4240
4210
4130

45.7
45.7
47.3
48.5
47.7
48.2
47.5
48.8
48.7
46.5
45.7
45.7
48.3
44.7
48.4
48.5
47.7

45.7
45.7
47.3
48.5
47.7
48.2
47.5
48.8
48.7
46.5
45.7
45.7
48.3
44.7
48.4
48.5
47.7

309
278
258
543
463
441
932

294
257
243
511
431
397

793
726
270
248
207
483
404
363
776
700

3970
3380
4240
4240
3250
4480
3300
3610
4120
3930
4220
4120
4180
4290

48.2
46.5
46.5
46.5
47.9
53.4
47.9
48.0
47.0
47.7
45.0
44.7
48.4
43.9

48.2
46.5
46.5
46.5
31.1
53.4
39.6
39.6
47.0
22.7
31.0
26.2
35.4
38.4

596
174
178
155
344
285
-

2
2

505
506
469

For 17 specimens Avg. vytest/vycalc = 1.04,

For 25 specimens Avg. vutest/vucalc = 1.05,

1.11

1.10
1.11

0.96
1.19

1.17

1.10

1.16
1.18

1.17
1.12
1.12
1.06
1.06

1.08

1.06
-

1.06
1.08
1.21
1.13

0.94
0.94
0.86
0.96
1.01
-

1.02
0.90
0.80
0.81
(0.72)
0.90
(0.83)
(0.73)
0.94
(0.62)

1.17

0.79
(0.53)
(0.54)
0.87

Typ
Failures

S
S
S

S
S
FT

FT
FT

S
S
S
S

S
S
00

05

FT
CE

DS
CE
CE

S
CE
DS
CE
CE
DS

Standard Deviation = 0.088;

Standard Deviation = 0.132.

Table A3-Test Results for Combined Load Series (continued)

(H/V = 1/1)
No

h,

h',

a,

d,

p,

u
f",

fy,

fs test, v test, v calc, vntest, vucalc,

v test v test
y
u
Type
vycalc vucalc Failures

psi

psi

psi

psi

47.0
44.3
46.8
44.3
44.3

174
155
134
373
295

9
185
?
343
2

251
224
213
503
373

198
186
150
346
278

0.84
1.08
-

1.26
1.20
1.42
1.45
1.34

FT
FT
FT
FT
FT

24.1 0.62 0.114 4000 45.3

16.1 1.86 0.171 4270 44.3
20.1 1.49 0.137 4110 47.2
24.1 1.24 0.114 4250 48.8
16.2 0.48 0.370 3720 45.0
20.2 0.38 0.297 4300 45.0
24.2 0.32 0.248 4o4o 45.0
16.1 0.93 0.372 4250 43.6
20.1 0.75 0.298 4320 43.6
24.1 0.62 0.249 405o 43.6

45.3
44.3
47.2
48.8
45.0
45.0
45.0
43.6
43.6
43.6

233
660
553
519
154
136
110
272
230
207

337
660
575
532
212
166
245
388
349
311

248
564
476
425
167
163
144
291
266
235

0.93
0.87
1.00
0.93
0.93

1.36
1.17
1.21
1.25
1.27
1.02
1.70
1.33
1.31
1.32

s
S
S
s
FT
FT
FT
FT
FT
FT

18
6
6.o
22
6
6.o
26
6
6.o
18
6 10.0
6 10.0
22
26
6 1o.0
18
6 1o.0
9 10.0
18
18 18 1o.0
22
6 1o.0

16.1 1.86 0.37 2 4230 45.3

20.1 1.49 0.298 413o 48.5
24.1 1.24 0.249 3960 45.3
16.2 0.48 0.617 4750 48.5
20.2 0.38 0.495 4120 48.5
24.2 0.32 0.413 3670 48.5
16.1 0.93 0.621 4150 45.3
16.1 0.93 0.621 4300 45.6
16.1 0.93 0.621 4540 45.5
20.1 0.75 0.497 4200 45.3

543
513
404
127
121
110
194
203
202
155
142
156
182
272
337
212
192
295

1.10
1.18
- * 1.05
0.87
(0.84)
(0.90)
- * (0.92)
0.89
(0.85)
(0.87)
0.91* 0.84
0.75
(0.71)

24.1 0.62 0.415 4090 45.3

24.1 0.62 0.415 4470 43.2
24.1 0.62 0.415 435o 46.7
16.1 1.86 0.621 4080 48.3
16.1 1.86 0.621 4520 45.4
20.1 1.49 0.497 4110 42.5
24.1 1.24 0.415 4440 42.5
24.1 1.24 0.415 4550 46.7

543
482
404
127
121
110
194
202
155
130
182
212
272

492
433
386
151
133
119
229
233
240
219

6 10.0
11 1o.0
26 1o.0
6 1o.0
18 1o.0
6 1o.0
6 10.0
26 1o:0

45.3
48.5
45.3
48.5
48.5
48.5
45.3
41.4
45.5
45.3
45.3
36.9
46.7
38.2
38.4
42.5
39.6
46.7

2
2
?
2
166
157
2
272
247
223
2
9
?
146
2
z
218
221
223
208

in. in.

in.

136
137
138
139
140

18
22
26
18
22

6
6
6
6
6

2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75

16.2
20.2
24.2
16.1
20.1

in.

47.0
44.3
46.8
44.3
44.3

141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150

26
18
22
26
18
22
26
18
22
26

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

2.75
2.75
2.75
2.75
6.o
6.0
6.0
6.o
6.o
6.o

151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168

26
26
26
18
18
22
26
26

0.48
0.38
0.32
0.93
0.75

0.170
0.136
0.114
0.171
0.137

psi ksi
3870
4610
3870
4420
3890

ksi

195
192
202
?
396
344
326
355

204
0.66*
214
0.90
211
378
39736o
0.62*
354
0.77
358

(0.70)
(0.73)
(0.86)
(0.72)
0.85
(0.59)
(0.54)
0.82

S
S
Ds
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
Ds
CE
CE
CE
B
CE
Ds
CE
CE
Ds

For 10 specimens Avg. v ytest/vycalc = 0.92, Standard Deviation = 0.084;

For 21 specimens Avg. vutest/vucale = 1.21, Standard Deviation = 0.216.
02
02

ut

Table A3Test Results for Combined Load Series (concluded)

No.

h, h',
in. in.

a,
in.

d,
in.

3.0

12.1 1.24 0.248

1351 14

p,
`%

f',
c
p
psi

fy,
ksi

6430

.8

f sutest, vytest, vycalc, vu test, vutalc,

ksi
p
psi
psi
psi
psi
( n/ V = 3/4)
46.8
542

vytest vutest
Type
vycale vucale Failures

533

775

605

1.02

1.28

983

722

1.36

(n /v =5/4)
1691 14

3.0

12.1 2.48 0.248 6650 46.8

46.8

NOTES:
Types of Failure (see Figs. 13 to 16)
B - Bearing
CE - Corbel End, crack intersecting inclined face
DS - Diagonal Splitting
FC - Flexural Compression
FT - Flexural Tension
S - Shear
= 12 in. and b = 8 in. for all specimens unless otherwise noted
* not measured or inconclusive test data
=6in.
? fsu calculated smaller than fy
C)
0
5,

692

Table A4-Test Results for Corbels with Stirrups

5,w
No.
01
CA

in.

a
StPr^r^ Stirrups
and ins. d
ups
Reinf.
in. in. in.

18
18
18
18
18
18
26
26
26
18
26

9
9
9
9
9
9
11
11
12
9
12

h,

h', a,

d,

fc' Spacing
ps i c/c
in.

vytest utest
fy^
Tension f test, vy test,, v calc, vu test , v caic, vycalc v calc
Stirrup
Reinf. su
y
u
u
ksi
psi
psi
psi
psi
psi
psi
(H/V = 0)

iS1

251
304
41
5s 1
651
751
85 1
9s 1
1051
115 1

0.34
0.62
0.93
0.34
0.62
0.93
0.34
0.62
0.93
0.62
0.62

1.27
1.55
1.86
1.27
1.55
1.86
1.27
1.55
1.86
1.55
1.55

0.590
0.590
0.590
0.372
0.372
0.372
0.394
0.394
0.394
0.295
0.197

4340 3 1 / 2
4590 3 1 / 2
4430 2 3/ 4
4330 3 1 /2
4340 32/ 2
4480 2 3/ 4
4110 4
4300 4
4230 3 1/4
4150 3'/ 2
4280 4

16.1

0.6 2

0.93

0.`021

6 120

3 1/ 2

16.1
10.0 16.1
6.5 16.1
4.75 24.1

0.34
0.93
0.62
0.62

0.93-a
0.93-a
0.933
0.932

0.621
0.621
0.404
0.197

3900

3 1/2
23/4
3 1 /2
4

9.5 - 16.1
9.5 16.1
9.5 16.1
6.0 16.1
6.0 16.1
6.0 16.1
9.5 24.1
9.5 24.1
9.5 24.1
4.75 16.1
4.75 24.1

^.o.o

135
14s
15S
166

18
18
18
26

9
9
9
12

10.0

50.0
46.2
46.9
56.8
49.4
49.1
55.7
50.0
51.5
49.1
49.1

01

= 12 in. and b = 8 in, for all specimens

} w = 15 in. (w 3 in. for all others)
2 Test stopped at v = 1190 psi
. Stirrups not included in p
f su calculated smaller than f y

4110
4ioo

44.0
44.0
45.0
44.2
44.2
44.2
43.9
42.4
35.3
47.5
?

738
844
849
932
1050
116o
1200
-

738
844
849
932
1050
1160
827
939
912
1210

691
759
793
843
902
974
806
881
911
942
1030

1.18
1.18
-

1.07
1.11
1.07
1.10
1.16
1.20
1.03
1.07
1.00
1.28
-

47.5

388

352

536

444

1.10

1.21

47.5
47.5
47.5
47.3

259
272
408
467

'
229
4

260
273
432
589

222
235
277
326

1.19
-

1.17
1.16
1.56
1.81

712
716

4
4

4
-'

4
?
For 10 specimens Avg.u vtest/vcalc
= 1.11; Standard Deviation = 0.084
u
( H/V =
50.2

(H/V ='
4350

44.0
44.0
45.0
44.2
44.2
44.2
45.0
45.0
46.3
47.5
44.2

49.0
49.9
49.1
49.1

1/2)
47.5
/1)
47.5
47.5
47.5
47.3

4
For 4 specimens Avg. vtes
u
u
/vcalc
= 1.42

Table A5-Comparison with Test Results of Other Investigators

Source

U.of z.

U.of z. (5)

No .

B-8
B-2 -1
B-2-2
B-3 -1
B-3-2
B-3-3
B -4 -1
B-4-2
B-4-3
F4si
F4S2
F3S2
F3S3
F2S1
F2S2

a,

d,

p,

in.

in.

14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.o

29.0
22.0
22.0
15.5
15.5
15.5

10.0
10.0
10.0

2.20

6.o
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0

6.0
6.0
8.0
8.0
12.0
12.0

o.83
1.67
0.83
1.67
0.83
1.29

1.03

1.00

2.00
1.00
1.00

2.00

1.00

1.00

f ,

f y,

f sutest,

ksi

ksi

vy
psi

vycalc, v

ucalc,

v test
y
vycalc

c
psi

0.483
0.636
0.636
0.903
0.903
0.903
1.400
1.400
1.400

3390
2910
2290
3740
4940
2960
2800
2520
6460

46.0
*
*
*
*
39 . 9
*
45.9
*
50.9
403
50.9
51.4
51.4
516
*
42.4
*
45.0
45.0
237
*
54.5
*
47.3
47.3
285
Avg. v test/v calc = 0.96;
u
u

621
628
511
501
502
560
427
459
527
1
532
.1
645
514
237
261
289
0.91
.1
317
357
404
0.70
372
439
Standard Deviation = 0.128

1.000
1.000

497o
5030

46.7
48.6
47.4
47.4
46.0
44.8

411

0.750
0.750
0.500

0.500

3530

4980
4920
4600

46.7
48.6
47.4
47.4
46.o
44.8

306
614
427
700
610
885

psi

psi

psi

626
440
1
1

433
?
616
1

442
854
575
1140
902
1150

vu test
vucalc

0.99

1.01
1.25
0.82
0.89
0.85

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

1.02

0.90
0.93

464
589
472
707
693
844

0.74
0.98
0.99
-

0.95
1.45
1.22
1.61
1.30
1.36

4
4
3
3
2
2

595
478
746
591
600
452
642
737
577
518
522

1.03
0.90
0.84
0.74
0.85
0.73
-

1.30
0.97
1.05
0.74
1.18

1.39
1.24
0.81
1.19
1.29

2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4

0.85
0.74
0.80

3
3
3

Specimens have compression reinforcement

U.of 1. (6)

G23S-11
G23s-21
G24s-11
G24S-21
G33S -11
0333-21
G333-31
G34s -11
G343-21
G43s -11
G44s -11

6.0
6.o
6.0
6.o
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.o
6.o

13.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
7.0
7.0

0.83
0.46
0.83
0.46
1.67
0.83
2.58
1.67
0.83
1.67
1.67

0.462
0.462
0.462
0.462
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667

0.857

0.857

3560
3420
5600
5240
3380
3050
2890
5100
4960
3510
3560

45.7
51.4
45.7
51.4
47.3
45.2
45.2
47.2
47.0
44.1
47.9

45.7
51.4
45.7
51.4
47.3
45.2
45.2
47.2
47.0
44.1
47.9

533
325
535
323
667
324
861
694
359
475
530

Avg. vutest/vucalc = 1.10;

U.of 2. M

0
a

Hoa
Hob
Hon

6.0
6.0
6.0

8.o
8.o
8.0

0.83
0.83
0.83

0.750
0.750
0.750

2930
5800
3580

45.0
51.0
51.0

338
421
351
Avg. vuu
test/vcalc = 0.80
45.0
51.0
51.0

516
362
636
437
1

382
1
1

493

1
1

776
462
785
435
711
454
891
915
467
618
671

1.00

Standard Deviation = 0.209

381
581
463

367
448
382

430
605
476

0.89
0.72
0.76

Table A5-Comparison with Test Results of Other Investigators (concluded)

No.

a'
in.

d'

24a
24b
25a
25b
26a
26b
27a
27b
28a
28b
29a
29b
30
31

28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.0

Source
JACI(11)

in.

p'
%

21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0

2.72
2.72
3.46
3.46
4.25
4.25
2.72
2.72
3.46
3.46
4.25
4.25
4.25
4.25

1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33

fc,
psi

fy'
ksi

2580
2990
3530
2500
3140
2990

45.7
45.7
45.4
45.4.
43.8
43.8
x+5.7
45.7
45.4
45.4
43.8
43.8
43.8
43.8

3100

3320
3380
3250
3150
3620
3680
3250

fsutest, vytest ,
ksi
psi
24.8
26.3
18.4
20.0
26.0
23.0
28.5
29.5
21.0
26.1
22.4
24.1
*
*

*
*

Avg. vutest/ ucalc

U.of T.

'1
2
3
4
5
6

21.0
21.0
15.0
36.25
36.25
20.87

33.4
33.7
33.4
33.0
33.0
33.0

0.55
1.12
0.37
0.46
1.01
1.02

0.629
0.623
0.449
1.10

1.10
0.632

5120
468o
6170
2860
4820
4820

64.0
47.0
75.0
75.0
47.0
47.0

*
*
*
*
*
*

vycalc, vutest , vucalc, vytest vutest

vycalo vucalc
psi
psi
psi
1
.
1
1
1
1

2.
A
1

452
462
408
442
643
605
531
544
462
520
595
667
731
776

402
433
510
429
513
500
441
457
499
489
514
551
555
522

* Not measured or inconclusive test data

1.12
1.07
0.80
1.03
1.25
1.21
1.20
1.19
0.93
1.06
1.16
1.21
1.32
1.49

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

1.03'
0.99
0.95
1.14
1.02
1.07

12.87
12.37
12.50
12.44
14.00
12.62

1.14; Standard Deviation = 0.168

*
*
*
*
*
*

523
1
569
267
444
1

568
662
589
309
465
723

548
668
623
270
457
673

Avg. vutestwucalc = 1.03; Standard Deviation = 0.066

1 f su
calculated smaller than f y

^tJ^l

^l

-I-]-t

-1

000000'0

--n-

ti

N'W NNW
Nwwr
M
W-0)-F''00)
(100
-.00) him0)
0'0H N0 OOo-r(1
0000000000

0000

t^[O
+]

O m 090000 COIJ[0
^J w
+7[O

^]b1 ntm
c0 [9L0

W 000

0trJ

[O
= mcJ^(n(
Ln

nCn G
0

N
G
N ^

-F'F'W o

00] 01010,-J
0)0)00)0)101010(110)
O 000)000)0000)
0)0)011
H MW 0)0)00)00)0110010
(00)0
U]
Ul 0)100001010101010
0)010)
0
00000

rr000000rrr000000000 0000000000 000rr000rr

p -'7'000
rO^ p^" O^
0-n N0)tO^
.00)0
00-.)Ol
'0'.))O-1
N -1 V^
W O^ ^O N N ^1 Ol 0-nI'0H
Vt O\ Wc-c--.1
Ol F' O^-00
OW0
W --^l Vt0010'000
N Ol ^D O^ '.0
0)00O0)0-'0'0O0)

0000000000

1 4,-O'0

ti m
10

10w
H'L
G "dd

n OH
_C

W t'O^C^0\ O^O^Ol Ol O^O^WW F'-C' -F"-F' ww4000000

T3 M
N '0r'0 W-) -0)0.11
1 H N) r -0 00'0'0 0)H N (0 r0,-' H Hn
0000000000 0000000000
-000)0001)0)00)1
W 0)0N0I100H
'F-1n'000rW
0)'-)W
WNwW
FrrrNNN
1) M
-10-110)
-n NOWW
00.00.1110-0)0.0
N p0W0-n
H WO00-1
0-10000010
'0-1-400)0)--)
rr-.l
\0
01-0)0)0)0)0)
0)0) r OH
0-10)0)\O\0
F0)0)0) OOH
r W \DInV+
0)00 00)0.O
O rN00)
0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000

CF C'WWF'-A- 4Fw
H
H- 'C ^^ N O H O
0000000000

rrrrrrrrrr
rrrrrrrrrr 0r00000'0000000'0000.
)O 0-.1'00)
r r r r '00)
r r rF')r Hr H000000000
'0000)0)00)0)00 o
000
00)01-1 '01)10W

0 W

OHHHOOHHOO 00000H0000 0000000000 0000000000 n-(1

MI H
(OW-.l^n
Wp
Nrr-1^1
'
N\OSOrNOD^1
mOl OlNO^OA F"W
^1 mil- O^
'0
O^C'O ^Ol\J1
n
wO
OaHr O^-FO 00 01 -1^nW^n^F"w
^l Ol0OO^ VtW^1
N NO p^'0-1
0 1OWN-1

N N NNw
NFt'WW
Ww NWw
FH W-1'.O
NNW WNW00
NNW N Nr NIV NN
OW
0'00.11
O'000'
0100)0
HOD
O-0
00 H
Nvi\O
'00.0
.)-J 0) O-0)0.0O0
010)-)
00)NWr W
N N W-.) Or
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000

0)0

00001)
FWw0 $p1 W O)Ww'0 410.00)
-H
0
.0)0)0)0)000)0
F'4, D p w0 C F-F-F
b H
1 0 '0-H'0'00 '0H 01) H NW- H
OH'0H M0 HH HO
0
O 0)'0'000 \0 wN '0-0)0)-H -0'.o
0000000000
0000000000
000000000 8 V. 0_
`

W-^-^t

0 0 00-.1 000) -F'W N r O'.0 W-mil 00141 00)) N r 0l0 01-.7 000n 4,0)41 N H 00)F-F
'00)4,0)4
'W N r
00-.) rF-^-F'r-F-

c^A^[mJ mmw [co

Imo-'

Cn^m m cca w Cdf) V](n 0 [dl][m co Cn H H3M Ul V][n Cn CR Cn (nmCA Cn

c0 w ca

^'O

000rrrrrHO rrrrH000rr rr00000000 rrrrrrrrOr

^i+^N
OFI NW-H 0)0)) NNN H CO^F
^
000
HNo 4\0\0
-- H^0)0-H00^^YO

N Nr ran
N '0 000 r-.1 0.n
W
wF' W W w W W H W
w .F V W
kY o
0-1 0r0)-'0-H-) 'w\p 0)1001'41
H
O"0000) N OIw N-. I '0H 0) Or
W -7 F" o Oar F 0 W W N F' H SO H N H OJ-. l O0 0D 0n N' O0 o 0 0 40n N
0 -I -H H --1 N0)
-'.0
0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000

-r-' w W WWO
.0)0) t' .F- -F '0
''10)l'0 0)0)0)0)10) F -F F' -F' W ,P F ^N W W w w 000. N nM
WF'
OJW0 011 Iw N 'N\0-1S0 0)1-.i 0000F'Vt '0)00000 -10tH N'ONVt Wr-)
O0N-1 0)00
HH 0O -10O
O10.0w N Nr0vi -N on'O
HOO' O FN F"O '00-.) 0-. 1 -0)01)10-400 t+ 0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000

F'0)
W N NN N N N NNNNr r lr r rr r
W N r O'O W-1 O'v^ 4 w N H O00 N-j7 O00)1 Fw N r 000 00-I Olvt F'W OH
000 W
N- WwWwWWW
00 0) -0-O

il3 uznof IDd

CO

CD

CD

CD
N

Z
CD
N

W
m
t_

0
a
CD

Cs

1
01

8S

12
rn

Table A6-Corbel Bearing Stresses at Ultimate Strength (concluded)

No.

121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137

fc'

fbu'

psi

psi

3970
3380
4240
4240
3250
4480
3300
3610
4120

4790
1140
1410
1670
1260
1840
1810
1960
2710
1740
2290
1880
2240
3680
1560
1350
1510

3930

4220
4120
4180
4290
6430
3870
4610

H/V = 0 for 1
H/V = 1/ 2 for
H/V = 3/4 for
H/V = 1/ 1 for
H/V = s /4 for

CE

cc

fbu
f

1.21
0.34
0.33
0.39
0.39
0.41
0.55
0.54
0.66
0.44
0.54
0.46
0.54
0.86
0.24
0.35
0.33

to 103
104 to 134
135
136 to 168
169

Type
Failure

S
DS
25

FT
CE

Ds
CE
CE

CE

DS
CE

CE

OS

FT
FT

No.

138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154

psi

f,

psi

fbu'

fbu
f'

3870
4420
3890
4000
4270
4110
4250
3720
4300
4040
4250
4320
4050
4230
4130
3960
4750

1720
2700
2500
2710
3540
3850
4260
1140
1120
1980
2080
2340
2500
2920
3440
3250
690

0.44
0.61
0.64
0.68
0.83
0.94
1.00
0.31
0.26
0.49
0.49
0.54
0.62
0.69
0.83
0.82
0.14

a
Failure
FT
FT
FT

S
S
S
S

FT
FT
FT
FT
FT
FT

S
S
Ds

CE

No.

155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163

164
165
166
167
168
169

fc'

fbu'

psi

psi

4120
3670
4150
4300
4540
4200
4090
4470
4350
4080

810
880
1040
1090
1080
1040
1140
1250
1460
1460
1810
1420
1540
2370
1980

4520
4110
4440
4550
6650

fc

0.20
0.24
0.25
0.25
0.24
0.25
0.28
0.28
0.34
0.36
0.40
0.34
0.35
0.52
0.30

Type
Failure
CE
CE

CE
CE
OS
-CE
CE
CE

CE

OS

CE

CE
DS
S

Table A7-Values

of C 2

= 0.8 (10)a /3d

(H/V = 0 and no stirrups)

ad
o.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9

0.00
0.80
0.86
0.93
1.01
1.09
1.17
1.27
1.37
1.48
1.6o

0.01
0.81
0.87
0.94
1.01
1.10
1.18
1.28
1.38
1.49
1.61

0.02
0.81
0.88
0.95
1.02
1.10
1.19
1.29
1.39
1.50
1.62

0.03
0.82
0.88
0.95
1.03
1.11
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.51
1.63

0.04
0.82
0.89
0.96
1.04
1.12
1.21
1.31
1.41
1.52
1.64

0.05
0.83
0.90
0.97
1.05
1.13
1.22
1.32
1.42
1.54
1.66

0.06
o.84
0.90
0.98
1.05
1.14
1.23
1.33
1.43
1.55
1.67

0.07
o.84
0.91
0.98
1.06
1.15
1.24
1.34
1.44
1.56
1.68

0.08
0.85
0:92
0.99
1.07
1.16
1.25
1.35
1.45
1.57
1.70

0.0
0.86
0.92
1.00
1.08
1.16
1.26
1.36
1.47
1.58
1.71

Table A8-Values of C 2 = 0.25 (10)a /d

(H/V = 0 and stirrups)

a/d

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.0 0.25
0.1 0.31
0.2 0.40
0.3 0.50
0.4 0.63
0.5 0.79
0.6 1.00

0.26

0.27

0.29

0.40
0.51

o.41

0.35
0.44

0.36
0.45

0.29 0.30
0.37 0.38
0.46 0.48

0.31

0.34
0.42

0.27
0.34

0.28

0.32

0.26
0.33
0.52

0.53

0.57

0.59

0.72
0.91
1.14

0.74

0.43

0.55 0.56
0.64 0.66 0.67 0.69 0.70
0.81 0.83 0.85 0.87 0.89
1.02 1.04 1.07 1.09 1.12
0.7 1.25 1.28 1.31 1.34 1.37 1.40
0.8 1.58 1.61 1.65 1.69 1.73 1.77
0.9 1.98 2.03 2.08 2.13 2.18 2.23

60

0.39
0.49

0.60 0.61
0.75 0.77

0.93 0.95 0.97

1.17 1.20 1.22
1.44 1.47 1.51 1.54
1.81 1.85 1.90 1.94
2.28 2.33 2.39 2.44

PCI Journal

Table A9-Values of C, = 1.5 (a/d) 2/3

(H/V does not equal 0)

a/d

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.0

0.00

0.07

0.11

0.14

0.18

0.20

0.23

0.25

0.28

0.30

0.1

0.34

0.36

0.38

0.40

0.42

0.44

0.46

0.48

0.50

0.51

0.2

0.53

0.55

0.56

0.58

0.60

0.61

0.63

0.64

0.66

0.67

0.3

0.69

0.70

0.72

0.73

0.74

0.76

0.77

0.79

0.80

0.81

0.4

0.83

0.84

0.85

0.87

0.88

0.89

0.91

0.92

0.93

0.94

0.5

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.04

1.06

1.07

0.6

1.08

1.09

1.10

1.11

1.12

1.14

1.15

1.16

1.17

1.18

0.7

1.19

1.20

1.22

1.23

1.24

1.25

1.26

1.27

1.28

1.29

0.8

1.30

1.31

1.32

1.34

1.35

1.36

1.37

1.38

1.39

1.40

0.9

1.41

1.42

1.43

1.44

1.45

1.46

1.47

1.48

1.49

1.50

Table A10-Values of C 2 = 0.7 (10)/2d

(H/V does not equal 0)

a/d,

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.0

0.70

0.71

0.72

0.72

0.73

0.74

0.75

0.76

0.77

0.78

0.1

0.78

0.79

0.80

0.81

0.82

0.83

0.84

0.85

0.86

0.87

0.2

0.88

0.89

0.90

0.91

0.92

0.93

0.94

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.3

0.99

1.00

1.01

1.02

1.03

1.05

1.06.

1.07

1.08

1.10

0.4

1.11

1.12

1.13

1.15

1.16

1.18

1.19

1.20

1.22

1.23

0.5

1.24

1.26

1.27

1.29

1.30

1.32

1.33

1.35

1.36

1.38

0.6

1.40

1.41

1.43

1.44

1.46

1.48

1.50

1.51

1.57

1.58

1.60

1.62

1.64

1.66

1.68

1.70

1.53
1.72

1.55
1.74

0.81 1.76

1.78

1.80

1.82

1.84

1.86

1.88

1'.90

1.93

0.9

2.00

2.02

2.04

2.06

2.09

2.11

2.14

2.16

1.95
2.19

0.7

1.97

February 1965

61