IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE)

e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 11, Issue 6 Ver. V (Nov- Dec. 2014), PP 31-35
www.iosrjournals.org

Failure cracks in reinforced concrete structures in Khartoum District

Prof. Dr. Salih Elhadi Mohamed Ahmed
Professor of structural engineering- Sudan University of Science & technology
P.O. Box: 6417- Khartoum- Sudan

Abstract: Failure in reinforced concrete elements (Partial or complete collapse) may due to lack in design or
in certainties of detailing or due to poor construction, or poor concreting and insufficient curing, or due to poor
building materials, such as cement, aggregates and reinforcing steel.
Failure in reinforced concrete structures may also due to the movement of foundations or due to excessive
vibrations in the neibour-hoods.
During the last 10 years (1998-2014) failure in reinforced concrete buildings in Khartoum district has been
predominant.
The research contained in this paper is a result of a series of scientific case studies regarding failure or at least
deficiency in some building complexes in Khartoum district carried by the author during his professional
practice through his consultant firm named (Thiga for Engineering Consultants and Experimentation) located
in Khartoum.
Many buildings (having number of stories range between 7-13 storey) has been studied according to scheduled
investigations.
It has been found that the major reasons of these failure are duo to poor concreting, slab excessive deflection,
excessive cracks in beams, foundation settlement, insufficient design, low thickness of slab, and other reasons.

I. Introduction:
Cracks may be caused by the external applied load on the structure just like flexural crack, shear crack,
other cracks are also occurring independently, for example cracking of restrained members due to concrete
shrinkage. Or temperature change, surface cracking of fresh concrete in plastic stage, and surface cracking of
new concrete near reinforcing bar. However, the major cracks in concrete structures may be due to lack in
design or details, bad instruction.
Settlement in foundation or due to the time factor (1). A typical study in Egypt showed percentage
comparisons of these factors as shown in Fig. 1 (2).

1.1 Other types of crack in buildings maybe summarized as:

- Shrinkage cracks in buildings are unlikely to be of any structural concern but can be a source of water entry
or radon entry in buildings and may form a tripping hazard.
- Settlement cracks in a slab indicate inadequate site preparation, such as failure to compact fill on which a
foundation was poured.
- Frost heaves or expansive soil damage can cause substantial damage to basement, crawl space, or garage
floor slabs in some conditions.
- Crack from settling of new addition. Anew addition has experienced settling as a result of soil consolidation
at the new foundation.
- Crack formation due to soil related influences. Ground water can cause soil erosion and reduction of soil
compressive strength, reduction load bearing capacity of the foundation, stressing and cracking building
materials.
- Illustrate of structural member, which can occur for variety of reason such as defect or deterioration. This
stresses on other building components, promoting crack formation.
www.iosrjournals.org 31 | Page
 Failure cracks in reinforced concrete structures in Khartoum District

- Partial collapse of foundation, which is common among older stone foundation. Mortar has deteriorated and
stones have fallen into the basement area. The loss of structural foundation support has caused cracking of
drywall in the building interior. This is a form of deterioration.
- Cracks in wallboard due to settling.
- Cracks formed instantaneously as a result of a natural gas leakage fueled explosion in the building.
- Cracks in block wall about halfway up the wall. This is an indicator of soil and! or water pressure causing
inward deflection of the wall and impending failure. In this case, water drainage toward the foundation had
caused an excessive hydraulic load. Lock of maintenance of gutter drainage and grade near the wall has
increased hydraulic loading against the wall over time. (see Fig. 2 for the differenftypes of cracks in
buildings).

1.2 Limits on crack width:

It is necessary to identify limits of acceptability for crack widths. Max allowable in range of 0.1 mm to
0.4 mm, one reason often given for limitation of crack width is prevention of corrosion of reinforcing steel.
Table (1) present the permissible limits of crack widths (3).

Table (1): Permissible crack width:

Member Crack width (mm)
Dray air protection members 0.4
Humility, moister, soil 0.3
Deicing chemicals sea water and sea water spray 0.15
Water retaining structures 0.1

II. Crack with calcuations

2.1 Standard Formula:

Fig. 3.b: Definition of A

Fig. 3. Crack width calculations

Taking fig.. (a & b) under consideration, Welch and Janjua (4) proposed that the crack spacing S is given by:

www.iosrjournals.org 32 | Page
 Failure cracks in reinforced concrete structures in Khartoum District

Where h is the concrete cover measured to the bar centre and db is diameter; the same authors proposed the
following formula for the maximum crack width;

The CEB- FIP model code (5) proposed the following formula for the crack spacing:

Where a is the spacing of the reinforcing bars and pr is the ratio of steel bar to effective surrounding area of
concrete in tension.
Gergely and Lutz (6) has proposed that

Where h is the minimum cover to the centre of the bar and A is the concrete tension area surrounding
each bar.
ACI (7) proposed the following formula for the maximum crack width in fully cracked tensile
members.
(5)
Or
(6)
Where = ratio of distance between neutral axis and tension face to distance between neutral axis and centroid
of reinforcing steel 1.2 in beams.
fs = actual tensile strength of concrete in psi dc = distance from centre of bar to extreme tension fiber in (in.)
A = area of concrete symmetric with reinforcing steel divided by the number of bars (in2).

2.2 Effect of cracking on members stiffness:

When a symmetrical un-cracked reinforced concrete member is loaded in tension the tensile force is
distributed between the reinforcing steel and concrete in proportion to their respective stiffness. The load carried
across the crack by reinforcement is gradually transferred by the bond to the concrete on each site of crack. As
the applied load increases additional cracks form at distance intervals along the member and the stiffness is drop
down, as a result of this drop, the member under cracking may finally fail. The contribution of concrete between
cracks to the net stiffness of a member is known as tension stiffening.

2.3 Finite element applications:

Extensive researches has been done in recent years on the application of finite elements to modeling
the behavior of reinforced concrete and is summarized in a report of the ASCE task committee on finite element
analysis of reinforced concrete (8). Two basic approaches, the discrete crack approach and the smeared crack
approach have been used to model cracking and tension stiffening.

2.4 Deflection - calculation:

Prediction of deflection is very important in order to avoid damage to finishes and services, although
the estimation of exact deflection may be difficult due to some considerable effects on deflection calculation,
such as:
The long term creep effects.
The effect of finishes, partitions ... etc.
Shrinkage of the concrete.
The precise duration of the live load. However, the max deflection (a) in concrete may be calculated using
the following formula (9);
.(7)
where K is a coefficient that depends on the load distribution and the end fixity conditions.
L = length of the concrete member.
M = bending moment.
Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete.
Ice = second moment of area of the section in equivalent concrete units.
The permissible deflection in the building elements should not exceed the values given in table (2)

www.iosrjournals.org 33 | Page
 Failure cracks in reinforced concrete structures in Khartoum District

Table (2) Permissible Deflection

Member Deflection
Cantilever beam Length/180
Beams carrying plaster Span/ 360
All other beams Span /200
Columns in multi-storey buildings Height/ 300
Crane girders Span/ 600

Table (3): the studied buildings

Building No. Type of Beams size
Location No. of Floors Column size cm Type of foundation
slab cm
1.
AlGeraif- KRT 11 Flat - Raft

2.
Riadh KRT 7 Flat - Raft

3.
Riadh KRT 6 Flat - Raft

4. alGeraif- KRT 3 FLAT 50 20 50 20 ISOLATED

5. AlNuzha- KRT Footings - - - -
6. Slab-
Algeraif- KART 3 50 25 40 40 Isolated
Beam
7. Khartoum centre 7 Slab-beam 40 25 60 25 Isolated
8. Mamoura- KRT 1 Flat - 50 25 Isolated
9. Thawora- Omdurman 2 Flat - 50 25 Isolated
10. Sinaat- Omdurman 3 Slab- beam 50 25 50 25 Isolated
11. Saifa- KRT-N Footings - - - -
12.
3rd Class-KRT 6 Flat - Raft

13. Amarat-KRT 11 Flat - 60 30 Raft

14. Arkawit-KRT Footings - - - -
15. Khartoum Center 3 Slab- beam 50 25 50 25 Isolated
16. 60 30 Isolated
Amarat-KRT 2 Flat -
17. 60 30 Isolated
Magran-KRT 4 Slab-Beam 50 25

Table (4): Types of failures in the different buildings:

www.iosrjournals.org 34 | Page
 Failure cracks in reinforced concrete structures in Khartoum District

III. Discussion of Results:

The crack width calculations in the different buildings has ranged between 0.7 mm-15mm, all of it is
more greater that the permissible crack width shown in table (1).
Regarding deflection in some members it has been recorded in two of the cantilevers of lengths 160 cm
as 60 mm which is very excessive in comparison to table (2).
In reference to table (3) and table (4) that 17 reinforced concrete structures has been studied and the main type
of failure has been presented and it has been found that the main types of failure is due to construction and lack
in design and regarding the structural elements, the slabs and walls are suffering failure more than the other
elements. Table (5) present the percentage comparison for the different causes of failure in the studied
reinforced concrete elements in tables (3) and (4).

Table (5). Failure % age comparison

IV. Conclusions:
From the case study in this research, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1) The main cracks in reinforced concrete buildings are due mainly to lack in construction process.
2) Soil testing is very important before the design process of the reinforced concrete building.
3) The flat slab may be one of the main causes of failure in reinforced concrete structures due to the punching
shear developed at the column face.
4) Insufficient design and poor detailing may lead to failure in reinforced concrete structures.
5) In design the ability requirements like the expansion joints, the reinforced concrete cores, and the shear
walls should be taken under consideration.

References:
[1]. Future Engineering Group Design of high rise building to resist wind and seismic loads in Arabic, walid printing press, Egypt
1994, 480 pp.
[2]. Abu Almagd. .et..al Cracks in Reinforced Concrete Structures and its Repair, Egyptian Universities Printing Press, Cairo,
2007.
[3]. Concrete manual, 8th edition, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, 1975, 627 pp.
[4]. Janjun, M.A and Welch, G.B Magnitude and Distribution of concrete cracks in Reinforced concrete Flexural Members, UNICJV.
Report No. R 78, Univ. of NSW, Kensington, 1972.
[5]. CEB-FIP Model Code for Concrete Structures, C&CA, London, 1979.
[6]. Gergely P., and Lutz, L.A Maximum crack width in reinforced concrete flexural member, ACT publications, sp-20, Detroit, 87-1
17 pp. 1968.
[7]. 7. ACI 224 2R 92, Cracking of Concrete Members in Direct Tensiontt, re-approved 1997.
[8]. Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, 1982, 545 pp.
[9]. Morell, P. Design of Reinforced Concrete Elements, Granda,U.K,1984.

www.iosrjournals.org 35 | Page