Figure 1
Deep beam geometries (dimensions in mm)
Figure 2
Details of reinforcements on DB-NR-H1 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 5
Details of reinforcements on DB-WR-H2 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 3
Details of reinforcements on DB-WR-H1 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 4
Details of reinforcements on DB-NR-H2 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 2
Details of reinforcements on DB-NR-H1 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 5
Details of reinforcements on DB-WR-H2 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 3
Details of reinforcements on DB-WR-H1 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 4
Details of reinforcements on DB-NR-H2 (dimensions in mm)
Figure 7
Comparison of average failure loads
Figure 8
Comparison between cracking loads and failure loads
Figure 9
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H1 (load in kN): (a) 85% of Pf ; (b) 95% of Pf ; (c) Failure.
Figure 16
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H2-NA-2 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 10
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H1-2 (load in kN): (a) 85% of Pf ; (b) 95% of Pf ; (c) Failure.
Figure 11
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H1-1 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 12
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H1-2 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 13
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H2-1 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 14
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H2-2 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 15
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H2-1 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 10
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H1-2 (load in kN): (a) 85% of Pf ; (b) 95% of Pf ; (c) Failure.
Figure 11
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H1-1 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 12
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H1-2 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 13
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H2-1 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 14
Cracking pattern in DB-NR-H2-2 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 15
Cracking pattern in DB-WR-H2-1 (load in kN): (a) 30% of Pf ; (b) 50% of Pf ; (c) 70% of Pf ; (d) 90% of Pf ; (e) Failure.
Figure 17
Load-strain curve
Figure 20
Load-strain curve
Figure 19
Load-strain curve
Figure 18
Load-strain curve
Figure 21
DB-H1 analysis results: (a) Principal compressive stress; (b) Principal tensile stress.
Figure 22
DB-H2 analysis results: (a) Principal tensile stress; (b) Principal compressive stress.
Figure 23
Comparison between the STM and experimental results
Figure 24
Forces acting on each STM element
Figure 26
Comparison between the STM and experimental results.
Figure 27
Forces acting on each STM element.
Figure 29
Comparison between the STM and experimental results
Figure 30
Efforts acting on each element.
Figure 32
Comparison between the STM and experimental results
Figure 33
Efforts acting on each element
Figure 23
Comparison between the STM and experimental results
Figure 24
Forces acting on each STM element
Figure 26
Comparison between the STM and experimental results.
Figure 27
Forces acting on each STM element.
Figure 29
Comparison between the STM and experimental results
Figure 30
Efforts acting on each element.
Figure 32
Comparison between the STM and experimental results
Figure 33
Efforts acting on each element
Table 1
Deep beam details
Table 2
Mechanical properties of concrete
Table 3
Mechanical properties of the reinforcement
Table 4
Experimental results: cracking load, failure load and failure modes
Table 5
Allowed ranges for the angle formed between the compressed diagonals and the longitudinal reinforcement in the STM.