ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

MS No. S-2012-395.R3

Analysis of Rectangular Sections Using Transformed

Square Cross Sections of Unit-Length Side
by Girma Zerayohannes

This paper deals with the analytical proof of the equivalence gular solid section with four-corner reinforcement and the
between the relative biaxial bending resistance of a rectangular ultimate bending moments and axial force of an equivalent
solid reinforced concrete section and the biaxial bending resis- square cross section of unit length-side is also provided in
tance of the transformed solid square section of unit-length side. Cedolin et al.3
Similar proofs are also derived for rectangular hollow sections.
The results of the analytical proof show that the relative biaxial
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
bending resistance of a rectangular solid section is identical to the
biaxial bending resistance of the transformed square solid section This research deals with the development of a new
of unit-length side, provided that the concrete fiber and reinforcing approach for the analytical proof of the equivalence between
bar coordinates in the transformed section are in conformity with the related biaxial bending resistances of rectangular solid
the transformation that maps the rectangular section into a square and hollow sections, and biaxial bending resistances of the
cross section of unit-length side, the concrete and steel stresses in transformed square solid and hollow sections of unit-length
the transformed section comply with the resulting stress transfor- sides. The proposed method: 1) covers a wider range of
mation, and the area of reinforcement in the transformed section reinforced concrete sections with arbitrary reinforcement
comply with the resulting area transformation. The proof also arrangement; and 2) facilitates the calculations of biaxial
shows the equivalence in rectangular hollow sections, provided interaction diagrams because it allows the use of a single
that similar transformation-related conditions are met.
value—unity—as strength input data for the design strengths
Keywords: analysis; biaxial bending; cross section; hollow sections; of all classes of concrete, and the use of unit side lengths as
homogeneous transformation; solid sections; transformed sections; unit- geometric input data representing all rectangular solid and
side length. hollow sections.

INTRODUCTION Equivalence between relative biaxial bending

The results of cross section analysis1,2 show that the rela- resistance of rectangular section and biaxial
tive biaxial bending resistance of a rectangular solid section bending resistance of transformed square cross
is identical to the biaxial bending resistance of the trans- section of unit-length side
formed square cross section of unit-length side, provided Biaxial interaction diagrams for solid rectangular cross
that: 1) the concrete fiber and reinforcing bar coordinates section made of reinforced concrete are presented as load
in the transformed section are in conformity with the trans- contours with the design normal force and biaxial bending
formation that maps the rectangular section into a square resistance expressed in non-dimensional form as
cross section of unit-length side; 2) the concrete and steel
stresses in the transformed section comply with the resulting N Rd
stress transformation; and 3) the area of reinforcement in the ν Rd = (1)
f cd ⋅ b ⋅ h
transformed section comply with the resulting area trans-
formation. The results of cross section analysis1,2 also show
the equivalence between the relative biaxial bending resis- M Rd y
µ Rd y = (2)
tance of a rectangular hollow section and the biaxial bending f cd ⋅ b ⋅ h 2
resistance of the transformed square hollow cross section of
unit-length side, provided that similar transformation related M Rd z
conditions are met. µ Rd z = (3)
While comparisons of cross section analysis results have f cd ⋅ h ⋅ b 2
shown the equivalence, analytical proof for its justification
is hardly available in the literature. More recently, however, where νRd, μRd y, and μRd z are the relative values of the
Cedolin et al.3 used the square cross section of unit-length combined design axial load and biaxial bending resistance
side to calculate interaction diagrams for load eccentricities of the rectangular cross section; NRd, MRd y, and MRd z are the
along axes parallel to the axes of symmetry and to a diag-
ACI Structural Journal, V. 111, No. 1-6, January-December 2014.
onal of a solid rectangular cross section for the derivation of MS No. S-2013-345.R3, doi: 10.14359/51687295, received April 2, 2014, and
approximate analytical expressions of the moment contours reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright © 2014, American Concrete
Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is
based on the ACI 318-05.4 Analytical proof of the equiva- obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including author’s
closure, if any, will be published ten months from this journal’s date if the discussion
lence between the dimensionless expressions for the rectan- is received within four months of the paper’s print publication.

ACI Structural Journal 1

combined design axial load and biaxial bending resistance conditions laid down in Eq. (11) to (13) is equal to the rela-
of the rectangular cross section; fcd is the design compressive tive values of the combined design axial force and biaxial
strength of concrete; and b and h are the side lengths of the bending resistance (νRd, μRd y, μRd z) of the original section.
rectangular cross section. The conditions state that the results of the products are all
Consider a linear homogeneous transformation T repre- unity and dimensionless.
sented by the matrix (Eq. (4)), that maps the “original
section” defined in Eq. (1) to (3) to its image, which will be f cdT ⋅ bT ⋅ hT = 1 (11)
referred to as the “transformed section”. The transformation
constitutes a two-way dilation, of factor k1 along the y-axis f cdT ⋅ bT ⋅ (hT ) 2 = 1 (12)
and of factor k2 along the z-axis.
f cdT ⋅ hT ⋅ (bT ) 2 = 1 (13)
 k1 0
Tk1 , k2 =  (4)
0 k2  Equations (11) to (13) represents a system of independent
simultaneous equations in bT, hT, and f cdT . The solutions are
The relative values of the combined design axial force and
biaxial moment resistances of the transformed section are bT = 1, hT = 1, and f cdT = 1 (14)
determined using the expressions in Eq. (5) to (7).
Because the products in Eq. (11) to (13) are dimensionless, it
T
T
N Rd follows that each of f cd , bT, and hT are also dimensionless.
νTRd = (5) Therefore, the unit values determined as solutions for bT, hT,
f ⋅ bT ⋅ hT
T
cd T
and f cd in Eq. (14) are constants without dimension. With the
T
M Rd solutions for bT and hT determined, the elements of the trans-
y
µTRd y = (6) formation matrix can be readily determined as k1 = 1/b and
( )
2
f cdT ⋅ bT ⋅ hT k2 = 1/h, so that the transformation matrix associated with the
special conditions in Eq. (11) to (13) is given by Eq. (15).
T
M Rd z
µTRd z = (7) 1/b 0 
( )
2
f cdT ⋅ hT ⋅ bT T =  (15)
 0 1/h 
T
where ν Rd , µ Rd y, and µ Rd z are the relative values of the
T T

For a more general transformation condition where the unit

combined design axial force and biaxial bending resistance values on the right-hand sides of Eq. (11) to (13) are replaced
T
of the transformed section; N Rd T
, M Rd y , and M Rd
T
z are the by constants q1, q2, and q3, respectively (q1, q2, and q3 are
combined design axial force and biaxial bending resistance real numbers greater than zero), the solutions are given by
T
of the transformed section; f cd is the design compressive Eq. (16)
strength of concrete in the transformed section; and bT and hT
are the side lengths of the transformed section. bT = q3/q1, hT = q2/q1, and f cdT = q13 ( q2 ⋅ q3 ) (16)
The proof is carried out by first assuming that the rela-
tive values of the combined design axial force and biaxial The solutions indicate a linear homogeneous transformation
bending resistance is invariant under the transformation and represented by the transformation matrix in Eq. (4), where
later proving that the assumption is valid. the elements k1 and k2 are given by k1 = (q3/q1) · (1/b) and
Thus, k2 = (q2/q1) · (1/h). The design resistance of the transformed
section is then related to the normalized design resistance
T
N Rd of the original rectangular section through the relationships
ν Rd = (8) shown in Eq. (17) to (19).
f ⋅ bT ⋅ hT
T
cd
T
N Rd
M T ν Rd = (17)
µ Rd y =
Rd y
(9) q1
( )
2
f ⋅ bT ⋅ hT
T
cd
T
M Rd y
M T µ Rd y = (18)
µ Rd z =
Rd z
(10) q2
( )
2
f cdT ⋅ hT ⋅ bT
T
M Rd z
It can be seen from Eq. (8) to (10) that the combined design µ Rd z = (19)
q3
axial force and biaxial bending resistance of the transformed
T
section ( N Rd
T
, M Rd y , M Rd
T
) satisfying the transformation Therefore, the equivalent square cross section of unit-length
z
side is a special case resulting from the special condition

2 ACI Structural Journal

Fig. 1—(a) Rectangular solid section; and (b) square solid section of unit-length side.

Fig. 2—(a) Rectangular hollow section; and (b) square hollow section of unit-length side.
q1 = q2 = q3 = 1. Finally, it can be concluded that the rela- Other invariant variables under the transformation include
tive values of the combined design axial force and biaxial geometric reinforcement ratio ρ, mechanical reinforcement
bending resistance of a rectangular section is equal to the ratio ω, combined related design axial force and biaxial
combined design axial force and biaxial bending resistance bending resistance (νRd, μRd y, μRd z), and strains of corre-
of a square cross section of unit-length side that satisfies the sponding fibers in the original and transformed sections.
transformation requirements described prevously and asso- The proof of invariance of each variable will be discussed in
ciated transformations that will be described in more detail subsequent sections.
in the following sections. Rectangular hollow cross sections—Figures 2(a) and (b)
show the actual rectangular hollow section with uniformly
Coordinate transformation distributed reinforcement along the edges and the trans-
Rectangular solid cross sections—Previously it was shown formed square hollow section of unit-length side, respec-
that a homogeneous linear transformation with two-way dila- tively. The latter is determined using the transformation
tion of factors (1/b) and (1/h) along the y- and z-axes, respec- described in the following.
tively, transforms a rectangular cross section into an equivalent Biaxial interaction diagrams for hollow rectangular cross
square cross section of unit-length side. The transforma- section made of reinforced concrete are presented in nondi-
tion was represented by the transformation matrix shown in mensional form as
Eq. (15). The matrix is referred to as coordinate transforma-
tion matrix to emphasize its use in the determination of the N Rd
ν Rd = (22)
coordinates of any desired point such as corner concrete fibers f cd ⋅ α ⋅ b ⋅ h
and reinforcing bar locations in the transformed sections.
As an example, the transformation matrix is used in
M Rd y
Eq.  (20) and (21) to map corner concrete fiber and rein- µ Rd y = (23)
forcing bar coordinates in the first quadrant of the original f cd ⋅ α ⋅ b ⋅ h 2
cross section (Fig. 1(a)), to the images in the equivalent
square cross section of unit length-side (Fig. 1(b)). M Rd z
µ Rd z = (24)
f cd ⋅ α ⋅ h ⋅ b 2
1/b 0  b / 2  0.5
 0 1/h   h / 2  = 0.5 (20)
    
where α is the fraction of the solid part of the cross section,
which will be referred to as “solidity ratio” in short and the
1 b 0   (b / 2) − b ′  0.5 − (b ′ /b)  definitions of other variables are as in Eq. (1) to (3).
 0 1 h  (h / 2) − h ′  = 0.5 − (h ′ /h)  (21) The relative values of the combined design axial force and
    
biaxial moment resistance of the transformed section are
The term “homogeneous” is used to indicate that the
determined using the expressions in Eq. (25) to (27).
origin is an invariant point under the transformation.

ACI Structural Journal 3

 T
N Rd also be directly extended to rectangular hollow sections to
νTRd = (25) show that the transformed square hollow cross section of
f cdT ⋅ αT ⋅ bT ⋅ hT
unit-length side is a special case resulting from the special
condition (q1 = q2 = q3 = 1) in Eq. (31) to (33).
T
M Rd y Finally, it can be concluded that the relative values of the
µTRd y = (26) combined design axial force and biaxial bending resistance
f cdT ⋅ αT ⋅ bT ⋅ (hT ) 2
of a rectangular hollow section is equal to the combined
T
design axial force and biaxial bending resistance of a square
T
M Rd z hollow cross section of the unit-length side that satisfies the
µ Rd z = (27)
f cdT ⋅ hT ⋅ (bT ) 2 transformation requirements described previously and asso-
ciated transformation requirements that will be described in
more detail in subsequent sections.
where αT is the solidity ratio of the transformed section that
As an example, the coordinate transformation matrix
will be shown to be invariant under the transformation—that
is used in Eq. (35) and (36) to map the outer and inner
is, αT = α. The other variables are the same as for solid cross
concrete fiber coordinates in the first quadrant of the orig-
sections.
inal cross section (Fig. 2(a)), to the images in the equivalent
Using similar assumptions made in the solid cross sections
square hollow sections of unit-length side (Fig. 2(b)). In the
regarding invariance under the transformation of the rela-
example, the aspect ratio and relative wall thicknesses of
tive values of the combined design axial force and biaxial
the original section are arbitrarily chosen as b/h = 2.0 and
bending resistance, Eq. (28) to (30) hold. The validity of the
wb = wh = 0.2h.
assumption will be proved subsequently.

T
N Rd 1/b 0  b / 2  0.5
ν Rd = T (28)
 0 1/h   h / 2  = 0.5 (35)
f cd ⋅ α ⋅ bT ⋅ hT     

T
M Rd 1/b 0  0.4b  0.4 
µ Rd y =
y
(29)
 0 1/h  0.3h  = 0.3 (36)
f cdT ⋅ α ⋅ bT ⋅ (hT ) 2     

T The locations of individual reinforcing bar in the square

M Rd
µ Rd z =
z
(30) hollow section of unit-length side are also determined using
f cdT ⋅ α ⋅ hT ⋅ (bT ) 2 the same transformation matrix.

It can be seen from Eq. (28) to (30) that the combined design Area and stress transformation
axial force and biaxial bending resistance of the transformed Rectangular solid sections—In a linear transformation
T T with the matrix given by Eq. (15), the magnitude of the
section ( N Rd , M Rd y , M Rd
T T
z ) satisfying the transformation
determinant (determinant = (1/b) · (1/h) – 0 · 0 = 1/(b ·
conditions laid down in Eq. (31) to (33) is equal to the rela- h)) is equal to the ratio of the area of the new shape to the
tive values of the combined design axial force and biaxial area of the original shape. Therefore, in a transformation
bending resistance (νRd, μRd y, μRd z) of the original section. with two-way dilation of factors (1/b) and (1/h) parallel to
The conditions state that the results of the products are all y- and z-axes, respectively, the area of the image undergoes
unity and dimensionless. a dilation of factor (1/b) · (1/h) = 1/(b · h). As a result, the
transformed area of the compression zone and transformed
f cdT ⋅ α ⋅ bT ⋅ hT = 1 (31) area of the reinforcement in the square cross section of unit-
length side are given by Eq. (37) and (38), respectively.
f cdT ⋅ α ⋅ bT ⋅ (hT ) 2 = 1 (32)
Ω
f cdT ⋅ α ⋅ hT ⋅ (bT ) 2 = 1 (33) ΩT = (37)
b⋅h

The solutions are

As
AsT = (38)
b = 1, h = 1, and f = 1/α
T T T
(34) b⋅h
cd
where ΩT is the area of the compression zone in the trans-
Following the same argument as in solid sections, it follows formed section, and Ω is the area of the compression zone in
that each of f cdT , bT, and hT are dimensionless. Moreover, the original section.
because the solutions for bT and hT remain unchanged, the Similarly, because the transformation conditions in
derivations leading to and including the transformation Eq. (11) to (13) have caused the transformation of the design
matrix in Eq. (15) apply for hollow cross sections. The argu- compressive strength into unity, the transformation factor
ment about the more general transformation conditions can for stresses in concrete and reinforcement is 1/fcd. As a result,

4 ACI Structural Journal

Fig. 3—Stress-strain diagrams in original and transformed solid sections: (a) concrete; and (b) reinforcing steel.
the stress-strain relationships of concrete and steel in the T
and zsi are the moment arms of the reinforcement bar i about
original solid section are transformed into the stress-strain
relationships of concrete and steel in the transformed section z- and y-axes, respectively.
(Fig. 3(a) and (b)). In particular, the transformed design Because ΩT = Ω/(b · h) from Eq. (37), it follows that
yield strength of reinforcement, f ydT , is given by Eq. (39)
dΩT = (1/(b · h))dΩ (43)
f yd
f ydT = (39) Using the change of variable indicated in Eq. (43) and the
f cd transformation factors described previously, Eq. (40) to (42)
can be rewritten as
The stress-strain curves for materials and reduction
factors in the original sections are according to Eurocode T 1 1  
N Rd = ⋅  ∫ σ c d Ω + ∑ Asi σ si  (44)
2.5 In Eurocode 2,5 the stress-strain curve for concrete is f cd b ⋅ h  Ω i
idealized by a parabolic function followed by a plateau. The
steel stress-strain is idealized as elastic-perfectly plastic.
1 1 1  
The design strengths are obtained from the characteristic T
M Rd y = ⋅ ⋅  ∫ σ c zd Ω + ∑ Asi σ si zsi  (45)
(nominal) values using constant reduction factors (partial f cd h b ⋅ h  Ω i

factors for concrete, γc, and steel, γs).

Having derived the transformation factor for stresses, and T 1 1 1  
the dilation factors for areas and length measurements along M Rd z = ⋅ ⋅  ∫ σ c yd Ω + ∑ Asi σ si ysi  (46)
f cd b b ⋅ h  Ω
the y- and z-axes, it is possible to derive the transformation
factor for stress resultants as well as prove the assumption
made previously with regard to the invariance under the The quantities in brackets on the right-hand sides of
transformation of the relative values of the combined axial Eq. (44) to (46) are expressions for the stress resultants in
force and biaxial bending resistance of the original section. the original section. Whether or not the stress resultants are
The combined design axial force and biaxial bending in the ultimate limit state similar to the transformed section
resistance of the transformed section is determined by calcu- needs further discussion. Figures 4(a) and (b) show the
lating the stress resultants at the ultimate limit state using strain and stress distributions in the original and transformed
Eq. (40) to (42). sections, respectively. The strain distributions in the trans-
formed section represent an ultimate limit state. The location
T of the neutral axis in the original section can be determined
N Rd = ∫ σTc d ΩT + ∑ AsiT σTsi (40)
ΩT i from the intercepts k1y0 and k2z0 in the transformed section
using the dilation factors k1 and k2 along the y- and z-axes,
T T T T T T T respectively. The intercepts in the original section are thus
M Rd y = ∫ σ c z d Ω + ∑ Asi σ si z si (41)
ΩT i k1y0/k1 = y0, and k2z0/k2 = z0, as shown in Fig. 4(a). Moreover,
it can be verified using geometry that any given fiber parallel
T T T T T T T to the neutral axis in the transformed section is an image of a
M Rd z = ∫ σ c y d Ω + ∑ Asi σ si ysi (42) corresponding fiber parallel to the neutral axis in the original
ΩT i

T
section. It can also be shown that the ratio of the neutral axis
where Ω is the area of the compression zone in the trans- depth in the transformed section to the neutral axis depth in
T
formed section; σ c is the compressive stress on an elemental the original section can be expressed in terms of k1, k2, y0,
area of concrete in the compression zone; AsiT is the area of and z0. Let it be designated by k3.
steel reinforcement bar i; σTsi is the steel stress in reinforce- Fiber strains on the neutral axis or other fibers parallel to
the neutral axis in the original section can be determined
ment bar i; yT and zT are the moment arms of the elemental from corresponding fiber stresses in the transformed section
area of concrete about z- and y-axes, respectively; and ysiT using the stress transformation and stress-strain diagrams

ACI Structural Journal 5

Fig. 4—(a) Strain and stress distribution at ultimate limit state: (a) in original section; and (b) in square cross section of unit-
length side.
(Fig. (3a)). As an example, the fiber stresses along the neutral Therefore, the transformation factors for the design resis-
T
axis in the original section are σNA = σ NA· fcd = 0 · fcd = 0 and tance of the original cross section (NRd, MRd y, MRd z) are
using the stress-strain diagrams, the strains are εNA = 0. 1/(fcd · b · h), 1/(fcd · b · h2), and 1/(fcd · b2 · h), respectively.
For parallel fibers in the transformed section that are closer Because
to the neutral axis than the one with strain εc2, at reaching T T
the maximum strength—that is, (1)—the stresses are less N Rd N Rd
νTRd = = T
= N Rd (50)
than 1 (Fig. 3(b)). As stated previously, the stresses in the f cdT ⋅ bT ⋅ hT 1⋅1⋅1
corresponding fibers in the original section can be deter-
mined using the stress transformation. Although the stresses T
M Rd T
M Rd
y y
in the two fibers are different, the strains are the same as µTRd y = = T
= M Rd y (51)
shown in the strain stress diagram (Fig. 3(a)). In addition f cdT ⋅ bT ⋅ (hT ) 2 1⋅1⋅12
from geometry, the strain in the most compressed fiber in the
transformed section can be shown to be equal to the strain T
M Rd z
T
M Rd z
in the corresponding fiber in the original section. Therefore, µTRd z = = T
= M Rd z (52)
f cdT ⋅ hT ⋅ (bT ) 2 1⋅1⋅12
the strain distribution in the original section is one in the
ultimate limit state and the stress resultants are the design
resistance of the section. The equality of strains holds for it follows that
all corresponding fibers, including reinforcing bars, leading
to the conclusion that strains of corresponding fibers are νTRd = ν Rd (53)
invariant under the transformation.
Thus, Eq. (44) to (46) can be rewritten as µTRd y = µ Rd y (54)

T N Rd µTRd z = µ Rd z (55)
N Rd = = ν Rd (47)
f cd ⋅ b ⋅ h
Therefore, the assumption that the relative values of the
combined axial force and biaxial bending resistance is
M Rd y
T
M Rd y = = µ Rd y (48) invariant under the transformation is valid, and the deriva-
f cd ⋅ b ⋅ h 2 tions based on this assumption are appropriate.
Further, the geometric reinforcement ratio in the trans-
M Rd z formed section is
T
M Rd z = = µ Rd z (49)
f cd ⋅ h ⋅ b 2
AsT
ρT = (56)
bT ⋅ hT

6 ACI Structural Journal

 T the square cross section of unit-length side by ω, provided
Substituting bT = hT = 1 and the expression for As from T
Eq. (38) in Eq. (56) that f yd = 1. The direct use of ω as reinforcement data can be
used advantageously in the calculation of biaxial interaction
As diagrams where it can be systematically varied to cover the
ρT = = ρ (57) practical range of the mechanical reinforcement ratio.
b⋅h
Rectangular hollow sections—Hollow sections are treated
as the result of two solid components made up of the full
Equation (57) indicates that the geometric reinforcement cross section and the hollow part with positive and negative
ratio is invariant under the transformation. areas, respectively.
Similarly, the mechanical reinforcement ratio in the trans- Previously, it was shown that the transformation matrix T
formed section is for hollow sections and solid sections are the same. There-
fore, the transformed area of the compression zone and
f ydT transformed area of the reinforcement in the square hollow
ωT = ρT ⋅ (58)
f cdT cross section of unit-length side are given by Eq. (37) and
(38), respectively. In Eq. (37), the area of the compression
zone, Ω, has now two components made up of positive and
Substituting f cdT = 1,
negative areas associated with the actual solid and hollow
component of the compression zone.
ωT = ρT ⋅ f ydT (59) Further, the transformed area of the solid part of the cross
T
section, Ac , can be determined using the area transformation
Substituting further for ρT and f ydT from Eq. (57) and (39),
factor as
f yd
ωT = ρ ⋅ = ω (60) Ac α ⋅b⋅ h
f cd AcT = = = α (63)
b⋅h b⋅h

Equation (60) indicates that ω is also invariant under the

The solidity ratio αT in the transformed section is
transformation.
Finally, from Eq. (39), (56), (59), and (60)
AcT α α
αT = = = = α (64)
f cd bT ⋅ hT bT ⋅ hT 1 ⋅ 1
AsT = ω ⋅ (61)
f yd
Therefore the solidity ratio α is invariant under the
Equation (61) gives the transformed area of steel in the square transformation.
cross section of unit-length side in terms of the mechanical Similarly, because the transformation conditions in
reinforcement ratio ω, the design compressive strength of Eq. (31) to (33) have caused the transformation of the design
the concrete, and yield strength of the reinforcement in the compressive strength into 1/α, the transformation factor for
original cross section. This same amount of concrete area is stresses in concrete and reinforcement is 1/(α · fcd). As a
to be deducted if the analysis would be based on net cross result, the stress-strain relationships of concrete and rein-
section. Usually, analysis is based on gross cross sections, as forcing steel in the original hollow section are transformed
the use of net cross sections does not affect the result signifi- into the stress-strain relationships of concrete and rein-
cantly. The effect of the displaced amount of concrete on forcing steel in the transformed section, as shown in Fig. 5(a)
the cross section capacity may, however, be significant if the and (b). In particular, the transformed design yield strength
high strength of concrete is used, requiring analysis on the
of reinforcement, f ydT , is given by Eq. (65).
basis of net cross section.6,7
T
The transformed area of reinforcement, As , can also be f yd
expressed in terms of the transformed design yield strength f ydT = (65)
of reinforcement, f ydT , as
(α ⋅ fcd )

ω Following the same argument that led to Eq. (40) to (42)

AsT = (62) in the solid sections and noting the stress transformations in
f ydT
hollow sections described previously, Eq. (44) to (46) take
the form
Additional analytical advantage can be gained by setting
f ydT = 1, because it allows the direct substitution of the rein- T 1 1  
N Rd = ⋅  ∫ σ c d Ω + ∑ Asi σ si  (66)
forcement data by the mechanical reinforcement ratio ω. It is (α ⋅ fcd ) b⋅h Ω i

to be noted that this is not a consequence of the transforma-

tions discussed so far. It is rather an isolated action that 1 1 1 
T 
allows the substitution of the amount of reinforcement AsT in M Rd y = ⋅ ⋅ ∫ σ zd Ω + ∑ Asi σ si zsi  (67)
(α ⋅ fcd ) h b ⋅ h  Ω c i

ACI Structural Journal 7

Fig. 5—Stress-strain diagrams in original and transformed hollow sections: (a) concrete; and (b) reinforcing steel.

T 1 1 1   As
M Rd z = ⋅ ⋅  ∫ σ c yd Ω + ∑ Asi σ si ysi  (68) ρT = = ρ (76)
(α ⋅ fcd ) b b ⋅ h Ω α ⋅b⋅ h

Equations (66) to (68) result in Eq. (69) to (71) after Equation (76) indicates that the geometric reinforcement
following the same argument as in the solid cross sections. ratio is invariant under the transformation.
Similarly, the mechanical reinforcement ratio in the trans-
T N Rd formed section is
N Rd = = ν Rd (69)
α ⋅ f cd ⋅ b ⋅ h
f ydT
ωT = ρT ⋅ (77)
M Rd y f cdT
T
M Rd y = = µ Rd y (70)
α ⋅ f cd ⋅ b ⋅ h 2
Substituting f cdT = 1 α,

T
M Rd z
M Rd z = = µ Rd z (71) ωT = αT · ρT · f ydT (78)
α ⋅ f cd ⋅ h ⋅ b 2
Substituting further for ρT and f ydT from Eq. (76) and (65),
Because
f yd
NT N RdT ωT = ρ ⋅ = ω (79)
ν T
= T T Rd T T = = N T (72) f cd
Rd
f cd ⋅ α ⋅ b ⋅ h (1 α ) ⋅ α ⋅1⋅1 Rd
Equation (79) indicates that ω is also invariant under the
T T
T
M Rd y M Rd y T
transformation. Finally, from Eq. (65), (75), (78), and (79)
µ = = =M (73)
( ) (1 α) ⋅ α ⋅1⋅1
Rd y 2 2 Rd y
f cdT ⋅ αT ⋅ bT ⋅ hT
f cd
AsT = α ⋅ ω ⋅ (80)
T T f yd
M Rd z M Rd z
µTRd z = = T
= M Rd z (74)
f cdT ⋅ αT ⋅ hT ⋅ bT ( )
2
(1 α ) ⋅ α ⋅1⋅12 Equation (80) gives the transformed area of steel in the
square hollow section of unit-length side in terms of the
T
it follows that ν Rd = νRd, µ Rd y= μRd y, and µ Rd z = μRd z. There-
T T
solidity ratio, mechanical reinforcement ratio ω, design
fore, the assumption that the relative values of the combined compressive strength of the concrete, and yield strength of
axial force and biaxial bending resistance is invariant under the reinforcement in the original rectangular hollow section.
the transformation is valid, and the derivations based on this This same amount of concrete area is to be deducted in the
assumption are appropriate. transformed section if the analysis would be based on net
The geometric reinforcement ratio in the transformed cross section.6,7
T
section is The transformed area of reinforcement, As , can also be
expressed in terms of the transformed design yield strength
AsT of reinforcement, f ydT , as
ρT = (75)
α ⋅ bT ⋅ hT
ω
AsT = (81)
Substituting b = h = 1 and the expression for A from
T T T f ydT
s

Eq. (38)

8 ACI Structural Journal

Thus, the amount of reinforcement in the square hollow Germany. The author wishes to gratefully acknowledge the financial
support by the German Academic Exchange Services (DAAD).
cross section of unit-length side can be replaced by ω by
setting f ydT = 1.
NOTATION
AsT = area of reinforcement in transformed section
CONCLUSIONS AsiT = area of steel reinforcement bar i
The following conclusions can be drawn from this study: b, h = side lengths of rectangular cross section
bT, hT = side lengths of transformed section
1. The paper deals with the analytical proof of the equiv- fcd = design compressive strength of concrete
alence between the relative biaxial bending resistance of fcdT = design compressive strength of concrete in trans-
a rectangular solid reinforced concrete section, and the formed section
fyd, f ydT = design yield strength of reinforcing steel in original
biaxial bending resistance of the transformed square solid and transformed sections, respectively
sections of unit-length side. The results of the analytical k1, k2 = dilation factors along y- and z-axes, respectively
proof show that the relative biaxial bending resistance of a k3 = ratio of neutral axis depth in transformed section to
that of original section
rectangular solid section is identical to the biaxial bending NRd, MRd y, MRd z =  combined design axial load and biaxial bending
resistance of the transformed square solid section of unit- resistance of rectangular cross section
length side, provided that the concrete fiber and reinforcing T
N Rd , M RdT
, T = 
y M Rd z
combined design axial force and biaxial bending
resistance of transformed section
bar coordinates in the transformed section conform with yT, zT = moment arms of elemental area of concrete about z-
the transformation that maps the rectangular section into and y-axes, respectively
a square cross section of the unit-length side, the concrete ysiT , zsiT = moment arms of the reinforcement bar i about z- and
y-axes, respectively
and steel stresses in the transformed section comply with α, αT = solidity ratio in original and transformed section,
the resulting stress transformation and the area of reinforce- respectively
ment in the transformed section comply with the resulting εc2 = concrete strain at reaching maximum strength fcd and/
or 1
area transformation. νRd, μRd y, μRd z = relative values of combined design axial load and
2. The results of the analytical proof also show the equiv- biaxial bending resistance of rectangular cross section
alence between the relative biaxial bending resistance of a νTRd , µTRd y , µTRd z = relative values of combined design axial force and
biaxial bending resistance of transformed section
rectangular hollow section and the biaxial bending resis- ρ, ω = geometric and mechanical reinforcement ratio,
tance of the transformed square hollow section of unit-length respectively
side, provided that similar transformation-related conditions ρT , ω T = geometric and mechanical reinforcement ratios in
transformed section, respectively
are met. σTc = compressive stress on elemental area of concrete in
3. The results of the analytical proof has shown that the compression zone
geometric reinforcement ratio ρ, the mechanical reinforce- σTsi = steel stress in reinforcement bar i
T
Ω = area of compression zone in transformed section
ment ratio ω, the relative values of the combined design Ω = area of compression zone in original section
axial force and biaxial bending resistances (νRd, μRd y, μRd z),
and strains of corresponding fibers in the original and trans- REFERENCES
formed sections are invariant under the transformation. 1. Busjäger, D., and Quast, U., “Programmgesteuerte Berechnung beli-
4. Transformed square cross section of unit-length side ebiger Massivbauquerschnitte unter zweiachsiger Biegung mit Längskraft
(Computer Program for the Analysis and Design of Arbitrarily Shaped
fulfilling the conditions above ((1) and (2)) are used in the Reinforced Concrete Sections under Axial Load and Biaxial Bending),”
calculation of biaxial interaction diagrams for rectangular Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton, Heft 415, Beuth Verlag, Berlin,
solid and rectangular hollow sections.2 Germany, 1990. (in German)
2. Zerayohannes, G., “Bemmesungsdiagramme für Schiefe Biegung mit
5. Relative values of combined design axial load and Längskraft nach DIN 1045-1: 2001-07 (Interaction Diagrams for Biaxial
biaxial bending resistances are calculated on the basis of Bending with Axial Load on the Basis of the German Code DIN 1045-1:
net cross section for high-strength concrete by deducting the 2001-07),” Schriftenreihe der Fachgebiete Baustofftechnologie und Baus-
chadenanalyse, Massivbau und Baukonstruktion und Stahlbau des Studi-
amount of the transformed area of steel (AsT = ω · fcd/fyd) and enganges Bauingenieurwesen der Technischen Universität Kaiserslautern,
(AsT = α · ω · fcd/fyd) from the square solid and square hollow Band 4, 2006, 270 pp. (in German and English)
section of unit-length side.2 3. Cedolin, L.; Cusatis, G.; Eccheli, S.; and Rovda, M., “Capacity of
Rectangular Cross Sections under Biaxially Eccentric Loads,” ACI Struc-
tural Journal, V. 105, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2008, pp. 215-224.
AUTHOR BIOS 4. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
ACI member Girma Zerayohannes is an Associate Professor at Addis Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (ACI 318R-05),” American
Ababa University, Addis Ababa Institute of Technology, Addis Ababa, Ethi- Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2005, 430 pp.
opia. He received his BSc and MSc from Addis Ababa University in 1979 5. Eurocode 2, “Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Building,” Euro-
and 1984, respectively, and his PhD from the University of Kaiserslautern, pean Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2003.
Germany, in 1995. His research interests include nonlinear analysis of rein- 6. Zilch, K.; Jähring, A.; and Müller, A., “Erläuterungen zu DIN 1045-1
forced concrete structures. Explanation on DIN 1045-1),” Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton, Heft
525, Beuth Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2003. (in German)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 7. DIN 1045-1:2001-07, “Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und Span-
This investigation was conducted at the Institute of Concrete Struc- nbeton. Teil 1: Bemessung und Konstruktion (Concrete, Reinforced and
ture and Building Construction, Technical University of Kaiserslautern, Prestressed Concrete Structures – Part 1: Design),” Normenausschuss
Bauwesen (NABau) im DIN (Deutsches Institut für Normung) e.V. Beuth
Verlag, Berlin, Germany, July 2001. (in German)

ACI Structural Journal 9

 NOTES:

10 ACI Structural Journal