According to reinforced concrete design practice (IS 456 context), the minimum area of tension reinforcement required in a beam must be greater than which expression?

Difficulty: Easy

Correct Answer: 0.85 bd/fy

Explanation:


Introduction / Context:
Minimum tension steel in beams is provided to ensure ductility, crack control, and to prevent sudden failure after concrete cracking. Codes specify a formula linking minimum steel to beam dimensions and steel strength so that a small but necessary reinforcement area is always present, even when flexural demand is low.


Given Data / Assumptions:

  • Beam breadth b and effective depth d are design dimensions.
  • fy is the characteristic yield strength of the reinforcement.
  • We seek the standard minimum tension steel requirement.


Concept / Approach:

A common code expression for beams is Ast,min ≥ 0.85 * b * d / fy. This ensures the reinforcement percentage decreases with stronger steel (higher fy) yet maintains a floor for post-cracking capacity. The expression has proper dimensions of area and scales with section size.


Step-by-Step Solution:

Recall the minimum tension steel expression used in IS practice.Check dimensional consistency: 0.85 * b * d / fy has units of area.Select the matching option: 0.85 bd/fy.


Verification / Alternative check:

Design examples across textbooks use this expression for various grades of steel, producing typical minimum percentages around 0.2% to 0.3% of the concrete area for common fy values.


Why Other Options Are Wrong:

  • 0.87 fy/bd: Inverse dimensions (stress divided by area) and not an area.
  • 0.04 bd or 0.4 bd/y: Arbitrary/incorrect forms not tied to fy; may be unconservative or excessive.
  • 0.12 bd/fck: Relates to concrete strength rather than steel yield; not the standard minimum steel formula.


Common Pitfalls:

  • Forgetting to compare provided Ast with both minimum and maximum limits.
  • Using gross depth instead of effective depth d.


Final Answer:

0.85 bd/fy

More Questions from GATE Exam Questions

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
Join Discussion