Shear behavior of multiple openings-RC beams having no shear reinforcement internally reinforced with web steel plates

This study explores the viability of reinforcing multi-openings beams with web steel plates (SPs) as an alternative This study explores the viability of reinforcing multi-openings beams with web steel plates (SPs) as an alternative to conventional shear reinforcement. Eight beams with multi openings and one solid beam were part of the to conventional shear reinforcement. Eight beams with multi openings and one solid beam were part of the experimental program. Internal reinforcement was provided by different web SP designs for each beam. The experimental program. Internal reinforcement was provided by different web SP designs for each beam. The existence of transverse apertures and the distribution, thickness, and number of longitudinal and transverse SPs existence of transverse apertures and the distribution, thickness, and number of longitudinal and transverse SPs are investigated. It was investigated how important factors affected the tested beams' stiffness, toughness, failure are investigated. It was investigated how important factors affected the tested beams' stiffness, toughness, failure mechanism, load displacement behavior, peak load and accompanying deflection, and cracking load. The results mechanism, load displacement behavior, peak load and accompanying deflection, and cracking load. The results showed that lateral buckling that developed on the steel plates' compression side at the shear span was the showed that lateral buckling that developed on the steel plates' compression side at the shear span was the reason why all of the tested beams collapsed. In comparison to a single LSP-beam, the peak loads of the beams reason why all of the tested beams collapsed. In comparison to a single LSP-beam, the peak loads of the beams rose by 59 % and 69 %, respectively, when two and three longitudinal steel longitudinal (LSPs) were executed. rose by 59 % and 69 %, respectively, when two and three longitudinal steel longitudinal (LSPs) were executed. Furthermore, compared to performing two thinner LSPs, conducting one thicker LSP, having same thickness of Furthermore, compared to performing two thinner LSPs, conducting one thicker LSP, having same thickness of two thinner LSPs, reduced the first crack load, peak load, deflection, stiffness, and toughness of the beams by two thinner LSPs, reduced the first crack load, peak load, deflection, stiffness, and toughness of the beams by 17.5 %, 31.39 %, 33.3 %, 1.06 %, and 43.14 %, respectively. Additionally, a finite element approach was used to 17.5 %, 31.39 %, 33.3 %, 1.06 %, and 43.14 %, respectively. Additionally, a finite element approach was used to computationally study the effects of the opening arrangement and the SP-to-beam height ratio. The findings computationally study the effects of the opening arrangement and the SP-to-beam height ratio. The findings demonstrated a 141 % increase in beam capacity when the SP-to-beam height ratio was raised from 0.4 to 1.0. demonstrated a 141 % increase in beam capacity when the SP-to-beam height ratio was raised from 0.4 to 1.0. The beam capacity was increased by 15 % due to the lack of openings near the supports. The beam capacity was increased by 15 % due to the lack of openings near the supports.