The bearing capacity of RC overhangs under concentrated loads can be dependent on the width of the slab. The goal of this paper is to investigate the effect of different widths using tests from the literature and non-linear FE-simulations as a reference. Shear force redistributions along the loading process and the shear concrete capacity are analysed. The shear effective width and the influence of an edge beam are also addressed. The results show that the bearing capacity of RC overhangs increase with the width until a transition area is reached and the increase flattens. An increased shear distribution sideways and posterior redistributions under the loading process are enabled. The shear capacity of concrete increases with the width and for loads close to the root an arch effect is observed. The edge beam contributes to a further increase of the ultimate capacity for wide enough overhangs. The effect of the width and the edge beam is not only quantitative but also qualitative since the failure mode and the critical section are influenced. Existing formulation for shear effective widths should be revisited. Experimental tests used for this purpose should consider wide enough specimens to capture the real behaviour of a bridge overhang slab.
3. Reissen K & Hegger J: “Experimental investigations on the effective width for shear of single span bridge deck slabs”. (“Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur mitwirkenden Breite für Querkraft von einfeldrigen Fahrbahnplatten”). Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, Vol. 108, No. 2, 2013, pp. 96-103. (In German).
4. Lantsoght E O L, de Boer A, van der Veen C & Walraven J C. “Effective Width in Shear of Reinforced Concrete Solid Slab Bridges under Wheel Loads”. Proceedings, TRB 93rd Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers, Washington DC, 2014, pp. 12-16.
5. Reissen K & Hegger J: “Experimental investigations on the shear-bearing behaviour of bridge deck cantilever slabs under wheel loads”. (“Experimentelle Untersuchungen zum Querkrafttragverhalten von auskragenden Fahrbahnplatten unter Radlasten”). Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, Vol. 108 (5), 2013, pp. 315-324. (In German).
6. CEN [European Committee for Standardization]: “Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. EN 1992-1-1”. Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
7. American Concrete Institute (ACI): “318-14 Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary”. Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2014, 520 pp.
8. FIB: “Model code for concrete structures 2010”. Ernst & Sohn, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2010.
9. Zanuy C & Gallego J M: “Discussion of Shear Design of RC Bridge Deck Slabs according to Eurocode 2 by Guenter Rombach and Matthias Kohl”. ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 9, 2015.
10. DAfStb German Committee for Structural Concrete Book 240. “Tools for calculation of internal forces and changes in shape of reinforced concrete members.” (“Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton Heft 240: Hilfsmittel zur Berechnung der Schnittgrößen und Formänderungen von Stahlbetonbauwerken”). Berlin, 1976-1991. (In German).
11. Reissen K & Hegger J: “Experimental Study on the Shear Capacity of Concrete Slabs”. Proceedings, IABSE-IASS Symposium 2011, London, September 2011, pp. 584.
12. DIN German Design Code: “1045-1 Design and Construction of Concrete Reinforced Concrete and Prestressed Concrete”. (“Bemessung und Konstruktion von Stahlbeton- und Spannbetonbauteilen”), Berlin, 2008. (In German).
13. Reissen K & Hegger J: “Experimental investigations on the shear capacity of RC cantilever bridge deck slabs under concentrated loads - Influences of moment-shear ratio and an inclined compression zone”. Proceedings. 16th European Bridge Conference, Edinburgh, June 2015.
14. Rombach G & Latte S: “Shear resistance of bridge decks without shear reinforcement”. Proceedings, fib Symposium, Tailor Made Concrete Structures, Amsterdam, May 2008, pp. 519-525.
15. Reissen K, Classen M & Hegger J. “Shear in reinforced concrete slabs—Experimental investigations in the effective shear width of one-way slabs under concentrated loads and with different degrees of rotational restraint”. Structural Concrete, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2018, pp. 36-48.
16. Lantsoght EOL, van der Veen C, de Boer A & Walraven J C. “Transition from one-way to two-way shear in slabs under concentrated loads”. Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 67, 2015, pp. 909-22.
17. Rombach G & Henze L: “Shear capacity of concrete slabs without shear reinforcement under concentrated loads close to support”. Proceedings, fib Symposium, Springer, Maastrich, June 2017, pp. 676-683.
18. Lubliner J, Oliver J, Oller S & Onate E: “A plastic-damage model for concrete”. International Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1989, pp. 299-329.
19. Lee J & Fenves GL: “Plastic-Damage Model for Cyclic Loading of Concrete Structures”. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 124, No. 8, 1998, pp. 892-900.
20. Cornelissen H, Hordijk D & Reinhardt H. “Experimental determination of crack softening characteristics of normal weight and lightweight concrete”. Heron, Vol. 31, No. 2, 1986, pp. 45-56.
21. Broo H, Lundgren K & Plos M. “A guide to non-linear finite element modelling of shear and torsion in concrete bridges”. Report 2008:18. Chalmers University of Technology, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gothemburg, Sweden, 2008, pp. 21.