English is currently available.
Civil Engineering DISCUSSION
A beam design calls for about 800 mm² of tension reinforcement, provided as four 16 mm bars (804 mm²). A single 32 mm bar has exactly the same area and would be far quicker to fix.
If the steel area is what resists the tension, why does it matter how it is divided? Is this only about convenience, or is there a structural reason for using several smaller bars?
The steel can only work if its force gets into it from the concrete, and that transfer happens through bond on the bar surface. Four 16 mm bars have a combined perimeter of 4 × π × 16 = 201 mm; one 32 mm bar has π × 32 = 101 mm. Same area, half the surface.
The consequence shows up as anchorage length. The length of bar needed to develop its full strength is proportional to the bar diameter, typically some tens of diameters depending on concrete strength and code. If that is 40 diameters, a 16 mm bar needs 640 mm and a 32 mm bar needs 1280 mm, which often does not fit at a support. Lap lengths double in the same way.
Crack control is the second reason. Concrete in the tension zone cracks at working load; the reinforcement decides whether that means many hairline cracks or a few wide ones. Closely spaced small bars keep every part of the tension zone near a bar, so cracks stay numerous and fine. One large bar leaves wide regions of unreinforced concrete on either side, and the cracks there open wider.
Crack width matters for durability, because wide cracks let water and chlorides reach the steel. Design codes therefore limit bar size or bar spacing as a function of steel stress, and a single large bar in a beam of ordinary width usually fails that check.
There are practical structural reasons as well. The links (stirrups) need a longitudinal bar in each corner to hold them, so two bars is the minimum in any case. Several bars allow curtailment: where the bending moment falls towards the supports, two of the four bars can be stopped, which a single bar cannot do. Minimum bend radii scale with diameter, so a 32 mm bar needs a large radius and heavy equipment to form hooks or bends. And with four bars, a defect in one bar or one lap does not remove all of the tension capacity.
The argument does not run without limit towards ever smaller bars. Concrete has to flow around and between the bars and be compacted, so codes require a minimum clear gap, typically not less than the bar diameter, the aggregate size plus a margin, or about 20 mm.
Check it for a 300 mm wide beam with 30 mm cover and 8 mm links: the width available to the bars is 300 - 2 × 38 = 224 mm. Four 16 mm bars leave three gaps of (224 - 64) / 3 = 53 mm, which is fine. Eight 12 mm bars (905 mm²) would leave seven gaps of (224 - 96) / 7 = 18 mm, too tight, forcing a second layer that reduces the effective depth. The usual answer is the smallest number of bars that satisfies bond, crack control and spacing together.
