Abstract
Abstract This study conducted an extensive review and evaluation of torsional design methods specified in SNiP and other international building codes. Unlike thin‐walled tube approach utilized as a key basis of design expressions in ACI 318, CSA, and Eurocode 2, skew‐bending theory is still adopted as torsional design methods specified in SNiP code used through Eurasia region. This comparative study is timely required since there are radical code changes in leading Eurasia countries, such as Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan, toward Eurocode from SNiP code. To this end, a total of 253 reinforced concrete (RC) specimens that failed in pure torsion were collected from the literature to compare the analytical accuracy of the torsional design methods specified in various design codes. It was found that the torsional design methods specified in SNiP and CSA codes can estimate the torsional strengths of RC members with good level of accuracy, while Eurocode 2 provided quite conservative results. In addition, the maximum limitations stipulated in each design code on the compressive strength of concrete and yield strength of reinforcements are of importance for the safe and efficient torsional design due to interrelation between reinforcement ratios considering materials strengths and inclination angle of compressive concrete strut.