P. 1


|Views: 5|Likes:
Published by Chintan Pathak
Slabs on flexible beams
Slabs on flexible beams

More info:

Published by: Chintan Pathak on Feb 25, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Comparison of Various Methods of Analysis of Beam-Supported Slabs




Partial fulfillment of the Degree of

M.Tech(Civil Engineering)
Specialization in Structural Engineering


Chintan Pathak

Supervisor Prof Rajesh Chaturvedi

Civil Engineering Department


Rajesh Chaturvedi (Supervisor) Dr.Comparison of Various Methods Analysis of Beam-Supported Slabs Introduction Literature Review Objectives of the study Model Formulation/Methodology Results and Discussions Conclusions References of Chintan Pathak (Candidate) Prof.Archana Keerti Chowdhary Principal & HOD .

1 INTRODUCTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. With increasing requirement for sheltered spaces. Framed structures are a network of beams and columns that transmit the superstructure load to the foundation. Indian code for Design of concrete structures (BIS-456). and ever-increasing cost of land. Preferred structural arrangement for tall construction is a framed structure.1 General Slabs are an integral part of any RCC structure. multi-storeyed construction is preferred. issued by the Bureau of Indian Standards was last revised in the year 2000. Changes regarding the factors affecting the durability of concrete were also incorporated. Increasing number of structures with beams and columns. when the primary method of design was changed from Working Stress Method (WSM) to Limit State Method (LSM). One such case is the analysis and design of slabs over flexible beams. 1 . often lead to conditions not adequately detailed in code.

2 .2 Objectives of the study The current investigation aims to study the behavior of slabs resting on flexible beams. Beams as supports lead to a different behavior than walls as supports.Recently though. 1. Walls. Indian Concrete Institute (ICI) has announced the preparation for yet another revision for BIS-456. our code has yet to follow suit. even brick masonry. While the American Code for Concrete design ACI-318 unified the analysis and design provisions for slabs using the Direct Design Method and the Equivalent Frame Method for design of all types of two-way slabs with/without beams. The main properties of interest are the moments and deflection throughout the slab. This thesis aims to be a timely reference for aiding the committee to validate a long ignored provision for analyzing slabs over beams. If beams are not rigid enough. are very rigid in their plane leading to very little to negligible deflections in the plane. While beams are flexible and deflect in the direction perpendicular to their span and rotate to release the fixing moments. this deflection and rotation can be significant affecting the moments and deflection in the resting slab.

the exact analysis methods are far too complicated to be applied on routine design problems efficiently. Slater (1921) This study correlated the results of tests with the results of numerical analysis to aid in development of design standards for slabs. featuring in analysis courses for the first time during postgraduation.  Moments and stresses in slabs.” -Isaac Newton Lot of work has been done to advance our understanding of the behavior of slabs. Westergaard and W. it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants. remains the preferred text for introduction of the subject. codal provisions provide simplified formulae for solving the problems of slabs. and of estimating the factor of safety.2 Literature survey ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------“If I have seen further than others. iii) A study of the test results for flat slabs with a view of comparing the moments of observed steel stresses with the bending moments indicated by the analysis. So. Slabs are complex objects. M. by H. A. and Woinowsky-Krieger. to this day. Briefed below is an account of the studies relevant to the subject. 3 . (1959). made for the purpose of assisting in the interpretation of slab tests. Even after that. S. summarized in Timoshenko. Most RC slabs can be treated as thin plates. S. The study is divided in three parts : i) Analysis of moments and stresses in slabs. ii) A study of the relation between the observed and computed steel stresses in reinforced-concrete beams. The theories of plates and shells.

Tables and charts have been prepared for various end conditions after simplifying the equations derived from the analysis.E. Goodman and N.M. P. remains straight after bending. With these factors.G. iii) The plates are homogeneous. elastic and of uniform thickness. iv) A straight line.  Analysis of plates continuous over flexible beams by J. Factors of equivalent uniformly distributed loads are determined for use in calculating bending moments and shears in each direction of the slabs and supporting beams. the design of slabs with any degree of rectangularity or variation in adjacent panels may be handled in the same manner as in one-way construction.  Slabs Supported On Four Sides by J. A minimum thickness formula is established based on limiting deflection to definite ratios of the span consistent with all cases of rectangularity and continuity. This study was also the first recognized work on flat slabs. ii) The plates are medium thick. Van Buren (1936) The basis of the ACI Building Regulations for slabs supported on four sides is covered in this paper. Newmark (1953) Approximate numerical solutions were obtained by the Ritz method for the interior panel of a plate which is continuous over a rectangular grid of flexible beams supported by columns at their intersections. v) The stresses in the neutral plane are zero. Parallel beams were assumed to be of 4 . Di Stasio and M.The analysis is based on the assumptions that: i) The plates are horizontal and the loads acting are vertical. L. drawn vertically through the plate before bending. Sutherland.

The solutions include. The problem considered is that of an interior panel of a plate continuous over a rectangular grid of flexible beams which are supported at their intersections by columns. Duncan (Aeronaut. A tabulated summary and graphs of the solutions are included. Research Council. The present work gives the theoretical distribution of moments in an interior panel for supporting beams of any stiffness. as limiting cases of the general problem. The plate was considered to be acted upon by a lateral load uniformly distributed over the whole area. Consequently only one interior panel need be considered. the known results for plates fixed against rotation and deflection at 5 . and for plates supported by a rectangular array of columns without connecting beams. The solutions include. This simplification will not have much effect on the deflections and moments near the centers of the panels but in some cases. The plate is considered to be acted upon by a lateral load which is uniformly distributed over its whole area. Under these conditions the bending in all interior panels may be assumed to be identical. as limiting cases. 2281:23.equal stiffness and uniformly spaced. In addition to the assumptions of the standard plate theory as described above the problem has been simplified by assuming that the widths of the beams and the crosssectional dimensions of columns are small compared with the panel dimensions. 1950) for beams clamped at both ends.J. That is. and M. will lead to excessively high moments near the columns. Apart from their intrinsic importance. the known results for plates fixed against rotation and deflection at their supports. The plate deflection was represented by an infinite series of polynomial functions (S-functions) derived by W. R. shears and deflections for several other loadings by superposition with known solutions. results of the analysis for this case of uniform loading of the entire plate can be used to obtain moments. It is assumed that parallel beams are of equal stiffness and are uniformly spaced and that the system has a large number of panels in both directions. the beam deflections are usually assumed to be small in comparison with the deflections of the central portions of the loaded panels. Numerical solutions were obtained for about 40 cases covering 3 different width-length ratios and a wide range of beam-plate rigidities. Two-way concrete slabs are usually designed without accounting for the flexibility of the supporting beam.

G. recommendations are made for an equivalent two-dimensional frame analysis which may be used to obtain moments at the design sections in reinforced concrete slabs. and for plates supported by a rectangular array of columns without connecting beams (flat slabs). The object of this investigation is to make a quantitative comparison of moments determined by the analysis of equivalent two-dimensional elastic frames with those determined from the theory of flexure for plates and from tests on both elastic and reinforced concrete models.  Equivalent Frame Analysis For Slab Design by W.A. The use of this method was restricted to structures with dimensions similar to those from which it was developed. After a large number of reinforced concrete slab structures had been built and load-tested. The study is based on the quantitative comparison of moments in slabs as determined from analysis and from tests. After these comparisons are completed. Since it was very difficult to obtain solutions to the plate problem by this method. At this time. an equivalent frame analysis was developed which would give approximately the same results as the empirical design method.P.their supports. the only method available for determining the moments in these structures was that of the theory of flexure for plates. For this reason. M. an "empirical" method of determining moments was developed. it was not practical for use as a design procedure. Siess (1961) The study presented here is concerned with the investigation of methods for determining moments in reinforced concrete slabs by the analysis of equivalent twodimensional elastic frames. It was soon recognized that some method was needed for extending the empirical method to structures with more extreme ranges of dimensions. Corley. Reinforced concrete as a material for the construction of slabs did not come into widespread use until soon after the beginning of the twentieth century. Sozen and C. Contd… 6 .

and the detailing of the corner connections. Based on an empirical value of slab deflection at ultimate load. Gamble (1972) The results of a study of the influence of the stiffness of the supporting beams on the distribution of moments within typical interior panels of reinforced concrete floor slabs are presented. The behavior of the slabs is discussed and. It is shown that once the beam stiffness parameter exceeds 2. The problem of T-beam action is also critically discussed. Hayes and R. were square and consisted of two-way-spanning slabs supported on. in particular. Taylor (1969) Results of tests on ten reinforced concrete beam-slab panels are reported. the layout of the slab reinforcement.  Ultimate strength of reinforced concrete slab-beam system by C. Moments in beam-supported slabs by W.L. Ramesh and T.K. the ultimate loads are compared with those predicted by simple yield-line theory.  Some tests on reinforced concrete beam-slab panels by B. Further 7 . edge beams. as will be the case in a large portion of slabs supported on beams on all four sides of panels. the theory gives a satisfactory correlation with the ultimate loads obtained from several tests on square single panel slab-beam units. The results are presented in terms of a beam stiffness parameter and the panel shape. and integral with. The panels. The theory uses a rigid plastic strip approximation and takes into account the lateral bowing of the edge beam. The limitations of this theory are discussed and suggestions are made for a more accurate method of calculation to be used in design which would effect some economy in reinforcement.K. which were subjected to a uniformly distributed load. Variables in the investigation included the relative strengths of the beams and slabs. the moment distribution are relatively insensitive to further increases in beam stiffness. Datta (1973) The paper develops a yield-line theory taking into account the compressive membrane action present in the slab-beam system having different degrees of edge restraint and different percentages of steel in the slab.

 Load deflection behavior of reinforced concrete slab-beam panels by P.K. The results of the method are compared with experimental results and a satisfactory agreement is noticed. Kulkarni (1979) The authors present a method for the determination of complete load-deflection characteristics of reinforced concrete isolated slab-beam panels subjected to uniformly distributed loading.studies are in progress and it is hoped that a rational basis will be established for the design of a slab-beam system on ultimate strength criteria. is also made. Desayi and A.B. Ramesh and T. The ultimate loads of the models are predicted by a method proposed by the authors and compared with the experimentally obtained values for good agreement. An empirical recommendation for the enhanced capacity due to T-beam action alone. and the degree of edge restraint at the surrounds of the slab provided by the varying lateral rigidity of the edge beams. Datta (1975) Experimental tests on nineteen single-panel square slab-beam models are reported in order to study the enhancement of the load-carrying capacity due to the development of compressive membrane forces. which induces some pre-compression in the slab.K.  Some experimental studies on a reinforced concrete slab-beam system by C. The second stage takes into account the effects of lateral bowing of edge beams and the compressive membrane forces to establish the load-deflection relationship. In the first stage load-deflection relationship up to yield line load is determined. The variables included are the percentage of reinforcement. Contd… 8 . The method is developed in two stages.

this has yet to be implemented by the IS codes.U. Ibrahim and H. Load deflection behavior of partially restrained slab strips by K. 9 . the effect of end conditions. the problem of slabs is still not clearly understood. is mainly aimed at simplifying the results from numerical analysis to propose a more usable empirical solution. including. material model of RCC for finite element analysis. An experimental study was designed to cast and test ten partially restrained slab strips with different edge rigidity. A parametric study has been made on the load enhancement beyond yield line load and the results are presented. K. As can be seen from the literature review.2 Critique While exact analysis is important from an academic point-of-view. 2. Unification will ensure the design of all two-way slab systems with same reliability. moment and deflection theories. it is rarely feasible to use it for practical implementations. the study of slabs since the theory of plates was first proposed by Kirchhoff in 1888. Mattarneh (2007) The paper gives the results of an analytical method proposed to predict the load deflection behavior of partially restrained slab strips. The results indicate that the proposed method can predict the load deflection behavior satisfactorily. Amarnath. Although. and the effect of shape and slope of the slab under consideration. The effect of deflection prior to yield line load on the development of compressive membrane forces was incorporated in the theoretical analysis. So. A comparison has been made between the results of the proposed and one of the other methods available in the literature. and work on all aspects. Phenomenal study by Westergaard in 1920 started the unification of slab analysis methods. A. Muthu.

al. The study also compares the results with the FDM for the special case of very rigid supporting beams. with and without beams. This ensures similar reliability in design for all two-way slabs. Most commonly used numerical method these days is the Finite Element Method (FEM). FEM is an algorithm advanced from Finite Difference Method (FDM). led to the development of the ACI codal provisions for design of two-way slabs with or without beams. This and further studies at the University of Illinois. While Indian Code suggests Moment Coefficient Method for wall supported as well as beam supported slabs. Sutherland et. The congruence of results with the experimental results prove the correctness of the theory and solution method. Currently. Solution can generally be obtained by applying one or more numerical methods.3 Methodology ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Slabs present complicated differential equations without an exact analytical solution. (1953) derived numerical results for the case of Beam supported slabs with various beam stiffness’s and various ratios of rectangularity. ACI suggests Equivalent Frame Method (EFM) for design of all two-way slab systems. ignoring the effect of beam flexibility and suggest the EFM 10 .

All the steps in the software analysis will be done though scripts rather than through the UI to allow re-use and ease of change. Two methods result in variable reliability of design with the result that the beam-supported two-way slabs are designed much conservatively. then importing the model into STAAD Pro and SAP2000.3). Besides the said methods. European Standard (Eurocode-2) and the study of Sutherland et. The analysis will be done by first modeling the structure in AUTOCAD. (1953). 11 . Finite Element Analysis (FEA) of the beam supported twoway slabs is also conducted by software like STAAD Pro and SAP2000. American Standard (ACI-318). Canadian Standard (CSA-A23.for design of only Flat Slabs. In this thesis. an attempt is made to compare the various methods of slab analysis namely the Indian Standard (IS-456).al.

277 0.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The following chart and table show the deflection w (1/2.443 0.359574 0. Xa=Xb= w (1/2.1/2) at the mid-point of the slab as the study of Sutherland et..283396 0. 1/2)(Deflection) as per Sutherland in mm w (1/2.al.5 0. 12 .454971 0.559 Contd.1/2) (Deflection) in mm (STAAD) (Node 1556) 5 2 1 0.352 0. (1953) and FEA by Staad Pro for various stiffness ratios for beams.578673 0.

141 0.5 w (0.1/2) (Deflection) in mm (STAAD) (Node 215) 0.349 Contd… 13 .060872 0.067 0. Xa=Xb= 5 2 1 0. 1/2) of the mid-point of the beam as per the study of Sutherland (1953) and Staad Pro.134989 0.237 0.346819 w (0.227486 0. 1/2)(Deflection) as per Sutherland in mm 0.The following chart and table shows the deflection w (0.

047334 0. Staad Pro and IS-456 for various beam stiffness ratios.06144 0. Xa=Xb= Mx(1/2.06144 0.057523 0.067 0. 1/2) (in KNm/m) as per Sutherland Mx (1/2.The following chart and table show the Moment at the mid-point of slab as per the Study of Sutherland.050022 0.064 0.1/2) (in KNm/m) as per IS 456 5 2 1 0.06 0.1/2) (in KNm/m) (Node1556) Plate 2096 Mx (1/2.0732 0.06144 0.5 0.06144 14 .053325 0.

1992. Technical Report to Office of Naval Research. Reinforced Concrete Design (Second Edition). Ontario. 2000. Goodman.. University of Illinois. Sutherland. L. Eurocode – 2.. Newmark. S. N..E. Pillai. S. European Committee for Standardization.3-04. Urbana.5 References ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Tata McGraw Hills.G. 6. D.U. Detroit. Conc. Design of Concrete Structures. Analysis of Plates Continuous Over Flexible Beams. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete And Commentary. 4. and Menon. Michigan. Canadian Standards Association. 2011. 5. New Delhi.M. 1953. 3. Design of Concrete Structures. IS 456: 2000 — Plain and Reinforced Concrete – Code of Practice (Fourth Revision). 15 . 2. Bureau of Indian Standards. Bruxelles. 2003. Institute. Am. Rexdale. CSA Standard A23.. ACI Standard 318-11. New Delhi. 2004.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->