Strip Method Design Handbook: (Type The Document Subtitle)

MesginaG
StripMethodDesign
Handbook
[Typethedocumentsubtitle]
Professor A.Hillerborg
11
StripMethodDesignHandbook
JOIN US ON THE INTERNET VIA WWW, GOPHER, FTP OR EMAIL:
WWW:
http://www.thomson.com
GOPHER:
gopher.thomson.com
A service of
FTP:
ftp.thomson.com
EMAIL:
findit@kiosk.thomson.com
StripMethodDesignHandbook
Professor A.Hillerborg
Emeritus Professor at Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden
E
&
An Imprint of Chapman & Hall
FN
SPON
London Weinheim New York Tokyo Melbourne Madras

Published by E & FN Spon, an imprint of Chapman & Hall, 26 Boundary Row,
London SE1 8HN, UK
Chapman & Hall, 26 Boundary Row, London, SE1 8HN, UK
Chapman & Hall GmbH, Pappelallee 3, 69469 Weinheim, Germany
Chapman & Hall USA, 115 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10003, USA
Chapman & Hall Japan, ITP-Japan, Kyowa Building, 3F, 221 Hirakawacho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo
102, Japan
Chapman & Hall Australia, 102 Dodds Street, South Melbourne, Victoria 3205, Australia
Chapman & Hall India, R.Seshadri, 32 Second Main Road, CIT East, Madras 600 035, India
First edition 1996
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003.
1996
ISBN 0-203-47467-8 Master e-book ISBN
ISBN 0-203-23874-5 (OEB Format)
ISBN 0 419 18740 5 (Print Edition)
2
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as
permitted under the UK Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988, this publication may not be
reproduced, stored, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in
writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction only in accordance with the
terms of the licences issues by the Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK, or in accordance with
the terms of licences issued by the appropriate Reproduction Rights Organization outside the UK.
Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the terms stated here should be sent to the publishers at
the London address printed on this page.
The publisher makes no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy of the
information contained in this book and cannot accept any legal responsibility or liability for any
errors or omissions that may be made.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
TableofContents
TableofContents..........................................................................................................................................4
Notation........................................................................................................................................................7
Conversionfactors........................................................................................................................................8
Preface..........................................................................................................................................................8
CHAPTER1Introduction.............................................................................................................................11
1.1Scope.................................................................................................................................................11
1.2Thestripmethod.............................................................................................................................11
1.3Stripmethodversusyieldlinetheory...........................................................................................12
1.4Stripmethodversustheoryofelasticity.......................................................................................13
1.5Serviceability...................................................................................................................................13
1.5.1Cracking....................................................................................................................................13
1.5.2Deformations............................................................................................................................15
1.6Liveloads.........................................................................................................................................15
1.7Minimumreinforcement.................................................................................................................15
CHAPTER2Fundamentalsofthestripmethod......................................................................................16
2.1General.............................................................................................................................................16
2.2Therationalapplicationofthesimplestripmethod....................................................................17
2.3Averagemomentsinonewayelements.......................................................................................20
2.3.1General......................................................................................................................................20
2.3.2Uniformloads...........................................................................................................................21
2.3.3Loadswithalinearvariationinthereinforcementdirection..............................................22
2.3.4Loadswithalinearvariationatrightanglestothereinforcementdirection.....................23
2.3.5Elementswithashearforcealonganedge............................................................................25
2.3.6Elementswithaskewanglebetweenspanreinforcementandsupport.............................25
2.4Designmomentsinonewayelements..........................................................................................27
2.4.1Generalconsiderations............................................................................................................27
2.4.2Lateraldistributionofdesignmoments.................................................................................27
2.5Designmomentsincornersupportedelements..........................................................................28
2.5.1Cornersupportedelements....................................................................................................28
2.5.2Rectangularelementswithuniformloads.............................................................................29
2.5.3Nonrectangularelementswithuniformloadsandorthogonalreinforcement.................30
2.5.4Elementswithnonorthogonalreinforcement......................................................................31
2.5.5Elementswithnonuniformloads..........................................................................................31
2.6Concentratedloads.........................................................................................................................32
2.6.1Onewayelements....................................................................................................................32
2.6.2Cornersupportedelements....................................................................................................33
2.7Strips................................................................................................................................................34
2.7.1Combiningelementstoformstrips........................................................................................34
2.7.2Continuousstripswithuniformloads....................................................................................35
2.8Supportbands.................................................................................................................................35
2.8.1General......................................................................................................................................35
2.8.2Comparisonwithcornersupportedelements.......................................................................36
2.8.3Applicationrules......................................................................................................................36
2.9Ratiosbetweenmoments...............................................................................................................38
2.9.1Ratiobetweensupportandspanmomentsinthesamedirection.......................................38
2.9.2Momentsindifferentdirections.............................................................................................38
2.10Lengthandanchorageofreinforcingbars..................................................................................39
2.10.1Onewayelements..................................................................................................................39
2.10.2Cornersupportedelements..................................................................................................40
2.10.3Anchorageatfreeedges........................................................................................................40
2.11Supportreactions............................................................................................................................41
CHAPTER3Rectangularslabswithallsidessupported........................................................................42
4
3.1Uniformloads..................................................................................................................................42
3.1.1Simplysupportedslabs............................................................................................................42
3.1.2Fixedandsimplesupports......................................................................................................43
3.2Triangularloads.................................................................................................................................45
3.3.1General......................................................................................................................................49
3.3.2Aconcentratedloadalone.......................................................................................................49
3.3.3Distributedandconcentratedloadstogether........................................................................52
CHAPTER4Rectangularslabswithonefreeedge.................................................................................54
4.1Introduction.....................................................................................................................................54
4.1.1Generalprinciples....................................................................................................................54
4.1.2Torsionalmoments.Cornerreinforcement...........................................................................55
4.2Uniformloads....................................................................................................................................55
4.4.1Loadsclosetothefreeedge....................................................................................................61
4.4.2Loadsnotclosetothefreeedge..............................................................................................62
CHAPTER5Rectangularslabswithtwofreeedges.................................................................................64
5.1Twooppositefreeedges.................................................................................................................64
5.2Twoadjacentfreeedges.................................................................................................................64
5.2.1General......................................................................................................................................64
5.2.2Simplysupportededges,uniformloads.................................................................................64
5.2.3Onefixededge,uniformloads.................................................................................................66
5.2.4Twofixededges,uniformloads..............................................................................................69
5.2.5Nonuniformloads...................................................................................................................70
CHAPTER6Triangularslabs....................................................................................................................71
6.1General.............................................................................................................................................71
6.1.1Reinforcementdirections........................................................................................................71
6.1.2Calculationofaveragemomentsinwholeelements.............................................................71
6.1.3Distributionofreinforcement.................................................................................................72
6.2Uniformloads..................................................................................................................................72
6.2.1Allsidessimplysupported......................................................................................................72
6.2.2Onefreeedge............................................................................................................................75
6.2.3Fixedandsimplysupportededges.........................................................................................77
6.4Concentratedloads...........................................................................................................................80
CHAPTER7Slabswithnonorthogonaledges............................................................................................80
7.1General..........................................................................................................................................80
7.2Fourstraightedges...........................................................................................................................81
7.2.1Alledgessupported..................................................................................................................81
7.2.2Onefreeedge............................................................................................................................82
7.2.3Twooppositefreeedges..........................................................................................................85
7.2.4Twoadjacentfreeedges..........................................................................................................86
7.3Othercases.......................................................................................................................................89
7.3.1Circularslabswithauniformload..........................................................................................89
7.3.2Generalcasewithalledgessupported...................................................................................91
7.3.3Generalcasewithonestraightfreeedge...............................................................................96
7.3.4Generalcasewithtwoormorefreeedges.............................................................................96
CHAPTER8Regularflatslabswithuniformloads.................................................................................97
8.1General.............................................................................................................................................97
8.1.1Definitionofregular..............................................................................................................97
8.1.2Droppanelsandcolumncapitals............................................................................................97
8.1.3Determinationofspan.............................................................................................................97
8.1.4Calculationofaveragedesignmoments.................................................................................98
8.1.5Lateraldistributionofreinforcement.....................................................................................99
5
8.1.6Summaryofthedesignprocedure........................................................................................100
8.2Exteriorwallorbeamsupports...................................................................................................101
8.2.1Onesingleinteriorcolumn....................................................................................................101
8.2.2Morethanoneinteriorcolumn.............................................................................................103
8.3Exteriorcolumnsupports.............................................................................................................105
8.3.1General....................................................................................................................................105
8.3.2Columnsupportatoneedge..................................................................................................105
8.3.3Columnsupportatacorner...................................................................................................107
8.4Slabcantileveringoutsidecolumns................................................................................................108
8.5Oblongpanelsandcornersupportedelements.............................................................................109
CHAPTER9Regularflatslabswithnonuniformloads.............................................................................111
9.1Introduction....................................................................................................................................111
9.2Uniformloadsinonedirection.......................................................................................................111
9.3Differentloadsonpanels................................................................................................................113
CHAPTER10Irregularflatslabs................................................................................................................119
10.1General..........................................................................................................................................119
10.2Designprocedure..........................................................................................................................119
10.3Edgesstraightandfullysupported...............................................................................................121
10.4Edgesstraightandpartlycolumnsupported................................................................................125
10.5Edgecurvedandfullysupported..................................................................................................128
10.6Edgecurvedandcolumnsupported.............................................................................................131
10.7Slabcantileveringoutsidecolumns..............................................................................................134
CHAPTER11Lshapedslabsandlargewallopenings...............................................................................145
11.1General..........................................................................................................................................145
11.2Reentrantcorner...........................................................................................................................146
11.3Supportingwallwithalargeopening.......................................................................................148
11.3.1Innerwall..............................................................................................................................148
11.3.2Wallalonganedge...............................................................................................................150
11.3.3Slabcantileveringoutsidewall...........................................................................................154
CHAPTER12Openingsinslabs.................................................................................................................157
12.1General...................................................................................................................................157
12.2Slabswithalledgessupported...................................................................................................158
12.2.1Rectangularslabs.................................................................................................................158
12.2.2Nonrectangularslabs..........................................................................................................164
12.3Slabswithonefreeedge.............................................................................................................166
12.3.1Openingnotclosetothefreeedge.....................................................................................166
12.3.2Openingatthefreeedge......................................................................................................205
12.4Slabswithtwofreeedges...........................................................................................................169
12.4.1Twooppositefreeedges......................................................................................................169
12.4.2Twoadjacentfreeedgesandsimplesupports..................................................................208
12.4.3Twoadjacentfreeedgesandfixedsupports.....................................................................171
12.5Cornersupportedelements..........................................................................................................211
CHAPTER13Systemsofcontinuousslabs................................................................................................174
13.1General..........................................................................................................................................174
13.2Systemsofrectangularslabs.........................................................................................................175
13.3Rectangularslabsandconcretewalls...........................................................................................223
13.4Othercases...................................................................................................................................223
CHAPTER14Joistfloors............................................................................................................................224
14.1General..........................................................................................................................................224
14.2Noncornersupportedfloors........................................................................................................224
14.3Floorswithcornersupportedelements.......................................................................................228
CHAPTER15Prestressedslabs..................................................................................................................234
15.1General..........................................................................................................................................234
15.2Thesimplestripmethodfortendons...............................................................................191
6
15.3Prestressedsupportbands...........................................................................................................236
15.4Flatslabs........................................................................................................................................237
References................................................................................................................................................240
Notation
a
b
ba
c
l
l
M
m
mf
mxf
mf1
msA
mxAB
mAB
Q
q
R
x,y,(z)
Widthofreinforcementfordistributionofaconcentratedload,Section2.6.1.
Widthofareinforcementbandforcarryingaconcentratedload,Section2.6.1.
Average width of the elements which are supported by a support band, see Section
2.8.3
Lengthinthereinforcementdirectionfromasupporttothelineofzeroshearforcein
an element, see Section 2.3. Indices are used to separate different lengths within an
element,Section2.3,orlengthsbelongingtodifferentelementsintheexamples.
Widthofanelement,seeSection2.3.Indicesareusedtoindicatedifferentpartsof the
width.
Additional length of a reinforcing bar for anchorage beyond the point where it can
theoreticallybeended(Section2.10).InSection14.2ithasanothermeaning.
DesignmomentinkNm.Apositivemomentisamomentwhichcausestensioninthe
bottom reinforcement. Indices are used for the direction of the reinforcement
correspondingtothemoment(xory,sometimesalsoz),
forsupportmoment(s)orspanmoment(f),
for the place where the moment is acting, e.g. a number of an element or a letter
denotingasupportortwolettersdenotingthespanbetweentwosupports.
DesignmomentperunitwidthinkNm/m.IndicesareusedinthesamewayasforM.In
general m stands for an average moment on the width of an element. Examples of
notationsare:
Spanmomentintheloadbearingdirection.
Designspanmomentforreinforcementinthexdirection.
Designspanmomentinanelementdenoted1.
DesignsupportmomentatsupportA.
Design span moment for reinforcement in the xdirection for the span between
supportsAandB.
Design span moment for the span between A and B, the direction not necessarily
followingacoordinateaxis.
LoadorshearforceinkN/m.
LoadperunitareainkN/m2.
ReactionforceinkNorkN/m.
Coordinates.
Ratio between moment in the middle strip and the average moment in a corner
supportedelement,Section2.5.2.
Ratiobetweenwidthofsupport stripandtotalwidthofa cornersupportedelement,
Section2.5.2.
Factor for the determination of the length of support bars in cornersupported
elements,Section2.10.2.
Afreeedge.
Asimplysupportededge.
Afixedorcontinuousedge.
Anopeninginaslab.
Asupportingwall.
Asupportingcolumn.
Alimitedloadedarea.
Adividinglinebetweenelements,asarulealineofzeroshearforce.Designmoments
are,withafewexceptions,activeinsuchlines.
Thepositionofasupportband.Itmayalsoshowthepositionofalineofzeromoment
incaseswherethebottomandtopreinforcementhavedifferentdirections.
Theloadbearingdirectioninaonewayelement.Iftwosignswithdifferentdirections
areshownwithinthesameelementitmeansthattheloadisdividedbetweenthetwo
directions.
Thetwoloadbearingdirectionsinacornersupportedelement.
Diagram showing the lateral distribution of a design moment. The lines within the
diagram show the direction of the reinforcement and the values of the moments are
writteninacorrespondingdirection.
Diagramillustratingaloaddistribution.
Conversionfactors
TheSIsystemisusedthroughoutthebook.Allsizesaregiveninm(metres).Allloadsandforcesare
giveninkN(kilonewtons),kN/m(kilonewtonspermetre)orkN/m2(kilonewtonspersquaremetre),
depending on type of load or force. Bending moments designed M are always in kNm, bending
momentsdesignedmarealwaysinkNm/m.
SIunits
USunits
1m
3.281ft
1kN
224.8lb.
1kN/m
68.52lb./ft
1kN/m2
20.89psf
1kNm
737.6ftlb.
1kNm/m
224.8ftlb./ft
Preface
In the early fifties design methods for reinforced concrete slabs were discussed within a Swedish
concretecodecommittee,whereIwastheworkingmember,preparingtheproposals.Themainpoint
of disagreement was whether the yield line theory was to be accepted in the code. Some of the
committeememberswereagainsttheacceptanceoftheyieldlinetheorybecauseitisinprincipleon
the unsafe side and may lead to dangerous mistakes in the hands of designers with insufficient
knowledgeofitsapplicationandlimitations.Intheendtheyieldlinetheorywasacceptedwithsome
limitations, but one of the committee members asked me if there did not exist any design method
basedonthetheoryofplasticity,butwithresultsonthesafeside.TheanswerthattimewasNo.
Towards the end of the committee work Professor Prager, the wellknown expert on the theory of
plasticity,happenedtogiveaseriesoflecturesinSweden,whereIhadtheopportunitytogetbetter
acquaintedwiththetwotheoremsofthetheoryofplasticity,theupperboundtheorem,uponwhich
theyieldlinetheoryisfounded,andthelowerboundtheorem,whichbythenhadfoundnopractical
application, at least not to reinforced concrete slabs. Both theorems were described as methods
mainlyintendedtocheckthestrength ofagivenstructure,notin thefirstplaceasdesignmethods.
Alsothe lowerboundtheoremwas mainlydescribed asabasisforcheckingthe strengthofagiven
structureandtheconclusionwasthatitisnotverysuitableforthatpurpose.Thebackgroundtothis
statementwasthatonlytheapplicationtohomogenousmaterialslikemetalplateswasdiscussed,not
theapplicationtomaterialswherethebendingstrengthcanbevaried.
It then struck me that the lower bound theorem could be used the other way round for reinforced
concrete slabs, starting by seeking a statically admissible moment field and then arranging the
reinforcementtotakethesemoments.Thiswasthebeginningofthestripmethod.Theideawasfirst
8
published in a Swedish journal (in Swedish) in 1956. The theory was called Equilibrium theory for
reinforced concrete slabs. As a special case the assumption of strips which carried the load only by
bendingmomentswasmentionedandcalledtheStripmethod.Thisiswhatwetodaycallthesimple
stripmethod.Atthattimenosolutionexistedfordesigningcolumnsupportedslabsbymeansofthis
equilibriumtheory.
InthelatefiftiesitwasusualthatslabsinSwedishapartmentbuildingsweresupportedonwallsplus
one interior column. No suitable design method existed for this case. I was asked by the head of the
design office of the Swedish firm Riksbyggen to propose a design method for this case. The result was a
publicationinSwedishin1959,whichwaslatertranslatedintoEnglishbyBlakeyinAustraliaandpublishedin
1964underthetitleStripmethodforslabsoncolumns,Lshapedplates,etc.Thisextensionofthestripmethod
haslaterbecomeknownastheadvancedstripmethod.
The first time the strip method was mentioned in a nonSwedish publication was at the IABSE
congressinStockholmin1960,whereIpresentedashortpaperwiththetitleAplastictheoryforthe
designofreinforcedconcreteslabs.Thispaperarousedtheinterestofsomeresearchers,whostudied
theSwedishpublications(orunofficialtranslations)andwrotepapersandreportsaboutthetheory.
ThusCrawfordtreatedthestripmethodinhisdoctoralthesisattheUniversityofIllinois,Urbana,in
1962andinacorrespondingpaperin1964.
MuchearlyinterestforthestripmethodwasshownbyArmerandWood,whopublishedanumberof
paperswherethemethodwasdescribedanddiscussed.Theyhaveplayedamajorroleinmakingthe
methodinternationallyknown.
IntheearlyseventiesIhadfoundthattheinterestinthemethodwassogreatthatitwastimetowrite
abookwhichtreatedthe methodinagreaterdetail.Theresultwasabookwhichwaspublishedin
Swedishin1974andinEnglishin1975withthetitleStripMethodsofDesign.Myintentionwiththat
bookwastwofold.Iwishedtoshowhowmostdesignproblemsforslabscanbetreatedbymeansof
the strip method in a rigorous way, but I also wished to give advice for its practical application.
Whereas I think that the first goal was reached, the second was not. The book has rightly been
regardedastootheoreticalanddifficultforpracticalapplication.
From1973tomyretirementIwasaprofessorinbuildingmaterialsandhadtodevotemyinterestto
othertopicsthantostructuraldesignproblems.DuringthisperiodIdidpracticallynothingaboutthe
stripmethodexceptthecontactsIkeptwithinterestedpeople.
Duringthelast20yearsthestripmethodhasbeenintroducedintomanytextbooksonthedesignof
reinforcedconcrete.Inmostcasesthetreatmentismainlylimitedtothebasicideaandthetreatment
ofsimplecasesbymeansofthesimplestripmethod,asthisiseasiesttoexplainandtoapply.Inmy
opinion this is a pity, as the greatest advantage of the strip method is that it makes it possible to
performarathersimple,safeandeconomicaldesignofmanyslabswhicharecomplicatedtodesignby
meansofothermethods.
Theinterestinthestripmethodthusseemstohaveincreased,butprobablythepracticalapplication
haslaggedbehindbecauseofalimitedunderstandingoftheapplication.Thismademeconsiderthe
possibilityofwritinganewbook,intendedforthepeopleindesignoffices.Aftermyretirementafew
yearsagoIhavegotthetimeforwritingthebook.AgrantfromkeochGretaLisshedsStiftelsefor
buyingacomputerandappropriateprogramsforthatpurposehasmadeitpossibleformetocarry
throughtheproject.
WhereasinmyearlierbookItriedtoshowrigorouslycorrecttheoreticalsolutions,thistimeIhave
allowedmyselfsomeapproximationsandsimplificationswhenIhavegiventherecommendationsfor
the practical application. This has been done in order to simplify and systematize the numerical
analyses. As far as I can judge the resulting design is always on the safe side in spite of these
approximations, which sometimes cannot be shown to formally fulfil the requirements of the lower
boundtheoremofthetheoryofplasticity.Anywaythedesignisalwayssaferthanadesignbasedon
the yield line theory. Checks by means of the yield line theory of slabs designed according to the
recommendationsinthisbooknevershowthatitisontheunsafeside,atleastasfarasIhavefound.A
formalexceptionisthatIhavedisregardedthecornerleverswhicharesometimestakenintoaccount
in the yield line theory. Instead I have recommended lateral moment distributions where the
influenceofthecornerleversisminimized.
9
Thebookisnotintendedtobereadrightthrough,buttobeusedindesignofficesasasupportforthe
designerwhomeetsadesignproblem.Heshouldjustbeabletolookupthetypeofslabandstudythe
relevantpagesinthebook.
It should be pointed out that the approach in the book only gives the moments for the design of
flexural reinforcement and the reaction forces, and does not give recommendations for the design
withregardtoshearandpunching.Rulesfromrelevantcodeshavetobefollowedinthesecases.
WhenIstartedwritingthebookIthoughtthatitwouldbeasimpleandstraightforwardtaskforme
toshowhowtoapplythemethod.InpracticeitdidnotprovesosimplewhenItriedtofindsolutions
whichweresimpleandeasilyexplainedinthemorecomplicatedcases.Inspiteofmyeffortsmaybe
someofthesolutionsstillwillbelookeduponascomplicated.Itmusthoweverberememberedthat
manyoftheslabsanalysedarestaticallycomplicated,e.g.flatslabswithirregularlyplacedcolumns,
andthatitisnotrealistictohopeforverysimplesolutionsforsuchcases.
The book contains thousands of numerical calculations. Although I have tried to check everything
thoroughly there are certainly some errors left. As all authors know it is very difficult to observe
mistakesinwhatyouhavewrittenyourself.Iaskthereadertoexcusepossiblemistakes.
Iwishtoexpressmythankstoallmyfriendsandcolleaguesallaroundtheworldwhobytheirinterest
and support through the years have encouraged me to decide to write this book. I refrain from
mentioningnames,asthereisariskthatImightforgetsomeone.
Itismysincerehopethatthebookwillproveusefulinthedesignoffices.
Nykping,Sweden
ArneHillerborg
10
CHAPTER1
Introduction
1.1 Scope
Thegeneralscopeofthisbookistogiveguidanceonthepracticalapplicationofthestripmethod.
Thestripmethodisinprincipleamethodfordesigningslabssothatthesafetyagainstbendingfailure
issufficient.Asopposedtotheyieldlinetheoryitgivesasafedesignagainstbendingfailure.Thestrip
methoddoesnotinitselfleadtoadesignwhichisclosetothataccordingtothetheoryofelasticity,
nordoesittakeshearorpunchingfailureintoaccount.Theadditionalrecommendationsgiveninthis
bookhowevertakethemomentdistributionsaccordingtothetheoryofelasticityintoaccountinan
approximatewayandgiveshearforceswhichcanbeusedinshearandpunchingdesign.
ThestripmethodwasfirstdevelopedinthemidfiftiesandpublishedinSwedish.Sometranslationsin
Englishwerepublishedinthesixties.Thesefirstpublicationsshowedthegeneralprinciplesandsome
applications, but they were not very complete. A more complete publication in English appeared in
1975inthebookStripMethodofDesign.Thatbookhadadoublescope:todeveloptheoreticallywell
founded rules for the application of the strip method to cases met with in practical design, and to
demonstratetheapplication.
The development of the rules for practical application involved in many cases rather complicated
discussions and theoretical derivations, which were necessary in order to prove that the resulting
practical rules rested on a solid theoretical basis. As a result the book has been looked upon as
theoreticallycomplicatedanddifficulttoreadandapply.Thisimpres sionmayhavebeenincreasedby
itsdiscussionofmanyexamplesofdifferentalternativepossibilities.
Bearinginmindthisbackgroundandtheincreasinginterestinthestripmethod,thepresentbookhas
beenwrittenwiththesingleobjectiveofdemonstratingtheapplicationtoagreatnumberofpractical
examples, without discussing the theoretical background in detail. Those who are interested in the
theoreticalbackgroundarereferredtothebookStripMethodofDesign.
In order to make the application of the method to practical design as simple as possible some
approximations have been used which have been estimated to be acceptable even though the
acceptabilityhasnotbeenstrictlyproved.Evenwiththeseapproximationstheresultingdesignsare
probably safer than many accepted designs based on yield line theory, theory of elasticity or code
rules.
Theintentionisthatadesignershouldbeabletoapplythestripmethodtothedesignofaslabmet
with in practice without having to read the book but just by looking for the relevant examples and
following the rules given in connection with the examples, including the references to the general
guidelinesandrulesgiveninthetwointroductorychapters.
1.2 Thestripmethod
Thestripmethodisbasedonthelowerboundtheoremofthetheoryofplasticity,whichmeansthatit
inprincipleleadstoadequatesafetyattheultimatelimitstate,providedthatthereinforcedconcrete
slab has a sufficiently plastic behaviour. This is the case for ordinary underreinforced slabs under
predominantly static loads. The plastic properties of a slab decrease with increasing reinforcement
ratioandtosomeextentalsowithincreasingdepth.Withadesignbasedontherecommendationsin
thisbook,includingtherecommendationsinSection1.5,thedemandontheplasticpropertiesofthe
slab is not very high. The solutions should give adequate safety in most cases, possibly with the
exceptionofslabsofveryhighstrengthconcretewithhighreinforcementratios.
11
Asthetheoryofplasticityonlytakesintoaccounttheultimatelimitstate,supplementaryruleshaveto
be given to deal with the properties under service conditions, i.e. deflections and cracks. Such
supplementary rules are given in Section 1.5, and the applications of these rules are shown and
sometimesdiscussedintheexamples.
Thelowerboundtheoremofthetheoryofplasticitystatesthatifamomentdistributioncanbefound
which fulfils the equilibrium equations, and the slab is able to carry these moments, the slab has
sufficientsafetyintheultimatelimitstate.Inthestripmethodthistheoremhasbeenreformulatedin
thefollowingway:
Find a moment distribution which fulfils the equilibrium equations. Design the reinforcement for
thesemoments.
Themomentdistributionhasonlytofulfiltheequilibriumequations,butnootherconditions,suchas
therelationbetweenmomentsandcurvatures.Thismeansthatmanydifferentmomentdistributions
arepossible,inprincipleaninfinitenumberofdistributions.Ofcourse,somedistributionsaremore
suitable than others from different points of view. The reasons and rules for the choice of suitable
distributionswillbediscussedinSection1.5.
1.3 Stripmethodversusyieldlinetheory
Theyieldlinetheoryisbasedontheupperboundtheoremofthetheoryofplasticity.Thismeansin
principlethataloadisfoundwhichishighenoughtomaketheslabfail,i.e.thesafetyintheultimate
limitstateisequaltoorlowerthantheintendedvalue.Ifthetheoryiscorrectlyappliedthedifference
between the intended and the real safety is negligible, but there exists a great risk that unsuitable
solutions may be used, leading to reduced safety factors, particularly in complicated cases like
irregularslabsandslabswithfreeedges.
Withthestripmethodthesolutionisinprinciplesafe,i.e.therealsafetyfactorisequaltoorhigher
thantheintended.Ifunsuitablesolutionsareused,thesafetymaybemuchhigherthantheintended,
leadingtoapooreconomy.Fromthepointofviewofsafetythestripmethodhastobepreferredto
theyieldlinetheory.
Astheyield linetheory givessafetyfactorsequal to or belowthe intended value,whereasthestrip
methodgivesvaluesequaltoorabovetheintendedvalue,exactlytheintendedvaluewillbefoundin
the case where the two solutions coincide. This gives the exact solution according to the theory of
plasticity.Exactsolutionsshouldinprinciplebesought,asexactlytheintendedsafetygivesthebest
economy.Howcloseastripmethodsolutionistotheexactsolutioncanbecheckedbyapplyingthe
yieldlinetheorytothefoundsolution.Inmostoftheexamplesinthisbookacheckagainstyieldline
theory shows that the difference is only a few percent, which means that the strip method leads to
safetyfactorswhichareequaltoorjustslightlyabovetheintendedvalues.
Whencomparingthestripmethodandtheyieldlinetheoryitshouldbenotedthatthestripmethodis
adesignmethod,asamomentdistributionisdetermined,whichisusedforthereinforcementdesign.
Theyieldlinetheoryisamethodforcheckofstrength.Whentheyieldlinetheoryisusedfordesign,
assumptionshavetobemadeforthemomentdistribution,e.g.relationsbetweendifferentmoments.
Inpracticethereinforcementisoftenassumedtobeevenlydistributed,whichasamatteroffactmay
notbeveryefficient.Thestripmethodinmostapplicationsleadstoamomentdistributionwherethe
reinforcementisheavieratplaceswhereitismostefficient,e.g.alongafreeedgeoraboveacolumn
support.Asthestripmethodthustendstousethereinforcementinamoreefficientway,stripmethod
solutionsoftengivebetterreinforcementeconomythantheyieldlinesolution,inspiteofthefactthat
the strip method solution is safer. The reinforcement distribution according to the strip method
solutionisoftenalsobetterfromthepointofviewofthebehaviourunderserviceconditions.
Areinforcementdesigndoesnotonlymeanthedesignofthesectionsofmaximummoments,butalso
thedeterminationofthelengthsofreinforcingbars,andthecurtailmentofthereinforcement.Asthe
strip method design is in principle based on complete moment fields, it also gives the necessary
information regarding the curtailment of reinforcement. With the yield line theory it is very
complicated to determine the curtailment of reinforcement in all but the simplest cases. The result
12
from the application of the yield line theory may be either reinforcing bars which are too short or
unnecessarilylongbars,leadingtopoorreinforcementeconomy,asthelengthinpracticeisbasedon
estimations,duetothecomplexityofmakingtherelevantanalyses.
Fromtheaboveitseemsevidentthatthestripmethodhasmanyadvantagesovertheyieldlinetheory
asamethodfordesignofreinforcedconcreteslabs.Inasituationwherethestrengthofagivenslab
hastobechecked,theyieldlinetheoryisusuallytobepreferred.
1.4 Stripmethodversustheoryofelasticity
Itissometimesstatedthatthestripmethodisnotaveryusefulpracticaldesignmethodtoday,aswe
are able to design slabs by means of efficient finite element programs, based on the theory of
elasticity.Thispointofviewisworthsomediscussion.
A finite element analysis gives a moment field, including torsional moments which also have to be
taken into account for the determination of the design moments for the reinforcement. The design
moment field is usually unsuitable for direct use for the design of the reinforcement. The moments
haveacontinuouslateralvariationwhichwouldrequireacorrespondingcontinuousvariationofthe
distancesbetweenreinforcingbars.Thisisofcoursenotpossiblefromapracticalpointofview.
Onesolutiontothisproblemistodesignthereinforcementforthehighestdesignmomentwithina
certain width. This approach is on the safe side, but may lead to poor reinforcement economy, for
example,comparedtoastripmethodsolution.
A correct solution according to the theory of elasticity sometimes shows very pronounced moment
concentrations.Forinstance,thisisthecaseatcolumnsupportsandsupportsatreentrantcorners.It
isinpracticenotpossibletoreinforceforthesehighlocalmoments.
In order to avoid poor reinforcement economy and high reinforcement concentrations the
reinforcementmaybedesignedforanaveragedesignmomentoveracertainwidth.Asamatteroffact
thisapproachisbasedonthetheoryofplasticity,althoughappliedinanarbitraryway.Itmayleadto
resultswhichareoutofcontrolregardingsafety.Inthisaveragingprocesssomeoftheadvantagesof
thetheoryofelasticityarelost.Inanefficientuseoffiniteelementbaseddesignsomepostprocessing
procedurehastobeusedfortheaveraging.Theresult,e.g.regardingsafety,economy,andproperties
intheservicestate,willdependonthispostprocessor.
Efficient use of the finite element method, with due regard to economy and safety, may thus
necessitatetheuseofrathersophisticatedprogramsincludingpostprocessors.Thecostofusingsuch
programshastobecomparedtothecostofmakingadesignbymeansofthestripmethod.Inmost
casesthetimeformakingastripmethoddesignbyhandcalculationissoshortthatitdoesnotpayto
useasophisticatedfiniteelementprogram.
Ahandcalculationbymeansofthestripmethodcanprobablyinmanycasescompetefavourablywith
adesignbasedonfiniteelementanalysis.
It should also be possible to write computer programs based on the strip method, although such
programsdonotsofarseemtohavebeendeveloped.
1.5 Serviceability
1.5.1 Cracking
In discussing cracking and crack control it is important to take into account the importance of the
cracksinarealisticway.Cracksneednotbeavoidedorlimitedunderallconditions.Wherethereisno
risk of reinforcement corrosion, which is the case for most indoor structures, cracks are only to be
limitediftheycauseavisibledamage.Theuppersurfaceofaslabisoftencoveredbysomeflooring,
carpet, parquet etc. Then a certain amount of cracking is of no practical importance and the top
reinforcementmaybeconcentratedinthepartswithinasectionwherethelargestnegativemoments
may be expected under service conditions, whereas the parts with smaller moments are left
unreinforced.
13
Incaseswherecrackinghastobelimitedtherehastobesufficientreinforcementinallsectionswhere
themomentsarelargeenoughtocausecracks.Thisreinforcementmustnotyieldintheservicestate.
The basic way of fulfilling this requirement is to choose solutions where the design moments are
similar to those which may be expected according to the theory of elasticity. Some modifications of
thisgeneralrulemaybeacceptedandrecommended.
Itisnotnecessarytotrytofollowtheelasticmomentsindetailregardingthelateraldistributionina
sectionwithmaximummoments.Thedesignmomentmaybeassumedtobeconstantoverquitelarge
widths,evenifthemomentsaccordingtothetheoryofelasticityvaryinthatwidth.Themainthingis
that the average moment in the section is close to the elastic value and that there is a general
agreementbetweentheelasticandthechosendistribution.
Whenthemomentsarecalculatedaccordingtothetheoryofelasticityitisgenerallyassumedthatthe
slab has a constant stiffness, independent of the amount of reinforcement. This corresponds to an
assumptionthatthereisadirectproportionalitybetweenmomentandcurvature.Intheplaceswhere
the moments are largest the curvature is also largest. From this it follows that the stresses in the
reinforcementarealsolargestwherethemomentsarelargest,evenifthereinforcementisdesigned
for the theoretical moments. Yielding of reinforcement can be expected to ocur first in the sections
wherethelargestmomentsoccurifthereinforcementisdesignedforthemomentsaccordingtothe
theory of elasticity. In order to avoid yielding and large cracks more reinforcement than is needed
according to the theory of elasticity should in principle be chosen for the sections with the largest
moments and less reinforcement should be used in sections with smaller moments. The difference
between large and small design moments should thus be exaggerated compared to the values
accordingtothetheoryofelasticity.
Asthesupportmomentsareoftenlargerthanthespanmomentsitmayberecommendedtochoosea
higher ratio between the numerical values of the support and span moments than according to the
theory of elasticity, or at least not a smaller ratio. This recommendation also leads to a good
reinforcementeconomy.
Themaincheckonsuitabilityofthedesignmomentsisthustheratiobetweenthenumericalvaluesof
supportandspanmoments.Whereastripwithbothendsfixedhasauniformloadactingonitswhole
lengthbetweenthesupportsthisratioshouldbeabout23fromthesepointsofview.Incaseswhere
cracks are less important on the upper surface of the slab, e.g. where there is a floor cover, values
downtoabout1.5maybeaccepted.
Whereastripisloadedonlyneartheendsandunloadedinthecentralpartahigherratioispreferred.
Bythechoiceofasuitableratiobetweensupportandspanmomentsregardcanalsobegiventothe
relativeimportanceofcracksintheupperandlowersurfacesoftheslabforthestructureinquestion.
Wheretheserulesarefollowedthedesignmomentsaccordingtothestripmethodmayprobablybe
usedalsoforatheoreticalcrackcontrolaccordingtoexistingformulas.
Specialattentionmayhavetobepaidtopartsofaslabwheretheloadiscarriedinaquitedifferent
way from that assumed in the strip method. This is particularly the case where much of the load is
carried by torsional moments, but the strip method disregards the torsional moments and assumes
thatalltheloadiscarriedbybendingmomentsinthedirectionsofthecoordinateaxes.Thissituation
occurs in the vicinity of corners, particularly where simply supported edges meet. It also occurs in
slabswithfreeedges,whereitmayinsomecasesdominate.
Cracking is best limited by reinforcement which is placed approximately in the directions of the
principalmoments.Wherelargetorsionalmomentsoccurthesedirectionsdeviateconsiderablyfrom
thoseofthecoordinateaxes.Wherethetorsionalmomentsdominate,thedirectionsoftheprincipal
momentsareatabout45tothecoordinateaxes.
Wheretwosimplysupportededgesmeetatacornerthestripmethodinitsnormalapplicationdoes
not give any negative moment or top reinforcement. In reality there is a negative moment
correspondingtoatorsionalmoment.Thismomentmaygivecracksapproximatelyatrightanglesto
the bisector. The best way of limiting such cracks is by introducing some top corner reinforcement
paralleltothebisector.Thedesignofthisreinforcementshouldbebasedonthetheoryofelasticity.
Manycodesgivedesignrecommendations.
14
Corner reinforcement has nothing to do with safety and it is only needed for crack control. Where
cracksontheuppersurfaceareunimportantthisreinforcementmaybeomitted.
At corners where corner reinforcement may be needed the corner has a tendency to lift from the
support. This should be taken into accounteither byanchoring ofthe corner,by arrangements that
allowthecornertoliftwithoutdamagingtheadjacentstructure,orbymakinganintentionalcrackin
theuppersurface.
1.5.2 Deformations
Thedistributionofreinforcementhasaverylimitedinfluenceonthedeformationsintheservicestate
as long as it does not correspond to design moments which deviate appreciably from the moments
accordingtothetheoryofelasticity.Aslongastherecommendationswithregardtocrackcontrolare
followed,thedistributionofreinforcementmayberegardedasfavourablefromthepointofviewof
deformations.
Calculations of theoretical deformation values have to be based on the theory of elasticity. Most
normalformulasandproceduresmaybeappliedtoslabsdesignedbythestripmethod.Suchanalyses
willnotbediscussedorappliedinthisbook.
1.6 Liveloads
Asthestripmethodisbasedonthetheoryofplasticityitcanonlybeusedtogivethestructurethe
intendedsafetyagainstcollapseunderagivenconstantloadsituation,whichisnormallyafullloadon
allthestructure.
Where the live load forms an important part of the total load on a continuous slab the moments at
some sections may be increased by unloading some parts of the slab. Typically the increase in
momentsinonepaneldependsontheremovalofloadsfromotherpanels.
The strip method can be used for analysing the change in behaviour at ultimate load due to the
unloading of certain panels. This is mainly a matter of changes in requirements for lengths of
reinforcingbars.
Where there is a repeated change in magnitudes and positions of live loads the stresses in
reinforcement and concrete will vary. Such a variation leads theoretically to a decrease in safety
against collapse through the effect known as shakedown. For most structures this effect is of no
practicalimportance.Insomecasesitshould,however,betakenintoaccountThishastobedoneby
anadditiontothedesignmoments,whichhastobecalculatedbymeansofthetheoryofelasticity.
Even though the additional moments are calculated by means of the theory of elasticity the basic
moments may be calculated by means of the strip method. The additional moments are generally
rather small compared to the basic moments. Approximate formulas or estimates then give an
acceptableaccuracy.
In cases where the change in live load magnitude is large and is repeated a great many times with
nearly full intensity there may be a risk of fatigue failure. Such structures should be designed by
meansofthetheoryofelasticity.
1.7 Minimumreinforcement
Most codes contain rules regarding minimum reinforcement. These rules of course have to be
followed.Therulesareverydifferentindifferentcountries.Themainreasonforthegreatdifferences
seemstobethelackofwellfoundedjustificationfor minimum reinforcement.No accounthasbeen
takenofminimumreinforcementintheexamples.
15
Whererulesforminimumreinforcementleadtomorereinforcementthanisneededaccordingtoan
analysis,somereinforcementmaybesavedbymakingarevisedanalysis,wheretherelevantmoment
isincreaseduptoavaluecorrespondingtotheminimumreinforcement.Thisrevisionwillleadtoa
decrease in design moments at other sections with a corresponding reduction in the reinforcement
requirement.
A typical example is an oblong rectangular slab. The strip method will often lead to a rather weak
reinforcementinthelongdirection.Throughachangeinthepositionsofthelinesofzeroshearforce
thisdesignmomentcanbeincreasedwhilethedesignmomentintheshortdirectiondecreases.
CHAPTER2
Fundamentalsofthestripmethod
2.1 General
Goodintroductionstothestripmethodaregiveninmanytextbooks,e.g.byFerguson,BreenandJirsa,
MacGregor, Nilson and Winter, Park and Gamble, and Wilby. For a more complete presentation see
StripMethodofDesign.Hereonlyaveryshortintroductionwillbegivenandtheemphasiswillbeon
rulesandrecommendationsforpracticalapplicationofthemethodtodesign.
Thestripmethodisbasedonthelowerboundtheoremofthetheoryofplasticity.Thismeansthatthe
solutionsobtainedareonthesafeside,providedthatthetheoryofplasticityisapplicable,whichisthe
case for bending failures in slabs with normal types of reinforcement and concrete and normal
proportions of reinforcement. As the theorem is usually formulated its purpose is to check the
loadbearing capacity of a given structure. In the strip method an approach has been chosen which
instead aims to design the reinforcement so as to fulfil the requirements of the theorem. The strip
methodisthusbasedonthefollowingformulationofthelowerboundtheorem:
Seekasolutiontotheequilibriumequation.Reinforcetheslabforthesemoments.
Itshouldbenotedthatthesolutionhasonlytofulfiltheequilibriumequation,butnottosatisfyany
compatibility criterion, e.g. according to the theory of elasticity. As a slab is highly statically
indeterminatethismeansthataninfinitenumberofsolutionsexist
The complete equilibrium equation contains bending moments in two directions, and torsional
momentswithregardtothesedirections.Anysolutionwhichfulfilstheequationcan,inprinciple,be
used for the design, and thus an infinite number of possible designs exist. For practical design it is
important to find a solution which is favorable in terms of economy and of behavior under service
conditions.
Fromthepointofviewofeconomy,notonlyistheresultingamountofreinforcementimportant,but
also the simplicity of design and construction. For satisfactory behaviour under service loading the
designmomentsusedtodeterminethereinforcementshouldnotdeviatetoomuchfromthosegiven
bythetheoryofelasticity.
Torsional moments complicate the design procedure and also often require more reinforcement.
Solutions without torsional moments are therefore to be preferred where this is possible. Such
solutionscorrespondtothesimplestripmethod,whichisbasedonthefollowingprinciple:
Inthesimplestripmethodtheloadisassumedtobecarriedbystripsthatruninthereinforcement
directions.Notorsionalmomentsactinthesestrips.
The simple strip method can only be applied where the strips are supported so that they can be
treated like beams. This is not generally possible with slabs which are supported by columns, and
special solution techniques have been developed for such cases. One such technique is called the
advanced strip method. This method is very powerful and simple for many cases encountered in
16
practicaldesign,butashithertopresentedithashadthelimitationthatitrequiresacertainregularity
inslabshapeandloadingconditions.Ithasherebeenextendedtomoreirregularslabsandloading
conditions.
Analternativetechniqueoftreatingslabswithcolumnsupportsorotherconcentratedsupportsisby
meansofthesimplestripmethodcombinedwithsupportbands,whichactassupportsforthestrips,
seeSection2.8.Thisisthemostgeneralmethodwhichcanalwaysbeappliedandwhichmustbeused
where the conditions that control the use of other methods are not met. It requires a more time
consuminganalysisthantheothermethods.
2.2 Therationalapplicationofthesimplestripmethod
Inthesimplestripmethodtheslabisdividedintostripsinthedirectionsofthereinforcement,which
carry different parts of the total load. Usually only two directions are used, corresponding to the x
and ydirections. Each strip is then considered statically as a oneway strip, which can be analyzed
withordinarystaticsforbeams.
Theloadonacertainareaoftheslabisdividedbetweenthestrips.Forexample,onehalfoftheload
canbetakeninonedirectionandtheotherhalfinanotherdirection.Generally,thesimplestandmost
economical solution is, however, found if the whole load on each area is carried by only one of the
stripdirections.Thisprincipleisnormallyassumedinthisbook.Wecanthusformulatethefollowing
principletobeappliedinmostcases:
Thewholeloadwithineachpartoftheslabisassumedtobecarriedbystripsinonereinforcement
direction.
In the figures the slab is divided into parts with different load bearing directions. The relevant
directionwithineachareaisshownbyadoubleheadedarrow(seeFig.2.2.1).
The load is preferably carried with a minimum of cost, which normally means with a minimum
amountofreinforcement.Asafirstapproximationthisusuallymeansthattheloadshouldbecarried
inthedirectionthatrunstowardsthenearestsupport,asthisresultsintheminimummomentandthe
minimumreinforcementarea.Fromthepointofviewofeconomy,thelengthsofthereinforcingbars
arealsoimportant.Wherethemomentsarepositive,thelengthofthebarsisapproximatelyequalto
thespanintherelevantdirection.Insuchcases,therefore,moreoftheloadshouldbecarriedinthe
shortdirectioninarectangularslab.
A consequence of these considerations is that a suitable dividing line between areas with different
loadbearingdirectionsisastraightlinewhichstartsatacornerofaslabandformsananglewiththe
edges.Fig.2.2.1showsatypicalsimpleexample,arectangularslabwithadistributedloadandmore
orlessfixededges.Thedividinglinesareshownasdashdotlines.
Fig.2.2.1
Thedividinglinesarenormally assumedtobelinesofzeroshearforce. Alongtheselines the shear
force is thus assumed to be zero (in all directions). The use of lines of zero shear force makes it
possible to simplify and rationalize the design at the same time, as it usually leads to good
reinforcement economy. For the choice of positions of the lines of zero shear force the following
recommendationsmaybegiven.
17
A line of zero shear force which starts at a corner where two fixed edges meet may be drawn
approximatelytobisecttheangleformedbytheseedges,butmaybealittleclosertoashortthantoa
longedge.
Alineofzeroshearforcewhichstartsatacornerwheretwofreelysupportededgesmeetshouldbe
drawn markedly closer to the shorter edge. The distances to the edges may be chosen to be
approximatelyproportionaltothelengthsoftheedges,forexample.
Where afixed edge and a freely supportededge meet, the line of zero shear force should be drawn
muchclosertothefreeedgethantothefixededge.
The economy in reinforcement is not much influenced by variations in the positions of the lines of
zero shear force in the vicinity of the optimum position. In cases of doubt it is fairly easy to make
severalanalyseswithdifferentassumptionsandthentocomparetheresults.
Theuseoflinesofzeroshearforceisbestillustratedonasimplestrip(orabeam).Theslabstripin
Fig. 2.2.2 is acted upon by a uniform load q and has support moments ms1 and ms2 (shown with a
positivedirection,thoughtheyarenormallynegative).Thecorrespondinglinesforshearforcesand
momentsarealsoshown.Themaximummomentmfoccursatthepointofzeroshearforce.
Thepartstotheleftandrightofthepointofzeroshearforcecanbetreatedasseparateelementsifwe
knoworassumethepositionofthispoint.Theseseparatedelementsareshowninthelowerfigure.
Thefollowingequilibriumequationisvalidforeachoftheelements:
(2.1)
withtheindices1and2deleted.
ThebeaminFig.2.2.2canthusbelookedonasbeingformedbytwoelements,whichmeetatthepoint
ofzeroshearforce.ThiscorrespondstostripsintheydirectioninthecentralpartoftheslabinFig.
2.2.1.
Inmanycasestheloadedelementsofthestripsdonotmeet,butinsteadthereisanunloadedpartin
between.ThisisthecaseforthinstripsinthexdirectioninFig.2.2.1.SuchastripisillustratedinFig.
2.2.3. It can be separated into three elements, the loaded elements near the ends and the unloaded
element in between. The unloaded element is subjected to zero shear force, and thus carries a
constantbendingmomentmf. The spanmomentsmf mustbethesameattheinnerendsofthetwo
loadbearingelementsinordertomaintainequilibrium.
Inarigorouslycorrectapplicationofthesimplestripmethodwewouldstudymanythinstripsinthe
xdirection in Fig. 2.2.1 with different loaded lengths and different resulting design moments. This
leadstoaveryunevenlateraldistributionofdesignmomentsandareinforcementdistributionwhich
is unsuitable from a practical point of view. For practical design the average moment over a
reasonablewidthmustbeconsidered.Inthefirstplace,therefore,theanalysisshouldgivetheaverage
moments.
To calculate these average moments we introduce slab elements, which are the parts of the slab
borderedbylinesofzeroshearforceandonesupportededge.Eachslabelementis
18

Fig.2.2.2
actively carrying load in one reinforcement direction, the direction shown by the doubleheaded
arrow.ThustheslabinFig.2.2.1islookeduponasconsistingoffourslabelements,twoactiveinthe
xdirectionandtwointheydirection.Theloadwithineachelementisassumedtobecarriedonlyby
bending moments corresponding to the reinforcement direction. Such elements are called oneway
elements.Eachonewayelementhastobesupportedoveritswholewidth.Theaveragemomentsand
momentdistributionsarediscussedinSections2.35.Caseswhichcanbetreatedbymeansonlyof
onewayelementscanbefoundbythesimplestripmethod.
Even though the dividing lines between elements with different loadbearing directions, shown as
dashdot lines, are normally lines of zero shear force, there are occasions when the analysis is
simplifiedbyusingsuchlineswheretheshearforceisnotzero.Itisthenonthe
Fig.2.2.3
safesidetoundertaketheanalysisasiftheshearforcewerezeroalongsuchlines,providedthatthe
stripofwhichtheelementformsparthasasupportatbothends.
This is explained in Fig. 2.2.4, which shows a strip loaded only in the vicinity of the left end. The
loaded part corresponds to an element. The righthand end of the loaded part corresponds to a
dividinglinebetweenelements.Theuppercurveshowsthecorrectmomentcurve,whereasthelower
19
curveisdeterminedontheassumptionthattheshearforceiszeroatthedividingline.Themoments
accordingtothelowercurvearealwaysonthesafesidecomparedtothoseaccordingtothecorrect
curve. Where this approximation is used the economical consequences for the reinforcement are
usuallyinsignificant.
Fig.2.2.4
2.3 Averagemomentsinonewayelements
2.3.1 General
The load on a oneway element is carried to the support by bending moments in one direction,
correspondingtothedirectionofthemainreinforcement.Thisdirectionisshowninfiguresasashort
linewitharrowsatbothends,seee.g.Fig2.2.1.Thistypeofarrowthusindicatesthattheelementisa
onewayelementandalsoshowsthedirectionoftheloadbearingreinforcement.
Aonewayelementissupportedonlyalong oneedge.Normallytheshearforce iszero along allthe
otheredges.Theformulasgivenbelowrefertothiscase.Theedgeswithzeroshearforceareshownas
dashdotlines.
Inmostcasesthereinforcementdirectionis atrightanglestothesupportededge.Thiscasewillbe
treatedfirst
Theloadperunitareaisdenotedq.
Theoretically,aonewayelementconsistsofmanyparallelthinstripsinthereinforcementdirection.
The moment in each thin strip can be calculated and a lateral moment distribution can thus be
determined. The principle is illustrated in Fig. 2.3.1, which shows a triangular element with load
bearingreinforcementinthexdirectionandwithonesideparalleltothatdirection.
The element carries a uniform load q and is divided into thin strips in the xdirection. Each strip is
assumedtohavezeroshearforceatthenonsupportedend.Thelengthofastripisyc/l,andthesum
ofendmomentsineachthinstripcanbewritten
Fig.2.3.1
(2.2)
Thecorrespondinglateralmomentdistributionisshowninthefigure.Theaveragemomentisqc2/6.
Formulas are given below for average moments in typical elements with distributed loads. These
formulasareutilisedinthenumericalexamples.Thetheoreticalmomentdistributionsareillustrated.
InpracticaldesignapplicationsthemomentdistributionissimplifiedasdiscussedinSection2.4.
20
2.3.2 Uniformloads
Inarectangularonewayelement,Fig.2.3.2,thesumofaveragemomentsis
(2.3)
Inatriangularonewayelement,Fig.2.3.3,thesumofaveragemomentsis
(2.4)
Inatrapezoidalonewayelement,Fig.2.3.4,thesumofaveragemomentsis
(2.5)
Fig.2.3.2
Fig.2.3.3
Fig.2.3.4
Inanirregularfoursidedonewayelement,Fig.2.3.5,thesumofaveragemomentsis
21

(2.6)
Thisformulacanbeexpressedinageneralwayforslabswithanarbitrarynumberofsidesandwith
thenumberingoflengthsfollowingtheprinciplesofFig.2.3.5:
(2.7)
ForthecaseillustratedinFig.2.3.6theformulaissimplifiedto
(2.8)
Fig.2.3.5
Fig.2.3.6
2.3.3 Loadswithalinearvariationinthereinforcementdirection
Theloadisassumedtovaryfromzeroatthesupporttoq0perunitareaadistancecfromthesupport.
(2.9)
22
Fig.2.3.7
(2.10)
(2.11)
Fig2.3.8
Fig.2.3.9
2.3.4 Loadswithalinearvariationatrightanglestothereinforcementdirection
Theloadisassumedtovarybetweenzeroatthetopoftheslabsinthefigurestoq0atthebottomof
theslab,i.e.withinadistancel.
23
(2.12)
Fig.2.3.10
(2.13)
(2.14)
Fig2.3.11
24
Fig,2.3.12
2.3.5 Elementswithashearforcealonganedge
Insomecasestheshearforceisnotzeroalongtheedgeofanelement.Atypicalcaseiswhereashear
force has a linear intensity variation along an edge according to Fig. 2.3.13. The averagemoment is
then
(2.15)
Fig.2.3.13
2.3.6 Elementswithaskewanglebetweenspanreinforcementandsupport
Insomeslabsitisnaturaltohavedifferentdirectionsforsupportandspanreinforcement.Thisisthe
case for triangular slabs and other slabs with nonorthogonal edges. The support reinforcement
shouldnormallybearrangedatrightanglestothesupport,asthisisthemostefficientarrangement
fortakingthesupportmomentandforlimitingcrackwidths.Spanreinforcementisoftenarrangedin
twoorthogonallayers.
Themostdirectwayoftreatingthecaseofdifferentdirectionsofsupportandspanreinforcementis
throughtheintroductionofaline(orcurve)ofzeromoment.Ononesideofthislinethemomentis
positive and on the other side it is negative. The positive moments are taken by the span
reinforcement and the negative moments by the support reinforcement. The load is assumed to be
carriedinthedirectionsofthereinforcement,thatisindifferentdirectionsoneachsideofthelineof
zeromoment.Wecanmakeadistinctionbetweenspanstripsandsupportstrips.
Alongthelineofzeromomentshearforcesareacting.Theseshearforcesoriginatefromtheloadon
thespanstrips.Thelinesofzeromomentactasfreesupportsforthespanstrips.Thesupportstrips
actascantilevers,carryingtheloadonthestripsandtheshearforcesfromthespanstrips.
The shear force in a strip is normally expressed as a force Q per unit width at right angles to the
reinforcementdirection.Whereaspanstripissupportedonasupportstripatalineofzeromoment
thewidthsofthecooperatingstripsarenotthesame.UsingnotationaccordingtoFig.2.3.14,weget
thefollowingrelationbetweentheshearforcesperunitwidth:
(2.16)
25

Fig.2.3.14
Inthiswayitispossibletocalculatethepositiveandnegativedesignmomentsandtheirdistributions
bymeansofthesimplestripmethod.ExamplesofsuchcalculationsaregiveninChapter6.
Thisapproachisonlysuitablewherethespanstripsarecarryingalltheloadinonedirection.Inmany
cases where the directions of the support and span reinforcements are different the span
reinforcement in two directions cooperate in carrying the load on an element. Then the following
generalapproachcanbeused,wheretheequilibriumofthewholeelementisconsidered,takinginto
accountthemomenttakenbythespanreinforcementinbothdirections.
ThelefthandpartinFig.2.3.15showsanelementwherethespanreinforcementisarrangedparallel
to the x and yaxes, whereas the support reinforcement is arranged at right angles to the support,
whichformsananglewiththexaxis.Thereinforcementinthexandydirectionscorrespondsto
averagemomentsmxfandmyfandthesupportreinforcementcorrespondstoanaveragemomentms.
Thetotalmomentsactingontheelementaregiveninthefigure.
Fig.2.3.15
The righthand part of Fig. 2.3.15 shows a corresponding element which is rectified so that the
support is at right angles to the xaxis. The distances in the xdirection are the same for the two
elements. The areas of the elements are the same. Each small area in the lefthand element has a
corresponding area of the same size in the righthand element. The distance at right angles to the
support for such an area in the lefthand element is sin times the distance at right angles to the
supportintherighthandelement.Assumingthesameloadperunitareaatthecorrespondingpoints
inthe twoelements,themomentwithrespecttothesupportfor thelefthandelementisthussin
timesthemomentintherighthandelement.Ifwedenotetheaveragemomentcausedbytheloadin
the righthand element m0, the total moment caused by the load in the lefthand element is thus
m0lsin.
Wecannowwritetheequilibriumequationforthelefthandelement,whichistheactualelementwe
areinterestedin:
(2.17)
26
whichcanberearrangedinto
(2.18)
Inthisequationm0istheaveragemomentfortherighthandelementinFig.2.3.15.Fortheelements
treated in equations (2.3)(2.15) it corresponds to the righthand side of these equations. It can be
inEq.(2.18).
seenthattheseequationscorrespondto
Ifthespanreinforcementisnotorthogonal,butwithonereinforcementdirectionparallelwiththex
axis and the other reinforcement direction parallel to the support, the second term in Eq. (2.18)
vanishes.
This approach is not a use of oneway elements, as the load is carried in more than one direction.
Unlike in the use of oneway elements it is in this case not possible to determine how the load is
carried within the element. It is also not possible to determine a theoretical lateral distribution of
designmoments.Anestimateofasuitabledistributionofdesignmomentscanhoweverbebasedon
thedistributionsforonewayelementsofthesamegeneralshape.
2.4 Designmomentsinonewayelements
2.4.1 Generalconsiderations
Thestripmethodgivesinprincipleaninfinitenumberofpossiblepermissiblemomentdistributions.
Forpracticaldesignasolutionshouldbechosenwhichsuitsourdemands.Themaindemandsare:
1. Suitablebehaviorunderserviceconditions.
2. Goodreinforcementeconomy,includingsimplicityindesignandconstruction.
Indiscussingmomentdistributionstherearetwodifferenttypesofdistributiontotakeintoaccount,
viz.distributionbetweensupportandspanmoments(distributioninthereinforcementdirection)and
lateral distribution (distribution at right angles to the reinforcement direction). The ratio between
supportandspanmomentsisdiscussedinSection2.9.1.
2.4.2 Lateraldistributionofdesignmoments
In the application of the simple strip method average moments in oneway elements are first
calculated.Inarigorousanalysisusingthestripmethodthemomentisnotnormallyconstantacross
thesection,butvariesduetothevaryinglengthsofthethinonewaystrips,andsometimesalsodueto
varyingloadintensities.Theformalmomentvariationacrossthesectionisshownfordifferentcases
inFigs2.3.113.
Forarectangularelementwithauniformloadthemomentisconstantacrossthewidth.Inthiscase
theaveragemomentcanbedirectlyusedfordesign.Inallothercasesthestrictmomentdistribution
is not uniform, but decreases towards one or both sides. From a practical point of view it is not
possible to follow these theoretical distributions in detail, and it is also not necessary, as the
behaviouroftheslabisnotsensitivetolimitedvariationsinthelateralreinforcementdistribution.On
the other hand the choice of an evenly distributed reinforcement corresponding to the average
momentmayinmanycasesbetooroughanapproximation.
Areinforcingbarisusuallymoreactiveandthereforemorebeneficialforthebehaviouroftheslabifit
issituatedwherethecurvatureoftheslabinthedirectionofthebarishigh.Barswhichareparallel
andclosetoasupportarenotveryactive,asthereispracticallynocurvatureintheirdirection.This
fact should be taken into account in the distribution of design moments. It may even be rational to
leavepartswithasmallcurvaturetotallywithoutreinforcementandassumeazerodesignmomenton
acertainwidthoftheelement.Asthiswouldprobablynotbeacceptedbysomecodesthispossibility
hasnotbeenappliedinthemajorityoftheexamples.
27
Where the theoretical strict moment distribution is uneven it is generally recommended that one
design moment value is chosen for the part where the greatest theoretical moments occur and a
smallerdesignmomentischosenoutsidethispart.
Whereanaveragemomentmav,actingacrossawidthl,determinesthedesignmomentsmd1onwidth
l1andthedesignmomentmd2onwidth(ll1),Fig.2.4.1,thefollowingrelationisvalid:
(2.19)
Withchosenvaluesoftheratiosmd2/md1andl1/l,thedesignmomentmd1canbecalculatedfromthe
followingformula:
(2.20)
The ratio md2/md1 is often chosen as 1/2 or 1/3 in order to achieve a simple reinforcement
arrangement.Inthenumericalexamplesthevalue1/2isoftenused.
Thesuitablechoiceofl1/ldependsontheshapeoftheelementandtheloaddistribution.Proposalsfor
thischoicearegivenintheexamples.
Whereanotherdistributionischosen,forexample,withthreedifferentvaluesofdesignmoments,the
sameprinciplemayofcoursebeused.
Fig.2.4.1
2.5 Designmomentsincornersupportedelements
2.5.1 Cornersupportedelements
Acornersupportedelementisanelementwhichisonlysupportedatonecorner.Alongalltheedges
the shear forces and the torsional moments (referred to the reinforcement directions) are zero. In
figurestheedgesareshownasdashdotlines,indicatingzeroshearforces.
The load on a cornersupported element has to be carried in two (or more) directions into the
supportedcorner.Ithastohaveactivereinforcementintwo(ormore)directions.Itishereassumed
thatthereareonlytworeinforcementdirections,whichareusuallyatrightanglestoeachother.The
full load on the element has to be used for the calculation of moments in both directions. This is
illustratedbycrossingdoubleheadedarrowsinthereinforcementdirections.
Eachreinforcementdirectioncoincideswiththedirectionofoneoftheedgesoftheelement.
Fig.2.5.1showsexamplesofcornersupportedelementswithasupportatthelowerleftcorner.
Torsionalmomentsexistwithinacornersupportedelement,asitisnotpossibletocarryaloadtoone
point without such moments. Both reinforcement directions cooperate in carrying the torsional
moments. A certain amount of reinforcement is required for this purpose in addition to the
reinforcementforcarryingthebendingmoments.Thetotalamountofreinforcementrequiredistaken
into account in the rules given below, which express the required reinforcement as design bending
moments.
28
Withtherules andlimitationsgivenbelow the maximumdesignmomentsoccurattheedgesofthe

elements, which means that only the edge bending moments need to be calculated as a basis for
reinforcementdesign.Withoutsuchrulesandlimitationshigherdesign
Fig.2.5.1
momentsmightoccurinsidetheelement,whichwouldcomplicatetheanalysesandbeuneconomical.
2.5.2 Rectangularelementswithuniformloads
Thedominatingtypeofcornersupportedelementinpracticaldesignistherectangularelementwith
a uniform load. This case has therefore been investigated in more detail, leading to detailed design
rules.TherulesandtheirbackgroundaregiveninStripMethodofDesign.Heretheruleswillbegiven
inasimplifiedform,suitableforpracticaldesign.Therulesareonthesafeside,sometimesverymuch
so.Minordeviationsfromtherulesforlateralmomentdistributionsmaybeaccepted.
Fig.2.5.2illustratesarectangularcornersupportedelementwithauniformloadqperunitarea.The
averagebendingmomentsalongtheedgeshaveindicesxandyforthecorrespondingreinforcement
directions,sforsupportandfforspan(field).Theaveragemomentsmxs(supportmoment,negative
sign)andmxf(spanmoment,positivesign)areactingontheelementwidthcy.Theequilibriumofthe
elementwithrespecttotheyaxisdemandsthat
(2.21)
Fig.2.5.2
Thesemomentsareusuallydistributedontwostripswiththewidthscyand(1)cyrespectively.The
stripwithwidthcy,closesttothesupport,iscalledthecolumnstrip,andthestripwithwidth(1)cy
iscalledthemiddlestrip.Thesetermsarechoseninaccordancewiththenormaltermsusedforflat
plates,whichareacommonapplicationofcornersupportedelements.
Thedistributionofdesignmomentsbetweenthetwostripshastobesuchthatthenumericalsumof
moments is higher in the column strip than in the middle strip in order to make the moment
29
distributionfulfiltheequilibriumconditionswithinthewholeelement.Thedistributionofmoments
betweenthestripsisdefinedbythecoefficient:
(2.22)
Themomentdistributionhastofulfilthefollowingconditions
(2.23)
(2.24)
Inmanycasesischosenas0.5,andthenwehave:
(2.25)
Forthesimplestpossiblearrangementofreinforcementallthesupportreinforcementisplacedwithin
the column strip and the span reinforcement is evenly distributed. This moment distribution is
illustrated in Fig. 2.5.3. As in this case there is no support moment in the middle strip the moment
withinthisstripismxf.Thuswehave
(2.26)
Combining(2.22)and(2.26)gives
(2.27)
or
(2.28)
Applyingthisto
gives
(2.29)
This simple moment distribution may be applied for all normally used ratios between support and
spanmoments.Forsmallervaluesof,whichmeansmoreconcentratedsupportreinforcement,the
.
upperlimitofthemomentratioisreduced.Itisequalto2for
Whetherthisreinforcementarrangementissuitabledependsonthedemandforcrackwidthcontrol.
A reinforcement distribution more in accordance with Fig. 2.5.2 will presumably reduce maximum
crackwidths,especiallyfortopcracksfarfromthesupport.
Fig.2.5.3
2.5.3 Nonrectangularelementswithuniformloadsandorthogonalreinforcement
30
Alsoinnonrectangularelementsitisappropriatetodividetheelementintotwostripsanddistribute
the moments between them. It is not possible to give such detailed rules for these cases as for
rectangular elements. It is, however, possible to give some general recommendations, which in
practicewillleadtoasafedesign.
Fig. 2.5.4 shows triangular cornersupported elements of three different arrangements of
reinforcement in the xdirection. With the same definitions as for the rectangular element the
followingrulesarerecommendedfortheseslabs:
Casea:
(2.30)
Caseb:
(2.31)
Casec:
(2.32)
Most cornersupported elements with orthogonal reinforcement are rectangular or triangular. In
cases where other shapes occur they have a shape which is intermediate between rectangular and
triangular, and suitable moment distributions may be estimated by means of the recommendations
above.Itisimportanttorememberthateachreinforcementdirectionmustbeparalleltoanedgeof
theelement.
Fig.2.5.4
2.5.4 Elementswithnonorthogonalreinforcement
Thedeterminationofthedesignmomentsinanelementwithnonorthogonalreinforcementisbased
onasocalledaffinitylaw.Accordingtothislawthedesignmomentsarethesameasthemomentsina
rectifiedelementwithorthogonalreinforcementandthesamelengthandwidthwithrespecttothe
reinforcementinquestion.
This rule is exemplified in Fig. 2.5.5, which shows a rhomboidal element and the corresponding
rectangular elements for the calculation of the design moments in the x and ydirections. Thus the
design moments and the resulting distributions for the reinforcement in the xdirection are
determined from the slab in the x1y1system and for the reinforcement in the ydirection from the
slabinthex2y2system.
2.5.5 Elementswithnonuniformloads
Thenumericalsumofdesignmomentsineachdirectioniscalculatedwiththesameformulasasfor
oneway elements. In the distribution of design moments between column strip and middle strip
regard nust be taken of the load distribution. If the column strip in one direction is more heavily
loadedthanthemiddlestripahigherportionofthemomentshouldbetakenbythecolumnstripthan
indicatedbytherulesforuniformloadandviceversa.Itisnotpossibletogiveexactrulestocoverall
31
cases,butastherulesforuniformloadarequitewide,itoughttobepossibletofindsafedistributions
inmostcasesstartingfromtherulesforuniformloadandmodifyingthemwithrespecttotheactual
loaddistribution.
ThecaseofaconcentratedloadactingonacornersupportedelementistreatedinSection2.6.2.
AnalternativetreatmentofcornersupportedelementsisdiscussedinSection2.8.
Fig.2.5.5
2.6 Concentratedloads
2.6.1 Onewayelements
Aconcentratedloadisaloadwhichhastoohighavalueperunitareatobetakendirectlybyaone
way strip (or crossing oneway strips) without giving rise to too excessively high local moments. It
maybeapointload,alineloadorahighloadonalimitedarea.Thegeneralwayoftakingcareofa
concentrated load is by distributing it over a suitable width by means of specially designed
distributionreinforcement
Fig. 2.6.1 shows an example. A concentrated load F acts as a uniform load over a small rectangular
areawithwidthb1inthexdirection.Itistobecarriedbyarectangular,simplysupportedslab.The
loadiscarriedonastripintheydirectionwithawidthb,chosentohaveamomentinthestripwhich
is not too high per unit width. Thus the load F has to be evenly distributed over a strip width b by
means of a small strip in the xdirection. The bending moment in this strip is
. This
momentshouldbeevenlydistributedonasuitablewidtha,givingamoment
(2.33)
32

Fig.2.6.1
It is recommended that the width a should be chosen such that it is approximately centered on the
concentratedloadandsmallenoughtofulfilthe(approximateandsomewhatarbitrary)requirements
giveninthefigure.Thevalueofbischosensoastogetreinforcementinthestripwhichiswellbelow
balancedreinforcementinordertoensureplasticbehaviour.
Theloaddistributiononthewidthbismainlyofimportanceforthespanreinforcement.Ifthestripis
continuous,thesupportmoment(reinforcement)maybedistributedoveralargerwidththanb,asthe
supportinitselfactsasaloaddistributor.
Inmanycasesitmaybesuitabletodividetheconcentratedloadovertwostrips,oneinthexdirection
andoneintheydirection,inordertogetareinforcementdistributionwhichisbetterfromthepoint
of view of performance under service conditions. In such a case it is recommended that the load
should bedivided between the directions approximately in inverseproportion tothe ratio between
thespanstothefourthpower,providedthatthesupportconditionsarethesameforbothstrips.Ifthe
stripshavedifferentsupportconditionsthisshouldbetakenintoaccountsothattheloadtakenbya
stripwithfixedendscanbeincreasedcomparedtotheloadtakenbyasimplysupportedstrip.
Whenconcentratedloadsareactingonaslabtogetherwithdistributedloadsspecialloaddistribution
reinforcementisnotnecessaryifthedistributedloadsaredominating.Thismaybeconsideredtobe
thecaseifaconcentratedloadislessthan25%ofthesumofdistributedloads.Thentheconcentrated
loadissimplyincludedintheequilibriumequationsfortheelements.Thedesignmomentsmayalso
be redistributed so as to have more reinforcement near the concentrated load. If there are several
concentratedloadsthissimplifiedproceduremaybeusedevenifthesumoftheconcentratedloadsis
muchhigher,andparticularlyiftheconcentratedloadsarenotclosetoeachother.
ApplicationsareshowninthenumericalexamplesinSection3.3.
Cornersupportedelementsalreadyhavereinforcementintwodirectionsandarethusoftenableto
takecareofconcentratedloadswithoutanyspecialdistributionreinforcement.
The point load F on the cornersupported element in Fig. 2.6.2 gives rise to bending moments
. It is generally recommended that the numerical sum of span and support moments
.
should be distributed evenly over the width ly. Over this width the moment is then
Somevariationsfromthisbasicruleareacceptable,e.g.adistributionoverasomewhatlargerwidth.
33
Fig.2.6.2
Eventhoughthenumericalsumofspanandsupportmomentshasauniformlateraldistributionitis
recommended that the span moment should be concentrated in the vicinity of the load and the
support moment in the vicinity of the supported corner. Such a distribution is in better agreement
withthemomentdistributionunderserviceconditionsandwilllimitcracking.
Whenlyisclosetozerothebendingmomentperunitwidthbecomestoolargeforthereinforcement
in the xdirection according to the expression above. In such cases some extra distribution
reinforcementmaybenecessary,designedaccordingtothegeneralprincipleforonewayelements.
ForapplicationsseeSection9.4.
2.7 Strips
2.7.1 Combiningelementstoformstrips
Theelementsintowhichtheslabisdividedhavetobecombinedinsuchawaythattheequilibrium
conditionsarefulfilled.Theseconditionsarerelatedtothebendingmomentsandtheshearforcesat
theedgesoftheelements.Torsionalmomentsareneverpresentattheedgesoftheelements.
Shear forces are in most cases assumed to be zero at those edges of the elements, which are not
supported,butinsomeapplicationsnonzeroshearforcesmayappearatsuchanedge.
Oneway elements with the same loadbearing direction are often not directly connected to each
other, but by means of a constant moment transferredthrough elements with another loadbearing
direction,cf.Fig.2.2.3.AtypicalexampleisshowninFig.2.7.1,ofarectangularslabwithauniform
load, two simply supported edges and two fixed edges. The positive moments in elements 1 and 3
havetobethesame,andthismomentistransferredthrough2and4,whichinpracticemeansthatthe
reinforcementisgoingbetween1and3through2and4.
Fig.2.7.1
The choice of cvalues is based on the rules in Section 2.2. It may in practice also be influenced by
rulesforminimumreinforcementiftheoptimumreinforcementeconomyissought.
In flat slabs cornersupported elements are often directly connected with each other and with
rectangular oneway elements into continuous strips as in Fig. 2.7.2. Each such strip acts as a
continuousbeam,andcanbetreatedassuch.TheslabinFig.2.7.2thushasacontinuousstripinthree
spans with width wx in the xdirection and a continuous strip in two spans with width wy in the y
direction.Thedesignoftheslabisbasedontheanalysisofthesetwostrips,takingintoaccountthe
34
rulesforreinforcementdistributionforcornersupportedelements.Theaveragedesignmomentsin
the triangular elements near the corners of the slab are equal to onethird of the corresponding
momentsintheadjoiningrectangularelements.
MoredetailedrulesandnumericalexamplesaregiveninChapter8.
2.7.2 Continuousstripswithuniformloads
InacontinuousstripformedaccordingtoFig.2.7.2,forexample,eachpartofthestripbetweentwo
supports,canbetreatedusingnormalformulasforbeams.Thecalculationofdesignmomentsusually
startswithanestimateofsuitablesupportmoments.Atacontinuoussupportthemomentinastrip
withauniformloadisnormallychosenwithrespecttowhatcanbeexpectedaccordingtothetheory
ofelasticity,cf.section2.9.1.Afterthesupportmomentshavebeenchosen,thedistancec1inFig.2.2.2
canbecalculatedfromtheformula
(2.34)
andthespanmomentfromtheformula
(2.35)
2.8 Supportbands
2.8.1 General
Asupportbandisabandofreinforcementinonedirection,actingasasupportforstripsinanother
direction.Bymeansofsupportbandsitispossibletomakedirectuseofthegeneralprinciplesofthe
simplestripmethodforalltypesofslab.Itisthemostgeneralmethod,andthemethodwhichhasto
beusedincaseswhereotherapproachescannotbeapplied.
A reinforcement band of course has a certain width. In Strip Method of Design it has been
demonstratedhowreinforcementbandsmaybeusedinastrictlycorrectway,takingintoaccountthe
widths of the bands. In order to simplify the analyses the following approximation will be accepted
hereforthecalculationofthedesignmomentinthesupportband:
Inthenumericalanalysisthesupportbandisassumedtohavezerowidth.
Thereinforcementforthemomentinthesupportbandisdistributedoveracertainwidth,whichis
limitedbyrulesgiveninSection2.8.3.Iftheserulesarefollowedthesafetyattheultimatelimitstate
canbeestimatedtobesufficientinspiteoftheapproximation.
35
2.8.2 Comparisonwithcornersupportedelements
A rectangular cornersupported element with a uniform load can be analysed by means of simple
stripssupportedonsupportbandsalongthecoordinateaxes,whichareintheirturnsupportedatthe
corner.
Fig. 2.8.1 a) shows an element where half the load is assumed to be carried in each direction. This
givesevenlydistributedmoments
,andareactionforceonthesupportbandalongthe
xaxis equal to qcy/2. This reaction force on the support band gives concentrated moments
,correspondingtoanaveragemoment
onthewholewidthcy.Thushalfthetotal
moment
isevenlydistributedandtheotherhalfisconcentratedintheassumedsupportbandof
zerowidth.
Fig.2.8.1
ThemomentscalculatedfromanassumptionofsupportbandsinFig.2.8.1a)canbecomparedtothe
moment distribution according to Fig. 2.8.1 b), which is acceptable according to condition (2.25).
Fromthiscomparisonitcanbeconcludedthatinthiscaseitisacceptabletodistributeconcentrated
momentsfromanassumedsupportbandofzerowidthoverhalfthewidthoftheelementandthatthe
solution is still on the safe side. This conclusion is drawn for a rectangular element with a uniform
load, but indirectly it can also be concluded that moments from an assumed support band of zero
widthcanalwaysbedistributedoveracertainwidthoftheelement.Themostsuitablechoiceofthis
widthdependsontheloaddistributionandtheshapeoftheelement.Ifmoreoftheloadisactingnear
thesupportbandasmallerwidthshouldbechosen.Withsomecautionitisnotdifficulttochoosea
widthwhichissafe.Detailedrecommendationsaregivenbelow.
Itmayalsobenotedthataccordingtoconditions(2.23)and(2.24)themomentfromthesupportband
maybeevenlydistributedoveranyarbitrarywidthbetweenzeroandly/2.
2.8.3 Applicationrules
Themomentsinthesupportbandaredistributedoveracertainwidthtogivethedesignmomentsfor
thereinforcement.Thewidthofthereinforcementbandhastobelimitedsoitcanaccommodatethe
momentswhichareconcentratedinabandofzerowidth.Itisnotpossibletoestablishgeneralrules
forthemaximumacceptablewidthofthereinforcementbandbasedonarigoroussolutionaccording
tothelowerboundtheoremofthetheoryofplasticity.Thefollowingrecommendationsarebasedon
the comparison above with a cornersupported element and on estimates. They are intended for
situationswheretheloadontheslabisuniform.
36
Thewidthofthereinforcementbandisbasedonacomparisonwiththeaveragewidthoftheelements
whicharesupportedbythesupportband.Thisaveragewidthisdenotedba.Thewidthofthesupport
reinforcement in the band may be equal to ba provided that the band is supported over its whole
widthbyasupportwhichisnearlyatrightanglestotheband.Supportreinforcementovercolumns
maybedistributedoverawidthofabout0.5ba.Spanreinforcementmaybedistributedoverawidth
between0.5baandba,dependingontheimportanceofthebandforthestaticbehaviouroftheslab.
The more important the band is, the narrower the width of the reinforcement band. The
reinforcement should if possible be distributed on both sides of the theoretical support band in
proportiontotheloadsfromthetwosides.
Where a support band has a support with a strong force concentration certain rules have to be
followedinordertopreventlocalfailure.
For the case in Fig. 2.8.2 some minimum top reinforcement is required at the ends of the band to
preventradialcracksfromthesupportpoint.Thisreinforcementisplacedatrightanglestotheband
andisdesignedforabendingmoment ,determinedfromthefollowingcondition:
(2.36)
whereRisthesupportreactionfromthesupportband,and
mbisthenumericalsumofthespanandsupportmomentswhicharetakenbythereinforcementin
thereinforcingbandatthesupportwhereRisacting.
Thecorrespondingreinforcementshouldbepresentfromthesupporttoadistanceequaltoonethird
ofthedistancetothepointofmaximummomentinthesupportbandandbewellanchored.Itdoes
notneedtobeadditionalreinforcement,asthereinforcementarrangedforotherreasonsmaycover
thisneed.
Acheckaccordingtotheserulesmustbemadeforbothendsofthereinforcementband.
Where the band is supported on a column, a check should be made that the following relation is
fulfilled
Fig.2.8.2
(2.37)
wherethespanandsupportmomentscorrespondtothereinforcementinthevicinityofthecolumn.If
thespanmomentsaredifferentonthedifferentsidesofthecolumntheaveragevalueisused.Risthe
reactionforceatthecolumn,Aisthesupportareaatthecolumnandqistheloadperunitareainthe
vicinityofthecolumn.
It is not normally necessary to perform this check, as the recommendations for the design are
intendedtofulfilthisrelationautomatically.
Inadditiontotheconcentratedreinforcementinabandsomeextrareinforcementmaybeneededfor
crackcontrol.
Although it cannot be strictly proven by means of the lower bound theorem that the above
recommendationsarealwaysonthesafesidethedesigncanbeconsideredtobesafe.Inanycaseitis
37
alwayssaferthanadesignbasedontheyieldlinetheory:thiscanbecheckedbyapplyingtheyield
linetheorytoslabsdesignedaccordingtotheserecommendations.
2.9 Ratiosbetweenmoments
2.9.1 Ratiobetweensupportandspanmomentsinthesamedirection
TherecommendationsbelowfollowthegeneralguidelinesinSection1.5.
Thestripmethoddoesnotinitselfgiveratiosbetweensupportandspanmoments,astheequilibrium
equationscanbefulfilledindependentlyofthisratio.Fromthepointofviewofsafetyattheultimate
limitstatethisratioisunimportant.Theratiois,however,ofimportanceforbehaviourunderservice
conditions and for reinforcement economy. These factors should therefore be taken into account in
thechoiceoftheratiosbetweensupportandspanmoments.
Itcan beshownthatthebestchoiceoftheratiobetweenthenumericalvalues ofsupportandspan
momentsinanelementorstripisusuallyapproximatelyequaltotheratioaccordingtothetheoryof
elasticityorsomewhathigher.Theratiomay,however,bechosenwithinratherwidelimitswithout
anyeffectonsafetyandwithonlyaverylimitedeffectondeformationsunderserviceconditions.It
mainlyhasaninfluenceonthewidthofcracks.Withahigherratiothecrackwidthsabovethesupport
are somewhat decreased whereas the crack widths in the span are somewhat increased. If the
intention is to limit the crack width on the upper side of the slab a large ratio between span and
supportmomentsshouldthereforebechosen.
Wheretheloadisuniformitisgenerallyrecommendedthat,forcontinuousstripsandforstripswith
fixedsupports,aratiobetweenthenumericalvaluesofsupportandspanmomentsshouldbechosen
around2,saybetween1.5and3.0.Fortriangularelements,suchasattheshortedgeofarectangular
slab,highervaluesmaybeused.Whereastripiscontinuousoverasupporttheaverageofthespan
momentsonbothsidesofthesupportisusedforthecalculationofmomentratio.
SoforaslabsuchasthatinFig.2.7.1theratioc2/c4ischosenbetween1.6and2.0,correspondingtoa
moment ratio of between 1.56 and 3.0, whereas c1/c3 may be chosen between 1.7 and 2.2,
correspondingtoamomentratiobetween1.9and3.8.
Whereitispossibletoestimatethemomentsaccordingtothetheoryofelasticitythisshouldbedone
as a basis for the determination of the main moments. This is the case, for instance, where the
advanced strip method is used for flat slabs. The support moment at a support where the slab is
continuouscanbetakentobeapproximatelyequaltotheaverageofthemomentscorrespondingto
fixededgesforthespansonthetwosidesofthesupport.
For the irregular flat slabs discussed in Chapter 10 a special approach for the determination of
support moments has been introduced in order to find support moments which are also in
approximateagreementwiththetheoryofelasticityinthesecomplexcases.
2.9.2 Momentsindifferentdirections
In some applications there is no real choice of moment distribution in different directions. For
example,thisisthecasefortheflatslabinFig.2.7.2,wherethedistributionisgivenbytheanalysisof
thestrips.Thisisduetothefactthatwithinthemajorpartoftheslabtheloadiscarriedbycorner
supported elements, which carry the whole load in both directions, and where the load is thus not
distributedbetweenthedirections.
Inslabswheretheloadiscarriedbyonewayelements,e.g.theslabinFig.2.7.1,itispossibletomake
a choice of the direction of loadbearing reinforcement within those parts of the slab where the
38
elements with different directions meet. Thus, for the slab in Fig. 2.7.1, it is possible to increase or
decreasec1andc3,leadingtoincreasedordecreasedmomentsinelements1and3andcorresponding
decreasesorincreasesofthemomentsintheoppositedirection.Thechoiceofdirectionsofthelines
ofzeroshearforcestartingatthecornershasbeendiscussedinSection2.2.
2.10 Lengthandanchorageofreinforcingbars
2.10.1 Onewayelements
Inprinciple,thelengthofreinforcingbarsisdeterminedfromthecurveofbendingmomentswhich
showsthevariationofbendingmomentsinthedirectionofthestrip.Thiscurveiseasytodetermine
forrectangular elementswithauniformload,butinmostothercasesthecurveisnotwelldefined.
Thenthe necessary length ofreinforcing bars has to be determined by means of someapproximate
rule,whichshouldbeonthesafeside.
Foronewayelementswithauniformloadthefollowingrulesarerecommended:
1.Onehalfofthebottomreinforcementistakentothesupport.Closetoacornerofaslab,however,all
thebottomreinforcementistakentothesupport.
2.Theotherhalfofthebottomreinforcementistakentoadistancefromthesupportequalto
(2.38)
3.Onehalfofthetopreinforcementistakentoadistancefromthesupportequalto
(2.39)
4.Therestofthetopreinforcementistakentoadistancefromthesupportequalto
(2.40)
Intheseformulascisthelengthoftheelement,showninFigs2.2.25,andlisanadditionallengthof
the reinforcing bars for anchorage behind the point where the moment curve shows that it is not
neededanymore.Thisadditionallength,whichdependsontheslabdepthandonthediameterofthe
reinforcement,isgiveninmanynationalcodes.Ifthisisnotthecase,itisrecommendedthatavalueis
usedequaltothedepthoftheslab.
Itisnotpossibletogiveexactrulescoveringallpossiblesituationswithrespecttoloaddistributions.
Incasesotherthanthosetreatedaboveitcanonlyberecommendedthatreinforcementlengthsare
chosenwhicharejudgedtobeonthesafeside.
Asanexample,theapplicationoftheaboveformulastothereinforcementinthexdirectionwillbe
shown for the slab in Example 3.2. The value of l is assumed to 0.15 m. The moment values are
,whichgives
.
.Inthiselementhalfthebottomreinforcementistakento
Forelement1inFig.3.1.3wehave
thesupportandtheotherhalf,accordingtoEq.(2.38),toadistancefromthesupportequalto
(2.41)
One half of the top reinforcement is, according to Eq. (2.39), taken to a distance from the support
equalto
39

(2.42)
The rest of the top reinforcement is, according to Eq. (2.40), taken to a distance from the support
equalto
(2.43)
,thesupportmomentiszeroandthereisnosupportreinforcement.Half
Forelement3,with
the bottom reinforcement is taken to the support and the other half to a distance from the support
equalto
(2.44)
Thisisasmalldistanceandfromaneconomicpointofviewallthereinforcementmayaswellbetaken
tothesupport.Itisgenerallyrecommendedthatallbottomreinforcementistakentothesupportina
slabwhichissimplysupported.
Thelengthofreinforcingbarswillnotbecalculatedinthenumericalexamples,asthecalculationis
simpleandsometimesotherruleshavetobefollowedaccordingtocodes.
Thedistributionofdesignmomentswithinacornersupportedelementisextremelycomplex,dueto
thefactthattorsionalmomentsplayanimportantpartincarryingtheloadtoacorneroftheelement.
These torsional moments have to be taken into account in the design of reinforcement, which is
formally done as an addition to the design bending moments which the section have to resist. It is
hardly possible to find solutions which cover all situations in a theoretically correct way. The rules
givenbelowarebasicallyonthesafesideatthesametimeasgivingapproximatelythesameresultsas
commondesignmethodsforflatslabs.
Inallcornersupportedelementsallbottomreinforcementshouldbetakenallthewaytotheedgesof
theelement.
Inrectangularcornersupportedelementswithauniformloadhalfthetopreinforcementshouldbe
takentoadistancefromthesupportlineequalto
(2.45)
Therestofthetopreinforcementshouldbetakentoadistancefromthesupportlineequalto
(2.46)
Intheseformulaslhasthesamemeaningasin2.10.1,dependsontheratiobetweensupportand
span moments according to Fig. 2.10.1 and c is the length of the element in the direction of the
reinforcement.
2.10.3 Anchorageatfreeedges
Where a reinforcing bar ends at a free edge it must be satisfactorily anchored. In many cases a
deformedbarmayjustendattheedge,butwheretheforceinthebarisexpectedtobehighcloseto
theedge,thebarshouldbeprovidedwithanextrastronganchorage,e.g.accordingtoFig.2.9.2.This
willoccurwherethereisashortdistancefromalineofmaximummoment(lineofzeroshearforce)to
theedgeorwherelargetorsionalmomentsareactingintheslab,whichisthecaseinthevicinityof
point supports or where point loads are acting close to a free edge, for example. Large torsional
momentsalsoactinslabswithtwoadjacentfreeedges.
40
Fig.2.10.1
Fig.2.10.2
2.11 Support reactions

Inonewayelementstheloadiscarriedintheloadbearingdirectionintothesupport.Itisthussimple
to determine the support reaction and its distribution. With a uniform load on an element the
distributioncorrespondstotheshapeoftheelement.Theaccuratedistributionofthereactionshould
betakenintoaccountinthedesignofsupportingstructureslikebeamsandsupportbands.
Wherethesupportisnotparalleltooneofthetwospanreinforcementdirections,asinFig.2.3.15,itis
not possible to use oneway elements and therefore not possible to determine an accurate
distributionofsupportreactions.Insuchacasetheloadisassumedtobe carriedatrightanglestothe
support(theshortestdistancetothesupport).Thisassumptiongivesthecorrecttotalsupportreactionandthe
resultingmomentsinasupportingbeamorbandwillinallpracticalcasesbeonthesafeside.Themaximum
shearforceinasupportingbeamorbandmaybeslightlyontheunsafeside.
For cornersupported elements the whole load on the element is theoretically acting as a support
reactionatthesupportedcorner.Inrealityitisofcoursedistributedinsomewayovertheareaofthe
support.Theresultanttothesupportforcesisdeterminedbythetheoreticalforcesfromtheelements
actinguponthesupport.
41
CHAPTER3
Rectangularslabswithallsidessupported
3.1 Uniformloads
3.1.1 Simplysupportedslabs
Example3.1
TheslabinFig.3.1.1issimplysupportedwithauniformloadof9kN/m2.Thelinesofzeroshearforce
arechosenasshowninthefigureinaccordancewiththerulesgiveninSection2.2.Theaveragespan
momentinthexdirectionis,Eq.(2.4):
(3.1)
Theaveragespanmomentintheydirectionis,Eq.(2.5):
(3.2)
The lateral distribution of design moments follows the general recommendations in Section 2.4.2.
Thus, for example, we may choose to have moments in the side strips which are half those in the
centralstrip(andwithdistancesbetweenbarstwiceaslarge).Ifwechoose
42
Fig.3.1.1
thewidthsofthesidestripsto1.1minbothdirections,wegetinthecentralstrips,Eq(2.20):
(3.3)
(3.4)
ThismomentdistributionisillustratedinFig.3.1.2.
3.1.2 Fixedandsimplesupports
Example3.2
TheslabinFig.3.1.3hasthesamesizeandload(9kN/m2)asthepreviousslab,buttheupperandleft
hand edges are fixed and there are negative moments along these edges. The numerical sum of
momentsintheseelementsisthusgreaterthanintheelementsatthesim
Fig.3.1.2
ply supported edges. This is achieved by choosing suitable sizes of the elements, see Section 2.9.1.
WiththechoiceofsizeasshowninFig3.1.3forelements1and3wegetfromEq.(2.4)
(3.5)
(3.6)
(3.7)
43
Forelements4and2wegetfromEq.(2.5)
(3.8)
(3.9)
(3.10)
Fig.3.1.3
Thenumericalratiosbetweenthesupportandspanmomentsare2.45inthexdirectionand2.07in
theydirection.Thesevaluesareacceptable(seeSection2.9.1),butif,forexample,wewishtohavea
slightlysmallerratiofortheydirectionwecanchangethedividingline(e.g.withcvaluesof2.7and
and
andtheratio
1.7insteadof2.8and1.6)andrepeattheanalysis.Wethenfind
1.49.Thisratioisevidentlysensitivetothechoiceofthepositionofthelineofzeroshearforce.
Ifwechoosethesametypeofmomentdistributionasinthepreviousexamplewefindthedistribution
ofdesignmomentsaccordingtoFig.3.1.4.
Thedeterminationofthelengthsofreinforcingbarsfortheslabinthisexampleisdemonstratedin
Section2.10.1.
Example3.3
TheslabinFig.3.1.5hasaloadof11kN/m2.Thelefthandedgeisfixed,whereastherighthandedge
iselasticallyrestrainedsothatthesupportmomentislower.Thisistakenintoaccountintheanalysis
byassuminganonsymmetricalpatternoflinesofzeroshearforce,asshowninthefigure.
Fig.3.1.4
44
Fig.3.1.5
UsingEq.(2.1)wegetforelement1
(3.11)
andforelement3
(3.12)
,whichgives
Wecan,forinstancechoose
FromEq.(2.4)wegetforelements2and4
(3.13)
IncalculatingdesignmomentsaccordingtoEq.(2.20)thewidthsofthesidestripsarechosenequalto
1.0minthexdirectionand1.5mintheydirection.Thereasonwhyahighervaluehasbeenchosen
fortheydirectionisthatreinforcementalongafixededgeisratherinefficientintakingupstresses
under normal loads, as the slab has very limited deflections in these regions. The resulting
distributionofdesignmomentsisshowninFig.3.1.6.
Fig.3.1.6
3.2 Triangular loads

Example3.4
The slab in Fig. 3.2.1 is simply supported along all edges. It is a vertical slab acted upon by water
pressure,whichiszeroattheupperedgeandisassumedtoincreaseby10kN/m2permdepth.(This
valueisanapproximationusedtomakeiteasiertofollowtheanalysis.Amorecorrectvalueisabout
45
10.2.) For reasons of symmetry

. The value of
conditionthatthespanmomentsinelements2and4mustbethesame.
is determined by the
Fig.3.2.1
For the different elements we have the following expressions for the moments, calculated from Eq.
(2.13)forelements1and3,from(2.11)forelement2andfromacombinationof(2.5)and(2.11)for
element4(evenlydistributedloadof34minusatriangularloadwiththevalue10c4attheupperline
ofzeroshearforce):
(3.14)
(3.15)
(3.16)
leadstoanequationofthethirddegree.Itisinpracticeeasier
Todirectlyusethecondition
it is found that
to use iteration, trying different values until the condition is fulfilled. Using
,andwegetthefollowingresultforaveragemoments:
Theratiobetweenthemomentsinthexandydirectionsshouldalsobecheckedinordertoachievea
good reinforcement economy and satisfactory behaviour under service conditions. In this case this
ratiomayseemsuitablewithrespecttothespansinthexandydirections.Theratiomaybechanged
bymeansofanotherchoiceofthevalueofl1.However,neithereconomynorserviceabilityaremuch
influencedbysmallchangesofthistype.
Withthevaluesabove,thedistributionofdesignmomentscanbechoseninaccordancewithFig3.2.2.
The distribution of reinforcement in the xdirection is chosen with less reinforcement in the upper
panoftheslab,wheretheloadissmaller.
Fig.3.2.2
Example3.5
Fig.3.2.3showsaslabwithalledgesfixed,whichisacteduponbyaloadwhichis18kN/m2atthetop
andincreasesby5kN/m2permetreto39kN/m2atthebottom.Achoiceoflinesofzeroshearforceis
shown.Forallpartsoftheslabacombinationofuniformloadandtriangularloadhastobeused.
46

Fig.3.2.3
Forelement1(identicaltoelement3)Eq.(2.4)isusedwith
(3.17)
Forelement2Eq.(2.5)isusedwith
(3.18)
Forelement4,Eq.(2.5)isusedwith
andEq.(2.13)isusedwith
(3.19)
We can now choose values of mxf and myf, which give suitable ratios between support and span
moments.Thefollowingvaluesmaybechosen,forexample:
Withthesevaluesandsidestripsinbothdirectionsequalto1.0mwegetthedistributionofdesign
momentsshowninFig.3.2.4.Iftheratiosbetweenthedifferentmomentsarenotregardedassuitable,
either the choice of span moments can be changed, or the pattern of lines of zero moments can be
adjustedandthecalculationrepeated.
Fig.3.2.4
Example3.6
ThewallinFig.3.2.5isacteduponbyawaterpressurewithawaterlevel1.0mbelowtheupperedge.
Thepressureistriangularwithanassumedincreaseof10kN/m2permetredepth.Theloadingcases
on the elements do not directly correspond with those treated in Section 2.3. It is necessary to
47
combineseveralofthesecasesinordertocalculatetheaveragemoments.Thecombinationofloading
casesforthecalculationofmomentsinelements1,2and3isindicatedinFig.3.2.5.
Inelement1(and3)thisgivesthefollowingevaluation:
Fig.3.2.5
(3.20)
ThefirsttermistheinfluenceofatriangularloadonthewholeelementaccordingtoEq.(2.13)and
the second term is the influence of a negative uniform load on the whole element according to Eq.
(2.4).Thethirdandfourthtermsshowtheinfluenceofloadsononlytheupperpartoftheelement,
down to a depth of 1.0 m, where the height is 0.69 m. The average moment on the upper part is
distributedonthewholeelementwidth4.2mthroughmultiplicationby1.0/4.2.
Forelement2weget
(3.21)
ThefirsttermistheinfluenceofatriangularloadonthewholeelementaccordingtoEq.(2.11)and
the second term is the influence of a negative uniform load on the whole element according to Eq.
(2.5).Thethirdandfourthtermsgivetheinfluenceofauniformloadandanegativetriangularloadon
onlytheupper1.0moftheelement.Thewidthoftheelementatthatlevelis3.62m.
Forelement4weget
(3.22)
The first term is the influence of a uniform load according to Eq. (2.5) and the second term is the
influenceofanegativetriangularloadaccordingtoEq.(2.11).
The following moments are chosen in order to achieve suitable ratios between support and span
moments:
A suitable distribution of design moments is proposed in Fig. 3.2.6. The reinforcement in the x
direction is not symmetrical, but is concentrated downwards because of the very nonsymmetrical
loaddistribution.
48
Fig.3.2.6
3.3.1 General
Aconcentratedloadisaloadwhichactsonlyonarelativelysmallpartofaslab.Itmaybeapointload,
alineloadoraloadwithahighintensityonasmallarea.
A concentrated load generally acts together with a distributed load. The way that the concentrated
loadistakenintoaccountindesigndependsontherelativeimportanceofthisloadcomparedtothe
distributedload.Iftheconcentratedloadisimportantitmustbeseparatelytakenintoaccountinthe
design.Ifthedistributed loadisdominanttheinfluenceoftheconcentrated loadcanbeincludedat
thesametimeasthedistributedload.Itissuggestedthataseparatecalculationisnotneededincases
wheretheconcentratedloadislessthan about25%ofthesumofdistributedloads. Iftwoormore
concentratedloadsarespreadovertheslabthisfiguremaybeincreased.
3.3.2 Aconcentratedloadalone
Example3.7
TheslabinFig.3.3.1isacteduponbyapointloadof150kN.Itshouldbedesignedtocarrythewhole
loadinthedirectionoftheshortestspan,i.e.intheydirection.Thisistheleastexpensivewaytocarry
thisload,butifonlytheresultingreinforcementisused,theslabwillnotbehavewellintheservice
state. This example is only shown in order to demonstrate the principle used in design for
concentratedloads.Thenextexampleshowshowaconcentratedloadcanbedividedbetweenstrips
intwodirectionsinordertoachieveareinforcementwhichisbetterforthebehaviourintheservice
state.
Asshowninthefiguretheloadisassumedtobecarriedbyastripintheydirectionwithawidthof
2.0m.Theloadisdistributedoverthiswidthbymeansofreinforcementinthexdirectioninashort
stripwithwidth1.5m.ThedesignmomentinthisstripiscalculatedbymeansofEq.(2.33):
(3.23)
Thetwoelements2and4meetatthepointload.Strictly,onepartF4ofthepointloadiscarriedby
element2andtheremainingpartbyelement4.Wegetthefollowingrelations:
(3.24)
49
Fig.3.3.1
(3.25)
A suitable choice is
, which gives
;
. The resulting distribution of design
momentsisshowninFig.3.3.2.
The distribution reinforcement in the xdirection is mainly intended for the distribution of the
bending moment over the width of the span reinforcement in the ydirection. The support
reinforcementcanbeactiveoveralargerwidth,asthesupportactsasloaddistributorandforcesthe
reinforcement to cooperate. The support moment can therefore be distributed over a larger width
thanthewidthof2.0massumedforthedesign.ThishasbeenindicatedbyadashedlineinFig.3.3.2.
Fig3.3.2
Example3.8
This example is intended to illustrate both how a concentrated load is distributed on strips in two
directionsandhowtotreataconcentratedloadintheformofahighloadintensityonasmallarea.A
totalloadof150kNisuniformlydistributedonanareaof
.Theloadisdistributedonone
stripinthexdirectionwithwidth2.0m,andonestripintheydirectionwithwidth2.5m.
Whentheloadisdistributedinthetwodirectionsitissatisfactorytodividetheloadapproximately
inverselytotheratioofspanstothefourthpower.Inthiscasewewillhave40kNinthexdirection
and110kNintheydirection.
Foreachdirectionwecanassumealineofzeroshearforce(maximummoment)atrightanglestothe
loadbearing direction, placed inside the loaded area. The coordinates of these lines are denoted x1
andy1.
50
ForthestripinthexdirectionwegetamomentmyfforloaddistributionfromEq.(2.33):
(3.26)
Fig.3.3.3
Forthemomentsinthetwoelements1and3formingthestripwehave:
(3.27)
(3.28)
Different values of x1 are tried in these formulas until a suitable ratio between support and span
momentsisfound.Thusfor
wefind
.
Forthestripintheydirectionwegetamomentmxfforloaddistribution:
(3.29)
Forthemomentsinthetwoelements2and4formingthestripwehave
(3.30)
(3.31)
wefind
,whichhaveasuitableratio.
For
Themomentsfor loaddistributionhavetheir maxima atthecentreoftheloadedarea, whereasthe
span moments in the strips have their maxima at x1 and y1. Adding together the moments for load
distribution and the span moments in the strips will therefore give values slightly on the safe side.
Performingthisadditionwegetthefollowingdesignmoments:
This moment distribution is shown in Fig. 3.3.4. As pointed out in the previous example it is
acceptabletodistributethesupportmomentsoverlargerwidths.
51
Fig.3.3.4
3.3.3 Distributedandconcentratedloadstogether
Example3.9
ThesimplysupportedslabinFig.3.3.5hasauniformloadof7kN/m2andapointloadof40kNinthe
positionshown.Thetotaluniformloadis
.Thepointloadisonly20%oftheuniform
load,whichmeansthatitcanbetreatedinthesimplifiedwayrecommendedin2.6.1and3.3.1.Asitis
difficult to estimate directly if it is to be taken only by element 2 or if it is distributed between
elements2and4westartbyassumingthatthelineofzeroshearforcepassesthroughthepointload
butthatthewholeloadiscarriedbyelement2.WethengetthefollowingaveragemomentsfromEq.
(2.5)forthedistributedloadandasimplemomentequationforthepointload:
(3.32)
(3.33)
Fig.3.3.5
Fromthesevaluesitcanbeseenthatelement2takesalittletoomuchofthepointload.Itcaneasily
beshownthattheconditionthatthetwovaluesshallbeidenticalisfulfilledifelement2carries37.39
.Iftheaboveanalysishadgivenm2<m4thelineof
kNandelement42.61kN.Themomentis
zeroshearforceshouldhavebeenmovedtoapositionfurtherdowninthefigureinordertomakethe
momentsequal.
52
Asimplifiedwayofcalculatingmomentsinthiscaseistotreatthedistributedloadandthepointload
separatelyandaddthemaximummomentsfromthesetwocases,inspiteofthefactthatthemaxima
donotoccuratthesamesections.Suchanadditionisonthesafeside.Forsymmetryreasonstheline
of zero shear force for the distributed load in this case is situated
from the edge. The
averagemomentis
(3.34)
This value is about 3% higher than the value when the distributed load and the point load were
treatedtogether.Thissmalldifferenceisacceptablefromthepointofviewofreinforcementeconomy.
Thissimplifiedapproachissatisfactoryinmanycases.
ForthereinforcementinthexdirectionEq.(2.4)gives:
(3.35)
Theratiobetweenthemomentsinthexandydirectionscanberegardedasacceptable,butmaybea
littlelow.Ifwewishtoincreasethisratiowemayincreasetheheightofthetrianglesandrepeatthe
calculation.
We may calculate the distribution of design moments approximately as in Examples 3.1 and 3.2.
However,inthiscasemuchofthebendingmomentiscausedbythepointloadandfromthepointof
viewofperformanceintheservicestateitisbettertoconcentratemoreofthereinforcementcloserto
thepointload.
Atthesametimeanotherpossibilitycanbedemonstratedhere,viz.zonesofzeroreinforcementalong
the supports. The slab has zero curvature along the supports and thus the reinforcement takes no
stresses, at least not until at a late ultimate state when severe cracks appear and membrane action
takes place. Therefore the reinforcement along the supports is of little use and it is better to use it
where curvature exists. In the authors opinion such unreinforced zones should be used along
supportsinallslabs,butmostbuildingcodesdonotseemtoacceptthis,whichiswhymostexamples
inthisbookareshownwithoutsuchzones.
Inthisexampleawidthof0.5mhasbeenchosenfortheunreinforcedzonesandthereinforcement
has been placed with a certain concentration around the point load. The proposed distribution of
designmomentsisshowninFig.3.3.6.Intheydirectionthesmallermomentshavebeenchosentobe
onethirdofthelargermoments.
Fig.3.3.6
53
CHAPTER4
Rectangularslabswithonefreeedge
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 Generalprinciples
Asoneedgeisfree(unsupported)thestripsatrightanglestothatedgehavenosupportatthefree
end.Insteadtheyhavetobesupportedinternally,i.e.byastripalongtheedge.Somesolutionsofthis
typearegiveninStripMethodofDesign.Thesolutionsshownbelowaresomewhatdifferent,asthe
designprocedureadoptedissimilartothatusedforslabswhereallthesidesaresupported.
ThesupportalongthefreeedgeisassumedtobeasupportbandofthetypedescribedinSection2.8,
i.e.abandwhichintheanalysisistreatedashavingzerowidth,butwheretheresultingreinforcement
isdistributedoveracertainwidthalongtheedge.AccordingtotherecommendationsinSection2.8
thewidthoverwhichthereinforcementisdistributeddependsontheimportanceofthesupportband
tothesafetyoftheslab.Typicallythiswidthcanbechosenratherarbitrarilyifthefreeedgeisinthe
shorter direction of the slab, but it must satisfy some limiting rules if the free edge is in the longer
direction of the slab. Some concentration of reinforcement along a free edge is generally
recommended.
Fig. 4.1.1 a) shows a slab with the upper edge free. Lines of zero shear force are shown exactly the
sameasusedforslabswithfoursidessupported.Element2hasnorealsupport.Insteaditisassumed
to be supported on asupport band along the free edge. This support band is loaded by the load on
element 2. The bending moment Mx in the strip is determined by the load and its distribution on
element2.
Fig.4.1.1
Forthetotalmomentmxintheslabwecanaddthemomentinthestriptothemomentsinelements1
and 3. Formally this can be done by analysing new elements 12 and 32, where the corresponding
partsofelement2areincorporatedintoelements1and3.Thusthedesignoftheslabcanbebasedon
theelementsandlinesofzeromomentsshowninFig.4.1.1b).
A design based on Fig. 4.1.1 b) can only be used if
. The values of c2 and c4 depend on the
momentsmyfandmysandonthetypeofload.Forauniformloaditcanbeshownthatthisconditionis
fulfilledif
(4.1)
54
Incaseswherethisrelationisvaliditcanbeassumedthatthewidthofthebandofreinforcementisof
minorimportanceforthesafetyoftheslab.Thusinsuchacasenocheckofthepartofthemoment
whichisattributedtothebandisneeded,norisanycalculationofasuitablebandofreinforcementor
widthofsuchabandneeded.However,acertainconcentrationofreinforcementinthevicinityofthe
freeedgeisstillrecommendedinsuchcases.
Where the above relationship is not fulfilled, elements 2 and 4 will no longer be triangles, but
trapezoids,Fig.4.1.2.Thelongerthelineofzeroshearforcebetweenelements2and4becomes,the
moreimportantistheroleplayedbythesupportbandinthesafetyoftheslab.Themomentsinthe
supportbandmustnowbecalculatedandthewidthofthereinforcementbanddeterminedaccording
totheprinciplesdiscussedinSection2.8.
Fig.4.1.2
4.1.2 Torsionalmoments.Cornerreinforcement
The distribution of moments in slabs with an unsupported edge is more complicated than in slabs
with all sides supported, particularly when the free edge is one of the longer edges. In such a case,
torsional moments play an important role, whereas the bending moments corresponding to
reinforcementatrightanglestothefreeedgeareofminorimportance.Inthestripmethod,solutions
areusedwheretheloadiscarriedbybendingmomentsonly,withouttakingtorsionalmomentsinto
account.Theresultingdesignisonthesafesideregardingtheultimatelimitstate,butthedistribution
of reinforcement may be quite different from that given by an analysis based on the theory of
elasticity.
According to the theory of elasticity large torsional moments occur where two simply supported
edgesmeet.Intheseareasreinforcementmaybenecessarytopreventunacceptablecracking.Many
codes specify particular comer reinforcement that should be provided. To limit cracks in the upper
faceoftheslabtheprovisionoftopreinforcementintheslabcornersparallelltothelinesbisecting
the corners is recommended. The amount of such reinforcement may be based on code rules or on
values of torsional moments obtained from tables of moment values determined by the theory of
elasticity.
Theimportanceofthetorsionalmomentsincreasesastheratiobetweenthelengthofthefreeedge
andthelengthoftheperpendicularedges(a/binFig.4.1.1)increases.Theuseoftheformofthestrip
metod presented here is not recommended for simply supported slabs if this ratio is higher than
about2.AnalternativeapproachforsuchslabsisdemonstratedinStripMethodofDesign.
4.2 Uniform loads

Example4.1
TheslabinFig.4.2.1hasonefreeedge,onesimplysupportededgeandtwofixededges,andsupports
a uniform load of 9 kN/m2. The shape is such that, with a relatively short free edge, the approach
accordingtoFig.4.1.1b)maybeused.Theproposedlinesofzeroshearforceareshown.Forelements
12and32wegetfromEq.(2.5)
55
(4.2)
(4.3)
andthus
Fig.4.2.1
.Forelement4wegetfromEq.(2.4)
(4.4)
Forafixedshortedgeitissuitabletochooseahighratiobetweenthenumericalvaluesofthesupport
and
.Theconditionof
andspanmoments.Forexample,inthiscasewemaychoose
Eq.(4.1)iswellfulfilled.
These average moments can be distributed as shown in Fig. 4.2.2. The distribution of the
reinforcementisarrangedsothatthereisastrongbandofreinforcementalongthefreeedge.
Fig.4.2.2
Example4.2
The slab shown in Fig. 4.2.3 carries a uniform load of 11 kN/m2. It is of the type which cannot be
designedbymeansofthesimplifiedapproachusedinthepreviousexample,asrelation(4.1)cannot
befulfilledbyadoptingasuitableratiobetweenthemomentsinthexandydirections.Insteadthe
slabhastobeanalysedasifitweresimplysupportedonasupportbandlocatedalongitsupperedge,
afterwhichananalysismustbemadeofthesupportband.
56
WiththechosenpatternoflinesofzeroshearforceandbyapplyingEqs.(2.4)and(2.5)asshown,we
getthefollowingaveragemomentsintheslab
Fig.4.2.3
(4.5)
(4.6)
(4.7)
(4.8)
The load distribution on the support band corresponds to the shape of element 2. If we assume a
sectionofzeroshearforceinthesupportbandsituatedatadistanceof2.3mfromtherighthandend,
wefindthemoments
(4.9)
(4.10)
IftherecommendationsinSection2.8arefollowedstrictly,thespanmomentMfwillbeconcentrated
onawidthcorrespondingtohalftheaveragewidthofelement2,whichcorrespondsto0.45m.The
widthhasbeenchosento0.5mintheproposeddistributionofdesignmomentsshowninFig.4.2.4.It
mightevenhavebeendistributedoveralargerwidthwithoutanyriskofinconvenience.Inanycaseit
isnotpossibletoshowbyyieldlinetheorythatsuchadesignisunsafe.Themomentsmxfandmxshave
beendistributedovertheremainingpartoftheslab.
57
Fig.4.2.4

In practice, triangular load is usually a liquid pressure, an earth pressure or something similar. A
rectangularslabwithonefreeedgeinsuchcaseshasthefreeedgeastheupperedge.Onlythiscase
willbedemonstratedhere.
Forthetreatmentoftriangularloadswithacombinationofloadingcases,seealsoExamples3.5and
3.6.
Example4.3
TheslabshowninFig.4.3.1formsonesideofawatertankwiththehighestwaterlevel1.0mbelow
the upper edge. The water pressure is assumed to increase by 10 kN/m2 per metre depth (a more
correctvalueis10.2).Thedistributionofthewaterpressureisshowninthefigure.Theshapeofthe
slabissuchthatthesimplifiedapproachofFig.4.1.1b)maybeused.Thatthisassumptioniscorrect
canafterwardsbecheckedbystudyingatriangularelementoftype2inFig.2.1.1a)andestablishing
thatitdoesnotreachelement4.
Fig.4.3.1
The average moments in the xdirection can be calculated by means of Eq. (2.14) with
.Theaveragemomentfromthisequationisvalidforthedepth4.0m.Toget
theaveragemomentforthetotaldepth5.0m,thisvaluehastobemultipliedby4.0/5.0.
(4.11)
TheaveragemomentsintheydirectionarecalculatedwithEq.(2.4)forauniformloadof40kN/m2
minusatriangularloadof18kN/m2atthetop,calculatedwithEq.(2.10).
(4.12)
Thefollowingvaluesofaveragemomentsarechosentoensuresuitableratiosbetweensupportand
.Adistributionofdesignmomentsisproposed
spanmoments:
in Fig. 4.3.2. With respect to the load distribution, the mxmoments might have been more
concentrated downwards, but on the other hand there is also the general rule that recommends
concentrating some reinforcement close to the free edge. As a compromise the design moment has
beengivenaconstantvalueoverthemajorpartofthedepth.
58

Fig.4.3.2
Example4.4
The slab in Fig. 4.3.3 forms one side of a water tank with the water surface 0.4 m below the upper
edge.Fromthatlevelthewaterpressureisassumedtoincreaseby10kN/m2permetredepth(amore
correctvalueis10.2).TheshapeoftheslabissuchthatthesimplifiedapproachaccordingtoFig.4.1.1
b)cannotbeapplied.AnassumedpatternoflinesofzeroshearforceisshowninFig.4.3.3.
Fig.4.3.3
InordertobeabletousethestandardformulasinChapter2forcalculatingthemomentinelement2
the load has to be divided into the following cases, which are added to form the actual load (cf.
Example3.6,Fig.3.2.5):
1. Atriangularload,zeroatthefreeedgeand22atthebottom.
2. Auniformload4overthewholedepth.
3. Auniformload+4ontheuppermost0.4 m.
4. Atriangularload,zeroatthefreeedgeand4at0.4mbelowthefreeedge.
ForthefirstandfourthcasesEq.(2.11)isapplied,andforthesecondandthirdcasesEq.(2.5).Forthe
thirdandfourthcases
,thewidthofelement2atthewaterlevel.
(4.13)
59
The moment in element 4 is calculated from the influence of a uniform load with intensity 42
accordingtoEq.(2.5)minusatriangularloadwithintensity24atthetopoftheelementaccordingto
Eq.(2.11).
(4.14)
.
Weget
The average moments in elements 1 and 3 can, with satisfactory accuracy, be calculated with a
triangular load with maximum intensity 46 according to Eq. (2.13) minus a uniform load with
intensity4accordingtoEq.(2.4).Asmalldifferenceintheuppercornerisdisregarded.
(4.15)
;
.
Wemaythenchoose
Theloadonthesupportbandalongthefreeedgecorrespondstotheloadonelement2.Theloadis
looked upon as consisting of onepart with a pyramidal shape and one part with aprismatic shape.
Duetosymmetrythepointofzeroshearforce(maximumspanmoment)issituatedinthecentre.
(4.16)
.
Wecanchoose
Todeterminethedesignmomentswehavetoaddthemomentsfromelement1andfromthesupport
band.AdistributionofdesignmomentsisproposedinFig.4.3.4.Ifthedistributionsfromthedifferent
parts had been followed we should have had a concentrated band of reinforcement along the free
edge, and also heavier reinforcement below the centre of the slab, as the load is increasing
downwards. Halfway between the top and the centre the reinforcement would have been weaker.
Such an uneven distribution of reinforcement does not correspond to our experience of the real
behaviourinservice.Thereforethedesignmomenthasbeenchosenwithauniformdistributionover
mostofthedepth,withoutanyconcentration.
Fig.4.3.4
60
4.4.1 Loadsclosetothefreeedge
Aconcentratedloadactingclosetoafreeedgehastobecarriedbyreinforcementalongtheedge.If
theloadisactingveryclosetotheedgeitwillcauseanegativemomentwithacertaindemandfortop
reinforcementatrightanglestotheedge.Thisreinforcementwillinthefirstplacebeneededforthe
distribution of the load to a strip of a certain width in the ultimate limit state, but it may also be
needed to limit top cracks. In principle, the strip method only takes the ultimate limit state into
account,andthisistheonlycasewhichwillbedemonstratedintheexamplebelow.Inordertolimit
topcracksaminimumwidthoftheassumedstripalongtheedgeisrecommended,e.g.1/10to1/5of
thelengthofthefreeedge.
Inpracticetheconcentratedloadalwaysactstogetherwithadistributedload,suchastheloadarising
fromtheweightoftheslab.
Example4.5
TheslabinFig.4.4.1carriesapointloadof30kNataposition0.1minsidetheedge.Ifwelet10kNbe
carriedtotherightand20kNtotheleftsupportthemomentintheedgestripis
,
. If we decide not to reinforce for a higher span moment than about 40
kNm/m for the point load (in addition to the moment for the other loads on the slab), we have to
distributetheloadoverastripwidthofabout
.Wecanassumeawidthof0.65m.
Fig.4.4.1
Apossibleloaddistributioninthestripintheydirectionisshowninthefiguretotheright.Inorder
tomaintainequilibriuminthestripweneedadownwardforceatthelowerendofthestrip,i.e.atthe
support.Fromsimplestaticsthisforceisfoundtobe
.Inarigorousanalysisthis
forcemaybetakenintoaccount,butasitissmallcomparedtotheactingload,wewilldisregardits
influenceandsimplytakethedesignmomentforthereinforcementatrightanglestotheedgeasthe
.This
loadtimesthedistancebetweentheloadandthecentreofthestrip,thus
analysis is quite accurate enough bearing in mind the approximate assumptions, which are
conservativefromthepointofviewofsafety,ascanbecheckedbymeansofyieldlinetheory.
The result in this case is thus that the point load gives span reinforcement corresponding to
, distributed on a strip with a width of 0.65 m along the edge, and top reinforcement
at right angles to the edge at the load. The support moment
corresponding to
canbedistributedoveragreaterwidth,asthesupportinitselfhasaloaddistributingeffect.
ThemomentMycanbedistributedonquiteasmallwidth,say0.51.0minthiscase.
61
The use of the simplified approach which is demonstrated here is generally recommended for
designingreinforcementtocarryaconcentratedloadclosetoafreeedge:
1.Calculatemomentsinthestripalongtheedge.
2.Determineasuitablewidthofthestriptogiveanacceptableconcentrationofspanreinforcement.
Calculatethedesignmomentforthetopreinforcementatrightanglestotheedgeastheloadtimes
3.thedistancefromtheloadtothecentreofthestrip.Thisreinforcementisconcentratedonarather
smallwidthneartheload.
4.4.2 Loadsnotclosetothefreeedge
Inmanycasesitissimplesttoassumethattheloadiscarriedbyastripwhichisparalleltothefree
edge.Inthiscasethedesignisdoneexactlyasinaslabwithfoursidessupported,seeSection3.3.
Whenthedistancefromtheloadtothesupportoppositetothefreeedgeisshort,theloadorpartofit
isbestcarriedinthedirectionatrightanglestothefreeedge.Accordingtothegeneralprinciplesfor
slabswithafreeedge,thestripatrightanglestothatedgeisassumedtohaveasupportattheedge,
thuscausingmomentsinastripalongtheedge.
Theexamplebelowdemonstrateshowthedesignisperformedforalargeconcentratedload,whichis
thedominantloadontheslab.Wheretheconcentratedloadisonlyaminorpartofthetotalloadon
theslabasimplifiedapproachmaybeusedaswasdemonstratedinExample3.9.
ForthegeneraltreatmentofconcentratedloadsseeSections2.6and3.3.
Example4.6
TheslabinFig.4.4.2carriesapointloadof40kNatapositionwhichisclosertothesupportopposite
tothefreeedge.Thisisacasewheretheload(oragreatpartofit)isbestcarriedbyastripinthey
direction.
Ifthewholeloadiscarriedbyastripintheydirectionthisstripisassumedtobesupportedatthe
freeedge.Wecanassume,forexample,that6kNiscarriedtothefreeedge.Thisgivesaspanmoment
.Thesupportmomentisthen
.
Theedgestriphastocarrythereaction6kN.Ifweassumethat2kNiscarriedtotherightsupport,
;
.
themomentsintheedgestripare:
If the whole load is instead carried by a strip in the xdirection we can then assume that 13 kN is
in this strip and
carried to the right support, which gives
.
Fig.4.4.2
Ifwecomparethetwosolutionswefindthatthefirstsolutiongivesasumofspanmomentsequalto
compared to 31.2 in the second, and a numerical sum of support moments equal to
inthefirstand66.0inthesecondsolution.Asthereinforcementareaisproportionalto
themomentthiscomparisonshowsthatthefirstsolutionistobepreferredfromaneconomicalpoint
ofview.
62
Itisalsopossibletodividetheloadbetweenthetwosolutions,forexample,inordertogetabetter
reinforcementdistributionwithrespecttothebehaviourunderserviceconditions.Iftheconcentrated
loadisdominantsuchadivisionissuitable,butifthedistributedloadontheslabisdominantsucha
divisionisunnecessary.
For a complete solution some reinforcement for load distribution across the strip should also be
provided. If we choose a strip width of 1.0 m for the main strip and 0.5 m for the load distribution
reinforcement,thedesignmomentforthisreinforcementis
,Eq.(2.33).If
wechooseawidthof0.5mforthestripalongthefreeedge,wegetthedesignmomentsaccordingto
thefirstsolutionasshowninFig.4.4.3.Thesupportmomentshavebeendistributedovertwicethe
widthsofthestrips.Thisisacceptableasthesupportsactasloaddistributors.
63
CHAPTER5
Rectangularslabswithtwofreeedges
5.1 Twooppositefreeedges
Whenarectangularslabhastwooppositesidessupportedandtheothertwoedgesfree,itactsasa
series of oneway strips and causes no design problems, at least not as long as the loads are
distributed.
Designforconcentratedloadsismadeinthesamewayasforotherrectangularslabs,seeSection3.3
forloadsintheinterioroftheslabandSection4.4forloadsclosetoafreeedge.
5.2 Twoadjacentfreeedges
5.2.1 General
Slabswithtwoadjacentfreeedgeshavearathercomplicatedstaticbehaviour,particularlywhenthe
other two edges are freely supported. Because strips parallel to the edges do not have supports at
bothendstheloadhastobecarriedtoagreatextentbytorsionalmomentswithrespecttotheedges.
There are at least two ways of coping with the problem. One possibility is to carry out an analysis
whichincludestorsionalmomentsanddesignreinforcementparalleltotheedgestotakethetorsional
moments.Theslabcanthenbereinforcedonlywithbarsparalleltotheedges,whichisanadvantage
during construction. Solutions including torsional moments have been discussed in Strip Method of
Design. These solutions are generally too complicated to be recommended for practical design. One
suchsolutionwill,however,begivenasanalternativebelow.
Another possible solution is to make use of a support band, which spans between the two corners
where the free and supported edges meet. This method may lead to somewhat lengthy numerical
calculationsandchecks.ItsapplicationisdemonstratedinChapter7onanonrectangularslab.Herea
similarbutnumericallysimplermethodwillbeappliedinthefirstexample,usingcornersupported
elements. The results of these two methods are similar, as the reinforcement is not parallel to the
edges.Thisisadisadvantagefromthepointofviewofconstruction,butitsavesmuchreinforcement
atthesametimeasitreducesdeflectionsandcracksasthereinforcementisactiveapproximatelyin
thedirectionsoftheprincipalmoments.
5.2.2 Simplysupportededges,uniformloads
Thisisthemostcomplicatedcase,asnoloadcanbetakensolelybybendingmomentsparalleltothe
edges. It can even be argued that this is an unsatisfactory type of structure. It is probably not very
common,atleastnotforstructuresotherthansmallbalconies,forexample.
Thecentreofgravityofauniformloadontheslabissituatedwherethediagonalscross.Itistherefore
natural to assume that the slab is supported at point supports at the outer ends of the supported
edges.Iftheslabisassumedtobesupportedalongthesupportededgessomeofthesupportreaction
hastobenegativeinordertofulfilequilibriumconditions.
64
Apossiblesolutionistoassumethattheslabissupportedattheoutercornersofthesupportededges
and to base the design on the use of cornersupported elements. Such a loadbearing system is
illustratedinFig.5.2.1withcornersupportsatBandD.Thecornersupportedelementsaretriangles
formedbytheedgesandthediagonals,whicharelinesofzeroshearforce.Inordertobeabletouse
therulesfortriangularcornersupportedelementsthereinforcementdirectionshavetobeparallelto
thesidesofthetriangles,inthiscaseparalleltothediagonals.Itisimpossibletomaintainequilibrium
onalineofzeroshearforceifthereinforcementisparalleltoanedgeoftheslab,astheacceptable
distributionsofdesignmomentsinthetwoelementswhichmeetatthelineofzeroshearforcecannot
thenbemadetocoincide.
Asthereinforcementdirectionsinthegeneralcasearenotatrightangles,theruleinSection2.5.4has
tobeapplied.Thisrulesaysthatthecvaluesforboththereinforcementdirectionsareequaltohalf
thelengthofthediagonal.
The design of the reinforcement in direction BD is based on Fig. 2.5.4 c) as the ydirection in this
figureisparalleltothesidewhichdoesnotgotothesupportedcorner.Asthereisnosupportmoment
indirectionBD,wefindforthatdirectiontheaveragemoment
Fig.5.2.1
(5.1)
ForthereinforcementindirectionACthereisnospanmoment.ThedesignisbasedonFig.2.5.4b).
WefindfordirectionACtheaveragemoment
(5.2)
ForthedistributionofdesignmomentswehavetofollowtherulesgiveninSection2.5.3.
FordirectionBDEq.(2.32)isvalid.Inthisdirectionwehavetotakeallthedesignmomentonlyinthe
column strip as
. It may be suitable to distribute the reinforcement as evenly as possible, i. e.
with
.Thismeansthatthedesignmomentiszerointheexteriorpartoftheelementand3times
theaveragemomentinthecentralpart(columnstrip").Itisnotacceptabletoleavetheexteriorparts
without reinforcement, so some reinforcement must also be provided in these parts. In Fig. 5.2.2 a
designmomentisrecommendedequaltohalftheaveragemomentaccordingtoEq.(5.1)withinthese
parts.Thischoicecanofcoursebediscussed.
For direction AC Eq. (2.31) is valid. Here it is acceptable to use which
means an evenly
distributeddesignmomentequaltotheaveragemoment,whichisasuitablechoiceinthiscase.
UsingthesevalueswegetthedesignmomentsaccordingtoFig.5.2.2.Itmustbenotedthattherules
inSection2.4.3are basedontheassumption thatallreinforcingbarshave afulllengththrough the
elementandarewellanchoredattheedges.Itisalsorecommendedtohaveatleastonebottombar
andonetopbaralongeachfreeedge.
65

Fig.5.2.2
Asthereinforcementbasedonthisdesigniscomplicated,involvingdifferentlengthsforeachbar,a
design with bars parallel to the edges may be preferred, even if it leads to a greater amount of
reinforcement.ApplyingasolutionincludingtorsionalmomentsofthetypediscussedinStripMethod
ofDesign,Section4.3,itcanbeshownthatasafedesignwouldbetoreinforcethewholeslabparallel
totheedgesforthepositivemoments
(5.3)
andthenegativemoments
(5.4)
Asthereinforcementisintendedtotaketorsionalmomentsithastobewellanchoredattheedges.
In order to fulfil equilibrium conditions with this solution the inner corner A in Fig. 5.2.1 has to be
anchoredbyaforceRequalto
(5.5)
Thetotalamountofdesignreinforcementismorethandoubledwiththisdesign,butinspiteofthisit
mayoftenberecommendedduetothesimplicityofconstruction.Dueregardhasalsotobetakenof
the fact that the first solution may be regarded as unacceptable without some secondary
reinforcement.
5.2.3 Onefixededge,uniformloads
If a support is fixed, a strip at right angles to that support can act as a cantilever, carrying load by
meansofpurebendingmoments.Inprinciplealltheloadcanbecarriedinthiswayifatleastoneof
the supports can take negative moments. If only one of the supports is fixed such a solution is
uneconomical and it also gives a design which is not suitable for the behaviour of the slab under
serviceconditions.
Ifalltheloadiscarriedbycantileveractiontherewillbeonlytopreinforcementintheslab.Thisisnot
acceptable, as it may result in wide bottom cracks. In the service state moments will give rise to
tensioninthebottomfaceoftheslab.Asimplewayoftakingcareofthisproblemistoassumethat
onepartoftheloadiscarriedwithoutcantileveraction,i.e.asiftheslabweresimplysupported.The
moments caused by thatpart of the loadare then calculated by means ofequations (5.3)and (5.4).
The amount of the load carried in this way is chosen to ensure that a suitable minimum amount of
bottomreinforcementisprovided.
Example5.1
The slab in Fig. 5.2.3 has one long fixed support and one short free support. The load is uniform 9
kN/m2.Inordertogetsomebottomreinforcementinbothdirectionsitisassumedthat20%ofthe
loadgivesmomentsaccordingtoEqs(5.3)and(5.4).Thisratioshouldbechosensothattheamountof
66
bottom reinforcement is sufficient to prevent wide bottom cracks and to take at least some of the
torsionalmomentsintheservicestate.
The part of the load to be used in Eqs (5.3) and (5.4) is thus
. This gives design
moments,whichareactiveinthewholeslab:
(5.6)
(5.7)
Fig.5.2.3
Therestoftheload,7.2kN/m2,iscarriedbyonewaystripsasshowninFig.5.2.3.Thestripinthex
directionissupportedatitsrighthandendbythecantileverintheydirectionalongthedashedline,
which is the limit between the x and ystrips. The line of zero shear force is halfway between the
dashedlineandthelefthandsupport.
Asthecantileverintheydirectionhastoactasasupportforthexstrip,ithastocarryalltheloadto
the right of the line of zero shearforce. Theaverage supportmoment is calculated by means of Eq.
(2.5)
(5.8)
TheaveragespanmomentinthexstripiscalculatedbymeansofEq.(2.4)
(5.9)
(notarealsupport
Thetotalmomentsarethesumofthemomentsfromthetwocases,thus
moment,butanegativemoment),
;
;
.Thedesign
momentsaccordingtocase1shouldbeevenlydistributed,whereasthedesignmomentsaccordingto
case2shouldbedistributedwithrespecttotheshapeoftheelements,i.e.withmorereinforcement
alongthefreeedges.Distributionsofdesignmomentsforbottomreinforcementinthexdirectionand
top reinforcement in the ydirection are proposed in Fig. 5.2.4. The design moments for top
reinforcementinthexdirectionandforthebottomreinforcementintheydirectionareconstantwith
thevaluesabove.Thereinforcementcorrespondingtocase1shouldcoverthewholeslabareaandbe
well anchored, whereas the reinforcement corresponding to case 2 may be curtailed according to
normaldetailingrules.
67

Fig.5.2.4
Example5.2
The slab in Fig. 5.2.5 has the same proportions and the same load, 9.0 kN/m2, as the slab in the
previousexample,butitistheshortedgethatisfixedandthelongedgewhichissimplysupported.
Thisleadstobehaviourexpectedtobeclosertothatofaslabwherebothedgesaresimplysupported.
It is then natural to carry more of the load as if the slab were simply supported. Whereas in the
previousexamplewechosetocarry20%oftheloadinthisway,herewechoosetotakehalftheload
inthisway.Thus4.5kN/m2isassumedtogivemomentsaccordingtoEqs(5.3)and(5.4):
(5.10)
(5.11)
Fig.5.2.5
Theremainingpartoftheload,4.5kN/m2,iscarriedbythestripsystemaccordingtoFig.5.2.5,which
issimilartothesysteminFig.5.2.3 withtheexceptionthatthe dividingline betweentheprimarily
loadbearingdirectionsisdrawntotheoutercorner.Ifithadbeendrawntoapositionmoretothe
left, the strips in the ydirection would not have had a support on their whole width. If it had been
drawntoalowerpositionattherighthandedgethemomentinthestripwouldhaveincreasedtoo
much.
InthesamewayasinthepreviousexamplethemomentsarecalculatedbymeansofEqs.(2.5)and
(2.4)respectively:
(5.12)
68
(5.13)
and
.Distributionsofthe
Addingthesemomentstothoseofthefirstcaseweget
correspondingdesignmomentsareproposedinFig.5.2.6.Inadditiontothesemomentsthesteelfor
evenly distributed reinforcement should be arranged for design moments mxf and mys according to
Eqs(5.10)and(5.11)above.
Fig.5.2.6
5.2.4 Twofixededges,uniformloads
With both supported edges fixed it is simplest and most economical to carry the whole load on
cantileveringstripsfromthosesupports.Withthissolutiontheslabonlyrequirestopreinforcement,
butthismaynotensuresatisfactorybehaviourunderserviceconditions.Inordertoprovideforsome
bottomreinforcement inthedesignsomeoftheloadcaninstead becarriedas ifthesupportswere
freelysupported,i.e.applyingEqs(5.3)and(5.4)forthatpartoftheload.
The dividing line between the cantilevers in the two directions is best drawn approximately in the
directionofthebisectorbetweenthesupportededges.
Example5.3
The slab in Fig. 5.2.7 has the same proportions and the same load, 9 kN/m2, as the slabs in the
previoustwoexamples,butbothsupportededgesarefixed.
Inordertoget somebottomreinforcementwetake 20%of theload,1.8kN/m2,asiftheslabwere
simply supported, applying Eqs (5.3) and (5.4). We can take the values directly from Example 5.3,
wherethesameassumptionwasused:
and
.
Therestoftheload,7.2kN/m2,iscarriedbythecantilevers.FromEqs(2.4)and(2.5)wederivethe
averagesupportmoments
(5.14)
(5.15)
69
Fig.5.2.7
;
. Distributions of the negative design
Adding the negative values above gives
momentsareproposedinFig.5.2.8.Inadditiontothesenegativemomentsthewholeslabshouldbe
reinforcedinbothdirectionsforpositivemomentswithintensity10.80.
5.2.5 Nonuniformloads
Thesameprinciplesasthoseabovecanbeappliedtoothertypesofdistributedloads.Theprincipleof
Fig.5.2.1iscomplicatedtoapply,partlybecausetheshapesofthecornersupportedelementshaveto
be modified in order to fulfil equilibrium conditions, and partly because the rules for acceptable
momentdistributionsarenotknownindetail.IftheprincipleaccordingtoFig.5.2.1isappliedthishas
tobedonewithcare,usingdesignmomentswhichareestimatedtobewellonthesafeside.
Itisalwayspossibletousetheapproachwithasupportband,whichisdemonstratedinSection7.2.4.
For slabs with fixed supports the principles demonstrated in Examples 5.13 can be applied to any
type of distributed load. The part carried by applying Eqs. (5.3) and (5.4) is always chosen to be
uniform.
Concentrated loads on slabs with fixed supports can be treated with the methods demonstrated in
Sections3.3and4.4.
Fig.5.2.8
AconcentratedloadFkNonaslabwithtwosimplysupportededgescanbeassumedtogiveriseto
designmomentsequaltoF/2kNm/mwithinarectanglewithsidesalongthesupportededgesanda
corneratthecentreoftheload,seeFig.5.2.9.
70

Fig.5.2.9
As nonuniform loads on slabs with two adjacent free edges are rarely encountered, no numerical
exampleisgiven,butitishopedthattheadvicegivenabovewillbesufficienttoenableasafedesignto
becarriedoutinanysuchcases.
CHAPTER6
Triangularslabs
6.1 General
6.1.1 Reinforcementdirections
Atfixedorcontinuoussupportsthemostefficientuseofreinforcementiswiththebarsatrightangles
tothesupport.Spanreinforcementissuitablyarrangedasarectangularmeshwithoneofthemesh
directionsparalleltooneoftheslabedges.Iftheslabhasonefreeedgeitisnaturaltoplacethespan
reinforcement parallel to that edge. In other slabs it is often suitable to choose one of the span
reinforcementdirectionstobeparalleltotheshortestside.
6.1.2 Calculationofaveragemomentsinwholeelements
71
Whereas in a rectangular slab all reinforcement is normally arranged in only two orthogonal
directions, parallel to and at right angles to the edges, this is not possible in triangular slabs. This
poses particular problems. Reinforcement oriented in different directions has to cooperate. Some
reinforcementformsaskewangletotheedgewherethecorrespondingelementhasitssupport.
Thebasicmethodofanalysisisthesameasforrectangularslabs.Theslabisdividedintoelementsby
meansofassumedlinesofzeroshearforcesothateachelementhasitssupportalongonesideofthe
triangle. For each element the moment equilibrium is considered with respect to the support. The
differencefromrectangularslabsisthatthereisnotonewelldefinedloadbearingdirectionineach
element,astheloadhastobecarriedbymeansofreinforcementrunningindifferentdirections.For
example, these may be one direction for the top reinforcement and one or two directions for the
bottomreinforcement.Therearetwodifferentapproachesfordeterminingthedesignmomentsunder
thesecircumstances,seeSection2.3.6.
Oneapproachistointroducealineofzeromoment,withpositivemomentsononesideandnegative
moments on the other. Span reinforcement is active within the part with positive moment and
determines the loadbearing direction within that part, whereas the support reinforcement
determines the loadbearing direction within the part with negative moments. Strips with span
reinforcement are treated as supported on cantilevers with support reinforcement. With this
approachthemomentdistributioncanbedeterminedinarigorousway.Thenumericalcalculations
maybecomecomplicated,particularlywhenthesamesupportreinforcementfunctionstogetherwith
thespanreinforcementintwodirections.
Theotherapproachistowriteacompleteequilibriumequationwithrespecttothesupportforeach
element, taking into account the moment vectors along all the boundaries of the element. The
numericalcalculationsaregenerallysimplerwiththisapproach.Thedisadvantagesarethattheresult
doesnotgiveaclearoverviewofthedetailsofhowtheloadiscarried,orofthetheoreticalmoment
distributions which would be used as a basis for determining the distribution and curtailment of
reinforcement.
6.1.3 Distributionofreinforcement
Whereareinforcingbarcutsoveracorner,thelengthofthebarwithintheslabisveryshortnearthe
corner.Abarwithsuchashortlengthcannotbeexpectedtobeofanyuse.Itisthereforeproposed
that,forslabsofnormalthickness(about0.15to0.2m)barsshorterthanabout0.5mshouldnotbe
usedwithintheslab.Thedesignmomentswithinsuchpartsofaslabarethusreducedtozero.
Elements in triangular slabs have triangular shapes. The theoretical moment distribution is more
uneventhaninelementsoftrapezoidalshape,whichcarrymostoftheloadinrectangularslabs,see
Figs. 2.3.3 and 2.3.4. In the proposed distribution of design moments in the examples the ratio
betweenthemajorandminordesignmomentshasbeenchosentobe3,whereasforrectangularslabs
thisratiowasoftenchosentobe2.
Atcornerstheremaybeaneedfortopreinforcementrunningapproximatelyinthedirectionofthe
bisectorofthecornerangleinordertoavoidtopcracks.Suchreinforcementcannotbederivedfrom
thesolutionsgivenbythe stripmethod,buthastobedesignedbysomeothermeans,basedon the
theoryofelasticity.
6.2 Uniformloads
6.2.1 Allsidessimplysupported
Example6.1
ThesimplysupportedtriangularslabinFig.6.2.1hasauniformloadof8kN/m2.Theassumedlinesof
zeroshearforceareshown.
72
Fig.6.2.1
IthasbeenshowninStripMethodofDesignthatasuitableheightofelement3is0.2to0.25ofthe
lengthoftheshortside.Inthiscaseithasbeenchosentobe
.
Firstanapproximatesolutionwillbeshown,whereweusetheapproximationdemonstratedinFig.
2.2.4forelement3(whichmeansthatthedashdotlinesborderingelement3arenotreallinesofzero
shear force, though they are treated as such) and also disregard the influence of myf on the
equilibrium of elements 1 and 2. This means that both elements 1 and 2 will cause the same span
moment mxf, calculated from Eq. (2.4) with c being the horizontal distance from the point of
intersectionofthelinesofzeroshearforcetotheedge,cf.Fig.2.3.15.Inordertogetthesamevalues
ofmxfthedistancesc1andc2havetobeequal.Wethusfind
(6.1)
(6.2)
(6.3)
Thisisevidentlyaverysimplewayofdeterminingtheaveragemoments.Theapproximationisonthe
safeside.Itmaybenotedthatthehorizontalpositionofthepeakofthetriangledoesnotinfluencethe
result.
Foramorerigoroussolutionwehavetotakeintoaccounttheinfluenceofmyfontheequilibriumof
elements1and2,andstudytheequilibriumwithrespecttothesupports.Fig.6.2.2showselement1
withtheactingtotalmomentsattheboundaries.ApplyingEq.(2.18)andEq.(2.4)weget
(6.4)
73

Fig.6.2.2
Thelastterminthisequationisthereductioninmxfduetomyf.Inthesamewaywefindforelement2
(6.5)
Wealsohavetherelation
(6.6)
we can solve these equations and find
,
and
, which is a lower
With
value than the approximate value of 5.20 above. An estimation of the relative amounts of
reinforcement with the two solutions can be made by comparing the sum of moments in the two
directions, which gives the ratio
. The simple approximate solution thus
requiresabout8%morereinforcementbecauseitismoreconservative.
In Fig. 6.2.3 a distribution of design moments has been proposed, based on the more accurate and
economical solution, and taking into account the general rules for reinforcement distribution in
Section6.1.3.Thetheoreticaldistributionofmomentsmxfisalsoshown.
Fig.6.2.3
Lastlyitshouldbementionedthataverysimplesolutionforasimplysupportedtriangularslabwitha
uniform load is possible if the same average moments are used in two orthogonal directions. This
averagemomentis
(6.7)
74
whereriistheradiusoftheinscribedcircle.Thepointofintersectionofthelinesofzeroshearforceis
,whichgives
.Thetotal
atthecentreofthecircle.Forthetriangleintheexample
amount of reinforcement with this solution is a few percent higher than with the most accurate
solutionabove,butlowerthanwiththesimpleapproximatesolution.
6.2.2 Onefreeedge
Example6.2
The slab in Fig. 6.2.4 has two orthogonal fixed supports and one free edge. It is acted upon by a
uniform load of 7 kN/m2. The top reinforcement is at right angles to the supports and the bottom
reinforcement is parallel to the free edge. Thus there is designed bottom reinforcement only in the
directionparalleltothefreeedge.Theelementsaredenoted1and2,theaveragesupportmoments
ms1andms2,andthespanmomentmxf.
Acoordinatesystemwiththexaxisinthedirectionofthespanbottomreinforcement,paralleltothe
freeedge,isintroducedinordertobeabletouseEq.(2.18).ApplyingthatequationandEq.(2.4)and
usingthenotationinthefigurewehavetheequilibriumequations
(6.8)
(6.9)
Wealsohavetherelation
(6.10)
Assumingvaluesofmxfandc1,thecorrespondingsupportmomentscanbecalculated.Thechoiceis
madesuchthatsuitableratiosbetweenthemomentsresult.With
and
Fig.6.2.4
thesupportmomentsare
,
.ThesemomentsareusedforthedesigninFig.
6.2.6.
Inordertodemonstratetheuseofcooperatingstripsandhowatheoreticalmomentdistributioncan
bedetermined,ananalysiswillalsobemadewiththismethod,usingthesameaveragemoments.For
thispurposelinesofzeroshearforceandzeromomentsareshowninFig.6.2.5.Elements1and2are
dividedintospanelementsIfand2fandsupportelements1sand2s.Eachoftheseelementsnowhas
onlyoneloadbearingdirection.
With
and
thecvalueofelementsIfand2fare,cf.Eq.(2.4):
75
(6.11)
ThedistancesshowninFig.6.2.5arecalculatedbymeansofsimplegeometry.
Theshearforcesatthelinesofzeromomentareproportionaltothedistancefromtheinnercornerof
theslab.Wecanstudyathinspanstripalongtheedge.Attheendsofthisstriptheshearforceis
(6.12)
ThecorrespondingshearforcesattheendsofthesupportstripsarecalculatedbymeansofEq.(2.16).
Insertingtherelevantsinvaluesfoundfromordinarytrigonometricalrelations,wefind:
Fig.6.2.5
(6.13)
(6.14)
The average moments caused by these shear forces on the relevant parts of the supports are
accordingtoEq.(2.15)
(6.15)
(6.16)
Theaveragemomentscausedbythedirectloadonthesupportelementsgive
(6.17)
(6.18)
Thesumsofaveragemomentsalongthesupportsare
(6.19)
(6.20)
Thesevaluesareidenticalwiththevaluesdeterminedforelements1and2above.
Itmaybenotedfromtheanalysisthattheinfluenceoftheshearforcealongthelineofzeromoment
dominatesincalculatingthesupportmoments.Thishastobetakenintoaccountindistributingthe
designmoments.
AdistributionofdesignmomentshasbeenproposedinFig.6.2.6.Inordertoillustratetheinfluenceof
thedifferentpartsofthesupportmoment,acurvehasbeendrawnforthetheoreticaldistributionof
76
ms2accordingtothemodelwithcooperatingstrips.Itcanbeseenthatthismodelgivesasteepjump
inthemomentintensity.Thisjumpdoesnothavemuchtodowiththerealbehaviouroftheslab,and
thereisnopointintryingtoreinforceexactlyaccordingtothisdistribution.Thecurvedoes,however,
indicatewhichpartoftheedgemostofthereinforcementshouldbeplacedin.
Fig.6.2.6
Regarding the span reinforcement it is always advisable to have a certain concentration of
reinforcementalongafreeedge.
In this case the slab has design bottom reinforcement in only one direction. Some secondary
reinforcementmightbeintroducedatrightanglestothedesignreinforcementaccordingtorelevant
coderules.Intheauthorsopinionitisquestionablewhethersuchreinforcementisofanyuse.
6.2.3 Fixedandsimplysupportededges
Example6.3
TheslabinFig.6.2.7hastwofixededgesandonesimplysupportededge.Theloadis9kN/m2.The
linesofzeroshearforceareshownwiththecvaluesofthethreeelementsinsertedinthexandy
directions respectively. The bottom reinforcement is arranged in the x and ydirections. From Eqs
(2.18)and(2.4)wegettheequilibriumequations
Fig.6.2.7
77
(6.21)
(6.22)
(6.23)
Wealsohavethegeometricalrelation
(6.24)
have been chosen all the corresponding moments can be
After two cvalues and the ratio
calculated. The choice is repeated until the ratios between the moments are estimated to be
,
gives
,
,
;
,
.
acceptable.Asolutionwith
Inthiscaseitiscomplicatedtomakeadesignbasedonthecooperationofstrips.Thepossibilityexists
of using the approximate solution where element 3 is treated according to the approximation
describedinSection2.2,Fig.2.2.4,butthisgivesasolutionwhichisunnecessarilyconservative.Based
ontheshapeoftheelementsitishoweverpossibletoestimateasuitablemomentdistribution.
Amomentdistributionbasedonthevaluesgivenaboveandtakingintoaccountthepointsofviewin
Section6.1.3isproposedinFig.6.2.8.

Example6.4
Fig.6.3.1showsawallintheshapeofatriangularslabwithonefixededge,onesimplysupportededge
andonefreeedge.Thewallisacteduponbyanearthpressure,whichcanbeassumedtobezeroat
thefreeedgeandtoincreaseby8kN/m2perverticalmetre.Thismeansthattheloadontheslabhasa
linear variation in both the vertical and the horizontal directions, with a maximum intensity of
attheinnercorner.
The wall is reinforced for a positive moment with bars parallel to the free edge and for a negative
momentatthefixedsupportwithbarsatrightanglestothatsupport.Theassumedlineofzeroshear
forceisshowninthefigure.
78

Fig.6.2.8
TheanalysisofthisslabfollowsexactlythesamelinesasExample6.2above.Theonlydifferenceis
.WethususeEq.(2.18)
thattheloadingcasesforbothelementscorrespondtoFig.2.3.11with
togetherwith2.13,whichgivestheequations
(6.25)
(6.26)
Wealsohavethegeometricalrelation
Fig.6.3.1
79
Fig.6.3.2
(6.27)
and
(6.28)
,
wefind
,
.Adistributionofdesignmomentsisproposedin
Choosing
Fig. 6.3.2. As the load is zero along the free edge there is no reason to use a strong band of
reinforcementalongtheedge,butontheotherhandthereinforcementshouldnotbereducedalong
theedge.Besidethereinforcementwhichisdesignedforthesemomentssomeminimumtransverse
bottomreinforcementmayberequiredbycodes,aswellasextratopreinforcementatthecorner.
6.4 Concentrated loads

Thedesignforaconcentratedloadonatriangularslabismadewiththesamemethodswhichareused
forrectangularslabs,seeSections3.3and4.4.
CHAPTER7
Slabswithnonorthogonaledges
7.1 General
Thischaptertreatsslabswhichareneitherrectangularnortriangularandwherethecornersbetween
edges have angles smaller than 180. Corners with an angle greater than 180 are called reentrant
corners.SlabswithreentrantcornersaretreatedinChapter11.
The general rules for analysis are the same as for rectangular and triangular slabs. Examples of
analysesareonlygivenforuniformloads,assuchloadsarethemostcommon.Incaseswhereother
typesofloadareactingonaslabmodificationstotaketheseintoaccountcanbebasedontherules
andexamplesgivenforrectangularandtriangularslabs.
Supportreinforcementismostefficientifitisarrangedatrightanglestothedirectionofthesupport.
Thishasbeenassumedtoapplygenerally.
Spanreinforcementisnormallyassumedtobearrangedintwoorthogonaldirections,paralleltothe
chosen coordinate axes. In some cases one part of the span reinforcement is arranged in another
direction.Thisappliesparticularlywithfreeedges,wheresomespanreinforcementisalwaysplaced
alongthefreeedge.
Asintheearlierchapterstheanalysisisbasedontheassumptionofapatternoflinesofzeroshear
force. These lines should, in principle, be so arranged that the amount of reinforcement needed to
carrytheloadisassmallaspossible.Thisgenerallymeansthatifthesupportconditionsarethesame
(bothfreelysupportedorbothfixed)thedistancesfromalineofzeroshearforcetothetwonearest
80
supportsshouldbechosentobeapproximatelyequal.Wherethesupportconditionsaredifferentthe
distancetothefixedsupportshouldbe1.5to2timesthedistancetothesimplesupport.Inadirection
with longer spanreinforcement the distance shall be chosen to be shorter compared to a direction with a
shorter span reinforcement. The final choice is based on an estimate of the suitability of the ratio between
differentmoments.
Bymeansofthelinesofzeroshearforcetheslabisdividedintoelements.Eachelementisboundedby
a number of lines of zero shear force and one straight support. The equilibrium equation for each
elementisestablished,e.g.bymeansofEq.(2.18).
By means of the equilibrium equations and geometrical conditions the average moments can be
calculated for an assumed pattern of lines of zero shear force. This pattern will often have to be
modified a number of times before the ratio between the different moments is considered to be
satisfactory. In the examples below only the final pattern, which is the result of such modifications,
willbeshown.
During the analyses the moments are generally treated as if they were uniformly distributed in the
lateral direction. The final distribution of design moments is however chosen with respect to an
estimated more correct theoretical distribution, with greater moments in the central parts. This
procedureissatisfactoryfromthepointofviewofsafety.
7.2 Four straight edges

7.2.1 Alledgessupported
At each of the corners a line of zero shear force will start. There will usually also be one such line
which does not start at a corner. The direction of this line is best chosen approximately in the
directionofthebisectortothesupportsoftheelementswhichareseparatedbytheline.Inthisway
thepatternoflinesofzeroshearforceisatthesametimeayieldlinepattern,whichshowsthatthe
designisreasonablyeconomical.
Example7.1
TheslabinFig.7.2.1hastwofixedandtwofreelysupportededges.Thetopreinforcementisatright
angles to the supports and the bottom reinforcement is parallel to the x and yaxes. The load is 9
kN/m2.
Astheslabhasaratherirregularshapethexandycoordinateshavebeengivenforthecornersand
for the crossing points of the lines of zero shear force. The pattern of the lines of zero shear force
follows the general rules given above. It is the result of a trial and error process until the ratios
betweenthemomentsareestimatedtobeacceptable.
Withthispatternoflinesofzeroshearforcewegetthefollowingcvalues:
.
Applyingequations(2.18),(2.4)and(2.6),andnotingthat
,
81
Fig.7.2.1
and
(7.1)
,wegetthefollowingequilibriumequationsforelements1,2,3and4
(7.2)
(7.3)
(7.4)
.
Solvingtheseequationswefind
Inthiscasewefinduniquevaluesoftheaveragemomentswithagivenpatternoflinesofzeroshear
force.Thisisbecausetherearetwofixededgesandthusfourmomentstodeter
mine,equaltothenumberofequations.Iftherehadbeenthreefixededgesoneofthemomentvalues
couldhavebeenchosenandiftherehadbeenfourfixededgestwoofthemomentvaluescouldhave
beenchosen.If,ontheotherhand,fewerthantwoedgesarefixedthepatternoflinesofzeroshear
forcehastobearrangedsothatallfourequationsaresatisfiedalthoughthenumberofunknownsis
lessthanfour.
AdistributionofdesignmomentsisproposedinFig.7.2.2.
Fig.7.2.2
7.2.2 Onefreeedge
The application to nonrectangular slabs with one free edge is a mixture of the principles
demonstratedforrectangularslabswithonefreeedgeinChapter4andtheprinciplesshownabove
forslabswithnonorthogonaledges.
Dependingontheshapeoftheslabthechoiceofthemaindirectionsofbottomreinforcementandof
thepatternoflinesofzeroshearforcewilldiffer.Iftheshapeisveryirregular,withallcornersnon
orthogonal, the numerical analysis becomes laborious, even if in principle it is no more difficult.
Thereforeonlyoneexamplewillbeshownwithaslabwhichisnottooirregular.
82
Example7.2
TheslabinFig.7.2.3hasthreefixededgesandonefreeedge.Thefixededgesformrightangles,but
thefreeedgehasaskewdirection.Theloadis12kN/m2.
Fig.7.2.3
The main bottom reinforcement directions are parallel to the x and yaxes and the main support
reinforcementisatrightanglestothesupports.Asupportbandisalsoarrangedalongthefreeedge.
The analysis starts with the calculation of moments for the design of the main reinforcement. After
thatthedesignofthesupportbandiscarriedout.
Thefigureshowsapossiblepatternoflinesofzeroshearforceforthecalculationofdesignmoments
forthemainreinforcement.Othershapesofthepatternarealsopossible,e.g.withelements2and4as
trianglesand1and3astrapezoids,orwithallfourelementsastriangles,meetingatapoint.Thec
values should be chosen so that the ratios between the different moments are estimated to be
acceptable.Asuitablechoiceofvaluescanalsosimplifythenumericalanalyses.Thusinthisexampleit
issuitabletochoose
.Ofcoursethesumsofcvaluesintheydirectionhavetobeadaptedto
thesizeoftheslab.
Thefollowingnumericalvalueshavebeenusedintheanalysisbelow:
.
Applying equations (2.18), (2.4), (2.5) and (2.6) and noting that
, we get the following
equilibriumequationsforelements1,2,3and4
(7.5)
(7.6)
(7.7)
(7.8)
Wehaveliveunknownmomentsbutonlyfourequations.Wethushavetochooseoneofthemoment
values. It is in this case not appropriate to choose a value for myf or ms4, as the value of mxf is very
sensitive to such a choice. The best value to choose is mxf. A suitable value may be
, which
.
gives
Thesupportbandalongthefreeedgehastocarrytheloadfromelement2.Thisloadisassumedtobe
carriedatrightanglesintothesupportband.Themaximumloadperunitlengthofthesupportbandis
83
.Fig.7.2.4showstheloadonthesupportband.Themomentsinthebandcanbe
determined withusualmethods. Wewillassume apointofzero shear forceat adistanceof3.80m
from the lefthand end. With notation Mbf for the span moment and Mbs1 and Mbs3 for the support
momentswegetthefollowingequilibriumequations:
(7.9)
(7.10)
Ifwechoose
wefind
Fig.7.2.4
According to the recommendations in Section 2.8.3 the bottom reinforcement in the support band
shouldbedistributedacrossawidthofabouthalftheaveragewidthofelement2.
This average width is 0.7 m. A width of 0.4 m may therefore be chosen, which gives 60 kNm/m as
designmomentforthebottomreinforcement.
Thesupportmomentsinthesupportbandcorrespondtoareinforcementdirectionwhichisparallel
to the direction of the free edge. This direction is not at right angles to the supports of the slab.
Support reinforcement is, however, most efficient if it is arranged at right angles to a support, as
expectedcrackswillbeparalleltothesupport.ItispossibletotakecareofthemomentsMbs1andMbs3
bymeansofreinforcementatrightanglestothesupport.Inthiscasethereinforcementsonlyneedto
takethecomponents
and
respectively.Inthisexamplewechosetotake
halfthesupportmomentsineachway.Thuswereinforcefor23.87and23.47respectivelyinthe
direction of the edge and add 22.86 and 22.48 respectively to the support moments for
reinforcement at right angles to the supports. The reinforcement in the direction of the edge is
concentrated in a width of 0.4 m whereas the reinforcement at right angles to the edge is less
concentrated,seetherecommendationsinSection2.8.3.
Thetotalsupportmomentstobetakenbyreinforcementatrightanglestotheedgesareforsupport
,andforsupport
.Thesetotalmomentshave
tobedistributedwithrespecttotheiroriginswhichmeansthatthetotalmomentcontainsonepart
fromtheelementandonepartfromthefree
Fig.7.2.5
84
edge; in approximate terms, the part from the band should be concentrated near the free edge. A
suitabledistributionofdesignmomentsisproposedinFig.7.2.5.
With the distribution shown, the concentration of reinforcement is higher at the upper end of the
righthand support than at the upper end of the left hand support, as two layers of support
reinforcement are crossing in the former case. This seems to be in agreement with the moment
distributionwhichcanbeexpectedaccordingtothetheoryofelasticity.
7.2.3 Twooppositefreeedges
Theloadwill in principlebecarriedbystripsbetween the supported edges.This ismainlydoneby
meansofonewaystrips,oftenwiththeaidofsupportbandsalongthefreeedges.
Example7.3
OneofthesupportsfortheslabinFig.7.2.6isfixedandoneisasimplesupport.Theloadis7kN/m2.
Thesizesoftheslabaregivenbymeansofcoordinates.
Fig.7.2.6
The load is assumed to be carried by reinforcement which is at right angles to the fixed support.
Theoretically it would be slightly better to arrange the span reinforcement at right angles to the
dividing line between elements 1 and 2, the line of zero shear force, but this would complicate the
analysis and the gain is small. The line of zero shear force between elements 1 and 2 is chosen
approximatelyasthebisectorbetweenthesupportdirections.
Withthechosenshapesoftheelements,whichareshowninthefigure,wegettheaveragemoments
inelements1and2bymeansofEq.(2.8)
(7.11)
(7.12)
andthus
.
Intheendpartsoftheslabtriangularelements36havebeenchosen.Otherpossibilitiesexist,which
maybemoreefficient,butarealsomorecomplicated.Eq.(2.4)givesforthesetriangularelements
(7.13)
(7.14)
andthus
(7.15)
85
Elements3and6aresupportedonsupportbandsalongthefreeedges.Astheelementsareofapure
onewaytype,theloadisdirectlycarriedintheydirectionandgivestriangularloaddistributionson
thebandswiththemaximumloadatoneend.Forthecalculationofmomentsinthesupportbands,
ordinaryformulasforbeamsaccordingtothetheoryofelasticitycanbeusedinthiscase.
Thesupportbandalongelement3carriesatotalloadof
andhasaspanof6.40m.
and a span moment of
This gives a support moment of
. The average width of the element is about 0.6 m and according to the
recommendationsinSection2.8.3thespanreinforcementmaybedistributedoverawidthofabout
0.4m,asthiswidthisnotofgreatimportanceforthebehaviouroftheslab.
Thesupportbandalongelement6carriesatotalloadof
andhasaspanof3.52m.
and a span moment of
This gives a support moment of
. The average width of the element is about 0.5 m and a corresponding
distributionwidthofthespanreinforcementisabout0.4m.
AdistributionofdesignmomentsbasedonthecalculatedvaluesisproposedinFig.7.2.7.Themain
conditionisthatthetotaldesignmomentinasectionhastocorrespondtothesumofthecalculated
moments. Thus, for example, the sum of span moments for the reinforcement in the ydirection is
.Thelateraldistributionischosenwithrespecttothevariationof
thedistancebetweenthesupportandthelineofzeroshearforce.
Fig.7.2.7
Atthelowerrighthandcornertwolayersoftopreinforcementhavebeenproposedwhichcrossover
eachother,onelayeratrightanglestothesupportandonelayeralongthefreeedge.Thechoiceof
this arrangement is influenced by the fact that a moment concentration can be expected at such a
corner according to the theory of elasticity. The concentration of reinforcement prevents the
formationoflargecracksatthisposition.
7.2.4 Twoadjacentfreeedges
IthasbeendemonstratedinSection5.2thatthedesignofarectangularslabwithtwoadjacentfree
edgesmaybecomplicated.Ofcoursethedesignofaslabwithnonorthogonaledgesandtwoadjacent
freeedgesisstillmorecomplicated.Solutionswiththetypesofelementwhichareusedinmostofthe
othercasescannotbeappliedinthiscase.Wethereforehavetomakedirectuseofthebasicprinciples
of the strip method with support bands in one direction supporting strips in other directions, as
describedinSection2.8.
Example7.4
TheslabinFig.7.2.8carriesaloadof7kN/m2.IthasonefixededgeAB,onefreelysupportededgeAD
andtwofreeedgesBCandCD.
86

Fig.7.2.8
AsupportbandisassumedtohaveitssupportsatBandD.AccordingtotherulesinSection2.8the
supportbandisassumedtohavezerowidthwhenitactsassupportforcrossingstrips.Thesupport
. The crossing strips, which are supported by the
band follows a line with the equation
supportband,areassumedtohaveadirectionatrightanglestothesupportband.Thisisoftenthe
best assumption from the points of view of reinforcement economy and behaviour under service
conditions. There may however be situations where another direction is preferable. This will be
discussedattheendofthisexample.
As one support is fixed, some top reinforcement should also be arranged at right angles to that
support.Thisreinforcementcanbeassumedtocarryalltheloadwithinacertaindistancefromthe
support.ItisassumedthatitcarriesalltheloadtotheleftofalinefromAtothepointontheedge
withcoordinates(2.2/3.4).Thechoiceismadesuchthatthissupportmomentisofapproximatelythe
same magnitude as the negative moment above the support band, which seems reasonable in this
case. The line cuts the support band at point c with coordinates (1.88/2.50). The distance from
(2.2/3.4)totheedgeABis1.99m.ApplicationofEq.(2.4)givesanaveragesupportmoment
(7.16)
Intheremainingpartoftheslabtheloadiscarriedbystripsatrightanglestothesupportband.Some
typicalstripsarenowconsidered.
Fig.7.2.9
,whichcutsthesupportbandatpoint
ThestripthroughpointCisalinewiththeequation
awithcoordinates(4.09/0.73).ThestripanditsloadareshowninFig.7.2.9a).Thesupportreactions
actingatthesupportbandatpointaandatthesupportededgeare
(7.17)
(7.18)
Thereisthusanegativereactionatpoint(3.5/0),whichmeansthattheslabhastobeanchored.
. This
In the same way we can analyse a strip through point A, which has the equation
stripcutsthesupportbandatpointbwithcoordinates(2.56/1.95)andtheedgeat(3.45/3.06).The
stripanditsloadareshowninFig.7.2.9b).Wefindthesupportreactions
87
(7.19)
(7.20)
.This
Wecancontinuetochoosethestripthroughpointc,whichhastheequation
linecutsthefreeedgeat(2.53/3.31)andthefixededgeat(0.73/1.06).Thestripanditsloadisshown
inFig.7.2.9c).ForsimplicityitisassumedthatthereisafreesupportatlineAB.Wefindthereaction
atc
(7.21)
Atlastwelookatthestripthrough(2.2/3.4).Thisstripcutsthesupportbandat(1.63/2.69).Atthis
pointtheloadonthesupportbandhasfallentozero.
Fig.7.2.10illustratestheloadonthesupportband.Someadditionalpointshavebeencalculatedinthe
samewayasaboveinordertobeabletodrawthecurve.Ontheotherhandaquitesatisfactoryresult
wouldhavebeenachievedwithstraightlinesbetweenthecalculatedvaluesabove.
Fig.7.2.10
An analysis of the support band as a simply supported beam with the load according to Fig. 7.2.10
and
. The maximum moment in the support band is
gives the support reactions
atadistanceof3.9mfromBand2.5mfromD.
In order to determine a suitable width for the reinforcement band the recommendations in Section
2.8.3areused.Theaveragewidthofthepartsoftheslabwhicharesupportedbythesupportbandis
notwelldefinedinthiscase,butitmaybeestimatedtobeabout2.5m.Asthesupportbandinthis
case is of great importance for the behaviour of the slab a suitable width is
. With this
widthwefindthemaximummoment
(7.22)
As the slab is cantilevering outside the support band some minimum reinforcement for a negative
moment
must be introduced at the ends of the support band according to Eq. (2.36). At D the
anglesaccordingtoFig.2.8.2are
andweget
(7.23)
Thisisanegativemoment,requiringtopreinforcementwithinadistanceequalto2.5/3=0.83mfrom
D.
WealsohavetomakethesameanalysisforthesupportatB.Therewefind
and
and
(7.24)
The bending moments in the strips through a, b and c can easily be calculated from Fig. 7.2.9. The
resultsare17.9,7.1and3.8,respectively.Thetotalmomentinthestripsrestingonthesupportband
ismosteasilycalculatedbymeansofEq.(2.6),usingnumbersfromFigs7.2.9and7.2.10andnoting
thatthedistancefromdto(2.2/3.4)is0.91m.
88
(7.25)
Fig.7.2.11showsaproposeddistributionofnegativedesignmoments.Allthereinforcementatright
anglestothesupportbandshouldbecarriedtotheedges.Thereinforcementforthesupportmoment
3.1 close to corner B can take a moment across the support band equal to
, where
37.3istheanglebetweenedgeABandthesupportband.Thuscondition(7.24)isfulfilled.
Fig.7.2.11
across a width of 1.25 m
The support band should be designed for a positive moment
symmetrical to the support band. All this reinforcement should be carried to the edges and be well
anchored. In addition to the band reinforcement, minimum bottom reinforcement should be
introduced, preferably parallel to the band, and possibly also some bottom reinforcement at right
angles.
Asthereinforcementinthesupportbandissomuchheavierthantherestofthereinforcementitmay
bequestionedwhetherthisisasuitabledesign.Couldwegetamoreevenreinforcementdistribution
by using some other design method? If, instead, we apply the theory of elasticity in a theoretically
correct way (e.g. using elements which are small enough in the finite element method), we would
presumably geta still highermaximum momentclosetocorner D. Toapplytheyieldlinetheoryto
thisslabinacorrectwayisextremelydifficult,aschecksofmanydifferentyieldlinepatternswould
havetobecarriedout,includingfanshapedlocalpatterns,forinstanceinthevicinityofcornerD.
Infactitisquestionablewhetherthisisasuitablewayofmakingtheslab,orwhetheritwouldnotbe
bettertousearealbeaminsteadofasupportband.
Insteadofarrangingthetopreinforcementatrightanglestothesupportbanditmaybearrangedat
another angle. If, for example, a slope of 1/1.65 is used instead of 1/1.25 there will be no negative
reaction along edge AB and the load on the support band will be lower. This would lead to smaller
momentsinthesupportbandandacorrespondingreductionofreinforcement.Ontheotherhandthe
reinforcementcrossingthebandwillincrease.Dependingontheanglesbetweentheedgesoftheslab
thistypeofsolutionmaysometimesbethemostsuitable.
7.3 Othercases
7.3.1 Circularslabswithauniformload
Circular slabs with polar symmetric load and support can easily be analysed with the equilibrium
equationexpressedinpolarcoordinates.SuchanalysesareshowninStripMethodofDesign,Chapter
3.Theresultsarepresentedasradialandtangentialmoments.Inpracticeitiseasiertoarrangethe
bottomreinforcementasarectangularmeshofintwodirectionsatrightanglestoeachother.Itcan
be demonstrated that the bottom reinforcement in both directions should then be designed for the
tangentialmoment.
Forasimplysupportedcircularslabwithradiusrandauniformloadq,reinforcedintwodirectionsat
rightangles,theaveragemomentsaccordingtothisanalysisare
89
(7.26)
Thecorrespondingreinforcementcanbeevenlydistributedandshouldinthatcasebecarriedtothe
support.Itmay,however,bebettertoconcentrateitsomewhattowardsthecentre,e.g.asshownin
Fig.7.3.1.
Fig.7.3.1
TheslabcanalsobetreatedbydirectuseofthesimplestripmethodaccordingtoFig.7.3.2,wherethe
load is carried to the nearest support in one of the two reinforcement directions. As the support is
curvedtheaveragemomentismostsimplycalculatedbymeansofanumericalintegration.Theresult
shows an average moment which is about 16% lower than the value above, and thus theoretically
moreeconomical.ThecorrespondingmomentdistributionisalsoshowninFig.7.3.2andcomparedto
asolutionaccordingtothetheoryofelasticity(curvemarkedel.).Itcanbeseenthat,inthiscase,the
momentdistributiondeterminedfromthedirectuseofthesimplestripmethodisnotverysuitable
withrespecttoserviceconditions,asitdoesnotgiveanydesignreinforcementacrosstheouterpart
of the diameter. The distribution of reaction force along the edge is very uneven according to the
simplestripsolutionwithzeroshearforceinthe45direction.Thisalsoshowsthatthesolutionisfar
from the reality of the service state. It is therefore recommended that values should be chosen
according to the equation above and a distribution of design moments which is approximately
accordingtoFig.7.3.1orisconstant.
If the edges of the slab are fixed the support reinforcement is best arranged at right angles to the
support,i.e.inaradialarrangement.Inthenormalcasethetopreinforcementisthusradialandthe
bottomreinforcementisanorthogonalnet.
Ifthesupportmomentismsthefollowingrelationfortheaveragedesignmomentsisvalidaccording
tothepolarsymmetricsolution:
Fig.7.3.2
(7.27)
Itmaybenotedthatthisvalueisthesameasforacircumscribedsquare,seeFig.7.3.3,wherecforthe
elementsinthesquarecorrespondstorforthecircle.Thevalidformulafortheelementsis(2.4).Thus
theaveragemomentsinacircularslabcanbetakenasthemomentsinacircumscribedsquareslab
withthesidesparalleltothedirectionsofthebottomreinforcement.
90
Fig.7.3.3
7.3.2 Generalcasewithalledgessupported
Whereaslabissupportedaroundallitsedgesitisalwayspossibletoapplythesimplestripmethod,
dividing the slab into narrow strips in the reinforcement directions, although the numerical
computationsmaybecomelengthy.Alsotheresultmaybeadesignwhichisnotappropriateforthe
behaviour in the service state, as the design moment may be zero within some parts where
appreciable moments occur under service conditions. Some minimum reinforcement then has to be
added.
Onewayofsimplifyingtheanalysismaybetoapplythefollowinggeneralrule:
It is always safe to design the slab for the moments in a circumscribed slab with the same bottom
reinforcement directions and with all support reinforcement at right angles to the supports in both
slabs.
Ifthisruleisapplied,thereinforcementcanbecurtailedaccordingtotherulesgiveninSection2.9.1,
providedthatthedistancetothesupportistakenasthedistancetotheedgeofthecircumscribedslab
for the bottom reinforcement andto the edge of the real slab for the support reinforcement. The c
valueistakenfromthecircumscribedslab.
Example7.5
The elliptical slab in the upper part of Fig. 7.3.4 has fixed edges and carries a load of 9 kN/m2. The
designmomentsarefirstdeterminedfromthecircumscribedrectangularslabinthelowerpartofthe
figure.Thechoiceoflinesofzeroshearforceisshown.BasedontheselinesandEqs.(2.5)and(2.4)
theaveragedesignmomentsare:
(7.28)
(7.29)
We can choose
. A distribution of design moments based on
these values is proposed in Fig. 7.3.5. The limit between the parts where mxs and mys are active is
wherethecorrespondinglineofzeroshearforcecutstheellipseinFig.7.3.4.Thedistributionofmys
mighthavebeenchosenwithsomeconcentrationtowardsthecentre,asthesupportmomentsinthe
servicestatearehighestthere.
Thiswayofusingthemomentsfromthecircumscribedrectanglegivesverysimplecalculationsanda
conservative result. On the other hand the design may be regarded as too conservative and thus
uneconomical. In order to get a more economical design a direct application of the strip method is
possible, dividing the slab into narrow strips in the xand ydirections for span moments and
cantileveringstripsatrightanglestothesupportforthesupportmoments.Wherethespanstripsrest
ontheendsofthecantileversdueregardhasto
91

Fig.7.3.4
be given to the difference in directions according to the rules in Section 2.3.6. Such an analysis is
lengthyandtimeconsumingandwillnotbeshownhere.
However, there also exists the possibility of circumscribing the ellipse with a polygon instead of a
rectangle.Thisgivesresultswhicharenotsoconservativeandyetthecalculationsarenottoolengthy
or complicated. Fig. 7.3.6 shows the ellipse circumscribed by a polygon shapedby introducing lines
withtheslopes0.5,whicharetangentstotheellipse.Onlyonequarteroftheslabisshown,asitis
symmetricalwithrespecttoboththexandyaxes.
Fig.7.3.5
92
Fig.7.3.6
Theassumedlinesofzeroshearforceareshowninthefigure,aswellastheassumeddistributionof
spandesignmoments.Notethatmxfandmyfinthiscasedonotmeanaveragemomentsbutmoments
intherelevantparts.
Forelements1and3weget,bymeansofEqs(2.4)and(2.5),
(7.30)
(7.31)
Forelement2wecanapplyEq.(2.18)togetherwith(2.6).Thedirectionofedge2cutsthexaxisat
5.66.ThefollowingvaluesareintroducedintoEq.(2.6):
;
We also have to introduce the average span moments on the width corresponding to edge 2. This
givesusthefollowingrelation:
(7.32)
Introducing
,therelationcanbewritten
(7.33)
Ifwechoose
and
weget
ofdesignmomentsisshowninFig.7.3.7.
.Thecorrespondingdistribution
Fig.7.3.7
This analysis reduces the total amount of reinforcement by about 14%, compared with the analysis
basedonacircumscribedrectangle.Italsogivesamoresatisfactoryreinforcementdistribution
Thedistributionofsupportmomentsandtheratiobetweenmomentsinthexandydirectionscanbe
changedbychangingtheassumedpointswherethelinesofzeroshearforcemeetthexaxis.
Example7.6
TheslabinFig.7.3.8hasthreefixedandtwofreelysupportededgesandauniformloadof7kN/m2.It
is to be reinforced with bottom reinforcement in the directions of the coordinate axes and support
reinforcementatrightanglestothesupports.
93

Fig.7.3.8
Threedifferentwaysofperformingthedesignwillbediscussed.
Thefirstmethodistousethemomentsfromthecircumscribedrectangle.Thismethodisbyfarthe
simplest,butitmayleadtoaverycoservative,i.e.uneconomical,solution.
ThecircumscribedrectangularslabisshowninFig.7.3.9.Inorderthatthisslabshallcorrespondto
therealslabasfaraspossiblethetwolongedgesareassumedtobefixedonlyonthepartsadjacentto
thefixededgesintherealslab.Assumedlinesofzeroshearforcearealsoshowninthefigure.Based
on these lines we get the following relations from Eqs. (2.4) and (2.5). The moments ms are the
averagemomentsonthefixedpartsoftheedges.
Fig.7.3.9
(7.34)
(7.35)
(7.36)
(7.37)
andifwechoose
wefind
and
.
Weget
Support BC in the real slab corresponds partly to edge 1 and partly to edge 2 in the circumscribed
rectangularslab.Thecorrespondingpartsdependonwherethelineofzeroshearforcecutstheedge.
94
Wethenfindthat32%correspondstoedge1and68%toedge2.Ifweusethesepercentageswefind
theaveragesupportmoment8.22.
Asusualasuitabledistributionofthedifferentaveragemomentsshouldbechosen.
Thissimpledesignisonthesafeside,butprobablytoomuchso.Thereforeanalternative,butmore
laborious,solutionwillbedemonstrated,basedontheanalysisofequilibriumconditionsforelements,
eachofwhichhasonesidealonganedgeoftheslab.Aconfigurationoflinesofzeroshearforce,which
dividestheslabintosuchelements,isshowninFig.7.3.10.
Fig.7.3.10
In determining the pattern of lines of zero shear force some general rules may be followed. The
elementsattheshorteredgesareusuallytriangles.Thelinesbetweentheelementsatthelongersides
runapproximatelyinadirectiontowardsthepointwherethedirectionsoftheseedgesmeet.Inthis
waythe generalshapemaybedetermined. Forthecompletedeterminationof theshapeatrialand
errorprocedurehastobeusedinordertogetsuitablerelationsbetweenthedifferentmoments.In
thisprocedurethepositionsofpointsa,bandcarethereforevaried.Oftenitissufficienttoexactly
fulfil the equilibrium conditions only for the largest elements but a check should be made that the
designmomentsarelargeenoughtomaintainequilibriuminthesmallerelements.Thisisonthesafe
side,butwithonlyasmallinfluenceontheeconomyofthedesign.
Before starting the equilibrium analyses the distribution of the span design moments should be
decided,asthisdistributioninfluencestheequilibriumconditions.Anassumeddistributionhasbeen
giveninthefigure.
Inthiscasesuitablechoicesarethefollowingcoordinatesforthepoints:
Thecompleteanalysiswillnotbeshown,asitisratherlaborious,butasanexampletheequilibrium
condition for element 2 will be given. It is based on Eq. (2.18) combined with (2.6). The geometric
valuestobeusedinEq.(2.6)arethefollowing:
Using these values and the relevant average span moments we get the equilibrium condition for
element2
(7.38)
or,with
(7.39)
Writing the corresponding equations for the other four elements and choosing values of the span
momentswecanfindthefollowingmomentvalues:
95

When we compare these values with the previous solution we find that they are on average about
20%lower.Wecanthus,inthiscase,saveabout20%reinforcementbyusingthismorecomplicated
solution. This comparison must be take into account the fact that the latter solution may involve
severalhoursworkbeforea suitable patternoflinesof zeroshearforceisfoundfromthetrialand
error process, whereas the first solution can be made in a couple of minutes. The cost of
reinforcementhastobecomparedtothecostoftime.
A third possibility is a direct application of the principles of the simple strip method. Fig. 7.3.11
illustrates how this may be performed. The slab is divided into zones with different loadbearing
directions.Thedashedlinesareinthiscaselinesofzeromoments.Thezonesbythefixedsupports
arezoneswherethesupportreinforcementisactive.Thesesupportstripsactascantileverswithzero
momentattheends.Intheremainingpartstheloadiscarriedbyspanstripsparalleltothebottom
reinforcement, in the direction of the coordinate axes. The load within a certain part may also be
dividedbetweenthetworeinforcementdirections.Thespanstripsrestonthecantileversandonthe
supports.Themomentsare calculated innarrow stripsatsuitabledistances,whichgivesamoment
distributionandanaveragemomentofeachtype.Asuitabledistributionoftheaveragemomentsis
usedasthebasisfordesign.Theratiosbetweendifferentaveragemomentsdependonhowthelimits
arechosenbetweendifferentparts.
Where a span strip rests on a support strip due regard has to be paid to the change in direction
accordingtotherulesinSection2.3.6.
Fig.7.3.11
WiththestripdirectionsinFig.7.3.11therewillbenodesignreinforcementintheydirectionnear
the righthand side of the slab. Some minimum reinforcement can be arranged there, but it is also
possibletogetdesignreinforcementbydividingtheloadinthisregionbetweenthetwodirections.
This type of analysis is rather timeconsuming, as it takes time to analyse a number of strips. The
analysis may also have to be repeated with other limits between the different zones, if the ratios
betweendifferentmomentsprovetobeunsuitable.
7.3.3 Generalcasewithonestraightfreeedge
Whereonestraightedgeisfreeasupportbandhastobeassumedalongthisedge.Theanalysismay
be based on a combination of the second approach in the example above and the method
demonstratedinSection7.2.2.Asanalternative,adirectapplicationofthesimplestripmethodmay
beusedasdiscussedaboveanddemonstratedinSection7.2.4.
7.3.4 Generalcasewithtwoormorefreeedges
This complicated case has to be analysed by means of the direct use of the simple strip method,
includingsupportbands,inprincipleasdemonstratedinSection7.2.4.
96
CHAPTER8
Regularflatslabswithuniformloads
8.1 General
8.1.1 Definitionofregular
Inthischapterthewordregularmeansthatthesupportsformanorthogonalnetandthatallinterior
supports are columns. The exterior supports may be walls or columns and the slab may cantilever
outsidetheexteriorsupports.Thereshouldbenomajoropeningsintheslab.
The advanced strip method was developed in the first place for the design of the regular flat slabs
treatedinthischapter.Providedthatcertainapproximationsareaccepteditcan,however,beapplied
toamuchwidergroupofslabs,treatedinotherchapters.
8.1.2 Droppanelsandcolumncapitals
Adroppanel,Fig.8.1.1,meansthattheslabisgivenagreaterdepthinanareaaroundacolumn.In
this way the slab becomes stronger in the part where the moments and shear forces are largest,
withoutmuchincreaseinthemomentscausedbythedeadweight.
Wheredroppanelsareused,thewidthsofthecolumnstripsarebestchosenequaltothewidthsofthe
droppanels,atleastregardingsupportreinforcementatthecolumns.Thewidthsofthecolumnstrips
maybechosenlargerforthespanreinforcement.
Asadroppanelincreasesthestiffnessoftheslabatthesupportitmaybeappropriatetoincreasethe
supportmomentsomewhatcomparedtothecasewithoutadroppanel.
Fig.8.1.1
A column capital, Fig. 8.1.1, is intended to increase the punching strength and at the same time
decreasethebendingmomentsintheslab.
Acolumncapitaldecreasestheratiobetweensupportandspanmomentsaccordingtothetheoryof
elasticity,comparedtotheratiowithoutacapital.
8.1.3 Determinationofspan
The main type of element in a flat slab is the cornersupported element, supported on the
circumferenceofacolumnoracolumncapital.Theoreticallythesupportareaisinfinitelysmallwhich
97
givesan infinitelyhighstress.Inpractice,ofcourse,thesupportareaandsupportstresshave to be
finite.Thismaybeinterpretedsothatthereactionforceactssomewhereinsidethecolumnandnot
atsomepointatthecircumference.
Ifwelookattheultimatelimitstate,acrackwillappearatthecircumferenceofaconcretecolumn,
wherethusthecriticalsectionis.Forthedeterminationofdesignmomentsthespancanthereforebe
assumedtobetakentothecircumferenceofthecolumn,andthetheoreticalpointofsupportforthe
cornersupported element at that circumference. If there is a sufficiently strong column capital the
pointofsupportmaybeassumedtobeatitscircumference.
If we accept that a point on the circumference is chosen as the theoretical point of support, from
which the span is calculated, the same point is, of course, valid for both directions of the element.
Thus,ifwehavecircularcolumnswithradiusratequalcentreslcinbothdirections,thespansmaybe
,providedthatthepointsofsupportaretakeninthe45directionfromthecolumn
takenas
centres,seeFigs8.1.2and8.1.3.Bychangingtheassumedpointofsupportthespancanbesomewhat
decreasedinonedirectionbutthenithastobeincreasedintheotherdirection.
Itisimportanttonotethatthespanmaynotbetakenasthecleardistancel2r,whichisusedinsome
codes. It can easily be demonstrated by means of the yield line theory that such an assumption is
theoreticallyunsafe.
Fig.8.1.2
Inanalysisbythestripmethodthereisaonewaystripbetween,andactingtogetherwith,thecorner
supportedelements,seeFig.8.1.2.Wherethecolumnsarecircularthespanofsuchaonewaystripis
alittleshorterthanthatofthecornersupportedelements,closertol2r.Astheonewaystripsareof
aminorimportanceforthetotalamountofreinforcement,theirspanscanbetakentocoincidewith
thoseofthecornersupportedelements.
Insummary,thefollowingruleisusedforthedeterminationofthespanwheretheslabissupported
onaconcretecolumn:
Thespanofastriprestingonaconcretecolumnismeasuredfromthesideofaninscribedrectangle
withedgesparalleltothereinforcement.
Ifthecolumnismadeofsomeothermaterial,e.g.masonry,thespanhastobemadealittlelonger.
8.1.4 Calculationofaveragedesignmoments
The elements are combined to form strips in the way which is exemplified in Fig. 8.1.3. The whole
widthwxcanbetreatedasonewidestripinthexdirectionandthewholewidthwyasonewidestrip
intheydirection.Thewholestaticanalysisislimitedtotheanalysisofthesetwostripsinthesame
wayasacontinuousbeamisanalysed.Thisanalysisgivestheaveragedesignmoments.
When the average design moments are known, the positions of the lines of zero shear force
(maximummoments)canbecalculated.Thusthemomentsinthexdirectiondeterminethewidthsof
theindividualstripsandelementsintheydirectionandviceversa.
98

Fig.8.1.3
The determination of support moments in the strips can be based on the theory of elasticity and
calculatedby ordinary methods for continuous beams. It is, however, not necessary to calculate the
supportmomentsaccuratelyaccordingtothetheoryofelasticity,althoughtheratiobetweensupport
and span moments should not deviate too much from that derived from the theory. Sufficient
agreementwiththetheoryofelasticityisachievedifthefollowingrecommendationsarefollowed.See
alsoSection1.5.
Firstsupportmomentsarecalculatedforeachspanaccordingtothetheoryofelasticityassumingthat
itisfixedatinteriorcolumnsupports,i.e.ql2/12iftheoppositeendisfixedandql2/8iftheopposite
endis freely supported.Iftheoppositeendiscontinuouswithawall anintermediatevaluemaybe
used,e.g.ql2/10.Ifthereisadroppanelwhichincreasesthestiffnessoftheslaboverthecolumnthe
supportmomentsmaybeincreased.Ifthesupportfortheslabiswide,e.g.whereacolumncapitalis
used,thesupportmomentsmaybedecreased.Thedesignsupportmomentistakenastheaverageof
themomentsfromthespansmeetingatthesupport,providedthatnomomentisassumedtobetaken
bythecolumn.Startingfromthisaveragevaluesomemodificationcanbemade.Ifitisimportantto
minimizecracksonthetopsideoftheslabthesupportmomentcanbesomewhatincreasedandititis
important to minimize cracks on the bottom side the support moment can be somewhat decreased. Such a
changeshouldnotbegreaterthanabout15%.Withinthelimitsgivenbytheserecommendationstheinfluence
oftheratiobetweensupportandspanmomentshasnonoticeableinfluenceondeflectionsintheservicestate.
Regard should be given to moment transfer between the slab and the columns, where this transfer
maybeofimportanceforthebehaviorofthestructure.Forinteriorcolumnsthemomenttransfermay
often be disregarded, but for exterior columns this is as a rule not to be recommended. How these
momentsarecalculatedisoutsidethescopeofthestripmethod.Forthesakeofsimplicitytheyare
thereforedisregardedintheexamples,withtheexceptionofExample8.4.Thisdoesnotmeanthatitis
generallyrecommendedtodisregardthemoments.Relevantcoderuleshavetobefollowed.
8.1.5 Lateraldistributionofreinforcement
The strip method in itself only gives some limits for the distribution of design moments across the
widthofcornersupportedelements,seeSection2.5.2.Someadditionalrulesmaybeneededforcrack
controlunderserviceconditions.
Thesimplestpossiblemomentdistributioniswithaconstantspanmomentoverthewholewidthand
the support moment only within a limited width (the column strip) over the column, leaving the
middle strip between the columns without top reinforcement. This choice leads to simple drawings
andsimpleconstructionandisthusfavourablefromthepointofviewofeconomy.Itisalsosuitable
99
for limitation of deflections. It is, however, not the best design for crack limitation. It may lead to
visuallyunacceptabletopcracksbetweenthecolumnsandisonlyrecommendedwheresuchcracks
willbecoveredbysomefloorfinish.
For the best possible crack control the design moment (reinforcement) should be distributed with
someregardtothemomentdistributionaccordingtothetheoryofelasticity.Wherecrackcontrolon
thetopsurfaceisessentialthedesignsupportmomentinthemiddlestripshouldbechosentobe30
50% of the average support moment. Where crack control is essential on the bottom surface the
designspanmomentinthecolumnstripmaybeincreasedbyabout20%.Inbothcasestheaverage
momentsarekeptunchanged.
The theoretical moments are different in the cornersupported elements and in the oneway strip
betweenthem,asthereisauniformmomentinthelatterelement.Whenlateralmomentdistributions
arediscussedhalftheonewaystripisassumedtobelongtoeachofthecornersupportedelementsin
ordertosimplifythediscussion.
Thewidthofthecolumnstripmaygenerallybechosenashalfthetotalwidthoftheindividualstrip.
(An individual strip is a strip with a width equal to the sum of the widths of two cornersupported
elements supported on the same column and the oneway strip in between, see Fig. 8.1.3). Where
thereisadifferenceinspanbetweenthexandydirectionsitmaybeappropriatetochooseasmaller
widthforthecolumnstripintheshorterdirection,e.g.sothatithasthesamewidthinbothdirections.
Thewidthofthecolumnstripshouldneverbechosenlargerthanhalfthetotalwidthoftheindividual
strip.
Where a moment transfer between a column and a slab is taken into account in the design, the
reinforcementhastobearrangedinsuchawaythatthismomenttransfercantakeplace.
Inthevicinityofanexteriorcolumnthereshouldbesometorsionalreinforcementalongthefreeedge
oftheslabinordertolimittorsionalcracking.
TypicalrecommendedlateralmomentdistributionsareillustratedinFig.8.1.4.Distributions1isthe
normally recommended distribution of the support moment where limitation of cracks on the top
surfaceisnotimportant,whereass2showsanexampleofasuitabledistributionforcracklimitation
on the top surface. Distributions s3 and s4 are examples of corresponding distributions of support
momentsintheshorterdirectionwherethespansaredifferentinthetwodirections.Distributionf1is
the normally recommended even distribution of span design moments, whereas f2 may be used
wherecracklimitationonthebottomsurfaceisparticularlyimportant.
InFig.8.1.4thecolumnstripisshownwiththeeccentricitywhichresultsfromtheapplicationofthe
cornersupported element. In practice the reinforcement may be placed centrally over an interior
column.
ThechosendistributionsshouldbecheckedtoensurethattheyfulfiltheconditioninEq.(2.24).This
conditionisautomaticallyfulfilledifdistributions1ors2oranintermediatebetweenthemisusedfor
thesupportmomentandf1forthespanmoment,andtheratiobetweensupportandspanmomentis
between1and3,whichisthemostcommoncase.
Wherethereisnosupportmoment,thespanmomentmustbemoreconcentratedinordertofulfilthe
conditionaccordingtoEq.(2.24),whichmeansthatthemomentinthemiddlestripmustnotbelarger
than0.7mf.Thismaybethecasewherethereisnomomenttransferfromanexteriorcolumn.
Where there is no span moment, i.e. where a slab is cantilevering outside an exterior column, the
support moment must be distributed so that the condition according to Eq. (2.24) is fulfilled.
Distributionss2ands4areonthesafesidewithrespecttothiscondition.
8.1.6 Summaryofthedesignprocedure
The determination of the design moments according to the advanced strip method is made in the
followingsteps:
1.Determinethelengthofthespansasdescribedin8.1.3.
2.Determinetheaveragesupportmomentsasdescribedin8.1.4.
100
3.CalculatethecvaluesbymeansofEq.(2.34)and,fromthese,calculatethewidthsoftheindividual
strips.
4.CalculatetheaveragespanmomentsbymeansofEq.(2.35).
5.Chooselateralmomentdistributionsaccordingtotherecommendationsin8.1.5.CheckagainstEq.
(2.24)ifthisisthoughttobenecessary.
Fig.8.1.4
6. Use these design moments for the design of the reinforcement. The design moments in the
triangularelementsinthecorneroftheslab(seeFig.8.1.3)aretakenasonethirdofthemomentsin
theparallelpartsofthestrips.Wherethereareexteriorcolumnsarrangetorsionalreinforcementat
thefreeedge.
7.DeterminethelengthofreinforcingbarsaccordingtotherulesinSection2.10.
8. Calculate the support reactions at the columns and check for punching according to rules in
handbooksorcodes.Thesupportreactionisequaltotheloadinsidethelinesofzeroshearforcein
thespanssurroundingthecolumn.
The examples will generally only show the application of points 14 above, as the choice of lateral
momentdistributiondependsontherequirementforcrackcontrolintheactualsituation.
8.2 Exteriorwallorbeamsupports
8.2.1 Onesingleinteriorcolumn
Whereasmanymethodsforthedesignofflatslabsareonlyvalidifthereisatleastacertainnumberof
spansineachdirection,thestripmethodisnotlimitedbyanysuchrule.Itmaythusbeappliedtoa
slabwhichissupportedonwallsorbeamsallaroundandononesingleinteriorcolumn.Thiscaseis
101
easilytreatedwiththestripmethodalthoughitisrathercomplicatedwithothermethods,suchasthe
yieldlinetheory,atleastiftheslabisnotsymmetricalwithrespecttothecolumn.
Example8.1
The slab in Fig. 8.2.1 carries a uniform load of 8 kN/m2. Support A can be assumed to be fixed,
whereas support D is only partly restrained and can be assumed to have a support moment
corresponding to half the fixed end moment. The other two supports are freely supported. It is
assumedthatnomomentistransferredfromthecolumntotheslab,i.e.thesupportmomentsonboth
sidesofthecolumnarethesame.
Thesupportmomentsareestimatedtobe
(8.1)
(8.2)
(8.3)
Fig.8.2.1
(8.4)
Ifwewish,wemaychoosesupportmomentswhicharesomewhatlargerorsmaller,butinthiscase
wejustchoosethecalculatedvalues.WecannowcalculatethecvaluesfromEq.(2.34):
(8.5)
102
(8.6)
(8.7)
(8.8)
WecannowcalculatetheaveragespanmomentsfromEq.(2.35):
(8.9)
(8.10)
(8.11)
(8.12)
Providedthatweusemomentdistributionschosenfroms1,s2andf1(correspondingto
)inFig.
8.1.4wemaychoosethedistributionofsupportmomentsarbitrarilyexceptwithregardtospanAE,
wheretheratiobetweensupportandspanmomentis
.Ifwechoosedistributions1for
,whichistoolowaccordingtoEq.(2.25).Wehave
thesupportmomentwefind
assupportmomentinthemiddlestrip.
totakeatleast
AsthespanmomentinAEcomesoutsolowitmighthavebeenbettertochoosealittlelowervalueof
the support moment at A, e.g. 12. The difference in behaviour of the slab with such a change is
probablyquiteinsignificant.
Thesupportreactionatthecolumnis
.
8.2.2 Morethanoneinteriorcolumn
Inaregularflatslaballcolumnsshouldbesituatedatthecrossingpointsoflinesparalleltotheedges.
Thedesignprocedurewillbethesameregardlessofthenumberofcolumns.Itwillbedemonstrated
onaslabwithonlytwointeriorcolumns.
Example8.2
TheslabinFig.8.2.2carriesaloadof11kN/m2.SupportsAandBarefixed,CandDfreelysupported.
Thecolumnshavestrongcolumncapitalswithadiameterof2.0m.
103

Fig.8.2.2
Thespansaredeterminedasiftheinteriorsupportsconsistofrectanglesinscribedintothecircular
columncapitals.Aasquareisusuallychosen,andthiswillbedonehere.Aslightlybetterchoicewould
havebeentousearectangle,forexample,withlength1.6minthexdirectionandwidth1.2minthe
ydirection. This would have decreased the reinforcement in the xdirection by a few percent and
increaseditintheydirectionbyafewpercentandgivenatotaldecreaseinreinforcementofbetween
1and2percent,whichisinsignificant.
Withtheinscribedsquareasthesupportwegetthespansgiveninthefigure.Withthesespanswecan
calculatetheapproximatemagnitudesofthesupportmomentsandchoosethedesignvaluesofthese
moments:
(8.13)
(8.14)
(8.15)
(8.16)
(8.17)
Thevaluesofsupportmomentsatthecolumnshavebeenchosensomewhatlowerthanthecalculated
valuesbecauseofthelargecolumncapitals.ThevalueofmAhasbeenchosenalittlehigherthanthe
calculated value because the moment at E is a little lower than the value for a fixed support. The
choiceofvaluesmaybediscussed,butsmallvariationswillnotinfluencethebehaviouroftheslab.
ThecvaluesarecalculatedfromEq.(2.34)andthecorrespondingspanmomentsfromEq.(235):
(8.18)
(8.19)
(8.20)
104
(8.21)
(8.22)
(8.23)
(8.24)
(8.25)
(8.26)
(8.27)
In this case the ratios between support and span moments are such that the distribution of design
moments can be chosen rather freely. As the oneway elements between the cornersupported
elementsareratherwideitisacceptabletouseawidthofthecolumnstripwhichiswiderthanhalf
thewidthoftheindividualstrip.Asthespansintheydirectionaremuchsmallerthanthespansinthe
xdirectiontherelativewidthofthecolumnstripintheydirectionmaybechosensmaller,e.g.with
thesamewidthasinthexdirection.
8.3 Exteriorcolumnsupports
8.3.1 General
In this section the emphasis is on the design of a slab where the edge of the slab is supported by
columns.Inordertosimplifytheexamples,slabsareconsideredwithoutanyinteriorcolumn,asitis
notdifficulttocombinethedesignproceduredemonstratedbelowwiththeprocedureabove.
Whereitisassumedthatnomomenttransfertakesplacebetweentheexteriorcolumnandtheslabit
muststillberememberedthatmostofthesupportreactionisassumedtoactatthecolumnface.This
eccentricitycausesamomentinthecolumn.
8.3.2 Columnsupportatoneedge
Example8.3
The slab in Fig. 8.3.1 carries a load of 9 kN/m2. All supported edges are freely supported. It is also
assumedthatthereisnomomenttransfertothecolumn.
TheonlysupportmomentisthemomentmxBabovethecolumn.Thevalueisestimatedfrom
(8.28)
105
Fig.8.3.1
Wemaychoose
moments:
.FromEqs.(2.34)and(2.35)wenowcalculatethecvaluesandthespan
(8.29)
(8.30)
(8.31)
(8.32)
(8.33)
(8.34)
The ratio between support and span moments permits a rather arbitrary distribution of
reinforcementinthexdirectionofthetypesshowninFig.8.1.4.Itisacceptabletoconcentratesome
reinforcementtothevicinityofthefreeedge(withinthelimitsgivenbyEq.(2.24)),particularlysome
span reinforcement. On the other hand the oneway element theoretically requires an evenly
distributeddesignmoment,sothespanmomentshouldnotbetoounevenlydistributed.
Intheydirectionthereisnosupportmoment,whichmeansthattheconditioninEq.(2.24)hastobe
fulfilledbythespanreinforcementalone.Thusthedesignspanreinforcementinthemiddlestripmay
notbelargerthan0.7mDEandtheremainingpartmustbeconcentratedinthecolumnstrip.Thisof
coursemeansthatthereinforcementisnotevenlydistributedintheonewayelementatedgeD,but
thisisofnopracticalimportance.
Thereshouldbesomebarsalongthefreeedgeandsomestirrupsinordertoavoidtorsionalcracks.
Anexampleofasuitabledistributionofthemomentsinthelefthandhalfoftheslabcanbeseenin
Fig.8.3.3.
Example8.4
The slab and load are the same as in the preceding example, but with a moment transfer to the
column.Itisassumedthattheaveragemomentis8.0kNm/matthesectionthroughtheinneredge
of the column, which gives a total moment of
. How this moment is
calculatedorestimatedisnotdiscussedhere.
106
Theanalysisisexactlyasaboveregardingthexdirection.Fortheydirectionweget:
(8.35)
(8.36)
It is recommended that the top reinforcement corresponding to the moment in the column is
concentratedinasmallwidth.Ithastobeanchoredinsuchawaythatthecontinuityissecured.As
thesupportmomentisrathersmalltheconditioninEq.(2.24)isnotfulfilledifthespanreinforcement
is evenly distributed. The span design moment for the middle strip may not be larger than
andtheremainingparthastobeconcentratedinacolumnstripofasuitablewidth.
Thereshouldbesomebarsalongthefreeedgeandsomestirrupsinordertoavoidtorsionalcracks.
8.3.3 Columnsupportatacorner
Example8.5
Fig. 8.3.2 shows a slab which is similar to the slab in the preceding two examples except that the
supportingwallCisexchangedforacolumnattheoutercorner.Ifweassumethattheslabisfreely
supportedatthesideofthecolumnsthecvaluesandtheaveragemomentsareexactlythesameasin
Example8.3.Theonlydifferenceisthedistributionofdesignmoments.
Fig.8.3.2
As the cornersupported element at the corner column has no support moment the span
reinforcementhastobedistributedinsuchawaythatcondition(2.24)isfulfilled.Thismeansthatnot
more than0.7mBC may be taken in the middle strip.In the xdirection it is, however, satisfactoryto
takelessthanthisinthemiddlestripandmoreinthecolumnstrip,i.e.alongthefreeedge,andalsoto
make the column strip smaller than half the strip width. In this way some reinforcement is
concentrated along the free edge, which is to be recommended, particularly in this case where the
stripspansbetweentwocolumns.
As the slab is assumed to be simply supported at the corner column there is no design top
reinforcement in that region. There will, however, be certain negative moments under service
conditions, which may cause cracks, mainly in the direction of the bisector to the corner. It is
advisabletohavesometopreinforcementatrightanglestothatdirection.
Intheydirectionthedistributionofspanmomentsmustalsobechosensoastofulfilcondition(2.24),
i.e.withnotmorethan0.7mDBinthemiddlestrip.InthiscasethecooperatingelementatedgeDisa
oneway element, which means that it is not acceptable to have too uneven a distribution of span
moment. For this direction the moment in the middle strip may thus be chosen to be 0.7mDB or
somewhatsmaller.
107
Fig.8.3.3showsapossibledistributionofdesignmoments.
Fig.8.3.3
In most practical cases it is recommended to take into account the moment transfer to the corner
columnaswellastotheedgecolumn.Theinfluenceofthesemomentsonthedesignisdemonstrated
inExample8.4.
8.4 Slab cantilevering outside columns

Wheretheslabcantileversoutsideacolumnwegetcornersupportedelementswithoutanypositive
moment corresponding to the reinforcement in the direction of the cantilever. Then the support
designmomenthastohaveadistributionwhichsatisfiescondition(2.24).
Example8.6
TheslabinFig.8.4.1carriesaloadof14kN/m2andissupportedoncolumncapitalswithadiameter
of1.5m.Thesupportistakenastheinscribedsquare,whichhasasidelengthof1.06m.Thisgivesthe
spanlengthsshowninthefigure.Nomomenttransferisassumedtotakeplacebetweentheslaband
thecolumns.
Fig.8.4.1
Theaveragemomentscausedbythecantileversarestaticallydeterminate.Wethusget
(8.37)
(8.38)
ThesupportmomentmxBisstaticallyindeterminateandcanbeestimatedfrom
108

(8.39)
The reason why mxB has been chosen lower than the approximate value is partly the large column
capital and partly the fact that mxC is larger than the moment corresponding to a fixed support for
spanBC.Itmightevenhavebeenreducedfurther.
WecannowcalculatethecvaluesandthecorrespondingspanmomentsfromEqs(2.34)and(2.35):
(8.40)
(8.41)
(8.42)
(8.43)
(8.44)
(8.45)
Fig.8.4.2showsapossibledistributionofdesignmomentsforthereinforcementinthexdirection.It
.If,forexample,we
fulfilscondition(2.24)andissuitableforcracklimitation.Itcorrespondsto
checkthevaluetotheleftofcolumnBwefind
(8.46)
Thus we are close to the limit, and we could not have increased the support moment at the edge
withoutdecreasingthecorrespondingspanmomenttoanequalextent.
Inthiscaseitisnotrecommendedthatallthesupportmomentshouldbeconcentratedinthecolumn
strip,asthiswouldleavetheedgewithouttopreinforcement.
Fig.8.4.2
8.5 Oblong panels and corner-supported elements

The advanced strip method always results in a design which is safe, which means that the slab has
adequatesafetyagainstbendingfailure.Forthedesignitisalsoimportantthattheslabfunctionswell
under service conditions and that the reinforcement economy is good. For most slabs met with in
109
practice this can be expected to be the case if the rules above regarding moment ratios and lateral
momentdistributionsarefollowed.
If, however, the panels are very elongated the advanced strip method may lead to a moment
distributionwhichistoodifferentfromtheexpecteddistributionintheservicestate.Thismightlead
tounacceptablecracksinplaceswherethemomentshavebeenunderestimated.Insuchcasesitmay
be better to assume that the slab is composed of ordinary rectangular slabs supported on support
bands.
Fig.8.5.1demonstratesanexample.Fig.8.5.1a)showselementsforadesignbasedontheadvanced
stripmethod.Thepanelsstudiedinthisapproach,e.g.ABCD,areveryelongated,aswellassomeof
thecornersupportedelements.
Fig.8.5.1 b)showselementsforadesignofthesameslabassumingrectangularslabssupportedon
support bands. Thus the rectangular slab ABEF is assumed to be supported along all sides and
continuousatADF.ThesupportsalongAFandBEconsistofsupport
Fig.8.5.1
bands which are continuous over columns D and C respectively. The design follows the principles
demonstratedinChapter4.
Ifthedesignmomentsobtainedfromthetwoapproachesarecompareditisfoundthata)giveslarger
momentsmxandmysbutsmallermomentsmyfthanb).Theriskwiththeapplicationoftheadvanced
stripmethodthusliesinanunderestimationofmyfleadingtopossiblecrackingintheundersideofthe
slab.Thisriskincreasesthemoretheshapesofthepanelsandthecornersupportedelementsdeviate
fromthatofasquare.Itisnotpossibletogiveanygeneralruleforwhentheriskhastobetakeninto
account. In practice this will probably seldom be the case, as the column supports are normally
arrangedsothatthespansinthe twodirectionsarenottoounequal.Apracticalcasemaybewhereafree
edgeofarectangularslabissupportedononeormorecolumns.Inthiscasetheapproachaccordingtob)is
normallytobepreferred,althoughtheapproachaccordingtoa)mayformallybeapplied.
In cases where there is a doubt whether approach a) gives an acceptable result it is recommended
thatbothapproachesareusedandtheresultscompared.Ifthedifferencesaregreatitisadvisableto
useapproachb)ortotakesomekindofweightedaveragebetweentheresults.
110
Itmustberememberedthatthechoiceofapproachisunimportantwithregardtotheultimatelimit
stateandthatithasonlytodowithcrackcontrol.
CHAPTER9
Regularflatslabswithnonuniformloads
9.1 Introduction
Wheretheloadonaflatslabisnotuniformtheadvancedstripmethodinitsbasicformcanonlybe
usediftheloadisuniforminoneofthemaindirections.Acceptableapproximatesolutionswiththe
methodcan,however,befound.
The reason why the advanced strip method in its basic form is not generally applicable for non
uniformloadsisthatthelinesofzeroshearforcearenotcontinuous,sothewidthsofthestripswill
vary.
9.2 Uniform loads in one direction

If the loadon a flat slab is uniform in one of the main directions the advanced strip method can be
applied, as the lines of zero shear force are straight and continuous. The only differences from the
analysisofflatslabswithauniformloadarethattheloadvariesinonedirectionandthemomentsin
parallelstripsintheotherdirectiondiffer,i.e.theyhavedifferentloads.Themomentsinthesestrips
arechosensothatthemaximumspanmomentsoccuralongthesameline.
Example9.1
TheloadontheslabinFig.9.2.1is9kN/m2betweenlinesaande,and17kN/m2betweenlineseand
i. The edge along line 1 is fixed, whereas the other edges are freely supported. All columns are
.
111

Fig.9.2.1
The strips in the xdirection have different loads on the spans ae and ei. An approximate elastic
analysisshowsthatsuitablevaluesofsupportmomentsare:
.
BasedonthesesupportmomentsthecvaluesgiveninthefigurehavebeencalculatedbymeansofEq.
(2.34).Eq.(2.35)givesthespanmoments:
.
Thestripsintheydirectiontotherightoflineehaveauniformloadof17kN/m2.Anapproximate
elasticanalysisshowsthatthesupportmomentscanbechosentobeequal:
.
Thecorrespondingcvaluesaregiveninthefigure.Thespanmomentsare:
.
Thestripstotheleftoflineehaveauniformloadof9kN/m2.Themomentsaresimplytakenas9/17
ofthosetotherightoflinee:
.
The distributions of design moments follow the recommendations in Section 8.1.5. One special
question in this case is the support moments for the reinforcement in the ydirection above the
columnsinlinee.Themostcorrectdistributionistofollowthecalculatedmomentsstrictlyanduse
different values to the left and right of the column centre. This is what is recommended in the first
place.
Suitable distributions of design moments along lines 1, 2 and 3 are shown in Fig. 9.2.2. The
distributionscorrespondto
,whichmeansthatthewidthsofthecolumnstripsareequaltohalf
thetotalstripwidths.Otherdistributionsarepossible,dependingontheneedforcrackcontrol.
112

Fig.9.2.2
AcheckshouldinprinciplealwaysbemadethattherulesforlateralmomentdistributionsinSection
2.5.2arefollowed.Withthenormallyrecommendeddistributionofsupportandspanmomentssuch
checksneed,however,onlybemadeiftheratiobetweenthenumericalvaluesofthesupportandspan
momentsisaboveabout3orbelowabout1.Forthisslabsuchacheckonlyhastobemadeforthe
momentsmxinelementde,wherethisratiois
.Ifwechooseanevendistributionofspan
momentandconcentrateallthesupportmomentinthecolumnstripweget
.This
isnotanacceptablevalueaccordingtoEq.(2.24).Wehavetotakesomeofthesupportmomentinthe
middlestrip.Wemay,forexample,take0.4msinthemiddlestrip,ashasbeendoneinFig.9.2.2.Then
weget
,whichissatisfactory.
Fromthepointofviewofconstructionitmaybeadvantageoustouseonlyonedesignvalueforthe
support reinforcement over each column. Instead of the values 39.0 and 73.6 a weighted mean
valuemightbeusedoverthewholewidthforthecolumnstripinlinee.Thisweightedmeanvalueis
(9.1)
Thesafetyandbehaviouroftheslabwouldprobablynotbemuchinfluencedbychoosingtheaverage
valueinsteadofthetwovaluesinFig.9.2.2,butinordertoavoidanyrisksitisrecommendedthatthe
twovaluesgiveninthefigureareused.
9.3 Different loads on panels

Theadvancedstripmethodcanbeappliedtothesituationwheredifferentloadsareappliedtopanels
inanapproximatebutsafewaybynotkeepingtheregularityofthenetoflinesofzeroshearforcein
thespansandacceptingthatthelinesmaychangepositionwheretheypassfromonestriptoanother.
This means that the strips change width wheretheypass a support. The strips on both sides of the
support do not fit together. Even if they have the same average moments there is not perfect
equilibriumoverthesupportasthetotalmomentsaredifferent.
The simplest way of treating this problem is to reinforce for the largest total moment over the
support, i.e. to reinforce for the support moment on the width of the widest strip. In this way the
design is on the safe side. In practice the difference in width is seldom great, which means that the
economicalconsequenceofthissimpleapproachisunimportant.
Example9.2
Fig.9.3.1 shows aslabwithdifferentloadsondifferentareas. The slabrests onlarge columnheads
andisfreelysupportedalongalledges.
The strips which are used for the design are shown in Fig. 9.3.2, where all the cvalues which have
resultedfromtheanalysisaregiven.
Inthexdirectionthestripbetweenlines2and3hasonespanwithload8kN/m2andtwospanswith
18 kN/m2. An approximate elastic analysis of the strip shows that suitable support moments are
and
. With these support moments we get the cvalues given in the figure from Eq.
(2.34)andspanmoments
fromEq.(2.35).
113
Fig.9.3.1
Fig.9.3.2
,
In the same way, for the strip between lines 3 and 4 we find the moments
.
.
Forthestripintheydirectionbetweenlinesbandcwefind
Forthestripbetweenlinescandfwefind
.
Figs9.3.3and9.3.4showproposeddistributionsofdesignmomentsforthereinforcementinthex
andydirections,respectively.
114

Fig.9.3.3
Thespanmomentshavebeenchosentobeuniformwithineachstripandtohavethevaluesabove.
Forthedistributionofsupportmomentsthecolumnstripsandmiddlestripshavebeenassumedto
. The support moments in the middle strips have been
have equal widths, corresponding to
takenas0.4times,andinthecolumnstrips1.6times,theaveragemomentinthestriptowhichthey
belong.Thedistributionofsupportmomentsthuscorrespondstocases2inFig.8.1.4.
Justasinthepreviousexamplethesupportmomentsinthecolumnstripsmightbeevenlydistributed
andequaltoaweightedaverage,butinthefirstplaceitisrecommendedthatthedistributionsshown
inthefiguresareused.
AcheckagainsttherulesinSection2.5.2hasinthiscasetobeperformedforthemoments
and
, where the ratio between the numerical values of the support and span moments is
greaterthan3.WiththedistributioninFig.9.3.3wehave
,whichisacceptable
accordingtoEq.(2.24).
Fig.9.3.4
9.4 Concentrated loads

Where more or less concentrated loads are acting on a flat slab they are taken into account in the
determinationoftheaveragesupportandspanmomentsinthestripsjustlikeuniformloads.
Iftheconcentratedloadissmallcomparedtothetotaluniformloadonthesamepanel,saylessthen
10%,thenormallateraldistributionofdesignmomentsmaybeused.Itmaybesomewhatbetterfor
the behaviour under service conditions to make some redistribution of moment to the part of the
panel where the concentrated load is acting, and thus to a column strip if the concentrated load is
actingmainlywithinthatstrip.
Iftheconcentratedloadisnotsmallcomparedtothetotaluniformloadonthepanel,theanalysisis
bestmadeseparatelyfortheuniformloadandfortheconcentratedloadandthemomentsarethen
115
added.Thisleadstosomeoverestimationofthespanmoments,asthemaximummomentsfromthe
twoloadingcasesdonotappearinthesamesections.
Theprocedurefordeterminingthedesignmomentscausedbyaconcentratedloadisbestillustrated
bymeansofanexample.
Example9.3
Fig.9.4.1showsaninteriorpanelwithinaflatslabwithaconcentratedload
actingoveran
area
withitscentreat(3.0/1.0)inthecoordinatesystemshown.
Fig.9.4.1
Westartbydeterminingthetotalmomentscausedbytheconcentratedload.Thesupportmoments
maybetakenasabouthalfthemomentsaccordingtothetheoryofelasticityforabeamwiththesame
loadandfixedends.Wemaychoosethevalues
,
whereindex1indicatestheendsonthecoordinateaxes.
Basedonthesevalueswefindthesupportreactions
(9.2)
(9.3)
.Thepositionsofthe
Theloadpermlengthinthestripsinbothdirectionsisequalto
linesofzeroshearforcearedeterminedfrom
(9.4)
(9.5)
Thespanmomentsare
(9.6)
(9.7)
Thelinesofzeroshearforcedividestheloadbetweenthedifferentelementsanddifferentpartsofthe
strip.Thus1.05/1.20oftheloadiscarriedonthestripwithwidthcy1.Thecorrespondingpartsofthe
momentsaredistributedonthewidthsofthestripsinquestion.Wegetthefollowingaveragedesign
moments:
Inthestripwithwidthcy1:
116
(9.8)
(9.9)
(9.10)
(9.11)
Inthesamewaywefind:
Inthestripwithwidth
Inthestripwithwidth
Inthestripwithwidth
Itcanbeseenthatthedominantmomentsarethoseinthestripwithwidthcy1.Thesemomentsare
ratherhighandconcentratedinanarrowband.Itmaybebettertodistributetheminawiderband.
Thiscanbedonethroughtheintroductionofdistributionreinforcementintheydirection,applying
theprincipledemonstratedinSection2.6.1.Letusdistributetheloadoveradistanceof
inthe
. Eq. (2.33) gives a design moment for the distribution
ydirection with a bandwidth
reinforcement
(9.12)
. One part of this area is outside the
The load is now acting on the slab over an area of
studied cornersupported elements and acts on the parallel oneway element in the xdirection (or
slightly on the other side of that element). The part of the load acting on the cornersupported
elementis
,andithasitscentreat(3.0/1.25).
ThetotalmomentsMx(includingtheonewayelement)andthevalueofcx1areunchanged.Itproves
satisfactorytochoose
.Withthesemomentswefind
.
Asonly2.5/3.0ofthewidthintheydirectioniswithinthecornersupportedelementonly2.5/3.0of
themomentsMxbelongtotheseelements.Forthestripwithwidthcylwethusgettheratiobetweenm
andM:
(9.13)
Inthiswaywegetthefollowingaveragedesignmoments:
. The parallel oneway element has the
In the strip with width
samemoments.
.
Inthestripwithwidth
.
Inthestripwithwidth
Inthestripwithwidth
.
Now the largest moments per unit width are reduced to about 55% of the earlier values at the
expenseofsomedistributionreinforcement.
ThedistributionofmfmsforapointloadwillbeuniformaccordingtoSection2.6.2.Byintegration
overtheloadedareaauniformdistributionforapointloadcorrespondstoatriangulardistribution
onthewidthofauniformloadandaconstantvalueontheremainingpart,accordingtoFig.9.4.2.This
distribution may be transformed to stepped constant values. It is suitable to distribute ms with a
certainconcentrationtowardsthesupportedcornerandmfsomewhattowardstheload.Forthefinal
distributionofdesignmomentssomefurtherredistributionmaybeacceptedinordertosimplify.
117

Fig.9.4.2
Fig. 9.4.3 shows a possible distribution of design moments based on the second solution. These
momentsaretobeaddedtothemomentscausedbytheuniformloadontheslab.Thereinforcement
shouldnot,inprinciple,becurtailedwithinacornersupportedelementinthiscase.
Fig.9.4.3
Thesupportmomentshavetobetakencareofintheadjacentpanels.Thiswillcauseachangeinthe
position of the lines of zero shear force in the spans. The span moments may thus be reduced. The
increaseinlengthofreinforcingbarsshouldbetakenintoaccount.
118
CHAPTER10
Irregularflatslabs
10.1 General
Anirregularflatslabmayhavecolumnsplacedquitearbitrarilyandedgesatanyangletoeachother.
It is of course not possible to find simple general methods for the design of all types of such slabs,
automaticallyleadingtosuitableresultsfromallpointsofview,particularlyregardingreinforcement
economyandbehaviourunderserviceconditions.
Whateverapproachisusedwithintheframeworkofthestripmethod,itismostlynecessarytousean
iterationprocessinordertogetaresultwithasatisfactorydistributionofreinforcement.Estimating
whetherthereinforcementissatisfactoryismainlybasedonacomparisonbetweensupportandspan
momentsandonsomefeelingforthebehaviourofaslab.
One possible approach might be the use of support bands between the columns, supporting strips
whichintheirturncarrytheloads.Thisapproachisgenerallycomplicatedbecausetherearesomany
choices to be made, and therefore so many iterations. A major problem is that the support bands
whichmeetoveracolumnhavedifferentdirectionsofsupportmoments,whichhavetobetakenby
straightreinforcementbars.Thisapproachisthereforenotgenerallysatisfactory.
Analternativeapproachwillberecommendedherewhich isbasedontherestricting conditionthat
mostreinforcingbarsareplacedintwoorthogonaldirections.Thisrestrictionisvalidforspanaswell
assupportreinforcement.Anexceptionisreinforcementalongfreeedges,whichisbestplacedalong
the edge. Another exception is that support reinforcement at a support where the slab is fixed or
continuousisbestarrangedatrightanglestothesupport.
Themainadvantageofthisapproachisthatitgivesthepossibilityofformulatinggeneralrulesforthe
design, which can be carried through in a systematic way. Another advantage is that it leads to a
simplereinforcementarrangement.
The main disadvantage is that the reinforcement directions may deviate considerably from the
directionsoftheprincipalmoments.Wherethisisthecasethereinforcementislessefficient,which
means that the crack control is not asgood as whenthe reinforcement directions coincide withthe
principalmomentdirections.Itmayalsomeanapoorerreinforcementeconomy.Ontheotherhand,
reinforcementwhichfollowsthedirectionsoftheprincipalmomentsbetterismorecomplicatedand
maybemoreexpensive.
Over a column the moments often tend towards a polar symmetry. Where this is the case the
reinforcement directions are not important, provided that there are two orthogonal reinforcement
directions.
From a practical point of view the advantages of the approach are probably greater than the
disadvantages.
Theapproachisnotgenerallyapplicabletoslabswithfreeedges.Thiswillbediscussedinconnection
withsomeexamples.
10.2 Design procedure

Theproposedapproach,whichisbasedontheconditionthatallreinforcingbarswithintheinteriorof
theslabareplacedintwodirectionsatrightangles,paralleltothecoordinateaxes,normallycontains
thefollowingsteps:
119
1. Determine suitable directions of the coordinate axes, corresponding to the reinforcement

directions. One axis may, for instance, be chosen parallel to an edge of the slab or to an important
directionbetweencolumncentres.
2. Determine theoretical column profiles. The theoretical column profile for each column is an
inscribedrectanglewithsidesparalleltothecoordinateaxes.
3.Determinethelinesofzeroshearforcewherethespanmomentshavetheirmaxima,thespanlines,
inthefollowingway.First,placelinesofzeroshearforcebetweentheedgesandthecolumnsnearest
theedges.Theselinesaredrawnatabouthalfthedistancebetween thecolumnandtheedgeifthe
edgeisfixed,andatabout0.625ofthisdistancefromthecolumnsiftheedgeisfreelysupported.If
theedgeisonlypartlyrestrained,useintermediatevalues.Thendrawlines(thesearenotlinesofzero
shearforce)betweenadjacentcolumncentres.Startingfromthecentresoftheselinesandrunningat
rightanglestothem,drawlinesofzeroshearforce.Drawtheminbothdirectionsuntiltheyintersect
thecorrespondinglinesfromotherpairsofcolumnsorotherlinesofzeroshearforce.Incaseswhere
twoormoreintersectionsareclosetoeachotheradjustthelinessothattheyhaveacommonpointof
intersection.
4.Drawthelinesofzeroshearforcewherethesupportmomentshavetheirmaxima.Thesesupport
linesareacontinuationofthesidesofthetheoreticalcolumnprofilesandaredrawninthedirections
ofthecoordinateaxesuntiltheymeetthespanlines.Therearefoursupportlinesaroundeachcolumn
(except for edge and corner columns), two in each direction. There is also a support line at each
supportonawall,beamorsupportband.
5.Calculatethetotalmoments(spanminussupportmoment)withrespecttoeachofthesupportlines
at the columns. Each moment is caused by the load on the element formed by the support line in
questionandthenearestspanlines.Thespanmomentsarebestexpressedasaveragemoments(m)
butthesupportmomentsatcolumnsastotalmoments(M).Calculatealsothecorrespondingaverage
moments in the oneway elements supported on walls, beams or support bands. Where such a
supportisnotparalleltoacoordinateaxisthespanmomentmwithrespecttothesupporthastobe
takenbydesignspanmomentsmx andmy inthereinforcementdirections.The followingrelationis
valid:
(10.1)
whereistheanglebetweenthesupportandthexaxis.Oftenitissuitabletoassumemx=my=m.Itis
alsopossibletoincreaseoneofthedesignmomentsanddecreasetheotheraccordingtotheequation.
6.Choosesupport momentsMxandMyateachcolumnwheretheslab is continuousin therelevant
direction.Valuesapproximatelyequaltoonethird(between0.30and0.37)ofthesumoftherelevant
totalmomentsonbothsidesofthecolumnwillbesuitable.Thesevaluesareusuallycloseenoughto
the support moment, according to the theory of elasticity. Choose (or calculate, if statically
determined) support moments where the slab is supported by a wall, beam or support band. If the
slab is fixed at such a support the support moment can be taken as approximately twothirds
(between0.60and0.75)ofthesumoftherelevanttotalmomentsintheelement.
7.Calculatethespanmomentsfromthevaluesaccordingtosteps5and6.Thiswillgivetwovaluesof
eachspanmoment,onefromeachsideofthespanline.Oftentherewillbeagreatdifferencebetween
thesevalues.Thenthespanlinehastobemovedinthedirectionwhichwilldecreasethedifference.A
suitabledistanceltomovethespanlinecanbeestimatedbymeansofthefollowingrelation
(10.2)
wherem1andm2arethetwospanmomentsandlistherelevantspan.Thengobacktostep4and
maketheanalysiswiththenewpositionsofspanandsupportlines.Whenthedifferencebetweenthe
spanmomentsatallspanlinesissmalltheresultisaccepted.Thespanmomentmightbetakenasthe
averagemomentfromthetwovalues.Thisaveragemomentwillprobablygiveanacceptablelevelof
safety,butinordertobeonthesafesideahighervaluemaybepreferred.Tousethehigherofthetwo
values is always on the safe side, but may be unnecessarily conservative. A compromise is to add
120
threequarters of the higher value and onequarter of the lower value. This compromise is
recommended and will be used in the examples. An acceptable difference between the higher and
lower value will be about 0.4 times the higher value in situations where this compromise is used.
Wherethespanmomentissmallcomparedtothesupportmoments(e.g.ashortspanbetweenlong
spans)largerrelativedifferencesmaybeaccepted.
8.Basedonthecalculatedsupportandspanmoments,thedesignmomentsforthereinforcementare
determined.Thedesignspanmomentsmaybetakendirectlyasthecalculatedaveragemoments or
redistributed towards places wherethe curvature isestimated tobe larger. The supportmoment is
suitablydistributedwith70to80%overthecentralhalfofthesupportlineandtherestdistributed
ouside this part, see the examples. A distribution with the whole moment concentrated within the
central part may be accepted only if the ratios between the numerical values of support and span
momentsareeverywherebetweenabout1.5and2.5.
Adesignbasedontheserulesistheoreticallynotassafeasthedesignofregularflatslabsaccordingto
the rules given inChapters 8and 9, as the limitations on moment distributions used there are only
validforrectangularelements.However,thedesignisprobablyquitesafe,particularlyifthechoiceof
momentdistributionsisalsobasedonsomefeelingforthebehaviourofslabs.Anexceptionisslabs
withfreeedges,whichhavetobehandledwithcare.Thisisdiscussedinsomeexamples.
Ahandcalculationaccordingtotheserulestakesaratherlongtime,asmanysimpleoperationshave
to be performed. It should not be too difficult to write a computer program which more or less
automaticallycarriesthroughthecalculations,whichmay,perhaps,includesomeinteractionwiththe
designer.
10.3 Edges straight and fully supported

Example10.1
The slab in Fig. 10.3.1 has a uniform load of 12 kN/m2. It has three freely supported and one fixed
edge and is supported on three columns. The column capitals have diameters of 1.0 m. The
coordinatesforthecornersandthecolumncentresaregiveninthefigureinthechosencoordinate
system,whichhasbeenassumedtogivesuitablereinforcementdirections,paralleltothecoordinate
axes.
Fig.10.3.1
ThetreatmentoftheslabaccordingtotheprocedureaboveisillustratedinFig.10.3.2.Thetheoretical
column support profiles are chosen as inscribed squareswith edgesparallel to the coordinateaxes.
Thesesquareshavesides0.70m.Thetypesofelementareindicatedwitharrowsintheusualway.
121
First,theassumedspanlinesofzeroshearforcearedrawn,startingwiththelinesabcdalongthe
edges.Usingtherulesinpoint3abovewefindsuitablecoordinatesforthesepoints:
a(4.15/14.83),b(20.75/8.23),c(21.62/2.50),d(6.53/1.32)
Next,thelinesbetweenthecentresofthecolumnsaredrawn(notshowninthefigure)andspanlines
atrightanglestotheselinesfromtheircentres.Thesespanlines(ofzeroshearforce)areextended
until they meet other span lines. In this way we find the following coordinates for the points of
intersection:
e(13.83/1.89),f(5.57/6.78),g(12.61/7.72),h(14.15/10.85)
Nowwehavethecompletepatternofspanlinesofzeroshearforce.Next,wedrawthesupportlines
ofzeroshearforcealongthesidesofthetheoreticalcolumnsupportprofilesuntiltheymeetthespan
lines.Thetotalnumberofpointsofintersectionbetweensupportandspanlinesis8foreachcolumn
andthus,inthiscase,24inall.Thesecoordinatevalues
Fig.10.3.2
arenotallgivenhere.Onlysomeexampleswillbegiveninconnectionwithmomentcalculations.
Wealsodeterminethedistancesatrightanglesfrompointsa,b,c,d,e,fandhtothesupports.These
distancesareshownaslinesofzeroshearforceinFig.10.3.2.
Nowwecanwritetheequilibriumequationsforthedifferentparts(elements)oftheslab.Thereare
four such equations for each column and seven for the edge supports in this case, a total of 19
equations.Notalloftheseequationswillbedemonstratedindetail,butonlyafewtypicalexamples.
Fortheotherelementsonlytheresultingrelationswillbeshown.Allequilibriumequationsarebased
onEq.(2.7)withspecialcases(2.6)and(2.8).
The element between span line af and the support
has at a
and at f. This gives the
followingmomentequation:
(10.3)
ThesupportlinetotheleftofcolumnEhasendcoordinates(8.40/7.16)and(8.40/13.14)andthusa
length of 5.98 m. The corresponding element has its corners at f and a. In writing the equilibrium
equationitmustbenotedthatthespanmomenthasanactivewidthequaltothelengthofthesupport
line, as the reinforcement outside the ends of this line works in both directions and thus gives no
contributiontothemomentequation.Intheanalysisitisassumedthatthespanmomentisuniformly
distributed within each element. If another distribution is used for the design, this difference will
normallymakethedesignsafer,asanunevendistributionofreinforcementismadeinthedirection
whereitismoreefficient.
WiththevaluesabovewegetthefollowingequationforthesupportlinetotheleftofcolumnE:
122

(10.4)
Continuinginthesamewaywefindthefollowingrelationsforthereinforcementinthexdirection:
(10.5)
(10.6)
(10.7)
(10.8)
(10.9)
(10.10)
(10.11)
Basedontheserelationswecancalculatesuitablesupportmomentsbymeansoftheruleinpoint6in
Section10.2.
,
.
Introducingthesevaluesintotheequationsabovewegettwovaluesofeachspanmoment.Thesetwo
values are given below within parentheses as well as the weighted average according to the rule
proposedinpoint7inSection10.2.AsthedirectionsofedgesAandCarenotfarfromthatofthey
axisitis,onthesafeside,assumedthat
inEq.(10.1).Thus
etc.
,
.
Performingthecorrespondinganalysisfortheydirectiongivesthefollowingresults:
(10.12)
(10.13)
(10.14)
(10.15)
(10.16)
(10.17)
(10.18)
(10.19)
(10.20)
(10.21)
,
,
123
.
If we check the resultwith respect to the rule proposed in point 7in Section 10.2 we find that it is
acceptable.ThemostquestionablevalueismyGE,wherethelowervalueismorethan40%lowerthan
the higher value. On the other hand this moment is small compared to the other moments and this
difference might be accepted. However, it will be demonstrated how the accuracy of the solution is
increasedbychangingthecoordinatesforthepointsofintersectionofthespanlines.
The principles for the change of these coordinates is to move the points of intersection in such a
directionthatthedifferencesaredecreased.Thuse.g.pointg(orf)ismoveddownwardsinorderto
decreasethedifferenceinmyEG.Pointgisalsomovedtotheleftinordertodecreasethedifferencein
mxGF. Some of the other points are also moved in order to decrease other differences. It should be
noted that points h, e and f, which were originally situated on the straight lines ab, cd and da,
respectively,maybemovedwithouttakingintoaccountthesestraightlines.
Thefollowingcoordinatesarechosenforthesecondanalysis:
a (4.45/14.50), b (20.75/8.50), c (21.62/2.40), d (6.40/132), e (13.70/1.89), f (5.55/6.78), g
(12.30/7.50),h(14.00/10.85).
Itmaybenotedthatthechangesincoordinatesareatmostintheorderofabout0.3m,whichisabout
5%oftheaveragespan.
Ananalysiswiththenewcoordinatesforthepointsofintersectionofthespanlinesgivethefollowing
momentvalues:
.
,
.
.
,
.
Acomparisonwiththepreviousanalysisshowsthatthedifferencesarerathersmall.Thedesignmight
well have been basedon the first analysis. The practical effect onthe behaviour ofthe slab and the
safetyarecertainlynotnoticeable.
We now know all the moment values which we need for the design of the reinforcement. Possible
designmomentdistributionsusingthesevaluesareshowninFig.10.3.3forreinforcementinthex
direction and support moments at the fixed edge, and in Fig. 10.3.4 for reinforcement in the y
direction.Thedistributionofsupportmomentsatthecolumnsfollowsthegeneralrecommendations.
Fig.10.3.3
In addition to the design moments shown some minimum reinforcement according to the relevant
code should also be provided, as well as some corner reinforcement if prevention of top cracks is
important.
124

Fig.10.3.4
Wecanalsocalculatethereactionforcesonthecolumns.Thecolumnforceistheloadactingonthe
area within the span lines of zero shear force surrounding the column. So, for example, the area
belongingtocolumnEis45.5m2andthecorrespondingreactionforceis546kN.
10.4 Edges straight and partly column supported

Thetreatmentinthiscaseissimilartotheprecedingonewiththeexceptionthatreinforcementhasto
be arranged along the columnsupported edges. Support bands are introduced along these edges,
carryingthesupportreactions.
Where a column is situated at an obtuse corner of a slab, case b) in Fig. 10.4.1, the situation is
intermediatebetweenthatofacolumnatarightangledcorner,casea),andastraightedge,casec).In
case a) there is no negative support moment, provided that the slab is assumed to be simply
supportedonthecolumn.Incasec)thereisalargesupportmoment,correspondingtocontinuityof
the slab over the column. In the intermediate case b) there may also be some support moment,
particularlywhentheangleapproaches180.Thesupportmomentincreasesfromzerofor
to
thefullsupportmomentcausedbycontinuityfor
.Probably,itincreasesslowlyatsmallangles
andfasterasapproaches180.Thefollowingapproximateruleisproposedforthedesignsupport
momentMs:
(10.22)
(10.23)
whereMs,contisthesupportmomentcorrespondingtofullcontinuity.ThereinforcementforMshasto
bewellanchored.
Fig.10.4.1
ThemomentMsatanobtusecornerhasdifferentdirectionsforthetwosupportbandsmeetingatthe
corner.ForequilibriumtheremustalsobeamomentMbwithitsvectorperpendiculartothebisector:
(10.24)
125
Thismomentmaybetakenbybottomreinforcementintheslaborbymomentinthecornercolumn.It
is not necessary to arrange extra reinforcement to take Mb, but a check must be made that the
reinforcementarrangedforotherreasonsissufficienttotakethatmoment.
InordertopreventtopcracksinthedirectionofthebisectorthesupportreinforcementforMsshould
bedistributedoveracertainwidth,selectedaccordingtotherulesforsupportbandsinSection2.8.3.
Also,where
,somereinforcementforthispurposemaybeneeded,preferablyatrightanglesto
thebisector.
Example10.2
TheslabinFig.10.4.2isthesameasinthepreviousexamplewiththeexceptionthatedgesBandCare
supportedoncolumnswithadiameterof0.4m.Theloadisalsothesame.Theslabisassumedtobe
simplysupportedatthecolumns.WecanthususetheresultsfromExample10.1andneedonlymake
thecalculationsforthesupportbands.
Forthedesigncalculationthecircularcolumnsareexchangedforsquareinscribedcolumnswithsides
0.28maccordingtoFig.10.4.3.Forthecornercolumnaninscribedfigure
Fig.10.4.2
is used with edges at right angles to the directions of the support bands. In this case a triangle is
suitable.
The positions of the columns have been chosen so that the support band along the inside of the
columnsinFig.10.4.3followsthesupportsinExample10.1.Wecanthustaketheloadonthesupport
bandsfromthelinesofzeroshearforceinFig.10.3.2,assumingthattheloadiscarriedatrightangles
intothesupportband.TheselinesareshowninFig.10.4.3.Inaddition,thereistheloadonthestrip
betweenthecolumns,whichhasawidthof0.34m,correspondingtoaloadof4.0kN/m.
Theloadonthesupportbands,includingtheloadonthestripbetweenthecolumns,isshowninFig.
10.4.4. As the angle at L is less than 135 the bands are assumed to be simply supported at that
column.Thecalculationofthemomentscanbemadebymeansofordinarymethodsaccordingtothe
theoryofelasticity.Here,instead,thesameiterativemethodwillbeappliedasfortheslabaccording
totherecommendationinSection10.2.
WestartbyanalysingbandHIJKL.Pointsofzeroshearforceareassumedatthecentresofallspans
except span KL, where this point is assumed to be at a distance of
from K. The
analysisisrathertrivialandwillnotbeshownindetail.As
126

Fig.10.4.3
anexamplethecalculationforthepartnexttoH willbeshown.Theloadatthepointof zero shear
forceinspanHIis14.2kN/m.Theequilibriumequationis
(10.25)
Inthesamewaywefind
(10.26)
(10.27)
(10.28)
(10.29)
(10.30)
Fig.10.4.4
(10.31)
(10.32)
127
AccordingtotherulesinSection10.2wefindthefollowingdesignmoments:
.
. With
we get
from Eq. (10.25) as the support moment at the fixed edge. This is an acceptable value
althoughalittlelow.IfwehadusedtherecommendationinSection10.2,abettervaluemighthave
been
,givingadecreaseinMHIto20.2.
AllthevaluesareacceptableaccordingtotherecommendationsinSection10.2
ThemaximumwidthofthereinforcementbandischeckedbymeansoftherulesinSection2.8.3.Thus
the width on the inside ofthe support band may correspond to about half theaveragewidth of the
elementwhichcausestheloadontheband.Thesebandwidthsarefoundtobeabout0.4mforspan
HI,0.8mforspanIJ,0.9mforspanJK,and0.9mforspanKL.Tothesevaluesshouldbeaddedthe
widthofthebandwhichisdirectlycarriedonthecolumns.Thiswidthis
.Wheretwo
differentvaluesarefoundonbothsidesofacolumntheaverageisapplied.
A corresponding analysis for band LMN with the points of zero shear force according to the
recommendationsatdistances3.15and3.11mrespectivelyfromcolumnMgives
(10.33)
(10.34)
(10.35)
(10.36)
.
ThedifferencebetweenthetwovaluesofMMNisnotquiteacceptable.Wethereforehavetomovethe
pointofzeroshearforceinspanMNclosertoM.Thenewdistanceischosenas2.87m.Ifweonly
make this change we will get a greater difference in the values of MN. We therefore also move the
pointofzeroshearforceinspanLMclosertoM,choosing3.07m.
Withthesenewvalueswefind
.
Itwillbeseenthatthedifferencebetweenthetworesultsisnotveryimportant.Thefirstcalculation
might well have been accepted in spite of the different values of MMN. The latter calculation gives a
savinginreinforcementofabout5%.Itmaybeworthwhilemakingasecondanalysisinordertosave
reinforcement,butithardlyinfluencesthesafetyorthebehaviour.
The resulting design moments in the support bands are shown in Fig. 10.4.5, given as moments in
kNm/m in the band widths shown. At the obtuse corner a design moment for an extra top
reinforcement is shown, which has been estimated to be about onequarter of the moment for full
continuity.
The complete design moments for the slab are the moments according to Figs 10.3.3, 10.3.4 and
10.4.5.
10.5 Edge curved and fully supported

Wheretheedgesarecurvedintheanalysistheymaybeexchangedforacircumscribedpolygon,which
gives a safe design. The polygon is as a rule best chosen so that each side corresponds to the
supportedsideofananalysedelement.
ThegeneralrulesinSection10.2apply.
128

Fig.10.4.5
Example10.3
The slab in Fig. 10.5.1 has a simply supported edge in the shape of a quarter of an ellipse. The two
straight edges are fixed. There are two square interior columns with 0.3 m sides. The load is 10
kN/m2.Allreinforcementisassumedtobearrangedinthexandydirections.
TheassumedcircumscribedpolygonandthelinesofzeroshearforceareshowninFig.10.5.2.Itmay
benotedthateachsideofthepolygonformsthesideofanelementwheretheothersidesarelinesof
zeroshearforce.Thepatternoflinesofzeroshearforcehasbeendeterminedaccordingtotherulesin
Section 10.2 and adjusted after a first analysis, which is not shown here, in order to reduce the
differencesbetweenvaluesofspanmoments.
Thecoordinatesofthepointsofintersectionbetweenthespanlinesofzeroshearforceare:
a(2.8/8.6),b(10.0/7.3),c(15.7/5.3),d(17.6/1.5),e(9.0/2.4),f(2.8/3.2).
Performing the analysis in the same way as demonstrated in Example 10.1 we find the following
relations:
Fig.10.5.1
129
Fig.10.5.2
(10.37)
(10.38)
(10.39)
(10.40)
(10.41)
(10.42)
(10.43)
(10.44)
(10.45)
(10.46)
(10.47)
(10.48)
(10.49)
(10.50)
Applyingtherulesinsection10.2andwiththenotationusedinExample10.1wefurtherget
.
.
,
,
.
ItshouldbenotedthatthevaluesformxHD,myGBandmyHCareonlyvalidif
withintheareasclose
tothesupports,cf.Eq.(10.1).Itiseconomicallymoreefficienttohavedifferentvaluesofmxandmy.
Thus to reinforce for mGB we may use a value of mx which only corresponds to the reinforcement
130
designedforthexdirection.Withtherulesusedformomentdistribution,thisvaluemaybetakenas
. At B,
. Applying Eq. (10.1) we
the lower of onethird of mxAG or mxGH, which is
find
(10.51)
giving
forthatelementand
.
ApplyingthesameprinciplesformHDandmHCwefind
(10.52)
,and
giving
(10.53)
giving
.
ItisonlymxHDwhichisappreciablyinfluencedbythisanalysis.Thereasonisthattheanglebetween
theedgeandthexaxisiscloseto45inthiscase.Wherethisangleiscloserto0or90theinfluence
issmaller.
Figs10.5.3and10.5.4showpossibledistributionsofdesignmomentsforreinforcementinthexand
ydirections respectively. The general recommendations regarding distribution have been followed.
The width over which the support reinforcement in the xdirection has been distributed is
approximatelyequaltothelengthoftherelevantsupportlineofzeroshearforceinFig.10.5.2.The
distributionwidthforthesupportreinforcementintheydirectionhasbeenchosenthesameasinthe
xdirection,cf.Section8.1.5.
Thewidthsofdistributionofspanreinforcementarebasedonthepatternofspanlinesofzeroshear
forceinFig.10.5.2andarealwayschosentobeonthesafeside.
Fig.10.5.3
Fig.10.5.4
10.6 Edge curved and column supported

Example10.4
131
TheslabinFig.10.6.1isthesameasinthepreviousexamplewiththeexceptionthatthecurvededge
issupportedbysquarecolumns
situatedwiththeirinneredgesatthelineofsupportinthat
example.Thecoordinatesofthecentresofthecolumnsaregiven.Theslabisassumedtobesimply
supportedonthecolumns.
Thepatternoflinesofzeroshearforceinsidetheslabistakenunchangedfromthepreviousexample.
Fig.10.6.2showsthespanlinesandalsothesupportbandswhichcarrythesupportreactionstothe
columns,shownasdashedlinesbetweencolumncorners.Thesupportbandsareassumedtomeetthe
fixededges0.3mfromthecorners.
The shapes of the elements closest to the free edge are not exactly the same as in the previous
example. So, for example, the moment on span line ab comes from two elements with slightly
differentdirectionsofthesupportlines.ThemomenttotheleftofBis
.With
forthat
support line we also find
. For the part to the right of B we find
. With
and
(cf.Eq.(10.52))weget
.Theaverage onlineabis
andusingtheother value
fromthepreviousexampleweget
Fig.10.6.1
Fig.10.6.2
. In the same way we find

and
. These values are
slightlylowerthaninthepreviousexample,whichmaybeexpectedasthedimensionsoftheelements
aresmaller.
The load on the support bands corresponds to the load on the elements outside the line abcd
supplemented by the lines from a and d to the intersections between the support bands and the
supports.Theloadisassumedtobecarriedatrightanglesto thesupportbands.Theresultingload
distribution on the support band is shown in Fig. 10.6.3, where a series of linear approximations is
used.
132

Fig.10.6.3
The calculation of moments in the support bands can be performed according to the theory of
elasticityorinthesamewaythatisusedfortheelementsinsidetheslab,i.e.withassumedpositions
ofpointsofzeroshearforce.Inbothcasesthesupportmomentsshouldbereducedaccordingtothe
rules in Eqs (10.22) and (10.23). The method with assumed lines of zero shear force will be
demonstrated.
The angles between meeting support bands are 170.0 at B, 165.3 at C and 147.5 at D. The
correspondingreductionfactorsforsupportmomentsare0.778atB,0.673atCand0.278atD.
We can start by assuming that all points of zero shear force are at the centres of the spans, even
thoughitcaneasilybeestimatedthatthesearenotthecorrectpositions.Simplestaticsthengivesthe
followingrelations
(10.54)
(10.55)
(10.56)
Page195
(10.57)
(10.58)
(10.59)
(10.60)
(10.61)
ApplyingtherecommendationsinSection10.2andthereductionfactorsgivenabovewecancalculate
thefollowingmoments:
,
,
.
,
.
There are unacceptably large differences between the two values of span moments for MAB and for
MDE. The positions of the points of zero shear force are changed in these two spans, while the
positionsarekeptunchangedintheothertwospansforthenextcalculation.Anestimatebymeansof
Eq.(10.2)showsthatitmaybesuitabletomovethepointofzeroshearforceinspanAB0.26mtothe
rightandinspanDE0.35mtotheleft.Afterthischangeweget:
.
.
ThedifferenceinspanmomentsisstilltoolargeinspanDE.Thepointofzeroshearforceismoved
0.28mfurthertotheleft.AtthesametimethepointofzeroshearforceinspanCDismoved0.12mto
therightinordertodecreasethedifferenceinthatspan.Afterthesechangeswegetthemoments:
.
133
,
.
Thesevaluesarequiteacceptableandmaybeusedforthedesign.
The difference in direction of moment vectors on both sides ofthe columns gives rise to a moment
according to Eq. (10.24), which has to be balanced by reinforcement. Thus at B, for instance, this
moment is
. At C the moment is 7.5 and at D 4.8. These moments should be
takenbybottomreinforcementatrightanglestotheedge.
Fig.10.6.4showsthemomentsinthesupportband.ThevaluesareforMinkNm,notforminkNm/m
as in most other corresponding figures. The moments have been shown distributed on a width of
about0.6m,whichmaybesuitable.Alternativewidthsandpositionsareofcoursealsopossible.At
the columns it has been indicated that there are two different directions of the reinforcement
corresponding to the support moments. Two different systems of reinforcement bars may be
arranged,whichshouldbewellanchored,orbarsmaybehorizontallybentoverthecolumns.Inthe
latter case some secondary reinforcement might be needed to avoid the risk of splitting due to the
radialpressureagainstthebend.
Fig.10.6.4
10.7 Slab cantilevering outside columns

Wheretheslabcantileversoutsidecolumnsatleasttwodifferentapproachesmaybeused.Eitheruse
canbemadeofsupportbandswhichsupportcantileversapproximatelyatrightanglestothesupport
bands,orthetreatmentcanbebasedonthedesignprocedurewithreinforcementintwodirections,
described in Section 10.2. In Example 10.5 both approaches are discussed and an analysis with the
latter approach is demonstrated, whereas in Example 10.6 three different approaches are
demonstratedindetailandcompared
ItmustbenotedthattheapproachaccordingtoSection10.2doesnotautomaticallygiveresultson
thesafeside,astherulesforacceptablemomentdistributionsmaybeclearlyviolated.Inparticular,
theremaybesomenegativecantilevermomentswhichareunderestimatedwiththismethod,leading
toariskofuncontrolledcracking.ThiswillbecommenteduponinExample10.6.However,thesafety
againstcollapsewillprobablyalwaysbeadequateiftherecommendationsarefollowed.
A particular problem which has to be taken into account is the case of reinforcing bars, normally
bottom bars, which reach a free edge soon after crossing a line of zero shear force. As the
reinforcementisassumedtobeabletoyieldatsuchalinethereneedstobeacertaindistancetothe
freeedge,wherethesteelstressiszero.Inordertomakesurethatthereinforcementisfullyefficient
inthelinesofzeroshearforceitisrecommendedthatthefollowingruleshouldbeapplied:
134
Areinforcingbarisonlytakenintoaccountinthedesignifithasalengthfromthelineofzeroshear
force tothe point where it is terminated ata freeedge which is at least equal to l/8, where l is the
lengthofthespanwherethebarisactive.
Thisruleisnotveryprecise,asitisnotalwayspossibletodefinetherelevantvalueofl,butitcanbe
expectedtogiveresultsonthesafesideinmostsituations.Incaseofdoubtavalueonthesafesideis
chosen.
Example10.5
TheslabinFig.10.7.1hascolumnsplacedasinthepreviousexample,buttheslabcantilevers1.5m
outsidethecolumnswhichstoodalongtheedgeinthatexample.Thecolumnshavethesamecentres,
but have their sides along the directions of the coordinate axes. All columns have a square section
withsides0.3m.Theloadis10kN/m2,asinthepreviousexamples.Thefreeedgehastheshapeofan
ellipse.
Fig.10.7.1
Fig.10.7.2showstheprinciplesoftheapproachwithasupportbandalongtheouterrowofcolumns.
The treatment is very similar to that in Example 10.4 and the numerical calculations w ill not be
shown. The main difference from Example 10.4 is that the cantilevering parts give rise to negative
momentsoverthesupportband(correspondingtotopreinforcementperpendiculartothefreeedge),
whichhave to be taken intoaccount in writing the equilibrium equations for the oneway elements
inside the support band. It is recommended that the top reinforcement is arranged with a certain
concentration towards the columns. The support band will take a substantially higher load than in
Example10.4.
Fig.10.7.2
Fig.10.7.3showslinesofzeroshearforcewhentheslabisdesignedaccordingtoSection10.2,withall
reinforcement parallel to the coordinate axes. The system of lines of zero shear force has been
135
determined according to the principles in Section 10.2. After some adjustments of the positions the
followingcoordinatesofthepointsofintersectionhavebeenchosen:
a (2.80/7.80), b (8.80/7.80), c (9.60/5.40), d (14.60/6.60), e (16.10/1.80), f (9.00/2.40), g
(2.80/3.20),h(3.00/11.69),i(9.45/10.63),j(15.51/8.29),k(20.76/3.60).
When establishing the equilibrium relations for the elements next to the free edge it is not evident
howmuchofthespan(bottom)reinforcementshouldbetakenintoaccount.Tobeonthesafeside,it
hasbeenassumedthatalltheloadiscarriedbythesupportreinforcementincaseswherethereisa
smallanglebetweenthesupportlineandtheedge,whichis
Fig.10.7.3
thecaseforreinforcementinthexdirectionatcolumnDandintheydirectionforallthreecolumns
B, C and D. This is done in order to eliminate the risk of too little top reinforcement in the
cantileveringpart.
For the elements where a free edge forms a small angle with the reinforcement direction the
recommendationabovehasbeenapplied.Therelevantcasesarereinforcementinthexdirectionnear
points h, i and j. In all three cases the value of l can be taken to be approximately 6.0 m and the
distancefromthelineofzeroshearforcetothefreeedgenotmorethanabout0.75m.Dependingon
theslopeofthefreeedgethereductioninwidthonwhichthereinforcementisactiveisfoundtobe
0.06math,0.20matiand0.36matj.Thesereductionshavebeenusedforthedeterminationofthe
activewidthsforthemvaluesintheequationsbelow.
Thefollowingequilibriumrelationshavebeenfound:
(10.62)
(10.63)
(10.64)
(10.65)
(10.66)
(10.67)
(10.68)
(10.69)
136
(10.70)
(10.71)
(10.72)
(10.73)
(10.74)
(10.75)
(10.76)
(10.77)
(10.78)
(10.79)
(10.80)
(10.81)
(10.82)
(10.83)
(10.84)
(10.85)
(10.86)
From these relations we can calculate the moments according to the recommendations in Section
10.2:
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
Fig.10.7.4showspossibledistributionsof design momentsforreinforcement inthe xdirectionand
Fig.10.7.5fortheydirection.Forthereinforcementinthexdirectionsomesimplificationshavebeen
usedformxA,wherethelargervaluemxA1onlyhasbeenused,formxABandmxAI,wherethevalue16.0
hasbeenusedforboth,andformXBC,mxICandmxIH,wherethevalue22.0hasbeenusedforallthree.
Thechosenvaluesaresomewhatarbitrary,butonthesafeside.Somecorrespondingsimplifications
mighthavebeenmadealsofortheydirection,butthedifferencestherearegreater.
137

Fig.10.7.4
The support moment at E has been given a concentration towards the end where it meets the free
edge.Thereasonisthatithasbeenestimatedthattheslabhasasmallcantileveractioninthatpart.
The support moments over the columns have been distributed according to the general
recommendationsonapproximatelythewidthofthecorrespondingsupportlinesofzeroshearforce.
Itis,however,onlymeaningfultoarrangereinforcementwherethereisasuffi
Fig.10.7.5
cientlengthofreinforcingbar.ThisisthereasonwhythedistributionisunsymmetricalforMxD,MyC
andMyD.
In addition to the reinforcement for the design moments at least one top bar and one bottom bar
shouldbeplacedalongthefreeedge.Atleastsomeofthetopreinforcementshouldbebentaround
thesebarsaccordingtotheprincipleillustratedinFig.2.10.2.
Example10.6
The triangular slab in Fig. 10.7.6 has all edges free, and is supported on three square columns
.Itissymmetricalwithrespecttothexaxis.Thepositionsofthecornersandthecentresof
thecolumnsaregivenascoordinates.Theloadis9kN/m2.
Three differentpossibilities for designing this slab will be discussed. In all the solutions use will be
madeofthesymmetrysothatonlytheupperhalfoftheslabisanalysed.
Approach1
ThefirstapproachisadirectapplicationofthedesignprocedureaccordingtoSection10.2,withall
reinforcementparalleltothecoordinateaxes.Thecorrespondingpatternoflinesofzeroshearforceis
showninFig.10.7.7.Theonlypointswhichhavetobechosenareaand
138

Fig.10.7.6
b.Accordingtotherecommendationsthelinebetweenthesepointshasadirectionapproximatelyat
right angles to the line between columns A and B. The positions have been determined so that the
span moments mxf from the two elements on both sides of the line areapproximately equal. In this
waysuitablecoordinateshavebeenfoundtobe:
a(4.8/2.4),b(4.0/0).
ThesupportlineoftheelementtotheleftofcolumnAhasalengthof3.6m.ApplyingEq.(2.5)wefind
(10.87)
The support line of the element to the right of column A has a length of 3.5 m. As the span
reinforcement meets the edge at a skew angle the recommendation on page 197 is applied. The
relevantlengthlis6.3minthiscaseandtheminimumlengthofreinforcingbarsfromthelineofzero
thereductioninactivewidthis0.27m
shearforcetotheedgeisabout0.8m.Withtheslope
andtheactivewidth
.FromEq.(2.6)wethenfind
Fig.10.7.7
139
(10.88)
Asweanalysetheupperhalfoftheslabweincludehalfthewidthsoftheonewayelementsinthex
direction at column B. For the element to the right of column B we then find that the length of the
relevantsupportlineis1.3m.FromEq.(2.4)wefind
(10.89)
Itshouldbenotedthatthisisonlyhalfthemomentabovethecolumn.
FortheelementtotheleftofcolumnBthelengthofthesupportlineis1.4m.Theactivewidthofthe
spanreinforcementistakentohavethesamevalueasabove,2.13m.WefindfromEq.(2.6)
(10.90)
.
FromEqs(10.87)(10.90)wefind
ThelengthofthesupportlineoftheelementabovecolumnAis4.78m.FromEq.(2.6)weget
(10.91)
ThelengthofthesupportlineoftheelementbelowcolumnAis4.68m.FromEq.(2.5):
(10.92)
.
andso
ThelengthofthesupportlineoftheelementabovecolumnBis7.50m.FromEq.(2.4):
(10.93)
Wenowknowallthedesignmomentsandjusthavetochooseasuitabledistributionaccordingtothe
generalrecommendations.SuchadistributioncanbefoundinFig.10.7.10below.
Approach2
InthisapproachuseismadeofasupportbandbetweencolumnsAandB,cantileveringtotheleftofA,
Fig.10.7.8.Thesupportbandisdividedintotwobands,eachpassingthroughacomerofeachcolumn
and passing through the column section. In this way the static system becomes clear. A somewhat
more economical assumption might have been to let the bands rest on column corners without
passingthroughthecolumnsections.
TheparttotherightofcolumnBisassumedtobebalancedbyacorrespondingparttotheleftofthe
column.Theloadswithintheseareasaretakenbyreinforcementinthexdirection.Intheremaining
part of the slab the load is assumed to be primarily carried by reinforcement in the ydirection in
stripswhichrestonthesupportbands.
It would have been somewhat more economical and statically correct to use reinforcement
perpendiculartotheedgestotakethemomentsinthecantileveringpartsoftheslab.Thisispossible,
butitleadstoamorecomplicatedstaticsystembecausethestripswhichhavetobalanceeachother
insidetheslabwillformananglewitheachother,causingaresultingmomentwhichhastobetaken
intoaccount.
ThemomentMxsBcanbetakenfromthecalculationinApproach1above,andisthus29.66onthe
upperhalfoftheslab.
The support reaction from the triangular elements on the oneway strip in the ydirection is
for
.Thisgivesamomentof13.69kNm.Tothisshouldbeaddedtheinfluenceof
thedirectloadontheonewaystrip,whichgivesamomentofapproximately
.The
.
totalmomentisthus
140

Fig.10.7.8
Theloadonthewholeslabisprimarilycarriedintheydirectionforx<3.9.For3.9<x<7.8theloadis
primarilycarriedintheydirectionfory>(x3.9)/3.Thecantilevermomentsinthesestripsare
(10.94)
(10.95)
Thepositivemomentsintheystripsare
(10.96)
(10.97)
Themaximumvalueofmyfis22.23kNm/mandthetotalmomentis28.90kNm.
Theloadsonthesupportbandsare
(10.98)
(10.99)
Theanalysisofthebandsissimpleinprinciple,astheyarestaticallydeterminatewithzeromomentat
B,buttheanalysisisratherlengthy.Theresultisasupportmoment
andamaximumspan
moment
.
AdistributionofdesignmomentsbasedonthisapproachcanbefoundinFig.10.7.10.
Approach3
This approach follows the recommendations in Section 10.2 with the exception that the two
reinforcementdirectionsarenotatrightanglesbutareinsteadparalleltothefreeedgesinthemain
partoftheslab.Onedirectionisparalleltotheyaxis.Theotherdirectionisdifferentintheupperand
lower half of the slab, as it follows the nearest free edge. The upper half will be analysed and the
reinforcementdirectionstherefollowthezandyaxesinFig.10.7.9,whichalsoshowsthepatternof
linesofzeroshearforce.AbovecolumnB,however,thereinforcementdirectionsfollowthedirections
ofthexandyaxesinordertoavoidhavingthreecrossinglayersofreinforcement.Astheelementsto
therightofthatcolumncarryalltheloadasacantilevertheloadbearingdirectionsintheseelements
followthexandydirections,asindicatedinthefigure.
Thetheoreticalsupportareaistakenastheinscribedareawiththesidesparalleltothereinforcement
directions.Otherapproachesarealsopossible,whichmaydecreasethemomentssomewhat,butthe
differenceissmallandthechosenapproachisinaccordancewiththegeneralrecommendations.
141
It is possible to use directions of support reinforcement over columns A and C which are at right
anglestotheedgeinoneorbothdirections.Thiswouldmeanasmallreductionintotalreinforcement,
butwouldhavethedisadvantagesthatthereinforcementwouldnotbeasactiveincontrollingcracks
atrightanglestotheedgeandwouldnotreachtheverycorner.
In applying the formulas from Section 2.3 there are two possibilities when the reinforcement
directionsarenotatrightangles.Onepossibilityistousethecvaluesinthedirectionoftherelevant
reinforcement and the lvalues at right angles to that direction. Another possibility is to take the
momentequationaroundthesupportlineandusetherelevantcomponentsofthedesignmomentsto
balancethismoment.Bothapproachesrequirethattheotherreinforcementdirectionisparalleltothe
support line. This requirement is not fulfilled at column B, where three different reinforcement
directionsmeet.Thisproblemwillbediscussedlater.
It can be established that suitable coordinates for points c and d are the same as for a and b in
Approach1,thus
c(4.8/2.4),d(4.0/0).
FortheelementtotheleftofcolumnAitissimplesttotakethemomentaroundthesupportline.The
valueofthemomentisexactlythesameasinApproach1above,sowecanusethatvalue.
Fig.10.7.9
(10.100)
we get
, which is the same value as the support moment in the support
With
bandinApproach2.
FortheelementtotherightofcolumnAwecanusethesameapproach.Theactivewidthofthespan
reinforcementistakenas2.5m.
(10.101)
.
whichgives
Thesupportmomentis
onthewidthoftheupperhalfoftheslabjustasintheprevious
approaches.FortheelementtotheleftofcolumnBwemayagaintakethemomentaroundthevertical
support line and make use ofthevalue fromApproach 1. It should be noted that mzf andMxsB have
differentdirections.
(10.102)
. Using also the value 35.55 from above we can, according to the
which gives
.
recommendation,calculatethedesignvalue
142
IncalculatingthemomentsforthereinforcementintheydirectionfortheelementabovecolumnAit
is simplest to take the cvalue in the ydirection and the lvalues in the xdirection. The projected
lengthinthexdirectionofthesupportlineis4.43m.FromEq.(2.5)weget
(10.103)
For the element below column A in the figure, the projected length of the support line is 4.37 m.
Assumingthattheeffectivewidthofthespanreinforcementis4.0m,Eq.(2.6)gives
(10.104)
.
fromwhich
AtcolumnBthesituationissomewhatcomplicatedforcalculatingthemomentforthereinforcement
intheydirection,astherearemomentscorrespondingbothtothexandzdirections.Wecanstartby
analysingtheinfluenceoftheloadonthetriangletotherightofthelinethroughtheleftsideofthe
column (this triangle is composed of the oneway strip and the cornersupported triangle), which
givesnoproblem.Thisgivesrisetothemoment
(10.105)
For the trapezoidal element to the upper left of column B we take the moment around the support
line. This equilibrium is influenced by the part of the moment MxsB which acts along the side of the
element. It is not quite clear how this moment influences the equilibrium, as some of the
corresponding reinforcement also passes the support line around which the equilibrium is studied,
and helps in taking some of the support moment in this line. A comparison can be made with the
solution according to Approach 2, where the element to the right of column B is balanced by a
correspondingelementtotheleft.Inthatcaseevidentlysomereinforcementinthexdirectionpasses
thesupportbandandhelpsintakingasupportmomentaroundthesupportband.
Anassumptiononthesafesideistoassumethatthereinforcementinthexdirectiondoesnottake
anypartin carryingthesupportmomentaroundthesupportline.Thepart ofMxsB whichhastobe
taken into account comes from the triangle to the upper right of the column and is
. In applying Eq. (2.5) around the support line we note that
and
:
(10.106)
.Addingthetwopartsweget
.
Thisgives
ThereisnopositivespanmomentmyfintheelementtotheleftofcolumnB.
ApossibledistributionofdesignmomentsisshowninFig.10.7.10.
Fig. 10.7.10 shows the proposed distributions of design moments according to the three different
approaches. As well as the reinforcement for the design moment there should also be some
reinforcementtominimizetheriskoflargecracks.Thus,thereshouldbesomereinforcementalong
thefreeedgeswheresuchreinforcementisnotgivenbythedesignmoments.OnlyApproach3gives
such reinforcement along the sloping edge in the figure, but this approach does not give any such
reinforcement beside column B. It may also be appropriate to put minimum reinforcement in some
areaswherethedesignmomentsdonotrequirereinforcement.
Comparison
AcomparisonbetweentheresultsshowsthatApproach1givesratherlittlesupportreinforcementin
theydirectioninthelefthandpartoftheslabandmuchintherighthandpartandleavesapartin
betweenwithoutsupportreinforcement.Italsogivesspanreinforcementinthexdirectionwhichis
toounsymmetricalwithrespecttocolumnA.Forboththesereasons,someadditionalreinforcement
hastobeusedinordertominimizetherisksofcrackingandmaybeeventoensureadequatesafety.
143
ThesolutiongivenbyApproach1isnottoberecommended,atleastnotwithoutintroducingsome
additional reinforcement, based on an estimate of the behaviour of the slab. One reason why the
approachisnottoberecommendedhastodowiththefactthatthereisnotmuchredundancyinthe
structure,asthesupportmomentsarestaticallydeterminate,unlikeinthepreviousexamples.
WhencomparingtheresultsofApproaches2and3,whichbothcertainlygiveadequatesafety,itmay
benotedthatApproach3givesareinforcementdistributionwithacertainconcentrationaroundthe
columns, but also with some reinforcement over a greater width. Approach 2 gives a heavy
concentrationalongthesupportbandbutnoconcentrationintheydirectionatcolumnA.Ifthistype
ofsolutionisusedindesignitisrecommendednottofollowthistheoreticaldistributionstrictly,but
toredistributesomeofthereinforcementinthesupportbandoveralargerwidthandtoconcentrate
someofthesupportreinforcementintheotherdirectionoverthecolumns.
ItwouldseemthatApproach3is,inthefirstplace,toberecommended.
Fig.10.7.10
144
CHAPTER11
Lshapedslabsandlargewallopenings
11.1 General
Theslabsinthischaptercanbetreatedbymeansofsupportbands,buttheapproachusedherewith
cornersupported elements is simpler, more systematic and safer, as the wellestablished rules for
suchelementscanbeapplied.
However,the static system is more complicated than in a regular flat slab, for example. There is no
element to take the support moment from the cornersupported element, but this support moment
hastobetransferredtothewallinthedirectionofthereinforcement.Thusforelement3inFig.11.1.1
theforcesinthesupportreinforcementinthexdirectionhavetobebalancedbyarathercomplicated
momentdistributionwithinelement2,carryingtheforcestothesupportforelement2.Ithasbeen
demonstrated in Strip Method of Design that it is possible to find such complete moment
distributions,whichareonthesafeside,butthatitissufficienttoanalyseonlytheelementsshownin
Fig.11.1.1.
The moment distribution in the service state in the cornersupported element in Fig. 11.1.1 is
different from that in a regular flat slab. The support moment can be expected to be more
concentratedtowardsthesupport,whereasthenegativemomentattheotherendofthesupportline
israthersmall.Morereinforcementshouldbeconcentratedinthevicinityofthesupportedcorner.It
isrecommendedthatadesignsupportmomentdistributionshouldbeused,forexample,accordingto
Fig.11.1.2,wheremavistheaveragesupportmoment.Thelengthofthereinforcingbarsintoelement
2inFig.11.1.1maybetakentobethesameasintoelement3,whicharedeterminedfromtherulesin
Section2.10.2.
145

Fig.11.1.1
Thesupportmomentinthecornersupportedelementunderserviceconditionsissmallerthanthat
correspondingtoafixededge,asitisonlyfixedatthecorner,andmayrotatearoundthesupportline
further away from the corner. The support moment should thus be chosen lower than that
corresponding to a fixed edge. In the examples the support moment has been taken as 75% of the
momentcorrespondingtoafixededge,whichhasbeenestimatedtobeasuitablevalue.
In the examples the theoretically calculated support moments have been used. As always it is
permissibletoincreaseordecreasethesevalues,e.g.inordertolimitthecrackwidthsinthetopor
bottomsideoftheslabortomakeuseofminimumreinforcement.
Fig.11.1.2
The triangular end elements 1 and 5 in Fig. 11.1.1 have no direct counterpart to take the span
moments,butinpracticethesemomentscanbetakencareofintheslab,andthedesigncanbebased
ontheequilibriumoftheseelements,calculatedfromEq.(2.4).Someparticularproblemsrelatedto
thistypeofelementarediscussedinExample11.4.
Thedesignmomentsinthetriangularcomerelementsinparallelwithelements2,9,4and6inFig.
11.1.1 may be taken as onethird of the moments in the latter elements, cf. Section 8.1.6. This also
holdsforthecornerbetweenelements7and8.
11.2 Reentrant corner

146
Example11.1
Fig.11.1.1showsaslabwithareentrantcornerandtheelementsusedforitsdesign.Theslabhasfour
fixedandtwosimplysupportededges.Theloadis9kN/m2.
Thesupportmomentsatthefixededgesarecalculatedbymeans ofstandardformulasaccordingto
the theory of elasticity. The support moments for the cornersupported element 3 is reduced as
describedabove.Asstrip37isnotfullyfixedattheleftendandalsomayhaveadeflectionatthat
end,thesupportmomentforelement7isintermediatebetweenthatforstripswiththeoppositeends
fixedorsimplysupported.Thecvaluesforelements2and3arecalculatedfromEq.(2.34)andthe
corresponding span moments from Eq. (2.35). The cvalues for the triangular elements 1 and 5 are
estimatedusingtothesameprinciplesasforrectangularslabs.Thus
and
areestimated
tobesatisfactoryvalues.Becauseofsymmetry
.
(11.1)
(11.2)
(11.3)
(11.4)
(11.5)
(11.6)
(11.7)
(11.8)
(11.9)
(11.10)
(11.11)
(11.12)
(11.13)
(11.14)
Wemaychoose
elementinalongstrip.
.Thegreatvalueoftheratioischosenbecausetheelementisanend
147
Fig.11.2.1showsthedistributionofdesignmoments.Someofthemomentsaresosmallthatrulesfor
minimum reinforcement may give higher values. If this is the case the values of c1 and c5 may be
increasedinordertomakeuseofthereinforcement.
Fig.11.2.1
Thesupportreinforcementinelements2and4maybemoreconcentratedtowardsthecorner,where
theriskofcrackingishighest.Theoretically;theseelementsmaybetreatedas cornersupportedatthe
corner,whichgivessuchaconcentrationofreinforcement.Inthenextexamplesuchaconcentrationhasbeen
chosen.
With regard to checking permissible moment distributions in the cornersupported element see
Example11.3below.Theconditionsaremetquitesatisfactorily.
11.3 Supportingwallwithalargeopening
Where a supporting wall has a large opening the situation is similar to that at a reentrant corner
regarding design moments for reinforcement in the direction of the wall. For the reinforcement at
rightanglestothatdirectionthesituationforthecornersupportedelementismoresimilartothatin
acolumnsupportedslab.
11.3.1 Innerwall
Example11.2
Fig.11.3.1showsaslabwithaninnersupportingwallthatextendstolessthanhalftheslabwidth.The
loadis9kN/m2.Theelementsarealsoshown.
Elements 5, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 form a continuous strip. The average moments in this strip may be
calculatedinthesamewayasforaflatslab:
(11.15)
(11.16)
148
(11.17)
(11.18)
(11.19)
(11.20)
Fig.11.3.1
Elements1,3(withintermediateonewaystrip)and9formastrip.Withtherecommendationgiven
inSection11.1theaveragemomentsinthestripcanbecalculated:
(11.21)
(11.22)
(11.23)
Ifwechoose
weget
(11.24)
Fig.11.3.2showsa possibledistributionofthedesignmoments.ThedistributionofmyAfollowsthe
recommendation in Section 11.1 with a slight modification for the oneway element between the
cornersupported elements. For the distribution of mxA first 2mxA has been distributed on half the
widthofthecornersupportedelements.Thesamemomentintensityhasalsobeenusedonthefirst
0.6moverthewallandmxA/3overtheremainingpartofthewall.Suchadistributioncanbesaidto
correspond to an assumption that elements 2 and 4 act as comersupported. It may also be better
fromthepointofviewofcrackingthanadesignmomentmxAonthewholewidth(1.5m)ofelements
2and4.
149
Fig.11.3.2
11.3.2 Wallalonganedge
Example11.3
TheslabinFig.11.3.3hasthreefixededgesandoneedgewhichispartlysupportedbyawall.Theslab
is assumed to be freely supported at the wall. If it had not been assumed to be freely supported
elements2and3wouldhavehaddifferentlengthsintheydirectionandelement5wouldhavehadto
bedividedintotwoelements.Theloadontheslabis9kN/m2.
Fig.11.3.3
Asuitablevalueofc1isestimatedtobe3.0m.Thisgives
(11.25)
Becausethisisanendelementinalongslabtheratiobetweensupportandspanmomentsischosen
tohaveahighvalue.Suitablevaluesare
.
Accordingtotherecommendationsaboveweget
(11.26)
150
(11.27)
(11.28)
(11.29)
(11.30)
(11.31)
(11.32)
Based on these values a distribution of support moments has been proposed in Fig. 11.3.4. For the
supportmomentmxs3adistributionwitharatioof2betweenthehigherandthelowermomenthas
been chosen, which means a little less concentration than in the previous example. The difference
betweenthesedistributionsprobablyhasnopracticaleffect.
For the cornersupported element 3, a check should be made that the conditions in Section 2.5.2
regarding moment distributions are met. In the xdirection twothirds of the support moment are
taken with
and onethird with
. Taking a weighted average, this means that the lower
.Withthedistributionshownweget
.The
limitationis
conditionismetquitesatisfactorily.Wemightevendecreasethespanmomentsomewhat(to7.2)and
putabandofreinforcementalongthefreeedge,whichmaybeadvantageousforcracklimitation.
Intheydirectionwehavenosupportmomentinelement3andwethushavetofulfi1thelimitations
withthedistributionofspanmoment.Withthedistributionshownwehave
for
,whichis
withinthelimits.Alsothespanmomentinelement2hasbeengivenacorrespondingdistribution.
Thedistributionofsupportmomentsalongtherighthandedgehasbeengiveninaccordancewiththe
general rules. This distribution is, however, not in a good agreement with the expected moments
accordingtothetheoryofelasticity.Iftheedgehadbeenfreely
Fig.11.3.4
supportedtheangleofrotationwouldhavebeengreateratthecentreoftheedgethanattheupper
end, as the slab deflects more in the central part than at the end of the supporting wall. Thus the
supportmomentforthefixededgeisgreateratthecentrethanattheupperend,whichisoppositeto
the moment distribution shown. For that reason it might be better to make a redistribution of the
151
designmoments,e.g.asshowntotherightinthefigure,particularlyifcracksatthesupportaretobe
limited.
Example11.4
TheslabinFig.11.3.5isthesameasinthepreviousexamplewiththeexceptionthatthewallopening
hasbeenmoved1.0mtotheleftandalengthofwallhasbeenintroducedattherighthandendwhich
is only 1.0 m long. Such a short wall length beside an opening introduces the problem that the
triangular element 6 has to have such a small height c6 that the moments in that element are
unrealistically small. It is necessary to find a procedure for dealing with this case, which forms a
continuouslinkbetweenthecasescorrespondingtothelefthandpartandtherighthandpartinthe
previous example, i.e. with a long wall and no wall respectively.The following procedure is
recommended.
Theloadqonelement4isdividedintotwoparts.Onepartkqiscarriedonlyinonedirection,justlike
thewhole loadinthepreviousexample.Thestripcarryingthisload issupportedon therighthand
supportandhasaspan
.Theotherpart(1k)qis
Fig.11.3.5
carriedonelement4actingasacornersupportedelement.Thestripcarryingthisloadissupported
.
ontheendofthewallandhasaspan
Asuitablevalueofkis
(11.33)
wherecisthelengthofthewallpart(correspondingtothepossibleheightc6ofthetriangularelement
6)andc0istheheightofthetriangularelement,whichwouldhavebeenchosenifthewallparthad
beenlong.Inthiscasethevalueofc0correspondsto
,whichgives
.Thisisofcoursenot
anexactvalue,butitwillbeusedfortheanalysis.
Asanapproximation,thesupportmomentsaregiventhefollowingvalues:
(11.34)
(11.35)
(11.36)
ThereactionatsupportAinkN/mis
152
(11.37)
whichgives
(11.38)
(11.39)
Thesupportmomentmxs4cannotfalltozerojusttotherightofpointB.Ifc6issmallsomepartofthat
momentistransferredtoC.ItisproposedtoassumethatthefollowingvalueisaddedtomCtotake
intoaccountthateffectwhen
:
(11.40)
Wealsohavetotakeintoaccountthemomentsinelement6:
(11.41)
Justasforelement1,aboutthreequartersofthisvalueistakenasthesupportmoment,whichgives
.ThetotalaveragemomentatC(onthewidth
)isthus
(11.42)
Theaveragemomentintheremainingpartoftherighthandsupportcanbetakenas
.
Theformalmomentdistributionattherighthandsupportisveryunevenaccordingtothisanalysis,
with21.49atCbutonly2.26onthewidthcorrespondingtoc5.Inorderto
limit cracking at the support the distribution of support moments has to be changed. A suitable
distributionisproposedinFig.11.3.6.
Element7iscooperatingwithelement4incarryingthepart(1k)ofthetotalload.Thispartofthe
loadgivesmomentsmywhichare(1k)timesthemomentsinelement5.Fortheremainingpartofthe
loadthesemomentsareasusualtakenasonethirdofthemomentsinelement5.Thetotalmoments
my in element 7 are thus
times the moments in element 5. The moments in
element5arethesameasinthepreviousexample.
(11.43)
(11.44)
Themomentmxf7is,accordingtonormalrules,takenasmxf3/3.
AsuitabledistributionofdesignmomentsisproposedinFig.11.3.6.Itisbasedonthevaluesabove
andvaluesfromthepreviousexample,wheretheseareunchanged.
153
Fig.11.3.6
11.3.3 Slabcantileveringoutsidewall
Example11.5
TheslabinFig.11.3.7cantilevers2.0moutsidethewallwiththeopening.Otherwisetheslabisthe
sameasinthepreviousexample.Theloadisalsothesame,9kN/m2.Thecantileveringparthasafixed
edgetotheleftinthefigure,whereastheothertwoedgesarefree.
Fig.11.3.7
Theelementsarealsoshowninthefigure.Thevalueofc1hasbeenchosensomewhatlowerthanin
thepreviousexamplebecausethereisasupportmomentatthewallwhichdecreasesthedeflection
andalsomakesitlesseconomictocarryloadinthexdirection.Theequilibriumequationforelement
1is
(11.45)
Asuitablechoiceis
.
154
As c1 is assumed to correspond to c0 in Eq. (11.33) we get a different value of k from that of the
previousexample:
(11.46)
(11.47)
(11.48)
(11.49)
(11.50)
(11.51)
(11.52)
(11.53)
.AddingthedifferentmomentsatCweget
Asinthepreviousexample,wehave
(11.54)
The average moment in the remaining part of the righthand support can be taken as
.
Inthecantileveringpartthemomentinelement10isthesameasin1.Forelements12and13the
supportmomentsarecalculatedjustasinthepreviousexamples:
(11.55)
Becauseofsymmetrythecxvaluesforelements12and13are2.6m,whichisthesamevalueascx3
.
fromthepreviousexample.Thespanmomentisthesameasinthepreviousexample,
Thecantileveringslabgivesanaveragesupportmoment,validforelements1114:
(11.56)
According to the theory of elasticity, this support moment causes a change of +9.00 of the support
momentforelement5,whichthusbecomes(seeExamples11.3and11.4)
(11.57)
Thisgives
(11.58)
(11.59)
155
As in the previous example, the moments in element 7 are taken as the moments in element 5
multipliedby(12k/3),whichinthiscaseis0.76:
(11.60)
(11.61)
ApossiblemomentdistributionisshowninFig.11.3.8.Forclaritythedistributionofmomentsover
thesupportingwallanditsopeninghasbeenshownseparated.
Itshouldparticularlybenotedthatthereisnospanmomentmyinthecornersupportedelements12
and13.Thismeansthat,accordingtotherulesinSection2.5.2,someofthesupportmomenthastobe
distributed on the whole width of the element. In this case much of the moment has been
concentratedneartheendofthewalls,correspondingto
,whichrequires>0.31.This
conditionismetquitesatisfactorily.
Asalways,itisbesttohavemoreratherthelessreinforcementalongthelongfreeedge.Thishasbeen
takenintoaccountintheproposeddistribution.
Fig.11.3.8
156

CHAPTER12
Openingsinslabs
12.1General
How the design of a slab has to be modified because of an opening depends on the shape, size and
positionoftheopening.Themostsignificantquestionishowmuchtheopeningisestimatedtochange
thestaticbehaviouroftheslab,inparticularthestaticbehaviourinthevicinityoftheopening.
Where the static behaviour of the slab is only slightly changed by the opening, the design may be
basedontheanalysisoftheslabwithoutanopening.Thereinforcementwhichwouldbecutbythe
openingmustbearrangedalongitsedgesandproperlyanchored.
It is not possible to establish any simple wellfounded rules for when this approximate approach is
applicable.Thefollowingsimpleruleisrecommended:
Theapproximateapproachmaybeusediftheopeningcanbeinscribedinasquarewithsideequalto
0.2timesthesmallestspanintheslab.Itmay,however,notbeusedforcornersupportedelements,
see Section 12.5, or for openings close to a free edge or in areas where torsional moments play an
importantrole.
Itcannot be provedby means ofthestripmethod thatthisrule alwaysleadsto safe results.Onthe
other hand, it is probably never possible to prove by means of yield line theory that it may lead to
unsafe results. From a practical point of view it seems that the rule is satisfactory. It is also in
agreementwiththeacceptedpracticeofallowingsmallholeswithoutanystrengthanalysis.
Fig.12.1.1a)showsasimplysupportedslabwithauniformloadandtheelementswhichwereused
foritsdesign.Fig.12.1.1b)showsalimitingopeningforapplicationoftherecommendationabove.
Fig.12.1.1
Fig.12.1.1c)showsalargeropeningwithsupportbandsintroducedalongitsedges.Thelinesofzero
shear force have been rearranged in order to simplify the numerical analysis. Some strips are
supportedatoneendbyasupportband.Thesupportbandsareeitherassumedtobesupportedatthe
edgesoftheslabor,alternatively,tobesupportedbysupportbandsintheperpendiculardirection.
Fortheslabinthefigureitisreasonabletoassumethatthesupportbandsintheshortspandirection
aresupportedattheedgesoftheslab,whereasthesupportbandsinthelongspandirectionmaybe
partlyorcompletelysupportedbythesupportbandsintheshortdirection.Oftenamixtureofthetwo
possibilitiesmaybeusedinordertogetasuitablerelationbetweentheamountsofreinforcementin
thetwodirections.
Intheanalysesthesupportbandsareassumedtohavezerowidthandtobesituatedexactlyalongthe
edgesoftheopening(ortouchingtheopeningwheretheyarenotparalleltoanedge).Inpractice,the
designmomentsinthesupportbandaredistributedoveracertainwidthwithinareasonabledistance
fromtheedge,e.g.withinonethirdofthedistancetothenearestparallelslabsupport.Althoughsuch
157
adistributionisnotinstrictagreementwiththebasisofthestripmethod,itcanberegardedassafe.It
isnotpossibletoshowbymeansofyieldlinetheorythatitisunsafe.
In Fig. 12.1.2 the slab has fixed edges. In a) the slab is without any opening, in b) with an opening
whichcutsmuchofthemainspanreinforcement.Astheedgesoftheslabarefixed,theloadcanbe
carried on cantilevers from the edges. As the edges of the opening deflect, this deflection is mainly
prevented by the cantilevering action. In this case the static performance is thus changed so that
certain support moments increase and take care of most of the load, whereas much of the span
reinforcementcanbeomitted.Inthefirstplacemuchofthespanreinforcementintheshortdirection
maybeomitted,butsomespanreinforcementisneededalongtheloweredgeoftheopeninginthe
figure. A support band is also shown along this edge, which takes care of the reaction from the
triangularelementonthewidthoftheopening.
Fig.12.1.2
TheopeningsinFigs12.1.1and12.1.2havetheiredgesparalleltothemainreinforcementdirections.
If this is not the case a choice must be made between support bands in the main reinforcement
directionsorparalleltotheedgesoftheopening.Asarule,thefirstpossibilityisrecommended,asit
givesthesimplestcalculationsandexecution.
Independentoftheresultoftheanalysis,thereshouldalwaysbeatleastonebottomandonetopbar
alongeachedgeofanopeninginordertodecreasecracking,particularlyatthecorners.
Openingswithinthecolumnbandofacornersupportedelementposeparticularproblemsduetothe
high torsional moments within this area. This is treated in Section 12.5. Openings at free edges are
treatedinSections12.3and12.4.
12.2 Slabswithalledgessupported
12.2.1 Rectangularslabs
Example12.1
The slab in Fig. 12.2.1 is the same as in Example 3.1, but with a rather large opening ABCD. As in
Example3.1theloadis9kN/m2.Thereisnolineloadalongtheedgesoftheopening.
Thechosenlinesofzero shearforceareshown inthefigure,aswellastheassumed supportbands
alongtheedgesoftheopening.
158
Fig.12.2.1
Thesupportreactionsfromstrips1,3,4and5onthesupportbandsarefoundbysimplestaticstobe
(12.1)
(12.2)
(12.3)
(12.4)
Thesupportbandsinthexdirectioncanbeassumedtobesupportedeitheronthesupportbandsat
right angles or at their ends on the slab supports. A combination of these possibilities may also be
assumed.Withtheproportionsintheactualcaseitseemsmostsuitabletoassumethatallormostof
the load is carried by the support bands at right angles. It may well be assumed that all the load is
carriedinthisway,butinordertodemonstratethemoregeneralcaseitwillbeassumedthat10%of
theloadiscarriedtotheslabsupports.
The static analysis of the support bands acted upon by these loads is trivial and only the resulting
momentswillbegiven.Thefirsttermisthemaximummomentfromtheloadearnedbythesupport
bandsatrightangles(span2.5m)andthesecondtermisthemaximummomentfromtheloadcarried
totheslabsupports.Thesetwomaximaarenotsituatedatexactlythesamepoint,butitisalwayssafe
toaddthem.
(12.5)
(12.6)
The support bands in the ydirection are loaded by the loads RAD and RBC respectively, by
atAandB,andby
atCandD.Theresultingmomentsare
(12.7)
(12.8)
Themomentsinthedifferentonewayelementsare
(12.9)
(12.10)
(12.11)
(12.12)
159
Thetriangularcornerelementswith
haveaveragemoments3.38.
With values of the widths of the support bands chosen partly with respect to the values of the
moments,adistributionofdesignmomentsisshowninFig.12.2.2.
Example12.2
TheslabinFig.12.2.3isthesameasinExample3.2,butwithanopening.Itisalsothesameasinthe
previousexample,butwiththeupperandlefthandedgesinthefigurefixed.
The fact that the edges are fixed changes the static behaviour of the parts of the slab next to these
edges,asmuchoftheloadiscarriedbycantileveraction.Forthisreason,nosupport
Fig.12.2.2
Fig.12.2.3
bandisneededalongAB,asalltheloadonelement3canbecarriedsatisfactorilybythiscantilever
action.Thisgivesasupportmoment
(12.13)
Themomentsinelements4and5arethesameasinthepreviousexample.Thisalsoholdsfortheir
supportreactionsonthesupportbands,
.
Forthelefthandpartoftheslab,twopossibilitieswillbediscussed.Thefirstpossibilityisshownin
themainfigure.Theloadsonelements1and7arecarriedinthexdirection,giving
(12.14)
(12.15)
Element 2 may be treated like element 3, giving the same support moment and no span moment.
Element6may,asasafeapproximation,beassumedtohaveaspanmoment
(12.16)
onsupportbandAD.Onthesameassumptionasin
Element7givesasupportreaction
thepreviousexamplethat90%oftheloadonsupportbandCDiscarriedbythesupportbandsatright
atthecrossingpoints,andthemomentinbandCDis
angles,thesehavetocarry
the same as in the previous example,
, provided that the band is treated as if it were
hingedatitsends.
160
Thesupportbandsintheydirectionareassumedtohavesupportmomentsatthefixededgeofthe
slab.Thesesupportmomentsmaybechosentohavethevalue
(12.17)
Usingthisvaluewefind
(12.18)
(12.19)
andthusasuitableratiobetweensupportandspanmoments.
AnalternativesolutionforthelefthandpartoftheslabisshowninthelefthandpartofFig.12.2.3.In
thatcaseelement1isassumedtocarryalltheloadasacantilever,giving
(12.20)
whichhappenstobethesamevalueaswiththefirstsolution.Fromthestripformedbyelements2
and6weget
(12.21)
(12.22)
As element 1 now does not give any reaction on support band AD this is only acted upon by the
reactionforce7.59kNfromsupportbandCD.Choosing
(12.23)
wefind
(12.24)
whichmaybeacceptedasasuitableratiobetweensupportandspanmomentwithregardtothefact
thattheloadisactingatsomedistancefromthesupport.
Incomparingthetwosolutions,wefindthattheresultsarerathersimilar.Forthereinforcementin
thexdirectionthesupportmomentisthesame.Thereisasmallspanmomentaccordingtothefirst
solution but no span moment according to the second. With due regard to minimum reinforcement
requirements,thisdifferenceis,inpractice,negligible.Forthereinforcementintheydirectionwecan
compare the sum of design moments in the strip 26 and the support band AD. We then find the
numerical sum of support moments to be
in the first case and
inthesecondcase.Forspanmomentswefind
inthefirstcase
inthesecondcase.Thesedifferencesareunimportant.Thesmallincreaseintotal
reinforcement in the second case is compensated for by the lack of span reinforcement in the x
direction. Either of the two approaches may be used without any noticeable difference in the
behaviouroftheslab.
Fig.12.2.4showsadistributionofdesignmomentsbasedonthefirstsolution.Thesupportmomentin
asupportbandmaybedistributedoveragreaterwidththanthespanmoment,asthesupportactsas
amomentdistributor.Thishasbeentakenintoaccountinthefigure.Asusual,itisrecommendedthat
atleastonebottomandonetopbarareprovidedalongeachsideoftheopening.
Example12.3
TheslabinFig.12.2.5isthesameasinExample12.1,butwithatriangularopeningABCinsteadofa
rectangularone.Theloadisstill9kN/m2.Thesamesupportbandsinthedirectionsofthecoordinate
axesareintroduced,butwithsupportbandsalongtheedgesACandBCaswell.
TheloadonthetrianglesACaandBbCcanbeassumedtobecarriedineitherthexorydirection,or
dividedbetweenthem.Inthiscase,theydirectionisthemainloadbearingdirection,becauseofthe
shapeoftheslab.Thereforeithasbeenchosentocarryalltheloadonthesetrianglesinthatdirection.
161
Thus element 5 also includes these triangles and is spanning between the edge of the slab and the
supportbandsACandBC.Elements1and4aresupportedonthesupportbandsintheydirection.
The support reaction from element 5 on the support bands varies linearly from
permetrewidthinthexdirection.Theaveragevalueis
Fig.12.2.4
Fig.12.2.5
10.80kNpermetrewidthandthedifferencebetweentheendsis8.1kNpermetrewidth.Thesupport
reactionsfromthesesupportbandsare
(12.25)
(12.26)
RAandRBarecarriedbythesupportbandsintheydirection.RCiscarriedbythesupportbandab,
either only to a and b,where supported on the support bands in the ydirection, or with some part
carryingtotheedgesoftheslab.Itis,asinthepreviousexamples,assumedthat10%iscarriedtothe
edgesoftheslaband90%topointsaandb,andweget
(12.27)
(12.28)
SupportbandAaisacteduponatAby7.59kNfromsupportbandACand5.57kNfromsupportband
AB,seeExample12.1,ataby5.31kNfromsupportbandabandbetweenAandaby4.05kN/mfrom
and the maximum
element 1, see Example 12.1. These loads give the moments
.
moment
In the same way, support band Bb is acted upon by 13.16 kN at B, 5.31 kN at b and 6.75 kN/m
between B and b. These loads give the moments
and the maximum moment
.
ThelengthofsupportbandsACandBCis
162

(12.29)
Theloadpermetrelengthofthesebandsisequalto1.25/ltimesthereactionspermetrewidthinthe
.Themomentinthesupport
xdirectiongivenabove.Theaverageloadisthus
bandsis,withsufficientaccuracy(within2%)
(12.30)
Theaveragemomentinelement5canbecalculatedbymeansofEq.(2.8),takingintoaccountthefact
that the cvalues in that formula correspond to half the lengths of the element, as the maximum
momentissituatedatthecentreofthestrip.
(12.31)
As the lengths of the strips forming element 5 vary considerably from the centre to the sides the
designmomentsshouldbechosenwithacorrespondingdistribution.
Fig.12.2.6showsapossibledistributionofdesignmoments. ThisfigureshouldbecomparedtoFig.
12.2.2,fromwhichsomeofthemomentsaretaken.
It is interesting to compare the amount of reinforcement in the slab with an opening according to
Examples12.1and12.3withthatforthesameslabwithoutanyopening,Example3.1.Theamountof
reinforcementisproportionaltotheaveragemomentoverthe
Fig.12.2.6
wholewidthoftheslab.Inthefirstplace,thereinforcementwhichisbesidetheopeningiscompared.
FortheslabinExample12.1wefindtheaveragemoments
(12.32)
(12.33)
FortheslabinExample12.3wefindtheaveragemoments
(12.34)
(12.35)
The average moments for the slab without any opening are, according to Example 3.1,
.Acomparisonshowsthatwewouldhavehadenoughtotalreinforcementbesidethe
opening if we had used the simple rule of just moving the reinforcement which would have passed
throughtheopeningtothesideofit.Thedistributionwouldhavebeensomewhatdifferent,butthisis
hardlyofanyimportanceforthebehaviouroftheslab.
The simple rule of moving the reinforcement does not, however, tell us anything about the
reinforcementinthedirectionbetweentheedgeoftheslabandtheedgeoftheopening(elements1,
3, 4 and 5 in the examples), nor about reinforcement along the edges of the opening which are not
parallel to the main reinforcement directions. For this reason the complete analysis is needed for
openingsaboveacertainsize.
Example12.4
163
TheslabinFig.12.2.7hasalargecircularopening.Supportbandsareintroducedinthedirectionsof
thecoordinateaxesandinall45directions,allbandsformingtangentstothecircle.Theanalysisis
similartothatinthepreviousexample,withthe45bandsformingsupportsforstripsinoneorboth
directions. These bands are supported on the bands in the directions of the coordinate axes. As the
analysisissimilartothatinthepreviousexamplenonumericalcalculationsareshown.
Fig.12.2.7
Asusual,itisrecommendedthatatleastonebottombarandonetopbarareprovidedalongtheedge
oftheopening.
12.2.2 Nonrectangularslabs
The principles for treating openings in nonrectangular slabs are the same as for rectangular slabs.
The main difference is that the numerical calculations are more timeconsuming because the static
systemandtheelementsaremoreirregular.Insteadofusingsimpleformulasitisoftennecessaryto
performnumericalsummationsandintegrationsofseriesofparallelstripsandofsupportbands.Only
onesimpleexampleisillustrated,atriangularslab.
Example12.5
ThetriangularslabinFig.12.2.8isthesameasinExample6.3,butwithalargeopeningABCD.The
loadis9kN/m2.
Theproposeddividinglinesbetweenelementsandsupportbandsareshowninthefigure.Between
elements2and3thereisalineofzeroshearforce(maximummoment).
Fig.12.2.8
Betweenelements3and4thereisalineofzeromoment.Elements5and7areassumedtofunctionas
purecantilevers.
Element1issupportedbytheedgeoftheslabandthesupportbandalongAD.Thedashdotlinein
thiscaseisjustaborderoftheelement,notalineofzeroshearforce.Themomentintheelementand
thesupportreactiononthesupportbandcannotbecalculatedbymeansofsomesimpleformulas,but
164
anumericalanalysisofaseriesofstripsinthexdirectionhastobeperformed.Theaveragemoment
intheelementis2.1kNm/m.ThesupportbandalongADisassumedtobesupportedonthesupport
bandalongABandfixedattheedgeoftheslab.(Itmightalsohavebeenassumedtobeextendedand
supportedatitsupperendinthefigureonthesupportoftheslab.)Thenumericalanalysisshowsthat
asupportreactionof4.4kNatAgivesasupportmomentof2.94kNmandaspanmomentof1.50
kNminsupportbandAD.
The average span moment between elements 2 and 3 is
. The reaction from
. This causes a support moment of 18.25 kNm, which is
element 3 on 4 is
distributedonthewidthoftheelement,whichis3.92m,givinganaveragemomentof4.66kNm/m.
The direct load on the element gives an average moment of 1.62, so the total average support
momentinelement4is6.28.
Theaveragesupportmomentinelement5,calculatedwithEq.(2.6)is,3.09.
Thesupportmomentinelement7is4.5.
Elements6and8areanalysedbymeansoftheapproximationaccordingtoFig.2.2.4andtheresulting
totalmomentisdistributedwithtwothirdsassupportmomentandonethirdasspanmoment.The
resultis
.
ThesupportbandalongABisassumedtoconsistofapartwithpositivemoments,supportedatitsleft
endattheedgeoftheslabandatitsrightendonacantilever,whichisperpendiculartothefixededge.
Thelengthofthepartwithpositivemomentsis3.0mandthelengthofthecantileveris1.04m.The
reaction4.4kNfromsupportbandADisacting1.36mfromtheleftend.Theresultingspanmomentis
3.27kNmandthesupportmoment2.07kNm.
AdistributionofdesignmomentsisproposedinFig.12.2.9.Thespanmomentsinthesupportbands
aredistributedoverawidthsof0.5m.Thesupportmomentsfromthesupportbandshavejustbeen
addedtoandincludedinthesupportmomentsfromelements8respectively4and5,inthelattercase
with about half in each. There is no reason to have a concentration of support moment at the
theoreticalcantilevercorrespondingtothesupportband,asthemomentissmallandthesupportacts
asadistributorofthemoment.
Fig.12.2.9
Thedesignmomentsclosetotheacutecornershavebeenassumedtobezero,asthecorresponding
reinforcementwouldhaveaninsufficientlengthwithintheslabandthusbeuseless.
Asusual,thereshouldbeatleastonebottomandonetopbarprovidedalongeachsideoftheopening
inordertopreventlargecracks.InthiscasethereisprobablyapositivemomentatcornerCunder
serviceconditionsandariskofacornercrackifthereisnoedgereinforcement.
The moments in this slab with an opening may be compared to those in the same slab without an
opening,Example6.3.Thisshowsthat,withtheopening,agreaterproportionoftheloadiscarriedin
165
thexdirection.Thisseemsreasonable,consideringtheactualsizeandpositionoftheopening.Inthis
comparison it must, however, be remembered that the ratio between loads carried in the different
directionsisbasedonamoreorlessarbitrarychoice.
12.3 Slabswithonefreeedge
12.3.1 Openingnotclosetothefreeedge
Thiscaseisanalysedwithmethodswhichareamixtureofthosedescribedaboveandthemethodsfor
slabswithonefreeedgedescribedinChapter4.
Example12.6
TheslabinFig.12.3.1isthesameasinExample4.2,butwithalargeopeningABCD.Theloadis11
kN/m2.Theassumedlinesofzeroshearforceareshown,aswellasthesupportbandsattheopening.
Element5isassumedtocarrytheloadasacantilever,sonosupportbandisneededalongDC.The
width of elements 2 and 6 is chosen so as to get suitable moments in element 1. A support band is
assumedalongthefreeedge.
WiththesupportreactionatthesupportbanddenotedRADwefind,forelement1,
(12.36)
With
wefind
Wefurtherfind
(12.37)
(12.38)
(12.39)
Fig.12.3.1
(12.40)
(12.41)
(12.42)
(12.43)
,andthesevaluesseemacceptable.
166
ThesupportbandalongABcaneitherbesupportedonthesupportbandsalongADandBCoronthe
slabsupports.Inthiscasewewillassumethatitissupportedontheslabsupportsforthewholeload.
This choice is made because it gives more reinforcement along the opening and more evenly
distributed reinforcement in the xdirection. With the load
acting between A and B and the
reactionRattherighthandendwehavethefollowingequilibriumequations
(12.44)
(12.45)
,whichisasuitableratiointhiscase.Correspondinganalyses
WithR=5wefind
for bands AD and BC give
,
and the reactions on the
supportbandalongthefreeedgeequalto1.5kNfromADand3.5kNfromBC.
Thesupportbandalongthefreeedgeisacteduponby
fromelement2,5.5kN/mfrom
element3,triangularloadsneartheendsandthepointloadsfromsupportbandsADandBC.Suitable
momentsarefoundtobe
.
The triangular elements at the corners give average moment contributions on the relevant widths:
. The ratios between these moments do not follow the normal
recommendations, but this is of no importance, as these moments are small compared to the other
momentsintheslab.
Fig.12.3.2
Fig. 12.3.2 shows a proposed distribution of design moments. The constant mxf value 37.1 on the
wholewidthbetweentheopeningandthefreeedge, calculatedas8.77/1.0+25.2/1.0+3.10,canbe
questioned.Maybeitwouldbesomewhatbettertoconcentratethereinforcementmoretowardsthe
freeedge,e.g.with49.0onhalfthewidthand25.2ontheotherhalf.
ThesupportmomentsfromthesupportbandsADandBChavebeendistributedsothatthemomentis
not too uneven along the edge. This type of distribution can be varied within rather wide limits
withoutanysignificantinfluenceonthebehaviouroftheslab.Maybeinthiscaseitwouldhavebeen
slightlybettertoplacemoreofthereinforcementclosertothelefthandsideoftheslab.Thesupport
reinforcement according to Fig. 12.3.2 is probably too small by about one metre from the left hand
cornerfromthepointofviewofcrackprevention.
12.3.2 Openingatthefreeedge
Wherethereisanopeningatthefreeedgethemainsupportbandisplacedjustinsidetheopening.
Besidetheopeningareplacedsupportbands,whichcantileveroutandtakecareoftheloadcloserto
thefreeedge.
Example12.7
The slab in Fig. 12.3.3, which has an opening at the free edge, is again basically the same as in the
previousexampleandExample4.2,withaloadof11kN/m2.Theproposedsupportbandsandlinesof
zeroshearforceareshown.
167

Fig.12.3.3
In this case it is rather difficult to estimate the behaviour and moment distribution under service
conditions. The opening makes the slab weaker, so that it deflects more than a slab without an
opening.Thislargerdeflectioncanbeexpectedtoleadtolargersupportmoments,particularlyalong
theshortfixededge.Thepositionofthelineofzeroshearforcebetweenelements5and7determines
thesupportmomentalongthelongfixededge.Ithasbeenplacedsomedistanceawayfromtheedge
inordertogetsupportmomentswhichareestimatedtobelargeenough.
ApplyingEqs(2.3)(2.5)andtheequationforasimplysupportedbeamweget
(12.46)
(12.47)
(12.48)
(12.49)
(12.50)
(12.51)
(12.52)
and the load from element 3 on BC
The load from element 2 on support band AD is
.Thecorrespondingdesignmomentsinthesupportbandsare
(12.53)
(12.54)
Thesesupportbandsarefixedatthelowerendsinthefigure.Itisdifficulttoestimatehowlargethe
supportmomentsare,andeventhesignsofthemoments.Itisthereforeassumedthatthemoments
arezero,correspondingtohinges.Thisassumptionisofnoimportanceforthebehaviouroftheslab,
asthemoments inthesesupportbandsaresmallcomparedtotheothermoments intheslab.With
thisassumptionwegetsupportreactionsfromthesesupportbandsonthemainband
(12.55)
(12.56)
168
TheloadonthemainsupportbandalongCDconsistsofthesetwoforcesandtheloadonelement5.
Ananalysisofthesupportbandwiththeassumptionthatthepointofmaximummomentis1.9from
therighthandendgives
(12.57)
(12.58)
whichcanbeconsideredtobeasuitablemomentratiowithregardtothetypeofload.
Fig.12.3.4showsaproposeddistributionofdesignmoments.Thedistributionalongtheshortfixed
edge has been chosen to be somewhat different from the theoretical distribution according to the
analysis.Agreatdealofthesupportmomentfromthemainsupportbandhasbeenmovedcloserto
thefreeedgeoftheslab.Thisismotivatedbythefactthatitmaybeestimatedthatthemomentinthe
servicestateincreasestowardsthecorneratthefreeedge.Ifthefixededgehadbeenfreelysupported
the angular displacement along the edge would probably have increased towards that corner. The
total sum of moments along the edge of course corresponds to the calculated values. Possibly the design
momentshouldhavebeenvariedinmoresteps.
Fig.12.3.4
12.4 Slabswithtwofreeedges
12.4.1 Twooppositefreeedges
Theanalysisofthiscaseisquitesimilartothatofaslabwithonefreeedge,withtheonlydifference
beeingthattwosupportbandsalongthefreeedgesareintroduced.
12.4.2 Twoadjacentfreeedgesandsimplesupports
Thediscussionbelowfirstconsidersrectangularslabs.
Where the other two edges are simply supported, no solution can be found with the simple strip
method if the reinforcement is placed in the directions of the edges, see Chapter 5. This is because
therehavetobetorsionalmomentstofulfiltheequilibriumconditions.Suchsolutionsareoutsidethe
scope of this book and are not treated, with the exception of some particular standard solutions,
mainlyforcornersupportedelements.
Theonlypossibilityfortreatingaslabwithtwoadjacentfreeedgesandtwosimplysupportededges
bymeansofthestripmethodistoarrangethereinforcementinskewdirections,onereinforcement
direction forming a support band along the diagonal between the edges where free and simply
supportededgesmeet.Thissupportbandactsassupportforstripsinadirectionparalleltotheother
diagonaloratsomeotherangletothefirstdiagonal.Thereinforcementinthesupportbandisbottom
reinforcementandintheotherdirectionitistopreinforcement.Forreinforcementdistributionssee
Section5.2.2andExample7.4.
Analysisofaslabwithanopeningtendstobecomenumerically complicated,andasthesituationis
notcommon,itwillonlybediscussedinprinciple,withoutanynumericalexample.
169
Iftheopeningissituatedwelloutsideorinsidethesupportbandtheanalysisisnottoocomplicated,
as the support band is unbroken. With the opening outside the support band the approach is
illustrated in Fig. 12.4.1. The main support band AC is unbroken. Secondary support bands are
introducedonbothsidesoftheopeninginthedirectionofthediagonalBD,asinthefigure,oratsome
otherangletothemainsupportband.Theloadbetweenthesebandsiscarriedtothebandsbymeans
of bottom reinforcement parallel to AC or parallel to the edges of the opening. The corresponding
momentscanbecalculatedratherapproximately,astheyaresmall.Thesecondarysupportbandsare
supportedonthemainsupportbandandonthesimplysupportededges.
Fig.12.4.1
If the opening is situated so that it cuts the diagonal AC the analysis is more complicated. One
possibility is illustrated in Fig. 12.4.2. From each of the corners A and C two support bands are
introduced, tangents to the opening. These support bands together take over the role of the main
supportbandinFig.12.4.1.Secondarysupportbandsareintroducedpastthecornersoftheopening.
ThesebandsaresupportedonthepartsofthemainbandsbetweentheopeningandthecornersAand
C respectively. Each secondary band is thus supported by two main bands. The load is divided
betweenthesebandsina suitable proportion, e.g.sothatthe reactionof the secondary bandatthe
simplysupportededgeisclosetozero.
Fig.12.4.2
The band Ad has no real support at d. Another secondary band has to be introduced to take that
reactionandtransfertheforcetothemainbands.ThesamealsoholdsforbandCbatb.Pointdisnot
necessarilysituatedat thefree edge.Itmaybeassumedtobesituatedcloserto theopening,which
maygiveabettermomentdistribution.
The procedure is numerically complicated, but with a suitable choice of moment distribution it
probablyleadstoasounddesign.Inadditiontothedesignedreinforcementthereshouldbebottom
and top bars along the edges of the opening and along the free edges as well as some minimum
reinforcement.
A design with the main reinforcement in the directions of the diagonals is advantageous for the
behaviour of the slab and economical regarding the amount of reinforcement, as the reinforcement
directions are close to the principal moment directions. However, it has the disadvantage that the
reinforcingbarshavevaryinglengths,whichcomplicatesconstructionwork.
170
12.4.3 Twoadjacentfreeedgesandfixedsupports
Whereatleastoneedgeisfixed,thestaticbehaviourmaybebasedoncantileveraction,ashasbeen
shown in Chapter 5. Then it may also be possible to analyse a slab with an opening and the
reinforcementparallelwiththeedgesbymeansof the stripmethod,providedthatthelongedge or
bothedgesarefixed.
Example12.8
TheslabinFig.12.4.3isthesameasinExample5.1,butwithanopeningABCD.Theloadis9kN/m2.A
formal analysis can be performed with the support bands along AD and BC, cantilevering from the
fixedsupport,andtheelementsshown.Theelementscarryingloadinthexdirectionareassumedto
besimplysupportedonthesupportbands.
Fig.12.4.3
Wegetthefollowingmomentsintheelements
(12.59)
(12.60)
(12.61)
(12.62)
(12.63)
(12.64)
onsupportbandAD.Elements3aand3bgivereactions
Element2bgivesareactionof
onbothbands.Theseloadsgivethefollowingsupportmomentsforthebands
(12.65)
(12.66)
AdistributionofdesignmomentsbasedonthesevaluesisshowninFig.12.4.4.Thesupportmoments
inthesupportbandshavebeendistributedoncertainwidthsofthesupport.Ithastobenotedthatall
reinforcement in the bands has to pass beside the opening, as the moment in the bands decreases
ratherslowly.
171

Fig.12.4.4
Thereinforcementdeterminedfromthisanalysisissufficientfromthepointofviewofsafety,butitis
not sufficient to make the slab behave well in the service state, particularly regarding cracks. The
analysishasbeenbasedontheassumptionthattheloadiscarriedbybendingmomentsinthexand
ydirections.Inrealitytheloadinthistypeofslabgivesrisetolargetorsionalmoments.Therehasto
be torsional reinforcement to prevent the formation of large torsional cracks. In the analysis of the
correspondingslabwithoutanopening,Example5.1,someoftheloadhasbeenassumedtobecarried
by means of a solution including torsional moments, which gives at least some torsional
reinforcementintheslab.Nocorrespondingsolutionexistsfortheslabwithanopening.Theamount
oftorsionalreinforcementshouldbeatleastaslargeintheslabwithanopeningasintheslabwithout
anopening.Forarealisticestimateofthetorsionalmomentssomekindofanelasticanalysishastobe
performed.
ThedistributionofsupportmomentinFig.12.4.4isalsoquestionable.Thesuddenjumpinvalueat
thesupportbandsisnotrealistic.Inordertopreventwidecrackssomeextrareinforcementhastobe
introduced in these regions. The ratio between the support moments to the left and right of the
openingisalsodifferentfromwhatcanbeexpectedfromanelasticanalysis.Themomenttotheright
oftheopeningiscertainlylargerthantotheleftunderserviceconditions,asthemaximumdeflection
of the slab is in its outer free corner. A better solution from this point of view can be obtained by
supposingthattheuppermost1.5mofelement2issupportedonsupportbandBCinsteadofAD.With
this change in assumption, the numerical value of MAD decreases by
. The
supportreactionatbandBCincreaseswith4.00kN/monthecorrespondinglength,whichgivesan
increase in the numerical value of MBC of
. The total amount of support
moment decreases and the distribution is more satisfactory with such an assumption. At the same
timethespanmomentintheuppermost1.5mofelement2increasesto10.9kNm/m.Somepartof
thismomenthastobeaddedtom3,astheforceistransferredthroughelement3.Themaximumvalue
ofthespanmomentwithinelement3becomes9.4kNm/m.
It is evident that this example demonstrates a case where the strip method must be applied with
caution, supplemented with at least some estimates of moment distributions in the service state,
whicharedifferentfromthestripmethodsolution.
12.5 Corner-supported elements

In a cornersupported element, much of the loadbearing action takes place by means of torsional
moments, which have been taken into account in the rules for the design of such elements. The
importanceofthetorsionalmomentsishighestclosetothesupportedcorner.Anopeningchangesthe
behaviour of the slab in a way which is not easy to estimate and to compensate for. Therefore no
attempt will be made to give a complete recommendation for the analysis of cornersupported
elementswithopenings,butonlysomegeneralpointsofviewandrecommendationsforlesscrucial
cases.Onlyrectangularelementswithadistributedloadwillbediscussed.
172
Thetypeofdesigntobeusedforacornersupportedelementdependsonthesizeandpositionofthe
opening. Regarding positions at least three cases can be identified. The following recommendations
aregivenwithreferencetothesedifferentsituations.
Within area A in Fig. 12.5.1, where the two column strips cross, the torsional moments are very
important.Ifopeningsofasizelargerthanoftheorderofthedepthoftheslabaremadewithinthis
areaitisrecommendedtorefrainfromthefulluseofthestripmethodandatleasttosupplementitby
an elastic analysis. With smaller openings the reinforcement which would be cut by the opening is
arrangedalongitsedges..
Fig.12.5.1
WithinareasBinFig.12.5.1,whereacolumnstripandamiddlestripcross,openingswhichcanbe
inscribed inasquarewiththesidesparalleltothereinforcementdirectionsand notlarger than0.2
timesthesmallestcvalueoftheelementmaybetreatedinthefollowingway:
Thereinforcementwhichshouldhavepassedthroughtheopeningiskeptinpositionandjustcutat
theopening.Acorrespondingamountofreinforcementisplacedalongtheedgesoftheopeningand
givenasufficientlengthtoensureasafeforcetransferbetweenthetworeinforcingsystems.
WithinareaCinFig.12.5.1,wherethetwomiddlestripscross,openingswhichcanbeinscribedina
squarewiththesidesparalleltothereinforcementdirectionandnotlargerthan0.3timesthesmallest
cvaluemaybetreatedinthesameway.
The application of these recommendations will lead to slabs with adequate safety against bending
failure,andprobablyalsowithacceptablebehaviourunderserviceconditions.
Where the openings are larger than those treated in these recommendations it may sometimes be
possible to make an analysis based on the assumption of support bands, particularly for openings
totallywithinareaCinFig.12.5.1orwithinareasB,butnotclosetothecoordinateaxesinthefigure.
Such an analysis tends to be numerically complicated and to require qualified estimates of suitable
reinforcement distributions with regard to the service state. In such cases it is probably better to
makeanelasticanalysiswithacomputerprogram.
173
CHAPTER13
Systemsofcontinuousslabs
13.1 General
Mostofthepreviouschaptershavetreatedoneslabatatime.Theonlyexceptioncanbesaidtobeflat
slabs which are continuous over the column supports. In this chapter the situation will be treated
whereslabsarecontinuousoverwalls.Themainproblemisthechoiceofsuitablesupportmoments.
The basic approach is to start by calculating support moments for the slabs which meet over the
support as if they were fixed. The support moment is then calculated as a weighted average of the
momentsonbothsidesofthesupportingwall.Possiblyalsosomeofthemomentdifferencemaybe
taken by the wall. The weighted average is determined with regard to the estimated stiffness ratio
between the slabs in accordance with normal methods applied in structural mechanics. Even if the
estimateofthestiffnessratioisratherapproximatetheresultisasaruleacceptable.Itis,however,
generallyrecommendedthatthesupportmomentischosensomewhatonthehighratherthanthelow
side.
Thechoiceofsupportmomenthasnoimportanceforsafetybuthasaninfluenceonthebehaviourin
the service state. Within reasonable limits it has practically no influence on the deformations, so in
practice in the first place it is the risk of wide cracks that should be taken into account. Enough
reinforcement must be provided in sections where it is important to avoid visible cracks. Thus the
supportmomentmustbechosenonthehighsideifitismainlyimportanttoavoidwidecracksonthe
top surface, whereas the support moment may be chosen somewhat on the low side if it is more
importanttoavoidwidecracksonthebottomsurface.Thischoicemaybedeterminedbythetypeof
floorcovering,forinstance.
Fig.13.1.1showsasituationwherethesupportmomentfromthelargeslabisbalancednotonlyby
thesupportmomentsfromthesmallerslabs,butalsobythemomenttakenbythewallatrightangles,
which presents a short fixed part of the support of the large slab. Close to the wall, the support
moment for the large slab will be larger than if the edge had been fixed all along. In this case, the
averageslabmomentsonbothsidesofthewallarethusnotthesame,assomemomentistakenbythe
wallatrightangles.
Fig.13.1.1
Fig. 13.1.2shows another situation where the slab moments on the two sidesof the wall cannot be
assumed to balance each other. The small slab has two free edges and the support moment
distributionissuchthatitisconcentratedtowardstheupperendinthefigure,cf.Example5.1.The
support moment from the load on the large slab, which is supported all around, has its maximum
closertothecentreofthesupport.Thesetwomomentdistributionsthuscannotbalanceeachother
completely, at least not in the service state. Some of the moment from the small slab has to be
balancedbymomentstakenbytheupperwallatrightanglesinthefigure.
Fig 13.1.3 shows a slab where there is continuity only along a certain part of an edge whereas the
remaining part is simply supported. In analysing this situation we may start by assuming that the
wholeedgeisfixed.Ifwethenreleasethemomentfromthesimplysupportedpart,themomentinthe
remaining part will increase. It cannot, however, increase so much that the total moment along the
174
edge increases. With the notations in the figure, the average moment along the fixed part a0 of the
edgeamustthusliebetweenthevaluesm0andam0la1,wherem0isthemomentwhenthewholeedge
isfixed.Whichisthebestvaluebetweentheselimitshastobeestimated.Withtheproportionsshown
inthefigurethemomentwillbelargestattheendofthecontinuouspart.
Fig.13.1.2
Fig.13.1.3
13.2 Systems of rectangular slabs

Inordertolimitthenumericalcalculations,theexampleschosenbelowareassimpleaspossible.The
intentionisonlytodemonstratetheprinciples.Withaproperunderstandingofthegeneralapproach
thereshouldbenoprobleminanalysingmorecomplexslabsystems.
Example13.1
TheslabsysteminFig.13.2.1consistsofonlytwoslabs,whichmeetoverasupportingwall.Allother
edgesaresimplysupported.Theloadis9kN/m2.Linesofzeroshearforceareshown,basedonthe
generalprinciplesgiveninSection2.2.
Fig.13.2.1
Westartbycalculatingthesupportmomentsasiftheslabshadfixedsupportsatthewall.Applying
Eqs(2.5)and(2.4)anddirectlysubtractingthespanmomentsfromthenumericalvaluesofsupport
momentswefindtheaveragemoments
(13.1)
175
(13.2)
Suitable choices of cvalues (with regard to ratios between span and support moments) are:
,whichgives
.Asthesmallslabisstifferthanthelarge
.
slabthefinalmomentshouldbechosencloserto7.61thanto4.73,say
We now have to adjust the c values to conform to the new value of ms. We can assume that the
dimensionsinthedirectionsatrightanglesareunchanged.(Inmorecomplexslabsystemsofcourse
changes in these directions may also have to be taken into account.) We can then apply the above
equations.
Forthesmallslabwehavetotakeintoaccountthat
.Wefind
.Forthelarge
slab we may keep the value of c4, as the change in the support moment in this case influences the
momentinelement4verylittle.Wefind
.
Example13.2
TheslabsysteminFig.13.2.2isthesameasinthepreviousexamplewiththeexceptionthatthesmall
slab has a long free edge. This of course increases the support moment. It is now more difficult to
estimate the pattern of lines of zero shear force for the small slab. It seems reasonable to assume
whenthesupportisfixed,althoughasmallervaluemightbechosen.Theequilibriumequation
gives
(13.3)
Fig.13.2.2
Forthelargeslab,Eq.(13.2)isvalid,andforthecasewithafixedsupportweusethesamevaluesas
.
above,i.e.
Because of the free edge the small slab is now less stiff than the large slab. A suitable value of the
support moment may be 8.10. Applying the same procedure as above we find
.
Theresultinthiscaseisverysensitivetothechoiceofc1.This,however,doesnotinfluencethesafety,
onlythebehaviourintheservicestate.
Example13.3
TheslabsysteminFig.13.2.3isagainthesame,butwiththeexceptionthatnowtheupperedgeofthe
smallslabisalsofree.ForthatslabweapplythesametypeofsolutionasinExample5.1,startingwith
anassumptionthatthecontinuousedgeisfixed.Mostoftheloadiscarriedbythestripsinthefigure,
but part of it is carried by a solution including torsional moments, as discussed in Chapter 5. As in
Example 5.1, we assume that 20% of the load is carried in this way. If we assume
, the
2
remainder,7.2kN/m ,givesrisetoasupportmoment
(13.4)
176

Fig.13.2.3
This moment is unevenly distributed along the support, with the largest value in the vicinity of the
uppercorner,seeFig.5.2.4.Thewholeofthemomentsms2cannotbeusedtobalance
,as
theirdistributionsaresodifferent.Onepartofms2hastobecarriedbytheperpendicularsupportfor
thelargeslab.Wecan,forexample,assumethat20%istakeninthatway.Theremainingpart,15.0,
mightbetakenintoaccountindeterminingthevalueofms.
Asthesmallslabisnowmuchlessstiffthanthelargeslab,asuitablesupportmomentmightbeabout
13.However,thislargeincreaseinms3correspondstoanappreciableangulardisplacementoverthe
support.This angulardisplacementwillcausemoreofthesupportmomentms2 tobecarriedatthe
uppercorner,andalsomoretobecarriedbytorsionalmoments.
Thesituationisevidentlyverycomplex,anditisdifficulttoknowhowthemomentsandthetypeof
static function can be best estimated. It is proposed that the part of the load taken by the solution
includingtorsionalmomentsshouldbeincreasedto30%andc1shouldbeincreasedto1.5m.Wethen
.Ifwefurtherassumethat30%iscarriedattheuppercornerwefind
.This
find
valueseemsreasonablewithrespecttothelargeslab,andgives
.
Thissolutionistoaratherlargeextentevidentlybasedonestimates.Itis,however,safeaslongasthe
assumed moment distributions are such that the corresponding reinforcement can function in an
appropriateway.Thechosenmomentdistributionhastocoveranappropriatemomentdistribution
for the large slab as well as for the small slab. This will be the case if we distribute the support
moment according to the diagram shown to the left in the figure. A normal distribution, with two
thirdsofmsoutsidethequarterpointsandfourthirdsinsidethequarterpointsforthelargeslabis
covered,aswellasthetotalmomentforthesmallslabwithastrongconcentrationtowardstheupper
corner, where the slab is locally fixed. The solution also seems to give an acceptable reinforcement
distributionwithregardtotheservicestate.
Example13.4
TheslabsysteminFig.13.2.4consistsofthreeslabsA,BandC,supportedonwallsbetweentheslabs
butsimplysupportedalongallotheredges.Alltheslabshaveauniformloadof9kN/m2.
ForslabAwecancalculatetheaveragesupportmomentbyassuming
,whichgives
(13.5)
ForslabBwecanassume
,whichgivestheaveragemoment
177
Fig.13.2.4
(13.6)
SlabChasanedgewhichisonlypartlycontinuous.Wethenhavetostartbyassumingthatitisfully
weget
fixed.With
(13.7)
. From the shape of
The total moment corresponding to this average moment is
element9itcanbeseenthatthegreatestpartofthismomentistheoreticallycausedbystripswhich
endatthepartoftheedgewhichisinrealitysimplysupported.Whenthewholeedgeisfixedthus,
only a minor part of the total moment falls within the distance ab. When the moment on the freely
supportedpartisreleased,however,themomentonabwillincrease,withaconcentrationclosetoa.
Itmaybeestimatedthatbetween30and60%ofthetotalmomentwillremainwithinab,say,45%or
about24kNm.Mostofthistotalmomentwillbetakenclosetoaandtransformedtothewallatright
anglesata.Wemayassumethatthemomentistakenasadistributedmoment
andthe
remainingpartasaconcentratedmoment
ata.
Indeterminingthesupportmomentsalongthesupportabcwehavetotakeintoaccountthatms3is
the largest and will cause an angular displacement of the slab over the support. This angular
displacement will be prevented at b by the wall at right angles. This causes a concentrated support
moment at b. An estimate may be that the moment difference on some 20 to 30% of the support
lengthwillbetakenbythatconcentratedmoment.Themomentdifferenceisabout15kNm/mandthe
concentratedmomentcanthusbetakentobe
.
is mainly taken at bc. We can assume
and
The remaining total moment
,whichgivesapproximatelytherighttotalmoment.
Using the above moments, and averaging with an approximate regard to the stiffnesses, gives the
designmoments
,
.
Afterthesemomentshavebeendeterminedwecancalculatethenewcvalues.Thuswiththeaverage
designsupportmoment
weget
178

(13.8)
.
whichleadsto
InslabBwemaykeepc7unchangedandequalto1.3,andweget
(13.9)
.
whichgives
In slab C we may keep c11 unchanged and equal to 1.8. The average moment ms9 is
andweget
(13.10)
.
whichgives
With the changed positions of the lines of zero shear force we can now calculate the average fixed
edgesupportmomentsoverthewallbetweenslabsBandC,assuming
(13.11)
(13.12)
SlabBisslightlystifferthanCandasuitabledesignmomentis13.5.
The remaining part of the analysis follows normal procedures. In determining the distribution of
design moments, the concentrated moments at a and b should be distributed on small widths and
added to the other moments. In slab C the span moment from elements 9 and 11 must be rather
unsymmetricallydistributedinordertocompensatefortheunsymmetricaldistributionofthesupport
moment.
Example13.5
Awatertankhasarectangularbottom
andadepthof4.0m.Itrestsoncolumnsalongthe
edgesofthebottom.Itmustbedesignedforthecasewhereitisfilledwithwater.ThebottomBofthe
tankandtwoofthesidesAandCareshowninFig.13.2.5.Patternsoflinesofzeroshearforcearealso
shown.Becauseofsymmetry
etc.
The water pressure is assumed to increase by 10 kN/m2 per metre depth (a more correct value is
10.2).Itisthus40kN/m2atthebottom.
Assuming
, and taking the symmetry into account, we get the
followingaveragemoments,applyingtheequationsinSections2.3.24:
(13.13)
(13.14)
(13.15)
(13.16)
179
Fig.13.2.5
(13.17)
(13.18)
(13.19)
(13.20)
.
Withregardtosuitablemomentratios,wemaychoose
Elements2and11aresupportedbysupportbands.Themomentsinthesesupportbandsare
(13.21)
(13.22)
With regard to load distributions and suitable moment ratios we may choose
as
supportmomentswhentheendsarefixed.
Ifwecomparethemomentsonbothsidesofsupportswefindthatthemomentdifferencesarequite
smallinallcasesexceptforthesupportbands.Inthefirstplacewethereforetakethisdifferenceinto
account.
AsslabCissmallerandstifferthanA,asuitabledesignsupportmomentforthesupportbands,based
on the above values, is 17 kNm. (Application of the recommendation in Section 10.2 gives
,thusthesameresult.)Suchavaluewillmeanthatthespanmomentintheband
alongelement11isnegativeandthebandisbentinwards.Ontheotherhand,thebandalongelement
2willdeflectoutwards.Thesedeformationswillleadtoadecreaseinthenumericalvalueofms9and
180
anincreaseinms4.Takingthisandthemomentdifferencesattheedgesintoaccount,wecantrynew
cvalues,whicharenowregardedasfinal.
We start by assuming new values for slab C,
. This leads to
,
.
wecanfindthatasuitablevalueofc7is1.75,whichgives
.
Basedon
Ifwefurtherassume
and
,wefindthatasuitablevalueofc3is2.5,which
.
gives
. A
We have now determined all cvalues and we can calculate
suitablevalueofthesupportmomentforthesupportbandsis15,whichgives
,a
smallnegativevalue.
wefind
,whichisacceptable.
Applying
Becauseofthetriangularloaddistributionandtheshapeofthetank,strongmomentconcentrations
cannotbeexpectedatthefreeedges.Thedesignmomentdistributionmightthereforebechosentobe
rathereven.Ontheotherhand,theanalysisisbasedontheassumptionofsupportbandsalongthe
freeedges.ThemomentdistributionproposedinFig.13.2.6forslabAisacompromisebetweenthese
pointsofview.
Fig.13.2.6
The result of this analysis is a tank with adequate safety and a reinforcement distribution which is
suitablefromthepointofviewofdeformations.Itmaynotbethebestreinforcementarrangementto
limitcracking.Thistypeofdesignisthereforenotrecommendedwheretheconcreteisintendedtobe
watertight.Forsuchacasethedesignshouldbebasedonthetheoryofelasticity,takingdueaccount
oftorsionalmoments.
13.3 Rectangular slabs and concrete walls

Concretewallscanberegardedasconcreteslabswithzeroload.Thesupportmomentscantherefore,
as a reasonable approximation, be calculated with the same methods as above, with the support
moments for fixed edges equal to zero for the walls, taking into account the ratios between the
stiffnessesoftheslabs.
13.4 Other cases

Systems including nonrectangular slabs or slabs with cornersupported elements can be analyzed
accordingtothesameprinciplesasabove.Ofcoursesuchcasestendtogivemorelaboriousnumerical
calculationsandmoreintricateestimates.Thereforenonumericalexamplesareshown.
181
CHAPTER14
Joistfloors
14.1 General
In a joist floor Joists or ribs in one or two directions interact with a rather thin slab to take the
moments.ForpositivemomentsthejoistsandtheslabactasTbeamswithtensionreinforcementin
thebottomofthejoistsandcompressivestressesintheslab.Joistfloorscanbemadetotakemuch
higherpositivethannegativemoments.Inplaceswherelargenegativemomentsoccur,thejoistfloor
isreplacedbyasolidslabwiththesamedepth.
Ajoisthasaverylimitedabilitytotaketorsionalmomentsinthedirectionoftheribs.Thedesignhas
tobemadeontheassumptionthatonlybendingmomentsoccur.Thislimitsthepossibilityofusing
joist floors in situations where torsional moments are essential for carrying the load. Thus, for
example,ajoistfloorwithjoistsparalleltotheedgescannotbeusedforarectangularslabwithtwo
adjacentedgesfreeandtheotheredgessimplysupported.Whereacornersupportedelementforms
partofajoistfloortheremustbeasolidpartinthevicinityofthesupportedcorner.
Asjoistfloorsaredesignedontheassumptionthattheytakenotorsionalmoments,butonlybending
momentsinthedirectionsofthejoists,theapplicationofthestripmethodisbasedonthesimplestrip
method.
A joist floor has a limited ability to redistribute moment in the lateral direction. The lateral
redistributionwithinwidelimits,whichmaybeacceptedforasolidslab,cannotbeacceptedwithina
joistfloor.Eachjoisthas,inprinciple,totakethemomentfromtheloadwhichhasbeenassignedtoit.
Where there is a system of crossing joists some lateral moment redistribution may however be
accepted.
14.2 Non-corner-supported floors

The simple strip method may in principle be applied directly. Just as for solid slabs, the floor is
normally divided into areas where the load is carried in the different joist directions. The dividing
linesareoftenlinesofzeroshearforceandofmaximumpositivemoments.Theloadwhichisassigned
toeachjoististhatontheareabetweenthecentrelinesbetweentheparalleljoists.
As the lines of zero shear force often form an angle to the direction of a joist, the theoretical load
distribution on a joist from a uniform load on the floor has a shape according to Fig. 14.2.1. The
momentsinthejoistarethendeterminedfromtheequation
(14.1)
Thesecondtermcanoftenbedisregarded.
182

Fig.14.2.1
Example14.1
ThesimplysupportedjoistfloorinFig.14.2.2hasjoistsat0.9mcentresinbothdirections.Theloadis
8 kN/m2, which corresponds to 7.2 kN/m for the loaded parts of the joists. An assumed pattern of
linesofzeroshearforceisshown.
Joistahas
and
.Wethusget
(14.2)
Inthesamewaywefind
(14.3)
Fig.14.2.2
(14.4)
(14.5)
Noticethatlissmallerforjoistd.
Joistehas
etc.Joisthhas
(14.6)
(14.7)
(14.8)
.Weget
(14.9)
Acertainlimitedredistributionofmomentsbetweenadjacentparallelstripsmaybeperformed.
183
Thissolutiongivesaratherunevenreinforcementdistribution.Itisalsopossibletomakeananalysis
ontheassumptionthattheloadisdividedbetweenthetwodirectionswithincertainareas.Wecan,
forexample,assumealoaddistributionaccordingtoFig.14.2.3,wherehalftheloadistakenineach
directionwithinthecornerregions.Withthisdistributionweget
(14.10)
(14.11)
(14.12)
Fig.14.2.3
This analysis is simpler and gives a more even reinforcement distribution. It gives a little more
reinforcement. The sum of all moments is for the first analysis
and for the second analysis
,
which is about 5% higher, corresponding to 5% more reinforcement. This small difference is in
practicemoreorlesscompensatedforbyagreaterneedforminimumreinforcementinthefirstcase.
Inmanycasesasolutionofthesecondtypeistobepreferred.Ofcourse,otherloaddistributionsthan
onewithhalfineachdirectionmaybeused.
Example14.2
ThejoistfloorinFig.14.2.4hasonefreeedgeandthreefixededges.Thejoistspacingis1.2m.Along
thefixededgesthereisasolidslabofwidthequaltoonejoistspacingplushalfthewidthofajoist.
Alongthefreeedgethereisabeamwithawidthequaltohalfthewidthofajoistplus0.2m.Theload
isassumedtobeauniform8kN/m2.Thehigherdeadweightofthesolidpartsisthusdisregardedin
ordertosimplifythenumericalcalculations.
A simple approach has been chosen with dividing lines parallel with the edges and half the load
carriedineachdirectiononareas
.
at3.0mfromeachend.
Westartbyanalysingjoistb,whichhasaloadof
184
Fig.14.2.4
(14.13)
Due to the higher stiffness near the supports and to the load distribution we may choose
.Themomentsinjoistcmaybetakenasonehalfofthesevalues,
.
Stripd,whichisasolidslabstrip,musttakeloadfromawidthof1.8mandwillthustakeamoment
whichis1.5timesthatinjoistc,
.Thereinforcementforthesemomentsmustmainly
beplacedfarfromtheparallelsupport.
Joist f has a load of 4.8 kN/m at 3.0 m from the fixed end and is supported on beam a, where the
supportreactionisdenotedRfa.Theequilibriumequationis
(14.14)
Suitable values may be
, which gives the span moments
. The ratio
between moments is acceptable with respect to the higher stiffness near the fixed support and the
loaddistribution.Themomentsinstripecanbetakenas1.5timesthesevalues,
andthecorrespondingreaction
,acting0.9mfromthesupport.
Joistghasaloadof9.6kN/monthewholelength.Theequilibriumequationis
(14.15)
Suitablevaluesmaybe
Theedgebeamahastocarryauniformloadof
and
endandthereactions
.
actingalongalengthof3.0mfromeach
.Theequilibriumequationis
(14.16)
Suitablevaluesmaybe
.
Thelargestpositivejoistmomentis13.35kNmandthelargestnegativejoistmomentwhereitmeets
the solid slab can be shown to be about 6.4 kNm. The most stressed member is the edge beam.
Whetherthedesignisacceptablecanonlybejudgedafterthereinforcementhasbeendesignedand
theconcretestressescalculated.Itmayhavebeenadvantageoustochooseawideredgebeam.
14.3 Floors with corner-supported elements

In a cornersupported element the moment field in the vicinity of the support is nearly polar
symmetric with negative tangential moments and positive or numerically smaller negative radial
moments. This moment field contains large torsional moments with respect to the reinforcement
185
directions.Thesetorsionalmomentscannotbecarriedbyajoistfloor.Inthevicinityofthesupport
therehastobeasolidslab,withtheabilitytotaketorsionalmoments.
A cornersupported element which forms part of a joist floor thus has to have a solid slab in the
vicinity of the supported corner, whereas the rest of the element has crossing joists. As a rule, the
solidparthasarectangularshapeandhasitsedgesasacontinuationofthejoists.Onlythiscasewill
betreatedhere,butofcoursethesameprinciplesmaybeusedevenwherethesolidparthasanother
shape.
Acornersupportedelementthushascrossingjoistswhichcarrytheloadonlybymeansofbending
moments.Thesejoistsareintheirturncarriedbythesolidpartwhichalsotakestorsionalmoments
andwhichcarriestheloadintothesupport.
Fig.14.3.1showsacornersupportedelementwhichhasasolidpartnexttothesupportedcorner.The
element is divided into column strips and middle strips. The boundary lines between column and
middlestripsarehalfwaybetweenthesolidpartandthenearestjoist.Thewidthofthecolumnstrip
inthexdirectionisdenotedycY.
Withintheareawherethemiddlestripscrosstheloadisdividedbetweenthetwostrips.Thesimplest
assumptionistodividetheloadintotwoequalparts,andonlythiscasewillbetreatedhere.Ofcourse
itispossibletomakeotherassumptions,butthisdoesnotseemtogiveanyadvantageinthiscase.
Amiddlestripissupportedonthecrossingcolumnstrip.Intheanalysiswemayuseaveragemoments
and forcesper unit width. From these average moments and forces we later calculate the moments
and forces in the joists and in the solid part. The forces per unit area on the middle strip in the x
direction are shown in Fig. 14.3.2. The reaction on the column strip is assumed to be uniformly
distributed.Forthemomentsperunitwidthinthemiddlestripinthexdirectionwefind,withindex
mformiddlestrip
(14.17)
Itcanbedemonstratedthatitissuitabletohaveequalnumericalvaluesforthetwomoments,thus
(14.18)
Thevalueofthesupportmomentmayhavetobemodifiedinordertomakeitagreewiththevalue
fromtheelementontheothersideofthesupport.Insuchacasethevalueofthespanmomenthasto
bemodifiedsothatEq.(14.17)isfulfilled.
Fig.14.3.1
186

Fig.14.32
TheloadfromthemiddlestripinthexdirectiononthecolumnstripintheydirectionisgiveninFig.
14.3.2.Thecolumnstripalsohastocarrythedirectloadq.Thetotalloadonthecolumnstripwithin
thejoistedpartis
(14.19)
Thesumofallmomentsalongtheedgesoftheelementhastofulfiltheequilibriumequationforthe
element.Whenweknowthissumandthemomentstakenbythemiddlestripwecaneasilycalculate
themomentsinthecolumnstrip.
In determining the average total moments for the element we may take into account the higher
stiffness of the solid part. This can be done by choosing a somewhat higher numerical value of the
support moment. A suitable increase is in the order 1015 % compared to the values for a normal
solidslab.
Thesolidparthasahigherdeadloadthanthejoistedpart.Asthisloadisactingclosetothesupportit
mainlyinfluencesthesupportmoment.Itcanthereforejustbeaddedtothesupportmomentwithin
thecolumnstnp.
Where two cornersupported elements meet at a line of zero shear force in a regular system, the
lateralmomentdistributionscanbemadetoagree.Inothercasestheremaybedifferenttheoretical
lateral distributions. A typical case is where a cornersupported element meets a oneway element,
whichissupported onitswholewidth.Thetheoretical distribution ofspanmomentsinthecorner
supported element is rather uneven, with higher moments in the column strip, whereas the
distributionintheonewayelementisuniform.
Thiscasecanbeanalysedontheassumptionthattheelementwithasupportonitswholewidthisnot
atrueonewayelement,butthatthemiddleandcolumnstripscontinueintothispart.Halftheloadon
the middle strip is transferred to the column strip, just like in the cornersupported element. The
reinforcementinthejoistsatrightanglesisthesameasintheparalleljoistsinthecornersupported
element.Itcanbeshownthatthisanalysisleadstoanacceptabledistributionofspanmoments,even
ifitisnotalwaysrigorouslycorrect.Arigoroussolutioncanalwaysbeachievedbyassumingthata
smallerpartoftheloadthanonehalfiscarriedinthedirectionofthemiddlestrip.Thisassumption
leadstoanincreaseinmomentsinthejoistsatrightangles,whichhardlyseemsnecessaryinpractice.
As the joists are supposed to take only bending moments, the lengths of reinforcing bars can be
calculated by ordinary methods. In the solid part, where torsional moments are also acting, it is
recommended that all the support reinforcement is carried to theboundary of this part.No bottom
reinforcementistheoreticallyneededwithinthesolidpart,unlessthereisapositivemomentatthe
boundary. In this case the corresponding reinforcement is carried to the support line. Fig. 6.3.7 in
StripMethodofDesignshowsthetheoreticaldesignmomentdistributionforthecase
.
Aswillbedemonstratedintheexamplebelow,thisanalysisleadstoaratherunevenlateralmoment
distribution, with small moments in the middle strips. The resulting design is safe with respect to
ultimateload.Theremaybeariskofunacceptablecracksinthemiddlestrips,particularlyonthetop
surface. The moment distribution is a consequence of the assumption that the joists can take only
bendingmomentsandnotorsionalmoments.Alateralredistributionofdesignmomentsasforsolid
slabs cannot be made without the introduction and acceptance of torsional moments in the joists.
Maybesomesuchredistributioncanbeaccepted.Here,however,onlythetheoreticalsolutionwithout
torsionalmomentsinthejoistswillbeused.
187
Example14.3
The joist floor in Fig. 14.3.3 has joists at 0.6 m centres. It has solid parts corresponding to 6 filled
modulesineachdirection.Thetotalwidthsofthecolumnstripsarethus
ineachdirection.
.Theouterboundariesaresimplysupported.
Thesupportingcolumnshavesquaresections
Thetotalloadonthemajorpartsoftheflooris11kN/m2.Withinthesolidpartstheexcessloadis5
kN/m2.
We start by determining the average support moments in order to calculate the cvalues, which we
need for the detailed analysis. Asstated above, the solid partsare stifferthan the joistedparts,and
thisisheretakenintoaccountasafactor1.15forthesupportmoments.Theexcessloadonthesolid
partisnottakenintoaccountatthisstage.
(14.20)
(14.21)
ThecvaluesarecalculatedwithEq.(2.34)andtheaveragespanmomentswithEq.(2.35)
(14.22)
(14.23)
(14.24)
(14.25)
(14.26)
Notingthatthewidthofthecolumnstripbelongingtoeachelementisthedistancefromthecornerof
thecolumntothedividinglinebetweencolumnandmiddlestrip,wefindthat
(14.27)
Fig.14.3.3
188
(14.28)
(14.29)
(14.30)
Forthesupportmomentinthemiddlestripinthexdirectionwefindsomewhatdifferentvaluesfrom
thetwospansfromEq.(14.18).Weusetheaverageofthesevalues
(14.31)
ApplyingEq.(14.17)wefindthecorrespondingspanmomentsinthemiddlestrip
(14.32)
(14.33)
Wecannowcalculatetheaveragemomentsinthecolumnstripinthexdirectionbysubtractingthe
parttakenbythemomentsinthemiddlestripsfromthetotalaverageanddistributetheresultonthe
widthofthecolumnstrip.Forthesupportmomentwenowaddthemomentcausedbytheexcessload
onthesolidpart.Notingthatthisexcessloadisonlyactingonawidthof1.55mofthetotalwidth1.85
mofthecolumnstripwefindthattheaverageexcessmomentis
(14.34)
(14.35)
(14.36)
(14.37)
Itisalsoofinteresttocalculatethemomentattheboundarybetweenthesolidpartandthejoists.For
thispurposewecalculatetheloadonthejoistpartofthecolumnstripfromEq.(14.18)
(14.38)
Themomentsattheboundariesclosesttosections1and2respectivelyare
(14.39)
(14.40)
Asthesemomentsarenegativesometopreinforcementisrequiredinthejoistsinthevicinityofthe
solidpart.Nobottomreinforcementistheoreticallyneededinthesolidpart.
FortheydirectionwegetthemomentsinthemiddlestripsfromEq.(14.18)
(14.41)
Themomentsinandtheloadonthecolumnstriphavesomewhatdifferentvaluesonbothsidesofthe
column,aswehavedifferentxvalues.Wemaydirectlycalculatetheaveragevalue
(14.42)
(14.43)
(14.44)
Themomentattheboundaryofthesolidpartis
189

(14.45)
In addition to the cornersupported elements, there is a thin oneway element at each side of the
column. The moments in this element can be calculated separately and the corresponding
reinforcementadded.Itissimpler,andslightlyonthesafeside,toassumethatthemomentsinthis
elementarethesameasinthecolumnstrips.
ThejoistsmustbereinforcedformomentsinkNmcorrespondingtotherelevantmvaluesinkNm/m
multipliedby0.6m.ThesolidpartsshouldbereinforcedfortotalmomentsinkNmcorrespondingto
the above support moments multiplied by 4.2 m, which is the total width of the support strip,
including the oneway element. This reinforcement may be uniformly distributed over the width of
the solid part, which is 3.6 m plus the width of one joist, or with some concentration towards the
support.
CHAPTER15
Prestressedslabs
15.1 General
The strip method is based on the theory of plasticity, and the main relevant plastic property of
reinforced concrete slabs is the yielding of reinforcement at ultimate load. Prestressed slabs are
mainly assumed to function elastically and their plastic properties are limited. The strip method as
applied to slabs with ordinary reinforcement cannot be generally accepted as a design method for
prestressedslabs.Thereexist,however,situationswherethestripmethodmaybeuseful.
One possiblewayofapplyingthestripmethodis to usethemostbasicprinciple ofthesimplestrip
methodanddividetheslabintoanumberofnarrowstrips,eachstripcontainingonetendon,which
carriestheloadonthestrip.Inthiscasetheplasticpropertiesoftheslabareunimportant.
Itisalsopossibletouseamixeddesign,e.g.withprestressingtendonsasasupportbandalongafree
edge,whereastherestoftheslabhasnormalreinforcement.Inthiswaythedeflectioncanbelimited.
When the strip method is applied in connection with prestressing it seems most natural to use the
principleofloadbalancing,inwhichtheloadonastripisbalancedbytheforcecausedbythechange
indirectionofacurvedtendon.Onlythisapproachwillbediscussedbelow,andthereaderisexpected
to be familiar with it. However, the analysis is often made in terms of bending moments
190
corresponding to these forces. The idea of load balancing is of importancefor the arrangement and
shapesofthetendons.
The examples of applications below are also simplified by assuming only a constant load and
disregarding prestress losses due to creep, shrinkage and relaxation, and other effects which are
normally taken into account in the design ofprestressed structures. The intention of this chapter is
only to show some possible ways of making use of the strip method for the design of prestressed
slabs,nottogivecompleteguidanceforsuchadesign.
15.2Thesimplestripmethodfortendons
Thedirectapplicationofthesimplestripmethodforaslabwithprestressingtendonsissimilartoits
applicationtojoistfloors.Inajoistflooreachjoistcarriestheloadfromacertainpartofthefloor.The
joists are at equal spacings and the amount of reinforcement varies depending on the load. In a
prestressedslaballtendonsareoftenequalandinordertoutilisethemthewidthsofthestripshave
tovary.Insimplecasesthewidthsofthestripsarechosentogivethemequalmoments.
Example15.1
The slab in Fig. 15.2.1 is simply supported. It has a load of 11 kN/m2 and is to be prestressed with
tendons,abletoprovideeachforamomentof15kNm.
According to the principles of the simple strip method the slab is divided by means of lines of zero
shearforceintoareaswhichcarrytheloadindifferentdirections.
Thetotalmomenttobetakenbythetendonsinthexdirectionis,accordingtoEq.(2.4),
(15.1)
Thenumberoftendonstotakethismomentisdenotednx.Weget
(15.2)
Thetotalmomenttobetakenbythetendonsintheydirectionis,accordingtoEq.(2.5),
(15.3)
Withthenumberoftendonstotakethismomentdenotedny,weget
(15.4)
Wecanthusassumeavalueofnxandcalculatecxfrom(15.2)andnyfrom(15.4).Ifweassume
we get
. The theoretical total number of tendons is 19.9. It proves that we get
approximatelythesametheoreticaltotalnumberoftendonsifweassume
or8.Ifweassume
wegetatheoreticaltotalnumberof20.1.
Inthiscaseitseemssuitabletochoose
.
Fig.15.2.1
191
Suitablepositionsoftendonsaredeterminedinthefollowingway.Thefirsttendoninthexdirection
takestheloadonawidthy1.Themomentrelationgives
(15.5)
.Withthetriangularloaddistributionwithinthatpartitisreasonabletoplacethefirst
Wefind
.Amoreexactdeterminationofthepositionisnotimportantforthebehaviourof
tendonat
theslab.
Wecontinuebydeterminingavaluey2fortwotendonsbyreplacingy1withy2anddoublingtheleft
side in the equation. This gives
. The second tendon thus takes the load between
and
. It may be placed at
. The third tendon is placed at
and the fourth and fifth
symmetrictothesecondandfirst.
Inthesamewaywefindthatthetendonsintheydirectionmaybeplacedatx=1.3,2.1,2.5,2.8,3.1,
3.4,3.7,4.0etc.
Theshapeofthetendonsshouldbedeterminedfromtheloadthattheyareexpectedtocarry.Thus,
thetendonsshouldbestraightwithinthepartswheretheloadistakenbythetendonsinthedirection
atrightangles.Thefirsttendoninthexdirectionshould,forinstance,becurvedapproximatelyinthe
first1.3mfromtheedgeandthenstraightuntilthesamedistancefromtheoppositeedge.
This design is the most economical with respectto the number oftendons. If, for some reason, it is
thoughtbettertohavesome otherdistributionof tendons, theloadmaybeassumedtoactinsome
otherway,e.g.dividedbetweenthetwodirectionswithincertainpartsoftheslab.
15.3 Prestressed support bands

Inordertolimitthedeflectionofaslabandpreventexcessivecracking,itmaybeadvantageoustouse
prestressing tendons in a support band whereas the rest of the slab has normal reinforcement. A
typicalcaseiswherealargeslabhasonelongfreeedgeandtheotheredgessimplysupported.With
only normal reinforcement the deflection may be unacceptably large. According to the theory of
elasticity, muchoftheloadiscarriedbytorsional moments,which maycauselarge cracksinunder
service conditions, as reinforcement parallel to the edges is less effective for limiting skew cracks.
Withaprestressedsupportbandalongthefreeedgetheslabmaybemadetoactasifitissupported
alongalsothisedgeandtheloadiscarriedmainlybybendingmoments,forwhichthereinforcement
iseffectiveforcracklimitation.
Example15.2
TheslabinFig.15.3.1carriesaloadof11kN/m2.Ithasonelongfreeedgeandtheotheredgesare
simply supported. A support band with prestressing tendons is arranged along the free edge. The
widthofthissupportband,whichdependsonthetypeandnumberoftendonsandontheconcrete
stresses,isassumedtobe0.6m.
Theslabisassumedtobesupportedalongthecentrelineofthesupportband.Thisassumptionisnot
thesameasthatnormallyusedinthisbook.Thereasonforthisdifferenceisthatthestripmethodis
basedonthetheoryofplasticity,whichisnotapplicablefortheprestressedsupportband.Inorderto
be on the safe side in the case of a prestressed support band, this different approach is used. The
differenceismainlyoneofprincipleandhasaverysmallinfluenceontheresultingdesign.
Theslabisthusassumedtohaveaspanof3.7mintheydirectionandtheordinaryreinforcementis
designedaccordingtothemethodsinChapter3.
The support band has to carry the load from the slab plus the direct load outside the centre of the
band.BymeansofEqs(2.3)and(2.4)wefindthemomentinthesupportband
(15.6)
192

Fig.15.3.1
Theshapeoftendonsshouldbedeterminedfromtheloaddistribution.Asthisisnearlyuniformthe
tendonsmaybegivenapurelyparabolicshape.
Even though thetendons balancethe forces,this doesnot guarantee thatthe edge does not deflect.
Theunevencompressivestressdistributionmaycausecurvature.Thiscanbeneutralizedbysuitable
choicesofanchorage,prestressforceandshapeofthetendons.Thereaderisreferredtotheliterature
onprestressedconcrete.
15.4 Flat slabs

Theanalysisofprestressedflatslabsmay,inprinciple,bemadewiththesameapproachasforjoist
floors. If the column strip can be made so narrow that it is not much wider than the supporting
columns,suchadesigncanberegardedasrigorouslycorrect.Withwidercolumnstripsthesolutionis
less rigorous, as torsional moments appear within the area where the support strips cross. These
torsional moments are necessary to bring the load to the support.The wider the column strips, the
moreimportantarethetorsionalmoments.
The torsional moments correspond to principal moment directions which form an angle to the
directionsofthetendons.Inthevicinityofthesupporttheprincipalmomentsaremainlypolar,with
thetangentialmomentshavingthelargestnegativevalues,whereastheradialmomentshavesmaller
negative values or even positive ones. From equilibrium conditions it will be found that there is
always a difference between radial and tangential moments close to the support of a corner
supportedelementequalto2R/,whereRisthesupportreactionfromtheelement.Theslabhasin
principletobedesignedforbothmoments.
Theprestressedtendonscauseamomentfieldintheslabwithprincipaldirectionscorrespondingto
the directions of the tendons. The resulting moment field acting on the concrete section is thus a
combination of two fields having different principal directions. This resulting moment field has
principaldirectionswhichdifferfrompointtopoint,andateachpointithastwoprincipalmoments
whicharedifferent.Thesectionshouldbecheckedwithrespecttoboththesemomentsatallpoints
withinthesupportarea.
Thestresssituationisevidentlyextremelycomplex.Acorrectsolutionshouldbebasedonamoment
field from the acting load calculated with the theory of elasticity, which unfortunately gives very
unevenmomentdistributions,notdirectlyapplicablefordesign.Asanapproximationonthesafeside
regardingultimateload,thedesignmaybebasedonthemomentfieldforacornersupportedelement
accordingtothestripmethod.Forsuchanapproachthefollowingproceduremaybeused:
1.Determinevaluesforthecornersupportedelementsfromthechosenwidthsofthecolumnstrips.
Thesewidthsdependontheacceptableconcretecompressivestress.
2.Calculatethemomentsinthemiddlestripsbythesamemethodasforjoistfloors.
3. Calculate the loads on the column strips. The column strip in one direction is regarded as the
supportforboththemiddleandcolumnstripsinthedirectionatrightangles.
4. Determine the moments for the column strips based on these loads and the assumption that the
stripsaresupportedatthecolumn.
193
5. Starting from these curves, determine design moment fields by adding the negative and positive
mvaluesaccordingtoFig.15.4.1,whichisvalidforthexdirection.Thisresultsintwocurveswithin
thesupportarea.Bothcurvesaretobetakenintoaccountinthedesign.
Thisdesignissafewithregardtotheultimatelimitstate.Maybeitistooconservative.Itisprobably
alsoacceptablefromthepointofviewofcracking,althoughitisnotbasedonmomentsaccordingto
the theory of elasticity. The ratio between span and support moments should be based on the
principlesofthetheoryofelasticity.
Example15.3
Fig.15.4.2showsacornersupportedelementwith
.The widthsof thepartsofthe
columnstripswithintheelementare1.0minbothdirections.Thiscorrespondsto
.
Theloadis12kN/m2.
ApplyingEq.(14.17)wefindforthemiddlestrips
(15.7)
Fig.15.4.1
(15.8)
ApplyingEq.(14.19)wegettheloadsonthepartsofthecolumnstripswheretheycrossthemiddle
strips
(15.9)
(15.10)
Themomentsinthecolumnstripscausedbytheseloadsare
(15.11)
(15.12)
Theloadsonthecolumnstripswithintheareawherethecolumnstripscrossare
(15.13)
(15.14)
194
Fig.15.4.2
Themomentswithinthisareaare
(15.15)
(15.16)
ThecurvesforthemomentsinthecolumnstripsaccordingtotheserelationsareshowninFig.15.4.2.
Thesumsofmomentsinthecolumnstripsare
(15.17)
(15.18)
To the values according to the above relations are to be added the values from Fig. 15.4.1. The
resulting curves are shown in Fig. 15.4.2. Both the upper and lower curves have to be taken into
accountindesign.Theconcretestressesresultingfromthesemoments,combinedwiththeinfluence
ofprestressingtendons,havetobechecked.
References
Armer,G.S.T.:Thestripmethod:anewapproachtothedesignofslabs.Concrete,Sept.1968,358363.
Crawford,R.E.:Limitdesignofreinforcedconcreteslabs.JournalofEngineeringMechanicsDivision,
Proc.ASCE,Oct.1964,321342.
Ferguson,M., Breen,J.E.andJirsa, J.O.:ReinforcedConcrete Fundamentals,5thed.1988,JohnWiley
andSons.
Hillerborg,A.:Equilibriumtheoryforreinforcedconcreteslabs(inSwedish).Belong1956.171182.
Hillerborg, A.: Strip method for slabs on columns, Lshaped plates, etc. Translated from Swedish by
F.A.Blakey,CSIRO,DivisionofBuildingResearch,Melbourne1964.
Hillerborg, A.: A plastic theory for the design of reinforced concrete slabs. IABSE Sixth congress,
Stockholm1960,PreliminaryPublication,177186.
Hillerborg,A.:StripMethodofDesign.AViewpointPublication,C&CA1975.E&FNSpon.
MacGregor,J.G.ReinforcedConcrete:MechanicsandDesign,2nded.1992,PrenticeHall.
Nilson,A.H.andWinter,G.:DesignofConcreteStructures,11thed.1991,McGrawHill,Inc.
Park,R.andGamble,W.L.:ReinforcedConcreteSlabs,1980,JohnWiley.
Wilby, C.B.: Structural Concrete, 1983, Butterworth & Co. Revised as Concrete Materials and
Structures,1991,CambridgeUniversityPress.
195
Wood,R.H.andArmer,G.S.T.:Thetheoryofthestripmethodforthedesignofslabs.InstitutionofCivil
Engineers,Proceedings,Oct.1968,285311.
196

Strip Method Design Handbook: (Type The Document Subtitle)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strip Method Design Handbook: (Type The Document Subtitle)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MesginaG

London Weinheim New York Tokyo Melbourne Madras

Withtherules andlimitationsgivenbelow the maximumdesignmomentsoccurattheedgesofthe

2.11 Support reactions

3.2 Triangular loads

10.2.) For reasons of symmetry

4.2 Uniform loads

4.3 Triangular loads

6.3 Triangular loads

6.4 Concentrated loads

7.2 Four straight edges

8.4 Slab cantilevering outside columns

8.5 Oblong panels and corner-supported elements

9.2 Uniform loads in one direction

9.3 Different loads on panels

9.4 Concentrated loads

10.2 Design procedure

1. Determine suitable directions of the coordinate axes, corresponding to the reinforcement

10.3 Edges straight and fully supported

10.4 Edges straight and partly column supported

10.5 Edge curved and fully supported

10.6 Edge curved and column supported

. In the same way we find

10.7 Slab cantilevering outside columns

11.2 Reentrant corner

12.5 Corner-supported elements

13.2 Systems of rectangular slabs

13.3 Rectangular slabs and concrete walls

13.4 Other cases

14.2 Non-corner-supported floors

14.3 Floors with corner-supported elements

15.3 Prestressed support bands

15.4 Flat slabs

You might also like