Limit state design and verification

Joost Walraven

25 October 2011

1
Flat slab on beams

To be considered:
beam axis 2

25 October 2011 2
Determination of effective width (5.3.2.1)
beff = S beff,i + bw  b
where beff,i = 0,2bi + 0,1l0  0,2l0 and beff,I  bi
beff
beff,1 beff,2
bw

bw
b1 b1 b2 b2
b

l0 =
l0 = 0,85 l1 0,15(l1 + l2 ) l0 = 0,7 l2 l0 = 0,15 l2 + l3
l1 l2 l3

25 October 2011 3
Cross-section of beam with slab

beff,i = 0,2bi + 0,1l0  0,2l0 and beff,I  bi

beff,i = 0,22875 +0,1(0,857125) = 1180 mm (<2875mm)

beff = S beff,i + bw = 21180 + 250 = 2610mm

25 October 2011 4
Beam with effective width

Cross-section at mid-span

25 October 2011 5
Beam with effective width

Cross-section at intermediate support

25 October 2011 6
Maximum design bending moments and
shear forces

Maximum design moments

Med in kNm (values for
different load cases)

Maximum shear forces Ved in

kN (values for different load
cases)

25 October 2011 7
Maximum design bending moments and
shear forces

Maximum design moments

Med in kNm (values for
different load cases)

Maximum shear forces Ved in

kN (values for different load
cases)

25 October 2011 8
Determination of bending reinforcement using method
with simplified concrete design stress block (3.1.7)
cu3 fcd

Fc
Ac x x

As Fs
s

 = 0,8 for fck  50 MPa

(f ck  50)
 0,8  for 50 < fck  90 MPa
400

 = 1,0 for fck  50 MPa

= 1,0 – (fck – 50)/200 for 50 < fck  90 MPa

25 October 2011 9
 Simplified factors for flexure (1)
Factors for NA depth (n) and lever arm (=z) for concrete grade  50 MPa

1.20

1.00
lever arm

0.80
Factor

0.60

0.40

NA depth

0.20

0.00
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 M/bd 2fck
n 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.36 0.39 0.43 0.46
z 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.86 0.84 0.83 0.82

25 October 2011 10
 Simplified factors for flexure (2)

Factors for NA depth (=n) and lever arm (=z) for concrete grade 70 MPa
1.20

1.00 lever arm

0.80
Factor

0.60

0.40

NA depth
0.20

0.00
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 M/bd 2fck
n 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.14 0.17 0.20 0.23 0.26 0.29 0.33
z 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.91 0.90 0.89 0.88

25 October 2011 11
Determination of bending reinforcement (span AB)

Example: largest bending moment in span AB: Med = 89,3

kNm

M Ed 89,3 106
  0,001
bd 2 f ck 2610  3722  25

Read in diagram: lever arm

factor = 0,99, so:

M Ed 89,3 106
Asl ,req    563mm2
z  f yd 0,98  372  435

25 October 2011 12
Determination of bending reinforcement (span AB)

Example: largest bending moment in span AB: Med = 89,3 kNm

Moreover, from diagram: neutral

axis depth factor is 0,02, so xu =
0,02180 = 4 mm. So height of
compression zone < flange
thickness (180 mm), OK

25 October 2011 13
Determination of bending reinforcement (intermediate
support B

Bending moment at support B: Med = 132,9 kNm

M Ed 132,0 106
  0,154
bd 2 f ck 250  372 2  25
Read: lever arm factor 0,81

M Ed 132,9 106
Asl    1014mm2
z  f yd 0,81 372  435

25 October 2011 14
Maximum design bending moments and
shear forces

Maximum design moments

Med in kNm (values for
different load cases)

Maximum shear forces Ved in

kN (values for different load
cases)

Shear may be determined at distance d

from support, so Ved  115 kN

25 October 2011 15
Design of beams for shear (6.2.2)
First check (6.2.2): if VEd ≥ VRd,c then shear reinforcement is
required:

VRd ,c  (0,18 /  c )k (100l f ck )1/ 3 bd

where: fck in Mpa
200
k = 1  2,0 with d in mm
d
Asl
l =  0,02
bw d

with d = 372mm, bw = 250mm, l = 0,61%, fck = 25MPa

VRd ,c  (0,18 / 1,5) 1,73  (0,61 25)1/ 3  250  372 103  47,8kN  115kN

so shear reinforcement is required

25 October 2011 16
Expressions for shear capacity at stirrup
yielding (VRd,s) and web crushing (VRd,max)

s
c = fc1
z 
 Aswfyw = fc

Vu,3 z cot  Vu,2

s
cc
=f1
z 
Afyw
sw =fc

V t
zco V
u,3 u,2

For yielding shear reinforcement: At web crushing:

VRd,s = (Asw/s) z fywd cot VRd,max = bw z  fcd /(cot + tan)
with  between 450 and 21,80 with  between 450 and 21,80
(1  cot   2,5) (1 cot  2,5)

 = 0.6 (1- fck/250)

25 October 2011 17
Design of beams for shear
Basic equation for determination of shear reinforcement:

VEd,s = (Asw/s) z fywd cot

With Ved,s = 115000 N, fywd = 435 Mpa, z = 0,9d, d = 372 mm and cot  = 2,5 it is
found that

Asw/s ≥ 0,32 e.g. stirrups 6mm – 175mm

Check upper value of shear capacity (web crushing criterion)

VRd,max = bw z  fcd /(cot + tan)

with bw = 250mm, d = 372mm, z = 0,9d,  = 0,6(1-fck/250) = 0,54, fcd = 25/1,5 =

13,3 Mpa and cot  = 2,5 it is found that

VRd,max = 1774 kN which is much larger than the design shear force of 115 kN

25 October 2011 18
Stirrup configuration near to support A

25 October 2011 19
Transverse shear in web-flange interface

25 October 2011 20
Shear between web and flanges of T-sections

25 October 2011 21
 Shear between web and flanges of T-sections

Strut angle :
1,0 ≤ cot f ≤ 2,0 for compression flanges (450  f  26,50
1,0 ≤ cot f ≤ 1,25 for tension flanges (450  f  38,60)

No transverse tension ties required if shear stress in interface

vEd = Fd/(hf·x) ≤ kfctd (recommended k = 0,4)

25 October 2011 22
Check necessity of transverse reinforcement

bf VEd 1180 115000

vEd      0,86MPa
beff z  h f 2610 0,9  372 180
No transverse reinforcement required if vEd  0,4fctd
For C25/30 fctd = fctk/c =1,8/1,5 = 1,38 Mpa, so the limit value for interface shear is
0,4fctk = 0,41,38 = 0,55 MPa.
Transverse shear reinforcement is required at the end of the beam.

25 October 2011 23
Maximum design bending moments and
shear forces

Maximum design moments

Med in kNm (values for
different load cases)

Maximum shear forces Ved in

kN (values for different load
cases)

25 October 2011 24
Areas in beam axis 2 where
transverse reinforcement is required

25 October 2011 25
Areas in beam axis 2 where transverse
reinforcement is required

25 October 2011 26
Example: transverse reinforcement near to
support A

Required transverse reinforcement for Ved = 115 kN

Ast b f VEd 1 1180 115000 1

       0,18mm2 / mm
s beff zf yd cot  f 2610 335  435 2,0

e.g. 8 – 250 (=0,20 mm2/mm)

25 October 2011 27
Design of slabs supported by beams

25 October 2011 28
Design of slabs supported by beams

Load transmission from slabs to beams

Simplified load transmission model

Dead load G1 = 0,1825 = 4,5 kN/m2

Partitions, etc. G2 = 3,0 kN/m2

Variable load Q = 2,0 kN/m2

Ged = 1,3(4,5 + 3,0) = 9,75 kN/m2

Qed = 1,52,0 = 3,0 kN/m2

25 October 2011 29
Load transfer from slabs to beams

Loading cases on arbitrary strip

(dashed in left figure)

25 October 2011 30
Longitudinal reinforcement in slabs on beams

Examples of reinforced areas

25 October 2011 31
Floor type 2: flat slab d = 210 mm
From floor on beams to flat slab: replace beams by strips with
the same bearing capacity

25 October 2011 32
From slab on beams to flat slab

hidden strong strip

-Strips with small width and large reinforcement ratio favourable for punching
resistance
- Strips not so small that compression reinforcement is necessary

25 October 2011 33
 Methods of analysis: Equivalent Frame
l (> l ) x Analysis – Annex I
y

l /4 l /4
y y B = l - l /2 (Informative)
x y

ly/4

ly/4 A – Column strip

B = ly/2 ly
B – Middle strip

A = ly/2

Negative moments Positive moments

Column Strip 60 - 80% 50 - 70%

Middle Strip 40 - 20% 50 - 30%
Note: Total negative and positive moments to be resisted by the column and
middle strips together should always add up to 100%.

25 October 2011 34
Flat slab with “hidden strong strips”

25 October 2011 35
Punching shear control column B2

25 October 2011 36
Punching column B2
C

 = 1,5

B A

 = 1,4  = 1,15

Junction column to slab Simplified assumptions for

Vertical load from slab to eccentricity factor  according to
column Ved = 705 kN EN 1992-1-1 Cl. 6.4.3

25 October 2011 37
How to take account of eccentricity
(simplified case)
VEd
Or, how to determine  in equation vEd  
ui d
C Only for structures where
 = 1,5 lateral stability does not
depend on frame action and
where adjacent spans do
not differ by more than 25%
B A
the approximate values for 
 = 1,4  = 1,15 shown left may be used:

25 October 2011 38
 Upper limit value for design punching
shear stress in design

At the perimeter of the loaded area the maximum punching shear

stress should satisfy the following criterion:

VEd
vEd   vRd ,max  0,4f cd
u0 d
where:

u0 = perimeter of loaded area

 = 0,6[1 – fck/250]

25 October 2011 39
 Punching shear column B2
1. Check of upper limit value of punching shear capacity

Further data: dy = 210 – 30 – 16/2 = 172mm

dz = 210 – 30 – 16 – 16/2 = 156 mm
Mean effective depth 0,5(172 + 156) = 164mm
 = 0,6(1 + fck/250) = 0,54

vRd,max = 0,4fcd = 0,40,54(25/1,5) = 3,60 Mpa

vEd = Ved/(u0d) = 1,15705000/(4500164)

= 2,47 Mpa < 3,60 Mpa

25 October 2011 40
Definition of control perimeters
The basic control perimeter u1 is taken at a distance 2,0d from
the loaded area and should be constructed as to minimise its length

Length of control perimeter of column 500x500mm: u = 4500 + 22164 = 4060 mm

25 October 2011 41
Punching shear capacity column B2

Punching shear stress at perimeter:

VEd 1,15  705000

vEd    1,22MPa
u1d 4060 164

No punching shear reinforcement required if:

vEd  vRd ,c

25 October 2011 42
Limit values for design punching
shear stress in design

The following limit values for the punching shear stress are used in
design:

If vEd  vRd ,c no punching shear reinforcement required

where:

vRd ,c  CRd ,c k (100l f ck )1/ 3  k1 cp  (vmin  k1 cp )

where: k1 = 0,10 (advisory value)

25 October 2011 43
Punching shear capacity of column B2
No punching shear reinforcement required if vEd < vRd,c

vRd ,c  CRd ,c k (100l f ck )1/ 3

With CRd,c = 0,12

k = 1 + (200/d) = 1 + (200/164) < 2, so k = 2,0
 = (xy) = (0,860,87) = 0,865%
fck = 25 Mpa

It is found that vRd,c = 0,67 Mpa

Since vEd = 1,22 MPa> 0,67 MPa punching

shear reinforcement should be applied.

25 October 2011 44
Punching shear reinforcement
Capacity with punching shear reinforcement
Vu = 0,75VRd,c + VS
Shear reinforcement within 1,5d from column is accounted for with
fy,red = 250 + 0,25d(mm)  fywd

25 October 2011 45
 Punching shear reinforcement
Outer perimeter of shear
Outer control reinforcement
perimeter

The outer control perimeter at which

0.75d
shear reinforcement is not required,
kd 1.5d (2d if > 2d from should be calculated from:
column)
A A uout,ef = VEd / (vRd,c d)
0.5d

The outermost perimeter of shear

reinforcement should be placed at a
distance not greater than kd (k =
Outer control
0.5d
0.75d
perimeter 1.5) within the outer control
kd
perimeter.

25 October 2011 Section A - A 46

 Design of punching shear reinforcement
The necessary punching shear reinforcement per perimeter is found from:

u1sr (vEd  0, 75vRd ,c )

Asw 
1,5 f ywd ,ef
with:
vEd = 1,22 N/mm2
vRd,c= 0,67 N/mm2
u1 = 4060 mm
fyd,ef = 250 + 0,25  164 = 291 N/mm2
sr = 0,75  164 = 123 mm  120 mm

It is found that: Asw = 800 mm2 per

reinforcement perimeter

47
Design of column B2 for punching shear
Determination of the outer perimeter for which vEd = vRd,c

uout  VEd /(vRd ,c  d )  (1,15  705000) /(0,67 164  7378mm

The distance from this perimeter to the edge of the column follows from:

a  (uout  4h) / 2  (7378  4  500) /( 2 )  856mm  5,22d

The outer punching shera reinforcement should be at a distance of not more
than 1,5d from the outer perimeter. This is at a distance 5,22d – 1,5d = 3,72d
= 610 mm.

The distance between the punching shear

reinforcement perimeters should not be larger
than 0,75d = 0,75164 = 123mm.

25 October 2011 48
Punching shear design of slab at column B2

Perimeters of shear reinforcement

25 October 2011 49
Design of column B2

25 October 2011 50
General background: Second order effects at axial
loading (EC2, 5.8.2, 5.8.3.1 & 5.8.3.3

- Second-order effects may be ignored if they are smaller than 10% of the
corresponding 1th order effects

- “Slenderness”: is defined as  = l0/i where i = (l/A)

so for rectangular cross-section  = 3,46 l0/h
and for circular cross section  = 4l0/h

- Second order effects may be ignored if the slenderness is smaller than

the limit value lim

- In case of biaxial bending the slenderness should be calculated for any

direction; second order effects need only to be considered in the
direction(s) in which lim is exceeded.

25 October 2011 51
General background: “Slender” versus “short” columns

Definition of slenderness

l0 l0
 
i ( I / A)

l0 effective height of
the column
i radius of gyration of the
uncracked concrete section
I moment of inertia around the axis
considered Basic cases
A cross-sectional area of column EC2 fig. 5.7

25 October 2011 52
General background: when is a column slender?

Relative flexibilities of rotation-springs

at the column ends 1 en 2

k = (/M)(EI/l)

where

 = rotation of restraining members for

a bending moment M
EI = bending stiffness of compression member
l = height of column between rotation-springs

25 October 2011 53
General background: when is a column slender?

Determination of effective column height Non-failing

in a frame column
End 1
For braced frames: Failing
k1 k2
column
l0  0,5l (1  )(1  )
0,45  k1 0,45  k2 End 2

Non failing
For unbraced frames: the largest value of: column

k k  k1  k2 
l0  l (1  10 1 2 ) and l0  l  1  1  
k1  k2  1  k1  1  k 2 

where k1 and k2 are the relative spring stiffnesses at the ends of the column,
and l is the clear height of the column between the end restraints

25 October 2011 54
General background: determination of effective
column length (1) (5.8, 5.8.3.2)
Non failing
Simplifying assumption: column

* The contribution of the adjacent “non End 1

failing ” columns to the spring stiffness is Failing
ignored (if this contributes in a positive column
sense to the restraint)
End 2
* for beams for /M the value l/2EI may Non failing
be assumed (taking account of loss of column

beam stiffness due to cracking)

Assuming that the beams are symmetric with regard to the column and that their
dimensions are the same for the two stories, the following relations are found:

k1 = k2 = [EI/l]column / [SEI/l]beams = [EI/l]column / [22EI/l]beams = 0,25 

where:  = [EI/l]column / [EI/l]beams

25 October 2011 55
General background: Determination of effective
column length (2) (5.8, 5.8.3.2)
l0 l0
The effective column length l0 can, for this situation
be read from the table as a function of 
 
i ( I / A)

 0 
0.25 0.5 1.0 2.0
(fixed end) (pinned end)
or
k1 = k2 0 0.0625 0.125 0.25 0.50 1.0

l0 for braced
column 0.5 l 0.56 l 0.61 l 0.68 l 0.76 l 1.0 l

l0 for
unbraced 1.0 l 1.14 l 1.27 l 1.50 l 1.87 l ∞
column:
Larger of the
values in the 1.0 l 1.12 l 1.13 l 1.44 l 1.78 l ∞
two rows
25 October 2011 56
General background: when is a column slender ?

A column is qualified as “slender”, which implies that second order

effects should be taken into account, if   lim. The limit value is
defined as:
lim  20  A  B  C / n
where:

A  1 /(1  0,2ef )
B  1 2
C  1,7  rm
ef = effective creep factor: if unknown it can be rm = M01/M02: ratio between end-
assumed that A = 0,7 moments in column, with
 = Asfyd/(Acfcd): mech. reinforcement ratio, M02 M01
if unknown B = 1,1 can be adopted
n = NEd/(Acfcd);
25 October 2011 57
Design of column B2

B2

Configuration of variable load on slab

25 October 2011 58
Determination of columns slenderness 
First step: determination of rotational spring stiffness at end of column:

Column: EI/l = 0,043106 kNm2

Beam: EI/l = 0,052106 kNm2

K1 = [EI/l]col/[SEI]beams = 0,043/(20,052) = 0,41

k1 k2 0,41 2
l0  0,5l (1  )(1  )  0,5l (1  )  0,70l
0,45  k1 0,45  k2 1,02

If the beam would be cracked a value of 1,5 k1 would be more realistic. This would result
in l0 = 0,80l = 3,2m.

25 October 2011 59
Verification of column slenderness
3,46l0 3,46  3,2
Actual slenderness of column:    22,1
h 0,5

Limit slenderness according to 20 A  B  C

EC2, Cl. 5.8.3.1: lim 
n
With the default values A = 0,7 B=1,1 C = 0,7 whereas the value n follows from
n= Ned/(Acfcd) = 438400/(500220) = 0,88, the value of lim becomes:

20  0,7 1,1 0,7

lim   11,5
0,88

Because the actual slenderness of the column is larger than the limit slenderness second
order effects have to be taken into account.

25 October 2011 60
General : Method based on nominal curvature

Mt = NEd (e0 + ei + e2)

Different first order eccentricities e01 en e02

At the end of the column can be replaced by
an equivalent eccentricity e0 defined as:

e0 = 0,6e02 + 0,4e01  0,4e02

e01 and e02 have the same sign if they lead to tension
at the same side, otherwise different signs.
Moreover e02  e01

25 October 2011 61
General : Method based on the nominal curvature
Mt = NEd (e0 + ei + e2)

The eccentricity ei by imperfection follows from (5.2(7)):

l0
ei  v
2
where l0 = effective column height around the axis regarded

1 1
v 
100 l 200

where l = the height of the column in meters

25 October 2011 62
General: Method based on nominal curvature
Mt = NEd (e0 + ei + e2)

The second order eccentricity e2 follows from:

l02  yd
e2  K Kr
 2 0, 45d
where

f ck  N ud  N Ed
K  1  (0,35   )ef  1 and Kr   1,0
200 150 N ud  N bal

25 October 2011 63
Calculation of bending moment including
second order effects
The bending moment on the column follows from:

M t  M Ed (e0  ei  e2 )

e0 = Med/Ned = 42/4384 = 0,010m = 10mm . However, at least the maximum value of

{l0/20, b/20 or 20mm} should be taken. So, e0 =b/20 = 500/20 = 25mm.

ei = i(l0/2) where i = 0hm 0 = 1/200 rad, h =2/l = 1 and

1 1
 m  0,5(1  )  0,5(1  )  1 so that ei =(1/200)(4000/2) = 10mm
m 1
l02  yd f ck 
e2  K Kr where K  1  (0,35   )eff and
 2 0, 45d 200 150
n  nEd
eff  (M 0 Eqp / M 0 Ed ),t and finaly Kr  u
nu  nbal
25 October 2011 64
Calculation of bending moment including
second order effects
M 0 Eqp 0,3  2
eff     2  0,4
M 0 Ed 1,5  2

f ck  30 22,9
K  1  (0,35   )eff  1  (0,35   )0,4  1,14
200 150 200 150
nu  nEd f yd 0,03  435
Kr  where nu  1   1  1,65 (estimated value  = 0,03)
nu  nbal f cd 20
N Ed
nEd   0,88 nbal  0,4 so Kr = 0,62 and finaly:
Ac f cd

l02  yd 32002 2,17 103

e2  K K r 2  1,15  0,62   14mm
 0,45d  2 0,25  454

25 October 2011 65
Calculation of bending moment including
second order effects and reinforcement
M tot  N Ed (e0  e1  e2 )  4384  (25  10  14) 103  215kNm

Determination of reinforcement

N Ed 4384000
  0,58
bhf ck 5002  30

M Ed 215000
  0,06
bh f cd 500  30
2 3

From diagram: As f yk  0,15

bhf ck
So: 0,20  5002  30
As   3448mm2
435
(1,4%)

25 October 2011 66
Design of shear wall

25 October 2011 67
Design of shear wall
The stability of the building is ensured by two shear walls (one at any end of the
building) and one central core

shear wall 1 core shear wall 2

I = 0,133 m4 I = 0,514 m4 I = 0,133 m4

Contribution of shear wall 1: 0,133/(20,133 + 0,514) = 0,17 (17%)

25 October 2011 68
Second order effects to be regarded?
“If second order effects are smaller than 10% of the first
order moments they can be neglected”.

Moment magnification factor:

qv 
M Ed  M 0 Ed [1  ]
N B / N Ed  1
 2 EI
NB  N Ed  qvl
(1,12l ) 2

NB is the buckling load of the system sketched, l = height of building, qv =

uniformely distributed load in vertical direction, contributing to 2nd order
deformation.

25 October 2011 69
Second order effects to be regarded?
The moment magnification factor is:
n
f  where n = NB/NEd
n 1

Requiring f < 1,1 and substituting the corresponding

values in the equation above gives the condition:
qvEd l
l  0,84 (Eq.1)
EI

Assuming 30% of the variable load as permanent, the

load per story is 3014,2510,65 = 4553 kN. Since the
storey height is 3m, this corresponds with qv=1553
kN/m’ height.
With l = 19m, E = 33.000/1,2 = 27.500 MPA, I = 0,78 m4

19 1518 19
 0,70  0,84
103 27,5  0,78
25 October 2011 70
Second order effects to be regarded?
However, in the calculation it was assumed that the stabilizing
elements were not cracked. In that case a lower stiffness
should be used.

For the shear wall the following actions apply:

Max My = 66,59 kNm = 0,0666 MNm
Corresp. N = -2392,6 kN = 2,392 MN/m2

 2392
N   4,78MN / m 2
2  0,25
M 0,0666
M    3,99MN / m 2
W 0,01667

So the shear wall remains indeed uncracked and 2nd order

effects may be ignored.

25 October 2011 71
Alternative check by Eq. 5.18 in EC2
According to Cl. 5.8.3.3 of EC-22nd order effects may be ignored if:

ns SEcd I c
FV , Ed  k1 
ns  1,6 L2
Where
FV,Ed total vertical load (both on braced and unbraced elements)
ns number of storeys
L total height of building above fixed foundation
Ecd design E-modulus of the concrete
Ic moment of intertia of stabilizing elements

The advisory value of the factor k1 is 0,31. If it can be shown that the
stabilizing elements remain uncracked k1 may be taken 0,62

25 October 2011 72
Alternative check by Eq. 5.18 in EC2
Verification for the building considered:

ns SEcd I c
FV , Ed  k1 
ns  1,6 L2

Condition:

6 27,5 106  0,78

6  4553  0,62  
6  1,6 192

or: 27.318  29.084

so the condition is indeed fullfilled

25 October 2011 73
Monodirectional slab with embedded lighting
elements

25 October 2011 74
Bearing beams in floor with embedded elements

25 October 2011 75
Design for bending of main bearing
beam in span 1-2
Med = 177,2 kNm
Effective width: beff  Sbeff ,i  bw  b beff ,i  0,2bi  0,1l0
Midspan: beff = 2695 mm

M Ed 172,2 106
  0,02 from diagram z = 0,98d = 365mm
bd 2 f ck 2695  3722 25
M Ed 172,2 106
Asl    1367mm2
z  f yd 365  435

25 October 2011 76
Design for bending of main bearing beam in
span 1-2 (intermediate support)
Med = 266 kNm
Effective width: beff  Sbeff ,i  bw  b beff ,i  0,2bi  0,1l0
Internal support: beff = 926 mm

M Ed 266 106
At intermediate support:   0,31 !?
bd f ck 250  372  25
2 2

25 October 2011 77
 Simplified factors for flexure (1)
Factors for NA depth (n) and lever arm (=z) for concrete grade  50 MPa

1.20

1.00
lever arm

0.80
Factor

0.60

0.40

NA depth

0.20

0.00
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 M/bd 2fck
n 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.36 0.39 0.43 0.46
z 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.86 0.84 0.83 0.82

25 October 2011 78
Design for bending of main bearing beam in
span 1-2 (intermediate support)
Med = 266 kNm
Effective width: beff  Sbeff ,i  bw  b beff ,i  0,2bi  0,1l0
Internal support: beff = 926 mm

At intermediate support compression reinforcement required:

( K  K ' ) f ck bd 2 (0,31  0,167)25  250  3722

Asc    826mm2 e.g. 320
f yd (d  d ' ) 435  (372  35)

25 October 2011 79
Design for bending of main bearing beam in
span 1-2 (intermediate support)
Med = 266 kNm
Effective width: beff  Sbeff ,i  bw  b beff ,i  0,2bi  0,1l0
Internal support: beff = 926 mm

Calculation of tensile reinforcement:

For K = 0,167 z = 0,81372=301 mm
M Ed 266 106
Asl    2031mm2 e.g. 720 = 2198 mm2
z  f yd 301 435

25 October 2011 80
Design of one-way beams with embedded
elements

Loads:
G1 = 2,33 kN
G2 = 3,0
Q = 2,0
Qed = 1,3(2,33+3,0) + 1,52,0=9,93 kN/m2

25 October 2011 81
Beams with embedded elements: design for
bending at intermediate support

M Ed 63 106
k 2  0,294  0,167
bd f ck 240 1892  25
Compression reinforcement required

( K  K ' ) f ck bd 2 (0,294  0,167)  25  240 1892

Asc    406mm2
f yd (d  d ' ) 435  (189  35)
In any rib 203 mm2

25 October 2011 82
Beams with embedded elements: design for
bending at intermediate support

Tensile reinforcement: for K = 0,167 z = 0,8189=151 mm

M Ed 63 106
Asl    959mm2 e.g. 12-100 = 1130 mm2 or
z  f yd 151 435
10-75 = 1040 mm2

25 October 2011 83
Beams with embedded elements: design
for bending at midspan

M Ed 39,2 106
K 2   0,044 From diagram z = 0,95d = 0,95189 = 180 mm
bd f ck 1000 189  25
2

M Ed 39,2 106
Asl    501mm2 251 mm2 per rib
z  f yd 180  435

25 October 2011 84
 Deflection control by slenderness limitation

For span-depth ratios below the following limits no further checks is needed

l     
3
2
 K 11 1,5 fck 0  3,2 fck  0  1  if   0 (7.16.a)
d      


l  0 1 ' 
 K 11 1,5 fck  fck  if  > 0 (7.16.b)
d     ' 12 0 
l/d is the limit span/depth
K is the factor to take into account the different structural systems
0 is the reference reinforcement ratio = fck 10-3
 is the required tension reinforcement ratio at mid-span to resist the moment
due to the design loads (at support for cantilevers)
’ is the required compression reinforcement ratio at mid-span to resist the
moment due to design loads (at support for cantilevers)
25 October 2011 85
 Deflection control by slenderness
limitation
The expressions given before (Eq. 7.6.a/b) are derived based on many different
assumptions (age of loading, time of removal of formwork, temperature and humidity
effects) and represent a conservative approach.
The coefficient K follows from the static system:

The expressions have been derived for an assumed stress of 310 Mpa under the quasi
permanent load. If another stress level applies, or if more reinforcement than required
is provided, the values obtained by Eq. 7.16a/b can be multiplied with the factor
s 500

310 As ,req where s is the stress in the reinforcing steel at mid-span
f yk  ( )
As , prov
Rules for large spans
For beams and slabs (no flat slabs) with spans larger than 7m, which
support partitions liable to damage by excessive deflections, the
values l/d given by Eq. (7.16) should be multiplied by 7/leff (leff in
meters).

For flat slabs where the greater span exceeds 8,5m, and which
support partitions to be damaged by excessive deflections, the
values l/d given by expression (7.16) should be multiplied by 8,5/ leff.
Eq. 7.16 as a graphical representation,
assuming K = 1 and s = 310 MPa
fck =30 40 50 60 70 80 90
60

50
limiting span/depth ratio

40

30

20

10

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Reinforcement percentage (As/bd)
25 October 2011 88
Tabulated values for l/d calculated
from Eq. 7.16a/b
The table below gives the values of K (Eq.7.16), corresponding to
the structural system. The table furthermore gives limit l/d values
for a relatively high (=1,5%) and low (=0,5%) longitudinal
reinforcement ratio. These values are calculated for concrete C30
and s = 310 MPa and satisfy the deflection limits given in 7.4.1 (4)
and (5).

Structural system K  = 1,5%  = 0,5%

Simply supported slab/beam 1,0 l/d=14 l/d=20

End span 1,3 l/d=18 l/d=26
Interior span 1,5 l/d=20 l/d=30
Flat slab 1,2 l/d=17 l/d=24
Cantilever 0,4 l/d= 6 l/d=8

25 October 2011 89
Beams with embedded elements: design
for bending at midspan

M Ed 39,2 106
K 2   0,044 From diagram z = 0,95d = 0,95189 = 180 mm
bd f ck 1000 189  25
2

M Ed 39,2 106
Asl    501mm2 251 mm2 per rib (e.g. 214 = 308 mm2)
z  f yd 180  435

25 October 2011 90
Control of deflection slab with embedded
elements

Reinforcement ratio at midspan  = Asl/bed = 501/(1000189) = 0,265%

According to Cl. 7.4.2(2) no detailed calculation is necessary if the l/d ratio of
the slab is smaller than the limit value:

l    0  2
3

 K 11 1,5 fck 0

 3,2 fck   1 
d      

So:
l 0,5 0,5
 1,3[11  1,5 25   3,2  5  (  1)3 / 2  49
d 0,256 0,265

25 October 2011 91
Control of deflection slab with embedded elements

Moreover correction for real steel stress versus 310 N/mm2 as default value:

Quasi permanent load: Qqp=2,33 + 3,0 + 0,32,0 = 5,93

Ultimate design load: Qed = 9,93

Steel stress under quasi permanent load 2 = (5,93/9,93)435 = 260 Mpa

l 310 l 310
Corrected value of l/d is:  ( )   49  58,4
d  s ,qp d 260
Actual value is l/d = 7,125/189 = 38 so OK

25 October 2011 92
 Theory of crack width control
The crack width is the difference sr

between the steel deformation se

and the concrete deformation

steel stress

t t
over the length 2lt, where lt is fctm

the “transmission length”, concrete stress

necessary to build-up the w

concrete stength from 0 to the

tensile strength fctm. Then the
maximum distance between two
cracks is 2lt (otherwise a new
crack could occur in-between). 1 f ctm 
It can be found that the lt 
transmission length is equal to: 4  bm 

25 October 2011 93
EC-formula’s for crack width control

For the calculation of the maximum (or characteristic) crack width,

the difference between steel and concrete deformation has to be
calculated for the largest crack distance, which is sr,max = 2lt. So
sr

 s , (   )
se

wk Eq. (7.8) steel stress

r max sm cm t t
fctm

concrete stress

where w

sr,max is the maximum crack distance

and
(sm - cm) is the difference in deformation between
steel and concrete over the maximum crack distance.
Accurate formulations for sr,max and (sm - cm) will be given

25 October 2011 94
EC-2 formula’s for crack width control

f ct ,eff
 s  kt (1   e  p ,eff )
 p ,eff s (Eq. 7.9)
 sm   cm   0,6
Es Es

where: s is the stress in the steel assuming a cracked section

e is the ratio Es/Ecm
p,eff = (As + Ap)/Ac,eff (effective reinforcement ratio
including eventual prestressing steel Ap
 is bond factor for prestressing strands or wires
kt is a factor depending on the duration of loading
(0,6 for short and 0,4 for long term loading)

25 October 2011 95
EC-2 formulae for crack width control

For the crack spacing sr,max a modified expression has been

derived, including the concrete cover. This is inspired by the
experimental observation that the crack at the outer concrete
surface is wider than at the reinforcing steel. Moreover, cracks are
always measured at the outside of the structure (!)

25 October 2011 96
EC-3 formula’s for crack width control
Maximum final crack spacing sr,max

s r ,max  3.4c  0.425 k1k2  p,eff (Eq. 7.11)

where c is the concrete cover

 is the bar diameter
k1 bond factor (0,8 for high bond bars, 1,6 for bars
with an effectively plain surface (e.g.
prestressing tendons)
k2 strain distribution coefficient (1,0 for tension
and 0,5 for bending: intermediate values van be
used)

25 October 2011 97
EC-2 formula’s for crack width control

In order to be able to apply element loaded

in tension
the crack width formulae, t

basically valid for a concrete beam c

tensile bar, to a structure

loaded in bending, a

h-xe

d
h
definition of the “effective

3
a eff. cross- c

2.5 (h-d) <

section
tensile bar height” is
necessary. The effective gravity line
height hc,ef is the minimum of steel smallest value of
2.5 . (c + /2) of t/2
of:
slab
smallest value of
2,5 (h-d) b 2.5 . (c + /2)
(h-x)/3 c
of
(h - xe)/3

h/2
25 October 2011 98
EC-2 requirements for crack width control
(recommended values)

Exposure class RC or unbonded Prestressed

PSC members members with
bonded tendons
Quasi-permanent Frequent load
load

X0,XC1 0.3 0.2

XC2,XC3,XC4 0.3

XD1,XD2,XS1,XS2, Decompression
XS3

25 October 2011 99
 Crack width control at intermediate
support of slabs with embedded elements

Assumption: concentric tension of upper slab of 50 mm.

Steel stress s,qp under quasi permanent load:
Qqp As ,req
 s ,qp    f yd  0,597  0,85  435  220MPa
QEd As , prov
Reinforcement ratio: s,eff = Asl/bd = 959/(100050) = 1,92%

 12
Crack distance:  s ,max  k3  c  k1  k2  k4   3,4 19  0,8 1,0  0,425   277mm
 s ,eff 0,0192

25 October 2011 100

 Crack width control at intermediate
support of slabs with embedded elements

f ct ,eff
 s  kt (1   e  p ,eff )
 p ,eff 
Average strain:  sm   cm   0,6 s
Es Es
2,6
220  0,4 (1  7  0,0192)
0,0192
 sm   cm   0,79 103
200.000

Characteristic crack width: wk  sr ,max { sm   cm }  227  0,79 103  0,18mm  0,30mm

so, OK

25 October 2011 101

Crack width at mid-span beams with
embedded elements

Cross-section of
tensile bar
Height of tensile bar: smallest value of 2,5(h-d), (h-x)/3 or h/2.
Critical value 2,5(h-d) = 2,529 = 72 mm.
s,eff = Asl/bheff = 308/(12072) = 3,56%

Qqp As ,req
 s ,qp    f yd  0,597  0,81 435  210MPa
QEd As , prov

25 October 2011 102

Crack width at mid-span beams with
embedded elements

Cross-section of
tensile bar

 12
 s ,max  k3  c  k1  k2  k4   3,4  29  0,8  0,5  0,425   156mm
 s ,eff 0,0356
f ct ,eff 2,6
 s  kt (1   e  p ,eff ) 210  0,4 (1  7  0,0356)
 p ,eff 0,0356
 sm   cm    0,87 10 3
Es 200.000

wk  sr ,max ( sm   cm )  156  0,87 103  0,14mm OK

25 October 2011 103
Different cultures: different floors

25 October 2011 104