3 views

Uploaded by salman

one way slab design

- 9781483403724.pdf
- Behavior of GFRP Wrapped Beam Under Pure Torsion
- IRJET-Pushover Analysis of G+15 Steel and Steel-Concrete Composite Frame Structure
- Beam Analysis V1-9!6!2018
- GTS 2D Tutorial on Metro Station
- Development of Innovative Long-Span Floor Systems for Multi-Story Residential Steel Construction (Conference Proceedings Article)
- [Surinder Singh Phd, Msc, Dipce, Dipqs, Fie, Fis,
- Crane Kits Specifications - CSL1003-0206
- Diseño Contra Fuego
- Information and Pool Sap2000 Manuals English Problem 1-002
- Double Girder Box Type EOT Crane Design
- General Guidelines for Analysis & Design of a T- Girder Bridge Structure
- Designing Members for Torsion
- Slabs Beam Detailing
- A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF T-BEAM BRIDGES FOR VARYING SPAN LENGTHS.pdf
- Thin Walled Structures
- strap_english.pdf
- Experimental Behavior of Composite Deep Beams, AUB Conference, 2015.pdf
- 5_395
- Bridge

You are on page 1of 27

2. Spans are approximately equal, with the longer of two adjacent spans not greater than the

shorter by more than 20%

3. Loads are uniformly distributed

4. The unit live load does not exceed 3 times the unit dead load

5. Members are prismatic

Question:

Note: Beam sizes mentioned here are designed in the coming steps.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Calculations:

Since, we have a symmetric slab system. So we have to design only two panels (one exterior and one

interior).

For this panel, one end is continuous and remaining three ends are discontinuous.

Minimum Thickness:

×

hmin = = = 7.5” (using table 13.1,from Nilson 13th edition)

Load calculations:

.

Weight of slab = × 150 = 93.75 psf

Factored Loads:

wu = 296.5 psf

For this case the design moments at critical sections may be found using the ACI moment coefficients

(Using table 12.1, from Nilson 13th edition)

Note:

wn = total factored load per unit length of beam or per area of slab

ln = clear span for +ive moment and shear & the average of the two adjacent clear spans for the –ive

moment.

Assuming the column dimensions: Each column of 18” x 18”, thus clear span = 13.5’

At interior support: -M = wuln2 = x (0.2965) x (13.5)2 = 5.04 k-ft

At mid span: +M = wuln2 = x (0.2965) x (13.5)2 = 3.859 k-ft

At exterior support: -M = wuln2 = x (0.2965) x (13.5)2 = 2.251 k-ft

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

If that maximum value of ρ was used actually, the minimum required effective depth, controlled by the

negative moment at the interior support, would be found from equation 3.38 (Nilson 13th edition):

ØMn = Øρfybd2(1 − 0.59 )

5.04×12

Or d2 = = = 5.38

Ø (

. ) 0.90×0.0214×60×12(1−0.590.0214×60

4

)

d = 2.319 in

This is less than the effective depth of 7.5 – 1.00 = 6.5 in. At the interior support, if the stress-block

depth a = 1.00 in., the area of steel required per foot of width in the top of the slab:

.

×

#$ = ' = *.++ = 0.186 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(). )

( (

-.

./)×)

,= = = 0.273 in

./

./××

.

×

#$ = ' = +.(01 = 0.176 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(). )

( (

.)

For which a = 0.273 × = 0.25 in. No further revision is necessary.

./)

At the other critical sections it will be satisfactory to use the same lever arm to determine steel areas

and,

At Mid span:

2./ ×

#$ = ' = +.(01 = 0.134 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(). )

( (

At Exterior support:

. ×

#$ = ' = +.(01 = 0.08 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(). )

( (

The minimum reinforcement is that required for control of shrinkage and temperature cracking. This is:

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

per 12 in. strip. This requires a small increase in the amount of steel used at the exterior support and at

mid span.

The factored shear force at a distance d from the face of the interior support is

56 7 8 296.5 13.5

34 = 1.15 × = 1.15 × = 2301 lb

2 2

Thus the design strength of the concrete slab, ØVc = 0.75 × 9866 = 7399 lb, is well above the required

strength on shear of Vu = 2301 lb

-ive Exterior Support # 3 @ 12” c/c # 3 @ 7” c/c

Mid span # 3 @ 9” c/c # 3 @ 10” c/c

-ive Interior Support # 3 @ 7” c/c # 3 @ 7” c/c

Figure:

The locations of bend and cutoff points shown in above figure were obtained using Figure 5.15 (From

Nilson 13th edition)

The required area of steel to be placed normal to the main reinforcement for the purpose of

temperature and shrinkage crack control is 0.162 in2. This will be provided by No. 3 bars at 8 in c/c

spacing (As = 0.17 in2), placed directly on the top of the main reinforcement in the positive moment

region and below the main steel in the negative-moment zone.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

For this panel, two ends are continuous and remaining two ends are discontinuous.

Minimum Thickness:

×

hmin = = = 6.4” (using table 13.1,from Nilson 13th edition)

/ /

NOTE: Now as for interior panel we have calculated hmin = 6.5” but exterior panel has 7.5”.

So for sake of economy we must have to check for exterior panel by taking hmin = 6.5”, whether for such

condition all requirements are fulfilled or not. If all checks (like shear) satisfy then there is no need to

provide 7.5” thick slab throughout.

But here this time we will proceed by taking 7.5” slab thickness even for the interior panel.

At interior support: -M = wuln2 = x (0.2965) x (13.5)2 = 5.40 k-ft

At mid span: +M = wuln2 = x (0.2965) x (13.5)2 = 3.37 k-ft

) )

If that maximum value of ρ was used actually, the minimum required effective depth, controlled by the

negative moment at the interior support, would be found from equation 3.38 (Nilson 13th edition):

ØMn = Øρfybd2(1 − 0.59 )

5.40×12

Or d2 = = = 5.76

Ø (

. ) 0.90×0.0214×60×12(1−0.590.0214×60

4

)

d = 2.4 in

This is less than the effective depth of 7.5 – 1.00 = 6.5 in.

At the interior support, if the stress-block depth a = 1.00 in., the area of steel required per foot of width

in the top of the slab:

.

×

#$ = ' = *.++ = 0.2 in2

Ø(& ( )

.×)

(). )

(

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

-.

.×)

,= = = 0.294 in

./

./××

.

×

#$ = ' = +.(?@ = 0.188 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(). )

( (

.//

For which a = 0.294 × = 0.27 in. No further revision is necessary.

.

At the other critical sections it will be satisfactory to use the same lever arm to determine steel areas

and,

At Mid span:

2.2 ×

#$ = ' = +.(?@ = 0.117 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(). )

( (

The minimum reinforcement is that required for control of shrinkage and temperature cracking. This is:

Use # 3 @ 8” c/c

per 12 in. strip. This requires a small increase in the amount of steel used at mid span.

The factored shear force at a distance d from the face of the interior support is

5 6 78 296.5 × 13.5

34 = 1.15 × = 1.15 × = 2301 lb

2 2

Thus the design strength of the concrete slab, ØVc = 0.75 × 9866 = 7399 lb, is well above the required

strength on shear of Vu = 2301 lb

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Using the ACI moment coefficients, design a typical continuous beam. Consider the figure below:

Assumptions

Assume the width of beam as 8”. (Assumption will be on the basis of the column dimensions)

Minimum thickness of beam (from Mac Cormaic, table 3.1) = = = 9.729 in. Assume a total

/. /.

depth of 15 (So assumed d = 15 – 2.5 = 12.5”) in and the web depth of 15 – 7.5 = 7.5 in.

Load calculations:

Since; we are dealing with one way slab system. And in actual the load distribution on one way slab

system is same as for the two way slab system (i.e., Triangular & trapezoidal distribution). But in field,

there is a practice for one way slab that load distribution is taken as rectangular.

But here, for the sake of practice we will take the load distribution for continuous beam as per two way

slab system load distribution.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

.

Volume of triangular portion of slab = [2 × ( × 7.5 × 7.5)] × = 35.156 cft

.

UDL on beam (A) due to slab = = 0.35 k/ft

= 100 × [2 × ( × 7.5 × 7.5)] = 5.625 k

.)

UDL on beam (A) due to live load = = 0.375 k/ft

= 20 × [2 × ( × 7.5 × 7.5)] = 1.125 k

.

UDL on beam (A) due to I.D.L = = 0.075 k/ft

Load due to self weight of beam (A) = (Volume of beam, exclusive of flange) × 150

/×.

=[( ) × 15] × 150 = 0.94 k

144

.

UDL on beam (A) due to Self-weight = = 0.062 k/ft

The beam is continuous on five spans and symmetrical about the centerline at D. therefore it is

sufficient to design half of the beam ABCD, because the other half has similar dimensions and

reinforcement.

Note: If the adjacent spans are not equal and their span ratio is less than 1.2 then ACI moment

coefficients can be applied to the beam. Moreover, the average of the adjacent clear span is used to

calculate the negative moments at the supports.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Mu = coefficient × wuln2

Location 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moment

- + - + - +

Coefficient

) )

Mu (K.ft) -8.96 +15.36 -21.51 +13.44 -19.55 +13.44

Maximum negative moment is -21.51 k-ft. using ρmax = 0.0214, Ru = 936.72 psi (Table A.14)

.×

d=A =A = 5.87 in ------- (A)

B

.2)×/

*Since calculate is less than assumed, so we will take the assumed value being on the safer side.

Otherwise we will end up with very small cross-section.

The section at the supports acts as rectangular sections with tension reinforcement placed in the flanges.

The reinforcement required at the supports is as follows:

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Figure:

(a)

× L = × 15 = 15” Use

(b) 6 × hf = 45”

(c)

× l= 324”

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Location 1 3 5

Mu (K.ft) -8.96 -21.51 -19.55

Ru = ( (psi) 86.02 206.49 187.680

&

ρ (%) 0.18 0.4 0.36

As (in2) 0.18 0.4 0.36

No. 4 bars 2 3 2

Note:

• For the calculation of ρ (%), divide the Ru with 0.9, then for that value of Rn see the value of ρ in

table A.14.

• While calculating As = ρ × b × d. And this d is actual d = 12.5, as mentioned above.

For the Mid span T-section, Mu = +15.36 k-ff. For a = 1.00 in. and flange width = 15”

.2) ×

#$ = ' = * = 0.28 in2

Ø(& )

.×)

(. ()

(

-.

./ × )

Check a; ,= = = 0.329 in

./

./××

Revised ‘a’ gives As = 0.276 in2. Therefore use 2 # 4 bars (As = 0.39 in2) for all mid span sections.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

(a) T-Beam

Note: First of all we will assume the cross section of the T-beam and then considering that section, we’ll

calculate the Mu and on the behalf of Mu we will calculated the d, now using that calculated d again

calculation of load on the beam would be our next step. Finally on this selected cross section design will

be done.

Load Calculations:

.

Slab load = 150 × × 15 = 1.40 k/ft

)

Self load of beam (only web portion) = Web depth × 150 × -------------- (i)

Web depth = [(d + cover) – hf]/12 = [(20.5 + 3.5) – 7.5]/12 = 1.375 ft --------------- (ii)

)

Self load of beam = 1.375 × 150 × = 0.275 k/ft

Now:

wu = 1.2 (1.40 + 0.3 + 0.275) + 1.6 (1.5) = 4.77 k/ft ---------- (iii)

C ( (.)× (2)( th

Mu = = = 486.93 k-ft ------- (iv)

(From Hibbler 6 edition, Table FEMs)

We have relation:

/).2×

d=A =A = 19.7 in

B

.2)×)

&

Now check ratio, it should be between 1.5 -2.0:

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

.

= = 1.28 < 1.5 So need to revise the ‘d’

)

Assume d= 24.5 in, and re-solving the equ. (ii), (iii) & (iv) we get:

wu = 4.848 k/ft

Mu = 494.9 k-ft So, Mn = = 549.88 k-ft

.

&

d = 20 in, less than the assumed & check is also OK

(a) × L = × 35 = 105” Use

(b) 12+ 2(8)hf = 12 + (2)(8)7.5 = 132”

(c) 35’ = 420”

DE

Assume lever arm z Equal to the Larger of 0.9d or (d - )

F

.

z = 24.5 – = 20.75 in

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Asfyz = Mn

×/.//

As = = 4.97 in2

)

×.

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 4.97 × 60

Ac = 87.85 in2

/./

a= = 0.836 in

./2)

z = 24.5 – = 24.08”

×/.//

As = = 4.5 in2

)

×.

/

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 4.5 × 60

Ac = 79.41 in2

.

a= = 0.756 in

.)

z = 24.5 – = 24.12”

×/.//

As = = 4.55 in2 OK, close enough to previous value.

)

×.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

) .

As min = = = 1.239 in2

)

,

G &

) .

Or As min = = = 1.30 in2.

)

,

Figure:

2

Maximum T = (2940) = 2205 k > (4.0)(60) = 240 k OK

moment area:

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

C ( (.)× (2)(

Mu = = = 243.46 k-ft

Mn = = 270.5 k-ft

.

×

.

As = = 2.45 in2s

)

×.

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 2.45 × 60

Ac = 43.23 in2

2.2

a= = 0.411 in

.

z = 24.5 – = 24.29”

×

.

As = = 2.23 in2

)

×.

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 2.23 × 60

Ac = 39.35 in2

2.2

a= = 0.37 in

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

.2

z = 24.5 – = 24.31”

.

As = = 2.22 in2 OK, close enough to previous value.

)

.2

So use 3 # 8 (As = 2.35 in2) bars, at –ive moment zone i.e, at supports

(b) L-Beam

The values of bw and d will be same as assumed for the T-beam. So bw = 10” and d = 15.5”

Load Calculations:

.

Slab load = 150 × × 7.5 = 0.70 k/ft

Self load of beam (only web portion) = Web depth × 150 × -------------- (i-a)

Web depth = [(d + cover) – hf]/12 = [(15.5 + 2.5) – 7.5]/12 = 0.875 ft --------------- (ii-a)

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Now:

wu = 1.2 (0.7 + 0.15 + 0.109) + 1.6 (0.75) = 2.35 k/ft ---------- (iii-a)

C ( (.2)× (2)( th

Mu = = = 239.89 k-ft ------- (iv-a)

(From Hibbler 6 edition, Table FEMs)

We have relation:

2./×

d=A =A = 17.6 in

B

.2)×

Since calculated‘d’ is more than assumed, so now take d = 17.6” and repeat the above steps, then equ

.(iii-a) and (iv-a) gives:

wu = 2.40 k/ft

C ( (.

)× (2)(

Mu = = = 245.85 k-ft

We have relation:

./×

d=A =A = 17.7 in

B

.2)×

So depth = 17.7 + 2.5 = 20.2 in, using 21” thus actual d = 18.5”

Mn = = 273.166 k-ft

.

(d) ×L= × 35 = 35”

(e) 6 × hf = 6 × 7.5 = 45”

(f) × l = × 33.5 = 33.5” Use

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

DE

Assume lever arm z Equal to the Larger of 0.9d or (d - )

F

.

z = 18.5 – = 14.75 in

Asfyz = Mn

×2.))

As = = 3.28 in2

)

×).)

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 3.28 × 60

Ac = 58.00 in2

/.

a= = 1.73 in

22.

.2

z = 18.5 – = 17.63”

×2.))

As = = 3.10 in2

)

×.)2

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 3.1 × 60

Ac = 54.70 in2

.

a= = 1.63 in

22.

.)2

z = 18.5 – = 17.68”

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

×2.))

As = = 3.09 in2 OK, close enough to previous value.

)

.)/

/.

As min = = = 0.58 in2

)

,

G &

/.

Or As min = = = 0.616 in2.

)

,

2

Maximum T = (916) = 687 k > (3.0)(60) = 180 k OK

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

The values of bw and d will be same as assumed for the T-beam. So bw = 10” and d = 18.5” (same, as

selected in above steps while designing L-beam for negative moment zone)

From Equ. (iii-a) wu = 1.2 (0.7 + 0.15 + 0.109) + 1.6 (0.75) = 2.35 k/ft

C ( (.2 2(

Mu = = = 119.94 k-ft

Mn = = 133.26 k-ft

.

(a) ×L= × 35 = 35”

(b) 6 × hf = 6 × 7.5 = 45”

(c) × l = × 33.5 = 33.5” Use

DE

Assume lever arm z Equal to the Larger of 0.9d or (d - )

F

.

z = 18.5 – = 14.75 in

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

Asfyz = Mn

×22.)

As = = 1.60 in2

)

×).)

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 1.60 × 60

Ac = 28.23 in2

/.2

a= = 0.84 in

22.

./

z = 18.5 – = 18.0”

×22.)

As = = 1.48 in2

)

×/.

0.85 fc’ Ac = As fy

0.85 × 4 × Ac = 1.48 × 60

Ac = 26.129 in2

).

a= = 0.77 in

22.

.

z = 18.5 – = 18.11”

×22.)

As = = 1.47 in2 OK, close enough to previous value.

)

×/.

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

/.

As min = = = 0.58 in2

)

,

G &

/.

Or As min = = = 0.616 in2.

)

,

2

Maximum T = (916) = 687 k > (3.0)(60) = 180 k OK

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

T-beam:

Thus;

(. .

Vu at a distance d from the support = I J × 59.10

= 53.89 k

ØVc = 15.91 k

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

M .

= = 9.42 ft from right

2./ .

For ØVc :

M .

= = 4.71 ft from right

. .

&

The max spacing should neither exceed, =9.25” nor 24”

-N

Also; Smax= = 19.88” (Av = 2 × 0.11 for # 3 stirrups)

.: G

-N

Smax ≤ = 18.86”

G

∅-N &

For Max Shear S = = 8.29” > 4” (Because stirrup spacing should not be less than 4”, according to code)

P ∅P

As we have max spacing 9.25” but at same time we have max shear S = 8.29”, this happened so because

in our case the loading is very small, so we don’t need to place shear reinforcement at different

locations in different ratio.

So in general we will place the shear reinforcement at a spacing of 9” c/c, up to ØVc

Figure:

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

L-beam:

Thus;

(. .

Vu at a distance d from the support = I J × 49.7 = 43.90 k

ØVc = 14.61 k

Syed Saqib Mehboob 06-CE-50

M .

= = 10.29 ft from right

. .

For ØVc :

M .

= = 5.14 ft from right

.) .

&

The max spacing should neither exceed, = 12.25” nor 24”

-N

Also; Smax= = 19.88” (Av = 2 × 0.11 for # 3 stirups)

.: G

-N

Smax ≤ = 18.86”

G

∅-N &

For Max Shear S = = 16.5” > 4” (Because stirrup spacing should not be less than 4”, according to code)

P ∅P

As we have max spacing 12.25” but at same time we have max shear S = 16.5”, this happened so

because in our case the loading is very small, so we don’t need to place shear reinforcement at different

locations in different ratio.

So in general we will place the shear reinforcement at a spacing of 12” c/c, up to ØVc

Figure:

- 9781483403724.pdfUploaded byM Refaat Fath
- Behavior of GFRP Wrapped Beam Under Pure TorsionUploaded byNisarg Trivedi
- IRJET-Pushover Analysis of G+15 Steel and Steel-Concrete Composite Frame StructureUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Beam Analysis V1-9!6!2018Uploaded byMouy PhonThorn
- GTS 2D Tutorial on Metro StationUploaded byCihuy Rahmat
- Development of Innovative Long-Span Floor Systems for Multi-Story Residential Steel Construction (Conference Proceedings Article)Uploaded byKristjon06
- [Surinder Singh Phd, Msc, Dipce, Dipqs, Fie, Fis,Uploaded byAulia Mirza
- Crane Kits Specifications - CSL1003-0206Uploaded byhasnol_othman
- Diseño Contra FuegoUploaded byUALU333
- Information and Pool Sap2000 Manuals English Problem 1-002Uploaded byHao Luo
- Double Girder Box Type EOT Crane DesignUploaded byJeevan Hingne
- General Guidelines for Analysis & Design of a T- Girder Bridge StructureUploaded bychetan.butle0123
- Designing Members for TorsionUploaded byabou92
- Slabs Beam DetailingUploaded byŞäŧřïą Ţøėë
- A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF T-BEAM BRIDGES FOR VARYING SPAN LENGTHS.pdfUploaded byesatjournals
- Thin Walled StructuresUploaded byamer
- strap_english.pdfUploaded byflavbom
- Experimental Behavior of Composite Deep Beams, AUB Conference, 2015.pdfUploaded byProfessor Dr. Nabeel Al-Bayati-Consultant Engineer
- 5_395Uploaded byGhazi Eng
- BridgeUploaded byairtel
- Steel Bridge Beam Design TutorialUploaded byephrem
- prob50Uploaded bynazgulturuk
- Method Statement Static Pile Load TestUploaded byBejay Bermudez
- Beam1Uploaded bychristian moisés castro huanca
- (Syllabus) SSC_ Junior Engineer 2014Uploaded byJogindra Singh
- ChapterIIUploaded byDhimas Zakaria
- Paper-1-252Uploaded byShoyeeb Ahmed
- Exercise1 SpreadsheetUploaded byHarlal Choudhary
- Beam Design ( Ssb )Uploaded byEr Sai Kiran
- Examp iUploaded byBunkun15

- Effects of Stiffness Degradation on DuctilityUploaded bysalman
- HistéresisUploaded bySigfridoLoges
- New Classification SystemUploaded bysalman
- The Effect of Using Hysteresis Models (BilinearUploaded bysalman
- Basic Example ManualUploaded bysalman
- Final ProjectUploaded bysalman
- CEP CHP 2.docUploaded bysalman
- Ready Mix Concrete PlantUploaded bysalman
- dowden-cvUploaded bysalman
- ThesisUploaded bysalman
- Tugas 01_Beton LanjutUploaded bySalman
- Details of Beam.pdfUploaded bysalman
- Details of ColumnUploaded bysalman
- tranverse reinUploaded bysalman
- beam columnUploaded bysalman
- column designUploaded bysalman
- Details of BeamUploaded bysalman
- Tugas 02_Beton lanjut.xlsxUploaded bysalman
- Uniaxial column design.pdfUploaded bysalman
- Biaxial Column DesignUploaded bysalman
- 5_plastic_analysisUploaded byRahul Karthikeyan

- Cat 3520 gas engineUploaded byJafarShoja
- 08800 - GlazingUploaded byJeffy Shannon
- Steinemann Flyer A4 Dfoil 76 106 en 2017 WebUploaded byAnderson Antunes
- 10.1.1.746.8619Uploaded bykarthikkanda
- Insulators FINALUploaded byGunjan Varshney
- ACICO-Light-Weight-Building-Blocks.pdfUploaded byFred Anthony A. Uera
- CB.building Material.pdfUploaded byMariwan Mir
- Aging April 2017Uploaded byRon Ramos
- Emissions From Marine Engine and Reduction MethodsUploaded byMochamad Rochyana
- SIZE REDUCTION.pptxUploaded byRA Memije
- Tds - Bengalac Gloss - English - Issued.18.11.2002Uploaded bySatish Sarma
- manual vesconiteUploaded byatenciaj
- IS 3589 - 2001Uploaded byAara Megh
- Leoni Automotive CablesUploaded byPascual Mendoza
- Himac 2014 Catalogue WebUploaded byhimacindustries
- ABRV90 Airblast Vacuum Recovery System VRS SeriesUploaded bycastkarthick
- PINCH ANALYSIS OF BENZENE PRODUCTION PROCESS VIA THE HYDRODEALKYLATION OF TOLUENEUploaded byCluisantony Jayco Dize
- Schmidt 2004Uploaded byRahul Gupta
- Solution ManualUploaded by1866272
- World Steel Recycling 2015Uploaded byLina Marcela
- z350xt_tppUploaded byPutri Morteza
- Klean Esp- Ecology Units SpecUploaded byAdnan Khan
- Hardenability HardenabilityUploaded byRecep Vatansever
- The Effect Of Panel ZoneUploaded byGhaith Al-Hourani
- Normas PIPUploaded byAnonymous oUj9yse4
- Generator Operator ManualUploaded byGreg Taylor
- 20111113 My Addition to Model Battery ChargeUploaded byshiftingphases
- Fqp - Civil NewUploaded byVenkatesh Mudragada
- HX 6100Uploaded byAsif Zahidul Haq
- Langmuir Volume 20 Issue 23 2004 [Doi 10.1021%2Fla0480336] Okushima, Shingo; Nisisako, Takasi; Torii, Toru; Higuchi, Toshir -- Controlled Production of Monodisperse Double Emulsions by Two-Step Droplet Breakup in MicrofUploaded byLeandro de Barros