0 views

Uploaded by Ijaz Ahmed

form

- Reinforced Concrete Drawings- HK University.pdf
- Universal Design Guidelines
- Safety
- FIRECODE.doc
- reviewer2_ncii.pdf
- Chapter-4
- RequestedFile
- NORMA AREMA
- 10 - Design of Doubly Reinforced Beams
- Of the - Copy
- CIVL311 CIVL911 2019 Sample Examination 2
- REBARS (318-05)
- Staircase Final Design
- 12
- Reinforcement Bars
- Beam Formulas
- Inter penertrating polymer network CBRI paper.pdf
- 10. Bed and Breakfast Establishments Policy
- Strand Room Directions
- RO-II Tank_Ring Wall

You are on page 1of 23

at the face of the column, Mz

Maximum Shear Force, Vu 172.579 kN

fck 25 N/mm2

fy 500 N/mm2

Breadth of Beam 230 mm

Depth of Beam 600 mm

The limiting value of moment of resistance of the section is:

Assume 20 mm ɸ bar and 25mm cover

Effective Depth,

D 600-(25+20/2)

565mm

Xulim 0.46×d

0.46×565 = 259.9 mm

Refer IS 456 page 96

MUlim 𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥

0.36 × (1 − 0.42 × ) × b𝑑 2 f𝑐𝑘

𝑑 𝑑

245.2398 kNm

Mu>MUlim

Section is doubly reinforced

To find Ast1

MUlim 𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 ×𝑓𝑦

0.87×fy×Ast1×d×(1 − )

𝑏×𝑑×𝑓𝑐𝑘

245.239×106 𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥

0.87 × 500 × 𝐴st1 × 565 × (1 − 230×565×30 )

𝑋 ×500

𝐴st1 × ( )

3248750

Section with Compression Reinforcement:

When the Ultimate Moment of resistance of section exceeds the limiting value, MUlim

Compression reinforcement is obtained from the following equation

MU-MUlim fsc× Asc(d-d′)

d′ cover+ɸ/2

25+20/2

35mm

(297.194-245.398)×106 fsc× Asc(565-35)

530

98.026 ×103

From IS-456,Clause 38.1

0.87×𝑓𝑦

98.026 ×103

0.87×500

225.34 mm2

fsc-Design stress in compression reinforcement corresponding to a strain εsc

𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥

From IS456 – Pg 70

𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.46

𝑑

𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 0.46 × 𝑑

𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 259.9 mm

εsc 0.0035(𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 −𝑑′ )

𝑋𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥

εsc 0.0035(259.9−35)

259.9

εsc 0.0031

fsc εsc× Es ≤ 0.87×fy

εsc× 2×105≤ 0.87×500

605.74 ≤ 435 N/mm2

Asc 𝐴𝑠𝑡2 ×0.87×𝑓𝑦

𝑓𝑠𝑐

225.34×0.87×500

435

225.34 N/mm2

Ast Ast1+Ast2

1229.49+225.34

1454.83 mm2

Adopt 20mm ɸ as bottom reinforcement bar

Ast 1229.49 mm2

Number of bars 1229.49

314.15

3.913

Provide 4 # 20 mm ɸ bar as bottom reinforcement

Ast 225.34 mm2

Number of bars 225.34

314.15

0.717

Provide 2 # 20 mm ɸ bar as top reinforcement

Provide 2 # 20 ɸ as top reinforcement

Check for shear :

𝛕v 𝑉𝑢

𝑏×𝑑

172.58×103

230×565

1.328

Pt 100×𝐴𝑠𝑡

𝑏×𝑑

100×6×314.15

230×565

1.45

From Table 19, IS 456 Page 73

1.25 0.71

1.5 0.76

1.45 0.75

𝛕v >𝛕c

Vus 𝑉𝑢 − 𝜏𝑐 × 𝑏 × 𝑑

172.58×103-0.75×230×565

75.117 kN

Using 8 mm ɸ two legged stirrup

Vus 0.87×2×𝑓𝑦 ×𝐴𝑠𝑣 ×𝑑

𝑆𝑣

Sv 𝜋×82

0.87×2×500×565×

4

75.117×103

328.92 mm

Provide 8mm ɸ 2 legged stirrups at 300 mm c/c as shear reinforcement.

Comparison of manually obtained Beam Design Results against BEAM DES Software

Slab

Span(shorterer direction) 3.735 m

Depth of Beam on which the 230 mm

slab is supported

Slab Thickness 150 mm

Clear cover 15 mm

Grade of concrete M 25

Grade of steel Fe 500

Solution

Effective depth,dx 8

150-15-2

131

Effective depth,dy 131-8

123

Clear span in longer direction, 6200-230

5970

Clear span in shorter direction, 3735-230

3505

From IS456 2000 Clause 22.2

Effective length should be

minimum of c/c distance

orclaer span +eff. Depth

In Ly direction 5.97+0.123 6.093m

Or

5.97+0.23 6.2 m

In Lx direction 3.505+0.106 3.611m

Or

3.505+0.23 3.735 m

Effective length in longer 6.093

direction ,Ly

Effective length in shorterer 3.611

direction ,Lx

Ly 1.687<2

Lx

Hence the slab is designed as a

two way slab

Load clculations

Dead Load:

Self weight 0.15×25

3.75 kN/m2

Floor Finish 1 kN/m2

Total Dead load 4.75 kN/m2

Factored Load 7.125 kN/m2

Imposed Load:

Total Live load on slab 2 kN/m2

Factored Live Load 3 kN/m2

Total Factored load 10.125 kN/m2

α𝑥+𝑣𝑒 0.0439

α𝑥−𝑣𝑒 0.0582

α𝑦+𝑣𝑒 0.024

α𝑦−𝑣𝑒 0.032

Short Span

+ve moment at mid span,

M𝑥+𝑣𝑒

α𝑥+𝑣𝑒 × W𝑢 × 𝐿𝑥 2

0.0439×10.125×3.6112

5.795 kN/m2

-ve moment at mid span,

M𝑥−𝑣𝑒

α𝑥−𝑣𝑒 × W𝑢 × 𝐿𝑥 2

0.0582×10.125×3.6112

7.683 kN/m2

Long Span

+ve moment at mid span,

M𝑦+𝑣𝑒

α𝑦+𝑣𝑒 × W𝑢 × 𝐿𝑦2

0.024×10.125×3.6112

3.1685 kN/m2

-ve moment at mid span,

𝑀𝑦−𝑣𝑒

α𝑦−𝑣𝑒 × W𝑢 × 𝐿𝑦2

0.032×10.125×3.6112

4.224 kN/m2

Check for effective depth

MUlim 0.1336×fck×b×d2

0.1336×25×1000×1312

57.31 kNm > Muy & Mux

Hence the depth provided is adequate

Flexural Reinforcement Calculations

Positive Moment

R 𝑀𝑢

𝑓𝑐𝑘 ×𝑏×𝑑 2

5.795×106

1000×1312

0.3376

𝐴𝑠𝑡

𝑓𝑐𝑘 4.598×𝑅

𝑏×𝑑

2𝑓𝑦

(1 − √1 − 𝑓𝑐𝑘

)

(1 − √1 − )

2×500 25

Minimum Ast 0.12% of effective area

0.0012×150×1000

180 mm2

ast

Spacing × 1000

Ast

π×82

4

180

× 1000

279.25 mm2

Negative Moment

R 𝑀𝑢

𝑓𝑐𝑘 ×𝑏×𝑑 2

7.683×106

1000×1312

0.4477

𝐴𝑠𝑡

𝑓𝑐𝑘 4.598×𝑅

𝑏×𝑑

2𝑓𝑦

(1 − √1 − 𝑓𝑐𝑘

)

(1 − √1 − )

2×500 25

Minimum Ast 0.12% of effective area

0.0012×150×1000

180 mm2

ast

Spacing × 1000

Ast

π×82

4

180

× 1000

279.25 mm2

Positive Moment

R 𝑀𝑢

𝑓𝑐𝑘 ×𝑏×𝑑 2

3.1685×106

1000×1312

0.1846

𝐴𝑠𝑡

𝑓𝑐𝑘 4.598×𝑅

𝑏×𝑑

2𝑓𝑦

(1 − √1 − 𝑓𝑐𝑘

)

(1 − √1 − )

2×500 25

Minimum Ast 0.12% of effective area

0.0012×150×1000

180 mm2

ast

Spacing × 1000

Ast

π×82

4

× 1000

180

279.25 mm2

Provide 8 mm ɸ at 270 mm c/c.

Negative Moment

R 𝑀𝑢

𝑓𝑐𝑘 ×𝑏×𝑑 2

4.224×106

1000×1312

0.2461

𝐴𝑠𝑡

𝑓𝑐𝑘 4.598×𝑅

𝑏×𝑑

2𝑓𝑦

(1 − √1 − 𝑓𝑐𝑘

)

(1 − √1 − )

2×500 25

Minimum Ast 0.12% of effective area

0.0012×150×1000

180 mm2

ast

Spacing × 1000

Ast

π×82

4

× 1000

180

279.25 mm2

L 6093

(d) 131

provided

46.51

𝐿

(as per IS 456:2000, 𝑑 = 26 )

Ast provided ast ×1000

spacing

251.3 mm2

MF 1

Ast req b×d

0.225+0.00322(0.5×fy× )−0.625×log( )

Ast pro. 100×Ast pro.

1

180 1000×131

0.225+0.00322(0.5×500× )−0.625×log( )

251.3 100×251.3

2.83

L 2.83×26

( )

d max

L

73.58> (d)

provided

Hence Safe.

Staircase

Design of staircase

fck 25 N/mm2

fy 500 N/mm2

Riser (R) 150 mm

Tread (T) 300 mm

Width of mid landing 1.2 m

Length of going 2.915 m

Effective Span 1.2+2.915+0.15

4.265 m

Assume,

Waist slab thickness 150 mm

Mid landing slab thickness 150 mm

Clear cover 20 mm

Diameter of main bar 12 mm

Effective depth of waist slab 150 – 20 – 6

124 mm

Load calculation

300

4.192 kN/m2

Self-weight of step 20×0.15

2

1.5 kN/m2

Finishes 0.6 kN/m2

Live Load 2 kN/m2

Total Load 8.292 kN/m2

Factored Load 12.438 kN/m2

Loads on landing slab

3.75 kN/m2

Finishes 0.6 kN/m2

Live load 2 kN/m2

Total load 6.35 kN/m2

Factored load 9.525 kN/m2

Reactions

Reaction at A,RA 29.38 kN

Maximum BM at X-X (2.10 m) 32.874 kNm

Design of Reinforcement

Main Reinforcement

Mu 32.874×106

bd2 1000×1242

2.13

2.10 0.542

2.15 0.557

2.13 0.567

Ast 124

0.567 × 1000 × 1000

703.08 mm2

Assuming 12 mm ɸ bars as main reinforcement

Spacing of 12 mm ɸ bars 113.09×103

703.08

160.8 mm

Provide 12 mm ɸ bars at 160 mm c/c

Distribution Reinforcement

Ast 0.12×1000×150

100

180 mm2

Assuming 8 mm ɸ bars as distribution

reinforcement

Spacing 50.26×103

180

279.22 mm

Provide 8 mm ɸ bars at 200 mm c/c

Mu wl2

8

9.525×2.62

8

8.648 kN/m

Column

Column Number 1

Pu 5803 kN

My 462.695 kNm

Mx 136.066 kNm

Cover 40 mm

Fck 30 N/mm2

Fy 500 N/mm2

Breadth of Column 600 mm

Depth of Column 1050 mm

Check for BM due to minimum eccentricity:

ey min Lu 𝐷

+

500 30

3000 1050

+

500 30

41 mm >20mm

ex min Lu 𝐷

+

500 30

3000 600

+

500 30

26 mm >20mm

Muxe 5803×41

1000

Muye 5803×26

1000

Eccentric moments govern in the x direction while the moments in the y direction is not influenced by

eccentricity.

Design Moments,

Muy 462.695 kNm

P/fck 2

30

0.067

Assuming 40 mm cover (severe condition as per table 16 IS 456),8 mm ties and 20 mm main bars

d′ 40 + 8 +

20

2

0.067

d′/D 58

1050

= 0.055

𝑃𝑢 5803×103

𝑓𝑐𝑘 𝐵𝐷 30×600×1050

0.307

From Chart 47 of SP16

𝑀𝑢 0.11

𝑓𝑐𝑘 𝐷𝑩2

𝑀𝑢 = 𝑀𝑢𝑥1 fckDB2×0.11

30×600×10502×0.11

𝑀𝑢𝑥1 2182.95 kNm

P/fck 2

30

0.067

d′/D 58

600

= 0.096

𝑃𝑢 5803×103

𝑓𝑐𝑘 𝐵𝐷 30×600×1050

0.307

From Chart 48 of SP16

𝑀𝑢 0.11

𝑓𝑐𝑘 𝐷𝑩2

𝑀𝑢 = 𝑀𝑢𝑥1 fckDB2×0.11

30×1050×6002×0.11

𝑀𝑢𝑥1 1247.4 kNm

Calcualaete Puz from chart 63 of SP 16 corresponding to P t=2%,fs=500 Mpa,fck=30Mpa

Puz 21×Ag

Puz 21×600×1050

1000

13230 kN

Check the capacity of assumed section

𝑃𝑢 5803

13230

𝑃𝑢𝑧

𝑃𝑢 0.438

𝑃𝑢𝑧

𝑃𝑢𝑧 represents bending about x and y axes respectively

α

Mux α Muy

[( ) +( ) ]≤1

Mux1 Muy1

Where

Mux and Muy are moments about x and y axes respectively due to design loads

Mux1 and Muy1 are the maximum uniaxial moment capacities with an axial load

𝑃

α is an exponent dependent on 𝑃 𝑢

𝑢𝑧

Mux 237.473

= 0.1087

2182.95

Mux1

Muy 462.695

= 0.3709

1247.4

Muy1

From SP 16 clause 3.3

0.2 1

0.8 2

0.438 1.396

Hence,

α

M α M (0.1087)1.396 + (0.3709)1.396

(M ux ) + (M uy )

ux1 uy1

0.295 < 1

Hence the trail section is safe under applied load

Provide

As 1050

2×600×

100

As 12600 mm2

Provide 32 mm ɸ bars

Number of bars 12600

π = 15.6

×322

4

16 no’s

Max. diameter/4 32/4=8 mm

6 mm

Therefore provide 12 mm ɸ ties

Pitch: least of

B 600 mm

16 mm × ɸ 16×32 =512 mm

300 mm

Provide 12 mm ɸ lateral ties @ 300 mm c/c

According to IS 13920,cl 7.3.3

The spacing of ties shall not exceed half the least lateral dimension of

the column i.e.,

B/2 300 mm

Provide 12 mm ɸ lateral ties @ 300 mm c/c

Design of Isolated RCC Footing

qo 20 kN/m2

fck 30 N/mm2

fy 500 N/mm

Clear cover 50 mm

Solution

Determine size of footing assuming weight of footing and backfill as 10%of coloumn load

3726.44

1.1× 250

16.3963

Size of square footing √16.3963

4.049 × 4.049

Provide 4.2×4.2 m

Factored net soil Presure,qu P×Υf

B2

Where

Υf – partial safety factors for load , also the factor used to determine unbalanced moment transferred

by flexure at slab column connection

qu P×Υf

B2

3726.44×1.5

4.2×4.2

0.3168 N/mm2

The critical section for one way shear is at a distance d from the face of the column

Vu1 qu ×B

2

× (B − C − 2d)

Where,

Vu1 qu ×B

2

× (B − C − 2d)

4200−600−2×d

0.3168×4200×( 2

)

663.6×(4200-600-2×d)

2388960 – 1327.2×d

0.36×4200×d

1512×d

Since Vu>Vu1

1512 × d ≥ 2388960 − 1327.2 × d

2839.2 d = 2388960

D 841.42

910 mm

D 10

910+50+ 2

970mm

980mm

The critical section for two way shear is at a distance d/2 from the periphery of the column

0.316 × (42002 − (600 +

910)2 )

4853.72 kN

Where

Ks (0.5+βc ) < 1

βc – Ratio of short side to longer side of the column

βc 600

1050

Ks 0.5+0.5714

1.0714 < 1

Hence adopt 1

τc 0.25√fck

0.25√30

1.36

Hence

Vn2 K s × τc (4(C1 + d)d)

1 × 1.36(4(600 + 910)910)

7475.104 > 4853.72

Check for qa with the actual size of footing with the weight of concrete and soil as 24 kN/m3 and 18

kN/m3 respectively

q 3726.44

4.2×4.2

+ 24 × 0.91 + 18 ×

0.91

249.46<250 kN/m2

Hence safe

qu

Mu

8

× B × (B − C1 )2

0.316

8

× 4200 × (4200 −

600)2

2150.06 kNm

Mu 2150.06×106

bd2 4200×8502

0.7085

Pt = 0.166 %

As this % of steel is less than the % assumed for calculating shear strength i.e., 0.25% in step 2, shear

strength requirement governs the design hence

× 4200 × 850

100

8925 mm2

Assuming 20 mm ɸ bars

Number of bars 8925

π

×202

4

29 bars

Spacing 4200−(50×2)−20

29−1

145.71 mm

Provide 20mm ɸ bars at 145 mm c/c

For M30 concrete and Fe500 steel required development length for 20mm ɸ bar from table 66 (page

185) of SP16 is 906 mm.

2

− 2

Hence Safe

5589.66 kN

As per C1 30.6 of IS456, limiting bearing stress

fbrmax A

0.45fck √A1

2

Where

fbr-Bearing stress at bends

At footing face,fck=30 Mpa

A1 (4200×4200) mm2

A2 (600×1050) mm2

A 4200×4200

√A 1 √

2 600×1050

Permissible Bearing Stress,fbr 0.45×30×2

27 MPa

Actual Bearing Stress Factored Load

Actual Column Base

1.5×3726.44

600×1050

- Reinforced Concrete Drawings- HK University.pdfUploaded byMahmood Mufti
- Universal Design GuidelinesUploaded byEricson Puig Europa
- SafetyUploaded byOvi Zunayed
- FIRECODE.docUploaded byMikee Brobio San Miguel
- reviewer2_ncii.pdfUploaded byDel James Lambongog
- Chapter-4Uploaded byLenon Rugayan
- RequestedFileUploaded byAli Kılınç
- NORMA AREMAUploaded byJuan Carlos Fernandez
- 10 - Design of Doubly Reinforced BeamsUploaded byammarnakhi
- Of the - CopyUploaded byJack Galmitz
- CIVL311 CIVL911 2019 Sample Examination 2Uploaded byMah Kanxu
- REBARS (318-05)Uploaded bySana Ullah
- Staircase Final DesignUploaded byIts me
- 12Uploaded byKamille Gabayno
- Reinforcement BarsUploaded byjworder
- Beam FormulasUploaded byZdravko Vidakovic
- Inter penertrating polymer network CBRI paper.pdfUploaded byRadha Krishnan
- 10. Bed and Breakfast Establishments PolicyUploaded byMuhammad Izwan
- Strand Room DirectionsUploaded byGodofGuns
- RO-II Tank_Ring WallUploaded byARUNKUMAR K
- RC Notes by Engr. GREGUploaded byMichael Suan
- Steel Reinforcement for ConcreteUploaded byVijaya Raghava Sunke
- One Way Slabs11Uploaded byHemant Sonawadekar
- Bridge-ConcreteColumn.xlsUploaded bySaitheja Sharma
- Flexural Beam Design.pdfUploaded bydoverman
- Deck Balcony GuidelineUploaded byCasey Yong Sue Fai
- 3 Self-drilling Hollow Rock Bolts - Technical Submission File CompressedUploaded byrolo7720
- Wide-Module-Pan-Skip-Joist-Spandrel-Torsion-Concrete-Floor-Design-Detailing.pdfUploaded byGonzalo Gomez Castillo
- Khodaie Et Al-ACI Spring 2016Uploaded byeros
- Chapter_7Uploaded bySureshKollat

- Edit.txtUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- SAUploaded byDebendra Dev Khanal
- ansys doc.txtUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- ReactionsUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- EditorUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- editor.docxUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- editor.docxUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- 40module 47mps Stow R2Uploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- BASEPLT9Uploaded byHomero Silva
- Utility VbaUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Hat Calculation VsUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- R AGOR- By EasyEngineering.netUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- MaterialUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- MaterialUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Indian Steel TableUploaded byshreekant27
- kupdf.com_is-875-part-3-2015pdf.pdfUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Assignment 1Uploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Is 800:2007Uploaded bycrajtry
- OtherUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- rep_compUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- ExtUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Flood Hazard Mapping Using Aster Image DataUploaded byMogie Talampas
- s2703_1Uploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Reactions ReportUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Extraction ResultsUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Report_phase1.pdfUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- Report_phase1.pdfUploaded byIjaz Ahmed
- gis_repUploaded byIjaz Ahmed

- MAE 91 Su13: HW 2 SolutionsUploaded byFUSION Academics
- 2008 Syn Book Base StockUploaded byPauloAntal
- Energy Balance in Dynamic Fracture Investigated by a Potential DropUploaded byPablo Coll
- Shell and Tube Heat ExchangersUploaded byLieu Dinh Phung
- Raisa Ehsan Past PaperUploaded byvipkolon
- WS - Honors Atomic Theory WSUploaded bysquattingm0nkeys
- Zoeppritz EquationsUploaded byriyadi
- 5-Types of LasersUploaded byRizkiansyah Rakhmadin
- מספרים חסרי מימדUploaded byA.b Te'ena
- Yogesh Solar CellsUploaded byStark
- Tugas Soal Kekuatan Bahan (1)Uploaded byPrima Januar Wijaya
- 2014 Entropy Tutorial With Solution for StudentsUploaded byChen Zhihao
- Melting and solidificationUploaded byanish_npcil
- sample refrigeration unit.docxUploaded byatiqah
- API 682 Edn II 2002 Parte2Uploaded bybrujula27
- Pure SubstanceUploaded byPhuc Truong
- Paper 287Uploaded byidora27
- melting point determinationUploaded byDaniel Mifsud
- MagnetismUploaded byBharat Ramkumar
- nearsurf_2Uploaded byDr-Alaa Hashim
- Shear Strength of Expansive SoilsUploaded bySanko Kosan
- Homogenization TechniquesUploaded byxavier_snk
- DISTILLATION LECTURE NOTE-2.docxUploaded byBassey
- SyllabusUploaded bykarthickmech19874601
- Gdjp Lesson PlanUploaded bysarathkumar sebastin
- 60 - Fatigue and Fracture TestingUploaded bychristian_zavala
- Design CalculationsUploaded byTharmalingam Vijay
- Heat of HydrationUploaded byThaiAnhBo
- NanotexUploaded byzaid8182
- Ferrous Metal.pptUploaded byAshwani Dogra