0 views

Uploaded by paulkohan

.

- Bending Stresses for Simple Shapes
- On Ground Tank
- Todd J. D., 1974, Structural Theory and Analysis
- TIMOSHENKO - Strength of Materials-Vol2
- Content Rec
- Bending (1)
- Beam Model Calculation
- CONT_BEAM (1).xlsx
- The Effective Width in Multi-girder Composite Steel Beams With Web Openings
- shear force
- Folded Plates
- Lecture3_LoadBalance
- TechFeb15.pdf
- Shear Strength of Rc Deep Beam Panels – a Review
- 2-1 MOS [Nov 2009 Regular]
- R09222104-AEROSPACEVEHICLESTRUCTURES-I
- 01. Deflection of Elastic Beams
- How to - Beam Stresses
- Analysis and Design for End Effects in Twisted Double Tees
- A_Oxygen Scarvenger 15m3_Mech Report

You are on page 1of 9

Simply Supported One-way Slabs

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1

PhD, Institute for Building Construction and Technology, University of Technology

Vienna, Karlsplatz 13/206/4, 1040 Vienna, Austria; PH +43 1 58801 215 12; FAX

+43 1 58801 215 99; email: ildiko.merta@tuwien.ac.at

2

Prof. PhD, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17,

2000 Maribor, Slovenia; PH +386 2 229 4348; stojan.kravanja@uni-mb.si

ABSTRACT

The paper presents the cost optimization of reinforced concrete simply supported

one-way slabs under uniformly distributed load with the nonlinear programming

approach. A detailed objective function of the slab’s manufacturing costs was given

including the material costs of the concrete, reinforcement and formwork panels as

well as the labour cost items. The slabs were designed in accordance with the

European Building Code. A multi-parametric cost optimization was carried out for

variable spans from 5 to 8m and variable uniformly distributed imposed load of 2

and 5kN/m2. Additionally, at the serviceability limit state, two different deflection

limitation designs have been performed. In the first the slenderness ratio of the slabs

was limited while in the second the slabs deflection was controlled. The comparison

of the results shows that the slenderness controlled design results in a considerable

lower slab's depth and consequently a lower manufacturing cost.

INTRODUCTION

heuristic methods such as genetic algorithms, threshold accepting, tabu search, etc.

(Coello et al. 1997, Ferreira et al. 2003, Govindaraj and Ramasamy 2005, Azmy and

Eid 1999). A very limited number of research deals with the exact methods which are

based on the (non)linear programming approach. So far the optimization of RC

beams of rectangular- and T cross-section has been proposed (Merta and Kravanja,

2009a; Merta and Kravanja, 2009b) and the obtained results for rectangular section

has been compared with the results of steel beams (Merta et al., 2008).

In this work the cost optimization design of RC one-way slabs was performed by the

nonlinear programming (NLP) approach by taking into account design constraints

defined by the European Building Code for reinforced concrete structures (Eurocode

2, 2005). A detailed objective function of the slab's manufacturing costs is given

including the material and labour cost items. At the serviceability limit state

Eurocode 2, allows two design ways for deflection control, namely the limitation of

the real calculated deflection and a simplified way where solely the slab's slenderness

ratio has been limited. The task of the research was to perform a comprehensive

comparison of the obtained optimal cross-sections as well as manufacturing costs of

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2671

comparative multi-parametric NLP cost optimization of the RC slab was performed

and the slab's optimal cost development as well as optimal depth was investigated for

different spans of the slab (5, 6, 7, and 8m) and two different live loads (2 and 5

kN/m2).

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Generally to design a reinforced concrete (RC) slab as a one-way spanning slab one

of the following two cases should hold:

• the slab is supported on four sides and has a much longer span in one direction

lx/ly >2, thus the slab may be assumed to be supported only along its longer side,

• the slab is supported on two sides.

One-way slabs are typically divided into a series of beam strips (Figure 1.) and the

depth of the slab and reinforcement is determined for a 1m wide strip using the

classical beam theory.

At the ultimate limit state (ULS) the slab strip was checked for bending moment. The

ultimate strength design of the RC sections under the bending moment is defined by

the non-linear constitutive laws of concrete and steel. The actual stress-strain

diagram of concrete is replaced with a simplified equivalent rectangular stress-strain

diagram. A bi-linear design stress-strain law with a horizontal top branch was

considered for the reinforcing steel. At the ULS it should be verified that the acting

moment does not exceeds the flexural capacity of the section:

M Ed ≤ M Rd

α ⋅ f ck f

M Rd = ⋅ 0.48 ⋅ b ⋅ x 2 + y ⋅ As ⋅ ( d − x )

γc γs

where MEd is the design bending moment, MRd is the design bending moment

resistance, fy is the yield strength of main reinforcement, fck is the characteristic

cylinder strength of concrete, α is the coefficient which takes into account the long-

term effects on the compressive strength of concrete, γc, γs are the safety coefficients

for concrete and structural steel, respectively, As is the cross-sectional area of the

main reinforcement per unit width of the slab, d is the distance between the main

Ast As

lx

h

b=1m

l

with the cross-section of a 1m slab strip

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2672

reinforcement's center of gravity and the section's most compressed fiber, x is the

depth of the section's compression zone and b=1m is the width of the beam (slab

strip).

Because of their high shear resistance slabs could be designed without shear

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

secondary reinforcement in the transverse direction is placed. The area of the

transverse reinforcement Ast should be at least 20% of the main reinforcement.

At the serviceability limit state (SLS) the slab's deflection and crack were controlled.

According to the Eurocode 2 the deflection control could be provided by one of the

following two limitations:

• the calculated actual deflection of the slab is limited under the value of span/250,

• the slenderness ratio of the slab is limited to: l/d ≤ 20 (for lightly stressed

concrete).

reinforcement required to ensure controlled cracking in the member (Eurocode 2,

2005):

A

As,min = kc ⋅ k ⋅ f ct ,eff ⋅ ct

σs

where kc is a coefficient which takes into account the nature of the stress distribution

within the section immediately prior to cracking (kc=0.4 for bending without normal

force), k is a coefficient which allows the effect of non-uniform self-equilibrating

stresses (k=1.0 for h ≤ 300 mm and k=0.65 for h ≥ 800 mm), fct,eff is the concrete

tensile strength at the appearance of the first cracks, Act is the area of concrete within

tensile zone and σs is the maximal stress permitted in the reinforcement immediately

after formation of the crack.

The additional requirements of the Eurocode 2 have been also taken into account:

− for an element of the structure to be considered as a slab, its shorter span should

be not less than five times the slab’s depth,

− the minimal amount of the main reinforcement is constrained with:

As ≥ 0.0013·b·d and As ≥ 0.26· fctm b·d/ fyk, where fctm represents the mean value of

the concrete tensile strength and fyk denotes the characteristic yield stress of the

reinforcing steel,

− the maximal cross-sectional area of the main reinforcement is constrained with:

As ≤ 0.04·Ac, where Ac = b h.

Min z = f(x)

subjected to: h(x) = 0 and g(x) ≤ 0

x ∈ X = { x⏐ x ∈ Rn, xL ≤ x ≤ xU }

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2673

Functions f(x), h(x) and g(x) are (non)linear functions involved in the objective

function z, equality and inequality constraints, respectively. All the functions f(x),

h(x) and g(x) must be continuous and differentiable. The vector of continuous

variables denotes different parameters of a structure, e.g. dimensions, cross-section

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

etc. The optimal values of the considered variables are obtained when the minimal

value of the defined objective function is reached. The system of equality and

inequality constraints and the bounds of the variables represent a rigorous system of

the design, load, stress, deflections and resistance functions derived from the

structural analysis and design codes.

The manufacturing cost of the member is defined as a sum of material and labour

costs required for the fabrication, because the power consumption costs may be

neglected at the cost estimation since they usually represent less than 1% of the total

cost6.

follows:

f ( x ) = min : Cost = CM ,c,r + CM , f + CL, f + CL,r + CL,c + CL,v + CL,cc

where the variable Cost (€/m2) represents the manufacturing costs of the slab, the

notations CM,… and CL,… represent the considered material and labour costs.

The material costs of the concrete, the main and the transverse reinforcement are

defined by:

CM ,c,r = cM ,c ⋅Vc + cM ,r ⋅ρ s ⋅ (Vs ,m + Vs,t )

where cM,c (€/m3) and cM,r (€/kg) are the prices of the concrete and reinforcement; Vc,

Vs,m, and Vs,t in (m3) represent the volumes of concrete, main and transverse

reinforcement respectively; ρs (kg/m3) is the unit mass of steel.

1

C M , f = cM , f ⋅ ⋅ Ac,s

nuc

where cM,f (€/m2) is the price of the prefabricated panels; nuc is the number of the use

cycles of the panels; Ac,s (m2) is the concrete slab surface area.

The labour costs for the panelling of concrete slab, the levelling, disassembling and

cleaning of the formwork may be calculated by using the expression:

CL , f = cL ⋅ T f ⋅ Ac ,s

where cL (€/h) represents the labour costs per working hour; Tf (h/m2) is the

formwork time (including panelling, levelling, disassembling and cleaning); Ac,s (m2)

is the concrete slab surface area. The panelling of the concrete slab with fully

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2674

The labour costs for cutting, placing and connecting of the reinforcement bars in the

concrete slab are defined as follows:

CL ,r = cL ⋅ Tr ⋅ρ s ⋅ (Vs ,l + Vsw )

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where cL (€/h) denotes the labour costs per working hour; Tr (h/kg) is the time

required for cutting, placing and connecting the reinforcement; Vs,m, and Vs,t (m3)

represent the volumes of main and transverse reinforcement respectively; ρs (kg/m3)

is the unit mass of steel.

The labour costs for concreting the slab are given in the form:

CL ,c = cL ⋅ Tc ⋅ Vc

where cL (€/h) denotes the labour costs per working hour; Tc (h/m3) represents the

concreting time and Vc (m3) denotes the volume of the concrete slab.

CL ,v = cL ⋅ Tv ⋅ Ac ,s

where cL (€/h) are the labour costs per working hour; Tv (h/m2) is the vibration time

required for the consolidation of concrete and Ac,s (m2) is the concrete surface area.

The placement and consolidation of concrete is achieved by using a concrete pump

and internal vibrators.

The labour costs for curing the concrete may be evaluated by using the following

equation:

CL ,cc = cL ⋅ Tcc ⋅ Vc

where cL (€/h) represents the labour costs per working hour; Tcc (h/m3) denotes the

curing time and Vc (m3) is the volume of the concrete slab.

The task of the optimization was to find the minimal possible structure’s

manufacturing costs and consequently the optimal design of one-way slabs. The NLP

optimization model OPTIRCS (OPTImization of RC Slab) was developed. All the

applied economic parameters (used in Equations above) are shown in Table 1. They

were defined according to Klanšek and Kravanja (2006), Meier (1990) and ARH

(2001). For the mathematical modelling and data input/outputs the high level

language GAMS (General Algebraic Modelling System) was used (Brooke et al.,

1988). CONOPT, (Generalized reduced-gradient method) was used for the

optimization (Drud, 1994).

The structure's optimal cost development was investigated for different spans of the

slab and various loads. Since the two allowed deflection controls of Eurocode 2

result in a considerable different slab's depth and consequently in a different

manufacturing cost, the cost optimization design for both cases has been carried out

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2675

programming) cost optimization of the RC slab was performed for all combinations

of the following design parameters:

− four different spans of the slab from l=5 m to l=8 m with a 1 m step,

− two different uniformly distributed live loads of p=2 kN/m2 and p=5 kN/m2,

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

− two different deflection controls i.e., slenderness ratio limitation and deflection

limitation.

Material and labour cost parameters

cM,c Price of the concrete C25/30 90.00 €/m3

cM,r Price of the reinforcing steel BSt 550 0.90 €/kg

cM,f Price of the prefabricated panels 30.00 €/m2

cL Labour costs 20.00 €/h

Fabrication times

Tf Time of panelling, levelling, disassembly and cleaning of the formwork 0.30 h/m2

Tr Time for cutting, placing and connecting of the reinforcement 0.03 h/kg

Tc Time of concreting 1.00 h/m3

Tv Time for consolidation of the concrete 0.20 h/m2

Tcc Time for curing of the concrete 0.20 h/m2

Input data

g Self weight of the floor construction (without the concrete slab) 1.00 kN/m2

fck Characteristic compressive cylinder strength of concrete (C25/30) 25 N/mm2

fctm Mean value of the concrete (C25/30) tensile strength 2.6 N/mm2

fct,eff Effective tensile strength of the concrete (C25/30) 3.0 N/mm2

Ecm Secant modulus of elasticity of concrete (C25/30) 30.50 kN/mm2

Es Modulus of elasticity of steel 200 kN/mm2

fyk Characteristic yield strength of tension reinforcement (BSt 550) 550 N/mm2

fykw Characteristic yield strength of transverse reinforcement (BSt 550) 550 N/mm2

a Concrete cover 2.50 cm

ρc The unit mass of concrete 2500 kg/m3

ρs The unit mass of steel 7850 kg/m3

γc Partial safety factor for concrete 1.5

γs Partial safety factor for steel 1.15

α Coefficient taking into account the long-term effects on the concrete 1.0

nuc Number of the use cycles of the panels 30

With increasing span of the slab its depth increases as well. However, there is an

obvious difference in the slab's depth in the design case where the slenderness of the

slab is limited and in case if the slab's deflection is limited (Figures 2. and 3.). In the

deflection controlled design the obtained optimal slabs are much thicker than by the

slenderness controlled design. For slabs loaded with 2kN/m2 the depth of the slabs is

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2676

about 11% to 15% higher (for spans 6 and 7m respectively) as in the slenderness

controlled design. At higher loads of 5kN/m2 the depth increase is even higher and

represents 18% to 26%.

Whereas by the slenderness controlled design the load level has no influence on the

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

slab's depth and manufacturing costs by the deflection controlled design the load

increase from 2 to 5kN/m2 results in a 17% and 10% increase of the slab's depth (for

spans 5 and 7m respectively) and consequently to a cost increase.

For both design ways the manufacturing costs increase in the same manner as the

slab's depth increases. Whereas at the deflection controlled design the increase of the

slab's manufacturing costs is much more rapid.

The deflection controlled design results a much uneconomic design and the

manufacturing costs of the obtained optimal slabs are up to 8%-19% higher (for

spans 6 and 7m respectively) than the slabs designed with slenderness limitation. At

higher loads of 5kN/m2 the cost increase is even more distinctive i.e., 11% to 27%

(for spans 5 and 7m respectively).

At the slenderness controlled design (where the slenderness ratio l/d should not be

higher than 20) the most economic slabs are those with a depth of exactly d=l/20. If

the design is controlled with the deflection limitation the most economic slabs have

considerable lower slenderness (Figure 4.) resulting in a higher slab's depth and

consequently higher manufacturing costs.

50

5kN/m2 80 5kN/m2

Manufacturing costs [€/m2]

Depth of the slab [cm]

2kN/m2 2kN/m2

40

70

30

60

20 50

5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8

Span [m] Span [m]

in case of slenderness controlled design (l/d ≤ 20)

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2677

50

80

Depth of the slab [cm]

40

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

70

30 5kN/m2 5kN/m2

60

2kN/m2 2kN/m2

20 50

5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8

Span [m] Span [m]

in case of deflection controlled design (deflection ≤ l/250)

Deflection limitation

20

2kN/m2

19

Slenderness of the slab

5kN/m2

18

17

16

15

5 6 7 8

Span [m]

in case of a deflection controlled design

CONCLUSIONS

The paper reports the cost optimization design of the RC one-way slabs. The

structural optimization was performed by the non-linear programming approach. The

objective function of the manufacturing costs was subjected to a rigorous system of

design, load, resistance and deflections (in)equality constraints.

performed and the slab's optimal cost development was investigated for different

spans of the slab (5, 6, 7, and 8m), two different live loads (2 and 5 kN/m2) and for

two allowed deflection controls according to Eurocode 2, namely the slenderness

ratio limitation and the real deflection limitation. The two different deflection control

designs result in a considerable different slab's depth and consequently in a different

manufacturing cost.

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2678

It has been shown that if at the SLS the slab's deflection is limited, the depth of the

obtained optimal slab is considerable higher than if the slab's slenderness ratio would

be limited. Consequently the manufacturing costs of the slabs designed with

deflection control are much higher than of the slabs designed with slenderness

control.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

REFERENCES

Zentralverband des Deutschen Baugewerbes e. V., Berlin, ZtV Zeittechnik-

Verlag GmbH, (2001)

Azmy, A. M., Eid, M. H. (1999). "Cost-Optimum Design for Shear Reinforced

Concrete Beams", ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 1, pp. 122-126.

Brooke, A., Kendrick, D. and Meeraus, A. (1988). GAMS-A User's Guide. Scientific

Press, Redwood City, CA.

Coello C. C., Hernandez F. S., Farrera F. A. (1997). "Optimal Design of Reinforced

Concrete Beams using Genetic Algorithms", Expert Systems with Applications,

Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 101-108.

Drud, A.S. (1994), CONOPT – A Large-Scale GRG Code. ORSA Journal on

Computing, 6(2), pp. 207-216.

Eurocode 2 (2005). Design of concrete structures – Part 1-1: General – Common

rules for building and civil engineering structures EN 1992-1-1, European

Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

Ferreira, C.C., Barrros, M. H. F. M., Barros, A. F. M. (2003). "Optimal design of

reinforced concrete T-sections in bending", Engineering Structures, Vol. 25,

pp. 951-964.

Govindaraj, V., Ramasamy, J. V. (2005). "Optimum detailed design of reinforced

concrete continuous beams using Genetic Algorithms", Computers&Structures,

Vol. 84, pp. 34-48.

Klanšek, U., Kravanja, S. (2006). "Cost estimation, optimization and competitiveness

of different composite floor systems–Part 1: Self-manufacturing cost

estimation of composite and steel structures", Journal of Constructional Steel

Research, Vol. 62, pp. 434-448.

Meier, E. (1990). Zeitaufwand Tafeln für die Kalkulation von Hochbau- und

Stahlbetonarbeiten, Bauverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden und Berlin.

Merta I., Kravanja S., Klanšek U., (2008). "Optimization based cost comparison

between reinforced concrete and steel beams"; 4th International Conference on

High Performance Structures and Materials, The Algarve, Portugal, 449-456.

Merta I., Kravanja S., (2009a). "Cost-Optimum Design of Singly Reinforced

Concrete Beams with Rectangular Cross-Section" to be published in the

proceedings of the 2nd International/ 8th Construction Specialty Conference, St.

John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, May 27-30.

Merta I., Kravanja S., (2009b). "Cost-optimum design of reinforced concrete T-

section beams", Third International Conference on Modeling, Simulation and

Applied Optimization (ICMSAO'09), American University of Sharjah, United

Arab Emirates, ISBN 978-9948-427-12-4.

- Bending Stresses for Simple ShapesUploaded bylimin zhang
- On Ground TankUploaded bySanjoy Sanyal
- Todd J. D., 1974, Structural Theory and AnalysisUploaded byprisciliano1
- TIMOSHENKO - Strength of Materials-Vol2Uploaded bybrouck103
- Content RecUploaded bysuranga
- Bending (1)Uploaded byTare Er Kshitij
- Beam Model CalculationUploaded byPrabu Rengarajan
- CONT_BEAM (1).xlsxUploaded byP.Karthi
- The Effective Width in Multi-girder Composite Steel Beams With Web OpeningsUploaded byIAEME Publication
- shear forceUploaded byMuhamed Zaim
- Folded PlatesUploaded bySivaAgathamudi
- Lecture3_LoadBalanceUploaded by16052169
- TechFeb15.pdfUploaded byMatteo
- Shear Strength of Rc Deep Beam Panels – a ReviewUploaded byInternational Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology
- 2-1 MOS [Nov 2009 Regular]Uploaded bymicmech
- R09222104-AEROSPACEVEHICLESTRUCTURES-IUploaded byNaresh Jonna
- 01. Deflection of Elastic BeamsUploaded byFlaviana Ama
- How to - Beam StressesUploaded byAnthony
- Analysis and Design for End Effects in Twisted Double TeesUploaded byFabrizio Biserna
- A_Oxygen Scarvenger 15m3_Mech ReportUploaded byJK Lim
- 003 a Oxygen Scavengrer Tank 1Uploaded bySee Kiat Pang
- HO - Handout w7Uploaded byBilly Jimenez
- design of flat plateUploaded byabdul khader
- RBEs.pptUploaded bylokeei
- 28TOCIEJUploaded byBeny Abdou
- Deflection of Beams - GDLCUploaded bySanthosh Kumar Gnanasekaran
- CES512 JAN 2017Uploaded byshamsukarim2009
- lec-18 (1).pdfUploaded byreethu anna
- QN-E121.00003-000.pdfUploaded byAditya Jain
- tv_19_2012_3_653_658.pdfUploaded byjcvalencia

- Wang 2013Uploaded bypaulkohan
- Sezen 2012Uploaded bypaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S0141029610000209-mainUploaded bypaulkohan
- Digital Image Correlation to Reinforced Concrete FractureUploaded byjs kalyana rama
- 1-s2.0-S0141029612004609-mainUploaded bypaulkohan
- 99-s80Uploaded bypaulkohan
- widianto2010Uploaded bypaulkohan
- 106-s32Uploaded bypaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S0263822315009976-mainUploaded bypaulkohan
- 98s11.pdfUploaded bypaulkohan
- Wind Loads On Non-Building Structures Using ASCE 7-10 .pdfUploaded bygulilero_yo
- 10.1002@stc.2273Uploaded bypaulkohan
- 2014 - Damage identification-Modal Curvature.pdfUploaded bypaulkohan
- 2013 - TurquiaUploaded bypaulkohan
- 2013 - Chile.pdfUploaded bypaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S2214399815000089-main.pdfUploaded bypaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S026382230500022X-mainUploaded bypaulkohan
- 101103366-Concrete-Bridges-Design-and-Construction.pdfUploaded bypaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S0141029610000209-mainUploaded bypaulkohan
- 81-46Uploaded bypaulkohan
- 96-S13Uploaded bypaulkohan
- 96-S13Uploaded bypaulkohan
- Bhattacharya 2014Uploaded bypaulkohan

- Quality Function Deployment - A Comprehensive ReviewUploaded bygschiro
- Radiation Protection Bushong Study GuideUploaded byAsha6842
- 9780415889544_previewUploaded byElmejri Hatem
- TubularUploaded byanellbmc
- Bsnl Project Organization BehaviourUploaded byPrashantqmar
- Langata MP Generali Nixon Korir Petition to Parliament on Seefar ApartmentsUploaded byBrian Mbugua Higgins
- Curl Easy PauseUploaded byMarko Vujnovic
- Brett Slatkin - Refactoring PythonUploaded byyamabushi
- DICE_ the Cube That Changes Everything Chapter 123 Online for Free - ManganelUploaded byHari Kurniawan
- physics-special-focus-electrostaticsUploaded byPeter Lee
- 4 Human Evolution 2016 AnswersUploaded byNathanael Foo
- Informatica 9.1 CommandReferenceUploaded byPC
- United Kingdom ISCED MappingUploaded byMaria Benedikta
- Avoiding Math Taboos- Effective Math Strategies for Visual-Spatial LeaUploaded byChi Coloso
- Modeling NodesUploaded byamcuc
- Okinawan (Uchinaaguchi_ Hogen)Uploaded byAmenah Calaca
- Prevention of corrosion of reinforcing bars in concrete.pdfUploaded byEnanko Mazumder
- Master of Lean ITUploaded byBudiarto Gouw
- Fuzzy Strongly g*s Closed sets in Fuzzy Topological spacesUploaded byEditor IJTSRD
- 1st Law of TermodynamicUploaded byKhairul Amir
- fs reflectionUploaded byFhranxcisS'zSanTanix'z
- Handbook Org MeasurementUploaded byMiguel Silva Gouveia
- IO InterfacingUploaded byMohanakrishna
- KAUFMAN,J. Identifying and Assessing Creativity...2012 (60-73)Uploaded bya_l_y_n
- CK12_Calculus.pdfUploaded byOctavio Gil
- Introduction to Iso 14001-2015Uploaded bynunukanta
- BASF_Nanotechnology_Charts_SachwehUploaded byanpuselvi125
- Insurance ManagementUploaded byHimantika Sharma
- Challan FormUploaded byAmAr Ali
- Short Circuit Analysis Using ETAPUploaded byAri Amrinal Putra