STABILITY OF COLUMN SUPPORTING FLAT SLAB

WITHOUT BEAM GRID

George Lin, 1 Member, ASCE

ABSTRACT

Column stability of braced and unbraced building framing systems have been widely studied and very
well established. But, stability of column supporting two-way flat slab without beam grid is still rather
sparse. There are many different types of two-way flat slab in building structural systems. It is the intention
of this study to carry out a detailed study of stability of column which support reinforced concrete flat slab
building system. Computer-aided analysis based on three dimensional finite-element model consisting of
columns and two-way flat slab with various layout and thickness to be used for carrying out stability
studies.
The buckling analysis of braced and unbraced column supporting flat-slab building may be generalized
to a similar framing building in which portion of flat-slab stiffness is replaced by the stiffness of horizontal
beam. It requires analytical analysis in order to decide which portion of flat slab can be counted to
substitute for the stiffness of replaced beam grid. The purpose of this study is to carry out a detailed
analysis in an attempt to formulate a practical and professional process for the buckling strength of columns
supporting flat slab building system.

Keywords : Flat-Slab Column Stability

INTRODUCTION

For the complicated stability analysis of three-dimensional model with columns and flat slabs,
finite element method becomes an effective and useful approach. Columns and beams are divided
into line elements, while flat slabs are treated as small sizes of two dimensional elements. System
matrix is formulated from all element matrices consisting of all line elements and two-
dimensional elements. The structural stiffness matrix [Ks] and the differential stiffness matrix
[Kd] are formulated to form the buckling solution:

{ [Ks] + λ [Kd] } {u} = 0

in which the eigenvalue, λ , is the load level factor for various buckling mode with the
displacement matrix, {u}. The buckling strength of column depends on column location, size,
dimension, and base support condition in addition to flat slab thickness and layout. The columns
on the edge of flat slab have relatively smaller buckling strength than that of column in the center
of flat slab building. The corner column has even much lower buckling strength than that of edge
column of the same dimension.
Various layout of flat slabs are analyzed in an attempt to find solutions for improving column
buckling strength. Results of this study to be tabulated into a simplified format for the purpose of
establishing a practical expression for buckling strength of columns supporting flat slab building
structures. Eventually, the difference of buckling strength of columns supporting flat slab and
framing building can be fully realized and clearly defined for the purpose of practical use in
professional column designs.

1
Professor of Civil Eng., California State University, Fullerton, CA 92634. E-mail: geolin@fullerton.edu
STABILITY ANALYSIS BY USING FINITE ELEMENT METHOD

Pcr
3 6 9

2 5 8 L
4 7
1

b
a a

FIG. 1. Stability of columns supporting flat slab without beam grid

There are many factors influence the stability of individual column member and the entire
structural as a whole. These factors include geometrical, material, and loading effects. As shown
in Fig. 1, three dimensional flat-slab structural system is analyzed for column stability by using
finite element method. When the individual point load is placed at various locations, finite
element method with computer analysis gives the column critical buckling load, Pcr, as shown in
Tables 1 and 2. P e is the magnitude of Euler load, π 2 EI/L2 , and k-value is the ratio of effective
column length to actual unbraced length. Pcr is critical buckling of column, π 2 EI/(kL)2 , in which
k is the ratio of effective column length to actual unbraced length.

TABLE 1. Critical buckling loads for columns with fixed supports

a=10 ft. (3.048 m); b=10ft. (3.048 m); L=10ft. (3.048m)

Location of Applied Buckling Load, Pcr

slab
thick. Column Column Column All Columns
(inch) #1 #2 #5 from #1 to #9

6 1.63 2.27 2.87 0.50

Pcr/Pe 9 2.40 3.05 3.45 0.69

6 0.78 0.66 0.59 1.41

k-Value 9 0.65 0.57 0.53 1.20
 TABLE 2. Critical buckling loads for columns with hinged supports
a=10 ft. (3.048m); b=10 ft. (3.048m); L=10 ft. (3.048m)

Location of Applied Buckling Load, Pcr

slab
thick. Column Column Column All Columns
(inch) #1 #2 #5 from #1 to #9

6 0.40 0.55 0.94 0.06

Pcr/Pe 9 0.64 0.85 1.34 0.06
6 1.58 1.35 1.03 4.08
k-Value 9 1.25 1.08 0.86 4.08

BUCKLING LOAD OF COLUMNS SUPPORTING FLAT SLAB

Flat slab floor is characterized by the absence of beam grid along column lines and it can be
divided into column and middle strips as shown in Fig. 2.

a a

half
half-width of equivalent rigid frame column
strip
centerline of panel b/2
middle
strip

width of equivalent rigid frame

b/2 column
width of equivalent rigid frame strip

centerline of panel b/2 middle

half half strip
column middle strip column strip middle strip column
strip strip

FIG 2. Plan of flat slab without beam grid

In order to compare the results of this study with the building code requirements for structural
concrete from American Concrete Institute (ACI 318-99), the effective length factor from ACI
building code is computed herein for the purpose of comparison and practical application. Figure
3 shows the effective width of slab for the computation of moment inertia of slab.

Ls Ls

FIG. 3. Effective width of slab for the computation of moment inertia

TABLE 3. Effective length factor of columns with fixed support

Width of Slab (Ls ) for the Computation of Moment of Inertia (Is)

a = width of equivalent rigid frame = 10 ft. ( 3.048 m )

slab
thick . 1.0 a 0.5 a 0.25 a 0.167 a 0.125 a
(inch.)

k-value 6 1.13 1.23 1.40 1.50 1.57

9 1.05 1.08 1.13 1.20 1.26

TABLE 4. Effective length factor of columns with hinged support

Width of Slab (Ls ) for the Computation of Moment of Inertia (Is)

a = width of equivalent rigid frame = 10 ft. ( 3.048 m)

slab
thick. 1.0 a 0.5 a 0.25 a 0.167 a 0.125 a
(inch.)

k - value 6 2.26 2.50 3.00 3.30 3.52

if ψh = ∝ 9 2.05 2.08 2.25 2.45 2.60

k – value 6 1.72 2.00 2.26 2.45 2.70

if ψh = 10 9 1.73 1.80 1. 90 1.95 2.10
CONCLUSIONS

Tables 1 and 2 show the results of finite element analysis from this study, while Tables 3 and 4
give the numerical values from ACI 318-99 building code requirements. After careful comparison
among these numbers, the following conclusions can be summarized from this study:

1. In general design loading conditions, the critical buckling load of individual column from
finite element analysis is greater than that of design value as required from ACI 318-99 building
code. It means that the ACI 318-99 building code is really on safe side in most professional
practice.
2. Under certain condition of special loading distribution, finite element analysis gives lower
buckling load than that of ACI building code requirement. This can be seen from Table 2 when
Pcr is applied on all columns instead of just individual column. Thus, it has been found from this
study that care must be exercised in column design when there is a special type of loading
distribution in practical design.

REFERENCES

Zienkiewicz, O. C. and R. L. Taylor (2000), “The Finite Element Method” 5th Ed., Butterworth
Heinemann, Woburn, MA 018801.
ACI (1999), Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (318-99) and Commentary
(318R-99), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
Wang, C. K. and C. G. Salmon (1998), “Reinforced Concrete Design” 6th Ed., Addison-Wesley,
451-790.

APPENDIX I. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

a, b = slab dimensions
E = Young’s modulus;
Ic = moment of inertia of cross section of column;
Is = moment of inertia of cross section of slab;
k = the ratio of effective column length to actual unbraced length;
Kd = differential stiffness matrix;
Ks = structural stiffness matrix;
L = column length;
Ls = width of flat slab;
P e = the magnitude of Euler load;
Pcr = critical buckling load of individual column;
ψ = ratio of Σ(EI/L )of compression members to Σ(EIs/Ls) of the cross section of flat
slab in a plane at one end of a compression member;
ψh = the value of ψ at hinged support of column;
ψm = average of the ψ-values at the two ends of the compression member.