Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lecture - 03
Topics
y References
1
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
Design Problem
y Structural Arrangement
18″ 18″
(assumed)
(18″ wall
because hall
is 20′ high).
2
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Structural Arrangement
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 01: Sizes
l = ln + h ≤ lc/c l = ln = 9′
Assume h = 6″
l = 9.5 + 6/12 = 10′
3
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 01: Sizes
y h = l/24 × (0.4+fy/100000) = 4″ (Minimum by ACI for end span)
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 02: Loads
Factored Load (wu) = 1.2D.L + 1.6L = 1.2 × 0.125 + 1.6 × 0.04 = 0.214 ksf
4
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 03: Analysis
z Bending moment diagram for slab
M = coefficient wu ln2
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Calculate moment capacity provided by minimum reinforcement in slab:
z Asmin = 0.002bhf = 0.002 × 12 × 6 = 0.144 in2/ft
z This will work for both positive and negative steel as Asmin governs.
5
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Main reinforcement spacing:
z Maximum spacing for main steel reinforcement in one way slab according to
ACI 7.6.5 is minimum of:
z 3hf = 3 × 6 =18″
z 18″
z Finally use, #3 @ 9″ c/c.
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Shrinkage steel or temperature steel (Ast):
z Ast = 0.002bhf Ast = 0.002 × 12 × 6 =0.144 in2/ft
6
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Step No. 05: Drafting
y Main reinforcement = #3 @ 9″ c/c (positive & negative)
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 01: Sizes
z Minimum thickness of beam (simply supported) = hmin = l/18.5
l = clear span (ln) + depth of member (beam) ≤ c/c distance between supports
z Let depth of beam = 2′
ln + depth of beam = 29.25′ + 2′ = 31.25′
c/c distance between beam supports = 30 + 2 × (9/12) = 30.75′
z Therefore l = 30.75′
Depth (h) = (30.75/18.5)×(0.4+fy/100000)×12= 15.95″ (Minimum by ACI 9.5.2.1).
z Take h = 2′ = 24″
d = h – 3 = 21″
bw = 12″ (assumed)
7
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Beam Design
y Step No 02: Loads
y Load on beam will be equal to
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 03: Analysis
wuln / 2 coefficient
wuln2 coefficient
8
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for flexure (for positive moment)
z Step (a): According to ACI 8.10, beff for T-beam is minimum of:
z 16hf + bw = 16 × 6 + 12 =108″
z (c/c span of beam)/4 =(30.75′/4) × 12 =92.25″
z c/c spacing between beams =10′ × 12 =120″
z So beff = 92.25″
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for flexure (for positive moment)
z Step (b): Check if beam is to be designed as rectangular beam or T-beam.
z Re-calculate “a”:
z After trials As = 3.01 in2 {Asmax = 5.11 in2 ;Asmin = 1.26 in2}
9
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for flexure (for interior negative moment)
z bw = 12″ instead of beff for calculation of “a” because of flange in tension.
z Re-calculate “a”:
z After trials As = 4.17 in2 {Asmax = 5.11 in2 ;Asmin = 1.26 in2}
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for shear
10
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for shear
y Other checks
z Check for depth of beam:
z ΦVs = (ΦAvfyd)/sd
Design Problem
z Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for shear
y Other checks
z Check if “ΦVs ≤ Φ4 √f′c bwd” {ACI 11.5.4.3}:
z ΦVs = (ΦAvfyd)/sd
11
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
z Beam Design
z Step No. 04: Design
y Design for shear
y Reinforcement provision
z It will be practically more feasible to provide # 3, 2 legged @ 9″ c/c
throughout, starting at sd/2 = 9/2 = 4.5″ from the face of the support at both
ends.
Design Problem
z Girder Design
z Step No. 01: Sizes
l = ln + h ≤ lc/c l = ln = 28.5′
Assume h = 3′ = 36″
l = 29.25 + 3/12 = 32.25′ > lc/c
Therefore, l = lc/c = 30.75′
12
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 01: Sizes
z Minimum thickness of beam (simply supported) = hmin = l/18.5
l = 30.75′
Depth (h) = (30.75/18.5)×(0.4+fy/100000)×12= 15.95″ (Minimum by ACI 9.5.2.1).
z Take h = 3′ = 36″
d = h – 3 = 33″
bw = 18″ (assumed)
Design Problem
z Video
13
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 02: Loads
z Beams load can be approximated as point loads on girder. The
uniformly distributed load on girder is coming from self weight of girder
rib plus weight of slab directly resting on girder.
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 02: Loads
z P is the point load on girder and is the reaction coming from the interior
support of beam due to factored load.
z P = 2 × 40.5 = 81 kips
14
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 02: Loads
z (U.D.L)self wt = Factored self weight of girder rib
=1.2hwgbwgγc
Design Problem
y Applicability of ACI Approximate Analysis
z According to ACI 8.3.3, ACI approximate analysis (coefficient
method) is subjected to following limitations
z The structure has two or more spans
z The spans are approximately equal, with the larger of the two adjacent
spans not greater than the shorter by more than 20 percent
z Loads are uniformly distributed, and the unfactored live load does not
exceed 3 times the unfactored dead load
15
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Applicability of ACI Approximate Analysis
z The ACI coefficient method cannot be applied to the girder as it is
not subjected to uniform loading.
Design Problem
z Girder Design
z Step No. 02: Analysis
96 K 86 K
71.97 K 61.73 K
5K
19.27 K
29.52 K
110.53 K
120.77 K
668.5 ft-k
424.55 ft-k
190.55 ft-k
178.1 ft-k
731.95 ft-k
16
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
z Girder Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Design for Flexure
z According to ACI 8.10, beff is minimum of:
z beff = 92.25″
Design Problem
z Girder Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Design for Shear: Shear design of girder is done by another approach
z dg = 33″ = 2.75′
17
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Design for Shear:
z ΦVn = 48.808 + 22.92 = 71.72 k > Max. Shear at A and B but < Max. Shear
at C, D and E
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Design for Shear:
18
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Design for Shear:
y Other checks
z Check for depth of girder:
z ΦVs = (ΦAvfyd)/sd
Design Problem
y Girder Design
z Step No. 04: Design
z Design for Shear:
y Other checks
z Check if “ΦVs ≤ Φ4 √f′c bwd” {ACI 11.5.4.3}:
z ΦVs = (ΦAvfyd)/sd
19
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Column Design
z Gross area of column cross-section (Ag) = 18 × 18 =324 in2
z Load on column:
z Pu = 297.8 k (Reaction at interior support of girder due to factored load)
Design Problem
z Column Design
z Main Reinforcement Design:
z Nominal strength (ΦPn) of axially loaded column is:
z ΦPn = 0.80 × 0.65 × {0.85 × 3 × (324 – 0.01 × 324) + 0.01 × 324 × 40}
z Use 8 #6 bars
20
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
z Column Design
z Tie Bars:
z Using 3/8″ Φ (#3) tie bars for 3/4″ Φ (#6) main bars (ACI 7.10.5),
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Data Given:
z Column size = 18″ × 18″
z fc′ =3 ksi
z fy = 40 ksi
z qa = 2.204 k/ft2
21
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Sizes:
z Assume h = 18 in.
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Sizes:
z Effective bearing capacity, qe = qa – W
davg + c B = 12′
davg / 2 =
z Critical Perimeter, bo = 4 x (c + davg) 14/2 = 7″
c = 18″
= 4 × (18 + 14) =128 in
davg + c
B = 12′
22
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Loads:
z qu (bearing pressure for strength design of footing):
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Analysis:
z Punching shear:
z Vup = quB2 – qu(c + davg) 2
= 283.09 kip
B B
23
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Footing Design
Critical Section
z Analysis:
z Flexural Analysis:
z Mu = quBk2/2
qu qu
z k = (B – c)/2 = (12 x 12 –18)/2 B B
= 63 in = 5.25´
= 342 ft-k
= 4104 in-kip
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Design:
bo
= Φ4 √f′c bodavg
24
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Design:
z Design for Flexure:
z Mu = 4104 in-kip
After trials, As = 8.42 in2 (Asmin = 0.005Bdavg = 10.08 in2 so Asmin governs)
Design Problem
y Drafting Details for Slab
25
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Drafting Details for Beam
Design Problem
Section Mu As Asmin Asmax Bar # of
(kip-ft) (in2) (in2) (in2) used bars
Exterior + 668.5 6.87 2.97 11.88 #8 9 (5 +4)
y Drafting Details for Girder Interior − 731.95 8.30 2.97 11.88 #8 12 (6 +6)
Interior + 190.55 1.93 2.97 11.88 #8 4
Note: at Sec C-C 4 bars are required from calculation but for practical feasibility we shall provide 5 bars as shown in the figure
26
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Drafting Details for Column and Footing
Design Problem
y In the subsequent slides the same hall has been analyzed and
designed for beams and girders supported on columns instead of walls.
y Structural Plan:
Beam
C1 C2
Girder
C3
27
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Frame Analysis for Beam
z 2D frame can be detached from a 3D system as follows:
Wu = 2.41 k/ft
29.25′ 29.25′
20′
Design Problem
y Frame Analysis for Beam
z Using ACI moment coefficients for analyzing the frame:
1/14 1/14
Wu = 2.41 k/ft
29.25′ 29.25′
1/16 1/16
20′ 20′ 20′ =
1/9
z Note: Interior support conditions for the beam (if supported on column, or on roller)
does not effect analysis results.
28
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Frame Analysis for Girder
z 2D frame can be detached from a 3D system in the following
manner:
1.0 k/ft
40 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 40 k
Girder
Design Problem
y Frame Analysis for Girder
z Analysis of Girder
Mu (Exterior +)
40 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 81 k 40 k Mu (Interior+)
Mu (Interior -)
29
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Slab Design
z Design of slab for beams supported on column will be same as
that of beams supported on walls.
y Main reinforcement = #3 @ 9″ c/c (positive & negative)
Design Problem
y Beam Design
z Mu (+ve) = 1767 in-kips
30
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Girder Design Mu (Exterior +)
Mu (Interior+)
Mu (Interior -)
Design Problem
y Column Design
z Design of C1 (already done on slides 39 to 41)
z 8 #6 bars, #3 ties @ 9″ c/c
z Design of C3
z Design of column C3 is carried our in subsequent slides.
31
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Column Design (C3)
Pu = 35.25 kip
Mu = 1546.43 in-kip
Pu Mu
Design Problem
y Column Design (C3): Using ACI Design Aids
z Main Reinforcement Design
18′′
z Size:
z 18 in. × 18 in.
18′′
z Loads:
f′c = 3 ksi, fy = 60 ksi
z Pu = 35.25 kips
z Mu = 1546.43 in-kips
z Calculate the ratio γ , for 2.5 in. cover: γ = (18 – 5)/18 = 0.72
32
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Column Design (C3)
z ρ = 0.018
z Using 8 #8 bars
Design Problem
y Column Design (C3)
z Tie Bars:
z Using 3/8″ Φ (#3) tie bars for 3/4″ Φ (#6) main bars (ACI 7.10.5),
33
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Column Design (C3)
z Drafting
Design Problem
y Column Design (C1 and C2)
z Drafting
34
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Footing Design
z Design of footing for the column C1 has already been done (refer to
slides 42 to 49)
Design Problem
y Footing Design for C1
z Drafting
35
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
Design Problem
y Footing Design for C2
z Drafting
Design Problem
y Footing Design for C3
z Drafting
36
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar
References
y ACI 318
The End
37