This article was downloaded by: [130.132.123.

28]
On: 31 December 2014, At: 05:43
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Architectural Science Review

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tasr20

Folded Plate Roofs

a
S. ARONI B.C.E., A.M.I.E. Aust.
a
University of Melbourne
Published online: 10 Oct 2011.

To cite this article: S. ARONI B.C.E., A.M.I.E. Aust. (1965) Folded Plate Roofs, Architectural Science Review, 8:1,
20-28, DOI: 10.1080/00038628.1965.9696136

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00038628.1965.9696136

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability
for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions
and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of
the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of
information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands,
costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in
any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Folded Plate Roofs
Lectui.er in Civil Engineel-ing
Univemity of Melbourne
(Conti17iiecl f r o i n V o l . 7 ,
Theories Allowing for Joint Displacements
Before examining such theories, let us consider
the reason for the presence of joint displacements.
Fig. 7 shows a cross-section through part of a
folded plate. If such a structure is subjected to
Forces consistent with the membrane theory, a plate
m will carry a bending moment M,,, (see equation
(12)) which induces plate action. Under this bend-
ing moment, the plate will have, in its own plane,
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
a deflection v,,,, which can be calculated from the
elementary beam theory.
Thus, the ends of the plate, points ni - 1 and ni.
will move in the plane of plate m. However, thesc
points are also part of pl:itcs ni - 1 and ni I +
respectively and must move distances v,,, and
v,,, , in the planes of the two plates. These
conflicting requirements form the inconipatability
of deformation mentioned above. T o reconcile these
requirements points m - I and ni will move out
of the plane of the plates, at right-angles to them,
to points in - 1' and ni'. These joint displace-
ments will tend to change the angles between
adjacent plates and, since the plates are rigidly
connected, induce moments M, at the edges, lead-
ing to slab action of the structure.
In the case of a folded plate analysed with no
joint displacements (fig. 6), the presence of such
joint displacements will transform the continuous
beam shown in fig. 6 (b) into a beam on elastic
foundations. This will alter the values of the reac-
tions and affect both the slab and plate action
bending moments. Joint displacements have a
greater influence on the transversc slab action thnn
o n th: longitudinal plate action.
In the thirty-one years since Ehlers's first paper
was published, there have been quite a number of
theories developed to allow for joint displacements
(Ref. 40). It is not possible within the scope of
this paper to derive and fully explain any one of
them. In an attempt to create a starting point for
further study, an outline will be given of the
approach used and somt of the theories will be
briefly mentioned. They fall into two main cate-
gories.
~~
E. GRUBE?
::: : "Berechnung prismatischer Scheiben-
werke", M e m o i r s , I n t e r . Assn. of B r i d g e and
Structural Eng., Vol. 1, 1932, p. 225.
2:i * V. Z. VLASSOW: "Structural Mechanics of Thin-Walled
Shells" (in Russian), Moscow, 1936.
BY
S. ARONI
B.C.F.. A.M I E Au\t
PART 11
N o . 4, December, 1964)
General Solutions
The common feature of the general theories is
the fact that they all require the solution of a great
number of simultaneous equations. Some of the
theories lead to simultaneous differential equations.
others to linear ones. Some theories have different
numbers of simultaneous equations, for a given
folded plate, due to the consideration of additional
possible actions in the structure.
An outline of a typical general solution will
now be given. A Compatability Method is used
and the folded plate is first made determinate by
considering the joints to have special hinges which
permit a change of angle between two adjacent
plates as well a s relative movement along the joint
~
in the longitudinal d i rec t ion. 7his determinate
structure can be analysed under a given load but,
as previously mentioned, each joint would not
satisfy two deformation requirements, namely that
both the relative angle change and the relative
longitudinal movement should be zero.
This is required since the joints in the stucture
are rigid. Thus, at each joint, we must apply to
the determinate structure an unknown longitudinal
edge force N and transverse moment M,, such that
these deformation requirements are satisfied.
At each joint we have two such unknowns and
at the same time can write two compatability
equations in terms of the unknowns at the joint
and at its neighbours. For a folded plate structure
consisting of k plates and ( k - I ) joints with at least
two plates (Fig. 21. the total number o f unknowns
and simultaneous equations to be solved will be
2(k-I). It should be noted that the typical method
described uses the assumptions mentioned earlier.
I t also neelects any torsion in the plates and any
lonqtitudinal slab action moments M,.
Consider some of the general theories:
Gruber" (1932) seems to have published
the first theory which allows for joint dis-
placements. He developed his solution in
the form of simultaneous differential equa-
tions of the fourth order, the solution of
which, by converging series, is very com-
plicated and tedious. For a folded plate
structure with k plates and (k-1) joints the
total number of unknowns and equations in
Gruber's method is (7k-5).
V~US.SOM~** (1936) simplified the solution
into a set of 2(k-1) simultaneous linear
equations. His method, which is described
 FOLDED PLATE ROOFS
by Traum (Ref. 40), follows the lines of the
typical general solution mentioned above.
A certain difficulty arises here. which is
not peculiar t o this method (Ref. 40). T h e
simultaneous equations are written for a
particular cross-section and their solution
gives the slab action moments a t that section.
These moments are due to two factors, the
applied loads a n d the effect of joint dis-
placements. T h e first varies along the span
a s a function of the applied loads, while
the second varies according to the deflected
elastic line of the plates. which is not accu-
rate 1y known .
O n e very tedious and time consuming way
to solve the unknowns all along the span
would obviously be to perform thc full
solution a t a number of points. Another
possibility. which is usually adopted, is to
assume the variation of load along thc struc-
ture as similar to thc elastic line. namely a s a
sine wave o r to express it a s a Fourier
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
:cries. This, however. introduces a certain
error into thc results.
( 3 ) Girkmann'.v (Ref. 1 ) (1948) theory is
similar to that of Vlassow. Whitney et al (Ref. 3Y)
describcd it in their paper and the method was
recently used (Ref. 54) in the analysis of an inter-
mediate unit of the Museum folded plate roof at
the Central Building Research Institute, Rootkee.
India: This method uses Fourier serics. of which
only the first term need be taken under certain
circumstances, and requires the solution of two sets
of simultaneous cquations each involving k un-
knowns.
( 4 ) C'raemar ( R e f . 1 5 ) ( 1953) presented ;I
method using simultaneous differential equations.
which he solved for particular examples. T h e
method is only applicable for distributed loads and
is considerably simplified tor the case of uniformly
distributcd loads. A feature of Craemer's paper
is the introduction of an indicator t o judge the
accuracy of the simple beam theory under given
circumstances. This aspect will be discussed later.
( 5 ) Werfel (Ref. 18) ( 1954) used the mathe-
matical theory of elasticity and his approach requires
thc solution of 8 ( k ~ I ) simultaneous equations.
( 6 ) G ~ l d D ~ rugn d Lrve (Ref. 30) ( 1 9 5 7 ) pre-
sented another theory. based on both the theor)
of platcs and thc two-dimensional elasticity theory.
Their method requires the solution of 4 (k - I )
simultaneous algebraic equations. for each harmonic
of th: Fourier expansion. Only routine calculations
and tabulated functions are involved in the writing
of thesc equations.
( 7 ) Parme und Sharounis (Ref. 5 5 ) ( 1961)
gave ;I solution involving 2 (k - 1) simultmeous
linear equations. T h e use is madc of Fourier series
and the paper includes a very valuable table of
d e s i y coefficients for triangular repetitive V-type
folded plate structures, under uniform vertical load.
21
S. Aroni
Simplified Solutions
T h e simplified theories avoid, a s much a s pos-
sible, simultaneous equations and pcrforni the solu-
tion by the superposition of a number of easier steps,
They also rely on moment and stress distribution
techniques and. in a way. have the same relation
to the General Solutions a s that of the Moment
Distribution method to the Slope Deflection one.
Examples of such theories will now bc outlined.
( I ) Gaafur's (Refs. 16 and 2 5 ) ( 1954) theory
is very similar to the proccdure used in the Moment
Distribution Method, allowing for thc sway due to
joint movements. Gaafar assumed a sinusoidal
distribution of joint displacements along the span.
( 2 ) Sitnpvorl (Ref. 3 1 ) ( I Y S X ) presented
Gaafar's method in a slightly modified form and
discussed it with the aid of a well explaincd example.
T h r solution is performed in the following steps.
which arc also illustrated in ;I How chart in Fig. - X.
T h e folded plate structure is tirst
analysed for slab and plate action
assuming no joint displacements. A
mom en t d is t r i but ion and re1ax at i o n
procedure are used instcad of thc
solution of simultaneous cquations.
T h e resultant plate deflcctions v (sec
Fig. 7) are calculated at mid-span.
An arbitrary rotation is now given to
one of the plates a t mid-span (this
;I mo u n t s to arbitrary re I at i ve joint d is-
placements of the two ends of the
plate). This causes fixed end moments
at the ends of the particular platc and
these are distributed by ii transversc
(slab action I moment distribution.
These slab moments cause reactions at
the joints and step ( a ) is repeated for
this particular "loading" due to thc
arbitrary rotation. In the cast of ;I
simple-span structure. it is assumed
that the rotation angle (and hence thc
corresponding plate loads) varies along
the longitudinal span iis a half-wavc
of ;I sine curve.
Step (b) is repeated for each plate that
does not have a frec edge. I f the struc-
ture is symmetrical only half the platcs
need be considered.
The final defections of each plate are
now expressed in terms of the numerical
results of step ( a ) solution (no platc
rotations) plus those for the various
arbitrary rotation solutions (steps ( b )
and (c) ), each multiplied by an un-
known factor D.
Considcring now the geometry of the
structurc. thc results of step (dl iirc
used t o calculate each final plate
rotation in terms of the Ds. T h e geo-
metric relations can be obtained
graphically o r analytically from con-
struction such a s Fig. 7.
 AKCHlTECTUKAL SCIENCE REVIEW MARCH, 1965

(f) But it is known that the final rotation (Ref. 54) that the methods described by Whitney
of each plate is D times the arbitrary (Ref. 39) and Simpson (Ref. 31) are the most
assumed rotation, and the resulting set suitable for use in the design office.
of simultaneous equations can be solved The question of suitability of the different
for the unknown D factors. For a methods should be re-examined in the light of the
structure with k plates, there will be possible advantageous use of digital computers.
(k - 2 ) such equations, or, if the Library routines are at present available for the
structure is symmetrical, half that solution of linear simultaneous equations (e.g.
number. C.S.I.R.A.C. in Melbourne up to thirty-one equa-
(g) The final solution, obtained by super- tions and S.I.L.L.I.A.C. in Sydney up to thirty-
position, is the sum of step (a) solution, eight) and programmes can be written for larger
plus each of the rotation solutions numbers. This might make the use of some General
multiplied by its respective D. Solution, in which the writing of the simultaneous
( 3 ) Yitzhaki’s (Refs. 4 and 4 0 ) ( 1959) equations does not involve much work, much easier
Method of Particular Loadings proceeds along lines than the use of a Simplified one.
similar to, but more generalised than, the above There is another way in which digital computers
two methods. Yitzhaki deals directly with deflections can be used. This is to express the problem in
rather than rotations and obtains the solution by matrix notation and to use matrix algebra opera-
superimposing several stages of loading on the tions for its solution. A recent textbook, by Hall
folded plate structure. Traum (Ref. 40) gives a and Woodhead (Ref. 7 1 , gives a good introduction
concise description of the method and uses it to to the matrix analysis of structures.
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014

re-calculate Simpson’s numerical example. Subroutines for matrix operations are also avail-
Comments able in the libraries of the local computers.
For typical folded plate roofs, any one of the Scordelis (Ref. 48) used 21 method, similar to
ten methods described above scems to be satisfac- Y itzhaki’s, involving matrix algebra. He also
tory. Some methods are more conservative than described a sequence which has been programmed
others. Roberts (Ref. 41) analyscd a particular four- for the 1BM 704 computer.
platc folded structure, under vertical uniformily
distributed load. and with different spans, using both Accuracy of Approximations
Gaafar’s and Craemer’s methods. Higher stresses In certain circumstances, the analysis which
were obtained from Gaafar’s analysis, particularly allows for joint displacements can be replaced,
for shorter spans, and it was suggested that this is the without significant loss of accuracy, by simpler
result of the assumption of sinusoidal joint displace- methods. which neglect joint displacements, or the
ment distribution. It has been recently suggested very simple approach of considering the whole

Fig. 8
Deflections
Ste P a l

Ar bit rary rot a l l on

Analysis of
m I to k-2 @ate rn

___~-
n-k-2
Total Rotation
of
m = l lo k-2 n =1 g eornet ry Plate m , fn (Dn)
n-l to k-2
\

XePJ
k-2 equatiwa im=l to k-2 ) fpr k-2 unknown D’s

Given Loads,
Final Solution = No joint displ + /
(
Each arbitrory
soiJtion
rotation (Corresponding D )
Analysis

Note 1 k = T o t a l number of piates (here, numbered 0 40 k-I)

2 vrni= Deflection of plate m , due to the loads ( no plate rotation)
3 In deflection v, . x = the plate jn which the deflection occurs
y = the plate which wo5 rotated l o cause the deflection

22
 F O L D E D P L A T E ROOFS
~-

folded piate structure as a simply supported thin-
walled beam. Unfortunately, there is n o easy way
of determining accurately when such simplifications
are justified. There are many factors involved,
including itzms of shape and dimensions of the
structure as well as type of applied load. A dis-
cussion of these factors is given below.
Considering the effect of the length of span
alone, with all the other factors kept constant, the
following tendencies are observed:
( I ) For very short spans, joint displacements
can be neglected but simple beam theory is
very inaccurate.
(2) For medium spans, joint displacements must
be considered.
(3) For long spans, the simple beam theory can
be used.
The practical difficulty is to know, in a particular
case, the points of transition between short, medium
and long spans.
Approximation of Neglecting Joint Displacements
It must again be emphasised that joint displace-
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
at the ends of the structure, where the free edges
are, and decreases towards the centre of it. If the
structure is very wide, the analysis might be per-
formed separately for an intermediate and an end
unit. The accuracy of the latter analysis, taking
joint displacements into consideration, depends on
the width selected as the end unit.
The following examples, selected from the litera-
ture, illustrate the effect of joint displacements.
( I ) Museum building at Roorkee (Ref. 5 4 ) .
The end unit (25 ft. wide) was analysed
using Simpson's method. The structure has
the following ratios:
l/h (inclined plates) = 10.65
Angle between plates = 140 degrees
t/h (inclined plates) = 0.074
The analysis was performed for a vertical
uniformly distributed load of 60 p.s.f. The
results showed the effect of joint displace-
ments to be most significant. The maximum
ratios of the corrections due to the joint dis-

ments have a greater influence on the transverse
slab action than on the longitudinal plate action
The following are some of the factors influencing
the accuracy of neglecting joint displacements.
Most of them were discussed by Paulson and
Maugh (see Discussion to Gaafar's paper, Ref. 16),
who evaluated the errors involved by analysing
structures of various proportions, subjected to a
uniformly distributed vertical load.
( I ) Span to width ratio (l/h 1 . The error
placements to the values calculated by nep-
lecting them, were 1.6 for the longitudinal
stresses and 13.3 for the transverse
moments. In some cases the corrections
reversed the signs of the no displacement
analysis. In this structure Samuely's ratio is
equal to 5 .
Fig. 9
UUlrOLM VBLTI-L LOAD

due to the assumption of no joint displace- (ACCOZDING TO

CRALMLK 15)
ments increases with the increase in this
ratio. The l/h ratios calculated by Paulson
and Maugh (for a folded plate of the shape
shown in Fig. 6 ) varies between 1.74 to 3.47.
Number of Plutes. In a folded plate of
the type shown in Fig. 2 , the error increases
with the increase in the number of plate
elements.
Depth of Edge Beam. For a folded plate
shape as shown in Fig. 10, the error
increases with the decrease of the depth
of edge beams (plates 1 and 5). This com-
parison, however, was made without con-
sidering the torsional resistance of the edge 1
/

beams, which will become important for

large edge beams. c , =2 c,= I 5
Angle between Plate5 (angle ,3 in figure ib) iC)

7). The error increases with the increase

in the angle between the plates. According
to Samuely (Ref. 36), the effects of joint
displacements should be investigated if
Pm
sin (--) / -
+
/ 3 . (hill h,,, + 1)
> 1.(19) INlMUM

2 / 1 2
Thickness to width ratio ( t / h ) . The error
0.76 I0 2
increases with the increase in this ratio.
In the case of periodical repetitive, folded plates, 6 9
such as the triangular section o r the trape- 10.8
zoidal, the effect of joint displacements is maximum

23
 ARCHITECTURAL SCIENCE REVIEW MARCH, 1965

( 2 ) Simpson (Ref. 31) gave a numerical
example of a symmetrical 6-plate V-shape
folded plate with the following details:
l/h = 5.15
Angle between Plates = 118 degrees
t/h = 0.0286
The structure was analysed under its own
dead weight (50 p.s.f.) and the maximum
ratios of the corrections due to the joint
displacements to the values calculated by
Fig. 10
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
neglecting them, were 0.034 for the longi-
tudinal stresses and 1.65 for the transverse
moments. No signs were reversed by the
corrections. In this case Samuely’s ratio is
only 1.47.
The two examples presented illustrate the
influence of the factors discussed earlier and, at
least in these particular cases, show Samuely’s
criterion to be a reliable one.
Approximation of Simple Beam Theory
To judge the accuracy of the simple beam theory,
Craemer (Ref. 15) (1953) suggested the use of the
following indicator:
/-
1 / t
c=- /-- 120)
h V h
Figure 9 (a) shows the plot of the f,/f,, ratio
against the value of the indicator, where
f = longitudinal stress, calculated according to
Craemer’s theory, allowing for joint dis-

placements, and
f,, = longitudinal stress, calculated according to
the simple beam theory.
C , z the value of the indicator C, above which
the beam theory becomes accurate.
The relationship between f/f,, and C depends not
only on the shape of the cross-section, as can be seen
from Fig. 9 for the cross-sections considered by
Craemer, but also on the type of applied load,
Fig. 9 having been calculated for one which is
uniform and vertical. Thus, the analysis of a given
folded plate by means of the beam theory, which
is accurate under one type of load, might give quite
a false picture if the type of loading changes. It
should be noted that, for the shape illustrated, the
beam theory, for low values of C, tends to overesti-
mate the compression at the top of the structure
and to underestimate the tension at the bottom.
This underestimation is serious in reinforced con-
crete structures.
Whitney, Anderson and Birnbaum (Ref. 39)
attempted to simplify Craemer’s indicator into a
general one for repetitive, symmetrical folded plates.
They suggested the use of the l/H ratio and, based
on calculations such as those shown in Fig. 9 (d)
(with assumed h/t = 20 as typical for reinforced
concrete structures), stated that for I/H> 10, the
intermediate units of a symmetrical repetitive struc-
ture can be accurately designed by means of the
simple beam theory. They also claimed that, for
the particular case of triangular or trapezoidal
sections, the beam theory could be used with l/H
- v e 4 tve ratios as low as 2.
comp . ten 31o n
LONGITUDINAL
While it is highly desirable to have a simple
STRL.SS&S (p.5.L)AT MID S P A N
indicator, like the Z/H ratio, it is doubtful, in view
of the many factors involved, if it can be accurate
LXP€KI M € N TAL
in all cases. The intermediate unit of the Museum
_-__- .
TH co e c T I c A L GA A FA R ’4 M E T HOD building (Ref. 54) was analysed using Girkmann’s
method ( a s described by Whitney (Ref. 3 9 ) . The
THEOLETICAL. NO JOINT DISPLACEMLNT5
-- THE.OR€TICAL. R € A M TWCORY unit had values of l / H = 16 and C = 2.78.
Nevertheless, if one compares the simple beam

24
 FOLDED PLATE ROOFS S. Aroni

theory values with the values from the accur:ite all other tests. Experimental errors in small
method used, differences of the order of 30 - 35 model tests can be quite high and Roberts
percent are observed. These differences, however, has estimated the probable error to be up to
are mainly due to the fact that only the first term about 10 percent of the readings. The beam
of the Fourier series was considered in applying theory is seen to be very much in error, as
Girkmann's method. might have been expected with the low value
With higher values of indicator C, the longi- of indicator C.
tudinal stresses can be more accurately approxi- Fig. 1 1
mated by the beam theory but, at the same time,
there will be an increase in the error in the trans-
verse moments due to the assumption of no joint
displacements. Knowing the longitudinal stresses,
however, the joint displacements can be directly
calculated and the transverse, slab action, analysis
easily performed as a continuous beam, with the
supports settling a known amount.
ELASTIC MODEL TESTS
A search of the literature reveals amazingly few
reports of tests performed on folded plate struc-
tures or models. And yet such tests are necessary
to judge the validity of the theories that have been
developed.
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014

Gaafar's Tests (Ref. 16) (1954) were the first

model tests reported. Gaafar used a 1/40 scalc
aluminium model and obtained reasonable agree-
ment with his proposed theory. At the same time
his experimental results showed large variations
from the results of the theory neglecting joint dis-
placemen:s, particularly in the transverse slab
action.
Roberts' 'rests (Ref. 41) (1960) were performed
at the University of Western Australia, a s the final
requirement for the B.E. (Hon.) Degree and have
not been published elsewhere. He tested three
models made of thin steel plates with soldered joints.
All models were set on silver steel rollers to ensure
simple support conditions. A total of nine tests
were performed under varying load conditions,
some with concentrated loads and others with
uniformly distributed loads normal to the plates,
and some with additional intermediate diaphragms.
Strains were recorded using electric resistance
strain gauges. A test on each one of the three models
will be described below.
( a ) Model 1. The concentrated loads are
applied by means of weights acting through a
system of pulleys. When a hydraulic jack
is released the model takes the load.
The details of the model and some
experimental results are shown in Figure
10. The shape and dimensions, except the
thickness t, as well as the loading arrange-
ment are identical with Gaafar's model.
Here, however, much better agreement was -ve++ve
found, in the longitudinal stresses, between comp. tension
the accurate method and the n o joint dis- LONGITUDINAL
placements analysis, then the agreement STeESSES(pS.Ll AT MIDSPAW
reported by Gaafar for his model. This is
because the t/h ratio is 2.6 times lower
than Gaafar's value. The experimental
stresses are lower than those calculated
from Gaafar's method but agree fairly well
with them. This tendency was observed in

25
 ARCHITECTURAL SCIENCE REVIEW MARCH, 1965

This model was also tested, under the
same loading system, with two additional
intermediate diaphragms at the third points,
under the loads. This gave very close agree-
ment with the simple beam theory. A further
test, with only one central additional
diaphragm, gave results which deviated from
the simple beam theory but agreed reason-
Fig. 12
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
ably well with those calculated from Gaafar’s
method with a correction for the presence of
the diaphragm, calculated according to
Craemer (Ref. 12).
Model 2 (see Figure 11) . This model has
a longer span 1 and is of a similar thick-
ness t. These changes lead to an increase
of l/h and a decrease of t/h, which
ratios have opposing tendencies on the
accuracy of the no joint displacements
method. However, from the increased
Samuely’s ratio we would expect the error
in this approach to increase, as indeed it
has. The value of C is still not high enough
to make the beam theory applicable.
Model 3 . This model was tested under a
uniformly distributed load applied normal
to the plates. A plastic airbag was used to
apply the load. The bag was inflated by
means of a small electric pump and the
pressure measured with a manometer con-

taining coloured water. The bag fitted in the

space between the model and an upper
“dummy” model of similar but larger cross
section.
The model (as shown in Fig. 12) is of
the same shape as the one on which Craemer
based some of his calculations (see Fig 9
(a) ). The relationship of f/fb against C as
given in Fig 9 (a) is not applicable since
it was detained for a vertical load as
opposed to a normal one here. However, it
is probably qualitatively accurate. The model
dimensions were selected to give a value
of C such that tension would be expected
to occur at the top (from Fig, 9 (a), C
should be less than 1.25).
Reasonable agreement can be seen
between the experimental results and those
predicted from Gaafar’s theory. The no
joint displacement predictions are also not
very far out, as we would expect from the
low values of the relevant ratios. In this
particular model a reading was also taken
of the longitudinal stress at mid-span, at
- v e 4 tve
comp tenston
the middle of plate CB1. This experimental
LONGITUDINAL reading shows some inconsistency with the
3TR.€35€5 Lp9’ ) AT M I D SPAN straight line strain distribution assumption
CXPCIIMCNTAL
within each plate. Transverse readings were
_____ I I E O R E T I C A L . GAAFAEkMETWOD also taken at the points P, 0 and Q and
---- t H E O L E T I C M . NO JOINT DISTLACCMENTS the experimental results tabulated show
-- THEoeLllCAL BEAM THEOEY some disagreement with the theoretical pre-
COMPA12150N OF TKAN5VEXSE 4TK655E5 AI M I D ~ P A W dictions. Experimental error might account
for some of the discrepancy.
Roberts also performed a limited experi-
mental investigation on a plywood folded
t 1360 plate structure.
+3,550
DESIGN OF
THE REINFORCED CONCRETE PLATES
Boftom -3420 -3530
After the structural analysis of a folded plate
has been performed, the next step is to design the
reinforcement in the concrete plates and diaphragms.

26
 FOLDED PLATE ROOFS
Within the scope of this paper it is only possible
to mention briefly the problem involved and refer
to some relevant publications.
Because of the thinness of the plates, shear and
diagonal tension stresses are often the most critical.
The plates, as we have seen earlier, are also subject
to edge-shear forces, and the determination of
shear stresses, using standard elastic procedures, is
somewhat different from, and probably even less
reliable than, that used in normal reinforced con-
crete beams. This subject is dealt with in Refer-
ences (2) (3) (9) (11) and (15). The full details
of the reinforcement used in the Museum roof are
given in Ref. 54.
ULTIMATE STRENGTH
The assumptions of a homogeneous, isotropic
and elastic material, made in the structural theory
discussed above, are such that they are hardly
satisfied by a reinforced concrete folded plate under
working loads. Any cracking that will develop in
the concrete will upset the stresses calculated from
the elastic folded plate theory. While a theory of
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
folded plates which allows for the presence of
cracks, with the tensile stresses taken by the rein-
forcement, has been proposed by Kazinczy (1948)
(Ref. 10) it does not take into consideration the
non-elastic behaviour in the concrete. Thus, an
ultimate strength theory, is most desirable and
necessary. Such a theory, based on existing rein-
forced concrete ultimate strength techniques, will
probably also make the design and analysis of
folded plate structures a much easier and shorter
operation. Since folded plates combine both slab
and plate actions, we might expect slab and beam
ultimate strength theories to be relevant.
Model tests to destruction are the first require-
ment for the development of an ultimate strength
theory. With folded plates, in common with rein-
forced concrete models of other shell types, some
difficulties arise in the selection of the material,
:tc., due to the very thin sections involved (Ref. 6 ) .
Some recent work on ultimate strength will be
briefly described.
Dykes (Ref. 42) (1960) tested six models under
three different support conditions. The models were
inverted “V” shape two-plate structures, made of
cement mortar, with equal reinforcement in two
directions at right angles provided by a steel wire
mesh, placed in the middle of the section. The
models were 29.5 in. long, 0.5 in. thick, with a
rise of 6.8 in. and plate width of 12.3 in. The
load was applied symmetrically, normal to the two
surfaces, by means of concentrated dead loads dis-
tributed on the surface of each plate by means of
twenty-one 2.5 in. square plates.
The ultimate loads were predicted by means of
the Yield Line theory used for slabs, extended to
include the effects of the membrane forces. The
oredicted collapse forms, as well as the ultimate
loads. showed close agreement with those obtained
exnerimentallv.
Chams and Ssalzi (Ref. S 1) ( 19611 reported the
test to destruction of one folded plate model. The
model had a symmetrical three-plate configuration
27
S. Aroni
(like Roberts’ Models 1 and 2, without the
vertical edge plates) and was made of sand mortar
of an ultimate compressive strength of 1500 p.s.i.
It had end diaphragms and was simply supported
over a span of 60 in. The plates were 12 in. wide
and 0.5 in. thick. The main longitudinal rein-
forcement was in the form of four Q in. dia. cold
drawn steel rods, two at the bottom of each
inclined plate, grit blasted to develop bond resist-
ance. A distributed load was applied only to the
top horizontal plate.
The observed collapse load was within 1.8 per-
cent of the theoretical load calculated from the
ultimate moment of the model considered as an
under-reinforced simply supported beam (equation
(AS) in CA2-1958). This excellent agreement is
probably due to a great extent to the shape of the
cross-section of the model.
The two projects described are more in the
nature of preliminary tests than full ultimate
strength investigations. Much more testing needs to
be done but the work considered forms a valuable
beginning.
PRECASTING AND PRESTRESSING
Precasting and prestressing techniques, either
separately or together, can be used to great advan-
tage in folded plate structures. The individual plates
can be precast separately or in simple folded units,
and easily erected. Prestressing is usually used to
help the plate action of the structure and long spans
can be economically achieved (Ref. 49). The pre-
stressing could prevent concrete cracking under
working loads and improve the applicability of the
elastic theory. Some simple design methods have
also been used for prestressed folded plates (Refs.
52 and 49). Other examples of precast (Refs. 20,
34, 37, 46) and prestressed (Refs. 27, 29, 36)
structures are given in the bibliography.
Conclusions
1. Reasonable methods of analysis of folded
plate structures are available but the validity of
simplifying approximations can not be accurately
predicted over the full range of shapes and types
of loads.
2. Digital computers can be used to great ad-
vantage in the analysis of folded plates as well as
in obtaining more information on the accuracy of
simvlifying assumptions.
3. More model tests are necessary for a variety
of folded shapes as well as for multi-bay, multi-
span structures with different support conditions.
4. The development of an ultimate strength
theorv for reinforced and prestressed concrete
folded plate structures is desirable for a more realis-
tic design annroach.
5. The advantages of folded plates are such that
an increase in the use of this form of construction
seems inevitable.
REFERENCES
A. Textbooks
1 K. GIRKMANN: Flachentragwerke, 2 Aufl., Springer
Verlae; Wien 1948
2. A. J. ASRDOWN: The Design of Prismatic Structures,
Concrete Publ. London, 1951, 65 pp.
 A R C H i T E C T U R A L S C I E N C E REVIEW
3. J. BORN: Faltwerke (Folded Plate Theory and
Analysis, in G e r m a n ) , Verlag Konrad Wittner, Stuttgart,
1954, LO4 pp.
4. D. YITZHAKI:Prismatic and Cylindrical Shell Roofs,
North-Holland Publishing Co.. Amsterdam. 1959. 253 KID.
5. W. FLUGGE: Stress& in' Shells, Springer-Verf&.
Berlin, 1960, 499 pp.
6. J. E. GIBSON:The design of Cylindrical Shell Roofs,
Spon, 2nd ed., London, 1961.
7. A. S. HALLand R. W. WOODHEAD: Flame Analysis,
J . Wiley, New York, 1961, 247 pp.
B. Articles
8. G. EHLERS : Ein neues Konstruktionsprinzip. Bauing-
enieur, Vol. 9, (1930), p. 125.
9. G. WINTERand M. PEI: Hipped Plate Construction.
Journal of American Concrete Institute, Vol. 18, (1917),
pp. 505-531.
10. G. DE KAZINCZY: The Limit Design of Shells ( i n
German) , International Association for Bridge and
Structural Engineering, 3rd Congress, Liege, (1948) ,
pp. 615-621.
11. E. SHEPLEY:Approxmate Design of Thin Vault
Roofs. Civil Engineering and Public Works Review, Val.
43, (November, 1948).
12. H. CRAEMER : Prismatic Structures with Transverse
Stiffeners, Concrete and Constructional Engineoring,
VOl. 45, (1950), pp, 81-86.
13. A. KRYSZTAL: Hipped Plate and Shell Roof Con-
Downloaded by [] at 05:43 31 December 2014
struction in Reinforced Concrete, Journal of the
Institution of Engineers, Australia, Vol. 22 (1950), pp.
235-245.
14. E. GRUBER: The Exact Membrance Theory of Pris-
matic Structures Composed of Thin Plates (in G e r m a n ) ,
Publ. International Association for Bridge and Structural
Engineering, Vol. I1 (19511, pp. 129-164.
15. H. CRAEMER: Design of Prismatic Shells, Journal of
American Concrete Institute, (1953), pp. 549-563.
16. I. GAAFAR: Hipped Plate Analysis, Considering Joint
Displacements, Trans. Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers, Vol.
119, (1954), pp. 743-784.
17. A. J. ASHDOWN: Prismatic Roof Slab with Small
Angular Change, Concrete and Constructional Engineer-
ing, Vol. 49, (1954), pp. 3-12, 73-80 and 105-109.
18. A. WERFEL:The Exact Theory of Prismatic Struc-
tures Formed by Bending and its Practical Application
(in German), Publ. International Association for Bridge
and Structural Engineering, Vol. 14, (1954), pp. 276-318.
19. K. K. LAULL: Analyss of Prismatic Folded Structures
(in Russian), Trudi Tallinsk. Politekhn. I n - t a ( a ) , No. 56
(1954), pp. 1-28; Referativnyi Zkurnal Mekhanika (Mos-
cow), No. 8 (1958), Rev. 9291; Applied Mecanics Reviews,
Vol. 13, (October, 1960).
20. M. S. KETCHUM: Design and Construction of a
Folded Plate Roof Structure, Journal of American
Concrete Institute, Vol. 26 (19551, pp. 449-456.
21. B. G. ANDERSON:Cost Factors i n Concrete Hangars,
Architectural Record, Vol. 117, No. 2, (1955), pp. 214-215.
22. ANON:Folded Plate Shell Concrete Roofs, Archi-
tectural Forum, Vol. 102, No. 2, (19551, pp. 156-157.
23. H. AICHINGER: On some Extensions of the Theory
of Rigid-Jointed Folded Plate Structures with Prismatic,
Narrow Individual Plates (in German) , Der Bauingenieur
(Berlin), Vol. 30, (1955), pp. 397-403, VOl. 31, (1956),
pp. 216-221.
24. ANON:New Concept in Hangars-Cable Suspended
Folded Plate Roof. Engineering News-Record, Vol. 156,
NO. 4 (1956), pp. 44-48.
25. I. GAAFAR:The Design of Prismatic Roofs, Concrets
and Constructional Engineering, Vol. 51, (1956), pp.
509-515.
26. I. E. MORRIS:Atlanta Housing Project uses Folded
Plate Roof, Journal of American Concrete Institute,
Vol. 28, (News Letter, November, 1956). p. 11.
27. ANON:Folded Slab Roof in Glazed Tracery Walls
for new Church, Prefabrication (London), Vol. 4, (1957),
pp. 208-211.
28. B. N. THADANI: Analysis of Hipped Plate Struc-
tures by Influence Coefficients, Indian Concrete Journal,
Vol. 31, (1957). pp. 106-114.
29. J. J. DRISKELL: Multispan Prestressed Folded Plate
Roof for Langendorf Bakery, Journal of American Con-
28
M A R C H , 1965
crete Institute, Vol. 29, (1957), pp. 115-126.
30. J. E. GOLDBERG and H. L. LEVE:Theory of Prismatic
Folded Plate Structures, Publ. International Association
for Bridge and Structural Engineering, Vol. 17, (1957),
PP. 59-86.
31. H. SIMPSON: Design of Folded Plate Roofs, Journal
of the Structural Division Proc. of the Am. SOC.of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 84, No. ST1 (January, 1958).
32. ANON:Concrete Hangars Spread Folded Slab Wings,
Engineering News-Record, Vol. 160, No. 8, (1958), pp.
46-51.
33. C. S. WHITNEY:Cantilevered Folded Plate Roofs
ACI Headquarters, Journal of American Concrete
Institute, Vol. 30, (1958), pp. 427-430.
34. J . STRANGE: Construction for ACI, Journal of
American Concrete Institute, Vol. 30, (1958), pp. 431-438.
35. L. WELCH:Folded Plate Dome Ideal for Auditorium,
Journal of American Concrete Institute, Vol. 30, (1958),
Pp. 441-446.
36. F. J. SAMUELY: Folded Slab Construction, Journal
of American Concrete Institute, Vol. 30, (1958), pp,
447-460.
37. I. MARTIN and N. PADILLA: Precast Folded Plate Roof
for a Paint Plant, Civil Engineering, Val. 29, No. 3,
(1959), pp. 56-59.
38. I. MARTINand S. RUIZ: Folded Plate Raft Founda-
tion for 24-Storey Building, Journal of Amsrican Con-
crete Institute, Vol. 31, (19591, pp. 121-126.
39. C. S. WHITNEY,B. G . ANDERSONand H. BIRNBAUM:
Reinforced Concrete Folded Plate Construction. Journal
of the Structural Division Proc. of the Am. Soc. of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 85, No. S T 8 (October, 1959).
40. E. TRAUM: The Design of Folded Plates, Journal of
the Structural Division Proc. of the Am. SOC.of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 85, No. ST8 (October, 1959), pp. 103-123.
41. B. C. ROBERTS: Folded Plate Structures, Thesis sub-
mitted to the University of Western Australia, not
published, (January, 1960).
42. A. R. DYKES: Folded Plate Construction: An
investigation of Collapse Conditions, The Structural
Engineer, Vol. 38, (1960), pp. 60-67.
43. J. 0. POWER:Folded Plate Concrete Roof is Post-
Tensioned in Place, Journal of the Prestressed Concrete
Institute, Vol. 5, (1960), pp. 29-34.
44. ANON:Unique Features a t Blakehurst High School,
Constructional Review, Vol. 33, No. 3, (19601, pp. 18-21.
45. P. S. BALINT:Result 0:' Structural Test on Folded
Plate Roof, Constructional Review, Vol. 33, No. 3, (1960),
pp. 21-25.
46. ANON: Concrete is Feature of Unique Banking
Office, Journal of American Concrete Institute, Vol. 31,
(Newsletter, April, 1960), p. 18.
47. ANON: Folded Plate Construction, Building and
Decorating Materials, (September/October, 1960), pp.
32-33.
48. A. C. SCORDELIS: Matrix Formulation of the Folded
Plate Equations, Journal of the Structural Division Proc.
of the Am. SOC. of Civil Engineers, Vol. 86, No. STlO
(October, 1960), pp. 1-22.
49. J . C. BROUGH and B. H. STEPHENS: Long Span Pre-
stressed Concrete Folded Plate Roofs, Journal of the
Structural Division Proc. of the Am. SOC. of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 86, No. STlO (October, 1960), pp. 37-108.
50. M. S. KETCHUM: Design of Shell Structures-Folded
Plate Forms, Consulting Engineer, Vol. 16, No. 1 (1961),
pp. 118-122.
51. G. P. CHACOS and J . B. SCALZI: Ulimate Strength of
a Folded Plate Structure, Journal of American Concrete
Institute, Vol. 32, (1961), pp. 965-971.
52. H. H. EDWARDS: Precast and Prestressed Folded
Plate Slabs. Journal of American Concrete Institute.
Vol. 32, -(1961), pp. 131311322,
53. ANON: Shell Structures in the U.S.A., Indian Con-
crete Journal, Vol. 35, (1961), D. 208.
54. G. S. RAMASWAMY, M. RAMIAHand V. C. JAIN:
Analysis and Design of Folded Plates, Indian Concrete
Journal, Vol. 35, No. 7 (1961).
55. A. L. L. PARME and J . A. SBAROUNIS: Direct Solution
of Folded Plate Concrete Roofs, Bulletin of the Inter-
national Association for Shell Structures, No. 6 (1961),
45 PP.