7099 The theory of the strip method for design of slabs R. H. WOOD, bse, Php, Ceng, MICE, AMIStructE* G. S. T. ARMERt For the ultimate-load design of reinforced concrete slabs the ‘strip method’ of Arne Hillerborg provides a powerful alternative to yield-line theory. It is also more obviously a design procedure, in which the designer chooses the layout of reinforce- ment as the calculations progress, whereas with yield-line theory the process requires the analysis of a given slab with assumed reinforcement to find by trial and error the required reinforcement. Although the strip method is known in Scandinavia, it is virtually unknown in Great Britain. This Paper undertakes a critical examination of the theory. It is shown that the original method is remarkably simple to apply, whereas the later developments are too complicated to be readily acceptable, Modifications are proposed, aimed at simplicity and veracity, and it is shown that the method as applied by Hillerborg is not necessarily a ‘lower-bound’ solution as he intended. PART I: THE BASIS OF THE SIMPLE THEORY Historical introduction Apart from the rules to be found in various codes of practice, which are usually limited in their application, the designer has roughly four alternative approaches for the design of reinforced concrete slabs: @) elastic analysis by modern computers, (6) strict ‘limit analysis’ of slabs,* (© yield-line theory,®+* @d) the strip method. 2. Limit analysis allows ‘upper-bound’ (unsafe or correct) solutions based on the collapse mechanisms of yield lines, and ‘lower-bound’ (safe or correct) solutions based on completely acceptable stress fields. Most of the lower- bound solutions of limit analysis have been aimed at verifying yield-line theory, but if variable reinforcement is allowed then an acceptable, unique and very economical lower-bound solution is given by elastic analysis, pro- vided there exists a simple method for placing the reinforcement? Hiller- borg’s eatly publications®-* outlined a simplification of the lower-bound (plastic) stress fields, by the device of deliberately eliminating the twisting moments. This ‘simple theory’ will be subjected in Part I of this Paper to a critical examination according to the rules of limit analysis. A later Written discussion closes 30 November, 1968, for publication after February 1969. * Senior Principal Scientific Officer, Building Research Station, Watford, Herts. Associate Professor of Engineering Science, University of Warwick, Experimental Officer, Building Research Station, Watford, Herts, ‘Crowa copyright reserved, 285WOOD AND ARMER publication” of Hillerborg is what Crawford® has called *, . . for lack of a better name. , . the Advanced Strip Method’, and is similarly examined in Part II of this Paper. The simple strip method is particularly attractive to designers but appears to be almost unknown outside Scandinavia, where it is allowed in the Swedish Code.?° Particularly in view of recent developments in limit analysis, it has become important to describe and examine this ‘strip method? in detail, for it has been described by Blakey? as‘. . . one of the mile- stones in the history of the design of flat-plate structures”. The simple strip method The simplified equilibrium approach 3. If the yield criterion were known, then in any valid lower-bound solu- tion the equilibrium equation, which must be satisfied? at all points, is OM, AM, , OMey Greats nepPacee porto teresa te tate tet HCD, where the moments M,, My, and twist M,,, follow Timoshenko’s nomen- clature,!! and p is the distributed load intensity at the pois 4. Normally the stress field is complicated, With a Johansen-type slab it is hardly ever possible to put M.,=0, except in very special cases.” How- ever, the essential feature is that Hillerborg’s method is an attempt to design a slab with variable reinforcement, and not to analyse a slab with given uniform reinforcement. The intention is to make the stress field coincide with the field of resistance moments due to the reinforcement. That being so, Hiller- borg can, for the first time, deliberately make M,,=0 so as to make the direc- tions of reinforcement (assumed to be placed along the x- and y-axes) coincide with the principal moment directions, Evidently equation (1) can then be superseded by equations representing twistless beam-strip action: “at = SEES eee eC): and ta ep, ee by where « is the proportion of load taken in the strips in the x-direction, and (1a) in the y-direction. Thus the load may be divided between the strips, or, as more often happens in strip theory, the value of a is taken as either 0 or 1. When a=0 all the load is dispersed by strips in the y-direction; when a=1 the x-strips take all the load. Also the value of p could change throughout the slab without affecting the validity. Point loads are treated as local concentrations. of p. 5. Lines of stress discontinuity are then introduced, as shown in Fig. 1 for a rectangular slab supported on edge-beams, the intention being to signify sudden changes in the direction of load dispersion so that the strips become loaded as shown and give rise to the diagrammatic representation of beam loads shown in Fig, 2. It has always been an attractive feature of the strip method that the beam loads are known in intensity and in distribution. Indeed, they must be known for any lower-bound solution, but by contrast they are not provided by yield-line theory.* 286THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS 1 ip erie TY Line of stress dicontinuley Une of zero shear Fig. 1. Hillerborg’s discontinuous Fig, 2. Loads on supporting beams stress fields Fig. 3. Unsymmetrical slab Fig. 4. Simply supported square slab 6, In Fig, 1, in regions 1 and 2 the value of « is 1; in regions 3~7 the value of « is zero, “Beyond insisting that the accumulated shear force in each imaginary strip is taken care of when the load dispersion changes sign, Hillerborg does not place any other restrictions on the discontinuity lines. Thus, although discontinuous stress fields are allowed?- in limit analysis, Hillerborg does not examine rigorously the rules for permissible discontinuities, and this feature will be examined later. For a symmetrical slab the bending moment in strip a-a (Fig. 1) is uniform over the centre portion, but it is not uniform in strip a-a of Fig. 3. This shows that the centre length of strip a—a must be reinforced even though it carries no load locally—an important point not emphasized in the literature. It should be noted at this stage that the discontinuity lines are quite arbitrary, provided that continuity of shear is observed in strips, Line ce in Fig. 1 is not a discontinuity line, it is a line of zero shear. The load-dispersion lines of Fig. 2 have therefore nothing to do with imaginary yield lines. It is curious that such load-dispersion diagrams, often quoted in codes of practice in conjunction with either yield-line theory or elastic analysis, are not correct in either case but they are compatible only with strip theory. 3 287WOOD AND ARMER Reinforcement in strips with varying moments 7. The size of regions 1 and 2 (Fig. 1) affects the amount of reinforcement but the choice is not critical. With a simply supported square slab (Fig. 4) the discontinuity lines may be the diagonal lines themselves, although other systems are possible. It follows that the maximum moment in each strip is a variable quantity, whereas in Fig, 1, region 7, all the short strips had a con- stant maximum moment of p/?/8. In region 7, therefore, a band of reinforce- ment can be stopped off at any convenient length, easily evaluated, as in an ordinary beam, This is not so in Fig. 4 where the moments are continuously variable. If triangular load regions are used, Hillerborg considered it reasonable to place the reinforcement in uniform bands where the average maximum momeat for strips within that band was taken as the design moment, This decision was taken in the belief that the method was generally based on a safe lower-bound solution with a reserve of strength. Moreover, since one band width is not likely to suffice for the whole slab, it is necessary to study a typical loaded area such as abcd (Fig. 4) with a band width ad=w. 8. A typical strip, with loaded length / at a distance z from ab and span L, has a maximum bending moment of a pl.l-pe = ipl =m say, where The average moment is [7% = mov, per unit width. 7 0 01 09 03 a4 OS 06 07 G9 09 70 uh Fig. 5. Coefficient K for average moment in strips 288THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS Fig. 6. General shape of loaded area (Hillerborg) <— Arrow show fond Fig. 7 (right). Treatment of square stab diperton On substituting for m, it is found that cop (ath 1333 1 = 9-P-(average loaded Jongth)*.(K) = (maximum moment in mid-strip).K =... @) where K is shown in Fig. 5. 9. Hillerborg refers to the average loaded length as the ‘mean span’, but this is likely to be confused with the actual span of the strips. Also, equation (2) is only valid for a value m=4pl?, implying symmetrically loaded strips and zero shear along the discontinuity line. However, these values of K are used whether or not there is zero shear arising from symmetry; also, these values of K are used for the most general irregularly shaped loaded area shown in Fig. 6, again no doubt because of the alleged reserve of strength expected from a lower-bound approach. Thus, when there is a strong shear at the dis- ine, Hillerborg evaluates the maximum moment correctly for the mid-strip and then applies the factor K. Example of a simply supported square slab 10. To illustrate the method, it will be applied to a simply supported square slab (Fig. 7) using four bands of equal width, 1/4, ‘The working may be set up as below. xK Band = (4+/)/2 Aijla (Fig. 5) = MipL?_ from equation (3) no. 1 iw + 1-04 +.)?. 1:04) = 00732 2 aL 0 133 $.@)?.(1:33) = 0-0104 For simplicity these values will be made to apply to the whole length (Z) of each band, without curtailment of reinforcement near the edges. 289WOOD AND ARMER Fig. 8. Discontinuity lines fitting the banded reinforcement 11. A measure of the total amount of reinforcement required and the efficiency of this method can be gained by examining? the ‘moment volume’ V = Sf (Ma+ My)[Link], Bands 1: V, = 4.L.4.L.0-0732pL? = 0-0732pL4 Bands 2: Va = 4.L.4.L.0-0104pL? = 0-0104pL* V = 0-0836pL* 12, The solution by yield-line theory? is, for uniformly placed reinforce- ment without top steel in the corners, M=pL?/22, Hence V = 2.17, pL7/22 = 0-091pL', showing that yield-line theory uses, in this treatment, slightly more steel, Disregarding the bands, with continuously variable reinforcement the absolute minimum moment volume* for this Hillerborg-type load dispersion is Vrain, =0-0625pL4, showing that Hillerborg’s treatment is reasonably econ- omical, It should be pointed out that the reinforcement required for bands similar to Band 2 above is often below the minimum code requirement for slabs. Alternative treatment of discontinuity lines 13, In limit analysis there is no intrinsic reason why the discontinuity lines should be straight, and it would appear to the Authors that Hillerborg has sometimes needlessly complicated the calculations by employing triangular and trapezoidal shapes of loaded regions, The discontinuity lines may in fact be chosen to fit the bands of reinforcement identically, and to give uniform treatment of the strips, as shown in Fig. 8, In addition to avoiding the use of equation (3) and Fig. 5, the solution now happens to be exact and strictly in accordance With limit analysis, which is certainly not true of any averaging- of-moments process. It should be noticed that the outer longitudinal strips theoretically carry no load. In reality they carry very little load, so that only nominal reinforcement is required. This remark is likely to apply to most edge bands (e.g, region 2, Fig. 7). Treatment of holes 14, Holes present no problem with the strip method, so long as it is feasible to provide strong bands round the hole acting as beams (Fig. 9). Thus strips a-a are supported in turn by the strong band b-b, the interreactive forces being suitably distributed, It is easy to see that the distribution of reaction on the 280THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS le oof me He i of ‘it 1 iseong band | i t ul i Yedge beam | | a fe | « | Increased load trom arong bands 1 } —— 5" Lead dispersion Key ‘Contraflexure line ae Serene discontinuity Intensity of load on edge beam Fig. 9, Slab with a hole Fig. 10. Clamped slab edge beam is therefore known at some stage of the calculations, even though this loading diagram appears to be crudely discontinuous. In marked con- trast to yield-line theory, no part of the structure can be left without its accom- panying statement of loading, and this feature of the strip method is of instant appeal to designers, Treatment of corners and restrained edges 15. If the edges of the slab shown in Fig. 1 were continuous or encastered, then negative support moments would occur. As regards thcir values, plastic theory gives entire freedom of choice. Consider the end of an encastered rectangular slab (Fig. 10), in particular the changing moments in a band of reinforcement as shown. Owing to the negative moments, each strip has a point of contraflexure and it is convenient to invent a straight ‘contrafiexure- line’ as shown, where /is the loaded length of the strip in the negative moment region, / being the loaded length in the positive region. Evidently the condi- tions set out in Fig. 6 and equation (3) still apply for averaging, according to Hillerborg’s treatment, the maximum positive strip moments. Hillerborg, however, does not indicate what to do about the negative moments, How- ever, the support moment in the strip is #=—pl.!—p(J/2), and supposing Ut=h]ky= hjla=B, then me ~pP(a+ ). Therefore, by inspection of the previous proof, 2 2) Fave, womone = ~(2+5).p (average loaded length in postive moment region)*.(K) = (maximum negative moment in mid-strip).x. . . (Ba) 16. In this formula, X is still obtained from Fig. 5 on the understanding that the average loaded length (4; +/,)/2 is measured from the contrafiexure Tine to the line of discontinuity, and f is defined by (loaded length between contraflexure line and support B = ratio ( caged length between contrallexure line and discontinuity)" 291WOOD AND ARMER Fig. 11. Triangular slab with free-edge Fig. 12. Load dispersion in an irregular slab 17. Hillerborg was forced to adopt a different treatment when the strips were not supported at their far ends by a symmetrical, or nearly symmetrical, system. Thus, in Fig. 11 showing a triangular slab with a free edge, the strips are cantilevered out from the fixed edges, and carry both the distributed load and the reaction from the other strips in the positive-moment region, which latter strips may have to change direction as shown. On the contrafiexure line itself the total vertical reactions must be balanced which means, in effect, that the strips change in width. If Q, and 4, refer to the shear per unit width in region 1, and the corresponding width of strip, when Q;.b1= [Link], by _ sina @ : = by = sina’ 18, The conditions in Fig, 11 seem to imply that the strips in region | must of necessity be parallel to the free edge. This is not so, for the slab near the free edge can always be heavily reinforced so as to form a strong band almost indistinguishable from a ‘beam’. The remaining strips may then span directly across to this beam band. This simpler treatment is preferred by the Authors, Qa a Superimposition of strips not at right angles 19. The strips shown in Fig. 11 are equivalent to curved beams, and this kind of strip placement can result in strips not crossing at right angles, as shown in Fig. 12. Jn one direction the strips are like those in Fig. 11; in the other direction the treatment is similar to the strips in Fig. 1. Fig. 12 is typical of many produced by Hillerborg. The designer must always remember that strips must continue right across the slab until some suitable reaction point is encountered, and continuity of shears must be preserved, otherwise the diagrams can become bewildering. Skew slabs may be treated by a series of skew strips, with discontinuity lincs similar to those in Fig. 1, each set of strips dealing with the appropriate load dispersion, the reinforcement following the strips. In his many worked examples, Hillerborg®-" clearly expects the designer to treat every case on its own merits. Critical examination in the light of limit analysis General comments 20. It is obvious that the strip method is at one and the same time a power- ful method of design and a daring, perhaps startling, use of limit analysis. 292THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS a (eon ee ff Vi Load dispersion i Fig. 13, Stress states on a discontinuity line a Fig. 14 (right). Examination of ' 8 ¥ discontinuity $ With the load dispersion system changing dircction apparently at will, at least two important questions must be asked, (@) How will the slabs perform on test, especially as regards deflexions ? ‘This strip theory pays not the slightest attention to the comp: i of deflexions between strips. (According to rigid-plastic li analysis it does not have to do so, because a lower-bound solution indicates a rigid slab with no yield, and zero deflexion everywhere constitutes compatible deftexions!) The designer, however, will be wise to choose values of positive and negative moments which do not depart too far from the expected elastic distribution, especially as this is economical? and avoids cracking. Only tests to destruc- tion can therefore give guidance regarding the deflexions,!? (b) Does the method give a true lower-bound solution? Obviously this depends on two features—first, whether there is any invalid dis- continuity, implying unbalanced forces, and second, whether there is any reserve of strength when collapse takes place, for the mech- anism of collapse has not been investigated. Discontinuous stress fields 21, The rules for valid discontinuities? may be put quite simply: any stresses which ‘cross’ the discontinuity must themselves be continuous, Thus, in Fig. 13, the normal moment M,, the twist My, and the shear, 4 Mot Oi ort must be continuous on line #f; but a sudden ‘jump’ in the tangential moment M, is allowed, and likewise the functions for My, Mi, Mju in the adjacent regions may change provided the above continuities are observed. Thus in Fig, 8 a sudden jump in M; along the ‘strong’ discontinuity #7 is permitted 293WOOD AND ARMER whilst preserving the shear, normal moment and zero twist in direction nn. In Fig. 3 there is a so-called ‘weak’ discontinuity on rf, where only the rate of change of tangential moment M; changes, without a sudden jump in M, (this being the distinction between a strong and weak discontinuity). (In more severe discontinuities it may be deemed sufficient to have continuity in 8M, Va = On- Fes and not Qs, Mn: separately, as in nodal force theory.?°) 22, So far the sudden changes in direction of load dispersion have not been critically examined. Consider Fig. 14, where a discontinuity in direction f crosses a band of strips 11 in direction x, and a second band of strips in direc- tion 22, not necessarily at right angles, In region A the distributed load p is all dispersed in direction 1(=x) by strips 11 only; in region B it is dispersed in direction 2 by strips 22 only. In region A there is a continuous (strip-like) field of stress; likewise in region B but a different function. It is required to show that, if continuity of shear and moment is preserved in strips 11 and 22, then all continuity conditions are satisfied on ¢¢, Actually it will be sufficient to prove that these conditions are satisfied for one band of strips alone: for, if so, they will be satisfied with both strips simultaneously. 23. It should be noted that all strips in direction 11 do not have the same distribution of bending moments. However, it has been found that if, for these strips 11, any mathematical function describing a possible bending moment field is set up which agrees with a distributed load p in region A, and a distributed load of zero in region B, then all continuity conditions are rigorously satisfied normal to the discontinuity #1. 24. Hillerborg's other type of discontinuity (shown in Fig. 11) may be considered to be a stronger discontinuity, for in this case the strips themselves change direction, so that the former proof does not apply. Fig. 14 may still be used with the following changes (@) strips 1 vanish in region B ©) strips 2 vanish in region A. 25. Again, setting up mathematical statements for possible fields of bending moments in each set of strips, and afterwards differentiating to obtain 0M, 2. = raat ing upon this being continuous, leads to the condition that where the 2M, er” and insi strips join _ £088 strips 3 COS This is the same result as given by Hillerborg’s intuitive treatment given by equation (4), showing that the strip method rigorously satisfies the rules of limit analysis on such discontinuities. The corresponding mechanism of collapse 26. If the stress field gives a lower bound for the collapse load, then it may well be asked whether it matters what the mechanism of collapse is. However, the answer is perhaps surprising, Some years ago the Authors first tried a 294THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS layout of yield lines corresponding to the discontinuity lines of Figs 1 and 2, ‘The collapse load was found to be the same load as that used in the design. With coincident upper and lower bounds, this, then, was the required answer. The same conclusion obviously applies to the trial diagonal yield lines of the square slab, Fig. 4, which is a special case of Fig. 1. However, in Fig. 1, there was no restriction whatever on the layout of the discontinuity lines, so clearly there are many modes of collapse. In contrast, Fig. 8 provides no ‘obvious yield line pattern for such ‘strong’ discontinuities; however, when the usual basic? pattern of yield lines was tried the collapse load was again given exactly. 7 27, A more interesting test is to try the alternative collapse mode of Fig. 15 imposed on the ideal Hillerborg stress field applying in Fig. 4, i.e. with ideally placed reinforcement. It is required to find the value of X for the critical mode. If 0 is the rotation of the outer regions, then the external work due to the load is easily shown to be E = p§tue-@xy. ieee etree COD Now for any distance y from the centre line, (@ the yield moment on the diagonal is given by faa ima = m= my =3 (5) rin) (b) the yield moment on a yield line parallel to the y-axis is ‘Le cL L = Otdyas = 0 (5-%) (F-r)-8(G-2) = oe ow. ep Hence the dissipation of energy internally is D = 80([) Myndy+[.” [Link]) bas ie y x ue y ing from equations (7) and (8), it is eventually found that p= u—exy. Bee eEeeECeeeECHEHeereE Co) and on substit This is the same expression as in equation (6), which means that any value of X will provide the exact collapse Joad p for which the slab was designed, ‘There are therefore an infinite number of simultaneous modes of collapse. This (30) = GX) (£-9)~2 ( Ws po Me My =a Phy)? Vy Fig. 15. Trial mode of collapse 295WOOD AND ARMER Principal seraing In direction normal to yield locus Cx—Stress state at yleld Prtnctpal moment | ‘ a Conven yield ufics Fig 46, IMustrating the ‘plastic potential’ or theory of ‘normality Principal moment 2 of strains” result alters the whole attitude given to this design method; clearly a more generalized statement is required. To do this the formal proofs of upper and lower bounds are briefly re-examined. The key to such proofs is the state- ment relating maximum dissipation of energy to normal plastic strains (Fig. 16), thus: If the principal (plastic) strains are normal to the yield locus at the point of yield, then the work done is a maximum, In simpler terms, if the principal moments in the stress field in an isotropic slab coincide with the direction of yielding, then more energy is dissipated than with any other possible stress state on yield locus, 28, The limit theorems can be put very concisely as follows. Let {oo} represent the correct [= exact] stress field at collapse, and {«,} the corresponding exact field of strains, So that D{o.}.{.} represents the internal dissipation of energy at collapse. Let the external correct collapse loads be denoted by {P.}, and the field of defiexions be {5,}, being compatible with {«,.}. Then by the theorem of virtual work, since the structure is everywhere in equilibrium, E being the external work, Dac} {to = E{Po} {Sh » 1 ss + (10) Suppose there exists another different stress field {o}, everywhere in equilibrium with loads {P}, where {P}=A{P,}, A being a constant multiplier for all the various loads. The theorem of virtual work then allows any arbitrary test mechanism, so choose the correct mechanism, giving + Doh feo} = EAP}.(8) 6 ee. AD If the correct stress field follows the ‘normality rule’, then this new stress fleld probably does not, so that Dio}. {Ko} < Dloo}.{e} 6 6 «ees CQ) whence EXP}.{80} < E{ Po} (80) or Asem eer eee ode ere eee). which is the lower-bound theorem. 29. It should be noted that alternative correct stress fields can exist, These allow changes in the rigid regions only, where the dissipation of energy is not taking place. Moreover there is nothing in the proof to prevent the use of variable yield moments, made to fit the stress fields; nor would discontinuous stress fields affect the dissipation of energy, provided there are no unbalanced forces. 296THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS 30. For an upper-bound solution consider an alternative mechanism {84}. This imposes a definite strain field {xa}. Then, using the normality rule (Fig. 16), the corresponding stress states are defined, on the yield lines only, This enables a work equation Dios} Les} = E{Po} Bab ss 6 ee (4) to be set up, noting that {P,} is not everywhere in equilibrium with (a0). 31, If this (incorrect) mechanism is now used as a valid virtual displace- ment with the correct stress field {o,}, and since ‘normality’ will not prevail, then, by virtual work, Dio.) {ka} = E( Po}. {Sa} and Df} {ea} = D{oo}.{res}. Hence (P} > {Po}, or APL. 6 ww ws ASD providing an upper-bound solution. 32, This far the proof will only be upheld if there is isotropic (square mesh) reinforcement, although this may be varied in intensity. This arises because the conditions in Fig. 16 presuppose that the yield locus is the same whatever the principal moment directions. With orthotropic or skew reinforcement, because of anisotropy, the slab can yield in directions other than the principal moment directions, Consequently equation (12) requires redefining. 33. Let My, be the normal moment on any yield line of the correct collapse mode, of length Z,, and rotation $.. Then D{o.}.{«.} is actually 5(Mno. Loo), due to the reinforcement which is provided. Now let Myo be the normal moment on the same yield line L,, due to another stress field {0}. Then D(a}. {xc} is actually S([Link])- 34. To establish a lower-bound solution, the inequality (12) must hold. Since there can be no restriction in direction of yield lines, in general Magma Mgnt at iH (16): ie, the normal moment in any direction due to the trial stress field must be less than the normal yield moment which the reinforcement could sustain in that direction at that point. This proof independently reaches the same conclusion as Kemp" in a recent paper defining the criterion of yield for orthotropic reinforcement. In addition Kemp shows that this test-of-normal- moment-in-every-direction criterion obeys the normality of strains. It is therefore important to note that, without this recent extension of the yield criterion the basis of Hillerborg’s method with variable reinforcement remained intuitive. 35, It can now beseen that, if {ou} is a Hillerborg stress field in equilibrium with loads {P} then the virtual work theorem allows any test mechanism {ex}, from which Dion}.{exd = E(P}.8). 6 2. 2 « OAD However, if, and only if, the field of resistance moments due to the reinforce- ment coincides identically with this stress field, then the normal moments at 297WOOD AND ARMER any point will coincide with the yield criterion in any direction, so that equation (17) then is preciscly the work equation for any mechanism of col- lapse. Hence basically Hillerborg’s method provides an exact solution with an unlimited number of simultaneous modes. Hillerborg’s ‘averaging’ process, equation (2), by failing to satisfy the coincidence mentioned above, does not provide a lower-bound solution, Control of analysis is lost. Indeed in many cases it can be proved that an upper-bound solution for the collapse load results, The designer who instead places the reinforcement in a conservative manner, carefully accounting for any lack of symmetry in the slab (cf. §§ 7-9), would then achieve a lower-bound solution, 36. On test, slabs designed by the strip method may be expected to yield in nearly all directions at failure, and so they do, somewhat like a piastic hammock. At working loads, however, there are hardly any cracks to be seen, Whereas with a Johansen-slab designed by yield-line theory there are rigid regions of the slab still remaining at collapse, with a Hillerborg-slab such rigid regions tend to disappear. This is the direct result of the strip method having produced a design with more efficient and economical use of reinforcement, but there is a corresponding price to pay in terms of increased defiexions. With a Hillerborg-slab, keeping the deflexions within reasonable lit more dependent upon membrane action.!2 PART il: THE ADVANCED STRIP METHOD 37. Hillerborg’s later publication” arose out of the difficulty of dealing in particular with columns, or with slabs containing re-entrant corners (Fig. 17, which depicts actual examples from ‘Strimlemetoden’), The problem seems to be to transfer the reaction from the strips to the column, The treatment he proposed will first be examined and afterwards alternative procedures will be given by the Authors. Two-way spanning special elements “Type-3' elements 38. For the first time, in ‘Strimlemetoden’, three types of slab clement (‘fragment’) are distinguished by numbers: Type-1 element: rectangular element dispersing the load in one direction, ‘Type-2 element: triangular element dispersing load in one direction, ‘Type-3 element: rectangular element dispersing load in two directions and supported at one corner. ‘These are easily distinguished in Fig. 17, the type-3 elements being a new type of element for special study. The aim behind the invention of type-3 elements is not so much to deal with two-way spanning, but rather to have no shear on the edges so that, as shown in Fig, 18, the ‘field moments’ M,, and Mr, will be maximum positive span moments, the ‘support’ moments —M,, and — Muy will be maximum negative moments, and all the vertical load on the element ‘gocs’ to the column at one corner. In Fig. 17, therefore, the elements are shown surrounded by zero shear lines. 39, It is as well to point out right at the start that the reader is likely to be 298THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS Type -3 clement Fored edges where shown otherwise simple spports ® ® a 17. Examples taken from ‘ Strimlemetoden’ : (a) slab with column ; (b) L-shaped a Fig. 18. Type-3 element (new treatment) ; these elements are subjected to a uni- tormly distributed load p perplexed by the treatment of these type-3 elements. For example in Fig. 17(b) it is almost impossible for the type-3 element to have zero shear on its boundaries when linked by the strips with distant triangular elements. Crawford® observes . . . ‘Actually, in grasping the underlying principles of the advanced method, it would almost be better to forget completely the original strip method.’ Clearly, Hillerborg intended to allow approximations in the belief that this was a safe lower-bound approach, The stress fields of type-3 elements and their reinforcement 40. Only the briefest outline is given since the Authors, in spite of a sus- tained effort, have not succeeded in verifying the derivation of the reinforce- ment patterns, On the other hand such reinforcement seems intuitively reasonable, For exact details the reader is referred to ‘Strimlemetoden’, and the following comments may be found useful. From Fig, 18(a) equilibrium about the y-axis gives (Mext Max) = tibet 6 6 ew (18) 299WOOD AND ARMER Values of Myx and M,x are chosen from analysis of the surrounding strips crossing the whole slab so that their values will be maximum positive and negative moments in those long strips. 41. It is obvious that no ordinary strip theory for the type-3 element will cause all the reaction to be taken at one corner. There must be very strong twists. In keeping with ‘fans’ of yield lines which form round column sup- ports,* Hillerborg uses a radial stress field to transfer the load to the column, and examines only a square element. In Fig. 19, consider half the total load, intensity p/2, in which the ‘primary load action”? consists of the y-strips being carried by x-strips which occupy a smaller area abcd. These x-strips in turn are carried by an imaginary circular portion of the slab of radius R. These ‘secondary’ interactive forces are of low intensity at the centre of the circle, reaching infinite intensity on the periphery. This part of Hillerborg’s analysis ean be checked, and the ingenuity lies in eventually arriving at a radially symmetrical stress field which carries all the load, ic. when a further load p/2 is also cartied by a complementary system. 42, Thus far Hillerborg's system is rigorous, although it is stretching the theory to the limit to expect strips to carry other strips, and then in turn to be carried by a part of themselves with an infinite intensity of interaction! The goal is to obtain a reasonable placing of reinforcement, if possible for a high negative moment of fairly constant intensity over the column and for a short distance on each side, This Hillerborg attempts to do by combining solutions with different R-values, and transforming the radial stress field into required orthogonal reinforcement (see ref. 8), eventually arriving at three- dimensional diagrams such as Fig. 20, The Authors have repeatedly tried to check this part without success, but the rules for reinforcement which are forthcoming are simple, thus: (@) For the positive field-moments, uniform reinforcement is carried across the full width of the slab of intensity corresponding to Mrz or Mry. (b) For the negative reinforcement twice the computed value of Myx (or M,,) is allowed for and this double reinforcement is distributed over half the width nearest to the column. Crawford® sums up as follows ‘... this rather arbitrary distribution of tho negative reinforcement is probably not too bad... . The scheme is not as irrational as may appear at first glance. In any event, statics, in terms of total moment, is satisfied.’ 43. This final comment is the reason why these extraordinary type-3 elements seem to behave reasonably well under test.12 To decide the size of the elements, i.e. distance between maximum positive and negative elements, the designer studies the behaviour of the continuous strips of which the elements form a part. Indeed, Hillerborg makes liberal use of the theory of elasticity of continuous strips (Fig. 21), with additional imaginary beams supporting the slab on the column line. Since the moment fields are arbitrary, this method is probably as good as any for deciding the size of element, Alternative treatments of type-3 elements 44. A rigorous lower-bound solution can be obtained even for rectangular elements without departing from common slab action. ‘Thus consider one 300THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS SECTION AA. SECTION BB ® Fig. 19. Hillerborg’s treatment of a square type-3 element ; (a) primary load action ; (b) secondary load action quarter of a uniformly loaded rectangular slab, size LxaL, with free edges on corner cofumns only (Fig. 22). Then the stress field a 2 My = p'¢ (1-47) Loe eee 9a) ape a o, = pF (1-3) Loe eee 9b) Muy = Fay Serre eee eeece-t Do) satisfies the following conditions: (@) a plastic moment of p£?/8 on one centre line, and pa®Z?/8 on the other, (0) zero moment on the free edges, (¢) the equilibrium equation (1) everywhere, Mae _ 9 Ply = 9 on edges x= +12; likewise on teh, 301WOOD AND ARMER it's ¥ Fig. 20. Calculated moment field for type-3 field moment m,=0. This case is for R=l, the full line representing the greatest negative moment and the broken line ‘the greatest positive moment ©) principal moments at the corners of + (Myvi, a4 = tp oL*/8, and elsewhere of smaller value except approaching the centre lines, (/) a corner reaction R= —2Myy=paL?/4. 45. With all necessary conditions satisfied, if constant negative moments —K,(pL*)[8 and — K,.p(a3L?/8) are added all over the quarter slab (Fig, 22) in the respective directions then, without interfering with the equilibrium equation or the zero shear conditions, a natural type-3 rectangular element is obtained where, compared with equation (18), 2 am My = PEK) Mie = [Fe Ko| +. GO) Ae ara Mey = FEO -K), Ma = |KO] «+ 0d) where L=2l,, aL =2l,=2al,, as depicted in Figs 18(a) and (b). 46. A computer program was written which divided up the element (Fig. 18(b)) into a grid of points, with rows and columns nos 0-5 as shown. The principal moments and their directions were calculated at 36 points, according to equations (19) and (20), and the top and bottom reinforcement, placed only in x- and y-directions, was calculated according to Hillerborg’s rules (re-examined and restated in ref. 8). For the positive (bottom steel) a uniform orthotropic mesh is indicated as being suitable, without undue con- servatism. The greatest of all the 36 values in the x- and y-directions are tabulated in the Appendix as the MX and MY positive coefficients (times pl,?). For top (negative) mesh the element was divided into regions 1, 2, 3 and 4 as shown. It was too conservative to take the highest single value of required moment of resistance in each sub-region, so that an average was taken" 302THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS Pillar and Imaginay fupporting bean Fig. 21, Assumed moment distribution in Hillerborg’s continuous strips ! 2 | a Kype Lye ¥ Fig. 22. Type-3 element obtained from lower-bound solution for rectangular slab with free edges of the worst values to be found in each column of mesh points within the sub- regions 1, 2, 3 and 4. The Appendix thus gives tabulated values for the required moment of resistance MX1, MY1, for the top reinforcement of region 1, and similarly for the other regions, 47, These tables account for the following parameters: e= hike Ke Ky where the type-3 element has constant field moments on the boundary of a pet x), dx? 2S d-Ko, and constant support moments of Plt _ yg pol KP, — KP All tabulated reinforcement coefficients are in terms of p/.? units, 48. To, illustrate the use of these new type-3 elements the methods for calculating the moment field is shown for a rectangular slab simply supported along its edges, propped in the centre and uniformly loaded, Fig, 23 shows the division of the slab into different types of elements. To decide the positions of the lines of zero shear bounding the type-3 elements, the designer uses his knowledge of the approximate elastic behaviour of continuous beams, 303WOOD AND ARMER or preferably slabs. (In this case a computer analysis was available which gives 1,=4L, af=L/4 and a=0-4.) Alternatively punching shear round the column may decide the permissible column load, which is the total load on the type-3 elements combined. 49. Consider moments along line A-A. The moments at the boundaries of the type-3 elements are given in Fig, 22 and, put in terms of /., become ‘p(,2/2)(1—K,) as shown in Fig. 23. Then, remembering that all the load shown is carried by the edge reactions, taking moments about the line of zero shear gives: Hence = 2G) Similarly for section C-C ; (L/2—alx)* K, =: Eh Ps) |: ‘Thus in this case K,=0-64 and K,=0. Then by reference to the relevant table in the Appondix—here, that for «=0-4—the design moments M, and M,, both positive and negative, can be obtained readily by interpolation. The parts between the zero shear lines and the supports can be reinforced all over to resist the moment values given by the table or the reinforcement can be curtailed to fit the field more closely. 50. The loading and support conditions for sections B-B and D-D are shown in Fig. 23. The lengths x and y are obviously variable and the design moments in these strips are calculated in exactly the same way as has been described above in §§ 7-9 using Fig, 5. A slab based on this example has been tested’? and behaved satisfactorily both at working and at ultimate load, Can type-3 elements be avoided ? 51. It seems to the Authors that Hillerborg has too readily abandoned the ‘simple’ strip method, Provided there is room for the reinforcement, it would seem feasible to ‘spread’ the column load by strong strips of short length above the column, until such a width is obtained which permits a support for strong beam bands, Such a layout is shown in Fig. 24, and proved very successful on test.1# Conclusions—final comments 52, Hillerborg’s ‘simple’ strip method provides an exact (not a lower- bound) solution for the collapse load of a slab carrying distributed load if the reinforcement were made to fit ideally. Point loads may be treated as local concentrations of distributed load. It is a powerful design method giving excellent results for the designer who has a good background knowledge of elastic design. Although there is almost unlimited freedom of choice in plac- ing the reinforcement, the design chosen should not be too far removed from that expected in elastic design. Thus, in effect, a great simplification of elastic design is achieved. 304THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS po SECTION CC SECTION DD Fig. 23, Assumed moment field for a rectangular slab with a central prop 306WOOD AND ARMER “Beam band (Waking reaction from adjacent reccangle 7 rei Fig, 24, Alternative treatment of Fig. 17{a) without type-3 elements. 53, The shapes of discontinuities may be chosen so as to favour the simple evaluation of reinforcement in distinct bands (a modification proposed by the Authors, § 13). Hillerborg’s advanced strip method treatment for flat slabs has not been rigorously proved and demands somewhat violent discontinuities, but his final placing of reinforcement seems reasonable. This part of the original presentation is confusing and the Authors present two rigorous and simplified alternatives. There are few tests on record, but the simplicity of the method and the directness of design will appeal to engincers, Acknowledgements 54, This Paper deals with work forming part of the programme of the Building Research Station, and is published by permission of the Director. Rofarences 1, Praoer W. An introduction to plasticity. Addison-Wesley, New York, 1959. 2, Wooo R.H, Plastic and elastic design of slabs and plates. ‘Thames and Hudson, London, 1961. 3, Fouanmun'K.W. Yeldtne theory. Cement and Concrete Association, London, 1962, 4. Jones L, L. and Woop R. H. Yield-line analysis of slabs. Thames and Hudson, Chatto and Windus, London, 1967, 5. Hitterpora A, A plastic theory for the design of reinforced concrete slabs, Proc, 6th Congr. Int. Ass. Brit, struct, Engng, Stockholm, 1960. 6. Hucenaono A. Jamviktsteori for armerade betongplattor. Berong, 1956, 41 ) 171-182. 7. HiLisrBora A. Strimlemetoden. Svenska Riksbyggen, Stockholm, 1959. See also Strip method for slabs on colurans, L-shaped plates etc. ‘Translated by F. A. Blakey, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Mel- bourne, 1964. 8 Woop R. H. The reinforcement of slabs in accordance with a predetermined field of moments. Coner. Mag., 1968, 2 (2), 69-76. 9, Crawrorp R. E, Limit design of reinforced concrete slabs, PhD thesis, University of Ulinois, 1962, 10. SweorsH State Concrete Commrrres, Massive concrete slabs; specifications for design methods, ete. Stockholm, 1958, a 306THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS 11, Timosinko $, and Worvowsky-KRieder S, Theory of plates and shells, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959. 12. Armen G. S, T. Ultimate load tests of slabs designed by the strip method, Proc. Instn civ, Engrs, 1968, 41 (Oct) 315-334. 13, Recent developments in yicld-line theory. Mag. Coner. Res. Spec, Publ., 1965 (May) 31-62, 14, Kemp K. O. ‘The yield criterion for orthotropically reinforced concrete slabs. Int, J. mech, Scl., 1965, 7, 731-746. Appendix: Reinforcement coefficients for proposed new type-3 elements 3S. The coefficients are tabulated for values of «, the ratio of the lengths of the sides, and for values of K, and Ky, the coefficients of the moments on boundaries with adjacent type-3 elements. oe coefficients are in terms of pi,? and relate to the positions indicated in 307WOOD AND ARMER Fig. 25. Partitioning of new type-3 elements VALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS | FOR ALPHAne 4 GATIVECTOR REINFORCEMENT) | a x4 wx eo WX4 MYT NY2 YS MY4 ix KXm#eQ KY"O 0520 0200 oe 000 4034 2000 0129 4005 2004 4000 KYe2 : 160 000 KYsed 00 Kywe6 6313 152 +360 KY#98 9309 0136 5350 S000 ey KX 06 kye0 0220 6160, Y #220 0128 + 460 6000 6333 02430112 +460 2000 «340 2209 6096 + 460 «000 +340 KXee8 #120 6409 ! 4120 +093 2228 S044 2439 913 2007 0560 0044 0440 2109 061 6560 0044 «440 308 035 2000 «14: 27 2022 +010 «000 2000 0164 2038 «015 2000 0000 6177 6054 «021 000 3 000 0192- 10 «208 2060 2035 6000 S000 2224 2076 0051 6000 2000 0334 $009 + 160 9024 2004 2000 176: 6037 «014 2000 £000 +192 +093 +029-=000 2000 +208 2069 «045 000 2000 +224 6085 +061 002 2120 0125. #56 0049 0 434, +000 #160 52023, 004 000 eee0"C 044 0435 0000 0176: 0a 044.0000 2003 0192 0065 2029 «000 0004 «208 0081 0045 2004 2004 #224 0097 #064 «010THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS VALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FOR MPHAWeS GAT IVE(TOP_ REINFORCEMENT) BR TAY tt Wx2 NS NOG NYE HYD. “HYD Wd KXeeQ KYe0 65302250 «200 «000 «039° 6000 be +010 +000‘ +000 KYme2 0530 225 «200 000 042 +000 035 007 000 38 +200 +200 +000 6045 +000 20 6175 «200 +000 +050 85 2025 .000 20 180 200 2000 2050 2000 273 S140 2044 2000 043g +250 «300 «000 2139, +000 +184 +043 2000 +000 430 0225 300 «000 #442 +000 +209 2038-2007 +000 3230 2260 5300 S000 2443 so00 s294 <0 2 +02) +000 1420 6175 +300 +000 +150 +000 +289 08 Xeon, 2420 6150 #300 2000 2150 2000° +284 0113 «060 +000 KXwe 4d #330 250. #400 2000 223) 2000 «200 2018 #000 +000 3330 0225 «400 «000 «242 4000-225 2043 #007 000 2330 «200 «400 «000 +245 2000 +250 2068: 2023 +000 320 0175 «400 #000 +250 +000 #275 “4093 +040 +000 0320 +150 2400 2000 +250 2000 #300 0118 065 2004 Kkee6 #230 208 «500 «000 «339 +000 +200 +032 000’ «000 3230 +183 2500 +000 +342 2000 +225 +057 .007 +000 2230 615: +500 000 2385 200 2900 +250 +082 +025 +009 003 KXeo8 00, 044, +000 «000. 225. 2069 2007 +000 50 2094 =025 000 15 143 050 +003 44 0075 0012 VALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FOR AHN NEGATIVE(TOP REINFORCEMENT) i Tw" MX4 MX2 MX3 OMX4 MYT MY2 MY3 “MYA 2540 6269 #240 +000 +049 4000 +250 050 002 000 540 «233 «240 2000 2052 0000 286 2086 2014 sooo 2540 0197 240 «000 +059 4000 «322 «122 «028 -000 2520 0164 2240 0000 2060 2000 +358 #158 0055 e000 ©440 +305 © 340 #000 #139 6000 +229 018 2000 +000 9440 #269 6340 #000 +149 6000 «265 0054 002 +000 2440 233 +340 +000 «152 +000 +301 2099 +019 +000 9440 #4 #340 6000 #159 0000 «337 #126 +043 +000 $420 0161 «340 2000 » 3160 3990 2B. is 388 000 334°.305 —.420°.880°245°.008 240, 2600) 2340 4269 “4440 6000 «249 2000 . «340 4233 440 4000 «252 4000 2000 3340 6197 440 6000 «259 2000 043 2000 3320 4161 440 4000 4260 000 3 4001 #240 6300 «540 6000 +339 6000 «240 4047 +000 «000 #240 6264 4540 6000 +349 2000 «276 000 £340 +228 «340.000 #352 2000 «312 +000 40 ‘KXweQ KXeon KXwed Kkme6 8 6049 +540 4000 «379 +000 «348 38 3053 S008 20 0156 —eAD 6000 © 360 2000 +384 231 2089 004 440 «240 +640 2067 0133 12000 «240 6055 000 «000 2140 6204 640 3074 4449 +000 #276 094 +002 000 S440 2468 2640 L076 2452 2003 6312 +127 +019 <000 2140 6132 «640 0076 +459 2009 «348 «163 2053 002 #120 2096 640 4076 +460 2009 +384 0199 +089 014 KXwe8 309WOOD AND ARMER VALUES OF+ Hee e TIVE COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPHAwe7 NEGATIVE(TOP REINFORCEMENT) He ak} mK MRS Wa WY RY YD WY KXeoQ kY¥=0 3589 9368 +209 000 +039 +000 «256 +019 «000 +000 KYwo2 0560 2319 «280 000 0050 #000 +305 0068 +000 +000 taste $360. 2270 +28 2000 2059 +000 2384 s1yZ 28 #041 2000 KY¥e6 0553 2221 #280 #000 +065 000 0403 «1 shat +000 KY¥we8 6592 0172" «280 +000 « 970 *2000 452 0215 2067 +000 Kxee2 KYa0 2460°2360° +380 +000 4 oat 2277 ae +000 SRS KYme2 0460 #319 9380 +000°« 09 326" +074 000 G09 Wieed od 0 0270 180 «000 Ky=c6 2453 62210380 3000 if 5 88 1222 152 2oas obo #380 4000 2170 2000 4473 922 2085 000 Kxmo 4 +480 600 «239 .600 «280 2936 0008 +099 +4480 #000 +250 «000 6329 «085 4000 .000 #480 +000 4259 000 +378 Be 65 a7 0183 2232 0 Kxee6 80 «056 6000 +350 6000-329 6405 «000 #359 0000 4376 6154 6012 427 6203 6053 2252 6102 Kyxme8 +009 +280, 067 000 465 0041 0427 0214 6053 2000 #470 2012 0476 0263 0102 0015 VALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPHAS® : ISITIVE GATIVE( TOP REINFORCEMENT) Pay uxt NWS HRA HY nya 0520 9445 +320 9000 4039 6000, +300 2085" 4000" +000 2580 2381 ©6320 2000 +050 2000 364 +089 2000 000 2388 2347 1320 5000 205 S000 5428 +153 +006 +000 3560 2253 6320 2000 6072 2000 0492 +247 «032 +000 BH 32) (5320 2000 1980 3000 $558 281 4080 .000 480" 0 4. +420 «600 #139 «000 +320 «032 +090 090 wi80" 2381" s4B0"C000" «230° «000" 384" +096" 100 2420 6000 »165 «000 «448 oe see 2998 00! KX KxXme2 KXwed 520" +000 +220 +000 +384 «110 20 +000 +265 +000 448 3 20 2000 +272 +000 23 . 20 2000 +280 6000 57! se +620 4016 «339 +000 «320 2065 +016 +350 +000 +384 129 000 «000. 2620 2016 2365 2000 «448 6193 2006 +000 #820 «016 +372 +000 512 +257 +054 «900 2620 0016 «380 0000 0576 0921 0115 2007 2720 2091 «439 000 +320 +080 +000 «000 2720 2098 +450 +000 +384 #144 «000 +000 2720 0108 2485 +003 ©448 +208 «006 000 2720 «108 2472 «014 «512 «272 +051 +000 +720 #108 +480 2045 3348 0336 0115 0017 Kxw06 2 8 Kxee8 8 310THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN OF SLABS VALUES OF REINFOROEHENT COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPHAeed 0S IT. GATIVE(TOP REINFORCEHENT) yet wx ARS ia MYT YS YS Yd +389, 00 +095, 9. 2079 0 oa a ae +098” -000. 3e0 2600 1038 300° . 508 2193 4001 2000 KYae6 0590 #360 #000: 6079 +000 +589 «274 6034 000 KY¥se8 0545 0205 “ozo 2000 60902000. +670 0355 0094 +000. 2469 0000 2139 0000 «360 2041 2000 «000 1D 2000 e150 2000 +441 0122 e000, 2000 2460 5000 3172 2000 «522 «203 001° =000 2460 2000 0179 0000 +603 «284 0043 «090 $280 2000 0190 +000 +684 0365 0103 «000 5 0 +000 «239 000 «360. +059 a +000 +560 000° #250 «000 o4di «140 2000 2560 2000 «272 s000 2522 +227 <00t +560: 6000 oH ea 0603 «302 0043 Kxeag KXwed Kxm06 KXwe8 | oa i 360 cea 2495 “a “ies 8 335 oer HYosd lta t4ay 2460 Lad 1490 L017 fond tata 928 VALUES OF REINFORCERENT COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPHAW4 IVE GAT 1YE(TOP. Re INFORCEHENT) TY MRL WK2 WKS HRA MYT HY2 WYA KX"e0 1 +620" +620 +394 2000 6039 0000 0394 0039 080 7.000 KYme2 "0620 520 400 2000 #050 000 «494 +139 +000 +000 +620 «420 4000 +073 +000 «594 #239 “208 td 2620 2320 694 «339 034 0000 2580 2220 2000 Kye 2 520 +620 100 +139 «000 +400 2050 000 «000 #520 6520 2000 «150 +000 +500 +150 +000 +000 2520 6420 2000 «173 +000 +600 #520 +320 000 «185 +000 +700 +350 «04 2480 2220 000 «200 +000 +800 +450 «122 2000 Kxmeg #420: «620 100 #239 2000 +400 2073 +000 +000 ©420 6520 9 +000 +259 +000 «500 +173 +000 «000 0420 0420 0 +000 =273 000 +600 -273 +000 «000 id 2388 000 +700 +373 2040 «000 }0. +000 +800 +473 140 003 +000, + 400 «085-4000 4000, 350 4000 «500 «185 4000 +000 $000 2600 2285 000 +000 . 900 2700 «385 +040 +000 2000 4800 +485 4140 0011 wha +109 6 43 «300.» 400. «700 800, 000 800 +122 «439 000 «300 «200 «000 +009 3220 2360 2600 +140 3473 003 2600 5300 000 2808 #220 6280 800 4140 4485 4011 67002400 2040 00 #180 £180 «800 0140 4500 2020 6800 0500 140 2020 KXm06 Kxme 8 20) 8 3 3 8 3