Chapter 2 - Strip Method For Slabs: Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes Dr.-Ing. Adil Zekaria

Chapter 2 – Strip Method for
Slabs
Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes
Dr.-Ing. Adil Zekaria
Chapter 2- Strip Method for Slabs
• 2.1 Introduction
• Different methods of analysis are allowed by
EBCS-2
• One of these is plastic methods
• Strip method is a plastic method of analysis
Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 2

• The upper bound theorem of the theory of
plasticity is presented in chapter 1. The YL
method of slab analysis is an upper bound
approach to determining the capacity of the slab
• Disadvantages:
• An upper bound analysis if in error will be on the
unsafe side. The actual carrying capacity will be
less than, or at best equal to the capacity
predicted, which is a cause for concern.
• When applying this method it is necessary to
assume that the distribution of reinforcement
is known over the whole slab.
•  a tool for review.
• Can be used for design only in an iterative
sense, i.e., trail design until a satisfactory
amount is found

• These circumstances motivated Hillerborg
(1956) to develop what is known as strip
method for slab design
• In contrast to yield line analysis, the strip
method is a lower bound approach, based on
the satisfaction of equilibrium requirements
every where in the slab

• By the strip method, a moment field is first
determined that fulfills equilibrium
requirements, after which the reinforcements
of the slab at each point is designed for this
moment field

• Lower Bound Theorem: If a distribution of
moments can be found that satisfies both
equilibrium and boundary conditions for a
given external loading, and if the yield
moment capacity of the slab is nowhere
exceeded, then the given external loading will
represent a lower bound of the true carrying
capacity

• Advantages:
• The strip method gives results on the safe
side, which is certainly preferable in practice
• The strip method is a design method, by
which the needed reinforcement can be
calculated

• 4.2 Basic Principles
• The governing equilibrium equation for a
small slab element having sides dx and dy is:

Figure 1
 mx  m y  mxy
2 2 2
 2  w
x 2
y 2
xy

• Where w = the external load per unit area
• mx, my = Bending Moments per unit width in
the x and y directions and
• mxy = the twisting moment

• So according to the lower bound theorem, any
combination of mx, my, and mxy that satisfies
the equilibrium at all points in the slab and
that meets boundary conditions is a valid
solution, provided that the reinforcement is
placed to carry these moments

• The basis for the simple strip method is that
the torsional moment is chosen equal to zero;
no load is assumed to be resisted by the
twisting strength of the slab
 mxy = 0
• The equilibrium equation then reduces to:
 mx  m y
2 2
   w
x 2
y 2

• This equation can be split conveniently into 2
parts, representing twist less beam strip
action.
 mx
2
 kw
x 2
 my
2
  (1  k ) w
y 2

• Where the proportion of load taken by the
strips is k in the x-direction and (1-k) in the y-
direction (concept of load dispersion)
• In many regions in slabs, the value k will be
either 0 or 1, i.e., load is dispersed by strips in
x or in y direction
• In other regions, it may be reasonable to
assume that the load is divided equally in the
two directions, i.e. k=0.5

• 2.3 Choice of load distribution
• Theoretically, the load w can be divided
arbitrarily b/n x and y directions.
• Different divisions will, of course, lead to
different patterns of reinforcement, and all
will not be equally appropriate.

• The desired goal is to arrive at an arrangement
of steel that is safe and economical and will
avoid problems at service load level
associated with excessive cracking or
deflections.
• In general, the designer may be guided by his
knowledge of the general distribution of
elastic moments.

• To see an example of the strip method and to
illustrate the choices open to the designer,
consider the square, simply supported slab
shown below, with side length a and a
uniformly distributed factored load w per unit
area.
• The simplest load distribution is obtained by
setting k=0.5 over the entire slab, as shown in
Figure 2.

Figure 2
• The load on all strips in each direction is thus
w/2 ( with k=0.5), as illustrated by the load
dispersion arrows
• This gives maximum design moments mx = my
= wa2/16, implying a constant curvature for all
strips in the x-direction at mid-span
corresponding to a constant moment wa2/16
across the width of the slab (see fig. 2)

• The same applies for y-direction strips
• It is recognized however that the curvatures in
the strips (say x-direction strips) near the
supports, for such a slab, are less than near mid-
span.
• If the slab were reinforced according to this
solution, extensive redistribution of moments
would be required, certainly accompanied by
much cracking in the highly stressed regions near
the middle of the slab

• So what we need is a type of load distribution
(dispersion) which can give a moment
distribution that gives rise to greater
curvatures in strips near the middle of the slab
and less near the ends
• Try the alternative, more reasonable
distribution shown in Figure 3 next slide.

Figure 3
• Here the regions of different load dispersion
separated by the dash-doted discontinuity
lines follow the diagonals, and all of the load
on any region is carried in the direction giving
the shortest distance to the nearest support.
• k=0 or 1 in the different regions

• The lateral distribution of moments shown in
Fig (3) would theoretically require a
continuously variable bar spacing 
impractical
• A practical solution would be to reinforce for
the average moment over a certain width,
approximating the actual lateral variation in
Fig. (4) in a stepwise manner.

• Hillerborg notes that this is not strictly in
accordance with the equilibrium theory and
that the design is no longer certainly on the
safe side, but other conservative assumptions,
e.g., neglect of membrane strength in the slab
or strain hardening of the reinforcement,
would compensate for the slight reduction in
safety margin

• A third alternative is with discontinuity lines
parallel to the edges.
• Here again the division is made so that the
load is carried to the nearest support, as
before, but load near the diagonals is divided
with one-half taken in each direction.
• Thus k is given the values 0 or 1 along the
middle edges and 0.5 in the corners and
center of the slab

Figure 4
• Two different strip loadings are now
identified, strip along A-A and along B-B.
• This design leads to practical arrangement,
one with constant spacing through the center
strip of width a/2 and a wider spacing through
the outer strips, where the elastic curvatures
and moments are known to be less.

• The averaging of moments necessitated in the
second solution is avoided here, and the 3rd
(Fig. 4) solution is fully consistent with the
equilibrium theory.
• The three examples also illustrate the simple
way in which moments in the slab can be
found by strip method, based on familiar
beam analysis.

• It is important to note too that the load on the
supporting beams is easily found because it
can be computed from the end reactions of
the slab-beam strips in all cases.

• 2.4 Rectangular slabs with simple support
• Discontinuity lines parallel to the edges as shown
in the figure
• In the x-direction:
• Side strips: mx = w/2×b/4×b/8 = wb2/64
• Middle strips: mx = w×b/4×b/8 = wb2/32
• In the y-direction
• Side strips: my = wb2/64
• Middle strips: my = wb2/8

Figure 5 Rectangular slab with discontinuity

lines originating at the corners.
Figure 6 Rectangular slab with discontinuity

lines parallel to the edges
• Design the rectangular slab using the strip
method for slabs
• Use a=6.0 m, b= 4.5 m, t = 150 mm, C-25
concrete and S-300 reinforcing steel.
• Compare the results with the solution using
the coefficients in EBCS-2
• Take variable load q = 3.0 kN/m2
• Floor finish-30 mm screed and 20mm thick
marble
• 2.5 Fixed Edges and Continuity
• Up to now we have dealt with positive
moments in strips, where a large amount of
flexibility in assigning loads to the various
regions of the slab was provided
• This same flexibility extends to the assignment
of moments b/n negative and positive
bending sections of slabs that are fixed or
continuous over their supported edges

• Some attention should be paid to elastic moment
ratios to avoid problems with cracking and
deflection at service loads
• Figure 7 (next slide) shows a uniformly loaded
rectangular slab having two adjacent edges fixed
and the other two edges simply supported
• Let us consider slab strips with one end fixed and
one end simply supported as shown in Fig. 7

B
A A
Figure 7

• In designing by strip method, slab strips
carrying loads only near supports and
unloaded in the central region are
encountered
• It is convenient if the unloaded region is
subject to a constant moment (and zero
shear) because this simplifies the selection of
positive reinforcement

• The discontinuity lines are shifted to account
for the greater stiffness of the strips with fixed
ends (i.e. bigger reaction at the fixed support)
• Their location is defined by a coefficient ,
with a value less than 0.5, so that the edge
strips have widths greater and less than b/4 at
the fixed and simple end respectively

• For a BMD for x-direction middle strips
(section A-A) with constant moment over the
unloaded part, the following maximum
moments are achieved
 b    b   b   
2 2
wb
mxf  w   w      
2
 2   2  4   8 
• and
 
b  
b  wb 2
  wb 2

mxs  w(1   )   (1   )    
2
  (1  2 ) 
2 4  8   2 
• The first term is the “cantilever” moment at
the left end
• So the negative moment at a support plus the
span moment = the “cantilever” moment
• Now the ratio of negative to positive moments
in the x-direction middle strip is:

• mxs/mxf = 1-2/2
• Hillerborg notes that as a general rule for fixed
edges, the support moment should be about
1.5 to 2.5 times the span moment in the same
strip.
• For mxs/mxf =2.0   = 0.366
• Determine moment in the x-direction edge
strips  They are half middle strip values

• Determine moments in the y-direction middle
strip
• It is reasonable to choose the same ratio b/n
support and span moments in the y-direction
as in the x-direction.
• To achieve this, choose the distance from the
right support to maximum moment section as
b

• myf = wb(b)- wb(b/2)= 2(wb2/2)
• The cantilever span = (1-)b
• mys =w(1-)b.(1-)b/2 = (1-2)(wb2/2)
• So the ratio of negative to positive moment is
as before  mys/myf = 1-2/2
• Determine moment in the y-direction edge
strips
• myf = w(b)2/16
• Cantilever moment=(w/2)(1-)(b/2).(1-)(b/4)
• mys=(1-)(wb2/16)  1/8 of y-direction
middle strip
• With the above expressions, all the design
moments for the slab can be found once a
suitable value for  is chosen

• 0.350.39 give corresponding ratios of
Negative to positive moments from 2.45 to
1.45
• 2.6 Unsupported Edges
• The real power of the strip method becomes
evident when dealing with nonstandard
problems, such as with unsupported edge,
slabs with holes, or slabs with reentrant
corners (L-shaped)

• For a slab with one edge unsupported, a
reasonable basis for analysis by the simple
strip method is that a strip along the
unsupported edge takes a greater load per
unit area than the actual load acting, i.e., that
the strip along the unsupported edge acts as a
support for the strips at right angles.

• Such strips have been referred to as “strong
bands”.
• A strong band is, in effect, an integral beam,
usually having the same total depth as the
remainder of the slab but containing a
concentration of reinforcement.
• The strip may be made deeper than the rest of
the slab to increase its carrying capacity, but
this will not usually be necessary

• Consider the rectangular slab carrying a
uniformly distributed ultimate load w with
fixed edges along three side and no support
along one short side, shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8

• The following are observed:
• Discontinuity lines are chosen as shown
• The load on a unit middle strip in the x–
direction, includes the downward load in the
region adjacent to the fixed left edge and an
upward reaction kw in the region adjacent to
the free edge

• M about the left end (with moments +ve
clockwise and with the unknown support
moment mxs acting clockwise) 
• mxs+wb2/32-(kwb/4)(a-b/8)=0 
• k=(1+32mxs /wb2)/(8(a/b)-1)
•  k will be known once mxs is selected
• Selection of mxs will depend on the shape of
the slab.
• If a is large relative to b, the strong band in the
y-direction at the edge will be relatively stiff,
and the moment at the left support of the x-
direction strips will approach the elastic value
for a propped cantilever

• If the slab is nearly square, the deflection of
the strong band would tend to increase the
support moment; a value about half the free
cantilever moment might be selected
• With mxs selected and k calculated from the
above equation, the max span moment is
determined

• mxf = (kwb2/32)((8a/b)-3+k)
• Determine moments in the x direction edge
strips  They are one-half those in middle
strip
• In the y direction middle strip, the cantilever
moment is wb2/8
• Adopting a ratio of support to span moment
of 2 results in support and span moments,
respectively, of
• myf + mys = myf + 2myf = wb2/8
•  myf = wb2/24 and mys = wb2/12
• Determine moments in y-direction strip adjacent
to the fixed edge
•  It is one-eighth the middle strip values (check)
• In the y-dir strip along the free edge, moments
can, with slight conservatism, be made equal to
(1+k) times y-dir middle strip values

• 2.7 Slabs with Holes
• Slabs with small openings can usually be
designed as if there were no openings,
replacing the interrupted steel with bands of
rebar of equivalent area on either side of the
opening in each direction.
• Smaller dimensions are those needed to
accommodate heating, plumbing and
ventilating risers, etc.

• Larger size holes are required by stairways and
elevator shafts
• Slabs with larger openings must be treated more
rigorously
• The strip method offers a rational and safe basis for
design in such cases. Integral load-carrying beams
(strong bands) are provided along the edges of the
opening, usually having the same depth as the
remainder of the slab but with extra reinforcement, t
pick up the load from the affected regions and
transmit it to the supports
• In general, these integral beams should be
chosen so as to carry the loads most directly
to the supported edges of the slab.
• The width of the strong bands should be
selected so that the steel ratios are at or
below the maximum for beams

• Example: Rectangular slab with central
opening
• Figure shows a 5m×8m slab with fixed
supports along 4 sides. A central opening
1.2m×2.4m must be accommodated.
Estimated slab thickness is 200 mm. The slab
is to carry a uniformly distributed factored
load of 15kN.m2 including self weight.

• Devise an appropriate system of strong bands
to reinforce the opening, and determine
moments to be resisted at all critical sections
of the slab
• Discontinuity lines for the basic slab (w/o
hole) are first chosen and the moments
determined which are used as a guide in
selecting moments for the actual slab with
hole

• Edge strips are defined having width equal to
5/4 = 1.25m
• In the central region, 100% of the load is
assigned to the y direction
• Moments of the basic case w/o hole will be
calculated and later used as a guide in
selecting moments for the actual slab with
hole. A ratio of support to span moments of
2.0 will be used generally

Moments for the slab w/o is:
 x direction middle strips:
• Cantilever  mx = wb2/32 = 552/32=11.72
kNm/m
• Negative  mxs = 11.722/3 = 7.81 kNm/m
• positive  mxf = 11.721/3 = 3.91 kNm/m
• X direction edge strips are ½ middle strips

 Y direction middle strips
• Cantilever  my = wb2/8= 1552/8=46.88
kNm/m
• negative  mys = 46.882/3=31.25 kNm/m
• positive  myf = 46.881/3=15.63 kNm/m
• Y direction edge strips are 1/8 middle strip
values

• Because of the hole, certain strips lack
support at one end. To support them, 0.3m
wide strong bands will be provided in the x
direction at the long edges of the hole and 0.6
m wide strong bands in the y direction on
each side of the hole.
• The y dir bands will provide for the reactions
of the x dir bands.

• With the distribution of loads shown in figure,
strip reactions and moments are found as
follows:
• Strip A-A: Assuming propped cantilever action
with the restraint moment along the slab edge
taken as 31.25
• 31.25+w1(0.3)(1.75)-15(1.6)2/2 = 0
•  w1=-7.95 kN/m

• The negative value indicates that the
cantilever strips are serving as supports for
strip DD, and in turn for the strong bands in
the y-direction, which is hardly a reasonable
assumption.
• Hillerborg notes that the restraint moment
should stay as close to the basic value” w/o w1
being negative
• w1=0 (cantilever alone)

• Note: with w1 = 0 chosen  -kw = 0  k=0 
loading on the strong band = (1+k)w = w = 15
KN/m2
• Now mys = 15(1.6)2/2 = -19.2 kNm/m
• Strip B-B:
• mxs = 7.81 kNm/m (basic value) 
7.81+w2(0.6)(2.5)-15(1.25)2/2 = 0  w2=2.61
kN/m

• Because of the positive reaction by the strong
band the load dispersed in the y direction
must be greater than 15 kN/m2
• Determine k
• -kw = -15k = -2.61 kN/m2  k=0.174
•  load dispersed in strong band in y-dir in the
middle: (1+k)w = (1.174)15=17.61 kN/m2

•  load dispersed in strong band in y-dir near
the edge: (1+k/2)w = (1.087)15=16.31 kN/m2
• Determine max span moment:
• Shear is zero at: 15x = 0.6(2.61) x = 0.1m
• mxf = 0.6(2.61)(0.3+0.95+0.1)-15(0.1)2/2 = 2.04
kNm/m

• Strip C-C:
• Negative and positive moments and the
reaction to be provided by strip C-C, are al
one-half the corresponding values for strip B-
B.
• Strip D-D:
• The 0.3m wide strip carries 15kN/m2 in the x-
direction with reactions provided by the
strong bands E-E (loading 150.3 = 4.5 kN/m)
• (we0.6)2 = 4.52.4  we= 9.0 kN/m (over a
0.3 m wide strip)
• mxf = 9(0.6)(1.2+0.3)-4.5(1.2)/2 = 8.1 – 3.24 =
4.86 kNm/(0.3m width)
• Strip E-E:
• Direct load dispersed (1+k)w and (1+k/2)w are
17.61 and 16.31 kN/m2 respectively

• Reactions from strong bands D-D is 9.0 kN/m
over 0.3 m width or 9/0.3 = 30 kN/m2
300.6 = 18 kN/m over 0.6 m wide strip
• 17.610.6 = 10.566 kN/m over 0.6 m wide
strip
• 16.310.6 = 9.786 kN/m over 0.6 m wide strip

• Determine moments:
• Cantilever 9.786(2.5)2/2+(10.566-
9.786)(1.25)(1.25+0.625)+18(0.3)(1.6+0.15) =
41.86 kNm (per 0.6 m width)
• Negative:  mys = 41.86(2/3) = 27.911 kNm
(per 0.6 m width)
• positive:  myf = 41.86(1/3) = 13.95 kNm (per
0.6 m width)

• Reference
• Nilson and Winter, 14th edition or newer

Chapter 2 - Strip Method For Slabs: Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes Dr.-Ing. Adil Zekaria

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 2 - Strip Method For Slabs: Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes Dr.-Ing. Adil Zekaria

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 2 – Strip Method for

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 2

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 4

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 5

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 6

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 7

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 8

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 9

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 11

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 12

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 13

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 14

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 15

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 16

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 17

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 18

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 19

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 21

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 22

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 23

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 25

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 26

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 27

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 28

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 30

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 31

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 32

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 33

Figure 5 Rectangular slab with discontinuity

Figure 6 Rectangular slab with discontinuity

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 37

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 38

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 39

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 40

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 41

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 43

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 44

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 45

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 47

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 48

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 49

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 50

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 51

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 52

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 53

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 55

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 56

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 58

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 59

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 61

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 62

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 63

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 64

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 65

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 66

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 67

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 68

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 69

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 70

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 71

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 72

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 74

Dr.-Ing. Girma Zerayohannes 75