REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN-II

CEE-406

Course Instructor:
Engr. M Fayyaz Ulhaq

m.fayyaz@cuisahiwal.edu.pk
DESIGN OF TWO-WAY SLAB BY
COEFFICIENT METHOD
 Behaviour of two way slabs

 One way slab deform under load into an approximately cylindrical

surface. The main structural action is one way in such cases, in the
direction normal to supports on two opposite edges of a rectangular
panel. In many cases, rectangular slabs are of such proportions and
are supported in such a way that two way action results.

 When loaded, such slabs bend into a dished surface rather than
cylindrical one. This means that at any point the slab is curved in both
principal directions, and since bending moments are proportional to
curvatures, moments also exists in both directions.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

To resist these moments, the slab must be reinforced in both

directions, by at least two layers of bars perpendicular, respectively,
to two pairs of edges. The slab must be designed to take a
proportionate share of the load in each direction.
Types of reinforced concrete slabs that are characterized by two-
way action include

 Slabs supported by walls or beams on all sides

 Slab without beams, with column capital or drop panel, flat slab.
 Slab directly supported on columns, flat plate.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

The simplest type of two way slab action is that represented by

Fig.-. Where the slab or slab panel is supported along its four edges
relatively deep, stiff, monolithic concrete beams or by walls or steel
girders.

To visualize the flexural performance of the slab which is supported

on unyielding supports, consider two sets of parallel strips, in each of
the two directions, intersecting each other. Evidently, part of the load
is carried by one set and transmitted to one pair of edge supports,
and the remainder by the other.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

Fig.- shows the two center strips of a rectangular plate with short
span ℓa and long span ℓb . If the uniform load is w per square foot of
slab, each of the two strips acts approximately like a simple beam,
uniformly loaded by its share of w. Because these imaginary strips
actually are part of same monolithic slab, their deflections at the
intersection point must be the same.

Equating the center deflections of the short and long strips gives

5 w a 4a 5 w b 4b
 (a )
384EI 384EI
 Behaviour of two way slabs

Where wa is the share of load w carried in short direction and wb is

the share of the load carried in the long direction. Consequently

w a 4b
 4  b
w b a

From the eq.(b) it is clear that larger share of the load is carried in
the short direction, the ratio of the two portions of the total load being
inversely proportional to the fourth power of the ratio of the spans.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

This result is approximate because the actual behaviour of a slab is

more complex than that of the two intersecting strips. The Fig. shows
a slab model consisting of two sets of three strips each. It can be
seen that the two central strips s1 and ℓ1 bend in a manner similar to

that shown in Fig. The outer strips s2 and ℓ2 , however, are not only
bent but also twisted.
Consider, for instance, one of the intersections of s2 and ℓ2. It is

seen that at the intersection the exterior edge of strip ℓ2 is at higher

elevation than the interior edge, while at the nearby end of strip ℓ2

both edges are at the same elevation; the strip is twisted.

 Behaviour of two way slabs

The exact theory of bending of elastic plates shows that actually,

maximum moment in such a square slab is only 0.048wℓ2, so that in
this case twisting moment relieve the bending moments by about 25
percent.

The largest moment occurs where the curvature is sharpest. Fig

shows this to be case at mid span of the short strip s1. Suppose the
load is increased until this location is overstressed, so that the steel
at the middle of strip s1 is yielding.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

This twisting results in torsional stresses and torsional moments

that are more pronounced near corners. Consequently, the total load
on the slab is carried not only by the bending moments in two
directions but also be the twisting moments.

For this reason, bending moments in elastic slabs are smaller than
would be computed for sets of unconnected strips loaded by wa and

wb. For instance, for a simply supported square slab wa=wb=w/2. If

only bending were present, the maximum moment in each would be
2
w 2
  
2  0.0625 w2 c
8
 Behaviour of two way slabs

If the strip were an isolated beam, it would now fail. Considering the
slab as a whole, however, that failure would not occur immediately.
The nieghbouring strips(those parallel as well as perpendicular to s1)
being actually monolithic with it will take over any additional load that
strip s1 can longer carry until they, in turn, start yielding.

This inelastic redistribution will continue until in a rather larger area

in the central portion of the slab all the steel in both directions is
yielding. Only then will the entire slab fail.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

From this reasoning, which is confirmed by tests, it follows that

slabs need not be designed for the absolute maximum moment in
each of the two directions (such as 0.048wℓ2) but only for a smaller
average moment in each of the two directions in the central portion of
the slab.

For instance, one of the several analytical methods in general use

permits the above square slab to be designed for a moment of
0.036wℓ2. By comparison with actual elastic maximum moment
0.048wℓ2, it is seen that, owing to inelastic redistribution, a moment
reduction of 25 percent is provided.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

The largest moment in the slab occurs at the mid span of the short
strip s1 of Fig. It is evident that the curvature, and hence the moment,

in the short strip s2 is less than at the corresponding location of strip

s1.

Consequently, a variation of short span moment occurs in the long

direction of the span. This variation is shown qualitatively in Fig. The
short span moment diagram is valid only along the center strip at 1-1.
Elsewhere, the maximum moment is less. Other moment ordinates
are reduced proportionately.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

Similarly, the long span moment diagram in Fig. applies only at

longitudinal center line of the slab; elsewhere, ordinates are reduced
according to variation shown.

These variations in maximum moment across the width and length

of a rectangular slab are accounted for in an approximate way in
most practical design methods by designing for a reduced moment in
the outer quarters of the slab span in each direction.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

Only slabs with side ratios less than 2 need be treated as two-way
slabs. From eq.(b), it is seen that, for a slab of this proportion, the
share of the load carried in the long direction is only of the order of
one-sixteenth of that in the short direction. Such a slab acts almost as
if it were spanning in the short direction only. Consequently,
rectangular slab panel with an aspect ratio more than 2 may be
reinforced for one-way action, with the main steel perpendicular to
long edges.

Shrinkage and temperature steel should be provided in the long

direction.
 Behaviour of two way slabs

w a 4b
 4  b
w b a
b b
4 w a  256 w b  3 .5 w a  150 .06 w b
a a
b b
3 w a  81w b  2 .5 w a  39.06 w b
a a
b
2 w a  16 w b
a
b
1 wa  wb
a
 Analysis by the coefficient method
The precise determination of moments in two-way slabs with
various conditions of continuity at the supported edgesis
mathematically formidable and not suited to design practice. For this
reason, various simplified methods have been adopted for
determining moments, shears and reactions of such slabs.

According to the 1995 ACI Code, all two reinforced concrete slab
systems including edge supported slabs, flat slabs and flat plats are
to be analyzed and designed according to one unified method, which
will presented later on.
 Analysis by the coefficient method
However, the complexity of the generalized approach, particularly
for systems which do not meet the requirements permitting analysis
by the “Direct Design Method” of the present code, has led many
engineers to continue to use the design method of the 1963 Code for
the special case of two-way slabs supported on four sides of each
slab panel by relatively deep, stiff edge beams.

Method 3 of the 1963 ACI Code will be presented in this chapter. It

has been used extensively since 1963 for slabs supported at the
edges by walls, steel beams or monolithic concrete beams having a
total depth not less than about 3 times the slab thickness.
 Analysis by the coefficient method
While it was not a part of the 1977 or later ACI Codes, its continued
use is permissible under the current code provision (ACI Code
13.5.1) that a slab system may be designed by any procedure
satisfying conditions equilibrium and geometric compatibility, if it
shown that the design strength at every section is at least equal to
the required strength, and that serviceability requirements are met.

The method makes use of tables of moment coefficients for a

variety of conditions. These coefficients are based on elastic analysis
but also account for inelastic redistribution. In consequence, the
design moment in either direction is smaller by an appropriate
amount than the maximum elastic moment in that direction.
 Analysis by the coefficient method
The moments in the middle strips in the two directions are
computed from Ma  Ca w2a
and
Mb  Cb w2b

Where

Ca, Cb = tabulated moment coefficients

w = uniform load, psf

a ,b
= length of clear span in short and long directions respectively
 Analysis by the coefficient method
The method provides that each panel be divided in both directions
into a middle strip whose width is one-half that of the panel and
edges or column strips of one-quarter of the panel width.
As shown in Fig., the moments in both directions are larger in the
center portion of the slab than in regions close to the edges.
Correspondingly, it is provided that the entire middle strip be
designed for the full, tabulated design moment. In the edge strips this
moment is assumed to decrease from its full value at the edge of the
middle strip to one third of this value at the edge of the panel. The
lateral variation of the long span moment Mb is similar.
 Analysis by the coefficient method
The discussion so far has been restricted to single panel simply
supported at all four edges. Another situation in which a system of
beams supports a two-way slab is shown in Fig.

It is seen that some panels, such as A, have two discontinuous

exterior edges, while the other edges are continuous with their
neighbors. Panel B has one edge discontinuous and three continuous
edges, the interior panel C has all edges continuous, and so on. At a
continuous edge in a slab, moments are negative, just as at interior
supports of continuous beams. Also, the magnitude of the positive
moments depends on the conditions of continuity at all four edges.
 Analysis by the coefficient method

Correspondingly, table-1 gives moment coefficients C, for negative

moments at continuous edges. Maximum negative edge moments
are obtained when both panel adjacent to the particular edge carry
full dead and live load. Hence, the moment is computed for this total
load. Negative moments at discontinuous edges are assumed to one
third of the positive moments for the same direction. One must
provide for such moments at discontinuous edges by the torsional
rigidity of the edge beams or by the supporting wall.
 Analysis by the coefficient method

For positive moments there will be little, if any, rotation at the

continuous edges if dead load alone is acting, because the load on
both adjacent panels tend to produce opposite rotations which, or
nearly so. For this condition, the continuous edges can be regarded
as fixed, and the appropriate coefficients for the dead load positive
moments are given in table-2.
 Analysis by the coefficient method

On the other hand, the maximum live load positive moments are
obtained when live load is placed only on the particular panel and not
on any of the adjacent panels. In this case, some rotation will occur at
all continuous edges. As an approximation it is assumed that there is
50% retraint for calculating these live load moments. The
corresponding coefficients are give in Table-3. For computing shear
in the slab and loads on the supporting beams table-4 gives the
fractions of the total W that are transmitted in the two directions.
 Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab

In two way edge supported slab, the main flexural reinforcement is
placed in an orthogonal pattern, with reinforcing bars parallel and
perpendicular to the supported edges. As the positive steel is placed
in two layers, the effective depth ‘d’ for the upper layer is smaller than
that for the lower layer by one bar diameter.

Because moments in the long direction are smaller ones, it is

economical to place the steel in that direction on top of the bars in the
short direction. The stacking problem does not exist for negative
reinforcement perpendicular to the supporting edge beams except at
the corners where moments are small.
 Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab

Either straight bars, cut off where they are no longer required, or
bent bars may be used for two way slabs, but economy of bar
fabrication and placement will generally favour all straight bars.

The precise of inflection points are not easily determined, because

they depend upon the side ratio, the ratio of live to dead load and
continuity conditions at the edges. The standard cut off and bend
points for beams, summarized in Fig, may be used for edge
supported slabs as well.
Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab
 Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab
According to ACI code, the minimum reinforcement in each
direction for two–way slabs is that required for shrinkage and
temperature crack control, as given in Table.
Table-5: Minimum ratios of (temperature and shrinkage)
reinforcement area to gross concrete area in slabs
Slabs where Grade 40 or 50 deformed bars are used 00.0020

Slabs where Grade 60 deformed bars or welded wire 0.0018

fabric (smooth or deformed) are used

Slabs where reinforcement with yield strength 0.0018  60,000

exceeding 60,000 psi measured at yield strain of fy
0.35 percent is
 Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab
For two-way systems, the spacing of flexural reinforcement at
critical sections must not exceed 2 times the slab thickness h.

The twisting moments discussed earlier are usually of consequence

only at exterior corners of a two-way slab system, where they tend to
crack the slab at the bottom along the panel diagonal, and at the top
perpendicular to the panel diagonal.
Special reinforcement should be provided at exterior corners in
both the bottom and top of the slab, for a distance in each direction
from the corner equal to one-fifth of the longer span of the corner
panel as shown in Fig.
 Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab

The reinforcement at the top of the slab should be parallel to the

diagonal from the corner, while that at the bottom should be
perpendicular to the diagonal.

Alternatively, either layer of steel may be placed in two bands

parallel to the sides of the slab. The positive and negative
reinforcement, in any case, should be of a size and spacing
equivalent to that required for the maximum positive moment in the
panel.
Table 1: Coefficients For Negative moments in slabsa
Ma,neg  Ca,neg, w2a

where w  total uniform dead plus live load

Mb,neg  Cb,neg w2b

a
A crosshatched edge indicates that the slab continues across, or is
fixed at, the support; an unmarked edge indicates a support at which
torsional resistance is negligible
Ratio Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6 Case 7 Case 8 Case 9
M= La/ Lb
1.00 Ca.neg 0.045
Cb.neg 0.045

0.95 Ca.neg 0.050

Cb.neg 0.041

0.90 Ca.neg 0.055

Cb.neg 0.037

0.85 Ca.neg 0.060

Cb.neg 0.031

0.80 Ca.neg 0.065

Cb.neg 0.027

0.75 Ca.neg 0.069

Cb.neg 0.022

0.70 Ca.neg 0.074

Cb.neg 0.017

0.65 Ca.neg 0.077

Cb.neg 0.014

0.60 Ca.neg 0.081

Cb.neg 0.010

0.55 Ca.neg 0.084

Cb.neg 0.007

0.50 Ca.neg 0.086

Cb.neg 0.006
Table 2: Coefficients For dead load positive moments in slabsa
Ma,pos,d  Ca,d, w2a

where w  total uniform dead load

Mb,pos,d  Cb,d, w2b

a
A crosshatched edge indicates that the slab continues across, or is
fixed at, the support; an unmarked edge indicates a support at which
torsional resistance is negligible
Ratio Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6 Case 7 Case 8 Case 9
M= La/ Lb
1.00 Ca.dl 0.036 0.018 0.018 0.027 0.027 0.033 0.027 0.020 0.023
0.036 0.018 0.027 0.027 0.018 0.027 0.033 0.023 0.020
Cb.dl

0.95 Ca.dl 0.040 0.020 0.021 0.030 0.028 0.036 0.031 0.022 0.024
Cb.dl 0.033 0.016 0.025 0.024 0.015 0.024 0.031 0.021 0.017

0.90 Ca.dl 0.045 0.022 0.025 0.033 0.029 0.039 0.035 0.025 0.026
Cb.dl 0.029 0.014 0.024 0.022 0.013 0.021 0.028 0.019 0.015

0.85 Ca.dl 0.050 0.024 0.029 0.036 0.031 0.042 0.040 0.029 0.028
Cb.dl 0.026 0.012 0.022 0.019 0.011 0.017 0.025 0.017 0.013

0.80 Ca.dl 0.056 0.026 0.034 0039 0.032 0.045 0.045 0.032 0.029
Cb.dl 0.023 0.011 0.020 0.016 0.009 0.015 0.022 0.015 0.010

0.75 Ca.dl 0.061 0.028 0.040 0.043 0.033 0.048 0.051 0.036 0.031
Cb.dl 0.019 0.009 0.018 0.013 0.007 0.012 0.020 0.013 0.007

0.70 Ca.dl 0.068 0.030 0.046 0.046 0.035 0.051 0.058 0.040 0.033
Cb.dl 0.016 0.007 0.016 0.011 0.005 0.009 0.017 0.011 0.006

0.65 Ca.dl 0.74 0.032 0.054 0.050 0.036 0.054 0.065 0.044 0.034
Cb.dl 0.13 0.006 0.014 0.009 0.004 0.007 0.014 0.009 0.005

0.60 Ca.dl 0.081 0.034 0.062 0.053 0.037 0.056 0.073 0.048 0.036
Cb.dl 0.010 0.004 0.011 0.007 0.003 0.006 0.012 0.007 0.004

0.55 Ca.dl 0.088 0.035 0.071 0.056 0.038 0.058 0.081 0.052 0.037
Cb.dl 0.008 0.003 0.009 0.005 0.002 0.004 0.009 0.005 0.003

0.50 Ca.dl 0.095 0.037 0.080 0.059 0.039 0.061 0.089 0.056 0.038
Table 3: Coefficients For live load positive moments in slabsa

Ma,pos,  Ca,, w2a

where w  total uniform live load

Mb,pos,  Cb,, w2b

a
A crosshatched edge indicates that the slab continues across, or is
fixed at, the support; an unmarked edge indicates a support at which
torsional resistance is negligible
Ratio Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6 Case 7 Case 8 Case 9
M= La/ Lb
1.00 Ca.ll 0.036
Cb.ll 0.036

0.95 Ca.ll 0.040

Cb.ll 0.033

0.90 Ca.ll 0.045

Cb.ll 0.029

0.85 Ca.ll 0.050

Cb.ll 0.026

0.80 Ca.ll 0.056

Cb.ll 0.023

0.75 Ca.ll 0.061

Cb.ll 0.019

0.70 Ca.ll 0.068

Cb.ll 0.016

0.65 Ca.ll 0.74

Cb.ll 0.13

0.60 Ca.ll 0.081

Cb.ll 0.010

0.55 Ca.ll 0.088

Cb.ll 0.008

0.50 Ca.ll 0.095

Cb.ll 0.006
Table 4: Ratio of load W in la and lb directions for shear in slab and
load on supportsa
Ma,pos,d  Ca,d, w2a

where w  total uniform dead load

Mb,pos,d  Cb,d, w2b

a
A crosshatched edge indicates that the slab continues across, or is
fixed at, the support; an unmarked edge indicates a support at which
torsional resistance is negligible
Ratio Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6 Case 7 Case 8 Case 9
M= La/ Lb
1.00 Wa
Wb
0.95 Wa
Wb
0.90 Wa
Wb
0.85 Wa
Wb
0.80 Wa
Wb
0.75 Wa
Wb
0.70 Wa
Wb
0.65 Wa
Wb
0.60 Wa
Wb
0.55 Wa
Wb
0.50 Wa
Wb
 Problem:
 A Monolithic reinforced concrete floor is to be composed of
rectangular bays measuring 2126 ft as shown in fig. Beams of width
12 in. and depth 24 in. are provided on all column lines. Thus the
clear span dimension for the two-way slab panel is 2025 ft. The
floor is to be designed to carry a service live load of 137 psf uniformly
distributed over its surface, in addition to its own weight, using
concrete of strength fc’= 3000 psi & reinforcement having fy=60,000
psi. Find the required slab thickness and reinforcement for the corner
panel as shown in fig.
 Solution
 Slab thickness = Perimeter /180

12
h  2 20  25    6 in.
180

 The corresponding dead load is 150  0.5= 75 psf

The factored loads on which the design is to be based are

 Live load = 1.7  137 = 232.9 psf

 Dead load = 1.4  75 = 105 psf
 Total load = 338 psf

 Aspect ratio m = la / lb = 20/25 = 0.8

 Solution
The moment calculations for the slab middle strips at continuous
edges
For case 4(one long side and one short side continuous)
Ca.neg = 0.071 Cb.neg = 0.029 (table-1)
 Taking unit strip total Load = 338 lb/ft

Ma,neg  Ca,neg, w2a  0.071 338  20 2  9600 ft  lb  115 ,000 lb.in

Mb,neg  Cb,neg w2b  0.029  338  25 2  6130 ft  lb  73,400 lb.in
 Solution
The positive moment calculations for the slab middle strips
For case 4(one long side and one short side continuous)
Ca.dl = 0.039 Cb.dl = 0.016 (table-2)

Ca.ll = 0.048 Cb.ll = 0.020 (table-3)

Ma,pos,d  Ca,d, w2a  0.039  105  20 2  1638 lb.ft  19,700 lb.in
Ma,pos,  Ca,, w2a  0.048  233  202  4470 lb.ft  53,700 lb.in
Ma,pos,tot  73,400 lb.in
Mb,pos,d  Cb,d, w2b  0.016  105  252  1050 lb.ft  12,600 lb.in
Mb,pos,  Cb,, w2b  0.020  233  252  2910 lb.ft  35,000 lb.in
Mb,pos,tot  47,600 lb.in
 Solution
Negative Moment at Discontinuous Edge

 Negative B.M at discontinuous support is one-third of B.M at mid-

span.
1
Ma,neg   73,400   24,500 lb.in
3
1
Mb,neg   47,600   15,900 lb.in
3
Reinforcement calculations
For fc  4000 psi 1  0.85

0.85 fc  87,000  0.85  3000  87,000 

b  1   0.85 
 
fy  87,000  fy  60,000  87,000  60,000 
 0.02138
Solution max  0.75b  0.016035
min  0.0018
Short Direction(positive mid span reinforcement)
Mu 73,400
Mn    81555 .6 lb.in
 0 .9
Mn 81555 .6
Rn  2   271 .852
bd 12  5 2

fy 60,000
m   23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85  3000
1  2mR n   
  1 1  1  2  23.53  271 .852   0.0048
 1 1
m  fy  23.53  60,000 
  
A s  bd  0.0048  12  5  0.288 in2 / ft
Choose # 4 @ 8 in c / c ( A s  0.29 )
Max. spacing  2h  2  6  12 in.
Continuous End(Negative reinforcement)
max  0.75b  0.016035
min  0.0018

Mu 115 ,000
Mn    127777 .78 lb.in
 0.9
M 127777 .78
Rn  n2   425.93
bd 12  5 2

fy 60,000
m   23.53
0.85 fc 0.85  3000
1  2mR n   
  1 1  1  2  23.53  425.93   0.0078
 1 1
m  fy  23.53  60,000 
  
A s  bd  0.0078  12  5  0.0.468 in2 / ft
Choose # 4 @ 5 in c / c ( A s  0.47)
Max. spacing  2h  2  6  12 in.
Discontinuous end(Negative reinforcement)
max  0.75b  0.016035
min  0.0018
Mu 24,500
Mn    27222.22 lb.in
 0.9
Mn 27222 .22
Rn  2   90.74
bd 12  5 2

fy 60,000
m   23.53
0.85 fc 0.85  3000
1  2mR n  
  1 1  1  2  23.53  90.74   0.00154
 1 1
m  fy  23.53  60 ,000 
  
Thus min imum value of  will be used
A s  bd  0.0018  12  5  0.108 in2 / ft
Choose #3 @ 12 in c / c ( A s  0.11)
Max. spacing  2h  2  6  12 in.
Solution max  0.75b  0.016035
min  0.0018
Long Direction(positive mid span reinforcement)
Mu 47,600
Mn    52888 .89 lb.in The positive moment steel in
 0.9
the long direction is placed
Mn 52,888.89
Rn  2   217.65 on top of that for the short
bd 12  4.5 2
direction. Thus d=4.5 in.
fy 60,000
m   23.53
0.85fc 0.85  3000
1  2mR n   
  1 1  1  2  23.53  217.65   0.0038
 1 1
m  fy  23.53  60,000 
  
A s  bd  0.0038  12  4.5  0.205 in2 / ft
Choose #3 @ 6 in c / c ( A s  0.22)
Max. spacing  2h  2  6  12 in.
Continuous End(Negative reinforcement)
max  0.75b  0.016035
min  0.0018
Mu 73,400
Mn    81555 .6 lb.in
 0.9
Mn 81555 .6
Rn  2   271 .852
bd 12  5 2

fy 60,000
m   23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85  3000
1  2mR n   
  1 1  1  2  23.53  271 .852   0.0048
 1 1
m  fy  23.53  60,000 
  
A s  bd  0.0048  12  5  0.288 in2 / ft
Choose # 4 @ 8 in c / c ( A s  0.29 )
Max. spacing  2h  2  6  12 in.
 Discontinuous end(Negative reinforcement)
max  0.75b  0.016035
min  0.0018

 In long direction, at discontinuous edge, the applied moment Mu is

(15,900 lb.in.) even much lesser than the negative moment at
discontinuous edge in short direction (24,500 lb.in). While for
24,500lb.in moment, minimum reinforcement came out after
calculations. Thus for moment 15,900 lb.in, minimum reinforcement
will be used.
A s  bd  0.0018  12  5  0.108 in2 / ft
Choose #3 @12 in c / c ( A s  0.11)
Max. spacing  2h  2  6  12 in.
 Corner reinforcement for twisting moments

 The twisting moments are of consequence only at exterior corners

of a two-way slab system.

 Therefore in this problem, #4@8” c/c will be used, parallel to the

slab diagonal at the top, and perpendicular to the diagonal at the
bottom, this reinforcement will be carried out to a point 25/5=5 ft from
the corner.
 Shear Check
 Total applied load = 20  25  338 =169,000 lb
From table-4 Wa = 0.71 and Wb = 0.29
169,000
Load per foot on the long beam   0.71 25  2400 lb / ft
2
169,000
Load per foot on the short beam   0.29  20  1220 lb / ft
2
The shear strength of the slab is
 
Vc   2 fc bd  0.85  2  3000  12  5  5586 .77 psi

Thus the resisting shear is well above the applied shear. Thus there
is no need of shear reinforcement.