W.P.s. Dias
BSc{Eng), PhD(Lond),DIC, pEng, MIStructE, MIE(SL)
Senior Lecturer
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Moratuwa
Moratuwa
Sri Lanka
.,. "'~
.... _._.J
PublisheJI. by
ji
ISBN 9559347004
FOREWORD
Our membership is very small and our fmancial resources are absolutely
minimal. Nevertheless, the members of our Committee have contributed a great
deal of their time and effort to collect funds from various sources to help
advance the knowledge and practice of structural engineering in Sri Lanka
through, inter alia, the publication of books on related topics.
As the majority of structures in this country are constructed of reinforced
concrete, the selection of GRADED EXAMPLES IN REINFORCED
CONCRETE DESIGN as the object of the Society's first book publishing effort
constitutes an ideal beginning.
Dr Priyan Dias is a brilliant young academic and is highly motivated towards
training engineers to use a "thinking" approach to solve technical problems.
Whilst this book itself is of an immediately practical nature, Dr Dias and others
will, no doubt, follow up with more publications which will help our engineers
to think laterally so as to come up with innovative solutions to any structural
problems they encounter.
A.C. Visvalingam
MA, PhD, DIC, MICE, MIStructE, MIE(SL), CEng
PRESIDENT, Society of Structural Engineers  Sri Lanka
2 March 1995
CONTENTS
Introduction
13
26
31
38
58
66
76
83
90
94
104
107
INTRODUCTION
Sections of code are referred to by indicating the relevant clause, table Or equation of BS
8110: Part 1. Where clauses, tables, charts or equations from Parts 2 and 3 of BS 8110 are
referenced, the relevant Part is also indicated. One very useful feature of BS 8110 is that
each table also gives the equation from which its values are derived. .This is a clear
advantage for computerised design, and even hand calculations. Therefore, although the
tables have in fact been referred to in the following calculations, very often it is the
corresponding equations that have been used.
\,
 specifying more simply and surely by strength. Concrete, February 1982, pp.192l), which
describes how U.K. concrete strengths vary for given cement contents and water/cement
ratios and shows how the grade specified covers the cement content and water/cement ratio
requirements 96% of the time.
It must be emphasised here that the index of durability used in BS 8110 is mix proportions.
However, it has related these mix proportions to strength, which is a much easier parameter
to measure and control. This is clearly evident in the provisions made in the code for
reducing the grade if a checking regime establishes that a lower grade of concrete complies
with the cement content and water/cement ratio limits (Clauses 3.3.5.2 and 3.3.5.3 of Part
1). Such a relaxation of grade is not allowed, however for concretes using blended cements.
Even a cursory glance at Table 3.4 in BS 8110: Part 1 will indicate that at least grade 40
concrete will have to be used for all but mild and moderate exposure conditions, although
the corresponding minimum cement content and maximum water/cement ratio are only
325kg/m3 and 0.55 respectively. This seems to be a very stringent condition to be imposed
on concreting practice in developing countries, where most concrete specified is still grade
20 to 25. In fact, even in the U.K., the most commonly used grades were grades 20 to 30,
even up to the early 19805.
The question arises as to whether Table 3.4 in BS 8110: Part 1, developed for the U.K. is
applicable in other (especially developing) countries, where materials and practices may be
very different. This problem was studied by the author using Sri Lanka as a case in point.
The strengths that could be achieved for various cement content and water/cement ratio
values were obtained on the basis of a batching plant survey.
Specifications based on the above survey are given in TABLE 1. This table is taken from the
author's publication "Specifying for Concrete Durability: Part II  The Sri Lankan Context,
Engineer, Vol. XX, Nos 14, 1992, pp. 414". The Notes in TABLE 1 indicate the scope
of the specifications, and also conditions under which deviations from the tabulated values
can be allowed. In particular, Notes 5 and 6 allow reductions in grade and cover values that
bring these recommendations in line with current Sri Lankan practice. In short, these
recommendations rationalise satisfactory Sri Lankan practice (especially under mild exposure
conditions) with respect to BS 8110, while suggesting improvements to Sri Lankan practice
where problem areas (such as concrete exposed to sea spray) are concerned.
Although the recommendations in TABLE 1 make it possible to use grade 20 concrete for
mild exposure conditions, it was felt that basing the examples on such a low grade would
have deviated too much from the provisions of BS 8110, where grade 25 is specified as the
lowest grade to be used with normal weight aggregate concrete (Clause 3.1.7.2) and where
all tables and charts have grade 25 as the lowest grade. As such, it is grade 25 concrete that
is used for all the following examples, except in Examples 28 and 29, where the use of grade
30 concrete is illustrated.
Exposure
Classification
Examples of
Exposure
Mild
Moderate
Severe
Very severe
Extreme
Indoor
Outdoor
Driving Rain
Sea Spray
Abrasive
mm
25

Nominal Cover
mm
mm
20
35

20*
30
40
50
mm
mm
20*
25
30
40
60
20*
20
25
30
50


. 0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
0.45
275
(300)
300
(325)
325
(350)
350
(400)
400
(450)
40
45
25

30

35
Note 1
Note 2
Note 3
Cover values marked with asterisks (*) can be reduced to 15 mm, provided
the nominal maximum aggregate size does not exceed 15 mm, subject to the
conditions in Notes 1 and 2.
Note 4
Note 5
Note 6
The above cover values can be reduced by 5 mm, subject to the conditions in
Notes 1 and 2 and a minimum of 15 mm, provided a 1:3 cement: sand
rendering of 10 mm, 15 mm or 20 mm is applied to concrete made to
water/cement ratios of 0.65, 0.6 and 0.55 respectively.
225
f eu = 25 N/mm2
f y = 460 N/mm2
320
000
(All dimensions in mm)
Introductory Notes
1.
This example is regarding the analysis of an existing beam. The first step in finding
the moment of resistance is to find the lever arm.
Area of steel
Note 2
Note 3
3,4,4. 1(e)
Output
Calculations
Reference
= 942.5 mm2
= (377189)(300)
= 113.16 x106 Nmm
= 113 kNm
= 377189 N
= 300 mm
166 mm
113 kNm
Notes on Calculations
2.
The condition that tensile reinforcement has ~ielded when the concrete strain is
0.0035, is x/d < = 0.64 (for fy = 460 N/mm ) and x/d < = 0.76 (for fy = 250
N/mm 2). This can be shown by assuming a linear strain distribution. However the
code recommends that x/d < = 0.50, in order to accommodate redistribution up to
10% (Clause 3.4.4.4).
Concluding Notes
4.
The lever arm is the distance between the centroids of the tensile and compressive
forces. This separation between two opposite forces is what creates the moment of
resistance in a flexural element.
5.
Because this distance has to be accomodated within the depth of the section, flexural
elements tend to have larger cross'sections than compressive elements.
150
225
Id=300
f cu = 25 N/mm2
f y = 460 N/mm 2
Introductory Notes
1.
Reference
Output
Calculations
Area of steel
= 981.7 mm2
Note 3
= (0.45)(25)(150)(0.9)(200)
= 303750N
Note 4
= 206 mm
= 64.8 kNm
= 206 mm
Notes on Calculations
2.
In some rare cases, as in this one, a beam may be overreinforced, meaning that the
yielding of steel will not take place before the crushing of concrete. If such a beam
fails, it will do so suddenly, without warning, and hence overreinforced beams are
discouraged in practice.
3.
Since the steel has not yielded, the stress can no longer be assumed to be 0.87fy.
Rather, the stress is the steel is obtained by
(i)
determining the strain in the steel, assuming a linear strain distribution across
the section and
(ii)
using the stressstrain curve in Figure 2.2 of the code to arrive at the stress.
~
'"8
........
0.87x460=400 N/mm 2
,
,
I
200 ,
kNAnm 2
Strain
Strain diagram
4.
StressStrain diagram
It is possible to use this method because the stressstrain curve for steel below the
Concluding Notes
5.
One way of ensuring that the beam failure is ductile is to introduce some compression
steel, so that x/d will be reduced to 0.5 (See Example 3).
~ .150 .) ~
A'd'
d=300
f eu
fy
x/d
0.5 in
= 25 N/mm2
= 460 N/mm2
225
Introductory Notes
1.
2.
Increasing the breadth of the section will generally be uneconomical. Therefore, if the
depth of the section cannot be increased due to nonstructural reasons, option (iii)
above is used.
Reference
Note 3
Calculations
Output
d' = 50 mm
Note 4
A s '= 412 mm 2
Use 4T12
(452.4 mm2)
Reference
Output
Calculations
Table 3.27
Note 5
Note 6
M = 94.2 kNm
Notes on Calculations
3.
The value of d' will depend on the cover, and other requirements (See Example 8).
4.
If the compression steel provided is greater than that required, the neutral axis depth
will be reduced slightly; this is desirable, as it will increase the ductility of the
section. When providing four bars within a width of 150 mm, it may be necessary to
use the bars as two pairs of bars.
5.
6.
In general, the most convenient way of fmding the moment of resistance for a doubly
reinforced section, is to take moments about the level of tension steel. The amount
of compression steel to be used in the calculation is the amount required (412 mm 2),
and not the amount provided (452.4 mm2).
Concluding Notes
7.
150
t
 d'=50
I 41~m2 _
d=300
1o
150
""<~~
>
982 mm2
o:~~~
~:.G.....&'l 232.5
570mm2
10
It ,
300
d=400
h=450
156
Introductory Notes
1.
Reference
Output
Calculations
Assume values for the neutral axis, x until the
compression in concrete is equal to the tension in
steel.
The area of the section under compression =
(0.5)(0.9)x[600  {(3OO150)/450}(O.9)x]
~300~
Area of steel = 981.7 mm 2
Assume also that the steel bas yielded. \10.9><
II
W:
Try x = 100 mm
0
Area in compression, Ac
~
= (O.5)('JO){600  (O.33)(O.9)(IOO))
= 25650 mm2
C = (0.45)fcu .Ac = (0.45)(25)(25650) = 288563 N
T = (0.87)(460)(981.7) = 392876 N
Try x = 139 mm
Then, C = 392868 Nand T = 392876 N.
This approximation is satisfactory.
Note also that x/d = 139/400 = 0.35 < 0.5; hence
assumption that steel has yielded is O.K.
11
= 139 mm
Note 2
Note 3
Output
Calculations
Reference
= 338
=
mm
133 kNm
139 mm
Notes on Calculations
2.
The lever arm cannot be calculated as d  (0.45)x in this case, because the
compression block is nonrectangular.
3.
This calculation will become a little more complicated if the section is not underreinforced (see Example 2).
Concluding Notes
4.
This approach from first principles, using the idea of strain compatibility, will have
to be employed even in the desi&n of beams such as these, which are nonrectangular,
since the design formulae and charts apply only to rectangular sections. When
designing, the amount of steel has to be assumed, and the moment carrying capacity
checked to ensure that it is greater than the design moment.
5.
It should be noted that the form of the formulae given in the code is such that,
although they can be used to design rectangular sections, they are not meant to find
the moment of resistance of a given section. This has to be done using strain
compatibility concepts from first principles, as illustrated in Examples 1 to 4, or by
suitably rearranging the form of the equations.
12
Introductory Notes
1.
Calculations
Reference
Output
Note 3
3.4.4. 1(e)
Table 3.27
Note 4
As = M / (0.87)f Z
= (150 xlW) (0.87)(460)(401) = 935 mm 2
Hence, use21'25 (As = 981.7 mm 2)
lOOA/Ae = (982)(100) / (525)(225) = 0.83
> 0.13; hence O.K.
3.4.4.4
13
.dmin = 425 mm
d =475 mm
h = 525 mm
b = 225 mm
0(
225
~I~I4Th
As = 935 mm 2
Use 21'25
(981.7 mm 2)
Calculations
Reference
(b)
Note 5
Note 6
Output
d = 350 mm
b = 225 mm
Now K = M 1 {b.d2.fcu>
= (150 x106 ) 1 {(225)(350)2(25)}
= 0.218 > 0.156 (Le. K')
Hence, compression reinforcement is required.
Let us assume that d' = 50 mm.
As'
= {(O.2180.156)(25)(225)(350f} 1
{(O. 87)(460)(35050)}
= 356 mm2
Use 2Tl6 (~' = 402.1 mm 2)
looAs '/Ac = (100)(402.1)1 (400)(225)
= 0.45
Table 3.27
z
3.4.4. 1(e)
Use2Tl6
(402.1 mm 2)
< (0.95)(350)
Table 3.27
Note 8
10:: Li~
(225 )
= 356 mm 2
Note 7
A'
s
400
000
+ 356
As = 1344 mm 2
Use 3T25
(1473 mm 2)
Notes on Calculations
2.
In practice, the ratio of depth to breadth for a beam will have a value between 1.5
and 2.5.
3.
Many designers still choose dimensions for beams and columns in steps of 25 mm,
because 1 inch is approximately 25 mm. Furthermore, depths considerably in excess
of the minimum depth for a singly reinforced section may be chosen, in order to
reduce the steel requirement.
4.
The check for minimum reinforcement is almost always satisfied for tension steel in
14
The overall depth of the beam may have to be restricted, due to architectural
requirements. On the other hand, there may be some economy in designing beams
with a marginal amount of compression steel, because longitudinal steel on the
compression face will be required anyway, in order to support the shear links.
6.
This is keeping with the idea that the difference between overall and effective depths
is 50 mm.
7.
When calculating the are of tension steel, it is sufficient to use the value of
compression steel required (as opposed to that provided), in this equation.
8.
Concluding Notes
9.
Design charts (in Part 3 of the code) could also have been used to design the steel
required for these sections. The relevant charts are Chart No. 2 for the singly
reinforced section and Chart No.4 for the doubly reinforced section, since d'/d =
50/350 = 0.143.
10.
The design charts are given for ,.. ' d'/d values ranging from 0.10 to 0.20, in steps
of 0.05. The chart with d'/d value closest to the actual value should be used for
design. If the actual d'/d value lies exactly between the chart values, the chart with
the higher d'/d value should be used in the design, as this is more conservative.
Introductory Notes
1.
If the moment at a section has been reduced by downward redistribution, that section
must have adequate rotational capacity at ultimate limit state, in oder for plastic hinge
action to take place. This capacity is ensured by restricting the x/d ratio to a specified
value.
15
Output
Calculations
Reference
Cal Using formulae
3.2.2.1(b)
3.4.4.4
I3b
= (10.3) 1 1 = 0.7
K' = (0.402)(l3b0.4)  (0.18)(~0.4)2
= (0.402)(0.70.4)  (0,18)(0.70.4)2
= 0.104
= (475)[0.5 + {0.25
3.4.4. 1(e)
Table 3.27
= 412 mm
 (0.104)/(0.9)}O.5]
As ' = 104 mm 2
Use 2Tl2
(226.2 mm 2)
As = 905 mm 2
Use 2T25
(981.7 mm 2)
Chart 3
(part 3)
3.2.2. 1(b)
Note 2
Note 3
525
21~
225
475
As = 908 mm 2
Use 2T25
As ' = 107 mm 2
Use 2Tl2
Notes on Calculations
2.
Any combination to the left of the line corresponding to the x/d = 0.3 line will give
a feasible combination of lOOAjbd and lOOAs ' /bd. If a point on the line itself is
chosen, the solution will generally be the most economical one, in terms of the total
amount of steel required.
3.
The differences between the solutions by formulae and charts are very small indeed,
despite the fact that the design charts are based ,?n the parabolic stress block for
concrete stress, while the formulae are based on the simplified rectangular one. It is
the design charts that are used for everyday designs.
Concluding Notes
4.
Although the applied moment for this section was the same as that in Example 5,
because of the restriction on the neutral axis depth for the purpose of ensuring plastic
hinge rotation, this section had to be doubly reinforced.
5.
17
Introductory Notes
1.
100
1<:
Beam Section
Sectional Elevation
_'i' ..
  
~
 
  
  
  'I _
rr~
I
I
I
'
I
I
I I
r~
3500
   r
+~r
I
I
3500
I I
I
I I
I
~LL
~~l
I
I I
____
___
.Ly
Plan
(All dimensions in mm)
18
Reference
Note 2
Calculations
Output
~
A~ t..:.6(XX):.:.:.~
_
on beam (per m
len~th);
Note 3
From slab
= (0.125)(24)(3.5)
= 10.5 kN/m
From finishes = (1.0)(3.5)
= 3.5 kN/m
From beam = (0.450.125)(0.3)(24) = 2.34 kN/m
Total dead load udl
= 16.34 kN/m
Dead load point load at A = (2.0)(3.5) = 7.0 kN/m
Live load udl
= (4.0)(3.5) = 14.0 kN/m
3.2.1.2.2
/45.28 kN/rn
~'ft
M B = (7.0)(1.4)(1.95)
= 109.7 kNm
(45.28)(2.0)2/2
19
M B = 110 kNm
(hogging)
Output
Calculations
Reference
/45.28 kN/rn
L:~
te
,t
Notes on Calculations
2.
Idealization is the first step in analysis. Since it is not possible to model the actual
structure with complete accuracy, idealization should be performed such that the
results obtained are conservative. For example, although point C has a certain degree
of restraint, it is impossible to quantify it. However assuming the end C to be simply
supported will give a higher (and hence conservative) moment in the span Be. The
restraint moment at C can be subseqently accounted for by providing a nominal
amount of.hogging steel there.
3.
Since the beam spacing is 3.5 m, each beam carries the loads acting on a strip 3.5
m wide.
Concluding Notes
4.
Where dead and imposed loads are combined, as in the case of this example, the
design moments at critical sections have to be arrived at by a proper combination of
loading patterns.
20
In this example, only the reinforcement for the maximum sagging and hogging
moments need to be calculated, since the beam section is already specified in
Example 7.
2.
Furthermore, as the bending. moment diagram for the beam has not been drawn
(although it could be), the curtailment of reinforcement is not considered. This aspect
is considered in Example 12.
Reference
Output
Calculations
Effectiye de,pth
Table 3.2
Note 3
Note 4
TABLE 1
Table 3.5
Note 5
Chart 2
(Part 3)
Table 3.27
"
cover
= 30 mm
= 397.5 mm
As = 799 mm 2
Use 21'20 &
lT16(829 mm 2)
(hogging)
3.4.1.5
21
= 1140 mm
bf
= 1140 m
Calculations
Reference
3.4.4.4
Chart 2
(Part 3)
Table 3.27
Note 6
Output
N.A. is in
flange
As = 1224 mm 2
Use 21'25 &
11'20
(1295 mm z)
(sagging)
TranYerse steel
Table 3.27
Note 7
Transverse steel
R6@150 (min)
(190 mmz/m)
Slenderness check
3.4.1.6
Continuous portion  clear distance between restraints
is 5700 mm
(60)bc = (60)(1140) = 68400 mm
(250)b/ld = (250)(1140)21 (397.5) = 817358 mm
Since these values are > 5700 mm, check is O.K.
Note 8
22
Slenderness
O.K.
Notes on Calculations
3.
structures, which are not subjected to freezing and sheltered from driving rain.
4.
The cover values are obtained from TABLE 1 in the Introduction to this text; this
Table is relevant for Sri Lankan concreting practice. The figures in the table can be
further modified by Notes 5 and 6 of the table, as has been done here. It is assumed
in this example therefore, that the mix proportions correspond to a grade 30 mix
(although the strength achieved is only grade 25) and also that a 15 mm (min)
cement: sand rendering protects the concrete surface.
5.
The calculation of effective depth from the overall depth is illustrated by the figure
below.
bars
,Lt
b~a
~1
x.....
shear link
cover
6.
Although the actual steel requirement is calculated using the value of flange width,
the minimum steel requirement is based on the web width.
7.
This transverse steel will also have to resist the hogging moment in the slab, and a
greater amount than this will need to be provided in most cases.
8.
This slenderness check is almost always noncritical, except perhaps in the case of
long, deep cantilevers.
Concluding Notes
9.
When designing beamslab systems, care must be taken to note where flanged beam
action takes place and where it does not. Furthermore, such locations will be reversed
in systems where upstand beams are used.
10.
If the neutral axis of a flanged beam falls within the flange, the design is identical to
When designing for hogging and sagging moments at support and span respectively,
care must be taken to remember what steel has to be placed at the top of the beam
section, and what steel at the bottom.
23
Introductory Notes
1.
An edge beam will have a transverse slab only on one side; hence it is called an
Lbeam. The beam in the earlier example is called a Tbeam, since the slab extended
over both sides of the beam. If the beam is below the slab (as is the case most of the
time), the slab will act as a flange only in the span, when the top of the section is in
compression, and not at the supports.
.
Output
Calculations
Reference
Note 2
3.4.1.5
b = lesser of 2000 mm
or lilO + bw = {(O.7)(6000)}/lO
Hence, b = 645 mm
+ 225
= 645 mm
b = 645 mm
Note 3
3.4.4.4
Note 4
equation 2
Note 5
3.4.4.5
Note 6
24
dmin = 282 mm
d = 325 mm
h = 375 mm
N.A. is out of
flange
singly
reinforced
Output
Cakulatioas
ReCerence
equation 1
Note 7
3.12.6.1
Note 8
[(O.87)(460){325(0.5)(I00))] = 1894 mm
Use 21'32 &. 11'20 (As = 1922 mm2)
l00A/bwh = (100)(1922) I (225)(375)
.
= 2.28 < 4.0; hence O.K.
=[(200xl()6)+(0.1X2S~2S){(0.45)(325)100}f
= 1894 mm2
Use 21'32 &.
11'20'
(1922 mm 2)
As
Notes on Calculations
2.
A web width of 225 mm is around the minimum that is practically desirable, in order
to accommodate the reinforcement. A width of 200 mm can be considered as the
absolute minimum for all beams save those which carry very nominal loads.
3.
The difference between d and h has been taken as SO mm, although the actual
calculation of cover should be carried out as in Example 8.
4.
This trialanderror approach has to be adopted to find out wbetbet Clause 3.4.4.5 has
to be used (singly reinforced flanged beam design) or whetha" it is sufficient to use
Clause 3.4.4.4. (rectangular beam design, since the neutral axis is within the flange).
5.
It is easier and more accurate to use equation 2 to obtain the value of Pf rather than
to resort to double interpolation in Table 3.7.
6.
Pf.fcu.b.d'i is the greatest moment capoci.ty for a singly reinfcm:ed section when x is
restricted to (0.5)d.
7.
8.
This check for maximum percentage of reinforcement is also almost always satisfIed,
except for very heavily reinforced sections. Although the check is satisfIed here, care
will have to be exercised if lapping is done.
Concluding Notes
9.
10.
This example illustrated the situation where the neutral axis fell below the flange of
a flanged beam. Design charts cannot be used in such a situation, and the equations
.. in Clause 3.4.4.5 have to be employed.
In addition, if the moment is greater than Pf .fcu .b.d2 (i.e. compression steel is
required), or if more than 10% redistribution has been carried out, the beam has to
be designed from strain compatibility fIrst principles as given in Clause 3.4.4.1.
25
The two main effects caused by flexure are bending moment and shear. The bending
moment in a concrete beam is carried by steel reinforcement parallel to the ~.
axis. The shear force is carried by steel reinforcement in atransvene direction,
generally in the form of:linb.
2.
Cakuiatioas
Reference
Note 3
3.4.5.10
Output
design
.
:
~
'
~d~.
VJIWt
~2500 ~
"".
""
Table 3.9
Table 3.8
Note 6
designed.
vJIWt
3.4.5.2
Note 4
equation 3
Note 5
Note 7
3.4.5.5
Note 8
26
Vmax
= 1.67
1.4 N/mm 2
Vc
=;
N/mm2
= 0.58
N/mm2
Links
RIO @ 175
Notes on Calculations
3.
This is the simplified method to account for the enhanced shear resistance near
supports. The section considered should be an effective depth away from the face of
the support. Where support details are not available, it will be comervative to
measure d from the centreline of support.
4.
This is the maximum shear check. If this fails, there is no alternative but to change
the beam dimensions. It is prudent therefore, to make this check fairly early in the
design procedure.
5.
b v for a flanged beam should be taken as the average width of the web below the
flange.
6.
0.4 N/mm2 is the shear resistance that can be carried by nominal shear links.
7.
When using this inequality for providing links, either the Aav value or Sy value must
be chosen. In g~, the A.., value is assumed and the Sy value c:a1culated. The A.v
value refers to the total cross section of links at the neutral axis of a section.
Gea1etally, it is twice the area of the chosen bar, since in most cases it is links with
2 vertical legs that are used. The resulting Sy value should not exceed (0.75)d, to
ensure that at least one link crosses a potential shear crack. The transverse spacing
between the legs of a link should be such that it does not exceed d and that 00
longitudinal tension bar is greater than 150 mm from a vertical leg.
8.
The link spacing is also often specified in steps of 25 mm, because of the tendency
Concluding Notes
9.
In this example, only the shear reinforcement requirement near the support has been
calculated. The requimnent close to midspan will be much less. This aspect will be
considered in the next example.
27
In this example, two. bent up bars are also used to provide shear reinforcement near
the beam supports.
2.
The most reasonable way to provide shear reinforcement for the entire span would
be to consider three areas  Le.
(i)
the support area where bent up bars are also effective in addition to links,
(ii)
the middle of the beam, where only nominal links would suffice , and
(iii)
the portion in between the above.
R.eference
Output
Calculatioos
SumutNCl!l
= 400 kN
v
= (400 xl<P) I (350)(550) ... 2.08 N/nun2
(0.8)(W0.s = .(0.8)(25)0.5
= 4 N/mm2 > 2.08 N/mm2 < 5 N/mm2 ;
V max
lDllX
3.4.5.2
Vmax
= 2.08
N/mm2
hence O.K.
equation 4
3.4.5.6
Note 3
Table 3.9
3.4.5.10
Note 4
3.4.5.6
28
Vb
= 1.44
N/mm 2
Vc
= 0.5
N/mm 2
Reference
Output
Calculations
Table 3.9
Table 3.8
RIO @ 150 mm
(support area)
area
Vc
== 0.63
N/mm2
RIO @ 225 mm
(middle area)
Area inbetween
Note 5
Table 3.8
Note 6
l~
2/1(QjaX)
1~2T25
I.
4T25
2T25'"
1.48m
29
v = 1.58
N/mm2
Vc
= 0.63
N/mm 2
2 RIO@
200 mm
(area inbetween)
Notes on Calculations
3.
Since fJ should be taken as > 45 and ~ is restricted to l.S(d..(i'), this assumed value
of 67.5 for fJ is reasonable and easy for calculation purposes.
4.
This is the same approach described in Note 3 of Example 10, The links designed can
be used from the support upto the point where the main bars are cranked up.
S.
Although 2 bars are bent up, they also continue for at least distance "d" from any
point in this section of the beam. Hence, the value of vc will be the same as in the
middle area.
6.
If the link spacing is less than around ISO mm, it will be difficult for concreting to
be carried out. Hence, as in this case, 2 links can be placed together, spaced wider
apart. An alternative would have been to use 12 mm dia. links; however fabrication
will be easier if links of the same diameter are used throughout the beam.
Concludina Notes
7.
It is not very common practice to use bent up bars as described in this example,
although it was in the past.
30
Carry out serviceability checks on the beam analysed in Example 7 and designed in Example
8. Also carry out detailing of reinforeement, including curtailment and lapping. Assume that
type 2 defonned bars are used as reinforcement.
Introductory Notes
1.
The serviceability checks consist of spanldepth ratio calcu1ations for deflection and
bar spacing rule checks for cracking. If these simplified checks are satisfied, the beam
is "deemed to satisfy" the serviceability limit state requirements.
Refereace
Calculations
Output
Table 3.11
Notes
3&4
3.4.1.4
Table 3.10
Example 8
Table 3.11
Notes
3&4
Curtailment of reinforcement
The bending moment diagram envelope must first be
dmwn
31
All. span!
depth = 30.2
Act spanI
depth = 15.1
Hence O.K.
All. span!
depth = 7.5
Act. span/
depth = 5.03 .
Hence O.K.
Cakulatiolls
Reference
NoteS
/45.28 kN/m
~ nn~
1.95m
Example 7
6.Om
Mx = (128.1)x  (45.28)x212
Mx = Oatx  O.
Mx is max. at x = 2.83 and equal to 18l.2 kNm
Mx .. 0 apiA<al x = 5.66 m
Example 8
Note 6
3.12.9.1
shown to be 148.4kNm.
Putting (128.1)x  (22.64)x2 == 148.4
we can obtain x = 1.63 m and 4.03 m.
These are the theoretical cutoff points.
Note 7
Keep the practical cutoff points an ancboragelength
3.12.9.1(c) . away from the theoretical ones.
Table 3.29 Anchorage length = (40)(20) =300 mm
This ancborage length is greater than
(12)41 {= (12)(20)= 240 mm} or d (397.5 mm).
Hence, practical cutoff points are at
x = 1.63  0.8 = 0.83 m and
x = 4.03 + 0.8 = 4.83 m
Length of 20 mm bar required = 4.83  0.83
=4.0m
Distances to ends from B are 5.17 m and 1.17 m.
32
Curtail 1no
bottom bar at
1.13 m and
5.13 m from B.
Length of bar
is 4.0 m.
Calculations
RelereDe
Note 8
45 28 kNjm
/16.34 kNjm
Ra
+ (16.34)(6~/2
= 167.7kN
My == (7)(1.4){y"o..0S]
My
+ (4S.28)r/2
 (167.7)[y2.0)  (45.2816.34)[Y2.0j2/2
== (9.8){y"o.05] + (22.64)r  (167.7)[y2.0)
 (14.47)[y2.0r
/
M.o.R.
'\..... M.o.R./2
;B
3.12.9.1
Note 9
3.12.9.1(e)
33
Output
Note 10
Table 3.29
Note 11
Output
Calculatioos
Refereoce
Curtail I T16
top bar 0.78 m
(left) and
1.10 MCright)
ofB.
I..eIlgth of bar is
1.88 m.
J 'Imine of bars
Note 12
3. 12.9. 1(c)
Table 3.29
Note 13
+ 0.4= 4.63 m
3.12.8.13
Note 15
3.12.8.13
Note 14
3.12.8.11
34
Curtail 2T20
top bars 2.63 m
to .right of B.
Start 2T12 top
bars 2.1~ m to
right of B.
Curtail 2T25
bottom bars
0.06 m to left
ofB.
Start 2Tl2
bottom bars
0.42 m to right
ofB.
Relerenee
Output
Calculations
lT16
ZIal
mo
I
A
>
Zf12
214>
<
<
>'
Zf12
),
21Q
2I25
l'IID
21"25t
c
Cover required = 30 mm
Assume link diameter of 10 mm.
Example 8
Table 3.30
Note 16
3.12.11.2.2
Note 17
3.12.11.2.5
Example 8
Table 3.30
Note 16
3.12.11.2.2
Note 17
3.12.11.2.5
3.12.11.1
Note 18
ISO rom.
The top spacing at the support < 160 mm; hence
O.K. (Note: Since 16120 = 0.8 > 0.45, the 16 mm
(0].1
( :m )
Crack Width
O.K. at support
Crack width
O.K. in span
Note also that all the above spacings are greater than
hagg + 5 mm, if we assume that h
= 20 mm.
Hence, minimum spacing rules are~so satisfied.
Minimum
spacing O.K
35
Notes
00
cakulatioos
2.
The span is taken from Example 7. More guidance regarding the calculation of
effective spans is given in clauses 3.4.1.2 to 3.4.1.4.
3.
The use of eq~on 7 will be more convenient than obtaining F 1 from double
interpolation in Table 3.11.
4.
In a practical beam, there will be some bars on the compression face, in order to
anchor the shear links. These may be considered as compression reinforcement;
neglecting them is conservative.
S.
If the structure is simple, instead of drawing the entire bending moment envelope, the
controlling loading cases for each situation can be considered.Wberethe span BC is
concerned, the controlling case will be that which causes the points of contraflexure
to be as close as possible to the supportsB and C.
6.
7.
Since the curtailed bar will be anchored in the tension zone, one of the conditions (c)
to (e) in Clause . 3.12.9.1 must be satisfied. In general (c) can be used in sagging
moment regions and (e) in hogging moment ones.
8.
The controlling loading case for the hogging moment steel at support B is that which
produces the maximum moment at B, while causing the point of contraflexure closer
to B in the span Be to be as far as possible from B.
9.
10.
For the same reason given in Note 9  Le. the bending moment diagram being convex
to the baseline  the lengths of curtailed bars at supports are much smaller than those
in spans.
II.
The anchorage length has to be provided on. either side of the critical section for
design, so that the full strength of the steel can be utilized. The anchorage lengths
vary depending on the surface characteristics of the reinforcement as well as its yield
strength. The anchorage length check may become critical when curtailing support
steel.
12.
The continuing bars at the top (2T20) and the bottom (2T2S) can be lapped with
smaller bars, when the former are no longer required to carry tensile stresses. At
least two bars are required at any section for anchoring the shear links. The minimum
diameter for such bars will be around 12 mm, so that the reinforcement cage will
have adequate stiffness during erection.
36
13.
In this instance, it is sufficient to satisfy amdilioos (a) and (b) alone in Clause
3.12.9.1 isosed, as the bars will not be anchored in the tension zone.
14.
All the references in Clause 3.12.8.13 are to the smaller of the two lapped bars.
Although the basic lap length does not need to be increased in this example, it may
need to be in some cases.
15.
16.
No downward redistribution of moments has been carried out at this support section.
If such redistribution bad been performed at a .support ectioo, the muimum spacing
allowed becomes fairly small.
17.
The continuing bars are able to carry twice the moment actually applied, as
curtailment has been done according to condition (e) in Clause 3.12.9.1. As the
service stress will thtn be quite small, margiDal.aations of the bar spicing rules can
be allowed. In any case, see Note 19.
18.
Both maximum and minimum spacings have to be satisfied. The maximum spacings
apply to the tension face and are "deemed to satisfy rules for crack control. The
minimum spacing roles apply to both faces and eosure that concre.ting can be carried
out satisfactorily. The most commonly used ~ size in pmctice is 20 mm
(maximum size).
C........ Netes
19.
37
A slab which has several continuous spans of 5 m is to carry an imposed load of 3 kN/m2
as a one way spanning slab. The loading from finishes and lightpartitioos can each be
considered equivalent to a uniformly distributed load of I kNIm2 Taking the density of
reinforced concrete to be 24 kN/m3 , feu = 25 N/mm 2 , and fy = 460 N/mm2, design a
typical interior panel.
Introductory Notes
1.
2.
Where the loadings from light ~tions is not accurately known, it is reasonable to
U$umeaudl value of I kNlm2 Furthermore, partitions whose positions are not
known should be treated as additional imposed load. The imposed load value specified
in this example corresponds to .that for a school building. Imposed loads assumed for
office buildings and domestic buildings are 2.5 kN/m 2 and 1.5kN1m2 n=spectively.
Further guidance can be obtained from "BS 6399: Part I (1984)  Design loading for
buildings: Code of pmctice for dead and imposed loads".
Output
Calculatioas
Slab
thickness
Note 3
TABLE 1
Note 4
NoteS
h == 175 mm.
d ISO . .
4.2 kN/m
= 1.0 kNlm
= 5.2 kN/m (gk)
= 3.0 kN/m
= 1.0 kN/m
+ (1.6)(4.0) =
38
13.7 kN/m
design udl =
13.7 kN/m
Calculations
Referenee
Output
M~
21.6 kNmlm
M rt=
2r6~mlm
v = 34.3 kN/m
bars_
deflection
Note 9
Check for
Table 3.11
Table 3.10
Fig. 3.25
Span steel
TIO @ 175 mm
Deflection O.K.
bendin& at sUllJlOrt
39
Support steel
TIO @ 175 mm
Output
calculations
Reference
Note 10
Table 3.9
Table 3.17
Note 11
= 0.23
N/mm 2
vc  0.54
N/mm.2.
Seconda[y reinforcement
Table 3.27
3.12.11.2.7
l00As/A c = 0.13
As = (0.13)(1000)(175) I (100) = 227.5 mm 2/m
Use TlO @ 350 mm (As = 224 mm2/m)
Max. spacing = (3)(150) 450 mm > 350 mm.
~ o. 7fm J>=7~
~7EmMO.7~
Tl~175
Notel2
cr
nOl3OO~75
TlQfJ350
..
....
~~Tl~
n~TlOOI75
, I
0(
I.On
'>
SeCondary
steel
TI0@350mm
"
.. ~
Tl............I
'f
f
( I.On )
5.0m
Notes on Calculatioas
3.
Although the bending moment is the controlling factor in the choice of depth for
beams, where slabs are concerned, the controlling factor is the spanldepth ratio,
representing the check for deflection. Atrial'V8lue has to be used initially; a value
of around 34 is a reasonable estimate for lightly loaded one way continuous slabs; this
should be reduced to around 30 for heavily loaded .s1abs. A lightly loaded slab would
have an imposed load of around 4 kN/m2 , while a heavily loaded slab would bave one
of around 10 kN/m2
4.
Slabs are generally designed such that shear links are not required; hence, no
allowance need be made for link diameter.
5.
One way and two way slabs are generally designed  Le. loads evaluated and
reinforcementcalculated  on the basis of a strip of unit width (e.g. 1 m wide).
6.
The minimum steel requirement is in fact based on looA/ Ac. However. since the
40
lOOA/bd is obtained from the design charts, it provides an approximate check on the
minimum steel requirement.
7.
8.
Although 60% of the steel can be curtailed, in practical slabs, curtailing 50% is
easier, because every other bar can be curtailed.
9.
10.
The area of steel used here is that of the top (tension) steel at the support.
11.
In general, apart from .some cases in flat slabs, it is sought to avoid shear
reinforcement in flat stabs. Hence, if v is greater than vC' the slab thickness is
increased. This should always be borne in mind, and perhaps an approximate check
for shear made early in the design,especially if the slab is heavily loaded (e.g. with
a water load).
12.
Where the curtailment of steel is'toncemed, the distances corresponding to top steel
are given from the face of the support and those corresponding to bottom steel from
the centreline of support.
Concluding Notes
13.
Although it is quite easy to satisfy minimum steel requirements and maximum bar
spacing rules at critical sections (such as midspan and support), care should be taken
to ensure that the above checks are not violated after curtailment of reinforcement.
14.
The simplified approach to the design of slabs, using Table 3. 13can be used in most
practical situations. Such an approach is given for the design of continuous beams as
well, in Table 3.6. The coefficients in this latter table are higher than those for slabs,
because the slab coefficients are based on the less stringent single load case of all
spans loaded, with support moments redistributed downwards by 20%.
41
Introductory Notes
1.
This example has more unknowns than the previous one. It describes a "real"
situation, where design assumptions will have to be made. The imposed load and load
from finishes and parapet wall have to be assumed and a decision taken regarding the
end fixity of the slab.
...i..
The imposed load could be taken as 1.5 kN/m 2, since it is a domestic building. The
finishes (onboth top surface and soffit) can be assumed to be a uniformly distributed
load of 1 kN/m2 .
3.
The parapet wall which is constructed on the slab perpendicular to its span will give
a degree of fixity to the slab. However, the most conservative approach is to idealize
this slab as a one way simply supported slab. Any fiXing moments caused by the
above partial fixity can be accomodated by taking SO% of the midspan steel into the
top face of the slab at the support.
4.
The parapet wall parallel to the span will have to be carried by the slab. It can be
assumed that the wall is 1.0 m high and 120 mm thick and that the density of the
(brick) wall is 23 kN/m2 The load from this wall will be distributed only over a
limited width of the slab (Clause 3.5.2.2).
Calculations
Reference
Output
Slab thickness
Note 5
Note 6
TABLE 1
Example 8
Note 7
3.4.1.2
42
h
d
=
=
160 mm
125 mm
eff. span
3.625 m
Reference
Calculations
Output
= 3.84 kN/m
1.00 kN/m
4.84 kN/rn
= 1.50 kN/rn
design udl =
9.2 kN/rn
Mspan = 15.1
kNmlm
V = 16.7 kN/m
A.
3.12.11.2.7
Note 9
Fig. 3.25
43
span steel
TIO @ 187.5
mm
RefeNilee
Note 10
3.12.10.3.2
Output
Calculations
The rest of the steel could be taken into the support
and bent back into the span as top steel to extend a
distance from support face of (0.15)1 = (0.15)(3625)
= 544 mm {> (45)cP = (45)(10) = 450 mm}, say
0.55 m
support steel
TI0 @ 375 mm
Note II
Table 3.11
Table 3.10
Mlbd2 = 0.93
f s = (5/8)(460)(325/419) = 223 N/mm 2
Hence, F 1 = 1. 71 (for tension steel)
Deflection O.K.
looA/bvd
Table 3.9
Table 3.17
Hence,
Vc
0~131
Shear O.K.
SecondflO' reinforcement
3.12.11.2.7
Note 12
looA/Ac = 0.13
As = (0.13)(1000)(160) I (100) = 208 mm2/m
Use TIO @ 375 mm (i.e. max. spacing allowed  3d)
(As = 209 mm2/m)
Note: It can be shown that the spacing of the
reinforcement in the edge strips of 1.21 m should be
T10 @ 175 mm at midspan (and hence TIO @ 350
mm at supports).
rt1 110075
TIotm5
~o.~
II~
I :
1100187.5
o.ti:
~.
0.:rAJn
44
secondary steel
TI0@375 rom
under parapets
TI0@ 175 mm
(span)
TI0@350
(support)
Notes on Calculations
5~
6.
In order to use Clause 3.4.1.2 tofind the effective span, the clear distance between
supports is taken as a first approxl.mation of the span.
For a lightly loaded oneway simply supported slabs, a span/depth ratio of around
In this instance, we have taken a value for h, such that slab thicknesses are assumed
to vary in steps of lO mill. To use steps of 25 mm (corresponding to 1 inch) would
be too Conservative for slabs. Hence either 10 mm steps or 12.5 mm steps
(corresponding to 0.5 inches) should be adopted.
8.
The edge areas of the slab, Le. the 1.21 m strips carrying the parapet loads, will be
more heavily reinforced than the rest of the slab. However, only the central part of
the slab is actually designed in this example.
9.
There may be other alternatives to increasing the midSpan steel, bot this approach
makes the detailing for curtailment very simple and also helps to satisfy the deflection
check, which is very critical in slabs. This approach also facilitates the detailing of
steel for support restraint, as shown in the figure. One possible alternative is to use
smaller diameter bars, but bars smaller than 10 mm, if used as main steel, will not
be very stiff and may deflect significantly during concreting, thus losing their cover.
lO.
As shown in the fIgure,this is a very neat method of providing top steel at partially
restrained ends of slabs and beams.
11.
Since we have provided more steel than required at midSpan (see Note 9), advantage
should be.taken of this by generally calculating the service stress, which will be lower
than (5/8)fy and lead to a greater allowable span/depth ratio.
12.
It may be convenient to reinforee the entire slab with TlO @ 175 mm at mid span and
TlO@ 350 mm at support, since the central part of the slab already has TlO @ 187.5
mm and TlO @ 375 mm at span and support respectively. The small penalty in cost
will probably be worth the simpler detailing arrangement.
Concluding Notes
13.
It is important to keep in mind curtailment, bar spacing rules and minimum 'steel
requirements while designing the reinforcement, because these detailing considerations
may lead to the design being altered, as was the case here.
45
A .two way spanning slab which has several bays in each direction.ha$ a panel.size of S m
x 6 m. The imposed load on the slab is 3 kN/m2 The loading fronl finisheaand light
partitions can each be taken as 1 kN/m2 Design a typical interior panel, using feu == 2S
N/mm2 , fy == 460 N/mm2 and density of reinforced concrete == 24kN1m3.
Introductory Notes
1.
The short span length and loading for this example have been anade ideAtica1to those
in Example 13 for a oneway spanning slab. Hence, results can be compared.
2.
It will be assumed that the comers of this slab are prevented from lifting and that
adequate provision is made for torsion. .
Calculatiops
ReferellCe
Note 3
3.5.7
TABLE I
Note 4
Note 5
h == 150 mm
dlbort
==
125 mm
~==
l1Smrn
Loadine (udl)
== 3.6 kN/m2
Self load == (0.15)\:, 1(24)
Finishes == (1,0>,
== 1.0 kNlm2
Total dead load
== 4.6 tN/mt
Imposed load == (3.0).
== 3.0kN/m2
Partitions = (1,0)'
= 1,0 kNlm 2
Total imposed load
== 4.0 kN/m 2
Design load= (1,4)(4.6) + (1,6)(4.0) == 12.8 IcN/m 2
Bendine moments
This interior panel has lyIlx == 615 == 1,2
46
n == 12.8
kN/m2
Reference
Table 3.15
Chart 2
(Part 3)
3.12.11.2.7
Table 3.27
Note 6
Table 3.11
Table 3.10
Chart 2
(part 3)
:l.12.11.2.7
Table 3.27
Calculations
Short way,
Short way,
Long way,
Long way,
edge
span
edge
span
Output
I
Desien of reinforcement
/
Short way, midman:Mlbd 2 = (10.24 xld') 1 (lOOO)(l25t = 0.66
100A/bd = 0.17
As = (0.17)(1000)(125) 1 100 = 213 mm2/m
Use TlO @ 350 mm (As :: 224 mm2/m)
Max. spacing = (3)(125) = 375 mm > 350 mm
l00A/Ac = (100)(224) 1 (1()()())(150) = 0.15 >0,13
Hence, bar spacing and min. steel are O.K. but if
steel is curtailed, they will be violated.
Deflection O.K.
Short way. cts. edge:MJbd2 = 0.86, l00AJbd = 0.23, As '7' 288 mm2/m
Use TlO @ 250 mm (A. = 314 mm2/m)
Bar spacing and min. steel areIO.K.
"
Mlbd 2
47
CalcuJatiOllS
Reference
Output
Edge strips:3.5.3.5
Note 7
Table 3.16
Table 3.9
l00A/Ac =0.13
As = (0.13)(150)(1000) I (100) = 195 mm2/m
Use TlO @ 375 mm (governed by max. spacing rule
in short way direction)
Use only in short way cts. edge; at other locations,
use middle strip steel for edge steel.
Edge strip
nO@375 mm
(only for short
way, cts. edge)
Table 3.16
Table 3.9
Fig. 3.25
No shear r/f
required
< 1800
~
16T106325'11 ~
600
,
"" Eo
...
1.0
l:"
Eo
~lo
1.0
N
,
~l
1.0
M
@
Eo
Eo
O'l
00
48
...1
Eo
1.0
r
Eo
Notes on CalcuIatiODS
3.
A trial value for span/depth ratio of 40 is reasonable for a lightly loaded, continuous
square2way slab; a ratio of 38 would be appropriate for heavily loaded slabs. This
will of course reduce with the ratio of long to short span, ~hing the value for 1way slabS when the latter ratio becomes 2. The span/depth ratio is calculated with
respect to the shorter span, as it is this that controls d~flection.
4.
It should be noted that the slab thickness required for a twoway slab is less than that
required for a oneway slab of similar span and loading  cf. 175 mm required for the
slab in Example 13.
5.
In arranging the reinforcement in the slab, the short way reinforcement should be
placed outermost, in order to have the greatest effective depth, since the shorter span
controls deflection and since the bending moments and shear forces are greater in the
short way direction as well.
6.
Two way spanning slabs are, in general, very lightly reinforced, so that curtailing is
often not possible because of the minimum steel requirement or the maximum spacing
requirement, or both.
7..
Since the main steel requirements are also fairlysmaIi, for practical detailing it may
be it' may be convenient to use the same reinforcement as the middle strip for the
edge strips, except in the case of the short way continuous edge.
Concluding Notes
8.
Where an edge or comer panel is concerned, in addition to the main and edge
steel, the requirements of torsional steel reinforcement have to bernet at the top and
bottom of the slab according to Clause 3.5.3.5; in many cases, the main and edge
steel provided would meet those requirements.
9.
Although the loads on a beam supporting a twoway slab will be either triangular or
trapezoidal, the code gives coefficients for an equivalent uniformly distributed load
over three quarters of its span.
10.
In the calculation of moment coefficients from Table 3.15, if there are significantly
differing coefficients on either side of a common edge, the code suggests a method
of moment distribution to rectify the situation, in Clause 3.5.3.6.
49
Introductory Notes
1.
2.
As the columns are braced, and as the I1ab has several bays in each. direction, the
be
simplified method of analysis described in Clause 3.7:2.7 and Table 3.19
employed.
3.
It will be assumed that the slab is without drops, and the maximum value of effective
diameter will be employed for column .beads.
will
Calculations
Reference
Slab thickness
3.7.1.4
Note 4
3.7.8
TABLE 1
NoteS
Loadin~ (for
entire panel)
he
= 1.25 m
h == 212.5 mm
d y == 187.5 mm
dx == 177.5 mm
davg==182~5 mm
>"
Note 6
Panel area == (5)(6) == 30 m2
Self load = (0.2125)(30)(24) == 153lcN
Finishes
== (1.0)(30)
= ..1U:.kN
Total dead load
= 183 leN .
Imposed load = (3.0)(30)
= 90 leN
Partitions
= (1.0)(30)
= 30 leN
Total imposed load
= 120 leN
Design load = (1.4)(183) + (1.6)(120) = 448 leN
50
.il"
F = 448 leN
Reference
Table 3.19
Note 7
Fig. 3.12
Table 3.20
Fig. 3.12
Note 8
Table 3.11
3.7.8
Chart 2
(part 3)
Note 9
3.12.11.2.7
Table 3.27
Note 10
Chart 2
(Part 3)
Calculations
Output
Bending mOments
Long way:1 = 6.0  (2/3)(1.25) = 5.17 m
Span moment = (0.071)(448)(5.17) = 164 kNm
Col. strip (2.5 m) = (0.55)(164) = 90.2 kNm
Mid. strip (2.5 m) = (0.45)(164) = 73.8 kNm
Support moment = (0.055)(448)(5.17) = 127 kNm
COL strip (2.5 m)= (0.75)(127) = 95 kNm
MId. strip(2.5 m) = (0.25)(127) = 32 kNm
Short way:1 = 5.0  (2/3)(1.25) = 4.17 m
Span moment = (0.071)(441)(4.17) = 133 kNm
Col. strip (2.5 m) = (0.55)(133) ::: 73 kNm
Mid. strip (3.5 m) = (0.45)(133) = 60 kNm
Support moment = (0.055)(448)(4.17) ::: 103 kNm
Col. strip (2.5 m) = (0.75)(103) = 77 kNm
Mid. strip (3.5 m) = (0.25)(103) = 26 kNm
Design of reinfOrcement
Long way. an:(Check for deflection)
Total ~ moment = 164 kNm
Mlbd2 = (164 xlo6) 1 (5000)(187.5)2 = 0.93
2
If AS,reqd = Aa.(Jrov. fs = 288 N/mm
and F 1 = 1.41 for tension steel)
Allowable spanldepth = (26)(1.41)(0.9) = 33.0
Actual spanldepth = (6000)/(187.5) = 32
< 33.0; hence O.K.
Deflection O.K.
51
Output
Calculations
Reference
Lone
3.7.3,1
Table 3.27
Chart 2
(Part 3)
3.12.11.2.7
Note 11
3.7.3.1
3.12.11.2.7
Check for
3.7.7.4
Long way,sup
(Col. strip)
12 TI0 @ 104
6 TI0 @ 208
shear
S2
3.7.6.2
3.7.7.4
Note 12
Table 3.9
Output
Calculations
Reference
Vt = 448 kN
Veff = (1.15)V t = (1.15)(448) = 515.2 leN
vmax = (515.2 xloJ) I (4.4 xloJ)(182.5)
= 0.64 N/mm2 < (0.8)(25).5 = 4 N/mm2;
Load on 1st crit. perimeter = (448/30)(302.716)
= 407 kN
v = (407 xloJ)(1.15) I (6.59 xloJ)(182.5)
= 0.39 N/mm2
(I00A/bd)avg=(112)(I00/182.5){(14l4+ 1257)12500}
= 0.29
ve
0.51 N/mm2 > 0.39 N/mm2
o~
I
7:
Shear r/f
not required.
~ ~r,
I __ L ll~
,1
g
~
~
I"
I:
,
12Tl00292B
~ :100J
:
I
13Tl00269T
~ "
S;
I
~'
,+'" 
fJ
 I    t   ......
I
<!ill
~

E:
Cl'l
~ ~
N""
~ ~
ll
3Tl0f208T
15Tl00167B
lOTlO,125T
3T lO'208T
~~
~ ~
<!ill <!ill
E: E: E:E:
C'?C'NC'?
........
Notes on Calculations
4.
The trialspan/depth ratio should be around 0.9 times that used for continuous
oneway slabs (See Example 13, Note 3); hence a value of around 32 is reasonable.
The deflection is governed by the longer span, unlike in twoway slabs; therefore the
slab thicknesses will be greater for flat slabs than for twoway slabs of similar
dimensions and .loading.
5.
Compare .this much greater overall depth with that of 150 mm obtained for the two
53
way slab in Example 15; of course. there is the considerable advantage here of not
requiring beams. The slab thickness has been chosen in steps of 12.5 mm
(corresponding to 1/2 inch). The greater effective depth should be used for the long
way span  Le. the long way reinforcement should be on the outside  because
deflection is governed by the longer span and the moments in the long way direction
are greater than those in the short way direction; this too is the opposite of two way
slab action. The average value of effective depth is used for punching shear checks.
6.
It is more convenient to determine the loading on an entire panel for flat slabs, as
opposed to that on a strip of unit width.
7.
The flat slab has to be analysed in two mutually perpendicular directions, with the
total load being taken in each direction. This is because there are no peripheral beams
around the slab, the flatslab acting as both slab and beam.
8.
The deflection check is done early here, even before the steel is designed. This is a
conservative approach, but has the advantage that it can detect early any changes that
may be required in slab thickness. If this check is made after the steel has been
designed, the average of column and middle strip steel can be taken for the As values.
9.
The reinforcement in a flat slab is generally specified in terms of the number of bars
in a given strip. As such, the spacing may not be in preferred dimensions.
10.
Curtailment, in this and other instances will not be carried out in this example. In
!'D0st cases, the minimum steel requirement will preclude such curtailment, although
the maximum spacing requirement can easily be satisfied.
11.
Note that the effective depth in the short way direction is 177.Smm (as opposed to
187.5 mm) and that the width of the middle strip is 3.S m (as opposed' to 2.5 m).
12.
Just as the average effective depth is used for punching shear calculations, the
lOOA/bd value should also be avetaged. This is because the square sbear perimeters
cross both the long way and short way steel.
Concluding Notes
13.
Unlike in the twoway slab, where the middle strips carry most of the moment and
are hence more heavily reinforced, in the flat slab, it is the column strips that carry
most of the moment and are more heavily reinforced.
14.
Where the simplified method used here is not applicable, a frame analysis will have
to be carried out according to Clause 3.7.2.
15.
Edge and comer columns of flat slabs will have column strips considerably narrower
than those in interior panels (see Clause 3.7.4.2). Furthermore, the enhancement
factors for shear due to moment transfer will be greater at these columns (see Clause
3.7.6.3).
54
Introductory Notes
1.
This example can be compared directly with Example 13, where the only difference
is that the slab is solid.
2.
Although this slab is continuous, because of the difficulty of reinforcing the topping
over the supports, it will be treated as a series of simply supported slabs (see Clause
3.6.2).
Reference
Choice
Note 3
TABLE 1
Fig. 3.2
Table 3.5
3.6.1.3
Table 3.18
3.6.1.3
Note 4
Fig. 3.2
Output
Calculations
of form
~~
\(
250
500
55
*50
if
h
d
= 225 mm
= 195 mm
te
= 115
mm
Calculations
Reference
Note 5
Output
design 001 =
5.83 kN/m
3.4.4.4
Table 3.27
main r/f
1 1'20 per rib
Table 3.10
Table 3.11
56
Deflection O.K.
Reference
Note 7
Table 3.9
3.6.4.7
Top steel
3.6.2
Output
Cakulations
over sup,port
over support
1 TIO per rib
Notes on CalculatioR
3.
This trial ratio is reasonable for simply supported one~way slabs  see Note 6 in
Example 14.
4.
It should be noted that the effective thickness of this slab (reflecting the volume of
concrete that will be used) is much lower than the oneway solid slab of similar span
and loading in Example 13.
5.
It is convenient to calculate the loading for a strip of width equal to a repeating cross
sectional unit.
6.
Since support details are not given, the shear force is calculated at a distance "d"
from the centreline of support (and not from the face of the support  Clause
3.4.5.10). The approach here is conservative.
7.
The average width of web below the flange is used for shear stress calculations.
Concluding Notes
8.
Fire resistance considerations will, to a large extent, govern the choice of form of
ribbed slabs.
9.
The design of these slabs is essentially the same as the design of flanged beams.
Generally the neutral axis will lie within the flange.
10.
Although the code suggests a single layer mesh reinforcement for the topping, it does
not demand it (Clause 3.6.6.2). It will be quite difficult to place such a mesh in a 50
mm topping while maintaining the top and bottom cover requirements.
11.
These ribbed slabs probably have a lower material cost than solid slabs, but their
construction costs would be greater, because of nonplanar formwork requirements.
57
PI. four storey building has columns on a grid 9f 5.0 m x 5.0m, supporting beams of
dimension 525 mm x 300 mm in one direetiononly and a oneway $lab of 175 mm thickness.
The roof also has a beamslab ammgement identical to other. floors. The oolumns are of
dimension 300 mm x 300 mm and the soffit to soffit heigbtoffloors is.3.5m; the height
from the top of the pad foundation (designed to resist moment) to the soffit of U1e first floor
beams is 5.0 m. If the frame is braced. classify a typical internal column for different storeys
as short or slender.
Introductory Notes
1.
Columns are classified as unbraced or braced on the one hand (depending on whether
they' take lateral loads or not) and .as slender or short on the other (depending on
whether they should be designed to carry additional moments due to deflection or
not).
2.
The effective length of a column will depend on the degree of fixity at its ends.
Caknlations
Reference
Table 3.21
Note 3
3.8.1.3
3.8.1.3
Output
= 5.35 m
.
58
Notes on Calculations
3.
The values of {3 in Tables 3.21 and 3.22 have been obtained from the more rigorous
method for calculating effective column lengths in framed structures, given in
(i.e. sum of
equations 3 to 6 in section 2.5 of Part 2 of the code. The ratios
column stiffnessesl sum of beam stiffnesses) have been assumed to be 0.5, 1.5, 3.0,
and 7.0 for conditions 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Clause 3.8.1.6.2 (Part I) respectively.
"c
Concluding Notes
4.
Where edge columns are concerned, they will not have beams "on either side" as
specified in the provisions of Clause 3.8.1.6.2. In this case, an approximate value for
{3 can be interpolated, based on the actual Cc value and the values used in Tables
3.21 and 3.22 (see Note 3 above); otherwise the method in Section 2.5 of Part 2 can
be adopted.
5.
For a column to be considered short, both le/h and le/b have to be less than 15 (for
braced columns) and less than 10 (for unbraced columns), as specified in Clause
3.8.1.3. The ratiO"c in section 2.5 of Part 2 or the value {3 in Clause 3.8.1.6 has to
be obtained for beams in one plane at a time.
Introductory Notes
1.
Since the ground floor .part of an internal column has been found to be short, and
since the arrangement ,of loads symmetrical, this design can be carried out according
to the provisions of Clause 3.8.4.3, using equation 38.
2.
The major part of this exercise consists of a load evaluation, taking into account the
appropriate reduction factors for imposed loads specified in "BS 6399: Part 1 (1984):
Design loading for buildings: Code of practice for dead and imposed loads". The
partition loads are taken as imposed loads, since their positions are not fixed.
59
Reference
Calculations
Column grid dilDClDsions are 5.0 x 5.0 m.
Dead loads
Note 3
Ok = 601 kN
Imposed loads
From roof
= (1.0)(25)
= 25 kNFrom 3 floors = (3)(2.5)(25)
= 187.5 kN
From partitions (3)(1.0)(25)
=~
Total imposed load
= 287.5.kN
I.L. reduction due to floor area
= (0.05)(25/50)(287.5)(4) = 28.75 kN
I.L. reduction due to 4floors
= (0.3)(287.5) = 86.25 kN
Hence, imposed load = 287.5  86.25 == 201.25 kN
o.c .. 201 kN
N .. 1163 kN
Note 4
Note 5
Table 3.27
Use 4 T16
(at column
comers)
Notes on .Calculations
3.
The total imposed load can be reduced either on the basis of the area supported by
the column or the number of floors  supported by the column. In this case, the
reduction allowed as a result of the latter is greater and is hence applied  see as
6399: Part 1 (1984), referred to in Note 2 above.
4.
The term Ac is the net area of concrete. A trial value of Awe C3ft be obtained from
equation 38 assuming the gross area of concrete for Ac as a flrst approximation; this
60
area of A~ can then be deducted from the gross area to obtain Ac' The value of Asc
obtained from the formula should be less than the original trial value of A.c.
5.
In some cases, a negative value may be obtained for A~; this indicates that nominal
steel will be sufficient. In any case, bar diameters under 12 mm are generally not
used for columns, because they will not be stiff enough for the erection of the
reinforcement cage.
Concluding Notes
6.
This method of design is applicable for short braced columns, where moments. are
negligible, due to a symmetrical arrangement of loads. Even if this symmetry is only
approximate, provided the columns are short and braced, equation 39 can be used in
place of equation 38.
7.
surround the main reinforcement as well. Ttiis will be shown in the next example.
N/mm2
Introductory Notes
1.
This column canies a substantial moment as well as an. axial load. Hence, we shall
have to use the design charts, which will give us a symmetrically reinforced section.
61
,.
Output
Calculations
Reference
Note 2
Chart 23
(part 3)
Chart 23
(Part 3)
3.8.4.5'
Note 3
Table 3.24
Chart 23
(Part 3)
Note 4
Note 5
3.12.7.1
Note 6
major axis
4T16
CJ
o
minor axis
4
no
!;>endin
MyIb'
hence M,/h'
equation 41
[J
<
M~'
M ' = M +(fl)
(b.Ii.fcu>=
'Ih')~
N1
(800 x1(3) 1 (300)(400)(l.S) = 0.267
hence P = 0.690
~' = 80 + (0.~(250/300)(8O) = 126 leN
Mlbh2 = (126 xl )/ (400)(300)2 = 3.5
.
100~lbh == 1.7
A~ = (1.7)(300)(400) 1(100) = 2040 mm 2
Use 4 TI5 + (2 T16 in each dir.) (A~ = 2366 mm2)
)&silo of links
, For major axis~ding, use R6 {> (16/4) = 4 mm}
@ 175 mm{ < (12)(16) = 192 mm}.
For minor axis bending, use R6{ > (20/4) = 5 mm}
@ 225 mm {< (12)(20) = 240 mm}.
For biaxial bending, use R 8 {> (25/4) :;: 6.25 mm}!
@ 175 mm {< (12)(16) = 192 mm}.
0
OeO
biaxial
4 T25 + 4 T16
JiDb
= (126)/(800) = 0.158
(0.75)(0.3) = 0.225 m);
3.8.4.6
MIN
Note 7
62
Shear check
oot required.
Calculations
Reference
3.8.6
Crack control
(0.2)fcu .Ac = (0.2)(25){(3OO)(400)  804} = 596 kN
Axial load = 800 kN > 596 kN.
Hence, no check is required.
Output
Crack width
check not
required.
Notes on Calculations
2.
3.
In this case too, the difference between hand h' and b and b' is taken as 50 mm, by
a similar argument as in Note 2 above.. '
4.
If the steel requirement for biaxial bending is greater than that which can be
provided as corner steel, the additional amount required has to be provided in each
of the, two mutually perpendicular directions, distributed along the faces of the
section. Other approaches, which are less conservative and more accurate, perhaps,
are given in "Allen, A.H., Reinforced concrete design to BS 8110 simply explained,
E. & F.N. Spon, London, 1988" and in "Rowe, R.E. et al., Handbook to British
Standard BS 8ll0: 1985  Structural use of concrete, Palladian, London, 1987".
5.
Although smaller diameter bars (e.g. TIO) could have been used, the Tl6 bars'are
used, so that the link spacing would no~ be too small; furthermore, bars smaller than
T12 are not used as column reinforcement, as they would not be stiff enough during
erection.
6.
Generally plain mild steel is used for links as it is easier to bend into shape.
Furthermore, where bars other than corner bars are used, multiple links may have to
be used if (i) there is more than one intermediate bar or (ii) the intermediate bar is
greater than 150 mm ~way from a restrained bar (see Clause 3.12.7.2)
7.
Strictly speaking, howe~er, the shear stress should be found in order to check for the
limits on v max '
Concluding Notes
8.
In general,sh.ear and crack control are not very critical for columns.
63
A braced slender column of 300 mm x 400 mm cross section carries an ultimate axial load
of 800 kN. It is bent in double curvature about the major axis, carrying ultimate moments
of 80 kNm and 40 kNm at its ends. The effective length of the column corresponding to the
major axis is 7200 mm. Determine the column reinforcement if feu = 25 N/mm 2 and fy =
460 N/mm 2
Introductory Notes
1.
This example can be compared with Example 20, where the short column was of the
same dimensions and carried similar loads.
Reference
3.8.1.3
3.8.3.3
Note2
3.8.3.2
equation 36
3.8.2.4
equation 34
equation 32
equation 35
Output
Calculations
Type of column
Vh = (7200)/(400) = 18
Also h/b = (400)/(300) =
hence, single axis bending.
s~nder.
Design moments
M 1 = 40 kNm; M 2 = +80 kNm
M i = (0.4)(40) + (0.6)(80) = 32 kNm
{= (0.4)(80) = 32 kNm}
emin = (0.05)(400) = 20 mm
N.emin = (800)(0.020) = 16 kNm
(3a = (1I2000)(IJb')2= (112000)('200/300Y= 0.288
au = #a K.h = (0.288)(1)(0.4) = 0.115
M add == N.au = (800)(0.115) = 92 kNm
Hence, critical moment is M j + Madd = 32 + 92 =
124 kNm. However, as K is reduced, if M j + Madd
becomes < 80 kNm, M2 will become critical.
Design of reinforcement
TABLE 1
Chart 23
(Part 3)
64
slender column
bent about
major axis.
M j = 32 kNm
Madd = 92
kNm
Reference
Output
Calculations
Chart 23
(Part 3)
Note 3
Chart 23
(part 3)
80 kNm)
Mlbh 2 = (115 xldi) 1 (300)(400)2 = 2..40
K = 0.85
Madd ~ (0.85)(92) = 78 kNm
M = 32 + 78 = 110 kNm
Mlbh2 = 2.29; K = 0.85 (again).
Hence, lOOAsc /bh
0.8
Asc (0.8)(300)(400) 1 (100) :;: 960 mm2
Use 4 1'20 (Asc
1256 mm2)
aJnksl
3.12.7.1
= 0.85
main steel 
::I
R6@ 225 mm
Notes on Calculations
2.
When major axis bending takes place, if either the Vh value is greater than 20 or the
bib value is not less than 3, in order to account for the deflection due to,'Slendemess
about the minor axis, the column has to be designed asbiaXiaUy Dent, with zero
initial moments about the minor axis (see Clauses 3.8.3.4 and 3.8.3.5).
3.
Concluding Notes
4.
The reinforcement required for this column is the same as for minor axis bending of
the short column in Example 20.
65
~LE
22 PAD FOOTING
Design a square pad footing for a 300 mm x 300 mm internal column, which carries an
ultimate load of 1100 leN (service load of 760 kN), if the allowable bearing pressure of the
soil is 150 kN/m 2 Use feu = 25 N/mm2 , fy = 460 N/mm2 (deformed type 2) and density
of reinforced concrete = 24 kN/m3
Introductory Notes
1.
Square pad footings are the most common foundation type for columns of framed
structures. Pad footings are essentially inverted cantilever flat slab elements.
2.
"
Calculations
Reference
Output
Dimensions of base
Note 3
Note 4
=
=
=
NoteS
=
=
= (1100) 1 <2.4/
= 191 kN/m
moment (at face of column)
(191)(2.4){(2.4o.3)/2}2(1/2) = 253 leNm
~ritical bending
TABLE 1
Note 7
footing size
~x2.4m
.4m
Service load
760 leN
Expected total load
(1.08)(760) 821 leN
Required area for base
(821) 1 (150)
5.47 m2
Try a base of 2.4 m x 2.4 m x 0.4 m
Weight of base
(2.4Y(0.4)(24)
55 leN
Actual total load
760 + 55
815 leN
Bearing pressure
(815) 1 (2.4j
141 kN/m2
2
< 150 kN/m ;hence O.K.
Preliminary check on effective depth:d > 10(N)'~
10(1100)5 332 mm;
hence overall depth of 400 mm is O.K.
66
= 253 leNm
= 336 mm
dan = 344 mm
d min
Reference
Calculations
Chart 2
(Part 3)
3.11.3.2
= (3/4)(300) + (9/4)(336)
= 981 mm < Ie = 1200 mm;
hence reinforcement should be banded.
Use 7 Tl6 @ 200 mm in band of 1200 mm
{< (3)(336) + 300 = l308}; Use (3+3) T12 @
200 mm in two outer bands.
(As = 1407 + 678 = 2085 mm2; 1407/2085 > 2/3)
Max. spacing = 750 mm; hence O.K.
100AiAe = (100)(2085) I (2400)(400) = 0.22
> 0.13; hence O.K.
Anc~ge length :; (40)(16) = 640 mm
< (2400300)/2 = 1050 mm; hence O.K.
3.12.11.2.7
Note 8
l00A/bd = 0.25
As = (0.25)(2400)(336) I (100) = 2016 mm2
(3/4)c
+ (9/4)d
Table 3.9
shear
3.7.7.2
<
3.7.7.6
Note 9
Output
(O.8)(25f S = 4 N/mm2
bottom r/f
3 T12 @ 200
7 T16 @ 200
3 T12 @ 200
(both ways)
[I
m
Shear r/f not
required.
Notes on Calculations
3.
Soil bearing pressures are given in terms of service lOads. Hence, service loads have
to be used to determine the footing area. Service loads can be approximately obtained
from ultimate loads by dividing the latter by 1.45 in reinforced concrete structures.
67
In order to estimate ultimate loads from service loads however, it is safer to factor
the latter by 1.5.
'4.
The weight of the footing itself cannot be known until it is sized. An allowance of
8 % of the column load is generally satisfactory for obtaining a first estimate of
footing weight, which should subsequently be calculated accurately. Another approach
is to first estimate a depth (in this case 0.4 m) and reduce the allow~le bearing
pressure by the corresponding weight per unit area (i.e. 0.4 x 24 = 9.6 ~/m2),
before fInding the footing area.
5.
This formula is not dimensionally homogeneous and can be used only if N is in leN
and d in mm. It is based on a punching shear considerations for commonly used pad
footings. If there is moment transfer to the footing as well, use d > (11.5)(Nf'5
6.
7.
If the values of TABLE 1 are modified by Note 5, a cover of 35 mm will suffice for
moderate exposure conditions. However, the cover is increased by a further 5 mm,
in case the footing comes into contact with .any contaminated ground water. The
minimum value of "d" should be used in the design for flexure and vertical line
shear, while the average value of lid" can be used in checking for punching shear.
8.
If the distance between the column face and the end of the footing is smaller than the
anchorage length, the bars will have to be bent up near the end. of the footing;
otherwise, they can be straight.
.
9.
In most cases, punching shear is more critical than vertical line shear. Furthermore,
if a distance "d" is not available from the critical perimeter to the end of the footing,
the value of Vc should correspond to 100A/bvd < = 0.15 in Table 3.9.
Concluding Notes
10.
I.f the footing carries a bending moment in addition to the axial load, the maximum
and minimum pressures under the footing will be given by (l/BL}(N 6M1L), with
symbols having usual meanings. The maximum pressure should be kept below the
allowable bearing pressure.
11.
If the difference between maximum and minimum pressures is small (say upto 20%
of the maximum pressure) it may be convenient to design for bending and vertical
shear by assuming that the pressure distribution is uniform and equal to the maximum
pressure.
12.
Where the design for punching shear is concerned, the average pressure can be taken
for calculations, but a factor of 1.15 applied to the shear force, according to the
provisions of Clause 3.7.6.2.
68
o~_""
4_._7m_~_7>1~~'r
\lOkN
C
~D
Introductory Notes
1.
The situation described above is often found in crowded urban areas where buildings
are constructed on very small plots of land.
2.
It is difficult to provide an isolated pad footing for the external column, because of
eccentric loading on the footing. Hence, it can be combined with the first internal
column footing as shown above.
Reference
Calculations
Service loads
Note 3
External column load
External column moment
,Internal column load
Dimensions of footine
Note 4
69
Output
Note 5
Note 6
Outppt
CalcuJatloDS
Reference
footing size
6.8 mx 2.0 m
xO.8 m
Analysis of footing
Assuming that the C.of G. for ultimate loads is the
same as that for service loads, the footing can be
:1T
A&;::':_= ,6E
= 250 leN/m
~~
250 kN/m/
x~
70
longitudinal top
steel S n5
Reference
Table 3.27
3.11.3.2
Table 3.27
Table 3.29
Output
Calculations
longitudinal rlf
to be evenly
spaced
crransverse direction)
M = (25012){(2.00.3)/2}2(112) = 45 kNm/m
d = 747.5  25/2  20/2 = 725 mm (assuming bar
size of 20 mm)
M/bd 2 = (45 x106) 1 (1000)(725)2 = 0.09
Use 100A/Ae = 0.13
As = (0.13)(1000)(800) 1 (100) = 1040 mm 2/m
Use TIO @ 300 mm (Ag = 1047 mm 2/m)
Anchorage length = (20)(40) = 800 mm
< (2000300)/2  40(cover) = 810 mm; hence O.K.
This steel too can be evenly distributed, as it is
nominal reinforcement; the same nominal steel can
also be used as distribution steel for the top
longitudinal bars.
4.7m
5T25 \.
, ~T20@300 ........
..
1
'5T25
6.&n
>I
71
transverse
bottom steel T20@3oo
mm, to be
evenly spaced.
longitudinal
bottom steel 5TI5
Reference
Calculations
Output
Notes
00
Calculations
3.
Where service loads are not specified or known, they can be estimated by dividing
ultimate loads by 1.45 for.reinforced concrete structures. When converting service
to ultimate" loads, it is safer to multiply the former by 1.5.
4.
If the footing dimensions are given, as opposed to being designed, the pressure
distribution under the base may riot be uniform.
5.
This base thickness is fairly high, and is governed primarily by shear considerations.
If the distance between columns is large, bending moment considerations will also
require a, fairly deep base.
6.
This fairly large width has been chosen to reduce the pressure under the footing and
satisfy the shear criteria. Although increasing the depth is generally more efficient
than increasing the width, having a large depth may also cause excessive build up of
h5t of hydration temperatures, leading to thermal cracking.
7.
Assulning the column loads to be point loads is conservative. In reality, the load will
be spread over a (mite
and the resulting bending moments and shear fol'CeS' at
the column faces will ~, somewhat~maller than those obtained from this analysis.
8.
The argument used to choose the cover is the same as that in Note 7 of Example 22.
area
Coocludina Notes
9.
If the perimeter or section at which shear should be checked falls outside the footing,
The analysis of the above footing has been performed assuming that both footing and
subgrade are rigid. If elastic foundation assumptions had been used, the soil pressure
near the columns (i.e. loaded areas) would increase, but the midspan bending moment
would decrease.
72
A twopile group of pile diameter 500 mm and spacing 1250 mm centres supports a 450 mm
square column carrying an ultimate load of 2500 leN. Design the file cap, using concrete of
grade 25 and type 2 deformed reinforcement of fy = 460 Nlmm .
Introductory Notes
1.
The minimum centretocentre distance for piles is twice the least width of piles for
end bearing piles and thrice the least width of piles for friction piles.
2.
A pile cap can be considered as a deep beam, and the most appropriate way to
analyse forces is to consider truss action in the pile cap.
Reference
Calculations
Output
Note 3
dimensions
2250 mm x
1000 mm x
700mm
61
Truss action
Note 4
3.11.4.2
Note 5
l'
Anchoraee
Anchorage length requirec;l beyond centreline of pile
is given by (40)(25)(3016/3437) = 878 mm
73
main steel
71'25
Reference
Calculations
Output
Note 6
3.12.8.23
r = 160 mm
Anchorage O..K,
3.11.4.4
3.11.4.3
Table 3.9
3.4.5.8
av = 625150225 = 250 mm
V (at critical section) 2500 I 2  1250 kN
74
Output
Calculations
Reference
Distribution steel
Table 3.27
Note 7
Il
7T25 main
distribution steel
16T@200 mm
binders
4')16
LJTl~
horizontal
binders
4 Tl6
Notes on Calculations
3.
The criterion used is that the effective depth is equal to at least half the distance
between pile centres. When using truss theory, this will result in a compressive strut
of 45 minimum inclination. The cover value has been chosen as per Note 7 of
Example 22.
4.
If the width of the column is accounted for, the value of tensile force will be a little
less. This is given some treatment in nAllen, A.H., Reinforced concrete design to BS
8110 simply explained, E. & F.N. Spon, London, 1988".
5.
6.
We start the bend closer to the edge of the pile cap than assumed in the bend radius
calculation  this is to achieve as great a length for anchorage as possible within the
geometry of the pile cap.
7.
This provision is also given by Allen, referred to in Note 4 above. The main steel
required (as opposed to provided) can be used in the calculation.
Concludinl Notes
8.
It can be shown that less steel is required if Beam Theory is used. Furthermore, the
anchorage requirement beyond the centre line of pile is much less. However, Truss
Theory probably describes more accurately the actual behaviour of the pile cap.
9.
If the spacing of piles exeeds 3 times the pile diameter, an additional check for
punching shear has to be made, and the pile cap has to be considered as being
"banded" for the distribution of tension steel and check for vertical line shear.
75
EXAMPLE 25 STAIRCASE
A staircase has to span between two beams, which are 3.0 m apart in plan. The difference
between the two levels is 2.0 m. Assuming that the staircase is sheltered and that it is
subject to crowd loading, design the staircase, using feu = 25 N/mm2 , fy = 460 N/mm 2
(deformed type 2) or 250 N/mm 2 (plain) and density of reinforced concrete = 24 kN/mJ .
Assume top finishes (on tread only) as O.S kN/m 2 and the soffit plaster as 0.25 kN/m 2
IJ;ttroductory Notes
1.
Staircases are essentially inclined slabs. The major difference in design approach
is that the loading has to be obtained as the loading in plan.
2.
In this particular example, the layout of the staircase has to be designed as well.
Reference
Calculations
Output
Choice of layout
Let us choose 12 stairs.
Note 3
rise = 167 mm
going =
2SOmm
tread
275 rom
Waist thickness
Note 4
3.10.2.2
TABLE 1
Table 3.5
Note S
76
= 1.20
h = 120mm
d = 94 mm
Note 6
Output
Calculations
Reference
= 1.1
Waist
= (0.1~)(1)(24)(1.2) = 3.46 kN/m
Steps
= (112)(0.167)(1)(24)(1.1) = 2.20 kN/m
= 0.55 kN/m
Top finishes = (0.5)(1)(1.1)
= 0.30 kNlm
Soffit plaster = (0.25)(1)(1.20)
= 6,51 kNlm
Total dead load
Imposed load = (5.0)(1)
= 5.0 kN/m
Design load ... (1.4)(6.51) + (1.6)(5.0) = 17.1 kN/m
design udl =
17.1 kN/m
3,12,11.2,7
Table 3.27
Note 8
main steel
T12 @ 250 mm
Table 3.11
3.10.2.2
Mfbd2 = 1.75
fa = (5/8)(460)(451/452) = 287 N/mm 2
Hence, F 1 = 1.15 (for tension reinforcement)
Allowable spanldepth = (26)(1.15)(1.15) = 34.4
Actual span/depth = (3000)/(94) = 31.9 < 34.4;
hence deflection O. K.
Deflection O. K.
Table 3.9
77
required.
Reference
Output
Calculations
Distribution steel
Table 3.27
Note 10
A.
Use R8 @ 175 mm
(As
distribution steel
R8@175 mm
= 287 mm 2/m)
R8@175
(4)
Note 11
Tl2@250 (1)
Tl2@250
3.<In
..
~fC:>j
Notes on Calculations
3.
In general the rise should vary from a minimum of 150 mm for public stairways to
a maximum of 175 mm for private stairways. The going should vary from 300 mm
for public stairways to 250 mm for private stairways. (2R + 0) should be kept as
close as possible to 600 mm. A nosing can be provided so that the tread is greater
than the .going, thus making for greater user comfort.
4.
Although the value used in Example 13 for a continuous one way slab was 34, a ratio
of 30 is used here, because the loading is much heavier  the waist carries the load
of the steps, in addition to its own weight on an incline, and also a high imposed
load. The above ratio is increased by 15% because of the stiffness contributed by
the stairs.
5.
The waist and soffit plaster have thicknesses that are measured perpendicular to the
incline. Hence their load in plan will be greater by a factor of (R} 0 2)0.5 I O. The
steps and tread finishes have 2S mm overlaps for each 250 mm length in plan,
because of the provision of a nosing. Hence their load will have to be factored by
T/O. This factor can be ignored for the imposed load, because it can be argued that
the entire tread will not be available for standing.
78
6.
The imposed load corresponding to crowd loading is 5.0 kN/m2  see "BS 6399: Part
1 (1984): Design loading for buildings: Code of practice for dead and imposed
loads" .
7.
For a staircase having continuity, we can assume that both the span and support
moments are approximately F.l/1O.
8.
Staircases are generally heavily loaded (see Note 4 above), unlike horizontal slabs.
Hence, the check for minimum steel is not very critical.
9.
Taking Shear Force as (0.6)F is conservative for staircases such as this, In any case,
as for most slabs, staircases will not require shear reinforcement.
10;
Mild steel reinforcement is often used for distribution bars, as in this case, since the
use of high yield reinforcement may result in more steel than that specified by the
minimum steel requirement, in order to meet the maximum bar spacing rule.
11.
When detailing reinforcement, care should be taken not to bend tension steel in a
way that an inside comer can get pulled out. Hence bar type (2) should be continued
from the bottom face of the lower slab to the top face of the waist. Bar types (2) and
(3) can be taken horizontal distances of (0.3)1 (see Clause 3.12.10.3) into the waist
from the faces of the beams. Bar types (1), (2) and (3) can be continued into the
lower and upper slabs as sl$ reinforcement, if required. Bar type (4) shows how the
upper slab reinforcement can be taken into the beam support.
Concluding Notes
12.
If the supporting beam for the flight of stairs is at the ends of the landings, the entire
system of staircase and two landings can be taken as spanning between the supporting
beams (see figure below). In this case, the slab system could be considered as simply
supported if there is no continuity beyond the landings. The loading on the landing
and staircase section would be different in a case such as this.
r/
span
79
EXAMPLE 16  STAIRCASE
A typical plan area of a stair well is shown in the figure, where the landings span in a
direction perpendicular to the flight and span of the stairs. The dimensions of a single stair
are as follows: rise = 175 mm; going = 250 mm; tread = 275 mm. The top finishes (on
tread only) are equivalent to a distributed load of 0.5 kN/m2 and the soffit plaster one of
0.25 kN/m 2 The imposed load can betaken as 3 kN/m 2 Using feu = 25 N/mm2 , fy = 460
N/mm 2 (deformed type 2) or 250 N/mm2 (plain) and density of reinforced concrete ;:; ~4
kN/m3 ,design the staircase component of the system.
1.2m
\<:.....;*
8xO.25
= 2.Om
2.Om
*:~)'
."
1. 2m
1.2m
I,
Introductory Notes
1.
In this example of a staircase, the landings span perpendicular to the stairs and
support the staircase, unlike in the case described in Note 12 of Example 2S, where
the landings also span in the direction of. the staircase.
2.
In analysing the above system, the staircase is assumed to be supported along two
edges within the landings. Continuity over the supports can be assumed for the
purpose of spanldepth Iatio calculations.
Calculations
Reference
Output
3.10.2.2
= la + (O.5)(lb,l + Ib,V
= 2.0 + (0.5)(1.2 + 1.8)
= 3.5 m
length of stairs (%) = {(2.0)/(3.5)}(IOO) % = 57%
Effective span
80
eff. span
3.5 m
Reference
Note 4
CaJcuJatioas
Outpat
h = 140 mm
d = 114 mm
= (R2 + OZ)0S I G
= {(l75f + (250f}o.s I (250) = 1.22
Factor for overlap = TIG = (275)/(250) = 1.1
Waist
= (0.14)(1.2)(24)(1.22) = 4.92 kN/m
Steps
= (112)(0.175)(1.2)(24)(1.1)= 2.n kN/m
Top finishes
(0.5)(1.2)(1.1)
= 0.66 kN/m
Soffit pJasta'
(0.25)(1.2)(1.22)
0.37 kNlm
Total dead loed
= 8.72 kN/m
Imposed lOad = (3.0)(1.2)
= 3.6 kN/m
Design load= (1.4)(8.72) + (1.6)(3.6) = 18.0 kN/m
=
=
design udl =
18.0 kN/m
@; RA = (18)(2.0)(1.9) I (3.5) =
19.5 kN
Chart 2
(Part 3)
MIbc
81
= 1.43
main steel
5 T12
CaJcu,,
Wei.,...
Output
fs
Table 3.11
= (5/8)(460)(534/565) = 2n N/mm2
H~,FJ
:: (26)(1.29) == 33.5
Actual spaoIdeptb == (3500)1{U4) == 30.7
< 33.5; hence O.K.
~. spanldepth
Deflection O. K.
Distribution reinfon:ement
Table 3.27
lOOAJA.c
OD
distribution steel
R8@ ISO mm
Cakulatious
3.
The support Jineforthe stain:ase is at the centre of the smaller landing but only
0.9 m into the wider Janding, because 1.8 m js the maximum distance ,over which the
load can be assullWldto be spread.
4.
This ratio is a liUlep:ater than that assumed for the previous example (Example 25),
because theimposed load here is somewhat lower.
5.
These factors and their use are deScribed in Note 5 of Example 25.
6.
Concluding Notes
7.
8.
Shear can also be checJrd for, as in Example 25, the maximum.sIlear force being the
greater of RA and~  i.e. 19.5 kN.
9.
When designing the landings, in addition to their own dead and imposed loads, the
loads from the stain:ase i.e. RA and RB will be uniformly spread over the entire
smaller landing and over 1. 8 m of the Jarges landing, respectively.
10.
Where staircase flights surrounding openwe1ls intersect at right angles, the loads
from the common landing can be shared between the two perpendicular spans.
82
Introductory Notes
1.
Given that.even plain concrete walls require horizontal and vertical reinforcement
(Clause 3.9.4.19), and if this n"inforeement will be ,distributed on two faces (which
is advisable, since crack control reinforcement should be as close to the surface as
possible), then it is very difficult to construct a wall under 175 mm. This is
because cover requirements will be 20 mm on the inside (mild exposure) and 30 mm
on the outside (moderate exposure)  see TABLE 1, including Notes 5 and 6  and
because the bar diameter for vertical steel should be at least 12 mm, in order to
ensure sufficient sti.ffJIess, for the rant"orcementcage prior to concreting.
2.
Guidance on calculating wind loads is given in CP3: Ch. V: Part 2 (1972): Basic
data for the design of buildings: Loading: Wind loads, and the method is shown in
Example 31.
3.
It is assumed that stability for the stn1Cture as a whole has been satisfled. The
overturning moment due to wind, factored by 1.4 should be less than the resisting
moment due to dead load, factored by 1.0 (see Table 2.1)
Refereoce
Cakulatioos
Output
Wall CJassi'ierinn
3.9.4.3
Note 4
Note 5
1.2.4.9
3.9.4.4
Ie = 3.5 m
Hence, Ie = (0.875)(4.0) = 3.5 m
lJh = 20
Ie/h = (3.5 xloJ)/(17S) = 20 > 15; hence slender.
hence, slender
< 30; hence max. value not exceeded. braced wall.
83
1./;
i (
3.9.4.9
Note 6
3.9.4.15
3.9.4.16
..
ex == 8.75 mm
e. == 28 mm
Table 2.1
Combination 1.
f l == (1.4)(18+ 12+80) + (1.6)(7.5+ 19)(0.7)
== 184 kN/m
Combination 2.
f2 == (1.4)(110) + (1.4)(33.6) == 201 kNlm or
f 2 == (1.0)(110)  (1.4)(33.6) == 63 kN/m
Combination 3,
f3
(1.2){1l0 + (26.5)(0.7) + 33.6}
195 kNlm
Note:  no tension arises.
l1w.~ ==
~OI kN/m
n
.:;:
"W.1IlUI
63 kN/m
equation 43
equation 44
Note 7
3.9.4.18
shear
84
l1w is O.K.
Caleulatio..
Refereace
Minimum reinfOfCQDCOt
4"
Min. r/f
Note 8
= (0.25)(1000)(175) I (100)
= 437.5 mm2/m (both directions)
 
Output
vertfcal steel
2 x Tl2 @ 300
horizontal steel
2xT8@225
Notes on Calculations
4.
5.
Since the end conditions in the given wall are "midway between those specified in
Clause 3.9.4.3., the effective length factor is also midway between the factors given.
6.
The imposed load here is factored by 0.8, according to BS 6399: Part 1 (1984):
Design loading for buildings: Dead and imposed loads, since loads from 3 floors are
involved. Later on, when cbecldng the Ow value for the wall .panel, a factor of 0.7 is
used, since loads from 4 floors are involved.
7.
Equations 43 and 44 for braCed walls correspond to the top (maximum initial
eccentricity) and midway (maximum eccentricity due to deflection) sections.
However OW is calculated at .the bottom of the wall,. taking into account the self
weight of the wall and maximum inoment due to wind. This is slightly inconsistent
but conservative. A similar approach is used in column design.
8.
Concluding Notes
9.
The wall reinforcement should also be checked for satisfying tie reinforcements. This
is dealt with in Example 33.
85
EXAMPLE 28  CORBEL
Design a corbel that will carry a vertic:alloed of 350 kN into a 300 mm x 300 nun column.
assuming the line of action of the load to be 150 mm from the face of the column. Take ~u
= 30 N/mm 2 and f y = 460 N/mm2 (defcmned type 2).
Introductory Notes
1.
A cos:bcl can be considered to bea deep cantilever" where truss Don. as opposed
beam action, predominates and where shearing action is critical..
2.
Compatibility of strains between the strutandtie system of the truss must be ensured
at the root of the corbel (Clause 5.2.7.2.1 (b.
Calc:ulatioos
Output
Corbel dimensions
5.2.3.4
Note 3
~l~n:
350 kN (ultimate)
'l5o L
1: t
T~C'
125 Oo9xl[J
0.45f
A
86
cu
bearing width
100 mm
total proj~tion
400nun
h =375 mm
d::;: 345 mm
Reference
5.2.7.1
Output
Calculations
Note 4
5.2.7.2.1
NoteS
main steel
3 T16
Detailing O.K.
Shear reinforeeroent
Table 3.9
3.4.5.8
Table 3.8
5.2.7.2.3
87
links
2TlO
Reference
3.12.8.25.2
equation 50
.1
rl30,.,
250
2TIOfH75(
Notes on Calculations
3.
Varying the depth from a full depth at the root to 2/3 of the depth at the end ensures
that one of the conditions for a corbel in Clause 5.2.7.1 is automatically met  i.e.
that the depth at the outer edge of bearing is greater than half the depth at the root.
Furthermore, it facilitates the placing of horizontal shear links in the upper twothirds
of the effective depth of corbel as specified in Clause 5.2.7.2.3.
4.
Using Figure 2.2, the strain at yield is (0.87)(460) 1(200 xloJ) = 2.0 x 103 for steel
of fy '= 460 N/mm 2 , since the Young's Modulus specified is 200 kN/mm2 .
5.
Although these limits on l00A/bd, where d is the effective depth at th~ root of the
corbel, are not given in BS 8110, they are specified in "Rowe, R.E. et aI., Handbook
to British Standard BS 8110: 1985 : Structural use of concrete, Palladian, London,
1987".
88
6.
Although the code allows the bend to start at the edge of the bearing plate itself, the
allowance of a cover distance from the outer edge of the bearing plate will ensure the
spreading of load from the bearing plate to the level of tie steel before the bend
commences.
Concluding Notes
7.
89
IDtroductory Notes
1.
It is instructive to classify torsion into two types. Compatibility torsion, which may
arise in statically indeterminate situations, is generally not significant; torsional
moments will be shed back into the elements carrying bending moments (at right
angles to the element carrying torsion), because torsional stiffnesses are lower than
bending stiffnesses. Any torsional cracking will be controlled by shear links.
However, equilibrium torsion in statically determinate situations, where torsional
resistance is required for static equilibrium, will have significant magnitudes, and has
to be designed for. The example above is such a case (see Clause 2.4.1, Part 2).
2.
Assuming that the columns provide full bending restraint implies that they have
infinite stiffness. In practice, of course this will not be the case and the deformation
of the columns will reduce the beam fixed end moments. However, full torsional
restraint has to be provided by the columns, in order to preserve static equilibrium,
where equilibrium torsion is invol"lled.
CaleuIatiODS
Reference
~oILJ
2000
Output
~$OO
)
~.
Loadin 2 on beam
90
bending udl
19.6 kN/m
Calculations
Reference
Output
Torsional loadio&
(assume shear centre is at centroid of beam section)
Hood
= (7.2)(2/3)(0.15+ 1.0)
+ (7.2)(1/3){0.15+(2.0/3)} = 7.48 kNmlm
= 1,15 kNm/m
Finishes == (0.5)(2.0)(0.15+ 1.0)
Total dead load torsion
== 8,63 kNm/m
Imposed load torsion = (0.5)(2.0)(0,15+ 1.0)
== 1,15 kNm/m
Design load=={(1.4)(8,6)+(1.6)(1.15)} = 13.9 kNmlm
torsional udl
=
13.9 kNm/m
Chart 2
(Part 3)
Table 3.27
Table 3.9
d = 550 mm
YI
= 530 mm
Xl
== 230 mm
Xl
Note 3
1.2m
..~
"
27.8
91
Refereace
CaJaJlatioos
equation 2
(Part 2)
Table 2.3
(Part 2)
Output
Proyision of reinforcement
Table 2.4
(part 2)
equation 2
(Part 2)
Table 2.3
(Part 2)
Table 3.8
Nominal links
RIO@250mm
(middle 1.2 m)
2.4.8
(Part 2)
A,;.)Sv > = T I
(0.8)~'Yl(0.87)f
= (27.8 xl
) I (0.8)(130)(530)(0.87)(250)
= 1.31
For 10 mm links, Asv = 157 mm2; Sv < = 120 mm
Use 2RI0 links @ 200 mm {< = 200 mm, Xl' yl /2}
Length of beam at each end for torsional links
= (4.0  1.2) I 2 = 1.4 m
Designed additional longitudinal steel given by
2.4.7
(Part 2)
2.4.9
(Part 2)
Note 4
530) = 540 mm 2
If this is divided between 8 bars, each requires 67.5
mm2 (3 at top and bottom, 2 in middle).
Since beam length is small, assume bending
reinforcement is not curtailed; longitudinal
reinforcement for torsion also cannot be curtailed.
92
Torsion links
2RIO@2oo
mm (1.4 m
from both ends)
Reference
Table 3.30
2.4.9
(part 2)
Output
Calculations
Total steel requirement at top and bottom levels =
(67.5)(3) + 234 = 436.5 mm 2
Use 2Y16 + YIO at top and bottom levels (As =
481 mm2) and 2 Y 10 at intennediate level (As = 157
mm 2)
This arrangement will satisfy
(a) max. spacing for tension rlf < = 160 mm
(b) max. spacing for torsional rlf < = 300 mm
(c) torsional rlf provided in 4 comers
Notes on Calculations
3.
The torsional moment variation in beams, whether for a distributed moment such as
this or for a point moment, is geometrically identical to the shear force variation
corresponding to distributed or point loads respectively.
4.
Concluding Notes
5.
The links provided for torsion have to be of the closed type as specified in Clause
2.4.8 (Part 2), whereas even open links are permissible for shear links.
6.
If the section carrymg torsion is a flanged beam, it has to be divided into component
(nonintersecting) rectangles, such that hmin3.hmax is maximized. This can generally
be achieved by making the widest rectangle as long as possible (see Clause 2.4.4.2Part 2). The torque is divided up amoung the rectangles in the ratios of their
(hmin3 .h max) values and each rectangle designed for torsion. The torsional links should
be placed such that they do intersect.
IC
l
J ~intersecting torsional
II
93
links
2nd FIoar
4. Om
B
1st FIoar
4.2f.m
,
T75m. ~". ~
6.0m
7 ~
6.0m
.
?!~    
Ground Level
Footing Level
The next 4 examples (including this one) deal with the entire structure, as opposed
to structural elements.
2.
The loading for partitions and imposed loads is the minimum permissible under"as
6399: Part I (1984): Design loading on buildings: Dead and imposed loads~
3.
In general, most frames are braced, the lateral load being taken by masonry infill or
lift!stair wells.
4.
Since the frame is braced, it is possible to use either a beam level subframe analysis
or a continuous beam analysis. Since the latter overestimates moments considerably,
the fanner will be performed.
94
Output
Calculations
Refereoce
Stiffnesses
b f = 1140 mm
15
4 so
~
Distribution factors
Only the beam factors will be considered.
DAB = D CB =(1.565)/(1.565 +0. 169+0. 135) = 0.84
DBA =DBC = 1.565/{(1.565)(2)+0.169+0.135} =0.46
Loading on beam
= (5)(0.15)(24)
= 18 kN/m
= (0.45)(0.3)(24)
= 3.24 kN/m
Finishes = (0.5)(5)
= 2.5 kN/m
Total dead load
= 23.74 kN/m
Imposed load (floor) = (5)(2.5)
= 12.5 kN/m
Partitions
= (5)(1.0)
= 5.0 kN/m
Total imposed load
= 17.5 kN/m
Since a beam span carries 30 m2 of floor area,
reduced imposed load = (0.97)(17.5) = 17.0 kN/m
Slab
Beam
BS 6399:
Part 1
Load arrangements
3.2.1.2.2
95
Output
Arrangement 3 will be the mirror image, about B, of
Arrangement 2.
0.84
Note 6
0.46
AB
181.2
+ 152.2.....,.
 29,0
0.46
0.84
BA
Be
CB
+ 181.2 181.2
+ 181.2
+ 76,1  76,1 <Eo 152.2
+ 257.3 ~257.3 + 29,0
Arrangement 1
Support moment
at B= 257 kNm
(Arrangement 2)
0.84
0.46
AB
181.2
0.46
BA
BC
+ 181.2  11.1
 25.3 ~ ......
 5"'lo0"'"'.6"_......50Qt~,6
+ 173.5 + + 86,8
 15.5 +  31.1
+ 13.1+ + 6.5
 3.0 t  6.0
+
Note 7
+ 1.3
s  1.2
+ 186.9
2.5  t
 0,6
 36.5
Shear forces
0.84
CB
+ 71.1
+  25,3
 19.3 <t ~
 31.1 +  15.5
+ 6,5 t + 13,1
Arrangement 2
 6,0 +  3.0
+ 1.3 ~ + 2.5
 1.2 ~  0.6
171.5
+ 3.8
Support
moments at B
= 187 kNm
&. 172 kNm
lkN)
Rc can be found
Arrangement 1
143.2
219.3
219.3
143.2
Arrangement 2
156.1
206.3
99.1
43.2
Output
Calculations
Reference
Span moments
~x
/w
0
Note 8
,M1
1
<S
AB
Span Be
Arran~t 1
Points of
contraflexure
(from A)
Max. sagging
moment
Note 9
Arran&eJDent 2
Points ~f
contraflexure
(from A)
Max. sagging
moment
O.21m, 4.52m
141 kNm at
2.37 m
O.25m, 4.92m
165 kNm at
2.58 m
7.48m, 11.79m
141 kNm at
9.63 m
8.45m, 11.90m
35 kNm at
10.18 m
257.3
165
141
Bending Moment Diagram (kNm)
219.3
Note 10
97
Span moments:Arrangement 1
141 kNm
(both spans)
Arrangement 2
165 kNm and
35 kNm
Notes on Calculations
s.
The distribution' factorS have accOunted for the column stiffness, but the column
moments have been left out of the .calculations for conven~ce, as we are interested
only in'the beam. mOments. Since the. remOte ejlds of the columns are assumed to be
fixed, there will be no Carty over riidmentsfrom them to the beameQlumn joints. The
sign convention adopted is that clockwise moments are positive and anticlockwise
moments negative.
6.
In this symmetrical loading arrangement, the calculation is complete with just one
joint release.
7.
The difference between the moments MBA and M BC arises out of the fact that the
columns take part of the moment arising out
of asymmetrical loading.
.
8.
The sign convention adopted in this part of the solution is that sagging moments are
negative and ho"ing moments posi~ve.
9.
'This two~ frame is typical of most situations, where the maximum support
moments are' obtairied when all spans are loaded with the maximum design ultimate
loads (1.4 gk + 1.6 qk) and the maximum span moments are obtained when that span
is loaded with the maximum design ultimate load (1.4 gk + 1.6Q]J while the adjacent
spans are loaded with the minimum design ultimate load (1.0~).
The diagrams. for Load Arrangement 3 have not been shown, for the sake of clarity,
since they will be mirror images of those for Load Arrangement 2 about B.
Concluding Notes
II.
The beam moments could have. been obtained using a continuous beam analysis,
instead of a subframe analysis (Clause 3.2.1.2.4) as pointed out in Note 4. However,
column moments will then have to be estimated as indicated in Clause 3.2.1.2.5.
12.
If there are 3 or more approximately equal bays in the frame and the characteristic
imposed load does not exceed the characteristic dead load, the beam moments and
shear forces can be obtained from Table 3.6 for a continuous beam analysis (see
Cla~ 3.4.3).
98
where the basic wind speed is 40 mis, determine the moments and shear forces induced in
. a typical internal frame due to the wind load.
Introductory Notes
1.
The wind forces have to be determined using''cP 3: Ch. V: Part 2 (1972): Basic data
for the design of buildings: Loading: Wind loads:'
2.
In carrying out the analysis, the entire structure is analysed, assuming that only the
wind load acts on it and that points of contraflexure are developed at the centres of
all beams and columns (Clause 3.2. 1.3.2). A further assumption is made regarding
the distribution either of shear forces or of axial loads in columns (see Note 4 below).
Thus the analysis for the lateral loads is performed on a statically determinate
structure, as opposed to an indeterminate one as in the case of vertical load analysis.
Reference
Calculations
Output
Wind force
CP3:Ch.V:
Part 2
Note 3
Table 10
of
CP3:Ch.V:
Part 2
Analysis
The following assumptions are made:1. The wind force is applied at floor and roof levels,
the force at each level being proportional to the
areas shared by them.
99
Wind force on a
frame = 45 kN
Output
Calculations
Reference
Note 4
The forces at roof, 2nd floor and 1st floor levels are
(2/12.25)(45) = 7.35 leN (roof)
{(2+2)/12.25}(45) = 14.7 leN (2nd flopr) and
{(2+2.S0)/12.25}(45) = '16.5 ,1eN(lst floor)
6.llil
M<
6.llil
.
I lJ
r
.
~:~
t
e
7.35+
Note 5
Roof
+ 3.67
1.84
1.225
if225
225
1.225
'11.84
3.67 ...
.J..
1.84.. c 'l
i)
2.llil
2nd Fl r
. 2.llil
~ 5.51
?~
14. 7~ t"'4~+.....1
c!>~
11.03
l'
o
6.125
6.125
11.03~)
Note 6
16.5:+
~tl2.Qn
.....++t
~<4:
9.64'
~
17.83
Note 7
5.51
~ ~
't
19.28
Is t Fl r
2.fIn
'9.64
,.
17.83
"'35'1'.~~
.. 35.f . . . .
A
"J
.. C
. '.B.
.
. .'
..
35.'f
100
35.1
Moment at A, B
and C is ,~5..1
kNm
Calculations
Reference
Output
Shear force in
AB and BC is
11.7kN
Notes on Calculations
3.
The S2 factor can be calculated separately fordifferent parts of the stucture or for the
entire structure, using the total height of the structure. Since this is only a 3 storey
structure, it is simple and conservative to work with a single S2 value..
4.
If the column sizes are uniform, the vertical forces will be proportional to the
distances of the columns from the centroid of the column group. An alternative
assumption to this is to consider that the horizontal shear forces in the columns are
proportional to the bay sizes.
5.
The analysis is essentially a subframe analysis, but the entire frame has to analysed
step wise, from the top to bottom. At each step, the vertical column reactions are
obtained first, taking moments for the equilibrium of the entire sub structure, together
with the third assumption referred to in Note 4 above. The horizontal shear forces in
the columns can be found by taking moments about the points of contraflexure in the
beams, for the equilibrium of different parts of the substructure. The results obtained
from each substructure have to be used for analysing the next lower sub structure.
6.
If the column bases are not designed to resist moments, the point of contraflexure on
lowest column should be moved down to the level of the base (as opposed to being
at column mid height).
7.
In order to meet stability requirements, the lateral load at each level should be at least
1.5 % of the characteristic dead load at each level (Clause 3.1.4.2). Since the total
dead load ona beam (Example 30) is (23.7)(12) = 284.4 kN and 1.5% of this is 4.3
leN 7.35 kN), the above condition is met.
Concluding Notes
8.
For unbraced frames having three or more approximately equal bays, the combined
effect of wind and vertical loads can be obtained by superposing the results .of an
analysis such as the one above with those of a subframe analysis such as the one in
Example 30, after factoring the loads appropriately (Clause 3.2.1.3.2).
9.
For very slender structures, the overall stability of the structure against overturning
due to lateral wind loads should also be checked. The appropriate load combination
would be 1.4 W k (causing the overturning moment) and 1.0 G k (providing the
restoring moment).
101
Introductory Notes
1.
Although the design of reinforced concrete sections is carried out using the plastic
capacity of the section, the analysis of structures is still performed using elastic
methoos. The advantage to the designer arising out of the above plasticity is
incorporated in the analysis by moment redistribution.
2.
Calculations
Reference
Output
Support moments
Example 30
3.2.2.1
Note 3
Note 4
Note 5
AB
BA
BC
CB
Arrangement I
29.0
+180.1
180.1
+29.2
Arrangement 2
36.5
+180.1
180.1
+ 3.8
Span moments
These can be found by superimposing the free
bending moment diagrams on the above fixed end
moment variation.
102
support moment
at B = 180.1
kNm
"
Output
Calculations
Reference
Arraneement 1
Points of
contraflexure
(from A)
0.19m, 4.97m
7.03m, 11.81m
span moments:
Max. sagging
moment
Arraneement 2
Points of
contraflexure
(from A)
Max. sagging
moment
173 kNm at
2.58 m
0.24m,4.97m
168 kNm at
2.60 m
173 kNm at
9.42 m
8.57m, 11.91m
33 kNm at
10.24 m
Arrangement 1
173 kNm (both
spans)
Arrange':Dent 2
168 kNm
(span AB)
33 kNm
(span BC)
Notes on Calculations
3.
4.
In general, the x/d ratios in columns are larger than those required to permit plastic
hinge formation. Hence, column elastic moments should never ~ redistributed.
5.
The support moments in Arrangement 2 are made equal to 180.1 kNm  the value
obtained after 30% redistribution in Arrangement 1. This requires a much lower
percentage of downward redistribution for the elastic momentBA and an upward
redistribution for the elastic moment BC. Such upward redistribution may help to.
reduce span moments.
Concluding Notes
6.
Compared with the elastic design moments in Example 30, the redistributed design
moments are such that the support moment at B is considerably lower, while the span
moments are only slightly higher; hence the advantage in <:arrying out moment
redistribution  the total moment field is considerably reduced.
7.
The points of contraflexure are generally closer to the supports for the redistributed
bending moment diagrams than for the elastic bending moment diagrams. In order to
prevent serviceability state cracking on the top surface, the restriction on the
redistributed moment envelope specified in Note 2 above has to be applied.
103
ChlumS"(
Beans
~
5.(0} = 2(0}
I.
2.
3.
In calculating the amount of reinforcement required, the steel can be assumed to act
at its characteris~c value Le. 'Ym = 1.0. Furthermore, reinforcement designed for
other p~ can be used as ties (Clause 3.12.3.2).
Calculations
Reference
3.12.3.7
Output
V ertical ties
104
vertical ties
A, = 489 mm 2
Output
Calculations
Reference
3.12.3.5
Peripheral ties
3.12.3.4.2
3.12.3.4
F t = 44 leN
peripheral tie
A = 96 mm 2
lr = 5.0 m
Force I unit width = {(5+5)/(7.5)}(515)(44)
= 59 kN/m {> (1.0)(44) = 44 leN/m}
Total force = (59)(6.0) = 354 leN
Area of ties required = (354 x1oJ) I (460)
= 770 mm 2
If carried in the two peripheral beams, area required
per beam = (770)/2 = 335 mm 2
Note: spacing of ties = 6.0 m < (1.5)(5.0) = 7.5 m
3.12.3.4
Note 4
longitudinal
internal tie
A = 770 mm 2
Peripheral beams
Total tie area per beam in longitudinal direction =
96 + 335 = 431 mm 2
Total tie area per beam in transverse direction =
96 + 612 = 708 mm 2
105
transverse
internal tie
A == 3061 mm 2
peripheral
beams (tie rlf)
longitudinal 431 mm2
transverse 708 mm 2
Calculations
Reference
3.. 12.3.6
Coltamn ties
Note 5
Force
Output
column ties
A5 = 134 mm 2
Notes on Calculations
4.
Although the beam reinforcement may be greater than these tie areas required, it must
be ensured that continuity of tie reinforcement is provided  this has to be borne in
The,3% load is taken for 6 storeys,since there will be five floor slabs and the roof
above the level of the frrst floor column tie; using the floor loading for the roof as
~ll is a conservativeapproxjmation.
Conduding Notes
6.
If a structure has key elements (Le. those that carry, say, over 70 m2 or over 15%
of floor area at a given level), they have to be designed to withstand a specified load
(Clause 2.6.2, Part 2). Furthermore, if it is not possible to tie the structure (e.g. in
load bearing masonry construction), bridging elements have to be designed, assuming
that each,vertica110adbearing element is lost in tum (Clause 2.6.3, Part 2).
'}.
The overall layout of the structure should also be designed to provide robustness and
key elements should preferably be avoided.
106
EXAMPLE 34  CRACK
wmm CALCULAnON
The figure shows a cross section of a simply supported beam of 7 mspan, and supporting
dead and imposed loads of 20 kN/m each. Determine the crack widths (i) midway between
the bars, (ii) at the bottom comer and (iii) 2S0 mm below the neutral axis.
(
450
>f cu = 25 N/mm2
f y ;"'460 N/mm 2
690
750
3T25
000
Es
= 200 kN/mm 2
Introductory Notes
1.
This crack width calculation can be performed when the bar spacing rules are not
satisfied, to see whether this more accurate method will satisfy the crack width
requirements in Clause 3.2.4 of Part 2. It can also be used to estimate the actual
crack width in a flexural element.
Reference
Output
Calculations
Sectional data
= 24S kNm
Note 2
Ms = (20+20)(7) 2 18
equation 17
E c = 20 + (0.2)(25) = 25 kN/mm 2
Eeff = (0.5)Ee = 12.5 kN/mm 2
CX e = E/Eeff =' (200 xloJ) 1 (12.5 xHf) = 16
P = (3)(491) 1 (690)(450) = 0.00474
x/d = cxe.p + {cxe.p (2 + cxe.p)}o.S
= (16)(0.00474)
+ [(16)(0.00474){2+(16)(0.00474)}]O.S = 0.321
x = 221 mm
~/bd3 = (1/3)(x1d)3 + a.,..p {I  (x/d)}2
= (1/3)(0.321)3 + (16)(0.00474)(1Q.321Y
= 0.046
Ie = 6.80 x10 9 mm4
3.8.3
(Part 2)
Note 3
Note 4
Note 5
107
M s = 245 kNm
x = 221 mm
Ie
= 6.80 xl09
mm~
Calculations
Reference
Output
Calculation of strains
Strain in steel
.
equation 13
(part 2)
equation 13
3.8.3
(Part 2)
Note 6
= (245 x1(6)(690221) I
= 1.35 dO3
= 1.84 dO3
(part 2)
At 250 mm below neutral axis,
= (1.35 xlO'3)(250)/(690221) = 0.72 xlO3
tension stiffening = (450)(750221)(250) I
(3)(200 xl<Y)(3)(491)(690221) = 0.144 xlO3
3
3
Em = (0.72  0.144) xlO = 0.576 dO
EI.
= 750690(2512)
= 47.5 mm
+ (82.5)2}O.s
 12.5 = 89.5 mm
3er2 = {(60)2 + (60)2)}o.s
 12.5 = 72.4 mm
3er3 = {(60)2 + (69O221.250)2}O.S
12.5 = 214.5 mm
<lerl = {(60)2
Crack widths
equation 12
(part 2)
3.2.4
(part 2)
CW t
= (3)(89.5)(1.219 dO3) /
[I
{(2)(89.547.5)/(750221)}]
{(2)(72.447.5)/(750221)}]
< 0.3 mm; satisfactory.
CW3 = (3)(214.5)(0.576 xlO3) /
[1 + {(2)(214.547.5)/(750221)}]
= 0.227 mm < 0.3 mm; satisfactory.
= 0.242 mm
108
CW t
= 0.282
mm
CW2
= 0.242,
mm
CW3
= 0.227
mm
Calculations
Reference
...
3.12.11.2.3
Table 3.30
3.12.11.2.5
Table 3.30
Comparison with
Output
max. spacing
O.K.
comer distance
O.K.
Notes on Calculations
2.
3.
4.
The serviceability calculations are based on a triangular stress block for concrete in
the elastic state. There is no restriction on the x1d ratio, as in ultimate limit state
calculations.
5.
The effective second moment of area is found by considering only the area of
concrete that is not cracked; the area of steel is converted to an equivalent area of
concrete using the effective modular ratio, Qe'
6.
The strain at the required level in the concrete is found by calculating the strain from
elastic theory (Et), and reducing from this valuean allowance for tension stiffening
in the concrete; this is because in calculating Ie and El we assume that the concrete
has no tensile strength, whereas in fact it does.
Concluding Notes
7.
All the calculated crack widths are below 0.3 mm and hence satisfactory (Clause
3.2.4, Part 2). This could have been expected, because the maximum 'spacing and
comer distance rules are satisfied as well. It is these empirical rules that are used in
everyday design, because of their convenience.
8.
For beams of overall depth exceeding 750 mm, side reinforcement in the form of
small diameter bars at spacings not exceeding 250 mtn over two thirds of the beam
depth from the tension face must also be provided;~as per Clause 3.12.11.2.6.
109
375
)
2T25
125
fcu
= 25 N/mm2
fy
= 460 N/mm2
Bs = 200 kN/mm2
Introductory Notes
1.
This deflection calculation can be performed when the span/depth ratio check fails,
to see whether this more accurate method will satisfy the deflection requirements in
Clause 3.2.1.1 of Part 2. It can also be used to estimate the actual deflection of a
flexural element.
2.
Where domestic and office space is concerned, 25 % of the imposed load can be
considered permanent; where storage areas are concerned the above figure should be
increased to 75 %.
3.
The age of loading is when the fonnwork is removed, at which point much of the
dead load and some imposed construction loads will be acting on the concrete
elements.
Reference
CaIculatio.
Output
Chart 2
(Part 3)
equation 8
equation 7
Table 3.10
110
span/depth
check violated
Output
Calculations
Reference
Ee = 20 + (0.2)(25) = 25 kN/~B.\2
Eff. section thickness =(2)(375)(225) I (2)(375 + 225)
= 141 mm
RH = 85 % (assumed for Sri Lanka)
Long term creep coefficient, 4> = 1.8
Eeff = 25 I (1 + 1.8) = 8.93 kN/mm2
fes = 120 x106
P = 982 I (225)(325) = 0.0134
a e = Es I Eeff = 200 I 8.93 = 22.4
x/d
=  ae.p + {ae.p(2 +
=  (22.4)(0.0134) +
= 0.53
Hence, x = (0.53)(325) = 172 mm
Ie/bd 3
3.6
(Part 2)
= (1I3)(x/d)3
= (3rrm
.28 x1oti) 
{(113)(225)(375172)3(0.55) I (325172)}
= 36 x106 Nmm
Calculation of curvatures
lIrlp
= M I Eeff.Ie
= (36 x1(j6) I
1Ires
= fesaeS s I
= 22.4
xld = 0.53
x = 172 mm
+ a e.p{l  (x/d)}2
(22.4)(0.0134)(1  0.53)2
= (113)(0.53)3 +
= 0.116
Note 5
ae
a e.p)}O.5
[(22.4)(0.0134){2 + (22.4)(0.0134)}f.5
Note 4
1\:=25 kN/mm2
Ie
Ie = 896 x1()6
mm4
7'
.. . ,
0ulJwt
To find instantaneous
Be =25 kN/mm 2 . . .
a = 200 I 25 =8 ....
.
.'
= 0.368
'.."
Ie = 459 xl()6
lIrit llri = (Mtot  M.rm> I Ecle
~ (61.2538.2$)X1()6 I (2~ xl(3)(459 xl~
= 2.01 xl<r' nunI
lIr = lIrlp + IIres + (llrit .;. 11rin>
'1= (4.5 + 0.45 + 2.01) x10~ mm I
= 6.96 xlO~ mmI
lIr= 6.96 xlO~
Jd
Note 6
mm I
Estimation of det'ls;gion
Table 3.1
K =0.104
K.l~lIr)
= (0.104)(7~6.96xIO~ == 35.5 mm
a = 35.5 mm
(Part 2)
3.2.1.1
(Part 2)
Note 7
Notes on Calculations
4.
The serviceability calculations are ~on a triangular stress block for concrete in
the elastic state. There \s n., resttietionon. the x1d ratio, as in ultimate limit state
calculations.
5.
6.
7.
The final long term d~tlection is greater than spanl250. Hence, it may be visually
unacceptable.
"
Concluding Note
8.
.,:
',~,~" <~,'~'~'~~""
'$,<.;
';,'.
~,,:,.(
;~'\',
"
i . . ~
' __,
'1l:~~."."
Muito mais do que documentos
Descubra tudo o que o Scribd tem a oferecer, incluindo livros e audiolivros de grandes editoras.
Cancele quando quiser.