Group 16

Robert Brooks
Ryan Shene
Kevin Baxter
Concrete Structures
Term Project
4/24/2013
Table of Contents
Design Report p.1-7
Kassimali for Design 1 and 2 p.8-17
Design for Bending, Shear, Skin Reinforcement, Dev. Length and Deflection p.18-25
Design for Dev. Length in Girder p.26
Kassimali for Service Loads p.27-29
Serviceability Check p.30-31
Column Design p.32-38
Girder Sections p.39
Stress-Strain Diagrams p.40
Column Sections p.41
Final Design p.42

Design Report

1
Objective
Design and detail the most economical frame including both girders and columns
using the given structural frame of warehouse which consists of two-hinged
frame supporting a roof slab with transverse girder. Our design is meant to meet
the ACI code 318 requirement. Our report will include a detailed description
of the structural frame, analysis, design assumptions made, structural design,
and serviceability. Included in this analysis will be detailed drawings of all the
members and elements of the frame.
2
Overview
1) Objective
2) Frame and Loads
3) Design
4) Structural Analysis
5) Ultimate Structural Design
6) Serviceability
7) ACI Codes
8) Conclusion
3
1) Frame and Loads
Our frame that was given spans a distance of 44 feet from the middle of each column,
with 5 concentrated loads across the girder. The loads were spread at x=0ft, x=10ft, x=22ft,
x=34ft, and x=44ft. The two end loads were 50kip loads while the 3 middle loads were 75 kips.
It was also subjected to 2 horizontal wind loads. The center of the girder is at a distance of 20ft
above the bottom of the column. One wind load of 5kips was placed 10ft above the bottom of
the column while the other was placed at the center of the girder, 20ft above the bottom of the
column.
We labeled our loads starting with the applied loads and then working to the wind
loads. We called the 50 kip load P1, and the 75 kip load P2, the 5 kip wind load applied to the
middle was named P3, and the 10 kip wind load at the top left joint was P4 . P2 was applied 3
times over the beam and P1 was applied at the ends of the beam. We assumed the unit weight
of concrete to be .15 kips/foot and would multiply it by the area of the cross section of our
beam to calculate the member force that is constant in both design cases 1 and 2. We then
computed the factored live loads using the equation, multiplying the load *.4*1.6. For the dead
load we multiplied .6 *1.2*the load. In total we have a factored load for P1 of 68kips which was
found by summing the weighted and factored live and dead loads caused by P1. Similarly for P2
we have a factored load of 102 kips. These load calculations were for design 1 in which the live
loads were factored 1.6 and the wind loads were not considered. For design case 2 the wind
loads were factored 1.6, making P3=8kips and P4=16kips. In both cases the dead loads were
factored 1.2. For design case two the final factored weighted loads came out to be; P1=56kips,
P2=84kips, P3=8kips, and P4=16kips. From here we will decide on the dimensions of our beam.
In MathCad we broke up P1 and P2 into live and dead load portions for both cases and labeled
the load that that would be used for design with a subscript u. We repeated a similar process
for the wind load situation.
2) Design
For the initial design of the beam we used the height (h) to be equal to L/25, and b to be
equal to h/2 where L is the length of the span of the beam, 44 feet. From this we calculated
h=21.12inches and b=10.56inches. After many estimations of As (area of tension steel) and As
(area of compression steel) we finally calculated that a cross section of h=36inches and
b=18inches would yield reasonable results. Our design was requiring more compression steel
than tension steel when running through calculations because our cross section was too small.
4
We increased b and h until As was closer to half of As; we knew As > As was not a sound
design.
When designing the column we knew that the column had a constant width cross
section, b=18inches because it had to match up with the girder. Our h in the column cross
section changed as it tapered down from h of column = h of girder down to h of column=.6h of
girder. In Kassamili we could not adjust for the tapering of the column so we used an average
column h of .8h of girder.
3) Structural Analysis
We completed the majority of the structural analysis using the Kassamili software. We ran 2
analyses, the first with live loads factored 1.6 and the wind loads not considered. In the second
analysis the live loads were factored 1.0 and the wind loads were factored 1.6. We have our
areas and moments of inertia labeled on our MathCad file. Ic is the moment of inertia of the
column and I is of the girder, similarly with A and Ac. We have printouts of both Kassamili
analyses in our report. We used our Vmax and positive and negative ultimate bending
moments from our Kassamili analyses.
4) Ultimate Structural Design
Our Mu for positive and negative bending came from our Kassamili results. Our maximum
shear came from design 1 and so did our Mu for positive bending (Mpos.u). Our Mu for
negative bending(Mneg.u) came from design 2. Our Mpos.u=1390 kip*ft, Vmax=167.85kips,
and Mneg.u=970.833kip*ft. We divided the moments by .9 and the shear by .75 to obtain
our minimum Mn and Vn respectively. Then we estimated a calculation of As and As. We
did this by assuming d=h-3.5 inches, and that epsilon.t was equal to .005. This allowed us to
calculate x and then we assumed that we could use .5x because of the assumption that steel
would control deflection. We assumed d=3inches and from there we had everything that we
needed to calculate an estimate of As and As. Next we chose bars to be around our estimated
As and As. Then we could calculate d and d, show that the compression steel remained elastic
(after the initial assumption that it yielded), and then we could calculate x. Once all of this
was completed we could calculate our Mn and show that it was greater than Mu/.9. This was
correct; we continued to show that the section followed Asmin code, bar spacing code, and
epsilon.t code. We followed the same procedure for the negative moment bending section;
the work can be seen and followed along with without another step by step explanation. Our
results gave us 12 #9 bars in tension and 5 #9 bars in compression for the positive bending
moment section and 7 #9 bars in tension and 2 #9 bars in compression for the negative bending
5
moment section.
After the bending reinforcement was completed we calculated the shear reinforcement.
We took our Vmax for design 1 and design 2 from our Kassamili printouts, as well as our axial
force (Nu). We used our area of the girder, d for the negative bending (dwind), and d for the
positive bending (d1) in our calculations of Vc. The concrete resisted more shear in the case
of the wind loading, but because the Vmax was less, the steel was required to resist more
shear for the first design case. We continued our design, calculating the stirrups required to
meet our calculated Vs. We got our spacing, checked Avmin, and made sure our spacing was
less than Smax. Because our Vs was less than 4sqrt(fc)b*d our Smax was d/2. We followed a
similar process to find the steel required to resist shear in the section of negative bending, but
Vs was negative so we could use Avmin at almost Smax. From our shear calculations we got #4
stirrups at 5.5inches for the positive bending moment section and #4 stirrups at 15inches for
the negative bending moment sections.
We do not need skin reinforcement for cracking because our height, h=36. Skin
reinforcement is only required when h is greater than 36 inches. We also do not need to test
for deflection because for our 2end continuous beam our minimum required h is L/21. L/
21=25.14inches and since our h=36inches, we do not need to test for deflection according to
table 9.5a. We calculated our development length, ld, that our top tension reinforcement bars
needed to continue down passed the bottom of the girder. In order to do this we assumed that
Psi sub t, e, and s were all 1, and that Ktr was 0 because no bars were being spliced. From there
we simply plugged into the equation. To calculate the distance from the mid-span and from the
edge that we could cut off steel reinforcing bars within the girder we drew free body diagrams
and solved for x, this can be seen in one of the hand written sheets. To design the column we
used the SP Column program with the print outs attached. The design for shear in the column
was controlled by the maximum spacing. We solved for the maximum spacing of stirrups in the
column, which was controlled by the minimum column dimension. We had to use 2 stirrups
for the lower section because we only had 8 bars. We needed to use 3 stirrups for the upper
section because of the increased number of bars. It is acceptable according to the ACI code to
do every other bar if we have an odd number, which is what we did.
6
5.) Serviceability
In order to determine our stress in the concrete and in the tension steel in the girder we had to
do a 3
rd
Kassamili analysis under the service loads. To do this we input the loads exactly as they
appear of the project handout. Our P1=50kips, P2=75kips, P3=5kips, P4=10kips. We completed
the analysis and found the maximum positive and negative bending moments. From there we
could complete our serviceability analysis. Under service loads the concrete is in more stress
in the positive bending moment section than in the negative bending moment section, while
the steel is in higher stress in the negative bending moment section than the positive bending
moment section. Overall, our serviceability analysis makes sense.
6) ACI Codes
We checked a number of ACI codes throughout the design and analysis of our frame. Below is a
list of the codes that we checked.
As(min) ACI code 10.5.1
Epsilon.t ACI code 10.3.4
Minimum Bar Spacing
Av(min) ACI code 11.5.6.3
Stirrup Spacing ACI code 11.5.5.3
Deflection ACI Table 9.5a
Skin Reinforcement ACI code 10.6.7
Development Length
Mn > Mu
Stirrups Required in Column
7) Conclusion
Our goal was to design the most economical and stable frame for the warehouse given. This
was a very in depth project that included information from the entire year. It was a very
practical and useful project to bring together everything that we learned this semester.
7
ueslgn 1
ueslgn 1 ueflecLlon
8
ueslgn 2 ueflecLlon
ueslgn 2
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Ryan Shene, Kevin Baxter, Robert Brooks Concrete Design Term Project 4/3/13
150
lb
It
3
!"
L 44It !" h
L
25
!" b
h
2
!"
h 21.12 in # " b 10.56 in # " Tried h=22 and b=11, didn't work, increase h and b
h 36in !" b 18in !" hc .8 h # 28.8 in # " !" bc b 18 in # " !" A h b # 648 in
2
# " !"
I b
h
3
12
# !" I 6.998 10
4
$ in
4
# " Ic b
hc
3
12
# 3.583 10
4
$ in
4
# " !" Ac hc b # 518.4 in
2
# " !"
W
c
h b # # 675
lb
It
# " !" P1 50kip !" P2 75kip !"
P1
LL
.4 P1 # 1.6 # !" P1
DL
.6 P1 # 1.2 # !" P1
u
P1
LL
P1
DL
% !" P1
u
68 kip # "
P2
LL
.4 P2 # 1.6 # !" P2
DL
.6 P2 # 1.2 # !" P2
u
P2
LL
P2
DL
% !" P2
u
102 kip # "
Wind Loads
P3 5kip !" P4 10kip !" P3
u
1.6 P3 # !" P4
u
1.6 P4 # !"
PW1
u
P1
DL
.4 P1 # % 56 kip # " !" P3
u
8 kip # " P4
u
16 kip # "
PW2
u
P2
DL
.4 P2 # % 84 kip # " !"
Maximum Moments and Maxium Shear
Vmax 167.85kip !"
Mpos
u
1.6686 10
4
# kip in # 1.39 10
3
$ kip It # # " !" Mneg
u
1.1650 10
4
# kip in # 970.833 kip It # # " !"
Mnpos
Mpos
u
.9
1.545 10
3
$ kip It # # " !"
Mneg
u
.9
1.079 10
3
$ kip It # # "
Givens and assumptions:
Ic 6000 !" Iy 60000 !" .85 .05
Ic 4000 & ( )
1000
'
(
)
*
+
,
& 0.75 " !"
d h 3.5in & 32.5 in # " !"
x 19.5 .6x & !" x 1.6x 19.5 !" 1.6x
x
.003
.005
-
.
/
0
1
2
d x & ( ) # !" x
.003
.005
d # 19.5 in # "
x
19.5 in #
1.6
12.187 in # " !" Assuming that the steel is going to control deflection try x=.5x
@Et=.005
x .5 x # 6.094 in # " !" a x # 4.57 in # " !"
18
Calculate moment resisted by tension reinforcement
Ic 6
kip
in
2
!" Cc .85 Ic # b # a # 419.555 kip # " !" Tc Cc !" dprime 3in !"
Es 29000
kip
in
2
!"
Mnc Tc d
a
2
$
%
&
'
(
)
*
# 1.056 10
3
+ kip It # # " !"
Mns Mnpos Mnc $ 488.602 kip It # # " !"
Mns
d dprime $
198.753 kip # " Cs
Mns
d dprime $
198.753 kip # " !" Ts Cs !"
prime
x dprime $ ( )
x
,
-
.
/
0
1
.003 # 1.523 10
3 $
+ " !" Ey .00207 !"
prime Ey 2 1 "
Result of 1 means that it is true, Eprime is less than Ey, so the
compression steel remains elastic
Is
prime
Es prime # .85Ic $ 39.069
kip
in
2
# " !" Asprime
Cs
Is
prime
5.087 in
2
# " !"
Calculate the Tension Steel
T Tc Ts 3 618.308 kip # " !" Iy 60
kip
in
2
!" As
T
Iy
10.305 in
2
# " !"
Try 5 #9 bars in compression and 12 #9 bars in tensi on with #4 bar for stirrups
As 12in
2
!" Asprime 5in
2
!"
g1
5 2.5in
1.128in
2
3
%
&
'
(
)
*
# 5 2.5in 1.128in 2 # 3
1.128in
2
3
%
&
'
(
)
*
# 3 2 2.5in 4 1.128 # in 3
1.128in
2
3
%
&
'
(
)
*
# 3
,
-
.
/
0
1
12
!"
d h g1 $ 31.244 in # " !" dprime 3.064in !"
As Iy # 720 kip # "
Given x 6in !"
As Iy # .85Ic b # # x # Asprime Iy .85 Ic # $ ( ) # 3 !
x Find x ( ) !" x 6.471 in # "
This is 0 because s' is less
than Ey which means that
the steel remains elastic
prime .003
x dprime $ ( )
x
,
-
.
/
0
1
# 1.579 10
3 $
+ " !" prime Ey 4 0 "
19
2.) Assume the compression steel remains elastic
As Iy ! .85 Ic ! b ! ! x ! Es
.003 x dprime " ( ) !
x
#
$
%
&
'
(
.85Ic "
#
$
%
&
'
(
Asprime ! ) !
.85 Ic ! 5.1
kip
in
2
! *
.85 Ic ! b ! ! 68.85
kip
in
! * Es .003 ! 87
kip
in
2
! * 87 dprime ! 266.568 in ! *
720 68.85x
87x 266.568 " ( )
x
#
$
%
&
'
(
5.1 "
#
$
%
&
'
(
5 ! ) !
Plugged into calculator and solved, x=7.2in x 7.2in +*
This is 1, meaning it is true,
therefore the compression
steel remains elastic
prime .003
x dprime " ( )
x
#
$
%
&
'
(
! 1.723 10
3 "
, * +* prime Ey - 1 *
a x! 5.4 in ! * +*
Is
prime
Es prime ! .85Ic " 44.877
kip
in
2
! * +* Cs Asprime Is
prime
! 224.383 kip ! * +*
Cc .85 Ic ! b ! a ! 495.72 kip ! * +* d 31.244 in ! *
Mn Cc d
a
2
"
.
/
0
1
2
3
! Cs d dprime " ( ) ! ) 1.706 10
3
, kip It ! ! * +*
Ultimate Moment is Mnpos This is 1 meaning that our Mn is greating
than our ultimate moment, meaing the
current design meets the minimun
strength requirement. Mn>Mu/
Mnpos 1.545 10
3
, kip It ! ! * Mn Mnpos 4 1 *
Check Asmin and s.t
Asmin1 b d ! 3 !
Ic 5 6
Iy
! ! Asmin1 3 18 ! 32.308 !
6000 5 6
60000
! 2.252 * +* in
2
Asmin2
200 18 ! 32.308 !
60000
1.938 * +* in
2
Asmin=2.252in^2, As=10in^2 This follows AC code
t
.003 d x " ( ) !
x
0.01 * +* The steel yields and this follows
AC code, also =.9 as assumed
t
.005 4 1 *
The bar spacing also follows AC code because only 5 #9
bars can fit in 1 row and that is how many we have
20
Mneg
u
1.1650 10
4
! kip in ! 970.833 kip It ! ! " #"
Mnneg
Mneg
u
.9
1.079 10
3
$ kip It ! ! " #"
Givens and assumptions:
Ic 6000 #" Iy 60000 #" .85 .05
Ic 4000 % ( )
1000
&
'
(
)
*
+
% 0.75 " #"
d h 3.5in % 32.5 in ! " #"
x 19.5 .6x % #" .6x 1.6x 19.5 #" 1.6x
x
.003
.005
,
-
.
/
0
1
d x % ( ) ! #" x
.003
.005
d ! 19.5 in ! "
x
19.5 in !
1.6
12.187 in ! " #"
Assuming steel is going to control deflection try x=.5x @Et=.005
x .5 x ! 6.094 in ! " #" a x ! 4.57 in ! " #"
Calculate moment resisted by tension reinforcement
Ic 6
kip
in
2
#" Cc .85 Ic ! b ! a ! 419.555 kip ! " #" Tc Cc #" dprime 3in #"
Es 29000
kip
in
2
#"
Mnc Tc d
a
2
%
,
-
.
/
0
1
! 1.056 10
3
$ kip It ! ! " #"
Mns Mnneg Mnc % 22.305 kip It ! ! " #"
Mns
d dprime %
9.073 kip ! " Cs
Mns
d dprime %
9.073 kip ! " #" Ts Cs #"
prime
x dprime % ( )
x
&
'
(
)
*
+
.003 ! 1.523 10
3 %
$ " #" Ey .00207 #"
prime Ey 2 1 "
Result of 1 means that it is true, Eprime is less than Ey, so the
compression steel remains elastic
Is
prime
Es prime ! .85Ic % 39.069
kip
in
2
! " #"
Asprime
Cs
Is
prime
0.232 in
2
! " #"
Calculate the Tension Steel
T Tc Ts 3 428.628 kip ! " #" Iy 60
kip
in
2
#" As
T
Iy
7.144 in
2
! " #"
21
Try 2 #9 bars in compression and 7 #9 bars in tension with #4 bar for stirrups
As 7in
2
!" Asprime 2.256in
2
!"
g1
5 2.5in
1.128in
2
#
$
%
&
'
(
)
* 2 2.5in 1.128in 2 * #
1.128in
2
#
$
%
&
'
(
)
* #
+
,
-
.
/
0
10
!"
d h g1 1 33.404 in * " !"
dprime 3.064in !"
As Iy * 420 kip * "
Given x 6in !"
As Iy * .85Ic b * * x * Asprime Iy .85 Ic * 1 ( ) * # !
x Find x ( ) !" x 4.301 in * "
This is 0, meaning false
because s' is less than Ey
which means that the steel
remains elastic
prime .003
x dprime 1 ( )
x
+
,
-
.
/
0
* 8.63 10
4 1
2 " !" prime Ey 3 0 "
2.) Assume the compression steel remains elastic
As Iy * .85 Ic * b * * x * Es
.003 x dprime 1 ( ) *
x
+
,
-
.
/
0
.85Ic 1
+
,
-
.
/
0
Asprime * # !
.85 Ic * b * * 68.85
kip
in
* " Es .003 * 87
kip
in
2
* "
87 dprime * 266.568 in * " .85 Ic * 5.1
kip
in
2
* "
420 68.85x
87x 266.568 1 ( )
x
+
,
-
.
/
0
5.1 1
+
,
-
.
/
0
2.256 * # !
Plugged into calculator and solved, x=5.12in
x 5.12in !" This is 1, meaning it is true,
therefore the compression
steel remains elastic prime .003
x dprime 1 ( )
x
+
,
-
.
/
0
* 1.205 10
3 1
2 " !" prime Ey 4 1 "
a x* 3.84 in * " !" Is
prime
Es prime * .85Ic 1 29.836
kip
in
2
* " !"
Cs Asprime Is
prime
* 67.31 kip * " !" Cc .85 Ic * b * a * 352.512 kip * " !"
22
This is 1 meaning that
it is true, Mn>Mu/
Mn Cc d
a
2
!
"
#
$
%
&
'
( Cs d dprime ! ( ) ( ) 1.095 10
3
* kip It ( ( + ,+ Mn Mnneg - 1 +
Check Asmin and s.t
b 18 in ( + d 33.404 in ( + x 5.12 in ( +
Asmin1 b d ( 3 (
Ic . /
Iy
( ! Asmin1 3 18 ( 33.754 (
6000 . /
60000
( 2.353 + ,+ in
2
Asmin2
200 18 ( 33.754 (
60000
2.025 + ,+ in
2
Asmin=2.353in^2, As=7in^2 This follows AC code
t
.003 d x ! ( ) (
x
0.017 + ,+
The steel yields and this follows
AC code, also =.9 as assumed
t
.005 - 1 +
This also follows AC code for bar spacing, there is a maximum
of 5 bars in 1 row and that is the most we have in 1 row
Calculating Shear Reinforcement: Find Vs for both scenarios and design for the one with larger Vs.
Vmax1 167.85kip ,+ Vmaxwind 150kip ,+ Nu1 45700lb ,+ Nu
wind
48500lb ,+
Ag 18in 36 ( in ,+ Ag 648 in
2
( + b 18 in ( + d
wind
33.404in ,+ d1 31.244in ,+
Ic 6000 ,+
Vc1 2 1
lb
in
2
Nu1
2000 Ag (
)
"
#
$
%
&
'
( Ic ( b ( d1 ( 9.02 10
4
* lb ( + ,+
Vc1 90.2kip ,+
Vcwind 2
Nu
wind
2000 Ag (
1
lb
in
2
)
"
#
#
$
%
&
&
'
( Ic ( b ( d
wind
( 9.663 10
4
* lb ( + ,+ Vcwind 96.63kip ,+
Vn1
Vmax1
.75
223.8 kip ( + ,+ Vnwind
Vmaxwind
.75
200 kip ( + ,+
Vs1 Vn1 Vc1 ! 133.6 kip ( + ,+ Vswind Vnwind Vcwind ! 103.37 kip ( + ,+
This means that we must continue the design considering the first situation, if we put in enough
steel to resist the shear in the first situation the second situation requirements will also be met
because it does not need as much steel.
23
Vsmax 8 6000 ! 18 ! 31.244 ! 3.485 10
5
" # $# Vsmax 348.5kip $#
Vs1 Vsmax % Can proceed with design of stirrups.
Try 1 #4 hoop
Av 2 .2 ! in
2
0.4 in
2
! # $# Iy 60
kip
in
2
! # d1 31.244 in ! # Vs1 133.6 kip ! #
Spacing Av Iy !
d1
Vs1
! 5.613 in ! # $# Try 1 #4 hoop at 5.5'' S 5.5in $#
Check Av(min)
Avmin .75 6000 !
18 5.5 !
60000
! 0.096 # $# or Avmin 50 18 !
5.5
60000
! 0.083 # $#
Avmin .1in
2
$# Av Avmin & The size stirrups and spacing is sufficient
Check Smax
Limit 4 6000 18 ! 31.244 ! 1.743 10
5
" # $# Limit 174.3kip $#
Vs1 Limit % Due to this the maximum spacing is d/2 < 24''
d1
2
15.622 in ! # Maximum spacing is 15.622in, actual is 5.5in, follows code for spacing
Now find shear reinforcement for section 2 of the beam.
Vu2 59.2kip $# Vn2
Vu2
.75
78.933 kip ! # $# Vc1 90.2 kip ! # Vc2 Vc1 $#
Vc2 Vn2 & Due to this, the Vs is negative so we use minimum Av and maximum spacing
Use 1#4 stirrup still instead of 1#3 stirrup because #4 stirrup works better for the first section and
when constructing the beam it saves time and money to use all the same size stirrups instead of
having two that are very close together in size. n essence, instead of trying to use a #3 stirrup, a
#4 stirrup will be more economical; proceed design with #4 stirrup
Calculate maximum spacing
d1
2
15.622 in ! # is maximum spacing, so use #4 stirrups at 15inches for section 2
24
Skin reinforcement is not required for the beam because h=36 inches, so cracking is not an issue
in this beam. Also, minimum thickness as followed in AC Table 9.5a is L/21, which is 25.14inches,
since h=36 inches we do not need to calculate the deflection, it will pass deflection testing.
Design for Development length
d
b
1.128 !" 1 !"
Ld
3
40
#
$
%
&
'
(
Iy
Ic )
#
$
%
&
'
(
)
t e
)
s
C
b
K
tr
*
+ ,
d
b
-
.
/
0
1
2
)
-
.
.
.
/
0
1
1
1
2
) d
b
) !
Iy 60000 !" Ic 6 10
3
3 "
s
1 !"
e
1 !"
Assume we are not using
epoxy coated bars
t
1 !"
C
bcover
2 .5 *
1.128
2
* 3.064 " !"
C
bbar
.5 .25 ) 18 2 2 ( ) 4 2 .5 ( ) 4 2
1.128
2
#
$
%
&
'
(
4
-
.
/
0
1
2
) 1.484 " !"
C
b
1.484 !" K
tr
0 !"
Assuming no bars are
spliced
Development Length for #9 bar is
49.811 inches
Ld
3
40
#
$
%
&
'
(
Iy
Ic )
#
$
%
&
'
(
)
t e
)
s
C
b
K
tr
*
+ ,
d
b
-
.
/
0
1
2
)
-
.
.
.
/
0
1
1
1
2
) d
b
) 49.811 " !"
The top bars in the girder must bend and continue down into the column a distance of 49.8
inches past the bottom of the girder. We will have them continue down 50'' for simplicity.
Mn for 2 #9 bars bars ignoring As'
As2 2 1in
2
+ ,
) 2 in
2
) " !" Iy 60
kip
in
2
!" T As2 Iy ) 120 kip ) " !"
a
T
.85 6 )
kip
in
2
b )
1.307 in ) " !" d 36in 2in 4 .5in 4
1.128in
2
4 32.936 in ) " !"
Mn2 .9 T ) d
a
2
4
#
$
%
&
'
(
) 290.542 kip It ) ) " !"
Mn12 1706kip It ) !"
25
26
27
28
29
Serviceability: Finding stress in steel and concrete
Aspos 12 !" Asneg 7 !" b 18 !" dpos 32.244 !" d'pos 3.064 !"
As'pos 5 !" As'neg 2 !" dneg 33.404 !" d'neg 3.064 !"
Ec 57000 6000 !" Es 29 10
6
# !" n
Es
Ec
6.568 " !" Ic 6 !"
'pos
As'pos
b dpos #
8.615 10
3 $
% " !" 'neg
As'neg
b dneg #
3.326 10
3 $
% " !"
pos
Aspos
b dpos #
0.021 " !" neg
Asneg
b dneg #
0.012 " !"
Kpos 'pos n 1 $ ( ) # pos n # & | |
2
2 n pos # 'pos
d'pos
dpos
'
(
)
*
+
,
# n 1 $ ( ) &
-
.
/
0
1
2
& 'pos n 1 $ ( ) # n pos # & | | $ !"
Kpos 0.377 "
Kneg 'neg n 1 $ ( ) # neg n # & | |
2
2 n neg # 'neg
d'neg
dneg
'
(
)
*
+
,
# n 1 $ ( ) &
-
.
/
0
1
2
& 'neg n 1 $ ( ) # n neg # & | | $ !"
Kneg 0.312 "
jdpos dpos 1
Kpos
3
$
'
(
)
*
+
,
# 28.192 " !"
jdneg dneg 1
Kneg
3
$
'
(
)
*
+
,
# 29.934 " !"
From doing an analysis of our design under the service loads in Kassamili got our Ms for both
positive and negative bending
Mspos 949.17 !"
both values are in kip-ft, so we must multiply by 12 when
calculating fc and fs Msneg 750.78 !"
30
Now we can find the stress in the concrete, fc, and the stress in the tension steel, fs.
Icpos
2 Mspos ! 12 ! ( )
jdpos Kpos ! b ! dpos ! ( )
3.693 " #"
both values are in ksi
Icneg
2 Msneg ! 12 ! ( )
jdneg Kneg ! b ! dneg !
3.212 " #"
Ispos
Mspos 12 ! ( )
Aspos jdpos !
33.668 " #"
both values are in ksi
Isneg
Msneg 12 ! ( )
Asneg jdneg !
42.996 " #"
Under service loads the concrete is under slightly more stress in the maximum positive bending
moment section while the steel is under more stress in the maximum negative bending moment
section.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42