Simplified Flexural Design

for Beams and Slabs

Learn time-saving design methods that comply with ACI 318 strength
and serviceability requirements and minimize building costs

BY DAVID A. FANELLA AND S.K. GHOSH efficiency in structural design, re- get construction drawings in the
duces total construction cost. In owners hands faster and make
n low- to mid-sized stru c- fact, using slightly more materials more money in the process. Simpli-

I t u re s, its often unnecessary

and uneconomical to follow a
design code that encompass-
es all structures. The added design
costs needed to prepare thorough
can reduce overall building cost if
the added material simplifies con-
struction.
The following guidelines give
practicing engineers tips on reduc-
fied designs usually yield members
that are more conservative than re-
quired by code, but savings due to
the ease of construction should off-
set additional material costs.
studies that effectively utilize ma- ing design time for smaller pro-
t e rials are nt justified in low - ri s e jects, while still complying with ACI Design Guidelines
b u i l d i n g s. For low- to mid-size d 318-89 (revised 1992). Using these This simplified design approach
s t ru c t u re s, designing for expedi- simple and quick design proce- can be used for conventionally re-
ency in construction, rather than d u re s, experienced engineers can inforced cast-in-place concrete
buildings of moderate size and
Portland Cement Association
Figure 1. Deflections height with usual spans and story
of beams and one- heights. Maximum building plan
way slabs dont need dimension should be in the range
to be computed if of 200 to 250 feet to reduce the ef-
the overall minimum fects of shrinkage and temperature.
thickness meets ACI Maximum building height should
requirements. The be in the range of four to six stories
ACI requirements to justify the economics of simpli-
are shown in this fied design.
figure. To find the Design dead, live, and wind
minimum thickness
loads are in accordance with
in inches, enter the
graph at the bottom American Society of Civil En g i -
axis with the clear neers Minimum Design Loads for
span in feet. Move Buildings and Other St r u c t u re s
up until intersecting (ASCE 7-88), with reductions in
the appropriate span live loads as permitted in ASCE 7-
condition. Next, 88. The local building code should
move horizontally be consulted for any possible dif-
and read the ferences from reductions permit-
minimum thickness ted in ASCE 7-88. If resistance to
from the vertical earthquake-induced forces, earth
scale.
or liquid pressure, impact effects,
 Table 1 Design Coefficients for Flexural Members

Concrete Assumed Size Reinforcement

Strength, Reinforcement Equation Required
f c (psi) Ratio 12 (34 pb ) bd 2 = As =
3000 0.8% 30.6M u M u /3.94d
Use 30 M u (M u /4d)
4000 1.1% 22.9 M u M u /3.93d
Use 20 M u (M u /4d)
5000 1.3% 19.3 M u M u /3.97d
or structural effects of differential Use 20 M u (M u /4d)
settlement, shrinkage, or temper-
Note: M u is in kip-ft, b and d are in inches, and A s is in square inches. Design
ature change need to be included coefficients are for Grade 60 reinforcement.
in the design, such effects should
be considered separately. They are
not included within the scope of using appropriate load factors and and may result in an answer within
the simplified design techniques strength reduction factors. 25% of the actual deflection, or
presented here. even less accurate. Most designers
All simplified design procedures Choose Member Depth to select the minimum member
comply with provisions of Building Control Deflection depth using empirical length-to-
Code Requirements for Re i n f o rc e d Calculating short- and long-term depth ratios that provide satisfacto-
Concrete (ACI 318-89, revised 1992) deflections can be time-consuming ry deflection performance under

DESIGN DECISIONS THAT REDUCE FORMWORK COSTS

The cost of formwork in a cast-in-place structure
can run as high as 60% of the total structural cost.
Designers, therefore, should choose a structural sys-
tem that minimizes formwork costs. Consider form-
work economy during the conceptual or preliminar y
design stages of the project. This also is a good time
to consult a contractor for his recommendations on
economical formwork design. The three basic princi-
ples in formwork economy are the use of standard
forms, repetition, and simplicity. Here are some sug-
gestions for different member types.
Slabs. Avoid offsets and irregularities that are labor
intensive and increase overall material costs. Depres-
sions in the slab should be designed by adding the
thickness to the top of the slab; keep the bottom
face flush.
Beams. For a line of continuous beams, keep the
beam size constant and vary the reinforcement from
span to span. For a joist floor system, use wide flat
beams as theyre easier to form than beams project-
ing below the joists. Use beams that are as wide, or
wider, than the columns to save formwork costs and
alleviate rebar congestion.
Walls. Use walls with rectangular cross sections;
they cost considerably less than nonrectangular
walls. Use the same wall thickness throughout the
project to maximize reuse of equipment and hard-
ware. Always maintain sufficient wall thickness to per-
mit proper placement and vibration of the concrete.
Wall openings should be kept to a minimum because
theyre costly and time-consuming. When necessary,
opening size and location should be standardized to
promote reuse of formwork and minimize mistakes.
Columns. Whenever possible, use the same column
size throughout the entire height of the building. If size
changes are necessary, make them in 2-inch incre-
ments. Typically, no more than three different column
sizesexterior corner, exterior side, and interiorare
necessary. Along with constant column dimensions,
use a uniform symmetrical column pattern with all the
columns having the same orientation and shape.
Square and round columns are the most economical.
normal loading conditions. Deflec-
tions arent likely to be a problem
when overall thickness meets or ex-
ceeds the length-to-depth ratios for
uniformly distributed loads.
ACI doesnt require deflection
calculations if the overall member
thickness of beams and one-way
slabs meets the minimum value
specified by ACI. The ACI values
can be simplified into a single
TEN TIPS FOR ECONOMICAL DETAILING OF REINFORCEMENT
Often engineers focus too
much on material savings and
ignore designing for c o n s t ru c-
tion e ff i c i e n c y. Saving material
might actually lead to signifi-
cantly higher c o n s t ru c t i o n
costs. Consider if the rebar
weight savings are o ff s e t by in-
c re a s e d costs in fabrication,
placing, and inspection.
Proper reinforcement is crucial
to the satisfactory performance of
concrete structures. The following
notes on reinforcement selection
and placement will usually provide
for overall economy and can mini-
mize costly project delays.
1. Show clear and concise rein-
forcement details and bar
arrangements in the contract doc-
uments. This issue is addressed
by ACI 315-80 Section 1.1, De-
tails and Detailing of Concrete Re-
inforcement: ... the responsibility
of the engineer is to furnish a
clear statement of design require-
ments; the responsibility of the
detailer is to carry out these re-
quirements.
2. Use Grade 60 reinforcing
bars. Generally, bars smaller than
#6 cost more per pound and re-
quire more placing labor per
pound of reinforcement.
3. Use only straight bars in flexur-
al members. Avoid truss (bent)
bars; theyre difficult to fabricate
and place, and structurally unsound
where stress reversals occur.
4 .S p e c i f y bars in single layers
for beams. Use one bar size for
each reinforcement layer at a
given span location. In slabs,
specify reinforcement spacing in
whole inches, preferably at spac-
graph (Figure 1). Enter the graph
with the clear span, ln, to find the
minimum overall thickness that
satisfies the ACI code for deflection
control.
Dont use the graph in special
cases where spans may be subject
to heavily distributed or concen-
trated loads, or to members sup-
porting or attached to nonstructur-
al elements that may be damaged
ings greater than 6 inches.
5. Use the largest bar size pos-
sible for the longitudinal reinforce-
ment in columns.
6. Use the fewest possible bar
sizes for a project.
7. Specify the largest stirrup
Bruce Suprenant
Structural steel details have an
impact on construction costs.
bar size and the fewest varia-
tions in spacing. When closed
stirrups are required, specify two-
piece closed types to facilitate
placing.
8. Check fit and clearance of re-
inforcing bars in congested areas,
especially beam-column joints.
9. Use or specify standard ACI re-
inforcing bar details and practices.
10. Avoid field welding of rebar.
by deflections. Calculate deflec-
tions for these special cases.
Size Member to Resist Bending
Moment
Using length-to-depth ratios to
choose the minimum beam depth
for deflection control doesnt guar-
antee that the member will be
strong enough to resist the bending
moment generated by the applied
loading. The depth, width, and
amount of reinforcement deter-
mine the members flexural
strength. A simplified design equa-
tion can be derived for beam width
and depth if a reasonable assump-
tion is made for the amount of rein-
forcement.
Deflections are rarely a problem
with beams having a reinforcement
ratio ( ) equal to
about one-half of
the maximum per-
mitted. To calculate
the required width
(b) for a specific
concrete compres-
sive strength and
reinforcement
strength, assume a
reinforcement ra-
tio, use the calculat-
ed factored mo-
ments (Mu), and
determine the ef-
fective depth (d)
from the selected
member depth. As-
sume d = depth -
2.5 inches for
beams with one
layer of bars and d =
depth - 1.25 inches
for joists and slabs. These calcula-
tions are shown in Table 1 for dif-
ferent compressive strengths (f c )
and for Grade 60 reinforcement.
For a concrete compressive
strength of 4000 psi and Grade 60
rebar, the equation relating section
dimensions and required flexural
strength is bd2 = 20Mu. Since the
structural analysis provides the re-
quired strength and deflection con-
trol selects the beam depth, the
beam width can be calculated.
When frame moments vary, deter-
mine the width for the largest fac-
tored moments. For economy, use
this beam width for all similar
members in the frame.
If the depth determined for con-
trol of deflections is shallower than
desired, a larger depth can be se-
lected with a corresponding width
(b) determined from the above siz-
ing equation. Actually, any combi-
nation of width and depth can be
determined from the sizing equa-
tion with the only restriction being
that the final depth selected must
be greater than that required for
deflection control. A similar sizing
equation can be derived for materi-
als with differing properties than
those listed (Ref. 1).
When sizing members for econ-
omy, use whole inches for ove ra l l
beam dimensions, specify slabs in
1
2-inch increments, and use beam
widths in multiples of 2 or 3 inch-
es. Use constant beam sizes from
span to span and va ry re i n f o rc e-
ment as re q u i red. Use wide, flat
beams rather than narrow, deep
b e a m s, and make beam widths
equal to or greater than the col-
umn width. For overall construc-
tion efficiency, use uniform depth
and width of beams thro u g h o u t
the stru c t u re, va rying the re i n-
forcement as needed.
Select Moment Reinforcement
A simplified design equation for
the area of tension steel (As) re-
quired can be derived (see Refer-
ence 1, pp. 3-4 for derivation). This
relationship is As = Mu/ d(con-
stant). The constant in the denom-
inator depends on the concrete and
reinforcing strengths (see Table 1).
Use this equation for re i n f o rc e-
ment ratios up to about two-thirds
of the maximum ACI-permitted re-
inforcement.
The simplified equation for flex-
ural reinforcement is applicable
only for members with rectangular
cross sections with Grade 60 ten-
sion reinforcement. For members
with reinforcement ratios in the
range of approximately 1 to 1.5%,
the error in using the equations in
Table 1 is less than 3%.
References
1. Simplified DesignReinforced
Concrete Buildings of Moderate Size
and Height, second edition, 1993,
Portland Cement Association, Skokie,
Ill.
2. Building Code Requirements for
Reinforced Concrete, (ACI 318-89, re-
vised 1992), American Concrete Insti-
tute, Detroit, Mich.
David A. Fanella is coord i n a t i n g
structural engineer and S. K. Ghosh
is dire c t o r, engineered stru c t u re s
and codes, for the Portland Cement
Association.
Editors note
If you are interested in learning more
about simplified flexural design, the
Portland Cement Association (PCA) is
conducting one-day seminars on the
subject in various U.S. cities from April
through June, 1994. For more informa-
tion about seminar dates and loca-
tions, call PCA at 708-966-6200.
PUBLICATION #C940338
Copyright 1994, The Aberdeen Group
All rights reserved