Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 70

COMPARISON BETWEEN Codes

ECP (EGYPTIAN CODE OF PRACTICE)


ACI (AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE)
BSI (BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTE)
PREPARD BY
STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT TEAM

CHECKED BY

STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT SENIOR


ENG. WAEL MOHMED ABDUL MAQSOOD
INTRODUCTION
This comparison between codes provides minimum requirements
for design and construction of structural concrete members of any
structure in different codes, That doesn't mean that the structural
design safe in code and unsafe at the other one But this difference
due to factor of safety used, the quality control of materials used in
the construction …etc. as a result we have to study carefully those
differences between codes in order to we can do a smart design.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Columns Design
‫)‪Egyptian code (2007‬‬

‫‪AXIAL LOADED COLUMN:‬‬

‫‪ -‬عند تصميم العمود يتم حساب اقصى حمل يتحمله العمود و منه يتم حساب مقاومه الضغط‬
‫الخرسانى للعمود و مقاومه الضغط الناتج من تسليح العمود كما هو موضح بالمعادله‬
‫التالية ‪:‬‬

‫‪-‬‬

‫‪-‬‬
‫)‪Egyptian code (2007‬‬

‫مقاومة العمود ‪- Pu :‬‬


‫مقاومة القطاع الخرساني ‪- Cc :‬‬
‫مقاومة تسليح العمود ‪- Cs :‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪: Factor of safety for material .‬‬

‫‪7‬‬ ‫‪e\t‬‬ ‫‪7‬‬ ‫‪e\t‬‬


‫]) ( ‪𝝲𝐶 =1.5[( )-‬‬ ‫‪,‬‬ ‫]) ( ‪𝝲s =1.15[( )-‬‬
‫‪6‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬ ‫‪6‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬
Egyptian code (2007)

- The Existence of moment leads to a reduction in axial load capacity.


Thus the code impose a further reduction on the column strength by
reducing the capacity by 10% So, the equation:
Egyptian code (2007)

Pu = 0.35*Fcu*Ac+0.67*Asc*Fy
‫‪ACI CODE‬‬
‫‪ -‬و فى الكود االمريكى يتم حساب الحمل الذي يتحمله العمود ومنه يتم عمل تصميم للعمود‬

‫‪-‬‬
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Conditions for column t≤5b t≤4b t≤4b


(not shear wall)
Effect of shape of The shape of cross The shape of cross The shape of cross
column in slenderness section of column is section of column is section of column isn't
ratio. taken into consideration. taken into taken into
consideration consideration
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Asmin 0.6 1 0.4


Ag Ag Ag
100 100 100

Asmax 4% Ag for Interior col. 8% Ag 6% Ag


5% Ag for Edge col.
6% Ag for Corner col.

Smax 250 mm 6 inch=150 mm 155 mm

Smin
70mm 25mm 30mm
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI
Classification of structure Braced & Unbraced Sway & non- Sway Braced &
according to buckling design. Un Braced

Maximum slenderness ratio. Rec. Circular not braced against side sway Slenderness Limits For
𝐾 𝐿𝑢 Columns 𝐿0 < 60𝑏
Braced 30 25 ≤ 22 Slenderness of
𝑟
Unbraced 23 18 unbraced Columns
100𝑏2
braced against side sway 𝐿0 = ≤ 60𝑏

𝐾 𝐿𝑢
≤34 – 12(M1/M2) ≤ 40
𝑟
Neglect slenderness effect if : 𝐿𝑒 = 𝛽𝐿0
𝐾𝐻 Values of 𝛽 for braced
Braced < 15 Non-sway columns
𝑏1 𝑜𝑟 𝑡1 K Lu 𝑀
≤ 34 -12 (𝑀1) ≤ 40
r 2
𝐾𝐻 Sway
Unbraced < 10 𝐾 𝐿𝑢
𝑏1 𝑜𝑟 𝑡1
≤ 22
𝑟
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Neglect slenderness ‫ فى حالة األعمدة فى المبانى المقيدة جانبيا يؤخذ طول‬K: effective length factor (for Values of 𝛽 for
‫ مساويا لألصغر من‬He ‫االنبعاج‬ braced (non sway) frame ≤ 1 unbraced columns
effect if :
𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 0.7 + 0.05 𝛼1 + 𝛼2 ≤ 𝐻0
𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 0.85 + 0.05 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝐻0 Lu: unsupported height of
column from top of floor to the
‫وفى حالة األعمدة فى المبانى الغير مقيدة جانبيا يؤخذ‬
bottom of the beams or slab in
‫ مساويا لألصغر من‬He ‫طول االنبعاج‬
the slab above Where:
𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 1 + 0.15 𝛼1 + 𝛼2 ≥ 𝐻0
𝐿0: clear height
𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 2 + 0.3 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≥ 𝐻0 R: radius of gyration, equal to 0.3 between end restraints
and 0.25 times the overall depth b: width of column
𝐸 𝐼
Σ 𝑐 𝑐 of rectangular and circular h: depth of cross
𝐻0
𝐸𝑐 𝐼𝑏 columns , respectively section
α=Σ
𝐿𝑏 𝐿𝑒 :effective height of
‫𝐻 هو ارتفاع العمود الخالص‬0 ‫حيث أن‬ M1/M2: ratio of the moments at column
‫𝛼 عند الطرف‬1 ‫و 𝑛𝑖𝑚𝛼 هى القيمة األصغر من‬ the two ends of the column
‫𝛼 عند الطرف العلوى‬2 ‫السفلى و‬
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Cover
-Concrete not exposed to
weather or in contact
with ground:
Primary reinforcement,
Ties, stirrups, spirals………....40
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI

- Notes:
- Column according to ( ECP ) is unsafe due to large factor of
safety although it is safe according to ( BSI & ACI ).

- As (BSI) < As (ACI)


- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Beam Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Shear Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

𝒅 𝒅 𝒅
Critical Section 𝐴𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐴𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐴𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒
𝟐 𝟐 𝟐
𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡

𝑓𝑐𝑢
Max. strength ∗ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.7 N/𝑚𝑚2 ∗ 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ∅8 𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑤 𝑑 ∗ 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.8 𝑓𝑐𝑢
𝝲𝐶
(stress/force) 𝑜𝑟 4 𝑁/𝑚𝑚² 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 − 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒. (𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡) 𝑜𝑟 5 𝑁/𝑚𝑚² 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚
− 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 − 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Nominal shear strength 𝑓𝑐𝑢 1


∗ 𝑞𝑐𝑢 = 0.24 N/𝑚𝑚2 ∗ ∅ 𝑉𝐶 = ∅2 𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑑 100 𝐴𝑆 3 400 1
of concrete 𝝲𝐶 ∗ 𝑉𝑐 = 0.79 ( )4 / 𝛾𝑚
𝑏𝑣 𝑑 𝑑
(stress/force)
• 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 … … 𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡
• 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓′𝑐 , b & d. • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑐𝑢 , d & AS
• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑐𝑢

Design value of shear 𝑄𝑢 ∗ 𝑉𝑈 → 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒. 𝑄𝑈


(stress/force) ∗ 𝑞𝑢 = ∗ 𝑉𝑈 →
𝑏.𝑑 𝑏𝑑
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
𝑉
R. F. T − 𝐼𝐹 𝑞𝑢 < 𝑞𝑐𝑢 − 𝐼𝐹 𝑉𝑢 < 𝐶
2
→ 𝑈𝑠𝑒 𝑚𝑖𝑛. 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇. → 𝑁𝑜 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑
5 ∅8/𝑚
− 𝐼𝐹𝑞𝑐𝑢 ˂𝑞𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝐼𝐹 𝑉𝑢 < 𝑉𝑐
→ 𝑈𝑠𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇. → 𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑

𝐴𝑠𝑡 𝑓𝑦 𝐴𝑠𝑣 0.4𝑏𝑣


𝑞𝑐𝑢
∗ ( 𝑞𝑢 − )= ∗ 𝑆𝑣
=
0.95𝐹𝑦𝑣
if V≤𝑉𝑐 +0.4𝑏𝑣 d
2 𝑏.𝑠 𝛾𝑠

𝐴𝑠𝑣 𝑉−𝑉𝑐
− 𝐼𝐹 𝑞𝑢 ˃ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑆𝑣
=
0.95𝐹𝑦𝑣 𝑏𝑡
if V≤𝑉𝑐 +0.4𝑏𝑣 d
→ 𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

0.75dt or four times the web


Max spacing between 𝑑 ∗ 𝑑/2 thickness for flanged members
∗ 𝑜𝑟 200𝑚𝑚
2 When V exceeds 1.8Vc, the
stirrups 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 maximum spacing should be
reduced to 0.5dt .

Min spacing between Minimum practical spacing


stirrups 100𝑚𝑚 ≈ 3 in. or 4 in.

45° 30° 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 45° 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒


Stirrups indention
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Max. grade 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 60.000 𝑃𝑠𝑖 ≅ 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 460 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
of stirrups (𝑓𝑦 )

Slabs & footings − 𝑁𝑜 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 − 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑. − 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑.
𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑
𝑏𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Flexural design
Egyptian code (2007)
: ‫يتم أوال التأكد من القطاع الخرساني انه آمن باستخدام المعادلة االتية‬

𝑀𝑢 ∗ 105
𝑑 = 𝐶1
𝑏 ∗ 𝐹𝑐𝑢
Where:
d : depth of SEC.
Mu : Ultimate Moment Affecting on SEC.
b : Width of SEC.
Fcu : Characteristic Concrete Strength
C : Factor where Cmin=2.65 & Cmax=4.85
‫)‪Egyptian code (2007‬‬
‫‪ -‬بمعلومية القطاع الخرساني ال ‪ b*d‬وكذلك قيمة ال ‪ Mult‬نستطيع التعويض فى المعادلة السابقة‬
‫وايجاد قيمة ال ‪. C‬‬

‫‪ -‬فاذا كانت قيمة ال ‪ C‬أقل من ال ‪ Cmin =2.65‬يكون القطاع غير امن فنزيد أبعاد قطاع‬
‫الخرسانة ‪.‬‬

‫‪ -‬واذا كانت قيمة ال ‪ C‬أكبر من ال ‪ Cmax‬فيكون القطاع ‪ more safe‬فالبد من ان تتراوح قيمة‬
‫ال ‪ C‬بين ال ‪ Cmin‬و ‪. Cmax‬‬

‫‪ -‬بعد التاكد من أن القطاع امن يتم التعويض فى المعادلة االتية اليجاد قيمة الحديد في القطاع ‪. As‬‬
‫𝒖𝑴‬
‫= 𝒔𝑨‬
‫𝑱 ∗ 𝒅 ∗ 𝒚𝑭‬
Egyptian code (2007)

𝑴𝒖
𝑨𝒔 =
𝑭𝒚 ∗ 𝒅 ∗ 𝑱

Where
Fy : Yield Stress
d : depth of SEC
Mu: Ultimate Moment Affecting on
Section
J: Factor Get It's Value From Table
According to Value Of C1
ACI CODE

‫يتم أوال التأكد من قطاع الخرساني انه امن باستخدام المعادلة االتية‬
: Rn ‫اليجاد قيمة ال‬

𝑀𝑢
∅ 𝑅𝑛 = 2 ………… We can get Rn=√√√
𝑏𝑑

Where
d: depth of Section.
Mu: Ultimate Moment Affecting on Section.
b: Width of Section.
∅ = 0.9
ACI CODE
Rn From Table (1-C) depend on Fc' & B1
𝟎.𝟓𝝆𝑭𝒚
𝑹𝒏 = 𝝆(𝟏 − ) 𝝆 𝒎𝒊𝒏 ≤ 𝝆 ≤ 𝝆𝒎𝒂𝒙
𝟎.𝟖𝟓 𝑭𝒄′

𝟑 𝑓𝑐 ′ 0.319 β1𝑓𝑐 ′
𝝆 𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 𝝆 𝒎𝒂𝒙 =
𝑭𝒚 𝑭𝒚

Where Rn :STANDS FOR NOMINAL RESISTANCE (STRENGTH)


ρ: ratio of As to bd
β1 = 0.85 … for fc’ ≤ 4000 psi
𝑓𝑐 ′ −4000
= 0.85 - 0.05 ( ) .… for 4000 psi < fc’ < 8000 psi
1000
= 0.65 … for fc’ ≤ 8000 psi
‫‪BSI CODE‬‬

‫‪ -‬بالتعويض فى المعادلة التالية بأبعاد العمود ال ‪. b , d‬‬


‫‪ -‬وكذلك قيمة ال ‪. Mult‬‬
‫‪ -‬فنحصل على قيمة ‪ K‬والتى البد ان تقل عن ‪. 0.156‬‬

‫‪105‬‬
‫=‪K‬‬ ‫‪M𝑢 2‬‬ ‫‪= ..‬‬ ‫‪< 𝐾 ′ = 0.156‬‬
‫𝑢𝑐𝐹∗ 𝑑∗𝑏‬

‫‪ -‬بعد التعويض فى المعادلة السابقة والتأكد من أن قطاع الخرسانه امن تحت تأثير قيمة ‪. Mult‬‬
‫‪ -‬وتحقيق شرط أن ‪ K‬تقل عن ( ‪ (K`=0.156‬عدا ذلك يتم زيادة التسليح في منطقة الضغط‪.‬‬
BSI CODE
: ‫ يتم بعد ذلك حساب قيمة تسليح الخرساني باستخدام المعادلة التالية‬-

105
𝑨𝒔 = Mu ∗
0.87 ∗ 𝐹𝑦 ∗ 𝑑 ∗ 0.95

𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒:
𝐹𝑦 = characteristic concrete strength.
𝐹𝑐𝑢 = characteristic yield strength.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

The Strain Of Concrete 0.003 0.003 0.0035


𝜻𝑐𝑢

B1 section 𝑘𝐿 0.12𝐿 𝑂𝑟 6𝑡𝑠 𝐿


+ 𝑏 𝑜𝑟 6𝑡𝑠 + 𝑏 (L section) 𝑏+
10 10
0.25 L Or 8ts
𝑘𝐿
+ 𝑏 𝑜𝑟 16𝑡𝑠 + 𝑏 ((T section) 𝐿
5 𝑏+
5
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

1.1 𝑑
Minimum Area Steel 𝑏𝑑 * 3 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑤 𝑓𝑦 Table (1-2)
𝐹𝑦
Asmin The least Where:
1.3𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 𝑑 d
the biggest 3 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑤 ≥ 200bw
𝑓𝑦 fy
0.15
𝑏𝑑 𝐻.𝑇.𝑆
100

Depth of compression 0.8 c 0.85 c 0.9 c


block
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Conditions For using L.L > 1.5D.L L.L > 3 D.L L.L > D.L
Empirical Methods Spans difference not exceed 20%

Min spacing H.agg. + 5mm Hagg + 5mm


∅ ≥ 1 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ
Bigger ∅ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 Bigger
∅ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 2.5cm
2.5cm

Moment & Normal We can neglect Normal We Can neglect Normal


We Can neglect Normal if
Sections Force if : Force if:
e=M/N≤(1 in. or 0.05h)
𝑁 ≤ 0.04 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑏𝑡 𝑁 ≤ 0.1 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑏𝑡
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

One Way slab


(+ve moment) 𝑊𝐿2 𝑊𝐿2 0.09 FL
Intermediate span 12 16
Empirical =0.083 𝑊𝐿2 =0.0625 𝑊𝐿2
= 0.083 F L =0.0625 F L

Concrete Strength 𝐹𝑐𝑢 0.85 fc' 𝐹𝑐𝑢


0.67 0.67
𝛾𝑐 𝛾𝑐

= 57000 𝑓𝑐′ Ps 𝑓𝑐𝑢


Concrete Young's 4400 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = 5.5 𝐾𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
= 4200 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 𝛾𝑚
Modulus = 4700 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = 4490 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Yield Stress in Steel Deformed Steel


Fy ≤ 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Hot rolled mild steel
Fy
Fy > 80.000 psi Fy = 250 N/mm2
Mild Steel
Fy = 550 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Height Yield (hot rolled or
Fy ≤ 280 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 cold worked)
Cold drown smooth welded Fy = 460 N/mm2
mesh
Fy ≤ 300 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison

Cover -Concrete not exposed to


weather or in contact
with ground:

Primary reinforcement, ties,


stirrups,
spirals..……….. 40
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI

Table (1-2)
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Slabs Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

• solid slab • One way slab • solid slab


• Flat slab • Two way slab • Flat slab
Types of Slabs a)- Two way beam supported
• Hollow block slab • Hollow block slab
slab
b)- Flat plate
c)- Flat slab
d)- Waffle slab
Solid Slab Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Thickness of slabs • One way slab • One way slab


-simply supported slab -simply supported slab
𝑙 𝑙
tmin = 30 tmin = 20
-one end continuous -one end continuous
𝑙 𝑙
tmin = 35 tmin = 24
-both ends continuous -both ends continuous
𝑙 𝑙
tmin = 40 tmin = 28
-cantilever -cantilever
𝑙 𝑙
tmin = 𝟏0 tmin = 10
Where 𝑙 is the direction of Where 𝑙 is the direction of the
the load load
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Thickness of slabs • Two way slab • Two way slab


-simply supported slab -fy = 280 (N/𝑚𝑚2 )
𝑙 𝑙
tmin = 35 tmin = 36
-one end continuous
𝑙
tmin = 40 -fy = 420 (N/𝑚𝑚2 )
𝑙
-both ends continuous tmin = 33
𝑙
tmin = 45
-fy = 520 (N/𝑚𝑚2 )
𝑙
* Where tmin = 28
𝑙 :is short span length
measured from center to * Where
center 𝑙 : is long span length measured
face to face from support
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison

Cover -Shells, folded plate members:


No. 19 bar and larger.....…..20
No. 16 bar, MW200 or MD200
wire, and smaller…………… 13
Flat Slab Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Thickness of slabs

* Where
𝑙 :is long span length
measured from center to
center
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI

Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Drop panel

tdrop min. = 1.25 tslab


tdrop min. = 1.25 tslab
𝑙𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛
< Ldrop < 𝑙 𝑙
3 2 ≤ Ldrop
𝟑 𝟑
≤ Ldrop
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison

Marginal
beam

Effective beam section :


tBeam ≥ 3 tslab
• Edge beam
b + hw ≤ b + 4 tslab tBeam ≥ 1.5 tslab
• Interior beam
b + 2 hw ≤ b + 8 tslab

tBeam ≥ 2.5 tslab


- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Opening in 1-Holes in areas bounded by column
strips:
the slab that their greatest dimension in a
direction parallel to a centre-line of
the panel does not exceed 0.4 ɭ .
2-Holes in areas common to two
column strips:
that in aggregate their length or
In case of col. Strip intersecting with width does not exceed one-tenth of
col. Strip: the width of the column strip
Lvoid ≤ ɭ1 / 16 3-Holes in areas common to a
In case of col. Strip intersecting with column strip and middle strip:
middle strip : that in aggregate their length or
Lvoid ≤ ɭ1 / 8 width does not exceed one- quarter
In case of middle Strip intersecting of the width of the column strip
with middle strip :
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Check punching
𝑞𝑝𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 ___ safe punching Vu ≤ ∅ Vn ___ safe punching If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use :

• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 only Where : Vn = Vc+ Vs

𝐴𝑣 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡
Vs = 𝑆
• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒
• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel
And steel
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison

Actual Punching Stress Check for Wide-beam action Actual Punching Stress
Check Shear : 𝛽𝑽
ʋ=
punching 𝛽 𝑄𝑝𝑢 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅𝑉𝑛 𝒖𝑑
𝑞𝑝𝑢 =
𝑏𝑜 𝑑
𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅(2𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑤𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress (ʋc)
Allowable Punching Stress refer to table (2.1)
Min. of Check for Two way Shear
𝑎 𝑓𝑐𝑢
Max. Shear Stress
𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316(0.5 + ) 𝑉𝑢 ≤ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓: ʋmax= 0. 𝟖 𝒇𝒄𝒖
𝑏 𝛾𝑐

α𝑑 𝑓𝑐𝑢 4
𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316 0.2 + 1- 2 + 𝛽 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑜 𝑑
𝑏𝑜 𝛾𝑐
𝛼𝑠 𝑑
And not exceed that 2- + 2 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑜 𝑑
𝑏𝑜

𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316
𝑓𝑐𝑢 3- 4𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑜 𝑑
𝛾𝑐
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
𝑉𝑢 −∅ 𝑉𝑐 𝑆
if un safe punching If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use :
Check punching • Increase slab thickness
Av = ∅ 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡

• Use drop panel if un safe punching


• Increase fc’
• increase slab thickness by If 1.6 ʋc < v ≤ 2 ʋc use :
Using drop panel
• Providing shear reinforcement
( bars, wires , steel I shape
Or headed shear studs )
If v > 2 ʋc use :
• Increase fc’
• increase slab thickness by
Using drop panel
• Providing shear
reinforcement
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI

headed shear studs shear reinforcement stirrups


- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Where :
Where : Where : ʋc : design concrete shear stress
Check punching Qpu : Punching Force V : Punching Force V :design ultimate value of the
bo : Length of the Perimeter concentrated load.
𝛽: ratio of (long side/ short side) of
of uo : effective length of the perimeter
Critical Sec the column concentrated load or which touches a loaded area.
d : Effective depth of slab reaction area ʋ : design shear stress.
𝛽: 1.15 for Interior columns 𝛼𝑠 : 40 for interior columns u : effective length of the outer
1.30 for Edge columns 30 for edge columns perimeter of the zone.
1.50 for Corner columns 20 for corner columns β: 1.15 for Interior columns
bo : perimeter of critical 1.25 for Edge columns
section 1.40 for Corner columns
ΣAsv :is the area of shear reinforcement
fyv :is the characteristic strength of
shear reinforcement (in N/mm2 )
α : is the angle between the shear
reinforcement and the plane of the
slab.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

for Wide-beam action Shear 1st take critical sec. at


- take critical sec. at distance - Take critical sec. at distance distance (1.5d)
Critical sec. (d/2) (d) from support. If ʋ ≤ ʋc use then no further
for Two way Shear checks are needed.
If not
- Take critical sec. at distance - take the critical sec. at
(d/2) from support. distance d/2 and get As for
shear
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI

Table (2.1)
Hollow block design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
-PAN WIDE (500-750)mm -In situ ribs should be
PANS FORM spaced at centers not
exceeding 1.5 m & should
not exceed four times their
width
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison

RIBS

Standard depth : The minimum width of rib will be


6,8,10,12,14,16&20 determined by considerations of
We can use tapered rib cover , bar spacing and fire.
with dimension
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
One at mid for span ( 6-9 )m
& 2 ribs at third points for spans over
Cross rib (9) m.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Slab thickness over permanent -not less than 20mm or
fillers shall be not less than 1/10 clear distance between
Cover Slab ribs
one-twelfth the clear distance
between ribs ,nor less than 40
mm .
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Cover slab Rein.
Consideration should be
Reinforcement given to providing a single
layer of welded steel fabric,
having a cross-sectional area
of not less than 0.12 % of the
topping, in each direction;
the spacing between wires
should not be greater than
half the center-to-center
distance between ribs.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison

1 hour:
(20)mm for slab
Fire 2 hour:
resisting (25)mm for slab
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Cover Shells, folded plate members:


No. 19 bar and larger ....... 20
No. 16 bar, MW200 or MD200
wire, and smaller……………. 13
Footing Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI

Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

Assume Overall Footing


Assume Thickness and Check
Thickness < 300 mm Thickness=33 in
Shear
Check Shear

mm50
‫المغمورة والمعرضة للهواء‬
Min Cover 75mm 70mm
mm70
‫المعرضة للبلل والجفاف‬
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Check shear
Check for Wide-beam action Actual Punching Stress
Check punching Actual Shear Stress 𝛽𝑽
𝑄𝑢 Shear :
ʋ=
Check shear 𝑞𝑢 = 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅𝑉𝑛 𝒖𝑑
𝑏𝑑
Allowable Shear Stress
𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅(2𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑤𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress (ʋc)
𝐹𝑐𝑢 refer to table (2.1)
𝑞𝑠𝑢 = 0.15
𝛾𝑐 Check for Two way Shear
Max. Shear Stress
Check punching
𝑉𝑢 ≤ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓: ʋmax= 0. 𝟖 𝒇𝒄𝒖
Actual Punching Stress
𝛽 𝑄𝑝𝑢
𝑞𝑝𝑢 = 1-
4
2 + 𝛽 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑜 𝑑
𝑏𝑜 𝑑
Allowable Punching Stress 𝛼𝑠 𝑑
2- + 2 𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑜 𝑑
As slabs 𝑏𝑜
3- 4𝜆 𝑓𝑐 ′ 𝑏𝑜 𝑑
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
𝑉𝑢 −∅ 𝑉𝑐 𝑆
if un safe punching If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use :
Check punching • Increase footing
Av = ∅ 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡

thickness if un safe punching


• Use drop panel • Increase fc’
• increase footing thickness or If 1.6 ʋ < v ≤ 2 ʋ use :
c c
Using drop panel
• Providing shear reinforcement
stirrups

If v > 2 ʋc use :
• Increase fc’
• increase footing thickness
or
Using drop panel
• Providing shear
reinforcement
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of ECP ACI BSI
comparison
Where :
Where : Where : ʋc : design concrete shear stress
Check punching Qpu : Punching Force V : Punching Force V :design ultimate value of the
bo : Length of the Perimeter concentrated load.
𝛽: ratio of (long side/ short side) of
of uo : effective length of the perimeter
Critical Sec the column concentrated load or which touches a loaded area.
d : Effective depth of slab reaction area ʋ : design shear stress.
𝛽: 1.15 for Interior columns 𝛼𝑠 : 40 for interior columns u : effective length of the outer
1.30 for Edge columns 30 for edge columns perimeter of the zone.
1.50 for Corner columns 20 for corner columns β: 1.15 for Interior columns
bo : perimeter of critical 1.25 for Edge columns
section 1.40 for Corner columns
ΣAsv :is the area of shear reinforcement
fyv :is the characteristic strength of
shear reinforcement (in N/mm2 )
α : is the angle between the shear
reinforcement and the plane of the
slab.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Point of comparison ECP ACI BSI

𝑞𝑝𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 ___ safe punching Vu ≤ ∅ Vn ___ safe punching If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use :
Check punching
• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 only Where : Vn = Vc+ Vs

𝐴𝑣 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡
Vs = 𝑆
• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒
• 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel
And steel
THANK YOU

You might also like