CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

CHAPTER IV. ANALYSIS OF THE STRUCTURE AT THE ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE

4.0 Introduction
A reinforced concrete structure is a combination of beams, columns, slabs and walls, rigidly connected together to
form a monolithic frame. Each individual member must be capable of resisting the forces acting on it, so that the
determination of these forces is an essential part of the design process. The full analysis of a rigid concrete frame is
rarely simple; but simplified calculations of adequate precision can often be made if the basic action of the structure
is understood.
There are several methods, of structural analysis, but the common ones are;
i) Moment distribution for manual methods
ii) Computer plain frame programs based on the matrix stiffness method of analysis
iii) Moment coefficients
Since the design of a reinforced concrete member is generally based on the ultimate limit state, the analysis is
usually performed for loadings corresponding to that state.

4.1 Actions
The actions (loads) on a structure are divided into two types: permanent actions, and variable (or imposed) actions.
Permanent action are those which are normally constant during the structure’s life. Variable actions, on the other
hand, are transient and not constant in magnitude, as for example those due to wind or to human occupants.
Permanent actions
Permanent actions include the weight of the structure itself and all architectural components such as exterior
cladding, partitions and ceilings. Equipment and static machinery, when permanent fixtures, are also often
considered as part of the permanent actions.
For most reinforced concretes, a typical value for the self-weight is 25KN per cubic metre, but a higher density
should be taken for heavily reinforced or dense concrete. In the case of a building, the weights of any permanent
partitions should be calculated from the architects’ drawings. A minimum partition loading equivalent to 1.0KN per
square metre is often specified as a variable action, but this is only adequate for lightweight partitions.
Variable actions
Variable actions are more difficult to determine accurately. For many of them, it is only possible to make
conservative estimates based on standard codes of practice or past experience. Examples of variable actions are: the
weights of its occupants, furniture, or machinery; the pressures of wind, the weight of snow, and of retained earth
or water; and the forces caused by thermal expansion or shrinkage of the concrete.
Although the wind load is a variable action, it is kept in a separate category when its partial factors of safety are
specified, and when the load combinations on the structure are being considered.

4.2 Load combinations and patterns

Load combinations and patterns for the ultimate limit state
Various combinations of the characteristic values of permanent G k , variable actions Qk , wind actions Wk , and
their partial factors of safety must be considered for the loading of the structure. The partial factors of safety
specified in the code are discussed in chapter 3, and the ultimate limit state the following loading combinations
from tables 3-10, 3-12 and 3-14 are commonly used.
1. Permanent and variable actions
1.35Gk  1.5Qk
2. Permanent and wind actions
1.35Gk  1.5Wk
The variable load can usually cover all or any part of the structure and, therefore, should be arranged to cause the
most severe stresses. So, for a three-span continuous beam, load combination 1 would have the loading
arrangement shown in figure 4-1, in order to cause the maximum sagging moment in the outer spans and the
minimum possible hogging moment in the centre span.

1.35Gk + 1.5Q k 1.35Gk + 1.5Q k

1.35Gk

A C

Fig.4-1 Loading arrangement for maximum sagging moment at A and C

Page 1 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Load combination 2, permanent  wind load is used to check the stability of a structure. A load combination of
permanent  variable  wind load could have the arrangement shown in figure 3.6.
Figure 4-2 shows the patterns of vertical loading on a multi-span continuous beam to cause (i) maximum design
moments in alternate spans and maximum possible hogging moments in adjacent spans, (ii) maximum design
hogging moments at support A, and (iii) the design hogging moment at support A as specified by the EC2 code for
simplicity.

1.35G k + 1.5Q k 1.35G k + 1.5Q k 1.35G k + 1.5Q k 1.35G k + 1.5Q k

1.35G k 1.35G k 1.35G k

(i) Loading arrangements for maximum moments in the spans

1.35G k + 1.5Q k 1.35G k + 1.5Q k 1.35G k + 1.5Q k

1.35G k 1.35G k
A

(ii) Loading arrangements for maximum support moment at A

1.35G k + 1.5Q k
1.35G k 1.35G k
A

(iii) Loading for design moments at the supports according to Ec2

Figure 4-2 Multi-span beam loading patterns

4.3 Analysis of beams

To design a structure it is necessary to know the bending moments, torsional moments, shearing forces and axial
forces in each member. An elastic analysis is generally used to determine the distribution of these forces within the
structure. The properties of the materials, such as Young’s modulus, which are used in the structural analysis
should be those associated with their characteristic strengths. The stiffnesses of the members can be calculated on
the basis of any one of the following:
i) The gross concrete cross-section( ignoring the reinforcement);
ii) The concrete cross-section including the transformed area of reinforcement based on the modular ratio;
iii) The compression area only of the concrete cross-section, plus the transformed area of reinforcement based
on the modular ratio
A structure should be analyzed for each of the critical loading conditions which produce the maximum stresses at
any particular section. This procedure will be illustrated in the examples for a continuous beam and a building
frame. For these structures it is conventional to draw the bending-moment diagram on the tension side of the
members.
Sign Conventions
i) For the moment-distribution analysis anti-clockwise support moments are positive as, for example, in table 4.1
for the fixed end moments (FEM).
ii) For subsequently calculating the moments along the span of a member, moments causing sagging are positive,
while moments causing hogging are negative, as illustrated in figure 4-4.

Non-continuous beams
One-span, simply supported beams or slabs are statically determinate and the analysis for bending moments and
shearing forces is readily performed manually. For the ultimate limit state we need only consider the maximum
load of 1.35Gk  1.5Qk on the span.

Example 4.1 Analysis of a non-continuous beam

The one-span simply supported beam shown in figure 4-3a carries a distributed permanent action including self-
weight of 25KN/m. a permanent concentrated action of 40KN at mid-span, and a distributed variable action of
10KN/m.

Page 2 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

1.35 40=54 KN

(1.35 25+1.5 10)4=195 KN

4.0 m

(a) Ultimate load

124.5 KN 27

27
124.5 KN
(b) Shearing Force Diagram

151.5 KNm

(c) Bending Moment Diagram

Fig.4-3 Analysis of one-span beam

Figure 4-3 shows the values of ultimate load required in the calculation of the shearing forces and bending
moments.
54 195
Maximum shear force    124.5 KN
2 2
54  4 195  4
Maximum bending moment    151.5 KNm
4 8
The analysis is completed by drawing the shearing-force and bending-moment diagrams which would later be used
in the design and detailing of the shear and bending reinforcement.
Continuous beams
The method of analysis for continuous beams may also be applied to continuous slabs which span in one direction.
A continuous beam should be analyzed for the loading arrangements which give the maximum stresses at each
section. The analysis to calculate the bending moments can be carried out manually by moment distribution or
equivalent methods, but tabulated shear and moment coefficient may be adequate for continuous beams having
approximately equal spans and uniformly distributed loads.
Continuous beams – the general case
Having determined the moments at the supports by, say, moment distribution, it is necessary to calculate the
moments in the spans and also the shear forces on the beam.
For a uniformly distributed load, the equations for the shears and the maximum span moments can be derived from
the following analysis.
Load = w/metre
A B

VAB S.F.D
VBA

MAB M BA
--
-- B.M.D
+ M max a2
a1

a3

Fig.4-4 Shears and moments in a beam

Page 3 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Using the sign convention of figure 4-4 and taking moments about support B;
wL2
V AB L   M AB  M BA  0
2
Therefore
wL ( M AB  M BA )
V AB   (4.1)
2 L
And
VBA  wL  VAB (4.2)
Maximum span moment M max occurs at zero shear, and distance to zero shear
V AB
a3  (4.3)
w
Therefore
2
V AB
M max   M AB (4.4)
2w
The points of contraflexure occur at M  0 , that is
wx 2
V AB x   M AB  0
2
Where x the distance from support A; taking the roots of this equation gives
V AB  (V AB
2
 2wM AB )
x
w
So that
V AB  (V AB
2
 2wM AB )
a1  (4.5)
w
And
V AB  (V AB
2
 2wM AB )
a2  L  (4.6)
w
Example 4.2 Analysis of a continuous beam
The continuous beam shown in figure 4-5 has a constant cross-section and supports a uniformly distributed
permanent action including its self-weight of Gk  25 KN / m and a variable action Qk  10 KN / m .
The critical loading patterns for the ultimate limit state are shown in figure 4-5 where the ‘stars’ indicate the region
of maximum moments, sagging or possible hogging.

G k = 25 KN/m Q k = 10 KN/m

A B C D
6m 4m 6m

(1.35 25 + 1.5 10) 6

(1.35 25 4)
(1) = 292.5 KN = 135 KN 292.5 KN

(1.35 25 + 1.5 10) 4

(1.35 25 6)
(2) = 202.5 KN = 195 KN 202.5 KN

(3) 292.5 KN 195 KN 202.5 KN

(4) 195 KN 292.5 KN Fig.4-5 Continuous beam loading

202.5 KN
Patterns

Page 4 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Table 4.1 is the moment distribution carried out for the first loading arrangement: simpler calculations would be
3I
required for each of the remaining load cases. It should be noted that the reduced stiffness of has been used for
4L
the end spans.
Table 4-1 Moment distribution for the first loading case

A B C D
Stiffness (k) 3 I I 3 I
4 L L 4 L
= 3 1 = 0.125 = 1 = 0.125 = 3 1 = 0.125
4 6 4 4 6
Distr. factors 0.125
0.125+0.25
= 1/3 2/3 2/3 1/3
Load (kN) 292 135 292
-292 6 + 135 4 292 6
F.E.M. 0 -- 12 + 0
8 8
0 -219.4 + 45.0 - 45.0 + 219.4 0
Balance +58.1 + 116.3 - 116.3 -58.1

Carry over -58.1 +58.1

Balance +19.4 + 38.7 - 38.7 -19.4

Carry over -19.4 +19.4
Balance +6.5 + 12.9 - 12.9 -6.5
Carry over -6.5 +6.5
Balance +2.2 + 4.3 - 4.3 -2.2
Carry over -2.2 +2.2
Balance +0.7 + 1.5 - 1.5 -0.7
M (KNm) 0 -132.5 + 132.5 - 132.5 + 132.5 0

The shearing forces, the maximum span bending moments, and their positions along the beam, can be calculated
using the formulae previously derived. Thus for the first loading arrangement and span AB, using the sign
convention of figure 4-4:
Load ( M AB  M BA )
Shear V AB  
2 L
292.5 132.5
   124.2 KN
2 6.0
VBA  Load  VAB
 292.5  124.2  168.3 KN
2
V AB
Maximum moment, span AB   M AB
2w
Where w  292.5 / 6.0  48.75 KN / m. Therefore:
124.2 2
M max   0  158.2 KNm
2  48.75
V
Distance from A, a3  AB
w
124.2
  2.55 m
48.75
The bending-moment diagrams for each of the loading arrangements are shown in figure 4-6, and the
corresponding shearing-force diagrams are shown in figure 4-7. The individual bending-moment diagrams are
Page 5 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

combined in figure 4-8a to give the bending-moment design envelope. Similarly, figure 4-8b is the shearing-force
design envelope. Such envelope diagrams are used in the detailed design of the beams.
In this example, simple supports with no fixity have been assumed for the end supports at A and D. Even so, the
sections at A and D should be designed for a hogging moment due to a partial fixity equal to 25 per cent of the
maximum moment in the span, that is 158 / 4  39.5 KNm .

133 133

(1) 65

158 158
108 108
11
(2)

103 103
151
100
(3)

151 109
151
100

(4)

109
151
Fig.4-6 Bending-moment diagrams (kNm)

124 168
67.5

(1)
67.5
124
168

83 97.5 119

(2)

119 97.5 83

121 110 118

(3)
85 85
171
171
85
85
(4)

118 110 121

Fig.4-7 Shearing-force diagrams (KN)

Page 6 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

151 151
65
KNm
11

158 158
124 110 171

110 124 KN
171
Fig.4-8 Bending-moment and shearing-force envelops

Continuous beams with approximately equal spans and uniform loading

The ultimate bending moments and shearing forces in continuous beams of three or more approximately equal
spans without cantilevers can be obtained using relevant coefficients provided that the spans differ by no more than
15 per cent of the longest span, that the loading is uniform, and that the characteristic variable action does not
exceed the characteristic permanent action. The values of these coefficients are shown in diagrammatic form in
figure 4-9 for beams.
End span Interior span

0.11 FL 0.10 FL 0.10 FL

(a)
Bending Moments
0.09 FL 0.07 FL

0.45 F 0.55 F
(b)
Shearing Forces
0.60 F 0.55 F

F  Total ultimate load on span  (1.35Gk  1.5Qk ) KN

L  Effective span

Fig.4-9 Bending-Moment and Shearing-Force coefficients for beams

The possibility of hogging moments in any of the spans should not be ignored, even if it is not indicated by these
coefficients. For example, a beam of three equal spans may have a hogging moment in the center span if Qk
exceeds 0.45G k .

4.4 Analysis of frames

In situ reinforced concrete structures behave as rigid frames, and should be analyzed as such. They can be analyzed
as a complete space frame or be divided into a series of plane frames.
The general procedure for a building is to analyze the slabs as continuous members supported by the beams or
structural walls. The slabs can be either one-way spanning or two-way spanning. The columns and main beams are
considered as a series of rigid plane frames which can be divided into two types:
(1) Braced frames supporting vertical loads only
(2) Frames supporting vertical and lateral loads.
Type one frames are in buildings where none of the lateral loads such as wind are transmitted to the columns and
beams but are resisted by much more stiffer elements such as shear walls, lift shafts or stairwells.
Type two frames are designed to resist the lateral loads, which cause bending, shearing and axial loads in the beams
and columns. For both types frames the axial forces in the columns can be generally be calculated as if the beams
and slabs were simply supported.

Page 7 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Braced frames supporting vertical loads only

A building frame can be analyzed as a complete frame, or it can be simplified into a series of substitute frames for
the vertical loading analysis.
The frame shown in figure 4.10, for example, can be divided into any of the sub frames shown in figure 4.11.

H2
(1)
H1

Half stiffness Half stiffness

H2
(2)
H1

Half stiffness Half stiffness

H2
(3)
H1

H1, H2 =Storey Heights

Fig 4.10 Building frame Fig 4.11 Substitute frames

The substitute frame 1 in figure 4.11 consists of one complete floor beam with its connecting columns (which are
assumed rigidly fixed at their remote ends). An analysis of this frame wil1 give the bending moments and shearing
forces in the beams and columns for the floor level considered.
Substitute frame 2 is a single span combined with its connecting columns and two adjacent spans, all fixed at their
remote ends. This frame may be used to determine the bending moments and shearing forces in the central beam.
Provided that the central span is greater than the two adjacent spans, the bending moments in the columns can also
be found with this frame.
Substitute frame 3 can be used to find the moments in the columns only. It consists of a single junction, with the
remote ends of the members fixed. This type of sub frame would be used when the beams have been analyzed as
continuous over simple supports.
In frames 2 and 3, the assumption of fixed ends to the outer beams over-estimates their stiffnesses. These values are,
therefore, halved to allow for the flexibility resulting from continuity.
The various critical loading arrangements to produce maximum stresses have to be considered. In general these
loading arrangements for the ultimate limit state as specified by the code are:
(1) Alternate spans loaded with total ultimate load ( 1.35Gk  1.5Qk ) and all other spans loaded with minimum
dead load ( 1.35Gk ); this loading will give maximum span moments and maximum column moments.
(2) All spans loaded with the total ultimate load ( 1.35Gk  1.5Qk ) to provide the design moment at the supports.
When considering the critical loading arrangements for a column, it is sometimes necessary to include the case of
maximum moment and minimum possible axial load, in order to investigate the possibility of tension failure caused
by the bending.

Example 4.3 Analysis of a substitute frame

The substitute frame shown in figure 4.12 is part of t he complete frame in figure 4.10. The characteristic actions
carried by the beams are permanent actions (including self-weight) Gk  25 KN / m , and variable action,
Qk  10 KN / m , uniformly distributed along the beam. The analysis of the beam will be carried out by moment
distribution: thus the member stiffnesses and their relevant distribution factors are first required.

Page 8 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

J K L M

3.5m
A B C D

4.0m
Beam
600 300
E F G H

6.0m 4.0m 6.0m

350
300
Typical column section
Fig 4.12 Substitute frame

 Stiffnesses, k

Beam Columns
0.3  0.6 3
0.3  0.353
I  5.4  10 3 m 4 I  1.07 10 3 m 4
12 12
Spans AB and CD Upper
3
5.4 10 1.07 10 3
k AB  kCD   0.9 10 3 kU   0.3110 3
6.0 3.5
Span BC Lower
3
5.4 10 1.07 10 3
k BC   1.35 10 3 kL   0.27 10 3
4.0 4.0
kU  k L  (0.31  0.27)10 3  0.58 10 3

 Distribution factors

Joints A and D
 k  0.9  0.58  1.48
0.9
D.F. AB  D.F .DC   0.61
1.48
0.58
D.F. cols   0.39
1.48

Joints B and C
 k  0.9  1.35  0.58  2.83
0.9
D.F. BA  D.F .CD   0.32
2.83
1.35
D.F. BC  D.F .CB   0.48
2.83
0.58
D.F. cols   0.20
2.83

The critical loading arrangements for the ultimate limit state are identical to those for the continuous beam in
example 4.2, and they are illustrated in figure 4.5. The moment distribution for the first loading arrangement is
shown in table 4.2. In the table, the distribution for each upper and lower column have been combined, since this
simplifies the layout for the calculations.

Page 9 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Table 4.2 Moment distribution for the first loading case

A B C D
Cols. AB BA Cols. BC CB Cols. CD DC Cols.
( M) ( M) ( M) ( M)
D.F.s 0.39 0.61 0.32 0.20 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.32 0.61 0.39
Load kN 292 135 292

F.E.M. 146 146 45.0 45.0 146 146

Bal. 56.9 89.1 32.3 20.2 48.5 48.5 20.2 32.3 89.1 56.9

C.O. 16.2 44.6 24.2 24.2 44.6 16.2

Bal. 6.3 9.9 22.0 13.8 33.0 33.0 13.5 22.0 9.9 6.3

C.O. 11.0 5.0 16.5 16.5 5.0 11.0

Bal. 4.3 6.7 6.9 4.3 10.3 10.3 4.3 6.9 6.7 4.3

C.O. 3.4 3.4 5.2 5.2 3.4 3.4

Bal. 1.3 2.1 2.8 1.7 4.1 4.1 1.7 2.8 2.1 1.3

M (kN m) 68.8 68.8 135.0 40.0 95.0 95.0 40.0 135.0 68.8 68.8

The shearing forces and the maximum span moments can be calculated from the formulae of section Continuous
beams (page 3). For the first loading arrangement and span AB:
load (M AB  M BA )
Shear VAB  
2 L
292.5 (68.8  135.0)
   135 KN
2 6.0
VBA  load  V AB
 292.5  135  157 KN
2
V AB
Maximum moments, span AB   M AB
2w
135 2
  68.8  118 KNm
2  48.75
V 135
Distance from A, a3  AB   2.8m
w 48.75
Figure 4.13 shows the bending moments in the beams for each loading arrangement; figure 4.14 shows the shearing
forces. These diagrams have been combined in figure 4.15 to give the design envelopes for bending moments and
shearing forces.
The moment in each column is given by
k col
M col   M col 
 kcol
Thus, for the first loading arrangement and taking M col from table 4.2 gives
0.31
Column moment M AJ  68.8   37 kNm
0.58
0.27
M AE  68.8   32 kNm
0.58

Page 10 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

0.31
M BK  40   21 kNm
0.58
0.27
M BF  40   19 kNm
0.58

This loading arrangement gives the maximum column moments, as plotted in figure 4.16.
135 157
135 135
69 95 95 69
67.5
28
(1) (1)

67.5

118 118 135

157
107 107 91 111
88 88 97.5
45 45

(2) (2)
10
97.5 91
77 77
147 133 111
115 102 111
106
67 80
46

(3) (3)
1

79 89 92
114
160 160
147
102 115
80 67 92 89
46

(4) (4)
1

79 106
114 111
133

Fig 4.13 Beam bending moment diagrams (kNm) Fig.4.14 Beam shearing-force diagrams (kN)

147 147
69 115 115 69
28
kN m
10

118 118

37 21 21 37
160 32 32
135 19 19

106

kN

106
135
160

Fig 4.15 Bending-moment and shearing-force Fig.4.16 Column bending moments (kNm)
envelopes

Page 11 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Example 4.4 Analysis of a substitute frame for a column

The substitute frame for this example, shown in figure 4.17, is taken from the building frame in figure 4.10. The
loading to cause maximum column moments is shown in the figure for Gk  25 KN / m and Qk  10 KN / m .
The stiffnesses of these members are identical to those calculated in
example 4.3, except that for this type of frame the beam stiffnesses are

3.5m
1.35G k + 1.5 Q k halved. Thus
1.35G k
= 292.5kN = 135kN 1
A B C k AB   0.9  10 3  0.45  10 3
2

4.0m
1
k BC   1.35  10 3  0.675  10 3
2
3
Upper column kU  0.3110
6.0m 4.0m
Lower column k L  0.27  10 3
Fig 4.17 Substitute frame  k  (0.45  0.675  0.31  0.27) 10 3
 1.705  10 3

6
Fixed-end moment M BA  292.5   146 kNm
25
4
Fixed-end moment M BC  135   45 kNm
25 18
Column moments are 16 kNm
0.31
Upper column M U  (146  45)   18 kNm
1.705
0.27
Lower column M L  (146  45)   16 kNm
1.705
Fig 4.18 Column moments
The column moments are illustrated in figure 4.18. They should be compared with the corresponding moments for
the internal column in figure 4.16.

Lateral loads on frames

Lateral loads on a structure may be caused by wind pressures, by retained earth, or by seismic forces.
The vertical-loading analysis can be carried out by the method described previously. The analysis for the lateral
loads should be kept separate. The forces may be calculated by an elastic computer analysis or by a simplified
approximate method.
A suitable approximate analysis is the cantilever method. It assumes that:
1. Points of contraflexure are located at the mid-points of all columns and beams; and
2. The direct axial loads in the columns are in proportional to their distances from the centre of gravity of the frame.
It is also usual to assume that all the columns in a storey are equal cross-sectional area.

Example 4.5 Simplified analysis for lateral loads-cantilever method

Figure 4.19 shows a building frame subjected to a characteristic wind action of 3.0kN per meter height of the
frame. This action is assumed to be transferred to the frame as a concentrated load at each floor level as indicated in
the figure.
By inspection, there is tension in the two columns to the left and compression in the columns to the right; and by
assumption 2 the axial forces in columns are proportional to their distances from the centre line of the frame.

Page 12 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

5.25kN

3.5
10.5kN 4 th

3.5
lateral load= 3.0kN/m
10.5kN 3 rd

3.5
11.25kN 2 nd

4.0
12.0kN 1 st

4.0
6.0kN

6.0 4.0 6.0

Fig 4.19 Frame with lateral load

CL

F1= 0.54 F2= 0.675 F3= 0.54

5.25

1.75
s
H1= 0.93 H2= 1.70 H3= 1.70 H4= 0.93
N1= 4.0P N2= 1.0P N3= 1.0P N4= 4.0P
= 0.54 = 0.135 = 0.135 = 0.54
(a) Roof

0.54 0.135 0.135 0.54

0.93 1.70 1.70 0.93
1.75 1.75

2.16 2.705 2.16

10.5

t t'
2.78 5.1 5.1 2.78
2.70 0.68 0.68 2.70
(b) 4th floor
Fig 4.20 Subframes at the roof and 4th floor
Thus
Axial force in exterior column: axial force in interior column  4.0P : 1.0P
The analysis of the frame continues by considering a section through the top-storey columns: the removal of the
frame below this section gives the remainder shown in figure 4.20a. The forces in this subframe are calculated as
follows.
(a) Axial Forces in the Columns
Taking moments about point s, M s  0 , therefore
5.25 1.75  P  6.0  P 10.0  4P 16.0  0
And therefore
P  0.135 kN
Page 13 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

Thus
N1   N 4  4.0 P  0.54kN
N 2   N 3  1.0 P  0.135kN
(b) Vertical Shearing Forces F in the Beams
For each part of the sub frame, 
F  0 , therefore
F1  N1  0.54 kN
F2  N1  N 2  0.675 kN

(c) Horizontal Shearing Forces H in the Columns

Taking moments about the points of contra flexure of each beam,  M  0 therefore
H 1  1.75  N1  3.0  0
H 1  0.93 kN
And
( H1  H 2 )1.75  N1  8.0  N 2  2.0  0
H 2  1.70 kN
The calculations of the equivalent forces for the fourth floor (figure 4.20 b) follow a similar procedure, as follows.
(d) Axial Forces in the Columns

For the frame about section tt  , M t  0 therefore
5.25(3  1.75)  10.5  1.75  P  6.0  P  10.0  4 P  16.0  0
P  0.675 kN
Therefore
N1  4.0 P  2.70 kN
N 2  1.0 P  0.68kN
(e) Beam Shears
F1  2.70  0.54  2.16 kN
F2  2.70  0.68  0.54  0.135  2.705 kN
(f) Column Shears
H1  1.75  0.93  1.75  (2.70  0.54)3.0  0
H1  2.78 kN
1
H2  (10.5  5.25)  2.78  5.1 kN
2
Values calculated for sections taken below the remaining floors are
Third floor N1  7.03 kN N2  1.76 kN
F1  4.33 kN F2  5.41 kN
H1  4.64 kN H 2  8.49 kN
Second floor N1  14.14 kN N2  3.53 kN
F1  7.11 kN F2  8.88 kN
H1  6.61 kN H 2  12.14 kN
First floor N1  24.37 kN N2  6.09 kN
F1  10.23 kN F2  12.79 kN
H1  8.74 kN H 2  16.01 kN
The bending moments in the beams and columns at their connections can be calculated from these results by the
following formulae
Beams M B  F  2 beam span
1

Columns M C  H  2 storey height

1

Page 14 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

So that the roof’s external connection

1
M B  0.54   6.0  1.6 kN m
2
1
M C  0.93   3.5  1.6 kN m
2
As a check at each joint,  M B  M C
The bending moments due to characteristic wind loads in all the columns and beams of this structure are shown in
figure 4.21.
1.6 1.4 1.6
1.6 3.0
1.6 1.4 1.6
6.5 5.4 6.5
1.6 4.9 3.0 8.9
6.5 5.4 6.5
13.0 10.8 13.0
4.9 8.1 8.9 14.9
13.0 21.3 10.8 13.0 21.3
17.8
8.1 13.2 14.9 24.3
21.3 30.7 17.8 21.3 30.7
25.6
13.2 17.5 24.3 32.0
30.7 25.6 30.7
17.5 32.0 32.0

24.4 6.1 6.1 24.4

External Internal
Column Beams Column
Fig 4.21 Moments (kN m) and reactions (kN)

4.5 Redistribution of moments

Some method of elastic analysis is generally used to calculate the forces in a concrete structure, despite the fact that
the structure does not behave elastically near its ultimate load. The assumption of elastic behavior is reasonably
true for low stress levels; but as a section approaches its ultimate moment of resistance, plastic deformation will
occur. This is recognized in EC2, by allowing redistribution of the elastic moments subject to certain limitations.
Reinforced concrete behaves in a manner midway between that of steel and concrete. The stress-strain curves for
the two materials (figures 2.3 and 2.2) show the elasto-plastic behavior of steel and the plastic behavior of concrete.
The latter will fail at a relatively small compressive strain. The exact behavior of a reinforced concrete section
depends on the relative quantities and the individual properties of the two materials. However, such a section may
be considered virtually elastic until the steel yields; and then plastic until the concrete fails in compression. Thus
the plastic behavior is limited by the concrete failure; or more specifically, the concrete failure limits the rotation
that may take place at a section in bending.
Thus, in an indeterminate structure, once a beam section develops its ultimate moment of resistance M u , it then
behaves as a plastic hinge resisting a constant moment of that value. Further loading must be taken by other parts of
the structure, with the changes in moment elsewhere being just the same as if a real hinge existed. Provided rotation
of a hinge does not cause crushing of the concrete, further hinges will be formed until a mechanism is produced.

Example 4.6 Moment redistribution

In example 4.3, figure 4.13, it is requited to reduce the maximum support moment of M BA  147 kNm as much as
possible , but without increasing the span moment above the present maximum value of 118 kN m.

Page 15 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

147
115 102
67 80
46

79
114
(a) Original Moments (kNm)

140 108 102

67 80
46

79
118
(b) Redistributed Moments (kNm)

134
105 111

90 92
158.5
(c) Shears (kN)

Fig 4.22 Moments and shears after redistribution

Figure 4.22a duplicates the original bending-moment diagram (part 3 of figure 4.13) of example 4.3 while figure
4.22b shows the redistributed moments, with the span moment set at 118 kN m. The moment at support B can be
calculated, using a rearrangement of equations 4.4 and 4.1. Thus
VAB  [( M max  M AB )2w]
And
 wL 
M BA  V AB   L  M AB
 2 
For span AB, w  48.75kN/m , therefore
V AB  [(118  67 )  2  48.75]  134 kN
 48.75  6.0 
M BA  134  6.0  67  140 kNm
 2 
And
VBA  292.5 134  158.5kN
Reduction in M BA  147 140
 7kNm
7 100
  4.8 per cent
147
In order to ensure that the moments in the columns at joint B are not changed by the distribution, moment M BC
must also be reduced by 7 kN m. Therefore
M BC  115  7  108kNm hogging
For the revised moments in BC:
(108  80) 195
VBC    105kN
4 2
Page 16 of 17
CE311 STRUCTURAL DESIGN I CHAPTER IV

VCB  195  105  90kN

For span BC:
105 2
M max   108  5kNm Sagging
2  48.75
Figure 4.22c shows the revised shearing-force diagram to accord with the redistributed moments. This example
illustrates how, with redistribution
1. The moments at a section of beam can be reduced without exceeding the maximum design moments at other
sections;
2. The values of the column moments are not affected; and
3. The equilibrium between external loads and internal forces is maintained.

Page 17 of 17