Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Two Way Slab (By Coefficients)
Two Way Slab (By Coefficients)
slab by coefficient
method
Behaviour of two way slabs
One way slab deform under load into an approximately cylindrical
surface. The main structural action is one way in such cases, in the
direction normal to supports on two opposite edges of a rectangular
panel. In many cases, however, rectangular slabs are of such
proportions and are supported in such a way that two way action
results.
When loaded, such slabs bend into a dished surface rather than
cylindrical one. This means that at any point the slab is curved in both
principal directions, and since bending moments are proportional to
curvatures, moments also exists in both directions.
Behaviour of two way slabs
Fig.-1.
Behaviour of two way slabs
Fig.-2 shows the two center strips of a rectangular plate with short
span ℓa and long span ℓb . If the uniform load is w per square foot of
slab, each of the two strips acts approximately like a simple beam,
uniformly loaded by its share of w. Because these imaginary strips
actually are part of same monolithic slab, their deflections at the
intersection point must be the same.
5 w a 4a 5 w b 4b
(a )
384EI 384EI Fig.-2.
Behaviour of two way slabs
w a 4b
4 b
w b a
From the eq.(b) it is clear that larger share of the load is carried in
the short direction, the ratio of the two portions of the total load being
inversely proportional to the fourth power of the ratio of the spans.
Behaviour of two way slabs
w a 4b
4 b
w b a
b b
4 w a 256 w b 3 .5 w a 150 .06 w b
a a
b b
3 w a 81w b 2.5 w a 39.06 w b
a a
b
2 w a 16 w b
a
b
1 wa wb
a
Behaviour of two way slabs
This result is approximate because the actual behaviour of a slab is
more complex than that of the two intersecting strips. The Fig.3(b)
shows a slab model consisting of two sets of three strips each. It can
be seen that the two central strips s1 and ℓ1 bend in a manner similar
to that shown in Fig.3 The outer strips s2 and ℓ2 , however, are not
only bent but also twisted.
Fig.-3.
Behaviour of two way slabs
Consider, for instance, one of the intersections of s2 and ℓ2. It is
seen that at the intersection the exterior edge of strip ℓ2 is at higher
elevation than the interior edge, while at the nearby end of strip ℓ2
both edges are at the same elevation; the strip is twisted.
2
w 2
2 0.0625 w2 c
8
Behaviour of two way slabs
If the strip were an isolated beam, it would now fail. Considering the
slab as a whole, however, that failure would not occur immediately.
The neighboring strips (those parallel as well as perpendicular to s1)
being actually monolithic with it will take over any additional load that
strip s1 can longer carry until they, in turn, start yielding.
The largest moment in the slab occurs at the mid span of the short
strip s1 of Fig(b). It is evident that the curvature, and hence the
moment, in the short strip s2 is less than at the corresponding location
of strip s1.
Behaviour of two way slabs
Consequently, a variation of short span moment occurs in the long
direction of the span. This variation is shown qualitatively in Fig.4 The
short span moment diagram in Fig.4(a) is valid only along the center
strip at 1-1. Elsewhere, the maximum moment is less. Other moment
ordinates are reduced proportionately.
Fig.-4.
Behaviour of two way slabs
Similarly, the long span moment diagram in Fig.4(b) applies only at
longitudinal center line of the slab; elsewhere, ordinates are reduced
according to variation shown.
Fig.-4.
Behaviour of two way slabs
These variations in maximum moment across the width and length
of a rectangular slab are accounted for in an approximate way in
most practical design methods by designing for a reduced moment in
the outer quarters of the slab span in each direction.
Fig.-4.
Behaviour of two way slabs
Only slabs with side ratios less than 2 need be treated as two-way
slabs. From eq.(b), it is seen that, for a slab of this proportion, the
share of the load carried in the long direction is only of the order of
one-sixteenth of that in the short direction. Such a slab acts almost as
if it were spanning in the short direction only. Consequently,
rectangular slab panel with an aspect ratio more than 2 may be
reinforced for one-way action, with the main steel perpendicular to
long edges.
Shrinkage and temperature steel should be provided in the long
direction, of course, and auxiliary reinforcement should be provided
over, and perpendicular to, the short support beams and at the slab
corners to control cracking.
Analysis by the coefficient method
The precise determination of moments in two-way slabs with
various conditions of continuity at the supported edges is
mathematically formidable and not suited to design practice. For this
reason, various simplified methods have been adopted for
determining moments, shears and reactions of such slabs.
According to the 1995 ACI Code, all two reinforced concrete slab
systems including edge supported slabs, flat slabs and flat plats are
to be analyzed and designed according to one unified method, which
will presented later on.
Analysis by the coefficient method
However, the complexity of the generalized approach, particularly
for systems which do not meet the requirements permitting analysis
by the “Direct Design Method” of the present code, has led many
engineers to continue to use the design method of the 1963 Code for
the special case of two-way slabs supported on four sides of each
slab panel by relatively deep, stiff edge beams.
Where
Fig.-5.
Analysis by the coefficient method
As shown in Fig.4, the moments in both directions are larger in the
center portion of the slab than in regions close to the edges.
Correspondingly, it is provided that the entire middle strip be
designed for the full, tabulated design moment. In the edge strips this
moment is assumed to decrease from its full value at the edge of the
middle strip to one third of this value at the edge of the panel. This
variation is shown for the moments Ma in the short span direction in
Fig.-5. The lateral variation of the long span moment Mb is similar.
Analysis by the coefficient method
Fig.-6.
Analysis by the coefficient method
On the other hand, the maximum live load positive moments are
obtained when live load is placed only on the particular panel and not
on any of the adjacent panels. In this case, some rotation will occur at
all continuous edges. As an approximation it is assumed that there is
50% restraint for calculating these live load moments. The
corresponding coefficients are give in Table-3. For computing shear in
the slab and loads on the supporting beams table-4 gives the
fractions of the total W that are transmitted in the two directions.
Reinforcement for two-way edge supported slab
In two way edge supported slab, the main flexural reinforcement is
placed in an orthogonal pattern, with reinforcing bars parallel and
perpendicular to the supported edges. As the positive steel is placed
in two layers, the effective depth ‘d’ for the upper layer is smaller than
that for the lower layer by one bar diameter.
Either straight bars, cut off where they are no longer required, or
bent bars may be used for two way slabs, but economy of bar
fabrication and placement will generally favour all straight bars.
Mb,neg Cb,negw2b
1.00 Ca.dl 0.036 0.018 0.018 0.027 0.027 0.033 0.027 0.020 0.023
Cb.dl 0.036 0.018 0.027 0.027 0.018 0.027 0.033 0.023 0.020
0.95 Ca.dl 0.040 0.020 0.021 0.030 0.028 0.036 0.031 0.022 0.024
Cb.dl 0.033 0.016 0.025 0.024 0.015 0.024 0.031 0.021 0.017
0.90 Ca.dl 0.045 0.022 0.025 0.033 0.029 0.039 0.035 0.025 0.026
Cb.dl 0.029 0.014 0.024 0.022 0.013 0.021 0.028 0.019 0.015
0.85 Ca.dl 0.050 0.024 0.029 0.036 0.031 0.042 0.040 0.029 0.028
Cb.dl 0.026 0.012 0.022 0.019 0.011 0.017 0.025 0.017 0.013
0.80 Ca.dl 0.056 0.026 0.034 0039 0.032 0.045 0.045 0.032 0.029
Cb.dl 0.023 0.011 0.020 0.016 0.009 0.015 0.022 0.015 0.010
0.75 Ca.dl 0.061 0.028 0.040 0.043 0.033 0.048 0.051 0.036 0.031
Cb.dl 0.019 0.009 0.018 0.013 0.007 0.012 0.020 0.013 0.007
0.70 Ca.dl 0.068 0.030 0.046 0.046 0.035 0.051 0.058 0.040 0.033
Cb.dl 0.016 0.007 0.016 0.011 0.005 0.009 0.017 0.011 0.006
0.65 Ca.dl 0.74 0.032 0.054 0.050 0.036 0.054 0.065 0.044 0.034
Cb.dl 0.13 0.006 0.014 0.009 0.004 0.007 0.014 0.009 0.005
0.60 Ca.dl 0.081 0.034 0.062 0.053 0.037 0.056 0.073 0.048 0.036
Cb.dl 0.010 0.004 0.011 0.007 0.003 0.006 0.012 0.007 0.004
0.55 Ca.dl 0.088 0.035 0.071 0.056 0.038 0.058 0.081 0.052 0.037
Cb.dl 0.008 0.003 0.009 0.005 0.002 0.004 0.009 0.005 0.003
0.50 Ca.dl 0.095 0.037 0.080 0.059 0.039 0.061 0.089 0.056 0.038
Cb.dl 0.006 0.002 0.007 0.004 0.001 0.03 0.007 0.004 0.002
Table 3: Coefficients For live load positive moments in slabsa
Wa is the load per foot on the long beam and W b is the load per foot
on the short beam.
Ratio Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6 Case 7 Case 8 Case 9
M= La/ Lb
1.00 Wa 0.50 0.50 0.17 0.50 0.83 0.71 0.29 0.33 0.67
Wb 0.50 0.50 0.83 0.50 0.17 0.29 0.71 0.67 0.33
0.95 Wa 0.55 0.55 0.20 0.55 0.86 0.75 0.33 0.38 0.71
Wb 0.45 0.45 0.80 0.45 0.14 0.25 0.67 0.62 0.29
0.90 Wa 0.60 0.60 0.23 0.60 0.88 0.79 0.38 0.43 0.75
Wb 0.40 0.40 0.77 0.40 0.12 0.21 0.62 0.57 0.25
0.85 Wa 0.66 0.66 0.28 0.66 0.90 0.83 0.43 0.49 0.79
Wb 0.34 0.34 0.72 0.34 0.10 0.17 0.57 0.51 0.21
0.80 Wa 0.71 0.71 0.33 0.71 0.92 0.86 0.49 0.55 0.83
Wb 0.29 0.29 0.67 0.29 0.08 0.14 0.51 0.45 0.17
0.75 Wa 0.76 0.76 0.39 0.76 0.94 0.88 0.56 0.61 0.86
Wb 0.24 0.24 0.61 0.24 0.06 0.12 0.44 0.39 0.14
0.70 Wa 0.81 0.81 0.45 0.81 0.95 0.91 0.62 0.68 0.89
Wb 0.19 0.19 0.55 0.19 0.05 0.09 0.38 0.32 0.11
0.65 Wa 0.85 0.85 0.53 0.85 0.96 0.93 0.69 0.74 0.92
Wb 0.15 0.15 0.47 0.15 0.04 0.07 0.31 0.26 0.08
0.60 Wa 0.89 0.89 0.61 0.89 0.97 0.95 0.76 0.80 0.94
Wb 0.11 0.11 0.39 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.24 0.20 0.06
0.55 Wa 0.92 0.92 0.69 0.92 0.98 0.96 0.81 0.85 0.95
Wb 0.08 0.08 0.31 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.19 0.15 0.05
0.50 Wa 0.94 0.94 0.76 0.94 0.99 0.97 0.86 0.89 0.97
Wb 0.06 0.06 0.24 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.14 0.31 0.03
Problem:
A Monolithic reinforced concrete floor is to be composed of
rectangular bays measuring 2126 ft as shown in fig. Beams of width
12 in. and depth 24 in. are provided on all column lines. Thus the
clear span dimension for the two-way slab panel is 2025 ft. The
floor is to be designed to carry a service live load of 137 psf uniformly
distributed over its surface, in addition to its own weight, using
concrete of strength fc’= 3000 psi & reinforcement having fy=60,000
psi. Find the required slab thickness and reinforcement for the corner
panel as shown in fig.
Problem:
Solution
Slab thickness = Perimeter /180
h 220 25
12
6 in.
180
The corresponding dead load is 150 0.5= 75 psf
The factored loads on which the design is to be based are
Live load = 1.7 137 = 232.9 psf
Dead load = 1.4 75 = 105 psf
Total load = 338 psf
Aspect ratio m = la / lb = 20/25 = 0.8
YOU WILL USE NOW NEW LOADS FACTORS, i.e. 1.6 and 1.2
FOR LIVE AND DEAD LOADS RESPECTIVELY.
Solution
The moment calculations for the slab middle strips at continuous
edges
For case 4(one long side and one short side continuous)
Ca.neg = 0.071 Cb.neg = 0.029 (table-1)
fy 60,000
m 23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85 3000
1 2mR n
1 1 1 2 23 .53 271 .852 0.0048
1 1
m fy 23 .53 60,000
A s bd 0.0048 12 5 0.288 in2 / ft
Choose # 4 @ 8 in c / c ( A s 0.29 )
Max . spacing 2h 2 6 12 in.
Continuous End (Negative reinforcement)
max 0.75b 0.016035
min 0.0018
Mu 115,000
Mn 127777 .78 lb.in
0 .9
M 127777 .78
Rn n2 425 .93
bd 12 5 2
fy 60,000
m 23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85 3000
1 2mR n
1 1 1 2 23 .53 425 .93 0.0078
1 1
m fy 23 .53 60,000
A s bd 0.0078 12 5 0.0.468 in2 / ft
Choose # 4 @ 5 in c / c ( A s 0.47 )
Max . spacing 2h 2 6 12 in.
Discontinuous end (Negative reinforcement)
max 0.75b 0.016035
min 0.0018
Mu 24,500
Mn 27222 .22 lb.in
0 .9
Mn 27222 .22
Rn 2 90 .74
bd 12 5 2
fy 60,000
m 23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85 3000
1 2mR n
1 1 1 2 23 .53 90 .74 0.00154
1 1
m fy 23 .53 60 ,000
Thus min imum value of will be used
A s bh 0.0018 12 6 0.13 in2 / ft
Choose #3 @ 10 in c / c ( A s 0.13 )
Max . spacing 2h 2 6 12 in.
Solution max 0.75b 0.016035
min 0.0018
Long Direction (positive mid span reinforcement)
Mu 47,600
Mn 52888 .89 lb.in The positive moment steel in
0 .9
the long direction is placed
Mn 52,888 .89
Rn 2 217 .65 on top of that for the short
bd 12 4.5 2
direction. Thus d=4.5 in.
fy 60,000
m 23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85 3000
1 2mR n
1 1 1 2 23 .53 217 .65 0.0038
1 1
m fy 23 .53 60,000
A s bd 0.0038 12 4.5 0.205 in2 / ft
Choose #3 @ 6 in c / c ( A s 0.22 )
Max . spacing 2h 2 6 12 in.
Continuous End (Negative reinforcement)
max 0.75b 0.016035
min 0.0018
Mu 73,400
Mn 81555 .6 lb.in
0 .9
Mn 81555 .6
Rn 2 271 .852
bd 12 5 2
fy 60,000
m 23 .53
0.85 fc 0.85 3000
1 2mR n
1 1 1 2 23 .53 271 .852 0.0048
1 1
m fy 23 .53 60,000
A s bd 0.0048 12 5 0.288 in2 / ft
Choose # 4 @ 8 in c / c ( A s 0.29 )
Max . spacing 2h 2 6 12 in.
Discontinuous end (Negative reinforcement)
max 0.75b 0.016035
min 0.0018
Thus the resisting shear is well above the applied shear. Thus there
is no need of shear reinforcement.
Deflection Control
Edge-supported slabs are typically thin relative to their span, and
may show large deflections even though strength requirements are
met, unless certain limitations are imposed in the design to prevent
this. The simplest approach to deflection control is to impose a
minimum thickness-span ratio.
Effects of cracking.
For slabs it is not clear from the ACI code or Commentary whether
the longer or shorter span is to be used as the basis, but it is
conservative (and reasonable when considering possible damage to
supported elements ) to base calculated limits on the shorter span.
Deflection Control
Maximum live load deflection, for example, will normally be
obtained when the live load acts on the given panel, but not on the
adjacent panels. Therefore, live load deflection should be based on
the maximum positive moments found using table of positive
moments.
This will be illustrated for the slab shown in Fig(a), considering the
middle strip of unit width in the long direction of the panel. The
variation of moment for a uniformly distributed load is parabolic, and
the sum of the positive and negative moments must, according to
statics, be
1
M w b b
2
(a )
8
Deflection Control
where wb is the fractional
part of the load transmitted in
the long direction of the panel
(Fig (c)). If fully fixity were
obtained at the supports, the
negative moment would be
1 2
Mneg w b b M
2
(b) 2
M
12 3 3
And the positive moment
would be
1 1
Mpos w b b M
2
(c )
24 3
Deflection Control
It has been noted earlier that the coefficients for maximum live
load positive moments were derived assuming 50 percent, 100
percent, fixity.
Accordingly, the zero moment baseline associated with the
maximum positive moment Mb obtained using table of positive
moment as shown in Fig(c), and the statically consistent negative
moments are one-half the positive moment Mb.
Deflection Control
Deflection calculations are thus based on the parabolic moment
diagram, with maximum ordinate Mb at midspan and negative end
moments one-half that value.
The midspan live load deflection, l, of the slab strip shown in
Fig(b) can easily be found based on the moment diagram of Fig.(c).
For the slab shown, with both edges continuous
3 Mb 2b
(d)
32 Ec eff
where Mb is the live load positive moment obtained using the
appropriate coefficient of Table of positive moment, Ec is the elastic
modulus of the concrete, and eff is the effective moment of inertia of
the concrete cross section of unit width
Deflection Control
Eq.(d) was derived for a typical interior panel, with equal
restraining moments at each end of the slab strip. Similar equations
can easily be derived for the cases where one or both ends are
discontinuous.
According to coefficient method of moment analysis, negative
moments at discontinuous slab edges are assumed equal to one-third
the positive moment in the same direction, so it is clear that resulting
deflection would differ very little from eq.(d).
That equation can be used for panel strips with one or both ends
discontinuous, but monolithic with supporting beams, with very little
error.
Deflection Control
For the special case where edges are completely free of restraint,
as if, for example, the slab where supported by masonry walls, the
midspan live load deflection is
5 Mb 2b
(e)
48 Ec eff
The dead load deflection should be based on the moment diagram
found using maximum dead load positive moment based on table of
“dead load positive moment”, which assumes all panels loaded.
1 Mb 2b
d (f )
16 Ec eff
Where Mb is, in this case, the dead load positive moment obtained
using the coefficients of table of “dead load positive moment”.
For the special case where both ends are free of restraint, the
midspan dead load deflection can be found from
5 Mb 2b
d (g)
48 Ec eff
Deflection Control
While the deflections discussed above have been with reference
to a unit strip spanning in the longer direction of the panel of
Figure(a), calculations may also be based on the strip in the shorter
direction.
The resulting deflection at the center of the panel should be same
in either case, although small differences can be expected because
of the approximate nature of the calculations.
9000 25 12
2
d 0.08 in.
16 3.12 10 216
6
Solution
For comparison, in the short direction the service load moment due to
dead load is
19,700
14,100 in lb
1 .4
And the corresponding deflection at midpanel is
14,100 20 12
2
d 0.08 in.
16 3.12 10 216
6
Just as before.
The time-dependent increment of deflection will be calculated
based on a 5-year multiplier =3.0, but the ACI Code time variation
shown in Fig is used. That figure indicates that one-half the time-
dependent deflection would have occurred at 3 months.
Solution
Only the remaining half would occur after installation of the partitions
and other elements. Thus the fractional part of the time-dependent
dead load deflections that may cause damage is
1
0.08 3 0.12 in.
2
Live load deflection will be calculated from eq.(d).
35,000
20,600 in lb
1 .7
is service load moment.
Solution 3 Mb 2b
And the deflection at midpanel is (d)
32 Ec eff
3 20,600 25 12
2
0.26 in.
32 3.12 10 216
6
3 31,600 20 12
2
0.25 in.
32 3.12 10 216
6