Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2: two-way slab
DATA .............................................................................................................. 2
CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 13
Thickness ....................................................................................................................... 13
Bottom reinforcement .................................................................................................... 13
Upper reinforcement ...................................................................................................... 13
No shear reinforcement ................................................................................................. 13
Drawing ......................................................................................................................... 14
x
6m
5m
Concrete: C 30/37
Steel: BE 500
Concrete cover: 25 mm
Since the limit ratio l/d is the same as for the one-way slab:
l
20 with l = 5 m,
d
The thickness should be 29 cm.
But, as we have seen for the one-way slab, this value is very conservative, and a
thickness of 21 cm gave us an exact deflection under quasi-permanent loads smaller
than the limit l/250.
The same slab with 2 more supports will have a smaller deflection.
We adopt the same thickness, which will permit to make the comparison:
h = 21 cm
Loads
Characteristic values:
Permanent loads:
Self-weight of slab: 0,21 m x 25 kN/m = 5,25 kN/m
Surfacing and covering: 2,50 kN/m
Total = 7,75 kN/m
Variable loads:
Service load: 3,00 kN/m
gd = 10,5 kN/m
qd = 4,5 kN/m
To calculate the design bending moments of this rectangular slab, the abaci of
MARCUS can be used since the slab is an isolated slab.
(see 11.3.6)
mx = Kx.q.lx2 Where lx = a = 5 m
my = Ky.q.ly2 ly = b = 6 m
Kx1 = 0,057
Ky1 = 0,028
One finds:
mx = 21,4 kNm/m
my = 15,1 kNm/m
Remark:
One notices immediately that the bending moments are very different than those of
the one-way slab:
Reduced moment:
Md md
d = =
b d fcd
2
d fcd
2
One finds:
21 400 Nmm/mm
d = = 0,039 << lim = 0,371 OK
(180 mm) 17 N/mm
Since
A s fyd
=
b d fcd
One finds
A sx f 17
= d cd = 0,0404 180 mm = 284 mm2 /m
b fyd 435
Reduced moment:
Md md
d = =
b d fcd
2
d fcd
2
One finds:
15 100 Nmm/mm
d = = 0,0307 << lim = 0,371 OK
(170 mm) 17 N/mm
Since
A s fyd
=
b d fcd
One finds
A sx f 17
= d cd = 0,0316 170 mm = 210 mm2 /m
b fyd 435
A f
sx, min 2,9 MPa
= 0,26 . ctm . d = 0,26 . 180 mm = 271 mm/m OK
b f 500 MPa
yk
And Asy,min= 256 mm/m not OK
A sx, min
= 0,0013 . d = 0,0013 . 180 mm = 234 mm/m OK
b
And Asy,min= 221 mm/m not OK
A ct
A s, min = k c k fct, eff. (minimum reinforcement to control cracking)
s
A s, min 105 mm
= 0,4 1 2,9 MPa = 244 mm/m OK
b 500 MPa
The required principal bottom reinforcement (284 mm/m) is larger than the minimum
reinforcement (271 mm/m), but not the secondary one (210 mm/m), which has to
be increased to the minimum (256 mm/m).
A s, max
= 0,04 h = 0,04 . 210 mm = 8 400 mm/m OK
b
Asmax / b = 8 400 mm/m
The required bottom reinforcement (284 mm/m) is smaller than the maximum
reinforcement (8.400 mm/m). The condition is fulfilled.
min [1,5.h ; 250 mm] = 250 mm for the principal reinforcement (x)
min [2,5.h ; 400 mm] = 400 mm for the secondary reinforcement (y)
sxmax = 250 mm
symax = 400 mm
The required area in the principal (x) direction is thus 284 mm/m.
The required area in the secondary (y) direction is thus 256 mm/m.
AREA (mm/m)
Diameter (mm)
- cm 6 8 10 12 16 20 25 32 40
20 5 565 1005 1571 2262 4021 6283 9817 16085 25133
17 6 471 838 1309 1885 3351 5236 8181 13404 20944
14 7 404 718 1122 1616 2872 4488 7012 11489 17952
13 8 353 628 982 1414 2513 3927 6136 10053 15708
11 9 314 559 873 1257 2234 3491 5454 8936 13963
10 10 283 503 785 1131 2011 3142 4909 8042 12566
9,1 11 257 457 714 1028 1828 2856 4462 7311 11424
8,3 12 236 419 654 942 1676 2618 4091 6702 10472
7,7 13 217 387 604 870 1547 2417 3776 6187 9666
7,1 14 202 359 561 808 1436 2244 3506 5745 8976
6,7 15 188 335 524 754 1340 2094 3272 5362 8378
6,3 16 177 314 491 707 1257 1963 3068 5027 7854
5,9 17 166 296 462 665 1183 1848 2887 4731 7392
5,6 18 157 279 436 628 1117 1745 2727 4468 6981
5,3 19 149 265 413 595 1058 1653 2584 4233 6614
5 20 141 251 393 565 1005 1571 2454 4021 6283
4,8 21 135 239 374 539 957 1496 2337 3830 5984
4,5 22 129 228 357 514 914 1428 2231 3656 5712
4,3 23 123 219 341 492 874 1366 2134 3497 5464
4,2 24 118 209 327 471 838 1309 2045 3351 5236
4 25 113 201 314 452 804 1257 1963 3217 5027
3,3 30 94 168 262 377 670 1047 1636 2681 4189
2,9 35 81 144 224 323 574 898 1402 2298 3590
2,5 40 71 126 196 283 503 785 1227 2011 3142
X: 8/170
Y: 8/190
We have respected the assumptions that were made for the calculation of the effective
depth dx and dy:
- Diameter of the principal rebars (x) smaller or equal to 10 mm
- Diameter of the secondary rebars (y) smaller or equal to 10 mm
In theory, the reinforcement area can be reduced to 50% near the supports. But in
this case, it cannot because the reinforcement area would become smaller than the
minimum.
Primary:
Due to accidental hogging moments, a top reinforcement has to be provided above the
supports. According to Eurocode 2, the area of this reinforcement should not be
smaller than 25% of the main required bottom reinforcement.
A sX A
= 0,25. sx = 0,25 . 284 mm/m = 71 mm/m
b b
AsX / b = 71 mm/m
This area has to be provided on a length of 0,2 . 5 m=1 m from the supporting edges.
Secondary:
A sY A
= 0,20. sX = 0,2 . 71 mm/m = 14 mm/m
b b
AsY / b = 14 mm/m
min [2,5.h ; 400 mm] = 400 mm for the principal reinforcement (X)
min [3.h ; 450 mm] = 450 mm for the secondary reinforcement (Y)
sXmax = 400 mm
sYmax = 450 mm
Choice of upper reinforcement above the long beams:
X: 6/400
Y: 6/450
Primary:
Due to accidental hogging moments, a top reinforcement has to be provided above the
short supports. Its area should not be smaller than 25% of the main required bottom
reinforcement.
A sY A sy
= 0,25. = 0,25 . 210 mm/m = 52 mm/m
b b
AsY / b = 52 mm/m
This area has to be provided on a length of 0,2 . 6 m= 1,2 m from the supporting
edges.
Secondary:
A sX A
= 0,20. sY = 0,2 . 52 mm/m = 10 mm/m
b b
AsX / b = 10 mm/m
min [2,5.h ; 400 mm] = 400 mm for the principal reinforcement (Y)
min [3.h ; 450 mm] = 450 mm for the secondary reinforcement (X)
sYmax = 400 mm
sXmax = 450 mm
Choice of upper reinforcement above the short beams:
Y: 6/400
X: 6/450
One has to limit either the diameter either the spacing of the bars to values which are
given by tables in function of the steel stress under the quasi-permanent combination
of loads:
M x,qp
s,qp =
A sx .z
c. SLS Deflection
Where:
2
M
= 1 . r with = 0,5
Mqp
fctm.II
Mr =
h xI
5 Mqp .l
fI = is the deflection of the uncracked slab
48 Ec,ef .II
5 Mqp .l
fII = is the deflection of the fully cracked slab
48 E c,ef .III
We wont proceed to these 3 SLS verifications, this would be too long for this session.
Whats more, as the 3 SLS were satisfied for a slab supported by 2 beams, they will
also be satisfied for the more favorable case of the same slab supported by 2
supplementary beams.
vEd 1,25.vRd,c
Where
(10,5 kN/m + 4,50 kN/m) 5m
v Ed < v Ed,1 way = = 37,5 kN/m
2
v Rd,c =
VRd,c
b
[ ]
= 0,12 . k . (100 . . fck )1/3 + 0,15 . cp . d
With
200
k =1+ = 2,054 > 2 2
180
284 mm
= = 0,0016
180 mm . 1000 mm
Thus
[ ]
vRd,c = 0,12 . 2 . (100 . 0,0016 . 30)1/3 + 0,15 . 0 . 180 = 72,5 kN/m
We see that the slab does not need any shear reinforcement.
CONCLUSIONS
Thickness
h = 21 cm
Bottom reinforcement
X: 8/170
Y: 8/190
On the whole span.
Upper reinforcement
X: 6/400 above the long supports, on 1 m
Y: 6/400 above the short supports, on 1,2 m
repartition 6/450
No shear reinforcement
6/400
6/450
1,2 m
6/450
6/450
1m 1m
6/450
6/400