Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1.0. Introduction
In some construction cases, it is desirable to have large uninterrupted floor areas, and in such cases, the
presence of columns have to be minimal. This feature is desirable in buildings like conference halls,
auditoriums, stadiums, churches, dance halls, and all buildings where there is need for performing stage,
and spectators. The structural implication of such features is usually the presence of long spans elements,
and a lot of solutions already exist for such constructions.
It is already a well known fact that the use of beams becomes more uneconomical as the construction
span increases. This is primarily because the predominant internal forces in beams are bending moment
and shearing forces, which are all functions of the length of the beam. To accommodate these internal
forces during design calls for increase in the member sections to satisfy ultimate and serviceability limit
state requirements. This further adds to the total dead load of the structure, which is conventionally
undesirable for economical reasons. A better solution for handling the problem of long span construction is
the use of structural forms like trusses and arches.
Trusses are arrangements of straight members connected at their ends. The members are arranged to
form a triangulated system so as to make them geometrically unchangeable, and hence will not form a
mechanism. They resist loads by developing primarily axial forces in their members especially if the ends
of the members are pinned together. In typical trusses, loads are applied only at the joints.
Trusses provide practical and economical solutions to engineering problems, and can efficiently span
greater lengths than beams due to the development of predominantly axial forces in the members.
Trusses can be found in roof of buildings, bridges etc. The picture below shows a model of a truss bridge.
Arches are also widely used in modern engineering due to their ability to cover large spans and their
attractiveness from aesthetic point of view. The greater the span, the more an arch becomes more
economical than a truss. Materials of the modern arches are concrete, steel, and timber. Arches are
mainly classified as three-hinged, two-hinged, and arch with fixed supports.
Arches carry most of their loads by developing compressive stresses within the arch itself and therefore in
the past were frequently constructed using materials of high compressive strength and low tensile strength
such as stones and masonry. They may be constructed in a variety of geometries; semi-circular, parabolic
or even linear where the members comprising the arch are straight. The picture below shows the New
River Gorge Arch steel bridge near Fayetteville, West Virginia USA.
However, when it is desirable to have a relatively large hall devoid of internal columns, a network of
interacting reinforced primary and secondary beams can be employed as alternatives to other solutions. A
little consideration will show that in such cases, it is possible that the cost of adopting such method of
construction can be cheaper than that of trusses or arches. Especially in a developing country like Nigeria,
no serious expertise is required on the part of the contractor, since very familiar construction processes
are adopted. The logistics and expertise associated with assembling trusses and arches can offset the
cost of larger concrete sections and reinforcing bars. Therefore, knowledge of how this analysis and
design can be carried out is necessary in the engineering community.
2.0 Primary and Secondary Beams
In the simplest term, a network of primary and secondary beams involves supporting a beam (called a
secondary beam) off another beam (called a primary beam). The position of support can be at the ends or
at any intermediate location of the secondary beam. By implication, it is very usual for the secondary beam
to be shallower than the primary beam (but sometimes this may not the case).
The choice of selecting the axis of the primary beam usually depends on the length. The beam with the
shorter span is preferably the primary beam, so as to easily control strength and deflection. The analysis
often involves loading and analysing the secondary beams first, and then the support reactions are
transferred to the primary beam as concentrated loads.
A primary beam is often supported off a column as usual. In the example below, a hall of 12m x 20m with
the general arrangement shown below has been analysed and designed.In the example below, we are
going to analyse only the internal beams, and we are going to consider all the spans to be fully loaded at
ultimate limit state. From the figure below, the secondary beams are shown in red (dotted lines) while the
primary beams are shown in green. Every beam under consideration is supported by columns at the first
and last supports. No internal column exists anywhere in the hall, and it is also assumed that the internal
beams are not carrying block work loads.
With the general arrangement shown above, let us attempt to design some of the secondary and primary
beams.
DESIGN DATA
Thickness of slab = 150 mm
All secondary beams = 450mm x 230mm
All primary beams = 900 mm x 400mm
Density of concrete = 25 KN/m3
Design compressive strength of concrete = 35 N/mm2
Yield strength of all reinforcements = 460 N/mm2
Concrete cover to slab = 25mm
Concrete cover to beams = 30mm
ULS Combination = 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
SLS Combination = 1.0Gk + 1.0Qk
Imposed load = 5 KN/m2 (NA to BS EN 1991-1-1:2002)
Building Category = Category C4
Where;
CRd,c = 0.18/γc = 0.18/1.5 = 0.12
k = 1 + √(200/d) = 1 + √(200/404) = 1.704 > 2.0, therefore, k = 1.702
Vmin = 0.035k(3/2) fck(1/2) = Vmin = 0.035 × 1.702(3/2) × 35(1/2) = 0.4598 N/mm2
ρ1 = As/bd = 402/(230 × 404) = 0.004326 < 0.02; K1 = 0.15
σcp = NEd/Ac < 0.2fcd (Where NEd is the axial force at the section, Ac = cross sectional area of the
concrete), fcd = design compressive strength of the concrete.)
Take NEd = 0
The compression capacity of the compression strut (VRd,max) assuming θ = 21.8° (cot θ = 2.5)
VRd,max = (bw.z.v1.fcd)/(cotθ + tanθ)
V1 = 0.6(1 - fck/250) = 0.6(1 - 35/250) = 0.516
fcd = (αcc ) fck)/γc = (1 × 35)/1.5 = 23.33 N/mm2
Let z = 0.9d
VRd,max = [(230 × 0.9 × 404 × 0.516 × 23.333)/(2.5 + 0.4)] × 10-3 = 347.195 KN
Since VRd,c < VEd < VRd,max
Hence, Asw/S = VEd/(0.87Fykzcot θ) = 68330/(0.87 × 460 × 0.9 × 404 × 2.5 ) = 0.1878
Since the beams are receiving loads from both sides, we can multiply by two (to account for the slab loads
at the adjacent sides of the beam);
Hence p = 16.3425 × 2 = 32.685 KN/m
Self weight of the beam (ULS) = 1.35 × 0.9m × 0.4m × 25 KN/m3 = 12.15 KN/m
Therefore total uniformly distributed load on the primary beams = 32.685 + 12.15 = 44.835 KN/m
For beams on grid lines 2 and 5, the total load transferred from the secondary beams are the summation
of the shear forces on supports 2 and 5 of the secondary beam. This is given by;
P = 104.78 KN + 91.11 KN = 195.89 KN
Structural Design
MEd = 1982.37 KNm
Effective depth (d) = h – Cnom – ϕ/2 - ϕlinks
Assuming ϕ32 mm bars will be employed for the main bars, and ϕ10mm bars for the stirrups (links)
Shear Design
Support A
Ultimate shear force VEd = 562.84 KN
VRd,c = [0.12 × 1.486 (100 × 0.009526 × 35 )(1/3)] 400 × 844 = 193759.0667 N = 193.759 KN
Since VRd,c (193.759 KN) < VEd (562.84 KN), shear reinforcement is required.
The compression capacity of the compression strut (VRd,max) assuming θ = 21.8° (cot θ = 2.5)
VRd,max = (bw.z.v1.fcd)/(cotθ + tanθ)
V1 = 0.6(1 - fck/250) = 0.6(1 - 35/250) = 0.516
fcd = (αcc ) fck)/γc = (1 × 35)/1.5 = 23.33 N/mm2
Let z = 0.9d
In this case, additional links of X10@100mm c/c have been distributed at a length of 900mm on the
primary beam, within the interaction zone (see detailing sketches below.