Nigerian Journal of Technology (NIJOTECH)

Vol. 33 No. 4, October 2014, pp.436 441

Copyright Faculty of Engineering,
University of Nigeria, Nsukka, ISSN: 1115-8443
1115
www.nijotech.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/njt.v33i4.3

RELIABILITY - BASED DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE TWO-

TWO-WAY
SOLID SLABS USING EUROCODE 2

I. Abubakar1, * and A. Maaruf2

1, *DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA, NIGERIA

2DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, KANO STATE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, WUDIL, NIGERIA

addresses:: 1 [email protected], 2 [email protected]

E-mail addresses

ABSTRACT
FORTRAN--based computer program was developed to aid the design of reinforced concrete slabs to
In this work, a FORTRAN
2)[1]design
Eurocode 2 (EC 2)[1] design requirements at constant reliability levels using First Order Reliability Method
(FORM)..The design variables for the design of the slab were considered random with safety indices calculated using
(FORM)
FORM. It was shown among other findings that the FORM design procedure gave more economical designs
considering the area of steel required and final depth of section, than the EC 2 design procedure when a target
safety level of 3.0 was considered. Also, example of design using the program was included for various values
values of
target safety indices at constant geometrical, loading and end condition of the slab. The developed program is
therefore suitable for application.

Keywords: Design, reliability, two-way

way slabs, target safety index, Eurocode 2

1. INTRODUCTION information on the influence of different parameters

A structure is only as strong as its weakest element, of design [5].
and so members with good measure of reliability do The reliability is commonly described as the
contribute significantly to overall structural reliability probability or likelihood of structure performing its
[2]. purpose adequately for a period of time intended
Despite what designers often think, the parameters of under the operating conditions encountered [6].
loading and load-carrying
carrying capacities of structural A structural element will cease to perform when the
members are not deterministic quantities,
quantities that is, nominal value of load exceeds
exceed its nominal load-
quantities which are perfectly known. They are carrying capacity. The reliability basis for designing a
random variables, and thus absolute safety (or zero range of structures, structural materials, safety and
probability of failure) cannot be achieved [3]. functional requirements, and the actions, to which
It is in the interest of the concrete
te industry and the these facilities are exposed, form a vital framework for
engineering community to produce concrete a coherent suite of structural
uctural design standards [7].
structures that not only have an adequate margin of The probability-based
based design concept is not new [8].
safety against collapse but also provide acceptable However, improvement on the methodology was
performance in service at minimum cost [4]. recommended [9; 10]. The work presented in this
The presence of uncertainty in the analysis and design paper therefore proposes a reliability-based design
of engineering structures has always been recognized. program for two-way way solid slabs to EC2.
E The program
However, traditional approach simplified the problem examines the uncertainties and consequences of
by considering the uncertain
ncertain parameters to be failure of reinforced concrete two-way
two solid slabs
deterministic, and accounted for the uncertainties designed to EC 2 [1] requirements,
equirements, as well as safety
through the use of empirical safety factors. Safety index format for the design using FORM.
factors were derived
rived based on the past experience but
do not absolutely guarantees safety or satisfactory
performance. They do not either provide any

703-960-6065
* Corresponding author, Tel: +234-703
 RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE TWO-WAY SOLID SLABS USING EUROCODE 2, I. Abubakar & A. Maaruf

2.0 DESIGN OF TWO- TWO-WAY SOLID SLABS TO

EUROCODE 2 v Ed
= V Ed v Rd ,c
bd (5)
The purpose of structural analysis is the
establishment of the distribution of internal forces In equations (4) and (5), VRd,c is the concrete shear
and moments, or stresses strains and displacements, resistance of the section, v Rd,cis the allowable shear
over the whole or part of a structure. Additional local stress in the unreinforced slab, v Ed isthe applied shear
analysis shall be carried out where necessary [1].In stress, VEd is the applied shear force on the section,
most normal cases, analysis will be used to establish while b and d are respectively the width and effective
the distribution of internal forces and moments; depth of the section.
however, for certain complex elements, the methods
of analysis used (e.g finite element analysis) give 2.3
2.3 Punching Shear in Slabs
stresses, strains and displacement rather than internal Punching shear refers to a shearing stress caused by a
forces and moments. Special methods are required to concentrated load around a section of the load. A new
use these results to obtain appropriate reinforcement model to analyse the punching shear of concrete slabs
areas. is to assume that cracks, which are the potential
failure surfaces, are already developed and the slab
2.1 Restrained Slab Spanning in Two Directions resistance is concentrated along these failure surfaces
For slab with fixity at supports, the maximum [12]. The maximum force that can be carried by the
moments per unit width are calculated using: slab without shear reinforcement can be obtained
2
M sx = sx nl x in direction of span (1) using the values of VRd ,c , given by the code of practice.
2 However, checks must be undertaken to ensure that
M sy = sy nl x in direction of span (2)
the maximum permissible shear force (values of
In (1) and (2), and are the moments at mid VRd ,max , given by equation 6) is not exceeded at face of
span on strips of unit width spans in shorter span ( ) the loaded area.
and longer span ( ) respectively, n is the total VRd , max = 0.5v1 f cd ud = 0.5v1 ( f ck / 1.5)ud
(6)
ultimate load per unit area, sx sy In equation (6) u is the perimeter of the loaded area, d
and are the
is the depth of slab, fck is the characteristic strength of
respective moment coefficients in and directions concrete and v 1, is the strength reduction factor,
respectively.
The area of reinforcement Asx calculated as[1]: 2.4 Limit state of Deflection
M sx (3) In design, excessive deflections of slabs will cause
A =
sx
0 . 87 f Z damage to the ceiling, floor finishes or other
yk
architectural finishes. To avoid this, limits are set on
In equation (3), Msx, fyk and Z are the applied bending
the span-depth ratio. EC 2 [1] specifies equations to
moment, characteristic strength of steel and lever arm
calculate basic span-effective depth ratios to control
of the reinforced concrete section respectively.
deflections to a maximum of span/250 and these are
however given in Table 7.4N of the code.
2.2 Shear in Slabs
The limiting span-to-depth ratio may be calculated
Shear stresses in slabs subjected to uniformly
using Expressions (7.16a) and (7.16b) of the EC 2 [1],
distributed loads are generally small, shear
written respectively as equations (7) and (8):
reinforcement will seldom be required and it would be
L 2
3

usual to design the slab such that the design ultimate = K 11 + 1 .5 f ck o + 3 .2 f ck o 1 ; if o (7 )

d
shear force is less than the shear strength of the
unreinforced section. This can conveniently be And,
checked on the basis of the allowable shear stress in L o 1 '
= K 11 + 1 .5 f ck + f ck ; if o (8)
the unreinforced slab given by d
'
12 o
V Rd ,c
In (7) and (8),
vEd ,c = bd (4)
o = f ck 10 3 (9)
The ultimate shear stress is therefore given as:

Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 33, No. 4, October 2014 437

 RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE TWO-WAY SOLID SLABS USING EUROCODE 2, I. Abubakar & A. Maaruf

In equations (7) to (9),L/d is the limiting span/depth the performance of a structural system, a limit state
ratio of the slab, K is the factor to take into account the equation in terms of the basic design variable is
different structural systems, o is the reference required. This limit state equation is referred to as the
reinforcement ratio, is the required tension performance or state function and expressed as:
reinforcement ratio at mid-span to resist the moment G(Xi) = G(X1, X2,...., Xn) = R S, (10)
due to the design loads, is the required compression where Xi, for i = 1,2,..., n, represent the basic design
reinforcement at mid-span to resist the moment due variables, R is the strength capacity and S the loading
to design loads and fck is the characteristic strength of effect(s) of a structural system which are random
concrete.Equations (7) to (9) were derived for variables. The limit state of the system can then be
rectangular sections of concrete class C30/35 and for expressed as
grade 500 steel. G(Xi) = 0. (11)
and in terms of these reduced variates the limit state
2.5
2.5 Limit state of Cracking equation becomes:
Members subjected to bending exhibit flexural cracks, G(xiX'1 + xi, x2 X'2 + x2,..., xnX'n + xn) = 0
and even at working loads. These cracks become (12)
excessive when the width becomes greater than the where and are the means and standard deviations
permissible value given in Table 7.1 of EC 2 [1]. The of the design variables.
maximum acceptable value suggested by EC 2 for The safety index associated with the minimum
ordinary reinforced concrete is 0.3mm for all distance of the failure surface to the origin can be
exposure classes under the action of quasi-permanent calculated using the method of invariant solution [13].
load combinations [11]. The reliability based equation (12) using FORM is
For reinforced slabs in buildings subjected to bending therefore given by
without significant axial tension, specific measures to
control cracking are not necessary where the overall = min
x F
((X 1) + (X )
' 2 ' 2
2 ( ))
+ ....... + X n'
2
(13 )
depth does not exceed 200 mm and the provisions of
9.3 of EC 2 have been applied. where X1, X2,, Xnare the random variables in
the limit state function given by G(X)=0. The
2.6
2.6 Minimum Area of Reinforcement minimization of equation (13) is performed through
Minimum areas of steel reinforcement must be an optimization procedure over the failure domain F
provided to control crack. The provision of minimum corresponding to the region G(X)=0. This can be
area ensures that the steel reinforcement does not accomplished using FORM5[14], which is a subroutine
yield when the concrete in the tension zone cracks that solves the FORM problem. FORM5 (written in
with a sudden transfer of stress to the reinforcement. FORTRAN) provides an approximation to
The area of reinforcement in primary direction (for P = P(X F) =P(G(X)0)= dF (X) (14)
500 grade steel) should not be less than 0.13%bh for f x
G(x) 0
C25/30 concrete, 0.15%bh for C30/35 concrete,
bytransforming the non-normal variables into
0.18%bh for C40/50 concrete and 0.21%bh for
independent standard normal variables, by locating
C50/60 concrete.The area of secondary reinforcement
the most likely failure point through an optimization
may be taken as 20% of the main reinforcement.
procedure by linearizing the limit state function in
that point and by estimating the failure probability
2.7 Concrete Cover for Durability
using the standard normal integral[14]. A first
Table 4.4N of EC 2 gives the minimum cover to meet
approximation to Pf = P(G(X)) 0 is
the durability requirements for slabs and other
structural members for the various exposure classes P = () (15)
f
relating to the environmental conditions given in
Where in equations (14) and (15), Pf is the probability
Table 4.1 of the EC 2. Nominal cover as defined in
section 4.4 of EC 2 is the design depth of concrete of failure, (.) is the standard normal integral, is the
cover to all reinforcement including links. safety index or reliability index[14] and other
variables are as defined earlier.
3. FIRST ORDER RELIABILITY METHOD
In order to investigate the effect of the variables on

Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 33, No. 4, October 2014 438

 RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE TWO-WAY SOLID SLABS USING EUROCODE 2, I. Abubakar & A. Maaruf

3.1 Performance Functions

Functions spans, and respectively, have to be fed in to the
The calculation of the performance function is
computer. The program will proceed with the design
performed for discrete combination of basic variables
of the two-way slab based on the calculated ratio of
considering the bending failure mode of the reinforced
longer to shorter span. The program then asks the
concrete solid slab in accordance with EC 2 [1] as:
user to give the proposed thickness of the slab and its
0.97WXY Z
U(V) = 0.87WXY Z[\ ] [1 end conditions.The span and support moments are
W_Y
calculated using the method of elastic analysis
1.6`a [] (0.875b + 1)
(16) described in EC 2, which is in-built into the program.
cd The flowchart of the program is given in Figure 1.
Also, the performance function considering the shear
If the design satisfies the ultimate and serviceability
failure mode for reinforced concrete slabs in
limit states of EC 2, reliability analysis of the designed
accordance with EC 2 [1] is given by:
section will be carried out by the program. A design is
0.79 100 A S 3 400 4
1 1
finally acceptable if the calculated safety index is
G( X ) = v ED bd (17)
bd d approximately equal to the target safety index. The

design procedure is repeated by the program until this
And, the performance function considering the
condition is satisfied.
deflection failure mode for reinforced concrete slabs
The program terminates after a list of suitable slab
considered in accordance with EC 2 [1]when o, is
section is given with the implied safety level for the
given by
design, or alternative design output given using
o 2 L
3

G ( X ) = K 11 + 1 .5 f ck o
+ 3 .2 f ck 1 (18 ) different diameter of steel reinforcement.
d

And when o, the performance function
considering deflection is given as
o 1 ' L
G ( X ) = K 11 + 1.5 f ck + f ck (19 )

'
12 o d

In equations (16) to (19), (Alpha) is the ratio of

dead-to-live loads and other variables are as defined
earlier.

3.2 Design Procedure

As proposed in this study, a design is considered
satisfactory if the following condition is satisfied[15;
16]:
T (20)
Where is the calculated safety index obtained from
the reliability program on the basis of the input
variables and T is the target safety index[17;18].

4. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
A program was developed to aid the design of
reinforced concrete slabs in accordance with EC 2 [1]
design requirements as well as the requirement of Figure 1: Program Flowchart
FORM explained in previous section.
The program starts by requiring the user to input the 5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
values of target safety index, weight of finishes and 5.1 Design Example of a Two-
Two-Way Solid Slab
partitions, imposed load (Qk), diameter () of the 5.1.1 Design Data
reinforcement to be used, concrete cover (COV), It is required to design a solid slab using the following
characteristic strength of both the concrete (fck) and parameters: Characteristic concrete strength, fck=30
steel reinforcement (fyk). The shorter and longer N/mm2; characteristic steel strength, fyk=500 N/mm2.
Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 33, No. 4, October 2014 439
 RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE TWO-WAY SOLID SLABS USING EUROCODE 2, I. Abubakar & A. Maaruf

The shorter and longer spans of the panel were 4m 5.2 Examp
Example le of Reliability-
Reliability-Based Design Slab at
and 7m respectively, and the weight of finishes and Varying Safety Indices
partitions were each 1kN/m2respectively. A shorter Reliability-based designs of the slab presented in the
edge of the slab was assumed to be discontinuous. previous section were carried out at varying reliability
Also, the characteristic imposed load was 4kN/m2, and levels of 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0. Each design output satisfied
the diameter of steel reinforcement, and concrete the EC 2 requirements and the safety index of
cover were 12mm and 20mm respectively. FORM[14]. In each case, Equation (20) was satisfied as
a final check. The results obtained from the program
5.1.2 FORM Design Procedure considering the three safety indices are as presented
The slab was designed using the developed program in Table 2.
and assuming a target safety index, T of 3.0. An initial
depth of 100mm was assumed and fed into the Table 2: Probabilistic Design of Slab at Varying Safety
program. The stochastic models considering the Indices
failure modes of solid slabs in accordance with EC 2 Design Details Target Reliability Level, T
[1] were prepared in accordance with FORM [14, 19], T = T = T =
were in-built into the computer program. The 3.0 4.0 5.0
Area of Steel Required
developed program was used to carry out the analysis 279.65 325.77 336.95
(mm2/m)
with optimum design variables automatically selected Final Depth of Slab (mm) 125 135 175
by the program for the design. The FORM design
satisfied the requirements of both EC 2 and FORM From the results presented in Table 2, it was observed
[14]. Equation (20) was satisfied as a final check. The that:
design results of the FORM design are as presented in a) As the safety index was increased, the depth of the
Table 1. section increased.
b) As the target safety index was increased from 3.0 to
5.1.3 Design using Eurocode 2 Procedure 4.0, there was an increase of 8% in the depth of the
The slab was designed using the assumed design designed section. However, there was an increase
variables stated earlier in accordance with the EC 2 of about 30% in magnitude of depth of designed
design procedure. The results are also presented in section when target safety index was increased
Table 1. from 4.0 to 5.0.
c) Also, as the target safety index was increased from
Table 1: Results of FORM Design and Design using 3.0 to 4.0, the magnitudes of area of steel provided
Eurocode 2 increased by about 14%. However, there was an
Design Details Design to FORM increase of about 3% in magnitude of area of steel
Eurocode2 (2004) Design provided when the target safety index was
Area of Steel
267.4 279.65 increased from 4.0 to 5.0.
required (mm2/m)
Final Depth of Slab
150 125
(mm) 6. CONCLUSION
Implied Safety Index 4.57 3.0 The work presented the design of reinforced concrete
two way solid slabs at a uniform safety level with the
From Table 1, the FORM design gave more economical aid of a computer program. The requirements of EC 2
design considering the final depth of section which is [1] and FORM [14] were strictly adhered to. It was
about 20% lower than the EC 2 [1] design method at a shown among other findings that the FORM design
target safety level of 3.However, the EC 2 design gave gave more economical designs considering the area of
area of steel required that is about4% lower than the steel provided and final depth of section, than the EC 2
FORM design. It is to be noted that the FORM design design procedure when a target safety level of 3.0 was
has a safety index of 3.0, which smaller than the safety considered. Also, example of FORM design using the
index of 4.57 considering the EC 2 [1] design which program was included for various values of target
therefore signifies economy of the FORM design safety indices at constant geometrical, loading and end
procedure when all variables were considered in the condition of the slabs. It can be concluded that the
design. developed program is suitable for application.

Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 33, No. 4, October 2014 440

 RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN OF REINFORCED CONCRETE TWO-WAY SOLID SLABS USING EUROCODE 2, I. Abubakar & A. Maaruf

7. REFERENCES 10. Maaruf, A. Reliability-based Design of Reinforced

Concrete Two-way Solid Slabs using Eurocode 2,
1. Eurocode 2.Design of Concrete Structures, European M.Sc. Thesis, Dep. of Civil Eng., Ahmadu Bello
Standard ENV 1992-1-1: General rules and rules for University, Zaria, 2011.
buildings, CEN, European Committee for
Standardisation, Brussels, Belgium, 2004. 11. Mosley, B., Bungey, J., Hulse, R. Reinforced Concrete
Design,6th Ed. Palgrave, 2007.
2. Stewart, M.G. Serviceability Reliability Analysis of
Reinforced Concrete Structures, Journal of Structural 12. Yankelevsky, D.Z. and Leibowitz, O. Punching Shear
Engineering, July 1996, Vol. 122, No.7, pp. 794-802. in Concrete Slabs, International Journal of
Mechanical Science, 1996, Vol. 41, pp.1 15.
3. Nowak, A.S. and Collins, K.R. (2000) Reliability of
structures, 1st Ed., Thomas Casson Press. 13. Hasofer, A. M. and Lind, N. C. An Exact and Invariant
First Order Reliability Format, Journal of
4. Lee, Y.H., Scanlon, A. and Kim, H. Deflection Control Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, 1974, Vol.
of Concrete Members based on Utility Theory, 100, No. 1, pp. 111 121.
Technical paper, ACI Structural Journal,2007, Title
no. 104-S07. 14. Gollwitzer, S., Abdo, T. and Rackwiz, K. First Order
Reliability Method (FORM), Users Manual, RCP-
5. Haldar, A. and Mahadevan, S. Reliability Assessment GMBH, Munich, West Germany, 1988.
using Stochastic Finite Element Analysis, 1stEd., John
Wiley and Sons, lnc., 2000. 15. Abubakar, I. and Afolayan, J.O. Probabilistic Finite
Element Design of Strip Footings at Varying Safety
6. Uche, O.A.U and Afolayan, J.O. Reliability-based Levels, Journal of Engineering Research, March 2010,
Rating for Reinforced Concrete Columns, Journal of Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 11 20.
Engineering Technology, June 2008, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.
1 20. 16. Abubakar, I. and Afolayan, J.O. Finite Element Design
of Strip Footings at Varying Safety Levels, Journal of
7. Holicky, M, and Retief, V. Reliability Assessment of Engineering Research, March 2010, Vol. JER-15, 7,
Alternative Eurocode and South African Load No. 1, pp. 11 - 20.
Combination Schemes for Structural Design, Journal
of South African Institution of Civil Engineers, 2005, 17. Eurocode0. Basis of Structural Design, European
Vol. 47, No. 1, pp.15 21. Standard BS EN 1990, CEN, European Committee for
Standardisation, Brussels, Belgium,2002, pp. 65-66.
8. Afolayan, J.O. and Abubakar, I.Reliability-based
Design Program for Reinforced Concrete One- way 18. JCSS. Probabilistic Model Code, Joint Committee on
Slabs to BS8110 (1985), Nigerian Journal of Structural Safety. 12th draft, 2006.
Engineering, June 2003, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp 1 6. 19. Abubakar, I. and Peter, H.B. Failure Investigation of
9. Abubakar, I. and Abdulkadir, O.I. Reliability-based Reinforced Concrete Cantilever Retaining Walls,
Design of a Rigid Pitched Portal Frame, International Nigerian Journal of Technology, November 2012, Vol.
Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering, 31, No. 3, pp. 248 260.
December 2011, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 91 99.

Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 33, No. 4, October 2014 441