CE221: Nonlinear Structural Analysis

Part 7: Reinforced Concrete Slabs

Khalid M. Mosalam
Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California, Berkeley

Prof. K.M. Mosalam CE221 Part 7 1

 Overview
◼ Slab Systems
◼ Background
◼ Lower bound method of analysis (Hillerborg strip method)
◼ Examples
Simple strip method
◼
◼ How to select discontinuity lines (DL)
Mostly self-study
◼ What is the proper strip width if interested
◼ Banding reinforcement
◼ Strong bands
◼ Complex numerical example
◼ Advanced strip method-Closure
◼ Introduction of Yield Line Theory (YLT)
◼ YL patterns
◼ Flexural strength of slabs for YLA
◼ YLA using principle of virtual work (PVW)
◼ Numerical Examples
◼ Membrane action

2
 Slab Systems (1/2)
References: Park, T. and Gamble, W., Reinforced concrete slabs, Wiley, 2nd Ed.
MacGregor, J., Reinforced concrete, mechanics and design, Prentice Hall, 4th Ed.
Types of slab systems for gravity-load-resistance:
1. Flat plate floor system
• 15’-20’ spans
• Light gravity loads (e.g. apartment buildings)
• Economical because formwork costs are low
2. Flat slab floor system
• 20’-30’ spans
• Higher gravity loads than flat plates,
e.g., office building
• Use of drop panels to reduce shear stresses
(direct and moment-induced) at column
3. Waffle slab floor system
• 20’-35’ spans
• High gravity loads (e.g., industrial buildings)
• High stiffness leads to small displacements
• Expensive because formwork costs are high
4. Two-way slabs with two-way beams (conventional framing)
5. Two-way slabs with band beams
• Band beams wide and shallow to minimize band beam depth and permit passage of services
3
 Slab Systems (2/2)
For design of slab systems, the engineer must:
1) Provide a load path to the columns and walls, 2) Satisfy equilibrium

Analysis of slab systems:

1. Elastic methods
• Direct Design Method (DDM) [ACI, §13.6]
• Equivalent Frame Method (EFM) [ACI, §13.7]
2. Limit analysis
• Upper bound method (Yield-line analysis)
• Lower bound method (Strip method)

4
 Background (1/4)
Equilibrium requires (regardless of the type of framing):

𝑤𝑙2 𝑙12
Total B.M. across Sec. A (E−W) = 𝑀 =
8
𝑤𝑙1 Τ2 𝑙22
B.M. in one beam (Sec. B) = 𝑀𝑏1 = 𝑀𝑏2 =
8
2
𝑤𝑙1 𝑙2
Total B.M. across Sec. B (N−S) =
8

𝑤𝑙2 𝑙12
Total B.M. across Sec. A = 𝑀𝐴 =
8
𝑤𝑙1 𝑙22
Total B.M. across Sec. B = 𝑀𝐵 =
8
5
 Background (2/4)
Uniformly reinforced (top and bottom) in each direction
Fixed
1. Prior to cracking
• For short-term loads, deflection

Fixed

Fixed
and stresses from elastic analysis
2. After cracking & before rebar yielding
• Common state for building slabs
under service loads Fixed
• Variable stiffness and anisotropic
(different cracking in two
directions)
• Still elastic theory does a good job
in predicting B.M. at this stage
Elastic analysis is inaccurate for loads > service loads and
3. Rebar yielding
significantly cracked slabs (e.g., when shrinkage is restrained)
• Initiates in region of high –ive B.M.
Substantial load redistribution after initial yielding (need ductility!)
• Plastic hinges form when
deformation exceeds that at yield
(due to load increase) and B.M.
redistribute causing eventual yield
of +ive rebars and –ive rebars in
other direction.
4. Yield line mechanism
• With further loading, yielding zone
propagates splitting the slab into
“rigid” sub-regions.
6
 x3 , w 1
For details, especially sign convention, 𝑀11,11 + 2𝑀12,12 + 𝑀22,22 = −𝑝 x2 ,u2
𝑝
see the extra slides of Part 7. 𝑤,1111 + 2𝑤,1212 + 𝑤,2222 =
𝐷 x1 ,u1 2
p(x1 , x2 )
h 2

Background (3/4)
h 2

Shear, bending moment, and twisting moment are per unit width

m xy = m yx

𝜕𝑉𝑥 𝜕𝑉𝑦 𝜕𝑚𝑥 𝜕𝑚𝑥𝑦 𝜕𝑚𝑦 𝜕𝑚𝑥𝑦

+ = −𝑤, + = 𝑉𝑥 , + = 𝑉𝑦 Applicable for
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 elastic, cracked,
Equilibrium 𝑆𝑢𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥𝑦 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑦 plastic, isotropic or
+2 + = −𝑤
𝜕𝑥 2 𝜕𝑥𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2 orthotropic slabs

Moments are
𝜕 2 𝛿𝑧 𝜕 2 𝛿𝑧 𝜕 2 𝛿𝑧
In general: 𝑚𝑥 𝛼 𝜑𝑥 , 𝜑𝑥 = 𝑚𝑦 𝛼 𝜑𝑦 , 𝜑𝑦 = 𝑚𝑥𝑦 𝛼 𝜑𝑥𝑦 , 𝜑𝑥𝑦 = proportional to
𝜕𝑥 2 𝜕𝑦 2 𝜕𝑥𝜕𝑦 curvatures

Classical plate theory 𝜕 4 𝛿𝑧 𝜕 4 𝛿𝑧 𝜕 4 𝛿𝑧 𝑤 𝐸𝑡 3

+2 2 2 + = , 𝐷=
𝜕𝑥 4 𝜕 𝑥𝜕 𝑦 𝜕𝑦 4 𝐷 12(1 − 𝜈)
7
Background (4/4)
Largest deflection in B → moments in B larger
than those in A

Strip A

B.M.D.

Strip B
Strip c

B.M.D.
B.M.D.
Z-axis displacement approximately constant

8
Lower Bound Method of Analysis
Find moment distribution such that:
1) Equilibrium conditions are satisfied at all points of the slab
2) Yield criterion defining the strength of the elements of the slab is not exceeded anywhere
3) Boundary conditions are complied with

Method is often referred to as:

1) Equilibrium method
2) Hillerborg strip method (Hillerborg proposed the method in the 1950’s)
3) Strip method
𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥𝑦 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑦
From the equilibrium equation (slide 7) +2 + = −𝑤
𝜕𝑥 2 𝜕𝑥𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2

To obtain lower bound solution to the slab equilibrium equations,

load w can be arbitrarily apportioned between the terms:

𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥𝑦 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑦
− , − , −
𝜕𝑥 2 𝜕𝑥𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 2

Where load can be carried by any combination of slab bending and twisting in two directions

9
 Hillerborg Strip Method (HSM) (1/2)
Hillerborg, A., Strip Method Design Handbook, E&FN SPON, London, 1996

Although distribution of moments is left to the designer, the method must be applied with care.
This is because, substantial cracking and deflection can result from poor choices of load distribution.
General rule: Loads should be distributed in a manner reasonably close to the elastic distribution.

For simplicity, set twisting term to zero: 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑦

+
𝜕𝑥 2 𝜕𝑦 2
Dividing the slab into strips in the x and y directions
= −𝑤
𝜕 2 𝑚𝑥 𝜕 2 𝑚𝑦
= −𝛾𝑤, = −(1 − 𝛾)𝑤
𝜕𝑥 2 𝜕𝑦 2

Designer selects γ (0≤ γ ≤1) where γ=1 → all load in x-direction, and γ=0 → all load in y-direction.
Experience gained by examples!
Free (unsupported) edge

Simply supported edge

Fixed (continuous) edge

Column
10
 Hillerborg Strip Method (HSM) (2/2)

If 𝑙1 ≈ 𝑙2 → 𝛾 = 0.5 By intuition!
Is this in agreement with what is expected, e.g. for A−A?
𝑤𝑙2 𝑙12
𝑀𝑥 = 𝑀𝐴−𝐴 = (Recall Slide 5)
8
𝛾𝑤𝑙2 𝑙12 Beam
𝑀slab in y−direction = (4 total)
8
2 1 − 𝛾 𝑤 0.5𝑙2 𝑙12 1 − 𝛾 𝑤𝑙2 𝑙12 = simply
𝑀beams in y−direction = = supported
8 8
2
𝑤𝑙2 𝑙1 edges
෍𝑀 = = 𝑀𝑥
8

11
 HSM Examples (1/5)
Example 1:

1 − 0.5 0.3 302

𝑀𝑦 = = 16.9 kip−ft/ft strip
8
0.5 0.3 202
𝑀𝑥 = = 7.5 kip−ft/ft strip
8
For 8" thick slab (≈ 6.5" effective depth in each dir.)
Flexural strength (Recall bending theory):
𝐴𝑏 1 𝐴𝑏 1 𝐴𝑏 𝑓𝑦
𝑚𝑛 = φ 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 − 𝑎 = φ 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 1 −
𝑠 2 𝑠 2 𝑠𝑑 0.85𝑓𝑐′
𝐴𝑏 𝐴𝑏 𝑓𝑦 f’c fy wu
⇒ 𝑚𝑛 = φ 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 1 − 0.59
𝑠 𝑠𝑑 𝑓𝑐′ 4 ksi 60 ksi 0.3 ksf
2
Using #6 bars 𝐴𝑏 = 0.44 in and φ = 0.9 ⇒
x−dir.: #[email protected]" on center for 𝑀𝑦 Assume γ=0.5
y−dir.: #[email protected]" on center for 𝑀𝑥
(30′ × 12) × 20′ (20′ × 12) × 30′
Total length of #6 rebars in the slab = + = 1195′
19.6" 8.7"

12
 HSM Examples (2/5)
Example 2 (Same as example 1): But Assume γ=0.75
1 − 0.75 0.3 302 0.75 0.3 202
𝑀𝑦 = = 8.4 kip−ft/ft strip, 𝑀𝑥 = = 11.25 kip−ft/ft strip
8 8
x−dir.: #[email protected]" on center for 𝑀𝑦 , y−dir.: #[email protected]" on center for 𝑀𝑥
(30′ × 12) × 20′ (20′ × 12) × 30′
Total length of #6 rebars in the slab = + = 967′ (cf 1195′ in Example 1)
13.0" 17.4"
How could the designer select a better distribution of load (value of γ)?
Consider 2 strips in the middle of the slab spanning in the x- and y-directions:
For deflection at intersection point to be the same , we need

4 4
𝑤𝑦 𝑙𝑥 30 𝛾 5.1 wx , l x
𝑤𝑥 𝑙𝑥4 = 𝑤𝑦 𝑙𝑦4 ⇒ = = = 5.0625 = ⇒𝛾= = 0.835
𝑤𝑥 𝑙𝑦 20 1−𝛾 6.1
wy , l y

In theory, we can use γ=1.0 but keep in mind, we still have to add temperature and
shrinkage rebars to the slab

13
 Self-study if
interested

HSM Examples (3/5)

Example 3 (Same as example 1): But use Discontinuity Lines originating from the slab corners

(5wu×5)/2×(5/3)=

10wu×5×(5/2)+(10wu×5)/2×(5+5/3)=

14
 Self-study if
interested

HSM Examples (4/5)

Example 3 (Cont.):
Strip width Length Mu Mu/ft Spacing Dir.

1 5’ 30’ 6.3 1.25 117” X

2 10’ 30’ 87.5 8.75 16.8” X
3 5’ 30’ 6.3 1.25 117” X
4 10’ 20’ 50 5.0 29.3” Y
5 10’ 20’ 150 15.0 9.8” Y
6 10’ 20’ 50 5.0 29.3” Y
10wu×(10/2)×(10/3)= Ignoring min. reinf. requirements (red numbers)
and bar cutoff, total rebars are 654’ much less
than before

Band rebars in Strips 1 through 6.

Again assuming effective depth = 6.5”
and using #6 rebars, the results are
given in the table.
Note: this method of using “average
moments” is not totally correct but at
the ultimate load condition, some
redistribution of load will occur. 8
15
 Self-study if
interested

HSM Examples (5/5)

Example 4 (Same as example 1): But use Discontinuity Lines (DL) originating from the slab sides

10wu

Solution proceed as for example 3. The total length of

10wu
rebars is 736’ assuming no rebar cutoff.

How do we select DL?

What is the width of each strip?
10wu
Strong bands?

16
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (1/17)

How do we select DL and width of strips?
Example: Choose c>a and d>f, why? Simply supported
Answer: More load will be transferred to the

Simply supported
stiffer support

Fixed supported

a
What is the width of each strip?
By examples (Next slides)

b
There are no specific rules for the choice of slab strip.
The designer must recognize that some level of load d e f
redistribution at ultimate condition will occur, i.e.

c
overloaded regions will be relieved through
redistribution. The challenge is to:
1) Detail slabs with high ductility to facilitate Fixed supported
redistribution, i.e. with small ρ, see table for sample
curvature ductility. ρ [%] 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5
2) Select slab width so that excessive redistribution is not
needed by: μΦ 4 6 10 23
• Keeping strips relatively narrow
• Selecting load paths similar to that predicted by
elastic analysis
17
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (2/17)

How do we select DL and width of strips?
Selecting DL at right angles to the strips (bands) has 2 advantages:
1) Direct determination of max. design B.M. in bands without averaging.
2) Simplified calculations and solution become exact in accordance with lower bound solution.

Wood, R.H. and Armer, G.S.T., “The

theory of the strip method for design of
slabs,” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., Vol. 41, Oct.
1968, pp. 313-331

18
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (3/17)

How do we select DL and width of strips?

Area=(L)(wuL2/16)=wuL3/16
(1 −  )wu
wu Solution 1

Slab subjected to wu
System of twistless strips

γ =0.5 over the entire area of the slab

19
 Simple Strip Method (4/17)
How do we select DL and width of strips?
Solution 2

γ =1.0, 0.5, or
0.0 depending
on the region of
the slab Area=2×(L/4)(wuL2/64)+(L/2)(5wuL2/64)=3wuL3/64

For L/4 < y < 3L/4 20

 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (5/17)

How do we select DL and width of strips?
Solution 3
γ =1.0 or 0.0 depending on the region of the slab
Features:
1) Ease of finding moments in slabs
and loads on supporting system
2) Varity of moment and load
distributions depending on
assumed load dispersion

As/ft α B.M./ft width

Assume all bars run the full, L, length
of the slab and all have the same
effective depth.
Then, total As of the slab α diagram of
distribution of max mx. Therefore, Area=2×(1/3)(L/2)(wuL2/8)=wuL3/24

Solution 1 : Solution 2 : Solution 3=

1/16 : 3/64 : 1/24=1.00 : 0.75 : 0.67
21
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (6/17)

How do we select DL and width of strips?
Attracts moment
According to Hillerborge:
The most economical load dispersion if

 = tan −1 (l x l y ), l x  l y

Rules proposed by Hillerborg for DL originating at right angle corners.

Example: Rectangular with all edges simply supported

22
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (7/17)

How do we select DL and width of strips?

Intentionally made constant, within the freedom allowed!!

Tytpically, M(-ive) = 1.5 to 2.5 M(+ive) Can not be made constant, why??

Example: Rectangular with fixed and simply Example: Non-rectangular with simply
supported edges (more details in next slide) supported edges
23
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (8/17)

DL and Banding reinforcement
Continuously varying spacing of reinforcement as in
Solution 3 (slide 21) is a problem (impractical).
Hillerborg suggests placing reinforcements in bands of
reasonable widths, relying on redistribution at ultimate.
Each band has a number of strips. For a strip at a
distance z from the edge ab of the band

𝛽𝑙 2 𝑙2 −𝑙1 𝑧
𝑚max = 𝑤𝑢
2
, 𝛽𝑙 = 𝑙1 +
t
As a cantilever
𝑡 𝑡
𝑚max 𝑤𝑢 𝑧 2
𝑚average maximum per unit width (at bd) = න 𝑑𝑧 = න 𝑙1 + 𝑙2 − 𝑙1 𝑑𝑧
t 2t 𝑡
0 0
2
𝑤𝑢 𝑙1 + 𝑙2 1.333
⇒ 𝑚av max = 1.333 −
2 2 𝑙1 Τ𝑙2 + 2 + 𝑙2 Τ𝑙1
= max. mom. at midstrip per unit width × K
1.333
K = 1.333 −
𝑙1 Τ𝑙2 + 2 + 𝑙2 Τ𝑙1

24
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (9/17)

DL and Banding reinforcement

Pervious K can also be used for more general cases as

follows:
1) Analyze middle strip
2) Find where the maximum moment is
3) Use K from L1 & L2 from the side where max. mom.
is found

This may lead to underestimation of the max. moment

because the actual max. mom. is located within the L1
length and not at the edge but the error maybe small
unless β2<<β1

25
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (10/17)

DL and Banding reinforcement
Examples:

26
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (11/17)

How do we select DL and width
of strips?

R
MF

DL are positioned to take advantage of the greater load-carrying capacity of the fixed edges.
β is chosen to give reasonable moment distribution.
Middle strip sizes are chosen in this example similar to
Assume slab regions not carrying load to have constant moment, i.e. zero shear
→ Find reaction of the right support of the middle strip in the x-direction
𝑅 = 𝑤𝑢 𝛽𝑙𝑦 Τ2 with max. + ive B.M. per unit length = 𝑤𝑢 𝛽 2 𝑙𝑦2 Τ8 , Similarly, MF = 𝑤𝑢 (1 − 𝛽)2 𝑙𝑦2 Τ8
The value of β will depend on the desired ratio of max. -ive to max. +ive B.M.=RM.

RM 2.0 1.5 1.0 Typically, β=0.36 to 0.40 for different support conditions, if
both ends are similar, e.g., both fixed, use β=0.50
β 0.366 0.387 0.414
27
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (12/17)

Strong Bands (Hidden Beams)
Introduced to deal with:
1) Openings Simple
2) re-entrant corners Example:
3) free edges
4) beamless slabs with column supports
A strong band is a strip of slab of
reasonable width (e.g. 2 ft) that contains
b
a concentration of reinforcement. Often
the depth is set equal to the slab depth

Strong band
The designer can choose any value of R but it
is reasonable to select something less than
the reaction of a “propped cantilever.”

28
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (13/17)

Strong Bands (Hidden Beams)

Openings Example:

Loading hierarchy:
1) Strong bands aa and bb
transfer loads to cc and dd
2) Strong bands cc and dd span
to the simple supports.

29
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (14/17)

Strong Bands (Hidden Beams)
Other Examples:

Re-entrant corner

Beamless slab

30
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (15/17)

Strong Bands (Hidden Beams)
Final Example:

One rational load path is as follows:

1) The zone 1 slab spans as shown (select distribution of γ based on pervious experience (examples))
2) Strip aa supports part of the zone 1 slab and spans from fixed support to the strong band bb
3) The zone 2 slab spans to the supports and strong band bb
4) Strip cc supports the line load but no load from the zone 2 slab.
5) Strip bb supports load from zones 1 and 2 and the point load from strip aa.

31
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (16/17)

Complex Numerical examples (from Park and Gamble):
A corner panel of a floor system is continuous with adjacent panels supporting beams along two edges and
simply supported at the other two edges except for a rectangular opening that is unsupported at its edges.
The service loads are a uniformly distributed live load (LL) of 100 psf and a line load of 300 plf positioned as
shown in the figure. The concrete is of normal weight with a compressive strength of 4 ksi and the steel has a
yield strength of 40 ksi. Design a suitable panel.

Note, use serviceability requirements to

arrive at slab thickness of
span/24=16(12)/24=8”

Therefore, dead load (DL) is 100 psf

Use load factors of 1.4 for DL and 1.7 for LL

(older version of ACI)

32
 Self-study if
interested

Simple Strip Method (17/17)

Solution of the numerical examples: You may want to reproduce the results as
an exercise.

R1 from max. –ive B.M. =

1.5 max +ive B.M.

R2 and R3 reduce the free

cantilever maximum
negative moment by 50%

33
 Self-study if
interested

Advanced Strip Method-Closure

It is used to extend strip method to design of

beamless slabs with column supports and slabs
with re-entrant corners. In this case a new type
of element is introduced referred to as Type 3.

Types of slab elements:

1) Type 1: rectangular in shape and supported at
one edge, dispersing load in one direction
2) Type 2: triangular in shape and supported at
one edge, dispersing load in one direction
3) Type 3: rectangular in shape and supported at
one corner, dispersing load in two directions

34
 Introduction of Yield Line Theory (YLT) (1/2)

Yield Line Analysis (YLA) uses rigid-plastic theory to estimate failure loads corresponding to given plastic
moment resistances.
• Can be used for slabs, beams, and frames
• Material independent: reinforced concrete, steel, or others
• Gives no information on deflections
• Useful for ultimate (post-yielding) behavior only. It gives no information on service-load response
• Often used for evaluation of existing structures
• Kinematic method provides an upper-bound estimate to the collapse load

Modern YL theory was developed by Johansen in late 1940s [See Park and Gamble for further
information]. First attempt to use limit analysis for RC slabs is by Ingerslev in 1923.
Some of the important “classical” literature are:

1) Ingerslev, A., “The strength of rectangular slabs,” J. Inst. Struct. Eng., Vol. 1, No. 1, Jan. 1923, pp. 3-14.
2) Johansen, K.W., Brudlinieteorier, Jul. Gjellerups Forlag, Copenhagen, 1943, 191 pp. (Yield line theory, translated by
Cement and Concrete Association, London, 1962, 181 pp.)
3) Hognestad, E., “Yield line theory for the ultimate flexural strength of reinforced concrete slabs,” Proc. ACI, Vol. 24,
March 1953, pp. 637-656.
4) Wood, R.H., Plastic and elastic design of slabs and plates, Thames and Hudson, London, 1961, 344 pp.

35
 Introduction of Yield Line Theory (YLT) (2/2)
Rigid-plastic behavior

There are three basic rules to Beam

determine YL patterns in slabs.
1. YL must be straight lines forming axes of rotation (AOR) for the
movements of the rigid (plane) segments.
2. Slab supports will act as AOR. If an edge is fixed, a YL may form
along a support. An AOR will pass over a column.
3. For compatibility of deformations, a YL must pass through the
intersection of the AOR of adjacent slab segments (see next slide).

(B.M. and S.F.)

Slab 36
 YL Patterns (1/2)

Sign Convention

Illustration for rule (3) in previous slide

Examples

37
YL Patterns (2/2)
What are plausible YL patterns for the uniformly loaded these slabs?
Answer: Later (Slide 41)!

38
 Flexural Strength of Slabs for YLA (1/2)
YL ┴ slab rebars (As=area of tension rebar per unit width), the moment resistance per unit width for that rebar is
1 1 𝑓𝑦 𝑓𝑦
𝑚𝑢 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 − 𝑎 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 − 𝐴𝑠 ≈ 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 𝑑 − 0.59𝐴𝑠
2 0.85𝑓𝑐′ 𝑓𝑐′
Notes: 2
• Dependable strength is obtained by introducing the Φ factor
• Effect of compression steel can be neglected since slabs are always under-reinforced (small depth to N.A. and for practical
cover, small ε’s) where compression rebar makes little difference to the ultimate strength of the section.
YL skewed with respect to slab rebars: muy (rebar in y-direction) and mux (rebar in x-direction) are obtained from mu
(above) for rebar in y & x directions, respectively.

Johansen yield criterion: To find for a unit width the

ultimate bending (mun) and torsional (munt) moments
Assumptions (supported by experimental findings):
1) Actual YL is replaced by a stepped YL (small steps in
x- and y-directions.)
2) Torsional moments acting in x- and y-directions are
zero (i.e., B.M. on these faces are principal moments.)
3) Strength of the section is not affected by kinking of
the rebar across the YL (cracks) or by biaxial stress
Moment acting on a triangle conditions in the concrete compression zone.
element with ab=unit length
4) The stress in the tension steel in both directions
crossing the YL (crack) is fy.
5) The internal lever arms for the ultimate flexural
strength in the x- and y-directions are not affected
when bending occurs in a general direction.

39
 Flexural Strength of Slabs for YLA (2/2)
Johansen yield criterion (Cont.):
Taking moments about side ab and its normal of the triangle element:
𝑎𝑐=(𝑎𝑏) cos 𝛼, 𝑐𝑏=(𝑎𝑏) sin 𝛼
𝑚𝑢𝑛 (𝑎𝑏) = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 (𝑎𝑐) cos 𝛼 + 𝑚𝑢𝑦 (𝑐𝑏) sin 𝛼
𝑚𝑢𝑛 = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 cos 2 𝛼 + 𝑚𝑢𝑦 sin2 𝛼
𝑎𝑐=(𝑎𝑏) cos 𝛼, 𝑐𝑏=(𝑎𝑏) sin 𝛼
𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑡 (𝑎𝑏) = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 (𝑎𝑐) sin 𝛼 − 𝑚𝑢𝑦 (𝑐𝑏) cos 𝛼
𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑡 = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 − 𝑚𝑢𝑦 sin 𝛼 cos 𝛼

Consider two cases:

1. If 𝑚𝑢𝑥 = 𝑚𝑢𝑦 ⇒ 𝑚𝑢𝑛 = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 cos2 𝛼 + sin2 𝛼 = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 , 𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑡 = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 − 𝑚𝑢𝑥 sin 𝛼 cos 𝛼 = 0
• Ultimate moment of resistance per unit width is the same in all directions
• Torsional moment at the YL is zero
• Such slab is said to be isotropic or isotropically reinforced.

2. If 𝑚𝑢𝑥 ≠ 𝑚𝑢𝑦
• Ultimate moment of resistance per unit width is dependent on the direction of the YL
• Torsional moment exists at the YL
• Such slab is said to be orthotropic or orthotopically reinforced.

40
 YLA Using PVW (1/7)
1) Propose YL pattern following the 3 rules on slide 36. The proposed YL pattern will generally
contain unknown parameters that locate the positions of the YL. Moreover, there is generally more
than one family of YL for a given slab. All possible YL patterns should be identified because of:
• Correct pattern is the one that gives the lowest value of the ultimate load
• If the correct pattern is missed, the calculated ultimate load will be unsafe (upper bound)

Number of segments?
Solution of
question
Patterns with unknown parameters
on slide 38
B (e.g., dimensions, angles, … etc.)
A

Coordinates of point B?
Coordinates of point A
and slop of column AOR?

Different alternatives

2) Ultimate load can be calculated from YL patterns using:

• Equations of equilibrium [See Park and Gamble among other references for details]
• Principle of virtual work (PVW) which is generally easier [we will only talk about this!]
41
 YLA Using PVW (2/7)
What is PVW?
“If a rigid body that is in equilibrium under a system of forces is given a virtual (arbitrary)
displacement, the sum of the virtual work done by the forces is zero.” This is because the
resultant force is zero.

To analyze a slab by PVW:

1. A YL pattern is proposed for the slab at the ultimate load.
2. Segments of the YL pattern may be regarded as rigid bodies because the slab deformation
with increased deflection occurs at the YL’s.
3. Segments of the slab are in equilibrium under external loading and the bending and
torsional moments and shear forces along the YL’s.
4. A point within the slab is given a small displacement δ in the direction of the applied load.
The displacement at all points within the slab δ(x, y) and the rotations of the slab segments
about the YL’s can be established in terms of δ and the dimensions of the slab segments.
5. Work will be done by:
• The external loads
• The internal actions along the YL’s
42
 YLA Using PVW (3/7)
Consider a slab with uniformly distributed load per unit area wu with total load on segment i
of the YL pattern Wui and downward movement of the centroid of the segment ∆i.
Accordingly, the work done by the external loads is:
all segments
ඵ 𝑤𝑢 𝛿(𝑥, 𝑦)𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦 = ෍ 𝑊𝑢𝑖 Δ𝑖
𝑖=1
Notes:
1. Support reactions do not contribute to the
work because of no movement at the support.
2. The work done by the shear forces and
torsional moments is zero when summed over Comp. mun
the whole slab. This is because actions on
each side of the YL are equal and opposite but
there is no relative movement between the Tens.
sides of the YL corresponding to the torsional
moments and shear forces.
3. The work done by internal actions at the YL’s
is due only to the bending moments and
relative rotation θn.

43
 YLA Using PVW (4/7)
The work done by the ultimate moment of resistance per unit length mun at a YL length l0 with
relative rotation between the segments θn is –mun l0 θn because bending moments are acting
in opposite direction to slab rotation if the virtual displacement in the direction of loading.

The total work done by the ultimate moments of resistance is –∑mun l0 θn where the summation
extends over all YL’s. The virtual work equation can be written as:
l0
all segments all YL′s
0= ෍ 𝑊𝑢𝑖 Δ𝑖 − ෍ 𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖 𝜃𝑛𝑖 𝑙0𝑖
i=1 i=1 Comp. mun

Tens.
External work Internal work
(EW) (IW)

In this way, the ultimate uniformly distributed load per unit area (wu) can be easily estimated
for an isotropically reinforced (with positive moments of resistance per unit width in x and y
directions mux=muy=mu) square simply supported slab of side length l (see next slide).

44
YLA Using PVW (4.5/7)

45
 YLA Using PVW (5/7)
𝑚𝑢𝑥 = 𝑚𝑢𝑦 = 𝑚𝑢
all segments
𝑤𝑢 𝑙 2 𝛿 𝛿
EW = ෍ 𝑊𝑢𝑖 Δ𝑖 = 4 × = 𝑤𝑢 𝑙 2 Postulated YL
4 3 3
i=1 pattern
all YL′s
𝛿 𝑙
IW = ෍ 𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖 𝜃𝑛𝑖 𝑙0𝑖 = 𝑚𝑢 2 4 = 8𝑚𝑢 𝛿
i=1
𝑙Τ 2 2
24𝑚𝑢
EW = IW ⇒ 𝑤𝑢 = 2
𝑙

Corner effects can complicate YL’s in the corner regions of

slabs and may result in a slightly smaller ultimate load.
We will explore this later. 2𝑙/2 = 𝑙/ 2
46
YLA Using PVW (5.5/7)

47
 YLA Using PVW (6/7)
What happen if 𝑚𝑢𝑥 ≠ 𝑚𝑢𝑦 ?

Components of IW:
all YL′s all YL′s
IW = ෍ 𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖 𝜃𝑛𝑖 𝑙0𝑖 = ෍ 𝑚𝑢𝑥𝑖 cos 2 𝛼𝑖 + 𝑚𝑢𝑦𝑖 sin2 𝛼𝑖 𝜃𝑛𝑖 𝑙0𝑖
i=1 i=1
all YL′s
⇒ IW = ෍ 𝑚𝑢𝑥𝑖 𝜃𝑛𝑖 cos 𝛼𝑖 𝑦0𝑖 + 𝑚𝑢𝑦𝑖 𝜃𝑛𝑖 sin 𝛼𝑖 𝑥0𝑖
i=1
all YL′s
⇒ IW = ෍ 𝑚𝑢𝑥𝑖 𝜃𝑦𝑖 𝑦0𝑖 + 𝑚𝑢𝑦𝑖 𝜃𝑥𝑖 𝑥0𝑖
i=1

Component of θn about the x-axis

Component of θn about the y-axis

48
 YLA Using PVW (7/7)
AF is ½ AD (Slide 45) and AG is ½ AB (Slide 45). Plate ADE rotates @ y-axis only (θx=0)
and plate ABE rotates @ x-axis only (θy=0), then

𝛿
IW for plate ADE = 𝑚𝑥 𝜃𝑦 𝑙𝑦 + 𝑚𝑦 𝜃𝑥 𝑙𝑥 = 𝑚𝑥 𝑙 + 0 = 2𝑚𝑥 𝛿
𝑙 Τ2
𝛿
IW for plate ABE = 𝑚𝑥 𝜃𝑦 𝑙𝑦 + 𝑚𝑦 𝜃𝑥 𝑙𝑥 = 0 + 𝑚𝑦 𝑙 = 2𝑚𝑦 𝛿
𝑙 Τ2
Total IW for the 4 segments = 2 2𝑚𝑥 𝛿 + 2𝑚𝑦 𝛿
Isotropic slab: 𝑚𝑥 = 𝑚𝑦 = 𝑚𝑢 ⇒ Total IW = 8𝑚𝑢 𝛿 (as before, slide 46!)

From Slide 46
49
 Numerical Examples (1/9)
Example (a): The slab is orthotropically reinforced with mux=10 kip-ft/ft and muy=15 kip-ft/ft. It
is required to calculate the maximum uniformly distributed load per unit area.

1st YLP, assume a unit mid-span deflection

300
IW = 𝑚𝑢𝑥 𝑦0 𝜃𝑦 + 𝑚𝑢𝑦 𝑥0 𝜃𝑥 × 2 = 10 15 1Τ𝑥 + 15 25 1Τ7.5 × 2 = + 100
𝑥
E𝑊 = 𝑤𝑢 15𝑥Τ2 1Τ3 × 2 + 𝑤𝑢 7.5𝑥Τ2 1Τ3 × 4 + 𝑤𝑢 25 − 2𝑥 7.5 1Τ2 × 2
= 𝑤𝑢 187.5 − 5𝑥
EW = IW ⇒ 𝑤𝑢 = 300Τ𝑥 + 100 Τ 187.5 − 5𝑥

How do we solve for wu? By either dwu/dx=0 and back substituting, or by trial and error as shown below.

x (ft) 6 7 8 9
wu (ksf) 0.952 0.937 0.932 0.936
50
 Numerical Examples (2/9)
Example (a) Cont.: Is the problem now complete with wu=0.932ksf?
Not necessarily because other mechanisms may control.

2nd YLP, assume a unit mid-span deflection

IW = ⋯ , E𝑊 = ⋯ , EW = IW ⇒ 𝑤𝑢 = 24 + 750Τ𝑦 Τ 187.5 − 25𝑦Τ3
y (ft) 5 6 7 7.5
wu (ksf) 1.193 1.084 1.015 0.992

What does this mean? What is wu?

Side note: Assume slab is 10” (unit weight = 150 pcf) thick and there is no other dead load (using load
factors for DL/LL=1.2/1.6)
Permitted service LL=wL 𝑤𝐿 = 932 − 1.2 × 150 × 10Τ12 Τ1.6 = 488 psf
51
 Numerical Examples (3/9)
Example (b): mux=muy=mu for positive bending and m’ux=m’uy=m’u for negative bending.
Calculate the maximum concentrated load at the center of the slab.

Impose a displacement δ at the center of the slab

IW = 𝑚𝑢 + 𝑚′𝑢 𝐿 𝛿 Τ 𝐿Τ2 × 4 = 8 𝑚𝑢 + 𝑚′𝑢 𝛿

EW = 𝑃𝛿
EW = IW ⇒ 𝑃 = 8 𝑚𝑢 + 𝑚′𝑢

52
 Numerical Examples (4/9)
Example (c): Consider the n-sided polygon-shaped slab fixed around the perimeter having
overall dimension length L and mux=muy=mu for positive bending and m’ux=m’uy=m’u for
negative bending. Calculate the maximum concentrated load at the center of the slab.
Impose a displacement δ at the center of the slab and consider one segment of the n-sided polygon:

53
 Numerical Examples (5/9)
Example (c) Cont.: What does the answer of this example for the special case of n=∞ mean?
• If the response of the slab is dominated by a concentrated load, the slab will always fail in
a circular pattern as shown below.
• Both of these solutions are equally valid because the solution is independent of L.
• How about off-centered loads? Same solution as the one to the right.

54
 Numerical Examples (6/9)
Circular Fans
• Circular fans will comprise all or part of a failure cone and are liable to form anywhere where there
are concentrated loads or reactions.
• Consider an isotropic slab with ultimate positive and negative moments of resistance mu and m’u,
respectively. Let the circular fan be a portion of the YL pattern.
• Consider the IW done by the ultimate moments of the shaded segment if the center of the fan is
given a downwards displacement δ and the segment rotates around the negative-moment YL axis.

IW for the shaded segment = 𝑚𝑢𝑛 𝜃𝑛 𝑙0 = 𝑚𝑢 + 𝑚′𝑢 𝛿 Τ𝑟 𝑟 𝑑𝜑

𝜑
IW for the entire fan = න 𝑚𝑢 + 𝑚′𝑢 𝛿 Τ𝑟 𝑟 𝑑𝜑 = 𝑚𝑢 + 𝑚′𝑢 𝛿𝜑
0

Compare this result with that obtained in slide (53) for a polygon with an
infinite number of sides (a circle, Φ=2π).

Example: Fans should be considered in YLA in case of uniformly loaded

floor plate with a collapse mode around a rectangular column. See
Park and Gamble for other examples.
55
Numerical Examples (7/9)

56
 Numerical Examples (8/9)
Ex 3
Ex 4

57
Numerical Examples (9/9)

58
Membrane Action of Slabs (1/5)
General

? YLP develops with the help of compressive membrane forces due to

B jamming of the slab segments after cracking between the boundary
restraints leading to enhancement of the flexural strength.
A
Reduction of the compressive membrane forces and excessive
material damage.

Membrane forces in the central portion of the slab changes from

compression to tension. Reinforcement acts as plastic tensile
membrane until fracture (or other slab failure, e.g., anchorage) at D.

59
 Self-study if
interested

Membrane Action of Slabs (2/5)

Compression Membrane Action:
Fully restrained against rotation
and vertical translation
?
Partially restrained against
lateral displacement

Theory is sensitive to axial shortening due to elastic, creep, & shrinkage strain (ε).

From the change of the end portion 12 due to ε and t:

𝛽𝑙 + 0.5𝜀 1 − 2𝛽 𝑙 + 𝑡 sec 𝜑
= ℎ − 𝑐′ tan 𝜑 + 1 − 𝜀 𝛽𝑙 − 𝑐 tan 𝜑 ⇒
2𝛽𝑙 sin2 𝜑Τ2 + 𝜀𝛽𝑙 cos 𝜑 + 0.5𝜀 1 − 2𝛽 𝑙 + 𝑡
ℎ − 𝑐′ − 𝑐 = At Section 2
sin 𝜑
Small 𝜑 and 𝜀 𝛿 𝛽𝑙2 2𝑡
𝑐′ + 𝑐 = ℎ − − 𝜀+
2 2𝛿 𝑙

Equilibrium: 𝐶𝑐′ + 𝐶𝑠′ − 𝑇 ′ (for section 1) = 𝐶𝑐 + 𝐶𝑠 − 𝑇 (for section 2)

Using 𝐶𝑐′ = 0.85𝑓c′ 𝛽1 𝑐 ′ and 𝐶𝑐 = 0.85𝑓c′ 𝛽1 𝑐
𝑇 ′
− 𝑇 − 𝐶 ′
+ 𝐶 Solving: 𝑐 ′ = 𝐴 + 𝐵, 𝑐 = 𝐴 − 𝐵
𝑠 𝑠
⇒ 𝑐′ − 𝑐 = ′ 𝐴 = ℎΤ2 − 𝛿 Τ4 − 𝛽𝑙2 𝜀 + 2𝑡 Τ𝑙 Τ4𝛿 , 𝐵 = 𝑇 ′ − 𝑇 − 𝐶𝑠′ + 𝐶𝑠 Τ 1.7𝑓c′ 𝛽1
0.85𝑓c 𝛽1
when deflection of slab is significant!
60
 Self-study if
interested

Membrane Action of Slabs (3/5)

Compression Membrane Action:
Virtual rotation
θ

membrane force: 𝑛𝑢 = 𝐶𝑐 + 𝐶𝑠 − 𝑇 = 0.85𝑓c′ 𝛽1 𝑐 + 𝐶𝑠 − 𝑇

resisting moment: 𝑚𝑢 = 0.85𝑓c′ 𝛽1 𝑐 0.5ℎ − 0.5𝛽1 𝑐 + 𝐶𝑠 0.5ℎ − 𝑑′ + 𝑇 𝑑 − 0.5ℎ

ℎ 𝛿 ℎ 𝛿 1
෍ m = 𝑚𝑢′ + 𝑚𝑢 − 𝑛u 𝛿 = 𝐶𝑠′ + 𝐶𝑠 − 𝑑′ − + 𝑇′ + 𝑇 𝑑− + − ′ ′
′ 𝑇 − 𝑇 − 𝐶𝑠 + 𝐶𝑠
2
+
2 2 2 2 3.4𝑓𝑐
2
′
ℎ 𝛽1 𝛿 𝛽𝑙2 2𝑡 𝛿2 𝛽1 𝛽𝑙2 𝛽1 2𝑡 𝛽1 𝛽2 𝑙4 2𝑡
0.85𝑓c 𝛽1 ℎ 1− + 𝛽1 − 3 + 𝛽 −1 𝜀+ + 2− + 1− 𝜀+ − 𝜀 +
2 2 4 4𝛿 1 𝑙 4ℎ 2 4ℎ 2 𝑙 16ℎ𝛿 2 𝑙

𝐼𝑊 = 𝑚𝑢′ + 𝑚𝑢 − 𝑛u 𝛿 𝜃 = 𝐸𝑊 ⇒ Load−deflection Relationship

Accurate only when sufficient deformation has occurred 𝑚𝑢

to allow full plasticity to develop at the critical sections. 𝑚𝑢′ 𝑛𝑢
61
 Self-study if
interested

Membrane Action of Slabs (4/5)

Tension Membrane Action:

Assumptions:
• All concrete has cracked throughout its depth, i.e. incapable of carrying any load
• All reinforcement has reached yield, i.e., acts as plastic membrane
• No strain hardening of steel occurs
• Only reinforcement extending the entire area of the slab contributes to the membrane

𝜕𝛿 𝜕𝛿 𝜕 2 𝛿 𝜕𝛿 𝜕𝛿 𝜕 2 𝛿 𝑇𝑥 𝜕 2 𝛿 𝜕 2 𝛿 𝑤
Equilibrium: 0 = 𝑤𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦 − 𝑇𝑥 𝑑𝑦 + 𝑇𝑥 𝑑𝑦 + 2 𝑑𝑥 − 𝑇𝑦 𝑑𝑥 + 𝑇𝑦 𝑑𝑥 + 2 𝑑𝑦 ⇒ 2
+ 2=−
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 𝑇𝑦 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝑇𝑦
𝑇y
Standard plastic membrane theory by 𝑋 =𝑥 𝑇x 𝜕2𝛿 𝜕2𝛿 𝑤
+ = − ⇒
𝜕𝑋 2 𝜕𝑦 2 𝑇𝑦
𝑤𝑙𝑦2 𝜋3
= 𝛿
𝑇𝑦 1 1
4 σ∞ −1 𝑛−1 Τ2 1−
𝑛=1,3,5,… 𝑛3
cosh 𝑛𝜋𝑙𝑥 Τ2𝑙𝑦 𝑇𝑦 Τ𝑇𝑥 62
 Self-study if
interested

Membrane Action of Slabs (5/5)

Black, M.S., “Ultimate

strength of two-way
concrete slabs,” J.
Struct. Div., ASCE, Vol.
101, No. ST1, Jan.
1975, pp. 311-324.

63
Corner Effect (1/5)

64
Corner Effect (2/5)

65
Corner Effect (3/5)

66
Corner Effect (4/5)

67
Corner Effect (5/5)

68
One Unknown (1/3)

69
One Unknown (2/3)

70
One Unknown (3/3)

71