7099 The theory of the strip method for

design of slabs

R. H. WOOD, DSc, PhD, CEng, MICE, AMIStructE.

G. S. T. ARMERt

Forthe ultimate-load design of reinforced concreteslabs the‘stripmethod’ of

Arne Hillerborg provides a powerful alternative to yield-line theory. It is also more
obviously a design procedure, in which the designer chooses the layout of reinforce-
ment as the calculations progress, whereas with yield-line theory the process requires
the analysis of a given slab with assumed reinforcement to find by trial and error the
required reinforcement. Although the strip method is known in Scandinavia, it is
virtually unknown in Great Britain. This Paper undertakes a critical examination
of the theory. It is shown that the original method is remarkably simple t o apply,
whereas the laterdevelopments aretoo complicated to be readily acceptable.
Modifications are proposed, aimed at simplicity and veracity, and it is shown that
the method as applied by Hillerborg is not necessarily a ‘lower-bound’ solution as
he intended.

PART I: THE BASIS OF THESIMPLETHEORY

Historical introduction
Apart from therules to be found in various codes of practice, which are usually
limited in their application, the
designer has roughly four alternative approaches
for the design of reinforced concrete slabs:
(a) elastic analysis by modern computers,
(b) strict ‘limit analysis’of slabs,l-a
(c) yield-line t h e ~ r y , ~ . ~
( d ) the strip method.6-7
2. Limit analysis allows ‘upper-bound’ (unsafe or correct) solutionsbased
on the collapse mechanisms of yield lines, and ‘lower-bound’(safe or correct)
solutions based on completely acceptable stress fields. Most of the lower-
bound solutions oflimit analysis have been aimed at verifyingyield-line
theory,a but if variable reinforcement is allowed then an acceptable, unique
and very economical lower-bound solution is given by elastic analysis, pro-
vided there exists a simple method for placing the reinforcement.a Hiller-
borg’s early publication^^*^ outlined a simplification of thelower-bound
(plastic) stress fields, by the device of deliberately eliminating the twisting
moments. This ‘simple theory’ will be subjected in Part I of this Paper to
a critical examinationaccording to the rules of limit analysis. A later
Written discussion closes30 November, 1968, for publication after February 1969.
* Senior Principal Scientific Officer, Building ResearchStation, Watford, Herts.
Associate Professor of Engineering Science, University of Warwick.
f Experimental Officer, Building Research Station, Watford, Herts.
Crown copyright reserved.
285
WOOD AND ARMER
.
publication7 of Hillerborg is what Crawfordg has called '. . for lack of a
better name . . , the Advanced Strip Method', and is similarly examined in
Part I1 of this Paper. The simple strip method is particularly attractive to
designers but appears to be almost unknown outside Scandinavia, where it is
allowed in the Swedish Code.lo Particularly in view of recent developments
in limit analysis, it has become important to describe and examine this 'strip
method' in'detail, for it has been described by Blakey7 as '. . . one of the mile-
stones in the history of the design of flat-plate structures'.

The simple strip method

The simplified equilibrium approach
3. If the yield criterion were known, then in any valid lower-bound solu-
tion the equilibrium equation, which must be satisfied2 at all points, is

where the moments M,, M y , and twist M,,,, follow Timoshenko's nomen-
clature,ll and p is the distributed load intensity at the point.
4. Normally the stress fieldis complicated.WithaJohansen-type slab
it is hardly ever possible to put M,, = 0, except in very special cases2 How-
ever, the essential feature is that Hillerborg's method is an attempt to design
a slab with variable reinforcement, and not to analyse a slab with given uniform
reinforcement.The intention is to makethe stress fieldcoincidewith the
field of resistance moments due to the reinforcement. That being so, Hiller-
borg can, for the first time, deliberately makeM,, = 0 so as tomake the direc-
tions of reinforcement (assumed to be placed along theX - and y-axes) coincide
withthe principal moment directions. Evidently equation (1) can thenbe
superseded by equations representing twistless beam-strip action:
a=M_
,
_a$ -- -ap . . . . .
and

where 01 is the proportion of load taken in the strips in the x-direction, and
(1 -a) in the y-direction. Thus the load may be divided between the strips,
or, as more often happens in strip theory, the value of a is taken as either
0 or 1. When a = O all the load isdispersed by strips in the y-direction;
when a = 1 the x-strips take all the load. Also the value of P could change
throughout the slab without affecting the validity. Point loads are treated as
local concentrations of p .
5. Lines of stress discontinuity are then introduced, as shown in Fig. 1 for
a rectangular slab supported on edge-beams, the intention being to signify
sudden changes in the direction of load dispersion SO that the strips become
loaded as shown and give rise to the diagrammatic representation of beam
loads shown in Fig. 2. It has always been an attractive feature of the strip
methodthat the beam loads are knowninintensity and in distribution.
Indeed, they must be known for any lower-bound solution, but by contrast
they are not provided by yield-line theory.*
286
 THETHEORY O F THE S T R I P METHOD F O R DESIGN OF S L A B S

c
Y

-.._ Line of stress dircontlnulv

-0- Llne of zero shear

Fig. 1. Hillerborg's discontinuous Fig. 2. Loads on supporting beams

stress fields

Band
width

$9
Fig. 3. Unsymmetricalslab Fig. 4. Simply supported square slab

6. In Fig. 1, in regions 1 and 2 the value of CL is 1;in regions 3-7 the value
of a is zero.Beyondinsisting thatthe accumulated shearforceineach
imaginary strip is taken care of when theload dispersionchangessign,
Hillerborg does not place any other restrictions on the discontinuity lines.
Thus, although discontinuous stressfields are allowed'sainlimitanalysis,
Hillerborg does not examine rigorouslythe rules for permissible discontinuities,
and this feature will be examined later. For a symmetrical slab the bending
moment in strip a-a (Fig. 1) is uniform over the centre portion, but it is not
uniform in strip a-a of Fig. 3. This shows that the centre length of strip a-a
must be reinforced even though it carries no load locally-an important point
not emphasized in the literature. It should be noted at this stage that the
discontinuity lines are quite arbitrary, provided that continuity of shear is
observed in strips. Line cc in Fig. 1 is not a discontinuity line, it is a line of
zero shear. The load-dispersion lines of Fig. 2 have therefore nothing to do
with imaginary yield lines. It is curious that such load-dispersion diagrams,
often quoted in codes of practice in conjunction with either yield-line theory
or elastic analysis, are not correctin either case but they are compatible only
with strip theory.
3 287
WOODAND ARMER
Reinforcement in strips with varying moments
7. The size of regions 1 and 2 (Fig. 1) affects the amount of reinforcement
but the choice is not critical. With a simply supported square slab (Fig. 4)
the discontinuity lines may be the diagonal lines themselves, although other
systems are possible. It follows that the maximum moment in each strip is
a variable quantity, whereas in Fig. 1, region 7, all the short strips had a con-
stant maximum moment ofpla/8. In region 7, therefore, a band of reinforce-
ment can be stopped off at any convenient length, easily evaluated, as in an
ordinary beam. This is not so in Fig. 4 where the moments are continuously
variable. If triangular load regions are used, Hillerborg considered it
reasonable to place the reinforcement in uniform bands where the average
maximum momentfor strips within that band was taken as thedesign moment.
This decision was taken in the belief that the method was generally basedon a
safe lower-bound solution with a reserve of strength. Moreover, since one
band width is not likely to sufiice for the whole slab, it is necessary to study
a typical loaded area such as abcd (Fig. 4) with a band width ad=w.
8. A typical strip, with loaded length l at a distance z from ab and span L,
has a maximum bending moment of
la 1
pl.1-p- = -.PP = m
2 2
say, where

l la - 11
= (-++ll.

The average moment is

Jr mG = m*".. per unit width.

Fig. 5. Coefficient K for average moment in strips

288
 THETHEORY OF THESTRIPMETHOD F O R D E S I G N OF S L A B S

,, \-.-
/;P \

Fig. 6. General shape of loaded area (Hillerborg)

C- Arrows show lord

Fig. 7 (right). Treatment of square slab dispersion

O n substituting for m, it is found that

msve. = z1 . p . (h1 +) l’,. ( 1 - 3 3 3 - . . . (2)

1
= 2 . p .(average loaded length)”.(K)
= (maximum
moment
in mid-strip). K . . (3)
where K is shown in Fig. 5.
9. Hillerborg refers to the average loaded length as the ‘mean span’, but
this is likely to be confused with the actual span of the strips. Also, equation
(2) is only valid for avalue m = + P P , implying symmetricallyloaded strips and
zero shear along the discontinuity line. However, these values of K are used
whether or not there is zero sheararising from symmetry;also, these valuesof
K are used for the mostgeneralirregularly shaped loaded area shownin
Fig. 6,again no doubt because of the alleged reserveof strength expected from
alower-boundapproach.Thus, when there is astrongshear at the dis-
continuity line, Hillerborg evaluates the maximum moment correctly for the
mid-strip and then applies the factor K.

Example of a simply supported square slab

10. To illustrate the method,it will be applied to a simply supported square
slab (Fig. 7 ) using four bands of equal width, L/4. The working may be set
up as below.
K
Band (I, + 1,)/2 11/12 (Fig. 5 ) M/pLa from
equation (3)
no.
l +L 3 1.04 +
.(3)”. ( 1 r04) = 0.0732
2 W 0 1.33 +.(#)“.(1*33) = 0.0104
For simplicity these values will be made to apply to the whole length ( L ) of
each band, without curtailmentof reinforcement near the edges.
289
W O O D A N D ARMER

Fig. 8. Discontinuity lines fitting

the banded reinforcement

11. A measure of the total amount of reinforcementrequiredand the

efficiency of this method can be gained by examininga the ‘moment volume’
+
V = JJ (Mx M J d x . d y .
Bands l : VI = 4 . L . + . L.0.0732pL1 = 0.0732pL4
B a d 2: V, = 4.L.d.L.0.0104pLa = 0.0104pL4

V = O*0836pL4

12. The solution by yield-line theory1 is, for uniformly placed reinforce-
ment without top steel in the corners, M=pLa/22. Hence
V = 2 .La.pLa/22 = 0.091pL4,
showingthat yield-line theory uses,in this treatment, slightly more steel,
Disregarding the bands, with continuously variable reinforcement the absolute
minimum moment volumea for this Hillerborg-typeload dispersion is
Vmin.=0 . 0 6 2 5 ~ 1 ; ~showing
. that Hillerborg’s treatment is rcasonably econ-
omical. It should be pointed out that the reinforcement required for bands
similar to Band 2 above is often below the minimum code requirement for
slabs.
Alternative treatment of discontinuity lines
13. In limitanalysis there is no intrinsic reason why the discontinuity
lines should be straight, and it would appear to the Authors that Hillerborg
has sometimesneedlessly complicated the calculations by employingtriangular
and trapezoidal shapes of loaded regions. The discontinuity linesmayin
fact be chosento fit the bands of reinforcement identically, and to give uniform
treatment of the strips, as shown in Fig. 8. In addition to avoiding the use of
equation (3) and Fig. 5, the solution now happens to be exact and strictly in
accordance with limit analysis, which is certainly not true of any averaging-
of-moments process. It should be noticed that the outer longitudinal strips
theoretically carry no load. In reality they will carry very little load, so that
only nominal reinforcement is required. This remark islikely to apply to
most edge bands (e.g. region 2, Fig. 7).

Treatment of holes
14. Holes present no problemwith the strip method, so long as it is feasible
to provide strong bands round the hole acting as beams (Fig. 9). Thus strips
a-a are supportedin turn by the strong bandb-b, the interreactive forces being
suitably distributed. It is easy to see that the distribution of reaction on the
290
 THE T H E O R Y O F T H E S T R I P M E T H O D FOR DESIGN OF SLABS

c o f slab
1
I

X X A 3 5 A
......l...
Load dispersion
Key + -+- Contraflexureline
Intensity of load on edge beam -..-.- Stress discontinuity

Fig. 9. Slab with a hole Fig. 10. Clamped slab

edge beam is therefore known at some stage of the calculations, even though
this loading diagram appears to be crudely discontinuous. In marked con-
trast to yield-line theory, no part of the structure can be left without its accom-
panying statementof loading, and this feature of the strip method is of instant
appeal to designers.

Treatment of corners and restr’ained edges

15. If the edges of the slab shown in Fig. 1 were continuous or encastered,
then negative support moments would occur. As regards their values, plastic
theory gives entire freedom ofchoice.Consider the end of an encastered
rectangular slab (Fig. lO), in particular the changing moments in a band of
reinforcement as shown. Owing to the negative moments, each strip has a
point of contraflexure and it is convenient to invent a straight ‘contraflexure-
line’ as shown, where 1is the loaded lengthof the strip in the negative moment
region, I being the loaded length in the positive region. Evidently the condi-
tions set out in Fig. 6 and equation (3) still apply for averaging, according to
Hillerborg’s treatment, the maximumpositive strip moments. Hillerborg,
however, does not indicate what to do about the negative moments. How-
ever, the support moment in the strip is *=
-PI. 1-p(I2/2), and supposing
I / l = i ~ / l ~ = I a / l a = / 3 then
, r?i= - p l a ( / 3 + T ) . Therefore, by inspection of the
previous proof,
f i a v e . at SUPPOrtB = -
(B +- 7) .p (average loaded lengthin
positive moment
region)a. (K)
= (maximumnegativemomentin mid-strip) .K. . . (3a)
16. In this formula, K is still obtained from Fig. 5 on the understanding
that the average loaded length (ll+&,)/2is measured from the contraflexure
line to the line of discontinuity, and B is defined by
loaded length between contraflexure line and support
loaded length between contraflexure line and discontinuity
291
WOOD AND ARMER

Fig. 11. Triangular slab with free edge Fig. 12. Load dispersionin an irregular slab

17. Hillerborg was forced to adopt a different treatment when the strips
were not supported at their far ends by a symmetrical, or nearly symmetrical,
system. Thus, in Fig. 11 showing a triangular slab with a free edge, the strips
are cantilevered out from the fixed edges, and carry both the distributed load
and the reaction from the other strips in the positive-moment region, which
latter strips may have to change direction as shown. On the contraflexure
line itself the total vertical reactions must be balanced which means, in effect,
that the strips change in width. If Qland bl refer to the shear per unit width
in region 1, and the corresponding width of strip, when Ql .bl = Q2. b2, i.e.

18. The conditions in Fig. 11 seem to imply that the strips in region 1 must
of necessity be parallel to the free edge. This is not so, for the slab near the
free edge can always be heavily reinforcedso as toform a strong band almost
indistinguishable from a 'beam'. The remaining strips may then spandirectly
across to this beam band. This simpler treatment is preferred by the Authors.
Superimposition of strips not at right angles
19. The strips shown in Fig. 11 are equivalent to curved beams, and this
kind of strip placement can result in strips not crossing at right angles, as
shown in Fig. 12. In one direction the strips are like those in Fig. 11 ; in the
other direction thetreatment issimilar tothe strips in Fig. 1. Fig. 12 is
typical of many produced by Hillerborg. The designer must always remember
that strips must continue right across the slab until some suitable reaction
point is encountered, and continuity of shears must be preserved, otherwise
the diagrams can become bewildering. Skew slabs may be treated by a series
of skew strips, with discontinuity lines similar to those in Fig. 1, each set of
strips dealing withthe appropriate loaddispersion, the reinforcement following
the strips. In hismanyworkedexamples, Hillerborge-' clearlyexpects the
designer to treat every case on its own merits.
Critical examination in the lightof limit analysis
General comments
20. It is obvious that the strip methodis at one and the same time a power-
ful method of design and a daring, perhaps startling, use of limit analysis.
292
 THE T H E O R Y O F T H E S T R I P M E T H O D FOR DESIGN O F SLABS

Fig. 13. Stress states on a

discontinuity line V/
l 2

Fig. 14 (right). Examination of

discontinuity

With the loaddispersion system changing direction apparently at will, at least

two important questionsmust be asked.
(a) How will the slabs perform on test, especially as regards deflexions ?
This strip theory pays not slightest
the attention to the compatibility
of deflexionsbetween strips. (According to rigid-plasticlimit
analysis it does not have to do so, because a lower-bound solution
indicates a rigid slab with no yield, and zero deflexion everywhere
constitutes compatible deflexions !) The designer, however, will be
wise to choose values of positive and negative moments which do
not depart too far from the expected elastic distribution, especially
as this is economicala and avoids cracking. Only tests to destruc-
tion can therefore give guidance regarding thedeflexions.la
(b) Does the methodgive a truelower-boundsolution ? Obviously this
depends on twofeatures-first,whether there is anyinvalid dis-
continuity, implying unbalanced forces, and second, whether there
is any reserve of strength when collapse takes place, for the mech-
anism of collapse has not been investigated.

Discontinuous stress fields

21. The rules for valid discontinuitiesa maybe put quite simply: any
stresses which ‘cross’ the discontinuity must themselves becontinuous. Thus,
in Fig. 13, the normal moment M,,, the twist M,,:, and the shear,
Q =---aMn
aMnt
an at 3
must be continuous on line t t ; but a sudden ‘jump’in the tangential moment
Mt is allowed, and likewise the functions for M,, M:, Md in the adjacent
regions may change provided the above continuities are observed. Thus in
Fig. 8 a sudden jump in M: along the ‘strong’ discontinuity tt is permitted
293
WOOD AND ARMER
whilst preserving the shear, normal moment and zero twist in direction nn.
In Fig. 3 there is a so-called ‘weak’ discontinuity on tt, where only the rate of
change of tangential moment Mt changes, without a sudden jump in M: (this
being the distinction between astrongand weak discontinuity). (In more
severe discontinuities it maybedeemedsufficient to have continuity in

and not Q,,, M,: separately, as in nodal force theory.15)

22. So far the sudden changesin direction of load dispersion have not
been critically examined. Consider Fig. 14, where a discontinuity in direction
t crosses a band of strips 11 in direction X, and asecond band of strips in direc-
tion 22, not necessarily at right angles. In region A the distributed load p is
all dispersed in direction l(=x) by strips 11 only; in region B it is dispersed
in direction 2 by strips 22 only. In region A there is a continuous (strip-like)
field of stress; likewise in region B but a different function. It is required to
show that, if continuity of shear and moment is preserved in strips 11 and 22,
then all continuity conditions are satisfied on tt. Actually it will be sufficient
to prove that these conditions are satisfied for one band of strips alone: for,
if so, they will be satisfied with both strips simultaneously.
23. It should be noted that all strips in direction 11 do not have the same
distribution of bending moments.However, it has been found that if, for
these strips 11, any mathematicalfunction describing a possiblebending
moment field is setup which agrees with a distributed load p in region A , and
a distributed load of zero in region B, then all continuity conditionsare
rigorously satisfied normal to the discontinuity tt.
24. Hillerborg’s othertype of discontinuity (shown in Fig. 11) maybe
considered to be a stronger discontinuity, for in this case the strips themselves
change direction, so that the former proof does not apply. Fig. 14 may still
be used with the following changes
(a) strips 1 vanish in region B
(b) strips 2 vanish in region A .
25. Again, setting up mathematical statements for possible fieldsof bending
moments in each set of strips, andafterwards differentiating to obtain

and insisting upon this being continuous, leads to the condition that where the
strips join
. . . . (S)
This is the same result as given by Hillerborg’s intuitive treatment given by
equation (4), showing that the strip method rigorously satisfies the rules of
limit analysis on such discontinuities.

The corresponding mechanism of collapse

26. If the stress field gives a lower bound for the collapse load, then it may
well be asked whether it matters what the mechanism of collapse is. However,
the answer is perhaps surprising. Some years ago the Authors first tried a
294
 THETHEORY O F THE STRIP METHOD F O R DESIGN OF SLABS
layout of yield lines corresponding to the discontinuity lines of Figs 1 and 2.
The collapse load was found to be the same load as that used in the design.
With coincident upper and lower bounds, this, then, was the required answer.
The same conclusion obviously applies to the trial diagonal yield lines of the
square slab,Fig. 4, whichisaspecialcase of Fig. 1. However,inFig. 1,
there was no restriction whatever on the layout of the discontinuity lines, so
clearly there are many modes ofcollapse. In contrast, Fig. 8 provides no
obvious yield line pattern for such ‘strong’ discontinuities; however, when the
usual basic2S4pattern of yield lines was triedthe collapse load was again given
exactly.
27. A more interesting test is to try the alternativecollapse mode of Fig. 15
imposed on the ideal Hillerborg stress field applying in Fig. 4, i.e. with ideally
placed reinforcement. It is required to find the value of X for the critical
mode. If e is the rotation of the outer regions, then the external work due
to the load is easily shown to be
e . ] ..
E =P ~ [ L ~ - ( ~ X ) ~ . . . . (6)

Now for any distance y from the centre line,

(a) the yield moment on the diagonal is given by

(b) the yield moment on a yield line parallel to the y-axis is

Hence the dissipation of energy internally is

and on substituting from equations (7) and (S), it is eventually found that
. . . . .(9)
This is the same expression as in equation (6), which means that any value of
X willprovide the exact collapse load p for which the slab wasdesigned.
There are therefore aninfinite number of simultaneous modesof collapse. This

+v’*
Fig. 15. Trial mode of collapse
295
WOOD AND A R M E R

Prlncipal rtralns in direction

normal t o yield locur

moment I
Fig. 16. Illustratingthe'plastic
potential' or theory of 'normality
Princlpal moment 2 of strains'

result alters the whole attitude given to this design method; clearly a more
generalized statement is required. To do this the formal proofs of upper and
lower bounds are briefly re-examined. The key to such proofs is the state-
ment relating maximum dissipation of energy to normal plastic strains (Fig. 16),
thus :
If the principal (plastic) strains are normal to the yield locus at the point
of yield, then the work done is a maximum.
In simpler terms, if the principal moments in the stress field in an isotropic
slab coincide with the direction of yielding, then more energy is dissipated
than with any other possible stress state on yield locus.
28. The limit theoremscan be put veryconcisely as follows.Let {ac}
represent the correct [ =exact] stress field at collapse, and { K ~ the
} corresponding
exactfieldof strains. So that D{U~}.{K~} represents the internal dissipation
of energy at collapse. Let the external correct collapse loads be denoted by
{Po},and the field of deflexions be {Sc}, being compatible with { K ~ } . Then by
the theorem of virtual work, since the structure is everywhere in equilibrium,
E being the external work,
D{U0}.{Kc) = E{Po1.{8J.. . . . . . (10)
Suppose there exists another different stress field{ U } , everywhere in equilibrium
with loads {P},where {P}=A{Po},A being a constant multiplier for all the
various loads. The theorem of virtual work then allows any arbitrary test
mechanism, so choose the correct mechanism, giving
' D{U}.{KC} = E{P}.{S,}. . . . . . * (11)
If the correct stress field follows the 'normality rule', then this new stress field
probably does not, SO that
DIU}. {Kc} d D(uc}.{K,) . . . . . * (12)
whence
E { P ) .{&l d E{Po}.{&l
or
A G l . . . . . . . * (13)
which is the lower-bound theorem.
29. It should be noted that alternative correct stress fields can exist. These
allow changes in the rigid regions only, where the dissipation of energy is not
taking place. Moreover there is nothing in the proof to prevent the use of
variable yield moments, made to fit the stress fields; nor would discontimous
stress fields affect the dissipation of energy, provided there are no unbalanced
forces.
296
 THETHEORY OF THESTRIPMETHOD FOR D E S I G N O F S L A B S
30. For an upper-bound solution consider an alternative mechanism {a,}.
This imposes a definite strain field { K ~ } . Then, using the normality rule
(Fig. 16), the corresponding stress states are defined, on the yield lines only.
This enables a work equation
D{u~}.{K~}= E{P,} .{an} . . . . . . (14)
to be set up, noting that {Pn}
is not everywhere in equilibrium with {au}.
31. If this (incorrect) mechanism is now used as a valid virtual displace-
ment with the correct stress field {U,}, and since ‘normality’ will not prevail,
then, by virtual work, .

and

Hence
{Pu}3 {P,}, or h 3 1 . . . . . . (15)
providing an upper-bound solution.
32. This far the proof will only be upheld if there is isotropic (square mesh)
reinforcement, although this may be varied in intensity. This arises because
the conditions in Fig. 16 presuppose that the yield locus is the same whatever
the principal momentdirections. With orthotropic or skewreinforcement,
because of anisotropy, the slab can yield in directions other than theprincipal
moment directions. Consequently equation (12) requires redefining.
33. Let M,, be the normal moment on any yield line of the correct collapse
mode, of length L,, and rotation 4,. Then D{U,).{K~} is actually Z(M,,, .L,.+,),
due to the reinforcementwhichisprovided.Now let M,,, be thenormal
moment on thesame yieldline L,, due to another stress field {U}. Then
D{u}.{K,} is actually I(Mn,.L, .4,).
34. To establish a lower-bound solution, the inequality (12) must hold.
Since there can be no restriction in direction of yield lines, in general
M,, M,,, . . . . . . . (16)
i.e. the normal moment in any direction due to the trial stress field must be
less than the normal yield moment which the reinforcement could sustain in
that direction atthat point. This proof independently reaches thesame
conclusion as Kernpl‘ in a recent paper defining the criterion of yield for
orthotropic reinforcement. In addition Kemp shows that this test-of-normal-
moment-in-every-direction criterion obeys thenormality of strains. It is
therefore important to note that, without this recent extension of the yield
criterion the basis of Hillerborg’s method with variable reinforcement remained
intuitive.
35. It can now be seen that, if {uH} is a Hillerborgstress field in equilibrium
with loads {P}then the virtual work theorem allowsanytestmechanism
{ K ~ } from
, which
D{u~}.{K,} = E{P}.{8,}. . . . . . . (17)
However, if, and only if, the field of resistance moments due to the reinforce
ment coincides identically with this stress field, then the normal moments at
297
WOOD AND ARMER
any point will coincidewith the yield criterion in any direction, so that
equation (17) then is preciscly the work equation for any mcchanism of col-
lapse. Hence basically Hillerborg’s method provides an exact solution with
an unlimited number oJsimultaneous modes. Hillerborg’s ‘averaging’ process,
equation (2), by failing to satisfy the coincidence mentioned above, does not
provide a lower-boundsolution. Control ofanalysisislost. Indeed in
many cases it can be proved that an upper-bound solution for thecollapse load
results. The designer who instead places the reinforcement in a conservative
manner, carefully accounting for any lack of symmetry in the slab(cf. $8 7-g),
would then achieve a lower-bound solution.
36. On test, slabs designed by the strip method may be expected to yield
in nearly all directions at failure, and so they do, somewhatlike a plastic
hammock. At working loads, however,there are hardly any cracks to be seen.
Whereas with a Johansen-slab dcsigned by yield-line theory there are rigid
regions of the slabstill remaining at collapse, with a Hillerborg-slab such rigid
regions tend to disappear. This is the direct result of the strip method having
produced a design with more efficient and economical use of reinforcement,
but there is a corresponding price to pay in terms of increaseddeflexions.
With a Hillerborg-slab,keeping the deflexionswithin reasonable limitsis
more dependent upon membrane action.la

PART II: THEADVANCED STRIP METHOD

37. Hillerborg’s later publication’ arose out of the difficulty of dealing in
particular with columns, or with slabs containing re-entrant corners (Fig. 17,
which depicts actual examples from ‘Strimlcmetoden’). The problem seems
to be to transfer the reaction from the strips to the column. The treatment
he proposed will first be examined and afterwards alternative procedures will
be given by the Authors.

Two-way spanning special elements

-
Type-3’ elements
38. For the firsttime, in ‘Strimlemetoden’, three types of slab element
(‘fragment’) are distinguished by numbers:
Type-l element : rectangular element dispersing the loadin one direction,
Type-2 element : triangular element dispersing load in one direction,
Type-3 element: rectangular element dispersingload in two directions and
supported at onecorner.
These are easily distinguished in Fig. 17, the type-3 elements being a new type
of element for special study. The aim behind the invention of type-3 elements
is not so much to deal with two-way spanning, but rather to have no shear on
the edges so that, as shown in Fig. 18, the ‘field moments’ Mr, and M,, will
bemaximumpositive span moments, the‘support’ moments -Max and
-May will be maximum negative moments, and all the vertical load on the
element ‘goes’ to the column at one corner. In Fig. 17, therefore,the elements
are shown surrounded by zero shear lines.
39. It is as well to point out right at the start that thereader is likely to be
298
 THETHEORY O F T H E S T R I P M E T H O D F O R DE.SIGN O F S L A B S
,Type - 3 element

Fixed tdger where shown otherwise simple supports

Fig. 17. Examples takenfrom ‘Strimlemetoden’: (a) slab with column;(b) L-shaped
slab

Column

Fig. 18. Type-3 element (new treatment) ;these elements are subjected to a uni-
formly distributed load p

perplexedby the treatment of thesetype-3elements. For example in Fig.

17(b) it is almost impossible for the type-3 element to have zero shear on its
boundaries whenlinkedby thestrips with distanttriangular elements.
Crawford9 observes . . . ‘Actually, in grasping the underlying principles of
the advanced method, itwould almost be better to forgetcompletely the
original strip method.’ Clearly, Hillerborg intended to allow approximations
in the belief that this was a safe lower-bound approach.
The stress fields of type-3 elements and their reinforcement
40. Only the briefest outline is given since the Authors, in spite of a sus-
tained effort, have not succeeded in verifying the derivation of the reinforce-
ment patterns. On the other hand such reinforcementseemsintuitively
reasonable. For exact details the reader is referred to ‘Strimlemetoden’, and
the following comments may be found useful. From Fig. 18(a) equilibrium
about the y-axis gives
(Aft= +
Mm%)= + p .lza. . . . . . . (18)
299
WOOD AND A R M E R
Values of M*, and MS, are chosen from analysis of the surrounding strips
crossing the whole slab so that their values will be maximum positive and
negative moments in those long strips.
41. It is obvious that no ordinary strip theory for the type-3 elementwill
cause all the reaction to be taken at one corner. There must be very strong
twists. In keeping with ‘fans’ of yield lines which form round column sup-
ports,’ Hillerborg uses a radial stress field to transfer the load to the column,
and examines only a square element. In Fig. 19, consider half the total load,
intensity p / 2 , in which the ‘primary loadaction’? consists of the y-strips being
carried by x-strips which occupy a smaller area abcd. These x-strips in turn
are carried by an imaginary circular portion of the slab of radius R. These
‘secondary’ interactive forces are of low intensity at the centre of the circle,
reaching infinite intensity on the periphery. This part of Hillerborg’s analysis
can bechecked, and the ingenuityliesineventually arriving at a radially
symmetrical stress field which carries all the load, i.e. when a further load p / 2
is also carried by a complementary system.
42. Thus far Hillerborg’s system is rigorous, although it is stretching the
theory to the limit to expect strips to carry other strips, and then in turn to be
carried by a part of themselves with an infinite intensity of interaction ! The
goal is to obtain a reasonable placingof reinforcement, if possible for a
high negative moment of fairly constant intensity over the column and for a
short distance on eachside. This Hillerborg attempts to do by combining
solutions with different R-values, and transforming the radial stress field into
required orthogonal reinforcement (see ref. S), eventually arriving at three-
dimensional diagrams such as Fig. 20. The Authors have repeatedly tried to
check this part without success, but the rules for reinforcement which are
forthcoming are simple, thus:
(U) For thepositive field-moments,uniform reinforcement is carried across
the full width of the slab of intensity corresponding to M,, or M,,.
(b) For the negative reinforcement twice the computed value of M,,, (or
M.,,) is allowed for and this double reinforcement is distributed
overhalf the width nearest to the column. Crawfords sums up
as follows ‘. . .
this rather arbitrary distribution of the negative
.
reinforcement is probably not too bad. . . The scheme is not as
irrational as may appear at firstglance. In anyevent, statics, in
terms of total moment, is satisfied.’
43. This fmal comment is thereason why these extraordinary type3
elements seem to behave reasonably well under test.la To decide the size
of the elements, i.e. distance between maximum positiveand negative elements,
the designer studies thebehaviour of the continuous strips of which the
elements form a part. Indeed, Hillerborg makes liberal use of the theory of
elasticity of continuous strips (Fig. 21), with additional imaginarybeams
supporting the slab on the columnline. Since the moment fields are arbitrary,
this method is probably as good as any for deciding the size of element.

Alternative treatments of type-3 elements

44. A rigorous lower-boundsolution can be obtained even for rectangular
elementswithout departingfromcommon slab action. Thus consider one
300
 T H E T H E O R Y OF T H E S T R I P M E T H O D F O R D E S I G N OF S L A B S

SECTION BB

Fig. 19. Hillerborg's treatment of a square type-3 element : (a) primary load action ;
(b) secondary load action

quarter of a uniformly loaded rectangular slab, size L X aL, with free edges
on corner columns only (Fig. 22). Then the stress field

M* = p gLa
(l-4$) . . . . . (19a)

My= p a8 z (I--$$) . . . . . (19b)

Mm
P
- ~ X Y . . . . . . . . . (19c)

satisfies the following conditions:

(a) a plastic moment ofpLa/8 on onecentre line, andpaaLa/8on the other,
(b) zero moment on the free edges,
(c) the equilibrium equation (1) everywhere,

- L
(4 v, = =0 on edges X = f.Lj2; likewise on f a -,
2
301
W O O D AND ARMER

+
Fig. 20. Calculated moment field for type-3 fieldmoment m,=O. This case is for
R = / , the full line representing the greatest negative moment and the brokenline
the greatest positive moment

(e) +
principal moments at the corners of (Mxu);, f = + p aL218, and
elsewhere of smaller value except approaching the centre lines,
(f) a corner reaction R = - 2Mx, =paL2/4.
45. With allnecessary conditions satisfied, if constant negative moments
- K,(pLa)/8 and - K y .p(aaL2/8)are added all over the quarter slab (Fig. 22)
in the respectivedirections then, without interfering with the equilibrium
equation or the zero shear conditions, a natural type-3 rectangular element is
obtained where, compared with equation (1 8),

where L = 21,, aL = 21, = 2al,, as depicted in Figs 18(a) and (b).

46. A computer program waswrittenwhichdivided upthe element
(Fig. 18(b)) into a grid of points, with rows and columns nos 0-5 as shown.
The principal moments and their directionswerecalculated at 36points,
according to equations (19) and (20), and the top and bottom reinforcement,
placed only in X - and y-directions, was calculated according to Hillerborg's
rules (re-examined and restated in ref. 8). For the positive (bottom steel) a
uniform orthotropic mesh is indicated as being suitable, without undue con-
servatism. The greatest of all the 36valuesin the X - and y-directions are
tabulated in the Appendix as the M X and M Y positive coefficients (times
plxa). For top (negative)meshtheelementwasdivided into regions l , 2, 3
and 4 as shown. It was too conservative to take the highest single value of
required moment of resistance in each sub-region, so that anaverage wastaken'
302
 T H E T H E O R Y O F T H E S T R I P M E T H O D F O R DESIGN O F SLABS
Type 3 - -
Type 3
element 1 element
l-
I I

Fig. 21. Assumed moment distribution in Hillerborg's continuous strips

/M Y pL2/8
Y V P

J
Y
Fig. 22. Type-3 element obtained from lower-bound solution for rectangular slab
with free edges

of the worst values to be found in each column of mesh points within the sub-
regions 1, 2, 3 and 4. The Appendix thus gives tabulated values forthe
required moment of resistance M X 1 , M Y 1, for the top reinforcement of
region 1, and similarly for the other regions.
47. These tables account for the following parameters:
a = hI1xs K x , Ky,
where the type-3element has constant field moments on the boundary of
pCfa1,a
(1 - K x ) , 7(1 -K,,),
and constant support moments of

All tabulated reinforcement coefficients are in terms of plZaunits.

48. To, illustratethe use of thesenewtype-3elements the methods for
calculating the moment field is shown for a rectangular slab simply supported
along its edges, propped in the centre and uniformly loaded. Fig. 23 shows
the division of theslabinto differenttypes of elements. To decide the
positions of the lines of zero shear bounding the type-3 elements, the designer
uses his knowledge of the approximate elastic behaviour of continuous beams,
303
WOOD AND ARMER
or preferably slabs. (In this case a computer analysiswas available which
gives l, =$L, al, =L/4 and c( = 0.4.) Alternatively punching shear round the
column may decide the permissible column load, which is the total loadon the
type-3 elements combined.
49. Consider moments along line A-A. The moments at the boundaries
of the type-3 elements are given in Fig. 22 and, put in terms of I, become
p(lxa/2)(l- K,) as shown in Fig. 23. Then, remembering that all the load
shown is carried by the edge reactions, taking moments about the line of zero
shear gives :

Hence

Similarly for section C-C

Thus in this case K, = 0.64 and Ky= 0. Then by referenceto therelevant table
in the Appendix-here, that for a = O.4-the design moments M, and M,,
both positive and negative, can be obtained readily by interpolation. The
parts between the zero shear lines and the supports can be reinforced all over
to resist the moment values given by the table or the reinforcement can be
curtailed to fit the field more closely.
50. The loading and support conditions for sections B-B and D-D are
shown in Fig. 23. The lengths X and y are obviously variable and the design
moments in these strips are calculated in exactly the same way as has been
described above in $0 7-9 using Fig. 5. A slab based on this example has been
tested'" and behaved satisfactorily both at working and at ultimate load.

Can type-3 elements be avoided ?

51. It seems to the Authors that Hillerborg has too readily abandoned the
'simple' stripmethod.Provided there is roomforthe reinforcement, it
would seem feasible to 'spread' the column load by strong strips of short
length above the column, until such a width is obtained which permits a
supportforstrong beambands. Suchalayout is shown in Fig. 24, and
proved very successful on test.la

Conclusions-final comments
52. Hillerborg's 'simple' stripmethodprovidesan exact (not a lower-
bound) solution for the collapse load of a slab carrying distributed load if the
reinforcement were made to fit ideally. Point loads may be treated as local
concentrations of distributed load. It is a powerfuldesign method giving
excellent results for the designer who has a good background knowledge of
elastic design. Although there is almost unlimited freedomof choice in plac-
ing the reinforcement, thedesign chosen should not be too far removed from
that expected in elastic design. Thus, in effect, a great simplification of elastic
design is achieved.
304
 -~

THETHEORY O F THE STRIP METHOD F O R DESIGN O F S L A B S

SECTION DD

PY

Fig. 23. Assumed moment field for a rectangular slab with a central prop

305
W O O D A N D ARMER

\Local strong bands

to spread reaction,
shear-relnforced If Fig. 24. Alternative treatment of
necessary Fig. 17(a) without type-3 elements

53. The shapes of discontinuities may be chosen so as tofavour the simple

evaluation of reinforcement in distinct bands (a modification proposed by the
Authors, 0 13). Hillerborg’s advanced strip method trcatment for flat slabs
has not been rigorously proved and demandssomewhat violent discontinuities,
but hisfinalplacing of reinforcementseemsreasonable. This part of the
original presentation is confusing and the Authors present two rigorous and
simplified altcrnatives. There are few tests on record, but the simplicity of
the method and the directness of design will appeal to engincers.

Acknowledgements
54. This Paper dealswithwork forming part of the programme of the
Building Research Station, and is published by permission of the Director.

References
1. PRAGER W. An introduction to plasticity. Addison-Wesley. New York, 1959.
2. WOODR. H. Plastic and elastic design of slabs andplates. Thames and Hudson,
London, 1961.
3. JoHANseN K. W. Yield-line theory. Cement and Concrete Association, London,
1962.
4. JONESL. L. and WOOD R. H. Yield-lineanalysis of slabs. Thames and
Hudson, Chatto and Windus, London, 1967.
5. HILLERBORG A. A plastic theoryforthe design of reinforced concrete slabs.
Proc. 6th Congr. Int. Ass. Brit. struct. Engng, Stockholm, 1960.
6. WLLeRBoRc A. Jamviktsteori forarmerade betongplattor. Betong, 1956, 41
(4) 171-182.
7. HILLERBORG A. Strimlernetoden. Svenska Riksbyggen, Stockholm, 1959. See
also Strip method for slabs on columns, L-shaped plates etc. Translated by F. A.
Blakey, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Mel-
bourne. 1964.
8. WOODR. H. The reinforcement of slabs in accordance with a predetermined
fieldof moments. Concr. Mag., 1968, 2 (2), 69-76.
9. CRAWFORD R. E. Limit design of reinforced concrete slabs. PhD thesis,
University of Illinois, 1962.
10. SWEDISH STATECONCRETE COMWWEE. Massive concreteslabs; specifications
for dcsign methods, etc. Stockholm, 1958.
306
 THE THEORY OF THE STRIP METHOD FOR DESIGN O F SLABS
11. TIMOSWENKO S. and WOWOWSKY-KRIECIER S. Theory of plates and shells.
McGraw-Hill, Ncw York, 1959.
12. ARMER G. S. T. Ultimateloadtests of slabs designcd by the strip method.
Proc. lnstn civ. Engrs, 1968. 41 (Oct) 315-334.
13. Recent developments in yicld-line theory. Mug. Concr. Res. Spec. Publ., 1965
(May) 31-62.
14. KE” K. 0. The yield criterion for orthotropically reinforced concrete slabs.
Int. J. meclr. Sci., 1965, 7, 737-746.

Appendix : Reinforcement coefficients for proposedn e w type-3 elements

55. The coefficients are tabulated for values of Q, the ratio of the lengths of the sides,
and forvalues ofK, and K,,the coefficients of the moments on boundaries with adjacent
type-3 elements. The coefficients are in terms of plZa and relate to the positions
indicated in Fig. 25.

307
W O O D AND A R M E R

/1z"--+l

Fig. 25. Partitioning of new type-3 elements

VALUESOFREINFORCEMENTCOEFFICIENTSFOR ALPHAm.4
 THE THEORY O F THE STRIP METHOD F O R DESIGN O F S L A B S

YALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FORALPHA-05

POSITIYE NEGATIVE(T0P REINFORCEMENT)

VALUES .OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPtUm.6

POSITIVE NEGATIYE(T0P REINFORCEMENT)

0240 0000 -052 0000 -286 -086 -014 0000

0240 -000 0059 0000 0322 0122 -02'8 -000
-240 -000 -060 -000 -158 -055 -000
-340 -000 -139 -000 -2:~8-018 -000 -000
-340 -000 -149 -000 -265 0054 -002 -000
-340 -000 -152 -000 -301 -090 -0.19 -000
-340 -000 -159 -000 -337 -126 -043 -000
-340 0000 -160 -000 -573 -162 -073 -000
- 4 4 0 .OOO -239 .000 -240-026 0000 -000
-440 oooo -249 .ooo -276-062 -002 .ooo
0440 e000 0252 e 0 0 0 0312 0098 -019 0000
0440 0000 0259 0000 -348 -134 -043 0000
-440 m000 -260 e 0 0 0 0384 -170 -019 -001
-540 -000 0339 -000 0240 -041 -000 0000
-540 0000 -349 0000 0216 0083 -002 -000
-540 -000 0352 -000 0312 0119 0019 -000
e540 e000 0359 -000 0348 -155 -053 0000
-540 -000 0360 -000 -384 0191 -089 -004
-640 0067 0439 -000 0240-055 -000 0000
-640 -074-449 .000 -216 -091 -002 -000
-640 -076 -452 -003 -312 - 1 2 1 -019 -000
-640 0076 0459-0090348 -163 0053 -002
-640 ,076 ,460 ,099 -384 -199 -089 -014

309
WOOD AND ARMER

VALUES OF, INFORCEMENT

RE COEFF1 C IENTS FORALPHAm.7
~~~

NEGATIVE(TOP'REINF0RCEMENT)
'MXf MX2 M X 3 MX4 MY1 M Y 2 M Y 3 MY4
-280 -000 0039 -000 -256-019 -000 0000
0280 m000 0050 0000 -305 -068 -000 -000
6280 -000 -059 -000 -354 -011 m000
0280 -000 -065 -OOO -403 01 0127
6 -031 -000
-280 0000 -000 04520215 -067 -000
-380 0000 O ; ? ~ ~ O O O O-277. -025 0000 -000
' 0 80 0000 -1 0 -000 0074 m000 0000
. -380 -000 0139 0000 *%'.l23 -012 0000
-380 -000 ,165 .OOO 0424 m172m045 -000
-380 -000 m170 0000 -473e221-085 m000
-480 -000 -239 -000 e280 0036 ~ O O Om000
. 0480 m000 m250 -000 m329 -085 -000 -000
0480 -000 0259 -000 e3780134-012 m000
-480 -000 -265 -000 m427 0183 m045 -000
m480 m 0 0 0 -270 -000 -476 m232 0094 -001
05800007 0339 *OOO -280 -056 m000 o O 0 0
0580 -007 e350 -000 -329 m105 0000 -000
0580 -007 m359 0000 m378 m154 0012 0000
-580 -007 ,365 mOOO 0203 m053 -000
-580 m007 0970 0000 --422 4 7 -252 m102 -005
-680 m079 0439 0000 -280-067 m000 0000
-680. -086 0450- 0000 m329 0116 0000 m000
0680. -092 0459 0003 0378 0165 -012 ~ o O O
06800092-465 0011 m427 - 2 1 4 m053 0000
-680 m092 .e470 m012 -476 0263 -102-015

VALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPHAm.8

NEGATIVE(T0P REINFORCEMENT)
M X 1 MX2 M X 3 MX4 M Y 1 MY2 . M Y 3 MY4
0320 m000 -039 0000 m300 -025 m000 0000
-320 -000 -050 o000 0364-009 -000 -000
-320 .000 -065 .000 .428 -153 .006 .oOO
0320 0000 m072 0000 m492 - 2 1 7 m032 -000
0320 -000 -080 0000 05560281-080 0000
0420 m000 m139 0000 m320 -032 m000 -000
m420 -000 -150 -000 -384-096 -000 -000
0420 m000 0165 -000 -448 -160 -006 -000
-420 -000 -172 0000 -512-2240045 0000
0420 m000 -180 -000 -576-288-097 -000
0520 0000 -239 -000 0320-046 -000 0000
-520.0000-250 0000 -3840110 m000 -000
0520 -000 -265 0000. -448-1740006 -000
-520 -000 0272 0000 051% -2380045 m000
-520 -000 -280 0000 057 * X 2 -1090002
-620 -016 -339 -000 -320 .065 -000 -000
-620 .016 -350 0000 0384 0129 -000 -000.
-620 4 6 0365 -000 -448 0193 -006 0000
m620 .016 0372 0000 m512 0257-051 -000
-620 -016 0380 0000 -576 0321 -115 0007
0720-0910439 -000 -320 -080 -000 m000
-720 -098 -450 0000 -384 -144 -000 -000
-720 0108 -465 -003 -448 0208 -006 '-000
0720 0108 m472 0011 -512 -272 -051 0000
-720-108-480 -015 .576 -336 -115 . oil

310
 THE THEORY O F T H E S T R I P M E T H O D FOR DESIGN OF S L A B S

VALUES OF REINFORCEHENT COEFFICIENTSFOR ALF'HA.eg

POSIT IVE' NEGATlVE(T0P REINFORCEHEUT')
nx HY 14x1 H X ~ n x 3 - n i 4 nri- nu2 -nu3 -ny4
KX= 6 0 .600.529 m360 ~ O O Om039 , mOOO e346e031 eOOO -000
.600 0448 e360 e000 e050','m000 m427 m112 e000 m000
-600 -367 m360 e000 m072 e000 m508 a193 m 0 0 1 aOOO
.590 .2a6 m360 mOOO. e079 eOOO'm589 m274 m034 0000
e545 e205 . m360 m000 eo90 *mOOO. e670 ,0355 e094 mOOO.
KX=i 2 a500e529 m460 m000 m139 m 0 0 0 e360e041 m000 0000
.5oo .44a e 4 6 0 e000 m150 e000 e441 m122 0000, a 0 0 0
'm500 e367 a460 e000 m172 m000 e 22e203e001 0000
6490 m286 0460 e000 e t 7 9 m000 0203 m284 a043 0000
e445 m205 0000 m190 m000 e684 m365 ,109 aOOO
KXmm 4 m400 e529 mg;o m 0 0 0 m239 e000 a360 m059 m000 e000
-400 .44a m560 ~ 0 0 0 . e 2 5 0m000 e441 m140 m000 0000
6 400.e367 m560 m000 e272 m000 e522 m221 m 0 0 1 m000
e390e286 e560'e000 m279 mOOO e603 a302 m043 m 0 0 0
e345 m205 m560 m000 m290 mOOO m684m383m124 0002
KXm.6 m300 m506 -660 -027 .339 .ooo 0360 0075 0000 0000
-300 -425 -660. .028 -350 .ooo -441 .l56 -000 .ooo
m300 m344 -660 e028 03 2 e000 22 m237 m001 .OOO
0290 8263 .660 e028,s339 .000 -203 .318 .047 -000
0 2 6 m182 .660 0028-390 m000 m684 m399 m120 0009
KX- m 8 m200 m 471 i76O -102e439 m 0 0 0 m360 -Q90 m 0 0 0 m000
m200 a390 a760 m110 -450 m000 m441 m171 m000 m000
e200 m309 .l60 m124 e472 m003 e522 e252 m001 e000
.l90 -228 e760 m124 m479 e011 m603 m333 e 0 4 7 m000
e145 m147 e760 m124 e490 e017 m684 e414 e128 m019

VALUES OF REINFORCEMENT COEFFICIENTS FOR ALPHA=^

POSlTlVE NEGATIVE(TOP REINFORCEMENT)
HX MY M X l 'HX2 H X 3 MX4 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4
KXI.0
KY.0 -620 .620 e394 e000 m039 e000 m394 m039 m000 m000
KYm.2
m620 0520 m400 m000 e050 m000 -494 0139 a000 -000
KYI.4 -620 m420 -400 m000 a073 m000 m594 0239 m000 -000
KYI.6 .620 e320 m400 m000 a085 m000 -694 a339 0034 *000
KYm.8 -580
0220 m400 a000 m100 m000 m794 0439-109 *OOO
KXm.2
KY-0
m520 .620 -494 m000 m139 m000 e400 m050 m000 -000
KYm.2 m520 m520 -500 -000 m150 -000 -500 e150 m000 -000
KYI.4 -520 a420 -500 a000 m173 a000 .600 a250 -000 m000
KYW.6 .520 .320 0500 -000 m185 -000 a700 m350 a040 *OOO
KYm-8 -480 a220 .500 e000 m200 m000 a800 -450 -122 m000
KXm.4 KY-0 e420
-620 -594 a000 -239 m000 m400 m073 m000 0000
KYm.2 0420 m520 -600 -000 a250 m000 0500 a173 m000 0000
KY-m4 a420 m420 m600 0000 m273 a000 -600 m273 a 0 0 0 m000
KYw.6 m420 m320 -600 -000 m285 -000 m700 -373 m040 -000
KYm-8 -380 m220 -600 -000 m000 -800 a473 e 1 4 0 -003
KXm.6 KY-0
m320 -620-694
a034 .j~!OOOOO -400 m085 0000 e000
KYm.2 -320-520 m700 -040 e 3 5 0 m000 a500 m185 -000 m000
KY-04 m320 8420-700
0040 a373 0000 -600-285 e 0 0 0 0000
KYm.6 -320 m320 m700 -040 m385.mOOO m700 -385 m040 -000
KYI-8 a280 a220 0700 -040 m400 m000 m800 m485 a140 a011
KXw.8 K Y m O -220 -580 .794
-109,439 .OOO 0400 0100 -000 0000
KYm.2 ,220 - 4 8 0 m800 0122 -450 m000 m500 m200 e000 e000
KW.4 .220
.380 .800 .l40,473 .003
-600
-300 -000 .OOO
K Y m - 6 e220 m280 m800 0140 0485 m011 m700'm400 m040 m000
KYW.8 m180m180 m800 m140 m500 m020 -800 m500 m140 0020

31 1