Detailings of
Reinforced Concrete to
Code of Practice for
Structural Use of Concrete
2004
Housing Department
February 2007
Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Some highlighted aspects in Basis of Design 3
3.0 Beams 6
4.0 Slabs 35
5.0 Columns 52
6.0 Column Beam Joints 69
7.0 Walls 77
8.0 Corbels 86
9.0 Transfer Structures 93
10.0 Footings 99
11.0 Pile Caps 107
12.0 General R.C. Detailings 118
Appendices
Appendix A Clause by Clause Comparison between Code of Practice for
Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110
Appendix B Assessment of Building Accelerations
Appendix C Derivation of Basic Design Formulae of R.C. Beam sections
against Flexure
Appendix D Underlying Theory and Design Principles for Plate Bending Element
Appendix E Extracts of Design Charts for Slabs
Appendix F Derivation of Design Formulae for Rectangular Columns to Rigorous
Stress Strain Curve of Concrete
Appendix G Derivation of Design Formulae for Walls to Rigorous Stress Strain
Curve of Concrete
Appendix H Extracts of HKIE paper for plate bending analysis and design
Appendix I Derivation of Formulae for Rigid Cap Analysis
1
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Promulgation of the Revised Code
A revised concrete code titled Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete
2004 was formally promulgated by the Buildings Department of Hong Kong
in late 2004 which serves to supersede the former concrete code titled The
Structural Use of Concrete 1987. The revised Code, referred to as the Code
hereafter in this manual will become mandatory by 15 December 2006, after
expiry of the grace period in which both the revised and old codes can be used.
1.2 Main features of the Code
As in contrast with the former code which is based on working stress design
concept, the drafting of the Code is largely based on BS8110 1997 adopting
the limit state design approach. Nevertheless, the following features of the
Code in relation to design as different from BS8110 are outlined :
(a) Provisions of concrete strength up to grade 100 are included;
(b) Stress strain relationship of concrete is different from that of BS8110
for various concrete grades;
(c) Maximum design shear stress of concrete (
max
v ) are raised;
(d) Provisions of detailings to enhance ductility are added, with the
requirements of design in beamcolumn joints (Sections 9.9 and 6.8);
(e) Criteria for dynamic analysis for tall building under wind loads are
added (Clause 7.3.2).
As most of our colleagues are familiar with BS8110, a comparison table
highlighting differences between BS8110 and the Code is enclosed in
Appendix A which may be helpful to designer switching from BS8110 to the
Code in the design practice.
1.3 Outline of this Manual
This Practical Design Manual intends to outline practice of detailed design and
detailings of reinforced concrete work to the Code. Detailings of individual
types of members are included in the respective sections for the types, though
the last section in the Manual includes certain aspects in detailings which are
2
common to all types of members. Design examples, charts are included, with
derivations of approaches and formulae as necessary. Aspects on analysis are
discussed selectively in this Manual. In addition, as the Department has
decided to adopt Section 9.9 of the Code which is in relation to provisions for
ductility, conflicts of this section with others in the Code are resolved with
the more stringent ones highlighted as requirements in our structural design.
As computer methods have been extensively used nowadays in analysis and
design, the contents as related to the current popular analysis and design
approaches by computer methods are also discussed. The background theory
of the plate bending theory involving twisting moments, shear stresses, and
design approach by the Wood Armer Equations which are extensively used by
computer methods are also included for analysis of slabs, flexible pile caps
and footings.
To make distinctions between equations quoted from the Code and the
equations derived in this Manual, the former will be prefixed by (Ceqn) and
the latter by (Eqn).
1.4 Reference of this Manual
This Manual has made reference to the following documents :
(a) The Code itself
(b) Concrete Code Handbook by HKIE
(c) Hong Kong Building (Construction) Regulations
(d) The Code of Practice for Dead and Imposed Loads for Buildings (Draft)
(e) BS8110 Parts 1, 2 and 3
(f) Code of Practice for Precast Concrete Construction 2003
(g) Code of Practice for Fire Resisting Construction 1996
(h) Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete 3
rd
edition Kong & Evans
(i) Reinforced Concrete Design to CP110 Simply Explained A.H. Allen
(j) Ove Arup and Partners. Notes on Structures: 17. April 1989
(k) ACI Code ACI31805.
3
2.0 Some highlighted aspects in Basis of Design
2.1 Ultimate and Serviceability Limit states
The ultimate and serviceability limit states used in the Code carry the usual
meaning as in BS8110. However, the new Code has incorporated an extra
serviceability requirement in checking human comfort by limiting acceleration
due to wind load on highrise buildings (in Clause 7.3.2). No method of
analysis has been recommended in the Code though such accelerations can be
estimated by the wind tunnel laboratory if wind tunnel tests are conducted.
Nevertheless, a design example is enclosed in Appendix B, based on some
recognized empirical formulae in the absence of wind tunnel tests.
2.2 Design Loads
The Code has made reference to the Code of Practice for Dead and Imposed
Loads for Buildings for determination of characteristic gravity loads for
design. However, the Code has not yet been formally promulgated. At the
meantime, the design loads should be therefore taken from HKB(C)R Clause
17. Nevertheless, the designer may need to check for the updated loads by fire
engine for design of new buildings, as required by FSD.
The Code has placed emphasize on design loads for robustness which are
similar to the requirements in BS8110 Part 2. The requirements include design
of the structure against a notional horizontal load equal to 1.5% of the
characteristic dead weight at each floor level and vehicular impact loads
(Clause 2.3.1.4). The small notional horizontal load can generally be covered
by wind loads if wind loads are applied to the structure. Identification of key
elements and designed for ultimate loads of 34 kPa, together with examination
for progress collapse in accordance with Clause 2.2.2.3 can be exempted if the
buildings are provided with ties determined by Clause 6.4.1. The usual
reinforcement provisions as required by the Code can generally cover the ties
provision.
Wind loads for design should be taken from Code of Practice on Wind Effects
in Hong Kong 2004.
It should also be noted that there are differences between Table 2.1 of the
4
Code that of BS8110 Part 1 in some of the partial load factors
f
. The
beneficial partial load factor for earth and water load is 1. However, lower
values should be used if the earth and water load are known to be
overestimated.
2.3 Materials concrete
Table 3.2 has tabulated a set of Youngs Moduli of concrete up to grade 100.
The values are generally smaller than that in BS8110 and also slightly
different from the former 1987 Code. The stress strain curve of concrete as
given in Figure 3.8 of the Code, whose initial tangent is determined by these
Youngs Moduli values is therefore different from Figure 2.1 of BS8110 Part 1.
Furthermore, in order to achieve smooth (tangential connection) between the
parabolic portion and straight portion of the stress strain curve, the Concrete
Code Handbook (Clause 3.1.4) has recommended to shift the
0
value to
c
m cu
E
f ) / ( 34 . 1
instead of staying at
m
cu
f
4
10 4 . 2
which is the value in
BS8110. The stress strain curve for grade 35 is plotted as an illustration.
Stress Strain Profile for Grade 35
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Distance Ratio from Neutral axis
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
M
P
a
)
Design formulae for beams and columns based on these stress strain curves by
0.3769 where
0
= 0.001319
Figure 21 Stress strain profile of grades 35
5
BS8110, strictly speaking, become inapplicable. A full derivation of design
formulae and charts for columns and walls are given in Sections 5 and 7,
together with Appendix F and G of this Manual.
Table 4.2 of the Code tabulated nominal covers to reinforcements under
different exposure conditions. However, reference should also be made to the
Code of Practice for Fire Resisting Construction 1996.
2.4 Definitions of structural elements
The Code has included definitions of slab, beam, column and wall in
accordance with dimensions in Clause 5.2.1.1, 5.4 and 5.5 which are repeated
for ease of reference :
(a) Slab : the minimum panel dimension 5 times its thickness;
(b) Beam : for span 2 times the overall depth for simply supported span and
2.5 times the overall depth for continuous span, classified as shallow
beam, otherwise : deep beam;
(c) Column : vertical member with section depth not exceeding 4 times its
width and height is at least 3 times its section depth;
(d) Wall : vertical member with plan dimensions other than that of column.
(e) Shear Wall : walls contributing to the lateral stability of the structure.
(f) Transfer Structure : horizontal element which redistributes vertical loads
where there is a discontinuity between the vertical structural elements
above and below.
This Manual is based on the above definitions in delineating structural
members for discussion.
6
3.0 Beams
3.1 Analysis (Cl. 5.2.5.1 & 5.2.5.2)
Normally continuous beams are analyzed as subframes by assuming no
settlements at supports by walls, columns (or beams) and rotational stiffness
by supports provided by walls or columns as L EI / 4 (far end of column /
wall fixed) or L EI / 3 , (far end of column / wall pinned).
In analysis as subframe, Clause 5.2.5.2 states that the following loading
arrangements will be adequate for seeking for the design moments :
1.0G
K 1.0G
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.0G
K 1.0G
K
Figure 3.2c To search for maximum hogging moment at support
adjacent to spans with 1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.0G
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.0G
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.0G
K
Figure 3.2b To search for maximum sagging moment in spans with
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
Figure 3.1 continuous beam analyzed as subframe
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
1.4G
K
+1.6Q
K
Figure 3.2a To search for maximum support reactions
7
However, most of the commercial softwares can actually analyze individual
load cases, each of which is having live load on a single span and the effects
on itself and others are analyzed. The design value of shears and moments at
any location will be the summation of the values of the same sign created by
the individual cases.
With wind loads, the load cases to be considered will be 1.2(G
K
+Q
K
+W
K
) and
1.0G
K
+1.4W
K
on all spans.
3.2 Moment Redistribution (Cl. 5.2.9)
Moment redistribution is allowed for concrete grade not exceeding 70 under
conditions 1, 2 and 3 as stated in 5.2.9.1. Nevertheless, it should be noted that
there would be further limitation of the neutral axis depth ratio d x / if
moment redistribution is employed as required by (Ceqn 6.4) and (Ceqn 6.5)
of the Code which is identical to the provisions in BS8110. The rationale of
such further limitations is discussed in Concrete Code Handbook 6.1.2.
3.3 Highlighted aspects in Determination of Design Parameters of Shallow Beam
(i) Effective span (Cl. 5.2.1.2(b))
For simply supported beam, continuous beam and cantilever, the
effective span can be taken as the clear span plus the lesser of half
effective depth and half support width except that on bearing where the
centre of bearing should be used to assess effective span. (Fig. 5.3 of
the Code);
(ii) Effective flange width of T and Lbeams (Cl. 5.2.1.2(a))
Effective flange width of T and Lbeams are as illustrated in Figure
5.2. of the Code as
Effective width (b
eff
) = width of beam (b
w
) + 0.2 times the centre to
centre width to the next beam (0.2b
i
) + 0.1 times the span of zero
moment (0.1l
pi
), with the sum of the latter two not exceeding 0.2 times
the span of zero moment and l
pi
taken as 0.7 times the effective span of
the beam. An example for illustration is as indicated :
8
The effective spans are 5 m and they are continuous beams.
The effective width of the Tbeam is, by (Ceqn 5.1) of the Code
3500 5000 7 . 0 = =
pi
l ; 750 3500 1 . 0 2000 2 . 0
2 , 1 ,
= + = =
eff eff
b b
As 700 3500 2 . 0 750
2 , 1 ,
= > = =
eff eff
b b 700
2 , 1 ,
= =
eff eff
b b ;
1800 1400 400 2 700 400 = + = + =
eff
b
So the effective width of the Tbeam is 1800 mm.
(iii) Support Moment Reduction (Cl. 5.2.1.2)
The Code allows design moment of beam (and slab) monolithic with
its support providing rotational restraint to be that at support face if the
support is rectangular and 0.2 if the support is circular with diameter
. But the reduction should not be less than 65% of the support
moment. An example 3.1 for illustration is given below :
In Figure 3.4, the bending moment at support face is 200 kNm which
2000 2000
2000
400
400 400
400
Figure 3.3 Example illustrating effective flange determination
800
250 kNm at 0.2 into
the support face
350 kNm at
support
0.2800
200 kNm at
support face
centre line of beam
column elements
idealized as line
elements in analysis
Bending Moment
Diagram
Figure 3.4 Reduced moment to Support Face for
support providing rotational restraint
9
can be the design moment of the beam if the support face is rectangular.
However, as it is smaller than 0.65350 = 227.5 kNm. 227.5 kNm
should be used for design.
If the support is circular and the moment at 0.2 into the support and
the bending moment at the section is 250 kNm, then 250 kNm will be
the design moment as it is greater than 0.65350 = 227.5 kNm.
For beam (or slab) spanning continuous over a support considered not
providing rotational restraint (e.g. wall support), the Code allows
moment reduction by support shear times one eighth of the support
width to the moment obtained by analysis. Figure 3.5 indicates a
numerical Example 3.2.
The design support moment at the support under consideration can be
reduced to 230
8
8 . 0
200 250 = kNm.
(iv) Slenderness Limit (Cl. 6.1.2.1)
The provision is identical to BS8110 as
1. Simply supported or continuous beam :
Clear distance between restraints not to exceed 60b
c
or 250b
c
2
/d
if less; and
2. Cantilever with lateral restraint only at support :
Clear distance from cantilever to support not to exceed 25b
c
or
100b
c
2
/d if less
F
Ed,sup
= 200 kN
800
250 kNm
Figure 3.5 Reduction of support moment by support shear for
support considered not providing rotational restraint
10
where b
c
is the breadth of the compression face of the beam and d is
the effective depth.
Usually the slenderness limits need be checked for inverted beams or
bare beam (without slab).
(v) Span effective depth ratio (Cl. 7.3.4.2)
Table 7.3 under Cl. 7.3.4.2 tabulates basic span depth ratios for various
types of beam / slab which are deemedtosatisfy requirements against
deflection. The table has provisions for spans and end spans which are
not specified in BS8110. Nevertheless, calculation can be carried out to
justify deflection limits not to exceed span / 250.
Support condition
Rectangular Beam
Flanged Beam
b
w
/b < 0.3
One or twoway
spanning solid
slab
Cantilever 7 5.5 7
Simply supported 20 16 20
Continuous 26 21 26
End span 23 18.5 23
(2)
Note :
1. The values given have been chosen to be generally conservative and calculation may
frequently show shallower sections are possible;
2. The value of 23 is appropriate for twoway spanning slab if it is continuous over one long side;
3. For twoway spanning slabs the check should be carried out on the basis of the shorter span.
Table 3.1 effective span / depth ratio
The basic span depth ratios can be modified due to provision of tensile
and compressive steels as given in Tables 7.4 and 7.5 which are
identical to BS8110.
(vi) Minimum spacing between bars should not be less than bar diameter,
aggregate size + 5mm or 20mm (Cl. 8.2).
(vii) Maximum spacing between bars in tension near surface, by Cl. 9.2.1,
should be such that the clear spacing between bar is limited by
clear spacing
y
b
f
70000
300 mm where
b
is the ratio of moment
redistribution. Or alternatively, clear spacing
y
f
47000
300 mm.
11
So the simplest rule is 152
460
1 70000 70000
=
=
y
b
f
mm when using
high yield bars and under no moment redistribution.
(viii) Concrete covers to reinforcements (Cl. 4.2.4 and Cl. 4.3)
Cl. 4.2.4 of the Code indicates the nominal cover required in
accordance with Exposure conditions. However, we can, as far as our
building structures are concerned, roughly adopt condition 1 (Mild) for
the structures in the interior of our buildings (except for bathrooms and
kitchens which should be condition 2), and to adopt condition 2 for the
external structures. Nevertheless, the Code of Practice for Fire
Resisting Construction 1996 should also be checked for different fire
resistance periods (FRP). So, taking into account our current practice
of using concrete not inferior than grade 30 and maximum aggregate
sizes not exceeding 20 mm, we may generally adopt the provision in
our DEDD Manual (DEDD404 Table 2) with updating by the Code
except for compartment of 4 hours FRP. The recommended covers are
summarized in the following table :
Description Nominal Cover (mm)
Internal 30
External 40
Simply supported (4 hours FRP) 55
Continuous (4 hours FRP) 45
Table 3.2 Nominal Cover of Beams
3.4 Sectional Design for Rectangular Beam against Bending
3.4.1 Design in accordance with the Rigorous Stress Strain curve of Concrete
The stress strain block of concrete as indicated in Figure 3.8 is different from
Figure 2.1 of BS8110. Furthermore, in order to achieve smooth connection
between the parabolic and the straight line portions, the Concrete Code
Handbook has recommended to shift the
0
to the right to a value of
c m
cu
E
f
34 . 1
. With the values of Youngs Moduli of concrete,
c
E , as indicated in
Table 3.2 of the Code, the stress strain block of concrete for various grades can
12
be determined. The stress strain curve of grade 35 is drawn as shown
Stress Strain Profile for Grade 35
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Distance Ratio from Neutral axis
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
M
P
a
)
Based on this rigorous concrete stress strain block, design formulae for beam
can be worked out as per the strain distribution profile of concrete and steel as
indicated in Figure 3.7.
neutral axis
d
d
x
0035 . 0 =
ult
Stress Diagram
Strain Diagram
Figure 3.7 Stress Strain diagram for Beam
0.3769 where
0
= 0.001319
Figure 3.6 Stress strain block of grades 35
13
The solution for the neutral axis depth ratio
d
x
for singly supported beam is
the root of the following quadratic equation where 0035 . 0 =
ult
for concrete
grades not exceeding 60 (Re Appendix C for detailed derivation) :
0
3
1
1
67 . 0
12
1
3
1
2
1 67 . 0
2
0
2
2
0 0
=


.

\

+ 
.

\



.

\

+
bd
M
d
x f
d
x f
ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu
(Eqn 31)
With neutral axis depth ratio determined, the steel ratio can be determined by
(Eqn 32)
d
x f
f bd
A
ult m
cu
y
st


.

\

=
0
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
(Eqn 32)
As
d
x
is limited to 0.5 for singly reinforcing sections for grades up to 40
under moment redistribution not greater than 10% (Clause 6.1.2.4 of the Code),
by (Eqn 31),
cu
f bd
M
2
will be limited to ' K values as in
154 . 0 ' = K for grade 30
152 . 0 ' = K for grade 35
151 . 0 ' = K for grade 40
which are all smaller than 0.156 under the simplified stress block.
However, for grade 45 and 50 where neutral axis depth ratio is limited to 0.4
for singly reinforced sections under moment redistribution not greater than
10% (Clause 6.1.2.4 of the Code), again by (Eqn 31)
cu
f bd
M
2
will be limited
to
126 . 0 ' = K for grade 45
125 . 0 ' = K for grade 50
which are more significantly below 0.132 under the simplified stress block.
It should be noted that the
d
x
ratio will be further limited if moment
redistribution exceeds 10% by (Ceqn 6.4) and (Ceqn 6.5) of the Code as
( ) 4 . 0
b
d
x
for 40
cu
f ; and
( ) 5 . 0
b
d
x
for 70 40 <
cu
f
where
b
us the ratio of the moment after and before moment redistribution.
14
When
cu
f bd
M
2
exceeds the limited value for single reinforcement,
compression reinforcements at ' d from the surface of the compression side
should be added. The compression reinforcements will take up the difference
between the applied moment and
2
Kbd and the compression reinforcement
ratio is

.

\



.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f bd
M
bd
A
y
cu
cu
sc
'
1 87 . 0
'
2
(Eqn 33)
And the same amount of reinforcement will be added to the tensile
reinforcement :

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f bd
M
f
f bd
A
y
cu
cu
ult m
cu
y
st
'
1 87 . 0
'
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
2
0
(Eqn 34)
where is the limit of neutral axis depth ratio which is 0.5 for grade 40 and
below and 0.4 for grades up to and including 70 for moment redistribution not
exceeding 10%.
It follows that more compressive reinforcements will be required for grade 45
than 40 due to the limitation of neutral axis depth ratio, as illustrated by the
following Chart 31 in which compression reinforcement decreases from grade
30 to 40 for the same
2
bd
M
, but increases at grade 45 due to the change of the
limit of neutral axis depth ratio from 0.5 to 0.4 with moment redistribution not
exceeding 10%. The same phenomenon applies to tensile steel also. With
moment redistribution exceeding 10%, the same trend will also take place.
15
Reinforcement Ratios for Doubly Reinforced Beams d'/d = 0.1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Reinforcement ratios (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Grade 30 Ast/bd Grade 30 Asc/bd Grade 35 Ast/bd Grade 35 Asc/bd
Grade 40 Ast/bd Grade 40 Asc/bd Grade 45 Ast/bd Grade 45 Asc/bd
Furthermore, as similar to BS8110, there is an upper limit of lever arm ratio
d
z
which is the depth of the centroid of the compressive force of concrete to
the effective depth of the beam section of not exceeding 0.95. To comply with
this requirement, the minimum steel percentages will be 0.33%, 0.39%, 0.44%
and 0.5% for grades 30, 35, 40 and 45 respectively which are all in excess of
the minimum of 0.13% in accordance with Table 9.1 of the Code.
Design Charts for grades 30 to 45 comprising tensile steel and compression
steel ratios
bd
A
st
and
bd
A
sc
are enclosed at the end of Appendix C.
3.4.2 Design in accordance with the Simplified Stress Block
The design will be simpler and sometimes more economical if the simplified
rectangular stress block as given by Figure 6.1 of the Code is adopted. The
design formula becomes
For singly reinforced sections where '
2
K
bd f
M
K
cu
= where 156 . 0 ' = K
for grades 40 and below and 132 . 0 ' = K for grades over 40 and not
Chart 31 Reinforcement Ratios of Doubly Reinforced Beams for Grade 30
to 45 with Moment Redistribution limited to 10% or below
16
exceeding 70.
95 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 + =
K
d
z
;
45 . 0
1
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0
45 . 0
1
1


.

\

= 
.

\

=
K
d
z
d
x
;
z f
M
A
y
st
87 . 0
= (Eqn 35)
For doubly reinforced sections '
2
K
bd f
M
K
cu
> = ,
9 . 0
'
25 . 0 5 . 0
K
d
z
+ =
45 . 0
1
1 
.

\

=
d
z
d
x
( )
( ) ' 87 . 0
'
2
d d z f
bd f K K
A
y
cu
sc
=
sc
y
cu
st
A
z f
bd f K
A + =
87 . 0
'
2
(Eqn 36)
3.4.3 Worked Examples for Rectangular Beam with Moment Redistribution < 10%
Worked Example 3.3
Section : 500 (h) 400 (w), 35 =
cu
f MPa
(i) 286
1
= M kNm; (ii) 486
2
= M kNm;
444 16 40 500 = = d
0013192 . 0
23700 5 . 1
35 34 . 1 34 . 1
0
=
= =
c m
cu
E
f
3769 . 0
0
=
ult
152 . 0 104 . 0
444 400 35
10 286
2
6
2
1
< =
=
bd f
M
cu
, so singly reinforced
Solving the neutral axis depth ratio by (Eqn 31)
d
x
38 . 60
12
1
3
1
2
1 67 . 0
2
0 0
=


.

\

+
ult ult m
cu
f
;
669 . 13
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
=


.

\

ult m
cu
f
; 627 . 3
444 400
10 286
2
6
2
=
=
bd
M
( ) ( )
( )
5 . 0 307 . 0
38 . 60 2
627 . 3 38 . 60 4 699 . 13 699 . 13
2
=
+
=
d
x
0105 . 0 307 . 0 699 . 13
460 87 . 0
1
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
0
=
=


.

\

=
d
x f
f bd
A
ult m
cu
y
st
1865 =
st
A mm
2
Use 2T32 + I T25
(ii) 440 20 40 500 = = d
17
0013192 . 0
23700 5 . 1
35 34 . 1 34 . 1
0
=
= =
c m
cu
E
f
3769 . 0
0
=
ult
152 . 0 179 . 0
440 400 35
10 486
2
6
2
2
> =
=
bd f
M
cu
, so doubly reinforced
50 10 40 ' = + = d 114 . 0
440
50 '
= =
d
d
By (Eqn 33)
( )
( )
267 . 0
114 . 0 1 460 87 . 0
35 152 . 0 179 . 0
'
1 87 . 0
2
=
=

.

\



.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f bd
M
bd
A
y
cu
cu sc
%
469 440 400 00267 . 0 = =
sc
A mm
2
Use 2T20
By (Eqn 34)

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f bd
M
f
f bd
A
y
cu
cu
ult m
cu
y
st
'
1 87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
2
0
978 . 1 00236 . 0 5 . 0 699 . 13
460 87 . 0
1
= +
=
bd
A
st
%
3481 440 400 01978 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use 3T40
(i) and (ii) of Worked Example 3.3 are redone in accordance with Figure 6.1
of the Code (the simplified stress) block by (Eqn 35) and (Eqn 36)
(i) 867 . 0
444 400 35
10 286
25 . 0 5 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0
2
6
=
+ = + =
K
d
z
( )
01045 . 0
867 . 0 460 87 . 0 444 400
10 286
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
=
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
1856 =
st
A mm
2
Use 2T32 + I T25
(ii) 156 . 0 179 . 0
440 400 35
10 486
2
6
2
> =
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
, so doubly reinforcing
section required, 775 . 0 5 . 0 9 . 0 5 . 0 1 = =
d
z
( )
( )
( )
( )
399
50 440 460 87 . 0
440 400 35 156 . 0 179 . 0
' 87 . 0
'
2 2
=
=
=
d d f
bd f K K
A
y
cu
sc
mm
2
>
0.2% in accordance with Table 9.2.1 of the Code;
3498 399
440 775 . 0 460 87 . 0
440 400 35 156 . 0
87 . 0
'
2 2
= +
= + =
sc
y
cu
st
A
z f
bd f K
A mm
2
Use 3T40
Summary for comparison :
18
Singly
Reinforced
Doubly
Reinforced
st
A (mm
2
)
sc
A (mm
2
)
st
A (mm
2
) Total
(mm
2
)
Based on Rigorous
Stressstrain profile
1865 469 3481 3950
Based on Simplified
stress strain profile
1856 399 3498 3897
Results by the two approaches are very close. The approach based on the
simplified stress block are slightly more economical.
3.4.4 Worked Example 3.4 for Rectangular Beam with Moment Redistribution >
10%
If (ii) of the Worked Example 3.3 has undergone a moment redistribution of
20% > 10%, i.e. 8 . 0 =
b
, by (Ceqn 6.4) of the Code
( ) 4 . 0 4 . 0 8 . 0 4 . 0 =
d
x
d
x
b
, 82 . 0 5 . 0 9 . 0 4 . 0 1 = =
d
z
132 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 82 . 0 = + = K
K
( )
( )
( )
( )
764
50 440 460 87 . 0
440 400 35 132 . 0 176 . 0
' 87 . 0
'
2 2
=
=
=
d d f
bd f K K
A
y
cu
sc
mm
2
> 0.2 %
as required by Table 9.2.1 of the Code;
3242 347
440 82 . 0 460 87 . 0
440 400 35 132 . 0
87 . 0
'
2 2
= +
= + =
sc
y
cu
st
A
z f
bd f K
A mm
2
So total amount of reinforcement is greater.
3.5 Sectional Design of Flanged Beam against Bending
3.5.1 Slab structure adjacent to the beam, if in flexural compression, can be used to
act as part of compression zone of the beam, thus effectively widen the
structural width of the beam. The use of flanged beam will be particularly
useful in eliminating the use of compressive reinforcements, apart from
reducing tensile steel due to increase of lever arm. The principle of sectional
design of flanged beam follows that rectangular beam with an additional
flange width of
w f
b b as illustrated in Figure 3.8.
19
Design formulae based on the simplified stress block are derived in Appendix
C which are summarized as follows :
(i) Singly reinforcing section where 0.9 neutral axis depth is outside
flange depth by checking
d
d
K
d
x f


.

\

=
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 2 9 . 0 where
2
d b f
M
K
f cu
= (Eqn 37)
If so, carry out design as if it is a rectangular beam of width
f
b .
(ii) Singly reinforcing section where 0.9 neutral axis depth is outside
flange depth and '
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
'
2
r
f
w
f f
m
f
w
K
d
d
b
b
d
d
K
d b
M
+


.

\



.

\

=
where 156 . 0 ' =
r
K for 40
cu
f and 132 . 0 ' =
r
K for
70 40 <
cu
f
d
x
be solved by the quadratic equation :
0 402 . 0 1809 . 0
2
2
=
+ 
.

\

d b
M M
d
x
f
d
x
f
w
f
cu cu
(Eqn 38)
where


.

\



.

\

=
d
d
b
b
d
d
f
d b
M
f
w
f f
m
cu
w
f
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
2
(Eqn 39)
If
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0 , treat as a rectangular beam of width
f
b .
x 9 . 0
m
cu
f
67 . 0
x
d
f
d
f
b
w
b
Figure 3.8 Analysis of a T or L beam section
20
If
d
d
d
x f
> 9 . 0 ,
+


.

\

=
d
x
d
d
b
b
f
f d b
A
f
w
f
m
cu
y w
st
9 . 0 1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
(Eqn 310)
(iii) Doubly reinforcing section :
By following the procedure in (ii), if
d
x
obtained by (Eqn 38)
exceeds 0.5, then double reinforcements will be required by

.

\



.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f d b
M
bd
A
y
cu f
cu w
sc
'
1 87 . 0
'
2
(Eqn 311)

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f d b
M
d
d
b
b
f
f bd
A
y
cu f
cu w f
w
f
m
cu
y
st
'
1 87 . 0
'
45 . 0 1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
2
(Eqn 312)
3.5.2 Worked Examples for Flanged Beam
(i) Worked Example 3.5 : Singly reinforced section where
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0
Consider the previous example done for a rectangular beam 500 (h)
400 (w), 35 =
cu
f MPa, under a moment 486 kNm, with a flanged
section of width = 1800 mm and depth = 150 mm,:
400 =
w
b , 440 20 40 500 = = d , 1800 =
w
b 150 =
f
d
First check if
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0 based on beam width of 1800 =
w
b
0398 . 0
440 1800 35
10 486
2
6
2
=
= =
d b f
M
K
f cu
By (Eqn 37),
341 . 0
440
150
103 . 0
45 . 0
1
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 9 . 0 = = =


.

\

=
d
d
K
d
x f
So 95 . 0 954 . 0 45 . 0 1 > = =
d
x
d
z
; 95 . 0 =
d
z
Thus
( )
00367 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 440 1800
10 486
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
=
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
21
2905 =
st
A mm
2
.
As in comparison with the previous example based on rectangular
section, it can be seen that there is saving in tensile steel (2905 mm
2
vs
3498 mm
2
) and the compression reinforcements are eliminated
(ii) Worked Example 3.6 Singly reinforced section where
d
d
d
x f
> 9 . 0
Beam Section : 1000 (h) 600 (w), flange width = 2000 mm,
flange depth = 150 mm 35 =
cu
f MPa under a moment 4000 kNm
600 =
w
b , 890 60 50 1000 = = d , 2000 =
w
b 150 =
f
d
169 . 0
890
150
= =
d
d
f
; 333 . 3
600
2000
= =
w
f
b
b
First check if
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0 based on beam width of 2000 =
w
b
0721 . 0
890 2000 35
10 4000
2
6
2
=
= =
d b f
M
K
f cu
By (Eqn 37)
169 . 0
890
150
176 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 2 9 . 0 = = > =


.

\

=
d
d
K
d
x f
So 0.9 neutral axis extends below flange.
65 . 2675
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
2
=


.

\



.

\

=
f
f
w
f f
m
cu
w
f
M
d
d
b
b
d
d
f
d b
M
kNm
Solve
d
x
by (Eqn 38)
0 402 . 0 1809 . 0
2
2
=
+ 
.

\

d b
M M
d
x
f
d
x
f
w
f
cu cu
( )
0
890 600
10 65 . 2675 4000
35 402 . 0 35 1809 . 0
2
6
2
=
+ 
.

\

d
x
d
x
2198 . 0 =
d
x
By (Eqn 310)
0231 . 0 9 . 0 1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
=
+


.

\

=
d
x
d
d
b
b
f
f d b
A
f
w
f
m
cu
y w
st
12330 =
st
A mm
2
, Use 10Y40 in 2 layers
(iii) Worked Example 3.7 Doubly reinforced section
Beam Section : 1000 (h) 600 (w), flange width = 1250 mm,
flange depth = 150 mm 35 =
cu
f MPa under a moment 4000 kNm
22
600 =
w
b , 890 60 50 1000 = = d , 1250 =
w
b 150 =
f
d
169 . 0
890
150
= =
d
d
f
; 083 . 2
600
1250
= =
w
f
b
b
First check if
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0 based on beam width of 1250 =
w
b
115 . 0
890 1250 35
10 4000
2
6
2
=
= =
d b f
M
K
f cu
By (Eqn 37)
169 . 0
890
150
302 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 2 9 . 0 = = > =


.

\

=
d
d
K
d
x f
So 0.9neutral axis extends below flange.
26 . 1242
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
2
=


.

\



.

\

=
f
f
w
f f
m
cu
w
f
M
d
d
b
b
d
d
f
d b
M
kNm
Solve
d
x
by (Eqn 38)
0 402 . 0 1809 . 0
2
2
=
+ 
.

\

d b
M M
d
x
f
d
x
f
w
f
cu cu
( )
0
890 600
10 26 . 242 82 . 1337 4000
35 402 . 0 35 1809 . 0
2
6
2
=
+ 
.

\

d
x
d
x
5 . 0 547 . 0 > =
d
x
. So double reinforcement is required.
By (Eqn 311)
0038 . 0
'
1 87 . 0
'
2
=

.

\



.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f d b
M
bd
A
y
cu f
cu w sc
Use 0.4% as per Table 9.2.1 of
the Code
2040 =
sc
A mm
2
. Use 2T25 + 4T20
0247 . 0 9 . 0 1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
=
+


.

\

=
d
x
d
d
b
b
f
f d b
A
f
w
f
m
cu
y w
st
13196 =
st
A mm
2
, Use 11Y40 in 2 layers
3.6 Detailings of longitudinal steel for bending
The followings should be observed in placing of longitudinal steel bars for
bending which will directly affect design (Cl. 9.2.1 and 9.9.1 of the Code, the
requirements arising from ductility are marked with D)
(i) Minimum tensile steel percentage : Table 9.1 of the Code where 0.13%
23
for rectangular beam and other percentages for others;
(ii) Minimum compressive steel percentage : Table 9.1 of the Code where
0.2% for rectangular beam and other percentages for others;
(iii) Minimum total percentage : total reinforcements to be not less than
0.3% (D);
(iv) Maximum steel percentage : 2.5% (D);
(v) At any section of a beam within a critical zone (e.g. a potential plastic
hinge zone) the compression reinforcement should not be less than
onehalf of the tension reinforcement in the same region (D);
(vi) Minimum clear spacing of bars should be the minimum of bar diameter,
20 mm and aggregate size + 5 mm;
(vii) At laps, the sum of reinforcement sizes in a particular layer should not
exceed 40% of the beam width;
(viii) Maximum clear spacing between adjacent bars near tension face of a
beam 70000
b
/f
y
300 mm where
b
is the ratio of moment
redistribution or alternatively 47000/f
s
300 mm where
b prov s
req s y
s
A
A f
f
1
3
2
,
,
= ;
(ix) Requirements for containment of compression steel bars is identical to
that of columns (Cl. 9.5.2.2 of the Code) : Every corner bar and each
alternate bar (and bundle) in an outer layer should be supported by a
link passing around the bar and having an included angle < 135
o
. No
bar within a compression zone be more than 150 mm from a restrained
bar;
(x) For beam with depths > 750 mm, provision of sides bars >
y b
f b s /
where
b
s is the side bar spacing and b is the lesser of the beam
breadth under consideration and 500 mm. In addition, 250
b
s mm
and be distributed over twothirds of the beams overall depth
measured from its tension face;
(xi) When longitudinal beam bars are anchored in cores of exterior
columns or beam studs, the anchorage for tension shall be deemed to
commence at the lesser of 1/2 of the relevant depth of the column or 8
times the bar diameter as indicated in Figure 3.9.
Where it can be shown that the critical section of the plastic hinge is at
a distance at least the beam depth or 500 mm, whichever is the less
from the column face, the anchorage length can be considered to
24
commence at the column face. (D)
For calculation of anchorage length, bars must be assumed to be fully
stressed as a ductility requirement. As such, the anchorage and lap
lengths as indicated in Tables 8.4 and 8.5 should be increased by 15%.
Alternatively, the anchorage length can be determined by
bu
y
b
f
f
l
4
which is a modification from (Ceqn 8.4) of the Code where
cu bu
f f = and is 0.5 for tension anchorage and 0.63 for
compression anchorage for high yield bars in accordance with Table
8.3 of the Code. Lap lengths can be taken as identical to anchorage
lengths (D);
(xii) Notwithstanding the adequacy of the anchorage of a beam bar in a
column core or a beam stud, no bar shall be terminated without a
vertical 90
o
standard book or equivalent anchorage device as near as
practically possible to the far side of the column core, or the end of the
beam stud where appropriate, and not closer than 3/4 of the relevant
depth of the column to the face of entry. Top beam bars shall be bent
down and bottom bars must be bent up.
Requirements by (xi) and (xii) are illustrated by Figure 3.9.
3.7 Design against Shear
> 3/4 D
>the lesser
of D/2 or
8
D
h
anchorage
commence at
this point
Anchored bar
of dia.
Figure 3.9 Anchorage of bar in exterior column for ductility
enhancement
25
3.7.1 Checking of Shear Stress and provision of shear reinforcements
Checking of shear in beam is based on the averaged shear stress calculated
from (Ceqn 6.19) of the Code
d b
V
v
v
=
where v is the average shear stress, V is the ultimate shear, d is the
effective depth of the beam and
v
b is beam width.
v
b should be taken as the
averaged width of the beam below flange in case of flanged beam)
If v is less than the values of
c
v , termed design concrete shear stress in
Table 6.3 of the Code which is determined by the formula
m v
s cu
c
d d b
A f
v
1 400 100
25
79 . 0
4
1
3
1
3
1

.

\



.

\


.

\

= listed in Table 6.3 with the following
limitations :
(i) 25 . 1 =
m
;
(ii)
d b
A
v
s
100
should not be taken as greater than 3;
(iii)
4
1
400

.

\

d
should not be taken as less than 0.67 for member without shear
reinforcements and should not be taken as less than 1 for members with
links;
then shear links of
( )
yv
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
87 . 0
= should be provided (Table 6.2 of the
Code), or alternatively ( )( )
b
yv sb b
s
d d
f A V
'
cot sin cos 87 . 0
+ = in (Ceqn
6.20 of the Code) can be used for design of bentup bars.
Maximum shear stress not to exceed
cu tu
f v 8 . 0 = or 7 MPa, whichever is
the lesser by Cl. 6.1.2.5.
3.7.2 Minimum shear reinforcements
If
c
v v 5 . 0 < , no shear reinforcement is required;
If ( )
r c c
v v v v + < < 5 . 0 , minimum shear links of
yv
r
v
sv
f
bv
s
A
87 . 0
= along the
whole length of the beam be provided where 4 . 0 =
r
v for 40
cu
f and
26
( )
3 / 2
40 / 4 . 0
cu
f for 40 >
cu
f , but not greater than 80;
3.7.3 Enhanced shear strength close to support
At sections of a beam at distance d a
v
2 from a support, the shear strength
can be increased by a factor
v
a
d 2
, bounded by the absolute maximum of
cu tu
f v 8 . 0 = or 7 MPa.
3.7.4 Worked Examples for Shears
(i) Worked Example 3.8 shear design without shear enhancement in
concrete
Section : 400 = b mm;
644 16 40 700 = = d mm; 5 . 1
100
=
bd
A
st
; 35 =
cu
f MPa;
700 = V kN;
81 . 0
1 400 100
25
79 . 0
4
1
3
1
3
1
= 
.

\



.

\


.

\

=
m v
s cu
c
d d b
A f
v
MPa;
where
4
1
400

.

\

d
taken as 1.
72 . 2
644 400
10 700
3
=
= v MPa,
( ) ( )
91 . 1
460 87 . 0
81 . 0 72 . 2 400
87 . 0
=
=
yv
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
; Use Y12 200 c/c s.s.
d
v
a
Figure 3.10 Shear enhancement near support
section under consideration, shear strength
enhanced to
c
v
v
a
d 2
27
(ii) Worked Example 3.9 shear design with shear enhancement in concrete.
At section of 0.75 m from a support, as a heavy point load is acting so
that from the support face to the point load along the beam, the shear is
more or less constant at 700 kN.
Section : 400 = b mm; 644 16 40 700 = = d mm; 5 . 1
100
=
bd
A
st
;
35 =
cu
f MPa; 700 = V kN;
81 . 0
1 400 100
25
79 . 0
4
1
3
1
3
1
= 
.

\



.

\


.

\

=
m v
s cu
c
d d b
A f
v
MPa;
where
4
1
400

.

\

d
taken as 1.
Concrete shear strength enhanced to 39 . 1 81 . 0
750
644 2 2
=
=
c
v
v
a
d
MPa
< 7 and 7 . 4 35 8 . 0 8 . 0 = =
cu
f MPa
72 . 2
644 400
10 700
3
=
= v MPa,
( ) ( )
33 . 1
460 87 . 0
39 . 1 72 . 2 400
87 . 0
=
=
yv
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
; Use Y12 150 c/c s.s
(iii) Worked Example 3.10 inclusion of bentup bars
If half of the shear in Worked Example 3.8 is to be taken up by bentup
bars, i.e. ( ) 246 10 644 400 81 . 0 72 . 2 5 . 0
3
=
kN to be taken up by
bentup bars.
By (Ceqn 6.20) of the Code,
( )( )
b
yv sb b
s
d d
f A V
'
cot sin cos 87 . 0
+ =
( )
413
588 60 cot 45 sin 45 cos 160 87 . 0
441 246000
0 0 0
=
+
=
sb
A mm
2
s
b
= 441 s
b
= 441
S
t
= 882
= 60
o
= 45
o
d d= 644 40 16 = 588
28
Use 6 nos. of T10 at spacing of s
b
= 440 mm as shown.
3.8 Placing of Shear reinforcements
The followings (in Cl. 6.1.2.5(d), Cl. 9.2.2 and Cl. 9.9.1.2 of the Code) should
be observed for the placing of shear reinforcements which may directly affect
design :
(i) The minimum provision of shear reinforcements (links or bent up bars)
in beams should be given by ( )
yv v v sv
f s b A 87 . 0 / 4 . 0 ;
(ii) At least 50% of the necessary shear reinforcements be in form of links;
(iii) The maximum spacing of links in the direction of span of the beam
should be the least of
(a) 0.75d;
(b) the least lateral dimension of the beam (D);
(c) 16 times the longitudinal bar diameter (D);
(iv) At right angle of the span, the horizontal spacing of links should be
such that no longitudinal bar should be more than 150 mm from a
vertical leg; this spacing should not exceed d;
(v) Links or ties shall be arranged so that every corner and alternate
longitudinal bar that is required to function as compression
reinforcement shall be restrained by a leg
(vi) Links should be adequately anchored by means of 135
o
or 180
o
hooks
in accordance with Cl. 8.5 of the Code. Anchorage by means of 90
o
hook is not permitted (D);
3.9 Design against Torsion
3.9.1 By Cl. 6.3.1 of the Code, in normal slabandbeam and framed construction,
checking against torsion is usually not necessary. However, checking needs be
carried out if the design relies entirely on the torsional resistance of a member
such as
29
3.9.2 Calculation of torsional rigidity of a rectangular section for analysis (in
grillage system) is by (Ceqn 6.64) of the Code
max
3
min
h h C = where is to be read from Table 6.16 of the Code.
3.9.3 Calculation of torsional shear stress
Upon arrival of the torsion on the rectangular section, the torsional shear stress
is calculated by (Ceqn 6.65) of the Code

.

\

=
3
2
min
max
2
min
h
h h
T
v
t
and in case of a section such as T or L sections made of rectangles, the section
should be broken up into two or more rectangles such that the
max
2
min
h h is
maximized and the total Torsional moment T be apportioned to each
rectangle in accordance with (Ceqn 6.66) of the Code as


.

\

max
3
min
max
3
min
h h
h h
T .
If the total shear stress exceeds
cu
f 067 . 0 (but not more than 0.6MPa),
torsional reinforcements will be required. Furthermore, the torsional shear
stress should be added to the shear stress induced by shear force to ensure that
the absolute maximum
cu tu
f v 8 . 0 = or 7MPa is not exceeded, though for
small section where
1
y (the larger centretocentre dimension of a
Beam carrying
unbalanced
torsion induced
by slab needs be
checked
Figure 3.11 Illustration for necessity of checking against torsion
30
rectangular link) < 550mm,
tu
v will be decreased by a factor 550 /
1
y .
Revision of section is required if the absolute maximum is exceeded.
3.9.4 Calculation of torsional reinforcements
Torsional reinforcement in forms of close rectangular links and longitudinal
bars are to be calculated by (Ceqn 6.67) and (Ceqn 6.68) of the Code as
( )
yv v
sv
f y x
T
s
A
87 . 0 8 . 0
1 1
= (Ceqn 6.67)
(
sv
A is the area of the 2 legs of the link)
( )
y v
yv sv
s
f s
y x f A
A
1 1
+
= (Ceqn 6.68)
It should be noted that there is no reduction to shear strength (
c
v ) by concrete.
The derivation of the design formula (Ceqn 6.67) of the Code for close
rectangular links is under the assumption of a shear rupture length of stirrup
width + stirrup depth
1 1
y x + as shown in Figure 3.12. A spiral torsional
failure face is along the heavy dotted line. It is shown in Figure 3.12 that the
torsional moment of resistance by the stirrups within the Regions X and Y are
identical and is the total resistance is therefore
v
y sv
s
y x f A
1 1
87 . 0
.
y sv
f A 87 . 0 5 . 0
y sv
f A 87 . 0 5 . 0
y sv
f A 87 . 0 5 . 0
y sv
f A 87 . 0 5 . 0
shear rupture
spiral face
1
x
Moment provided by this
stirrup in region Y is
1
87 . 0 5 . 0 x f A
y sv
. Total
nos. of stirrup within Y is
v
s y /
1
. So total moment
is
v y sv
s y x f A / 87 . 0 5 . 0
1 1
1
y
Region Y
Region X
1
y
1
x
Moment provided by this
stirrup in region X is
1
87 . 0 5 . 0 y f A
y sv
. Total
nos. of stirrup within X is
v
s x /
1
. So total moment
is
v y sv
s x y f A / 87 . 0 5 . 0
1 1
45
o
45
o
1
y
1
x
Figure 3.12 Derivation of Design Formulae for Torsional Resistance
31
So
1 1
1 1
87 . 0
87 . 0
y x f
T
s
A
s
y x f A
T
y v
sv
v
y sv
= = . An additional factor of 0.8 is
added and the equation becomes (Ceqn 6.67). The derivation of the
longitudinal bars is based on the use of same quantity of longitudinal bars as
that of stirrups.
3.9.5 Worked Example 3.10 Design for Tbeam against torsion
A total torsion of 200 = T kNm on a Tsection as shown with an average
vertical shear stress on the web of 0.82 N/mm
2
Option A is made up of two rectangles of 400 550 and one rectangle of
1000
400
400
1500
1000
400
400
1500
Option A
1000
400
400
1500
TSection
Option B
Figure 3.13 Section of a T section resisting torsion
32
1400 400 . From Table 6.16 of the Code, for the 400 550 rectangle
and 1400 400 are respectively 0.185 and 0.2675
So the total stiffness of Option A is
9 3 3
10 992 . 36 400 1400 2675 . 0 400 550 185 . 0 2 = + mm
4
Option B is made up of one rectangle of 400 1500 and one rectangle of
1000 400 . From Table 6.16 of the Code, for the 400 1500 rectangle
and 1000 400 are respectively 0.27125 and 0.245
So the total stiffness of Option B is
9 3 3
10 72 . 41 400 1000 245 . 0 400 1500 27125 . 0 = + mm
4
As Option B has a large torsional stiffness, it is adopted for design.
The torsional moment is apportioned to the two rectangles of Option B as :
For the 400 1500 rectangle 832 . 124
72 . 41
04 . 26
200
1
= = T kNm;
Torsional shear stress is
142 . 1
3
400
1500 400
10 832 . 124 2
3
2
2
6
min
max
2
min
1
1
=

.

\

=

.

\

=
h
h h
T
v
t
N/mm
2
> 396 . 0 067 . 0 =
cu
f N/mm
2
So torsional shear reinforcement is required
308 2 6 2 40 400
1
= = x ; 1408 2 6 2 40 1500
1
= = y
( )
899 . 0
460 87 . 0 1408 308 8 . 0
10 832 . 124
87 . 0 8 . 0
6
1 1
1
=
= =
yv v
sv
f y x
T
s
A
Use T12 250 s.s.
( )
( )
1543
460
1408 308 460 899 . 0
1 1
=
+
=
+
=
y v
yv sv
s
f s
y x f A
A mm
2
Use 8T16
For the 400 1000 rectangle 168 . 75
72 . 41
68 . 15
200
2
= = T kNm
084 . 1
3
400
1000 400
10 168 . 75 2
3
2
2
6
min
max
2
min
2
1
=

.

\

=

.

\

=
h
h h
T
v
t
N/mm
2
The total shear stress is 904 . 1 82 . 0 084 . 1 = + N/mm
2
< 88 . 2 550 /
1
= y v
tu
MPa
As 396 . 0 067 . 0 904 . 1 = >
cu
f N/mm
2
33
So torsional shear reinforcement is required
308 2 6 2 40 400
1
= = x mm; 908 2 6 2 40 1000
1
= = y mm
( )
84 . 0
460 87 . 0 908 308 8 . 0
10 168 . 75
87 . 0 8 . 0
6
1 1
1
=
= =
yv v
sv
f y x
T
s
A
mm
Use T12 250 s.s.
It should be noted that the torsional shear link should be closed links of shape
as indicated in Figure 9.3 of the Code.
( )
( )
1021
460
908 308 460 84 . 0
1 1
=
+
=
+
=
y v
yv sv
s
f s
y x f A
A mm
2
. Use 6T16
It should be borne in mind that these torsional reinforcements are in addition
to others required for flexure and shear etc.
3.10 Placing of Torsional reinforcements
The followings (in Cl. 6.3.7, Cl. 6.3.8 and Cl. 9.2.3 of the Code) should be
observed for the placing of shear reinforcements which may directly affect
design :
(i) The shear link should form the closed shape as in Figure 9.3 in Cl.
9.2.3 of the Code;
(ii) The value
v
s for the closed link should not exceed the least of
1
x ,
2 /
1
y or 200 mm as per Cl. 6.3.7 of the Code;
(iii) In accordance with Cl. 9.2.3 of the Code, provision of the longitudinal
torsion reinforcement should comply the followings :
1000
400
400
1500
Figure 3.14 Arrangement of torsional reinforcements
34
(a) The bars distributed should be evenly round the inside perimeter
of the links;
(b) Clear distance of the bars not exceed 300 mm;
(c) Additional longitudinal bars required at the level of the tension or
compression reinforcements may be provided by using larger
bars than those required for bending alone;
(d) The longitudinal bars should extend a distance at least equal to
the largest dimension of the section beyond where it theoretically
cases to be required.
35
4.0 Slabs
4.1 Types of Slabs
Slabs can be classified as one way slab, two way slab, flat slab, ribbed
slab.
4.1.1 One way slab is defined by the Code as one subjected predominantly to u.d.l.
either (i) it possesses two free and parallel edge; or (ii) it is the central part of a
rectangular slab supported on four edges with a ratio of the longer to shorter
span greater than 2. So, strictly speaking, it is only the central part of (ii) be
treated as one way slabs. Nevertheless, as we usually design for a slab based
on the bending moment at the central part of the slab which is the maximum
and assign reinforcements to the whole slab without curtailment, treating the
whole rectangular slab as two ways bending in design is usually adequate.
4.1.2 Two way slab is a rectangular one supported on four sides with length to
breadth ration smaller than 2.
4.1.3 Flat slab is a slab supported on columns without beam.
4.1.4 Ribbed or Waffled Slab is a slab with topping or flange supported by closely
spaced ribs. The Code allows idealization of the ribbed slab or waffled slab as
a single slab without treatment as discretized ribs and flanges in analysis. If
the stiffness of the ribbed or waffled slab is required for input, the bending
stiffness in the X and Y directions can be easily found by summing the total
bending stiffness of the composite ribs and flange structure per unit width. The
twisting stiffness is difficult to assess. However, it should be acceptable to set
the twisting stiffness to zero which will end up with pure bending in the X and
Y directions as the slab, with its ribs running in the X and Y directions are
clearly predominantly strong in bending in the X and Y directions.
4.2 Analysis of Slabs without the use of computer method
4.2.1 One way slab can be analyzed as if it is a beam, either continuous or single
span. As we aim at simple analysis for the slab, we tend to treat it as a single
element without the necessity to consider the many loading cases for
continuous spans, Cl. 6.1.3.2(c) of the Code allows the design against moment
36
and shear arising from the singleload case of maximum design load on all
spans provided that (i) the area of each bay (defined in Figure 6.5 of the Code)
not to exceed 30 m
2
; (ii) the ratio of the characteristic imposed load to
characteristic dead load not to exceed 1.25; and (iii) the characteristic imposed
load does not exceed 5 kN/m
2
excluding partitions.
4.2.2 Two way rectangular slab is usually carried out by treating it as if it is a single
slab in the absence of computer method. Bending moment coefficients for
calculation of bending moments are presented in Table 6.6 of the Code for
different support restraint conditions. Nevertheless, simplified formulae for the
bending coefficients in case of rectangular simply supported two way slab are
available in the Code (Ceqn 6.26 and 6.27).
4.2.3 Flat slabs, if of regular arrangement, can be analyzed as frames in the
transverse and longitudinal directions by such methods as moment distribution
method as if they are separate frames. Analyzed moments and shears should
be apportioned to the column strip and Middle strip as per Table 6.10. In
addition, the bending moment and shear force coefficients for the one way
slab can also be used as a simplified approach.
4.2.4 More bending moment and shear force coefficients of rectangular slabs with
various different support and loading conditions can be found from other
published handbooks, the most famous one being Tables for the Analysis of
Plates, Slabs and Diaphragms based on the Elastic Theory. Extracts of
commonly encountered slabs are enclosed in Appendix E.
4.3 Analysis of Slabs with the use of the computer method
Analysis of slabs with the use of the computer method is mainly by the finite
element method in which the slab is idealized as an assembly of discrete plate
bending elements jointed at nodes. The support stiffnesses by the supporting
walls and columns are derived as similar to that for beams as subframes. A
complete set of results including bending moments, twisting moment, shear
force per unit width (known as stress in finite element terminology) can be
obtained after analysis for design purpose. The design against flexure is most
commonly done by the Wood Armer Equations which calculate design
moments in two directions (conveniently in two perpendicular directions)
which are adequate to cater for the complete set of bending and twisting
37
moments. The design based on node forces should be avoided due to its
inadequacy to cater for twisting effects which will result in underdesign. A
discussion of the plate bending theory and the design approach by the Wood
Armer Equations is enclosed in Appendix D, together with the stress
approach for checking and designing against shear in the same appendix. An
example of the mathematical modeling of a floor slab by the software SAFE
and results of subsequent analysis is illustrated in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Modeling of an irregular floor slab as 2D mathematical model,
subsequent analytical results of bending moments and twisting moment, design of
reinforcements by the Wood Armer Equations.
38
The finite element mesh of the mathematical model is often very fine. So it is
a practice of lumping the design reinforcements of a number of nodes over
certain widths and evenly distributing the total reinforcements over the widths,
as is done by the popular software SAFE. However, care must be taken of
not taking widths too wide for lumping as local effects may not be well
captured.
4.4 Detailing for Solid Slabs
Generally considerations in relation to determination of effective span,
effective span depth ratio, moment redistribution, reduced design
moment to support, maximum and minimum steel percentages, concrete
covers as discussed in 3.3 for design of beam are applicable to design of slab.
Nevertheless, the detailing considerations for slabs are listed as follows (Re
9.3.1.1 of the Code) :
(i) Minimum steel percentage :
Main Reinforcing bars:
0.24% for 250 =
y
f MPa and 0.13% for 460 =
y
f MPa;
Distribution bars in one way slab : 20% of the main reinforcements;
(ii) Maximum reinforcements spacing :
(a) In general areas without concentrated loads :
the principal reinforcement, max. spacing 400 3 h mm; and
the secondary reinforcement, max. spacing 450 5 . 3 h mm.
(b) In areas with concentrated loads or areas of maximum moment:
the principal reinforcement, max. spacing 250 2 h mm; and
for the secondary reinforcement, max. spacing 400 3 h mm.
(iii) In addition to (ii), crack control can be carried out by crack widths
calculations, Nevertheless, no further check on crack control is
required on bar spacing if either :
(a) max. spacing 250 h mm (grade 250 steel);
(b) max. spacing 200 h mm (grade 460 steel); or
(c) the percentage of required tension reinforcement is less than
0.3%.
(iv) Requirements pertaining to curtailment and anchoring of tension
reinforcements should be similar to that of beams;
(v) Reinforcements at end supports
39
(a) Half of the span reinforcements should be provided and well
anchored on end supports in simply supported slabs and
continuous slabs;
(b) If support shear
c
v v 5 . 0 < , the following arrangement can be
considered as effective anchorage.
(vi) Minimum bottom reinforcements at internal supports : 40% of the
calculated midspan bottom reinforcements.
(vii) Reinforcements at free edge should be as shown :
(viii) Shear reinforcements not to be used in slabs < 200 mm.
4.5 Structural Design of Slabs
The structural of slab against flexure is similar to that of beam. The
determination of reinforcements should be in accordance with Section 3.4
listing the options of either following the rigorous or simplified stress strain
> 1/3b and 30 mm if
c
v v 5 . 0 <
b
Figure 4.2 Anchorage of end span bar for
c
v v 5 . 0 <
h
2h
Figure 4.3 Free edge reinforcements for Slabs
40
relationship of concrete. Design against shear for slabs under line supports (e.g.
oneway or twoway) is also similar to that of beam. However for a flat slab,
the checking should be based on punching shear in accordance with empirical
method of the Code or by based on shear stresses revealed by the finite
element method. They are demonstrated in the Worked Examples in the
following subSection 4.6 :
4.6 Worked Examples
Worked Example 4.1 One Way Slab
A oneway continuous slab with the following design data :
(i) Live Load = 4.0 kN/m
2
;
(ii) Finishes Load = 1 kN/m
2
;
(iii) Concrete grade 35;
(i) Fire rating : 1 hour, mild exposure;
(ii) Span : 4 m
Sizing : Limiting Span depth ratio = 6 . 40 56 . 1 26 = (by Table 7.3 and Table
7.4 of the Code, assuming modification by tensile reinforcement to be 1.56 as
the slab should be lightly reinforced). So effective depth taken as
120 5 25 150 = = d as 4000/120 = 33.3 < 40.6 (assuming 10mm dia. bars
under 25 mm concrete cover.)
Loading : D.L. O.W. = 24 15 . 0 3.6kN/m
2
Fin. 1.0 kN/m
2
Total 4.6 kN/m
2
L.L. 4.0 kN/m
2
The factored load on a span is ( ) 36 . 51 4 0 . 4 6 . 1 6 . 4 4 . 1 = + = F kN/m
Based on coefficients of shear and bending in accordance with Table 6.4 of the
4m 4m 4m 4m
Figure 4.4 Slab in Example 1
41
Code listed as follows :
(a) End span support moment = 22 . 8 4 36 . 51 04 . 0 = kNm/m
0163 . 0
120 1000 35
10 22 . 8
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
95 . 0 982 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 > = + =
K
d
z
% 15 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 120 1000
10 22 . 8
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
=
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
180 120 1000 100 15 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 300
(
st
A provided = 262mm
2
)
End span shear = 63 . 23 36 . 51 46 . 0 = kN/m.
2 . 0
120 1000
23630
=
= v N/mm
2
< ( ) 5 . 0 25 / 35 45 . 0
3 / 1
= N/mm
2
.
No shear reinforcement required.
End span span moment = 41 . 15 4 36 . 51 075 . 0 = kNm/m
0306 . 0
120 1000 35
10 41 . 15
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
95 . 0 965 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 > = + =
K
d
z
% 28 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 120 1000
10 41 . 15
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
=
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
338 120 1000 100 28 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 225
(
st
A provided = 349mm
2
)
(b) Interior span support moment = 67 . 17 4 36 . 51 086 . 0 = kNm/m
0351 . 0
120 1000 35
10 67 . 17
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
95 . 0 96 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 > = + =
K
d
z
S.F. 0.46F 0.6F 0.6F 0.5F 0.5F 0.6F 0.6F 0.4F
B.M. 0.04Fl 0.075 Fl 0.086Fl 0.063Fl 0.086Fl 0.063Fl 0.086Fl 0.075 Fl 0.04Fl
Figure 4.5 Bending Moment and Shear Force coefficients for Continuous Slab
42
% 13 . 0 % 32 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 120 1000
10 67 . 17
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
> =
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
387 120 1000 100 32 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 200
(
st
A provided = 393mm
2
)
Maximum shear = 82 . 30 36 . 51 6 . 0 = kN/m.
25 . 0
120 1000
30820
=
= v N/mm
2
< ( ) 5 . 0 25 / 35 45 . 0
3 / 1
= N/mm
2
.
No shear reinforcement required.
Interior span moment = 94 . 12 4 36 . 51 063 . 0 = kNm/m
Use T10 225 (
st
A provided = 349mm
2
)
Worked Example 4.2 Two Ways Slab (4 sides simply supported)
A twoway continuous slab with the following design data :
(i) Live Load = 4.0 kN/m
2
;
(ii) Finishes Load = 1 kN/m
2
;
(iii) Concrete grade 35;
(ii) Fire rating : 1 hour, mild exposure;
(iii) Span : Long way : 4 m, Short way, 3 m.
Sizing : Limiting Span depth ratio = 2 . 31 56 . 1 20 = (by Table 7.3 and Table
7.4 of the Code, assuming modification by tensile reinforcement to be 1.56 as
the slab should be lightly reinforced). So effective depth taken as
120 5 25 150 = = d as 3000/120 = 25 < 31.2. So the structural depth is 150
mm (assuming 10mm dia. bars under 25 mm concrete cover.)
Loading : D.L. O.W. = 24 15 . 0 3.6kN/m
2
Fin. 1.0 kN/m
2
Total 4.6 kN/m
2
L.L. 4.0 kN/m
2
The factored load is ( ) 84 . 12 0 . 4 6 . 1 6 . 4 4 . 1 = + = F kN/m
(Ceqn 6.26) and (Ceqn 6.27) of the Code are used to calculate the bending
moment coefficients along the short and long spans :
( )
( )  
095 . 0
/ 1 8
/
4
4
=
+
=
x y
x y
sx
l l
l l
;
( )
( )  
053 . 0
/ 1 8
/
4
2
=
+
=
x y
x y
sy
l l
l l
43
So the bending moment along the short span is
98 . 10 3 84 . 12 095 . 0
2
= =
x
M kNm/m
0218 . 0
120 1000 35
10 98 . 10
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
95 . 0 975 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 > = + =
K
d
z
% 13 . 0 % 2 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 120 1000
10 98 . 10
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
> =
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
240 120 1000 100 2 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 300
(
st
A provided = 262mm
2
)
13 . 6 3 84 . 12 053 . 0
2
= =
y
M kNm/m
0145 . 0
110 1000 35
10 13 . 6
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
% 13 . 0 % 11 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 110 1000
10 13 . 6
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
< =
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
143 110 1000 100 13 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 300
(
st
A provided = 262mm
2
)
Worked Example 4.3 Two Ways Slab (3 sides supported)
A twoway continuous slab with the following design data :
(i) Live Load = 4.0 kN/m
2
;
(ii) Finishes Load = 1 kN/m
2
;
(i) Concrete grade 35;
(ii) Span : Long way : 5 m, Short way, 4 m
(iii) Fire rating : 1 hour, mild exposure;
continuous
edge
5 m
4 m
free edge
simply supported edge
Figure 4.6 Plan of 3sides supported slab for Example 4.3
44
Sizing : Based on the same limiting Span depth ratio for one way and two way
slab which is 2 . 31 56 . 1 20 = (by Table 7.3 and Table 7.4 of the Code,
assuming modification by tensile reinforcement to be 1.56 as the slab should
be lightly reinforced). So effective depth taken as 130 5 25 160 = = d as
4000/130 = 25 < 30.8. Thus the structural depth is 160 mm (assuming 10mm
dia. bars under 25 mm concrete cover.)
Loading : D.L. O.W. = 24 16 . 0 3.84kN/m
2
Fin. 1.0 kN/m
2
Total 4.84 kN/m
2
L.L. 4.0 kN/m
2
The factored load is ( ) 18 . 13 0 . 4 6 . 1 84 . 4 4 . 1 = + = F kN/m
From Table 1.38 of Tables for the Analysis of Plates, Slabs and Diaphragms
based on Elastic Theory extracted in Appendix E where 8 . 0 5 / 4 = = , the
sagging bending moment coefficient for short way span is maximum along the
free edge which 0.1104 (linear interpolation between 75 . 0 = and 0 . 1 =
28 . 23 4 18 . 13 1104 . 0
2
= =
x
M kNm/m
0394 . 0
130 1000 35
10 28 . 23
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
95 . 0 954 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 > = + =
K
d
z
% 13 . 0 % 362 . 0
95 . 0 460 87 . 0 130 1000
10 28 . 23
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
> =
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
471 130 1000 100 362 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 150
(
st
A provided = 523mm
2
)
At 2 m and 4 m from the free edge, the sagging moment reduces to
798 . 17 4 18 . 13 0844 . 0
2
= kNm/m and 75 . 8 4 18 . 13 0415 . 0
2
= kNm/m
and
st
A required are reduces to 360 mm
2
and 177 mm
2
.
Use T10 200 and T10 300 respectively.
The maximum hogging moment (bending along longway of the slab) is at
midway along the supported edge of the shortway span
01 . 24 5 18 . 13 0729 . 0
2
= =
y
M kNm/m
45
0476 . 0
120 1000 35
10 01 . 24
2
6
2
=
= =
bd f
M
K
cu
944 . 0
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 = + =
K
d
z
% 13 . 0 % 44 . 0
944 . 0 460 87 . 0 120 1000
10 01 . 24
/ 87 . 0
2
6
2
> =
=
=
d z f bd
M
bd
A
y
st
528 120 1000 100 44 . 0 = =
st
A mm
2
Use T10 125
(
st
A provided = 628mm
2
)
The maximum sagging moment along the longway direction is at 2 m from
the free edge which is
18 . 6 5 18 . 13 01876 . 0
2
= =
y
M kNm/m. The moment is small.
Use T10 300
Finally the reinforcement arrangement on the slab is (Detailed curtailment
omitted for clarity)
Worked Example 4.4 Flat Slab by Simplified Method (Cl. 6.1.5.2(c))
Flat slab arrangement on rectangular column grid of 7.5 m and 6 m with the
following design data :
T
1
0
1
2
5
T
1
1200
1200
800
800
T10 300 B1
T10 200 B1 T10 150B1
T
1
0
3
0
0
B
2
2000
2000 1000
T10 300 T1
Figure 4.7 Reinforcement Details for Example 4.3
46
(i) Finish Load = 1.5 kPa
(ii) Live Load = 5.0 kPa.
(iii) Column size = 550 550
(iv) Column Drop size = 3000 3000 with d
h
= 200 mm
(v) Fire rating : 1 hour, mild exposure;
Conditions as stipulated in Cl. 6.1.3.2(c) are satisfied as per Cl. 6.1.5.2(g).
Hence the simplified method is applicable. In the simplified method, the flat
slab is effectively divided into column strips containing the columns and the
strips of the slabs linking and the columns and the middle strips between the
column strips which are designed as beams in flexural design with assumed
apportionment of moments among the strips. However, for shear checking,
punching shear along successive critical perimeters of column are carried
out instead.
Effective dimension of column head ( ) 40 2
max
+ =
h c h
d l l (Ceqn 6.37)
( ) 870 40 200 2 550 = + = mm
Effective diameter of column head (Cl. 6.1.5.1(c))
982
4 870
2
=
c
h mm
Effective span in the long side is 6846
3
982 2
7500
3
2
=
=
c
h
l mm
1500
1500
1500
1500
7500
7500
6000 6000 6000
Figure 4.8 Flat Slab Plan Layout for Example 4
47
(Ceqn 6.38)
Sizing : Based on the same limiting Span depth ratio for one way and two way
slab which is 30 15 . 1 26 = (by Table 7.3 and Table 7.4 of the Code,
assuming modification by tensile reinforcement to be 1.15), 228
30
6846
= = d .
As cover = 25 mm, assuming T12 bars, structural depth is
259 2 12 25 228 = + + mm, say 275 mm.
Loading : D.L. O.W. = 24 275 . 0 6.6kN/m
2
Fin. 1.5 kN/m
2
Total 8.1 kN/m
2
L.L. 5.0 kN/m
2
The factored load is ( ) 34 . 19 0 . 5 6 . 1 1 . 8 4 . 1 = + = F kN/m
Design against Flexure (Long Way)
The bending moment and shear force coefficients in Table 6.4 will be used as
per Cl. 6.1.5.2(g). Total load on one panel is 3 . 870 6 5 . 7 34 . 19 = = Fl kN.
Hogging Moment :
Total moment at outer support is 46 . 238 85 . 6 3 . 870 04 . 0 = kNm
Total moment at first interior support is 69 . 512 85 . 6 3 . 870 086 . 0 = kNm
Total moment at middle interior support is 58 . 375 85 . 6 3 . 870 063 . 0 = kNm
These moments are to be apportioned in the column and mid strips in
accordance to the percentages of 75% and 25% as per Table 6.10, i.e.
Column Strip Mid Strip
Total Mt Mt/width Total Mt Mt/width
Outer Support 178.85 59.62 59.62 19.87
1
st
interior support 384.52 128.17 128.17 42.72
Middle interior support 281.69 93.9 93.9 31.30
The reinforcements top steel are worked out as follows,
( 444 6 25 475 = = d over column support and 244 6 25 275 = = d in
other locations)
Column Strip Mid Strip
Area (mm
2
)/m steel Area (mm
2
)/m steel
Outer Support 640 T10 100 319 T10 225
1
st
interior support 760 T12 125 459 T10 150
Middle interior support 577 T12 150 316 T10 225
48
Sagging Moment :
Total moment near middle of end span is 12 . 447 85 . 6 3 . 870 075 . 0 = kNm
Total moment near middle of interior span 58 . 375 85 . 6 3 . 870 063 . 0 = kNm
These moments are to be apportioned in the column and mid strips in
accordance to the percentages of 55% and 45% as per Table 6.10, i.e.
Column Strip Mid Strip
Total Mt Mt/width Total Mt Mt/width
Middle of end span 245.92 81.97 201.20 67.07
Middle of interior span 206.57 68.86 169.01 56.34
The reinforcements bottom steel are worked out as follows :
Column Strip Mid Strip
Area (mm
2
)/m steel Area (mm
2
)/m steel
Middle of end span 910 T12 100 744 T10 100
Middle of interior span 764 T10 100 625 T10 125
Design against Shear
The maximum shear is at the 1
st
interior support which is
01 . 1201 3 . 870 15 . 1 2 6 . 0 = kN
(Note : 0.6 is the shear force coefficient for first interior support from Table
6.4; 2 is to account for shear from both sides of the slab; 1.15 is the coefficient
to account for moment transfer in Cl. 6.1.5.6(b) in the absence of calculation.
Alternatively, (Ceqn 6.40) can be used to arrive at a more accurate coefficient
which is
( )


.

\

+
+ =


.

\

+ =
2 666 . 0 55 . 0 3 . 870
7 . 0 52 . 384 5 . 1
1 3 . 870 2 6 . 0
5 . 1
1
sp t
t
t eff
x V
M
V V .
8 . 1301 = kN > 1201.01 kN. The coefficient of 0.7 applied to
t
M is per note 2
of Cl. 6.1.5.6(b))
Check on 1
st
critical perimeter d 5 . 1 from column face, i.e.
666 . 0 444 . 0 5 . 1 = . So side length of the perimeter is ( ) 1882 2 666 550 = +
Length of perimeter is 7528 1882 4 =
Shear force to be checked can be the maximum shear 1201.01 kN after
deduction of the loads within the critical perimeter which is
49
51 . 1132 882 . 1 34 . 19 01 . 1201
2
= kN
Shear stress = 339 . 0
444 7528
1132510
=
N/mm
2
. < 38 . 0 =
c
v N/mm
2
in accordance
with Table 6.3 ( ( ) 38 . 0 25 / 35 34 . 0
3 / 1
= ). No shear reinforcement is required.
No checking on further perimeter is required.
Nevertheless, if the higher shear of 8 . 1301 =
eff
V kN is adopted which
becomes 3 . 1233 882 . 1 34 . 19 8 . 1301
2
= kN, the shear stress will be
37 . 0
444 7528
1233300
=
N/mm
2
. < 0.38 N/mm
2
. No shear reinforcement is required.
Example 4.5 Design for shear reinforcement
(Ceqn 6.44) and (Ceqn 6.45) of the Code gives formulae for reinforcement
design for different ranges of values of v .
For
c
v v 6 . 1 ,
( )
>
y
c
sv
f
ud v v
A
87 . 0
sin
For
c c
v v v 0 . 2 6 . 1 < ,
( )
>
y
c
sv
f
ud v v
A
87 . 0
7 . 0 5
sin
As a demonstration, if 5 . 0 = v N/mm
2
in the first exterior column head which
is < 61 . 0 6 . 1 =
c
v N/mm
2
but > 38 . 0 =
c
v N/mm
2
in the Example 4.4. By (Ceqn
6.64) of the Code,
( ) ( )
1002
460 87 . 0
444 7528 38 . 0 5 . 0
87 . 0
sin =
>
y
c
sv
f
ud v v
A mm
2
.
If vertical links
is chose as shear reinforcement, 1 sin 90
0
= = . So the 1002 mm
2
should be distributed within the critical perimeter as shown in Figure 4.6.
In distributing the shear links within the critical perimeter, there are
recommendations in Cl. 6.1.5.7(f) of the Code that
(i) at least two rows of links should be used;
(ii) the first perimeter should be located at approximately 0.5d from the
face of the loaded area (i.e. the column in this case).
So the first row be determined at 200 mm from the column face with total row
length 3800 4 950 = . Using T10 500 spacing along the row, the total steel
area will be ( ) 597 500 / 3800 4 / 10
2
= mm
2
> 40% of 1002 mm
2
.
The second row be at further 300 mm away where row length is
50
6200 4 1550 = . Again using T10 500 spacing along the row, the total steel
area will be ( ) 974 500 / 6200 4 / 10
2
= mm
2
.
Total steel area is 597 + 974 = 1570 mm
2
Design for Shear when ultimate shear stress exceeds 1.6v
c
It is stated in (Ceqn 6.43) in Cl. 6.1.5.7(e) that if
c c
v v 0 . 2 6 . 1 < < ,
( )
>
y
c
sv
f
ud v v
A
87 . 0
7 . 0 5
sin which effectively reduces the full inclusion of
c
v for reduction to find the residual shear to be taken up by steel at
c
v v 6 . 1 = to zero inclusion at
c
v v 0 . 2 = .
Example 4.6 when 1.6v
c
< v < 2.0v
c
In the previous Example 4.5, if the shear stress 68 . 0 = v N/mm
2
which lies
between 61 . 0 38 . 0 6 . 1 6 . 1 = =
c
v N/mm
2
and 76 . 0 38 . 0 2 0 . 2 = =
c
v N/mm
2
300
275 200
550
666
666
300 0.75d
200 0.5d
666 5 . 1 = d
1
st
critical
perimeter
T10 300 link
1
st
row , using
T10 500
(total area = 597mm
2
)
>40% of 1002 mm
2
2
nd
row , using
T10 250
(total area = 973mm
2
)
Figure 4.9 Shear links arrangement in Flat Slab for Example 4.5
51
( ) ( )
4009
460 87 . 0
444 7528 38 . 0 68 . 0 7 . 0 5
87 . 0
7 . 0 5
sin =
>
y
c
sv
f
ud v v
A mm
2
. If
arranged in two rows as in Figure 4.6, use T12 250 for both rows : the inner
row gives ( ) 1719 250 / 3800 4 / 12
2
= mm
2
> 40% of 4009 mm
2
; the outer
row gives ( ) 2802 250 / 6200 4 / 12
2
= mm
2
. The total area is 1719 + 2802 =
4521mm
2
> 4009 mm
2
.
Cl. 6.1.5.7(e) of the Code says, When
c
v v 2 > and a reinforcing system is
provided to increase the shear resistance, justification should be provided to
demonstrate the validity of design. If no sound justification, the structural
sizes need be revised.
52
5.0 Columns
5.1 Slenderness of Columns
Columns are classified as short and slender columns in accordance with their
slenderness. Short columns are those with ratios h l
ex
/ and b l
ey
/ < 15
(braced) and 10 (unbraced) in accordance with Cl. 6.2.1.1(b) where
ex
l and
ey
l are the effective lengths of the column about the major and minor axes,
b and h are the width and depth of the column.
As defined in Cl. 6.2.1.1, a column may be considered braced in a given plane
if lateral stability to the structure as a whole is provided by walls or bracing or
buttressing designed to resist all lateral forces in that plane. It would otherwise
be considered as unbraced.
The effective length is given by (Ceqn 6.46) of the Code as
0
l l
e
= where
0
l is the clear height of the column between restraints and
the value is given by Tables 6.11 and 6.12 of the Code which measures the
restraints against rotation and lateral movements at the ends of the column.
Generally slenderness limits for column : 60 /
0
< b l as per Cl. 6.2.1.1(f). In
addition, for cantilever column b
h
b
l 60
100
2
0
= .
Worked Example 5.1 : a braced column of clear height 8
0
= l m and sectional
dimensions 400 = b mm, 550 = h mm with its lower end connected
monolithically to a thick cap and the upper end connected monolithically to
deep transfer beams in the plane perpendicular to the major direction but beam
of size 300(W) by 400(D) in the other direction.
By Tables 6.11 and 6.12 of the Code
Lower end condition in both directions : 1
Upper end condition about the major axis : 1
Upper end condition about the minor axis : 2
For bending about the major axis : (1 1) 75 . 0 =
x
,
6 8 75 . 0 = =
ex
l
15 91 . 10 550 / < =
ex
l . a short column.
For bending about the minor axis : (1 2) 8 . 0 =
y
,
53
4 . 6 8 8 . 0 = =
ey
l
15 16 400 / > =
ey
l a slender column. 60 16 400 / < =
ey
l , O.K.
For a slender column, an additional deflection induced moment
add
M will
be required to be incorporated in design, as in addition to the working
moment.
5.2 Design Moments and Axial Loads on Columns
5.2.1 Determination of Design moments and Axial Loads by subframe Analysis
Generally design moments, axial loads and shear forces on columns are that
obtained from structural analysis. In the absence of rigorous analysis, (i)
design axial load may be obtained by the simple tributary area method with
beams considered to be simply supported on the column; and (ii) moment may
be obtained by simplified subframe analysis as follows :
Worked Example 5.2 (Re Column C1 in Plan shown in Figure 5.2)
Design Data :
Slab thickness : 150 mm Finish Load : 1.5 kN/m
2
Live Load : 5 kN/m
2
Beam size : 550(D) 400(W)
Upper Column height : 3 m Lower Column Height : 4 m
1.0G
k
1.4G
k
+1.6Q
2 1
5 . 0 5 . 0
b b u L
u es
u
K K K K
K M
M
+ + +
=
2 1
5 . 0 5 . 0
b b u L
L es
L
K K K K
K M
M
+ + +
=
L
K
u
K
2 b
K
1 b
K
b
K
L
K
u
K
1.4G
k
+1.6Q
b u L
u e
u
K K K
K M
M
5 . 0 + +
=
b u L
L e
L
K K K
K M
M
5 . 0 + +
=
Symbols:
e
M : Beam Fixed End Moment.
u
K : Upper Column Stiffness
es
M : Total out of balance Beam Fixed End Moment.
L
K : Upper Column Stiffness
u
M : Upper Column Design Moment
1 b
K : Beam 1 Stiffness
L
M : Upper Column Design Moment
2 b
K : Beam 2 Stiffness
Figure 5.1 Diagrammatic illustration of determination of column design
moments by Simplified Subframe Analysis
54
Column size : 400(W) 600(L)
Column Load from floors above D.L. 443 kN L.L. 129 kN
Design for Column C1 beneath the floor
Check for slenderness : End conditions of the column about the major axis are
1 at the lower end and 2 at the upper end whilst the end conditions about the
minor axis are 1 at the lower end and 2 at the upper end. The clear height
between restraints of the lower level column is 3450 550 4000 = . So the
effective heights of the column about the major and minor axes are
59 . 2 45 . 3 75 . 0 = m and 76 . 2 45 . 3 8 . 0 = m. So the slender ratios about the
major and minor axes are 15 3 . 4
600
2590
< = and 15 9 . 6
400
2760
< = . Thus the
column is not slender is both directions.
Loads :
Slab: D.L. O.W. 6 . 3 24 15 . 0 = kN/m
2
Fin. 1.5 kN/m
2
5.1 kN/m
2
L.L. 5.0 kN/m
2
Beam B1 D.L. O.W. 12 . 21 4 24 55 . 0 4 . 0 = kN
End shear of B1 on C1 is D.L. 56 . 10 2 12 . 21 = kN
B4
B3
B2 B1
5m
C1
4m 3m 3m
Figure 5.2 Plan for illustration for determination of design axial load and
moment on column by the Simplified Subframe Method
55
Beam B3 D.L. O.W. ( ) 84 . 3 24 15 . 0 55 . 0 4 . 0 = kN/m
Slab 85 . 17 5 . 3 1 . 5 = kN/m
21.69 kN/m
L.L. Slab 5 . 17 5 . 3 0 . 5 = kN/m
End shear of B3 on C1 D.L. 23 . 54 2 5 69 . 21 = kN
L.L. 75 . 43 2 5 50 . 17 = kN
Beam B4 D.L. O.W. ( ) 84 . 3 24 15 . 0 55 . 0 4 . 0 = kN/m
Slab 3 . 15 3 1 . 5 = kN/m
19.14 kN/m
L.L. Slab 0 . 15 3 0 . 5 = kN/m
End shear of B4 on B2 D.L. 85 . 47 2 5 14 . 19 = kN
L.L. 50 . 37 2 5 00 . 15 = kN
Beam B2 D.L. O.W. 68 . 31 6 24 55 . 0 4 . 0 = kN
B4 47.85 kN
79.53 kN
L.L. B4 37.50 kN
End shear of B2 on C1 , D.L. 77 . 39 2 53 . 79 = kN
L.L. 75 . 18 2 5 . 37 = kN
Total D.L. on C1 O.W. 12 . 21 4 24 55 . 0 4 . 0 = kN
B1 + B2 +B3 56 . 104 23 . 54 77 . 39 56 . 10 = + + kN
Floor above 343.00 kN
Sum 568.68 kN
Total L.L. on C1 B1 + B2 +B3 5 . 62 75 . 43 75 . 18 0 = + + kN
Floor above 129.00 kN
Sum 191.50 kN
So the factored axial load on the lower column is
55 . 962 5 . 191 6 . 1 68 . 468 4 . 1 = + kN
Factored fixed end moment bending about the major axis (by Beam B3 alone):
( ) 6 . 121 5 5 . 17 6 . 1 69 . 21 4 . 1
12
1
2
= + =
e
M kNm
Factored fixed end moment bending about the minor axis by Beam B2:
56
24 . 95 6 5 . 37
8
1
6 . 1 6 85 . 47
8
1
68 . 31
12
1
4 . 1
2
=

.

\

+

.

\

+ =
eb
M kNm
Factored fixed end moment bending about the minor axis by Beam B1:
04 . 7 4 12 . 21
12
1
0 . 1
2
=

.

\

=
eb
M kNm
So the unbalanced fixed moment bending about the minor axis is
2 . 88 04 . 7 24 . 95 = kNm
The moment of inertia of the column section about the major and minor axes
are 0072 . 0
12
6 . 0 4 . 0
3
=
=
cx
I m
4
, 0032 . 0
12
4 . 0 6 . 0
3
=
=
cy
I m
4
The stiffnesses of the upper and lower columns about the major axis are :
E
E
L
EI
K
u
cx
ux
0096 . 0
3
0072 . 0 4 4
=
= =
E
E
L
EI
K
L
cx
Lx
0072 . 0
4
0072 . 0 4 4
=
= =
The stiffnesses of the upper and lower columns about the minor axis are :
E
E
L
EI
K
u
cy
uy
004267 . 0
3
0032 . 0 4
4
=
= =
E
E
L
EI
K
L
cy
Ly
0032 . 0
4
0032 . 0 4
4
=
= =
The moment of inertia of the beams B1, B2 and B3 are
005546 . 0
12
55 . 0 4 . 0
3
=
m
4
The stiffness of the beams B1, B2 and B3 are respectively
E
E
005546 . 0
4
05546 . 0 4
=
; E
E
003697 . 0
6
05546 . 0 4
=
; and
E
E
004437 . 0
5
05546 . 0 4
=
Distributed moment on the lower column about the major axis is
E E E
E
K K K
K M
M
b Lx ux
Lx ex
ux
004437 . 0 5 . 0 0096 . 0 0072 . 0
0072 . 0 6 . 121
5 . 0
3
+ +
=
+ +
=
= 46.03 kNm
Distributed moment on the lower column about the minor axis is
( ) ( )E E E
E
K K K K
K M
M
b b Ly uy
Ly ey
uy
003697 . 0 005546 . 0 5 . 0 004267 . 0 0032 . 0
0032 . 0 2 . 88
5 . 0
2 1
+ + +
=
+ + +
=
57
= 23.35 kNm
So the lower column should be checked for the factored axial load of
962.55kN, factored moment of 46.03 kNm about the major axis and factored
moment of 23.35 kNm about the minor axis.
5.2.2 Minimum Eccentricity
A column section should be designed for the minimum eccentricity equal to
the lesser of 20 mm and 0.05 times the overall dimension of the column in the
plane of bending under consideration. Taking the example in 5.2.1, the
minimum eccentricity about the major axis is 30 mm as
20 30 600 05 . 0 > = mm and that of the minor axis is 20 400 05 . 0 = mm. So
the minimum eccentric moment to be designed for about the major and minor
axes are 88 . 28 03 . 0 55 . 962 = kNm and 25 . 19 02 . 0 55 . 962 = kNm. As they
are both less than the design moment of 46.03 kNm and 23.35 kNm, they can
be ignored.
5.2.3 Check for Slenderness
In addition to the factored load and moment obtained in 5.2.1, it is required by
Cl. 6.2.1.2(b) to design for an additional moment
add
M if the column is
found to be slender by Cl. 6.2.1.1. The arrival of
add
M is an eccentric
moment created by the working axial load N multiplied by a predetermined
lateral deflection
u
a in the column as indicated by the following equations of
the Code.
u add
Na M = (Ceqn 6.52)
Kh a
a u
= (Ceqn 6.48)
2
2000
1

.

\

=
b
l
e
a
(Ceqn 6.51)
1
=
bal uz
uz
N N
N N
K (conservatively taken as 1) (Ceqn 6.49)
sc y nc cu uz
A f A f N 87 . 0 45 . 0 + = (Ceqn 6.50)
bd f N
cu bal
25 . 0 =
Final design moment
t
M will be the greatest of
(1)
2
M , the greater initial end moment due to design ultimate load;
58
(2)
add i
M M + where
2 2 1
4 . 0 6 . 0 4 . 0 M M M M
i
+ = (with
2
M as
positive and
1
M negative.)
(3) 2 /
1 add
M M +
in which
1
M is the smaller initial end moment due to design ultimate
load.
(4)
min
e N (discussed in 5.2.2)
where the relationship between
1
M ,
2
M ,
add
M and the arrival of the
critical combination of design moments due to
add
M are illustrated in Figure
6.16 of the Code.
In addition to the above, the followings should be noted in the application of
t
M as the enveloping moment of the 4 cases described in the previous
paragraph :
(i) In case of biaxial bending (moment significant in two directions),
t
M
should be applied separately for the major and minor directions with
b replacing h for bending in the minor direction;
(ii) In case of uniaxial bending about the major axis where 20 / h l
e
and
b h 3 < ,
t
M should be applied only in the major axis;
(iii) In case of uniaxial bending about the major axis only where either
20 / h l
e
or b h 3 < is not satisfied, the column should be designed
as biaxially bent, with zero
i
M in the minor axis;
(iv) In case of uniaxial bending about the minor axis,
add
M obviously be
applied only in the minor axis only.
Worked Example 5.3 :
A slender braced column of grade 35, cross sections
400 = b , 500 = h
8 = =
ey ex
l l m, 1500 = N kN
(i) About the major axis only, the greater and
smaller bending moments due to ultimate load
are 153 kNm and 96 kNm respectively.
As 20 16 / = h l
ex
; 1200 3 500 = < = b h
So needs only checked for bending in the major axis.
96
1
= M kNm; 153
2
= M kNm
2
M
1
M
Illustration of
1
M and
2
M in
column due to ultimate load
59
Taken 1 = K in the initial trial.
2 . 0
400
8000
2000
1
2000
1
2 2
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
b
l
e
a
1 . 0 5 . 0 1 2 . 0 = = = Kh a
a u
150 1 . 0 1500 = = =
u add
Na M
The design moment will be the greatest of :
(1) 153
2
= M
(2) ( ) 4 . 53 153 6 . 0 96 4 . 0 6 . 0 4 . 0
2 1
= + = + = M M M
i
2 . 73 4 . 0
2
= < M
(3) 171 2 / 150 96 2 /
1
= + = +
add
M M
(4) 5 . 37 025 . 0 1500
min
= = e N as 20 25 500 05 . 0
min
> = = e
So the greatest design moment is case (3) 171 2 /
1
= +
add
M M
Thus the section need only be checked for uniaxial bending with
1500 = N kN and 171 =
x
M kNm bending about the major axis.
(ii) Biaxial Bending, if in addition to the moments bending about the major
axis as in (i), there are also moments of 72
1
= M kNm; 127
2
= M kNm
bending in the minor axis. By Cl. 6.1.2.3(f),
add
M about the major axis
will be revised as follows :
Bending about the major axis :
128 . 0
500
8000
2000
1
2000
1
2 2
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
l
e
a
064 . 0 5 . 0 1 128 . 0 = = = Kh a
a u
96 064 . 0 1500 = = =
u add
Na M kNm.
Thus item (3) which is 144 2 / 96 96 2 /
1
= + = +
add
M M is reduced and
case (1) where 153
2
= M controls.
Bending about the minor axis :
72
1
= M kNm; 127
2
= M kNm
Taken 1 = K in the initial trial.
2 . 0
400
8000
2000
1
2000
1
2 2
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
b
l
e
a
60
1 . 0 5 . 0 1 2 . 0 = = = Kh a
a u
150 1 . 0 1500 = = =
u add
Na M
The design moment will be the greatest of :
(1) 127
2
= M
(2) ( ) 4 . 47 127 6 . 0 72 4 . 0 6 . 0 4 . 0
2 1
= + = + = M M M
i
8 . 50 4 . 0
2
= < M
(3) 147 2 / 150 72 2 /
1
= + = +
add
M M
(4) 30 02 . 0 1500
min
= = e N as 20 400 05 . 0
min
= = e
So the greatest design moment is case (3) 147 2 /
1
= +
add
M M
Thus the ultimate design moment about the major axis is 153 kNm and
that about the minor axis is 147 kNm.
5.3 Sectional Design
Generally the sectional design of column utilizes both the strengths of
concrete and steel in the column section in accordance with stress strain
relationship of concrete and steel in Figure 3.8 and 3.9 of the Code
respectively. Alternatively, the simplified stress block for concrete in Figure
6.1 can also be used.
5.3.1 Design for Axial Load only
(Ceqn 6.55) of the Code can be used which is
y sc cu
f A f N 75 . 0 4 . 0 + = . The equation is particularly useful for a column
which cannot be subject to significant moments in such case as the column
supporting a rigid structure or very deep beams. There is a reduction of
approximately 10% in the axial load carrying capacity as compared with the
normal value of
y sc cu
f A f 87 . 0 45 . 0 + which accounts for the eccentricity of
h 05 . 0 .
Furthermore, (Ceqn 6.56) reading
y sc cu
f A f N 67 . 0 35 . 0 + = which is
applicable to columns supporting an approximately symmetrical arrangement
of beams where (i) beams are designed for u.d.l.; and (ii) the beam spans do
61
not differ by more than 15% of the longer. The further reduction is to account
for extra moment arising from asymmetrical loading (by live load generally).
5.3.2 Design for Axial Load and Biaxial Bending :
The general section design of a column is account for the axial loads and
biaxial bending moments acting on the section. Nevertheless, the Code has
reduced biaxial bending into uniaxial bending in design. The procedure for
determination of the design moment, either '
x
M or '
y
M bending about the
major or minor axes is as follows :
(i) Determine ' b and ' h as defined by the
diagram. In case there are more than one
row of bars, ' b and ' h can be measured to
the centre of the group of bars.
(ii) Compare
' h
M
x
and
' b
M
y
.
If
' ' b
M
h
M
y
x
, use
y x x
M
b
h
M M
'
'
' + =
If
' ' b
M
h
M
y
x
< , use
x y y
M
h
b
M M
'
'
' + =
where is to be determined from Table 6.14 of the Code under the
predetermined
bh
N
;
(iii) The '
x
M or '
y
M will be used for design by treating the section as
either (a) resisting axial load N and moment '
x
M bending about
major axis; or (b) resisting axial load N and moment '
y
M bending
about minor axis as appropriate.
5.3.3 Concrete Stress Strain Curve and Design Charts
The stress strain curve for column section design is in accordance with Figure
3.8 of the Code. It should be noted that the Concrete Code Handbook has
recommended to shift
0
to
( )
c
m cu
E
f / 34 . 1
in para. 3.1.4. With the
recommended shifting, the detailed design formulae and design charts have
been formulated and enclosed in Appendix F. Apart from the derivation for the
normal 4bar column, the derivation in Appendix F has also included steel
' h h
' b
b
62
reinforcements uniformly distributed along the side of the column idealized as
continuum of reinforcements with symbol
sh
A . The new inclusion has
allowed more accurate determination of load carrying capacity of column with
many bars along the side as illustrated in Figure 5.3 which is particularly
useful for columns of large cross sections. The user can still choose to lump
the side reinforcements into the 4 corner bars, with correction to the effective
depth as in conventional design by setting 0 =
sh
A in the derived formulae.
Figure 5.4 shows the difference between the 2 idealization. It can be seen that
the continuum idealization is more economical generally except at the peak
moment portion where the 4 bar column idealization shows slight
underdesign.
Comparison of Load Carrying Capacities of Rectangular Shear Walls with Uniform Vertical
Reinforcements Idealized as 4 bar column with d/h = 0.75 and Continuum to the Structural Use of
Concrete 2004 Concrete Grade 35
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel as 4 bar column
0.4% steel as continuum
1% steel as 4 bar column
1% steel as continuum
4% steel as 4 bar column
4% steel as continuum
8% steel as 4 bar column
8% steel as continuum
idealized as
continuum of steel
strip with area
equivalent to the row
of bars
Figure 5.3 Idealization of steel reinforcements in large column
Figure 5.4 Comparison between Continuum and 4bar column Idealization
63
Worked Example 5.4 :
Consider a column of sectional size 400 = b mm, 600 = h mm under an axial
load 4000 = N kN, 250 =
x
M kNm, 150 =
y
M kNm,
Assume a 4bar column, 540 20 40 600 ' = = h mm;
340 20 40 400 ' = = b mm;
476 . 0
600 400 35
4000000
=
=
bh f
N
cu
; 446 . 0 = from Table 6.14;
441 . 0
'
463 . 0
'
= > =
b
M
h
M
y
x
;
356 150
340
540
446 . 0 250
'
'
' = + = + =
y x x
M
b
h
M M kNm
67 . 16 =
bh
N
; 47 . 2
600 400
10 356
2
6
2
=
=
bh
M
; 9 . 0
600
540
= =
h
d
Use Chart F10 in Appendix F, 1.8% steel is approximated which amounts to
4320 018 . 0 600 400 = mm
2
, or 6T32 (Steel provided is 4826mm
2
)
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
The section design is as shown in Figure 5.5, with two additional T20 bars to
avoid wide bar spacing.
64
5.3.4 Alternatively, the design of reinforcements can be based on formulae derived
in Appendix F. However, as the algebraic manipulations are complicated (may
involve solution of 4
th
polynomial equations) and cases are many, the
approach may only be practical by computer methods. Nevertheless, spread
sheets have been prepared and 2 samples are enclosed at the end of Appendix
F.
5.3.5 Direct sectional analysis to Biaxial Bending without the necessity of
converting the biaxial bending problem into a uniaxial bending problem.
Though the Code has provision for converting the biaxial bending problem
into a uniaxial bending problem by (i) searching for the controlling bending
axis and (ii) aggravate the moments about the controlling bending axis as
appropriate to account for effects of bending in the noncontrolling axis, a
designer can actually solve the biaxial bending problem by locating the
orientation of the extent of the neutral axis (which generally does not align
with the resultant moment except for circular section) by balancing axial load
and the bending in two directions. Theoretically, by balancing axial load and
the 2 bending moments, 3 equations can be obtained for solution of the neutral
axis orientation, neutral axis depth and the required reinforcement. However,
the solution process will be very tedious and not possible for irregular section.
Practical approach by computer method may be based on trial and error
method. If the reinforcements are predetermined, various combinations of the
neutral axis depth and orientation will be presumed for calculation of axial
load and moment carrying capacities of the section. The section will be
considered adequate if a combination of neutral axis depth and orientation
produce axial load and moments of resistance in excess of the applied loads
and moments. Such approach can be applied to section of irregular shape.
T32
Figure 5.5 Design Chart and Worked Rebar details for Example 5.4
Extra T20
65
Figure 5.6 illustrates the method of solution.
5.4 Detailing Requirements for longitudinal bars in columns (generally by Cl. 9.5
and Cl. 9.9.2.1(a) of the Code, the ductility requirements are marked with D)
(i) Minimum longitudinal steel based on gross area of a column is 0.8%;
(ii) Maximum longitudinal steel based on gross area of a column is 4%
except at lap which can be increased to 5.2% (D);
(iii) Longitudinal bars should have a diameter > 12 mm;
(iv) The minimum number of longitudinal bars should be four in rectangular
columns and six in circular columns. In columns having a polygonal
crosssection, at least one bar be placed at each corner;
(v) In any row of bars, the smallest bar diameter used shall not be less than
2/3 of the largest bar diameter used (D);
(vi) At laps, the sum of reinforcement sizes in a particular layer should not
exceed 40% of the breadth at that section;
(vii) Where the columns bars pass through the beams at column beam joints,
the bar diameter should be limited to
y
cu
f
f h 8 . 0 2 . 3 25 . 1
as per
(Ceqn 9.7) of the Code where h is the beam depth. For grade 35
concrete and based on high yield bar, the limiting bar diameter is simply
strain profile
across section
concrete
stress
profile
Strain profile on section
Neutral axis
The total sectional resistance of the section
under the stress strain profile resists the
applied axial loads and moments
Figure 5.6 General Biaxial Bending on irregular section
66
h 046 . 0 , i.e. if beam depth is 600 mm, 6 . 27 implying maximum
bar size is 25 mm. The factor 1.25 can be removed if the column is not
intended to form a plastic hinge (D);
(viii) Where column bars terminate in a beamcolumn joints or joints between
columns and foundation members where a plastic hinge in the column
could be formed, the anchorage of the column bars into the joint region
should commence at 1/2 of the depth of the beam/foundation member or
8 times the bar diameter from the face at which the bars enter the beam
or the foundation member (D) and the bend should be inwards;
(ix) No column bar should be terminated in a joint area without a horizontal
90
o
standard hook or an equivalent device as near as practically possible
to the far side of the beam and not closer than 3/4 of the depth of the
beam to the face of entry (D);
(x) Minimum clear spacing of bars should be the minimum of bar diameter,
20 mm and aggregate size + 5 mm;
5.5 Detailing Requirements for transverse reinforcements in columns (generally by
Cl. 9.5.2 and Cl. 9.9.2.1(a) of the Code, the ductility requirements are marked
with D. Items (i) to (iv) below are requirements for columns not within
critical regions as defined in item (v) :
(i) Diameter of transverse reinforcements > the greater of 6 mm and 1/4 of
longitudinal bar diameter;
(ii) The spacing of transverse reinforcement shall not exceed 12 times the
diameter of the smallest longitudinal bar;
(iii) For rectangular or polygonal columns, every corner bar and each
alternate bar (or bundle) shall be laterally supported by a link passing
>0.75D
Beam or foundation element
>0.5D
or 8
D
Anchorage should
commence at this point
Figure 5.7 Column Bar anchorage requirements as per 5.4 (viii) and (ix)
67
around the bar and having an included angle < 135
o
. No bar within a
compression zone be further than 150 mm from a restrained bar. Links be
adequately anchored by hooks through angles < 135
o
;
(iv) For circular columns, loops or spiral reinforcement satisfying (i) to (iii)
should be provided. Loops (circular links) should be anchored with a
mechanical connection or a welded lap by terminating each end with a
135
o
hook bent around a longitudinal bar after overlapping the other end
of the loop by a minimum length. Spiral should be anchored either by
welding to the previous turn or by terminating each end with a 135
o
hook
bent around a longitudinal bar and at not more than 25 mm from the
previous turn. Loops and spirals should not be anchored by straight
lapping, which causes spalling of the concrete cover;
(v) Transverse reinforcements in Critical regions within columns as
defined in Figure 5.8 (Re Cl. 9.9.2.2 of the Code) shall have additional
requirements as for the maximum spacing of transverse reinforcements
as :
(a) 1/4 of the least lateral column dimension (D) in case of rectangular
or polygonal column and 1/4 of the diameter in case of a circular
column;
(b) 6 times the diameter of the longitudinal bar to be restrained (D);
(c) 200 mm.
68
b
h
m
max
xM
max
M
Normal
transverse
reinforceme
H, Critical regions
with enhanced
transverse
reinforcements
H, Critical regions
with enhanced
transverse
reinforcements
Height of critical
region , h, depends on
N/A
g
f
cu
ratio :
(a) 0<N/A
g
f
cu
0.1,
x = 0.85
H > h
m
H > h or D
(b) 0.1 <N/A
g
f
cu
0.3,
x = 0.75
H > h
m
H > 1.5h or 1.5D
(c) 0.3 <N/A
g
f
cu
0.6,
x = 0.65
H > h
m
H > 2h or 2D
D
h
Figure 5.8 Critical Regions (Potential Plastic Hinge Regions) in Columns
69
6.0 ColumnBeam Joints
6.1 General
The design criteria of a columnbeam joint comprise (i) performance not inferior
than the adjoining members at serviceability limit state; and (ii) sufficient
strength to resist the worst load combination at ultimate limit state. To be
specific, the aim of design comprise minimization of (a) the risk of concrete
cracking and (b) spalling near the beamcolumn interface, and (c) checking
provisions against diagonal crushing or splitting of the joint and where necessary,
providing vertical and horizontal shear links within the joint and confinement to
the longitudinal reinforcements of the columns adjacent to the joint.
6.2 The phenomenon of diagonal splitting of joint
Diagonal crushing or splitting of columnbeam joints is resulted from shears
and unbalancing moment acting on the joints as illustrated in Figure 6.1(a) and
6.1(b) indicating typical loading arrangement acting on the joint. Figure 6.1(a)
shows a large horizontal shear from the right, reversing the hogging moment on
the beam on the left side of the joint.
BR
C
BL
C
BL
T
BR
T
V
c1
V
c2
Potential failure
surface (tension)
V
b1
V
b2
hogging moment
in beam
sagging moment
in beam
Figure 6.1(a) Phenomenon of Diagonal Joint Splitting by moments of opposite
signs on both sides of joint
70
The unbalanced forces due to unbalanced flexural stresses by the adjoining
beams on both sides of the joint tend tear the joint off with a potential tension
failure surface, producing diagonal splitting. Though generally there are
shears in the column usually tend to act oppositely, the effects are usually less
dominant than that of moment and therefore can be ignored. Reinforcements in
form of links may therefore be necessary if the concrete alone is considered
inadequate to resist the diagonal splitting.
6.3 Design procedures :
(i) Work out the total nominal horizontal shear force across the joint
jh
V in
X and Y directions generally.
jh
V should be worked out by considering
equilibrium of the joint. Generally the load due to unbalanced forces by
the beams on both sides of the joints need be considered. The horizontal
shears by the columns can generally be ignored as they are comparatively
small and counteract the effects by bending. By the load capacity concept,
the reinforcing bars in the beam will be assumed to have steel stress equal
to 125% yield strength of steel if such assumption will lead to the most
adverse conditions. Figure 6.2(a) and 6.2(b) indicates how to determine
jh
V by this criterion.
BL BR
T T >
BR
C
BL
C
BR
T
BL
T
V
c1
V
c2
Potential failure
surface (tension)
V
b1
V
b2
hogging moment
in beam
hogging moment
in beam
Figure 6.1(b) Phenomenon of Diagonal Joint Splitting by moments of same sign
on both sides of joint
71
(ii) With the
jh
V determined, the nominal shear stress is determined by
(Ceqn 6.71) in the Code.
c j
jh
jh
h b
V
v =
where
c
h is the overall depth of the column in the direction of shear
c j
b b = or
c w j
h b b 5 . 0 + = whichever is the smaller when
w c
b b
w j
b b = or
c c j
h b b 5 . 0 + = whichever is the smaller when
w c
b b
where
c
b is the width of column and
w
b is the width of the beam.
The vector sum of
jh
v for both the X and Y directions should be worked
out and check that it does not exceed
cu
f 25 . 0 .
cu jhy jhx
f v v 25 . 0
2 2
+
sL y BL
A f T 25 . 1 =
sagging moment
in beam
hogging moment
in beam
BR
C
BL BL
T C =
BL
T
BR
T
Potential failure
surface (tension)
sR y BR
A f T 25 . 1 =
( )
sR sL y BR BL jh
A A f T T V + = + = 25 . 1
L
z
hogging moment
in beam M
L
hogging moment
in beam
BR
C
BL
C
BL
T
sR y BR
A f T 25 . 1 =
Potential failure
surface (tension)
BL BR
T T >
L y
L
BL
z f
M
T
87 . 0
=
z f
M
A f T T V
y
L
sR y BR BL jh
87 . 0
25 . 1 + = + =
Figure 6.2(a) Calculation of
jh
V , opposite sign beam moments on both sides
Figure 6.2(b) Calculation of
jh
V , same sign beam moments on both sides
72
(iii) Horizontal reinforcements based on (Ceqn 6.72) reading


.

\

=
cu g
j
yh
jh
jh
f A
N C
f
V
A
*
5 . 0
87 . 0
*
should be worked out in both directions and
be provided in the joint as horizontal links. It may be more convenient to
use close links which can serve as horizontal reinforcements in both
directions and confinements as required by (v). If the numerical values
arrived by (Ceqn 6.72) becomes negative, no horizontal shear
reinforcements will be required;
(iv) Similarly vertical reinforcements based on (Ceqn 6.73) reading
( )
yv
j jh c b
jh
f
N C V h h
A
87 . 0
* * / 4 . 0
= should be worked out in both directions
and be provided in the joint as horizontal links. It may be more convenient
to use close links which can serve as horizontal reinforcements in both
directions. If the numerical values arrived by (Ceqn 6.73) becomes
negative, no horizontal shear reinforcements will be required;
(v) Notwithstanding the provisions arrived at in (iii) for the horizontal
reinforcements, confinements in form of closed links within the joint
should be provided as :
(d) Not less than that in the column shaft as required by Cl. 9.5.2 of the
Code, i.e. Section 5.5 (i) to (iv) of this Manual if the joint has a free
face in one of its four faces;
(e) Reduced by half to that provisions required in (a) if the joint is
connected to beams in all its 4 faces;
(f) Link spacing 10 (diameter of smallest column bar) and 200 mm.
6.4 Worked Example 6.1:
Consider the column beam joints with columns and beams adjoining as
indicated in Figure 6.3 in the Xdirection and Ydirections. Concrete grade is 40.
73
(i) Check nominal shear stress :
Xdirection
The moments on the left and right beams are of opposite sign. So Figure
6.2(a) is applicable. The top steel provided on the left beam is 3T32,
with 2413
1
=
st
A mm
2
whilst the bottom steel provided on the right
beam is 4T20 with 1257
1
=
st
A mm
2
.
6000 * = N kN
800
6000 * = N kN
Beam moment 300 kNm
(hogging)
Beam moment 550 kNm
(hogging)
Column size 900 800
Beam size 700 500
(effective depth 630)
Beam size 700 500
(effective depth 630)
Column size 900 800
Figure 6.3 Design Example for Column Beam Joint
900
Xdirection
900
Beam moment 300 kNm
(hogging)
Beam moment 550 kNm
(hogging)
Beam size 700 500
(effective depth 630)
Column size 900 800
800
Ydirection
Beam size 700 500
(effective depth 630)
74
1445 2413 460 25 . 1 = =
BR
T kN;
BR BR
T C =
723 1257 460 25 . 1 = =
BL
T kN;
BL BL
T C =
So the total shear is 2168 = + = + =
BL BR BR BL jx
C T C T V kN
In the Xdirection 800 =
c
h
As 500 900 = > =
w c
b b ,the effective joint width is the smaller of
900 =
c
b and 1300 800 5 . 0 900 5 . 0 = + = +
c w
h b , so 900 =
j
b
So 01 . 3
800 900
2168000
=
= =
c j
jx
jx
h b
V
v MPa
Ydirection
The moments on the left and right beams are of equal sign. So Figure
6.2(b) is applicable. As the moment on the right beam is higher, the
potential plastic hinge will be formed on the right beam.
1445 2413 460 25 . 1 = =
BR
T kN;
BR BR
T C =
BL
T is to be determined by conventional beam design method.
512 . 1
2
=
bd
M
MPa, 948 . 0 =
d
z
, 49 . 1254 =
sL
A mm
2
;
05 . 502 87 . 0 = =
sL y BL
A f T kN
So 943 502 1445 = =
jy
V kN
In the Ydirection 900 =
c
h , similarly, 900 =
j
b ,
L
z
BR
C
BL
C
BL
T
BL BR
T T >
BR
C
BL
C
BL
T
BR
T
75
So 31 . 1
800 900
943000
=
= =
c j
jy
jy
h b
V
v MPa.
Combining X and Y direction, the total shear stress is
10 25 . 0 28 . 3 31 . 1 01 . 3
2 2 2 2
= < = + = + =
cu jy jx jh
f v v v MPa.
(ii) To calculate the horizontal joint reinforcement by (Ceqn 6.72 of the
Code), reading


.

\

=
cu g
j
yh
jh
jh
f A
N C
f
V
A
*
5 . 0
87 . 0
*
where
jy jx
jh
j
V V
V
C
+
=
Xdirection
697 . 0
943 2168
2168
=
+
=
+
=
jy jx
jx
jx
V V
V
C

.

\

=


.

\

=
40 800 900
5000000 697 . 0
5 . 0
460 87 . 0
2168000
*
5 . 0
87 . 0
*
cu g
jx
yh
jhx
jhx
f A
N C
f
V
A
1922 = mm
2
Ydirection
303 . 0
943 2168
943
=
+
=
+
=
jy jx
jy
jx
V V
V
y C

.

\

=


.

\

=
40 800 900
5000000 303 . 0
5 . 0
460 87 . 0
943000
*
5 . 0
87 . 0
*
cu g
jx
yh
jhx
jhx
f A
N C
f
V
A
1029 = mm
2
Use 5T16 close stirrups (Area provided = 2011 mm
2
) which can
adequately cover shear reinforcements in both directions
(iii) To calculate the vertical joint reinforcement by (Ceqn 6.73 of the Code),
reading
( )
yh
j jh c b
jv
f
N C V h h
A
87 . 0
* * / 4 . 0
=
Xdirection
( )
( )
460 87 . 0
6000 697 . 0 2168 900 / 700 4 . 0
87 . 0
* * / 4 . 0
=
yh
j jh c b
jvx
f
N C V h h
A
8 . 8 = . So no vertical shear reinforcement is required.
Ydirection
76
( )
( )
460 87 . 0
6000 303 . 0 943 800 / 700 4 . 0
87 . 0
* * / 4 . 0
=
yh
j jh c b
jvy
f
N C V h h
A
8 . 3 = . So no vertical shear reinforcement is required.
(iv) The provision of outermost closed stirrups in the column shaft is 10 T
at 200 which is in excess of the confinement requirements. So no
additional confinement requirement.
Closed links 5T16
Figure 6.4 Details of Column Beam Joint Detail
77
7.0 Walls
7.1 Design Generally
7.1.1 Similar to column by design to resist axial loads and biaxial moments.
7.1.2 The design ultimate axial force may be calculated on the assumption that the
beams and slabs transmitting force to it are simply supported. (Re Cl. 6.2.2.2(a)
and Cl. 6.2.2.3(a) of the Code).
7.1.3 Minimum eccentricity for transverse moment design is the lesser of 20 mm or
20 / h , as similar to columns.
7.2 Categorization of Walls
Walls can be categorized into (i) slender walls; (ii) stocky walls; (iii)
reinforced concrete walls; and (iv) plain walls.
7.3 Slender Wall Section Design
7.3.1 Determination of effective height
e
l (of minor axis generally which
controls)
(i) in case of monolithic construction, same as that for column; and
(ii) in case of simply supported construction, same as that for plain wall.
7.3.2 Limits of slender ratio (Re Table 6.15 of the Code)
(i) 40 for braced wall with reinforcements < 1%;
(ii) 45 for braced wall with reinforcements 1%;
(iii) 30 for unbraced wall.
7.3.3 Other than 7.3.1 and 7.3.2, reinforced concrete design is similar to that of
columns.
7.4 Stocky Wall
7.4.1 As similar to column, stocky walls are walls with slenderness ratio < 15 for
braced walls and slenderness ratio < 10 for unbraced walls;
78
7.4.2 Stocky reinforced wall may be designed for axial load
w
n only by (Ceqn
6.59) of the Code provided that the walls support approximately symmetrical
arrangement of slabs with uniformly distributed loads and the spans on either
side do not differ by more than 15%;
sc y c cu w
A f A f n 67 . 0 35 . 0 +
7.4.3 Other than 7.4.2 and the design for deflection induced moment
add
M , design
of stocky wall is similar to slender walls.
7.5 Reinforced Concrete Walls design is similar to that of columns with
categorization into slender walls and stocky walls.
7.6 Plain Wall  Plain wall are walls the design of which is without consideration
of the presence of the reinforcements.
7.6.1 Effective height of unbraced plain wall, where
0
l is the clear height of the
wall between support, is determined by :
(a)
0
5 . 1 l l
e
= when it is supporting a floor slab spanning at right angles to it;
(b)
0
0 . 2 l l
e
= for other cases.
Effective height ratio for braced plain wall is determined by
(a)
0
75 . 0 l l
e
= when the two end supports restraint movements and rotations;
(b)
0
0 . 2 l l
e
= when one end support restraint movements and rotations and
the other is free;
(c)
0
l l
e
= when the two end supports restraint movements only;
(b)
0
5 . 2 l l
e
= when one end support restraint movements only and the other
is free;
7.6.2 The load carrying capacity of plain wall will depend on concrete strength
alone. For detailed design criteria including check for concentrated load, shear,
load carrying capacities etc, refer to Cl. 6.2.2.3 of the Code.
7.7 Sectional Design
The sectional design of wall section is similar to that of column by utilizing
stress strain relationship of concrete and steel as indicated in Figure 3.8 and
3.9 of the Code. (Alternatively, the simplified stress block of concrete as
79
indicated in Figure 6.1 can also be used.)
0
should be shifted as discussed in
Section 5.3.3. Conventionally, walls with uniformly distributed reinforcements
along its length can be treated as if the steel bars on each side of the centroidal
axis are lumped into two bars each carrying half of the steel areas as shown in
Figure 7.1 and design is carried out as if it is a 4 bar column. Nevertheless, it
is suggested in the Manual that the reinforcements can be idealized as a
continuum (also as shown in Figure 7.1) which is considered as a more
realistic idealization. Derivation of the formulae for the design with
reinforcements idealized as continuum is contained in Appendix G, together
with design charts also enclosed in the Appendix.
7.8 Worked Example 7.1
Wall Section : thickness : 200 mm, plan length : 2000 mm;
Wall Height : 3.6 m,
Concrete grade : 35
Connection conditions at both ends of the wall : connected monolithically with
floor structures shallower than the wall thickness.
Check for slenderness
d = 0.75h
Shear Wall Section
Current idealization
based on 4bar
column design chart
Proposed idealization
with reinforcing bars as
continuum with areas
equal to the bars
Figure 71 Idealization of Reinforcing bars in shear wall
80
Only necessary about the minor axis.
End conditions are 2 for both ends, 85 . 0 = (by Table 6.11 of the Code);
06 . 3 6 . 3 85 . 0 = =
e
l m
Taken 1 = K (Ceqn 6.49 of the Code) in the initial trial.
117 . 0
200
3060
2000
1
2000
1
2 2
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
b
l
e
a
0234 . 0 2 . 0 1 117 . 0 = = = Kh a
a u
(i) Axial Load : 7200 = N kN, 110 =
x
M kNm at top and 110kNm at
bottom , 25 =
y
M kNm at top and 24 kNm
Final design moment
t
M about the major and minor axes will be the
greatest of :
(1)
2
M , the greater initial end moment due to design ultimate load;
(2)
add i
M M + where
2 2 1
4 . 0 6 . 0 4 . 0 M M M M
i
+ = (with
2
M as
positive and
1
M negative.)
(3) 2 /
1 add
M M + in which
1
M is the smaller initial end moment due
to design ultimate load.
(4)
min
e N (discussed in 5.2.2)
For bending about the major axis, 15 53 . 1 2000 / 3060 / < = = h l
e
, so
0 =
add
M ,
x
M will be the greatest of (1) 110
2
= M ; (2)
106 0 110 6 . 0 100 4 . 0 = + + = +
add i
M M ; (3)
100 0 100
1
= + = +
add
M M and (4) 144 02 . 0 7200
min
= = e N .
So 144 =
x
M kNm for design.
For bending about the minor axis, 15 3 . 15 200 / 3060 / > = = b l
e
,
117 . 0
200
3060
2000
1
2000
1
2 2
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
b
l
e
a
0234 . 0 2 . 0 1 117 . 0 = = = Kh a
a u
48 . 168 0234 . 0 7200 = = =
u add
Na M kNm,
y
M will be the greatest of
(1) 25
2
= M ; (2) 08 . 193 48 . 168 25 6 . 0 24 4 . 0 = + + = +
add i
M M ; (3)
48 . 192 48 . 168 24
1
= + = +
add
M M and (4)
144 02 . 0 7200
min
= = e N . So 08 . 193 =
y
M kNm for design.
So the factored axial load and moments for design are
81
7200 = N kN; 144 =
x
M kNm; 08 . 193 =
y
M kNm
165 10 25 200 ' = = b ; 1500 75 . 0 2000 ' = = h
514 . 0
2000 200 35
7200000
=
=
bh f
N
cu
; 403 . 0 = from Table 6.14;
17 . 1
'
096 . 0
'
= < =
b
M
h
M
y
x
;
46 . 199 144
1500
165
403 . 0 08 . 193
'
'
' = + = + =
x y y
M
h
b
M M kNm
18 =
bh
N
; 4933 . 2
200 2000
10 46 . 199
2
6
2
=
=
hb
M
; 825 . 0
200
165
= =
b
d
Choosing the most appropriate chart (Chart F7) in Appendix F which is
Grade 35 with d/h = 0.8, and plot 18 =
bh
N
and 494 . 2
2
=
hb
M
on it, the
estimated steel percentage is 2.5% which is
10000 2000 200 025 . 0 = mm
2
or 5000 mm
2
/m
Use T20 125 (B.F.)
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
(ii) Axial Load : 7200 = N kN, 1800 =
x
M kNm at top and 1200kNm at
bottom , 25 =
y
M kNm at top and 24 kNm
Final design moment
t
M about the major and minor axes will be the
greatest of :
(1)
2
M , the greater initial end moment due to design ultimate load;
82
(2)
add i
M M + where
2 2 1
4 . 0 6 . 0 4 . 0 M M M M
i
+ = (with
2
M as
positive and
1
M negative.)
(3) 2 /
1 add
M M + in which
1
M is the smaller initial end moment due
to design ultimate load.
(4)
min
e N (discussed in 5.2.2)
For bending about the major axis, 15 53 . 1 2000 / 3060 / < = = h l
e
, so
0 =
add
M ,
x
M will be the greatest of (1) 1800
2
= M ; (2)
1560 0 1800 6 . 0 1200 4 . 0 = + + = +
add i
M M ; (3)
1200 0 1200
1
= + = +
add
M M and (4) 144 02 . 0 7200
min
= = e N .
So 1800 =
x
M kNm for design.
For bending about the minor axis, 15 3 . 15 200 / 3060 / > = = b l
e
,
117 . 0
200
3060
2000
1
2000
1
2 2
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
b
l
e
a
0234 . 0 2 . 0 1 117 . 0 = = = Kh a
a u
48 . 168 0234 . 0 7200 = = =
u add
Na M kNm,
y
M will be the greatest of
(1) 25
2
= M ; (2) 08 . 193 48 . 168 25 6 . 0 24 4 . 0 = + + = +
add i
M M ; (3)
48 . 192 48 . 168 24
1
= + = +
add
M M and (4) 144 02 . 0 7200
min
= = e N .
So 08 . 193 =
y
M kNm for design.
So the factored axial load and moments for design are
7200 = N kN; 1800 =
x
M kNm; 08 . 193 =
y
M kNm
165 10 25 200 ' = = b ; 1500 75 . 0 2000 ' = = h
514 . 0
2000 200 35
7200000
=
=
bh f
N
cu
; 403 . 0 = from Table 6.14;
17 . 1
'
2 . 1
'
= < =
b
M
h
M
y
x
;
6 . 2415 08 . 139
165
1500
403 . 0 1800
'
'
' = + = + =
y x x
M
b
h
M M kNm
18 =
bh
N
; 0195 . 3
2000 200
10 6 . 2415
2
6
2
=
=
hb
M
;
Choosing the wall design chart for grade 35 for wall (Chart G2) in
Appendix G which is Grade 35 with d/h = 0.8, and plot 18 =
bh
N
and
83
494 . 2
2
=
hb
M
on it, the estimated steel percentage is 3% which is
12000 2000 200 03 . 0 = mm
2
or 6000 mm
2
/m
Use T20 100 (B.F.)
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 35
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Alternatively, use Column Design Chart F6 in Appendix F by treating it as
column of d/h = 0.75, the estimated steel percentage is 3.1% amounting to
12400 2000 200 031 . 0 = mm
2
or 6200 mm
2
/m which is slightly higher.
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Design can be performed by calculations with the formulae derived in
Appendices F and G. However, the calculations are too tedious and cases to try
84
are too many without the use of computer methods. Spread sheets have been
devised to tackle the problem and a sample is enclosed in Appendix G.
7.9 Detailing Requirements
There are no ductility requirements in Cl. 9.9 of the Code for walls. The
detailing requirements are summarized from Cl. 9.6 of the Code :
Vertical reinforcements for reinforced concrete walls
(i) Minimum steel percentage : 0.4%. When this reinforcement controls
the design, half of the steel area be on each side;
(ii) Maximum steel percentage : 4%;
(iii) Maximum distance between bars : the lesser of 3 times the wall
thickness and 400 mm;
Horizontal and transverse reinforcements for reinforced concrete walls
(i) Minimum horizontal reinforcements : 0.25% for 460 =
y
f MPa and
0.3% for 250 =
y
f MPa if the required vertical reinforcement does not
exceed 2%;
(ii) If the required vertical reinforcement > 2%, links be provided as :
(g) to anchor every vertical compression longitudinal bar;
(h) no bar be at a distance further than 200 mm from a restrained bar
at which a link passes round at included angle 90
o
;
(i) minimum diameter : the greater of 6 mm and 1/4 of the largest
compression bar;
(j) maximum spacing : twice the wall thickness in both the
horizontal and vertical directions. In addition, maximum spacing
not to exceed 16 times the vertical bar diameter in the vertical
direction;
200 200
bars not required to
take compression
bars required to take
compression
Figure 7.2 Anchorage by links on vertical reinforcements
85
Plain walls
If provided, minimum reinforcements : 0.25% for 460 =
y
f MPa and 0.3%
for 250 =
y
f MPa in both directions generally.
86
8.0 Corbels
8.1 General A corbel is a short cantilever projection supporting a loadbearing
member with dimensions as shown :
8.2 Basis of Design
8.2.1 According to Cl. 6.5.2 of the Code, the basis of design method of a corbel is
that it behaves as a Tieandstrut model as illustrated in Figure 8.2. The strut
action (compressive) is carried out by concrete and the tensile force at top is
carried by the top steel.
Concrete ultimate
strain 0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress block at corbel
support
neutral axis
v
x
Balancing force polygon
u
V
t
F
c
F
Tie action by
reinforcing bar
Strut action by
concrete
Applied
Load
u
V
d
v
a
Figure 8.2 StrutandTie Action of a Corbel
v
x 9 . 0
Steel strain to be
determined by linear
extrapolation
Top steel bar
Applied
Load
h 5 . 0
d
d a
v
<
Figure 8.1 Dimension requirement for a Corbel
h
87
8.2.2 In addition to the strutand tie model for the determination of the top steel bars,
shear reinforcements should be provided in form of horizontal links in the
upper two thirds of the effective depth of the corbel. The horizontal links
should not be less than one half of the steel area of the top steel.
8.2.3 Bearing pressure from the bearing pad on the corbel should be checked and
properly designed in accordance with Code of Practice for Precast Concrete
Construction 2003 Cl. 2.7.9. In short, the design ultimate bearing pressure to
ultimate loads should not exceed
(i)
cu
f 4 . 0 for dry bearing;
(ii)
cu
f 6 . 0 for bedded bearing on concrete;
(iii)
cu
f 8 . 0 for contact face of a steel bearing plate cast on the corbel with
each of the bearing width and length not exceeding 40% of the width and
length of the corbel.
The net bearing width is obtained by
stress bearing ultimate length bearing effective
load ultimate
The Precast Concrete Code has specified that the effective bearing length be
the least of
(i) physical bearing length;
(ii) one half of the physical bearing length plus 100 mm;
(iii) 600 mm.
8.3 Design Formulae for the upper steel tie
The capacity of concrete in providing lateral force as per Figure 8.2 is
bx f x b f
cu cu
405 . 0 9 . 0 45 . 0 = where b is the length of the corbel
The force in the compressive strut is therefore cos 405 . 0 bx f F
cu c
=
By the force polygon,
u cu u c
V bx f V F = = cos sin 405 . 0 sin
As
v
a
x d 45 . 0
tan
= ;
( )
2 2
45 . 0
cos
x d a
a
v
v
+
=
( )
( )
2 2
45 . 0
45 . 0
sin
x d a
x d
v
+
=
So
( )
( )
( )
( )
2 2 2 2
45 . 0
45 . 0 405 . 0
45 . 0
45 . 0
405 . 0
x d a
x d bxa f
V V
x d a
x d a
bx f
v
v cu
u u
v
v
cu
+
= =
+
88
Expanding and grouping
( ) ( ) ( ) 0 45 . 0 9 . 0 18225 . 0 2025 . 0
2 2 2
= + + + + d a V x ba f V d x ba f V
v u v cu u v cu u
Putting
v cu u
ba f V A 18225 . 0 2025 . 0 + = ; ( )
v cu u
ba f V d B 45 . 0 9 . 0 + =
( )
2 2
d a V C
v u
+ =
A
AC B B
x
2
4
2
= (Eqn 81)
By the equilibrium of force, the top steel force is
x d
a V
V T
v u
u
45 . 0
cot
= =
(Eqn 82)
The strain at the steel level is, by extrapolation of the strain diagram in Figure
8.2 is 0035 . 0
=
x
x d
x
x d
ult s
(Eqn 83)
8.4 Design Procedure :
(iii) Based on the design ultimate load and
v
a , estimate the size of the corbel
and check that the estimated dimensions comply with Figure 8.1;
(iv) Check bearing pressures;
(v) Solve the neutral axis depth x by the equation (Eqn 31).
(vi) By the assumption plane remains plane and that the linear strain at the
base of the corbel is the ultimate strain of concrete 0035 . 0 =
ult
, work
out the strain at the top steel level as
s
;
(vii) Obtain the steel stress as
s s s
E = where
6
10 205 =
s
E kPa.
However, the stress should be limited to
y
f 87 . 0 at which 002 . 0 =
s
;
(viii) Obtain the force in the top steel bar T by (Eqn 82)
(ix) Obtain the required steel area of the top steel bars
st
A by
s
st
T
A
=
(x) Check the shear stress by
( )bd
V
v
u
3 / 2
= . If
c
v v > (after enhancement as
applicable), provide shear reinforcements by
( )
y
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
87 . 0
= over the
upper d
3
2
where
sv
A is the cross sectional area of each link and
v
s
is the link spacing. However, the total shear area provided which is
89
d
s
A
v
sv
3
2
should not be less than half of the top steel area, i.e.
sl
v
sv
A d
s
A
2
1
3
2
.
8.5 Detailing Requirements
(i) Anchorage of the top reinforcing bar should (a) either be welded to a bar
of equivalent strength or diameter; or (b) bent back to form a closed loop.
In the former case, the bearing area of the load should stop short of the
transverse bar by a distance equal to the cover of the tie reinforcement.
In the latter case, the bearing area of the load should not project beyond
the straight portion of the bars forming the tension reinforcements.
(ii) Shear reinforcements be provided in the upper two thirds of the effective
depth and total area not less than half of the top bars.
Typical detailings are shown in Figure 8.3(a) and 8.3(b)
Shear reinforcements
d
3
2
c, cover to
transverse bar
d
u
V
c >
v
a
Figure 8.3(a) Typical Detailing of a Corbel
transverse bar welded to
the main tension bar of
equal diameter or
strength
Top main bar
Additional bar for shear
link anchorage
90
8.6 Worked Example 8.1
Design a corbel to support an ultimate load of 600 kN at a distance 200 mm
from a wall support, i.e. 600 =
u
V kN, 200 =
v
a mm. The load is transmitted
from a bearing pad of length 300 mm. Concrete grade is 40.
(a) The dimensions of the corbel are detailed as shown which comply with
the requirement of Cl. 6.5.1 of the Code with length of the corbel
Shear reinforcements
d
3
2
d
u
V
0 >
v
a
Figure 8.3(b) Typical Detailing of a Corbel
Top main bar
Net bearing
width
500 = h
600 =
u
V
h 5 . 0 250
450 = d
450 200 = < = d a
v
Figure 8.4 Worked Example. 8.1
91
300 = b mm.
(b) Check bearing stress :
Design ultimate bearing stress is 32 40 8 . 0 8 . 0 = =
cu
f MPa
Net bearing width is 5 . 62
32 300
10 600
3
=
mm.
So use net bearing width of bearing pad 70 mm.
(c) With the following parameters,
600 =
u
V kN; 40 =
cu
f MPa; 300 = b mm;
200 =
v
a mm 450 = d mm
substituted into (Eqn 81)
( ) ( ) ( ) 0 45 . 0 9 . 0 18225 . 0 2025 . 0
2 2 2
= + + + + d a V x ba f V d x ba f V
v u v cu u v cu u
Solving 77 . 276 = x mm.
(d) The strain at steel level
002 . 0 00219 . 0 0035 . 0
77 . 276
77 . 276 450
> =
=
ult s
x
x d
(e) The stress in the top steel is
y
f 87 . 0 as 002 . 0 >
s
;
(f) The force in the top steel is
71 . 368
77 . 276 45 . 0 440
200 600
45 . 0
=
=
=
x d
a V
T
v u
kN;
(g) Steel area required is 32 . 921
460 87 . 0
368710
=
mm
2
, provide 3T20;
(h) Check shear stress over the upper two thirds of d , i.e. 300 mm.
( )
33 . 3
600 450 3 / 2
600000
=
MPa > 5 . 0 =
c
v MPa.
So shear reinforcement
( ) ( )
12 . 2
460 87 . 0
5 . 0 33 . 3 300
87 . 0
=
=
y
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
mm
So use T12 closed links 100 (
v
sv
s
A
provided is 2.26) over the top 300
mm. Total steel area is 679 3 2 113 = mm
2
> 461 921 5 . 0 = mm
2
.
92
T12 closed links
300
450
u
V
v
a
Figure 8.5 Detailing of Worked Example 8.1
3T20
T20 anchor bar
93
9.0 Transfer Structures
9.1 According to Cl. 5.5 of the Code, transfer structures are horizontal elements
which redistribute vertical loads where there is a discontinuity between the
vertical structural elements above and below.
9.2 In the analysis of transfer structures, consideration should be given to the
followings :
(i) Construction and pouring sequence the effects of construction sequence
can be important in transfer structures due to the comparative large
stiffness of the transfer structure and sequential built up of stiffness of
structures above the transfer structure as illustrated in Figure 9.1;
(ii) Temporary and permanent loading conditions especially important when
it is planned to cast the transfer structures in two shifts and use the lower
to support the upper shift as temporary conditions, thus creating lockedin
stresses;
(iii) Varying axial shortening of elements supporting the transfer structures
which leads to redistribution of loads. The phenomenon is more serious as
the transfer structure usually possesses large flexural stiffness in
comparison with the supporting structural members, behaving somewhat
between (a) flexible floor structures on hard columns; and (b) rigid
structures (like rigid cap) on flexible columns;
(iv) Local effects of shear walls on transfer structures shear walls will stiffen
up transfer structures considerably and the effects should be taken into
account;
(v) Deflection of the transfer structures will lead to redistribution of loads of
the superstructure. Care should be taken if the structural model above the
transfer structure is analyzed separately with the assumption that the
supports offered by the transfer structures are rigid. Reexamination of the
load redistribution should be carried out if the deflections of the transfer
structures are found to be significant;
(vi) Lateral shear forces on the transfer structures though the shear is lateral,
it will nevertheless create outofplane loads in the transfer structures
which need to be taken into account;
(vii) Sidesway of the transfer structures under lateral loads and unbalanced
gravity loads should also be taken into account. The effects should be
considered if the transfer structure is analyzed as a 2D model.
94
Stage (1) :
Transfer Structure (T.S.)
just hardened
G/F
Stage (2) :
Wet concrete of G/F just
poured
G/F
Stage (3) :
G/F hardened and 1/F wet
concrete just poured
1/F
G/F
Stage (4) :
1/F hardened and 2/F wet
concrete just poured
2/F
1/F
G/F
Stage (5) :
2/F hardened and 3/F wet
concrete just poured
3/F
2/F
1/F
G/F
Stage (6) and onwards
Structure above transfer
structure continues to be
built. Final force induced on
T.S. becomes {F
n
} + {F
n1
}
+ {F
n2
} + ........... + {F
2
} +
{F
1
}
Figure 9.1 Diagrammatic illustration of the Effects of Construction Sequence of
loads induced on transfer structure
Stress/force in T.S. being
{F
1
} due to own weight of
T.S. and stiffness of the T.S.
Stress/force in T.S. being
{F
1
} + {F
2
}, {F
2
} being
force induced in transfer
structure due to weight of
G/F structure and stiffness
of the T.S. only
Stress/force in T.S. being
{F
1
} + {F
2
} + {F
3
}, {F
3
}
being force induced in
transfer structure due to
weight of 1/F structure and
stiffness of the T.S. + G/F
Stress/force in T.S. being
{F
1
} + {F
2
} + {F
3
} + {F
4
},
{F
4
} being force induced in
T.S. due to weight of 2/F
structure and stiffness of the
T.S. + G/F + 1/F
Stress/force in T.S. being
{F
1
} + {F
2
} + {F
3
} + {F
4
}
+ {F
5
}, {F
5
} being force
induced in T.S. due to
weight of 1/F structure and
and stiffness of the T.S. +
G/F + 1/F + 2/F
95
9.3 Mathematical modeling of transfer structures as 2D model (by SAFE) :
The general comments in mathematical modeling of transfer structures as 2D
model to be analyzed by computer methods are listed :
(i) The 2D model can only examine effects due to outofplane loads, i.e.
vertical loads and moments. Lateral loads have to be analyzed
separately;
(ii) It is a basic requirement that the transfer structure must be adequately
stiff so that detrimental effects due to settlements of the columns and
walls being supported on the transfer structure are tolerable. It is
therefore necessary to check such settlements. Effects of construction
sequence may be taken into account in checking;
(iii) The vertical settlement support stiffness should take the length of the
column/wall support down to level of adequate restraint against further
settlement such as pile cap level. Reference can be made to Appendix H
discussing the method of Compounding of vertical stiffness and the
underlying assumption;
(iv) Care should be taken in assigning support stiffness to the transfer
structures. It should be noted that the conventional use of either L EI / 4
or L EI / 3 have taken the basic assumption of no lateral movements at
the transfer structure level. Correction to allow for sidesway effects is
necessary, especially under unbalanced applied moments such as wind
moment. Fuller discussion and means to assess such effects are
incorporated in Appendix H;
(v) Walls which are constructed monolithically with the supporting transfer
structures may help to stiffen up the transfer structures considerably.
However, care should be taken to incorporate such stiffening effect in the
mathematical modeling of the transfer structures which is usually done
by adding a stiff beam in the mathematical model. It is not advisable to
take the full height of the wall in the estimation of the stiffening effect if
it is of many storeys as the stiffness can only be gradually built up in the
storey by storey construction so that the full stiffness can only be
effected in supporting the upper floors. Four or five storeys of walls may
be used for multistorey buildings. Furthermore, loads induced in these
stiffening structures (the stiff beams) have to be properly catered for
which should be resisted by the wall forming the stiff beams;
96
9.4 Modeling of the transfer structure as a 3dimensional mathematical model can
eliminate most of the shortcomings of 2dimensional analysis discussed in
section 9.3, including the effects of construction sequence if the software has
provisions for such effects. However, as most of these softwares may not have
the subroutines for detailed design, the designer may need to transport the
3D model into the 2D model for detailed design. For such transportation,
two approaches can be adopted :
(i) Transport the structure with the calculated displacements by the 3D software
(after omission of the inplane displacements) into the 2D software for
reanalysis and design. Only the displacements of the nodes with external loads
(applied loads and reactions) should be transported. A 2D structure will be
reformulated in the 2D software for reanalysis by which the structure is
reanalyzed by forced displacements (the transported displacements) with
recovery of the external loads (outofplane components only) and subsequently
recovery of the internal forces in the structure. Theoretically the results of the
two models should be identical if the finite element meshing and the shape
functions adopted in the 2 models are identical. However, as the finite element
meshing of the 2D model is usually finer than that of the 3D one, there are
differences incurred between the 2 models, as indicated by the differences in
recovery of nodal forces in the 2D model. The designer should check
consistencies in reactions acting on the 2 models. If large differences occur,
revealing lesser loads on the structure, the designer should review his approach;
2D model (usually finer meshing) with
nodal forces recovered by forced
displacement analysis at nodes marked
with
External nodal
force is {F
2D
}
{F
3D
} after
reanalysis
External nodal
force is {F
3D
}
3D model (usually coarser meshing)
with displacements at nodes with
external loads marked with
Figure 9.2 3D model to 2D with transportation of nodal displacements
97
(ii) Transport the outofplane components of the external loads (applied loads and
reactions) acting on the 3D model to the 2D model for further analysis. This
type of transportation is simpler and more reliable as full recovery of loads
acting on the structure is ensured. However, in the reanalysis of the 2D
structure, a fixed support has to be added on any point of the structure for
analysis as without which the structure will be unstable. Nevertheless, no effects
due to this support will be incurred by this support because the support reactions
should be zero as the transported loads from the 3D model are in equilibrium.
9.5 Structural Sectional Design and r.c. detailing
The structural sectional design and r.c. detailing of a transfer structure member
should be in accordance with the structural element it simulates, i.e. it should be
designed and detailed as a beam if simulated as a beam and be designed and
detailed as a plate structure if simulated as a plate structure. Though not so
common in Hong Kong, if simulation as strutandtie model is employed, the
sectional design and r.c. detailing should be accordingly be based on tie and strut
forces so analyzed.
The commonest structural simulation of a transfer plate structure is as an
assembly of plate bending elements analyzed by the finite element method. As
such, the analytical results comprising bending, twisting moments and
outofplane shears should be designed for. Reference to Appendix D can be
The outofplane
components of all loads
acting on the structure
including reactions be
transported
3D model with external loads obtained
by analysis
2D model with outofplane components of
external forces transported from 3D model and
reanalyzed with a fixed support at any point
Figure 9.3 3D model to 2D with transportation of nodal displacements
98
made for the principles and design approach of the plate bending elements.
99
10.0 Footings
10.1 Analysis and Design of Footing based on the assumption of rigid footing
Cl. 6.7.1 of the Code allows a footing be analyzed as a rigid footing
provided it is of sufficient rigidity with uniform or linearly varying pressures
beneath. As suggested by the Code, the critical section for design is at column
or wall face as marked in Figure 10.1.
As it is a usual practice of treating the rigid footing as a beam in the analysis
of its internal forces, the Code sets the some rules in requiring concentration of
reinforcing bars in areas with high concentration of stresses. Re Figure 10.2 :
Footing under pure axial load
creating uniform pressure beneath
Footing under eccentric load creating
linearly varying pressure beneath
critical sections for design
c c
area with 2/3 of the
required
reinforcements
area with 2/3 of the
required
reinforcements
1.5d 1.5d 1.5d 1.5d
l
c
is the greater
of l
c1
and l
c2
d is the
effective depth
l
c2
2l
c1
Plan
Figure 10.1 Assumed Reaction Pressure on Rigid Footing
Figure 10.2 Distribution of reinforcing bars when l
c
> (3c/4 + 9d/4)
100
Cl. 6.7.2.4 of the Code requires checking of shear be based on (i) section
through the whole width of the footing (as a beam); and (ii) local punching
shear check as if it is a flat slab. (Re Example 4.5 in Section 4).
10.2 Worked Example 10.1
Consider a raft footing under two column loads as shown in Figure 10.3.
Design data are as follows :
Column Loads (for each): Axial Load: D.L. 2400 kN L.L. 600 kN
Moment D.L. 300kNm L.L. 80 kNm
Overburden soil : 1.5 m deep
Footing dimensions : plan dimensions as shown, structural depth 500 mm
Concrete grade of footing : grade 35
(i) Loading Summary :
D.L. Column: = 2400 2 4800 kN;
O.W. 108 24 5 . 0 0 . 2 5 . 4 = kN
Overburden Soil = 20 5 . 1 2 5 . 4 270 kN
Total 5178 kN
Moment (bending upwards as shown in Figure 10.3)
600 300 2 = kNm
L.L. Column 1200 600 2 = kN.
Moment (bending upwards as shown in Figure 10.3)
160 80 2 = kNm
Factored load : Axial load 2 . 9169 1200 6 . 1 5178 4 . 1 = + kN
Moment 1096 160 6 . 1 600 4 . 1 = + kNm
(ii) The pressure beneath the footing is first worked out as :
D.L. 300 kNm
L.L. 80kNm for
each column
1000
1000
400
1000
400
400
1000 2500
Plan
Figure 10.3 Footing layout for Worked Example 10.1
101
At the upper end : 13 . 1384
2 5 . 4
1096 6
2 5 . 4
2 . 9169
2
=
kN/m
2
At the lower end : 47 . 653
2 5 . 4
1096 6
2 5 . 4
2 . 9169
2
=
kN/m
2
At the critical section 87 . 1091
12 / 2 5 . 4
2 . 0 1096
2 5 . 4
2 . 9169
3
=
kN/m
2
The pressures are indicated in Figure 10.3(a)
(iii) At the critical section for design as marked in Figure 10.3(a), the total
shear is due to the upward ground pressure minus the weight of the
overburden soil which is
8 . 4348 5 . 4 8 . 0 5 . 1 20 5 . 4 8 . 0
2
87 . 1091 13 . 1384
= 
.

\
 +
kN
The total bending moment is
( ) 5 . 4
3
2
8 . 0
2
87 . 1091 13 . 1384
5 . 4
2
8 . 0
5 . 1 20 87 . 1091
2
2

.

\

+
66 . 1809 = kNm
(iv) Design for bending : Moment per m width is :
15 . 402
5 . 4
66 . 1809
= kNm/m;
5 . 412 5 . 12 50 500 = = d mm
363 . 2
5 . 412 1000
10 15 . 402
2
6
2
=
= =
bd
M
K ,
By the formulae in Section 3 for Rigorous Stress Approach,
655 . 0
0
= p %; 2702 =
st
A mm
2
/m
As 125 . 1228 4 / 5 . 412 9 4 / 400 3 4 / 9 4 / 3 1250 = + = + > = d c l
c
, two
thirds of the reinforcements have to be distributed within a zone of d 5 . 1
1091.87
kN/m
2
Section for
critical design
653.47 kN/m
2
1384.13 kN/m
2
400
1000
400
400
1000 2000
Figure 10.3(a) Bearing Pressure for Worked Example 10.1
102
from the centre of column, i.e. 2375 . 1 2 5 . 412 5 . 1 = ,
Total flexural reinforcements over the entire width is
12159 5 . 4 2702 = mm
2
, 2/3 of which in 475 . 2 2 2375 . 1 = m.
So 3275 475 . 2 / 3 / 2 12159 = mm
2
/m within the critical zone. So
provide T25 150.
Other than the critical zone, reinforcements per metre width is
( ) 2001 475 . 2 5 . 4 / 3 / 12159 = mm
2
/m. Provide T25 225
(v) Design for Strip Shear : Shear per m width at the critical section is
4 . 966
5 . 4
8 . 4348
= kN
Shear stress at the critical section is
343 . 2
5 . 412 1000
966400
=
= v N/mm
2
> 614 . 0 =
c
v N/mm
2
as per Table 6.3 of
the Code.
So shear reinforcement required is
( ) ( )
32 . 4
460 87 . 0
614 . 0 343 . 2 1000
87 . 0
=
=
yv
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
mm/m width
Use T12 150 (B.Ws),
v
sv
s
A
provided is 5.02
(vi) Check punching shear by first locating the first critical perimeter for
punching shear checking. The first critical perimeter is at 1.5d from the
column face.
Factored load by the column is 4320 600 6 . 1 2400 4 . 1 = + kN
Weight of overburden soil is ( ) 64 . 75 5 . 1 20 4 . 0 6375 . 1
2 2
= kN
400+1.5d2=1.637.5
Critical perimeter for
punching shear checking
400+1.5d2=1637.5
400
1000
1000
400
1000
400
Plan
Figure 10.3(b) checking punching shear for Worked Example 10.1
103
Weight of concrete is ( ) 26 . 30 5 . 0 24 4 . 0 6375 . 1
2 2
= kN
Upthrust by ground pressure is 82 . 2731 6375 . 1
2 5 . 4
2 . 9169
2
=
kN
Net load along the critical perimeter is
08 . 1694 82 . 2731 26 . 30 64 . 75 4320 = + + kN
Effective shear force for punching shear stress checking is, by (Ceqn
6.40) of the Code :
06 . 2196
6375 . 1 08 . 1694
548 5 . 1
1 08 . 1694
5 . 1
1 = 
.

\

+ =


.

\

+ =
sp t
t
t eff
x V
M
V V kN
Punching shear stress is 81 . 0
5 . 412 4 5 . 1637
10 06 . 2196
3
=
N/mm
2
>
614 . 0 =
c
v N/mm
2
.
So shear reinforcements in form of links required. As
98 . 0 6 . 1 81 . 0 = <
c
v N/mm
2
, full reduction by
c
v can be carried out.
Total shear reinforcement is, by (Ceqn 6.44) of the Code,
( ) ( )
1323
460 87 . 0
5 . 412 5 . 1637 4 614 . 0 81 . 0
87 . 0
=
yv
c
sv
f
ud v v
A mm
2
Comparing with the shear reinforcements obtained in (v) by which the
total reinforcements within the perimeter is
( ) 12670 4 . 0 6375 . 1
2 . 0 2 . 0
201
2 2
=
mm
2
.
So shear reinforcements in (v) controls
(vii) Checking of bending and shear in the direction parallel to the line joining
the columns can be carried out similarly. However, it should be noted
that there is a net torsion acting on any section perpendicular to the line
joining the two columns due to linearly varying ground pressure. To be
on the conservative side, shear arising due to this torsion should be
checked and designed accordingly as a beam as necessary. Nevertheless,
one can raise a comment that the design has to some extent be duplicated
as checking of bending has been carried out in the perpendicular
direction. Furthermore, for full torsion to be developed for design in
accordance with (Ceqn 6.65) to (Ceqn 6.68) of the Code, the beam
should have a free length of beam stirrup width + depth to develop the
torsion (as illustrated in Figure 3.12 in Section 3) which is generally not
possible for footing of considerable width. As unlike shear where
enhancement can be adopted with shear span less than d 2 or d 5 . 1 ,
104
no similar strength enhancement is allowed in Code, though by the same
phenomenon there should be some shear strength enhancement. So full
design for bending in both ways together with torsion will likely result in
overdesign.
(viii) The flexural and shear reinforcements provisions for the direction
perpendicular to the line joining the columns is
10.3 Flexible Footing Analysis and Design
As contrast to the footing analyzed under the rigid footing assumption, the
analysis of footing under the assumption of its being a flexible structure will
also take the stiffness of the structure into account by which the deformations
of the structure itself will be analyzed. The deformations will affect the
distribution of the internal forces of the structure and the reactions which are
generally significantly different from that by rigid footing analysis. Though it
is comparatively easy to model the cap structure, it is difficult to model the
surface supports provided by the ground because :
(i) the stiffness of the ground with respect to the hardness of the subgrade
and geometry of the footing are difficult to assess;
(ii) the supports are interacting with one another instead of being
independent Winkler springs supports. However, we are currently
lacking computer softwares to solve the problem.
As the outofplane deformations and forces are most important in footing
analysis and design, flexible footings are often modeled as plate bending
Shear links T12 150 BWs in the
whole footing
T25 225(B1)
T25 150(B1)
400
1237.5 1237.5
400
400
Plan
Figure 10.3(c) Reinforcement Details for Worked Example 10.1 (in the
direction perpendicular to the line joining the two columns only)
105
elements analyzed by the finite element method discussed in 10.4 in more
details.
10.4 Analysis and Design by Computer Method
The followings are highlighted for design of footing modeled as 2D model
(idealized as assembly of plate bending elements) on continuous surface
supports:
(i) The analytical results comprise bending, twisting moments and
outofplane shears for consideration in design;
(ii) As local stresses within the footing are revealed in details, the rules
governing distribution of reinforcements in footing analyzed as a beam
need not be applied. The design at any location in the footing can be
based the calculated stresses directly. However, if peak stresses (high
stresses dropping off rapidly within short distance) occur at certain
locations which are often results of finite element analysis at points with
heavy loads or point supports, it would be reasonable to spread the
stresses over certain width for design. Nevertheless, care must be taken
of not taking widths too wide for spreading as local effects may not be
well captured.
(iii) The design against flexure should be done by the Wood Armer
peak stress
width over
which the
peak stress is
designed for
Figure 10.4 Spreading of peak stress over certain width for design
106
Equations listed in Appendix D, together with discussion of its
underlying principle. As the finite element mesh of the mathematical
model is often very fine, it is a practice of lumping the design
reinforcements of a number of nodes over certain widths and evenly
distributing the total reinforcements over the widths, as is done by the
popular software SAFE. Again, care must be taken of not taking
widths too wide for lumping as local effects may not be well
captured. The design of reinforcements by SAFE is illustrated on the
right portion of Figure 10.3;
(iv) The principle together with a worked example for design against shear
is included in Appendix D, as illustrated in Figure D5a to D5c. It
should be noted that as the finite element analysis give detailed
distribution of shear stresses on the structure, it is not necessary to
calculate shear stress as done for flat slab under empirical analysis in
accordance with the Code. The checking of shear and design of shear
reinforcements can be based directly on the shear stresses revealed by
the finite element analysis.
107
11.0 Pile Caps
11.1 Rigid Cap analysis
Cl. 6.7.3 of the Code allows a pile cap be analyzed and designed as a rigid
cap by which the cap is considered as a perfectly rigid structure so that the
supporting piles deform in a planar structure. As the deformations of the piles
are governed, the reactions by the piles can be found. If it is assumed that the
piles are identical, the reactions of the piles follow a linearly varying pattern.
Appendix I contains derivation of formulae for solution of pile loads under
rigid cap assumption.
Upon solution of the pile loads, the internal forces of the pile cap structure
can be obtained with the applied loads and reactions acting on it. The
conventional assumption is to consider the cap as a beam structure spanning
in two directions and perform analysis and design separately. It is also a
requirement under certain circumstances that some net torsions acting on the
cap structure (being idealized as a beam) need be checked. As the designer
can only obtain a total moment and shear force in any section of full cap
width, there may be underdesign against heavy local effects in areas having
heavy point loads or pile reactions. The Code (Cl. 6.7.3.3) therefore imposes
a condition that shear enhancement due to closeness of applied load and
support cannot be applied.
Cl. 6.7.3.5 of the Code requires checking of torsion based on rigid body
theory.
pile loads,
magnitude follows
linear profile
under assumption
of equal pile
stiffness
Figure 11.1 Pile load profile under rigid cap assumption
108
11.2 Worked Example 11.1 (Rigid Cap Design)
The small cap as shown in Figure 11.2 is analyzed by the rigid cap
assumption and will then undergo conventional designed as beams spanning
in two directions.
Design data : Pile cap plan dimensions : as shown
Pile cap structural depth : 2 m
Pile diameter : 2 m
Column dimension : 2 m square
Factored Load from the central column :
50000 = P kN
2000 =
x
M kNm (along Xaxis)
1000 =
y
M kNm (along Yaxis)
(i) Loads : from Columns :
50000 = P kN
2000 =
x
M kNm (along Xaxis)
1000 =
y
M kNm (along Yaxis)
O.W. of Cap 4752 24 2 9 11 = kN
Weight of overburden soil 2970 20 5 . 1 9 11 = kN
Factored load due to O.W. of Cap and soil is
( ) 10811 2970 4752 4 . 1 = + kN
So total axial load is 60811 10811 50000 = + kN;
400
Y
3000
3000
1500
1500
1500 1500 4000 4000
X
Figure 11.2 Pile cap layout of Worked Example 11.1
P1 P2 P3
P4 P5 P6
critical sections
for shear
checking
109
(ii) Analysis of pile loads assume all piles are identical
(Reference to Appendix I for analysis formulae)
x
I of pile group = 54 3 6
2
=
y
I of pile group = 32 0 2 4 2
2
= +
Pile Loads on P1 : 69 . 9903
54
3 1000
32
4 2000
6
60811
=
kN
P2: 69 . 10153
54
3 1000
32
0 2000
6
60811
=
kN
P3: 69 . 10403
54
3 1000
32
4 2000
6
60811
=
+ kN
P4: 65 . 9866
54
3 1000
32
4 2000
6
60811
=
kN
P5: 65 . 10116
54
3 1000
32
0 2000
6
60811
=
kN
P6: 65 . 10366
54
3 1000
32
4 2000
6
60811
=
+ kN
(iii) Design for bending in the Xdirection
The most critical section is at the centre line of the cap
Moment created by Piles P3 and P6 is
( ) 33 . 83081 4 65 . 10366 69 . 10403 = + kNm
Counter moment by O.W. of cap and soil is
( ) 75 . 10617 75 . 2 2 2970 4752 = + kNm
The net moment acting on the section is
58 . 76423 75 . 10617 33 . 83081 = kNm
1865 60 75 2000 = = d ; 9000 = b
441 . 2
1865 9000
10 58 . 76423
2
6
2
=
= =
bd
M
K ; % 668 . 0 = p
112070 =
st
A mm
2
, requiring T40 200 (2 layers, B1 and B3)
(iv) Design for shear in the Xdirection
By Cl. 6.7.3.2 of the Code, the critical section for shear checking is at
20% of the diameter of the pile inside the face of the pile as shown in
Figure 11.2
Total shear at the critical section is :
Upward shear by P3 and P6 is 33 . 20770 65 . 10366 69 . 10403 = + kN
Downward shear by caps O.W. and soil is
110
( ) 2 . 1474
11
1 . 2
2970 4752 = + kN
Net shear on the critical section is 13 . 19299 2 . 1474 33 . 20770 = kN
17 . 1
1865 9000
10 13 . 19299
3
=
= v N/mm
2
> 618 . 0 =
c
v N/mm
2
by Table 6.3 of
the Code.
No shear enhancement can be effected.
Shear reinforcements in form of links per metre width is
( ) ( )
379 . 1
460 87 . 0
618 . 0 17 . 1 1000
87 . 0
=
=
yv
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
Use T12 links 200 in Xdirection and 400 in Ydirection by which
v
sv
s
A
provided is 1.41.
(v) Design for bending in the Ydirection
The most critical section is at the centre line of the cap
Moment created by Piles P1, P2 and P3
( ) 17 . 91383 3 06 . 30461 3 69 . 10403 69 . 10153 69 . 9903 = = + + kNm
Counter moment by O.W. of cap and soil is
( ) 25 . 8687 25 . 2 2 2970 4752 = + kNm
The net moment acting on the section is
92 . 82695 25 . 8687 17 . 91383 = kNm
1825 40 60 75 2000 = = d ; 11000 = b
257 . 2
1825 9000
10 92 . 82695
2
6
2
=
= =
bd
M
K ; % 613 . 0 = p
122422 =
st
A mm
2
, requiring T40 200 (2 layers, B2 and B4)
(vi) Checking for shear in the Ydirection
By Cl. 6.7.3.2 of the Code, the critical section for shear checking is at
20% of the diameter of the pile inside the face of the pile as shown in
Figure 11.2
Total shear at the critical section is :
Upward shear by P1, P2 and P3 is 06 . 30461 kN
Downward shear by caps O.W. and soil is
( ) 8 . 1801
9
1 . 2
2970 4752 = + kN
111
Net shear on the critical section is 26 . 28259 8 . 1801 06 . 30461 = kN
417 . 1
1825 11000
10 26 . 28259
3
=
= v N/mm
2
< 601 . 0 =
c
v N/mm
2
by Table 6.3
of the Code.
No shear enhancement can be effected.
Shear reinforcements in form of links per metre width is
( ) ( )
038 . 2
460 87 . 0
601 . 0 417 . 1 1000
87 . 0
=
=
yv
c
v
sv
f
v v b
s
A
As
v
sv
s
A
in Ydirection is greater than that in Xdirection, so adopt this
for shear reinforcement design
Use T12 links 200 BWs by which
v
sv
s
A
provided is 2.82.
(vii) Punching shear : As the critical perimeter for punching shear checking
of the piles and column overlap with each other, punching shear cannot
be effected. So shear checking as a beam in (iv) and (vi) is adequate.
(viii) Checking for torsion : There are unbalanced torsions in any full width
sections at XY directions due to differences in the pile reactions.
However, as discussed in subsection 10.2(vii) of this Manual for
footing, it may not be necessary to design the torsion as for that for
beams. Anyhow, the net torsion is this example is small, being
12 . 1611 3 04 . 537 = kNm (537.04 is the difference in pile loads
between P3 and P4), creating torsional shear stress in the order of
097 . 0
3
2000
9000 2000
10 12 . 1611 2
3
2
2
6
min
max
2
min
=

.

\

=

.

\

=
h
h h
T
v
t
N/mm
2
. So
the torsional shear effects should be negligible.
(ix) Reinforcement details are as shown in Figure 11.3
112
11.3 StrutandTie Model
Cl. 6.7.3.1 of the Code allows pile cap be designed by the truss analogy, or
more commonly known as StrutandTie Model (S&T Model) in which a
concrete structure is divided into a series of struts and ties which are
beamlike members along which the stress are anticipated to follow. In a
S&T model, a strut is a compression member whose strength is provided by
concrete compression and a tie is a tension member whose strength is
provided by added reinforcements. In the analysis of a S&T model, the
following basic requirements must be met (Re ACI Code 2002):
(i) Equilibrium must be achieved;
(ii) The strength of a strut or a tie member must exceed the stress induced
on it;
(iii) Strut members cannot cross each other while a tie member can cross
another tie member;
(iv) The smallest angle between a tie and a strut joined at a node should not
exceed 25
o
.
The Code has specified the following requirements :
(i) Truss be of triangular shape;
(ii) Nodes be at centre of loads and reinforcements;
(iii) For widely spaced piles (pile spacing exceeding 3 times the pile
diameter), only the reinforcements within 1.5 times the pile diameter
T
4
0

2
0
0
(
T
1
,
B
1
,
B
3
)
T40200 (T2, B2,,B4)
Y
3000
3000
1500
1500
1500 1500 4000 4000
X
Figure 11.3 Reinforcement Design of Worked Example 11.1
P1 P2 P3
P4 P5 P6
Shear links
T12 200 BWs on
the whole cap
113
from the centre of pile can be considered to constitute a tension
member of the truss.
11.4 Worked Example 11.2 (StrutandTie Model)
Consider the pile cap supporting a column load of 6000kN supported by two
piles with a column of size 1m by 1 m. The dimension of the cap is as shown
in Figure 11.4, with the thickness of cap 1.5 m.
(i) Determine the dimension of the strutandtie model
Assume two layers of steel at the bottom of the cap, the centroid of
both layers is at 135 20 40 75 = + + mm from the base of the cap. So
the effective width of the tension tie is 270 2 135 = mm. The tie and
strut dimension is drawn in Figure 11.5.
(ii) A simple force polygon is drawn and the compression in the strut can
be simply worked out as
75 . 5028 6000 62 . 36 sin 2
0
= = C C kN;
6000kN
1500
2500
1000
dia.
1000
dia.
3000
3000
Figure 11.4 Pile Cap Layout of Worked Example 11.2
Plan
Elevation
114
And the tension in the bottom tie is 87 . 4035 62 . 36 cos
0
= = C T kN.
(iii) To provide the bottom tension of 4035.87 kN, the reinforcement steel
required is 10085
460 87 . 0
10 87 . 4035
87 . 0
10 87 . 4035
3 3
=
y
f
mm
2
. Use 9T40.
(iv) Check stresses in the struts :
Bottom section of the strut, the strut width at bottom is
26 . 813 62 . 36 cos 270 62 . 36 sin 1000
0 0
= + mm
As the bottom part is in tension, there is a reduction of compressive
strength of concrete to 08 . 10 35 8 . 1 8 . 1 = =
cu
f MPa as suggested
top strut
width =
596.57mm
1000
Bottom strut
width =
813.26mm
bottom tie, strength
be provided by steel
concrete
strut
36.62
o
36.62
o
2230
2230
3000 3000
4000 kN 4000 kN
6000 kN
6000kN
270
2500
1000
dia.
1000
dia.
3000 3000
Elevation
Figure 11.4 Analysis of strut and tie forces in Worked Example 11.2
115
by OAP, which is an implied value of the ultimate concrete shear
strength of
cu
f 8 . 0 as stated in BS8110.
As a conservative approach, assuming a circular section at the base
of the strut since the pile is circular, the stress at the base of the strut
is 69 . 9
4 / 813
10 75 . 5028
2
3
=
MPa < 75 . 15 45 . 0 =
cu
f MPa
11.5 Flexible Cap Analysis
A pile cap can be analyzed by treating it as a flexible structure, i.e., as in
contrast to the rigid cap assumption in which the cap is a perfectly rigid body
undergoing rigid body movement only with no deformation upon the
application of loads, the flexible pile cap structure will deform and the
5T40 B1 & 4T40 B2
1000
2500
1000
dia.
1000
dia.
3000 3000
Elevation
T16 s.s. 200
5T32 T1
Figure 11.5 Reinforcement Details of Worked Example 11.2
116
deformations will affect the distribution of internal forces of the structure and
the reactions. Analysis of the flexible cap structure will require input of the
stiffness of the structure which is comparatively easy. However, as similar to
that of footing, the stiffness of the pile cap itself which is mainly offered by
the supporting pile is often difficult, especially for the friction pile which will
interact significantly with each other through the embedding soil. Effects by
soil restraints on the piles can be considered as less significant in endbearing
piles such large diameter bored piles.
Similar to the flexible footing, as the outofplane loads and deformation are
most important in pile cap structures, most of the flexible cap structures are
modeled as plate structures and analyzed by the finite element method.
11.6 Analysis and Design by Computer Method
Analysis and design by computer method for pile cap are similar to Section
10.3 for footing. Nevertheless, as analysis by computer methods can often
account for load distribution within the pile cap structure, Cl. 6.7.3.3 of the
Code has specified the followings which are particularly applicable for pile
cap in respect of design :
(i) shear enhancement may be applied to a width of 3 for circular pile,
or pile width plus 2 least dimension of pile.
(ii) averaging of shear force shall not be based on a width > the effective
depth on either side of the centre of a pile, or as limited by the actual
dimension of the cap.
v
a
v
a
B
B
B
Area where shear
enhancement may
apply
v
a
v
a
Figure 11.6 Effective width for shear enhancement in pile cap around a pile
117
Figure 11.7 can be a guideline for effective widths adopted in
averaging peak stresses as will often be encountered in finite element
analysis for pile cap structure modeled as an assembly of plate bending
elements under point loads and point supports, as in the same manner
as that for footing as discussed in 10.4(ii) of this Manual.
Shear force diagram
Width over which
the shear force can
be averaged in the
cap for design
peak shear at
pile centre
Figure 11.7 Width in cap over which shear force at pile can be
averaged for Design
118
12.0 General Detailings
12.1 In this section, the provisions of detailing requirements are general ones
applicable to all types of structural members. They are mainly taken from
Section 8 of the Code. Requirements marked with (D) are ductility
requirements.
12.2 Minimum spacing of reinforcements clear distance is the greatest of
(i) maximum bar diameter;
(ii) maximum aggregate size (h
agg
) + 5 mm;
(iii) 20 mm.
12.3 Permissible bent radii of bars. The purpose of requiring minimum bend radii
for bars are
(i) avoid damage of bar;
(ii) avoid overstress by bearing on concrete in the bend.
Generally, the minimum bend radii are 3 for 20 mm and 4 for
20 > mm.
If the above requirement is not fulfilled, bearing pressure inside the bend
should be checked so that (Ceqn 8.1) listed as below is fulfilled


.

\

+
b
cu bt
a
f
r
F
2 1
2
where
bt
F is the tensile force in the bar; r the internal bend radius of the
bar; is the bar diameter,
b
a is centre to centre distance between bars
perpendicular to the plane of the bend and in case the bars are adjacent to the
face of the member, + =
b
a cover.
Take an example of a layer of T40 bars of centre to centre separation of 100
mm and internal bend radii of 120mm in grade 35 concrete.
503051 1257 460 87 . 0 = =
bt
F N
8 . 104
40 120
503051
=
=
r
F
bt
89 . 38
100
40
2 1
35 2
2 1
2
=

.

\

+
=


.

\

+
>
b
cu
a
f
So the (Ceqn 8.1) is not fulfilled.
12.4 Anchorage of longitudinal reinforcements
119
(i) Anchorage is derived from ultimate anchorage bond stress with concrete
assessed by the (Ceqn 8.3) of the Code.
cu bu
f f = where for high yield bars 5 . 0 = for tension and
65 . 0 = for compression. For example, 96 . 2 35 5 . 0 = =
bu
f MPa for
grade 35. For a bar of diameter , the total force up to
y
f 87 . 0
is


.

\

4
87 . 0
2
y
f . The required bond length L will then be related by
34 8 . 33
4
87 . 0
4
87 . 0
2
= = =


.

\

cu
y
cu y
f
f
L L f f which agrees
with Table 8.5 of the Code;
(ii) In addition to (i), it has been stated in 9.9.1.1(c) of the Code which
contains ductility requirements for beams that For the calculation of
anchorage length the bars must be assumed to be fully stressed. The
steel bars should therefore be carrying stress of
y
f instead of
y
f 87 . 0
in determination of anchorage (and bond) lengths, resulting in increase
of bond and anchorage lengths for beam should be increased by
% 15 1 87 . 0 / 1 = . (D)
(iii) Bearing stress on concrete by bend must be checked by (Ceqn 8.1) of the
Code if anchorage of bar requires a length more than 4 beyond the
bend Code (Re Figure 8.1 of the Code)
(iv) With the minimum support width requirements as stated in Cl. 8.4.8 of
the Code, bends of bars can start beyond the centre line of supports
offered by beams, columns and walls. By the same clause the
requirement can be considered as not confining to simply supported
beam as stated in Cl. 9.2.1.7 of the Code;
12.5 Anchorage of links Figure 8.2 of the Code displays bend of links of bend
angles from 90
o
to 180
o
. However, it should be noted that the Code requires
anchorage links in beams and columns to have bend angles not more than 135
o
as ductility requirements; (D)
120
12.6 Laps the followings should be noted
(i) If sum of reinforcement sizes in a particular layer exceeds 40% of the
breadth of the section at that level, the laps must be staggered;
(ii) Details of requirements in bar lapping are indicated in Figure 8.4 of the
Code reproduced in Figure 12.1 for ease of reference;
(iii) Compression and secondary reinforcements can be lapped in one section.
12.7 Lap Length the followings should be noted :
(i) Absolute minimum lap length is the greater of 15 and 300 mm;
(ii) Tension lap length should be at least equal to the design tension
anchorage length and be based on the diameter of the smaller bar;
(iii) Lap length be increased by a factor of 1.4 or 2.0 as indicated in Figure
8.5 of the Code.
20mm
>4
0.3l
0
l
0
50mm
4
Figure 12.1 Lapping arrangement for tension laps
Appendix A
Clause by Clause Comparison
between Code of Practice for
Structural Use of Concrete 2004
and BS8110
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A1
1.1 Scope The clause has explicitly stated that the Code applies
only to normal weight concrete, with the exclusion of
(i) no fines, aerated, lightweight aggregate concrete
etc; (ii) bridge and associated structures, precast
concrete (under the separate code for precast
concrete); and (iii) particular aspects of special types
of structures such as membranes, shells.
Pt. 1 1.1
Scope
The clause only explicitly excludes bridge structures
and structural concrete of high alumina cement.
The exclusion of CoPConc2004
should also be applied to
BS8110. In addition, BS8110
does not apply to high strength
concrete.
2.1.5
Design
working life
The clause states that the Code assumes a design
working life of 50 years. Where design working life
differs from 50 years, the recommendations should be
modified.
Nil No similar statement in
BS8110.
2.2.3.3
Response to
wind loads
The clause refers to clause 7.3.2 for the usual limits
of H/500 to lateral deflection at top of the building
and accelerations of 1in10 year return period of 10
minutes duration of 0.15m/sec
2
for residential and
0.25m/sec
2
for office. However, there is no
requirement on the interstorey drift, though the draft
steel code has a requirement of storey height/400.
Pt. 1 2.2.3.3
Response to
wind loads
Reference to specialist literature is required. In
addition Pt. 2 3.2.2.2 stipulates a limit on interstorey
drift of Storey height/500 for avoidance of damage to
nonstructural elements.
CoPConc2004 is more specific.
However, method for
determination of the
acceleration is not given in the
Code and in the HKWC2004.
2.3.2.1
Loads for
ultimate limit
state
Table 2.1 is generally reproduced from Table 2.1 of
BS8110 except that the partial factor for load due to
earth and water is 1.0 for the beneficial case.
Pt. 1
2.4.3.1.2
Partial factors
for earth
pressures
It is stated in the clause that when applying the load
factor, no distinction should be made between
adverse and beneficial loads.
1.0 in CoPConc2004 may not
be adequately conservative as
there may even be
overestimation in the
determination of the unfactored
soil load. It is even a practice to
set the load to zero in beneficial
case. ICU has raised this
comment during the comment
stage when the draft Code has
exactly the content of BS8110.
2.3.2.3 &
2.3.2.4
The clauses explicitly state that these effects need
only be considered when they are significant for
No similar clauses in BS8110 The clause in CoPConcrete2004
affirms engineers to ignore
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A2
Differential
settlement of
foundations,
creep,
shrinkage,
temperature
effects
ULS. In most other cases they need not be considered
provided ductility and rotational capacity of the
structure sufficient.
consideration of these effects in
normal cases which are the
usual practices.
2.4.3.2
Values of
m
for ULS
Table 2.2 gives
m
for ULS for concrete and rebars.
m
for rebars is 1.15, implying strength of rebars for
design remain as 0.87f
y
.
Pt. 1 2.4.4.1
Values of
m
for ULS
Table 2.2 gives
m
for ULS for concrete and rebars.
m
for rebars is 1.05, implying strength of rebars for
design remain as 0.95f
y
.
BD has been insisting on the
use of 0.87f
y
even if BS8110
was used before the
promulgation of the new
concrete code
3.1.3
Strength
grades
Table 3.1 states concrete strength grades from 20
MPa up to 100 MPa which is the range covered by
the Code.
BS8110 has not explicitly stated the concrete grades
covered by the BS, However, concrete grades
covered by the design charts in Part 3 of the Code
range from grade 25 to 50 whilst other provisions
such as v
c
(Pt. 1 Table 3.8), lap lengths (Pt. 1 Table
3.27) are up to grade 40.
The coverage of CoPConc2004
is wider.
3.1.4
Deformat
ion of
Concrete
It is stated in the 1
st
paragraph of the clause that for
ULS, creep and shrinkage are minor, and no specific
calculation are required.
Pt. 1 2.4.3.3
creep,
shrinkage and
temperature
effects
The clause states that For the ULS, these effects will
usually be minor and no specific calculations will be
necessary.
BS 8110 has included
temperature effects be a minor
one that can be ignored in
calculation.
3.1.5 Elastic
deformat
ion
Table 3.2 stipulates short term static Youngs
Modulus of concrete of various grades based on the
formula 3.46f
cu
+3.21 in MPa derived from local
research.
Pt. 1 Figure
2.1
The determination of short term static Youngs
Modulus of concrete is given by the slope gradient in
the figure which is 5.5(f
cu
/
m
).
Values in the CoPConc2004
should be used as it is based on
local research and concrete E
values are affected by
constituents which are of local
materials. Nevertheless, it
should be noted that E values in
the new Code are slightly
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A3
higher than the previous ones in
The Structural Use of
Concrete 1987 (Table 2.1).
3.1.7 &
3.1.8 Creep
and shrinkage
Though it is stated in 3.1.4 that for ULS creep and
shrinkage are minor and require no specific
calculations, these clauses contain detailed formulae
and charts for prediction of creep and shrinkage
strain. The approach is identical to the Structural
Design Manual issued by Highways Department and
the charts are extracted from BS5400:Pt 4:1990.
No account has been given for creep and shrinkage,
as stated in 2.4.3.3.
As stated in the CoPConc2004
Cl. 2.3.2.4, effects need only be
considered if they are
significant.
3.1.9
Thermal
Expansion
The linear coefficient of thermal expansion given in
the Code for normal weight concrete is 1010
6
/
o
C
whilst that stated in the Structural Design Manual
issued by Highways Department is 910
6
/
o
C in
Clause 2.4.4.
No account has been given for temperature, as stated
in 2.4.3.3.
The linear coefficient of
thermal expansion given by
both CoPConc2004 is slightly
higher than SDM and both are
independent of concrete grades.
3.1.10
Stress
strain
relationship
for design
The short term design stressstrain curve of concrete
(Fig. 3.8) follows closely the traditional one in
BS8110, though there are differences in the values of
the Youngs Moduli. Furthermore, the ultimate strain
is limited to below 0.0035 for concrete grade
exceeding C60. Nevertheless, the plastic strain,
strain beyond which stress is constant remains
identical as BS8110;
Pt. 1 2.5.3
Analysis of
section for
ULS
Pt. 1 Fig. 2.1 shows stressstrain relation of normal
weight concrete.
(i) The Youngs Moduli of
concrete stipulated in
CoPConc2004 should be
adopted as they are based
on local data and cover up
to grade 100 concrete,
together with the decrease
of ultimate strain for grade
above C60, to account for
the brittleness of high
strength concrete;
(ii) Smooth connection
between the parabolic
curve and the straight line
portion of the stressstrain
curve cannot be effected if
0
= 2.410
4
f
cu
/
m
is kept
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A4
and the Youngs moduli in
Table 3.2 of CoPConc2004
are used. For smooth
connection,
0
should be
revised 2
ult
/E where
ult
=0.67f
cu
/
m
.
3.2.7
Weldability
(of rebars)
The clause states that rebars can be welded provided
the types of steel have the required welding
properties given in acceptable standards and under
Approval and inspection by competent person.
Further provisions for welding are given in 10.4.6.
Pt. 1 3.12.8.16
7.6
There are provisions for lapping rebars by welding
in Pt. 1 3.12.8.16, and general welding requirements
in Pt. 1 7.6. Nevertheless, another BS7123 titled
Metal arc welding of steel for concrete
reinforcement requires the rebars be in compliance
with BS4449 or BS4482.
Steel complying CS2 is likely
weldable as CS2 does not differ
significantly from BS4449.
Section 4
Durability
and fire
resistance
The requirements are general. The followings are
highlighted :
(i) In 4.1.1, it is stated that requirements are based
on design working life of 50 years;
(ii) In Table 4.1 under 4.2.3.2, exposure conditions
1 to 5 are classified with headings similar to that
in Pt. 1 3.3.4 of BS8110. However, detailed
descriptions are different except the last one
abrasive;
(iii) In 4.2.7.3, control of AAR has been
incorporated from the previous PNAP 180;
(iv) Concrete covers are given in Table 4.2 for
various concrete grades and exposure
conditions;
(v) By 4.3, the user has to refer to the current fire
code for additional requirements against fire
resistance.
Pt. 1 2.2.4
Durability;
Pt. 1 2.2.6
Fire
resistance; Pt.
1 3.1.5.2
Design for
Durability
Pt. 1 3.3
Concrete
cover to
rebars
Pt. 2 Section 4
The requirements are general. However, the
followings are highlighted :
(i) 3.1.5.2 states that when cement content > 400
kg/m
3
and section thicker than 600 mm,
measures for temperature control should be
implemented;
(ii) A full description for fire resistance control is
given in Pt. 2 Section 4, outlining methods of
determining fire resistance of structural
elements and with reference to BS476 Pt. 8;
The approaches of the two
codes are quite different.
However, CoPConc2004 is
more related to local practice.
5.1.3.2
Load cases
and
3 simplified load cases for Dead + Live loads are
recommended (with DL always present): (i) all spans
loaded with LL; (ii) alternate spans loaded with LL;
Pt. 1 3.2.1.2.2 2 simplified load cases are considered sufficient for
design of spans and beams (with DL always present):
(i) all spans loaded with LL; (ii) alternate spans
CoPConc2004 more reasonable,
though not truly adequate.
Nevertheless, the current
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A5
combinations
for beams and
slabs
(iii) adjacent spans loaded with LL. The 2
nd
case is to
seek for max. sagging moment and the 3
rd
case is
likely to seek for max. hogging moment. But true
max hogging moment should also include alternate
spans from the support being loaded.
loaded with LL; softwares mostly can account
for the load case to search for
max. hogging moment at
support.
5.2 Analysis
of Structure
The clause contains definition of beam, slab
(included ribbed, waffle, oneway or twoways),
column in accordance with their geometries. The
following differences with BS8110 are highlighted :
(i) Conditions in relations to rib spacings and
flange depths for analysis of a ribbed or waffle
slab as an integral structural unit are given in
5.2.1.1(d);
(ii) By definition, the effective flange widths in T
and Lbeams included in 5.2.1.2 (a) are slightly
greater than that in BS8110 by 0.1clear rib
spacing unless for narrow flange width
controlled by rib spacing. It is also stated that
the effective flange can be adopted in structural
analysis;
(iii) Clearer definition of effective spans of beams is
also included in 5.2.1.2(a) with illustration by
diagrams, together with reduction of span
moments due to support width in 5.2.1.2(b).
In principle, the effective span of a simply
supported beam, continuous beam or cantilever
is the clear span plus the minimum of half
effective depth and half support width except
that on bearing where the span should be up to
the centre of the bearing.
(iv) Furthermore reduction in support moments due
to support width is allowed which is not
mentioned in BS8110;
(v) The definition of effective flange for T and
3.2 Analysis
of Structures
3.4 Beams
The followings are highlighted :
(i) Generally provisions are applicable to normal
strength concrete;
(ii) Consideration for highrise buildings (second
order effects) and structures such as shear walls,
transfer structures are not given;
(iii) The effective span of a simply supported beam
is the clear span plus the lesser of half effective
depth and half of support width whilst that of
continuous beam and cantilever are span
between supports (presumably midsupport
width) except at end span in case of continuous
beam and a cantilever forming the end of a
continuous beam, the effective span is the clear
span plus midsupport width should be used.
The following remarks are
made :
(i) CoPConc2004 is more
suitable for use in Hong
Kong as it cover high
strengths concrete, high
rise buildings, shears,
transfer structures.
(ii) Extended use of effective
flange in beam in
structural analysis and
moment reduced to
support shear are explicitly
stated in CoPConc2004.
(iii) Method of analysis in both
codes are oldfashioned
ones that can be performed
by hand calculations. Use
of computer methods
(extensively adopted
currently in Hong Kong)
are not mentioned.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A6
Lbeams are slightly different from BS8110
though the upper bound values are identical to
that of BS8110. So more stringent.
(vi) Moment redistribution is restricted to grade
below C70 as per 5.2.9.1;
(vii) Condition 2 in 5.2.9.1 relation to checking of
neutral axis depths of beam in adopting moment
redistribution is different from Cl. 3.2.2.1 b) of
BS8110. More stringent limit on neutral axis is
added for concrete grade higher than C40 as per
6.1.2.4(b);
(viii) Provision for second order effects with axial
loads in 5.3 is added. The provisions are quite
general except the statement second order
effects can be ignored if they are less than
10%;
(ix) Provisions for shears walls and transfer
structures are added in 5.4 and 5.5 though the
provisions are too general.
6.1
Members in
Flexure
The followings differences with BS8110 are
identified :
(i) Ultimate strains are reduced below 0.0035 for
concrete grade exceeding C60 as per Fig. 6.1;
(ii) Neutral axis depths limited to less than 0.5d for
concrete grade higher than C40 as per
6.1.2.4(b);
(iii) The limitations on neutral axis depth ratio under
redistribution of moments are further restricted
for grade > 40, as different from BS8110 which
makes not differences among concrete grades in
Cl 3.4.4.4 which if redistribution of moment
exceed 10%;
(iv) Different design formulae are used for the
higher grades (40<f
cu
70; 70<f
cu
100) concrete
Pt. 1 3.4
Beams
In the design aspects, the Code is limited to grade 40. The followings are highlighted :
(i) Provisions are made in
CoPConc2004 for concrete
grades higher than 40
including limitation of
neutral axis depths etc.
However, it is also noted
that the ultimate stress in
Fig. 6.1 remains
unchanged for high
concrete grade though the
ultimate strain is reduced;
(ii) Ultimate concrete shear
strengths increased in
CoPConc2004;
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A7
based on simplified stress blocks as per
6.1.2.4(c). Design charts similar to that BS8110
based on stressstrain relationship in figure 3.8
are not available;
(v) Table 6.2 in relation to v
c
of concrete as related
to tensile reinforcements is identical to Pt. 1
Table 3.8 of BS8110 except that applicability is
extended to C80 whereas BS8110 limits to
grade 40. The minimum amount of shear
reinforcements required is reduced to that can
provide shear resistance of 0.4(f
cu
/40)
2/3
MPa
for grade over 40 whilst that for concrete at and
below grade 40 remains to that can provide 0.4
MPa;
(vi) Partial strength factor for steel remains as 0.87f
y
in accordance with BS8110:1985 instead of
0.95f
y
as in accordance with BS8110:1997, for
both flexure and shear;
(vii) Ultimate shear strength of concrete increased to
7.0 MPa as compared 5.0 MPa in BS8110. The
other limitation of 0.8f
cu
is identical to
BS8110;
(viii) By 6.1.3.5, the minimum shear reinforcement to
cater for shear strength of 0.4 MPa is for
concrete grade below C40 (requirement by
BS8110). Above grade C40, the required shear
strength is increased by factor (f
cu
/40)
2/3
as per
Table 6.2;
(ix) By 6.1.4.2, ribbed slabs (6.1.4.2) can be
designed as twoways spanning as similar to flat
slab if they have equal structural properties in
two mutually perpendicular directions. BS8110
does not explicitly require equal structural
properties in mutually perpendicular directions
in adopting design method as flat slab (BS8110,
(iii) Due to the more stringent
limitation on neutral axis
depth for high grade
concrete in CoPConc2004,
different formulae have
been devised for x > 0.5d
for rectangular beams.
However, similar formulae
are not given for flanged
beams;
(iv) 6.1.4.2 of CoPConc2004 is
similar to BS8110 Pt. 1
3.6.2. However, it is ICUs
comment to qualify that if
ribbed slabs are to be
designed as twoways
spanning as similar to a
flat slab, it should be
qualified that the slab has
equal structural properties
in two mutually
perpendicular directions.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A8
3.6.2).
6.2
Members
axially loaded
with or
without
flexure
The followings are highlighted:
(i) The CoP contains no design charts for column
design with moments. Strictly speaking, the
design charts in BS8110 are not applicable (a)
the Youngs Moduli of concrete are different;
and (b) the ultimate strain for concrete grade >
C60 are reduced;
(ii) Due to the use of lower partial strength factor of
steel (
m
= 1.15), the factors on steel in
equations for strengths of column sections
(6.55, 6.56) are lower than BS8110 (Eqn 28,
29);
(iii) The provisions for more accurate assessment of
effective column height in accordance with
BS8110 Pt. 2 2.5 are not incorporated in the
Code.
Pt. 1 3.8
Columns
Pt 2 2.5
Effective
column height
The followings are highlighted :
(i) In the design aspects, the provisions are limited
to grade 40;
(ii) A more tedious approach for determination of
effective height of column by consideration
stiffness of the connecting beams and columns
is outlined in Pt. 2 2.5.
The followings are highlighted :
(i) The limitation of neutral
axis depth as for beam is
clearly not applicable to
columns. However, it
should be noted that
members with axial loads
creating axial stress < 0.1f
cu
may be regarded as beam in
design. Re 6.1.2.4 of
CoPConc2004.
6.3 Torsion
and
Combined
Effects
The followings are highlighted :
Table 6.17 in relation to limitation of torsional shear
stresses contains specific values for grades 25 to 80.
For values below grade 40, they are identical to
BS8110. Above grade 40, the Code provides values
for v
tmin
and v
t
for different grades up to 80, beyond
which the values remain constant whilst BS8110 set
the values to that of grade 40 for grades above 40;
Pt. 2 2.4 The followings are highlighted
(i) Table 2.3 contains specific values for v
tmin
and
v
t
up to grade 40. The values remain constant
from grade 40 thereon;
(ii)
CoPConc2004 contains more
specific values for ultimate
concrete shear stress.
6.4 Design
for robustness
The followings are highlighted :
(i) In 6.4.2 in relation to design of bridging
elements which is identical to BS8110 Pt.2
2.6.3, the words where required in buildings of
five or more storeys have been deleted. So the
Code is more stringent as consideration to loss
of elements is required for all buildings;
Pt 2 2.6.3 The followings are highlighted :
(i) Pt.2 2.6.3 in relation to design of bridging
elements applies to buildings of five or more
storeys;
CoPConcrete 2004 is more
stringent.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A9
6.6
Staircase
The followings are highlighted :
(i) 6.6.1 is in relation to design of staircase. There
is no stipulation that the staircase may include
landing;
Pt 1 3.10.1 The followings are highlighted :
(i) A note in 3.10.1 in relation to design of
staircase has stipulated that a staircase also
include a section of landing spanning in the
same direction and continuous with flight;
It is more reasonable to assume
staircase should include
landing, as in CoPConc2004.
6.7
Foundations
The following differences with BS8110 are
highlighted :
(i) In 6.7.1.1, the assumptions of uniform reaction
or linearly varying reaction of footing and pile
cap are based on use of rigid footings or pile
caps. So a prerequisite for the use of these
assumptions is stated at the end of the clause
which reads if a base or pile cap is considered
be of sufficient rigidity.;
(ii) In 6.7.3.1, a statement has been inserted that a
pile cap may be designed as rigid or flexible,
depending on the structural configuration. No
similar provision is found in BS8110;
(iii) In 6.7.3.3, 2
nd
dot, it is stated that where the
shear distribution across section has not been
considered, shear enhancement shall not be
applied. No similar provision is found in
BS8110;
(iv) In 6.7.3.3 3
rd
dot, shear enhancement in pile cap
can only be applied where due consideration
has been given to shear distribution across
section. No similar provision is found in
BS8110;
(v) In 6.7.3.3 4
th
dot, determination of effective
width of section for resisting shear is included.
No similar provision is found in BS8110;
(vi) In 6.7.3.3 5
th
dot, it is explicitly stated that no
shear reinforcement is required if v<v
c
. No
Pt 1 3.11 The followings are highlighted :
(i) In Pt 1 3.11.2.1, the assumption of uniform or
linearly varying assumption is without the
prerequisite that the footing or pile cap is
sufficiently rigid. This is not good enough as
significant errors may arise if the footing or
pile cap is flexible;
(ii) In Pt 1 3.11.4.1, there is no mention of pile cap
rigidity which affects design;
(iii) In Pt 1 3.11.4.3, there is no mention that shear
enhancement shall not be applied to where
shear distribution across section has not been
considered;
(iv) In Pt 1 3.11.4.4 b), there is no mention that
shear enhancement in pile cap shall be applied
to under the condition that shear distribution
across section has not been duly considered;
(v) There is no explicit stipulation on the limit of
effective width for checking shear;
(vi) No explicit statement that shear reinforcement
is required if v<v
c
though it is a normal practice
of not providing shear stirrups in pile caps;
(vii) No explicit statement that torsion is required to
be checked, if any.
The followings are highlighted :
(i) CoPConc2004 is generally
more reasonable as it
makes provision for the
modern analysis by treating
the pile cap as a flexible
structure by computer
methods;
(ii) Apparently CoPConc2004
forces the designer to check
torsion as if the cap or
footing is a beam under the
rigid cap (footing). This is
not too sound as the
formulae for beam are
under the assumption that
torsional cracks can be
fully developed for a beam
length of b+d. If such
length is not available
which is very common for
cap or footing structures
which are usually wide
structures. There should be
shear enhancement if the
full length cannot
mobilized, as similar to
direct stress. However, no
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A10
similar stipulation is found in BS8110;
(vii) In 6.7.3.4, the ultimate shear stress is increased
to 7 MPa, as compared with BS8110;
(viii) In 6.7.3.5, it is stated that torsion for a rigid pile
cap should be checked based on rigid body
theory and where required, torsional
reinforcements be provided.
study data is available for
torsional shear
enhancement.
6.8 Beam
Column
Joints
The Code contains detailed provisions for design of
beam column joints. No similar provision found in
BS8110.
No similar provision. Design checking on
beamcolumn shall be done if
CoPConc2004 is used.
Section 7
Serviceability
Limit States
The followings are highlighted :
(i) This section contains provisions in BS8110 Pt.
2 Section 3 and the deemtosatisfy
requirements (for deflections) in BS8110 Pt. 1
Section 3;
(ii) Limits of calculated crack widths are given in
7.2.1 for member types and exposure
conditions. The limited values are mostly
0.3mm as compared with BS8110 except water
retaining structures and prestressed concrete
(0.2 mm);
(iii) 7.2.4.1 is identical to BS8110 Pt. 2 3.8.4.1
except that the last paragraph and Table 3.2 of
BS8110 Pt. 2 3.8.4.1 have been omitted. The
omitted portion is in relation to estimated
limiting temperatures changes to avoid
cracking;
(iv) Equation 7.3 in 7.2.4.2 is different from
Equation 14 of BS8110 Pt. 2 3.8.4.2 where the
difference in temperatures is divided into 2
parts and a factor of 0.8 is employed in the
estimation of thermal strain. Also it is allowed
in the clause to take reinforcements into
Pt. 2 Section 3 The followings are highlighted :
(i) General provisions for determination of
deflections, cracks (including thermal cracking)
are given;
(ii) Some of the provisions may be applicable to
UK only;
(iii) Limit of calculated crack widths is given as
0.3mm in 3.2.4.1 as a guide.
The following remarks are
made :
(i) The omission of the last
paragraph and Table 3.2
of BS8110 Pt. 2 3.8.4.1 is
likely because of the
different climate and
material properties in
Hong Kong;
(ii) Equation 7.3 in 7.2.4.2
appears to be a refined
version of Equation 14 of
BS8110 Pt. 2 3.8.4.2. The
factor 0.8 accounts for
discount of strain due to
the long term strain.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A11
consideration;
(v) In 7.3, precamber is limited to span/250 to
compensate excessive deflection. The limit is
not given in BS8110 Pt. 2 3.2.1. Also,
deflection limit after construction for avoidance
of damage to structure is limited to span/500,
whilst BS8110 Pt. 2 3.2.1.2 specifies span/500
or span/350 in accordance with brittleness of
finishes for avoidance of damage to
nonstructural elements. In addition, 20 mm as
an absolute value is also imposed in BS8110;
(vi) In 7.3.2, limits (0.15 and 0.25 m/s
2
) on
accelerations (10 years return period on 10 min.
duration) are given as avoidance of excessive
response to wind loads whilst no numerical
values are given in BS8110 Pt. 2 3.2.2.1.
Furthermore, deflection limit due to wind load
is given as H/500 whilst BS8110 Pt. 2 3.2.2.2
indicates limit of h/500 as interstorey drift for
avoidance of damage to nonstructural
members;
(vii) In 7.3.3, excessive vibration should be avoided
as similar in BS8110 Pt. 2 3.2.3. However,
there is extra requirement in 7.3.3 that dynamic
analysis be carried out in case structural
frequency less than 6 Hz for structural floor and
footbridge less than 5 Hz;
(viii) Table 7.3 under 7.3.4.2 in relation to
deemtosatisfy requirement for basic
span/depth ratios of beam and slab contains,
requirements for twoway slabs and end
spans are included, as in comparison with
Table 3.9 of BS8110 Pt 1;
(ix) Table 7.4 in relation to modification factor to
effective span depth ratio by tensile
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A12
reinforcement is identical to Table 3.10 of
BS8110 except that the row with service stress
307 (f
y
= 460) has replaced that of 333 (f
y
=
500);
(x) 7.3.4.6 is identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 3.4.6.7
except that the last sentence in BS8110 is
deleted;
(xi) The provision of deflection calculation in 7.3.5
is identical to BS8110 Pt 2 Cl. 3.7;
(xii) Equation 7.7 in 7.3.6 is not identical to
equation 9 in BS8110 Pt. 2 in the derivation of
shrinkage curvature;
Section 8
Reinft
requirements
The followings are highlighted :
(i) In 8.1.1, it is declared that the rules given in the
Section for rebars detailings do not apply to
seismic, machine vibration, fatigue etc and
epoxy, zinc coated bars etc. No similar
exclusion is found in BS8110;
(ii) In 8.1.2, it is stated that bar scheduling should
be in accordance with acceptable standards
whilst BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.4.2 requires standard
be in accordance with BS4466;
(iii) In 8.2, the minimum spacing of bars should be
the lesser of bar diameter, h
agg
+5 mm and 20
mm. BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.11.1 does not include
20 mm and bar diameter is only required when
bar size > h
agg
+5 mm;
(iv) In 8.2, it is stated that the distance between
horizontal layer of bars should be sufficient
without quantification whilst BS8110 Pt. 1
3.12.11.1 requires minimum be 2h
agg
/3;
(v) 8.3 is essentially identical to BS8110 Pt. 1
3.12.8.22, 24, 25, except that a single Table 8.2
(in relation to minimum bend radii of rebars)
Pt. 1 Section 3
Pt. 1 4.10 in
relation to
anchorage of
tendons in
prestressed
concrete
The followings are highlighted :
(i) The provisions are general;
(ii) Consideration for ductility is not adequate.
The followings are highlighted :
(i) CoPConc2004 requires bar
scheduling to acceptable
standards. However,
provisions in 8.3, 9.2.3 etc
have requirements for bend
of bars;
(ii) ICU has commented that
requirement in BS8110 Pt.
1 3.12.9.4(a) should extend
to all support conditions.
8.4.8 of the Code seems to
incorporate the comment;
(iii) ICU has also suggested the
use of torsional links
similar to that in ACI code
(135
o
hood) which is of
shape other than shape
code 77 of BS4466.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A13
to replace Table 3 of BS4466 to which BS8110
is making reference. As such, no distinction is
made between mild steel bars and HY bars
both adopting minimum radii of HY bars.
Provisions to the newer BS BS8666 where
the minimum bend radii are generally smaller is
not adopted;
(vi) 8.4 is essentially identical to BS8110 Pt. 1
3.12.8 except
(a) It is mentioned in 8.4.1 that when
mechanical device is used, their
effectiveness has to be proven. No similar
provision is found in BS8110;
(b) Type 1 bars are not included in the Code;
(c) 8.4.6 is added with Figure 8.1 for
illustration of bend anchorage;
(d) 8.4.8 in relation to minimum support
widths requires any bend inside support be
beyond the centre line of the support. This
effectively extend the requirement of
BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.9.4(a) to support
conditions other than simply support;
(vii) 8.5 in relation to anchorage of links and shear
reinforcements contains more stringent
requirement for the length of the link beyond
bends of bars than BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.8.6. (1)
the greater of 4 or 50 mm for 180
o
bend in the
Code but only 4 in BS8110; (2) the greater of
10 or 70 mm for 90
o
bend in the Code but
only 8 in BS8110. Provisions for 135
o
bend
and welded bars are also added;
(viii) 8.6 contains requirements for anchorage by
welded bars which is not found in BS8110;
(ix) Except for the requirement that the sum of
rebar sizes at lapping < 40% of the breadth of
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A14
the section, 8.7 contains more requirements in
terms of staggering laps, minimum
longitudinal and transverse distances between
adjacent lapping of bars which are not found in
BS8110 in case that sum of rebar sizes at
lapping > 40% of the breadth of the section in
not using staggered laps. The requirements are
also schematically indicated in Fig. 8.4;
(x) 8.7.4.1 contains different and more detailed
requirements for transverse reinforcements in
lapped zone than BS8110 Pt. 2 3.12.8.12;
(xi) 8.8 and 8.9 in relation to large diameter bars
(>40) and bundle bars which are not found in
BS8110;
(xii) The provision in BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.8.16 for
butt joints of rebars is not found in the Code.
Section 9
Detailing of
Members and
particular
rules
The followings are highlighted :
(i) Table 9.1 under Cl. 9.2 tabulates minimum steel
percentage equal to that of BS8110;
(ii) In 9.2.1.4 in relation to maximum distance of
bars in tension as similar to BS8110 Pt. 1
3.12.11.2, the stipulation in BS8110 that
demonstration of crack width < 0.3 mm can be
accepted is omitted;
(iii) In 9.2.1.5, a requirement of 15% span moment
be used to design beam support even under
simply supported assumption is not found in
BS8110. Furthermore, it is also stated in the
clause that total tension rebars of a flanged
beam over intermediate supports can be spread
over the effective width of the flange provided
that half of the steel within the web width.
There is also no such provision in BS8110;
(iv) 9.2.1.8 requiring 30% of the calculated
Pt. 1 Section 3
and 5.2.7
The followings are highlighted :
(i) The analysis procedures are largely
oldfashioned relying on old theories of
Johansen, Hillerborg. Detailings to cater for
behaviours not well understood or quantified
are thus provided, though the determination of
which are largely empirical or from past
experiences;
(ii) Though ductility is not a design aid explicitly
stated in the BS, the BS does requires 135
o
bend of links in anchoring compression bars in
columns and beams (Pt. 1 3.12.7.2).
The followings are highlighted :
(i) The stress reduction in
design of cantilevered
projecting structures in
PNAP173 is not
incorporated is likely
because the PNAP is based
on working stress design
method. So there should be
some other approaches and
this is not mentioned in the
CoPConc2004;
(ii) Ductility is more
emphasized in
CoPConc2004 9.9 which
largely stem from seismic
design.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A15
midspan rebars be continuous over support
appears to be adopted from Fig. 3.24 a) of
BS8110. However, the circumstances by which
the Figure is applicable as listed in 3.12.10.2 of
the BS is not quoted;
(v) 9.2.1.9 requires top steel of cantilever to extend
beyond the point of contraflexure of the
supporting span whilst Fig. 3.24 c) requires at
least half of the top steel to extend beyond half
span of the cantilever or 45;
(vi) In 9.2.2, maximum spacing of bentup bars is
stipulated whilst no such requirement is found
in BS8110;
(vii) Torsional links has to be closed links (shape
code 77 of BS4466) as required by BS8110 Pt.
2 2.4.8. However, 9.2.3 of the Code provides an
alternative of using closed links of 135
o
bend;
(viii) In 9.3.1.1 (b) in relation to maximum spacing
of rebars in slab is more detailed than BS8110
Pt. 1 3.12.11.2.7 and appears more reasonable.
The provisions are, in fact, more stringent :
(a) for principal rebars, 3h 400 mm whilst
BS8110 is 3h 750 mm;
(b) for secondary rebars 3.5h 450 mm
whilst no provision in BS8110;
(c) more stringent requirements are added for
slabs with concentrated loads or areas of
maximum moments whilst no similar
requirements are found in BS8110;
(ix) The first para. in 9.3.1.3 requires half of the
area of the calculated span rebars be provided
at the simply supported slabs and end support
of continuous slabs. The requirement is
identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.10.3.2. However,
the provision in BS8110 is under the condition
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A16
listed in 3.12.10.3.1 that the slabs are designed
predominantly to carry u.d.l. and in case of
continuous slabs, approximately equal span.
These conditions are not mentioned in the
Code;
(x) In 9.3.1.3, there is also a provision that if the
ultimate shear stress < 0.5v
c
at support, straight
length of bar beyond effective anchorage for
1/3 of support width or 30 mm (whichever is
the greater) is considered effective anchorage.
No similar provision is found in BS8110;
(xi) 9.3.1.6 requiring closed loops of longitudinal
rebars at free edge of slab is not found in
BS8110;
(xii) 9.3.2 is in relation to shear in slabs which
should be identical to that for beams. However
it is stated that shears should be avoided in
slabs < 200 mm thick;
(xiii) 9.4 in relation to cantilevered projecting
structures has incorporated requirements for
minimum thickness, minimum steel areas,
maximum bar spacing, anchorage length from
PNAP173. However, other requirements such
as design with reduced stresses are not found;
(xiv) 9.5.2.3 contains more stringent requirements of
links in circular columns than that in BS8110
Pt. 1 3.12.7.3 as the termination of links should
be at 135
o
hook;
(xv) There is an extra requirement in the maximum
spacing of traverse reinforcement in wall in
9.6.3 which is 400 mm, as in comparison with
BS8110 Pt. 1 3.12.7.4;
(xvi) 9.6.5 in relation to reinforcement provisions to
plain walls include BS8110 Pt. 1 3.9.4.19 to 22.
However, 3.9.4.23 in relation to plain walls
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A17
with more than 1/10 in tension to resist flexure
is not included. Anyhow, this is not important
as the wall should not be regarded as plain
wall;
(xvii) In 9.7.1 and 9.7.2 in relation to pile caps and
footings, it is stipulated that the minimum steel
percentage should refer to Table 9.1 though
Table 9.1 is under the heading Beam. So the
minimum steel percentage of 0.13% for HY
bars should be observed. There is no explicit
provision in BS8110 for minimum steel in pile
caps and footings;
(xviii) 9.7.3 in relation to tie beams has included
a requirement that the tie beam should be
designed for a load of 10 kN/m if the action of
compaction machinery can cause effects to the
tie beams. This is not found in BS8110;
(xix) 9.8 in relation to design of corbels carries the
same content as 6.5.2.2 to 6.5.2.4 and is
identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 5.2.7;
(xx) 9.9 contains requirements more stringent than
BS8110 in detailing with the aim to enhance
ductility. The followings are highlighted :
(a) 9.9.1.1(a) requires steel percentage in
beam > 0.3% and percentage of tensile
steel < 2.5%;
(b) 9.9.1.1(c) requires anchorage of beam bar
into exterior column to commence beyond
centre line of column or 8 instead of
column face unless the moment plastic
hinge can be formed at 500 mm or half
beam depth from column face;
(c) 9.9.1.1(d) imposes restriction in locations
of laps and mechanical couplers (i) not
within column/beam joints, (ii) not within
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A18
1 m from potential plastic hinge locations;
(iii) reversing stresses exceeding 0.6f
y
unless with specified confinement by links.
In addition, bars be terminated by a 90
o
bend or equivalent to the far face of
column;
(d) 9.9.1.2(e) requires distribution and
curtailment of flexural rebars be attained
in critical sections (potential plastic hinge
regions);
(e) 9.9.1.2(a) states the link spacing in beam <
the lesser of 16 and beam width or depth
and corner and alternate compression
rebars be anchored by links;
(f) 9.9.1.2(b) states that links be adequately
anchored by means of 135
o
or 180
o
hooks.
Anchorage by 90
o
hooks or welded cross
bars not permitted;
(g) 9.9.2.1(a) states min. (0.8%) and max.
steel% (4% with increase to 5.2% at lap)in
column;
(h) 9.9.2.1(a) requires the smallest dia. of any
bars in a row > 2/3 of the largest bar;
(i) 9.9.2.1(a) limits max. dia. of column rebar
through beam by (eqn 9.7) dependent on
beam depth, with increase by 25% if not
forming plastic hinge;
(j) 9.9.2.1(b) requires spacing of links to
longitudinal bars not be spaced further than
1/4 of the adjacent column dimension or
200 mm;
(k) 9.9.2.1(c) requires anchorage of column
bar into exterior beam or foundation to
commence beyond centre line of beam or
foundation or 8 instead of interface unless
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A19
the moment plastic hinge can be formed at
500 mm or half beam depth from column
face;
(l) 9.9.2.1(d) states restrictions in locations of
laps
(m) 9.9.2.2 describes the establishment of
critical regions in columns where there
are extra requirements on links (i) link
spacing in column < the lesser of 6 and
least 1/4 of column lateral dimension; (ii)
each longitudinal bar be laterally supported
by a link passing around the bar and
having an included angle < 135
o
. (Regions
other than critical regions fallow 9.5.2)
Section 10 The followings are highlighted :
(i) 10.2 lists figures for construction tolerances
whilst BS8110 refers most of the requirements
to other BS;
(ii) 10.3.4 in relation to sampling, testing and
compliance criteria of concrete. They are
extracted from HKB(C)R but with
incorporation of 100 mm test cubes. Such
provision is not found in BS8110;
(iii) The subclause on Concreting in cold
weather in BS8110 is not incorporated. 10.3.7
on Concreting in hot weather is modified
from BS8110 Pt. 1 6.2.5 (reference to BS
deleted);
(iv) Table 10.4 is similar to BS8110 Pt. 1 Table 6.1.
However the parameter t (temperature) is
deleted and the categorization of cement is
OPC and others instead of the few types of
cement in BS8110;
(v) 10.3.8.1 contains general requirements for
Pt. 1 2.3,
Section 6,
Section 7,
Section 8
The followings are highlighted :
(i) Pt. 1 2.3 lists general requirements for
inspection of construction;
(ii) References to other BS are often stated in
Section 6 and 7;
(iii) Provisions of works in extreme temperatures
are given which are deleted in CoPConc2004.
The followings are highlighted :
(i) The first part of Section 10
of CoPConc2004 mainly
stems from HKB(C)R,
CS1, CS2 whilst the second
part incorporates
workmanship requirements
listed in BS8110 Pt. 1
Section 6;
(ii)
(iii)
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A20
Formwork and falsework similar (but not
identical) to BS8110 Pt. 1 6.2.6.1;
(vi) 10.3.8.2 lists criteria for striking of formwork
identical to that in BS8110 Pt. 1 6.2.6.3.1. In
addition, provisions for using longer or shorter
striking time for PFA concrete and climbing
formwork are included;
(vii) Minimum striking time in 10.3.8.2 are in
accordance with HKB(C)R Table 10 (with the
addition of props to cantilever requiring 10
days striking time) instead of BS8110 Pt. 1
Table 6.2. Furthermore, BS8110 Pt. 1 Table 6.2
gives temperature dependent striking time
whilst the striking times in CoPConc2004 are
not temperature dependent;
(viii) The contents of 10.3.9 in relation to surface
finish are extracted from BS8110 Pt. 1 6.2.7.
However, the general requirements are
differently written and the classes of finish
have been deleted;
(ix) 10.3.10 and 10.3.11 in relation to joints are
identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 6.2.9 and 6.2.10
though the wordings are different, except the
last sentence of 6.2.9 last para. in relation to
treating vertical joint as movement joint;
(x) 10.4.1 contains general requirements on rebars
to standards CS2 and other acceptable
standards whilst BS8110 Pt. 1 7.1 requires
conformance to other BS;
(xi) 10.4.2 in relation to cutting and bending of
rebars is identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 7.2 except
(a) conformance is not restricted to BS but to
acceptable standards; and (b) the requirement
of preheating rebars at temperatures below
5
o
C is deleted;
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A21
(xii) 10.4.3 is effectively identical to BS8110 Pt. 1
7.3 except that the requirement for spacer
blocks be of concrete of small aggregates of
equal strength to the parental concrete is
replaced by spacer blocks to acceptable
standards;
(xiii) 10.4.6 is effectively identical to BS8110 Pt. 1
7.6 except (a) conformance to BS changed to
acceptable standards; (b) detailed descriptions
of the types of welding omitted; and (c)
requirement to avoid welding in rebar bends
omitted;
(xiv) 10.5.1 is identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 8.1 except
conformance to BS is changed to acceptable
standards;
(xv) 10.5.5.3 in relation to tensioning apparatus of
prestressing tendons is effectively identical to
BS8110 Pt. 1 8.7.3 except that CoPConc2004
has an additional requirements that apparatus
be calibrated within 6 months;
(xvi) 10.5.5.4 in relation to pretensioning of
deflected tendons, compressive and tensile
stresses should be ensured not to exceed
permissible limits during transfer of
prestressing force to the concrete with the
release of holdingup and down forces. BS8110
Pt. 1 8.7.4.3 has omitted the compressive
forces;
(xvii) 10.5.5.5(b) requires anchorage of post
tensioning wires to conform to acceptable
standards whilst BS8110 Pt. 1 8.7.5.2 requires
compliance with BS4447
(xviii) 10.5.5.5(d) in relation to tensioning
procedures which is identical to BS8110 Pt. 1
8.7.5.4, the requirement of not carrying out
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A22
tensioning below 0
o
C is omitted. Further, the
paragraph in BS8110 stipulating that when full
force cannot be developed in an element due to
breakage, slip during the case when a large no.
of tendons is being stressed is omitted in
CoPConc2004;
(xix) 10.5.7 contains detailed provisions for grouting
of prestressed tendons whilst BS8110 Pt. 1 8.9
requires compliance to BS EN 445, 446.
Section 11
Quality
Assurance
and Control
This section outlines measures and procedures in
general quality assurance and control, with reference
to local practice. The followings are highlighted :
(i) Control are on design, construction and
completed products;
(ii) Control can be by independent organization;
(iii) Concrete must be from supplier certified under
the Quality Scheme for the Production and
Supply of Concrete (QSPSC);
(iv) Control on construction includes surveillance
measures.
No similar provisions in BS8110. The control in CoPConc2004
are summaries of local good
practice.
Section 12
Prestressed
Concrete
This section is basically identical to Section 4 of
BS8110 Pt. 1. The followings are highlighted :
(i) 12.1.5 in relation to durability and fire
resistance makes reference to previous
recommendations in Sections 4 and 10 whilst
BS8110 makes reference also to Part 2 of
BS8110;
(ii) 12.2.3.1 in relation to redistribution of moments
is restricted to concrete grade C70, as in
consistency with reinforced concrete. BS8110
Pt. 1 4.2.3.1 does not have this limitation. But
the BS covers grades up to 40;
(iii) The first loading arrangement in 12.3.3 for
Pt. 1 Section 4 The provisions are general. CoPConc2004 follows quite
closely the provisions in
BS8110 except for minor
changes.
Comparison between Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004 and BS8110:1997 (or 1985) Appendix A
HK CoP Structural Use of Concrete 2004 BS8110:1997
Clause No. Contents Clause No. Contents
Remark
A23
continuous beam is not found BS8110 Pt. 1
4.3.3. The loading arrangement is in consistency
with 5.1.3.2 for reinforced concrete beams.
Though not truly adequate (per similar
argument as above), CoPConc2004 is more
conclusive than BS8110;
(iv) 12.3.8.2 gives ultimate concrete stress 7.0 MPa,
as similar to r.c. works;
(v) 12.8.2.2 in relation to 1000 h relaxation value
which is identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 4.8.2.2, UK
has been deleted in description of
manufacturers appropriate certificate;
(vi) 12.8.4 and 12.8.5 in relation to shrinkage and
creep of concrete make reference to 3.1.8 and
3.1.7 whilst BS8110 Pt 1. 4.8.4 and 4.8.5 list
UK data;
(vii) 12.10 makes reference to 8.10.2.2 for
transmission lengths in prestressed members
which is titled transfer of prestress which is
identical to BS8110 Pt. 1 4.10.1 except that the
2
nd
paragraph of the BS in relation to the
difficulty of determination of transmission
length has been deleted;
(viii) 12.12.3.1(a) is identical to BS8110 Pt. 1
4.12.3.1.1 except that not only protection
against corrosion is added. In 12.12.3.1(c),
reference for protection against fire is not
identical to BS8110;
Section 13
Load Tests of
Structures or
parts of
structures
This section contains testing of structures during
construction stage under circumstances such as
substandard works are suspected and visible defects
are identified.
No similar provisions in BS8110.
Appendix B
Assessment of Building
Accelerations
Appendix B
B1
Assessment of acceleration of Buildings
Underlying principles :
Two Approaches are outlined in this Appendix :
(i) The first one is based on the assumption that the building will undergo simple
harmonic motion under wind loads. Thus the equation of x x
2
= & & where x& &
is the acceleration and x is the displacement of the motion, is the
circular frequency of the building where f 2 = ( f is the natural frequency
of the building) can be used. However, the acceleration that will be causing
discomfort to the occupants is the dynamic resonant component of the
motion. If the G factor which is equal to
SE g
B g I G
f
v h
2
2
2 1 + + = in
Appendix F of the Wind Code 2004 is used to arrive at a total displacement, it
can be considered that the total displacement is made of up of three
components : (a) the static part which is 1 in the equation; (b) the dynamic
background component which is B g I
v h
2
2 ; and (c) the dynamic resonant
component which is
SE g
I
f
h
2
2 . It is the last displacement that should be
multiplied to
2
to obtain the acceleration by which the building is
responding to wind loads. So it is only necessary to calculate the dynamic
resonant component. of the building can either be obtained by detail
dynamic analysis or by some empirical formula such as 460/h.
(ii) The second approach is that listed in Australian Wind Code AS/NSZ
1170.2:2002 Appendix G2 as extracted at the end of this Appendix. The
approach is also based on the same principle as (i) though the formula G2
listed in the Australian Code has incorporated empirical parameters
0
m and
h for assessment of the dynamic properties of the building. The formula G2
shows clearly it utilizes the dynamic resonant component Furthermore, it
should also be noted that
SE
g
R
for assessment of acceleration.
Nevertheless, there is a denominator of
h v
I g 2 1+ in the formula in the
Appendix B
B2
Australian Code as different from Hong Kong Wind Code, the reason being
that the Australian Code is based on
, des
V which is 3 second gust whilst
Hong Kong Code is based on hourly mean wind speed. So this denominator
can be omitted.
In addition, it should be noted that the Concrete Code requires the wind load for
assessment of acceleration to be 1in10 year return period of 10 minutes duration
whilst the wind load arrived for structural design in the Hong Kong Wind Code is
based on 1in50 year return period of hourly duration. For conversion, the formula
listed in Appendix B can be used (as confirmed by some experts that the formula can
be used for downward conversion from 1in50 year to 1in10 year return periods).
The 10 minutes mean speed can also be taken as identical to that of hourly mean
speed (also confirmed by some experts.)
Worked Example
Data : Building height 4 . 96 = h m;
Building width 3 . 37 = b m
Building natural frequency 384 . 0 =
a
n Hz
Total displacement at the uppermost floor by the approach listed in
Appendix G of the Hong Kong Wind Code is 74 mm
Total dead load is 251555 kN and total live load is 48171 kN
(A) To compute the dynamic resonant component of the total force
Computation of the G factor, the dynamic background and dynamic resonant
components in accordance with HKWC 2004:
4 . 96 = h m 3 . 37 = b m 384 . 0 =
a
n Hz
1047 . 0
90
4 . 96
1055 . 0
90
1055 . 0
11 . 0 11 . 0
= 
.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
I
h
7 . 3 =
v
g
00 . 4 ) 3600 ln( 2 = =
a f
n g
05 . 1762
10
1000
25 . 0
= 
.

\

=
h
L
h
Appendix B
B3
73 . 0
64 36
1
1
2 2
=
+
+
=
h
L
b h
B
6 . 49 =
h
V m/sec
64 . 13 = =
h
h a
V
L n
N
1285 . 0
4
1
5 . 3
1
1
=
+
=
h
a
h
a
V
b n
V
h n
S
( )
0816 . 0
2
47 . 0
6 / 5
2
=
+
=
N
N
E
02 . 0 =
So 898 . 1 2 1
2
2
= + + =
SE g
B g I G
f
v h
The dynamic background component is
662 . 0 2
2
= = B g I G
v h
The dynamic resonant component is
607 . 0 2
2
= =
SE g
I G
f
h t dynresonan
(B) To scale the wind loads from 50 years return period 1 hour duration to 10 years
return period 10 minutes duration
The formula in Appendix B of the Wind Code can be used for scaling to wind
loads of shorter return period, as confirmed by some experts that the formula
could be used for period shorter than 50 years. Thus the factor in scaling down
the wind load from 50 years to 10 years is
6714 . 0
50 ln 5
10 ln 5
2
= 
.

\

+
+
The wind pressures of 10 minutes duration and 1 hour duration can be taken as
identical. Thus no adjustment needs be carried out.
Appendix B
B4
Assessment of accelerations By the two approaches
(I) By x x
2
= & & , based on assumption of simple harmonic motion.
Fundamental natural frequency = 0.384 Hz
Circular frequency = 412 . 2 2 = = f /sec
Dynamic Magnification factor = 1.898
Total Displacement = 0.074 m. The dynamic resonant component is
024 . 0
898 . 1
607 . 0
074 . 0 = = x m
The acceleration is 138 . 0
2
= x m/sec
2
which is for 50 year return period and one
hour mean wind speed.
Scaling down to 10 year return period, the acceleration for 10 years return period and
10 minute duration as required by Clause 7.3.2 of the Concrete Code 2004 is
093 . 0 6714 . 0 138 . 0 = m/sec
2
< 0.15 m/sec
2
.
(II) By
b
M
h m
a
3
2
0
= in accordance with the Australian Code
As total dead load is 251555 kN and total live load is 48171 kN
The weight used is full dead load + 0.25 live load = 263598 kN
= h 96.4 m
The weight per m height is 2734
4 . 96
263598
= kN/m
which is equal to 279022
8 . 9
2734000
= kg/m
279022
0
= m kg/m
The total bending moment about X axis is 562163 kNm for full static + dynamic load.
For the dynamic portion 179786
898 . 1
607 . 0 562163
=
kNm
Scaled to 10 minutes duration and 10 years return period
120708 6714 . 0 179786
= =
b
M kNm
Appendix B
B5
So the acceleration is 14 . 0 10 120708
4 . 96 279022
3
3
2
=
m/sec
2
< 0.15 m/sec
2
.
Explanatory Note : The existence of the denominator
h v
I g 2 1+ in the formula G2
listed in the Australian Code is because
, des
V used in the wind pressure calculation
in the same formula is based on 3 second gust. As our code is based on hourly mean
speed, downscaling by the factor is not necessary.
Appendix C
Derivation of Basic Design
Formulae of R.C. Beam sections
against Flexure
Appendix C
C1
Derivation of Basic Design Formulae of R.C. Beam sections against
Flexure
The stress strain relationship of a R.C. beam section is illustrated in Figure C1.
In Figure C1 above, the symbols for the neutral axis depth, effective depth, cover to
compressive reinforcements are x, d, and d, as used in BS8110 and the Code.
To derive the contribution of force and moment by the concrete stress block, assume
the parabolic portion of the concrete stress block be represented by the equation
B A + =
2
(where A and B are constants) (Eqn C1)
So B A
d
d
+ =
2 (Eqn C2)
As
c c
E B E
d
d
= =
=0
where
c
E is the tangential Youngs Modulus of
concrete listed in Table 3.2 of the Code.
Also
0 0
0
2 2
0 2 0
0
c
E B
A B A
d
d
= = = + =
=
(Eqn C3)
As
m
cu
f
67 . 0 = when
0
=
m c
cu c
m
cu c c
m
cu
E
f E f E E f
34 . 1
2
67 . 0
2
67 . 0
0
0 0 0
2
0
= = = (Eqn (C4)
(accords with 3.14 of the Concrete Code Handbook)
neutral axis
d
d
x
0035 . 0 =
ult
Stress Diagram
Strain Diagram
Figure C1 Stress Strain diagram for Beam
Appendix C
C2
0
2
c
E
A = where
m c
cu
E
f
34 . 1
0
=
So the equation of the parabola is
c
c
E
E
+ =
2
0
2
for
0
Consider the linear strain distribution
At distance u from the neutral axis,
x
u
ult
=
So stress at u from the neutral axis up to
ult
x
0
is
u
x
E
u
x
E
x
u
E
x
u E
E
E
ult c ult c
ult c ult
c
c
c
+ =

.

\

+

.

\

= + =
2
2
0
2 2
0
2
0
2 2 2
(Eqn C5)
Based on (Eqn C5), the stress strain profiles can be determined. A plot for grade 35 is
included for illustration :
Stress Strain Profile for Grade 35
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Distance Ratio from Neutral axis
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
M
P
a
)
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Figure C2 Strain diagram across concrete section
0.3769 where
0
= 0.001319
Figure C3 Stress strain profile of grades 35
Appendix C
C3
Sectional Design of rectangular Section to rigorous stress strain profile
Making use of the properties of parabola in Figure C4 offered by the parabolic
section as
1 c
F given by
bx
f f
x b F
ult m
cu
m
cu
ult
c
3
34 . 1
67 . 0
3
2
0 0
1
= = (Eqn C6)
and the moment exerted by
1 c
F about centre line of the whole section


.

\

=


.

\

=
ult
c
ult ult
c c
x
h
F x x
h
F M
0
1
0 0
1 1
8
5
1
2 8
3
1
2
(Eqn C7)
The force by the straight portion is


.

\

=


.

\

=
ult m
cu
ult m
cu
c
bx f
b x x
f
F
0 0
2
1
67 . 0 67 . 0
(Eqn C8)
The moment offered by the constant part about the centre line of the whole section is


.

\

=
2
1
2
0
2 2
x h
F M
ult
c c
(Eqn C9)
The compressive force by concrete as stipulated in (Eqn C6) and (Eqn C8) is


.

\

=


.

\

+ = + =
ult m
cu
ult m
cu
ult m
cu
c c c
bx f bx f
bx
f
F F F
0 0 0
2 1
3
3
67 . 0
1
67 . 0
3
34 . 1
For singly reinforcing sections, moment by concrete about the level of the tensile steel
is, by (Eqn 27) and (29)
Area = ab
3
2
centre of mass
a
8
3
b
a
Figure C4 Geometrical Properties of Parabola
Appendix C
C4


.

\

+


.

\

= + =
2
1
8
5
1
0
2
0
1 2 1
x
d F x d F M M M
ult
c
ult
c c c


.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
2
1 1
67 . 0
8
5
1
3
34 . 1
0 0 0 0
x
d
bx f
x d bx
f
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu


.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
d
x
d
x f
d
x
d
x f
bd
M
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu
0 0 0 0
2
1
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
8
5
1 1
3
34 . 1


.

\

+ +


.

\

=
d
x
d
x f
bd
M
ult ult ult m
cu
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
3
1
1
67 . 0
12
1
3
1
2
1 67 . 0
2
0
2
2
0 0
=


.

\

+ 
.

\



.

\

+
bd
M
d
x f
d
x f
ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu
(Eqn C9)
which is a quadratic equation in
d
x
As
d
x
is limited to 0.5 for singly reinforcing sections for grades up to 40 under
moment distribution not greater than 10% (Clause 6.1.2.4 of the Code), by (Eqn C9),
cu
f bd
M
2
will be limited to K values as in
154 . 0 ' = K for grade 30
152 . 0 ' = K for grade 35
151 . 0 ' = K for grade 40
which are all smaller than 0.156 under the simplified stress block.
However, for grades 45 and 50 and 70 where
d
x
is limited to 0.4 for singly
reinforcing sections under moment distribution not greater than 10% (Clause 6.1.2.4
of the Code), again by (Eqn 31)
cu
f bd
M
2
will be limited to
126 . 0 ' = K for grade 45
125 . 0 ' = K for grade 50
1199 . 0 ' = K for grade 70
again less than more significantly less than 0.132 under the simplified stress block.
Consider grade 100 where
d
x
is limited to 0.33, 0958 . 0 ' = K , again more
significantly less than that arrived by the simplified stressed block which is 0.113. The
implication is that design based on the rigorous stress block approach requires
compression steel at smaller moments than the simplified stress approach.
Appendix C
C5
With the
d
x
analyzed by (Eqn C9), the forces in concrete
d
x f
bd
F bx f
bx
f
F F F
ult m
cu c
ult m
cu
ult m
cu
c c c


.

\

=


.

\

+ = + =
0 0 0
2 1
3
1
1
67 . 0
1
67 . 0
3
34 . 1
can be calculated which will be equal to the required force to be provided by steel,
thus
d
x f
f bd
A
d
x f
bd
A
f
ult m
cu
y
st
ult m
cu st
y


.

\

=


.

\

=
0 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
(Eqn C10)
When
cu
f bd
M
2
exceeds the limited value for single reinforcement. Compression
reinforcements at ' d from the surface of the compression side should be added. The
compression reinforcements will take up the difference between the applied moment
and
2
' bd K

.

\



.

\

=


.

\

= 
.

\

d
d
f
f K
f bd
M
bd
A
K
f bd
M
d
d
bd
A
f
y
cu
cu sc
cu
sc
y
'
1 87 . 0
'
'
'
1 87 . 0
2
2
(Eqn C11)
And the same amount of steel will be added to the tensile steel.

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f bd
M
f
f bd
A
y
cu
cu
ult m
cu
y
st
'
1 87 . 0
'
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
2
0
(Eqn C12)
where is the limit of
d
x
ratio which is 0.5 for grade 40 and below and 0.4 for
grades up to and including 70.
Furthermore, there is a limitation of lever arm ratio not to exceed 0.95 which requires
95 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
12
1
3
1
2
1 67 . 0
0
0
2
2
0 0


.

\



.

\

+ 
.

\



.

\

+
d
x f
d
x f
d
x f
ult n
cu
ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu
Appendix C
C6


.

\

+


.

\

2
0 0
0
12
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
1 05 . 0
ult ult
ult
d
x
(Eqn C13)
Thus the lower limits for the neutral axis depth ratio are 0.112, 0.113, 0.114 and 0.115
for grades 30, 35, 40, 45 respectively. With such lower limits of neutral axis depth
ratio, the tensile steel required will be 0.33%, 0.39%, 0.44% and 0.5% for grades 30,
35, 40 and 45 respectively which are in excess of the minimum of 0.13% in
accordance with Table 9.1 of the Code.
As illustration for comparison between the rigorous and simplified stress block
approaches, plots of
2
bd
M
against steel percentages is plotted as
Comparison of Reinforcement Ratios for Grade 35 according
to the Rigorous and Simplified Stress Block
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 1 2 3 4 5
Steel Percentage (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Ast/bd  Rigorous Stress Approach Ast/bd  Simplified Approach
Asc/bd  Rigorous Approach Asc/bd  Simplified Approach
It can be seen that the differences are very small, maximum error is 1%.
Appendix C
C7
Determination of reinforcements for Flanged Beam Section T or LSections
For simplicity, only the simplified stress block in accordance with Figure 6.1 of the
Code is adopted.
The exercise is first carried out by treating the width of the beam as
f
b and analyze
the beam as if it is a rectangular section. If the 90% of neutral axis depth is within the
depth of the flange, i.e.
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0 , the reinforcement so arrived is adequate for the
section. The requirement for
d
d
d
x f
9 . 0 is
d
d
K
d
x f


.

\

=
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0 2 9 . 0 (Eqn C14)
If, however,
d
d
d
x f
> 9 . 0 , the section has to be reconsidered with reference to Figure
C5.
For singly reinforced sections, taking moment about the level of the reinforcing steel,
( ) ( )( ) x d x b
f
d
d d b b
f
M
w
m
cu
f
f w f
m
cu
45 . 0 9 . 0
67 . 0
2
67 . 0
+


.

\

=
(Eqn C15)

.

\


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

=
d
x
d
x f
d
d
d
d
b
b
f
d b
M
m
cu
f f
w
f
m
cu
w
45 . 0 1 9 . 0
67 . 0
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
2
x 9 . 0
m
cu
f
67 . 0
x
d
f
d
f
b
w
b
Figure C5 Analysis of a T or L beam section
Appendix C
C8
Putting


.

\



.

\

=
d
d
b
b
d
d
f
d b
M
f
w
f f
m
cu
w
f
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
2

.

\

d b
M M
d
x f
d
x f
w
f
m
cu
m
cu
0 402 . 0 1809 . 0
2
2
=
+ 
.

\

d b
M M
d
x
f
d
x
f
w
f
cu cu
(Eqn C16)
As the neutral axis depth ratio is limited to 0.5 or 0.4 depends on concrete grade in
accordance with (Eqn 6.1) to (Eqn 6.3) of the Code, the maximum moment of
resistance is, by (Eqn C15).
For grades 40 and below :

.

\


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

= =
d
x
d
x
f
f
d
d
b
b
d
d
f
f
d b f
M
K
cu m
cu
f
w
f f
cu m
cu
w cu
f
45 . 0 1 9 . 0
67 . 0
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
'
2
156 . 0
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
+


.

\



.

\

=
d
d
b
b
d
d
f
w
f f
m
which is simply
2
d b f
M
w cu
f
plus ' K of the rectangular section
Similarly for grade above 40 and up to 70
132 . 0
2
1
1 1
67 . 0
' +


.

\



.

\

=
d
d
b
b
d
d
K
f
w
f f
m
f
For tensile steel ratio :
( ) ( ) x b
f
d b b
f
d b
A
f
w
m
cu
f w f
m
cu
w
st
y
9 . 0
67 . 0 67 . 0
87 . 0
+ =
+


.

\

=
d
x
d
d
b
b
f
f d b
A
f
w
f
m
cu
y w
st
9 . 0 1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
(Eqn C16)
When
cu w
f d b
M
2
exceeds the limited value for single reinforcement. Compression
reinforcements at ' d from the surface of the compression side should be added. The
compression reinforcements will take up the difference between the applied moment
and
2
Kbd

.

\



.

\

=


.

\

=

.

\

d
d
f
f K
f d b
M
bd
A
K
f bd
M
d
d
bd
A
f
y
cu f
cu w
sc
cu
sc
y
'
1 87 . 0
'
'
1 87 . 0
2
2
(Eqn C17)
Appendix C
C9
And the same amount of steel will be added to the tensile steel.

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

=
d
d
f
f K
f d b
M
d
d
b
b
f
f bd
A
y
cu f
cu w f
w
f
m
cu
y
st
'
1 87 . 0
'
45 . 0 1
67 . 0
87 . 0
1
2
(Eqn C18)
ChartC1
Reinforcement Ratios for Doubly Reinforced Beams d'/d = 0.05
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Reinforcement ratios (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Grade 30 Ast/bd Grade 30 Asc/bd Grade 35 Ast/bd Grade 35 Asc/bd Grade 40 Ast/bd
Grade 40 Asc/bd Grade 45 Ast/bd Grade 45 Asc/bd
ChartC2
Reinforcement Ratios for Doubly Reinforced Beams d'/d = 0.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Reinforcement ratios (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Grade 30 Ast/bd Grade 30 Asc/bd Grade 35 Ast/bd Grade 35 Asc/bd Grade 40 Ast/bd
Grade 40 Asc/bd Grade 45 Ast/bd Grade 45 Asc/bd
ChartC3
Reinforcement Ratios for Doubly Reinforced Beams d'/d = 0.15
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Reinforcement ratios (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Grade 30 Ast/bd Grade 30 Asc/bd Grade 35 Ast/bd Grade 35 Asc/bd Grade 40 Ast/bd
Grade 40 Asc/bd Grade 45 Ast/bd Grade 45 Asc/bd
ChartC4
Reinforcement Ratios for Doubly Reinforced Beams d'/d = 0.2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Reinforcement ratios (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Grade 30 Ast/bd Grade 30 Asc/bd Grade 35 Ast/bd Grade 35 Asc/bd Grade 40 Ast/bd
Grade 40 Asc/bd Grade 45 Ast/bd Grade 45 Asc/bd
ChartC5
Reinforcement Ratios for Doubly Reinforced Beams d'/d = 0.25
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4
Reinforcement ratios (%)
M
/
b
d
2
Grade 30 Ast/bd Grade 30 Asc/bd Grade 35 Ast/bd Grade 35 Asc/bd Grade 40 Ast/bd
Grade 40 Asc/bd Grade 45 Ast/bd Grade 45 Asc/bd
Appendix D
Underlying Theory and Design
Principles for Plate Bending
Element
Appendix D
D1
Underlying Theory and Design Principles for Plate Bending Element
By the finite element method, a plate bending structure is idealized as an assembly of
discrete elements joined at nodes. Through the analysis, node forces at each node of
an element, each of which comprises two bending moments and a shear force can be
obtained, the summation of which will balance the applied load at the node. Figures
D1a and D1b illustrates the phenomena.
F
Z
at
Node 2
F
A
, external load
applied at the
common node
F
4
F
2
F
3
F
1
M
X
at
Node 2
M
X
at
Node 1
F
Z
at
Node 1
F
Z
at
Node 4
F
Z
at
Node 3
M
Y
at
Node 3
3
M
Y
at
Node 2
M
X
at
Node 2
Y
Z
X
2
1
Figure D1a Diagrammatic illustration of the Node Forces at the four Nodes of a
Plate Bending Element 1234.
Note :
M
X
, M
Y
, F
Z
represents
respectively the bending
moments about X, Y axes
and the force in the Z axis
at the nodes of the plate
bending element
For equilibrium, F
1
,
F
2
, F
3
and F
4
which
are node vertical
shear of 4 elements
at the common node
will sum up to
balance the
externally applied
force F
A
such that
F
1
+ F
2
+ F
3
+ F
4
=
F
A
. Balancing of
moments is similar.
Figure D1b Diagrammatic illustration of balancing of Node shear forces at a
common node to 2 or more adjoining elements. The four elements joined at the
common node are displaced diagrammatically for clarity.
Appendix D
D2
The finite element method goes further to analyze the stresses within the discrete
elements. It should be noted that stresss is a terminology of the finite element
method which refer to bending moments, twisting moments and shear forces per unit
width in plate bending element. They represent the actual internal forces within the
plate structure in accordance with the plate bending theory. R.H. Woods (1968) has
developed the famous WoodArmer Equations to convert the bending moments and
twisting moments (both are moments per unit width) at any point to design
moments in two directions for structural design purpose.
Outline of the plate bending theory
Apart from bending moment in two mutually perpendicular directions as well known
by engineers, a twisting moment can be proved to be in existence by the plate bending
theory. The bending and twisting moments constitutes a moment field which
represents the actual structural behaviour of a plate bending structure. The existence
of the twisting moment and its nature are discussed in the followings. Consider a
triangular element in a plate bending structure with two of its sides aligning with the
global X and Y directions as shown in Figure D2 where moments
X
M and
Y
M
(both in kNm per m width) are acting respectively about X and Y. A moment
B
M
will generally be acting on the hypotenuse making an angle of with the Xaxis as
shown to achieve equilibrium. However, as the resultant of
X
M and
Y
M does not
necessarily align with
B
M , so there will generally be a moment acting in the
perpendicular direction of
B
M to achieve equilibrium which is denoted as
T
M . The
vector direction of
T
M is normal to the face of the hypotenuse. So instead of
bending the element like
X
M ,
Y
M and
B
M which produces flexural stresses, it
twists the element and produce shear stress in the inplane direction. The shear
stress will follow a triangular pattern as shown in Figure D2 for stressstrain
compatibility.
T
M is therefore termed the twisting moment. Furthermore, in order
to achieve rotational equilibrium about an axis out of plane, the shear stress will have
to be complementary. As the hypotenuse can be in any directions of the plate
structure, it follows that at any point in the plate bending structure, there will
generally be two bending moments, say
X
M and
Y
M in two mutually perpendicular
directions coupled with a complementary twisting moment
XY
M as indicated in
Figure 11a. The phenomenon is in exact analogy to the inplane stress problem where
generally two direct stresses coupled with a shear stress exist and these components
vary with directions. The equations relating
B
M ,
T
M with
X
M ,
Y
M ,
XY
M and
derived from equilibrium conditions are stated as follows:
Appendix D
D3
( ) ( )
( )
2 sin 2 sin
2
1
2 sin 2 cos
2
1
2
1
XY Y X T
XY Y X Y X B
M M M M
M M M M M M
=
+ + + =
(Eqn D1)
In addition, if is so varied that
T
M vanishes when = , then the element will
be having pure bending in the direction. The moments will be termed the principal
moments and denoted as
1
M ,
2
M , again in exact analogy with the inplane stress
problem having principal stresses at orientations where shear stresses are zero. The
angle can be worked out by
) (
2
tan
2
1
1
Y X
XY
M M
M
=
(Eqn D2)
Complementary shear stress pattern
Y
X
Plate Structure
M
B
M
T
M
Y
M
X
Figure D2 Derivation and nature of the Twisting Moment
Appendix D
D4
Again, as similar to the inplane stress problem, one may view that the plate bending
structure is actually having principal moments bending in the principal directions
which are free of twisting. Theoretically, it will be adequate if the designer designs
for these principal moments in the principal directions which generally vary from
point to point. However, practically this is not achievable for reinforced concrete
structures as we cannot vary the directions of the reinforcing steels from point to point
and from load case to load case.
The stress approach for design against flexure would therefore involve formulae for
providing reinforcing steels in two directions (mostly in orthogonal directions)
adequate to resist the moment field comprising the bending moments and twisting
moments. The most popular one is the Wood Armer Equations by Woods (1968),
the derivation of which is based on the normal yield criterion which requires the
provided reinforcing steels at any point to be adequate to resist the normal moment
which is the bending moment
B
M in any directions as calculated from (Eqn D1).
The effects of the twisting moments have been taken into account in the formulae.
The Wood Armer Equations are listed as follows.
For bottom steel reinforcement provisions:
XY X X
M M M + =
if 0
X
M ;
XY Y Y
M M M + =
if 0
Y
M
If 0 <
X
M , then 0 =
X
M and
X
XY
Y Y
M
M
M M
2
+ =
M
Y
X
M
1
M
1
M
Y
M
XY
M
XY
M
X
M
X
M
XY
M
XY
M
2
M
2
Y
Figure D3a General coexistence
of bending moments and twisting
moment in a plate bending structure
Figure D3b Principal moment in a
plate bending structure
Appendix D
D5
If 0 <
Y
M , then 0 =
Y
M and
Y
XY
X X
M
M
M M
2
+ =
For top steel reinforcement provisions:
XY X X
M M M =
if 0
X
M
XY Y Y
M M M =
if 0
Y
M
If 0 >
X
M , then 0 =
X
M and
X
XY
Y Y
M
M
M M
2
=
If 0 <
Y
M , then 0 =
Y
M and
Y
XY
X X
M
M
M M
2
=
(Eqn D3)
The equations have been incorporated in the New Zealand Standard NZS 3101:Part
2:1995 as solution approach for a general moment field.
The stress approach is therefore based on the actual structural behaviour of the plate
bending structure which is considered as a direct and realistic approach. The approach
is particularly suitable for structures analyzed by the finite element method which
produces a complete set of components of the internal forces of the plate bending
structures including twisting moments,
max
Q . Design has to cater for all these
components to ensure structural adequacy.
Design against shear
As an alternative to checking or designing punching shear in slab in accordance with
6.1.5.7 of the Code by which the punching shear load created by column (or pile in
pile cap) is effectively averaged over a perimeter, more accurate design or checking
can be carried out which is based on finite element analysis by which an accurate
shear stress distribution in the slab structure can be obtained. The finite element
analysis outputs the shear stresses (shear force per unit width) in accordance with
the general plate bending theory at the Xface and Yface of an element which are
respectively
y
M
x
M
Q
XY Y
XZ
= and
y
M
y
M
Q
XY X
YZ
= , as
diagrammatically illustrated in Figure D4. It can be easily shown that the maximum
shear after compounding these two components will occur in a plane at an
orientation
=
YZ
XZ
Q
Q
1
tan on plan and the value of the maximum shear is
Appendix D
D6
2 2
max YZ XZ
Q Q Q + = as per the illustration in the same Figure. Thus one can view
that both
XZ
Q and
YZ
Q are components of the actual shears in a preset global axis
system. The actual shear stress is
max
Q , the action of which tends to produce shear
failure at the angle on plan as shown in Figure D3. So the designer needs to
check or design for
max
Q at the spot. There is no necessity to design for
XZ
Q and
YZ
Q separately.
Following the usual practice of designing against shear in accordance with the Code,
if the
max
Q does not exceed allowable shear strength of concrete based on v
c
(the
max
Q
X
Plan
Outof plane shear Q
XZ
, Q
YZ
and Q
YZ
Q
Plate structure
Z
Y X
XZ
Q
YZ
Q
Q
XZ
Q
Derivation
For vertical equilibrium, Q
can be expressed as
cos sin 1
YZ XZ
Q Q Q + =
For
Q to be maximum set
YZ
XZ
YZ XZ
Q
Q
Q Q
d
dQ
= = =
2 (Eqn F2)
As
c c
E B E
d
d
= =
=0
where
c
E is the tangential Youngs Modulus of
concrete listed in Table 3.2 of the Code.
Also
0 0
0
2 2
0 2 0
0
c
E B
A B A
d
d
= = = + =
=
(Eqn F3)
As
m
cu
f
67 . 0 = when
0
=
m c
cu c
m
cu c c
m
cu
E
f E f E E f
34 . 1
2
67 . 0
2
67 . 0
0
0 0 0
2
0
= = = (Eqn (F4)
(accords with 3.14 of the Concrete Code Handbook)
0
2
c
E
A = where
m c
cu
E
f
34 . 1
0
=
So the equation of the parabola is
c
c
E
E
+ =
2
0
2
for
0
Consider the linear strain distribution
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Figure F1 Strain diagram across concrete section
Appendix F
F2
At distance u from the neutral axis,
x
u
ult
=
So stress at u from the neutral axis up to
ult
x
0
is
u
x
E
u
x
E
x
u
E
x
u E
E
E
ult c ult c
ult c ult
c
c
c
+ =

.

\

+

.

\

= + =
2
2
0
2 2
0
2
0
2 2 2
(Eqn F5)
Based on (Eqn F5), the stress strain profiles for grade 35 within the concrete
compression section are plotted in Figure F2 for illustration.
Stress Strain Profile for Grade 35
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Distance Ratio from Neutral axis
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
M
P
a
)
By the properties of parabola as shown in Figure F3, we can formulate total force
offered by the parabolic section as
1 c
F given by
Area = ab
3
2
centre of mass
a
8
3
b
a
Figure F3 Geometrical Properties of Parabola
0.3769 where
0
= 0.001319
Figure F2 Stress strain profile of grades 35
Appendix F
F3
bx
f f
x b F
ult m
cu
m
cu
ult
c
3
34 . 1
67 . 0
3
2
0 0
1
= = (Eqn F6)
and the moment exerted by
1 c
F about centre line of the whole section


.

\

=


.

\

=
ult
c
ult ult
c c
x
h
F x x
h
F M
0
1
0 0
1 1
8
5
1
2 8
3
1
2
(Eqn F7)
The force by the straight portion is


.

\

=


.

\

=
ult m
cu
ult m
cu
c
bx f
b x x
f
F
0 0
2
1
67 . 0 67 . 0
(Eqn F8)
The moment offered by the constant part about the centre line of the whole section is


.

\

=
2
1
2
0
2 2
x h
F M
ult
c c
(Eqn F9)
Thus if full section of concrete in compression exists in the column section
h
x f
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
ult m
cu c c c


.

\

= + =
0 2 1
3
1
1
67 . 0
(Eqn F10)


.

\


.

\


.

\

=


.

\

=
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu c
h
x
h
x f
bh
x
h
bx
f
bh
M
0 0
2
0 0
2
1
8
5
1
2
1
3
34 . 1 1
8
5
1
2 3
34 . 1


.

\



.

\


.

\

=


.

\



.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
bh
x h bx f
bh
M
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu c
0 0
2
0 0
2
2
1 1 1
2
67 . 0 1
2
1
2
1
67 . 0


.

\



.

\


.

\

+


.

\


.

\


.

\

=
+
=
h
x
h
x f
h
x
h
x f
bh
M M
bh
M
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu c c c
0 0 0 0
2
2 1
2
1 1 1
2
67 . 0
8
5
1
2
1
3
34 . 1


.

\

+ +

.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
ult ult ult m
cu
2
0 0 0
12
1
3
1
2
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0
(Eqn F11)
(II) Derivation of Basic Design Formulae of R.C. column sections
Cases 1 to 7 with different stress / strain profile of concrete and steel across the
column section due to the differences in the neutral axis depth ratios,
h
x
, are
investigated. The section is reinforced by continuous reinforcements
sh
A along its
length h idealized as continuum and reinforcements at its end faces
sb
A with cover
' d .
Pursuant to the derivation of the stress strain relationship of concrete and steel, the
Appendix F
F4
stress strain diagram of concrete and steel for Cases 1 to 7 are as follows, under the
definition of symbols as :
b : width of the column
h : length of the column
x : neutral axis depth of the column
sb
A : total steel area at the end faces of the column
' d : concrete cover to the centre of the end face steel
sh
A : total steel area along the length of the column
Case 1 where x/h 7/3(d/h)
Pursuant to the derivation of the stress strain relationship of concrete and steel, the
stress strain diagram of concrete and steel for Case 1 is as indicated in Figure F4.1 :
Steel compressive force in the portion steel elastic zone by
sb
A is
sb y sb y sc
A f
x
d
A f
x
d x
F 5 . 0 87 . 0
'
1
4
7
5 . 0 87 . 0
7 / 4
'
1

.

\

=

.

\

= (Eqn F12)
Steel compressive force in the portion steel plastic zone by
sh
A is

.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
x
A f
x
h
A
f F
sh y
sh
y sc
7
3
87 . 0
7
3
87 . 0
2
(Eqn F13)
Steel compressive force in the portion steel elastic zone by
sh
A is

.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
x
A f
x
h
A
f F
sh y
sh
y sc
7
2
87 . 0
2
1
7
4
87 . 0
3
(Eqn F14)
Steel tensile force in the portion steel plastic zone by
sb
A is
sb y st
A f F 5 . 0 87 . 0
1
= (Eqn F15)
Steel tensile force in the portion steel plastic zone by
sh
A is

.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
x
A f
x
h
h
A
f F
sh y
sh
y st
7
11
1 87 . 0
7
11
87 . 0
2
(Eqn F16)
Steel tensile force in the portion steel elastic zone by
sh
A is

.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
x
A f
x
h
A
f F
sh y
sh
y st
7
2
87 . 0
2
1
7
4
87 . 0
3
(Eqn F17)
To balance the external load
u
N
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
N
st st st sc sc sc c c u 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 1
+ + + + =
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
N
st st sc sc c u 2 1 2 1
+ + = as
bh
F
sc3
and
bh
F
st 3
are equal and opposite.
By (Eqn 10)
Appendix F
F5

.

\

+

.

\

+


.

\

=
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
A
f
x
d
h
x bx f
bh
N
sh
y
sb
y
ult m
cu u
7
3
87 . 0 5 . 0 87 . 0
'
1
4
7
3
1
1
67 . 0
0

.

\

h
x
bh
A
f
bh
A
f
sh
y
sb
y
7
11
1 87 . 0 5 . 0 87 . 0
bh
A
f
x
h
h
d
bh
A
h
x
f
h
x f
bh
N
sb
y
sh
y
ult m
cu u
87 . 0
'
8
7
8
3
1 2 87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0

.

\

+

.

\

+


.

\

=
(Eqn F18)
Rearranging (Eqn F18)
F
sc1
4x/7 3x/7
s
= 0.002
F
st2
F
st3
F
sc3
F
sc2
F
c2
F
c1
4x/7
h11x/7 4x/7
0.87f
y
3x/7 4x/7
m
cu
f
67 . 0
' d
' d
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress Block
Steel stress Block
Strain diagram across whole section
Figure F4.1 Concrete and steel stress strain relation for Case 1
F
st1
Appendix F
F6
h
x
bh
A
bh
A
f
bh
N
h
x
bh
A
f
f
sb sh
y
u sh
y
ult m
cu

.

\

+

.

\

+


.

\

8
3
87 . 0 87 . 0 2
3
1
1
67 . 0
2
0
0
'
87 . 0
8
7
=
h
d
bh
A
f
sb
y
(Eqn F19)
(Eqn F19) can be used for solve for
h
x
To balance the external load
u
M
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
st st st sc sc sc c c u
+ + + + + + + = (Eqn F20)
By (Eqn F11)


.

\

+ +

.

\

= + =
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu c c c
2
0 0 0
2
2
2
1
2
12
1
3
1
2
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\


.

\

=

.

\


.

\

=
h
d
bh
A
f
x
h
h
d
d
h
bh
A
f
x
d
bh
M
sb
y
sb
y
sc
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0
'
1
4
7
'
2
5 . 0 87 . 0
'
1
4
7
2 2
1
(Eqn F21)

.

\


.

\

= 
.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
x h
h
x
A f
bh
M
sh
y sh y
sc
14
3
2
1
7
3
87 . 0
1
14
3
2 7
3
87 . 0
2 2
2
(Eqn F22)

.

\


.

\

= 
.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
x h
h
x
A f
bh
M
sh
y sh y
sc
21
13
2
1
7
2
87 . 0
1
21
13
2 7
2
87 . 0
2 2
3
(Eqn F23)

.

\

= 
.

\

=
h
d
bh
A
f d
h
bh
A f
bh
M
sb
y
sb y
st
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0 '
2
5 . 0 87 . 0
2 2
1
(Eqn F24)

.

\


.

\

= 
.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
x
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
M
sh
y
sh
y
st
14
11
7
11
1 87 . 0
14
11
7
11
1 87 . 0
2 2
2
(Eqn F25)

.

\


.

\

= 
.

\


.

\

=
2
1
21
29
7
2
87 . 0
1
2 21
29
7
2
87 . 0
2 2
3
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
h x
h
x
A f
bh
M
sh
y sh y
st
(Eqn F26)

.

\

+

.

\


.

\

=
+
h
d
bh
A
f
h
d
bh
A
f
x
h
h
d
bh
M M
sb
y
sb
y
st sc
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0
'
1
4
7
2
1 1

.

\


.

\

=
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
sb
y
'
8
7
8
11 '
2
1
87 . 0 (Eqn F27)

.

\


.

\

+ 
.

\


.

\

=
+
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
M M
sh
y
sh
y
st sc
14
11
7
11
1 87 . 0
14
3
2
1
7
3
87 . 0
2
2 2

.

\


.

\

=
2
49
65
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
sh
y
(Eqn F28)

.

\


.

\

+ 
.

\


.

\

=
+
2
1
21
29
7
2
87 . 0
21
13
2
1
7
2
87 . 0
2
3 3
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
M M
sh
y
sh
y
st sc
2
147
32
87 . 0

.

\

=
h
x
bh
A
f
sh
y
(Eqn F29)
Appendix F
F7
Total

.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\

=
2
2
147
163
87 . 0
'
8
7
8
11 '
2
1
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
bh
M
sh
y
sb
y
s

.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\

=
2
2
147
163 '
8
7
8
11 '
2
1
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
bh
A
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
bh
M
sh sb
y
s
(Eqn F30)
Substituting into (Eqn F20)


.

\

+ + 
.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
2
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\

+
2
147
163 '
8
7
8
11 '
2
1
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
bh
A
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
sh sb
y
(Eqn F31)
Case 2 where 7/3(d/h) < x/h 7/11 (1 d/h)
There are two subcases to be considered in Case 2,
i.e. Case 2(a)
14
3 '
h
d
and Case 2(b)
14
3 '
<
h
d
For Case 2(a), where
14
3 '
h
d
. However,
2
1 '
3
7
h
d
and
2
1 '
1
11
7
< 
.

\

h
d
. So this case
doesnt exist.
For Case 2(b), where
14
3 '
<
h
d
both
1 sc
A and
1 st
A are in the plastic zone as shown in
Figure 3.2.
The various components of stresses in concrete and steel are identical to that of Case
1 except that of
1 sc
A where
sb y sc
A f F 5 . 0 87 . 0
1
= and

.

\

=
h
d
A f M
sb y sc
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0
1
It can be seen that
1 st
F and
1 sc
F are identical but opposite in direction, so cancel out.
By formulation similar to the above,
bh
A
h
x
f
h
x f
bh
N
sh
y
ult m
cu u

.

\

+


.

\

= 1 2 87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
(Eqn F32)
+


.

\

+
=
bh
A
f
f
bh
A
f
bh
N
h
x
sh
y
ult m
cu
sh
y
u
87 . 0 2
3
1
1
67 . 0
87 . 0
0
(Eqn F33)
Appendix F
F8


.

\

+ +

.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
2
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\


.

\

+ 
.

\

+
2
147
163 '
2
1
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
bh
A
h
d
bh
A
f
sh sb
y
(Eqn F34)
Case 3 where 7/11(d/h) < x/h 7/11 for d/h > 3/14 and
7/11(1 d/h) < x/h 7/11 for d/h < 3/14
The concrete / steel stress / strain diagram is worked out as shown in Figure F4.3. It
F
st2
F
st3
F
sc3
F
sc2
F
c2 F
c1
4x/7
h11x/7 4x/7
0.87f
y
3x/7 4x/7
m
cu
f
67 . 0
' d
' d
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress Block
Steel stress Block
s
= 0.002
Strain diagram across whole section
Figure F4.2 Concrete and steel stress strain relation for Case 2(b)
Appendix F
F9
should be noted that the components of stresses are identical to that of Case 2 except
that by
1 st
A which is
( )
( )
sb y sb y sb
y
st
A
x
d
x
h
f A
x
d x h
f A
x
d x h f
F
8
7
1
'
87 . 0
8
7 '
87 . 0 5 . 0
7 / 4
' 87 . 0
1

.

\

=
=
=
(Eqn F35)
By derivation similar to the above in balancing axial load,
bh
A
h
x
f
x
d
x
h
bh
A
f
h
x f
bh
N
sh
y
sb
y
ult m
cu u

.

\

+

.

\

+ +


.

\

= 1 2 87 . 0
'
8
7
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
(Eqn F36)
F
st2
F
st3
F
sc3
F
sc2
F
c2 F
c1
4x/7
h11x/7 4x/7
0.87f
y
3x/7 4x/7
m
cu
f
67 . 0
' d
' d
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress Block
Steel stress Block
s
= 0.002
Strain diagram across concrete section
Figure F4.3 Concrete and steel stress strain relation for Case 3
Appendix F
F10
Rearranging (Eqn F36)

.

\


.

\

+

.

\

+


.

\

h
x
bh
N
bh
A
bh
A
f
h
x
bh
A
f
f
u sh sb
y
sh
y
ult m
cu
8
11
87 . 0 87 . 0 2
3
1
1
67 . 0
2
0
0 1
'
8
7
87 . 0 =

.

\

+
h
d
bh
A
f
sb
y
(Eqn F37)
By balancing moments :


.

\

+ +

.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
2
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\


.

\


.

\

+
bh
A
h
x
h
x
bh
A
x
h
h
d
x
h
h
d
f
sh sb
y
2
147
163
8
3 '
8
7
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0 (Eqn F38)
Case 4 where x < h < 11x/7, i.e. 7/11 < x/h 1
The concrete / steel stress / strain diagram is worked out as shown in Figure F4.4. It
should be noted that the components of stresses are identical to that of Case 3 except
that by
2 st
A which vanishes.
Hence by derivation similar to the above by balancing axial load,

.

\

+ +

.

\

+ +


.

\

=
4
7
8
7
56
9
87 . 0
'
8
7
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
x
h
h
x
bh
A
f
x
d
x
h
bh
A
f
h
x f
bh
N
sh
y
sb
y
ult m
cu u
(Eqn F39)
Rearranging

.

\


.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

h
x
bh
N
bh
A
bh
A
f
h
x
bh
A
f
f
u sh sb
y
sh
y
ult m
cu
4
7
8
11
87 . 0 87 . 0
56
9
3
1
1
67 . 0
2
0
0 1
'
8
7
87 . 0 =

.

\

+
bh
A
h
d
bh
A
f
sh sb
y
(Eqn F40)
which can be solved as a quadratic equation.
By balancing moment :

.

\



.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
6
1
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\

+ +

.

\


.

\


.

\


.

\

+
bh
A
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
x
h
h
d
x
h
h
d
f
sh sb
y
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
8
3 '
8
7
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0
(Eqn F41)
Appendix F
F11
Case 5 where x>h>(1
0
/
ult
)x, i.e 1 < x/h 1/(1
0
/
ult
)
The concrete / steel stress / strain diagram is worked out as follows. The whole
section is in compression so that the neutral axis depth ratio is greater than unity and
hence becomes a hypothetical concept. The contribution by
1 c
F becomes partial and
need be calculated by integration to partial limits. The contribution by
1 st
F become
compression
' 1 sc
F and
2 st
F ,
3 st
F vanish.
( )
x
x h
=
0035 . 0
1
F
st3
F
sc3
F
sc2
F
c2 F
c1
4x/7
h x
0.87f
y
3x/7 4x/7
m
cu
f
67 . 0
' d
' d
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress Block
Steel stress Block
s
= 0.002
Strain diagram across concrete section
Figure F4.4 Concrete and steel stress strain relation for Case 4
Appendix F
F12
Concrete compressive stresses and forces
bdu F
ult
x
h x
c
/
1
0
where u
x
E
u
x
E
ult c ult c
+ =
2
2
0
2
2
(Eqn F42)
du u
x
b E
du u
x
b E
bdu u
x
E
u
x
E
F
ult ult ult
x
h x
ult c
x
h x
ult c
x
h x
ult c ult c
c
+ =
+ =
/ /
2
2
0
2 /
2
2
0
2
1
0 0 0
2 2


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

=
0
2
3
3
0
0
2
2
2
0 1
2
1
6
1
2
ult c
ult c
ult
ult c
ult
ult c c
E
E
h
x E E
bh
F
( )
x
x h
=
0035 . 0
1
F
sc3
F
sc2
F
c2
F
c1
4x/7
0.87f
y
3x/7 4x/7
m
cu
f
67 . 0
' d
' d
h
x
0
=
u
ult
x /
0
0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress Block
Steel stress Block
s
= 0.002
Strain diagram across concrete section
Figure F4.5 Concrete and steel stress strain relation for Case 5
Appendix F
F13
2
0
2
0
2
6 2 2

.

\



.

\

+
x
h E
x
h E E
ult c ult c ult c
(Eqn F43)
h
x f
F
ult m
cu
c


.

\

=
0
2
1
67 . 0
(same as the previous cases) (Eqn F44)


.

\

+


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

= + =
0
2
0 0
3
3
0
0
2
2
2
0 2 1
2
1
2
1
6
1
2
ult c
ult c
ult
c
ult
ult c
ult
ult c c c c
E
E
h
x E E E
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
2
0
2
0
2
6 2 2

.

\



.

\

+
x
h E
x
h E E
ult c ult c ult c
(Eqn F45)
Steel compressive force in the portion steel plastic zone by
sb
A is
bh
A
f
bh
F
A f F
sb
y
sc
sb y sc
5 . 0 87 . 0 5 . 0 87 . 0
1
1
= = (Eqn F46)
( )
bh
A
h
d
x
h
f
bh
F
A
x
d h x f
F
sb
y
sc
sb
y
sc
8
7 '
1 1 87 . 0 5 . 0
7 / 4
' 87 . 0
' 1
' 1

.

\

=
+
= (Eqn F47)
bh
A
h
d
x
h
f
bh
F
bh
F
sb
y
sc sc

.

\

= +
'
1
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
' 1 1
(Eqn F48)
Steel compressive force in the portion steel plastic zone by
sh
A is
bh
A
h
x
f
bh
F x
h
A
f F
sh
y
sc sh
y sc

.

\

=

.

\

=
7
3
87 . 0
7
3
87 . 0
2
2
(Eqn F49)
Steel compressive force in the portion steel elastic zone by
sh
A is
2
1
7
3
7 / 4
1 87 . 0
7
3
7 / 4
87 . 0
3

.

\


.

\

+

.

\

=
x
h
h
A
x
h x
f
x
h
h
A
x
h x
f F
sh
y
sh
y sc
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
bh
F
sh
y
sc

.

\

=
56
33
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
3
(Eqn F50)
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
bh
A
h
x
f
bh
F
bh
F
sh
y
sh
y
sh
y
sc sc

.

\

=

.

\

+

.

\

= +
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
56
33
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
7
3
87 . 0
3 2
(Eqn F51)
As
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
F
bh
N
sc sc sc sc c u 3 2 ' 1 1
+ + + + =
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
bh
A
h
d
x
h
f
x
h E
x
h E E
E
E
h
x E E E
bh
N
sh
y
sb
y
ult c ult c ult c
ult c
ult c
ult
c
ult
ult c
ult
ult c u

.

\

+

.

\

+

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

+


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

=
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
'
1
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
6 2 2
2
1
2
1
6
1
2
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0 0
3
3
0
0
2
2
2
0
h
x
bh
A
f E
bh
N
sh
y
ult
ult ult
ult c
u


.

\

+ + =
56
9
87 . 0
6
1
2
1
2
1
6
1
0
0
2
2
0
Appendix F
F14


.

\

+ + +
bh
A
f
bh
A
f
E
E
sh
y
sb
y
ult c
ult c
4
7
87 . 0
8
11
87 . 0
2
0
2
2
0
2
0
2
6 8
7
87 . 0 1
'
8
7
87 . 0
2 2

.

\


.

\

+ +
x
h E
x
h
bh
A
f
h
d
bh
A
f
E E
ult c sh
y
sb
y
ult c ult c
(EqnF52)
Rearranging (Eqn F52)
3
0
0
2
2
0
56
9
87 . 0
6
1
2
1
2
1
6
1

.

\



.

\

+ +
h
x
bh
A
f E
sh
y
ult
ult ult
ult c
2
0
2
4
7
87 . 0
8
11
87 . 0
2

.

\



.

\

+ + +
h
x
bh
N
bh
A
f
bh
A
f
E
E
u sh
y
sb
y
ult c
ult c
0
6 8
7
87 . 0 1
'
8
7
87 . 0
2 2
0
2
0
2
=

.

\

+ +
ult c sh
y
sb
y
ult c ult c
E
h
x
bh
A
f
h
d
bh
A
f
E E
(Eqn F53)
which is a cubic equation in
h
x
that can be solved by formulae or by numerical
method with predetermined
bh
A
sh
,
bh
A
sb
and under applied
u
N .
Summing the Moments as follows :
Concrete compressive stresses and moments

.

\

+ =
u x
h
bdu M
ult
x
h x
c
2
/
1
0
where u
x
E
u
x
E
ult c ult c
+ =
2
2
0
2
2
du u x
h
b u
x
E
u
x
E
M
ult
x
h x
ult c ult c
c

.

\

+
+ =
2 2
/
2
2
0
2
1
0
(Eqn F54)
Integrating and expanding

.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

+

.

\

+ +


.

\


.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

+
+


.

\


.

\

=
2 2
4
4
0
2
3
3
0
0
2
2
3
3
0
2
2
0
2
1
4 6 4 1
4
1
3 3 1
2
1
3
1
2
3 3 1
3
1
2 1
2
1
2
1
x
h
x
h
h
x
h
x
x
h
x
h
h
x
h
x E
x
h
h
x
h
x
x
h
h
x
h
x
E
bh
M
ult ult
ult c
ult ult
ult c
c


.

\



.

\


.

\

=


.

\



.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
bh
x h bx f
bh
M
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu c
0 0
2
0 0
2
2
1 1 1
2
67 . 0 1
2
1
2
1
67 . 0

.

\

=

.

\

=
h
d
bh
A
f d
h
bh
A f
bh
M
sb
y
sb y
sc
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0 '
2
5 . 0 87 . 0
2 2
1
bh
A
h
d
x
h
h
d
x
h
f
h
d
h
bh
A
x
d
x
h
f
bh
M
sb
y
sb
y
sc

.

\


.

\

+ = 
.

\


.

\

+ =
'
2
1 '
1
8
7
87 . 0
1
'
2 8
7 '
1 87 . 0
2
' 1
bh
A
h
d
x
h
h
d
f
sb
y

.

\


.

\

+ =
'
2
1
1
'
1
8
7
87 . 0
Appendix F
F15
bh
A
h
d
x
h
h
d
f
h
d
bh
A
f
bh
M
bh
M
sb
y
sb
y
sc sc

.

\


.

\

+

.

\

= +
'
2
1
1
'
1
8
7
87 . 0
'
2
1
5 . 0 87 . 0
2
' 1
2

.

\


.

\

= +
8
3 '
1
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0
2
' 1
2
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
bh
M
bh
M
sb
y
sc sc
(Eqn F55)
bh
A
h
x
h
x
f
bh
A
h
x
h
x
f
bh
M
sh
y
sh
y
sc

.

\

=

.

\


.

\

=
2
2
2
98
9
14
3
87 . 0
14
3
2
1
7
3
87 . 0

.

\


.

\

+

.

\

=
6
1
7
2
56
9
4
3
8
7
87 . 0
14
3
4
3
4
7
2
5
87 . 0
2
3
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
f
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
f
bh
M
sh
y
sh
y
sc

.

\

+ =
2
392
45
112
33
48
7
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
f
sh
y

.

\

+ = +
2
2
3
2
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
f
bh
M
bh
M
sh
y
sc sc
(Eqn F56)
Total Moment
2
3
2
2
2
' 1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
sc sc sc sc c c
+ + + + + =
bh
A
h
x
h
x
x
h
f
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
h
x
h
x f
x
h
x
h
h
x
h
x
x
h
x
h
h
x
h
x E
x
h
h
x
h
x
x
h
h
x
h
x
E
bh
M
sh
y
sb
y
ult ult m
cu
ult ult
ult c
ult ult
ult c
u

.

\

+ +

.

\


.

\

+


.

\



.

\


.

\

+


.

\


.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

+


.

\


.

\

+ +


.

\


.

\



.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

+


.

\


.

\

=
2
0 0
2 2
4
4
0
2
3
3
0
0
2
2
3
3
0
2
2
0
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0
8
3 '
1
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0 1 1 1
2
67 . 0
4 6 4 1
4
1
3 3 1
2
1
3
1
2
3 3 1
3
1
2 1
2
1
2
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
3
3
0
2
24
1
6
1
4
1
6
1
24
1

.

\



.

\

+ + =
h
x
E
bh
M
ult
ult ult ult
ult c
u
2
0 0 0
0
2
2
0
24
1
12
1
12
1
12
1
4
1
4
1
12
1

.

\

+


.

\

+
+ + +
x
h
E
x
h
E
h
x
E
ult
ult c
ult
ult c
ult
ult
ult
ult c
bh
A
h
x
h
x
x
h
f
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
sh
y
sb
y

.

\

+ +

.

\


.

\

+
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0
8
3 '
1
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0
(Eqn F57)
Case 6 where (1
0
/
ult
)x>h>3x/7, i.e. 1/(1
0
/
ult
) < x/h 7/3
The concrete / steel stress / strain diagram is worked out as follows :
Appendix F
F16
Comparing with Case 5, contribution by
1 sc
F vanishes. So formulation as similar to
above :
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
bh
A
h
d
x
h
f
f
bh
N
sh
y
sb
y
m
cu u

.

\

+

.

\

+ =
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
'
1
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
67 . 0
(Eqn F58)
Rearranging (Eqn F58)

.

\


.

\

+ +

.

\

h
x
bh
A
bh
A
f
f
bh
N
h
x
bh
A
f
sh sb
y
m
cu u sh
y
4
7
8
11
87 . 0
67 . 0
56
9
87 . 0
2
s
= 0.002
F
sc3
F
sc2
F
c2
4x/7
0.87f
y
3x/7 4x/7
m
cu
f
67 . 0
' d
' d
h
x
0035 . 0 =
ult
Concrete stress Block
Steel stress Block
Strain diagram across concrete section
Figure F4.6 Concrete and steel stress strain relation for Case 6
Appendix F
F17
0
8
7
1
'
8
7
87 . 0 =

.

\

bh
A
bh
A
h
d
f
sh sb
y
(Eqn F59)
which is a quadratic equation in
h
x
which can be solved
In moment balancing moment 0
2
=
bh
M
c
, whilst that by steel is identical to Case 5
Total Moment
2
3
2
2
2
' 1
2
1
2
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
bh
M
sc sc sc sc
+ + + =

.

\

+ +

.

\


.

\

=
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0
8
3 '
1
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
f
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
sh
y
sb
y
(Eqn F60)
Case 7 where x/h > 7/3
In this case, the concrete and steel in the entire column section are under ultimate
stress. The axial load will be simply

.

\

+ + =
bd
A
bd
A
f
f
bh
N
sh sb
y
m
cu u
87 . 0
67 . 0
(Eqn F61)
and the moment is zero.
0
2
=
bh
M
u
(Eqn F62)
(III) Design formulae for 4bar column sections for determination of
reinforcement ratios
It is the aim of the section of the Appendix to derive formulae for the determination of
bh
A
sb
against applied axial load and moment under a predetermined sectional size. In
the following derivations,
bh
A
sh
are set to zero. The process involves :
(i) For the 7 cases discussed in the foregoing, eliminate
bh
A
sb
between equations
h
b
Appendix F
F18
obtained from balancing
bh
N
u
and
2
bh
M
u
by making
bh
A
sb
subject of formulae
in the equation for balancing of
bh
N
u
substitute into the equation for balancing
of
2
bh
M
u
. The equation obtained in a polynomial in
h
x
which can be solved
by equations (if quadratic or cubic or even 4
th
power) or by numerical methods.
Solution in
h
x
will be valid if the value arrived at agree with the
predetermined range of the respective case;
(ii) Back substitute the accepted value of
h
x
into the equation obtained by
balancing
bh
N
u
to solve for
bh
A
sb
.
Case 1 where x/h 7/3(d/h)
By (Eqn F18) with 0 =
bh
A
sh
0
'
87 . 0
8
7
8
3
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
2
0
=

.

\



.

\

h
d
bh
A
f
h
x
bh
A
f
bh
N
h
x f
sb
y
sb
y
u
ult m
cu
h
x
h
d
h
x
bh
N
h
x f
bh
A
f
u
ult m
cu
sb
y
8
3 '
8
7
3
3
67 . 0
87 . 0
2
0

.

\



.

\

(Eqn F63)
Substituting into (Eqn F34) again with 0 =
bh
A
sh

.

\



.

\

+


.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
2
1
3
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\


.

\


.

\



.

\

+
x
h
h
d
h
d
h
x
h
d
h
x
bh
N
h
x f
u
ult m
cu
'
8
7
8
11 '
2
1
8
3 '
8
7
3
1
1
67 . 0
2
0
3
2
0 0
12
1
2
1
3
1
8
3 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

h
x f
ult ult m
cu
2
2
0 0 0
'
96
7 '
4
3
24
7 '
16
29
2
1 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

+ + + +
h
x
h
d
h
d
h
d f
ult ult ult m
cu
0
'
2
1 '
8
7
3
1
1
'
8
7 67 . 0 '
2
1
8
11
2 2
0
2
=

.

\

+


.

\


.

\


.

\

+
h
d
bh
N
bh
M
h
d
h
x
bh
M
h
d f
h
d
bh
N
u u u
ult m
cu u
Appendix F
F19
The equation can be solved for
h
x
and substituted into (Eqn F18)

.

\


.

\



.

\

=
h
x
h
d
f
h
x
bh
N
h
x f
bh
A
y
u
ult m
cu
sb
8
3 '
8
7
87 . 0
3
3
67 . 0
2
0
Case 2 where 7/3(d/h) < x/h 7/11 7/11(d/h) (applicable to d/h > 3/14 only)
By (Eqn F33) with 0 =
bh
A
sh
,


.

\

=
ult m
cu u
f
bh
N
h
x
0
3
1
1
67 . 0
Substituting
h
x
into (Eqn F34) obtained and calculate
bh
A
sb
as

.

\


.

\



.

\


.

\

+ 
.

\


.

\

=
h
d
f
h
x
h
x
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
bh
A
y
ult ult ult m
cu u sb
'
2
1
87 . 0
12
1
3
1
6
1
1
2
1 67 . 0
2
0 0 0
2
(Eqn F64)
Case 3 where 7/11(d/h) < x/h 7/11 for d/h > 3/14 and
7/11(1 d/h) < x/h 7/11 for d/h < 3/14
and Case 4 where 7/11 < x/h 1
By (Eqn F36) and setting 0 =
bh
A
sh
.

.

\

+ +


.

\

=
x
d
x
h
bh
A
f
h
x f
bh
N
sb
y
ult m
cu u
'
8
7
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0

.

\

+


.

\

=
x
h
h
d
x
h
f
h
x f
bh
N
bh
A
y
ult m
cu u
sb
'
8
7
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
Substituting into (Eqn F38) and again setting 0 =
bh
A
sh

.

\



.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
6
1
1
2
1 67 . 0

.

\

+


.

\


.

\


.

\


.

\


.

\

+
x
h
h
d
x
h
f
h
x f
bh
N
x
h
h
d
x
h
h
d
f
y
ult m
cu u
y
'
8
7
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
8
3 '
8
7
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0
0
3
2
0 0
12
1
2
1
3
1
8
11 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

h
x f
ult ult m
cu
Appendix F
F20
2
2
0 0
2
0 0
'
96
7 '
12
5
96
7 '
16
13
12
7
16
21 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

+


.

\

+ +
h
x
h
d
h
d
h
d f
ult ult ult ult m
cu

.

\

)
`

.

\



.

\

+ 
.

\

+
h
x
bh
M
bh
N
h
d
h
d
h
d
h
d f
u u
ult ult m
cu
2
0 0
8
11 '
2
1
8
3 '
3
1 '
3
1
1 1
'
8
7 67 . 0
0 1
'
8
7
1
' '
2
1
8
7
2
= 
.

\


.

\


.

\

h
d
bh
M
bh
N
h
d
h
d
u u
(Eqn F65)
which is a cubic equation in

.

\

h
x
Upon solving 
.

\

h
x
lying between 
.

\

h
d'
1
11
7
and 1,
bh
A
sb
can be obtained by

.

\

+


.

\

=
x
h
h
d
x
h
f
h
x f
bh
N
bh
A
y
ult m
cu u
sb
'
8
7
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
3
1
1
67 . 0
0
(Eqn F66)
Case 5 where 1 < x/h 1/(1
0
/
ult
)
Solving
bd
A
sb
by (Eqn F52)

.

\


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

+

.

\



.

\

+ + =
x
h
h
d
x
h E
x
h E E E
E
x
h
h
d
h
x
bh
N
bh
A
f
ult c ult c ult c ult c
ult c
ult
ult
ult
u sb
y
1
'
8
7
8
11
6 2 2 2
1
'
8
7
8
11
2
1
6
1
6
1
2
1
87 . 0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
0
2
2
0
Substituting into (Eqn F57)

.

\


.

\

+


.

\



.

\


.

\

+


.

\


.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

+


.

\


.

\

+ +


.

\


.

\

+ +

.

\



.

\

+
+


.

\


.

\

=
8
3 '
1
8
7 '
2
1
87 . 0 1 1 1
2
67 . 0
4 6 4 1
4
1
3 3 1
2
1
3
1
2
3 3 1
3
1
2 1
2
1
2
1
0 0
2 2
4
4
0
2
3
3
0
0
2
2
3
3
0
2
2
0
2
x
h
h
d
h
d
bh
A
f
h
x
h
x f
x
h
x
h
h
x
h
x
x
h
x
h
h
x
h
x E
x
h
h
x
h
x
x
h
h
x
h
x
E
bh
M
sb
y
ult ult m
cu
ult ult
ult c
ult ult
ult c
to solve for
h
x
.
Backsubstituting into the previous equation to solve for
bd
A
sb
by trial and error
Appendix F
F21
Case 6 where (1
0
/
ult
)x > h > 3x/7 i.e. 1/(1
0
/
ult
) < x/h 7/3(1d/h)
Referring to (Eqn F58) and setting 0 =
bd
A
sh
bh
A
h
d
x
h
f
f
bh
N
sb
y
m
cu u

.

\

+ =
'
1
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
67 . 0

.

\



.

\

=
h
d
x
h f
bh
N
bh
A
f
m
cu u sb
y
'
1
8
7
8
11 67 . 0
87 . 0
Substituting into (Eqn F60) and again setting 0 =
bd
A
sh
and rearranging

.

\



.

\

+
+ 
.

\



.

\


.

\

=
8
3 '
2
1 67 . 0
8
11
'
2
1 67 . 0 '
1
8
7
2
2
h
d f
bh
N
bh
M
bh
M
h
d f
bh
N
h
d
h
x
m
cu u
m
cu u
With
h
x
determined, calculate
bh
A
sb
by (Eqn F58)
bh
A
h
d
x
h
f
f
bh
N
sb
y
m
cu u

.

\

+ =
'
1
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
67 . 0

.

\

=
h
d
x
h
f
f
bh
N
bh
A
y
m
cu u
sb
'
1
8
7
8
11
87 . 0
67 . 0
(Eqn F67)
Case 7 where x/h > 7/3
y m
cu u sb sb
y
m
cu u
f
f
bh
N
bh
A
bh
A
f
f
bh
N
87 . 0
1 67 . 0
87 . 0
67 . 0


.

\

= + =
(Eqn F68)
0
2
=
bh
M
u
Appendix F
Chart F1
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 30, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F2
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 30, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F3
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 30, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F4
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 30, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F5
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 30, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F6
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F7
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F8
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F9
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F10
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 35, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F11
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 40, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F12
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 40, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F13
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 40, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F14
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 40, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F15
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 40, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F16
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 45, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F17
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 45, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F18
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 45, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F19
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 45, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F20
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 45, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F21
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 50, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F22
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 50, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F23
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 50, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F24
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 50, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F25
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 50, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F26
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 55, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F27
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 55, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F28
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 55, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F29
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 55, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F30
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 55, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F31
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 60, 4bar column, d/h = 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F32
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 60, 4bar column, d/h = 0.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F33
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 60, 4bar column, d/h = 0.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F34
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 60, 4bar column, d/h = 0.9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Appendix F
Chart F35
Design Chart of Rectangular Column to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Concrete Grade 60, 4bar column, d/h = 0.95
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5 18
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Rectangular Column R.C. Design to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004
Project :
Column Floor
f
cu
= 35 N/mm
2
f
y
= 460 N/mm
2
E
c
= 23700 N/mm
2
b = 1500 h = 2000 b' = 1285.17 h' = 1684.31 cover= 50
Steel provided : 15 Y 40 (Along each long sides h, excluding corner bars)
12 Y 40 (Along each short sides b, excluding corner bars)
4 Y 40 (Corner bars)
Total Steel Area = 72885 mm
2
Steel Percentage = 2.43 % Max. Ultimate Load = 76069 kN
Area of Steel per mm length for the long sides bars (including corner bars) = 21.36 mm
2
/mm
Area of Steel along long sides (excluding corner bars) = 37699 mm
2
Area of Steel per mm length for the short sides bars (including corner bars) = 23.46 mm
2
/mm
Area of Steel along short sides (excluding corner bars) = 30159 mm
2
Basic Load Case
1 2 3 4 5 6
D.L. L.L. Wx Wy W45 W135
37872 1101 3628.1 2611.1 5692.3 8209.2
291.3 37.11 470.81 3700 1750.3 4892.9
31.33 16.09 5.17 2700 2764 3520.2
P M
x
M
y
Load Comb 1 1.4D+1.6L 54782 467.2 18.118 Mx' = 476.55 Mux = 16452 Section OK
Load Comb 2 1.2(D+L+Wx) 42413 170.88 12.084 Mx' = 179.2 Mux = 23474 Section OK
Load Comb 3 1.2(D+LWx) 51121 959.06 24.492 Mx' = 973.01 Mux = 18743 Section OK
Load Comb 4 1.2(D+L+Wy) 43634 4834.1 3221.7 Mx' = 6999.6 Mux = 22861 Section OK
Load Comb 5 1.2(D+LWy) 49900 4045.9 3258.3 My' = 4639 Muy = 14871 Section OK
Load Comb 6 1.2(D+L+W45) 39936 2494.5 3298.5 My' = 4352.2 Muy = 18945 Section OK
Load Comb 7 1.2(D+LW45) 53598 1706.3 3335.1 My' = 3865.6 Muy = 13130 Section OK
Load Comb 8 1.2(D+L+W135) 56618 5477.4 4242.6 My' = 5801.2 Muy = 11590 Section OK
Load Comb 9 1.2(D+LW135) 36916 6265.5 4206 Mx' = 9507.3 Mux = 26076 Section OK
Load Comb 10 1.4(D+Wx) 47941 251.31 36.624 Mx' = 273.77 Mux = 20575 Section OK
Load Comb 11 1.4(DWx) 58099 1067 51.1 Mx' = 1090.8 Mux = 14185 Section OK
Load Comb 12 1.4(D+Wy) 49365 5587.8 3736.1 Mx' = 7805.2 Mux = 19771 Section OK
Load Comb 13 1.4(DWy) 56676 4772.2 3823.9 My' = 5179.4 Muy = 11560 Section OK
Load Comb 14 1.4(D+W45) 45051 2858.3 3825.7 My' = 4911.9 Muy = 16951 Section OK
Load Comb 15 1.4(DW45) 60989 2042.6 3913.4 My' = 4416.8 Muy = 9164 Section OK
Load Comb 16 1.4(D+W135) 64513 6442.2 4972.2 My' = 6446.8 Muy = 7132 Section OK
Load Comb 17 1.4(DW135) 41527 7257.9 4884.4 Mx' = 10685 Mux = 23910 Section OK
Load Comb 18 1.0D+1.4Wx 32792 367.83 24.092 Mx' = 387.89 Mux = 27896 Section OK
Load Comb 19 1.0D1.4Wx 42951 950.43 38.568 Mx' = 976.72 Mux = 23206 Section OK
Load Comb 20 1.0D+1.4Wy 34216 5471.3 3748.7 Mx' = 8512.2 Mux = 27278 Section OK
Load Comb 21 1.0D1.4Wy 41527 4888.7 3811.3 My' = 5808.5 Muy = 18343 Section OK
Load Comb 22 1.0D+1.4W45 29902 2741.8 3838.3 My' = 5236.3 Muy = 22460 Section OK
Load Comb 23 1.0D1.4W45 45841 2159.2 3900.9 My' = 4707.8 Muy = 16626 Section OK
Load Comb 24 1.0D+1.4W135 49364 6558.7 4959.6 Mx' = 9502.2 Mux = 19771 Section OK
Load Comb 25 1.0D1.4W135 26379 7141.3 4897 Mx' = 11689 Mux = 29921 Section OK
Moment M
y
(kNm)
Load Case No.
Load Case
Axial Load P (kN)
Moment M
x
(kNm)
P versus Mx and My of the Column Section
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000
M (kNm)
P
(
k
N
)
P  Mx P  My Actual Loads Mx control Actual Loads My control
Rectangular Column R.C. Design to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004  4 bar column
Project :
Column Mark Floor
f
cu
= 35 N/mm
2
f
y
= 460 N/mm
2
E
c
= 23700 N/mm
2
b = 400 h = 500 b' = 325.00 h' = 425.00 cover= 55 bar size = 40
Basic Load Case
1 2 3 4 5 6
D.L. L.L. Wx Wy W45 W135
2304.7 582.1 362.17 545.1 56.92 82.09
29.13 32.11 47.1 75.12 98.1 8.93
31.33 16.09 2.15 44.2 76.99 35.21
N Mx My N/bh M/bh
2
d/h / d/b x/h / y/h Steel Steel area
(kN) (kNm) (kNm) (N/mm
2
) (N/mm
2
) (%) (mm
2
)
Load Comb 1 1.4D+1.6L 4157.9 92.158 18.118 Mx' = 99.437 20.79 0.9944 0.85 1.1601 1.9538 3907.6
Load Comb 2 1.2(D+L+Wx) 3029.6 130.01 15.708 Mx' = 140.15 15.148 1.4015 0.85 0.9671 0.8 1600
Load Comb 3 1.2(D+LWx) 3898.8 16.968 20.868 My' = 25.431 19.494 0.3179 0.8125 1.31 1.1989 2397.7
Load Comb 4 1.2(D+L+Wy) 2810 16.656 34.752 My' = 41.482 14.05 0.5185 0.8125 1.0602 0.8 1600
Load Comb 5 1.2(D+LWy) 4118.3 163.63 71.328 Mx' = 192.92 20.591 1.9292 0.85 1.0304 2.5083 5016.5
Load Comb 6 1.2(D+L+W45) 3532.5 191.21 74.1 Mx' = 231.37 17.662 2.3137 0.85 0.9381 2.0771 4154.3
Load Comb 7 1.2(D+LW45) 3395.9 44.232 110.68 My' = 125.44 16.979 1.5679 0.8125 0.9731 1.4265 2852.9
Load Comb 8 1.2(D+L+W135) 3562.7 84.204 23.964 Mx' = 97.029 17.813 0.9703 0.85 1.0902 1.1552 2310.4
Load Comb 9 1.2(D+LW135) 3365.7 62.772 60.54 My' = 81.714 16.828 1.0214 0.8125 1.0402 0.9675 1935
Load Comb 10 1.4(D+Wx) 2719.5 106.72 40.852 Mx' = 135.77 13.598 1.3577 0.85 0.9306 0.8 1600
Load Comb 11 1.4(DWx) 3733.6 25.158 46.872 My' = 54.182 18.668 0.6773 0.8125 1.1502 1.2111 2422.2
Load Comb 12 1.4(D+Wy) 2463.4 64.386 18.018 Mx' = 78.233 12.317 0.7823 0.85 0.9637 0.8 1600
Load Comb 13 1.4(DWy) 3989.7 145.95 105.74 Mx' = 192.42 19.949 1.9242 0.85 1.0205 2.3331 4666.2
Load Comb 14 1.4(D+W45) 3306.3 178.12 63.924 Mx' = 215.78 16.531 2.1578 0.85 0.9268 1.6862 3372.3
Load Comb 15 1.4(DW45) 3146.9 96.558 151.65 My' = 186.76 15.734 2.3345 0.8125 0.8694 1.7268 3453.6
Load Comb 16 1.4(D+W135) 3341.5 53.284 5.432 Mx' = 56.444 16.708 0.5644 0.85 1.1402 0.8 1600
Load Comb 17 1.4(DW135) 3111.7 28.28 93.156 My' = 103.56 15.558 1.2945 0.8125 0.9764 0.8543 1708.6
Load Comb 18 1.0D+1.4Wx 1797.7 95.07 28.32 Mx' = 121.06 8.9883 1.2106 0.85 0.7208 0.8 1600
Load Comb 19 1.0D1.4Wx 2811.7 36.81 34.34 My' = 49.207 14.059 0.6151 0.8125 1.0401 0.8 1600
Load Comb 20 1.0D+1.4Wy 1541.6 76.038 30.55 Mx' = 105.83 7.7078 1.0583 0.85 0.585 0.8 1600
Load Comb 21 1.0D1.4Wy 3067.8 134.3 93.21 Mx' = 193.77 15.339 1.9377 0.85 0.9181 1.2341 2468.2
Load Comb 22 1.0D+1.4W45 2384.4 166.47 76.456 Mx' = 226.58 11.922 2.2658 0.85 0.7798 0.8 1600
Load Comb 23 1.0D1.4W45 2225 108.21 139.12 My' = 191.13 11.125 2.3891 0.8125 0.7229 0.8 1600
Load Comb 24 1.0D+1.4W135 2419.6 41.632 17.964 Mx' = 55.614 12.098 0.5561 0.85 0.9885 0.8 1600
Load Comb 25 1.0D1.4W135 2189.8 16.628 80.624 My' = 88.693 10.949 1.1087 0.8125 0.8755 0.8 1600
Steel required = 2.5083 5016.5
Moment M
y
(kNm)
Load Case No.
Load Case
Axial Load P (kN)
Moment M
x
(kNm)
Mx
My
b
h
P versus Mx and My of the Column Section
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
M (kNm)
P
(
k
N
)
P  Mx P  My Actual Loads Mx control Actual Loads My control
Appendix G
Derivation of Design Formulae
for Walls to Rigorous Stress
Strain Curve of Concrete
Appendix G
G1
Derivation of Design Formulae for Shear Walls to Rigorous Stress Strain
Curve of Concrete
As similar to the exercise in Appendix F for columns, the exercise in this Appendix is
repeated for walls by which
bh
A
sb
are set to zero in the various cases 1 to 7, using the
equations summarized in Appendix F.
Cases 1 to 3 where x/h 7/11
By (Eqn F18) or (Eqn F32) or (Eqn F36) of Appendix F
bh
A
h
x
f
h
x f
bh
N
sh
y
ult m
cu u

.

\

+


.

\

= 1 2 87 . 0 3
3
67 . 0
0

.

\



.

\

=
1 2 87 . 0
3
3
67 . 0
0
h
x
f
h
x f
bh
N
bh
A
y
ult m
cu u
sh
(Eqn G1)
Substituting into (Eqn F31) or (Eqn F34) or (Eqn F38) and putting 0 =
bh
A
sb

.

\


.

\

+

.

\



.

\


.

\

+ 
.

\


.

\

=
2
2
0 0 0
2
147
163
87 . 0
12
1
3
1
6
1
1
2
1 67 . 0
h
x
h
x
bh
A
f
h
x
h
x
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
sh
y
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
2
0 0
3
2
0 0
147
163
12
1
3
1
2
1 67 . 0
6
1
441
131
147
16 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

+ + 
.

\



.

\

+
h
x
bh
N f
h
x f
u
ult ult m
cu
ult ult m
cu
0
6
1
2
1 67 . 0 2
2
0
2
= +


.

\

+
bh
M
h
x f
bh
M
bh
N
u
ult m
cu u u
(Eqn G2)
Upon solving
h
x
, back substituting into (Eqn G1) to calculate
bh
A
sh
Case 4 where 7/11 < x/h 1
h
b
Appendix G
G2
Referring to (Eqn F39) of Appendix F and setting 0 =
bh
A
sb
bh
N
x
h
h
x
bh
A
f
h
x f
u sh
y
ult m
cu
= 
.

\

+ +


.

\

4
7
8
7
56
9
87 . 0 3
3
67 . 0
0

.

\

+


.

\

=
4
7
8
7
56
9
87 . 0
3
3
67 . 0
0
x
h
h
x
f
h
x f
bh
N
bh
A
y
ult m
cu u
sh
(Eqn G3)
Substituting into (Eqn F41) with 0 =
bh
A
sb

.

\



.

\


.

\

+

.

\


.

\

=
h
x
h
x
h
x
h
x f
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
2
0 0 0
2
12
1
3
1
6
1
1
2
1 67 . 0
bh
A
h
x
h
x
x
h
f
sh
y

.

\

+ +
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0

.

\


.

\



.

\

+


.

\


.

\

=

.

\

x
h
h
x
h
x
h
x f
x
h
h
x
bh
M
ult ult ult m
cu u
8
7
56
9
4
7
12
1
2
1
3
1
6
1
2
1 67 . 0
8
7
56
9
4
7
2
0 0 0
2


.

\


.

\

+ +
h
x f
bh
N
h
x
h
x
x
h
ult m
cu u
0
2
3
3
67 . 0
392
9
112
9
48
7
4
2
0 0
224
3
196
9
784
45 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

+
h
x f
ult ult m
cu
3
2
0 0
392
9
48
7
12
7
8
7 67 . 0

.

\



.

\

+ +
h
x
bh
N f
u
ult ult m
cu
2
2
0 0
2
112
9
12
1
3
2
5 . 1
8
7 67 . 0
56
9

.

\



.

\

+ + +
h
x
bh
N f
bh
M
u
ult ult m
cu u
0
48
7
8
7
3
12
7
3
67 . 0
4
7
2
0
2
=
+ +
bh
N
bh
M
h
x f
bh
M
u u
ult m
cu u
(Eqn G4)
Upon solving
h
x
, backsubstitute into (Eqn G3) to solve for
bh
A
sh
Case 5 where 1 < x/h 1/(1
0
/
ult
)
Referring to (Eqn F52) and setting 0 =
bd
A
sb


.

\

+
+ + =
0
0
0
2
2
0
2
1
1
2
1
6
1
6
1
2
1
ult
ult c
ult
ult
ult
ult c
u
E
h
x
E
bh
N
Appendix G
G3
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
x
h E
x
h
E
sh
y
ult c ult
ult c

.

\

+ 
.

\



.

\

+
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
6 2
1
2
1
2
0
2
0
(Eqn G5)
Substituting for
bh
A
f
sh
y
87 . 0 into (Eqn F57), again setting 0 =
bd
A
sb
2
0
0
2
2
0
3
3
0
2
24
1
6
1
4
1
6
1
24
1

.

\



.

\

+ + =
h
x
E
bh
M
ult
ult ult ult
ult c
2
0 0 0
0
2
2
0
24
1
12
1
12
1
12
1
4
1
4
1
12
1

.

\

+


.

\

+
+ + +
x
h
E
x
h
E
h
x
E
ult
ult c
ult
ult c
ult
ult
ult
ult c
bh
A
h
x
h
x
x
h
f
sh
y

.

\

+ +
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0
2
0
0
2
2
0
3
3
0
2
56
9
8
7
4
7
24
1
6
1
4
1
6
1
24
1
56
9
8
7
4
7

.

\


.

\



.

\

+ + = 
.

\

h
x
h
x
x
h
E
h
x
x
h
bh
M
ult
ult
ult ult
ult c
x
h
h
x
x
h
E
h
x
h
x
x
h
E
ult
ult c
ult
ult
ult
ult c

.

\



.

\

+ 
.

\

+ + +
56
9
8
7
4
7
12
1
12
1
56
9
8
7
4
7
12
1
4
1
4
1
12
1
0 0
0
2
2
0

.

\

+ + 
.

\


.

\

+
2 2
0
392
9
112
9
48
7
56
9
8
7
4
7
24
1
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
N
x
h
h
x
x
h
E
u ult
ult c

.

\

+
+ +
2
0
0
2
2
0
392
9
112
9
48
7
2
1
6
1
6
1
2
1
h
x
h
x
x
h
h
x
E
ult
ult
ult
ult c

.

\

+


.

\


.

\

+


.

\

2
0
2
0
392
9
112
9
48
7
2
1
2
1
392
9
112
9
48
7
2
1
1
h
x
h
x
x
h
x
h
E
h
x
h
x
x
h
E
ult
ult c
ult
ult c

.

\

+ 
.

\

+
2 2
0
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
6 h
x
h
x
x
h
x
h E
ult c
3
0
0
2
2
0
3
3
0
3136
9
196
3
1568
45
392
9
448
3

.

\



.

\

+ +
h
x
E
ult
ult
ult ult
ult c
2
0
0
2
2
0
3
3
0
392
9
4704
289
294
79
16
7
24
7
96
7

.

\

+


.

\

+ +
+
h
x
bh
N
E
u ult
ult
ult ult
ult c

.

\

+


.

\

+ + +
h
x
bh
N
bh
M
E
u ult
ult
ult ult
ult c
112
9
56
9
9408
1229
588
289
32
21
24
7
193
7
2
0
0
2
2
0
3
3
0
x
h
bh
N
bh
M E
bh
M
E
u ult c ult
ult
ult
ult c


.

\

+ + +


.

\

+ +
48
7
8
7
1344
125
4
7
7056
281
21
5
24
7
72
7
2
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
576
7
96
7
3
0
2 2
0
2
= 
.

\


.

\

+
x
h E
x
h E
ult c ult c
(Eqn G6)
which is in fact an equation of 6
th
power in
h
x
.
h
x
is to be solved by numerical
Appendix G
G4
method. By backsubstituting
h
x
into (Eqn G5)


.

\

+
+ + =
0
0
0
2
2
0
2
1
1
2
1
6
1
6
1
2
1
ult
ult c
ult
ult
ult
ult c
u
E
h
x
E
bh
N
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
x
h E
x
h
E
sh
y
ult c ult
ult c

.

\

+

.

\



.

\

+
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
6 2
1
2
1
2
0
2
0

.

\


.

\

+


.

\



.

\

+ +
=
h
x
x
h
f
x
h E
x
h
E E
h
x
E
bh
N
bh
A
y
ult c ult
ult c
ult
ult c
ult
ult
ult
ult c
u
sh
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
6 2
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
6
1
6
1
2
1
2
0
2
0 0
0
0
2
2
0
Case 6 where 1/(1
0
/
ult
) < x/h 7/3
Consider (Eqn F58) and substituting 0 =
bh
A
sb

.

\

=

.

\

+ =
h
x
x
h
f
f
bh
N
bh
A
bh
A
h
x
x
h
f
f
bh
N
y
m
cu u
sh sh
y
m
cu u
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
67 . 0
56
9
8
7
4
7
87 . 0
67 . 0
(Eqn G7)
Substituting into (Eqn F60)

.

\

+ =
2
2
392
9
112
9
48
7
87 . 0
h
x
h
x
x
h
bh
A
f
bh
M
sh
y
u
2
2
3
67 . 0
112
9
56
9 67 . 0
392
9

.

\



.

\

+

.

\



.

\

h
x f
bh
N
bh
M
h
x f
bh
N
m
cu u u
m
cu u
0
8
7 67 . 0
48
7
4
7
2 2
=
+


.

\

+
bh
M f
bh
N
h
x
bh
M
u
m
cu u u
(Eqn G8)
Solving the cubic equation for
h
x
and substituting into (Eqn G7) to solve for
bh
A
sh
Case 7 where x/h > 7/3
By (Eqn F61) and setting 0 =
bh
A
sb
y m
cu u sh sh
y
m
cu u
f
f
bh
N
bh
A
bh
A
f
f
bh
N
87 . 0
1 67 . 0
87 . 0
67 . 0


.

\

= + =
(Eqn G9)
0
2
=
bh
M
u
ChartG1
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
ChartG2
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 35
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
ChartG3
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 40
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
ChartG4
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 45
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
ChartG5
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
ChartG6
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 55
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
ChartG7
Design Chart of Rectangular Shear Wall with Uniform Vertical Reinforcements to Code of Practice
for Structural Use of Concrete 2004, Concrete Grade 60
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5
M/bh
2
N/mm
2
N
/
b
h
N
/
m
m
2
0.4% steel
1% steel
2% steel
3% steel
4% steel
5% steel
6% steel
7% steel
8% steel
Shear Wall R.C. Design to Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete 2004  Uniform Reinforcements
Project :
Wall Mark Floor
f
cu
= 35 N/mm
2
f
y
= 460 N/mm
2
E
c
= 23700 N/mm
2
b = 200 h = 2000 b' = 165.00 h' = 1500.00 cover= 25 bar size = 20
Basic Load Case My Mx
1 2 3 4 5 6
D.L. L.L. Wx Wy W45 W135
3304.7 1582.1 362.17 245.1 56.92 82.09
29.13 32.11 2047.1 1275.1 1098.1 888.93
31.33 16.09 2.15 44.2 206.5 35.21
N Mx My N/bh M/bh
2
d/h / d/b x/h / y/b Steel Steel area
(kN) (kNm) (kNm) (N/mm
2
) (N/mm
2
) (%) (mm
2
)
Load Comb 1 1.4D+1.6L 7157.9 92.158 18.118 My' = 22.238 17.895 0.278 0.825 1.28 0.7541 3016.2
Load Comb 2 1.2(D+L+Wx) 5429.6 2530 15.708 Mx' = 2607.8 13.574 3.2597  0.7152 2.3059 9223.4
Load Comb 3 1.2(D+LWx) 6298.8 2383 20.868 Mx' = 2473.2 15.747 3.0915  0.7772 2.5637 10255
Load Comb 4 1.2(D+L+Wy) 5570 1456.7 34.752 Mx' = 1624.9 13.925 2.0311  0.8365 1.0928 4371.1
Load Comb 5 1.2(D+LWy) 6158.3 1603.6 71.328 Mx' = 1918.9 15.396 2.3986  0.8314 1.7861 7144.5
Load Comb 6 1.2(D+L+W45) 5932.5 1391.2 229.51 My' = 306.62 14.831 3.8328 0.825 0.7508 2.7599 11040
Load Comb 7 1.2(D+LW45) 5795.9 1244.2 266.09 My' = 336.52 14.49 4.2065 0.825 0.7255 3.0079 12032
Load Comb 8 1.2(D+L+W135) 5962.7 1140.2 23.964 Mx' = 1249.5 14.907 1.5618  0.9185 0.9046 3618.4
Load Comb 9 1.2(D+LW135) 5765.7 993.23 60.54 Mx' = 1277.8 14.414 1.5972  0.9032 0.8122 3248.8
Load Comb 10 1.4(D+Wx) 4119.5 2906.7 40.852 Mx' = 3150.7 10.299 3.9384  0.6025 2.5143 10057
Load Comb 11 1.4(DWx) 5133.6 2825.2 46.872 Mx' = 3068 12.834 3.835  0.6673 2.7996 11199
Load Comb 12 1.4(D+Wy) 4283.4 1744.4 18.018 Mx' = 1849.7 10.709 2.3121  0.6995 0.7417 2966.7
Load Comb 13 1.4(DWy) 4969.7 1826 105.74 Mx' = 2387.4 12.424 2.9842  0.7031 1.7913 7165.1
Load Comb 14 1.4(D+W45) 4706.3 1578.1 245.24 My' = 350.54 11.766 4.3818 0.825 0.6532 2.626 10504
Load Comb 15 1.4(DW45) 4546.9 1496.6 332.96 My' = 435.07 11.367 5.4384 0.825 0.62 3.4305 13722
Load Comb 16 1.4(D+W135) 4741.5 1285.3 5.432 Mx' = 1315.1 11.854 1.6439  0.8274 0.4 1600
Load Comb 17 1.4(DW135) 4511.7 1203.7 93.156 Mx' = 1731.6 11.279 2.1645  0.7373 0.6743 2697.1
Load Comb 18 1.0D+1.4Wx 2797.7 2895.1 28.32 Mx' = 3093.4 6.9942 3.8667  0.5051 2.1902 8760.9
Load Comb 19 1.0D1.4Wx 3811.7 2836.8 34.34 Mx' = 3050.1 9.5293 3.8126  0.5843 2.2839 9135.8
Load Comb 20 1.0D+1.4Wy 2961.6 1756 30.55 Mx' = 1966 7.4039 2.4576  0.5307 0.607 2428.1
Load Comb 21 1.0D1.4Wy 3647.8 1814.3 93.21 Mx' = 2405.2 9.1196 3.0065  0.5941 1.3272 5308.9
Load Comb 22 1.0D+1.4W45 3384.4 1566.5 257.77 My' = 381.82 8.461 4.7727 0.825 0.5596 2.3848 9539.2
Load Comb 23 1.0D1.4W45 3225 1508.2 320.43 My' = 442.13 8.0625 5.5266 0.825 0.5456 2.9149 11660
Load Comb 24 1.0D+1.4W135 3419.6 1273.6 17.964 Mx' = 1390.7 8.5491 1.7384  0.6436 0.4 1600
Load Comb 25 1.0D1.4W135 3189.8 1215.4 80.624 Mx' = 1755.3 7.9744 2.1941  0.5706 0.4 1600
Steel required = 3.4305 13722
Moment M
y
(kNm)
Load Case No.
Load Case
Axial Load P (kN)
Moment M
x
(kNm)
b
h
Plot of P (kN) versus M (kNm)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
M (kNm)
P
(
k
N
)
P  Mx P  My Actual Loads Mx control Actual Loads My control
Appendix H
Extracts of HKIE paper for plate
bending analysis and design
Appendix H
H1
Some Problems in Analysis and Design of Thin/Thick Plate (Extracts)
Y.M.
Cheng
1
and C.W. Law
2
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
1
Housing Department, Hong Kong SAR Government
2
III. Simulation of Support Stiffness in Plate Bending Structure
For support stiffness, we are referring to the force or moment required to produce unit
vertical movement or unit rotation at the support which are denoted by
Z
K ,
X
K
,
Y
K
for settlement stiffness along the Z direction, and rotational stiffnesses about X and Y
directions. These stiffnesses are independent parameters which can interact only through
the plate structure. Most softwares allow the user either to input numerical values or
structural sizes and heights of the support (which are usually walls or columns) by which
the softwares can calculate numerical values for the support stiffnesses as follows :
(i) For the settlement stiffness
Z
K , the value is simply L AE where A is the
cross sectional of the support which is either a column or a wall, E is the
Youngs Modulus of the construction material and L is the free length of the
column / wall. The L AE simply measures the elastic shortening of the
column / wall.
Strictly speaking, the expression L AE is only correct if the column / wall is
one storey high and restrained completely from settlement at the bottom. However,
if the column / wall is more than one storey high, the settlement stiffness
estimation can be very complicated. It will not even be a constant value. The
settlement of the support is, in fact, interacting with that of others through the
structural frame linking them together by transferring the axial loads in the
column / wall to others through shears in the linking beams. Nevertheless, if the
linking beams (usually floor beams) in the structural frame are flexible, the
transfer of loads from one column / wall through the linking beams to the rest of
the frame will generally be negligible. By ignoring such transfer, the settlement
Appendix H
H2
stiffness of a column / wall can be obtained by compounding the settlement
stiffness of the individual settlement stiffness at each floor as
=
+ + +
=
i i
i
n n
n
Z
E A
L
E A
L
E A
L
E A
L
E A
L
K
1
......
1
3 3
3
2 2
2
1 1
1
(ii) For the rotational stiffness, most of the existing softwares calculate the numerical
values either by
L
EI 4
or
L
EI 3
, depending on whether the far end of the supporting
column / wall is assumed fixed or pinned (where I is the second moment of area
of the column / wall section). However, apart from the assumed fixity at the far
end, the formulae
L
EI 4
or
L
EI 3
are also based on the assumption that both ends of
the column / wall are restrained from lateral movement (sidesway). It is obvious
that the assumption will not be valid if the outofplane load or the structural
layout is unsymmetrical where the plate will have lateral movement. The errors
may be significant if the structure is to simulate a transfer plate under wind load
which is in the form of an outofplane moment tending to overturn the structure.
Nevertheless, the errors can be minimized by finding the force that will be
required to restrain the slab structure from sideswaying and applying a force of
the same magnitude but of opposite direction to nullify this force. This magnitude
of this restraining force or nullifying force is the sum of the total shears produced
in the supporting walls / columns due to the moments induced on the walls /
columns from the plate analysis. However, the analysis of finding the effects on
the plate by the nullifying force has to be done on a plane frame or a space
frame structure as the 2D plate bending model cannot cater for lateral inplane
loads. This approach is adopted by some local engineers and the procedure for
analysis is illustrated in Figure 13.
IV. Effects of Lateral Shears
If the plate structure is also subjected to an inplane shear, it will sway under the
shear force (typically wind load) unless it is effectively restrained from lateral
movement. If there are moment connections between the plate and the supporting
walls/columns/piles, there will be frame actions creating extra loads on the plate
when it sways. As the 2D plate model cannot cater for the inplane load, such
effects have to be assessed separately by plane frame or space frame mathematical
Appendix H
H3
models. The effects due to lateral shears as obtained from such analysis should be
superimposed onto that of the 2D plate mathematical model for design. Outof
plane support reactions as derived from the plane frame or space frame models
due to the lateral shear can be added onto the 2D plate model with all support
stiffnesses removed but adding a single support with restraints in settlement and
rotations at any point of the plate structure. The purpose of adding the single
support is to prevent the stiffness matrix of the 2D plate model from being
singular. However, as the outofplane support reactions (on the actual supports)
derived from the plane frame or space frame models should have a net effect
equal to zero, the reactions on the added support should also be zero, thus creating
no effects on the 2D model. The 2D model is then reanalyzed and effects can
be conveniently superimposed onto the original one which has been used to solve
for the outofplane loads.
V. General discussions on design based on Nodal Forces and
Stresses
As pursuant to completion of analysis by the finite element method based on
discretized elements joined at nodes, generally (i) the forces at the joining nodes
of every element and; (ii) stresses within every element can be obtained. It
should be perfect if the designer relies on stresses for structural design.
However, he will soon find that the stresses at any nodes joined by more than
one element (which should have unique values except under point loads or
supports) are generally different when the results are generated from different
adjoining elements. The differences can be accounted for as errors in the finite
element analysis and it should diminish as the meshing of elements is getting fine.
It is however well known that the average stresses from all the adjoining elements
of a node are reasonably close to the exact values and can be based on for design.
Design based on stresses is however not popular as many commercial programs
generate the design forces from nodal forces.
Appendix H
H4
A popular approach in design in Hong Kong is based on nodal forces of the
elements. The nodal force at each node is to be resisted by the tributary
structural width extending from the node to midway to the adjacent node of the
same element. Such design approach possesses the beauty of ensuring structural
adequacy (but not necessarily an accurate distribution of forces in the structure) as
perfect equilibrium among all elements is achieved. However, one may view that
the design forces so chosen are not representing the actual behaviour of the
structure. For example, in a plate bending problem where there should be
stresses in form of bending, twisting moments and outofplane shears per unit
width at every point in the structure, the nodal force approach simply reduces
the structure into an assembly of discretized elements joined at nodes with nodal
outofplane shears and moments. Twisting moment does not appear as a
component in the nodal force and the outofplane nodal shear cannot be resolved
into its original components at the X and Y faces. The problems encountered in
design based on nodal forces will be discussed in fuller details in Section VII.
Actually, design based on stresses instead of nodal reactions is very popular in
the past when finite element analysis is first introduced to Hong Kong for plate
analysis. Some recent popular commercial programs adopt nodal reactions instead
of stresses in the design and most of the local engineers just simply adopt this
approach without greater thought. The problems that are mentioned are actually
very common for recent design (though the error is not great).
VI. Structural Design in Plate Bending Structure
Before carrying out more detailed discussion in the structural design of a plate
bending structure, it is worthwhile to conduct a brief review in the structural
behaviour of a plate bending structure. The problem relating to bending and
twisting moment is first discussed. Basically, one may view that at any point
inside the plate bending structure, there exist bending moments in two mutually
perpendicular directions and a twisting moment (all per unit widths) which are
termed stresses. A perfect analogy can be drawn to an inplane load problem
where at any point there exist normal stresses in two mutually perpendicular
Appendix H
H5
directions and a shear stress. Whilst the normal stresses and the shear stress at the
point can be compounded to the principal stresses in the directions where the
shear stress is zero, likewise the principal moments can be derived by
compounding the bending and twisting moment in certain directions (known as
the principal directions) free of twisting. One can then view that the plate is under
pure bending in the principal directions without twisting. Of course the
principal directions do not necessarily align with the artificial X or Y directions
predetermined by the designer. Theoretically the designer can perform his design
in the principal directions as the twisting moment is not involved. However, this
approach is impractical for the engineers to design as the reinforcements have to
follow the principal directions which change from point to point and load case to
load case and is therefore not adopted in practice.
The WoodArmer Equations developed by Wood [19] serve to calculate the
optimum design moments at any point in two directions (not necessarily, but
preferably mutually perpendicular) in a moment field. The components of the
optimum moments in any orientation, which are derived by Johansens Yield
Criterion [10] can adequately cover the bending moments normal and
perpendicular to the plane of the orientation. During the process, the twisting
moments have been catered for and the design is structurally adequate. On the
contrary, design by nodal moments (current local practice) can never capture the
effects of twisting correctly, as there is no twisting moment in the nodal forces.
Furthermore, if the designer goes further to sum up the nodal forces across a
number of adjacent nodes and design the forces against the section formed from
the summed tributary length of the nodes (currently the most popular approach in
Hong Kong as provided by some commercial softwares), he will face the problem
of how to design adequately for the net torsion on the section due to the generally
unbalanced effects of the outofplane nodal forces and nodal moments bending in
the plane of the section. Theoretically this net torsion is not a real force in the
structure. So it is neither correct to design the torsion for the section by treating
the section as a beam section. WoodArmer equations are recently introduced to
Appendix H
H6
some commercial programs but nearly all the local designs are still based on the
nodal moments in the bending reinforcement design.
To provide a sound design approach against outofplane shears, it is required to
calculate the design shear based on the components of stresses in relation to
shear derived from structural analysis, as similar to that in establishing the Wood
Armer Equations. By the general plate bending theory, the shear force per unit
width at the Xface and Yface of an element are respectively
y
M
x
M
Q
XY Y
XZ
= and
y
M
y
M
Q
XY X
YZ
= , as diagrammatically illustrated
in Fig. 14(a). It can be easily shown that the maximum shear will occur in a plane
at an orientation on plan such that
=
YZ
XZ
Q
Q
1
tan and the value of the
maximum shear is
2 2
max YZ XZ
Q Q Q + = as per the illustration in Fig. 14(b). So
the designer needs to check or design for the maximum shear of magnitude
max
Q
at the point, as it is the shear stress under which the plate will most likely to fail
with failure surface at the orientation . Following the usual practice of designing
against shear, if the
max
Q does not exceed allowable shear stress of concrete v
c
, no
shear reinforcements will be required. Otherwise, reinforcements will be required.
The designer may initially wonder that he has to arrange the vertical shear links in
the direction of the orientation as shown in Fig. 14(c) which is practically
impossible to be achieved. However, as the required shear resistance depends
only on the total cross sectional area of links per unit area, the orientation of the
shear links arrangement on plan does not really matter so long as the same total
cross sectional area is provided. Thus it will be at the designers discretion to
arrange the shear links on plan in any convenient orientations, say in the global X
direction as shown in Fig. 14(d).
Turning back to the current practice in design of shear by nodal forces, the
designer will easily find that the vertical shear force in a node cannot be split into
Appendix H
H7
components in the adjacent faces of the element. A practical way for design
appears to be lumping a series of adjacent nodal shear forces along a cutsection
and design the summed shear force against the section. However, problems again
arise as to the determination of the orientation of the cutsection on plan. The
designer will find that, in a slab simply supported on two opposite sides. The
summed shears along any sections in the direction of the span of the slab are
small and that in the direction perpendicular to the span are close to the actual
shear values in the slab structure. So, apparently the designer has to identify the
main span direction for his determination of the orientation of the cutsections.
And yet, it is difficult to determine appropriate guidelines for adequate design as,
in the first place, the slab structure does not behave as discretized elements with
nodal forces.
Lateral force, S , to
prevent sidesway
1
S
1 U
M
2
S
2 U
M
3
S
3 U
M
h
1
h
2
h
3
1
S
3
S
2
S
Note : 1. If the wall / column is prismatic and the lower end is restrained from
rotation, the moment at the lower end will be
Ui Li
M M 5 . 0 = (carryover
from the top); if the lower end is assumed pinned, the moment at it will be
zero;
2. The shear on the wall / column will be
i
Li Ui
i
h
M M
S
+
= where
Ui
M is
obtained from plate bending analysis and the total restraining shear is
=
i
S S
Figure 13. Diagrammatic illustration of the restraining shear or nullifying shear
Appendix H
H8
Z
Q
XZ
Y Q
YZ
X
Figure 14(a). Diagrammatic illustration of
shear stresses in the X and Y faces of an
element
Q
Q
XZ
Q
YZ
Plan
Figure 14(b). Derivation of the direction
and magnitude of the maximum shear
stress
s
v
s
v
max
Q
Q
XZ
Q
YZ
Plan
Figure 14(c). Diagrammatic illustration of
arrangement of theoretical shear links on Plan
against
max
Q
s
v
max
Q s
v
Q
XZ
Q
YZ
Plan
Figure 14(d). Diagrammatic illustration
of convenient arrangement of shear links
on Plan that will produce the identical
shear capacity against
max
Q
For vertical equilibrium, Q can be expressed as
cos sin 1
YZ XZ
Q Q Q + =
For
Q to be maximum set
YZ
XZ
YZ XZ
Q
Q
Q Q
d
dQ
= = =
+ + =
i i O iZ
y b x b b K P
2 1
i iZ i iZ iZ O
y K b x K b K b P
+ + =
2 1
Balancing the applied Moment ( )
i i i O iZ X
y y b x b b K M
2 1
+ + =
+ve
X
M
and
Y
M
Y
O
i
y
i
x
Pile i
X
Figure I1 Derivation of Pile Loads under Rigid Cap
I2
2
2 1 i iZ i i iZ i iZ O X
y K b y x K b y K b M
=
Balancing the applied Moment ( )
i i i O iZ Y
x y b x b b K M
+ + =
2 1
i i iZ i iZ i iZ O Y
y x K b x K b x K b M
+ + =
2
2
1
It is possible to choose the centre O such that
0 = = =
i i iZ i iZ i iZ
y x K y K x K .
So the three equations become
=
iZ O
K b P
=
iZ
O
K
P
b
2
2 i iZ X
y K b M
=
=
2
2
i iZ
X
y K
M
b
2
1 i iZ Y
x K b M
=
=
2
1
i iZ
Y
x K
M
b
The load on Pile i is then
) (
2 1 i i O iZ
y b x b b K P + + =
+ =
i
i iZ
X
i
i iZ
Y
iZ
iZ
y
y K
M
x
x K
M
K
P
K
2 2
i
i iZ
iZ X
i
i iZ
iZ Y
iZ
iZ
y
y K
K M
x
x K
K M
K
PK
+ =
2 2
To effect 0 = = =
i i iZ i iZ i iZ
y x K y K x K , the location of O and the
orientation of the axes XX and YY must then be the principal axes of the
pile group.
Conventionally, designers may like to use moments along defined axes instead of
moments about defined axes. If we rename the axes and UU and VV after translation
and rotation of the axes XX and YY such that the condition
0 = = =
i i iZ i iZ i iZ
v u K v K u K can be satisfied, then the pile load become
i
i iZ
iZ Y
i
i iZ
iZ U
iZ
iZ
iZ
v
v K
K M
u
u K
K M
K
PK
P
+ =
2 2
If all piles are identical, i.e. all
iZ
K are equal, then the formula is reduced
i
i
V
i
i
U
iZ
v
v
M
u
u
M
N
P
P
+ =
2 2
where N is the number of piles.
Or if we do not wish to rotate the axes to U and V , then only
= = 0
i iZ i iZ
y K x K and the moment balancing equations becomes
I3
2
2 1 i iZ i i iZ i iZ O X
y K b y x K b y K b M
=
2
2 1 i iZ i i iZ X
y K b y x K b M
=
and
i i iZ i iZ i iZ O Y
y x K b x K b x K b M
+ + =
2
2
1
i i iZ i iZ Y
y x K b x K b M
+ =
2
2
1
Solving
= =
iZ
O iZ O
K
P
b K b P
( ) ( )
+
+
=
2 2
2
2
1
i iZ i iZ i i iZ
i iZ Y i i iZ X
y K x K y x K
y K M y x K M
b
( ) ( )
+
=
2 2
2
2
2
i iZ i iZ i i iZ
i iZ X i i iZ Y
y K x K y x K
x K M y x K M
b
So the pile load becomes
( ) ( )
i iZ
i iZ i iZ i i iZ
i iZ Y i i iZ X
iZ
iZ
iZ
x K
y K x K y x K
y K M y x K M
K
PK
P
+
+
+ =
2 2
2
2
+
( ) ( )
i iZ
i iZ i iZ i i iZ
i iZ X i i iZ Y
y K
y K x K y x K
x K M y x K M
+
2 2
2
2
.
If all piles are identical, i.e. all K
iZ
are equal, then the formula is reduced
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
i
i i i i
i X i i Y
i
i i i i
i Y i i X
iZ
y
y x y x
x M y x M
x
y x y x
y M y x M
N
P
P
+
+
+
+
+ =
2 2
2
2
2 2
2
2
For a symmetrical layout where 0 =
i i
y x , the equation is further reduced to
i
i
X
i
i
Y
iZ
y
y
M
x
x
M
N
P
P
+ + =
2 2