Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
General Information
Instructor
Asst.Prof. Mohammad Shafiqual Alam
Office:105, Ground Floor, New Academic Building
Phone: (029291254-59) 3348
Email: shafiq37@iut-dhaka.edu
Class Location
A/B R-110
Class Time
SUN
MON
11:20 - 13:00
09:40 - 11:20
1/16/2011
BOOKS
Textbooks:
Design of Concrete Structures, 13th Edition Arthur H. Nilson, David Darwin,
Charles W. Dolan, McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Reference books:
1. Reinforced Concrete: Mechanics and Design, 4th Edition
James G. MacGregor, James K. Wight, Prentice Hall, 2005.
2.Reinforced Concrete Fundamentals, 5th Edition
Phil M. Ferguson , John E. Breen , James O. Jirsa
3. Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings
Thomas Paulay , M. J. N. Priestley
4. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete,
ACI318-05,American Concrete Institute, 2005.
3
Lecture goals
An introduction to different structural forms
Reinforce Concrete Structure
Design approach
1/16/2011
Cantilever construction
1/16/2011
1/16/2011
10
1/16/2011
11
Continuous Arch
12
1/16/2011
13
14
1/16/2011
15
16
1/16/2011
17
18
1/16/2011
19
20
10
1/16/2011
21
22
11
1/16/2011
23
24
12
1/16/2011
25
26
13
1/16/2011
Typical Structure
27
Typical Structure
28
14
1/16/2011
Concrete:
30
15
1/16/2011
31
Rigidity
Greater stiffness & mass reduces oscillations
(wind), floor vibrations (walking)
32
16
1/16/2011
33
Disadvantage of RCC
Construction time
Concrete Quality Control
Cracking of Concrete
34
17
1/16/2011
Disadvantage of RCC
Forms and Shoring (additional steps)
Construction of forms
Removal of forms
Prepping (or shoring) the new concrete to
support weight until strength is adequate.
Labor/Materials cost not required for other
types of materials
35
Disadvantage of RCC
Time-dependent volume changes
Concrete & steel undergo similar expansion
and contraction.
Concrete undergoes drying shrinkage, which
may cause deflections and cracking.
Creep of concrete under sustained loads
causes an increase in deflection with time.
36
18
1/16/2011
Disadvantage of RCC
Strength per unit volume is relatively low.
fc (5-10% of steel)
greater volume required
long spans typical built with steel
37
Analysis Vs Design
Analysis
Assessing structure responses
due to the application of loads
Responses may include:
Force
Stress
Deformation (Deflection)
19
1/16/2011
Analysis Vs Design
Design
Selection of many aspects of
structure among a large array
of possibilities
Layouts
Member sizes & shapes
Materials
Construction processes
Structural
Modeling and
Analysis
Model the
structure as
beam, columns,
frame, truss, etc
Obtain the load
effect (moment,
stress, etc)
Design a structure
member
Determine size and
shape of member to
resist the load effect
40
20
1/16/2011
Design Objectives
Basic design objectives are:
Stability
Constructability
Safety
Functionality
Serviceability
Aesthetics
Economy
Maintainability
41
Design Challenges
Civil Engineering designs have several challenges that differ from
other engineering disciplines
Most of the design is one-of-a-kind. We cannot test the structure before
putting it into service.
Structures are designed to last for a very long time (40 years or more)
There are a lot of uncertainties that may affect the performance of the
structure, most of which are unknown at the time of design. For example
Quality of materials
Quality of construction
Building usage (loads on each room)
Nonstructural modifications to the building
Natural disaster (Hurricane, Earthquake, Tsunami)
Major failure of structure affects a lot of human life
Repair, Retrofit and Maintenance cost, in some cases, can be as much as the
initial cost of the structure
42
21
1/16/2011
Limit States
Serviceability
Excess deflection
Excess vibration
Permanent
deformation
Crack Width
(relate to corrosion
and durability)
Ultimate
Exceeding moment
capacity
Crushing of concrete
in compression
Rupture of cables
Loss of overall
stability
Weld rupture
Shear of the bolt
Buckling of steel
flange or web
Special
Effects of fire,
explosions, or
vehicular
collisions.
Effects of
corrosion,
deterioration
Long-term
physical or
chemical
instability
44
22
1/16/2011
Design Criteria
General format:
Estimated Value > or < Prescribed Value
Load Effect < Resistance
Examples:
Moment acting on beam < Moment capacity
Crack width < Maximum crack width
Mid span deflection < Maximum deflection limit
45
Design Approaches
Prescriptive Design: Tell you specifically how to design
things
Working Stress Design (WSD), Allowable Stress Design
(ASD), Service Load Design (SLD)
Ultimate Strength Design (USD), Strength Design (SD),
Limit State Design (LSD), Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD)
23
1/16/2011
WSD/ASD
Consider the structure under service load, i.e. load that
we can normally expected in the structure
The structural members remain in the elastic range
General Format:
47
USD/SD/LRFD
Consider the structure under ultimate load, i.e. load
that may occur once in a lifetime of the structure
The structural members are in the inelastic range
(near failure)
General Format:
iQi Rn
Load Factor
Nominal Load Effect
Nominal Resistance/strength
Resistance/Strength Factor
48
24
1/16/2011
USD/SD/LRFD
In
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Since there are numbers of uncertainties in the building
construction and usage that we cannot accurately determine,
we must allow for these uncertainties by designing for the
worst possible condition combinations of applied load and
structural resistance for each limit state.
Structure must have adequate strength reserve over the
designed service construction
50
25
1/16/2011
PROBABILISTIC DESIGN
PHILOSOPHY
51
PROBABILISTIC DESIGN
PHILOSOPHY
52
26
1/16/2011
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Overload: Load higher than the typical service load
Change of use
Underestimation of loads
Variations in construction
Let:
m = mean value
= bias factor, the ratio of mean to nominal (design) value
s = standard deviation
CV = coefficient of variation, the ratio of standard deviation to mean
value
Notes:
Large bias means that the actual load is higher than the design value
Not good
Large s or CV means that we dont know the magnitude of load for
Certain
Not good
53
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Typical variations of building loads in USA (Nowak, 2005)
54
27
1/16/2011
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Under strength: Strength of structural member is
lower than predicted
Flaws in material/ Concrete understrength
Deviations of structure size/geometry during construction
Formula for calculating member capacity are not 100% exact
55
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Typical variations of concrete quality in USA (Nowak, 2005)
56
28
1/16/2011
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Observed and theoretical frequencies
Column Strength (28 days)
Clas
s
80
Observations
70
Normal Distribution
# of Data
:336
Mean ()
:4089 psi
Std ()
:989 psi
COV()
:24.2%
Chi-Squ. Test :5% satisfied
Frequency
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
10
11
12
13
14
Class
Lower bound
(psi)
Upper bound
(psi)
500
1000
1000
1500
1500
2000
2000
2500
2500
3000
3000
3500
3500
4000
4000
4500
4500
5000
10
5000
5500
11
5500
6000
12
6000
6500
13
6500
7000
14
7000
7500
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Observed and theoretical frequencies
200
Frequency
Upper bound
(psi)
1000
1500
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
Class
Distribution
140
# of Data
:669
Mean ()
:3455psi
Std ()
:901 psi
COV()
:26%
Chi-Squ. Test :5% satisfied
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
-20
1
2
Lower bound
(psi)
500
1000
Observations
10
11
12
13
14
Class
29
1/16/2011
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Observed Vs Theoritical frequeny
60Grade yield strength
300
Class
Observations
40
45
Gamma
distribution
45
50
50
55
55
60
60
65
65
70
70
75
75
80
80
85
10
85
90
11
90
95
Frequency
250
200
# of Data
:710
Mean ()
:66ksi
Std ()
:6 ksi
COV()
:9%
Chi-Squ. Test :Not satisfied
150
100
50
0
1
10
11
Class
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Observed Vs Theoritical frequencies
300
observation
Frequency
Normal
distribution
250
Class
# of Data
:710
Mean ()
:100. ksi
Std ()
:11.6 ksi
COV()
:11.5%
Chi-Squ. Test :Not
satisfied
200
150
60
70
70
80
80
90
90
100
100
110
110
120
120
130
130
140
100
50
0
1
Class
30
1/16/2011
UNCERTAINITIES IN
CONSTRUCTION
Typical variations of concrete member sizes (Nowak, 2005)
61
62
31
1/16/2011
63
64
32
1/16/2011
RESISTANCE FACTOR
Takes care of uncertainties in the
resistance
3 Main sources of uncertainties
Material Property uncertainty in
the strength, chemical
composition, defects
Fabrication uncertainty in the
dimensions
Analysis many methods are
approximate so there are a lot of
uncertainties in predicting the
resistance
65
RESISTANCE FACTOR
Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318 before 2002)
66
33
1/16/2011
RESISTANCE FACTOR
Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318 after 2002)
67
68
34
1/16/2011
FINAL NOTES
USD/LRFD method does not necessarily provide a cheaper design
compared with the WSD/ASD method
USD/LRFD method generally provide more uniform safety margins across
the range of structure types and loads compared with the WSD/ASD
Method
Variations of load and resistance are separated in USD/LRFD whereas they
are lumped in the safety factor for WSD/ASD
Unusual loads and materials can be handle with new load and resistance
Factors
There are also some changes in the way structural resistance are calculated
(due to recent knowledge of structural behaviors and materials)
69
35