Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 104-S07

Deflection Control of Concrete Members


Based on Utility Theory
by Young Hak Lee, Andrew Scanlon, and Heecheul Kim

Design provisions for deflection control of concrete structures are simulation is then used to develop histograms of deflection
generally empirical in nature and based on previous experience. with assumed statistical distributions for the input parameters.
Due to the increasing use of high strength materials, longer spans, Loss functions are then defined that specify the onset of
and as a result more flexible members, a more rational approach is damage due to deflection and an upper limit at which the
desirable. This paper explores the applicability of the utility theory structure is assumed to be unusable. The utility theory is then
as a basis for developing deflection control criteria. The approach
considers uncertainties in member behavior and loading as well as
applied to the member by minimizing the total cost considered
lack of well-defined discrete serviceability limits. Monte Carlo as the sum of the initial cost and the probabilistically
simulation is used to develop histograms of selected deflection determined cost of failure.
parameters. A serviceability loss function is then specified to define
the onset of serviceability failure and an upper limit representing RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
complete serviceability failure with associated costs. Optimum The approach presented in this paper provides a rational
structural parameter (member depth) is obtained by minimizing approach to deflection control considering uncertainties in
total cost consisting of initial construction cost and probabilistic structural behavior and deflection limits. The methodology
cost of failure. Results for one-way slabs are developed and compared has the potential to produce improvements in design codes
with current ACI code provisions for minimum thickness. related to serviceability.
Keywords: deflection; reinforced concrete; serviceability.
DEFLECTION CONTROL
BASED ON UTILITY THEORY
INTRODUCTION Reid and Turkstra (1980, 1981) presented a formulation in
In the design of concrete building structures, deflection which serviceability can be considered as a specific type of
control for floors and roofs is an important design consideration. structural utility U that can be expressed as
While the current code procedures have provided adequate
designs in the past, developments in design practice such as
the use of higher strength materials and longer spans leading U = B – CI – ∑i cF i
(1)
to more flexible structures, as well as increasing expectations by
owners for building performance, suggest that a more
rational approach to design for deflection control may be where B equals the benefit derived from fully serviceable
required in the future. Such an approach should consider the structure; CI equals the initial construction cost; cFi equals
uncertainties inherent in predicting deflections of concrete CFi × Hi(x), cost due to failure in mode i; CFi equals the cost
members and structures as well as the difficulties associated of failure due to being completely unserviceable in mode i; x
with defining acceptable limits for deflection of members. equals the deflection ratio to span length; and Hi(x) equals
Many researchers have used cost related analyses for optimi- the serviceability loss function as a function of deflection to
zation and serviceability problems (Hossain 2000; Koskisto span length ratio in mode i.
and Ellingwood 1997; Sarma and Adeli 1998). This paper If the benefit associated with a fully serviceable structure
explores the application of the utility theory to the problem. is considered to be constant, the utility can be maximized by
Because serviceability failure can occur in structures with minimizing the total cost consisting of initial construction
adequate safety against collapse, the question becomes an cost and cost of failure. Figure 1 shows a schematic plot of
economic issue. The utility theory approach balances the costs versus a structural parameter such as member depth for
initial cost of construction against the potential costs of a given span length. As the member depth increases, the
repair considering uncertainties associated with structural initial construction cost can be expected to increase while the
behavior at service load levels, and lack of a well-defined expected cost of serviceability failure can be expected to
limit for deflection. It is assumed that the structure has decrease as the stiffness increases. Adding initial construction
adequate strength to satisfy ultimate (strength) limit states. cost to failure cost results in a plot of total cost. The optimum
The formulation of the approach is based on the work of member thickness occurs where the total cost is a minimum.
Reid and Turkstra (1980, 1981) and Turkstra and Reid The cost of failure can be attributed to a number of sources
(1981) at McGill University. Reid and Turkstra applied the (modes), including direct cost of repairs, costs due to lost
method to two-way slab systems assuming the slabs were production, and loss of rental income during repairs as
uncracked. In this study, effects of cracking, creep, and
shrinkage are considered to provide a realistic assessment of ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 1, January-February 2007.
MS No. S-2006-103 received March 9, 2006, and reviewed under Institute publication
member behavior. A deterministic model is used to calculate policies. Copyright © 2007, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the
deflections for a member with defined time-dependent making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent
discussion including author’s closure, if any, will be published in the November-
material properties and loading history. Monte Carlo December 2007 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received by July 1, 2007.

60 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007


ACI member Young Hak Lee is a full-time Lecturer in the Department of Architectural
Engineering at The Kyunghee University, Yongin, Korea. He received his PhD from
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa. His research interests include the
serviceability of reinforced and prestressed concrete members and developing analytical
models of concrete structures.

Andrew Scanlon, FACI, is a Professor of civil engineering at Pennsylvania State


University. He is a member of ACI Committees 224, Cracking; 318, Structural Concrete
Building Code; 318-C, Safety, Serviceability, and Analysis (Structural Concrete
Building Code); 342, Evaluation of Concrete Bridges and Bridge Elements; 348,
Structural Safety; 435, Deflection of Concrete Building Structures; and E 803, Faculty
Network Coordinating Committee.

Heecheul Kim is a Professor in the Department of Architectural Engineering at The


Kyunghee University. He received his PhD from New Mexico State University, Las
Cruces, N. Mex. His research interests include the behavior of reinforced concrete and
fiber-reinforced structures for earthquake resistance.

Fig. 1—Function of member depth h.


examples. The expected cost of serviceability failure due to
floor deflection can be computed if the probability density
function (pdf) for deflection is known and a serviceability
loss function is defined as shown in Fig. 2. The pdf provides
a measure of the probability that a particular deflection value
will be exceeded. The serviceability loss function recognizes
that serviceability failures generally do not have well defined
limits. The loss function H(x), shown in Fig. 2, indicates the
onset of serviceability failure (that is, need for repair to
remedy the problem) at a deflection parameter x1 and a
gradual increase reaching a value of 1.0 at deflection parameter
x2, at which point the floor is assumed to be completely
unserviceable requiring a cost CF to remedy. For a deflection
parameter in the range x1 to x2, the repair cost is defined as
H(x) · CF. As shown later in the paper, the loss function can
be continuous, as shown in Fig. 2 or may be discontinuous,
increasing in stepwise fashion.
The utility function for a given mode can be calculated as Fig. 2—Deflection probability density function and service-
ability loss function.
ui(x) = B – CI – cFi(x) (2)
For a given loss function H(x), as the member depth increases
where ui(x) equals the utility function for failure mode i and cFi(x) and stiffness increases, the pdf f(x) or pmf p(x) shifts to the
equals the failure cost function for failure mode i = CFi × Hi(x). left and the expected cost of failure decreases. The greater
The expected utility is given by the overlap between the deflection pdf and serviceability loss
function, the greater the expected cost of failure.
∞ Total failure cost can be obtained by summing failure
costs for each mode. Figure 3 shows conceptual examples of
E [ Ui ] =
∫ ui ( x )f ( x ) dx (3a)
deflection histograms along with a single-step discontinuous
–∞ loss function, a two-step discontinuous loss function, and a
continuous loss function. In this study, a two-step discontinuous
where f(x) equals the probability density function of x. loss function was used for calculating indirect cost of failure
Substituting Eq. (2) into Eq. (3a) gives such as loss of production and a continuous loss function for
direct cost of failure and cost of repair. Total cost of failure
∞ could be calculated by summing these two types of failure costs.
E [ U i ] = B – C I – C Fi
∫ Hi ( x )f ( x ) dx (3b)
FLOOR MEMBER DEFLECTION
–∞
AND IMPACT ON SERVICEABILITY
The time-dependent development of deflection in a
The continuous pdf can be replaced by a probability mass
concrete member is affected by structural configuration,
function (pmf) or histogram obtained for example from
material properties, and load history. Figure 4 shows a
Monte Carlo simulation. Equation (3b) can then be
schematic load-time history for a slab in a multi-story
converted into discrete type as follows
structure (Graham and Scanlon 1986). Depending on the
shoring and reshoring procedure used, the slab may be
n
heavily loaded during construction, causing cracking that
E [ U i ] = B – C I – C Fi ∑ Hi ( xj )p ( xj ) (3c) will affect the stiffness of the structure during its service life.
j=1 After installation of nonstructural elements, the slab is
subjected to sustained load and intermittent short-term live
where p(xj) is the probability mass function of xj in a load. A simplified version of the load history is shown in
given member. Fig. 4(b) in which the maximum construction load is applied to

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007 61


Fig. 4—Simplified load-time history with probabilistic
approach and corresponding deflection-time history.

Table 1—Statistical parameters of damaging


deflections (Δ/L) (Hossain and Stewart 2001)
Parameter Perception damage Partition wall damage
Sample size 60 51
Minimum value 0.0030 0.0006
Maximum value 0.0171 0.0135
Mean 0.0077 0.0054
COV 0.42 0.57
Distribution Truncated lognormal Gamma

Table 1. According to their study, the minimum value of


deflection-to-span ratio for which perception damage was
reported is 0.003 (≈1/333). An earlier study by Mayer and
Rusch (1967) concluded that a deflection-to-span ratio of up
to 1/300 is not found to be visually disturbing.
Fig. 3—Probability histogram for deflection and service- In the present study, the data presented by Hossain and
ability loss functions. Stewart were used to establish upper and lower bounds for
continuous loss function for direct costs of repair. For conve-
the slab followed immediately by application of sustained load. nience, the cumulative density function was used to define
The corresponding deflection-time history is shown in Fig. 4(c). the loss function H(x) between the two limits because it is
In design, when deflections are to be calculated, ACI 318-05 assumed in this study that expected repair costs follow the
(ACI Committee 318 2005) requires checks to be made for probability of damaging deflection. In addition, the floor
deflection due to live load and incremental deflection after member is assumed to be completely unusable when deflection
installation of non-structural elements. Most damage related to to span length ratio exceeds 0.02.
deflection, particularly visual sagging and damage to nonstruc-
tural elements, is due to long-time deflection under sustained COST INFORMATION
load. Available data on deflection-related damage is obtained To implement the approach outlined previously, cost data
from deflection surveys based on total long-time deflection. are needed for initial construction cost and cost of failure.
Hossain and Stewart (2001) reviewed survey data and Cost data for initial construction cost were obtained from RS
presented results for damage due to perception (noticeable Means building construction cost data (RS Means 2002a).
visual sagging, slanting furniture, and damage to floor Two types of failure cost data were considered to
finishes) and damage to non-structural elements (partition demonstrate the application of the method. Data for the
walls). Statistical data from their survey are presented in direct cost of repair were obtained from RS Means repair and

62 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007


remodeling cost data (RS Means 2002b). Data on the cost of Table 2—Initial construction cost data
loss of production during the repair process were obtained Item Unit price Remarks
from national compensation survey data published by the Plywood to 15 ft
Formwork,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor 5.40 (60.00) (4.57 m) high,
$/ft2 ($/m2) three use
(2003). The two types of repair costs were summed to obtain
the total cost of repair. Reinforcement,
$/ton [short] 1300.00 (1444.44) Grade 60, A614
($/ton [metric])
Cost of initial construction f ′c = 3000 psi
76.00 (100.00) Concrete ready
Construction costs include costs of formwork, reinforcement, Concrete, (20.69 MPa)
mixed, normal-
concrete placing, finishing, curing, installation of reinforcement, $/yd3 ($/m3) f ′c = 4000 psi weight
81.50 (107.25)
and shoring and reshoring. For the sake of simplicity, only (27.58 MPa)
the direct costs of one-way slab construction were considered. h < 6 in.
25.00 (32.90)
(152.4 mm)
A more refined analysis would consider the effect of changing
slab thickness on the supporting structure (columns and Placing concrete, 6 in. ≤ h ≤ 10 in.
(152.4 mm ≤ h ≤ 22.00 (28.95) Pumped
foundations). Unit costs obtained from RS Means are $/yd3 ($/m3) 254.0 mm)
summarized in Table 2. h > 10 in.
19.30 (25.40)
(254.0 mm)

Cost of repair Integral topping


Finishing, and finish, using
In the present study, two types of repair cost were considered: 1.10 (12.22)
$/ft2 ($/m2) 1:1:2 mixture,
direct cost of slab repair and costs related to loss of production 3/16 in. thick
for an office building. The former uses the continuous loss Curing, $/ft2 ($/m2) 0.55 (6.11) Curing blankets
function and the latter uses the two-step discontinuous Shoring $78.00 each
7800 lb (34.70 kN)
loss function. capacity
Cost of failure for repair—The cost of repair depends on
the type of repair required. At the onset of damage due to Table 3—Repair cost data
deflection, repairs might consist of cosmetic repairs of Type Item Unit price
cracking in drywall partitions. In the extreme case, damage
Cutout demolition, ≤6 ft (0.17 m3)
3 39.50 (1395.76)
may be sufficient to require replacement of the floor
$/ft3 ($/m3) 3
>6 ft (0.17 m ) 3 35.50 (1254.42)
member. To establish the cost of failure at the upper limit of
the loss function, costs for demolition and replacement were 7 in. (177.8 mm) thick 15.20 (168.89)
obtained from RS Means repair and remodeling cost data Slab 8 in. (203.2 mm) thick 16.15 (179.44)
(2002b) and are summarized in Table 3. Replacement, 9 in. (228.6 mm) thick 16.90 (187.78)
Cost of failure for loss of production—For this case, it is $/ft2 ($/m2) 10 in. (254.0 mm) thick 17.90 (198.89)
assumed that the floor is in an office building and that repairs x in. (interpolation
0.9x + 8.9
prevent access to the floor by the office workers during the function)
repair work. The loss of production cost is then taken as the
wages or salaries of office workers prevented from using the
space affected by repairs. An upper bound to this cost is ⎧
assumed to correspond to roughly 4 weeks of lost production ⎪ 0, x < 0.003
for the affected work area. ⎪
⎪ L
0.003 < x < ---------
According to the survey data conducted by Bureau of H ( x ) = ⎨ 0.5, 240 (4)
Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor (2003), annual ⎪
⎪ 1, L
x > ---------
average earnings of full-time workers is approximately ⎪ 240
$36,484. Assuming that an office worker occupies roughly ⎩
150 ft2 (13.94 m2) of office floor area, a typical office
production rate is roughly $243/year/ft2 ($2617.22/year/m2)
It is assumed for all practical purposes that the time-
of serviceable floor area. This amount is converted to dependent deflection reaches a maximum at 5 years and this
$20.25/4 weeks/ft2 ($218.10/4 weeks/m2). Assuming that is the time at which the incremental deflection is calculated.
the area disrupted for repair is twice the failed floor area, this Because cost data are highly dependent on local market
unit cost should be multiplied by 2. In this study, incremental conditions, construction costs and repair costs were simply
deflection of L/240 was used as critical point to apply this taken as average present values based on published data.
assumption because the current ACI 318 code (ACI Further refinement of the methodology could be incorporated
Committee 318 2005) defines L/240 as deflection limit for by considering discounted values.
members not supporting nonstructural elements. If the
incremental deflection is greater than L/240, it is assumed DEFECTION HISTOGRAMS FROM
that the level below will also be affected by the repairs. Thus, MONTE CARLO SIMULATION
a reasonable upper bound to the disruption cost of service- It is assumed that the critical deflection affecting service-
ability failure is estimated to be $81/ft2 ($872.40/m2) of ability is the total long-time deflection as illustrated in
failed floor area. Fig. 4. To account for uncertainties in material properties
The upper limit on the cost of loss of production is there- and loads, deflection histograms are developed using the
fore taken as CF equal to $81/ft2 ($872.40/m2) of failed floor approach presented by Choi et al. (2004). This approach is
area and the loss function for loss of production is defined as based on a deterministic layered beam finite element model.

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007 63


Table 4—Probability model of random variables Table 5—Probabilistic load models
Standard Distri-
Variable Mean COV deviation Source Load Statistical parameters bution Source
0.675f ′c + 1100 ≤ Formwork
f′c , psi 1.15f c′ Mirza et al. load Mean = 0.11Dn, El-Shahhat
0.176 — Normal
(Mpa) (0.675f ′c + 7.58 ≤ 1979 (additional COV = 0.10 et al. 1993
dead load)
1.15f c′ )
Concrete Construc- Sustained Ayoub and
fr , psi Mirza et al. Mean = 6.0 psf (0.29 kPa),
(in place) 0.218 — tion load construction Gamma Karshenas
(MPa) 8.3 f c′ (0.69 f c′ ) 1979 live load COV = 1.10 1994
Ayoub and
Ec, psi 60,400 f c′ Mirza et al. Stacking Mean = 20 psf (0.974 kPa) Gamma Karshenas
0.119 — load COV = 0.60
(MPa) 1979 1994
(5015.21 f c′ )
Mean = 1.05Dn, Stewart
Mirza and Dead load Normal
As 0.99An COV = 0.10 1996
0.024 — MacGreagor
Reinforcement 1979 Elling-
Es, ksi Sustained μlsus = 11.6 psf (0.56 kPa), Gamma wood and
29,200 2
(201,326.91)
0.024 — Julian 1966 live load σ lsus = 26.2 + (6500/A)κ Culver
(MPa) 1977
b, in. bn + 5/32 Naaman μE = (μQμRλ)/A,
0.045 — Live load
(cm) (bn + 0.397) 1982 Elling-
Beam Extra- σE2 = wood and
dimension dst, 0.68/hn ordinary 2 2 2 2 2 Gamma
dsn + 1/16 Naaman live load λκ ( μ Q μ R + μ R σ Q + μ Q σ Q ) Culver
dsh, in. (0.27/ — ---------------------------------------------------------------
- 1977
(dsn + 0.159) 1982 A
2
(cm) hn)
121.66 Choi et al. Note: Dn = nominal dead load; κ = 2.76, A = influence area; (μQ, σQ) = (150, 25 [psf]),
(εsh)u 780 × 10–6 —
× 10–6 2004 A – 155
(7.305, 1.218 [KPa]); (μR, σR) = (4, 2), λ = ------------------ ; A ≥ 400 ft2 (36 m2); Wco
Choi et al. 6.3
Shrinkage γ 1.0 — 3.33 × 10–2 = construction load + dead load; Wlvar = extraordinary live load; Ws = sustained load =
2004
dead load + sustained live load.
Choi et al.
f 55 days — 25 days
2004
ACI
φu 2.35 — 0.6 Committee simulation was used to generate the required deflection
209 1992 histograms. Statistics for material properties and loads are
Creep summarized in Table 4 (material properties) and Table 5
η 0.6 — 6.66 × 10–2 Bažant 1985
Choi et al. (loads). The material and load parameters are summarized in
D 10 days — 6.66 days the Notation. The schematic load-time history shown in
2004
Tension Choi et al. Fig. 4 was used as the basis for computing long-time deflection.
β 3.0 0.11 0.33
stiffening 2004 Assuming two levels of shoring and one level of reshoring,
Note: All variables follow normal distribution. the construction load due to shoring and reshoring was taken
as 1.84 times the slab self-weight (Rosowsky and Stewart
2001). The total long-time deflection was assumed to occur
at age t3 years equal to 5 years. In this study, a simplified
loading history is assumed in which it is assumed that the
construction load and dead load is initially applied at 28 days.
Some of the variability due to age at loading is assumed to be
included in the assumed variability in concrete material
properties. This, however, is a variable that could be looked
at more closely in future studies. The Monte Carlo simulation
results of slab deflections were discussed in a previous paper
(Choi et al. 2004).

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
A simply supported slab spanning 15 ft (4.57 m) with a
design live load of 50 psf (2394 kPa) was analyzed to determine
Fig. 5—Effect of variation of lower bound of continuous the sensitivity of the results to variations in the assumed loss
serviceability loss function on total unit cost for 180 in. functions and initial construction costs. Five slab thicknesses
(4.57 m) span simply-supported one-way slab. were considered. Analyses were performed with the
following variations.
1. Lower bound on serviceability loss function varied by
The age-adjusted effective modulus of elasticity is used to plus or minus 30%;
compute time-dependent deflections under sustained load. 2. Lower bound on loss of production function varied by
Tension stiffening is modeled using a bilinear stress-strain plus or minus 30%;
diagram for concrete in tension with a linear descending 3. Upper bound on loss of production function varied by
branch beyond the peak stress. Contributions of shrinkage plus or minus 30%;
warping to the long-time deflection are computed using the 4. Initial construction cost varied by plus or minus 10%;
simplified approach reported by ACI Committee 209 (1992). 5. Cost of repair varied by plus or minus 10%;
Using the deterministic model and statistical data on input 6. Cost of loss of production varied by plus or minus
parameters obtained from the literature, Monte Carlo 10%; and

64 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007


Fig. 6—Effect of variation of lower bound of two-step Fig. 10—Effect of variation of cost of loss of production on
discontinuous loss function (loss of production) on total unit total unit cost for 180 in. (4.57 m) span simply-supported
cost for 180 in. (4.57 m) span simply-supported one-way slab. one-way slab.

Fig. 7—Effect of variation of upper bound of two-step discon- Fig. 11—Effect of variation of cost of failure on total unit
tinuous loss function (loss of production) on total unit cost for cost for 180 in. (4.57 m) span simply-supported one-way slab.
180 in. (4.57 m) span simply-supported one-way slab.

Fig. 8—Effect of variation of cost of initial construction on Fig. 12—Effect of live load and span length on span-depth
total unit cost for 180 in. (4.57 m) span simply-supported one- ratio for simply-supported one-way slabs.
way slab.
Table 6—Summary of one-way slabs
Simply supported, both ends
Boundary condition continuous, one end continuous
Span length (in. [m]) 120 (3.04), 180 (4.57), 240 (6.09),
for simply supported 300 (7.62), 360 (9.14), 420 (10.66)
Span length (in. [m]) for both ends 180 (4.57), 240 (6.09), 300 (7.62),
continuous and one end continuous 360 (9.14), 420 (10.66), 480 (12.19)
6.0 (152.4), 9.0 (228.6), 12.0 (304.8),
Simply supported 15.0 (381.0), 18.0 (457.2), 21.0 (533.4)

Thickness Both ends 6.5 (165.1), 8.5 (215.9), 11.0 (279.4),


(in. [m]) continuous 13.0 (330.2), 15.0 (381.0), 17.0 (431.8)
One end 7.5 (190.5), 10.0 (254.0), 12.5 (317.5),
continuous 19.0 (482.6), 17.5 (444.5), 20.0 (508.0)
Live load when CDF = 0.95 50 psf (2.44 kPa), 100 psf (4.87 kPa)
Fig. 9—Effect of variation of cost of repair on total unit cost Note: Mean of extraordinary live load was magnified so that 100 psf (4.87 kPa) was
for 180 in. (4.57 m) span simply-supported one-way slab. sum of sustained live load and extraordinary live load corresponding to 0.95 of CDF.

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007 65


DISCUSSION
It is in the interests of the concrete industry and the
engineering community to produce concrete structures that
not only have an adequate margin of safety against collapse
but also provide acceptable performance in service at
minimum cost. The preliminary results presented previously
suggest that the proposed approach to design for
serviceability can provide a rational base for deflection
control criteria covering a wide range of design situations.
Further work is needed to better define costs for both initial
construction and repair costs in specific situations. Other costs,
such as the impact of a serviceability failure on the engineer’s
reputation, should be considered.
Serviceability loss functions can be developed for specialized
applications. For example, a floor supporting sensitive
Fig. 13—Effect of live load and span length on span-depth equipment may have upper and lower limits more stringent
ratio for both ends continuous one-way slabs. than those used in the present study. Loss of production costs
will vary depending on the application. The definition of the
loss function between the upper and lower limits can also be
improved by considering costs of various repair scenarios
associated with increasing deflection values.
It is not anticipated that analyses of the type outlined
previously would be employed in routine building design.
The methodology, however, may provide a basis for more
generalized code deflection control criteria in the future.
In the present study, the long-time deflection was selected
as the basis for analysis. The procedure can be extended to
consider other deflection criteria including deflections occurring
at any time between initial construction and long-time in-service
use. The methodology can be extended to other structural
systems such as two-way slabs and prestressed members.
Fig. 14—Effect of live load and span length on span-depth ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ratio for one end continuous one-way slabs. This work was supported in part by the Brain Korea 21 (BK21), Level II.
The support is gratefully acknowledged.
7. Total cost of failure varied by plus or minus 10%.
Analysis for upper bound on serviceability loss function NOTATION
was not performed because quite a few deflections were A = influence area
generated in a given design situation so as to investigate As = area of reinforcement
b = width of beam
uncertainty of the limit. As shown in Fig. 5 to 11, variations COV = coefficient of variation
of these magnitudes did not lead to changes in the thickness Dn = nominal dead load
corresponding to minimum total cost. dsb = distance from top fiber to centroid of bottom steel
dst = distance from top fiber to centroid of top steel
Ec = concrete modulus of elasticity
COMPARISON BETWEEN THICKNESSES Es = steel modulus of elasticity
OBTAINED BY PROPOSED METHOD AND f ′c = concrete compressive strength
CURRENT ACI 318 CODE MINIMUM THICKNESSES fr = modulus of rupture
A parametric study was performed to compare the thickness β = tension stiffening parameter
of one-way slabs obtained by the proposed procedure and the (εsh)u = ultimate shrinkage strain
minimum thickness values given in ACI 318-05 (ACI φu = ultimate creep coefficient
Committee 318 2005). The range of parameters considered γ, f = constants of shrinkage equation
η, D = constants of creep equation
is summarized in Table 6. The results are presented in Fig. 12 to κ = constant of sustained live load
14 in terms of span-to-depth ratio versus span length. In each λ = parameter for extraordinary live load
case, the ACI 318 minimum thickness value is constant with μ = mean
span length, whereas the optimum span-to-depth ratio based σ = standard deviation
on minimum total cost decreases as span length increases. Subscripts:
Also, there is a slight decrease in span-to-depth ratio as live E = extraordinary live load
load increases. In general, the proposed procedure results in lsus = sustained live load
smaller thicknesses than ACI 318-05 for shorter spans and Q = weight of single concentrated load in cell uniformly divided
larger thicknesses than ACI 318-05 for longer spans except from influence area
R = number of loads per cell
simply supported case, which showed smaller thicknesses
than ACI 318-05 in all the given span lengths. The results
suggest that the ACI 318-05 minimum thickness rules are REFERENCES
ACI Committee 209, 1992, “Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage, and
adequate for minimum thickness up to approximately 20 ft Temperature Effects in Concrete Structures (ACI 209R-92),” American
(6.10 m) span, the typical span range for both ends continuous Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 47 pp.
and one end continuous one-way slabs. ACI Committee 318, 2005, “Building Code Requirements for Structural

66 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007


Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (318R-05),” American Concrete of Plant Precast Concrete Structures,” Journal of Structural Engineering,
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 430 pp. ASCE, V. 123, No. 3, pp. 298-304.
Ayoub, H., and Karshenas, S., 1994, “Survey Results for Construction Mayer, H., and Rusch, H., 1967, “Building Damage Caused by Deflection
Live Loads on Newly Poured Slabs,” Journal of Structural Engineering, of Reinforced Concrete Building Components,” Technical Translation
ASCE, V. 120, No. 5, pp. 1543-1562. 1412, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 115 pp.
Bažant, Z. P., 1985, “Probabilistic Analysis of Creep Effects in Concrete Mirza, S. A.; Hatzinikolas, M.; and MacGregor, J. G., 1979, “Statistical
Structure,” 4th International Conference of Structural Safety and Reliability, Descriptions of the Strength of Concrete,” Journal of the Structural Division,
pp. 1331-1344. ASCE, V. 105, No. 6, pp. 1021-1037.
Branson, B. E., 1963, “Instantaneous and Time-Dependent Deflections Mirza, S. A., and MacGregor, J. G., 1979, “Variability of the Mechanical
of Simple and Continuous Reinforced Concrete Beams,” HPR Publication 7, Properties of Reinforcing Bars,” Journal of the Structural Division,
Part 1, Alabama Highway Department, Bureau of Public Roads, pp. 1-78. ASCE, V. 105, No. 5, pp. 921-937.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003, “National Compensation Survey: Naaman, A. E., and Amnuayporn, S., 1982, “Reliability of Partially
Occupational Wages in the United States,” U.S. Department of Labor, Prestressed Beams at Serviceability Limit States,” PCI Journal, V. 27,
Washington, D.C., 184 pp. pp. 66-85.
Choi, B.-S.; Scanlon, A.; and Johnson, P. A., 2004, “Monte Carlo Reid, S., and Turkstra, C., 1980, “Serviceability Limit States—Probabilistic
Simulation of Immediate and Time-Dependent Deflections of Reinforced Description,” Report ST 80-1, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, 94 pp.
Concrete Beams and Slabs,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 101, No. 5, Sept.-
Reid, S., and Turkstra, C., 1981, “Codified Design for Serviceability,”
Oct., pp. 633-641.
Report ST 81-6, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, 139 pp.
Ellingwood, B., and Culver, C. C., 1977, “Analysis of Live Loads in
Rosowsky, D. V., and Stewart, M. G., 2001, “Probabilistic Construction
Office Buildings.” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, V. 103, No. 8,
Load Model for Multistory Reinforced-Concrete Buildings,” Journal of
pp. 1551-1560.
Performance and Constructed Facilities, ASCE, V. 15, No. 4, pp. 145-152.
El-Shahhat, A. M.; Rosowsky, D. V.; and Chen, W. F., 1993, “Construction
Safety of Multistory Concrete Buildings,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 90, RS Means, 2002a, “Building Construction Cost Data,” RS Means Co.,
No. 4, July-Aug., pp. 335-341. Inc., Kingston, Mass., 700 pp.
Graham, C. J., and Scanlon, A., 1986, “Long-Time Multipliers for RS Means, 2002b, “Repair and Remodeling Cost Data,” RS Means Co.,
Estimating Two-Way Slab Deflections,” ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 83, Inc., Kingston, Mass., 625 pp.
No. 6, Nov.-Dec., pp. 899-908. Sarma, K. C., and Adeli, H., 1998, “Cost Optimization of Concrete
Hossain, N. B., 2000, “Time-Dependent Deflections, Serviceability, Structures,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 124, No. 5,
Reliability and Expected Costs of Unserviceability for Reinforced Concrete pp. 570-578.
Flexural Beams,” PhD thesis, Department of Civil, Surv. and Environmental Stewart, M. G., 1996, “Serviceability Reliability Analysis of Reinforced
Engineering, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia, 244 pp. Concrete Structures,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 122,
Hossain, N. B., and Stewart, M. G., 2001, “Probabilistic Models of No. 7, pp. 794-803.
Damaging Deflections for Floor Elements,” Journal of Performance of Trost, H., 1967, “Implications of the Superposition Principle in Creep
Constructed Facilities, ASCE, V. 15, No. 4, pp. 135-140. and Relaxation Problems for Concrete and Prestressed Concrete,” Beton
Julian, O. G., 1966, discussion of “Strength Variations in Ready-Mixed and Stahlbetonbau, West Berlin, Germany, V. 62, pp. 230-238 and 261-269.
Concrete,” by A. E. Cummings, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 51, No. 9, Turkstra, C., and Reid, S., 1981, “Probabilistic Design for Serviceability,”
Sept., pp. 772-4 to 772-8. 3rd International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, Trondheim,
Koskisto, O. J., and Ellingwood, B., 1997, “Reliability-Based Optimization Norway, pp. 583-592.

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2007 67


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen