Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
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.
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
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)