Two-Way Slab with Beams Design and Detailing (CAC Design Handbook)

Version: Sep-25-2019
Two-Way Slab with Beams Design and Detailing (CAC Design Handbook)

The concrete floor slab system shown below is for an intermediate floor to be designed considering superimposed
dead load = 1.6 kN/m2, and unfactored live load = 4.8 kN/m2. The lateral loads are independently resisted by shear
walls. The use of flat plate system will be checked. If the use of flat plate is not adequate, the use of slab system with
beams between all supports will be investigated. The analysis procedure “Elastic Frame Method (EFM)” prescribed
in CSA A23.3-14 is illustrated in detail in this example (Example #4 from the CAC Design Handbook). The hand
solution from EFM is also used for a comparison with the Reference results using Direct Design Method (DDM) and
results of the engineering software program spSlab. Explanation of the EFM is available in StructurePoint Video
Tutorials page.

Figure 1 - Two-Way Flat Concrete Floor System

Version: Sep-25-2019
Contents
1. Preliminary Member Sizing .....................................................................................................................................4
2. Two-Way Slab Analysis and Design ...................................................................................................................... 10
2.1. Direct Design Method (DDM) ........................................................................................................................ 10
2.1.1. Direct design method limitations.......................................................................................................... 10
2.2. Elastic Frame Method (EFM) ......................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.1. Elastic frame method limitations .......................................................................................................... 13
2.2.2. Frame members of elastic frame .......................................................................................................... 15
2.2.3. Elastic frame analysis ........................................................................................................................... 21
2.2.4. Design moments ................................................................................................................................... 22
2.2.5. Distribution of design moments ........................................................................................................... 23
2.2.6. Flexural reinforcement requirements.................................................................................................... 25
2.2.7. Column design moments ...................................................................................................................... 32
3. Two-Way Slab Shear Strength ............................................................................................................................... 33
3.1. One-Way (Beam action) Shear Strength for The Slab .................................................................................... 33
3.2. Two-Way (Punching) Shear Strength ............................................................................................................. 34
4. Two-Way Slab Deflection Control (Serviceability Requirements) ........................................................................ 37
5. spSlab Software Solution ....................................................................................................................................... 37
6. Summary and Comparison of Two-Way Slab Design Results ............................................................................... 63
7. Comparison of Two-Way Slab Analysis and Design Methods .............................................................................. 67

Version: Sep-25-2019
Code

Design of Concrete Structures (CSA A23.3-14)

Reference

CAC Concrete Design Handbook, 4th Edition, Cement Association of Canada

Notes on ACI 318-11 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, Twelfth Edition, 2013 Portland
Cement Association

Design Data

Floor-to-Floor Height = 3 m (provided by architectural drawings)

Superimposed Dead Load, SDL = 1.6 kN/m2

Live Load, LL = 4.8 kN/m2

f 'c = 25 MPa (for slabs)

f 'c = 25 MPa (for columns)

f ' y = 400 MPa

Column Dimensions = 400 mm x 600 mm

Solution

1. Preliminary Member Sizing

For slab without beams (flat plate)

a) Slab minimum thickness - Deflection

CSA A23.3-14 (13.2)

Minimum member thickness and depths from CSA A23.3-14 will be used for preliminary sizing.

Using CSA A23.3-14 minimum slab thickness for two-way construction without interior beams in Section
13.2.3.

Exterior Panels (E-W Direction Governs):

ln ( 0.6 + f y /1000 ) 6200 ( 0.6 + 400 /1000 )

hs ,min = 1.1 = 1.1 = 227 mm CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.3)
30 30

But not less than 120 mm. CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.1)

Where ln = length of clear span in the short direction = 6600 – 400 = 6200 mm

4
 Interior Panels (N-S Direction Governs):

ln ( 0.6 + f y /1000 ) 6900 ( 0.6 + 400 /1000 )

hs ,min = = = 230 mm CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.3)
30 30

But not less than 120 mm. CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.1)

Where ln = length of clear span in the long direction = 7500 – 600 = 6900 mm

Try 250 mm slab for all panels (self-weight = 5.89 kN/m2)

b) Slab one way shear strength

Evaluate the average effective depth (Figure 2):

db 16
dt = tslab − cclear − db − = 250 − 25 − 16 − = 201 mm
2 2
db 16
dl = tslab − cclear − = 250 − 25 − = 217 mm
2 2
dl + dt 201 + 217
d avg = = = 209 mm
2 2

Where:
cclear = 20 mm for 15M steel bar CSA A23.3-14 (Annex A. Table 17)
Note that the reference used 25 mm as clear cover, in this example the clear cover used is 25 mm to
be consistent with reference.
db = 16 mm for 15M steel bar

Figure 2 - Two-Way Flat Concrete Floor System

Load Combination 1:
Factored dead load, wdf = 1.4  (5.89 + 1.6) = 10.49 kN/m2 CSA A23.3-14 (Annex C. Table C.1 a)

Total factored load wf = 10.49 kN/m2

Load Combination 2:
Factored dead load, wdf = 1.25  (5.89 + 1.6) = 9.36 kN/m2

5
 Factored live load, wlf = 1.5  4.8 = 7.20 kN/m2 CSA A23.3-14 (Annex C. Table C.1 a)

Total factored load wf = wdf + wlf = 16.56 kN/m2 (Controls)

Check the adequacy of slab thickness for beam action (one-way shear) CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.6)

At an interior column:
The critical section for one-way shear is extending in a plane across the entire width and located at a distance,
dv from the face of support or concentrated load (see Figure 3). CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.6.1)
Consider a 1 m. wide strip.
  7500   600   
  −  − 188  (1000 ) 
   
= 
2 2  = 3.26 m 2
Tributary area for one-way shear is ATributary
 10002 
 
 
V f = wf  ATributary = 16.56  3.26 = 54.03 kN

Vc = c  f 'c bw dv CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 11.6)

Where:
 = 1 for normal weight concrete CSA A23.3-14 (8.6.5)
 = 0.21 for slabs with overall thickness not greater than 350 mm CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.6.2)

dv = Max (0.9davg ,0.72h) = Max (0.9  209,0.72  250) = Max (188,180) = 188 mm CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)

fc' = 5 MPa  8 MPa CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.4)

188
Vc = 0.65 1 0.21 25 1000  = 128.3 kN  V f
1000
Slab thickness of 250 mm is adequate for one-way shear.

c) Slab two-way shear strength

Check the adequacy of slab thickness for punching shear (two-way shear) at an interior column (Figure 4):

Shear prerimeter: b0 = 2  (600 + 400 + 2  209) = 2836 mm CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.3)

Tributary area for two-way shear is

 7.5 + 6.7   600 + 209 400 + 209 

ATributary =   6.6  −   = 46.86 − 0.49 = 46.37 m2
 2   1,000 1,000 

The factored resisiting shear stress, Vr shall be the smallest of : CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.1)

6
  2 
1. vr = vc = 1 +  0.19c f 'c CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.5)
  c 

 2 
vr = 1 +   0.19  0.65  25 = 1.44 MPa
 1.5 
600
Where c = = 1.5 (ratio of long side to short side of the column) CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.1)
400

 d 
2. vr = vc =  s + 0.19  c f 'c CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.6)
 bo 

 4  209 
vr =  + 0.19  1 0.65  25 = 1.58 MPa
 2836 

3. vr = vc = 0.38c f 'c = 0.38 1 0.65  25 = 1.24 MPa CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.7)

 7.5 + 6.7 
16.56    6.6 
v f , ave =
Vf
=  2  1, 000 = 1.309 MPa
bod 2836  209
vr 1.240
= = 0.94  1.20 CAC Concrete Design Handbook 4th Edition (5.2.3)
v f , ave 1.309

Slab thickness of 250 mm is not adequate for two-way shear.

Figure 3 - Critical Section for One-Way Figure 4 - Critical Section for Two-Way
Shear Shear

7
For slab with beams

a) Slab minimum thickness – Deflection

Control of deflections. CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.5)
In lieu of detailed calculation for deflections, CSA A23.3 Code gives minimum thickness for two-way slab
with beams between all supports on all sides in Clause 13.2.5.
Ratio of moment of inertia of beam section to moment of inertia of a slab (α) is computed as follows:
Ib
= CSA A23.3 (13.2.5)
Is

The moment of inertia for the effective beam and slab sections can be calculated as follows:
bw h3   hs  
Ib =  2.5 1 −  
12  
CSA A23.3 (Eq. 13.4)
h 

The preliminary values are shown below and will be checked in next steps:
Slab thickness (hs) = 200 mm
Slab width (b) = 6600 mm for interior and 3300 mm exterior (North-South)
= 7100 mm for interior and 3350 mm exterior (East-West)
Beam depth (h) = 400 mm
Beam width (bw) = 1400 mm for interior and 800 mm exterior

Edge Beams:
The effective beam and slab sections for the computation of stiffness ratio for edge beam is calculated as
follows:
For North-South Edge Beams:
800  4003   200  
Ib =  2.5  1 −   = 5.33 10 mm
9 4

12   400 

3300  2003
Is = = 2.20 109 mm4
12
5.33 109
= = 2.42
2.20 109
For East-West Edge Beams:
800  4003   200  
Ib =  2.5  1 −   = 5.33 10 mm
9 4

12   400  

3350  2003
Is = = 2.23 109 mm4
12
5.33 109
= = 2.39
2.23 109

8
Interior Beams:
For North-South Interior Beams:
1400  4003   200  
Ib =  2.5  1 −   = 9.33 10 mm
9 4

12   400  

6600  2003
Is = = 4.40 109 mm4
12
9.33 109
= = 2.12
4.40 109
For East-West Interior Beams:
1400  4003   200  
Ib =  2.5  1 −   = 9.33 10 mm
9 4

12   400  

7100  2003
Is = = 4.73 109 mm4
12
9.33 109
= = 1.97
4.73 109
The average of α for the beams on four sides of exterior and interior panels are calculated as:
(2.42 + 2.39 + 2.12 + 1.97)
For exterior panels:  m = = 2.23
4
(2  2.12 + 2 1.97)
For interior panels:  m = = 2.05
4
αm shall not be taken greater than 2.0, then α m = 2.0 for both exterior and interior panels.

The minimum slab thickness is given by:

 fy 
ln  0.6 + 
= 
1, 000 
hmin CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.5)
30 + 4 m

Where:
ln = clear span in the long direction measured face to face of columns = 6.9 m = 6900 mm
clear span in the long direction 7500 − 600
= = = 1.113
clear span in the short direction 6600 − 400

 400 
6900  0.6 + 
hmin =  1000 
= 177.4 mm
30 + 4 1.113  2
The assumed thickness is more than the hmin. Use 200 mm slab thickness.

9
2. Two-Way Slab Analysis and Design

CSA A23.3 states that a regular slab system may be designed using any procedure satisfying conditions of
equilibrium and compatibility with the supports, provided that it is shown that the factored resistance at every
section is at least equal to the effects of the factored loads and that all serviceability conditions, including specified
limits on deflections, are met. CSA A23.3-14 (13.5.1)

CSA A23.3 permits the use of Plastic Plate Theory Method (PPTM), Theorems of Plasticity Method (TPM),
Direct Design Method (DDM) and Elastic Frame Method (EFM); known as Equivalent Frame Method in the
ACI; for the gravity load analysis of orthogonal frames. The following sections outline a brief description of
DDM, a detailed hand solution using EFM and an automated solution using spSlab software respectively.

2.1. Direct Design Method (DDM)

Two-way slabs satisfying the limits in CSA A23.3-14 (13.9) are permitted to be designed in accordance with
the DDM.

2.1.1. Direct design method limitations

There shall be a minimum of three continuous spans in each direction (3 spans) CSA A23.3-14 (13.9.1.2)

Successive span lengths centre-to-centre of supports in each direction shall not differ by more than one- third
of the longer span ((7500-6700)/6700 = 0.12 < 0.33) CSA A23.3-14 (13.9.1.3)

All loads shall be due to gravity only and uniformly distributed over an entire panel (Loads are uniformly
distributed over the entire panel) CSA A23.3-14 (13.9.1.4)

The factored live load shall not exceed twice the factored dead load (Service live-to-dead load ratio of
(4.8/(24*200/1000) = 1.00 < 2.0) CSA A23.3-14 (13.9.1.4)

Since all the criteria are met, Direct Design Method can be utilized.

Detailed illustration of analysis and design of two-way slab using DDM can be found in “Two-Way Flat Plate
Concrete Slab Floor Analysis and Design (CSA A23.3-14)” example available in the design examples page in
StructurePoint website. This example focuses on the analysis of two-way slab with beams using EFM.

10
Figure 5 – Sample Calculations Using DDM from “Two-Way Flat Plate Concrete Slab Floor Analysis and Design”
Design Example

11
2.2. Elastic Frame Method (EFM)

EFM (also known as Equivalent Frame Method in the ACI 318) is the most comprehensive and detailed
procedure provided by the CSA A23.3 for the analysis and design of two-way slab systems where these systems
may, for purposes of analysis, be considered a series of plane frames acting longitudinally and transversely
through the building. Each frame shall be composed of equivalent line members intersecting at member
centrelines, shall follow a column line, and shall include the portion of slab bounded laterally by the centreline
of the panel on each side. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.1.1)

Probably the most frequently used method to determine design moments in regular two-way slab systems is to
consider the slab as a series of two-dimensonal frames that are analyzed elastically. When using this analogy,
it is essential that stiffness properties of the elements of the frame be selected to properly represent the behavior
of the three-dimensional slab system.

In a typical frame analysis it is assumed that at a beam-column cconnection all members meeting at the joint
undergo the same rotaion. For uniform gravity loading this reduced restraint is accounted for by reducing the
effective stiffness of the column by either Clause 13.8.2 or Clause 13.8.3. CSA A23.3-14 (N.13.8)

Each floor and roof slab with attached columns may be analyzed separately, with the far ends of the columns
considered fixed. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.1.2)

The moment of inertia of column and slab-beam elements at any cross-section outside of joints or column
capitals shall be based on the gross area of concrete at that section. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.2.5)

An equivalent column shall be assumed to consist of the actual columns above and below the slab-beam plus
an attached torsional member transverse to the direction of the span for which moments are being determined.
CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.2.5)

12
2.2.1. Elastic frame method limitations
In EFM, live load shall be arranged in accordance with 13.8.4 which requires:

• slab systems to be analyzed and designed for the most demanding set of forces established by
investigating the effects of live load placed in various critical patterns. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.4)

• Complete analysis must include representative interior and exterior equivalent elastic frames in both the
longitudinal and transverse directions of the floor. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.1.1)

• Panels shall be rectangular, with a ratio of longer to shorter panel dimensions, measured center-to-center
of supports, not to exceed 2. CSA A23.3-14 (3.1a)

• For slab systems with beams between sypports, the relative effective stiffness of beams in the two
directions is not less than 0.2 or greater than 5.0. CSA A23.3-14 (3.1b)

• Column offsets are not greater than 20% of the span (in the direction of offset) from either axis between
centerlines of successive columns. CSA A23.3-14 (3.1c)

The reinforcement is placed in an orthogonal grid. CSA A23.3-14 (3.1d)

13
Figure 6 – Elastic (Equivalent) Frame Methodology

14
2.2.2. Frame members of elastic frame
Determine moment distribution factors and fixed-end moments for the elastic frame members. The moment
distribution procedure will be used to analyze the equivalent frame. Stiffness factors k , carry over factors
COF, and fixed-end moment factors FEM for the slab-beams and column members are determined using the
design aids tables at Appendix 20A of PCA Notes on ACI 318-11. These calculations are shown below.

a. Flexural stiffness of slab-beams at both ends, Ksb

For Interior Span:
cN 1 600 c 400
= = 0.080 , N 2 = = 0.061
1 7500 2 6600

For cF1 = cN 2 , stiffness factors, kNF = kFN = 4.09 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

Ecs I s Ecs I s
Thus, K sb = k NF = 4.09 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
1 1

Where Isb is the moment of inertia of slab-beam section shown in Figure 7 and can be computed as follows:

Figure 7 – Cross-Section of Slab-Beam

3 (1 − B ) B ( A − 1)
2

Ct = 1 + ( A − 1) B3 + = 1.95 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Figure 20-21)

1 + B ( A − 1)

Where A = b/bw = 6600 / 1400 = 4.71 and B = hs/h = 200 / 400 = 0.5
 b h3   1400  4003 
I s = Ct  w  = 1.95   = 14.57 10 mm
9 4
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Figure 20-21)
 12   12 

(   
)
1.5

Ecs = 3300 f c' + 6900  c  CSA A23.3-14(8.6.2.2 )

 2300 
1.5
 2402.8 
Ecs = (3300 25 + 6900)   = 24,986 MPa
 2300 
14.57 109 −3
K sb = 4.09  24,986   10 = 198.6 10 N.m
6

7500
Carry-over factor COF = 0.50 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
Fixed-end moment FEM = 0.0843wu 2 1
2
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

For Exterior Span:

15
 cN 1 600 c 600
= = 0.090 , N 2 = = 0.061
1 6700 2 6600

For cF1 = cN 2 , stiffness factors, kNF = kFN = 4.10 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

Ecs I s Ecs I s
Thus, K sb = k NF = 4.10 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
1 1

14.57 109 −3
K sb = 4.10  24,986   10 = 222.8 10 N.m
6

6700
Carry-over factor COF = 0.51 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
Fixed-end moment FEM = 0.0843wu 2 1
2
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

b. Flexural stiffness of column members at both ends, Kc

Referring to Table A7, Appendix 20A:
ta = 400 − 200 / 2 = 300 mm , tb = 200 / 2 = 100 mm

H = 3.0 m = 3000 mm, Hc = 3000 − 400 = 2600 mm

ta t H
= 3.00, b = 0.33, = 1.15
tb ta Hc

Thus, kc, top = 6.33 and kc, bottom = 5.13 by interpolation.

b  h3 400(600)3
Ic = = = 7.20 109 mm4
12 12

  
1.5

Ecc = (3,300 f c' + 6,900)  c  CSA A23.3-14(8.6.2.2)

 2,300 
1.5
 2402.8 
Ecc = (3300 25 + 6900)   = 24,986 MPa
 2300 

c = 3.0 m = 3000 mm

kc Ecc I c
Kc = PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A7)
c

7.20 109 −3
Kc ,top = 6.33  24986   10 = 380 10 N.m
6

3000

7.20 109 −3
Kc ,bottom = 5.13  24986   10 = 308 10 N.m
6

3000

16
c. Torsional stiffness of torsional members, Kt
9 Ecs C
Kt =  CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.2.8)
  c2 3 
 t 1 −  
  t  

For Interior Columns:

9  24,986  24.90 109

Kt_int = 3
10−3 = 102.3 107 N.m
 400 
6600  1 − 
 6600 
Where:

 x   x3 y 
C =  1 − 0.63    CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.2.9)
 y  3 

x1 = 200 mm x2 = 200 mm x1 = 400 mm x2 = 200 mm

y1 = 1400 mm y2 = 1800 mm y1 = 1400 mm y2 = 200 mm
C1 = 3.40×109 C2 = 4.46×109 C1 = 24.49×109 C2 = 0.20×109

∑C = 3.40×109 + 4.46×109 = 7.90×109 mm4 ∑C = 24.49×109 + 2×0.20×109 = 24.90×109 mm4

Figure 8 – Attached Torsional Member at Interior Column

17
For Exterior Columns:

9  24,986 11.9 109

Kt _ ext = 3
10−3 = 48.86 107 N.m
 400 
6600  1 − 
 6600 
Where:

 x   x3 y 
C =  1 − 0.63    CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.2.9)
 y  3 

x1 = 200 mm x2 = 200 mm x1 = 400 mm x2 = 200 mm

y1 = 800 mm y2 = 1000 mm y1 = 800 mm y2 = 200 mm
C1 = 1.80×109 C2 = 2.33×109 C1 = 11.69×109 C2 = 0.20×109

∑C = 1.80×109 + 2.33×109 = 4.10×109 mm4 ∑C = 11.69×109 + 0.20×109= 11.90 ×109 mm4

Figure 9 – Attached Torsional Member at Exterior Column

18
d. Increased torsional stiffness due to parallel beams, Kta.

For Interior Columns:

Figure 10 – Slab-Beam in the Direction of Analysis

14.6 109
= (1.00 109 ) 
Kt_int I sb
Kta_int = = 3.40 109 N.m
Is 4.40 109

Where:
l2  h3 6600  2003
Is = = = 4.40 109 mm4
12 12
For Exterior Columns:
14.6 109
= ( 0.49 109 ) 
Kt_ext I sb
Kta_ext = = 1.60 109 N.m
Is 4.40 109

e. Equivalent column stiffness, Kec

 K c   Kta
K ec =
 K c +  Kta

Where ∑ Kta is for two torsional members one on each side of the column, and ∑ Kc is for the upper and
lower columns at the slab-beam joint of an intermediate floor.

Figure 11 – Equivalent Column Stiffness

19
 For Interior Columns:
(379.6 106 + 307.6 106 )(2  3.4 109 )
Kec_int = = 623.9 106 N.m
(379.6 106 + 307.6 106 ) + (2  3.4 109 )

For Exterior Columns:

(379.6 106 + 307.6 106 )(2 1.6 109 )
Kec_ext = = 566.9 106 N.m
(379.6 106 + 307.6 106 ) + (2 1.6 109 )

f. Slab-beam joint distribution factors, DF

Figure 12 – Slab and Column Siffness

At exterior joint:
222.8 106
DF = = 0.282
( 222.8 106 + 566.9 106 )
At interior joint:
222.8 106
DFExt = = 0.213
( 222.8 10 + 198.6 106 + 623.9 106 )
6

198.6 106
DFInt = = 0.190
( 222.8 10 + 198.6 106 + 623.9 106 )
6

COF for slab-beam = 0.50 for Interior Span

= 0.51 for Exterior Span

20
2.2.3. Elastic frame analysis
Determine negative and positive moments for the slab-beams using the moment distribution method. Since
the unfactored live load does not exceed three-quarters of the unfactored dead load, design moments are
assumed to occur at all critical sections with full factored live on all spans. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.4.2)
L 4.8 4.8 3
= = = 0.66 
D  1.4  ( 4.7 + 1.0 + 1.6 ) 4
 2400  0.2 + 2400  ( 0.4 − 0.2 )  + 1.6 
 6.6 
a. Factored load and Fixed-End Moments (FEM’s).
Factored dead load, wdf = 1.25  (4.7 + 1.0 + 1.6) = 9.1 kN/m2

Factored live load, wlf = 1.5  4.8 = 7.2 kN/m2

Total factored load qu = wf = wdf + wlf = 16.3 kN/m2

FEM’s for slab-beams = mNF qu 2 1

2
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

= 0.0840 16.3  6.6  7.52 = 509.6 kN.m (For Interior Span)

= 0.084116.3  6.6  6.72 = 407.1 kN.m (For Exterior Span)

b. Moment distribution.
Moment distribution computations are shown in Table 1. Counterclockwise rotational moments acting on the
member ends are taken as positive. Positive span moments are determined from the following equation:
M uL + M uR
M u , midspan = M o −
2
Where M o is the moment at the midspan for a simple beam.

When the end moments are not equal, the maximum moment in the span does not occur at the midspan, but
its value is close to that midspan for this example.
Positive moment in span 1-2:

(16.3  6.6)  6.72 ( 288.5 + 475.4)

M u+ = − = 221.7 kN.m
8 2
Positive moment span 2-3:

(16.3  6.6)  7.52 (504.9 + 504.9 )

M u+ = − = 251.5 kN.m
8 2

21
 Table 1 – Moment Distribution for Elastic Frame

Joint 1 2 3 4
Member 1-2 2-1 2-3 3-2 3-4 4-3
DF 0.282 0.213 0.190 0.190 0.213 0.282
COF 0.510 0.510 0.500 0.500 0.510 0.510
FEM 407.10 -407.10 509.60 -509.60 407.10 -407.10
Dist -114.80 -21.83 -19.48 19.48 21.83 114.80
CO -11.13 -58.55 9.74 -9.74 58.55 11.13
Dist 3.14 10.40 9.27 -9.27 -10.40 -3.14
CO 5.30 1.60 -4.64 4.64 -1.60 -5.30
Dist -1.50 0.65 0.58 -0.58 -0.65 1.50
CO 0.33 -0.77 -0.29 0.29 0.77 -0.33
Dist -0.09 0.22 0.20 -0.20 -0.22 0.09
CO 0.11 -0.05 -0.10 0.10 0.05 -0.11
Dist -0.03 0.03 0.03 -0.03 -0.03 0.03
CO 0.02 -0.02 -0.02 0.02 0.02 -0.02
Dist 0.00 0.01 0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.00
CO 0.01 0.00 -0.01 0.01 0.00 -0.01
Dist 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
M, kN.m 288.50 -475.40 504.90 -504.90 475.40 -288.50
Midspan M, kN.m 221.73 251.52 221.73

2.2.4. Design moments

Positive and negative factored moments for the slab system in the direction of analysis are plotted in Figure
13. The negative moments used for design are taken at the faces of supports (rectangle section or equivalent
rectangle for circular or polygon sections) but not at distances greater than 0.175 1 from the centers of

supports. CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.5.1)

600
= 300 mm < 0.175  6700 = 1172.5 mm (use face of supporting location)
2

22
Figure 13 - Positive and Negative Design Moments for Slab-Beam (All Spans Loaded with Full Factored Live Load)

2.2.5. Distribution of design moments

After the negative and positive moments have been determined for the slab-beam strip, the CSA code permits
the distribution of the moments at critical sections to the column strips, beams (if any), and middle strips in
accordance with the DDM. CSA A23.3-14 (13.12)

Beams shall be reinforced to resist the following fraction of the positive or interior negative factored moments
determined by analysis or determined as specified in Clause 13.9.3. CSA A.23.3-14 (13.12.2.1)

Portion of design moment resisted by beam:

1  l2  2.12  6.6 
1 −  = 1 −  = 0.619 (for the interior span)
0.3 + 1  3l1  0.3 + 2.12  3  7.5 

1  l2  2.12  6.6 
1 −  = 1 −  = 0.588 (for the exterior span)
0.3 + 1  3l1  0.3 + 2.12  3  6.7 

Beams shall be proportioned for 100% if the exterior negative moment. CSA A.23.3-14 (13.12.2.2)

The slab shall be reinforced to resist the interior negative moments not resisted by the beams. This
reinforcement shall be uniformly distributed over the width of the slab. CSA A.23.3-14 (13.12.4.1)

The distribution factors for the remaining part of the column strip and middle strip are calculated as follows:

23
 1.9
DFcs = (1 − 0.619 )  = 0.319
1.9 + 3.3 (interior span)
3.3
DFms = (1 − 0.619 )  = 0.242
1.9 + 3.3

1.9
DFcs = (1 − 0.588 )  = 0.150
1.9 + 3.3 (M+ section and M- section at the interior support - exterior span)
3.3
DFms = (1 − 0.588 )  = 0.261
1.9 + 3.3

Factored moments at critical sections are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 - Lateral distribution of factored moments

Factored Column Strip Beam Strip Two Half-Middle Strips*

Moments Moment Moment Moment
(kN.m) Percent Percent Percent
(kN.m) (kN.m) (kN.m)
Exterior
193.5 100.0 193.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Negative
End
Positive 221.7 58.8 130.5 15.0 33.3 26.1 57.9
Span
Interior
363.7 58.8 214.0 15.0 54.7 26.1 95.0
Negative

Interior Negative 388.7 61.9 241.0 13.9 54.2 24.2 94.1

Span Positive 251.5 61.9 155.7 13.9 35.0 24.2 60.8
* That portion of the factored moment not resisted by the column strip is assigned to the two half-middle strips

24
2.2.6. Flexural reinforcement requirements

a. Determine flexural reinforcement required for strip moments

The flexural reinforcement calculation for the beam strip of interior span – negative location is provided
below:
M f = 241 kN.m

Beam strip width, b = 1400 mm

Use d = 400 – (25 + 16/2) = 367 mm
jd is assumed equal to 0.949d. The assumption will be verified once the area of steel in finalized.
Assume jd = 0.949  d = 348.3 mm

Mf 241106
As = = = 2035 mm2
s f y jd 0.85  400  348.3

1 = 0.85 − 0.0015 fc' = 0.81  0.67 CSA A23.3-14 (10.1.7)

1 = 0.97 − 0.0025 fc' = 0.91  0.67 CSA A23.3-14 (10.1.7)

s As f y 0.85  2035  400

Recalculate ' a ' for the actual As = 2035 mm 2 → a = = = 37.4 mm
c1 f 'c b 0.65  0.81 25 1400

a 37.4
c= = = 41.25 mm
1 0.91

The tension reinforcement in flexural members shall not be assumed to reach yield unless:
c 700
 CSA A23.3-14 (10.5.2)
d 700 + f y

41.25
= 0.112  0.640
367
a
jd = d − = 0.949d
2

0.2  fc' 0.2 25

As,min =  bt  h = 1400  400 = 1400 mm2 CSA A23.3-14 (10.5.1.2)
fy 400

 As = 2035 mm2

Provide 11 – 25M bars with As = 2200 mm2

25
The flexural reinforcement calculation for the column strip of exterior span – interior negative location is
provided below:
M f = 54.7 kN.m

Column strip width, b = (6600 /2) - 1400 = 1900 mm

Middle strip width, b = 6600 - 1900 - 1400 = 3300 mm
Use d = 200 – (25 + 16/2) = 167 mm
In this example, jd is assumed equal to 0.959d. The assumption will be verified once the area of steel in
finalized.
Assume jd = 0.959  d = 160.2 mm

Mf 54.7 106
As = = = 1004.3 mm2
s f y jd 0.85  400 160.2

1 = 0.85 − 0.0015 fc' = 0.81  0.67 CSA A23.3-14 (10.1.7)

s As f y 0.85 1004.6  400

Recalculate ' a ' for the actual As = 1004.6 mm 2 → a = = = 13.62 mm
c1 f 'c b 0.65  0.81 25 1900

a 13.62
c= = = 15 mm
1 0.91

The tension reinforcement in flexural members shall not be assumed to reach yield unless:
c 700
 CSA A23.3-14 (10.5.2)
d 700 + f y

15
= 0.09  0.64
167
a
jd = d − = 0.959d
2
As ,min = 0.002 1900  200 = 760 mm2 < 1004.3 mm2 CSA A23.3-14 (7.8.1)

 As = 1004.3 mm2

Maximum spacing: CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.4)

- Negative reinforcement in the band defined by bb: 1.5hs = 300 mm  250 mm = 250 mm

- Remaining negative moment reinforcement: 3hs = 600 mm  500 mm = 500 mm

Provide 6 – 15M bars with As = 200 mm2 and s = 1900/6 = 317 mm ≤ smax = 500 mm
All the values on Table 3 are calculated based on the procedure outlined above.

26
 Table 3 - Required Slab Reinforcement for Flexure (Elastic Frame Method (EFM))
As Req’d for
Mf b d Min As Reinforcement As Prov. for
Span Location flexure
(kN.m) (m) (mm) 2 (mm2) Provided flexure (mm2)
(mm )
End Span
Exterior Negative 193.5 1.4 367 1616 1400 11 - 15M* 2200
Beam
Positive 130.5 1.4 367 1075 1400 7 - 15M† 1400
Strip
Interior Negative 214.0 1.4 367 1796 1400 11 - 15M** 2200
Exterior Negative 0.0 1.9 167 0 760 4- 15M† 800
Column
Positive 33.3 1.9 167 601 760 4 - 15M† 800
Strip
Interior Negative 54.7 1.9 167 1004 760 6 - 15M 1200
Exterior Negative 0.0 3.3 167 0 1320 7- 15M† 1400
Middle
Positive 57.9 3.3 167 1045 1320 7- 15M† 1800
Strip
Interior Negative 95.0 3.3 167 1744 1320 9 - 15M 1800
Interior Span
Beam Negative 241.0 1.4 367 2035 1400 11 - 15M** 2200
Strip Positive 155.7 1.4 367 1290 1400 7- 15M† 1400
Column Negative 54.2 1.9 167 995 760 6 - 15M 1200
Strip Positive 35.0 1.9 167 633 760 4- 15M† 800
Middle Negative 94.1 3.3 167 1727 1320 9 - 15M 1800
Strip Positive 60.8 3.3 167 1099 1320 7 - 15M† 1400
* The reinforcement is selected to meet CSA A23.3-14 provision 13.10.3.
** The reinforcement is selected to meet CSA A23.3-14 provision 13.11.2.7.
† Design governed by minimum reinforcement

b. Calculate additional slab reinforcement at columns for moment transfer between slab and column by flexure

When gravity load, wind, earthquake, or other lateral forces cause transfer of moment between slab and
column, a fraction of unbalanced moment given by  f shall be transferred by flexural reinforcement placed

within a width bb. CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.2)

Portion of the unbalanced moment transferred by flexure is  f  M r

1
f = CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.2)
1 + (2 / 3)  b1 / b2

Where

b1 = Width width of the critical section for shear measured in the direction of the span for which moments
are determined according to CSA A23.3-14, clause 13 (see Figure 14).
b2 = Width of the critical section for shear measured in the direction perpendicular to b1 according to CSA
A23.3-14, clause 13 (see Figure 14).
bb = Effective slab width = c2 + 3  hs CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)

bb = 400 + 3  200 = 1000 mm

27
 For Exterior Column For Interior Column
367
b1 = 100 + 600 + = 883.5 mm b1 = 600 + 367 = 967 mm
2
b2 = 400 + 367 = 767 mm b2 = 400 + 367 = 767 mm

1 1
f = = 0.583 f = = 0.572
1 + (2 / 3)  883.5 / 767 1 + (2 / 3)  967 / 767

Repeat the same procedure in section 2.2.6.a to calculate the additional reinforcement required for the
unbalanced moment as shown in the following table:

Table 4 - Additional Slab Reinforcement Required for Moment Transfer Between Slab and Column (EFM)
Effective slab As req’d As prov. For
Mu* γf Mu d Add’l
Span Location γf width, bb within bb flexure within bb
(kN.m) (kN.m) (mm) Reinf.
(mm) (mm2) (mm2)
End Span

Column Exterior Negative 288.5 0.583 168 1000 367 1418 1800 -
Strip Interior Negative 29.5 0.572 16.9 1000 367 136 1800 -
*Mu is taken at the centerline of the support in Elastic Frame Method solution.

Figure 14 - Critical Shear Perimeters for Columns

28
c. Determine transverse reinforcement required for beam strip shear

The transverse reinforcement calculation for the beam strip of interior span is provided below.

Figure 15 – Shear at critical sections (at distance dv from the face of the column)

dv = Max (0.9d ,0.72h) = Max (0.9  367,0.72  400) = 330.3mm CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)

The required shear at a distance dv from the face of the supporting column Vf@dv = 335.6 kN.

Vr ,max = 0.25  c  fc  bw  dv CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.3)

Vr ,max = 0.25  0.65  25 1400  330.3 /1000 = 1879 kN

V f @ dv = 335.6 kN  Vr ,max = 1879 kN → section is adequate

Vc = c  fc' bw dv CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 11.6)

Vc = 0.65 1.0  0.21 25 1400  330.3 /1,000 = 315.6 kN  V f @ dv = 335.6 kN

∴ Stirrups are required. (While this may cause concern during construction and complicate bar and
concrete operations, it will be continued for illustration of the required calculations in this example.
Ideally, a revised geometry, material strength, and loading should be considered to eliminate shear
reinforcement. This reference example did not include detailed beam shear calculations to reveal the
need for stirrups).

This beam is cast integrally with the slab where the overall depth (400 mm) is not greater than one-half
the width of web (1400/2 = 700 mm) or 550 mm. thus, the value of β shall be taken as 0.21 and θ shall
be taken as 42ᴼ. CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.6.2(e))

fc' = 25 = 5 MPa  8 MPa CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.4)

The following shows how to calculate the distance from the column face beyond which transverse
reinforcement is required:

29
Vs = V f @ dv − Vc CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.3)

Vs = 335.6 − 315.6 = 20 kN

 Av  V f @ dv − Vc
 s  =   f  d  cot  CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.5.1)
 req s yt v

 Av  20 1000
 s  = = 0.160 mm2 / mm
 req 0.85  400  330.3  cot 42

 Av  0.06  fc'  bw
 s  = CSA A23.3-14 (11.2.8.2)
 min f yt

 Av  0.06  25 1400
 s  = = 1.05 mm2 / mm (Governs)
 min 400

Av 2 100
sreq = = = 190.5 mm
 v
A 1.05
 s 
 req

Check whether the required spacing based on the shear demand meets the spacing limits for shear
reinforcement per CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.8).

0.125c fcbw dv  V f @ dv CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.8.3)

0.125c fcbw dv = 0.125 1.0  0.65  25 1400  330.3 = 939.3 kN  V f @ dv = 335.6 kN

Therefore, maximum stirrup spacing shall be the smallest of 0.7dv and 600 mm.
CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.8.1 & 11.3.8.3)
0.7dv  0.7  330.3  231 mm 
smax = lesser of   = lesser of 600 mm  = lesser of 600 mm = 231 mm
600 mm     
Since sreq  smax → use sreq = 190 mm

Select sprovided = 175 mm – 10M stirrups with first stirrup located at distance 76.2 mm (3 in.) from the
column face.
The distance where the shear is zero is calculated as follows:
l 7.5
x=  Vu , L =  403.4 = 3.75 m = 3750 mm
Vf ,L + Vf ,R 403.4 + 403.4

The distance at which no shear reinforcement is required is calculated as follows:

x 3.75
x1 = x −  ( 0.85  Vc ) = 3.75 −  ( 0.85  315.6 ) = 1.256 m = 1256 mm
Vf 403.4

The following two provisions from CSA A23.3-14 explain the use of 85% of Vc:
The reudctions of shear resistance caused by terminating longitudinal reinforcement in flexural tension
zones shall be taken into account. It can be assumed that the reductions in shear capacity occur over a
length dv centred upon the termination point. CSA A23.3-14 (11.2.13.1)

30
 Note that if the factored shear resistance has been calculated using the simplified method of either Clasue
11.3.6.2 or Clause 11.3.6.3 then the calculated shear resistance within the length specified in Clause
11.2.13.1 shall be reduced by 15% (85% of Vc as shown in the previous equation).
CSA A23.3-14 (11.2.13.2)
c1 600
x1 − − 76.2 mm 1256 − − 76.2
# of stirrups = 2 +1 = 2 + 1 = 6.03 → use 7 stirrups
s provided 175

All the values on Table 5 are calculated based on the procedure outlined above.

Table 5 - Required Beam Reinforcement for Shear

(Av/s)min (Av/s)req sreq smax Reinforcement
Span Location
mm2/mm mm2/mm mm mm Provided
End Span
Exterior 0.0 0.0 --- --- ---
Interior 1.05 0.04 190.5 231.5 5 – 10M @ 185 mm
Interior Span
Interior 1.05 0.16 190.5 231.2 7 – 10M @ 175 mm

31
2.2.7. Column design moments

The unbalanced moment from the slab-beams at the supports of the elastic frame are distributed to the support
columns above and below the slab-beam in proportion to the relative stiffness of the support columns.
Detailed calculations regarding this topic (including column design for axial load and biaxial moments) can
be found in “Two-Way Flat Plate Concrete Slab Floor Analysis and Design (CSA A23.3-14)” example
available in the design examples page in StructurePoint website.

Figure 16 - Sample Calculations of Column Design from “Two-Way Flat Plate Concrete Slab Floor Analysis and
Design” Design Example

32
3. Two-Way Slab Shear Strength

Shear strength of the slab in the vicinity of columns/supports includes an evaluation of one-way shear (beam
action) and two-way shear (punching) in accordance with CSA A23.3-14 clause 13.

3.1. One-Way (Beam action) Shear Strength for The Slab CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.6)
The beam is designed to resist 100% of the one-way shear and the slab one-way shear strength need not to be
checked. However, the following shows the calculations of the slab one-way shear strength for illustration
purposes.

Vc = c  f c' bw dv CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 11.5)

λ = 1 for normal weight concrete

β = 0.21 for slabs with overall thickness not greater than 350 mm CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.6.2)
dv = Max (0.9dslab ,0.72hslab ) CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)

dv = Max (0.9 167,0.72  200) = Max (150,144) = 150 mm

fc' = 25 = 5 MPa  8 MPa CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.4)

150
Vc = 0.65 1 0.21 25  6600  = 533.4 kN
1000

33
 3.2. Two-Way (Punching) Shear Strength CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.2)
Two-way shear is critical on a rectangular section located at d v/2 away from the face of the column as shown
in Figure 14.

a. Exterior column:

The factored shear force (Vf) in the critical section is computed as the reaction at the centroid of the critical
section minus the self-weight and any superimposed surface dead and live load acting within the critical section
(d/2 away from column face).
V f = 332.5 − 16.3 ( 0.8834  0.767 ) = 321.4kN

The factored unbalanced moment used for shear transfer, Munb, is computed as the sum of the joint moments to
the left and right. Moment of the vertical reaction with respect to the centroid of the critical section is also taken
into account.
 b − c − c / 2 − 100 mm 
M unb = M u − M f  1 AB 1 
 1000 mm 

 883.5 − 308 − 600 / 2 − 100 

Munb = 288.5 − 321.4   = 232.1 kN.m
 1000 
For the exterior column in Figure 14, the location of the centroidal axis z-z is:
moment of area of the sides about AB 2  (883.5  367  883.5 / 2)
c =e= = = 308 mm
AB area of the sides 2  883.5  367 + 767  367
The polar moment Jc of the shear perimeter is:
 b d 3 db 3 b  
2

J c = 2  1 + 1 + (b1d )  1 − cAB   + b2 dcAB

2
 12 12  2  


 883.5  3673 367  883.53  883.5  

2

Jc = 2  + + (883.5  367 )  − 308   + 767  367  (308) 2 = 87.77 109 mm 4

 12 12  2  

 v = 1 −  f = 1 − 0.583 = 0.417 CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.8)

The length of the critical perimeter for the exterior column:

 367 
bo = 2   600 +100 +  + ( 400 + 367 ) = 2534 mm
 2 
The two-way shear stress (vu) can then be calculated as:
Vf  v M unb e
vf = + CSA A23.3-14 (Eq.13.9)
bo  d J

321.4 1000 0.417  (288.5 106 )  308

vf = +
2534  367 87.77 109
v f = 0.3456 + 0.3398 = 0.685 MPa

The factored resisiting shear stress, vr shall be the smallest of : CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.1)

34
  2   2 
a) vr = vc = 1 +  0.19c f 'c = 1 +  0.19  0.65  25 = 1.441 MPa
  c   1.5 

Where βc = c1/c2 = 600/400 = 1.5

 d   3  367 
b) vr = vc =  s + 0.19  c f 'c =  + 0.19  1 0.65  25 = 2.03 MPa
 bo   2534 

Where αs = 3 for edge columns

c) vr = vc = 0.38c f 'c = 0.38 1 0.65  25 = 1.235 MPa

vc = min (1.441, 2.030, 1.235) = 1.235 MPa

CSA A23.3 requires multiplying the value of vc by 1300/(1000+d) if the effective depth used in the two-way
shear calculations exceeds 300 mm. CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.3)
 1300 
vc =   1.235 = 1.174 MPa
 1000 + 367 
Since ( vr = 1.174 MPa  v f = 0.685 MPa ) at the critical section, the slab has adequate two-way shear strength

at this joint.

b. Interior column:

V f = ( 403.4 + 284.3) − 16.3  ( 0.967  0.767 ) = 779.6 kN

M unb = ( 504.9 − 475.4) − 779.6  (0) = 29.5 kN.m

For the interior column in Figure 14, the location of the centroidal axis z-z is:

b1 967
cAB = = = 483.5 mm
2 2

The polar moment Jc of the shear perimeter is:

 b d 3 db 3 b  
2

J c = 2  1 + 1 + (b1d )  1 − cAB   + 2b2 dcAB

2
 12 12  2  


 967  3673 367  9673  967  

2

Jc = 2  + + (967  367 )  − 483.5   + 2  767  367  (483.5) 2 = 194.9 109 mm 4

 12 12  2  


 v = 1 −  f = 1 − 0.572 = 0.428 CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.8)

The length of the critical perimeter for the interior column:

bo = 2  (600 + 367) + 2  (400 + 367) = 3468 mm

Vf  v M unb e
vf = + CSA A23.3-14 (Eq.13.9)
bo  d J

35
 779.6 1000 0.428  (29.5 106 )  483.5
vf = +
3468  367 194.9 109

v f = 0.613 + 0.031 = 0.644 MPa

The factored resisiting shear stress, Vr shall be the smallest of : CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.1)
 2   2 
a) vr = vc = 1 +  0.19c f 'c = 1 +  0.19  0.65  25 = 1.441 MPa
  c   1.5 

 d   4  367 
b) vr = vc =  s + 0.19  c f 'c =  + 0.19  1 0.65  25 = 1.993 MPa
 bo   3468 

c) vr = vc = 0.38c f 'c = 0.38 1 0.65  25 = 1.235 MPa

vc = min (1.441, 1.993, 1.235) = 1.235 MPa

CSA A23.3 requires multiplying the value of vc by 1300/(1000+d) if the effective depth used in the two-way
shear calculations exceeds 300 mm. CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.3)
 1300 
vc =   1.235 = 1.174 MPa
 1000 + 367 
Since ( vr = 1.174 MPa  v f = 0.660 MPa ) at the critical section, the slab has adequate two-way shear strength

at this joint.

c. Corner column:

In this example, interior equivalent elastic frame strip was selected where
it only have exterior and interior supports (no corner supports are
included in this strip). Detailed calculations for two-way (punching) shear
check around corner supports can be found in “Two-Way Flat Plate
Concrete Slab Floor Analysis and Design (CSA A23.3-14)” example
available in the design examples page in StructurePoint website.

36
4. Two-Way Slab Deflection Control (Serviceability Requirements)

Since the slab thickness was selected based on the minimum slab
thickness equations in CSA A23.3-14, the deflection calculations
are not required. Detailed calculations of immediate and time-
dependent deflections can be found in “Two-Way Concrete Slab
on Beams Floor Analysis and Design (CSA A23.3-14)” example
available in the design examples page in StructurePoint website.

5. spSlab Software Solution

spSlab program utilizes the Elastic (Equivalent) Frame Method described and illustrated in details here for
modeling, analysis and design of two-way concrete floor slab systems. spSlab uses the exact geometry and
boundary conditions provided as input to perform an elastic stiffness (matrix) analysis of the equivalent frame
taking into account the torsional stiffness of the slabs framing into the column. It also takes into account the
complications introduced by a large number of parameters such as vertical and torsional stiffness of transverse
beams, the stiffening effect of drop panels, column capitals, and effective contribution of columns above and
below the floor slab using the of equivalent column concept.

spSlab Program models the equivalent elastic frame as a design strip. The design strip is, then, separated by spSlab
into beam, column, and middle strips. The program calculates the internal forces (Shear Force & Bending
Moment), moment and shear capacity vs. demand diagrams for beam, column, and middle strips, instantaneous
and long-term deflection results, and required flexural reinforcement for beam, column, and middle strips. The
graphical and text results are provided below for both input and output of the spSlab model.

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
6. Summary and Comparison of Two-Way Slab Design Results

Table 6 – Summary of Flexural Design Moments

Reference (DDM) Hand (EFM) spSlab
Exterior Span
Exterior Negative 81 193.50 189.42
**
Frame Strip Positive 299 221.70 199.96 (191.46) **
*

Interior Negative 354 363.70 426.96

Interior Span
Interior Negative 421 388.70 434.98
Frame Strip
Positive 227 251.50 206.24
*
Maximum positive moment along exterior span (not at midspan)
**
Positive moment at the middle of the exterior span

In Table 6, the negative moments are taken at the supports faces. Note that for the exterior span, the location of the
maximum positive moment is not located at the mid span. The hand solution assumed that the maximum positive
moment is located at the midspan for simplification. However, the spSlab program results provide the exact location
of the maximum positive moment which is higher (199.96 kN.m) and will be used.

The reference used the Direct Design Method (DDM) to calculate the design moments, this method uses generic
distribution factors for slabs with beams regardless of the geometric properties of the transverse and longitudinal
beams. In spSlab and hand calculations, Elastic Frame Method (EFM) is being used, in this method, the exact
geometric properties of the transverse and longitudinal beams are employed to perform the analysis and calculate the
design moments.

In the hand calculations, the calculations of the moment distribution constants are approximated using the design aids
tables for flat plates since tables for two-way slabs with beams are not available. On the other hand, spSlab calculates
the exact values of these constants taking into account the effect of the longitudinal and transverse beams.

63
 Table 7 - Comparison of Moments obtained from Hand (EFM) and spSlab Solution
Hand (EFM) spSlab
Exterior Span
*
Exterior Negative 193.5 189.4
Beam Strip Positive 130.5 117.7
*
Interior Negative 214.0 251.2
*
Exterior Negative 0.0 0.0
Column Strip Positive 33.3 30.1
*
Interior Negative 54.7 64.2
*
Exterior Negative 0.0 0.0
Middle Strip Positive 57.9 52.2
*
Interior Negative 95.0 111.5
Interior Span
*
Interior Negative 241.0 269.3
Beam Strip
Positive 155.7 127.7
*
Interior Negative 54.2 60.5
Column Strip
Positive 35.0 28.7
*
Interior Negative 94.1 105.1
Middle Strip
Positive 60.8 49.9
*
negative moments are taken at the faces of supports

64
 Table 8 - Comparison of Reinforcement Results with Hand and spSlab Solution
Additional Reinforcement Total
Reinforcement
Provided for Unbalanced Moment Reinforcement
Span Location Provided for Flexure
Transfer* Provided
Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab
Exterior Span
Exterior Negative 11- 15M 10- 15M --- --- 11- 15M 10- 15M
Beam
Positive 7- 15M 7- 15M n/a n/a 7- 15M 7- 15M
Strip
Interior Negative 11- 15M 12- 15M --- --- 11- 15M 12- 15M
Exterior Negative 4- 15M 4- 15M n/a n/a 4- 15M 4- 15M
Column
Positive 4- 15M 4- 15M n/a n/a 4- 15M 4- 15M
Strip
Interior Negative 6- 15M 6- 15M n/a n/a 6- 15M 6- 15M
Exterior Negative 7- 15M 7- 15M n/a n/a 7- 15M 7- 15M
Middle
Positive 7- 15M 7- 15M n/a n/a 7- 15M 7- 15M
Strip
Interior Negative 9- 15M 11- 15M n/a n/a 9- 15M 11- 15M
Interior Span

Beam Negative 11 - 15M 12- 15M --- --- 11 - 15M 12- 15M
Strip Positive 7 - 15M 7- 15M n/a n/a 7 - 15M 7- 15M

Column Negative 6 - 15M 6- 15M n/a n/a 6 - 15M 6- 15M

Strip Positive 4 - 15M 4- 15M n/a n/a 4 - 15M 4- 15M

Middle Negative 9 - 15M 11- 15M n/a n/a 9 - 15M 11- 15M
Strip Positive 7 - 15M 7- 15M n/a n/a 7 - 15M 7- 15M
* In the EFM, the unbalanced moment (Msc, Munb) at the support centerline is used to determine the value of the additional
reinforcement as compared with DDM using the moments at the face of support.

Table 9 - Comparison of Beam Shear Reinforcement Results

Reinforcement Provided
Span Location
Hand spSlab
End Span
Exterior --- ---
Interior 5 – 10M @ 185 mm 6 – 10M @ 187 mm
Interior Span
Interior 7 – 10M @ 175 mm 7 – 10M @ 176 mm

65
 Table 10 - Comparison of Two-Way (Punching) Shear Check Results Using Hand and spSlab Solution
b1, mm b2, mm bo, mm Ac, x 105 mm2 Vu, kN vu, kN/mm2
Support
Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab

Exterior 883.5 883.5 767 767 2534 2534 9.30 9.30 321.4 316.0 0.346 0.340
Interior 967 967 767 767 3468 3468 12.73 12.73 779.6 791.8 0.613 0.622

cAB, mm Jc, x 109 mm4 γv Munb, kN.m vu, MPa ϕvc, MPa
Support
Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab

Exterior 308 308 87.77 87.77 0.417 0.417 232.1 225.7 0.685 0.670 1.174 1.174
Interior 483.5 483.5 194.88 194.88 0.428 0.428 29.5 9.3 0.644 0.632 1.174 1.174

66
7. Comparison of Two-Way Slab Analysis and Design Methods

A slab system can be analyzed and designed by any procedure satisfying equilibrium and geometric compatibility.
Three established methods are widely used. The requirements for two of them are described in detail in CSA
A23.3-14 Clasues (13.8 and 13.9) for regular two-way slab systems. CSA A23.3-14 (13.5.1)

Direct Design Method (DDM) is an approximate method and is applicable to flat plate concrete floor systems that
meet the stringent requirements of CSA A23.3-14 (13.9.1). In many projects, however, these requirements limit
the usability of the Direct Design Method significantly.

The Elastic Frame Method (EFM) has less stringent limitations compared to DDM. It requires more accurate
analysis methods that, depending on the size and geometry can prove to be long, tedious, and time-consuming.
StucturePoint’s spSlab software program solution utilizes the EFM to automate the process providing
considerable time-savings in the analysis and design of two-way slab systems as compared to hand solutions using
DDM or EFM.

Finite Element Method (FEM) is another method for analyzing reinforced concrete slabs, particularly useful for
irregular slab systems with variable thicknesses, openings, and other features not permissible in DDM or EFM.
Many reputable commercial FEM analysis software packages are available on the market today such as spMats.
Using FEM requires critical understanding of the relationship between the actual behavior of the structure and
the numerical simulation since this method is an approximate numerical method. The method is based on several
assumptions and the operator has a great deal of decisions to make while setting up the model and applying loads
and boundary conditions. The results obtained from FEM models should be verified to confirm their suitability
for design and detailing of concrete structures.

The following table shows a general comparison between the DDM, EFM and FEM. This table covers general
limitations, drawbacks, advantages, and cost-time efficiency of each method where it helps the engineer in
deciding which method to use based on the project complexity, schedule, and budget.

67
Applicable
Concrete Slab Analysis Method
CSA
Limitations/Applicability
A23.3-14 DDM EFM FEM
Provision (Hand) (Hand//spSlab) (spMats)
Panels shall be rectangular, with ratio of
13.8.1.1
13.9.1.1
longer to shorter panel dimensions, measured  
center-to-center supports, not exceed 2.
For a panel with beams between supports on
13.8.1.1 all sides, slab-to-beam stiffness ratio shall be
13.9.1.1 satisfied for beams in the two perpendicular  
directions.
Column offset shall not exceed 20% of the
13.8.1.1
13.9.1.1
span in direction of offset from either axis  
between centerlines of successive columns
13.8.1.1 The reinforcement is placed in an orthogonal
13.9.1.1 grid.
 
Minimum of three continuous spans in each
13.9.1.2
direction

Successive span lengths measured center-to-
13.9.1.3 center of supports in each direction shall not 
differ by more than one-third the longer span

13.9.1.4 All loads shall be due to gravity only 

All loads shall be uniformly distributed over

13.9.1.4
an entire panel (qf)

Unfactored live load shall not exceed two
13.9.1.4
times the unfactored dead load

13.10.6 Structural integrity steel detailing   
13.10.10 Openings in slab systems   
8.2 Concentrated loads Not permitted  
Engineering judgment required
13.8.4.1 Live load arrangement (Load Patterning) Not required Required
based on modeling technique
Reinforcement for unbalanced slab moment Moments @ Moments @ Engineering judgment required
13.10.2*
transfer to column (Msc) support face support centerline based on modeling technique
Irregularities (i.e. variable thickness, non- Not permitted Engineering Engineering judgment required
13.8.2 prismatic, partial bands, mixed systems, judgment required
support arrangement, etc.)
Complexity Low Average Complex to very complex

Design time/costs Fast Limited Unpredictable/Costly

Conservative Somewhat Unknown - highly dependent on
(see detailed conservative modeling assumptions:
comparison with 1. Linear vs. non-linear
Design Economy spSlab output) 2. Isotropic vs non-isotropic
3. Plate element choice
4. Mesh size and aspect ratio
5. Design & detailing features
Very limited Limited geometry Limited guidance non-standard
applications application (user dependent).
General (Drawbacks)
Required significant engineering
judgment
Very limited Detailed analysis is Unlimited applicability to handle
analysis is required required or via complex situations permissible by
General (Advantages)
software the features of the software used
(e.g. spSlab) (e.g. spMats)
*
The unbalanced slab moment transferred to the column M sc (Munb) is the difference in slab moment on either side of a column at a specific joint.
In DDM only moments at the face of the support are calculated and are also used to obtain Msc (Munb). In EFM where a frame analysis is used,
moments at the column center line are used to obtain Msc (Munb).

68