CAREER EPISODE 1: STRUCTURAL DESIGN - RC SLAB ON ELASTIC

FOUNDATION – INTERACTION BETWEEN REPLACEMENT MATERIAL AND RC

SLAB DIMENSIONS ASSESMENT, COMPACTION LEVEL

CE1.1 In career episode 2 I will present structural design on a base plate EC slab on elastic surface
and the relation between compaction level of the replacement material and thickness of the RC slab.
The design was accomplished from June 2015 till Augsut2015. The design was carried within
geotechnical company / design company, controlled by geotechnical engineer while working at
industrial building in R. Macedonia By completing the structural design/computation and
comparison analysis with different load combination, different level of compaction and finally
different shapes on the foundation slab, I have proved the basic connection between the replacement
compaction level and the imperial equation with aim saving costs and earn benefit from the company
doing the construction on site. Furthermore, those aspect were designed with finite element analysis
which contributes and encompasses the whole assessment completely.

Location , municipality of Veles, Karasslari, .R.Macedonia, total area 15000 m2

CE1.2 Design considerations

TECHINICAL DESCRIPTION

Reinforced concrete (RC) slabs on elastic foundation are frequently subjected to heavy equipment
loads (machines, movable platforms) due to mechanical system that required serving the building.
For the task I have been given , the load is static with different characteristics (in a sense of
disposition etc) .The purpose of design / computation of a RC slab in an Industrial building , depends
on many factors such as,, material used for compaction, bulk density , moisture of the material grain
fraction e.t.c. Furthermore, depending directly on the loads as well , the thickness of the slab can
vary and affect the total cost of the structure. In this case, the slab was predicted 20 cm of thickness,
reinforced with double layer of mesh reinforcement.

For the computation I have used materials such as

CONCRETE C25/30 ( real state)

REINFORCEMENT MA 500/600; or B 560/600
REPLACEMENT THICKNESS – from 60 -100 cm
COMPACTION LEVEL FORM -40 – 60 MPa ( with subgrade more then 25 MPa)

LOAD ANALISIS

PERMANENT LOADS

1. SELF WEIGHT
2. INSTALATION IN THE SLAB ( SUCH AS HEATING
ADDITIONAL
LIVE LOADS
 LIVE LOAD 100 KN/m 2 uniformly distributed
 LIVE LOAD 1– unsymmetrical distribution 50 KN/m2
 LIVE LOAD 1– unsymmetrical distribution 50 one side loaded KN/m2
All loads were carefully considered due to the fact that RC slab is subjected to heavy equipment
loads (machines, movable platforms) due to mechanical system that required serving the building
According to the available standard, all live loads should be evaluated as moving loads defining
influential lines and most critical load, with certain combination. Avoiding this complex solution
RC slab (is on the elastic foundation ) with dimensions 10 x 10 m. and 10 x 15 m (rectangular shape)
was treated only statically.
Before entering the calculation and behaviour simulation of the RC slab a table with
handmade empirical calculation is presented according to Smilevsky Method with different
compaction level (module) in relation with different slab dimension affected through coefficient f

 Es – compression module KN/m2 ( compaction of 30 - 60 MPa , 40000 KN/m2

 C – reaction ratio of the soil KN/m3
 f = coefficient dependent on dimension of the RC SLAB 0,45 -0.65, a / b = 1
a / b = 1.5 assumed relation for obtaining calculations (depends on cutting through the upper
layer, performing dilatation )
 А = area subjected to analysis 100 m2 ;
.

C= = =() KN/m3
. . √
Figure 1 As per different module C value for constant a/b =0.45; As

Es Mpa  a/b = 1  As  C  As per different module C value for constant a/b =0.65; As
 25000  0.45  10  17568.21
40000  0.45  10  28109.13
50000  0.45  10  35136.42
60000  0.45  10  42163.7
  As per different module of compaction degree; for constant
Es Mpa  a/b = 1.5  As  C  a/b= 0.65; As
25000  0.65  10  12162.61
40000  0.65  10  19460.17
50000  0.65  10  24325.21
60000  0.65  10  29190.26

The geotechnical parameters of the soil are assumed to be equal , means that in both cases only
the thickness of the replacement material fro obtaining compaction level varies.

CE1.3 Structural calculation (rc slab behaviour )

Mathematical model – At this stage a model, mathematical, was build , using finite element method to have
precise results on the internal forces and reinforcement determination as well . The software I used is
TOWER RADIMEX v 6 The first step was is to create a reliable model, with all reliable joint restrictions
at the end for the slab and predefined parameters for the compaction of the soil – reaction ratio. The slab it
self was released at the ends for bending moments in a normal plane
Load 1: DEAD (g) Load 2: LIVE

q = -2.00 q = -50.00

Load 3: UNSYM ET RICAL LIVE Load 4: UNSYM ET RICAL LIVE CASE 2

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00
q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

For that purpose , two model were build , with different length and width, to obtain different results and
compare the final adopted reinforcement as well as to prove the and save costs on reinforcement.

The values shown in figure 1 , were used as commencement point , which through computation will or not
eventually result with different amount of reinforcement and settlements under different loads. Thus,
additional condition was computed dependent form a/ b ratio.

CASE 1 a/b = 0.45

 max  min Load  a/b constant value, compaction level at 42000 KN/m3
C  Mpa Mpa Case  
59.74  54.23  7 
    42.43  2.80  8 
42000  61.12  4.91  9 
61.51  3.88  10 

 max  min LOAD  a/b constant value, compaction level at 17000 KN/m3
C  Mpa Mpa CASE  
57.3  51.25  7 
  40.4  2.15  8 
17000  64.5  4.85  9 
64.60  4.95  10 
RECTANGULAR DIMENSION a/b = 0.65
Load 1: DEAD LOAD (g) Load 2: LIVE LOAD

q = -2.00 q = -50.00

Load 5: UNSYMETRICAL LIVE LOAD 3 Load 3: UNSYMETRICAL LIVE LOAD

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00 q = -50.00

CASE 2 a/b = 0.65

 max  min Load  a/b constant value, compaction level at 42000 KN/m3
C  Mpa Mpa Case  
53.22  54.23  7 
    56.54  5.32  8 
42000  60.11  9.25  9 
32.5  23.8  10 

 max  min LOAD  a/b constant value, compaction level at 12000 KN/
C  Mpa Mpa CASE  
57.4  56.25  7 
  58.2  4.20  8 
12000  59.6  4.12  9 
37.8  26.54  10 
Hence, some of the results graphically are shown bellow for C = 35000 KN/m3 : CASE 1
Load 7: I+II σ,soil [kN/m²] Load 8: I+III σ,soil [kN/m²]
55.38 21.87
55.67 24.49
55.95 27.11
56.24 29.73
56.52 32.35
56.81 34.97
57.09 37.59
55.39 М1=0 57.38
55.39 40.21 М1=0 40.21
21.87

М1=0 М1=0

57.37 57.37

М1=0

М1=0
М1=0

М1=0

М1=0

М1=0
М1=0

М1=0

57.37 57.37

55.39 М1=0 55.39 21.87 М1=0 40.21

М1=0 М1=0

Area Support Results: max σ,soil= 57.37 / min σ,soil= 55.39 kN/m² Area Support Results: max σ,soil= 40.21 / min σ,soil= 21.87 kN/m²
Load 9: I+IV σ,soil [kN/m²] Load 10: I+V σ,soil [kN/m²]
4.70 4.70
12.46 12.46
20.22 20.22
27.98 27.98
35.75 35.75
43.51 43.51
51.27 51.27
М1=0 4.70 59.03 4.70 М1=0 59.03
М1=0 М1=0

59.03 59.03

5.27 5.27
М1=0

М1=0

М1=0

М1=0
М1=0

М1=0

М1=0

М1=0

59.03 59.03

М1=0 4.70 4.70 М1=0

М1=0 М1=0

Area Support Resul ts: max σ,soi l = 59.03 / mi n σ,soi l = 4.70 kN/m² Area Support Resul ts: max σ,soi l = 59.03 / mi n σ,soi l = 4.70 kN/m²
 
Figure 2

Results form RC slab 10 *10, thickness of 20 cm, with C = 35000 KN/m3

Hence, some of the results graphically are shown bellow for C = 24000 KN/m3 : CASE 2
Load 7: I+II σ,soil [kN/m²] Load 8: I+III σ,soil [kN/m²]
56.00 55.96 55.95 4.80
56.13 12.51
56.32 20.22
56.50 27.93
56.69 35.63
56.87 43.34
57.21 57.23
57.06 51.05
57.24 58.76

58.73 58.74 58.75

4.81 4.80
5.34

57.21 57.23

56.01 55.97

Area Support Results: max σ,soil= 57.23 / min σ,soil= 55.96 kN/m² Area Support Results: max σ,soil= 58.75 / min σ,soil= 4.80 kN/m²

Load 9: I+IV σ,soil [kN/m²] Load 10: I+V σ,soil [kN/m²]

4.81 39.14 23.65 23.65
12.52 25.87
20.22 28.08
27.93 30.30
35.64 32.52
43.35 34.74
51.05 36.95
58.76 39.17

5.33
4.83 4.82

58.73 58.73 58.75

39.16 23.66

Area Support Results: max σ,soil= 58.75 / min σ,soil= 4.82 kN/m² Area Support Results: max σ,soil= 39.16 / min σ,soil= 23.65 kN/m²
 

Results form RC slab 12.5 *7.5, thickness of 20 cm, with C = 35000 KN/m3

CE1.4: After obtaining the results for assumed load case with different C value , and different slab
dimension ratio, the design process took place in which I have calculated the required reinforcement and
compared with for both cases. Furthermore, I have used the available standard , PBAB with load
combination for determination of contact (ground stress and adopting reinforcement ).

The load combinations are shown as it follows :

Load Case a/b = 1 (0.45) d= 20 cm Adopted reinforcement
1.35 1.35
Aa - bottom zone [cm²/m]
PBAB 87, MB 30, MA 500/560, a=5.00 cm 0.00
Do not combine with 0.14
0.27
Combinations from the load pattern 10 9 11
0.41
0.54

01. 1.60×I+1.80×III
0.68
0.82
2 0.95
02. 1.60×I+1.80×IV 8 1.09
1.22

03. 1.60×I+1.80×V 1.36

04. 1.60×I+1.80×II
05. I+1.80×III
06. I+1.80×V
07. I+1.80×II
1.34 1.34
5 4

08. I+1.80×IV
09. 1.60×I
II -> III, IV, V
III -> II, IV, V
IV -> II, III, V 3
V -> II, III, IV 6 7
I DEAD (g) - <Permanent>
II LIVE - <Imposed> 1.35
1
1.35

III UNSYMETRICAL LIVE - <Imposed> Aa - bottom zone

IV UNSYMETRICAL LIVE CASE 2 - <Imposed>

V UNSYMETRICAL LIVE CASE 3 - <Imposed>
Governing load -
Direction 2: (α=90°) Direction 2: (α=90°)
Level: [0.00 m] Critical combination: Critical combination:
PBAB 87 1.60xI+1.80xIII 1.60xI+1.80xIV
slab depth h=20.0 cm Md = -0.94 kNm Md = -0.39 kNm
MB 30 Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN
Top zone: MA 500/560 (a=4.0 cm) εb/εa = -0.209/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.159/10.000 ‰
Bottom zone: MA 500/560 (a=5.0 cm) Ag2 = 0.11 cm²/m Reinforcement not required
Full load pattern Ad2 = 0.00 cm²/m
Point 9
Point 1 Point 5 X=4.00 m; Y=8.80 m; Z=0.00 m
X=4.00 m; Y=0.00 m; Z=0.00 m X=0.80 m; Y=4.80 m; Z=0.00 m Direction 1: (α=0°)
Direction 1: (α=0°) Direction 1: (α=0°) Critical combination:
Critical combination: Critical combination: 1.60xI+1.80xV
1.60xI+1.80xV 1.60xI+1.80xIV Md = -11.53 kNm
Md = -11.77 kNm Md = 0.48 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.986/10.000 ‰
εb/εa = -0.999/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.147/10.000 ‰ Ag1 = 1.10 cm²/m
Ag1 = 1.13 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad1 = 1.32 cm²/m
Ad1 = 1.35 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.06 cm²/m
Direction 2: (α=90°)
Direction 2: (α=90°) Direction 2: (α=90°) Critical combination:
Critical combination: Critical combination: 1.60xI+1.80xIV
1.60xI+1.80xIV 1.60xI+1.80xIII Md = 1.74 kNm
Md = 0.94 kNm Md = -1.25 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.356/10.000 ‰
εb/εa = -0.209/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.226/10.000 ‰ Ag2 = 0.16 cm²/m
Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.16 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.19 cm²/m
Ad2 = 0.13 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.00 cm²/m
Point 10
Point 2 Point 6 X=0.80 m; Y=8.80 m; Z=0.00 m
X=0.00 m; Y=8.40 m; Z=0.00 m X=0.80 m; Y=0.80 m; Z=0.00 m Direction 1: (α=0°)
Direction 1: (α=0°) Direction 1: (α=0°) Critical combination:
Critical combination: Critical combination: 1.00xI+1.80xIII
1.60xI+1.80xIV 1.60xI+1.80xIII Md = -1.35 kNm
Md = 0.76 kNm Md = 1.33 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.252/10.000 ‰
εb/εa = -0.186/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.249/10.000 ‰ Ag1 = 0.16 cm²/m
Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ad1 = 0.10 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.18 cm²/m
Direction 2: (α=90°)
Direction 2: (α=90°) Direction 2: (α=90°) Critical combination:
Critical combination: Critical combination: 1.00xI+1.80xIII
1.00xI+1.80xIII 1.60xI+1.80xIII Md = -2.87 kNm
Md = -7.14 kNm Md = 1.33 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.349/10.000 ‰
εb/εa = -0.570/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.249/10.000 ‰ Ag2 = 0.36 cm²/m
Ag2 = 0.91 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ad2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.18 cm²/m
Point 11
Point 3 Point 7 X=8.80 m; Y=8.80 m; Z=0.00 m
X=0.00 m; Y=1.60 m; Z=0.00 m X=8.00 m; Y=0.80 m; Z=0.00 m Direction 1: (α=0°)
Direction 1: (α=0°) Direction 1: (α=0°) Critical combination:
Critical combination: Critical combination: 1.60xI+1.80xIII
1.60xI+1.80xIII 1.60xI+1.80xIV Md = 1.08 kNm
Md = 0.91 kNm Md = -2.25 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.233/10.000 ‰
εb/εa = -0.206/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.395/10.000 ‰ Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.21 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.14 cm²/m
Ad1 = 0.12 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.25 cm²/m
Direction 2: (α=90°)
Direction 2: (α=90°) Direction 2: (α=90°) Critical combination:
Critical combination: Critical combination: 1.60xI+1.80xIII
1.60xI+1.80xIII 1.00xI+1.80xIII Md = 1.08 kNm
Md = 7.18 kNm Md = -0.35 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.224/10.000 ‰
εb/εa = -0.614/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.159/10.000 ‰ Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.15 cm²/m
Ad2 = 0.98 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.05 cm²/m

Point 4 Point 8
X=4.80 m; Y=4.80 m; Z=0.00 m X=8.00 m; Y=8.00 m; Z=0.00 m
Direction 1: (α=0°) Direction 1: (α=0°)
Critical combination: Critical combination:
1.60xI+1.80xV 1.00xI+1.80xV
Md = -4.99 kNm Md = 2.00 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.609/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.406/10.000 ‰
Ag1 = 0.47 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.25 cm²/m
Ad1 = 0.56 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.21 cm²/m
Load Case a/b = 1 (0.45) d= 20 cm
Do not combine with Governing load: Complete scheme
PBAB 87, MB 30, MA 500/560, a=5.00 cm
1
Aa - bottom zone - Direction 2 [cm²/m]
3
0.00
0.17
Combinations from the load pattern 0.33
12 11 10 0.50
01. 1.60×I+1.80×III 0.66
0.82
02. 1.60×I+1.80×IV 0.99
1.16
03. 1.60×I+1.80×V 1.32
1.49
04. 1.60×I+1.80×II 1.65

05. I+1.80×III 7 8 9
06. I+1.80×V
07. I+1.80×II
1.64 1.61 1.65
2

08. I+1.80×IV
09. 1.60×I
II -> III, IV, V
1.63 1.60 1.63

III -> II, IV, V

IV -> II, III, V
V -> II, III, IV
I DEAD (g) - <Permanent>
II LIVE - <Imposed>
III UNSYMETRICAL LIVE - <Imposed> 4 5 6

IV UNSYMETRICAL LIVE CASE 2 - <Imposed>

V UNSYMETRICAL LIVE CASE 3 - <Imposed> Aa - bottom zone - Direction 2 - max Aa2,д= 1.65 cm²/m

Direction 2: (α=90°) Direction 2: (α=90°)

Level: [0.00 m] Critical combination: Critical combination:
PBAB 87 1.00xI+1.80xV 1.60xI+1.80xIV
slab depth h=20.0 cm Md = -0.81 kNm Md = -6.27 kNm
MB 30 Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN
Top zone: MA 500/560 (a=4.0 cm) εb/εa = -0.188/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.692/10.000 ‰
Bottom zone: MA 500/560 (a=5.0 cm) Ag2 = 0.10 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.59 cm²/m
Full load pattern Ad2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad2 = 0.71 cm²/m

Point 1 Point 5 Point 9

X=1.33 m; Y=15.00 m; Z=0.00 m X=6.15 m; Y=1.00 m; Z=0.00 m X=8.95 m; Y=10.10 m; Z=0.00 m
Direction 1: (α=0°) Direction 1: (α=0°) Direction 1: (α=0°)
Critical combination: Critical combination: Critical combination:
1.00xI+1.80xV 1.00xI+1.80xV 1.00xI+1.80xIV
Md = -7.29 kNm Md = 0.36 kNm Md = -0.54 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.577/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.167/10.000 ‰ εb/εa = -0.210/10.000 ‰
Ag1 = 0.93 cm²/m Reinforcement not required Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ad1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.10 cm²/m
Direction 2: (α=90°)
Direction 2: (α=90°) Critical combination: Direction 2: (α=90°)
Critical combination: 1.60xI+1.80xV Critical combination:
1.60xI+1.80xII Md = 0.30 kNm 1.60xI+1.80xIV
Md = 0.58 kNm Nd = 0.00 kN Md = -6.13 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN εb/εa = -0.115/10.000 ‰ Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.168/10.000 ‰ Reinforcement not required εb/εa = -0.683/10.000 ‰
Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.58 cm²/m
Ad2 = 0.08 cm²/m Point 6 Ad2 = 0.69 cm²/m
X=8.95 m; Y=1.00 m; Z=0.00 m
Point 2 Direction 1: (α=0°) Point 10
X=10.00 m; Y=8.70 m; Z=0.00 m Critical combination: X=8.95 m; Y=13.95 m; Z=0.00 m
Direction 1: (α=0°) 1.60xI+1.80xV Direction 1: (α=0°)
Critical combination: Md = 2.17 kNm Critical combination:
1.60xI+1.80xIII Nd = 0.00 kN 1.60xI+1.80xV
Md = 0.79 kNm εb/εa = -0.323/10.000 ‰ Md = 2.13 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.191/10.000 ‰ Ad1 = 0.29 cm²/m εb/εa = -0.319/10.000 ‰
Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ad1 = 0.11 cm²/m Direction 2: (α=90°) Ad1 = 0.29 cm²/m
Critical combination:
Direction 2: (α=90°) 1.60xI+1.80xV Direction 2: (α=90°)
Critical combination: Md = 2.00 kNm Critical combination:
1.00xI+1.80xIII Nd = 0.00 kN 1.60xI+1.80xV
Md = 13.80 kNm εb/εa = -0.309/10.000 ‰ Md = 2.13 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -1.097/10.000 ‰ Ad2 = 0.27 cm²/m εb/εa = -0.319/10.000 ‰
Ag2 = 1.38 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ad2 = 1.65 cm²/m Point 7 Ad2 = 0.29 cm²/m
X=1.00 m; Y=10.10 m; Z=0.00 m
Point 3 Direction 1: (α=0°) Point 11
X=8.60 m; Y=15.00 m; Z=0.00 m Critical combination: X=5.10 m; Y=13.95 m; Z=0.00 m
Direction 1: (α=0°) 1.00xI+1.80xIV Direction 1: (α=0°)
Critical combination: Md = -0.51 kNm Critical combination:
1.60xI+1.80xV Nd = 0.00 kN 1.60xI+1.80xIII
Md = 7.75 kNm εb/εa = -0.204/10.000 ‰ Md = -0.42 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.640/10.000 ‰ Ad1 = 0.09 cm²/m εb/εa = -0.129/10.000 ‰
Ag1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.05 cm²/m
Ad1 = 1.05 cm²/m Direction 2: (α=90°) Ad1 = 0.00 cm²/m
Critical combination:
Direction 2: (α=90°) 1.60xI+1.80xIV Direction 2: (α=90°)
Critical combination: Md = -6.13 kNm Critical combination:
1.60xI+1.80xV Nd = 0.00 kN 1.60xI+1.80xV
Md = 0.83 kNm εb/εa = -0.683/10.000 ‰ Md = 0.49 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Ag2 = 0.58 cm²/m Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.196/10.000 ‰ Ad2 = 0.69 cm²/m εb/εa = -0.149/10.000 ‰
Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m Ag2 = 0.00 cm²/m
Ad2 = 0.11 cm²/m Point 8 Ad2 = 0.07 cm²/m
X=5.10 m; Y=10.10 m; Z=0.00 m
Point 4 Direction 1: (α=0°) Point 12
X=2.00 m; Y=1.00 m; Z=0.00 m Critical combination: X=1.00 m; Y=13.95 m; Z=0.00 m
Direction 1: (α=0°) 1.60xI+1.80xIV Direction 1: (α=0°)
Critical combination: Md = -1.37 kNm Critical combination:
1.60xI+1.80xV Nd = 0.00 kN 1.00xI+1.80xV
Md = -1.47 kNm εb/εa = -0.276/10.000 ‰ Md = -1.47 kNm
Nd = 0.00 kN Ag1 = 0.15 cm²/m Nd = 0.00 kN
εb/εa = -0.246/10.000 ‰ Ad1 = 0.08 cm²/m εb/εa = -0.246/10.000 ‰
Ag1 = 0.19 cm²/m Ag1 = 0.18 cm²/m
Ad1 = 0.00 cm²/m Ad1 = 0.00 cm²/m

Tower - 3D Model Builder 7.0 - x64 Edition Registered to AA Radimpex - www.radimpex.rs

CE1.5: After completing the results form design of the slab , I have concluded the following

 The empirical approach for different assessment on dimension during design process gives
very different results, due to the fact that subjected area has different proportions in the
given equation , naturally, it can lead to very expensive usage of reinforcement, whole the
finite element calculation , even the fact the C value varies , the required reinforcement is
in 5 % difference , for both cases .
 As conclusion , empirical method for determination of C value , should always follow the
geotechnical experiments, and the exact model with soil layer should be build , to have
better control and behaviour of the structure.