Building Floor Vibrations

THOMAS M. MURRAY, 1991 T. R. Higgins Award

INTRODUCTION
Annoying floor motion induced by building occupants is Procedure to ensure satisfactory performance of floor
probably the most persistent floor serviceability problem systems in Appendix G, Canadian Standards Association
encountered by designers. According to Allen and Rainer (1984). This procedure includes a human response scale
(1975), Tredgold in 1828 wrote that girders over long spans based on the work of Allen and Rainer (1976). The scale was
should be "made deep to avoid the inconvenience of not being developed using test data from 42 long-span floor systems.
able to move on the floor without shaking everything in the The data for each test floor includes initial amplitude from a
room." If the response of a floor system from normal heel-drop impact, frequency, damping ratio, and subjective
activities is such that occupants are uneasy or annoyed, the evaluation by occupants or researchers. The procedure
intended use of the building can be radically affected. requires the calculation of peak acceleration, first natural
Correcting such situations is usually very difficult and frequency, an estimate of system damping, and evaluation
expensive, and success has been limited. using the human response scale. Apparently, as part of a
A number of procedures have been developed by Canadian Standards Association Specification, this procedure
researchers which allow a structural designer to analytically must be followed in all Canadian building designs.
determine occupant acceptability of a proposed floor system. To provide sufficient static stiffness against floor
Generally, the analytical procedures require the calculation motions during walking, Ellingwood and Tallin (1984) have
of the first natural frequency of the floor system and either suggested a stiffness criterion of 1 mm due to a concentrated
maximum amplitude, velocity, or acceleration for a reference load of 1 kN be used. The criterion is recommended by them
excitation. An estimate of the damping in the floor system is for floors used for normal human occupancy (e.g., residential,
also required in some instances. A human perceptibility scale office, school), particularly for light residential floors. This
is then used to determine if the floor system meets criterion does not include damping, which many researchers
serviceability requirements. believe to be the most important parameter in controlling
The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of transient vibrations. In addition, no test data are presented to
analytical tools and concepts for controlling annoying floor substantiate the criterion. Since the criterion is relatively
movement in residential, office, commercial, and gymnasium new, acceptance by structural designers and performance of
type environments. floor systems so designed is unknown at this time.
Allen, Rainer and Pernica (1985) and Allen (1990,
OVERVIEW OF NORTH AMERICAN DESIGN 1990a) published criteria for the acceptability of vibration of
PROCEDURES floor systems that are subjected to rhythmic activities such as
dancing and jumping exercises. Values for dynamic load
Murray (1975, 1981, 1985) has developed an analytical
parameters and acceleration limits are suggested for various
procedure to determine the acceptability of proposed floor
activities. Using the suggested values, a set of minimum
systems supporting residential or office-type environments.
natural frequencies for different occupancies and floor
The procedure utilizes a human response scale which was
constructions are recommended. For dance floors and
developed using field measurements taken on approximately
gymnasia, the recommended minimum frequencies are 7, 9,
100 floor systems. The scale relates occupant acceptability of
and 11 hz for solid concrete, steel joist-concrete slab, and
floor motion to three parameters: first natural frequency,
wood supported structures, respectively.
amplitude, and damping. The amplitude is the maximum
In the following section, specific recommendations,
displacement of the floor system due to a reference heel-drop
based on the writer's experience, are made for floor
excitation. Guidelines for estimating damping in the system
serviceability design. Three types of occupancy are
are provided as part of the procedure. The procedure is
considered: (1) residential and office environments, (2)
widely used and no instances of unacceptable performance of
commercial environments, and (3) gymnasium environments.
floor systems which satisfy the criterion have been reported.
The Canadian Standards Association provides a design
RECOMMENDED DESIGN CRITERIA
Thomas M. Murray is Montague-Betts professor of structural steel
design at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Residential and Office Environments
Blacksburg, VA. Ellingwood, et al. (1986) is a critical appraisal of structural

102 ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 serviceability. The criteria developed by Murray (1981) and locations and (2) they are located within the effective beam
by Ellingwood and Tallin (1984) with modifications are spacing or the effective floor width which is used to calculate
recommended for controlling objectionable floor vibrations system amplitude (Murray 1975, Galambos, undated). The
due to walking. Because of this recommendation and the wide direction of the partitions with respect to the supporting
use of the writer's criterion, the former procedure is member span does not affect the damping provided. Partitions
recommended for floor motion control in office and are equally effective if they are attached below the slab as
residential environments. compared to directly on the floor slab.
In these environments, the forcing function is intermittent If partitions are not part of the architectural plan, either
movement of a few occupants. Movement of groups does not above or below the floor area under investigation, the
generally occur and thus the floor motion is transient (e.g., designer may consider methods to artificially increase
motion occurs because of a short duration impact and decays damping. If sufficient space exists between the ceiling and
with time). As a result, the most important parameter for the underside of the floor slab, "false" sheetrock partitions of
residential and office environments is damping. maximum possible depth might be installed in this space.
The recommended criterion (Murray 1981) states that if This approach is relatively inexpensive and can provide
the following inequality is satisfied, motion of the floor damping equivalent to a similarly constructed handrail for a
system caused by normal human activity in office or pedestrian bridge or crossover. From unreported laboratory
residential environments will not be objectionable to the tests conducted by the writer, an increase in damping of 0.5%
occupants: to 1% can be achieved if the "partitions" are 2-3 feet deep.
Attempts to artificially increase damping in a floor
D > 35 Aof + 2.5 (1)
system have been periodically reported in the literature. The
where D = damping in percent of critical, Ao = maximum use of dashpot dampers was shown to be successful in
initial amplitude of the floor system due to a heel-drop laboratory tests (Lenzen 1966), but successful installation in
excitation (in.), and f = first natural frequency of the floor actual buildings has not been reported. Viscoelastic material
system (hz). The heel-drop excitation used to develop the has been attached to the bottom flanges of beams in an
criterion can be approximated by a linear decreasing ramp existing department store building where the floor motion
function having a magnitude of 600 lbs and a duration of 50 was annoying to shoppers. The effort was reported to be only
milliseconds. The criterion was developed using field marginally successful (Nelson 1968). Additional experiments
measurements of approximately 100 floor systems mostly in with these materials have not been reported. The use of
the frequency range of 5-8 hz. Use of the criterion for floor viscoelastic materials to increase damping is very expensive,
systems with a first natural frequency above about 10 hz is typically over $5 per square foot of floor area.
not recommended. Detailed calculation procedures and an Although not strictly a method to increase system
example are given in the Appendix. damping, the installation of a second mass system below the
Use of this criterion requires careful judgment on the part floor slab, in theory at least, has the same effect. Laboratory
of the designer. A light office building floor system with experiments have been reported (Allen and Pernica 1984),
hung ceiling and minimal mechanical ductwork will exhibit but the writer is unaware of any successful field installations.
at least 3-3.5% of critical damping. Additional damping may Allen (1990) states that "tuned dampers have so far not been
be provided by a thicker slab, office furniture, partitions, very successful."
equipment, and the occupants themselves. If the required Damping devices, dashpots, friction dampers,
damping (right hand side of Inequality 1) is less than 3.5-4%, viscoelastic materials, and second mass systems all require
the system will be satisfactory even if the supported areas are relative movement between the floor system and the device
completely free of fixed partitions. If the required damping is support. Because a vertical floor motion amplitude of only
between 4% and about 5%, the designer must carefully 0.040-0.050 in. can be very annoying to humans, the problem
consider the final configuration of the environment and the of developing a device which can effectively dampen floor
intended use. For instance, if fixed partitions will not be motion is difficult. However, work is currently in progress at
present, the environment is quiet, and the required damping is Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University on the
4%, complaints may be received once the building is development of methods to artificially increase floor system
occupied. If the required damping is much greater than 5%, damping.
the designer must be able to identify an exact source of Concerning frequency, the designer must be aware of
damping or artificially provide additional damping to be sure very low first natural frequencies (below about 3 hz) to avoid
the floor system will be satisfactory. If this cannot be walking resonance. Further, it is well known from automobile
accomplished, redesign is necessary. and aircraft comfort studies that humans react adversely to
Framed in-place partitions (sheetrock on wood or metal frequencies in the 5-8 hz range (Hanes 1970). The
studs) are very effective sources of additional damping if (1) explanation for this phenomenon is that the natural
each partition is attached to the floor system in at least three frequencies of internal human organs (heart, kidneys, liver,

THIRD QUARTER / 1991 103

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 and bladder) are in the 5-8 hz range. Consequently, when the Commercial Environments
human body is subjected to such motion, resonance occurs In commercial environments, such as shopping centers, the
and annoyance is the result. The writer has investigated over forcing function can be nearly continuous walking or running
50 problem floors (none of which satisfied Inequality 1) and, movement of the occupants. In this situation, damping is not
in the vast majority of the cases, the measured first natural as critical as for office/residential environments because the
frequency of the floor system was between 5 and 8 hz. The floor movement is approximately steady-state. Control of the
writer can state that he has never encountered an annoying stiffness of the structural system is the best solution.
residential/office floor where the span was greater than 40 The criterion suggested by Ellingwood, et al. (1986) is
feet, which is contrary to the common belief that long span recommended for commercial floor design. This criterion is
floors vibrate and should be avoided. Furthermore, an based on an acceleration tolerance limit of 0.005 g and
office/residential floor with a natural frequency greater than walking excitation. The criterion is satisfied if the maximum
10 hz has never been found to be a problem. deflection under a 450 lbs. (2 kN) force applied anywhere on
In calculating natural frequency, the transformed moment the floor system does not exceed 0.02 in. (0.5 mm).
of inertia is to be used, as long as the slab (or deck) rests on Because the maximum deflections caused by occupant
the supporting member. This assumption is to be applied even movements are so small, the floor system will act as if
if the slab is not structurally connected to the beam flange or composite construction was used even if structural connection
joist chord, since the magnitudes of the impacts are not is not provided between the floor slab and the beam. Thus,
sufficient to overcome the friction force between the the transformed moment of inertia should be used when
elements. For the case of a girder supporting joists, it has calculating the stiffness of a proposed design.
been found that the joist seats are sufficiently stiff to transfer Although it is doubtful that the floor system which
the shear, and the transformed moment of inertia assumption satisfies this criterion will have a very low natural frequency,
is to be used for the girder. If only the beam moment of the possibility of walking resonance must also be checked.
inertia is used, a lower frequency results, but the system will First harmonic resonance will occur below 3 hz and second
actually vibrate at a much higher frequency and, thus, an harmonic resonance between 5 and 6 hz. It is recommended
evaluation using Inequality 1 may be inaccurate. that the first natural frequency of the floor system be above 8
If the supporting member is separated from the slab (for hz for commercial environments. The guidelines given in the
example, the case of overhanging beams which pass over a above subsection and in the Appendix for calculation of
supporting girder), the performance of the floor system can frequency and effective floor width of residential/office
be improved if shear connection is made between the slab floors can be used for commercial floors.
and supporting girder. Generally, two to four short pieces of
the overhanging beam section, placed with their webs in the Gymnasium Environments
plane of the web of the girder and attached to both the slab
For floor systems supporting dancing or exercise activities,
and girder, provide sufficient shear connection.
damping is usually not of consequence. The forcing function
Annoying vibration of office floors occurs when the floor
for these activities generally results in steady-state response
system is lightly loaded; thus a careful estimate of the
and resonance must be avoided. Accompanying music for
supported load must be made. Only the actual dead loads
aerobic exercising usually does not exceed 150 beats per
should be included plus 10% to 25% of the design live loads.
minute. The resulting forcing frequency is then about 2.5 hz.
Annoying vibrations have not been reported when the floor
Allen and Rainer (1976) suggest that the first natural
system is supporting the full design live load. One should
frequency of floors supporting such activities be above 7-9
note that an increase in supported load results in a decrease
hz to avoid resonance with the first and second harmonics of
in frequency, which in turn results in a lower required
the forcing function.
damping.
More recently, Allen (1990a) has presented specific
In some instances, the beams or joists and the supporting
guidelines for the design of floor systems supporting aerobic
girders will vibrate as a unit. This phenomenon usually
activities. He recommends that such floor systems be
occurs when the supporting girders are flexible relative to the
designed so that
beams or joists or when overhanging beams are supported by
girders. In these instances the system frequency can be 2 α i wp
approximated from f o ≥ fi 1+ (3)
ao /g wt
1 1 1 with fo = first natural frequency of the floor structure (hz), fi
2
= 2 + 2 (2)
fs fb fg = ith multiple of f (hz), i = harmonic of jumping frequency (i
= 1,2,3), f = jumping frequency (hz), ao/g = acceleration
where fs = system frequency, fb = beam or joist frequency, limit, αi = dynamic load factor for the harmonic of the
and fg = girder frequency, all in hz. loading function, wp = equivalent uniformly distributed load

104 ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 of participants (psf), and wt = equivalent uniformly Motion Transverse to Supporting Members
distributed floor weight (psf). (The reader is referred to the
Occasionally, a floor system will be judged particularly
referenced paper for more details.) Application of Inequality
annoying because of motion transverse to the supporting
3 generally results in a required natural frequency greater
beams or joists. In these situations, when the floor is
than 9-10 hz.
impacted at one location, there is the perception that a wave
To avoid complaints of undesirable motion of floors
moves from the impact location in a direction transverse to
supporting exercise activities, the following is recommended:
the supporting members. The writer has observed this
(1) provide structural framing so that the first natural
phenomenon and felt the "wave" 50-70 ft. (15-20 m) from the
frequency satisfies Inequality 3, generally above 9-10 hz; (2)
impact location perhaps up to 1 second after the impact. In at
isolate the floor system from the remaining structure using
least one instance the "wave" was felt to hit the exterior wall
separate columns; (3) separate ceilings and partitions
and return almost to the impact location. This phenomenon
immediately below the exercise floor by supporting the
occurs when the building is rectangular, the floor is free of
ceiling on its own framing and by not extending partitions to
fixed partitions, and all beams are equally spaced and of the
the floor above; and (4) accept the possibility of complaints
same stiffness, including those at column lines. The resulting
from non-participating individuals who happen to be on the
motion is very annoying to occupants because the floor
exercise floor during significant activity by medium-to-large
moves without apparent reason (the cause is not within sight
groups (20-60 participants). (It is also recommended that
or hearing). However, a simple remedy is available. The
sound insulation be provided between the exercise floor and
"cure" is to periodically (say every third bay) change one
the ceiling below.) Obviously, only recommendations 3 and 4
beam spacing or one beam stiffness. The result is that the
are economically feasible once construction is complete.
"wave" simply stops at this location.
Structural framing with sufficient stiffness to meet the 9-
10 hz criterion can be very expensive, as frequency is EXAMPLES
proportional to the square root of moment of inertia. The
The following examples illustrate some of the concepts
most economical systems result from the use of deep beams
discussed.
or joists and lightweight concrete slabs (a decrease in mass
increases frequency). The guidelines given above for EXAMPLE 1
calculating frequencies of floor-supporting residential/office Check the typical interior bay shown for susceptibility to
activities apply for gymnasium floors. vibration. The floor supports office space. (See Appendix for
definition of terms.)
SPECIAL SITUATIONS
3½-in. lightweight (110 pcf, n = 14) concrete slab
2-in. metal deck (concrete in deck + deck = 9.1 psf)
Pedestrian Bridges
Composite construction; hung ceiling; little ductwork
Pedestrian footbridges or crossovers require particular
attention because damping is usually less than 2.5-3% and
resonance with walking impacts can occur. (Recall that the
average walking frequency of a human is approximately 2
hz.) If only casual pedestrian traffic is anticipated (for
instance, a crossover in a hotel atrium), it is recommended
that Inequality 1 be used as the design criterion. For this
case, the damping exhibited by the completed structure
should be assumed to be less than 3% of critical. If heavy
traffic is anticipated (for instance, a footbridge at a sports
arena exit), the structure should be designed so that the first
natural frequency exceeds 7-9 hz to avoid walking resonance.
The designer of footbridges is cautioned to pay particular
attention to the location of the concrete slab. The writer is
aware of a situation where the designer apparently
"eyeballed" his design based on previous experience with
floor systems. Unfortunately, the concrete slab was located
between the beams (because of clearance considerations) and Beam
the footbridge vibrated at a much lower frequency and at a
larger amplitude than anticipated because of the reduced W18×35 A = 10.3 in.2 Ix = 510 in.2 d = 17.70 in.
transformed moment of inertia. The result was a very de = 3.5 + (9.1 / 110) (12) = 4.5 in.
unhappy owner and an expensive retrofit. Ac/n = 120 (4.5) / 14 = 38.57 in.2

THIRD QUARTER / 1991 105

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 . (20.95) + 10.3 (17.70 / 2)
3857 (0.97)(600)(30 × 12) 3
Yb = = 18.40 in. Aot = = 0.0049 in.
. + 10.3
3857 (48)(29 × 106 )(4,000)
8.57(4.5) 3
It = + 3857
. (2.55) 2 + 510.0 + 10.30(18.40 − 17.70 / 2) 2 Neff = 1.0 Aog = 0.0049 in.
12
Required damping = 35(0.0049)(7.22) + 2.5 = 3.7%

= 1,765 in.4 System

1 1 1 1 1
= + = +
f s2 f b2 f g2 526
. 2
7.22 2

fs = 4.25 hz
Aos = Aob + Aog / 2 = 0.0077 + 0.0049 / 2 = 0.0102 in.
Required damping = 35 (0.0102) (4.25) + 2.5 = 4.0%

Evaluation

f, hz Ao, in. Required Damping, %

Beam 5.26 0.0077 3.9
Girder 7.22 0.0049 3.7
System 4.25 0.0102 4.0

Since the required damping is approximately 4%, the system

Supported weight = slab + deck + beam + actual is judged to be satisfactory unless the office environment is
mechanical (4 psf) + actual ceiling very quiet or sensitive equipment is being operated. Because
(2 psf) + 20% live load (10 psf) the girder frequency is greater than the beam frequency, the
W=[(4.5/12)(110)(10.0)+35+(4+2+10)(10.0)]36.0 = 21,870 system will probably vibrate at the beam frequency, 5.26 hz,
lbs. rather than the system frequency, 4.25 hz.
1
1
 (386.0(29 × 106 )(1,765)  2 EXAMPLE 2
 gEI  2
fb = 157
.  3t  = 157
.   = 5.26 hz Evaluate the framing plan of Example 1 if used in the public
 WL   (21870, )(36 × 12)3  areas of a shopping center.
From Table 1, DLF = 0.75 Applying the criterion that the deflection caused by a 450
600 L3 (0.75)(600)(36 × 12) 3 lbs. force does not exceed 0.02 in. (Ellingwood, et al. 1986):
Aot = ( DLF ) max = = 0.0148 in.
48EI t (48)(29 × 106 )(1,765) 450 L3 1 450(36 × 12 3 ) 1
∆b = × = × = 0.0077 in.
48EI t N eff 48(29 × 10 )(1,765) 193
6
.
S L4
N eff = 2.97 − +
17.3d e 135
. EI t 450(30 × 12) 3
∆g = = 0.0038 in.
48(29 × 106 )(4,000)
120.0 (36 × 12) 4
= 2.97 − + = 193
.
. (29 × 106 )(1,765)
17.3(4.5) 135 ∆ s=∆ b+∆ g/2=0.0077+0.0038/2=0.0096 in. < 0.02 in. OK
Aob = Aot / Neff = 0.0148 / 1.93 = 0.0077 in. However, the natural frequency of the system is estimated to
Required damping=35Aof+2.5=35(0.0077)(5.26)+2.5=3.9% be 5.2 hz, which is considerably less than the recommended
minimum value of 8 hz. Redesign is necessary.
Girder
W24×55 A = 16.20 in.2 Ix = 1,350 in.4 REFERENCES
As above, with an assumed effective slab width = 10 ft, It = Allen, D. E., "Building Vibrations from Human Activities,"Concrete
4,000 in.4 International: Design and Construction, American Concrete
Supported weight = 2 × 21,870 + 30 × 55 = 45,390 lbs Institute, 12:No.6 (1990) 66-73.
1 Allen, D. E., "Floor Vibrations from Aerobics,"Canadian Journal of
 (386.0)(29 × 106 )(4,000)  2
Civil Engineering, 17:No.5 (1990a) 771-779.
f g = 157
.   = 7.22 hz
 (45,390)(30 × 12)
3 Allen, D. E. and G. Pernica, "A Simple Absorber for Walking
 Vibrations," Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 11:(1984)
(DLF)max = 0.97 112-117.

106 ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 Allen, D. E. and J. H. Rainer, "Floor Vibration,"Canadian Building Ceiling: 1–3%
Digest, (Ottawa: Division of Building Research, National
Research Council of Canada, September, 1975).
Lower limit for hung ceiling; upper limit for sheetrock on
Allen, D. E. and J. H. Rainer, "Vibration Criteria for Long-Span furring attached to beams or joists.
Floors," Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 3:No.2 (1986)
Ductwork and Mechanical: 1–10%
165-173.
Allen, D. E., J. H. Rainer and G. Pernica, "Vibration Criteria for Depends on amount and attachment.
Assembly Occupancies," Canadian Journal of Civil Partitions: 10–20%
Engineering, 12:No.3 (1985) 617-623.
If attached to the floor system and not spaced more than
Canadian Standards Association, Steel Structures for Buildings
(Limit States Design), (Willowdale, Ontario, Canada, Canadian every five floor beams or the effective joist floor width.
Institute of Steel Construction, 1984). Note: The above values are based on observation only.
Ellingwood, B., et al., "Structural Serviceability: A Critical
Appraisal and Research Needs," Journal of Structural Frequency
Engineering, 112:No.12 (1986) 2646-2664.
Ellingwood, B. and A. Tallin, "Structural Serviceability—Floor Beam or girder frequency can be estimated from
1
Vibrations," Journal of Structural Engineering, 110:No.2  gEI  2

(1984) 401-418. f = K  3t  (A.1)

Galambos, T. V., "Vibration of Steel Joist Concrete Slab Floor  WL 
Systems," Technical Digest No. 5, Steel Joist Institute, where
Arlington, VA.
Hanes, R. M., Human Sensitivity to Whole-Body Vibration in Urban f = first natural frequency, hz.
Transportation Systems: A Literature Review, (Silver Springs, K = 1.57 for simply supported beams
MD, Applied Physics Laboratory, The John Hopkins University, = 0.56 for cantilevered beams
1970). = from Fig. 1 for overhanging beams
Lenzen, K. H., "Vibration of Steel Joist-Concrete Slab Floors," g = acceleration of gravity, in./sec./sec.
Engineering Journal, 3:No.3 (3rd Quarter 1966) 133-136.
Murray, T. M., "Design to Prevent Floor Vibrations,"Engineering
E = modulus of elasticity, psi
Journal, 12:No.3 (3rd Quarter 1975), 82-87. It = transformed moment of inertia of the tee-beam
Murray, T. M., "Acceptability Criterion for Occupant-Induced Floor model, Fig. 2, in.4
Vibrations," Engineering Journal, 18:No.2 (2nd Quarter 1981)
62-70.
Murray, T. M., "Building Floor Vibrations," Papers, Third
Conference on Steel Developments, (Melbourne, Australia:
Australian Institute of Steel Construction) 145-149.
Nelson, F. C., "The Use of Visco-Elastic Material to Dampen
Vibrations in Buildings and Large Structures," Engineering
Journal, 5:No.2 (2nd Quarter 1968) 72-78.
Tredgold, T., Elementary Principles of Carpentry, second edition,
(Publisher unknown, 1828).

APPENDIX

GUIDELINES FOR ESTIMATION OF PARAMETERS Fig. 1. Frequency coefficients for overhanging beams.

Damping
Damping in a completed floor system can be estimated from
the following ranges:

Bare Floor: 1–3%

Lower limit for thin slab of lightweight concrete; upper limit Fig. 2. Tee-beam model for computing transformed moment of
for thick slab of normal weight concrete. inertia.

THIRD QUARTER / 1991 107

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 W = total weight supported by the tee-beam, dead load Table 1.
plus 10–25% of design live load, lbs. Dynamic Load Factors for Heel-Drop Impact
L= f, hz DLF F, hz DLF F, hz DLF
tee-beam span, in. 1.00 0.1541 5.50 0.7819 10.00 1.1770
1.10 0.1695 5.60 0.7937 10.10 1.1831
System frequency is estimated using 1.20 0.1847 5.70 0.8053 10.20 1.1891
1.30 0.2000 5.80 0.8168 10.30 1.1949
1 1 1 1.40 0.2152 5.90 0.8282 10.40 1.2007
= + 1.50 0.2304 6.00 0.8394 10.50 1.2065
f s2 fb2 f g2 1.60 0.2456 6.10 0.8505 10.60 1.2121
1.70 0.2607 6.20 0.8615 10.70 1.2177
where 1.80 0.2758 6.30 0.8723 10.80 1.2231
1.90 0.2908 6.40 0.8830 10.90 1.2285
fs = system frequency, hz 2.00 0.3058 6.50 0.8936 11.00 1.2339
fb = beam or joist frequency, hz 2.10 0.3207 6.60 0.9040 11.10 1.2391
fg = girder frequency, hz 2.20 0.3356 6.70 0.9143 11.20 1.2443
2.30 0.3504 6.80 0.9244 11.30 1.2494
Amplitude from a Heel-Drop Impact 2.40 0.3651 6.90 0.9344 11.40 1.2545
2.50 0.3798 7.00 0.9443 11.50 1.2594
Aot 2.60 0.3945 7.10 0.9540 11.60 1.2643
Ao = (A.2) 2.70 0.4091 7.20 0.9635 11.70 1.2692
Neff
2.80 0.4236 7.30 0.9729 11.80 1.2740
2.90 0.4380 7.40 0.9821 11.90 1.2787
where
3.00 0.4524 7.50 0.9912 12.00 1.2834
Ao = initial amplitude of the floor system due to a heel 3.10 0.4667 7.60 1.0002 12.10 1.2879
drop impact, in. 3.20 0.4809 7.70 1.0090 12.20 1.2925
3.30 0.4950 7.80 1.0176 12.30 1.2970
Neff = number of effective tee-beams 3.40 0.5091 7.90 1.0261 12.40 1.3014
Aot = initial amplitude of a single tee-beam due to a 3.50 0.5231 8.00 1.0345 12.50 1.3058
heel drop impact, in. 3.60 0.5369 8.10 1.0428 12.60 1.3101
= (DLF)maxds (A.3) 3.70 0.5507 8.20 1.0509 12.70 1.3143
where 3.80 0.5645 8.30 1.0588 12.80 1.3185
3.90 0.5781 8.40 1.0667 12.90 1.3227
(DLF)max = maximum dynamic load factor, Table 1 4.00 0.5916 8.50 1.0744 13.00 1.3268
4.10 0.6050 8.60 1.0820 13.10 1.3308
ds = static deflection caused by a 600 lbs. force, in. 4.20 0.6184 8.70 1.0895 13.20 1.3348
See (Murray 1975) for equations for (DLF)max and ds 4.30 0.6316 8.80 1.0969 13.30 1.3388
4.40 0.6448 8.90 1.1041 13.40 1.3427
For girders, Neff = 1.0. 4.50 0.6578 9.00 1.1113 13.50 1.3466
4.60 0.6707 9.10 1.1183 13.60 1.3504
For beams: 4.70 0.6835 9.20 1.1252 13.70 1.3541
1. S < 2.5 ft, usual steel joist-concrete slab floor systems. 4.80 0.6962 9.30 1.1321 13.80 1.3579
4.90 0.7088 9.40 1.1388 13.90 1.3615
 πx  5.00 0.7213 9.50 1.1434 14.00 1.3652
N eff = 1 + 2 ∑ cos  for x ≤ xo (A.4) 5.10 0.7337 9.60 1.1519 14.10 1.3688
 2 xo  5.20 0.7459 9.70 1.1583 14.20 1.3723
5.30 0.7580 9.80 1.1647 14.30 1.3758
where 5.40 0.7700 9.90 1.1709 14.40 1.3793
x = distance from the center joist to the joist under
consideration, in.
xo = distance from the center joist to the edge of the t = slab thickness, in.
effective floor, in. It = transformed moment of inertia of the tee-beam, in.4
= 1.06 εL S = joist spacing, in.
L = joist span, in.
ε = (Dx/Dy)0.25 2. S > 2.5 ft, usual steel beam-concrete slab floor systems.
Dx = flexural stiffness perpendicular to the joists S L4
= Ect3 / 12 N eff = 2.97 − + (A.5)
17.3d e 135EI T
Dy = flexural stiffness parallel to the joists
= EIt/ S where E is defined above and
Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete, psi
E = modulus of elasticity of steel, psi S = beam spacing, in.

108 ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.
 de = effective slab depth, in. The amplitude of a two-way system can be estimated from
L = beam span, in.
Aos = Aob + Aog / 2
Limitations:
where
15 ≤ (S/de) < 40; 1 × 10 ≤ (L /IT) ≤ 50 × 10
6 4 6
Aos = system amplitude
Aob = Aot for beam
Aog = Aot for girder

THIRD QUARTER / 1991 109

© 2003 by American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher.