630 / Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems-Slabs Supported on Beams

Section A-A
Fig. 16.13.2
Corner reinforcement in two-way slab.

in slabs supported on beams having a value of x greater than 1.0, special

reinforcement (Fig. 16.13.2) shall be provided at exterior corners in both
the bottom and top of the slab. This reinforcement (ACI-13.4.6) is to be
provided for a distance in each direction from the corner equal to one-fifth
the longer span. The reinforcement in both the top and bottom of the slab
must be sufficient to resist a moment equal to the maximum positive moment
per foot of width in the slab, and it may be placed in a single band parallel
to the diagonal in the top of the slab and perpendicular to the diagonal in
the bottom of the slab, or in two bands parallel to the sides of the slab.

16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method

The equivalent-frame method prescribed by the AC1 Code differs from
the direct-design method only in the way by which the longitudinal mo-
ments along the spans of the equivalent rigid frame (as defined in Sec. 16.2)
are obtained. In the equivalent-frame method (ACI-13.7) the elastic analy-
sis of the equivalent rigid frame is made for various vertical or lateral or
both critical load combinations, and the maximum positive moments (and
reversals) within the span and negative moments at the supports are deter-
mined.

Equivalent Rigid Frame. The equivalent rigid frame is taken on both

longitudinal and transverse column lines as described in Sec. 16.2. For ver-
tical loading each floor of such a frame may be analyzed separately with its
attached upper and lower columns which are assumed to be fixed at their
 16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method I 631

far ends; and the slab-beam may be assumed to be fixed at any support two
panels distant from the support or the span where critical moments are
being obtained.

Moments of inertia. When an elastic analysis is to be made, the moments

of inertia are treated in a more accurate manner than when moment coeffi-
cients are used in the direct-design method. The moment of inertia of the
slab-beam between the center of the column and the face of the column,
bracket, or capital is to be assumed equal to that of the slab-beam at the
face of the column, bracket, or capital, divided by the quantity (1 - c,/LJ2
(ACI-13.7.3.3). The moment of inertia of the column is to be assumed in-
finite from the top of the slab to the bottom of the slab-beam at the joint
(ACI-13.7.4.5).

Fixed-End Moments, Stiffness, and Carry-Over Factors. The stiffness

and carry-over factors of the slab-beam and of the columns, with variable
moments of inertia along their respective lengths, may be conveniently
computed by the column-analogy method [ 181. The fixed-end moments due
to uniform load acting on the slab-beam can be computed by the same
method [18] ; AC1 Commentary Table 13-1 provides values of fixed-end
moments, as well as stiffness and carry-over factors, for slabs with various
support widths.

Equivalent Column Stiffness. The equivalent column stiffness K,, is to

be computed from
1
-= &+
KC c K
wherein

CK, = stiffness K,, of the upper column + stiffness Kc2 of the lower
column

C is the torsional constant of the transverse torsional member having a

section that consists of the larger of (a) a portion of slab having width equal
to that of the column dimension in the direction of the span, (b) the portion
of slab in (a) plus the transverse beam above and below the slab, or (c) the
transverse beam stem plus portion of slab on each side of the beam ex-
tending a distance equal to the projection of the beam above or below the
slab, whichever is greater, but not greater than 4 times the slab thickness.
Zsb is the moment of inertia of width of slab used for the calculation of I,
but including the contribution of that portion of the beam stem extending
above or below the slab.
632 / Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems-Slabs Supported on Beams

Loads on the Equivalent Frame. When the loading pattern is definitely

known, the equivalent frame should be analyzed for that load. When the
service live load does not exceed three-quarters of the service dead load,
the maximum bending may be assumed to occur at all sections under full
factored live load (ACI-13.7.6.2). For other conditions, maximum positive
bending near midspan of a panel may be assumed to occur under three-
quarters of the full factored live load in the panel and in alternate panels,
and maximum negative bending in the slab at a support may be assumed
to occur under three-quarters of the full factored live load in the adjacent
panels only. In no case, however, may the factored moments be taken as
less than those occurring with full factored live load on all panels.

Reduction of Negative Moment to Face of Support. The factored nega-

tive moment at any support is to be taken at the face of the column. When
capitals (or brackets) are used, as described in Sec. 16.1, the face of capital
is considered the face of support (ACI-13.7.7.3) and special conditions re-
garding reduction of negative moment apply (ACI-13.7.7). Section 17.13
considers this in detail.

Column Moments. Moments determined for the equivalent column in the

frame analysis should be apportioned to the lower end of the upper column
and the upper end of the lower column in the ratio of their respective stiff-
nesses, with the resulting values further reduced to the top of the slab or the
bottom of the slab-beam for design use.

Sum of Positive and Average Negative Moments. Two-way slab sys-

tems that satisfy the limitations of the direct-design method, but yet have
the longitudinal moments determined by means of the equivalent-frame
method, may have the resulting factored moments reduced in such pro-
portion that the numerical sum of the positive and the average negative
moments at face of supports need not exceed the total statical moment MO.

Deflections. When the deflection must be calculated for a two-way slab

system, the AC1 Code (ACI-9.5.3.4) provides little guidance other than that
one should take into account the size and shape of the panel, conditions of
support, and nature of restraints at the panel edges. The effective moment
of inertia I, (Eq. 14.4.1) is required to be used in such calculations. Although
a number of techniques have been proposed [ 19-221, adaption of the equiv-
alent-frame concept seems to have the most promise of being relatively
simple to apply and giving reasonable results. This equivalent-frame appli-
cation has been developed by Nilson and Walters [21] for essentially un-
cracked systems and extended by Kripanarayanan and Branson [23] for
partially cracked load ranges.

EXAMPLE 16.14.1 Assuming the equivalent-frame method is to be ap-

plied to the design example described in Sec. 16.3, obtain the distribution
and carry-over factors at the exterior and .interior joints of the equivalent
rigid frames A, B, C, and D as shown by the notations in Fig. 16.3.3. Also
 16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method I 633

determine the longitudinal moments in equivalent rigid frame A by the

moment-distribution method and compare them with the results of the
direct-design method in Example 16.9.1, Part (h).
Solution: (a) Flexural properties of slab-beam. The variations in the mo-
ment of inertia of the slab-beam in the long and short directions are shown
in Fig. 16.14.1. For the long slab-beam, the ratio of moment of inertia
between the center and the face of the column to the moments of inertia of
therestofthespanis l.O/(l - 15/240)2 = 1.137;andit isl.O/(l - 15/300)2 =
1.11 for the short slab-beam (ACI-13.7.3.3). The stiffness, carry-over, and
fixed-end moment coefficients may be computed by the column-analogy
method [18].
For the long direction, referring to Fig. 16.14.la,
A = 23.75 + 2(0.879)(0.625) = 23.75 + 1.10 = 24.85
I = ff(23.75)3 + 1.10(12.1875)2 = 1117 + 164 = 1281
25 25( 12.5)2
sii = __ = 1.005 + 3.045 = 4.05
24.85 + 1281
Sij = -(I.005 - 3.045) = 2.04

COF = g = 0.503

.0.625'
+

Relative moment of inertia Relative moment of inertia

0.879 0.902

-L, 1!0-1 ++

T I

Analogous column section Analogous column section

78.1

Simple moment diagram Simple moment diagram

w = 1.0 w = 1.0

(a) Long slab-beam (b) Short slab-beam

Fig. 16.14.1
Flexure properties of slab-beam strip, Example 16.14.1.
634 I Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems-Slabs Supported on Beams

load on analogous column for uniform load (w = 1.0)

= +(78.1 - 7.6)(23.75) + 7.6(23.75) + 0.879(7.6)(0.625)
= 1117 + 180 + 4 = 1301
1301 1301
fixed-end moment coefficient = ~ - = 0.084
24.85L: - 24.85(625)
For the short direction, referring to Fig. 16.14.lb,
A = 18.75 + 2(0.902)(0.625) = 18.75 + 1.13 = 19.88
I = &(18.75)3 + 1.13(9.6875)2 = 550 + 106 = 656
20
sii = __ + ~ lo)2
20( = 1.01 + 3.05 = 4.06
19.88 656
Sij = - (1.01 - 3.05) = 2.04

COF = g = 0.502

load on analogous column for uniform load (w = 1.0)

= 5(50 - 6.05)(18.75) + 6.05(18.75) + 0.902(6.05)(0.625)
= 550 + 113.5 + 3.4 = 666.9
666.9
fixed-end moment coefficient = $$& = = 0.084
1 19.88(400)
The flexural stiffnesses of the slab-beams in frames A, B, C, and D are,
using the I, and I, values from Example 16.5.1,
K + K = 4.05E(45,400 + 5490)
Frame A, b s = 687E
300
K + K =4.05E(38,000 + 2745)
Frame B, b s = 550E
300
K + K =4.06E(24,400 + 6870) = 529E
Frame C, b s
240

K + K = 4.06E(20,500 + 3435) = 405E

Frame D, b s
240

These stiffnesses and the carry-over factors are shown in Fig. 16.14.4.
(b) Flexural properties of columns. The variations in the moment of
inertia of the column section in the long and short directions are shown in
Fig. 16.14.2. The stiffness and carry-over factors may be computed by the
column-analogy method.
For the long direction, referring to Fig. 16.14.2a,

A = 9.67, I = &(9.67)j = 75.3

S,, = & + 21p;9302 = 1.24 + 7.60 = 8.84

 16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method I 636

IZOO
r6.5 (ACI-13.7.4.5)
-. 1--F---5---r-.T~7,+

275

-0 12-0

-:
r- t ?0.27 -
(a) Column section in long direction

~6.5

--T
-- -__-----
, -.
!.5-I- f
20.75
--.
1.7:
f
.-

6.73
1 I
12-0
12-0 I
-_
10.,00-

t
5.27

I = I------,---
-23.25 -. 1
I T - - T = 0.27
(b) Column section in short direction
Fig. 16.14.2
Flexure properties of columns, Example 16.14.1.

S,, = & + '2(75;:o)2 = 1.24 + 4.15 = 5.39

ST, = S,, = - & - 12(6';;):5'10)] = - 1.24 + 5.60 = 4.36

L

c -4.36=0493
=' - 8.84 '

c,, = g= 0.809

Stiffness at top, K EZ ,= TT
S Z
L = 884E(15)4/12 = 259E
144
K cl = sBBE L= =WW4/12 = 158E
Stiffness at bottom,
144
636 / Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way SystemgSlabs Supported on Beams

For the short direction, referring to Fig. 16.14.2b,

A = 10.00, Z = &(1O)3 = 83.3

s TT _ - 2 + 12(6.73)* = 1.20 + 6.53 = 7.73

10 83.3
s - 12 t 12(5.27)* = 1.20 + 4.01 I= 5.21
BE 10 83.3

s T B _- s _ - 2 _ 12(6.73)(5.27)
BT-
10 83.3 1 = _ 1 20 + 5 12 = 3 92

CT, = z = 0.507

CBT = g = 0.752

K c2 = 7.73-N5)4/12 = 226E
Stiffness at top,
144
K cl = =1(W4/12 = 153E
Stiffness at bottom,
144
These stiffnesses and the carry-over factors obtained above are sum-
marized in Fig. 16.14.4.
(c) The torsional stiffnesses of transverse torsional members. The tor-
sional constants C for the transverse edge members shown in Fig. 16.14.3
are taken from Example 16.9.1, but those for the transverse members through
the interior columns have been computed in the same manner with the
results shown in Fig. 16.14.3. The values for the ratio of I,, to I, needed to
amplify the torsional stiffness K, (AC1 Code and Commentary-13.7.5.4) for
each direction are also shown in Fig. 16.14.3.
For frame A,

edge K, = 18E(10700) (12.13) = 974E(12.13) = 11,800E

240( 1 - 15/240)3

18E(11900)
interior Kt = 240(1 _ 15/240)3 (12.13) = 1084E(12.13) = 13,200E

For frame B, using Z,,/Z, = 19.9 for 14 x 21.5 projection below 127 x 6.5 slab,

edge K, = 487E(19.9) = 9680E

interior K, = 542E(19.9) = 10,800E
For frame C,

edge K, = 18E(19100) (5.76) = 134OE(5.76) = 7720E

300(1 - 15/300)3

18E(207700)
mterlor Kt = 300(1 _ 15/300)3 (5.76) = 1450&(5.76) = 8350E
 16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method I 637

T
C = 8050 in.4NG C = 10,700 in.4 USE C = 9670 in.4 NG
L-4 12

C = 11,900 im4 USE

240
0.98

-1~~~~;~.4

pr-
I;,& = 12.13
(a) Span of transverse member = 240 in.
,,

pqp r*T

14 14 14
I- k-l l - l
C= 14,500 in.4NG C= 19,100 in.4USE C = 16,500 in.4NG C = 20,700 in.4 USE

300 ,I

-L===T3zin.

I, = 6,870 in.4
w
Ill, = 5.76
(b) Span of transverse member = 300 in.
Fig. 16.16.3
PropertIes of transverse torsional members, Example 16.14.1.

For frame D, using Z,,/I, = 9.51 for 12 x 17.5 projection below 156 x 6.5 slab,
edge K, = 670E(9.51) = 6370E
interior K, = 725E(9.51) = 6890E
(d) The equivalent column stiffness K,, and distribution factors. The
equivalent column stiffness is computed from the formula
1 1 1

For frame A,
E
exterior K,, = = 402E
l/417 + l/11,800
E
interior K,, = = 404E
l/417 + l/13,200
636 1 Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems-Slabs Supported on Beams

0.809 0.809

0.493 0.493
0.809 0.809
4
4 0 1 E(s)= 152E

401 E(E)= 249E

4
0.493 0.493
0.752 0.752

5 2 9 E t [ 529E

0.502 0.502

3 6 2 E (G)= 2 1 6 E
4
o.io7 0.507
0.752 0.752

Frame D

o.io7 o.io7
Fig. 16.14.4
Distribution factors at exterior and interior joints, Example 16.14.1.

For frame B,
E
exterior K,, = = 400E
l/417 + l/9680
E
interior K,, = = 401E
l/417 + l/10,800
 16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method / 639

For frame C,
E
exterior K,, = = 361E
l/379 + l/7720
E
interior K,, = = 362E
l/379 + l/8350
For frame D,
E
exterior K,, = = 358E
l/379 + l/6370
E
interior K,, = = 3596
l/379 + l/6890
These equivalent stiffnesses K,, are apportioned to the upper and lower
columns in the ratio of their respective stiffnesses, as shown in Fig. 16.14.4.
The distribution factors at the exterior and interior joints for each of the
four frames, as well as carry-over factors, are also shown in Fig. 16.14.4.
It may be noted that the effect of the torsional member stiffness on the
equivalent column stiffness is relatively small.
(e) Fixed-end moments for frame A
factored dead load wD = 1.4(%)(6.5) = 1.4(81) = 114 psf
factored live load wL = 1.7( 120) = 204 psf
FEM due to (wD + wJ = 0.084(0.318)(20)(25)2 = 334 ft-kips
FEM due to (MJ~ + $M:~) = 0.0S4(0.267)(20)(25)2 = 280 ft-kips
FEM due to u~ only = 0.084(0.1 14)(20)(25)2 = 120 ft-kips
(f) Moment distribution for frame A. Moment distribution for five loading
conditions is shown in Table 16.14.1. Although only two cycles of moment
distribution are needed, a third cycle is added for little extra work. The
positive moments at midspan are computed from the formula
Mpos = +wL: - 3(Mni + M,j)

where M,i and Mnj are the negative moments at the center of supports.
Summarizing the results of moment distribution in Table 16.14.1.
Maximum positive moment
= the larger of 232 and 225 = 232 ft-kips
at center of first span
Maximum positive moment
= the larger of 149 and 180 = 180 ft-kips
at center of second span
Maximum positive moment
= the larger of 171 and 195 = 195 ft-kips
at center of third span
Maximum negative moment = the larger of 131 and 123 = 131 ft-kips
at O-l
Maximum negative moment = the larger of 399 and 349 = 399 ft-kips
at 1-O
Maximum negative moment
= the larger of 375 and 337 = 375 ft-kips
at l-2
640 I Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems--Slabs Supported on Beams

Table 16.14.1
Moment Distribution

Maximum negative moment

at 2-l = the larger of 321 and 308 = 321 ft-kips

Maximum negative moment

at 2-3 = the larger of 326 and 312 = 326 ft-kips

(g) Reduction of negative moment to face of support for frame A. The

shear diagram consistent with the maximum negative moments at supports
is shown in Fig. 16.14.5b. When the negative moments in Fig. 16.14.5a are
leveled off between the center and the face of the column, the resulting
moment diagram takes the shape in Fig. 16.14.5~.
(h) Sum of positive and average negative moments for frame A. The sum
of positive and average negative moments in each span of Fig. 16.14.5~ may
 16.14 Equivalent-Frame Method I 641

Table 16.14.1 (cont.)

Second and Fourth Spans Loaded with Three-Fourths Liue Load

Firsr. Srcmd, am/ Fourth Spam Loaded with Three-Foarrhs Live Load

Sec~md, Third, am/ F$h Spam Loaded with Three-Fourths Live Load

be obtained as
232 + $(89 + 344) = 449 ft-kips for the first span
180 + i(325 + 274) = 480 ft-kips for the second span
195 + 278 = 473 ft-kips for the third span
Because the present system satisfies the limitations of the direct-design
method and the total static moment is 458 ft-kips, the moments in the
second and third spans may be scaled down by the ratios 4581480 and
4581473, respectively.
(i) Comparison with longitudinal moments in the direct-design method
for frame A. The longitudinal moments obtained by the direct-design
 642 I Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems-Slabs Supported on Beams

81.7 79.5

d!l \ (48) 4
(48)

86.3 go.2 (b) 73.3v 77.3

2321k

M"
89

278
(cl
Fig. 16.14.5
Maximum shears and moments for frame A.

method are - 65, +261, - 334, - 298, + 160 ft-kips; these values compare
well with - 89, +232, - 344, -278 (or - 270 scaled down), + 195 (or + 189
scaled down) in Fig. 16.14.5.

SELECTED REFERENCES

1. Joseph DiStasio and M. P. Van Buren. Slabs Supported on Four Sides, AC1
Journal, Proceedings, 32, January-February 1936, 350-364.
2. R. L. Bertin, Joseph DiStasio, and M. P. Van Buren. Slabs Supported on Four
Sides, ACI Journal, Proceedings, 41, June 1945, 537-556.
 Selected References I 643

3. C. P. Siess and N. M. Newmark. Rational Analysis and Design of Two-Way

Concrete Slabs, ACI Journal, Proceedings, 45, December 1948, 273-316.
4. W. L. Gamble, M. A. Sozen, and C. P. Siess. Measured and Theoretical Bending
Moments in Reinforced Concrete Floor Slabs, Civil Engineering Structural
Research Series No. 246. Urbana: University of Illinois, June 1962.
5. M. A. Sozen and C. P. Siess. Investigation of Multi-Panel Reinforced Concrete
Floor Slabs, ACI Journal, Proceedings, 60, A u g u s t 1963,999-1028.
6. S. A. Guralnick and R. W. LaFraugh. Laboratory Study of a 45-Foot Square
Flat Plate Structure, AU Journal, Proceedings, 60, September 1963, 1107-l 185.
7. W. L. Gamble, M. A. Sozen, and C. P. Siess. Tests of a Two-Way Reinforced
Concrete Floor Slab, Journal of Structural Dioision, ASCE, 95, (ST6) June 1969,
1073-1096.
8. M. Daniel Vanderbilt, Mete A. Sozen, and Chester P. Siess. Tests of a Modified
Reinforced Concrete Two-Way Slab, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, 95,
(ST6) June 1969, 109771116.
9. W. G. Corley and J. 0. Jirsa. Equivalent Frame Analysis for Slab Design,
ACI Journal, Proceedings, 67, November 1970, 875-884.
10. William L. Gamble. Moments in Beam Supported Slabs, ACI Journal, Pro-
ceedings, 69, March 1972, 149- 157.
11. Shearhead Reinforcement for Flat-Plate Floors, Modern Developments in
Reinforced Concrete (No. 22). Chicago : Portland Cement Association, 1948.
12. Notes on ACI 318-71 Building Code Requirements with Design Applications. Skokie,
Illinois: Portland Cement Association, 1972.
13. J. 0. Jirsa, M. A. Sozen, and C. P. Siess. Pattern Loadings on Reinforced Concrete
Floor Slabs, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, 95, (ST6) June 1969, 1117-
1137.
14. Edward G. Nawy. Crack Width Control in Welded Fabric Reinforced Cen-
trally Loaded Two-Way Concrete Slabs, Causes, Mechanism, and Control of
Cracking in Concrete (SP-20). Detroit: American Concrete Institute, 1968 (pp.
(211-235).
15. Edward G. Nawy and G. S. Orenstein. Crack Width Control in Reinforced
Concrete Two-Way Slabs, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, 96, (ST3) March
1970, 701-721.
16. Edward G. Nawy and Kenneth W. Blair. Further Studies on Flexural Crack
Control in Structural Slab Systems, Cracking, Dejection, and Ultimate Load of
Concrete Slab Systems (SP-30). Detroit: American Concrete Institute, 1971, (pp. i
1-41).
17. Edward G. Nawy. Crack Control Through Reinforcement Distribution in
Two-Way Acting Slabs and Plates, ACI Journal, Proceedings, 69, A p r i l 1 9 7 2 ,
2177219.
18. C. K. Wang. Statically Indeterminate Structures. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1953
(Chap. 9).
19. Mortimer D. Vanderbilt, Mete A. Sozen, and Chester P. Siess, Deflections of
Multiple-Panel Reinforced Concrete Floor Slabs, Journal of Structural Division,
ASCE, 91, (ST4) August 1965, 77-101.
20. AC1 Committee 435, State-of-the-Art Report, Deflection of Two-Way Reinforced
Concrete Floor Systems, Deflections of Concrete Structures, (SP-43). Detroit:

J
American Concrete Institute, 1974, (pp. 55-81).
21. Arthur H. Nilson and Donald B. Walters, Jr., Deflection of Two-Way Floor
Systems by the Equivalent Frame Method, ACI Journal, Proceedings. 72, May
1975,210-218.
22. B. Vijaya Rangan, Prediction of Long-Term Deflections of Flat Plates and
Slabs, ACI Journal, Proceedings, 73, April 1976, 223-226.
644 I Chapter 16 Design of Two-Way Systems-Slabs Supported on Beams

23. K. M. Kripanarayanan and D. E. Branson, Short Time Deflections of Flat

Plates, Flat Slabs, and Two-Way Slabs, ACZ Journal, Proceedings, 73, December
1976, 686-690.

PROBLEMS

16.1 Design the typical interior frame along columns 2-5-7 for the two-way slab
system shown. The 13-ft long columns are connected by beams, and no column
capitals or drop panels are used. As an initial trial, assume all beams (interior)
are 12 x 24 in. overall. Revise beam size as necessary during the design. De-
termine slab thickness based on ACI-9.5.3, then use the direct-design method
for longitudinal distribution of moments. Show design sketch giving all your
decisions, including dimensions, bar sizes, bar lengths, and stirrups for the two
spans from column 2 to column 7. The live load is 150 psf, f: = 4000 psi, and
f, = 60,000 psi.

Parapet extends
from columns
1 to 10 and from
columns 1 to 3

- T - U
10
1,
1 I I \ 6

Section A-A

Crosshatch indicates

below the slab

I'=
23'-0 23'-0
Probs. 16.1 through 16.4

16.2 Design the interior frame of Prob. 16.1, except that a 12-in. wall exists at the
lower-story level and contains the 24-in. square columns at locations 1,2,3,4,6,
and 10.
16.3 Design the typical interior frame along column lines 4-5-8 for the two-way slab
system of Prob. 16.1.
16.4 Design the exterior half-frame along column lines l-2-3 for the two-way slab
system of Prob. 16.1.
 Problems I 646

16.5 Design an interior frame in the long direction for a floor system of slabs supported
on beams which has 5 panels at 21 ft in one direction and 5 panels at 27 ft in the
other direction. The live load is 175 psf and the dead load is 40 psf in addition
to the slab weight. Assume that all panels are bounded by beams that are 14 in.
wide. Columns 15 in. square and 13 ft long are located at the corners of all panels.
Use f: = 4000 psi, f, = 50,000 psi, and the direct-design method of the AC1
Code.
16.6 Design a floor system of slabs supported on beams which has two panels at
16 ft in one direction and two panels at 21 ft in the other direction. Assume
that all panels are bounded by beams 12 in. wide and the columns are 14 in.
square and 11 ft long. The live load is 200 psf, and the dead load is 50 psf in
addition to the slab weight. Use f: = 3000 psi, fY = 60,000 psi, and the AC1 Code.
16.7 Design a simply supported sidewalk slab for an 18-ft square panel to carry a live
load of 250 psf. The panel is supported by beams 12 in. wide on all four sides.
There are no walls or columns above the slab. Use f: = 4000 psi, f, = 60,000 psi,
and the AC1 Code.