Two-Way Concrete Floor with Slab Bands – Longitudinal Bands Analysis & Design (CAC Design Handbook)

Version: Feb-19-2021
Two-Way Concrete Floor with Slab Bands – Longitudinal Bands Analysis & Design (CAC Design Handbook)

Slab bands are thickened portions extended along columns centerlines in one direction of the slab to increase the
nominal strength of the concrete floor at the critical section around the columns. This system is considered more
economical compared to slabs with drop panels due to the savings in the formwork and labor cost. Slab bands are
sometimes viewed as continuous extension of drop panels between supports or a support and another slab band. In
U.S. standards like ACI-318, slab bands are modeled as a system of wide and shallow beams in one direction.

The concrete floor system with slab bands shown below is for an intermediate floor to be designed considering loads
described in design data below. The lateral loads are independently resisted by shear walls. The use of flat plate system
will be checked first. If the use of flat plate is not adequate, the use of a slab system with slab bands will be investigated.
The analysis procedure “Elastic Frame Method (EFM)” prescribed in CSA A23.3-14 is illustrated in detail in this
example (Example #3 from the CAC Design Handbook). The EFM hand solution is also used for a comprehensive
comparison with results from the Reference using the Direct Design Method (DDM). The EFM hand solution results
are further compared with the output from the engineering software program spSlab. Explanation of the EFM is
available in StructurePoint Video Tutorials page. A table comparing the three two-way slab analysis methods is
provided at the end of this document.

This example will examine floor design strips with slab bands parallel to the direction of analysis (Longitudinal
Bands). Floor design strips with slab bands perpendicular to the direction of analysis (Transverse Bands) are covered
in detail in (Two-Way Concrete Floor with Slab Bands – Transverse Bands Analysis & Design (CAC Design
Handbook)) design example.

Version: Feb-19-2021
Figure 1 - Two-Way Flat Plate Concrete Floor System

Version: Feb-19-2021
Contents
1. Preliminary Member Sizing .....................................................................................................................................6
1.1. Preliminary Member Sizing For Slabs Without Slab Bands .............................................................................6
1.1.1. Slab minimum thickness - Deflection ....................................................................................................6
1.1.2. Slab one way shear strength ...................................................................................................................6
1.1.3. Slab two-way shear strength...................................................................................................................8
1.2. Preliminary Member Sizing For Slab With Slab Bands .................................................................................. 10
1.2.1. Slab band minimum thickness (E-W direction) – Deflection .............................................................. 10
1.2.2. Slab minimum thickness (E-W direction) – Deflection....................................................................... 11
1.2.3. Slab Band Width .................................................................................................................................. 12
1.2.4. Slab shear strength – one way shear ..................................................................................................... 12
1.2.5. Slab shear strength – two-way shear .................................................................................................... 13
1.3. Preliminary Member Sizing For Columns ...................................................................................................... 16
2. Two-Way Slab Analysis and Design ...................................................................................................................... 17
2.1. Direct Design Method (DDM) ........................................................................................................................ 17
2.1.1. Direct design method limitations.......................................................................................................... 17
2.2. Elastic Frame Method (EFM) ......................................................................................................................... 19
2.2.1. Elastic frame method limitations .......................................................................................................... 20
2.2.2. Frame members of elastic frame .......................................................................................................... 22
2.2.3. Elastic frame analysis ........................................................................................................................... 28
2.2.4. Design moments ................................................................................................................................... 29
2.2.5. Distribution of design moments ........................................................................................................... 30
2.2.6. Flexural reinforcement requirements.................................................................................................... 32
2.2.7. Factored moments in columns .............................................................................................................. 36
3. Two-Way Slab Shear Strength ............................................................................................................................... 37
3.1. One-Way (Beam action) Shear Strength ......................................................................................................... 37
3.1.1. Shear capacity of the entire frame strip ................................................................................................ 37
3.2. Two-Way (Punching) Shear Strength ............................................................................................................. 38
4. Two-Way Slab Deflection Control (Serviceability Requirements) ........................................................................ 41
5. spSlab Software Solution ....................................................................................................................................... 42
6. Summary and Comparison of Two-Way Slab Design Results ............................................................................... 67
7. Comparison of Two-Way Slab Analysis and Design Methods .............................................................................. 69

Version: Feb-19-2021
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 kN/m2 for framed partitions, wood studs plaster 2 sides

= 1 kN/m2 for mechanical services

Live Load, LL = 3.6 kN/m2 for Residential floors

f 'c = 25 MPa (for slabs and columns)

f ' y = 400 MPa

Column Dimensions = 400 mm x 600 mm

5
Solution

1. Preliminary Member Sizing

1.1. Preliminary Member Sizing For Slabs Without Slab Bands

1.1.1. 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 (N-S 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 long direction = 6600 – 400 = 6200 mm

Interior Panels (E-W 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)

1.1.2. 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
davg = = = 209 mm
2 2
Where:
cclear = 20 mm for 15M steel bar CSA A23.3-14 (Annex A. Table 17)

6
 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 + 1) = 11.05 kN/m 2 CSA A23.3-14 (Annex C. Table C.1 a)

Total factored load w f = 11.05 kN/m 2

Load Combination 2:
Factored dead load, wdf = 1.25  (5.89 + 1 + 1) = 9.86 kN/m2

Factored live load, wlf = 1.5  3.6 = 5.40 kN/m2 CSA A23.3-14 (Annex C. Table C.1 a)

Total factored load w f = wdf + wlf = 15.26 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 = w f  ATributary = 15.26  3.26 = 49.75 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)

7
 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.

1.1.3. Slab two-way shear strength

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

Shear perimeter: 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 resisting shear stress, Vr shall be the smallest of: CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.1)
 2 
a) 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 
b) 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 

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

Determine the shear stress due to the factored direct shear:

 7.5 + 6.7 
15.26    6.6 
Vf   1,000 = 1.206 MPa
(v ) f avr
=
bod
=
2
2836  209
For an interior column, multiply this value with 1.20 in order to account for the effect of unbalanced moment.

1.20  ( v f ) = 1.20 1.206 = 1.45 MPa  vr = 1.24 MPa (No Good)

avr

CAC Concrete Design Handbook 4th Edition (5.2.3)

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

8
Figure 3 – Critical Section for One-Way Shear Figure 4 – Critical Section for Two-Way Shear

In this case, four options could be used: 1) to increase the slab thickness, 2) to increase column’s cross sectional
dimensions or cut the spacing between columns (reducing span lengths), however, this option is assumed to be not
permissible in this example due to architectural limitations, 3) to use headed shear reinforcement, or 4) to use drop
panels or slab bands. In this example, slab bands will be used to achieve an economical design.

9
 Figure 5 – Two-Way Slab with Slab Bands

1.2. Preliminary Member Sizing For Slab With Slab Bands

For slabs with changes in thickness and subjected to bending in two directions, it is necessary to check shear at
multiple sections as defined in the CSA A23.3-14. The critical sections for two-way action shall be located with
respect to:
1) Perimeter of the concentrated load or reaction area. CSA A.23.3-14 (13.3.3.1)
2) Changes in slab thickness, such as edges of slab bands. CSA A.23.3-14 (13.3.3.2)

1.2.1. Slab band minimum thickness (E-W direction) – Deflection

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

Determine the slab band thickness by using CSA A23.3-14 minimum slab thickness for slab bands per Clause
13.2.6.

10
 End span (Governs):

ln 6100
hband ,min = = = 339 mm CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.3)
18 18

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

Where ln = length of clear span in the long direction = 6700 – 600 = 6100 mm

Interior span:

ln 6900
hband ,min = = = 329 mm CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.3)
21 21

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 hband = 350 mm slab bands for all panels

1.2.2. Slab minimum thickness (E-W direction) – Deflection

Determine the slab thickness by using CSA A23.3-14 minimum slab thickness for slabs with drop panels.
CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.4)

By definition a slab band is an extended drop panel. However, as a drop panel, the slab band is very deep.
The difference between the band thickness and the slab thickness, Δh, is likely to exceed the slab thickness.
Since, for the purposes of Equation 13.2 in CSA A23.3-14, Δh cannot be taken larger than the slab thickness,
a preliminary estimate of slab thickness is based on Equation 13.2 with Δh equal to hs. In the spanning
direction of the slab band the term xd/ln would take its maximum value of 0.25.
Interior Panel (E-W Direction):

hs ,min =
( 0.6 + f/ 1, 000 )  ln 
y
  CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.4)
1+
2 xd  30 
ln

( 0.6 + 0.4 ) 7500 − 600 

hs ,min =   = 153.3 mm
1 + 2  0.25  30 
But not less than 120 mm. CSA A23.3-14 (13.2.1)

The N-S direction shall be checked in order to determine slab thickness.

Try hs = 160 mm slab for all panels.

Self-weight for slab section without slab bands = 24 kN/m3 × 0.160 m = 3.84 kN/m2
Self-weight for slab section with slab bands = 24 kN/m3 × 0.350 m = 8.40 kN/m2

11
1.2.3. Slab Band Width

The slab band width is assumed to extend in each direction from the centerline of support one-sixth the span
length measured from center-to-center of supports in that direction.
6.6 6.6
lsb = + = 2.2 m
6 6

1.2.4. Slab shear strength – one way shear

For critical section at distance dv from the edge of the column (slab section with slab band):

Evaluate the average effective depth:

db 16
dt = hband − cclear − db − = 350 − 25 − 16 − = 301 mm
2 2
db 16
dl = hband − cclear − = 350 − 25 − = 317 mm
2 2
dt + dl 301 + 317
davg = = = 309 mm
2 2
Where:
cclear = 20 mm 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

 2.2 6.6 − 2.2  

Factored dead load → wdf = 1.25   8.40  + 3.84   + 1 + 1 = 9.20 kN/m2
 6.6 6.6  

Factored live load → wlf = 1.5  3.6 = 5.40 kN/m2 CSA A23.3-14 (Annex C. Table C.1 a)

Total factored load → w f = 9.20 + 5.40 = 14.60 kN/m 2

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

Consider a 1 m wide strip. The critical section for one-way shear is located at a distance dv, from the edge of
the column (see Figure 6)
  7500   600   
  −  − 278  (1000 ) 
 2   2 
Tributary area for one-way shear is ATributary =   = 3.17 m 2
 10002 
 
 
Where:

0.9d  0.9 ( 309 ) 

  278
dv = Max   = Max   = Max   = 278 mm CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)
0.72h  0.72 ( 350 )
  252

12
 V f = w f  ATributary = 14.60  3.17 = 46.30 kN

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

Where  = 1 for normal weight concrete

 = 0.21 for slabs with overall thickness not greater than 350 mm CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.6.2)

278
Vc = 0.65 1 0.21 25 1000  = 189.8 kN  V f
1000
Slab band thickness of 350 mm is adequate for one-way shear for the first critical section (from the edge of
the column).

Figure 6 – Critical Sections for One-Way Shear

1.2.5. Slab shear strength – two-way shear

For critical section at distance d/2 from the edge of the column (slab section with slab band):

Check the adequacy of slab thickness for punching shear (two-way shear) at an interior column (Figure 7):
Tributary area for two-way shear is ATributary = ( 7.5 / 2 + 6.7 / 2 )  ( 6.6 ) − ( 0.6 + 0.309 )  ( 0.4 + 0.309 )

= 46.22 m2
Vf = w f  ATributary = 14.60  46.22 = 675 kN

bo = 2  ( 600 + 309 ) + 2  ( 400 + 309 ) = 3236 mm CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.3)

13
 Vf 675 1000
vf = = = 0.675 MPa
bo d 3236  309

The factored resisting shear stress, vr shall be the smallest of : CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.4.1)
 2 
a) 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 
b) vr = vc =  s + 0.19  c f 'c CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.6)
 o
b 

 4  309 
vr =  + 0.19  1 0.65  25 = 1.86 MPa
 3236 

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

vr 1.240
= = 1.84  1.20 CAC Concrete Design Handbook 4th Edition (5.2.3)
(v )
f avr
0.675

Slab band thickness of 350 mm is adequate for two-way shear for the critical section (from the edge of the
column).

Figure 7 – Critical Section for Two-Way Shear

14
While the preliminary sizes determined above and summarized in the Figure 8 leads to a more optimal design, we will
proceed with the dimensions provided in the reference example (Example #3 of CAC Design Handbook) for
comparison purposes (see Figure 9 below).

Figure 8 – Section A-A (As Calculated Above)

Figure 9 – Section A-A (As Calculated by the Reference)

15
1.3. Preliminary Member Sizing For Columns

Check the adequacy of column dimensions for axial load:

Tributary area for interior column for live load, superimposed dead load, and self-weight of the slab is
7.5 + 6.7
ATributary =  6.6 = 46.86 m2
2
Tributary area for interior column for self-weight of additional slab thickness due to the presence of the slab
band is
7.5 + 6.7
ATributary =  3 = 21.3 m2
2
Assuming five story building
Pf = n  w f  ATributary = 5  (13.05  46.86 + 5.15  21.3) = 3606 kN

Assume 600 mm x 400 mm column with 12 – 30M vertical bars with design axial strength, Pr,max of
Pr ,max = (0.2 + 0.002h) Pro  0.80 Pro (For tied column along full length) CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 10.9)

Pro = 1 c f 'c ( Ag − Ast − At − Ap ) + s f y A st +  Fy At − f pr Ap CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 10.11)

Pro = 0.81 0.65  25  (600  400 −12  700) + 0.85  400  (12  700) + 0 = 5904 kN

Pr ,max = (0.2 + 0.002  600)  5904  0.80  5904

= 8266  4723
= 4723 kN  Pf = 3606 kN

Where:
1 = 0.85 − 0.0015 f 'c = 0.85 − 0.0015  25 = 0.81  0.67 CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 10.1)

Column dimensions of 600 mm × 400 mm are adequate for axial load.

16
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 (factored live-to-dead load ratio of 0.71
< 2.0) CSA A23.3-14 (13.9.1.4)

Since all the criteria are met, Direct Design Method is utilized in the CAC Design Handbook.

Even though this system meets all the limitations of the DDM, based on engineering judgment, DDM is not
recommended to be used with floor systems with slab bands since the generic moment distribution factors used
in DDM might, in some cases as this example, underestimate the negative moment values since these factors
were derived based on a two-way slab systems without beams between interior supports (Flat Plate). The stiffer
the supports (due to the precence of drop panels and slab bands) the more moments the supports will carry. The
EFM takes into consideration detailed geometry of the cross section and the slab-beam distribution factors are
calculated exactly. This calculation can be tedious and complicated to be done by hand for slab systems with
different thicknesses but computer aids such as spSlab or spMats can be utilized. There are design aids tables
that can be utilized for simplifying hand calculation. Howerver, the available tables are only applicable for flat
plates and some special cases of slabs with drop panels. There are no design aid tables for two-way slabs with
slab bands, slabs with beams between all supports, or two-way joist (waffle) slabs. For these systems, using the
available design aid tables might in some cases also underestimate the moment values at the supports.

17
 Detailed illustration of analysis and design of a two-way flat plate concrete slab system 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 slabs
with slab bands using EFM.

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

18
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)

19
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)

20
Figure 11 – Elastic (Equivalent) Frame Methodology

21
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. Note that the available tables are limited
to flat plate and slab with drop panels systems, litreture showed that these tables can be used for other systems
for simplicity to an extent. This point will be discussed later in this document. These calculations are shown
below.

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

Table A1 in the PCA Notes handbook will be used to calculate the flexural stiffness of slab-beams since the
slab has a constant cross-section along the span length. This table has been adopted in this example and is
deemed to represent the most comparable system for the analysis of two-way slab with longitudinal slab
bands.
For Interior Span:
cN 1 600 c 600
= = 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,int = k NF = 4.09 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
1 1

Where Is is the moment of inertia of slab-beam section shown in the following figure and can be computed
as follows:

Figure 12 – Cross-Section of Slab-Beam

3 (1 − B ) B ( A − 1)
2

Ct = 1 + ( A − 1) B3 + = 1.43 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Figure 20-21)

1 + B ( A − 1)

Where A = b/bw = 6600 / 3000 = 2.2 and B = hs/h = 175 / 350 = 0.5
 b h3   3000  3503 
I s = Ct  w  = 1.43   = 15.34  10 mm
9 4
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Figure 20-21)
 12   12 

22
 (   
)
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 

15.34 109 −3
K sb,int = 4.09  24,986   10 = 208.9 10 N.m
6

7500

Carry-over factor COF = 0.505 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
Fixed-end moment FEM = 0.0840wu 2 1
2
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

For Exterior Span:

cN 1 600 c 400
= = 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,ext = k NF = 4.10 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
1 1

15.34 109 −3
K sb,ext = 4.10  24,986   10 = 234.5 10 N.m
6

6700
Carry-over factor COF = 0.505 PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)
Fixed-end moment FEM = 0.0841wu 2 1
2
PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A1)

23
b. Flexural stiffness of column members at both ends, Kc.

Referring to Table A7, Appendix 20A,

For the Top Column (Above):

175 175
ta = 350 − = 262.5 mm , tb = = 87.5 mm
2 2
ta 262.5
= =3
tb 87.5

H = 3 m = 3000mm , Hc = 3000mm − 350 = 2650 mm

H 3000
= = 1.132
H c 2650

Thus, k AB = 6.02 and CAB = 0.536 by interpolation.

6.02 Ecc I c
K c ,top = PCA Notes on ACI 318-11 (Table A7)
c

7.20 109
Kc,top = 6.02  24,986  = 360.8 106 N.m
3000 1000

b  h3 400(600)3
Where I c = = = 7.20 109 mm4
12 12

  
1.5

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

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

c = 3.00 m = 3000 mm

For the Bottom Column (Below):

tb 87.5
= = 0.33
ta 262.5

H 3000
= = 1.132
H c 2650

Thus, kBA = 4.99 and CBA = 0.641 by interpolation.

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

7.20 109
Kc,bottom = 4.99  24,986  = 299.1106 N.m
3000 1000

24
c. Torsional stiffness of torsional members, Kt
9 Ecs C
Kt = 3
CSA A23.3-14 (13.8.2.8)
 c2 
t 1 − 
 t 

9  24,986  874.9 106

Kt = 3
 10−3 = 35.96  106 N.m
 400 
6600  1 − 
 6600 

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

 175   1753  600 

C = 1 − 0.63    = 874.9 10 mm
6 4

 600   3 

c2 = 400 mm, and lt = 6.6 m = 6600 mm

Figure 13 – Torsional Member

25
d. Increased torsional stiffness due to parallel beams, Kta.

For Interior Columns:

Figure 14 – Slab-Beam in the Direction of Analysis

Kt_int I sb 15.34 109

Kta_int = = ( 35.96 106 )  = 187.2 106 N.m
Is 2.95 109

Where:
l2  h3 6600 1753
Is = = = 2.95 109 mm4
12 12

For Exterior Columns:

Kt_ext I sb 15.34 109
Kta_ext = = ( 35.96 106 )  = 187.2  106 N.m
Is 2.95 109

e. Equivalent column stiffness, Kec

Where  Kt 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 15 – Equivalent Column Stiffness

26
 For Interior Columns:

Kec_int =
(360.8 10 6
+ 299.1106 )  ( 2 187.2 106 )
= 238.8 106 N.m
(360.8 10 6
+ 299.1106 ) + ( 2 187.2 106 )

For Exterior Columns:

Kec_ext =
(360.8 10 6
+ 299.1106 )  ( 2 187.2 106 )
= 238.8 106 N.m
(360.8 10 6
+ 299.1106 ) + ( 2 187.2 106 )

f. Slab-beam joint distribution factors, DF

Figure 16 – Slab and Column Siffness

At exterior joint:
234.5 106
DF = = 0.495
( 234.5 106 + 238.8 106 )
At interior joint:
234.5 106
DFExt = = 0.344
( 234.5 10 + 208.9 106 + 238.8106 )
6

208.9 106
DFInt = = 0.306
( 234.5 10 + 208.9 106 + 238.8 106 )
6

COF for slab-beam = 0.505 for Interior and Exterior Spans

27
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 3.6 3.6 3
= = = 0.45 
D  3  ( 4.2 + 1.87 + 2 ) 4
175  2400 + ( 350 − 175 )  2400  + 2
 6.6 
a. Factored load and Fixed-End Moments (FEM’s).
 3 
Factored dead load, wdf = 1.25  175  2400 + ( 350 − 175)  2400  + 2
 6.6 

wdf = 1.25  (4.2 + 1.87 + 2) = 10 kN/m 2

Factored live load, wlf = 1.5  3.6 = 5.4 kN/m 2

Total factored load qu = w f = wdf + wlf = 15.4 kN/m 2

FEM’s for slab-beams = mNF qu 2 1

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

= 0.0840 15.4  6.6  7.52 = 480.2 kN.m (For interior span)

= 0.084115.4  6.6  6.7 2 = 383.7 kN.m (For exterior span)

b. 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, the
maximum positive moment for a uniformly distributed load and variable end moments can be calculated
using any design aid as follows (For positive moment in span 1-2):

(15.4  6.6)  6.72 (193.7 + 479.8) (193.7 − 479.8)

2
+
M = − +− = 242.5 kN.m
2  (15.4  6.6 )  6.72
u
8 2

For positive moment span 2-3:

(15.4  6.6)  7.52 ( 480.1 + 480.1)

M u+ = − = 234.6 kN.m
8 2

28
 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 0.495 0.344 0.306 0.306 0.344 0.495
COF 0.505 0.505 0.505 0.505 0.505 0.505
FEM 383.70 -383.70 480.20 -480.20 383.70 -383.70
Dist -189.93 -33.20 -29.53 29.53 33.20 189.93
CO -16.77 -95.91 14.91 -14.91 95.91 16.77
Dist 8.30 27.86 24.79 -24.79 -27.86 -8.30
CO 14.07 4.19 -12.52 12.52 -4.19 -14.07
Dist -6.96 2.86 2.55 -2.55 -2.86 6.96
CO 1.44 -3.51 -1.29 1.29 3.51 -1.44
Dist -0.71 1.65 1.47 -1.47 -1.65 0.71
CO 0.83 -0.36 -0.74 0.74 0.36 -0.83
Dist -0.41 0.38 0.34 -0.34 -0.38 0.41
CO 0.19 -0.21 -0.17 0.17 0.21 -0.19
Dist -0.09 0.13 0.12 -0.12 -0.13 0.09
CO 0.07 -0.05 -0.06 0.06 0.05 -0.07
Dist -0.03 0.04 0.03 -0.03 -0.04 0.03
CO 0.02 -0.02 -0.02 0.02 0.02 -0.02
Dist -0.01 0.01 0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.01
CO 0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.01 0.01 -0.01
Dist 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
M, kN.m 193.7 -479.8 480.1 -480.1 479.8 -193.7
Midspan M, kN.m 242.5 234.6 242.5

2.2.4. Design moments

Positive and negative factored moments for the slab system in the direction of analysis are plotted in Figure
14. 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

29
Figure 17 - 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 (13.11.2.5)

• For negative moment at an interior column, the column strip should resist 80% to 100% of the total
frame strip moment.

• For negative moment at an exterior column, the column strip should resist 100% of the total frame
strip moment.

• For positive moment at all spans, the column strip should resist 80% to 100% of the total frame strip
moment.

Distribution of factored moments at critical sections is summarized in Table 2.

30
 Table 2 - Distribution of factored moments
Slab-beam Strip Column Strip Middle Strip
Moment Moment Moment
Percent Percent
(kN.m) (kN.m) (kN.m)
Exterior Negative 109.0 100.0 109.0 0.0 0.0
End Span Positive 242.5 90.0 218.3 10.0 24.2
Interior Negative 369.5 90.0 332.5 10.0 37.0
Negative 370.3 90.0 333.3 10.0 37.0
Interior Span
Positive 234.6 90.0 211.1 10.0 23.5

31
2.2.6. Flexural reinforcement requirements

a. Determine the flexural reinforcement required for strip moments

The flexural reinforcement calculation for the column strip of end span – exterior negative location is
provided below.
Reinforcement for the total factored negative moment transferred to the exterior columns shall be placed
within a band width bb. Temperature and shrinkage reinforcement determined as specified in clause 7.8.1
shall be provided in that section of the slab outside of the band region defined by bb or as required by clause
13.10.9. CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.3)
M r = 109 kN.m

band strip width, b = 3000 mm

Middle strip width, b = 6600 − 3000 = 3600 mm

Use d = 350 – (25+0.5(16)) = 317 mm

In this example, jd will be assumed to be taken equal to 0.986d. The assumptions will be verified once the
area of steel in finalized.

Assume jd = 0.986  d = 312.56 mm

Mf 109
As = = = 1025.6 mm 2
s f y jd 0.85  400  0.987  317

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

s As f y 0.85 1025.6  400

Recalculate ' a ' for the actual As = 1025.6 mm 2 → a = = = 8.80 mm
c1 f 'c b 0.65  0.81 25  3000

a
jd = d − = 0.986d
2
Therefore, the assumption that jd equals to 0.986d is valid.
 As , req = 1025.6 mm 2

32
Reinforcement for the total factored negative moment transferred to the exterior columns shall be placed
within a band width bb. CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.3)

For negative reinforcement in the band defined by b b:

bb = c2 + 2  (1.5  hsb ) = 400 + 2  (1.5  350 ) = 1450 mm

0.2  f c
As ,min =  bb  hsb CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 10.4)
fy

0.2  25
As ,min = 1450  350 = 1268.75 mm2  As , req
400

∴ As,min governs

Provide 7 - 15M bars (1400 mm2 > 1268.75 mm2)

Maximum spacing for negative reinforcement in the band defined by bb:

smax = 1.5hsb = 525 mm  250 mm

smax = 250 mm > sprovided = 1450/7 = 207.14 mm (O.K.) CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.4)

Temperature and shrinkage reinforcement shall be provided in that section of the slab outside of the band
region defined by bb (including middle strip and the remaining part of the band strip outside the band region).
CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.3)

For the remaining reinforcement of the band strip outside bb:

0.2  f c 0.2  25
As ,min =  Ag =  350  ( 3000 − 1450 ) = 1356.3 mm2 CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 10.4)
fy 400

Provide 7 - 15M bars (1400 mm2 > 1356.3 mm2)

Maximum spacing for the remaining reinforcement of the band strip outside bb:
smax = 3hsb = 1050 mm  500 mm

smax = 500 mm > sprovided = (3000-1450)/7 = 221.4 mm (O.K.) CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.4)

Total reinforcement in the band Strip:

(7 – 15M) + (7 – 15M) = (14 – 15M)

(A )
s ,min Band Strip = ( As,min )Within bb + ( As,min )Remaining = 1268.75 + 1356.3 = 2625 mm2

For middle strip:

As ,min = 0.002 Ag = 0.002 175  3600 = 1260 mm 2 CSA A23.3-14 (7.8.1)

Provide 8 - 15M bars (1600 mm2 > 1260 mm2)

8 bars are used instead of 7 bars to meet the maximum spacing requirement as shown below.

33
 Maximum spacing for negative moment reinforcement in middle:
smax = 3hs = 525 mm  500 mm

smax = 500 mm > sprovided = 3600/8 = 450 mm (O.K.) CSA A23.3-14 (13.10.4)

Based on the procedure outlined above, values for all span locations are given in Table 3.

Table 3 - Required Slab Reinforcement for Flexure

As Req’d for
Mr 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 109.0 3000 317 1025.6 2625 14 - 15M* 2800
Band
Positive 218.3 3000 317 2084.2 2625 14 - 15M 2800
Strip
Interior Negative 332.5 3000 317 3225.9 2625 17 - 15M 3400
Exterior Negative 0.0 3600 142 0.0 1260 8- 15M * † 1600
Middle
Positive 24.2 3600 142 508.3 1260 8- 15M † 1600
Strip
Interior Negative 37.0 3600 142 781.8 1260 8- 15M † 1600
Interior Span
Band Negative 333.3 3000 317 3234.0 2625 17 - 15M 3400
Strip Positive 211.1 3000 317 2013.5 2625 14 - 15M 2800
Middle Negative 37.0 3600 142 781.8 1260 8- 15M † 1600
Strip Positive 23.5 3600 142 492.9 1260 8 - 15M † 1600
* The reinforcement is selected to meet CSA A23.3-14 provision 13.10.3.
† Number of bars governed by maximum allowable spacing.

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 18).

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 18).
bb = Effective slab width = c2 + 3  hs CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)

34
 bb = 400 + 3  350 = 1450 mm

For Exterior Column For Interior Column

317
b1 = 100 + 600 + = 858.5 mm b1 = 600 + 317 = 917 mm
2
b2 = 400 + 317 = 717 mm b2 = 400 + 317 = 717 mm

1 1
f = = 0.578 f = = 0.570
 2  858.5 2 917
1+   1+  
3 717 3 717

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
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 193.7 0.578 112.0 1450 317 1071.3 1400 -
Strip Interior Negative 0.3 0.570 0.17 1450 317 1.6 1600 -
*Mu is taken at the centerline of the support in Elastic Frame Method solution.

Figure 18 - Critical Shear Perimeters for Columns

35
2.2.7. Factored moments in columns

The unbalanced moment from the slab-beams at the supports of the equivalent 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 Slab (Drop Panels) Concrete Floor Analysis and Design (CSA A23.3-14)”
example available in the design examples page in StructurePoint website.

Figure 19 - Sample Calculations of Column Design from “Two-Way Flat Slab (Drop Panels) Concrete Floor
Analysis and Design” Design Example

36
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

CSA A23.3-14 (13.3.6)

One-way shear is critical at a distance dv from the face of the column and slab band. Figure 20 shows the
factored shear forces (Vr) at the critical sections. In members without shear reinforcement, the design shear
capacity of the section equals to the design shear capacity of the concrete:
Vr = Vc + Vs + Vp = Vc , (Vs = Vp = 0) CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 11.4)

Where:

Vc = c  fc' bdv CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 11.5)

3.1.1. Shear capacity of the entire frame strip

It is assumed that the shear is resisted by the slab band:

hsb = 350 mm

d = 350 – (25-0.5(16)) = 317 mm

0.9  d  0.9  317  285.3

dv = Max   = Max   = Max   = 285.3 mm CSA A23.3-14 (3.2)
 0.72  h   0.72  350  252.0
 = 1 for normal weight concrete
 = 0.21 for slabs with overall thickness not greater than 350 mm CSA A23.3-14 (11.3.6.2)

285.3
Vc = 0.65 1.0  0.21 25  3.0  = 584.15 kN > V f
1000
Because Vc  V f at all the critical sections, the slab has adequate one-way shear strength.

Figure 20 – One-way shear at critical sections (at distance dv from the face of the supporting column)

37
 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/2 away from the face of the column as shown in
Figure 18.

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 = 297.8 − 15.4 ( 0.8585  0.717 − 0.600  0.400 ) = 292.01kN

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 

 858.5 − 302.8 − 600 / 2 − 100 

Munb = 193.7 − 292.01  = 148.24 kN.m
 1000 

For the exterior column in Figure 18, the location of the centroidal axis z-z is:

moment of area of the sides about AB 2  (858.5  317  858.5 / 2)

c =e= = = 302.8 mm
AB area of the sides 2  858.5  317 + 717  317

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  
 

 858.5  3173 317  858.53  858.5  

2

Jc = 2  + + (858.5  317)  − 302.8   + 717  317  (302.8)2

 12 12  2  


J c = 67.53 109 mm 4

 v = 1 −  f = 1 − 0.578 = 0.422 CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.8)

The length of the critical perimeter for the exterior column:

bo = 2  858.5 + 717 = 2434mm

The two-way shear stress (vu) can then be calculated as:

38
 Vf  v M unb e
vf = + CSA A23.3-14 (Eq.13.9)
bo  d J

292.011000 0.422  (148.8 106 )  302.8

vf = +
2434  317 67.53 109

v f = 0.378 + 0.281 = 659 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 

Where βc = c1/c2 = 600/400 = 1.5

 d   3  317 
b) vr = vc =  s + 0.19  c f 'c =  + 0.19   1 0.65  25 = 1.887 MPa
 o
b   2434 

Where αs = 3 for edge columns

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

1.441 
 
vr = vc = min 1.887  = 1.235 MPa
1.235 
 

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 = 1.219 MPa
 1000 + 317 
Since ( vr = 1.219 MPa  v f = 0.659 MPa ) at the critical section, the slab with slab band has adequate two-way

shear strength at this joint.

39
b. Interior column:

V f = ( 381.2 + 383.2 ) − 15.4  ( 0.917  0.717 − 0.600  0.400 ) = 757.97 kN

M unb = ( 480.1 − 479.8 ) − 757.97  0 = 0.3 kN.m

For the interior column in Figure 18, the location of the centroidal axis z-z is:

b1 917
cAB = = = 458.5 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  
 

 917  3173 317  9173  917  

2

Jc = 2  + + (917  317)  − 458.5   + 2  717  317  (458.5)2

 12 12  2  


J c = 141.17 109 mm4

 v = 1 −  f = 1 − 0.570 = 0.430 CSA A23.3-14 (Eq. 13.8)

The length of the critical perimeter for the interior column:

bo = 2  (917 + 717) = 3268 mm

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

757.97 1000 0.430  (0.13 106 )  458.5

vf = +
3268  317 141.17 109

v f = 0.732 + 0.000 = 0.732 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  317 
b) vr = vc =  s + 0.19  c f 'c =  + 0.19   1 0.65  25 = 1.879 MPa
 o
b   3268 

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

1.441 
 
vr = vc = min 1.879  = 1.235 MPa
1.235 
 

40
 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 = 1.219 MPa
 1000 + 317 
Since ( vr = 1.219 MPa  v f = 0.728 MPa ) at the critical section, the slab with slab band 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.

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 Flat Plate Concrete Slab Floor
Analysis and Design (CSA A23.3-14)” example available in the design
examples page in StructurePoint website.

41
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 column and middle strips. The program calculates the internal forces (Shear Force & Bending Moment),
moment and shear capacity vs. demand diagrams for column and middle strips, instantaneous and long-term
deflection results, and required flexural reinforcement for column and middle strips. The graphical and text results
are provided below for both input and output of the spSlab model.

42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
6. Summary and Comparison of Two-Way Slab Design Results

Table 6 - Comparison of Moments obtained from Hand (EFM) and spSlab Solution
Hand (EFM) spSlab
Exterior Span
*
Exterior Negative 109.0 108.9
Band Strip Positive 218.3 218.1
*
Interior Negative 332.5 332.8
*
Exterior Negative 0.0 0.0
Middle Strip Positive 24.2 24.2
*
Interior Negative 37.0 37.0
Interior Span
*
Interior Negative 333.3 333.5
Band Strip
Positive 211.1 210.8
*
Interior Negative 37.0 37.1
Middle Strip
Positive 23.5 23.4
*
negative moments are taken at the faces of supports

Table 7 - Comparison of Reinforcement Results with Hand and spSlab Solution

Additional
Reinforcement
Reinforcement Provided Total Reinforcement
Provided for
Span Location for Flexure Provided
Unbalanced Moment
*
Transfer
Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab
Exterior Span
Exterior
14-15M 14-15M --- --- 14-15M 14-15M
Negative
Band Strip Positive 12-15M 14-15M n/a n/a 14-15M 14-15M
Interior
17-15M 17-15M --- --- 17-15M 17-15M
Negative
Exterior
8-15M 8-15M n/a n/a 8-15M 8-15M
Negative
Middle
Positive 8-15M 8-15M n/a n/a 8-15M 8-15M
Strip
Interior
8-15M 8-15M n/a n/a 8-15M 8-15M
Negative
Interior Span
Negative 17-15M 17-15M --- --- 17-15M 17-15M
Band Strip
Positive 14-15M 14-15M n/a n/a 14-15M 14-15M
Middle Negative 8-15M 8-15M --- --- 8-15M 8-15M
Strip Positive 8-15M 8-15M n/a n/a 8-15M 8-15M
* 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.

67
 Table 8 - Comparison of One-Way (Beam Action) Shear Check Results Using Hand and spSlab Solution
Vu , kN ϕVc, kN
Span
Hand spSlab Hand spSlab
Exterior 323.7 323.7 584.2 584.2
Interior 321.7 321.7 584.2 584.2

Table 9 - Comparison of Two-Way (Punching) Shear Check Results Using Hand and spSlab Solution
b1, mm b2, mm bo, mm Ac, mm2 Vu, kN vu, N/mm2
Support
Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab Hand spSlab
5 5
Exterior 858.5 858.5 717.0 717.0 2434 2434 7.72 x 10 7.72 x 10 292.0 292.7 0.378 0.379
6 6
Interior 917.0 917.0 717.0 717.0 3268 3268 1.04 x 10 1.04 x 10 758.0 754.3 0.732 0.728

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 302.8 302.8 67.53 67.53 0.422 0.422 148.24 148.12 0.659 0.659 1.219 1.219
Interior 458.5 458.5 141.17 141.17 0.430 0.430 0.30 0.16 0.732 0.728 1.219 1.219

68
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.

69
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).

70