Bahzad5, profile picture
Uploaded byBahzad5
PDF, PPTX601 views

COMPARISON BETWEEN CODES

This document compares column and beam design requirements between the Egyptian Code of Practice (ECP), British Standard Institute (BSI), and American Concrete Institute (ACI) codes. For column design, key differences are noted in the calculation of axial load capacity, minimum reinforcement, and effective height considerations. The ECP uses more conservative safety factors. For beams, differences are outlined in critical shear section location and equations for nominal shear strength.

Embed presentation

Download as PDF, PPTX
COMPARISON BETWEEN Codes ECP (EGYPTIAN CODE OF PRACTICE) BSI (BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTE) ACI (AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE)
PREPARD BY STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT TEAM CHECKED BY STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT SENIOR ENG. WAEL MOHMED ABDUL MAQSOOD
INTRODUCTION This comparison between codes provides minimum requirements for design and construction of structural concrete members of any structure in different codes, That doesn't mean that the structural design safe in code and unsafe at the other one But this difference due to factor of safety used, the quality control of materials used in the construction …etc. as a result we have to study carefully those differences between codes in order to we can do a smart design.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Columns Design
AXIAL LOADED COLUMN: - ‫مقاومه‬ ‫حساب‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫منه‬ ‫و‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫يتحمله‬ ‫حمل‬ ‫اقصى‬ ‫حساب‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫تصميم‬ ‫عند‬ ‫الضغط‬ ‫بالمعاد‬ ‫موضح‬ ‫هو‬ ‫كما‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫تسليح‬ ‫من‬ ‫الناتج‬ ‫الضغط‬ ‫مقاومه‬ ‫و‬ ‫للعمود‬ ‫الخرسانى‬ ‫له‬ ‫التالية‬ : - - Egyptian code (2007)
- Pu : ‫العمود‬ ‫مقاومة‬ - Cc : ‫الخرساني‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫مقاومة‬ - Cs : ‫العمود‬ ‫تسليح‬ ‫مقاومة‬ - : Factor of safety for material . 𝝲𝐶=1.5[( 7 6 )- ( et 3 )] , Egyptian code (2007) 𝝲s=1.15[( 7 6 )- ( et 3 )]
- The Existence of moment leads to a reduction in axial load capacity. Thus the code impose a further reduction on the column strength by reducing the capacity by 10% So, the equation: Egyptian code (2007)
Egyptian code (2007) Pu = 0.35*Fcu*Ac+0.67*Asc*Fy
- ‫للعمود‬ ‫تصميم‬ ‫عمل‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫ومنه‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫يتحمله‬ ‫الذي‬ ‫الحمل‬ ‫حساب‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫االمريكى‬ ‫الكود‬ ‫فى‬ ‫و‬ - ACI CODE
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison t ≤ 4 b t ≤ 4 b t ≤ 5 b Conditions for column (not shear wall) The shape of cross section of column isn't taken into consideration The shape of cross section of column is taken into consideration The shape of cross section of column is taken into consideration. Effect of shape of column in slenderness ratio.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.4 100 Ag 1 100 Ag 0.6 100 Ag Asmin 6% Ag 8% Ag 4% Ag for Interior col. 5% Ag for Edge col. 6% Ag for Corner col. Asmax 155 mm 6 inch=150 mm 250 mm Smax 30mm 25mm 70mm Smin
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Braced & Un Braced Sway & non- Sway Braced & Unbraced Classification of structure according to buckling design. Slenderness Limits For Columns 𝐿0 < 60𝑏 Slenderness of unbraced Columns 𝐿0 = 100𝑏2 ℎ ≤ 60𝑏 not braced against side sway 𝐾 𝐿𝑢 𝑟 ≤ 22 braced against side sway 𝐾 𝐿𝑢 𝑟 ≤34 – 12(M1/M2) ≤ 40 Rec. Circular Braced 30 25 Unbraced 23 18 Maximum slenderness ratio. 𝐿𝑒 = 𝛽𝐿0 Values of 𝛽 for braced columns Non-sway K Lu r ≤ 34 -12 ( 𝑀1 𝑀2 ) ≤ 40 Sway 𝐾 𝐿𝑢 𝑟 ≤ 22 Braced 𝐾𝐻 𝑏1 𝑜𝑟 𝑡1 < 15 Unbraced 𝐾𝐻 𝑏1 𝑜𝑟 𝑡1 < 10 Neglect slenderness effect if :
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Values of 𝛽 for unbraced columns Where: 𝐿0: clear height between end restraints b: width of column h: depth of cross section 𝐿𝑒:effective height of column K: effective length factor (for braced (non sway) frame ≤ 1 Lu: unsupported height of column from top of floor to the bottom of the beams or slab in the slab above R: radius of gyration, equal to 0.3 and 0.25 times the overall depth of rectangular and circular columns , respectively M1/M2: ratio of the moments at the two ends of the column ‫حالة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫يؤ‬ ‫جانبيا‬ ‫المقيدة‬ ‫المبانى‬ ‫فى‬ ‫األعمدة‬ ‫طول‬ ‫خذ‬ ‫االنبعاج‬ He ‫من‬ ‫لألصغر‬ ‫مساويا‬ 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 0.7 + 0.05 𝛼1 + 𝛼2 ≤ 𝐻0 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 0.85 + 0.05 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝐻0 ‫جانب‬ ‫مقيدة‬ ‫الغير‬ ‫المبانى‬ ‫فى‬ ‫األعمدة‬ ‫حالة‬ ‫وفى‬ ‫يؤخذ‬ ‫يا‬ ‫االنبعاج‬ ‫طول‬ He ‫من‬ ‫لألصغر‬ ‫مساويا‬ 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 1 + 0.15 𝛼1 + 𝛼2 ≥ 𝐻0 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 2 + 0.3 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≥ 𝐻0 α = Σ Σ 𝐸𝑐𝐼𝑐 𝐻0 𝐸𝑐𝐼𝑏 𝐿𝑏 ‫أن‬ ‫حيث‬ 𝐻0 ‫الخالص‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫ارتفاع‬ ‫هو‬ ‫و‬ 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ‫من‬ ‫األصغر‬ ‫القيمة‬ ‫هى‬ 𝛼1 ‫الطرف‬ ‫عند‬ ‫و‬ ‫السفلى‬ 𝛼2 ‫العلوى‬ ‫الطرف‬ ‫عند‬ Neglect slenderness effect if :
BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -Concrete not exposed to weather or in contact with ground: Primary reinforcement, Ties, stirrups, spirals………....40 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI - Notes: - Column according to ( ECP ) is unsafe due to large factor of safety although it is safe according to ( BSI & ACI ). - As (BSI) < As (ACI)
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Beam Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Shear Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 𝐴𝑡 𝒅 𝟐 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝐴𝑡 𝒅 𝟐 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝐴𝑡 𝒅 𝟐 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 Critical Section ∗ 𝑉 𝑚𝑎𝑥= 0.8 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑜𝑟 5 𝑁/𝑚𝑚² 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 − 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 ∗ 𝑉 𝑚𝑎𝑥= ∅8 𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑤 𝑑 − 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒. (𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡) ∗ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥= 0.7 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝝲𝐶 N/𝑚𝑚2 𝑜𝑟 4 𝑁/𝑚𝑚² 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 − 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 Max. strength (stress/force)
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison ∗ 𝑉 𝑐 = 0.79 100 𝐴𝑆 𝑏𝑣 𝑑 1 3 ( 400 𝑑 ) 1 4 / 𝛾𝑚 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑐𝑢 , d & AS ∗ ∅ 𝑉𝐶 = ∅2 𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑑 • 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 … … 𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓′𝑐 , b & d. ∗ 𝑞𝑐𝑢= 0.24 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝝲𝐶 N/𝑚𝑚2 • 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑐𝑢 Nominal shear strength of concrete (stress/force) ∗ 𝑉𝑈 → 𝑄𝑈 𝑏𝑑 ∗ 𝑉𝑈 → 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒. ∗ 𝑞𝑢 = 𝑄𝑢 𝑏.𝑑 Design value of shear (stress/force)
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison − 𝐼𝐹 𝑉 𝑢 < 𝑉𝐶 2 → 𝑁𝑜 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 − 𝐼𝐹 𝑉 𝑢 < 𝑉 𝑐 → 𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑠𝑣 𝑆𝑣 = 0.4𝑏𝑣 0.95𝐹𝑦𝑣 if V≤𝑉 𝑐+0.4𝑏𝑣d 𝐴𝑠𝑣 𝑆𝑣 = 𝑉−𝑉𝑐 0.95𝐹𝑦𝑣𝑏𝑡 if V≤𝑉 𝑐+0.4𝑏𝑣d − 𝐼𝐹 𝑞𝑢 < 𝑞𝑐𝑢 → 𝑈𝑠𝑒 𝑚𝑖𝑛. 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇. 5 ∅8/𝑚 − 𝐼𝐹𝑞𝑐𝑢˂𝑞𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 → 𝑈𝑠𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇. ∗ ( 𝑞𝑢 − 𝑞𝑐𝑢 2 ) = 𝐴𝑠𝑡 𝑏.𝑠 ∗ 𝑓𝑦 𝛾𝑠 − 𝐼𝐹 𝑞𝑢˃ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 → 𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛. R. F. T
BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.75dt or four times the web thickness for flanged members When V exceeds 1.8Vc, the maximum spacing should be reduced to 0.5dt . ∗ 𝑑/2 ∗ 𝑑 2 𝑜𝑟 200𝑚𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 Max spacing between stirrups Minimum practical spacing ≈ 3 in. or 4 in. 100𝑚𝑚 Min spacing between stirrups 45° 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 30° 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 45° Stirrups indention - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 460 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 60.000 𝑃𝑠𝑖 ≅ 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Max. grade of stirrups (𝑓𝑦) − 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑. − 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑. − 𝑁𝑜 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒. Slabs & footings
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Flexural design
Egyptian code (2007) ‫من‬ ‫التأكد‬ ‫أوال‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫انه‬ ‫آمن‬ ‫اال‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫باستخدام‬ ‫تية‬ : 𝑑 = 𝐶1 𝑀𝑢 ∗ 105 𝑏 ∗ 𝐹𝑐𝑢 Where: d : depth of SEC. Mu : Ultimate Moment Affecting on SEC. b : Width of SEC. Fcu : Characteristic Concrete Strength C : Factor where Cmin=2.65 & Cmax=4.85
- ‫بمعلومية‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫ال‬ b*d ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫وكذلك‬ Mult ‫السابق‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫التعويض‬ ‫نستطيع‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫وايجاد‬ . C - ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫كانت‬ ‫فاذا‬ C ‫ال‬ ‫من‬ ‫أقل‬ Cmin =2.65 ‫قطاع‬ ‫أبعاد‬ ‫فنزيد‬ ‫امن‬ ‫غير‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫يكون‬ ‫الخرسانة‬ . - ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫كانت‬ ‫واذا‬ C ‫ال‬ ‫من‬ ‫أكبر‬ Cmax ‫القطاع‬ ‫فيكون‬ more safe ‫قيمة‬ ‫تتراوح‬ ‫ان‬ ‫من‬ ‫فالبد‬ ‫ال‬ C ‫ال‬ ‫بين‬ Cmin ‫و‬ Cmax . - ‫ال‬ ‫في‬ ‫الحديد‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫اليجاد‬ ‫االتية‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫التعويض‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫امن‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫أن‬ ‫من‬ ‫التاكد‬ ‫بعد‬ ‫قطاع‬ . As 𝑨𝒔 = 𝑴𝒖 𝑭𝒚 ∗ 𝒅 ∗ 𝑱 Egyptian code (2007)
𝑨𝒔 = 𝑴𝒖 𝑭𝒚 ∗ 𝒅 ∗ 𝑱 Where Fy : Yield Stress d : depth of SEC Mu: Ultimate Moment Affecting on Section J: Factor Get It's Value From Table According to Value Of C1 Egyptian code (2007)
‫قطاع‬ ‫من‬ ‫التأكد‬ ‫أوال‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫باستخدام‬ ‫امن‬ ‫انه‬ ‫االتية‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫اليجاد‬ Rn : ∅ 𝑅𝑛 = 𝑀𝑢 𝑏𝑑2 ………… We can get Rn=√√√ Where d: depth of Section. Mu: Ultimate Moment Affecting on Section. b: Width of Section. ∅ = 0.9 ACI CODE
Rn From Table (1-C) depend on Fc' & B1 𝑹𝒏 = 𝝆(𝟏 − 𝟎.𝟓𝝆𝑭𝒚 𝟎.𝟖𝟓 𝑭𝒄′) 𝝆 𝒎𝒊𝒏 ≤ 𝝆 ≤ 𝝆𝒎𝒂𝒙 ACI CODE 𝝆 𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 𝟑 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑭𝒚 𝝆 𝒎𝒂𝒙 = 0.319 β1𝑓𝑐′ 𝑭𝒚 Where Rn :STANDS FOR NOMINAL RESISTANCE (STRENGTH) ρ: ratio of As to bd β1 = 0.85 … for fc’ ≤ 4000 psi = 0.85 - 0.05 ( 𝑓𝑐′−4000 1000 ) .… for 4000 psi < fc’ < 8000 psi = 0.65 … for fc’ ≤ 8000 psi
- ‫بالتعويض‬ ‫ال‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫بأبعاد‬ ‫التالية‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ . b , d - ‫وكذلك‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ Mult . - ‫فنحصل‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫على‬ K ‫والتى‬ ‫ان‬ ‫البد‬ ‫عن‬ ‫تقل‬ . 0.156 K= M𝑢 105 𝑏∗𝑑2∗𝐹𝑐𝑢 = .. < 𝐾′ = 0.156 - ‫بعد‬ ‫قطاع‬ ‫أن‬ ‫من‬ ‫والتأكد‬ ‫السابقة‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫التعويض‬ ‫الخرسانه‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫تأثير‬ ‫تحت‬ ‫امن‬ Mult . - ‫أن‬ ‫شرط‬ ‫وتحقيق‬ K ‫تقل‬ ‫عن‬ ( (K`=0.156 ‫الضغط‬ ‫منطقة‬ ‫في‬ ‫التسليح‬ ‫زيادة‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫ذلك‬ ‫عدا‬ . BSI CODE
- ‫تسليح‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫حساب‬ ‫ذلك‬ ‫بعد‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫التالية‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫باستخدام‬ : 𝑨𝒔 = Mu ∗ 105 0.87 ∗ 𝐹𝑦 ∗ 𝑑 ∗ 0.95 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒: 𝐹𝑦 = characteristic concrete strength. 𝐹𝑐𝑢 = characteristic yield strength. BSI CODE
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.0035 0.003 0.003 The Strain Of Concrete 𝜻𝑐𝑢 𝑏 + 𝐿 10 𝑏 + 𝐿 5 0.12𝐿 𝑂𝑟 6𝑡𝑠 0.25 L Or 8ts 𝑘𝐿 10 + 𝑏 𝑜𝑟 6𝑡𝑠 + 𝑏 (L section) 𝑘𝐿 5 + 𝑏 𝑜𝑟 16𝑡𝑠 + 𝑏 ((T section) B1 section
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Table (1-2) * 3 𝑓𝑐′𝑏𝑤 𝑑 𝑓𝑦 Where: 3 𝑓𝑐′𝑏𝑤 𝑑 𝑓𝑦 ≥ 200bw d fy 1.1 𝐹𝑦 𝑏𝑑 The least 1.3𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 the biggest 0.15 100 𝑏𝑑 𝐻.𝑇.𝑆 Minimum Area Steel Asmin 0.9 c 0.85 c 0.8 c Depth of compression block
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison L.L > D.L L.L > 3 D.L L.L > 1.5D.L Spans difference not exceed 20% Conditions For using Empirical Methods Hagg + 5mm Bigger 2.5cm ∅ ≥ 1 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ H.agg. + 5mm Bigger ∅ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∅ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 2.5cm Min spacing We Can neglect Normal Force if: 𝑁 ≤ 0.1 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑏𝑡 We Can neglect Normal if e=M/N≤(1 in. or 0.05h) We can neglect Normal Force if : 𝑁 ≤ 0.04 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑏𝑡 Moment & Normal Sections
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.09 FL 𝑊𝐿2 16 =0.0625 𝑊𝐿2 =0.0625 F L 𝑊𝐿2 12 =0.083 𝑊𝐿2 = 0.083 F L One Way slab (+ve moment) Intermediate span Empirical 0.67 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 0.85 fc' 0.67 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 Concrete Strength 𝐾𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = 5.5 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑚 4490 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = = 57000 𝑓𝑐′ Ps = 4200 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = 4700 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 4400 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Concrete Young's Modulus
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Hot rolled mild steel Fy = 250 N/mm2 Height Yield (hot rolled or cold worked) Fy = 460 N/mm2 Fy > 80.000 psi Fy = 550 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Deformed Steel Fy ≤ 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Mild Steel Fy ≤ 280 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Cold drown smooth welded mesh Fy ≤ 300 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Yield Stress in Steel Fy
BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -Concrete not exposed to weather or in contact with ground: Primary reinforcement, ties, stirrups, spirals..……….. 40 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Table (1-2)
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Slabs Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison • solid slab • Flat slab • Hollow block slab • One way slab • Two way slab a)- Two way beam supported slab b)- Flat plate c)- Flat slab d)- Waffle slab • solid slab • Flat slab • Hollow block slab Types of Slabs
Solid Slab Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison • One way slab -simply supported slab tmin = 𝑙 20 -one end continuous tmin = 𝑙 24 -both ends continuous tmin = 𝑙 28 -cantilever tmin = 𝑙 10 Where 𝑙 is the direction of the load • One way slab -simply supported slab tmin = 𝑙 30 -one end continuous tmin = 𝑙 35 -both ends continuous tmin = 𝑙 40 -cantilever tmin = 𝑙 𝟏0 Where 𝑙 is the direction of the load Thickness of slabs
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison • Two way slab -fy = 280 (N/𝑚𝑚2 ) tmin = 𝑙 36 -fy = 420 (N/𝑚𝑚2 ) tmin = 𝑙 33 -fy = 520 (N/𝑚𝑚2 ) tmin = 𝑙 28 * Where 𝑙 : is long span length measured face to face from support • Two way slab -simply supported slab tmin = 𝑙 35 -one end continuous tmin = 𝑙 40 -both ends continuous tmin = 𝑙 45 * Where 𝑙 :is short span length measured from center to center Thickness of slabs
BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -Shells, folded plate members: No. 19 bar and larger.....…..20 No. 16 bar, MW200 or MD200 wire, and smaller…………… 13 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Flat Slab Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison * Where 𝑙 :is long span length measured from center to center Thickness of slabs
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 𝑙 𝟑 ≤ Ldrop tdrop min. = 1.25 tslab 𝑙 𝟑 ≤ Ldrop tdrop min. = 1.25 tslab 𝑙𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑡 3 < Ldrop < 𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛 2 Drop panel
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison tBeam ≥ 1.5 tslab Effective beam section : • Edge beam b + hw ≤ b + 4 tslab • Interior beam b + 2 hw ≤ b + 8 tslab tBeam ≥ 2.5 tslab tBeam ≥ 3 tslab Marginal beam
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 1-Holes in areas bounded by column strips: that their greatest dimension in a direction parallel to a centre-line of the panel does not exceed 0.4 ɭ . 2-Holes in areas common to two column strips: that in aggregate their length or width does not exceed one-tenth of the width of the column strip 3-Holes in areas common to a column strip and middle strip: that in aggregate their length or width does not exceed one- quarter of the width of the column strip In case of col. Strip intersecting with col. Strip: Lvoid ≤ ɭ1 / 16 In case of col. Strip intersecting with middle strip : Lvoid ≤ ɭ1 / 8 In case of middle Strip intersecting with middle strip : Opening in the slab
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel Vu ≤ ∅ Vn ___ safe punching Where : Vn = Vc+ Vs Vs = 𝐴𝑣 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 𝑆 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel 𝑞𝑝𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 ___ safe punching • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 only Check punching
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Actual Punching Stress ʋ= 𝛽 𝑽 𝒖 𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress (ʋc) refer to table (2.1) Max. Shear Stress ʋmax= 0. 𝟖 𝒇𝒄𝒖 Check for Wide-beam action Shear : 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅𝑉𝑛 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅(2𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑤𝑑 Check for Two way Shear 𝑉 𝑢 ≤ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓: 1- 2 + 4 𝛽 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 2- 𝛼𝑠 𝑑 𝑏𝑜 + 2 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 3- 4𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Actual Punching Stress 𝑞𝑝𝑢 = 𝛽 𝑄𝑝𝑢 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Allowable Punching Stress Min. of 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316(0.5 + 𝑎 𝑏 ) 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316 0.2 + α𝑑 𝑏𝑜 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 And not exceed that 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 Check punching
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : If 1.6 ʋc < v ≤ 2 ʋc use : If v > 2 ʋc use : • Increase fc’ • increase slab thickness by Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement Av = 𝑉𝑢−∅ 𝑉𝑐 𝑆 ∅ 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 if un safe punching • Increase fc’ • increase slab thickness by Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement ( bars, wires , steel I shape Or headed shear studs ) if un safe punching • Increase slab thickness • Use drop panel Check punching
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI shear reinforcement stirrups headed shear studs
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Where : ʋc : design concrete shear stress V :design ultimate value of the concentrated load. uo : effective length of the perimeter which touches a loaded area. ʋ : design shear stress. u : effective length of the outer perimeter of the zone. β: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.25 for Edge columns 1.40 for Corner columns ΣAsv :is the area of shear reinforcement fyv :is the characteristic strength of shear reinforcement (in N/mm2 ) α : is the angle between the shear reinforcement and the plane of the slab. Where : V : Punching Force 𝛽: ratio of (long side/ short side) of the column concentrated load or reaction area 𝛼𝑠: 40 for interior columns 30 for edge columns 20 for corner columns bo : perimeter of critical section Where : Qpu : Punching Force bo : Length of the Perimeter of Critical Sec d : Effective depth of slab 𝛽: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.30 for Edge columns 1.50 for Corner columns Check punching
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 1st take critical sec. at distance (1.5d) If ʋ ≤ ʋc use then no further checks are needed. If not - take the critical sec. at distance d/2 and get As for shear for Wide-beam action Shear - Take critical sec. at distance (d) from support. for Two way Shear - Take critical sec. at distance (d/2) from support. - take critical sec. at distance (d/2) Critical sec.
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI Table (2.1)
Hollow block design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -In situ ribs should be spaced at centers not exceeding 1.5 m & should not exceed four times their width -PAN WIDE (500-750)mm PANS FORM
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison The minimum width of rib will be determined by considerations of cover , bar spacing and fire. Standard depth : 6,8,10,12,14,16&20 We can use tapered rib with dimension RIBS
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison One at mid for span ( 6-9 )m & 2 ribs at third points for spans over (9) m. Cross rib
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -not less than 20mm or 1/10 clear distance between ribs Slab thickness over permanent fillers shall be not less than one-twelfth the clear distance between ribs ,nor less than 40 mm . Cover Slab
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Cover slab Rein. Consideration should be given to providing a single layer of welded steel fabric, having a cross-sectional area of not less than 0.12 % of the topping, in each direction; the spacing between wires should not be greater than half the center-to-center distance between ribs. Reinforcement
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 1 hour: (20)mm for slab 2 hour: (25)mm for slab Fire resisting
BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Shells, folded plate members: No. 19 bar and larger ....... 20 No. 16 bar, MW200 or MD200 wire, and smaller……………. 13 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
Footing Design
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Assume Thickness and Check Shear Assume Overall Footing Thickness=33 in Check Shear < 300 mm Thickness 70mm 75mm mm50 ‫للهواء‬ ‫والمعرضة‬ ‫المغمورة‬ mm70 ‫والجفاف‬ ‫للبلل‬ ‫المعرضة‬ Min Cover
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Actual Punching Stress ʋ= 𝛽 𝑽 𝒖 𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress (ʋc) refer to table (2.1) Max. Shear Stress ʋmax= 0. 𝟖 𝒇𝒄𝒖 Check for Wide-beam action Shear : 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅𝑉𝑛 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅(2𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑤𝑑 Check for Two way Shear 𝑉 𝑢 ≤ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓: 1- 2 + 4 𝛽 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 2- 𝛼𝑠 𝑑 𝑏𝑜 + 2 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 3- 4𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Check shear Actual Shear Stress 𝑞𝑢 = 𝑄𝑢 𝑏𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress 𝑞𝑠𝑢 = 0.15 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 Check punching Actual Punching Stress 𝑞𝑝𝑢 = 𝛽 𝑄𝑝𝑢 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Allowable Punching Stress As slabs Check punching Check shear
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : If 1.6 ʋc < v ≤ 2 ʋc use : If v > 2 ʋc use : • Increase fc’ • increase footing thickness or Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement Av = 𝑉𝑢−∅ 𝑉𝑐 𝑆 ∅ 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 if un safe punching • Increase fc’ • increase footing thickness or Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement stirrups if un safe punching • Increase footing thickness • Use drop panel Check punching
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Where : ʋc : design concrete shear stress V :design ultimate value of the concentrated load. uo : effective length of the perimeter which touches a loaded area. ʋ : design shear stress. u : effective length of the outer perimeter of the zone. β: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.25 for Edge columns 1.40 for Corner columns ΣAsv :is the area of shear reinforcement fyv :is the characteristic strength of shear reinforcement (in N/mm2 ) α : is the angle between the shear reinforcement and the plane of the slab. Where : V : Punching Force 𝛽: ratio of (long side/ short side) of the column concentrated load or reaction area 𝛼𝑠: 40 for interior columns 30 for edge columns 20 for corner columns bo : perimeter of critical section Where : Qpu : Punching Force bo : Length of the Perimeter of Critical Sec d : Effective depth of slab 𝛽: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.30 for Edge columns 1.50 for Corner columns Check punching
- COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel Vu ≤ ∅ Vn ___ safe punching Where : Vn = Vc+ Vs Vs = 𝐴𝑣 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 𝑆 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel 𝑞𝑝𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 ___ safe punching • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 only Check punching
THANK YOU

More Related Content

PDF
Design Philosophy Volume 8 Autodesk Robot Structural Arabic Handbook
byBahzad5
 
PDF
تكنولوجيا الخرسانة لمحمود امام
bySarmed Shukur
 
PDF
Final sap2000 v14-
byAnas Ramadan
 
PDF
Important topics in civil engineering-Eng.hassan hammami
byBahzad5
 
PDF
QA in Civil Engineering 1
byBahzad5
 
PDF
إختبار وتقييم المنشآت الخرسانية
bySuper Arc Consultant
 
PDF
كتاب الهندسة المدنية الشامل
byMuhamed Elsayed
 
PDF
important topics in civil engineering Dr.MAGDY EL-SHEIKH
byBahzad5
 
Design Philosophy Volume 8 Autodesk Robot Structural Arabic Handbook
byBahzad5
 
تكنولوجيا الخرسانة لمحمود امام
bySarmed Shukur
 
Final sap2000 v14-
byAnas Ramadan
 
Important topics in civil engineering-Eng.hassan hammami
byBahzad5
 
QA in Civil Engineering 1
byBahzad5
 
إختبار وتقييم المنشآت الخرسانية
bySuper Arc Consultant
 
كتاب الهندسة المدنية الشامل
byMuhamed Elsayed
 
important topics in civil engineering Dr.MAGDY EL-SHEIKH
byBahzad5
 

What's hot

PDF
ACI 318-19 Presentation - changes to the concrete design standard
byssuser8685dc
 
PPS
steel structural basics
byAsan Ibrahim
 
PPTX
BBS ppt.pptx
byKanavSharma201638
 
PPT
Presentation on construction of cable stay bridge - a modern technique for su...
byRajesh Prasad
 
PPTX
Repair and Retrofit on Beam and Column Joints
byamerald24
 
PDF
8110-1-1997.pdf
byAshraf Zayed Abu Mahfouz
 
PPTX
Presentation "Use of coupler Splices for Reinforcement"
byPralhad Kore
 
PPT
Column design.ppt
byDharmsinh Desai of University
 
PPTX
Reinforced Cement Concrete and Bar Bending Schedule
byKailash Chander
 
PDF
Etabs example-rc building seismic load response-
byBhaskar Alapati
 
PPTX
Post tensioning
bySAIV Exports
 
PPTX
INDUSTRIAL BUILDING GANTRY GIRDER
byHarsh Shani
 
PPT
Durability of concrete
byRajesh Prasad
 
PPT
Fundamentals of-psc-bridge
byUniversity of Tikrit
 
PPTX
Introduction to Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete (SFRC)
byZubayer Ibna Zahid
 
PPTX
Steel fiber reinforced concrete
byShaswat Routray
 
PPT
Reinforced Concrete Design (2)
byAbdul Rafay
 
PPT
Analysis and design of building
byKrishnagnr
 
PPT
Peb
byJogendra Yadvendu
 
PPTX
Etabs BY Subash Pathak
bySubash Pathak
 
ACI 318-19 Presentation - changes to the concrete design standard
byssuser8685dc
 
steel structural basics
byAsan Ibrahim
 
BBS ppt.pptx
byKanavSharma201638
 
Presentation on construction of cable stay bridge - a modern technique for su...
byRajesh Prasad
 
Repair and Retrofit on Beam and Column Joints
byamerald24
 
8110-1-1997.pdf
byAshraf Zayed Abu Mahfouz
 
Presentation "Use of coupler Splices for Reinforcement"
byPralhad Kore
 
Column design.ppt
byDharmsinh Desai of University
 
Reinforced Cement Concrete and Bar Bending Schedule
byKailash Chander
 
Etabs example-rc building seismic load response-
byBhaskar Alapati
 
Post tensioning
bySAIV Exports
 
INDUSTRIAL BUILDING GANTRY GIRDER
byHarsh Shani
 
Durability of concrete
byRajesh Prasad
 
Fundamentals of-psc-bridge
byUniversity of Tikrit
 
Introduction to Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete (SFRC)
byZubayer Ibna Zahid
 
Steel fiber reinforced concrete
byShaswat Routray
 
Reinforced Concrete Design (2)
byAbdul Rafay
 
Analysis and design of building
byKrishnagnr
 
Peb
byJogendra Yadvendu
 
Etabs BY Subash Pathak
bySubash Pathak
 

More from Bahzad5

PDF
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
byBahzad5
 
PDF
2013 (Total Station & Civil 3D) فێرکاری
byBahzad5
 
PDF
Engineering field knowledge -زانیاری بواری ئەندازیاری
byBahzad5
 
PDF
(atmosphere correction) زانیاری دەربارەی
byBahzad5
 
PDF
(Building Permit Guidelines ) ڕێنماییەکانی مۆڵەتی بینا
byBahzad5
 
PDF
المبادئ التوجيهية البلدية - ڕێنامەی شارەوانی (Municipal guidelines)
byBahzad5
 
PDF
CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT FOR WORKS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION
byBahzad5
 
PDF
Lecture 1: Basics of trigonometry (surveying)
byBahzad5
 
PDF
الشروط العامة لمقاولات اعمال الهندسة المدنية
byBahzad5
 
PDF
GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR CONTRACTS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING WORKS
byBahzad5
 
PDF
2 سەرەتاکانی دیزاین
byBahzad5
 
PDF
Soil Mechanics (Problems & solutions)
byBahzad5
 
PDF
ڕێبەری بەشە ئەندازیارییەکان
byBahzad5
 
PDF
سەرەتاکانی دیزاین
byBahzad5
 
PDF
ڕێبەری بەشەئەندازیارییەكانی زانكۆی كۆیە
byBahzad5
 
PDF
پرۆژەی ناساندنی ئەندازیاری
byBahzad5
 
PDF
بناغە و بنەپایە Footing and Foundation
byBahzad5
 
PDF
slump test سڵەمپ تێست
byBahzad5
 
PDF
Design of Storm Sewer System
byBahzad5
 
PDF
ڕۆنی بزوێنەر
byBahzad5
 
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
byBahzad5
 
2013 (Total Station & Civil 3D) فێرکاری
byBahzad5
 
Engineering field knowledge -زانیاری بواری ئەندازیاری
byBahzad5
 
(atmosphere correction) زانیاری دەربارەی
byBahzad5
 
(Building Permit Guidelines ) ڕێنماییەکانی مۆڵەتی بینا
byBahzad5
 
المبادئ التوجيهية البلدية - ڕێنامەی شارەوانی (Municipal guidelines)
byBahzad5
 
CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT FOR WORKS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION
byBahzad5
 
Lecture 1: Basics of trigonometry (surveying)
byBahzad5
 
الشروط العامة لمقاولات اعمال الهندسة المدنية
byBahzad5
 
GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR CONTRACTS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING WORKS
byBahzad5
 
2 سەرەتاکانی دیزاین
byBahzad5
 
Soil Mechanics (Problems & solutions)
byBahzad5
 
ڕێبەری بەشە ئەندازیارییەکان
byBahzad5
 
سەرەتاکانی دیزاین
byBahzad5
 
ڕێبەری بەشەئەندازیارییەكانی زانكۆی كۆیە
byBahzad5
 
پرۆژەی ناساندنی ئەندازیاری
byBahzad5
 
بناغە و بنەپایە Footing and Foundation
byBahzad5
 
slump test سڵەمپ تێست
byBahzad5
 
Design of Storm Sewer System
byBahzad5
 
ڕۆنی بزوێنەر
byBahzad5
 

Recently uploaded

PPTX
Optimizing Operations: Key Elements of a Successful Plant Maintenance Plan — ...
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
PPTX
Data Science with R Final yrUnit II.pptx
byOsmania University
 
PPTX
22PEOIT4C Session 1 Introduction to AI and intelligent agents.pptx
bymailmegokilavani
 
PPTX
Network Security v1.0 - Module 2.pptx
byssuserb1479b
 
PDF
Hybrid Anomaly Detection Mechanism for IOT Networks
byIJCNCJournal
 
PPTX
Engineering Economics CHAPTER 4.pptx - R
byMisgnaArefe
 
DOCX
Buy Facebook Ads Accounts_ Boost Your Professional ....docx
bytopusapro.com
 
PPTX
The Complete Guide to Energy Audits_ Unlocking Savings, Sustainability, and P...
bygreentechnexus2024
 
PPTX
How to Implement Kaizen in Your Organization for Continuous Improvement Success
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
DOCX
Project Management(BOE 070) notes Unite 4 AKTU
by26dsyogam
 
PPTX
UNIT -3 -DIGITAL AND MOBILE FORENSICS FORENSIC READINESS-.pptx
byjemimaa3
 
PDF
A Guide to Components and Operation of Refrigeration Plant - Part 1
byMahmoud Moghtaderi
 
PPT
Intro AI DBATU.ppt ppt useful engineering
bydevinjon990
 
PPT
24CYT13 - Chemistry for Electronics and Computer Systems-Unit-V-E Waste & Its...
byKrishnaveniKrishnara1
 
PPTX
22PEOIT4C Session 7 A searching algorithm.pptx
bymailmegokilavani
 
PDF
Modeltomodel_Transformation_with_ATL (1).pdf
byISEMENSIAS
 
PPTX
Optimizing Plant Maintenance — Key Elements of a Successful Maintenance Plan ...
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
PPTX
1_Sources of security threats, Motives, Target.pptx
bydolly475229
 
PPTX
Preventive Maintenance Program for Compressors – Complete Guide
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
PPTX
Fiber reinforced concrete (FRC) is a composite material made from Portland ce...
bymanojaioe
 
Optimizing Operations: Key Elements of a Successful Plant Maintenance Plan — ...
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
Data Science with R Final yrUnit II.pptx
byOsmania University
 
22PEOIT4C Session 1 Introduction to AI and intelligent agents.pptx
bymailmegokilavani
 
Network Security v1.0 - Module 2.pptx
byssuserb1479b
 
Hybrid Anomaly Detection Mechanism for IOT Networks
byIJCNCJournal
 
Engineering Economics CHAPTER 4.pptx - R
byMisgnaArefe
 
Buy Facebook Ads Accounts_ Boost Your Professional ....docx
bytopusapro.com
 
The Complete Guide to Energy Audits_ Unlocking Savings, Sustainability, and P...
bygreentechnexus2024
 
How to Implement Kaizen in Your Organization for Continuous Improvement Success
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
Project Management(BOE 070) notes Unite 4 AKTU
by26dsyogam
 
UNIT -3 -DIGITAL AND MOBILE FORENSICS FORENSIC READINESS-.pptx
byjemimaa3
 
A Guide to Components and Operation of Refrigeration Plant - Part 1
byMahmoud Moghtaderi
 
Intro AI DBATU.ppt ppt useful engineering
bydevinjon990
 
24CYT13 - Chemistry for Electronics and Computer Systems-Unit-V-E Waste & Its...
byKrishnaveniKrishnara1
 
22PEOIT4C Session 7 A searching algorithm.pptx
bymailmegokilavani
 
Modeltomodel_Transformation_with_ATL (1).pdf
byISEMENSIAS
 
Optimizing Plant Maintenance — Key Elements of a Successful Maintenance Plan ...
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
1_Sources of security threats, Motives, Target.pptx
bydolly475229
 
Preventive Maintenance Program for Compressors – Complete Guide
byMaintWiz Technologies Private Limited
 
Fiber reinforced concrete (FRC) is a composite material made from Portland ce...
bymanojaioe
 

COMPARISON BETWEEN CODES

  • 1.
    COMPARISON BETWEEN Codes ECP(EGYPTIAN CODE OF PRACTICE) BSI (BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTE) ACI (AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE)
  • 2.
    PREPARD BY STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENTTEAM CHECKED BY STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT SENIOR ENG. WAEL MOHMED ABDUL MAQSOOD
  • 3.
    INTRODUCTION This comparison betweencodes provides minimum requirements for design and construction of structural concrete members of any structure in different codes, That doesn't mean that the structural design safe in code and unsafe at the other one But this difference due to factor of safety used, the quality control of materials used in the construction …etc. as a result we have to study carefully those differences between codes in order to we can do a smart design.
  • 4.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Columns Design
  • 5.
    AXIAL LOADED COLUMN: - ‫مقاومه‬‫حساب‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫منه‬ ‫و‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫يتحمله‬ ‫حمل‬ ‫اقصى‬ ‫حساب‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫تصميم‬ ‫عند‬ ‫الضغط‬ ‫بالمعاد‬ ‫موضح‬ ‫هو‬ ‫كما‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫تسليح‬ ‫من‬ ‫الناتج‬ ‫الضغط‬ ‫مقاومه‬ ‫و‬ ‫للعمود‬ ‫الخرسانى‬ ‫له‬ ‫التالية‬ : - - Egyptian code (2007)
  • 6.
    - Pu :‫العمود‬ ‫مقاومة‬ - Cc : ‫الخرساني‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫مقاومة‬ - Cs : ‫العمود‬ ‫تسليح‬ ‫مقاومة‬ - : Factor of safety for material . 𝝲𝐶=1.5[( 7 6 )- ( et 3 )] , Egyptian code (2007) 𝝲s=1.15[( 7 6 )- ( et 3 )]
  • 7.
    - The Existenceof moment leads to a reduction in axial load capacity. Thus the code impose a further reduction on the column strength by reducing the capacity by 10% So, the equation: Egyptian code (2007)
  • 8.
    Egyptian code (2007) Pu= 0.35*Fcu*Ac+0.67*Asc*Fy
  • 9.
    - ‫للعمود‬ ‫تصميم‬ ‫عمل‬‫يتم‬ ‫ومنه‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫يتحمله‬ ‫الذي‬ ‫الحمل‬ ‫حساب‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫االمريكى‬ ‫الكود‬ ‫فى‬ ‫و‬ - ACI CODE
  • 10.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison t ≤ 4 b t ≤ 4 b t ≤ 5 b Conditions for column (not shear wall) The shape of cross section of column isn't taken into consideration The shape of cross section of column is taken into consideration The shape of cross section of column is taken into consideration. Effect of shape of column in slenderness ratio.
  • 11.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.4 100 Ag 1 100 Ag 0.6 100 Ag Asmin 6% Ag 8% Ag 4% Ag for Interior col. 5% Ag for Edge col. 6% Ag for Corner col. Asmax 155 mm 6 inch=150 mm 250 mm Smax 30mm 25mm 70mm Smin
  • 12.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Braced & Un Braced Sway & non- Sway Braced & Unbraced Classification of structure according to buckling design. Slenderness Limits For Columns 𝐿0 < 60𝑏 Slenderness of unbraced Columns 𝐿0 = 100𝑏2 ℎ ≤ 60𝑏 not braced against side sway 𝐾 𝐿𝑢 𝑟 ≤ 22 braced against side sway 𝐾 𝐿𝑢 𝑟 ≤34 – 12(M1/M2) ≤ 40 Rec. Circular Braced 30 25 Unbraced 23 18 Maximum slenderness ratio. 𝐿𝑒 = 𝛽𝐿0 Values of 𝛽 for braced columns Non-sway K Lu r ≤ 34 -12 ( 𝑀1 𝑀2 ) ≤ 40 Sway 𝐾 𝐿𝑢 𝑟 ≤ 22 Braced 𝐾𝐻 𝑏1 𝑜𝑟 𝑡1 < 15 Unbraced 𝐾𝐻 𝑏1 𝑜𝑟 𝑡1 < 10 Neglect slenderness effect if :
  • 13.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Values of 𝛽 for unbraced columns Where: 𝐿0: clear height between end restraints b: width of column h: depth of cross section 𝐿𝑒:effective height of column K: effective length factor (for braced (non sway) frame ≤ 1 Lu: unsupported height of column from top of floor to the bottom of the beams or slab in the slab above R: radius of gyration, equal to 0.3 and 0.25 times the overall depth of rectangular and circular columns , respectively M1/M2: ratio of the moments at the two ends of the column ‫حالة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫يؤ‬ ‫جانبيا‬ ‫المقيدة‬ ‫المبانى‬ ‫فى‬ ‫األعمدة‬ ‫طول‬ ‫خذ‬ ‫االنبعاج‬ He ‫من‬ ‫لألصغر‬ ‫مساويا‬ 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 0.7 + 0.05 𝛼1 + 𝛼2 ≤ 𝐻0 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 0.85 + 0.05 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝐻0 ‫جانب‬ ‫مقيدة‬ ‫الغير‬ ‫المبانى‬ ‫فى‬ ‫األعمدة‬ ‫حالة‬ ‫وفى‬ ‫يؤخذ‬ ‫يا‬ ‫االنبعاج‬ ‫طول‬ He ‫من‬ ‫لألصغر‬ ‫مساويا‬ 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 1 + 0.15 𝛼1 + 𝛼2 ≥ 𝐻0 𝐻𝑒 = 𝐻0 2 + 0.3 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≥ 𝐻0 α = Σ Σ 𝐸𝑐𝐼𝑐 𝐻0 𝐸𝑐𝐼𝑏 𝐿𝑏 ‫أن‬ ‫حيث‬ 𝐻0 ‫الخالص‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫ارتفاع‬ ‫هو‬ ‫و‬ 𝛼𝑚𝑖𝑛 ‫من‬ ‫األصغر‬ ‫القيمة‬ ‫هى‬ 𝛼1 ‫الطرف‬ ‫عند‬ ‫و‬ ‫السفلى‬ 𝛼2 ‫العلوى‬ ‫الطرف‬ ‫عند‬ Neglect slenderness effect if :
  • 14.
    BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -Concretenot exposed to weather or in contact with ground: Primary reinforcement, Ties, stirrups, spirals………....40 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
  • 15.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI - Notes: - Column according to ( ECP ) is unsafe due to large factor of safety although it is safe according to ( BSI & ACI ). - As (BSI) < As (ACI)
  • 16.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Beam Design
  • 17.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Shear Design
  • 18.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 𝐴𝑡 𝒅 𝟐 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝐴𝑡 𝒅 𝟐 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝐴𝑡 𝒅 𝟐 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 Critical Section ∗ 𝑉 𝑚𝑎𝑥= 0.8 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑜𝑟 5 𝑁/𝑚𝑚² 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 − 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 ∗ 𝑉 𝑚𝑎𝑥= ∅8 𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑤 𝑑 − 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒. (𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡) ∗ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥= 0.7 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝝲𝐶 N/𝑚𝑚2 𝑜𝑟 4 𝑁/𝑚𝑚² 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 − 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 Max. strength (stress/force)
  • 19.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison ∗ 𝑉 𝑐 = 0.79 100 𝐴𝑆 𝑏𝑣 𝑑 1 3 ( 400 𝑑 ) 1 4 / 𝛾𝑚 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑐𝑢 , d & AS ∗ ∅ 𝑉𝐶 = ∅2 𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑑 • 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 … … 𝐸𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓′𝑐 , b & d. ∗ 𝑞𝑐𝑢= 0.24 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝝲𝐶 N/𝑚𝑚2 • 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑐𝑢 Nominal shear strength of concrete (stress/force) ∗ 𝑉𝑈 → 𝑄𝑈 𝑏𝑑 ∗ 𝑉𝑈 → 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒. ∗ 𝑞𝑢 = 𝑄𝑢 𝑏.𝑑 Design value of shear (stress/force)
  • 20.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison − 𝐼𝐹 𝑉 𝑢 < 𝑉𝐶 2 → 𝑁𝑜 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 − 𝐼𝐹 𝑉 𝑢 < 𝑉 𝑐 → 𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑠𝑣 𝑆𝑣 = 0.4𝑏𝑣 0.95𝐹𝑦𝑣 if V≤𝑉 𝑐+0.4𝑏𝑣d 𝐴𝑠𝑣 𝑆𝑣 = 𝑉−𝑉𝑐 0.95𝐹𝑦𝑣𝑏𝑡 if V≤𝑉 𝑐+0.4𝑏𝑣d − 𝐼𝐹 𝑞𝑢 < 𝑞𝑐𝑢 → 𝑈𝑠𝑒 𝑚𝑖𝑛. 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇. 5 ∅8/𝑚 − 𝐼𝐹𝑞𝑐𝑢˂𝑞𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 → 𝑈𝑠𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇. ∗ ( 𝑞𝑢 − 𝑞𝑐𝑢 2 ) = 𝐴𝑠𝑡 𝑏.𝑠 ∗ 𝑓𝑦 𝛾𝑠 − 𝐼𝐹 𝑞𝑢˃ 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 → 𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛. R. F. T
  • 21.
    BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.75dtor four times the web thickness for flanged members When V exceeds 1.8Vc, the maximum spacing should be reduced to 0.5dt . ∗ 𝑑/2 ∗ 𝑑 2 𝑜𝑟 200𝑚𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚 Max spacing between stirrups Minimum practical spacing ≈ 3 in. or 4 in. 100𝑚𝑚 Min spacing between stirrups 45° 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 30° 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑒 45° Stirrups indention - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
  • 22.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 460 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 60.000 𝑃𝑠𝑖 ≅ 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Max. grade of stirrups (𝑓𝑦) − 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑. − 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑. − 𝑁𝑜 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑅𝐹𝑇 𝑖𝑠 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒. Slabs & footings
  • 23.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Flexural design
  • 24.
    Egyptian code (2007) ‫من‬‫التأكد‬ ‫أوال‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫انه‬ ‫آمن‬ ‫اال‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫باستخدام‬ ‫تية‬ : 𝑑 = 𝐶1 𝑀𝑢 ∗ 105 𝑏 ∗ 𝐹𝑐𝑢 Where: d : depth of SEC. Mu : Ultimate Moment Affecting on SEC. b : Width of SEC. Fcu : Characteristic Concrete Strength C : Factor where Cmin=2.65 & Cmax=4.85
  • 25.
    - ‫بمعلومية‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫ال‬ b*d ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬‫وكذلك‬ Mult ‫السابق‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫التعويض‬ ‫نستطيع‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫وايجاد‬ . C - ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫كانت‬ ‫فاذا‬ C ‫ال‬ ‫من‬ ‫أقل‬ Cmin =2.65 ‫قطاع‬ ‫أبعاد‬ ‫فنزيد‬ ‫امن‬ ‫غير‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫يكون‬ ‫الخرسانة‬ . - ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫كانت‬ ‫واذا‬ C ‫ال‬ ‫من‬ ‫أكبر‬ Cmax ‫القطاع‬ ‫فيكون‬ more safe ‫قيمة‬ ‫تتراوح‬ ‫ان‬ ‫من‬ ‫فالبد‬ ‫ال‬ C ‫ال‬ ‫بين‬ Cmin ‫و‬ Cmax . - ‫ال‬ ‫في‬ ‫الحديد‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫اليجاد‬ ‫االتية‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫التعويض‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫امن‬ ‫القطاع‬ ‫أن‬ ‫من‬ ‫التاكد‬ ‫بعد‬ ‫قطاع‬ . As 𝑨𝒔 = 𝑴𝒖 𝑭𝒚 ∗ 𝒅 ∗ 𝑱 Egyptian code (2007)
  • 26.
    𝑨𝒔 = 𝑴𝒖 𝑭𝒚 ∗𝒅 ∗ 𝑱 Where Fy : Yield Stress d : depth of SEC Mu: Ultimate Moment Affecting on Section J: Factor Get It's Value From Table According to Value Of C1 Egyptian code (2007)
  • 27.
    ‫قطاع‬ ‫من‬ ‫التأكد‬‫أوال‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫باستخدام‬ ‫امن‬ ‫انه‬ ‫االتية‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫اليجاد‬ Rn : ∅ 𝑅𝑛 = 𝑀𝑢 𝑏𝑑2 ………… We can get Rn=√√√ Where d: depth of Section. Mu: Ultimate Moment Affecting on Section. b: Width of Section. ∅ = 0.9 ACI CODE
  • 28.
    Rn From Table(1-C) depend on Fc' & B1 𝑹𝒏 = 𝝆(𝟏 − 𝟎.𝟓𝝆𝑭𝒚 𝟎.𝟖𝟓 𝑭𝒄′) 𝝆 𝒎𝒊𝒏 ≤ 𝝆 ≤ 𝝆𝒎𝒂𝒙 ACI CODE 𝝆 𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 𝟑 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑭𝒚 𝝆 𝒎𝒂𝒙 = 0.319 β1𝑓𝑐′ 𝑭𝒚 Where Rn :STANDS FOR NOMINAL RESISTANCE (STRENGTH) ρ: ratio of As to bd β1 = 0.85 … for fc’ ≤ 4000 psi = 0.85 - 0.05 ( 𝑓𝑐′−4000 1000 ) .… for 4000 psi < fc’ < 8000 psi = 0.65 … for fc’ ≤ 8000 psi
  • 29.
    - ‫بالتعويض‬ ‫ال‬ ‫العمود‬ ‫بأبعاد‬‫التالية‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ . b , d - ‫وكذلك‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قيمة‬ Mult . - ‫فنحصل‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫على‬ K ‫والتى‬ ‫ان‬ ‫البد‬ ‫عن‬ ‫تقل‬ . 0.156 K= M𝑢 105 𝑏∗𝑑2∗𝐹𝑐𝑢 = .. < 𝐾′ = 0.156 - ‫بعد‬ ‫قطاع‬ ‫أن‬ ‫من‬ ‫والتأكد‬ ‫السابقة‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫فى‬ ‫التعويض‬ ‫الخرسانه‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫تأثير‬ ‫تحت‬ ‫امن‬ Mult . - ‫أن‬ ‫شرط‬ ‫وتحقيق‬ K ‫تقل‬ ‫عن‬ ( (K`=0.156 ‫الضغط‬ ‫منطقة‬ ‫في‬ ‫التسليح‬ ‫زيادة‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫ذلك‬ ‫عدا‬ . BSI CODE
  • 30.
    - ‫تسليح‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫حساب‬‫ذلك‬ ‫بعد‬ ‫يتم‬ ‫الخرساني‬ ‫التالية‬ ‫المعادلة‬ ‫باستخدام‬ : 𝑨𝒔 = Mu ∗ 105 0.87 ∗ 𝐹𝑦 ∗ 𝑑 ∗ 0.95 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒: 𝐹𝑦 = characteristic concrete strength. 𝐹𝑐𝑢 = characteristic yield strength. BSI CODE
  • 31.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.0035 0.003 0.003 The Strain Of Concrete 𝜻𝑐𝑢 𝑏 + 𝐿 10 𝑏 + 𝐿 5 0.12𝐿 𝑂𝑟 6𝑡𝑠 0.25 L Or 8ts 𝑘𝐿 10 + 𝑏 𝑜𝑟 6𝑡𝑠 + 𝑏 (L section) 𝑘𝐿 5 + 𝑏 𝑜𝑟 16𝑡𝑠 + 𝑏 ((T section) B1 section
  • 32.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Table (1-2) * 3 𝑓𝑐′𝑏𝑤 𝑑 𝑓𝑦 Where: 3 𝑓𝑐′𝑏𝑤 𝑑 𝑓𝑦 ≥ 200bw d fy 1.1 𝐹𝑦 𝑏𝑑 The least 1.3𝐴𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞 the biggest 0.15 100 𝑏𝑑 𝐻.𝑇.𝑆 Minimum Area Steel Asmin 0.9 c 0.85 c 0.8 c Depth of compression block
  • 33.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison L.L > D.L L.L > 3 D.L L.L > 1.5D.L Spans difference not exceed 20% Conditions For using Empirical Methods Hagg + 5mm Bigger 2.5cm ∅ ≥ 1 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ H.agg. + 5mm Bigger ∅ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∅ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 2.5cm Min spacing We Can neglect Normal Force if: 𝑁 ≤ 0.1 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑏𝑡 We Can neglect Normal if e=M/N≤(1 in. or 0.05h) We can neglect Normal Force if : 𝑁 ≤ 0.04 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑏𝑡 Moment & Normal Sections
  • 34.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 0.09 FL 𝑊𝐿2 16 =0.0625 𝑊𝐿2 =0.0625 F L 𝑊𝐿2 12 =0.083 𝑊𝐿2 = 0.083 F L One Way slab (+ve moment) Intermediate span Empirical 0.67 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 0.85 fc' 0.67 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 Concrete Strength 𝐾𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = 5.5 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑚 4490 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = = 57000 𝑓𝑐′ Ps = 4200 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 = 4700 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 4400 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Concrete Young's Modulus
  • 35.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Hot rolled mild steel Fy = 250 N/mm2 Height Yield (hot rolled or cold worked) Fy = 460 N/mm2 Fy > 80.000 psi Fy = 550 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Deformed Steel Fy ≤ 400 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Mild Steel Fy ≤ 280 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Cold drown smooth welded mesh Fy ≤ 300 𝑁/𝑚𝑚2 Yield Stress in Steel Fy
  • 36.
    BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -Concrete notexposed to weather or in contact with ground: Primary reinforcement, ties, stirrups, spirals..……….. 40 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
  • 37.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Table (1-2)
  • 38.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Slabs Design
  • 39.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison • solid slab • Flat slab • Hollow block slab • One way slab • Two way slab a)- Two way beam supported slab b)- Flat plate c)- Flat slab d)- Waffle slab • solid slab • Flat slab • Hollow block slab Types of Slabs
  • 40.
  • 41.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison • One way slab -simply supported slab tmin = 𝑙 20 -one end continuous tmin = 𝑙 24 -both ends continuous tmin = 𝑙 28 -cantilever tmin = 𝑙 10 Where 𝑙 is the direction of the load • One way slab -simply supported slab tmin = 𝑙 30 -one end continuous tmin = 𝑙 35 -both ends continuous tmin = 𝑙 40 -cantilever tmin = 𝑙 𝟏0 Where 𝑙 is the direction of the load Thickness of slabs
  • 42.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison • Two way slab -fy = 280 (N/𝑚𝑚2 ) tmin = 𝑙 36 -fy = 420 (N/𝑚𝑚2 ) tmin = 𝑙 33 -fy = 520 (N/𝑚𝑚2 ) tmin = 𝑙 28 * Where 𝑙 : is long span length measured face to face from support • Two way slab -simply supported slab tmin = 𝑙 35 -one end continuous tmin = 𝑙 40 -both ends continuous tmin = 𝑙 45 * Where 𝑙 :is short span length measured from center to center Thickness of slabs
  • 43.
    BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -Shells, foldedplate members: No. 19 bar and larger.....…..20 No. 16 bar, MW200 or MD200 wire, and smaller…………… 13 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
  • 44.
  • 45.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison * Where 𝑙 :is long span length measured from center to center Thickness of slabs
  • 46.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 𝑙 𝟑 ≤ Ldrop tdrop min. = 1.25 tslab 𝑙 𝟑 ≤ Ldrop tdrop min. = 1.25 tslab 𝑙𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑡 3 < Ldrop < 𝑙𝑚𝑖𝑛 2 Drop panel
  • 47.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison tBeam ≥ 1.5 tslab Effective beam section : • Edge beam b + hw ≤ b + 4 tslab • Interior beam b + 2 hw ≤ b + 8 tslab tBeam ≥ 2.5 tslab tBeam ≥ 3 tslab Marginal beam
  • 48.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 1-Holes in areas bounded by column strips: that their greatest dimension in a direction parallel to a centre-line of the panel does not exceed 0.4 ɭ . 2-Holes in areas common to two column strips: that in aggregate their length or width does not exceed one-tenth of the width of the column strip 3-Holes in areas common to a column strip and middle strip: that in aggregate their length or width does not exceed one- quarter of the width of the column strip In case of col. Strip intersecting with col. Strip: Lvoid ≤ ɭ1 / 16 In case of col. Strip intersecting with middle strip : Lvoid ≤ ɭ1 / 8 In case of middle Strip intersecting with middle strip : Opening in the slab
  • 49.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel Vu ≤ ∅ Vn ___ safe punching Where : Vn = Vc+ Vs Vs = 𝐴𝑣 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 𝑆 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel 𝑞𝑝𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 ___ safe punching • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 only Check punching
  • 50.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Actual Punching Stress ʋ= 𝛽 𝑽 𝒖 𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress (ʋc) refer to table (2.1) Max. Shear Stress ʋmax= 0. 𝟖 𝒇𝒄𝒖 Check for Wide-beam action Shear : 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅𝑉𝑛 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅(2𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑤𝑑 Check for Two way Shear 𝑉 𝑢 ≤ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓: 1- 2 + 4 𝛽 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 2- 𝛼𝑠 𝑑 𝑏𝑜 + 2 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 3- 4𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Actual Punching Stress 𝑞𝑝𝑢 = 𝛽 𝑄𝑝𝑢 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Allowable Punching Stress Min. of 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316(0.5 + 𝑎 𝑏 ) 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316 0.2 + α𝑑 𝑏𝑜 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 And not exceed that 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 = 0.316 𝑓𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 Check punching
  • 51.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : If 1.6 ʋc < v ≤ 2 ʋc use : If v > 2 ʋc use : • Increase fc’ • increase slab thickness by Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement Av = 𝑉𝑢−∅ 𝑉𝑐 𝑆 ∅ 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 if un safe punching • Increase fc’ • increase slab thickness by Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement ( bars, wires , steel I shape Or headed shear studs ) if un safe punching • Increase slab thickness • Use drop panel Check punching
  • 52.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI shear reinforcement stirrups headed shear studs
  • 53.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Where : ʋc : design concrete shear stress V :design ultimate value of the concentrated load. uo : effective length of the perimeter which touches a loaded area. ʋ : design shear stress. u : effective length of the outer perimeter of the zone. β: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.25 for Edge columns 1.40 for Corner columns ΣAsv :is the area of shear reinforcement fyv :is the characteristic strength of shear reinforcement (in N/mm2 ) α : is the angle between the shear reinforcement and the plane of the slab. Where : V : Punching Force 𝛽: ratio of (long side/ short side) of the column concentrated load or reaction area 𝛼𝑠: 40 for interior columns 30 for edge columns 20 for corner columns bo : perimeter of critical section Where : Qpu : Punching Force bo : Length of the Perimeter of Critical Sec d : Effective depth of slab 𝛽: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.30 for Edge columns 1.50 for Corner columns Check punching
  • 54.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 1st take critical sec. at distance (1.5d) If ʋ ≤ ʋc use then no further checks are needed. If not - take the critical sec. at distance d/2 and get As for shear for Wide-beam action Shear - Take critical sec. at distance (d) from support. for Two way Shear - Take critical sec. at distance (d/2) from support. - take critical sec. at distance (d/2) Critical sec.
  • 55.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI Table (2.1)
  • 56.
  • 57.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -In situ ribs should be spaced at centers not exceeding 1.5 m & should not exceed four times their width -PAN WIDE (500-750)mm PANS FORM
  • 58.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison The minimum width of rib will be determined by considerations of cover , bar spacing and fire. Standard depth : 6,8,10,12,14,16&20 We can use tapered rib with dimension RIBS
  • 59.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison One at mid for span ( 6-9 )m & 2 ribs at third points for spans over (9) m. Cross rib
  • 60.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison -not less than 20mm or 1/10 clear distance between ribs Slab thickness over permanent fillers shall be not less than one-twelfth the clear distance between ribs ,nor less than 40 mm . Cover Slab
  • 61.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Cover slab Rein. Consideration should be given to providing a single layer of welded steel fabric, having a cross-sectional area of not less than 0.12 % of the topping, in each direction; the spacing between wires should not be greater than half the center-to-center distance between ribs. Reinforcement
  • 62.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison 1 hour: (20)mm for slab 2 hour: (25)mm for slab Fire resisting
  • 63.
    BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Shells,folded plate members: No. 19 bar and larger ....... 20 No. 16 bar, MW200 or MD200 wire, and smaller……………. 13 Cover - COMPARISON BETWEEN ECP & ACI & BSI
  • 64.
  • 65.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Assume Thickness and Check Shear Assume Overall Footing Thickness=33 in Check Shear < 300 mm Thickness 70mm 75mm mm50 ‫للهواء‬ ‫والمعرضة‬ ‫المغمورة‬ mm70 ‫والجفاف‬ ‫للبلل‬ ‫المعرضة‬ Min Cover
  • 66.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Actual Punching Stress ʋ= 𝛽 𝑽 𝒖 𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress (ʋc) refer to table (2.1) Max. Shear Stress ʋmax= 0. 𝟖 𝒇𝒄𝒖 Check for Wide-beam action Shear : 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅𝑉𝑛 𝑉𝑢 ≤ ∅(2𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑤𝑑 Check for Two way Shear 𝑉 𝑢 ≤ 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓: 1- 2 + 4 𝛽 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 2- 𝛼𝑠 𝑑 𝑏𝑜 + 2 𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 3- 4𝜆 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Check shear Actual Shear Stress 𝑞𝑢 = 𝑄𝑢 𝑏𝑑 Allowable Shear Stress 𝑞𝑠𝑢 = 0.15 𝐹𝑐𝑢 𝛾𝑐 Check punching Actual Punching Stress 𝑞𝑝𝑢 = 𝛽 𝑄𝑝𝑢 𝑏𝑜𝑑 Allowable Punching Stress As slabs Check punching Check shear
  • 67.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : If 1.6 ʋc < v ≤ 2 ʋc use : If v > 2 ʋc use : • Increase fc’ • increase footing thickness or Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement Av = 𝑉𝑢−∅ 𝑉𝑐 𝑆 ∅ 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 if un safe punching • Increase fc’ • increase footing thickness or Using drop panel • Providing shear reinforcement stirrups if un safe punching • Increase footing thickness • Use drop panel Check punching
  • 68.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison Where : ʋc : design concrete shear stress V :design ultimate value of the concentrated load. uo : effective length of the perimeter which touches a loaded area. ʋ : design shear stress. u : effective length of the outer perimeter of the zone. β: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.25 for Edge columns 1.40 for Corner columns ΣAsv :is the area of shear reinforcement fyv :is the characteristic strength of shear reinforcement (in N/mm2 ) α : is the angle between the shear reinforcement and the plane of the slab. Where : V : Punching Force 𝛽: ratio of (long side/ short side) of the column concentrated load or reaction area 𝛼𝑠: 40 for interior columns 30 for edge columns 20 for corner columns bo : perimeter of critical section Where : Qpu : Punching Force bo : Length of the Perimeter of Critical Sec d : Effective depth of slab 𝛽: 1.15 for Interior columns 1.30 for Edge columns 1.50 for Corner columns Check punching
  • 69.
    - COMPARISON BETWEENECP & ACI & BSI BSI ACI ECP Point of comparison If ʋ ≤ 1.6 ʋc use : • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel Vu ≤ ∅ Vn ___ safe punching Where : Vn = Vc+ Vs Vs = 𝐴𝑣 𝑑 𝑓𝑦𝑡 𝑆 • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 And steel 𝑞𝑝𝑢 ≤ 𝑞𝑐𝑝𝑢 ___ safe punching • 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 only Check punching
  • 70.