Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Pergamon
0360-1323(95)00017-S
NOMENCLATURE
a
As
b
C
cc
cs
d
fc
h
h
In
M
Mn
REINFORCED
concrete (R/C) beams are one of the
most commonly
used structural
elements in everyday
structures.
In practice, design is governed by various
architectural requirements.
If the height and width of the
beam are given by the architect, the designer needs only
to allocate the right amount of steel. Usually, when
designing precast beams the designer has more flexibility
in determining beam dimensions. In this study, we have
PROBLEM DEFINITION
A typical rectangular single-reinforced
beam is shown
in Fig. 1. The beam is characterized
by the following
parameters.
(1) The height of the section, h.
(2) The width or breadth, b.
(3) Distance from extreme compression fiber to center
of tension reinforcement,
d.
(4) Main reinforcements
; Asl, As2, and As3.
TX 77041-l 101,
East University,
545
M. M. Samman
546
and H. F. Erbatur
As3
As1
As2
(a) longitudinal
section
(5) Secondary
(6) Stirrups.
/I1 = 0.85
reinforcements.
= 0.85-0.5(fc-4)
(1)
C = 0.85fc *b * a,
(2)
where
T is the tensile force in steel
C is the equivalent compressive force in concrete
As is the area of tension steel
fy is the yield strength of steel
fc is the compressive strength of concrete
a is the depth of the equivalent rectangular stress block.
For equilibrium,
the compression
and tension forces
are equal. Hence, equations (1) and (2) are used to design
for bending as follows :
As *fy
a = 0.85 .fc *b
(3)
Mu=@*Mn
= 0.9As.fy.
(d-a/2),
(4)
where
Mu is the
@ is the
factor),
Mn is the
(or undercapacity
(5)
@)
where
P nlax
> 0.65
(7)
200
(8)
Pm = .fii
SCOPE
In the present paper, we study a typical single-span
R/C beam. The impact of the following parameters on
optimum steel ratios is investigated.
The following three support conditions are considered :
(a) simply supported ; (b) fixed-fixed ; and (c) fixedhinged.
In addition to its own weight, the following six values
of bending moments, M, are used as design loads :
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
547
30
40
50
60
ksi
ksi
ksi
ksi
of steel,fy,
(206.8
(275.8
(344.7
(413.7
is taken as :
MPa)
MPa)
MPa)
MPa).
ASSUMPTIONS
(1) The
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
ALGORITHM
RESULTS
Effect of material costs
To present the results, two-dimensional
plots are used.
In all plots, the ratio of costs (CsjCc) is the abscissa and
the optimum steel ratio, popt, is the ordinate. For each
combination
of support conditions. fc, fy, and b, six
curves representing
the applied bending moments are
plotted. In all plots, the ratio ofcosts (CsjCc) takes values
between 0 and 1000. Steel ratios take values between pmln
and pmax.
A typical curve consists
as shown in Fig. 3.
of the following
four regions,
W)
(R3)
548
I
+
.
Design ford
&,&
t
find cost(new)
i=i+l
---+-z
Fig. 2. A flow chart of the search algorithm.
_-----
w
t-
= 40 ksi.
Fig. 6. Fixed-hinged
= 40 ksi.
R4, cost-optimal
steel ratios are not sensitive to
slight variations in material costs any more. Even
when steel is very expensive, the optimal steel ratio
is not pmln. This is because assigning such a low
steel ratio results in increasing the weight of the
beam prohibitively.
of steel
steel, fy, increases, curves of optiin two ways (Figs 4 and 8). First,
a wider range of material costs.
50.0E
amt..
E.BB
200.60
400. Gin
ccd 01smdlWa al-
Fig. 5. Fixed-fixed
em.88
800.00
lm30. Bi3
cc&l
550
R2
become
less sensitive
25.00
to
Effect of width
The width of the beam has very little effect on optimal
steel ratios. Figures 9 and 10 represent the cases of simply
supported beams 5 and 20 in. wide, respectively. When
small bending moments are applied to the beam, optimal
steel ratios slightly increase as the width increases. When
large bending moments are applied, the width has no
effect at all.
CONCLUSIONS
(2)
have significant
effects on optimal
steel ratios.
(a) End conditions.
The type of structural support
is crucial in determining
optimal steel ratios. In
addition to changing optimal steel ratios, end conditions influence the convergence characteristics
of
steel ratios due to changes in material costs.
(b) Material costs. In contrast to current design
practices and guidelines given in design handbooks,
in countries like the United States in which steel
is relatively inexpensive,
the maximum steel ratio
allowed by the AC1 code should be used. On the
other hand, no matter how expensive steel is, the
minimum steel ratios should never be used.
The following parameters
may considerably
influence optimal steel ratios.
(a) Applied loads. As applied bending moments, M,
on beams increase, optimal steel ratios decrease.
However, this influence is more obvious at lower it4
than it is at large M.
(b) Yield strength of steel. Steel that has a low yield
strength, fv, makes optimum steel ratios more sensitive to variations in material costs.
(3) The following parameters have negligible effects on
optimal steel ratios.
(a) Strength of concrete, fc.
(b) Width of the beam, b.
Some of the above conclusions
agree with current
design practices and designer commonsense.
Others contradict current practices as well as guidelines given by
design handbooks.
The findings of this paper provide
means for cost-effective
selection of steel ratios under
different circumstances.
The findings are most useful for
the design of precast beams where engineers usually
determine beam dimensions and where saving in material
costs is significant. When applicable, the set of curves
generated in this study can be used directly to obtain
optimal steel ratios.
REFERENCES
1. P. Balaguru, Cost optimum design of reinforced concrete beams. Building and Emironmenf 15,219-222
(1980).
2. U. Kirsch, Multilevel optimal design of reinforced concrete structures. Engineering Optimization 6,207212 (1983).
551