Chapter 1
Inelastic Moment
Redistribution
Yohannes K.
March 2024 1
1.1 Introduction
Statically indeterminate structures made up of reinforced
concrete like fixed ended one span beams, continuous beams
and frames are designed considering internal forces like
bending moment, shear force and axial thrust obtained from
structural analysis. Either or several sections of these
structures may have peak values of the internal forces, which
are designated as critical sections. These sections are
dimensioned and reinforced accordingly.
Flexural members, however, do not collapse immediately as
soon as the loads at a particular section cause bending
moment exceeding the maximum resisting moment capacity
of the section. Instead, that section starts rotating at almost
constant moment. This is known as formation of plastic hinge
at that section reaching its maximum resisting moment
capacity.
2
• The section then transfer loads to other sections if
the applied load is further increased. This process
continues till the structures have plastic hinges at
sufficient sections to form a failure mechanism when it
actually collapses.
• However, significant transfer of loads has occurred
before the collapse of the structure. This transfer of
loads after the formation of first plastic hinge at
section having the highest bending moment till the
collapse of the structure is known as redistribution of
moments.
• By this process, therefore, the structure continues to
accommodate higher loads before it collapses. 3
• The elastic bending moment diagram prior to the
formation of first plastic hinge and the final bending
moment diagram just before the collapse are far
different. The ratio of negative to positive elastic
moment is no more valid.
• The development of the plastic hinges depends on the
available plastic moment capacity at critical sections. It
is worth mentioning that the redistribution of moment is
possible if the section forming the plastic hinge has the
ability to rotate at constant moment, which depends
on the amount of reinforcement actually provided at
that section.
• The section must be under-reinforced and must have
sufficient ductility. 4
• The phenomenon is well known in steel structures.
However, the redistribution of moment has also been
confirmed in reinforced concrete structures by
experimental investigations. It is also a fact that
reinforced concrete structures has comparatively
lower capacity to rotate than steel structures.
• Yet, this phenomenon is drawing the attention of the
designers. Presently, design codes of most of the
countries allow the redistribution up to a maximum
limit because of the following advantages:
5
Advantages of Redistribution
1) It gives a more realistic picture of
the actual load carrying capacity of the
intermediate structure.
2) Structures designed considering the
redistribution of moment (though
limited) would result in economy as
the actual load capacity is higher than
that we determined from any elastic
analysis.
3) The designer enjoys the freedom of
modifying the design bending
moments within limits. These
adjustments are sometimes helpful in
reducing the reinforcing bar, which are
crowded, especially at locations of
higher bending moment.
6
Let us take up a two-span beam of uniform cross section,
as shown in the above figure, with the following
assumptions:
a) The ultimate moment of resistance of section at B and D
are − and , respectively.
b) There will not be any premature shear failure so that
the sections can attain the respective ultimate moment
capacity.
c) The moment-curvature relationship for the ductile
section is the idealized bilinear as shown in figure 3.2. It
may be noted that for all practical purposes only a limited
rotation will take place.
d) All sections of the beam have the same constant
flexural rigidity up to the ultimate moment and moment
remains constant at the ultimate moment with increasing
curvature.
e) The self weight of the beam is neglected. 7
8
The beam is subjected to two point loads of magnitude P
each and acting at distances of L/2 from the two supports
A and C, as shown in fig. 3.1 (a). The elastic bending
moment diagram is shown in fig. 3.1 (b).
On increasing the loads P, the ultimate moment of
resistance M of cross section at B will be reached at the
support first before reaching at other sections, which is
shown in fig. 3.1 (d).
The plastic hinge will be formed at the cross-section B as
shown on (fig. 3.1(c). The two point loads P can still be
increased as long as the plastic hinge at B will rotate
sufficiently.
If the cross-section at B is brittle, the load will decrease
fast (see fig. 3.2) and the beam will fail suddenly. Hence,
the beam will not carry any additional load.
9
The cross section at B has to be ductile so that it
undergoes rotation at the constant moment of
resistance, which will enable the beam to carry
additional loads.
This increase of load will continue until the maximum
positive moments in the span (at D and E) reach
and as shown in fig. 3.1(f), when plastic hinges will
form at D and E also.
The three plastic hinges at B, D and E will form the
collapse mechanism (fig. 3.1 (e). The structure will fail at
this stage carrying much higher loads.
It is important to know that the requirement of
equilibrium will be satisfied at all stages, i.e., and
, during the elastic phase, will follow the equation
+ . = /4 …………………… (3.1) 10
11
From the structural analysis of the beam on fig 3.1(a), we
know that:
= /32 and = /32
Substituting these values in equation 3.1, we find that the
equation is satisfied where PL/4 is the maximum positive
moment of a simply supported beam having a load P at the
center of the beam. From the above values of and
(i.e. 6PL/32 and 5PL/32 respectively), we also note that:
/ = 1.2 ……………………………(3.2)
As the loads are increased till the formation of the first
plastic hinge at B, this ratio of / as 1.2 will be
maintained, as shown in fig 3.3. This phase is known as the
elastic phase when the bending moment increases with
increasing loads maintaining the ratio of / as 1.2.
12
With further increase of the loads, the plastic hinge at B
will rotate at the constant moment and positive
moments at D and E will increase as shown in fig 3.3.
This phase is known as moment redistribution phase as
the loads are now transferred to sections, which have
less moment.
However, the cross-section at B must have the ability to
sustain the required plastic rotation at this stage with
increasing loads. As the value of is now increasing
when is remaining constant, the ratio of / will
not be 1.2 anymore. Thus, in the redistribution phase,
the additional moments at higher loads are to be
redistributed to the support and mid-span in such a
manner that we get a similar equation like 3.1.i.e.
+ . = /4 …………………… (3.3)
13
= − ……………………………………..(3.4)
Where M is some amount of moment by which negative
moment at the support is reduced. From equations 3.3 and
3.4, we have:
= /4 – 0.5 = /4 – 0.5( − )
= ( /4 – 0.5 ) + 0.5M = + 0.5 ,
which we get by substituting = PL /4 - 0.5 from
equation 3.1. Therefore, we have:
= + . ……………………………………..(3.5)
Thus, in the moment redistribution, if we reduce some
amount M from the negative moment at support, we have
to add 0.5M to the span-moment to get the as
shown in equation 3.5. The redistributed moment and
satisfy the equilibrium condition of equation 3.3. Similar
equilibrium condition is also satisfied at the elastic stage by
and as in equation 3.1.
14
The amount of moment M which will be reduced from
the negative support moment depends on the rational
capacity as per the actual reinforcement provided in the
cross-section. Furthermore, the deformation of the
support should be within acceptable limits under service
loads.
In the extreme case, if the negative moment at the
support is reduced to zero, i.e. = , we have
from equation 3.5:
= + . = /4 ………………………..(3.6)
That is, the unreinforced central support will crack and
the continuous beam will behave as two simply supported
beams.
15
Thus, the choice of the bending moment diagram after the
redistribution should satisfy the equilibrium of internal
forces and external loads. Moreover, it must insure the
following:
1) The plastic rotations required at the critical should not
exceed the amount the section can sustain.
2) The extent of cracking or the amount of deformation
should not make the performance unsatisfactory under
service loads.
• The redistribution of moments is permitted if the analysis
of forces and moments is done following linear elastic
behavior. Analysis by linear elastic behavior is a logical
procedure in the working stress method of design where
the design concept is based on the assumptions of linear
elastic behavior of materials up to the level of
recommended safe stresses. 16
• However, analysis by linear elastic theory and design by
the limit state of collapse appear to be somewhat
contradictory. At the stress levels of for steel and
for concrete, the strains are not linearly related.
• Unfortunately, till now there is no such analysis, which
takes into account the complex behavior of reinforced
concrete just before the collapse. Accordingly, the elastic
theory of analysis of forces and moments cannot be
avoided at present except for the slabs.
• Moreover, unlike steel structures, cross-section forming
the first plastic hinge in reinforced concrete members
undergoes limited rotations, which is insufficient for
other sections to attain the desired . Therefore, full
redistribution has been restricted in the design of
reinforced concrete structures. 17
1.2 Moment Redistribution as per EBCS-2/1995
• A limited amount of redistribution is permitted by EBCS depending up
on the degree of ductility with out explicit calculation of rotation
requirements and capacities.
• The amount of redistribution allowed is dependent on the grade of the
concrete and on the ductility characteristics of the reinforcement as well
as the neutral axis.
• Moments obtained from a linear analysis may be reduced by multiplying
by the following reduction coefficient provided that the moments are
increased in other sections in order to maintain equilibrium. Usually it is
the maximum support moments which are reduced, so economizing in
reinforcing steel and also reducing congestion at the columns.
18
a) For continuous beams and for beams in rigid jointed braced
frames with span to effective depth ratio not greater than 20,
The neutral axis height, X, is calculated at the ultimate limit state
and the term x/d refers to the section where the moment is
reduced
b) For other continuous beams and rigid jointed braced frames
a) For sway frames with slenderness ratio of column less than 25
19
Example 1: Inelastic Moment Redistribution
Draw the design bending moment diagram of the beam
on fig 3.4 below, clamped at both ends and carrying
ultimate uniformly distributed load of 24 kN/m with full
redistribution of 30 percent.
20
21
22
Example 2: Inelastic Moment Redistribution
Draw the design bending moment diagram of the beam
of fig 3.5 below, clamped at both ends and carrying two
point loads 30 kN each at distances of 3 from the
supports. Assume full redistribution of 30 percent..
23
24
25
Example 3: Inelastic Moment Redistribution
Draw envelope of the design moments of the two-span
continuous beam shown in fig 3.6 below, carrying design
total load of 60.375 kN/m and design dead load of 7.87
kN/m. The cross-section of the beam is 300 mm x 700
mm. Assume full redistribution of 30 percent.
Assignment No 1
26
Example 4: Inelastic Moment Redistribution
Draw the design bending moment diagram of the
propped cantilever beam of fig 3.7 below, carrying one
point loads of P = 30 kN at mid span. Assume full
redistribution of 20 percent. (Materials to be used are C-
25 & S-400 Class-I works) – Assignment No 1
P = 30 kN
2m
600
300
4m
Fig. 3.7 Reinforced Concrete Propped Cantilever Beam 27
Thank You!
?
28