Study of a beam:

I. PRE-DIMENSIONING OF THE BEAM:

1. Position of the beam in the architectural plan
This is the F12 beam belonging to the upper floor of the 4th floor.

Fig.1: Location of the beam in the architectural plan

[Link] of the loads on the beam

The loads from the ribs and the self-weights of the supported elements as well as from the
The concentrated force caused by the pole is defined in the following diagram:

Fig.2: calculation diagram of the beam

 [Link]-sizing

Span 'i'

Mor(KN.m) 73 32 193

Tab 1. Table of maximum ultimate moments in reference spans.

The width: b=22cm (to respect the dimensions of the posts)

The height must meet the following conditions:

. h> l/16 h 482/16=30.25cm

√ √
M 0u 193×10−3
. hc ≥ = =0.438m
0.92×b×μ×f l this 0.92 ×0.22×0.39×14.17

Let h=45cm

The final loading scheme, becomes after taking into account the self-weight of the beam:

Q=615×3.415=2100.22+ 850=2950.22 kN
S=150×3.415=512.25 KN
 Fig.3: calculation diagram of the beam with its own weight

II. CALCULATION OF REQUESTS:

Choice of calculation method

Due to the presence of a concentrated load, the flat-rate method is not applicable, so the
Caquot's method prevails.

2. Combinations of charges

To determine the most unfavorable loads, we consider the combinations of loads.

following:

Fig.4: Different loading cases

Each combination is made with the aim of obtaining the most unfavorable loading for
obtain the maximum solicitation that will then be adopted for the sizing.
The 1heloading cases (CCC) gives us the maximum moments on supports.
The 2 and the 3 loading cases (CDC and DCD) give us the maximum moments and
th th

minimum on spans.
 The 2thloadingcase (CDC) provides us with the maximum shear forces in
the edge supports, and finally the 4thand the 5thloading cases (CCD and DCC) for the supports
intermediaries.
Note:
For the first 3 loading cases, we use two load combinations at the ultimate limit state (ULS):

(1.35 G + 1.5 Q)
(G+1.5 Q)
For the last 2 loading cases, we only introduce the load combination (1.35
G+1.5 Q).

At the ELS and for all loading cases, we use the load combination (G+Q).

3. Bending moments

i. Moment on support
The moment due to loads distributed on support:

−q w∗the w3 +q e∗the e 3
M q=
8 . 5 ∗(l ' w+l ' e)

The moment due to concentrated loads on the left support:

− Kw∗Predw∗lw '2
Mpw=
(l ' w+l ' e )

The moment due to concentrated loads on the right support:

−Ke∗Predator∗the e 2
Mpe=
(l ' w+l ' e )

The total moment on support:

M tot =M q + Mpe + M pw

ELU Bay 1 Support 2 Truss 2 Support 3 Span 3

The (m) 3,77 2.96 4,82

0.00056
K combinationsw 0 4

0.00026
Ke 5 0
 qu(KN/m) 47.5 47.5 47.5

Pu (KN) 0 0 95.85

Mq(KN.m) -66.03 -99.06

(1.35G + 1.5Q)
Mpw(KN.m) 0 0

Mon(KN.m) 0 -0.1614

|Mtot(KN.m) -66.03 -99.22

qu(KN/m) 37.18 37.18 37.18

Pu (KN) 0 0 71

Mq (KN.m) -52.4 -78.83

(G+1.5Q)
Mpw(KN.m) 0 0

Mon(KN.m) 0 -0.1212

|Mtot(KN.m) -52.4 -78.95

Table 1. Maximum moments on supports given by the combination (CCC) at the Ultimate Limit State.

ELS Span 1 Support 2 Truss 2 Support 3 Truss 3

The (m) 3.77 2.96 4.82

qs(KN/m) 34.62 34.62 34.62

Ps (KN) 0 0 71

Kw 0 0,000564

Ke 0.000265 0

Mq(KN.m) -48.12 -72.2

Mpw(KN.m) 0 0

Mon(KN.m) 0 0.1212

|Mtot(KN.m) -48.12 -72.32

Table 2. Maximum moments at supports given by the combination (CCC) at the SLE
 ii. Moments in spans

The expression of the bending moment in the continuous span is given by:

With:

o Bending moment of the reference span:

. For a span supporting a distributed load q and a concentrated load F:

. For a span supporting only a distributed load:

Moment on the left support of the considered span.

Moment on the right support of the considered span.

The abscissa of the maximum moment in continuous span is given by:

With: Maximum isostatic moment of span i subjected only to loads

distribute.
Case Truss Combination i m0(KN.m) x (m) µ0(x) (KN.m) Mt(x)(KN.m)

1 84.39 1,535 81.479 56

(1.35G + 1.5Q) 2 68.1 1.62 67.05 10.165

3 137.94 3.39 205.446 176.96

1 66.05 1.54 63.84 38.29

(G+1.5Q) 2 50.48 1,608 49.61 27.49

3 107,97 3.35 157.66 128.36

1 70.74 1.49 67.63 44.37

(1.35G + 1.5Q) 2 81.28 1.69 80.67 9.4

3 115.64 3.52 184.9 161.68

1 52.41 1.48 49.99 26.89

(G+1.5Q) 2 63.62 1,706 63.238 1.77

3 85.67 3.53 136.84 119.56

Tab3. Moments in spans at L'ELU

Case Span i m0(KN.m) x (m) µ0(x) (KN.m) Mt(x)(KN.m)

1 39,182 1.55 59.56 40.72

2 48,644 1.63 49.76 6.78

3 97,760 3.4 150.68 130

1 31,636 1.49 50.1 32.97

2 60,246 1.69 58.8 6.24

3 78,657 3.53 136.84 119.83

 Tab4. Moments in spans at the ELS

Truss I Mt(x)(KN.m)

1 56

ELU 2 27.49

3 176.96

1 40.72

ELS 2 6.78

3 130

Tab5. Maximum moments in spans

Span i Mt(x)(KN.m)

1 26.89

ELU 2 1.77

3 119.56

1 32.97

ELS 2 6.24

3 119.83

Tab6. Minimum moments in spans

4. Calculation of shear forces

The cutting efforts are given by the following formulas:

With: V0eand V0ware the absolute values of the shear forces on the right and left at support 'i' of the
reference spans.

The expression of the shear force in an isostatic span is given by:

. For a span supporting a distributed load and a concentrated load:

. For a span supporting only a distributed load:

Case of 1 2 3 4
loading Support 'i'
D G D G D G
max
V(KN)
0u 89.53 -89.53 87.87 -87.87 95.96 -95.96
CCD
V muax(KN) 72.01 -107.04 82.45 -93.28 113.81 -78.1

max
V(KN)
0u 75.07 -75.07 87.87 -87.87 141.12 -141.12
DCC
V muax(KN) 59.46 -90.67 76,79 -98.77 161.7 -120.53

Tab 7. Maximum cutting efforts at the connection points of supports

The concentrated force is almost in the middle of the span, so it does not induce a shear force.
right to his support.

III. REINFORCEMENT
Longitudinal armatures
 Let's detail the calculation for [Link], and for the other spans a calculation
and it is built up. All results will be summarized in Table Tab.8.

Since the cracking is not very detrimental, we proceed with a design at the Ultimate Limit State (ULS), then a
verification at the ELS, as well as a verification of the non-fragility condition.

Longitudinal armatures in spans

Mu=176.96−310
MN.m

So the section will be devoid of compressed reinforcements.

Let Ast=3HA16+3HA16+3HA12= 15.45 cm².

[Link] at the ELS

Ms 130 KN.m.

Y1is the solution to the equation:

 Y10.139 m

(Verified)

iii. Condition of non-fragility

So the condition of non-fragility is verified

Span 'i' 1 2 3

Mu(KN.m) 56 27.49 176.96

Μ 0.175 0.086 0.32

μl(fe=400MPa) 0.39 0.39 0.39

Asc(cm²) 0 0 0

Α 0.23 0.1125 0.5

yu(m) 0.0736 0.036 0.21

Z (m) 0.29 0.305 0.336

 Atheoretical stress(cm²) 5.55 2.591 15.14

Amin(cm²) 0.85 0.85 1.11

3HA12+3HA 3HA16+3HA16+3HA
AReal (cm²) 12 3HA12 12

6.78 3.39 15.45

y1(m) 0.131 0.0996 0.139

ISRH/AN(m4) 0.000528 0.000319 0.0017

Ms (KN.m) 40.72 6.78 129.39

σbc (Mpa) 10.16 2.11 10.62

σbc (Mpa) 15 15 15

σbc < σbc Verified Verified Verified

Table 8: longitudinal reinforcements in spans

iv. Longitudinal armatures on supports

Support "i" 1 2 3 4

Mu(KN.m) --------- -66.03 -99.22 ---------

Μ --------- 0.2 0.18 ---------

μl(fe400MPa --------- 0.39 0.39 ---------

 Asc(cm²) --------- 0 0 ---------

Α --------- 0.28 0.25 ---------

yu(m) --------- 0.089 0.105 ---------

Z (m) --------- 0.284 0.378 ---------

Atheoretical systemcm²--------- 6.68 7.54 ---------

Amin(cm²) --------- 0.85 1.11 ---------

3HA12+3HA1
Areal (cm²) ---------3HA10+3HA14 4 ---------

--------- 6.98 8.01 ---------

y1(m) --------- 0.134 0.16 ---------

ISRH/AN(m4) --------- 0.000538 0.00111 ---------

Ms(KN.m) --------- -48.12 -72.32 ---------

σbc (Mpa) --------- 11.9 10.5 ---------

σbc (Mpa) --------- 15 15 ---------

σbc < σbc --------- Verified Verified ---------

Table 9: Table of longitudinal reinforcements on supports

[Link] of transverse reinforcements

Reduced sharp effort

For the spans subjected only to distributed loads (edge spans):

For the span subjected to a concentrated load (intermediate span):

So:
With:

a: The position of the concentrated force relative to the nearest support

1 2 3 4
Support 'i'
D G D G D G

qu(KN/m) 47.5 47.5 47.5 47.5 47.5 47.5

V muax(KN) 72.01 -107.04 82.45 -98.77 161.7 -120.53

V ured(KN) 58.15 93.185 68.59 84.91 143.88 102.71

Table 10. Table of reduced cutting efforts

Verification of concrete with regard to shear stress

We must verify that:

For a barely harmful fissuration and for an angle of inclination of the reinforcements = 900 :

iii. Minimum percentage of transverse reinforcements

 iv. Minimum diameter of transverse reinforcements

{
ϕ t≤ Min ϕlmin;
h b0
;
35 10 }
=Min {10;12.85;22 }

We have a frame and two stirrups: At = 6 Ø6 = 1.69cm².

v. Maximum spacing of the reinforcements

St
= Min (0.9 d ; 40 cm ; 15Øl min if Asc≠ 0) = Min (0.9×32; 40 cm) = 28.8 cm

Let it be

St
Min (0.9 d; 40 cm; 15Ø)l min if Asc≠ 0) = Min (0.9×42; 40 cm)=37.8 cm

Let it be

vi. Reinforcement

For spans subjected to distributed loads and concentrated forces:

St0
From the sewing rule, the initial spacing is determined. on the right of support by ensuring:
S
7cm ¿ t0 ¿t
S this rule is given by:

*ft28= 2.1 MPa.

* K= 1 (simple flexion, without concrete rework, F.P.P)

. * γs=1,15.

* α = 90°.
 V ured
τ ured=
b0. d
*

Span No. 1:

For x = 0;

St 0
=11cm
2

21 cm. 7 c m ≤ S t 0≤ S t=29cm
t0
Let S

The transverse reinforcements of the right half span are then distributed as follows:

11/7x25/13.5. Then we proceed by symmetry.

Truss No. 2 :

For x = 0;
 St 0
=9cm
2

=18 cm. 7 c m ≤ S t 0≤ S t=29cm

t0
Let S

The transverse reinforcements of the right half span are then distributed as follows:

9/2x20/5x25/11. Then we proceed by symmetry

Truss No. 3:

St 0
=6cm
2

= 12 cm. 7 c m ≤ S t 0≤ S t=38cm
t0
Let S

The transverse reinforcements of the right half-span are then distributed as follows:

6/2x13/2x16/2x20/2x25/2x35/17. Then we proceed by symmetry

3. Verification of supports

Sliding steels
 For a bank support:

For interim support:

With:

Z : lever arm = 0.9 × d = 0.288m

Z : lever arm = 0.9×d = 0.378m

Support (KN) AG(cm²) AGréelle(cm²)

I
Left Right (KN.m) Left Right Left Right

The extension of the reinforcements

(1) --- 72.01 0 --- 2.07 ---
is not necessary.

Extend the reinforcements of

Extend the rebar of
assembly of the span beyond
span deflection to
support
beyond the support 3HA10+
(2) 107.04 82.45 66.03 -3.51 4.22
3HA14= 6.98cm²
3HA10 + 3HA14 = 6.98 cm²

Extend the reinforcements of Extend the reinforcements of

assembly of the span to span deflection beyond
beyond support the support
(3) 98.77 161.7 99.22 -7.06 -2.89
3HA12+ 3HA14= 8.01 cm² 3HA12+ 3HA14= 8.01 cm²

The extension of
(4) 120.53 --- 0 3.46 --- armatures is not ---
necessary.
 Tab12. Calculation table for sliding steels

ii. verification of the compressed connecting rod

For a bank support:

It must be that:

With:

oσbCompression constraint in concrete

o a= lacoating-2cm and the asupport width.
oe = coating = 2.5cm.
o
For an intermediate support:

It is necessary that:

With:

Support 'i' Width of the support (m)a (m) |Vu(KN) σb(MPa) σb≤ 13.33MPa
(1) 0.22 0.175 72.01 3.74 Verified

(2) 0.22 0.175 107.04 5.56 Verified

(3) 0.22 0.175 161.7 8.4 Verified

(4) 0.22 0.175 120.53 6.26 Verified

Tab 13. Verification table of the compressed connecting rod.

IV. VERIFICATION OF THE BEAM DEFLECTION:

 The verification of the deflection is a justification concerning the service limit state. It becomes
useless if the following conditions are met:

With:

o M0Moment of the reference span

oMt: Maximum moment in span
oTensioned steel section in span

The verification of these three conditions for the different spans of the beam will be summarized.
in the table Truss "i" 1 2 3 who follows:

h (m) 0.35 0.35 0.45

l (m) 3,77 3.7 4.82

h/l 0.092 0.094 0.093

Condition Verified Verified Verified

Mt (KN.m) 39.78 8.96 129.39

M0(KN.m) 65.506 59.24 100.53

(1/10) × (Mt/ M0) 0.060 0.015 0.128

(n
Condition ( Verified ) ( Verified )
Verified)

A (cm²) 6.78 3.39 15.45

b(m) 0.22 0.22 0.22

d (m) 0.32 0.32 0.42

A/(b×d) 0.0096 0.0048 0.0167

(n
Condition ( Verified ) (Verified)
Verified

No
Verification of the No use Not useful
verified
 Tab 14. Conditions for checking the arrows.

Aisle No. 3:

Since the beam does not support partitions, we can use the flat-rate method.
stated by theBAEL for the verification of the deflection in the span .

Let's calculate:

Such as:

I0Moment of inertia of the total section rendered homogeneous.

,
Digital application:

.
However, the allowable arrow is limited to:

car L<5m.

The arrow is verified.

V. REINFORCEMENT SCHEME OF THE BEAM

Fig.6: Reinforcement diagram of the 1st span.
Fig. 7: Rebar diagram of the 2nd span
Fig.8: Reinforcement diagram