Strip method

By Girma K.(MSc)
1. Strip method of slab design

 This method was developed by Swedish Engineer, Hillerborg, in

1956.
 In this method, ( sometimes referred to as, equilibrium theory), a
moment field is first determined the fulfills equilibrium
requirements, after which the reinforcement in the slab at each point
is designed for this moment field.
 If a distribution of moment can be found satisfying both equilibrium
and boundary conditions for a given external loading and if the yield
moment capacity of the slab is nowhere exceeded, then the given
external loading will represent a lower bound of the true carrying
capacity.
Upper bound and lower bound theorems

 General theory of structural plasticity states that the collapse load of a

structure lies between two limits, an upper bound and the lower bound of the
true collapse load.
 lower bound theorem:-if for a given external load, it is possible to find the
distribution of moments that satisfies equilibrium requirements with the
moment not exceeding the yield moment at any location and if the boundary
conditions are satisfied, then the given load is a lower bound of the true
carrying capacity.
 Upper bound theorem:- if for a small increment of displacement, the internal
work done by the slab, assuming that the moment at every plastic hinge is
equal to the plastic moment and that boundary conditions are satisfied, is equal
to the external work done by the given load for that same small increment of
displacement then the load is an upper bound of the true carrying capacity.
Basic principles
The governing equation for a small slab element having sides is:

Where, q= external load per unit area

= bending moments per unit width in x & y directions respectively
= twisting moment
The basis for the simple strip method is that the torsional moment is chosen
equal to zero; no load is assumed to be resisted by the twisting strength of
the slab. Thus,
 Cont’d
This equation can be split conveniently into two parts, representing
twistless beam strip action.

&

Where the proportion of load taken by the strips is k in the x direction &
1-k in the y-direction. In many regions in slabs, the value of k will be
either 0 or 1. with k=0, all of the load is dispersed by the strips in the y-
direction. with k=1, all of the load is carried in the x direction in other
regions, it may be reasonable to assume that the load is divided equally in
the two directions (i.e. k=0.5)
Cont’d

Choice of load distribution

The load q can be divided arbitrarily between x & y direction. However,
designers should carry out the distribution in such a way that it doesn’t
compromise the safety as well as serviceability performance of the slab.
Economy need to be considered as well. Observe the following load
distribution cases.
Case 1- a simply supported square slab, k=0.5
In this example, the slab is subjected to a distributed area load q. the load is
distributed uniformly and has a side dimension of ‘a’. The simplest
distribution case is obtained by setting k=0.5 over the entire slab. The load on
all strips in each direction is the giving a maximum moment of
Cont’d

Case 1 Case 2
 Cont’d

Case 1 Case 2
Curvatures, hence moments, are All the load on any region is carried in
greater in the middle strips than the the direction giving the shortest distance
edge strips in the direction parallel to the nearest support. The solution
to the edge. If the slab is reinforced proceeds, giving k values of either 0 or 1,
depending on the region with load
according to this distribution,
transmitted in the directions indicated by
extensive moments redistribution
the arrows in the second figure. For a
would be required accompanied by strip A-A at a distance from the x-axis
extensive cracking at the middle the moment is,
making the design uneconomical
and fail its serviceability.
The lateral distribution of moments as in
2d would theoretically require a
continuously variable bar spacing
obviously an impracticality.
Cont’d
one way to mitigate this would be
to reinforce for the average
moment over a certain width,
approximating the actual lateral
variation in a stepwise manner.
This results in an outcome which is
on the unsafe side. However
conservative assumptions, like
neglect of strain hardening of the
reinforcement, would surely
compensate for the slight reduction
in safety margin.
Consider the following distribution
which results in a better design.
Case 3
Cont’d
Case 3
Here, the division is made so that the and for the strip along section B-B,
load is carried to the nearest support, the maximum moment is,
as before, but load near the diagonals
has been divided, with one half taken
in each direction. Thus, k is given The variation of along the line is
values of 0 or 1 along the middle shown in figure 3d. This design leads
edges and a value of 0.5 in the corners to a practical arrangement of
and center of the slabs, with load reinforcement one with constant
dispersions in the directions indicated spacing through the center strip of
by the arrows shown in figure 3a. width and a wider spacing through
Two different strip loading are now the outer strips, where the elastic
identified. For an x direction strip curvatures and moments are known to
along section A-A, the maximum be less.
moment is,
Rectangular slabs
 All the previous cases represented
strip design techniques for square
slabs.
 When it comes to rectangular slabs,
it is logical to assume that
throughout most of the area, the load
will be carried in the short direction.
In addition, it is important to take
into account because of their length,
longitudinal reinforcing bars will be
more expensive than transverse bars
of the same size and spacing.
Consider the following two load
distributions options suggested by
Hillerborg.
 Cont’d
First case represents an option with Here the load in the corner is divided
discontinuity lines originating from the equally in the x and y direction as shown,
slab corners at an angle depending on while elsewhere all of the load is carried in
the ratio of the short to the long sides of the direction indicated by the arrows. The
the slab. All of the load in each region arrangement gives slab moments as follows.
is assumed to be carried in the In the x-direction:
directions indicated by the arrows. This
side strips
requires continuously varying
reinforcement to be strictly correct
which is impractical. Middle strip
The second option is more preferable
and it represents discontinuity lines
In the y direction:
parallel to the sides of the slab. For
such cases, it is reasonable to take edge Side strips
bands of width equal to one fourth of Middle strips
the short span dimensions.
Fixed edges and continuity
the strip method gives flexibility to the
assignment of moments between
negative and positive sections of slabs
that are fixed or continuous over their
supported edges. Some attention
should be paid to elastic moment ratios
to avoid problems with cracking and
deflection at service loads. However,
the redistribution that can be achieved
in slabs, which are rather lightly
reinforced and, thus, have large plastic
rotation capacities when overloaded,
permits considerable arbitrary
readjustment of the ratio of negative to
positive moments in a strip.
 Cont’d
For slab strips with one end fixed and one The selection of relates directly to the
simply supported, the dual goals of ratio of negative to positive moments
constant moment in the unloaded central in the strip.
region and suitable ratio of negative to
positive moments govern the location to be
The moment curve of fig b is chosen
chosen for the discontinuity lines. The so that the moment is constant over
figure below shows a uniformly loaded the unloaded part i.e. shearing force is
rectangular slab having two adjacent edges zero. With constant moment , the
fixed and the other two edges simply positive steel can be fully stressed
supported. Note that although the middle over most of the strip. The maximum
strips have the same width as the previous positive moment in the x-direction
case, the discontinuity lines are shifted to middle strip is then,
account for fixed ends. Their location is
defined by coefficient , with a value
clearly less than 0.5 for the slab shown , its
exact value yet to be determined.
Cont’d
the cantilever moment at the left support is

And so the negative moment at the left support is

For reference, the ratio of negative to positive

moments in the x-direction middle strip is

The moment in the x-direction edge strips are one

half of those in the middle strips because the load is
one half as great.
It is reasonable to choose the same ratio between
span and support moments in the y-direction as in
the x-direction.
cont’d

Accordingly, the distance from the right support, to the maximum

positive moment section is chosen as .it follows that the maximum
positive moment is,

Applying the same methods as used for the x direction shows that the
negative support moment in the y-direction middle strip is
Unsupported edges
the real power of the strip method becomes
evident when dealing with non-standard
problems such as slabs with an unsupported
edges, slabs with holes, or slabs with re-
entrant corners.
For a slab with one edge unsupported, a
reasonable basis for analysis by the strip
method is that a strip along the unsupported
edge takes a greater load per unit area than
the actual unit load acting i.e. that the strip
along the unsupported edge acts as a
support for the strips at right angles. Such
strips have been referred to as strong bands.
A strong band is in effect an integral beam
usually having the same total depth as the
remainder of the slab but containing a
concentration of reinforcements.
Cont’d
The above figure shows a rectangular From which
slab carrying a uniformly distributed
factored load of q per unit area, with
fixed edges along three sides and no Thus, k can be calculated after the support
support along one short side. moment is selected. The appropriate value
of to be used in the above equation will
Discontinuity lines are chosen as shown . depend on shape of the slab. If a is large
The load on a unit middle strip in the x relative to b, the strong band in the y-
direction, shown in fig b includes the direction at the edge will be relatively stiff,
downward load q in the region adjacent and the moment at the left support in the x-
to the fixed left edge and the upward direction strips will approach the elastic
reaction kq in the region adjacent to the value for a propped cantilever. If the slab is
free edge. summing moments about the nearly square, the deflection of the strong
left end, with moments positive band will tend to increase the support
clockwise and with the unknown support moment, a value about one half the free
moment denoted , gives cantilever moment might be selected.
Cont’d
once is selected and k is known, it is
easily shown that the maximum span Moments in the y-direction strip adjacent
moment occurs when, to the fixed edge as in fig c, will be one
eighth of those values. In the y-direction
strip along the free edge, fig e, moments
It has a value can, with slight conservatism, be made
equal to (1+k) times those in the y-
direction middle strip.
The moments in the x-direction edge
strips are one half of those in the If the unsupported edge is the long span
direction, then a significant fraction of
middle strips. In the y-direction as in
the load in the slab region will be carried
fig d, the cantilever moment is .
in the direction perpendicular to the long
Adopting a ratio of support to span edges, and the simple distribution as
moment of 2 results in support and shown in the following figure is more
span moments, respectively, of suitable.
cont’d
A strong band along the free edge serves as
an integral edge beam, with normally chosen
as low as possible considering limitations on
tensile reinforcement ratio in the strong band.
For a y-direction strip, with moments positive
clockwise,

From which
Cont’d
The value of K1 may be selected so Slabs with larger opening must be
as to make use of the minimum steel treated more rigorously. Integral load
in the x direction required by ACI carrying beams are provided along the
code 7.12. for the calculation of K2, edge of the opening, usually having the
can be taken to be one half of the free same depth as the remainder of the slab
cantilever moment may be but with extra reinforcement to pick up
appropriate in typical cases. the loads from the affected region and
transmit it to supports.
Slabs with holes
the beams should be chosen so as to
Slabs with small openings can usually carry the loads most directly to the
be designed as if there were no supported edges of the slab. The width
openings, replacing the interrupted of the strong bands should be selected
steel with bands of reinforcing bar of so that the reinforcement ratios are at
equivalent area on either side of the or below the value required to produce
opening in each direction. tension controlled members.
The end