Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
(OP)
When would you use a post-tensioned conc. floor slab instead of a cast-in-place slab?
When was the last time you drove down the highway without seeing a commercial truck hauling goods?
Download nowINTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS Come Join Us!Are you an
Engineering professional? Join Eng-Tips Forums!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Posting GuidelinesJobs |
Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
|
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
Post tensioned floors allow for longer spans with thinner slabs. Typical span to depth ratios for two way slabs are in the order of:
L/30 to 33 for Conventional Reinforcing (Aci 318 Table 9.5c)
and
L/45 for PT slabs (Per PT Institute)
If your architect is looking for column spacings in the 30 foot range, I would definately consider post tensioning, as these spans would require fairly thick mildly reinforced slabs.
JMHO
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
In my neck of the woods, mid to high rise residential is usually cast in place flat plate.
What about multi-level storage building for cast in place vs. post tensioned? Live loads about 3 times residential live loads.
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
Mike McCann
McCann Engineering
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
Composite slabs would also be worth investigating.
csd
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
what is the question? is it:
"When would you use a post tensioned conc. floor slab instead of a reinforced concrete floor slab?"
or does it concern pre-tensioned elements.
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
We have also specified them when the soils conditions were questionable (fill, ect..) and any sizeable cracking/differential settlement was a huge concern.
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
The general question is "When would you use a post tensioned elevated conc. floor slab instead of a reinforced concrete floor slab?".
It sounds like a lot of post-tensioned slabs are used for on-grade purposes.
The typical storage building I design uses steel. My client wants to erect a building in an area where concrete framing is the norm, and have asked about the better system to use - cast-in-place (regular rebar), or post tensioned. I'm not sure which is the better system, and does the high storage live load have an impact on which system to use?Yes, columns can be closer in storage buildings, but still looking at a 20x20 or 30x30 bay. Like haynewp said, I'm sure at some point it has to be cheaper to lay rebar for a 3-4 story building than using PT.
Yes, hokie66, I understand the terminology, although I don't think I mentioned pre-tensioned as an option.
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
These are in metric so multiply by 3.3 for feet.
htt
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
RE: Cast-in-place vs. Post-tensioned
Your continual reference to "case in place" is what is causing the understanding problem.
PT slabs are "cast in place" just as RC slabs are.
For what you are talking about, PT slabs will work well but I would make the following comments (repeated from another post under Post-tensioning)
"Main thing to consider with these types of loads is that the concrete tensile stresses will be fairly high and the most economical design will be to use partial prestress. Allowing for pattern loading will result in a need for both top and bottom reinforcement as well as the PT tendons.
To do this poroperly, you cannot use the banded/distributed logic and especially the "average moment" logic of the PTI and ACI. You need to consider actual stress concentrations and design for each area accordingly. Averages simply are not logical.
It is also more logical to use bonded PT to gain the extra crack control advantages post cracking.
Flat plates will normally not be the most economical solution for these types of slabs. Flat Slabs with Drop Panels are far more efficient and will give you much better results.
"
Also, someone earlier mentioned L/D ratios of L/45. Don't try it. The ACXI/PTI design methods might say it works but when you calculate it properly allowing for stress concrentrations and the actual effect of cracking on deflections you would want lower L/D ratios even for lightly loaded slabs. As the loads get heavier the thicknesses will need to increase proportionately.