×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

(OP)
as stated on the (ACI 318.2-14):3.1.1) "Elastic behavior shall be an acceptable basis for determining internal forces and displacements of thin shells. This behavior shall be permitted to be established by calculations based on an analysis of the uncracked concrete structure in which the material is assumed linearly elastic, homogeneous, and isotropic. Poisson’s ratio of concrete shall be permitted to be taken equal to zero."
can I design slab/check deflection using an etabs model without using property modifiers for all members or do I misunderstand this?

RE: Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

A question to anyone else reading this thread: does the ACI actually allow to ignore the plate effect (also present in shells) of restricted expansion (Poisson's ratio is a part of plate stiffness equations, and it is what distinguishes a plate from a beam) in shell design? That doesn't seem to make any sense. With such an approach, shells/plate are modeled as as collection of curved beams/beams in two orthogonal directions - that is not how a plate or shell behaves!

To answer your question: what do you mean by "property modifiers"? The text you quoted seems to allow you to modify the property of shells in such a way that they become curved beams (zero Poisson's ratio). Furthermore, the text you quoted is obviously not applicable to all reinforced concrete shells - uncracked behavior is not always guaranteed with shells!

The correct (linear-elastic) way to perform any design of plates or shells is to follow the linearly elastic solution for internal forces, and to use appropriate methods for reducing stiffness in case the plate/shell/beam is expected to crack. Code provisions do not overrule basic principles of structural mechanics that your hand-calculations or FEM-models assume to be valid.

PS. Axisymmetric liquid storage tanks are some of the few RC shell structures that are usually designed to be uncracked (by prestressing the concrete shell), and for those, the uncracked section assumption is reasonable.

RE: Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

(OP)
thank you for your response
property modifiers represent the cracking behavior of structural elements , and my question is basically about modeling an uncracked structure (uncracked column, beam, shear wall, slab) when analyzing and designing (shells) based on the quoted text.
I agree with you that uncracked behavior is not always guaranteed with shells, so, where is the quoted text applicable? and can we also guarantee the uncracked behavior of shells other than liquid storage tanks?

RE: Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

I am not very familiar with ACI, but the most straightforward answer to your main question is that you cannot assume that the structure is uncracked just because it is a shell - regardless of what an ACI chapter says about it. If you wish to prevent cracking, you must ensure that the cross-sectional stresses do not exceed the tensile strength of concrete; this can be achieved by limiting shell geometry (e.g., a dome with restrictions on width-to-height ratio) or by introducing prestressing. For a general shell (no axisymmetry, non-uniform load), ensuring an uncracked cross-section is very difficult.

Furthermore, I wish to emphasize that modeling a shell (or slab) with zero Poisson's ratio is incorrect, because a basic concept of shells and plates (2D objects) is that Poisson expansion is restricted, resulting in a higher stiffness than for a beam. Illustrating the relevance of Poisson's ratio for the isotropic case:

a beam: bending stiffness = EI = E*(b*h^3)/12

a plate: bending stiffness = D = E*t^3/(12*(1-v^2)) , where v = Poisson's ratio

The shell is simply a stiffer plate (initial curvature increases stiffness and capacity), and from the above two equations, a difference of (approximately, depending on material) 20% in stiffness - in favor of the plate - can be observed.

This advice applies to modelling with FEM or performing hand-calculations. You may, of course, calculate an extremely conservative deflection approximation by neglecting the shell stiffness and instead using a beam model, but this should be done using the internal forces received from elastic theory (which includes non-zero Poisson's ratio), because elastic theory is what correctly predicts the distribution of internal forces.

RE: Property modifiers for slab/shell thin design

(OP)
thank you for your clarification

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close