You are on page 1of 13

Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U.

(2016)

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF A NETWORK OF INTERACTING


PRIMARY AND SECONDARY BEAMS AS ALTERNATIVES IN
LARGE SPAN CONSTRUCTION

Ubani Obinna Uzodimma


Department of Civil Engineering, Nnamdi Azikiwe University
PMB 5025, Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria
E-mail: rankiesubani@gmail.com
Abstract
In this paper, a hall of 12m x 20m dimensions was designed with no interior columns using Eurocode
2. The floor system of the hall was supported by an interaction of primary and secondary beams. The
full steps for load analysis, load transfer from secondary beam to primary beam, structural analysis,
and full design of the structure was carried out manually. After the analysis and design, a section of
900mm x 400mm, and reinforcement ratio of 1.786% was found to satisfy both ultimate and
serviceability limit state requirements of the primary beams.

Keywords: Primary beams, Secondary beams, Eurocode 2, Large Span, Reinforced Concrete

1.0 Introduction

In some construction cases, it is desirable to have large uninterrupted floor areas, and in such cases,
the presence of columns has to be minimal. This feature is desirable in buildings such as conference
halls, stadiums, churches, dance halls, and all buildings where there is need for performing stage, and
spectators. The structural implication of such features is usually the presence of long spans elements,
and a lot of solutions already exist for such constructions.

It is already a well known fact that the use of beams becomes more uneconomical as the construction
span increases. This is primarily because the predominant internal forces in beams are bending
moment and shearing forces, which are all functions of the length of the beam. To accommodate these
internal forces during design calls for increase in the member sections to satisfy ultimate and
serviceability limit state requirements. This further adds to the total dead load of the structure, which
is conventionally undesirable for economical reasons. A better solution for handling the problem of
long span construction is the use of trusses. Trusses are arrangements of straight members connected
at their ends. The members are arranged to form a triangulated system so as to make them
geometrically unchangeable, and hence will not form a mechanism. They resist loads by developing
primarily axial forces in their members especially if the ends of the members are pinned together. In
typical trusses, loads are applied only at the joints. Trusses provide practical and economical solutions
to engineering problems. Trusses can efficiently span greater lengths than beams, and hence can be
found in roof of buildings, bridges etc.

Figure 1.0: Different truss configuration systems, and their possible loading conditions

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 1


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

Arches are also widely used in modern engineering due to their ability to cover large spans and their
attractiveness from aesthetic point of view. The greater the span, the more an arch becomes more
economical than a truss. Materials of the modern arches are concrete, steel, and timber. Arches are
mainly classified as three-hinged, two-hinged, and arch with fixed supports. Arches carry most of
their loads by developing compressive stresses within the arch itself and therefore in the past were
frequently constructed using materials of high compressive strength and low tensile strength such as
stones and masonry. Arches may be constructed in a variety of geometries; they may be semi-circular,
parabolic or even linear where the members comprising the arch are straight.

Figure 2.0: Arch Structure Systems

When it is desirable to have a relatively large hall devoid of internal columns, a network of interacting
primary and secondary beams can be economically employed as alternatives to other solutions. A
little consideration will show that in such cases, the cost of adopting such method of construction can
be cheaper than that of trusses or arches. Furthermore, no serious expertise is required on the part of
the contractor, since standard construction processes are adopted. Therefore in a country like Nigeria,
knowledge of how this can be employed is very much needed among engineers.

2.0 Primary and Secondary Beams


In the simplest term, a network of primary and secondary beams involves supporting a beam (called a
secondary beam) off another beam (called a primary beam) other than from a column. By implication,
it is very usual for the secondary beam to be shallower than the primary beam. The analysis often
involves loading and analysing the secondary beams first, and then the support reactions are
transferred to the primary beam as concentrated loads. The primary beam is often supported off a
column as usual. In the example below, a hall of 12m x 20m with the general arrangement shown
below has been analysed and designed. The design data is shown in Table 1.0.

Table 1.0: Preliminary Design Data


Parameter Value
Thickness of slab 150 mm
All secondary beams 450mm x 230mm
All primary beams 900 mm x 400mm
Density of concrete 25 KN/m3
Design compressive strength of concrete 35 N/mm2
Yield strength of all reinforcements 460 N/mm2
Concrete cover to slab 25mm
Concrete cover to beams 30mm
ULS Combination 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
SLS Combination 1.0Gk + 1.0Qk
Imposed load 5 KN/m2 (NA to BS EN 1991-1-1:2002)
Building Category Category C4

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 2


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

In the example below, we are going to analyse only the internal beams, and we are going to consider
all the spans to be fully loaded at ultimate limit state. From figure 2.1, the secondary beams are shown
in red (dotted lines) while the primary beams are shown in green. Every beam under consideration is
supported by columns at the first and last supports. No internal column exists anywhere in the hall,
and it is also assumed that the internal beams are not carrying wall loads.

Figure 3: General Floor Arrangement of the Hall

3.0 Load Analysis of Secondary Beams


Permanent loads on slab

Self weight of slab = 25 KN/m3 × 0.15m = 3.75 KN/m2

Weight of finishes (assume) = 1.3 KN/m2

Partition allowance = 1.5 KN/m2

Total dead load (Gk) = 6.55 KN/m2

Variable Load on slab

Leading variable action (Imposed load) Qk1 = 5 KN/m2

Total load on slab (ULS) = 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk = 1.35(6.55) + 1.5(5) = 16.3425 KN/m2

Load Analysis of secondary beams

A little consideration will show that the floor slabs are spanning in two directions, since the ratio (k)
of the longer side (Ly) to the shorter side (Lx) is less than 2.

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 3


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

 
Hence, k =  =  = 1.33

We can observe from the general arrangement of the structure that the secondary beams are parallel to
the long span direction of the slab. Therefore, the equivalent load that is transferred from the slab to
the beam can be represented by;
 . × 
p= 
1 −    = 
1 − ( .)  = 19.894 KN/m

Since the beams are receiving loads from both sides, we can multiply by two (to account for the slab
loads at the adjacent sides of the beam).

Hence p = 19.894 × 2 = 39.788 KN/m

Self weight of the beam (ULS) = 1.35 × 0.45m × 0.23m × 25 KN/m3 = 3.49 KN/m

Therefore total load on the secondary beams = 39.788 + 3.49 = 43.278 KN/m

3.1 Structural Analysis of secondary beams (all spans loaded)

Figure 4: Loading and Internal Stresses Diagram of the Secondary Beams

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 4


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

3.2 Structural Design of the secondary beams

Design of span 1-2 and span 5-6

MEd = 53.95 KNm


Effective depth (d) = h – Cnom – ϕ/2 - ϕlinks
Assuming ϕ16 mm bars will be employed for the main bars, and ϕ8mm bars for the stirrups (links)
d = 450 – 30 – 8 − 8 = 404 mm;

Effective flange width of the beams (T-beams)


beff = bw + b’
Where b’ = 0.2(aw + lo) ≤ 0.4lo ≤ 1.0aw (for T-beams)
bw = web width;
aw = Clear distance between the webs of adjacent beams = 3000 – 230 = 2770 mm
lo = The distance between points of zero moment on the beam = 0.85L = 0.85 × 4000 = 3400mm

Therefore in this case, b’ = 0.2(2770 + 3400) = 1234 mm ≤ 0.4lo

Therefore beff = 230 + 1234 = 1464mm

 .! × "#



= 0.00645
   ×  × " 
k= =

Since k < 0.167 No compression reinforcement required


z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882+) , = z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882(0.00645) , = 0.95d

 .! × "#


/0 = = 351.244 mm2
".123 4 ".12 × " × ".! × "
=

Provide 2X16 mm BOT (ASprov = 402 mm2)

To calculate the minimum area of steel required;


8 8
fctm = 0.3 × 67  = 0.3 × 35  = 3.20996 N/mm2 (Table 3.1 EC2)

9:;< ."!!
ASmin = 0.26 × × b × d = 0.26 × × 230 × 404 = 168.587 mm2
=>? "
Check if ASmin < 0.0013 × b × d (120.796 mm2)
Since, ASmin = 168.587 mm2, the provided reinforcement is adequate.

Check for deflection at the span;

K = 1.3 for simply supported at one end and continuous at the other end
A0 "
@= =  × " = 0.0006797 < 10B √35


Since @ < @"


8
EF E 
L/d = K D11 + 1.5(67 + 3.2(67 EF − 1 G
E

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 5


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

8
".""! " ".""! " 
L/d = 1.3 D11 + 1.5√35 × "."""2!2 + 3.2√35 "."""2!2 − 1 G = 1.3(11 + 77.24 + 404.8) =
640.952
 "
ModiLication factor S0 =
TU

 "3 AWXY  " × " ×  .


V0 = = 222.995 N/mm2
"" AWZX[\ "" × "
=

 "
S0 =
.!!
= 1.39

Since the beam is flanged, check the ratio of b/bw = 1464/230 = 6.3652

Since b/bw is greater than 3, multiply the allowable L/d by 0.8

The allowable span/depth ratio = 0.8 × S0 × 640.952 = 0.8 × 1.39 × 640.952 = 712.738
Taking the distance between supports as the effective span, L = 4000mm
"""
Actual deflection L/d = = 9.9
"
Since 712.738 < 9.9, deflection is not a problem

Based on the design presented above, 2Y16mm will be satisfactory for all bottom reinforcements in
the beam;

Top reinforcements (Hogging moment)

Support 2

MEd = 72.89 KNm

 2.1! × "#



= 0.055
 ]  × " × " 
k= =

Since k < 0.167 No compression reinforcement required


z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882+) , = z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882(0.055) , = 0.949d

 2.1! × "#


/0 = = 475 mm2
".123 4
=
".12 × " × ".!! × "

Provide 3X16mm TOP (ASprov = 603 mm2)

Support 3 and 4

MEd = 54.67 KNm

 .2 × "#



= 0.0416
 ]  × " × " 
k= =

Since k < 0.167 No compression reinforcement required


z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882+) , = z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882(0.0416) , = 0.95d

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 6


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

 .2 × "#


/0 = = 355.93 mm2
".123 4 ".12 × " × ".! × "
=

Provide 2X16mm TOP (ASprov = 402 mm2)

Shear Design
Support 1
Ultimate shear force VEd = 68.33 KN
^
VRd,c = [CRd,c.k. (100@ 67 )_ + k1. V7` ]bw.d ≥ (Vmin + k1. V7` ) bw.d
CRd,c = 0.18/b7 = 0.18/1.5 = 0.12

"" ""
k = 1+c = 1+c" = 1.704 > 2.0, therefore, k = 1.702
_ ^ _ ^
Vmin = 0.035d  67  = Vmin = 0.035 × (1.702) × (35) = 0.4598 N/mm2
A0 "
@ =  = " × " = 0.004326 < 0.02; K1 = 0.15

V7` = NEd/Ac < 0.2fcd (Where NEd is the axial force at the section, Ac = cross sectional area of the
concrete), fcd = design compressive strength of the concrete.) Take NEd = 0
^
VRd,c = [0.12 × 1.703(100 × 0.004326 × 35 )_ ] 230 × 404 = 46977.505 N = 46.977505 KN
Since VRd,c (46.977505 KN) < VEd (68.33 KN), shear reinforcement is required.
The compression capacity of the compression strut (VRd,max) assuming θ = 21.8° (cot θ = 2.5)
g.4.h^ .
VRd,max =
:i; j k lmj
 
V1 = 0.6 1 − "

 = 0.6 1 − " = 0.516
n  × 
= 23.33 N/mm2
o .
fcd = =

Let z = 0.9d
" × ".! × " × ".  ×.
VRd,max = p q × 10B = 347.195 KN
. k ".

Since VRd,c < VEd < VRd,max


r 1"
".12 s3 4 7tl j ".12 × " × ".! × " × .
Hence Asw/S = = = 0.1878

Minimum shear reinforcement;


Asw/S = @],vw × x] × yz{| (| = 90° for vertical links)
"."1 × (s "."1 × √
@],vw =
s3 "
= = 0.0010289

Asw/S (min) = 0.0010289 × 230 × 1 = 0.2366


Since 0.2366 > 0.16809, adopt 0.2366
Maximum spacing of shear links = 0.75d = 0.75 × 404 = 303mm
Provide X8mm @ 275mm c/c (Asw/S = 0.36556) Ok

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 7


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

Support 2
Ultimate shear force VEd = 104.78 KN
^
VRd,c = [CRd,c.k. (100@ 67 )_ + k1. V7` ]bw.d ≥ (Vmin + k1. V7` ) bw.d

CRd,c = 0.18/b7 = 0.18/1.5 = 0.12

"" ""
k = 1+c = 1+c = 1.704 > 2.0, therefore, k = 1.702
"
_ ^ _ ^
Vmin = 0.035d 67 = Vmin = 0.035 × (1.702) × (35) = 0.4598 N/mm2
 

A0 "
@ =
 " × "
= = 0.006489 < 0.02; K1 = 0.15

V7` = NEd/Ac < 0.2fcd (Where NEd is the axial force at the section, Ac = cross sectional area of the
concrete), fcd = design compressive strength of the concrete.) Take NEd = 0
^
VRd,c = [0.12 × 1.703(100 × 0.006489 × 35 )_ ] 230 × 404 = 53777.07 N = 53.777 KN
Since VRd,c (53.777 KN) < VEd (104.78 KN), shear reinforcement is required.
The compression capacity of the compression strut (VRd,max) assuming θ = 21.8° (cot θ = 2.5)
g.4.h^ .
VRd,max =
:i; j k lmj
 
V1 = 0.6 1 − "

 = 0.6 1 − " = 0.516
n  × 
= 23.33 N/mm2
o .
fcd = =

Let z = 0.9d
" × ".! × " × ".  ×.
VRd,max = p q × 10B = 347.195 KN
. k ".

Since VRd,c < VEd < VRd,max


r "21"
".12 s3 4 7tl j ".12 × " × ".! × " × .
Hence Asw/S = = = 0.2880

Minimum shear reinforcement;


Asw/S = @],vw × x] × yz{| (| = 90° for vertical links)

0.08 × c~d "."1 × √


@],vw = ~€d "
= = 0.0010289

Asw/S (min) = 0.0010289 × 230 × 1 = 0.2366


Since 0.2366 < 0.2577, adopt 0.2577
Maximum spacing of shear links = 0.75d = 0.75 × 404 = 303mm
Provide Y8mm @ 275mm c/c (Asw/S = 0.36556) Ok
Therefore provide shear links of X8 @ 275mm all through the secondary beam

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 8


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

3.3 Reinforcement Details of Secondary Beams (Sections)

Figure 5: Sections through the secondary beams

4.0 Loading and Analysis of Primary Beams


We can observe from the general arrangement of the structure that the primary beams are parallel to
the short span direction of the slab. Therefore, the equivalent load that is transferred from the slab to
the beam can be represented by;

 . × 
= 16.3425 KN/m
 
p= =

Since the beams are receiving loads from both sides, we can multiply by two (to account for the slab
loads at the adjacent sides of the beam).

Hence p = 16.3425 × 2 = 32.685 KN/m

Self weight of the beam (ULS) = 1.35 × 0.9m × 0.4m × 25 KN/m3 = 12.15 KN/m

Therefore total uniformly distributed load on the primary beams = 32.685 + 12.15 = 44.835 KN/m

For beams on grid lines 2 and 5, the total load transferred from the secondary beams are the
summation of the shear forces on supports 2 and 5 of the secondary beam. This is given by;

104.78 KN + 91.11 KN = 195.89 KN

Figure 6: Loading of the primary beams

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 9


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

Figure 7: Internal Stresses in the primary beams

4.1 Structural Design of the Primary Beams

Design of span A-E

MEd = 1982.37 KNm


Effective depth (d) = h – Cnom – ϕ/2 - ϕlinks
Assuming ϕ32 mm bars will be employed for the main bars, and ϕ10mm bars for the stirrups (links)

d = 900 – 30 – 16 − 10 = 844 mm;

Effective flange width of the beams (T-beams)


beff = bw + b’
Where b’ = 0.2(aw + lo) ≤ 0.4lo ≤ 1.0aw (for T-beams)
bw = web width; aw = Clear distance between the webs adjacent beams; lo = The distance between
points of zero moment on the beam

Therefore in this case, b’ = 0.2(3685 + 12000) = 3137 mm ≤ 0.4lo

Therefore beff = 400 + 3154 = 3537 mm

 !1.2 × "#



= 0.0224
   × 2 × 1 
k= =

Since k < 0.167 No compression reinforcement required


z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882+) , = z = d$0.5 + ((0.25 − 0.882(0.0224) , = 0.95d

 !1.2 × "#


/0 = = 6177.91 mm2
".123 4 ".12 × " × ".! × 1
=

Provide 8X32mm BOT (ASprov = 6432 mm2)

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 10


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

The minimum area of steel required;


8 8
fctm = 0.3 × 67  = 0.3 × 35  = 3.20996 N/mm2 (Table 3.1 EC2)

9:;< ."!!
ASmin = 0.26 × × b × d = 0.26 × × 400 × 844 = 612.458 mm2
=>? "
Check if ASmin < 0.0013 × b × d (438.88 mm2)
Since, ASmin = 612.458 mm2, the provided reinforcement is adequate.

Check for deflection at the span;

K = 1.0 for simply supported beams


A0 
@= = 0.0021546 < 10B √35
 2 × 1
=

Since @ < @"


8
EF E 
L/d = K D11 + 1.5(67 + 3.2(67 EF − 1 G
E

8
".""! " ".""! " 
L/d = 1.0 D11 + 1.5√35 × ".""  + 3.2√35 ".""  − 1 G = 1.0(11 + 24.366 + 43.667) =
79.033
 "
ModiLication factor S0 =
TU

 "3 AWXY  " × " × 2!."!


V0 = = 256.870 N/mm2
"" AWZX[\ "" × 
=

 "
S0 =
.12"
= 1.206

Since the beam is flanged, check the ratio of b/bw = 3537/400 = 8.8425

Since b/bw is greater than 3, multiply the allowable L/d by 0.8

Since the length of span is greater than 7m, multiply L/d also by 7/span
2
The allowable span/depth ratio = 1.206 × 0.8 ×  × 79.033 = 44.479

Taking the distance between supports as the effective span, L = 12000mm


"""
1
Actual deflection L/d = = 14.218

Since 44.479 < 14.218, deflection is not a problem

Provide 25% of the span reinforcement (1608 mm2) as top bars (hanger bars)

Hence provide 4Y25mm Top (ASprov = 1964 mm2)

Provide X16mm @ 175mm spacing as side bars to prevent cracking.

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 11


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

Shear Design

Support A
Ultimate shear force VEd = 562.84 KN
^
VRd,c = [CRd,c.k. (100@ 67 )_ + k1. V7` ]bw.d ≥ (Vmin + k1. V7` ) bw.d

CRd,c = 0.18/b7 = 0.18/1.5 = 0.12

"" ""
k = 1+c = 1+c = 1.486 > 2.0, therefore, k = 1.486
1
_ ^ _ ^
Vmin = 0.035d 67 = Vmin = 0.035 × (1.486) × (35) = 0.375 N/mm2
 

A0  
@ =
 "" × 1
= = 0.009526 < 0.02; (Assuming only 4X32mm bars will be fully anchored at the
supports. This is on the safer side for shear design)
V7` = NEd/Ac < 0.2fcd (Where NEd is the axial force at the section, Ac = cross sectional area of the
concrete), fcd = design compressive strength of the concrete.) Take NEd = 0
^
VRd,c = [0.12 × 1.486(100 × 0.009526 × 35 )_ ] 400 × 844 = 193759.0667 N = 193.759 KN
Since VRd,c (193.759 KN) < VEd (562.84 KN), shear reinforcement is required.
The compression capacity of the compression strut (VRd,max) assuming θ = 21.8° (cot θ = 2.5)
g.4.h^ .
VRd,max =
:i; j k lmj
 
V1 = 0.6 1 − "

 = 0.6 1 − " = 0.516
n  ".1 × 
= 19.833 N/mm2
o .
fcd = =

Let z = 0.9d
"" × ".! × 1 × ".  × !.1
VRd,max = p . k ".
q × 10B = 1072.239 KN
Since VRd,c < VEd < VRd,max
r 1"
".12 s3 4 7tl j ".12 × " × ".! × 1 × .
Hence Asw/S = = = 0.7405

Minimum shear reinforcement;


Asw/S = @],vw × x] × yz{| (| = 90° for vertical links)

0.08 × c~d "."1 × √


@],vw =
~€d "
= = 0.0010289

Asw/S (min) = 0.0010289 × 400 × 1 = 0.41156


Since 0.7405 > 0.41156, adopt 0.7405
Maximum spacing of shear links = 0.75d = 0.75 × 844 = 633mm
Provide 2 Legs of X10mm @ 200mm c/c (Asw/S = 0.785) Ok

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 12


Analysis of Primary and Secondary Beams in Large Span Construction... Ubani Obinna U. (2016)

4.2 Reinforcement Details of Primary Beams


According to clause 9.2.5 of EC2, where a beam is supported by a beam instead of a wall or column
(primary and secondary beam interaction), reinforcement should be provided and designed to resist
the mutual reaction. This reinforcement is in addition to that required for other reasons. The
supporting reinforcement between two beams should consist of links surrounding the principal
reinforcement of the supporting member. Some of these links may be distributed outside the volume
of the concrete, which is common to the two beams.

In this case, additional links of X10@100mm c/c should be distributed at a length of 900mm on the
primary beam, within the interaction zone (see detailing sketches below).

Figure 8: Detailing Sketches of the primary beam

5.0 Conclusion
Interaction of primary and secondary beams can be employed as alternatives in large span
construction, provided that adequate analysis, design, and detailing of the members are carried out.

References
[1] EN 1992-1-1: 2004: Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules
for buildings

Downloaded from www.structville.com (C) Ranks Michael Enterprises (2016) Page 13

You might also like