The Equivalent Frame Concept As mentioned in Section 11.1.

3, in the case of beam-supported twoway slabs, 100 percent of the gravity loads on the slabs are transmitted to the supporting columns, in bot
Ih longitudinal and transverse directions (see Fig. 11.3(b)). The mechanism of load transfer from slab to
columns is achieved by flexure, shear and torsion in the various elements. The slab-beam-column system
behaves integrally as a three-dimensional system, with the involvement of all the floors of the building, to
resist not only gravity loads, but also lateral loads. However, a rigorous three-dimensional analysis of the
structure is complex, and not warranted except in very exceptional structures. Conventionally, when stiff
beams are provided along column lines, the slab design is separated from the design of beams (and
columns), as in the case of wall-supported slabs. The remaining part of the structure, comprising a threedimensional skeletal framework of beams and columns, is separated for convenience, into (twodimensional) plane frames in the longitudinal and transverse direction of the building. As the integrally
cast slab also contributes to the strength and stiffness of the beams, the beam members are considered
as flanged beams (T-beams, L-beams), with portions of the slab acting as the flanges of these beams;
this concept was explained in Chapter 9. However, when the beams are flexible or absent, it is not
appropriate to separate the slab design from the beam design.
In using the concept of a plane frame comprising columns and slab-beam members at various floor
levels, fundamentally, the slab-beam member should consist of the entire floor member (slab and beam, if
any) tributary to a line of columns forming the frame. This is illustrated in Fig. 11.24(a) and (b), which
show how a building structure may be considered as a series of equivalent (plane) frames, each
consisting of a row of columns and the portion of the floor system tributary to it. The part of the floor
bound by the panel centrelines, on either side of the columns, forms the slab-beam member in this plane
frame. Such equivalent frames must be considered in both longitudinal and transverse directions, to
ensure that load transfer takes place in both directions [Fig. 11.24(a)].
The equivalent frames can now be analysed under both gravity loads and lateral loads using the
procedures mentioned in Chapter 9. The primary difference between the frame in Fig. 9.1(b) and the one
in Fig. 11.24(b) lies in the width of the slab-beam member and the nature of its connections with the
columns. Whereas in the conventional skeletal frame, the full beam is integral with the column, and the
rotational restraint offered by the column at the joint is for the entire beam (with both beam and column
undergoing the same rotation at the joint), in the equivalent frame, the column connection is only over
part of the slab-beam member width, and hence the flexural restraint offered by the column to the slabbeam member is only partial. Thus, the rotation of the slab-beam member along a transverse section at
the column support will vary, and will be equal to the column rotation only in the im For example, for the
purpose of gravity load analysis, it is possible to simplify the mes. Accordingly, instead of mediate vicinity
of the column. This, in turn, results in torsion in the portion of the slab transverse to the span and passing
through the column (i.e., a cross-beam running over the column).
In the elastic analysis of the plane frame in Fig. 9.1(b), it was shown (in Section 9.3) that several
approximations can be made, subject to certain limitations. Similar approximations can also be made in
the present case.
For example, for the purpose of gravity load analysis, it is possible to simplify the analysis by applying the
concept of substitute frames. Accordingly, instead of analysing the full equivalent frame [Fig. 11.24(b)], it
suffices to analyse separate partial frames [Fig. 11.24(c)], comprising each floor (or roof), along with the
columns located immediately above and below. The columns are assumed to be fixed at their far ends
[refer Cl. 24.3.1 of the Code]. Such substitute frame analysis is permissible provided the frame geometry
(and loading) is relatively symmetrical, so that no significant sway occurs in the actual frame.

Fig. 11.25 Moment variations in a two-way slab