July-Nov.

2016

CE 5630
ADVANCED THEORY & DESIGN OF
CONCRETE STRUCTURES

Module 10
MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION
Devdas Menon
Professor, Dept of Civil Engg
IIT Madras
1
ADJUSTMENT OF DESIGN MOMENTS AT BEAM-
COLUMN JUNCTIONS

2
The slight reduction (equal to Vb/6) in the design positive
moment at mid-span may be ignored; this is conservative
and satisfactory.
3
In the case of columns, the moment gradient is not so
significant, and so there is little to gain in taking the moment at
the beam face, rather than at the beam centre line.
4
 LINEAR vs NONLINEAR
INPUT (Cause, Load)

OUTPUT (Effect, Response)

5
LINEAR ANALYSIS

Linear analysis deals with problems in which the response

varies linearly with the load.

For example: if the applied load (P) is doubled, the

displacements () and internal forces (M) are also doubled.

P 2P 2 2 2P

M 2M
2M
P 2P
2P

6
NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS
Types of Non-linearity

1. Geometric Nonlinearity

2. Material Nonlinearity
P

H
Geometric Nonlinearity

Equilibrium should be considered in

the deformed configuration (which
M+P cannot be approximated by the
H
original undeformed configuration).

7
MATERIAL NONLINEARITY: Typical Bilinear Models

Stress
Stress

Strain Strain

Hardening Elastic-perfectly plastic

Stress

Softening

Strain

8
 P

Max. moment = PL/4 always.

If P is doubled, M is also doubled, even if this causes
material non-linearity!
Because the structure is statically determinate.
Most real-life structures are, however, highly
indeterminate.

9
MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP ec

CURVATURE
e +e
d
= c st
d

Moment, M
Moment, M
SECONDARY
COMPRESSION
est
FAILURE MuR
MuR

YIELDING OF COMPRESSION
TENSION STEEL FAILURE

Mcr
FIRST CRACK
Mcr

Curvature, Curvature,

Under-reinforced beam Over-reinforced beam

(almost bilinear, elasto-plastic)

10
 Maximum force
if structure remains Fel
elastic Due to Total
Linear Elastic Ductility Horizontal
Response Non linear Load
Total Horizontal Load

Maximum Response
Load Capacity Fy First Due to
Significant Redundancy
Load at First Fs Yield
Yield
Due to
Overstrength
Design force Fdes

0 w y max
Roof Displacement ()

Maximum Elastic Force (Fel)

Response Reduction Factor =
Design Force (Fdes)
11
LIMIT ANALYSIS
Limit analysis is inelastic analysis for RC framed structure for
proper determination of the distribution of bending moments
for loading beyond the yielding stage at any section.
For convenience, the moment-curvature relation is sometimes
idealised as perfectly elasto-plastic.
Valid only if the
section is adequately
M
uR
Yielding of steel
under-reinforced and
Moment, M the reinforcing steel
EI
1
has a well-defined
yield plateau
y u

Curvature,

Plastic Hinge formation

12
 Modelling Frame Element

With Concentrated With Spread

Plasticity Plasticity

13
MODELLING CONCENTRATED PLASTICITY

1. Plasticity is assumed to be concentrated at the critical

locations. In addition to usual moment hinges, there can be
axial hinges and shear hinges.

2. Plastification of the section is assumed to occur suddenly, and

not gradually or fibre-by-fibre.

Plastic Hinge

14
MODELLING DISTRIBUTED PLASTICITY

1. Nonlinearity is assumed to be distributed along the length

of the plastic hinge.
2. It provides a more accurate representation of the actual
non-linear behaviour of the element
Length of plastic hinge

Curvature diagram along the length of the member

How to calculate curvature? How to relate it to bending moment?

Influence of Cracking, Slab, Reinforcement, Confinement,
Plastification, Bond, Shear??
15
16
17
EXAMPLE OF LIMIT ANALYSIS w w1

A C
(a) loading on beam l B l

MuR
(b) flexural detailing of beam A C
MuR B MuR

()0.125 w1l2 = MuR

0.375 l
C
(c) bending moments up to limit A
B
of elastic behaviour (phase I) (+)0.0703 w1l2 = 0.5624 MuR

18
 w > w1

(d) plastic hinge at continuous A C

MuR MuR
support B

w2 MuR w2
(e) limit analysis (equilibrium MuR
method) x lx

wu l 2 w2 x 2 w2 (l x )2
Solving , x = 0.4142l and M uR = M uR = 2M uR =
11.656 2 2

elastic analysis

(f) bending moment w1 = 8M uR l 2

MuR 0.4142 l
distribution(s) in the inelastic Mu
phase (phase II) R
limit analysis

w 2 = 11.6M uR l 2 = 1.46 w1

19
 Moment, M
Inelastic phase
Elastic phase Mechanism

Mur

0.5624 Mur
hinged mechanism at
ultimate load w = w2
M =0.125 wl2
0.0703 wl2

w1 w2 = 1.46w1 The beam is capable of

Loading, W carrying load extra 46%
beyond the limit of elastic
variation of support/span behaviour.
moment with loading

20
The distribution of bending moments in a continuous beam (or
frame) gets modified significantly in the inelastic phase. The term
moment redistribution is generally used to refer to the transfer of
moments to the less stressed sections as sections of peak moments
yield on their ultimate capacity being reached (as witnessed in the
example above).
From a design viewpoint, this behaviour can be taken advantage of
by attempting to effect a redistributed bending moment diagram
which achieves a reduction in the maximum moment levels (and a
corresponding increase in the lower moments at other locations). 21
 MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION

The main advantage underlying under reinforced sections is that they

exhibit ductile behaviour, undergoing large curvatures at nearly
constant moments after the yielding of steel. This ductile behaviour
enables the structure to enter into an inelastic phase, wherein the
sections which have reached their ultimate moment capacities undergo
rotations (under constant moment)

22
The term moment redistribution is generally used to refer to the
transfer of moments to the less stressed sections as sections of
peak moments yield on their ultimate capacity being reached (as
witnessed in the example above). From a design viewpoint, this
behaviour can be taken advantage of by attempting to effect a
redistributed bending moment diagram which achieves a reduction
in the maximum moment levels (and a corresponding increase in
the lower moments at other locations)

Such an adjustment in the moment diagram often leads to the

design of a more economical structure with better balanced
proportions, and less congestion of reinforcement at the critical
sections.

23
Considering the example of the two-span continuous beam, as
a design problem (rather than an analysis problem), it may be
seen that the designer has several alternative factored moment
diagrams to choose from, depending on the amount of
redistribution to be considered.

If the design is to be based on a purely elastic moment

distribution (without considering any redistribution) then the
-
corresponding design support moment M uR(E) and span moment
+
M uR(E) are obtained as:

24
25
For the desired moment redistribution to take place, the plastic
hinges that develop must have the required rotation capacities to
hold on without undergoing premature failure.
Through proper design and detailing, it may be possible to muster
the ductility required for significant amounts of moment
redistribution.
Excessive moment redistribution can be undesirable if it results in
plastic hinge formation at low loads (less than the service loads),
and the consequent crack-widths and deflections are likely to
violate serviceability requirements. Codes generally attempt to
preclude such a situation by ensuring that plastic hinges are not
allowed to form under normal service loads. In general, codes
allow only a limited amount of redistribution in reinforced concrete
structures.

26
 REDUCTION IN PEAK POSITIVE MOMENTS

Moment redistribution may also be advantageously applied to

situations where positive moments are relatively high and need to be
reduced for greater economy and less congestion of reinforcement.
The maximum span moment from elastic analysis (the live load
component in the loading is high) can be redistributed by allowing the
first plastic hinge to form in the span region.

27
28
 CODE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION

Equilibrium: The redistributed moments must be in a state of static

equilibrium with the corresponding factored loads .
Serviceability: The ultimate moment of resistance (MuR) at any section
should not be less than 70 percent of the factored moment (Mu,max) at
that section, as obtained from the elastic moment envelope (considering
all loading combinations). In other words, the flexural strength at any
section should not be less than that given by the elastic factored moment
envelope, scaled by a factor of 0.7:
This restriction (Cl. 37.1.1.b)is aimed at ensuring that plastic hinge
formation does not take place under normal service loads, and even if
it does take place, the yielding of the steel will not be so significant as
to result in excessive crack-widths and deflections

29
Low Demand for High Plastic Hinge Rotation Capacities: The
reduction in the elastic factored moment (negative or positive) at
any section due to a particular combination of factored loads should
not exceed 30 percent of the absolute maximum factored moment
(Mu,max), as obtained from the envelope of factored elastic moments
(considering all loading combinations). However, in the design of
lateral load resisting frames (with number of storeys exceeding four),
the Code (Cl. 37.1.1.e) imposes an additional over-riding restriction.
The reduction in the elastic factored moment is restricted to 10
percent of Mu,max.
This restriction is intended to ensure that the ductility requirements at
the plastic hinge locations are not excessive.

30
Adequate Plastic Hinge Rotation Capacity: The design of sections
at all (plastic hinge locations) should be such that they are
sufficiently under-reinforced, with a low neutral axis depth factor
(xu/d), satisfying

31
 MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION IN BEAMS

Low values of xu/d (and, thus large values of ) are generally not
possible in beams without resorting to very large sections, which may
be uneconomical. However, even with the extreme case of a
balanced section (with xu = xu,max), it can be shown that,

Thus, it is seen that a limited moment distribution (for example,

up to 12.1 percent for Fe 415 steel) is possible, even with the
limiting (maximum) neutral axis depth permitted for design , but a
higher percentage is possible with lower xu.

32
MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION IN COLUMNS
Reduction of moments on account of moment redistribution is generally
not applied to columns, which are essentially compression members that are
also subjected to bending (due to frame action).
In general, the neutral axis location at the limit state is such that the Code
requirements cannot be satisfied by a column section unless the column is
very lightly loaded axially and the eccentricity in loading is very large.
In the case of a typical beam-column joint in a reinforced concrete building,
it is desirable that the formation of the plastic hinge occurs in the beam,
rather than in the column, because there is less likelihood of progressive
collapse; and in case of collapse it is likely to be less extensive and
catastrophic.

33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
 July-Nov. 2016

CE 5630
ADVANCED THEORY & DESIGN OF
CONCRETE STRUCTURES

Yield Line Analysis of RC Slabs

Devdas Menon
Professor, Dept of Civil Engg
IIT Madras
49
 YIELD LINE ANALYSIS OF RC SLABS
Yield line Analysis is the equivalent for a two-dimensional flexural
member (plate or slab) of the limit analysis of a one-dimensional
member (eg., continuous beam)
In slabs, peak moments occur along lines (such as negative
moments along support lines and positive moments along lines near
the mid-span), and hence the yielding (plastic hinge formation) occurs
along lines (yield lines), and not at sections, as in beams.

50
RC slab thickness is generally governed by deflection control criteria,
resulting in under-reinforced sections, with low xu/d values. Hence, it is
possible to generate adequate plastic rotation capacity at yield line

Limit analyses of RC slab does not account for possible unserviceability,

in terms of excessive cracking or deformations. However, this can be
checked to some extent, corresponds to the elastic moment distribution

51
 LOWER BOUND AND UPPER BOUND METHODS
The main objective in inelastic analysis (or limit analysis) of a slab is
to determine the collapse load of the slab (with prescribed loading
and boundary conditions, material properties and reinforcement
detailing).
Uniqueness theorem: three conditions to be satisfied at the limit
state of impending collapse to get the correct (exact) solution
1. Mechanism condition: sufficient number of plastic hinges should
have formed to transform the structure, or part of it, into a hinged
(unstable) mechanism which can undergo deformation at constant
load;
2. Equilibrium condition: equations of static equilibrium should be
satisfied at all points on the slab;
3. Yield (or Safety) condition: the ultimate moment capacity of the
slab should not be exceeded at any point on the slab.
In general, it is possible to get solutions satisfying two of the three
conditions (and refine it to meet the third as closely as possible). 52
LOWER BOUND THEOREM
The collapse load, computed on the basis of an assumed
distribution of bending moments, satisfying the equilibrium and
yield (safety) conditions, will be less than or, at best, equal to
the true collapse load. The method of calculation is called the
equilibrium method. Hillerborgs strip method, proposed in
1956, belongs to this category.

UPPER BOUND THEOREM

The collapse load, computed on the basis of an assumed
distribution of plastic hinges (yield lines), satisfying the
mechanism and equilibrium conditions, will be greater than or,
at best, equal to the true collapse load. The method of
calculation is called the mechanism method. The yield line
theory, first proposed in 1923 by Ingerslev, and later developed
by Johansen in 1962, belongs to this category.
53
 Equilibrium & Yield conditions satisfied;
Mechanism condition not satisfied

Elastic solution corresponding to Elastic solution corresponding to

plastic hinge forming at A plastic hinges forming at A and C
54
Mechanism & Yield conditions satisfied;
Equilibrium condition also satisfied!

55
The mechanism method is simpler and more versatile to apply
and is therefore more popular as the method used for inelastic
analysis of slabs.
However, being an upper bound method, it is likely to over-
estimate the true collapse load, and so can be unconservative.
The regions of the slab between yield lines are not examined in
all but simple cases to ensure that the yield condition is satisfied.

In order to address this issue (which is a problem with all

mechanism methods), it is necessary to investigate as many likely
mechanisms (yield line patterns) as possible, and find the
minimum collapse load.
The associated yield line pattern will be the most probable
mode of collapse of the slab.
Indeed, the correct solutions for nearly all the common cases
are now well established and experimentally validated.
56
Yield line theory estimates the collapse load corresponding to
the flexural collapse mode only

Other effects, such as due to shear and bond, must be

considered separately. In practice, for slabs proportioned and
detailed in accordance with Code requirements, these effects
are not critical.

Shear stresses are generally low and the slab (whose

thickness is generally governed by serviceability considerations,
rather than strength considerations) is significantly under-
reinforced, thereby having adequate plastic rotation capacity
required to form all the plastic hinges (yield lines) for a proper
collapse mechanism.

57
 YIELD LINE PATTERNS
Yield Line Formation in One-way Slabs

58
59
60
 YIELD LINE FORMATION IN TWO-WAY SLABS

The yield line is an idealisation of a band of extensive cracks

across which the tension steel has yielded. Considerable
redistribution of load effects takes place after yielding, tending
generally to enhance the relatively higher moments elsewhere.
61
If the corner A is not held down, it may lift up, the small corner
segment (called corner lever) rotating about line BC. The yield line
BC is a negative yield line, which is not likely to form when the
corner A is not held down (restrained against uplift) and adequate
corner reinforcement is provided (as required, when the corner is
held down). 62
GUIDELINES FOR YIELD LINE PATTERNS

63
64
Except in cases (such as a square slab) where the locations
and directions of the yield lines are known without any
uncertainty, one or more dimensional variables (distances or
angles of inclination) are identified as unknowns for an
assumed yield line pattern. The correct values of these
variables are those which yield the minimum collapse load
and hence a minimisation (differentiation) procedure will be
required. 65
In the case of slabs subject to concentrated (point) loads, there
is a tendency for the positive yield lines to converge at the point
load location. It is not necessary for the positive yield lines to
reach the boundaries of the slabs and collapse of a local interior
portion of the slab is possible under the action of a point load. 66
MOMENT CAPACITY OF AN YIELD LINE

67
In an orthotropically reinforced slab, the yield line has a little torsional strength,
as indicated by Eq. 11.55. However, in solving problems using yield theory, this
usually does not have a role to play, as no relative twisting takes place along the
yield lines.

68
69
70
Work Method applied to a one-way slab with fixed ends

71
72
 73
Hayes, 1969
 mL

Internal virtual work, WI = mL 4

= 4mL(2/L)
WI = 8m

If the square slab is subject to a point load Pu at the centre O,

External virtual work, WE = Pu

WE = WI Pu = 8m Pu = 8m
74
If the slab is subject to a uniformly distributed load of intensity wu per unit area,

wu L2 Visualize the total load in each triangular area (of

WE = 4 magnitude wL2/4) acting at the centroid of the
4 3 triangle and undergoing a deflection equal to /3

WE = wu L2
3

WE = WI
24 m
wu L2 = 8 m wu =
3 L2

75
If the square slab is fixed (or continuous) along the four edges and reinforced at top
near these edges such that the negative yield lines forming along these edges have a
moment capacity m per unit length

mL mL

WI = (mL + m'L) 4 = 4(m + m') L

= 4(m + m')(2/L)
WI = 8 m + m '
76
As an alternative to the application of the Principle of Virtual
Displacements, the direct application of equations of static
equilibrium can be attempted, and in many instances, this
method may turn out to be simpler.

In this method, the free-bodies of the various fractured slab

segments are considered, with appropriate bending moments,
twisting moments and shear forces applied at the boundaries
(wherever applicable), in addition to the applied external
loads.

77
78
In two-way slab systems, however, the shear forces along the
slab segment boundaries are generally statically indeterminate
(in terms of magnitude and distribution). For convenience, they
can be resolved into statically equivalent concentrated forces,
called nodal forces, at the two ends of each yield line on the two
slab segment free-bodies separated by the yield line. In the
special case where the yield line meets the free edge at right
angles, the nodal force is zero.

79
Another useful finding is that at the junction of three yield lines
governed by the same reinforcement mesh, the nodal forces are
all zero at the junction, if the yield lines are either all positive
moment lines or all negative moment lines.

80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
Load transmission
mechanisms in
buildings

93
94
Gravity Load Analysis
Substitute Frames

95
Influence lines and gravity load patterns for a continuous beam

96
97
 Indoor stadium Cochin

Architects
N. M. Salim & Associates

Structural Consultants
REC Calicut
3420
131
Thank you 132