0 tayangan

Diunggah oleh paulkohan

.

- Lecture 2 Beams - Oct 12 - End
- 9 Beam Deflection
- AE310 Syllabus Schedule 2013
- 26IJER.pdf
- PR - Shear Wall Analysis
- ideCAD Structural 5.doc
- Part3 T05 PowerPad Calculation Wizard Tutorial
- Beton.pdf
- Deflections of Beam
- Design of Structural Cannels
- Structural Design (Autosaved)
- RC Notes by Engr. GREG
- Secondary Beam Example
- building-construction-1_5_floors-vaults.pdf
- post-tensado
- Design Example 4
- 1-s2.0-S2212670814000682-main
- chap8
- Design Seta(Latest) (1)
- E3-BENDING TEST.doc

Anda di halaman 1dari 9

Simply Supported One-way Slabs

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1

PhD, Institute for Building Construction and Technology, University of Technology

Vienna, Karlsplatz 13/206/4, 1040 Vienna, Austria; PH +43 1 58801 215 12; FAX

+43 1 58801 215 99; email: ildiko.merta@tuwien.ac.at

2

Prof. PhD, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17,

2000 Maribor, Slovenia; PH +386 2 229 4348; stojan.kravanja@uni-mb.si

ABSTRACT

The paper presents the cost optimization of reinforced concrete simply supported

one-way slabs under uniformly distributed load with the nonlinear programming

approach. A detailed objective function of the slab’s manufacturing costs was given

including the material costs of the concrete, reinforcement and formwork panels as

well as the labour cost items. The slabs were designed in accordance with the

European Building Code. A multi-parametric cost optimization was carried out for

variable spans from 5 to 8m and variable uniformly distributed imposed load of 2

and 5kN/m2. Additionally, at the serviceability limit state, two different deflection

limitation designs have been performed. In the first the slenderness ratio of the slabs

was limited while in the second the slabs deflection was controlled. The comparison

of the results shows that the slenderness controlled design results in a considerable

lower slab's depth and consequently a lower manufacturing cost.

INTRODUCTION

heuristic methods such as genetic algorithms, threshold accepting, tabu search, etc.

(Coello et al. 1997, Ferreira et al. 2003, Govindaraj and Ramasamy 2005, Azmy and

Eid 1999). A very limited number of research deals with the exact methods which are

based on the (non)linear programming approach. So far the optimization of RC

beams of rectangular- and T cross-section has been proposed (Merta and Kravanja,

2009a; Merta and Kravanja, 2009b) and the obtained results for rectangular section

has been compared with the results of steel beams (Merta et al., 2008).

In this work the cost optimization design of RC one-way slabs was performed by the

nonlinear programming (NLP) approach by taking into account design constraints

defined by the European Building Code for reinforced concrete structures (Eurocode

2, 2005). A detailed objective function of the slab's manufacturing costs is given

including the material and labour cost items. At the serviceability limit state

Eurocode 2, allows two design ways for deflection control, namely the limitation of

the real calculated deflection and a simplified way where solely the slab's slenderness

ratio has been limited. The task of the research was to perform a comprehensive

comparison of the obtained optimal cross-sections as well as manufacturing costs of

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2671

comparative multi-parametric NLP cost optimization of the RC slab was performed

and the slab's optimal cost development as well as optimal depth was investigated for

different spans of the slab (5, 6, 7, and 8m) and two different live loads (2 and 5

kN/m2).

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Generally to design a reinforced concrete (RC) slab as a one-way spanning slab one

of the following two cases should hold:

• the slab is supported on four sides and has a much longer span in one direction

lx/ly >2, thus the slab may be assumed to be supported only along its longer side,

• the slab is supported on two sides.

One-way slabs are typically divided into a series of beam strips (Figure 1.) and the

depth of the slab and reinforcement is determined for a 1m wide strip using the

classical beam theory.

At the ultimate limit state (ULS) the slab strip was checked for bending moment. The

ultimate strength design of the RC sections under the bending moment is defined by

the non-linear constitutive laws of concrete and steel. The actual stress-strain

diagram of concrete is replaced with a simplified equivalent rectangular stress-strain

diagram. A bi-linear design stress-strain law with a horizontal top branch was

considered for the reinforcing steel. At the ULS it should be verified that the acting

moment does not exceeds the flexural capacity of the section:

M Ed ≤ M Rd

α ⋅ f ck f

M Rd = ⋅ 0.48 ⋅ b ⋅ x 2 + y ⋅ As ⋅ ( d − x )

γc γs

where MEd is the design bending moment, MRd is the design bending moment

resistance, fy is the yield strength of main reinforcement, fck is the characteristic

cylinder strength of concrete, α is the coefficient which takes into account the long-

term effects on the compressive strength of concrete, γc, γs are the safety coefficients

for concrete and structural steel, respectively, As is the cross-sectional area of the

main reinforcement per unit width of the slab, d is the distance between the main

Ast As

lx

h

b=1m

l

with the cross-section of a 1m slab strip

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2672

reinforcement's center of gravity and the section's most compressed fiber, x is the

depth of the section's compression zone and b=1m is the width of the beam (slab

strip).

Because of their high shear resistance slabs could be designed without shear

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

secondary reinforcement in the transverse direction is placed. The area of the

transverse reinforcement Ast should be at least 20% of the main reinforcement.

At the serviceability limit state (SLS) the slab's deflection and crack were controlled.

According to the Eurocode 2 the deflection control could be provided by one of the

following two limitations:

• the calculated actual deflection of the slab is limited under the value of span/250,

• the slenderness ratio of the slab is limited to: l/d ≤ 20 (for lightly stressed

concrete).

reinforcement required to ensure controlled cracking in the member (Eurocode 2,

2005):

A

As,min = kc ⋅ k ⋅ f ct ,eff ⋅ ct

σs

where kc is a coefficient which takes into account the nature of the stress distribution

within the section immediately prior to cracking (kc=0.4 for bending without normal

force), k is a coefficient which allows the effect of non-uniform self-equilibrating

stresses (k=1.0 for h ≤ 300 mm and k=0.65 for h ≥ 800 mm), fct,eff is the concrete

tensile strength at the appearance of the first cracks, Act is the area of concrete within

tensile zone and σs is the maximal stress permitted in the reinforcement immediately

after formation of the crack.

The additional requirements of the Eurocode 2 have been also taken into account:

− for an element of the structure to be considered as a slab, its shorter span should

be not less than five times the slab’s depth,

− the minimal amount of the main reinforcement is constrained with:

As ≥ 0.0013·b·d and As ≥ 0.26· fctm b·d/ fyk, where fctm represents the mean value of

the concrete tensile strength and fyk denotes the characteristic yield stress of the

reinforcing steel,

− the maximal cross-sectional area of the main reinforcement is constrained with:

As ≤ 0.04·Ac, where Ac = b h.

Min z = f(x)

subjected to: h(x) = 0 and g(x) ≤ 0

x ∈ X = { x⏐ x ∈ Rn, xL ≤ x ≤ xU }

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2673

Functions f(x), h(x) and g(x) are (non)linear functions involved in the objective

function z, equality and inequality constraints, respectively. All the functions f(x),

h(x) and g(x) must be continuous and differentiable. The vector of continuous

variables denotes different parameters of a structure, e.g. dimensions, cross-section

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

etc. The optimal values of the considered variables are obtained when the minimal

value of the defined objective function is reached. The system of equality and

inequality constraints and the bounds of the variables represent a rigorous system of

the design, load, stress, deflections and resistance functions derived from the

structural analysis and design codes.

The manufacturing cost of the member is defined as a sum of material and labour

costs required for the fabrication, because the power consumption costs may be

neglected at the cost estimation since they usually represent less than 1% of the total

cost6.

follows:

f ( x ) = min : Cost = CM ,c,r + CM , f + CL, f + CL,r + CL,c + CL,v + CL,cc

where the variable Cost (€/m2) represents the manufacturing costs of the slab, the

notations CM,… and CL,… represent the considered material and labour costs.

The material costs of the concrete, the main and the transverse reinforcement are

defined by:

CM ,c,r = cM ,c ⋅Vc + cM ,r ⋅ρ s ⋅ (Vs ,m + Vs,t )

where cM,c (€/m3) and cM,r (€/kg) are the prices of the concrete and reinforcement; Vc,

Vs,m, and Vs,t in (m3) represent the volumes of concrete, main and transverse

reinforcement respectively; ρs (kg/m3) is the unit mass of steel.

1

C M , f = cM , f ⋅ ⋅ Ac,s

nuc

where cM,f (€/m2) is the price of the prefabricated panels; nuc is the number of the use

cycles of the panels; Ac,s (m2) is the concrete slab surface area.

The labour costs for the panelling of concrete slab, the levelling, disassembling and

cleaning of the formwork may be calculated by using the expression:

CL , f = cL ⋅ T f ⋅ Ac ,s

where cL (€/h) represents the labour costs per working hour; Tf (h/m2) is the

formwork time (including panelling, levelling, disassembling and cleaning); Ac,s (m2)

is the concrete slab surface area. The panelling of the concrete slab with fully

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2674

The labour costs for cutting, placing and connecting of the reinforcement bars in the

concrete slab are defined as follows:

CL ,r = cL ⋅ Tr ⋅ρ s ⋅ (Vs ,l + Vsw )

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where cL (€/h) denotes the labour costs per working hour; Tr (h/kg) is the time

required for cutting, placing and connecting the reinforcement; Vs,m, and Vs,t (m3)

represent the volumes of main and transverse reinforcement respectively; ρs (kg/m3)

is the unit mass of steel.

The labour costs for concreting the slab are given in the form:

CL ,c = cL ⋅ Tc ⋅ Vc

where cL (€/h) denotes the labour costs per working hour; Tc (h/m3) represents the

concreting time and Vc (m3) denotes the volume of the concrete slab.

CL ,v = cL ⋅ Tv ⋅ Ac ,s

where cL (€/h) are the labour costs per working hour; Tv (h/m2) is the vibration time

required for the consolidation of concrete and Ac,s (m2) is the concrete surface area.

The placement and consolidation of concrete is achieved by using a concrete pump

and internal vibrators.

The labour costs for curing the concrete may be evaluated by using the following

equation:

CL ,cc = cL ⋅ Tcc ⋅ Vc

where cL (€/h) represents the labour costs per working hour; Tcc (h/m3) denotes the

curing time and Vc (m3) is the volume of the concrete slab.

The task of the optimization was to find the minimal possible structure’s

manufacturing costs and consequently the optimal design of one-way slabs. The NLP

optimization model OPTIRCS (OPTImization of RC Slab) was developed. All the

applied economic parameters (used in Equations above) are shown in Table 1. They

were defined according to Klanšek and Kravanja (2006), Meier (1990) and ARH

(2001). For the mathematical modelling and data input/outputs the high level

language GAMS (General Algebraic Modelling System) was used (Brooke et al.,

1988). CONOPT, (Generalized reduced-gradient method) was used for the

optimization (Drud, 1994).

The structure's optimal cost development was investigated for different spans of the

slab and various loads. Since the two allowed deflection controls of Eurocode 2

result in a considerable different slab's depth and consequently in a different

manufacturing cost, the cost optimization design for both cases has been carried out

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2675

programming) cost optimization of the RC slab was performed for all combinations

of the following design parameters:

− four different spans of the slab from l=5 m to l=8 m with a 1 m step,

− two different uniformly distributed live loads of p=2 kN/m2 and p=5 kN/m2,

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

− two different deflection controls i.e., slenderness ratio limitation and deflection

limitation.

Material and labour cost parameters

cM,c Price of the concrete C25/30 90.00 €/m3

cM,r Price of the reinforcing steel BSt 550 0.90 €/kg

cM,f Price of the prefabricated panels 30.00 €/m2

cL Labour costs 20.00 €/h

Fabrication times

Tf Time of panelling, levelling, disassembly and cleaning of the formwork 0.30 h/m2

Tr Time for cutting, placing and connecting of the reinforcement 0.03 h/kg

Tc Time of concreting 1.00 h/m3

Tv Time for consolidation of the concrete 0.20 h/m2

Tcc Time for curing of the concrete 0.20 h/m2

Input data

g Self weight of the floor construction (without the concrete slab) 1.00 kN/m2

fck Characteristic compressive cylinder strength of concrete (C25/30) 25 N/mm2

fctm Mean value of the concrete (C25/30) tensile strength 2.6 N/mm2

fct,eff Effective tensile strength of the concrete (C25/30) 3.0 N/mm2

Ecm Secant modulus of elasticity of concrete (C25/30) 30.50 kN/mm2

Es Modulus of elasticity of steel 200 kN/mm2

fyk Characteristic yield strength of tension reinforcement (BSt 550) 550 N/mm2

fykw Characteristic yield strength of transverse reinforcement (BSt 550) 550 N/mm2

a Concrete cover 2.50 cm

ρc The unit mass of concrete 2500 kg/m3

ρs The unit mass of steel 7850 kg/m3

γc Partial safety factor for concrete 1.5

γs Partial safety factor for steel 1.15

α Coefficient taking into account the long-term effects on the concrete 1.0

nuc Number of the use cycles of the panels 30

With increasing span of the slab its depth increases as well. However, there is an

obvious difference in the slab's depth in the design case where the slenderness of the

slab is limited and in case if the slab's deflection is limited (Figures 2. and 3.). In the

deflection controlled design the obtained optimal slabs are much thicker than by the

slenderness controlled design. For slabs loaded with 2kN/m2 the depth of the slabs is

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2676

about 11% to 15% higher (for spans 6 and 7m respectively) as in the slenderness

controlled design. At higher loads of 5kN/m2 the depth increase is even higher and

represents 18% to 26%.

Whereas by the slenderness controlled design the load level has no influence on the

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

slab's depth and manufacturing costs by the deflection controlled design the load

increase from 2 to 5kN/m2 results in a 17% and 10% increase of the slab's depth (for

spans 5 and 7m respectively) and consequently to a cost increase.

For both design ways the manufacturing costs increase in the same manner as the

slab's depth increases. Whereas at the deflection controlled design the increase of the

slab's manufacturing costs is much more rapid.

The deflection controlled design results a much uneconomic design and the

manufacturing costs of the obtained optimal slabs are up to 8%-19% higher (for

spans 6 and 7m respectively) than the slabs designed with slenderness limitation. At

higher loads of 5kN/m2 the cost increase is even more distinctive i.e., 11% to 27%

(for spans 5 and 7m respectively).

At the slenderness controlled design (where the slenderness ratio l/d should not be

higher than 20) the most economic slabs are those with a depth of exactly d=l/20. If

the design is controlled with the deflection limitation the most economic slabs have

considerable lower slenderness (Figure 4.) resulting in a higher slab's depth and

consequently higher manufacturing costs.

50

5kN/m2 80 5kN/m2

Manufacturing costs [€/m2]

Depth of the slab [cm]

2kN/m2 2kN/m2

40

70

30

60

20 50

5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8

Span [m] Span [m]

in case of slenderness controlled design (l/d ≤ 20)

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2677

50

80

Depth of the slab [cm]

40

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

70

30 5kN/m2 5kN/m2

60

2kN/m2 2kN/m2

20 50

5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8

Span [m] Span [m]

in case of deflection controlled design (deflection ≤ l/250)

Deflection limitation

20

2kN/m2

19

Slenderness of the slab

5kN/m2

18

17

16

15

5 6 7 8

Span [m]

in case of a deflection controlled design

CONCLUSIONS

The paper reports the cost optimization design of the RC one-way slabs. The

structural optimization was performed by the non-linear programming approach. The

objective function of the manufacturing costs was subjected to a rigorous system of

design, load, resistance and deflections (in)equality constraints.

performed and the slab's optimal cost development was investigated for different

spans of the slab (5, 6, 7, and 8m), two different live loads (2 and 5 kN/m2) and for

two allowed deflection controls according to Eurocode 2, namely the slenderness

ratio limitation and the real deflection limitation. The two different deflection control

designs result in a considerable different slab's depth and consequently in a different

manufacturing cost.

Earth and Space 2010: Engineering, Science, Construction,

and Operations in Challenging Environments © 2010 ASCE 2678

It has been shown that if at the SLS the slab's deflection is limited, the depth of the

obtained optimal slab is considerable higher than if the slab's slenderness ratio would

be limited. Consequently the manufacturing costs of the slabs designed with

deflection control are much higher than of the slabs designed with slenderness

control.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on 09/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

REFERENCES

Zentralverband des Deutschen Baugewerbes e. V., Berlin, ZtV Zeittechnik-

Verlag GmbH, (2001)

Azmy, A. M., Eid, M. H. (1999). "Cost-Optimum Design for Shear Reinforced

Concrete Beams", ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 1, pp. 122-126.

Brooke, A., Kendrick, D. and Meeraus, A. (1988). GAMS-A User's Guide. Scientific

Press, Redwood City, CA.

Coello C. C., Hernandez F. S., Farrera F. A. (1997). "Optimal Design of Reinforced

Concrete Beams using Genetic Algorithms", Expert Systems with Applications,

Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 101-108.

Drud, A.S. (1994), CONOPT – A Large-Scale GRG Code. ORSA Journal on

Computing, 6(2), pp. 207-216.

Eurocode 2 (2005). Design of concrete structures – Part 1-1: General – Common

rules for building and civil engineering structures EN 1992-1-1, European

Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

Ferreira, C.C., Barrros, M. H. F. M., Barros, A. F. M. (2003). "Optimal design of

reinforced concrete T-sections in bending", Engineering Structures, Vol. 25,

pp. 951-964.

Govindaraj, V., Ramasamy, J. V. (2005). "Optimum detailed design of reinforced

concrete continuous beams using Genetic Algorithms", Computers&Structures,

Vol. 84, pp. 34-48.

Klanšek, U., Kravanja, S. (2006). "Cost estimation, optimization and competitiveness

of different composite floor systems–Part 1: Self-manufacturing cost

estimation of composite and steel structures", Journal of Constructional Steel

Research, Vol. 62, pp. 434-448.

Meier, E. (1990). Zeitaufwand Tafeln für die Kalkulation von Hochbau- und

Stahlbetonarbeiten, Bauverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden und Berlin.

Merta I., Kravanja S., Klanšek U., (2008). "Optimization based cost comparison

between reinforced concrete and steel beams"; 4th International Conference on

High Performance Structures and Materials, The Algarve, Portugal, 449-456.

Merta I., Kravanja S., (2009a). "Cost-Optimum Design of Singly Reinforced

Concrete Beams with Rectangular Cross-Section" to be published in the

proceedings of the 2nd International/ 8th Construction Specialty Conference, St.

John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, May 27-30.

Merta I., Kravanja S., (2009b). "Cost-optimum design of reinforced concrete T-

section beams", Third International Conference on Modeling, Simulation and

Applied Optimization (ICMSAO'09), American University of Sharjah, United

Arab Emirates, ISBN 978-9948-427-12-4.

- Lecture 2 Beams - Oct 12 - EndDiunggah olehoqusous
- 9 Beam DeflectionDiunggah olehBharat Jajoria
- AE310 Syllabus Schedule 2013Diunggah olehChristopher Daniel
- 26IJER.pdfDiunggah olehEbrahim Shabbir
- PR - Shear Wall AnalysisDiunggah olehfuafuafua
- ideCAD Structural 5.docDiunggah olehGandhi Hammoud
- Part3 T05 PowerPad Calculation Wizard TutorialDiunggah olehPrawin Kumar
- Beton.pdfDiunggah olehFirmino Ximenes
- Deflections of BeamDiunggah olehIrene Margaretha Lumban Raja
- Design of Structural CannelsDiunggah olehAnonymous 87xpkIJ6CF
- Structural Design (Autosaved)Diunggah olehgani
- RC Notes by Engr. GREGDiunggah olehMichael Suan
- Secondary Beam ExampleDiunggah olehAboalmaail Alamin
- building-construction-1_5_floors-vaults.pdfDiunggah olehDamjan
- post-tensadoDiunggah olehMqAshlady
- Design Example 4Diunggah olehsom_bs79
- 1-s2.0-S2212670814000682-mainDiunggah olehlazem.360
- chap8Diunggah olehCesar Man
- Design Seta(Latest) (1)Diunggah olehsteven bianes
- E3-BENDING TEST.docDiunggah olehLakshwanath Jaganath
- Module1 Beam Bending.pdfDiunggah olehMaged Mohammed
- 17 - Curling Stresses in Concrete SlabsDiunggah olehTariq Aziz
- MOS SyllabusDiunggah olehPraveen Kumar
- 3.0 Basic ConceptDiunggah olehVinCEdemonteverde
- SOM1-2Diunggah olehAbhishek Choudhary
- allpages.twosidedDiunggah olehs1133387
- 2marksDiunggah olehSayyadh Rahamath Baba
- amity brochure 2Diunggah olehV J Vijay Yadav
- CONCRETE-2014.pdfDiunggah olehHarf Jucoy Miranda
- 332-532-L25A Theory of BendingDiunggah olehNicholas Nuccio

- Wang 2013Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- Sezen 2012Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S0141029610000209-mainDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- Digital Image Correlation to Reinforced Concrete FractureDiunggah olehjs kalyana rama
- 1-s2.0-S0141029612004609-mainDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 99-s80Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- widianto2010Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- 106-s32Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S0263822315009976-mainDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 98s11.pdfDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- Wind Loads On Non-Building Structures Using ASCE 7-10 .pdfDiunggah olehgulilero_yo
- 10.1002@stc.2273Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- 2014 - Damage identification-Modal Curvature.pdfDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 2013 - TurquiaDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 2013 - Chile.pdfDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S2214399815000089-main.pdfDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S026382230500022X-mainDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 101103366-Concrete-Bridges-Design-and-Construction.pdfDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 1-s2.0-S0141029610000209-mainDiunggah olehpaulkohan
- 81-46Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- 96-S13Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- 96-S13Diunggah olehpaulkohan
- Bhattacharya 2014Diunggah olehpaulkohan

- Construction Method for WTP WWTP.pdfDiunggah olehAlfyan Amar Pratama
- Guidance on the Assessment of Strength in StructuresDiunggah olehMustafa
- Structural Computations - SHAP (Version 2)Diunggah olehAllan Soriano
- 4Diunggah olehMalith De Silva
- BondSlip.pdfDiunggah olehAngga Fajar Setiawan
- Sample Specification for FRP StrengtheningDiunggah olehsjpaul1973
- Mechanical vs. Lap SpliceDiunggah olehEricson M. Gonzales
- Rebar Drawing Check ListDiunggah olehalok
- LITERATURE REVIEW sravani.docDiunggah olehTejaSri
- Coverblocks Overview GeneralDiunggah olehjack21ab
- SDM WeldingDiunggah olehPrashant Malve
- 09Diunggah olehMark Edowai
- SSCS2010 UPT Romania D.dubina, S. BordeaDiunggah olehSorin Bordea
- Shortcol VerificationDiunggah olehqazalbash1109588
- IS 3370-1965 Part IIDiunggah olehNaresh Babu
- Concrete column Design Flow ChartsDiunggah olehayoub bahmani k
- RC Stair SlabsDiunggah olehAssad Mohammed Ali
- Staad Foundation Data SheetDiunggah olehSathyaseelan Jayabalan
- 0a CIA EQ Design Parts 1-3 CombinedDiunggah olehZac Francis Daymond
- Concrete Beam Design Flow ChartsDiunggah olehayoub bahmani k
- 3.2.1 Square FootingDiunggah olehNeil Son
- List of Accredited StandardsDiunggah olehReina Fe Cabangisan Rombo
- Tensile Splice ACI 350-06Diunggah olehYioYin
- Bond Slip EffectDiunggah olehRabee Shammas
- Prediction of Shear Strength of Slender RC Beams without Shear Reinforcement by Standard Codes of PracticeDiunggah olehIRJET Journal
- Analysis of Ribbed SlabDiunggah olehmickymat
- bangladesh Concrete CodeDiunggah olehXaid Ibrahim
- Eng-bore Pile UlubeluDiunggah olehNurfandy Dewanto
- DEMU 4010 Rebar Coupler System DEMUDiunggah olehTonni Kurniawan
- rcpDiunggah olehMunarwand Ahmad