COMPARISON OF SOME METHODS - OF SLABDESIGN

Abstract

It was intended to investigate, few n.vthode of slab design and to compare vith the provisions of e1ab design in las486®1964 regarding its safoty and economy. TIn addition if the cavity of the bra slab can be determined by taking Into ac©ounb the true behaviour of the slab at ultimate load, the design Engineer would than be able to realise the true reserve strength available in the floor system. Keeping in mind all these points an attesnt was made to coaare the design of slabs by Strip method,, 19# 466-1964 (Ca) method and yield line method as regards their economy, reserve strength and service'► ability and ex eriment . investigation of the ssms. To com ors, the steel requirsente of the slabs designed by above mentioned methods in ran deimensional lb ra, their moment Vol. have been caleulat.d% It is Ibund that the slab designed by I$ 6.1964 (c•3) method is cheaper and designing of slab by strip method Is little costlier* But cosDareing the results of + erirnenta1 verification, we find that Strip method is a better method of slab design. variation of maximum deflection is only 1$ but It is the least with strip method. Maximum crack width for all the slabs are within the tolerable limit$ but the crack width in the slab designed by strip method is the minimun. Its load carrying us aaity is also greaten coat ared to IS, 456 4964 method. So it Is recommended that the designing of the slab by strip method may be in „uded in our code of practice.