3 e CONFERENCE

7

I)'

~,I#

OO

TECHNICAL REPORT C-70-1

THE LIBRARY. OF THE

APR 2 2 1970UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISAT URBANA-CHAMPAIGti

SHORT- AND LONG-TIME DEFLECTIONS OFREINFORCED CONCRETE FLAT

by

H. G. Geymayer, J. E. McDonald

[II - 111010 00ll

111111

-m ;UiA~t 'V

I

t')

iiH tei

February 1970

Sponsored by Office, Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army meatadc30402 6

Conducted by U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi

This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited

SLABS

IJ

L

I

r

5 ,

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed.Do not return it to the originator.

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an officialDepartment of the Army position unless so designated

by other authorized documents.

TECHNICAL REPORT C-70-I

SHORT- AND LONG-TIME DEFLECTIONS OFREINFORCED CONCRETE FLAT SLABS

by

H. G. Geymayer, J. E. McDonald

February 1970

Sponsored by Office, Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army

Conducted by U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi

ARMY-MRC VICKSBURG. MISS.

This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited

FOREWORD

The investigation reported herein was authorized by the Office, Chief of Engineers, by third indorse-

ment, dated 20 May 1965, to a letter, dated 16 December 1964, subject: Research on Reinforced Concrete

Slabs.

The work was done at Enlisted Men's Barracks 11, Fort Hood, Texas. The work was performed dur-

ing the period September 1965 through June 1969 by personnel of the Concrete Division, U. S. Army Engi-

neer Waterways Experiment Station (WES), under the direction of Mr. Bryant Mather and Mr. James M.

Polatty. The principal investigators were Mr. James E. McDonald and Dr. Helmut G. Geymayer, co-authors

of this report. 1LT Glenn S. Orenstein performed most of the computations, and SP 4 Peter A. Calenzo as-

sisted in the data analysis and preparation of drafts.

COL John R. Oswalt, Jr., CE, and COL Levi A. Brown, CE, were Directors of the WES during the in-

vestigation and the preparation and publication of this report. Mr. J. B. Tiffany and Mr. F. R. Brown were

Technical Directors.

iii

CONTENTS

Page

FOREW ORD............................................................. 111

CONVERSION FACTORS, BRITISH TO METRIC UNITS OF MEASUREMENT............... .. vii

SUM M A RY . ............................................................. ix

INTRODUCTION....................... ............................... ........... 1

Background ................ ............................................. 1O bjectives . .. ..... ... ... ..... ......... .... ... .... . .... .. . ........ ... 1

Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

TEST STRUCTURET R........................................................ 1

Site Selection......................................................... 1Construction......................................................... 2Observation Points..................................................... 2

MEASUREMENTS. R.M.N......................................................... 4

Equipm ent........................................................... 4Concrete M ixture. ..................................................... 4Load Conditions....................................................... 4Experim ental Results.................:.................................. 5

THEORETICAL DEFLECTIONS ............................................... 7

CONCLUSIONSC ........................................................... 8

LITERATURE CITED ....................................................... 8

TABLES 1-4

PLATES 1-16

v

CONVERSION FACTORS, BRITISH TO METRIC UNITS OF MEASUREMENT

British units of measurement used in this report can be converted to metric units as follows:

Multiply

inches

feet

cubic yards

pounds per square inch

pounds per square foot

Fahrenheit degrees

2.54

0.30480.7645 55

0.070307

4.88243

5/9

To Obtain

centimeters

meters

cubic meters

kilograms per square centimeter

kilograms per square meter

Celsius or Kelvin degrees*

vii

* To obtain Celsius (C) temperature readings from Fahrenheit (F) readings, use the following formula: C = (5/9)(F - 32).To obtain Kelvin (K) readings, use: K = (5/9)(F - 32) + 273.15.

SUMMARY

This report summarizes the results of a field investigation to determine the short- and long-time de-

flections and concrete strains in an Army barracks flat-plate structure at Fort Hood, Killeen, Texas.

Due to the rather great slab thickness of 9 in., corresponding to an L/T ratio of approximately 28, all

observed deflections were small and in no instance exceeded 0.022 ft, or about 1/800 of the shorter span,

during the 45-month observation period, in spite of an early temporary construction load estimated to have

been almost 30 percent in excess of the total design load.

The measured short-time deflections under various loading conditions compared reasonably well with

deflections predicted by use of the ersatz frame analysis method.

ix

SHORT- AND LONG-TIME DEFLECTIONS OF

REINFORCED CONCRETE FLAT SLABS

INTRODUCTION

Background

1. In 1959 a lightweight-concrete, flat-plate structure was tested1-5 in Melbourne, Australia, to de-

termine the effects of (a) creep of the concrete, (b) differential settlement of supports, and (c) progressive

cracking of the concrete slab due to thermal shrinkage and settlement stress on the long-time deflections and

strains of the test structure. The test structure spanned three bays in each direction. Each test panel was

12 ft* long, 9 ft wide, and 3-1/2 in. thick, and was lightly reinforced. The lightweight concrete cast in the

test structure was exposed to the elements, and the concrete was not cured in any manner. Deflection read-

ings were taken prior to and after removal of formwork and for several months thereafter. In this test

structure the total deflection after eight months under dead load was more than 12 times the initial deflec-

tion. In view of these results, the investigation reported herein was initiated to obtain more information on

time-dependent deformations of reinforced concrete slabs representative of construction materials and meth-

ods used in the United States.

Objectives2. The primary objectives of this investigation were: (a) to obtain information on the time-

dependent (creep and shrinkage) deformations of selected panels of typical floor slabs in an Army Enlisted

Men's (EM) barracks, (b) to ascertain conditions during construction that might influence these deforma-

tions, and (c) to evaluate the frame analysis method of computing immediate elastic and time-dependent de-

flections of reinforced concrete floor slabs that was developed at the University of Illinois.6

Scope

3. To accomplish the objectives stated above, the investigation was conducted in four phases as

follows:

a. Phase I: Compilation of a detailed record of construction practices and weather condi-tions during and after construction of the test structure.

b. Phase II: Instrumentation of selected panels of the first- and second-floor slabs.

c. Phase III: Measurement of deflection and strain during and after completion ofconstruction.

d. Phase IV: Analysis of data and preparation of report.

TEST STRUCTURE

Site Selection

4. Discussions between Office, Chief of Engineers, and U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment

* A table of factors for converting British units of measurement to metric units is presented on page vii.

1

Station (WES) representatives resulted in the selection of Fort Hood (near Killeen, Texas, see fig. 1) as the

site of this investigation. Of the seven two-company EM barracks (fig. 2) scheduled for construction atFort Hood in FY 66, Nos. 8 and 11 were originally selected for study.

Fig. 1. Vicinity map

Waco

84

FORT HOOD

,RESERVT ON

,Kileen_1%Temple

81

18

AUSTIN

crete was discharged into buckets that were positioned by crane (fig. 5). Internal vibrators were used to

consolidate the concrete. Polyethylene sheeting was used in curing the concrete.

Observation Points

9. A total of 73 points on the first-floor slab were selected for deflection measurements (plate 3).

Since this slab was placed about seven weeks before the investigation began, these points were marked on

the top surface of the slab, and measurements were made with the level rod directly on the slab's upper

surface.

10. In order to obtain initial deflection measurements on the second-floor slab prior to its stripping,

removable panels were cut at 83 locations (plate 4) in the plywood decking prior to placing of the concrete.

After the concrete had been placed and allowed to set, these panels were removed and steel studs were

driven into the concrete. Eyebolts attached to the studs (fig. 6) and a special hook in the end of the level

rod made it possible to hang the rod from the bottom of the slab. To utilize available manpower fully dur-

ing lags in construction, small indented steel disks were applied at points on the bottom of the second-

floor slab to allow strain measurements in two perpendicular directions.

2

Construction

5. Personnel of the WES Concrete Division arrived

at the construction site on 7 September 1965 with the inten-

tion of instrumenting selected panels of the second-floor slabs

of EM Barracks 8 and 11. However, the construction lag be-

tween the two structures was such that the costs of additional

travel required would have exceeded the available funds. As

a result, it was decided to instrument selected panels of the

first- and second-floor slabs of Barracks 11. Plan and eleva-

tion views of the test structure are given in plate 1. A chron-

ological description of construction of the test structure is

given in plate 2. Forming, steel and concrete placing, and

concrete curing procedures conformed, in general, to standard

construction practices. A brief description of these practices

as observed during construction of the test structure follows.

6. Forming. Fig. 3 shows a general view of support-

ing forms for the second-floor slab. Oil-treated plywood was

used as decking.

7. Reinforcement. Fig. 4 shows a general view of

the reinforcing steel. No. 5 deformed bars were used as flat-

plate reinforcement.

8. Concreting. Transit mixers served to mix and

transport concrete to the construction site where the con-

fs

0AI

Fig. 2. Typical EM barracks

U -- -I - , - -

"- r

w: H

'; i ~

Fig. 3. Shoring for second-floor slab

Fig. 4. Steel reinforcement for second-floor slab

id

Fa

W

, .,-"' '",' -- ,.,i. >.rw ; " -' .ate

:-

- x V

Fig. 5. Concrete placing operations

7

Fig. 6. Facilities for strain and deflection measurements in second-floor slab

MEASUREMENTS

Equipment

11. A self-leveling level and a modified level rod were used to make deflection measurements. Modi-

fications to the level rod included a small steel rod attached to the bottom for a point contact and a hook

added to the top of the rod to allow measurements on the bottom of the second-floor slab. Readings were

estimated to the nearest 0.001 ft. Strains were measured with a mechanical extensometer over 2- and 4-in.

gage lengths.

Concrete Mixture

12. The concrete mixture used in the test structure had a nominal maximum-size aggregate of 1 in.,

a cement (type I) content of 5.0 bags per cu yd, and a water-cement ratio of 0.487 by weight. Field slump

test results were within the limits 2.5 0.5 in.

13. A series of 6- by 12-in. cylinders was cast from the concrete used in the second-floor slab.

Small steel disks were glued to the sides of seven cylinders to provide points between which creep and

shrinkage strains could be measured with a mechanical extensometer over a 4-in. gage length. Four cylin-

ders, two each loaded to stress levels of 300 and 417 psi, were used in the creep studies. The three remain-

ing cylinders were used in shrinkage tests. Results of the creep and shrinkage tests that were conducted at

the test structure site are given in plates 5 and 6, respectively. Eighteen cylinders, three at each of six ages,

were tested to determine ultimate compressive strength after curing under site conditions until one week

prior to testing. Two strain gages were mounted diametrically opposite each other at midheight of the

specimens to allow determinations of stress versus strain in the concrete at various ages. Results of these

tests are presented in plate 7.

Load Conditions

14. Two sets of measurements were made at each of 10 different stages of construction and at

4

various increments of time after completion of the test structure. Load conditions at the time of measure-

ments were as follows:

Stage Date

Initial 11 Sept 1965

1 14 Sept 1965

2 16-19 Sept 1965

3 23-25 Sept 1965

4 2-3 Oct 1965

5 13-14 Oct 1965

6 27-28 Oct 1965

7 3-4 Feb 1966

8 2-3 May 1966

9 2-3 Feb 1967

10 18-19 June 1969

Load Condition

No shoring under first-floor slab; shoring and formwork in position forsecond-floor slab; live load on first-floor slab estimated at 17 psf

Sections 1, 2, and 4 of second-floor slab in place; shoring and formworkin place for remainder of second-floor slab

Placing of second-floor slab complete; live load on first-floor slab esti-mated at 130 psf

Shoring and formwork for second-floor slab completely stripped

One 4- by 4-in. shore between first and second floors at midpoints ofeach panel; shoring and formwork in place on second floor for castingof third-floor slab; live load on second-floor slab estimated at 17 psf

Placing of third-floor slab complete; live load on second-floor slab esti-mated at 100 psf

First floor: no shoring; a number of stacks of masonry blocks, bricks,etc., randomly spaced; interior and exterior walls approximately 10percent complete

Second floor: one 4- by 4-in. shore at the midpoint of each panel; a fewrandomly spaced stacks of blocks

Third floor: complete shoring in place for placing of roof deck

Roof: decking, steel, etc., in place for placing of concrete

All interior and exterior brick and masonry walls complete

Immediately prior to placement of floor tiles

Building complete and occupied

Building complete and occupied

Experimental Results

15. Under the load conditions previously described, vertical movements were measured at 73 posi-

tions on the top of the first-floor slab and 83 positions on the bottom of the second-floor slab. Individual

results of these measurements are given in tables 1 and 2, respectively. For each point, the variation of

vertical movement with time could be expressed as a single graph. Obviously, it was impractical to present

all results in such a manner; consequently, results that are considered to illustrate the behavior of the struc-

ture were selected.

16. Plate 8 shows a comparison of average deflections at four midslab points located in exterior

bays of the first-floor slab (observation points 21, 24, 27, and 77) and at three midslab points located in

interior bays (observation points 56, 59, and 62) both as a function of time and loading conditions. The

initial readings were taken about seven weeks after casting; therefore, the measured deflections do not

5

include the deflections of the slab under its own weight and under an estimated live load of 17 psf, repre-

senting the weight of shoring and formwork for the second-floor slab already in place. The deflection ver-

sus time plot shows clearly that midslab deflections reached a maximum upon completion of casting of the

second-floor slab, i.e., when the first-floor slab had to carry the weight of the fresh concrete of the second-

floor slab in addition to shoring, formwork, and its own weight (estimated weight of concrete, 112 psf).

After the forms of the second-floor slab had been stripped, thus removing the live loads, the first-floor slab

rebounded to about one-third of its deflection under the additional live load of 112 psf.

17. Placing of masonry partitions, particularly in the interior bays, as well as creep and shrinkage,

subsequently increased the deflections. However, the average midspan deflections never exceeded the meas-

ured temporary deflections under the construction live load of about 130 psf at any time during the nine-

month observation period. All measured deflections were small, the maximum average midslab deflection

observed being about 0.011 ft, or roughly 1/1700 of the short span.

18. Plate 9 shows a comparison of deflections at midpoints between columns across the width of the

building (interior bay points 55, 57, 61, 63, and exterior bay points 20, 22, 26, 28, 76, and 78).

19. Plate 10 repeats the comparison for midpoints between columns in the longitudinal direction of

the building (interior bay points 37, 42, 47, 66, 70, 74, and exterior bay or grade-beam points 4, 8, 12, and

81). It can be seen that the grade beams hardly deflected, as would be expected due to their great

stiffness.

20. Plates 11-13 summarize the results of deflection measurements made on the second-floor slab.

The initial readings on this slab were taken prior to stripping of the forms, so that the measured deflections

include those under the slab's own weight. The average midspan deflection upon stripping the formwork

was about 0.005 ft and increased slightly during the following two weeks due to creep, an estimated live

load of 17 psf (weight of formwork for third-floor slab), random construction loads, and possibly some dif-

ferential shrinkage. The second-floor slab experienced a first deflection maximum upon completion of

casting of the third-floor slab under an estimated live load of 100 psf, i.e., 30 psf of the estimated total

130-psf live load on the second-floor slab at that time was considered to be transferred to the first-floor

slab through the shores. Average midspan deflections at this point were somewhat in excess of 0.012 ft,

both for interior and exterior bays (plate 11). Rebounding after removal of the construction live load was

relatively small, and the average midslab deflection in interior bays exceeded the first maximum after all

partitions had been placed. The peak average midspan deflection observed at the end of the 45-month ob-

servation period on interior bays of the second-floor slab was about 0.022 ft, or approximately 1/800 of

the short span. Exterior slabs, due to the smaller dead load, showed only 0.015-ft midspan deflections at

this time. No significant deflections could be measured on the edge beams of the second-floor slab, ob-

viously because of the great stiffness of these beams and in part due to the practice of reshoring.

21. Results of fragmentary strain measurements on the bottom side of the second-floor slab are

summarized in plates 14-16. They represent the sum of temperature, shrinkage, and load-induced strains

and indicate that the latter were rather small and probably never exceeded 300 microstrains. Since creep

and shrinkage curves obtained on small specimens (plates 5 and 6) cannot be expected to reflect concrete

behavior in the structure realistically and since information on concrete temperatures throughout the build-

ing was not obtained, no attempt was made to compute stresses from the measured strains. In general,

the measured strains reflect qualitatively the expected structural behavior, but beyond that they reflect

little.

6

THEORETICAL DEFLECTIONS

22. Deflection computations were based on the ersatz frame analysis proposed by Vanderbilt, Sozen,

and Siess. 6 This method replaces the more cumbersome three-dimensional approach to deflections in slabs

and plates with an approximate two-dimensional analysis of selected parts of the structure.

23. The floor system is subdivided into column strips and central slab portions. The column strips

act as beams, and, in conjunction with the columns, act as an ersatz frame, which can be analyzed by con-

ventional methods of structural analysis such as moment distribution. Slab deflections are then computed

as the summation of the deflection of the ersatz beam adjoining the slab panel under consideration plus the

deflection of the slab panel acting as though its boundaries were clamped and unyielding.

24. It should be noted that although the frame analysis method provides the designer with a means

of estimating deflections of multipanel slabs and plates, it is limited to instantaneous elastic deflections, i.e.

effects of creep, shrinkage, and plastic behavior are not included. Furthermore, the method works best

when the structure is composed of rectangular slabs in which the details of the column strips do not vary

significantly from slab to slab. A multipanel flat plate, for example, will present difficulty in analysis if

edge spandrel beams are present.

25. Table 3 presents the loading history of the second-floor slab as used in the analysis. Of those

loads shown, only load b (self weight) is known with any degree of certainty. Load d is based on an esti-

mation of the percentage of the weight of the fresh concrete of the third-floor slab which is transmitted

to the first-floor slab by reshores, and is, at best, an educated guess. In addition, load b is the only one

that can be considered an instantaneous static load. Loads c and d were applied after the slab had the op-

portunity to creep.

26. Table 4 presents the results of deflection computations for an interior panel of the floor system,

and compares these results with the measured deflections. The deflections shown were computed on the

basis of the uniformly distributed loads shown in table 3, on the basis of moments of inertia of uncracked

sections, and on the basis of a modulus of elasticity for the concrete based upon the formula given in the

ACI Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete. 7

27. Section properties for uncracked sections were used because it was felt that the 9-in. slab was

not sufficiently stressed to initiate cracking. This assumption was largely substantiated by observation.

28. A computed modulus of elasticity was used rather than a measured modulus because the meas-

ured modulus would not be known to the designer. In fact, the actual modulus of elasticity of the con-crete, 3.52 X 106 psi, was 6 percent below the computed modulus, 3.75 X 106 psi.

29. Examination of measured and computed deflections for load b in table 4 shows that the com-

puted values exceed the measured values by approximately 20 to 30 percent. It is noted that the difference

in deflection between the midpoint between columns and the center of the slab is the same for both meas-

ured and computed deflections. Thus, the differences between measured and computed deflections are at-

tributable to miscalculations concerning the deflection of the ersatz frame rather than to the deflection of

the slab portions of the structure.

30. Two explanations exist for the discrepancies in the deflections. First, the zero deflection meas-

urements could have been made when the floor system was already carrying part of its load, possibly due

to settlement of the formwork or to creep in the first-floor slab. A second explanation is that the ersatz

frame system is, in fact, stiffer than the theory predicts. This extra stiffness can be attributed to the fact

that the aspect ratio of the slab, 0.873, is close enough to unity that the ersatz beam stiffness is increased

by beam action in an orthogonal direction.

7

CONCLUSIONS

31. Due to the rather great slab thickness of 9 in., corresponding to an L/T ratio of about 28, the

measured slab deflections were very small and in no instance exceeded 0.022 ft, or approximately 1/800 of

the shorter span. Since the accuracy of the expedient measuring technique used was limited to about

0.002 ft, a precise determination of slab deflections was not achieved; however, the results are accurate

enough that the following conclusions are believed to be warranted:

a. The measured initial and time-dependent deformations of the observed flat-plate structurewere well below those normally considered acceptable 8-1 0 and should, therefore, not posea problem. The highest total midslab deflection observed on the second-floor slab at anage of 45 months was approximately 0.022 ft, or 1/800 of the shorter span. The time-dependent deflections at the end of this observation period were less than the initialdeflections.

b. The temporary live load of about 130 psf during construction (i.e., upon completion ofcasting of the subsequent floor slab) exceeds the sum of the assumed design live load(40 psf) and equivalent partition load (40 psf) for an exterior panel by a factor of over1.6. The exterior panels of the flat plate are thus required to carry, at an early age, atransient total load almost 30 percent in excess of their total design load. Although shor-ing will bring some relief to slabs other than the first-floor slab, the lack of shores under-neath the first-floor slab and the possibility of additional simultaneous random construc-tion loads appear to justify some concern for the structure during this construction stage.However, observation of the investigated flat-plate structure during and after the criticalloading period failed to reveal any signs of distress.

c. The temporary overload resulted in a permanent increase of deflections. However, dueto the small magnitude of deflections in the observed structure, this appears to be of noparticular concern in this particular case. Generally speaking, however, a temporaryoverload of such magnitude at an early age must be expected to cause extensive crackingthat will be detrimental to the structure's subsequent performance.

d. The calculated deflections for an interior panel of the investigated flat-plate structureunder various load conditions were within about 30 percent of the measured deflections.The calculations were based on the ersatz frame analysis proposed by Vanderbilt, Sozen,and Siess, 6 using uncracked sections, an elastic modulus of concrete as suggested by ACICode 318-63, and somewhat questionable load assumptions. In view of the limited ac-curacy of the measured deflections and some debatable assumptions made in the analysis,the agreement appears fair.

LITERATURE CITED

1. "Experimental Lightweight Flat Plate Structure; Part I: Measurements and Observations During Con-struction," Constructional Review, Vol 34, No. 1, Jan 1961, pp 21-32.

2. "Experimental Lightweight Flat Plate Structure; Part II: Deformations Due to Self-Weight," Construc-tional Review, Vol 34, No. 3, Mar 1961, pp 25-33.

3. "Experimental Lightweight Flat Plate Structure; Part III: Long-Term Deformations," ConstructionalReview, Vol 34, No. 4, Apr 1961, pp 21-26.

4. Blakey, F. A., "Australian Experiments with Flat Plates," American Concrete Institute, Proceedings,Vol 60, Apr 1963, pp 515-524.

5. , "The Deflection of Flat Plate Structures," Civil Engineering and Public Works Review,Vol 58, Sept 1963, pp 1133-1136.

8

6. Vanderbilt, M. D., Sozen, M. A., and Siess, C. P., "Deflections of Reinforced Concrete Floor Slabs,"Structural Research Series No. 263, Apr 1963, Civil Engineering Department, University of Illinois,Urbana, Ill.

7. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete," ACI 318-63, 1963,American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Mich.

8. Blakey, F. A., "The Design of Flat Plates by Simple Analysis," Constructional Review, Vol 35,No. 11, Nov 1962, pp 26-34.

9. Marshall, W. T., "Permissible Deflection in Floor Slabs," Civil Engineering and Public Works Review,Vol 62, Dec 1967, 2p 1379-1381.

10. ACI Committee 435, "Allowable Deflections," American Concrete Institute, Proceedings, Vol 65,No. 6, June 1968, pp 433-444.

9

Vertical Movements (ft X

Table 1

10-3) Under Various Load Conditions; First-Floor Slab

ObservationPoint*

Load Conditions**1 2 3 4 5 6

12345

6789

10

1112131415

1617181920

2122232425

2627282930

3132333435

3637384041

t0t+2

0

+3+5+5+5+4

+7+3

t+4+6

+5+2+6+1+2

+3+3+5+6+3

+5

-20

+2+5

+4+5+4

t+2

t-2+5+4+3

(Continued)

See plate 3.See paragraph 14.Unable to make measurement.Lost point.

0-3

0-1-1

0-2-2-2-1

0-4

0-4-6

-6-5-4-5-4

-6-5-5-7-8

-7-8-6-6-6

-9-8-4

0-4

0-9-2-3-8

-3-2-4-3-3

-5-4-4-3-2

-2-4-1-4-7

-6-5-4-5-5

-5-5-6-6-6

-6-7-4-6-6

-8-5-4-4-3

-4-7-3-4-7

-1 -3-4 -4-1 -2-2 -3-4 -6

0+1

-1-1

0

-1-1-1

00

+10

+1

-2-3

-2-1-1-3-1

-1-2-1-2-3

-2-3-2-4-4

-4-2

0-1-2

tt0

-2-1-2

-3-3-1-1-1

-2-3-1-4-4

-3-4-3-3-2

-3-4-6-4-5

-5-5-3-6-5

-6-4-3-2-3

tt-3-4-2-3

-6-5-3-3-1

-3-6-3-4-6

-5-6-7-6-5

t-5ttt

-8-10t-7t

tt-5-6-5

-4-8-3-5-7

7

tttttt-6-3

tt-8-7ttt

-7-7-8tt

-11

-10-10-10tt

-11

-11-8

-12-10-11

tt-12-12tt

-12

-13-9tt-8

-12

-9-14tt

-10-13

8

tttttttttt

tt-5tt-4tt

tttttttt-7

-7-7tttt-9

tttt-8-8-9

tttttttt

-10

-10-7tttt

-10

tttttttt

-12

*

**

ttt

Table 1 (Concluded)

Load Conditions1 2

4243444547

4849505152

5354555657

5859606162

6364656669

7071747576

ObservationPoint 4 5 6

+5+4+3+2

-1

t+5+3+4+6

+6

-1-1-2+3

+4+6+4

+1

-3

0tt

-1+5

+2+4

0t+4

+2+3+4

t Unable to make measurement.tt Lost point.

-10-8-3-3

-10

0-3

-10-10-7

-3-5-7

-12-7

-10-11-9-6

-12

-400

-11-1

-120

-100

-6

-14-6-4

3

-8-9-5-4-6

-2-4-8-8-7

-3-5-6-8-6

-8-8-7-6-7

-2-4-4

-10-2

-90

-7+2

-3

-7-4-2

777881

-5-3-3-2-5

-10

-5-4-2

0-2-1-4-2

-4-3-4-4-5

-100

-50

-70

-60

-4

-6-3-2

-6-5-4-4-7

-4-2-6-6-5

-2-3-4-4-5

-5-5-5-6-9

-4-2--1-6-2

-80

-7-1-5

-8-5-2

-8-8-7-4

-11

-5-3-8

-10-6

-4-5-6-6-6

-7-6-6-7

-12

-5-2-2-9-4

-9-2

-11-4-8

-11-7tt

7

-13-12

-8-9

-16

-9tt

-15-16-14

-14-13-12-14-14

-15-16-16-14-20

-14-6-6

-14-8

-18-6tttttt

-16-11

-7

8

-14-10tttttt

tttttt-16-14

tt-10-11-11-13

-14-14-13-12tt

-10tttttt-8

-16-6tttt

-12

-15-11tt

Table 2

Vertical Movements (ft X 10-3) Under Various Load Conditions; Second-Floor Slab

Load Conditions**3 4

12345

6789

10

1112131415

1617181920

2122232425

2627282930

3132333435

3637383940

See plate 4.See paragraph 14.Unable to make measurement.Lost point.

ObservationPoint*

-3-4-4-4-3

-4-2-5-4-3

-1-1-1-6-5

-7-5-4-6-7

-8-6-6-9-6

-6-9-4-5-7

-8-7-4-4-7

-4-8-4-2-3

10

tttttttttt

0-2-1-3-2

-20

-4-3-4

+10

+1

-5-5

-6-4-4-6-5

-7-5tt-8-6

-5-9-6-4-7

-8-7-3-2-7

-1-8-2-2-3

5

t-4-2-4-5

-4-1-6-4-3

-4-2-1

-13-12

-13-12-11-11-11

-14-13tt

-19-15

-14-18-14-11-15

-18-16-11-2

-13

-2-15-5t-4

6

+9

-5-4-7-6

-7-5-7-6-3

-5-5-3

-13-12

-14-11-12-12-13

-15-13tttt

-16-18t

-11t

tt

-11-6

-13

-4-16-6-6-7

7

tttttt-9

-11

tt-10tt

-11tt

tt-8-8

-18-16

-18-17tt

-20-19

-20-19tt

-24-21

tt-24-21-17-20

-23-20tt-8

-20

-9-23tttt

-14

8

tttttttttt

tttttttttt

tttttttt-9

-10-9tt

-12-13

-15tttt

-16-12

tt-17tttttt

-14-12tttt

-12

tt-17tttttt

9

tttttttttt

tttttttttt

tttttttt-1

-3-1tt-2-3

-7tttt-9-6

tt-11tttttt

-8tttttt-7

tt-10tttttt

tttttttttt

tttttttt

+28

+26+28tt

+28+28

+23tttt

+20+25

tt+15tttttt

+21tttttttt

tt+17tttttt

*

**

tt

(Continued)

Table 2 (Concluded)

Load Conditions3 4 5

ObservationPoint

4142434445

4647484950

5152535455

5657585960

6162636465

6667686970

7172737475

7677787980

818283

-6-9-7-4-1

-4-6-2-5-5

-7-6-3-6-6

-7-6-5-7-6

-5-8-3-4-4

-9-1+2

-2-7

-3-5

0-7+2

-4-5-5-5-3

+1

-3-3

-5-10-5-2-1

-3-7-1-5-5

-7-6-4-5-6

-8-6-6-7-6

-6-11-4

00

-9-1+1-2-8

-2-3-3tt

0

-5-6-6-4-3

+1

tt-2

6 7

-11-19-11-3-2

-8-16-3

-11-12

-18-14-10-10-10

-15-13-16-17-15

-12-19-12-1

0

-16-4-3-5

-15

-5-5-3tt-1

-12-15-13-8-4

-1tt-4

t Unable to make measurement.tt Lost point.

8 9

-11-18-11-6-3

-8-17-5

-11-12

-15-13-11-11-9

-15-12-15-14-13

-11-20-11-2-2

-15-6-4-7

-13

-5-7-4tt-4

-12-16-14-9-6

-4tt-4

-17-25-17-9tt

tt-24-9

-18-19

-24-21tt

-17-18

-24-21-22-25-23

-20-28-21-6-6

-22-12-10-12-22

-12-15tttttt

t-22tt

-13tt

-8tttt

-S-19-10tttt

tt-13tttt

-13

-18-13tt

-11-10

-18tt

-15-17-14

-13-18-10tttt

-18-5-4-6

-16

-6-8tttttt

-13-17tt-9tt

-7tttt

-2-11

-2tttt

tt-11tttt-7

-12-8tt-4

0

-13tt

-11-13-9

-6-15-5tttt

-10+5+8+4

-8

+3+2

tttttt

-2-6tttttt

tttttt

10

+27+20+28tttt

tt+16tttt

+21

+15+22tt

+30+25

+13tt

+17+13+18

+20+12+23tttt

+19+35+38+36+20

+35+34tttttt

+25+23tt

+33tt

tttttt

Table 3

Loading History of Second-Floor Slab

LDesi

~oad EstimatedJoad

gnation Date

a 16 Sept 1967

b 24 Sept 1967

c 3 Oct 1967

d 14 Oct 1967

Agedays Event

0 Placed slab

8 Stripped slab; no reshores; only self weight acting

17 Third-floor slab formwork in place; one 4- by 4-in.reshore per slab panel between second- and first-floor slabs; estimated zero load in reshores

28 Third-floor slab placed; estimated 75 percent of ad-ditional load (84 psf) distributed to second-floorslab; remainder carried by reshores to first-floorslab

Estimated

Load, psf

0

112

129

213

Table 4

Measured and Computed* Deflections of the Second-Floor Slab

Midpanel DeflectionDiffer-

Measured, ft Computed, ft ence, %

4.8 X 10-3 5.8 X 10-3 +21

7.5 X 10-3 6.7 X 10-3 -11

14.0 X 10-3 11.1 X 10-3 -21

Deflection at Midpoint BetweenColumns

Differ-Measured, ft Computed, ft ence, %

3.0 X 10- 3 4.0 X 10-3 +33

3.8 X 10-3 4.6 X 10-3 +21

9.5 X 10- 3 7.7 X 10-3 -19

* Computed by use of ersatz frame analysis theory.

LoadDesig-nation

b

c

d

Esti-matedLoadpsf

112

129

213

SYMMETRICAL ABOUT q

4, - - T0

0

Ul

a0U

0

0

0

LEGEND0 15"X15" COLUMNS

17" X17" COLUMNSU

0

0

0 0

0

0

I

0

u; - 14] I

14"

0"1/81-811

4971-e" ___________

MIN CRAWL SPACE 2'-6"

PLAN AND ELEVATIONOF BARRACKS II

11

0

0

0

-N

6 '-9"

0 0 m

0

0

-

a~

0

0 n

21'1-0"~'21,-0" 2/'-0" '-" 0-l

4 84'- 8"

mu

._

" V L. L/

n n n

I I I Ii T 1 11

F-0

I-J

0

0

W~F-

FORMING OF FLCSLABS

PLACINGSLABSTEEL

CASTING SLABS

CASTING COLUM

STRIPPINGSLABFORMS

PLACING EXTERIS INTERIOR WALL

0ur

m

CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

-J

J:

-J

I OO

DC - ---- - - - - -- - - - --

O

1 00 - - - 4--- -80 HIGH7C0

60 ------------ _

50 --- -

40 LOW

3C

C - - ---- _---

120 -

10O - HIGH -- _- _-

90 -- - - ---

70

3RC LLOW

60 -9111 y 1

30 _

FOR

ROOF

3RD FLOOR ZI2ND FLOOR

NS SFLO

ORLS

20 10 20 10 20 10 20 10 20 10 20 10 20 10 201JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB

1965 1966

I.!IL.V r- 12.U

5

n

CL SYMMETRICAL ABOUT (

o o 6 ~c12 8 7i0 0 ) 0 0 0 0

118 17 16 15 14

O 0 0 0 0 027 26 25 24 23 22

330 0 0 0 029450 32 31 30

0 4000 0 040047 4443 42 41

0 0 0 0 053 52 51 50 49

0 0 0 0 0 062 61 60 59 58 57

113

28

48

-N- 63

i75 6900

4 0 23

O 0 021 20 19

037 36 0 0

35

0 0 056 55 54

66 6500 0

3 4 00

LEGENDo 15"X15" COLUMNS

17" X17" COLUMNS

0 .

E]

0 0

0 0 078 77 76

n 0 0

OBSERVATION POINTSFIRST-FLOOR SLAB

074 X71I 70

0

81n

0

0

F

-mw'

T V Li

64 om

0 0 0

C_ SYMMETRICAL ABOUT (P1

4 0 2 003

0 0 021 20 19

0 00 0 00037 36 35 34

12 9 8 7

O 0 0 0 018 17 16 15 14

0 0 0 0 0 027 26 25 24 23 22

033 032 031 030 0290 45p 44 0 0 0038

47 46 43 42 4140 39

0 0 0 0 053 52 51 50 49

0 0 0 0 0 062 61 60 59 58 57

S72 670 071 0 O

74 7 70 69~ 68

LEGEND0 15"X15" COLUMNS

17" X17" COLUMNS

m 0

13

28

ODI48

N 63

7564o]

00

0 0 078 77 76

83

082 O 80 79

0 0 0 0

0 0 0

OBSERVATION POINTSSECOND-FLOOR SLAB

0 0 056 55 54

o~ oo66 650D

ED

0

N

..-.

- - - - - -I

10

V 9

h 8

7

- 6

= 51

W 4

31

21

0

h 4

x

I-

U - 21

0L SEP 1265

50 X A00 150

SJAN 1966200 250

3 MAY 1966ATIME, DAYS

300 350 400 450 SoD

3 FEB 1967-

CREEP STRAIN VS TIME

0

0 _

0 -0 0j[ LEGEND

J 11 11 1 A Jv H LEH BUILDING COMPLETED TEMPERATURE

o r ---- REL HUMIDITY

0 AH

0

0

3-/-SI- -S

0100, 300

PSI

0 - - ______ _________ _ __________ _ _______ _________ _ _ _ _ _ _ __" _2 CY IN E R

0- - --- ------- ---- --- ------ ------- ------ 6X 12 CYLINDERS ---

0 1 1___ _ - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - -1.- -

(-r-

-4

-oI-

1

a)I

0LISEP 1965

50 100 ISO

I JAN 1966200 f 250

3 MAY 1966-TIME, DAYS

300 350 400

100 - - -----

90

80- -0 LEGEND

7 0 BUILDING COMPLETED TEMPERATURE

0 60 , - I - - -f-4

REL HUMIDITY

W 40W I

30

20 - --- - -------3-

60

40

a _o

20

8" X 12" CYLINDERS

0O

450 500

3 FEB 1967-

SHRINKAGE STRAIN VS TIME

800

4000

3200

a-

V 2400Ix

I-

1 600

800

01600 2000

STRAIN, IN./IN. X 10- 6

COMPARISONOF ULTIMATE LOADS

PLATE 7

4800

56 DAYS-360 DAYS

28 DAYSoole-/4 DAYS

7 DAYS

/0/

12000 400

100 -REL HUMIDITY '

o -- - - f -i -80 4-4~ - -- I-I-I - 1-,-t--I1-

%

fI1

I ,

I V

20 TEMPERATURE

10F- ~SUPPORT SET TLEMENT (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATON POINTS ),3, 5.,6, /0,z ~//, /3, 34, 36, 38, 40,9 44, 45, 48, 64, 65.,69,? 7/, 75)

0

x 1

U w EXTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATIONF- -20 POINTS 2/, 24, 27, 77) ~ ~-~-~-~~ ~ ~ ~

INTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION

30' POINTS56,59,62)

-0

0Z EXTERIOR BAY

J x INTERIOR BAY

0U-3

0

II SEP 1965

50 tOO 150K JAN 1966

TIME, DAYS

200

3 MAY 1966-

MIDSPAN DEFLECTIONSFIRST-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE 8

LLJ

w

wa-w

0

II SEP 1985

5010 0 15 0

JAN 1968TIME, DAYS

200

3 MAY 1966-

DEFLECTIONS AT MIDPOINTSBETWEEN COLUMNS

(TRANSVERSE)FIRST-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE 9

f-

IJwc:

--REL HUM/D/TY

80 - --- - - i---t. . -----

40

TEMPERA TURE

10

SUPPOR T SE T TL EMEN T

EX TERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION

POINTS 20,22,26,28,76,78)

INTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATIONPOINTS 55, 57, 6/, 63)

I0

EX TERIOR BAY-

IN TERROR BAY--10

-20

-30

zw

Wry> 10 0

J

Q -uW

F-Lth

W x~

0

F-

IJw

z

U-\-00

WLL0

INTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS 37, 42,47,66,70,74)

- - - - -- -I

0

1 1 SEP 1985

50 100 4150LJAN 1966

TIME, DAYS

200

3 MAY 1966 -

DEFLECTIONS AT MIDPOINTSBETWEEN COLUMNS

(LONGITUDINAL)FIRST-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE 10

A-,

0

w

w

H

w

-

Zw2

0

IL

8 DREL HUMIDITY

80- - -j - - - --

6C __ I ; r' I I V' 1 160-

__ TEMPERA TURE

I0

EX TERROR BAY SUPPORT SE T TL EMEN T

-10

INTERIOR BAY-20 -- -- - ------

-30

r1EXTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS 4,8,12,8/)

)

-30' 1 T 1 1

-20 II

100

9080

70

60

50

40

30

2040

SUPPORT SETTLEMENT (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS , 3, 5, 6, /0,/i, /3, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40, 44, 45, 46, 48, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 7/, 72, 73, 75)-

ETIRA(A....--AI--T2-2, iEX TERROR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS 21, 24, 27, 77)~~~~

INTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVAT/ON POINTS 56, 59 , 62)

__________________________ ___________________________ I II-- II I I__ __ __ __

/NTER/OR BAY-

0 50 100 150 200 25n 300 35n An "

L-1 1 SEP 1965 3 MAY 19663J I v SU 40 U

TIME) DAYS

3E uv3 FEB 1967-

137719 JUNE 1969 -

MIDSPAN DEFLECTIONSSECOND-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE II

~LLJ

I

H2

>100

Jx-J

<HWLL

_i11ILEGEND

BUILDING COMPLETED _MERTR

- ------- REL HUMIDITY

--- - 11 -1I~71111

1

20

0

-20

-40

0

Z

WHo

0

-40

II I I I

....--...... ----

...--...--

'V L V V 450vL-I JAN 1966

-i

- LEGENDBUILDINCCOMPLETED EMER ETEMPERATURE

S---- -- REL HUMIDITY

I------------------- 1= ---I 7 I

0

z

f--oWx-20

LA

0

0 5L-I SEP 1965

S2503 MAY 156

300 400 450

TIME, DAYS

50013 FEB 1967

3779 JUNE 1 9 6 9 -

DEFLECTIONS AT MIDPOINTSBETWEEN COLUMNS

(TRANSVERSE)SECOND-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE 12

W o

Q D

L..J

cr x

.1 WW .r

HA

I 00

908070

60

5040

30

2040

WxM>100

Jx-

<HLE-L

Wd

20

0

-20

W-,-- -.- I

--

---SUPPORT SETTLEMENT -

EXTERIOR .4Y (AVERAGE OF OBSERVE TION POINTS 20, 22, 26, 28 76, 78)

INTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS 55, 526/, 63)

-INTERIOR BAY

EXTrIOR:A

i'

i

i

-404L

0 200 350i

100LIJA 19150SJN966

--------- 9---m---. -- -- itLEGEND

BUILDING COMPLETED TEMPERATURE

j----- REL HUMIDITY

-- 4*-------------------- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - ~ -~ -. - - - -- - - - - - - - . - - ----

0

20

-40S5

11 ISEP 19650 I JAN 1966 7 250

3 MAY 966300 350 400 450

TIME, DAYS

5003 FEB 1967-

13779 JUNE 19 6 9 -

DEFLECTIONS AT MIDPOINTSBETWEEN COLUMNS

(LONGITUDINAL)SECOND-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE 13

Li-

SIpH M

Q D

zLi

> 1Oo

xS-

HWi

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

40

20

0

-20

-40L

-9--

-9---

-9-

9--

SUPPORT SETTLEMENT

EXTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS 4, 8, /2, 8/

INTERIOR BAY (AVERAGE OF OBSERVATION POINTS 37 42, 47, 66, 70)

,____________ __________________________ _____________ ___________________ ______ _____________ ________________________________________ __________________________________________

Z

U -W xJ

0

EXTERIOR BAY (SPANDREL BEAMS)

INTERIOR BAY

I -200

11

I 00

9080

70

60

50

40

30

20

-80

- 60-----

QX-20cr Z

Z)

0

_-----

20

400 5L-1i SEP 1965

-- ---------------- i9 E I EB I1 111LEGEND

- BUILDING COMPLETED _______ TEMPERATURE

----- REL HUMIDITY

--~-

W 0L

0

.F-I

a J

F-

I-

0 100 150I JAN1 966

200

r T 1 7

300 350 1TIME, DAYS

400L2503 MAY I6

450 50oo3 FEB 1967-

13779 JUNE 1969 -J

MIDSPAN STRAINSSECOND-FLOOR SLAB

(BOTTOM SIDE)

I

PLATE 14

--

r-

40 -

INTER/OR BAY -

-EXTERIOR BAY________________ 4 1 7 9 4 I-

4 .

I I I- I I 1 1 1 l i f FI-1 1 I I I I I T 1 1 1 ,1 17-F

I

I

----- t 4

i --- +

~i LI r"tl- ~ ~~-

t-~

-401

o 95111 SE P 1965

0 100 150I JAN 1966

Wo

3 -

F-

rI-

200 2503 MAY 1966

300 350 400 450

TIME, DAYS

5003 FEB 1967-

,1=T

1377

19 JUNE 1969 -

AVERAGE STRAINS ATMIDPOINTS BETWEEN COLUMNS

SECOND-FLOOR SLAB(BOTTOM SIDE)

PLATE 15

1 00

908070

60

5040

30

20

-80

-60

___________ ____________________ r

__I __ I -I

LEGENDI {(-fBUILDING COMPLETED ----- TEMPERATURE

I I II ----- REL HUMIDITY11- - - ------------------------- -- ~--- ----- --.-- ---- -- - - -

- - - - ----- - - --- - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - -

Z O

<X -20

0

20

40

PERLENDCUL AR COL UMN LINES

-PA RAL L EL TO COL UMN L INES

-__ _ ___- I- -- II __ _ _

_ _ _ _ _I _ _ _ _ _I _ _ _ _ _I _ _ _ _ _I__ _ _ _ _I_ _ _ _ _J. _ _ _ __L _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ I ___ _ _ _

---- --

~

17 -2-7-7

I I _ _- LEGEND

1-IBUILDING COMPLETED -- _---_TEMPERATUR E1- I----REL HUMIDITY

I --- - - - -

- - - - -- --- -- _ -- - l- - F- - I - - - ---

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

0 50L I SE P 1965

100 150Lg JAN 1966

200 2503 MAY 1966

300 350 400 450

TIME, DAYS

500,3 F E B 9 6 7 -J

13779 JUNE 1969 -J

STRAINS ATINTERIOR COLUMNSSECOND-FLOOR SLAB

PLATE 16

0

1 00

908070

60

50

40

30

20

oUW0

W FH

LU

I

/I

PERPENDICULAR

DIAGONAL

I___________ .___________ ___________ .___________ __________________________________r ___________I___________

I

""

-

4n(-

DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR CONCRETE RESEARCH REPORTS

No. ofOffice Copies Remarks

OCE (ENGCW-E) 2OCE (ENGAS-I) 1OCE (ENGAS-I, Library) 1OCE (ENGSA) 1

Bd of Engrs for Rivers and Harbors 1Engr School Library, Fort Belvoir 1

CERC 1

HUNTSVILLE 1 ATTN: Mr. A. H. Bauman1 ATTN: Mr. J. J. Kennedy, Jr.1 ATTN: Mr. M. M. Dembo1 ATTN: Mr. G. E. Hatch

LMVD 1 ATTN: Library1 ATTN: Mr. R. I. Kaufman1 ATTN: Mr. C. V. Robison1 ATTN: Mr. A. B. Smith

Memphis 1 ATTN: Tech Library1 ATTN: Mr. J. R. Bentley1 ATTN: Mr. C. A. McVean1 ATTN: Mr. O. R. Rankin1 ATTN: Mr. A. P. Broughton1 ATTN: Mr. J. R. Benjamin1 ATTN: Mr. J. H. Conditt

New Orleans 1 ATTN: Foundations & Matls Branch1 ATTN: Construction Division

St. Louis Abstract to DE1 ATTN: Foundations & Matils Branch1 ATTN: Mr. A. J. Kochanski

Vicksburg 1 ATTN: Chief, Construction Division1 ATTN: Chief, Design Branch1 ATTN: Chief, Foundations & Matls Branch1 Area Engineer, Greenville1 Res Engr, Ouachita Resident Office, Jonesville1 Res Engr, DeGray Resident Office, Arkadelphia1 ATTN: Mr. H. L. Mullin1 ATTN: Mr. J. R. Black

MRD (including Omaha Dist) 8 ATTN: Office of Administrative Services (Library)

Kansas City 5 ATTN: Library

NED 1 ATTN: Foundations & Mats Branch1 ATTN: Mr. J. A. McElroy

NAD 1 ATTN: Engineering Division1 ATTN: Civil Works Br, Constr-Oper Division1 ATTN: Mr. A. V. Iarrobino1 ATTN: Mr. A. G. Distefano1 ATTN: Mr. A. Weiner

Baltimore 4 DEAbstract: Mr. J. P. Weaver, Raystown Resident Office

New York 1 DE1 ATTN: Chief, Foundations & Mals Branch1 ATTN: Mr. F. L. Panuzio1 ATTN: Mr. P. A. Romano1 ATTN: Mr. O. Compton

1

No. ofOffice Copies Remarks

NAD (Continued)

Norfolk 1 DE1 ATTN: Asst Chief, Design Branch

Abstract to Chief, Engineering Division

Philadelphia 1 ATTN: Engineering Division, NAPEN-D1 ATTN: Engineering Division, NAPEN-F

NCD 1 DE1 ATTN: Chief, Foundations & Matls Branch

Buffalo 1 ATTN: Chief, Engineering Division

Chicago 1 ATTN: Chief, Engineering Division1 ATTN: Chief, Operations Division1 ATTN: Mr. G. McKerral

Detroit 2 ATTN: Library1 ATTN: Mr. C. A. Aune

Rock Island 1 DE1 ATTN: Mr. F. W. Ashton1 ATTN: Mr. K. E. Jensen1 ATTN: Mr. G. M. Wood

St. Paul 1 DE1 ATTN: Mr. F. E. Mullen

NPD 1 ATTN: Geology, Soils & Matls Branch1 ATTN: Construction Division2 ATTN: Division Materials Laboratory

Alaska 1 ATTN: Library1 ATTN: Foundations & Mails Branch1 ATTN: District Laboratory

Portland 2 ATTN: Library

Seattle 1 ATTN: Chief, Construction Division1 ATTN: Chief, Foundations & Matls Branch1 Resident Office

Walla Walla 3 DE2 Resident Engineer, Dworshak Resident Office

ORD 1 DE2 Director, ORDL1 ATTN: Mr. J. M. Scanlon1 ATTN: Mr. T. L. Huckaby1 ATTN: Mr. V. D. Edgerton1 ATTN: Mr. A. O. Kauranen1 ATTN: Mr. I. Narrow

Huntington 1 ATTN: Library1 ATTN: Mr. D. J. Deeds1 ATTN: Mr. L. R. Clayton, Jr.1 ATTN: Mr. G. Robinette1 ATTN: Mr. V. L. Odale1 ATTN: Mr. H. K. Crisp1 ATTN: Mr. J. M. Foster1 ATTN: Mr. W. F. McCraw, Jr.1 ATTN: Mr. W. A. King, Jr.1 ATTN: Mr. J. R. Turner III

Louisville 1 ATTN: Chief, Construction Division1 ATTN: Mr. C. V. Edwards1 ATTN: Mr. A. Harrison

2

Office

ORD (Continued)

Nashville

No. ofCopies Remarks

1 ATTN: Chief, Design Branch, Engrg Div1 ATTN: Chief, Construction Division1 ATTN: Chief, Foundations & Matls Branch1 Res Engr, J. P. Priest Res Office (Mr. J. P. Dealy)1 Res Engr, Cordell Hull Proj (Mr. L. Marcum)1 Res Engr, Laurel River Reservoir Proj

(Mr. R. L. Thomas, Jr.)1 ATTN: Mr. F. B. Couch, Jr.1 ATTN: Mr. W. K. Ladd

Pittsburgh 1111

POD

Honolulu

SAD

Canaveral

Charleston

Jacksonville

Mobile

ATTN: Engineering Div Tech LibraryATTN: Chief, Design BranchATTN: Chief, Construction DivisionATTN: Chief, District LaboratoryAbstract: Mr. J. C. Staples, Mr. J. B. Lloyd, Mr. E.

McCabe, Mr. E. Comis, Mr. R. J. Kroft

ATTN: PODVG

1 ATTN: Library

1 ATTN: Engineering Division1 ATTN: SAD Laboratory

1 DE

1 ATTN: Chief, Engineering Division

ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:

ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:

ATTN:ATTh:ATTN:ATTN:ATTN:

Chief, Design Branch, Engrg DivMr. T. H. WheelerMr. R. T. Quick

SAMEN-FSAMEN-DGMr. W. C. KnoxMr. W. K. SmithMr. J. F. Stewart, Jr.Mr. R. E. AndersonMr. J. Abbott, Jr.Mr. R. E. MuellerMr. E. J. Clark

LibraryPaving and Grading SectionConstruction DivisionStructural SectionFoundation & Matls Branch

111

111111111

11111

Savannah

Wilmington 1 ATTN: Chief, Engineering Division

SPD

Los Angeles

Sacramento

San Francisco

SWD

Albuquerque

1 ATTN: Chief, Geology, Soils & Matls Branch1 SPD Laboratory, Sausalito

1 ATTN: LibraryAbstract: Mr. S. F. L. Vallet, Mr. F. R. Cline, Mr. N. E.

MacDougall, Mr. J. S. Short, Mr. G. A. Lilley,Mr. R. S. Perkins, Mr. A. P. Gildea

4 ATTN: District Librarian

2 ATTN: Library

4 ATTN: Library3 Abstracts

3 ATTN: Engineering Division LibraryAbstract: Mr. L. C. Slack, Mr. J. H. McCausland,

Engineering Division Librarian

3

No. ofOffice Copies Remarks

SWD (Continued)

Fort Worth 1 ATTN: Librarian

Galveston 1 ATTN: Librarian1 ATTN: Mr. E. O. McGehee (1 abstract)

Abstract: Mr. J. L. Ransom, Mr. E. W. Schuldt, andMr. C. Ramsbacher

Little Rock 1 DE1 ATTN: Mr. J. W. Story1 ATTN: Mr. C. D. Boyd1 ATTN: Mr. F. D. Welshans1 ATTN: Mr. R. S. Durham1 ATTN: Mr. C. E. Mayo1 ATTN: Mr. H. A. Rabjohn1 ATTN: Mr. L. D. Carter1 ATTN: Mr. W. O. Gray1 ATTN: Mr. J. K. Cowger1 ATTN: Mr. H. L. Dobbins

Tulsa 26 DE

USA Cold Regions Research 1 DirectorEngineering Laboratory

USA Construction Engineering 1 ATTN: LibraryResearch Laboratory

DDC 20 ATTN: Mr. Myer Kahn

Chief, R&D, Hqs, DA ATTN: Dir of Army Tech Info3 copies of Form 1473

Consultants:Mr. Byram W. Steele 1Mr. R. L. Blaine1Professor Raymond E. Davis 1Dr. Roy W. Carlson 1Dr. Bruce E. Foster 1

Automatic:Engineering Societies Library 1Library, Div of Public Doc (NO CLASSIFIED REPORTS TO THIS AGENCY), U. S. Govt 1

Printing Office, Washington, D. C.Library of Congress, Doc Expd Proj, Washington, D. C. 3Bureau of Reclamation, ATTN: Code 294, Denver, Colo. 2COL C. T. Newton 1Mr. Ralph Lane, TVA, Singleton Laboratory, Knoxville, Tenn. 1

Exchange Basis, Foreign:Dept of Civil Engineering, McGill University, Canada (ENG-271) 1Swedish Cement & Conc Res Inst, Stockholm, Sweden (ENG-121) 1National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada (ENG-17) 1Inst of Civil Engineers, London, England (ENG-47) 2Institution of Engineers, Sydney, Australia (ENG-162) 1Cement and Concrete Assoc, London, England (thru ENGME-AS) 1P. Dutron, Centre National de Recherches Scientifiques and Techniques pour l'Industrie Cimentiere,

Bruxelles 5, Belgium (ENG-304) 1Director, Public Works Research Inst, Ministry of Constr, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan (ENG-324) 1Institute Mexicana del Cemento y del Concreto, A.C., Mexico 20, D.F. (ENG-329) 1Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches de l'Industrie du Bton Manufactur, Epernon, France (ENG-336) 1Chief Librarian, CSIRO, Victoria, Australia (ENG-291) 1Cembureau, Sweden (ENG-268) 1Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut, Kobenhavn, Denmark (ENG-36) 1Library, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (ENG-122) 1Institute Eduardo Tarroja de la Construccion y del Cemento, Madrid, Spain (ENG-263) 1

4

Exchange Basis, Foreign (Continued):Librarian, Bldg Research Sta, Ministry of Public Building and Works, Herts, England (ENG-335) 1Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, New Delhi-21, India (ENG-337) 1Cement Research Institute of India, New Delhi 16, India (ENG-340) 1

Exchange Basis, Domestic:APPLIED MECHANICS REVIEWS, San Antonio, Tex. 2Dept of Civil Engineering, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz. 1Civil Engr Dept, Auburn Univ, Auburn, Ala. 1Library, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo. 1Engineering Library, Univ of Calif., Berkeley, Calif. 1Central Records Lib, Dept of Water Resources, Sacramento, Calif. 1Prof. H. R. Nara, Engrg Div, Case Inst of Tech, Cleveland, Ohio 1Central Serial Record Dept, Cornell Univ Lib, Ithaca, N. Y. 1Engrg & Industrial Experi Sta, Univ of Florida, Gainesville, Fla. 1Price Gilbert Memorial Lib, Georgia Inst of Tech, Atlanta, Ga. 1Gordon McKay Library, Harvard Univ, Cambridge, Mass. 1Gifts & Exchange Div, Univ of Ill. Library, Urbana, Ill. 1Library, Iowa State Univ of Science & Tech, Ames, Iowa 1Engrg Experi Sta, Kansas State Univ of Agric & Applied Science, Manhattan, Kans. 1University Library, Univ of Kansas, Lawrence, Kans. 1Librarian, Fritz Engineering Lab, Lehigh Univ, Bethlehem, Pa. 1Hydrodynamics Lab, 48-209, MIT, Cambridge, Mass. 1Mr. Robert T. Freese, Engineering Librarian, Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 1Engrg & Industrial Research Station, State College, Miss. 1College of Engrg, Univ of Missouri, Columbia, Mo. 1Librarian, Univ of Mo., School of Mines & Metallurgy, Rolla, Mo. 1National Sand & Gravel Assoc, Silver Spring, Md. 1Dept of Engrg Research, N. C. State College, Raleigh, N. C. 1New York University, ATTN: Engrg Lib, University Heights, Bronx, N. Y. 1Dept of Civil Engrg, Technological Inst, Northwestern Univ, Evanston, Ill. 1Gifts & Exchange, Main Library, Ohio State Univ, Columbus, Ohio 1College of Engrg, Univ of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Ark. 1Engrg Experi Station, Oregon State Univ, Corvallis, Oreg. 1Engrg Lib, Pennsylvania State Univ, University Park, Pa. 1Periodicals Checking Files, Purdue Univ Lib, Lafayette, Ind. 1Engrg Library, Stanford Univ, Stanford, Calif. 1Chief Engineer, Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tenn. 1Research Editor, Texas Transportation Inst, Texas A&M Univ, College Station, Tex. 1Trend in Engineering, Univ of Washington, Seattle, Wash. 1Allbrook Hydraulic Lab, Washington State Univ, Pullman, Wash. 1Engineering Library, Univ of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. 1Research Librarian, Portland Cement Assoc, Skokie, Ill. 1Serials Acquisitions, Univ of Iowa Libraries, Iowa City, Iowa 1Prof. S. P. Shah, Dept of Mtls Engrg, Univ of Illinois, Chicago, Ill. 1Mr. H. H. Newlon, Asst State Highway Res Eng, Virginia Highway Research Council, 1

Charlottesville, Va.Prof. Sandor Popovics, Northern Arizona University, Box 5753, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001 1Prof. Dean C. McKee, Department of Civil Engineering, Louisiana State University, 1

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803

Abstract of report:Commandant, USAREUR Engineer-Ordnance School, APO New York 09172U. S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, ATTN: Mr. LormanMr. William A. Maples, American Concrete InstituteBureau of Public Roads, ATTN: Harold AllenHighway Research Board, National Research CouncilNational Crushed Stone Assoc, Washington, D. C.CG, Fourth U. S. Army, Fort Sam Houston, Tex., ATTN: AKAEN-OIPrinceton University River & Harbor Library, Princeton, N. J.Duke University Library, Durham, N. C.Princeton University Library, Princeton, N. J.Serials Record, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa.Louisiana State University Library, Baton Rouge, La.The Johns Hopkins University Library, Baltimore, Md.Laboratorio Nacional de Engenharia Civil, Lisboa, PortugalUniversity of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, JapanUniversity of California Library, Berkeley, Calif.Mr. C. H. Willetts, Alabama Power Co., Box 2641, Birmingham, Ala.Commanding Officer & Director, U. S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory,

Port Hueneme, Calif. 93041, ATTN: Code L31

5

Abstract of report (Continued):Mr. David A. King, Manager, Quality Control Dept., Maule Industries, Inc., 2801 N. W. 38th Ave.,

Miami, Fla.Amman and Whitney, Consulting Engineers, 76 Ninth Ave., New York, N. Y.Engineering Library, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Forestry Sciences Lab, Morgantown, W. Va.

Announcement of Availability by Public Affairs Office: CIVIL ENGINEERING; THE MILITARYENGINEER; ENGINEERING NEWS-RECORD; PIT AND QUARRY Magazine; and ROCK PRODUCTSMagazine

6

UnclassifiedSecurity Classification

DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA - R & D(Security classification of title, body of abstract and indexing annotation must be entered when the overall report is classified)

1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY (Corporate author) 2a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Unclassified

Vicksburg, Mississippi 2b. GROUP

3. REPORT TITLE

SHORT- AND LONG-TIME DEFLECTIONS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FLAT SLABS

4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES (Type of report and inclusive dates)

Final report5. AUTHOR(S) (First name, middle initial, last name)

Helmut G. GeymayerJames E. McDonald

6. REPORT DATE 7a. TOTAL NO. OF PAGES 7b. NO. OF REFS

February 1970 36 10Sa. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. ea. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUb(BER(S)

Technical Report C-70-1b. PROJECT NO.

C. ob. OTHER REPORT NO(S) (Any other numbers that aay be assignedthis report)

d.

10. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

This document has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited.

II. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY

Office, Chief of EngineersU. S. ArmyWashingt n, D. C.

13. ABSTRACT

This report summarizes the results of a field investigation to determine the short- and long-time deflectionsand concrete strains in an Army barracks flat-plate structure at Fort Hood, Killeen, Texas. Due to the

rather great slab thickness of 9 in., corresponding to an L/T ratio of approximately 28, all observed deflec-

tions were small and in no instance exceeded 0.022 ft, or about 1/800 of the shorter span, during the

45-month observation period, in spite of an early temporary construction load estimated to have been al-

most 30 percent in excess of the total design load. The measured short-time deflections under various

loading conditions compared reasonably well with deflections predicted by use of the ersatz frame analysis

method.

DD ?..14.. 73 P -A -O-ro MY JAN 64. WHICN I. Unclassified$ecurity Classification

- - ----- - - - - ---- ---- -- ----- ---- - ---- -- ------- -

UnclassifiedSecurity Classification

14. LINK A LINK B LINK CKEY WORD!

ROLE WT ROLE WT ROLE WT

Concrete slabs

Concrete structures

DeflectionLoads (forces)Reinforced concrete

UnclassifiedSecurity Classification