NED UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

CE-503: ADVANCE REINFORCED CONCRETE

Seminar Report on

COMRESSIVE MEMBRANE ACTION

HISTORY, MECHANISM & INFLUENCE ON RC SLAB DESIGN

November, 2017

Submitted by:
Submitted to:
Fatima Ahmed
CE-099 | Batch 2017-18
Prof. Dr. S.F.A. Rafeeqi
 Table of Contents
Preface.................................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Research Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 3
Structure of Report ................................................................................................................................ 3
Quest for Real Strength and Robustness of Concrete......................................................................... 4
Compressive Membrane Action ............................................................................................................ 8
Mechanism of Compressive Membrane Action ................................................................................... 9
Experimental Work ............................................................................................................................... 11
Effects on Flexural Capacity ............................................................................................................ 11
Compression Membrane Action in Composite Slabs by Peel Cross, R.J. / Rankin, G.I.B. /
Gilbert, S.G. ...................................................................................................................................... 13
Slab Analysis adopted by ACI Code of Practice .................................................................................. 15
Yield-line theory ................................................................................................................................ 15
Lower-bound approach .................................................................................................................... 15
Elastic Theory Analysis..................................................................................................................... 15
Direct Design method ...................................................................................................................... 16
Limit Analysis.................................................................................................................................... 16
Treatment in Design Codes – Economics of Utilization of CMA in Design ....................................... 16
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 17
Biblography........................................................................................................................................... 18

List of Figures
Figure 1 Punching failure in beam and slab bridge deck ....................................................................5
Figure 2- Top surface crack pattern of punching failure zone in model bridge deck test .................5
Figure 3- Bottom surface crack pattern of punching failure zone in model bridge deck test...........6
Figure 4- Enhanced strength of cellular structures .............................................................................7
Figure 5- Arching action in slab .............................................................................................................8
Figure 6 - Axial forces developed in laterally restrained slab: a) slab subjected to transverse
loading, b) slab elongates upon cracking, c) restrained elongation induces axial compression. ....9
Figure 7- shows the load –central deflection curve of a uniformly loaded two-way rectangular
reinforced concrete slab with laterally restrained edges. ................................................................ 10
Figure 8- Experimentally observed mode of failure in two-way slabs under uniform distributed
load at (a) the upper surface and (b) the soffit of the slab (Ockleston, 1955). .............................. 11

1
Preface
These pages are a mere attempt to introduce the concept of Compressive Membrane
Action (CMA) in general. The said, is achieved by overviewing the research work done by
the past researchers, thereby attract the reader to understand the mechanism that on the
one hand satisfy the fundamental principles and on the other predict the true failure of an
unrestrained RC Slab. The CMA is not a new approach to design the RC Structures, but its
influence on the strength parameters of the reinforced concrete slab under some boundary
conditions have made it worth discussing in a separate panel to develop a vision about
the mechanism and incorporate its efficiency in practical reinforced concrete slab design.
That can only be achieved by introducing it in a manner that the readers feel an urge to
read, understand and then probe in to the method on their own.

The sole purpose and intention is to create liking for the method and establish its
importance. Much of the content is extracted from the book “Reinforced Concrete Slabs”
by Robert Park and William L. Gamble (including the graphs and figures), although the
papers from A. E. Long, and G. I. B. Rankin, were of much help as well. The extracted
content was extremely simply written, and was therefore easy to understand, thereby
making it very difficult to improve on the original language, except wherever necessary.
Further, extrapolation has not been made, as this would have been far beyond the scope
of this seminar.

Fatima Ahmed,
Student

2
Introduction
Reinforced concrete slabs are one of the most common structural engineering elements.
Their behavior strongly depends on the support condition and interaction of slab with the
surrounding structure. If the edges of slabs are restrained against lateral movement by
stiff boundary elements, compressive membrane forces are induced in the plane of slab
when, as the slab deflects, changes of geometry cause the slab edges to move outward
and to react against the bounding elements. The compressive forces so induced enhance
the flexural strength of slab sections at the yield lines which will cause the ultimate load
of the slab to be greater than the ultimate load calculated using Johansen’s theory of yield
lines. This action enhances not only the flexural capacity of slabs, but also their punching
capacity in case of beamless slabs. At larger deflections, the slab edges tend to move
inward, and, if the edges are laterally restrained, tensile membrane forces are induced
that may enable the slab to carry significant load by catenary action of the reinforcing steel.
The three factors, membrane action, flexural behavior and punching shear are
interdependent. The type and degree of membrane action will depend on the loading,
support conditions and the shape (both plan and cross sections) of the slab. The flexural
strength is generally improved in a compressive membrane field. The punching shear
strength will decrease as the amount of cracking due to flexure increases. Therefore, as
membrane action improves the flexural strength, it also aids the punching strength, unless
the shear failure load is much below the flexural failure load. The presence of compressive
membrane action has been recognized for many decades now, but its obvious benefits are
not fully utilized in design and assessment codes.

Research Objectives
 To present reader the fundamental mechanism of compressive membrane action.
 Understand the contribution of CMA in enhanced practical strength of RC slabs.
 Economics of utilizing compressive membrane action in design.

Structure of Report
Part 1
This part presents an overview the historical background of the struggle to formulate true
efficiency of concrete and thus the evolution of compressive membrane action.
Part 2
This part comprises of the background of the membrane action in slabs with emphasis on
the role of compressive membrane action (CMA) on the flexural strength and punching
shear strength of the reinforced concrete slabs. Furthermore, It highlights the experimental
investigations about enhancing effects of membrane action on the loading capacity of RC
beams and slabs with respect to different contributing factors are covered in the review of
literature.

3
Part 3
This part discusses the conservative slab design approaches adopted by the ACI 318 Code
of Practice. And a brief discussion on the benefits of the utilization of compressive
membrane action in design leading to economical design.
Part 4
This part concludes the discussion with recommendations for further research work areas
in the subject i.e. compressive membrane action.

PART 1

Quest for Real Strength and Robustness of Concrete

Design methods for reinforced concrete structures have underdone many changes and
development since the early part of this century when the technology was in its infancy.
For example, when first slab/column structures were introduced in the Unites States in the
period 1905-1915 no rational design method was available. As a consequence a wide
range of possible solutions were postulated, the structure built and to confirm their
strength loading tests were carried out. It is of interest to note that in spite of the wide
range of reinforcement levels specified (see Table 1) by the various designers, all the
structures came through the loading test with flying colours. Thus the dilemma which faces
us today is one which has been with us for around more than 80 years.

Possible reason for the low estimation of structures can be considered as:
1- Material properties
2- Geometric properties
3- Codes of practice inherently conservative

4
The flexural strength of statically determinate members predicted with only a modest
degree of conservation using code based methods, however, for indeterminate systems,
the effect of re-distribution of moments can be significant. In simply supported slabs for
example it has been found that yield line theory gives strength predictions which are
around 20% conservative even though the give upper bound (theoretically safe) estimate
of strength.

With the advent of Johansen’s Yield Line theory in the 1940’s, designers and researchers
felt that at long last they had a prediction method of slabs which yield realistic strength of
estimates.
In the United Kingdom, the method developed by Kirkpatrick, Rankin & Long in 1984 and
substantiated by testing a full-scale bridge in 1986 first led to the introduction of new rules
for the economic design of reinforced concrete beam and Slab Bridge decks in Northern
Ireland. The concept and method were later incorporated, by the United
Kingdom Highways Agency, into the UK design manual for roads and bridges, BD 81/02,
‘Use of Compressive Membrane Action in Bridge Decks’. Use of this CMA methodology
normally results in substantial savings in reinforcement in the slab of a beam and slab
bridge deck, provided certain limitations and boundary conditions are satisfied.

Figure 1 Punching failure in beam and slab bridge deck

Figure 2- Top surface crack pattern of punching failure zone in model bridge deck test

5
 Figure 3- Bottom surface crack pattern of punching failure zone in model bridge deck test

Kirkpatrick, Rankin & Long’s approach to the prediction of the enhanced punching
strength of bridge deck slabs was based on the punching shear prediction equation
derived by Long for the shear mode of punching failure, combined with an effective
reinforcement ratio, which represented the arching action strength enhancement. The
effective reinforcement ratio was determined from the maximum arching moment of
resistance in a rigidly restrained concrete slab, which Rankin had derived for laterally
restrained concrete slabs from McDowell, McKee and Sevin’s arching action deformation
theory for masonry walls. The derivation of the maximum arching moment of resistance of
laterally restrained concrete bridge deck slabs utilised Rankin’s idealised elastic-plastic
stress-strain criterion for concrete, valid for concrete cylinder strengths up to at least
70N/mm2, which he had derived on the basis of Hognestad, Hanson and McHenry’s
]ultimate parabolic stress block coefficients for concrete.

In North America, a more pragmatic approach has been adopted and research into
compressive membrane action has primarily stemmed from the work of Hewitt and
Batchelor and Batchelor and Tissington in the 1970s. They carried out an extensive series
of field tests, which led to the introduction of an empirical method of design into the
Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code in 1979. This required minimum isotropic
reinforcement (0.3%) in bridge deck slabs, provided certain boundary conditions were
satisfied. In the 1990s Mufti et al. extended this research and showed that significant
enhancements in the durability of laterally restrained slabs can be achieved by utilising
fibre reinforced deck slabs without steel reinforcement. Later, Mufti and Newhook adapted
Hewitt and Batchelor’s model to develop a method for evaluating the ultimate capacity of
fibre reinforced deck slabs using external steel straps for the provision of lateral restraint.
Research into arching or compressive membrane action has continued over the years
at Queen’s University Belfast, with the work of Niblock, who investigated the effects of CMA
in uniformly loaded laterally restrained slabs; Skates, who researched CMA in cellular
concrete structures; Ruddle, who researched arching action in laterally restrained
rectangular and Tee-beams; Peel-Cross, who researched CMA in composite floor slab
construction; Taylor who researched CMA in high strength concrete bridge deck slabs, and
Shaat who researched CMA using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) techniques. A

6
comprehensive guide to compressive membrane action in concrete bridge decks, was
compiled by Taylor, Rankin and Cleland in 2002.
Ockelston test have indicated very significant reserve of strength for typical interior panel.
The typical results shown in Figure 4 below indicates a marked increase in ultimate load
bearing capacity with increasing restraint.

Figure 4- Enhanced strength of cellular structures

Figure 4 Enhanced strength of cellular structures

Arising out of this series of test, test by Ruddle on longitudinally resrained Tee- beams
which results in considerable strength enhancement not in flexure only but also enhanced
shear capacity.
Overall it may be concluded that generally there are considerable reserves of strength in
cast in-situ reinforced concrete structures and a major factor is the development of
arching/ compressive membrane action. This to a large extend explains that why loading
tests are seldom unsuccessful in structure of this nature.

7
 PART 2

Compressive Membrane Action

Arching or compressive membrane action (CMA) in reinforced concrete slabs occurs as a
result of the great difference between the tensile and compressive strength of concrete.
Cracking of the concrete causes a migration of the neutral axis which is accompanied by
in-plane expansion of the slab at its boundaries. If this natural tendency to expand is
restrained, the development of arching action enhances the strength of the slab. The term
arching action is normally used to describe the arching phenomenon in one-way spanning
slabs and compressive membrane action is normally used to describe the arching
phenomenon in two-way spanning slabs.

The strength enhancing effects of arching action in reinforced concrete floors were first
recognized near the beginning of this century. However, it was not until the full scale
destructive load tests by Ockleston on the Old Dental Hospital in Johannesburg that the
extent of strength enhancement caused by arching action was really appreciated. In these
tests, collapse loads of between 3 and 4 times those predicted by yield-line theory were
obtained.

Since the 1950s there have been several attempts to develop theories for arching action
in both one and two-way slabs. One of the principal approaches to membrane action was
that due to Park which has been used as a basis for many studies into arching action in
slabs. Park’s approach was based on rigid plastic slab strip theory, and required the
assumption of a critical deflection of one half of the slab depth at failure. Park’s approach
was later extended by Park and Gamble in their method for predicting the plastic load-
deformation response of laterally restrained slabs. In 1971, the American Concrete
Institute produced a special publication which presented the most recent research, to that
time, on arching and compressive membrane action in reinforced concrete labs.

Lahlouh and Waldron were some of the earliest researchers to achieve a degree of success
in finite element modelling of the phenomenon. In 1993, Kuang and Morley presented a
plasticity approach which included the effect of compressive membrane action on the
punching shear strength of laterally restrained concrete slabs.

Figure 5- Arching action in slab

8
Mechanism of Compressive Membrane Action

Consider the behavior of a reinforced concrete slab under transverse load, shown in
Figure-5. As the slab deflects under the load, the concrete on the tension face cracks and
the reinforcement is stretched. Typically, the strains on the tension face will be
considerably greater in magnitude than those on the compression face.

Figure 6 - Axial forces developed in laterally restrained slab: a) slab subjected to transverse loading, b) slab elongates
upon cracking, c) restrained elongation induces axial compression.

The net tensile strain resulting at the slab mid-depth causes the slab to expand, producing
outward horizontal displacements at the slab ends. The tendency to expand will be
prevented, to some degree, by the lateral stiffness of supporting columns, beams, or walls.
Adjoining slab panels will also form an extremely stiff diaphragm which will oppose the
expansion of the loaded slab. As a result, compressive membrane force will be induced in

9
the loaded slab owing to restrained expansion. The compressive force, in turn, produces
an increase in the nominal flexural capacity of the slab section. This mechanism is known
as membrane action and can lead to significant increases in the load carrying capacity of
slab. In more advanced stages, of deformation, the concrete may crush completely leaving
only the reinforcement to act as a tensile net. This second stage behavior is termed as
Catenary Action.

Figure 7- shows the load –central deflection curve of a uniformly loaded two-way rectangular reinforced concrete slab
with laterally restrained edges.

One can distinguish 3 phases:

Phase-1, From A to B: As the load is increased from A to B, the yield line pattern develops,
and with the help of compressive membrane forces, the slab reaches its enhanced
ultimate load at B. The introduction of compressive membrane forces in the slab can be
thought of as being due to jamming of the slab segments between boundary restraints,
which causes the slab strips to arch from boundary to boundary. The induced compressive
membrane force in slab results in an enhancement of the flexural strength of slab section.

Phase-2, From B to C: As the deflection increases beyond B, the load carried by the slab
decreases rapidly because of a reduction in compressive membrane force. As C is
approached, the membrane forces in the central region of slab change from compression
to tension.

Phase-3, From C to D: Beyond C the slab carries load by the reinforcement acting as a
plastic tensile membrane with full depth cracking of the concrete over the central region
of slab due to the large stretch of the slab surface. The slab continues to carry further load

10
with an increase in deflection until at D, the reinforcement begins to fracture or some other
component in the system fails. The load at B will be referred to as ultimate load.

Experimental Work

Reinforced concrete slab is one of the structural elements which is extensively used in civil
engineering construction. Two-way structural action, post-cracking nun-linear behaviour
and development of membrane action complicate the analysis and estimation of the
ultimate strength of the slab. Design of RCC slabs based on limit states also requires a
knowledge of their deflections and cracking behavior. A number of researchers have
investigated the flexural strength, deflection and cracking of two-way slabs and these
aspects are briefly reviewed here.

Effects on Flexural Capacity

Perhaps, the most dramatic demonstration of membrane action was made by Ockleston
(1955). The floor slabs in a 10-year old three storey reinforced concrete structure were
intentionally loaded to destruction. The lightly reinforced two-way slab panels were 135mm
thick, 4.9m x 4.1m in plan, and bounded by main and secondary beams. The slabs were
designed for a dead load of 3.2 kN/m2 and a superimposed floor load of 3.4 kN/m2. Upon
gradual loading, the floor did not collapse until the total load reached 40.4 kN/m2,
representing a factor of safety of 6.12.

Figure 8- Experimentally observed mode of failure in two-way slabs under uniform distributed load at (a) the upper surface
and (b) the soffit of the slab (Ockleston, 1955).

The structural aspects pertaining to the 1978 collapse of a warehouse structure in Niagra
Falls were examined in a paper (Vecchio and Collins 1990). The collapsed structure was
the Kimberley Clark Warehouse building, a four-storey reinforced concrete structure with
flat-slab floors supported on columns with capitals. Its floors were designed for a dead load
of 4.8kN/m2 and a superimposed live load of 6.0kN/m2, thus the total design load was
10.8kN/m2. In time, the third floor of the building came to be used as a storage site for
nickel materials. At the time of collapse, the total load imposed over several entire bays of
the third floor was estimated to be in excess of 48kN/m2. It is a disputed issue as to

11
whether overloading of the floor, or the effects of a fire burning directly beneath, caused
collapse. Nevertheless, the floor demonstrated a factor of safety against collapse of 4.5
relative to design loads. It was surmised that this high strength reserve was developed
primarily through the influence of compressive membrane action in the slabs.

In a test conducted by Gamble et al., on a ¼ scale model of a nine panel (3x3) reinforced
concrete slab and beam floor, when the interior panel alone was subjected to a uniformly
distributed live load, the supporting beams failed when the load was approximately twice
the ultimate load predicted by Johansen’s yield line theory. This slab was in the tensile
membrane stage, as the mid span deflection was about twice the slab thickness, and
tensile cracks penetrated the full thickness of the slab in the central portion of the panel.

Vecchio and Tang conducted test on two large-scale slab strip specimens consisted of
100mm thick, 1500mm wide slab strip built integral with two stub columns 200x200 mm
in cross section with 100mm thick drop panel provided at each column. Transverse edge
beams were included at the ends to facilitate the desired support conditions. The results
demonstrated the influence of membrane action in reinforced concrete slabs. Axial forces
induced because of membrane action served to increase the flexural stiffness and load-
carrying capacity of slab by about 30 to 40% relative to an unrestrained slab. However,
test results also indicated that geometric non-linearity effects had also a significant
influence over capacity. The high axial forces induced, coupled with large slab deflections
at ultimate load, created large secondary moments which partially negated the beneficial
influence of membrane action.

Two ¼ scale models of a reinforced concrete nine-panel (3x3) flat slab system supported
by four interior columns and by a continuous wall around perimeter have been tested
under uniform static and dynamic loading by Criswell, and showed a 30% increase in the
ultimate load due to compressive membrane forces from the restraint of the boundry walls.
Comparison of this test result with the load enhancement obtained by Ockleston,
Lienbenberg and Gamble et al. illustrates that the increase in ultimate load due to
membrane action is more significant for slab-and-beam systems than for flat slab systems.

In a paper presented by G.S.T. Armer (1968) on the ultimate load test of slabs by strip
method, it was shown that in slabs having relatively higher reinforcement ratio, it was
possible to increase load beyond the limiting state without collapse resulting. The applied
load was then carried by a combination of flexural and compressive membrane action.
This was not possible in the slab with low reinforcement ratio because of its low moment
capacity.( See Figure-5) As shown in Figure-5, the main difference between two slabs is
their behavior after the limiting (maximum) compressive membrane action has been
generated by the partial restraint of the edge beams.
In a paper by Taplin and Hon, a method for assessing typical beam-and-slab bridge decks
taking into account the compressive membrane action, is described and experimental
results are compared with capacity predicted by code. (See Figure-6)

12
Compression Membrane Action in Composite Slabs by Peel Cross, R.J. / Rankin,
G.I.B. / Gilbert, S.G.
Compressive Membrane Action is the two-way arching effect which occurs when a laterally
restrained slab is loaded. The load is resisted by a compressive force which extends
through the slab from the load to the supports (see Fig 1). The greater the element
depth/length ratio is, the greater is the amount of arching which occurs. CMA is already
used to justify a reduction in the amount of reinforcing steel used in certain beam and slab
bridge decks, but has not yet been applied in practice to other structures. Thus, a series
of full scale in-situ and laboratory tests was devised to investigate the effects of the
following parameters:
a) slab boundary conditions - interior, edge and corner composite slabs were tested and
b) fire damage - composite slabs were tested before and after fire loading.

This paper discusses the results from a two year research project which studied the effects
of Compressive Membrane Action (CMA) on composite metal decking/concrete slabs
before and after fire. The paper concentrates on work carried out on full scale slabs in the
BRE test building at Cardington, but compares these results with those obtained from slab
strips tested in the laboratory. It was found that fire damaged slabs exhibited far greater
strengths than previously supposed, some held loads higher than those predicted by yield
line analysis.

The Cardington test results are compared with the laboratory test results in Table 4. The
failure loads for the Cardington slabs are first compared with the failure loads for the
simply supported laboratory strips. The ratios of Pcar/Pla show that the strength of real

13
panels tested in-situ was considerably greater than the conventional simply supported
design strength. This strength enhancement is mainly attributable to the presence of
rotational and lateral restraint at the slab boundaries which gives rise to boundary
moments and Compressive Membrane Action. As the internal panel had the greatest
degree of restraint it exhibited the greatest strength enhancement (except in the post-fire
test where the internal panel was the most severely damaged by the fire).

The ratios ofPcar/Plab<res) for the pre-fire tests show that the high degree of restraint
used in the laboratory was close to that ofthe internal panel at Cardington but was greater
than that for the edge and corner panels. The post-fire test results again reflect the more
severe damage to the Cardington internal panel than the edge and corner panels and also
indicate that the edge and corner panels had greater residual strength than the laboratory
results suggested.

All ofthe slabs exhibited strengths far greater than the ultimate design load of 10.7kN/m2,
which shows that even after a fire, although the slab would be unserviceable, it may be
possible to rely on the residual strength ofthe slab for safety purposes.

The major conclusion made was that the strengths of the composite metal
decking/concrete slab panels in the BRE Cardington test building were found to be
significantly greater than the ultimate capacities predicted by yield line theory. This
strength enhancement is mainly attributable to the effect of boundary conditions which
induce boundary moments and compressive membrane action.

14
 PART 3

Slab Analysis adopted by ACI Code of Practice

There are numbers of approaches to analysis and design of reinforced concrete slab
systems. These various approaches are elastic theory, limit analysis theory and
modifications to elastic theory and limit analysis theory as in ACI Code.

Yield-line theory
The yield-line theory assumes that an increase in load causes concentration of strain in
steel and concrete along lines of maximum moment. These lines are called yield lines and
they spread into a pattern which divides the slab into segments. Near failure, the elastic
deformations of each segment are assumed negligible compared to plastic deformations
at the yield lines. Consequently, all curvatures in the slab at failure are assumed to be
concentrated at the yield lines. As the theory satisfies mechanism and the equilibrium
condition, it provides a theoretical upper-bound solution. This theory can be effectively
used for the analysis of any irregular type of slab having different type of boundary
conditions and loadings. The yield line theory is suitable for the ultimate load analysis with
uniformly distributed (isotropic and orthotropic) reinforcement, but it is difficult to handle
if non-uniform or curtailed reinforcement is utilized. Unless the correct mechanism is found
the resulting design may be unsafe and the reinforcement volume is uneconomical.
However, this theory is finding acceptance due to the fact that the ultimate loads of slabs
as determined in tests are much higher than those predicted by yield-line theory. This
difference between yield-line loads and experimental ultimate loads is due to the
development of membrane stresses, and this effect is considered in detail separately.

Lower-bound approach
In the lower-bound approach the solution should be determined to satisfy equilibrium and
boundary conditions and provide a statistically admissible moment field without violating
the yield conditions anywhere in the slab. This provides a safe solution because, the
collapse load may be greater than or equal to the calculated value. This solution provides
information on the required distribution of positive and negative reinforcement. This is a
design method and economy is achieved by varying the reinforcement in different options
of the slab. Wood and Arrner" have examined the strip method and concluded that, it
provides an exact solution ii the reinforcement provided is in accordance wlth the strip
moments with an unlimited number of simultaneous modes.

Elastic Theory Analysis

The distribution of moments and shear found by elastic theory is such that,
1- The equilibrium conditions are satisfied at every point in the slab.
2- The boundary conditions are complied with.
3- Stress is proportional to strain, i.e., bending moments are proportional to curvature.

15
Direct Design method
Wood proposed this method of design based on elastic stress fields. The steel is
determined by using elastic stress distribution at ultimate loads in conjunction with the
yield criterion. Recently Hago and Rhatt" reported test results designed by the above
method and it was found that the slabs behaved satisfactorily both at working load and at
ultimate loads. To design by this method, computer facilities are required and also, they
have assumed un-cracked stiffness of slab throughout the analysis.

Limit Analysis
Limit Analysis recognizes that because of plasticity, redistribution of moments and shears
away from elastic theory distribution can occur before the ultimate load is reached.
However, yield line theory does not take account of membrane effects in the slab, which
are often present in reinforced concrete slabs at the ultimate load as a result of boundary
conditions and the geometry of deformations of slab segments.

“The above-mentioned methods have been formulated without considering the effect of
change of geometry oi the slab. The changes in the geometry of the slab and boundary
restraints have considerable influence on the load-carrying capacity of the slab.”

Treatment in Design Codes – Economics of Utilization of

CMA in Design
In design and assessment codes, the flexural strength of reinforced concrete slabs is
usually determined using an elastic analysis and the ultimate strength of the cross-section.
The yield line theory developed by Johansen can also be used to determine the ultimate
strength of a reinforced concrete slab. These theories have a common limitation, in that
compressive membrane action within the slab cannot be taken into account.

The Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code first introduced provisions for compressive
membrane action in 1979. This code (and later editions including Canadian Highway
Bridge Design code) contains an empirical deck slab design method for slab on girder
bridges that reduces amount of steel required in concrete slab decks. The code allows this
to be done only if certain restrictions on span length, slab thickness, detailing of
diaphragms and connection between slab and beam are met.

In 2002, the United Kingdom Highways Agency published guidelines for the use of
compressive membrane action in bridge decks. This allows for both simplified and rigorous
analysis to utilize the beneficial effects of membrane action where adequate deck slab
restraint exists. Some of the present-day code provisions usually specify the punching
shear strength as a function of compressive strength of concrete alone. Thus, these codes
do not take adequate account of possible role of specimen size and edge restraint.

16
As concluded in a study by Alam, Amanat and Seraj, Present code methods underestimate
the punching load capacity of slabs as the code provisions are based on tests conducted
on simply supported slabs with their edges unrestrained.

PART 4

Conclusion
From the above discussion, following conclusions can be made:

1- Overall it may be concluded that generally there are considerable reserves of

strength in cast in-situ reinforced concrete structures and a major factor is the
development of arching/ compressive membrane action. This to a large extend
explains that why loading tests are seldom unsuccessful in structure of this nature.
2- The load carrying capacity of reinforced concrete slabs is enhanced by compressive
membrane action depending on the column layout, span to depth ratios, and
reinforcement ratio in slab and boundary restraints.
3- The slab-and-beam floors with only alternate panels loaded could carry extremely
high ultimate loads on the loaded panels.
4- Geometric non-linearity effects can have a significant influence over load carrying
capacity. High axial forces induced due to boundary restraints coupled with large
slab deflections at ultimate load can create large secondary moments which can
partially negate the beneficial effects of membrane action.
5- By obtaining a more accurate assessment of the true strength of the existing
reinforced concrete slabs, the need for strengthening may be removed.

Recommendations
Due to time constraints and limitation of scope of the report, following recommendation
can be done to explore the subject in more depth,

 Formulations of the effect of compressive membrane action needs to be studied to

quantify the effect in reinforced concrete structures.
 Other than flexural capacity and shear capacity, effect of CMA on the deflection and
cracking can also be evaluated using the research work available.

17
Biblography
1. Robert Park, William L. Gamble, “Reinforced Concrete Slabs”,2nd edition,1999.
2. Long, A.E. and Rankin, G.I.B., ‘Real strength and robustness of reinforced concrete
structures’, Proceedings of conference on Conservation of Engineering Structures,
Institution of Civil Engineers/Royal Institute of British Architects, 1989, pp 47 – 58.Rankin,
G.I.B. and Long, A.E. (1997), ‘Arching action strength enhancement in laterally restrained
slab strips’, Proc. Instn. Civ. Engrs Structs & Bldgs, 122, Nov., pp 461 - 467.
3. Peel-Cross, R.J., Rankin, G.I.B., Gilbert, S.G. and Long, A.E., ‘ Compressive membrane
action in composite floor slabs in the Cardington LBTF’, Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers, Structures and Buildings Journal, 146, Issue 2, May 2001, pp 217 - 226.
4. Prakash Desai & K U Muthu,” A brief review on strength, deflection and cracking of
rectangular ,skew and circular reinforced concrete slabs”, Indian Institute of Science , Mar-
Apr 1988,91-108
5. F.J Vecchio, K. Tang, “Membrane action in reinforced concrete slabs”, CAN. J. CIV. ENG.
Vol. 17, 1990.
6. Linus C.S. Lim, “Membrane action in fire exposed concrete floor systems”, thesis submitted
for the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, New Zealand, 2003.
7. A.K.M.Jahangir Alam, Khan Mahmud Amanat, Salek M. Seraj,BUET, Bangladesh, “An
Experimental Study on Punching Shear Behaviour of Concrete Slabs”, Advances in
Structural Engineering, vol 12, no.2, 2009.
8. G.S.T. Armer, “Ultimate load tests of slabs designed by the strip method”, Discussion on
paper published. Proc. Instn civ. Engrs, 1968, 41(oct) 313- 331.
9. Geoff Taplin, Maunsell Australia Pty Ltd, Alan Hon, Maintenance Technology Institute,
Monach University, “ Compressive Membrane Action in Bridge Deck Slabs”.
10. Kulkarni and Desayi, “Effect Of Membrane Action On The Plastic Collapse Load Of Circular
Orthotropic Slabs With Fixed Edges”, I n t . J. mech. Sci., Vol. 20, pp. 97-108. Pergamon
Press 1978.
11. Kirkpatrick, J., Rankin, G.I.B. and Long, A.E., 'Strength evaluation of M-beam bridge deck
slabs', The Structural Engineer, Vol. 62B, No 3, Sept 1984, pp 60-68.

18