Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
A. B. Choudhury
A free standing staircase is a highly redundant structure and is very complex in behaviour.
Analysis of such a structure gets further complicated if there are three flights. Though there is a
growing body of literature on the analysis of a free standing staircase, they all suffer from certain
weaknesses. Using the principles of rotational compatibility and equilibrium, a direct general
method of analysis has. been developed and simplified formulae presented. In this, the first
part of the paper, the first stage of the analysis is presented. In the subsequent part the second
stage, together with a numerical example will be published.
A free standing reinfcrced concrete staircase is a very years many papers on the analysis of two-flight
attractive structure and therefore of special interest to free standing straircases have ap~ared1.23,4”17,10.1 **t3*r4*
architects and engineers. Usually a free standing staircase Most of them are based on either the consideration of
has two flights and an intermediate landing, and has symmetrical flights loaded with ‘symmetrical loads, or
supports only at the upper and lower floor levels. Such very simplified assumptions, which have got their own
a structure is highly redundant and very complex in limitations. One paper analysing the three-flight free
behatio~r. Analysis @s more complicated if an inter- standing staircase has appeared”. But the structure
mediate flight is introduced in the landing slab. IO recent
,i--------,,~ , I
I
-+- __..- lb-.__.
I
(b)
Fig 1 Skeletal rigid frame and projections on different planes of the three-flight free stmding staircase
A B. Choudhuv. BE, DCT (bnd), MSC (En@, CENG MICE (landon), oivil
w~needw oxPat Sotmtrriat of Howing, Gomrnent of Libya, Trfpolf, Lfbya
FEBRUARY 1982
distance on X-Y plane between torsional, in-plane bending
the inner edges of the two end moment of flight elements at
flights joint i due to primary analysis
depth of the flight elements torsional, in-plane bending
A, B, C, respectively moment at joint i towards joint
modulus of elasticity for bending i due to primary analysis
modulus of elasticity for shear torsional, in-plane bending
moment of the flight elements at
horizontal reactions along joint i
X-axis at joint i due to primary torsional, in-plane bending
analysis and secondary analysis, moment at joint i towards joint i
respectively
axial force at joint i hr the
moment of inertia about X-axis elements A and B, respectively
for the cross-section of element,
C R;, i imaginary support reaction at
joint [2] and [3] respectively,
moment of inertia about Y-axis
for the cross-se&on of tight due to primary analysis
elements A and B, respectively R:, R; imagimuy support reaction at
joint P] and [3], rewctively
moment of inertia about Zaxis
fbr the cross-section of the due to secondary analysis
elements A, B and C, unbalanced reactionat joints [2]
respectively and [3] due to primary and
inclined length of the flight secondary analysis, respectively
e~p~~;lyA. B ami C, width of the flight elements
AandB
torsional moment of inertia of width of the tight element C
the elements A, B and C, vertical reactions along Z-axis
respectively
at joint i due to primary,
length of elements A, B, C on secondary analysis, respectively
X-Y plane respectively angle of inclination of the
elements A, B and C with X-Y
ML MZi. 4 = moment about X-axis, Y-axis,
Z-axis, respectively at joint i plane
due to primary analysis rotation about X-axis at joint i
cross-sectional area of elements net deflection of the structure in
A and B, respectively X-Z direction respectively
moment about X-axis, Y-axis, diffxential deflection in X-Z
Z-axis, respe&ively at joint i due direction respectively between
to secondary analysis joints [2] and [3]
FEBRUARY 1982.
8 reactive couple equal to H,PL, in X-Y plane. Let
P
M,= joint moments about Zaxis due to this couple
as shown in pig 5.
There are .no horizontal reactions in Y-direction, Hii
at supports[l] and [4].
F2- 1*5(L=-LL,) Fl
La 4 J’3 1 For compatibility, Sy2 = Sy3 = 8,
J&t d L; - .(9)
(2 EZm ws a) = (2 EI,acos a)
(r)
P P
P
vii
= 0.5 w,- (MS- Md +H,tana ,
I, = 1, = ; ; l2 = c
R =(F +(@; + ‘+
For the girder element [2] - [3], the end [2] will rotate
due to loading, Fig 7(b) (i)
41x2 = _ (w)s3 xs
(a) (192EI~ + (12EI~
Due to loading, Ng 7(b) (ii)
=- Rr(2c + 4
W&J
Due to loading, Fig 7(b) (iii)
For the tight element [l]- [2], the rotation of the end [2]
about X-axis due to torsional end moment& iUz is
..(Il) given by
=-(MXq~Co*aYM~sina)+
+ (jU~cosa-- Misina)L,
(W,Gkos2a)
- h&ana)L.
(J,Gcosa)
Similarly for joint [3]
(w&s3 xs wk + s)
- (192EZxJ + (m - W&l
. .(12b)
LC
Solving the equations (12a) and (12b)
al2 I al2 1 c cl2 rl2
1 I 1 .’
to)
M:=[(a,-1)(&)[~(2c+s)-Xl--(0,-l)
(II)
(v,*t) Q,, = 2 + 6Ezxck
-
(r1.t) 2’ #’ (J,GL, cos a)
-
II /’ 3/@i
’
Qb = 2 + 6EJ&b
3u @ (J&L, COS a)
(iii1
Referring to the free body diagram of the elements, A,
B and C, Fig 9, reactions at joints [2] and [3] are
given by
(iv)
(b)
,
Fig 7 hl> diagram
p’ ’ #
=- Ma- Miian a)& . .(12a) Fig 8 I$ diagram
(J,Gcosa)
I N D I A N CONCRETtE JG:LlRN.Ai,
Rotation on [2] with respect [l]
.
M.23
=J,Gcosa
Similarly, rotation of [3] with respect to [4]
Mii
= (JbG cos a)
Therefore, for compatibility of rotations
. .(16)
(J,G cos a) = (JbG cos a)
Again for equilibrium
.
Fig 9 Free body diagram of A, B and C Mi* -I- Mx: = &
Solving the equations (16) and (17)
R ’ = HItan a, and
FEBRUARY 1982 53
tl3ibB, ‘li and SrauwAsAN S. P. I%otoelastic
analysis of free stand&g stairs. Journ& ot the pu’ru’ur&
Division, ST-12, December 1972. PKxzedmgs
Society of Civil Engineers, VolP8, pp. 2836-2841:
2. CtTsBNs, A. R. and KUANO, J. G. Analysis of free standhrg
stairs under symmetrical loading. Conerere and Constructiona
Engineedng, May 1965. Vol 60, pp. 167-172..
. 3. CUSBNS, A. R. and KUANO, J. G. Experimental study of a
free standing staircase. Journal of the American Concrete
Institute, May 1966. Proc Vol 63, pp. 587604.
P P
d + $Js
Mma=M,-2
LC
P P. P
&r-r = Ma-2 ma + Mam2sib a