See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309202341

Differential Shrinkage Stresses in composite construction of prestressed and

reinforced structures

Article  in  Indian Concrete Journal · February 1984

CITATIONS READS

0 239

1 author:

Gouranga Prasad Saha

Construma Consultancy Pvt Limited, Mumbai, India
21 PUBLICATIONS   12 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Strain softening in prestressed concrete beams. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gouranga Prasad Saha on 17 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Differentialshrinkage stresses in composite construction of
reinforced and prestressed concrete structures
G.P. Saha
v., From a survey of literature it is found that ther eare two methods of analysis for the evaluation,
l
. of stresses at the different fibres of a composite section due to differential shrinkage. The two
".- methods give, in some cases, different results (as detailed in the Appendix). The paper discusses .:
. the two methods ai.d identifies the cause of the anomaly. '

From a survey of literatur- it is found that there are Method 1

two methods of analysis for the evaluation of stresses at As per this method of analysis the differential shrinkage
the different fibres of a composite section due to differential force is assumed to act at the interface between the insitu
shrinkage I. 2.
and the precast concrete. On the insitu element this force
The first method assumes a perfect bond at the interface acts as a tensile force and on the precast concrete element
of the insitu and precast elemerit and that the differential as a compressive force. The force due to differential.
I
·1
shrinkage force acts as a tensile force on the insitu element shrinkage is evaluated from tire compatibility of strains
and as a compressive force on the precast element":'. .as given below. . 1_
. I
the second method assumes that a tensile force is applied Tensile strain at the interface of insitu slab
at-the end of the insitu element at the centre of gravity
of the section till the elongation of the slab equals the !.,. rt- Fe;
differential shrinkage. The two concretes, viz, the insitu
and the precast are then clamped ~nd an equal and opposite
force is applied at the centroid of the insitu slab out acting
on the composite section. The stresses in the various
fibres of the composite seeron a e then calculated. and compressive
"ii=-r
strain at.
A; !Z;b .. (1)

th" i~terface of precast beam

I.
Kajfasz, Somerville and Rowe have presented an
- exhaustive review of the works carried out on composite F + Fep
concrete structures till 19632• [Venkatasulu and Bapu
fop;
~L~~ , . (2)
Satyanarayan have also given a ireview and provision in
the codes of various coun+ies'. IE~
The two method: :r. some cases give quite different The aforesaid strains will bemodifled due to creep.
results which can be seen from the example given in the Hence the total strain will be the sum of the strain of
Appendix. In the following, these two methods have been the insitu concrete slab at t~e interface = ,,;;(1 4>;) +
discussed and the cause of anomaly has been identified. and the strain of the precast concrete beam at the
The method 3 however has been based on methodl. interface I
Differential shrinkage = €Pi(l+ 4>p)' I

I . In case of composite construction with precast concrete

beam and insitu concrete slab on top, some shrinkage
has already taken place in the precast beam till the shrinkage
Therefore

S ~ ,,,(1
the differential

+ ,,) + ",(i +
shrinkage

1').. .....
strain

. .(3)

I
in the insitu concrete starts taking place. Hence, the
differential shrinkage between ' the insitu and· precast
concrete is the difference between. the total shrinkage of From the above, the differential shrinkage force is
insitu concrete and the remaining shrinkage in the precast evaluated and hence the stress ar. different fibres can also
beam since the time the composite action becomes effective. be evaluated. . .
Since the insitu concrete is not allowed to shrink. fully
r a force is developed at the interface of the precast and Method 2
i'
~ insitu concrete. This force acts as a tensile force on the
In this method, a pair of tensfrle iorces is applied at the
insitu concrete and as a compressive force on the precast

II
. two ends of the ir.situ slab till the elastic deformation of
beam.
the slab equals the differential shrinkage. The two concretes
The actual quantum of shrinkage depends on the are then clamped and an equal and opposite force is
various factors; viz. the cement in the mix, the water- applied to the composite sectipn at the centre of gravity
cement ratio, grade of concrete, surface area of. the of the in~itu slab. '1 J:~
diff9rential shrinkage force is
exposed surface. percentage of reinforcement, age of evaluated III the following manner
concrete, humidity, etc. The author does not intend to
~
,,; . evaluate the actual shrinkage of the precast and insitu
F = AiES
concretes in this article: r nly the effect of differential
The stresses at different fibrels can be evaluated following
shrinkage on the str~cLUre will-be investigated,
thevarious steps stated in thisl method. . . '
The examples given in the .Appendix show how the

G. P. Saha BE(Cal). MSc(Engg). PhDILeeds) CEng. MICE(Lond). MASCE(NVI,

Manager, Engineering. Toyo Engineeri.lg
Parade. Colaba. Bombay 400 005.

.
India'L,imited, Maker Tower 'E'; Cuf{o
. the modulus of elasticity of r
. stresses obtained by, these two , methods vary.
__ .. It can be seen that where the section properties and
the insitu and precast

I
!
FEBRUARY 1984 47

i
l~c- "'"
-~"-·"··-······"r·-·'·'_>'"""".,, ••
 ~.•~ ..•..•
~ ~~+-.,
/'

'..-
-1
'~

N01ATIONS
Ac = area of composite section S = differential shrinkage between the precast
= A" + Ai.f:i..· . beam and the insitutlab
Ep 8;m . = slope of insitu slab lue to the action of
= A~+ Ai T differential shrinkag+. force at interface
Ai = Area of insitu concrete slab. B,sw = slope of insitu slab due to self weight of
AT = transformed area of insitu concrete
insitu slab I
Ap r area of the precast concrete beam 8pM = slope of precast beam due to action of
ei = distance of the centre of gravity of the differential shrinkag~force at interface
insitu concrete slab from the interface
!
e" = distance of the centre of gravity of the
Yib = distance of the cent~e of gravity of the
insitu section from Hottom
precast beam from the interface
Yit = distance of the cent¥ of gravity of the
z. = modulus of elasticity of insitu concrete slab
insitu section from top
t: = modulus of elasticity of the precast
Y'b = distance of the centre of gravity of the
concrete beam
= strain due to differential shrinkage force' p;ecast section froml bottom
Eii

of insitu concrete slab at the level.of interface Ypt = distance of the centie of gravity of the
= strain due to differential shrinkage force precast section from top
Ep;
of precast beam at the level of interface
z.: = section modulus of composite section at
.f,J, = stress at top of insitu slab
z;
bottom of precast concrete
= section modulus of domposite section at
fit = stress at top of insitu slab
j;'h = stress at bottom of precast beam the junction of insitJ and precast concrete
/,.1 = stress at top of precast beam ZCI = section modulus' of composite section at
F = force due to differential shrin'cage z;
top of insitu concrete
J; = moment of inertia of the insitu slab = section modulus of ihsitu slab at the
II' = moment of inertia of the precast concrete bottom of insitu slab
beam Zit '= section modulus of insitu sieib at the top
Mi = Fe, of i~situ slab 1 .

M,. = Fe; Zph = section modulus of wecast beam at the

p = force in vertical ties per unit length bottom of precast beam
4>i = creep factor of insi tu concrete slab z; = section modulus of precast beam at the
4>,. = creep factor of precast concrete beam top of precast beam

sections are same then the stresses are also same, Table Method 3: The eccentric forc~s dlle to differentialshrinkage . 'OJ

. 3, But when the section properties of the precast beam at the interface cause a moment along the entire length of
are far more than those of the insitu slab then not only the precast beam and insitu slab, due to w::ich both the
do the stresses vary by a wide margin but also the stresses precast beam and the insitu s~ab will deflect. The quantum
at the top fibres of the insitu concrete are opposite in .of deflection/rotation will depend on the values of
. . I .
nature, i.e. compressive in method 1 and tensile in
M d M. . I rotation.
which cause such de flcctron ..
r"" .
j
'method 2, Table 1. It is also noted that the differential - an -I!.
. shrinkage force in ei ther case is several times higher-in- E;li ,_. E/p , ._.

case: of method 2 than in case of method 1. Case 1, when the slope of precast element is smaller
than that of insitu element - Fig 1 shows the differential
Anomaly in compatibility in methods 1 and 2 shrinkage force acting at the interface. Due to such force
In both these two methods compatibility is not fully the precast beam which is supported at the two ends will
satisfied as is shown below. . --deflect downwards. and thel insitu slab will deflect like
a cantilever, FiR 2. If theseparation of the insitu slab
Method J: The differential shrinkage -lorce has been is permitted then there will not be any force acting at
assumed to act at the interface and with this force acting . the interface over the lengf' of separation. Hence, this
as an eccentric force, the stresses are calculated. Fig 1. problem has been dealt wit in the following two steps.
Fig 2 shows how the deformations will take place when
the force, F acts eccentrically. . - (i) step 1 - the insitu sl~b i allowed to be lifted off but
the differential s nnkage force acts in horizonal
If. the values
. 0
f ..
M, - and
M"
,.... - f insitu
0 I
'.' an d precas t direction alOng~1 e entire length of the compo-
E/,. E"I" I site beam as if t e shear connectors which are
fixed to the prcast beam are put in rigid
units respectively are different then the slopes of insitu and
precast elements will also be different and since the insitu frictionless hollqw sleeves which are in turn
and precast units are connected together and no separation fixed to the insiu slabalong the entire length
is permitted, the compatibility is disturbed. This pheno- of the composit1 beam, Fig 3.
menon has been considered in this paper in method 3. I r- I nsitu

Method 2:' A pair 01 tensile forces is applied at the two -:

ends of the insitu slab at its centroid. These forces are
of such magnitude that the elastic elongation of the slab
should be equal to the differential shrinkage.
~ -. II rr-""""
'.
In the above, the interface of the slab is assumed as
not only free from any shear connector but also frictionless
j . L I . !
at that instant which is not so. Fig 1 Differential shrinkage force acts at interface

4H INDIANI CONCRETE JOURNAL

 ~
~
Hence, the differential shrinfage strain
r;;;= I .' .1_.~lnSIIU
IV

,-,_ ~t- ~~--=rOiM

. - I'
. _
(F
A;
+M;)(l+~I~ F +Frp(l+~)
Ap Zp; (7)
t . _l_'..::.~ I Zjj ..L
s- E ' E ..
(Q) . • . t I ~ p

From equation (7) different~al shrinka~e force. F can be

I
~. ""' ' i ' ' ' ' § .'
evaluated:

I, Step 2. Evaluation of vertical tics to prevent separation-

II' . \

(b)
l'~
u.~~~~n~g
Insilu
lh

If (aiM -- 0i'.) > O,M thi uplift of the insitu slab

.will take place. This can be prevented by providing
adequate vertical ties.

1I
i
7;'
F-----[-...-.-~::,os t
Net difference 'in slope between
the precast beam, Fig2
=(B;M-Bis..)-BpM

=8r
the insitu slab and

, (c)'

Let P be the force in the vertical ties per unit' length,

Fig 2 The slopes of various 'components of composite beam then
showing (a) slope of insitu slab due to eccentric differential
I . /
shrinkage' force (b) slope of insitu slab due to selfweight (e) slope
of precast beam due to eccentric differential shrinkage force e PL
=---1---
J PLJ
.. (8)
T . 48£./. . 24£ I .
I I P P
(il) step 1-in the case of uplift of the insitu slab taking
place, .the vertical ties between the precast
beam and theinsitu slab will be provided to P can be evaluated from equation (RL
l
prevent .:l~ separation.
The differential shrinkag~ force in this case can be
Steps 1 and 2 are dealt in detail below. evaluated from equation (7).
. I
Step 1. Evaluation of slopes=- Referring to Fig 2, the slope Case II . when the slope of precast element is greater
at the end of the precast beam due to the action of than that of insitu element - I~ this case the def!ected shape
moment M« is given by has been shown in Fig 4. In this case both the insitu
and the precast elements ate to be considered simply
L supported. Hence, the slope of the insitu clement can be
Mp x·-
2 calculated as given below:
81'M ~."" ..__...__ ... . :(4)
c, I" .1 (W,U)
It is
assumed that the precast beam is self-supporting
OjSlv = E./.
,, 24
.. (9).
at the time of launching erection. The slope at the tip
.of the insitu slab due to the action of moment M, is 8j\!and 81>M can be calculated· in the similar way as in
given by equation (5). The vertical ties to prevent the separation due
to effect of differential shrinkage can be calculated as
L follows
M; 5.
X
.. (5) = 8,
8'M
, -r-•. E~r-
"
Op - 8iJw - 8'M .. (10)

PL3 , PL3
The slope at the end G{ the insitu slab due 10 the self 8, =.= .,- -. - 't..- .. (II)
weight of the slab .' ... AL,,1p 24£/;
WL2 L 1
.8jsw = - x-x - ..(6) From equation (11) the falces in the vertical ties 'per
8 6 E;l; unit length can be calculatedr .

Now if(OiM. - O;.J '" iI.,mthen there will not be any The examples worked OUI!using method 1 and 2 ha~e
..also been worked out with method 3.. The stresses in
uplift of the insitu "jab ana hence no separation. linueh-'
a case the insitu slab will follow the curvature of the precast various fibres have been cOlPared in Tables 1 to 3 for
these 3 methods.
beam and the moment on the insitu slab will be modified
to .. It can be seen that the st esses obtained by method
, 0 3 are similar to those o~taired by method 2 both in
M = j rei X ...!'H_
°rM "" r .
I
-Insi t.u
ln~ilU'
Pr.CQsl
.. -Sh.o r
t...JW-.::I.:::Z::::r===="==="'===L . con n C tor s IZ

.
. ~
. .
__. Pre:cast t-s he Q reo n n 12 e ue r s
f
~ ~ ! l ------J.-----t.
I
\
i/.
Fig 3 Shear connectors along the entire
beam
length of composite
Fig'4 TO, deflected form of r"'"" and insitu "em en's
l FEBRUARY.1984 49
!i
I

I
".
,I
I

~"$;ii!!!'±'r_c;r.. V"'-.r~'" ~~ _', ~·~·~-"'7""""v~""""""~ •.~~-.-~"",···~,,~ .•.•,,------·--·

 _. ._. ~~. _· -A •••••• __ :...~ .~ _ _'_ •• ~ _ __.. __ C_
.. A~··A ••... ---='1:.2.=& =Ski.-

'Appendi" ~
3,35 m

r,nSi'U slab I rPoint 1 Example 1

i//Point Z A composite beam having a span of 40M has the following
properties, Fig 5. The differenti41 shrinkage is ioo« 10-6

1
v Precast girder

Ap = 9448cm' OIp = 90475iOOcm'

Zp/ = 767:)9<:cm' Zpb = 615063cm'

Ypl= 118cm Ypb = 147Cm

875 800 800 8.7 5
Ep = 3.52x101kg/cm2

o
\----Prqctlst b ec m lnsitu slab
'"
<0,
N
A, = 6700cm' t, = 22. 3333cm'
~ Zit = Zib = 22333. 3ems
Yi, = Yib ='lOcm I E; = 2.82x lO'kg/cm'

lY 1'1-"""
~
self weight of insitu slab

Stressesaccording

-6
to method 1

r F
J lS.08kg/cm
\

Fx 10 ]
/

, 100 X 10 = 6700 + 2~3333 x 2.82 x 10'

Fig 5 Cross-section of a composite beam
F ]FXI18] 1
magnitude and in direction. The differential shrinkage + [ 9448 't 767394 x,3.52 x 10'
force derived from method 2 is, however, many times higher
than th~t b~ method 3. '
Actually the force also is required to be evaluated
for the design of shear connectors due to the effects Solving
of differential shrinkage. Although the shear force due to
imposed loading acts in the opposite direction but in case F = 3497Jkg
of structures with low imposed loading; e.g. in roof
structures, this might be required to be checked. /;, = 34977 [ 6;00 - 22;~3.3\]
, Method 3 also provides a procedure for the evaluation = - 10. 46kg/cm2 (compression)
of vertical ties to preverit separation if required due to \

differential shrinkage which could not be achieved by

using methods 1 and 2. fib = 34977 [ 67~O + 22313~.3\ 1
= 20: 88kg/cmz '(tension)
Conclusion
The' stresses developed in the various parts of a structure ," '
/pr= - 34977
[I 9448 +
118\ ]
767394
calculated according to methods 1 and 2 can be not only
much different in some cases but also opposite in direction = - 9. 09kg/cm' ,<comprc:sJ1iOn)
as shown in example 1. This is due to the compatibility
of thestrains not being fully satisfied. Method 3 which is I 118 i'I
fp~ = 34977
an extension of method 1 yields a more accurate differential r 9448 - 767394
shrinkage force and.also more accurate stress in various = 1.68kg/cm' (tc nsion)
fibres ofa composite section. This method also gives a
procedure for the assessment of vertical ties between the Stresses according to me/hod 2
insitu and the precast element to prevent separation.
A; = 14816cT'l'
t, sss 146744G21cm'
Zel= 160t670cm'
Zrj = 204893"4cm3
References Zcb = 758841cm3 . ~.,
""
L'
,
A'. = 5368cm'
1.. Ev ANS,R. H, and PARKER,A. S, Behaviour of prestressed concrete
composite beams, Journal 01 the American Concrete Institute, F = 100 X 10· X 6700 x 2 82 X 10'
May 1955 Proc. Vol. 26, pp. 861-878.
= I88940kg. \
2. KAJFASZ,S. SOMERVILLE,G and ROWE,R. E. An investigation.of
the behaviour of composite concrete beams Res earch Report 15.. _ .: Ji .,' "l"I_iUl')'I~ ._ -I 81>9/10- h' 1 ~R94~ X RI ,62 ] 2,82
"1'"

Cement and C'HlLrCIC Association.' November 1%3. II 536B 14tll6 \ 16Jl670 X 3."'52
k
3: BANERJEE,S. P. Differential shrinkage effects in composite structures.
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, 10.26kgfcm' (tension)
publication vol. 31-II. 1971, pp. 15-29.
4: VENKATESULU, G, and BAPU. SATYANARAYANA.'Practical -,fih 188940 _
[ 5368
188940 _
14816
18:8940 :; 81.62 '12:82
\ 2048934 3,52
:-
approach to the problem of differentialshrinkage stresses in composite
construction of prestressed and insitu concrete used in bridge decks.
Indian Highways. August 1974,pp. 22-27. 14.92kg/cm· (tension)

50 INDIAN CONCRETE JOUHNAL '

,-;
 '"

: [pt -
. 188~0
[ 14816 "
188940 x 81.62
.J..
2048934
J Insiui slab
Ai
Zit
= 22Scm)
= = 281.2Scm I
lib J
1 t,
Yit
1055cm'
Yib =3.7Scm
'\

= - 20. 28kg/cm2 (r:-mpression) Et = 282 X 100kg/cJ;Il'

.; [ _ 188940 188940 x .81 .62 ] Self weight of insitu slab = 0.54)cglcm
fitb . 14816 + 758841
s ace
= 7. 57kg/cm2 (tension)

'Stresses according to metnodI x 1

X.~ -L225 '1281.25 .• 2.82 x 10" +
t 34977 x lOx 2000
8iM = 2.82 X 10' x 223333
F' FX3.75]
[ 225 +. 281.25 x 3.52 x 10'
= 0.011 radian

34977 X 118 X 2JOO Solving F = 877kg

8pM = 3.52 x J O' x 90475700 Working in the same manner as ~efore
fll = -7.8kg/cm' (compression)
= 25.92 X 10-5 radian fib = 15.6kg/cm' (tensionl)
16.08 X (4000)3 [pI = -IS.6kg/cm' (compression)
Oisw = 24 x 2.82 x 10' x 223333 [vb = 7.8kglcm' (tension)
, Stresses according to method 2
= 0.68 radian
Ae = 4OScm' Zeb = 1063cm'
Since 8isw > filM there will be no uplift' of the; insitu slab and the "
f insitu slab will deflect following the slope of the precast girder., Ie =7528cm' k = l8Ocm'
= 950cm' z.,
I
Zet =17924cm'
Hence, the moment of insitu slab will be modified by -'
F = 100X 10 X 225 X 2.82,\X10'
I 25.92 X 10-5 = 2356 x 10-5
= 6345kg.
i 0.01 I
Now writing the equilibrium equation with the revised moment
fit = [~2 _ 180 f
3645 _ 634~x 4.17].
405 950 '
x 2.82
3.52

00 0-6=[ ~ + Fx 10 x 2356 x 10-5] __ ._1_' __ - 6. 66kg/cm2 (~Omrression)

1 )( I 6700 22333.3 2 82 X I O'
= _ [~~~ _ ~}~ _ 6345 X 4.17 ] 2.82
F FX118]
fib
I80 405 I7924 x 3.52 I
+ .l'r ~~
9448 + 767394
= 14.44kgfcm' (tension)
Solving, F = 76628kg.
Working in the same manner as before
fipI = - [§jJ .•..6345 x 4.17]
fit =:= 10.6Ikg/cm' (tension)
405' 17924
fib = 12.2Jkg!cm' (tension) = - 17 . 15kg/cm2 (compression)
fpt
fpp
= -19.91kg/cm' (compression)
= 3.68kg/cm' (ter .ion) I'
Jpb
= _ 6345 ,t 6345 x
405' 1063
4!'
The differential shrinkageforce and the stresses developed are surnmarised
in Table 1.
= + 13 .22kg/cm2 (tensjon)
1
TABLE 1 Differerrtlalstresse s by example 1
Stress according to method 3
- '

At stress, kg/em' 8' _ 877 x 3..75 x 150

point 1M - 2.82 x 10' x 1055 I
method 1 method 2 method J .i
= 165.8 X 10-5 radia
-10.46 10.26 (tension) 10.61 (tension)
(compression). 877 x 3.75 x 150,
8pM= 3.52 x 10' ~ 1055
2 20.88 (tension) 14.92 (tension] 12.23 (tension)
3 -9.09 ·-20.28 _19.91
(compression) (compression) (compression) = 132.84 x 10-5 radian
4 1.68 (tension) 7.57 (tension) 3.68 (tension)
. _ 0.54 X (300)' \
Differ- 8/S w - 24 X 2.82 x 10' X 1055
ential
shrink-
age = 204 X 1O-~ radian
force
kg 34977 188940 76628

Example 2
Since 8isw > 8im the insitu S[bb will deflect lollowing the slope of
This comp~site beam has a span of 3m. The differential shrinkage is the precast beam. !' ,
100 X 10- .
Therefore, the modified mo en! of the insitu slab will be
Precast beam
'Ap = 225cm' Ip = 1055cm' M:=Fx 3.75 X
132.84
i65.8
Zpt = Zpb =
281.2Scml Ypt = Ypb = 3.75cm I

Ep = 3.52 x 10'kg/cm' =3F

FEBRUARY 1984 51

I
! .;7'
').;~

"
&;;;;?"
~f -~~•..
-::~.-~
.•.•
- -~-~,-- ..,.....-
..--'~-:-r-- .. -'~ ••""-'-""-'- ,,~~-,.,r,- .....
-.. ._.". ~,,__ . - __
 ___ .-: .•.._-.I:_.• _·._·~_~~ .f._._-....·.•.~ .._ ~~. - ---~~~~~ --.......•..~

1\ ~

""y

Now writing the equilibrium equation with the revised moment TABLE 2 Differenti:11 stres~,?,,,
I
,·.Jr example
.
2

JOO
.
y. 10
-6
=
[F225 +
. 3F]
281.25 "Q')
1
v 1m
+ At stress, kg/em'
point
method J method 2 method 3

F F x 3.75
[ 225 + 281.25 ] '1 "'1 1~_ 1(.•6 -7.8 -6.66 -6
(compression) (compression) (compression)
Solving F = 952kg. 2 15.6 (tension) 14'r (rensien) 14.38 (tension)
3 -15.6 -17V . -J6.85
• ( 1 .~) (compression) (compression) (compf.:5sion)
: [it = 952 225 - 28}.25 4 7.8 (tension) 13.22 (tension) 8.47 (tension)
./

.= - 6kg/cm' (compression) Differ·

ential
shear
/;b =.952 (~5 + '28t25) force, .
kg 877 6345\ 952
= 14. 38kg/cm2 (tension)

1 3.75 )
[pI = - 952 ( + 225 + 281.25 TABL:E3 Differentiallstresses for example 3

= - 16. 85kg/cm' (compression)

At _______ ---s-t-JLf-SS' kg/cm'
point
/ 1 3.75)
fpb = 952 \ - 225 + 281.25 method 1 method 2' method 3

;" 8.47kg!Cfn% (tension)

-7.07 -7.04 7.07
(compression) (compression) (compression)
2 14.05 (tension) Idol (tensio». 14.05 (tension)
The differential shrinkage force and the stresses developed are summarised
in Table 2. .' . . 3 . -14.05 -14.1 ~14.0S
(compression) (compression) (compression)
Example 3 4 7.07 (tension) 7.04 (tension) 7.07 (tension)
In this example the modulus of elasticity of both insitu and precast Differ·
concrete has been kept same, Ei = En = 2.H2 X IOSkg/cm1• The other ential
shear
data are as in example 2.
force,
Working i~ the same manner as before the stresses at the various fibres kg 794 6345 794
of the composite beam are given in Table 3.

.!

):

A large number of projects of various kinds are under execution all over the country, most of t~em using concrete in one
way or another. Many of these projects have interesting features. Many present technical problfms which require all the
ingenuity of the constructional engineer to resolve. Readers of this Journal are keenly interested' in reading about
all this and we shall therefore, particularly welcome worthwhile contributions bearing on- ~o~truc~; ';', They' should be
accompanied by good black and white glossy photographs.

52 INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL

I ~I.
View publication stats