Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS EQUIVALEHT FRAME ANALYSIS Analyses of the structure were made using two di f f e r e n t equivalent frame methods. One was used to compute deflections a t the center of the loaded panels for each t e s t . The second a n a l y s i s was applied to compute column loads for each of the three t e s t s , and also column loads resti l t i n g from settlement of the structure. In both methods of analysis the three-dimensional structure was f i r s t re- duced to an equivalent two-dimensional frame. Moments and shears from the applied loads were then obtained for the "ersatz" frame by use of the Cross moment d i s t r i b u t i o n procediire. (â¢'â¢Ì^ B r i e f descriptions of the analy- ses are presented i n Appendix A. Detailed descriptions of the procedures are given i n other references.(I5*l6,17*l8) Deflections. Since the structure was observed to be cracked a t the time of t e s t , deflections were computed on the ba s i s of a cracked section. Deflections were f i r s t computed using the uncracked f l e x u r a l s t i f f n e s s of the slab. These deflections were multiplied by the r a t i o of the s t i f f n e s s of the uncracked section to that of the cracked section. For t y p i c a l sections, t h i s r a t i o was equal to 2.J. Deflections of the frame, cantilever and plate computed as described i n Appendix A are l i s t e d in Table V I I . These deflections are for an applied load equal to 350 psf (added dead plus about 1.0 l i v e load). Values for the can t i l e v e r deflection include e f f e c t s of rotation of the supported end. Quantities l i s t e d for the frames and ca n t i l e v e r s are the average of the two frames bounding the loaded span. For the panels i n Test I and I I I , deflection i s p r i n c i p a l l y from deformation of the frame. In Test I I , deflection comes primarily from the cantilever beam. This indicates the contribution of rotation of the edge beam. 1-30
TABLE V I I COMPUTED DEFLECTIONS AT 300 psf APPLIED LOAD Test Panel Deflection i n Inches No. No. Frame Cantilever Plates Total I 3.4- B,C 4.5- B,C 3.4- C,D 4.5- C,D 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.065 0.068 0.061 0.068 0.031 0.031 0.029 0.029 0.266 0.269 0.260 0.267 I I 2.3- D,E 3.4- D,E 4.5- D,E 0.113 0.048 0.090 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.318 0.253 0.294 I I I 5,6-C,D 0.176 0.090 0.031 0.297 Measured and computed deflections at the center of the panels under one l i v e load are compared m Fi g . 53 for a l l three t e s t s . I n general, agree- ment between measured and calculated values i s s a t i s f a c t o r y . Computed values are about the same f o r each of the four panels i n Test I . As noted e a r l i e r , measured deflections In Panels 4,5-B,C and 3,4-C,D were about equal, while deflection measured m Panel 3,4-B,C was higher and that In 4,5-C,D was lower. Computed deflections agree c l o s e l y with those recorded m the t e s t for Panel 4,5-B,C. Computed deflections are somewhat l e s s than those mea- sured m Test I I but somewhat more than those measured in Test I I I . In the a n a l y t i c a l procedure, the equivalent frame I s taken along column l i n e s In the long span direction of the panels. Although the a n a l y t i c a l procedure was developed to obtain deflections at the center of a loaded panel, i t I s i n t e r e s t i n g to compare measiared and computed deflections at midspan of the column l i n e s . This comparison I s shown In F i g . 54. Deflec- tions at an applied load of 350 psf (added dead plus about 1.0 l i v e load) are l i s t e d f o r a l l three t e s t s . Deflections along Line D for Test I I are l i s t e d below column Line D. Deflections for Tests I and I I I along Line D are shown above Line D. 1-31
