huangyhg

hyperstatic moments in concrete slabs
my question is:
when calculating final moments for a slab, are all hyperstatic moments subtracted from moments at limit state? or are only the moments at supports subtracted and not the ones at midspan e.g.?
you design (it is surmised) everything to meet the forces reulting from a series of hypotheses mandated by the code. between them there may be some that when the effect of some prestressing action becomes a positive factor in resisting the applied forces, the code may mandate that even if enforcibly present you count only at service level or say 90% of it. it can as well specify that since the inverted curved section of strand over supports augments the moment they are to be taken at the max, value, i.e., factored loads level as your question seems to ask; they are not contributing to the reduction of the reinforcement at supports.
and note that i am not talking of the hyperestatic moments, but of the full application or not of what produces worse or better effect, and hence, a stronger structural element, or a weaker one.
this is no novelty, traditional combinations mandate all the live loads treated as nonexistent or zero when a positive factor to reduce the maximum effects of forces, but mandates the spans at both sides of a support fully loaded to get the maximum effect.
for limit states and only in the cases where a satisfactory check of the service level behaviour is warranted, the limit strength check may be a bit more lenient on what the standing deformations at such limit state level are. for example the full passive and active rebar may be directly taken at their respective design strengths whereas a more proper check would be one in compatibility of deformations, that in the end and for a strength check may not differ that from some simplification of that of all the steel at its design strength.
for a general design of structure where the slabs act conjointly with the columns (as must be done typically) the hypothesis at hand defines what to count and what not for the check; this, on the other hand, needs to be compatibilized with the particulars -as specified by the guiding code allowing it- of some simplified mode of calculation when using it. you will find as well minimums of rebar to place, maximum negative moment redistribution, particular specs for the geometry of the rebar etc.
927927,
depends on the design code and the calculation being done, flexure/shear.
927927,
you haven't gotten a lot of answers because most of us don't re
?
mike mccann
mmc engineering
back when i was still a university student i was at a bookfair when i came across a book authored by academics from monash and melbourne university (in australia) titled "hyperstatic structures: an introduction to the theory of indeterminate structures". i bought the book for a couple of dollars knowing that it was published in 1960, around the same time that fe was being introduced. saying that, i never referred to the book because i was taught in the "computer-analysis" era so my only assumption is that hyperstatic refers to a system which is not statically determinate.
yes, the live load should be placed where it will generate the greatest action. i find the best way to do this is to generate load cases with loads placed on each span, and filter through each load case to see how the load position will affect the shear and moment diagrams. this will give you a good idea on how you need to pattern the loading to give the greatest design actions. experienced designers who have a good understanding on how structures will behave can do this by inspection.
yes, hokie66, you are the brave one here to admit not knowing what we all didn't know either. way to go!

here is a paper on hyperstatic moments by allan bommer.

927927,
hyperstatic moments? you must be kidding! what exactly is your question?
ba
to all who are ripping on 927927 because you don't know what hyperstatic moments are:
hyperstatic actions are caused due to external constraint to displacement of a member under prestressing forces. bending moments caused by external constraints of post-tensioning (pt) actions, aka "hyperstatic moments" will cause failure in pt slabs if not accounted for properly in design. hyperstatic is common terminology in advanced pt design universally, and the term is plain english and very straightforward if you are familiar with the topic. perhaps we should refrain from making fun of others if we don't understand what they are talking about; possibly there are many others out there who do understand and can help. we have all asked dumb questions before. and this is not a dumb question.
to 927927:
i am not sure what country you are in or what code you use, but in the us (where i am) when modeling pt tendons we use the post-tensioning values when checking for service level (serviceability) effects; i.e., deflections, stresses, and cracking. when checking for ultimate level (strength and safety) effects, we use hyperstatic (secondary) values (with a load factor of 1.0). modeling a pt tendon as an applied loading necessitates the introduction and consideration of hyperstatic (secondary) actions as a separate design load for the safety check of post-tensioned
i still don't know what hyperstatic moments or hyperstatic structures are. blastresistant claims the term applies to pt structures, yet there are numerous articles on the internet which do not mention pt structures. for example:

__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言：前进吧，你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]