Thanks for this precious video.That means there is no benifit to design beam with flanged in continuous and fixed conditions. Only better for simply support condition like bridge girder.
Sir, If the case is one way continuous slab (eg if I am designing assembly hall as basic design done by students) and we design the beam as L and Tee beam shall we consider torsional check in beam for L beam .??? Nice vedio sir ...
How o you consider a beam where the web part is cast first and the top part of it is cast with the slab casting. Example a 425x200mm. beam, the web or lower part is cast first 300x200 and then the top portion that is 125x200 is cast together with the slab. It is definitely not a flanged beam for it is not monolithic with the slab. The only thing that run through both beam and slab is the stirrup. The bottom reinforcement is cast with the lower portion and the top bars are cast together with the slab. I will like to know how this affects desining and how such beam are to be entertained in such program as ETABS. Thanks.
Why do we provide same amount of extra top reinforcement at both side of column thou hogging moments are different at both side of column support.( In continuous beam design)
@@ilustraca Actually sir, In RCDC Beam design it shows same extra top rebars at both side of column for continuous beam( both sides means beam junction at column of continuous beam , i am not talking about both end of beam) . But when we split the beam by using BEAM CONTINUAM .It shows different extra top rebars . It may be acted as a series of fixed beam after spiting continuous beam. Regarding this scenario I raised above question. Please explain this.
@@ilustraca Sir , In RCDC beam design shows same extra top bar at both side of column for continuous beam.(It shows different only when we break continuity of beam by BEAM CONTINUAM by split option. Regarding to this scenario I raised this question. Please explain.
This video was about usability of flanged beam... only in case of sagging the flanged can be effective... as the concrete is able to take compression hence we don't consider any flange action separately and design the beam as rectangular. Plz don't make hotch potch of several topics at one place.
Again, beams are not only designed for gravity loads but also lateral forces.. so while designing and detailing you have to keep that action of that too in mind.
Wow! This is a great explanation. Well done!
I always had this doubt thanks for clearing beautifully 😊
nice explanation thank you
Thanks for this precious video.That means there is no benifit to design beam with flanged in continuous and fixed conditions. Only better for simply support condition like bridge girder.
We don't design beams as flanged...
@@ilustraca Can we take benefit of flange for inverted cantilever beam ?
Sir, If the case is one way continuous slab (eg if I am designing assembly hall as basic design done by students) and we design the beam as L and Tee beam shall we consider torsional check in beam for L beam .???
Nice vedio sir ...
How o you consider a beam where the web part is cast first and the top part of it is cast with the slab casting. Example a 425x200mm. beam, the web or lower part is cast first 300x200 and then the top portion that is 125x200 is cast together with the slab. It is definitely not a flanged beam for it is not monolithic with the slab. The only thing that run through both beam and slab is the stirrup. The bottom reinforcement is cast with the lower portion and the top bars are cast together with the slab. I will like to know how this affects desining and how such beam are to be entertained in such program as ETABS. Thanks.
, i want to find answer this question
You dont know what will happen during seismic condition. Try to elaborate the seismic condition also
Thus making the design/analysis more complex i guess
Is roof beam use rectangular beam or flange beam?
We don't use T beam concept anywhere ...
Why do we provide same amount of extra top reinforcement at both side of column thou hogging moments are different at both side of column support.( In continuous beam design)
Who provides the same? If the moments are different and you're providing same reinforcement then you're doing wrong.
@@ilustraca Actually sir, In RCDC Beam design it shows same extra top rebars at both side of column for continuous beam( both sides means beam junction at column of continuous beam , i am not talking about both end of beam) . But when we split the beam by using BEAM CONTINUAM .It shows different extra top rebars . It may be acted as a series of fixed beam after spiting continuous beam. Regarding this scenario I raised above question. Please explain this.
@@ilustraca Sir , In RCDC beam design shows same extra top bar at both side of column for continuous beam.(It shows different only when we break continuity of beam by BEAM CONTINUAM by split option. Regarding to this scenario I raised this question. Please explain.
This video was about usability of flanged beam... only in case of sagging the flanged can be effective... as the concrete is able to take compression hence we don't consider any flange action separately and design the beam as rectangular. Plz don't make hotch potch of several topics at one place.
Again, beams are not only designed for gravity loads but also lateral forces.. so while designing and detailing you have to keep that action of that too in mind.