III.

LOAD EVALUATION
Load classifcation:
a) Permanent loads
- own weight of the structure (slabs, girders, columns,
roof, walls);
- earth pressure
b) Variable loads
- live loads;
- snow;
- wind
c) Exceptional loads
- earthquake.
a) Permanent loads
he permanent loads are the result of the own weight of the
structural elements, of the non!structural elements of the building and
of other loads having a permanent action: earth pressure.
he own weight of the elements are computed b" multipl"ing the
volume of the element with the specifc weight of the material the" are
made of.
1. Superior foor slab
5
4
3
2
1
1
3
.
0
1
5
2
.
0
1
5
.
0
1
.
0
#o. La"er
hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
*+ ,oofng s"stem ! ! *.(- -. /0.-
* 1laster ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
) ,3 slab ..*- )-.. *.(- (0- -./.)-
( 4linding concrete ...) )*.. *.(- 5) -/.0
5 hermoinsulation ..*) *(. *.(- *-./ )*../
- 1rotection la"er ...( )*.. *.(- /( 6-..-
otal -/5./ 0/).)*
2. Current foor slab
i) warm 7oor
#o. La"er
hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* 1arquet ...* 0( *.(- ..0( ..26--
) Leveling concrete ...5 )*.. *.(- 65 **(.5
( ,3 slab ..*- )-.. *.(- (0- -./.)-
5 1laster ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
otal 506.0( /5/.)6/
ii) cold 7oor
#o. La"er hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* ile ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
) Leveling concrete ...5 )*.. *.(- 65 **(.5
( ,3 slab ..*- )-.. *.(- (0- -./.)-
2
3
4
4
.
0
1
5
.
0
1
.
0
1
1
.
0
2
3
4
4
.
0
1
5
.
0
1
.
0
1
1
.
0
5 1laster ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
otal 520 /0..2-
iii) circulated terrace
#o. La"er hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* 1laster ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
) ,3 slab ..*- )-.. *.(- (0- -./.)-
( Leveling concrete ...( )*.. *.(- /( 6-..-
5 hermoinsulation ..*) ).. *.(- )5 ().5
- &and ...( */.. *.(- 56 /5.6
/ 8osaic plates ...( )... *.(- /. 6*
otal -62 02-.*-
iv) non!circulated terrace
#o. La"er hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* 1laster ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
) ,3 slab ..*- )-.. *.(- (0- -./.)-
5
4
3
2
1
3
.
0
1
2
3
.
0
1
5
.
0
1
.
0
3
.
0
6
5
4
3
2
1
6
.
0
1
2
3
.
0
1
5
.
0
1
.
0
1
2
3
4
1
7
.
5
30
1
5
.
0
( Leveling concrete ...( )*.. *.(- /( 6-..-
5 hermoinsulation ..*) ).. *.(- )5 ().5
- 3la" slate .../ )6.. *.(- */6 ))/.6
otal /52 60/.*-
3. Stairs
#o. La"er
hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* ile ...* *2.. *.(- *2 )-./-
) ,3 steps ...0 )5.. *.(- */6 ))/.6
( ,3 ramp ..*- )-.. *.(- (0- -./.)-
5 1laster ...*- *2.. *.(- )6.- (6.50-
otal -2..- 020.*0-
4. Eterio
r !alls
1.5
4
3
2
1
int
ext
10 24.0 1.5
#o. La"er
hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* 1laster ...*- *2.. *.(- )6.- (6.50-
) 4rick masonr" ..)5 *6.. *.(- 5() -6(.)
( hermoinsulation ..* ).. *.(- ). )0
5 1laster ...*- *2.. *.(- )6.- (6.50-
otal -.2 /60.*-
". Di#i$in% !alls
1.5 11 1.5
3
2
1
#o. La"er
hickness
$m%
&pecifc
weight
$da#'m
(
%
n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
* 1laster ...*- *2.. *.(- )6.- (6.50-
) 439 masonr" ..** /.. *.(- // 62.*
( 1laster ...*- *2.. *.(- )6.- (6.50-
otal *)( *//..-
&urface loads transformation into linear distributed loads:
&tructural element
Load on
m
)
:
$m%
Load on
m
;<terior walls 6.6./- (.-- )60..0
=ividing walls *//.- (.-- -2*..6
b) Variable loads
1. Li#e loa$s
;lement n
Load value
$da#'m
)
%
characteristic design
&uperior slab *.- 0- **).-
3urrent 7oor *.- (.. 5-.
3irculated terrace *.- 5.. /..
&tairs *.- 5.. /..
2. Sno! loa$
=
k i e t 0,k
s c c s
> = 0.811200 160 da#'m
)
; n>*.-;
s
d
>
k
ns 1.5160 240 = =
da#'m
)

i
! shape coe?cient;
i
> ..6;
c
e
! e<posure coe?cient due to the site of the construction; c
e
>*;
c
t
! thermal coe?cient; c
t
>*;
s
.,k
@ characteristic value of snow load on the soil; s
.,k
> )..
da#'m
)
;
s
k
! characteristic value of snow load;
s
d
! design value of snow load.
c) Exceptional loads
i) Seismic action evaluation according to P100 2006:
An the modal computation, the seismic action si evaluated using
the response spectra corresponding to horiBontal unidirectional ground
movements, described b" accelerograms. he seismic action is
described using two horiBontal components evaluated starting from the
same design response spectrum.
Chen a spatial model is used, the seismic action is applied on all
relevant horiBontal directions, and on the central principal directions.
Dor the buildings with structural elements on two normal directions,
these directions are considered relevant.
An the computation, onl" the vibration modes with a signifcant
contribution to the total seismic response will be conisdered. his
condition is fulflled if:
the sum of the eEective modal masses for the considered
modes of vibration is at least 2.F from the total mass of the
structure;
all modes of vibration with an eEective modal mass greater
than -F of the total mass have been considered.
he shear force applied at the base of the building on the
direction of the seismic action:
b i d
F S(T)m =
where:
G
i
> *.). @ the building is clasifed as an importance class AA;
&
d
() @ the ordinate of the design response spectrum
corresponding to the fundamental period ;
@ the fundamental period of vibration in the plane of the
horiBontal direction considered;
m @ the total mass of the building;
H > ..6- @ the correction factor which takes into account the
contribution of the fundamental mode of vibration through the
eEective modal mass associated;
( )
d g
T
S(T) a
q

=
a
g
> ..)g @ the ground acceleration;

c
> ..0 s @ the corner period;
u
1
5
q

=

@ the behaviour factor of the structure (: ductilit"

class);
u
1
1.35;

I() @ elastic normalised response spectrum for

c
>..0 s
he mass on each level is computed using the software ,obot
8illenium.
ii) Combination o t!e modal responses
he modal responses for two consecutive vibration modes, k and
kJ* are considered independent if their periods of vibration
k
and
kJ*
(where
kJ*
K
k
) satisf" the condition:
kJ*
K..2
k
.
Dor the ma<imum independent modal responses, the total
ma<imum eEect is obtained using the modal composition relation:
2
E E,k
E E =
where:
;
;
@ the eEect of seismic action (internal force, displacement);
;
;,k
@ the eEect of the seismic action in mode k.
Af the modal responses are not independent, other means of
combining the eEects of seismic action for each mode of vibration will
be considered. (complete quadratic composition etc.).
iii) "!e spatial modal computation
An the case of buildings with a non!uniform distribution structural
elements masses and stiEness, the design will be made using a spatial
model of the structure. he seismic movement described in the design
response spectrum must be considered along at least two directions.
he main action directions are defned b" the direction of the resultant
of the base seismic force from the frst mode of vibration and the
normal to this direction. he response of the structure ma" be obtained
b" composing the responses along these two directions.
iv) #$pot!esis or design o structures %it! &oors undeormable
in t!eir o%n plane
he in7uence of the vertical component of the seismic
movement is neglected;
he seismic action is represented b" the ground movement
along one of the principal directions < or " or along an" other direction
in the horiBontal plane;
Dor each level, the centres of mass and the centre of
stiEness are diEerent, and the" ma" or ma" not be on the same
vertical line;
An the centre of mass of each 7oor, three ==LDs are
considered: two translations, u
<
and u
"
and a rotation about the vertical
a<is, u
M
.