Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We wish to express our appreciation to our advisors; Ato Mebrahtom G. and Ato Abdulaziz O.
who have assisted in the project progress by suggesting relevant information, ideas how to
design building structures. We have received a great deal of assistance, encouragement from
their consulting.
And we want to thank Ato Berhane T/haimanot, he helps us by providing the drawing (plan) of
our project. Finally our appreciation goes to Ato Ashenafi W/mariam who was helping us by
allowing using his computer & encouraging us to work hard.
24 June 2008 I
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
ABSTRACT
This project deals about the structural analysis and design of a G+4 building considering all the
external and external effects according to EBCS, 1995. It has 9 chapters and the contents and the
duties accomplished in each chapter are explained below.
The first chapter deals about the general introduction of the basic structural components of a
building, slab analysis & design approaches, and the main objective of the project including lay
out of the report. In the second chapter discuss the literature review on the two method of slab
analysis (i.e. coefficient & strip method). The third chapter deals about Wind load analysis and
design on roofs and flat slabs. The external wind pressure coming from different directions
were collected and transferred to frames according to EBCS, 1995.We divided the roof of the
building into two parts and each of its truss members made of timber were designed for resisting
axial forces. The fourth chapter focuses on the analysis and design of slabs using coefficient and
strip methods of slab analysis. The slabs including two-way, one-way and special slabs which are
treated as cantilever beam. The depths of all the slabs are made the same for construction
simplicity and reinforcement of each is determined using EBCS2, 1995. Earth quake analysis is
also in this chapter and stair case is designed in the fifth chapter. Frames; beam &column are
analyzed and designed in the sixth chapter. Finally the last two chapters, chapter 7 & 8 deals
about foundation design and cost comparison respectively as well as conclusion recommendation
are given at the end of the report.
24 June 2008 II
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT............................................................................................................. I
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................II
Chapter 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 1
1.0 General....................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Basic structural components.................................................................................... 2
1.2 Slab design and analysis approaches ...................................................................... 3
1.3 Objective of the project ............................................................................................ 3
1.4 Lay out of the report................................................................................................. 4
Chapter 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 5
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 5
2.0 Coefficient method of slab analysis ......................................................................... 5
2.1 Strip method of slab analysis ................................................................................... 5
Chapter 3 ....................................................................................................................................... 7
WIND LOAD ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ............................................................................. 7
3.0 Roof analysis and design .......................................................................................... 7
3.1 Purline design .......................................................................................................... 18
3.2 Truss Analysis and Design ..................................................................................... 21
3.3 Design of truss members ........................................................................................ 24
Chapter 4 ..................................................................................................................................... 26
SLAB ANALYSIS AND DESIGN......................................................................................... 26
4.0 Slab design using coefficient method analysis ...................................................... 26
4.1 Design of slab using strip method of analysis....................................................... 42
4.2 Load transfer to frames.......................................................................................... 52
4.2.1 Vertical loads................................................................................................... 52
4.2.2 Horizontal loads (Earthquake) ...................................................................... 54
Chapter 5 ..................................................................................................................................... 77
STAIR CASE DSIGEN .......................................................................................................... 77
Chapter 6 ..................................................................................................................................... 82
FRAME ANALYSIS AND DESIGN....................................................................................... 82
6.0 Beam Analysis and Design ..................................................................................... 82
6.0.1 Beam design and analysis for flexure............................................................ 82
6.0.2 Shear Reinforcement ...................................................................................... 93
6.1 Column Analysis and design .................................................................................. 96
6.1.1 Determination of the effective length ............................................................ 97
6.1.2 Check for sway mode.................................................................................... 100
6.1.3 Check slenderness ratio................................................................................ 102
6.1.4 Determination of the total eccentricity ....................................................... 103
6.1.5 Transverse bars for columns........................................................................ 110
6.1.6 Lap length for columns................................................................................. 110
Chapter 7 ................................................................................................................................... 119
FOUNDATION DESIGN..................................................................................................... 119
7.0 Proportioning of Footing...................................................................................... 119
7.1 Depth of footing determination ............................................................................. 122
24 June 2008 IV
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 General
The primary aim of all structural design is to insure that the structure will performs satisfactorily
during its design life. Specifically, the design must check that the structure is capable of carrying
the loads safely and that it will not deform excessively due to the applied loads. This requires the
designer to make realistic estimates of the strengths of the materials composing the structure and
the loading to which it may be subjected during its design life. Further more, the designer will
need a basic understanding of structural behavior. The designer must make an assessment of the
future likely level of loading, including self-weight, to which the structure may be subjected
during its design life. Using computer methods or hand calculations the design loads acting on
individual elements can be then be evaluated. The design loads are used to calculate the bending
moments, shear forces and deflections at critical points along the elements. Finally, suitable
dimensions for the element can be determined.
When we come to the serviceability, it requires that all kinds of loads likely to occur during use,
everything should be satisfactory, for example excessive deflection should be adequately small;
vibration should be within the tolerable limit, the maximum width of crack also should not be
greater than the specified limit etc. The structure also should be economical keeping its safety
against to collapse.
Generally; the building structure to serve its purpose, it must be safe against collapse,
economical to user and gives its serviceability in use (functional)
24 June 2008 1
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
I. Joints: the connection of every building component could be in b/n beam & column,
column & ground or beam with roof etc…
II. Beams: are structural elements carrying external loads that causes bending moments,
shear forces and torsion moments along their length. The beams can be; singly or doubly
reinforced, and simply supported, fixed or continuous. The structural detail of such
beams must resist bending, diagonal tension, shear and torsion, and must be such as to
transmit forces through a bond with out causing internal cracks. The detailer must be
able to optimize the behavior of the beams under load.
III. Columns: are vertical members which transfer the load from beam to foundation,
usually under compression and they are classified as short, long columns and slender
columns. Long columns are liable to buckle under axial loads.
IV. Slabs: Slab is a two dimensional structural member, it also called a surface element
which transfers the loads to the beams or column in case of flat slab. The type of slab is
depends on support condition, arrangement and load transfer mechanism etc. Slabs may
be simply supported or continuous over one or more supports and are classified
according to the method of supports as follows; spanning one-way b/n beams or walls,
spanning two-way b/n the support beams or walls and flat slabs carried on columns and
edge beams or walls or with no interior beams. Slabs may be solid of uniform thickness
or ribbed with ribs running in one or two directions.
V. Foundation: is the part of the structure that is usually placed below the surface of the
ground and that transmits the load to the underlying soil or rock. All soils compress
noticeably when loaded and causes the supported structure to settle. The two essential
24 June 2008 2
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
requirements in the design of foundations are that the total settlement of the structure be
limited to a tolerably small amount and the differential settlement of the various parts of the
structure be eliminated as nearly as possible.
The task of the structural engineer is to design a structure which satisfies the needs of the client
and the user. Specifically the structure should be safe, economical to build and maintain and
aesthetically pleasing. Design in civil and structural engineering is entire planning process for a
new building structure from out line concepts and feasibility studies through mathematical
calculation to working drawing which could show every last nut and bolt in the project. There
are many in puts in to the engineering design process; Client brief, site investigation, economical
factors, experience, model and laboratory tests, environmental factors and imagination.
24 June 2008 3
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
comparing the cost of structural elements based on concrete work, reinforcement and formwork
for these methods.
The structural design is including; design of roof, design of slab, design of structural frame,
design of beam and column, design of foundation and Bill of quantity for cost comparison. Limit
state design method has been adopted for the whole components. Ethiopia building code of
standards EBCS-1, EBCS-2, EBCS-7, and EBCS-8 are referred for the design of the building.
The roof truss, slab and frame are analyzed using SAP2000 v 9.0 for different combination of
loads. The working drawing with detail for slab, beam, column, and footing also prepared finally
bill of quantity for concrete work, reinforcement bars and form work of both method and by
using this bill of quantity, by compare and give recommendation the project will ended.
24 June 2008 4
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Thakkar, M.C and Rao, J.K.S; justify that the average moment distribution per unit width of
the slab is derived from uniform orthotropic reinforcement through out the whole width of the
slab. That is, the slab analysis is by Hillerborg’s strip method and then the average of moments
for all strips along each edge is taken and this value is the moment per meter width quoted by
tables.
24 June 2008 5
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
capacity of the slab is nowhere exceeded, then the given external loading will represent a lower
bound of the carrying capacity.
The strip method gives results on the safe side, and the needed reinforcement can be calculated,
leading the designer to economical arrangement of steel, as well as safe design. Generally, it is
simple to use, even for slabs with whole or irregular boundaries.
Hillerborg set basic principles for edge supported slabs and introduced the expression “strip
method”, in his first original work in1956. He later expanded the method to include the practical
design of slabs on columns and L-shaped or in the simplest possible way to produce safe
designs for most of the slabs that he will meet in practice, including slabs that are irregular in
plan or that carry uneven distributed loads. The strip method encourages the use of strong bands
of steel where needed, such as around openings or over columns, improving economy and
reducing the likelihood of cracking or large deflections under service load.
24 June 2008 6
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Chapter 3
WIND LOAD ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
The effect of wind on structures is significant on light and dynamic structures. It does have
considerable effect on vertically standing walls, columns and beams etc. there fore; its effect can
be easily studied on roof structures such as truss structures and flat slabs. Therefore, our analysis
on wind load actions and its design will focus on roofs analysis and design and calculation of
wind forces on flat slabs.
Method of Analysis
There are two methods for wind load analysis, namely, the quasi-static method and detailed
dynamic analysis. The former is applied to structures whose structural properties do not make
them susceptible to dynamic exaltation. The latter is applied to structures which are likely to be
susceptible to dynamic excitation. The choice of the above two methods depends on the value of
the structure of their dynamic coefficient he dynamic coefficient depends on the type of
structure, the height of the structure and its breadth.
The quasi-static method is used for structures whose Cd value is less or equal to 1.2. For our
case the building variables are; Height of building =20.1m and Width of building = 14.8m, From
figure 3.7 of EBCS-1, 1995, the value of the dynamic coefficient of this building is; Cd = 0.98
that is Cd < 1.2 and height of the building is less than 200m, this implies that the simple
procedure of EBCS (quasi-static) method of analysis the appropriate method. This is used for
wind load analysis and roof design
24 June 2008 7
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
The related parameters; Terrain factor, KT = 0.24 , Min. height Z min (m) = 16 and Roughness
length, Z o (m) = 1 .
Since the building is located in Mekelle city and the altitude above sea level of Mekelle city is
2001m there fore according to EBCS-1. 1995 table 3.1 the value of air density ( ρ ) = 0.94Kg/m3.
From the different types of roof, we select a mono pitch roof with a pitch angle 15º. There are
two direction of wind on the roof; Wind perpendicular (normal) to the ridge ( θ = 0o ) and Wind
parallel to the ridge ( θ = 90o ).
A. For Roof-1
1. Wind perpendicular (normal) to the parapet (θ=0º)
Wind pressure
There are two type of wind pressure; External wind pressure & Internal wind pressure
a. External wind pressure (We): The wind pressure acting on the external surfaces of a
structure we shall be obtained from, We = qref Ce ( Z e )C pe …… from EBCS-1, 1995 section 3.5.2,
Ce ( Z e ) = exposure coefficient
24 June 2008 8
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 9
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Exposure coefficient ( Ce ( z ) )
Wind velocity tends to decrease near the ground level owing to frictional effects beat win the
wind and the ground. The exposure coefficient takes in to account the variation from reference
wind velocity due to the ground roughness, the local topography and height above the ground.
7 kt
Ce ( z ) = Cr2 ( z ) × Ct2 ( z )[1 + ,
Cr ( z )Ct ( z )
] EBCS- 1, 1995 defines the exposure coefficient at height
z meter using the relationship. Where Cr (z ) is the roughness coefficient as it defined in section
3.8.3 of EBCS- 1 and Ct (z ) is the topography coefficient as described in the figures 3.5 and 3.6,
pages 59-60 of EBCS- 1, 1995, kt is the terrain factor as in table 3.2 of EBCS- 1, 1995.
Roughness coefficient ( Cr (z ) ): accounts for the variability of mean wind velocity at the site of
the structure due to the height above the ground level and roughness of the terrain. It is defined
by the logarithmic profile as:
z
Cr ( z ) = kt ln( ) for Cr ( z ) = zmin ≤ z ≤ 200mm , C r ( z ) = Cr ( zmin ) for z ≤ zmin ,
zo
Where zo =1, kt = 0.24 , zmin = 16 from EBCS- 1, 1995 table 3.2 for terrain category -4.
z
Therefore; Cr ( z ) = kt ln( ) because the value of z is, z = 21.65 > zmin = 16
zo
Therefore;
7 kt
Ce ( z ) = Cr2 ( z ) × Ct2 ( z )[1 + ] = 0.742x12x (1+ (7x0.24/ 0.74x1)) = 1.79
Cr ( z )Ct ( z )
C pe = 1 for A ≤ 1m2, C pe = 1 + ( C pe , 10- C pe , 1) x log A, for 1m2 < A < 10 m2 and C pe = 10 for
A ≥ 10 m2
24 June 2008 10
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Pressures
Table – 3.1 External pressure coefficients for each zone
ZONE F G H
24 June 2008 11
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
b. Internal wind: The pressure coefficients except the internal pressure coefficients are
similar to the above computation, there fore Wi = qref × Ce ( z )C pi = 0.2275*1.79 C pi = 0.41 C pi ,
From EBCS-1, 1995 section A. 2. 9(6), for closed buildings with internal partitions and opening
windows the extreme values are C pi = 0.8 for internal pressure and C pi = -0.5 for internal
pressure. The net pressure for the roof is given by Wnet = We ± Wi ; the worst case for the roof will
Case –II: when zone F, G, H are subjected to pressure. In this case worst effect will be when
the internal wind action suction. That is when C pi = -0.5
For wind load calculation we have to choose the greatest wind action from table 2 & 3. The
greatest suction=-0.861 and the greatest pressure=+0.2
24 June 2008 12
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Wind direction when θ = 900 Fig.3.4 wind direction parallel to the parapet
F G H I
Zone
24 June 2008 13
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
B) For Roof –2
Wind pressure
The pressure coefficients are the same. qref =0.2275KN/m2 and Ce (z ) =1.79
24 June 2008 14
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Zone F G H
C pe ,1 C pe ,10 C pe ,1 C pe ,10 C pe ,1 C pe ,10
C pe -2 .8 -2.5 -2 -1.3 -1.2 -0.9
C pe -2.56 -1.3 -0.9
C pi +0.8 +0.8 +0.8
C pe - C pi -3.36 -2.1 -1.7
Zone F G H I
From the above computation the wind load for design will be the maximum of suction and
pressure respectively;
Wdesign = 1.37 KN m 2 is uniformly distributed suction and Wdesign = 0.287 KN m 2 is uniformly
distributed pressure
Fig.3.8
iii) Self weight of purline; we select the cross section of the purline =5*7cm2, Wood type is
’TID’ having unit weight =560Kg/m3
=560Kg/m3*9.81m/s2=5.5KN/m3=5. 5KN/m3 *5*7*10-4m2=0.0193KN/m
iv) Live load; according EBCS-3, 1995, For distributed load=0.25KN/m and for concentrated
load =1KN
Load Combination
There are three types of load combination; using purline spacing =0.9m
1) Combination -1
Q1 =0.287KN/m3*0.9m +1.3 (self weight USG-30*purline spacing +self weight of purline) +
distributed load
=0.287 KN/m3*0.9m + 1.3(0.023 KN/m3*0.9m + 0.0193KN/m) +1.6*0.25KN/m =0.71KN/m
2) Combination -2
Q2 =0.287 Kn/m2 *0.9m + 1.3(0.023*0.9 + 0.0193KN/m)
=0.31KN/m with Qk=1.6*1KN=1.6 KN at the mid span of the roof
24 June 2008 16
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
3) Combination-3
Q3 = -1.37 KN/m2 *0.9m *1.3(0.023*0.9+0.0193) = -1.181KN/m
We have two roofs; Roof-1 & Roof-2 with truss spacing 1.3 & 1.4 respectively.
From the above; we choose the critical truss spacing i.e. 1.4m for our purline design.
i) Load Comb-1
24 June 2008 17
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
There fore; the actions for the design of truss, the loads transferred to truss joints are two;
2.03344KN down ward, 3.762KN upward by taking the intermediate purline.
grain, Eo, 05 = 8 ∗ 103 N mm 2 , Mean shear modulus G-mean=0.75*103 N/mm2 and Modulus of
Design actions
From purline analysis above, the maximum actions are given;
Max. Moment, M=0.636KNm and Max. Shear, V=1.017KN Sectional properties; Trial section
50x70mm
70cm
50cm
Fig.3.12 Purline cross section
Area =b*h=3500mm2, Moment of inertia, I=bh3/12 =1.43*106mm4,
Z y = bh2/6 =50*702/6 =40.83*103mm3 and M y =0.636*106Nmm
24 June 2008 18
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
My
σ myd = = 0.636 KNm = 15.58 N mm 2
Zy 40.83*103 mm3
kh × kls × kmod × f mk
f myd =
γm
For the class II of permanent weight, kmod =0.6, for loading shearing, kls =1.1, for timber and
But the permissible value is given by; U 2inst ≤ L/300=1400/300 =4.67mm> 3.404 …….Safe!
II) Check for U 2 fin = U 2ins (1 + kdlf ) , kdlf for permanent load and class-II is 0.8
And the permissible value for U 2 fin is given by L/200 =1400/200 =7mm> 6.137mm…....Ok!
24 June 2008 19
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Where; σ m ,d = design bending stress, kinst = the instability factor and f m , d = design bending
24 June 2008 20
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Where; Lef = 1330 , h=70, b=50, f k ,m = 27 , Eo,05 = 800 , Eo,mean = 12000 , Gmean = 0.75*103
Note: since the entire requirement is ok the section is safe and economic
Loading
I) Reaction forces from purline: Maximum reaction forces transferred to truss join are; 2.034KN
down ward and 3.762KN upward
II) Self weight of truss members: Initially take diameter of truss member =10cm,
A = p (0.1) 2 =0.008m2, the load is applied (acted) at joint of member, Use unit weight of
eucalyptus member =8.5 KN/m2
24 June 2008 21
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Fig.3.15
24 June 2008 22
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Fig.3.16
Result from SAP-2000
Fig.3.17
24 June 2008 23
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Fig.3.18
Fig.3.19
From the above fig.3.19, positive values indicate tension & negative values indicate
compression.
24 June 2008 24
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Members subjected to axial compression or tension are designed using the following
expression provided that there no tendency for buckling.
σ c , o, d ≤ f c , o, d or σ t ,o , d ≤ ft , o, d
4. Diagonal members
P = 7.18 KN (t), P = -9.54 KN (c)
For both vertical and diagonal members, use eucalyptus tree of C-30 with
Diameter = 8mm, Area = 5026.55mm2
σ c ,o ,d = 15.3*103/5026.55 = 3.04<<23 N/mm2 --------------------------------------------OK
24 June 2008 25
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Chapter 4
SLAB ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
Ly Ly
If the span ratio of a given beam-floor system is greater than two > 2, it is a one-
Lx Lx
Ly
way slab and for (1≤ ≤ 2), it is a two-way slab.
Lx
24 June 2008 26
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Note; Panel S6 and S8 are cantilever which are an extended slabs supported by beam in
three sides and treated as cantilever beams.
1.3m
Fig 4.2 cantilever beam
II. Determination of Depth for Deflection (from EBCS-2, 1995, Section 5.2.3)
⎡ 0.6 Fyk ⎤ Le
D > ⎢ 0 .4 + ⎥ , where
⎣ 400 ⎦ β a
• D-minimum effective depth which avoids undesirable and excessive deflection (mm).
• Fyk -characteristic yielding strength of the steel ( M PA ).
24 June 2008 27
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 28
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Cantilever 3200
28 97.14
Note: For the slab panels with intermediate span ratio between 1:1 and 2:1 linear interpolation
is used to determine the value of β a
9 From the above table 4.3 , the minimum effective depth for the two-way slab
Dmin =120.716mm and for the cantilever; Dmin =110.5mm
9 using the following recommendation, concrete cover (Cc)=15mm, Reinforcement for main
bars both shorter and longer direction use φ10 mm, and secondary reinforcement for the
cantilever to be φ8 mm
24 June 2008 29
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table 4.4 From EBCS-2, 1995; SECTION 3.5.3&3.5.4, for class I-works
For concrete For steel
Grade quality C-25 S-300
Characteristic strength 20 300
Partial safety factor 1.5 1.15
Design strength 11.33 260.87
V. Design Loads
From EBCS-1, section 2.4 and EBCS-2, section 3.6.1. The following table containing the
unit weight of different construction material
24 June 2008 30
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Reinforced concrete 25
Cement mortar 23
Floor finishing
PVC covering
16
Terrazzo tiling
23
Marble tiling 27
Note: Use a PVC tile for all slabs except for panel S1, S10 & bath room floor finishing,
terrazzo tile for S1 & S10 and marble for bath rooms
1. Dead load(DL)
a) Dead load from slab thickness
Cross-section of slab with PVC tile floor finishing
• Own weight=0.15m*25KN/m3=3.75KN/m2
• PVC finishing=0.002m*16KN/m3=0.032KN/m2
• Cement screed=0.048m*23KN/m3=1.104KN/m2
• Plastering =0.015m*23KN/m3=0.345KNm2
∑ DL 1 = 5.231 KN m 2
24 June 2008 31
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
∑ DL 2 = 5.245 KN m 2
∑ DL 3 = 5.325 KN m 2
24 June 2008 33
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
M s = α s pd Lx , M f = α f pd Lx
2 2
Where;
Ly
M i =Design moment per unit width, α i =moment coefficient depending on span ratio and
Lx
support condition, Lx =shorter span of the panel, Ly =longer span of the panel, s=support &
f=field
For S1; One -way (taking 1m width), and design load of W1=13.22KN/
Figs 4.7 span & support moment determination for one way slab
W1 2 13.22 × 1.352
Then Ms = L = =3.0KN.m
8 8
9W1L2 9 × 13.22 × 1.352
Mf = = =1.69KN.m
128 128
For S6 and S8; Cantilever type
W6=13.2
1.3m
Fig 4.8 span moment determination for cantilever
W6 L2
Ms = =13.2*1.32/2=11.15KN.m
2
24 June 2008 34
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
α xs 0.0574 M xs 16.76
α xf 0.043 M xf 12.56
10.80 5.2 1.12
S2
α ys 0.047 M ys 13.73
α yf 0.036 M yf 10.51
α xs 0.056 M xs 7.69
α xf 0.042 M xf 5.77
α yf 0.024 M yf 3.30
α xs 0.0574 M xs 18.83
α xf 0.0430 M xf 14.10
12.13 5.2 1.12
S4 α ys 0.0470 M ys 15.42
α yf 0.0360 M yf 11.81
α xs 0.056 M xs 13.75
α xf 0.042 M xf 10.31
11.60 4.6 1.26
S5
α ys M ys
α yf 0.034 M yf 8.35
α xs M xs
α xf 0.038 M xf 15.31
24 June 2008 35
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
α xs 0.077
M xs
14.91
α xf M xf
0.058 11.23
10.0 4.4 1.32
S9 α ys M ys
α yf M yf
0.044 8.52
α xs 0.057 M xs 8.54
α xf M xf
0.043 6.54
16.65 3.0 1.0
S10 α ys M ys
α yf 0.044 M yf 6.59
24 June 2008 36
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
the supports with out further field moment adjustment. moments are balance based
j) Method-2: if ∆M sup > 20% M l arg e , moments are balance based on the stiffness of the slab and
( M r − M st )
%∆M = *100
Mr
Table 4.8, Identification method of adjustment & adjusted value
Axis Slab Mr M st %DM Method of Adjustment value for
adjustment Mr M st
F-F S1&S3 4.39 3.0 31.66 II 4.03 4.03
E-E S2&S5 16.76 13.75 17.96 I 15.26 15.26
S3&S6 11.45 4.39 60.63 11.15 11.15
S4&S7 18.83 18.14 3.66 I 18.49 18.49
D-D S5&S10 13.75 8.54 37.89 II 11.327 11.327
C-C S7&S9 18.14 14.91 17.81 I 16.53 16.53
3-3 S2&S3 13.73 7.69 43.99 II 11.96 11.96
4-4 S3&S4 15.42 7.69 50.13 II 13.155 13.155
For method II
B/n slab S1&S3
24 June 2008 37
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
5.2 1.35
S3 4.39 3.0
4 EI
∆M 1.39 D fs = 5 .2 = 0.257
DF 0.257 0.743 4 EI + 4 EI
5 .2 1.35
-0.358 -1.0326
Madjusted 4.03 4.03
Lx=5.2
Ly=5.8
24 June 2008 38
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Ly=5.8m
Lx=5.2m
For panel S3
Ly Lx = 1.12 Cx1 = 0.32 , CY 1 = 0.372
Lx=5.2
Ly=5.8
Lx=5.2m
Ly=5.8m
24 June 2008 39
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
M max
d>
0.8 f cd ρ m(1 − 0.4 ρ m)
18.49*106
d> , d > 68.6mm
0.8*1000*11.17 *0.0225* 25.3(1 − 0.4*0.0225* 25.3)
Width is take the unit width = 1000mm, Over all depth = 150mm, and main reinforcement (at
support, short span direction and longer span direction Use Φ 10
24 June 2008 40
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
A, at support: use effective depth (d) = 130mm, minimum steel area required ( Amin )
B, for panels in shorter direction: use d = 130mm, Amin = 216.67mm2 & S max = 300
C, for panels in longer direction: use d =120mm, Amin =200mm2 and S max = 300mm
4M d
ρ = 0.5(C1 ± C12 − , where: C1 =0.087 and C2 =3003
C2bd 2
1000as
As = ρ bd & S = , then compare with S max = 300mm
As
MOMENT STEEL
EFFECTIVE STEEL AREA SPACI
DEPTH (d) RATIO AS NG PROVIDE
PANEL LOCATION VALUE (mm) r (mm2) (mm) ( mm)
SUPPORT B/n S1&S3 4.03 130 0.0009225 119.93 654.90 Φ 10 C/C300
SHORTER 1.69 130 0.0003845 49.98 1571.44 Φ 10 C/C300
S1 SPAN LONGER 0 120 Φ 8 C/C300
B/n S2&S5 15.26 130 0.0036056 468.73 167.56 Φ 10 C/C160
SUPPORT B/n S2&S3 11.96 130 0.0027988 363.84 215.86 Φ 10 C/C210
SHORTER 15.64 130 0.0036995 480.94 163.31 Φ 10 C/C160
S2 SPAN LONGER 12.9 120 0.0035759 429.10 183.03 Φ 10 C/C180
S3 SUPPORT B/n S3&S6 11.15 130 0.0026032 338.42 232.08 Φ 10 C/C230
24 June 2008 41
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Note; the effective depth, over all depth & loading is similar with the coefficient method. So, it is
better to take the previous calculated depth& loading for the strip method.
24 June 2008 42
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
I. Loading
Table 4.2.1, Loading
Panel S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10
Load
Designation W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10
Design load 13.22 10.8 13.41 10.8 11.60 13.20 11.98 13.20 10.00 16.65
II. Analysis
The analysis is by taking so many strips in the slab, using Hillerborg simplified equation,
given by;
∂2M x ∂2M y
= − Kq & = (1 − K )q
∂x 2 ∂y 2
Where; k=the proportion of the load q taken by the strip in the X-direction & (1-k) in
the Y-direction
The value of k ranges from 0 to1 for slabs with no openings & for one-way slab, k=1
Fig.4.2.1
24 June 2008 43
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
i) Axis 2-2
We can choose the max. Moment is at a distance of α b from the pin support.
From the right section; RL (2-2) = q α b ………. (Eq-1) and
q (α b) 2 q (α b) 2
M xf ,max = q (α b) −2
= ….. (Eq-2), from left section;
2 2
q (b − α b) qb 2 (1 − 2α b + (α b) 2 ) q (α b) 2 qb 2 (1 − 2α )
M xs + M xf = , M xs = − = …..(Eq-3)
2 2 2 2
M xs 1 − 2α
Taking the ratio of M xs & M xf then =
M xf α2
Note; from Hillerborg, the support moments should be about 1.5 to2.5 times the span moment
M xs 1 − 2α
( M xf ) in the same strip. We take the ratio to be 2, then = = 2 , implies, α =0.366,
M xf α2
24 June 2008 44
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
α bw2 αb w2 (α b / 2) 2 w2 (α b) 2
From the right section; M xf = − − =
2 2 4 16
w2b 2 (1 − α ) 2 w2 (α b) 2
From the left section; M xs = −
16 16
w2α b b(1 − α )
Reaction; RL = and RR =
4 4
Note; for one way slab, we consider the load dispersion is to the shorter direction, and we
analyze as unit width of beam. Example; slab one. Cantilever slab are treated by introducing
strong bands at their end edges, but for this project; since the cantilever is one way. So, we have
considered as cantilever beam. Example; S8 & S6
Analysis for the other slabs is as follow in tabular form
RL 10.277 M xs 9.783
B-B 2.6 RR 17.802 M xf 4.89
1-1., 3-3. RL 5.364 M xs 2.86
A-A,C-C 0.8 RR 5.364 M xf 1.431
RL 10.728 M xs 5.72
S3 2-2. 1.6 RR 10.728 M xf 2.862
RL 21.456 M xs 11.443
B-B 3.6 RR 21.456 M xf 5.721
RL 8.46 M xs 4.11
1-1. 1.15 RR 4.88 M xf 2.05
RL 26.68 M xs 30.68
2-2. 3.5 RR 26.68 M xf 17.26
RL 6.67 M xs 5.1
S5 3-3. 1.15 RR 6.67 M xf 2.55
RL 488 M xs 0
A-A 1.15 RR 8.46 M xf 7.66
RL 13.34 M xs 0
B-B 2.3 RR 13.34 M xf 15.3
RL 4.88 M xs 4.11
C-C 115 RR 8.46 M xf 2.05
S6,S8 1 R 17.16 M xs 11.154
RL 15.574 M xs 8.39
1-1. 1.85 RR 15.574 M xf 4.2
RL 17.97 M xs 17.97
2-2. 2.9 RR 17.97 M xf 8.98
S7 RL 15.574 M xs 8.39
3-3. 1.05 RR 15.574 M xf 4.2
RL 11.01 M xs 6.75
A-A 1.3 RR 6.36 M xf 3.37
RL 34.74 M xs
B-B 3.4 RR 34.74 M xf 24.37
RL 11.01 M xs 6.75
C-C 1.3 RR 6.36 M xf 3.37
1-1. 1.1 RL 7 M xs 3.24
24 June 2008 46
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
RR 4.03 M xf 1.62
RL 27.5 M xs 24.2
2-2. 3.6 RR 16.5 M xf 13.6
RL 7 M xs 3.024
S9 3-3. 1.1 RR 4.03 M xf 1.62
RL 5.5 M xs
A-A 0.8 RR 5.5 M xf 4.5
RL 11 M xs
B-B 2.2 RR 11 M xf 9
RL 5.5 M xs
C-C 1.4 RR 5.5 M xf 4.5
1-1. & RL 15.61 M xs 9.37
S10 A-A 1.4 RR 9.37 M xf 5.26
24 June 2008 47
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Joint D B
Member ED DE DB BD BA AB
S.F 1/5.2 1/5.2 39453 39453 1/4.4 1/4.4
DF 1 0.54 0.46 0.42 0.58 1
FEM 0 39.13 -17.97 17.97 -24.2 0
21.16 16.23
BM -11.43 -9.734 2.62 3.613
COM 0 1.31 -4.87
1.31 4.87
BM -0.707 -0.6026 2.045 2.82
COM 0 1.0225 -0.3013
BM -0.552 -0.47035 0.1265 0.175
COM 0.06325 -0.235
BM 0.034155 -0.0291 0.0987 0.1363
COM 0.01494 -0.01455
Final
moment 0 26.41 -26.41 17.5 -17.5
Joint E D B A
Member ED DE DB BD BA AB
S.F 1/5.2 1/5.2 6-Jan 6-Jan 1/4.4 1/4.4
D.F 1 0.54 0.46 0.42 0.58 1
FEM 0 4.89 -8.39 8.39 -3.24 0
BM 1.89 1.61 -2.163 -2.987
COM -1.0815 0.805
BM 0.584 0.4975 -0.338 -0.467
COM -0.169 0.249
BM 0.09126 0.0777 -0.1045 -0.1445
COM -0.0522 0.0389
F.M 0 7.45 -7.45 6.87 -6.87 0
24 June 2008 48
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
For span DB
24 June 2008 49
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
The same process with the above procedure the adjusted moment, reaction with reinforcement on
each strip is done as shown below table.
2-2. 3.2 RL 21.06 Mxs 28.24 130 0.00695 903.52 86.88 ∅10 C/C80
RR 35.4 Mxf 20.45 130 0.004909 638.11 123.02 ∅10C/C120
S2, 1-1.&C-C 0.95 RL 5.1385 Mxs 3.98 130 0.000911 118.42 662.88 ∅10C/C300
3-3.&A-A 1.65 RR 8.9 Mxf 3.35 130 0.000765 99.51 788.87 ∅10C/C300
S4
B-B 2.6 RL 10.277 Mxs 10.51 130 0.002449 318.41 246.54 ∅10C/C240
RR 17.802 Mxf 4.89 130 0.001122 145.86 538.20 ∅10C/C300
1-1., 3-3. 0.8 RL 5.364 Mxs,L 2.94 130 0.000671 87.24 899.87 ∅10C/C300
A-A,C-C RR 5.364 Mxf 1.43 130 0.000325 42.26 1857.49 ∅10C/C300
S3
2-2. 1.6 RL 10.728 Mxs 11.15 130 0.002603 338.42 231.96 ∅10C/C230
RR 10.728 Mxf 3.00 130 0.000685 89.03 881.73 ∅10C/C300
B-B 3.6 RL 21.456 Mxs 10.51 130 0.002449 318.41 246.54 ∅10C/C240
24 June 2008 50
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
1-1. 1.85 RL 15.574 Mxs,L 6.87 130 0.001585 206.03 381.02 ∅10C/C300
RR 15.574 Mxf 5.20 130 0.001194 155.23 505.69 ∅10C/C300
2-2. 2.9 RL 17.97 Mxs 26.41 130 0.006461 839.97 93.46 ∅10 C/C90
RR 17.97 Mxf 6.38 130 0.00147 191.07 410.83 ∅10C/C300
3-3. 1.05 RL 15.574 Mxs 6.87 130 0.001585 206.03 381.02 ∅10C/C300
S7
RR 15.574 Mxf 5.20 130 0.001194 155.23 505.69 ∅10C/C300
A-A 1.3 RL 11.01 Mxs 6.75 130 0.001557 202.36 387.92 ∅10C/C300
RR 6.36 Mxf 3.37 130 0.00077 100.11 784.15 ∅10C/C300
C-C 1.3 RL 11.01 Mxs 6.75 130 0.001557 202.36 387.92 ∅10C/C300
RR 6.36 Mxf 3.37 130 0.00077 100.11 784.15 ∅10C/C300
2-2. 3.6 RL 27.5 Mxs 17.50 130 0.004163 541.14 145.06 ∅10C/C140
S9 RR 16.5 Mxf 28.00 130 0.006887 895.27 87.68 ∅10 C/C80
24 June 2008 51
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
1-1. & 1.4 RL 15.61 Mxs 9.37 130 0.002177 282.96 277.42 ∅10C/C270
S10 A-A RR 9.37 Mxf 5.26 130 0.001208 157.05 499.84 ∅10C/C300
Note: Detail of reinforcement of each strip is attached on the last page of this report.
24 June 2008 52
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 53
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
D-E 14.727
1-1
E-F 13.433
2-2 B-D 13.786
B-D 13.786
D-E 14.727
3-3
E-F 35.764
A-C 12.144
C-E 23.013
4-4
E-F 36.242
A-C 12.144
C-E 15.342
5-5
E-F 15.087
4-5 14.168
A-A
3-
B-B 2-3 13.786
C-C 4-5 44.467
2-3
D-D
4-5 48.548
3-4 13.031
E-E
1-3 48.353
4-5 16.828
3-4 24.185
F-F
1-3 14.983
G-G 3-4 6.693
24 June 2008 54
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Sd (T1) = β α γ, Where α =the ratio of the design bed rock acceleration to acceleration of
gravity and is given by; α = α oI, Where α o=the bed rock acceleration ratio for the site and
depends on the seismic zone as given in table 1.1 of EBCS -8, 1995(10)
Zone 4 3 2 1
αo 0.1 0.07 0.05 0.03
Since our building is zone -4 the value of αo =0.1
I=the important factor of the building, from table 2.4 EBCS -8, 95 Since our building is
apartment building under category –II of EBCS-8;therefore,I=1.2,where α = α oI=0.1*1.2=0.12
β =the design response factor for the site which is given
T1=C1H3/4=0.075*(21.65)3/4=0.753 and
γ=γoKDKRKW ≤ 0.7Where γ=behavior factor to account for energy dissipation capacity
γo=basic type of behavior factor which depends on the structural type table 3.2 EBCS-8, 95
γo=0.2 since it is our building frame system, KD=factor reflecting the ductility class
35-38, DC”M”=>KD=1.5, KR=factors reflecting the structural regularity in elevation 38.since our
building is a regular structure, KR=1.0&KW=Factor reflecting the prevailing mode in structural
systems with walls 38.since our building is frame KW=1.0
γ=0.2*1.5*1.0*1=0.3
Sd (T1) =γ β α =0.3*1.45*.12=0.0522, Then
Fb=Sd (T1) W=0.0522W Where W=11035.522kN
Fb=11035.522*0.0522=576.054KN
B) Distribution of base shear over height of the building
The base shear force shall be distributed over the height of a structure, at each floor level as
follow.
24 June 2008 55
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table4.3.2.5 Total mass & Center Mass of Column (1st, 2nd, 3rd) Floors
Location Thickness
Axis section Length(m) Width(m) (m) Weight(KN) X(m) Y(m) WX WY
1-3 E-E 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 0 0 0 0
3-3 E-E 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 5.8 0 53.7138 0
4-4 E-E 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 9 0 83.349 0
6-6 E-E 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 14.8 0 100.699 0
1-1 D-D 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 0 5.2 0 35.3808
3-3 D-D 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 5.8 5.2 53.7138 48.1572
4-4 D-D 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 9 5.2 83.349 48.1572
6-6 D-D 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 14.8 5.2 100.699 35.3808
1-1 C'-C' 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 0 9.8 0 66.6792
2-2 C'-C' 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 4.4 9.8 40.7484 90.7578
3-3 B-B 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 5.8 11.2 53.7138 103.723
4-4 B-B 3.15 0.35 0.35 9.261 9 11.2 83.349 103.723
6-6 B-B 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 14.8 11.2 100.699 76.2048
3-3 A-A 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 5.8 15.6 39.4632 106.142
4-4 A-A 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 9 15.6 61.236 106.142
6-6 A-A 3.15 0.3 0.3 6.804 14.8 15.6 100.699 106.142
S10 * 3.15 3.14 0.0225 5.34114 2.8 12.7 14.9552 67.8325
S1 * 3.15 3.14 0.0225 5.34114 5.8 -1.35 30.9786 -7.2105
S1 * 3.15 3.14 0.0225 5.34114 5.8 -1.35 30.9786 -7.2105
Sum 142.0864 970.388 987.213
24 June 2008 58
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table4.3.2.7 Total mass & Center Mass of Beam (1st, 2nd, 3rd) Floors
Location
axis section Length Width Thickness Weight X Y WX WY
1-2 E-E 5.5 0.25 0.35 11.55 2.75 0 31.7625 0
3-4 E-E 2.85 0.25 0.35 5.985 7.4 0 44.289 0
4-6 E-E 5.5 0.25 0.35 11.55 11.9 0 137.445 0
1-2 D-D 5.5 0.25 0.35 11.55 2.75 5.2 31.7625 60.06
3-4 D-D 2.85 0.25 0.35 5.985 7.4 5.2 44.289 31.122
4-6 D-D 5.5 0.25 0.35 11.55 11.9 5.2 137.445 60.06
1-2 C'-C' 4.1 0.25 0.35 8.61 2.05 9.8 17.6505 84.378
2-3 C'-B 2 0.25 0.35 4.2 5.1 10.5 21.42 44.1
3-4 B-B 2.85 0.25 0.35 5.985 7.4 11.2 44.289 67.032
4-6 B-B 5.5 0.25 0.35 11.55 11.9 11.2 137.445 129.36
3-4 A-A 2.9 0.25 0.35 6.09 7.4 15.6 45.066 95.004
4-6 A-A 5.5 0.25 0.35 11.55 11.9 15.6 137.445 180.18
1-1 E-D 4.9 0.25 0.35 10.29 0 2.6 0 26.754
1-1 D-C' 4.3 0.25 0.35 9.03 0 7.5 0 67.725
3-3 E-D 4.9 0.25 0.35 10.29 5.8 2.6 59.682 26.754
3-3 D-B 5.65 0.25 0.35 11.865 5.8 8.2 68.817 97.293
3-3 B-A 4.1 0.25 0.35 8.61 5.8 13.4 49.938 115.374
4-4 E-D 4.9 0.25 0.35 10.29 9 2.6 92.61 26.754
4-4 D-B 5.65 0.25 0.35 11.865 9 8.2 106.785 97.293
24 June 2008 59
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table4.3.2.9 Total mass & Center Mass of Partition Wall (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th) Floor
Location Length Width Height U.W Weight X Y WX WY
E-E 5.5 0.2 2.8 14 43.12 2.75 0 118.58 0
5.5 0.2 2.8 14 43.12 11.2 0 480.79 0
D-D 5.5 0.2 2.8 14 43.12 2.75 5.2 118.58 224.22
3.4 0.2 2.8 14 26.656 10.7 5.2 285.22 138.61
C-C 4.2 0.2 3.15 14 37.044 10.6 9.2 392.67 340.8
4.15 0.2 2.8 14 32.536 2.2 9.8 71.579 318.85
B-B 5.5 0.1 2.8 14 21.56 12.1 11.2 260.34 241.47
1.35 0.2 2.8 14 10.584 5.1 11.2 53.978 118.54
A-A 5.5 0.2 2.8 14 43.12 11.2 15.6 480.79 672.67
1.-1. 4.9 0.2 2.8 14 38.416 0 2.6 0 99.882
4.3 0.2 2.8 14 33.712 0 7.35 0 247.78
2.-2. 1.15 0.2 2.8 14 9.016 4.4 10.53 39.67 94.893
3.-3. 4.1 0.2 2.8 14 32.144 5.8 13.4 186.44 430.73
4.-4. 4.1 0.2 2.8 14 32.144 9 13.4 289.3 430.73
5.-5. 2.65 0.2 3.15 14 23.373 10.4 6.55 243.08 153.09
24 June 2008 60
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 61
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 62
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table4.3.2.15 Total mass & Center Mass of for the Last Floor Column
Location
axis section Length Width Thickness Weight X Y WX WY
D-D 3.15 0.25 0.25 4.725 5.8 5.2 27.41 24.57
3'-3' B-B 3.15 0.25 0.25 4.725 5.8 11.2 27.41 52.92
A-A 3.15 0.25 0.25 4.725 5.8 15.6 27.41 73.71
D-D 3.15 0.25 0.25 4.725 9 5.2 42.53 24.57
4'-4' B-B 3.15 0.25 0.25 4.725 9 11.2 42.53 52.92
A-A 3.15 0.25 0.25 4.725 9 15.6 42.53 73.71
∑ = 28.35 209.8 302.4
24 June 2008 63
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 64
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Since our building geometry is almost square we have select as square column for initial
assumption as 30cmx30cm for exterior
35cmx35cm for interior b=h
25cmx25cm for 4th floor
Then Kxc= Kyc= h4/12L
• For ground floor (L=3.6m)
Beam Stiffness
Beam stiffness can be calculated as
24 June 2008 65
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Using tabular form, calculations of k, α and D-values of the columns in each frame in the X-
Direction can be calculated.
Dixc= α kixc and Diyc= α kiyc
α is a coefficient which depends on the nature of connection of the column considered on its
top and bottom ends in addition to the stiffness of the beams connected to it. And it is calculated
as.
Location
Level Beam Width(m) Depth(m) Length(m) Kb(m3)
1st 1'-3' 0.25 0.5 5.8 0.0008681
2nd 4'-6'
3rd 1-3' 0.25 0.5 3 0.000449
& 3'-4 0.25 0.5 3.2 0.0008138
4th E-F 0.25 0.5 1.35 0.001929
D-E 0.25 0.5 5.2 0.0005008
C-D 0.25 0.5 4.6 0.0005661
B-D 0.25 0.5 6 0.000434
A'-C 0.25 0.5 3 0.0008681
A-B 0.25 0.5 4.4 0.0005919
G 1'-3' 0.3 0.4 5.8 0.0002759
R 4'-6'
A 1-3' 0.3 0.4 3 0.0005333
D 3'-4 0.3 0.4 3.2 0.0005
E E-F 0.3 0.4 1.35 0.0011852
D-E 0.3 0.4 5.2 0.0003077
B C-D 0.3 0.4 4.6 0.0003478
E B-D 0.3 0.4 6 0.0002667
A A'-C 0.3 0.4 3 0.0005333
M A-B 0.3 0.4 4.4 0.0003636
1'-3' 0.25 0.25 5.8 5.61E-05
T 4'-6' 0
I 1-3' 0.25 0.25 3 0.0001085
24 June 2008 66
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 69
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 70
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 71
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Eccentricities (ex, ey): the difference between the center of mass and center of stiffness of the
ex = Xs-Xm
ey = Ys-Ym
٭Accidental eccentricity, eli=+ 0.05Li where Li is the length of the frame.
The design eccentricity or etot = e + eli
( Dix )e y ,tot
α ix = 1 + * yi Note: since ex,t ot can be ex1 or ex2 and ey,tot can be ey1or ey2
Jr
due to
( Diy )e x ,tot
α iy = 1 + * xi Accidental eccentricity, α y= α y1or α y2 and αx=
Jr
α x1 or α x2.
Where Jr=Jx+Jy
J x = ∑ ( Dix y i ) = ∑ ( Dix y i2 ) − (∑ Dix ) y s2
2
x i = x s − xi , y i = y s − yi
24 June 2008 72
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table4.3.2.25eccentricity determination
eya=0.0Ly=0.78
exa=0.05Lx=0.74 or -0.78
or -0.75 Accidental
Actual eccentricities eccentricities
ex ey
Level Xs Xm Ys Ym Xs-Xm Ys-Ym exa eya
8.51
20.1 7.4 7.798 10.667 5 -0.398 2.152
7.44
16.8 7.704 8.252 6.267 6 -0.548 -1.178
7.21
13.5 7.763 8.007 6.445 1 -0.244 -0.765
7.21
10.2 7.763 8.007 6.445 1 -0.244 -0.765
7.22
6.9 7.763 7.890 6.445 3 -0.127 -0.777
7.29
3.6 7.71 7.933 5.743 0 -0.222 -1.547
10.3
0 7.768 7.400 6.637 75 0.368 -3.738
24 June 2008 73
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Jx= 0.09
A-A -9.15 0 0.04 0.14 -1.55 0.01 -9.16 1.04
10.2
B-B -4.75 0 0.01 0.14 -1.55 0.01 -4.76 1.02
D-D 1.25 0 0 0.14 -1.55 0.01 1.25 0.99
E-E 6.45 0 0.02 0.14 -1.55 0.01 6.45 0.96
F-F 7.8 0 0.02 0.14 -1.55 0.01 7.8 0.98
Jx= 0.09
A-A -9.15 0 0.04 0.05 -1.56 0 -9.16 1.12
6.9
B-B -4.75 0 0.01 0.05 -1.56 0 -4.76 1.06
D-D 1.25 0 0 0.05 -1.56 0 1.25 0.98
E-E 6.45 0 0.02 0.05 -1.56 0 6.45 0.9
F-F 7.8 0 0.02 0.05 -1.56 0 7.8 0.94
Jx= 0.09
A-A -9.86 0 0.04 0.13 -2.33 -0.77 -9.86 1.07
3.6
B-B -5.46 0 0.01 0.13 -2.33 -0.77 -5.46 1.04
D-D 0.54 0 0 0.13 -2.33 -0.77 0.54 1
E-E 5.74 0 0.02 0.13 -2.33 -0.77 5.74 0.93
F-F 7.09 0 0.01 0.13 -2.33 -0.77 7.09 0.97
Jx= 0.08
A-A -8.96 0 0.02 0.11 -4.52 -2.96 -8.96 1.11
0
B-B -4.56 0 0.01 0.11 -4.52 -2.96 -4.56 1.11
D-D 1.44 0 0 0.11 -4.52 -2.96 1.44 0.97
E-E 6.64 0 0.02 0.11 -4.52 -2.96 6.64 0.86
F-F 7.99 0 0.01 0.11 -4.52 -2.96 7.99 0.96
x=0.06982
Table4.3.2.27
Level Axis Xs-Xi Diy Diy(Xs-Xs)2 edx,1 edx,2 Xi αy1 αy2 αx,max
1 7.4 0 0 0.005 -1.14 0.3418 7.4 1 1 1
20.1 3 1.6 0 5.00E-04 0.005 -1.14 0.3418 1.6 0.9248 1.023 1.02
4 -1.6 0 5.00E-04 0.005 -1.14 0.3418 -1.6 1.0752 0.977 1.08
6 -7.4 0 0 0.005 -1.14 0.3418 -7.4 1 1 1
Jy= 0.001
1 7.7 0 0.011 0.069 -1.29 0.1916 7.7 0.9742 1.004 1
16.8 3 1.9 0 0.001 0.069 -1.29 0.1916 1.9 0.9884 1.002 1
4 -1.3 0 6.00E-04 0.069 -1.29 0.1916 -1.3 1.0079 0.999 1.01
6 -7.1 0 0.011 0.069 -1.29 0.1916 -7.1 1.0295 0.996 1.03
Jy= 0.024
1 7.76 0 0.023 0.054 -0.98 0.4957 7.76 0.9465 1.027 1.03
13.5 3 1.96 0 0.004 0.054 -0.98 0.4957 1.96 0.9641 1.018 1.02
4 -1.2 0 0.002 0.054 -0.98 0.4957 -1.2 1.0226 0.989 1.02
6 -7 0 0.026 0.054 -0.98 0.4957 -7 1.0668 0.966 1.07
Jy= 0.054
1 7.76 0 0.023 0.14 -0.98 0.613 7.76 0.9794 1.013 1.01
10.2 3 1.96 0 0.004 0.14 -0.98 0.613 1.96 0.9862 1.009 1.01
4 -1.2 0 0.002 0.14 -0.98 0.613 -1.2 1.0087 0.995 1.01
6 -7 0 0.026 0.14 -0.98 0.613 -15 1.0542 0.966 1.05
Jy=0.054
24 June 2008 74
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Table4.3.2.28
Level Axis Qi αmax Level Axis Qi αmax
A-A 15.05 0.902 1 0 1
B-B 15.05 0.902 3 22.57 1.0226
D-D 15.05 0.902 4 22.57 1.0752
E-E 0 1 6 0 1
F-F 0 1 20.1 1 25.65 1.0038
A-A 30.98 1.054 3 46.48 1.0017
20.1 B-B 27.51 1.025 4 46.48 1.0079
D-D 34.2 0.992 6 31.83 1.0295
E-E 38.2 0.955 16.8 1 18.27 1.027
F-F 19.55 0.972 3 48.46 1.0181
A-A 28.96 1.115 4 48.46 1.0226
16.8 B-B 29.09 1.06 6 25.16 1.0668
D-D 29.09 1 13.5 1 14.46 1.0128
E-E 35.28 1 3 38.36 1.0086
F-F 17.93 0.97 4 38.36 1.0087
A-A 22.92 1.044 6 19.91 1.0542
13.5 B-B 23.03 1.023 10.2 1 10.4 1.0282
D-D 23.03 1 3 27.59 1.0189
E-E 27.93 1 4 27.59 1.0221
F-F 14.19 1 6 14.32 1.0653
A-A 16.48 1.116 6.9 1 6.475 1.0105
10.2 B-B 16.56 1.06 3 16.07 1.0064
D-D 16.56 1 4 16.07 1.0081
E-E 20.08 1 6 8.449 1.0233
F-F 10.21 1 3.6 1 0.74 1.0235
A-A 8.752 1.068 3 1.619 1.013
6.9 B-B 8.258 1.036 4 1.619 1.0027
3.6 D-D 9.381 0.999 0 6 0.987 1.0095
E-E 15.12 0.977
F-F 5.552 0.99
A-A 0.713 1.111
24 June 2008 75
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 76
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Chapter 5
STAIR CASE DSIGEN
Fig.5.1
Fig.5.2
24 June 2008 77
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
III) ANALYSIS
Fig.5.3
∑MB =0;
RA= (12.7*(3+0.7) +16.79*32/2-12.94)/4.4=29.18KN & RB=56.05KN
M(x) = -17.78(X-0.7)-16.79(X-1.4)2/2+29.18X
From maximum moment at span;
dM(x)/dx =0 then 11.4-16.79(X-1.4) =0, 34.9-16.79X=0, X=2.079m
Mmax(X=2.079), span, M (2.079) =32.276KNm
There fore;-Support moment at B, Ms=12.94KNm
-span moment at X=2.079m from A, Mf=32.276KNm
24 June 2008 79
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
V) REINFORCEMENT
¾ Effective depth, d=160mm
¾ Minimum steel ratio, ρmin=0,5/fy=0.5/300=0.0017
¾ Minimum steel area, Asmin= ρminbd=0.0017*1000*160=272mm2
¾ ρ=1/2(c1±√(c12-4Md/(c2bd2))
Where; c1=0.087, c2=3003
¾ Spacing, S<= 2D=2*180=360mm
300mm
Use, Smax=300mm
a) Reinforcement at support
ρ=1/2(0.087±√ (0.0872-4*12.94*106/ (3003*1000*1602))
ρ=1/2(0.087±0.083)
ρ=0.00198> ρmin or ρ=0.085> ρmin but ρ>0.75 ρb
Use ρ=0.00198
¾ As= ρbd=0.00198*1000*160=316.8mm2> Asmin=272mm2
¾ Spacing, S=bas/As=1000*78.54/316.8=247.92mm
Use, S=240mm, i.e.Ф10 C/C 240mm
b) Reinforcement at span
o Long direction
ρ=1/2(0.087±√ (0.0872-4*32.276*106/ (3003*1000*1602)
ρ=0.00513> ρmin or ρ=0.08185>0.75 ρb=0.0225
Use ρ=0.00513
As= ρbd=0.00513*1000*160=820.8mm2
S=bas/As=1000*78.54/820.8=95.69mm
24 June 2008 80
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Fig.5.4
24 June 2008 81
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Chapter 6
FRAME ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
6.0 Beam Analysis and Design
6.0.1 Beam design and analysis for flexure
Beams are designed primarily flexural. Further more it is essential to check and design the beam
sections for torsion and shear. But in our analysis output the torsion is very small(insignificant);
so no need of to check for torsion effect and our code recommends that beams are not designed
for axial forces. In our case beams are grouped after the design of reinforcement using Excel
following the following procedure;
Design information:;
Material data; Concrete C-25, Steel S-300, class-I works
Design constants; - fcd=11.33Mpa, fyd =260.87, m=24.33, ρ b=0.0253, C1=0.0869, C2=3003
Preliminary section;
For tie beam=250mmX250mm,
For intermediate beam=250mmX500mm
For grade =300mmX500m
A. Check Depth required for deflection
0.6 f yk Le
d ≥ { 0 .4 + }
400 β a ß = 28 (interior span) & ß =24 (exterior beams)
a a
fyk= 300Mpa
Looking the worst condition which is on the top tie beam of an exterior beam having length
(Le = 5800mm).
d≥ (0.4+0.6*300/400)*5800/24=205.42mm < 250mm-d’
= 205.42mm<250-43=207mm……..Ok!!
B. Checking the section for flexure
From the analysis result the support moments are much larger than the span moment, and then
we have check for the section whether it is single or double reinforced taking the support
moment. And also we have check for the section T-section for interior beams, and Γ- section for
exterior beams, or rectangular section.
24 June 2008 82
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
If M1 <Msd the section should have to be doubly reinforced, if not singly. For doubly
reinforcement, let M2 is the moment resisted by steel under compression (As’) and partial steel
under tension (As2);
Where: M2 =Msd-M1 and As2= M2 /(fyd*(d-d’c)) where d’c=25+10+8=43
As1= ρ bd, then the total tensile steel (As) will be As=As1+As2 and As2 will be calculated.
As’=M2/ (fs’ (d-d’c)); where fs’=Xc (x-dc’)*Es/x and x= ρ md. For fs’ > fyd As’=As2.
Assuming double row, Using Ø20steel bars and stirrups Ø8
Then d’=25+8+1.5 *20=63mm for all beams except for top tie beams.
d’=25+8+10=43mm for top tie beam. And d=D-d’.
Taking design moment at each floor, we can check for singly or doubly reinforced using table as
shown below.
24 June 2008 83
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 85
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 86
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
ii) Check for T-section (at the interior) & Γ- section (at edge) or rectangular beam
For the span in addition to doubly or singly we have to check weather they are rectangular or
T-section (for interior beam), Г-section (for exterior beam). Using the following procedures
Where;
Therefore the total bottom reinforcement (As) is As, total= As1+ As2
Table 6.1.4 reinforcement at the span for Coefficient Method
level axis beam d(mm) b(mm) L(mm) bw+L/5 bw+L/10 C/C be(m) Mspan
F-F 3.-4. 259 300 3200 620 675 620 4.39
1-3. 259 300 5800 880 2600 880 17.88
E-E
3-4. 259 300 3200 940 3275 940 3
4-6. 259 300 5800 880 2600 880 17.88
z=0m 1-3. 259 300 5800 1460 4900 1460 5.74
D-D
3-4. 259 300 3200 940 3900 940 3.68
4-6. 259 300 5800 1460 5600 1460 5.59
AB 259 300 4400 740 2900 740 10
6-6.
BD 259 300 6000 900 2900 900 16.46
DE 259 300 5200 820 2900 820 19
AB 259 300 4400 1180 4500 1180 10.32
4-4. BD 259 300 6000 1500 4500 1500 6
DE 259 300 5200 1340 4500 1340 6.3
EF 259 300 1350 435 1600 435 3
F-F 3.-4. 359 250 3200 570 675 570 6.6
1-3. 359 250 5800 830 2600 830 38.36
E-E
3-4. 359 250 3200 890 3275 890 40
4-6. 359 250 5800 830 2600 830 41.5
Z=3.6 1-3. 359 250 5800 1410 4900 1410 104
to 13.5 D-D
3-4. 359 250 3200 890 3900 890 104
4-6. 359 250 5800 1410 5600 1410 103
AB 359 250 4400 690 2900 690 17
6-6.
BD 359 250 6000 850 2900 850 38.06
DE 359 250 5200 770 2900 770 26.4
AB 359 250 4400 1130 4500 1130 14
4-4. BD 359 250 6000 1450 4500 1450 38
DE 359 250 5200 1290 4500 1290 55
EF 359 250 1350 385 1600 385 12
Z=16.8 F-F 3.-4. 209 250 3200 570 675 570 6.6
1-3. 209 250 5800 830 2600 830 2
E-E
3-4. 209 250 3200 890 3275 890 10.3
4-6. 209 250 5800 830 2600 830 2
24 June 2008 88
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 89
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
level axis beam d(mm) b(mm) L(mm) bw+L/5 bw+L/10 C/C be(m) Mspan
F-F 3.-4. 259 300 3200 620 675 620 3.25
1-3. 259 300 5800 880 2600 880 17.22
E-E
3-4. 259 300 3200 940 3275 940 9
4-6. 259 300 5800 880 2600 880 12.88
z=0m 1-3. 259 300 5800 1460 4900 1460 8.17
D-D
3-4. 259 300 3200 940 3900 940 3
4-6. 259 300 5800 1460 5600 1460 13.12
AB 259 300 4400 740 2900 740 19.87
6-6.
BD 259 300 6000 900 2900 900 22.68
DE 259 300 5200 820 2900 820 19.71
AB 259 300 4400 1180 4500 1180 26
4-4. BD 259 300 6000 1500 4500 1500 6.59
DE 259 300 5200 1340 4500 1340 14.2
EF 259 300 1350 435 1600 435 11.3
z=3.6 F-F 3.-4. 359 250 3200 570 675 570 6.28
24 June 2008 90
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 91
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 92
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Design actions
Beam =46 @ z=13.5m , shear left (Vl) =114, shear right (Vr) =87.62, length=5.8m
a) Shear reinforcement
Now let’s compute the design shear at d distance from the face of the support
From similarity of triangle
3.3-0.45/3.3 = Vdl/ Vlef=114 -------- Vdl=98.9KN
2.5-0.45/2.5 = Vdr/87.62 -------- Vdr =71.19KN
Since Vdl=98.9KN < Vdr=382.39 --- the section is …….ok!
Location of VC
24 June 2008 93
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 94
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Z=3.6 x=1.91 to 3.3 x=0.96 to 1.91 x=0 to 0.96 x=0 to 0.96 x=0.96 to 1.51 x=1.51 to 2.5
to 5.8m
13.5m φ10 c|c120 φ8 c|c160 φ6 c|c160 φ6 c|c160 φ8 c|c200 φ10 c|c140
Z=16.5 x=1.88 to 2.8 x=0.92 to 1.88 x=0 to 0.92 x=0 to 0.92 x=0.92 to 2.2 x=2.2 to 3
to 5.8m
20.1m φ8 c|c170 φ8 c|c200 φ6 c|c150 φ6 c|c150 φ8 c|c170 φ10 c|c160
Level(
Length Max. spacing to the left Max. spacing to the right
m)
x=1.66 to 2.4 x=0.7 to 1.66 x=0 to 0.7 x=0 to 0.7 x=0.7 to 1.53 x=1.53 to 2
Z=0 4.4m
φ10 c|c140 φ8 c|c160 φ6 c|c180 φ6 c|c180 φ8 c|c300 φ10 c|c160
Z=3.6 x=1.91 to 3.3 x=0.96 to 1.91 x=0 to 0.96 x=0 to 0.96 x=0.96 to 1.51 x=1.51 to 2.5
to 5.8m
13.5m φ10 c|c130 φ8 c|c170 φ6 c|c170 φ6 c|c170 φ8 c|c250 φ10 c|c150
Z=16. x=1.88 to 2.8 x=0.92 to 1.88 x=0 to 0.92 x=0 to 0.92 x=0.92 to 2.2 x=2.2 to 3
5 to 5.8m
20.1m φ10 c|c140 φ8 c|c180 φ6 c|c180 φ6 c|c180 φ8 c|c200 φ8 c|c140
24 June 2008 95
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Design procedures:
Columns which are concentrically compression occur rarely and hence are subjected to
bending moment also the axial load capacity decreased when moment also present. The total
eccentricity to be used for the design of columns of constant X-section at critical section is;
ed,tot = ea+eo+e2 Where; ea ≥ {Le/300,20mm; initial eccentricity
eo=Md/Nsd; first order eccentricity (when equal eccentricity exists at both ends).
eo = 0.6 eo1 + eo2, eo=0.4 eo2 ⇒ higher value & eo1 and eo2 are the first eccentricity at the
ends, eo2 being positive and greater in magnitude than eo1.
e2 =K1Le2/10(1/r) ⇒ for isolated columns of non-sway frames
For non-sway frames; λ ≤50-25(M1/M2); where M1&M2 are the first order moment at the
ends, M2 being always positive and greater than M1 and Le is effective length (distance between
two consecutive points of contra flexure i.e. zero bending moment). According to EBCS-2, 1995,
the effective length for a reinforced concrete column in a give plane is determined.
24 June 2008 96
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
A frame may be classified as non-sway for a given load case, if it satisfies the criterion;
Ns/Ncr ≤ 0.1, where Nsd is the design value and Ncr is critical value for failure in a sway mode.
Le
= 1+ 0.8αm ≥ 1.15
L
K1 + K c K + Kc α +α2
α1 = α2 = 2 α = 1
K 11 + K 12 , K 21 + K 22 and m 2
Table 6.2.2 stiffness of beam and column
Beam h(cm) b(cm) L(cm) Ix ex. Iy ky Column
649 50 40 580 5000000 8620.69 3E+06 5517.241
1081 50 40 600 5000000 8333.333 3E+06 5333.333
1093 50 40 440 5000000 11363.64 3E+06 7272.727
cl,385 35 35 360 1500625 4168.403 2E+06 4168.403 C1
Beam
649 50 40 580 5000000 8620.69 3E+06 5517.241
651 50 30 580 3750000 6465.517 1E+06 2327.586
1083 50 30 600 3750000 6250 1E+06 2250
1095 50 30 440 3750000 8522.727 1E+06 3068.182
1081 50 40 600 5000000 8333.333 3E+06 5333.333
1093 50 30 440 3750000 8522.727 1E+06 3068.182
cl,386387 35 35 360 1500625 4168.403 2E+06 4168.403 C1
Beam C1
651 50 30 580 3750000 6465.517 1E+06 2327.586
653 50 30 580 3750000 6465.517 1E+06 2327.586
24 June 2008 97
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
24 June 2008 98
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
151 12500 12500 120 120.43 120.43 0.02 0.02 0.02 3.30 3.33
153 12500 12500 120 120.43 120.43 0.01 0.02 0.02 3.30 3.32
155 1302 12500 0 120.43 120.43 1.00 0.02 0.51 3.30 3.85
frame K11 K12 K31 K34 KA KB KC α1 α2 αm L Lex
277 15625 6466 0 0.00 2250.00 0.00 4909.10 0.32 1.00 0.66 1.70 2.03
279 15625 6466 15625 6465.50 2454.55 4909.10 2250.00 0.21 0.32 0.27 3.60 3.97
281 11719 6466 11719 6465.50 2454.55 2250.00 2454.50 0.27 0.26 0.26 3.30 3.63
283 11719 6466 11719 6465.50 2454.55 2454.50 2454.50 0.27 0.27 0.27 3.30 3.64
285 11719 6466 11719 6465.50 1183.71 2454.50 2454.50 0.20 0.27 0.24 3.30 3.60
287 1221 674 11719 6465.50 1183.71 2454.50 1183.70 1.25 0.20 0.73 3.30 4.08
288 1221 0 1221 673.49 0.00 1183.70 1183.70 0.97 1.25 1.11 3.30 4.53
frame K21 K22 K41 K42 KA KB KC α1 α2 αm L Ley
385 4168 0 0 0.00 4168.40 0.00 4168.40 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.70 2.43
386 6250 8523 8333 8333.30 4547.35 4168.40 4168.40 0.59 0.25 0.42 3.60 4.15
388 6250 8523 6250 8445.90 4547.35 4168.40 4547.30 0.62 0.31 0.46 3.30 3.86
390 6250 8523 6250 8522.70 4547.35 4547.30 4547.30 0.62 0.31 0.46 3.30 3.86
392 6250 8523 6250 8522.70 1183.71 4547.30 4547.30 0.39 0.31 0.35 3.30 3.73
394 651 888 6250 8522.70 0.00 4547.30 1183.70 0.77 0.08 0.43 3.30 3.79
145 16667 0 0 0.00 110.39 0.00 240.85 0.02 1.00 0.51 1.70 1.93
147 12500 0 16667 0.00 120.43 240.85 110.39 0.02 0.01 0.01 3.60 3.62
149 12500 0 12500 0.00 120.43 110.39 120.43 0.02 0.01 0.01 3.30 3.32
151 12500 0 12500 0.00 120.43 120.43 120.43 0.02 0.01 0.01 3.30 3.32
153 12500 0 12500 0.00 120.43 120.43 120.43 0.02 0.01 0.01 3.30 3.32
155 1302 0 12500 0.00 0.00 120.43 120.43 0.09 0.01 0.05 3.30 3.37
frame K21 K22 K41 K42 KA KB KC α1 α2 αm L Ley
277 9615 8333 0 0.00 2250.00 0.00 4909.10 0.40 1.00 0.70 1.70 2.05
279 7212 6250 9615 8333.30 2454.55 4909.10 2250.00 0.35 0.40 0.37 3.60 4.10
281 7212 6250 7212 6250.00 2454.55 2250.00 2454.50 0.37 0.35 0.36 3.30 3.74
283 7212 6250 7212 6250.00 2454.55 2454.50 2454.50 0.37 0.36 0.37 3.30 3.75
285 7212 6250 7212 6250.00 1183.71 2454.50 2454.50 0.27 0.36 0.32 3.30 3.69
287 751 651 7212 6250.00 1183.71 2454.50 1183.70 1.69 0.27 0.98 3.30 4.30
288 651 651 751.20 651.04 0.00 1183.70 1183.70 0.91 1.69 1.30 3.30 4.68
277 300 300 6.75E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 2050 5.90E+09 13.9 1.9 0.14 sway
279 300 300 6.75E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 4100 5.90E+09 3.46 1.85 0.53 sway
281 300 300 6.75E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 3740 5.90E+09 4.16 1.43 0.34 sway
283 300 300 6.75E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 3750 5.90E+09 4.14 1.01 0.25 sway
285 300 300 6.75E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 3700 4.89E+09 3.52 0.6 0.17 sway
287 300 300 6.75E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 4300 4.89E+09 2.61 0.19 0.07 non-sway
288 300 300 6.75E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 4700 4.89E+09 2.18 0.02 0.01 non-sway
λ ≤ 25 15 M1
and λ ≤ λ ≤ 50 − 25
υd M2
Where M1 and M2 are the first-order (calculated) moments at the ends, M2 being always positive
and greater in magnitude than M1,and M1being positive if member is bent in single curvature and
N sd
negative if bent in double curvature. υd =
f cd Ac
Table 6.2.6 Check for long or short column condition effects.
frame Iy Le A i λ condition
385 2E+06 243 1225 35 6.94 non-slender 151 39741 332 707 7.50 44.28 non-slender
387 2E+06 415 1225 35 11.86 non-slender 153 39741 332 707 7.50 44.28 non-slender
389 2E+06 386 1225 35 11.03 non-slender 155 39741 362 707 7.50 48.28 non-slender
391 2E+06 386 1225 35 11.03 non-slender 277 810000 205 900 30 6.83 non-slender
393 2E+06 373 1225 35 10.66 non-slender 279 810000 410 900 30 13.67 non-slender
395 390625 379 1225 17.86 21.22 non-slender 281 810000 374 900 30 12.47 non-slender
145 39741 193 707 7.50 25.74 non-slender 283 810000 375 900 30 12.50 non-slender
147 39741 362 707 7.50 48.28 non-slender 285 810000 370 900 30 12.33 non-slender
149 39741 332 707 7.50 44.28 non-slender 287 390625 430 625 25 17.20 non-slender
289 390625 470 625 25 18.80 non-slender
K1L2e
e2 = Where: Le is the effective buckling length of the column
10r
K1=λ/20-0.75 for 15 < λ < 35 and K1=1.0 for λ > 35
24 June 2008 103
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
frame M1x M2x M1y M2y σs M1x M2x M1y M2y Nsd eo1y eo2y eo1x eo2x
385 5.39 22.42 7.71 9.32 1.02 5.50 22.87 7.86 9.51 940.45 5.85 24.32 8.36 10.11
387 31.22 16.17 8.40 6.75 1.10 34.36 17.79 9.24 7.43 1078.95 6.85 16.49 8.57 6.88
389 48.60 51.19 11.90 11.06 1.10 53.32 56.16 13.06 12.13 841.77 7.85 66.72 15.51 14.42
391 48.14 48.20 14.17 13.42 1.08 52.10 52.17 15.34 14.53 609.82 8.85 85.55 25.15 23.82
393 54.54 51.62 13.34 14.03 1.05 57.04 53.99 13.95 14.67 376.72 9.85 143.32 37.04 38.95
395 12.25 36.66 38.74 25.34 1.03 12.66 37.89 40.04 26.19 146.60 10.85 258.49 273.20 178.67
145 3.13 0.73 5.53 5.06 1.04 3.24 0.76 5.73 5.24 390.15 11.85 1.94 14.69 13.44
147 4.15 2.91 19.94 11.42 1.13 4.69 3.29 22.52 12.90 363.28 12.85 9.05 62.00 35.51
149 5.65 4.87 24.37 24.57 1.08 6.10 5.26 26.33 26.54 280.02 13.85 18.79 94.02 94.79
151 6.54 6.00 27.08 26.56 1.07 7.00 6.42 28.99 28.43 194.16 14.85 33.08 149.30 146.42
153 7.54 7.12 27.63 25.95 1.04 7.82 7.39 28.66 26.92 106.38 15.85 69.43 269.40 253.06
155 5.86 6.21 9.58 20.05 1.01 5.91 6.26 9.66 20.21 19.32 16.85 323.96 499.80 1045.97
277 12.97 2.59 2.30 1.60 1.16 15.03 3.00 2.67 1.85 1897.59 17.85 1.58 1.40 0.98
279 26.97 10.42 2.58 2.90 1.33 35.96 13.89 3.44 3.87 1846.81 18.85 7.52 1.86 2.09
281 38.73 41.50 2.75 1.60 1.33 51.64 55.33 3.67 2.13 1427.36 19.85 38.77 2.57 1.49
283 34.81 34.80 3.65 2.84 1.32 46.09 46.08 4.83 3.76 1013.14 20.85 45.48 4.77 3.71
285 40.77 37.54 4.35 3.40 1.21 49.14 45.25 5.24 4.10 600.37 21.85 75.37 8.73 6.83
287 1.72 23.55 1.45 2.34 1.08 1.85 25.36 1.56 2.52 186.49 22.85 136.00 8.37 13.51
289 5.45 5.52 6.78 7.20 1.01 5.51 5.58 6.86 7.28 24.19 23.85 230.73 283.40 300.95
case -2 worst case
frame M1x M2x M2y σs M1x M2x M1y M2y Nsd eo1y eo2y eo1x eo2x
385 2.53 1 20.23 1.02 2.58 1.02 14.28 20.64 940.45 2.74 1.08 15.19 21.94
387 27.68 27.88 7.68 1.10 30.46 30.68 14.69 8.45 1078.95 28.23 28.44 13.62 7.83
389 28.61 27.79 16.06 1.10 31.39 30.49 17.73 17.62 841.77 37.29 36.22 21.06 20.93
391 26.43 25.48 17.54 1.08 28.61 27.58 19.68 18.98 609.82 46.91 45.22 32.27 31.13
393 22.96 21.92 17.33 1.05 24.01 22.93 19.75 18.12 376.72 63.75 60.86 52.42 48.10
395 14.21 15.92 13.79 1.03 14.69 16.46 6.49 14.26 146.60 100.19 112.25 44.28 97.25
145 2.23 2 50.71 1.04 2.31 2.07 26.45 52.55 390.15 5.92 5.31 67.78 134.69
147 20.24 8 83.33 1.13 22.86 9.04 86.66 94.12 363.28 62.93 24.87 238.50 259.10
149 29.07 31 70.21 1.08 31.41 33.49 77.68 75.85 280.02 112.15 119.60 277.40 270.87
151 26.11 26.08 61.43 1.07 27.95 27.91 68.45 65.75 194.16 143.94 143.77 352.50 338.65
153 30.58 28.15 48.65 1.04 31.72 29.20 53.99 50.47 106.38 298.21 274.51 507.60 474.43
155 1.34 17.71 33.9 1.01 1.35 17.85 37.10 34.17 19.32 69.91 923.90 1920.00 1768.50
277 4.07 4.11 12.7 1.16 4.72 4.76 13.56 14.72 1897.59 2.49 2.51 7.14 7.76
279 0.5 1 32.9 1.33 0.67 1.33 29.04 43.87 1846.81 0.36 0.72 15.72 23.75
281 23.77 12.54 53.56 1.33 31.69 16.72 66.72 71.41 1427.36 22.20 11.71 46.74 50.03
283 37 39.06 40.78 1.32 48.99 51.72 54.03 53.99 1013.14 48.35 51.05 53.33 53.29
285 36.77 36.8 31.4 1.21 44.32 44.36 38.39 37.85 600.37 73.83 73.89 63.95 63.04
287 17.97 39.34 20.36 1.08 19.35 42.37 9.54 21.93 186.49 103.78 227.21 51.17 117.58
289 9.39 11.71 6.7 1.01 9.50 11.84 13.83 6.78 24.19 392.49 489.47 571.80 280.05
283 48.35 51.05 53.33 53.29 49.97 20.42 49.97 53.31 53.31
285 73.83 73.89 63.95 63.04 73.86 29.55 73.86 63.41 63.41
287 103.78 227.21 51.17 117.58 177.83 90.88 177.83 91.01 91.01
289 392.49 489.47 571.81 280.05 450.68 195.79 450.68 396.76 396.76
289 62500 300 0.02 11.39 7.59 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.00
case--2
frame Ac(mm2) h(mm) Nsd*10^6 Msdx*10^6 Msdy*10^6 η µsdx µsdy ω
385 250000 350 0.94 20.45 36.90 0.34 0.02 0.04 0.10
387 202500 350 1.08 52.17 32.53 0.48 0.07 0.04 0.30
389 160000 350 0.84 47.69 34.50 0.47 0.08 0.06 0.30
24 June 2008 108
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
391 160000 350 0.61 40.19 31.46 0.34 0.06 0.05 0.28
393 160000 350 0.38 30.90 26.31 0.21 0.05 0.04 0.10
395 122500 350 0.15 18.68 14.08 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.05
Mad η µsd ω
145 90000 300 0.39 18.68 49.91 57.40 0.39 0.19 0.35
147 90000 300 0.36 9.97 98.40 113.16 0.36 0.38 0.90
149 90000 300 0.28 21.83 82.18 94.51 0.28 0.31 0.55
151 90000 300 0.19 38.26 70.71 81.32 0.19 0.27 0.60
153 90000 300 0.11 31.81 54.01 62.11 0.11 0.21 0.45
155 90000 300 0.02 32.34 35.73 41.08 0.02 0.14 0.40
η µsdx µsdy ω
277 202500 300 1.90 42.70 52.20 0.84 0.06 0.08 0.10
279 160000 300 1.85 38.00 74.87 1.03 0.07 0.14 0.50
281 90000 300 1.43 51.26 98.08 1.42 0.17 0.33 0.90
283 90000 300 1.01 70.89 74.27 1.01 0.24 0.25 0.80
285 90000 300 0.60 56.35 50.07 0.60 0.19 0.17 0.70
287 62500 300 0.19 36.89 20.70 0.27 0.18 0.10 0.55
289 62500 300 0.02 11.39 10.08 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.70
final reinforcements
No
frame Ac(mm2) w As, calc Amin Asmax As provided Ø bars provided
Lb, min = 18.96 φ ≤31.6 φ for compression bars (calculated for beams above)
For bars with 100% lapping at a given section where a1 = 1.4, (EBCS-2 Table 7.3), the required
lap length is computed by:
Lo≥a1* Lb,net ≥ Lo,min
Lo≥1.4*31.6 φ
frame (mm) (mm) (mm^4) bars bar (mm) (mm^4) Le(mm) Eie 10^6 10^6 ratio condition
385 500 350 3.65E+09 8 28 132 3.23E+07 2430 1.54E+10 25.7 1.04 0 non-sway
387 450 350 2.66E+09 8 28 132 3.23E+07 4150 1.30E+10 7.43 1.18 0.2 sway
389 400 350 1.87E+09 8 28 132 3.23E+07 3860 1.10E+10 7.31 0.92 0.1 sway
391 400 350 1.87E+09 8 24 134 2.44E+07 3860 9.47E+09 6.27 0.66 0.1 sway
393 400 350 1.87E+09 8 24 134 2.44E+07 3730 9.47E+09 6.71 0.4 0.1 non-sway
395 350 350 1.25E+09 8 20 136 1.74E+07 3790 6.56E+09 4.5 0.14 0 non-sway
145 300 300 4.00E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 1930 4.21E+09 11.1 0.37 0 non-sway
147 300 300 4.00E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 3620 4.21E+09 3.17 0.34 0.1 sway
149 300 300 4.00E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 3320 4.21E+09 3.77 0.26 0.1 non-sway
151 300 300 4.00E+08 8 20 111 1.16E+07 3320 3.30E+09 2.95 0.18 0.1 non-sway
153 300 300 4.00E+08 8 20 111 1.16E+07 3320 3.30E+09 2.95 0.1 0 non-sway
155 300 300 4.00E+08 8 20 111 1.16E+07 3620 3.30E+09 2.48 0.02 0 non-sway
277 450 300 6.80E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 2050 5.90E+09 13.9 1.29 0.1 non-sway
279 400 300 6.80E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 4100 5.90E+09 3.46 1.23 0.4 sway
281 350 300 6.80E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 3740 5.90E+09 4.16 1 0.2 sway
283 350 300 6.80E+08 8 28 107 2.12E+07 3750 5.90E+09 4.14 0.75 0.2 sway
285 350 300 6.80E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 3700 4.89E+09 3.52 0.51 0.2 sway
287 300 300 6.80E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 4300 4.89E+09 2.61 0.14 0.1 non-sway
288 300 300 6.80E+08 8 24 109 1.62E+07 4700 4.89E+09 2.18 0.02 0 non-sway
non sway
50- 2nd order
frame Ac M1 M2 25(M1/M2) λ effect
385 3E+05 -9.17 22.25 60.30 9.92 not-consider
393 2E+05 -46.54 43.20 76.93 12.18 not-consider
395 1E+05 -9.33 29.37 57.94 21.22 not-consider
145 90000 -2.33 1.00 108.25 25.74 not-consider
149 90000 -4.00 3.77 79.71 44.28 not-consider
151 90000 -5.15 4.70 77.40 44.28 not-consider
153 90000 -6.00 5.73 76.31 44.28 not-consider
155 90000 -5.00 5.23 73.95 48.28 not-consider
277 2E+05 -1.00 0.50 79.00 10.25 not-consider
287 90000 -3.00 28.36 52.47 20.64 not-consider
289 90000 -4.00 4.37 71.91 22.56 not-consider
24 June 2008 112
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
283 6.86 4.31 11.6 10.89 1.22 8.39 5.27 14.23 13.31 0.75
285 28.28 10.46 11.9 11.4 1.17 33.1 12.24 13.98 13.34 0.51
287 2.8 28.36 12.9 13 1.06 2.96 29.99 13.62 13.75 0.14
289 3.83 4.37 8.01 9.05 1.01 3.87 4.41 8.08 9.13 0.02
0.6*eo2y+ 0.6*eo2y+
frame eo1y eo2y eo1x eo2x 0.4*eoy1 0.4*eo2y eoy 0.4*eoy1 0.4*eo2y eox
385 9.21 22.35 2.19 2.52 17.09 8.94 17.09 2.39 1.01 2.39
387 26.48 14.07 14.66 7.03 19.03 5.63 19.03 10.08 2.81 10.08
389 49.88 28.18 30.23 14.46 36.86 11.27 36.86 20.77 5.79 20.77
391 69.96 40.05 39.06 68.72 52.01 16.02 52.01 56.86 27.49 56.86
393 123.8 114.81 65.19 65.38 118.41 45.92 118.41 65.3 26.15 65.3
395 66.73 210.06 277.72 226.23 152.73 84.02 152.73 246.82 90.49 246.8
145 8.28 1.55 16.39 15.89 4.25 0.62 4.25 16.09 6.35 16.09
147 11.6 7.93 72.86 40.99 9.4 3.17 9.4 53.74 16.4 53.74
149 18.42 15.21 110.41 111.48 16.49 6.08 16.49 111.06 44.59 111.1
151 30.23 27.58 174.37 171.26 28.64 11.03 28.64 172.5 68.5 172.5
153 62.49 59.48 311.91 293.26 60.68 23.79 60.68 300.72 117.3 300.7
155 266.2 277.92 524.49 1163.76 273.24 111.17 273.24 908.05 465.5 908.1
277 0.49 0.43 1 1.32 0.45 0.17 0.45 1.19 0.53 1.19
279 1.37 1.73 9.04 5.79 1.59 0.69 1.59 7.09 2.32 7.09
281 0.98 0.4 14.51 13.99 0.63 0.16 0.63 14.2 5.6 14.2
283 11.13 6.99 18.88 17.67 8.65 2.8 8.65 18.15 7.07 18.15
285 64.48 23.84 27.22 25.99 40.09 9.54 40.09 26.48 10.4 26.48
287 20.91 211.8 96.19 97.09 135.45 84.72 135.45 96.73 38.84 96.73
289 191.8 218.82 401.08 453.16 208 87.53 208 432.33 181.26 432.3
283 8.34 5.21 122.4 116.4 6.46 2.08 6.46 118.76 46.544 118.76
285 49.2 17.9 105.7 97.24 30.4 7.14 30.4 100.62 38.896 100.62
287 16 159 194.6 193.5 101.91 63.68 101.9 193.97 77.412 193.97
289 143 161 701.9 701.9 153.94 64.57 153.9 701.87 280.748 701.87
395 122500 350 0.14 9.11 29.33 0.11 0.02 0.06 0.10
Msd η µsd ω
145 90000 300 0.37 23.09 10.80 0.36 0.08 0.04 0.12
147 90000 300 0.34 9.15 51.43 0.34 0.03 0.17 0.10
149 90000 300 0.26 8.61 52.41 0.26 0.03 0.17 0.08
151 90000 300 0.18 7.44 48.70 0.18 0.02 0.16 0.15
153 90000 300 0.10 6.28 40.40 0.10 0.02 0.13 0.10
155 90000 300 0.02 3.55 21.19 0.02 0.01 0.07 0.05
η µsdx µsdy ω
277 180000 400 1.29 26.32 64.58 0.64 0.03 0.08 0.15
279 140000 350 1.23 26.14 141.60 0.79 0.05 0.26 0.20
281 105000 300 1.00 21.50 67.42 0.85 0.06 0.19 0.50
283 105000 300 0.75 19.94 104.57 0.64 0.06 0.30 0.80
285 122500 350 0.51 25.88 61.93 0.38 0.05 0.13 0.15
287 90000 300 0.14 17.26 30.29 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.20
289 90000 300 0.02 3.51 14.55 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.10
Chapter 7
FOUNDATION DESIGN
Material data:
Concrete; C-25 steel: S-300
Column size: 300mmx300mm} for exterior
350mmx350mm} for interior
Soil data:
The soil where the structure is to be constructed is sand and gravel of dense. So from EBCS-
7, 1995 the bearing resistance of the soil is 560kpa. But the width of the foundation should not be
less than 1.0m
σ ult=560kpa using factor of safety 1.5, σ all=560/1.5=373.33kpa
7.0 Proportioning of Footing
A, Proportioning for the plan area (BxL)
Table 7.1 SAP result &proportioning of footing for both methods Coefficient method
8 COMB1 1447.6 0.85 1.3847 0.0006 0.001 373.33 1.974 1.974 1.97 COMB1
9 COMB2 727.5 5.109 48.578 0.007 0.0668 373.33 1.58 1.58 1.58 COMB2
9 COMB4 657.24 47.78 0.6693 0.0727 0.001 373.33 1.509 1.509 1.51
10 COMB5 511.41 21.02 0.2238 0.0411 0.0004 373.33 1.279 1.279 1.28 COMB5
11 COMB1 969.47 4.783 1.2331 0.0049 0.0013 373.33 1.63 1.63 1.63
11 COMB3 878.22 2.548 52.912 0.0029 0.0602 373.33 1.696 1.696 1.7 COMB3
12 COMB1 1897.6 1.6 2.5891 0.0008 0.0014 373.33 2.261 2.261 2.26 COMB1
13 COMB1 1826.9 2.161 0.0299 0.0012 2E-05 373.33 2.216 2.216 2.22 COMB1
13 COMB5 1460.6 53.72 0.6083 0.0368 0.0004 373.33 2.081 2.081 2.08
14 COMB1 895.63 5.44 0.064 0.0061 7E-05 373.33 1.567 1.567 1.57
14 COMB3 869.95 4.611 56.04 0.0053 0.0644 373.33 1.704 1.704 1.7 COMB3
15 COMB1 605.5 5.925 4.6217 0.0098 0.0076 373.33 1.323 1.323 1.32
15 COMB3 548.29 2.916 30.016 0.0053 0.0547 373.33 1.363 1.363 1.36 COMB3
16 COMB1 1269 0.261 1.0549 0.0002 0.0008 373.33 1.847 1.847 1.85 COMB1
17 COMB1 1142.9 3.968 0.7466 0.0035 0.0007 373.33 1.762 1.762 1.76 COMB1
18 COMB4 463.82 30.96 0.9856 0.0668 0.0021 373.33 1.282 1.282 1.28 COMB4
Joint Output P My Mx ea eb σ all L B B strip
Text Case KN KN-m KN-m m m KPA m m m method
1 COMB1 579.72 0.96 2.5708 0.0017 0.0044 373.33 1.264 1.264 1.26
1 COMB2 526.68 1.62 28.458 0.0031 0.054 373.33 1.332 1.332 1.33 COMB2
2 COMB1 1219.8 1.379 1.1664 0.0011 0.001 373.33 1.814 1.814 1.81 COMB1
2 COMB2 1001.4 4.068 23.05 0.0041 0.023 373.33 1.714 1.714 1.71
3 COMB1 737.71 2.695 6.2322 0.0037 0.0084 373.33 1.441 1.441 1.44 COMB1
3 COMB2 625.75 4.258 25.912 0.0068 0.0414 373.33 1.42 1.42 1.42
4 COMB1 369.48 5.661 0.5734 0.0153 0.0016 373.33 1.042 1.042 1.04
4 COMB2 361.13 4.084 16.266 0.0113 0.045 373.33 1.122 1.122 1.12 COMB2
5 COMB5 481.61 20.13 0.2168 0.0418 0.0005 373.33 1.246 1.246 1.25 COMB5
6 COMB1 834.55 3.219 4.9362 0.0039 0.0059 373.33 1.524 1.524 1.52
6 COMB2 779.68 0.901 50.122 0.0012 0.0643 373.33 1.612 1.612 1.61 COMB2
7 COMB1 1639.1 0.607 0.0675 0.0004 4E-05 373.33 2.097 2.097 2.1 COMB1
8 COMB1 1374.8 0.944 1.3471 0.0007 0.001 373.33 1.924 1.924 1.92 COMB1
9 COMB2 742.45 4.873 48.463 0.0066 0.0653 373.33 1.59 1.59 1.59 COMB2
9 COMB4 672.19 47.54 0.5541 0.0707 0.0008 373.33 1.52 1.52 1.52
10 COMB5 487.06 20.89 0.2316 0.0429 0.0005 373.33 1.255 1.255 1.26 COMB5
11 COMB1 833.08 4.842 1.0517 0.0058 0.0013 373.33 1.515 1.515 1.51
11 COMB3 775.93 2.591 53.048 0.0033 0.0684 373.33 1.622 1.622 1.62 COMB3
12 COMB1 1630.8 1.536 2.5099 0.0009 0.0015 373.33 2.097 2.097 2.1 COMB1
13 COMB3 1385 1.873 44.101 0.0014 0.0318 373.33 2.019 2.019 2.02 COMB3
13 COMB5 1328.9 54.61 0.2544 0.0411 0.0002 373.33 2 2 2
14 COMB1 905.83 5.12 0.1991 0.0057 0.0002 373.33 1.575 1.575 1.58
14 COMB3 877.6 4.371 56.141 0.005 0.064 373.33 1.709 1.709 1.71 COMB3
15 COMB1 498.17 7.175 4.6187 0.0144 0.0093 373.33 1.221 1.221 1.22
15 COMB3 467.8 3.853 30.014 0.0082 0.0642 373.33 1.294 1.294 1.29 COMB3
16 COMB1 1339.5 0.923 0.575 0.0007 0.0004 373.33 1.898 1.898 1.9 COMB1
17 COMB3 1049.4 2.604 22.195 0.0025 0.0212 373.33 1.743 1.743 1.74 COMB3
18 COMB1 541.73 4.652 2.0701 0.0086 0.0038 373.33 1.24 1.24 1.24
18 COMB4 526.84 33.08 0.6831 0.0628 0.0013 373.33 1.347 1.347 1.35 COMB4
From the above table since σ max= σ all & dmin>0 the plan dimension (BxL) provided above is
safe against over stress and tension.
As we see from the above table Vp is less than Ucw in both direction. So the depth provide for
punching is safe. Using the governing COMB for each depth of footing.
7.2 Reinforcement
The critical section for moment is at the face of the column. So we should calculate the design
moment at the critical section (face of the column).
i) Design moment
The design moment for both directions is calculated
Md, B= σ ’’B*((B/2-B’/2) 2)/2
Md, L= σ ’’L*((L/2-L’/2)2)/2
ii)Reinforcements
Design constants: For C-25 & S-300
C1=0.0867 C2=3003 take b=1000mm
Since construction of each footing considering different reinforcement spacing for the two
direction, taking each depth and length (L&B) is difficult for supper vision let’s categorize the
footing as shown below.
Table 7.7 Grouping for coefficient method
Footing Name Group member Plan area Depth provide Reinforcement provide
(mxm) (cm)
F1 7,8,12,,13 2.3x2.3 70 Ø14c/c150mm
F2 14,16,17 2.0x2.0 65 Ø14c/c180mm
F3 2,6,9 1.8x1.8 60 Ø14c/c210mm
F4 3,11 1.6x1.6 50 Ø14c/c240mm
F5 1,5,10,15 1.4x1.4 40 Ø14c/c270mm
F6 4,18 1.2x1.2 35 Ø14c/c300mm
Chapter 8
COST COMPARISON
Considering each element of the frame structure the total quantity of concrete & reinforcement
including there cost is summarized in tabular form as shown below.
description Element coefficient strip price coefficient strip difference saved saved
beam 82.4588 82.4588 1300 107196.44 107196.4 0 0.00 0.00
concrete
column 43.358875 40.0405 1300 56366.5375 52052.65 4313.89 7.65 7.65
slab 101.153 101.153 1300 131498.9 131498.9 0.00 0.00 0.00
footing 35.148 34.701 1300 45692.4 45111.3 581.10 1.27 1.27
total 262.1187 258.353 340754.2775 335859.3 4894.99 1.44 1.44
beam 10508.19 9965.42 26 273212.9816 259101 14111.98 5.17 5.17
reinforcement
column 13984.96 13006.57 26 363608.96 338170.8 25438.14 7.00 7.00
slab 7464.745 5831.3 26 194083.3778 151613.9 42469.47 21.88 21.88
footing 1262.678 1231.51 26 32829.63476 32019.34 810.30 2.47 2.47
Total 33220.5752 30034.81 863734.9542 780905.1 82829.88 9.59 9.59
Total cost in
(Birr) 1204489.2 1116764 87724.86 7.28
Since our main objective is to compare cost between building design using coefficient and strip
method analysis of slab. Referring the above summery table, the total quantity of concrete in the
design using coefficient and strip are 262.12m3 and 258.35m3 respectively. So 1.44% of concrete
which is design by coefficient method will be saved if we use a strip method of slab analysis.
And the total quantity of reinforcement in the design using coefficient and strip methods are
33220.5752Kg & 30034.81Kg respectively. So 9.59% of reinforcement which are obtained using
coefficient method will be saved by using strip method analysis. As you see from the above table
the greater contribution for this percentage difference is from slab.
Generally, the total cost for the structural elements for both concrete and reinforcement is greater
in coefficient than strip method of slab analysis. So 7.28% of the total cost for structural member
(slab, beam, column and footing) of coefficient method will be saved when we use strip method
of slab analysis.
24 June 2008 126
Design of G+4 Building Using coefficient and Strip and cost comparison
Finally, we can conclude that a building which is design using strip method of slab analysis is
much more economical than coefficient method slab analysis. This is due to considering accurate
load dispersion on slab & load transfer to the frames. But when we came to safety & difficulty
during supervision coefficient method is more conservative and simple for supervision specially
during placing of slab reinforcement than strip method.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. T.J. MACGINLEY & B.S. CHOO (1990) Reinforced concrete Design theory
&Examples, 2nd edition, Spon press, New York
2. JAMES AMBROSE (1993) Building structures, 2nd edition
3. M.Y.H. BANGASH (1992) Structural Details in concrete, 1st edition, Black well
scientific publication.
4. CHANAKYA ARYA (1993) Design of structural elements, 1st edition ,E&FN Spon
publication, London
5. EBCS-1,1995, EBCS-2,1995, EBCS-7,1995, EBCS-8,1995