Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2 Design of Slender Tall Buildings For Wind and Earthquake PDF
2 Design of Slender Tall Buildings For Wind and Earthquake PDF
Presented by
Dr. Juneid Qureshi
Director (Group Design Division)
Meinhardt Singapore Pte Ltd
AGENDA
01
Structural
02
Structural
03
Key
Design Systems for Tall Considerations
Challenges for Buildings for Seismic
Tall Buildings Design
04
Review of BC3 05 06
Case Studies Comparison of
Wind & Seismic
Effects
07
Cost Comparison
08
Concluding
of Concrete vs. Remarks
Composite Tall
Building
01
Structural Design Challenges for Tall Buildings
Structural Design Challenges for Tall Buildings
Balancing structural needs vs. project demands are always a challenge …..specially for
tall buildings.
Short Buildings:
2W
• Generally strength governs design w
• Gravity loads predominant 2h
W
h
Intermediate Buildings:
• Strength / drift governs design
• Gravity / lateral loads predominant
M 4M
Tall Buildings:
• Generally drift / building motion
governs design
• Lateral loads predominant
Source: CTBUH
Structural Design Challenges for Tall Buildings
Wind
As buildings get taller, wind-induced dynamic response starts to
dictates the design.
Zg (600m)
V(z) = Vg (z/zg)α
Fluctuating Wind α depends on terrain
Speed, V(z,t)
V
Static Loads, A + Dynamic Loads
Wind codes generally cover along-wind response based on the Gust Factor Approach –
but little guidance on cross-wind & torsional responses.
US Practice,
ISO, Office Office
US Practice,
ISO, Residential Residential
Structural Design Challenges for Tall Buildings
Drift
Many codes specify (& some provide guidelines) for tall & flexible
a deflection limit of h/400 ~ h/600.
0
0 20 40 60 80
-5
-10
-15
Column Elastic shortening
Column Creep shortening -20
Column Total shortening -25
Nearby Wall Total Shortening
-30
Structural Design Challenges for Tall Buildings
Robustness
Tall buildings are big budget projects – small savings per sq. m can become large
amounts of money.
Efficiency & economy are not defined by codes.
Custom programs & scripts required to interface directly with commercial structural
analysis packages to rapidly and efficiently establish optimum element sizes.
Structural Design Challenges for Tall Buildings
Foundation Settlements
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0
-10
-20
-30
Settlement (mm)
-40
-50
-60
-100
Along B-B
02
Structural Systems for Tall Buildings
Structural Systems for Tall Buildings
Interior Structures: single / dual component planar assemblies in 2 principal directions.
50 storey
H = 245m
Core
33 storey
Per. Columns
H = 186m
PT Band Beams
Semi-Precast Slab
RC Spandrel Beams
H/D = 6.5
50 Storey
H = 245m
75 storey
H = 342m
H/D=12.5
Residential
Hotel
Podium
52 storey, H = 200m
Effective because they
carry shear by axial
action of the diagonal
members (less shear
deformation).
(23m)
Atrium Braced
Truss
Outrigger Trusses
Belt Trusses L36
Coupling Truss
Overturning Outrigger Truss
Moment Belt Truss
L12
Outrigger Truss
Belt Truss
03
Key Considerations for Seismic Design
Seismic Design Considerations
Source: FEMA
Seismic Design Considerations
Plan Conditions Resulting Failure Patterns
Re-Entrant Corners
Diaphragm Eccentricity
Non-parallel LFRS
Out-of-Plane Offsets
Source: FEMA
Seismic Design Considerations
Vertical Conditions Resulting Failure Patterns
Mass Irregularity
Geometric Irregularity
Source: FEMA
04
Overview of BC3
Overview of BC3
• Seismic requirement in Singapore from 1 Apr 2015
Seismic Action determined according to Clause 3 & Clause 4, using where appropriate, either
• Lateral Force Analysis Method according to Clause 4.4, or
• Modal Response Spectrum Analysis Method according to Clause 4.5
B C D S1
Ordinary Building
All other than “Special
1.0 - - Y Y
buildings” below
Special Building
• hospitals
• fire stations
• civil defense installations 1.4 - Y Y Y
• government offices
• institutional building
Overview of BC3
Design Spectra
0.0 2.88 1.8 4.40 0.0 4.50 1.8 10.00 0.0 5.76 1.8 14.40
0.1 3.96 2.0 3.96 0.1 5.25 2.0 9.00 0.1 6.30 2.0 14.40
0.2 5.04 2.2 3.60 0.2 6.00 2.2 8.18 0.2 6.84 2.2 14.40
0.3 6.75 2.4 7.50 0.3 7.38 2.4 14.40
0.3 6.12 2.4 3.30
0.4 7.50 2.7 6.67 0.4 7.92 2.7 11.38
0.4 7.20 2.7 2.93
0.5 8.25 3.0 6.00 0.5 8.46 3.0 9.22
0.5 7.20 3.0 2.64
0.6 9.00 3.5 5.14 0.6 9.00 3.5 6.77
0.6 7.20 3.5 2.26
0.7 9.75 4.0 4.50 0.7 9.54 4.0 5.18
0.7 7.20 4.0 1.98
0.8 10.50 4.6 3.91 0.8 10.08 4.6 3.92
0.8 7.20 4.6 1.72
0.9 11.25 5.2 3.06 0.9 10.62 5.2 3.07
0.9 7.20 5.2 1.52 1.0 11.25 6.0 2.30 1.0 11.16 6.0 2.30
1.0 7.20 6.0 1.32 1.1 11.25 7.0 1.69 1.1 11.70 7.0 1.69
1.1 7.20 7.0 1.13 1.2 11.25 8.0 1.29 1.2 12.24 8.0 1.30
1.2 6.60 8.0 0.99 1.4 11.25 9.0 1.02 1.4 12.78 9.0 1.02
1.4 6.09 9.0 0.88 1.6 11.25 10.0 0.83 1.6 14.40 10.0 0.83
1.6 4.95 10.0 0.79
Thamrin Nine, Nurol Life Tower Izmir Ova Centre, IFC ISGYO Office Tower
Jakarta, Indonesia Turkey Turkey Turkey
325m, 71 Story, 250m, 60 Story, 112m, 27 Story, 111m, 27 Story,
Under construction Under construction Under construction Under construction
Composite Composite Composite Composite
Office & Hotel Residential & Office Office Office
245m
Case Studies
The Sail @ Marina Bay, Singapore
170
semi Pre-cast slab
600 x 1000
Spandrel Col
600 x 650
Spandrel
Beam 650
Main Shear
walls
300
Lift/Stair Walls
Case Studies
Height (m)
The Sail @ Marina Bay, Singapore 224
193
100
Building Performance/Strength
(Seismic Design to UBC 97)
Case Studies
The Sail @ Marina Bay, Singapore
2.4% W *
Zone 2A 0.15g (with special
detailing)
*Governed by minimum load required by code
Case Studies Shear Wall
Boundary Elements
The Sail @ Marina Bay, Singapore
660 mm 330 mm
1180 mm
Wall Coupling Beams
580 mm
Frame Members
Structural Performance
350
Wind
300 Notional
Seismic
250
Elevation (m)
200
150
100
50
0
0 1000 0 20000 40000 60000 0 5000 10000 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.0000 0.0050 0.0100
Lateral Load (kN) Story Shear (kN) Story Moment (MNm) Story Drift Ratio Story Drift Ratio
Case Studies 325m
Thamrin Nine, Jakarta, Indonesia
RC Walls/Columns/Beams/Slabs
Case Studies
Thamrin Nine, Jakarta, Indonesia
Seismic Design Parameters
Structural Performance
350
Wind
300 Seismic
250
Elevation (m)
200
150
100
50
0
0 2000 4000 0 50000 100000 0.00E+00 1.00E+07 2.00E+07 0 0.002 0.004 0 0.002 0.004
Lateral Load (kN) Story Shear (kN) Story Moment (kN-m) Story Drift Story Drift
Case Studies
Thamrin Nine, Jakarta, Indonesia
Non-Linear Static Push-Over Analysis
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
(23m)
(45m)
39m 45m
305m
0m
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
Atrium Void
L4
Atrium Void
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L7
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L10
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L12A
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L17
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L20
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L23
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L26
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L29
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L32
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L34
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L36A
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L40
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L43
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L46
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L49
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L50
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L54
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
L56
Case Studies
Signature Towers, Dubai
BS-6399-2 (ult)
250 250
EN 1991-1-4 +G.I. (ult)
200 200
Notional Load
height, m
height, m
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 300 600 0 300 600
Force (kN) Force (kN)
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Over Turning Moment 40m x 40m x 100m / 200m
BS-6399-2 (ult)
250 250
EN 1991-1-4 +G.I. (ult)
height, m
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 500000 1000000 0 1500000 3000000
Overturning Mom. (kN-m) Overturning Mom. (kN-m)
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Force 22m x 70m x 100m / 200m
BS-6399-2 (ult)
250 250
EN 1991-1-4 +G.I. (ult)
200 200
Notional Load
height, m
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 400 800 0 400 800
Force (kN)
Force (kN)
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Over Turning Moment 40m x 40m x 100m / 200m
height, m
height, m
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 500000 1000000 0 2000000 4000000
Overturning Mom. (kN-m) Overturning Mom. (kN-m)
Comparison of Lateral Loads
Impact of Seismic Loads
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Force 40m x 40m x 100m / 200m
height, m
height, m
50 50
0
0
0 250 500 750
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Force (kN) Force (kN)
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Over Turning Moment 40m x 40m x 100m / 200m
200 200
Notional Load
height, m
height, m
50
50
0
0 0 1000000 2000000 3000000
0 1000000 2000000 Overturning Mom. (kN-m)
Overturning Mom. (kN-m)
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Force 40m x 40m x 100m / 200m
200 200
Notional Load
height, m
height, m
50 50
0
0
0 250 500 750
0 200 400 600 800
Force (kN)
Force (kN)
Comparison of Lateral Loads RC building,
LxWxH=
Ultimate Over Turning Moment 40m x 40m x 100m / 200m
200 200
Notional Load
height, m
height, m
50
50
0
0 0 1000000 2000000 3000000
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 Overturning Mom. (kN-m)
Overturning Mom. (kN-m)
07
Cost Comparison of Concrete vs.
Composite Tall Building
Cost Comparison
Source: CTBUH
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
Building Description
GFA: 85,000 m2
Height: 130m
No. of Floors: 30
Typ. Floor Height: 4.3m
Typ. Floor Area: 2800 m2
Clear Span: up to 15.5m
Lateral System: Dual System -
RC Core + Frames
RC Building Steel-Concrete
Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
13.5m 15.5m
13.5m
15.5m
9m
Framing Systems Considered 9m
12.5m
12.5m Floor Framing Graphics
Design Criteria
Gravity Loading:
Dead Load (DL) : Self-weight of elements
Superimposed Dead Load (SDL) : 1.5 kPa
Live Load (LL) : 3.5 kPa + 1 kPa for Partitions = 4.5 kPa Total
Cladding (SDL) : 1.0 kPa (on elevation)
Lateral Loading:
Wind Speed : 22m/s Mean Hourly, 50-year Return Period
Wind Load Pressure : Max Pressure ~ 1.3 kPa
Seismic : SS-EN 1998-1, BC3, q=1.5, Ground Type D
Composite Building
T1 = 3.2 s T2 = 2.9 s
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
Lateral
35 Storey Forces 35
Overturning Moment 35
Inter-storey Drift
30 30 30
Seismic-RC
Seismic–Composite
Wind-RC Seismic–
25
Wind– 25 25 Composite
RC/Composite Seismic–RC
20 20 20
Storey
Storey
Δ = h / (200.v.q)
Δ = h / 500
15 15 15
Seismic-RC
10 10 10
Wind–
5 Composite
Wind– 5 Seismic-
5
RC/Composite Composite
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
-200000 800000 1800000 2800000 38000000 10 20 30
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
RC Building
Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
Costing Assumptions:
Pricing information was collated & verified through a combination of local sources (based on 2013 prices)
Formwork (S$/m2) $ 35
1.00
1.00
0.90
0.71
Normalized Building Weight
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
1.0
1.0
Normalized Concrete Costs 0.9
0.8
0.7 0.5
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite
Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
1.0
1.0
0.9
Normalized Rebar & PT Costs
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4 0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
2.3
2.5
2.0
Normalized Steel Costs
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.7
Foundation Costs
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
1.40 1.24
1.20 1.00
Normalized Structural Costs
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
1.24 1.30
1.40
1.20 1.00
Normalized Structural Costs
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
RC Building Composite With Seismic Composite Without Seismic
This cost premium is not unique. It will vary based on location, material rates, building type / form and
structural design parameters.
Comparative Case Study of a Typical Tall Building in Singapore
1 1 1.03
Normalized Project Construction Costs
-
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
The Big Picture ……..
The Big Picture ……..
PROJECT COSTS
GFA = 85,000 sq-m
Land Cost = $19,000 per sq-m of GFA
Legal Fee & Stamp Duty = 4% of land cost
Total Project Duration (including Design Period)= 33 months
Property Tax = 0.5% x land cost x duration)($)
Associated Costs (Prof. & Site Supervision Fee) = ~ 8% of Total Construction Cost
Marketing & Advertisement = ~ 5% of Total Construction Cost
GST = 7% of Construction & Associated Costs
Interest of Financing Cost for Land = 5% of Land Cost, Legal Fee & Property Tax
Interest of Financing During Construction = 5% of Construction & Associated Costs x 0.5
1.2 1 1.005
1
Normalized Structural Costs
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
RC Building Steel-Concrete Composite Building
The Big Picture ……..
1.05
1.03 RC Building
0.996 0.986
1 0.977 0.967
1.005
0.95 0.986
0.945
0.9
Composite – Adjusted Total
Development Cost
0.904
Cost
NormalizedCots
0.85
Composite –Adjusted Total 0.864
Normalized
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0 1 2 3 4
SavingsConstruction
in Construction Time
Time Saving (months)
(Months)
Composite Construction Benefits
Higher quality
One Raffles Link
Lesser maintenance
Flexibility to adaptation
Higher sustainability