7 views

Uploaded by Hayman Ahmed

Edoc.site Technical Report for a Structural Design Project

- Wall No.5 (4.2)m.rtf
- IS 13920.1993
- CONCRETE SLAB DESIGN USING MATHCAD.pdf
- nonlinear analysis of shear dominant prestressed concrete beams using ansys
- DS Rebar Splicing HB
- Ci3503crsi - Column Tie Configurations
- FORNEY TestingMachines
- Pag Asa Standard Rebars Information
- Reinforcing Bar Development and Splice Lengths per ACI 318-05.xls
- 4_HIT_RE500_BlackWhite.pdf
- NIST.GCR.16-917-40
- Sample of Design Brief
- Bi Ax Column Design
- STRUCTURAL LOAD DESIGN CRITERIA FOR OFFICE BUILDING.xlsx
- PIP STE05121 Anchor Bolt Design Guide
- Chapt_5_4_flexure.pdf
- RECTBEAM_(318-05)(1)
- Edibon MDB
- TCE-NEW.docx
- Slab Design Updated

You are on page 1of 95

Technical Report 2

Three-Dimensional Analysis and Design of the Gateway Building

Bashar Deek

Yazan Muqbel

Mo’az Alawneh

Muhammed Fashafsheh

December, 2013

to our parents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express sincere heartfelt gratitude to our advisor Dr. Samir H. Helou

for his valuable guidance and advice. He never ceased helping us learn important topics

in the field of Structural Engineering. Dr. Helou has been a great source of

encouragement and motivation as he provided us with his undivided attention and

continuous support.

ABSTRACT

The following project aims at providing a state of the art reinforced concrete structural

design undertaking of a commercial building situated in the city of Ramallah; it is called

The Gateway Building.

The building is comprised of thirteen stories, of which the three basement levels serve as

parking spaces, one basement level is reserved for storage purposes and the rest seven

stories provide office spaces and stores. The upper most two floors are reserved for

restaurants. The three basement levels together have a total area of 4800 square meters;

each of the upper floors has an average floor area of about 870 square meters.

The loads on each floor will be calculated according to its function. Load values,

combinations and factors will be in compliance with the ACI, the IBC or the UBC.

Analysis and design of the structure will be carried out using the Extended Three

Dimensional Analysis of Building Systems Software, ETABS. The slabs’ design as well as

the foundation design will be carried out using SAFE computer software. Various

roofing schemes are investigated and explored; the most economic one is recommended.

Foundation design is an inseparable part of the present design undertaking.

The Gateway Building has already been designed and constructed in Ramallah. However,

the present design exercise is conducted with absolutely no reference to any other

previous propriety design efforts.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE: ....................................................................................................................................................9

2. BUILDING INTRODUCTION: ..............................................................................................................................9

3. STRUCTURAL TOPOLOGY ...............................................................................................................................12

3.1 Design Codes .....................................................................................................................................12

3.2 Materials Used ..................................................................................................................................12

3.3 Gravity Loads: ....................................................................................................................................13

3.3.1. Dead Loads .............................................................................................................................................. 13

3.3.2. Snow Loads.............................................................................................................................................. 13

3.4 Load Combinations: ...........................................................................................................................15

3.5 Soil Conditions: ..................................................................................................................................15

4. THE MODEL: ..............................................................................................................................................16

4.1 Model Geometry:...............................................................................................................................16

4.2 The Finite Element Model: .................................................................................................................22

4.2.1. The Frame Element: ................................................................................................................................ 22

4.2.2. Soil Springs .............................................................................................................................................. 24

4.2.3. The Shell Element: ................................................................................................................................... 25

4.2.3.1 The Mat Foundation: .................................................................................................................... 27

4.2.3.2 The Walls: ..................................................................................................................................... 28

4.2.3.3 Ramps: .......................................................................................................................................... 29

4.2.3.4 Stair Cases: .................................................................................................................................... 30

4.2.3.5 Slabs: ............................................................................................................................................. 31

4.2.4. Model Creation Procedure ...................................................................................................................... 32

4.2.5. Model Load Assignment .......................................................................................................................... 33

1.1 Punching shear ..................................................................................................................................34

1.2 Deflection: .........................................................................................................................................38

2. STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR STATIC LOADS..........................................................................................................39

2.1 Concrete Frame Design ......................................................................................................................39

2.1.1. Column Design: ....................................................................................................................................... 39

2.2 Wall Design:.......................................................................................................................................51

2.3 Slab Design: .......................................................................................................................................63

th

2.3.1. 4 Basement Slab Design ........................................................................................................................ 64

2.3.2. First-Roof Slab Design.............................................................................................................................. 68

2.4 Mat Foundation Design: ....................................................................................................................70

1. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................75

2. GEOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................75

3. MODAL ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................76

4. EQUIVALENT LATERAL LOAD METHOD .............................................................................................................77

5. RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................................80

6. LOAD COMBINATIONS ..................................................................................................................................81

7. RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................................81

8. STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR DYNAMIC LOADS......................................................................................................82

8.1 Mat Foundation Design .....................................................................................................................82

8.2 Slabs Design .......................................................................................................................................84

8.2.1. Fourth Basement Slab Design.................................................................................................................. 84

2. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................................86

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2: Materials Used-Concrete...........................................................................................................12

Table 3: Materials Used- Grade 60 Rebar Steel ....................................................................................12

Table 4: Lateral Earth Pressure ...............................................................................................................13

Table 5: ASCE Minimum Design Loads ...............................................................................................14

Table 6: Load Combinations ...................................................................................................................15

Table 7: Cartesian Grid Data ...................................................................................................................17

Table 8: Cylindrical Grid Data ................................................................................................................18

Table 9: Cylindrical System Origin .........................................................................................................18

Table 10: Frame element sections used in the model ..........................................................................23

Table 11: Story Data .................................................................................................................................31

Table 12: Punching shear ratios for all 50 columns in the 4th basement...........................................35

Table 13: Punching shear ratios for all 25 columns in the 1st roof ...................................................37

Table 15: Maximum Deflection Values at Selected Floors .................................................................38

Table 14: ACI TABLE 9.5 (b) of maximum permissible roof deflections .......................................38

Table 16: "Interior Columns_Large" Auto-Select List ........................................................................39

Table 17: "Interior Columns_Small" Auto-Select List ........................................................................40

Table 18: "Exterior Columns' Auto-Select List ....................................................................................40

Table 19: Columns Section Design ........................................................................................................46

Table 20: Column forces in the 4th basement .......................................................................................46

Table 21: ETABS flexural design data of C23 column section ..........................................................47

Table 22: ETABS shear design data of C23 column section ..............................................................48

Table 23: ETABS report for uniform basement wall reinforcement ................................................54

Table 24: ETABS report for uniform interior wall reinforcement ....................................................58

Table 25: CSA3 forces and reinforcement reported by SAFE in B4 slab ........................................65

Table 26: Forces and Reinforcement as reported by SAFE for max. design strip in 1st Roof .....69

Table 27: Soil Pressure .............................................................................................................................71

Table 28: SAFE vs. hand-calculated values for mat reinforcement ..................................................73

Table 29: Modal analysis output .............................................................................................................77

Table 30: Modal mass participating ratios .............................................................................................77

Table 31: Parameters of Equivalent Lateral Load Method .................................................................78

Table 32: Table 16-N from UBC-97 Code............................................................................................78

Table 33l: Load combinations for earthquake loads ............................................................................81

Table 34: Soil pressure summary due to combined lateral and gravity loads ...................................82

Table 35: Soil pressure summary for a 60cm-thick foundation .........................................................82

Table 36: Max. forces in the mat foundation due to dynamic load ...................................................83

Table 37: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab .........................................................................84

Table 38: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab with drop panels ...........................................85

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2: Above-grade floors plan ..........................................................................................................10

Figure 3: Basement floor plan .................................................................................................................10

Figure 4: Elevation view of the building................................................................................................11

Figure 5: Model units and design codes.................................................................................................16

Figure 6: Grid Systems .............................................................................................................................16

Figure 7: Cartesian and Cylindrical Grid Systems ................................................................................19

Figure 8: Floors Labels .............................................................................................................................20

Figure 9: Story Data ..................................................................................................................................21

Figure 10: Local coordinate system of the frame element ..................................................................22

Figure 11: Local coordinates of a column section ...............................................................................23

Figure 12: Area spring property data......................................................................................................24

Figure 13: Soil Modulus assignment to shells .......................................................................................24

Figure 14: Quadrilateral shell element ....................................................................................................25

Figure 15: Shell element uniform coordinate systems .........................................................................26

Figure 16: 3D view of the mat foundation ............................................................................................27

Figure 17: Mat foundation section properties.......................................................................................27

Figure 18: 3D screen capture of the walls .............................................................................................28

Figure 19: 3D capture of the ramps .......................................................................................................29

Figure 20: Ramp-wall connection ...........................................................................................................29

Figure 21: 3D screen capture of stair slabs ...........................................................................................30

Figure 22: Slab mesh .................................................................................................................................31

Figure 23: 3D Extruded view of slabs ...................................................................................................31

Figure 24: The "model check" option ....................................................................................................32

Figure 25: Base Reactions due to a test load .........................................................................................33

Figure 26: Uniform shell load assignment .............................................................................................33

Figure 27: Snapshot of SAFE punching shear parameters for a 700X700mm interior column ...36

Figure 28: Local axes of columns ...........................................................................................................40

Figure 29: Column Labels ........................................................................................................................41

Figure 30: Column rebar selection rules in ETABS .............................................................................49

Figure 31: C23 rebar details in 3D view.................................................................................................49

Figure 32: Design section "E" for C23 column....................................................................................50

Figure 33: Design section "C" for C23 column ....................................................................................50

Figure 34: C23 design schedule from base to staircase .......................................................................50

Figure 35: Plan view of external basement walls ..................................................................................51

Figure 36: Extruded 3D view of external basement wall ....................................................................52

Figure 37: V23 values for the external basement wall .........................................................................53

Figure 38: M22 values for interior wall section ....................................................................................55

Figure 39:V23 values for interior wall section ......................................................................................56

Figure 40: Rebar selection prefrences for walls ....................................................................................59

Figure 41: 3D view of confined wall reinforcement at corners .........................................................60

Figure 42: Reinforced section in internal shear wall ............................................................................61

Figure 43: Elevation section of internal wall reinforcement ...............................................................62

Figure 44: Screen capture of design strips menu in SAFE v12 ..........................................................63

Figure 45: X-axis design strips for 4th basement slabs .........................................................................64

Figure 46: CSA_3 moment diagram .......................................................................................................64

Figure 47: Moment Diagrams for all A-strips in 4th basement slab .................................................66

Figure 48: Moment Diagrams for all B-strips in 4th basement slab ..................................................67

Figure 49: Design-strip moment diagram with max. values ...............................................................68

Figure 50: Moment diagrams in both A&B strips for 1st-roof slab ..................................................68

Figure 51: Moment diagram of A-strips in mat foundation ...............................................................72

Figure 52: Moment diagrams of B strips in mat foundation ..............................................................73

Figure 53: Mat foundation detailing preferences ..................................................................................74

Figure 54: Seismic zone factor map .......................................................................................................75

Figure 55: Mass source Definition..........................................................................................................76

Figure 56: Story shears in X-direction due to ELLMX .......................................................................79

Figure 57: Story shears in Y-direction due to ELLMY .......................................................................79

Figure 58: Response spectrum curve .....................................................................................................80

Figure 59: CSA3 moment diagram for Comb8 ....................................................................................84

CHAPTER I: Introduction & Numerical Modeling

1. Purpose:

The purpose of this Graduation Project Exercise is to analyze and design the structural system

for a multi-functional building in Ramallah; dubbed the Gateway Building. The 3-D analysis and

design undertakings are carried out in compliance with the ASCE, ACI and UBC codes of

practice. This is accomplished by the widely used computer software ETABS and SAFE.

2. Building Introduction:

The Gateway Building is a multi-functional building located in the city of Ramallah, Al-Irsal

Street. It is comprised of thirteen stories of which four basement levels serve as parking spaces

and the rest eight floors provide office spaces, stores and restaurants. The total area of the

building is about 14,000 square meters. All stories have a height of 3 meters each.

According to floor area and geometry, there are two groups of identical floors; the four

basement floors and the upper floors.

9

Figure 3: Basement floor plan

10

Figure 4: Elevation view of the building

11

3. Structural Topology

Code Use

ASCE /SEI 7-10 Minimum design loads, minimum section

requirements and load combinations.

ACI Code 318-11 Frames and shear wall section design and rebar.

ACI Code 318-08 Slab and mat foundation design using SAFE v12

Table 1: Codes Used for Analysis and Design

Concrete

Strength f’c Unit Weight Modulus of Elasticity

Usage

(MPa) (kN/m3) (MPa)

Foundation 35 23.54 27806

Columns 35 23.54 27806

Shear Walls 28 23.54 24870

Slabs 28 23.54 24870

Table 2: Materials Used-Concrete

Rebar Steel

Min. Modulus of Elasticity

Min. Yield

Tensile Unit Weight (MPa)

Usage Strength

Strength (kN/m3)

(MPa)

(MPa)

Foundation 413 621 77 200E+3

Columns 413 621 77 200E+3

Shear Walls 413 621 77 200E+3

Slabs 413 621 77 200E+3

Table 3: Materials Used- Grade 60 Rebar Steel

Solving for displacements and forces will be in the linear and elastic part of the stress-strain

diagram for each material. All materials are isotropic.

12

3.3 Gravity Loads:

The Dead loads are due to structural elements self weight. This load is computed

internally by the software and included in the analysis. The self-weight multiplier is

1, so ETABS calculates the weight of an element by multiplying the materials

density by the volume of element.

Lateral earth pressure; this type of load acts on structural elements below the

ground level; these are the external walls of the 4 basements. Backfill soil is

classified as silty gravels or poorly graded gravel-sand mixes with a design lateral

load value of 5.50 kN/m2 per one meter of depth. Table (3.2-1, ASCE).

Since ETABS software does not have a linear function for loads varying with

depth, it is decided that maximum earth pressure is calculated at the bottom of

each basement story and imported to ETABS as uniformly distributed loads over

areas.

Basement grade pressure

Floor (m) (kN/m2)

4th basement 12 66

3rd basement 9 49.5

2nd basement 6 33

1st basement 3 16.5

Table 4: Lateral Earth Pressure

Considering a snow density of 300 kg/m3 and a Maximum snow height of 70 cm;

the snow load per square meter is 210 kg/m2 which corresponds to 2 kN/m2.

13

Live Superimposed Snow

Dead Load

Floor Function Load Dead Load

(kN/m2)

(kN/m2) Load (kN/m2) (kN/m2

4th basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0

3rd basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0

2nd basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0

1st basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0

Ground Floor Store spaces 3.6 Self weight 2 0

Mezzanine Floor Store spaces 3.6 Self weight 2 0

1st floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0

2nd floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0

3rd floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0

4th floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0

5th floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0

1 roof floor

st Restaurants 4.8 Self weight 2 0

2nd roof floor Restaurants 4.8 Self weight 0 2

Staircase floor Staircase 1 Self weight 0 2

Table 5: ASCE Minimum Design Loads

14

3.4 Load Combinations:

For the analysis and design of the Gateway Building, gravity static loads are

considered; the ASCE 7-5 in Chapter 2 recommends the use of the following load

combinations for the strength design method:

Comb1: U= 1.4D

Comb2: U=1.2D + 1.6L

Comb3: U=1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5S

Comb4: U=1.2D+1.6L+ 0.5S+1.6H

Comb5: U=Envelope (Comb1, Comb2, Comb3, Comb4)

The Structure is built on rock that has a bearing capacity of 250 kN/m2. During

analysis and design the soil is treated as a linear and elastic material which means the

modulus of sub-grade soil is constant.

15

4. The Model:

Numerical Modeling is the basis for modern structural analysis and design. The model

has to simulate the expected behavior of all elements within the structure.

Model geometry is created in partial conformity with the architectural plans of the

building. A more challenging structural system necessitated the elimination of some

columns that are deemed superfluous; this resulted in longer span lengths at some

locations.

Metric SI standard units are used. All geometric dimensions are in meter units.

Design code preferences are also selected

The geometry of the building required defining both Cartesian and cylindrical

gridlines. Cartesian grid system is named G1 and cylindrical system is called

Cylindrical inside ETABS. Secondary gridlines were separately added in order to

account for interior structural details like shear walls and ramps. Gridlines are very

important since they provide the milestones for model creation and facilitate the

process of connecting finite elements precisely in the model.

G1- Cartesian Grid Data

A 0 1 574.2

B 1442.6 2 1204.2

C 1912.6 3 2584.2

D 2758.8 4 3326

E 3301.2 5 3461.4

F 3886.7 - -

G 4526.2 - -

H 5100.4 - -

I 5411.4 - -

A1

0 0 933.2 3461.4

A2

933.2 3461.4 5411.4 3326

A3

A4

686.7 0 1614.7 3442.1

A5

A6

2908.8 2974.2 3886.7 2974.2

0 0 4526.2 0

6

17

Cylindrical Grid Data

A’

0

B’ 574.2

Tangential Grid data

10 0

9 10

8 20

7 30

6 40

5 50

4 60

3 70

2 80

1 90

Note that cylindrical system’s origin is located at the intersection of Cartesian gridlines 1&G.

18

Figure 7: Cartesian and Cylindrical Grid Systems

19

Stories are defined in ETABS from bottom to top, keeping in mind that ETABS

labels floors according to their ceiling, i.e. B4 slab is the top of the 4th basement

floor and the ground slab for the 3rd basement floor and so on. Height of each story

is assigned as well.

20

Height Elevation

Floor Name

(mm) (mm)

Roof2 3000 39000

Roof1 3000 36000

F5 3000 33000

F4 3000 30000

F3 3000 27000

F2 3000 24000

F1 3000 21000

MEZZANINE 3000 18000

GF 3000 15000

B1 3000 12000

B2 3000 9000

B3 3000 6000

B4 3000 3000

Base 0 0

21

4.2 The Finite Element Model:

All structural elements in the model are either frame or shells elements. The task is to

select the element type that would simulate the real behavior of the structure. The three-

dimensional model consists of a large number of finite-elements connected together at

the nodes.

The following are the element types used in the numerical model:

The frame element is modeled as a straight line connecting two points. This

element activates six degrees of freedom at both of its joints (three translational

and three rotational) and include the effects of biaxial bending, torsion, axial

deformation and biaxial shear deformations.

A frame element has its own local coordinate system. The axes of this local

system are denoted by 1, 2 and 3. The “1” axis is directed along the length of the

element, the “2 & 3” axes lie in the plane perpendicular to the element.

Understanding the local coordinate system is essential since it is the basis of load

assignment and reading analysis results.

22

ETABS reports internal forces in frame elements as follows:

V2, the shear force in the 1-2 plane.

V3, the shear force in the 1-3 plane.

T, the axial torque.

M2, the bending moment in the 1-3 plane (about the 2-axis).

M3, the bending moment in the 1-2 plane (about the 3 axis)

All frame elements used in the model are prismatic and have square sections. All column

supports at the bottom of the lower basement level are pinned.

Section Depth (mm) Width (mm) Material

C70x70 700 700 Concrete_35MPa

C40X40 400 400 Concrete_35MPa

The figure below shows local axes of a typical column in ETABS, where the width is

along the 3-axis and the depth is along the 2-axis.

23

4.2.2. Soil Springs

The soil supporting the structure is assumed to be linear and elastic with constant sub-

grade modulus of (40 * safety factor * soil allowable pressure). Soil springs are assigned

as area springs with stiffness equal to sub-grade modulus in the Z-direction and zero

stiffness in the other two directions.

Soil property (Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction is 25,000 kN/m3) is assigned to all shell

elements that compose the mat foundation.

24

4.2.3. The Shell Element:

membrane and plate-bending behavior. The major advantage of using the shell

element in this model is that it does not have to be planar, thus it can be used to

model inclined ramps and stairs. Shell elements in the model are uniformly-

loaded in gravity and normal-to-plane directions.

Both quadrilateral and triangular elements are used in the model, but the majority

of shell elements are of a quadrilateral shape. Triangular elements are used in

corners and irregular locations where the quadrilateral element could not be used.

The shell element has its own local coordinate system. The axes of this local

system are denoted 1, 2 and 3. The “1 & 2” axes lie in the plane of the element

and the “3-axis” is normal to the plane. The shell element always activates all six

degrees of freedom at each of its connected joints (Ux, Uy, Uz, Rx, Ry and Rz).

25

All shell elements used in the model are “thin-shells” which means that shear

deformations are neglected. Local axes of area elements are meant to be uniform (all

pointing towards one direction); this facilitates retrieving analysis results and assigning

loads.

F11: Direct force per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the

positive and negative 1 faces in the 1-axis direction.

F22: Direct force per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the

positive and negative 2 faces in the 2-axis direction.

F12: Shearing force per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the

positive and negative 1 faces in the 2-axis direction, and acting on the positive and

negative 2 faces in the 1-axis direction.

V13: Out-of-plane shear per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on

the positive and negative 1 faces in the 3-axis direction.

V23: Out-of-plane shear per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on

the positive and negative 2 faces in the 3-axis direction.

M11: Direct moment per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the

positive and negative 1 faces about the 2-axis.

M22: Direct moment per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the

positive and negative 2 faces about the 1-axis.

M12: Twisting moment per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on

the positive and negative 1 faces about the 1-axis, and acting on the positive and

negative 2 faces about the 2-axis.

26

Shell elements are used in the model for the following structural systems:

A mat foundation of 25 cm thickness is spread under the entire building; underneath

columns there is additional thickness (drop panels) extruding 35 cm below the mat

foundation. Concrete of 35 MPa compressive strength is used for the foundations.

27

4.2.3.2 The Walls:

Walls of 30 cm thickness are constructed in the outer perimeter of the building where they

act as retaining walls. Interior walls are of 20cm thickness acting as shear walls and elevator

cores. All walls are defined as shell elements. All wall supports at the bottom of the lower

basement level were idealized as pinned connections. Windows and doors are assigned as

wall openings.

28

4.2.3.3Ramps:

Ramps are used in basement parking levels, so the model includes four ramps. They are

modeled as shell elements with a thickness of 25cm. Ramps’ meshing is made with added

accuracy so that the nodes on the ramp are adequately connected with the shear walls

surrounding it. The modeling choice is made since there will be ample steel anchorage

between the ramps and the walls; concrete is cast simultaneously for ramps and the adjacent

parts of the walls.

29

4.2.3.4 Stair Cases:

The stair slabs are modeled as shell elements having a thickness of 20 cm. The stairs’ slabs

are connected with the floor slabs in the model with no connection to the shear walls.

30

4.2.3.5 Slabs:

Slabs of 25 cm thickness are defined as shell elements; they are used in the model for all

floor levels.

4.2.4. Model Creation Procedure

The finite elements comprising the structure are interconnected with high accuracy and

precision starting from base to top floor level.

The 13-floors could be all replicated at once, but this is not a convenient act since errors

in the model are almost inevitable, therefore once a certain storey is ready it is preferred

to carry out a “Model Check” which will check area overlaps and other types of errors in

the model. When a “Model Check” indicates errors, it is the designer’s job to locate the

errors and fix them before trying to perform a “Model Run”, taking into consideration

that a “no-error-message” that the check process shows does not necessarily indicate

that the model will be “error-free” after performing the “Model Run”. In conclusion,

carrying out a “Model Run” upon the completion of each individual story is the proper

way to smoothen the process of locating errors. The “Model Run” is performed using

the standard solver at the level of modeling since it reports errors in the model and locates

them.

32

Most types of errors that are encountered are the “lost digits of accuracy”, mostly of 6 or

7 digits. The other type of error is the “Instability Error” which indicates the whole

structure or some elements are instable; this is normally due to lack of boundary

conditions.

After making sure that model is free of any type of error, an equilibrium check is carried

out. A test point load of 100 kN is applied at some point in the model in the three

directions (X, Y and Z) and base reactions are subsequently checked. Results confirm the

state of static equilibrium since base reactions in all directions must equal the applied

point loads.

After making sure that the model is free of any type of errors, the loads are assigned

according to the minimum design loads reported in Tables 4 & 5. All loads in the model

are uniform loads distributed on area elements.

For the assignment of load cases (superimposed, live and snow loads) on the slabs, all

the slabs having the same load values are selected and have the load assigned to them in

the gravity direction.

33

CHAPTER II: LINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS & DESIGN

1. Preliminary Analysis Results

A thickness of 25cm for the slabs is deemed adequate for resisting punching shear, yet the

method used for the check is simple and does not account for moment effects on the

punching shear stress and assumes a one-way behavior of slabs; a method that is not very

accurate for buildings.

SAFE V12 software is used for calculating punching shear ratios. Floors from ETABS

model are exported to SAFE V12 while considering load on the exported floor plus all loads

that come from upper stories. Punching shear ratio is the quotient of the maximum design

shear stress over the concrete shear stress capacity. Ratios with a value of less than one mean

that slab thickness is adequate for resisting punching shear; otherwise, slab thickness must be

increased.

The punching shear ratio check is performed for the mat foundation, 4th basement and 1st

roof. This selection of floors is based on change in live load values and load from upper

stories. 4th basement has the largest vertical load on columns; mat foundation has the largest

vertical load combined with soil stress while the 1st roof has the highest live load value of all

floors.

The following table is the SAFE output for punching shear ratios based on ACI-318-08 code

considering zero reinforcement for the 4th basement. COMB4 is used for the calculation.

Maximum shear ratio (highlighted in red) is less than one. The “Not Calculated” message is

generated because SAFE does not compute shear stress for columns that intersect with

beams and/or shear walls. A 250 mm-thickness slab is deemed adequate for resisting

punching shear for basement floors.

Point Status

(m) (m) (Unitless) (kN)

2087 14.426 12.042 Not Calculated

2088 19.126 25.842 OK 0.75442 589.752

2089 19.126 18.892 OK 0.524153 473.234

2090 19.126 12.042 OK 0.461789 399.601

2091 19.126 5.742 OK 0.733241 651.462

2092 27.588 25.842 OK 0.836288 732.716

2093 27.588 18.892 OK 0.834174 766.548

2094 27.588 12.042 OK 0.888361 762.012

2095 27.588 5.742 OK 0.793316 753.616

2096 38.867 12.042 OK 0.991457 666.383

2097 38.867 5.742 OK 0.891976 674.168

2098 38.867 18.892 OK 0.922998 650.342

2099 45.262 25.842 OK 0.881885 743.552

2100 45.262 18.892 OK 0.610887 559.122

34

2101 45.262 12.042 OK 0.513137 480.402

2102 45.262 5.742 OK 0.466837 444.783

2103 8.41506 5.742 OK 0.764348 702.741

2104 6.867 0 Not Calculated

2105 14.426 0 Not Calculated

2106 19.126 0 Not Calculated

2107 27.588 0 Not Calculated

2108 33.012 0 Not Calculated

2109 38.867 0 Not Calculated

2110 45.262 0 Not Calculated

2111 51.004 5.742 Not Calculated

2112 51.71601 12.042 Not Calculated

2113 52.49017 18.892 Not Calculated

2114 53.27564 25.842 Not Calculated

2115 54.114 33.26 Not Calculated

2116 45.262 33.52765 Not Calculated

2117 38.867 33.721 Not Calculated

2118 33.012 33.89803 Not Calculated

2119 27.588 34.06202 Not Calculated

2120 19.126 34.31787 Not Calculated

2121 14.426 34.45998 Not Calculated

2122 9.332 34.614 Not Calculated

2123 3.24655 12.042 Not Calculated

2124 1.54805 5.742 Not Calculated

2125 0 0 Not Calculated

2126 6.96705 25.842 Not Calculated

2127 5.09332 18.892 Not Calculated

2128 10.11355 12.042 Not Calculated

2332 14.426 18.892 Not Calculated

2345 14.426 25.842 Not Calculated

10410 33.012 25.842 Not Calculated

10428 38.867 25.842 Not Calculated

10431 38.867 29.742 Not Calculated

10449 33.012 29.742 Not Calculated

10476 29.088 29.742 Not Calculated

10479 29.088 25.842 Not Calculated

2087 14.426 12.042 Not Calculated

Table 12: Punching shear ratios for all 50 columns in the 4th basement

SAFE V2 uses the following equation for calculating punching shear stress (CSI Technical

Report 1 “How SAFE Calculates Punching Shear Ratios, November 16th, 1998”). The following

snapshot illustrates how SAFE applies the punching shear equation.

VU =

35

Figure 27: Snapshot of SAFE punching shear parameters for a 700X700mm interior column

36

The same procedure is performed for the 1st roof floor where the live load is 4.8 kN/m2

(The largest of all floors).

Point Status

(m) (m) (Unitless) (kN)

2187 14.426 12.042 Not Calculated

2189 19.126 25.842 OK 0.933907 705.807

2191 19.126 18.892 OK 0.990372 825.109

2193 19.126 12.042 OK 0.953191 783.597

2195 19.126 5.742 Not Calculated

2197 27.588 25.842 OK 0.954601 715.622

2198 27.588 18.892 Failed 1.401612 1246.713

2199 27.588 12.042 Failed 1.495514 1280.51

2201 27.588 5.742 Not Calculated

2203 38.867 12.042 OK 0.964988 1177.222

2205 38.867 5.742 Not Calculated

2207 38.867 18.892 Failed 1.441559 1158.114

2208 45.262 25.842 Not Calculated

2210 45.262 18.892 Not Calculated

2212 45.262 12.042 Not Calculated

2214 45.262 5.742 Not Calculated

2216 8.41506 5.742 Not Calculated

2226 10.11355 12.042 Not Calculated

2249 38.867 25.842 Not Calculated

2250 38.867 29.742 Not Calculated

2251 29.088 29.742 Not Calculated

2252 29.088 25.842 Not Calculated

2322 14.426 18.892 Not Calculated

2335 14.426 25.842 Not Calculated

14793 33.012 25.842 Not Calculated

14830 33.012 29.742 Not Calculated

Table 13: Punching shear ratios for all 25 columns in the 1st roof

Results show that a 250-mm-thick slab is inadequate for resisting punching shear at the

interior columns therefore 150-mm-thick drop panels are used at interior columns. After

applying the same procedure; Ground and Mezzanine floors need 150-mm-thick drop panels

for the interior columns. Accordingly, a drop panel of 40 cm thickness is defined and

assigned into the model at all interior columns.

37

1.2 Deflection:

Deflection of structural elements in the building is a major concern. Actual deflections in the

building need to be checked against permissible deflection limits in the ACI 318-08 code in

order to judge slab thickness adequacy.

Table 14: ACI TABLE 9.5 (b) of maximum permissible roof deflections

The critical criterion for checking deflection is L/480 since the building has nonstructural

elements likely to be damaged by large deflections. Floors are exported separately to SAFE

V12 for deflection check.

Location Allowable

Max. deflection, Critical Span

Floor Case Deflection Status

Uz (mm) length (mm)

X Y (mm)

Roof 1 Comb4 22.99 33.012 15.042 11300 23.5 OK

GF Comb4 21.59 33.012 15.042 11300 23.5 OK

B4 Comb4 22.54 33.012 15.042 11300 23.5 OK

F1 Comb4 18.57 33.012 15.042 11330 23.5 OK

Maximum deflection values do not exceed maximum permissible values, therefore the slab

thickness is judged adequate.

38

2. Structural Design for Static Loads

After analysis of the ETABS model has been completed and the preliminary results are quite

satisfying, the design process will be carried out in order to select optimum section

dimensions and reinforcement ratios for all structural elements in the building.

This includes the design of both columns and beams in the building. Design is performed in

compliance with the ACI-318-11 Code.

Column sections used in the modeling stage are checked again in the design stage in

order to assure their adequacy of resisting applied forces and to select the optimum

section dimensions. ETABS is used for this type of design where all columns in the

model are assigned to an “auto-select list” where the software is given multiple

sections defined by the user; the software’s job is to select the optimum section. A

first check trial was carried out; it indicated that 70X70cm column section is not

adequate at some locations.

Three auto-select lists are created; one for the interior columns that have relatively

large axial loads, one for the interior columns that have relatively small axial loads

and one for the exterior columns.

Radius of Gyration

Section Label Width mm Depth mm

about weak axis(mm)

39

Small Interior Columns

Radius of Gyration

Section Label Width Depth

about weak axis(mm)

Radius of Gyration

Section Label Width Depth

about weak axis(mm)

Figure 27 below shows local axes of columns in ETABS, where width is along 3-axis and

depth is along 2-axis.

The drawing next page shows all columns in the 4th basement level with all column labels.

ETABS provided optimum sections for each column label according to the “auto-select” list

each column is assigned to. Large interior columns and small interior columns are divided

into 5 groups based on story levels; there are five groups (basements, GF to F2, F3 to F5,

2Roofs and the staircase). Exterior columns are not assigned to any group, thus sections for

these columns are going to be the same along all story levels.

40

Figure 29: Column Labels

41

Column

Auto-select list Group Design Section

Label

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C22 F3 to F5 C80X80

Columns_Large

2 Floors C80X80

Staircase C60X60

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C23 F3 to F5 C80X80

Columns_Large

2 Floors C80X80

Staircase C60X60

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C24

Columns_Large

F3 to F5 C80X80

2 Floors C80X80

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C25

Columns_Large

F3 to F5 C80X80

2 Floors C80X80

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C42 F3 to F5 C80X80

Columns_Large

2 Floors C80X80

Staircase C60X60

42

Column

Auto-select list Group Design Section

Label

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C20 F3 to F5 C80X80

Columns_Large

2 Floors C80X80

Staircase C60X60

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C12

Columns_Large

F3 to F5 C80X80

2 Floors C80X80

Basements C80X80

GF to F2 C80X80

Interior

C16

Columns_Large

F3 to F5 C80X80

2 Floors C80X80

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60

C3

Small F3 to F5 C60XC40

2 Floors C60X60

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60

C11

Small F3 to F5 C60XC40

2 Floors C60X60

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns

C18 GF to F2 C60X60

Small

F3 to F5 C60XC40

43

Interior_Columns

C18 2 Floors C60X60

Small

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60

C19

Small F3 to F5 C60XC40

2 Floors C60X60

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60

C7

Small F3 to F5 C60X40

2 Floors C60X40

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60

C8

Small F3 to F5 C60X60

2 Roofs C60XC40

Basements C60X60

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60

C9

Small F3 to F5 C60X60

2 Roofs C60XC40

Basements C60XC40

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60XC40

C10

Small F3 to F5 C60XC40

2 Roofs C60XC40

Basements C60XC40

Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60XC40

C13

Small F3 to F5 C60XC40

2 Roofs C60XC40

44

Column

Auto-select list Group Design Section

Label

45

C17 External Columns All C40X40

Selection of “Auto-select” lists and column groups take two points into consideration:

optimization (selecting the minimum section that resists applied loads) and convenience

during construction by keeping the number of column sections as minimum and as uniform

as possible.

The table below shows an example of forces in design sections in the 4th basement level.

Label m kN kN kN kN.m kN.m kN.m

3 -4342 -402 -142 1.69 31 112

C23 Comb5 0 -9175 -228 98 1.33 202 -548

3 -9112 -228 98 1.33 -54 189

C13 Comb5 0 -2690 -20 -13. -0.4 -9.15 -28

3 -2666 -20 -13 -0.4 46.77 40

C48 Comb5 0 -395 2 -11 0.76 -13 10.6

3 -228 -4.6 25.8 -0.69 -12.9 5.7

According the equation Φ Pn (max) = 0.80ø [0.85f’c (Ag – Ast) + fyAst], where Φ=0.65,

f’c=35 MPa and Ast assumed as 3%, a section of 550x550mm would we adequate for

resisting the axial force on C23 column, but the design section is larger due to high

biaxial moment effects acting on the section.

C23 column is taken as an example of ETABS column design and illustrated in detail in

the following tables. Reinforcement detailing is provided as well.

46

ETABS 2013 Concrete Frame Design

ACI 318-11 Column Section Design

Level Element Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF Type

B4 C23 C80x80 Comb5ic(Envelope Static) 0 3000 0.4 Sway Special

Section Properties

800 800 50 17.3

Material Properties

27806 35 1 413 413

0.9 0.65 0.75 0.75 0.6 0.85

Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Rebar Area Rebar %

kN kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm² %

11746.2555 460.9231 -709.4527 460.9231 460.9231 10129 1.58

kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm

Major Bending(Mu3) -709.4527 0 -709.4527 460.9231 39.2

Minor Bending(Mu2) 155.0855 0 155.0855 460.9231 39.2

Unitless Unitless Unitless Unitless mm

Major Bend(M3) 0.522102 1 1 1 3000

Minor Bend(M2) 0.4 1 1 1 3000

47

ETABS 2013 Concrete Frame Design

ACI 318-11 Column Section Design

Column Element Details (Shear Details)

Level Element Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF Type

B4 C23 C80x80 Comb5ic(Envelope Static) 0 3000 0.4 Sway Special

Section Properties

800 800 50 17.3

Material Properties

27806 35 1 413 413

mm²/m kN kN kN-m kN kN kN

Major Shear(V2) 0 299.8167 11746.2555 -548.6075 1030.5642 0 1030.5642

Minor Shear(V3) 0 98.1831 11746.2555 202.573 1030.5642 0 1030.5642

Design Forces

kN kN kN-m

Major Shear(V2) 299.8167 9175.5855 -709.4527

Minor Shear(V3) 98.1831 9175.5855 155.0855

Design Basis

Unitless MPa MPa cm²

1 413 35 6400

kN cm² mm²

Major Shear(V2) 299.8167 6000 5064

Minor Shear(V3) 98.1831 6000 5064

Shear Rebar Design

MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa mm²/m

Major Shear(V2) 0.5 2.29 6.22 1.72 0 0

Minor Shear(V3) 0.16 2.29 6.22 1.72 4.67 0

48

Rebar selection rules are provided to the software for detailing.

49

Figure 34: C23 design schedule from base to staircase

Figure 33: Design section "C" for C23 column

50

2.2 Wall Design:

Two groups of walls are used in the model; exterior walls of 30 cm thickness and interior

walls of 20 cm thickness. The first group of walls mainly resists the lateral earth pressure

induced by the backfill soil; therefore M22 and V23 are the governing forces for design. The

second group acts mainly as bearing walls.

Maximum values of flexural moment M22 and shear V23 are found in the wall section

shown in Figure34. M22 and V23 values are plotted in the following diagrams. The

maximum moment value occurs at the bottom and corresponds to 115 kN-m/m. The

maximum V23 value also occurs at the bottom and corresponds to 128 kN/m. This

external wall is supported by the basement slabs.

51

Figure 36: Extruded 3D view of external basement wall

The 3D Figure 35shows the external basement wall having pin supports at the bottom and

supported by slabs of B4, B3, B2 and B1.

52

Figure 36: M22 values for the external basement wall

moment value of 115 kN.m/m, section strip width of 1000 mm and 300 mm as the

effective depth of section, the reinforcement ratio is 0.35%, which is almost the same

reinforcement ratio of 0.31 % that the software has provided.

53

Story Pier Station Design Edge End Rebar Min. Current Pier Leg Leg X1 Leg Y1 Leg X2 Leg Shear

Label Type Rebar Rebar Spacing Reinf. Reinf. mm mm mm mm Y2 Rebar

mm % % mm mm2/m

B1 P30 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Top Leg 47225 346 48133 769 750

1

B1 P30 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Bottom 47225 346 48133 769 750

Leg 1

B2 P30 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Top Leg 47225 346 48133 769 750

1

B2 P30 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Bottom 47225 346 48133 769 750

Leg 1

B3 P30 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Top Leg 47225 346 48133 769 750

1

B3 P30 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Bottom 47225 346 48133 769 750

Leg 1

B4 P30 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Top Leg 47225 346 48133 769 750

1

B4 P30 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Bottom 47225 346 48133 769 750

Leg 1

54

For the interior walls, flexure and shear values as well as reinforcement data are reported. The

following figures show M22 and V23 values in an interior wall section where the maximum

values of forces are found.

Maximum value of M22 is reported at the bottom of the wall section and corresponds to 54

kN-m/m. A hand calculated reinforcement ratio for this flexural force is 0.37 %. ETABS

has provided a reinforcement ratio of 0.49 to 0.67, which is larger than the hand-calculated

reinforcement values.

55

Figure 39:V23 values for interior wall section

Maximum value of V23 is reported at the bottom of the wall section and corresponds to 70

kN/m.

The table next page provides reinforcement data for all interior walls with 20cm section

thickness in the whole building.

56

Pier Rebar Min. Current Pier Leg Leg Leg Leg Shear

Design Edge End

Story Label Station Spacing Reinf Reinf Leg X1 Y1 X2 Y2 Rebar

Type Rebar Rebar

mm % % mm mm mm mm mm mm2/m

Stair Top 360 2779 3601 2974

P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Case Leg 1 12 2 2 2

Botto

Stair 388 2681 3886 2974

P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.48 m Leg 500

Case 67 7 7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

Roof2 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

101 1204 1442 1204

Roof2 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

13.6 2 6 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

Roof1 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

Roof1 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

F5 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

F5 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

F4 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

F4 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

F3 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

F3 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

57

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

F2 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

F2 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

F1 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

F1 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

MEZZAN Top 124 1354 1244 1554

P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

-INE Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

MEZZAN 124 1354 1244 1554

P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

-INE 49.7 2 9.7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

GF P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

GF P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

Top 124 1354 1244 1554

B1 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.66 500

Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2

Botto

124 1354 1244 1554

B1 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.48 m Leg 500

49.7 2 9.7 2

1

58

In ETABS, all walls need to be labeled as piers so that the software would be able to provide

reinforcement detailing values and graphics. Personal preferences for rebar selection are also

provided to ETABS.

The software calculates all forces in wall sections and provides the required steel ratio and

the minimum reinforcement according to ACI-318-11 Code. The uniform reinforcement option

is selected; therefore reinforcement values are uniform in all wall sections having the same

pier label. 30cm walls are labeled as Pier30 and 20cm walls are labeled as Pier20.

59

Figure 41: 3D view of confined wall reinforcement at corners

60

`

61

`

62

2.3 Slab Design:

Each roof is exported to SAFE V12 for design. SAFE designs slabs for flexure and

punching shear in accordance with ACI-318-08. There are two methods for design; a finite-

element-based method and a strip-based one. For this project, the strip-based design is used

since it allows for rebar calculations, while the finite-element-based approach checks rebar

area provided by designer against actual stresses in the slab. Moreover, design strips can be

used for rebar detailing.

Drawing design strips along the X and Y axes. Design strips are called Strip A and

Strip B respectively. Strips for each axis are divided into two types; column strips

that are drawn along column centerlines and middle strips drawn between each two

rows of columns (in mid-spans). All strips have a width of 1 meter.

Note that SAFE draws strips from centerlines, which means that a 1 meter strip is

assigned as 0.5 meters from right and 0.5 meters from left. Design strips may cross

slab openings and/or extrude slab outer lines, but this does not affect analysis or

design results.

Load combinations are checked (already exported from ETABS model) and the

Strength (ultimate) Design Method is selected.

“Run and Design” is carried out; the designer inspects strip forces and compares

them with forces based on a finite element analysis. The values of shear and moment

are almost identical everywhere in the slab.

Only slabs for the 4th basement, ground floor and 1st roof are designed. This

selection of slabs is based upon variation in live load values.

63

2.3.1. 4th Basement Slab Design

Flexure and shear values are reported by SAFE. SAFE also provides reinforcement steel

in accordance with ACI-318-08 Code. This slab is solid with no drop panels and has a

thickness of 25cm.

For design strips, MSA stand for middle strip-A and CSA stands for column strip-A.

64

Conc Width FTopMoment FTopArea FTopAMin FBotMoment FBotArea FBotAMin V Force VArea Global X Global Y

2 2 2 2 2 Status

m kN.m mm mm kN.m mm mm kN mm /m m m

1 -0.1726 374.834 465.396 14.0022 277.36 0 86.941 0 OK 51.004 12.042

1 0 146.421 0 35.7218 485.884 465.396 30.496 0 OK 50.262 12.042

1 -127.3975 1669.485 465.396 0.0193 0 0 157.117 861.845 OK 45.262 12.042

1 -60.5339 765.834 465.396 0 0 0 157.117 861.845 OK 44.867 12.042

1 -10.9128 134.806 465.396 1.1423 14.048 0 52.217 0 OK 43.867 12.042

1 0 0 0 9.9952 123.418 465.396 15.758 0 OK 42.867 12.042

1 0 0 0 9.9846 123.286 465.396 11.761 0 OK 41.867 12.042

1 -3.09 38.034 465.396 1.2232 15.043 0 28.424 0 OK 40.867 12.042

1 -36.8601 461.063 465.396 0.0422 0 0 28.424 0 OK 39.867 12.042

1 -357.0576 5161.406 465.396 0 946.911 0 340.187 2820.612 OK 38.867 12.042

1 -82.3367 1053.254 465.396 0 0 0 340.187 2820.612 OK 38.012 12.042

1 -14.5507 180.049 465.396 2.8689 35.309 0 67.778 0 OK 37.012 12.042

1 -0.02 0 0 34.8068 434.843 465.396 41.713 0 OK 36.012 12.042

1 0 0 0 57.5723 727.293 465.396 26.256 0 OK 35.012 12.042

1 0 0 0 69.0246 876.982 465.396 13.978 0 OK 34.012 12.042

1 0 0 0 71.0779 904.01 465.396 4.913 0 OK 33.012 12.042

1 0 0 0 69.4167 882.139 465.396 12.769 0 OK 32.588 12.042

1 0 0 0 58.7434 742.518 465.396 24.532 0 OK 31.588 12.042

1 0 0 0 37.6057 470.443 465.396 38.952 0 OK 30.588 12.042

1 -7.3336 90.442 465.396 4.0817 50.263 0 56.092 0 OK 29.588 12.042

1 -66.5377 844.326 465.396 0 0 0 231.155 1212.478 OK 28.588 12.042

1 -265.5921 3801.853 465.396 0 0 0 231.155 1212.478 OK 27.588 12.042

1 -105.2553 1362.75 465.396 0 0 0 163.827 861.845 OK 27.126 12.042

1 -32.4039 404.358 465.396 0.0217 0 0 72.5 0 OK 26.126 12.042

1 -0.4702 5.781 0 10.8523 134.055 465.396 36.255 0 OK 25.126 12.042

1 0 0 0 28.1028 349.968 465.396 20.927 0 OK 24.126 12.042

65

Figure 47: Moment Diagrams for all A-strips in 4th basement slab

66

Figure 48: Moment Diagrams for all B-strips in 4th basement slab

67

2.3.2. First-Roof Slab Design

The roof slab has a relatively high live load of 4.8 kN/m2; therefore design is expected to

be different. This slab is solid with a thickness of 25cm and having drop panels of 40cm

thickness (15cm extrusion below slab surface) as stated earlier in the preliminary design.

Figure 50: Moment diagrams in both A&B strips for 1st-roof slab

Maximum negative and maximum positive moments are 689 kN.m and 96.7 kN.m are

reported respectively in the CSA2 strip in the slab.

68

ConcWidth FTopMoment FTopArea FTopAMin FBotMoment FBotArea FBotAMin VForce VArea GlobalX GlobalY

Status

m kN.m mm2 mm2 kN.m mm2 mm2 kN mm2/m m m

1 -692.2001 5925.636 744.634 0 201.323 0 510.627 2329.948 OK 27.588 12.042

1 -174.8691 2388.936 465.396 0 220.075 0 510.627 2329.948 OK 28.588 12.042

1 -43.3142 577.721 465.396 0 130.779 0 136.563 0 OK 29.588 12.042

1 -0.0868 125.632 0 35.1028 473.076 465.396 77.354 0 OK 30.588 12.042

1 0 111.039 0 74.6225 979.651 465.396 43.957 0 OK 31.588 12.042

1 0 107.217 0 93.4558 1229.757 465.396 22.479 0 OK 32.588 12.042

1 0 98.449 0 96.4577 1268.027 465.396 8.943 0 OK 33.012 12.042

1 0 97.796 0 93.3042 1224.313 465.396 23.05 0 OK 34.012 12.042

1 0 97.202 0 74.1228 969.458 465.396 44.788 0 OK 35.012 12.042

1 -0.0931 110.065 0 34.046 455.534 465.396 78.841 0 OK 36.012 12.042

1 -46.6357 625.263 465.396 0 147.345 0 146.988 0 OK 37.012 12.042

1 -187.5513 2582.8 465.396 0 366.405 0 605.309 3169.326 OK 38.012 12.042

1 -736.1775 6401.231 744.634 0 374.324 0 605.309 3169.326 OK 38.867 12.042

1 -85.5196 1095.772 465.396 0 0 0 74.946 0 OK 39.867 12.042

Table 26: Forces and Reinforcement as reported by SAFE for max. design strip in 1st Roof

69

2.4 Mat Foundation Design:

This is the structural system used in this project for supporting the building. The use of this

type of foundation reduces the potential of differential settlement. The relation between

stresses in the mat slab and the downward vertical settlement is defined as the soil sub-grade

modulus (K).

An initial check of the model under this service load combination (D+L) resulted in a base

reaction of 162,500 kN. With soil capacity of 250kN/m2 the required foundation area is

650m2 which is way less than the area of the foundation provided in the model. Modulus of

sub-grade used is K=25000 kN/m3.

Before starting the first run, all points are selected and released in the vertical Z direction,

and then soil sub-grade property is applied as area springs. An initial check of punching

shear results for the mat foundation shows that drop panels of 70cm below columns are not

adequate for resisting punching shear stress at some locations where shearing stress reached

twice that of the section’s capacity. Depth of drop panel had to be increased to 120cm in

order to resist punching shear stress.

The major concerns when designing foundations are; foundation uplifts and soil allowable

pressure. There should be no behavior of uplift in the mat foundation (tension in soil) and

the allowable soil pressure must not be exceeded at any part in the foundation. The

following table reports SAFEv12 values of soil pressure.

Surface Pressure

Area

(kN/m2)

F1 -112.98

F1 -137.1

F1 -156.3

F1 -156.29

F2 -0.57

F2 -20.15

F2 -18.83

F2 -0.91

F3 -118.7

F3 -118.92

F3 -99

F3 -98.7

F4 -98.7

F4 -99

F4 -62.53

F4 -60.07

F5 -60.07

F5 -62.53

F5 -32.98

F5 -26.27

F6 -26.27

70

F6 -32.98

F6 -21.96

F6 -9.09

Surface Pressure

Area

(kN/m2)

F9 -20.15

F9 -81.08

F9 -72.42

F9 -18.83

F10 -81.08

F10 -173.56

F10 -162.77

F10 -72.42

F11 -173.56

F11 -238.77

F11 -233.9

F11 -162.77

F12 -238.77

F12 -244.54

F12 -237.08

F12 -233.9

F13 -188.48

F13 -178.84

F13 -233.9

F13 -237.08

F14 -178.84

F14 -125.78

F14 -162.77

F14 -233.9

F15 -9.09

F15 -21.96

F15 -21.34

F15 -3.36

F22 -125.78

F22 -64.06

F22 -72.42

F22 -162.77

F23 -64.06

F23 -27.07

F23 -18.83

F23 -72.42

F24 -27.07

F24 -13.7

F24 -0.91

F24 -18.83

F26 -137.1

71

All pressure values have a negative sign which means that soil is subjected to compressive

forces only and no uplift in the foundation. Maximum and minimum absolute pressure value

highlighted in red is 244.54 kN/m2; it is less than the allowable soil pressure; 250 kN/m2.

The 25 cm mat thickness selected in the ETABS model is not adequate for resisting flexure

because the required reinforcement exceeded the maximum allowed. Thickness was

increased to 30 cm and resulted in an acceptable reinforcement ratio.

thickness of 120 cm.

thickness of 30 cm.

72

Figure 52: Moment diagrams of B strips in mat foundation

Section Width As,hand (mm2) As,SAFE (mm2)

kN.m mm Ratio

4318.3 1200 1000 0.0088 10,610 10877

-283.6 300 1000 0.0093 2,797 3344

The table above is a verification of steel reinforcement provided by SAFEv12 for maximum

negative and positive moments in the mat foundation. Now SAFE has provided steel

reinforcement areas for all strips in the mat foundation. For detailing, the designer has to

provide his own preferences for rebar diameters and spacing.

73

Figure 53: Mat foundation detailing preferences

74

CHAPTER III:

EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS & DESIGN

1. Background

Earthquakes can cause disastrous damage to structures if the forces they induce are

sufficiently greater than the capacity of structural elements in the structure. The potential

seismic forces that may hit the Gateway Building should be studied. Behavior of the gravity-

loaded structure will be investigated against lateral dynamic forces. Two methods are used

for calculating seismic forces; the equivalent static lateral load method and the response

spectrum method.

For gravity loads, the elevator cores and internal walls in the model act as bearing walls,

while walls in the outer perimeter act as bearing walls and resist shear and moment due to

lateral earth pressure from soil backfill in the basement levels. Analysis complies with 1997

UBC Code.

2. Geology

The Gateway building is located in al-Irsal Street, Ramallah. This zone is classified as 2A

with both the acceleration seismic and the velocity seismic coefficients (Ca and Cv) equal

to 0.15 because soil is classified as rock,SB. This is considered a moderate-risk zone

according to UBC97.

75

3. Modal Analysis

This is a linear analysis that is used to determine the vibration modes of the structure.

These modes are useful to understand the dynamic behavior of the structure and form

the basis of the Response Spectrum Analysis.

The Eigenvector analysis is used to find the modes of The Gateway Building. The

number of modes this analysis can provide is equal to the mass degrees of freedom

found in the model, but usually for such buildings the first modes are sufficient.

Eigenvector analysis reports values as Eigenvalues. An Eigenvalue is the square of the

circular frequency (

Where K is the stiffness and M is the mass participating in the dynamic analysis,

therefore the mass source must be well-defined in order to provide correct dynamic

behavior for the structure.

The mass participating in the dynamic behavior of the structure comprises of self-mass

of the structure plus superimposed dead load and a portion of live load; 0.3.

76

Circular

Period Frequency Eigenvalue

Mode Frequency

(Seconds) (cycle/second) (rad2/sec2)

(rad/sec)

1 1.102 0.907 5.7019 32.5119

2 0.931 1.074 6.748 45.5361

3 0.511 1.956 12.2874 150.9794

4 0.268 3.736 23.4749 551.0726

5 0.227 4.408 27.6991 767.2421

6 0.143 6.974 43.82 1920.1896

7 0.128 7.793 48.9648 2397.5558

8 0.121 8.296 52.1273 2717.2537

9 0.097 10.301 64.7201 4188.687

10 0.088 11.346 71.2888 5082.0939

11 0.083 12.116 76.125 5795.0088

12 0.074 13.576 85.2979 7275.7348

13 0.069 14.469 90.9094 8264.5268

14 0.065 15.368 96.5631 9324.4252

15 0.063 15.997 100.5101 10102.2897

16 0.059 16.899 106.1809 11274.3828

17 0.058 17.216 108.1725 11701.2977

18 0.058 17.374 109.1661 11917.2423

19 0.054 18.58 116.7427 13628.8596

20 0.053 18.872 118.5737 14059.7315

The UBC-97 code states in section 1631.5.2 that at least 90 percent of the participating

mass of the structure is included in the calculations for each principal horizontal

direction. This code requirement necessitated 20 modes to be inspected since 12 modes

were not enough to satisfy the code requirement.

UX 99.98 93.54

UY 99.98 93.49

The Equivalent Lateral Load Method is based on simplified procedure that substitutes

potential dynamic forces for their equivalent static ones based on code provisions and

factors. For analysis, equivalent static base shear is program-calculated based on the

input values according to the UBC-97 Code. This method gives a good indication of

story shears.

77

Parameter Value

T (seconds) 1.1

R 4.5

Soil profile type SB

Z 0.15

Ca 0.15

Cv 0.15

I 1.0

first mode of the structure. The software provided a value of 1.1 seconds.

Method A in Section 1630.2.2 in the UBC-97 Code provides an equation to

approximate T.

T= Ct (hn)3/4

Where, Ct= 0.03, a numerical coefficient.

hn= 137.8 ft, height of the building in feet.

This equation yielded a structure period of 1.2 seconds. This values is not significantly

different from the values provided by ETABS.

resisting systems. This factor makes the design forces less than the forces

induced by the earthquake. The Gateway Building’s lateral-force-resisting

structural system is classified as concrete shear-walls. Table 16-N in the UBC-97

Code provides R values for common structural systems.

SB, soil profile type as in Table 16-J in the UBC-97 Code. Soil on site is classified

as rock.

78

Z, seismic zone factor. The UBC-97 Code provides values for Z for all regions in

the world. For this analysis practice, the value of Z is taken from Earth Sciences

and Seismic Engineering Center at An-Najah University.

Equivalent lateral load is defined as a load pattern in ETABS in both X and Y directions.

This resulted in a 4142 kN base shear in the both X and Y-directions. Load patterns are

denoted by ELLMX and ELLMY.

79

5. Response Spectrum Analysis

Elastic dynamic analysis of a structure utilizes the peak dynamic response of all effective

modes. The response spectrum curve is a plot of period and acceleration based on

statistical data for each location.

For Ca and Cv values of 0.15 and a damping ratio of 5%, the UBC-97 Code provides a

response spectrum curve.

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

Acceleration

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

Period

Proper modal combinations are assigned into ETABS in order to utilize the response all

effective modes. Defining a modal combination is essential since peak modal responses

occur at different times. The CQC (complete quadratic combination) method is used for

modal combination.

80

6. Load Combinations

Comb6: U=1.2D + 1.0L + 1.0S + 1.0H + 1.0E

Comb7: U=1.2D + 1.0L + 1.0S + 1.0H - 1.0E

Comb8: U=Envelope(Comb5, Comb6, Comb7)

7. Results

All story drifts are below maximum allowable drifts in the UBC-97 Code. Design

philosophy is based on the idea of assuring life safety during earthquakes, therefore,

some structural elements may undergo plastic deformations due to seismic forces but

this will not cause threat to the life of the building’s occupants.

81

8. Structural Design for Dynamic Loads

The main concern is the lateral forces induced to the structure by the earthquakes.

Structural elements’ that are designed to resist gravity static forces are expected to fail

under dynamic loading. Capacity of elements designed in the linear static stage of the

project will be re-evaluated after applying dynamic loads, and necessary changes to their

design will be carried out if needed. Design under dynamic loads is compared to design

under static loads.

The mat foundation is subjected to the summation of all story shears in the building. Soil

is assumed to be the same as in the static analysis; linear with modulus of 25,000 kN/m 3.

The pressure in any point in the mat foundation must not exceed 250 kN/m2, that is the

maximum allowable soil pressure. Tension or uplift forces on the soil are not allowed as

well.

For resisting gravity static forces, a mat foundation thickness of 30cm thickness with

120cm drop panels under columns was dubbed adequate. This design is re-evaluated

under dynamic lateral load.

The first design trial deemed a 30cm thickness adequate for resisting flexure and shear

forces and provided reinforcement ratios that satisfy minimum requirement and are

below maximum allowed limit, but soil pressure exceeded maximum allowable limit and

there were tensile forces acting on the soil as shown in next table.

kN/m2 kN/m2 m m m m

8.98 -389.72 33.012 16.042 27.588 13.042

Table 34: Soil pressure summary due to combined lateral and gravity loads

Excessive pressure on soil can be treated by increasing the mat foundation stiffness. This

is achieved by increasing the thickness. Both uplift and excessive pressure on soil were

treated by increasing mat thickness to 60cm.

kN/m2 kN/m2 m m m m

-22 -241 8.410 35.658 14.426 17.042

82

Section

Design Strip thickness

mm

Max. negative

moment 4613.6221 1200

(kN.m)

Max. positive

moment 513.2 600

(kN.m)

Max. shear

3275.746 1200

(kN)

Table 36: Max. forces in the mat foundation due to dynamic load

The table above reports maximum moment and shear force in the mat foundation slab.

The difference between these forces and the forces reported due to static gravity loads

are not significantly different.

83

8.2 Slabs Design

Slab thickness and reinforcement ratios adequacy is judged based on dynamic loading.

The design completed for gravity loads will be checked against dynamic lateral loads.

Design strips are defined as stated earlier.

SAFE V12 has shown that the thickness of 25cm is adequate and is able to resist the

lateral load.

Moment values due to Comb8 are not significantly different from those due to Comb5,

therefore slab thickness is adequate. Some variations in reinforcement values have been

found. As per punching shear design, it was determined that the use of drop panels for

basement floors slabs is unnecessary. Under dynamic loading, 40cm drop panels had to

be used because punching shear ratios exceeded 1 at many locations.

2088 19.126 25.842 OK 0.825018 556.497

2089 19.126 18.892 OK 0.657269 244.066

2090 19.126 12.042 OK 0.634517 217.287

2091 19.126 5.742 Failed 1.176682 650.936

2092 27.588 25.842 OK 0.926061 496.443

2093 27.588 18.892 OK 0.779566 720.752

2094 27.588 12.042 OK 0.792111 716.204

2095 27.588 5.742 OK 0.927096 738.724

2096 38.867 12.042 Failed 1.150031 629.302

2097 38.867 5.742 Failed 1.402556 662.195

2098 38.867 18.892 Failed 1.024411 613.127

2099 45.262 25.842 Failed 1.119385 715.722

All punching shear calculations are based on the slab’s effective depth of 217mm.

84

After adding drop panels, all punching shear ratios were below 1.

2088 19.126 25.842 OK 0.51545 588.531

2089 19.126 18.892 OK 0.387563 414.934

2090 19.126 12.042 OK 0.392851 388.707

2091 19.126 5.742 OK 0.642104 682.224

2092 27.588 25.842 OK 0.662842 633.553

2093 27.588 18.892 OK 0.464407 727.141

2094 27.588 12.042 OK 0.472063 707.536

2095 27.588 5.742 OK 0.533066 788.709

2096 38.867 12.042 OK 0.684385 596.694

2097 38.867 5.742 OK 0.742246 686.242

2098 38.867 18.892 OK 0.63552 609.602

2099 45.262 25.842 OK 0.721301 846.306

Table 38: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab with drop panels

Reinforcement details for the 4th basement slab are shown in the appendix.

85

CHAPTER IV: Structural Design Summary & Conclusion

principles that comply with the ACI-318-11 Code have resulted in a section of 60-cm

depth with 120-cm drop panels below columns for punching-shear resistance. As for

columns, the largest section is square-shaped with 80-cm side length, and the smallest

section is also a square with 30-cm length. Exterior walls that resist the seismic lateral

forces as well as gravity forces have a 30-cm thick section with reinforcement ratios 3

times greater than the minimum ratio advised by the code. Interior walls have a section

of 20-cm. For slabs, all floors have slabs with 25-cm thickness with drop panels

protruding 15-cm below slab (total thickness of 40-cm) for resisting punching shear

forces.

2. Conclusion

This project group has come up with many conclusions regarding analysis and reinforced

concrete design. Conclusions are summed as follows:

Flat-plate slab systems are very efficient and can be used for relatively long spans in

commercial buildings. This practice is proven by eliminating numerous columns that

were considered superfluous.

Column-drop panels are good for both increasing punching shear capacity of the

section and for negative moment resistance. They have also been found to reduce

deflection along the span.

For numerical modeling, the shell-element is best used for modeling shear walls and

slabs for they take into consideration both in-plane and out-of-plane bending

behavior in addition to axial forces.

The soil supporting the structure did undergo excessive pressures and tensile forces

at some locations due to the lateral forces induced by the earthquake, therefore, the

mat thickness had to be doubled. This practice may not be economical but is

justified.

86

APPENDIX

Reinforcement Detailing

87

- Wall No.5 (4.2)m.rtfUploaded byAli Al-Basha
- IS 13920.1993Uploaded byYogesh Thorat
- CONCRETE SLAB DESIGN USING MATHCAD.pdfUploaded byDiaconu Sofia
- nonlinear analysis of shear dominant prestressed concrete beams using ansysUploaded byMaryam Sh
- DS Rebar Splicing HBUploaded bydarkchecho
- Ci3503crsi - Column Tie ConfigurationsUploaded byNono_geotec
- FORNEY TestingMachinesUploaded byNhayelli Gergette Estrada
- Pag Asa Standard Rebars InformationUploaded byrubydelacruz
- Reinforcing Bar Development and Splice Lengths per ACI 318-05.xlsUploaded bycengiz
- 4_HIT_RE500_BlackWhite.pdfUploaded byMajed Abou Tinnen
- NIST.GCR.16-917-40Uploaded byVasanth Kumar
- Sample of Design BriefUploaded byshingkeong
- Bi Ax Column DesignUploaded byGill Kulwindersingh
- STRUCTURAL LOAD DESIGN CRITERIA FOR OFFICE BUILDING.xlsxUploaded bynap_carino
- PIP STE05121 Anchor Bolt Design GuideUploaded bypklin8866
- Chapt_5_4_flexure.pdfUploaded byfdfsdfs
- RECTBEAM_(318-05)(1)Uploaded byficsa20
- Edibon MDBUploaded byelenamoisoni
- TCE-NEW.docxUploaded byCalvin Christian
- Slab Design UpdatedUploaded byKeipeng Ng
- ASTM A 1035 A 1035M 04.pdfUploaded byGMQ8
- 3_am_WitjeUploaded byIvan Kelam
- Statica Constructiilor-Structuri Static Determinate-Indrumator Pentru LucrariUploaded byvasi
- Assignment-7question and SolutionUploaded byEdmar Magsakay
- Study of Mechanical Properties of the Available Brands of Steel Reinforcement in Kurdistan IraqUploaded byIAEME Publication
- Boundary Wall (2)Uploaded bynaseer
- Studienarbeit Teil 1_fertig.pdfUploaded byChechu Hermida Carballeira
- 030131 Concrete RehabilitationUploaded byjack.simpson.chang
- Slab ANAUploaded byAnthony Turner
- bourzam2008Uploaded byAdel Adel

- ELEVATION2-2.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- FIRST FLOOR PLAN-Model.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- Design Creteria Varation OrderUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- A.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- TOPVIEW-Model.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- vocabulary for ielts .pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- ELEVATION2-4.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- AUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- ELEVATION2-2.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- RAW - level at +101.30-Model.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- new.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- PlantsUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- First Floor Plan-modelUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- strorageUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- AR-101 -1183 TOPOGRAPHY-2-Model.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- Base of Generator3Uploaded byHayman Ahmed
- perkinsUploaded byEngAhmed
- a22.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- 1104C44TAG2TPD1637TechnicalDataSheetUploaded byFarhan Jutt
- aUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- 1.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- BASE OF GENERATOR.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- BUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- Base of Generator3Uploaded byHayman Ahmed
- 1Uploaded byHayman Ahmed
- BASE OF GENERATOR3.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- 1104C-44TAG2-Electropak.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- Base of GeneratorUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- 1.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed
- new.pdfUploaded byHayman Ahmed

- Other Syllabus Arch-03Uploaded byAnjan Kumar M
- Unified Mechanical EngineeringUploaded byshalom_pkl
- Assessment of PCCPUploaded bySuresh C
- AISC Design Guide 02 Errata Steel And Composite Beams With Web Openings.pdfUploaded byFernando Gutiérrez Urzúa
- E.L. Kemp - Effect of Rust and Scale on the Bond CharacteristicsUploaded bying_fernandogalvez2015
- XANSYS ~ View Topic - Applying Constraint Equations in Workbench 12Uploaded byRavi Khandelwal
- Calculation of Shafts in Marine ApplicationsUploaded byDirt Filter
- Y+ and First cell ht.pdfUploaded bylukhman
- Direct Shear Test_lab ManualUploaded byEr Venkat
- General Sol BarUploaded bySandya Karanam
- Co Relation of Pont Load With Uni Axial Compressive StrengthUploaded byNasir Ali Bhatti
- Design Procedures for Marine Renewable EnergyUploaded byAsad Hafudh
- ACI-351.2R-94 Foundations for Static EquipmentUploaded byjulian_andres51
- Local Buckling of Cft-column Verrr Imagen de Mecanismo de ColapsoUploaded byLeonardo Perez Montes
- Cavern DesignUploaded byShishir_Kadam_2138
- GATE 2014 Question Paper & Answers - XEUploaded byaglasem
- Topic 3a - Prestress ConceptUploaded byKumarJR86
- 48245_03Uploaded bybatmanbittu
- Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing by Barlow, Rae & PopeUploaded byAndrea Rapisarda
- Tension Compression and ShearUploaded byRizal Muhammad Faraday
- Spread FootingUploaded byMary Marasigan
- Irwin KiesUploaded byDeepak Kumar Behera
- Design Industrial BuildingsUploaded bydmardetk
- Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil (GRS) Walls Wu 2019Uploaded byBogdan Badea
- Geotechnical Studies and Design of La_Yesca_DamUploaded byjdav1206
- ONGC Mechanical Question PaperUploaded byPrabhu Charan Teja
- Seismic Design and Retrofit of Piping SystemsUploaded byv
- Special Blasting TechniqueUploaded byArief Pratama
- The Effect of Alumina and Titania on the Mechanical Properties of Epoxy ResinUploaded byIRJET Journal
- LRFD - Design - Bridge - Structures - Federal Highway Administration7Uploaded byDiane Mahal KO