Design of Reinforced Concrete Chamber

The RC chamber was proposed to house the pressure relief valve and to contain the
release of water which is evacuated (channel) same to soakaway without causing
inconvenience of ponding/flooding to residential area. The arrangement of the
Pressure Relief Valve inside the RC chamber is shown under the calculation sheets
with relevant data to be used for carrying out the design. A schematic drawing of the
RC chamber housing the PRV is shown in Figure X.
Design Assumptions
1. The chamber is kept 500mm above ground level to avoid the passing of heavy
vehicular load on top of the chamber
2. The height of the chamber was obtained by considering the depth from ground
level to crown of existing AC pipe 250mm which is 1500mm.
3. Width of strip footing= 700mm (Trial size of footing)
4. Strip footing thickness= 250mm (Trial size of footing)
5. Wall thickness= 175mm
Introduction to Concrete Design
Reference was made to the British Codes of Practice and Books for the design of the
RC chamber as follows:
1. BS 8110-1:1997- Structural use of concrete (Part 1: Code of Practise for Design
and Construction)
2. Design of Liquid Retaining Structures by R.D.Anchor
3. Reinforced Concrete Design Theory and Examples by T.J. MACGINLEY & B.S.
CHOO
4. Design of structural element by W.M.C Mckenzie

Before the advent of limit state design, structural design was based on the concept of
permissible stress design, by which the structure is designed such that the stresses in
any parts of the structure would not exceed the elastic limit of the materials. In other
words, it aims to ensure all the materials in the structure remain linear elastic.
However, it is found that a structure may not collapse or even can still perform
satisfactorily if certain parts of the materials in a structure have stressed beyond the
elastic limit. Hence, a more rational and realistic assessment of the uncertainties in
structural design, the Limit state design (LSD), is advocated.
Clause 2.1.1 of BS 8110-1:1997 states that the aim of design is the achievement of
an acceptable probability that the structure being designed will perform satisfactorily
during its life ie. it must carry the loads safely, not deform excessively and have
adequate durability and resistance to effects of misuse and fire. In other words, it
ensures the structure would not exceed its limit states, which are broadly classified
into two: (i) ultimate limit state (ULS) and (ii) serviceability limit state (SLS).

Ultimate Limit State (ULS)- is the state when the structure collapses,
overturn or buckle when subjected to the design loads. It concerns with the strength
and stability of the structure.

Serviceability limit state (SLS) is the state when the structure fails to serve its
purposes. It concerns with deflection, cracking, durability, vibration, etc. of the
structure.

In design, both limit states must be checked.

For commonly encountered building structures, the usual approach is to design for the
strength under ULS first, and then check if other limit states under SLS, e.g. deflection
and cracking, will not be exceeded.

Design Data
Material Properties/ Grades
Concrete
Characteristic strength of concrete is:
• 28-day cube crushing strength
• Not more than 5% of test results will fall below it
• Denoted by fcu in N/mm2 (or MPa)
For this design, the characteristic strength of concrete was 30 MPa. (Concrete Grade
30)
The unit weight of concrete was taken as 25 kN/m3

Reinforcing Steel/ Reinforcement

Characteristic strength of steel is:
• Yield strength
• Not more than 5% of test results will fall below it
• Denoted by fy in N/mm2 (or MPa)

Reinforcing bars are produced in two grades: hot rolled mild steel bars have a yield
strength fy of 250 N/mm2; hot rolled or cold worked high yield steel bars have a yield
strength fy of 460 N/mm2.
For this design, fy for main bars is taken as 460 N/mm2
Soil properties

• Unit weight of soil- 18 kN/m3

• Angle of repose- 30 degrees
• The soil bearing capacity was taken as 150 kPa based on the design carried
out within existing Irrigation Project of Block 2 and 3.
Water

Unit weight of water- 10 kN/m3

Loading and partial factor of safety

Dead load is as a result of the earth pressure acting laterally on the wall and the self-
weight of the chamber. Live load is due to surcharge. Wind load is not applicable for
this design
ADVERSE BENEFICIAL
DEAD LOADS 1.4 1.0
LIVE LOADS 1.6 1.0

Concrete cover

Concrete cover to main reinforcement bar is taken as 30mm due to exposure

conditions considered as moderate.
Figure A: Schematic drawing illustrating PRV assembly in the RC Chamber
Design Approach adopted for the Design of the RC chamber
The RC chamber was founded on a compacted sub grade of cohesive soil materials
and a safe bearing pressure of 150 kN/m2 was taken for the sizing of the strip footing.

The same type of cohesive soil materials was used for backfilling behind the wall during
construction. The wall of the chamber was designed as structural member with fixed
support on three sides (footing and two walls in perpendicular direction) and the fourth
side was unsupported.

The design was carried out in the following stages:

1. Design and Detailing of RC wall taking into consideration ultimate design load due
to active pressure of submerged soil, surcharge and hydrostatic pressure.
2. Check for bearing pressure analysis
The width of the footing was dictated based on Bearing Pressure Analysis. The
bearing pressure underneath the RC chamber was assessed based on the
Serviceability Limit State.
Ground Pressure due to action of direct load design and with lateral moment was
ensured not to exceed the safe beating pressure. (Refer to Sketches on the next
pages)
3. Design and Detailing of the strip footing designed to resist forces and moments
under Ultimate Limit State to the recommendation of BS 8110.

The thickness of the strip footing was checked against

shear at a distance d (effective depth of the strip footing)
from the face of the wall. This shall be illustrated in the
calculation sheets.
The shear stress must be less than 5 N/mm2 or 8√fcu
whichever greater.
Direct stress

Where
P is the total axial load and
A is the area of the strip footing in linear m = (W x 1 m)
Bending stress
As the wall of the chamber was designed as structural member with fixed support on
three sides and the fourth side was unsupported, the maximum negative vertical
moment moment (M) at base was taken for the calculating the bending stress.

𝑀
Bending stress (±) =
𝑍
𝑏𝑑 2
Where z =
6
Combined Stress
Combined stress varies linearly across the base of the footing.
Maximum pressure (+ve) at one end of the footing was ensured not to
exceed the safe bearing pressure and the minimum pressure (+ve) at
the other end must not be less than zero.
The pressure was kept positive so as to avoid tension at one end and
this was made possible when the eccentricity of the resultant reaction
was within the middle third rule i.e ( D/6)

Otherwise when the eccentricity was found greater that D/6 as in the
case of this design, the distribution of pressure was adjusted to a
triangular distribution of contact pressure as illustrated in the figure.
The maximum pressure obtained was ensured not to exceed the
allowable bearing pressure.
DESIGN INFORMATION
Project Modification irrigation network within NPIP Stage 1 under command area
of Lateral M1B2L9 under application MAC/16489/85/6250.1

Part of Structure Design of RC chamber to house hydraulic control valve

Relevant Codes BS 8110

Design Assumptions

1. The chamber is kept 500mm above ground level to avoid the passing of heavy vehicular
load on top of the chamber

2. The height of the chamber was obtained by considering the depth from ground level to
crown of existing AC pipe 250mm which is 1500mm.

Design Data
Material Properties
Concrete fcu 30 Mpa
ɣconcrete 25 kN/m3

Reinforcing Steel
fy 460 N/mm2
Soil properties
ɣsoil 18 kN/m3
ø internal angle of friction of soil 30 °
soil bearing capacity 150 Kpa
Water
ɣwater 10 kN/m3

Concrete cover 30 mm

Loading and partial factor of safety Adverse Beneficial

Dead loads 1.4 1
Live loads 1.6 1

Surcharge due to vehicular load 20 kN/m2

Imposed loads 2.5 kN/m2

Unit weight of GSM cover 76.98 kN/m3

Thickness of GMS cover 4 mm