Approval Code Response Summary

Item Title √ Tick Remark

which
Applicable
To be Filled
by
Approver
Code
1 2 3
1 PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2 x
ESC2 Precast Concrete Structure System Design Report

Total x

Date: 23 Oct 2019

Reviewer Signature:

Alvin Leong
(DDC3)

Approver Signature:

James Stabler David Parks

(DDC3) (LDC)

Note: Code 1 – Accepted

Code 2 – Accepted with comments
Code 3 – Rejected

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 1 of 8
 DOCUMENT / DRAWING REVIEW REQUEST SHEET

Submission / Doc. / Dwg. Title* : ESC2 Precast Concrete Structure System Design Report
Doc. / Dwg. Reference No.* : PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2 Previous DRR No. : -
Doc. / Dwg. Rev.* : 00 TRM / LET Ref. No.* : SSP-MGKT-TRANSMIT-xx
Submission Date* : 23 Oct 2019 Discipline : Structure
DRR Ref.* : SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx DRR Rev. No.* : 00
Reviewer(s)* : DDC3 Head of Department* :
Review Date* : 23 Oct 2019
*Compulsory

Doc. / Dwg. Reference

Item Comments Responses Code
No. and Rev. / Clause

1 General comments for Design
a. Refer to Attachment 1a, revise the title of report
b. Please make sure the design brief for the report is as per
ESC2 info not ESC3 proposed location. Refer markups
c. Please provide manual calculation validation to all in-house
spreadsheet. Review and approval of the precast component
design calculation can only be carried with the validation
check.
d. Please label all the appendix title cover
e. Please clarify on the required design tolerance for installation
considered and to be adopted in actual construction
f. Please elaborate in technical terms the surface of precast
half slab and precast double wall face to receive concrete.
Method of preparation of surface in production shall be stated
g. The precast specialist designer please confirm and
acknowledge that ancillary structure in KVMRT2 project and
for ESC2 are designed for seismic action. Thus, all the
member as well as connections
h. The precast specialist designer shall ensure all proposed
connection and the respective precast system are designed
to the equivalent Detail Design Consultant structural capacity
and stability.
i. From all the design appendixes, it is not understood on the
a. Kindly refer the attached revised report PJPT-JPT027-
GB-ES2-R3A
b. Noted
c. Most of our spreadsheets are using RCC, We will
submitted Validation calculation for our In–house
spreadsheet (refer Appendix 12 in the latest report).
d. Kindly refer the attached revised report PJPT-JPT027-
GB-ES2-R3A
e. Yes, we have considered some installation Tolerance in
the Design ( Eg. We have allowed 25mm Tolerance in Ring
wall connection to Slab).
f. All our precast surface receiving fresh concrete will be
“As Cast or As Extruded” as stated in BS 8110 Part 1 Table
5.5.
g. Kindly provide seismic load for checking. The precast

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 2 of 8
 Doc. / Dwg. Reference
Item Comments Responses Code
No. and Rev. / Clause
capacity of the precast system in comparison to IFC original design should be equivalent to the original design.
design provision. Please provide a summary showing the
precast connection capacity compare to original connection h. Noted.
capacity
j. Please provide a summary of capacity on all the i. Noted. We have updated the Table 6.2 in the report
connection/zone in which the effective depth changed PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 20.
k. Missing Table 6.1 & 6.2
l. DDC3 Comments and Specialist Designer Response shall be j. Noted. We have updated the Table 6.2 in the report
included as part of Appendix PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 20.

k. Refer to Table 6.1 & Table 6.2 in the report PJPT-

JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 19&20

l. Refer to Appendix 11 report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A

– Comments from DDC3 & Specialist Designer Response

2 Section 3.2 a. Please refer to markups, review and revise the necessary to a. Noted. We have updated in the latest report and
Precast component summary tally with drawing or vice versa drawing.

3 Section 4.1
Structural Design Parameters
a. Table 4.1 on concrete mix design, please refer IFC as well as a. Noted.
comment on item 2 in Drawing DRR
b. Table 4.2, please state the stud/anchor material properties b. Refer the attached revised Table 4.2 in the report
c. Please confirm the properties of Mapei Patch 128. Please PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
confirm the key feature of the grout and clarify is the grout
non-shrinkage grout c. Please refer to Latest report, we have specified
d. Table 4.4, for concrete cover of continuous slab as per IFC, Non Shrink grout with Strength >60mpa.
minimum cover shall be 35mm
d. Noted.

4 Section 5.1
Precast Half Slab Connection
a. Please state and indicate that the design of the slab shall
based on normal slab design without any beneficial
contribution of axial compression forces. Tension force, if
any, shall be considered
b. Please note that all connection and joint and thus the
detailing shall be moment connection as per KVMRT2 Design
requirement and original DDC IFC design intent. Please
revise
c. Please clarify why the staircase Mid landing precast plank
required to be 125mm that causes major loss of effective
depth at connection. Please revise to minimum
d. Please refer to comment in drawing DRR with respect to
finish level of staircase
e. Section 5.2.4, proposed detail not acceptable. Please revise
to IFC requirement
a. Agreed.
b. Agreed.
c. There is no major loss in effective depth, our
staircase flight and mid landing follows IFC
thickness 250mm. In order to satisfy the Nib
design, we require 125mm Thickness of Plank.
d. Staircase flight is FFL; whereas, staircase landing
could be SFL. To be adjust at site.
e. Section 5.2.4 is the corner wall joint for Precast
double wall, which able to provide moment
resistance in Local Mx & My direction. We have
provided Dowel bar from the joint to Ring wall. We

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 3 of 8
 Doc. / Dwg. Reference
Item
No. and Rev. / Clause
5 Section 5.3
Precast Staircase Connection
6 Appendix 1
Precast half slab design -
permanent stage
Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx
Comments Responses Code
can further improve this detail as per your
requirement & Site implementation
a. Section 5.3.1, please justify the non-shrinkage grout is able a. Contractor to apply a bonding agent between
to adhere to a steel surface. Please state the defined product Steel plate & grout
with product catalogue.
b. Please note that the structure requires 4hours fire rating and b. We have followed IFC requirement, refer to Table
the effective non-spalling effective concrete cover thickness 4.4 in the latest report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-
shall be defined R3A
c. Please note for item 4a and the grout material please provide
test results that the material is able to sustain the fire rating. c. Refer to Test Result from Suppliers to be
d. Please clarify how the connection shown in figure 5.9 achieve furnished in future
moment connection continuity
e. Section 5.3.2 Figure 5.10 & 5.11 shown the staircase and d. Please note that the Staircase is Simple
landing are designed with seating connection without any supported between the Mid landings. Mid landing
structural continuation. Please justify how is this proposed (Simple supported) spanning between Double
connection able to sustain seismic action walls. The connection between mid-landing &
Double wall is Pinned connection.
e. Structural continuation is through the starters bars
from Precast Staircase to Mid Landing Topping.
a. Precast specialist designer has been informed previously that a. Noted.
all intermediate slab be designed as normal slab without any
beneficial contribution of axial compression forces. b. Noted. Shall update accordingly.
b. Please revise the design and to note that DDC design do not
group B5 to that of B4 to B1. c. No. It is not advisable.
c. Please clarify is the 250mm double slab below Level B5 is to
d. We have revised in the latest report to ‘T’ as per
propose as precast system
d. Design calculation is showing the use of “R” type mild steel IFC requirement.
reinforcement and in not compliance to original design
e. We have updated our calculation at the Plank
requirement. Please revise
e. Please clarify is the crack width check is on at connection of Joint. Refer to attached revised calculation Page
precast slab plank. If the check is at this connection. There is 32,52 in the report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
no loss of effective depth capture in the design. Please
f. Rebar’s are orthogonal to the precast joints.
revise.
f. Crack width check has no consideration of orientation as well g. We have updated our calculation at the Plank
as the depth position of reinforcement. Please revise and Joint. Refer to attached revised calculation Page
provide.
32,52 in the report PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
g. Missing crack width check nor calculation to provide
equivalent IFC capacity at connection with loss of effective h. Please Elaborate ?.
depth.
h. Connection between ring wall to floor slab design check are i. Currently checked for the major direction bending
based on wrong rebar orientation & provision and calculation Noted, we have checked for both directions in the
Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 4 of 8
 Doc. / Dwg. Reference
Item
No. and Rev. / Clause
7 Appendix 2
Precast half slab design -
temporary stage
Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx
Comments
is not acceptable. Design shall be revised to IFC
arrangement and check shall be carried out with normal
beam/slab design formula for integrated capacity at j.
connection
i. State and show which direction the interface shear is
checked. Please note that there are always two direction of k.
shear/moment thus two shear flow design check.
j. Please provide actual precast half slab plank pictures to l.
show that the produce precast surface
k. Reinforcement anchorage of intermediate slab as well as its
orientation shall be as per IFC and not as per proposed in m. It’s not bent up bar, Shear link in the girder are
drawing. Refer to IFC and revise accordingly
l. Lattice girder provision as interface shear link spacing is
more than 0.75d. Please revise.
m. Interface shear link provision is provided in form of lattice n.
girder where the links is in form of bent-up bar. However, the o.
calculation presented seems to suggest the design remain
carried out as per normal vertical link. Please provide
validation to demonstrate bent-up bar design
n. With reference to bent-up bar, please provide check on
anchorage and bearing as per BS 3.3.5.7 and justify as
p.
necessary the design.
o. Referring to comment on Appendix 2 below, please
demonstrate that construction induced moment has been
captured as part of the check.
p. Please clearly indicate the link hook shape code to be
adopted for horizontal ties
a. The design check has been performed with Cube strength a.
40MPa for lifting and construction stage operation. No
information has been provided on demolding handling,
stacking/transportation design check that is inconsistent with
Drawing general notes on the minimum strength of handling
and installation. Please provide detail method of statement of
handle to justify the design intent and it has been stated b.
clearly in drawings to only demould after 40MPa strength has
been achieved.
b. No check is performed to demonstrate on the services
stresses induced due to construction stage (self weight + wet
concrete + construction load) c.
c. No check is performed to show that no crack will be induced
during handling operation
d. Please clarify how the lock-in forces during construction d.
stage has been considered and combined to full permanent
stage forces. The concept on which component are designed e.
to take the construction load shall be stated in prior section
clearly. f.
Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019
Responses Code
latest report.
Refer to the picture shown in SSP-H-PJPT-
UNGW-ESC2-CNS- STS-000130-H01.
Noted. Shall revise accordingly.
Lattice girder is only serves in temporary
condition, Not necessary to comply 0.75 d spacing
inclined in an angle 82 to planks surface. We have
included 82 degree inclination in the design.
Not Necessary
Refer to the appendix 2, In the latest report we
have checked the plank for moment due to
Construction stage against the provided
reinforcement.
Is that necessary? Because we have shown, bar
in the table with length.
Noted We have check the plank based on 25mpa
refer the attached latest report, As stated in the
drawing SSP-H-PJPT-UNGW-ESC2-CNS-GEN-
000010-H01 ,De-molding strength is 15 MPa and
Minimum Installation Strength is 25Mpa
We have checked the Construction stage inludes
load due to wet concrete, Selfwt, Consturction
load , Please refer to the Appendix 2 in the report
PJPT-JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A
The handling load is negligible, compared to the
permanent load.
Please Elaborate?
Yes.
The temporary support distance is 1m between
Page 5 of 8
 Doc. / Dwg. Reference
Item
No. and Rev. / Clause
8 Appendix 3
Precast Staircase Design –
Permanent stage
Comments Responses Code
e. All handling comments applicable to all precast component each prop. We have carried out the temporary
f. Please carry out deflection check of the precast plank during stage deflection check. Refer to the attached
construction stable and post construction/permanent stage latest report.
on the final deflection value to show compliance.
g. Precast half slab plank shall be checked for crack width g. Please extend us the Crack width limitation
limitation to ensure KVMRT2 compliance and serviceability according to KVMRT2 Compliance.
stress taking full wet concrete plus construction load.
a. Please clarify on how the original IFC design intent on a. The starter bars drilled in using HILTI and U bars
continuity and boundary at connection can to be achieved by from the precast plank lapped to the drill in bar is
the propose only two single nos of small steel corbel. supporting 80% load; whereas the welding plate is
b. Inconsistent staircase design length “b” to drawing and to supporting 20%.
original IFC design.
c. Clarify what is the tensile capacity of corbel b. Updated in the latest report PJPT-JPT027-GB-
d. Please justify the shear capacity of 50k adopted with ES2-R3A.
reference to test results in Appendix 9
e. Missing staircase nib design, bearing check, and shear check c. Please Elaborate?.
f. SSP-H-PJPT-UNGW-ESC2-CNS-RED-000240 please state
the minimum required contact for bearing and design d. Refer to the Test results in the Appendix 9,
accordingly. Anchor capacity is 180kN in Shear. But we
g. It is apparent that the proposed system is of non-equivalent adopted 50kN in the design with FOS of 3.6
to capacity of original design intent and all connections
e. Please refer the attached revised report PJPT-
JPT027-GB-ES2-R3A Page 69.

f. Noted, Updated in the latest drawing SSP-H-

PJPT-UNGW-ESC2-CNS-RED-000240-H02

g. Our Precast Flight is supported by the mid

landing, whereas the Mid Landing Spanning
between Double walls in one way direction. We
are confident that our system is equivalent to IFC.

9 Appendix 4 a.
Precast Staircase Design –
Temporary stage

10 Appendix 5 a. Missing interface shear check and no composite action a. Refer to the attached report PJPT-JPT027-GB-
Precast Double Wall design – design check. Please provide ES2-R3A Page 78.
permanent stage b. Missing shear capacity check of wall at vertical ties where
effective depth is reduced. Please provide b. Refer to the attached report PJPT-JPT027-GB-
c. Crack width design check shall be provided at all calculation ES2-R3A Page 77.
where the specialist designer reduced the effective depth of
structure. c. Crack width check for the Double wall with
d. Design check was carried out for 1 reinforcement orientation reduced section is incorporated in the latest report
only. Please provide the horizontal reinforcement capacity in the Appendix 5.
design check. The wall are required to design for moment in
Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 6 of 8
 Doc. / Dwg. Reference
Item Comments Responses Code
No. and Rev. / Clause
two direction as per original design. d. (f&e) Please note in the report page 20, We have
e. Referring to item 5d, please provide check to show the adopted your IFC reinforcement in the Precast
equivalent capacity provision across wall to wall parallel Double wall. We have submitted the calculation
panel design based on DDC3 analysis report to show
f. Please provide calculation of horizontal ties at all type of composite action between plank and cast insitu
profile (L-shape, T-shape, parallel). Please label and state infill. We have provided calculation for secondary
clearly on the calculation page which is design for which type.
directional moment in Appendix 5.

11 Appendix 6 a.
Precast Double Wall design –
temporary stage

12 Precast Solid Wall Design a. Please provide design to demonstrate the adequacy of a. We have attached the solid wall calculation in the page
proposal. Refer also item 9 & 17 in Drawings DRR for 109 of the latest report.
comments and requirement
b. Please note that RCW2 (200mm thick wall) is part of b Refer to the attached revised report PJPT-JPT027-GB-
structural framing as per IFC. Please provide equivalent ES2-R3A Page 20
structural capacity and design requirement as well as the
connection of this wall.

13 Appendix 7 a. Incomplete appendix without test setup and loading detail. (Need to initiate the test again…), we will submit the report
Anchor Plate Test Results Proprietor detail design and capacity in both shear, tension in the next report.
capacity in both SLS & ULS state is unable to be verified.
Deformation capacity is also not able to be verified
b. The test also missing all the witness and proper properties
detail to shown that it is relevant to proposed system
c. Please clarify on the test compliance to which code of
practice
14 Appendix 8 a. Please clarify exactly where HILTI post drill chemical system a. All staircase landing connections to the walls,
is to be adopted for review. Slab to Ring wall connection.

15 Accidental Load a. Please advice is accidental load considered in design for a. Temporary supports shall be designed by
temporary construction stage if not how is the stability of the Formwork designer submitted separately by
system and accidental impact to the setup can be ensured. precast installer.

16 Propping/Bracing/Temporary a. Please note it is contractor/specialist designer responsibility a. Temporary supports shall be designed by
Support detail and Handling to ensure, design, provision and endorse (if necessary). DDC Formwork designer submitted separately by
Design is only to ensure the impact due to temporary works is precast installer.
properly captured as part of permanent works design

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 7 of 8
 Doc. / Dwg. Reference
Item Comments Responses Code
No. and Rev. / Clause
17 Staircase a. State the design intent of the finishing face with respect to a. Smooth surface.
architectural requirement

18 Workability, constructability and
integrity of the constructed
precast components
a. Justify on how the narrow precast double wall with infill of a. The concrete pour rate is advised to control to be
160mm with lattice girder with proposed one-piece wall less than 1.2m per hour, without poker.
height of up-to 6m can be constructed without honey comb,
concrete segregation, and ensure full reinforcement bonding
to the proposed precast connection system of rebar/ties b. Panels are casted in the controlled environment;
without gap to surface of precast plank inner face. differential Shrinkage effects are negligible in our
b. Please justify and demonstrate the shrinkage as well as precast panels.
differential shrinkage has been considered in the design and
no trace of shrinkage effect calculation is identified.

Note: Code 1 – Accepted

Code 2 – Accepted with comments
Code 3 – Rejected

Ref. No: SSP-GCAS-UNGW-ESC2-DRR-000xx Rev No: 00 Date Issued: 23 Oct 2019 Page 8 of 8