1.

Suitable dimensions for the building

1.1 Dimensions of elevator core

Office: Floor to floor height = 4 m
Assume an investment downtown type office (Location: Nugegoda)
Population density = 10 m2/person
896
Rentable area = 896 𝑚2 : Population per floor = = 90 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒
10

Total population per office floor = 90 people; No of office floors = 15

Total population = 1350 people
5-minute population = 1350 x 12% = 162 people for time interval 25-35,
Car size = 20 Hence, Dimensions of the shaft = 2.55 m x 2.2 m

ȳ
To find X (To ensure no twisting in the structure),
1 1
( 𝑥 0.25 𝑥 𝑋3 𝑥 (7+21))+( 𝑥 0.25 𝑥 2.453 𝑥 (7+9.8+12.6+15.15+17.95+20.75))
12 12
ȳ= 1 1 = 14
(2 𝑥 12 𝑥 0.25 𝑥 𝑋3)+ (12 𝑥 0.25 𝑥 2.453 𝑥 6 )
Hence X ~ 3.2 m

1.2 Layout Drawing for the building

Y
 2. Loading

The following data have been considered for dead and live loads as per table 01 of BS 6399: Part
I: 1996.

Weight considered Value

Concrete 25 kN/m3
Imposed Load 2.5 kN/m2
Finishes:
Ceramic tiles 0.75 kN/m2
Partitions 1.25 kN/m2
Services 0.5 kN/m2

3. Section selection and structural layouts

Initial sizing of structural elements was done according to the manual for the design of reinforced
concrete building structures published by the Institute of Structural Engineers (IstructE).
3.1 Beam sizing
The possible spans, and associated depths of a beam, depend on the loading to which the beam is
subjected. The guidelines for selecting the breadth of the beams,
The nominal rule for selecting the beam size is one foot to one inch for the depth of the beam was
used to arrive at the final beam sizes. Sample calculation is given below.
Beam span = 8 m = 26’
Beam depth = 26” = 660 mm
Table 3.1: Span/effective depth ratios for initial design of beams

Cantilever 6
Simply supported 12
Continuous 15

For non-cantilever beams (Minimum b = 200 mm for fire resistance),

For a continuous beam of 8 m span, effective depth = 8000/15 = 533 mm
Beam depth = d + cover + link diameter + main bar dia. /2
= 533 + 25 + 10 + 20/2 = 578 mm
Hence, 600 mm was used as the initial beam depth.

Selected beam size = 250 mm x 600 mm

3.2 Column sizing

Column sizes were selected based on the approximate load per column, calculated considering the
tributary area and reinforce percentage intended to be used. In the event of an earthquake, the strong
beams remain elastic while the weak columns suffer concrete crushing or shear failure, which may
lead to the collapse of the building. That is the plastic hinge will form in column not at the beam in
beam column junction. Hence, larger columns than required by axial loads and moments were used.
Selected column sizing,
Up to 7th floor = 650 mm x 650 mm
Beyond 7th floor = 450 mm x 450 mm
3.3 Transfer plate
Assuming that the building consists of office floors only there is no need of a transfer plate as the
floor layouts will be typical.

3.4 Shear wall sizing

Shear walls are the main vertical structural elements with a dual role of resisting both the gravity
and lateral loads. Wall thickness is 250mm throughout, depending on the number of stories,
building age, and thermal insulation requirements (However, this has been given). These walls are
continuous throughout the building height hence, this is a proportionate structure.

3.5 Slab sizing

General guidelines for selecting thickness of the slabs, Span to depth ratios:
▪ One way:
Single: L/24
 Continuous: L/30
Cantilever: L/7

▪ Two way:
Single: L/28
Continuous: L/36

minimum fire resistance normally requires a depth of at least 125mm, but thickness of 150mm
slab will provide for better fire resistance and sound insulation.
Considering above, selected slab thickness = 200 mm
3.6 Structural Layout
 3.7 Substructure Design
Maximum column load is about 8400 kN. Hence, considering the higher vertical load and to
provide resistance for lateral loading, a pile foundation should be provided.
Pile capacity calculations for pile designing:
Max load for a single pile = 8400 kN => design for 9000 kN load
Hence, use 1500-mm diameter single piles (Capacity decided based on past experience of
geotechnical professionals)
Lateral spring coefficient calculation:
For clayey soils
Kh = (67×Cu)/d; d = Pile diameter; Cu taken as 10kPa
For sandy soils
Kh = nH × z ; nH = [A*(ℽsat-ℽwater)]/1.35
Assumed bearing capacity of the rock = 5000 kPa

Loose Medium dense Dense

A 100-300 300-1000 1000-2000

nh for moist sand 1111-3333 3,667-12,222 13,333-26,667

nh for saturated soil 666-2,000 2,222-7,400 8,200-16,300

Dry Saturated Coefficient of

Depth kH (kN/m)
Soil type A density Density subgrade
(m) 1.5m dia
(kN/m3) (kN/m3) reaction (nh)

2.6 Sandy clay 300 15 19 3333 8667

4.2 Sandy clay 300 9 19 2000 8400
5.3 Sandy clay 300 9 19 2000 10600
7.3 Sandy clay 300 9 19 2000 14600
9.15 Sandy clay 300 9 20 2000 18300
Fractured
11.8 1000 10 20 7407 87407
rock
Fractured
13.3 1000 10 20 7407 98519
rock
14.3 Sound rock 2000 11 22 16296 233037
15.3 Sound rock 2000 11 22 16296 249333
Pile cap dimensions:
2m
1. For single piles

1.5 m
2m

Side spacing was taken as 250 mm with a pile cap depth of (1.25*pile diameter + 0.6) = 2.5 m

2. For the piles in the foundation for shear walls a raft will be provided with a depth of 2.5
m

3.8 Foundation Layout

Pile caps
for single
piles

Raft for
shear
core
 4. Finite Element Model

5. Wind Analysis

Wind effect should be considered especially in tall buildings as it generated lateral loads on the
beams, columns, shear walls and other structural elements. This would cause for excessive
deflection on the structure which is unfavourable for the non-structural elements and the excessive
wind acceleration which exceeds 0.5ms-2 value, make discomfort for the living beings. Moreover,
the high wind could cause serious damage on to the structure.
The magnitude of the wind loads on a building will depend on the basic wind speed used for the
calculations. It is the three second (3 sec) gust velocity recommended for records collected over
50 years to determine the probable maximum wind speed that can occur at a height of 10m in open
country. Sri Lanka has been divided into three wind zones. Wind zone maps of Sri Lanka is shown
in the figure below.

Based on the design manual mentioned above, the following wind speeds are recommended for
the different zones. Recommended 3s gust wind speeds for different zones are tabulated in the
table below,
3s Gust wind speeds for different Post – Disaster Structures Normal Structures
zones Zone (m/sec) (m/sec)
01 53.5 49.0
02 47.5 42.5
03 38.0 33

Wind load calculation is done referring the BS EN 1991-1-4:2005, Eurocode 1: Actions on

structures, Part 1-4: General actions – Wind actions and Draft National Annex to SLS EN 1991-
1-4:201X. As per the latest recommendation for Colombo, base wind speed was taken as 38ms-1.
 Reference Description

Australian Code Check on analysis type

For dynamic building category,
1. The height exceeds five times the least plan dimensions, and
2. The natural frequency in the first mode of vibration is less
than 1.0Hz

Clause 1.6.1: Table 1

Assuming, Framed buildings with structural walls around lifts and
Figure 3 stairs only (e.g. office buildings of open plan or with partitioning):
Building type factor, Kb = 1.0
BS 6399-2:1997 Dynamic augmentation factor Cr = 0.08
Figure 1
Cr < 0.25 and H < 300m: static equivalent method could be adopted.
SLS EN 4.2 (2)P Note 1 Basic Wind Speed (𝑽𝒃 )
SLS EN 4.2 (2)P Note2 𝐶𝑑𝑖𝑟 = 1.0, 𝐶𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑜𝑛 = 1.0
and Note 1
SL Wind loading zones Structure Location: Nugegoda, Colombo: Zone - 3
map
SLS EN 4.2 (1)P Note 2
Vb zone = 38 m/s for normal structures and zone – 3 for 50 years return
period
A – 4 m above MSL

Calt = 1+0.001 A = 1 + 0.001 x 4 = 1.004 < 1.5 Hence, okay

𝑉𝑏,0 = 𝑉𝑏,𝑧𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑡 = 38 ∗ 1.004 = 38.152 𝑚/𝑠
SLS EN 4.2 (1)P Note 2 𝑉 = 𝐶 𝐶
𝑏 𝑑𝑖𝑟 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑉𝑏,0 = 1.0 ∗ 1.0 ∗ 38.152 = 38.152 𝑚/𝑠

Peak velocity Pressure

Assumptions:
Orography is not significant, C0 (z) = 1.0
Effect of large and higher neighbouring structures negligible
Effect of closely spaced buildings and other obstacles negligible
 1
Clause 4.5(1) Note 1 𝑞𝑝 (𝑧) = 𝑐𝑒 (𝑧) × 𝑞𝑏 ; 𝑞𝑏 = 2 ρvb2

Distance upwind to shoreline in km = 0.1 km (rough measurement

from Google Earth Pro)
Terrain Category – “Country” (III) : hdis = 0
z-hdis = 60 m
NA to BSEN 1991-1- 𝑐𝑒(60) = 3
4:2005
𝑞𝑝 (𝑧) = 𝑐𝑒 (𝑧) × 𝑞𝑏

Proposed building layout

b = 32m

y d = 28 m

Figure 7.5 Wind along y direction:

Pressure Coefficients
Clause 7.2 h = 60 m and b = 32m

Figure 7.4 of EN 1991- Wind Pressure Profile across storey height

1-4:2005
 ℎ 60
= = 2.14 -0.55
Table 7.1: EN 1991-1- 𝑑 28 0.8
4:2005
By linear interpolation,
▪ For zone D – windward: Cpe = 0.8
▪ For zone E – Leeward: Cpe = -0.55

Section 5: EN 1991-1- Wind Actions

4:2005 Wind force: 𝐹𝑤 = 𝑐𝑠 × 𝑐𝑑 ∑𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑤 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑓 ; 𝑤𝑒 = 𝑞𝑝 (𝑧𝑒 ) × 𝑐𝑝𝑒
Clause 6.2(1)c Structural factors: CsCd = 1.0 (Assumption)
Clause 5.3 Factor for lack of correlation of wind pressures between windward and
leeward = 0.89

Clause 7.2.2(3) External pressure coefficient:

F = 0.89 x 1.0 x (0.8- (-0.55)) = 1.2
z Ce(z) qp(z) External
pressure
(kN/m2)
Up to 32 2.5 2183 2.62
32-60 3 2620 3.14

Force at each level

Floors Force (kN) per floor

1-8 335
8-15 402

Clause 7.2 Wind along x direction:

Pressure Coefficients
h = 60 m and b = 28 m
Figure 7.4 of EN 1991-
1-4:2005

Wind Pressure Profile across storey height

ℎ 60
= 32 =1.9~2
𝑑
0.8 0.55
By linear interpolation,
Table 7.1: EN 1991-1- • For zone D – windward: Cpe = 0.8
4:2005 • For zone E – Leeward: Cpe = -0.55

Section 5: EN 1991-1- Wind Actions

4:2005 Wind force: 𝐹𝑤 = 𝑐𝑠 × 𝑐𝑑 ∑𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑤 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑓 ; 𝑤𝑒 = 𝑞𝑝 (𝑧𝑒 ) × 𝑐𝑝𝑒
Clause 6.2(1)c Structural factors: CsCd = 1.0 (Assumption)
Clause 5.3 Factor for lack of correlation of wind pressures between windward and
leeward = 0.89

Clause 7.2.2(3) External pressure coefficient:

F = 0.89 x 1.0 x (0.8- (-0.55)) = 1.2

z Ce(z) qp(z) External

pressure
(kN/m2)
Up to 32 2.5 2183 2.62
32-60 3 2620 3.14
 Force at each level

Floors Force (kN) per floor

1-8 335
8-15 402

6. Earthquake Analysis

Sri Lanka lays in Indo-Australian Tectonic plate. Likewise, Sri Lanka is located in the middle of
Indian Plate and well away from the plate tectonic boundaries. Therefore, only intra-plate type
earthquakes can occur close to Sri Lanka. However, there are few seismic activities that have been
recorded in the past. Therefore, high-rise buildings should be designed to survive moderate
earthquake.
An earthquake of a reasonable magnitude occurred close to Sri Lanka on 7th December 1993. The
magnitude was 4.7 on Richter scale and the epicenter was located 170 km west of Colombo. From
time to time, minor trimmers have been reported as being felt in certain parts of the country.
Another well documented event occurred on 14th of April 1614, that affected the areas close to
Colombo. In this earthquake, about 2000 people were killed and about 200 houses were damaged.
These events indicate that the chances of an earthquake of significant magnitude occurring close
to Sri Lanka is a remote even, but the possibility cannot be ruled out. One main feature of intra-
plate type earthquake is that they will occur without much warning.
The inter-plate type earthquake of 26th December 2004 that occurred on the well-known plate
boundaries close to Indonesia was felt only as mild trimmers in Sri Lanka. Since it was an
earthquake of magnitude 9.3 on Richter scale, it is safe to conclude that the chances of inter-plate
type earthquake affecting Sri Lanka will be extremely remote.
This building is 60 m tall. Earthquake analysis are carried out to measure the response of the
building against earthquake as per the code AS 1170.4-2007 Structural design actions, Part 4:
Earthquake actions in Australia.

Reference Calculation Output

AS 1170.4: 2007 The method of analysis depends on the earthquake
2.2 design category (EDC), the structure configuration and
the ductility of the structure. The earthquake design
AS 1170.0: 2002 & category depends on,
BCA 1. Importance level for the structure
2. The probability factor (kp) and the hazard factor (Z)
3. The site sub soil class

Importance level of the structure is IL2 by considering kp = 1.0

AS 1170.4: 2007 500 years return period and 50 years design life
Table 3.2 kp = 1.0
Hazard factor, Z = 0.08 (for Colombo) Z = 0.08
kpZ = 1.0 x 0.08 = 0.08
 Sub soil class could be Class Ae, since a pile foundation
4.2 will be constructed with 2m socketing into hard rock
with unconfined compressive strength greater than
50Mpa
Table 2.1 Height of the building is 60 m; Hence Earthquake design
category is EDC III.
Based on the latest code, dynamic analysis needs to be
Figure 2.2 performed for this building. EDC III

Reference Description
Horizontal equivalent static forces
AS 1170.4-2007 Structural ductility factor (μ) and structural performance factor (Sp) are taken
Table 6.5 as 3 and 0.67 for intermediate moment-resisting frames in combination with
a moderately ductile shear wall from Table 6.5 (A) of AS 1170.4-2007.

Earthquake base shear

Cl 6.2.1
V = [ kp Z Ch (T1) Sp / µ] Wt
Natural period of the structure
Cl 6.2.3
T1 = 1.25 kt hn0.75
kt = 0.075 (For moment resisting concrete frames)
hn = 60 m
T1 = 1.25 x 0.075 x 600.75
= 2.02 sec
Table 6.4
Ch (T1) = 0.26
Table 6.5(A)
For intermediate moment resisting concrete frame structures considering
moderately ductile structure
Sp / µ = 0.22

Cl 6.2.2
 Wi = ∑ Gi + ∑ Ψc Qi
Ψc = 0.3
Wi = [((25*0.2) +0.75+0.5+1.25) + (0.3*2.5)] *32*28
= 7392 kN per floor*15 = 110,880 kN

Cl 6.3 V = [ kp Z Ch (T1) Sp / µ] Wt
= [ 1.0 x 0.08 x 2.02 x 0.22] *110,880
= 3,942 kN
Vertical distribution of horizontal forces
Fi = kF,i V
( Wi hk
= 𝑛
i )
[ kp Z Ch (T1) Sp / µ] Wt
∑ (Wi hk
i)
𝑗=1

k = 1.75
x – Direction
hi (m)
Wi x hik KF,i Fi (kN)
4 83631 0.001 6
8 281300 0.005 19
12 571912 0.010 40
16 946176 0.017 65
20 1398184 0.025 97
24 1923675 0.034 133
28 2519350 0.044 174
32 3182544 0.056 220
36 3911032 0.069 270
40 4702913 0.082 325
44 5556536 0.097 384
48 6470445 0.113 447
52 7443339 0.131 515
56 8474050 0.149 586
60 9561514 0.168 661

Total 57026600 1.000 3942

Response spectrum loading is considered in X and Y directions. As per the recommendation for
Colombo, Peak Ground Acceleration value was taken as 0.08g. Defined Response Spectrum
Function in SAP2000 program is shown below figure.
 7. Validation of Model

7.1 Modal period

7.2 Modal mass participation

Mass source is defined by considering 100% dead loads and 30 % of the live loads. 12 numbers of
modes are used in the modal analysis and eigen vector method was used in order to capture at least
90 % of the mass in modal analysis. 94 % of modal mass participations are obtained from the
modal analysis in X & Y directions respectively from all the modes.
 7.3 Comparison between static and dynamic analysis

Static Dynamic

Modal period (s) 2.02 1.78

Base shear (kN) 3942 5265

8. Performance criterion for the building

8.1 Storey Drift

Two load combinations were considered for drift determination,
Story drift was assessed for the X and Y directions of the structure considering horizontal
earthquake forces acting independently in each direction. As per section 7.5 the drift was
determined as follows.

Allowable drift
Level dic (mm) di (mm) dst (mm) Remark
(1.5% x story height)
15 0.0091 0.04095 0.00225 0.06 OK
14 0.0086 0.0387 0.00225 0.06 OK
13 0.0081 0.03645 0.00225 0.06 OK
12 0.0076 0.0342 0.00225 0.06 OK
11 0.0071 0.03195 0.00270 0.06 OK
10 0.0065 0.02925 0.00270 0.06 OK
9 0.0059 0.02655 0.00225 0.06 OK
8 0.0054 0.0243 0.00315 0.06 OK
7 0.0047 0.02115 0.00270 0.06 OK
6 0.0041 0.01845 0.00270 0.06 OK
5 0.0035 0.01575 0.00270 0.06 OK
4 0.0029 0.01305 0.00270 0.06 OK
3 0.0023 0.01035 0.00225 0.06 OK
2 0.0018 0.0081 0.00180 0.06 OK
1 0.0014 0.0063 0.00630 0.06 OK
 8.2 P-Delta effects

As per section 6.7.3 the P-Delta effects were determined as follows.

Displacement his
Level Wj Fj dst (m) Ɵ
(mm) (m)
15 0.0091 7392 661 60 0.00000225 0.01042 1.16691E-06
14 0.0086 7392 586 56 0.00000225 0.011164 1.16691E-06
13 0.0081 7392 515 52 0.00000225 0.012023 1.16691E-06
12 0.0076 7392 447 48 0.00000225 0.013025 1.16691E-06
11 0.0071 7392 384 44 0.00000270 0.014209 1.40029E-06
10 0.0065 7392 325 40 0.00000270 0.01563 1.40029E-06
9 0.0059 7392 270 36 0.00000225 0.017366 1.16691E-06
8 0.0054 7392 220 32 0.00000315 0.019537 1.63367E-06
7 0.0047 7392 174 28 0.00000270 0.022328 1.40029E-06
6 0.0041 7392 133 24 0.00000270 0.026049 1.40029E-06
5 0.0035 7392 97 20 0.00000270 0.031259 1.40029E-06
4 0.0029 7392 65 16 0.00000270 0.039074 1.40029E-06
3 0.0023 7392 40 12 0.00000225 0.052099 1.16691E-06
2 0.0018 7392 19 8 0.00000180 0.078148 9.33525E-07
1 0.0014 7392 6 4 0.00000630 0.156296 3.26734E-06
Total 3941 0.518625

Since Ɵ ≤ 0.1, P-Delta effects need not be considered.

 8.3 Vibration control technique for performance measurement

If the performance of the building is unsatisfactory, measures can be taken to reduce the story drift.
The methods of reducing the vibration are:
1. Base isolation
2. Application of Dampers
For this building, dampers are applied with the following properties, in the ground level of the
structure.
After application of dampers, the drift results are as follows.

Allowable drift (1.5% x

Level dic (mm) di (mm) dst (mm) Remark
story height)
15 0.0084 0.0378 0.002250 0.06 OK
14 0.0079 0.03555 0.002250 0.06 OK
13 0.0074 0.0333 0.002250 0.06 OK
12 0.0069 0.03105 0.002700 0.06 OK
11 0.0063 0.02835 0.002700 0.06 OK
10 0.0057 0.02565 0.002700 0.06 OK
9 0.0051 0.02295 0.003150 0.06 OK
8 0.0044 0.0198 0.003150 0.06 OK
7 0.0037 0.01665 0.003150 0.06 OK
6 0.003 0.0135 0.003150 0.06 OK
5 0.0023 0.01035 0.003150 0.06 OK
4 0.0016 0.0072 0.002700 0.06 OK
3 0.001 0.0045 0.002700 0.06 OK
2 0.0004 0.0018 0.001478 0.06 OK
1 0.00007154 0.0003219 0.000322 0.06 OK
Comparison of drift ratio with using dampers and without dampers for response spectrum analysis.

Story Drift ratio

Level Without Dampers (%) With Dampers (%)
15 0.056250 0.056250
14 0.056250 0.056250
13 0.056250 0.056250
12 0.056250 0.067500
11 0.067500 0.067500
10 0.067500 0.067500
9 0.056250 0.078750
8 0.078750 0.078750
7 0.067500 0.078750
6 0.067500 0.078750
5 0.067500 0.078750
4 0.067500 0.067500
3 0.056250 0.067500
2 0.045000 0.036952
1 0.157500 0.008048