J10048-Nexus Parcel 1-C&S Concept Design Report - R00

NEXUS PARCEL 1
CIVIL & STRUCTURAL CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT

3A-3B Ton Duc Thang Street, District 1, HCMC, Vietnam
12/08/2013
Quality Management
Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3

Remarks Issue R0
Date 12 Aug 2013
Prepared by Phung Van Manh
Signature
Checked by Nguyen Trung Hieu
Signature
Authorised by Anthony Liu
Signature
Project number J10027-CS-001
Report number 1
File reference K:\Project
CS\J10048-CS-001
Project number: J10048-CS-001 2 | 50

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
NEXUS PARCEL 1
CIVIL & STRUCTURAL CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT
Client
Refico Real Estate
Level 16, Sailing Tower
111A Pasteur Street, District 1
Ho Chi Minh City
Vietnam
Consultant
WSP Vietnam Ltd
Tel: +83 8 2220 5345

Fax: +84 8 2220 5348
Registered Address
Unit 5, 16/F Green Power Building, 35 Ton Duc Thang

Ben Nghe Ward, District 1, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
WSP Contacts
Anthony Liu – anthony.liu@wspgroup.com.vn
Derek Martin – derek.martin@wspgroup.com.vn
3 | 50
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 6
2 Key Design Requirements and Considerations ......................................................... 10
2.1 Stability ..................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.1 Stability under Seismic Effects ..................................................................... 10
2.1.2 Stability under Wind Effects.......................................................................... 11
2.1.3 Durability and Sustainability ......................................................................... 11
2.1.4 Fire Resistance ............................................................................................ 12
2.1.5 Design for Differential Settlement ................................................................. 12
2.2 Serviceability ............................................................................................................. 13
2.2.1 Deflection Control ......................................................................................... 13
2.2.2 Response to Wind Load ............................................................................... 13
2.2.3 Vibration Control ........................................................................................... 13
2.2.4 Watertightness ............................................................................................. 13
2.2.5 Thermal Effects ............................................................................................ 13
2.3 Structural Efficiency .................................................................................................. 14
2.4 Buildability ................................................................................................................. 14
2.5 Cost Effectiveness .................................................................................................... 14
2.6 Flexibility ................................................................................................................... 15
2.7 Environmental Friendliness ....................................................................................... 15
3 Development of structural design .............................................................................. 16
3.1 Design Information and References .......................................................................... 16
3.2 Superimposed Loading Intensities ............................................................................ 17
4 Development of structural conceptual design ........................................................... 19
4.1 Superstructure Options ............................................................................................. 19
4.1.1 Options of Construction Materials ................................................................ 19
4.1.2 Options for Gravity Load Resisting Systems ................................................ 21
4.1.3 Options for Lateral Load Resisting Systems ................................................. 22
4.2 Basement Option ...................................................................................................... 22
5 Structural Options for Superstructure and Basement ................................................ 23
5.1 Comparison and Determination of Superstructure Schemes for Each Floor Type .... 23
5.2 Summary of Structural Schemes for Basement Floors ............................................. 24

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
6 Geotechnical Consideration ...................................................................................... 26
6.1 Ground Conditions .................................................................................................... 26
6.1.1 Soil Investigation Plan .................................................................................. 26
6.1.2 Sub-Soil Conditions ...................................................................................... 28
6.1.3 Summary of Soil Conditions ......................................................................... 29
6.1.4 Ground Water ............................................................................................... 30
6.1.5 Tentative Bored Pile Capacity Determination ............................................... 30
6.2 Foundation Option..................................................................................................... 32
6.2.1 Conventional Bored Piles and Barrette Piles ................................................ 32
6.2.2 Shaft Grouted Bored Piles and Barrette Piles .............................................. 34
6.2.3 Trial Piles...................................................................................................... 34
6.3 Basement Construction Options ............................................................................... 34
6.3.1 Bottom-Up Construction ............................................................................... 35
6.3.2 Top-Down Construction ................................................................................ 36
6.3.3 Semi-Top-Down Construction ...................................................................... 37
6.3.4 Discussion on Basement Construction Scheme ........................................... 38
7 Specific Conceptual Design Issues ........................................................................... 39
7.1 Specific Basement Structural Issues ......................................................................... 39
7.2 Diaphragm Wall Issues ............................................................................................. 39
7.3 Procedure for Semi Top-down Construction ............................................................. 39
7.4 Specific Foundation Structural Issues ....................................................................... 45
7.5 Assessment of Layout of Office Tower...................................................................... 45
7.5.1 Vertical Structural System ............................................................................ 45
7.5.2 Horizontal Structural System ........................................................................ 45
7.6 Assessment of Layout of Hotel Tower....................................................................... 46
7.6.2 Horizontal Structural Systems ...................................................................... 46
7.7 Assessment of Layout of Residential Tower ............................................................. 47
7.7.2 Horizontal Structural Systems ...................................................................... 48
8 Issues To Be Developed for Schematic / Basic Design ............................................ 49
5 | 50
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 1.1: Map of Nexus Parcel 1 project ............................................................................. 8

Figure 1.2: Site Satellite Image .............................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.1: Earthquake Occurrences in Vietnam .................................................................. 10
Figure 6.1: Site Investigation – Borehole Layout Plan .......................................................... 27
Figure 6.2: SPT graphic........................................................................................................ 29
Figure 6.3: Bottom-Up Construction Sequence .................................................................... 35
Figure 6.4: Top-Down Construction Sequence ..................................................................... 36
Figure 6.5: Semi Top-Down Construction Sequence............................................................ 37
Figure 7.1: Stage 2 ............................................................................................................... 40
Figure 7.2: Stage 3 ............................................................................................................... 41
Figure 7.3: Stage 4 ............................................................................................................... 41
Figure 7.4: Stage 5 ............................................................................................................... 42
Figure 7.5: Stage 6 ............................................................................................................... 43
Figure 7.6: Stage 7 ............................................................................................................... 44
Figure 7.7: Section of Basement after completed ................................................................. 44
Figure 7.8 : Shear wall layout for apartment ......................................................................... 47

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
LIST OF TABLE
Table 6.1: Borehole Designation .......................................................................................... 26

Table 6.2: Soil Layer Properties Summary ........................................................................... 28
Table 6.3:Summary table of bored pile(Non-Shaft grouted) ................................................. 31
Table 6.4: Summary table of bored pile(Shaft grouted) ........................................................ 31
Table 6.5: Summary table of barrette pile(Non-Shaft grouted) ............................................. 32
Table 6.6: Summary table of barrette pile(Shaft grouted) ..................................................... 32
7 | 50
1 Introduction
The proposed Nexus Parcel 1 development is to be located at 3A-3B Ton Duc Thang Street,
District 1, HCMC. It is a proposed to be a mixed-use development, incorporating retail, commercial
and residential facilities, with provisions for car and motorcycle parking within four levels of the
4&5-storey basement.
Nexus
Parcel 1
Figure 1.1: Map of Nexus Parcel 1 project
Nexus
Parcel 1
Figure 1.2: Site Satellite Image

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
The building facilities are split as follows:
 Car Park - 5 floors at basement level of the office tower, with five
floor providing dedicated parking facilities (B5/F to B1/F).
And 4 floors at basement level of the hotel and residential
tower, with three floors providing dedicated parking
facilities (B4/F to B2/F), and B1/F offering a retail and
food court.
 Podium - 8 floors of retail, cinema, restaurant, bridge bar,
swimming pool, etc. area covering a significant area of
the site above ground level, and extending to each tower
block.
 Office - 32 floors above Podium level (7/F to 38/F).
 Hotel - 24 floors above Podium level (10/F to 33/F).
 Residential - 32 floors above Podium level (7/F to 38/F).
The external areas will include car parking, roadways, footpaths and landscaping.
The purpose of this structural and geotechnical design concept report is as follows:
 Explore options for the structural system, including pre-cast concrete, in-situ concrete, and
steel structural solutions, and develop the justification of the chosen schemes;
 Establish the preferred structural grid and transfer structures between the tower, podium and
basement levels;
 Conduct a desk study of the geotechnical constraints and identify the range of possible
solutions for the foundation and basement system.
9 | 50
2 Key Design Requirements and Considerations
To as great an extent as possible, the structural design has been aimed to achieve a building with
high structural performance which would be measurable with the following criteria:
 Stability
 Serviceability
 Sustainability
 Structural Efficiency
 Buildability
 Cost Effectiveness
 Flexibility to Modification / Extension / Demolition
 Environmental Friendliness
The above criteria will be further discussed in the subsequent sections.
2.1 Stability
The stability of the building shall always be maintained under normal uses, as well as exceptional
loading conditions.
2.1.1 Stability under Seismic Effects
The building situated in HCM City is to be

designed to cater for seismic loading.
According to historical data, and also the
zoning map for earthquake occurrence with a
return period of ≤ 500 years, an earthquake
intensity of 7 (according to the Medvedev-
Sponheuer-Karnik, or MSK-64 scale) is used
in the design. During the structural concept
design stage, Eurocode 8 as well as the local
seismic code TCXDCVN 375:2006, have been
reviewed for subsequent adoption in the
Schematic Design Stage.
The design of the structural frame would

ultimately have an influence on the magnitude
of the seismic loading, and so the following
considerations have been made to review the
TPHCM
structural stability of the building under
seismic loading:
● Dead weight of the structural frame should
Figure 2.1: Earthquake Occurrences in

Vietnam

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
be kept as light as possible to minimize seismic load and also enhance structural ductility;
● Embedment adequacy of the basement will also aid resistance to seismic shear load
● The building should minimize the occurrence of transfer structures for vertical
structural members, and also avoid sudden changes in lateral structural stiffness.
The dead load of the building includes the weight of all materials and fixed equipment
incorporated into the building, such as the self-weight of structural elements, finishes,
partition and equipment fixed in machine rooms. The load is used to determine the time
period of the building, as well as the horizontal base shear due to seismic action.
2.1.2 Stability under Wind Effects
Due to the uniqueness of the building shape not only with regard to the structural form, but
also for the consideration of wind design, the building requires in-depth wind loading
analysis in order to properly design the building to withstand the most likely critical static
and dynamic wind loads experienced within the design life of the building. Wind analysis
in the form of wind forces in multiple directions, chosen in accordance with the critical
geometry of the building are considered to ensure that the building remains structurally
stable under all wind loading conditions.
2.1.3 Durability and Sustainability
As a mixed-use development, offering a high standard environment for business uses, the
proposed building must be designed to last throughout its service life. The building should
be durable, that is, be able to withstand the external and internal forces exerted on it,
without showing signs of excess deformation, cracking, or overall degradation of
materials. Sustainability refers to the way in which the building is designed – the efficient
use of materials, which result in minimum wastage of materials during the construction
phase, but also the building itself, should have a low degree of structural redundancy.
With this in mind, the effective design of the building will promote low maintenance and
repairs to the structure, thus minimising interference to day-to-day activities of the users.
Suitable materials combined with a high standard of workmanship will ensure the
durability of the building. Both concrete and steel are durable materials and are widely
used throughout the construction industry. With suitable protection coating applied, the
steel structures could last and exceed the designed life of the building.
Simple construction details and factory-made pre-fabricated structural members will have
reduced workmanship problems associated with in-situ construction, and this will
inevitably help to reduce the cost and difficulties in future maintenance.
Efficient structural design of concrete members and simple construction details will aid a
high standard of concrete work. Thorough site supervision and regulation of construction
quality will reduce the likelihood of concrete defects occurring as the building matures.
11 | 50
2.1.4 Fire Resistance
In order to provide a safe building, the structure will be designed to achieve a high
standard of fire protection. All materials used in the structural elements shall have good
fire resistance and will prevent the propagation of fire.
Concrete provides excellent resistance to fire without any treatment; the degree of fire
resistance period dependant upon the concrete cover thickness to the main reinforcement
of the structural members. For steel, however, members should be suitably protected by
using a fireproof coating, such as intumescent paint or fire proofing spray.
2.1.5 Design for Differential Settlement
Differential settlement of the building could cause serious local or widespread damage to
the building. This would be in the form of structural cracks to walls, beams or columns,
and the cost of repairing such damage is high. Differential settlement is not preferable as
it may give rise to secondary effects such as excessive local loading of structural
elements, which would ultimately lead to structural failure if left unresolved.
In order to prevent differential settlement, the following measures shall be taken:
● The foundation of the building shall be properly designed to avoid inherent

unevenness in settlement;
● The building weight shall be such that the loading from the columns and walls shall be
evenly distributed into the foundations as much as possible;
● A piled foundation shall be adopted, relying primarily on shaft friction and end-bearing
loading resistance;
● Using combined pile caps for parts of the building which are sensitive to movement, or
where differences in loading between adjacent elements may differ significantly;
● Superstructure of the building should be designed to be flexible to resist certain
amounts of unpredictable differential settlement;
● Movement joints should be added to areas of the building where obvious problems
with differential settlement may arise;
● Temporary watertight construction gaps to be used between the tower and
podium/basement structure until completion of tower structure to reduce the effects of
differential settlement.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
2.2 Serviceability
2.2.1 Deflection Control
Vertical deflection due to gravity loads and lateral deflections due to static and dynamic
wind and seismic loads should be considered to prevent damage to non-structural
elements and ensure the proper function of the building, without causing discomfort or
interference to the building occupants.
2.2.2 Response to Wind Load
The lateral accelerations due to wind effects should be considered to ensure the comfort
of the users.
2.2.3 Vibration Control
The proposed structural framework is aimed to provide satisfactory stiffness to the

building and prevent discomfort or alarm to occupants, structural damage and interference
with day-to-day functions. Isolation of the sources of vibration (e.g. generators, lift motors,
etc.) will be provided to prevent the transmission of structural bond noise.
2.2.4 Watertightness
To ensure the proper function of the building, prevention of water ingress is also
important. The roofs and facades of the buildings shall be designed to be watertight and
adequate measures shall be provided to prevent cracks or excessive movement which
may lead to water leakage.
For the basement design, the basement screen walls and basement slabs shall be
susceptible to constant water head. Such water pressure shall be duly assessed and
allowed in the element design. The screen walls and basement slab shall also be
designed as water-tight elements to minimise the chance of water ingression. An
adequate drainage system shall also be provided for collection of water seeping through
the basement screen walls and basement slab for ensuring the dry condition of the
basement.
2.2.5 Thermal Effects
Since the floor plates of the proposed buildings are rather large, with larger-than-average
spans between columns the effect of thermal moment may be considerable in some
areas. Due consideration shall be taken in the structural layout to prevent accumulation of
stress due to thermal movements. The effect of thermal movement shall also be assessed
and measures will be provided to prevent overstressing of the structure.
13 | 50
2.3 Structural Efficiency
The definition of an efficient structural system in simple terms is the ability to have the largest
load carrying capacity with the minimum quantity of material used. Such efficiency depends on
the following conditions:
● Span of the structure

● Allowable depth of the structure
● Applied load intensity
● Load conditions
In reality, there will, of course, be limits to how much structural efficiency can be achieved. On
the one hand, the structure will also have to achieve an aesthetic goal, which may not permit the
usage of certain structural systems. On the other hand, however, local construction knowledge
and experience, and lack of construction expertise may be the other limiting factor, as well as
labour and construction costs and significant differences in construction programme.
2.4 Buildability
Buildability is measure of the ease of erection of the structure. As mentioned above, it is an

important factor affecting the cost and time for construction. It would also affect the overall quality
of the construction works, and also affect the level of supervision required. Therefore, a highly
buildable structure means an easily-built structure with minimum requirement for supervision.
The following factors would enhance the buildability of the structure:
● Simple details
● Straight forward operations
● Repetitiveness and standardisation of building elements
● Use of common construction techniques and materials
● Flexibility to on-site adjustment
2.5 Cost Effectiveness
The cost effectiveness of the building is accountable both from the construction cost (short-term
investment) and the maintenance cost (long-term investment). To achieve the minimum
construction cost, the structural efficiency and buildability are immediate governing factors. To
achieve the minimum maintenance cost, durability and sustainability are the governing factors.
However, the above factors may turn out to be contradictory. For example, highly efficient
structures (e.g. pre-stressed or post-tensioned slabs) may not be good options in terms of
buildability and ease of maintenance. Therefore, all the above factors must be duly considered
and balanced to achieve the best economy.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
2.6 Flexibility
As the building is proposed to be a multi-use development, a certain degree of flexibility should

be considered when choosing the final structural form of the building. Flexibility may include the
following changes:
● Alteration of internal layout

● Change of intended use
● Extension of building
The measure of flexibility is the ease at which alterations to the structure can be achieved,
without causing significant loss of structural stiffness or stability.
2.7 Environmental Friendliness
Environmental friendliness is measured by the level of environmental impact (pollution) caused

by the proposed construction. Environmental pollution can be split into two parts – the amount of
pollution caused during construction, and the amount of pollution caused when the building is
occupied. Post-construction environmental friendliness falls into the category of energy
efficiency, insulation, sewage treatment, and so on, which is beyond the scope of this structural
report.
During the construction stage, major sources of pollution can be attributed to water, noise, dust
and material wastage. To reduce the impact of such pollutions, the construction shall seek to
maximise the level of off-site fabrication if technically and financially viable. In cases where it is
possible to do so, the use of pre-cast or steel elements would have a positive contribution with
regards to the environmental concerns.
However, where it is not possible to incorporate these environmentally-friendly construction

substitutes, a fair share of environmental protection can be achieved by incorporating
environmental controls within the construction site – such as dust reduction systems, water
recycling, material re-usage, etc.
15 | 50
3 Development of Structural Design
3.1 Design Information and References
From the inception stage, and as the structural design of the building develops, the fundamental
design parameters must be ascertained as early as possible, in order to avoid over and under
design, and also to avoid the adoption of a structural form which would be unsuitable for the
intended purpose.
In order to assess and obtain the most reasonable structural design parameters for the proposed
building, different codes of practice have been cited, and the various values compared.
For the Determination of Superimposed Dead Load and Live Load

 BS6399 - Part 1 : 1996 - Code of Practice for Dead and Imposed Loads
For the Determination of Static and Dynamic Wind Effects

 TCVN 2737 : 1995 - Loads and effects: Design standards
 TCVN 229 : 1995 - Guidance for determination of dynamic component of the wind load under
TCVN 2737 : 1995
For the Determination of Seismic Loading

 TCVN 375 : 2006 - Design of structures of earthquake resistance
 BS EN 1998 : 2004 - Design of Structure for earthquake resistance
For the Design of Foundations

 TCXDVN 326 : 2004 - Cast-in-situ bored pile. Construction, check and take over standard.
 TCXDVN 269 : 2002 - Pile standard test method for piles under axial compressive load.
 TCXDVN 205 : 1998 - Pile Foundation. Specifications for Design.
 TCXDVN 358 : 2005 - Bored Pile - Sonic pulse method for determination of homogeneity of
concrete
 BS 8004 - Design of Foundations
 Pile foundations in engineering practice – Shamsher Prakash, Hari D. Sharma
 Pile design and Construction practice – M.J.Tomlinson
 Principal of foundation engineering – Braja M.Das
 Foundation Analysis and Design – Joseph E.Bowles
 The foundation engineering handbook – Manjriker Gunaratne
 Deep excavation, Theory and Practice - Chang-Yu Ou
For the Design of Reinforced Concrete Elements

 BS 8110 : 1997 – Structural Use of Concrete
For the Design of Structural Steel Design

 BS 5950 : 1990 – Structural Use of Steel

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
3.2 Superimposed Loading Intensities
The following table shows the loading intensities adopted for the structural design of the
proposed building, in accordance with the codes of practices listed above:
Load Description Dead Load Imposed Load

General Loads
Weight of Concrete 24.00 kN/m 3 -
Weight of Brick Wall 20.00 kN/m 3 -
Weight of Earth Fill 18.00 kN/m 3 -
Weight of Water - 10.00 kN/m 3
Basement Floors
50mm Screed Finish 1.20 kN/m 2 -
Ceiling Services Load 0.50 kN/m 2 -
Partition Load (Minimum) 1.00 kN/m 2 -
Car Park (Weight ≤ 2.5T) - 4.00 kN/m 2
Vault - 5.00 kN/m 2
Corridors - 5.00 kN/m 2
Lift Lobbies - 4.00 kN/m 2
Staircases - 4.00 kN/m 2
Toilets - 2.00 kN/m 2
General E&M Service Areas - Min 7.50 kN/m 2
Podium Floors – Khối đế

Shops - 4.00 kN/m 2
Food court - 4.00 kN/m 2
Supermarket - 4.00 kN/m 2
Office Floors
Office Floor - 2.50 kN/m 2
Function Rooms - 5.00 kN/m 2
Storage Rooms - 5.00 kN/m 2
Computer Rooms - 3.50 kN/m 2
17 | 50
Load Description Dead Load Imposed Load
Hotel Floors
Hotel Floor - 2.00 kN/m 2
Residential Floors
Residential Floor - 1.50 kN/m 2
Restaurant and Kitchen Floors in Podium

300mm Screed Finish in Kitchen 3.60 kN/m 2 -
Restaurant Areas - 4.00 kN/m 2
Kitchen Areas - 4.00 kN/m 2
Podium Roof / Tower Roof (General)

Waterproof Layer and Finishes 2.00 kN/m 2 -
Inaccessible Roof Areas - 1.50 kN/m 2
Accessible Roof Areas - 3.00 kN/m 2
Roof Garden - 15.00 kN/m 2
Cooling Tower - 10.00 kN/m 2

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
4 Development of Structural Conceptual Design
4.1 Superstructure Options
To determine the concept design for the superstructure, the material to be used and the
proposed form of the superstructure shall be determined.
4.1.1 Options of Construction Materials
To achieve an economical and durable building, the correct choice of suitable construction
material is crucial. All the technical and economical factors should be duly considered.
In the current market, Concrete (cast in-situ or pre-cast) and steel are the most popular
materials for construction. Both materials are technically viable, although the use of
structural steel would perhaps be used more suitably in combination with reinforced
concrete.
Structural Steel
1) Fast construction speed;
2) Expensive in material and fire protection;
3) High strength/weight ratio, and relatively lighter than concrete. It is particularly im-
portant to have a lighter weight for high-rise structures;
4) Not as rigid as reinforced concrete for central core construction to provide the nec-
essary lateral structural resistance. However, a concrete core, and a steel floor
can be combined to form a structurally efficient scheme. This type of combined
scheme is still not financially justified to be used for a building.
5) Less pollution generated during construction;
6) Most of the components are pre-fabricated, the quality of works are less reliant on
site workmanship quality.
Reinforced Concrete
1) Major advantage of reinforced concrete construction for high-rise buildings is the
material’s inherent properties of heaviness and mass, which create lateral stiff-
ness, or resistance to horizontal movement. Occupants of concrete towers are
less able to perceive building motion;
2) Cheap in material and labour cost;
3) Heavy self-weight will generate high seismic load than steel structure, but not criti-
cal except for super high-rise buildings;
4) Good acoustic insulation performance;
5) Due to its versatility, an unlimited variety of curves and angles can be created. A
high degree of on-site adjustment is possible;
6) Solid concrete walls provide an airtight thermal barrier to the surroundings;
7)
8) Naturally waterproof and fire-resistant, therefore eliminating the need for special
treatment;
9) Excellent durability over several decades with little maintenance required.
19 | 50
Pre-cast Concrete
1) The production takes place under controlled conditions, with the end project being
of a higher quality, with its dimensions more accurate;
2) As most of the production is completed in the factory, only the erection works need
to be performed on the construction site, thus potentially reducing the construction
period;
3) Bending moment connections between pre-cast beam and column is difficult and
expensive, and therefore may not be technically viable or cost-effective for high-
rise building. Combined frame action of the columns and beams with the central
core to resist seismic load may be impaired. In this case, it may be possible to
consider pre-cast construction of the floor structure only;
4) Industrialised processes facilitate a high total production capacity within a given
period of time;
5) Quick to manufacture and erect if a high degree of standardisation can be
achieved;
6) Cost depends on quantity and degree of standardisation.
Recommendations
Taking into consideration the proposed building layout, and the discussion on the possible
adoption of different construction materials, the following conceptual recommendations
are made:
Technically, the following options are conceptually viable:
(a) Cast in-situ reinforced concrete columns and central core with cast in-situ
reinforced concrete floor;
(b) Cast in-situ reinforced concrete columns and central core together with pre-cast
reinforced concrete frame and slab;
(c) Cast in-situ reinforced concrete columns and central core together with steel
frame.
Option (a) is more preferred than option (b), both technically and financially, as seismic
load in option (a) can be more widely distributed outside the central core than option (b).
This is due to better column/slab connections.
Option (a) is more preferred than option (c), as the steel cost in option (c) is much more
expensive.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
4.1.2 Options for Gravity Load Resisting Systems
Gravity frames for tall buildings generally do not differ substantially from those in low -rise
buildings. However, there are certain aspects and properties that need to be considered
during design:
 Floor weight to be minimised;

 Integration of mechanical services (such as ducts and pipes) in the floor zone;
 Fire resistance of the floor system;
 Buildability of the structure;
 Long-spanning capability.
Meeting the above criteria, the following floor systems are suggested to be adopted in the
proposed building.
Wall, Beam and Slab System
This is the simplest structural system, and offers the most flexibility in terms of structural
layout. It also offers the best frame action for the transfer of gravity and lateral loading into
the columns and walls. The layout of the beams and slabs can be easily arranged to fit
with the architectural layout, and the provision of slab openings can easily be
accommodated.
Flat Slab System
Depending on the floor type, the flat slab would require a thickness of at least 250mm,
and ranging up to 400mm thick for larger spans. Drop panels at column heads ranging
from 500mm to 600mm depth will also be required for structural stability, as well as
providing a stiffer connection at the columns to adequately resist lateral loads. In order to
provide even load distribution and control of deflection along the building, an edge beam
is also required. Due to the additional thickness in slab, and the long spans, the flat slab
system would be more expensive.
Post-Tensioned Flat Slab System
The post-tensioned flat slab system improves on the flat slab system by providing a floor
with post-tensioned tendons. This system is ideally suited for large span slabs, where the
deflection of the slab when using flat slab or conventional slab may result in very thick
slabs, or excessive reinforcement provisions.
21 | 50
4.1.3 Options for Lateral Load Resisting Systems
Considering the layout and height of the proposed buildings, there are not many choices
available for the lateral load resisting system. For regular shaped buildings there maybe
the chance to use tube-in-tube systems as well as the core wall and floor system.
However, for the proposed building, the core wall and floor system will be considered.
Core Wall and Frame
To maximise the ability to re-distribute loads under seismic load, a core wall and column
system framed with external columns connected by a rigid floor may be considered. This
frame system provides good lateral rigidity.
4.2 Basement Option
The basement is susceptible to the same assessment of structural system as the superstructure.
As a result, both beam and slab system and flat slab system are technically viable for the
basement floors. A flat slab system would obviously provide better all round clear headroom, and
to promote the routing of services.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
5 Structural Options for Superstructure and Basement
5.1 Comparison and Determination of Superstructure Schemes for Each Floor Type
The current architectural layout is designed for office function purpose of varying grid line, but all
fitting within a modular design which allows for a fairly flexible approach to structural layout.
Specific conceptual issues relating to the current architectural layout of the proposed
development are shown in Section 7. However, the sections below show a brief summary of the
advantages and disadvantages of the various structural schemes which are deemed to be
feasible for this particular project.
Beam & Slab System

Pros
 Good resistance to both gravitational and lateral loading
 Easy construction and maintenance
 Relatively easy to allow for future alterations, such as break panels and service
openings
Cons
 Large spans between columns result in deep beams to control vertical deflection
 May cause limitations to MEP routing due to reduced free headroom and obstruc-
tions
 Low floor-to-floor height, and high clear height requirements may result in addi-
tional beams required to share loading from slab in order to limit beam size
Flat Slab or Post-tensioned Flat Slab System

Pros
 Thicker slab thickness, but beams omitted
 Post-tensioned slab can allow reduced deflections for the long-span areas, where-
as conventional flat slab must increase thickness to control vertical deflection
 Larger columns and thicker walls required to compromise for decreased slab stiff-
ness
Cons
 Band beam may required for post-tensioned flat slab to increase rigidity
 Flat slab column drop may obstruct passage of MEP equipment, but continuous
clear zone achievable in other areas
 Marginally decreased resistance to lateral loading as compared with the beam and
slab system due to lower stiffness of the slab compared with the beam, but de-
pendent upon analysis method
 More difficult to allow for break panels in the floor slab, unless it is specifically de-
signed for.
From the points above, it seems that the beam and slab system is not the most favourable
structural system, in view of the high headroom requirement and marginally insufficient
floor to floor height. Due to the potentially large beams required for the beam and slab
23 | 50
system, the weight savings of typical beam and slab systems when compared with flat
slab systems seem less apparent. For this floor type, the use of post-tensioned flat slab
seems to be the most appropriate. Furthermore, with the appropriate structural
arrangement, the use of the post-tensioned flat slab system will allow easier and more
convenient provisions for removable floor panels, in the event internal circulation
staircases between office floors are required.
5.2 Summary of Structural Schemes for Basement Floors
Beam and Slab system

Pros
 Simple construction and relatively
consistent structural sizes through-
out basement due to relatively con-
stant spans
 Slab thickness can be kept to a
minimum
 No column drop required
 Good flexibility for the addition or modification of service openings, such as pipe ducts
and vent shafts

 Cons
 Longer span beams would require extra beam depth, thus restricting E&M space and
possibly clear floor height
 Slightly more complicated formwork arrangement
 May not allow for the most efficient floor height due to increased structural depth
Flat Slab System

Pros
 Flat ceiling profile, and so relatively easy routing of M&E services allowable
 Easy construction and simplified formwork
 Promotes the most flexible combination of services space and clear headroom
 May allow reduced floor-to-floor height, thus saving on excavation
Cons
 Column drops may impede into us-
able M&E space
 Slabs thicker than conventional
slabs – overall floor system may be
slightly heavier than the beam and
slab system
 Service openings, such as pipe ducts and vent shafts can be difficult or impossible to
modify after construction
 Increased steel ratios (compared with beam and slab system), resulting in slightly
higher construction costs

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
From the above, as the flexible of the layout plan and the complicate behaviour of the deep
basement floors, and the huge lateral compression force from soil pressure especially in
basement 3 and 4 level, the beam and slab system are technically viable for the basement floors.
The band beams system can be applied to reduce the story height as well as increase the
headroom for basement. And it should be noted that the post-tensioned should not be used in
the basement due to construction difficulties and potential problems with waterproofing and
maintenance.
25 | 50
6 Geotechnical Consideration
As part of the feasibility study for the proposed building, a site investigation commissioned by the
Client was carried out by Vina Mekong Engineering Consultants Joint Stock Company (VMEC).
The objectives of the site investigation were to achieve the following:
 Determine the soil profile throughout the proposed site area;

 Determine the occurrence, level and variation of ground water within the soil layer;
 Obtain sufficient information to determine the optimum diaphragm wall, foundation system
and subsequently the extent of foundation required.
The site investigation was carried out from 07 March to 14 April 2013. In total 6 boreholes were
drilled 2 nos. to a depth of 80m (BH08, BH09), 2 nos. to a depth of 100m (BH03, BH11), 1 nos. to a
depth of 120m (BH05) and 1 nos. to a depth of 130m (BH02). The borehole locations are shown in
the diagram below.
6.1 Ground Conditions
Based on the site investigation results, the ground conditions below the proposed site are
summarised in the following section.
6.1.1 Soil Investigation Plan
Based on the site investigation results, the ground conditions below the proposed site are
summarised in the following section.
Table 6.1: Borehole Designation

Borehole Nos. Depth
BH08, BH09 80 m
BH03, BH11 100m
BH05 120m
BH02 130 m

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
Figure 6.1: Site Investigation – Borehole Layout Plan
27 | 50
6.1.2 Sub-Soil Conditions
From the results of the site investigation, the soil profile can be summarised as follows:
Table 6.2: Soil Layer Properties Summary
Layer Soil description Avegage SPT-
Thickness (m) N30
Fill layer About 1.2 – 4.2m thick 1.2m-4.2m 0
1a Underlying fill to the depth of 2.4m, greenish - blackish grey, 0.5m 3-6
soft to firm sandy fat clay with some organic matter. An
average value of water content is of 57.7%, plastic limit of
29%, liquid limit of 67%, unit weight of 1.62T/m 3
1b Underlying 1a to the depth of 7.8m, greenish - blackish grey, 1.0m-5.0m 7-9
firm to medium stiff sandy lean clay. An average value of
water content is of 26.6%, plastic limit of 19%, liquid limit of
47%, unit weight of 1.99T/m 3.
2a Yellowish - whitish grey, reddish brown, loose to medium 2.0m-4.0m 7-15
dense silty, clayey sand with occasional rounded quartz
gravel. An average value of water content is of 11.7%.
2 Underlying layer 1b to the depth of 36.5m, yellowish - whitish 30.0m-32.0m 7-25
grey, reddish brown, reddish brown, loose to medium dense
silty, clayey sand with occasional rounded quartz gravel. An
average value of water content is of 17.2%, unit weight of
2.10T/m 3
3 Underlying layer 2 to the depth of 50.0m, yellowish grey, 14.0m-16.0m 14-56
reddish brown mottled whitish – greenish grey, very stiff to
hard fat clay. An average value of water content is of 16.8%,
plastic limit of 19%, liquid limit of 50%, unit weight of 2.12T/m 3
4 Underlying layer 3, yellowish grey, reddish brown, medium to 29.0m-39.0m 9-84
dense silty, clayey sand with occasional rounded quartz
gravel. An average value of water content is of 16.1%.
5 Underlying layer 4, yellowish grey, reddish brown mottled 0.5m-5.0m 21-28
whitish – greenish grey, very stiff to hard lean clay. An
6 Underlying layer 5, yellowish grey, reddish brown, medium to 24.5m-33.0m 24-91
dense silty sand with occasional rounded quartz gravel. An
average value of water content is of 14.1%, unit weight of
1.97T/m 3
7 Underlying layer 6, yellowish grey, reddish brown mottled 12.0m 38-70
whitish – greenish grey, hard to very hard lean clay. An
8 Underlying layer 7, yellowish grey, medium dense clayey 10.0m 16-22
sand. An average value of water content is of 19.9%, unit
weight of 2.06T/m 3

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
6.1.3 Summary of Soil Conditions
From the soil descriptions above, it can be seen that the soil at the site comprised mainly
of clays from plastic to stiff and sands from loose to dense that have relatively high
bearing. The soil profile has indicated that the SPT value of Borehole BH2, BH3 is lower
than the SPT value of Borehole BH5, BH8, BH9, BH11. And from ground to the depth -
50m, the SPT value of Boreholes is seem to be closed, but from -50m to -130m the SPT
value have big difference between borehole BH3 and BH11. In generally, this soil profile is
suitable for apply the shaft frictional resistance mainly and may consideration combine
with the end-bearing resistance where the soil properties is good. The summaried SPT
value graphical is presented as below:
Figure 6.2: SPT graphic
29 | 50
6.1.4 Ground Water
Field test results indicate that the water level within the site area is mainly at about 1.0-
2.5m below ground level. The water table is at this level of layer 2 of yellowish - whitish
grey, reddish brown, reddish brown, loose to medium dense silty, clayey sand with
occasional rounded quartz gravel.
Ground water must be accounted for in the design of the building, as it would contribute to
upthrust pressure loading on the base slab. Whilst this would not be considered a problem
for areas of the building with many floors above, there are, however, several locations
where the downward force due to the self-weight of the building is not sufficient to offset
the upward loading due to water pressure.
To combat this effect, it may not be economical to add to the self-weight of the building, as
this would involve a lot of excess concrete which would be deemed wasteful. In this case,
it would be down to the foundation design to include measures to resist the loading due to
the upthrust water pressure. In any case, however, the basement structural elements
themselves, in particular the basement base slab and diaphragm wall must be designed to
resist these forces.
6.1.5 Tentative Bored Pile Capacity Determination
In view of the abovementioned subsoil profile, deep foundation should be adopted for the
building.
The Semi-empirical Method will be applied for Bored Pile and Barret Pile geotechnical
capacity. Semi-empirical correlations have been extensively developed relating both shaft
resistance
and base resistance of bored piles to N-values from Standard Penetration Tests
(SPT’N’ values).
The commonly used correlations for bored piles are as follows:
fsu = Ksu x SPT’N’ (in kPa)
fbu = Kbu x SPT’N’ (in kPa)
Where:
Ksu Ultimate shaft resistance factor
Kbu Ultimate base resistance factor
SPT’N’ = Standard Penetration Tests blow counts (blows/300mm)
Ultimate Pile Capacity:
Qu = Qp + Qs = fsu × As + fbu × Ap
where:

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
Qs ultimate shaft friction resistance
Qp ultimate end-bearing resistance
As area of shaft in contact with soil
Ap cross-sectional area of pile base
Allowable Pile Capacity:

Qa = Qu / Fs = (Qs / FSs + Qp / FSp)
where:
Fs overall factor of safety
FSs factor of safety for Qs, taken as 2.50
FSp factor of safety for Qp, taken as 2.50
The following table below shows the tentative pile capacity based on a 2.0m diameter
bored pile with 85m length and 1.5mx2.8m barret pile 85m length with Non-Shaft grouted
and Shaft grouted.
Table 6.3:Summary table of bored pile(Non-Shaft grouted)

Pile Ultimate Capacity Factor of Safety Allowable Capacity
Dimensions (kN) (kN)
Borehole ID
(Non- Shaft
Friction Bearing Total Friction Bearing Friction Bearing Total
grouted)
(m)
BH02 2 42,704 553 43,257 2.5 2.5 17,082 221 17,303
BH03 2 40,544 879 41,423 2.5 2.5 16,217 352 16,569
BH05 2 48,180 1,080 49,260 2.5 2.5 19,272 432 19,704
BH11 2 51,295 703 51,998 2.5 2.5 20,518 281 20,799
Average 45,681 804 46,485 -- -- 18,272 322 18,594
Table 6.4: Summary table of bored pile(Shaft grouted)

Borehole ID
(Shaft
grouted)
(m)
BH02 2 82,193 553 82,745 2.5 2.5 32,877 221 33,098
BH03 2 59,836 879 60,715 2.5 2.5 23,934 352 24,286
BH05 2 75,423 1,080 76,503 2.5 2.5 30,169 432 30,601
BH11 2 80,736 703 81,439 2.5 2.5 32,294 281 32,576
Average 74,547 804 75,351 -- -- 29,819 322 30,140
31 | 50
Table 6.5: Summary table of barrette pile(Non-Shaft grouted)
Borehole ID
(Non- Shaft
grouted)
(m)
BH02 1.5x2.8 58,480 739 59,219 2.5 2.5 23,392 296 23,688
BH03 1.5x2.8 55,522 1,176 56,698 2.5 2.5 22,209 470 22,679
BH05 1.5x2.8 65,979 1,445 67,424 2.5 2.5 26,392 578 26,970
BH11 1.5x2.8 71,208 941 72,149 2.5 2.5 28,483 376 28,860
Average 62,797 1,075 63,872 -- -- 25,119 430 25,549
Table 6.6: Summary table of barrette pile(Shaft grouted)

Borehole ID
(Shaft
grouted)
(m)
BH02 1.5x2.8 112,557 739 113,296 2.5 2.5 45,023 296 45,318
BH03 1.5x2.8 81,941 1,176 83,117 2.5 2.5 32,776 470 33,247
BH05 1.5x2.8 103,286 1,445 104,731 2.5 2.5 41,314 578 41,892
BH11 1.5x2.8 110,562 941 111,502 2.5 2.5 44,225 376 44,601
Average 102,086 1,075 103,162 -- -- 40,835 430 41,265
6.2 Foundation Option
Due to the relatively high loads from the proposed structure, a piled foundation option is
considered necessary. On top of that, it has already been discovered in the previous sections
that the clay and sand layers that are characteristic of the soil profile of HCMC are not ideally
suited to high load bearing applications. The following foundation options are considered, and
their merits discussed:
6.2.1 Conventional Bored Piles and Barrette Piles
Bored piles between 0.6m and 2.5m in diameter founded

within the very dense sand layer can be used to carry the
structural superstructure loads. Due to the granular nature of
the sediments that underlie the site and the high ground water
table, the pile shafts will require support during the boring and
concreting process. This can be achieved by either using a
fully cased excavation, or by using a bentonite slurry to support
the pile bore. The fully cased option will be expensive due to
the diameter and length of the piles, and also time consuming.
It is therefore likely that the bored pile constructed using
bentonite will be more cost and time effective. As these piles
will be founded within the very dense sand layer or very stiff
clay, they will contribute a part of the pile capacity in the end-
bearing, although the shaft friction is the main contribution for

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
this soil profile. It will therefore be very important to ensure that a sound base is achieved
prior to concreting each pile. This depends on how the base is cleaned and also on the
control of the quality of the bentonite prior to concreting. Full-time supervision of the piling
works is therefore recommended to ensure that the piles are constructed in accordance
with the assumptions made at the design stage.
Barrette piles are similar to bored piles in their usage

and operation. However, they are more suited to
taller buildings where the loading intensity is more
highly concentrated. Due to their size, each barrette
pile can take the equivalent of several bored piles,
but, depending on the soil conditions, may not be
able to achieve the same degree of efficiency as the
traditional bored pile. In cases where column loads
are small in relation to the allowable loading capacity
of a particular barrette pile group, this leads to further
inefficiency of the pile due to a lower capacity usage. During barrette pile construction, the
walls of the pile shaft are stabilised with bentonite, but due to the rectangular shape of the
shaft, the collapse or inward bulge of the shaft is often experienced. This sometimes
makes it difficult to install the reinforcement cage, and also reduces the concrete cover
between the soil and the reinforcement, which could lead to early corrosion of the
reinforcement particularly in heavily acidic or alkaline soils.
33 | 50
6.2.2 Shaft Grouted Bored Piles and Barrette Piles
To enhance the shaft capacity of a conventional Bored pile and Barrette pile, a technique
known as shaft grouting can be carried out. This process involves injecting cement grout
around the pile shaft after the pile has been concreted. This has the effect of increasing
the soil strength immediately around the pile, and thus increasing the shaft capacity up to
two times. The result is that the number of piles can be reduced. In locations where end-
bearing capacity is not significant, the shaft capacity increase may also result in the use of
shorter piles, if it can be proved that the gain in shaft resistance is sufficient enough to
warrant both a reduced number of piles and also a shorter pile.
However, if this technique is to be adopted, then a piling contractor experienced in this

technique will need to be employed. Such expertise may not be available locally. Full time
supervision of the piling works is recommended to ensure that the piles are constructed
and grouted in accordance with the assumptions made at the design stage. However, due
to variations in ground conditions, including ground water variation, it may be difficult to
control the quality of the grout, which may in turn lead to inconsistent pile capacities.
6.2.3 Trial Piles
For all the foundation systems discussed above, it is highly

recommended to carry out a trial pile to determine and
confirm the actual design parameters to be used on the
working piles. The piles should be fully instrumented in
order to accurately measure settlement and displacement.
In addition, both destructive and non-destructive pile
testing should be carried out. The non-destructive pile
should be chosen from one of the actual future working
piles. The destructive pile should be a separate pile, and
load tested until destruction.
6.3 Basement Construction Options
The basement structure is comprised of 4 or 5 levels. Level B1 is proposed to be a part of the

retail component with the car park locatedin the office component only. On Levels B2 to B5 this
is designated primarily for the car parks and motorcycle and some MEP plant.
To account for the thickness of pile cap, the total excavation level will need to be taken to at least
2.0 to 3.0m below the bottom basement level. Due to the proximity of adjacent buildings next to
the proposed development, and the potential sensitivity of the surrounding ground with regard to
settlement and movement as a result of the new construction works, and the less-than-usable
engineering conditions of the soil (relating to high water table), the selection of basement
construction method, and the associated temporary works is of great importance within this site.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
There are three main construction methods available for the construction of the basement, and
all are technically viable – top-down construction and bottom-up construction and a third option,
the semi top-down construction method.Their merits and weaknesses are addressed below..
6.3.1 Bottom-Up Construction
 Total excavation of the basement area is required. Lateral support structure with
internal strutting would also be required;
 If building diaphragm wall is used, the temporary case for total basement cantilevered
length may cause the wall to be over-designed when compared to the permanent
case, unless a temporary lateral support scheme is implemented, in which case the
temporary works would also have a significant cost implication;
 Pile cap can be constructed as soon as excavation bottom level is reached;
 Superstructure cannot proceed until all basement floors are completed;
 Additional site area to be assigned for temporary material storage;
 Construction time would be the longest, as time would have to be allowed for
excavation, lateral support works, and basement construction occurring almost con-
secutively.
Figure 6.3: Bottom-Up Construction Sequence
35 | 50
6.3.2 Top-Down Construction
 Construction of the basement floors is carried out simultaneous with excavation;

 Potential time savings possible, as superstructure may be constructed simultaneously
with the basement;
 King post is required to support the floors before the columns are constructed;
 King post may be expensive, depending upon the number of floors it has to support;
 Internal lateral strutting can be avoided;
 Excavation access may be restricted;
 G/F may be used for temporary material storage;
 Semi top-down method may be adopted to save on excavation lateral supports, and
save on king post size
 May result in a larger or more restricted pile layout, due to the pile required to be
located directly beneath the king post;
 King post may result in larger columns compared with conventional column.
Figure 6.4: Top-Down Construction Sequence

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
6.3.3 Semi-Top-Down Construction
 Similar to Top-Down Construction, in that basement structure is constructed concur-

rently with the basement excavation;
 Semi top-down method saves on excavation lateral supports, and can also allow a
smaller king post size;
 Semi top-down method requires considerably more time than a fully top-down method,
as superstructure construction above ground level does not commence until the whole
basement construction is completed (due to limited king post size);
 Semi top down method may not have any significant time savings over the conven-
tional bottom-up construction method;
Piling layout would be similar to the fully top-down construction method, and slightly
more extensive than the piling layout for the bottom-up construction method.
Figure 6.5: Semi Top-Down Construction Sequence
37 | 50
6.3.4 Discussion on Basement Construction Scheme
The options report discussed the possibility of exploiting three different excavation and
basement construction techniques, with the aim of reducing cost, saving time and also
reducing the impact to the surrounding area. The options discussed were as follows:
Option 1: Bottom-Up Construction

Option 2: Top-Down Construction
Option 3: Semi Top-Down Construction
The site is an L-shaped site with slightly irregular dimension. The overall basement area
extends to the limits of the site boundary on each edge. Existing buildings include the
Lotte Legend Hotel and the new Le Meridian Hotel (near completion). It will therefore be
important that the construction works will not cause excessive effect to the surrounding
land. This is particularly important with regard to dewatering, as the site investigation
results suggest that the water table is very high in this area. Therefore a system of
dewatering within the site area and recharging outside the site area will most probably be
vital to keep ground movement to an absolute minimum.
In general, a top-down construction can offer benefits such as reduced ground movement,
due to the inherent stabilisation of the diaphragm wall from both the floor plate as well as
passive soil pressure. As a result, a top-down construction method can also reduce the
difference in stresses within a diaphragm wall between the temporary and permanent
case – as well as the possibility of the structural system to reach equilibrium state
(balance of forces, settlement, deflection) quicker.
The bottom-up construction method will require excavation of the whole site (or partial
excavation in the case of phased construction). Temporary works such as waling and
struts will be required to stabilise the diaphragm wall during the construction phase. The
cost of the temporary works may be potentially high due to the deep excavation area –
weighing up the cost benefit of increasing the thickness of the diaphragm wall / increasing
rebar areas compared with the cost of incorporating the temporary stabilising works will be
required in order to reach the highest level of efficiency in this case. However, the bottom
up construction method may be hampered by the high water table and the effectiveness of
dewatering a large area over a long period of time.
Other issues to be considered will also inevitably be the effect of the basement
construction to the proposed MRT line. At this stage, it is unclear as to which will be
constructed first – in this instance, it is assumed that both scenarios will be considered –
that is, to estimate the effect of tunnelling on the stability of the diaphragm wall, as well as
to estimate the effect on the stability of the tunnel due to the construction of the basement.
Although no direct conclusion can be reached at this time regarding a definitive

construction method, a solution may become clearer on development of the schematic
design.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
7 Specific Conceptual Design Issues
As part of the conceptual design of the proposed development, some fundamental issues have
been identified which would have an influence on the future design development of the various
structural elements, as well as the more detailed architectural layout design. Notwithstanding,
some issues also relate to possible construction techniques with regard to the basement as well as
superstructure.
The following sections describe some of the issues associated with different areas of the
development, and identify some of the possible structural solutions which may be available.
7.1 Specific Basement Structural Issues
As much of the site area is to have 4-storey basement and 5-storey basement depending on
area, the construction method and construction phasing will have a significant influence on the
structural system of the basement structures. This not only includes the permanent structural
elements, but also the temporary structural elements – all of which will have an impact on cost,
as well as speed of construction.
With regard to construction programme, it may be required to construct the basement in phases.
In this case, the extent of the temporary works as well as the extent of how much the permanent
works will contribute during the construction phase will be of much importance.
7.2 Diaphragm Wall Issues
A diaphragm wall system is an economical and efficient solution for the side walls of the
basement. The diaphragm wall can be used to act as a retaining wall during excavation, and so
will help to save money on temporary works. The diaphragm wall can be constructed even
before mass excavation commences.
The extent of the diaphragm wall design will depend on how much it will have to contribute
during the construction stage. It is certain that the permanent loading case will be less critical
than the temporary loading case, and so, to minimise the over-design of the diaphragm wall for
its ultimate purpose, some sort of supplementary temporary works will be required.
7.3 Procedure for Semi Top-down Construction
Stage 1 : Construct the Diaphragm wall and Barrette piles / bored piles with the King post
system
Stage 2 :
- Excavate to Ground Floor level
- Prepare plan for the form work and Erect support formwork for Ground floor slab
and beams
- Install columns reinforcement and reinforcement for beams and slab
- Cast Ground Floor slab and beams including capping beam
39 | 50
- Leave opening at stair case or ramp for soil taking out
- Install struts for the temporary opening slab
Figure 7.1: Stage 2

Stage 3 :
- Excavate below Ground to basement B1 and remove the formwork of Ground
level
- Prepare plan for the form work and erect support formwork for B1 floor slab and
beams
- Cast B1 Floor slab and beams

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
Figure 7.2: Stage 3
Stage 4 :
- Excavate below basement B1 to basement B2 and remove the formwork of B1
level
beams
Figure 7.3: Stage 4
41 | 50
Stage 5 :
level
beams
Figure 7.4: Stage 5
Stage 6 :
level
beams

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
Figure 7.5: Stage 6
Stage 7 :
level
- Prepare plan for the form work and erect support formwork for B5 floor slab,
beams and pile cap
- Install pile cap reinforcement, columns and corewalls reinforcement and rein-
forcement for beams and slab
- Cast B5 Floor slab, beams and pile cap
- Cast Columns and Corewalls from B5 to Ground floor level
- Cast Ramp and temporary opening from B5 to Ground floor level and remove the
struts subsequently
43 | 50
Figure 7.6: Stage 7
Figure 7.7: Section of Basement after completed

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
7.4 Specific Foundation Structural Issues
It has already been discussed in previous sections that the most efficient piling system for this
development is the use of barrette piles and bored pile. The barrette piles offer the best in terms
of material usage and big loading capacity. The bored pile can be used for smaller column load.
Additional piling capacity can be obtained by shaft grouting – this can effectively reduce the
water content of the soil, thus stiffening the soil, providing more resistance to local settlement
and also potentially increasing shaft resistance in particular poor soil areas.
The development can therefore be split into different areas: areas with columns and areas with
core wall systems; areas with high vertical load and areas with low vertical load. Due to the grid
line of column is not typical, the column loading will have some difference in some areas, and for
this reason, the comparison between the effectiveness of different piling techniques and soil
strengthening techniques is of great importance.
For the core wall areas, the large pile cap will be applied distribution the huge loading above.
Due to the height and number of floors of each tower, it is envisaged that both barrette or bored
pile can be suitable for this development – again, shaft grouting can be used to increase the
loading capacity of the piles in this particularly weak soil.
7.5 Assessment of Layout of Office Tower
7.5.1 Vertical Structural System
The current tower shape is almost an irregular trapezoidal shape, with a fairly substantial
central lift core. To enable the most efficient layout of the office with minimal intrusion of
internal columns and the like, it is proposed to adopt a system of central core and
perimeter columns only. The current layout and the respective spans between each
vertical element does permit the use of conventional structural systems as outlined
previously. Due to the size of the lift core, it is expected that some minor tweaks to the lift
core may be required later on due to the aspect ratio of core in the major and minor
directions. On the other hand, by thickening the walls in the shorter direction may
contribute to stiffness, but may have an effect on resonant period of the structure as a
whole.
One inherent feature of such a structural system is that the structure outside the core
offers little contribution to stiffness and resistance to deflection. In the later stages of
design, we will need to ensure that the resonant performance of the structure is
compatible with current ground acceleration in order that cumulative dynamic response
does not occur.
7.5.2 Horizontal Structural System
Based on the vertical structural layout, and the overall geometry of the building, it is
proposed that a post-tensioned flat slab structure is adopted. This scheme is considered
to be the most suitable, given the span of the structure between vertical elements, the
45 | 50
allowable floor to floor height, as well as creating maximum flexibility for the routing of
MEP services through the ceiling voids.
In addition, to create additional flexibility for the likely tenants, it is also proposed to create
break-out panels at a strategic location within the floor plate to allow for the inclusion of
internal access staircases, should a single tenant require office space of more than one
floor. The location of this break-out panel will be chosen subject to the structural
restrictions as well as the impact to dynamic performance of the building.
7.6 Assessment of Layout of Hotel Tower
The hotel tower, similar to many hotels of similar standard, have modularized room sizes,
which means that the geometry of the structure will be fairly standard with regular column
spacings.
Currently, the grid arrangement for the development is loosely based on a 9 x 9m grid,
with a 4.5m subdivision. This layout lends itself well to a standardized hotel room size,
which will mean that it may be possible to incorporate a structure for the hotel, at least in
terms of vertical elements, which fits with the podium and basement floors, and therefore,
does not require the need for a transfer beam system.
The shortfall of such a scheme is that column sizes may become fairly intrusive within the
hotel room which may impinge into usable space and affect the layout of the room.
Alternatively, it would be preferable to use blade walls which disguise themselves as
partition walls between rooms. It would be possible to design the walls to be sufficiently
thin.
Obviously, a blade wall system may present certain problems later should the hotel be
abandoned and the building usage changed – the blade walls, being structural, cannot be
demolished, thus causing potential reductions in layout flexibility.
At present, however, there does appear to be a shortage of shear walls, as the lift core is
very small. This will present some problems with wall thicknesses due to the huge
concentration of vertical and lateral forces into a very small area. It is recommended that a
suitable shear wall system with common elements which run directly to the foundation is
devised, which is able to fit with the current basement and podium layouts.
7.6.2 Horizontal Structural Systems
Based on the vertical structural layout, and the overall geometry of the building, it is
proposed that either a beam and slab system or a post-tensioned slab system are equally
feasible. Beams can be seen to be non-intrusive as they will be aligned with the partition
walls, whilst the slabs, which can be designed only to resist gravity loading, can be made
to be thinner due to the smaller spans between beams.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
7.7 Assessment of Layout of Residential Tower
The residential tower is an irregular shaped tower block, most probably designed in such
a way to maximize the natural lighting penetration into each apartment unit. At the time of
this report, however, no residential layouts are available, apart from a base layout of
apartment mix based on floor area and arrangement on each floor.
The tower is currently based on a conventional column frame, which follows the column
grid system of the podium and basement. Whilst such an arrangement appears to be
acceptable in the absence of a clear residential layout, the actual implications of columns
and especially their large size at the lower floors should be carefully considered.
It has been proposed to use an alternative vertical support system based on shear walls
which are strategically placed so that the walls appear not to intrude into living space at
all. This relies on using shear walls as partitions or external walls which would otherwise
be blockwork. At this current time, a conceptual shear wall layout has been proposed as
shown in the sketch below. The diagram on the left shows a wall layout which follows the
grid (potentially simplifying the transfer beam system), but doesn’t offer the best flexibility
for the apartment layouts. The diagram on the right is in coherence with the apartment
layout, but it should be stressed that reaching an agreed apartment mix will have a large
impact on the potential layout of the shear walls.
Figure 7.8 : Shear wall layout for apartment
47 | 50
In conjunction with a shear wall system, it will be required to have a transfer beam floor to
act as the interface between the shear wall layout of the residential tower, and the column
layout of the podium and basement. It would not be advisable to continue the shear walls
down into the foundation, since it is almost certain that the irregular layout of the shear
walls which are designed to be compatible with the residential layouts, are not compatible
or suitable for the podium and basement spaces.
Despite the inclusion of shear walls around the tower, it is still considered that the lift core
is too small, and of an irregular shape which may cause undesirable deformation under
dynamic loading, such as torsional rotation, or excessive deflection and stress distribution.
It is recommended that a suitable shear wall system with a less complex geometry is
developed on maturity of the architectural layout.
7.7.2 Horizontal Structural Systems
In the case of both column frame and shear wall frame systems, a flat slab or post-
tensioned flat slab structure can be adopted. Depending on the span, the cost-
effectiveness of a post-tensioned flat slab may not have any distinct advantage over
conventional systems. In this case, adopting a beam and slab system may present certain
disadvantages related to complicated beam layouts when attempting to conceal beams
within partition walls, and maintaining beam-free ceilings.

Dated: 12/8/2013
Revised: 00
8 Issues To Be Developed for Schematic / Basic Design
At the current time, the concept design is being developed and the planning parameters are being
finalised. In terms of structure, a great deal still remains undefined, and this will inevitably require
attention in the next stage of design.
Of particular importance, and for the basis of the Schematic and Basic design stage, the structural
design will focus on the following areas:
● Core wall sizes and layouts to achieve good structural performance

● Rationalisation of staircase locations in order to minimize disruption to structural load paths
● Arrangement of all vertical elements and to address areas of non-compliance
● Sizing of floor plates, beams, wall thicknesses and column sizes based on the optimized layouts
● Adoption of piling scheme and basement construction method as well as preliminary assessment on
diaphragm wall sizes
● Preliminary coordination of subsurface tanks and their influence on the pile cap extent, depth and
shape
49 | 50
WSP Vietnam Ltd
Unit 5, 16/F, Green Power Building
35 Ton Duc Thang Street
Ben Nghe Ward, District 1
Ho Chi Minh City
Vietnam
Tel: +84 8 2220 5345
Fax: +84 8 2220 5348
www.wspgroup.com

J10048-Nexus Parcel 1-C&S Concept Design Report - R00

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

J10048-Nexus Parcel 1-C&S Concept Design Report - R00

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NEXUS PARCEL 1

CIVIL & STRUCTURAL CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT

Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3

Project number: J10048-CS-001 2 | 50

Tel: +83 8 2220 5345

Unit 5, 16/F Green Power Building, 35 Ton Duc Thang

Project number: J10048-CS-001 4 | 50

Figure 1.1: Map of Nexus Parcel 1 project ............................................................................. 8

Project number: J10048-CS-001 6 | 50

Table 6.1: Borehole Designation .......................................................................................... 26

Figure 1.1: Map of Nexus Parcel 1 project

Figure 1.2: Site Satellite Image

Project number: J10048-CS-001 8 | 50

The above criteria will be further discussed in the subsequent sections.

2.1.1 Stability under Seismic Effects

The building situated in HCM City is to be

The design of the structural frame would

● Dead weight of the structural frame should

Figure 2.1: Earthquake Occurrences in

Project number: J10048-CS-001 10 | 50

2.1.2 Stability under Wind Effects

2.1.3 Durability and Sustainability

2.1.5 Design for Differential Settlement

In order to prevent differential settlement, the following measures shall be taken:

● The foundation of the building shall be properly designed to avoid inherent

Project number: J10048-CS-001 12 | 50

2.2.1 Deflection Control

2.2.2 Response to Wind Load

2.2.3 Vibration Control

The proposed structural framework is aimed to provide satisfactory stiffness to the

2.2.5 Thermal Effects

● Span of the structure

Buildability is measure of the ease of erection of the structure. As mentioned above, it is an

2.5 Cost Effectiveness

Project number: J10048-CS-001 14 | 50

As the building is proposed to be a multi-use development, a certain degree of flexibility should

● Alteration of internal layout

2.7 Environmental Friendliness

Environmental friendliness is measured by the level of environmental impact (pollution) caused

However, where it is not possible to incorporate these environmentally-friendly construction

3.1 Design Information and References

For the Determination of Superimposed Dead Load and Live Load

For the Determination of Static and Dynamic Wind Effects

For the Determination of Seismic Loading

For the Design of Foundations

For the Design of Reinforced Concrete Elements

For the Design of Structural Steel Design

Project number: J10048-CS-001 16 | 50

Load Description Dead Load Imposed Load

Podium Floors – Khối đế

Restaurant and Kitchen Floors in Podium

Podium Roof / Tower Roof (General)

Project number: J10048-CS-001 18 | 50

4.1 Superstructure Options

4.1.1 Options of Construction Materials

Technically, the following options are conceptually viable:

Project number: J10048-CS-001 20 | 50

 Floor weight to be minimised;

Wall, Beam and Slab System

Flat Slab System

Post-Tensioned Flat Slab System

Core Wall and Frame

4.2 Basement Option