DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT OF

T.K GROUP (BD) LTD. (Part F)

Project type: 3 Storied factory Building (Building-f) Including Roof Top Shed.

Location: CHANDGAON I/A, CHITTAGONG

Client: T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.

Assessed by-
Engr. Md. Mehedi Hasan
Lead Structural Engineer,
Sthapona Consultants
M.Sc. (Structural Engineering, BUET) B.Sc. (BUET),
MIEB -24748, Rajuk Reg. DMINB-CE0233.

Submitted by

Y OUR S AFETY IS OUR C ONCERN

1st Floor , House#18, Road#20, Nikunjo-2, Dhaka-1229.
Office: +880-1762-777666.
sthaponaconsultants@gmail.com
[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1
1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 2
1.1 BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 GENERAL OBJECTIVE ..................................................................................................... 3
2 ANALYSIS FOR STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY .......................................................... 4
2.1 STRUCTURAL SYSTEM ................................................................................................... 4
2.2 CODES AND PRACTICES ................................................................................................ 5
2.3 MATERIAL PROPERTY .................................................................................................... 5
2.4 LOADS ...................................................................................................................................... 6
2.4.1 Dead Load ......................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.4.2 Live Load........................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.4.3 Wind Load (W) ................................................................................................................................................ 6
2.4.4 Earthquake Load (E) ...................................................................................................................................... 8

2.5 METHOD OF ANALYSIS .................................................................................................. 8

2.6 LOADING AND LOAD COMBINATION ................................................................... 9
2.7 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 11
2.8 APPLICATION OF LOAD AND ANALYSIS .......................................................... 11
3 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS FOR BNBC GUIDELINES
(RECOMMENDED LOADINGS & LOAD COMBINATIONS) ................................ 12
3.1 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF FOUNDATION ....................................................... 12
3.1.1.1 Evaluation of Steel Columns ...........................................................................................17
3.1.1.2 Evaluation of Steel Beams ...............................................................................................23
3.1.1.3 Evaluation of RCC Columns ...........................................................................................26

3.2 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF BEAMS ...................................................................... 29

3.2.1.1 Evaluation of Grade Beam ...............................................................................................29

4 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 30
5 RECOMMENDATION ...................................................................................................... 30
6 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS AFTER RETROFITTING .... 31
6.1 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF FOUNDATION ....................................................... 31
6.1.1.1 Evaluation of Steel Columns & Bracing ..........................................................................36
6.1.1.2 Evaluation of Steel Beams ...............................................................................................43
6.1.1.3 Evaluation of RCC Columns ...........................................................................................47

6.2 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF GRADE BEAMS .................................................... 50

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS
[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.2.1.1 Evaluation of Grade Beam ...............................................................................................50

7 DISCLAIMER ...................................................................................................................... 51

List of Figures
Figure 1.1.1: Location of Project ..................................................................................... 2

Figure 2.1.1: Steel Beam-Column Frame System of the Building ..................................... 4

Figure 2.1.2: 3D View of Analytical Model ....................................................................... 4

Figure 2.4.1: Wind Load for steel shed (perpendicular to ridge) ................................. 7

Figure 2.4.2: Wind Load for steel shed (parallel to ridge) ............................................ 7

Figure 2.8.1: Deflected Shape of the building .................................................................. 11

Figure 3.1.1: Foundation Layout Plan ............................................................................... 12

Figure 3.1.2: Node ID from ETABS Model .................................................................. 13

Figure 3.1.3: Steel Column Layout Plan ....................................................................... 17

Figure 3.1.4: Conditions of Steel Members ................................................................... 18

Figure 3.1.5: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-1 ...................................................... 18

Figure 3.1.6: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-2 .................................................. 19

Figure 3.1.7: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-3 .................................................. 19

Figure 3.1.8: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-4 ...................................................... 20

Figure 3.1.9: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-5 ...................................................... 20

Figure 3.1.10: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-6 .................................................... 21

Figure 3.1.11: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-7 .................................................... 21

Figure 3.1.12: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-8 .................................................... 22

Figure 3.1.13: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-9 .................................................... 22

Figure 3.1.14: Conditions of 1st Floor Steel Beam ....................................................... 23

Figure 3.1.15: Conditions of 2nd Floor Steel Beam ....................................................... 24

Figure 3.1.16: Conditions of Rafters.............................................................................. 25

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS
[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.17: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 1 ............................................... 26

Figure 3.1.18: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 2 ............................................... 26

Figure 3.1.19: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 3 ............................................... 26

Figure 3.1.20: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 4 .................................................... 27

Figure 3.1.21: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 5 ............................................... 27

Figure 3.1.22: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 6 ............................................... 27

Figure 3.1.23: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 7 ............................................... 27

Figure 3.1.24: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 8 ............................................... 28

Figure 3.1.25: Conditions of RCC Members in grid-9 ................................................ 28

Figure 3.2.1: Condition of Grade Beams. ......................................................................... 29

Figure 6.1.1: Foundation Layout Plan ............................................................................... 31

Figure 6.1.2: Node ID from ETABS Model ..................................................................... 32

Figure 6.1.3: Steel Column Layout Plan ....................................................................... 36

Figure 6.1.4: Steel Members ........................................................................................... 37

Figure 6.1.5: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-1 ...................................................... 38

Figure 6.1.6: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-2 .................................................. 38

Figure 6.1.7: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-3 .................................................. 39

Figure 6.1.8: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-4 ...................................................... 39

Figure 6.1.9: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-5 ...................................................... 40

Figure 6.1.10: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-6 .................................................... 40

Figure 6.1.11: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-7 .................................................... 41

Figure 6.1.12: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-8 .................................................... 41

Figure 6.1.13: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-9 .................................................... 42

Figure 6.1.14: Conditions of 1st Floor Steel Beam ...................................................... 43

Figure 6.1.15: Conditions of 2nd Floor Steel Beam ....................................................... 44

Figure 6.1.16: Conditions of Rafter ............................................................................... 45

Figure 6.1.17: Conditions of Horizontal Steel Bracing ................................................ 45

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS
[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.18: Conditions of Vertical Steel Bracing (Red coloured members having
DCR>1, inadequate). ....................................................................................................... 46

Figure 6.1.19: Conditions of RCC Members ................................................................ 47

Figure 6.1.20: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 1 ............................................... 47

Figure 6.1.21: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 2 ............................................... 48

Figure 6.1.22: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 3 ............................................... 48

Figure 6.1.23: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 4 (Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate &
O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required). ............................................... 48

Figure 6.1.24: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 5 ............................................... 48

Figure 6.1.25: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 6 ............................................... 49

Figure 6.1.26: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 7 ............................................... 49

Figure 6.1.27: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 8 ............................................... 49

Figure 6.1.28: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- G (Red colour: DCR>1,

inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required). ................. 49

Figure 6.2.1: Condition of Grade Beams. ......................................................................... 50

List of Tables
Table 1.1.1: Basic information ............................................................................................ 2

Table 3.1.1: Foundation Size Check for Spread Footing............................................. 14

Table 3.1.2: Punching Shear Check for Spread Footing ................................................... 15

Table 6.1.1: Foundation Size Check for Spread Footing .................................................. 33

Table 6.1.2: Punching Shear Check for Spread Footing ................................................... 34

ANNEX-I: NDT & DT REPORT

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS
[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The existing Factory building of T.K GROUP (BD) LTD. is currently in operation as a 3-storied Steel
building.

For improving structural condition T.K GROUP (BD) LTD. has engaged Sthapona Consultants
for performing Detailed Engineering Assessment along with checking architectural and structural
drawing of the building.

The structural and architectural drawings were verified by Ferro-scanning, dimensions

measurement, foundation explorations etc. There are few changes in as-built condition with
architectural drawings which has been incorporated during DEA.

For Detail Engineering Assessment, one of the key input is the strength of structural steel and the
strength of concrete. As we didn’t collect any cores from pedestal columns. However, considering
the Guide line of NTPA, the Equivalent Concrete Strength for columns with brick chips is
assumed as 2045 psi. We collected three samples of steel from columns and tested it in BUET
lab and the average strength was found as 50 ksi. The yield strength of structural rebar is 40 ksi.

Considering BNBC referred loading combinations, we analysed the structure & found that all the
spread footings are adequate for bearing capacity as well as for punching shear. But pedestal
columns and grade beams are not adequate. Few steel columns, beams and almost all rafters are
also inadequate.

We recommend to rectify the overstressed Steel Column, Beam and all Rafters shown in this
report with proper rectification design to meet loadings and load combinations as per BNBC.
Overstressed pedestal column and grade beams are recommended for retrofitting RCC columns.
Until rectification the factory can continue its operation under allowable load.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 1

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND
The factory building of T.K GROUP (BD) LTD. is a three storied steel building including pre-
fabricated roof top shed located at Chandgaon I/A, Chittagong, Bangladesh having Latitude:
22°20'21.28"N and Longitude: 91°50'38.17"E.

Source: Google Earth

Figure 1.1.1: Location of Project

Table 1.1.1: Basic information

Information Description

Structural System The structural system of this building is steel moment resisting
frame system and foundation system is spared footing.
Floor Area 26286sft. Per floor

Number of Stories Three storied steel building including pre-fabricated roof top shed

Foundation Type Spared Footing.

Construction materials Concrete with Brick chips and steel.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 2

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

1.2 GENERAL OBJECTIVE

Sthapona Consultants was assigned to conduct detailed engineering assessment of the factory
building of T.K GROUP (BD) LTD. The scope of work of the project has been shown below,
which includes recommendation made by the Alliance team,

(i). Ferro-Scanning in Column, Beam and Slab for Rebar Detection

(ii). Validate available structural design drawings
(iii). Verify architectural drawings and
(iv). The Structural Integrity Assessment of the building, which includes the following
items:
 Highlight any variations between as-built and structure design drawings (if
applicable).
 Result of testing of materials.
 Details of assumptions, loading, inputs and results of computer modelling.
 Detail assessment of the performance of all structural members under the seismic
load, earthquake load and gravity load.
 Commentary on adequacy/inadequacy of elements of the structure and further plan
of action.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 3

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

2 ANALYSIS FOR STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY

2.1 STRUCTURAL SYSTEM

The structural system of the factory building is a three-story pre-fabricated steel moment resisting
frame system. In steel frame structures steel columns, beams & rafters exists. General 3D view of
the building has been presented in Figure 2.1.2.

Figure 2.1.1: Steel Beam-Column Frame System of the Building

Figure 2.1.2: 3D View of Analytical Model

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 4

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

2.2 CODES AND PRACTICES

For the present project, relevant sections of Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC, 2006)
have been used for analyses. For the reinforced concrete design, American Concrete Institute
(ACI 318-08) & for steel design, AISC360-05 (American Institute of Steel Construction, LRFD)
code has been consulted as and when became necessary to complement the BNBC.

2.3 MATERIAL PROPERTY

The principal material of construction is reinforced concrete & structural steel. As per
investigation and design drawings, the following material properties has been used:

 Yield strength of structural steel, fy = 50,000 lb/in2

 Yield strength of structural rebar, fy = 40,000 lb/in2
 Compressive strength of concrete for column, fc' = 2045 lb/in2
 Compressive strength of concrete for beam, fc' = 2045 lb/in2
 Young's modulus of concrete, Ec = 45,000fc'

The above concrete strength is Equivalent concrete strength found assuming as per NTPA
guideline and the strength of steel is based on the test result from BUET Lab.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 5

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

2.4 LOADS

Prior to structural analysis it is essential that the loads that may act upon the building during its
lifetime be duly considered and incorporated in the analysis. The loads that may act upon the
structure are as follows:

2.4.1 Dead Load

Dead loads (D) are those gravity load which remain acting on the structure permanently without
any change during the structures normal service life. These are basically the loads coming from
the weight of the different components of the structure. For the sake of convenience in the
analysis, sometimes this kind of loads are divided into two types, namely a) self-weight of the
structure (SW) and b) the weight coming from the non-structural permanent components of the
building (SDEAD).

 Unit weight of reinforced concrete = 135 pcf

 Unit weight of brickwork = 120 pcf
 Unit weight of steel = 490 pcf

2.4.2 Live Load

Live load is the gravity load due to non-permanent objects like machines, furniture, and human.
Analysis has been carried out base on load recommended by BNBC (2006). For checking if
needed reduced live load are also used to find the allowable live load for the structure. For general
area,

Live Load on Roof = 1 KN/m2

Live load on stair case = 84psf

Live load on floor = 63 psf

2.4.3 Wind Load (W)

Bangladesh is typically a storm prone area where due consideration to the thrust due to storm
must be given in the analysis and design of building and structures. Wind load due to storm is
typically modelled as lateral thrust force causing sway or overturning of the building. Detailed
specifications on wind loading on buildings are outlined in BNBC (2006). The present project is
located in Chittagong, for which the following basic parameters are used in wind load calculation,

 Basic wind speed, Vb= 260 km/h

 Exposure category = A
 Structure Importance coefficient CI =1.00

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 6

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

The following figure illustrates the procedure of calculating wind load for this structure-

Figure 2.4.1: Wind Load for steel shed (perpendicular to ridge)

Figure 2.4.2: Wind Load for steel shed (parallel to ridge)

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 7

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

2.4.4 Earthquake Load (E)

Proper structural design of any building structure must include loads due to earthquake shaking.
Although there has been no major incident of earthquake hazard in the recent past of Bangladesh,
earthquakes are not uncommon in this area. Scientific geological study of the earth crust below
Bangladesh shows that Bangladesh does fall in moderate to high seismic risk zone. Statistical
evidence from past major and minor earthquake incidents shows that a major earthquake is
overdue in the recent times of geological scale. Therefore, it is necessary to prepare against any
possible earthquake hazard. It should be kept in mind that the objective of earthquake resistance
building design is not to make a strong building which can resist any damage due to earthquake.
Instead, earthquake resistant design basically aims at minimizing the possible damage and
casualty to an acceptable level.

Regarding the earthquake resistant structural design, it essential that the specific design code is
followed. For the analysis and design checking of this building, Equivalent Static Force Method
of BNBC (2006) is followed. The main considerations for calculation of earthquake load are given
below.

 Zone co-efficient, Z = 0.15 (zone 2, As Per BNBC 2006)

 Structure importance co-efficient, I = 1.00 (Standard Occupancy, Table 6.2.23, BNBC
2006)
 Response modification co-efficient for concrete, R = 5.0 (OMRF, Table 6.2.24, BNBC)
 Response modification co-efficient for steel, R =6.0 (OMRF, Table 6.2.24, BNBC)
 Site co-efficient, S = 1.5 (type 3 soil as suggested in Table 6.2.25, BNBC)

2.5 METHOD OF ANALYSIS

Depending on the type of project, there are several well-established methods among which Finite
Element Method (FEM) is perhaps the most sophisticated and all-encompassing one. For analysis
and design checking of the building, powerful finite element based structural design software
package ETABS 2016 V 16.2.1 has been employed for analysis. Some aspects of the analysis
process are discussed in the following paragraphs.

A full three dimensional modelling of the structure has been developed using frame and plate/shell
elements. The frame elements are typical two-nodded frame elements in space having six degrees
of freedom per node – three translations and three rotations in three mutually perpendicular axes
system. The plate/shell elements are of rectangular (or quadrilateral) and triangular shape. The
quadrilateral element has four nodes at its four corners. Each node has six degrees of freedom –
three translations and three rotations in a 3D space configuration. The frame elements are used to
model the columns while the plate/shell elements are used to model the ribs and the roof shell etc.
At base level, the columns are assumed to be held fixed in one direction but hinged in other
direction.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 8

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

2.6 LOADING AND LOAD COMBINATION

The basic sources of loads are described in earlier section. These loads are applied on the model
in seven basic categories. These are as follows:

Load Case 1: Self-weight of structure (DL).

Load Case 2: Floor finish and partition wall (SDEAD).
Load Case 3: Live Load on the Structure (LL).
Load Case 4: Earthquake load on East-West Direction. (Ex)
Load Case 5: Earthquake load on North-South Direction. (Ey)
Load Case 6: Wind load on East-West Direction. (Wx)
Load Case 7: Wind load on North-South Direction. (Wy)

These seven basic load cases are analysed in ETABS 2016 V 16.2.1 the results are then combined
in accordance with the specifications set forth by BNBC.

BNBC specifies a number of combination options. These are as follows:

For Concrete Structure:
 1.4 D
 1.4 D + 1.7 L
 0.9 D + 1.3 (W or 1.1 E)
 0.75 (1.4 D + 1.7 (W or 1.1 E))
 0.75 (1.4 D + 1.7 L + 1.7 (W or 1.1 E))
 1.4 (D + L + E)
Where D stands for total dead load i.e. D = DL + SDEAD, L stands for live load i.e. L=LL, W
stands for wind load and E stands for earthquake load. When these seven basic load cases are
combined accordingly considering the direction of lateral loads, then according to BNBC 2006,
we obtain, after simplification, the following thirty combination cases:

 Combination Case 1: 1.4 D

 Combination Case 2:
 Combination Case 3:
 Combination Case 4:
 Combination Case 5:
 Combination Case 6:
 Combination Case 7:
 Combination Case 8:
 Combination Case 9:
 Combination Case 10:
1.4 D + 1.7 L
1.05 D + 1.275 L + 1.275 Wx
1.05 D + 1.275 L - 1.275 Wx
1.05 D + 1.275 L + 1.275 Wy
1.05 D + 1.275 L - 1.275 Wy
1.05 D + 1.275 Wx
1.05 D - 1.275 Wx
1.05 D + 1.275 Wy
1.05 D - 1.275 Wy

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 9

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

 Combination Case 11: 0.9 D + 1.3 Wx

 Combination Case 12:
 Combination Case 13:
 Combination Case 14:
 Combination Case 15:
 Combination Case 16:
 Combination Case 17:
 Combination Case 18:
 Combination Case 19:
 Combination Case 20:
 Combination Case 21:
 Combination Case 22:
 Combination Case 23:
 Combination Case 24:
 Combination Case 25:
 Combination Case 26:
 Combination Case 27:
 Combination Case 28:
 Combination Case 29:
 Combination Case 30:
0.9 D - 1.3 Wx
0.9 D + 1.3 Wy
0.9 D - 1.3 Wy
1.05 D + 1.275 L + 1.4025 Ex
1.05 D + 1.275 L - 1.4025 Ex
1.05 D + 1.275 L + 1.4025 Ey
1.05 D + 1.275 L - 1.4025 Ey
1.05 D + 1.4025 Ex
1.05 D - 1.4025 Ex
1.05 D + 1.4025 Ey
1.05 D - 1.4025 Ey
0.9 D + 1.43 Ex
0.9 D - 1.43 Ex
0.9 D + 1.43 Ey
0.9 D - 1.43 Ey
1.4 D + 1.4 L + 1.4 Ex
1.4 D + 1.4 L - 1.4 Ex
1.4 D + 1.4 L + 1.4 Ey
1.4 D + 1.4 L - 1.4 Ey

But in analysis, we do not calculate combination cases 27, 28, 29 & 30.

For Steel Structure:

 Combination Case1: 1.4 DL
 Combination Case2: 1.2 DL + 1.6 Lf + 0.5 Lr
 Combination Case3: 1.2 DL + 1.6 Lr + 0.5 Lf
 Combination Case4: 1.2 DL + 1.6 Lr + 0.8 Wx(+)
 Combination Case5: 1.2 DL + 1.6 Lr + 0.8 Wx(-)
 Combination Case6: 1.2 DL + 1.6 Lr + 0.8 Wy(+)
 Combination Case7: 1.2 DL + 1.6 Lr + 0.8 Wy(-)
 Combination Case8: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf + 0.5 Lr + 1.3 Wx(+)
 Combination Case9: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf + 0.5 Lr + 1.3 Wx(-)
 Combination Case10: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf + 0.5 Lr + 1.3 Wy(+)
 Combination Case11: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf + 0.5 Lr + 1.3 Wy(-)
 Combination Case12: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf + 1.5 Ex
 Combination Case13: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf - 1.5 Ex
 Combination Case14: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf + 1.5 Ey
 Combination Case15: 1.2 DL + 0.5 Lf - 1.5 Ey
 Combination Case16: 0.9 DL + 1.3 Wx(+)
 Combination Case17: 0.9 DL + 1.3 Wx(-)

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 10

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

 Combination Case18: 0.9 DL + 1.3 Wy(+)

 Combination Case19: 0.9 DL + 1.3 Wy(-)
 Combination Case20: 0.9 DL + 1.5 Ex
 Combination Case21: 0.9 DL - 1.5 Ex
 Combination Case22: 0.9 DL + 1.5 Ey
 Combination Case23: 0.9 DL - 1.5 Ey

2.7 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

In any finite element analysis, applying appropriate boundary conditions are important. Without
appropriate boundary conditions the model of building structure may not be stable. On the
other hand, application of excessive restraints may render the structure too stiff resulting in
development of unreasonable stresses. For a structure like this building, it is reasonable to
assume that the bases of columns are not fully restrained in all directions.

2.8 APPLICATION OF LOAD AND ANALYSIS

A static analysis is performed using the loadings and combinations of loads (mentioned earlier)
for the factory building. Some pictorial representation of the analysis results is shown in figures
below.

Figure 2.8.1: Deflected Shape of the building

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 11

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

3 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS FOR BNBC

GUIDELINES (RECOMMENDED LOADINGS & LOAD
COMBINATIONS)

3.1 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF FOUNDATION

Provided structural drawings of the project shows that spread footing had been used for this
project (Figure 3.1.1). We have checked adequacy of footing capacity & thickness of footing for
BNBC loadings & load combinations. Soil test report prepared by “SOIL PROFILE. The bearing
capacity from plate load test is 4.7 ksf. Considering concrete strength 2045 psi, we found all
footings are adequate in Capacity and are also adequate for punching shear.

Figure 3.1.1: Foundation Layout Plan

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 12

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.2: Node ID from ETABS Model

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 13

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 3.1.1: Foundation Size Check for Spread Footing

Provided
Bearing FoS (From Ultimate Load Reaction Available FoS Remarks
Joint Foundation Foundation
Capacity Soil Test Bearing Capacity (DL + LL) (For Existing (Minimum
Label Type Size
Report) Foundation) FoS=2.0)
sft ksf kip kip
1 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 56.583 10.92 OK
2 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 79.408 7.78 OK
3 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 87.467 4.17 OK
4 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 94.019 3.88 OK
5 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 93.968 3.88 OK
6 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 128.565 2.84 OK
7 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 119.385 3.06 OK
8 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 57.095 10.82 OK
9 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 30.774 20.07 OK
10 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 74.086 8.34 OK
11 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 32.053 19.27 OK
13 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 124.107 2.94 OK
14 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 128.96 4.79 OK
15 F2 52.6 4.7 2.5 617.61 130.096 4.75 OK
16 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 192.752 4.23 OK
17 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 227.365 3.59 OK
18 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 208.483 3.91 OK
19 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 213.95 3.81 OK
20 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 211.996 3.85 OK
21 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 176.928 2.06 OK
22 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 170.561 2.14 OK
23 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 169.306 2.16 OK
24 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 169.939 2.15 OK
25 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 182.422 2.00 OK
26 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 101.379 3.60 OK
27 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 248.696 3.28 OK
28 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 244.529 3.34 OK
29 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 244.88 3.33 OK
30 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 240.155 3.40 OK
31 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 264.328 3.09 OK
32 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 169.637 2.15 OK
33 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 230.129 3.54 OK
34 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 228.688 3.57 OK
35 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 227.659 3.58 OK
36 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 225.772 3.61 OK
37 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 248.192 3.29 OK
38 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 165.544 2.20 OK
39 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 229.462 3.55 OK
40 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 229.304 3.56 OK
41 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 227.744 3.58 OK
42 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 222.048 3.67 OK
43 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 249.807 3.27 OK
44 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 162.008 2.25 OK
45 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 229.328 3.56 OK

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 14

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Provided
Bearing FoS (From Ultimate Load Reaction Available FoS Remarks
Joint Foundation Foundation
Capacity Soil Test Bearing Capacity (DL + LL) (For Existing (Minimum
Label Type Size
Report) Foundation) FoS=2.0)
sft ksf kip kip
46 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 224.386 3.64 OK
47 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 223.636 3.65 OK
48 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 222.675 3.66 OK
49 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 246.024 3.32 OK
50 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 159.159 2.29 OK
51 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 243.113 3.36 OK
52 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 245.905 3.32 OK
53 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 243.219 3.35 OK
54 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 239.803 3.40 OK
55 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 261.401 3.12 OK
56 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 169.024 2.16 OK
57 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 172.846 4.72 OK
58 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 172.243 4.74 OK
59 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 170.964 4.77 OK
60 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 169.751 4.80 OK
61 F3 69.4 4.7 2.5 815.65 185.182 4.40 OK
62 F1 31.1 4.7 2.5 364.98 103.653 3.52 OK

Table 3.1.2: Punching Shear Check for Spread Footing

Factored Reaction Column Column Punching

Foundation
Joint Foundation Column (At Column Length, Width, Shear DCR for
Thickness Remark
Label Type Type Center) L B Capacity Punching
(1.4*DL+1.7*LL) in in in kip
1 F2 C1 81 23 15 15 431 0.19 OK
2 F2 C1 115 23 15 15 431 0.27 OK
3 F1 C1 130 36 15 15 974 0.13 OK
4 F1 C1 141 36 15 15 974 0.14 OK
5 F1 C1 140 36 15 15 974 0.14 OK
6 F1 C1 189 36 15 15 974 0.19 OK
7 F1 C1 174 36 15 15 974 0.18 OK
8 F2 C1 81 23 15 15 431 0.19 OK
9 F2 C1 43 23 15 15 431 0.10 OK
10 F2 C1 109 23 15 15 431 0.25 OK
11 F2 C1 45 23 15 15 431 0.10 OK
13 F1 C1 183 36 15 15 974 0.19 OK
14 F2 C1 188 23 15 15 431 0.44 OK
15 F2 C2 194 23 18 18 467 0.42 OK
16 F3 C2 291 56 18 18 2314 0.13 OK
17 F3 C2 345 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
18 F3 C2 318 56 18 18 2314 0.14 OK
19 F3 C2 326 56 18 18 2314 0.14 OK
20 F3 C2 323 56 18 18 2314 0.14 OK
21 F1 C1 261 36 15 15 974 0.27 OK

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 15

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Factored Reaction Column Column Punching

Foundation
Joint Foundation Column (At Column Length, Width, Shear DCR for
Thickness Remark
Label Type Type Center) L B Capacity Punching
(1.4*DL+1.7*LL) in in in kip
22 F1 C1 252 36 15 15 974 0.26 OK
23 F1 C1 250 36 15 15 974 0.26 OK
24 F1 C1 251 36 15 15 974 0.26 OK
25 F1 C1 269 36 15 15 974 0.28 OK
26 F1 C1 148 36 15 15 974 0.15 OK
27 F3 C2 379 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
28 F3 C2 373 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
29 F3 C2 373 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
30 F3 C2 366 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
31 F3 C2 403 56 18 18 2314 0.17 OK
32 F1 C1 251 36 15 15 974 0.26 OK
33 F3 C2 351 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
34 F3 C2 349 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
35 F3 C2 347 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
36 F3 C2 344 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
37 F3 C2 378 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
38 F1 C1 244 36 15 15 974 0.25 OK
39 F3 C2 350 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
40 F3 C2 350 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
41 F3 C2 347 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
42 F3 C2 339 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
43 F3 C2 381 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
44 F1 C1 239 36 15 15 974 0.25 OK
45 F3 C2 350 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
46 F3 C2 342 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
47 F3 C2 341 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
48 F3 C2 340 56 18 18 2314 0.15 OK
49 F3 C2 375 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
50 F1 C1 235 36 15 15 974 0.24 OK
51 F3 C2 371 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
52 F3 C2 375 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
53 F3 C2 371 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
54 F3 C2 366 56 18 18 2314 0.16 OK
55 F3 C2 399 56 18 18 2314 0.17 OK
56 F1 C1 250 36 15 15 974 0.26 OK
57 F3 C1 255 56 15 15 2217 0.12 OK
58 F3 C1 254 56 15 15 2217 0.11 OK
59 F3 C1 252 56 15 15 2217 0.11 OK
60 F3 C1 251 56 15 15 2217 0.11 OK
61 F3 C1 273 56 15 15 2217 0.12 OK
62 F1 C1 151 36 15 15 974 0.15 OK

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 16

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.1.1.1 Evaluation of Steel Columns

Results has been shown based on model grid. Assessment of columns (P-M-M Interaction Ratio)
according to BNBC guidelines. According to standard practice, column with P-M-M value greater
than 1.0 is considered as inadequate. The analysis results show that most of the steel Beams along
with some steel Columns & Rafters are overstressed as per BNBC guideline (recommended
loadings & load combinations).

Figure 3.1.3: Steel Column Layout Plan

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 17

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.4 to Figure 3.1.13 shows the failure of columns & rafters up to the particular level.

Figure 3.1.4: Conditions of Steel Members

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 3.1.5: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-1

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 18

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.6: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-2

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 3.1.7: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-3

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 19

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.8: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-4

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 3.1.9: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-5

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 20

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.10: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-6

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 3.1.11: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-7

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 21

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.12: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-8

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 3.1.13: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-9

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 22

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.1.1.2 Evaluation of Steel Beams

Figure 3.1.14 & Figure 3.1.16 shows the condition of main beams & sub-beams under lateral
loading. All of the sub-beams along with some of the main beams are inadequate under loading
according to BNBC code.

Figure 3.1.14: Conditions of 1st Floor Steel Beam

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 23

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.15: Conditions of 2nd Floor Steel Beam

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 24

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.16: Conditions of Rafters

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 25

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.1.1.3 Evaluation of RCC Columns

The analysis results show that most of the pedestal columns are inadequate. According to standard
practice, column with P-M-M value greater than 1.0 is considered as inadequate. Figure 3.1.17 to
Figure 3.1.25 shows the condition of Pedestal Columns.

Figure 3.1.17: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 1

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 3.1.18: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 2

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 3.1.19: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 3

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 26

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3.1.20: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 4

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

Figure 3.1.21: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 5

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

Figure 3.1.22: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 6

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 3.1.23: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 7

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 27

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

Figure 3.1.24: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 8

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

Figure 3.1.25: Conditions of RCC Members in grid-9

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 28

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.2 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF BEAMS

3.2.1.1 Evaluation of Grade Beam

Figure 3.2.1 shows the condition of RCC grade beam under lateral loading. Most of the grade
beams are inadequate under loading (according to BNBC Loadings & load combinations).

Figure 3.2.1: Condition of Grade Beams.

Beam Id. Provided Reif. At

Provided Reinf. Required Required
In Middle-Bottom
At Top-Edge (in2) Reinf. (in2) Reinf. (in2)
Drawing (in2)
GB-1 2.43 5.81 2.43 2.7
GB-2 2.91 2.1 2.91 1

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 29

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

4 CONCLUSION

According to BNBC load combinations-

For Steel Members

 Most of the steel columns are overstressed.

 Few steel beams are overstressed.
 All the rafters are inadequate.

For RCC Members

 Most of the Pedestal columns are inadequate.

 Most of the grade beams are inadequate.

5 RECOMMENDATION

We recommend to rectify the overstressed pedestal column and grade beams shown in this
report with proper rectification design to meet loadings and load combinations as per BNBC. All
the rafters are needed to replace. The overstressed steel columns and beams are also
recommended to rectify. Until rectification the factory can operate its operation under allowable
load.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 30

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

6 EVALUATION OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS AFTER

RETROFITTING

6.1 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF FOUNDATION

Provided structural drawings of the project shows that spread footing had been used for this
project (Figure 3.1.1). We have checked adequacy of footing capacity & thickness of footing for
BNBC loadings & load combinations. Soil test report prepared by “SOIL PROFILE. The bearing
capacity from plate load test is 4.7 ksf. Considering concrete strength 2045 psi, we found all
footings are adequate in Capacity and are also adequate for punching shear.

Figure 6.1.1: Foundation Layout Plan

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 31

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.2: Node ID from ETABS Model

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 32

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6.1.1: Foundation Size Check for Spread Footing

Provided
Bearing FoS (From Ultimate Load Reaction Available FoS Remarks
Joint Foundation Foundation
Capacity Soil Test Bearing Capacity (DL + LL) (For Existing (Minimum
Label Type Size
Report) Foundation) FoS=2.0)
sft ksf kip kip
1 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 101.17 7.33 OK
2 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 82.599 8.97 OK
3 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 93.417 4.69 OK
4 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 100.848 4.34 OK
5 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 100.844 4.34 OK
6 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 137.587 3.18 OK
7 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 126.447 3.46 OK
8 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 58.842 12.60 OK
9 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 50.893 14.56 OK
10 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 75.5 9.82 OK
11 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 35.518 20.87 OK
13 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 129.983 3.37 OK
14 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 123.412 6.01 OK
15 F2 52.6 4.7 3 741.13 132.424 5.60 OK
16 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 192.936 5.07 OK
17 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 229.586 4.26 OK
18 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 210.103 4.66 OK
19 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 215.002 4.55 OK
20 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 213.098 4.59 OK
21 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 185.92 2.36 OK
22 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 187.381 2.34 OK
23 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 177.255 2.47 OK
24 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 179.284 2.44 OK
25 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 185.973 2.36 OK
26 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 136.197 3.22 OK
27 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 249.776 3.92 OK
28 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 245.845 3.98 OK
29 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 246.069 3.98 OK
30 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 241.168 4.06 OK
31 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 264.769 3.70 OK
32 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 169.985 2.58 OK
33 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 231.389 4.23 OK
34 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 230.511 4.25 OK
35 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 229.426 4.27 OK
36 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 227.513 4.30 OK
37 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 249.539 3.92 OK
38 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 173.851 2.52 OK
39 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 230.912 4.24 OK
40 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 231.084 4.24 OK
41 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 229.33 4.27 OK
42 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 224.123 4.37 OK
43 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 247.642 3.95 OK
44 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 174.805 2.51 OK
45 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 230.242 4.25 OK
46 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 226.199 4.33 OK

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 33

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Provided
Bearing FoS (From Ultimate Load Reaction Available FoS Remarks
Joint Foundation Foundation
Capacity Soil Test Bearing Capacity (DL + LL) (For Existing (Minimum
Label Type Size
Report) Foundation) FoS=2.0)
sft ksf kip kip
47 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 225.574 4.34 OK
48 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 223.4 4.38 OK
49 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 247.541 3.95 OK
50 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 171.147 2.56 OK
51 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 244.492 4.00 OK
52 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 247.225 3.96 OK
53 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 244.889 4.00 OK
54 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 239.875 4.08 OK
55 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 266.896 3.67 OK
56 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 166.259 2.63 OK
57 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 181.847 5.38 OK
58 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 184.971 5.29 OK
59 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 182.357 5.37 OK
60 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 178.754 5.48 OK
61 F3 69.4 4.7 3 978.78 184.188 5.31 OK
62 F1 31.1 4.7 3 437.98 143.197 3.06 OK

Table 6.1.2: Punching Shear Check for Spread Footing

Factored Reaction Column Column Punching

Foundation
Joint Foundation Column (At Column Length, Width, Shear DCR for
Thickness Remark
Label Type Type Center) L B Capacity Punching
(1.4*DL+1.7*LL) in in in kip
1 F2 C1 146 23 12 25 474 0.31 OK
2 F2 C1 119 23 12 25 474 0.25 OK
3 F1 C1 138 36 12 25 1045 0.13 OK
4 F1 C1 150 36 12 25 1045 0.14 OK
5 F1 C1 150 36 12 25 1045 0.14 OK
6 F1 C1 202 36 12 25 1045 0.19 OK
7 F1 C1 184 36 12 25 1045 0.18 OK
8 F2 C1 83 23 12 25 474 0.18 OK
9 F2 C1 72 23 12 25 474 0.15 OK
10 F2 C1 110 23 12 25 474 0.23 OK
11 F2 C1 49 23 12 25 474 0.10 OK
13 F1 C1 191 36 12 25 1045 0.18 OK
14 F2 C1 179 23 12 25 474 0.38 OK
15 F2 C2 198 23 24 12 467 0.42 OK
16 F3 C2 292 56 24 12 2314 0.13 OK
17 F3 C2 348 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
18 F3 C2 320 56 24 12 2314 0.14 OK
19 F3 C2 327 56 24 12 2314 0.14 OK
20 F3 C2 324 56 24 12 2314 0.14 OK
21 F1 C1 274 36 12 25 1045 0.26 OK
22 F1 C1 276 36 12 25 1045 0.26 OK
23 F1 C1 261 36 12 25 1045 0.25 OK
24 F1 C1 264 36 12 25 1045 0.25 OK

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 34

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Factored Reaction Column Column Punching

Foundation
Joint Foundation Column (At Column Length, Width, Shear DCR for
Thickness Remark
Label Type Type Center) L B Capacity Punching
(1.4*DL+1.7*LL) in in in kip
25 F1 C1 274 36 12 25 1045 0.26 OK
26 F1 C1 198 36 12 25 1045 0.19 OK
27 F3 C2 381 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
28 F3 C2 375 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
29 F3 C2 375 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
30 F3 C2 368 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
31 F3 C2 404 56 24 12 2314 0.17 OK
32 F1 C1 250 36 12 25 1045 0.24 OK
33 F3 C2 353 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
34 F3 C2 351 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
35 F3 C2 350 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
36 F3 C2 347 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
37 F3 C2 380 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
38 F1 C1 256 36 12 25 1045 0.24 OK
39 F3 C2 352 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
40 F3 C2 352 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
41 F3 C2 349 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
42 F3 C2 342 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
43 F3 C2 377 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
44 F1 C1 257 36 12 25 1045 0.25 OK
45 F3 C2 351 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
46 F3 C2 345 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
47 F3 C2 344 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
48 F3 C2 340 56 24 12 2314 0.15 OK
49 F3 C2 377 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
50 F1 C1 252 36 12 25 1045 0.24 OK
51 F3 C2 373 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
52 F3 C2 377 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
53 F3 C2 373 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
54 F3 C2 366 56 24 12 2314 0.16 OK
55 F3 C2 407 56 24 12 2314 0.18 OK
56 F1 C1 245 36 12 25 1045 0.23 OK
57 F3 C1 268 56 12 25 2331 0.11 OK
58 F3 C1 272 56 12 25 2331 0.12 OK
59 F3 C1 268 56 12 25 2331 0.11 OK
60 F3 C1 263 56 12 25 2331 0.11 OK
61 F3 C1 271 56 12 25 2331 0.12 OK
62 F1 C1 209 36 12 25 1045 0.20 OK

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 35

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.1.1.1 Evaluation of Steel Columns & Bracing

Results has been shown based on model grid. Assessment of columns (P-M-M Interaction Ratio)
according to BNBC guidelines after retrofitting. According to standard practice, column with P-
M-M value greater than 1.0 is considered as inadequate. The analysis results show that after
retrofitting all of the steel columns & newly added bracings are adequate as per BNBC guideline
(recommended loadings & load combinations).

Figure 6.1.3: Steel Column Layout Plan

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 36

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.5 to Figure 6.1.13 shows the steel columns up to the particular level.

Figure 6.1.4: Steel Members

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 37

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.5: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-1

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 6.1.6: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-2

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 38

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.7: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-3

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 6.1.8: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-4

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 39

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.9: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-5

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 6.1.10: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-6

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 40

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.11: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-7

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 6.1.12: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-8

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 41

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.13: Conditions of Steel Members in Grid-9

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 42

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.1.1.2 Evaluation of Steel Beams

Figure 6.1.14 & Figure 6.1.18 shows the condition of steel beams & sub-beams, rafters and
bracings under lateral loading. All of the beams & sub-beams, rafters and bracings are adequate
under loading according to BNBC code after retrofitting.

Figure 6.1.14: Conditions of 1st Floor Steel Beam

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 43

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.15: Conditions of 2nd Floor Steel Beam

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 44

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.16: Conditions of Rafter

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

Figure 6.1.17: Conditions of Horizontal Steel Bracing

(Red coloured members having DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 45

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.18: Conditions of Vertical Steel Bracing (Red coloured members having
DCR>1, inadequate).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 46

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.1.1.3 Evaluation of RCC Columns

The analysis results show that all the RCC columns are adequate after retrofitting. According to
standard practice, column with P-M-M value greater than 1.0 is considered as inadequate.

Figure 6.1.19: Conditions of RCC Members

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 6.1.20: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 1

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 47

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.21: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 2

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum
required).

Figure 6.1.22: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 3

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 6.1.23: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 4 (Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate &
O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 6.1.24: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 5

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 48

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6.1.25: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 6

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 6.1.26: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 7

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 6.1.27: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- 8

(Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate & O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

Figure 6.1.28: Conditions of RCC Members in grid- G (Red colour: DCR>1, inadequate &
O/S: Reinforcing provided is below minimum required).

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 49

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.2 CHECKING ADEQUACY OF GRADE BEAMS

6.2.1.1 Evaluation of Grade Beam

Figure 6.2.1 shows the condition of RCC grade beam under loading. All of the grade beams are
adequate under lateral loading (according to BNBC Loadings & load combinations) after
retrofitting.

Figure 6.2.1: Condition of Grade Beams.

Beam Id. Provided Reif. At

Provided Reinf. Required Required
In Middle-Bottom
At Top-Edge (in2) Reinf. (in2) Reinf. (in2)
Drawing (in2)
RGB-1 6.2 6.05 4.86 3.5
GB-2 2.91 2.1 2.91 1

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 50

[T.K GROUP (BD) LTD.] DETAILED ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT REPORT

7 DISCLAIMER

The assessment engineer made the above observations & recommendations from Core test, DT &
NDT results & mathematical modelling of the building. We applied our best engineering
judgments. We do not bear responsibility for any deviation from the predicted behaviour of the
structure caused by uncertainties of performance or calamities.

STHAPONA CONSULTANTS Page | 51