Final Report For Preparation of Detailed Architectural/ Engineering Design, Drawing and Cost Estimate For Low Cost Residential Housing

Final Report for PREPARATION OF DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL/ ENGINEERING DESIGN, DRAWING AND COST
ESTIMATE FOR LOW COST RESIDENTIAL HOUSING
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction......................................................................................3
Chapter 2: Literature Review.............................................................................4
2.1. Lalitpur [Lubhu]...........................................................................................................................4
1.2. Lalitpur [Gokarneshwor]..............................................................................................................6
1.3. Kirtipur [ward no. 6, Naya Basti, Lumanti Housing]...................................................................7
1.4. Sindhupalchowk [Sanjaytar, ward no 11, Melamchi Municipality]..............................................9
1.5. Pokhara......................................................................................................................................10
1.6. India...........................................................................................................................................11
Chapter 3: Conceptual Designs........................................................................15
3.1 OPTION-A:................................................................................................................................17
3.2. OPTION-B:................................................................................................................................19
3.3. OPTION-C:................................................................................................................................21
3.4. OPTION-D:................................................................................................................................23
3.5. Technical Requirements Summary for New techniques Concept Load Bearing Structure.........25
3.6. Technical Requirements Summary for Sandwich Puff Panel.....................................................27
Chapter 4: Analysis...........................................................................................28
4.1. New techniques Concept Load Bearing Structure......................................................................28
4.1.1. Referred Codes, Documents and Standards of Practice...........................................................28
4.1.2. Software Utilized for Analysis.................................................................................................28
4.1.3. Data Assumed on Basis of Given Conditions...........................................................................28
4.1.4. Calculated Parameters..............................................................................................................28
4.1.5. Structural Modelling.................................................................................................................28
4.1.6. Analysis Results.......................................................................................................................29
4.2. Metal Frame Structure with Sandwich Puff Panel......................................................................70
4.2.1. Referred Codes, Documents and Standards Of Practice...........................................................71
4.2.2. Software Utilized for Analysis.................................................................................................71
4.2.3. Specified Parameters................................................................................................................71
4.2.4. Applied Loads..........................................................................................................................71
4.2.5. Structural Modelling.................................................................................................................71
4.2.6. Analysis Results.......................................................................................................................72
Chapter 5: Cost Summary................................................................................80
Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 1

List of Tables:
Table 1: Structures specifications of Lubhu Site..........................................................................................4
Table 2: Structures Specifications of Gokarneshwor Site............................................................................6
Table 3: Structures Specifications of Lumanti Housing...............................................................................7
Table 4: Structures Specification of Melanchi Site......................................................................................9
Table 5: Summary of area of various options.............................................................................................24
List of Figures:
Figure 1: Plans of Lubhu Site.......................................................................................................................4
Figure 2: Slab work of Lubhu Site...............................................................................................................5
Figure 3: Pictures of Site Visit of Lubhu......................................................................................................5
Figure 4: Plans of Gokarneshwor Site..........................................................................................................6
Figure 5: Pictures of Site Visit of Gokarneshwor Site..................................................................................7
Figure 6: Plans of Lumanti Housing............................................................................................................8
Figure 7: Site Visit Pictures of Lumanti Housing.........................................................................................8
Figure 8: Plan of Melamchi Site..................................................................................................................9
Figure 9: Site Visit Pictures of Melamchi..................................................................................................10
Figure 10: Case Studies of India Low Cost Housing..................................................................................11
Figure 11: Case studies of Prevalant Practices...........................................................................................11
Figure 12: Gorkha Earthquake of April 2015.............................................................................................12
Figure 13: Retrofitting Two-Storied Load Bearing Building.....................................................................13
Figure 14: Sandwiched Puff Panel with metal frames................................................................................14
Figure 15: Concepts of Design Formulation..............................................................................................15
Figure 16: Aerial view of all four options..................................................................................................16
Figure 17: Isometric, Front and Back views of Option A...........................................................................17
Figure 18: Ground Floor Plan for Option A...............................................................................................18
Figure 19: Isometric, Front and Back view of Option B............................................................................19
Figure 20 Ground Floor Plan for Option B................................................................................................20
Figure 21: Isometric, Front and Right view of Option C............................................................................21
Figure 22: Ground Floor Plan for Option C...............................................................................................22
Figure 23: Isometric, Front and Right view of Option D............................................................................23
Figure 24: Ground Floor Plan for Option D...............................................................................................24
Figure 25: EPS Sandwich Panel Roof........................................................................................................27
Figure 26: Option A Model Input...............................................................................................................30
Figure 27: Option B Model Input...............................................................................................................44
Figure 28: Option C Model Input...............................................................................................................56
Figure 29: Metal Structure Puff Panel Option A Model Input....................................................................70

Chapter 1: Introduction
Nepal, a landlocked country, lies on the lap of the Himalayas, it is divided into three ecological strips –
plain land in the south, hilly region in the midland and mountain in the northern belt, where the climate
and topography distinctly varies. There is a sharp increase in elevation as one goes from the flat terrain of
Terai (the lowest point of Mukhiyapatti Musharniya of Dhanusha District-elevation: 59m amsl) towards
north to the Higher Himalayas (the highest peak of the World Mt. Everest-elevation: 8,848mamsl).
Politically, it is divided into 753 local units, 77 districts and 7 states. The country covers an area of
147,516 sq. km. Its length is about 885 km from east to west and width varies from 130 to 255 km. Based
on 2011 Census data, the population of Nepal is 266.20 million with the yearly population growth rate of
1.40%. Land cover and population in the three physiographic regions i.e. mountain, hills and Terai of
Nepal are 15%, 68%, 17% and 6.7%, 43.1% and 50.2% respectively. One of the basic problems of
Nepalese housing and infrastructure is the distinct topography and climate which has created challenges in
affordable, resilient and environmentally friendly housing, requiring different concepts of housing for
different regions.
Low Cost Housing is a new concept which deals with effective budgeting and following of techniques
which help in reducing the cost construction through the use of locally available materials along with
improved skills and technology without sacrificing the strength, performance and life of the structure.
As per the city planning concepts of international practices, it is recommended that the city planning is
done for the land size of 2kmX2km, in regard to the concept that mobility of the local dwellers is
convenient as per the walking distance.
Objective of the Study:
a) Conduct the study of the relevant nature of the housing works conducted in the national as well as
international arena with an aim of eco-friendly affordable resilient and low-cost housing.
b) Detail A & E (Architectural & Structural, Electrical, Sanitary, Safety etc.) design and drawings of
three separate model of housing designs for a single family (Parents-2, Family-4, Guest-1) of two-
storied.
c) Preparation of Detailed Quantity and Cost Estimate with Rate Analysis on the basis of standard
norms and district rate of current fiscal year of the Kathmandu Valley and concern districts.
d) Socio-economic analysis of the benefit and cost of such housing

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Site Visits were conducted by the experts of the Consultant’s team in order to carry out case studies of the
following places:
2.1. Lalitpur [Lubhu]

Table 1: Structures specifications of Lubhu Site
S.N Description Specification Comment
1 Structure 4” Metal frame +Brick Masonry

2 Story: Two + height= 8’-0” a) Floor Noise
3 Roof materials: MS Truss cover with GI- Sheet
4 Foundation depth: 4 feet
5 Outer Partition 230mm Brick wall with sill & Lintel
6 Inner Partition Metal Frame with 12mm Ply- board
7 Building Area: 412.0 Sq.ft [ 0 -1– 0–3.26 ]
8 Room size: 10’-3”X8’-6”
9 No's of Room & 4 & GF Attached Toilet - 1 no
Toilet:
10 Doors Choukosh with Board
11 Window UPVC + Sliding with nets.
12 Stair: Metal
13 Construction Period: 2015
14 Cost Estimate: 8,93,875.59 +30% old brick reused.

Figure 1: Plans of Lubhu Site
Figure 2: Slab work of Lubhu Site
Figure 3: Pictures of Site Visit of Lubhu

1.2. Lalitpur [Gokarneshwor]

Table 2: Structures Specifications of Gokarneshwor Site
S.N. Description Specification Comment
1 Structure Metal frame +Brick Masonry a) Room not sufficient

2 Story: One +height =7’-6”
3 Roof materials: MS Truss cover with GI- Sheet
4 Foundation depth: 4 feet
5 Outer Partition 230mm Brick wall with sill & Lintel
6 Inner Partition Metal Frame with 12mm Ply- board
7 Building Area: 320.15 sq.ft [ 0-0-3-2.97 ]
8 Room size: 8’-4”X6’-5”
9 No's of Room & Toilet: 4 & Toilet Outside
11 Window UPVC + Sliding with nets.
12 Stair: Metal
14 Cost Estimate: 6,78,270
Figure 4: Plans of Gokarneshwor Site

Figure 5: Pictures of Site Visit of Gokarneshwor Site

1.3. Kirtipur [ward no. 6, Naya Basti, Lumanti Housing]
Table 3: Structures Specifications of Lumanti Housing
1 Structure Load Bearing with RCC column a) Room not

[9”x9”] +Brick Masonry Sufficiency.
2 Story: Two + height=7’-6” b) Leakage on Roof
3 Roof materials: MS Truss cover with GI- Sheet c) Disturb due to
row
4 Foundation depth: 4 feet House partition.
5 Outer Partition 100mm Brick wall d) Noise from roof
6 Inner Partition 100mm Brick wall during rainfall
7 Building Area: 342.25 Sq.ft [ 0-1-0-0 ]
8 Room size: 9’-0”X9’-0”
9 No's of Room & Toilet: 3 & Ground Floor Toilet -1 Attached
11 Window Wooden.
12 Construction Period: 2061 BS

13 Cost Estimate: 3,000,00+1,000,00=4,000,00/-
Figure 6: Plans of Lumanti Housing
Figure 7: Site Visit Pictures of Lumanti Housing

1.4. Sindhupalchowk [Sanjaytar, ward no 11, Melamchi Municipality]

Table 4: Structures Specification of Melanchi Site
1 Structure MS Square Pipe+ Puff Panel a) Temp- high in

summer.
2 Story: One + height =8’-0” b) Insufficient Room
3 Roof materials: MS Truss cover with Puff Panel Sheet c) Repairing not Good.
4 Foundation depth: 3 feet d) Noise from roof
during rainfall
5 Outer Partition MS Frame with 75mm Puff Panel
6 Inner Partition MS Frame with 75mm Puff Panel
7 Building Area: 336.6 Sq.ft [ 0- 0- 3- 3.74 ]
8 Room size: 10’-0”X10’-0”
9 No's of Room & 3 & Toilet -1 Outside
Toilet:
10 Doors Aluminum
11 Window Aluminum
12 kitchen: Outside
14 Cost Estimate: 8,00,000
Figure 8: Plan of Melamchi Site

Figure 9: Site Visit Pictures of Melamchi

1.5. Pokhara
Regional Office Building of
Employees Provident Fund,
Pokhara Housing Project
designed by Bhubaneshwar
Lal Shrestha was reviewed and
studied which were energy
efficient, cost effective and
environmentally friendly. The
project has incorporated load
bearing hollow cement block
masonry with vertical
reinforcement at corners,
junctions and other necessary
positions, including horizontal
band at DPC level, sill level and lintel level. The buildings are energy efficient by the use of hollow
cement blocks when compared to the RCC frame building. The cost of housing is 31.75% cheaper than
the RCC frame building with the strength similar to the RCC building. Strengthening the corners,
junctions, lintels and sills will the reinforcement bar and connecting them with the DPC improves the
ductility and tensile strength of the structure.

1.6. India
Figure 10: Case Studies of India Low Cost Housing
Figure 11: Case studies of Prevalant Practices

Figure 12: Gorkha Earthquake of April 2015
Outcomes:
Following were the concepts shortlisted for the Low Cost Housing with the help of Design Catalogue for
Reconstruction of Earthquake Resistant Houses: Volume I and Volume II by DUDBC, research
articles, journals, web site searches and aforementioned case studies & site visits.
 Row housing, Apartment, Use of local materials.
 Metal Structure with Brick masonry.
 Metal Structure with Cement block Structure.
 Cement board with metal section Prefabs Structure.
 Bamboo and wooden Structure.
 Metal Truss with Puff Panel Structure.
 Stone Masonry Structure.
 Hollow Interlocking Compressed Stabilized earth Block.
However, the consultant came up with the more innovative concepts for the low cost housin. The
consultant adopted New techniques Concept Load Bearing Structure, where the corners and the main
grid locations are reinforced with the bars and tied with the stirrups along the brick masonry which
strengthens the structure in tensile and ductile and makes it more seismic resistant.

Figure 13: Retrofitting Two-Storied Load Bearing Building
In the above figure, the first three pictures shows the practice of retrofitting of two storey loadbearing
building of mud houses. Similar, concept is adopted by the consultant but in the corners and grid locations
of the layout in the brick masonry load bearing structure as shown in the bottom three figures.
The consultant also reviewed the existing building bye-lays practiced by the municipalities for load
bearing structure. Following are the key points considered during the preliminary design formulation.
 Plot Area: Minimum = previously it was[0-2-2-0], however, as per the recent decision by the
Ministry of Urban Development, the minimum plot area updated is [0-4-0-0], Maximum = [ 0-8-
0-0 ]
 Coverage Area [GCA ] =70% of plot area [ Maximum ] .
 Permissible Area= Total plot area x 1.75
 Building Height = 2 Story from GL [7100mm]
 Plinth height= 450mm
 Right of way (ROW)= 6.0m
 Set back =1.5m
 Main Brick Wall= 230mm, Slab Thickness: 125mm,
 Beam depth: 150mm
 Partition wall = 100mm

For Mountain Region

The concept of Sandwiched Puff Panel with metal frame structure with truss is adopted for the Mountain
region as shown in pictures below.
Figure 14: Sandwiched Puff Panel with metal frames

Chapter 3: Conceptual Designs

After consultation with the Client and the aforementioned review works, the Consultant come up with the
idea of formulating four different layout designs as per the orientation of the site locations, viz. East
Facing, West Facing North Facing and South Facing, for Terai, Hilly and Mountain Regions. The
planning is done for the residential housing of two storied for a single family (Parents-2, Family-4, Guest-
1).
Figure 15: Concepts of Design Formulation

Figure 16: Aerial view of all four options

3.1 OPTION-A:
The Option-A is the east facing plan. For Terai and Hilly region, new technique concept load bearing
structure is adopted of reinforcing the grid locations as shown in the plans for Option A. For Mountain
region, the metal frame structure with Sandwich Puff Panel is adopted for the same Option A drawings.
The overall plans, sections and elevations are attached in the Drawing volume.
Figure 17: Isometric, Front and Back views of Option A

Figure 18: Ground Floor Plan for Option A
The plot area for Option A is 4 anna 3 paisa 1.35 dam [ 0-4-3-1.35] which is 1654.50 sq.ft. The Plinth area
is 862.18 sq. ft. The total floor area is 1535.82 sq.ft. The minimum plot width is 30’ 10”. The Option A
comprises 1 living room, 3 bedrooms, 1 kitchen/dining, 1 guest/servant room, common toilet and attached
toilet.

3.2. OPTION-B:
The Option-B is the west facing plan. For Terai and Hilly region, new technique concept load bearing
structure is adopted of reinforcing the grid locations as shown in the plans for Option B. For Mountain
region, the metal frame structure with Sandwich Puff Panel is adopted for the same Option B drawings.
The overall plans, sections and elevations are attached in the Drawing volume.

Figure 19: Isometric, Front and Back view of Option B
Figure 20 Ground Floor Plan for Option B
The plot area for Option B is 4 anna 2 paisa [ 0-4-2-0] which is 1542.13 sq.ft. The Plinth area is 965.86
sq. ft. The total floor area is 1993.80 sq.ft. The minimum plot width is 31’ 8”. The Option B comprises 1
living room, 1 Master Bedroom, 3 bedrooms, 1 kitchen/dining, 1 guest/servant room, common toilet and
attached toilet.

3.3. OPTION-C:
The Option-C is the north facing plan. For Terai and Hilly region, new technique concept load
bearing structure is adopted of reinforcing the grid locations as shown in the plans for Option B. For
Mountain region, the metal frame structure with Sandwich Puff Panel is adopted for the same Option B
drawings. The overall plans, sections and elevations are attached in the Drawing volume.
Figure 21: Isometric, Front and Right view of Option C

Figure 22: Ground Floor Plan for Option C
The plot area for Option C is 4 anna 2.14 dam [ 0-4-0-2.14 ] which is 1414.88 sq.ft. The Plinth area is
813.04 sq. ft. The total floor area is 1626.08 sq.ft. The minimum plot width is 28’ 7”. The Option C
toilet.

3.4. OPTION-D:
The Option-D is the south facing plan. For Terai and Hilly region, new technique concept load
bearing structure is adopted of reinforcing the grid locations as shown in the plans for Option D. For
Mountain region, the metal frame structure with Sandwich Puff Panel is adopted for the same Option D
drawings. The overall plans, sections and elevations are attached in the Drawing volume.
Figure 23: Isometric, Front and Right view of Option D

Figure 24: Ground Floor Plan for Option D
The plot area for Option D is 4 anna 2.14 dam [ 0-4-0-2.14 ] which is 1414.88 sq.ft. The Plinth area is
813.04 sq. ft. The total floor area is 1626.08 sq.ft. The minimum plot width is 28’ 7”. The Option D
toilet.
Table 5: Summary of area of various options
Option-A: East OPTION-B: West OPTION-C: OPTION-D:

Facing Facing North Facing South Facing
Plot area Ana [ 0-4-1-0.86 ] [ 0-4-2-0 ] [ 0-4-0-2.14 ] [ 0-4-0-2.14 ]

Plinth Area 862.18 sq.ft. 965.86 sq.ft. 813.04 sq.ft. 813.04 sq.ft.
T. Floor area 1535.82 Sq.ft 1993.80 Sq.ft 1626.08 Sq.ft 1626.08 Sq.ft
Minimum Plot 31'-4" X 47'-1" 31'-8" X 48'-8" 28'-7" X 49'-6" 28'-7" X 49'-6"
size
Plot area 1535.82 sq.ft. 1542.13 sq.ft. 1414.88 sq.ft. 1414.88 sq.ft.

3.5. Technical Requirements Summary for New techniques Concept Load Bearing
Structure
Site selection:
Geological fault or ruptured area, area susceptible to landslide,
steep slope of greater than 20%, filled area, river banks and
water-logged area are to be avoided for constructing the building. Plinth
Foundation:
Foundation name is STRIP FOUNDATION of stone Masonry in
1:6 cement sand mortar. The foundation trench shall be of
uniform width. The foundation bed shall be on the same level
throughout the foundation in flat area. The depth of footing
should not be less than 800mm. The width of footing should not
be less than 800mm in soft soil condition as it depends on soil
condition and is shown in detail in drawings. The footing should
be stone masonry after laying the brick soling and 3” PCC, and is
to be stone masonry upto the plinth level as per the drawings.
Plinth/DPC:
Provide a reinforced concrete
band at plinth level, as shown
in detail drawings. The top
level of plinth should be
450mm. Minimum height of
Plinth band is 150mm. Main
reinforcement should be 4-12 dia. bars. Use 8mm diameter rings at 150mm. Hook length should be
500mm. Bars shall have a clear cover of 25mm concrete.
Walls:
The brick should be first class brick. Masonry should not be
laid staggered or straggled in order to avoid continuous
vertical joints. At corners or wall junctions, through vertical
joints should be avoided by properly laying the masonry. It
should be interlocked. Mortar joints should not be more than
20mm and less than 10mm in thickness. The ratio
recommend is 1:4 (Cement: Sand) minimum. The width of
main wall is 230mm, with partition wall of 110mm.
Openings:
The total length of openings in a wall is not to exceed half
of the length of the wall. Lintel level are kept same for
doors and windows. Wooden door and aluminum windows
are proposed for the buildings.

Vertical Reinforcement:
Place vertical steel bars in the wall at all corners,
junctions of walls and jamb adjacent to all doors
and windows. They should be kept on the inner
and outer surface of the wall with screeding of
38mm over it. The vertical reinforcing bar for
masonry is given in detail drawings. 10mm
diameter for junctions and corners, 12mm
diameter for jambs opening places should be
provided as per the drawings.
Horizontal Band:
Horizontal bands should be provided throughout the entire wall with
minimum thickness of 75mm. A continuous sill band shall be provided
through all walls at the bottom level of opening (specially windows). A continuous lintel band shall be
provided through all walls at the top level of
opening. Main reinforcement should be 2-10 dia.
bars. Use 8mm diameter c-rings at 150mm.
Hook length should be 500mm. Bars shall have
a clear cover of 25mm concrete.

Beam:
The beams of the ground
floor and the roof floor
are needed to be 230mm
width and 300mm depth
including slab thickness
as shown in the drawing
connecting the grids,
where the vertical
reinforcing has been done. The beam acts as bond between the slab and load bearing wall, in addition to
transferring the loads to the wall. 6 numbers of 12mmØ bars with
8mmØ stirrups at 150mmc/c spacing needs to be provided.
Slab:
The slab thickness should be 125mm throughout with 10mmØ
bottom bars in both ways and 8mmØ top bars along with the
distribution bars. The spacing of all bars shall be 100mm.
Similarly the staircase of 150mm thick reinforced concrete riser
and tread orthogonally with waistless slab is adopted as shown in
the drawings with the detailing.
Note: The concrete mix for concrete works should not be leaner
than 1:1.5:3 (1 part cement, 1.5 parts sand and 3 parts aggregate, M20), High Strength Deformed Bars –
Fe500 should be used

3.6. Technical Requirements Summary for Sandwich Puff Panel

Structure System:
The structural system adopted for the mountain region is moment resisting steel frame system.
Foundation:
The foundation provided is isolated footing. The dimension of all the footing is 1000mmX1000mm and of
300mm depth. Depth of Pedestal Column of 1.5 meters from ground level and is provided upto the plinth
level where the steel column is connected via. Base plate. shown as per design in table.
Plinth/DPC:
R.C.C. (1:1.5:3) tie beam of size 230 x 230 mm shall be provided. Main reinforcement shall be 4 nos. of
12mm dia. Bars with 8mm Ø rings at 150mm C/C.
Walls:
EPS Sandwich Panel of 50mm of 6.2kg/m 2 weight shall be used for
walls as shown in the figure aside.
Column:
Square hollow section (SHS) 100X100X5 for the columns in both the
floor with full penetration groove weld in factory is used in structure.
Beam:
For primary beam ISMB125 in first floor and ISLB100 in upper floor.
ISLB100 should be used for secondary beam in upper floor.
Flooring System:
The flooring system shall be made of profile metal decking system. Thin layer of RC concrete shall be
laid. The total width of floor shall be 110mm. The detailing is shown in the drawing.
Roof System:
EPS Sandwich Panel of 50mm of 6.2kg/m2 weight shall be used for roof. All members of the truss shall be
SHS 38.1X38.1X2.5.
Figure 25: EPS Sandwich Panel Roof

Chapter 4: Analysis
4.1. New techniques Concept Load Bearing Structure
4.1.1. Referred Codes, Documents and Standards of Practice
The following are the referred codes and documents utilized for the analysis procedures:
 IS 456:2000, IS 1905:1987, IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, is used for design, seismic loading service
combinations for allowable stress design evaluation of existing brick masonry building by linear static
analysis
 NBC 203:2015, 202:2015 were also referred
 Design Catalogue for Reconstruction of Earthquake Resistant Houses by DUDBC, Karmachari
Sanchaya Kosh, Pokhara Housing Project designed by Bhubaneshwar Lal Shrestha were also referred
4.1.2. Software Utilized for Analysis
The software utilized for evaluation of existing structure as well as for the evaluation of designed
retrofitted structure is CSI ETABS v19.0, which is internationally certified software for performance
based analysis and design.
4.1.3. Data Assumed on Basis of Given Conditions
The following data was assumed on basis of given/indicated conditions:
 Assuming fair condition for masonry; F’m = 10.3MPa (First Class Brick)
 Masonry Elastic Modulus; Em = 1250
 Soil type : III, Soft Soil (As per IS Code)
 Masonry Shear Modulus G = 500 MPa
 Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, A = 0.0000031
 Poisson’s ratio, U = 0.25
 Assuming concrete used in beams, slabs; f’c = M20
4.1.4. Calculated Parameters
Following are the calculated parameters for the evaluation of the residential buildings:
 Importance factor for seismic loading as per IS 1893; I = 1.0
 Seismic Zone V;
 Seismic Zone Factor, Z=0.36
 For time period value as per IS 1893 calculated, T = 0.148874 sec (for X-direction) and T= 0.176291
sec (For Y-direction) for Option A
 Value of strength reduction factor for masonry wall; R = 2.5
4.1.5. Structural Modelling
Linear Static Analysis Model

The parameters utilized in linear static analysis model are as follows:
 Material properties for concrete beams and slabs; fc’ = M20
 Material properties for rebar; fy = Fe500
 Material properties for masonry walls; f’m = 20.4MPa
 Grade of Mortar; H2=1:4
 Frame properties for concrete beams : 9” x 12” reinforced with 4-12mmØ bars
 Frame properties for concrete band beams : 3” x 9” reinforced with 2-10mmØ bars
 Frame properties for masonry wall reinforced corners reinforced with 7-10mm Ø bars
 Wall section for masonry wall : 9” thick wall
 Slab properties for concrete slab : 5” thick slab

 Gravity loading was taken as; Dead = Slab self + wall self
SDL = 1.5kN/m2 for finishes
LL = 2kN/m2 for floors
Roof LL = 0.75 kN/m2
Water Tank Load = 1 kN/m2
 Seismic loading parameters were taken as; Zone = V
Soil = III
Importance factor = 1
R = 2.5 (Masonry)
 Rigid type diaphragms
 Analysis combinations using Limit State of Serviceability
D+L
D ± EQx
D ± EQy
D + 0.8L ± 0.8EQx
D + 0.8L ± 0.8EQy
4.1.6. Analysis Results
The results interpretation based on linear static and non-linear static analysis are discussed as follows for
new technique load bearing structure:

OPTION A
Figure 26: Option A Model Input

Linear Static Analysis Results
Below are the results obtained from Linear static analysis on application of static ground motion in X and
Y direction.
The seismic base shear is the sum of reactions at the base supports of the lateral force resisting system of
the structure attracted by the structure due to its stiffness and mass. The static base shear results are given
as follows:
Load Direction Ecc. R Soil Z I Period Weight Base Shear

Pattern Used
% sec kN kN
EQx(1/3) X 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.149 2524.8724 454.477
EQx(2/3) X+Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.149 2524.8724 454.477
EQx(3/3) X-Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.149 2524.8724 454.477
EQy(1/3) Y 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.176 2524.8724 454.477
EQy(2/3) Y+Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.176 2524.8724 454.477
EQy(3/3) Y-Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.176 2524.8724 454.477
IS 1893:2016 Auto Seismic Load Calculation

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern EQx according
to IS 1893:2016, as calculated by ETABS.
Direction and Eccentricity
Direction = Multiple
Eccentricity Ratio = 5% for all diaphragms
Structural Period
Period Calculation Method = User Specified
User Period T =0.149 sec
Factors and Coefficients
Seismic Zone Factor, Z [IS Table 3] Z=0.36

Response Reduction Factor, R [IS Table
R=2.5
9]
Importance Factor, I [IS Table 8] I =1
Site Type [IS Table 1] = III
Seismic Response
Spectral Acceleration Coefficient, Sa /g S a Sa

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g

Equivalent Lateral Forces

Sa
ZI
Seismic Coefficient, Ah [IS 6.4.2] g
Ah =
2R
Calculated Base Shear
Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
X 0.149 2524.8724 454.477
X + Ecc. Y 0.149 2524.8724 454.477
X - Ecc. Y 0.149 2524.8724 454.477
Applied Story Forces
Story Elevation X-Dir Y-Dir

m kN kN
PP 6.05 0 0
Roof 5.4 372.0357 0
GF 2.7 82.4413 0
Base 0 0 0


This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern EQy
according to IS 1893:2016, as calculated by ETABS.
Structural Period

Response Reduction Factor, R [IS Table9] R=2.5
Seismic Response
Spectral Acceleration Coefficient, S a /g [IS S a Sa

=2.5 =2.5
6.4.2] g g

Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R
Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
Y 0.176 2524.8724 454.477
Y + Ecc. X 0.176 2524.8724 454.477
Y - Ecc. X 0.176 2524.8724 454.477


m kN kN
PP 6.05 0 0
Roof 5.4 0 372.0357
GF 2.7 0 82.4413
Base 0 0 0

Displacement and Drift Checks

The story drifts and maximum displacements checks are applied utilizing IS code,
Here, maximum story displacement is 5.032267 as shown in graph above, which is well below limit
which is, 5400/250 = 21.6, 0.4% Similarly, the story drift 0.000972 as shown below is also within the
limit.
Stress Check in Walls

The stress limitations were computed using IS 1905:1987 as follows:
For H2 grade mortar and 10.3N/mm2 Brick strength, as per table 8, of IS 1905:1987,
Permissible compressive stress for masonry = 0.9755 N/mm 2

The compressive stresses due to envelope composed of design combinations resulting in maximum
compression are obtained from shell stresses “S22”, combo “Envelope, Min” and shell “Absolute
Max” as shown: The maximum value is within permissible value.

The shear stresses due to envelope composed of design combinations resulting in maximum shear are
obtained from shell stresses “S12, combo “Envelope-Min” and shell “Absolute Max” as shown: in
which the maximum shear stress is within permissible range,0.1+0.92/6=0.253MPa.

For improved tensile strength and seismic consideration, the corners of the structures are to be
reinforced with longitudinal bars as shown in figure below which is provided in the architectural
section drawing of required size and numbers at grid corners. Corners junctions are reinforced with 7
numbers 10mm diameter bars.
Load Calculations
Table: - Centers Of Mass
Mass X Mass Y XCM YCM Cum Mass X Cum Mass Y XCCM YCCM
Story Diaphragm
kg kg m m kg kg m m
GF D1 65624.18 65624.18 4.8651 2.5779 65624.18 65624.18 4.8651 2.5779
Roof D2 82998.38 82998.38 4.9416 3.5027 82998.38 82998.38 4.9416 3.5027
Table: Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Case Mode Period UX UY UZ SumUX SumUY SumUZ
sec
Modal 1 0.268 0.0082 0.8356 0 0.0082 0.8356 0
Modal 2 0.222 0.4373 0.0125 0 0.4456 0.8481 0
Modal 3 0.164 0.3864 0.0003 0 0.8319 0.8484 0
Modal 4 0.144 0.0061 0.00001983 0 0.8381 0.8485 0
Modal 5 0.091 0.0043 0.0921 0 0.8423 0.9406 0
Modal 6 0.081 0.006 0.000001446 0 0.8484 0.9406 0
Modal 7 0.077 0.0018 0.00001913 0 0.8501 0.9406 0
Modal 8 0.073 0.0349 0.000006527 0 0.885 0.9406 0
Modal 9 0.07 0.0008 0.004 0 0.8858 0.9446 0
Modal 10 0.065 0 0.0001 0 0.8858 0.9447 0
Modal 11 0.064 0.0069 0.00002455 0 0.8928 0.9448 0

Modal 12 0.06 0.0047 0.0001 0 0.8974 0.9448 0
Modal 13 0.06 0.0316 0.0011 0 0.929 0.9459 0
Modal 14 0.059 0.0002 0.0001 0 0.9292 0.946 0
Modal 15 0.058 0.0003 0.00000191 0 0.9295 0.946 0
Table: Mass Summary by Story

Stor
y UX UY UZ
kg kg kg
PP 5870.93 5870.93 0
Roof 136589.68 136589.68 0
GF 119885.04 119885.04 0
Base 10751.98 10751.98 0
Table: Mass Summary by Group

Grou
p Self Mass Self Weight Mass X Mass Y Mass Z
kg kN kg kg kg
All 0 2222.6407 273097.62 273097.62 0
Table: Load Reactions
Story Label Unique Name Load Case FZ Load Case FZ
kN kN
Base 1 9 Dead 106.3995 Dead+Live 138.2491


kN kN
Base 17 178 Dead 0 Dead+Live 0
Base ~1820 Dead 15.1437 Dead+Live 18.3818

kN kN

kN kN
Base ~3106 Dead -0.1438 Dead+Live -0.3399
Total DL 2222.6405 DL+LL 2866.126
Design of Foundation:
a) Taking overall structure load
Assuming, Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) = 100 kN/sqm of soil

DL+LL = 2866.126 kN
Total Load (TL) =1.1 X (DL+LL) = 3,152.7386 kN
Taking width of foundation, bf = 800 mm, Total area of foundation, A f = 43.4 m2 (Calculated from
trench layout plan for 800mm width for Option A layout)
Provided depth of foundation below ground level= 800mm
Net Upward Pressure (Nup) = 3152.7386 / 43.4 =

72.64 kN/sqm
Therefore, it is found that Net Upward Pressure is

below assumed Safe Bearing Capacity. Hence, safe.
b) Taking critical wall load
Assuming, Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) = 100

kN/sqm of soil
Length of Wall (L) =4.5m
Total Dead Load and Live Load Carried by the Wall
= 1.1 * 340.13 kN = 374.143 kN
For 800mm width foundation, Net Upward Pressure
(Nup) = 374.143 / 4.5 = 83.142 kN/sqm
Provided depth of foundation below ground level=
800mm
Since the location of the building is not fixed, the above-mentioned foundation design could be
modified as per the soil condition of the site selected. However, the total load remains same for the
superstructure as calculated above. As discussed earlier, for improved tensile strength and seismic
consideration, the corners of the structures are to be reinforced with longitudinal bars at grid corners.
These bars are to be brought from the foundation level to the superstructures. The conventional method
of foundation for load bearing stone wall is used, thick stone masonry wall of 200mm height at base,
and reducing to 450mm width for the remaining height upto DPC level. The material considered is
stone, since stone has higher load bearing strength than the bricks and it is cost-effective too.

OPTION B:
Figure 27: Option B Model Input

Below are the results obtained from Linear static analysis on application of static ground motion in X
and Y direction.
The seismic base shear is the sum of reactions at the base supports of the lateral force resisting system
of the structure attracted by the structure due to its stiffness and mass. The static base shear results are
given as follows:

Pattern Used
% sec kN kN
EQx(1/3) X 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.161 2781.1575 500.6084
EQx(2/3) X+Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.161 2781.1575 500.6084
EQx(3/3) X-Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.161 2781.1575 500.6084
EQy(1/3) Y 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.173 2781.1575 500.6084
EQy(2/3) Y+Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.173 2781.1575 500.6084
EQy(3/3) Y-Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.173 2781.1575 500.6084

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern EQx
Structural Period

R=2.5
9]
Seismic Response

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g
Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R

Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
X 0.161 2781.1575 500.6084
X + Ecc. Y 0.161 2781.1575 500.6084
X - Ecc. Y 0.161 2781.1575 500.6084

m kN kN
PP 6.65 0 0
Roof 5.65 412.489 0
GF 2.825 88.1194 0
Base 0 0 0

Structural Period


Response Reduction Factor, R [IS Table 9] R=2.5
Seismic Response

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g

Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R
Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
Y 0.173 2781.1575 500.6084
Y + Ecc. X 0.173 2781.1575 500.6084
Y - Ecc. X 0.173 2781.1575 500.6084

m kN kN
PP 6.65 0 0
Roof 5.65 0 412.489
GF 2.825 0 88.1194
Base 0 0 0


Here, maximum story displacement is 4.2189 as shown in graph above, which is well below limit
which is, 5650/250 = 22.6, 0.4% Similarly, the story drift 0.000541 as shown below is also within the
limit.




reinforced with longitudinal bars as shown in figure which is provided in the architectural section
drawing of required size and numbers at grid corners. Corners junctions are reinforced with 7 numbers
10mm diameter bars.
Load Calculations
Story Diaphragm
kg kg m m kg kg m m
Roof D1 83188.68 83188.68 5.0673 4.384 83188.68 83188.68 5.0673 4.384
GF D2 67682.3 67682.3 5.1256 4.2713 67682.3 67682.3 5.1256 4.2713

sec
Modal 1 0.246 0.0012 0.8382 0 0.0012 0.8382 0
Modal 2 0.202 0.5765 0.0004 0 0.5777 0.8387 0
Modal 3 0.183 0.2787 0.0093 0 0.8564 0.848 0
0.000004
Modal 4 0.114 5 0 0 0.8564 0.848 0
Modal 5 0.096 0.0004 0.000008181 0 0.8568 0.848 0
Modal 6 0.09 0.0023 0.00004607 0 0.859 0.8481 0
Modal 7 0.087 0.0005 0.09 0 0.8595 0.9381 0
Modal 8 0.079 0 0 0 0.8595 0.9381 0
0.000001
Modal 9 0.076 1 0.0001 0 0.8595 0.9382 0
Modal 10 0.07 0.0053 0.000008314 0 0.8649 0.9382 0
Modal 11 0.07 0.0014 0.000000612 0 0.8662 0.9382 0
Modal 12 0.069 0.0004 0.0008 0 0.8666 0.939 0
Modal 13 0.068 0.0254 0.00002973 0 0.892 0.939 0
Modal 14 0.068 0.0174 0.0001 0 0.9094 0.9391 0
Modal 15 0.068 0.019 0.000002583 0 0.9284 0.9391 0

Stor
y UX UY UZ
kg kg kg
Roof 152923.72 152923.72 0
GF 130675.41 130675.41 0
Base 9486.38 9486.38 0

Grou
kg kN kg kg kg
All 0 2335.9302 293085.52 293085.52 0
Unique
Story Label Name Load Case FZ Load Case FZ
kN kN

Unique
kN kN

Unique
kN kN

Unique
kN kN
Total DL 2335.93 DL+LL 3069.368

c) Taking overall structure load

kN/sqm of soil
DL+LL = 3069.368 kN
Taking width of foundation, b f = 800 mm, Total area
of foundation, Af = 48.44 m2 (Calculated from trench
layout plan for 800mm width for Option A layout)
800mm
69.70 kN/sqm

d) Taking critical wall load

kN/sqm of soil
Total Dead Load and Live Load Carried by the Wall = 1.1 * 280.15 kN = 308.165 kN
For 800mm width foundation, Net Upward Pressure (Nup) = 308.165 / 4.884 = 63.1 kN/sqm
Therefore, it is found that Net Upward Pressure is below assumed Safe Bearing Capacity. Hence, safe.

OPTION C
Figure 28: Option C Model Input


Since the option C and Option D are similar in plan and elevation, the analysis result of option C is
only presented below.
and Y direction.
given as follows:

Pattern Used
% sec kN kN
EQx(1/3) X 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.206 2413.6286 434.4531
EQx(2/3) X+Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.206 2413.6286 434.4531
EQx(3/3) X-Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.206 2413.6286 434.4531
EQy(1/3) Y 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.146 2413.6286 434.4531
EQy(2/3) Y+Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.146 2413.6286 434.4531
EQy(3/3) Y-Ecc 0.05 2.5 III 0.36 1 0.146 2413.6286 434.4531

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern EQx
Structural Period

R=2.5
9]
Seismic Response

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g

Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R

Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
X 0.206 2413.6286 434.4531
X + Ecc. Y 0.206 2413.6286 434.4531
X - Ecc. Y 0.206 2413.6286 434.4531

m kN kN
PP 6.65 0 0
Roof 5.65 356.0069 0
GF 2.825 78.4462 0
Base 0 0 0

Structural Period

Response Reduction Factor, R [IS Table 9] R=2.5

Seismic Response

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g

Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R
Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
Y 0.146 2413.6286 434.4531
Y + Ecc. X 0.146 2413.6286 434.4531
Y - Ecc. X 0.146 2413.6286 434.4531

m kN kN
PP 6.65 0 0
Roof 5.65 0 356.0069
GF 2.825 0 78.4462
Base 0 0 0


Here, maximum story displacement is 5.549 as shown in graph above, which is well below limit which
is, 5650/250 = 22.6, 0.4% Similarly, the story drift 0.000496 as shown below is also within the limit.





reinforced with longitudinal bars as shown in figure which is provided in the architectural section
drawing of required size and numbers at grid corners. Corners junctions are reinforced with 7 numbers
10mm diameter bars.
Load Calculations
Story Diaphragm
kg kg m m kg kg m m
Roof D1 70725.68 70725.68 3.0567 5.3873 70725.68 70725.68 3.0567 5.3873
GF D2 58685.24 58685.24 3.1436 5.4831 58685.24 58685.24 3.1436 5.4831

sec
Modal 1 0.274 0.6593 0.0481 0 0.6593 0.0481 0
Modal 2 0.205 0.1908 0.1967 0 0.8501 0.2448 0
Modal 3 0.157 0.0018 0.5793 0 0.8519 0.8241 0
Modal 4 0.122 0.00002192 0.0035 0 0.8519 0.8276 0
Modal 5 0.095 0.0426 0.00000522 0 0.8945 0.8276 0
0.00000104
Modal 6 0.092 2 0.0001 0 0.8945 0.8277 0
Modal 7 0.09 0.0026 0.0001 0 0.8972 0.8277 0
Modal 8 0.086 0.0231 0.0013 0 0.9202 0.829 0
Modal 9 0.074 0.0006 0.001 0 0.9208 0.83 0
Modal 10 0.074 0.0107 0.0151 0 0.9315 0.8452 0
Modal 11 0.073 0.0027 0.0002 0 0.9342 0.8453 0
Modal 12 0.072 0.004 0.0167 0 0.9382 0.8621 0
Modal 13 0.068 0.0011 0.000006614 0 0.9393 0.8621 0
Modal 14 0.067 0.0017 0.0034 0 0.941 0.8654 0
Modal 15 0.066 0.0007 0.0001 0 0.9418 0.8655 0
Modal 16 0.063 0.00003709 0.0002 0 0.9418 0.8657 0
Modal 17 0.063 0 0.0001 0 0.9418 0.8658 0
Modal 18 0.063 0.0002 0.0144 0 0.9419 0.8802 0
Modal 19 0.062 0.0003 0.0216 0 0.9422 0.9018 0
Modal 20 0.061 0.0001 0.0022 0 0.9423 0.9041 0

Stor
y UX UY UZ
kg kg kg
Roof 130818.26 130818.26 0
GF 115303.35 115303.35 0
Base 10149.82 10149.82 0

Grou
kg kN kg kg kg
All 0 2054.8167 256271.44 256271.44 0



Unique
kN kN

Unique
kN kN

Unique
kN kN
Total DL 2054.82 DL+LL 2683.587
e) Taking overall structure load
Assuming, Safe Bearing Capacity (SBC) = 100 kN/sqm of soil

DL+LL = 2683.587 kN
Taking width of foundation, bf = 800 mm, Total area of foundation, Af = 43.97 m2 (Calculated from
trench layout plan for 800mm width for Option A
layout)
800mm

67.13 kN/sqm

f) Taking critical wall load

kN/sqm of soil


Total Dead Load and Live Load Carried by the Wall = 1.1 * 237.82 kN = 261.602 kN
For 800mm width foundation, Net Upward Pressure (Nup) = 374.143 / 5.043 = 74.2 kN/sqm
Therefore, it is found that Net Upward Pressure is below assumed Safe Bearing Capacity. Hence, safe.
Slab Design for critical slab

Designed Depth of slab: 125mm
Input Parameters
Length of shorter span (lx) = 3.60 m
Length of longer span (ly) = 4.53 m
Support condition 4
Slab type
a= 26
b= 1
g (assumed) = 1.775
ly/lx = 1.26
Design two way slab

Assume grade of concrete (fck) = M 20

Assume steel (fy) = Fe 500
Thickness of finishing = 3.00 mm
Thickness of screed = 38.00 mm
Thickness of plaster = 0.00 mm
Unit weight of finishing = 21.00 KN/m3
Unit weight of screed = 23.00 KN/m3
Unit weight of plaster = 20.40 KN/m3
Unit weight of concrete = 25.00 KN/m3
Live load = 2 KN/m2
Assume bar diameter = 10.00 mm
Effective depth of slab (d) ] 78.07 mm

Assume, d = 100.00 mm
Total depth of slab, D = 125.00 mm
Dead load calculation of slab

Dead load of slab due to concrete = 3.13 KN/m2
Dead load due to floor finish Tile = 0.06 KN/m2
Dead load due to screed = 0.87 KN/m2
Dead load due to plaster = 0.00 KN/m2
Partition load = 3.50 KN/m2

Total dead load = 7.56 KN/m2

Dead load + Live load = 9.56 KN/m2
Design load = 14.34 KN/m2
Bending moment Coefficients Max. bending moment

ax = 0.0473 Mx = 8.81 KNm
-ax = 0.0629 -Mx = 11.72 KNm
ay = 0.0350 My = 10.32 KNm
-ay = 0.0470 -My = 13.86 KNm
Mmax = 13.86 KNm
Check depth for moment

Required depth for moment = 70.86 mm
Provided depth, d = 100.00 mm
Required depth is < Provided depth
O.K. safe
Area of steel
Solving quadratic equation
0.025 Ast2 + -100.00 Ast + 23723.67 = 0
0.025 Ast +
2
-100.00 Ast + 31857.50 = 0
Bottom bars Top bars
Ast = 3746.73 mm 2
Ast = 3650.97 mm2
Ast = 253.27 mm2 Ast = 349.03 mm2
Spacing required
8 f rods @ 198.4 mm c/c Bottom bars
8 f rods @ 143.94 mm c/c Top bars
Spacing provided
10 f rods @ 150.0 mm c/c Bottom bars
10 f rods @ 150.0 mm c/c Top bars
Check for shear

Provided Ast = 785.00 mm2
p% = 0.79 k = 1.3
tc’ = 0.57 N/mm2 IS 456:2000 (Table 19)
tc = 0.74 N/mm 2

Max.shear force (Vu) = 25.84 KN
tv = 0.26 N/mm2
tc > tv
O.K. safe
Check for minimum steel

Minimum steel (0.12%) Provided steel
120.00 mm2 < 785.00 mm2

O.K.
Check for deflection

a= 26 fs = 93.566 l= 1
b= 1 g= 1.775 d= 1

Allowable L/d = 46.15
Actual L/d = 36.03
Allowable L/d > Actual L/d
O.K.

4.2. Metal Frame Structure with Sandwich Puff Panel

For Metal Frame Structure with Sandwich Puff Panel analysis, since all the options uses same
materials and are two storied with similar sizes of rooms and plinth area, we have selected the option
with the model which has living room having slab opening on first floor, which is the option A.
Therefore, Option A analysis is shown below which is the critical of all options.
Figure 29: Metal Structure Puff Panel Option A Model Input

4.2.1. Referred Codes, Documents and Standards Of Practice

The following are the referred codes and documents utilized for the analysis procedures:
 IS 456:2000, IS 800:2007, IS 1893 (Part 1):2016, is used for design, seismic loading service
combinations for design evaluation of existing stone masonry building by linear static analysis
 Design Catalogue for Reconstruction of Earthquake Resistant Houses by DUDBC
4.2.2. Software Utilized for Analysis
The software utilized for evaluation of existing structure as well as for the evaluation of designed
retrofitted structure is CSI ETABS v19.0, which is internationally certified software for performance
based analysis and design.
4.2.3. Specified Parameters
Structural Steel Yield Strength : Fe250
Concrete Grade : M20
Steel Reinforcement Grade : Fe500 (for both longitudinal and shear reinforcement)
The following data was assumed on basis of given/indicated conditions:

 Soil type : III, Soft Soil (As per IS Code)
Following are the calculated parameters for the evaluation of the residential buildings:
 Importance factor for seismic loading as per IS 1893; I = 1.0
 Seismic Zone V;
 Seismic Zone Factor, Z=0.36
 For time period value as per IS 1893 calculated, T = 0.085XH0.75
 Value of strength reduction factor for masonry wall; R = 5
Sandwich Puff Panel Wall/Roof

Unit Weight : 6.2 kg/m2
Finishing
Plaster Unit Weight : 24 KN/m3
Floor finish : 1.5 KN/m2 (Screed + Punning)
4.2.4. Applied Loads
Refer Table: Load Intensity of Building Components
Live Load: 2 KN/m2 (for all rooms)
Live Load: 3 KN/m2 (for staircases and lobbies and cantilever portion)
Roof Live Load: 0.75 KN/m2 (for roof inaccessible)
Wind Load 47mile/sec (design speed as per IS code)
Seismic load EQx and EQy
Gravity loading was taken as; Dead = Slab self + wall self
4.2.5. Structural Modelling
The sizes of the structural components are as given below:
Sizes of Structural Components:
Slab: 110mm Deck slab
Beam: Main Beams size- ISMB125 (GF), ISLB100 (FF)

Secondary Beams size- ISLB100 (GF)

Column: SHS 100X100X5
Truss: SHS 38.1X38.1X2.5 (All members)
For Design of concrete elements, the following load combinations has been considered according to
Indian Standard (IS 456:2000, table 18):
Load Combination DL LL ELx ELy
1 1.5 - - -
2 1.5 1.5 - -
3 1.2 1.2 1.2 -
4 1.2 1.2 - 1.2
5 1.2 1.2 -1.2 -
6 1.2 1.2 - -1.2
7 1.5 - 1.5 -
8 1.5 - - 1.5
9 1.5 - -1.5 -
10 1.5 - - -1.5
11 0.9 1.5
12 0.9 1.5
13 0.9 -1.5
14 0.9 -1.5
Moreover, an envelope is created to find the maximum and minimum of the above mentioned 14
combinations.
4.2.6. Analysis Results
The results interpretation based on linear static and non-linear static analysis are discussed as follows:
and Y direction.
given as follows:

Pattern Used
% sec kN kN
EQx(1/3) X 0.05 5 III 0.36 1 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
EQx(2/3) X+Ecc 0.05 5 III 0.36 1 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
EQx(3/3) X-Ecc 0.05 5 III 0.36 1 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
EQy(1/3) Y 0.05 5 III 0.36 1 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
EQy(2/3) Y+Ecc 0.05 5 III 0.36 1 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
EQy(3/3) Y-Ecc 0.05 5 III 0.36 1 0.368 327.5067 29.4756

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern Eqx


Structural Period

R=5
9]
Site Type [IS Table 1] = II
Seismic Response

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g

Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R
Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
X 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
X + Ecc. Y 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
X - Ecc. Y 0.368 327.5067 29.4756


m kN kN
Story1 7.0488 21.0198 0
Roof 5.4 1.1275 0
1F 2.7 7.3283 0
Base 0 0 0

This calculation presents the automatically generated lateral seismic loads for load pattern Eqy
Structural Period

R=5
9]
Site Type [IS Table 1] = II
Seismic Response

=2.5 =2.5
[IS 6.4.2] g g

Sa
ZI
Ah =
2R
Period Used W Vb
Direction
(sec) (kN) (kN)
Y 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
Y + Ecc. X 0.368 327.5067 29.4756
Y - Ecc. X 0.368 327.5067 29.4756


m kN kN
Story1 7.0488 0 21.0198
Roof 5.4 0 1.1275
1F 2.7 0 7.3283
Base 0 0 0


Here, maximum story displacement is 28.09 as shown in graph above, which is well below limit which
is, 7050/250 = 28.2, 0.4% Similarly, the story drift 0.0062 as shown below is also within the limit.
Design Check

Load Calculations
Story Diaphragm
kg kg m m kg kg m m
1F D1 22607.11 22607.11 4.2875 3.0303 22607.11 22607.11 4.2875 3.0303

sec
Modal 1 0.763 0.6482 0.0271 0 0.6482 0.0271 0
Modal 2 0.75 0.1438 0.1409 0 0.792 0.168 0
Modal 3 0.668 0.0001 0.7548 0 0.7921 0.9228 0
Modal 4 0.355 0.2042 0.0001 0 0.9963 0.9229 0
Modal 5 0.271 0.00000103 0.0756 0 0.9963 0.9985 0
Modal 6 0.244 0.0025 0.0006 0 0.9989 0.9991 0
Modal 7 0.11 0.001 0 0 0.9999 0.9991 0
Modal 8 0.09 0 0.0009 0 0.9999 1 0
Modal 9 0.087 0.0001 0 0 1 1 0
0.00000526
Modal 10 0.035 2 0 0 1 1 0
0.00000737
Modal 11 0.034 4 0 0 1 1 0
Modal 12 0.03 0 0 0 1 1 0

Grou
kg kN kg kg kg
All 0 226.9111 33678.24 33678.24 0
Unique
Story Label Name Output Case FZ
kN
Base 1 1 UDStlS2 63.006
Base 10 10 UDStlS2 46.0227
Base 11 11 UDStlS2 31.4085
Base 96 230 UDStlS2 31.3705
Base 97 232 UDStlS2 62.7682
Total 1.5 (DL+LL) 683.06 kN

Design of Isolated Footing

Depth:
Type: F1 Size: 1m X 1m Joint Label:
300mm
1 Footing Size Design
Load Pu 70 KN
Design Load P 51 KN
Moment in x dir Mux 0 KN-m

Moment in y dir Muy 0 KN-m
Column size cx 300 mm

cy 300 mm
SBC q 100 KN/sqm
Footing Size required A req 0.51 sqmm
L 1.00 meters
Footing Size Provided
B 1.00 meters
Area Provided A prvd 1.00 meters
Zx 0.17
Zx 0.17
Net upward pressure Nup 50 KNm2
Footing Size OK
2 Slab Design
lx 0.350
ly 0.350
Bending Moment in x dir Mx 5 KN-m

Bending Moment in y dir My 5 KN-m
Concrete fck 20 MPa

Steel fy 500 MPa
Minimum Depth Required dmin 42
Depth Provided D 300 mm

Clear Cover c 50 mm
Effective Cover d' 56 mm
Effective Depth d' 244 mm
Spacing c/c in mm
Area of Steel
12# 16# 20#
293 sqmm 386 c/c 687 c/c 1073 c/c
293 sqmm 386 c/c 687 c/c 1073 c/c
Minimum Ast required across x direcion
Minimum Ast required across y direcion
Ast across x direction 12 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c 754 sqmm

Ast across y direction 12 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c 754 sqmm
Vu1 8 KN
ζv 0.033 MPa
ζc 0.260 MPa
Vc1 63 KN
293 sqmm 386 c/c 687 c/c 1073 c/c
Ast across x direction 12 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c

Ast across y direction 12 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c
3 One Way Shear along x direction
Vu1 8 KN
ζv 0.033 MPa
ζc 0.260 MPa
Vc1 63 KN
One Way Shear Check OK
4 One Way Shear along y direction
Vu1 8 KN
ζv 0.033 MPa
ζc 0.260 MPa
Vc1 63 KN
One Way Shear Check OK
5 Two Way Shear

Vu2 53 KN
ζv 0.100 MPa
ks*ζc 1.118 MPa

Vc1 594 KN
Two Way Shear Check OK
L= 1.00 meters
300
300
B= 1.00 meters
300 mm
150 mm
12 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c 12 mm dia @ 150 mm c/c

Final Report for PREPARATION OF DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL/ ENGINEERING DESIGN, DRAWING AND COST ESTIMATE FOR LOW COST RESIDENTIAL HOUSING
Chapter 5: Cost Summary

The Consultant conducted rate analysis with the help of district rate of Bardiya, Kathmandu and Lamjung Districts for the three different regions and calculated the
quantity of materials and labour, which were finally used for calculating the total cost of the building. The detailed cost estimate for each regions are presented in
other volumes. The summary of the cost is presented below:
Terai Region
S
Types of Building Total Floor area (Sq.ft) Civil Cost Electrical cost Sanitary Cost Total cost Rate per Sq.ft Total Cost with VAT
N
1 Option A 2,131.89 4,008,300.95 272,567.17 293,293.02 4,574,161.14 2,145.59 5,168,802.08
2 Option B 2,241.37 4,238,324.41 267,626.67 236,694.03 4,742,645.11 2,115.96 5,359,188.97
3 Option C 1,798.93 3,636,196.14 242,834.25 234,701.07 4,113,731.46 2,286.76 4,648,516.55
4 Option D 1,798.93 3,636,196.14 242,834.25 234,701.07 4,113,731.46 2,286.76 4,648,516.55
Hilly Region
S
N
1 Option A 2,131.89 4,926,960.69 272,567.17 401,398.16 5,600,926.02 2,627.21 6,329,046.40
2 Option B 2,241.37 5,192,825.07 267,626.67 293,400.95 5,753,852.69 2,567.11 6,501,853.54
3 Option C 1,798.93 4,541,608.59 290,391.05 290,391.05 5,122,390.69 2,847.46 5,788,301.48
4 Option D 1,798.93 4,541,608.59 290,391.05 290,391.05 5,122,390.69 2,847.46 5,788,301.48
Himalayan Region
S
N
1 Option A 2,131.89 6,978,931.86 6,978,931.86 3,273.58 7,886,193.00
2 Option B 2,241.37 7,937,788.41 7,937,788.41 3,541.49 8,969,700.91
3 Option C 1,798.93 6,096,867.53 6,096,867.53 3,389.16 6,889,460.31
4 Option D 1,798.93 6,096,867.53 6,096,867.53 3,389.16 6,889,460.31
5 Stone Masonry 2,131.89 6,451,187.97 292,316.69 317,890.74 7,061,395.41 3,312.27 7,979,376.81
Conclusion:

Final Report for PREPARATION OF DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL/ ENGINEERING DESIGN, DRAWING AND COST ESTIMATE FOR LOW COST RESIDENTIAL HOUSING
New technique load bearing structure for terai and hilly region, and metal square pipe structure with Puff Panel for the mountain region with four various options has
been prepared as per the study conducted above.

Final Report For Preparation of Detailed Architectural/ Engineering Design, Drawing and Cost Estimate For Low Cost Residential Housing

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

Final Report For Preparation of Detailed Architectural/ Engineering Design, Drawing and Cost Estimate For Low Cost Residential Housing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Report for PREPARATION OF DETAILED ARCHITECTURAL/ ENGINEERING DESIGN, DRAWING AND COST

ESTIMATE FOR LOW COST RESIDENTIAL HOUSING

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 1

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 2

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 3

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1. Lalitpur [Lubhu]

S.N Description Specification Comment

1 Structure 4” Metal frame +Brick Masonry

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 4

Figure 2: Slab work of Lubhu Site

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 5

Figure 3: Pictures of Site Visit of Lubhu

1.2. Lalitpur [Gokarneshwor]

S.N. Description Specification Comment

1 Structure Metal frame +Brick Masonry a) Room not sufficient

Figure 4: Plans of Gokarneshwor Site

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 6

Figure 5: Pictures of Site Visit of Gokarneshwor Site

S.N. Description Specification Comment

1 Structure Load Bearing with RCC column a) Room not

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 7

13 Cost Estimate: 3,000,00+1,000,00=4,000,00/-

Figure 6: Plans of Lumanti Housing

Figure 7: Site Visit Pictures of Lumanti Housing

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 8

1.4. Sindhupalchowk [Sanjaytar, ward no 11, Melamchi Municipality]

S.N. Description Specification Comment

1 Structure MS Square Pipe+ Puff Panel a) Temp- high in

Figure 8: Plan of Melamchi Site

Figure 9: Site Visit Pictures of Melamchi

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 10

Figure 10: Case Studies of India Low Cost Housing

Figure 11: Case studies of Prevalant Practices

Figure 12: Gorkha Earthquake of April 2015

 Metal Structure with Brick masonry.

 Metal Structure with Cement block Structure.

 Cement board with metal section Prefabs Structure.

 Bamboo and wooden Structure.

 Metal Truss with Puff Panel Structure.

 Stone Masonry Structure.

 Hollow Interlocking Compressed Stabilized earth Block.

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 12

Figure 13: Retrofitting Two-Storied Load Bearing Building

 Permissible Area= Total plot area x 1.75

 Building Height = 2 Story from GL [7100mm]

 Plinth height= 450mm

 Right of way (ROW)= 6.0m

 Set back =1.5m

 Main Brick Wall= 230mm, Slab Thickness: 125mm,

 Beam depth: 150mm

 Partition wall = 100mm

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 13

For Mountain Region

Figure 14: Sandwiched Puff Panel with metal frames

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 14

Chapter 3: Conceptual Designs

Figure 15: Concepts of Design Formulation

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 15

Figure 16: Aerial view of all four options

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 16

Figure 17: Isometric, Front and Back views of Option A

Shrestha Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Page | 17