Luke Kinsella D00189011

STUDENT: Luke Kinsella

ID NO: D00189011
COURSE: BSc (Hons) in Civil Engineering (Part-time Programme)
MODULE: Structural Design
COURSEWORK TITLE: Assignment 1 – Design of RC Building in Accordance with Eurocodes

1
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Contents

Part 1…………..……………………………………………………………………………....Pg 3
Part 2………………………...…………………………………………………………...……Pg 13
Part 3……………………………………………………………………………………..……Pg 19
Part 4……...……………………………………………………………………..………....….Pg 44

2
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Part 1

Movement Joint
Movement in concrete buildings can be caused by:
1. Autogenous shrinkage
2. Long-term drying shrinkage
3. Early thermal cantraction
4. Temperature variations
5. Creep
6. Settlement
7. Deflection
8. Solar radiation
9. Pre-stressing

For a typical building located in the UK & Ireland, 25mm wide movement joints located at 50 to
70m centres will normally be adequate to deal with the effects of shrinkage and temperature
variations. The restraint imposed on the slab will depend on the layout of the stability walls.
Movement joints may also be required at changes in shape of the building in plan or elevation.

Movement joints should be vertical throughout the height of the structure and each part of the
building should be stable.

The overall length of the building is 54.6m. As shown on the sketch attached, a movement joint
is located along GL F @ 39m.

3
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Stability

The following are examples of loads that may impose lateral forces on the structure:
1. Wind loads
2. Earthquakes
3. Lateral loads due to geometric imperfections
4. Horizontal component of soil loads
5. Accidental loads

The structure should be designed to resist these loads in two diagonal directions. For multi storey
building this can be achieved by using shear walls.

Shear walls are very effective in resisting horizontal loads which act in the direction of the plane
of the walls. As the walls are effectively thin they offer little resistance to loads which are
perpendicular to their plane.
The floor slabs which are supported by the walls also act as rigid diaphragms which transfer and
distribute the horizontal forces into the shear walls. The shear walls act as vertical cantilevers
transferring the horizontal loads to the structural foundations.

Shear walls should be arranged in plan so that their shear centre coincides with the resultant of
the overturning forces. If this is not possible, twisting moments will also occur and the additional
forces that result should be added to the other forces in each shear wall.

Please see marked up options attached showing different layouts for stability.

Option 1
This layout is the basic architect’s layout where I have also included a movement joint along GL
F. New columns are placed each side of the movement joint.
This layout is un-favorable as I would consider it to be unstable. With the addition of the
movement joint along GL F, we have to look at each area as independent structures. The part
from GL A to GL F would have its centre of rotation between GL C & D along GL 2. As the
main core is situated very close to this point; it would have good stability, however, an even more
favorable location for the main core would also be to move it up central on GL 2.
The part from GL F to GL H would be unstable as it only has one shear wall located along GL H.
The location of this wall is unsymmetrical and thus throws off the centre of rotation.

Option 2
With the addition of the movement joint along GL F, this option accommodates both independent
structures in terms of stability.
As already stated in option 1 above; the part from GL A to GL F would have its centre of rotation
between GL C & D along GL 2. As the main core is situated very close to this point, it would
have good stability.
With regards to the other part of the structure from GL F to GL H, I have included new shear
walls to create a more symmetrical arrangement and trying to centralize the centre of rotation.
New columns are included each side of the movement joint, and a new stability wall is included
off GL F between GL 1 & GL 2.
A new lift shaft is also included at G3. This also facilitates a very important building regulation
by providing wheel chair access to the buildings upper floors.
If possible; I would also suggest moving the main core to a more central position on GL 2.

4
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Option 3
This option also accommodates the stability of both independent parts of the structure with
respect to the new movement joint along GL F.
As already stated in option 1 & 2 above; the part from GL A to GL F would have its centre of
rotation between GL C & D along GL 2. As the main core is situated very close to this point, it
would have good stability.
With regards to the other part of the structure from GL F to GL H; I have included 3 new shear
walls while also moving the existing wall on GL H. This creates a symmetrical arrangement and
centralizes the centre of rotation.
New columns are included each side of the movement joint.
If possible; I would also suggest moving the main core to a more central position on GL 2.

Option 4
This option also accommodates the stability of both independent parts of the structure with
respect to the new movement joint along GL F.
As already stated in option 1, 2 & 3 above; the part from GL A to GL F would have its centre of
rotation between GL C & D along GL 2. As the main core is situated very close to this point, it
would have good stability.
With regards to the other part of the structure from GL F to GL H; I removed the wall along GL
H, and instead included one lift core centred on GL G2. This creates a symmetrical arrangement
and centralizes the centre of rotation.
The new lift shaft also facilitates a very important building regulation by providing wheel chair
access to the buildings upper floors.
New columns are included each side of the movement joint.
If possible; I would also suggest moving the main core to a more central position on GL 2.

5
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Robustness

Situations should be avoided where damage to a small area or failure of a single element could
lead to collapse of major parts of the structure (Source: Clause 9.10.1, Eurocode 2).

While it would be unreasonable to expect a structure to withstand extremes of accidental loading

as may be caused by collision, explosion or similar, it is important that resulting damage should
not be disproportionate to the cause. A major structural collapse must not be allowed to be
caused by a relatively minor mishap which may have a reasonably high probability of happening
in the anticipated lifetime of the structure.

The general stability and robustness of a building structure can be increased by providing
reinforcement acting as ties. These ties should act both vertically between roof and foundations,
and horizontally around and across each floor as shown below
.

- Vertical ties
Vertical ties are not generally necessary in structures of less than five storeys but in higher
buildings should be provided by reinforcement, effectively continuous from roof to foundation by
means of proper laps, running through all vertical load bearing members. This steel should be
capable of resisting a tensile force equal to the maximum design ultimate load carried by the
column or wall from any one storey or the roof.
The aim is to contribute to a bridging system in the event of loss of the member at a lower level.

- Horizontal ties
Horizontal ties should be provided for all buildings, irrespective of height, in three ways:
1. Peripheral ties – the peripheral tie must be provided by reinforcement which is effectively
continuous around the perimeter of the building at each floor and roof level. The
reinforcement must be within 1.2m of the outer edge.
2. Internal ties – internal ties should also be provided at each floor in two perpendicular
directions and be anchored at each end, either to the peripheral tie or to the continuous
column or wall ties. The ties must be effectively continuous and they may either be
spread evenly across a floor, or grouped at beams or walls as convenient. Where walls
are used, the tie reinforcement must be within 0.5m of the top or bottom of the floor slab.

10
Luke Kinsella D00189011

3. Column and wall ties – column and wall ties must be able to resist a force of at least 3%
of the total vertical ultimate load at that level for which the member has been designed.
Wall ties are assessed on the basis of the above forces acting per metre length of the wall,
while column ties are concentrated within 1m of either side of the column centre line.
Particular care should be taken with corner columns to ensure they are ties in two
perpendicular directions.

Please see marked up sketches showing location of ties for building stability and robustness.

11
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Part 2

Please refer to calculation sheets attached.

13
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Part 3

Please refer to calculation sheets attached.

- Option 1 – One way spanning slab on down stand beams.
- Option 2 – Waffle slab

19
Luke Kinsella D00189011

Part 4

Comparison of option 1 & option 2

One-way solid slab Waffle slab

Overall slab depth 375mm 390mm
Edge column size 400mm SQ 325mm SQ
Internal column size 600mm x 400mm 425mm x 325mm
Edge pad footing size 3.0m SQ x 1.575m Deep 2.25m SQ x 1.2m Deep
Internal pad footing size 4.25m SQ x 2.25m Deep 3.25m SQ x 1.8m Deep

(Table showing difference in element size for both scheme options)

One-way solid slabs

One-way in-situ solid slabs are the most basic form of slab.

Deflection usually governs the design, and steel content is usually increased to reduce service
stress and increase span capacity.

They are generally employed for utilitarian purposes in offices, retail developments, warehouse,
stores and similar buildings.

One-way in-situ solid slabs can be economical for spans from 4 to 6m.

One-way solid slabs are simple to construct and the provision of holes cause few structural
problems.

The associated down-stand beams may deter fast formwork cycles and can result in greater storey
height.

As can be seen from the table above; apart from the overall slab depth – the element sizes for the
one-way solid slab are greater than that for the waffle slab.

Waffle Slabs
Introducing voids to the soffit of a flat slab reduces the dead weight. The profile may be
expressed architecturally.

The depth of the slab is governed by deflection, punching shear around the columns and shear in
the ribs.

Solid area is required adjacent to the supporting columns.

Waffle slabs are designed as flat slabs, and are light and benefit from flexibility of partition
location and horizontal service distribution.

The formwork is more costly and the slightly deeper profile results in greater overall floor depth
then for the one way slab.

The reinforcement is also slow to fabricate and therefore may be slow to fix.

44
Luke Kinsella D00189011

It is also difficult to core the slabs as holes can have design implications.

As can be seen from the table above; apart from the overall slab depth – the element sizes for the
waffle slab are smaller than that for the one-way in-situ slab.

45