STRUCTURAL CRITERIA REPORT

for Proposed 3-Storey Office Building

Submitted by:

Nathaniel A. Famisan
2015-12571

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements in
CE 156: Design of Steel Structures

Submitted to:

Engr. Timothy John Acosta

October 20, 2021

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY PLEDGE:

I strive to uphold the University values of honor and excellence and affirm that I have
neither given nor receive any appropriate aid in the completion of this project.
I. Introduction

When designing steel structures, design criteria are formulated in order to

evaluate whether or not a design made in the process has been optimized or not.
Typical design criteria encompass both the minimization of costs (manufacture of
owner’s products and other pertinent expenses), weight, construction time and
labor, and the maximization of efficiency of operation to owner.

For structural engineers, their intuitive ability to make decisions are guided
by computational results, highlighted especially during the structural framework
design component. This is where the selection of arrangement and sizes of
structural elements takes places so that service loads may be carried safely at the
same time that displacements are inspected in order to fall within acceptable limits.

This report covers the first phase of this course’s project, wherein the
researcher is asked to design a proposed 3-storey office building to be located in
Palawan, Philippines. The specifications (dimensions for partitions and length-
width configurations) of the 3-storey office building are shown below from Figures
1 to 3. Note that all dimensions derived are expressed in millimeters (mm).

LEGEND:
Framework Joint. Original (Uniform) Column.
Transverse Girders. Transverse Secondary Beams.
Longitudinal Girders. Longitudinal Secondary Beams.

Figure 1: Dimensioning for the Front Elevation View of the Building.

2
Figure 2: Dimensioning for the Right Side Elevation View of the Building.

Figure 3: Dimensioning for the Left Side Elevation View of the Building.

II. Preliminary Structural Configurations

For this project, the researcher opted to utilize the Howe type of truss,
referring back to the frame system of the building’s structure. The calculated roof
angle was θ ~ 9.335⁰. The schematic diagram of the Howe truss configuration for

3
this project is shown below in Figure 4 via SketchUp 2019 software. Note that
all pertinent dimensions for the truss system are expressed in millimeters (mm).

Figure 4: Schematic Diagram of (Howe) Truss System and

Location of Purlins.

To supplement the truss system above in Figure 4, the purlins were to be

placed, each with the same separation distance from each other, materials of which
are marked by blank dots in the system. The distance between each 2 purlins
were measured to be 1,027.483 mm. For this project, a total of 26 purlins will be
used in each of the 9 trusses (including the roof apex).

The structural plans for this project are indicated in the succeeding images.
Figures 5A and 5B illustrate the 3D models of the office building excluding and
including the general roof truss system as per original construction plans. Figures
6A to 6C correspond to the building’s 3 stories, while Figure 7 shows the rough
sketch of the partitions based on the third floor (3F) as per rendering of the original
layout using SketchUp 2019 software.

Note that the open areas built for locating the staircases for the second and
third floors (2F and 3F) are omitted from the loadings since they do not cause any
loading. Moreover, tentatively for this introductory project phase report, the
researcher opts for the assumption of identical column layouts but different
selections of steel structural beam selections across the office building’s 3 floors,
and therefore still subject for revisions upon doing the analytical procedures for the
succeeding project phase reports on the design of truss members for axial
members as well as of compressive column layouts.

LEGEND:
Original (Uniform) Column. Tributary Area.
Transverse Girders. Transverse Secondary Beams.
Longitudinal Girders. Longitudinal Secondary Beams.

4
Figure 5A: Perspective View of the Building
Excluding the General Roof Truss System

Figure 5B: Perspective View of the Building

Including the General Roof Truss System.

5
Figure 6A: Ground Floor (GF) Configuration.

Figure 6B: Second Floor (2F) Configuration.

6
 Figure 6C: Third Floor (3F) Configuration.

Figure 7: Rough Sketch of Proposed Floor Partitions.

III. Load Definitions

Dead loads are fixed-position gravity service loads that are usually known
accurately but not until the design is completed. These include the structural
components’ self-weight, interior floor finishes, ceiling and utilities, and interior and

7
 exterior partitions. These were inspected in the preliminary design of the office
building, with respective loads indicated below in Table 1.

Table 1: Dead Loads.

COMPONENT MATERIAL LOAD (kPa)
Suspended metal
Ceilings lath and 0.48
gypsum plaster
Mechanical duct allowance 0.20
Coverings, roof Asphalt shingles 0.10
Coverings, wall Gypsum sheathing (13 mm) 0.10
Floor, Ceramic or quarry
levels tile (20 mm) on 1.10
2 and 3 25 mm mortar bed
50×100 @ 400 mm,
Frame walls 15 mm gypsum, 0.53
insulated, 10 mm siding
Windows, glass, frame, and sash 0.38
Walls Plaster per face 0.24
Galvanized
Roof iron sheets, 0.079
20 gauge
(Source: Continental Steel & Tube Company (2020).)

In contrast, live loads are gravity loads acting when the structure is in service
(or in general use) but vary in magnitude and location. These are prescribed by
empirical and conservative state and local building codes due to safety concerns in
the structure’s construction and usability. These were inspected in the preliminary
design of the office building, with respective loads indicated below in Table 2.

Table 2: Live Loads.

USE OR UNIFORM CONCENTRATED
OCCUPANCY LOAD LOAD
CATEGORY DESCRIPTION kPa kN
Access
floor Office use 2.4 9.0
systems
Lobbies and
Office ground floor 4.8 9.0
corridors
Other offices 2.4 9.0
Storage Light 6.0 -

This report also accounts for the special case for roof live loads given the
researcher’s option to choose the materials for the roofing phase of the office building’s

8
construction project. Since uniform roof loads are involved in the design of structural
members arranged to create continuity, full dead loads on all spans as well as full roof
live loads on adjacent and alternate spans alike are jointly considered. These were
inspected in the preliminary design of the office building, indicated below in Table 3.

Table 3: Minimum Roof Live Loads.

METHOD 1
ROOF TRIBUTARY AREA (m2)
SLOPE 0-20 20-60 > 60
UNIFORM LOAD (kPa)
Flat or rise less than 1-unit vertical in
3-unit horizontal (33.3%) slope. Arch 1.00 0.75 0.60
and dome with less than 1/8 of span.

Based on the dimensioning made in the preceding construction drawings, the

calculated slope was 16.4%, which is less than the 33.3% threshold aforementioned.
Solving for the tributary area, an area of 111.021 m2 was obtained. Thus, for the
project’s roofing, a uniform load of 0.60 kPa will be used.

To account for the minor detailed loadings in the interior design of the building,
special loads were also inspected to determine whether such components induce
uniform or concentrated load in the overall design load path of the structure, as
indicated below in Table 4.

Table 4: Special Loads.

USE OR OCCUPANCY
CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
Partitions and interior walls
Handrails
UNIFORM LOAD CONCENTRATED LOAD
kPa kN
- 0.25
0.89 (at any point
- on the rail in
any direction)

IV. Loading Calculations

The load combinations for the design of the office building are displayed
below as per Section 203.3.1 (Basic Load Combinations) from NSCP 2015:

• 1.4(D+F) (203-1)
• 1.2(D+F+T) + 1.6(L+H) + 0.5(Lr or R) (203-2)
• 1.2D + 1.6(Lr or R) + (f1L or 0.5W) (203-3)
• 1.2D + 1.0W + f1L + 0.5(Lr or R) (203-4)
• 1.2D + 1.0E + f1L (203-5)
• 0.9D + 1.0W + 1.6H (203-6)
• 0.9D + 1.0E + 1.6H (203-7)

9
 where f1 = 1.0, for floors in places of public assembly, for live loads in excess of
4.8 kPa, and for garage live load, or f1 = 0.5 for other live loads.

Denotations based on Section 203.2 (Symbols and Denotations):

• D = dead load.
• E = earthquake load set forth in Section 208.6.1.
• Em = estimated maximum earthquake force that can be developed in the
structure as set forth in Section 208.6.1.
• F = load due to fluids with well-defined pressures and maximum heights.
• H = load due to lateral pressure of soil and water in soil.
• L = live load, except roof life load, including any permitted live load
reduction.
• Lr = roof live load, including any permitted live load reduction.
• P = ponding load.
• R = rain load on the undeflected roof.
• T = self-straining force and effects arising from contraction or expansion
resulting from temperature change, shrinkage, moisture change, creep
in component materials, movement due to differential settlement, or
combinations whereof.
• W = load due to wind pressure.

Table 5A: Second Floor (2F) Load Calculations.

MDL Quantity
Component TOTAL
U.S. S.I. # Length (m) Area (m2)
2
Composite Slab - - 1.780 kN/m 8 - 46.760 665.858
CHB Walls - - 9.641 kN/m - 72.025 - 694.393
SDL Partition Loads - - 1.000 kPa - - 668.675 668.675
Glass, Frames - - 1.178 kN/m - 48.575 - 57.221
Floor, Ceramic - - 0.770 kPa - - 668.675 514.880
Girders 58.000 lb/ft 0.847 kN/m - 335.000 - 283.656
Secondary Beams 30.000 lb/ft 0.438 kN/m 8 22.333 - 78.250
SW
Steel Deck - - 0.141 kN/m2 8 - 46.760 52.587
Columns 86.000 lb/ft 1.256 kN/m 36 3.350 - 151.414
SUMMATIVE DEAD LOAD (kN) 3,166.935
Access Floor Systems - - 2.400 kPa - - 668.675 1,604.821
LL
Second Floor Lobby - - 4.800 kPa - - 668.675 3,209.642
Partitions, Interior Walls - - 0.250 kN - - - 0.250
SpL
Handrails - - 0.890 kN - - - 0.890
SUMMATIVE LIVE LOAD (kN) 4,815.603
TOTAL 2ND FLOOR LOAD (kN) 7,982.538

Table 5B: Second Floor (2F) Dimensions for Structural Analysis.

Atrib (m2) 46.760
Pwall (m) 72.025

10
 H2F = C (m) 3.100
Pglass (m) 48.575
W (m) 22.333
L (m) 33.500
2
A2F (m ) 668.675

Table 6A: Third Floor (3F) Load Calculations.

MDL Quantity
Component TOTAL
U.S. S.I. # Length (m) Area (m2)
2
Composite Slab - - 1.780 kN/m 8 - 46.760 665.858
CHB Walls - - 9.641 kN/m - 59.742 - 575.969
SDL Partition Loads - - 1.000 kPa - - 708.421 708.421
Glass, Frames - - 1.178 kN/m - 14.517 - 17.101
Floor, Ceramic - - 0.770 kPa - - 708.421 545.484
Girders 58.000 lb/ft 0.847 kN/m - 335.000 - 283.656
Secondary Beams 30.000 lb/ft 0.438 kN/m 8 22.333 - 78.250
SW 2
Steel Deck - - 0.141 kN/m 8 - 46.760 52.587
Columns 86.000 lb/ft 1.256 kN/m 36 3.100 - 140.114
SUMMATIVE DEAD LOAD (kN) 3,067.441
Access Floor Systems - - 2.400 kPa - - 708.421 1,700.210
LL
Third Floor Lobby - - 4.800 kPa - - 708.421 3,400.421
Partitions, Interior Walls - - 0.250 kN - - - 0.250
SpL
Handrails - - 0.890 kN - - - 0.890
SUMMATIVE LIVE LOAD (kN) 5,101.771
TOTAL 3RD FLOOR LOAD (kN) 8,169.213

Table 6B: Third Floor (3F) Dimensions for Structural Analysis.

Atrib (m2) 46.760
Pwall (m) 59.742
H3F = B (m) 3.100
Pglass (m) 14.517
W (m) 22.333
L (m) 33.500
A3F (m2) 708.421

Table 7A: Rooftop System (RF) Load Calculations.

MDL Quantity
Component TDL
U.S. S.I. # Length (m) Area (m2)
Roof Coverings - - 0.100 kPa 2 - 450.043 90.009
SDL Roof Sheets - - 0.079 kPa 2 - 450.043 71.386
Ceilings - - 0.480 kPa - - 111.021 748.167
Secondary Beams 30.000 lb/ft 0.438 kN/m 8 22.333 - 78.250
SW Girders 58.000 lb/ft 0.847 kN/m - 22.333 - 18.910
Truss Top Chord 6.140 lb/ft 0.090 kN/m 9 12.330 - 9.947

11
 Bottom Chord 6.140 lb/ft 0.090 kN/m 9 24.333 - 19.631
1 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 0.333 - 0.269
2 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 0.667 - 0.538
3 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 1.000 - 0.807
Vertical Chord
4 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 1.333 - 1.076
5 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 1.667 - 1.345
6 6.140 lb/ft 0.090 kN/m 9 2.000 - 1.613
1 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 2.055 - 1.658
2 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 2.135 - 1.722
Diagonal Chord 3 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 2.261 - 1.824
4 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 2.427 - 1.958
5 3.070 lb/ft 0.045 kN/m 18 2.625 - 2.118
Purlins 4.500 lb/ft 0.066 kN/m 252 12.330 - 204.124
SUMMATIVE DEAD LOAD (kN) 1,255.350
LL Roof Live Load - - 0.600 kPa 8 - 111.021 532.900
SUMMATIVE LIVE LOAD (kN) 532.900
TOTAL ROOFTOP LOAD (kN) 1,788.250

Table 7B: Rooftop System (RF) Dimensions for Structural Analysis.

OHW (m) 1.000
OHL (m) 1.500
W (m) 22.333
L (m) 33.500
2
Atrib (m ) 111.021
Hroof (m) 2.000
Roof Truss System
HV1 (m) 0.333
HV2 (m) 0.667
HV3 (m) 1.000
HV4 (m) 1.333
HV5 (m) 1.667
HV6 (m) 2.000
HD1 (m) 2.055
HD2 (m) 2.135
HD3 (m) 2.261
HD4 (m) 2.427
HD5 (m) 2.625

Table 8: Summative Computations of the Office Building Loads.

Load (kN)
Floor
Dead, DL ~ W Live, LL
2F 3,166.935 4,815.603
3F 3,067.441 5,101.771
RF 1,255.350 532.900

12
 7,489.726 10,450.274
OVERALL LOAD
17,940.000

The live and dead load calculations for each of the second and third floors,
as well as the roofing system, are displayed above from Tables 5A to 8. It is
assumed that steel decks are installed below each of the second and third floors,
and the roofing system also contains a ceiling. The overall dead load carried by the
3-storey office building, which is equivalent to the weight parameter that will affect
the overall earthquake load that it will experience, is 7,489.726 kN. Meanwhile, the
live load counterpart measures 10,450.274 kN.

The projection that the live load is greater than the dead load adheres to the
preliminary assumptions given the assumed standard occupancy of the building.
Subsequently, the overall maximum design gravity load carried by the 3-storey
office building, as shown from the same referred data, measured 17,940 kN.

V. Deflection Limits

Serviceability is a critical factor when making structural designs depending

on the intended purpose of the constructed building. It is thus not uncommon for
buildings to encounter disruptions in their functions as a result of factors ranging
from local minor damage and deterioration of building components to general
discomfort of a particular building’s occupant/s.

With this, it is important to determine the deflection limits that highly affect
the suitability of a structural design for its usage requirement. The deflection limits
for this project were determined and expressed in terms of length, l, of a particular
beam, as shown below in Table 9.

Table 9: Critical Appraisal of Current Serviceability Guidelines.

MAXIMUM DEFLECTION
MEMBERS LIVE LIVE + DEAD S ~ Wf
LOADS LOADS
Supporting plaster ceiling l / 360 l / 240 l / 360
Roof Beam Supporting non-plaster ceiling l / 240 l / 180 l / 240
Not supporting a ceiling l / 180 l / 120 l / 180
Floor Beam l / 360 l / 240 -
(Source: Ellingwood, B. “Serviceability Guidelines for Steel
Structures.” (1989). AISC Journal. U.S.A.)

VI. Codes and Standards Used

For the general parameters of this structural criteria report, the National
Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) (2015), specifically its Chapter 2, and
the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) Manual (2011) are used to
set the parameters. For the designated dead load of the desired roofing system of

13
the building, the specifications of the galvanized iron sheeting to be used in the
construction were derived from Continental Steel & Tube Company
(https://titanium-stainless-steel.continentalsteel.com/) for further inspection.

The researcher also opted to obtain the specifications of the steel deck for
the upper floors of the office building from Galvadeck Steel Decking Profile
(https://www.filbuild.com/b2b/united_steel_technology/25_galvadeck_steel
_decking_profile_dimensions_section_properties.html) for tabulation.

VII. Discussion

The dimensions are derived from Mathcad 2019 computations using the
researcher’s student number (2015-12571), as shown in Figure 8. Note that the
original equations, as stipulated in the previous construction drawings, are
expressed in meters (m), necessitating further conversion to millimeters (mm).

Figure 8: Snapshot of Preliminary Calculations for Dimens-

ions (Length, Width, Pertinent Partitions) of the Office Building.

As shown from Tables 1 to 8, the tentative total design load for each of the
3 stories and the roofing system consists of the dead loads (comprising both the
superimposed dead loads and the self-weights of pertinent components as per
NSCP (2015) guidelines) and live loads, depending on the use of each floor
throughout the building’s overall serviceability.

A uniform procedure was utilized in producing the load calculations for each
of the floors’ self-weights. For instance, the equivalent loading on the secondary
beam in the structure is obtained as a product of the indicated pressure load and
ratio of the tributary widths (which are half the lengths of their neighboring beams
or girders, whichever is applicable). This is then used to derive the reactions as
concentrated loads on the girders present in a section of interest in the structure.

14
 Aside from this, the loading on the interior column is obtained as a product of the
indicated pressure load and pertinent tributary area in the structure.

As previously stipulated in the preceding construction drawings, for the

construction of the 3-storey office building, the structure is assumed to be utilizing
W-sections for all pertinent structural members, as presented below in Table 9.

Table 9: Nomenclature of Steel Members on the Office Building.

DESCRIPTION/DIMENSION OF
STOREY STEEL MEMBER (SELF-WEIGHT)
GIRDER SECONDARY BEAM STEEL DECK INTERIOR COLUMN
Ground
Floor - - - W18×86
(GF)
Second 0.047 in
Floor W12×58 W10×30 or W18×86
(2F) 1.20 mm
Third 0.047 in
Floor W12×40 W10×22 or W18×86
(3F) 1.20 mm
Rooftop
System W12×40 W10×22 - -
(RF)

For the second and third floors, their respective composite slabs are
identical in composition, comprising of the ceiling and floor specifications shown
earlier in Table 1. The superimposed dead load for the composite slab is the sum
of all the mentioned components’ loadings, as shown below in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Snapshot of Preliminary Calculations for the

Superimposed Composite Slab Dead Load.

The concrete hollow block composition’s superimposed dead load is the

product of the wall’s height per respective floor and the sum of the dead loads of
the fully grout-spaced hollow concrete and plaster per face, since the researcher
assumed plastering of both faces of the block, as shown below in Figure 10.

15
Figure 10: Snapshot of Mathcad Preliminary Calculations for the
Superimposed Concrete Hollow Block Dead Load.

16