DESIGN CALCULATION OF PARKING SHADE Request # 4045238552

Compliance Staad file edit

Sl Comments Remark
Y/N Y/N

This CRM response is a structural design review of the submitted structural calculations (missing
document number) titled "DESIGN CALCULATIONS OF STEEL STRUCTURAL FRAME FOR CAR
1 PARKING SHADE, ONE SIDE CANTILEVER (PLAN DIMENSION 6.0M WIDE X 6.5 M LONG Need doc serial no
CANTILEVER) FOR BASIC WIND SPEED OF 155KM/HR." dated 27 Feb 2024 for Jafurah. This CRM
WIND SPEED OF 155KM/HR." dated 27 Feb 2024 for Jafurah. This CRM response does not apply to any
other project, location of site.

2 The scope of this design review is for shade structure calculations only. Structural drawings were not Done
submitted and are therefore excluded from the scope of this design review. Y

Justify why the parking shade standard drawings (see standard drawing DA-950182-001 and others) are As per phase1
3 not utilized. If the standard drawings are used, then structural calculations are not require for review by PP-418211-001
the CSD Structural Engineering Group.

4 SAES-A-204 Section 10.1 requires that the names of the calculation originator and the checker are given.
Revise the calculation cover sheet to include the designer and checker names.

Methodology section states that ASCE 7-10 is used for wind analysis. The wind design criteria are based
5 on the ASCE 7-05 method. Revise the code reference to match the wind design criteria.

The loading diagrams do not show lateral wind load applied to the structural members (columns and
6 beams) in the z-direction. Revise to include the missing wind loads.

7 Staad output is missing the deflection and drift checks. Revise to verify allowable drift and members
deflections against allowable limits.

Per the Staad input file, code analysis is done per the AISC 360-10 LRFD method. The load combinations
8 used are for the ASD method. Revise the Staad input to use LRFD load combinations or change the load
combinations.

9 Prokon input uses 0.50 for the sliding coeffient of friction. Provide the gotechnical investigation report to
justify this friction value or use 0.40 per Aramco engineering standards.

Foundation design design is incomplete because it considers a single load case. The moment considered
10 is less than the maximim base moment reaction. Revise the foundation design to consider all worst case
base reactions.

11 The base plate design in Prokon uses fy = 300 MPa steel. This does not exist. Revise the calculation to
be consistent with the steel grades given in the design basis.

12 Many structural calculation pages are missing page numbers, project reference and other important
information. Revise to include the missing information.

13 The anchor bolt calculations do not account for all potential failure modes per Chapter 17.3 of ACI 318-14
(see Table 17.3.1.1). Revise.

14 SAES-A-204 Section 12.2 requires the completion and submittal of the Civil/Structural Design Package
Check List found in Appendix A of the Standard. Provide the missing checklist. Report